HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 5C LOT A B C LODGE AT VAIL INTERNATIONAL WING 1996 APPEAL OF DRB DECISION PART 2 OF 2 LEGALDeSn Review Action For|
TOWN OF VAIL
)","noo Number--
Proiect Name:
Building Name:
Proiect DescriPlion:
Owner, Address and Phone:
ArchitecvOontact, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot / Block Subdivision
Project Street Address:
zone District leT
Board / Staff Action
Seconded bv:
y'gpp,ou"r'
! Disapproval
! Staff Approval
Conditions:
Town Planner
o^r", /1./ ' 7,f DRBFee e,"-p^ia #.Q-r)
Exhibit 28.
Letter from Abplanalp to Town - March 14, 1996 - appealing decision
o
. LAw OFFtcEs
DUNN, ABeLANALe & CxRrstehJsEN, P.C.
varu Birx E u rLolNG
gutrE 300
I 08 SoUTH FRoNTAGE RoAo \,VEST
v^rL, CoLoRAoo tl I 657
.14 March 1996
Town Council
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road Westvail coVIA TELECOPIER AND VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Town of Vail planning andEnvironmental Commiss ion75 South Frontage Road WestVaiI CO
VIA TELECOPIER AND VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Re: Lodge at Vail International Wing
Dear Sir or Madam:
This Firm represents Ms. Anita sartz, the owner of condominiumunit 527, Ttre Lodge at vail Apartment condominiums, on whose behalfthis letter is being directed to you.
By this letter, Ms. Anita Saltz appeals the action of the Townof Vair Department of cornmunity Development and, to the extent andif any action was taken, the Town of VaiI Design Review Board,approving certain revised prans of rhe Lodge at Vail rnternationalwing. Despite repeated requests for information and notice ofconsideration of proceedings, notice was not provided of eitherstaff consideration or of any consideration by the Design ReviewBoard- For the reasons noted below, there is uncertainty from therecord regarding the nature of the action which purports to approvethe plans which apparently have, somehow, been given approvil bythe Town of VaiL
The Town Council considered and gave conditional approval tothe Lodge International Wing in early December, 1995, despiteobjections by adjacent owners based upon both design and trespassinto the conmon elements of the Lodge Apartment condominium. Thecouncil was assured by the developer that no trespass occurredunder the offered pran, and imposed only the condition that theplan be redesigned to increase the buffer between the rnternationalWi.ng penthouse structure and the affected Lodge Apartmentcondominiuns, The devetoper then submitted a revised proposal tothe Department of comrnunity Deveropment which confirmed theexistence of the trespass previously j.dentified in the planpresented to, considered and conditionally approved by the Town
TE LE PHO N EI
(3O3) 476.O3OO
TELECOPIER:
(3Olt.r76-it763
I(ARE N M, OUNN
CEITIFIEO LEOA! A!'I'iArltI
JOXN W. DUNN
ARTHUR A. AIPLANALP, JR.
ALLEN C. CHRISTENsEN
DIANE L. HgRMAN
attctal covNrgL:
J ERRY W. HANNAH
councir. That revised pran was disapproved by the Department ofconmunity Development staff, at which tine interested plrties wereeffectively cut off from negotiations which occurred between staffand the developer.
On the 12th of March, 1996, this Firm received notice that arevised pran for the Lodge at Vail rnternationar wing had beenapproved by the Town of Vail. It is that approval. which is thesubject of this appeal
Initially, there is uncertainty regarding the source of theapproval , and therefore the nature of the appear. The Town councilreferred the plan considered by it in December back to theDepartment of Corununity Development staff. However, the 'tapproved"plan provided by the Town of Vail indicates that it was ,'Approved
by the Town of Vail Design Review Board - March 7, 1996", and alsoindicates that it was "Approved by Staff - Andy Knudtsen - 3/7/96".Therefore, the Town's record indicates that approval may haveoccurred either by the Design Review Board or by staff, or by both.
We shal.I rely upon the Town to determine who took the action and todirect this appeal to the appropriate body, in accordance with theVail Municipal Code.
Wj.th reference to the reasons for this appeal, they aremultiple:
1. The plan which was provided and identified as thatreceiving town of Vail approval is virtually unintelligible, but,to the extent j.t is intelligible, it clearly has no relationship tothat which was approved by the Town CounciI. Therefore, theapplication must be initiated as a new process, rather than beingsubject to wholesale redeslgn at the discretion of Community
Developnent staff.
2. Ttre new plan has an area which is between CondominiumUnit 527 and 533, on the west, and the penthouse structure, on theeast, which is not labeled, diagramed, or the subject of anyelevation, and which was not included on the prior plan. It may bean elevator shaft, and it may have a sloping roof or a flat roof.It may be two feet high, or it may be twelve feet high. Noinfornation has been provided which gj.ves any information regarding
these guestions.
3. Neither the "Roof Plan" nor the "Roof,/Planter Section"identifies the location of the Iatter sectj.on. One can only
speculate even as to whether the Lodge Apartment Condorninium is onthe left or right of that section, but it is clear that the latter
does not represent a section indicating the size or impact of thestructure which apparently is planned adjacent to Units 527 and
When, and if, our client and the other objectors are providedwith any additional plans which are necessary to makeunderstandable those two maps which were provided to us, it nay beable to identify with speci.ficity other problems with the designwhich are not now identifi.able. By this letter, in addition ioinitiating the appeal as set forth abowe, we again request copiesof a1l submittals, maps, plans, correspondence and other materialpresented to the Town of VaiI in association with this natter, orexchanged between the Town of lail and the applicant.
xc: Ms. Anita SaltzMr. Tom Moorhead
Ms. Ann FrickMr. Jay Peterson
Exhibit 29.
Letter from Abplanalp to Town Attorney - March 1'9, 1995
tDuruN
Law -*iFFrcEs O -, ,^BPLANALP & CURISTENSEN, P.C.
JOliN W. OUN N
ANIHUR A, ABPLANALP. JR.
ALLEN C. CH RISTENSEN
OIANE L. H ERMAN
R. C.gTEPHENSON
SPECIA! COUr{3€!:
J ERRY W. XANNAH
Mr. trom Moorhead
Tor,vn Attorney
Town of VailVail CO
VIA TELECOPIER
Txe Varr- Belx Burr-orr.rc
Su rte :oo
roe Sourx FRoNTAGE Roao Wesr
Verl, Coloneoo a tesz
19 March 1995
TELEPHON E:
(970) 476-O300
TELECOPIER:
(970' 476-47 63
KAREN M. OUN N
cERltFrEo !E6at a5SrslaNt
Re: International Wing - Lodge at Vail
Dear Eom:
Andy Knudsen has advised me that ble should nol.t contact you in
order to arrange an opportunity to review the fiLe with reference
to the Internitiona.I Wing, including that portion of the file
created subseguent to ths December decision of the Town Council
whlch ls now ln lltigatlon. You are, therefore, the custodian of
these records under CRS 24-72-2OI' et seq.
we understand that a decision was made by the Town of VaiI on
the 7th of March to approve an amended pIan. As you are aware' we
have appealed that declsion on behalf of our client, Anita sal-tz.
I attempted to contact you yesterday and today in order to
infornally mike arrangements for the review of the material which
has been ielivered to or is in the possession of the Town of Vail
related to the Inteto ret
Please contact me at 476-0300 and either advise me or leave a
message regarding the time when this materiaL can be inspected and
copied. In accoidance with CRS 24-72-203(3), I reguest that the
time set be within three working days of the date of this letter.
very-ftuty y9uf6l\,./ I / ,tT
dutttt, ABpLANALP e,cn TENSEN,
TFerEEore, EIe purpose of this letter is to
Gflpursuant to cRs 24-72-20I, €---&, the
opportunity to review and, to the extent deemed necessary, to copy,
aI] record! in the possession of the Town of Vail which have been
developed by, subrnitted to, or otherwise come into the possession
of tne town of Vail, since the 4th of December, 1995, and are
related to the Lodge at vail International wing.
Arthur A.
xc: Mr. and Mrs. Jack Saltz
Abpl Lp, Jr,
Letter from AbPIanalP to
Exhibtt 30.
Town Attorney - Nlarch 22, 1995
D u r'r N . t rro*^H f'dil*, =r.* rrQ r. a.
Txe Vatt- BeN x Butt-otHc
SurrE 3oo
rog Sourr FRoNTAGE Roao wEsr
Vrrr-, Coloneoo a l6sz
22 March 1996
Mr. Tom Moorhead
Town AttorneY
Town of VaiIvail co
VIA TELECOPIER
Re: rnternational Wing - Lodge at Vail
Dear Tom:
As you are aware, earl-ier this week I regues-ted th9
opportunity to t."iJi' tnl ro*n's . f iI5 .f.o1 tl: ^r".t.tl:":::?:1 ST.::;il:";;;;"".-*-ir. i was advised rhar rhe fire would be made
availableatNoontoday.Atnoontoday,Iwaspermittedtoreview
anumberofdocumentswhichwereapPar-ently-drawn_fromthatfile'but I was nor p.i*itt"C to revie-vi the tile. There can be no
guestlon that a number of maps were not provlded' and that at least
dne staff memorandum was not supplied'
documents which were readily ldentified as missing
the following maps ' to which leference is made in two
in the file:
referred to in Zehren and
Maps A1.1 and A1 .2
r-eferred to in Zehren and
Maps A1 .1, A4.1' A4.2' A4'3
Iaminpossessionofonestaffmemorandumwhichwaswrittenafter the beginning of the year, which I obtained earlier' but
whlch was not "*5ng the materlal supplled' Thls omission
illustrates the pl"U1?ttn with the fact thai I was not provided.the
opportunity to review the file, as reguired. by l.aw' I have no idea
what other documenli .t" in the fll.e, or what documents have been
removed from the file, but the publlc is entitled to review thaL
file.
Please make arrangements to produce tl" actual
afternoon, in order tnat-f might lnspect what it actually
at least at this Point in time '
Very t
Associates memorandum dated
Associates memorandum dated
and A4.4
file this
contains,
TELEPHONE:
(970) 476- 0300
TELECOFIER:
(97 0' 47 6-4765
KAREN M. OUN N
caFtllllD tEGAt assrstaN.l
JOHN W. OUNN
ARTHUF A. ABPLANALP' JR.
ALLEN C. CH FIISTENSEN
OIANE L. HERMAN
R. C. SIEPXENSON
SP€CIAL COUNSE!:
J ERRY W. HAN NAH
The
included
memoranda
Ma riq
2/26/962
MaPs
2/16/962
cruI
ABP
Arthur A. AbPlanal Jr.
Exhibit 31.
Letter from Abplanalp to Town Attorney - March 25' 1996
JOH N W. OUNN
AFITHUR A. ABPLANALP, JR.
ALLEN C. CH RISIENSEN
DIAN€ L. HERMAN
R. C. STEPH ENSON
3PECtlL COUfagEt:
J ERRY W. HANNAH
Du ru ru f"".o*"H f'6;RrsrENsl, P. c.
^ Piorts3roN^r co.Poi^rror
Txe Varr- Brttx Bu tr-ot ruc
5u rrE 3oo
roe Sourx Fnoxrace Roro West
Vrru, Colonroo e resz
25 March 1996
Mr. Tom Moorhead
Town Attorney
Town of VaiIVaiI CO
VIA TELECOPIER
Re: International Wing - Lodge at VaiI
Dear Tom:
You are aware that there is Pending a reguest for an
opportunity to review the actual file on the above matter' in order
to- iOentify and obtain copies of naterial which we have not been
provided. I have specifically requested a number of maps which
were submitted in February, and you indicated today that no
progress could be made on that matter because Andy Knudtsen was out
of town today.
In order to facititate your effort to obtain and provide the
material which has not been provided to us, and to assist you in
your conversations with Andy Knudtsen, I have identified a number
of documents and items which f have been able to establish, based
upon the lnformation which I was pernitted to review' were provided
to the Town of Vail but not included in the material I was
permitted to inspect:
1. Response to reguest for detailed statement "addressing
the Conditons of APproval from the Design Review Board approval of
November 1, 1995" (referred to in letter to clark Atkinson from
Andy Knudtsen dated 31 January 1995, which follows this letter);
2. Information submitted by architects on February 2, 1'996
(referred to in letter to Peterson from Andy Knudtsen dated
February 7, 1996, which follows this letter)t
3. Maps submitted by architects on February !6, 1995
(referred to in memorandum to Town of Vail 2-16-96, which foLlows
this letter) and identified as folLows:
A1.1 (dared 2-15-95
A4,1 (dated 2-15-95
A4,2 (dated 2-L6-96
A4.3 (dared 2-L6-96
A4,4 (dared 2-16-96
YEIEPHON E:
(97O) 476-O3OO
TELECOPIER:
ag'rOr 476-17 65
KAREN M. OUN N
clrtrrrEo raGAr ^sstg?arr
4. Maps submitted by architects on February 26, 1996(referred to in memorandum to Town of Vail 2-L6-96, which followsthis letter) and identified as follows:
A1.1 (dared 2-16-96 )A1.2 (dated 2-76-95)
Naturally, while hre can identify the foregoing items which,
with the possible exception of Item #1 (which may not have been
submitted at this tine), have been received by the Town, we still
wish to inspect the file. Notwithstanding what I am certain is
your good faith statement that all developments have been forwa.rded
to the District Court, \"re have reviewed the lists of items the Town
has provided, and which are intended to identify those items which
have been forwarded to the District Court to supplement the record.
Those supplements do not include the above information and
material .
Very truly yours,
/. tl
DUNN, ABPLANALP & CHRISTENSEN, P.C,
'! F-t's \ '.', r,\--' \-- v{Pl-/' - :1Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. ,//
t
V
xc: Mr. and Mrs Jack Saltz
Letter from Town
Exhibit 32 '
Attorney to AbPIanaIP - Illatch 27 , 1995
-'r1; 'tl\ |I
': r":"+ E;1on.u;==1 TCr r",torh+J
Co,/D6fx.Ca
Phone I Tn \1q_rpa
'u''t7L-91Lt Fax 4
MAR-2?-96 1e:29 FROM, TO r.Jr.l OF VAIL
75 tutah Frontage Road
VaiL Colorado 81657
970-4-t 9-2 I 07/Fax 97M79-Z I 57
I D, 3O 3'l 73215?PAGE l/7
ffice of thc Town Attornq
March?7,7996
VIA IELECOPTFR
Arthur A. Afuianalp, Jr.. Esguire
Dunq Abplanalp & Christcosca, P.C.
i08 S- Fronage Road, Suire 300
vail. CO 81657
Re: Sakz/Wells r'- Lodge Properties, Inc., a aI.
Dear Art:
In rcsponse to yo.tr request for rnaps submitted by architects oo February 16, 1996 and February' 26,
I 996, these are not pan of tbe
g4 rvas approved b1'
7, 1996, and'.rtich has been Anita Saltz is part of the rccord and rlzs
served upon Anira Sala rluough yorrr officc.
If you are in posscssion of a mernoran<irm or other documents tbat have not been made gert of the
offtcial record, please submit thenr to me for revielv so that an;- discrcpancy can be resolved.
R ThomasMoorhead
Toxn.A.ttorney
RTlvl'awxc: Aady Knudtsen
Very tnrjl'yours
6Yk
/
of a desiga be fore one is submined rthicb
is acceptablc to thc Toran dthc applicant ar€ nor
$tt-"rrorrro
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 1 07/Fax 970-479 -2 I 5 7
Ofice of the Town Attorney
March2T,1996
VIA TELECOPIER
Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr., Esquire
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C.
108 S. Frontage Road, Suite 300
Vail- CO 81657
Re:Saltz/Wells v. Lodge Properties, Inc., et al.
Dear Art:
In response to your request for maps submitted by architects on February 16,1996 and February 26,
1996, these are not part of the record at this time as the maps were previous iterations of a design
effort to create an adequate buffer. The several iterations ofa design before one is submitted which
is acceptable to the Town and the applicant are not saved or maintained as part ofthe record as they
are no longer relevant and would complicate the record. The final design, which was approved by
staffon March 7, 1996, and which has been appealed by Anita Salta is part of the record and was
served upon Anita Saltz through your office.
If you are in possession of a memorandum or other documents that have not been made part of the
official record, please submit them to me for review so that any discrepancy can be resolved.
Very truly yours,
R. Thomas Moorhead
Town Attomey
RTIWaw
xc: Andy Knudtsen
{g *""""uo "ut,
MEMORANDTJM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Tom Moorhead
AndyKnudaenfi
March 26, 1996
Interaational Wing, Lodge at Vail
Tom,
After I read Art,s letter of March2}nd,I woutd like to clariry that the maps referenced (for
example, zehren& Associates drawings dated February 26th or February 16, 1996) which are not
f J of tn" rr.ord at this time are the niaps which were previous. iterations of a desip effort to
ireate an adequate buffer. As is the casi with almost every Desigu Review Board projecl an
architect will proceed through several iterations ofa desip before o1e is generated which is
acceptable to the Tovm aoa-te applicant. The earlier detignt Uy Zebren,-referenced by Art in his
Ir,,tarch Z2nd letter, have not beeniaved as they are no longer relevant andwould complicate the
record. The final design, which was upptou.d by staffon March 7, 1996, is part of the record'
Regarding the other information Art is describing, perhaps you could requesJ that he be more
,piin"f io my knowledge, every scrap of paper related to the International Wing has been
included in the file.
Please let me know how I can be of fruther assistance.
Susan Connellycc:
f:\€veryom\Endy\meno3l96bmrb€84326
o
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 1 O7/F ax 970-47 9 -2 I 5 7
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Andy Knudtsen
R. rhomas voorneaalfiiA
March 25, 1996
lnternational Wing - Lodge at Vail
Andy, sorry to bother you with this but I'm afraid we must address Art Abplanalp's concerns of
March22, 1996. Please provide me with the information conceming the "missing maps."
I believe that the easiest thing for us to do is to supplement the certified record at the District Court
weekly with any new information so that there can be no question at to the completeness of the file.
Thanks for your assistance in this tp-{r*'*,
RTM/aw ( v'
Attachment
C:\krxdtsen. m6m
Ofice of the Town Attorney
{g *""r"rro r**
SE[{T BY:Xerox
+.
TelecoDier ?021 ;o
Durux, A
Jotar ?. Dl,rtx
AirFut A AaFtax^trr Jt.
AU.EX C. CxttJttrttr
DlliE t. lt3tl t
L G. t?3tt{tt tox
ttlgA Garr|.!:
.rlrlv r. x^rxaH
IE. [ot Moorhead
Torn Atto:rney
Towr of vallVaII CO
VIA TEIACOPIER
Re: Internrtlonal lflng - Iodgc at Vall
D€rr TOn!
AE you are aware, €trller thts wcel3 Iopportunlty to rsvlen the !!own't ttle tor the Intcrnathe Lodge at vall. f ras advtscd that thc tlle u
avatlable at lfoon today. At noon today, I war peflttr nu[ber of docunentg whlch were epparEntly drawn fronbut I war not pemtttrd to revlcn the flle. lfhere
gueetlon that a nunber ol naBs s€8r not provlded, an<l
onc gtalt [.Dorandun raE not eu1ryllcd.
llhe docuncntg whlch n rclncluded the followlng napr, to
Denoranda ln tha fllar
llapa retesred to ln lehrcn
21261952 u.pr Al.l snd Al.2
napa refcrrod to ln lehren rnd Asgoctato!
21161963 Uapt A1.1, A4.1, A{.2, A{.3 arut A{.{
I an ln goaserrlon of one staff.nenorandun shlchrftor th€ beElnnlng ol the year, whlch I obtaln€dwhlch wao not anong the unt€rlal oupglted.lllulttat€e the problco wtth the frct thrt I naa
oppoltunlty to rcvtsr the flle, aa rcgulnd by law.
what other docunentr are ln the flle, or whatrenoved fron the flle, but the pbllc tr entltledlth.
Please nele arrangglontE to produce the actual
afterrroon, Ln order thrt I nlght lnlpect rhf,t tt actuallrt lcas3 at thts polnt ln tlme.
3-22-S0 ; t:2gPI iDUNN,ur$NALP$srm 3034?92'15?;* 2
Ls OF?rcsa
EPLANALP & cXnrSrENSEN, P.C.
Txr Verl Benx EurLorr{o
Surrr roo
roa SouYX FFot? or RoAD WiaT
vAtL. ColoiAoo ctat?
22 llarch 1996
readlly ldcntltted
whtch retcrcncc ta
and Asgo€latee
atto, .rtt
x^]nSr x, ou
cttflltrD rlart
thc
lflng ofbe nndeto r€vletthat flle,can be noat l€alt
nt aalngtn two
dated
dated
wrlttcnLler, but
onl'stton
lded th€
no ldea
have bcrntotew that
llla thl.
contalne,
not.f
Arthus A. Abplana
, P.
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-4 79 -2 I 07/F ax 970-4 7 9 -2 I 5 7
Ofice of the Town Attorney
March 15, 1996
HAND DELIVERED
Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr., Esquire
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C.
108 S. Frontage Road, Suite 300
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Intemational Wing - Lodge at Vail
Dear Art:
We are in receipt by fax, regular mail and Federal Express your client's objection to the staff
decision of March 7 , 1996 on the above-referenced project.
Pursuant to Section 18.54.080 of the Vail Municipal Code, this appeal is scheduled on the Design
Review Board agenda on April 3.1996.
Very trulv vours-'/1c //6,Ylb,%
R. Thomas Moorhead
Town Attomey
RTM/aw
xc: Vail Town Council
Planning & Environmental Commission
Andy Knudtserr v/
Jay Peterson, Esq.
{p *""r"uo ru"r
FROI"I : ABPLANALP PH0NE N0. : 3443433648 l'lar. 14 1996 12:54P1'1
TELECONIER TNANSMITTAIJ
TO!_TOWN COUNCIL, TO[{N OF VAII Ar{D lllEVAII PI.ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAI. COUMISSION
EROM: ARTHUR ABPLANALP, JR.
TO TETECOPTER NO. (970)479-21s7 AND (970\479-2452
FRoM: TELEPHONE/TEIJECoPIER N0, (304)344-35{8 (WEST VIRGINIA)IN VAIL :, (-9?O)476-476.5
DA,TE: 14 March 1996
Eiluludirrg Llrls cover Eheet, the number of BageE t,rangfiitted lsl
Please call (3O4)344*3640 in the event ot difficufty wtth thtstTAneniesion. THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONIJY FOR THE USE OF THE
INDIVIDUAT. OR ENTITY tO SHTCH IT IS DINECTED AND MAV CONTAIN
INFORUATION VIHICH I5 PRIVILEGED. CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR EXEMPT FRO!{
DI$CIJOSUHU UNDER APFLTCAELE IrAW. If the reador of thle nescageis not the lntended recilrient or the employee or agent
responslble tor d6rivering the mosBage to the intended reclplent,
you ar6 herehy notified that any diEseEination, dletributlon orcopytng ot this comnunicatlon ie etrictly prohibited. If you
have recelved thig co$municatlon in crror, gleaae notify thetransnitter at the above telephone number by collect telephonecall and destroy the material transnltted.
FROT4 :HBFLANALP PFnNE N0. : 3A43433648
Lew Orrtcas
DUNN, ABPI-ANALF & cHRISTENSEN, P.c.
a Fnorrtl|oNAL cohPoxat tor{
VAIL EANI FUILDING
gutTE 3OO
I c,6 touTit FnoNTAG! RoAb wE:37
vAtL, eOLOhAEA 81 667
14 March 1995
llar. 14 1996 12:55PM PAa
JOHN W, PUNN
AR'I{UR A, ATPLANALF, JR.
ALLGT{ G, Cl{Fta.t!Ha2N
DIANE L, HERI,IAN
'11}'*oi_"'"
IFESIAI COUNTEL:
JFiiY W, HANNAH
tELCFHgt{El
(e?o) {?O€tOO
TELICOPItRt
(e?ol {?3'l7ct
KARBN T, olNN
CGaTtFr[D LEqaL Ala[at^atT
![own Council
Town of Veil
75 South Frontago Road t{eEtVaiI CO
VIA TEIJECOPIER AND VIA FEDENAL EXPRESS
ToBn of VaiI Plannlng andEnvironnental CounisEiotr
75 South Frontag€ Road tdestValI CO
VIA TEIECOPIER AND VIA PEDENATJ EXPBESE
Rer LodEe at Vail International Wing
Dear glr or Madar:
fhig Ftrm repregentg Ms, Anita Saltz, the owner of Condominiununit 527, The Lodga at vair Apaf,tment cooctornirriurng, on whoee behallthis lotter is being directed to you,
_ Py thts lettef, ME. Anita Sa1tg appgals the actlon of the Tor+rrof, vall DeplrlrnerrL uf ceuruqnity Develofiment and, to tbe extent anatlf Bny action wag takin, the Town of VaiI D€iign Review Board,app,rovirrg cnrLaiu rcvised prane of the Lodge at vall rnternationart{ing. Despite repeated regueetg for information erd notice of|jtJrrsiderdtiorr'uf proceedlnge, notlce waa not provided of eltherEtaf,f coneideration or of any consideration by the Design ReviewBoard. ror th3 rcasons note6 below, there is uncertainty tron th€rgcord regarding the nature of the action which purporte to approveth6 plan8 whlch apDarentty hav6, aomehow, been given approvif lythe Town of vail.
The Town Councll consldered and gave conditionat approual tothe Lodg€ International wtng tn early Dec6mber, Ig95; degpiteobjections by adjacent owners beBed upon both deslgn anci treslassinto the co[unon eremente ot tne Loctge Apartnent condominiun. - Thecounetl was agsured by the deveroper that no .tf,egpagg oceurreaunder the ottgretl Irlan, and impoaed only the condition that theplan be redeelgned to increase the buffer between the hternationallilIng penthouge structure and the af,fected Lodge Apartmentcondoniniuns. The developer then Bubmitted a revlBecl proposal totho Dapartnant ot Cotlrnunity Developnent uhlch confirneit theexlstence of the trespasa previously identtfled ln the planpreeented to, coneroered and conditlonally approv.d by the Eonrr
FROI',I : AEPLANALP PHoNE NO. : 3843433648 f'lar. 14 1996 12:56PN PA3
council. That revieed pr_an war dlsapproved by the Dcpartnrent ofcglmu?+tv_Developnent staff, , at which-tirue intdrosted plrireg we;;effectively eut off frorr negotiationE whiah oocurred bitwccn Bt;iiand the developer,
0n th6 l2th of March, 1,996, thie Firm received notice that arcviced pl,rn for the Lodtge at vail rnternational lfing had bsnnapproved !y tne Town of Vail., It is that approvat whlch ie therubJsct of thl.c appeal
Inltialtry, there le unsortalnty rsgordtng the ggutrse of thei,Dlfovalr and therefore th6 nature of ttre appeat, The rown counctlrrferrerl the Dlan ooneidered by it in - -Docernber back to theDgpartnent of Comnunlty pevelopilent staff. tlowever, tha napprovedil
plan provtdeil_by lhe Town of VaiI indicatec tlrat it wac ,,Approved
by the Tom of Vatl Design Revlew Board - Mafch Z, 1996,', aifd alsolndlcates that itwas 'rApproved by gtaff - Andy l(nuOtean - 3/l/96x.Thcrefore, the Town's record indicates that approval rnay-haveoccuirred etthcr by thc Dciign Review Bonrd or by eEat!, or bi both.
We ahalJ, rely upon the Town to deternine who took the action and todLrcct thl.e appcal to tbc approprlute body, tn accordlance wtth theVatl tlunicipal Code.
Wlth reference to the reaaons for thle appeal , they arenulttple;
1. Tlru plan whtch yras provideo anil ldentifted aE thatrcceiving Town of Vail appEoval ls virtually unintclllglble, but,Lo Lhr Hrtsrrt lt 1r htolllglble, it clearly has no relationBhip tothat which war approved by the Town Councll. Thereforo, theapplication mret bc tnltlated ea a nelJ procOBB, rathef than belngsubject to hrholesale redeetgn at the diecretion of ConnunttfDcvelopment Btall .
Z. TlrE nen plan has an Afea which is between CondOulnlumUnlt 527 and 533, on the weet, and the penthouse atructure, on theeaetf which ia not labeled, diagransal, or the EubjBct of anyelcvation, and which wes not included on ths Drior plan. ft may nean olevator Bhaft, and lt nay havb a sloplng roof or a flat roof.It nay be two feet hlgh, or it nay be twelve f,eet high. Nolnfornatlon har been providod which glvee any infornation regardlngth€ss questions.
3. Nslther the "Roof Plan" nor the 'rRoof/Planter Sectlon"tilenttfteB the location of the latter section, One can onlyspeculate even aB to whether the Loalge Apartnent Condominium lc onthe lett or rt-ght of that section, but it is clear that the latt€r
doea not reBresent a ssctlon tndlcating the size or impact of thestructure whtch apparently te plenned adjacent to Units 527 and
533.
FROI"I : NBPLANALP PHoNE N0, r 344343364S Nar. 14 1996 12:56PN PA4
ulhen, errd if, our client and ths other objectort are provirlcdwlth any adaltttonal plans' which arE ncceagary to nakeunderstandable thogo two mapB which were provldad to ue, it lny beable to tdentlfy with BDecificity other problemr wlth the deitgnwhteh tfe not now ldsntifioble. Dy tbia lettsr, tn addltlon tolnltlating ths aXrpcal aB Eet forth abover.we agatn r€gueBt copieeof all eubnlttqler mtpgr lrla$a, correspondence end othcr naterlalpresented to ths Town of Vail tn aaEociation wlth thi6 natter, or
errchangod betrilsen the Towrr of Vatt and the agplicant.
xci !18! Anlta SaltuMr. Tom Moorlrcad
Ms. Ann Frlck
Mu. Jay P$terron
truly
EA'd -1u101
-EFlr-alctl
Sahzl%ells v. Lodge properties, Inc. and Town
DA{IBITLIST
PRELIMINARY INruNCTION & RULE 106 MARING
Wednesdaf, ldarth 13, 1996
l. Ordinance 4(t970)
2. ftinaucc 21 (1980) (attrached to Wells, b,rief)
3. OrdinancE 4 (1993) (attachedto Wells, brief)
4' Miscellaneous sections of vail Town Code in cfrect in 19E3 (anached to s/ells, bricf)
5. Miscellaneo's sections of currcnt vail Towu code (some scctions werc sfiachedto Welts' brief)
6' certified Maps of Brock 5-c, vail viltage Firbt Filing from prglc county
7. Ordinance No - 41 (lg7S) (fiached to Wclls, bricf)
E. OrdinanceNo.42 (1990) (attachedto Wells, brief)
g' Memomndum dated August 12, rggs from cornmrmity Deveropment to pEC;
subject A rcquest for h height vadatrco and common area square footage variance inorder to add an ererrator addition to &e Lodge south condominium Building
l0' ordiuancc No- S (1973) (some sectiorc werc attached to weus' brief)
I l. Chars and Timclines
12' Documents attachcd to wclls' Motion to supprernent the certified Rscord
13. urban Design Guide prarr for vail village.-Design considcrations secrions
14. Certified Record in this case as supplemented by the Towu
EA/'g'd )XJ3f ES:SI 956I-eI-dUl^l
Jutt t t'C*** i ::6ti[ :*,"*"H,tfihffi#Jtustvuquti* zt v
Erf[.eI URRflYii# Ailt
2. The_;s6s ccncluflqne tlld appl!| to etlsulttlot oftotat denrtrv t" ll!l:^_*il;;T;: i.:! l= rtsmif rcant . enct!.nrrESrll;":"*ni ordrnancor 'rnc€ riirl or tr," fi;;-;;Iiir to
3. llf.rraetiue, w.ro .vsi.lallc to _Lodgr prollgrtl|r lnleEt rtthrn ble .tg_t"ttgl" "lltiJ'i_rn, r. ordrnrf,qe.l-. r€dsePropcrtlor could havc_ appllca-fii-c-rrzonJ,ng of lr.c 1eno,rncludtng as I sD€ctu ilviiopiiiz'dr"rrr"t.
4. Ttra rffrct, o! the lgg3-agrernent borrr€en lrotlgsPreltrtlet arrd the larn nii io-c5.iie i vrrtarrce frii'tne_zonlngord'rn'nee by contrlca anc nrihoii-6"pryrn9 wrth the tloqn,rrtqutr.ncnEg tor Eh?.grn[tl;g-;i-";"ralee. orantlng ot ayartrncs aB ro drnrlt! ir p.irilted-by ril;-i"*il]'JilI.r.".ngulatlons alrhough_i,"tiniicri-i"i-"igqy
lrevc rcldon, i ! cvrz,tr'en grrnrrq br ttri !or0;;;-;fidi;i;nd Envrronilonral coude6r.on.
rfrtb reopcct to other i'au.., rhteh havr bcrn rltsedove! thc Euat frv goyi, t r'a"c-r,Ji-i"o c,ehvrot lgacc to hcvc AnlcaEal,tr FrcrenE et the-hiari"g if--ii di*r, otr wcatneEdry. rn th11palt r Davs otrord 19 prooici-uil iir{i-riJ ;-iriilil;,degorltron and harre cari-.O-y"u-irr"-oo.. not lnt€nd tg Do tn ValIunEtl ttle r|toh of t6rsh lt. '-- -- '
wlth EcElrrct to tne rtigulation es to nlnutet ofeeetlngl of the r.oOge.eparcrint-iiilicrtrtuD Agloctlltonr I aleorav. ro nranE or coi*rii;g-ilied-luir,unti"lll:-';iiliii, yo"tttrve *quut.d utrrthoa irv 6ri"nc-ii;uing ro vr.thrrErt - hortrerpagr slatn. t.al-uniDr--id-rirpong to that requerr tncrnuchrg I bove nat recolved a copy ol-ihE-*.l"liil' H"l;L$il;:l,l!'til"fii'iii:"$i ;H'i3ll'.;*; -'
Jr<lr lpce
ccr l{s. Sal.bal'lr, lrlck. I{D. Imont
Youtg veay trUlyr
, rBPrJttttllp g cHnfgDEtlEN, !.cr
tl, Dunn
Lfh^ bt"5D)
t Q)'f *4e-'
zg 39vd LSVAELTAL6 Et:gI 966tlztlea
,Ori r. DUrra||t tt,r r, I|'tJuUf,t Jl.rltt{ C, G|tnaraErr3l|l a. tattr. l.- e. art.|.drt|tr
*rr( $s||altrrt|lr f. xaltt {
Q r-.^,,o , ir",11#n,,'*fftrli'ffik
DuN N, AerlaNntt; o'ac"r
. -*..1|.S::rsrsnsen, p. C.
Trt Verr P1p1 6111or"n
turr roq
toa Souff Fn*real llleo wrrirvtrL Cerorroo trrtr
toarah ll, t9g6
j!l!t S. Batlcy, Jr,
il;d'Ii,'*iltngr sr ar.
oe;;.;; t;i;;il""l62surrr r r ? g
vll ?tIJECOprEn 30!-0t?*009 7
.Re: geltl/Hetl,e ?.. Lodgr pfopsftio;. I!s.Dras Jtnr
;:::$l;rti"',aift $i:i:i"*i,rl"it##H:#i:h"
;;#'$tr 1"i*1t;t;o*ii'*:*Uii:.t:r+'!;;,n*,,.'
-
l:__b" cxgrerrro ry ffi-ffi.ifl: ff-::"_::b_"tance of rhC oprnlona
'opy oi [[;-;;"i{,1'#1i""ff *:*:"lll"it*"ir,llEri. -i -
i#l$]1'ildi$tr#.;i,1',;i'di;:iiii:,i,'$ili:;.ffii:}"
follone: flre rqbttance of ltr- r.anont,s oprnlon wllt bt ar
connecoJsn lrrf, t#I-: crlcur*.lon or
tri'$'T$Fff n'$fr+#i$l$l#,Timiffi
'
Itl"ll8;s #:l ffi:Tir!. ur'? "iiiiiii'r
fffe;sg****:**,rt,;H#jffi
tl!lttq!:aatot.ra-ga€
r.r,tcgt attr:(tto, at.-.r..
|larcl r. but|rt."tF t lltr! l|t||rrrr
O, Ut , AUilO, tX ll i)
E{rtff HAmlil0:* 2/10
r9 39Vd L9VSELTOL6 9E:gr 966rlZllES
.}1-r,-.o-i 4rzuriu ;*tra., *rr|-,U'7U47UU4b7;* U/ U, SINI bT;Elll ol ' ltt tuillLr.r
Bg 39Vd
JFlrroat/louqc 1996
1ItqqrTEGI.Ur r t' \D gIyJF lrGJNr rRltc Tf qFNrCt'^ N'
relz-.ffiiJ ny " "*i.tv cf ilobi!.. 1, rnd cn;lrccrlnj cou'grniw ar
dtrft$w, dcrigwr, rnd field lntpcctur'
l,re$rr alrri Uotil-o., A n d Drrtlr nrr : € rlpl r' rrYyo P il I And.
Dfryrr. WoifirnpUui;; ilffii; dcdgn.of rcsidcntial, coon*cial rnd inrtitu'
hiiJriroerutc$ iictlOing rilo plrnniri ud lo-drcepc dcliln'
!l rvcyo r in-a cifu E4ti :trta! T:ohniclu = crrpcr' wyoni I 3'
RcnsnsiDililio in;huttd rlrirting th; i0 fillddoign ol nrior nuniciPrl smrt Prv'
i;;G;i; dninryc proBsrrD fbr r stvil tn;iuerirg firo'
rrnq^rcur +aEnATrc^r s' study.of rhc nrbrn dcsiga, ilr$t'r pltmlu}'
nrd f*@Dtcrn.tloBr, rlleltl rnd uooolril
ccnnunitlct'
UDDl/lltllrrLsl r*rriting, lrq,r forrrrt.photography' tclcvision ptoduetion'
m$tzinr publie$iosr. tltf6tiliJ.t iitnotul.t rlirlgr,-;ripblor prcrcntrtioor, publlc
rpcd.ilj utd Ptcsr rrlrtionc'
EDlltrAgOlL
|9?0-ol|rcrrlty of goloredo'
'A,
Joc|oh1Y: eprc|alirrrlon ig urben gociolcgy'
iriiig tri gc-dir.ct"r"l dcoi6u. aivil colinrcirng, rnd prychology'
It?t.tlrivrrrllt rt Colorrdo ltlA, UrDrn tni l'tlrtrt PlrrahjlColuulty Dr'
irroptto,, *'iti . ,poo;rti".6o" in sountrin retort town plraninit dcrlS!' .od
oommullry dor ctcFnont toobnlqrror'
!4or.rnsroM r -$IGl r{l t aTrpN s : Amcrioru Plrln in8 A |.Oeirlion'
profnrffi pubtic rnd prlvric rrctor ptrnacrr'
L9VS6L'8L6 9€:€T 966rlZr/EO
G-,^.:.-...'...-:;:t.xr-r--.---.€3:hg.n*O, - - .-....i',',;iylil,".'.i'rr'i!'
.I15U-.tffr kll n rre rnoa t
ltt6 nDBUI|E
$Ircchlht(ipfi.GonnrdV llutlof nrtr l[,4 Mouttrtl R:rarr inrF ,trlillilf
irrloleavr
rlEcuTrvEl|lEcxo+1 pa+I Jlr.r.{!EF no}f||ovNFes
^qsoer-ATIO :i, Y rlr,r fiO&On AnQ- | rq r ..PBFiIlilL Orgu izrrional, rdntllill*lvt,
rnd planuinj rclPooabilitl"f for 8 propsrrt owucr rsrocietion rcprcmurilg indivtdu.tl prq?Bny orracrs rfrd condoadrlum r|rogirtions throughout Vril Vlllagc. R0.
spondbilltirr includs; Buput'irioo of acighborhood progrny owncr perticiprtion in
Oc plrulioj !y vdl Aloocirltr, [nc. of 327 miltion gotdon Perls Sti Brrr hrdovol-
opdlrlt rnd trvllwsd bt tho Town o(Vail. Critic aart rnlyois of nuy dcvrlop
rnont proporrls reYlcwnil by thc Towu of Vril'r Dlrign Revirw 8orrd, PlUtriagrnd
Environurqntrl comniseion. rnd fons conncll for Vril vlltrgc, Membcrof rivcnl
l'orm of Vril t&rk fproe conminccs 0r patticiparcd in rhc pubiic rcvicr on bchrlf ofttc Honcouroo ArrocirrioB on mltlcrt rcgrdiqf zgoil5, irud ur., mrsrrr phnruog,
aod enr{rourunlrl fisttett,
?r.,lF{ilING CPr{s Ut.r anT ; t ?rl-t} r I : Cl icntc incl udc npnlclprl gov3f!.Etttr; oondoninium il$ciatiotrl rnd comruunitt or gurizationr.lhuor Vtll Cordollnirn Arrocllrlftr novid€ roostcr pluninS, derljn rc,vicw ud-ludrcepc dorigr srnrice to oae of tbo oldrOr rnd lrtcrt "on{orriolori?repcrtt b vnil, lncludlog r multt-nrilllorr doltrr ranowrior and upgradgg prog,rail,
Rcpreacntcd thc associolioa and ncighborbood intcrcrr la t!. proprrariol rtd rrvicrr
by lf,e tofv! of Vall of tho Vril Vilhge Mrrrcr tlrn rnd gtrecaeitc plur-
Actior Vril/Srlcod-r of Opor $gr*: Ptunirig end oemmvqity dcvclopncnt
advisor to a nonprofrt putlic ir.rcrert oiganiation. ][c prlrrry afiortr of tha or3a.u:rtion erc dircctcd rt im?lgl1r_s opcnlp"cot in rbe Toivn of irrit througb itn oi.r,rl3ht ofrontng, nrrlcrurnd USFS lind cxchangts.
Towtt ol Rcl Clllf, Co.lorrdo: ,Mastcr plarling rnd connunity drvclepnrnrguidrncr to tle Towa council and strff conccrniog *i rcgmd?rtio! oi' too ydr odforro.cnrrioirg touro, ite govcrnh€n|., esd infrrstruoturc whilc arintrhiru lttc Hir"prnic culture of rhc oouaunlty.
Tora of lvor, Crlorrdol Cond'ctcd rerclrcb aad rtudier rcrulrlng In rheprcprra{on of Mrrlcr Plau nportr rad erhibhr nbmltrd for conrldcrrdoo' lrr Tor"nCeuacll, Plambl Commicrion, and fowl Mrorgc.
Nottio3lrp Rrncf Mrrrcl plrD f,rlarrr A rDort prtprrod for rhr
psrpo.lc of $teblioblag land use alt.n6tjvcs for alzo0 rcre imcd e[3iblc for u-o.rrtio! to tbr Ts',r of Auoa. Rucrrci hclude$ compilrilon of land-usc inforne.tioa ud orp?gt for rcas of firture uben dcveloparnr,
_-.1!_r- r ^ !f!$orr lt|rrrcr Flu: Two rcparlu trnd uw ptau wen pcparcd,wilCtr qr$GrlriItsC rh! lonrrionl ofrordwlyr, rlr.turll hrzrrCf, opcn lpw", -gtbl.port
tcrmilrl, somurcrsirl and rcridcilid dcvcloprwol rirll, drsrnriivcsltarogtiondtlter fol r alal.bole trolf eour* rnd ton rrrr puk with iportr cornplcx-
-
es 39vd L9rA6LrgL6 gE:Er 966llZl/ES
1",*-r*,, -'.'f:,.r,,-.....-.-s'.,.k',**r# *,*,oiHf,J.i',,ty ir,!d v
JFlrnoot/Rcrumn 1996
Wildlife lltrilfr ?lru A plln wes prcpared fot thc puriorc of dcfdn.
iog wildlifr miggrtion routtl lnd brbitar for brgc grrnc rnitrtr auC blrdt of prcy.
Plao imludcil mapping of nigmtior routcs and hrbltct. Plon nrrrrtivo providcd for
lltsrnrtitc rnijratiol rortttt thrrough utburized rnr utd invontory of cridprl migre'
tlol conidorg.
Itrcr llltr Ann:rrtlor Plrt! A plrn prcpared for tbe luipolc of
idmtifyiq rrcar GtldDls fsr annsratien to t!,e fo*t olAvol wtthln llmitrtlon er-
labll.rhcd ty Sntc of Coloralo crrbtiag lcgirlarien, Plrp lnctuded hvcrrtory, nrp.
pfugr rorl rnrlyrio +f rll 3ovcrnmcrtol fcrvieot, toundrry loertlon, |rod uret, and
dcnsltirr rlthin crtrblirtrC rpceiel octropoli[n rcrvicc dirrrior.
qtr'Xl4ler {Nrrrc cCIrsrrr rrxr, 4qIyrU_(l|r.AVON- eor.oRADp
tpla'$rtr l;cporuible for tle rcvicw of plrnning rnd d;rign frctorl of rll devcl.
Opmlnt projrclr Proposcd in tbe comnuoity. ScniOr consultlng rdvilor to tb? To\tn
Menrgcr, Plrnni4 Comoluion, rnd 'fo*n Council on rnrttcrs rglrtcd to ccoeotrlc
drvclepncnt Dolicy, long.rangr plranlng, urban dulgn rud ucbitoctuc. fhc Town
of AvDo il r ilouorain rerort levy rown sstrbltthrd ln 1970, wlth tLc intont of bc-
corin3 tlr grimaqr rboppng, and comarcrcirl rcrvics clntrr for tbc Vril Valtoy rc-
lort 5omPl.r.
ltrrfrr llrn Gorb r|oi lolicio: PreFred dreft of docunelt fot tubrequc.nr
rdoption wlfcb juidcr Oc conoudry's god! nnd potioier regudlng rbo dcrtlop.
romr of itr acolnl8t, tErntpotlction r)6(GrB, rubrrr dsrf8'. horrsirlg, ud publtc
ftcilitlu.
Urbrl Dortgr ?ht; Developncnt of an urbrn dorign tlcrnr rnd plrn furcrntrrl turlncrs Dirrriot, Fepered oupporriul 3rrplisr rld rtport. end c6nduotcd
Dublh btsringr. llrn indisrred losilion for rdditlonr urd nodlfleetlonr !o stcct
lynao; cirorhtion corridorr for rnr:r trrnrpgrtetfuin, dGlivlty roil cmergcncy vt.
bichr: titcr frr pcdrrtirn circuletion corri&orc, prrliry fxiliricr and ludrcapcd
cPGs sptr:G; |ld abc locetloA 0f rnqlor conu,crsiri rnrl rcridcnthl rrruquttt. Plei
providcd for M|ttcr PlanninS of s rtvcr ftont prr& and tor I[c cxpeuioo of horsl
sad rccon conm€rcirl orcr dea3 linitod portions of tlrr B4lc Rivcr.
lvon Towl Celtrrr Prtiicipalod io o publis/private ccononic dcv:loprncur
protran to dcvalop r retail rhoppiry aGntct wirh o Wall\tcrt dcpartEtnt storo rs I
mrjor uebor t Drot. Th rhopping wntcr projcct wer plenrcd rr I rDautr of oon.
lcrting thr conorunhy't tcoooolc barc fiou a dcpcsdorrcc upol roddndrl oon.
qtrupiloa rnd reol G$E!G sslcs t0 tn lconony dcpmctnt upon rrtcr tar frout retr.il
cdor. Ttc projaol furtbc.rcd the conrnunityl inrgc rs a rirq;or rGtril sld rervlce
etbtet in ths Vtil Vrtley-
Dlftflct Mrticr llmrr Proparrd Mrstcr Plus for mrjor devoloprucnt prrc+brdjx!$ ro rhc Eaglc Rlvcr. Mrsrr,r plans included ciro llanninj for prrkiug irrvc-
tr.rrer, buitdint_sr ogln oprc!, pedotlrirn $ircutatiorir lrra?br rtver nont park in.
provoruGott, wlldltfc plct€rvcc, rgurric rad othcr rocreational froilfilce . Mutgr
Plrnc wcrl proparc.l for Bqltbcrd, Mcym'r Rrnch, rnc white subdlvlrionr.
tA :PVd L9VSELDEL6 EE:EI 96EIIZIIEA
vu-lr-tD i'lr;zor ; EArl'r "-n ururrTuu{tiz;* D/ u$En I Dt.{!ala It r ala att- Ere
JFlarnoouRcru'sro I 996
pceffi ii" tb. ldrloiairtration of zooinS' trnd urc, ttd
[oitUog codcrl rupcrvlrion of dcpermcnld P1feoltlcl' rdvirory ro thc lown Altor-
ney; thJ prrprnflin of rcports and rccolrrtioltr to thr Planrring Comnrisrion rod
fown Couniil. rrnds tho lupcrviriob of lhc Tovrn Malrgor
T rrnfrrb6 ilvrlc pu .ot f,ljDir/Dclr t5' t rrctlo ntltt.dor Br po rtt
AuthOrca tcpotl tcslrdlng rta dlrpbttrlou end modificrtiOn lo tbe cornmunlty's
Irrnsfintli Ocvclopncnt Rlghtl progrlsli s.rcd oB con$ittc. ro drrft lqtitlrlior
ior cubrcqrrnt adoprjor of onilnanc.c ibic-b prrmitp{ tbo frrcrlonrllrrtion of a &-
vdoporcoi righf i[to I iombinrtioa of diffsrint r:ridoatirl unit riril In ordrr to cn-
OOU|1. r wilq. vrricty of hourirg typtt to b. colrlfuolcd, rnd to crUcC zodng
draritlcs lo rdjurS to cf,rngrr in mrrlri eohdidoos.
w- pnrr -trfiFrn aND.rf.[ 4 VJsIo\.I&QDilC'
ln-jfZ&tiiar publistrcr, produccr, unlfcr rnd photogrrphcr fot prilt rad tclovi-
lion oc|ia in rf,r Vril Vrtlcy. hivrtc pl60i$ rnd doiSn tlviow c6llultr11l fol
locrl S0vcruocntr, progotl;r orrafffr attot!€yr, ald hrt?rclt !itoup!'
Tl. Yitl larnr Ad Lecrl Mlprina: Comusroirl Dublicrionr ori-
c6tcd towrd viiltor rnd logd popu[6on, with cnPbu[ oD 3r6cnrl intcrcil uticltg
rnd foatures dircctcd towrrd plrulaj rnd drvcloprnrnr it oa'
publlc Tclcvllia Advilrry Conolt6ct Mcrbar of cltlzcnr sommit'
tE? 3urolrtrd by tbo 1'oll Torr8 Ceuneil 19 setrblirh publirc ecoc$ tGltvillotr ltr tbc
Vril Vrllgy, Co-rutboled !!pon ol inpleulcotrtion stt8te8its.
Ncr'rvril: PrOduccr of r ortc bOUr Wekly nor't iEttrvicw lhow {or Itlo
cosocsulivo vt'Lr GgncGtollg rignifica'.l ii'u!'' ?vcbtt' rnd pcrnonallti er of tho
Vril Vallcy. Tbr rbow eulalsrtrd ln e rcrirr of lpooirl plogl.nt wlicb wcrc pro-
duccd on tOCrtlOq tlocumanting thc cxpcrirncot of rh Vril fiIDior Hoctsy Tuo'r
tow of SloGklolm. Hchiuki, rd Lrrti4red.
Oolloo lml SLl Bur Briorcbpr:rl Mutcr Plur tlllt Boprc'
rertcd Mrnor Vdl Goldcuiniun Alroslrtl6n in ncgotirtiol u'itb Torm of Vril rnd
Yrll Arrociuor rogndlng thc nultr phnninS, grchitecturrl d9ttg1 udrulnCrncnl
of apiibborlrooA piopctty octltf govce$tt cf uttr wltbln @oldrn Pralc lki Brrc
OirUiit. MU13r Plrn providrl for rccr[rioorl og:n tyrce, end a. JEsort building
rvllcb lmtudoc food riwicq rll mhool, cltild cue, ncdicel rcrvicu' ctSldtltitl
towlnf, guhiag rlructuntt, l3d r:erlrttonrl facilifics. PrOjccrr wrr cpprovorl by
Town Couacit m0 prcpcrry owacts associrtioa-
Mrnoi lirll Prl.ltriar Mrllr lgltr Dori3n ald superririoc of thc
sonrtruction Of e pldartrlrn ndl tnd cntnncc plarr for Muor Vtil Lodg3 rud Ford
Prrk, ftorcct tctrtcwcd old rPprovs4 by Town of Vril Drritr Rrvirw Ecrrd snd
Pl"nnin$ coilmlUlotr.
9g -Itd L9Vq6LNAL6 EE:ET 9E6IIZIIEB
*itlqJtl Dt.9l .61 tvrr.'s. r -u-tt-uD
; it; zofal *,*r,*.l.
JFlarnont/&cams lgld
DrllEcron nr.GQVMrtIrrIIJOtrYf.r oIIltENT. f(Iry.9:+i:YAll.l
rqCn-ilqt-t .B.pr
",''ptoyAfCot
u lndurtc tudcnt rcrving ar aigainlsgruiat ltrit-
"lr On-pn-id tu fnifriwl Malagcr. Adminictretivc rwponslbiliticr includrd rhc
fqrmation of tbiDepUtfi.nl Of COntnunitf' DovelOpmurnt thrt rcsultcd ia rppoint-
n.nt lt Diroctor of-coalruniry DcYclopult4. Thc Dircctor'r toryonflbllitill itt'
oi.f"C roprr.'isiorr of phyriorl, rociat, ecoromiC, rnd ffcd planning factorr for rn
urbrs mor.rrtsin resort *ith I grqccted poptrtion of 50,000: !4onlnl to Etc Torvn
lf.*fir md ldvisor to TowrAtiornry, Town Counsll, Plqging Conoirrisn. Dc-
rirl flevicrr EOI?d lni r vfilcly of study courmirtces; cooldiBNlot of proforionrl
.olsdt or rrvlsct lur urban d*i3n md rrrrter planningl plrndng ltw, rrchitceture
rud lBdr..pr dctijn for lubllc capitrl inrPlovcilq0t projccrs toralint Sl5 mlllion;
adninir&rtor ol bu-ttgoi rid fixrl planning for a strff of livc rcchnioirnr tcrpo0riblc
f"" ttr e;1tilg ud inloraensnt oi lurd uac policy rnd tcgulationr including: build'
ing, cnvirennintrt hnlth, rooinS rod rubdivirioo codcs. enviromeutrl imprgt
"iiir.-.nr, rrod rro m111.r ptrining, dosign rcvicw 0f tmdscapc, sitc ptrnniUg r1d
irobitcotur., crplul improvcmclt p6nning, rnd jotni Vrll -lrrOcirtCrlggtc Couaty
rot6tcr phnning for tbG Viuttr Otynglcu rnd eth:r ilrua'- Esvlroursld Hrrrrdr ordhercr: .\utbored caabling lcgirlrtion
cstrblirhiag lrzrrd zoner tbgt Plovi&d for tbc prolibitlon of ilmcturcr lA rnrr of
knoqa rutrirul hrzrrdr. Lrgir[rion 3cquircd s$PPort iaformetion ptovitled by on-
rit! rclettttllc ludy s1d nutor plrnninj documrntlrioo. Tbc lo3irlatior wr! tc'
vicved by Plualng Conaiorion, rgprovrd !y 'Iown Couneil.
Eorlrortd Zorlng Oidli.tc.! Arthorrd rrtrltr ptrnnlnE t.F(tt rod
cnrbtirg lcgidrtion rlrt crcrtpd floor by /loor ?0!|n8 oll|tlncltblt for builtlln5r
i,ithin inc irtt vlllqe conrmorslrl corc. Tba lcaislrtlol wae rcvlcwcd !y Plrnnrn3
Oourlrrlon rld rpgrovcd by Town Counell.
Corfruilty Girl ftttht RcDorr: $erved es priuoiprl nauniciprl-mrs-
trr plenner rnd authoref t ilrr&il glen rcport of Sodr ud pollcirc' on bobrll of r
cirilon oododllrtr appoirtcd by tho Towa Council, wbich rot out tconOplc, fl|cd,
reoid, rnd cullcj1l iirlr urd polieigr for rhc Town of Vril. Plrnniag Cona6rlon
Rcvicu, rld Tcwrr Couucil Approvel.
t'13 vrlt ttrrriirhnr Sorvd rr prinoiprl nunioiprl plrnncr fur r nr-
tionrlly rctcctcd litdt6rpa dtrlln tl:r6 tbrt produpod t plan fot capltd lmptovc-
nrnt piojcolr for public ircititiJs and pubtic lrnfu wlthin thc Tour:n of Yail. Tlre
Etrrtar pien known ar thc Vril Plrn **l rpviuwcd by phnniug cgntrrirrlon rad ap'
provdiy Torrn Council rubecguctt to lcnl$-y end fctrilcd p_ublic r.cvitw- Mastcr
i'trn rorultcd iu lbr prda$rltnlirtion of Vdl Vi)lajc, trdfttrim mtll improvcmcntr'
lurk inprovcnrcnts, public lcndfctgr luploucmcnttr 6grrrco tO Vlil' thr rcqUiri'
ion of Ford Puk oud the cotrstructibn of t Crnttrl prrkiny'Uurporlrtion ccnbr for
Vril villqgc.
lr73 Zolilt Code f,iloru Ordiarrcc: rPas principrl municiprl plm'
Iret in cotljtroction norlln3 xfth utionatly roliciud phnnh3 ottornsy to drrft I ml-
jor rcforru-of t[e zoning oidi-t*o.. Tbr rcruldn3 relorar ordiurncr gtoridrd fcr trhc
-inclution
o'f dai6n tovlcs luldardl, cnvirountettal prucrvrtlon pmvirionr,
u'/u{/uu{b7;# ti/ u
99 39Vd L9VB6L'BZ€ ge:eT 96ET/Z|/EA
JCJI I Dt.JaJrt vl oa t tct nan U/U{/UU{B l t} // d
JPLrnorURcrunG 1996
cotrCidggr of opcn lprgqe lnd laldtgrDt1g, rnd.cctrBrlir.cd parli4 mq.Ul$!rcn$"
Ttre ordinrnso icEGiied Planailg Corninlgriol lcvierY aod Towa Gouncil ap9rovrl'
Rrrl srhtr Trrurtrr Trr: ttrr principul d$iciprl plrnnct il con"
jructiou with ToUn Managor eud Flr$oe Dircctor iu tho prcprrrtio[ of 1' tnuniciP€l
uriq progrm whlch csttbli$ed t\rndiry tor a caPltrl Inptovcrueut pto$mr w[ich
inc:uiiO dc lOqUtfitiol of gublic gPto lgtccr Otc conslructioa of improvcncnlr to
public opctr rpric rod Ds3kl, snd iqducrncilr for thc oonrlructlon ofprivatr lrctl'
irlonot imsritiro on privrt? PreFrt'. Produced tettcr plannbg docnneotr coo-
corninl qp?! rprcc roquiritloq,'rnd n11t?t plmnln3 rtpo-rtrfor lopro_lcmUp on
pUbticjmlr rnd nellr. Thc proJrot roceilf rpp'av-tl by-thc Towa Councll.
Vrll Vlltr;r Trrarprrtelfon Crdfir Ssvld rr prinoigd nunicigrl
pleuncr on r nrtionallyie lcctod intcdirclpthrry drriSn tcar of rrchits$!, t$ld'
l"rpc rrcbltcctE, rnd en'incsrt rbrt &rlgncd rud conrtnrcttd I Aulti.lcwl 1200 oat
puiilg stnrcNr;, inforiation dlitGtr bul turpottllioq ceutcr' cntr'noc plezr rnd
ionot.t tor Vril VillrSre. Rcrloaribilltlcs iucludcd' rc$c,rlch for nrastrr plrunin3
!!d urb1n desiSn Eri6ria, mortcr plannirg :dvlrory rcconncadoliol. to town Mrn-
agcr, Town Coirncit rnd Plrnning Conmirrio& rnd publie fglrtigl3 in conjunction
wltttrbond rlsction- Mrtlct plrn and urban dUlin lpprovcd hf PlllAlut Cornnis-
tion, Town counsil ald by iublic clcsrion. Tb! profcot rcccivcd nariond rccogni-
ilol for its orccllsncc ir hodccrpe .nd rtrbilr deri;t.
Eert Vril IIut* Plu All Aralrrflort Prcprrcd m$tcr hnd uce
plr+ rnd zoning plrn for Eart Yail. Ptcplrcd nrltlr plerrning r:r{ Eonlsg docu'
inrort, g"ro pobii" 6rtinooy dudrg ruaoHtion bcrri4 bcforc T.rwl Council, rp-
Pcrnd ct nrighborbood ncalnlr corrccrqisS a!!3r!tion, urltcr tluuitu' tud
ioaluj rla!fir. Preprred aoniu ylln for srvcrd hundrrd Jcparltc rroD'nlcr' nct
rrith p-roFrty ownr11, gf ve gublic lestimol]' bcforc Plamiog Commirr'lgn rud Town
gsunoil icgurltD3 llnd usc rnd roniog donrilics for trcb PNse I of hnd ln thc anmx'
&lo! rrG& Zontag denritier scru lowctrd ftom dcnsities rllowed bt privUe oovo'
s$r. The rongrrllon hcteased tbe rirc of lhr commulity tbrc. fold' The
rua3xltion rrnr rpprovod by plrnling cornmifrion, towo oounoil, rad public
sloction.
Jotr A. Dobror arGn lflllsar Plrn: Served ar rnuaiclprl pluncr
wirh ra intcrsrtlolal deriga lcam of rrsbltcctd fundrorpc trchi{ccl, cnginearr and
tcoultlclllr, to derigncd a uulti-nilliol dotlrr indoor ict arcat utd sonvcilion ccr-
trr. MrtGr plra inctudcd tbc dcriprtion oll g lanil errguiritloo rilc, ths locatlon of
najor publtd tOptOvements 0r thc silc. inclufing plblic plazcr aad landscrpcd ODon
rple3.- Yrll Al{ Rrglrtrl Growlh ManrFEGri Plre: Wu principrl tnunici'
prl mrstrr plilnct eonrulting with a nrtionrlly rolectcd nUaisiprl 1o\rtlomcut con'
iutrtnl tcrur conslstils oftrbon plrnning, Dulietprl eisirccrisg, Publlo wntlft rnt
ouniolprl filrecr to produce ir lrowlh nillltsE€nt ptrn throl3h w[ich to dc(nrEdaa
tbc levit oforb$ ronricts n?cessaty to neintrln rpopulatiea bllrnso btlrtccn $Li
uoultain crlnClry md ubrn dcvclOprncrt ta Vril, Bcrvcr €rcck and lhc rurround'
ing fUbdiviriom, The projcct ftori'rcd llrndng Comniwion rcvicw and Town
Conncil rpprovd.
Lg 39Vd L9Vq6LVAL6 9E:Er 96EllZT/E9
lErrr I DI ,
l|cltl ut.ttl lvtrr|Jt t Cr-,r-'oo ; a:(Jrrt-i....... uATLEI non}
lFLrmont/Rtsttrc 1996
Dirlrtet Mrtttr Plrul Authoru4 In coujonctios with muoiciPel dc-
sign rcvlcw.o*uttoob, ;iioi o.hiuott and lcgsl rdvkors, t ccries of nlrl:r plus
for Spcclet lrcyctopnc'r iis6i6tJ tn d13 TOw! of Vrll. Mrrtrr pbur inoludel! C13-
o.c.uii.3., uur_uqriotr ior"f vril viltrlr Inr, Nonlrroodr, Dsublo Trcc lnn,
i"a ritrinti.ot rcsiconiiiouriot ploiccr. Flinr rpprovcd by Prr$nl$ connlrllon
ia ro*n councll, projwtr wore colrtruclld'
yrll vrury-ii.iiii liiii ciua,*ua iatcrsovcmr$nl|l raastor plrn
rovtcws oo bchltt of rni'iqd of iitl of CcvntoPrrcot grep-orlrtcforc thr Erglc
louiiy corrlsciorcrr oo.rcerning thc crcrrion of rnctrcDolitan dirtriet for ths
rauUtrttiu tGlorl Conmuililict of T[€tr VEit, Ergtc-Yail, Avotl, Bewpr Ct9!X' AlroS''
Lerd, EcrrY Crcck, ud Edwrtilr'
pcvcropnJit Rrrirwr Authorrrl drtiSn r3vi1w rcn911{o1the Dcrign
Reviow Borr4 ptrsiiss Ceromirslou rnd TosaGolncil of ell rutdlvjrion rsd
Urfilirer coartruorod Uirt r"o iyzZ end l9?7, Rovicltt 4sco..oted for an cstinrtcd
ilil;iltilir, iorif""*"tioi .oto.rrlrl crpitrl aotrtttrclioi lacludcd 50 aulti-
ttotlcil ||trl mlrcd or" oorru*irl, iolol, coniominiun lttuGturos. Rcvlcw for
;il;il;t; iith v.ir *.ltot ptmr, luteirioion, zonlnS' drsign-rovirwl rnd onvi'
iJoilJoiti."O'r. ffrnt oppioJJ ty pt.nni* Conaisrioa aad foYrn Council, 95Vr
of tbc projcctt wQrt GgDllructcd-
Gllorrdo fi.iof"g Elrbtln; Lrgirlrtior Conclltlo' t97l: Ssrvcd
on a rub-crmittcc soipoiJ ei pl.nning profcssionrb rnd Sovcrnmcltrl oflicir6
*io aiin"O Semtc Billii, e-i"ti*iO. eislprchoudvc plaoniricnrbli4 ecl.1llt .
cr.r&d l04l rnrironmmlei ine plrnoiry rcAulrtiolc. T[t lctillrtiol T$ rdop0d
by tho rrdo lcgilltturc.
u/u*/uurlttr;F u/ u
Cor.ORlE Enploy.i'Uy rt t Vni".oitl of Colstldo whils r grlduate studErt rs
r rGurohor rvorEint oo .poi.t projccu sitb frcvttyrnd-denr .!l:t:,-1t-1i: 1.-":t
fioa thc Sohoolr orft*iiitoiu.J"i'li s"nitonncutti Dcsign' Public Affelrr' ud
Burlncrr.
MctropolitrnssruclrrluD3ugcr'Co|orrdo,Nclthborhoodtov.nr-
|[!|lt gtpt'tn rponiorca'bv thc unirerrity 0f colorrdo. Rcrerrch position doou-
iiiliiii-il.Coh of uotrololltrn loroltator rpoa neighhorhood rrabilitv-
iolrritr progtre[11 warc sotduutcd in noi3hborbood rntlylied rechnlque$, 1nfttg'
"otttio toivtsi dhtilott, rnd counoi! of govcrnr,rtnt isot *rlv*s'7-'-'-- --'-ir-iiii-iricmri $tuoy, Erlh couly, c-olrrr-!0, R'escarch cor-
du4!d orra"tllri ruipiooi oiCotirrao Mpultr'iu colla3r rnd tbr Ullversilv of Col'
;il;: &cscetched coadqetcd into thc govaraaral{, ilfrltruclurc.rnd rocirl
ioofiio,ra,otcd by lhc rrptd oxp*rrion t f 1trr'r[.t indu$y' mou'rdn .'rotl commB'
ilticr and thc prcporcd Ylmcr olympicr.
Vriisynperrul, VUl, Colorrdo. Pteics! rPc$gted by thc Tc*n of
vdl rud rb. Uni"elitf oi ioiottro;' Undct d[rcction of Town Manegcr grvrrided
rhc Inirirt rcscarch rrrd orgraftetional ruppon for the Vril SymporiuB. Tb? Putposc
cf $ynporium *rs fo "ngt{cr r tcnre- of eoronunity throu5h tbc crcttion of confcr-
rusrt tiot cacouregG cultrrral and intallcctur! drvllopnlat'
B0 39Vd L9VS6LVSLE 9e:€r 966llzrlEg
Io
,8,
J\\
,t\
<-tr'eoz;e-
(-
'(^t
\J
F\
(_,
<-
,> "'
Jucobs
Chase
Fdch
Kleitopf
Kelley
LLC
Attornep et Iaw
ItJ"p*&tr* Plo"o
1050 17A Sr,
Suitc 1500
Dcnvcr, CO 80265
303-685-4800
tu30368s4869
ea/T.a'd >J)lf,f LV tLT. 966T-68-UUtl
I'ACSIMTI.E co\rER SIIEET
To: Mr, Andy Knudtgen Fsx Numben 9701479-2452
Priority handling instuctions: J Deliver immediately
Deliver within 2 hrs.
From: Lia A" Woodall, Esq.
Date: Maroh 9, 1996 (a:a0pm)
Number of Pagcs (including cover sheet) 2
Original document(s): _ Will follow
- in the mail
- overnigbtdelivery
X* Will not follow
Clicnt Matter No.: 018t.001
Comments:
CONFIDFNTI AT.ITY NOTICE
This hcsimile covcr shcst and any documents which may accompany it contain information tonr
the law firm of JACOBS CIIASE FRICK KLEINKOPF & KELLEY LLC, ( t) which is intended for
the use of tbe individual or cntity to which it is addrcssed; and (2) which may contaiu informarion
ftat is privilcgcd, confidential, and/or otheruisc cxanpt fron: disclosure under applicabte law, If the
readcr of this mcssage is not te intended recipient or the ernployee or sgcnt responsible for
deHvering thc messagc to thc intcndcd rccipient, uny disr:losure, dirsernination, distribution, copying
or other use of this communication or itt suh$trnc€ is prohibied. If you have reccivatl this
communication in crror, plearc call us colloct to arrange for tle destruction of thc communication
or ils r€tun to us at our expcn$c. Ttrank you,
za'd tu-L0r
Jacobs
Chase
Frick
Kleinkopf
Kelley
LLC
Attorueys at Law
lndependence Plaza
1050 l?rhsr.
Suite 15fi)
Denver, CO t0265
303{6s-4800
tiil 303-685-4869
JCFXr4t?+l
za/ea'd
LAW:sdb
>D1lf.c AV tLI 966T-64-UUt^l
t
IjrA V/oo&ll
303-592-44'36
March 9" 1996
VIAFACSIMILE
97014194452
Mr. Andyltuudtsen
Scnior Planner
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Salb,/\ilelts v. Lodge Properties, [nc. ct rl'
Dcar Mr. Knudtsern:
This letter is to inform you that we have been hformed by Mr, Bailey'
attomey for Lodgc Propcrties, Ino., thal he is unable to bcgin thc hcuingin this casc
on Monday, lrto*tt t t, tlge to anothcr tial. Therefore, the hearing in this case will
begin, as scheduled, at 9:00 a'm' on lffeclnesday, tvfarch 13, 1996' The subpoenas
ftalt were served uElrr you ,ue still in cffcct and you are expected to bc present in the
couflroon of Judge Jones, Dislrict court of Eagle county. at 9:00 am. on
Wedncsday, March 13, 1995.
Thank you for your cooPeration.
Very tnrly yours,
Ff^rt}''d"tL
LiaA. Woodall
FftE C0Py
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
March 7,1996
Mr. Jay Peterson
WeststarBank Building
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail. Colorado 81657
Bob Mclaurin
Ton Moorhead
Susan Connelly
Pam Brandemeyer
Jivn Lamont
Jim Brown
Lynn Friulcn
Grcg Cristnan
lack 7*hren
Art Alplanalp
Ann Frick
Michael Ametl
Rick Rosen
SincelelY' / l,/ /i#l.{f^--Jv\---\
Andilqgdtsen
Senior Planner
De pantment of C ommunity Deve lopment
Re: The Lodge Intemational Wing
Dear Jay:
On Decernber 5, 1995, the Tou'n of Vail Town Council considered upon rypeal the Desiga Review
boardapprovalofNovemberl, lgg5. TheTownCouncilvoted6-l(Jewettopposed)toupholdthe
DRB approval with the condition that additional buffering be added betwan the terraces adjacent to
Units gi, 533 and 535 and the proposed Penthouse Suite of the International Wing. The Coungil
directed you to generate architecturil designs for this buffer to be reviewed and approved by staff'
As the atlached approval form indicates, staff has approved the design forthe buffer.
Thank you for your cooperation. Please call me a 479-2440 if you would like to discuss this issue in
any greater detail.
{,7 ""'"uo'uu'
F everyonehnd)^g6-leuetvacnm.3O
o
D
.t
..!
esign Review Actio
TOWN OF VAIL
o
NF orm
Category Number
Project Name:
Building Name:,-l-El
Project Description:
Owner, Address and Phone:
ArchitecVGontact, Address and Phone:
istrict C <: -Z-
Project Street Address:
Comments:
Board / Staff Action
Motion bp Vote:
Seconded by:
fl Approval
D Disapproval
) srattnetrovat
Conditionsr
oate: 3/1f 4t. DRBFeePre-paid ,fg'g ,.n
Jncobs
Chnse
Fnick
Kleirukopf
&
Ke lhy
ttc
Arronrrys lt Llw
lndependercr Plnzn
I O5O | 7rk Sr.
Suire I l0O
Drnven. CO 8O265
,or.68r.4800
rax 701.681.4869
JCIXX-4o12- l
Ann B. Frick
.,1 ut,'r.,' O
March 6, 1996
Arn B. Fnick
892.4422
R. Thomas Moorhead
Town Attorney
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Bob Mclaurin
Town Manager
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail. CO 81657
Andy Knudtsen
Senior Town Planner
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Dan Spaneck
Building Administrator
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Saltz/lVells v. Lodge Properties, Inc. et al.
Gentlemen:
We received the enclosed letter from Jim Bailey by facsimile at7:23 p.m. on
March 4. As you well know, we represent Luanne Wells who has a lawsuit pending
against Lodge Properties, Inc. and the Town of Vail with respect to Lodge Properties,
Inc.'s ("LPI") proposed development, commonly refened to as the Intemational
Wing. We now believe that LPI may to apply for a building permit immediately
after the close of business on March 14, 1996. At that time, Ms. Wells' lawsuit
still may be pending, in whole or in part, before the District Court of Eagle County,
Colorado, or before the Colorado Court of Appeals. Please be on notice that if the
Toun of Vail issues a builCing permit tc LPI for fhe International Wing while Ms.
Wells' lawsuit is pending, Ms. Wells will deem such action by the Town to be ultra
vires,illegal and in excess of the Town's authority; and Ms. Wells will pursue all
available legal remedies.
Very truly yours,
4*" fP"oa
kb
Enclosure
c: Luanne Wells
Paul C. Heeschen
U
TIARRIoILEY
Blu.ryEennwc& h'rrnsonr
A hoFussrgNAr CoBpoBduoN
Afaor.Nutlr^T Iaw
YAIL NITr|ONAL IIAIVI BI.DG.
lC SOUUrfrorrAct SOrlo
'TFU SUITB aoa
vAlI. GOInEADO tra!?
TtLEPFONtt (8[o, .tC{o08
IACETm|.E (tm) ar3{aat
Marsh 4,1996
R. Thomas Moorhcad
City of Vail
75 S. Fronage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE; saltz/well! v. Lodge Propertieq-lnc.. et ar., civil Action No. 95cV362
Dear.John, Ann and Tom:
This constitutcs our notice that as of the closc of business on March 14, 1996,
we will no longer be bound by ttr" Stipulation.
Best regards.
Cordially,
HARRING & PETERSON. P.C.
Anu B. Frick
Jacobs Chasc Frick Kleinkopf & Keltey
1050 lTrh Srreet, Suite 1500
Denver, Colorado 80265
6854669;# 2/ 2
IJNCOIJiI(,ENTNR
t0ln LtNcorn SlnaEI, 6urrr 9r?5D8t{vtf . cor.oalD{o !ot€,a
Itl.EmloN8 (rot rt?-t!ao
nacst[n,E (!08) r8?-Gt
wnrl8al &]t |L eAn.F.y6ttxnAw.cf)x
John W, Dunn
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christcnsen, P.C.
108 S. Frontagp Road South, Suitc 3fl)
Vail, Colorado 81657
JSB;mpp
o
FILE COPY
75 South Frontage Road
VaiL Colorado 81657
970-479-21iV479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
March ll,1996
Mr. John Dunn
Dunn Christensen & AlPlanalP
108 Sorth Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
Tom lr'loorhead
Susan Connelly
Grcg Moffet
Department of Conmunity Development
{"-t {/'=* {
,tt JAar^-^,-
:c\'eryole\rndy[ercBJ6\dun.3 I I
(:gg V.,-, -
4wtd /( ft?(,
RE: International Wing
Dear John:
Attached to this lettcr please find the plans recentty approved by the Toulr of Vail Community
Development staff for the buffer to be constructed betrveen tbe Penthouse on the International
Wing in the existing condominium dwelling units. You will find that the proposed improvements
havJbeen redesigned in such a \\'ay so that no portions encroach upon the limited common'
elcments of the existing lodge condominiums.
If you have any questions about the drawings, please do not hesitate to call me.
{S **oru",
'../-
*--<---
zY-l
.L ir- |
&$l
H$#
EEE-
o
EI
ryilrltiilll= il
| :, I
Bd
s3n6sE il? 0d
-:5arr(l\tq 9().r
o s-* d
n-X-U-:gr- tL \-
!r
{l!t3A
t:rl
!1
io
=2,- p'le=+
rHE-lE
Ne
bgd
ts:
s g,f
Fs3
oE
olLdooi5-biP
sdo
fi6i
sn
BE
fsso).713i;o*idi(!p b-9t63r#a-6 o-[q;n
is;
Iip
H+{f
f
=z
Eobo*6du,
fr-B
<
#s
5Fg
b
{iF
ed+
Ir [.;0.
6'lJ-rrF!lllo .fI
,Bg-:
ElzfooZo
U
';!iooc! O-
6.E pfrc
tV II) c:sosiExOgu
';
$giEu'I {8
'oooooolooooooq
-ooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo(fooooooooooootDOOOOOOloooooolbooooooloooooorboooooolOoOOoOrboooooo
+iN
SK''-.'N
oo<rOOoo(rooOo()ooool)oa
OOI)oooor
.c
o-q
EE
=L\$
rn
I
+
.c
o-
c)
A
oo
tol
ol
=o:;"5Es
=OPdhni" FE$oL
oo.qtot5oFF_
P8
s"r *
="', .B E
I
-o"l
T
$9
dE
=Lt
c.r
a
I.t
s
I
!tb
8H
=0a-
FXT*s p3lF tc:!gsi $ It?it
*$f; r
5$"3o i
=o
3q
!E3
b
et
q0
rJ(')
oc
oqt
]L
U)
E
oo
IL
o
a3
.d6L,,g
r=l
l1'r<;l
L;
hjjo
I
!g
ilt7
IB
ii
22,-cl
d3+
rHE
_?E6lxtl
o
0
6
t
uf
o
)
H*l {["I
th JAA-.--^"-
4,st
,fuor{ /( ff?/,
RE: International Wing
Dear John:
Attached to this lettcr please find the plans reccntly approved by the Town of Vail Community
Development staff for thc buffer to be constructed between the Penthouse on the International
Wing in the existing condominium dwelling units. You will find that the proposed improvements
have been redesigned in such a way so that no portions encroach upon the limited comlnon
elements of the existing lodge condominiums.
If you have any questions about the drawings, please do not hesitate to call me.
Tom Moorhead
Susan Connelly
Greg Moffet
:€vcryone\mdy{enq5:96uDn.3 I I
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
March I I, 1996
Mr. John Dunn
Dunn Christensen & Alplanalp
108 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
Department of Community Development
{S *r"r"uo r*""
''.'r'-(
'n-{
L
ZnI irl
Qtal{16 |uK{{Fg8!k)= rIEE! .
EYd t6=cc+
EP6rmo
Enl8_ ilti I| ,ot I
ffid
lillll
NI
U3o{=5S
?b6
cteF=
o 9(f)c^.
x-: 11 q)
xrJ, ^7 \
tEo
E o-i.t!oci
htil j
-*c qtcRsl
3 H^
Fs3
g
oLtcloi6.
b-89
3; '.s
fEe
-onn500I bre
d*$ots,0r1*s!
.Jiqp5.9t03t# o-i o.$
"6nci
5eI .,=-{'! ptrl
EPb6isE!F, oll.
EEo
g_"3{',
6l<ejzl-:
f:f
7 r--
=l)_ l(filo lrqlb rll'olE ZL).i a\
f t\
E g-'
ris
&F+
id3
io3
$
E3RTIJ "
efl+x-€
le8-
+6=
6 n-rr
661
.;"*f
fl
z
E
U
uzot\
$*pg
J'* S6
n*E&
*fgE
-'/J
..:
,':
:;l
.i!):l
'll.
t',i
r .:i
::'.i
:j;ilii
ilJi':
;l'!1{dl!.t
'iii
:,r
_c
0-el
EE
=tL\0((l
=o
3o
10
C3
!
o_{to
oo
rt
c{
f\r
=E;*
Eso!tn5P6E
sls
=a
v.
Nrt
o(,
Eg0FF=oO6966!t$fl
o_q
U
C.l
$xi*s 3gE 9 E0! s is:Ii;s i d
t13 l8t b 6
i$f; E5$8" i
6
t
o0o
U)c
=o
l|.
srs
o
0
L
et
$3
'i
,it
.:1
.:.i
:r
,,1
:li
;.,:
': ]i
'.:'ii
.-t
r':i
'::t
,::1i
J''\
.;:?
;d
rrL
n:fi
tr'i1)i,i
!--ii.l
1::
,.1-.1
lr'J
i.1:!
*:;
t. it:'
.-,'it
.i9i
i:I
I\Jrij;i ru',
iIll.i'i . '
I
(fi
.c
o-Q
o{
'tLt
@
ili
ffid
-c
d-r
OraA6
itI
=2"- p'le=:
-HE-:E
N?
o
&
r0
L,
of
o
I
.dfi!,,q
!r
!F6tdI
E8
ii
)ooooOollooooooqroooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooolooooooq)oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo(
DOOOOO0loooooo(booooootoooooolbooooooIOOOOOOTbooooooIOOOOOoIbooooooloooooobooooo0
r5{rmaj
il-acul
oo(rOOoo(,oooor)ooOor)ooOor)o0oo>oo
NI
ltem
ilign Review Action Ftn
TOWN OF VAIL
Category Numbef ,". sltlqu
Project Name:
Building Name:
Project Description:
Owner, Address and Phone:
oa-1- .'4"'--t-
Legal Desaiption: Lot I ZoneDistrict CC-f-
PrqectstreotAdarn"t /?4 f 4r.v-. Cr-=f 0--,.=
Board / Staff Action
Motion by:
Seconded by:
tr Approval
D Disapproval
! $attlpproval
Gonditions:
/tDae 3/ I I Q (.DRB Fee Pre-paid ffqz.z
,*
,tt '-'€,
-21 Vg\ ./-w> .,/ Ir\rr'\
e) _-,./t -,r.-si:r=; | _&--ll
ff
za-l
E l-l
a taluol.K51
JHBI
; s3r
.-LLt!.,";o 5i': -> UJ {
i;;3 .{ 0- *'7ra'
' q- t",
in
[.r.1cl
,sQ
9o
5-o<f)oi
T'.S(o
dstE|f)3^
8$
e)sq(L
d qio66'
rg9
3TsEi^flfr5
uEeitbE+rl7 b6
o=o, d_[
*-E 3-'"(l Ud)c{
F-Uxa
**,*s S(')= lL \-
qt
0
so(L
o_
E
qt
e):
o_o
Ef
Zfobo"-7afr Z-EOdu
E F-'
;i8
&E+
= (-^
lde
,L
o3
o_qt
{iF
ee+
!eE
P6=
fiT-raC Cnr60^
Oh dirtr.?ft.io
E:fz
Eo
ozo
U
u
u.
J
$8n[6
I
$
o:tHiF= I
s{, Ul6.s
s$g
=fi:
FsIH$I
z s .H sg
;giE iE
.HEg $[- ; qi {gNe E"ta
J'-0n.tt
P ! be
s $rgt or3l
R spb
ggEE
fL p 59ro b3tul#(U-
I r*t
ci
s3
*r,
6!
6gd5ES
*r (lsE
-^,* ovrl IL (\
IIII-
6l< szlr
roooooooooooo(rcooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo()oooooooooooo(
ooooool)oooooo
wN
Njr*'=SN
Oo()oo
OO(rOO
Oor
ool,OOoor)ooool,oo
sdt-
o-elet?o6
=o o-
dr
t.aJ
IL
e)
IJ
=oo
rt
c.{
I
c{
=ILfu
EEoetn5rP6E
U}
5rs
v.
=c!t
o0po-trJ'elFt-
H$60!€h -,!dtL
(Lq
U
ol
5.
o_el
8E
i0_ci
!.0
e)o
a-
oo
v.
6l-3+t0JL+,o
ar.
o
o-oF
s
\,
$lsa-
ool-
o_Lo+,q3
o+ts
rr$
Lrbfi186E-o- 96E ss€.s;'$ 3iE !t E,68E b
5 [Fst HU3 oJ' O- O_j$ I
5
3
0Ts3
sI
|l
ro
0o
$)s
=o
.FIL
UIsL
o
0LL
Lo
.r,
ro3
$
o!t(J ;.'us
f;s
., gl Los o03 €
tSE gfli
$iEFFi
s
o_0e,':ot
=ut -u
IgEEIi
o
a-
o
fl
QLJd03t-+to
I
S
H*g
ilem
loQ
Eo
-0j,tt
tJ)c.i
T,.s!0
ds,E|I|
d+
drS
I
$
.n:$$i8_ Hi
+, Itlos
sflisf :
FE $iFi
UEcitbF+rl? b6a\- -l r\"-o [*oSru=
o U(|)c{
tt t J.r\
(l)j lL r-
J'
-07,$t
i $$g
fr 3i6
s lHso b3t
gf*t"
ci
5*r
6n
6gf;5ES
+rO
nii
5l< szt-:
a
.9so
o_g
s
ao
.=L
o_o
ffz
Toozo
U
El
z
Eobo-7
ltt t-EOdu
P. .,
*=&'
iis
8F+
= a-^
tdE
o6
3o-ro
{IF
e0+
;*F$
e)s
olLf,ofr6R*
EtP
g6ss-^Inf
rgHug
llEIli
Efz
Toozo
U
roooooo
OOOOOOIrcoooooOOOOoorroooooo
OOOOOOIroooooooooooorroooooo
OOOOOOTroooooooooooolroooooo
OOOOOOIroooooooooooolrooooooOOOOoolrooooooOOOOoolrooooooOOOOoolroooooo
OOOOOOIroooooooooooolroooooooooooolroooooo
N$N
NTN
oolroooolroooolroooorroooo(roo
roo
n9'tZ
s
qT
L
a)
a)o
I
(f)
.qt-qt
-c+t f-(Le)
86
=o o-
dt
-c+,
o-
eto
0(f)
rt
ol
I
c\
;.r
s
ru
LToL
=IL
Eaoa!
ol-tt+,o
UIs
fou
=c\|rt
et0po_
iJ'0tFF=ri6bI€st
o_q
()
CI
I
$;i!
Hu
i$
nlii$l
5.(LQ
8E
+L
C\r
s
tr0e, r:ob
6r
!()
eto
a+
o
OL
6La+,03L{Jo
a!o
o_oF
\,
s)sa+
o
ol-(L
L
et+,g
e,{soIir F
LrOrl3t s,sE gs:as;s sEEIIt{ $u=q! g'€8E bjE5
Yt frq-=o
5',g $
l[E!lE
s
A
a.-
o
fl
lo
l-t+t0fL+to
=o
3
o-0
s3
-s
I
tl
I
.u
o
UIsso
ru
l|-
usa-
o
ot-
IL
L
et+,63
l[
:l
3*H
ll?m
L-
vE nr&.,
Anily Knuiltsen
o
@
@
('ltntJ Or/c ,ui .J-, N {,s_^ -^/.\/
37 ,1ea
y'1..,t 3 4",7
o,-: *-#.u*" {lZ'J ,"
lTv
tr)Tr'a L [*. s'-:a *.^. (/
hnsdL ,-"-*./
(t ./.".nr 4h
/La a- z1-{<._ w
t/--""/"J /" -u -nf
(? fta.aa-fu t/ &.-4 dK
aA l^&
do t-f4-.-- <i\rt<'<.
6let
@Z:L(n.r,
("-.11fi t Ft<w'Post-if Fax Note 7671 o"'" 1/5 /"1'ltdL"'2_
To | < .i\f /vl1 /\z'tr li-t Frcmht' !-, r:i-.- I f,.-",
Co./D6pt.c co' ',)
Phone #Phone f
Fax# €3] cc>,7 1 Fax *
to
@
vt fr*/- s-q"i-< t-VHt ,^s 6K
@
@)-T rJ +7 *"
tUf T/I-.J
[Z-<-cz-r- 4
,o&n
r
*/^
F^I> - FHD
O 9 ut//7f *."- t4^
&*'r
Z c.-,'//
artre^ru--4.
,j f,:2.--<- -\s 4rQ4
4 .a."..,-J r{,
SEI'IT BYr l-o 16-96 ; 3:10Pil : BAILEY tLARRlNG,Toffli 0F VAIL CoM-IEV';# l/ 3
/'/{ }//52 o
JAN 161996
,N I'l{E DISTFICT eounr, coLNTY oF EAGLE, srA?E oF COLORT)o
*
,*O .,1,:
AITITTA SALTZ-
PIriiliG
v.
LonCI PRoFERffi$,INc; IOr.^f Of YAIL r nndcipl corpnniug TOVTN COUI{C:IL OFmE hlwN oF vAIr, T! -e_or g^r',roU[ qVHr.r, nr,lves, fiul R JOHNSTON,MAROARET .r. osTERFos$, KEvD{ R" FO1g}, tvgcgA5r O. nrir3rf aod ROB FORD, ctbs To',m Coucil r,frhTsttl ofVll
Ihfcndmn,
.nd
LUANT{E WELI.S,
Phtuifi,
Y.
LoDcE PRoPERnEs,ll.tc, aul TIIE llcwN oF vjIL, coLoRADo, ,od k ,ffnr$ irrhir
:9T11 3F5 ,n*,il{r !S rowN corJNcr!;ruw-r.i L{Ar* d TOu,T'rrffiR}rExPLANNING AlrD ENVIRo}IMENTAL coMMlssroN, DEsrcil{ nHrew BoARD, A}irDyK\UDTSEN, in hb g$| erpdty-ar Saior ffmner'ed Zortg-Afi6r6d"s, ri,r DA!{sP^${EcIg ia hir efirirl o.F€tly rTFtE suILDtNc.cD}tr}u-ffirTo&
L)ttea.hltr,
Phi*ift. tu&D wcrb q*wcl6'), by bcr *orncyr, Jrmbe €ln* Fr;ckKtdnlcgfr* Kdrcy,ilC,."$dn8fe Urlguoa:ys, D*nqAbptlusr_Ll_Ctilb, iC. t"n rrinb,?,plruau
3.IEt t=qIltusrIPULAnoN {rm neqfiEsr FoRoR,DEttfi]cd iB tbirruenerrnd drredJanuEry l0' 1996' h.[cby fuil,ori! hc rcord ihu sDould bG acrtifisd in oir ralbr r.r followr:
. Flaintiffr r:lrust dldoanrrr_lcguding rhs Inrrnrtiarl wiry dcmrq,rrrcuaq{t tu 1963
ffiT b.t*rrn lofte nnryc*ics, t e. cftc r.ocre') ard rhe ro"i oiv"ir'. incMhe wft,r;
rcrr*"ttll
FLAINTTITS' DESIGNAI1ON OF TIIE NECORD TO TE CEiRTIIilf,D
IH\T BYJ
DATED: Jrnrlrry t?,,tggS
l-16-96 ; 3:10Pil ; BAILEY HARRlNG.Toffl\ 0F VAIL CoM-DEV;# 2/ 3
\
\ r. s$ccrrfdtprblicproccodin3prqdoffidrl*dmsud
\ 2' 'or'rrer .oduficcsir*'rru fo*ni$iort d€prffi, agin'yrad nruicptof*ditrgr and any Gndingr ud cucl'cimr ,rd" 6 -' '
Ttc ganc arc rcqrrc*rgd u,it,qcft E, bot trt pt,ilEcfuily Iimied tr, thC follonin$;
\ l . rV6t SEsriod $ fo* Conrcil hcld fuF 1 9, t gffi;\ 2. TowrCormilJrtrctrrsbtd*,&-ilfrg;
rv 3' Plrad48 6d rnvirorynrr d*rt;d"" cotrsidEnrtotr or Tb r.odgs,cepflicditu Sr E$qi*rllllrtlo'j ; l.t"a6"*o"r Hr C;;il Cqc t. Q(x) nrbnirudir t9t3r\ 4' rtr Lofueb 6qg oreileorca ,oai"r runcodroc io rh. c.r ud puilic
- - --*, Accorumdaior Zoasfui&a h tigl;
T Jrl Dcdsn Rcr'furlcd coaddcnrion ofTh Lote,r Apglicciel nrhluathOcbbcrof lggt:ad\, 6. TotaConn*ill-{ccriryofDmbcr, lg0,
Jecors Chrsr Flra Kurxror & tftu.sy LLC
y'\rBB. Frick,*fgZ+
LirA. Wmddl,#!{l8lt
l$0l7dr$r..$irr lS0O
DGEYE, CO80a6t
Ey.__..
Jop W. DuEqN#1421
Vrl[ CO f rdsz
(970)d?60300
Arrorxpys FoRttl$mFFi
Pqn' AbFhDJne Chrireo*a p.C.
tOt $, Fnogc Xd. S., €00
tlti4rrl-r
SENT BY:.l.lq.-96 ; 3:11Ft{ ; BAILEY HARRING-TofiN 0n V,!tl--Q.o{_-p;1 3-l 37,Ww
vv
. cEnnflcAtEor$eRncD
I brety celiry rhctsuc rndtr$d wpy dtc lbtr8ghgflaNTtrs, DEgcNATtfi qFTr,E*rcoRp rn BE (ErrrrED wrr nmcr ro rbc ffiiuta3 o 6irnF-l zJft; -*
JrurS. Brilslr, Jr_
B&y, I{Etat & pcanon' p.g.
1660 tit3ot11Sr. S11;b 317f
Daunr,CO t0264
R. Th91611t1&uiard
Tounfinnry
CftyofYrit' 75 3. FrorrncRd,vrilC0 srest
A*- 5"1"
,cfr&ttlr
roTrl- P,5q
SENT BY:ATTORNEYS ; 12-29-95 ; 1 I : 06Ail ; DLI\IIi{BPLANAIFCHR ToWI\ 0F vAlL COll-DEVr# 1/ I
LAVY OF F |l- E,s
DUNT'T. ABFLANALF & CHRISTENSEN, P,C.
ISTN*o
toHx w n|lNN
^N
THUR A. AEPLANALP, JN,
ALLEN 6, CHRISTE'{5EN
OIANE L, NEiTiAiI
N, C.3TE'HENsC}'\I
VAI I, BINX EUILDING
ll ||'fF :lno
I OB goLrTH FtnNtlnF Rnan l ,/F<T
varl-, c6!aRAD6 €l6E7
TELECOFIER SRINSI{IIItrAI.
(970) {75-0300(970) 476-4765
'ELEPHOH:!ttTpt d7+otoo
AALEGOPIEEI
l57O! {"6.4745
KA N€N iI. OUNN
Cefl l|Flgu !d6^! lnlrtt^XtSfEClll COutElLr
JCinv ur. r ili]atar r
Telephone;Iix!
TtO;
FROIIT:
TO
DAfE:
Excludlng thls cover sheetr J^ p^g." are Delng
transmitted.
PleaEe call (970) 476-0300 In the event of dllftculty
vith thls trandnlstlon.
couttENrs:
rul$ r|EGiGilGt! IE lralrn E ofrl FqR lllE ItsE ot 'lE IIDIvrrxnL m EnIiIAI r(' EFT'n
IC Ig DINTCl D IID NY ffiTA I YIFOEr|ATTOII TSICE Ig PNTVII.EGIID, €TIIDETATTT'
rm/m rranpr r:Rolt DrScrrsttf,E Uf,DER rssr,Icllr.! Lrn. r? @ FlrDlR ol' tgra
lr88hcr rg rftrr rtE fftdtfDED nEcrprgffr m tHE ruFrcrEr on lcllr RlSPofgrBrr toR
orum]f,tg tE laSSncr To tTE If,f!f,DED 8ICIPIEIIT' tcn, rRl EaEBI f,oTIFIID nm:t
;1ffi Dt8tillillf,tflolf , Dt3itllgrxrror oB tlryrrt$ sr 1'Ur6 Cnio@rrcltrf, 16 lilircll,Y
tnosrBxttD. rt r([ nva lrcErvF lEs gototuftclTroff llr EnndRr guBlSE Errlr
TEs opt'lcE tIilltDI.AlEDf EI o$LEqf lltlPEttE GLIJ, lm D!8!nOf llE tTrlslllllr.
R.farffi!
SENT BY:ATTORNEYS ;12-2S-85 ; ll :06N ;DUN|{ABPIJIN.ALPCIIR
L.\'iv o-l-lcain
DuNn, AopLANALP & CHRtsrENgEN, P.c.
^ Fx|]rlE!tluNAl LOliFOia I lOa!
VArL EaNfi I u ||.ntnO
6urTE goo
lo8 souTli FiloN tA(iE F!oAD r|,Fer
Var L, Col.oFAno e | 6i?
I)ecember 29 , 19 I 5
lSTi\i.TOl{No OF VAIL CON.DEV;# :i 8
JOHN V'. DIJTI N
AFTHUF A, AFPLANALf., JK.
Al I hta tl. a:llllllil I tJfiltN
nrlN r r Hl F UrN
R. C. STEFHENSOI{
,rFr-..,AL ,EOU ri €Ct,
.ri rFY w. HAt{NAtl
Tf r F FllnNF'
ag7O, 4'16.o,rtr
TEI ECOFIGNi
aaft)r 17ri.4"tot
KAiEN M, DUN N
surr flfrin t-geAt a6ll3 r^r I
Anlta Salz
The Lodgc Condoiliniun€
Apartm€nt 527
VetI Co 0155?
Rc: The Lodge at Vail
Dedl AfIIL.r i
Enclos6d are coples of motlons belng fllecl wiEh che
court and a noFice tndicating tnat Ann Friclc and J lntend to
appear at I:JU an luesctay to se€k a cenporary r€stralnlng order
unless rve have a6Eurance tron tne Town that a bulldlng permlt
will not be iasued. Ann asked that we ftle a notlon, and It clid
seen to rnake sense for ne to file one so that I may participate
nith Ailn in the heatlng.
AE we have cllecu66ed, tt will be n€ceEsary that the
eourt requlre postlng of a bond. Our argume4t 1ll1 be that the
amount of tnc bond should be nonlnal (say' 31'000) until hearing
is held at a later tine on a Prelt&lnary lnJunctton. If a
prelLmlnary tntunstlon ls granted, the anount of the bond no
houbt would be-subetantial . However, we will at thet time have a
ruling froil f-he jrrrlge rhct-her you and the ot-hnrs are llkely t-o
prevail on the mirtis of the case. fn othef rorvls. we should
iravc a ruling at that tlnre, although on a prellmlnary basle. on
whethcr the 1983 igreement was IIIegal contracE zonlng- Il thc
Judge rulsE in youi fewof, faiaLng a lafgef bond oughL to b€ trore
Juetifiable in evaryone's. nlnd.
It !t111 eose mattsrs lf you ore the one to post the
bond; aaauming it l.i noruLna I in amount. It would be ny
ruggestlon that you write a peraonal check tso our truBt account
ani-that' wc write a trueg acseunt qheck to the Cqurt. To be on
the cafc rldc, rc could conslder a greatcr atnount r such as
S51OO0. r woultl like to be abl'e to hand over d shesk on Tuelday
Lt we prevall on thc notlon.
Pleeue lel nte know yuul LftuughLs. I will be a-reund
home over ttre long wsttltttrld lf you uhould wl8h to call at that
tlme.
SEM BY:ATTORI\EI'S
5.2g-ss;11:0?A[l;DUNNABFLANATCHU\*T0IIN0FVA|LCOM-DEV;#3/8
Ysurs varY trulY,
DpNN, ABPL,ANAT.P & cHRrsrENsENrF.C.
I\llt \\,lofri w. ounn
t/'
SENT BY:ATTORNEYS ;12-29-95;ll:07AN ISTNo
Ilt THE orr*rat CoURT, COUNTY oF EAGIJE' STATE OF COLORADO
case No. 95 Cv 362
-'Toflli 0F vAlL C0M-DEV\# 1/ I
MOTION NOR TEMPORARY REETF.AINING ORDER AND FOR gT{ELIIIINAR'Y
IT{JUNCTION ( INCORPORATING AUTITORITY)
AI{ITA 5AIfZ,
Plalntl f f,
vs.
ITODGE PROPET{I'IEIJ, INC. i
TOWN OF VAIL' a nunlclpal corporation;
|IowN couNcll, OF TIIE TOwil Ob' VArIJ; and
SOBARMOUR,SYBILI-,IIAVAS,PATILR.JOHNSTON,MARGARETA'
osinnross,'KEvrN R. FoLEY, !'trcltAEl D' JEwli'rr ancl
nOg fOnD, as the Sordn Counctl of the Town of Vailr
Dafendants.
COITES NOW the Plalntl'ff by hcr attorneys' Dunn'
Abptanalp l-chrisienctn, P.C., and iottes pursuanl to Rules 65 and
106(a)({)(v), C.R.C.P. for a temporiry re-straininE order and for
a prallminary InJunctloni
IDID Ag GR,OUritDS TIIEREFOR, EtAtES AE fOIIOWS:
l. Plalntitf incorF'lttt'en each and every allegation of
its verified complalnt filed herein'
2.Uponinformationandbe}ief,if,Defendantsarenot'
{estrain€d, tho o"t"ttOant, Lodge ProPsrties., Inc" will apply
;;;;-;"ii-aire oetenaini,-to*n oi.vair, wllr issue' a building
permll fat thc "on"ii"laion of lmprovenente to lrhe Lodgc at vall-
-see g*hiblc A attached hereto'
3.llherearepresentt,hesixfactorslorprelininaryrelt€f Eet fortn in natni.F v. r'ra':qirrfane | 619 P'2d 648 (CsJ'o'
19E2):
a.gherelsareasonableprobabilityEhat'Plaiattffwill succeecl on tne rairit's' Tha subiect trrrup*:iuy-already exccsda
lfil-oensfty altouea by the Tostn's ordinancee' rf the
iiipro"ii*ente to rr,e r,6oge at valI. aro conettructedr the dettuiLv
*iii-U"-permitted io-n"-eten greater. If Defendants relv on the
""nlrict-enlerea inio by them-in 198f,, they are in effect
i"i"i[ing i rfqht-[o-co;rtr;cL zonlng.. coniract zonlng is lllagal
i"-ii-ufiri vfies Uirgalning away oE the pollce-power' Folg
Leaqlns Dev..9o. v' B6-ard oi countv Comrn'rst 528 P'ad 23'1 (Colo'
SEM BY:AfiORNEYS ;12-2$-95 ;11:t)8AN ;DTJNNABPLNALFCHRISTN.TOI{N OF VAIL COil-DEV;# 5/ 6
19074 ) .
b. A danger of real , Inmediate and irleparable lnJury
rnay be Prevented by-LnJunctLvc rellef' RuIe 106(d)({)(V) 't-li.c.e]r-provtdes-etrai ttre deeision of a governrental body under
revlew rnay- l,re aLayed. It the decision under revlcw ln thig case
is not atiycd and if Lodge Propertles, rnc', iE grdntecl a
iurlcttng pirnrt, lt may icguirtr vecLsd PraPerty rLghts or
ofhervile-proceed to completlon of, the pfopossd lmprovementg'
caualng Platntifl's slalm Ea be moot.
c. There ls no plain, gpeedY and adequat'e remetly aL
law. plainttff f= eniftfei to h"ttl the Court review the actlon
oi tne Town of Vall and to cletefnine the varictlty ot the 19E3
iot"rnett. Rules 5? and 106(a)(4), C.R'c'P', will provllepi;fitiia an ictequate reiledy'oiriy'it tssuanco ol a builcling
permit is stayed.
d. Granting of a preliminary injunction.will not
disserve *re puUifc iitereat'. To the lontrary, not- grantrng
iniuncti"e reiief wo,.trc allow the Defendants te violate the
zoiittg of,dlnances of lhe Towtt.
€. The balance of equitieg favors the-granting.of an
injunction. Ti is-equfEable tliat.the grantlnq of a bulldlng
permir be stayed ;";;a;;-tJ prtrii'in6 re.'i"w of, the actions of
th€ town -
f' Entry of an lnjunet'lon witl preserve the sBatug quo
pendlng a trlal on the merit6'
IIHEREFoRE/PtaintiffmovesthatDefendantsbeenjoined
and resrrJ;S6;-ffip;;;;;r; and pendins hearins on pleintl,f f 's
clain pursuanr ro-nuie 106(a)({),-C.R.C;P., from applylng for or
tssutrrg a [rullding Permit'
Dated the
-
daY of ilanuarYr 1996'
DUNN' ABPLAIIALP fr CTTRISTENSEN' F'C'
"y,
loa s. Frontage Road s. f300
Va11, colorado 81657(970) 4'lt5-0300
ittorneys for Plaintitf
SEM BY:ATTORNHfS ;12-29-85o ;11:08.{N IDUI\I,\ABPLANALPCHRISTN'TOIf]\ OF VAIL COM-DEV:# 6/ E
.0S 1J.1ilil,
75 South Fromage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970- 479-2 I 3 V479-Z I 3 I .
FAX 970-179-2152
DecenbcrS,1995
Jay Petason, Esq.
WestSbr Bank Building
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81657
Departme nt of Community Deve lopnent
RE: Ttrclodgs inwrndional Wing
Dear Jay:
On Decenrbot 5, 1995, tle Tcrwn of Vail Torvn Courrcit consider upon appeal the Design Review Borrd appro1el of
Novcmbcf, l, 1995- The Town Council votcd ti-l (Jewcn opposerli to uplold lb€ DRB approval '*ith tbe condiriotr
tbat additional buffering be added benvcen rhe reraces adjaccnt to UniB 527 . 513 and 535 and_thc proposed . _
P$rtlouss Suits uf 0rr Erlsrlatiolal Wing. Thc Cuturuil dircutcrl yuu tu gtEucrttc urqhitcctural dwigrt fur 0ris brdltr
to bc rwiewcd and approved by steff. A.l-though we do nat plan td, rcleCile this item for a Design Roiew BoarC .
headng rtalf rrortd iii<c to n:oftc tb; proposcdd**ings aviilablc for public rcvisw in our ofEccs et somc datc in rhc
fi.rture.
Pleasc srrborit drawings showing tttc fotlowing infornratiun:
A. At l/4" scale, sbow all existing improvements. Deiinsate wbat is a limited conrmon elenren! a
geilefial Cgmfion clcmcnt. anl what is unrler thc owncrship of the Lodgc Prorperties.
Show rhe oroorxed inrDrovemeots at 1/4" scalc in plan. sccCon and clcvancn. fhc scctions should
includc rhi nril ncrelr ['fthc sruCnrrcs 0n cither siile 0ftbe terrace aree. This would include both
thc poposedPentliousc Suite in)provemalts, as rr*ell as the cxisting units 52?, 531 and 535.
If it is helpftl for you and yor.u climl fte Town of Vail stalT is willing to rwiew conceptual proposals that would
uchisvc tlic l,rulTcrilg ncurlid in rhis arqr. Oncr you ha'r'e the existing cond;aions mapped oug we woultlbe happy_to
sit dou'n and mcct rfrth you I would likc to bare a final desig available for public ievrcry no latet ''!an January 2'
I996, Staff will maks a dccisiod od tbc 4plicdtiur approxinratcly onc wcch latcr.
Tbank you for yout sttctidon to thie mattcr. Plests call meat 4?9'] l38 ifyou s'ould likc tu discnss thic issuo in any
gesfet dct$I.
Esl, McL{d! .
Tom Moorlad
!i'.I!ro Co.dh
Pnlr Er orluricr
Jiu Lroorrt
filr Emrrn
Lyar Fnulco
6|tgCridnrn
Jlrt Z€lcd
Ai Alil.rrtlr|
Aoa Fiick
Mictrcl An€tt
X.iol Bolca
B.
t
EXHIBIT ..A.'
SEI{T BYIATTORNEYS ;12-29-95 ;11:09AN
COTJIITY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
ISTN.o TorN- 0F vAlL c0M-DEVi# 7/ 8
IN THE DISTRICT COURT,
Case No. 95 CV 362
NSTICE OF IIEARING
ANITA SAI.TZ,
Plalntt f f,
vc.
I,ODGE PROPERTIES, INC. i
TOWN OF VArL, a nunicipal corporatloni
rOWN COUNCIL OF THE lotftt OF VAIL' and
EOE TRMOUR, SYBILL NAVAS, PAI'L R. JOHNSTON, IIARGARET A'
OSlenrOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEY, MIcll4EL D' JEI|ETT and-
[oB-FoRD,'ae-t[L Town Councir of the Town of v411,
Defendants.
NoTIcEIsHEREBvGIVENthatPlaintiffg'tllapplytothe
court at 1:30 p.ul on-J-n,rary 2, 1996, fo! hearing forthwith on
t"" uotton for Ternporarrr Resiraintng Order-and her Motion for
6io"= Reguirlng celtiftcatlon of the Record'
DATED the 29th day of Decenber' 1995'
DI'NN' ABPLANALP & CHRISTENSEN' P.C.
IT
dellvery
copy hereof
followe I
was uerved bY
BY! -, , . =.r,=tJohnw. Dunnf ffi
108 S. Frontage Road S- *300
Vailr Colorado 81657
( 9?0 ) 4?5-0300ittort't"Yt for Plaintlf f
IS HEREBY C!:lt',frl'lllD tnat a
on December 29, 1995, as
Jay K. Fet€rson, Esq.
108 South Frontage Road
Vall, Colorado
R, lrhoflas iloorhead, Esq.
?5 South FrontaEe Road
VaiI, Colorado
SENT BYIATTORN$S ; 12-29-95 ; 1 1 : O0A|rl ;DUMABPLANALPCHRI STIIITTOI{N OF vAlL C0M-DEV;# 8/
IN EIIE DISTRICT COURT, COTNTY 0F EAGLE, STATE 0P COLoRADO
case No. 95 Cv 362
MOTION TO REQUIRE CERTIFICATION Of RECORD
ANITA SAI,TZ ,
Plainti ff,
vs.
I.,ODGE PROPERTIES, INC. ;
TOtfN oF VAIL, a nunlclpal corporatlon;
TOWN COTNCIL OF THE ToTil OF vAILi and
BOB ARMOUR, SYBILT NAVASS, PAT'L R. JOHNSTON. MARGAREE A.
OSTEREOSS, KEVII{ R. TOI,EY, UICHAEL D. JEIIETT ANd
ROB FORD' aa the lfown Councll of the Town of Vail'
Def€ndants.
COMES NOlf f-hc Plalnf-lf f tty her attorneys, Dunn.
Abplanalp e chrlstensen, P.C., and moves pursuatrt to Rule
fO3(a)(lJ(fff), C.R.C.P.. for an order raquiri.ng r:crtificet-ion of
the record;
AND As GROITI{DS TI{EREFOR. stat€s as follolrs!
1. Plalntlff has filed a complaint pursuant to Rule
lo6(a) (4), c.R.c.P.
2. Rule 106(a) (d)(III), c.R.c.P'. provides that, upon
motion of the plaintifi,'ihe'Court ghall ordef the defendant body
to file erith the clerl( or the courtr on a upeclfled clat.tl. Llre
record of proceedings before that body.
Datecl the daY of JanuarY, 1996.
DUNN, ABPLANAI,P E CHRISTENSEI{, P.C.
109 5. Frontage Road S. *300Vall, Colorado 8i557
( 970) 475-0300
Attorneys tor Plaintiff
SEIff BY:ATTORI{EYS
JOHH W. Oui|tl
AitHUi A, AEPI-AI{ALF, JR,
aLLEfa (:. cttIlS I |'xlrl;ti
Olar|t l.. r.ltl|afl
aFfctal coufatlEL
JSTII II. |rANAAH
lFOr
TELECOPI ER TR.AIISUITTAL
FRoMr .rorh.| w. runr
TO TET,ECO?IE$ NO, !'hq -:,viL
:12-29-95 ; 3:59Pil |DUNI{ABPLANALPCHR TO$N 0F lAlL Coff-DEVt# ll 2
ljw ottlcEr
DUNN, Aapuerv,rup & CnnrsrENsEN, F.g.
IST\*o
vltL 8at{( ButlotNlB
EUITE gCO
I O€ EOUYH FIO'ITAG' ROAd lvEsT
vall-- G6L6taDo tl85?
TELE rotalt
{r"01 a?a.ot€
tlLEcoPrEir
tl"Ol attt-atl!
xatc r. Dutat{
CtiTlrICA LaAA Allll?lfaT
Er(cluding this cover sheet, / pages are b8ing transmitted.
Pleage eall l97O) 476-0300 ln the event of dtftlcultl'wlth thls
trangnisslon.
Coilnents:
TIIIS MESSAGU IS INTf,NDTD ONI.,T TOR TEE USg OT TUE INDIVIDUAI. OB
IMIITY TO WHICE IT I5 DIRECfED AIID UAY COI.ITAIN INf,ORT'IATIODI MIICHrE PruvILEGru, coNI'lDtsN.rrArJ A$D/(,R Extr:!{FT tRoll DrscrrosuRE ITNDER
AIPLICIBLE IAlf. If the readcr of thls nessage is not thr
lntcnded reclplent or the enBloyce of ag€nt responslble lordelivering the ncrssage to the intended reclplent, you are herebynotified that any disseminatlon, distribution or copylng ot this
cooununlcation is strlctly prohlblted. If you have received thlscorfinunlcatlon Jn cffor, please notify fhis Office lmmediately bycollect telephone call and dcsttoy the transrntttal.
Reference I .
SENT BY;.{TT0RIIJEYS ;12-29-95;4:00Pil1
Law eF t tcHs
DUNru, AEFLANALF & CHHISTENSEN, P,C,
^ rF|.lFEs,3 (rN^r co8P€rk^ | t.rN
V./\rL EANK F LltLotNo
EurT! goo
I OA SOUTI l FRoNTAGE Roao WEST
varL, CaLon^[ro Bt€Sz
D,Bcember 29, L99S
;DUNNABFLANALPcnSnutotttl 0F vAlL coM-DEv;# 2/ 2
r ELCPHONEI
lsTor4ra arln:
TCI,,ECOPIER!
(l?(ll a?6-4?6,€
KAREN r}l. uuNN
9€RTltlt.o LEOAL A!rrnr^itl
.JOllN W. r'rrNnl
AIIT HUF A, ADPLANAI.F, JR,
AllCll g. gHxlB r a Nslr,l
DIANE L, }IE'IMAN
i. c. ETfinl tL N 6ON
tFECI^L counnil.,
JFRNY V'. XAniNAH
E'cl'sed ls a stlpulat,lon ernich hae been subnitted tothe attorney for Lodge properties.
_ Pr€paration of this stlpulation follows up on atelephone conversatron between ttr. narley, Ann Frici( and meearrler thiF afternoon. Jlm a66urea ue lirat Lodge propertieE hagnot conpleted the necessary pap€rwork to itte tndir ip[riciiioii--for a burlding permlt. He also lnatcatecr a desire to-workthrough the lseues we have raieed. r cannot go so far as to eaythat he rf,antg to worh everythLnq out on an amicabre basis, but iredld eeem to deslre to avold a flght lf he can. lle have arragreed to neet on Thuraclay to b€aln some dlecussjong.
The sttpulatlon, tf it ie eLgned hy Balley, would seemto.serve our purpoggs aa wel.r as a tenporary-reetrainlng order atthls tine. Obvlously it han f.he aclvanlage if tto bond bEtngrequired.
In the mgantlme, the motion sent to you this nrornlnghas heen filed with_thc coqstr and we wilr be aule to proceedrnmedlately to obtatn a rostralning order lf that becomes
l.:.s:rry_. AB p.rt of ouf discuaaion on Thurcdaye yre witl plck adate- for hearl.ng on a prell.mlnary lnJunction. wa ruay very ierlb€ able bo pass by tho regtrainlig oiaer stage.
Anlta SaIzllhe Lodge Condoniniume
Apartment 527vaLl CO 8165?
Re:
Dear Anito ;
You.Ea very brulyl
DUNN, ABPTJAI{ALP Ti CHHI$'r'UNSEN,F. C.
The lodge aL VaIl
If yau have any qu+rtionrl pleaee give me a call.
jwd: lpae John t{. Dunn
SEI,{T BY :AfiORNEYS
d2-2S-Ss
; 4r00PM ;DIM,iABPLINALPCIIUN.T0f,N 0F VAIL C0M-DEY;# 1/ 2
IN TIIE DISTRICE COURT, COUNTT OF EA0LB, STATE OF COITORTADO
Cas€ !fo, 95 CV 362
STIPULAEION
ANII'A !iA!'r6.
Plaintitt,
v3.
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. ;
TOIIN OF VAIL, a nunlcipal corporation;
TOI{I{ COTTNCIL OF rHE Tot'N Of VAIL, and
BOB ARMOUR, SYBILL NAVAS, PATJI., R, JOHNSTONI MARGARET A.
OSTERfOSS, KEVIN R, FOLEY, MICHAEL D. JEtlExlt and
ROg FORD, as the Town Council of the Town of Vall,
Defendants.
coME ltol'l the Ptalnttff and the Defendant, Lodge
Pfopettles, Ine., by thelr rrnriernlgned attorneys and stipulate
and agree ae followE:
1. Lodge Propcrtler, Inc', ehall not apply for a
buildtng perrnit for tnpiovements to The Lodge at Vsilr generally
OescrlbEd- in the Conplilnt hcreln, exc€pb upon len dayr wrltten
noticc Eo Plalntiff.
2, elaintlff ahall vaqete hearlng on her motlon for
temporary scsLraiolng order, now lct f,or l;30 P'M' on Januory 2,
1996.
DATED the
-
claY of , 199_.
UUNN, ABPITAI{AIJP & CIIRISTDNSEN, P.C'
Byr---
108 S. frontage Road S. *300
Val1, Colorado 8f657
{ 970 ) 476-0300
Attorneys for Plalntiff
SH\IT BY:ATTORNEYS
52s-s5
; 4:0lPM ;DUNNABPLANALncnRlf,rorN 0F vAlL C0M-DEV;# 2/ 2
EAILEY. HARING tr PETERSON' P.C.
Qtt ,
Jamer E. gall€y, Jr.
1500 Lincoln Street, *317t
Dcnvor CO 90264
AttorneyE for Lodge ProPertles
FILEMPY
75 South Frantage Road
Vail. Colorado 81657
970-479-U3q479-2139
FAX 970-479.2452
January 17.1996
Mr. Jay Peterson
Weststar- Bank Building
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81657
Enc.
cc:Susan Connelly
Tom Moorhead
Bob Mclaurin
Re:VailTownCouncilrequirementforbufferingatthelntematiorulWing
Dear Jay'
After revierving the information submitted by yorn architects regarding the buffering betlr'een declis on the third
floor ofdte Intenational Wing, staft'has the following comments:
Design
The distance separating tlte decks is inadequate at this time. Staffbelieves a buffer of 22 feet is appropriate' This
can be accomplished by mailtaining thc existing decks in their present configuration and reducing dre rvestem end
ofthe penthouse deck. The concept ofa planler benveen tlte decks should colltinue to be used. Please provide a
specific landscape ptal in the reviied drarvings indicating the size and species of tlrc plant material' lnclude
approfimately fiu. .r=.gr..,, O.es in the plan'ter area adj-acent to the peirthouse' Atso include a description of horv
the area rvill be lnaintail.led n the futurc. Saff is assunring rvindow configurations for the existing condomiriruns
will not change in the revised drarvings.
provide details regarding the elevator equipmetlt. I understand no mechanical equipment is required to be located on
dre roof. Furthennore. all renting can be acconrplislted rvith duct work that will be daylighted arvay frorn all
condorniniums. Please verifY.
Owner's apBroval
Prior to taking action on the requested desigr approval. the Torm must receive approval from the o\\mer of the area
to be modified. wlrether this is an individual or the association. Pror,ide the condominium declaration' with
appropnate sections highlighted, indicating rvho has the aufbority to modify a General Common Element' Include a
tetie. ito* rttis patty g"anting approval for all proposed rvork' Another option is to move all proposed improvements
outside any existing GCE or LCE.
Thalk you for you attention to these issues. I have included rhe correspotldence I have received frorn interested
parties ior your information. I look forward to resolving this in the near future.
Departrnent of Community Development
{,2 *"""o 'o""
F:ele4 one\andy96-ler er peterson Il7
:iJ #
i!-
ROat x.
. dL/Iz/sa tzl.zs
T|lC r.lt of FIEEE oF F I € }I A I D F.
1800
Iwary L2, 1996
9-irta
t tao
LI NCOLN STBEEI
sUttE I t00
oGNVEi CO|.OFADO
ooaof
rEL lo! ate I t0(,
FA. !g.t iC! O.l I t
FO EOX attt
VArL COLORAoo
€tG!a
t[L :oJ a1l lDao
Vb Facslmile nc,.47g ?d zt5'1
16- Andy KDudbetr
Cmmunity DeveloPment
Tsu of VaiI
7s South Froutage Road Wcst
Vd, Colondo 81657
Re: The Intemational Wing, The Lodge at Vail
lk Andy:
Ar you anc aware, this ofEce represeuB Dr' and Mrs. James H- Cavanaugh' the
fiiDcrs of Unit 533, The Lodge * Vail.
Tb purposc of this letter is to provide tbe Town of Vail, in particular the community
flr:{|c-topt ot Deparfnent, comments, cmocrus and suggestions relative to tbe final
grosi4 erchitectur.l plans submitted to tle Town by the developer-s for the
Ironational wing.
.rti&:r our mceting rhis past Tuesday, in which the prcposcd plars were revierred alld
rbrrsscd amqtrgst ourselvcs, I forwarded copics of ttrc tcrrace plans to my cfients'
Tlcse plans were reviewed by Dr. aod Mrs. cavanaugh rnd discussed last nigbt via
tclqrbonc.
Ffr.-t aDd forcnrost, it must be pohtcd out that sEoug cotrcerns rcrnain with the
alnErcut use, ard seemingly disrcgard, of thc Cavanaugh's private propcrty riqhts
.i*tti"g ftom the timited ioomon clcBests ("LCE) afiached to their condominium
* At no time has any rcprescutadve &om the dweloper requestcd tberigbt-to
{ffze such LCE as part of the current devcloPmcnt plan. Morcovcr, without benefltt
f frrthc investigAiou iro 1[e condominiuu tloCumcnation' I aE trot comfortablc
Itr thc coudominium association's righ to comrcy any irttsrt$B, whetber via an
.-q_.mcrt eucf,oachmeot, or trarsftr of titlc. I betiwe 'hit issus mwt be carefully
rwiewcd by the Town shoutd it havc not yet been addresscd.
Th secod maJor concen remains the propo*xl elevator shaft. As explaincd nbove, I
ar of tle opinion the protrusion of the shaft inm the prEseut deck area of thc
eaanergh'; condominium unit is a violatiou Of the propcrty righn relativc to the
I.'G'. Notwittstendng, thc actual placemen of the shaft in cloae proxiDity to the
Tb LodCe luilding appears to be noneother than a mater ofcooyeDicnce aud in total
dregarC tor ttc o*r.n& of the affected uniS. Should the dwelopcrremain
,rl^rnlr in the toc*ioo of tbc same, at least an inquiry imo the installarion of a
Ot. cou'Y5EL: ELRoo, KAT!. t'FEEO. LOOL' MOIEON tr nrLv€iMAX' F C
6L/Lz/sB tz:za 1800 ELROD,f,ATZ ET
TICHARO
| !,
Dr.. ard MrS- JanCS lf, Qlyrn:rrgh
Jrury 12,lg*t
@c Two
bgrkaulic clevstor should be reguestcd- Ttis tlpc of cquipmeor would elinirete the
#rg to. the promrsion of tla elevator shafr tbrougb rhe loof' A bydraulic el6ta0or
ds not requirc this cxte$iotr.
Fielly, shquld the Town prcreed with its approval of tbe current developmcnt plal,
(rc Bust addrcss Ure UnAscaping issues. Tte insAllation of the largc evclgXq9D trees
is ranrxrnount to the construction of a landscaping "wall'. This will accouplish
rding 6q1g then tbc ctimination sf wbat litlc light and air tbat would be rcnaidng
rc ti. project is complstUl. Morcovcr, neither mysclf, nor rly clients' bave beeu
e&ceted as to tbe actual Eaintcnarce of the landscapiug. Crmcerns ov€r cos6t usc of
rirate propeny !o apcess the landscaping, iusurance and liability, asd thc lib must
bc addrcssed.
Ifu overatl bcst solutiou fur tbc dcvclopmeat of the Ilternationd wing uld tbe
-daclnned' to Thc Lodgc building appea$ to be thc eliEinarioo of the proposed
tEraces on The Lottge, ttre elimination of the terraccs immediately adjaccnt to thc
cdcrtainmeut suite aod directly across ftom The Lodge buitding' the installation of
Ior lyisg landscaping on thc roof arca scparating the two buildingS' and the relocdioo
cf thc clerator shaft.
I fnrst thc above informatioo will be considered io thc final decision making process
ht the Toua of Vail. In the meautime, rhis officc will continue m monitor the
fitadoo as well as investigate all avcnucs of recourse should the Properfy rigbts of
Dr- and Mrs. Cavanaugb bc cast asidc.
Shoultt you wish to discrrss the contcuts hceof, please call- For your inforrration. I
t'in be iut of tbe country tom January 20th throueB February 4tb. Mr- Bob Prcco
dEkod, IGtz, rteeo, [nok, Moison & Silverman' P.C- should be callcd for any
imedia6 csnoerns or proble"',c- He ca1 bC rcachcd at the Samc nuuber. Thank
I8.
Ycrrs vcry mrly,
RruARD P- ROSEN. P.C.
Richard P. Rosen
/h$
o
E,Lsr Vn, lace Hoptr owN ERs Assoct,t rt oN, hq c.
otlicers: ltesident - gob Galvix S€cretari' - Greua l,a:Xs l'reasurer - lhrrick G:amm
Dircclors - JuCib 3€rkoritz - Dolph Briilgev,'atcr - CUic Ca,,lkin< - Ror I-anSicy - Bil! Vston - Con:ic Riildcr
Ptxt Officc Ror 2-18 Vail, Colorarlo 81 558
Telephcne: (97C) 32;--(69l \{essag€/FA.xr (9?0) 821-5856
FAX TRANSMISSION
COVER PAGE
To: Susan Connelly
Time: 11:.30:22
Pages (including cover):
From: Jim Lamont, Administrator
Dale: t/16/96
I
Subject Lodge at Vail, International Wing, as oroposed
Special Inslructions: Attn: Andy Knudtsen
Upon review of the document concerning the redesign of the roof top terrnce, the
Homeowners Association continues lo find ihe proposal insufficient. The proposal
does not meet the goals or expections of the Association.
JRN-15-1996 tA"42
pt
Kettry
ttc
Arrorrryr ar Lav
363-695-486
v
9 JCFKK 515 P.6?
Lir A, Wooddl
,or.8924416
0ltt.sl
-!-0TAL P.S2
Jncobs
Chnse
Fnick
Kteiruko
&
January 15, 1995
fudy Knudtsen
Senior Planncr
Towa of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
, Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Lodge at Vail Intemational Wing
Dear Mr. Knudtsen:
Oo behslf of our client, Mrs. Luanne \l'ells, we have reviewed the
drawings submitted by Zehren and Associates for The Lodge at Vail Internatioiral
Wing in rcspoDse to the Town Courcil's requirement that additional buffering be
installed to protect condominium units 527, 533 and 535. Wc join in the written
objections zubmittedby Art Abplanalp, on beh,alf of Alita Saltz, which present
detailed reasons why the drawings inadequatcly address the concerns raised by the
Town Council oa Decembcr 5, 1995.
We continue to objcct to final approval of this project based on the Town's
failure to address zoaing compliance and the questionable validity of the 1983
Agesmeut between the Lodge and the Town of Vail.
Very tnrly yows,
JACOBS C}IASE FRICK KLEINKOPF
& KELLEY r-t.c
lr.deprndrrrce Pllrr
l0tO 17il Sr.
Suitr l5O0
Dervm. CO 8O261
"3r fa:t: (97 O1 47 9'2452,or-68t486) ":. originaltofollow
u* !O1.68!-*859 cci LynnFriglen
, Art AbPlanalP
LiaA. Woodall
,cfxx.lo I r.J. i
JOHN W. DUNN
ARTHUR A. ABPLANALP. JR.
ALLEN C. CHRISTENSEN
OIANE L. HERMAN
R. C. STEPHENSON
TE LE PHO N E:
(97O) 476-O3OO
TELECOPIER:
t97Or 476-4'163
KAREN M. DUNN
Law OFFTcES
DUNN, ABPLANALP & CHRISTENSEN, P.C.
A PROF€5€IONAL CORPORATION
VAIL BANX BUILDING
sutrE 300
I 08 SoUTH FRoNTAGE RoAO \iIvEST
vArL, CoLoRADo 81 657
12 January 1996
SPECTAL COUNSELT
JERRY W. HANNAH
Mr. Andy Knudtsen
Town of VaiI
Department of Communlty Development
Vail CO
HAND DELIVERED
Res fnternatlonal Wing - Lodge at VaiI
n
tJ''t'tt
LEGAL ass
\\"C \/
^,F-
\* < fl!r4i;\-/ ,[''' t
Dear Andy:
we understand that the Town of Vail has received a revised
plan relating to the International wing, in,response to the Town
bouncil's r6quirement that additional buffer be installed to
protect the eiisting condominium units. As you wiII recall' this
iirm represents Jack- Sa1tz and Anita Saltz, who have requested that
we revi-ew and provide comments regarding that proposal'
our review of the proposed revision, cross-referencing
according tol sheet, identifiLa Lne following clarified or confirmed
problems with the proposal:
1. Sheet A1 . 1
a-Thenewplanconfirmsthattheproposedelevatorshaft and unidlntified adjacent companion structure will
penetrate the deck which is an exlsting limited common
element of the Lodge Apartment condoninium to the extent
of one-third of itl wi-attr, or two of six feet' This, of
course, contradicts the developer's statement to the
Councii, when its representatlves stated that the
eLevator would not penetrate that area. While the deck
is a limited common element, it is still a conmon element
of, the Lodge Apartment Condominium owned by the
Assoclation. rt cinnot be changed other than through the
coutprising a limited common element of Unit 527 and Unit
5r3.
b- The new plan proposes to modify the exterior waII
arrd door of Lodge apariment Condominium Unit 535. Again'
this cannot be changed other than by the Lodge Apartment
Condominlum AssoCiation, through the procedure
es*.ablished by the Declaration.
d,,r/
,^F
c. The new plan proposes to expand the common elements
of the Lodge Apaitment Condominium by creating
Condominium AJsocialion responsibility for an expanse of
terrace and planters replacing two existing decks '
Again, this reconfiguration of a relatively simple common
efement (the decks iow associated with Units 527 and 533)
and the associated responsibility cannot be changed other
than through the procedure established by the
Declaration. The queition is whether the Association
would agree to amend the Declaration to accept
responsidility for this modified structure, when it is
for the benefit of only three ol^tners, and many members of
the Association object to the project as a whole'
d. The plan not only confirms that the elevator
violates ttre area owned by the Lodge APartnent
Condominium Association, but that it's proximity to
Condominium Units 527 and 533 is certain to cause
disruption through noise and vibration. The elevator is,
of co-urse, adjacLnt to the terrace areas of each Unit'
The elevator structure and operating machinery (which
almost certainly is within the elevated structure
adJacent to Unit 533) is also less than six feet from
Unit SZZ and four feet away from Unit 533 ' No indication
is provided regarding access to the operating. machinery,
buC that would almost certainly be required through the
terrace of Unit 533 or 527, or across what is proposed to
be the nel^t "general common property" which is proposed to
the east of the proPosed terraces.
e- The plan clearly confirms the concern expressed by
Lhe Councit at the lJst hearing, that the development is
tu.rning three fifth-floor condominium units into three
streetllevel condominium units. Units which formerly had
nrountain view will now have views of a 12-foot by 14-foot
terrace boxed in by a planter and whatever amount of snow
may accumulate on top of those pfanters lurinq winter'
mifng the winter, ealh unit, despite the fact-t-hat it is
on th6 fifth floor, will have a view of a wall of wood
and snow.
Sheet A1.3a- This sheet establishes the effect of the extensive
Iandscaping necessitated by the proposal , which, with a
pl"anter he-ight of 3-l/2 fbet and plant height of L-2-feet, will Jttectively create a box around each unit 4-
Lt2 ieet to 5 feet high. This analysls does not consider
tlue effect of snow depth during winter. The excessive
marintenance involved in preventing damage, and the risk
of, damage from the snow, is not likety to be well
received by the Association whose property this is
2.
expected to become.
b. The terraces of Units 527 and 533 will abut an
operating elevator, which will make the owners' ability
to enjoy-those terraces speculative, at best'
c.Ifthesandstonebenchtobeinstalledabovepartofthe elevator shaft is intended to serve as seating, it is
unlikely to be successful, as its surface will be thirty
inches above floor level.
3. Sheet A4.1
Ttrl.s sheet confirms the proflle of the elevator shaft and
its unidentified companion structure and establishes (a)
that there wlll exilt only three feet in the elevator
slraft for operational equipment above the ceiling of the
floor below-, and (b) persons sitting on the .,sandstone
bench" above the eievator shaft in front of unit 533 will
be approximately five inches above the shaft and its
operattng eguiprient. Additionally, this sheet confirms
tbe inpa-ct -ot- the elevator enclosure which will be
constru-ctedtwentyfeetfromanddirectlyoppositeunits
527 and 533.
4. Sbeet A4.2Tlrissheetisnotparticularlyinformative,beyondthelnformation provided on other sheets'
5. Sheet A4.3lllris sheet confirms (a) the contemplated modification of
tbe general conmon 'eiements compri^einS - tle "n1f + "tt9windows of unit 535, (b) the obstruction of the window of
unit 533 by the eLevator shaft and associated structure
a<tJacent t-o it, and (c) the penetra.tion of the limited
cmmon elements comprised of Lhe decks outside Units 527
and 533 by the 6levator shaft and the associated
structure adjacent to it.
6. Sheet A4.4lfhis sheet confirms the penetratlon of the llmited common
elements comprised of thL decks outside Units 527 and 533
b* the elevalor shaft and associated structure adJacent
ta it, to the extent of one-third of its width, two feet'
In sunrnary, the developer proposes to redra!,t condominium
ownership bcrndaries and reOetine cohdoninium air rights without
even prelent"S.ng the issues to the Condominium Association whose
approial is soulht. Obviously, no approval has been obtained. The
t6wn of Vaiti co--ntinues to coirsider -ihis proposal in violation of
its own ordinance, which requires that the design review_ be
processed onX-y upon submittal of ptans by the "owner or authorized
agent of any project.'r Vait Municipal code 18-54.040.8.1. and c.1.
1'fre proieit- alsumes that the Lodge Ap_artment Condomlnium
essociation w1ll agree to the modlflcatlon of the content and the
boundary of the coridominium air space unit. Under the condominium
declaralion, that cannot occur except upon the consent of 75* of
the property owners and all holders of first deeds of trust. That
has not- happened and is
-extremely
unlikely to happen'
while the proposal was originally presented to the Town based
upon the representition that oniy the pfoperty of The Lodge at Vail
wis to be d6veloped, it has become apparent that the project cannot
proceed absent mbaification and development of property, including
ifr space rights, owned by the Lodge Apartment Condominium
Association. Therefore, the project is not properly before the
Town for approval, absent -consent of the Lodgg Apartment
Condominlum Association. Whether viewed on that basis or on the
basis of the design review criteria alone, the project should not
and cannot legally be approved as submitted.
A. Abplanal
Jncobs
Chnse
Fnick
&
Kkirkopf
Krlley
rLc
Arronrrys rr Lrw
lndrprndrnce Pl,ur
lol0 | hk Sr.
Suirr | 5OO
, Drrvtn, CO 8026,
,or.68r.4too viafax: (970)479-2452
original to followr* 701.685.4869 cc: Lynn Fritzlen
Art Abplanalp
.rAtl
_;
' .t-
January le:tsgt o .r?. t.-t
Andy Knudtsen
Senior Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vaii, Colorado 81657
Re: Lodge at Vail International Wing
Dear Mr. Knudtsen:
On behalf of our clien! Mrs. Luanne Wells, we have reviewed the
drawings submitted by Zeltrenand Associates for The Lodge at Vail Intemational
Wing in response to the Town Council's requirement that additional buffering be
installed to protect condominium units 527, 533 and 535. We join in the written
objections submitted by Art Abplanalp, on behalf of Anita Saltz, which present
detailed reasons why the drawings inadequately address the concems raised by the
Town Council on December 5. 1995.
We continue to object to final approval of this project based on the Town's
failure to address zoning compliance and the questionable validity ofthe 1983
Agreement between the Lodge and the Town of Vail.
Very truly yours,
JACOBS CHASE FRICK KLEINKOPF
& KELLEY t-rc
d;f)""*-t t-
lin A. Woodnll
,or.8924416
LiaA. Woodall
JCFKK.29IGI
o
{ \f/'" /Januaryt''tee' (qlf"o ''
aMr, Jay Pctcrson , $'- . t !
Wcststar Bank Building \'/ L,* . t" . A I
lT,l;T'"""ti:l,**' 'b\nt't' <r/t"
*{rr';
Dcar Jay,
After revicrving the information submittcd by your architccts rcgarding thc bu{Iering bctwcen dccks on the
third floor of thc Intemational Wing, staff has the followiltg commcnts:
Dcsign
The distancc separating thc decks is inadcquate at this timc. Saffbclicvs a buffcr offfcct is appropriatc'
This can be accomplisheO UV *.ittt"init'tg t'he cxisting dccks in the cxisting conliguration and rcducing the
wcstem cnd ofthc penttrousc deck. Thc-conccpt of a plantcr bcnvcen thc dccks should continuc to bc used'
Plcasc provide a spccific landscapc plan i9 the rcviscd drawings indicating the size and spccics ofthe plant
lnatcrial. Includc approxinratcly fivc cvcrgrccn trccs irr thc planter arca adjaccnt to the pcnthousc' Also
include a dcscription of how thc arca will be maintaimcd in thc futurc' Sta{I is assurningl window
configurations ior the existing condontiniums will not cha.gc in the reviscd drawtngs'
Provide details rcgarding the clevator cquiprnent. I rurderstand no ntcchanical cquipmcnt is rcquircd to be
located on thc roof. Furthcr morc, all vcnting can bc accomplishcd with duct work that will bc daylightcd
away from all condominiums. Plcasc vcrify'
owner's approval
- -^-..^^.^r r^'* na,*mrar oval from thc owner ofnioito taking action on the requested design approval, thc Towr must rccclve apprr
the arca to bc modified, whethcr this is an individual or the association' hovidc the condominium
dcclaration, with appropriatc sections highlighted, indicating who has thc authority to modify a Gcneral
Common Elemcnt. Includc a lcttcr froDr this party grantinf approval for all proposcd work' Anothcr option
is to movc all proposed improvcntcnts outsidc any existing CCE'
Thank you for your attenhon to thcse issues. I havc includcd thc concspondcnce I havc rcccivcd frotn
intcresicd partics for your information. I look forward to rcsolving this in thc near f.gturc'
Sincerely,
Andy Knudtscn
Senior Planncr
Re: Vail Town Council rcquiremcnt for buffcring at thc lntcmational Wiug
Susan Connclly
Torn Moorhead
Bob Mclaurin F:weryone\andy96-letter\peterson I I ?
.0L/t2/0A t2:23
tHC r.tl OFFICEE gr
flrol olsoo
nrcHanD P. Fo$tE.X.
Jmuary L2, lY96
9axr2l
I t20
Ltf.COL|.| 9Tl EET
ruttt I r90
oGNVCn COLOE OO
ootof
?EL lol OIZ t99l'
F^f J9".r i6t oa | !
YAIL
FO aOl ala7
Ylrl coLoFADO
at6!a
tEL !0! a7l |lao
Vie Fecslmile n0.47gld 2.t5ll
Mr. Andy KDudSetr
Community DeveloPment
Tovu of Vail
75 South Frontage Road WEst
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: The Interortional Wing, Thc L,odge at Vaii
Dear Andy:
As you arc aware, this of6ce reprcsenB Dr. and Mrs' Iamcs H' Cavanaugh' the
owners of Uuit 533, The Lodge at Vail-
The purpose of this lener is o prwidc tbe Town of vail, in particular tbc community
Dwetopmeut Departrnent, con;eo6, conoer$i and suggostions relative to the final
prre*fo erchitectural plans submittcd to tbe Town by the dcveloJrers for the
lntcrnational Whg.
After our meeting rll* past Trcsdey, iu which the proposcd plaru wcre revierrcd.and
rtiscusscd *-grt oursilvcs, f forwuded copies of tbc tcrrace plans 19 my c]ients.
Ttcsc plaos we;e reviewed by Dr. and Mrs. Cavanaugh and 4iscussed last nigbt via
telephonc.
First ald foromost, it must be pointcd out that stroug colcsros rsmain with tbe
;;;;*;, rtd seemingly Ourcgud' of thc Callpurh's privaie property dgbas
#Jtiot toit *," u"titue commoiclemcuts (-LCE) asached to their condonrinium
uuit. Ai no time has any reprsscntative ftom tbe dweloper requesttd theright to
"tilir"
,"rh LCE as part otin" cunent dcvelopment plen. Morcovcr, without bendtt
;i-fr"d investigation into the condomidum documcilation, I am Dot comfortable
with thc coudomiium association's rigbt to convey any irterc$ts, wbcther via^an
eagcmcn! encroachmeot, or trensftr of titlc. I belicvc this issue must ue cercnuy
rwiervcd by thc Town should it have not yet been addrcsscd'
The second major concern remains the proposed elevator shat' As explaincd abovc' I
am of the opinion the protrusiotr of trclnit into gre present deck arca of ths
crao*gn'i condo-iliun unit is r violahou of the propcrty Iight$ relativ_c to thr
LCE.Notwitbstanding,tbeactualplacenemofrbeshaftincloseproximityto-t}s
The Lodge building appears to be ioncother than a Eetter of cotrvcoicnce aud in toal
JGg.ta tot ttrc oi"nentip of tbe affccted units. Shotrld thc dwelopcr remain
aOaliluu in the l<ration of the sunc, at least an inquiry irno thc installarion of a
oF CountELr €LRoo. l(,|Tr. r'tE€O. LoOL' xOlEgt{ 'r
grLvEiNA|{' F'C'
,,01/L2/58 12:28 ELROD.KATZ ET AL
Rt cH.AR9 p. no€;lNr P. G.
::: .L-l::.
hyrtraulic elcvator should be requcsted' Ttis type of equipueft \ryould elplrte tle
oLd fot tbe protrusion of the eievator shaft through tle roof. A hydraulic elevator
docs not require this cxteosiotr.
l.inally, sbould the Tonn proceed wio its apprwal of ttre currcnt developmcnt plal,
oue -tst address the laDdscaping issucs. 1ae inshllation of thc large evcrglesn tee$
is tailenount to the construction of a landscaping "w'dll'. This will accOnplish
notling more rhrn thc elimination of what litle light and air dat would be rcnainiug
on "
tie project is complutUl. Morcover, ueither mysclf, nor my clietrB, have bee0
educated as io tl. r.ttat maintenance ofthe landscapiug. Couccrns over costs, usc of
private property to apcess tle landscaping, insurencs and liability, and thc lihc must
bc addrcsscd.
Tte ovcrall bcst solutiou for tbc rlorclopmcut of the hteruational wing ud tbe
-r63s[ne[t' to The l-odge building ryicars to be thc eliminrtlon of tbc prorposed
tffraoes on The Indge, tbe eliminatiou of the terraccs imnrcdiately edjaccot to thp
cntcrbinment suirc and dircctly acrms from The Lorlge buildinS, tle instrllation of
t * ly.lnc laudscaping on tbc r-oof arca scparating tbc two buitdings. and tbe reloction
of thc clwator shaft.
I Uust the above idormatio[ will be considered in the final decisiol makhg pl\r6s
by 0re Tovm of Vail. In the neafiine, this office will cOntinue to monitor tls
siUrarion as well as investigate all avenucs of recoruse should the Prqperty rights of
Dr. and Mrs. Cavanaugh be cast aside.
should you wsh b discuss thc conteots hereof, pleasc call. For your inforuatim. I
*ifr U i* of the counry from January 20th througb February 4flr. Mr.B_ob Prceo
of Elrod, KaE, Preeo, Ilok, Moison dc Sitverman, P.C. should be caltcd for aly
immcdiatc c0trcerrs or problcms- IIe can bc rcachcd et the sene nuuber- Thank
you.
Yorus very mrly,
RICIARD P- ROSEN. P.C.
Dr. rud Mrs. Jamcs H. Cavanaugh
January 12, lW
Page Two
Richard P. Rosen
/tN
E,lsr Vu,ucs HoMrowNERs Assocu.TtoN. INc.
Otlicets: ltosidont - tsob Galvin Socret!ry - Gr€tta lhJls 'lteasurer - Pdhick G:ainrn
Direclors - JuCith Berkon'itz - Dolph Dridgcvratcr - Etlic Caulkins - ltotl Langi€y - Bill Morton - Connie Riilder
PtxL Officc Bor 2-18 Vail, Colorachr l{ I 658
Teteptrcne: (970) 827-5680 \,le6saBe./FAX (970) 827-5856
FAX TRAT{SMISSION
COVER PAGE
To: Susan Connelly
Time: 11'.3O:,22
Pages (including cover):
From: Jim Lamont, Adminislrator
Date: l/16/96
1
Subiect Lodge at Vail, International \Mng, as oroposed
Special lnstructions: Attn: Andy Knudlsen
Upon review of the document ccncerning tre redesign of the roof top terrnce, the
Homeowners Association mntinues lo find the proposal insufficient. The proposal
does not meet the goals or expections of the Association.
o
Jncobs
Chnse
Fnick
Kteinkopf
Krlky
rLc
Arrornryr er Llw
January 16, 1996
AndyKnudtsen
Senior Planncr
Town ofVail
75 South Frontage Road
, Vail, Colorado 81557
R.e: Lodge atVail Int€rxational Wing
Dear Mr. Knudtsen:
On behrlf of our clienf lv!s. Luannc Wclls, we have rcviewed the
drawings zubmitted by Zeluen and Associates for The Lodge at Vail International
Wing in r€sponse to thc Town Courcil's requirement that additional buffering be
installecl to protect condominiuru ruits 527, 533 and 53 5. We join in the wittcn
objections submitrcd by Ad Abplanalp, on behalf of Anita Saltz, which present
detailed reasons why the &awings inadequatcly addrcss lhc concerns raised by thc
Town Council on December 5, 1995.
We continue to objcct to final approval of this project based on the Town's
failure to address zoning compliance and tlre questionable validity of the 1983
Agreement between the Lodge and 0re Town ofVail.
Ver.v truly yorus,
JACOBS CTI,ASE FRICK KLEINKOPF
& KELLEY t-t.c
Lir A. Woo<hll
,or.8q24+r6
0lltsl
TOTRL P.62
lrrdoeMncr Phrl
lOl017fi5t.
Suhr I lO0
Denwn, CO 8O269
rrii fqa' (970) 479'2452,or.6sr46cf,original to follow
r,ir !ol-6&5-*s69 cc: LynnFdtdeni Art Abplanalp
.X,;/,,Dd^/L
I.ia A. Woodall
,cFt(x.ar0.l
JOHN W. OUNN
ARTHUR A. ASPLANALP. JR.
ALLEN C. CHRISTENSEN
DIANE L, H ERMAN
R, C. STEPHENSON
TELgPHONE:
(970) 476-0300
TELECOPIER:
1970t 476-4765
KAR EN M. DUNN
LAw OFFIcES
DUNN, AgpTRrunLP & CHRISTENSEN, P.C,
VAIL BANK BU ILOI NG
sutr€ 300
I 08 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD WEST
VA rL, CoLoRADo 91657
12 January 1996
5P€clAL COUNS€Ll
JER RY W. HANNAH
n ';[''''""
LEG^L
^55
(ln f '-/ ^,F\* o +?Y tq'i;, J ,(,rr v
The elevator
comprising a limited common element of unit 527 and Unit
s33.
b. The new plan proposes to modify the exterior wall
and door of l-,o-dge apariment Condominium Unit 535' Again,
this cannot be tnangeO other than by the Lodge Apartment
Condominium AssoCiation, through the procedure
established by the Declaration.
Mr. Andy Knudtsen
Town of Vail
Department of Community DevelopnentVaiI CO
HAND DELIVERED
rocedure established the d
Re: Internatlonal lfing - Lodge at VaiI
Dear Andy:
We undergtand thaf, the Town of VaiI has roceived a revised
plan relating to the International Wing, in, -response to the Town
Louncil's re-guirement that additional buffer be installed to
protect tne eiisting condominium units. As you will recall' this-Firm represents Jacli Sattz and Anita Saltz, who have reguested that
we revi-ew and provide comments regarding that proposal'
our review of the proposed revision, cross -re ferencing
according to sheet, identifi-ed Lhe following ctarified or confirmed
problems with the ProPosal:
1. Sheet A1. 1a. The new plan confirms that the proposed elevator
shaft and unidlntified adjacent companion structure will
penetrate the deck whlch is an existing limited cornmon
Llement of the Lodge Apartment Condominium to the extent
of one-third of it6 width, or two of six feet' This, of
course, contradicts the developer's statement' to the
CouncLl, when its representatlves staLed that the
elevator would not penelrate that area. v{hile the deck
is a timited common Llement, it is stiLl a common element
of the Lodge Apartment Condominium owned by the
Association. It' cinnot be changed other than through the
d'l/
,^ff/
c. The new pJ.an propo8es to expand the common elementsof the Lodge Apartment Condominium by creating
Condominium Association responsibility for an expanse of
terrace and planters replacing two existing decks.
Again, this reconfiguratlon of a reLatlvely simple common
element, (the decks now associated with Units 527 and 533)
and the associated responsibility cannot be changed other
than through the procedure established by the
Declaration. The question is whether the Association
would agree to amend the Declaratlon to accept
responsibility for this modified structure, when it is
for the benefit of only three owners, and many members of
the Association objecL to the project as a whole.
d. The plan not only confirms Lhat the elevator
violates ttre area owned by the Lodge Apartment
Condominium Association, but that its proximity to
Condominium Units 527 and 533 is certain to cause
disruption through noise and vibration. The elevator is,
of course, adjacent to the terrace areas of each Unit'
The elevator structure and operating machinery (which
almost certainly is within the elevated structure
adjacent to UniC 533) ls also less than six feet from
Unlt SZ't and four feet away from Unit 533. No indication
is provided regarding access to the operating machinery,
Uut- ttrat would almosl certainly be required through the
terrace of Unit 533 or 527, or across what is Proposed to
be the new "general common property" which is proposed to
the east of the proPosed terraces.
e. The plan clearly confirms the concern expressed by
the councit at the ltst hearing, that the development ls
turning three fifth-floor condominium units into three
streetllevel condominium units. Units which formerly had
mountain view will now have views of a L2-foot by 14-foot
terrace boxed in by a planter and whatever amount of snow
may accumulate on top of those planters during wlnter'
ouiing the winter, ealh unit, despite the fact that it is
on th6 fifth floor, wiII have a view of a wall of wood
and snow.
Sheet A1 .3a. This sheet establishes the effect of the extensive
landscaping necessitated by the proposal , which, with a
planter height of 3-L/2 feet, and plant height of I-2
feet, ltill effectively create a box around each unit 4-
L/2 teet to 5 feet high. This anal-ysls does not conslder
the effect of snow depth during winter. The excessive
maintenance involved in preventing damage, and the risk
of damage from the snow' is not likely to be weII
received by the Association whose property this ls
2.
expected to become.
b. The terraces of Unlts 527 and 533 will abut an
operating elevator, which will make the owners' ability
to enjoy those terraces speculative, at best'
c. If the sandstone bench to be installed above part of
the elevator shaft is intended to serve as seating, it is
unlikely to be successful, as its surface will be thirty
inches above floor level .
3. Sheet. A4.1
Thls sheet confirms the profile of the elevator shaft and
its unidentified companion structure and establishes (a)
that there w111 exist only three feet in the elevator
shaft for operational equipment above the cei11n9 of the
floor betow, and (b) persons sitting on the "sandstone
bench" above the elevalor shaft in front of unlt 533 will
be approximately five inches above the shaft and its
operaling equipment. Additionally, this sheet confirms
the tmpict -of the elevator enclosure which wiII be
constlicted twenty feet from and directly opposite Units
527 and 533.
4. Sheet A4 .2
Thls sheet is not particularly infornative, beyond the
information provided on other sheets '
5. Sheet A4.3
Thls sheet conflrms (a) the contemp].ated modification of
the general conmon 'elements comprising tle "11] anq
winddws of Unit 535, (b) the obstruction of ghe wlndow of
unit 533 by the elevator shaft and associated structure
adjacent t-o it, anct (c) the penetration of the limited
common elements comprised of the decks outside units 52?
and533bytheelevatorshaftandtheassociatedstructure adjacent to it.
5. Sheet A4.4
Thls sheet conflrms the penetration of the limited common
elements comprised of thL decks outbide Units 527 and 533
by the elevalor shaft and associated structure adjacent
toit,totheextentofone-thirdofitswidthrtv'rofeet'
In surnmary, the developer proposes to redraw condominium
ownership boundaries and redefine condominium air rights without
even prelentlng the issues t,o t,he Condominium Association whose
approval is sougnt. obviously, no approval has been obtalned. The
t6wn of Vail continues to consider this proposal in violation of
its or^rn ordinance, which requires that the design review be
processed only upon submittal of plans by the "owner or authorized
agonL of any proj3ct," ValI Munlclpal Code 18-54.040.8.1. and C.1.
The proJeCt- assumes that the Lodge Apartment Condomlnium
Assoclatlon wll} agree to the modlflcation of the content and the
boundary of the condominium air space unit. Under the condominium
declaralion, that cannot occur except upon the consent of 75* of
the property owners and all holders of first deeds of trust. That
has not happened and is extremely unlikely to happen.
while the proposal was originally presented to the Town based
upon the representition that only the property of The Lodge at Vail
was to be developed, it has become apparent that the project cannot
proceed absent noOitication and development of property' includlng
ifr space rights, owned by the Lodge Apartnent Condominium
Associltion. Therefore, the project is not properly before the
Town for approval, absent consent of the Lodge Apartment
Condominium Aisociation. Whether viewed on that basis or on the
basis of the design review criterla alone, the project should not
and cannot legally be approved as submitted.
A. Abplanal
BROWN &
ONE NORWBSIT BANK CB{ITN,
ltI) LINCOLN STREET, SI.ITIE :nM
DE$WB&@IORADO IA}}Sa)
TELEIHONE (XB)&|zdm
FACSIMTLE (3(B) 8nLX53
JEB:lb
Enclosure
nWT?Ebcrrp.fl
ATTORNEYSATIAW
I
Jr-q E. Brown
i
cc Arthur Abplanalp, Esq.
Mr. Jorge Bosch
JAMES E BROWN
ruV-C0lttffi:D[*DEPT.
OlOo!.1
rcELD. RUSSMAN
January 19,19%
Mr.Andy Knudtsen
Torvn of Vail
Department of C-ommunity Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 91657
Re: International Wing at The lodge at Vail
Dear Andy:
Art Abplanalp has prwided me a aopy of his January 12,l996letter to the Town
concerning htgl Eliq" the International Wingls intrusion into general and limited oommon
elements of The lodge Apartment Condoniniums.
Please provide me copies of all correspondence on these iszues, as well as adequate
prior notice of any meetings, so that I may participate on behalf of my client.
Thank you for your consideration Best wishes in the new year.
1 Yours very truy,
O o
d4
J 1'h%"/tu
Cr-'lr-C"y* f f hLk*{"6 \\-'J o2^
c
ZEHREN AND ASSOCIATES-INC.
oo48 E. ,.,|;PaB?:i. L?# .tro.
AVON, COLORADO 81620
(303) 949-0257
FAX (303) 949-1080
WE ARE SENDING YOU T Rttached
! Shop drawings
tr Copy of letter
Prints
Change order
tr
!
! Specifications
LffiTtrfuF TRANSNNITTAL
fl euns E Samples
tr
fl Under separate cover via
qL+8'1,6
the following items:
coPlEs DATE NO.DESCRIPTION
?-7,6,qb At, l aerranc. 7o'-l
?-3,b,1b fd".2.aerraae.5,ee/-ioq
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked
f ror approval
E For your use
! As requested
I For review and
N FOR BIDS DUE
commenr
below:
n
n
tr
n
Approved as submitted
Approved as noted
Returned for corrections
! Resubmit
-copies
for approval
! Submit
-
copies for distribution
I Return
-
corrected Prints
19
-
! PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
?
I
ivqBraS SIGNED:
tf enctoauraa et? not aa no ktndty notw ua a,
SENT BY:o3- 4-e6 ; 6:28PM ;BATLEY *Utr
Jncob,s
Cknsr
Fnick
Kleinkopf
Keltey
t"tc
Arrorrayt rr L^u
lndrpemltrct Pbu
lOlO lTrlt 5t.
Suin ltfi)
Dcnva, CO 80261
,0r-6614Em
ei tol-bsrAatq
Re: SallzlVelts v. Lodge Properties, Inc" et al'
Dear Jim and Torn:
We are planning to filc onc rial bdef approximately one wcek to I 0 days i n
advancc of the t o.ittg io ttti* tutto *ra thcn suggest, if the judge dcems n€ccssary'
to file proposed findings offact and conclusions oflaw at thc conchsioo ofthc uial'
I ulso wish to notify vo" rbat t* may callthe followiug witnesscs to tcstify at thc
hearingl
Fcbruary 29, 1996
Jarnos S. B"il"Y, Jr., Esq.
Bailey Harring & Petersoa P'C'
1660 Lincoln St., Suite 3175
Dcnvet, CO 80264
R. Thomas Moorhead
TownAttorneY
75 S. Froutage Rd.
vail, CO 81657
krryEskwith
AndY K.nudtscn
Luaone Wells
Jim l,amont
HollY McCutchern
Don Elliott (orpert; CV enclosed)
Pleascletmeknowwhomyoueachmaycallaswitnesscsrrtthehcaring.I
apprcciatc your pnlfessional cooperation'
Very truly Yours,
Euclosurc
cr John W. Dunn
3034rufi7i# 4/10
Ann B. fnicl
89?.4+12
,GK(-tall.l
"cL
SENT BY:ei- 4-e6 ; 6:28PM ;BATLEY nAuc-,
DONALD L. NI,LIOTT
TS4ltunboltlt Strcst
D$rvcr, C() 802fE
IJSA
(.303) 3.55-(r104
3034752157;# 5/10
I'RO}'ESSIONAL HISTORY
Frcscnt:
Continuing:
Prior:
Vice Prc.sidcntt. Chrion Assosiiltes pf Colorado. LLCI
Rtral Estlte AttofllcY - Pluning :unl l)rvrloptucnt cr'rlltbtrr'rtivc'
Washirgtun, D.C., lnrl Sr. Pacr'*rurg. Rrrssiru 199+1995
flircctor of Downtown Z.oning and Oatcway Pryiwts - (:ity nud (:ounty of
Dcnvgr. l99l-1904
Assislunt trirestor ol'nirport Glteway l)cvclopmcnt Otlicc - Citt :rDd
County of Dcnvur, 1988-1991
l(cal Estatc Atlurnuy :rnd A.*socia..'-- Davis. Cnrhiun & Stuhbq pcovsr.
Crrhrradrr. I 984- | :rEE
ARIA^S OF SPECIAI.. COMI'I|'I'E,NCE
Lunrl-use pmctic$ concrinFulcd in urhun zrrning otrd dcvu'lopntunt rcgul:rdon:i.
dgsign rr;vicw $ystent.\ urd groulr nralngsurunt lcchniqus'
Infrl:lnrcr-'* linrrss pru:tice frrcusing on dcvclopmcnt r:lurges and ilnpact
l'ccs.
MAJOR PRO.tr:C-r'S
es.sistin8 City ol-St. Peterstrurg, Russir, to dcvclup law"- und legal proccdutts
1(, trunsfcr sttmrncrcial larul t'nm $t!te r)wncr$hip to gfivatc trwncrrlrip, unrl
dcvcloping similur modcl luws and pmccdurcs lirr use thntughtntt Rtssis.
Dr.rftiug md irdrrption ol'innovotivc zouitrg Ordirr:rnces impletrrcnting magtgr
plun lir f)owntnwn | )euvcr, tlohtritdo.
Drulling and adoption of mistur plm and zrrning otditnnccs lirr 4.5(xt acrv-
mixcd usc dcw{uprnunt ffta ncur l)gnvsr ltltcrnoliorrul Airprrt
Direction ef inrpact tbc stutlius antl drufting of dcvclopttlcnt linrrrrcing policy
for 4.5t)0 rCfc mixud u.re rtevcloJrnrcni nr:tr Dcavcr Intcmational Airport
I)nrffing of grrrwth rntuirgcm€nt ritrutegy and tools llrr Douglir.s coturty.
Ncvatla
'SEITT BY:d- 4-eo ; 6:28PM ;MrLEY -Ur 3034792157;# 6/10
DONALD L. R,LI,IOTT
Page 2
};I'UCATTON
r[IDLTCATIONS
PROTTSSTONAL
}lEMBERSHIPS
Mastsr of City i\rtl Regional Plcruriug - J.F.K. Schurrl Qf Covcnttuutt.
Hruv:ud tJnivcrsity, | )t!4
Juris f)rlcror. ctnn tlut'lc - Harvirrtl Llw School. 21)lf4
llnclrclor ul'Science, suttuua cutu lirudc, Phi Bcur Koppa '- Yulu tlnivcnity.
1n9
Narh.miel Rogg ticlltrwsbip lt Tlrc Joinr (tntcr trrr Udan Studir:s at llurqrnl
t-tnivcrsily rad M.l.T., l9D3
Fditor, 4th Ediiiorr ol'Cttlrrludo Llnd Plnttning unrl lltve ,
Coluradu Cihupter. Amcric.u ltlunning AsvrsirliQn (1991)- Wintrcr,,l 1QQ3
Amcric:rn Pllluirtg Arxrciuripn national awnrd lirr csccllcnce: "l'ocal
GovctnrnL'nt Exusliorrs tiom Dcrclopr:rs lllrr lleav.cr Ml8dryr" t6
L-olorndo Lawy'gr a2 (with Ruth l'i. Comr'cld. J.rnuilry...-1987); Usittg
Arbitratiurr irnd Me<ti.rtion lo Rcsolvr, Lund lJse Disputcs'' Jr) Land Usc Law
itnd Zq$ine Digcst 3 (with leflrey ll' Grl-ry. Muy 1987): 'Muniuipal
L*tlbrernenr pf Restrictivc ('ovcnil11.*' 38 l;rnd I lsc Lew arld i4ruini.lDi8g>(
3 punc 1986):."Pl.rnning Anrund the l!,orrldrr: An Evuluutirrn of the ltotculial
FII'ccLs of {lommunity (:rrulmrlniailEtns-Y--Bgildql ou Mrrniuip:rl Planrring
Activiry." Monograph 83-10 of Ancricrur Plunning A.sxrciation (19E1).
Frtrlucnt speeler on lOnd USC topic-.1 tirr the AntCriCAn Plgnning Associ:rtirrn.
Coloredo Rrr Ass+rciution. end Nstiotnl hstitutc of Municipal I "cw 0ffit:crs.
Prusidettt of Color.rdo Clrapter rrf Arrrc'rican Plaruring Assrrciation (lt)92-
1994), Mcrnbcr of Anticus Contutitlt'r (ltt5'). NationaUSlirtc Policy
Crnrdinating Conuuittsu ( | 99 I - | 995 ). Plorrnilg und l.uw f)ivision ( l r8s-)
and lutcrnalional Division ( 1 99 1 -) ol' Amr,ricln Plalning Associrrtion.
Mcmbcr, Anurirjiln Instltute of Crsdificd Pliurnsrs
Menrbcr of Atncricln, (blorudo. and l)snvur Blr Assrrr:iltions
. .. .,SENT BY:
'J- 4-e6 ; 6:28PM ;BAILEY *Ut 30{A792t5?t# ?/r0
tlotnd of l)in'clors of Rc*l,y Mountairt l-ilxl t,9! ln-rtituts (ur:n-pnrlit
crlucational.:lewicc. and rtscqrch orglnizatiou) at f)cnvsr Univrrsity $.'hool
ofl.aw, 1992-1995
l)ownttrwn l)crver Inc. (husirre*s lcadcxhip .rnd uivic orgrniartion).
Outstanrting Projcct Aw.ud. 199.5
Mcmlx-r, l.arrd Usc und Grwcrnancc Tu,sk l.'orcru olColorado Srnurt Gmwth
Initiativc (gubrmatorial qrprinuncrt kr pnrmoN gr.L\s mots gn:wth
rnirnugement initiatives). I !)95
Color:rclo Choptcr ol' Americsn Plmning Assor:iltjon. Outstnniling Plun
Aw$rds. l$r0'.$rl | !)94
Mcmbsr o1' joint Ams'rican/Japanesc dclcgrtiun to China nnd .speakcr at
synryxrsia in llc'ijing, Haikou. und Guangzl:ou rrn "Urbou Plinning iil Cllbus
Tr,rnsition to a Sorui.rlist Markct Ecunomy". 19!13.
SScahcr at llnitedNations l)cvckrpment Contl'rcnuc rrn Ilrbon l)cvctrrpmcnt
Progrnms and Polisisr in Nagoya. Japan, 199?
Boud of Dirc-ctors ol'Warren Villagu (non-1:mfit pmvit}"r uf lxru.sing. child
calc,lad carr.=r planning tbr singlc p:uent l"amiliss), I985-|9')5: Outstanding
Service Award , 1990
Bulrnl uf Dirrxton of tlrbsn Dcsign Forum (nor4:rulit mernbership
orlnniantion to promotc u$ln rlcsigrr gools), l9E7-1989
DONALD L. ELLIOTT
Pagc 3
clYlc nnvotvEMENT
AND HONORS
&
Jncobs
Chnse
Fnick
Kleinkopf
Ke llry
LLC
Alronrrys lr Lew
lndependence Plnzr
I O5O | 7rk Sr.
Suire | 5OO
Drnvrn, CO 8O26 5
,or.6814800
rrx 7O1.685'4869
JCFKK-4o15- l
Ann B. Fnick
892.4422
March 5, 1996
Andy Knudtsen
Senior Planner
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Sakz/Wells v. Lodge Properties, Inc. et al.
Dear Mr. Knudtsen:
This matter has been set for hearing to being at9am, March 13, at the District
Court for Eagle County. It has also been set to begin Monday, March I I atlpm,if
Mr. Bailey, counsel for Lodge Properties, lnc., is available at that time. We will not
know until perhaps as late as Monday moming, March I l. In any event, rather than
submitting two subpoenas to you, I have submitted one subpoena requring you to
appear beginning on Monday, March I I atlpm and continuing thereafter until your
testimony is concluded. However,l will let you know immediately when I receive
the information as to whether this hearing will begin on March l l or whether it will
not begin until March 13. Furthermore, I will try to work with your schedule with
rcspect to your appearing to testiry. My assistant Lia Woodall, will be contacting
you regarding the scheduling of your testimony.
Very truly yours,
Enclosure
JACOBS CHASE FRICK KLEINKOPF & KELLEY LLC
o
UNT DISCOUNT
.00
CHK TOTAL:
00882
AMOUNT
5.00
5.00
DATE INVOICE NO
03/05/96 030s95
COMMENT
WITNESS FEE
AMO
FOR TRIAL ]-B8. OO1
CHECK: 000882 03/05/96 ANDY KNUDTSEN
hcobs
Ckase
Fnick
Khirrkopf
& KtlLey
Arrorrep n bw
li\d.pc.{dtl|rE Ptlra
loto trk Sr.
tuIC lt00
Dcnlri, OA 8026[
,orar4f{Jo
Flxror,tSt1.f,9
COLONADO NATIONAL BANK
DENVER. CO 80217
23-2-',tO20
00882
000882
Lt-c
*FIVE DOLLARS AND NO CENTS DATE
03/05/e6
AMOUNT
*********5.00*
PAY
TO THE
ORDER
OF
ANDY KNUDTSEN
NOF
il.ooo88lr. r: to ao000 e Ir: Iqtl t eo? l5 2Lrp
IN THE DISTRICT COURT. COLTNTY OF EAGLE. STATE OF COLORADO
Case No. 95 CY 362
SUBPOENA
ANITA SALTZ,
Plaintiff,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC; TOWN OF VAIL, a municipal corporation; TOWN COUNCTL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL; and BOB ARMOUR, SYBILL NAVAS, PAUL R. JOHNSTON, MARCARET A.
OSTERFOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEY, MICHAEL D. JEWETT and ROB FORD, as the Town Council of the
Town of Vail.
Defendants,
and
LUANNE WELLS,
Plaintiff,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. and TI{E TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, and its agents, in their official
capacities, namely, THE TOWN COUNCIL, TOWN MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY, PLANNING.{ND
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, DEStcN REVIEW BOARD, ANDY KNUDTSEN, in his official
capacity as Senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, and DAN SPANECK, in his official capacity as THE
BUILDING ADMINISTRATOR,
Defendants.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO:
To: Andy Knudtsen
You are ordered to appear and give testimony at the hearing on Monday, March 1 I, I 996, and
continuing from day to day thereafter, beginning at l:00 p.m., as a witness for Plaintiffs in an action between
Anita Saltz and Luanne Wells, Plaintiffs, and Lodge Properties, Inc., the Town of Vail, et al., Defendants.
DATED:March 5, 1996
JACoBS FR]CKK]-ENKOPF & KELLEY LLC
B. Frick, #8974
Lia A. Woodall.#24183
1050 17th st.. suite 1500
Denver, CO 80265
(303) 68s-4800
ATTORNEYS FoR LUANNE WELLS
rf
,cFKK-3948-l
RETURN OF SERVICE
STATEOFCOLORADO )i rr.
COUNTYOF )
I declare under oath that I served this subooena on:
in County
(time), at the following location:
(date),
at
by (state manner of service)
I am over the age of l8 years and am not interested in nor a party to this case.
Date:
Name
D Private proc.ess server
D Sheriff,
Fee $
Mileage $
Sisned under oath before me on:
Notary Public
My commission expires:
County
JCFKK-]S48- I
ZEHREN
^X3 f:lr9lArlrNc.
0048 E. Beaver Creek Blvd. Suite 303
AVON, COLORADO 81620
Q7U 949-0257
FAX (970) 949-1080
ttrTTil @F TRANSNNITTAL
WE ARE SENDING YOU firnttacrrea tr Under separate cover via G*: 'n t'|- the following items:
Aprints! Change order
!
fl
! Shop drawings
! Copy of letter
I Samples E Specifications
coPtEs DATE NO.DESCRIPTION.L L'lb4tt AI
"t?^
Vte-og t<^trare, / n ,vE> dx*'^..
b tl *t.z 9ec*a7t,-a tl t\U (l
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
f,ror aooroval
I ro,. vor, ,""
! As requested
n
n
!
tr
Approved as submitted
Approved as noted
Returned for corrections
! Resubmit
-copies
for aPProval
! Submit
-
coPies for dlstribution
E Return
-
corrected Prints
! For review and comment
tr FOR BIDS DUE 19
-
tr PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
ll encloaurea are not es notad, Rlnctly notlfy ua at
'.":'::iilLi"ili':,i':il::
AVON, COLORADO 81620
(970) 949-0257
FAX (970) 949-1080
Ltrrrt@F TRANSnflITTAL
wE ARE SENDTNG You frttacneo trt o Snop crawingi S erint.
Under seoarate cover via
n Plans
tr Copy of letter ! Change order !
COPIES DATE NO.z ?,.bqa A{.1 #iohs e-g
levtz4s
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:\.,
ft For approval
}' For rour rr"
n As requested
u
n
n
tr
Approved as submitted
Approved as noted
Returned for corrections
n Resubmit
-copies
for aPProval
n Submit
-
copies for distribution
n Return
-
corrected Prints
n For review and comment
D FOR BIDS DUE 19
-
! PRINTS RETURNEDAFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
n V"l.en;Glli n= STGNED:
COPY TO
tt enctoaures are not aa noEd, klndty notw ua et on'
/:):' ./.\
Office of the Town Attorney
4u
TOWN OFVAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
97 0- 47 9 - 2 1 07/ F ax 97 o-4 7 9 -2 1 5 7
February 15, 1996
HAND DELIVERED
Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr., Esquire
Durur, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C.
108 S. Frontage Road, Suite 300
Vail, CO 81657
Re:International Wine - Lodee at Vail
Dear Art:
I am writing in response to your correspondence of February 7,1996 to Andy Knudtsen. I would
hrst like to address the public review of the International Wing - Lodge at Vail file. As I am sure
you are aware, our obligation to provide access to public records is tempered by the active use ofthat
record. As I am also sure you are aware since your law firm is involved in the litigation, this file is
presently in active use extensively and is therefore not available for public review at those times that
it is in use. We have presently completed the filing of the Designated Record and an index of that
Record is available at your office. I suggest that any review of that documentation take place at the
District Court.
Any plans, documents, correspondence or other matters that deal with the development of the site
as opposed to the litigation and post-date the filing of the record, will be available for public
inspection in a file in the Town Attorney's office. Appointments can be made to review such
documentation through Anne Wright.
The Town of Vail has not reached the conclusions, nor do we feel it is necessary to reach such
conclusions, that you have represented in your correspondence as "universally accepted" in regard
to the violation of property rights and/or conformity with the 1983 Agreement.
Your position that the PEC approval has lapsed due to a recent adoption ofan ordinance is not
consistent with the staff interpretation that has been held since the adoption of the ordinance that
such ordinance would not interfere with previously granted PEC approvals for exterior alteration.
{j un"uor*""
Thus far, any proposed changes to the development plan are subject to staffreview pursuant to the
Town Council direction that was given at the time of their review of the Design Review Board
approval.
Very tnrly yours,MR. Thomas Moorhead I
Town Attorney
RTN{/aw
62115/1996 L0:53 9794790467
LrNCOt ltl cE:irnER
ISOO LINCOLN STBEET' EUITE Cl'O
bEl{yEB, coLoIrADo 00to,.
TELEPTTONE (gl8) t t-lr@
I AccIll[IL,! (uuil, tt'l-o0t?
Pcbruar)' L5' 1996
PAGE 81
BAILEY, Ilannnva & PPtnn^soI\T
A PnonnssroNAr. coRPonATloN
AfNJfifiDtEATlJAw
VAIL NIXIONIL BAI{K ALDO.
roa 8ourll Fno*rAoE RoAD WES!. SUIISv lri coloE Do 9rltt
TET.EPBoNI (808) {70-1rc08
fACSDlg/D (lo0)'lttd{Cl
Mr. Andy Knudtsen
Senior Planner, Town of Vail
?5 south Frontage Road
VaiI , Col.orado 81657
RE: I,odge at
Dear Andy:
rn reviewing
Febr-uary 14,
vl,lt FAX NO. 9?O-479-2452
vair rnternational wingrrrerrace Landscaping
your letter dated February 7, 1996, trhich I received on
l-996, the follotrting arc my cQmments '
I. The itistance beLweerr Llre existir:g rlet;ks 611r;l our terrace is, aL a
. minimum, 19 feet and in most caseJ exceedg your request- of 22- feet.
The area where the sepB-rHl,;iorr is 19 L(J Zo fBet is sinply a planter
serviCe area. in order that we may access the landecaped area- for
malntenance fuiposes wlthout walking in tlre planl-er artid. wiLhuuL
this access area maintendnce of the- landscap:.nq on the north side
would be very dlff1cult-
2. I am unclear of your concern 1n youi second point in that a
landscape buffer aiea remains betvreen the decks of Lcdge Apartmant
ancl our new International .wing. ]t i5 impossible to expancl the
Iandscaped area atl the way over the Lodge Apartments as the
current- plan shows the landscaped area ovgr a structural wall
carrying the loait all tbe way down through the building'
3. I believe Sheet A-t.t sete forth the plantin_g uraterial- and the slae
and the species of the plant materiai, It also specifies-that that
area wili be naintainbO ny lrodge Properties, Inc. and not the
Condonin iurn Association.
4. Sheet A-4.4 shotrs the elevator vent facing east and away from Lodge
Apartment Condoniniurns. No other elevator vent is shown nor is
tlrtUer venting necessary. There is no obher nechanical equipnent
that will be located in tfris area. No venting or duct work for the' elevator will be daylighted toward Lodge Apartrnent Condominiums.
PAGE B2E2/L5/L396 18:53 97A4794467
Mr. AndY Xnudteen
Senior Fl"nner, Iown of, vail
Fcbruary L5, 1996
Page 2
vlA FAX NO. 97n-479-?452
If ycru llave any
I would like to
S incerely,
questione t woul"d aPPreoi-ate
lecelve final aPProval for
a pronpt tcloPhonc call,
our landscaPlng Plan.
J
TOWN AFVAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado A1657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
February 9,1996
Mr. Art AbplanalP
108 South Frontage Road West Suite 300
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: International Wing
Dear Art
In response to your letter of Febru ary 7 , 7996,I would Uke to conect some of the statements that
were made. you hal'e said that floor plans submitted to the Town were not made available for
public circulation. If you are stating that the material was not available for public review, that is
-
ialse. If you are suggesting that the Town staffis not in a position to circulate various portions of
the file *r-ni.h *uy bi of interest to you, tlat is correct. As I have communicated to your office,
the fi1es are available for you to review Monday through Friday. 8am to 5pm' This assumes that
the files are not in active use at the time. Please call me a few days in advance of the time you
would like to review the file, and I will have it available.
As there are approximately 15 to 20 people who are actively following the project, the Town staff
is unable to provide each individual with a comprehensive set of materials. I'm sure you can
understand the togistical problems, not to mention a potential legal liability, of committing to
provide every intJrested person copies ofthe on-going correspondence. When a staffdecision
conceming the desigp issues has been made, I will mail a notice of that to you and to all others
who have been involved in this issue. An appeal of such decision must be filed pursuant to
18.54.080.
Please callme, if you are interested in reviewing the file. I can be reached at9701479-2138,
Susan Con:relly
R Thomss Moorhead Esq.
FILE COPY
Department of Community Development
{S *r"r"ur r^r"*
:e'!'c!yone\ardJ'! ette!s-96UbPla!!l. 209
TOWN OFVAIL
75 South Frontqge Road
VaiL Colorado 41657
970-479-2 I 3 V4:79-2 I 39
FAX 970-479-2452
February7,1996
Mr. Jay Peterson
Weststar Bank Building
108 S. Frentage Road West
Vail, Colcnado 81657
Slsarn Comelly
Ton Moorhead
Bob Mclawin
Rc Vail Town Council requirement for buffering at the Interaational Wing - Staff review
ofproposed changes submitted February 2,1996'
Dear Jay:
After revirewing the information submitted by your architects on February 2, 1996- staff continues to
have the aoncems expressed in the letter January 17,1996'
o Staffbelieves that a buffer of 22' is appropriate, particularly on the north side of the
Idernational Wing, as that is in the "i.i"ity of the decks for Condominiums #533 an.d#527 '
r The concept of a planter between the decks should continue to be used. That concept was
-
elinrinated with the February 2, 1996 submittal. The planter area should be used, instead of a
t€race, across the area between the decks.
o please provide a specific landscape plan in the revised drawings indicating the tlg u"9-
species of the plantmaterial. lnclude a description of how the area will be maintained in the
fiuture.
oShowthatal1ventingandductworkfortheelevatorcanbeday-1ightedawayfromal1
codominiums. Pleise provide an explanation verifying that this is the case and that no other
methanical equipment will be located in this area of the proposal'
Thankym foryour attentionto these iszues.
FftE C0t".
Department of Community Development
{P *'"'"'"o '*'r
F:everyoncbndi96jener\peten on 207
t
Du ru ru, AB 'LANA'J; ilU'J. rsrENSEN, p.c.
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORA'TION
JOH N W. OUNN
ARTHUR A, AEIPLANALP, JR,
ALLEN C, CHRISTENSEN
DIANE L. H ERMAN
R. C. STEPHENSON
VA IL BAN K BU ILDING
su rrE 300
I O8 SoUTH FRONTAGE RoAo WEST
VArL, CoLoRADo 81657
TELEPHONE:
i97O) 476-O3OO
TELECOPIER:
tg'tot 476-4765
SFECIAL COU NSaLI
JER RY W. HANNAH
c ii rrrr Eo
7 February 1996
Mr. Andy Knudtsen
Town of VaiI
Department of Community Development
Vail CO
HAND DELIVERED
Re! International Wing - Lodge at
,--',\ {&7\'\,l
^:O\,l-'r(
. r\0i-
L ,'\
Dear Andy:
we understand that there is in process, some!,there within the
Town of Vail Department of Community Development' consideratlon of
possible modifications of a plan for reconstruction of the
International Wing of the Lodge at Vail.
The plan which is now under consideration may be comprised of
the two ',iloor plans" which were submitted to the Town on or about
the 5th of January, but whlch were not made available for public
circulatlon at thit time. Those two plans contemplated a roof,
rather than terraces, between the proposed penthouse and the
condominiums, and had no relationship to the plans approved by the
Design Review Board and conditionally approved by the Town Council.
whether or not these two plans comprise the proposal which is
now under review, we understand from the developer's attorneys that
the plan novt under consideration apparently is intended to address
the tact, which now seems to be universally accepted, that the
proposal approved by the Deslgn Revlew Board and conditlonally
lppioved Uy1tre Town Council, with direction to increase a buffer'
vtotatea the common elements of the Lodge Apartment Condominlum
Association. A new plan, whatever that plan might be, apparently
1s intended to eliminate that violation of property rights.
The purpose of this letter is to point out that any pLan which
is a moditication of the plan approved by the Design Revie$I Board
and condiLionally approved by the Town Council has not been
approved by either. The Design Review Board approved a plan with
teiraces, but which violated the property rights of the Condominlum
Assoclation and the condominium owners. The direction from the
Town Council in early December was simply to lncrease the buffer
st''
betsreen the penthouse and the condominiums.
submitted which eliminates the violation of
elements, that is a new plan which has not
approved by either the Design Review Board or
lnv such plan ia public record, 44q f{€-rySCgE!-
If a plan has been .__{ ...'Ithe limited common -., t ? ' r
been reviewed or
the Town Council.
copv of that Plan.
lc. r'vttt-f'T(
.{u.'. t'^we should also point out a difficulty with conformity with the
1983 agreement wniCn has recently come to our^_attention. We
understand that the developer is relying on the 1983 agreement_with
the To$rn of VaiI which lt asserts permits construction of the
proposed project. Documents which we have obtained, and which
i""brpuny-this letter, establish that the agreement was premised
,tpon representatj-ons to the Town of vatl that the improvements
would not extend so far in height as the lower level of the
condominlums of the Lodge at vai1. This fact is estabfished by the
memorandum from Mr. Peierson of the 18th of May, 1983, and the
"three-dimensionaL layouts" referred to in the final reference of
the first page of that- memorandum. Intervening pages between that
first paSJ aid the layouts are not being suppr ied, in the interest
of Ureltiy, but theylhould be available in the Toutn's files.
The layouts which accompanied the Peterson memorandum clearly
establish that the "Area of Expansion" did not extend even to the
top of the adJacent property owned by Lodge Properties' Inc. Only
two floor levels exi-st it t[1" Lodge lt Vaif betl^teen the top of the
International Wing and the bottori of the condomlnium units. The
peterson plans esfablish that the Town was told that development ti i:J,would occur only on the floor level lmmedlately above the 'ilcrDr'r
International Roo-m, and that the expansion would include only one 11
^floor Level . Therefore, even if the validity of t,he 1983 agreement l'Jftlwl\
is not an issue (which it obviously is), the premise of that
agreement, established by this material originating from - the
d5veloper's attorney, esta6lishes that design r:eview approval above
the floor level of liie condominium units should not have been and
should not now be permj.tted. Had the current application been
consistent with the -representatlons made ln 1983, the project would
never have generated the opposition which has occurred'
Finally, it must be observed that, with the acknowledgement by
the develop6r that the plan approved by the Design Review Board was
lllegal arie to its appropriation and violation of the common
elem6nts owned by th;- Lodge Apartment Condominium owners and
Association, and the lapse- of more than two years since the
f,toe period -permitited--T6r development, without even a valid
submitlal to tne Design Review Board. A new or alternative plan
adoption of the ordinance requiring issuance of a building permit
wlthin s of Planninq and Environmeryle-Adelopetis now well outside the
can be consj.dered only through a new PEC application based upon
some new, non-intrusive design. PEc approval having lapsed, any
such nevt DRB apPllcation may not be validly considered'
f.'1.,n-l
LAd'r\i--<
-.b t1\
/ "1 d\:
Ybur contlnued effortE
appreciated.
and cooperation ln thls matter are
xc: Mr. and Mrs. Jack Saltz
A. Abplana
,^-/''
r :./
Larry Eskwlth
.Iay. K. Peterson
llay 18r l9B3
Lodgc aL Vail
o
MEMORANDUH
FacLs
TOI
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Prior to May 5, L970, l^talter J. Stalder, ilr. andRoss E. Davis owned the property ciescrir:ea-on-[he at.taclredrixhir)it, A ("Tota1 parceri'). the rotat parcel contained 3.0423a9res. on l'ray 5, r970, starcrer and Davis submitted u poitiorr-orbhe 'l'.|-al l'arcer to thc cororado.condominiurn nct. This portionis <lcscribed o' thc attachecl Bxhil:ibs u ".J c.-- I,he Norttr winc-1I'ropct Ly cont-ained .6184 acres ("North winj r;ircel _ DxhiUit--ril .1'lrc.5our-lr r'rinq narcel is Lhe air space crescribed on the att,ached|jxltillit C ( "Siotrth. t'ting parcel,,) . The North plng earcel ancl SouLhl'lincr ['arcel constituLe a srngre Parcel owned by the LodgeAparLnrents concrominium owneri ana nssocialior,-iLoas" ApartmentsI'.rrccL ) .
lflOn Fc,bruary I9, l9Zl, the remai.ning property (.tota1l'arcel less Lhe Loclge Apartment,s parcel) was-tiansferrecl to r ^r,.^Irroperties, fnc. (Exhibit D)
on .Tuly I , LgiZ , Lodge propert.ies , f nc. leased tcSouth, Inc., for a period of 65 years, a portion of the TotI'arcel for the co'struction of 42 indivi.duar -arhring units1'his parcel of rand is crescribed- on Exliibit E {;r,oaq" souLh _ . ,. \I'ar:ce1" ) . I'lre Lodge South parce.L contained . f jSf acres.
Alr of'the above occurred prior to the effectiveof the Town of Vail zoning ordinance rirniting density to 25l)er acre
present tinre Lodge properLies, Ine. stillthe TotaI ParceI (Remaining Tot,al par."iil
con.structed 62 accommodation units with afeet of GRFA on the 2.0899 acres.
AL tlrc2.0889 acres of
l)ropert.ies , f rrc.of 37,347 scluare
Lod<1eacldiLic'lral rrniLs
owns
Lodge
total - :'
1
Prt;perties. fnc. proposes to construct up LowiLhin their remaininq cRFn.
- r'or yr.vuv r:onvcnienco, r have a t,tached tlrree-qimens iona rIG.tyol.tts shuwirr.l wlr;rL Lr-ansltired above.
42 :t
=E'
"N
oo
0t
\,
q_
T-p
$
eJJ-r
..!.
.4
.1,+:
d-T01r\,L3P -\)
^, -t-
+<0J
$r]F\
$.
r.0JvJ ll
r,r {
pt'+
I\l ,/
II,
IA
,i
\
\
VI.q)
t-r{\Iu
lr&
,l
tlI$
{
{fr
\t.1 J--? ul_tl
dtn{
F \-P
u
0
I
)
&ru-fu:/w /_.,1
^jrl_ u
P"--.--* 7 "* *L'L-
ct| @ /*r1
*7'*z-
a
FITEMPY
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-24s2
Deparnnent of Community Development
January 31,7996
Mr. ClarkAtkinson
Shaw Construction
760 Horizon Drive
Grand Junetion, Colorado 81506
RE: Pre-construction meeting for the Lodge at Vail Intemational Wing
Dear Clark:
I have summarized our meeting of January 31st below' If you have quesfions about the required
i"for*.ii*, please call "tCot-LV otn"iniembers of the Torvn of Vail present attheme.,eting toanswer
Vo"t quest,itis. We are here to help you construct your project. Although our standards are hlgh' we
wiU do what it takes to help you meet thcm.
Construction Staging Plan
The information to include in the Construction Staging Plan is as follows:
l. Siteplan showing:
The edge ofpavernent on the both sides of all streets'
The feice loiation (8 foot tall plywood, painted dark green)'
The two nearest fire hvdrants.
A;itrty ptan wifU aU'gas, electric and water mains (size and location).
The location for staging.
2. provide a description of the access to the construction site. Include the followi'g ilfoIl3]]tf'-
what roads within the Toum your construction vehicles will be usin-g; how fiequently clelrvenes
will be made; the size of trucls to be used: and any baffic control tlat u'ill be necessary.
3. provide the civil drawines for the storm drain, as well as any re-grading plary that-will need to be
conducted immediately In order to drain the water from the mountain away liom the stte.
4. Describe how you will mitigate any debris or mud problems affecting village streets as a result of
vehicles leaving the site.
5. Provide a parking plan indicaring how many vehicles are anticipated to pqT,kotlliE.-jjlli9ly
of all vehiiles sh-ould be parked-in the struc-ture. Please veri$ that you w'ill coordtnate paflflng
limitations with all subcontractors.
{g *""'"uo 'u"
f:\everyoae\andy96-lette\atkinson. I 3 I
o
the altached check list from Larry Pardee regarding work in the rightof-way'
Design Review Board
Please have Greg Crismran, the. architect, provide a detailed statement addressins the Conditions of
Aoproval from rhe Desip ReviewBoota upptouuio?-froiilGi t' iiqS. This riust be submitted with
the staeins plan and building permit. Please oot. in-ut tirii-is one condition of aooroval placed on the
oroiect-bfiown corro"iiolt?ti-niilil'iui" itn--i;"iiii;[i;t;ffi;;i been addreiied. rbe architects
ilir"tiil-(i,rJreiia;;;;4fiil;,,;;;;aiecei""D*Ri6;;;uuf6o' to submitting anv permits for this
site.
Building Permit
Dan Stanek will be providing you with requirements for Building P.ermit, including oPt'im: for speedier
tum-around times. This ffi"#ffi;'#"i;1i." i" b"fi";it""t"ty rin aays'.-as requeited in tle meeting, he
would like to sit down ;iili;;"d tn"-.init."ifi-addf before zubmitting the permit to walk
through it and flag any potential problems'
Timing
we are anticipating that you will be submitting the permit on Ma1q.h l, with the plans to start
construction around Ap.il G. i'l;;;;lilii tf,. siaigiog ptao on March. I also. During lhe meeting we
;;k;A f";G;;si"spil t" ;r i"U-iGa ptiq_to th1 alpilication for.a buildins oermit: however, the
March l st zubmission *ijiir[* ini-ii*"'iirri uaiquuiiti.n" io .e"ie* the stiiing plan prior to
construction.
As I mentioned earlier, the Town wants to help you with this constuction effort. To the extent that staff
i,ii r"ii-rii"tl-*itn'y* uU-o"lvo* [u"rtiois'un"ud ofti-", webelieve it will eliminate problems in
the future. Give me a call if I can help with anything.
Susan Connelly
TomMoorhead
MikeMollica
Dan Stanek
Greg Hall
Mike McGee
Tom Sheeley
Larry Pardee
Jav Peterson
Gieg Christrnan
FJI,T COPY
75 South Fronage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-21iV479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
Department of Community Development
January 29,1996
Mr. JimBrown
One Norwest Bank Center
1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 3000
Denver, Colorado 80203 4530
RE: Intemational Wing at the Lodge at Vail
Dear Jim:
After reviewins your letter of January 19, 1996, I must let you lnow.that the Town will not be providing
;;;;;i';;;;""d#;d;ti;ith6 irio-JvJioterested in this project. If you are. interested,.vo] ate
;j;;;;;;r;ilt"-rd Town offices and reiiew the material. As t'Eere are ap.proximatelv 15 to 20
Deople who are actively ir-no*i"t G p-:.&, tU. iown staff is ugable to proviile each individual with a
|;"il;"il;i"J iJi"itir"t".i.ls. i'm sit" yo" can understqnd the lo-gistical prob.lems, not to mention a
ooteitial lesal liabiliW. of a commifinent to provide every interested person co_pies of ibe on-golng.
fi;il;fi;;;;:-rb;i;a;r-fifiJryuitiutJro.puutic r6view from ti a.m' to 5 p.m. at the rown of vail
d;"i";]i;;.i;;.rt?ffi;;* ThiG;"ils'that the files are not in active uie at the time. Please call
;;;ifid;y;i" uai"".iof tle ti-e Vo" wo"td like to review the file and I witl have it available.
No meetings are scheduled. A meeting,woqld be scheduled only.in re.sponse to an appe_al9lq-._rj+:f
a;.i;i;il;hi.n ir &p-""t.a soon. I *iTt mait a copy_of the staffdecisio-n to v.ou. qnd to uJl,99:f _yho
have been involved in this issue once it has been made. Any appeal of such declston must De nleq
'purzuant to 18.54.080.
Susan Connelly
R. Thomas Moorhead, Esq.
cc:
{g ^'""t'o '*"r
f :\wcryoDcvrdy\96-L€tEs!os!- 129
t ' ANrrA sALrz & LUANNE?ELLS,
''-.ATNTFFS
v.
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. & TOWN OF VAIL, ETAL.
Case No. 95 CV 362 (lnternational\Mng)
INDEX
l. Record of rown council consideration of 1983 Agreement with Lpl
1. 07.19.83 Work Sessiona) Agendab) Transcript
2. 08.02.83 Evening Meetinga) Agendab) Minutesc) Transcript
3. 08.09.93 Agreement between Lodge Properties, lnc. and Town of Vail
' ' ll. Record of Planning and Environmental Commission ("PEC") Consideration of the
Lodge's Application for Exterior Alterations of Modifications in Commercial Core | ("CCl")
submitted in 1983
1. Application for Exterior Alterations or Modifications in ccl (2 copies)
2. 05.18.83 Memorandum from J. peterson to L. Eskwith
3. 06.13.83 PEC Meetinga) Agendab) Minutes
4. 10.06.83 Memorandum from community Development Department to pEc (2
versions)
5. 10.10.83 PEC Meetinga) Agenda
b) Minutesc) Transcript *(Not avaitable on 02.09.96 - will supplement)
6. 10.13.83 Lefter from E. Drager to Town Council
7. 10.18.83 Town Council Evening Meetinga) Agenda
b) Minutesc) Transcript
8. 10.21.83 Memorandum from community Development Department to pEC
9. 10.24.83 PEC Meetinga) Agendab) Minutesc) Transcript
' ' lll. Record of Design Review Board ("DRB") Consideration of the Lodge's Application
Submitted in October. 1993
1. View Studies and Existing Site
2. Authorization from E. Woit
3. Utility Location Verification
4. lnter-Departmental Review by Hall (no date)
5. Miscellaneous unsigned documents (no date)
6. Inter-Departmental Review by McGee (no date)
7. 01.1 1.93 Handwritten Notes
8. 10.11.93 DRB Apptication
9. 10.21.93 Handwritten Notes
10. 11.17.93 Handwritten Notes
11. 12.13.93 Lefter from J. Reutzet to A. Knudtsen
12. 12.22.g3Zone Check
13. 12.23.93 Handwritten Notes
14. 01.04.94 Handwritten Notes
. 15. 01.05.94 Letter from L. Fritzlen to A. Knudtsen
16. 01.06.94 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. peterson with Notes
17 . 01.07.94 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. peterson
18. 01.07.94 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. peterson with Notes
19. 01.27.94 Handwritten Notes
20. 02.10.94 Lefter from A. Knudtsen to J. Reutzel
21. 03.02.94 Letter from J. Reutzel to T. Moorhead with Notes
22. 03.02.94 Letter from J. Reutzel to T. Moorhead
23. 12.12.94 Memorandum from A. Knudtsen to B. McLaurin
ilt
lo
' ' 24. 12.14.g4Memorandum from A. Knudtsen to B. Mclaurin. et ar.
25. 01.05.95 Title Commitment
26. 03.21.95Memorandum
27. 03.27.95lnter-Departmental Review
28. 03.27.g5 Facsimile from G. Christman to A. Knudtsen
29. 03.28.95 Handwritten Notes
30. 03.29.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to C. Ryman
31. 04.06.95 Facsimile from one Vail place to A. Knudtsen
32. 04.10.95 Facsimile from G. Christman to A. Knudtsen
33. 04.14.95 Lefter from J. Brown to A. Knudtsen
34. 05.02.95 Letter from J. Reutzel to A. Knudtsen
35. 05.03.95 DRB Meetinga) Public Noticeb) Agendac) Transcript
36. Handwritten Notes
37. 06.21.95 DRB Meetinga) Public Noticeb) Agendac) Transcript
38. 06.21.95 Handwritten Notes
39. 07.10.95 Letter from A. Saltz to p. Osterfoss
40. 07.19.95 Letterfrom J. Brown to S. Connelly
4'l. 08.14.95 Letter from L. Fritzlen to A. Knudtsen
42. 08.25.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to L. Fri2len
43. 08.28.95 Facsimile from G. Christman to A. Knudtsen
' 44. 09.1 1.95 Letter from S. Cope to A. Knudtsen
tv
o
09.15.95 Zone Checka45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
AA
56.
57.
58.
59.
09,18.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. Brown
09.18.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to M. Brofos
09.18.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to A. Saltz
09.19.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. peterson
09.25.95 Letter from A. Saltz to S. Conneily
10.02.95 Letter from H. Smead to S. Connelly
10.02.95 Letter from D. Narins to S. Connelly
10.12.95 Note from Zehren & Assoc. To A. Knudtsen
10.12.95 Letter from G. Christman to A. Knudtsen
1 0. 16.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to L. Fritzlen
10.16.95 Letter from L. Fritzlen to A. Knudtsen
10.17.95 Letter from J. Lamont to Town of Vail
10.17.95 Letter from S. Shuman to S. Connelly
10.18.95 DRB Meetinga) Public Noticeb) Agendac) Transcript
60. 10.18.95 Handwritten Notes
61. 10.25.95 Handwritten Notes
62. lO.2T.g|lnternationalWing Site Lighting Lumen Data
63. 11.01.95 DRB Meetinga) Public Noticeb) Agendac) Transcript
1 1.01.95 Handwritten Notes
11.01.95 Design Review Action
1 1.01.95 Memorandum from A. Knudtsen to File,v
64.
65.
oo.
o
Lettera11.01.95 from A. Knudtsen to J. Peterson
1 1.01.95 Letter from L. Fritzlen to A. Knudtsen
11.07.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. peterson
11.08.95 Letter from A. Knudtsen to J. Peterson
1 1.09,95 Letter from A. Frick to T. Moorhead
11.09,95 Letter from A. Frick to T. Moorhead with Notes
vt
| " M. Record of town Council Meeting of December 5, 1995
'1. 12.01.9S Memorandum from T. Moorhead to Town Council
2. 12.05.95 protest of Ms. Luanne Wells
3. 12.0S.9S Work Sessiona) Agenda
4. 12.05.95 Evening Meetinga) Agendab) Minutesc) Transcript
. 5. 12.0S.9S Handwritten Notes
6. 12.05.95 Letter from R. Rosen to A. Knudtsen
7. 12.08.95 Lefterfrom A. Knudtsen to J, peterson
vtl
r-?oo
I ' V' Supplemental Documents for which Plaintiffu have Requested Certification
1 . 05.1 3.83 Petition for Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
2. 05.17.83 Analysis of PotentialforAdditional Hotel Rooms in CCt, PA & CCtl
3. 08.19.83 Memorandum from Department of Community Development to pEC
4. 08.22.83 pEC Meetinga) Agenda
b) Minutesc) Transcript
5. 05.15.84 Town CouncilWork Sessiona) Agendab) Transcript
6. 07.06.84 Letter from p. patten to F. Wells
7. 03.08.85 Letter from H. Frampton to p. patten
8. 09.18.90 Town CouncilWork Sessiona) Agendab) Transcript
- 9. 1983 Plattner Drawings
* 10. 1995 Zehren Design
* 11. 1995 Zone Check
* 12. Collection of Surveys dating from 1g80 - 1gg5
" (As of 4:00 P.M. 02.09.96 maps were not detivered and witt be fited on Monday,
02.12.96)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
Case No. 95 CV 362
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
ANITA SALTZ.
PlaintifL
LODGE PROPERTIES,INC; TOWN OF VAIL, amunicipal corporation; TOWN COLNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF VAIL; and BOB ARMOUR, SYBILL NAVAS, PAUL R. JOHNSTON,
MARGARET A. OSTERFOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEI MICHAEL D. JEWETT and ROB FORD, as
the Tou'n Council of the Town of Vail.
Defendants,
and
LUANNE WELLS.
Plaintiff,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. and THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, and its agents, in their
official capacities, namely, THE TOWN COIINCIL, TOWN MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY,
PLANNING AND E}N/IRONMENTAL COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, ANDY
KNUDTSEN, in his offrcial capacity as Senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, and DAN
SPANECK, in his official capacity as THE BLIILDING ADMINISTRATOR,
Defendants.
PLEASE T.\KE NOTICE that the deposition of Andy Knudtsen, in his official capacity as
Senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, will be taken on Wednesday, February 21,1996 atthe
conclusion of the deposition of Lawrence A. Eskwith, or approximately 3:00 p.m., and continuing
thereafter until completed, including the following day, February 22, if necessary, at the offices of
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C., 108 S. Frontage Rd. S. #300, Vail, Colorado.
DATED: February 2,1996
JCFKK-3 ?97- l
Jecoss CHnse Frucr KLerNKopr & Knllev LLC
ftrT*-
Ann B. Frick, #8974
LiaA. Woodall,#24183
1050 lTth St., Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80265
(303) 68s4800
ATToRNEYS roR Lumqwe Weu.s
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Norce oF DEposItIoN was
mailed to the following on February 2, 1996:
James S. Bailey, Jr.
Bailey, Haning & Peterson, P.C.
1660 Lincoln St., Suite 3175
Denver, CO 80264
John W. Dunn
Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr.
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C.
108 S. Frontage Rd. S., #300
Vail, CO 81657
R. Thomas Moorhead
Town Attorney
City of Vail
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail. CO 81657
ICFKK.3297- l
IN THE DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
Case No. 95 CV 362
SUBPOENADUCES TECUM
ANITA SALTZ.
Plaintiff,
v.
LODGE PROPERTIES,INC; TOWN OF VAIL, a municipal corporation; TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF VAIL; and BOB ARMOUR, SYBILL NAVAS, PAUL R. JOHNSTON,
MARGARET A. OSTEMOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEY, MICHAEL D. JEWETT and ROB FORD, as
the Town Council of the Town of Vail.
Defendants,
and
LUANNE WELLS,
Plaintiff,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. and THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, and its agents, in their
official capacities, namely, TFIE TOWN COLINCIL, TOWN MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY,
PLANNING AND ENWRONMENTAL COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, ANDY
KNUDTSEN, in his official capacity as Senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, and DAN
SPANECK, in his official capacrty as THE BUILDING ADMINISTRATOR,
Defendants.
THE PEOPLE OF TI{E STATE OF COLORADO:
To: Andy Knudtsen
You are ordered to appear and give testimony, in you offrcial capacity as Senior Planner and
Zorung Administrator, at your deposition on Wednesday, February 21, 1996 at the conclusion of
the deposition of Lawrence A. Eskwith, or approximately 3:00 p.m., and continuing thereafter until
completed, including the following day, February 22, if necessary, at the offices of Dunn, Abplanalp
tcFKK-3297- |
& Christensen, P.C., 108 S. Frontage Rd. S. #300, Vail, Colorado, as a witness in the above-entitled
action, and to produce at that time and place the following documents for plaintifPs counsel's
inspection and copying:
For purposes of this subpoena, the following definitions and instructions apply:
DEFIMTIONS
1. The term "International Wing Plan" refers to the proposed development of the
Intemational Wing at the Lodge at Vail, which Lodge Properties, Inc. has been pursuing since at
least 1983.
2. The term "LPI" refers to Lodge Properties, Inc.
3. The term "1983 Agreement" refers to the contract between LPI and the Town of Vail,
as signed by the Town Manager, and dated August 9, 1983.
4. The term "zoning ordinance" refers to Title 18 of the cunent Vail Town Code and/or
relevant predecessor codes and any particular sections specifically identified for the particular year
mentioned.
5. The term "Town" refers to the Town of Vail and any actions taken or decisions made
by the agents of the Town of Vail, including, but not limited to, the Mayor, the Town Council, the
Town Manager, the Town Attorney, the zoning administrator, the Community Development staffl,
the Senior Planner, the Design Review Board ("DRB"), the Planning Commission, the Planning and
Environmental Commission (*PEC") and the building official.
6.
District.
The term "CCI" refers to the area in Vail Villaee zoned as Commercial Core I
7. The term "Total Parcel" refers to the approximately 3.0423 acres previously owned
by declarants, Walter J. Stalder, Jr. and Ross E. Davis, as of the date of the execution of their
Declaration and legally described as follows:
A part of Lots 4 b, and c, Block 5-C, Vail Village, First Filing, County of Eagle,
State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest comer of Lot a, Block 5-C, Vail Village, First Filing;
thenceNorth24oll'00" Eastadistanceof 119.76 feet:thenceNorth l5'17'00" East
a distance 143.00 feet to a point of curve; thence along a curve to the right having a
radius of 96.00 feet, a cenfial angle of 64'00'00u, and an arc distance of 107.23 feet
to a point of tangent; thence along said tangent North 79'17'00" East a distance of
245.42 feet to a point of curve; thence along a curve to the right having a radius of
JCFKK-329?- |
582.79 feet, a cental angle of 2'03'54", and an arc length of 21.00 feet to a point;
thence South 10o30'16' East a distance of 369.21 feet to the South line of said Lot
a; thence South 89"44'00" Vy'est and along said South line a distance of490.63 feet
to the point of beginning.
8. The term "South Wing" refers to the condominiums located in the air rights above
the Lodge at Vail, on the fourth and fifttr floors, conveyed by and further described in the
Declaration.
9. The term "North Wing" refers to the condominiums located on .6184 acres within the
Total Parcel, and conveyed by and further described in the Declaration.
10. The term "Lodge at Vaif'refers to the well-known hotel structure originally built on
the Total Parcel and located on land underlyine the South Wine.
I l . The term "Lodge Tower" i, ,t
"
ligf,r-uory Uuilaling located on a ground lease from
LPI of approximately .3350 acres within the Total Parcel, and containing 42 condominium units.
12. The term "air rights theory" refers to the theory advanced by Jay Peterson in his
memorandum to Larry Eskwith dated May 18, 1983.
13. The term "Current Buildable Site" is the parcel of land upon which the Intemational
Wing Plan is proposed to be built and constituting the approximately 2.089 acres remaining when
the land for the North Wing of approximately .6184 acres and the grotrnd lease for the Lodge Tower
of approximately .3350 acres is subhacted from the Total Parcel of approximately 3.0423 acres.
14. The term "PEC Application" refers to the Application for Exterior Alterations and
Modifications in CCI submitted by Mr. Jay Peterson on behalf of LPI in May 1983.
15. The term "DRB Application" refers to the DRB Application submitted by Mr. Jay
Peterson on behalfoflPl in October of 1993.
16. The terms "relating" or "relate" mean, in addition to their customary and usual
meanings, addressing, discussing, referring to, pertaining to, reflecting, evidencing, stating, showing,
analyzing, acquired from or disseminated to, summarizing, or recording.
t7.The words "and" and "or" shall both mean "and./or."
18. The term "document(s)" includes any written, typewriuen, printed, drawn or other
graphic materials of any kind of nature, including, but not limited to, correspondence, notes,
memorand4 telegrams and cables, telexes, telecopies, panafaxes, publications, contracts,
agreements, insurance policies, minutes, offers, analyses, projections, studies, books, papers, records,
reports, lists, calendars, diaries, statements, complaints, filings with any court, tribunal or
,CFKK-1297.1
agendas, bills, invoices, receipts, estimates, evaluations, personnel f,rles, cedificates, instructions,
manuals, bulletins, maps, plats, architectural drawings, surveys, title reports, advertisements,
periodicals, accounting records, checks, check stubs, check registers, canceled checks, money orders,
negotiable instruments, sound recordings, films, photographs, mechanical or electronic recordings,
tapes, transcriptions, blueprints, computer programs and dat4 data processing cards, computer disks,
software, logs, e-mail, news postings, instruction manuals, x-rays, laboratory reports and all other
medical tests and test results, whether in draft or otherwise, including but not limited to, copies and
non-identical copies (whether different from the originals because of notes or marks made on or
attached to said copies or otherwise).
INSTRUCTIONS
l. If you make any claim of privilege as to any docrunent identified or requested herein,
for each such document:
(a) Identifr the person(s) who authored, signed, issued and/or authorized the document;
(b) Identifu the person(s) to whom the document was directed and by whom the
document was received;
(c) State the type of document, e.g., letter, memorandum, etc.;(d) State the date of the document;
(e) State the nature ofthe privilege claimed;
(0 Describe with particularity the nature and substance of the document; and
(g) Identify the person(s) who has custody or control of the document and every copy
thereof.
DOCUMENTS
I . Your entire file(s) regarding or pertaining to the 1983 Agreement the air rights theory
and the lnternational Wing Plan.
2. All documents that refer, reflect or relate to discussions, meetings, analyses, reviews,
and recommendations regarding the Intemational Wing Plan and its potential compliance or
noncompliance with allowable density for the Cunent Buildable Site.
3. All documents that refer, reflect or relate to the work session of the Town Council
held on or about July 19, 1983.
4. All documents that refer, reflect or relate to the Town Council meeting held on or
about August 2,1983.
5. All legal authority, including case opinions, Law Review articles, or judicial rulings
that uphold or pertain to the air rights theory.
JCfKI(.3297- l
Jacogs CHnse FRrcr Kr.Bn,mopr & Knnpv LLC
LiaA. Woodall,#24183
1050 lTth st., suite 1500
Denver, CO 80265
(303) 685-4800
ArroRI.nvs ron Lueltt'rs WeLLs
CERTIITICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certifu that a true and correct copy of the foregoing NorIce oF DEPoSITIoN was
mailed to the followins on Februarv 2.1996:-
James S. Bailey, Jr.
Bailey, Harring & Peterson, P.C.
1660 Lincoln St., Suite 3175
Denver, CO 80264
John W. Dunn
Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr.
Dunn, Abplanalp & ChristenserU P.C.
108 S. Frontage Rd. S., #300
Vail, CO 81657
R. Thomas Moorhead
Town Attomey
City of Vail
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
JCIXK-3297-l
RETI]RN OF SERVICE
1996,I served theI hereby certiff that on this _ day of
Notice of Deposition and Subpoena Duces Tecum as follows:
I certifi under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct.
STATEOFCOLORADO )i tr'
COTJNTYOF )
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 1996, by
NotaryPublic
My commission expires:
t?r,uror,il r e s
IN TIIE DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF EAGLE. STATE OF COLORADO
Case No. 95 CV 362
PLAINTIFFS'DESIGNATION OF TIIE RECORD TO BE CERTIFIED. AS AMENDED
ANITA SALTZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
LODGE PROPERTIES,INC; TOWN OF VAIL, a municipal corporation; TOWN COLINCIL OF
THE TO\IN OF VAIL; anC BOB .ARMOLTF. SYBILL NAVAS, P.{UL R. JOAISTON,
MARGARET A. OSTERFOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEY, MICHAEL D. JEWETT and ROB FORD. as
the Town Council of the Town of Vail,
Defendants,
and
LUANNE WELLS,
Plaintiff,
LODGE PROPERTIES,INC. and TIIE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, and its agents, in their
official capacities, namely, TT{E TOWN COUNCIL, TOWN MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY,
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, ANDY
KNUDTSEN, in his official capacity as Senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, and DAN
SPANECK, in his official capacity as THE BUILDING ADMINISTRATOR,
Defendants.
Plaintiffs, Luanne Wells ("Wells"), by her attorneys, Jacobs Chase Frick Kleinkopf & Kelley,
LLC, and Anita Saltz, by her attomeys, Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C. ("Plaintiffs'), pusuant
to Rule 106 and the STIPLILATION AND REQUEST FOR ORDER filed in this matter and dated
January 10, 1996, hereby amend PLAINTIFFS' DESIGNATION OF THE RECORD TO BE
CERTIFIED submitted on January 12, 1996, as follows:
The date in item number 5 regarding The Lodge's Application to the Design Review Board
should be changed to October of 1993 (not 1991).
rctxK-2932-l
For clarity and completeness, Plaintiffs' repeat the entirety of PLAINTIFFS'
DESIGNATION oF THE RECORD To BE CERTIFIED, AS AMENDED, herein, as follows:
Plaintitrs request all documents regarding the lnternational Wing development and the 1983
Agreement between Lodge Properties, Inc. (lthe Lodge') and the Town of Vail, including without
limitation:
${'r notices of all public proceedings and official actions; and
.r^nlr 2. minutes and transcripts of all commission, departnent, agency and public L h{rt ^(," proceedings and any findings and conclusions made thereat; ,wl l)&v
The same are requested with respect to, but are not necessarily limited,", *" ##
Work Session of Town Council held July 19, 1983;
Town Council Meeting held August 2,1983:
Planning and Environmental Commission consideration of The Lodge's I
Application for E>cerior Alterations or Modifications in Commercial Core I j
s:?"u#T:l"T,J3fi;**^ning amendments inthe ccr ''a
puurii
Accommodations Zone submitted in 1983; J"
Design Review Board consideration of The Lodge's Application submitted
in October of 1993; and
Town Council Meeting of December 5, 1995
January 17,1996
fl't<
\k$u
DATED:
bt.D \^,
JCFKI(-2912- l
JAcoas CHASE FRtcK trGE${roPr & lGi.Lcv LLC
,, ,lr; A P*'*'u''*
ArnB. Fnclq #t974
[itA. Woodall n4t'33
1050 l?tb St, Suit 1500
V.il, CO tt657
(970) '$?fl300
ATroRl.tEYs Fon Putxlrrs
CERfIIICAjrEOF SERYICE
I hercby cctiS tba a grr rd couect copy of rbc bregoirg puNrF?$' DESENAflo\r oF TllE
RE(pRDroBE cerIF1pD, AS AI{ENDED svzsmeilcdothc following mJrnnry 17' 1996:
Jrncs S. BailcY, Jr.
Bailey, I{ring & Pettcson, ?.C.
1660 LirolnSt" Suitc 3175
Dervcr, COW261
R lhooas lfoorhred
TownAromay
Cityofvail
75g.Froct gcRd.
V.it, CO t1657 \/ -da)d,Lr*-,
DGDv€r, CO t0265
303) 685,1800
TIITFL P.O4
IN TIIE DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
Case No. 95 CV 362
rlErEhrDAr{r""""niltRl"ff HHtfrHr*oooNor,nrE
ANITA SALTZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
LODGE PROPERTIES INC.; TOWN OF VAIL, a municipal corporation; TOWN
COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL; and BOB ARMOIJR, SYBII L NAVAS,
PAUL R. JOHNSTON, MARGARET A. OSTENTOSS, KEVIN R. FOLEY,
MICHAEL D. JEWETT and ROB FORD, as the Town Council of the Town of Vail,
Defendants,
and
LUANNE WELLS,
Plaintiff,
v.
LODGE PROPERTIES INC. and THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, and its
agents, in their offrcial capacities, namely, THE TOWN COUNCIL, TOWN
MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY, PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, ANDY KNLJDTSEN, in his official
capacity as senior Planner and Zoning Administrator, and DAN SPANECK, in his
official capacity as THE BUILDING ADMIMSTRATOR,
Defendants.
Defendant, Lodge Properties Inc., by its attorneys, Bailey, Haning & Peterson,
P.C. pursuant to Rule 106(a)(a)GV) and the STIPULATION AND REQUEST FOR
ORDER filed in this matter and dated January 10, 1996, hereby files its designation of
record to be certified in this matter as follows:
1. Defendant Lodge Properties Inc. concurs in Plaintiffs' designation of
those documents regarding (i) the Design Review Board (the 'DRB') consideration of
the Lodge's Application submitted in October of 1993 and (ii) the Town Council
Meeting of December 5, 1995.
2. To the extent that Plaintiffs have failed to designate certain documents
pertaining to the DRB's consideration of the Lodge's Application submitted in October,
1993 and the subsequent appeal of the DRB's decision, Defendant Lodge Properties
Inc. designates the following additional documents (the term 'Documents' includes
minutes, transcripts, notices, memoranda, correspondence, applications, notes, and any
other written item which was considered by the Design Review Board and Town
Council in their consideration of the matter at issue in this case) for inclusion in the
record to be certified in this matter:
a. all documents regarding the application oflodge Properties lnc. for
approval of its International Wing by the Design Review Board;
b. all documents regarding the Vail Design Review Board's
consideration of the International Wing development;
c. all documents regarding the appeal of the Vail Design Review
Board's decision to the Vail Town Council and the appellate proceeding and the decision
of the Vail Town Council.
3. Defendant Lodge Properties lnc. reserves ttre right to object to the following
documents designated by Plaintitrs for the reason that such documents are not part of the
public record regarding the governmental action on which Plaintiffs' Rule 106, C.R.C.P.
cause ofaction is based:
a. documents regarding the 1983 Agreement between Lodge Properties
Inc. and the Town of Vail;
b. documents regarding the Work Session of the Town Council meeting
heldJuly 19, 1983;
2
\r
c. documents regarding the Town Council meeting held August 2,
1983;
d. documents regarding the Planning and Environmenal Commission's
consideration of Lodge Properties Inc.'s Application for Exterior Alterations or
Modifications in Commercial Core I (CCD submitted in 1983; and
e. Lodge Properties Inc.'s request forp,roposed zoning amendmeng in
the CCI and Public Accommodation Zone submitted in 1983.
DATED ftit lZ day of January, Lgg6.
BAILEY, HARRING & PETERSON,
A Professional Corporation
Denver, Colorado 8m6/-
Telephone: (303) 837-1660
ATTORNEYS FOR LODGE
PROPERTIES INC.
CERTITICAIE OT SERVICE
I hereby c€rtiry that a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT
LODGE PROPERTIES INC.'S DESIGNATION OF THE RECORD TO BE
CERTF'IED was mailed to the following on January l?rt+ 1996:
Ann B. Frick, Esq.
Lia A. Woodall, Esq.
Jacobs Chase Frick Kleinkopf & Kelley LLC
1050 l7th. St., Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80265
John W. Dunn, Esq.
Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, P.C.
108 S. Frontage Rd. S., #300
Vail, CO 81657
4
--
/-2- re
a
,(/o.- ^re
^x-*:**
7a/ T
13 ^-f
Andy Knudtscn
*.*1,+,2 'A'1" 4Y u-4-
\rA-L
T, &,L.\ 4-"r--/,
/-
€1,."14 /*,*
S--/,"-*/-( u.-U
,
u--^-4*, t /-=-"-/ f1---
'4#f"l-- &.
/-L vdv
^"1".-/>,b+
*/,.*/ n1-^t l-L{-
+ ^_t //_._
a4 T-
s; /-.a---**>N-
{p necvcrcoeten
7-
rufr
T
a
/I-2.-.-*-<-
,A t/^
il; a "t sz-,-
/,, I -4
J-L-l^^A.1*,
/U iZ =, ,6- U),n< tL,^d ?
4
f s F-l- d,.A-..1- -x.*-/r^,,^-
5.d -T c_q__."_ ,L
t'4^ ,(_ A ;[
Vl.-,*
l
Painted.by Andy Knudtsen 10:12am
From: Andft Knudtsen
llo! Stl.Ean Conne].1y, Tom Moortread
subjecc: fwd: Internatiortal wing
===NOT'E==: ==1/t6/96==8:41am=:tJouad Che tswo of yotr tra'we time to meets
wednesday, ,Jarr 17 , f rom 10 - 11- , to
discuss Cfle internationa1 Wing? Ttre
buffer required blt counci]- has been
desiqrned. The P]-anners and I trave
recommendations f or modif icatsiorts.
collrlnentss from al]. interested partsies
r,rj-11 be de1i-vered bl. noort todafl.. Ttrexe
trave beert many conrmentss abor.r ts ctre
specifics of the Lodge dec].arats1ons - -
w}.o rea11y h.as Ctre rights to modj-fl't a
Limitsed Colrllnon Eaement?
can' twaitf oranansr^ter cotl.i sone
Fwd=bt : =sl.lsan=corrnel L -t / t 6 / 9 6 ==9 : 0 6am==
Fwd !o: And.l/ t(nudtssen
I can meet, but I don't ttrlnk ml'z
presense wi]-]- add anything|- rjn].ess
yor.r think dif f eren].lt, I'd jr"rs€ as soon
take a pass- Lec me know -
Fwd=lf,].: =AndL=Knrrdcs en=L /!6 / 9 6==9 : a3am==
Fwd to: Susan Connel].lt
Thats's f i-ne. Tom and I will forg|e
ahead and T wi ]. ]. Iet l,/ou krrow Ctre
scbedu]-e and (to the deg|ree ltolr arej-nterestsed) ctre conc].rrsions aborrt
LcE'/ccE/ c.ondo a.ir space (I am
fascinaced, personal-l-y). wtta.ts I
anticipate is giwing \tay a lettser on
1-17, out]-ining the ctrang|es and the
additiona1 infomation lhats we need co
make a deci-sion. He and che arctritecEs
can work orr t.tta. b wtriae I 'm awalt -
Fwd=by : =susan=connel-f=L / ! 6 / 9 6=:9 t 14am==
Fwd to: Andy Knrrdcsen
;;ii;iE;i;'k;.;know wtr.ere fzor-r
me informed, and l-ets me
tshink f can add wa1ue.
Page: 1
SE{T BY:
"a
l-16-96 ;11:50Ail ;BAI.EY
U'*
Ben^nv, Hrnnnvc & h'rensox
A Profcscimat Corponnon
Suib 3175
Lincoln Ccnter
1660 Lincoln Strea
Delver, Colorado &D61
Telephone Cl(B) tJZ-16d0
3034792157;# l/ 4
DATB ,uuary
TEtrIFAX: (9'0)a7y21f.
-, lN u,
,.f,f 6
"-l
rerefex (303) t3z{xtt7
efTEIEF|EX MESSAGE '0
16,196 'W
,5
To: Ton Moortead r . - ,O;rA
t'^"
- . Jr^ ln
^tr. t?Fr*\,q.r^.aq [-lg b"--- -lrr V'
BoM: JinrBairey /ut :rLqr#." ry,W( \ ly' -, ,\, Q
Total NumberOfpag€$IncludingThirons, M\' ^,',If pu do not rwoive all prger, U : W
,,flTfff"iln,1x1uding Trir o*,, @\, W t #,r_
preasecarf *.o,,#' !*\ ","_(/
Y*f NrrPEoF
r"!'Dr'!-r'.."'r'q'r'rc'r'
xtl't1*',''{r'v
nOCrmENr: ptaintiffi' Desiguation of rhe Rccord b bc Ceftin€d.*.lj#
2
"
;
I '
coMMnt{rs: rom: Ca'neonceyouhavercricc/Ed. rhilb. l(:'
(t y" j} t U
EAID c(Pr .,,l,fvu '
III FOIIOIf,: yes_ No X -1
r,Lv , lt l,lr
h.y t)
I
L n .t%{,*)'
llls lfss cE l5 rtlE AcorrxYtrc DGJiEXIS rnE trrElDED flq F* T|c UsE OF rxE tFtvtqxl ot Errrlt to t ltolrxer rrE rDotErsto rD i y c(rrl-r{ rtf{ntrr la idi'G n-rvrEr€!, oflttD€fTtr. rrD ErEpt Frq DIscLosnE u$ErrPFl'lcril'E ltlJ. rt rlE t?rDEt-oF rurs rrdrii'iri iis iiiireryrre DoqrEns rs Fr nG rxrE.@ rrcrprErr fiTllE illoru c
^ffrr
rEsllilstBtE iqr DrrrGilrcild'iiifre-..ro rn llEbeo rEcrnEn. y111 /uE flErEBr rorrrtoTrrl Art DtssEttr^rrd' Dtsnlrrrtq c cowirc or r-iui"corrrcrrra rs ii-r]drlT'ir6rruro. rF rqJ *vErtcCITED rlts mltcritn Ir Euon' prerse ro-iin-rs'iriid.nrerv_rv rtt"EfifirE, rb rEnnr r,.e nrcrr^t EssrcEl|D lrE roDooilvrrc DrnxErrs ro rd rr rnr iiinn'rriii!'ivrr rls u.s. pogrrL s€rucr. r r ritr.
SENT BY:1-16-96 ;ll:slAM ;4
t-'l'
BAILEY
UllNcr
N1'I{EDlsrRlcTeouRr,cor.JNryopnact r JAN 18 19S
i
cro No. 95 cv 362
s! ' ' r-r'.,rt ' r or tiAGLE srATE oF culoRilU) *'
ofu-o .aJ ,
*orooffi
aNffa setT4
Plhin iq
v.
LODGEPRoFERnH.:Nq
Touar oF vAIr*IIIE lowhf oF vAffim,###$ffi
OctnOrnts,
rnd
TUANNEWELLS,
pt iDlifi
v.
tffiLffigm u5-"4r+ rcwN oT vatr. cqoRADo, rnd irs .sr.'e, iE rrldr
*"GtE;*T"ffi*i ;;;N
Defeadrca
tt" "ffiiffi*I* rq/dc)' uv ro a'
ffi'",ffifrH
ffiffiffiffiffihffiHffir,ffi
tnqit|lDa
SETT BY:
^c BATLEYU**303l792157i# 3/- r-veFr .,ge . r u,| .lrr, a-!
4
l. lodcr, ofClpublicproceediqStrqdofidd*dong;md
2. uinrs nanascripu ofdl oomtrdr*r4 ocnrayrry* aSg1pyard ${,[icproeecliqg! udrr, fidiry, [(i;ffio|t EdrtEsr*
I'c soc ur rcq'coed wi., rqaa to, h' at oof rcily fi'fud !o, tb fothwirsl. Wctscssirorfln$uncittoHJuIy
I% tgEt;z rornco'srrrr*uffi;;ffi.iJ**,
,. PlOdcA ua EnnmqcUrt C.rrn'nird6.ffiffi
. &ffiJffiffih?-'"'"iDd.. ccrdhbrc
:' flffbff'li$r#'""id*t.ilffi ra{c'rAp1*catiesilhd*d
6. TornCouacilnfmfhgofDaebsj. t90J
D TED:.hlrE y lZ,lgg{l
Jecues Cprse fnq K.enrro* & Kzu.sv tLC
Ann3.Fdgftyr4
UrA, Woodrtl#24t93
Jo50 l7rhsr., $dr Foo
(y/0).?60t00
ArronmvsroRnrunfrs
2
Dcwcr, CO t(E6S
V, Du!$ tt4zl
6&att1.l
BY:qr
if r,l.l9-e9-;llj.slA[',.,,.,_.8{f,1fl ryH,"flg#.r&!flrr\,4,"nv
cnxutcrrEoPmyrcE
r Hy sriry th ltrr d'wm cop of rbctrgofog aenflil:rs, orlhrctrror otncRBcqD n' 8s Goflrfmr wrr ror ro ililiiril", J[ltry t2. tgre
Jreg Brilcl &.
8riLy, Ihaiq5 & ften, p.C.
t660 ticoh S,, SuiF 3l?5Ilrlrlcr,(EIt264
R.f}5rl[oodrrd
TmAr@y
Cltoftril
759FloqcBa
Vll,CO lt6tz
Ls-L
rr.:|{Dl
IUTf{- P.gt4
REVISED 01.02.95
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
December 5, 1995
7:30 P.M.
A regular meeting of the Vail rown council was held on Tuesday, December 5, 1g9s, in
the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. the meeting was called to order at
7:35 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:Bob Armour, Mayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem
Peggy Osterfoss
PaulJohnston
Kevin Foley
MichaelJewett
Rob Ford
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Robert W. Mclaurin, Town Manager
R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
First item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Rick Sackbauer of the Vail Valley
Consolidated Water District congratulated new council members on their recent
appointments and presented a brief update on district projects which included: efforts to
consolidate the water district and sanitation district through an election process in May,
1996; progress on employee housing; Eagle Park Reservoir project and completion of
the interconnect. Mr. Sackbaur informed Council members he would come in after first
of the year with a more detailed update and thanked Council for their participation.
The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda which consisted of approval
of the Minutes for the meetings of November 7 and 21, 1gg5.
Mayor Armour read the Consent Agenda in full. Sybill moved to approve the Consent
Agenda with a second by Kevin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0.
Third on the agenda was ordinance No. 24, series of 1995, first reading of an
ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 18.39 (SkiBase/Recreation Zone District)
of the Vail Municipal Code and approving the Development Plan for the Golden Peak
Ski Base, 485 VailValley Drive/Tract F, VailVillage Sth Filing, and Tract B, VaitVilage
7th Filing. Applicant vail Associates, Inc., was represented by David corbin. Mayor
Armour read the title in full. Town of Vail planners Jim Cu.rnutte and Lauren Waterton
reviewed the application, plans for the redevelopment of the Golden peak ski Base,
and work sessions that had been held with the PEC and the Town Council regarding
the application. (For a complete analysis of the proposal, please refer to the November
27, 1995 staff memorandum to the PEC, distributed to the Council on November 28,
1995.) lt was further explained that staff recommended approval of Ordinance No. 24,
Series of 1995, and conditional approval of the Development Plan, Jim Curnutte stated
the purpose of the ordinance was to amend the text of the Ski Base Recreation Zone
District. sybill moved to approve ordinance No. 24, Series of 1g95 on first reading, and
the motion was seconded by Rob Ford. A vote was taken and approved unanimously,
7-0.
Discussion then centered around the proposed development plan and included: the
proposed new base lodge, the building of a 148-space parking structure, lift upgrades
and other on-site improvements, including a skier drop-off lot and a new children's
center parking lot. Council members reviewed a list of conditions attached to the
development plan from Community Development as modified by the PEC. Dave Corbin,
t),J'1, cant u.r nu"? nh,,t" trllslqb
o
sh(;t)/zt.r\u+wt*t r*l *t m
eql uo peseq se/v\ le^ordde cf d eql pue 'eg/o1./ol uo epeur servl c:ld aql Aq te^orddBuo[eJaile Jopaue uv 'uotstcsp leql papacoJd guo eql q]!rv\ suolssas rJoru\ aaJq] leqlpue '6ur14leuotleuJolul eql anoldde o] 0-g palo^ gUO aql g6lllll uo lei{l paureldxe
pue lcafold aq1 0urpunolns fuolsrq aql pematneJ uesplnuy Apuy ,lauueld llpn
Jo umo|a^uo raarS aJoe 'f ,Ll p palecol 'l!en le a6po1 eql 1e 6ur14 leuo4eurolul
aq1 anordde ol uotstcep gUO B go ;eadde ue sem epuaFe aql uo ./ .oN ruall
'sJaquau llcunoc
||e ,(q panordde sem pue uotlepueutulocal gBls oql apnlcut ol uotloru Jaq papueulg
od '0-z 'r;snourrueun passed pue ualel se/v\ alo^ e 'uollorx aql papuocas se^eN
11rqr5 'a6a1rnud ;ercads e aleaJc lou plp pue eualtJc aoueuen laaul prp lsenue.r aqi
leq] lcpl aql uo posBq uorsrcap s,c:ld aql uJnua^o ol ssoralso {66e4 [q apetu sem
uotlout v 'JoJJa ueunq pailc pue auJog 'Jl/\ lo JoAB, ur e10ds louJv leEqctl^l ,luaptseJ
lren'uorsrcap c3d erll uJnua^o ol uoneJaprsuoc s,lrcunoc aq1 palsanba.r rllngcadser
aujog 'Jru 'roEqlas luoJl aql olur lueulqceoJcue lool g.t e pasnsc pBq JoJJa eLll pue
.rora ourraruns s ol anp rceqlas aq1 palsanbeJ pEq aql paure;dxa auJog qog ,luecrlddy
'apoO Ouruoz aql ql/v\ lualstsuocut aOa;rnud ;ercads;o luerO e ut unsal plno/yl acueuel
aq110 6ur1uer6 aq1 1eq1 11a1 'ruap ol uotlout aql Io Jo^el ur 6ur10n sJaquJaru aq1 peureldxa
a6:oag 'lsanbar ecueue^ rceqles luo:l pasodo.rd aq r(uep o1(6uiluassrg'l"goy1'pu"
lnou.ry) Z€ Jo alo^ sJaqu€u uorsstrutuoC aql pue 0u[aau C3d 966t ,/Z JaquanoN
aql pue leadde oql Jo punor64ceq aq1 pa/v\er^ar Jaqnu ao.roag r-uue1o |1en 10 urvroj
'apo3;edtcrunyl
llen lo u/v\oI aql to '020'zg'g l uorlcas o1 luenund ,lsanbar acueue^ rceqlas luo4aql ]o leruap s.uotsstuluos leluauuoJt^u3 puB 6uruue;6 eq Eurleadde sem ,.cul uojsaf,
oxu Jo pJsureJB r11e5 rq paluasardar 'euJo8 qog '1ue11adde eqr .peou rcruurrruur)
O Zggzluots!^!pqns si opEaUI lcnlqsuul ,g lol uo uotlcnJlsuoc rapun r{l1uer.rnJecueplseJ aql JoJ pesodo.,d acuerJe^ lseqlas luo4 porsanba: aq1 Auap o1 uorsrceps,uorsslur.uoc lelueuiuoJr^us pue 0uruue16 aq1 ;o leadde ue se/v\ epua6e'aq} uo'qy,S
'g-2 'r{;snoutuBun passBd pue ua1e1 se/v\ a}o^ v .$l,v\ar
arry{ *ro4 puocos e qlrrvr
"{1poq1ny
Eulsuacrr lecor aql uo rcuecen eq1 1;g oi u;deq3prneg guroddp ol pa^ou ;;rq[g .s1o1;eq eql perllpl uoaqctnccn,rrroH duiipenqurrliara/v\ sloileB 'uosr! A {ene6 'ueuJreqc Jaulrol Jo uoueuorsa: at{} Iq p"1e"rc Loiiridlauo rol sluecrldde aJa/n ra{eM fuial pue 'uollesn auag ,urdeqS'eneo ,"qr.y,1rluoqlny 6ursuecrl reco'r Jo luaurlurodde aq1 ser* epuao-e aq uo a^u JaquJnu uJall
alo^ v' sB^e N | | r
q^s rq puocss e qr|/vr, uqrnir;'"1!'fi#fi:l? :il:iffi iH.ffi $t;:l'/661 'Jequanop errdxe ol rujel 'ssoralso .y lereoreyl Jo ural perrdxeun
"|.$
ni"io'roiol Jequ,ou, rtcunoc e 6ullca;a 10 asod.rnd aql roJ uorlcarf ;ercads e JoJ elep aq1 6uu1asuorlnlosau e ,9661Jo sauas 'ZZ.oN uounlosag servr epue0eiql uo uay quno1 aql
'9661lo sauas 'gZ acueulprg uo 6urpee.rpuocos orD lo eurl eq11e lenordde s,;lcunog o1 pefqns aq prno^ uelo lueuoolenapaql paa:6e sJequJeui lrcunoc 'suJacuoc laq passerdxa pue suollsanb persBneepuou Acuel 'lueprsal rren'sJou/v\o ryadord lenpinrpuraqllo,{Ilq,sudos", "..li;iilacueurpro ,{q lBql pue sll'/v\apls ur'luteu lou saop sl,oM cllqnd lBr,.l} Icunoc pauJo}ut
pEatuool^l tllof 'eaJB eql JoJ IEAOIuAI MOUS Uo paluaululoc 'uollB!3ossv ujntutujopuosujorlsruBu eq1 Ourluasarder 'ue0r1Iy1 suero .sllB/v\aprs /v\eu pesodord lo erueuairl",ilo; a;qrsuodsar aq prno/v\ oqM lo uorlecuuelc Jo] parsB 'uo'l"rcossy sraurnoaruoga6e;I4lse3 aql buquasarda.l '1uoue1 up 'sluaujanordtur'edecs raaJls pasodord
Jo aouBueluleul pue buueqs lsoc 'sluaruenordulr adecs gaa:1s papnlcur uotssncsrp
10 sc1dol reuorlrppv 'r pilnq lou saleroossv rlen plnoqs uaddeq plno/v\ lBl.rwl pue ernrenJls6ur4red pasodo.rd aq1 6urp:e6al panurluoc uorssnoslo .lenordde alqrssod.ro; 6unaaqr6uru-ana rrcunoc 6! Jaquaoeo aql ol 1q6no.rq aq uorle:ado s' uo uelep e.rotr pe;sa06nspue palecr;drxoc eJan senssr 6ur1.red pelels aH .pouad reart oml E JAAo u1 paseqd
aq r{lqrssod plno/n arnlon.rls 6urlred aql leql paureldxa ,1uecr;dde eq1 Ounuasarda.r
criteria for exterior alterations as well as an agreement which the Town had executed
with the Lodge relating to accommodation units and conference area within the Village.
Attorney, Jay Peterson represented the applicant, Lodge Properties, lnc., explained he
was there to request the 1983 DRB decision be upheld. Mayor Armour requested Mr'
Peterson and other lawyers present speak after the presentation by the applicant.
Applicant, Lodge Properties, Inc., represented by Greg Christian, distributed the design
of the proposed International Wing, and presented the proposed change of 1983,
adding 19 rooms. Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead explained that 1983 decisions were
still in effect. He further stated that any changes or modification to the original approved
application would have to be reviewed by the DRB. Ann Frick, on behalf of Lou Ann
Wells, adjacent property owner, that statutory procedures were not adhered to, and that
the 1983 agreement was illegal. Architect, Lynn Fritzlen, stated inappropriate procedure
was followed and that relying on a 83 planning approvalwas inappropriate after 12
years. Peggy Osterfoss asked what the time line was for approval. Tom Moorhead
informed her that in 1983 there was, no time line set forth on exterior alterations, but
since that date there has been a two year time limit put into etfect. Those opposed to
the approval of the lnternational Wing who gave input included: Attorney, Art Abplanalp,
representing owners of Uni[#S22, Vt. & Mrs. Saltz, as well as three other units. Mr.
Abplanalp presented a map which he said depicted the proposed sight barriers of
certain private condominium owner! and stated that Rick Rosen represented the
Cabinas, also adjacent property owners. Jim Lamont, representing the East Village
Homeowners Association, requestdd council members take into consideration a new
opportunity, and requested this proiect be withdrawn. Jay Peterson, representing the
applicant, Lodge properties, lnc. acidressed concerns and answered questions. Mike
Arnett, Design Review Board Chailman, was on hand to answer questions, as was Jack
Zehren, architect for the project. Peggy moved to uphold the DRB approval of the
project with the stipulation that additional staff-approved modifications be made to the
plan to improve sight and sound barriers on the building's west side. Kevin Foley
seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1, Mike Jewitt voting in
opposition.
Item No. 8. On the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob asked council
members to check their calendars in order to meet for a special work session on
Tuesday, February 13, and reminded them of the Town of Vail's Christmas party at the
Marriott on Friday night.
Mayor Armour informed those present of his concern regarding raising the speed limit
to 75 mph and asked that statf research the issue and any possible alternatives. Bob
Mclaurin said he would discuss it with the new Police Chief.
Other topics of discussion included: the shortage of bus drivers and overcrowding; the
need for a voice mailsystem for council members.
There being no further business, a motion was made by Paul Johnston to adjourn, with
a second from Kevin Foley at approximately 1 1:10 P.M.
4ffiESr:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
(Names of certain Indlvlduals who gava publlc input may be inaccurate )
v",t :l*,, t"u,r'l t:*'j n h llt^h | 2/tt5ltl5
I
Vrl Ftcstann & US Mttr
(970) 47924s2
Mr. Randy Stouder
Planner in Charge
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
I
Jncobs
Cknsr
Fnick
Kleinkopf
Kelley
LLC
ArroRNEys Ar LAw
lndependencr Plnzn
1050 lTrk Sr.
Suiru | 100
Denvtn, CO 8O26I
,or.68r.4800
FNt ,0r.68r.4869
IC'IiKK-2468- l
Lin A. Woodnll
,or,892.4416
December22,1995
0Ec 2
TOV.COMM. DEV. DEPT
Re: The Lodge International Wing
Dear Randy and Staff:
We understand from Andy Knudtsen's letter to Mr. Peterson dated
December 8, 1995, tlnt Mr. Peterson must submit drawings conceming the additional
buffering to be added to the Intemational Wing Plan. I called you today and left a
voice mail asking whether those drawings have been submitted and when they would
be available for public review as we need to make plans to come to Vail to look at
them. We had represented Ms. Luanne Wells before the Town Council hearing on
December 5 and want to be clear that we should be notified on her behalf to review
the drawings that Mr. Peterson still needs to submit before staffmakes a decision on
the application.
Tha^nk-s in adt ar.ce for vour attention to this matler.
Sincerely,
Or)nr4"z,<-
LiaA. Woodall
V
HARIHE LAW OFFICES OF Rtc D P. ROsEN,
December 21, 1995
Jay Peterson, Esq.
108 South Frontage Road West
Vail. Colorado 81657
OINVER
| | 20
LINCOLN STREET
5UrlE I too
DENVER COLORAOO
4o203
TEL 303 A32 1900
FAX 303 463 04 r 2
PO EOX 4 r 37
VAIL COLORADO
a | 654
tEL 3O3 ?r7r 194O
IOV.CO[4IV1. DEV. DEPT
Re: The Lodge at Vail/International Wing
Dear Jay:
As you are aware, this office represents Dr. and Mrs James Cavanaugh. The
Cavanaughs are the owners of Condominium Unit 533, The Lodge at Vail.
During the past few weeks, I have had an oppornrnity to meet with the staff architects
at Zehen & Associates relative to the proposed design for the International Wing'
The information received, including copies of the design layout for the proposed
terraces for Unit 533 and the two adjacent units, has been reviewed and discussed
with my clients. Three major concerns are still present.
The proposed design elements for the terraces, although with good intentions to
mitigate the impact of the new structure, serve only to ascorbate the situation. The
terraces, as designed, incorporate a large number of evergreen-type trees, shrubs, and
other landscaping. It is obvious that this "natural" treatment will result in the
development of a "wall" surrounding the terraces serving noneother than to eliminate
any potential for natural lighting, and the total elimination of the remaining views.
Even more disconcerting is the elevator shaft that encroaches into the proposed terrace
for Unit 533. Although it has been described as a minimal impact onto the terrace, it
reduces the usable space of the terrace and eliminates any reasonable use of such a
terrace. This is only further compounded by the placement of the landscaping
discussed above and the ever present noise distraction of the placement of ventilation
outlets at the top of the elevator shaft.
Finally, the obvious reason for the proposed landscaping and otber architectural
elements to be installed on the terraces is to lessen the impact of the expected noise
from the exterior terraces adjacent to the entertainment suite that will be constructed
in the International Wing. This suite is expected to be of the same elevation of the
impacted condominium units in The Lodge.
It is not my intent to criticize without offering some suggestions for eliminating the
above referenced concerns. It is suggested that the following design change be
reviewed and incorporated into the final design that is to be presented for review by
the Town of Vail Community Development department.
OF COUN5EL €LROD I'iAf Z .,RLEO LOOA M(IISON & 5 LYERMAN P C
lF.F ?
?;,
RICHARO
Jay Peterson, Esq.
December 21, 1995
Page Two
o The exterior terrace ofthe entertainment suite that faces The Lodge should
be eliminated. It is not only apparent that the presence ofthis terrace necessitates the
proposed terracres for The Lodge condominium units, including the installation of the
landscaping elements, it also most undoubtedly will add significant construction costs
to tle overall development project. Moreover, the proposed terraces on both the
International Wing and The Lodge offer nothing visually other than the presence of
the other improvements. The remaining views for The Lodge units are to either sides
of the lnternational Wing, and the expected views for the new improvements clearly
are not the ones ofThe Lodge building.
o The installation of an elevator shaft within hilo feet of the large picture
window of Unit 533 is not well thought out. This proposed design element offers
what appears to be a cost-saving measure for the developer without consideration of
the impact onto adjoining properties. It is recommended that the developer either
relocate this elevator, or in the least, find some solution tbat allows for the reduction
of the height of the elevator shaft. Further, the venting system for the elevator must
be relocated to lessen, if not eliminate, the expected noise pollution.
I, as well as my clients, are eager to work with your designers to incorporate the
above recommendations. Of course, any reasonable solution will be entertained.
I look forward to hearing from you or your architects within the next few days.
Thank you for your consideration
Yours very truly,
RICHARD P. ROSEN. P.C.
YLclt*
Richard P. Rosen
/hs
Andy Knudtsen
John Volponi, The Lodge at Vail
FILE COPY
75 South Frantage Road
Vail, Colorada 81657
970-479-2 I 38/479-2 I 39
FAX 970-479-24s2
December 8, 1995
Jay Peterson, Esq.
WeststarBank Building
108 S. Frontage RoadWest
Vail. CO 81657
Bob Mclaurin
Tom. Moorhead
$rsan Colnellv
Parn Braodmeler
Jim Lamont
Jim Brown
Lynn Fritrlen
Grcg Cristnsn
Izc.k7*hren
4rt 4lnl4nanA-no f nc(
Nficbael funett
Rick Rosen
Department of Community DeveloPment
l.il l,L>JI/A-t
7 ff-.*- Z L,-t<
al"t,lt"P4 E <L,t
RE: The Lodge Intemational Wing
Dear Jay:
On Decernber 5, 1995, the Town ofVail Town Council consider upon appeal the Design Review Board approval of
November l, 1995. Tfoe Town Council voted 6-l (Jewett opposcd) to ubfiold the DRB approval with tle condition
that additional buffering be added between the terraces adjaclnt to Units 527. 533 and 535 and-the proPosqq .
Penthousc Suite of the International Wing. The Council directed you to generate architectural desigrrs for this buffer
to be reviewed and approved by staff. Al-though we dc not plan t6 schedule this item for a Design Review Board
hearing, Saff would iiice to maire the proposeddrawings aviilable for public revierv in our offices at some date in the
future.
Please submit drawings shorving the following information:
A. At l/4" scale, show all existing improvements. Delineate what is a limited common elemeflt, a
geneftll common element, and whdt is under the ownership of the Lodge Properties.
B- Show the proposed improvetnents at l/4" scale in plan. secdon and elev?tion. The sections should
includethlfirllheigbtbfthesructwesoneithersiileoftheterracearea. Thisv/ouldincludeboth
the proposed Pentfousc Suite improvements, as rvell as tle existing units 527, 533 and 535'
If it is helpfirl for you and your clien! the Town of Vail staff is willing to rwiew conceptual proposals- that would
achieve tf,e buffering needid in ttris area. Orce you have the existing conditions mapped out, we would be hqpy-to
sit down and meet rfrti you. I wout<l like to have a final design available for pubiic ieview no later than January 2,
1996. Statrwill make a decision on the application approximately one week lat€r.
Thank yon for your erttention to this matter. Please call me at 479-2138 if yotr would like to discuss this iszue in any
greater d€tail,
J4,
/{,rt"-t }
'.il Awn,
{p *""r""*ruo
7r4-- 7
tz/s/zr
t )t(z(k s-.** -.'
' t. ir
,AJ-I u/4nv* u-,1 l;/t"wJ.u
su G"nt l{'J tolttl4s
t lL lq*
Afilt {c^t r--.-N",
sfsles
/.-lLt I qs
iofrtl < r
tr I tl Tf
(
I iltb
DKB
DIZA
bes
D L/9
+" *o &--'=p*f"s
f'r"F5 nt"A^.ha't
c4+ M&Ss t++t..**Le*i'*'lr M'LJ
,t4f4* irhaa,*Lf; *%
' ?-f^.&r^-{3
dt-.v'o-<.-
r//+f w't/W
b-s?*rt
.to-yt-'-ut L fra-o n-*rff ryd'^ll7 )l>Je I rrrl1'-'Y1'l-?^ JLF
5..ol
sf"Qt:'
tl\Dg ry/ 7,/"W J-AA^Qlr /
' l'W'tg.t )4
k vlssrn 77 hLO rs,or
1.rV*tl"fYl
vlc--a V
-*4
-^t?lt fo,y v19
'7Yb 1=7 'f*.N- gllg ffYl-'
'\^c/{ "-fT Wd ?
?
Pn17;ov- L y+-l *y4 *T
s--/ 472-. k #"rl , -H-fz,/fff
J./n- .^rf- -?F 'va/-,-1 4, l",*--Arzr
nl-TO k 4-p-1* e/o.p_S.gt /f.*,-y47y +"y
t*+Vs z-lTfnC
orf 'J:1"w.Vr)-?t' -{.V -,"f
/1-T-\ U-f F, ry:$ , v>l4l;vj
ss:rf fo f :q
' ^/)'-/ -"'ld l;--r't'n . I I (:_./
S>1.t7 ftt JM?. tEbl '
..+rv lrlA--'1-{t\-
^c. nl\L2'Yl
':
l
a:
i'
)*.e/'.'i
.ir'
zr,' . rt7 i,'YV '\'t
-ltaPJ i
I
t:l-
!:
i
,JE.-Cl'
. .i ,1
1
j' li_ ,1.
,.iLE.',O) ll
i,
oe : 0'l ::'
:
Jl . ot a
;,
l!
,-i
5€,o I r:
Ja,
nrENE0ltou r r q
t -/s /rf
-T#d# OFt
t-/ c-ov' l.' l''^- f/t"-/
-AJ, {--,-J
Gentlemen:
On behalf of our clienl Luanne C. Wells, an adjacent property owner, w€
hereby appeal to the Vail Town Cowrcil the November I, 1995 decision ofthe Town
of Vail Design Review Board regarding the Lodge at Vail, International Wing. On
behalf of Ms. Wells, we object to the Design Review Board's decision based upon
the proposed development's nonconformance with standard procedures and
requirements of the Vail Village urban design guidelines, applicable design review
objectivesandpriorconditionsofapproval. OnbehalfofMs.Wells,wealsoobject
to the proposed development on the basis that it violates well-established zoning
rules, regulations, laws and policies.
Ms. Wells is a property owner at One Vail Place and is adversely affected by
this proposed development. n*on_B
'.o'! Sel/: 4r*- ^f v..yr,,ryl",;- fffi*;*-'lndrprndrncr Plnre V I t / , ' , t '-l.:-:.-,-^ - 4u- L-i-o-{-, M JecosscueseFrucrKlErNKopFfOlO | 7rh Sr. /\
suhe l ioO ." I / / .."-rt f* &KSLLevLLC
Jncobs
Cknse
Fnick
Ann B. Fnick
892.4422
Novem!er9-19951 ,7,lo'{7-1"'IYEAY 6T
b----dfu,1 L"-
"-4-4-Y L* /t"-"_^,
{_L..^_,..A
International Wing
Z/--L &4,,^-._ *?
t/'ll-/tofuf s at-tltr-,
VW
A
hrr,^* F.frti"t
'Ain g. r'ti"n
ABF/kb H //:za Brf *r.^.,.r VTrr* /*<--< - cA^Vl
Kleinkopf
Ke[[ey
LLC
Arronn rys lr Llw
Denvrn, CO 8O265
,or.685.4800
rxr 7O7.68J.4869
Jcflr.t7al-l
VU FACSIMILE andUS IqIAIL
Mayor Osterfoss and Town Council
Attn: Town Attomey, Tom Moortead
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Appeal Lodge at Vail, Proposed
L '"/ ,.-;//
xEfvEDf,toyr3u-
rOil50N
INTIRTAIN}i,tINT
November 7,1995
N{ayor Osterfoss and Town Council
Attn: Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead
75 SouthFrontageRoad
Vail, CO 81657
FAX: (970) 479-2157
RE: Appeal Lodge at Vail, International Wing, as proposed.
Dear Tom:
As an adjacent property owner, I hereby appeal to the Vail Town Council the November l,
1995, decision of the Town of Vail Design Review Board regarding the Lodge at Vail,
International Wing. I wish the Town Council to overturn the DRB decision based upon the
proposal's non-conformance witl standard procedures and requirements of the Vail Village
Urban Design Guidelines, applicable design review objectives and prior conditions of approval. I
am the owner of Units 523 and 525 in the Lodge at Vail and am adversely affected by the
proposal.
g-<__
345 North Maple Drive
Suite 208
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
(310) 2464688
345 NON.TH M,\?II DRIVT
slj|Ii 208
rtvtRtY liiLLs cA 90210
TIL: (ll0) 146-{688
tAX: (110) 2{7.8E82
I
J$nrcfpg 5.5{mtu
7ll fritt\.Atcuc
$rr farr,$.fl.tuur
FAX (970) 479-2452
October 17,1995
;
Ms. Susan Connelly
Community Development Director
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Ms. Connelly:
re: Intemational Wing at The Lodge at Vail
I am the owner of Condominium 363-365 at the Lodge. My wife
Sydney, our four sons, and I spend a good deal oftime throughout the year
enjoying the wonders of Vail. We have an unencumbered view of the Village
and mountain from our unit which is on the upper southeast corner of the
Lodge looking past Wildflower and over what is currently the International
Wing (Xerox picture enclosed).
Although I am a director of The Lodge Condominium Owners
Association, I am writing solely in my individual capacity as a unit owner. As
you know, the Association is a member of the East Village Homeowners
Association, and EVHA has already expressed many concerns which I share.
Although it is in the interest of Lodge Properties to increase their profitability
by creating additional facilities, the location, design and scale ofthese facilities
should be planned with consideration for all affected parties and the citizenry
as a whole.
Ms. Susan Connelly
Town of Vail
Page2
With this perspective in mind, I would hope that the DRB will look at
the proposed design in conformance with its own performance requirements
with respect to scale, roof design, tle requirements that commercial use be
limited to plaz.a levels, underground parking to be located at the site, required
passage ways between adjacent stnrctures, etc.
To the extent possible, views over, and privary of, oristing residential
units should not be diminished. It would appear that the upper most floor
exceeds the height requirement, and the Penthouse unit itself is a luxury that
serves largely to meet the hubris of the owner. It should be removed in order
to reduce the building height.
I have been impressed with the continued efforts of the DRB and the
Town Council to encourage enlightened development in the town, and I zubmit
tlese comments with the hope that they will be of assistance to you in ttre
course of your consideration of the proposed Intemationat Wing.
Very truly yours,
,./,t r' b-/.'M4'o{*^ --c,
Stanley S. Shuman
enclosure
e
,t$hrnleg F.S1"*nFcElvEDt{0y I lt srrrgirrtrA# tc: Utu'ti.(,fry.,
$"ri*r.l.fl.unrr ,t'Jl'{s cil)u'441
Cr[.'Jt-t'*':
FAX (970) 4794s7
November 7,1995
Mayor Osterfoss & Town Council
Attn: Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Sir:
re: Appeal Lodge at Vail, International Wing, as proposed.
As an adjacent property owner, I hereby appeal to the Vail Town
Council t}re November lst, 1995 decision of the Town of Vail Design Review
Board regarding the Lodge at Vail, International Wing. I wish the Town
Council to overturn the DRB decision based upon the proposal's non-
conformance with standard procedures and requirements of the Vail Village
Urban Design Guidelines, applicable design review objectives and prior
conditions of approval. I am owner of Unit 3631365 in the Lodge at Vail and
am adversely affected by the proposal as set forth in my letter ofOctober l7th,
1995, copy enclosed.
I very much appreciate your consideration.
Very truly yours,
I/,'2 , ,'/ '/i
l''f"'t't't' i' 'i i-e-__=.--
!
enclosure
ial.r
H
!l.i
El
H
€ $p -
.9 ff Ue;: E E
E F,ES
, E(A=Sf;pS
<.o3tE; ts
ire8E-l aSR c i:e;t4 Hsil, < l).=!68#.
1o
a
I
€)+..Ta
b0t
-lo-{.)ao-x
Frl
Ea
-GB
ao.-
€
--{.J0
Fq).-
(,zf-l
FJ
zo
-Fl
z&
Frl
Flz
-
Jf-{
F
r4coo
Fl
rI])l.{
lrL{F
o
o
al
'o
u
ll
t-a
r..,!
I
IY
-
a.)
a
ril
J
h
{-?(g
c.)bo
I
bo
(n
X
I
t\
u
.3
=
,<,\i
hll
.=
't.
./_
L]
N
A,
q.)
(-
Lr
-
()
-
fi1
"-
^.j
.ta/.'rl
o
View from Wildflower Patio - tlpprox. 7 5'-0" Jrom face oJ-builtling
l r,ltriai
1..ti
at,I\It
View from East end rvalkrvay - Acljacent to Lotlge.s,wimming pool
View studval
The Lodge at Vail -
International Wing
Photos taken May 4, 1995 - Black line
represents maximum exterior boundary
of Intemational Wing, using the string
line which was put in place for the
Conceptual DRB as a reference.
View from East end walkrvay - Adjacent to Wilclflower Restaurant
view from Gore creek Drive - Lorking s.uth ttlons eost end walkwav
'-ctara r-- -t
'E
-r ,!
6lt.-o
CL
C-)
eg':. o=Eaacr El>
q
rEO(J CJ
a
r-
-EJ ct'ir
'.r E)€
rCD
Jr_
.G
-a eL
.=o.-
-c c)
rh{,cr -Ervt
CD
I
'5 crjI
.;
.E
lil
.i
i:
ii
li
I
ii
I
I
I
'-l
II
lr
TxllllXt$rr-*rl I
[-,J.''-lj11; iri...__.1..,.r, I I
,
'JIrllal
Jl
I
et
!,\:i
S:l
at
-
t
TI
;l;;-l
I
I
li
t'
IL_
|ltl
nl
4 ..E1...l ata
1 I
+
I
I
I
It.,'
I |Etttrl
:l ;
(5
N
--l
lltlI
il
'i. '
-J-! -
ll
rl
:l
I
I
I:r;
x rTr
i.-; r
Ittt
'. . \l.t\|r'. .l.l
,-Of,+l
l:i,:' l,l ; Y-t" ;
a
'l
!
{
i1llir
a,
l__L--_, .r! ll.r,.r
:
-T-
DEC-45-1995 L6zU 343+685+4869 P.@.o
TOWN OF'VAIN-
TOWN COIINICIL }TEETING
fuerdoy, DeccnLe" 5, t995
7,30 p,-..
PROTE,ST ON IIS. LUANNE WELI,S
Rcspccdully ""b'oiced by J.coLs Chac. F;ck Kleinhopf & Kcllcy, LLC
Somm"ry of Frotoctt
The lntemational Wing Plan, as proposed by The Lodge hoperties, Inc. ("The Lodgc"),
violetes $ I E.24,I 30 of the Vail Zouiug Ordinance, wfuisfi limits total density iD the
Commscial Core I District to not more than 25 dwelling units per acrc of buildablc site
ar€a.
The subdivision of air rights which arc separatcly ovmcd by the Lodge Apartmcnts
Condominium Owners and Association ('Lodge Apatments') does not create a separate
buildable site area that doubles the allowed densiry per acrc nor should the number of
Lodge Aparuants be igrrored for deteftiining density.
The 1983 Agreement dated August 9, [983 between The Lodgc and the Town Ivlanagcr
which purports to waive thE dcnsity zoning requirement in exchange forthe constuction
ofnew conference facilitics at the Lodgc at Vail constinrtcs illegal contact zoning and is
null and void.
' In approviug the 1983 Agreement on August 2, 1983, the Town Council tcted ultra vires
and abused its discrction by effcctively granting a variancc for density without following
the mandated procedwes for notice arrd public hearing and without making findings upon
the record regarding the criteria used to grant variances.
I The Lodge hes no vested property rights, under common law or by statute, in lhe
Intcrnational Wing Plan, as proposed.
RECOM}f,ENDATXON
Sr'e raspectfully request that the Town Council void the 1983 Agreement. In the altemative, we
ask that the Town Council take the mattcr undcr adviserncn! so that it can thoroughly consider the maner
upon a properly developed rccord. We welcomc the oppornrnity to respond in person or in writing to any
questions or concerns that the Council may have regarding this matter, which may arisc during its review
arrd consideration of this matter.
,cf,F(-lrrr-l
.. DEC-45-1995 L6:34
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
343+585+4859 P.A3
TOWN OF VAIL, TOWN COUNCIL
Jacobs Chase Frick Kleinkopf & Kelley, LLC, on behalf of Ms. Luanne Wclls
DECEMBER 5. 1995
PROTEST OF INTERNATIONAL WING DEVELOPMENT, AS PROPOSED
Wing of the Lodge atVail. Ms. Wells objecrs to lhe lelality of fte
On behalf of Ms. Lu.gnne Wells, adjacent property owncr to the Lodge at Vail, the law firm of
Jacobs Chase Frick Kleinkopf & Kelley, LLC, protesrc the developmcnt of the pmposed lntemalional
ofthc Town ofVai
objects to the failurc ofThc lodgc to comply with the propcrly''.-,.ci@ Fi6EEffits-frd;ffice and public hearing requircments for variances and/or rezoning, particrrlarly with
- f i^p6 respecttottredensiryrequircmeotsmandatedby$ls.2a.l30oftheTowrrotVaitZoningOrdinance.t<€ T..z tf (ord.2l (1960)$ l(part).1 Ms.Wetlsreservesherrighttoobjectsndprotesronothsrgrounds,I t>M*'p F",. @
In l98Q thc Town of Vail passed a Zooing Ordinancc that resricCd density in the CCL. Under
S 18.24-l30,totaldensityisrestictedto25dweltingunilsperacrcotbuildablesiterea- Assumingthat
dre entire 2.089 acres of the parcel that The Lodge owns is a buildable site, the totd dcnsity would be
limited to 52 accommodation uuits. lhe 62 existing accommodation units were to
of the Vail Ordirpnce and would use. As such, the
units exceeded the meximum of the 2.089 acres owncd by Thc I-odge.
The Lodge's ThoorT That Separately-Ownod Air Rights Doubles Density aud/or
Such Units Should Not Be hdlded ir the Density Count-
In 19E3, The lodge took t}e position that the separately-owned accommodation units that
occupy the zubdividcd air rights above tle Lodge at Vai[ hotel unitsr should not bc counted ia the total
denstty cquation. in May of 1983, The [ndge Properties, Inc., submitted an Application Form For
t On May 5, 1970, previous owners, Walter J. Stalder, Jr. and Ross E. Davis,
zubmitted a portion of their property to tbe Colorado Condominiun Act. Thc subdivided
condominiums are owned by the Lodge Apartments Coudominium Oumers and Association
("Lodge Apartmcnts'). The condominium units in question are located above the first two floon
of the hotel complex known as the Lodge at Vail and are referred to as the South Wing of the
Lodgc Apartments ("South Wing').
I wrng orthe Lodge at vait.
,v<\, b*rrcen Thc Lodgc and Ri
, kC(V. CI9X3-AFEemRT:ffi.H' ^,<4D EffiEtlGcfrrifficeand
-P rt'^. @
n{*2rD BA.KGR.I'ND
Y tff ' In l9&t, The t odge proposed a plan to expand the Lodge at Vail by building an International
\Ving o!4p sdditional units on 2.089 scres in thc Commercial Core I District ('tcl"). At thc time, a
toul o@ccommodation units with a total of 37,347 squarc feet of GRFA had been constructed on tie2.089ad\- tZ-Lyz,.L= VZ ,,/
Etxx-2pr!l
DEC-O5-1995 15:35 343+685+4869 P,U
Exterior Altcrations or Modifications In Commercial Core I (CCI) ("Application dated May l9t3'),
which incorporatcd tt$ jiug tigh!:th*L*d rcprescnted rhe allowediensity at 104 accommodstion
units. .Scc Application dared May 1983, paragraph N, pagc 8. Apparently a dispute arosc regarding toral
density because that samc montl, The Lodgc.. through its atomcy, Jay K. petcnon, wrotc a
memorandum of law to Larry Eskwith, Town Anomey, in which be prcsentcd thc argument that thc
subdivision of air rights had doubled the totrl allowrblc density for the buildable sitc.
It is our understanding from talking with individuals knowledgeable about the hisrory of tbis
ploposd expansion that this was nst the frst timc that The Lodge had presented its *air righ6" argument
to tie Town of Vail. Wc undentand that on tbree previous occasions, other Town Anorncys had bccn
approached with tlis defrnition of density and each time the position was rejected outighr. Wc
rulderstand fiuther, that lv{r, Peterson.played a firndamental role in advancing this theory of ''air rights" at
thc time the Town Council was considering the subdivision ordinance in 1980. Again, t}e theory was
rcjcctcd.
Thc 19&f Agrecment Side Steps Zoniug Requiremcnts-
/ Aftsr scvccal pr€vious unsuccessful attcnrpts to persuade thc Town to incrcese the allowablc
,z density on its 2.0E9 acreq The Lodge apparently convinced tie Town to accept is air righs argurnent
\ or, at a minimum, not to reject it outright. On August 9, 1983, the Town of Vail ent€rEd into the 1983
\ Agrement with The Lodgc in which it was agrccd that:
I. The parties agree that the dcnsity conbol section ofthe zoning ordinance for the
CCI Disnict shall rot prohibit the Lodge frorn building rhe 34 new accommodation uuits
and one dwellidg unit f'Units') (emphasis addcd).
2- Before thc Lodge shall proceed with the coirstruction of the Units it shall be
required to comply with all thc appropnatc ordinances of the Town and obtain
pernission from the appropriate boards and commissions of thc Town and furthcr obtain
all required and necessary permits.
3. Should the lodge go forw-ard with the coostruction ofthe Units it shall be
firrther rcquired to construct cxpsnded confcrcncc and mccting room facilitics in thc
Lodge so that when such expansion is complete the Lodge [ ]2 contain total
conferencc ard meeting noom space which is at least [ ],400 in size, more or less of
which one nrom shall contain at least [ ],000 squre fect morc or less.
i a. The corporation sball not irutitutr any legal action lgrinst the Town conceming
any oflhe disputed issucs sct forth hcrein. The Lndge by entering into this Agreerncnt
docs uot waive its rights to request an additional six accornnrodation units nor docs the
Town waive its rigbt to oppose such rcqucst
Brackets indicate that copy is illcgiblc.
?,cFrr":!rr-r
.. DEC-85-191+5 16:35 3A3+685+4869 P.6
The 1983 AgrEement was unanimorrsly approved by the Town Councit at its regular qleetinc\
held on August 2, 1983. The agenda for that mecting lisred the item as "AppRovAL or AGREEIftNT )RELATING TO LODGE AT VAIL AIR RIGHTS.- Dcnsiry was not mentioned_ '/
Thereafter, Thc Lodge obtdncd approval from the Planning and Environmental Commission\
C'PEC") for its proposed expansion of the Intemational Wing on October 24, 1983, efter fust beins )
denied on octobcr | 0, 1983. Once agai4 no density issue was raiscd or discussed at the hcarings 6**. fthe PEC.
After twelvc ycars, The Lodgc has dccidcd to movc forward wilh its proposcd Inrernatioual
Wing, seeking Dcsign Rcview Board approval on the basis of a l21ear old PEC approval. Thc Dcsigrr
Review Board conditionally approved tbe Intemational Wing as proposcd, on November 1, 1995. The
Town Council called up the approval of thc Intcmational Wing on November 7.lgg5, scheduling the
hearing for December 5, 1995. Ms. Wells timely appealcd the DRB approval under g 18.54.090 by lottcr
datcdNovcmbcr9, 1995.
ARCT]Mf,NT
L TEf SUBDTVISION OF AIR RIGHTS TROM THE SURTACf, ESTATf, DOES
NOT DOUBLE THE TOAAL DENSITY t)F A BT]ILDABLE SITE AREA; TO
SOLD OTEERWISE WOTILD VIOI"ATE TI{E NTEGRITY OF THE VAIL
ZONING ORDINAITCE
The position advanced by The Lodge, that the International Wing, as proposed, compties with
the existing density limitations is unsupportable. The Lodge contends that the separat€ly-cneared estatc
in air rights owned by thc Lodge Apartrncnts is E scparatc building site area creating is own density.
That argurnent overlooks the clear understanding of the tern "parcel ofland" used in the dcfinition of
"LotorSite,"$ 18.04.220. TheLodge'sapplicationofcaseauthorities(noneofwhicharcColorado
authority) interpreting the tcrm 'oparcel of land" is off rhc mark. A *parcel of }rnd" is simply not the
s"me thing as a *parcel of air," separale ownership or not-
Moreover, if new density werc created every time a separately-owned estate in air rights is
created, the integriry of thc Vail Zoning Ordinancc, $ 18.24. t30, resticting total densiry in CCI, would
be complctely undcrmined- Subdivision of an above-surface cstate from thc surface cstate crcatcs no
more additional density righs than would subdivision ofa surface estate into two separate surface
estates, Zoning requirements sirnply cannot be changed or multiplied by creating subdivided ownership
since zoning is inteaded o regulate land and not owncrship. See Town of Lyonr v. Bcrhor, 867 P- 2d
159, l6l (Colo. App. 1993) (status ofland use docs notturn on the ststus ofownership-)
Accondingly, no reasonablc interpretation of thc zoning ordinance should permit The l,odge to
build aoother 34 accommodation units and one dwelling un.it on a site that already exceeds the maximum
dlowable density by l0 uoits, with the rcsult that tbc total density is nearly doubled. The t odge's theory
of air rights is absurd. h would permit othcr property owners whose air rights have bccn subdivided to
make similar claims, potentiatly doubling the density in the CCI Disrict. The integrity of the zoning
ordinance must be upheld.
rql't-2!_rLl
DEC-45-195 16:35 343+685+4869 P.6
U. TEE 1983 AGREEMf,NT IS DTIILL AND VOID AS TT CONSTITUTES ILLEGAL
CONTRACTZONING.
Thc 1983 Agrcement purporls to s€ttle a zoning dispur between The Lodgc and the Towa of
Vail by agreeing privately that 'lhe dcnsity control scction ofthc zoning ordinance for CCI shall not
prohibit the Lodge from building the [3a] Units." I 983 Agreement, Sec. II, Para. l. In exchangc for thc
zoning waiver, The Lodge prOmiscd !o Cqnstruct expanded confcrerrce cnd meeting faciliries.
Conhact zoning is illegal as t\ ultra vires bargaining away of the policc power. Ford Lcesing
Dcvclopmert Co' v. Boerd of County Comm'rr. of the Couuty of Jclfersoq 528P.2d.237,240 (Colo.
1974) (retrearing denied. l2l9l74). see abo Attman/Gtrzcr p.B. co. v. Mayor & Aldermen of
Anuapolir, l14 Md. 675;552 A.zd rz't7 (1989); suski v. Mayor & comm'rs. of Borough of Bcach
Heven, 132 N.J. super 158, 333 Ard 25 (App. Div. 1975)- see generetty 10 McQuitlin, Municipal
Corporatiol$, g 29-07 (3d ed. l98l); 2 Arderson, American L,aw of Z.Ering 34 g 9.21 (1986). ,.The
basis for this position is that zoning rcstrictions and permissions must be govcrned solely by the public
intersst atrd not by beuefit to an individual applicant.' Zoning & Planning Ei Am. Jr- 2d S 46, at p.67.
See, e,g. Wrrner Co, v. Sutton, et aL, 274 N.J- Super.464, 472;644 A.2d 656, 660 (App. Div. 1994)
('Thc zoning power delegated by the Legislature to the township officials was prostituted for the special
benefit of tbe plainniff")
Furthermore, this "principle is not limited to agreements of questionable legaliry, orro ftosc
made in smoke-fiUcd rooms; it applies as wcll to those made openly, in good faith, and containing terms
and conditions that would otherwise be appropriate." Attman/Glazcr, lrpra, 3 14 Md. at 687 522 A.Zd
8t 1284.
The 1983 Agreement exchanged a waiver of total dcnsity for thc promise that The lndge would
constuct expaaded conference and meeting facilities at fhe Lodge et Vail- Thus, the | 983 Agrcement is
nufl ard void as illegal contfact zooiog. See, eg., Baylis v. Bdtimorc,219 Md. 164, I4E A.2d429
(1959) (zoniag ordinance which reclassified land on condition that the owners entcr into an cgrcsmcot
with the city to develop &e land io a particular way was held invalid.) The tacts retaring to the 1983
Agnement te elen more egregiout than lho.ce in Baylis, suprq since there wos no zoning ordinance
Wrfed wnogtng to chnge totd
cltafge withglt the,proper proce&ral protections dorded to tlu cammuniry. in puticular the adJacent
wpatgLownefs,
The Supreme Court of Colorado wnote one of the lcading cases on contract zoning. In Ford
I-easing" the developer had applied for rezoning for a planned development. Although Ford's proposal
feiled to implement 12 of the plan"ing commission's recommendations and did not strictly comply with
the county ordinanca that required unified control, Ford rcquested the Board of County Commissioners
to inform it of whatcvcr additional re{uircments and regulations wcrc necessnry in order to have its
application approved. The Board refused. The Supreme Cou* of Colorado held rhat to "act ot}erwise
would be patent contract zoning a concept held illegal in most slotes as ur ultra ulres bargaining away of
the police power." Id- at240. See slso I R. Andenon, Americsn Law of Zotiu.g $ E.-20-1.
Thc rccord also shows that The Indgc visit€d with the Town.Council for more direction betw€cn
the first heariug before the PEC on October 1 0, 1983 wherc thc PEC denied its application and thc
jcll.r-zotLr
., DEC-45-1995 16:3?o 343+685+4869 P.S?
second hearing before tre PEC on October 24, 19t3, where the PEC approved thc applicatioo as reviscd.This factual scenario frrrther supports a finding of illegal contract zonini.
The Town Council would not have. engaged in illegal contact zoning if the density waiver had
!c9n olfered to elt prnperty owners with subdtvidcd eir righb. .See city Jf Beltiuore v. catq277
Md- 198, 205-06' 352 A.2d 786 ( l9?6) (ordinance granting additional deniity upon dcdicarion of land
not cont'act or conditional zoning wherc offcred to all similarly situated properry owncrs). Howc\rcr,
this position would bc untenable to tbe Town of Vail as it wouid completety desuoy the carclully
coosidcrcd density rcsnictions adopted by the zoning ordinance to prctect the unique qualities oithe
Tovm ofVail.
m.THE TOWN COUNCIL'S ACTION IS VOID BECAUSE rr WAS BEYOND ITS
JT'RISDICTION.
The Town Council's approval by resolution of the l9E3 Agreemenr cxecuted betweea Tbc Lodge
and Richard Caplan, thc Town lv{aaager, is an ulera vires tct- It is well settled in Colorado t}rt contracts
erecubd by rnunicipal corporations in which there was a failure to comply with the mandatory
provisious of applicable statutes or charte$ are void. Sec Swedhard u Denvet foiat St tck Land B@tk
of Denret, t18 P.2d 460 (Colo. tgat),
Thc Town Managcr has no authority under the Town Charter of Vail ro contract away zoning
requiremcnts. See Towl Cbartcr, $ 6.3- Indecd, thc Towu Manager is requircd to be "rcsponsible for the
snforcenent of the iaws aud ordinances of the town[-]" Id-,6.3(a).r
From the limited avaihble rccord, it appears that many other procedural mandates $rcre $imply
ignored and not enforced by the Town aad/or its commissiens at the time.
For cxample, thc Town of Vail's Zoning Codc provided in 1983 for a procedure for gnnting
variances from the literal interpr*ation of the Zoning Code, iucluding density restrictions" whcrc a
practical difficulty or unnecessar1/ physical hardship would resulr Town Code g 1E.62.010(A)
(emphasis added). Density contol is a development standerd for which a variance may bo sougbt aod
granted. $ 18.52.010(8). AccordingtotheTownCode,jurisdictiontogrentvarianceslieswiththe
Plauning Commission. $ 18.62.010(13). Application procedures are maldated pursuant to $ 13.62.060
ofthe Town Codc.
'If a municipalip desires !o allow a devialion from the permitted uses under the zoning
ordinance, it must eithcr smend the ordinance 'or follow the nccesssry proccdures for granting a
variance;itcgnnotshortcuttheseproceduresandpermitthe...usebymeansof-..acontactwitbthe
landovmcr-';TYernerCo. v. Suttou, etd.,274 N.J. Super. 464,471, &4 A.zd 656,659 (App, Div.
1994) (quoting Ench v. Mryor & Council of Tp. of Pcquennoclq 47 N.J. 535,539,222 Ard t (1966)).
3 Thc Town Chartcr dirests that the Mayor "shall bc recogrrized as the head of tbe
town goveidment for all . . . legal purposcs and he shall executc and authenticatc legal
instnrmens requiring his signatue as such official." Town Cbartcr, $ 3.3.
,cxx-'ot|.t
DEC-45-1995 1623?3a3+585+4869 P.@
There appears to havc becrr no formal applicatiorr f<rr a variance filed with the Planniag
Commissiou as reguired- lndeed, thc only "request to amend" made by Thc Lodge was luried in is
Agplication dated May I9E3 betbre the PEC. It requests only an ancndment to the Considcrations and
Guide Plan in accordance with 18.24.220(8I shoutd rny part of the application bc found not to comply
with th9 Vail Villagc Urban Desigrt Considerations or Guidelincs. .9ee Application dated May t9$; ;.4' As further evidencc that no applicarion for a variance was requestcd, the word 'variance" is not
containcd in the l9E3 Agreemcnt.
The recommendation from the Community Development Department to the PEC darcd Ocrobcr
6, 1983, failed to mention anytbing relatiag to density, including that a dispute had arisen and that it was
sefiled by €resment- Similarly, thc minutes of the PEC on both October I0, l9t3 and October 24. 1983
rcflest uo discussiou oftotal density.
Ms- Wells believes the proper public noticc and hearing requirements under the Town Code and
Cn-S.$31-23-301(l),er,sc4r.werenotfollowed. "substantialcompliincewithstatutoryprovisionsis
required for lawfirl enactment of zoning change . . . and failurc to comply with essential mandates of
sEtutes invalidates the proceeding. Wainwrightv. City of Whea nidge, 558 P. 2d 1005, 1006 (Colo.
App. 1976) (citations omittcd)- See dbo Snydcr v. The City of Lakewoad, 189 Coto. 421,425:542P.
2d371,372 (1975') ("The fact tiat these [zoning] hearings arc requircd is itselfrecognition ofthe fact
that the dccision making process must be more sensitive to the rights ofthe individual citizen involved.')
IV. TIIE RECORD REVEALS THAT TT{E TIEARINGS($ BETORI TEE TOWN
COI]NCIL AND PEC F'AILED TO COMPORT WITI{ TIIE PRINCIPI.,ES OF
FT]NDAMENTAL FAIRNESS.
A. Public Notice of A.uy Vrrirncc ln Density Was Inadequrte.
The .Town Council unanimously voted to approve the t 983 Agreement with The Lodge at is
meeting held on August2, 1983. The mafterwas listed as item 6: APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT
RELATING TO LODGE AT VAIL AIR RIGIITS on the agenda under a section cntitlcd "CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION." Tbe limited enfy in thc minutEs does not mention any nonapplicaut public
app€ar-ance aud does not dotsil the presentation made by L,arry Eskwith, the Town Attomey.
B. The Rccord Dernonrtretcr Thet the Town Council Friled to Meke The
Nccesary X'indilgs to Support A Vrrigncc.
As previously stated, zoning vsrianccs are granted only on the criteria ofpractical difliculty or
unnecessary physical hardship. If the PEC approval of tfre Intentional Wing proposal, followed by the
unanimous Vote of the Town Council, can be construcd to have bccn an application for and approval of a
a Se"tioo 18.24.220(8) states: 'Revisions to the Vail Village urbarr dcsign guide
plan and dcsign considerations shall be reviewed by thc plenning and environmental commission
with official actiotr to bc taken by the towu council by resolution on a semiannual basis to ensue
that the pli. reflects the purposes and intent for which it has bcen adopted. The review ard
action shall take placc within thirty days following the public hearing on the applicatioos (Ord-
2l(1980) $ I (pa't).)
Jctll.,rtr- I
DEC-45-19S 16:38 343+685+4869 P.W
vatiance, the record ofthose procccdings clearly arc deficient tojusti$ approval ofthe density variance,
The short enry in the minuies was:
Thc ncxt itcm on thc agenda was approval ofan agrecmcnt relating to the Lodge at Vail
air righs. Larry Eskwith prcscnted thc mattcr to thc council- A morion was made by
Bill Wilto for the Town Manager to exccute this agreement. Second by Ron Todd- A
vote was aken and the motion passed unanimously.
The record must contaiu details of the evidence prcsentcd and proper grounds and reasons to
support its dccision. Murrey, et aL v. Boord of Adjustmenl r,arimer county, 594 p2,d 596 (Colo.
App. 1979). 'Abscnt such detai[ thcre is no way a coun can rcview he decisiou of thc Board." Id. at
59E. While strict cvidsncc rulcs do not apply, the record must r€veal that the hearing before the Town
Council comported with the principles of fundsm€ntal fairness. Natiood Heritagg Inc. v- Prilrn, ?2E
P.2d737,73t (Colo. App. 1986) (record demonstated that approval of use variance, following hearing,
was based on City Couucil's findings that each of the criteria listed in City Code had been met).
The minutes of the Town Council and the PEC clearly show that no such criteria wss applied
aad no findings were made. The Towu Council's action adopting the 1963 Agreement as a variance of
density requiremenB was 8t ebuse ofdiscretion-
V. TEE l9E3AGRf,ETVMNTRESULTEDtrY Tf.I,NGALSPOTZONING.
Assuming that the Town Council properly amended the zoning ordinance by its private 1983
Agrccmen! the resultiug waiver of the density rcstriction is illegat spot zoning. Clerk v. City of
Boulder, 146Colo.525,528;362P.2d 160, 16l (1961). AstheSupremeCourrofColoradoarticulated
in Oerk, thc tcst for spot zoning is'Vhether thc cbange in qucstion was made with thc purpose of
furthering a comprehensivc zoning plan or dcsigncd mcrcly to rclievc a panicular propcrty fiom thc
rcstrictions of thc zoning rcgulations." Id.,1,46 Colo. at 528:362 P.2d at 161 (ordinauce which rczoned
certain lots from residqrtial to commercial z-one singled out smalt area for special treatmenl in manncr
which did not flutler the comprehensivc plan)-
The 1983 Agreement's waivcr of thr: dcnsity rcstrictions for the 34 additional accommodation
units aad one luxury dwelling unit of the International Wing proposal similarly cawes out a small section
of lim ited building site areas in the CCI for special treabnent. Our uuderstanding is that as of Fcbruary,
1994, no other property wi$in CCI has been givcn rclicf flrom th€ density requirernenl Moreover, dre
pupose of the'rczoning" of the particular property to pennit higfier density of building does not fruther
thc comprcbcnsive zoning plan adopted in 1980 by the Town of Vail for the CC I Disrict.t Nor can The
Scction 18.24,010 Purpose.
The commercial core I district is intended to provide sites and
to maintain the unique character qf the Vail Village commerciai
areq with its mixtr:re of lodges and commercial establishments in a
predomin ntly pcdestrian environment. Thc commercial core I
distict is intended to ensure adequatc lighL an, open space, and
jca3I'.:q'|-l
DEC-45-1995 16:39 343+685+4869 P.ta
Iadge point to 8ny matcrial changed conditions in thc "character of the neighborhood which may require
re-zoniug in the public interest-" Clerh 1a6 Colo. at 532, 362 p. Zdat l63lciting Eolly, Inc- v.
commissioncn, I40 colo. 95. 342 P- zd lo32 (1959) and Borough of crerrkilt-v. Borough ofIlumonl, 15 N.J. 238, 104 A. 2d 441 (1954). Under 6ese circumitances, the properry ownirs have aright to rely on existing zoning regulations. /d Thc action of the Town Council was arbitrary urd
illegal.
vI. TEE LODGE HAS NO YESTED PROPERTY RIGIITS IN THf,
INTERNATIONAL WING, AS PROPOSED.
A- Tte Lodge Ifas No Vcsted Prop€rty lrtererts Uudcr Conmon Lew.
lssuancc of a building permit, coupled with deaimeatat reliance. ctearcs vcstcd propelty rights,
$tc, e-9., Dervcr v. steckhouse, 3 l0 P.zd 296 (colo. 1956); clke v. Bot lder,45o p. za ris 1bolo.
!969) (nerc issuancc of permit without more, does not cause such a vesting); Graniger w Cormgt ofPil*h,794P2d 1045 (Colo. App. l9E9) (permittee must take substantial steps to cxcrcisc pmpcrty
rights in relianceon permit) andP.F. Invcstmentt lrrc.v- City of Watmhister,655 P,2d tS65 qCoto.
App. 1982). To date, there has been no building permit issued.
Thc Lodge sat on its PEC appmval of the International Wing for twelve ycars- During tbat timg,
it es&d the political warcrs by submitting applications to thc DRB, but then withdrawing them. finally,
on Novcmbcr 1, 1995, tbe Desigrr Review Board conditionally approvd The Lodge's most rEccnt
application. According to the leffer dsted Novcnber 7, I995 from Ardy Knudtsen, Senior Planner, b
Jsy Peterso4 attorney for The Lodge. The Lodge must still comply with eight couditions beforc it may
apply for a building permit (and one condition at the time thc building permit is issued). Clearll no
property rights havc vcstcd undcr commou law.
B. The Lodge.Eas No Statutory Vestrd Property Rigb$ Under
C,R-$ S 24-6&105 or Cheprer 18.67 of thc Tom Codc-
In strort, The Lodge can find no protcction under the Colorado statutc sutlorizing vestcd
propcrty rights or Vail's local chaptcr implementing that staMe because statutorily vested propcrty
dghts did rrot exist in 19E3. The colorado statute docs not spply for a numbq of reasons.
other amenities appropriatc to the permitted types of buildings and
uses. The disuict regulations in accordance with the Vail Village
urban dcsign guide ptan and desip. cousido-ations prescribe site
dwelopme'nt standards tha are intended to ensue the maintcnancc
and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings
fronting on pedesuian ways and public greeoways, End to cn$re
continustion ofthe building scale and architcctural qualitics that
distinguishthevillage. (Ord.2l (1980) $ I (part).)
ftxf-ltt|-l
DEc_as_1sss 16r3e O 343+685+4869 P. 11
Fi$t" the starutc was passed in 1987, four years after thc l9E3 Agreement was approved by the
Town Council, and clearly applies only to site specific development pleni approved on or after JonuaryI, 1988. $ 2+6&106.6
sccon4 the staarte permits a landowner to obtain a vested propcrty right after local
governmental approvel of a site specific development plan. g 2a-6&l0t(l)(b). Thc Vail local chaptcr
rcctricts the definition of a site specific devclopment plan to 'a final major or minor subdivision piat" or a
special devclopment district development plan." g I t.67.0 t 0(B). Apparently, ncither of thess
dcfinitions apply to the Intcmational Wing dcvelopmeut plan, as proposed.
Third, the procedural requirernents of0re statutqT including designatilg the documcnt that
triggers such vcsting at the timc ofepproval, $ 24-68-102(4),t were not mel and could not have been met
as the stafirte did not yet orist
Finally, a vested pmperty right undcr the stahte €xpires after three years rnd may not be
extended by any amendments to a site specific devclopmcnt plan unless cxpressly authorizcd by tbc local
goventmilt. $ 2+58-104(l). 9ee ulso g 18.57.045 Vested property righrs--Duration.
Nothing in the statute purpofts to change existing zoning authority or procedures for the exercise
of iL The statute clarifics that zoniog, oucide of a site specific dwelopment phn, shall nor rssult in ftc
crcation ofvcsted property rights, Conseguently, thc purportcd zoning change eftcted by the 1983
Agreemeut did not crcate a vestd property right in the waiver of density.
Tbereforg The Lodge has no vested property rights. either under common taw or by statute ir
the International Wing dwelopment, as pmposed.
6 Even ifttre statute did not so providc, thc common law of vcstcd propcrty rights
thar gxisfed in 1983 should apply. .fee Gramigerv. County of Piikin, 794P.2d 1045 (Colo.
App. 1989) Qaw in existence at the time of an application for a particular larrd use and uot the
law at the tirue ofjudicial dccision applies).
7 Vesting of thc property right must follow noticc and public hcaring. $ 2+68-
103(1). Local goveromerrt approval is subject !o all rights of refer€ndum and judicial rcview, the
period of which does not begin to run until the date of publication, in a newspaper of geaeral
circulation within &e jurisdiction, of a notice advising the gcneral public of the sitc specific
development plan approval and creation of a vested propery right The publication of the notice
shall sr6g111'rrq later then fourteen days following approval. Sce also $ 18.67.030.
I Section 18.67.050 Notice of approval requires that "Each map, plat, or site plan or
other document constituting a site specific development plan shalt contain the following
laoguage: 'Approval of this plan may crcate a vested prcperty right pursuant to Article 68 of
Title 24, C.RS., as amend€d.' Failurr to contain this rtatement shall invrlidate the crertion
of the vested pruperty right " I4 (emphasis added).
rctg{o?t"t l0
,. DEC-6-195 L6.4A | 3a3+68s+486e P.Lz
CONCLUSTON
Bascd on thc forcgoing argumenB, w€ rcqucst that the Town council rcscind thc | 9g3
Agr€crncot as void. In the alternativq wc rcquest.h't the Town Couacil rrtF dre mattg- rmder
advisemcnt for furthcr study aad dcvelopmcnt of the rccord. Wc welcome thc opportutrity to respond ia
pcron or in writing to any questions (r concenu that thc Council mey havc rcgarding this mattei, wtrich
na5r arisc during its rcview and consideration of this natcr,
lr
TOTAL P.12
FIIE COPY
AFV,4IL
South Frontage Road Department of Community Developmen:
970-479-2138/479-21i9
rFAxe7o47e'24s2
/r["ttr! (
Novembers, 1995 e ff
, n ,*t L
JayPeterson,Esq. \ \f0l' Nx 4# n
WeststarBank Building J4 lu -l ,/' l0SS.FrontageRoad '\{/ ,9-'\, (r(vailco8r657 ({,rl1l-'"
RE:AppealoftheDRBapprovalofThelnternationalWing "
A, *Nk,DearJay: Y
bil Colorado 81657
OnNovernber7,l995,the Town Council called up the approval of the Intemational Wing. We
have scheduled the hearing for December 5, 1995. Please call me if you would like to discuss the
matt€r in greater detail.
Sincereln
/1 /
\t I 1Wra.t 'v t/\1
Andlr Knudtsen
gsnio- plannsr
AIVjr
cc:
fu(
Bob Mclaurin
Tom Moorhead
Susan Connelly
Pam Brandmeyer
JimLamont
JimBrown
LynnFriElen
Greg Cristnan
{p*nt*rruo
Jncobs
C[rnsr
Fnick
Kleinko
NtF99195 L?36
pf
Kellry
Ltc
Arroaicyt at Lrr
lid€pE rd€icc Pt^rr
lOtO I 7th Sr.
Sualt I t(X,
De*cr, CO 8O,165
,or-68146(n
Ea ,0r.6614669
Etrdrat-l
o 343+685+4€89 P,@..'jc:
Co"'^'
'#ra*<oAn B. Frick
892422
VU FACSIMIIE ad IIS lrtAIL
Ittlayor Ostcrfoss and Towl C;ouncil
AtE Town Attorrr,y, ToE Mooftcad
75 SorltFroutageRoad
Vail, Colomdo 81657
Rc: Appcal Iadgc Ea Vail proposcd tncrraional Wing
Clcotlemcn:
Ou bcbalf of ornclicull,urnrc C. Welts, an adjaccntgoperty ownctr, wch"r.$y ryeal to thc vail rorn council thc Novrmbcr l,'ts9s a;^i;o- -thc Towa
of vail Dcsign Revicw Boad rcgading tbc lrdge at vail, IuEranimal wing: o!
bcbalf of Ms. wd\ urc objcct to thc Dcsign Rcview Board's dccisiou bascd-uponthe poposcd devclopmcot's loncor6nnaacc with standard proccdrrcs md
rcqui*@cots oftbc vail f.ruase-rutaa desip guidclincs, applicabL deeign rwicw
objccfircs adpir conditioos ofapponl. on bchalf of lus" wc\ wc Jso objcct
to-thc pmposcd derdopcnt on tre basis tbst it violates rrclt csablishcd zoningdes, rcgulations, Iarvs aod policics.
Iv[s. wells is aFopcrty owrc"ar ooc vail pls'e and is adrrcrseg aftcbd byrhis plpps5d dcrrclopmeot
Norabcr9, 1995
Vcrytnrly yorrs,
Iacoes CHAsE Fuoc tr(renxopr
&TG:,sYLLC
,/1
rt'r'* F.FRtrk
'AnB.Fdclc
ABF&b
TIITFL P.@
ttnn ReviewAction t
TOWN OF VAIL
Category Number
Project Name:
Building Name:
Project Description:
ArchitecVGontact, Address and Phone:
LegatDescription:Lot /* ;t# *"--rur#/.rdt'J
Zone District /C 2-
ProjectStreetA aaress: /14 F /l-.n'- (lr'<- L t) ti',-,
Comments:
Board / Staff Action
S_econded by:
AApproval
! Disapproval
! Staff Approval
Conditions:
Town Planner
o^r., // / ' '-/ f DRB Fee pre-paia ,/f {z z )
FILE 00n"
75 South Frontage Road
Vail Colordo EI657
97 0 - 4 79 -2 I 3 8/479-2 I 3 9
FAX.970-479-2452
Department of Communiry Developme
NovemberT,1995
Jay Peterson, Esq.
VailNational Bulding
108 S. FrontageRoad
Vail, CO 81657
RE: The Intemational Wing at The Lodge at Vail
On November I , 1995, the DRB voted 5-0 to approve the ptans for the Iaternational Wing.
Conditions ofapproval are as follows:
A. hior to application for a building paurit, the applicant shall dcdicatc a public
access easement through the corridor between the proposed International Wing
ad One Vail Place.
B- hior to application for a building pennit, the applicant shall provide detailed
drawings to tbe Town of Vail Fire Departnent which show tbat the existing
imFrrovements, as well as the proposed constmction, will be sprinklered.
C. Hor to application for a building p€Nrnit, applicant shall providc approval fnorn thc
U-S. Forest Ssvice for the use of U.S.F.S. land adjaceat to &e International Wing. paio. If ap'proval sann6f [s sccured, thc applicant shall rctum to the DRB for
q4rcval of a modified design of the landscaping, site planning and grading. DRB
cocburagcs the applicaot to anpand the landscapi"g in the area, ifthat is acceptable
tothe Forest Service.
D. The DRB-approved drawings indicate that all improvements comply with the
Towa standards for beight and view corridors. However, verification of the
cmsilructiou documents must bc providcd at time of building pcrnit. Prior to
alrylication for a building permit the applicant shall provide documentation to the
Cmmunity Development staffto verify that the proposed stnrcture does not
eocroach into any established or adopted view corridor. Docume,ntation shall
include a surveyor's stamp of the elevations and sections, speciSing the USGS
elcrration ofthe proposed roof ridges, plate heights, chimney caps and view
I
f1 ,ntoto"uo
"n'f\rl E I!?
cosidor boundaries. The urban design standards requirin g a 60140
heiebt also shall be verified'
prior to issuance of a building pemri! applicant shall pay a pa*Tq re; i" tN
anrcuntof $8,ss4.40p.;;;"'f";it"ii'ti"ga"t-,9-t-"1^T.lab1fli^r.anrcuur or iDo'Jt'f"rv pe''.er/v 'v' 'sv r----
parking requirernent of 62.e '
Jevelopment. The DRB-aperov{PlaT shorv a
rp"""t, so the fee would be $538,009'z|4'
F. Prix to application for a building permit' appli-canj sball provid6 verification that
"fiptopoi.a
lighting complies witn rOv standards'
G. Prior to application for a building pemrit' the aPPli-1Tt shall revise the landscape
liglting plan' replacing o" plopo'5'iigit n.ii!'E" with the 'village Lighl' in
orriler to be consistent-with tne rest of the Vail Village Area
H. Frior to application for a building pqrrit' the applicant shall redesign the enty
srarement into the courtyard n"'n ill-r";i'a;t plaz'a--T\eapplicanl shall zutmit
asketch to staff, veriffing th"t th:;try [i"nl"otn"" been "dramatically reduced
in size."
I.Inthefuture,tbeapplicantshallcooperatewiththeTownofVail'VailAssociates,
aEd surrounding property o*o*-ti'J"J'ioju -ott"t plan for the area to integratc
tt t lot.-uti*ti foiig *itn tht Village area and base of ski slopes'
Thank yo' for yo'r cooperation throughout tbe review of tbis project' Please call me if you have
any questions about these conditioos'
Siucerc!,
AK{r
cc:
k*/,,--ffi'rgsnisl plannsl
Greg Clrisrrtao
Susro CoocllY
Jirn Brolrn
Lynn F itdcn
Jita Lamost
Fritzlen Pierce Briner
P.O. Box 57 . Vd @br& tt6't. 3031rffi. ta: 303-'i'G4mt
November I, 1995
Andy Knudtscn
SeniorPlanner
Town ofVail Conmrmity Development
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail Colorad o81657 .
Re: Lodge at Vail Intcrnational Wing
E:cpansion
Dear Members of the Desip Review Boar4
On behalf of Luane Wells, I hcreby object to thc Design Rwiew Board's final lgview sf the Iodgc
at Vail International Wing ocpansion application The objection is based upon the failure of the
applicaut to comply with pre-established application requirements . The sicnificant failurc is as
follows:
- Failurc to obtain authorization from owner.
- Failurc to provide complete information
- Faihxe to provide information on a timely basis to faciliate a complete and accuate review..
The following is a discussion of the aforenentioned tbree poins
- Failurc to obtain euthorization from Orrner
Division IE.54.O4O of the Vail Mrmicipal Code requircs that the "owner of authorized agent of any
projecr-. shall submit for fi"al design review." The Lodge at Vail Site Lot AF, C Block.SC as
described on the Oct 11, 1993 DRB application consisb of tbree condominir:m associations, Lodge
Pnopcrties, Lodge Tower and the Lodge Aparmene. To date only the Lodge Properties has signed
or appruved the application.
The reccatly submittcd suney and title report arc inconsistcnt with the site description on the DRB
applicadon- The suwey and title report rely on nexcepting out" the seadominirrrn subdivisions
of the t odge Aparments Parcel of l97l and the Lodge South Parcel of 1972 to establish the
"Remaiuing Lodge Properties Parcel". These condominium subdivisions are not land subdivisions
as defi'.ed 6t Title 17 Subdivisions of the Vail Municipal Code ( Adopted by Ondinance #4 of 1970).
o
AadyKnudsca
Pagc 2
Novcobcr l, 1995
Therefore the Lodge at Vail sirc should be treated as one site and not as tbree independent parcels,
therefrre consent muil be obtained from all tbree owners.
Now ' at survey and ownership information is available i1 i5 important for the Town to revisit the
issues brought up by Mr. Jack Reucel's in his letter of Febnrary 23,l994to Mr. Tone Moorchead.
This letter questions the reliance on a condominiusr zuMivision to establish a "site or parceln.
The pecedent set by allowing two owuers oi associations sharing the same building envelope to
be tneeced as separate entities for the purposes ofzoning and redevelopment is contary to the Town
of Vail regulations and common sense.
2. Feflure to provide information on a timely basis to facilitete a complete and accurate
revie:w.
As of Friday October 27 , 1995 a completed zoning nnalysis was neither available from the Tovm of
Vail or the applicant confirming existing and proposed GRFA, density, site coverage, landscape
area, md height in relation to the allowable. Reliance on the 1983 PEC approval is not acceptable
due to the many changes rcflected in the current proposal. The aforementioned documenb, which
are necessary for a complete zoning analysis, are set forth and required by Section 18.54.040 as
follo*':s:
" B. Conceptual DesignReview
l. Submittal Requirenen6 ...
c. Sufficient information to show that the proposal complies with the development standads of the
zone dstrict in wbich the project is to be located (i.e. square footage total, site coverage calculations,
number ofparking spaces, etc.) "
"2. Staff{DRB procedure. The departnent of community development shall check all submitted
material for compliance with applicable provisions of the zoning code, subdivision rcgulations and
Sectioa 18.54.040 C Section 2... If the application is found not to be in compliance with applicable
provisions of the zoning code and Section 18.54.040C, the application and materials shall be
returned to the applicanLn
These materials are rcquired to be submitted four weela prior to a scheduled review as estrablished
by the Town of Vail Deparment of Community Develophent Policy. Sr'fficient time was not
provided for the staffor intercsted parties to review the appropriate documents.
3. Frilure to provide complete information.
o
Aady Knudbcn
Page 3
Novembcr l, 1995
We are still auaiting copies ofthe following infomation nhic,h was r€qucsted st thc Octobcr 18,
1995 If this information is not anailablc wc would requcst that the rwi€w be tabled ''til it is.
- Revised east elcvation ad&€ssing issucs brought W at tbc Octobcr 18, 1995 meeting regarding
pnuacy betrveen the two buildings.
- Revised watkway planten on thc east sidc ad&€ssing tbc issues brought up at the Octobcr 18,
1995 meeting.
I respecdrlly requesttbat the Board delay theirrcviewuntil the aforenrentioned issues arc properly
addressed-
Sincercly,
Lynn FrialenArchitect
sg; lnanne Wells and Paul Heeschcn
Dr. and lvfrs. Smead One Vail Placc
Tom Moorehead TOV Attorney
JackReutzel Attomey
Jim Brown Atiomey for Lodge at Vail Aparhcnts
Town of Vail Dcsip Review Board
Town of Vail Town Cormcil
Anita Saltz Lodgc at Vail Apartnars
Stanley Shuman Lodgc at Vail Aparhents
David andRhodaNarins Lodge at Vail Aparhents
East Village Homeowne/s Association, Jim Lamont Administrator
L:92O5\A}.IDY t 027.WPD
O 1,,
February23,1994
TomMoorehea4 Esg.
Vail TownAtrorney
75 South Frontagc Road
Vail, CO 81657
'North wing Parcel" all as defined in thc applicants l9g3 mcmorandunto the T
. Re: LodgeatVailproposcdExiransion
DearTom:
.-
J$ -* has beenprepared to address the cqrtrrl legal issucs surrounding thc Lodgc atVail proposcd ercpansion. There are several pla'mingrclatcdissues ttrat wilibc bcttci
addrcsscd through the Town's review proccss should the need arise. This memo
addresses tbe following spccific queitions:
1. Does thc qirrent proposar submitted by the Lodge at vail violate the
allowable density of Commcrcial Corc I?
2- Did thc 1983 Agreement between the Lodge at Vail andthe Town of Vaillaqfir[y waivc thc dcnsity reguirement of the subject property?
3- ltas the Lodge at Vail vcstcd its right to build the additional unirs?
it violate theallowable densitv of Commercisl Core T?
There is some coafisiou as to the area cootained in the Lodge at Vail's proposcd
expansion- Nocetheless, we belicvc that no matterhow the applicaat aiAnls the "Lot",the dcnsity limitation of the Commcrcial Core I ("ccl") Aistrictnas been excecded.
Jhlc arc 90 dwelling tP- it_s cxisting today on the 'T-otn. No matter how the Lodge at Vail
defines thc gcographic limitations ofthe i'Lot", (the 2.088 acres identified as the uTotal
Rcmaining Parcel" ot the 2.7073 acrcs idcntificd as the Total Rcmaining parcel and thc
1.
owllAttorney),
dtshisl Ifthe Lodge at Vail is proposing th" aaaitionalGin ttre Z.Ogg acre Lot fte
O o{'"=pEB'23'ia
Tom Moorehca{ Esq.
Febnrary 23,1994
Page Two
dcnsity ls set at 52 Eits. If tho applicant is proposing the additional units onthe 2,70?3
aqela, the dcusity is sct at 67 uaits. In eidrer event the current number of existing
units.olcccds the total numberpermited by tho CC I dishict
. Somc of thc ercisting 90 dwclling units oay barrc bccn constrrcted prior to tbe adoption of
the Town's zoning rcgulations and therefore would be considered legally non-confomdng
uscs. However, those units still cormtagainst&c density cap onthe Lot
The Lodge at Vail argscd in 1983 thgt within a defiDed geographic spaco more rhan ono
Lot could c2dst by vimre of separata owucrship ofthc airrights scpaf,ate &om the rcal
properfy- In this particular instascq for c:camplg thelodge at Vail seen$ to argue that
tbe 2.088 acres i's rcally a.176 acres for purposes of allocating densrty; the su&ce 2.088
acres asd &c 2.08E acres lying'above &e surfrcc owucd by a diffcrcat cntity. Iostead of
fifty-tqro dwellingunits, &c Lodgc is cntitled to lO4 dwelling units on &e 2.088 acre LoL
Tbc code's definition of a Lot tom which densrty is determined is defined as:
aParcel of land occupied by a wo, buildit'g or fiuctturc undcr lte provisions of
thic title and mccting &g minimum reguirements of this title. A sitc may cousist of
a siaglc lot ofrecord....
Nothing in the definition gvcs any indication that conunon ovroclship is a rcquircment of
a LoL Yet common was the key clc,ncnt to the Lodgcs rationale in 1983.
Sincc thctc were two separalc ownqs ofthe strface€state and thc air cstatc, thcre had to
be two Lots, each ofwhich were entitled to 25 uDits to the acre.
The togical results of this tfrinking is readily spparcnt. Densrty control has legislatively
bcc.u acloowledged as a lawfirl exercise of a municipali!/s police power since it
prodotesthe healtl, safcty and general welfare of the community (c.Rs. S3l-23-3ol(l) . To dlor two or rnorc ownerships to occupy tbc samc Lot and allow each
ownership thc sane density rights frustratcs the purpose of density limitations recognized
by the Stce enabling authority aod implicifly rccognized by the Towu,s Code.
In any ev€ng I believc thc Lodge at Vail's 1983 legat memorandum setting forth this
doublc deasity proposal was rejected by stafi, As a.rcsrilg the Lodge at Vail threatened
=a=es",{t' s
o-
Tom Moorehead, Esq.
Fcbruary 23,1994
Pagc Tnree
suit and the Town executed an agreementpqporting to waivc the density requirerncut. If
the Towu staffagreed with the l-odge's position expresscd in a memo from ie a$orncy to
the thc,n Town Attorney, there worrld have beerr no nccd to execute an agrccmcnt
resolving "thc disputc [relating] to wtether certain of the dwelling units of thc Lodge
Apartment Condominiums located on a parcel of air spacc above the real propcrty owned
. by the Lodge, is athibutable to tbc laod ovmed by thc podgeJ."
2. Trid the la83 greement helween the T rdge st Vail and the Towrr of Veil
The Agrecment waivcs the <iensity coutrol section ofthc Commercial Cors I Distict in .
violation of state statutes aod was done for no othcr-purpose but to rclieve a particular
property from the restriction of zoning rcgutations. As a rcsult, the 1983 Agrcement is
ulra-vines to the state enabling lcgislative and thc Town Code and is flrerefore void.
It is wetl scttled in Colorado that confracas o<ecutcd by municipal corporations in which
thcrc was a frilurc to comply wifl the maadaloryprovisions of the applicablc stanrtes or
charters are void. (Swedhrnd v. Denver Joint StocLland Rank of Denver, et al., I l8
P.2d.460, Colo. 1941.)
Colorado Revised Stitutcs, $3 tt3-301 (l), empowers municipalities to, among other
things, regulate and restrict hcight, number of stories, size of buildings, the sizc of yards,
t}e densitv ofpopuration and the rtse qf luildingF, stuctures and land. This same section
also rcquires that such regulations "shall provide for a board of adjdstment that may
detcrmine and vary their application in harmony with thcir general purposc and intent and
in accordance with geaeral or specific rules containcd in such regulations."
Sta,te law firtheroandates thatBoard ofAdjustme,nts hcar and decide all matters upon
which it is rcquiredtopsss undcr ordinance (C.RS. 531-23-307} Ths Torrn's Zoning
Code had in place in 1983, and today, a procedurc for granting variances tom thc literal
interpretation of the ZonngCodg includiqg densiqt, whcre a hardship would result
(Town Code Scction 18.62.010) Section 18.52.010 (13) ofthe Town Code vests
jurisdiction to grant varianccs from the provisions of thc Zoning Code with tbc
O
=r=""o=l' o=-O or=-.t=FEB 23'94 L
534P.2d
TomMoorehea4 Esq-
Fcbrusry 23, Lgg4
Page Four
Plaffring Commission. Applicaots forloT*lo qu$t Tryq*+ the criteria forrnd in
l*,iooig.e2.060 of the Town Code. The Lodge at Vail failcd to follow mandated
;;;"[;i;r oUtabing thc density variance and thcrcfore, the 1983 agreement is im'alid
ind r:nenforceable.
Thc Tonm is not estopped from frnding the 1983 Agrcc'ment uncnforceable becausc of a
lia" of cases stating th;t cstoppel apinst a mrmicipal corporation may not be udPt.9l, "
p*'"r"p*ryif thc-nnrnicip.itorpotati*Fa""-C**"Ttv-i1T*:TnT:3:1tu"
(Scc
805, Colo. APP., 1975-)
Notr*itbstandin! the ulta-vires naturc of the Agrccment if givcn its literal readhg, th!
A{feemcnt is conead zoning in violation of well established case law. (Scc ClgtkJ-CiE
"F"""ra"r,
3G2?Adl60, Colo. 196l; Kings Mill F{omeownen Assoc. v- Ciqv of
"trrG 557 p2d 1i86; Coto. 1976; andTnfcrrmation Please. Tnc' v. Board of Qpunty
FiT-i*"i*Lr. nfM-gr. Cn*ty, 600 P.2d 85, Colo. fup. 1979.) ThcAgecment
pq"rtt t" r*l* tho deosity reqlirc,meot within Cornmercial Core I for the Lodgc at
Vali. Wo othcrproperty witilitl CCt Uu" been giveo rclief from thc dcnsity requiremc'n!
tGru Lodge atVht.-gywEivingthe density theTowa Council, througfi
G1.*;gU*ager, bas rciicvcdtheLodge UVail from'the restriction of zoning
rqgularions, thereuy crcating for dt intcnc and purposes a diffcrcnt zone.
prior to 1987, Colorado wag one of tho number of statcs that recomized a vested property
rig$t only upon zubstaatial reliancc on the issuance of a valid building permit and 1
substantiat stcp toward conplaion ofthe project. (See P:W lrUestnnents' Tnc' v' City of
Jtlestrninsrqr , 6SS p.261365-, Colo. 1982, Cline v. city of noutder , 450 P .2d 335' Colo'
1969.) Tlt.te rcquircments wcrc not an4 to darc, have not been satisficd by the Lodgc at
\Iail. The tp$J ptanning and Environmental Qsmmis3iell approval ofthc exterior
modification in 1983 css-e does not vest the projcct. No building permit was cvcr issued
ty ,n" rot* or relied on by the Lodgc. Reliascc on the Planning and Environmental
<L--itrion approval in tigg as a sitc specific dcvclopment plaa, thcrcby sgtujgry
rr*tiog th" rigil must fail siacc there was tro sta$tory vcating possiblc in 1983'
3.
o
,$nrleg S. Slgnralt
ill Fjiftt.Xladst
$rr !arr,$.fl.uurz
FAX (970) 479-24s2
October 17,1995
Ms. Susan Connelly
Community Development Director
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Ms. Connelly:
re: Intemational Wing at The Lodge at Vail
I am the owner of Condominium 363-365 at the Lodge. My wife
Sydney, our four sons, and I spend a good deal oftime throughout the year
enjoyng the wonders of Vail. We have an unencumbered view of the Village '
and mountain from our unit which is on the upper southeast corner of the
Lodge looking past Wdflower and over what is currently the Intemational
Wing (Xerox picture enclosed).
Although I am a director of The Lodge Condominium Owners
Association" I am writing solely in my individual capacity as a unit owner. As
you know, the Association is a member of the East Vrllage Homeowners
Association" and EVIIA has already expressed many concems which I share.
Although it is in the interest oflodge Properties to increase their profitability
by creating additional facilities, the location" design and scale ofthese facilities
should be planned with consideration for all affected parties and tle citizenry
as a whole.
v
Ms. Susan Connelly
Town of.Vail
Page2
With this perspective in min4 I would hope that the DRB will look at
the proposed design in conformance with its own perfornance requirements
with respect to scale, roof design, the requirements that commercial use be
limited to plaza levels, underground parking to be located at the sitg required
passage ways between adjacent structuies, etc.
To the ortent possible, views over, and privacy of, existing residential
units should not be diminished. It would appear tbat the upper most floor
exceeds the height requirement, and the Penthouse unit itself is a luury that
serves largely to meet the hubris of tle orrner. It should be removed in order
to reduce the building heigbt.
I have been impressed with the continued efforts of the DRB and the
Toum Council to encourage enlightened dwelopment in the torvn, and I submit
these comments with the hope tbat they will be of assistance to you in the
course of your consideration of tle proposed tnternational Wing.
Very trulyyours,
-./l - ,r' o--re<.d[."*]-
Stanley S. Shuman
enclosure
' Please be advisedof the-following recommendations that are offered for your consider-
ation in review of the Lodge at Vail, International Wing, as proposed.
l. The scale of the Proposed structure adjacent to the passage way between One Vail
Place and the International Yil&.ur proposed, sliould be equivalenito the passage *ay bet*Ln
One Vail Place and the Hill Building. T[e International wing, as proposed, shoid tt"ir ii.p ----
down towards the One Vail Place passage way and Eaton Pllza. 'fni wiattr of the passagelay
between One Vail Place and the International Wing, as proposed, should be the sam'e wiOitr as itrepassage way between the Hill Building qrd the Golden Feak House. The passage way should be
a minimum of 25 feet- Design should allow for a qualitative or adequate jedesiian cir"utaiion
-
around-the building. The building_design should-aniicipatea anale Jompatible *itfr u1rin-miing ofthe parking areas located south of the proposed buildirig site that would provide for a pfaza gii--
ing direct access between the Village and ihe Mountainl should the Lanb Exchan.qe siie devjoo-ment option not be exercised, allowable GnfA can be relocated to lower floors, tf,us to*..in!1'5.
plo-!l-". of the building. There appears to be no requirement in the zoning contract with the Tjwnof vail that it must approved adjunct uses such asionvention facilities. -
2. A different ro-of style should be employed, without resort to dormers, so that view
blockages from surrounding residential units and public walkways of Vail Mountain and the GoreRange are decreased. The cathedral,ceiling roofcovering the penthouse unit is excessiue, it
- - -
should be substantially reduced in order to lower the appient 'building height.. I'ne proposed
roof forms increases shadowing on pedestrian walkwayi and public plLas. A different roof formcould cause less shadowing. Th_e privacy of,, or view hom, existing'residential units shoutA noi-
be diminished. The upper most flobr should be removed ui it "pp"Lt to exceed the height
requrement.
3- Flat roofs are.neither-encourage or allowed in Vail Village, the building should con-form to the 40To/600/o height.and sloping roof requirements of the faii vitt.g" trb; o"tign
Guidelines. The architectural desigrrattributes of the proposed structure should be reviewed forcompliance with the Vail.villagelJrban Design Guideiinei by the Town of Vail professionaiA+
sign review consultant. A.ll buildings in Vail Vittqge and many others having lesier impacts, have
been required to be reviewed for compliance by the Town ofVail's design consultant.'
4. The roof terrace should be removed in order to maintain the privacy of adjacent resi-dential units. The size of terr. ace allows forLarge social garherings which are i,iapptoi;ati aiitrislevel,ofthe building, given the adjacency ofreiidential inits and-the faiture ofthe apilic.nt toprovide privary screens.
Easr HouBowNERs
Ollicers: hesident - Bob Galvin Secretary - Gretts parks Treasurer - patrick Gramm
Directors - Judith Berkonitz - Dolph Bridge*atl. -i Ellie Caulkins - Ron kngley - Bill Monon - Connie Ridder
To: Town of Vail
Design Review Board
Town Council 1:
From: Jim Lamont, Administrator
Date: October 17,1995
RE: !9dg. at Vail, International Wing as proposed
DRB Application, October 18, 1995 (
Post Office Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81658
Telephone: (970) 827-5680 Mcssage/FAX: (970) 822-5Sj6
IATION, TNC.
+.
€,.'
F\
\,.s
F
.-5i.
t.iiil3;
r
/,5. How will noise and odor from building exhausts and mechanical systems be handled?
Wil[ they interfere with residential quality of adjacent residential units? Adequate protections
should be given to surround residential and commercial properties fiom these factors..
'
6. Building should conform to the design requirements of the Vail Village Master Plarl
which requires comrnercial uses to be located at the plaza level. Parking for the building should
be required to be located underground on the site.
The Homeowners Association requests that all substantive design standards and review re-
quirement be imposed upon this application as they have been imposed upon all other buildings
of similar size and scope that have undergone development within Vail Village in recent years.
The Homeowners Association requests the foregoing within the ethical context ofadvocating
equal treatment and standards for all property owners within the same zone district. Failure io
proi'ide for equal treatment and standards has the potential to seriously undermine the ethical in-
tegrity and intellectual authority of the public design review process within the Town of Vail.
oo
IIL E COPY
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213q479-2139
FAX 970479-2452
Octobcr 16,1995
Ir{s. Lynn Fritzlen
Fritzlen Pierce Briner
P.O. Box 57
VaiL CO 81658
Sincerelv.l*4'4'"
AndyKnfudt/en
Senior Pllofier
AIVjr.
c€: Tom Moorhead
Susan ConnellY
Depalnnent of Communiry D evelopmen.
Rs Thc Lodge at Vail Intcrnational Wing
DearLpn:
I would tike to conect your misundentanding expressed in your October 16, 1995 letter.
I . Tbe Town did not grant additional GRFA in 1983. Ncither the agreement, nor the staffmemo allocates
additional GRfA.2. Surveys have been submitrc( idemifring lot area, as well as topography. These surveys are dated
Fe5ruary 10, 1995. Please keep in mind that the staffdoes rely on information dating as far back as
possible. such as t 982. to establish pre-existing grade. The 1982 zurvey continues to be relevant, but
has been augmented with a current sun'ey.3. The title rc?ofi matches thc legal description. Please stop by my office to veriff this.4. GRFA parking height site coveragg e,aerior lighing and landscaping conform with zoning.
If you would like to stop by and review the drawings in greater detail, it may be helpful for your rurdersanding
of the project. I will be luppy to assist you in that effort, Please do not hesitate to call me at479'.2138.
Jo3./\
{sun"uoruo
It / IO' Jr
:
-
.-'._-.-
-7
|tlL
Fritzlen Pierce Briner
P.O. Box 57 o Vail &toratlo El65E . t03-t766342 . FeI'. t(84764m1
October 16,1995
AndyKnudscn
Senior Planner
Town of Yail Planning Dept.
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail Colorado 81557
re: Lodge at Vail
International Wing Addition
DearAldy,
'V
V'n#olr-t
On behalf of Luanne \l'ells, of One Vail Place I have the following connents.
As Srou are awale lrre have filed a formal protest with your departrnent arguing the validity of the
zoning of this proposed pxrject. Tom Moorehead has told mc th"t @
agreement that grants the adCitional GRF{Jhc agrcement does state that thc Project rcquircs
compliance with the DRB application ani review process.
A retierv ofthc Lodgc Propcrtics proposal is scheduled this Wednesday, October l8 at the regularly
scheduled DRts meeeting. We do not intend to debate rhe technical aspccts of the zoning at this
mccting butwe do bave the following:
l. To datc a complctc and cu:reut swv'ey has uot been submitted to the Town as is required by
Sestisn 18-54.040, Section C, division A of the Town of Vail 7-ontng Code. The 1982 suwey
submitted by the applicant does not reflect current building beight, location u toprgaPhy uor does
it rnee* the ottrer rcgtrirements of Section C. Most importantly the lot are'a and the legal description
are not stated on the srrvey. A partial survey, showiog miscellaneous grade elevations is not
appropriatc grvcn the scope of this projcct.Once this suley has been prepared the proposed "site
plan' as defined in Section C should be superimposed over thc suweyoCs inforrration.
The survey and site plan should be submitted fo'.:r rveels in advance of a scheduled review, as is
required for all applicatioos so thet all interested parties may have an adequate oppom:nity to revierv
the docuneots.
c,
/\
\\"
!35 FAI 970{FRITZIJN PTERCE ++' T'OV
Knudtsen
Pagc2
Octobcr 15, 1995 .l\L)
2. Thc titte r€port submified does not mstsh tbe legal dcscription on the application. Si"ce a recent \--l
$rr/ey has not been subnitted it is not possiblc to corrclate thesc two. Thc titlc rPort cxcepts out "/
sereral parcels that are not excepted orrt on the application or on what survey information is
avdlabb. It is my bclief rhat the property statcd on tbc applicatiog Parcels A.B *d q is owned by
a rnmber of eutfties including the Lodge Propenies and the application should bc zubmitted jointly
by tbe Lodge Prupertics, Lodgc Comncrcial and Rcsideotial Condorrinir:m Associations and
Lodge Tower .{ssociation Without a survcy rcflccting tbe boundaries of thesc cxccptcd parccls
or the Iodge Properties parccl it is not possiblc to determine if title report is accrxste and if tho
Lodge Propcrties alone is the qualilied applicanl
3. A.s of this date the staffhas not providcd a zoning ualysis to thc public confir:r,ring confonnonce
wirh allowed GRFA, pa*ing; treighC sitc corcrage, octerior lighting, land-ccaping. AIso I bsre not
seca an analysis by a Town of lail representative in rpgards to confornance rvith rhe Urban Dcsign
Guildelincs tbat are applicable for this disrict. We are rcgucsting that this information be oade
availabte to neigbboring property owrren at least four'*ccks in advancc ofa scheduled hearing ir
ordcr to bave adequate opportunity to review tbe documens.
Geoerally we are concemed ttrat the application is grossly inadcqrrate in comparison to tbe scde of
the pojict and is impact ou sunouading propcrtier It appears the applicant is more iuierested in
"csting tlrc dcvclop'm.ent rights tbrough the DRB process than going to €rpcnse of providing
aAequate infounation and dcsign for a tr'rly feasible project.
7E.1901
o
r4 0 0 l_._
llh nn o
Sincaely,
cc: L-uanne Wells
-rim L.amonl, East Villagc llomcownet's Association
Anita Sdtz
Jeck Reutzel Attorney
Frank Heeshin
f--tt Brown Attomey Attorney
T'om Moc,rehcad TOV AttorncY
L:r92OffrrANDY I 0l 6,\\?D
.B
b't)'
\
tt5:56 on.pt-ulvrsAvE TEt:eU,t9006 P, 002
fuvtulJ. Narirc' M.D.
Rhda S- Narins' MJ\
fhc Loilge at Vail#535
U4 East Gorc Cnck'Drive
VaiI, Colorado 81657
Octobcr2, 1995
Ms- Susan Connelly
Commuaity Developmcnt Direclor
Towu of Vail
75 South Frontagc Road
Vait, Colorado 81657
rc: Proposed Inlernational Wing at The Lodgc at VaiI
Dear Ms. Connelly:
We have ourned Coudominium 535 at the Lodge at Vail since 1985- Affcr having skied
at Vail since its qlenilg year and aftcr looking for many years, we purcbased this
condominium for irs locatiou and partiorlarly fot ils vicw of thc Gore raugc. Our family
bas eljoyed spending timc in Vait in both sumner and wiuter and feel tbat lhe cbarm of
Vail Village iJin irs scale and planned usc of space. As condominium owren; in thc Lodge
at Vait, wc have an igtcrcst in thc continued profitability of the Lodge, but feel that thcre
should be a desigu which does aot impact so lcgativcly on so miury peoplc'
The dcsign of thc proposed Iorcrnalional Wing at ibc Lodgc goes coulter to the .
plaaning we hivc seen in othet p"rts of the Villagc- lt is a large structure, whose beight
is oot oi scale with the surrounrling opeo space. Thc " Presidential Suile' to bc built oa
the roof of the structurc will affea the quality of life in Vail for us as wcll as markedly
decrease the monclary value of our property aDd that of rhe surrounding condoniaiums ia
the Lodge aud adjacent buildings. We havc beeo shown photograpbs of the views from our
windows which we fecl arc misleadilg. The architects havc drawn is tbc outlinc of the
proposed buildiog, but the line drawings thcy prescatcd do aot reflect thc uass of E fwo
story stnrcture which will be built oaly teu yards from our living area ald the faa that the
roof design calls for a large terrace wbich will be used fel strlgrtnining located only feet
from our window. An area in soch proximity to living space is i:lappropriate for such rse.
fiT,r) lr:or u A. rtAA
o
-2-
Wcwoulilbavcuoobjectiontoadcsignwhicheliminatesrhc,PrcsidentialSuite,aad
asy buitdi-g abovs rbe #"ril;;ii[T"*"g l,dg" boil{nq, G}ibinates thc roof area
as a potential cnlertaiDis;;; oo gff_cs adcgate'd-cafrce to bc-building to ue E"*t' we
would bc bappy ,o *oirlo*"'ai firdiqge +-* L"*-:.:ti :tisfy lbo cconomic
coosideratiors of rbe r.odgc 6il would prcscnrc tic-quatity of lifc thet so Erany of u's have
sougbl bY buYing h V-ail Villegc'
wc arc mesrbcrs orrle ti"st"vo Hooa omcrs A$ocidion rod arc endosin8, a oopy
of somc of rnc conccrnl;iJ ;y tb. Goci-erion witl which we egrcc' Ttcsc ooaccrs
should be addrcsscd ";#;; t"1"-* ntU" i""ti"g. We are surc tbrt a satisfiaory
solution ro this problcm-can L.-fo*a siai Ucra "n si n-y peopte who would lftc to
fiad a way 1o rse rlic ilfi;;;itr L*r
"rrr,"
.oootain ro bcne'fit ell couccrncd'
SincerclY'
Rhoda and David Nsrins
I l5:57 DRf,..'-D,{VlS AVE TE[:9J. )006
-3-
Corems ol 6c East Vall Eoncowners Assochdoa whlch should be consldered ln
the design review public hearlng
Tbc scalc of thc proposed strudure adjaccnt to the passageway between One Vail
Place and the Intemstional Wing as proposed should bc cquivalcnt to lhc passage ,
between Oae Vail Place and the Hill Building. The Internarional winges proposed
shonld stair sicp down lowards thc One Vail Place passageway aad Earon Plaza-
The width of the passageway between Oue Vail Placc and thc proposcd Internatio!8l
piro, should bc tlc samc width as thc passagcway between the Hill Building and rhe
Golden Peak House- (Aminimum of 25 feet).
The roof should be llipped wirh no dorners so that vicw bloclcagcs from sorrounding
rcsidcntial units and public wallsrays arc minimized-
Tbere should be no l€rrace space on the roofoftbe secoud level in orderlo maintain
privacy ofadjacenr residenrial units- The siz.e ofthc tcrra@ would allow Ior large social
Eltherings which are inagpropriate at this tevel of thc buikling.
IIow will the noisc aod odor from building cxhaust aud dcvators be bandled? Will
thcy inlcrfere wiih the rcsidcutial quality ofthe adjacent units- Clbis has been a
problem io the l-odgc ia tbc past).
Thc building should conform to tho 40Vol60% height requirement of the Vail Villagc
Design Guidelines-
The proposed roofincreases shadowing on pedestrian are.as aad public pla'as. A
Hipped roof wouldbc less shadowing.
Building should conform to thc dcsign rcquircmclts of Oc VaiI Village Master Plan,
which requires commetciat u.sas lo be localed at the plaza lcvel, .
Dasiga should allow for a qualitative or adequate pedestrian cirolatiou around thc
building-
Thc building dcsigu shoutd bc compatiblc with an ia-filliag of tbc parkiag areas
locatcd south of thc proposed boilding site-
The two slory third lloor'Presidential Suite. should be removed,
Parkilg for tbc buildiag should be reguired to be located undergrouad oo lhe site,
P. 00{
oo
October2, 1995
Design Review Board
Tonin Council
ONE VAIL PLACE
Via facc 479-2452
Ms. Susan Connelly
Community Elwelopment Dbestor
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Co.81657
Rd Internationalriling of Thelodge at Vail
DearIUs. Connelly,
We are own€rs of Condominium number 2 at One Vail Place, z4y'.Wall Street, and sperd
a Ereat ded oftime here in the Vail Vdley. We understand that change is necessary for
the growth and vitality of the Valley, btrt we are entreurely concerned with the impact of
the proposed orpansion of TheLodge.
Ilaving revi€wed the 14 concerns of the East Vail Homeowners Associatioq we share and
spport their oonserns and most certainly support the elimination of the third floor of the
proposed structure. It is also very important that the structure be pulled baclc at least 25
feet from One Vail Placeto allowfor adequate pede*rian circulation and views from
Founders Plaza"
Your efforts in reviewing projeqs and dlowing only the projects that are compatible with
tb neighborhood are appreciated.
Very trulyyours,
+t q e^.,r-'/
IL J. Smead I
W
Ann Becher-Smead
ANITA SALTZ
SIx MAR'IN BUTLER COURT
RYE, NEw YoRK tosao
Desicrn Review Board
Tosn-Council
vrA i;iTP?5'3i:- i"27 n u,
AND VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
h\t,-coMM, DEt/
f uy'uulslvl, uLll,
Ms. Susan ConnellY
Cornmunity Development Director
Town of VaiL75 South Frontage RoadVail, Colorado 8L657
RE: fnternational Vling at the Lodge at Vail
Dear Ms. Connelly:
My husband Jack, and I have been the owners ofCondominium 52'7-529 at The Lodge at VaiI. since 1986.During this time we have enjoyed the charms andfacilities of the town of Vail and Vail- mountain bothin winter and sumner. The view that we enjoy from ourcondorainium is very iurportant both to our guality ofIife and to the monetary val-ue of our unit.
Whereas we recognize that Lodge Properties has arequirement to e-xpand their fadititied and increasetJtgir profits, we strongly feel that the needs of allVai1 property owners and citizens must be considered.We therefore recommend that the third floor structurebe rernoved, and the building be Fuf'@-feerffo'n- Vail One p
Sredeetriarqirrcu1:attdn--Iid v i ews f rom Founders PI a z a .
As members of the East, Vail Horne Owners Association, wesha"re the fourteen concerns addressed by the EVHA andineluded with this mailing.
ThaTk you for all your efforts in helping to developProjects that are cornpatible with the surroundingneighborhood, and in their design exhibit a spirit ofgood neighborliness.
Sincerely,
d,e^e4;
Anita Saltz
Encl: Photos taken by Lodge properties of our presentview and overlay as dbne Ui r,oaq6 properties architectsshowing the bui-tding envel6pe oi the international wingas presently proposed. There are several units thatare altered more than ours.
EVIIA, list of iterus to consider.
LTZ 'l}L l\u.Jrl'{ >er \,|rrrl
Derign RevIerY Borrd
TowtrCourdl
$eptenber2$199{l
VIAFAXTO (n}r479i2{52
AI{DVIAREGGULI\RMAIL
Iv[r. SrnruConaclly
Coorsntty DevcloPanent Dlnctot
TowuofYrll
75 South Froatrge Roed
YelL Colqedo t1557
Rcr IntemetionrlWing rtThc Lodgc etVeil
DcrrM* C.olrcllY;
My lrurbend' Jrck ead I hrvc bccn thc oraco of Coadonbinn SE Si!9 tt
The r.odge rt vrll rtnce 19s5, DEint sie time wc hrvc eafoyed thc clrrns
ena flcnfOec of tte Town of Vell rnd Vrtl rnonnteln both i! wint'lr.nd
ssmnan Tlrc vlcw &et we cnfoy fron our condo'trtnisn ir vcry tnrportant
both to our qneltty of llfe end to the noneter5l vdue of our udt.
Iilhenr we le'cogdzc thrtlodge lto1lclllcr hrr rrequlrcracrrt to orpud
tbeirfrcilidcc end thercby tncrcerc lhdr prefitr' we atroryly ftel 6et t$e
nce& of ell Vrtl prolxrly orruerr end dtlzcor uust bc ontlde!"d. We
drccfon recouocnd 6rt thc thtd f,oor stflrtusc bc noove4 "td thc
bufldlng be pulled brck et tcert zi feect 6on vrll one Plece, co ee to ellor,v
fu edegartc pede*rlrlcirculedon endvlewr ft,om Founden Phzr"
Slncclefy.
Anitr Saltz k^ctlrokak^
lj
I 9,,tkc
ale
t 4.7 -e*t*,
W^fa.lzlP"J*^ )G-*^"'t'
Rry
Tffn Council
Mayor Peggy Osterfoss75 South Frontaqe RoadVaiI, Colorado Srgsz
Dear !ts; osterfoss,
TAV .r;}/'{l[t,0fy, l)ftl
Sincerely, .
,-- t-.-.ci'b
LLzLq. L e'-
Anita saltz '-J
O3
ANTTA SALTZ
Srx MaRtrN BU'LER CoURT
RYE, NEW YORX IC'S6O
July 10,1995
Uy husband Jack and I are tbe owners of acondorniniun at The Lodge at vail
We wish.to--go on record as being very strongly
oppo_?ed to_the expqns_ion of the International wingat The Lodge at Vail as presently proposed. I{6believe this proposal to -be ifle?ai i; that iti.grnores the density regulati.ons.
We also wish to state tbat r{€, as condominiuuroltners and menbers of the Lodge Condoninium OwnersAssociation, never voted for this proposal. As llerd-ere present at every meeting, I do not understandwhen or by whom this-vote wai-taken
Please add our names to the List of interestedparties who wish.to be informed of all .meetinqs ofthe Design Review Board, the Architectural RSviewB--ogrd, and -any. other ageircy. or fOV Defore whonthis issue is discussed.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
5.2.-0^1 ..'tonl
75 South Frontage Road
Vail. Colorado 81657
970-479-2 I 07/Fax 970-479- 2 I 5 7
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Office of the Town Auorney
MEMORANDUM
Vail Town Council
R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney
December 1, 1995
Proposed Development lor the International Wing
o
fcenie.u 4
tn?a+o hel-rx
s-/*- g3
@tn
On August 9, 1983 there das an agreement reached between Lodge Properties ("LPl") and the
Town of Vail (Town") (ExhibitA). The agreement resolved a dispute concerning what development
rights remained or how many additional dwelling units could be located on the property known as
the Lodge At Vail containing 2.090 acres. This agreement compromised and settled that dispute.
In summary it was agreed that the zoning ordinance for CC'l would not prohibit LPI from building
thirty-four new accommodation units and one dwelling unit. Prior to such construction however LPI
would be required to obtain permission from the appropriate boards and commissions of the Town
and required to obtain all necessary permits. LPI agreed to construct expanded conference and
meeting room lacilities at the time of building the expansion.
This agreement was discussed by Town Council on August 2, 1983 (Exhibit B). A transcript of that
discussion is attached which resulted in the passing of a unanimous motion authorizing the Town
Manager to execute the agreement (Exhibit C). There was no challenge raised by adjacent property
owners or any other objections raised to the agreement or the Town Council's authority to enter into
the agreement. The record reflects a good faith, negotiated compromise entered into to resolve a
valid dispute.
In May, '1983 an application was made for an exterior alteration in the name of LPl. This matter was
scheduled for consideration by the Planning and Environmental Commission on October 10, 1983.
The Community Development Department prepared a memorandum to the Planning and
Environmental Commission dated October 6, 1983 (Exhibit D).
On October 1Oth the Planning and Environmental Commission denied the application based upon
the closeness of the LPI property to One Vail Place (Exhibit E). This decision was appealed. On
October 24, 1983 this matter retumed to the Planning and Environmental Commission lor
consideration after changes in the proposal were presented to Town Council. The changes
included proposing fourteen feet between the International Wing and One Vail Place. The Planning
and Environmental Commission voted to approve the exterior alteration pursuant to the staff
recommendation (Exhibit F).
Q-'e.';.-t ,Yl fn',-.
Pc-r.^-al
DPS L*ks.
O-'*
@ A.L,
1-l' Nzu,r.-1*.
*-t'. f* lu
DP8
felaN'+l"'''.-i
{p rr"r"uorur*
^.v
This Planning and Environmental Commission approval remains effective. Subsequent to thls
approval, the zoning regulation tns been changed which caueee approval of an exterior aherar0on
to lapse and beoome void two yean bllouing trhe dab of approval. Tt*s povision was not in effect
at the timE of the PEC approval of thb s)(brior altondon and the nerv provlsbn has no effect upon
the approval.
Addltional information will be provlded as. requeebd. Thank you.
o
,t)' &rl
( "'l'lr o
( "tho
t2t t :; AOt
d bstwaerr thc
Cc|rpcrr:rt1on'' )
T<rwn,, ) .
o
'A(itat.:lrttt.:N f
Lodgo Propgr.t1(ts.I nc.
rnd the Town of Veil,
Gt Lcrg.d i rr lo tlil:r qt -, ^ .. z -O-,J_ s^y ot' ./., 3.
T , log35d l'.r t-ri.^^ ^,. & C(rl,oro,do Corl)(rr.rclon ,.r Co]'orado }lunt_cj
'r:rl Corporatl on
1. The cor r nEcrrnLs
Fotatlon 16 the Orvtror of ceata1n rell 6F.rh^_---'menrs l0cated thsreon rvhich are colrcettvcly urro*,""tt
property and lmlrrove-
("The Locts€")' Being rnor., parrrcurrrlv
";;"";;;;a
&6 rhe Lodse er ve11
and eontalnlng: 2.ogo ccr<ra- -ber'.4').,q oD the attached Exhrtrlt. -.,.i.
ot
2. Tbo Lodge ls loeated wlthj-nthe Town of V&l']'.
tlre Comnerclal Core I Zorre Dl'strict,
3. A d1.6,)uto trae a,rasen bcto rdhether rhe ,"ra",
_-]r;-__=:^
_"""rreeD
the corporatlon .and the To*,n as.zonl.ng ordlnq.nces o, tbe Town would &llow the EddltLon ot3{ nerv occ,onrmod!'tl'on units and one dwe]'llDg uDl'tas I'UnJ.ts,.) to tbe Lodge ( collectlvgly retorred to
4. The dieoute rar
gffi,ltrre Lodge
^o"to"t"
relatos to whethsr c'ert&ln cyy -.- --.r-rrtrneDt6 condomlnlums loc.te; ; *"_1.1" 11"rtlns unrt6
il: ;;"";:-:.:;"::::":::::,::,he,,.age: ;"";:;::1":: .:ij:T:c,
5. Trre partle. now wrsh to c6,nn:ah. __rerhaln between them.
compromlso snd 6ett:e arr.. crlf fercnce- whlcrr
IT NGREEUEI{TNoly THERE r.oRE, the partl"" ..r---::-:_l:r. .l.hc part,'os agree au"a arn"tee
aB tolrows:
'rdlnan.e tor comrne.^.,:;
-:__"': Ene dcnsity contror saction or r.r.,-.
bo unirs.
rnercrar corer J "n.rr-"1"-';r;";"1
sactlon or the zonl'trtall. rrcit prohlbl t the Lodtrc lrom.but lclj,:A2. Bet'orc the l.a,r-^ ^-r sh4rr o" ,"o",j."oT:":;;r_:;".-:: :::" aho c,
)rvn ancr obrarn per.misslon {ror' "r,o
"t''trrc appropl:::"::il^::":":r"I:"
re ToNn aDd turth
---'q
,rer obtaln alr ,u,"
olttopri:rtc boards and corrunlsslons .,,
@'loulcthoI,odgg"o,o".,"j]Tl1:::1r1'ceosarvper'ntt8.
ralr be fu'ther ,.enuJ-:; --:.'r"-rv..rcl
wlttr' tlro conotqulred to.constr
Drrlrles 1' r,r€ :::::':.';,:::;::ct cxponcr-o .o'i.",'o"l; :;r':::::;=,:.:,.t
:',"n expa'ns1on 1s corrJrf ete thc ,.,o.)aic
Bxhtbir A
,lr. r(t t I l! l.
whtsh (rn c IO()n
a/
J'ata.'r. J n st.zc:, Dro:.o ctr I c..J..r ar,
6;(Jrlur('.teet nor.c or lo.ss.
6hal l. ,cr[l t.n I n trt lb:ur !
l"""lli,::'::-:"1:":. "n:tl Dot r'n6rlrute anv regor actron ogelnsg r.r,,,
::::" .]- T ::':" ::'" ::^:::_ :
l:rruted lssucs'o,' r o'ti ;";;-; ."' ;:':::,;":"cnterlD[3 {n.to th16 Agrecmcnt does Dog walvc l.ts rlgbt,
""rl r(:guoEt a,n eddltlonh,:
rcqu,ost.
trro parile' hrve itgnca thl., Agreernent this
LODGD toonr"rros. INC.
7u
TIIE
by
TO!!N OF VArrJA Colorndo-il'rinf cf pal' Corporarlon
IN. I{TTNESS WIIBnEO!.
dav ol . ( +, :.983.
@
Edmu
IIINUTES
VAIL ?OWN COUNCIL MEETING
'FIIESDAY , AUGUST 2, Tg8330 P.il.
9l,Tug"oiy, Ausust 2, tsa3, a resutarnerd 1n the Vaj.l ltuaicipal Buildi;g.meeting of the VaiI Town Council was
Herman StauferPaul Johnston
Chuck Anderson*Bill t{i1to, ltayor pro-Ten
Rod Slifer, Mayor
Ron ToddGail lvahrlich*
None
Richard Caplan, Town llanager+l,arry Eskwith, Town At tornev
MEITIBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT :
OTHERS PRESE}TT:
,r ( arrived late )
The^first item on ,h:"*:"g: y?: th: first. readins of Ordinan ce #2?, Series of1983' an ordinance rnat<iig :.t iii"g.i ii'iua.in contror. over any stolen thlncof varue. Larrv Eskwith-stated if,ai ir,r" ordinance makes it iiregal toknowingly retain sto-r.en q1or.riy. ---r.,li-ionrr.
ton ,"o"-.-roiion'" .o "ppro.,.ff$,lf,:.:"1?l.;:: ff3 :;U,5:*l*t"i5 #il1:" iq;.'':,fi;,i1"..0 unanimously
The next i'tem on the agenda was the first.reading of ordinan ce #2g, series of1983, an ordinance arglraine. "h;p;;; io.oeo impoundnent of vehicles.Larrv Eskwith stated-.that, tt" *6ri" ;uv"ii"tiiro" nave ueen'Ji"i"r."n from thisurdtnance' which arlows. the Town to .nr."- into_ a "ont"""i--rIii-u.n o"g"rri""-lron who will salvage the cars "nJ-ti.-io"n wirr noi tir.t-'r.u"a to offer theiii:I:id:'3li'l3i;,,13l'1il"';:il:i ;;i;"i"':t"" to "pp"ouu"5iiin.n". *ie-;iothe ordinanc" r."-Jii"i";-;.;ii;;il rn"F,rlilt"t passed unanimoustv and
The next item of the agenda was the first reading of ordinan ce €2g, series of1983, an ordinance repeal.ing """ii"n=-ii.26.060 icj-e-ird..ii]io.ooo <cl s,rarrns to condominium. conversion p.oj""I.. ina.puiaunii; ;;;;;r"g utirlties.' 'rry Eskwi'th stated this ordinan""-"iirir"t"s the need for indr.viduarmeter'ng when units are^converteo i.nto -conaomin iumsl - -ion"ioii'r"o. a motionto approve ordinance rzg ana ctriir. -iii"i;lin
seconded rhe motion. Themotion passed unanirnously ."a -lr,J'
"iiil.iJ" *." ordered published in futl.There was no citizen participation.
The next iten on the aggnda. vras-.. cont i nued gl:":::rg" of.proposed speed dipon wesr Gore creek o"ty::
-Ar1 .weis
-p"..J"a.a-,the
council wirh additionalslgnatures supporti'nE. the speed aips. niien Knox stated she was in favoror the bumps, but .n;: :!.I-.n"uiO-[. ,i.i!a clearly. r,ar.ry.Licnrlter alsoi:iiiill!.:li,:*.';;:il:: ;ru;i"!i$5,,,:l'":",'v'in p."""i,!i-,o,r,ea drainase probrem,-Jam.e. tr,.-'n.iJ"-.iiii,"Xi,"iiliS ,;:;:"::,lf.oio,"n,".r.rabirity and would ui g!99n1i"ii-i",iiliiii. After discussion Bitl:lrr: Tldu a motion to j.nstatl ttrree speJj-l:: t9dd amended the-motion i" i""i.ri";;;9il:.on.lfest Gore creek Drlve.
ff:",":t::l l*::; "l;;lj:":li:';;-;::;,;3; i;:";.:l:;:" ;";:f.o;n ;L:;;:"0
Exhlblt B
$ill'r"il"ou*.r"
TUTSDAY, AUGUST7:30 P.ll.
MEETINC
2, L983
...e next item on the agenda was the aDDeal of Vall Associates Sno$making projec.Petrer patren presented tne proposat-ii-trr" councir. i"-=iit"o this is anapprication for a conditionar uie permit which had r."n:-""ii!i up b], thecouncit due to concerns over minimum "i.""r_f low. i;;;"-;;;';.en discussj.onswith va11 Associates, the rorest se""ice-"no ahe pr;;;i;s"6i"i,. TheForest Service and piannlng
"t"it-"triiitics shoqred that minimum srreem flowwould be protected. The planning o"p".ir"nt recommended "pp"ou"r with theseconditions. A) Meter cold pe.tl r,i6n.i..o ,oa -H.*-ii"iiiii. " st Review thedata at the end of l year to assure vl-is,noi-"x-d"!aiii^ii'i"t., u"" causingthe stre: n f10w to go be10nr miniurum. iit." much discussion Bon Todd madea motion for approval of a tempora.y "onarcion"r ,r".-p"iiii" oi v"ir Associatesrnowmaking puurp house_fgT lh: Dhase- I po"tion of the ;;;k. - Tiis approvarshourd be for a l vear period at ttr" eio-or "nr"n-tir"-*.'*:.ii'review thefacts and with the st:.pulatlon va
-ii"iiir' meters. ?he snowmaking shourd bemonitored c1ose, and with the .oraiiior"i ctirectlon that theconnunrcation that is currently sotng o;-tetween the Tov and va and theI'orest service continue so thai *e "in-n.u" some sort of ongoing idea whatlmpact snowmakins i.s occurring on the creet.. s."ona.i ;; ;ili;i'Anderson.Bob parker srated that he "ouia-noi"iii""*rtt this motion as stated. vAis investing too much-money to rlsk haviag the permit rernoved. for whatever' .ason i.n one year. rt was agreed tt"t-iir"v.nirwritr ;;i;-;.; together'th vail Associ.at es
-
( Bob parier j -t"-'airii a document which reflects RonTodd's motion' Ron T;dd t.=t.i.6 ;i.;;ii"n to. read: Appoval of a conditlonaruse permit for Vail f:g"i1t9: .no*."Xing-plmp house "onitition"r upon anannuar revi.ew as rerates^to minimum "i;;;r- tri* tor -coi.-c".Ji. -a" be reviewedby Town of vail, Forest servi cel" iir i -a!Ji"i.t..
and the water nistrict.That vA w'11 instalt a net€r to'moni.tor-iiows and aga'n on itre conoition thatthere be ongoing dialogue^bet"."n ir"-i*a', Forest service, vail Associatesand the water District ' ctrucr< eaerlJt -Jilono"o the motion. Tbe tnotionwas passed unanimously.
The next item oD ,h" .:i:o,lr,:ls approval of an agreement relating to theLodse at vail air ric!!:: _r,arry ir:k;i;; iresented tne matiei-io the council.A motion wa.s made bv B1r1 rirto'ror-irr;-tfol uanager-io-'-!i.""t
" this agreement.second bv Ron rodd. A vote was i.r.i"I"i"trr. .oiioo ;;.;;;";;;rrmousry.
The next item was aDDrovar of vacation of dralnage easement of Lot 16, Grenlyonsubdivision' pet tli'_pa.iie; - c;;;-;;;""!iort. to the council and expressedhis approval' This is_just a-torrnarity-iJ auanaon-this drainage easement,Bilr ltilto made a motion to approve irr! uic"tion of -drainage .i.emeot of Lot16' clenrvon sibdivision.-- s-"i""iia "i,; ;;;.., staufer. chuck And€rsonstained from giving his vote due to tn"-t..t he bad a conflict af lnterest.Morl'on approved.
ll:$";:-l"yi"3:::,fo$l;r}';"tllll:ri:1":.ln: councir whether the-rolrowlnstournameni. -ir,.^6oun"ir aereed-;i;;i;;":l; ;:..1: Jerry Ford corr
There was no Town Attorney Repolt,
As there was no further business the meetlng n,as adjourned at 9:OO p.M.
5 )-62 Tc ,^f
The next item is approval of an agreement relating to the Lodge atVail air rights. Mr. Eskwith.
Exhiblt C
agreement, pursuant. to the agreenent does not waive its right tocontest those additional units, nor does the Lodge waive its rightto come in at a future date to ask for t,hose units. r, ve b6enassured informal,fy by. representatives of the Lodge that they haveno intention of building those units but r think its importairt fo,the Town council to know that they are not precluded from d.oi-ngthat by this agreement. r,d be glad to answer any guestions froithe Council or from the menbers of the audience.
Larry is this a unique situation as far as this subdivision by airrlghts within our conmunity?
Larry:. The exact situation at the Lodge rnn to the best of myknowledge and its based on research bec-ause r went over to LandTi-tle and started pulling condomini.um declarations rike crazy, ih;only condominium association that r know of that's positioii";--;sorid block parcel,over a rodge thatrs under separatebwnership 6utconnected to that Lodge is the Lodge at Vai1, blfore zoning, bifore
-z_oninqr.tha!'_s right that occurred befo.e "offi'thatthiswho1etheorynecessiffisitatedareview
on my part of our density control section because r think when thecolorado statute relating to air rights, and that's what theirtheory, the Lodge's theory is based on, a statute in the state ofcolorado- rt state that air can be conveyed in parcers, that aparcel_of air rights is entitled to alJ. the same considerations asany other parcel of real estate. when you read that statute inconjunction with our ordinance it raise-s some not. so palatablepossibilities that r think need to be addressed and rm in theprocess of addressing that now and hope to have an amendedordinance for your consideration at your next meeting, noperurly-oithe_ meeting thereafter. As soon as possible because r think it hasto be considered.
Any questions from the Council?
Any guestions from the floor, from Jay?
(could not hear short response)
rf there are no discussion or any comments r thi_nk all it wourdtake is a motion authorizing tha Town Manager to execute thisagreement, if there are no changes or other qirestions.
Motlon by Bill Wilto, second by Ron ?
Any further discussion?
Aye.
opposed?
Unani-mous.
If not, all j_n favor vote saying aye.
(,
MEI,IORANDUIq
Planning and Enyironmenta'l Conmission
Conmunity Development Department
Prllig hearing and consideration of a reguest for an exterior alteration andmodification for the Lodge at Vail containing lodge rooms, retaii,pi.., ionfe..n..space and a deluxe dwelling suite. The prop6sal includes-modifications'tJ-ttrJ""!gdg" ?t.lql adjacent to Founders' plazi aha to tne pari.ing tot-on itii *isi"-side and additiona'!. storage space-on the parking tot ievei on the north sideof the Lodge south building. 'Applicants:' Lodg; at vait-ana ttrJ-loagi sJrir,
REQUEST: Condominium Association t
The request is to add 34 new luxury accommodation units and one luxury dwellino:lll :91!tin]ns qpproximaterv 30,0b0 ssuare feet arons wiirr new pil;;r;;;i""'commerctat space containing approximately 3,600 square feet, additional conferencespace, and a ski storage room'to the Lodle it vali. In addition, new stoiiqe'-"space for the condominjums is being prop6sed for the L;dg,-i6rin'diiioi;;:-"'
Other modifications. are a new gate house on the west, reversing the auto circu-l:ti9! into the parki.ng lot, aid a new entry court. 0ver on tie mountajn-srJe,the parkjng lot would be expanded and new siairs added for skiers io i.t t6'--'the ski lift chairs._Ih. eist plaza-wou'ld be redesigned to compiereni-Founae",s
l]li.: -At the Lodge Plaza there would be a temporary canvas pavittion removiuteourlng the winter. The new Internationa'l wing would contain idoitional conference
:pace' lodge rooms, one luxury dweiling unit ind commercial space on irre-piaii-I evel .
BACKGROUNO
0n.July.25, 1983, the two.restaurant expansions were approved by the planning
and Environmental cormission. Approved'were a 730 squhie foot expansion tothe salt Lick restaurant to be rbhamed the tiitdftower and a sis-i5ol-"ii,.nitonto the Arlberg restaurant to be renamed the cipriani restalrant.
CONFORMANCE b,ITH PURPOSE OF COI4MERCIAL CORE I DISTRICT
The commercial core I district is intended to provide sites and to maintainthe unique character_of the vail village conmercial area, with iti mixture'orlodges and commercial establ ishments in a preaominuniry-i"J.strian environment.The cormercial core I district is intended'to-ensure ag"qrii. rigfitl ii;.]";il;'space' and other amenities appropriate to the permitted dypes of-builoinis anauses. The district regulatiohs in accordance w'ittr the vaii-vtiiui.'u.ili-o!i'is,,
october 6, rs83 _u*n, plpfJ s3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUsJECT:
(
\
Exhibit D
Page 2 l0/6/93
VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN
Vehic'le Penetration:
There wil I be no change by this proposal
Streetscape Framework :
As noted in the application, there is noa pubrrc street. The proposed shops andin Vail Village.
I Vail
and Design considerations prescribe site deve'lopment standards that are intendedt0 ensure the maintenance and preservation oi ifiJ tigh;i;;-;iustered arrEngementsof buildings fronting on.pedestrianways and.puulic gilenil.ji, uno to ensurecontinuation of the buirding scare ani-arcrriieiturai ;;;i;{i., that distinsuishthe village.
The community Development Department considers.that the proposal is in conformancewith the purpose of the zone'district.-"ltre Lodge at Vaii ii the anchor forVail vitlase and needs.to be upeiadeJ to insul;'!li.eriiiti_r, vair Vii.raseand the conmunitv. lilithout a lirong_hJirt, the Village wi.lI suffer. Thecommunity 0everoiment oepgitmeni i.Eri-ii'.t.the long and short tenn successof Vail villase is partia)ly based-Jn-aluariit iffi";; i;;i.
direct,frontage by tne proposai onptaza d0 add t0 the pedestrian experience
#22 Pocket park' screen fence -to close off alleyway (gate required) and continue;:fii::'iff;.t!"!lil 3;ifrilil benches, pianters; snow storise-in winter. -.--
The proposa'l contains an improved,area of landscgping and walk between theffl?;,lT:::,*, lf ,
?l I,l,ll.,$:4. ;t,i.i i.,-"irosine orr the i,"i_i, not
#14 Vil'lage plaza. Feature area paving treatment, central focal point visiblefrom Gore creek Orive. -Major't.ria'"rJ-ipi'iriing-ii n.n.-iri [ii., .o"n".,1' with eversreen screen olaniing to oeiini,-"est .ige. 'wiir'ii.Jlr
stairs,! with mid-rever jos raniing, d.;; ;;iil'"lI. to Lazier Arcade shops.
This proposa]-19tual]I."tPul9t..the Founders' Plaza area and makes this intoan exciting space within Vail Village. -- -
pedestrianization:
iLliYllfliffii::T;::lllJn8t'rf,: ;ffirl::,piaza revel, the potentiar ror pedes-
Street Enclosurer O
The proposed International wingthe width of the enclosed spaci
space it faces.
The proposal.comp'lies with the intent of therssues wtil be more specifically discussed at
owould have generally two heights, one fourth1! ?.aces and one sixth the width of the enclosed
Design Considerations. Detailed desionthe Design Review Board neeting.
(
L
Street Edqe:
The irregular facades proposed for the shops and restaurants meet this elementof the design consideritibns.
views: There are no designated view corridors in the area of the proposal
service and Deliver-v: This wi'il not change by the new addition proposed.
Architectural and Landscape Considerations:
The proposed heiqht of the new International wing_from the new plaza ranges from24 feet to 33 fe6t. At_the p"a.Jiiian-piiii iei,Er ih;;;;d;.t meets the intentof the height section.of-the Design coniiderations. rrbm itre south side, the heightwould be 35 feet and 43 reet. -itrE conmuniiy-oiutiopr.ni"oefirtment feets that theheights. Frgposed meet the intent of the qesign ggniiae"iti6[i and provide for themix in building heishts as perceiveo in viii'Viii;;e:-
There would be no sun/shade impact on Town of vail public space (the Founders,plaza)as shown on the sun,/shade study.
One concern of the staff is the amount of space between One Vail place and the Inrer-national wing on the third floor. The stafi considers that the top floor be shiftedfive or six feet to the west to open ite space between buiidings.
For.the. proposed storage at the Lodge South, the Conmunity Devetopment Departmentfeels that there are no negative .irpicii.
Parki ng:
At the time of a building permit, the applicable parking fees for each type of usewill be required.
Fire Department Considerations :
A new fire hydrant wiilwing because of the new
be necessary along the south sideresidential and commercial space.
near the new International
Sun/Shade Consideratjons:
al=o-
RECOMMENDATION: '
l-\ The Cormunity-Oevelopment 0epartment reconmends approval of the Lodge atr/ailreguest for 34 new lodge rcoqlr a luxury dnelling unit, new conrnercial space
and new storage.sPagg. ln..addition, we consider the site improvement veiy positivefor the Lodge at-Vail and Vail Village. As noted previoully'in the memorinium,the Lodge at Vai'l is the anchor for Vail Village. The Cormlnity Development
Department feels the upgrading and expansion ii posltive for Vail'Villale
and the conmunity.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMEI{TAL COIIil'IISSOI{ ACTION OII OCToBER IO, 1983
Dgnovan moved and viele seconde! tg deny the application with the exceptionof the Lodge south proposal with the main reason being the closeness oi tne
Lodge property to One Vail Place. The vote to deny was 5-0.
(
r. .' PEc _2_ 10/.'o;
He added that he tra!_lola.the appricant that the board wourd act on the proposartodav, and had recommended oiniii "iir,'il,. suggestion that the applicant aoorvagain in November.
lack of information. the vote was 5_0 rn tavor of denial .
3.uest for an terior alteration Vi'l I a nter 0ro ect at t2
a n0nt east e to rev se
nstruct a
to const ct addit ons to th reta i 5!9PS 'pl icant: Fret-fi_tEG ect.
st for a conditional rmit in rgial Core II in order to constoncert HalI Plaza.
seconded
uest for an xterioL alteration for the Le note
conterence space and a de] uxe sui te.
containin retai I
corcoran read a 'letter from.the applicant gtlin.g to tab.le this item until l0l24.
Vote was 5-0.
4.
3.
west soft
Assoc i ationl
additionat lToFE e space on street leve on the rtn sideeth buildlnq.p I I cant:ge at Va o ut
DickRyanreviewedthememo.JayPeterson,,.}ffil-applicant,showed
model and asked if the.pEC.ouiiuoi.-iirrt on just the storage for the LodqeAlan Tafoya, representing nuoii-pirin."rr,ipr, the architect, showed where thein the parkino area of t-ooge-souii';;;i; go. He added that'there wourd be r6which wou'ld be minimizea "iir-aiJi:t"iiiing into.the garage. The garage wourd
fi :l.il.'oil"';il;';::0,:3';d" l-
a
South.
storage
I ockers,
be
stora
Jay then discussed the model and its different aspects: the new entry and rearrangedparkins lot, ski tt::ig..:lg :;it;ii.-tareteria,-Iil;h. iew rnternational suite.viele asked what would happen to itre 2 spruce trees next io the entrance when theparking lot was rearranged,'ina-F.i.rsin respondeo ilrai irrey would attempt to movethe trees to another toiition.'- l;;;;;;^*., expressed about the croseness of theInternationar wino to o;a v;ii pi;;;. "'peterJoh.;;i;.tiii'one Vair,prace overhunsits propertv rinel .He.added th;i-fi; ar:chitecis-nia il,"iii."..9.{noyjns the rop storyof the rnternational wins !J ir,i-rJli,'and weiJ-diii.iilii"o with the appearance.viere asked if there wert technicai-irooremi-*itr,'il;-;;;iiins, ,o crose tosether,and Peterson said ttrat ttrey-wo'iiii-rrui!"to use speciar glass
Trout said that he had difficulty witn having o_nly two feet.between the buildings.He sussested takino :p":e. r.or i'rr.e"oiiier..end-of_tfie uring-ina dir"-g,""rr,iiJ'uriraing.He approved the rist'gr !F qropbsii.'''Martha rriizieni i"resident of One vail placestated that everyone^who tiveb ih-cci'*.r.on..rned about narrovr alleyways and allot tnerr problems' Donovan stated itrai'sne fe]t that the bui'lding had blen designed
Exhibit E
PEc -3- O ,zes
I
8lt::'l?il;:,tli,il0:looiilf'rfl'ftiil1.:h.11-T!.eveyone rert that the Urban Desisn
whether o" noi ii w6"iea.-'5i.-liaii iiiilrilirffll8ooiilf"if.,lih;l!,uoep-iii-'iiilwas drawing peop'le to a dead end. Donovan r_ef['ir,ii-ii"ii. ru-.r the praza wourdbe a lively place' but not in-winter." she.was conie"neo-ibout the heights and confusedabout how thev were fisureo- i;e|J"iin saio irrai-on-iii.'pi... side, 50i of the roofswere below 35 feet, in-the uact, ttri-roor wai-'id il.i"ittiir," highest point. He fertthat if the guiderines were ipiiiiii,'itrey rourc need a varrance.
llore discussion followed concerning the-helght. of-the east end of the International!ing' Donovan pointed out that thE p"oposai-ir,irri"i.il-iitt tt. whole comp.tex, not5ust with 5 rooms (regarding itre-iioieitss_or-1rI'6"iil;"; to
'ne
vail place).Piper liked the new entrv, 5ri ieit-i[it iro*""i-ii-iri!'iiicare or the parrcini rotwould not be visible wtrei'ciri *""i iiiieo tfi;;. ".ri"igillc.with
Donovan'coicerning;li ;lT:':':"lLll.,?uitaing-to-bn.'i.ii-pi;;;;'.#-;;i!l"a *r,, the roof sarden
Ron Grant' representing l{aTgn pratner, architect, stated that he and his coworkershad worked with a rareE moder ano-rrai'iri:i.ili-i;p';i;; Jr tn" new wins in severaldifferent places' but-thii.itiev wei:I-cissat'isrieo fuir'-iiw-but the rocation shown.Piper said that he wourd rii.-io"I.! ;il;-;;i;;r;;:" iJ{."ron showed erevationswith the hish r:oof six feei-weit.--vrli" riiio-ir,i"iltr;;;, but fert that it wasunfortunate that the_ranoscaping-weri-io ui i;.is.q-;'i'iiili tn" cars had becomemore visible. He agreed witir o6novan regardils iJit.niii-Jr tn" praza, and fertthat he courd not e6 aiont.iu,-i-i.J io;l;it;rrr;i:-"i#.;"an asreed with the concernsiloif;ltii;rexcept that he-did not have anv prouiir-*iu,-iii feelins of the oeio enu
Patten pointed out.that One vail Place had built to and over, their property linewith an asreement with the l"ai".' it;il. rritiien iiiJ"u,fr-*nen_the schJeuir'luirdingilll iiiJl;.:i;"f;:*:l';'ffi.;i:l.Tiili'. side.- The eo"l-c"i"i eill.-iliiiffi*,,
-tar<-an moved and V
uth proposa
gq _!!'t I Ptace.
apol i h the tion of
Jim iilorgan arrived.
Jim sayre showed plans and.elevations and explained that the staff recomnended approvalbecause there wouid ue no oJtri;;il;i Irr..t'on tr," iJjJiiiis properties, therewas a phvsical hardshiF, and ttii"f *e"Ilother "a"iiniJ!-!"int"a for the construction:1,ffi:l:",ll,5.li,l.ll;,,nfr;;3,;n.**j;:lt,In$i:.i'ii,.t to-pri.i fi;";;.s.
Donovan felt
should be an
the commercial space request
accessory to the lodging.
a
was excessive, that the comnercial space
(
(
Morgan asked Eskwith whether or not he.felt.the applicant was asking for athangein the substance, and. Eskwith.repried-that rre wai-qu"iiiJ"ing the same thinq. He;j:r.o that the Town had the inhlreni po*er to cha;sJ-ii; iijd il il-r#'i|iinu..a
Patten stated that this was more of a rezoning with the reshaping of the sDD, andthat it would be a recorrnendation to the Town-corr.ii -r,"-rould have to pass anordinance' Morqan liked the-maii.,-uri"iorrJ-tn"-itiidniiui."p""ronal.ly offensive.Piper felt that this,was a major ir,ing",i9.!r,. origi;;i-i;D because of the additionof the Amoco site and.the reqiest-tJr"ioaitionai cf,iA: i!-t"lt that there wasa str'ng impact on vai'l Road.' He felt the view corrlaor'ias a personal opinion,'and a'lso felt that on-approaching thi 4-way one observed the immediate area or ,j!:.ul:l 1ea1-br. He feil tnat ine-t.inascaped corner *ii dooa, and had no probremwltn-the parking sPaces proposed, ana wintiJ-ti-li.'tfr!'.Silitionat uses remainas ls.
Ryan stated that the staff did their best to listen to the old tapes and to get iinformation from them. He feit that ti"". ".." severar posir,rve aspects of theproposal' but was basicallv concernea rriffr il,e-rigniiua.i--irt" staff felt thatthe Amoco site should oe rizoneo-tJ-pR"ana ilrere inouiJ-u" in amendment to thesDD' specificatv ror prrasJi-iv-a-v,'*rit ,i"y ;";;-il; jisi ,ino" changes.The staff did noi r::gT:lg chan;in;.i; permiited us"i-ff,"-ionditionar uses .risted,they did recorrnend deleting the ieciion toncerning aiitini"-o"tween bui.tdings,as this had been eriminatei trom-iii'oiir"" sDD's,-dii noi-i".o*.nd item D,-usingaverage height, did not. recornnend item-8, cf,ingi,ig-ih""EifR.unO allowing additionaltt0or area for corrnercih.l type ,r.,-urt-n.eded-to-kno" ,rri.r, rules would apply.
Ryan said the staff approved the amount of parking.
Piper suggested there-P"..1 Yo!. on the proposal with the exception of the allowanceof changing conditiona'l uses to p.rriit5o ,s.r.
Morgan moved and Donovan seconded to deny the uest based on the ma nitude andsca te.vote was 4 in avor 0 entat -ns nta erce
I lT gn.gler.ior alteration for Lodge at Vail to add a
mod at i ons roposa
nq lo west s
aza" adjacent the Foundeiir plaza
3];:o*{;'":li:;0.:nF:.rl:ll,',li.!:dse-_at-vair'!gnl lo the Town councf I they were;:1":.1" [jii?,, j", 1'!":l ;Li::ii-ir;i:i,
_ {i:';"i:rff l3ll if,Il'il.'li'or1?iitlli'ffi\'fi:;:l'3,1o"I'::.1"::::' ir ili::l;ii:iit li;i; iij"o'll"i"il"'i::J:'i;#'il.:"J.;ff: ill,:' ;;d-;;;.-:ti ii;F";i;i;;.:;"fl.il:"HT,YiJl',il"ii'uf{,i#"liT:,'lTJjl';"i;,r: ;1,::f::ii.ii- ::iiiiF T:H:l :il j;l::;,' LJi;lffl,;:"x:',l"'li3;,;:::nij",llF;.#;:jl'iil;i;ifficonded
o
lc'74't
rkhibtr F
I
I
1t"t'i.c n ,'.',\
aDstainino.
r staff
t\t\
.lr.re^
L2/05/gS 17 | 0d Osor 832o 1000
ttrc LAIV OtFl'Jl !r ol'
oa.avEi
I t 2l'
LTNCOLN *fee,Zf
n urlS i!oo
oENVSi coioiaoo
aoz 6a
Tr,! 301 l1: lrD('
FAX )o:r aa3 oa l I
r. a:i lox alJT
va I L €ol !rt?^oo
itara
TIL JOt {tl l9ao
Dcccnrber 5, 1995
Vh Faesimile 970.479.U52
Mr, Ady Knudtsen
Coomunify DcveloPment
Town of Vail
75 Suutlt Frtrot4go Road Wesr
Vail, Colorado 81657
You6 vcry Euly,
RICHARD P. ROSBN, P.C.
. t a-&L .,1t"b[ r{ov
4''
bt*n
1002
IntVntfl 1..Il^tt <r | ./
Y"ou,')AS)
rT\''
Re:AppealofDRBDecislon-lotemedonalWiDg,ThcLodgeatVatl
Deu Andy:
This office rcpresents Dr. and Mn. Ja.nrcs H. Cavanaugh, the owncrs of Unit 533'
Thc Lodgc tt Vail.
This lcncr sbatl scws as fsrrual uol,ic? of suPPort of the appcrl of thc DRB lpproval
of de applicarion relative to the Inlcrnationat wing, The Lodge at Vail, It is hereby
rcque$d of the Town Counsil tbr the Town sf vail' tlbel &cy wenun t[c. lppruval
*i-i*Oit U"rk to DRB for coutirued hcarings oo the design elemeats of the
.ppliruior.
'
Thc approval, as decided b1 th9 pRB'^fails to follow tbe applicable
o-.iig" g"iaorint pinti4ea by tbe Municip4 Cg99 for. the Town of Vail' In
p.*f,ufl, the proposed structrlre is not compdible witb the cuneut lodge
'improvomelts,-urost lotably the scale, mts$, ald site phning'
For pulpusc! uf rlc record bsforc Towa Council. it is oy understonding-tbet the
dili;r,tt;r*idcrs tbe rlesign etements of the pro-posed luternuiopal wing. Tbe
d:"ir-ination of the legality oitl* tg8f AgrccmcDt by and bElwccu tlre Town qf vail
-O l-oOgt Propcrties,
-lnc.,
OatcO Augrst 6, 1983, is not at issue nor bcforc thc Town
Council for todght's hcaring.
Should you brve aly qucsdons, please call.
/hs
0f couNsEL, cLtoq, B.Tz, tlEEo' Loo'' r\'lcl6f |t n ti'TvEFMAN' P t'
DEUTSCHOLUNE
DEUTscH, Srur,are& Rnurzrr. P'c'
ATrml.a;ts.raD Go|jEq[tLC|:t ATLatl'
rr.sEA.|T xtNVU'aAt EFUE
SI'Ills
DAtvr cnr 6l'r.?10 @t
TclttaotI (!!) rt''l9u
tIEr J(OB)r.aror
May2,1995
RE: Proposcd Expansion ofthe Lodge at Vail
DcarIUr- I(nudseu
Thank you for advising me oftrc pcnding Dcsigl Rwiew Bord considcration of
the Lodgo a vait's propcedlpanston- I hrvc had the to spcak rvith lvls'
fynu f'ritzlen -S"tdid t t *iio.tiog involverrcrrt rx'ith &is matirr on behdf ofNfs'
Luann Wclls. I have blen advised tnat Us. Wclls coutinu* to be consEf,ued about fbis
matter sad hec asked us to re,lnain involved'
whca wc last spoke about firis nrattcf, in vl8lch of 1994, we raised scvcral
tbrcshold issucs to be iesolved prior to trc applicant moving forward' Thase issucs were
f istcd in a letter to Tom Moorchead, datcd March 2, Lg94 and attached hereto for your
corrvcnicnce- In fari, we had earlier raised our legl and planning issues to you in a letter
datcd Deoember 13, 1993 also attached for yor:r review. If this matter is now bei4g
considcred at the May 3, 1995 DRB rnccting arc wc lhen to assrsre that thc issues raiscd
havc been addrcssed? Iiso, please advisc mc as to tbc t'csolution so that I may bc better
ablc to advise my ctrient ofher optiorrs. If tbc issucs prescrrtcd in our erlicr ureetings
have not yet been resolve4 I rc,rrclv our conssnr ahut utilizing the DRB's timc for a
proposal ihat is not bc pcrmittcd under tte prescnt zone catcgory. I tbink it important to
""rc tnut during the last 13 mont'hs, tbe applicant has not attempted to contact us
regarding rcsohrtion of 6csc issues.
Thc lapse of timc benreen discussing this proposal docs not rcnder our coBcer$i
irrclerrarrt It is clear that ifthe basis in reAich the Lodge at Vail prcsegts its request is
unlawfu! tben thc proposal must fF;|. I believc wc are entittcd to answers regarding ihe
central legal issues surronding this proposal md a spccific time line for addressing
rmrcsolved issues. Wc wilt noi ailor tc applicant to piececreal its oray tlrrougb the Vail
appr,oval pFocess without baving our conecrns addrcsscd. We therefore respectfirlly
rdo"st thst the DRB continue this matter to thc noC hearing darc with direction to the
apftioot to meet with oursclves and trre Town to discuss thc major issucs.
MAY.'-o)' 9S'ITUE) l4: 2l TEL:3030131 P.002
F^rtsrE Da'llsn
toEtta st*rrxE
,ACAS. ggtEd.
Mr. AndyKnudsen
Vail Comrnrnity Dwdopment Director
?5 South Frontage Road
VaiL CO 8r5s7
VTA TELEFAX
T
,ffi
05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.002
MAY.'-02' 95 (TUE) l4:22 DEUTScH,oLHNE TEr: i03o13r P.003
DErrrscH, Spu.r^eNe & R-Eural, r-c.
Mr. Andy I(nudsen
May 2, 1995
PageTwo
Because of aa earlier cornmitmeot, f an unavailabls to 8tt€u'l the DRB mccting
tomorrow. Ly111 Fritzlcn wifl bG in attcndance and will advise thc DRB of orx unresolved
conccrns. I wotrld "pp*&urc
you mnking &is lettcr and its attachEx@ts part ofth€ DRB
record- Thanks again- for b'ringing thc meeting to Ey att€ntion'
P-C.
JER/ji
oncl.
cc: Luanu Wells
I.ynnFritzlco
I05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.003
lHv..-o)' es{TUE} r4:22 DEUTscH,oLLANE
It{arch2" l99a
TomMooseheadEsq.
Vail TowuAttorncY
75 SorlhFrontageRoad
vail CO 81657
Rc: Lodgp at Vail Proposed E>rpansion
DearTom:
Tbis memo bas bcco prepared to addtcss the oeotral lcgal issr:es srrrrormding thc Lodge at
vait proposed cxpansion. Ttrerc arc sevcrat planning telaied issues that will be better
aaaressed tbrough &c Toqm's review process should t}c nccd arise. This mcmo
addrcsscs thc follorring spccific questions:
A Docs the cullent ploposal submitted by thc Lotlge at vail violatc thc
dlowablc dcnsity ofComnercial Corc I?
B. Did thc l9E3 Agreement between the Lodgc st vail and the Town of vail
lawfully waive the density rcquircrncnt ofthc subjectproperty?
C. Has dre Lodge at Vail vestcd its right to build ttrc additional tmits
in accordancc with its 1983 nrbmission?
1. Tloes the curJtent proDostl srhtlnlttc{ by tfre Irdge st \/,eil violete the
allowablrdcnsltlr Qf Commercial Core I?
Therc is some confirsion as to the area contained in the Lodge at Vail's proposcd
e:pansion. Nonetheless, we bclicrrc drat no matter how tre applicant defines fte "Lot",
tlri dcnsity tirnitaition of the Commcrcial Corc I ("CCI") district has been exceeded-
Thcre are 90 4lvglling units existing today on the "Lot"- No mattcr how the Lodge at Vail
defines the geographic limitations of thc "Lot". (the 2.088 acrcs ideutified as the "Total
Rcmaining Parcel" or tre 2-7073 acres identified as tbc Total Rcmaining Parcel and thc
"I{o(fr Wing Pacccl" all as dcfincd in the applicants May, 1983 legal memorandum to tho
Towu Attomcy), the existing den.sity exceeds the rnaximum density-pcrmiftcd by fle CCI
I
rn[,:sogDsst P. 004
05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX NO.0i36 P.004
uav.. oi' 95'(TUEI l4:22 DEUTSCHOLLANE
TomMoorebca4 Esq.
Marchz,1994
PageTwo
Diskict If the Lodge at Vail is proposingthe additional units on the2.088 acreLot thc
a"""ity is sct at 52 units. Ifthe aprplicant is proposing the additional rmits on the 2-7073
a4;;1el-ot the density is set at 67 units. In either event &e current numbor of existing
rurits exceeds the total nr:nrber pcrmittcd by ihc CC I district.
Some ofthe existing 90 dwelling units may have beeo costnrcted prior to the adoption of
the Towns 26ning regl.lations and drerefore would bc considered legally non-conforming
uses. I{owever, those r:nits still count ageinst the derrsity cap on thc I-ot
The Lodge at Vail argued in 1983 that within a defined gcographic space mce than one
Lot could exist by virtue of sepamte ornmership ofthe air rights seParate from the real
property- In this particulr instance, for enample ttrc Lodgc at Vail scslns to argpe trat
tft" Z-OSS acres G really 4.176 acres for puqposes of allocating density; the surface 2.088
acres and the 2.088 acrcs lying abovc thc sur&cc owncd by a different cntity- Instcad of
fifty-two dwelting units, the Lodge is entitledto 1O4 dwclling units on ths 2'088 acrs L<vt-
The Code's definition of a Lot ftom which density is deterrniued is defined as:
a pglelpflaqld occupied by a use, building or scuctrrrc under tlrc provisions of
this title and meeting the minimrrm requircmc,nts ofdris tittc. A sitc may consist of
asingie lot ofrecord-... (emphasis added)
The dcfinition docs not rccognizc air rights abovc a parccl of land as a Lot. Nothing in
the definitios gives any indication tbaf oommon ownership is a requirernent of a Lot. Yet
conurron ownership was the key elemerrt to the Lodge's ration:te in 1983 when it argued
that since fhere were two separiate owners of thc surfacc estate and fhe air Gstate, therc had
to be two Lots, each of which were entitled to 25 units to the acrc.
Thc logical results of this thinking is readily apparent. Density cmtrol has legislatively
been aclnowledged as a laurfi{ exercise ofa municipalityrs potice power since it
promotes the healtb" safety and general welfare of the community (C.R.S. $3I-23-301
(1)) . To allow multiple owuerstrip cntitios to occupy thc same Lot (or air spaces above
the Lot) and allsru each onmership deusity rigbts for the entire Lot ftrstrates the valid
purpose of density contols. If thc LodgCs approach is valid f can envision a sccnario
where ofh.er parcels are irrf,oduced on the Lot by virtue of other buildings or different
ownaships on the same Lot with each ncw ownership allowed up to 25 dwelling tmits an
I
trr.rs3frsr P. 005
05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX NO.0136 P.005
ulv.'roi' 951TUE) l4:23 OUrrrrnor.,U*n
TomMoorehcadBsq'
Mrch2,1994
Page Tbrcc
ase. The rssutt ofthis "laycring" effest is cleady absurd' and demonstrates dre weahcss
of thc qrylicant's Position-
This fu the rcason I beliore the l-odgc at Vail's 1983 lcgal scuing fordr this
double density pmoposal was initiallv qiccteat by stsfr, As a resul! thc Loilgc Et vsil
thrcatcncd zuit aodthe Town exeorrtod an "greclnelrtpurportingto
waive the density
,"q"ir.o,"ot If the Toum statragrccd with $e Lodge's positiog oprcsscd in a memo
fic;* it" attorney to ftc thcn Town 611666sy, trrcrc would havc bee'n no oeed to executc an
agreerrcot r€soi"irrg "the disputc [rclattngf to wha]rer certain of the dwclling uits of tttc
lfrgo Apartment CondominitrmJto"afea on a parcel of ai1 sp-ace-abovc the real property
"f*fu d'6e Lodge, is attributablc to thc land oumcd by the podgel'"
lawfuIly welye tte dcnslty requirement of thc snbJcct pYoDerty-
oncc it is acknowlcdgpd $at the Lodge's 1983 propoeal viohreo-cxisting deosity
restrictions, it bacomcs appa.cot tbat the agrcc}en1 wairrcs the density contol section of
the Commerpial Corc t fjistrict it .'iolation of state staEltcs and local ordinances, was
donc for no otrcr purlrcse but to rclicve a prticula proP€lfy &om the rcstiction of
zoning regulations. As a result &c 1983 agreemeni is ulEa-vires to thc sEtc cuabling
legistation and tro Town Code and is therefore void.
It is well scttted in Colorado th5t cmtacts executed by municipal co'rporations in whictt
therc was a failurc to comply with thc mandato,ry provisions of thc applicablc staJtrtes or
chartem arc void. fSwcAtrmC v- ne'nf.er loint Stoct t-and Bak-ofDcnvcrdel" 118
P.Zd^ 460, Colo. 1941.)
Colorado Rsviscd Statutes, $3f-23-3OI (I), cmpowers rrpnicipalities to, amongother
things, rcgutate and rcstictbeigh! number of storics, size of buildings, &e sizc -ofy3d:'.
the iensii ofpqputation ana tlic usc ofbuildings, sr-rtculres andlaoj. (emphasis addcd.)
Thit ta-J t"ction also requires that suc.h regulations "shall providc for aboard of
aajustrrerrt trst rDay detcrminc and vary rhcit applicatio in barmony with their general
prirpor" and hrcnt and in accordance *it g"oc"al or spccific nrles containod in spCh
regu.la.tions."
rn:soiOlit P.006
I0s/02/95 14:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.006
ulv.'-ot' 9s{TUE} l4:tJ DEUTscHO'LLAIIE
Tomlvloorehead' Esq.
Iiifgcha 19%
Pagc Four
state trnr frrths mmdatcs that Bosrd ofAdjusaent hcar and d€r;idc all nattg's upou
wbich it is rcqtrird to pass uader ordinmce (C'R-S' $31-23-30-7)' Thc
Town s Zoning Code had in place in 1983, and has in placc today' a prooedure fo-r
granting variances from the iite,rat intcrpretation of thi Zoolog Codc, inctrdingdssit$
where ahrdship *oota rcsult (Toum'Code S"ction 18.62'Oi0)' Segtion lS'62'010 (13)
ofdrc Town Codc vcsts exclusive jurisdiction to grant variances from the provisions of
the Zoning Cotle witnte if*"i"i Commission--Applicants for a varianoe must comply
with rbe criteria fognd in Section iS.SZ.O6O of the Tolwu Code' The Lodgc at Vail failcd
to follovr mmdarcd procedures for obtaining the density variance and therefore' thc 1983
agre€tn€ot is invalid and rmenforccablc'
6.rmr i""iorr"'* .rfMotga.t C.',-ty, 6U)P2d86, Colo' Ar4,' L979') TheAgrccment
p"rp*.r . *rt* rc aEity t"quircmcnt within Cmmercierl Core I for the Lodgc at
?"if. 1.o o'r loowlodg", ,,o other propcrty owner within CCI has bccn givcn relief from
the dmsity rcqu;eme;t arrougb a i"'rpt" contract likc thc Lodge at Vail. finalty' by
eTaiyingtlte dcnsity requireorit, tne iown Co'ncil, t'ough its To\trn Mqnagcr, has
r€licrrcd the Lodge at Vait from trc restriction of zoning regulations, thercby crcatilg for
all inEnts and pu4lOSCS a different zonc withorrt fotlouring prcper procedures therefor'
Troeei tbe Lodge st vall have e v€sted right to bulld the addltipnal uEits?
In 1987, Colorado enagted a statute dctailing thc actlons nccded tq establish a vesting
arising from a govem'Ileotal approval. I.neloaset proposal is npt subject 1e this stafttc'
sincc-ftpredatedJanuary 1,1988- C.RS. $2fi8-r06. clearly,evenhadfhcstahrte
applioil, the iodgc's pntpoit"a ""sting would have lapscd after threa (3) ycars- C.R.S
g2/t-68-104(l).
Thc Tfim is not cstopped fiom finding thc 1983 Agr€cdent *TPi?'bt"' S]^1:
hcld tbat estopp€l "gd", a m'nicipal corporalion riay uot be uUlyzcd bV a priwatc party if
;;;;;;';;k;n finds aprevio'sly exeourcd ageernent invatid-. (scc
| --. tt .1.s34P.2d,80s
TEL:3030'31 P.007
Morecnrer, beyondtbc ultra-vires natnc ofthe Agrecoen! 9: A-gre€ment is tmfatrfirt
beeuse it effcicts contriacr zoning in violatiou of icll cstablishcd case t*:^(Y^t#
CitJr of,Bouldcr, 362P.2d 160, Colo' 1961; Ki
IMffi --t"r.-55 7 P zd I I 86, iolo.
Colo. App., 1975).
05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX NO.0136 P.007 I
imv.,-oz' e5(TUEf l4:24 orutrrrlrront rel: toiJ ast
Tom Moorehead, Esq.
lfarcb 2,1994
PageFivc
Prior to 1987, thc concq)t of vcsting was .rempizod in Colorado o$V unon substsstiat
rcIiamcc on dre isnrmce'of a v*id building pemit irnd a substsntial stcP towed
complerioo ofthcprojeot 1Se p-WTrrvcsaents. Inc' v- Cityof Westmi ' 655 P2d
t:6i, Coto. rs82,-clineil:irydEould,e' 450 P-2d 335, Colo' 1969') Thcsc
requiremarts wero not an4 to datc, bavo uot bcca satisficd by &e Lodge at Vcil' The
l9'g3 plamiogandEnviroumeirtal Commission appmval of1te ed€riormodification in
1983 did not vcst thc projcct No building pcrmit was wer issucd by the Town nor did
the Lodgc othemrisc JuUiUatiaUy rely on aoy approval to its detrimcot In facf, it did
notbing with respcct to its 1983 approval fortcn years. Any arguncot 68t the lrcdgCs
rigbts havc vcstcd is without frctttsl c lcgal supPott.
I woutd bc happy to prrrvi& you wi& addiff'onal infomration in my ofthe issucs
discr:sscd "to*rJifyoo daermine it ncccssarlr. Thank you in advance for your
consideration-
Verytnrly yoltrs,
DEUTSCTL SPILI.ANE & KSrITTT:L, P.C.
Jaclc E- Retrtzel
JER'ji
Ltyrlp \ilells
L;enFritzlen
P,008
By
05/02/95 14: 18 TXIRX N0.0r36 P. 008 r
MAY.:-02' 95'(TUE) l4: 24 DEUTSCH,OTLANE
Deurscn, Srnrar.re & RsurzpL'P'c'
Arur.f lrE AlrD cqnisEl.l.oF .r? t^w
t7$Elisr !E l,JE|ttElt' .lvar|lJtJtrttEal
EsctsbEog. cd-ogDo aol tr
clotr'.-rd
rlLEF lc @t4lLEl
December 13' 1993
rel'solJrrt
H^A\'EYETI'EOT!ol[r rag,!r-AnG
|^CrErElrfiza,
P. 009
I
ft4r. A-sdy l(nudsen, Director
Vail Commr:nity Dwclopmerrt Deparuncnt
75 SouthFronage Road
VaiI, CO EL6S7
Rc: Propced E>pansion of the Lodge at Vail
DearN4r. Knudsen:
This firm rcpresents Mr. and adrs. Frunk wctls, adiaentproPsTy or'ncrs to thc
Lodgc at VaiI- Wihavc bcen advised that the oumers of lhe Lodge d, Vail are intcnding
to sit approval to build sdditional units on the proP€(q/. Orr ctierrts have conoems
aboutthcproposal from a lcgal and design pcrspecfive'
As we now rmderstand tbc proposa! ttre applicant wilt be rclying on a 1983
aEEee[rcDt executcd by the Town irlaiager as authority drat thc additional units proposed
at pernrittcd without the ncccssity of a rezoaing. Wc bclielvc thc reliaace on the
agrJemcnt i5 misptactd as it is our position Otat the agleement could not havc created
aiaitioout -"i"Cdghts in eKc€ss ofthe provisions of the Toun's own zoning ordinmces'
The agreemeot is ptcmisca on ao incrpretatioo of 'buildable sitc area" rhar would atlow
every_owucrofacondominiumtherigfottobuildatadensityof25dwellingrmitstothe
acrc, rcgardlcss of the size of the parcet- Adhercncc to such an interpretation leads to
a.bsurd dcosities that far excocd the intcnt of&e Code-
In addhiou to our qoncsm regarding trc tegafity of the proposal, Ms- L m Frieten
of Fritzle6 Pierce Brincr of Vail has rerricwed 6c proposal and has adviscd qs gf several
plaDqisg qpd dcsip dcficiencies that requirc firrthcr analysis and rcsolution from thc
fown s[aff. Hcr findings arcsummarized as follorn's:
05/02/95 l4:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.009
*ir. *r:esITUE) t4:14 n'urscu, OutE ,rr'roruoil
DEurscI{, Snrr-r-nrqn & Rsrrrul' r'c'
Ivlr- AndY Knudscru Dircctor
VXt Con*nt ity Dcvelopment Dcpartment
Decernber 13, 199}
PageTwo
P.010
I
1.A aomplct€ rcview of a proposal oftlis size and trc impacts to the
srrrounding propcrti"s "f,outd
be undertakcn r:nda the rcquiremcnts of a
rezoning or SDD Process that would incorporate stnrcarred public input and
decisions bY the Tovm Couucil'
ThcVailViltageMastcrPlaocallsfor.,minimrmimFactofviewsoftlre
mountain ftom Eatou Plaza-" Thc building is shornn as two and tluee
srsics from the pr""" ierr"f- ft appcars n aJ ae lowcrcd ridgc heigfut at the
two story portion i" *"o, iirvi# prot aion of the cxisting L.odge at Vail
residerrtial condominiugrs tnatr ror'ennancing a vicw corridor from the
adjacentpublic sPaoe'
A stated goal ofthc Tow of Vait is to e;grand the Villagc bed basc' The
derrelqrmcnt propo."J is cro"rv conitominiums, Is tlrere any assrrance that
thcsc units wiU stay t"tt"a"ta"othone'vacaot" sccondhomes odrer
thantbeworrdoftheappti"antzwhatfifurccontrolwillt}eLodgcatVail
harrc overrtrls dertelof,nent? At this time thcrc are ttrrcc separate
ilcrsnip entities forthe total Lodge at Vail derrclqlmentthat ars not
accountabte to cach other. wilt this development constitute a fourth cntity?
ThelodgcatvailiscrrrrentlyinEtigationwiththetow[ofvailovcrthcpr.piJr*a orcn"og€ thut-would filrtler c:gand thcir frcilitl.. .Tr. ftt
;;-u; aaat"rsea trJn" the crrrrectly groposed cccpansion would inrerface
with any firture develoPmcnf?
Thc uniforrnity oftle froade, inclutling fencsratiolu balcony rails' fascia'
landscaping is geoerally inconsistent iith "tot"ot
dctrclopment in vail
Villagc.
The pcdcstrian corridor th.at oonnccts Eaton Plaza and the lifts between one
Vait Placc and the opansion will be compromiscd by this dcrrelopment
Soiar.ryor.rre, figtti;& st"* removal "od "ooo'shed
should be addrcssed
for fftis axcl
J.
4.
{
6-
05/02/95 14:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.010
ulv. :oi, 9S{TUEI l4:25 DEUTS0H, 3r.,ilrg
- TtE..:vtfrtrsprur-enre & Rgtlrzru' r'c'
JEkji
TEt:3oi6l.Jl P.0n
Ivfr. AadY Knu&co' Diroctor
Vail Corrrmunity Dwclopmeot Depatrncnt
Docernber 13' 1993
P4goThrec
T.Thcpurposeofthcscrviooal1caonthcbasenrcntfloorisr.rrrdefincd.What
type ofactivitywill rhis area gco€carc? Noise' uuckaccess' cmployee
aacesq visual and acoustic ,crecrring of mectranical equipment and tash
shoutdbc addressed'
WcwouldapprcciatetheopPoftnitytoocetwithyorrstafftofirrherdiscllssor|r
ooncems. It r orrr cue,ng, iot"c to -rru every cmort to resolve this mattcr arnicably;
howevcr, they are preparcd to tglce wbstevo tlp" trg nooessEry to Ptote€ rhcir ProPerty'
VerytulYYours'
Nfr- and lvfrs. Frank Wclls
Mebbcf,s of Town Couucil
Mc,nrbers of Tovm Ptanning Commissisr
Msnbers of Town Desig4 Review Board
LynoFridco
I05/02/9s 14:18 TXIRX N0.0136 P.01r
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 1 07/Fax 970- 479-2 I 5 7
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Office of the Town Attorney
MEMORANDUM
Vail Town Council
R, Thomas Moorhead, Town Aftorney
December 1, 1995
Proposed Development for the International Wing
On August 9, 1983 there was an agreement reached between Lodge Properties ("LPl") and the
Town of Vail ('Town") (Exhibit A). The agreement resolved a dispute conceming what development
rights remained or how many additional dwelling units could be located on the property known as
the Lodge At Vail containing 2.090 acres. This agreement compromised and settled that dispute.
In summary it was agreed that the zoning ordinance for CC1 would not prohibit LPI from OuitOing
thirty-four new accommodation units and one dwelling unit. Prior to such construction however Lpl
would be required to obtain permission from the appropriate boards and commissions of the Town
and required to obtain all necessary permits. LPI agreed to construct expanded conference and
meeting room facilities at the time of building the expansion.
This agreement was discussed by Town Council on August 2, 1983 (Exhibit B). A transcript of that
discussion is attached which resulted in the passing of a unanimous motion authorizing the Town
Manager to execute the agreement (Exhibit C). There was no challenge raised by adjacent property
owriers or any other objections raised to the agreement orthe Town Council's authority to enter into
the agreement. The record reflects a good faith, negotiated compromise entered into to resolve a
valid dispute.
In May, 1983 an application was made for an exterior alteration in the name of LPl. This matter was
scheduled for consideration by the Planning and Environmental Commission on October 10, 1988.The Community Development Department prepared a memorandum to the Planning and
Environmental Commission dated October 6, 1983 (Exhibit D).
On October 1Oth the Planning and Environmental Commission denied the application based upon
the closeness of the LPI property to One Vail Place (Exhibit E). This decision was appealed. On
October 24, 1983 this matter returned to the Planning and Environmental Commission for
consideration after changes in the proposal were presented to Town Council. The changes
included proposing lourteen feet between the Intemational Wing and One Vail Place. The plannlng
and Environmental Commission voted to approve the exterior alteration pursuant to the staff
recommendation (Exhibit D.
{g *r"ourru",
a
This Planning and Environmental Commission approval remains effective. Subsequent to this
approval, the zoning regulation has been changed which causes approval of an exterior alteration
to lapse and become void two years following tre date of approval. This provision was not in effect
at the time of the PEC approval of this extedor alteration and the new provision has no etfect upon
the approval.
Additional information will be provided as requested. Thank you.
C 72tt:; Aot G,r Lcrs'd trrl4 tljin qt . 2 &J- day o! Zl ,
)d.rr nr.a^^ - F-' )'o83
a ( it a ti t.;t,t t.: N.I:
,r)' lttd butwc,en tho Locttfo I)lops).t1otr.Inc.,. q C(rl,orado Corporargton ,A Co1orado ltun.{,c J p:r 1 Corl)oratl on
( "1'tro Corl)uratlon,, )
( "'l'ho T<.rwn,. ) .
and the Town of Vrll,
1. Tlrc cor ' r llEcrr^Ls
poralion is lhe Orvtrer o! ccrtaln rer-l 6F..h^_---real property and lmprove_.ment's loc.ated thoreon rvhich are collcc,tlvely knowl(',Th€ Loog6.,1. Beins molo parErcurnrly
"t"_;;;;a
&s the Lodse Br v.tl
end eonta.{.ning 2.o9o.q,cre€ - -Ee\-.'n('q oD the a.tto'chcd Exbrl,
ot
2. Ttro Lodg,e lE located wl'thl'nthe To\en of Val.]'.
tlfe Comurerclal Ccrre I Zone Dlstrl ct
3. A dl'Ffruto trae artsen brto rdhetber rhe ,"rr;;_-:;.--:^:".lv:e! rhe corpor.tlon .and the ro$,n aE.zonl.ng ordlna,nces o.f tbe Town wou3{ new occonmoa.rlon unrts and "".-":_:.,:::.
*""td a.r.r.ow the addit1on otas ,u:rlts,.) to tbe Lod*ie. 't".o*ttt,tt" unlt ( correct1vgrv rerorred to
<1 . Tlre dl'soura >-r _ -_
_r.r!\ _. Bpute reJ,EtqB to whettterr cbr*. r _ -Blp1En e Lod*e o.r--.,^--:':'"t
ao whetbor c'ert&ln of tbe dwerllrr'\ry lrtnents condornin rurns loca.ted on jt_:.:" dwetllns unltr
I parcef o! !.1r rPaccil:;"j:.:":;":::j:":::::,:: tho Lodge. 16 ettrlbutabre to ,h. ,an.,
5. Tr)e partlea now wrsh rorenaln between them,
comprotnlso
'nd Gettf o a'rr ctlf f erobces whr,crr
Noly THERE F.RE, the partle"
tt ncREEMEt{T
1. .J.llc paFl
,rdlnance to,
"on'os
agree tltr't taBloe
ag folrows:
tro units.
rmer-c1ar core J "lu
o"t=tty contror scctlon o,' rhc'
";l::;.,2. Bctorc tho r^^_^ _. _-
r shalr be r-equl:
e Lodgs tharl prgceed rvlth thg c
,,.:,, : "" tjiJ:: lii ii:';::,;. t" :.
" " il.::":;:, .:
;: "
re Torvn a'd turtrrGlF ..,h+ _.
-':- LrIt' api)roPrl,lte bo,
-,-*._-\ --ter obtaln all teour --:^ :--"sL:
ooards aDd cotrunlsslon.' .f
@ t,ourd rho r,ods:s .o "o,.""llt::1,::: ?q'ceesarv per,nrts.
raLr be fu'trrer
'.e.,rr l -],. -'-- . 'v'rvnrc[ wltlr' t'o conol
lhilltres 1n t'e
'equired to constr
, L<rdge sc, tr,at *n::":
expanded
"";;::.":"" :"t:::::;=r:.t"
'" :u."lt cxpanslon 1s cornJ:1.a. tho L,(rdgo
dxhibit A
.,!.'....t. / tr a..rat..t .r.rrrt .rtrt.,r., :rrtd
t'a:(: t. t n :91,7.c , ntcrr(, ()r L cr:r.r Df
s,(rtruro tect nor.c or losb-.
1.".]l]1.::'::t"ll":. =n:tl not in6titure anv r.cs.r :rctron agelnst rrr<:Town conc.r.nlng a,ny of thn dls;rutod 166ue6 6.ct for
--"" ....atnag tlr..
cnterlnr in.to tx.la a.,F^^-^-- -e€'r'!;ct b'cE ror?tl her"{n' 'rhe Lodgc' bycnterlnr ln.ro thla Agirecmcnt does not .,ri r i,^ ...r_ __ ,noE r,valvc 1ts r''ghtE; tci
,rl.t(tL.l rtl'
which (rn c l.oonl ahaJ l.
I r:lr I rr U!. lo:rri I
.Crt|l t.a I n s,t I oirri L
rcguast an irddltlonn:
::1":::","c,datron
unrrs nor <roes.Ehe rown welve ,; ;;";; ::";;;r":"=l"onur*arcqu,os!.
trro pnrilea tra,ve slgned thtt Agreer|ent this
THE LODCD PNOPERTI]IS. INC.
by
7u
@
4;r3*g;-
TOIeN OIr \r4IIJA Col orado-U=rrof cf pa]' CorporBtlon
I
.;
Edmu
-.-_ _._ r..-:_;:..
II
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGTIIESDAY, AUGUST 2, 198330 P. .
Pl,Tr::oly, .4uq9"t 2, 1e83, a resurarne.!d rn the Vait Municipat Buil<l:.ig.meeting of the Vail Town Council was
Herman StauferPaul Johnston
Chuck Anderson*
B 11I Wilto, Mayor pro_Tem
Rod Slifer, ltavor
Ron Todd
Gal1 Wahrli ch*
None
Richard Caplan, Town Manager+Larry Eskwith, Torvn et t"rfr.y
IIEIIIBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT :
OTHERS PRESENT:
* ( arrived Late )
The first item oD the. agenda was the first.reading of ordinan ce #27, series of1e83' an ordinance T.:Ii:'t-i! iii.;;; ii'io."rn control over anof va1ue. Larrv Eskwith stated ti.t tr,i" ordinance makes it iirE!i].;..nt"srnowrngrv rerain store! q1"pu"iv.-- n",ii^ionn"ton ..a.-"-i"ii"i .o .pp.or,.H:'tf,:":,:?lJ:: ff: ::5:,::Tt$it"i:i ii;i:t:" ir;;_#.,i;i.it.""o unanimous,y
The next item on the ag6nda was the f irst^readi.ng.of ordinan ce #2g, series of1983, an ordi.nance amglains ;;;p;;; i6.oio impoundment of vehicres.Larry Eskwith stared^_that. it " *i"0. ;1iv"Iu"rton', have been strlcken from thisurcrnance' which alrows. the Town to anra" into a contract with an organiza_tron who wirl salvaqe the cars ""a-ti"-i"*" wirr noi-iir.t"ir"" to offer the:[i:l]4tii'::;':::;;Hrllsiilir ;li;.i,'"r'"" to upp"ou""5ii,n"n". *za anothe ordinanc" *".-Jio.t"d pubrished in triilt"n passed unanimouslv and
Tbe next i-tem of the agenda was the first .reading of ordinan ce FZg, series off il;ril ::'::;l:;rl:t:"11Iq .;";;;";^i;:26.060 io a-,"o"iilio.ooo rq s,. rrv Eirwitt,-tiii.i'iil,il:iiiili:r':iffii;;,::.iffioff::il"l;i6iiii",iii,ii""metering when units are^convertea int o
-
c onaom:- n iurns .
- -io.r'ioii'rro.
a motionto approve ordinance f29 and ct""x-ii"i.iJin seeonaea the motion. Themotlon passed unanimouslv
""4
-InJ""i:iiiuilu *"" ordered published in furl.There was no citizen participation,
The nexr item on the agenda
.
was_.. con t i nued gl:c::si:n of. proposed speed dipon ''esr core creek o"ty:: arr.weis -prJJJnrea-.ttre
councit wlrh addirionalslgnarures supportine-the speed cllps]--iii"n xno* stated she was ln favor:1"::; l!'fi; ?;tr:i:: !l.v-.r,o,-,.ia'u. ,i.r."a crearry. r.arry r,icnriter arsocouncrr r,i" ui"*"^lg;i,:i :f,:"3"3i[oi;,"31"'_1.::ylil p;;;il.;;' ro rhe
i. llilli". probtem, damase tt"-t"i"v-Io;i;"-:: stated thev would be*ii::';lI.'l'.":il:i f; :io""f!'J-i."ii:ili'ii"'' l?i:i il:::l:i":';,li*n'"
Ron rodd .,"nl"i-iii.";"il:;,:: ll:;:ri"::i $11:..1. we"t co".-6ieek or1ve.
ff:..:;::l SitJE; "ml*:.ili:,;;";:;;";:; t;:";"ll::: ;";:f"";:: itnx;;l"o
Exhiblt B
!IiNUTES
VAIL TOIYN
TUESDAY,
7:30 P,ll.
COUNCIL MEETING
AUCUST 2 , 1983
- ''e next ltem on the agenda was the aDDear' of vail Associates snowmaking projecrPetEer patten presented ttre proposat-iI-in. councir.----i.-"iIr.o !nrs ).s anappli-cation for a conditionat use permit which had ;".n-;"ii;; up b], thecouncil due to co'cerns over minimum stream.frgw, i;;;"-;;"';"en di.scussionswith Vail Associates, the Forest Service-ana in" pf""iing"Si.ir. ?heForest service and pranni.ng
"tart-.laiiitlcs showed that mininum srreem frowwould be protected. The pianning o.p"ttr"nt reconmended "pp"ourr with theseconditions. A) lteter cold p".r.l iiSn"ieaa ana ll"*-i;i.iriii. " sl Review thedata at the end of l vear to assure va i.s
-
not
--exJ.Jai.i^ii 'i"t". u"" causingthe stream f10w to go bel.w nini-urum, -- iil"1 nucb dlscussion Ron Todd medea motion for approval of a tempora.y "ondrtion"r u""-p"iiii" oi v"ir AssociatesDnowmakrng pultrp house for the phase I Dortion. of the ;;;;:- riis approv"rshourd be for B l vear peri.od "i irt.-"ii-or snich-iir.-r"'*iii review theracrs end $'ith the stipuratl.n va in"i.ir'netefs. trr" "n"rr"iing shourd bemonitored close, and wlth the conariionai crreci ion - ti";-;;;-^.comnunication that i.s culreFtly s"ini -;o -u"tseen the Tov and vA and theForest service continue so thai i. "in-i."" some sort of ongoing idea whatimpact sno$'nakins is occurring on the creek.- Seconded by Chuck Anderson.Bob Parker stated that he "oura n"i-'iri.-"ittr this notion as statecl. vALs investing too nuch-noney to rlsk n"uini the-permit removed for wtratever- -ason in one year. rt was egreed tt "t
-iirry
.nir"rit, ;;;i;-;.; tosether'th va'r Assoclates.(Bob parier l -ti"oi"ii a document vhich refrects RonTodd's motion. Ron T;dd re.iaie6 t i"-.iii"n to. read: Appoval ot a conditionaluse permit for Valt 1;::".lt:: "o*_rtini-punp house coniiiion.r upon anannuar review as rerates to mini'um streim- rri" tor-coi.-6".Jt-t" be reviewedby Town of valr, Forest servici, -vari-iiJo"r"t""
-and the water District.Thar vA will install a neter to'.ooiiot-i iows and again on the condition thatthere be ongoing di arogue -bet*..n
- itt" -io"i , Forest service, vail Associatesand the water Dist!ict: ctrucx aJersJu- Jlconaea the tnotlon. The motionwas passed unanLnousLy.
The next lten oD tbe ageoda.sl: app.royal of an agreeEent relating to theLodse at vall air "igl!:: -l*t"v-iii*ilfr iresenteo tbe natter to the council.A .otion was mede bv Blrt trrto- tor ib;};p uanage"-io'-Ji.i"tJ' this asreement.second bv Ron rocrd. A vote rae i"i"i-ili-tne ilti;; ;;";:;-;;rrnousry.
The -next item was approval 0f vacatl.n of dralnage easement of Lot 16, GlenlyonsuDclvtsion. petter patten gave the ,apoat. to _the Council and expressedhis approvar' This i:-i":l r-i"trriitv"fx'atanaon this drainage easement.Bi'll wilto made a motion to approve ttr6 vacation. of_drainage .i""r"nt of Lot16, clentyon sibdivision.-- Sltonaea-t; ;;;r"n Staufer. Chuck Anderson;:lifftJ;::rgi:t"t his.vote au"-i"-ir'.-'act he had a conrrict or interest.
under Town Manager Report, -Mr. capran asked the councll whether the folrowlng''ruesdays work session shourd ue cincelrra-orra to the Jerry Ford GolfTournament. The counclr .s".rd-iiiii;;d.y not to meet.
There was no Town Attorney Report.
As there was no further business the meetlng x,as adjourned at g:OO p.M.
ATTXST:
ly subtnltted,
O" - ) -s\ -i-c ,^)
The next item i-s approval of an agreement relating to the Lodge atVa1l air rights. Mr. Eskwith.
Tha1k9 Mr. Mayor. To give some background. on this issue the Lodgeat vail came in pursuant ro the urban design guidelines and "ppii6Jfor some redeveJ-opment of the Lodge itself, 5nd that redeveltpmentwas to incrude 34 additional units, almost of alr of them "i ""pione accommodation units under one dwerling. The staff reviewed tilerequest and denied the request on the basis that the zoninj,particurarly the density seition of the commerciar, core one zoieDistrlct prohibited the add.ition of those new units. r then wasinformed by Jim Bairey of the law firm of cawkrns, Kramer andGrimshaw (firrn name?) who represents the Lodge as werr- as JayPeterson hrho also represents the Lodge, that in fact ""r.lni"iunusual happened in i'9i2 which to them indlcated that the densitieihadn't been built out at the Lodge. This occuiiea pri_or to ttretime we had our zoning ordi.nancei in ptace -trd ,n.t n.ppened isthat the ohrners of the property on which the Lodge is buift deed.edsome property to the Lodge and they atso deeded by meets and boundsa parcel 0f air rights over the Lodge to thd Lodge Apartmentcondominiums- The Lodge Apartment condominiums buir_t- in Inat aiiparcel and their cl-aim to me was that the units which were buil_t inthat air parcel could not be att.ributeo to the r,oole itself becauseit was a separate parcel under different ownerstrii. They providedme with brief, cited a 10t of law. r then proceeded to researchthe law myself i1 .some detail, including tairing to the Nationalrnstitute of Municipal Law offices, the -cororadiuunicipal-i;;;,1;
and a woman who lectures on air rights, itta t".a of GeracaGoldhammer(?) from Hytand park. My re6r:-ng after discussins th;issue with all those people and resdarching It myserf is that wh1ler didn't think Mr. Bairey and Mr. peterson-were 6nti-re1y "orr".i-i'their assumprion, r ferl it was a regally oelaialre ""a u.j".ui.dlspute and of course r brought that up to the Town's attention andwe've discussed it in some detail. The council asked me to drafta possibre sett.reme.nt agreement for consideraLion tonight whichwouLd provide that in order to forego the necessity of a law suityitf lfe Lodge at Vail, that we would accede to tn"ir being allowedto build those certain accommodation unit" urrd Jwelring -units solong as they did-'certain things for the Town. one of the chiefthings .they would d.o for the fown if this .gr..*"r,t were enteredinto' i.s as a part of the redevel0prnent build and refurbishconventlon space in _the Lodge and that convention space wour-dprovlde for at least i,400 sq.- ft. in totat ana inat e,doo "q.-ii.wouLd have to be contained within one room, so it wour.d have onelarge convention roon in the Lod.ge which would handr_e that 6,000sq' ft' Both parties agreed to forego a raw suit. The Lodgel?:::9_:" comply wirh atr rhe zonins -..e"ii;*."i" of rhar zoneqrsrrrct as wel-l as-all the requirements of the submittal ,rnae. ineurban-Design Guidelines. r thint its importlni-to ,,ot" for theTown Council that if the Council enters .inro rhi,compromi se s tiri s i s sue, it mean s
-.flJ'Jri. T&"n.tX'"""ten;:?T:t
"
ii:containing 2.09a acres and that site wour.d alrow additionar unitsthan the units tbey are proposing to build now. They would beentitled to six additionai un:-ts. The Town by entering into this
Exhiblt C
o
agreement, pursuant. to the agreement does not waive its right tocontest those additionar units, nor does the Lodge waive its rightto come in at a future date to ask for those units. rrve beenassured informalLy by representatives of the Lodge that they haveno intention of building those units but r think its_ importa-nt fo,the Town council to know that they are not precluded from doingthat-by this agreement. r'd be glad to answer any guestions froithe Council or from the members of the audience. -
Larry is t.his a uni-gue situation as far as this subdivision by airrights within our cornmunity?
j,arry: The exact situation at tbe Lodge rnn to the best of myknowledge and its based on research bec-ause r went over to LandTitre and started pulring condominium declarations like crazy, th;onry condominium association that r know of that's positio"i"g isorid block parcel_over a rodge thatrs under separatetwnership 6utconnected to that Lodge is the Lodge at vair, before zoning, beforezoni-ng, that's right that occurred before zoning. But r think tothat this whole theory necessitates and has nec5ssitated a reviewon my part of our density controt section because r think when thecolorado statute relating to air rights, and that, s what theirtheory, the Lodge's theory is based on, a statute in the state oicolorado. rt state that air can be conveyed in parcels, that aparcel- of air rights is entitJ-ed to all the same considerations aiany other parceJ. of real estate. when you read that statute inconjunction with our ordinance it raisei some not, so paratablepossibilities that r think need to be addressed and ilrn in thdprocess of addressing that now and hope to have an amendedordinance for your consideration at your ne-xt meeting, rroperurly-oithe. meeting thereafter. As soon as possibre because r think it hasto be considered.
Any questions from the Council?
Any questj-ons from the floor, from
(coul-d not hear short response)
If there are no discussion or anytake is a motion authorizing theagreement, if there are no changes
Motj-on by Bill Wi1to, second by Ron
Jay?
comments I think aII it wouldTo!,rn Manager to execute thisor other questions.
saying aye.Any further discussion? If not, all in favor voteAye.
Opposed?
Unani-mous.
(,
o
MEMORANDUM
P'l anning and Environmental Conmission
Communi ty Deve'l opment Department
October 6, .|983
Exhibit D
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REQUEST:
SUBJ ECT:
prllig hearing and consideration of a request for an exterior alteratjon andmodification for the Lodge at vail containing iodge rooms, retail rp..., ionr...n.uspace and a deluxe dwelling suite. The proposal includes-nlodificationi'to-[nJ'-""fqdg. lt.lql adjacent to Founders' p'lazi aira to the parking lot on it. wesi'-side and additional storage space on the parking lot ievet 6n tne north sideof the Lodge south bui1ding. Applicants:' Lod96 at vail and tne r_oage sJuih
Condominium Association !
(
\
The request is to add 3-a ney llfufy accommodation units and one luxury dwetlingunit containing approximately 30,000 square feet along with new ptaza-]evetcommercjal space containing approx.imateiy 3,600 squarE feet, additional-cJnferencespace, and a ski storage room to the Lodle at,vaii. In addition, new stJ"ige'-"-space for the condominiums is being prop6sed for the Lodge souttr'ouitoi;i.-'-
other modifications are a new gate house on the west, reversing the auto circu-
l:!i:l illl lhe parking lot, a;d a new entry court. Over on tFe mountain side,tne parking lot would be expanded and new stairs added for skiers to get tothe ski lfft chairs. _The east plaza wouid be redesigned to complemeni Founder,s
flaz,a. .At the Lodge Plaza iherb would be a remporary canvas paulttion remJviuredurlng the winter. The new International wing would contain iOditional conference
:pace' lodge rooms, one luxury dwelling unit ind conrnercial space on the plaza
I evel .
BACKGROUND
0n.July 25, .|983, the two.restaurant expansions were approved by the planning
and Environmental conrnission. Approved were a 730 squii^e foot expansjon tothe Salt Lick restaurant to be rbnamed the wildflowei and a gzs iooi-.ip.niionto the Arlberg restaurant to be renamed the Cipriani restaurant.
CONFORMANCE WITH PURPOSE OF COMMERCIAL CORE I DISTRICT
The commercial core I district is intended to provide sites and to maintainthe unique character_of the Va.i I Village commercial area, with its,i"lure otlodges and corrnercial establishments in a preOominantiy pedestrian environment.The commercial core I district is intended to ensure aiebuaie tisht, iirl;i;i'space' and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of-buitoinqs lnJuses. The district regulations in accordance with the Vaii-viiiase'u"uii-oltisn
Page 2 10/6/83 'U
VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN
VAIL VI E UREAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE N
Vehicle Penetration:
There will be no change by this proposal
and Oesign considerations prescribe site development standards that are intendedt0 ensure the maintenance and preservation,or the lighiiy-.iurtered arrqngementsof bu.ildings fronting on.pedestr_ianways and.puUlic Sieeniuji, unO to ensurecontinuation of the bui'lding scale ani a"ittiieciurui';;;ilti.s thatdistinguishthe village.
The Community 0evelopment Department considers.that the.proposal is in conformancewith the purpose of the zone'district. irif-r6aii-it"iiiii'i!-rn" anchor forvair viilase and needs to oe upgiaaeJ to insurJ"il,ij;;iirr'o, vair Viriageand the cormunitv. Hithout.a !i"ong-neirt, the Village will suffer. Thecommunity Deveroiment oepartmeni ieErl-irrat-the rong and short tenn successof vail vi|rase is partiirlv based on-a-quariti iil.-;; iili.
o i Vai'l
#?2 Pocket park' screen fence -to close off alleyway (gate required) and continue;:ffi::.iffi.,!,!fil i;if"lli: benches, prantlrsi ffi;_si;;;;e,in *int",. -..-_
The proposal contains an improved.area of landscpping and walk between theLazier Arcade buitdinq anC ihe-Lodge at.Vaii.'--iforing off the area is notpobsible because it ii a fire line]- ,r
#14 Village plaza. Feature area paving treatment, central focal point visible' from Gore creek Drive. -Major'i.iJ'rJ"tiipi'inting-in l.w.-iri fii.t .o"nr.,1' with eversreen screen lJ:litlg_ti-oeiin!'west "ig..' wiir'ii"Jlt stairs,\ with mid-revel jog landing, opens entri-aiJa to Lazier Arcade shops.
This propostj-1!!r"l1y.expands. the Founders' Plaza area and makes this intoan exciting space within Vail Village. -- -
INTERNATIONAL l,lING
By having new commercial .shops at the new.,plaza level , the potential for pedes-trianization has increased by tt. piop6'iil.
Streetscape Framework :
As noted in thea publ ic street.in Vail Village.
application, there is nofhe proposed shops and !jSct,frontage by ttre proposa.l onpraza do add to the pedestrian experience
Pedestrianization:
Street gnclosure: I
The proposal.complies with the intent otlh.'rssues wt || be more specifically djscussed at
t'
t)esign Cons iderations. Oetailed desiqnthe Design Review Board meetinq.
(\
The proposed International wing would have generally two heights, one fourththe width of the enclosed space it faces ani one sjittr the wiotn of the enclosedspace it faces.
Street Edqe:
The irregu)ar facades proposed for the shops and restaurants meet this elementof the design consideritibns.
Buildinq Heiqht:
The proposed heisht of the new International wing-from the new plaza ranges from24 reet to 33 feit. At the p"a.ii"iin pilii i"i,Et:irr" ii:ipi't.r meets the intentof the height section-of_the Design_Coniiderations. rrbnr Ine south side, the heightwould be 35 feet and 43 feet. Th; cotmunity oevJiopm.ni o"pu"trent feels that theheights.proposed meet the intent of the Design coniiaeiitioIi ana provide for themix in building heights as perceived.in Vail-Viiiige.-
views: There are no designated view corridors in the area of the proposal
service and Deliver.v: This will not change by the new addition proposed.
Sun/Shade Considerations :
There would be no sun,/shade impact on Town of Vail public space (the Founders,p.l aza)as shown on the sun,/shade study,
One concern of the staff is the amount of space between One vai'l place and the Inter-r national wing on the third fioor. The staff considers that the top floor be shifted\- five or six feet to the west to open the ipace oetween uuiiaints.--' "-
For-the proposed storage at the Lodge South, the Comnunity Development Departmentfeels that there are no negative imiacts.
ZONING CONSIDERATIONS
Park i ng :
At the time of a buiiding permit, the ap.piicable parking fees for each type of usewill be required.
Architectural and Landscape Considerations:
Fi re Department Cons iderations :
A new fire hydrant will
wing because of the new
be necessary along the south sideresidential and commercia'l space.
near the new International
a
RECOI,II,IENDATION:
l-\ The Conmunity-Development Department recormends approval of the Lodge at-Vailreguest for 34 new lodge rcoq!: a luxury dwelling unit, nel, cormercial space
and new storage.sqagg. In..addition, we consider the site improvenent veiy positivefor the Lodge at-Vail and Vail Village. As noted previoully'in the memorinbum,the Lodge at Vai'l is the anchor for Vail Village. The Connunity 0evelopment
Department feels the upgrading and expansion i- positive for Vail .Vi'llaie
and the connunity.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONI,IENTAL COI.il.IISSON ACTION ON OCTOBER IO, 1983
Donovan moved and viele secono.O rt deny the application with the exceptionof.the Lodge south proposal with the main reason being the c'loseness oi ttreLodge property to One Vail P'l ace. The vote to deny was 5-0.
$'qe'|q'|'
1'
)-
PEc -2- rot;
He added that he had_to]d.the appricant that the board wouid act on the proposal
l3l iil'' i'ff,1:#o:::"8:ll:l,,o:l::i liit"li:-;:rsi:!ie;.r;ri-i,:. re r i cant app ryevqrrr rrr rrovemDer' %nded to d"nr ttr.'bpoiilitiSl'illack of information. Ine vote was s-o iffi
3.uest f r an elterior al rati on to the Vi'l 'l a Center ro.i ect at l2
seran
and to cons
p I i cant:Hibbe
gymaker,s rai1. to con add i ons to the re dl
I
Corcoran read a asking to tab'le item unti'l
'letter from the applicantrlper seconded to table uViele moved and
4.A
corme
p
a nditional usestorae units in
agre
ntil the ti
'l in
thisof0 ber 24.
al reI in order to const
e
10/24.
Vote was 5-0.
+
ower ver o
ar tey Investments,nc.
to !ryeen One at I Ptace aspacegonterence space and a u suite.to the
west s llqnal stora s ace on t street
soc i at ion.cant:at Va
conta i n ooqe ro retai l
uoes cati ons
ot onrts
-.e0nT
Jay then discussed the model and its different aspects: the new entry and rearrangedparkins lot, ski rt::ig..:l! !;gr;!9"-gareteiia,-i;i;h" iew rnternational suite.Viele asked what would happen io irre i spruce irees neit"io the entrance when theparking lot was rearranged,'ina-F.i."rin responded that they would attempt to movethe trees to another toiation. - cJi.!tn-"ur expressed about the closeness of theInternationar wino to oil v;i'i pi;;;."'peierioh'iiii-t[ii'one vair,p.race overhunsits propertv linel ,He.addeJ il'li-irri architects r,.a ioniia.red moving the top storyof the International wins-iJ iii.'niti,'.no weie-aiii.iiliiio with the appearance.viele asked if there were technicai-iroulemi-*iil,'ir,.'urjiiing, so close together,and Peterson said ttrat ttrey-woiiii-r,ui!-to use speciar grass
Trout said that he had difficulty with having only two feet.between the buildings.He suggested takinq :p?:e. t"or ii,.e"otiier.,eno-of_ti,9 yi"9-ina moue-11re
'rr,oi.:iriroing.
He approved the rist'pf lle proposii.'' Martha Fritz.tenl i resident of One Vait placestated that evervone^who tiveb in-ici'rr.r.on..rned about narrow alleyways and allof their prob'lemi' oonovan'ii.iira'ii.['srre rert that the building hait bben designed
The applicant asked to-table until October 24. Donovan moveto tubi. i[.-tt!',i'uniir "olildi]"ji."1il:
vote was 5:o i;
5.uest for aD exterior al terati on for the L
DickRyanreviewedthememo.JayPeterson'.l}ffil-applicant,showeda
ffi!;'r:?:,::*::":*1;.,llr":::l;,::i:^tir! o.'r,ii'iii',io".e. ror the Lodse south.Ar an Taroya, representins n,oii-p;il;.;;;;;r]"rii"i"iiiiriiii"lirM ;i:.:.ifl: iiill;"in the parkino area of Lods;-a;ui; ;;;ii gb.- He-aJa;J iil; there would be r6 .rockers,
xlr;n"y:l:"0:.Tl?rTj^."a wiin-aiJi:'"ii.i'g i'ti'-t["-ii'ii'.. The sarase wou]d be
fi :1. ll.'oil"'iil;' il:":6i;;" :-'i'ii"iJi.l"ii
Exhtbit E
PEc -3- lr*
I
8lt;:'li:l;:,t!8,il':looiill'rfl'ftif;!-lhlt-not.evervone rert that the urban Desisn;h;il";';; iiJi ii-i;"r"a. - ir,e-.io.i'iille,lliri:lurrnlrif.'::#1;,!gdl.il_;;il:'was drawing peop'le to a dead eno. -oonovan rct['i[ii-ti"ii. summer the praza wourdbe a lively place' but not in-winter." she.was coniJ"neo-ilout ilre heights and confusedabout how thev were figured. peleiiin saia irra!-q;-il;'pilr. side, EorJ of the roofswere berow 35 feet, in-the uacr,-tiri-ror.li li ii.i"lt"ii" highest point. He rertthat if the guiderines were speiific, iney wourc need a varrance.
li'lore discussion followe!.9o19ep!ng the_herght. of-the east end of the Internationalwing' Donovan pointed out that ilri iriposai-ir,irri"i.li-iiu, the whore comprex, notiust with 6 rooms (regarding itre-iioiiitss-or-gre'uriiiini'to One vail placb).Piper riked the new entrv, Eui ieit-uila h;*.;;-ri'ii!'j,iilore of the parkini rotwould_not be visible wnei'ciri ;;;; ;;;ili ::;#'F:":i.ii:,liiiiiiil'tt=6i.'ilfio,il:f..',1.#l:::,,}li li:"ijl,;i*:!i','
Ron Grant' representing ltaTgn p'r.atner, architect, stated that he and his coworkershad worked with a larg6.rndei ana-rriJ'iriea.iii-i6p-iiJii Jr u,. new wins in severa.ldifferent places. but-thai-ilev'*ei:iii-ssatisriei-iiirr-i|y-uut the location shown.Piper said that he uoura iiie-i"-;;; il;;-;;i;;ioiil" ti{"iron showed erevationswith the hish roof six reei-weii.--VtIil rilii-irti"irt"liiE, but fert that it wasunfortunate that the_ranascaping'w";;-;; m irrarigea';'ilIi the cars had becomemore visible. He aoreed with o6niivin rigarails ioitertii'or tn. praza, and fertthat he could not g5 aiongrritt-l'i,ri ii;t;iiEn;i.-..i#.;;an asreed with the concernsiioffitif;rilt"r'' that he-did not have inv p"ouitr'riu,-ii"'feelins of the deid end
Patten pointed out that One vair p'race had buirt to and oyer their prcperty linewith an asreement rith the-foai.. ' lliiiita. rrrtiien_iiii"ir,ii*l,en_the scrrJeo[r'uuirdinsIll iilll;':i;'rf;:*:l"J'Ti";iil..l,io:l'. sroi.- rrr!'eo"!-i"iti rrli.'iliiiiTtep,i
-/a,'<-Viele ion of
ar I Pla
Jim I'lorgan arrived.
Jim sayre showed olans and-elevations and explained that the staff recommended approvalbecause there wouid ue no oJtri;;;i;i .ir.it.o; til iilJiiilrg properties, therewas a phvsica'l hardship' ani il'li"i-*.".lother ua"iini"i-diiint"o for the construcron:l'ff[:::"'Jr'I"ir.J'rl;"n!:93';i:.1!*j*1.;,:iijii:.i'ii'.t to-pr jcr fi;"il;e"
l.lu Itr 1 Itlu l ?{t'
VAILTOWN COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1995
7:30 P.M. lN TOV COUNCTL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
1, CITIZENPARTICIPATION.
2. ConsentAgenda:
Approval of the Minutes tor the meetings of November 7 and 21 , 1995.
3. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1995, first relrding of an ordinance repealing and reenacting
Chapter 18.39 (Ski Base/Flecreation Zone Olrttt"U of the Vait Municifat Coie and approvin[
the Development Plan for the Golden Peak Ski Base, 485 Vail Valley Drive/TradtF, VaiiVillage Sth Filing, and Tract B, Vail Village 7th Filing. Appticant VLilAssociates,'tnc.,
represented by David Corbin.
4' Resolution No.27, Series of 1995, a Resolution setting the date for a Special Election for thepurpose of electing a Council member to complete the unexpired term of Margaret A.
Ostedoss, term to expire November, 1997.
5. Appointment of Local Licensing Authority Member.
6. An appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's decision to deny the requested
front setback variance proposed for the residence currently under construction on Lot 6,
Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision/2832 C Kinnickinnick Boad. The appellant, Bob Bome,represented by sally Brainerd of RKD Design lnc., is appealin! the planning andEnvironmental Commission's denial of the front setback vari'ance iequest, pursu-ant to
Section 18.62.070, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
7 ' Appeal of a DRB decision to approve the Intemational Wing at the Lodge at Vail, located at174 E. Gore Creek Drive. Applicant Town Council and LuAnn Wells.
8. Town Manage/s Report.
9. Adjoumment.
NorEUpocLonMtNGS,llTllllpJ"*Rr,nMESBELow:
rHE NExr vArL rowN
"l.!til'L llou*" woRK sEssroN
wlLL BE oN TUESDAY, 1212l9s, BEG]NN|NG AT 2:00 p.M. tN Tov couNctL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSIONWILL BE ON TUESDAY, tZt9195, llBqlNNtNG AT 2:00 p.M. tN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCTL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 12liU9E, BEG|NN|NG AT 7:30 p.M. tN TOV COUNCTL CHAMBERS.
||||l
!101-$ry-ugqe_interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. please call 47g-z114voice or479-2356 TDD for information.
C:\AGENDATC
Donovan felt
should be an
the corr{n€rcial space request was excessiv€, that the corrnercial spaceaccessory to the lodging.
(
(
Morgan asked Eskwith whether or not he felt the applicant was asking for a-changein the substance, and, Eskwith.reptieo-ttrit rre wai-6u;;;;;ri19 the same thinq. Hei::t.o that the Town had the inhirent power to chariee til iiid il;#';;'o'Biis.."a
Patten stated that this t{as rnore of a rezoning with the reshaping of the s0D, andthat it woutd be a recommendation to-the Town-co*ii,ii'*r,o-ft;ii i.;; io-pilr'unordinance. Morqan riked ail;;ii, -uri iounJ-ti,"-riisiiil;ie"persona.py offensive.Piper felt that this-,wut . ruior-ili"d.,lg the original sDD because of the additionof the Amoco site and.-the reqiest tor"ioa'itionai efiin.'II-t"tt that there wasa strong impact on vair Road. He rert-ttre,iil;;;;;or'i,, a personar opinion,and also felt that on-approach'ing the 4-way one observed the imnediate area orj!:.ul:l lgalfy. He feil ilrat tfie lindscaped corner was !ood, and had no problemwrtn-the parking spaces proposed, ana waniio-to-iJe tiii-"6ioitiona'l uses remainas 1S.
Ryan stated that the staff did their best to listen to the old tapes and to get iinformatjon from them. He fert that lt"r" w."" severar posrErve aspects of theproposal, but was basicailv concirnea wiilr ih.-*;;;;i;o"l--rn. sraff fert thatthe Amoco site should le
"izoneJ-to-Fn"ana ilrere irrouiJ-l. in amendment to thesDO' specificailv ror phasii-iv-a-i,'ttit tt.y were not just minor changes.The staff did noi "i:?ryind changini io'permiitea usei-thJ-ionditional uses listed,they did recorrnend deleting ttre ieliion loncerning-aiitini"-o"tween buildings,as this had been eriminatei rrom-iii'6tn." sDD's,-did noi-"".'*.nd itern D, usingaverage heisht, did not. "".ott"na-ii"i-1, .r,ingiis-i;""GirA and a'powing additionalfloor area ior commercier-itt;-;;e,-iut'neeaed to know which rures wou.rd appry.
Ryan said the staff approved the amount of parking.
Piper suggested there-f...1 yoF on the.proposai with the exception of the allowanceof changing conditional uses to permitttd uses.
Morgan moved and Donovan seconded to den.y the uest based on the ma itude andsca le.e vote was 4 in avor o dt -aqa r nst nla wltn Pie
xterior 11 teration for the Lod at Vail to add aace and t
to the
sacatonsthePl aza qs'Plaza
st6e.
3l;:o-tJ'":liffor:nBl.r:il1.r|;-!:dse-at-vair.wen! io the Town councit they were;:l'lJ',[jiil":',:':":ltl":::i:-:ldi:i: ;ii"o"i!1ff #ll #:i'il.'3iilrl?!i.lli,llyiffi:1.:,lo"l":1"1"::::, ,* il!:11.ijetii-r,r;;e Jil"oii"i.ii.rillJl"il
#tH.:"J":ff: gil,:r-"i.n-"JJ,. fi i;fi:i";;;iil.I";"i;:";";,lilj,ij.ii'ul{,
il3"li'i!,'lT.,jl';"i;,lg' ;1,::l;:::i'ii-llilir;:; T:i;:l :illil:3i,'i.Ji;;ll.lJl"y:',:,':i:i,;::y:L",i1!::' qF #,;lji;i#:' ;"',[lfi"fi,1::.ffi"ft
":iil'l8.ono"o
I
irrtC.L n i"r$"" tc''74't )
abstainino.
Exhiblt F
and Tro