Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 Vail Town Council Minutes.. .., M MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING January 3, 1.995 7:30 P.M. ~^ A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 3, 1995, in the Council Chambers o£ the Vaii Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybi.ll Navas Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Jan Strauch TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Sob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town A~~~.ney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager, Acting on behalf of Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Partiapation. Kit Williams, resident in the 11th Filing of East Vail, discussed a chain station that had been added to the I-70 expanse this summer that was now having detrimental effects on the local neighborhood. Items of concern for local residents were as follows: trucks idling producing enormous amounts of carbon monoxide as well as noise pollution; truck drivers urinating in public view; "peeping tom" behavior infringing on privacy for these homes; the widening of the interstate and increased steepness of slope and grade coming off the interstate that adds to a dangerous situation; visual effects; decreased real estate values since this residential neighborhood is directly positioned by a truck stop; and so on. Kit indicated CDOT had posted additional signs and between State Patrol and the Vail Police Department, both agencies have been very helpful in making sure that truckers were there for no longer than it took to chain up before they start over the pass. Additional suggestions and alternatives would involve using the Edwards rest area which has both public facilities and ample parking as the chaining up station; this would further allow trucks to be chained as they go through Dowd Junction. Another suggestion was to request a toxicology report that determines the actual affect of carbon monoxide being generated by idling trucks. Areal estate appraisal of the devaluation of this neighborhood was requested and a letter of support from the Vail Town Council to the Governor's office in regard to resolving these problems. Council requested Bob McLaurin schedule a follow-up on this issue at next week's work session. Second on the agenda was Vail Valley Marketing Board appointments. Out of the seventeen applicants for four positions, the following members were appointed: Barbara Black and M. Ross Boyle, 4 year t~~~~~s, and Dean Liotta and John Garth, 2 year t~~a,.~s. Third on the agenda was a Consent Agenda which contained the following items: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meeting of December b, 1994. B. Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1994, second reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 5.32 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Section 5.32.040; providing for the issuance of bed and breakfast permits for the service of complimentary alcohol under certain circumstances; and amending Chapter 2.20, Local Licensing Authority, to add an application fee for bed and breakfast permits; to revise the fee charged to transfer license; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. ~. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 1!03!36 C. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1995, a Resolution designating a public place within the Town of Vail for the posting of notice for public meetings of the Vail Town Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board, and other boards, commissions, and authorities of the Town ~° of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. After brief discussion in regard to Ordinance No. 32, Jim Shearer moved to ary~ove the consent agenda with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Forth on the agenda was Resolution No. 2, Series of 1995, a Resolution setting the date for a special election for the purpose of submitting to the voters for .their approval or disapproval, Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1994, an ordinance restricting the sale or possession of assault weapons; and submitting to the voters for their approval or disapproval a question regarding the construction of a cem~t~~y. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. After discussion of the actual wording for both issues, the following questions were arr~oved by Council. a. Shall Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1994, an Ordinance restricting the sale or possession of assault weapons be approved? b. Shall the Town of Vail construct a cemetery as generally proposed in the Town of Vail Municipal Cemetery Master Plan to be located on the upper bench of Donovan Park, Vail, Colorado, with no increase in taxes? Paul Johnston moved to ayt,~ove wording for both ballot questions, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Although this type of election does not require them, Town Manager Bob McLaurin said the Town would prepare pro/con statements on the two ballot issues for distribution to all registered voters. Council members further requested a copy of the assault weapons ordinance be included in the informational materials. Fifth on the agenda was the Town Manager's report. McLaurin indicated he had no further comments, if there were no questions. Following the Town Manager's report, Peggy Osterfoss indicated the Council was interested in appointing an Associate Municipal Judge by the name of Jim Stanley from Breckenridge, who would be serving up to twenty hours per year with funds not to exceed $1,000.00 annually, as a substitute for Vail Municipal Judge, Buck Allen, when he is out due to illness or other absences. Merv Lapin moved to approve this appointment, with a second coming from Jim Shearer. The motion was passed unanimously, 7-0. At this time a motion to go into executive session to consider an agreement with Vail Associates was made by Merv Lapin, seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. T'he time was 8:25 P.M. The Council reconvened at 10:30 P.M. to adjourn the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Mar are~t Ate. Osterfoss Ma o g ~ Y ATTEST: Holl L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Y Minutes taken by Pamela A. Brandmeyer for Holly L. McCutcheon 2 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 1!09!96 -.:' MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING January 17, 1995 7:30 P.M. Are ular meetin of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesda anuar 17 1995 in g g Y• J y , the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Jan Strauch TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none at this Time. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda which contained the following items: A. Appointment of Election Judges. Paul Johnston moved for approval of the four nominees, Karen Morter, Mary Jo Allen, Liz Picket, and Jeanne Tilkemeier, which was seconded by Jim Shearer. The motion and second were amended to include an alternate, Pam Story. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 17.26 Condominium Conversion. Tom Moorhead presented this ordinance with a request that the language be modified to take out the wording "dwelling units", limiting it to "lodges and accommodations units," as discussed in the afternoon work session. Jim Shearer moved to approve Ordinance No. 1 as presented with the . afternoon's amendments on the first reading, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Section 1$.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code regarding the maximum allowable height far garages in the front setback of lots exceeding a thirty percent average slope. Lauren Waterton proposed language as follows: "Garages located in the front setback as provided for in this Section 18.63.050 shall be limited to one story in height with the addition of a pitched or flat roof and subject to review and approval by the Design Review Board." Staff further recommended that there be an insertion of language: limiting one story in heighfA t~. a ~t.axt~ r~~ ~, f~. Tom Steinberg moved to pass .: .... Ordinance No. 2 on first reading, with a~ second from Paul Johnston A vote was taken and the motion passed 43, with Navas, Strauch, and Osterfoss opposed. Item No. 5 Citizen Participation resumed. Andy Wiessner, 811 Potato Patch Drive, congratulated the Council on proposing to ban assault weapons in Vail. He said the only thing assault weapons are good for is killing lots of people. He stated a lot of citizens in the valley are in support of what the Council's done. Paul Johnston encouraged everyone to come out to vote on February 7, 1995. 1 Vai] Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes iM7l95 :~: Item No. 6 Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1995, firs{ reading of an ordinance vacating a pedestrian easement located at 890 and 891 Red Sandstone Circle. Tom Moorhead informed Council that in 1970 there was a 10 ft. wide utility and pedestrian easement located between 890 and 891 Red Sandstone Circle, running the length of the lot which connected Red Sandstone Circle through then undeveloped Town owned land to the Sandstone lot. This particular easement is no longer viable as a path for pedestrians, although it remains crucial as a utility easement. Christie Hochtl appeared before Council and asked Council to vacate the pedestrian easement. Previously, Council had referred the vacation of easement back to the PEC, which board was in favor of vacating this pedestrian easement. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1995, on first reading as was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance authorizing a first supplemental trust indenture to the trust indenture executed in connection with the Town of Vail, Colorado single family mortgage revenue refunding bonds, series of 1992; ratifying certain action heretofore taken; authorizing the execution and delivery by the Town of said first supplemental trust indenture; repealing action heretofore taken in conflict herewith. Steve Thompson was contacted by Bruce Lewis of First Interstate Bank concerning this amendment to the trust indenture. The original bond counsel who wrote the trust indenture for the 1992 mortgage revenue bonds notified him there were some changes that needed to be made to the indenture, specifically, sections 507a and 509. First Interstate drafted the ordinance. The amendments are housekeeping items re: how the cash flow was prioritized. Paul Johnston made a motion to table this ordinance until Council can consult with the Town's bond counsel and underwriters to better understand the matter and its impact, which was seconded by Torn Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 8 was Resolution No. 3, Series of 1995, a resolution declaring February b-12, 1995 MS Awareness Week. Paul Johnston made a motion to approve this resolution, with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 9 was the Town Council appeal of a PEC decision to approve a conditional use permit that allows a helipad to be located in Ford Park. Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center. Council discussed earlier today that because of a desire on the part of the staff and the Town Council to obtain additional information and data re: short and long t~.~a~ solutions on the location of the helipad, it would be arr~opriate to continue this discussion. Merv Lapin made a motion to table this matter to February 7, 1995, which was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed . unanimously, 7-0. Ifem No. ~~ was a report from Bob McLaurin. The agenda for the CAST meeting February 8-10 is still being developed. Also, the bids were opened for 8 new buses, which came in at $332,000.00 below our estimate. Citizens, Lisa Mutz and another representative of the Nancy Davis Foundation and the Race to Erase MS came forward to talk about Resolution No. 3, Series of 1995, a resolution declaring February b-12, 1995, MS Awareness Week. One out of every 800 people in Colorado has MS. They were thrilled the community has proclaimed a week dedicated to MS awareness. Vail's response is helping to make the Race to Erase'95 the most successful event to date. Their goal is to surpass last year's 1.5 million, which could not be done without the wonderful support of the entire community. ]an Strauch requested undergrounding utilities. Jan had noticed some wires were taken down this winter that go all the way across the hillside, which prompted this question. Merv Lapin made a motion to move into executive session to discuss the contract re: refunding bands, which was seconded by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. 2 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutee 1117!96 ~~ There being no further business, a motion was made, seconded and passed, to reconvene and adjourn at approximately 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ., ,~ Q'~ ' Margar~A. Osterfoss, Mayor v • f A~t t~tJST: ~~-lo~r'~ ~~~fCc~~~ Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaocurale.} Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 1!17!96 ~ , .:" MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING February 7, 1995 7:30 P.M. _~ A regular meeb.ng of the Vafl Town Council was held on Tuesday, February 7,1995, m the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Jan Strauch TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Anne Wright, on behalf of the Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda which contained the following items: A. Arrloval of the Minutes for the meeting of January 3rd,1995. B. Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 17.26 Condominium Conversion. C. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending Section 18.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code regarding the maximum allowable height for garages in the front setback of lots exceeding a thirty percent average slope. D. Ordinance Na. 3, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance vacating a pedestrian easement located at 890 and 891 Red Sandstone Circle. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Merv Lapin moved to remove from the Cansent Agenda Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1995, seconded by Sybill Navas. Tom Steinberg moved that we approve the remainder of the consent agenda (items A, B and D}, with a second by Merv Lapin. Tom Moorhead noted he received a telephone call this date, S from an individual who desired to make public comment on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995. He informed her that the meeting started at 7:30 p.m. Therefore Tom Steinberg withdrew his motion to allow this person's comment. Merv Lapin moved to approve item A and D of the Consent Agenda, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 Discussion of Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending Section 18.b9.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code regarding the maximum allowable height for garages in the front setback of lots exceeding a thirty percent average slope. Mike Mollica answered Council questions. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1995, on second reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed 6-1, with Sybill Navas opposed. Item No. 4 was the Town Council appeal of a PEC decision to approve a conditional use permit, that allows a helipad to be located in Ford Park. Merv Lapin moved to call up this item at the February 21 evening session so that additional information would be available, with a second by Sybill. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. `1 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 7J07195 _, ~ ,~ Item No. 5 Design Review Board Appointments. Wi11 be appointing two members with two year t~l~~~s to DRB. Applicants are Mike Arnett, Sally Brainerd, Greg Moffet, and Louise Young. A motion was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Paul Johnston to appoint Mike Arnett and Sally Brainerd. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7- 0. Item No. 6 Art In Public Places and Housing Authority appointments. Jan Strauch moved to take up this item at the February 21 evening session, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was a report from Bob McLaurin, who updated Council on the Vail Improvement Process and spoke about a Council retreat. Discussion took place for a date for a full day retreat, at which time Tuesday, March 2$, 1995 was designated. Item No. 8 Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 17.26 Condominium Conversion was brought up for discussion. Paul Johnston made a motion to approve this ordinance on second reading and was seconded by Sybil! Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Paul Johnston moved that the Council go into executive session to discussion personnel matters and Jan Strauch seconded. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-Q. There being no further business, a motion was made, seconded and passed, to reconvene ' and adjourn at arr, oximately 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margar t A. Osterfoss, Mayor/ A~t # r:ST: Holly L. McGutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names of certain individuals vlno gave public input may be inaocurale.} f 2 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 2107!95 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING February 21, 1995 7:3Q P.M. Are ular meetin of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesda , Februar 21, 1995, g g y Y in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk . The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Ka.t Williams spoke concerning the I-70 chain up area at East Vail. He thanked the town for its support, He received a response from the CDOT that he thought insufficient. He asked for more suppart from the Town and Bob McLaurin informed him that he has an appointment with CDOT next week and would keep both Kit and the Council informed. Elaine Kelton expressed a concern that Vail is no longer user-friendly to tourists. She recommended creating "unadvertised, random acts of kindness," such as free parking in the structures for a day in thanks for visiting Vail. Council asked her to work with the Town Manager in more detail. Second on the agenda was Proclamation No. 2, Series of 1995, Girl Scouts' Be Your Best Day. Present to represent the Girl Scouts from Troop #289 was Kaitlin Russell and from Troop #145 were Nicole Layman, Lauren Davis, Courtney Davis, Emily Ewing and Erika Ring. Tom Steinberg made a motion to pass Proclamation No. 2, which was seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Third on the agenda was a discussion of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1995, and first -~ reading of an ordinance authorizing a first supplemental trust indenture to the trust indenture executed in connection with the Town of Vail, Colorado single family mortgage revenue refunding bonds, series of 1992; ratifying certain action heretofore taken; authorizing the execution and delivery by the Town of said first supplemental trust indenture; repealing action heretofore taken in conflict hc~ c with. ~. Keith Tully of George K. Baum & Associates explained in connection with the December 1st, 1994 interest payment date, the bond trustee discovered that certain provisions of the Trust Indenture were inconsistent with the cash flow proofs prepared in connection with the initial issuance of the bonds. With passage of this ordinance the inconsistencies will be resolved. With the aid of a flow chart Keith explained that the change to the Trust Indenture is that any amounts in the Debt Service Reserve Fund in excess of the amounts required to be held in that fund will be transferred to the Revenue Fund rather than to the Extraordinary Redemption Account. This will allow any such excess reserves to be used to pay debt service on the bonds then currently due, if so needed. The Town's obligation to make deposits to the Mortgage Reserve Fund has been terminated. Moody's is providing written notice that such tG~~~~ination and/or withdrawal will not cause the rating of the Bonds to be withdrawn or reduced below the initial rating of the Bonds. 1. Vai] Town Gouncik Evening Messing Minutee ?12ll9& ~. No amendment to the Trust Indenture or notice to Bond holders is required by the Trust Indenture in order for this obligation of the Town to be terminated. All that is required is the notice from Moody's described above, which is being provided. There are no indications of any financial stress or difficulty for this Bond issue. The change made by the ordinance assures that monies held under the txust estate are used in the proper priority. A motion was made by Sybill Navas and seconded by Merv Lapin to pass Chdinance No. 4, Series of 1995, on first reading. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-Q. Fourth on the agenda was Planning & Environmental Commission Appointments. Applicants are Kevin Deighan, Greg Moffet, and Henry Pratt. A motion was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Paul Johnston to appoint Kevin Deighan, Greg Moffet, and Henry Pratt, each with two year terms. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Fifth on the agenda was Art In Public Places Appointments. Applicants are Jim Cotter, Lolita Higbe, Kathy Langenwalter, Marianne McTighe, Ken Robbins, and Karen Smith. A motion was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Jim Shearer to appoint Jim Cotter, Lolita Higbe, Kathy Langenwalter, and Ken Robbins, each with three year t~=~~~s. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. - Sixth on the agenda was Housing Authority Appointments. Applicants are Dick Cleveland and Kyle Webb. A motion was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Tom Steinberg to appoint Dick Cleveland, with a five year term. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Seventh on the agenda was a Town Council appeal of a major CCII exterior alteration and parking and common area variances for a proposed building expansion at the Lions Square Lodge. A site visit was held at the work session earlier in the day. Jim Curnutte explained the conditions and alterations involved in the project. Bill Pierce, representing the Lions Square Lodge Homeowner's Association, spoke to the Council and answered their inquiries. Council members stressed that they would like to see the exterior reworked slightly to become less contemporary looking. Paul Johnston made a motion, with a second from Sybill Navas to arr~ ove plans for the lobby addition, upholding a~,ri oval by the PEC on February 13,and including the conditions of their approval. A vote was taken and passed with a 5-1 vote, with Tom Steinberg opposed. . Eighth on the agenda was a Town Council appeal of a PEC decision to approve a conditional use p~,.~~~it, that allows a helipad to be located in Ford Park. Andy Knudtsen explained that representatives of staff, the ambulance district, the hospital, the helicopter pilots, and Vail community met to discuss alternatives for a helipad site. They focused on what would and would not work. There were comments from Dan Feeney of the hospital, Dick Duran of the Vail Fire Department, Diana Donovan and Mike Halpert, Vail residents. Paul Johnston also had comments and stepped down from the Council due to a conflict of interest. Jim Shearer moved, with a second from Merv Lapin to modify a conditional use permit approved by the PEC for a helipad to be temporarily located at Ford Park. Several conditions placed by the PEC were eliminated, but agreed with the PEC decision to discontinue the Ford Park helipad site after May 1. Council authorized the former helipad site, west of the Municipal Complex, to be used after the May 1 deadline until a permanent site can be created in the future at the hospital. If the hospital is unable to accommodate the helipad on-site, the Municipal Camplex will be designated as the permanent location. The Council also recognized that several minor improvements to the helipad site would have to be made at the Municipal Complex in preparation for the May transition. A few items will be required to be completed prior to May 1, 1995. G Vai] Town Couna>? Evening Meeting Minutes 2l2ll95 Others which are more involved can wait until a permanent site is selected. If the site west of the Municipal Complex is ultimately selected, the balance of the improvemen#s will be made. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0, with Paul Johnston abstaining. There being no further business, a motion was made, seconded and passed, to adjourn at approximately 1:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, a ~- Marg et A. Osterfoss, yor A l .~~~ST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of tise Tawn Clerk. {'Names of certain individuals who gave public input may tre inaccurate.) • 3 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 2!2]!'95 J ~. MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 7,1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybil! Navas Jim Shearer Jan Strauch TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of January 17, February 7, and February 21, 1995. B. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance authorizing a first supplemental trust indenture to the trust indenture executed in connection with the Town of Vail, Colorado single family mortgage revenue refunding bonds, series of 1992; ratifying certain action heretofore taken; authorizing the execution and delivery by the Town of said first supplemental trust indenture; repealing action heretofore taken in conflict herewith. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, b-0. Third on the agenda was a discussion and first reading of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1995, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993; an ordinance amending Special Development District No. 5 and providing for a development plan and its contents; permitted, conditional and accessory uses; development standards, recreation amenities tax, and other special provisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Kirk Aker was present representing the owner, Walid Said. Also present to represent Simba Run was Dan Hancock. Merv Lapin moved to approve this Ordinance with the nine conditions recommended by the PEC and one additional condition, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6~0. Fourth on the agenda was a discussion and reading of Resolution No. 5, Series of 1995, a resolution modifying the Town of Vail Land Use Plan, changing the land use designation of Tract C, Vail Village 7th Filing f~.,~~~ Park to Low Density Residential, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Rick Sackbauer, Pat Daulphinais and Byron Brown were present to represent the Vail Valley Water District. Vail resident, Ann Rapetti, spoke in favor of this effort. Merv Lapin moved to arY~ove this Ordinance with the four conditions recommended by the PEC, as modified by the Council, and two additional conditions, and was second by Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Fifth on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was discussion as to the status of the East Vail Chain Up Area and Bob gave a review of his meeting with CDOT last week and CDOT's willingness to look into relocating this chain up area. ~. Vail Town CouncB mooning Mooting Minutes 3!7185 ~~ There being no further business, Paul Johnston made a motion which was seconded by jan Strauch, to adjourn at approximately 8:54 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~• ~- Marg et A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Tawn Clerk. (`Names of wrtain individuals who gave public Input may be inaaurate.) 2 Vai] Town CounciE Evening ]sleeting iNinutea 51'7195 ''~ MINUTES NAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING March 21, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 21, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Tom Steinberg Jan Straurh TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Pamela A. Brandrneyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993; an ordinance amending Special Development District No. 5 and providing for a development plan and its contents; p~.~~~itted, conditional and accessory uses; development standards, recreation amenities tax, and other special provisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Sybill Navas moved to arY~ove the Consent Agenda with a second by Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Peggy announced that item five on the agenda, the Roundabout Bid Award, would be moved to the March 2$, 1995 work session to allow staff time to analyze the bid submittal and provide a recommendation back to the Council on bid award. At this time Merv suggested the Council take citizen input from individuals who were • here this evening for the bid award item. Citizens who commented on the Roundabout project were was follows: Warren Miller, John Zonner, Jim Lamont, Norman Robinson, Steve Zorichak, Dan Charboneau, David Reichert, Trevor Bradway, Pepi Langegger, H~l~~~ann Staufer, Michael Jewett and Eileen Connors. Third on the agenda was a public meeting regarding the Agreement of the Town of Vail/Nail Associates Program to Manage Peak Periods. Andy Daly, Chris Ryman, and Paul Testweed were present representing Vail Associates. Nolan Rosall was present representing RRC Associates. Local citizens who participated with comments were: Bob Armour, Kathy Langenwalter, Rod Slifer, Kenny Friedman, John Horan-Kates, Stan Cope, Bruce Chapman, Michael Jewett, Jill Kovacevich, Hermann Staufer, Jim Lamont, Eileen Connors, Colleen McCarthy, Frank McKibbon, Warren Miller and Dan Charboneau. Fourth on the agenda was Resolution No. 4, Series of 1995, a Resolution Arr~ owing and Adopting the Town of Vail/Nail Associates Program to Manage Peak Periods. After the above lengthy discussion and concurrence with Vail Associates, Merv Lapin moved to hold the vote on this resolution until March 4, 1995 Council meeting. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 9l2V95 1 Sixth on the agenda was Serrano's call-up of the PEC decision. On March 13,1995, the PEC voted 5-1 to approve the Serrano's redevelopment. The project involves an exterior alteration; variances for site coverage, stream setback, and common area; as well as conditional uses for a second floor dinning deck and office space on the third floor. The PEC approved the request with seven conditions. The staff memo to PEC, a draft of the minutes from PEC, and notes from a conceptual DRB hearing were included in the Council packet for review. Larry Eskwith informed the Council that he had been asked by Glen Heelan to withdraw as council for Oscar Tang citing a conflict of interest. There was discussion between the Town Council, Mr. Eskwith, and Mr. Heelan as to whether this issue should be called up at a later date. Mr. Heelan stated that he would like to go through with the matter this evening. Mr. Eskwith and Mr. Heelan made phone calls to Mr. Heelan's attorney to verify that Mr. Eskwith could represent Mr. Tang. At this time the Council skipped to the Manager's report. Bob McLaurin added Monday, March 20, 1995 went very well. seventh item on the agenda, the Town that the Vail Commons open house held Tom Steinberg made a comment that he witnessed small children playing in the Ptarmingan Road avalanche path. He asked if it was feasible or possible to put up warning signs. The Council came back to item six on the agenda at this time after the attorneys for Mr. Tang and Mr. Heelan had reached an agr~,r...ent. Dalton Williams and Bob Armour of the PEC spoke regarding the PEC decision. Glen Heelan and Mark Donaldson spoke on behalf of the Serrano's project. Larry Eskwith spoke on behalf of Oscar Tang. Mark Matthews spoke on behalf of the Mill Creek Court Building. jim Lamont spoke on behalf of the East Village Homeowner's Association. Bill Whiteford, Jr. spoke on behalf of his mother, Greta Parks, who is the owner of the Serrano's property. After lengthy discussion Paul Johnston moved to uphold the PEC at,t,~ oval with the • additional conditions that the office space be reduced by 200 sq. ft.; that the site coverage variance request be eliminated; that the deck not encroach more then 4 ft. on Town property; and that there be a deed restriction on the office space. This motion was seconded by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and passed 4-2 with Sybill Navas and Tom Steinberg opposed. There being no further business the meeting was adjourn at arr~oximately 1:00 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. A l 1 SST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk. .~:-- Q ~ Osterfoss,ll~Yayor 2 Vai] Town CounciE Evening ffieeting Minutes 3/2ll95 ~' , MIlVUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 4, T995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jan Strauch TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Sob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joe Stauffer spoke regarding our current business license fee schedule and his thoughts that this system has worked well in the past and should continue with present fee schedule. Second on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of March 7 and March 21, 1995. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Jan Strauch moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Third on the agenda was Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1993 to provide changes to Area A requirements for SDD #4 that concern the development plans for the Westhaven Condominiums (The Ruins) Development site and setting forth details in regard thereto. On February 27,1995, the PEC voted 4-1 recommending approval of the requested major amendment to the Cascade Village SDD. Andy Knudtsen presented this Ordinance. Kathy Langenwalter presented drawings of the design. Jerry W.,~~~~an, the developer, also had input. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Sybill Navas moved to approve Ordinance No. 8 with rewording of Condition B, that owner agrees to be subject to a future employee housing ordinance. Condition F was also modified. This motion was seconded by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and passed, 4-2, with Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg being opposed. Fourth on the agenda was Resolution No. 4, Series of 1995, a Resolution Approving and Adopting the Town of Vail/Vail Associates Program to Manage Peak Periods. Andy Daly was present to represent Vail Associates. Bruce Chapman was present to represent the W. Forest Road property owners. He discussed a meeting that was held between VA, the Town and himself in which they were not able to reach an agreement regarding snowcats and Category III. Michael Jewett thanked Council for giving the public time to review the agreement prior to voting. Vai] Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 419195 Cindy Jacobson spoke in support of the W. Forest Road property owners and the fact that they have been trying to work with VA for several years regarding snowcats, etc. without success. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 4 with a second by Jan 5trauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, b-0. At this time Peggy announced that the Roundabout project was approved at the work session earlier this date and that Vail Associates will be making a $50p,000 contribution to this project. Fifth on the agenda was Resolution No. 9, Series of 1995, a request to amend the Vail Land Use Plan from Open Space to Public-Semi Public to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail golf course maintenance facility, located at 1278 Vail Valley Drive, Parcel E, Vail Valley 7th Filing. Since 1966, the golf course maintenance facility has been located on Parcel E. In 1980 this property was annexed into the Town and zoned Natural Area Preservation District. This facility is a nonconforming use and any proposed changes to the facility requires a change in the Vail Land Use Plan and a zoning change. Changing the Vail Land Use Plan is the first step in a three step process, that would enable the VRD to rezone the property to the General Use (GU) District and apply for a conditional use permit to remodel the facility. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed this . request on March 27, 1995 and unanimously (6-0) voted to recommend approval of this request. Russell Forrest explained the change to the Land Use Plan. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 9 with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Sixth on the agenda was Resolution No. 10, Series of 1995, a Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Vail expressing concern about "takings" legislation in general and urging elected representatives to .,nose SB 136, HB 1171 and similar legislation. At the work session on March 28, 1995, Council directed staff to prepare a Resolution apposing the "takings" regulations presently being considered in the Colorado State Legislation and in both Houses of the U.S. Congress. Tom Moorhead prepared and explained this Resolution. The Council suggested that this Resolution should be forwarded to the State and Federal legislators, Governor Romer, Colorado Municipal League, Colorado Association of Ski Towns, and Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Paul Johnston moved to arr~ove Resolution No. 10 with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Seventh on the agenda was Appeal of DRB decision to deny the proposed additions and remodel of John ICrediet's home located at 226 Forest Road/Lot 11-A, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: John Krediet. Council was asked by staff to review the design review guidelines pertaining to Duplex and Primary/Secondary development; review the proposed architecture for the Krediet remodel; and uphold, modify or overturn the DRB denial of the project. Vail Town Council >+waning Meeting Minutes 414!95 ,. handy Stouder stated that although the DRB felt that the proposed remodel was a definite improvement to Mr. Krediet's home, they felt bound by the design review guidelines for duplex and primary/secondary development which require architectural integration between structures. The existing Krediet and Samuels residences are located on the same lot in the Primary/Secondary zone district. Although the two units are physically separated, the question remained whether they are architecturally integrated according to the design review guidelines. The DRB felt that the proposed remodel and addition to the primary unit (Krediet residence} produced an architectural look that departed from the current architectural style of the secondary unit (Samuels residence) and thus did not meet the design review guideline requirement of architectural integration between primary and secondary units. Steve Riders made a short presentation on behalf of John Krediet. Mr. Riders cited several examples of other primary/secondary units that lacked architectural integration yet were arr.oved. Mike Arnett and Hans Wolrich were present representing the Design Review Board. Mike summarized the DRB's position. Merv Lapin moved to uphold the DRB decision to deny appeal with a second by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and passed, 5-1, with Sybili Navas opposed. Eighth on the agenda was Town Council call up of the Design Review Board (DRB) approval for a proposed building expansion and site amendments at the Lions Square Lodge, located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead First Filing, First Addition. Applicant: Bill Pierce, representing the Lion Square Lodge Condominium Association. Jim Curnutte asked Council to review the proposed building expansion and site amendments and uphold/overturn/modify the decision of the DRB to grant final design approval for the proposed project. On February 13,1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) arr~oved the requested common area and parking variances and a major exterior alteration in the CCII Zane District, with conditions. The vote was ~-0. On February 21,1995, the Town Council "called up" the PEC decision for further review. The Council decided to let the PEC approvals stand in order to allow the project to receive final Design Review Board review. The Council made the applicant aware that they may then "call up" the DRB approval for further review, if they so desired. On March 15,1995, the Design Review Board approved the project, with conditions, with a vote of 3-2. Bill Pierce and Jim Turner were present representing Lions Square Lodge. Bob Borne, Hans Wolrich, and Mike Arnett were present representing the DRB. Jan Strauch moved to overturn DRB approval of the building expansion, with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and failed, 1-5, with Jan Strauch voting in favor of the motion; thereby leaving the DRB approval in place. Ninth on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLaurin's only additional note was that he would have an update on the Gypsum bus route to them by the x#/11/95 work session. 3 Vai] Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 414185 h '1 " t - V t.. a n LJ There being no further business, Tom Steinberg moved to adjourn at a~,~,~oximately 11:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~, ~~ Marga et A. Osterfoss, Mayor :.7 • ATTEST: ~~~ "~~tZc.(~.tJ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk, {"Names of certain individuals whc gave public input may be irtamirate.~ Vai3 Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 919195 rY +' , MnvuTEs VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING April 18, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 18,1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Paul Johnston Sybil! Navas Jan Strauch Jim Shearer MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk • The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, which there was none. The second item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1995, an animal control and carriage operations ordinance. Tom Moorhead and Bob Slagle presented this Ordinance. After two work sessions, a comprehensive animal control ordinance which also addresses horse carriages is presented for consideration. Staff is asking Council to select 1 or 2 alternatives for control of animals. Either the leash/tethering requirement as presently exists or as presented in the new ordinance. The following citizens made comments on this Ordinance. Tom Talbot, Heather Smith, Blondie Vucich, Flo Steinberg and Josh Hall. Paul Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 5 with conditions including a leash free . zone, time limitations on second and subsequent offenders, and additional requirements for horse carriage equipment and testing, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed, 5-1 with Jan Strauch .,t,t,osed. The third item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995, an ordinance rezoning Tract C, Vail Village First Filing/967 Vail Valley Drive from the General Use Zone District to the Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District. Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, on behalf of the Vail Valley Consolidated Water District. Jim Curnutte presented this Ordinance. On February 27, 1995, the Water District received Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) review and approval of their request to change the Vail Land Use Plan designation of this property from park to Low Density Residential. On March 7, 1995, the Vail Town Council arr~oved Resolution No. 5, Series of 1995 which authorized the change to the Vail Land Use Plan from Park to Low Density Residential. Resolution No. 5 contained five conditions which must be addressed by the applicant prior to the transfer of ownership of the property. On April 10, 1995 the PEC unanimously approved the Water District's request to rezone Tract C from the General Use District to the Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District {see attached staff memorandum to the PEC and draft copy of the meeting minutes from the April 10, 1995 PEC meeting). Vail Tawn Council Evening Meeting Minutes 4!18195 ~. Paul Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 9, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and failed to receive a majority, 3-3 with Tom Steinberg, Merv Lapin and Jan Strauch ~,rrosed. The Council requested that Tom Moorhead consult "Roberts' Rules of Order" and come back to this issue later in the meeting. Jim Shearer left the meeting at this point. The fourth item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance Na. 8, Series of 1995, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1993 to provide changes to Area A requirements for SDD #4 that concern the development plans for the Westhaven Condominiums (The Ruins} Development site and setting forth details in regard thereto. Andy Knudtsen presented this Ordinance. On February 27, 1995, the PEC voted ~-1 recommending approval of the requested major amendment to the Cascade Village SDD. Kathy Langenwalter and Jerry W~~~~~an were present representing the Ruins. Sybill Navas moved to approve Ordinance No. $, with a second by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and passed 3-2, with Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg ~Nrosed. . The fikth i~~... on the agenda was Resolution No. 11, Series of 1995, a Resolution designating Bank One Wisconsin Trust Co., N.A., the One Group U.S. Treasury Securities Money Market Fund, 111 East Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53202 as a money market account for the funds of the Town as permitted by the Charter of the Town, its Ordinances, and the Statutes of the State of Colorado. Steve Thompson presented this Resolution explaining that our long-term investments managed by Dana Advisors is currently safekept at Colorado National Bank. We want to move the safekeeping to Bank One whose annual fees are less than half of Colorado National Bank's fees. Jan Strauch moved to approve Resolution No. 11 with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0. The sixth item on the agenda was the Alpine Standard/Amoco Sign Variance Request. Sign to be located at the Vail Alpine Standard, 28 Vail Road, Vail Village 2nd. Applicant: Doug Sterkyl. Randy Stouder presented this request and explained that on Apri15,1995 the DRB voted 5-0 recommending approval of the variance request. The changing geometry and landscaping of the main Vail interchange related to the construction of the roundabout necessitates re-orientation of the sign. Since the sign has to be re-oriented and reconstructed for effective signage purposes, the applicant wishes to take this opportunity to update all signage on property to reflect the current corporate name (Amoco} and reduce the non-conforming aspects of the signage to the maximum extent feasible. Staff asked Council to approve variance request with conditions in staff memo. Craig Klemz was present representing Doug Sterkyl. Jan Strauch moved to approve the request with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0. 2 Vai] Town Counci] Evening Meeting Minutes 4/28/95 f r ~ ~1 r The seventh item nn the agenda was the Town Council call up of the PEC approved major exterior alteration and conditional use permit for the Village Center Building (LaTour Restaurant, Cleone's and Gotthelf's Gallery). Located at 122 East Meadow Drive. Applicant: Fred Hibbard. George Ruther presented this call up and asked Council to acknowledge the applicant's request to withdraw the major exterior alteration and conditional use permit approval. At the April 11, 1995, Town Council meeting the Town Council members unanimously approved a motion to call up the PEC approval of the major exterior alteration and conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck request for the Village Center Building. The major exterior alteration and conditional use permit request was unanimously arr~oved by the PEC on April 1p, 1995. Upon hearing of the Town Council's desire to review the PEC's decision, the applicant, Fred Hibbard, has requested to have the item withdrawn. Jan Strauch moved to accept the applicant's withdrawal with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0. At this time Merv reminded the Council of the Town's interest in having someone serve on the Board of Channel 5. . Tom Moorhead came back to the Council with information concerning the 3rd item on the agenda, Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995, and informed Council that the public hearing could be continued to a future Council meeting for further comment and reconsideration of the Ordinance. Paul Johnston moved to continue the public hearing on Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995 to the May 16, 1995 Town Council meeting, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0. The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There being no further business, Jan Strauch moved to adjourn at arYA oximately 9:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, • ~L Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem ATTEST: -- * ~~ ~~~ " ~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Aone Wright on beha{f of the Town Clerk. ("Names of certain ir~viduals who gave public input may be inaccurate.) 3 Vail Town Council Evesdng Meeting Minutee 9118195 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING May 2, 1995 7:30 P.M. ~! A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 2, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Jim Shearer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk i The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Rick Sackbauer, Chairman of the Vail Valley Consolidated Water District gave Council an update on the agenda for the water district. Their Board intends to make a commitment to affordable housing and employee housing. Diana Donovan spoke before Council regarding attempts to have Chalet Road closed off and landscaped. She may come back to the Council at some point to request their support. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Arr,oval of the Minutes for the meetings of April 4 and April 1$, 1995. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Paul Johnston made note of two typos. Merv Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The third item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1995, an animal control and carriage operations ordinance. Tom Moorhead and Bob Slagle presented this ordinance. This is a comprehensive animal control ordinance that also addresses carriage operations in addition to other animal issues. The ordinance now provides for leash free zones as Council directed. Council was asked to pass Ordinance No. 5 with either the leash provisions as contained in Ordinance passed on first reading or as are presently in effect which require leash control in specified areas of the Town. The following citizens came forward to make comments: Matt Donavan, Chuck Ogilby, Sue Dugan, Chris Meisel, Flo Steinberg, Walt Olson, Tom Talbot, Diana Donovan, Blondi Vucich, and Bob Berger. The Council asked if staff could modify the ordinance eliminating the expanded leash ~ law, but strengthening the definition of what it means to have a dog under control. The remaining provisions of the ordinance received support from the Council, including additional protection, enforcement and penalty actions related to dangerous dogs; regulation of horse-drawn carriages; and an accelerated citation process to handle barking dog complaints. Vai] Town Counci€ Evening MeeEing 14~inutee 517196 F~ w ti Merv Lapin moved to table Ordinance No. 5 until the June 6, 1995 meeting with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed 6-1, with Tom Steinberg opposed. The fourth i#em on the agenda was Resolution No. 12, Series of 1995, a Resolution Approving and Adopting the Town of Vail Residential Employee Mortgage Loan Program. Tom Moorhead presented this Resolution. Town Council directed Town staff to work with FirstBank of Vail, develop a program that will provide loans for primary residential property for employees. The property shall be located within the Town of Vail and favorable loan t~.~~~s will be made available by the Town's pledge of funds in the amount of ten (10%) percent of the purchase price of the individual properties. The properties will be subject to deed restrictions which will guarantee that the properties remain available for residential use by employees. Jan.Strauch moved to arr~ove Resolution No. 12 with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fifth item on the agenda was Town Council Call-Up of the Ayy~oved New Temporary Sign for the Cornice Building Sign located at 3b2 Vail Valley Drive/Part of Tract B, Vail Village First Filing. George Ruther presented this item. At the April 25, 1995, Town Council meeting the Town Council members unanimously approved a motion to call up the DRB approval of a new temporary site development sign at the Cornice Building. The temporary site development sign was unanimously ay~,~oved by the DRB on April 19, 1995. The a~.Y~ oval from the DRB carried with it two conditions: 1) The sign be set in the ground on posts rather than a moveable structure as currently designed, and 2) The sign be removed once the property is sold or by 4/19/96, whichever comes first. The new temporary site development sign request was reviewed by staff to insure full compliance with Chapter 16 (sign code) of the Municipal Code. Alan Aarons representing High Tech Signs was present. After Council discussion regarding the size and content of the sign; the intention of section 16.20.160, Temporarv Site Development Sims; and the fact that it had been . displayed within a~,Y~oval, Paul Johnston moved to overturn the DRB approval of the new temporary sign for the Cornice Building sign with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fifth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There being no further business, Jan Strauch moved to adjourn at approximately 10;25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. A t t rC:ST: C ~~~ , ~t'YLU-~iN.LP~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright an behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaaurate.} ~~ ~~~ Osterfoss,~Giayor 2 Vail Town Council Evening Mooting Minutes G/?J91i r {• MINUTES NAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING May 16, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 16, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Paul Johnston Jan Strauch Jim Shearer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: ~ Sob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk MEMBERS ABSENT: Sybill Navas The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, there was none. At this time Paul Johnston made a motion directing staff to prepare a supplemental appropriation of up to $25,000 for the Gypsum/Nail Express. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, b-0. The second item on the agenda Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance rezoning Tract C, Vail Village First Filing/967' Vail Valley Drive from the General Use Zone District to the Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District. Applicant: Pat Dauphinais. Jim Curnutte presented this Ordinance and noted that on February 27, 1995, the Water District received Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC} review and a~,r~oval of their request to change the Vail Land Use Plan designation of this property from park to Low Density Residential. On March 7, 1995, the Vail Town Council approved Resolution No. 5, Series of 1995 which authorized the change to the Vail Land Use Plan from Park to Low Density Residential. Resolution No. 5 contained five conditions which must be addressed by the applicant prior to the transfer of ownership of the property. On April 10, 1995 the PEC unanimously approve the Water District's request to rezone Tract C from the General use district to the Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District (see attached staff memorandum to the PEC and draft copy of the meeting minutes from the April 10, 1995 PEC meeting.) Mayor Osterfoss read Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995 in full. Jan Strauch made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 9, with a second by Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and passed, 5-1. Merv Lapin was opposed. The third item an the agenda Presentations by the three finalists of proposals for the Vail Commons devel~r~=.ent. L Loftus Devel.,~.~~-ent 2. City Market 3. The Gart Companies • In conjunction with the Task Force and public, interview each development team after they have made their presentations. Fifteen minutes is allocated for each presentation, with the following 30 minutes reserved for questions. Since short-listing these three firms, each has received questions and comments about their original proposal. The proposals were reviewed earlier by the Council, Task Force, and community members on March 20, 1995 at the open house and on Apri14, 1995 at 3. Vail Town Caunci] Evening Meeting Minutes 6J1GIA& a public hearing. Staff understands that the proposals presented tonight have been modified in response to the Town's comments. Affordable Housing Development Corporation dropped out. Merv La in stated a conflict of interest in this project and stepped dawn from the p Council table at this time. 1. Presenters for Loftus Development were Randy McNichols, Co-Developer with Jim Loftus; Mike Mulhern, Architect; John B. Young, affordable housing consultant. 2. Presenters for City Market were john L. Caldwell, Director of Real Estate for City Market; Mark Donaldson, Architect; and Robert Warner, Warner Development. 3. Presenters for The Gart Companies were Steve Elkin, Tom Gart; Mark Humphreys, Architect. Presentations were made and questions asked from Council and the public. The fourth item on the agenda Town Council appeal of a PEC decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit that allows a Type II Employee Housing Unit to be ~ located at 126 Forest Road/Lot5, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Ron Byrne. Susan Connelly presented this appeal and noted that on May 8,1995, the PEC at,~xoved with a condition (5-0-1, Greg Moffett abstained) a conditional use permit allowing a Type II employee housing unit to be located at 126 Forest Road. Please see the memo to the PEC for additional background and the condition of approval. jay Peterson was present on behalf of the applicant, Ron Byrne. Paul Johnston made a motion to uphold the PEC decision to approve a conditional use permit, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and failed, 2-3. Merv Lapin, Tom Steinberg and Jan Strauch being opposed. A motion was then made by Jan Strauch to uphold the PEC approval with the addition of a condition that in addition to the restrictions included in the Type Il EHU deed restriction, the applicant agrees to future restrictions that the Town will adopt that pertain to deed restricted employee housing. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed, 4-1. Paul Johnston being opposed. The fifth item on the agenda was a Town Council call-up of Design Review Board approval of Alpine Bank tenant finish at Crossroads Mall, east building (old Verbatim Bookstore location}. At Phis time Merv Lapin stated a conflict of interest stCYred down from the Council table. Susan Connelly presented this call-up and noted that on May 3,1995 the DRB approved a tenant finish and modification to the storefront exterior and arcade roof support columns. Since the Crossroads owners and tenants are in the process of upgrading exterior facades at the mall, the Council is requesting attention to several other maintenance items. Jay Peterson let Council know that Alpine Bank was indeed the applicant for this project. John Young was present representing Alpine Sank. Jan Strauch made a motion to uphold the DRB approval of the Alpine Bank tenant finish at Crossroads Mall, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-Q, with one abstention, Merv Lapin. 2 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 5/1&x95 ~' The sixth item on the agenda was fihe Town Manager's .Report. No additional presentation was made. There being no further business, Jim Shearer moved to adjourn at approximately 10:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, A t-i~t;ST: ~~ A?u ~® Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ~~~. ~~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Deputy Town Clerk Minutes taken by Mne Wright an behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names o1 certain ir~dividuels who gave public input may be inaccurate.f 3 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 5116195 ,r,' `~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, June 6, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P. M. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Jim Shearer Paul Johnston TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob Mcl_aurin, Town Manager Torn Moorhead, Tawn Attorney. Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Lou Meskimen expressed concern about the potential displacement of beavers at Bighorn Park. The beavers, if displaced, will pose the same ar greater problem at another location. He suggested feeding the beavers with fallen or cut trees to help supplement their diet. He asked the Tawn to join him in keeping an eye on the situation. Rick Sackbauer, chairman of the Upper Eagle Valley Water District, read from a press release correcting a Denver news report which cited problems with Vail's water. He said the problems were actually occurring in the Lake Creek Water District, 20 miles west of Vail. The Denver television station ran a retraction to correct the error and offered its apologies. BiA Kerig, Kent Rose, and Paul Gotthelf of the Eagle Valley Cycling Coalition presented the Council with a $1,000 check to be earmarked for comple#ion of the Dowd Junction bike path. The coalition is dedicated to seeking a complete bike system throughout the Vail valley. Mayor Peggy Osterfoss thanked the group for their donation to the Town of Vail. The second item on the agenda was the Mauri Nottingham Environmental Quality Awards Ceremony. This award was created to recognize outstanding environmental achievements and actions. There are three categories for the award: individual, business, and student. The three award winners are as follows: The Antlers of Vai! (Business) far their fireplace conversion; Bill and Jean Johnson (Individual) far being the first to place land into the Eagle County Land Conservancy for perpetuity; and the Eagle Valley High School Bio-Building (Student); which is a building specifically dedicated to hydroponics and aquaculture. Honorable mentions were also presented to Mike King for starting a recycling program at the Battle Mountain High School and to Kerry Donovan a~student at Battle Mountain High School for her t~jverl~atch efforts. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes far the meetings of May 2 and 16, 1995. B. Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance rezoning Tract ~ Vai! Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 6/fi/g5 C, Vail Village First Filing1967 Vail Valley Drive from the Genera! Use Zone District to the PrimarylSecondary Residential Zone District. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Steinberg. Lapin then amended his motion to approve the Minutes only (with corrections being made to the May 1fi, minutes "four" changed to "three" on the Vail Commons Developers item and the vote on item five corrected to state that Lapin abstained from voting) and tha# discussion on Ordinance No. 9 be held separately. Steinberg seconded this amended mo#ion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, fi-0. Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995. Jim Cumutte presented this item to the Council and handed out a memorandum from April 10, 1995, to the Planning and Environmental Commission explaining the request to rezone Tract C, Vail Village 7th Filing from the General Use Zone District the PrimarylSecondary Residential Zone District. Ann Repetti, Ralph Davis and Jim Lamont offered comments in opposition to this ordinance. Jan Strauch moved to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1995 on second reading, second by Steinberg. The motion passed 5-1, with Merv Lapin opposing. The fourth item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1995, Vail Recreation District {VRD) request to change the zoning from the Natural Area Preservation District to the General Use District for the Vail Goff Course Maintenance Facili#y located at 1278 Vail Valley Drive, Parcel E Vail Valley 7th Filing. On Apr'tl 4, the Town Council unanimously approved changing the Vail Land Use Plan designation for this property from "Open Space" to "Public Semi Public." This zone change request is the second step in a.three-step process that could enable the District to apply for a conditional use permit to remodel the facility. This maintenance facility is currently a legal non conforming use on property that is zoned Natural Area Preservation {NAP). The use of the site is non consistent with the zoning (the only permitted use in NAP is nature preserve) and has existed on the site since 1966. The site is used for storage of fuel, equipment, and various supplies used to maintain the golf course. If this amendment to the Land Use Plan is approved, the Town will consider rezoning these properties, along with others, to further protect open space a'nd address conflicts between zoning and actua! land use. On May 8, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended the Town Council approve this zoning change. Russell Forrest presented this ordinance. Merv Lapin moved to approve.Ordinance No. 1 Q, Series of 1995, on first reading, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. • The fifth item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1995, an Animal Control and Carriage Operations Ordinance. Tom Moorhead and Bob Slagle presented this ordinance. This comprehensive animal control ordinance addresses carriage operations in addition to other animal issues. Tom Moorhead indicated the definition for "Training" had been revised to mean the education, instruction, or discipline of a dog that is being trained. He also indicated a typo which would be corrected. Citizen comments were received from Randy Guierro. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1995, on second reading including the changes presented by Tom Moorhead, with a second by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-1, with Tom Steinberg opposing. The sixth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 13, Series of 1995, a request to change the Vai! Land Use Plan for 13 parcels of property throughout the Town of Vail from their current Land Use Plan designations to the Open Space and Public/Semi- Public designations. Russell Forrest and Jim Curnutte presented this Resolution. The Community Development Department is proposing to change the Vail Land Use Plan designations of 13 properties throughout the Town of Vail. The reason for proposing • the changes is to address inconsistencies between the actual use of these parcels and their current designation on the Land Use Plan map. On May 8, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval of this amendment #o the Vail Land Use Plan. Citizen input was received from the following: 2 Vail Tawn Council Evening Meeting Minutes fi/fi/95 ,,.-~, Hermann Staufer, Peter Furstenberg, Douglas Hawkins, Bill Wilto, John Milligan (representing the Mays family) and Jim Lamont, all in support. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 13, Series of 1995, with the revision of adding to the property list "Lot 10, Bighorn Subdivision", with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The seventh item on the agenda was an Audit Report Presentation. Jerry McMahan of McMahan & Associates, PC, together with Steve Thompson and Christine Anderson presented the audit report. McMahan indicated the audit was very "clean." Merv Lapin disclosed that Jerry McMahan is his personal CPA #or Vail Securities. Lapin praised McMahan's work far the Town of Vail. However Lapin felt the Town of Vail should change who they hire to perform the audit every three or more years. Bob McLaurin stated the Town of Vail is currently in the first year of a three year contract with McMahan, and at the end of this term the Town will go out to bid again for another CPA. Merv Lapin moved to approve the 1994 Town of Vail Audit, with a second by Tam Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Council appeal of a PEC decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the installation of an Automatic Teller Machine {ATM} to be located at the One Vail Place Building, 244 Wall Street, a part of Block 5C, Vail Village First Filing. Jim Curnutte presen#ed this item. On May 22, the PEC approved with two conditions a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the installation of an Automatic Te11er Machine (ATM}. Joe Miller, Assistant Vice President of First Bank and Jack Curtin, owner of One Vail Place, gave their comments to the Council. Lapin disclosed he was in negotiations with First Bank, but felt he was still eligible to vote on this i#em. Tom Steinberg moved to uphold the PEC decision allowing an ATM machine at 224 Wa11 Street, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The ninth item on the agenda was to Appoint three Local Licensing Authority Members from the below list: Mary C. Zarba Ellen Schmitt Joseph Palaszynski Ben Irvin Davey Wilson Linda Fried Jeffrey S. Auxier . Merv Lapin moved to appoint Mary C. Zarba, Ellen Schmitt, and Davey Wilson to the Local Licensing Authority each for two year terms expiring in June 1997. This was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6- 0. The tenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLauren stated he would be out of Town June ~ 0-20, 1995. There being no further business, Merv Lapin moved to adjourn at approximately 10:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ATTEST: r y~~ a G Lori Aker D~}rt~D-P~Je~ '~~''~~iriL~G'~.ORPO~~~r~~~`a~ (Names of certeln Indf~Iduels whl~~ltprill~~u1 may 5e inaccurate.} Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes fi/G/15 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 20, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, June 20, 1995, in the Counci! Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Sybill Navas Tom Steinberg Jim Shearer Paul Johnston Jan Strauch Bob Mcl_aurin, Town Manager TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney _.._::~_ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was no citizen participation. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Ordinance No. 1 Q, Series of 1995, second reading, Vail Recreation District {VRD) request to change the zoning from the Natural Area Preservation District to the General Use District for the Vail Golf Course Maintenance Facility located at 1278 Vail Valley Drive, Parcel E Vail Valley 7th Filing. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Tom Steinberg moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-0 (note: Merv Lapin was not present for this vote}. The third item on the agenda was to appoint one new member to the Design Review Board. Merv Lapin joined the meeting. Sybill Navis moved to appoint Brent Alm to the " ~ __~. Design Review Board for the remaining term through February, 1996, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. The next item on the agenda was the contract renewal of Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney and Buck Allen, Municipal Court Judge, for another year. Merv Lapin moved to appoint Tom Moorhead as Town Attorney and Buck Allen as Municipal Court Judge for another 1 year contract, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. The next item on the agenda was the announcement by Russell Forrest, Communitiy Development environmental planner, that Vail's Comprehensive Open Lands Plan has won a national and state award #rom the American Society of Landscape Architects. ~~, ,\ There being no further business, Jim Shearer moved to adjourn at approximately 7:36 P.M. Respectfully submitted, i ~_ -~ Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor pe inaccurete.) LJ • Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 6.20.95 ATTFST~ MINUTES ~.~ VAIL TOiNN COUNCIL MEETING Juiy 18, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 18, 1995, in the council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Jim Shearer None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assist. Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk _! ~..~ The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Werner Koplin of 3030 Booth Creek Drive and spokesperson for the "Common Sense far the Commons Committee," presented a petition with 684 names, asking the Council to halt negotiations with City Market, revisit the issue and put the Vail Commons development decision to a vote of the people. Paul Rondeau, Lew Meskimen, Sherri Wilson and Randy Guerriero all spoke in support of the Common Sense for the Commons Committee. Mayor Osterfoss stated the Council takes the group's concerns very seriously. She encouraged constituents to become active participants at all levels of the process rather than appearing at the 12th hour. She reviewed the steps involved in the Vail Commons process all aimed at providing deed-restricted, low-density, quality housing on the site. Council has unanimously agreed to continue negotiations with City Market while recognizing an "information gap" exists between the Council and the Community. Council is working to improve its communications and responsiveness to the community and outlined several activities already in place 1) a meeting will be held with the Vail Commons Task Force; 2) a community breakfast to discuss Vail Commons and several other issues; 3) as negotiations proceed with City Market, the public will be kept informed and asked to share perspectives on particular issues; 4) a master planning process for the West Vail area will be undertaken; and 5) a question and answer sheet has been prepared to help provide additional information about the Vail Commons project. Navas and Strauch indicated they had originally voted against City Market, but they both are in agreement to continue to proceed with the approved proposal. Merv Lapin joins the meeting 8:30 PM. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in.full. A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of June 6 and 20, 1995. Lapin moved to approve the minutes of June 6 and 20, 1995 second by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. B. Resolution No. 14, Series of 1995, a Resolution Adopting the Town of Vail Nonpoint Source Water Quality Management Plan. Strauch wanted clarification on the 10'-25' set-back from streams regarding the use of pesticides or mowing. Russell Forrest indicated this is simply a range to look at as the process is implemented. Strauch made a motion to approve Resolution No. 14, Series of 1995, second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The third item on the agenda was discussion of pertinent issues with Jack Taylor of the Colorado Hose of Representatives and Dave Wittenberg of the Colorado Senate. Council asked Wittenberg and Taylor for their assistance in four projects: 1) sponsorship of iegis[ation to create voter-approved taxing districts that would be drawn differently than county boundaries for purposes such as transportation and marketing; 2) $5 to $10 million worth of state-funded infrastructure improvements for the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships; 3) property tax reductions for full-time residents who are otherwise being driven out of the mountain communities due to rising taxes; and 4) assistance in improving the Colorado Department of Transportation's snow plowing program and/or privatizing snow plowing on Vail Pass. The fourth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995, first reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.71 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area. George Ruther presented this item to Council. At Council work session on June 13, 1995, staff was provided direction to amend the "250" ordinance. The ordinance, as presented, incorporates those changes discussed on which consensus was reached. Tom Moorhead indicated to Council this Ordinance needs to be proofread once again and that changes had been made to defining an eligible dwelling constructed before 12/31/1984 and demolition-rebuilds no longer qualify fora 250. Bab Armour spoke in favor of passing the Ordinance. Kirk Hansen, John Hinchman, Lynn Fritzlin, Art Abplanalp, Dalton Williams, Ken Wilson, Frank McKibbin, Galen Aasland, Dave Cole, Hermann Staufer, Larry Eskwith, Karen Wiltheim, Mike Cacioppo all stated they like the Ordinance as it currently exists and do not want the proposed changes • made. The 250 ordinance was originally adopted in 1985 to allow small additions and expansions (up to 250 square feet) to residential property which is five years old or older. Several Council members have said the 250 provision allows for too much density to be built in the town in the future. Paul Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995 on first reading, with the drafted changes to 1, 2a, 3a {lease in 5 year), 5 and do not remove 5 years, with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and failed 3-4. Johnston, Navas, Osterfoss voted yes and Strauch, Lapin, Steinberg and Shearer voted no. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995 on first reading, with changes to the deed restrictions making them consistent, resolve the issues of properties with no building permits, make the Ordinance effective now, but applicants have until July 1, 1996 to apply for the 250 rule as it existed prior to this revision, second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and failed, 3- 4. Lapin, Steinberg and Shearer voted yes and Johnston, Navas, Osterfoss and Strauch~- voted no. Lapin moved to table Ordinance No 6 to a work session, second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fifth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 15, Series of 1995, a Resolution re: Vai! Valley Consolidated Water District Request to Create 3.2 Acres of Wetlands on the Eastern Portion of Katsos Ranch Park. Russell Forrest presented this item to Council. The Vail Valley Consolidated Water District, as part of its Section 404 permit mitigation requirements for the Black Lake No. 1 project, is required to restore six acres of wetlands. In 1991 the Town approved the creation of six acres in Katsos Ranch. The District was successful in creating 2.8 acres of wetlands and still needs to create an additional 3.2 acres. The District has a new praposa! for creating these wetlands on Katsos Ranch and this requires Town Council approval. On July 12, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval of #his request with the condition that a letter be furnished by a qualified engineer that the project will not change the floodplain or exacerbate flooding on the pedestrian trail If it is found that the project exacerbates flooding on the pedestrian trail, then the Vail Water District would be responsible for mitigating those impacts. A letter has been provided by a qualified engineer stating that the project will not change the 100 year floodplain and will not exacerbate flooding on the pedestrian trail in Katsos. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 15. Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 15, Series of 1995, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The sixth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 16, Series of 1995, a Resolution Adopting the Town of Vail Deferred Compensation Plan and Terminating the Deferred Compensation . Plans with Great West and ICMA. Tom Moorhead & Bob McLaurin presented this item to Council. The Pension Board passed by unanimous decision a motion to terminate the ICMA and Great West accounts and transfer all participants' accounts to the newly created Town of Vail deferred account. This action was taken after participants expressed dissatisfaction with the existing alternatives; study and recommendation by competent professionals; and an understanding that the new alternatives will present better performance at a lower cost. Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 16, Series of 1995, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. .~ Peggy Osterfoss (eaves at 11:20 PM. The seventh i#em on the agenda was Gorton's Sign Variance Request. Randy Stouder presented this item to the Council. A request for a sign variance to allow Gorton's Bar and Grill to place a sign at the top of the metal stairs accessing the parking deck, adjacent to the intersection of East Meadow Drive and Village Center Road. Although the proposed sign would be attached to the Crossroads Shopping Center East Building, the sign is not attached to Gorton's individual tenant space. Thus, the proposed sign is technically located off-site and therefore requires a sign variance. Location: 143 East Meadow DrivelLot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Gorton's Bar and Grill, represented by Dave Garton. Gorton's Bar and Gri[I wishes to upgrade its existing signage by removing the awning and awning sign located above the entrance to the parking garage, and replace it with a wall mounted cabinet sign at the top of the metal staircase. The applicant feels that the bar's visibility is poor since its location is recessed from the street and separated from the right-of-way by a parking deck. The existing awning sign is located off-site and was authorized by a previous Council after a finding of hardship related to the bar's recessed location. Staff and the Design Review Board are both recommending approval of the requested variance. Please see the staff memorandum dated June 21, 1995, for a detailed review of the sign variance criteria. Jan Strauch moved to approved the Gorton's Sign Variance Request, with the following conditions: 1) The proposed cabinet sign shall be mounted flush against the wall at the top of the metal staircase, and have the dimensions of 4' x 2.5' x 6" deep; 2) The sign face be made so light shines through only the letters and the remainder of the sign face is opaque; 3) the existing menu box and daily special board, located at the bottom of the metal staircase, shall be removed no later #han August 16, 1995 if the applicant does not obtain Town Council or DRB approval to keep these signs in their current location. These signs were never approved by the Town and are currently located on Town property; 4) the existing awning, supports and awning sign, located above the parking garage entrance shall be removed prior to erection of the new sign; 5) the electric wires supplying power to the sign be placed in a conduit, run along the stucco wall and painted to match the stucco color, with a second by Paul Johnsfion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. The Roundabout will be paved on Thursday. There being no further business, Jim Shearer moved to adjourn at approximately 11:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~, Mar~aret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Lori Aker, Deputy Town Cale k ~ ~ `,~ ~ ('"Names of certain individuals w~ g e public in t ray be inaccurate.) ~~1~~~~~ui~y ~~ IMF„P4~~~~`\`~a Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes July 18, 1995 ~~t8~~s C THE PEOPIiwE OI~ VP~IL. ARC ENIITiTI~ED TO ~~l~3~.~C'II~OTE ®N TF~E ~~~~~ T~ P~R~EI, ®F SAND I~~IC311'#tl~ i~S TIWE VAIL ~OMMO~I~--T'HE LAST L,AROI~ ~ARCE~. OF DE1~EL.OP~ABl.E l.~i~ID PIlRCI~~ISI~® ~Y TIDE TOWN C9~ V'~1I1. VI1tTH TAB a09,~,ARS. TU: Vl~ll_ TOWIU COUNCIL MEM13EIz5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNE®, A.R'~ PRC~I~'ERTY C)WNIrRS, C3USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VQTERS, ANDIOR RE sl®E~~TS WITHIN THE TOVV'N OF VAIL, AV`~D HEREBY OPPOSE THE GOMl1lIERGIA'~. E3EVELOPMENT OF THE PAR+:EL O~- LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL GOMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. 1tVE I~ETITION THAT ~°HE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE EIS°I'ERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET E3E t~iALTED AN® TIE RECOI~ti3ENDATI6JNS OF THE 'TASK FORGE DE CONSIDERED FOt7 THE FATE OF TI•~IiS a AST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELL VE iT IIIIEt ERATIVE ~'I-iAT THE `i"QUVN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CtDNSTIT~,`ENCY, At~® TI`i~T T'H~S IaSE1E BE BR®UGMT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE P9~OGE.EDING In11Ti-' ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~ Ca I (~~~ n C~ . ~~ PRINTEi} NAME ,~I ATURE STREET AI3aRESS f'I~DIIIE MAILING AgDRESSf~`~ ~, ~~ r~Cr~i Z- r7' 7r~ + f. -~ ~,~~-~-~7 ~.,~ff~lzl-x}-f~h ~~nc~r PRINTER NAME SI NAB-IlRG STREET AJ€}RESS PHDNE MAILING ARDRI=SS G C-l,'!~ 4 . ! .f~1Y '~ .lZ~l~ff~~7lJ~~ .~'1"{~~1 ~f ~/?._.1.CS~~'--7 a r~ r 1. ~ l~ ~(~!' 7 ~J ~.~~,<- K Cb ~~:~~~~~ PRINTED NAME l~ A,TDRE Si'REE'f ADi3RE_55 f'fIDNE MA1LlNG ADDRESS _ PRINTED NAME SIGNATl~B,E} ~ STREET ADDf~ESS PF~DI~fE MAiI-1NG ADDRESS •--''", ,~_ ~ ~ ` ~ %f .~ ~ Vii' ~"~~ ~~. r. . ~.~. PRINTED N; ME ,~' S6 A~a U~?~ ~ STREET A[1DAESS FHDNF I1~AII.ING A17!]RI=SS , ~~ ~ r 1~ .~. _ ` ~tS' ~~~ ~ ~~ V G f ~ t~7 ~1 -` r'T_~0'`7 ~ b ~l U ~/~, ~/ r/I.p~V1~~a PRINTEQ NAMEn J ,,SfC~f~iATUR~-. ,~'~ J STREET ADDRESS ~ PtiD~IE MA1l.ING ADD#~ESS (.....,/~ . ~~--~/ ,1 x_ti1L" .. Z ~~3~'1 C ra wv~°t c r~a , X ~l 11 ~,~ ~ 4~~ (o- la.'~.~ ~ ~~ #~~c. ~r (~ ~'.~ 1,/A~ J~- r'%~ ~. ~~ - .. - i f/'~ k{} ~F fj~ r..V ~ ~ ~ , PRINTED NAME NATURE _ STREET AD1)RES_S PHDN ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~~~ PRINTEQ 111A1V1E--._------_, ,--.SI AT'JRE- ._. ~ STIiEF~' AI}DRESS PHON ~..._//...... ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~- ~ i/ ~1 L ~a Cam( ~o~ ~7rcf+ I'~fr ,/'~~. !"C17~//u Ci3 ~ F-Cs71u~.t' ~1t' ~~ THE PEQPLE QF WAIL AftE E~4TiT~,ED TIC A P[JDL~C li®TE ~N THE FATE ®F THE PARCEL t~F LAND KNC]WN 14S THE VAIL CQIIJ~II~II®NS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL, ~~ OF DEVELQPA~3LE LAND P[1RCHA5E® EY THE TIDVIIN QF VAIL WITH TAX, DQLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MI_M81;RS WE, ,THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR .REST®ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO W1TH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE: OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR®pERTY. ~ l PRiNTEp NAME (~ ATHRE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADflRESS Y 1 S u ~~ r~ ~ ~ R ~! S CC7r G"~. ;~ S ~~~- ~~ I r r ~ r~ ~~~ t~~~.f 1.~~.~, PRINTED NAME SIGNAT Ht- STREET ADDRESS PHONE _.__...._ ._ f- ~-.lc~ 1 r ~~ c'1 ~~~3 ~ PRIM .ED NAME fl TUR ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~T~. \ mss'€~k~;'~L~ PRINTED NAME ST . E T ADIaRE MAILING ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ ~{7~ ~- lit' ~' :~ ~ ~". S 5 ~#IT E STREET ADDRESS ~ ~~?HDNE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~~~ PRINTED NAME S1//~~~jJAT~1RE ~~~/ STREET RDI~E~fSS pf~ JPHUNL /j f rj MAII.INfG~fy~A/f~/DRESS C~ .5y(~ 1 ~ ~~RANI~ PRINTED NAME S MATURE STREET RDgRCSS P~IO~IIE MAILING qD 1=55 ~.1 :- - _- PRINTED NA E AT~RE INT£ AM SI NATI~RE ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ STREET ADD ESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ° ~ c~aS~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ': , ~~ 7~~ °~ ' ~~ JF .. ~ Y h '~I 1 ~N '~~F~`~ 1 FR ~3 THE PEOIPLE ®l+ VAIL ARE ENTI'T'LED TG A PUBLIC VQTE QN THE FATE OF THE PARCEL QF LAND KNi3WN A5 THE VAfl COIVIMONS--THE LAST I.AR.GE PARCEL. ~ OF DEVELOPABLE LAIVp PUR~CHA~EB BY THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX dOLLARS. . TQ: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMDER5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PR®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND1OR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C~}MMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE: TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE,FATE 63F THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, WE BEL{EVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT ThIE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING 'WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. l PRINTE NAME SIGN I1RE~~ /J N fPIJ .)'C~CCi~[~'~ PRINTED NAME S1~pN~4TU ,¢ (~ .L PRINTED NAME S3GNATURE .~~~-~ - PRINTE[) NAME STREET ADR~RESS/~ PONE MAIL! G ADDRESS ..3~v..~ y ~/Gnr, ClOlr ~T ~~~c f~ ~~~1+' ~`'~S `~ ~~/~ STREET ADDRESS ~ PHflNE 2Z ~~4 mule c~ r ~] `~y7{ • 3~~ MAILING ADDRESS Pv. 3~z~ ~~~ ~~1~~h~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATt1RE~(- ~a .r ~~J Y`~111X~ ~e.1~ ~aUtz-T r•1 ~y ~o ~r~ PRINTED NAME SI~ATt1~E ~~ /' v ~' STREET ADi3RESS PHONE MAII:ING~ADDRI_SS STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHUNlr MAttthtG ADDRt;SS ~11g ~ 5 0 -~c,4Ge U~C~.c~ !/d 11, t ~ ~-(~~ (~ - 5~3~a (J 1~1, .~~E ~~~- C PRINTED NAME Nfl~TURE STREET AD~E S ~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHDN~ MAILING Al?DRESS ;~ ~1kt~.. ~ ~(7. STREET ADDRESS ~ PN{lNE MAILING ADDRESS ,%~b~a~k! iyJ~~N .b`~~ ~!~ rz. i o'~i.S PRI TED NAM IVATU ~~ ~~ ~~ THE PEOPLE 01= VAIL AIDE ENTITLEt~ T9 A PUBLIC VOTE ON THE 1~AT~ pF THE f PARCEL QF LAND KNCIINN AS THEE VAIL C®MIIII®NS--THE MAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAIV® PURC~iASED BY TIME TOWN qF _VAIL WITH TAX ~I` DOLLA,RS. . TD; VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEM13E#~S WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE F'R®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDfOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIUIEEiCIAI, DEVELOPMENT OF TFIE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERIIfItIRKET, WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~ OF VAIL. - WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TIiAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~ER,~k~ ~ f~S~~~C~ PRINTED NAME MAILING A13DRES5 !2L f?~T fC~ n~ ~e~~ AILING ADDRESS ~, ~.~ ~~~ SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE PRINTED !NAME S~IVATURf STREET A [TRESS PHDNE ~~ ~~~~~. ~ ~f ~. ~~ t PRINTED NAME PNt}NE S~ ATURE ~ n STREET ADDRESS 1 ~/~-~1r s~--~ ~~.v~ v ~ ~ e~{ PRINTED NAME SIBNA• RE ' ~' STREET, ANDRESS ~~ ~~~~ ~~1C~~ ~ PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME SIGNAT.lIi BEET RESS PtlQNE MAILING ADflR1=SS t`t car ~ ov.C,.. ~~ ap~~lh PRINTED NAME d GNAT RE ~ ,4 w.s~uwOA n,Qs- . PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE MA}Z}NG Ap[IRESS ~7 `~~ i 74 fin./ -~ i sS-' ~~~ PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS ~~~t e ~~.-~ a, ~,,~, ~ STREET ADflRESS . PHDNE MAILING~DDRESS° STREET ADDRESS PHONE MA1LlNG ADDRESS . i. ~S THL PEGPLI~ ~DF VAIL ARE EI~'~'1TLED `~0 i1 PUBE.IC VOTE OIV THE FATE CbF TWB PARCEL OE ~AII~D I~NOWIV A~ THE VAIL C®MiUIONS--THE LAST LARGE PAI'~CEL ~ OF DEVELOPABLE LAND !~U~'~.HA5E® BY THE TOVIIN OE VAIL WITH 'SAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS VILE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERRTY OVVNEf~S, BUSINEaS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND/OR RESfDENTS VIIITHIR- THE T01NN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COfVIIVIERCIAL DEVELG~PMENT OF T'HE PARCEL ~D1= LAND REFERRED TO ~AS TFiE VAIL COMI4~ONS Vlli~'f-t A SU!~~.~~3~IIIARI(E~'. Z"~, ~~..~.~~.~~~ .1.'F'7Ln.' .:.,~~ "?"':,/~"1~,""~~' '~`~P~1~ •~r/~,r.r - re.~~ a.,, ~o,i'!, .'~y pt^'',•4+., •~s ~.:`~' J...d~. 1Yi!•~ f':.~ , t~:: : INS ~ -,.t..i' k~.~4 :,1~ ;~!'G:~ ,~.: .w%t LYiL~i.;.• ~ t ! ~R~ ~` ... i',". tf N +r.•..`•. "C,a'Y'~`vYv t'SC= CONSIDERED 'BOR. ~''~?~= FATE LF THIS ? ASr RE'I~IAINI!~G G-ARGE PARCEL OF LAND 1Ai~iTH'N ~"HE T~JVIlN OF VAIL. Vlic BEL;E4'E I'~' 1MPERATIV'~ THA"!° THE a®VYN G~3VERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO I : ~ COhS ~"~T"JENCY, QND TFiA~" TI~iS fSSL1fE BE BROUGHT TCy A V03'E OF I~~SISTERE~' ELECT+~JRS BE:1=C}RE PR,C.?CEEDING VVfTH ANY DEVELOPIIIIENT OI~ TMw VE'IIL. Cr~MM~O~iS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME L~ a ~T 1 ~, ~ / ~ ~~~ HINTED NAML- ' TE1R~~ f~: ~ ~~~ ~ , ~ ~~~/ ~1~~~ PR!NTI=D ~lA,R~!E SIGf~~;,,'~'JR SIGN T11RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE y ~ _ f //~~ [~ ..~ •-~~~ _...."- ~.~ j'a !SCJ~~c'7 62l T%V' ~J t~f T"~~+' C ~ ~ ~r ~~ PRINTED ~ilAfvlE 51G1lAT~~ STREET A7^!~ESS ~~ `~ ~Z~~~3c~' ~~~>~> t~ 4rREE7 Dn^: 5S ~f~~ ~~~~ G... ~'~ iia ~i MA~I~~.fN[~ AD[`.~~RrSS !.JU .~ ~ / ~---~ "HONE ViAILIN a ADS Rk"`' ~~~` y 7l~~-~ ~y z ~~ x ~f~~ <,~ PHONE MAILING ADCi<~SS .~ STREET ADDR~.SS PHONE MAILING ANDRE~SS~ `~ T STREET ~;,D~R SS, PHONE ~~~~~ ~~' 7 ~ . MA~~.ING ADDRESS ~~~~ PRINTED NAM - 51 G ~ V~I~'~E . ~~, . C RlNTED NAME---- SIGNATURE ~~ Yom. ~ PRIN~ D N ME ~~IGh , _ ~ ~ ~. f PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADI)HESS PHQNI=. MAILING DDRES >, ~ .,~--~ ~ -.._ ,~' ter v~ +' -- ,a STREET AQ@,~fSS ~~~ PHDNE C~~ ~ GP i-3 ~ !E zt~.~Jr STRI;I:T ADDRESS PHONE /M ILING DDR~3~ l G .t !3 IIIIAILING ADDRESS ~-~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE Ei~'~ITA,IED TO ~!. Pt1BLIC WOTE ON THE FATE ~~F THE PARC@~, OF LAND KN®WN~ AS TINE ~a/AIL C®MMaNS--THE ll~lS'T LAIxCE PI~RCEiL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PI~RCHASED B1P' THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX ~~ DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAII, T~iAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMI1flONS WITH A SU~'ERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YD`S HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE. HALTED ARID THE RECDMMEI1tDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR. THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHII`! T"riE TOWN OF VAIL WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE i'OWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSI~E BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF '~' VAIL CDMMONS PROPERTY. . '~iINTE ~ NAME S!SNA .,rig STREET DRESS PHDN MAILING f~^R S U~ ~ f ~'e~ 8l~ ~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS ,---~ ~ IO~tr•rc ~~~t- PRINTED NAiVIE SIGNATURE o ;~ ~ U ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ PRINTEC NA E PRONE M;~iLING ADDRESS STREET AE~DRE ;HONE MAILING ADDRESS ~S`/~s~ ~~c~P h'~ [: r u~ 'fit fit- ~~'U Z ~`~'~' ~a /5'~Z iG A i ~ RE f p STR~~ADDRES HONE MA,~iNG ADDRESS ~. PRINTED NAME S~c~1~ {TUBE. STR££T AGRRESS ~ ~~EFIpNE MAILING ADDRESS 1 ~ __-.~ `~~ ~ n~ ~.~o~~y Pr31NrED NAME 51GNATUR£ ~ ~' ` , . ~ STREET ADD ~~,, _.. r .. . PRINTED NAME SIGN~T,~IRE `/ t r P~-IONE MAILl;VG ~DRES ~ ~, ~~ ~~~ ~~ Cr~~~~, ~~~ STREET ADDRESS PHON£ MAILING ADDR"E~SS,? PRINTED~4~AME SIGNAT RE ,.~r- STREET ADDRESS HONE ~. - ~9 IVfAILIil~G AooRFS ~~ ~~ THE PEQPLE pF VAIL ARE E~1T~TLE® TQ A Pu1~1.IC'~~T~ pN THE FATS ~~ THE PARCEL OF I.AIVq ~tNOW~ AS THE VAIL C[>IMri~®NS--THIS ~.l~ST l.AR~E PARCEi. ~ OP DEVELpPABLE LAND PliRCHASE® Blf THE TDWW pF VAI! ~II'ITIH TAX ` ®OLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNE®, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®1OR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. 'iNE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTII~TION9-YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MAR'~,F.T F~E HALTED AND THE RED®MI~ENnA?fIONS OF THE TAS:~, FORCE ~E CONSIDERED FOR TE'E FATE GF Z"ii1S LAS"~ REM! !,'DING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN {]F VAIL: WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN QOVERN~III~NT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BOUGHT TO A VOTE 4F REGISTERED ELECTORS QEFORE PROCEEDING WISH ANY QEVELOPMEI~T of THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~i~~2r ~' ~. ~ac~. S PRINT D NAME SI URE STREET ADDRESS PHONE_ .MAILING ADDRESS . ,z tar ~ _,~.~. .~ S ~(a [7ac1~S r ('u r,.' t~~~3G1 v .:~°) /~(e DG~~~I~ t~ ~1u • ( ~<6 5~ PRINTED NAME GNATURF~ „~Y~ STREET. ADDRESS PHONE MA#LING ADDRESS ~ `~.r.~-L~~.~[l ~LC`~~t l {zj~(~1~~~ ~L~ c~•~~-~t~.~~ll ~~~`,~(~41Y ~ x`1'7 ~~4f1~~L- ,C=-~ 1~~-~.~. H ~..~- Tn PRINTED NAME SI MATURE STREET ADD ESS f PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~_ --- ~:-,1~,,_ .. "met. ~~ PRINTED NAME SI NATUR STREET ADDRESS PAINTED N E IGNATU STREET ADDRESS ~,~ :3 o J~ i~ ~2,~c~4vc°"r PRINTEQ AMA ~ ~` ~~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~~ PRUNE MA#I.ING ADf3RE~SS `~7G,-- S3S"1 [ LEFT \ ~A~/'~- AT~~ STR ~ T ADDI#ESS ~~ PH ~ E ~ MAILING ADNn'~SS V~-~-~ PR TED NAME SIG ~I ~~~~~ STREET ADDRESS ~ ~}IONE MAILI~C~ ADDRESS ~.~ PRINTED NAME ~` S GNATUfIE STREET A REySS PHONE MAIL G ADDR 5 ~ ~ ~~ TWE PEOPLE 01~ VAIL ARE ENTITLED `T®A PtIR~,IC i~OTE ON THE ~ATI» t~P 7H~ PARCEL OF LAN® KNCJWN AS THE MAIL Ct~MMGNS-~TNE L,pIST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELONARl.E LAND PURCHASEC? BY THE T4W'N O!~ VAIL WITH TAX ~~ DOLLARS. . TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEfvIt3ER5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOAMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL DONIMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION ThIA:T THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MAR"SET E'E HALTED AND Th~E RECOMMENDA~"ION5 aF THE TAS~~. FnR:~E BE CONSIDERED FOR TE'E FATE GF °i'iil5 LAS'd' REM':VING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~OF VAIL, WE BELIEVE !T IMPERATIVE THAT ThIE TOWN GOVERNIVfENT 8E RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT TFIIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT T`~! A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR®CEEDING 'WI i H ANY ~?EVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL CON'IMONS PROPERT`~. r~,a~+~ C.i~ 1~~~ PRINTED NAME 51GNATUR STREET ADDRESS PHONE .MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~~ C.2i~ l ~~ ~- PRINTED NAM SIGI' TUBE ~ l _ /it/ y if ,f ,~ S/TREET A DRESS / / ~~ ~ ~~~'b ~2~ PNt7NE --7 (~ ~ ~~ I T 7 ~ MAILING ADDRESS r7 L~~-iw^-~~ ~ c J ~~/ y * ~ . ~ - . PRINTED NAME ~ , SI~TURE/~.. o ~ ! f lA~f~ c/1 ~ 1~MW1 STREET ADDRESS / ~i .~ tf ~ i.[ C Q ~rir ~ l !~ PRUN/E, 7 /~ '[' ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ MAIi.iNG ADDRESS ~ .~ ~lit/lari~[.. G4(.~ ~~~ U~,~l ~'r1f2~r~ C /~9J~C~u~~ PRINTED NA-MG i7 ~AL~~~E ~t~~~~s . PRINTED NAME SIGN TUBE STR ET ADD, ESS PHONI~ MAILING ADORES ~ PRINTED NAME 51G fiE STR ET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADt?Rt:SS STREET ADDRESS PFII~?i~E MA~,iNG RDDDESS ,~ ., PRINTED -DAME S~~TURE ~ STREET ADI)R~S ~' . _ ~v y~ [~ G E `~` ~ PRINTED A SI LIRE STREET ADRRESS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Qn~~-c. ~~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS s PHONE MAILING ADj.I,RES5 ~~6 [~ ~'zI ~. ~ c~{ ~Z-chi"' ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~' 65~' ..... . ,,._. .~; ,a ~ THE PEOPLE OF V,AIL ARE EN TiT~.Et~ ~~ ~ ~1~'ELlC i~LbTE (~N THE FP1TF a~^ TNT 'PARCEL qF LAND KN®'WN A5 THE 11<.All. CC~MMC~NS--THE LIST LA~tGE PARCEi, o~ o~~r~I.oP~,sI~E LANil Pl~~CH~1SE~8 ~Y THE ToW~ ~F vA~~. tNITH TAx U[]Li.ARS. . Td: Vr11L TOWN CUU<~IC1l.. ME?viBERS ' Ll WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, @UStNESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR REStDE,NTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAfL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL. EEVELOPMENT C}F TI-tE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAtL COMMONS 11VI~FH A SUPI~RMAR}CET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MA!~.~L.T E'E HALTEU ANC) TF~E RECO11l9~;ENDATIONS OF THE 'i'AS"~. FORCE ~ CONSIDERED FOR T~'E FATE OF ~'rIIS LA.~.a't" REM!''~IING L.ARC~E PARCEL. C)F LAND. WITHIN THE TOWN OF~ VAIL. WE @ELIEVE 1T IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOV1~N ~aOVERI~MENT BE RESPONSfVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT TINS ISSUE E3E '~~t?UGI~T TO A VOTI~ OF REGISTERED ELECTOR5 BEFORE PROCEEDING VIJITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF TH/E'~VAIL COI~I10N5 PROPERTY. l ~I~~ ~ ~~~~lf PRINTER E S GN E STIj~T AD1]RESS/' I'Hi3NE MAiI#NG ADDRESS PIiIN EU NAME ,, SI A ~~ STREET DDRESS PItQNE MAILING ADUI~ESS .-- r y ~,~ Pi~INTEU NAME 51GN~il'UIiE /~~ /jr ~ STREET aD13,RESS ~ R ~ ~ ,~HflNE j~IUTAILING ADDf~E~SS~ PRINTED NAMI; ~s~ cN~rTUI~~ . , ~ ~~~ 1 ~ ;~ 5T1~EET ADDRESS ~l~~r~ Z~ MAILING ADDRESS PIiINTEq NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS P#fDNE M/1iliNG ADDRESS t'RINTEi3 NAME SitiNATURE ~ STREET ADDRI'SS R#tL~i~E MAIL#NG ADD'?ESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATLJl~E STREET ADDRESS PNQNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADt7Rl;SS PE~ONE MAILING ADDRESS (G .~ THE PEOPLE OF 1lAlL ARE ENTITLED TO A Pl1BlIC VOTE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS THE 1iAIL COMiMON5--THE LAST LARCE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND Pl1RCHASE® DY THE T011VN OF 1lAlL WiTN TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS I3T; IT ORDAINED I3Y TEiE TOWN COUNCIL OF TI3E TOWN OF VAIL TIIAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR REST®ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL ®EVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C{)MMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET 8E HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE' OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME SIGNA~TUAI~ ~STRE T ADI3RES5 PHONE MAILING ADDRESS -~ ~Cz~~r~ ~~~~f~ PAINTEp NAME SIGNATURE J/ STREET ADQRES~S PHONE MAIL{NG ADDRESS ~r^ ~ c~ ~.~U~~v~ ~ PRIIUTED NAME ~ ~1G~NATURE STREET AD7DRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS // `lf~jl n! ~ i ~r_ PRlN ED E ~ SIGN~T . ~ _ , ~~ ~P,~ PRlNTEO NAME J ) ~ J ~frJJ ~~~~y 11 I TREE DD1~5S l 1 --~_ 1 i HONE ~ MAILING ,A DRESS ` ~. SI Tl1RE STREET RR SS HONE M LIN ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~.-- ~ ,L . _ .. _ ~1~~ . , m~- C,v~~ ~I,-~r~ o X1:3 ~ ~ ... ~ ~ -- P TED NAME SI TUR~ ~ ~l a ~E~~RESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING Y DRESS t 4~Id~~ia2 0'Z"~oK~;~i3 U~.r' ~`~i6sS ~- THE PEO~~~LE QF VAIL ARE EIINT{T~.ED TD A_PUBl.IC V®TE ON T#~E F~ITE OF TNT PARCEL. ®F LAN[] KN®"~11N AS THE VAIL CDMMQNS--TNIE LAST LARGE PAR_ CEL S~F DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHASED BY TIDE TOWN DF VAI_L W{TH TAX DOLLARS. ~n~ TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEME3E1~5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PIS®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOVIfN OF VAIL., AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS 1lIiiTH. A SUPERMARKET, WE RETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOl1 HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH GITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REGOMMENt~ATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE SATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE iT IMfPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITI~ENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE ~ROLJGHT TO A VOTE OF REGIS ~'EREL] ELECTORS EiEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME « ~~-~ -C`~~C~ SI NATURE ~.~1 STREET ADDRESS PHONE "MAILING ADDRESS / ~~; ~~ , ~r PRINTED NAME SI~NAT ~ ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAII.iNR ADDRESS PRINTED NAM ~~~~ v G~~ ~ ~~~1~(J ~~ C.~ ~~~,C~~` SIGNATURE STREE DQRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~~~ ~C~r ~~s~ ~ !~k PRINTED NAME k ~-4 f ~ ~~""~` ~ ~`' ~ ~ ~~' ~' SI T R STREET ADDRESS Pi~ONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ PRI ~E STREET Af]QRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS '7 iRTE~ NA .E TiJRE / G7 STREET. DRESS --, PHQI~E , ...., MAILING ADDRESS ~~~.r~~ ~ ~'Ll G~~~L ~[~ C~<~.~ ~~~ ~~.l~t_r~Yll~!r~ ~! y~ . ,i.+ /' ..L~~ _. l~ PRINTED NAME SIG A URE.._. • STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATUfiE STREET ApDfiESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~z ~'hlE PFDPI,E d~E u'A1L, ~11~~ ~NT1TL~[~ TD ~1 Pi~D~~C ~t)TE Did T~~~ iFAT~ ~~ ~°~~~ ~ARC1~L OF I.A~N,a ~ND~~ A~ ~~~~ ~~~~ CQMMCfU'~--T~~i~ L~1~'T ~AI'tDi~ PARC~~, DP t~'EilEl,{~P~I~~,E LANp PDRCt~ASED BY THE TOWN DF '~.1~IIv t11J1T!-I TAB RD~,l.I~RS. TO: VJ111_ TOWN COUNCIF. MEMBERS O S O S WE, T1~~E UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY 1f~fNE:RS, DUSINES WNER , REGISTERED VOTERS, AND1t]R RESIDENTS WITI-i[I~d THE TOWN OF Vla11L, AIdD HEREBY CIPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DE:VELOPIIlIENT 01= TI-IE PARCEL OI"' LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMNfONS WITH A SlJPER~IIARKET. VWE PETITION TI-II~T THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU f~IAVE EN71 QED INTO WITF~I CITY MJAR;~ET I::E HALTEI] AND TF-~E REGOMi~rENDAT10N5 CSF THE 'I"AS~~. FDR~'F Q CONSIDERED FOR 7F'E FATE OF `E'~IIS LAST' REM !'dING L~iRGE PARCEE, C7F LAND iNITHIN THE TO1NN OF VAIL. WE BEI..iEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TG'~IIN t~OVERPdMENT F~f RES.PONS111E TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT `#~I-fIa ISSUE ~3E ~l~OI~GI-IT ~'O A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTGRS REFORI* PR©CEEDING WITH ~1NY QEVELOF'MENT OI* THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~~~ ,ry ~ i~.V~ f EiINTEG Nt1~1fiE 5lGN~T RE f~, ~ STREET AD[iFiE55 `~ ( '"~ i k~ ~ ~-~ ~i ~ r ~r}try l~~t 7 P[iGNE MA[E.[i~lG A[l~ ~l ~~j-C~ f~(~ ~l fiESS ~ ~ ~~ J" ~ ,' _ 4. s~ ~ , ~~. ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1~J 0 PRINTED NAME SIGNATU E ry STREET AD[IRESS PftINTEf~ NAME ~S.[,G~)NATU ~ E . ~ S ~RE ~ADf]5 . ~ PR[NTED NAME SIGNATfIRE STREET A[1D[;ESS f'RINTEQ NAME S1GNA3U[iE STREET AEIdRESS PFiINTEU NAME SiGNAT[JRE ~ STREET ADDRESS f RINTEQ NAM'£ SfGNATUIiE STiiEET ADDRESS ~~ PfiINTED NAME SIGNATIJ[iE STREET AnDRESS P[(0[1fE MA[LiNG A[~[][iESS P[[QNE MA[LING ADD[iESS PIIONE MA[L[NG ADGfiESS P~t(1~!!= MF1IL[NG 11I]URESS PfID[~E M(~I[.iNG AG~n~Sc Nf[ONE MA[[.[NG AUpfiESS P[[QNE MAI[.[iJG ADp[iESS ~~1~- THE PEOPLE OF V,A~IL ARE EN"€`ET#.ED TO A PURL~C VOTE O~N THE SATE qF THE PARCE#. OF #.ANL1 KNOWN AS THE VA##~ C®MMONS--TNE LAST DIRGE PARCE#. OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PI~RCHASED BY THE TOWN OF VA#!» Wi7'H TAX DOL#.ARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIVIERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGH`C TO A VGTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS E3EFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY, C~~.~. { 1=RINTEn NAME SIGN~TUfiE ~i _ ,tNV _~ PRINTED NAME SIGN URE ~'1 ~ c'~f'1~~~~~/' 'IjRI TEq NAM , SI ATURE ~I,'rn ~ N n rtiw ~.r2 c ~~ PRINTED NAME SI__G~~~ ~~ STREET ADD_RESS PHONE . `'I20S~~-. (CSC v~~:R~'l~(~~ ~-l ] `/- Asp ~`~~ :j STRAnDRE55 PHONE STREET An E ~~s-~, "~~ ~ I ~~ ~~ MAILING ADDRESS 7ttS~' MAILING ADDRESS PHO MAILING ADDRESS ~~~~ ~~~ STREET ~A/DgRESS C-y PHONE Cr MAILING ADnRESS ~~ ",..~- PRINTEn ~" SIGN~TllRE 1 STREET ADDRESS ~~ ~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~J STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDFiE'SS PRINTED NAME ~ SiGNATIIRE ~ STR ET ADDRESS 1 _ PRI En NA }'E SIG r STREET ADD E~S PHONE MAILING AnDRESS f ., L1.7~ '~ f (a'~ ~Q r ak '~ ~ ~_3 ~~ PHONE MAfLI GAD RESS ~f TIE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENTITLELJ T®A PUBLIC V®TE ®N THE FATE OF THE PARCEL O1F LAND KNOWN AS THE VAIL C®MMONS--TFiE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHRSED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMpERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR REST®ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE MALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEl~ORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. . ~ ra~i~IC- ~,~ fly PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ppRESS ~_ ~~o~Zt'. ~ PRINTEp NAME GNATU E STREET AppRESS PHONE MAILING AQpRESS ~ ~ ~ PHONE ILING Ai}pRESS P p NAME IGN UR~„ STREET ADpRESS PHONE MAIL#NG AgqpRE S ~~ ~D~ p~ti~ ~. ~.f ..[~~ ~ 1~ ~ PRINTEp NAME MA SING ADIIRESS ~~ i73(~ NATU ( STREET AD RESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~_ ~~~ ~ ~r° ~ ~ ~u ~ c~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, ~ ~ .~ ~~ ~. ~~~~ ~ . U P iNTEp NAME PHONE ILING AppI;.ESS +0 ~ Iv t PRI p N E N STREET ApORES ~1 PI~OlVE NATURE y j STREET AppRESS Lc.7.- ~, 'PRINTS AME SIG URE ~-- TI3EET A~RES,S/ ; HONE MAILING ADpRESS PRINTEp NAME S G,NATU } STR ET AD~RESS ~- ~, PHONE ,MAILING ADpRESS ~~ ~~ THE PEOPLE OF O~AIL ARE ENT#TI.ED 'TO A PUBLIC'~OTE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND IClVOWN AS TIE 1lA~L C®MIVIONS~•THE LAST LARCE PARCEL OF DEVELOP,~IBE.E LAND PURCMASE® BY TI•IE TOWN 01F WAIL WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VA}L TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS DE IT Oi2DAINLD DY THE TOWN COUNCIL OP' THE TOWN OI' VAIL `PRAT ~ WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, ANI'] HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPIVIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. 1NE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. . WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT TI'lIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY, I~f,IriN ~ ~I ~~~I ,~ PRINTED NAME SIG ATU STREET ADDRESS r Y~.~ / C /' -Ea- L/~ ~P--~I~IT D ~AMEr PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~f7/-SSG ~ 5~~r~~ `f S G .~J E STREET AD,QRES~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~` ~~~1 051 PRINTED NAME ~~p ~. ~'a~7h'E~ /c/J . SIGN ~' RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGN~`~R `~~- STREET A13DRE S, PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGN TURt; ~ ,.~ u~• STRi~ A~t3DRES~~ rt"~/' /~~HO~ f~~~'~%~ILfN~AD~ RE~~`~~~~ C.'~ CIS ~ ~ ~ PR}NTED NAME 51GNATUR ~~~~~ ~~P v y \ STREET A DRE S PHON AILING ADDRESS 7 PRINTED NAME ~ `~--~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ S S ~T~RE ~' I STREET ADDRESS ~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS . PRIN ~D NA SI AT R ,. STREET ADDRESS PHONE M } ING ADDRESS .~ ~~~~f~ . ,~ ., ~ '~ THE PEQPLE OF VAf~. ARE ENTITLED TO A PUBLIC VQTE DN THE FATE OF THE PARCEL, C?F LAND KNOWN AS THE VAIL COMMONS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEI, OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHIpISE® BY TFIE TOWN D1= VAIi, WITH TAX DOLLARS. TtJ: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL M~MBEItS TAE YT ORDAINED !3Y THE TOWN COiJNL'IL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TliAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE 1"I-IE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T® AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOI~IMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE iT IMPERATIVE THAT THE T®WN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITllENCY, AND THAT TINS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY pEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. 7~ - - +~ PRIN b NAME 51GN RE -~~T~_EET DRESS I' ~ E Afi.ING ADDRESS '' i ~_(S~ ~1~~~5 P~fNTED NAME SIG ATURE ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PR1NTIwD NAMfw SIGNATl113 STREET ADp1~ES PHQN ,..~_ AfLING ADDRESS t 1 ~ ~ i - ~J~~#aee PRINTED NAME S N~TUPI~ ~ STREET ADDRESS PRUNE MAILING ADDRESS r~ o r r ~ 4~~ ~1 PRINTE~I NAME S#GNA~xUi~~,~ c S~ c7T~ ~c~~ ~ 2.~ PNgN~ ~ MA#LIN6 ADDRESS ~-I~-~~ ~ ~ ~~ -P#iIN~'ED NAME ~~StU~y~~7~E;- , STREET ADDRESS PRONE ~VIAILING ADDRESS `~ INTER NAME _ r SI N~(TU E STREET AD~ESS PHONE MA#LlN~ RDgRESS - - i ~ ~~ PRINTED NAME ' SIGNATURE STREET ADDRE ~ ~FIONE MAILING DDRESS ~/~S7~G,9 ~I2.lC:r~c.~2 I ~~ 7 (1 ~ .a x~~ ,~ ~`- r• - - ~- _ ~ _ 'SHE PEOP~.I~ CFF~ VAl1. ARE EI~TII,TLEO To A P11BLl+~ '11o'B'E t3~ T~iE FATE of Ti~i~ PARCEL. OF LAND tc111®1flBN A5 T~ VA#~. COM~IAO~lS-~T1H~ LAST i~I~E~GE PARCEL of o~vel.oPA~~~ ~A~o P~R~~ASEO Irv T~~~ ~®~r~ ®~ rrA~~. r~r~TH TAx DOLI,~IRS. . TO: VAIL ~TQWN COUNCIL tv1i~M~ERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®IOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE T~tE COMMERCi~,L. DEVELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF L.AN® REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKI=T. WE PETITION TI•IAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE NAL,TED AI11D THE REC~MIIAENDATiONS OF THE TASK FORGE BE CONSIDERE© FOR THE FATE ®F THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE T~iAT `~~ TGlI'~N C~®VERNN6ENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, ANm T~I~,~' 'HIS 15SUE BE BR®UGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BIEFORE PR®CEE®ING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR®PE~iTY. '~ PRINTEp NAME S1~NATU1~~ STREET AUUI~ESS PWONE MAILING AUURESS o\~vti-~-i ~`~' ~' ~- ~ I ! 4 ~1 ~'~~n~txle ~ ~f' ~ b - 3~7 ~ ~' ~ I11 1~ t- Y a ~1 nth e ~~ ~ PRINTEU I~~ME Sf~RE STREET AGGRESa ,p ~'~ONE MAILING ADDRESS .~. _ ,. 1 ~'~Cc.ra- ~~ fl"l"~ fiRINTED NAME ~ - SIG ATUR STREET AgURESS PWONE MAILING bDR ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ o Y `~ W!~/t/~+ jO. i17r~/~'L~iU~ ~~~Jf~~ ~~T~ P INTER NAME R SIG RE ST . '~T 'A~~~RESS !- PRINTEU NAME 51 ~N TU/R`C~ /J ~ / STREET AOf~RESS - ~~c ~nE~ ~?At...~t /,~~ s PRINTEU NAME SIGN T RE _ ~. ' ~. ~ ff v ~j~~~~~~ PRINTEU NAME SIG ATU E ~~~~ PRINTEU NAME SI NATURE U ~~~jrt~ STREET AnpRESS </ ~- PH01~lE , ,M~ IL .~U Aj1~tTES~~_-/J ~~~~r '~~~~2.-t-,~ pf~RESS PkiQNE MAILING AUURESS STREET AUURESS PWJNE MAILING AQURES STREET AIlDRESS PWONE MAILING A l~fi~S _ _~ .. :.~:,.; ~., i ~~ ~ ~~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE Ef~TITLE® TO A PUBLIC VOTE ON 'THE FATB OF THE PARCEL OF LAID KNAlIV1~J AS THE ~9AIL COMMONS-,TFiE LAS'S L,I~RGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LA~t® PFJRCI.9t4S"~D BY THE T®VIIN OF VAIL WITH TAX ~ DOLLARS. ~~j TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSiGNE®, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO ~AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT 'THE NEG®TIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REC®MMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR TIME FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~F VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TI'1A~° TI°IE TOWN COVEI~NMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO IT5 CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BRaUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR+DCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMM X15 PRDPERTYo ~ ~ n ~~ ~~ PRIN~ED NAME SIG ATURE ` STREET AD RE PHONE MAILING ADDRESS f , ~'a ~ ~~ .. 1 C' Cr r Lv-" PRINTED NAME SI N TU E STR T ADDRESS s PHONE ~ ~~~ PRINTE N E S{ A L~~ ~ v ~e STREET AI]IDRE~S PHONE ,e.~r1( ~ e 9 ?' l,.t.l riC - --~ _.. fa ~~ ~~~~ (~r'~, Cd MAILING AQDR£SS MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATLGRE STREET ADDRESS PWQNE MAIUNG ADDRESS -- kJ~--=<-Q ~' 1 ~ 5 ~7 r~ ~ ~#~' t err ~ ;_ PRINTED NAME N U STREET ADORE S y " PNONL MAILING-~II~ARESS ~~~~1~~ ~c~- ~ PRINTED N E ,~~ S#GNATUR ; f f STREET ADDRESS PWDIVE MAlt1NG ADDRESS _ / ,,r .~---' ' ~; ~:5~ . ~ i~.~',QC ~_..~.;Q(:Z ~I~~CQ ~.~'~y`~ ~' b. t~X R-(~ 1 I~~.~ [ zip ~ ~, Y/4.T~ ~'rL~S" ~~,)1W fCv~S~~~,~,~~5 PR TED NAME G A STREET A RESS PHONE MAILING ADD~ESS _~ ! ~,~ PRI TED AME 5 ~N TURE STREET Il E S PHONE MAIL#NG ADDRESS .= ~ ,'.!,~, r ~ I' ~~~ ~~ ~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARC l~NTIT'LI~D T'Q A pLiR1,IC MOTE ON THE FATE CIF TWE PARCEL OF LAND K{VOVVN AS THE VAIL CO1tIINl®NS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL l ~~ OF DEVEL®PABLE LANd PURCHA5Ed BY THE TOWN dF VAIL WITH -TAX, da1.LARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUI~ClL, MEMpERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNS®, ARE PROPERTY ®WNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDfOR REST®ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMI4~ER+CtAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET, WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE QF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF~VAIL. . WE RELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE 'THAT THE TOWN G®VERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT THIS ISSUE BE RROlJCH7 TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~ ~~_~ INTED NAME SIGNR~~~~~ ~~~~"~~Sr.~~-~.f~~~l~~U~~T"~ ,-/~y~iLENG %~~ ~ c a PRINTER NAME -_' .~ ~#GNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS V ~ ~ --- ~~1 k ~r ~ ~~f9 U ~`j rJ ~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS U ~ ~ j ."`7, ~'1 ~~1~~s.fi f. _ ~,~~.~~r~) Pi~II~TED N,~4ME SIGflIAT}}~~RE -~ / STRE~ AD ~R,E$S } PHONE A1L NG,ApDRESS _ I / J f~ PRINTED NAME ~~~~ ~ ` %l SI . IRE STREE Api)RESS PLlONE MAILING Af?!]RESS -~ ~~ P`-' w „~ , ~~ 'x , PRINTEp NAME t ~r,~ef~ ~~' ~ ~ ~-1 ~~~ r ~f ~~s ~1 ATURE~ f~~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS `J ~'1! t'~ ~- O N a4 L-'~ PRINTED NAME ~i~-I G-ivs,~c ~~= I ~~~~¢, `SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ;~,~ ~~ ~ 1, v. ~~~ e~~y(o 11~t~ ~ ~r~~-io~~ ~,~-,t~~ ~~2.~ ~r~ ~~~v s 5 PRINTED NAME - J SIG ATU,.R~E// / STREET//ll ADDRESS ~~,,,,~~// ,/ PROcN~E MAKING ADDRESS /1~ w ~GGLf-,(~ ~~.~ Q - 9~ f~z. ~~171m" [t~ Y .7 ~- / 7 Z. ~. ~n ,!/Y~~ 1111 _ t~~~ ~U~ ~ ~'fCG .5 1/~.~, 7 ~~o THE PEOPLE ®F ii'A1L ARE ENTfTLE® TO A RUISLi~ VOTE 0~ THE SATE nF THE PARCEL OF LAMS lC~OWIN AS TAE VAIL ~OMlIA®fNS--'THE LAST i.ARCE PARCEL OF DEVEL®PAELE LAND PURCHA~E® BY' T{~E T®WN OF HAIL WITH TAX DOLLARS TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PR®PERTY ®WNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND10R . l~ESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE GOMIVIERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS VI11TH A SUPEI~IIPIARKET, WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTa ~JIfITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED .ANI~ THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAlI.,o WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TI~AT ~°HE TOV11N GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAW THIS ISSEIE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR®PERTY. I ~~ P ED NAM G TUR R T DR1=SS~ ~I NE MAI~ ADDRESS r J , . L5"" 4 L~-a~er~ he ~~e~c PRINTED NAME SI NATURE _ STREET ADDRESS ~- va, ~ ~q{ ~tlf ~4 ~ ~ G lC~~(S PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS . _ L/~r.•-~ut~. ~ ~~~n ~ru-.ter-~-- ~'~^~ C7n~ ~ ~-~xson~ ~•~ . S ~ -T--r PRIN ED NAME ATUR ~/J ST~iEET ADDRESS x .~',~ ~~ na Gt~1~ 1 ~~ PRINTED NAME sic 7-u ~~(~". ~~-~, I~, S~/~.~ PRINTED NAME 51GN~ 1~~ ...~ ~~ ~d~~~ PRINTED NAME SI , ATTIRE -az~~r PRINTED NAME 5 ATURE P~IQNE MAILING ADDRESS PHONE MAILING Ar_DL~RI;SS ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ 2~'~~ PHONE INAILIN ADDRESS ~~~-~~r33~S ~ ~. 3DX SZ~~ ~~~r~,;~~~ y-~~ ~1 ~~ or-~ ~~ MAIt~~~ ~t ~ ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE ,~~'~ - _ STREET ARDRESS PHDNE AILING ADDRESS ~o r ~~ MAILING ADDRESS` STREET' ADDRESS PHDNE .MAILING ADDRESS Y {~ (''JAI/!'~~ 1 ~ • `1 THE PEOPLE DF VAIL ARE ENTITLED TD A PUELIC VgTE UIV THE FATE ~F THE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN A5 THE VAIL G©MMDNS--TIDE LAST LARGE PARGEM, OF DEVELOPAELE LAIV® PURGIiASED EY THE T'QWN OP 'VAIL WITI~# TAX ' ~ DQIw1.ARS, ~~ TO; VAIL TOWN CCtiUNCIL MEMBI=IBS WE, TI-IE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS owNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESiDE:NTS WiTIiiN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE; PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C®MMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTiATIOIVS YOU (HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH GITY MARKET BE HALTED ANI~ THE REC®MMENDATIONS OF THE TASK I=ORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF Tl~IS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITI`ilN THE TOWN DF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE Tt~WN GOVERNMEAJT BE RESPaN51VE TO ITS GQNSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT Td A V®TE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PR[NTEq NAME SIG TIRE _~,~~j~~ S/T,R_EET Agl)RESS PHONE MAILING AgDRESS ~~ 11~7~ ~~ ~f o rem ~~ /l~,. G f7 ~~ `~`~ E/~ ~c~ ~~ n~ Z.s 41 ~~p ~1~R1G PRINTED NAME SIG TU STREET ADDRESS ~"~ONE MAILING DDRESS ~.~.r~ti ~~.~ GAT ~~ ~ ~ `I ~~~~.~ f~ ~ U6~ PRINTEq NAME ATURE STREET AgqRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS V.q rL ~ C t~ , PRINTEQ NAMEVV SIG TURE ~~ ~ ~ ~ ., ~ - ~~~ ~~~ PRINTEq NAME SIGNATURE ~ ~ ~J//'~~/, . y~,, I~'Iary ~ /~[[e n PRINTEQ NAME Si N ~ RE ~ r~~ o ,. STREET AgqRESS PHONE MAILING AgqRESS ~ ~ t~ t` t ~ ~ g/b ~ 8r . ~1,Qf15 `f DRESS ~~-~PNO~IE~ Natant ~~~~ ~/ STREET AgqRESS PRONE MAILING gDRE S PRINTEg NAME SIGN TUR /!,~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.. RP INTED NAME ST,~EET ADgRESS_ PNO~IE ~ ~ ~ 7~ ,3 ~17G ~ 156 IV~iLIN~ ADDRESS I o c~ 1C 5 ~-.~-3 v ~~G Co S/~S 51 ATURE ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADU,~~ S~x 3 1S[3 Ua~~ ,~; . {~' r THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENT~TLEI] ~'0 A PI,iBLIC VOTE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND KNQ'WN AS TI-IE VAIL COIViMONS--1°HE LAS'li 1.~1RGE f~AfZCEL. OF DEVELOPABLE LAND P191'~CHASED BY THE TOWN ®1= i/AtL WITH TAX, DOLLARS. TO. VAIL TOWN COUNCCL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSfGNED, ARE PR®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIC3R ICES!®E~lTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPP05E THE COMIidIERCIAIe DEVELOPf~ENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T® A5 THE VAIL C®I~I~®NS WITH A SUPERMARI~CET. WE PETITION '!'HAT TI-#E N"~GOTIA ~'I®NS Y®U HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY ~v~A~3KEr~' c~E i ~e~LTED AND "~°~3E RE~::dOi~MF.:~9D°t~.°G~'~S C~- THE T:~~°'!~C FORS. E '~C COWSfDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL: WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE .THAT THE °~'OWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND TI-IAT ~'I.19S I SSU[w BE BR®UGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR®CEfEf]ING WITH AfJY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY, PRINTEC I NAME S NATURE ~ ~ / STREE OGRESS / PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ l~°.I~~ _~ PRINTED NAME S G R ST~ E~~, DR S ' ~ PL;ONE ~ AILING ADDRESS ( r J PRINTED NA E SIGNATUR /J~~ S~T/RpEET/1A,DDRE~S-S / PH-yO-,NE MAi~ING ADDRESS/~ PRINTED NAME _ ._. ... . SIGNATURE ~~" STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ri r1~~ --~~ ~/11~LF7 rf PRINTED NAME SIG ATU E STREET ADi]R SS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ED N E TU STREET A R S PH NE MAI G ADD ESS •- . _. . _ ~ .. I/~~ D_NAME , / SI STR ~ 7S p~ PH~ ,,,r~ AIL SS v - PRINTE '~IIAME ~ ~`"`~-" G TUBE ~n.rm,~.n~ , ASTREET ADDRESS I'NONE MAiUNG ADDRESS ~a ,~.-- `~ - _ , .,~ ~~ ,. THE PEOPLE O~ 11A~1 ~R~ ~~T~TL~ °~~ ~ I~~~LIIC ~I~TE Q1~ TF~~ FATS ~F THE - PARCEL OF .AHD KH~WVN AS 'I~>~E ~A~~ l~~-MAII®~S-,THE LAST` LARGE PARCEL ~ OF DEI~ELOPAI~LE LA~1~ A4.IRIC~AS~O BY THE TO1~IN OP 11A~1 ~IET'Hf TAX ~~ ~ DOLLARS. - ~ . TO: VAiL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERg WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPI~RTY CsV1id~ERS, 13USi11IESS OVIINEI~S, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANI~IGR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOVI~N OF VA;L, ANI] HEREE3Y OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL. DEl!E~.~a~NIENT` E3F TIDE PARCEL OF LAND REFE;REtED TO AS THE; VAIN. COr,':AMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. -~F P.ET"""ION.,"~~N'~ ~''~~ t{~~f;";~0,^~sA`"~:'NS `~~°"~.' y~P ~E ~9~`'' _:~~D IN'."aD: V1:"A'G : " ~:~~•~a~' ~j1 /~ ~1~; ~'+r' 'fir Y`, ".; k"~t Tr~~ '2~'S~, '1.+P~', A".~!~°~,F.°9~~tf 1,~t '`ti f','7.•~. r n ~ ~. nr >r! r;~ '.M F C?•~1 4t ~?c~>.Rq~+. it .w l', li+.. ;6>ILL f t, f~ ,,., aLi,~., N,. _ c, at~~~ .. ~, ~ F. ~'r• .~ •ri r~^~~~1~'n~~11 ~~,* ., ~ ..H Y~ ~ ~~ A ~ ~ ~ R ~. M a .` ~j~ ~': c > Il :.: ~li•,..,:•.~r'1!'~~.: Ctl~ ~w~','r~' ~'}~,',... :.rF .. ,`sy ~ti,h+;~~, Rs:l`.. ~;?'~i,-1 ...d'~ri`~.•s,; ,., 1~~'~,~ ~N.. ~I~ AIVD .WI`~R~I~ ""HE~ ~'~W~''D~ -'~ AIL,. Y11~ ~EL~GY E I~ IIYIE~'~~R~1 Y~iYq~~.. ~~~ L~ ~~'V'~.~ a~4iW1~A i71~V~RE'~I!IYp~,i\T ~~ Y':sEL71-Y,vI11~~V~ T4 ITS C9N5'~'IT4.IENCY, At~D '~'1-9A~' °I"H4.5 aSSU~ BE ~ROL'G~"T .TO A MOTE 'OF REGISTERED EL'~CTORS Dcl~®R~ PROC.EEDi~1G VIIITH ANY DEVEE.O~IIl+1EI~~T OF THE 1/AIL COMMONS PI:20PER`TY. PRINTED NAME SIG AT~JRE /f~ .STREET Aq"I3E~S/ PHQNE MA~~ING A DRESS l~~d~ ~ ~~~~~ - /D~1 1/a ~"j I~ieuJ ~r ~~ ~v) ~ ~~ _ y/~ r7 pD Box . `~/~ V~~~ l ~i~r ~~ ~~~~~r u~~ PRINTED NA SIGN U STREET A CRESS PNQIVE MAILING ADDRESS r !~ d ~ ~~. ..~~...~ PRINTED ~VAM ~ ATilRE / r ~ ~,[. ~t' ~ G ~ rvn,C~ r1. in PRINTED NAME SI~~IA~ur~~ _~ORr I ~n n ~~~~c.t PRINTED NAME -J SI~-.~IATUFi~I~ /f .~Fh ~ ~f z~s2tiLl~c~ PRINTED NAME SIGi~I~:T~J~~Er( ~~ ~.~Y~i`. ~ aAMiA~ ST~E~T( ~ADD ESS P'-DIVE MAtI_IN~ AI?!?''ESS STREET AD RESS. PF:C~NE IV:?~II.iNE DDRESS E ~ ~d ~w r~~..~~~~' "f 7G -~~~ ~ ~ a ~~ 33r ~ STREET ADDRESS P`~®NE MA1~I~;G ADpRtSS 1 /~81 ~~ tjQ~r ~~-.... ~1.7~ -~~~,~Q..~3.nx ~:~'z tLS~.J S~,3E°?' ADI~I3t~rS PRINTED N~i~VIE SIG ~ ~13EET ADDRESS 17~(~, C~aI~ v 4' , 1f 71~~ (~~~ _ ?HDIVE ~f,~l ND ADDRESS ` ., v1~1 ~ CY`~~/? ~~ ~ _ ~a Kok ~ ~~ PRINTED NAME SI N~TURL ~t~~ STREE ~,1 Irk, T ADDRI:~S` Cv~ ~~~~ ONE ~" AILING ADDRESS v -~ ~~l THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENTITLED TO A PUBLIC VOTE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS THE VAIL COMMONS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL p OF ©EVELOPABLE LAND PURCHASED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX ;~ DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL. MEM3ER5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDI~JR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL ®EVELOPMENT OF THE PAt~CEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. ~ Ip1 'T' ! 1 T w `r~..IG ~~"'~+Pe.IIT':1~.'i'1 1 a./4 1 e~ s. w~ r w ! :1' ~I ,r. ..; F' . ,.~.~* . N~? .~. ~ .~~. .O~.S . "' ' ~ ^ ~'~ ~"JTER~_D ~~# ~ T~' ^'TY "Jl.~;=~~~ : aE i~i~LTEC ~-~~: ~ ; HE R:wOM~IE'N~~-i'IaNS OF THE "s ASIA -ORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR TF'E FATE OF_THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL. OF LAND. VI~'lTHIN THE' TG~WN OF VAIL. ~ ~ _ WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE. BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VA1L COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME ' SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS G~,-~ ~~~_ ~.C"~~ qS }gin rnt`,r, ~ ~ L~ ~" t ~~ ~~ C~ ~ tKL.L' _ ~~ PRINfiEO NAME SI p-TUR ~ r~ STR~~T ~t~~f PRINTED NAME ADDRESS PF{ONE ~1 MAILING ADDRESS S ~ ~ ~(~ ~ ~i Z ~7 ~7_Q ~a -~1~ - SIG. T RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME ~ sic ATURE~ STR~ T PRA ~ ~ ~ . c.~ f~,K PRINTED NAME SIGNAT~iE r ) ~ . r' l / l~iVlr ~e/~ PRINTED NAME ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS _ STREET ADDRESS ~~~~_ 3~7! ~3tr,~~vR~ fzP SI9NA..lTl1 J IC PRINTED NAME SIGNATU v 1L ~~t FFOl~~Z..._ PRINTED AME SIGNA ~ ~ STREET ADDRE ~~~ ~~~~~ PHONE MAILING ADDR!`SS ~-?~ bo £~ ~ SA-M G PHONE MAILING ADDRESS y~6 -c?3~~ ~ .S ~ r~ . STRE T ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS /03~ ~ ~r-n~ ~'~~ ~7.6-~~~ -sue STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDEtESS ZiS4 ~S~,ca4~1~~~rz., ~~'~7~~ ~1~ - ~f7E PE~~{.~ ®F ~T6T91ia Y'9f~G~ ~p~ H ~ ®~E~ ~~ ~ ~i~~8.~4+ V®1 G ®1'B i ~E ~17~E ®f"' ~~E PARCER DP'.AIIlD E~~OWiN ~1S i°HE ~~~~IIo C®MM®NS~-THE BAST LARCI~ RARCE~. - OF DEVELDP~IBE.E LAIVt7 PUR~MA5ED ~Y THE TDWN OF VAIL WI`~~ TAB( ~~ DOLLARS. '~• TO: VAIL TOV1/N COUNCIL lvIEPvIDI`RS BE YT OItAA~NED HY THE TOWN COONCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL THAT WE, THE UN®ERSICNE®, ARE PR®~ERTY OWNERS, DUSINE aS ®WNERS, R'ECISTERED VOTERS, AN®~®R RESIDENTS WITHIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY( OPPOSE THE C®MI~ERCIAu~ REVEL®PMEN'T OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T® AS THE MAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMAIRKET. WE PETOTION THAT THE NEt~OT[ATION~ YOU HAVE ENTERED 1NT® WITH DITY MARKET BE HALTED AND TI-IE REC®I~AENpATI~NS ~ OF THE -TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE ®F TI-IS ~.ASI' REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE.IT INIPERA"I1VE THAT THE `~°OWI~ G®VERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT T'I CIS ISSUE BE BR®UGHT 7'O A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE I~I~OCEE®9NG WIl"H AIRY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTI(. ~~~ ~~~ PRINTEa ME SIGN U STRE T ADDRESS PHq~IE MRi~,ING AnD S ~,-re ~' ~ c 1 .4 ~~ , PRINTED`NAME SiGNAT RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING AnQRESS / ~, ~ `~ Gl . /~e,~w.ef (,L~~ c /3 /U,/ T~ox l~- ~ 7 r! ~, f I ~G~~'y ~d.~u a~7y ~' d: b~~ ~~7~ ~1~~ ~~3~ U/~ j~- tea. ~i~ s~ PRiNTEU DAME ~ '~go Ur~r,c u~ ~-w 17 ~. SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS ~~'` • PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTEf1 NAME . ~~; E STREET ADDRESS PHONE v '~~'~ ~'rn~~P~s PRiNTEn NRI~E y f MAILING ADD ESS SIGiy TllR~ STREE.'1' []CRESS PHQ ~ n.drv ~GvY,(I1~.Q.~ ~`~ ~- ~_~1i ~ ~1~n/~ PRi TEO NAME IG ATUI~E ~~~} ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE ~,~. C ~ ~c~S~i PRINTED NAME SlGNAT E STREET ADDRESS PRONE ~~~ PRINT U NAMI; SI ~[~ E ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE r ,~ MAI~,~N~~ ~E,S~ MAILING ADDRESS ~x ~~~ ~ MAILING AnnRESS '~~' ~f~~t,"1 !'~ S(o ~ ~ ~o r~ C,rr ~r MAILING ADDRESS ~?~ ~~ r :7 THE PE®PLE ®F VAl9. ARE ENTITLED T®A PUISLIC VQrtE IAN THE F~iTE QF THE PARCEL aF LAND KNOVIIN ~1S THE'~A~L C®MlUI®NS--THE 1,AST LAitCE PARCEi. OF DEVELOPABLE LANAI PURCHASED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL WfTH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MENDERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNEp, ARE PR®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED 1JOTERS, AND10R RESIDENTS WITHIN THE: TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE pARGEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS TI~iE NAIL C®MMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS '~'Oli HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND ~,~'HE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR ~ THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN 'OF VAILe WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT Ti~IE TOV~IN GOVERI`fMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT THIS ISSUE BE BR®LIGHT TD A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR~}CEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTYe MAILING ADDRESS ff P~ ~~~ .~"7 Z~ U~-,~ f MttApILING ADRRESS ._/{, V .~„<< < c o J'I c ~ 1- 1S~IGNATI~~E ~ STREET ADDRESS , r PHONE r-~., MAILING ADDRESS r y ~ ~~"U SIGNATURE 7 ~^1tSTREr4ET ACIDRESS / //~ PNS[~lN/E ~`. _ ~ SJJ`I~ ~-Y. 10. Unn WS 'L /s. ~Y'`i' ~2n~ `f ~l'f"~~7 [-~ ~] ~` a r l n~_ ~.~ PRINTED NAME ~08~~1' .~ . /"l~L~o~I/NELL. PRINTED !NAME N~I~ SfTREET ADDRESS 4 +f PHONE S~~vt~r~ C~~'N~u~ PRINTED NAME !sue ,~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ' ~ ~ ESS ~ j~ P ~ AILI AppRESS f~ PRINTED NAME sl UAE STREET AOD S PONE MAlI.IIVG ALORESS !~ ~~ C u p q,v wtf r rC PRiN Ei~ NAME SIGNATU~fA~E,.Y ~{I - /~/~y~ STREET ADOREaSr! ~ H€'~iE~) rq ~+MAILlNG AO,U/~REl,SS ~~7![J~"V~/.a "" vv7/W Pl V1 ~d~ ~~~W/o~.~~~ ~~/~/~~f~ Y7~S^^J 1 ~i ~..d a 13 Y'~~I 11~~ ~-. `~ j.T PAINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~~~~r ~ ~-~~~, PRINTED NAME STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~(,l~..a-a-~~; +!. Cif `~ ~ d ?d -57~ ~f ~c.~-r~e . SI NAT E STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS - ~:. ',,,~ ,„ 5 ~ 'i~ Il F. ~ '. ~ i. ~~ " ~' ~, TFIE PEOP~.E DF V~AI! ARE ENT~TlE® TO A P[J13lIC VDTE ON THE FATE DF THE PARCEL ©1~ I~ANO KNDWN AS THE VAIL COMM®NS--THE FAST lARGE PARCE! OF DE11ElOPABlE LAN® PUI7CFIASI~O BY TFIE TOWN OF VAI! V11iTH TAX ~~ DO!lARS. ~'. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS BE TT ORDAINEi7 BX THE TOWN COUNCIL OZi THE TOWN OE VAIL THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS DINNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDfOR RESI®E~4T5 WITHIN THE TOWN DF VAIL, ANfl HEREBY OPPOSE THE COIVIMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIAT10~9S YC3U HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RED®fifIMENDATtONS ~ OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR TFIE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VA1L. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE T®WN GOVERNMENT ~BE RESPONSIVE TO 1TS CONSTITUENCY, AND TFIAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS E3EFORE PR.OCEEI~ING WITH ANY AEVELOPIVIENT OF THE},V,AIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~/ _ P INTED NAME SIGN~UR~~~~~®G.__. S~Z7~'~13D S '' ~~rPr~~~A~fl~hn4i'~Z7Z-3 ~~'~~. s~~~1~~~~e c~.i~ P INTED NAME 51 ATfI. ~ ST13 T ADDRESS PHONE MAILING AOgRESS ' ~~~ ~(~-era 1 C ~ }~c~~ ~ .C.~ PRINTEp NAME SI ATUR~ ~~...., STR T Af)oRESS PHaNE MAILING Aa LESS P INTED NAME SI N TUAE ' ~ j~~~' ,~~EE~DRES~1 ~~~ MAILING ADDf~ESS ~ ~. ~, r _ ICI ~ ~ ~ PRI E NA S N E `~, STRI=ET AD ES5 PHDNE MAiLffVG-ADDRESS ..-r- ~~ 1V _ c,t c ~ 5 PRINTED NAME , A UF4 STREET ADDRESS PIS E MAILING ADDS ~ ~ ~ I~~~(r .~ ~fIJK-I~ f. PRINTED NAME SI NATUR~'"~~ ~~ STREET AOpRESS PHa E (MAILING ADO PI~INTEO NAME SIGNAT~ STREET ADDRESS ~ PIaONE MAILING ADDRESS ~.; `L1~5 G~+1a~n~.X ~ ~~~~~~°~~ ~~D' 170+! ~~~~ ~ Z~ THE PEOP~,E OF VAIL ARE ENTITLED TO A PUBLIC VOTE Q-N TWE FATE OF ':'~fE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS T'HE VAIL COMMONS--"~~IE LAST, L~RDE Pd~R~El. ~~~/ OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHASE® BY THE TOWN OIF VAS, {~,~~Tli ~ TAX D04LARS. i TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C®MIONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIf~NS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY yIARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMEN®ATIONS 'OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF PHIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT TI-IE T®WN GOVERNMENT 'BE RESPONSIVE TO 1TS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS lSStJE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. _ ~ ~~~~;~ . P INTER NAME r SIGN ~DR~ STR ~T ADDRESS PHONE MAILING DD S ~. 4 ~ u~ ~ ~ ~~ PRINTED AME SIB E ~ STRE~~ ADDRESS PF:ONE MAILING ADDRESS ,~~` f'1~~~-- cam-` x! jai' ~-~~1,.~ -!~~5~ ~~C~~ _~ kl ~~ ? ~~~, S wti~J` ~ . ~ ~- PRINTED NAME ~T R \ STREET ADDRESS Nn~7vE MAILING DRESS _ .P,~ INT~D N~~ME`_.. _. S! ATURE ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS 1 Z'`~D tJ . F'~c71J [!~G-~G r2t~ 4? G 2~~"~ - s'~ r-~ ~~. ` ~ t~"R'fi`i~i'~p NAME SIGNATURE ST E/S~T ADD~S PFEpNE r> MAILING ADDRESS 11__ ~I ~ JRfj Ur ~ ~Q, ~r~S~ ~Q rJ~ ~' ~ Ji'P_ ~ ~P, n~ PRlNTEf7 NAME k . SI ATU STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS `1~ ~J ~ 7 5r b N, Irv-.-~~. ~ ~'c~f ~F~~ ~i~2 ~ ~~ ~e 1`]~D ~~ PRINTED NAME S1G~I~A~SE ST~4 AODRE ~' ~a.r harp PRINTED NAME S~NATURE ~~~~ ~~Iloe PHONE MAILING ADOR~FS t - STREET ADD~~ESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~c~ S I ~5 n~ Gam. ~ . ~I ~[~~- 5 ~ ~; t~ ~~ ~~~~:. ~z~ THE PEOPLE ®~ ilA1L A~~ ENT9T~.ED `~®A PUBLIC V~?"~ ^i~ '~~~ F,AITE t3P THE ~~ PARCEL OF LAND KN®VVN AS THE 'FAIL COMMONS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL ,y OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHASED EY THE TOWN ®F VAIL V111TH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL ArIEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE 1~RO1~'ERTY OWNERS, 131<3SINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RES9[~ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL ®EVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMIUlONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NE+G®TIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR TFiE. FATE OF Tl-IIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®I~ VAIL. _ WE BELIEVE 1T IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GO1/ER'fVIUIENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A V®TE OF REGtSTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEE®ING WITH AMY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. _~ RT7 4 1, ~~~5~~~ PRINT~.~IIAME _ SIGH ti~`~i STREET ADDRESS PNO,N ~ AILI G ~pRESS .~ .- _~ ~~~~~ PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME SIGNp,Tat „j, w PRIN, ED~NAME 51 ATt'+R ~ t.t1~,. RINTEq NAME --~I NATUR --~ '.I~e.a~ SI ' URE ~ ST ET ADDRESS PHQ E M I ING ADORES ~'~ ~s~~ RINTED NAME S'G TUR ~ STfi~E~+,,~,DDRESS PHONE t MAILING ADDRESS STREET A~":.':~E"S PI~DNI; MAILING ADDRESS S~'REET ADDR SS PH NE MAILING ADI?RESS ~~ S EET ADDRESS ~ PHONE MAILING AD[?ftESS RINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~~ ~~~ ~ REED ADORES ~ ~j .fS•r, ~O ~/•v ENDIVE MAILING ADDRESS x/74 ~~~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS -. ... . '' PRINTED NAME SIGNA~~~~ L~ i ,., THE PEOPLE OF VIAL AIDE EINTGTLE TCd A P~B~.1~ VQTE._d~l~ `~~~ ~A~E OR THE @~A4CEL t~F LRND KNQ~`~'Iti A5 TIDE 1iAll C~]MMONS-a3'HE LAS'6 LA~AGE PARCEL ~ OF DEVELORABLE LAN~9 P111~CHASE~1 BY THE T®WN OF VAt~. WtTN TAX DOLLARS. ' TO: VAiL TOWN COL,~,~+:~~.1vIEPriUEi~S WE, THE l1ND~.~; ".~'aO`~fEE?, ~r~-~ n I'~RO~ ERTY OIPVNE:R`.S, BUSINESS OVIINERS, REGISTERE^ VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHItV ~'~~jE TOWN OF VAIL, ANI~ HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMEC~CGAL DEVELOPIVIEN`a OF TIDE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL, C®IRAMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET, WE "~'~;T!TION THAT THE NECK®TI~':T'"ONS'YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO 11'dtTH CITY MAI~l~F~' Bi',~' HA`~.TE~ f"~'~D T~°~E R ~`~OMM~,NDAT'I®NS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FC~R THE FATE OF THIS Lt~ST RENIA~NING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAIL4 WE BELIEVE IT IMP!~E?ATIVE Ti~ST Tt°IE TOWN GOVERNMENT RE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUE{VCY, ANC THAT TINS ISSUE BE BRG~JGHT TO A V®TE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEF®R~ PROCEEDING W!rl~ A,!~Y DE'~PELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS ~'ROPERT"~'~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ..-.~~~ .j `~ M ~r - a U`A~i,~~ _ PRIIIITED NAME SI NATURE ~ STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING AtiDRESS ~?lJf'~c /~%~,~.~ e,~trn,~r~a~(~ ~~(~-k~9~? fur-t7t~ ~.-1,~-ir .C©~.e PRINTE~ NAME SiG~IATURE p t { _ ~ PRIN D El S A~ _. 1 ' PHONE MAILING ADDRESS r r STF?EET ADDRESS PHONEIy/ MAILING ADDRESS STREET AD,,Dr'~S~Y'/~, cHON ' ,. MAill S DRESS G ~, S;"REL"Y ACC?RE55 PHONE MAILING AIIRRESS PAINTED NAME SIGI~AfTUG~E} (` ~fe~ 1~u.rn;tarol ~~ ~~~ PRINTED ~~ME SI''N y ~' ,. .. / ~.,r~, f ,~..~- PRINTED NAME SIGN~URE~.. ,~ ~. , / y ST~tEE'~ A€~DRESS _ P #3NE MAILING ADDRESS_ STREET AD~flESS ~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS . PRINTED NAM SIG(I~~~t /~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING AD[1RESS ~~ ., - v,.. . r°i~r~~ ~ ,, ~~ . J THE PEwaPLE ®F l~A~t ARE ENT~7°L` T A PUBLIC i10TE ~N THE P TE P TW A O E PARCEL ®F LPINU 1(I~iO'i~fN AS T'~lE 1~A~0. CQMM~'3HS-THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF D-EVEtOAABtE LAW® P1IItClyIAED Elf THE TQWIV OI+ VAIL :WITW TAX .,V~~ ~DOtt,AR5. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL lv1EMHE~5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, 13US1NESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®IOR RESI®ENTS 1NIT1-iIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPP05G THE C~MMERC@AL DEVELOPMENT' OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T`O AS THE VALE. CO~IM~3NS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEG®TIATIONS YOU HAVE E_NTERE® INTO WITH CITY MAR'~ET E~E HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDA310NS C3F THE T'AS~~ FORCE 3E CON5iDERED FOR T~'E FATE OF ~°~IIS LA'ST' REM !;VING II~ARGE PARCEE. OF LAND WITHIN THE T'O'NI<N ~'OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT TH9a ISSUE BE 3l~Ol~GHT TO A 'VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR~BCEEDiNG WI r H ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR®PERTY. ~~~ n dry ~~~~~ PRI NA ~ Gv '~ ~d ,~Iso~l' P TDN E SIG T ~~ ~_~Oo~ 1S''f~c~~rh PRINTEp DAME n~nuar~inr- STREET AD Rli PNO E, r iLIN ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILIN~ADDRESS /~~v j~i~r.G~/e~~pr ~f~G~UZ~ ~?v. oK 3rz9 STREET AppRESS f PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ST ~ ~ro/~~ +~C~` 3~C ~Tl~ ~7~ ~~ ~.SGd ~?a F~ ~,,,~ ~~E ~~ a ~' ~ ~ PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~~ P~r~~.c~ PRINTED NAME SIG /~ STREET AU[9RESS PHONE MAdI.l~,11G AQDf~IrStS,~~~ , `~~ ~~~~ PRINTEQ NAME 1GNA RE 2.~zv ~~~~ PRINTED NAME i~~~ f ~~- STREfT..AQDI$ESS ..,. ,. _, PHL~E ~~~~ S ATURE STREET ,.` ~~] / . PRINTED NAME y~~~~ RE /~ ~~ ' ~ °~ AQpRE S P~iONE ~~~ ~~~ STREET A~~Q,~D,~~ESS .~ PH ~~VIl E MAILING A~RICuC MAQI~IG Aflp~ES~~~~` ~/~..~ C~ i,t~LAILtND~~~ ~ 1 '. ~/ ~~~ f ~ ~ ,, ,~ ~,~ { ~; ~. ..I [i ~3~ THE PEOPL.C' Or VAIL ARE ENTITLE® TO A I~~iB~6C VOTE O~N THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS THE VAIL CAMNIONS--THE L~#S'T L~+IRGE PAIttCER OF aE'WELOPABLE LAND PURCHASED RY THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX DOLi.IaiRS. TC~: VAIL TQWN COUNCIL MEMDEEZ5 BE IT ORllAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VA?L~,THAT ~V WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, - ~- REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH .A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIAT10N5 YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RE:COMMEN®ATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE. FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN 'OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE 'TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OI" THE VAIL CO11~~aVI~CNS PROPERTY.. ~ ~.u~ (•~ ~ ~~Nx r~~~ PRINTED NAME S~~~I(~~/'/~f~~e~i //'j/ ~ ; S T R~E/ET /ADDRESS ///~~ // ~';, ; , .~ ti `~ pry ,L~ ~ ~ ~- PRINTED NAME V_..~.~--~ S!G q }~E%--~""~-~ ET ADDRESS C..~- ~. PRI~TED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS r~ PRINTED NAME SIGN TURF STREET ADDRESS PRONE MAILING ADDRESS r7 ~- 1 i PRINTED NAME SIG `T/ITRFE~~ r1G4~ I V ~~ ~ ~, (a -~~1~1/Z' r~~, ITEp NAME . STREET Ai7aRESS 51GNATl~RE STREET ADDRESS ~~. r ~. l RfNT~D NAME SIGNATU E d ! ~'~11~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRONE MAILING ADDRESS 1 PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS ,` PHONE ,:, j~y..yy~ -- MAILING ADDRESS PFIONE MAILING ADDRESS ~l ~~~G~ ~~-.~ STREET ADDRESS P~iON IV~~tiE~N£r-ADDRESS -~ s~yr~--~-r r.~~ • PRINTED NAME ~iGNAT~~ ~~. T AD~RE~ J ~ ~1 ~/ r ]HO~~ ~ NIAILiNG DRE ~^ _ ~~d ~'E Y ~ ~, I 1. ~ 5~ ~ 1.-. i ~ i .' ~~7 })%~ gg i ~~.• E, , I ~ . 1 ~ I i ', ~ tl ~Ai1 WE PETITION THAT THE NEG®TIA`~'I®NS `YOL9 HAVE ENTERED 1NT® WITH GITY MARKET BE FIALTED AND THE REG®MMEI~DATI®NS OF THE TASK °FORGE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE ®F THIS ~.AS`I' REMAINING LARGL PARGEL OF LAND WITHIN THE 'TOWN OF SAIL. WE BELIEVE !T IMPERATIVE T'I~A~° THE TOWN ~®VERNMEN°~' BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AP9D THAT T~-~9S lSS~E E3E BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERE® ELECTORS BEF.®RE PR~CEE®II~G ~IIIITI~ AIRY D+EVELC?FMENT ®F THE VAIL G®MMONS PROI~EI~TY. - _ 2 N~~~iJ4~ ~--N ~~ P N~~NAME ~% `~ URiw STREET ADDRESS . PHONE MAILING ADDRESS i f a ~ U~rt~... '1f I fit/ =~ ~ ~"~ ~-7(, ~ 795` ~'~ t'0 k l ~ ~ . , PR~ Sit PRl SIG ~J`~Qn~e ~.~~UPH~ti~~~ JAMS (~ TREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING A~IDRESS ~'n ~~~ I~k~y 1~'1 or~.v~w . ~ - ~t~~t..Co }'~~. Rr~x 1~r~ ~~I ~ ~ ~~o- ~{~~~ ~g P~ NAME ~E ~~ PRINTED NAM SIGN UR ~. STREET AD R SS P~fONE MAILING ADD SS ~~ ~ ...2,~ 300 ~.~~~ ~.~~ .va,. ~I.1 ~- ~~~~ ~~~-c L Ga ~l~,~ he~~ `~c~ P 1NTED;~IAME. 111 sT~ ET Annl~~ss U PHONE ILIlIlG ADDRESS SI •~lA ~ STR~A~',DR~S~ PONE MAiLINI; AD~1=SS NTED NP,ME -~ ~~~~~U SIGNATURE EET ADDRESS ~~ E MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ ~ - 1n~ ~ r a ~7G rC ~` ~ PRINT D N ME ~ . SIGNA 1R -_.. ~. S< ET AD ~ S P NE 6~ LIN U ~,- 1 ,.1 . .. ~ 'E ; ~ , , 1 ~ i. i ~'• ~ II F.~~i I~~ r ~ ~ ~ ' 1~ i S ~ ~ ~ l ~ I I A l! a X5,,11 { ~ r. F `~ F 1 Y I ~I {f ~ li I I ~~ 1 l (~ ~ ~~~ ~ `,. . s d ,~ ,i ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ 4 ' I Ih 11 rl '~ r. i ~ 4t , a G ~. ~ ~~t ' ~ . ^ ..~ J' ~'~ a ~~ < ^ . : ~ t`'I ~ 1 F ~ ~~ '~~ +~'~.~'1ha. ~~u ~ , f~ i ~ ~ "'F". 1P! ~"'* "" ~ ~. S~/A RE , ~' ~/,d ilt~ ~d 1(~L7 G 97UES~/~,-D~/Z:C~ . . ~ ` ri a ~° . ~° r • ~ ~ ~ . t4 J'1\) l TF~E PEQPLE OF 1IA1L ARE ENTITLE T'®~ i't~BL1C 1-QoTE 0~~. T~ ~E FATE ®F THE PARCEL t'~F LAiriD KIVOVUIV AS `1'If~E VAIL C®IIAM®1VS.~TIiE L~LST LARGE t~ARCEI. OF ®>rr1ELOpASLE LANp PURCHASI~D ICY THIS TOWN ®F r/A1L Wli'F1 1CAX DOLLARS. ~~ TO: VAfI. TOWN COUNCIL MEIvIUERS . ~ WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PR®PERTY OWNERS, ®USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COi~fIIUIERCiAL DEIAELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL. COMMON4 WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED.INT"O WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AN® THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR TFIE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THA~~ THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESP06~SiVE TO ITS CONSTITl1ENCY, AND. TI•IAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE I~ROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR®PERTY. PRINTEI] NAME . SIGIV~A,TURE f~ STREET Alif~fiESS PHDNE MAILING A[IDRESS /' ~~ PI~I TED NAME SIGNATU ~ ~ STRL~ET ADI]RESS ,~ PHDNE ~ M ILlNG A.UD~I S ~~ c~.c,t PRINTED !NAME • SIGNATURE ~E~A~ P~ES~~ PHDNE ~AILIN,~ AE~I~.I'? SS I ~ r t a.~ I "l.~`~ar ~ ~~ PRINTED NAME • GNAT cE STREET ADDRESS PH[iNE ~,AlL1NG AaDP~:SS ....~dL PRINTED NAME 1Gr~ TURF STREET AGOR S5 ~""-~.~ PHONE ~~ MAllll~G~AiI[}R~SS ~} Fes' ~ ~/dN 0/t!~ ~ ~ - PRINTE[) NAME SIGN/~T,U~ '' !y f ' ~rrr~rt~il.4' • -~ STREET A,,ppf7RESS `~ PHONE MAILING ADpRESS ~~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ PRINTED ~, ME SIGN RE STI3E~T AI]DRESS ---- ~, ~'Icr~il~~~~ ~f~.(~~fl -~ PRINTED NAME ~~~'°~,~il~aa 7 l~~ic ~/~~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~c..~ ~Tf~EET ADDF~ESS ~~ - ;~ ~ ~ ,. - ~S THE PEAPL~ DP VAIN. ARE E~1°~'~~'LE® `~D A P~I~LfC VC~1'E ON THE FATE ®F THE PARCEL ®F LAt~t~ KNDWN A5 TH~ VAIL CC~tViNl®NS--T~iE LA5T LARGE PARCEL OP DE~'ELOPA~LE LAND P~~'CHASED DY THE TOVIIN . C1F 'VAIL ~JIIiTIR TAX iD®LLPeitS. •~ TO: VAIL T®WN CC?UNCIL MLlviD1=RS ~' VIIE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE Pi~OPERTY OWNERS, BUSiNE~SS OWNERS, ~`~ REGISTERED 1lOTERS, AN®IOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF 1fAiL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE CQM~ERCIAL DEl!lE=L®PMENT' OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMiUi®NS WITH A SIJPERIVIARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEG®TIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED,INTO WITH CITY IUTARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECC)NIIVIENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE ®F THIS LAST REI4flAINiNO LARGE PARCEL OF LAN® WITI;IN THE TOWN ~OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE T®WN G01iERN~EINT f3E RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT T~IIS ISaUE 13E EROUGIiT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS DEI"O[r~E PROCEE®ING 11~ITH ANY DE~lELOPIIAENT OF THE VAIL COMIViONS PROPERTY. PRINTED AM SI~l~ATD ~ _ STREET ADDRESS P9i0NE MAILIIIIG ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SI NATI:R . STREET d[7D SS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRIN ED NAME . SIG ~~RE STREET AD ES5 PHO E MAiI.ING ADDRESS ~ ~S X199' ~~~ ~-ar~ J ~ ~i t TLS ~- ~'~OS PRINTED NAME S_lG TU STREET ADDRESS PH(lNk MAILING AGs:~~iESS ~~~ ~~~1 ~~ l.Ut fs~~ PRINTED • sIeNAT , ~ sTRE~~ Ar ~~ s~ r PRINTED NAME Sl/~±/7~pAT ~ J~ STREET jA~IIpI~.ESS N ~f ~~ r Lf"~ O rti - C_ ~ ~ ~L ~ I~ a rVl~T7 ~K. L~ (~ PRINTED NAME $~~~~ /f~~~~~~ v NEED S AT . E `~--.~ P~c+u~ ~ M~r~rru~ aooR~ss ~~~., ~7~-s/boy ~, ~~f~/PHDIIIE MAILING ADDRESS STREET A:~Dl~E5 ~ ~F'.DN~ , AILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PI'IOI~E MAILING ADDRESS ~~~`~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ f ~~~ X7`3 ~~. ._.~._ . _. ~ , :, ~~ TIRE PEOPLE ®F V~IIL ARE E~T3TLE® `~'~ A PUBLIC if®TE ®ly TIE FATE OF THE PA&iCEL ®F LAN® ~N®W~I AS 1~NE VAIL ~OMM®NS--7'F#E LAST LARCL PARCEL OF REVEL®PAELE LAI~10 PURCHASES ~Y TI~~ TO1dVI~ OF VAIL 1aVIT'H TAX DQ#,RARS. TO: VAlL TOWN COUNCIL. MEMBfk~S ~ WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND1OR RESI®EI~TS WITHIN T'L-!E TOWN Cr= VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE TI•IE COMMERCIAL. REVELOPMENT OF THE I~ARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERE® INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMI~IENDeRTIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERE© FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND W1THlN THE TOWM OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE; TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAeT TWIS ISSl3E BE E3ROUC~hIT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY, ~RINTE NAME PHONE . MAILIN ADDRESS SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ '~~ ' P E NAM ~SiGN "~ t STREET AD~RES~S ~ HONE MAILING ADDRESS 1 < 5~~ S GNATURE STR ET ADDRESS ~~~~~~ ~/ J i'~ Gl ~/"4 1n Gam. V ~ ~Q ~ ~ \ 5 PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE • G'~.~ G PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~?~ 1~~ ~~~~raC~~~c..~_ t ~[7l~•- LI'Z.L-fk~ ~~ ~ x U31Z Uc~ , C. ~~Av.s~r~ ~x~c~,~~ ~o~•~- ~ LcxR'wvv~ PfiINTEq NAME SIG Tt}R ~~' ~~~ I nyZ(tkc~. ~~:r~.ctc.~C~ PRlNTEq NAME SIGNATURE ~~~~ ~~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~Iv w L ~`~N.l ld r~~l ~n ~~.~-~<I~-~ o~~a s~ M~ STREET Ar~D-DR/ESS PHONE MAILINq AggRE5S STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PR NTED NAME ~ _ . ~ j~.~~ ~,~ SIGNATURE TAEGGyl' ADDRESS ' nPHONE MAI~L^ING ADDRESS " lJ: r „ -~ 3f7 THE PEOPLE ®P V'A4~, ARE E~V'~`I`i`L ~'®A P~~L~G ~O~E O~ ~°~~'~ F1~TE OF TAE PARCEL OF LAI~O ~~~W~ AS THE OtA,~~, ~®RIBM®IVS-THE LAST LARGE PARCEE, OF ~DEVI~LOPASLE LAN~3PURCHA~~~ RYT'HE T®1iUIV pF ''1-A11. WIT~1 TAX AOLLARS. - - TO; NAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ~~. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY ~OWNIERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, ~, REGISTERE© V®TERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN CAF 'FAIL, AN® i-6EREBY OPPOSE TFiE C®MMEI~~lr4L ®EV~LOPIVIENT ~ OF TIDE PARCEL. OF LAND REFERIRE® TO AS THE NAIL COII~M®NS WITH A SL7PERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT' TIRE NEG®TIATaONS YOU I°LAVE ENT',ERED INTa WITH CITY lM1IIARI~ET LSE .irIAL.TE® ~4,~i13 THE REC~M°;~,E,~ ~,A~°!®N°~ O~ THE T~:S!'~ FOpr^F EE CONSIDERED FOR THE FETE Ow~ ': ~,S LAa . ~ FZEIUII` "~~~iNG '~~~.An aE. PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE ~TOW~I C?F VAII.,.. WE BELIEVE IT IIVIPERA°~iVE THAT' THE 'OWN GC}VERNMENT ~E RESPONSIVE TO ITS COMSTITUEI•lCY, AND TI°~AT TH1S aSSUE BE ~R®UGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTEREI] E~,ECTORS BEF®RE PROCEE®ING WITH ANY ®EVELOPMEt~T OF TH5 NAIL C~'MII~ONS PROPERTY. ~J VY~L~~1 ~i. ~ ', P;~INTEp NAME S1GNA UR ~ ~ PRiNTEp NAME STREET AI]DRESS PH N~ MAILING ADDRESS ,_.. SIGNAT~-,-' STR ET ApDRESS~- P QNE A!L'NG ADDRESS PRINTE€I INANE `~7~a ~~ _.7~~ -~ ~i NATU E~ ~ ,. //~' STREE ADDRE~ySS /`~ nu _ HQNE~' MAIEING~AyppRESS i ~~l~t-'Lt,~(.~ [ ~t_.~i-/~ ~,.~L.t---ti! r7`~~ l.,l ~l~_X l ~ ~ Y v "'--'T/lti~L! ~~/L~~ /l 1'0 PRiNTEp~AME SIGN TUBE STREET' AaDRE ~, ~~ ~ ti~~ ~ 1~~~~1~~ i~~ ~~% PRINTED NAME SIG URE STREET Q.ar~ ) Lt~~~ K r~ ~(~.~;~-~~.~~1~ PR. NTED NAME ~(~-~- ~-30~ PHONE AILING AppRESS u ADDRESS PHONE MA~LIN(s AOONESS S GNATDI{E ~ ~`~TDEET Ai~D~~LSS Pi~DiJi; MRIL)NG ~~~7D~ir.SS ~<<.~ ~(~~f SLR PRINTED NAME SIGN , fv ~i~'~) ~~~K.~k~W~ PRINTED NAME 51o''lgA URrf,~ STREET ADDRESS Z ~ ~ ! ~' ~~c ~~ STREET A D SS 21 ~ I ~ ~. PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~1C-v~~ /~k 3pr~ PHONE MAILING AppRESS • ~ .~ THE PE®P~.E ®F 1l'A!!~ ARE E~VIT'11°~, TO A 'Pt~EL~C `VOTE ~~ THE Fe~TE C!F THE PARCEL (~~ l.A~l® ~6NOIlVN AS THE'UA~E. C01V1~®IVS--TINE LAST I.AItGE P1#ItCE! QF ®E11'EL®PA~~.E I.AI~D PURC~ASEi~ D1C T~#E TQWIV CAF 'VAII, IPVITM T14X C301.LA~tS. TO: VAfL TO1NN COLJNCIl. MEMBERS ~; WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY GWNERS, BUSIl~E55 OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTEl,S, ANE31+®R RESIDENTS .WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAII, Ald® HEREBY OPPC?SE THE COl~1~ERGlAI ®EVEL®P~JIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRE® TCD AS THE VAIL COMIUIO~IS W[THI A Sl1PERf~IAR[CET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEG4TIA°I'i.O[VS YOIi HAVE ENTERE® INTO VIIITH C[TY !~,"" R,~ET, PE N~~~,~':ED A.N~ T~;+~ r~ECC~I[~IE~DA~"~O~°S ~^F ~'!~M TASK FORCE ~F ~:vNS1DERED FOR T['~E FATE ®F `I"HIS LASS'' RE[I~AIN[NG LARGE PI~RCEI OF LAND WITHIN THE TQWN 'OF 'VAIL. WE EELIEVE IT IIVIPERATIUE TI~AT ~°I~E ToWN GOI~ERN~ENT ~E I~ESP(~NSI11E TO ITS CoItISTITIJENCI(, AND THAT THIS ISSUE ~E I~RCUtaHT TO A OIOTE ®F REGISTERED ELECTORS 1~1=F®RE P®CEEDING WITH ANY DEIPEL®PMEf~T OF TF[E VAIL CONIM4NS PR®PIrRTY. ~iL_L ~A ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ . s PRINTED NAME S GI~~I~~ E a ~ STREET App~ESS ~ Pk~ONE MAIEINR ADDRESS //~~/1 ~ ~% 7~1 7Z~~ ~'1,Y17S~1I"Gt. ~ ~ ~~n`" ~. i~~5'~ ~~ t'J7C~ ~ .~ 7~~ PRINTED NAME S URE STREET ADORES PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~~ iurr~~~ PR{NTEQ rriAME SIGN ~ STREET ADDft£SS PRINTED hl'Qilll , S GNATURE S'tR ET ADDRESS i ~!` PI:ZiINTE~~ NAM S1G ~ TUR ' ~"] i t 6'~._. J1^fQ(.Ur J r-. ~Cl ~.r/C.rAf PRINTED NAME SI a A'Tl1RE ~'J , `_- \ f f 7 ,~ ~~Nl~ L ~h~, PRINTED NAME I~NATURE PRINTED NAME SI ATURE ~c? . 1_:~ ~ 7, PHONE MAILING AppRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS v t -- ~ .~ 1i ,p ~ ~5~; ~'J-l,UI~E MAlI.ING ADDRESS ,STREE`~ A€]DR~:~S C i p!-~~r~~ M1r9.g,,~i.e!lr A ~~L~~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ .CSf~r {~r,q ~S~Cv 1 ,ai, f r ~ R r~- . <~ ~, ..~1- ~~ ; 1 Q r~ ~,5 STREET A~JDI~ES~~/,~ P9tfl E MAILING ADJIRESS~ / I STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~.~ ~ 5 ~~~ .mom. ~ZLa . ~~~~~~ `~~~~ `~ ~;~ G~ ~It~~7 -~~ 39 ~~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENTITLED T®A PU~L~~ V~BTE ®~ T~lE FATE OF THE PARCEL C1P LAND tiN®WN AS THE'VAIL C®~19lMONS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OP DEVELOPA~3LE LAND PI~RCHASED DY THE 'TOVVIIV OF V1~IL WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNC{L MEMBEt~S WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND1OR RESIDENT'S WITHIN THE TOVIIN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVEL®PIIIIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO ~AS THE VAIL. COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARItCET. WE PETITION ThA'i' THE NEGOTIATIONS YOt9 HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET SE HALTED ANf~ TI-k'E~RFCOI~l1~RE'`~CA°~AOI~S OF ~"HE -r4,~"~ F~?~?~' ~ B~' CONSIDERED FOR TIRE FATE OF~ THIS LAST REGVIAI~VIt+I~ LARGE PARCEL C}F LAND WITHIN THE TOWN 'OF VAIL.. . WE BELIEVE IT. IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITt1ENC1f, AND THAT THIS ISSL~; ~E BR®LIGI-IT TO A V®TE OF REGISTERED ELECTOR5 BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVEL®PMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTYn PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE~/~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDR ~t~-f~!~ ..`~u,.,.~.. COY/ /,~e~...c~~e~~_ Y~ ^'15~~~ ~~a ,~~~~~ ~~~-- ~rz.mrn`~.-Tuf-#~~- PRINTED NAME S~NATLiRE ~ '~f,STR+E~ET ADDRlPSSy I (PHONE! 7 MArI~LI~NGy ArD/Q~RyESS A ~~J ~i~11/H~'1'YL,~ \~~4u.~ v f ~dv ~2C~4Y~4ti ~f C~~ Lf ~~,- I~~~h. ~"l()I\ I 1 7' ~~Ti~ PRINTED NAME TUR f~ ^~ 1 V~STI~E~~Cr~~ PONE MA G ADDRESS PRINTE€] NANfE i TD ~ STREET Di~ESS ~~~~~~~ ~ Z ~ ~~ ~.~ ~~~ . ~2r~~ C.Z. V'~ L C.( rte, ~/[ ~ 1r ~lC~ ~~ ~~ PRINTED NAME 5! STREET ADD~3ES5 ~ ~ PHOiVE MA LING AClgRE55 PHi7iUE MAILifVG ADt3Rl:SS ~. PRINTED NAME s{i~ ~~u~E cY ~i~I.f~-~. ~ • ~~? ~ STREET r~D~ESS r PFiDNE MAILING ADDRESS (;~~,~~ , -~.. ~11~~_ ~~~~~ P NTED NAME I STREET AQD€~ES 'PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ ~_ ra i~ z ~ ~ ~~ GL~-wt PRINTED NAME V S GNATURE STREET ADDRESS PliONE MAILING ADDRESS _C?,t,~ _, ~., '1.`~ ~ `~ ~t,e r ~~ ~ .fit ~I.`7 F ~` 5 ~ ~ ~i P ~' ~~.,~ ', `~ ~ R; a 1^• ,; ~« THE PEQPLE QF 9fAiL ARE E113T~`~LE~ `T~ A PUSL~C V®TE Q~ THE F1ATE QF THE PARCEL OF LAN~1 ~CNQ4l~~ A~ THE 19A1L COMMONS--THE LAST i.ARGE PARCI~E. aF DEVEhQPA,~LE LAND PURCHAS€~} RY THE TQ~IiPN ®F VAIL '~VlTI~ TAX_ ClQLLARS. ~q TO: VAIE TOWN COUNC9L MEM€3ERS • WE, THE ~ UNDERSIGNED, .ARE PROPERTY OVIINERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND~OR RESIDENTS V11iTFiiN THE TOVII'N O!I; 1/AiL, AND HEREBY OPP®.SE THE COMMERCIAL DEVEL.OP,IVIENT OF THE RA,'~CEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C~MM®NS VIOITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THA~° THE ~EGO°rl~ T~~NS SOU HAVE ENTFI~ED INT® W9~~i~ CITY MARKET ~E ~ALT;~c~ A~V~ ~F-~t''RE~O~~~w ~~"~~,°:"I~ ~~. ~C',= T:~E T~51~. '=OR.CE ~E CONSi~"EI;d~~ FO_R ~'.; •.~: F.I~TE O.F "•''" ~.A~'" ~',E~~~~,`~~a:~C:~ ~_A!~~:-E ,~.'ARCEL (3F LAND iNITHIN THE 1®9~UN'Oh VAIL. •~. V'VE BELIEVE IT ! •~' ERATIVE THRT THE TOV~N GOVERNMENT EE RESPONSIVE TO lTS CONSTITUENCY, AND YHAT THIS ISSUE EE EROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING 11~ITH ANY i~Elr°ELOPMEI~T C]F THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~Q ~, ~~~ PRINTED NAME SIPj~VATI~ S~~NA STREET ADpRE`'S ~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHDNJE' MAILI,N~G- AD/pR/ESS /~~y,' ~ PRINTED ILIf[NTr' SIGN TI.`''E STREET Ap~lRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NA SIGNA~: ~r~_-_ ~ STREET RL1DR SS ~ PHONE ,MAILING ApQI~SS `~ y G~~ ,.. PRINTED NAME SIGNA~~l~,E/ - STREET AE3pRE S5 }~ j PHONE MAILING A[IDRESS /,~ .t"v ~7U Sd~~e~~ 11~. / ) U,~,`~7, (~)`y ~~b~. 'l `71~ .~ ~rn, 1 ~. .~ Nn1 ~ ~ l tab 4`+. ;!~ f~ PRINTED NAME SJGNATUPE ~ STREEr ,p'~pI~E~Su I':~Irl";': MAIL'rf~"~ .'~~~'RE~S k~v. ~~~ a~.~~.E--,.,ti.-n-or-, c~--h ~'c.©4~ I~, k~' ~ '-~'7 F> • ~- ~~ C~ c}-- •~.~1./m1Z.~- ~+{`a.~ ~1'Vi.Y~.C~'~f-flx ~ r~:1~ PRINTED NAME S''NATI.~R_ STREET' ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ' dun ~ T I-I {Q. I ~ (G~10 l (S PRINTEp NAME 51GNATU E/~, ~~~ ~/~ STREET AD~~ ~~ PHONE MAILING,~IIaDRESS [~ - r r~ ~ ' ~ r THE PEOPLE t~~ VAIL P-RE. E1VTIT~,EL# ~'®A PU~L~C VOTE ON TIHE FA~'E OF THE PARCEL B9F LA~3D ~~OV~H AS THE ~A1L COMM®~S--THE LAST LARGE PARCf~~ OP DEV'El.®PARLE LA1ND PURCHASED BY THE 'T®W~l ®I' iU'AIL 1~VITM TAX ~~' ©OLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL. MENDERS WE, THE Urii°~Ei'dSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY. OWI~fERS, BUISINI~SS~ QWNERS~ REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDfOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL ®EVEL®PMENT' OF 'S'HE PARCEL OF LAND DEFERRED TO AS THE VAIL DOMM®NS WITH A SUPEI~MAFtKE,T. WE PETITION TF°iAT THE NEGOTiATiO~4S Y[)U HAVE ENTERED INTO WI°1"I°i CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RE~:(.~1~9IVIEN®ATIONS OF THE `TASK F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FA~'E OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN 1~HE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BEL~~vE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVE~NI~nENT ~E RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENC1f, AN®.THA`T °~HIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A V®TE OF REGIc`'! FRED ELECTORS ~3EFORE PROCEEDING VIIITH ANY ®EVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PR[~PERTY. r '~ ~:.~ C~RINTED ~ME . ' SI TU l~ ~ ,~ STREET ADD~ES~ j~ PEfONE ~ ~~ MAIi.ING AD4D~SS V ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~ PRINT NAME Sib AT R i STREE~Ly ADDI3CSS ,p /PNyQ/NEE ~{~ ~'~~'/ fir,/ I7i~~1 ~~ /~W' ~7 fL~/~('I / / .~ ~PRII~TEQ NAME MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~I" /G SIG , ~`~,U.ftE ~/~ S~I"i~fE'6 AUi~RESS. PPIaNE ~i11 ~ ADDRESS -, !:~ ,, PRINTEU'NAME ~-~~ SIGNATURE ~ STREET AUD13,ESS ~~ •.. PNC~NE MAILING ADDRESS ----_... ~ ~ f ~.~~~ha ~ POINTED NAME J I[[;; ATU(IjE ~ S1T,REET ADDRESr~St ~ Pi~0I1fE ~ NdRitING AD[3fiES5 ~~.y~U~-~f rlri .~,~- 1 /~ n ! LJ ~:~;! ~~ i ~'~..,~ I J/ ~r~ `~ ~ ~ ~{ 7C, " fc~ ~{ `~ r~ii'r^--. PRINTED NAME 1 SIGNA c--, ~ ~.~ A ~~ss - ~F °iu~~~- ~AII.iN~ ~E l//fit PRINTED NAME NATI~RE STREET A DRESS PLI®N M !LING ADDRESS ~h ~eW CD,I~D~ , PRINTED NAMF~ ,~.°-` (~° r pYYI~'~-' ~.~.'t'~ ~, ~ 2'~ ~j~ SIGNATURE STREET ADL]RESS PRUNE MAILING ADDRESS '~-D~ 1. ~ C In ~-~. D ~n,'1 ~ I ~~ ~ ~ ~ . ~~ ~, ~.¢°~' y)~ ~' , , t. , i. ~'i~. ~'1 q ~ THE PE^~'WC 4^~ ~A~~ ARE ,E~ i -~'LE~ ~ ~~ k~ P~~~~C "~/~~'~ ~~"" "!'".':`~ ~ ~,~~ ~±~ ~'~~ PARCEL OP LAl~® KIV®VVN 14S THE VA-L COMMONS--THE LAST LARGE PA~ACEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCl~ASEC~ Bll THE TOWN. OF VAtL WITH ~'AX DOLLARS. ' TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIi.. MEMBERS ~ ' WE, THE. UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL REVELOPMENT .OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COIUdMONS WITH A SIDPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN O~F VAIL. , WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT ~TI-#E TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCIP, AN® THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF . THE VAIL/I C1OMMONS PROPERTY. PR! TED NAME ATURE ~~ STREET AD ESS ONE MAILING ADDRESS P~ ~ ~/ LJ a ~"L._`7~p N PRINTED NAME 5.~~~ . RE ~ ~STREET A~'~RESS ,~~1DIfiE MAILf~IG ADDRESS PRINTED NAME 5 G~TUR STREET ADDRESS PHONE _ MAILING ~.DDRESS 4• Li MA~IING DI]RI=~ SI '1"A~TURE ~ ~~ / STREET AD~?RESS ` .,~" , PMQI~E n~AI~.ING. A~Dfi~SS ~~t%IL~l,cf ~ ~. 1,.~ ~" -.,~i){iFfi C.F~~ rt,~~l~.,.,..~~, ~__~ ~ r{7/> (',a ~/ ~j' i~ jr~"r~.~ ~ --~~~ )~ ,J (P INTER NAME SIGN9.IEtR~ STREET ~~DDRESS PHONE .~ , PRINTED NMI; ,fir c spa ~~a ,/~ L.. NTED NAME SI NA~TAU~RE /) ~ . / STRbEET A/DDRES/S - -.... ~ ~a ~ J._-..- ,~~ ~ ~ )~~ P T D NAND IGN Tl1RE ~ .~, J71f [~7 ct~~~rr c~ UQn -~ PRINTED NAME SI NATURE STREET ADDRESS {~ ... . PFfONE MAiL[NG ADDRESS PHONNE _.-~ MAILING ADDRESS STREET DDRESS 11 PHONI= la~~J ~~ Cam. `~i7~-3s ll ,, , - .. ,... , '. ~:~. . . MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~f3 THE PEOPLE ®F i9'A,L ARE EN'T~T~.ED T®A P1l1S~,RIC VOTE Of~i i'HE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND ~CN[~VilN AS THE VAIL C®MM®NS~-THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OP DEI-ELC~Pt4BLE LAND PURCHASED BY 'THE TIDWN ®F 1fA1L W1TF# TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL M~M13RS ~ WE, THE UNDERSiGNE®, ARE PI~OI'ERTY O~lllNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERE® INTO WITH CITY IUTARKET BE I^IALTED AND THE RECOMMEIV®ATi®NS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REIVIAINtNG LARGE PARCEL OF LAND IdllITHIN THE TOIPVN ~OF VAlL4 WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TEAT THE TOWN GC?VERNMEIdT BE RESPONSIVE TO 1TS CONSTITUE~iCY,-AND TI-IAT THIS ISSUE BE BR®UGHT TO A VOTE DF REGISTERED ELEC~'ORS EEFORE PROCEE®ING UVITH ANY ®EVELOPMENT OP THE VAIL COMMONS PR®PERTYa ~_ PRINTED NAME --~ SIG -L#R ~ :' .~ . y~,t~l l ~ ~ ~. RINTED NAME i NATURE ._. /~-- ., - PRINTED NAME S NA3L4RE tif.. ` ~n ~ ~~. STREET AppRE~sS PliDNE MAILING ADDRESS STREET AD RE ~ PNQNE MAILING ADDRESS S?'R~T ADDRES k1flNE AILING ADDRESS U PRINTED NAME SI NATUR G STLiEET ADDRESS P I]NE ~~P. ~., CMG-s~~ MAILING ADDRESS PR N. Fr N ME SI STREET' . D ES5 PH IVE MA1tdI~G AilDRESS PRINTED NAME ~ ~ i~ ~ SIGNATURE STREET AD~31iES'S ~ pNd3NE MAILING ADDRESS I ~~ ~ 2t~...~ .~.. l ~~ .~ Z~'i~ pax ' 1 ~ I `-~ ~ ~C~~ I~~ ~. ~~~ i^l~ w I~.~ PRIN`T~ NAME 5lG URE STREET ADDRESS _ PLiONE MAILING ADDRESS ,~ r .-~.n.... I, ;s,.w.~ ~'7 ~~i 5"/ ~ r~ ~~ 7 i ~~ d ~. ~-~. ''~-~l. /;~7J51 Cl.~ X~ -~ f;~ • ~ -~ ~~~~~ ~ PRIN'rE ~ NAME sI,GNAT E ~ I~~~A~'~~~~ C 1~..~, PI~~ I ~ ~-~~~~ MA ~ ~~~ D~J ~-^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Al ~~ ~1i~ _, . i ~;: ~r~~{ TWE PE®PL.E ®F VAt` ARE E~°~T~~ ?'t~ A PUOI.~C 11®TE ON TliE FATE OF THE PARCEL. O~ ~A~O L(~OW AS TWA ~AffL CDMM®INSpmTHE LAST i.ARCE PARCE! OF DEVEL®PAI~LE LA~1~ iPt~RCWAS~t~ ~Y TWE TOWN ®F d1AiL WITH TAX ©DLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL M1=MBE&~S WE, THE UNDERSIGNE®, -4,RE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS ®WNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®IOR RESIDENT'S WITh11N ~ THE TOWN OF VAII, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE ~COMMERCtAL DEVELO~'MENT OF THE PPARCEL f1F LAND REFERRED TO AS T'HE 1fAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERE® INTO ir"~ITH CITY MARKET ~E HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF TI•~E TASK FORCE k3E CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TO11ilN'OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE I~' IMPERATIVE THAT THE T~4Wtd OONERNMENT EE RESPpNSiVE TO ITS GORISTITIIENCY, AN® THAT TH1S ISSUE EE EROUGHT TC~ A VQTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS ISEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OE THE VAIL COMM6JNS PROPERTY. PRINTEf) NAME SIGNATU E STREET ADDRESS `~ ~ ~ ~~1~ZV PH NTEU NAM SI ATURE STREET ARQRESS .~ a ,~v t~ ~ I ~~~ ,gU~~ ~~~ l~ .si ~ ~ ~~~ PRINTEQ NAME PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PI-kflN£ MAILING ARDRESS f ~ SIGNAT~,R~~--. STREET ADDRESS PI~IONE MAlLfNG ADDRESS R t ~yy ~ ,~ ~tc`~C~ ~~ ~~t.~C ~ ~ ZC-, -_ ~`~ ~ ~ g'~X: ~~- V ICI t-- ~~~i~~ PRINTEd NAM£ SIGNA R ~ _ STREET ADQR£SS PFfON£ MAILING ARRf?ESS P ~NT~C~J ME SI{3 ATURE t ST~~.£~~~..T ARD ~~SS PNONI; ~ MAlI.t~I ADDRESS . ~ ~' ~~ ~. ( ~ PRINTEa NAME SI6NA~yt~ ~E r ST'SE T AU~IIiESS _ P ,ONE MAII.}.i~9G AODRESS Y PR{NTED NAME SI ~, TU ~ r STREET ADpRE PHONE MAILING AQI3RESS PR T NAME ~ ,~ ~ r S N RE ~, (~/1 ~ S. ~`~~'ET AUD. 1'~,~ / l~ PIiI1N~3,~ .~,y MAILIN~~~ESS ~- THE PEOP~_~ ~F ihAil ARE ENTiTLEp T!~ A PIJBLiC COTE ~~ THE FA"~E ~F TUBE PARCEL OF i,AN~ ~N®yVtV F15 THE 5lAfL C®hli~ONS.,~-HE LAST LARGE PARCEL, OF ®EVELOPA~lLE LAND PURCHASED By THE TCIWN l]F 11~lIL VRIITl~ TAX DaLLARS. ~~,~, TO: VAIE TOWN COUNCIL' MEMDEIZS , WE, THE UN®ERSIGN~D, ARE PEt®PERTY OWNERS, E3~.IS1>NESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN[~fOR RESIDENT , WITHIN THE TOWN C)F HAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE ~COI~Al1AERCIAL IaEVELOi~nIIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMIVI®NS WiTI-I A SIIPERMARk~ET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGC)T'IATiO~IS Y®U HAVE ENTERE® INTO IIViTH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REC®I~MENDATIE~NS (~F THE TASK F®RCE BE CONSI®ERED FOR THE FATE OF T'B~IS LAST REMAINidVG LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAIL. V11E BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT TIDE T®WN GOi/ERNNdENT ~3E RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT TI~IIS ISSUE RE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE I~ROCEEDING WITH ANY ®EVELOPIi~IENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. f , PRINTt~{~INAME ' SIG~NjfA~T~,URE , /ST/~REET ADDRESS f 7P/HONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~~ C~j ~ ~ ~ _ PR1NTEp NAME SiGNATU~iE STREET ADDR~SS PRONE PAAILING ADDRESS ---,- // ~7 ~ ~f~ i ~tul /)r^MYII~CC;TT PRINTED NAME I~iNA~URE STREET ADDRESS ~ PHONE MAILING ADDI;ESS _ ~ , ~}~C~Cj~'~l~ l_. PRINTED NAME SIGf~ATUpR ~~ •ST~.EET ADD~seS ~ PHONE MA~.LiNG ADDRESS f r' PRINTED NAME SIGNA URE / ~.` 'STREET ADDRESS .~ PHONE •MAILING AD[]RFSS ~/J7 ~r/~ / J .... .. .... . .._ ~.. PRINTED NAME ~" Si f~E l/~~ STREET A~I.113ESS pNDI+dE . M II.iNG ADDRESS /~~, -~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATU STREET ADI~RI^SS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRI±~S ', i PRINTEp NAME S GNA ~~ ~.~ . r~ x f{ 1~ ~, ~, ~1 • ~~ ~~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENTfiTLEO T~ A POBL~sIr 11~OTE ON THE FATE ®F THE PARCEL C1F .AND tCNOV1~N AS TI`IE SAIL CONI~ONS°-THE LAST' LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PllR~CNASED BY THE T01diiIV OF VAII, V11ITH TAX ~ oo~~aes. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE ~PR,OPEIRTY OWNER, E3USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDE[VTS WITHIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE ~ COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF LANs REFERRED TO'AS THE VAII. C®MM®NS WITH A SUPERMARKET, TO: VAII TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MPMBERS WE PETITION TI~lAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INT® WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATICJNS OF THE TASK F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR. THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGEE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN' OF VAILo WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN G®VERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TG ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE aF REGISTERED ELECT®RS BEFQRE PRC)CEEDING '~i~'H ANY DEl-'EL©PMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. C~t~ ~{•L~o~~+a PRINTEa NAME Si TUBE (~ ~ . ~~~ Qa~~-- PRINTED NAME SIG A~ . c l b G-41~ ~ ~ iG~ ~ ~J PRINTED NAME SiG RE J~ , ,~„/ C ~ ---. STREET AI3DRrESS r PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET AD>~IiESS ~- PHONE IIt~IL1NG ApDRE~S .. ~~.~ i c~•k t~o~,~e•r t~ti~,rn.m PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRE5S~4~~,,~~._A~.. PElONE MAILING ADDRESS d ` ~~ ~ ~ ~ can rr.2 r~s t~ ~ PRIN ED NAME SI TURE ST~R-EET All RESS PHONE AIIAILRNG DpRESS , ~~~ K ~ ~ / . PRINTED NA14A~ `,A RE ~,. Si Nr~n I~,t c` STRE~~.._A DRESS ~/~J~`s'r'l3Jr~ c.~_~(i~ :. _.... PHONC . . tt7d'64'~`.~ MAIf.ING ADDRESS N~~ ~f~~~ ~7~ ~--? N . Mr's PRINTEO _ lGNAT~ ~ ;;~ } STREET ADDRESS PHONIw MAILING ADDRESS U ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ... G Kyles ~.~. ! PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE M STREET A~~jjDFFpRr~SS ~ ~ PuuHO//NE O~ 3- ' ~ '~~ MA~~ILlIcN/G ADDRESIfS_ Mr ~ ~ l~ ~"6 A ~ r rJ~ l ~1?~9~ .7`K~.~ yA.t 7 l W , av1 ~, V An~ r ~ ~` U 7 T#~E PEOPLE OF VAfiL ARE E~iT~Ttt~D TO ~ 1PUDL~C VOTE ®N T'RE FATE OP THE PARCEL OF LA~9C9 K~fD'WII~ AS THE ~A~~. ~OM~®IVS~~THE LAST LARCE PARCEL GF {~E1~EL®PASLE LAIV~b Pt~RCHASE® S'Y THE TOVIiN OF 1fAl~. VIIITM TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNC~L° MEMDERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY ®WNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL. DE1fELOPIUIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO ~S TFiE VAIL. C®I~IMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HA1~TE® AND THE RECO~fIMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FCIRCE BE CONSIDERED FOR .~'HE FATE ®F THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~F VAiLo WE BELIEVE IT Il1APERATIVE Td~IA°I° THE T®WN GOVERNINENT BE RESPQNSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT TI^I15 ISSUE BE BROUGHT TG A VOTE QF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEF®RE PR®CEE®ING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT QF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~'rc~.iCA ld~~~~~ PRINTED {~AME • SIG ATU ~ ~~ STREETTp ADDRESS PHONE MAILIiVG AOpRESS / 7.Q 1`~ •Ui Se -Tr Rc~, lv, *r g1> ~-(`7 ~ '- 3 7 G ~ I' d ~OX ~ 17G VLi.[f1 V ~~ . ~~ /~v PRINTED NAME SIGN R / ~ ST EET A~DRESS~ ,~ HONE MA fNG ADOR£SS , ~~~.1 ~-~ 71~`t%~~~e~ ~.Ol~rffeP,JPI~ ~/1~~~1/ ~~i,.. ~ ~!~`~j ~~ '~1~~(/~t~G- t..~21~~~i~V ~~~ u m~s~n PRINTED NAME . S ATURE _ err STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~`~-T~'3~~ .~t~3 %~. Cv S~G~,S~ ~~~,~.~/5 ~3rN 50.3 ~~ 16 ~.~ ~~a~'Pr~ar~ L`rr, , ,' ~ ~ i7C~~1-I~~. PAINTED NAME 51G~ATDRE . i ,~°~/ ~ ~~ - ~ ~9~. PRINTED NAME SiGNATIII3P ~~f~R fir n T s~f `au ~ctiri T~~-~~~~m PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE ~~ ~~ L ru-• ~n • INTER NAME S NATUR 1~--- ' ~ (.~1~~ C~~~-k~ PRINTED NAME PHONE MAILING AppRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ._ 5l A UR STREET ADDRESS PHONE MA9L{NG AppRES~ I;:; ~..: . STREET ADDRESS Pi-iDIVE MAILING i~pDRESS ' S~;IiEET A~lORPSS PH~IVE Ml~II.IAI(i ADf?RE S r ~~ ~ ,s-~°r. ~~B,~r,~, 1~~. ~~c 135` ~ i"!~i L-~ STREET ADDRESS f THE PEOPLE ®F 11'AI{, ARC E~ITITdED T®~ PUBLIC VOTE 011{ THE FATE OF THE PAI7CEL OP LANt~ i~~l{OllV A,S T'HE ~~A9L +~®lIIIM®NS~~THE i.AST #~A-RCE PARCEL OF []EVEL®PAHLE LA{~D PI~RCHASE® DY TCHE TQWI~ OF 1JAlL WITH TAX DOLLARS. __ ~.-_-- ~ TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL' M1=MBLRS . ~ . WE, THE UNDERSIGNE®, ARE F~ROPERTY OWNERS, HIJSINESS ®WNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIi~ENTS WITHIN TIDE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMEi~CIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERREr7 TO ~4S THE VAIL C®MMONS VIiITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOT'IATIO~IS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECO~IME!~E}ATIONS OF TEiE TASK F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FA`fE OF TINS LAST REMAIlvING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN (.3F VAll;o WE BELIEVE IT {MPERAT{VE THA`I' THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITLI~NCY, AND THAT 'THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEF®RE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME 51GNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MA[LING ADDRESS ~r~ ~'~ ~-~~1 ~r;~e C.f. IJf. l!~(-x-31 ~ r SI Gt ~' ~? ~c. f~ ~ tti ~' v~~ C~. ~~~ ~M, i ~6~ PRINTED NAI1~E SIGNATU STRI_ET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS 4 ~ca ~~ e~~~ ~~~. . PRINTED NAME SI RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADI3RES5 ~_ ,.. /~ PRINTED NAME I ' AT f~RE-~~~~ S~AEInT ADDRESS~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~.-.-_ PRINTED NAME IG ATURE `- STRI=ETA RESS PHONE MA[I_TNG ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIG R STREET ADDRESS P;~IONE MA!I.ING ADDRESS ~ `~~ P I TED ME f~ I AT REST ADI7RE5S _ PHONE M~ING DDRESS W ~'t.~'r, PRINTED NAME SIGNATUR ~}' STREI"T ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ... i;, jA.e, '. ~l L~'~ THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARC ENTITLED TO A PiI~L~C V®TE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAN® KNOWN AS THE VAIL COMMONS..THE LAST LARO1~ PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND P1lIRCHASED ~B1f TIRE TOWN OF VAiL WITH TAX DOLLAFtS~ . TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBLf~S WE, THE UNDERS[GNED, ARE PROi~ERT'Y~ OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS; ANDIOR REST®ENTS WITHIN Ti°fE TOWN OF VAiL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIIAERCiAL DEVELOPMENT OF T~-iE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS 'THE VAIE. COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERE® INTO} WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF TI-iE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF ThIIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT'THE TO~fN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPIViENT OF THE VAIL CONiMOi~S PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME ' SI ATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIG ATURE - STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ _~ Z~~ !~ ~ -~(O,nfr, ~ ~ ~Z.~ ~ yam,,, ~ ~ `~ ~ ] ~a ,~ ~ ~o~~ ~~~~ ~-~ PRINTED NAME SIG TURE STREET ADDR S PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ PRINTED NAME ! NA/TUR~ (~ 5~EET AO /RESSu„ /~ PHONE MAItfNG ADDRESS ~,yE'jC~ I! /~~ u~ i' U~ ~? /j 3 ~~1 ci,~ J,k'~-~~, ~7~ ._ ~G,`l7 ~~~~.~- ~~ ~~~I~~,L~II~~~ P I. TED N~ E Si ATflii~ S' Sf}h/ a4~'-Y.~oll/ PRINTED NAME SIG ~ATI~RE .~ STREET ADDRESS PHQ~IE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS P}~DNE MAt1.INR ADDRESS b`~ ~~~,~ ~- P INTER AME ATU E '~ I ~~ t~S~ ~ PRINTED NAME Sl NATURE STREET AD RES DNE MAILING ADDRESS A~ ~ del ~ ~4~5 ~ , 4~'L~-- '%~;~,,1, STREET AD ESS PhiONE MAIL NG ADDRESS . . THE PEOPLE AF VAIL ARE ENTi'~~.E TA A 1PUDLiC VOTE ON Tli'~E SATE OF THE PARCEL (}i~ i,AND K11iC3V41N AS THE OIA~L C®MMANS®~°B HE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELAPA~LE LAND PURCHASED BY TFIE TAWN t3F 1/AIL WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TC)WN COUNCII. MEMDERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE I~R~PERTY OWNERS, E3USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, A~VDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DI VELOF'MENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS , WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTG WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REC®MMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE 01= TI~fS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~ OF VAIL. WE BEI.lIVE !T IMPERATIVE TliA`f THE TOVIIN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE' EE BROUGHT TO A VOTE ®F REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~~~~ ~T~ PRI ~D NAME SI BTU ~~~ ~~ c~a ~"~/~t~~?4aV /~ , STREET ADfIRESS u!~/,r'~ 1~~~~~ ~ PRiNTEI] NAME 51~N T.}R c PRINT AME SIGN R ' ~ ~'t PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~"f s~ S~'Ri;ET ADI]RES~ PHDN~ MAILING ADDRESS ]~~Da~ ~L t.~7,~ {~ ~ M~, ~~ADDRESS .~'eff ~v~cabs' PRINTED NA E 5iGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PIiDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SI NATUR ~ STREET ARpRES3 PNUNE MAILING AU(IRESS ~~ ~ Q~d~ ~ .~} PRIN1'ED~ ~ I ~Sc~ ~'1C~E~Ir/ll!/Ll, SIGNATf#RE STREET ADDRESSCIV~ ~ _ PHDN MAILING ADDjiESS I~~~~ ~ ~~~~~ PRINTED NAM SIGNATURE STREE ADDRESS PHIJNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME ATt STREET ApfIR~SS { PI-IONE MAILI G AD[~RESS -' S / ~~ ~' WE, THE UN[~EFt51GNED, ARE PRC~P~:.TY ~ OWNERS, BIIISINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, /~1N®lOR RE~IDEp~TS WIT~NIN `THE T®WN d.F VAIL, AN[3 HEREBY C3PPOSE THE COMMERCIAaL DEVELOPMENT OF THE I~ARCEL OF LAND REFERRECj TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH ,4~e SUPERMARI~.ET. WE PETITIgN THAT THE I`iEGgTIATIONS YqU RAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET ICE HALTED AND THE RECQI~pMEN®ATIQNS OF THE TASK FORCE EE CONSIDERED FqR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE BARGEE OF LAND VItITHIN THE T®WN OF VApL. WE E3ELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE `S'OWN GOVERNIf~~ENT RE RESPE~NSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® TI~pAT TJI~IS IS~4.lE DE BR€7L1GHT T®A V®TE OF REGISTERE® ELECTORS BEFORE PRO~°EEDI~dG WITH ANY DEVI=LOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMC~N~ PROPERTY. ~~ PRINTED NAME SIG ~URE STREET ADDRESS Pd~ONE ~ILING ADDRESS -- ~ / i ~G1 ~/ ~~ d ~~7 -f r'G*f ~ 0 r~ GNAT RE ST ET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS Qrabn,~,,,_~db~~~- PRINTED NAME sIGNATuRE ~~~~~~ PRINTED NAME SiGN~T~~ PRINTED NAME sfcNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRfNTEf1 NAME S{GNATElRE STREET ADi]f~ESS PHONE MA3LfNG ADf?RESS S~fREET ADDRESS PHONE S01if+LY ASJ~YI~V9~ i 1i6J11~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE PRINTED NAME ~, IGNATURE ~ ^ STREET A' ~. ~ ~~~ ~ ._ . _ ., ~ y~ MAILING ADDRESS y4'6~'~'1 ~ ~vr~ P MAILING ADDDRESS Ii~AILI~fG RDt~d3ESS MAILING ADDRESS DRESS ` ~~ ` `PHONE°. LIN DARE S r. y > #! S Z- . THE PEOPLI~ OF VAIL AiI~E EN°~ITLED `TO A U~L~G 11~TE ®IN '~~#~ FATE QP T~~ PARCEL aF LAND I~NalA1N AS TRf~ V',I~~L CONI~AONS~-'TAE LAST LAR~~ PARCEL OF DEVIELaPAELE LAND P~R~I~A'SED ~ ~Y THE T®~V~! OF V~IIIIo .f,IVITH TAX oaLLARSe TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL A~~MpI;RS ~ , ~ 1111E, THE UN®ERSIGNE®, ARE PROPEF~TY .®1NNER5, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®!OR RESII~E°NTS WITHIN THE T01PVN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THIS CO~NiERCIAL ®E1/ELOPNIENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COI'a~~lONS WITH A SUPERIVIARKET. WE PETITION THAT TFIE NEG®TIATION~ YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MA:~"SET EE HALTED AND TI-rE RECO~II~ENnA~'lONS 0~= THE 'I°AS"~. FARCE ~E CONSIDERED FOR T~~E FATE OF `!"r~15 LA~'I' REI411~';"VING !~tiRGE PARCEL OF LAND VIlITHIN THE TOV41N OF~ VAIL. WE BELIEVE iT IMPERATIVE T'FlAT THE T®WN GOVERNI~IENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT ~'~IIS ISSUE BE ~B~~UGHT TO A it®Tl~ OF REGISTERE® ELECTORS BEFORE I~ROCEEDING 1d111`t'Ii ANY DEVEL®PIwE~tT OF THEE VAIL COIIIIMONS PROPERTY!. PRI TED NA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~'~` S AT ^- ,i~~TREET ADDRESS 1 J~P~IDNO/w~ ~AILING AD I~ SS /7`" / (p ~i v~ ~i~ ~tr~~L~wLS PRI T AME STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS '2°t Z ~ ~cres~ Ch.~,. 1Z. 1~ ~ W 76 ~r,~ 0 9 ~~ a-e_. PRINTED NAME SIGNATl1R£ STREET ADDRESS PkfON£ MAILING ADDRESS ~:u,l: l ~-~. ~~, ~.s t~r-tf~ ~it~.clc.. lyt.. f l ~v '~7~n-015 9 /,!-~..,.,~~._ ~. l: n-r~ 1 ~ l 4 ~ ~ PRINTED NAME ATURE y ~~ r ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ! ~' `~ ~~~ ~Llvt. b, ~1 ~` t2 t~ ~-t~ ~ 1 Y 7~ ~S' n ~t 7. <?~ ~ 51GNATURE STREET ADDRESS `~G~.,-,.cam.. ~D~i lG~ Gi.1~~t m.~ct~'m~1 !~ "~~ ~LE ~~ r PRINTED NAME ~U~~- l~`~J~JN PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME 51GNATURE PRINTED NAMI; SIfNATURE PNaNE MAILING ADDRESS STRE£~' ADD P5S ... _ PEICnIE MAILING Alr?DR'~Sc ~ tai c s ,r ;~~~°" . ,u ~7 k~ -~`~,`~ S 5 ~~., F STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS U THE PEt]pLE OE VAIL 1~4~E. ENITiTB.E4] `~'O ~, P>LI~L~C VOTE NN T~-4~ EATE ~P ~'~ PARCEL OP LANs] H:~DW~ A~S TAE 1f~.~~, C~IMM®I~S~-TNE II.A~T LARGE PARCI~~ Qp ~EVE~LdPABLE LAN[ PtJRCH1~Sl~l~ ~Y T1iE T~lU1tR~ OF 41AIL V1)I"i'~~# TAB DOLLARS. ~ " . TO: VAIL TC7WN C®UNC!!_ ME?~II3ERS WE, THE UNE]ERaIGNED, ARE P~tOPERTY OWNERS, BUSINES 3 OWhtERS, ~' REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDI®R RESIDENTS WITHIN T~-l E: TOVifN OF 1fAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIUIERCIAL I~EVELO!'I~iENT C]F T!-tE F'/ARC~L i-3F LAND REf=ERRED TU AS THE VAIf_ CQ~MMONS WiTI-f A SU!'ERMARKET. WE PETITION T'~i~:T THE NEGOTlI~TfONS YOU HAVE ENTEREE~ INTO WETH CITY MA:~:CET F'E HALi'Ea AND THE RECOMa-?YEN~lATIOEVS OI~ Tf-!E TAS".~ FQRCE ~ CONSIDER~D_ FOR T~~E.~~+TE OF' ~'~-iBS LAS'S REM ~`~ING LJ~RGE PARCEL OF LAND. Wi71~IIN THE TOWN: ,OF~ VAIL. V1tf=, Hf:.LIEVE !T fMPEfiATfV~ THAT THE TOVIFN G[~VERRf~fENT E3E RESPONSIVE: TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT i°Hf5 ISSUE SE ~ROUGIiT TO A VOTES OF REGISTEREfl ELECTORS UEFORE PR.OCEEdING UVITH ANY DEVEL.OPII~ENT OF THE VAIL GONIMONS PROPERTY'. t~ ~~~l.~r~~i PRINTER NAME: SIG E ST ET ADARE S PH NE _ ~VI,~4ILING ADDRES~ ~ - ~' , PE~INTED NA E r..-- . SI 'i~! ' i]I~E~ ~ CjJfny'I~REE AJ~7}.DRES~pS//J~ f 1D~}E /~J~~/J r , MAfL~1uG~~A7[]GIiESS r-^~-~ ~~ PRINTED NAME . 51GNATDRE STREET ADDRESS !'HONE MAILING AI~i31iESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADIaRESS PT10i+1E I~~A1LIhl'G ABDE3ESS PRINTED NAME. SfGNATURE STf~EET AdUIjESS PIfONE MAf[.fNG Al7RfiESS PRINTED ~1AME . SIGNATUfiE ~ ~ 5TREET ADC]FiESS FIID~EE MF"~Ii.ING 14D7r}ESc PRINTED NAME 51GNATURE STREET ADDRESS PlILiNE MAIL1idG ADDRESS ~'r' ,,y PRINTECI NAME 51GNATLIRE STREET ADDRESS PLlONE 1~1AIE.ING ADDRESS s~I ~ f THE PEOPLE OF VAIt AEE ENTITLE[] TD A Pl~EL1C'I~QTE (~N T~~E LATE Q~ THE PARCEL 4~F LAMD ICNCfWN ,~5 THE VP~11, Ct~MMD[~S4~THi~ La~T LAECE PARCIF~i. ~F DEVI~LQPARf.E LA(~p PURCHASED EY THE TQWN OF VA11. !It1l6T1~ TI~~ DaLLAIRS. ~ ~ . TO; VAIL TO1NN C4UNCI~ MEtv1~3ERS ~~ .WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY (.OWNERS, E3USINE,SS QWNERS, ~~ REGISTERED ~IOTER5, ANDIQR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TQVIlN C)F VAfL., AND HEREBY APPOSE THE COMMI=RCIAL DEVEL®PMEh#T OF THL PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TU AS TI~IE VAIL C®MMC?Na WITH A SUPERiVIARKI=T. WE PETITIC?N THAT THE NEGaTIATIONa YC~U HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY ;LIAR:~1~T EI HAL.YED AND TI-~ RECOMi~ENDATION5 OF TI-IE° '('AS:~~c FQEtvE ~ CONSI®ERED. FQR T4'E FATE OF T'~115 LAS'S' REM1~ ";yING LARGE P~1RCiCrl~ OF LAND. WITHIN THE TaWN OF~ 1lAIL. WE BELIEVE fT IMpIRATI~f~ THAT THE TG1NN G®~tERNMENT ESE RESPUNSIVIw TD ITS C~DNSTITUENCY, .AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE H~QUGh~T TC A VUTE OI~ REGISTERED ELECTt]RS`DEFORE PR~JC~EDiNG V1[I`TH ANY QEVELC31aMEl~~T t~F THE UA1L Cf~MMUNS PROPERTY. if~fJ~ t/~ 2 ~~ `2. ~ PfiINTEp NAME ~NATUftfr ~a~ ~~~~ ftlNTfrD ' ~ f +Jf j d ~h ~ ~~c.ll ~~~~, PAINTED hlaME SIG URE ~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRIIdTED NAME 51GNATt1ftE I'I`iINTEU NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~~ r~ ~. STREET ADDRESS PHQNE MAiI.iNG ADDRESS cc~~ ~~ ~' STREET DDftESS PIIDNE MAIEfNG ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS ~!I'NON J STREET ADDRESS P}IONS STREET AQI]RESS PIfQNE STIIEET ADDf~>"SS _ STREET ADDRESS. ~"II~i~E P}iONE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PI10NE. MAIUN~ ADDRESS ~~. ~ ~~ MA1tING AD~1ftE55 MAI1~1~lG a~QAESS IUTAIl.i~1G ADOn~ec MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS -~" Ss THE PEOPi.E OF 11A1i. ARE ENTiT~,EU T~ A PUE~.IC Vt~TE ®~ THE FATE ®F THE, PA~tCEL OF LAN[ KNO~1N AS THE 1~A~~. COMI~IONS--'~"NE LAS~° ~~RGE P'14~CE1. OP ~9EVELOPABLE LAND 1PUf~CHASD ~ RY Tf~fE TOWN ®F 1~AIL 'II~~TH T'AX ©OLLAI~S. . TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ,~~ WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OVi1NE:RS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®!®R RESIDENT a W1THiN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL LEVEL®PMENT ®F THIS PARCEL. OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL CO1~3~1®NS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NE{~OTIATIONS ~Ct~U I-IAVIM ENTERED fNTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THIS RECOI~MENDATfONS ®F THE TASK F®RCE f~E CONSIDERIwD FOR THE f=ATf~ Of= THfS f..AST REMAfNING LARGE PARCEL C}F LAND W1TH1N THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THIS `TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCYy AN® THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE I~R®CEEDING WITH ANY I~EVE;LURMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINT D NAME SIGN ~ R .~. y . C1~~ ~~ r~ c~1~,LF P IIVTED NAME S NATU ~~c..~, . Q~ ~ PR{NTED~AME ~r LD NAME TUBE ,~ ~~~'~ „~ STREET ADDRESS ~ ~~~~~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS Pi~ONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~~~~ PRINTED NAME S1GNA RE /~/~ ST E •~ A []RESS PHONE MAfLlNG ADDRESS i ~ ~ •-~ , PRINTED NAME: ~~/~~ .~f~G~~ SIGN TUBE ~; ~~~T~ADDRESS 1Ir~}D~~~~ ~ MAIL(ND ApptiESS ~~ ~ , PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PiIONE MAILING ADDRESS ? ~ ~ STREET ADti ESS PHONE MA{L{NG ADDRESS ,~ . ., C L7 . STREET ADDRESS PRINTED NAME . SIGNATURE STREE~~ ADDRESS PIiDNE MAILING ADDRESS THE PEUPLI~ [~F VA[L AIDE E~~'~`~'LE~ °~ 1~~9~LIC 1iOTE ON TF~E FATE CI1F THE PARCI~L DF LAN® I(NC~WN A~S `S`HE VA~~ ~~IMD~IS--THE BAST ~~R~E PAItDE~. CAF [?EilEL.DPI~DLE LAND RUI~CI°I,~S~D Y THE TDWN ®F Vl~l~ VVi'f~# T'AX ®DLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL N}EMBERS I3E IT ORDAINED BY TiiE TOjdl~ COiTNC1L OF TtiE TOWN OE VAIL 'THAI' ~~ WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PRO.I~EI~TY OWNERS, DUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VO~'ERS, AN®lC7R RESIDEI'~TS WITHIN THE TC)WN ®I" VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE CONIMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE 1/AIL COIIlIi NIONS WITH A ZUPERMARKET, WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE EN'T'ERE® INTO WITH CiT1C MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATI®NS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TC-WN OF VAIL, WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE .TFiA1' THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESP®N51VE TO ITS CONST6TUENCY, AND TF~AT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS F3EFORE PR~9CEEDING 'WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL ,COMMONS PROPERTY. Jd~~~n1~r-.o e PR N,. f~kkME --'l I STREET ADDRESS PHUNE MA LIN ADDRESS ~ ~! 1-^-- PR}NTED NAME SI ATURE ~ ~ STR T ADDRE PHOPtE MAI}.ING ADDRESS F J z ~~~~~~ PRINTED I~A~E AT STREET ADDR S PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~,y ~ , PRINTED NAM>; SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE i .~-~~-~~-~e X37 ~~.~~ ~~~,--,x ~v.~ ~~~N ~ ~~r ~ ~~-~~ PRINT D AME ~} trN O rv-, 1/L : ~-~~ ~ A (~an,~4 1~,~~ ~~'L'~~ )~1 O MAILING ADDRESS Goa. ~x° 3s ~i ~/~.~ MAI~NG 13DRESS ~~~.p ~j~ PRINTI:I:1 NAME ~ 7 (~~ ~~- ti I SIGNA ~ STREET~,DDRESS P}Iq`NE MAILING AOC~RESS ~ ~r ~ " ~o~ (F 1~ . FC m~~J~ P INTER NAME GNATU STREET ADDRE~ PHD~tE (~ .r , t l ~ , ._... - t~ R1? 7 \ ~~ l,~ C~i can ~ PRI TEO A E NATURE STREET ADDRESS PHUNE ~_.-~ .-. n; M 9.ING AflDRE~S n - ~l~_ t~L,c MAILING ADDRESS THE Pi~OPLE OF ®1l41L ARE ElilTi'~'~.El~ '~ W PURL{C VOTE Ol1i TFIE FATE OF THE PARCEL ®II~ LAND ICNOWIaf AS TIDE VAIL C4MIl11iONSM-THE LAaT i.ARDE PARCEL ®F I~Et1EL4~PABLE LARiD PUR~HAED BY Tl•E TOW~- DF V'A1L Willi TA~i DOLLARS. TO: VAIL. TOWN COUN~II: MEMI3El~~ .W ~`~~; 1lVE, THE UN®ERSiGNEf3, At~EPROPERTY O~VIVERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGiSTEREi] VaTERS, ANDtGR i3ES-L~EHI"5 WITHIN THE TQVVN 01= VAIL, AND HEREBY aPPaSE TE#E ~ C®AfIMERCIAL ®EVELOPMENT GF THE PARCEL OF LAN® REFERRED TO AS `S'HE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGGT'iATI®NS YGU HAVE ENTERE® INTQ WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED ANiI THE RECOMMENDATIONS C?F THE TASK FARCE BIE CONSIDERED FOR. THE FATE ®F THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN' OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT TIDE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPt~NSIVE TO ITS CCINSTITUENCY, ANI] TI"6AT ~°HIS ISSUE BE DROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PRE}CEEDING ~ilTl•i ANY DEVEL{~PMENT OF THE VAIL COMMUI~S PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME Zp~-9 ~UNt,y~ ~~ SIGN TU E STREET ADDR °SS PHONE MAILING ADgRESS n ~[~~ PRINTED NAME SIG ,Y. URE ST ET ADDRESS t PHONE j ~ MAII.~IG AODIiES [ .ITV ~ 5 C..~J y~~ o l ~ PRINTED NAME . SIGN ~ ~ r ~ `~S/i~'~R']EET ADjg/JRESS 171 d / r'~ I lfl/d,F'S4 EY'Y J)C ~~ / [/PHONE ~} L~ N ~ 7 I.~~~ ~~ (,}~! U~rl MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ .....~M PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADgRESS PAINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDr~ES~ Pf-9Qf~E MAILING ADDRI"5S PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADgRESS PHONE MAILING AfIDRESS PRINTED NAME P SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHUI~E MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ,~` ~~ #s 58 THE PEOPLE OF SAIL ARE EN~'l~'tD T®A PUBLIC 1i®TE ®N THE PATE OF THE PARCEL OF LA&VD K#~OWN AS THE ~AII. COMIIAO[~S~--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEtfELOPABtE tAN® PU'RCHA~EA ~Y THE TOWN OF VA1L VAII`I'IH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIi ~ MEMDEO~S . WE, THE UN®ERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, B1151NESS OWNERS, REGISTERED V+DTERS, ANDI®R RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF BAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAiL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET, WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOt1 HAVE ENTERED INTO) WITH -CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOt1MENDATI®NS ®F THE TASK, FORCE BE CONSIDERED hOR THE FATE OF TH6S LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEE. OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ~JF VAIL. LIVE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT' THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITl1ENCY, AND THAT THIS' ISS~iE BE BROliGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PR®CEEDINC WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAlL COMIIAONS PROPERTY. ~ti ~.~~ R~ rn~a.l~~~_ IaRINTED NAME IGNAT RE ~f STREET ADDRESS. P PHI)NI~ MAILING ADDRESS ~~-}} ~.. PRINT~I NAME ~ ~ a~ SI ~j THRE STREET ADDRESS PHCINE ~ MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ __.f PRINTEq NAME SI~i~ATIJRE ~ STR~ T ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~2vz~~ RINTED N.AM.~ ~ IGNA~R T }" 'BEET AD131~E55 PIiDNE MAiI.ING ADDRE55 PRI TED NAM SI A U E S~'HEET ADDRESS PNtINE N1AItliVG ADDRESS ,n~ _ ~~''~t' PRINTED NAME ~y IGN E ~~~~~ (~E~ DO ~~ ~ ~ ~ PI•iONE ,_,~ . MAIL IN~t~D ~ ~~`?~~ ~u-l uFf~w ~.c~~~ PI31NTEq NAME SI TU ~,,~ ~ STREET AODE~I:SS PHONE MAILING AppRESS ~ ~ ~~~1~~.e~ .~~7.~ ~~~/~~Gr/~if ~~ ~ 7Ca ~ 1 ~ ~ p0 P~`~C 3 u ~ ~~ VfJfl..- PRINTEq NAME IG ~ ~ STREET ADgr~ES PHONE MAIMING ADDRESS ~ ~- ,. i.' .~ ~~9 ®~ ~~~E~~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ T~~ ~~ ~~~~. rev@~rt~ T~ ,~„ ~ TC7: VAiL TO1Nl~ +~UIJN~.IE 1ViEA~RERS ~~ VUE, TEIE l1NDE-~ s9C~~IED, ARE ~RQPERT~~ 0111fNER~, F~11SlNESS ®V1t~fERS, REG1STiERED Wt~TEF~S, ANDIQR RED@I~ENTS ilil@~°@~@N T~~~,E TO~IIN CZF, alAll., AND REREBY ~]PPQ~E °T@-IE~ C®MMERG@rL DE~/~LC3PME3~°I' C~~ 7RE PARCEL OF LAND REI°ERRE® TQ A~ THE ~~~lL CQMMQ~9S ~dY@TR ~ ~UPFRIVIAf~KET. VILE PET'@°T@QN TI~A`~' T~@E NEGO°!°@AT'@ONS YOD RAVE ENTERED INTq VIO@TH C@TY MARKET ®E 1~@ALTED AND THE F~ECC~IVdMENDATION~ ®F THE TASK FORC1~ i~E CONSIDERED FC~R TIE FATE OF TENS LAST REMAINI~I+O LARGE PARCEL OF LAND VVITRtN THEE TOWN' OF YA@La VVE ~El.IEIIE IT IMRERATIVE TRAT THE `TOWN G~~lERNMENT DE RESPONSIIPE T® ITS COIm85Tl~"DENCY, AND TI~~~T TRIS ISSDE ~E RROE~C~RT TO A if®TE OF REGISTEP.E® ELECTORS DEFORE PR~CEED9NG VYi°TR ANY DE~fELOPMENT !DF THE VAIL C+DNiNIONS I~RQPERTYe 5~1 `~ ~~~ PRINTED NAMir ~~'`~~~ 51 NATURE ~1 a STREET ADDRESS PHC1~fE ~ MAILING AI~CIRESS ~ ; .PSI r!/I~~iYI~ ~.~ L~ l'1 r7 ~~C%;~I. ~'1L~~ ;~c~- ,c,.~ ~ ~,,r (~ 5 7 _~ I' NTEp NAME SIGNATI.IAE STREET ApI~RESS PHONE l~:~Ali..IR,iG Aap~}'ESS fj ~~~~~~~.i"~~ ~~v ~ PRINTED NAME U Y, ~`~" ~"~] SIGNATI.}RE S~B FEET A11471~I:SS PHONE MAILING Ai~Q ESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATU E `~ ,STREET AQDi~ESS PNDIdE ~ in~~~~ ~ ~~a PRINTED NAk~E • Ai'i~HE }~~ ~~ S~°#~~ET Isi~~~i~ S " RND~f~ ~1~.~{~t-P ~ `'~i ~ c~ C~ ~ ~ ,a~-cry ~~i: ~_ ~ _.__ J PRi ~ i~ E ~~~~~:~ A19.ING ADDRESS ,. MAtf.G AD Ri:SS ~ ~ its ~ SIE~°N~A1' _UR~ S~"REIe°~ Ai3R~:S5 IIDi'!~° i~A11.lAfGIA~D SS ~C~a~~r~~=~ ~1 ~~~` FRINTEU NAME S ATURE ~~ ~ ` r '~~ lr ~~T~~r~ PRINTED NAME SIG A- .U ` l/~ ,/ ~~ ~ ~:- -- STICEET ApD ESS PHONE i~All_lNia Ai~DRESS ~~ S .~, C~~ee~~ y~G~ ~3 ~Cr'r.~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING AI]DRESS ~ti T~i~ ~E®PI~~ ~F VA~~ ARE ~NT'i`~L~ 'TO ~ P1l~I~,AC 1it~'T~ O~ T~~ ~A~E OF TWE PI~Ri~EI. ®F ~AWO KiuflWil~ AS "T ~, ~A~~ ~OMM~~1S--'THE ~.AS~' ~AI~~E lPAtiCEL OF ®EVEL®I~ABLE @.ANO p~~A~~~ BY T'~PE T®W~1 OF WAIL W!7'H 'TAX C30L~.AiRS. TO: UAIL TOWN COUNCIL lNEfV-Rf~I~S VILE, THE UND~~S.GiiIED, ARE: I:~ROPE:RTY ®VIINERS, BUSINESS ®~IIiNERS, ,O REuISTERE® VOTERS, AND!®R REvSIDENTS WITHIN 'i'1~E TOWN OF t~.{AIL, AND HEREEiY OPPOSE THE C0~lIMERC~~`~L DEVELOPMENT' OF THE PARCEL OF ~ LAND REFERRED T® AS THE VAIN CO~lI~~ONS WITH A SUI~EWRMARI~CET. WE PETITI®N THAT THE NEGOTIA~°IONS 1fOU HAVE ENTERED INTO VIdITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED ANI~ THE R~:C®M6I~IENDATIOIVS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED F®R THE FATE ®~ TI~~~S LAST HEMA~I~IiNO LARGE PARCEL ®F LAND VNITHIN THE TOWN OF V~rlr~... WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE' THAW `~'I~E TOWN t~OVERNM~NT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS C®NSTITl1ENOY, ANA TI-~~oT THIS ISSI~E BE ®R®IJGHT TO A MOTE OF REGISTERE® ELECTORS BEF®R~', PR®CEEDING WITFI ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL Ct]M'M®NS PI2®PE:RTY, ~.~ ~r~,u,~,p ti~b ,ill ~/~C~~~vr~ GREET AD~R'ESS ~~ ~! ~~~ ~ V a~ ~~S V, ~'1 L I'Q. ~ I ~ i'YI ~t{ ~' Y1 c PRI TED NAME i ATuRE .. - S, ~ .; f~~~ s Vii/ ~~~ 4 PRIN~6D NAME ~~ 5 ~ ..RED ~~ .~ Q ~ r~.~~ ~ ~~T ~r . PHONE fVIAILING AppRESS ~l (p ~Y .3a ~-~~~ ~~D~~~~s~ ~`i~U~t r PRINI'EQ NAME ~~I RE ~ ~S~TFEET ADL;~ESS PHONE ° ~i~./ ~~ ~~ r9~~~ f~~ /~i ~ S PRINTED NAME .G A y E S'iREET ADi3RESS PHONE PRINT R AME SI TuI~E , , ~ ~. ~ , ti,,~ In ~' PRINT D NAME ~. ~~~ ,~ . .~ 1f ypl'~1 c b5o`~ P IN NA ) URE ,~/f~-~~.1 PRINTED NAiVIE SIGNATURE ~~f'~'c~ M~ J r~ A~ t~R ~' ~n ~~ MAILING ADDRESS MAILING A~ORESS ~ ~ ~"7 STREET ADDR SS PNOIV~ MAILI G ADDRESS STREET ADC~R °SS PHON MAILIN DQ ESS STREET AII~RFSS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~6'/ THE PEOPLE ®F ~fAlt ARE E~'TITLEI TO ~_P~JD~.~C ~®TE O~ THE FATE ®~ T'~E PARCEL OF LAID I~NOVIII~ AS THE VAIL C~MMOIVSw,THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHIASED Dlf TI-IE TOWN OF g6"AII, 'WITH TAX DOLLARS. ' TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL. MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERY'Y OWNERS, E3USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®~C~R RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND ~ HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL I~EVELOPNiENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL CO~~MONS WITH A SI~PERMARF~ET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEG®TIATIONS YOU HA~~E ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARI(ET BE HALTED AND TF•IE REC®MIiRENDA'~"IONS OF THE .1"ASI( F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR ThIE FATE OF THIS ,AST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT' THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE E3E BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS h3EF®RE PROCEEDING WITH ANY ®EVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMIVIONS PROPE TY. PIlINTEU NAME SI NATURE ({STREET ADDRES,S/ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME GNATURE STR .E AD~a E S _ PHONE ~ , MAILING ADDRESS 7 ~ ~ y ~ ~{L La ~ ~-(GG C--~~~~.~~ lam r~~ i PRINTED NAME . S NATURE STREET A DRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS (~ PRINTED NAME SI ~~ STREET AD~RELS~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ f ~~ ~~.~ ~Y1 ~ 2 ~/ 5 ~~ ~ ~-~~ T2 PRINTED NAME ~CrT~ ~~r~~ sT ~ ~g D ~ES&~ns.~d~~e_,~~~ E ~~ ~~ '~~bl! ~~~i~RESS ~~S ~ ~~„~. ~ ~ f .-}v PRINTED AME ~-~~~~i ~~ SIGNATURE~i FEET At7~ E5S ~~~ ~ P{iONE MAPt1~1~G~A[~D~ S ~f~s~ ~. (~7 ~ ~Il~ ~n S Y~JG -53~~ ( sr ~1'c ~' - D{, #~aat ~- ' PRINTED NAME 51GNA UR STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS 7 PRINTED NAME SIG Tf}GF~ n STREET ADDRESS PHOIIIE MAILING ADDRESS ,At~v~ ,ill .~ ~ ~~~ a ~~f. ~ ~ `~7 l~c~~ ~~7~-~ z_~ ~ ~ ~~.~~-. G ' TIME PEOPLE C3F BAIL ARE ENTfTLEI ~'~ A 'UBtIC ~VQTE ®~ SHE KATE ®K THE PARCEL t~3K LAND ~6111OV11N AS THE VAIL CS~MMD~S--TIDE LAST BARGE PARCEL OF ®EVI~LC}PABLE LAN® P~~C~A~~~ ~ THE T®Vllf~ ®F VAIL WITH TAB DOLLARS. TO: VAiL TOWN C4UNCli_ N1EM~EI~S BE ITi ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL 0~' THE TOWN OF VAIL.. THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PF~[~PERTY ~®VVNERS, BUSINESS OiNNERS, REGISTERED V®TERS, AN®f®R RESIDENTS 1AlITHiN THE T®V41N O~ VAIL, AN® HEREBY OPI~QSE THE C®MMERCI~IL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF ~~ LAND REI~ERRE® TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS V~ITH A SUPERMARKCT. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU MAVE ENTEREC~ INTO 1f111TH CITY MARKET BE HALTE@.AND THIE REC®MMEN[~ATIONS OF THE TASF6 FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF T'Ifi6S LAST REMAINING LARGE F~ARCEL OF LAND VIfITHIN THE TO1lVN ®I~ FAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPER~4TIVE °~FIAT TI°IE TORN G®VERI~MENT BE RESP®NSIVE TQ IT'S CC,~NSTITIJENCY, AN® TFIAT ~`a~9S ISSUE BE BROUGF9T TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECT®RS BEIA®I~E PI~OCEE®ING Y111TI~ ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL C®MIV~t~NS PROPERTY. PRINTED AME SAC, E E ~ILET"I gD~iS~iI~J ~' ' ~ PHDN ,~~~ AILI ~ ApDR~ ~ ~ ~ ~0~ ~~' pR~iVTE~ N ~ME GNATU E ~ STREET RDDRESS ~~ _ ~. n ~~~ P~ ~ P ~ RIf~~~R NAME i -,'Sf1~T R~ _ ~ STREET ADORES u PHON!~ MAILING ADDRESS PHONE FAILING ADDRESS ~~~~-db7~ Pax ~~I l~~i l ~~~~~ PH~{~ ~/ ~~~ MAILIN~AD ~~5~ ~ s `~ 4 ~~ ST~~~ A~JlDPESS (y ~' -~,~ ~ ~~ S ~~..aac ~! ~G..~,- f ~`~.~ ~ r~c ~~~ t `~~~}loll, A_D~ V ~~ ~J STRi=ET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADORES PRINTED NAME SAT ~ .~ ~ ;~J~'% ~~ PRI TE E~ SIG S~ ~o~AD~i ~ ~~ oNE~~~'=~ aA~c `~~~s~~ ~`~~ ~~ ST EET ADDRESS °HGNE MA! G AD~3 S ~,~,,~~ PF:iiVTED NA~E T~4E PE®PLE ~'~ VAIL ARE EI~T~TLEt~ T~ A RUBLIC 1~~'TE ®I~ TIE FATE ®F THE PARCEL OF LAND ICI11®WN AS THE VAIL CBMM®iVS--THE LAST LARGE PARCEL DF DEVELOPABLE LAND P~iRCHASED B'Y THE T®WN OF VAII. WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNS®, ARE PR®PERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RES~I®ENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND ~ HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OP THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL C®I~IMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU NAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALL"ED AND THE REC®MMEN®ATIONS OF THE TASK I°ORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE °~"®WN GOVERNMENT BE .RESPONSIVE TO 1TS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PRO~°EE®ING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF TEiE VAIL COMMONS PROI~ERTY. ,S~e-c1 ~ 1, rG~c~ PRINTED NAME Vl~f ~'' Si E STREET AQgRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS -~ I ~ - ____._~ IrvL ~~ In PRIN~Ep NAME ~ SIG ATl#RC /~ STREET AQ/f]~RESS PHONE d MAILING ADDRESS ~ . ~ ~ ,tG~ ,46Zo r~i lx~IdJT T ~L~•r? ~ . ~ ~~ -- 9~ / ~ .Sitsx~2_ ~~Q~~~ ~.~ ~'Ih~,,U P N ED NAME G ATURE STREET ,?DDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS /~f.~ r . J 0 ^ ~~C~G~itr~-~t~.. o~'jlcJ~c~~~ ~~.1~ ~-/ 7 ~ -" ~ ~-c.~~ ~v '- pr~TEQ ~ SIGNA-~! E .. ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRIiVTED NAME SIGN TITRE / STREt:T A~3Df~ESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~v 'dam ' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ i ~.~ ('~ PRINTED NAME ~ ~~'~ ~~/ ~' ~ S~~'3"I1RE _/~ C,.~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS i ~~~~I~h ~ I ~-tt-~~- PRINTED NAME SI NATUR STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS " ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ z..~F~U., F ~ ~ 7 ~ -- ~ ~ -r~ s~-~~-~. ~' ~~L~~-sL~~ Lo2 RINT n~AM . SI N TURE -~~ E -AaoSESS ~ PHONE. AILING AI)I~RESS ~~~r9 ~' car a. ~rc,~~ ~~-' C~r~ _ _ ~~~ ~t ~- ~ ~~E PE~P~E ®~ vA~L ARE EN~`~TLED ~~ A ~~~ic `ATE ~~ T~~ FACE ®~ T~~ PARCEL t3P LAND KNDVII~II A5 TIyE VAIL ~~I~IMt3NSp~THE i.AS'T LARGE PA~CE~. OF DEVELt~PADLE LAND PUI2C9~ASED Y 7HE T4v41N 4F VAIL W1~'li T~IX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWhI COUNCIL NIEi~pERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BllS1NESS OWNERS, '~~ REGISTERED V®TERS, AND!®R RESI®ENTS WITHIN Tk~E TOWN ~JF VAIE_, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THEE C4NIMERCIAL E?EVEL4PMENT ®F THE PARCEL ®F LANG REFERRED TO AS THE ~iAiL C®f~tAfl®NS WITH A SEJPEI~MARKE,°I°. WE ~ETITI4N THAT THE NEGaTIATIONS~ YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MAQ'~ET ESE HALTED AND TI-~E RECOM~EN[~AT14NS t3F THE 'EAS:~, FORCE ~ coNSiDER~v FoR T~~E FATE aF T•~IIS ~.AS•I' REMI';VINt9 L~iRGE PARCEL. OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE `~41f~~1 G~3VE'RNIVIENT EE RESPt~hISIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT THIS 15SUE BE ~~4UGHT T®A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS f3EF4RE PRQCEEDING WITIi ANY ~3EVELC~PMENT aF THE VAIL Ct3MMON5 PROPERTY. K~~_~S"~l ra ~PRlNTf~ NAME SI NATURE~'A STREET DDRESS PHONE . MAII_lNG ADDRESS U~ l s ~f1u,a,~ ~~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE Z~~.rr.~ ~.myav~~s' ~j e ~ ~~ti: ~,.~ PRINTED MAME STREET ADDRESS ~ `f ,~ ~ ~ ~u~lcs~ `lam[ ~ C.~ ~'IG, PHONE MAILING ADDRESS iCa~~'. ~ ~'Q ~t'rs.~-'~' PHDNf MAILING ADDRESS SIG A E ~d Oi STREET ADDRESS . S ~n1aR \1 ~ E C SL ~ h~. 1 PR D NAM 'A EIRE ~ S RECT A DRE S PNDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NA ~- 5 ATlI~RF ~ 5TREET A~DRI:SS I'HQNE NIAl1lNG ADDRESS t~ ~~ K ~ ~ 3 ~ ~~~~ PRINT D NAME ~~ ~ ~~ SIGNAT~IRE ST T ADDRESS PFIL~I~E MAfL1N6 ADDD~SS ~~ ~~s-~,~ ~~aC~ti`~ PRINTED NAME SIG~~ U~ -~~~~E~~UD E~S~~~~~HDN~ ~ ~~~9i.IN ~ DDS PRI TPD NAME .sla ~ ; ~ . ~~~~D R~s- ~~PHa-9-~~ llz~ MAID ~~A s~ Un~-Co ~l~s~- • TFIE I~E~P~E Oil~ ~,AI~. ~,~E E~°~'fIT'~ED ~!"~ ~ PUBLIC ~fQTE ~}IV Tt~E P~-TE I~IF Tfl•iE . ~AIt~EL DP L~-Ni] R~~ID~111?~ A THE V~aIL C~MM~lV5°-THE LAST !,~#RGE P~~CE~. ®F DEVE~.DP~IBt,E I°AN® PU~CHA~Ef~ Y Tti~ TDV41N ~P VEIL WITH `~#tX D~L~AI7S° TO: VAiI TOWN C®UNCIL 1vIEIVI#~ERS BE IT ORDAINED BY TNi; TbWid L'®UNCIL 0~' T~iE TOWN OF VAIL THAT ~ WE, THE UNDERSiG[~E®, ARE fPI~OPERTY C~WNEI~S, B1951NES5 ®WNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDi®R RESIDE['~TS Wil'I-![N Ti-IE TOWN ®F VAIN., AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCI,4L DEVEL®PMENT OF THE F'ARCEI~. ®F LAND REFERRED TO AS TIME VA[L CORM®I~S WITH A SUPERMAR[CET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOT[R~TiONS ~~OU I-IAVE ENTERE© INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AN® THE I~EC®~A4[EN®ATI®NS ®F THE TAS[`i F®RCE BE COBS!®ERED FOR THE FATE OF TH9~ ~,~aST REMA[NING LARGE PAF:CEL. OF LAND WITHIN THE T01IVN ®F SAIL. 5~lIE BEL[EVE !T IMPERATIVE THAT °["I•IE TOWN GC}VERNMEN°`~' . BE RESP®NSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT TtP~IS ISSUE BE BROUGHT `T®A V®TE ®F REG[STERED ELECTt?,RS BEFCJRE I~ROCEE`~I~IG WITH AIVY DE10EL[7PMENT OF THE VAI~. C~MM®NS PROPERTY. ~^~ ~~~~ PRINTED NAME 51 A'fURE )(///~J STREET Apl]RE ,~~$j/p~~a PHDNE M~IA~/l/I_Mlf~lGegyAD R SS -tea ~ 9 3 ~~~ V~ ~, Ca , ~<`6~"'~ PRINTED NAME ~;N l1RE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ , PRINTED ~uA~l~ SiGNATlI1iE . STREET ADDRESS PRONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ o fn'~' a ~.~ Pn~ 1 PRINTED NAME S NATi]R~ (~, STREET AppRESS k } PRONE MAILING,A/D[~RirSS {'~ + '7 ,~ 4 M~9_ ~~~ Q 0.51 3 3.~.,1 ,~r~.n e ,r ti ,~! o LC1n n - ~~io "~rJ ~Q 'V f! ~ ~ ,~ ~ n~-.-- 1C ~ b ~ '/ PRINTED NAME 51GNATUFiE STREET ADDRESS P1i0~fE MAILING ADDRESS d' PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTER NAME 51GNATURE S'I REET aODI~ES:s PRONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAMk SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS rRONE MAILING ADDRESS ~!J ~ Qy~ ~~ ~r ~.~ TO; Vn18. ~TOwN C:OU~I~tL nAE~L~EI~S ~~ IT O~tDA,hLNEn tSY T~lE '~Oi~N C~T4dCiI~ ®~ "~~~ T~~iH ~F VAII. TAT iNE~ THE 1~NDERSIGNEDp Af~E PR~PERT~ CVVi~ER3~ gU31NE33 GVVNER: , ,1 REG#STERI~D 1dOTER3~ A#d®10~ RESIDENTS i~#Th##iV THE T'~9V4ti~# ~F VAIL, I~NC HERE~~ ~9pPC3SE Ti~E CClIRAAER~IA4. ~E1fELQPlNENT ~F TIDE IPARCEL ~JF LAND REFERRED T~? AS THE SAIL ~Mi~QN3 ~A1fTH SURERII~AR~ETa WE PETlT#~N THAT THE NECT#ATi®A~S YDU ~fA~IE ENTERED INTO 1~(Tii ~#T1r I~IAREtET ~F~ HALTE® AND THE EtE~®~iN®ATf®NS CF THE TAl31C FCaRCE BE CaNSiDER1~D FOR THE 1°A`T'E CF T~iS LAST REAI#AlNI1~C~ LAR~#E I~A~RCEL QF LANd WITHIPI T~iE TOV91N OF ~1~lL, wE e~~#Ere~. IT IAi#PER1~TlVE THaT ~~ Tr3o~N G~~ERNII~EHT DE RE~P~~sIdE Tt,3 IT5 CONSTiTUENCIi; AN® THAT fill#S ISSUE EE ER®U~"sHT T®~ OIt9TE OF REG#STERE,Q ELECTORS EEF®RE P~O~EERiI~dG ~ITM A-NY DE1iELGRI~IENT CF THE lil4iL C®MMt]NS i~ROPEi7T1`s ~'oNt~~ ~~~~ PR! AME' S!G ,~ ) ~~ EET 1~ D~~1 ~G''~ ?. ~ ~ ~7 A~~J(~ ~~R£S5 ~~~~ ~ ~r~r.~e PRINTED NAME , SiGNA STRE~ ADpRES~ PNaNE MAIL~WG ADDRESS E ~ ~'~~.,7,~.~ , I>~,t,.5~ y PRIHTE4 NAME S NAT STREE ADDRESS P Q Y IC~~f lc~. r~-~'. A'~Li PRlNT£D NAME ~S~Na~uaE STR£FT o~~E~~, P~DNE ,'rt'. G2CP . ~`~ ~t~~~ ~~ ll~i~-1~:.~f~~~LntS,~~c ~~ f C~' yZ ~-11(a --~r~~SS ARINTE~ NAME SIGNA~~'llliE l .~ PRiNTEQ NAME SIGNATURE STR~.~T AQ~~E~S STREET R~TQRF~S PONE ~~ PONE MA1LlNG Aaa~~ss ZE=a~~ s. C.~,~c,~,e ~~ ~~ r, ~:.~~,3 ~ MAlt~~G ~Q~~,,fSS '~~ . 5331 MA~~ING ADDGESS iHAltIR1C ADDRESS ~r ~.~ ~~ WE PETITIt31'~i THAT 'TNE NEC~~TIATiO~GS YOU .HAVE ENTERED INTp VifITH CITY MARKET ~1~~ WALTEID ANG THE ItEC4MEi~GATI®N~ OF THE Tn~le Ft3RCE BE COM5IC~ER ~D FOR THE FATE ~1= THi~ LAST REMAINING I..AI~GE PARCEI. OF LANE] WIT'Ii~N TFIE TOWN Glr ~IAILo WE BELIEVE IT IMP'ERATII9E TH~4T TFI ~ GVEI~NMENT ~E RESP[?W51VE TD ITS C®PI~TITLIENG1l, ANA THAT ~'I~I~ ~~S~E ~ ~Re~I~GHT Tt~ A Vi~TE OIL REGISTEREE~ ELECT®R5 BEFORE ~'}~~~~@~~ ~VITI~4 ANY ~EVEL~PMERIT Ofd' THE O/AIL GCJMIIPIONS PR~PERTYo pfllivT a N~Mrr Si TIlAE STREET AID ES '~ ~~ j ~ ~ ~ PRIN,~~4 N . SIGf1iA STREET ADDRESS G ~~ PRIN ED NAME Std R~ ,, i ~ STREET ADDRESS PONE AilING ADDRESS pHDNf MIIiLlNG AOgRESS PNOI~E~ ~ h1~itll~ A4pRES5 ~~ , f~~~~ PRI T£~3 NAM ~ ~~` pY~ `~ 5! 7 „ . S AE~r A~DR~SS Pi~ONE ~RA~iG .ADDRESS ~ ~ PRINTED NAME 51GNA3UftE ~TAE~7 AOfi~pfSS PHp~IE MAii_iiVG ADDRESS ~~ilvrE~ NaM~ SIGhIATURE STREET AlJDRI':SS PiiONE MAII.lNG Ag11RESS WE PETITIC~FI 1'F#AT 'THE NEOOTIATION~ Y013 HAKE ENTERED INTO ~i6TH CITY IIAARICET ~1w~ HALTED AFI~ THE RECO~AI~EOATIOIi1S OP THIS TASK P®RCE EE COWSIDER~~7 P®R YHE DATE OP THIS L~~T REI~IAINIHO L~ROE PARCEL Cif LANd 1~11THihl THE TOii1PAl OF ~AILo I. WE BELIE1i~E, IT INlPERATII~E THAT THE TORN OOVERN~PIENT ®E RE~P'ON~IYE TO ITS COIAISTITI.IENCIf; ANti THAT THIS I~~~E SE EROIJOHT TO A 100TE 4F RECi18TEREQ ELECTORS ~Ef~RE PR~C~E~iNC~ KITH AIRY ®E4IEE.PAREFlT OF THE VA1L COMNION~ PROPERTY. ~~ ~ ~ PHI ED NAMf~~,..,~ SIGH ~i~~~~sY~Uv~~ i~-~T~~~H~ ~ P~?-Z~,n MA~i.iH ~I~Di~RESS ~~-4~~Lt ~uE1NLM ~~~ PRINTED N~IME SIGIV~fI~RE ! l S~'REE~` A~3QRES~ ~ PHONE MAILING AQGMESS ~!~{~. '-9~.P%'r~dU'~. ?-0~9 GI-l~c:'N, X C~6~"~ ~jy~; ~~~~`~' ,~'~~f7~:~ PI'~INTEti NAM SIG AT fl ~ J '~ ~] Sl`'REET AGQRESS P/H®NE _ MAILI,N/G AI~€]R SS -_ ~~~ ' ~. /~) _~ ll7l ~ ~~~`yrC~r] r~ 7` ~~~ ~:.`~ _~c'1 U V~ ~ ~ ~ . s ~ ~ _. ~- PRINrEO NAME ~ 1 SI aruRE`~`.~, /~,~~ s~ EEr ~~ • PRlNTEp NAME 51C~11~t>~j ~~ ~ `; STHE~T r- ~'4 ~s\ ~Y~y' `~~ PRINr~o }nraMf F S~~NATURE aQORESS PHO~E 1~AILING ,.Di~HfSS ~o~l~~ss P,~aN~ ~ NIAILJNG ~GaRES~ -- ~.. 3SHEET A~~Rf~S P~fON~ ~waI~ING aaoRESs i TNE~®I~~II~,,,~E ~ ~/ i WE, TAE ~~iDEItSIC#RlE®, ARE PR®~ER°~ ®~IiI~ERi~ ~UiII~IEEB C~VvaERi, s REGISTER~,D VOTE1t3, ANd1GR I~E~IDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN AP VAIL, AND HEIrtEaY ~ POSE THE ~~?~MEBtGIAL ®E~EL~IfAENT ~F THE I~AItGEL ~F ~(~~ LAND RER~RRE® T~ d~S THE VAIL ~®DNS W!3'hl A iUPERINARKETa V1 WE PETIT!®N TFIAT THE NE~DTiATI~~ ~~~U VE ENTERED iNTD WI'TI~ GITY MAIlI~ET 81~~ HALTE® AN®T~E dREG~I~I~EN~AT14Ni ~F THE TAiK P®IR~E BE C~NSIDER~Q F®R THE FATE DF THIS iT REi~/11NIN~# LARGE I*~RGEL OF LAAID VIi1T~~I~E THE T~VVN ®F VAtL, WE BELIEVQr IT III~PERATIVE THAT TAE TD1Ii11~1 ~®~IERHMENT ®E RESPC~ht;EIYE TQ ITS C4N~TITUEI~IGII, AHD THAT Tlil ISffi[~E ® ~R~~1~HT T~ A 1/~TE t?F REGISTE~tEd~ EL~GT~Rffi ®E~'®4~E PRDCEEDIPi® VYlTH, AI~1~ DEVELI~~MEI~1T ®f .THE VAIL GO(VIM®NS PR~PERT'Y. PRINT NAIWE~~ ~ ~TItEET ADDRESS ~= ~NDNE #~~~ ING ADDRESS SI~-~U~E ~ r t~ ~f p ~~ r3 I S'' L~ 7 ~ ~ Z ~J Ll ~c 4' ~ `~ ~Ii~l ~.,'~ ~'~i~`~ PRINYED NAME' ; SIG TURF ~ SYREET ADORES PK4P6E AILING AD®I~ESS PR4NTED NsMEI ;; SIGNA~~R~~~;~~~ ~ R~>Jr~~R~.-~~-~ P~~ ES ~ ~~1~~1~DDaES~~~~ ~~~ P I TEf! NAME " GN TURE ..~ _ •~ ~~ ~ ~ l~ ~` ~~ ~.~ ~ FRiNT NAME 31GNA U F. PRINTED NAME SIQNATLI~E ~~ j ~..-~ ~~RESS ~~ P~{ANE MAILING Ai~DAESS $TR€E'f bDD~ESt t~Oid1: Mx[LING AD^RI:$~ r S3REET ADDRESS FHONE iN~Il1N~ ADDRESS ~~I~;,, TO; YA11. 'fC]INf~I I~~~,JNDBL A~~M~ERS as IT ~1slaal~9bD by ~'~E ~T@~N ~~LiNGIL ~~ TF4~ ~~uK ~F YAYI. ~~~ ~ ~~ ~m~~~L~ ~~~~~ pII~ ~ ~ ~ Ytl f ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ DIVE PETITI4M THAT THE ~E~~TtA~'8~ YOU HAVE E1~TEI~EG BI~TO WtTI~ CITY AAARKET ~E~ M~ALTE® ANC THE RED®~®ATIQ~S QF THE TASK PQRCE 8E CC~NSIDERr~Q F®R THE FATE OF TI~I LET REI~AI~It~i® URGE PARCEL OF LA1VD WITHIW THE ~°Q1fVN ®F ~ABLa i .. WE BELIEVE IT 11NPERATIVE THAT TI~~ TQWN GOVERNtMEHT ~E RESI~OFIS6VE TO iTS C01~19TITUEEiCY, AHC ThLAT THBS aSS~]E ®E ERQU+~HT TQ A IiC~TE OF REGISTERS ELECTORS EEFORE P~~E~6~t~ WITH AE~Y OEYELQPMENT OF THE VAIN C~NtIIACiHS PROPERTY. Vie. ~r~~ ~ ~ INTED NAME~~~ ~_ SIGNAL RE ~,~ C.f/'c~/ ~~ ~~~~~G~~'~~~c~~` ~ ~t~0~7~s ~~~ LNG A~~l~~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ IaRINTEd AME ' StGNAT f ~/~, TR ~~ d U Q~-~_ ~~ ~PHfl~fjiC~, (.~ ~~~~ I~~ADQI~fSS i ~ ~ ` off PRINTEQ NAME s~GNaYIJRE STR~~T A[9~RESS PiiDNE MAiRIB~~ A®QAFSS <~s t~-.r ~ ; S~ .rYiil t i t t°,~ re+C-- ~%7~: r7Y ,... ti. ....... AI~INTfD NAME ~ ' __~ , SIGNATURE .. • ~ STI~fET A fSS ~~~; ,pI~GNf Ii~R~L6Al~ ADQRf S; r. ~ ~ ~ ~~~ PIiINTEa NAN9E 1t~N USE STREET bDD~ES HDNE MA4LING AQDAESS ~, PAINtED NAME' ~~ SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PNONf MAItIN~i ADaRESS ~{ WE BELIEWE IT 1MPERATII~E THAeT THE T1~1N ~i~V~RNME~T ~#E RE~PC~NSIVE TO iTS C®~1$TITUt:N~Y, ANA THAT THIS i~~UE EE ~R~U~HT T~ A 11~Tf ~F REGISTERE EL~CTCgRS REF®RE RR~C~E®9A1~ 1A~ITl~9 dRNY C+EVE~.~P'MEhiT ~F THE VAIL C~ilrl ~H5 PR®PERT`f9 ~~~~~~ neu~a~fllCl ~ ~ ~R~ ., ~ ' STREET ADDRE~3 PHONE I~IA1L aG At9 E,R Ii i ' ---•..~ ~~~~ PRINZEO ~~f,E~T ADD ~ ! .~,~' QRIN~EO NAIWE `: Si A R ~ . ~ ~~~ E°I~ ~~ ~~ f.ti,~ Iif V. I ~~J ~~r^ PRINTf~ NAME SiG USE 5TI3E~T Ap4RES~ PF~I~NE MAII.ONG A®~~~55 .-- . ~ ~ ;. PRINT6a NAME stir ~u (1 ~~ ~ C^. ~ '~tit~v t~t4~'~L-'.~ PrJ D NAME ~tl;r~A~~ ~ ~. ~~,~.~~. _L..- SgREI:T A Rlv~~ PKQI~E STREET A®OR~~S PHONE 12~ tip. C~~~~C~: KS~ . ~=1~- • ~t~ Sr7 PHQ E,,,,~ ~A~I,ING D~RES3 f~ -~ ~~ A~I~ SS ~ PFIflME INAItING Ai~~RESS MAII`ING ~ODRESS ~'~ ~ ~rr~ H ~~~ I•IIAII.ING AO~RESS ~1 C, ~~;c t~'_3 ~~~ r Wi+ BEL~E'YE~ 1T 1MP'ER~-TI1IE '~~9~T THE ~'~~d~ Ga~ERHMEHT ~~ RESP~i~sivE To STS ca~sTfTUiwiac~r; ~1~~ T1~~T T~~~ ~s~uE 1~E ~R~u~~T Tc~ A va~iw ®t~ REGiBTERE~ ELE~T'O~tS EEFaRE PI~~~~E~iP1~3 1N@TH ENV ~EV>€LaP14~1~NT ®B~ THE V~4iL. ~~}MMI~NE PR~PERT~. PRINT a NAME r .~~.~ ~~s_' s: A ~~ ~ TI,~EET aa~a S ply NE l~AIL1NG ~aDRfSS ~.~ r .~ r~- ~-. _STREEQR€SS P~34NE ~ MAiLtNG A1fI1RESS pRlNTEU P1AM~ 51 AT E ,.,~~ STREET ADQRESS PHpN~ MAlll~la A~ORE3S .r PRihfi'ED NARflE SIGNATURE PRINT~~ NAPE SIGNASL~AE r i PRINTED NAME SIGNA'C~1I'tE ~. STREET ApORt;SS ~-T~EE"~ AdDRE5S STREET AGGF~E~S P~tlN~ ~AAII.ING ApDRESS P!#ONE PHI~NIe IrdIAI~~1V6 ~GG~E~SS INAI~ING AGGRE55 i ~~J TO. VAIL T(JWN CC7UNCIL IWSEMf3ERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY' OWNf~RS, DUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®1®R REST®ENTS r®f~DTSI®E THE TO~1VN DF VAIL LIMITS, I1OV11EVEFt, WITHIN EAGLE CDl1NTY, AN® frIEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVEL®PME~IT OF TIE PARCEL OF LAN® REFERRED TA AS THE VAIL CDMMUNS WITH A SUPERMAR,l~ET. DUPLICATING SEEtVICES, I.E., ANO'T'HER SUF'EI~MARI~ET, IS NDT iIV THE BEST INTEREST ®F ALL CC)MML~NiTIES CDNCEEtIVED. TFIEREFDRE, VYFIAT MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT `VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT L15. PRINTED NAME SI I~~TURE /j STREET ~AtDDRESS PI~DNE MAILING ADDRESS , ~. Gl~-f1~/! /~~rlc_/ ~~ (,ia~atl, 5C' ~ ~~~~G/~'/_~~ 1~~~1 L ~'~5-13~.3 ~. ~~a Vc;~ r ~ t~ ~ (~ S PRINKED NAME SIGNATURE ,.~~~. Q,~ i ~,_ ~RINTED NAME ~AIA,TUI~E ~~~ ~~„" STREET AI3DR£S5 Pi-IRN£ MAlLiNG ADDRESS ~' - W ~~ ~ 7 Ci~.a.~,~n e ar~,~+tr STREET ApDR£SS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS /~ // ~ C f~Q.GZ f'" 112 ~ PRINTED NAME ~I~Ze 7yy, ,.U.~~,3~v~ Uw- f PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~,~`~. ~~~ ,ten `~ ~.,~. '1~~~ ~-•~y~`~~~r S ~E ~ STREET AD S PHDN MAILING DDR PRINTS NAME PRI!Vl'~D DAME SIGNATURE S~fREET ApORESS $I•G URE STREE~f Ap E ~~~ ~ : ~~ ~ ,~~ ~ ,~~ PRINTED NAME ~I"uNATURE STREET ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADI~i~ESS ~INTED NAME SIGNATURE STRi=£T ADf)RESS PHDN I~IAILfNG ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PHONE MARLING ADDRESS PHDN£ MAILING Af~DRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ 1`~ ~ O: VABL TOWN COUNCIL MEM8EK5 WE, THE UAt®ERSIGNE®, ARE PROPER~'Y OWNERS, E3USINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED "JOTERS, ANDlOR RESIC~EN"I'S OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL LIMITS, H®VIlEVER, WITHIN EAGLE CC7UNTY, AND ~1EREDY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUI~ERM~,R9~E'f. U • DUPLICAT[NG SERVICES, [.E.; AN®TFIER SUPERMARI~CET, IS NOT IN TIME VEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THIEREFORE, WHAT MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT L1S. ~,e;~ V t"~ ~ u rn PRINTEp NAME N PRINTEp NAME SI URE ~ STREET ADpRESS .. PHONE pr--~/ S ~ ATURE ~~-- 1~'11 14' ~~~at m-_~ STREET ADpRESS PHO E l rl ~;l. t~,t~~~ t - (c:~~~'~a~~r C~kItI~ZY'`l~ ~ ~~ MAILING ADDRESS _ ~ :,~t- - ~~~~ ~_: `~: . ~ ~~~. ~ ~ ~~a u e :. . ,- . ' ~--- `' I ` 5 ~Nnu jj~~ f fJbE( ~C~}~i I ~~~.~. , . PRINTEp NAME S11f~NATU E 1 ~/, 'r ~ STREET ADDRESS ~ l ~ ~ PHONE ' f ' '. MAILING ADpRESS ~ ~ - -cG~f: l,; ~! , ~.-~3 ~ t~kl~ ~` vc~ r ~ - l G' 7T i 4L~[> f! fit r ~~1-- 15 - ~ ~ Z - x ~!~' 1 i ~.j ~i :'iv `~ ~ ~ / ~`~' / RIN1'Ep N ~M - SIGNA R~ ~ STREET ADDRESS - PHONE MAILING ADpRESS PRiNTEp NAME ~IGNATIIRE STREET App11ESS MAILING ADDRESS ~• s ~;.~.\ ~. ...~ ~~.:, .~,,;., c .. ~,i t , 1 PHONE MAKING _ADpRESS PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADpRESS PHONE MAILING ADpRESS PRINTEp NAMIr SIGNATURE STREET ADpRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME 5lGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADpRESS PRIN~'ED NAME ' 5[GNI~TURE STREET ADDRESS PHONI: Ih~AILING ADpRESS PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADpRESS 1[ R,I ~.f / -. THE PEOPLE ®F VAtd ASE EI~T~°~L~~ TD A Pt~B~.l~ VDTE ~N THE FATE QF THE PARCEL DF LAND i41~E~VVN CIS TAE ~A1L C®t1AMONS~~THE LAST LARBE PARCEL rOF ®EVEL®PAI3LE LA111® RUR~HASE® DY THE TDiAIN IDF VA@L WIT~# TAX DOLLARS. - - . TO: VAIL TOWI~I COUIaIClL MEMBERS WE, TFiE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPI~RTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDI®R RESIDENTS 916~ITHIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE CC}MMERCIAL DE~/ELOPMENT C)F THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T® AS THE VRaIL C®MMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU hIA16E ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE I~ECOMMENDAT'IONS ®F THE TASK F®RCE E3E CONSIDERED FC?R THE FATE ®I" THIS LAST RE~I:AINI~IG LARGE PARCEL. QF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAlL, WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT TI°iE TQWI~i GQVERNMEI~T BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CQNSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROI~GHT Tt7 A VOTE QF REGISTERED ELECT®RS BEFORE r R®CE~DING WITH ANY ®EVEL®PMENT OF THE VAIL COMM®NS PR®I~ERTY, ~~~~ ~ P~.~~ ~o~ PRINTED NAME SI NATI~RE J P~--~-~ ~ ~ ~ PRI TEfl N ME SI NAT RE STRPCT ADUFiESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ ~ C'~_Iw~~'~a~.~ ~ x ~ ~.~ '~ 7~ - X315 ~~~~ STREET A D9ESS PHONE MAILCdI:~ ADDRESS rya-~'~ ~ -,r~c. Cis (o .3~~ ~~.Qr ~ ~3I S~ ~ 0 ~~ 8~~~ ~" ~~~ ~ ce u ~ ~ ~- PRINTEQ NAME . `S~ TITRE STREET AD13RE55 I~ MAII. CAD RESS '~~~ ~ 1~) ~--r1..~.~ ~, ~ ~ t~ -R3~ITED NAME ATIIRE STREET ADDRESS f PHONE '~ `:!LlNG ADD S5 ~~ u~D:-~'1 ~ ~~l) ~7rv~r~~ ~--r,.~.~4~cclr.,,-> 1~~ ~;;~ 1~.. ~~~~IGS~ )~ G _ ~ ~~r~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ PRINTED NAME G TU ~ /jSTREET ADUR~SS ) /PNfBNE I~nAItING R017RESS ~~ - ~' ~ ~ L....~ * 1C"!"' PR - NAME SIG E STREET ADDRI^SS PRONE MAILING ADDRESS ~.r.k~r~ ~z~~~~l PRINTED NAME ~,. SlGNATIIRE ° STREET ADDRESS ~ PHONE M ILIN ~~Ap~SSy,~ I ~- ~/) ~ _ ~`. PRINTED NAME °~ 1 SIGNAi~R ~~- STREET ADfiR~SS // PHONE MAI!.ING ADDRESS ~-~ ~---~ THE PEDi~i.E OF ~A!!, SIRE ENTiT~ED T ~~lI~LlC V®'~E OIV 4HE DATE OF TF9E ~ARCE~, ®F LAlll® tC~IDWI~I A5 ~°HE ~lAla ~®IN~DNSA-THE LAST LARtiE PARCEL GF ®EVEM~OPABI.E LAIi!® P~RDH~1~E® ~Y THE T`®W!V ~]F ~IIIIL 11111TH TAB DCD~.I~ARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBEI7S BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN CO~INCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE° Ir~OE'ERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN'Dl®R RESIDEN`~°S WITHIN I°HE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIVlERCIAL REVEL®PMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®R!S ~'OU MAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMI~IE~~®ATI®~IS ®F TI-IE TASK F®RCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN TIE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT TIDE TOWN GOVEI~N1'sIIENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® `THAT °~HIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCE~CIING WITH AI\IY ®EVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COM/M- ONS PR®PERTY. ~25~~~ '~l~~l.~ P NT NAME RE STREET' ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ e,,s PRI TED NAME SIC~~~~.lR~E ~ STREET jA[1[~RES$ PFiONE MAII.IN~ pDRESS ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ P TED ~AME IG ATU T DRESS ~~ HONE M II,IN ADDRESS , -~ _ - x111.. ~ el Q 'I.1L~ tr---. ~1_ PRINTED N M - ICfU TUBE - STREE7~ A~lORES PHONEun J MAILING ADD ESS M t,o ~~ ~'~v ~ . ~ ~r 1 ~~~~ ~ i r ~ ~ l `111-CS -°~a ~ '~~... rM-P '_' a~ ~ar~~j~e _ PRINTER NA E 5 A~ l1RE S;1R ET 1lDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ ~1~~K11b~~ ~R TED NAM 51G SURE STREET ADORES5 PHI)NI= MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS _ ~~ry /~ . , :'~ ~, .fit ,~;~r~. /~.~ ~ ~,~~~ PRINTED ,I~AM~ 51GNATU9>: ~ /' STREET AD;JRE55 PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ THE PEOPLE Of~ MAIL. ARE EI~TIT~.~®.°~~ A PUBLIC VOTE ®~ THE PATE ®II~ TFlE PARCEL QF LAN® KNOWN A~ THE 76AIL C®i~M®NS.~TI~E LAST LARGE PARCEL OP QE~EL®PABLE LA~1ED PIIiRCHASE~ ~Y THE 7°OWIV ®F CIA#L WITH TAX ®QLLARS. TO: VAIL. TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS BE IT t?Rl7ATNED BY THE TOWN COD~iCIL OF THE TOWN OI' VAII, THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE P>~'.OPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AN®IOR RIw~SI{~ENT'S WITHIN THE TOVlIN OF VAIL, AN® HEREBY OPPOSE THE C~bMMERCIAL ®EVELOPIifIENT L~F THE P,~IRCEL OF LAN® REFERRED TO AS THE FAIL CtC~ONS WI1fiH A SUPERMARKETo WE PE~'ITION THAT THE NE:GOTIATIOf~S YOU HAVE ENTEREC~ INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REC®I~fI~EI~®ATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONS113ERED FOR THE FATE OF TFIIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL ®F LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE T~iAT TIME ~°OWN GOVERNMENT ~E RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, ANU 'TI-IAT TI~I9S ISSUE BE BROUGHT ~"O A V®TE ®F REGISTERED Es ECTORS BEF®I~E PROCC~~II~If~ WITH ANY LEVELOI~IUIENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME SI ~ ~ STREET ADDRESS _ ~ .. ~ f/~ h~-. ~~"~ ~I~~4 ~ /~9~t1~~ PHONE LING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME .,..~ Sl~~TURE STREET ADDRES PHO E MAILING ADDRESS ~ ., U PRINT NAME A IJR ~ STREEI' ADDRESS PHDN~ ~ MAILING ADDRESS „ PRINTED NAME ,~ v ~~ ~ SIGNAT J STREET AD1J13ESS PHO MAILING ADDRESS .~ ~r ~ ,~ ~. ~ i PRINTED N M + ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ 1 ~&`~ °~ ST IwET Af]DRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS r .. PRINTED NAME SIGNA~DR~ c TREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~,-~• L~.ac.. ~. %~.l.,:iF~l~~~ /D11~'° ~%'7(c-%~o t~A' o7~Sl - G~da:~Z.- ---- PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADI7RE5S PHONE MAILING A[3Df3ESS PRINTED NAME F SIGNATURE S f REST AD~IRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS 7~ ~rwl~ ~~®~~~ ®~ r~A~a A~~ E~~~Y~~D ~u!aLrc ~~~ ~ T FA~~ ®~ T~~ P,PlftQEL C!~ LAND KN~'6tV~Y ~S TAE ~IIL ~~N~~®T'H LA~S`t LARGE ~A~t~EL GFA Q~11Epp~~LGi~A~LE LAND ~~~CHA~~~ `~ THE T®WN DP 'I~AiL WITI~ TAB ~QLLA~YR T4: VAIL T~7WN C~t~NC#L -11IEMI3ERS WE, THE UN®ERSIGNE®, ARE PR®6~ERTY OWNERS, Bi.1SttVESS C)WNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANQ~OR RESIDENTS Wti'HtN TIDE T®WN C?F VAIN, AND . HEREBY OPPOSE THE° C®{UItViERCaA~ DEVELOF'it~E~@T OF 1`f-IE PAR+~EL. ®F LAND REFERRED TC)~ AS TB~E VAtE. CONS WITH A S9~PERMAP.KE°!'. ' WE PETlTt(~N THAT THE NEGOTIATlON~ ~~U WAVE EtVTt; RED tNT® WITH CtT'Y :IIIAR'~E~' E'E ti 1A€.TED AND TIDE REDC~E~tE3ATtt~ritS• OF THE TAS~~, POtR~`E ~E CONSIDERED FOR T~'E DATE GF ~'~ItS I..AS'I' REM w,~ftNG Lf~RGE PARCEL. OF LAND u1ItTHIN THE T®WN ®F VAtL. WE BEL{EVE {T IMPERATIVE THAT' `CAE T~~WN t~GVIRN~EI'~°~' BE RESPONS{VE TO ITS C®NST1Tl~ENCY, AN® THAW TH{~ 9SS~E BE BROl~G~9T TO A V~T`t~ GF REGISTERED ELECT®RS BEFORE PR~~EEQlNG W!T{~ ANY QEI9ELOPNIENT C+F THE VAIL CuMiVtCDNS PR®PERT~. PRINTI:f? NAME ~~NATURt: REST ADI~AESS PRUNE .MAILING ADl?RI:SS ~.~-x~~~. ~~;~w G ~C/~~ ~~~ ~?~ ~a ~ c~-, Hof Y~ ~~.~a~R Cc~.~~ ~~~ (~~. ~ ~ ~ PRINTED NR~IE ~~~11~HE, ~ ~(~EE~ A~DI~ES~ ~ J~ ~I~H~~ ~ ~ II.ING~pRE~ S~ l'~~ ~ ((JJt~~JJ/J is ~/~~tU11/ ~c ~NT~2 PRINTED NAME SIGN~~ATUR-~~ ~-r-~"IfiE~T A#~DI~ESS PI~C~NEI ~ MAILING ~DDI~ESS lil~-ti . ~~.~~ ~'f ~ ~ .~a5'~ ~ ~ ~r~ ~ `I ~ ~ ~ t7 ~1 S c~ ~~ I'/. U~~,C ~~ ~~ ~ ~ . PRIN NAM£ ~ . SI E ~~~A~S~ 1 '~ PNO E~~~~~ (~ I~NC~ . (,~ RESS ~~~ a ~ ~~ PR#NTEU NAME •- NATURE STREET ADDRESS PRUNE MA##.II~G ADDRESS ~J~~ C'~^'. , .. PRINTED NAME S#GNATURE STREET ADpRfSS __.. ... F#iL'I~IE . MRIIIIUG ADa!?~SS PRINTEf~ NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PRUNE .MAILING AI]nRESS PRlNTEd NAME . SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS • ~•HE PEf~PI.E IMF 'li~ll~, ~1RE ~:NT~T~~D TO A P~II~I~1~ Vt~~E ~N T~1E FAT'I~ CAF THE PARCEB. OF I,ANIa KN~~tfN AS °~'1-1E ~1A1~ ~~['V[~~1'~S_,T!~~ .Ii~AST LARI~~ PARCEi. ~l~__OEVELOP~IBl.E LAN® PIJR~HASEO I~Y_- THE T~1~-°I~I CAF 1lAlti, 1f~11Tt~ TAX QCILLARS. TD: VAIL. 1'OWI~! C~Uf~'CCL M1~MGf~IZS l; l; I'T OEZt?I#INI,i) ElY 'IEEE 'J'OWPt COUNCIL Ole 'SIIF `T'OWN OF VAIL '1'E3A'E' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OVIINERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE T01A[~! OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMIVCERCIAL I~EVELOPMEN~T OF rHE PARCEL.. OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VACL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARI(E"t'. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO LNITH CITY MARKET ®E HALTED AND THE RECOIIiitItENUATI®NS OF TI-IE TASI( FORCE ~3E CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF TIiIS LAST F~EMAINlNG ~.ARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. 1NE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE WHAT THE TOWN GOVERNMEIN7 BE RESPONSIVE TO !TS CONSTITUENCY, ~ AND THAT Tt-IIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OP REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PRC3CEEDlNC WITH /-1NY CDEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL_ COMMONS PROPERTY. ~r PRINTED NAME ~3D3 ~ ~~,~~ ~, . IGNATUI3E % STRf:ET AUC7fCESS PC10P1~ MAILING AQdfiE55 .~ ~ ~~ .. ~ c . e Ma~n~s I'RINTEU NAME T ~V~-Y- STREET nR>=5S PRONE MAILING ItIlC7RESS ~I~If~EI~ NAM~~..~~ . ~ S16 ~ STREET AI7[7RESS C'll{7NE MAII.C~AG'~7FIES5 ~ ~~~~ ~~/ '- ~.~~- ~ f l,~ . ATiJRE STREET AnDRESS PHONE Ni CLING ADI]RESS ~ ~ PRINTED MIME SIGN11T131tE S~CRELT AC)t]fiESS ,- 1'IIdNE MACLCNG AUL~IIESS PRIIVI-El7 NAME ' st~NATUi~ty '(~ ~ ~ st~'tif/1~Y.~t STREET A13t~l1ESS I'i1dNE MACLIN[~ .ADdRE S r PRIN-C~E[7 NAME SI 'NATUI1t; ST#iEET ADDfiCSS PII(7hIE ~~rl~vre ~~~ PRINTEN NAME sC[iNI~1~ < STREET AUDC~ESS P1417NE MACL N AdDRl=55 MAILING AOGRFS~ dSdX yv~~- U~-/ TFIE, PEOPLE OIL VIA~t~ ~F11~~ ~k~Tl`~~GC3 TO Fa 1f~CB~~:I~~df~T~:_~~ ~'~-~#F_1i"AT~_~A~ TIH~ P1~IRCEI, QP LAY![® I~IV~![II~Tw CIS T~~'~1~i,11., C~dV}PIiiQEVS~Tl~~,E LAS`~_l,~~C;~ I?At~~T~» DP p~V~LC~P~A~L'E ~F~IVD PUR~UB~~1~~} _~3Y T}~~ TC}'~Ili~d OP ~~~. '4~1lTlf-~ Ti~~S GAL~.ARS~ -f~U: VAIL 'i OUVN COUNCIL MEMf3EI~S u~ ~'r o~z.r~nrtv~n ux 'rise 'rota~a c;r~t~~v~rz, or •r~tr~ •rotar~ ate vnzT.. •~:tin•r E, TI-}E UNDEfiSIGNED, AIDE PROPERTY OWNERS, Rl~S1NESS OVIINERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND101~ }~,ESIDENTS WlT}~iIN Tl-IE TOWN OF UAIL., AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE GOIVIMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF TI-iE I'"E+-f2CEL OF LAND REFERRED 1'O AS 'THE VAIL COMMONS WIT}-i A Si11'ERMAf~}(E-T. WE PETITION TFIAT TI-lE NEGOTIA't~IONS YOI~ Lif~U'E I~NTEREfJ iNTC7ltitlT}l CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND TI-}E RECC71~+1MEi'lQA'}IONS Oi/ THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED l=OR THE FATE OF TI-IIS LAS'}' REMAINING LARGE PARCT~L t?F LAND WITHIN TI~iL' TOWN 4F 1/111L. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT Tl-iE TOWN GOVERNI1liENT ~E }aI~sPONSIV~ TO 1T5 CONSTI'T'UENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE eC I~RQUGI-l~l' TO A VOTE OF f~EGISTERED Ei.ECTORS k3El°ORE PROCEEDING WITI~ ANY D1=1lELOPMEN'T' OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~_`~.~t~ PffIiVTEII ~iNA ~ S~lI~EE1~ IIfJDI~ESS f'4{dl~E M I[.ING 11DfJ ~-5' ~Cj G~ V . '~~C ~~ PfiiNTEU NAME SIGNATtJfi~ STIiLET AIJt)iifSS f'lIUI11E M~11l.If~G ~IOt7fii:SS (1 PI}11VTEU h1AME S~[~I~ ~UEZE ~ STI3EET AllDF33~ss PflufuE MAILIf11C !l[][lf iI:SS f I~INIEU NtIME - TUiIE STfiEET~ 11DIJfi -SS f'H[f~fE M~ZIIIf~G II[)DI~ESS I'I~IN~«u lVAIVII:, 51GN ~ ~ ~.Y 1~ ~ b b~f~E -T I~~i,ES~,LG~ '~iW ~ ~~P UP~E ~ (71 ~7.~.J ~.~~'~ -~ °L _~_~~C~ ~ ~aa, c-l I'~1 t) ~ PI~lN~fEU NAME SIG[Vn~~4JfiE /' ~ sTfiL-ET lI[~[]f~ESS . ~c-~r ~~. C~~~r~2s-*~2-- ~~ l L~v, c~r~i ~_ ~ fi _ PfI01VE MJIf[_fNG AI)[]f~f:SS ~...___. ~?6-~5~ ~' rJ __~..~ f f3fN1~EU NAME SfGIVRTUfiE STFiff~f /4[)[]fiESS ['[fDNE fJIAILf[~G A[][)f]FSS Sf(~NA1UIiE STREET !!D[]iZ1;55 F'fl[]N~ 1~f~nfLING AUDf{ESS . ~~( Ti_Is~ PEC?Pi,E Uf~ 1C/~li. ARC E~'i~R'l~l.`~U ~.O A: ~?i~FiL.IC VO'i"E~ ~f~ `i'i~l~ ~~TI~ 4~~= TIC' - - - - - ~~ PARCJ~t~ Vii' I,F~NIC~ ICtVUjlllN ~5 'CME ~I~1~~, i~~M~fi~NIS-°~CI~~ I.~~L~T ~.l~~U~ ~ARG~M, C1F GEVEIC.C}~?ABi,^E ~N~l~~ P1~~~1~#AS~U _~'1~ '~~-i~ TC3VtP~if r~~ '~'AIY~ lt~fl~`~i 'i'1~,]~ UQI.LAR5. ~-O: V/111. 1OWN COUNCIL ML=Mf3L'--fZS EiE: Z'i O1ZElnLNi'sl) 11Y '!'Ells '1'UWN CUtI1VC1L Of 'C11>; '):UjdP] Ole VA.1.L 'l~E[(1'[' ' E, TI-{E LfNDERSIGNEE3, ARE F'R~PERTY OWNERS, BU~iNESS OVIfNERS, EGISTERE^ VOTERS, ANDIQR 1~ESIDE'NTS WITI-IIN TI IE TCIWN GF VIdIL, AND 1-IEREBY t7F'f'05E THE CC7MN{ERCIAL UEVILDPNiENT C3 C= TF{E PARCEL OF LAND REfERREQ TD AS THE VAIL COiVIMC]NS WITI-t A 5UPERMAR1tE-i'. 1NE PETITION ~'~IA~1' THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU RAVE ENTERED INT01NIT1-I CITY IIrIARKET BE I~ALTELI ANp TI-IE I~ECC7MMChIDATiONS OF 'Tl-IE TASK FOi'tCE BE CaNS1DEREU Ffll~ THE FATE QF T~~IS LAS`S' REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND W1T!-UN 'r~HE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BBLIEVB IT IMPERATIVE `I-t~A~~~ T1-4E TOWN GOVEI7NMEN'1' BB RESPONSIVE Td ITS CaNSTlTUENCY, ANC1 7I~IAT TI~i1a t:`~SUE BE BRaUCI-iT T4 A VC3TE C)F I~EGISTEREq ELEC~{'01~5 BEf~URE PF'tC7GEEDING 1dUl-i'I-{ ANY DFVELC~I'M'CN-~ aF E VAIL GOMMOMS I'ROPEEiTY. ~~ PI{INTEU NItME ~ . GNnrt{fiE Si~ItEET nUUf~ESS f'lIONE MlIIC-ING AUURESS ~~te ~.~-~~rsUc~ ~1~3 Cc~tnC~rc~o.. ~~4b'~~~4~ ~~~~ai1~l~~0 ~~~5~ I'~INrEI~ NnM~ Si' TU E Sr#iE:Er Ahl[lf~C:SS I'IIE~NE MIIfEING ~IUIJCiI:SS ~f~ll~_?'~%~' f'111N t EU MIME 51UNAyJ~f1£ ~~ /__~tf~ . y ~CtA-~~ ~.. _ f'C~IN-{EU MIME slr n ~ iE _ ~~~ {'iiINTEC) MIME 51GNATULIE f'fIINTE~ NAME Slclun~~u~~ 171~INrEU NJIME SIGNIITClI~E ~__ I}IiiN l EU NAME SfGNn I UIiE S~fI~ECT 11UU1IESS f l{CANE MRI~IIUG ~17UIlESS '7`S~.L1"a~`~.~ ~, fr~r .~~-- ~ `f 7C~._-~U~3~ ~.t~.~y ~CY~o 5 1 y~~-95Y~ STREET (4U LESS F'I-IDNC Ml~IEING IlC~UIZESS 2 ~~~ ~ !.~ ~., rte. _~L~.--~~. ~a . ~/c~..~~~ STij1:El- 11[)fli~TSS I'f4[INE M1lll-INC Af)DCIESS STf~EGT nDUfiLSS 5-TfiEET AC)UCiESS STIIf:CT AUDI{ES5 f~}It~N~ M~If-I~~U AUUC~f:SS ['IIDNC Mfl{LING AC)Uf3ESS f IIDNE Mnfl-ING AU[JCIESS ~~~ ' THE P>~[IpI.E (~F'~,~li~.-r~i~'~~ ~t~i`~'C~~'GGC3_~`><.~ ~ ~aR,4~3~,tG ift~T~ C3~J T~-1~: 1'~J~1T1~ IG~E Tr~l~ PFIf~CE~ fDIE' I.,P-NQ ICNC11~.fN c~~S `~_H~.1fAFl[. C(~IViM~l~la~;~l~#E I.J~1ST L1~RC~ F~1~~~~1, rUF D^~,VEII.CIP~FIF3~.E ~.~iF~f?~PUi[~CI-t~~,SED__~1C T~~E TC-W~I 4E 1lAI~.. W~~'f~l! T'1~.~ TO: V/11L 7 UWhd CUl1NCl~ ML7vif3~R5 1i 1: 1'f 0lZllA].NED 19Y 'i'}lE 'T'OWN G'O1INGIL OC '.1'1II?. 'T'OWN ~)I VAIt. 'I'11R'f E, TI~FE UN.C]E4~51GNEp, ARE PRUi'ERTY OWNERS, E3USiNESS aWNERS, ~EGISTEREp VUTER.S, i0N~7lOft FiESIUENT~S ~NI-T~l~t{V 1'I-{E TGYVN OF VAIL, AND IiEREBY Ui~F~OSE TFiE G(~MMERGIAL ~]EVtLUpMENT U1= 1-IiE PAP.CEL OF LAt~IU REf=ERCiED TU AS THE VAIL COIV111liUNS 1lUI~TI~i A SUPERIVI~1Ri~ET. WE PETI~I"lON TI-tA~' TI-IE NEGO-I-IATIUN~~, YUl1 I-#40VE ENTERE® {N~'O 1111iT1-I CITY MARICET BE I-IAL~'EU AND 'TI~IE REGOMMf~NDA`I"TUNS U~ T6-IE` TIOS}( FUR.CE C3E CUNSIDEftEU I~Ui~ TIME f=ATE Ur ~I~IIIS t_AST F~EIVIAIfIING LARGE PARCEL CAF LAND WITI~UN ~{~I-IE TOWN Or VAtL. WE BEL{EVE 1'i' 111IIPEI~ATIVE THAT THE `FU1~'~N GOVERNN[EN-#" BE RESPONSIVE TG ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND TI-IA'T 't'~-IIS IS::UE BE BRC~UGt~lT Tt] A VU"~".E QF= REGISTERED EI_.ECTORS BE1!=-~RE F'Fi,O~:El1DING 1lViTli ANY DEVELQF'MCN~- Or 7FiE VAIL CQMMONS F~RQPEF~TY, filN~i EU NlIMi: iNATUIi S~liEET Atl[JfiCS5 l'll~]NE: Mrtlt[NG II[)[J1~~SS ~~ ~2~5_'S ,1G w wr l e~rvr ~ FtIG~ ~ ~ 9 `9,~`~ ~''Y~ ~s .~ .~O~r'~o. J~I r~~r~ I'111N1E[) NAME I'NJl ST43fE~ 11C]~1~FS I'fIUN~ tv1111~ING 11 C1f.111[:SS ~} r~~~ ~~ I'lIIN1i:U NnMI: ~'~~J, I~E~ ST13E~T ~1[][)t~F.SS I'F{UN~ M~[l_ING IiU[]f~ESS f'FIINI•~[1 N11ME 1 -UflC~ 1.-~.. T[~I: -~' ~[7UI3E55 PIlUNC M111L1NG {~[?[1[i~SS ~~~ I'[~INT~fI NAN[I; SIti~1l1~11SOE SrtIiEfT AD,€)Ii~SS '~ f'iIUP~J~ M,'!fLlNG 11C1[~f~F_SS _ V i ITIN f ~U~NI~ME ~ >ZC ST[t~ET ~U fi~SS 'HONE: Mr1ILINC AUb[3[:SS ~w~'~.~. Pfilllil~C[J NAME Ufi~ f'F{I ~ NnM~ SI AT fiF~ -••. S~F[~~~T ~ U[iESS I'HOfiIE Mil[L![di~ ~1~~7[3ES5 STf~~~T 11D[)fiESS ['HUNS MRiI_INU ~R[}C1E~ESS 3 ~ t. _ 1-~A~tto a ~ ~.~ ~c °~ b ~ ~ ray _ ~?' ~ ©, ~~? ~r~..~~b 2.- ~- v~~ ~ U _~ Tti.l~ p~vP~.l~_c~~ ~~i~. ~~~ r~~~r~T~l~~a ~~~ ~ P~~'~s~ ~~T~_~a~ ~ra~~ ~~T~ rar ~~~~ I~~-~c~t. o~ ~~_~r~~ Itn~~uuw~a ~s Ti~~ u~~~9 ~~~c~n~~r~~-- art,{i~ ~~.~~r ~,~~~~ Pi~R~~~ QE pE11E1.QPA~t,~ ~ AID P~ik~Ck{ASE _l~~" T~{E TOV11~! pE 1fF1)t~, 1~11T{'~ 7P~~ UAI.~,AR,S. "!~t_7: VAIE. TOWN COUNCIL MEMf3Ei~5 Ilia i'f URE)t~:CiVl;l) 1lY 7'4(t? 'fUWiV C~IjNC:1L UE' '1'Elli 'fUL~1td Oi~ VA.Ii, '1.'111'1' E, TI-IE UNDEI~S{GNED, APE PROPE~"tTY ~WNET~S, E3t~Sll`tESS CIWNERS, `EGISTERI~.U VOTERS, ANDIOii i~ESli]E~JTS WTCI-{1N TI-{E T01NN OF VAiL, ANI~ I-{EREBY O{~POSE TI-IE COIViIViERCiAL pE:VELOPMENT OF THE PAIRCEL C?F LANp REFEl~RE^ TO AS THE RAIL GOi~lf'~IOIVS ~1flTl~l A SUPERMA1~i~.ET. WE PETITION `I'1{AT THE I•IEGUTIAT1011#S 'SOU 1-{AVE E~9TERED INTO WIT{-I CITY MARKET 8E MALTED AND `~~i'iE f~ECOMMEr~DAT10N5 0~= TI IE '{"ASIC FORCE E3E CONSIDERED 1=OR TI-IE 1=ATE OF TkiIS Iw,~:~~i~ RE11llA{NING LAI~"tGC PAf~GEL OF LAND WI~{'I-iIN THE TUUVN OF VAIL., WE ©ELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TI"Ifs'{- ~!"I-{E ~~OWI`I GO~lEF~I~MENT nE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONS'i'I"1 UENGY, ANa 7"H.~T T~~IIa {SSUE BE 13E~OUGi-{T TO A VOTE OP REG1STEf~EIJ E~.ECTOI'ia pE~°ORE PFtUCEEC~IN~ VI!!TI-~ AhiY CIEVELOPNiENT OF THE AIE. CC7MMUi~[S PF~UPERTY. IiiNTE~ NRME IGN URE ~' ~}`+`~Tf~EET nUURES PIiD • ~ ~ I~Il1~fNG n~ES~J~ pffililiTEU NAME S1GNA Uli ~ SLSCET ~ ~..r~ ~. :~~~L~ I'IlINTEI] NAME S1GNA•IUf1E STCiEET AUf]RESS ~~ ~~ ~E Nn E ('CtIN u M f II~NE MAI!-13~C nUUI~E55 SI' n~TUIiE SI~REET n 17lZCSS , f'!lt7NE MAf[_ING nUUf~ESS ~QC!'tit I ~ 1„Ia~ ~`C r Pit1NTEU NnMC -!~ ,A ~,~, ~ ~ S-jfiEET 1IDS1liCSS ~c~a ~s ,~q _ ~1c~e m Ex ~± ----~----- !'E[Cl(~E ~ ~ '!r~ e 4 __ Mni[_1NG 11[)E1f~ESS -~~ ~_'__ ~~ _ ,335 \1~.: - , C'0 $_~.' 1 I?C'~t 1 PRiN~EU NRM~ ~ ! ~~ r~! C!~ NnM~ S! niU jw 1 ~/ . f'I~INTEU NnML SI I ~l)ft r / ' STREET nCli~l~[:SS f'C1UtdG Mn!!"I(~Ca A[]UClCSS S~IiCET ADURC:SS F'IIQNE 14~141LfNG AC7DE1CS5 S I E1- nUUliESS PIICINE MAILING AUUCI~SS UUCi>:SS I'Ii01~- Iii INt,~~ " TIE PEOPL,E,OF 11'Ail. ARE EN3'iT@,EC] TO A PI~B&,IC 1fDTE [~N THE i~A'T'f~ qF Tf-#f~ PARCEL. QF f.~A1ND iCi~(D~'UIV AS ~"I~iE VAiL C®M€1~1®NS-~TfiE f.AST i4ARG~ PARCEL. OF DEVEL,®F~ABL,E LAIND f~lrlRC9~ASI~D BY ~'fiE TOWN OF 11A#~ WlTf~f TAX DALI.ARS. T{J: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS 13E I'~ OItDAINE~~? I3Y 'I:iIB TOWN CCIINCIL 0~ TII~ 'l'OWt~ Ol' V11~[7.. TIIA'C WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, QUSINESS ~IWNERS, REGISTERf^ VOTERS, ANDfO'R RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWfi~ OF VAIL, AND HEREBY QPF'OSE THE COMMERCIAL IDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED T® AS THE VAIL COP~NI®NS WITI-! A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATI®N5 YC~U I•-IAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND ~'I-IE RECOMMENDATIONS OF TFIE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE C}F THIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITi-IIN THE TOWN ®F V.~1L. WE BELlE1/E {T IMPERATIVE °i"I-I~-T THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN® THAT T!-IIS ISSt9E BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE ~7f~ REGISTERF~D ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING ~lVITH ANY DEi/ELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. ~I~iN1~R NRME TUBE ~~~ ~~ C, o ~ ~ ~'~ e% Plia ~ Mal liuG A~lt3tiESS ~iS~JT M~ G~~~ ~~~. `SIG S BEET AtidRESS PlIDNE IUI IILG AdDl~l»SS i PRINTED NAME SI' TURE ~ STREET AD RESS PIIDNE MAiIIIVG ADDRESS ~. ~ ~ ~ Zl~r N ~--~a ~ pct ~`~i~ ~ ~z ~ z.~ . 5~.~._~. ~~~~~~~ I'F~INl~ED NAME S GN f~E ~ ~ -~~ ~ I'RINTE>3 NAME 51GNATIIRE Pf~INTEb NAME SIGNATURE pRINTEU MIME SIGNATUf~E PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~~~~ sTI~E~T AD(]R . ~3f ~H~IV~ ~ v~ C-~ l~ MAILi ~ ADC~R S !) i~~'-~ ~--- STF~EE~T Af][]f~ESS r ~~{[~~~ STREET AOD}iI:SS ~ PHONE MAIi.fNG ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS STREET' ADDRESS PPiOP~E MAILING ADDRESS ST(iEET ADDRESS PIIDNE MalE.IIUG ADI]}iESS ,U . • TIE PEOPI.i~ ®F 'lil~l~~. ~11tE EI~TITIrE~ ~'O A p~UDLIC 1lDTE [71111fLiE E,~TE OE TFiE PpIRCEL t)F 1,~1.111D ICN4~I~VN ~S TIDE '41'6~IL CD~~!®NS~-~'F~~ ~;1~ST' i.B~RGI~ F°f~IRC~1~ Q(E~~DEV}}EccLOPABLI~ LAND €~DRC1H~lSE® ~3Y TLtE Tt~1~N C1E l~,~llla VtillTi~i `f,AX DV~`Ai1.Vw TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCiP MCMBIrRS ]S 1's I'f` ORf3ALNG;I) lfY TIfL 'TOWK COUI~C:If. 0~' ~'ffE 'f'OF1N OF VAI.t~ 'f'E111'F WE, THE DI~JDERSIGNEA, ARE PROPERTY OVIFNEKS, E3tJ51NESS OWNERS, REGISTEREQ VOTERS, ANDfOR RESIi~FNT-S WITHIN THE TOWN OI"~ VAIL, AND HEREBY APPOSE THE COMIVBERCIAL UIw1/ELOPMI=NT CAF THE PARCEL vF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMIVIONS 1flfITH A Sl1PERMARICET. VILE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YoU HAVE ENTERED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THEE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK F~7RCE BE CONSIDEITED FOR THE FATE ELF THIS LAST RE1VlA1NING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF MAIL. WE BELIEI/E IT IMPERATIVE THAT T~-IE Tt~WN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTI'~UENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFOt~E F'R~OCEEDING WtTt~l ANY DEVELOPMENT' Ot" THE VAiL C~MMt7N5 PROPERTY. ~.-~ l ~-m-- tv, 1(~ t~.r-`t~ y PRINTED NAME . SIGNAT R1= STREET AIJDRESS P}~ONin MAILING ADQF~ESS ~1.A~? u ~ ~_~~.y ~.(S~. E ~ PI~lNTED NAME 51GNATURE STREET ADU}tESS PI10~}E MAILING AUDRE55 ~ ~ ('./-l~ ~ !I V"l f`~- 'f '1I,~ - '-~~~c~ :cam G.~ ~#~ F I ~~ ~~U1~ ~~ ~~/ PR1N £D NAME ` S TU~~~ ,/~ ET Aa0fiE5S /~~ ~~ TED NAME SIGl1~lTUl~~ - .. PRINTE~A i S }IiQ TUf~E~ ~ ~ ~~~ /~ ~l~-t- ~ ~( Y~ L.I,~vU /---~LitNfiC~--N~M E ~~f; _ /~ u STREET' ADDRESS PHCINE AILING AE)Qfi.ES5 ~ / ~~~~ ~~ PIIONE MAIL}NG AQ[}RESS ~75~C EET AEA}fi~SS ~~ /~ PIID~IE MAILING AbDRESS r,~ C1~~ ~~Z~t'~~Lt.t' ~• ~f ~~~a ~~"~ ~ ~~5 - /jcJ j! a2Q3Ifn I~Ct. ~~ ~a. STR1"T=7 ADDE~ESS PIIQNE ~~~~ I~ ~t~~N~~ru PfIINTEII NAME MAILING ADDRlwSS ~~-~ S16,t~ATUf~E STREET A[~d}iESS p}if7NE MAILING ADal3ESS -~~ r{ ~PRINTECI NAME SIGNA~fURE S['REET ADDRESS PIIpNE MAILING AI]gRE55 TIE REOP4E OF Ul~l~. ARE ENTITLE® T4 A PDI~LIC VO`T1~ TDI~1 TAE ~A'T~ 0~ TAE PfiRCEt, QIF LANID K~OVI1l~ AS T~~ 1tAlL ~OM~lltJfiiS~~'CHE ~.~IST 4.1~~?OE 6~AECEh OE D'EVE~.OpABLE LAND RU~RCF~ASED BY 'THE TOWN t~F ilAil, WITk~ TAX DO1.I.ARS. ' TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMUERS WE, TIME UNDERSIGNED, ARE F'ROPi~RTY OWNERS, sUStNESS OdAlNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, AND10R RESIDENTS W1~1'HIN THE TOWN C3F VAIL, AND HERE'QY t7PPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF T1-IE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU E~AVI~ ENTERED INTO 1NITH CITY MAR:~F`T EE HALTED AND TI-~ RECOIl~I~ENDA`I'I®N5 ®F THE 'rA5!~. F~O!~CE ~ CON5IDERED FOR T~'~E FATE OF ~`r115 LA5'I° RE1Vi~,";~iING LARGE PARCEE. OF LAND. WITHIN YHE TOWN OF~ -VA1L. ~'I' `: WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVE!~B~MENT RE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE QE gI~OUGt~4T ~'O A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING 11VIT'ki ANY QEVELOPIVIENT C)F THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRfNTEq NAME I ATU STREET AF~I3RESS, r I?F~[~NE~7p~ . MAlL11~G~[lCll~~.SS ~ PRINTEq NAM SiGNA ~ STREET AggRESS I'IiONE IVIAfLING AQDRESS~~~`"~~ PRINTE{] NAME SIE;NATUR '~~ ~ '^i'~FL! C 7F~4 A ` PRINT£f] NAME SIGNATURE PRINTElJ NAME SIGNATURE P{IIN~FEq NAME SIGNATURE PRINTEq NAMP SIGNATURE PRINTEq NAME SIGNATURE STREET Aggf~ES PIIQNE MAILING AggRl_SS , STREET AgURESS F'I•IONE MAILING r~U6RES5 STREET Aq[lRESS ~ PtfONE MAILIIi~G A[lQFi1=SS STREET AgbRESS , ~ PFIDi~lE MAiLi9VG Aq:~R~US STREET AggRESS PFIDNE MAILING AFII]RI*SS STREET AFIgRESS PRUNE MAILIIIIG AgE]RESS °~' ~y 7 THE PEOPLE OF 1~AIL ,ARE EN3'ITLED `~"~ A ~~3BLIC ~ImTE 0111 THE FATE ®F THE PARCEL Oli< LANp KNOWN ASS THE L~AIL COMMONS--T'~-E LAST t~ARCE BARGEE OF DE~IELOPABLE LAND PU~tCHASED BY THE T®~liftil (,~F 11A1L WITIi TAX DOLLARS. , , TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMf3E~ZS BE IT OktllAINEll BX TlIE 'FOWN COUNCIL (?F THE TOWN OF VAIL 7"HAT ~. WE, THE UNDER5IGNE®, ARE PP:O'ERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENT°S W1TH1N T4~E TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL I~EVIELOI~MENT OF TIE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS TI•IE VAIL COI~~~IS3NS WITi~ A SUPERIViARKET, WE PETITION THAT TI°iE NEt~OTIATI®NS '~®~J HAVE ENTERED INTO WITFI CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND 1`"FIE REC®M1111E~1®ATIONS OF THE TASK F®RCE BE Ct~NSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF TNJIS LAST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN ®F VAILe WE BELIEVE 1T IMPERATIVE THAT THE T®Wfil GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO 1TS CONSTITUENCY, ANB THA°i' THIS ISSUE BE BR®UGhIT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PP.OCI~.EDING WITH AIVY LEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTE E SI T E STREET AppRESS ~~ ~ ~-~ ~~ ~.e,w~s wt~~~~~ ~~ PRINTEp NAME PHONE MAILiNIa AppRESS SICIy~TU ~ STREET Ap[]RESS PHONE MAILING ADORES l / PRINTED NAME 5 GNATU~jE ~ BEET ApORESS PHONE _ MAILi'~G AI]pRESS ~~. X11. T~.J~~-.-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C. ~~ ~t t~n i3 ~~`~ ~ :/. t . h c~ ~!) h _ ~~J `~ ~ ~ ~, ~~ . ~,.. .. ~ ~ti 1 ~ - PRINTI:I? fUAI~AE GNATURE _!l .. (/ PRff1fTED VAMP .T '~FtE . - ~~" STREET AD ESS PHONE f~~AILING AppRESS f~ 3 ~? ~ • ~~.e.a~ ~ ~ x.17 ~! -v yt ~ '~~a n+ ~_ ST~F".ET DDDLSS PHONl= MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ ~~~ STREET ADDRESS -jPH~NE ,~1~ ~Pf4[I~`'l6 ~ RINTEp NAME S ~N TU4 ~ STREET ~QpR~S~ PHO1~E ~ ' ~., i IN •Ep NAME MA NG ADDRESS t~, ~ 3~3( ~~~~~ M LING ADDRESS _ • `{f~ ,J ~ ~ ~7t~'17 ~~ f ~ ljr.~~ G AT~19E REST. Clfl SS ~'.HO E MAILING AI31)~i SS ~~l ~ ~ C ~ r~~ ~C~S~~.. CJ U wE ~ETiT~®~ THAT SHE r~E~~°ri~Tl~~~ ~®u ~~~~E ~NT~~E~ INTO wiT'H ciTY MARKET BE ~iALTE® AN® T~dE R~CO~I~N~A~°IONS OF THE TASK FARCE BE CONSBGEREi] FOR TIRE FA~'E .®F Ti-19S L~S`3' REM.AiiViNG LARGE PAR~El. OF LAND wiTNiN THE TO1f~N OF V~aiL• wE BELIEVE iT iiiflPERATiVE °~~~~R~ THE ~~ OWN GOVERNMENT BE RESi~®NSIIiE TO ITS CONSTiTUEi~CY, ~6~~ THAT '~'HiS RSS~JE BE BRC?I~C~HT TO A V~}TE ®i= REGiSTERE® ELECT®RS BEF~~.E PFtOCEEBii~G 'IIUiTH ANY ®EVELOPi1~ENT OF THE VAtL COiM1iM®NS PROB~E~TY. ~~N~~ ~X, iaRINTED NAME S1GNA~ STREET At7DRESS PRINTED NAME PHE}NE I~AILiNG ADDRESS `~~,~r~~ ~~~ SI ATl1RE '/~ ~r~ S BEET ADDRESS PHONE I~AAILING ADDRESS ~i1 % ~'~ ~~~~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PRINTED NAME sleNa-TURE sTI~EE~ AoaaESs PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET AD6]RESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PHONE PHONE • l~l~alu~ Pl•gNE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS MAILIrhiP ADt1RESS MAILING ADUI~ESS I~IAILING ADDRESS PRINTEQ NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS -~.. THE pEDRE.E ~fi liAll. ARC E1Vl~'1'~'~.EL~ T'O ~ ~~~L1C VpT~ ONl T'N~ SATE p~ '~~~~ PA~tCEI, ®F LAND ~1~OVlt~ AS ~~~ V{~~I'~ ~~~t'~N'S°~T~~ 1.I~S'~ ~.ARCE ~ARGi~! Olw C~E~I~~DPABLE #.ANU P'B~itC1iA5E® ~Y 7°Hi~ T~WI~ OI" NAIL ~~~ 7'1~X DOE.E.I~itS. ' TO: V1111_ TbWN COUfyCIL MEIr~f3EIZS WE, THE tINDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINImmSS C1V~NEFtS, Iii=GISTERED V(]TERS, ANDIOR REST®ENi.S WITHIN ThiE ~'C~WS~I OF NAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE CO11111VIERCIAL DEVEL®PNIENT qF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS Tl lE 'NAIL CC3MMONS 11111TH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION TH/~T ThIE NEGO'TIRTIONS Y®U HAVE ENTERED IMTq WITH CITY MAR;~ET E'E HALTED AND TI-~ RECt~MI-~ENIITATIONS Or THE 'fii5'~. 1=~gRC'E ~ CONSIDERED FOR T~~E FATE qF °T~~IIS t.AS'I" REM !yIN~°~, LARGE PARCEL. OF LAND, Wl~'HIN YHE TOWN OF' NAIL. 1NE RELIEVE tT IMPERATIVE THAT .hI~E '1'C3WN G4JVE~`~N~dIENT BE RI~SPgNS1VE TC1 ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT TI-415 ISSI~E DE ~R~I~GHT Tq A VOTE qF REGI5TERED ELECTO4~S BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELC~PMEhIT qF ITHE V IL COMMONS PROPERTY. pfiINTED NAME Sf ATU S EET A ~ESS PFIO~fE ~ MAILING ADDRESS _ . P~{ M c ~~- ~. ~~ ~ pRIN~T AM STFZEET A[]DRESS P140NE MAILING ADDTiESS .---- PRlNTE NAME SIG AT ;TREE~T Al]DR>SS !=DONE MAIING ADDRESS -~' ~ . PRtNTI:fa NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDf~f`S5 pl{ONE MAILING ADDRESS pRIEdTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET AgdRESS PRfNTEU NAME SIGNATURE ~ STREET AC~[lfiGSS pRINTEO NAME SIGNAL-t1gE STREET AE~DRE55 r PF~ONE MlltE.tNG allnRESs PU~?h!E M111L41Vr A~)Oh~Sc pFIgNE . MAILING ADDRESS pRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS THE PEQP~.E aF ~A1L ARE 1~NT~T~.~aa °~~ A a~QBL~C iIrQTE AN Tt$~ FA1"B QF THE PRaCEh flF ~.AMQ K~lC1VI~~ AS T~~ 11A~6. GC~MMG~ISri-TME !AS's LAR~~ a~ARCEa, ot~ I~Errl~~.oPUB~.I~ a.~~~ ~uRCI~AS~~ ~Y T~~ ~~W~ ~~ VAIa. W~TFa r~x QUt,i,ARS. TO: V111L TOWN COUNCIL 1v'IEMBERS WE, THE UNDER SIGNED, ARE PRC71''ERTY OWNERS, R1151NE55 ®WNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS WiTH1N THE TOVIlN OF VAIL, AND HEREE3Y OPPOSE THE C®MNiERCIAL pEVELOPMENT ®F THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITI~ A SUPEI~IVIARKET. WE PETITION T~~IA.T THE NEGOTIATI®NS YOU HAVE ENTERED INT® VtFITN CITY ~IA:~.~ET E~E HALTED AND TI-~ RECOMI~ig~'NDATI®NS O~ THE 'fAS'.~. FOR:~E ~ CONSIDER~D_ FOR T~'E FATE OF ~'i=115 LAST' REMI':~iING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND. WITHIN THE TOWN OF' VA!!~. 11VE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE TI~{AT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT QE RESPONSIVI± TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AN~1 ThIAT THIS ISSUE BE BOUGHT TO A MOTE OF REGISTERED ELEC'EORS BEF®RE PROCEEDING WI~'I-I ANY QEVELOPMEI~IT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. f~rou s (\J`G~Lf..S~ PRIN~TEU~E SIGNATUfiE STREET ADDRESS PHONE ,MAILING ADDRESS PR~1TEd NAME PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ~' ~ ~ = STREET ADDRESS PI{ONE NfA1LING ADDRESS _ 2.1~(~-I ~~u.l~.~~)a( _.~.-( %C,-'G~rf_~`-"SCE STREET A~gR1:5S ' ~j~ HU~ MAILING ~~ S I~7~ U~~ iU~ r ~ Arn c c. ~, ~ f ~ ~ ~~. PRINl'ED NAME SIG TORE ST}iEET ADDRESS ~ PHONE MAILING AflD#iESS ,,~ / p PRINTED NAME SIp1~lA~T #iE~- STREET ADDfiI:SS ~ ~Z~ Pff(~NE MAPtiIVG aDD17ESS ~- ~ N~~ ~.~ be f ~ PRINT. NAME SI ~URi; ~ STREET AQI~RESS ~ ~. ~ PHCi~E MAIL1111G AD!]REuS PRINTED NAME SiGNATIIRE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAII_fNG FADflRESS .~ r i'RlNTED NAME 5lGNATIiRE S~I REET ADDRESS PHONE INAILII~G ADDRESS T~iE PEOPd.E OF Va41L ARE Et~TITI.El7 TO A P~,JB1,iC'IIQITE QNI THE FATE OF THI± PARCEI, 0~ I~A111C} ~CNOVt~N AS THE VA~1~, COMIVIONS--'THE LAST ~,I~IR~E P'RRC~~, ~~~ al; I]E~tELDI~AI~f~E I~AIU® pU1~~1-~InlSED I~~ T~I~ TOWS O~ 11AI1~ WIY~! TAB DIaLLARS. "~ TC]: VAII TOWN COUNCIL MEMi3ERS ~ ~~„~„{J ]3L IT O[tl)AINCD IiY 'li[L ']:OWN COUNCII, OF 'I'ii]: 'IOt~N Ole VIM, 'I'IiAi WE, TµE UNDERSIGNEp, ARE PROPERTY C~Ii1lNERS, DLDSINESS OWNERS, ~~ ~ { REGISTERED VGTERS, AND10R. RESIDENTS WITHIP~ THE TOWN OF VAIL, ANC f-tERt"6Y OPPOSE THE COMIII~ERCIAL gEVELOPMENT CJF THE PARCEL 01= LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAfI.. COfVIMONS WITH A SUpERl1~~~'~TtKfwT. VILE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS Y~7U HAVE ENTERED fNTt? WITf# CITY MARKET BE HALTED ANIi? THE RECOMMENCJATfONS Of~ THE TAS~t Ff]I~CE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF TI-IIS L~a5T REf~AINfNG LARGE PARCEL 01= LAND WtTIiIN THE T®WN OF ~OAiIw. WE BELIEVE fT ffVfPERATIVE THAT THE T(3V1lN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO fTS GONSTITUENCY, ANf~ THAT TE-~rS ISSUE BE BROUt~F-IT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE E'RC~(~EEDINO WITH Ai~Y gEVEL()PMENT 01= THE VAIL COIVIMONS PROPERTY- ~'i r~_ ~,~e'1v~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET A[tdRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS C`Y _ ~.... X74 ec~)p~ R.fl :~,i 7~-I~_~~! ~ / s2~ .~~~~'1, ~ ]Co PR~I QED NA E ~ C ~.c~,- L~~~S~~"> S GNA URA, STREET ADD CSS FI~UNE~j ,MAILING ADDRESS </ PI1lNTED NAME S4GNA -- STREET ADDRESS P1iD E !LING AD HESS PRI NAME . N . UR STREET AUU1{E. S pIIDNE MAILING 11DQRESS i 11 ~tlas"'~" ~T D NAM ~~-~ 51GI~i1~UE11= STREET AtiDRESS ~ .- I'IiONE MAILING ADDRESS PfiINTED NAME 51GIVATUfiE STREET ADDRESS ~ PiIIaNE MAILING A17URESS PIfiINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREE~i~ AaURESS PIIQNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADORE.SS f i10NE MAILING ADL]RESS `A'WE PEOPI.ir ®1=ll~ii~, ARE E~1TITi.~p T'O iA i~~E3LiC `~®T~ ON TAE ~'~TE ®~ T~ PARCE~,_Qla i,~lN® iCNDWIV ~!5 TI-lf~. ~I~ii, G4~MM®~Ma--TI~iE LAST L~i~~~ PI~l~GE~. OF DEVEt.C~PPiBLE LAI~i~S P"tlRGiiASi"D II~Y TiiE T't~Wl-I DF V~lii, 'WIY1N T~~ pOi.LAR, To: vnll_ TowN coulvcl~ t~f=M~>=xs 13L I'1' UttllAl.Nkst) k3Y '1'ktt; "1'OWt3 COUt+~CIL 01~ TIIF `T'OWN 0~" VA11~ 7'Etri'1' WE, THE tTNDERSIGNEa, ARE PROPERTY OaP'~hlERa, f~I.JSII~IESS O1tVNERS, RFGISTEI~ED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS 1(VITI-IIN THE T®WN OF VAIL, AND i-lEREBY OPPOSE THE C®MMERCIAL DEVELOPfVIENT OF TttE PARCEL O1; LAND REFERRED T[7 AS THE VAIL COMI'ONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. WE PETITION THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO 1AlIT4l CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE REC~~IMENOATIONS ®F THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE OF TFII~ LAST REMAINfNG Ll-~.RGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE 17 IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNIVIENT L3E RESPONSIVE TO 1T5 CONSTITUENCY, AN® T}-IAT TI~~fS ISSUE E3E aROUGIiT ~~O A VOTE GF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE F'f~LOCEf=DIP•[G WITH ANY L?E11EL6,~PittIENT OF THE VAIL COMIVION5 PROPERTY. C ~c ~~~~~ PRINTER NAME =~ S~6NATI~ , , '`~ STREET A[}DRESS I'HG~IE MAILING !IUDI}ESS E~l`]~s~~y ~ac`~x ~~~~. V~11~ ~~ Pfi~NT~a NAME ~NATUIi -~ l 6~IU ~~~k,,.~~.r 5 / / ~ ~ /, ~Yti ______._.___~~.~ PRINTED NAME SIG AT~II~~ r---- ~:~ o~ S~ ~ m t~ f'[iiNTED ~ ' 7 `\ S NATIJR - ~~ ~~ ' ~ I STRF,FT AUC~RESS L. c~ ~~ STREET ADUfiESS 1~ G/~1 ~r, iJc.~ ~lc~, /ti~E3 (~~~ Cc ~ ~ b l PIIONr MAILING AI7IJRESS } ~ ~ gae,s3 PfiUNE MAILING AUE}RE55 STREET AfJUf3ESS f!}OP~E ~ MAILING AI7I)RESS CT r~~c ~~5~~~~. ~d6-~5a tc.4 f~~x ~3~3 ~v~.~ ~ ... 1G ] ~ STREET IIliUl~C55 ~ {'IIEJNE ILINEY ADI]RESS ~ ~?~~+a ~~ ~ ~ yap, ~~e~~as I~~ ~~s g :.Z ~1~1 ~3~~ I ~~,j~~'~~c~ 1.. ~T~~~ ,4,'~~~<r:d ~ ~.C~ Ir'RIN~IEI7 NAME P, r SIGNATIIIiE ~'~.~'oS~J7~ Afu~ll~ ~~$~.~~3 ~~ ~~Ji~r~~_ t~~.ccc~~~'S ~ .~ ~~~! PRINTED 'M Sl.' - ~ ~~~~. I~ET AUUR~~~ f F'IfONE AILING AGUE}ESS SC C.A.Vt~Y:~~ r ,~ _~,~;~ PRINTED NAME SIG UIIE ~ STREET AUI}fiFSS I'IIUI E MAILING Ad[]iZESS .~ ~ C(k111~"}r10 oc~ [ v S`fUn~f'.ar t ~~~~-(~,C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ,~~~ ,, ,~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ___.~ THE pEO~LE qF VAIL t~~E E~T~Ti.ED ~'C~ ~ F~~L~~ TE ®~Y TRH F~T~ ~F T~~ ~At~CEL ~]F L~~t® ~NDI~ ~S TAE ~A1L ~[~~®[~S~-`C~iE '~5°~ ~~R~~ ~~~CEL i~F lt$EVEL®FEIBLE L~NI~ 1~~1R~H1~5ED ICY THE T~1Af 1N ~F V~1L :IfldlWt'F~ T~~( DQL~.ARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL PvIEtNf3EI~S WE, TFiE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY O~~IERS, DUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED 110~'ERS, ANf~POR REStI~Et~`~ WITHIN °T`i-IE 'I°®WN OF 1lAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COI~IMERCIAI_ DEVELOPMENT OI+ THE PAPtCEL t~F LAND REI"ERRED T® AS THE 1/All~ CO~~MONS WITI•~ A SUI'EFtMAC~ICET. WE PETITICaN THAT 'TNE NEGOTIATIONS 'YOU HATE ENTPRED INTO WITH CITY ~'IA4,~E~' EE HALTED AND TI-~ RECOME~fEN[7A~'IONS OI" THE 'I"ASR~- PORCE 3~ CONSIDERED FC31~ TE'E FATE OI" T°~IIS IsAS~E ITEM! °;~IING LI4RGC PARCEL OF LAND.INITHIN ~'HE TOWN OI^~•VAIL. WE BEI.IEIlE IT IIIIlPERATIVF THAT THE TOIAf'N G041E!~NI'~ENT ~E F~ESPONSI~JE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, ANB THAT THIS 9SSUE ~E ~4~OUGHT Tt3 A ~fGT~ 4F REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE F'R.~CEERII~IG WITH ANY DE16EL,OPME~IT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. .~: -i PRINTEp NAME ! 3!G T STREET AI]D#iC~~" PI~DNE MAILINU ADDRESS • n PHINTE~ NAME S16 ~UR ~ ~~~EE~D~ ~,~ PfiOd~lE ~ MAf'LING AgDHf~S Y7~-7T~Z.. >/1 c ~ If2-t--~ v ' ~~rc~~~. l~~dw~ n~INTEn NAME . SIGN TURF STtiEET Af]pR SS fNONE fVIAILING Agl)FtESS PRINTED NAME SkGNATUfiE . STREET Al]DRESS PRUNE r MAIEIN6 ADDRfWSS pRINTEl3 NAME slaNaTUI~E sTaEEr Ad)gIiI:SS Pltadud: dNAILdtVG AggRESS PfilNi-Eq ~AM~ SIGNA~€.l1f~E~ ~ .~ . ~:. '~:.! ~. PfiINTl:p NAME SIGNATIJRE PfiINTEp NAME SIGNATUfiE _''~S'CfiEd=1`~At~DI~PSS_ - _-~ ,` . .. STfiEET AIJDftf:SS STREET ADDRESS ..-i~flgi~~.: , . `~ ... ~;MAfLifVG ADDRESS .. I'IiUNE MAll,f~1G ADDRESS PkInNE MA11-1iVG AdpIiESS ~~ TO: VAfL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ~- ~ -• WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, SUSfNESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL LIMITS, HOWEVER, YV'ITHIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARGEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, l.E., ANOTI-!ER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT 1N THE REST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY N~GA~NELY ; FFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. PRINTED NAME SIGNAT~1$E'~ STREET AQDI3ESS_ PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS r Y PRINTED NAME S G ATU E STREET ADpI~ESS ~ - l~ ~. ~'~~ . ua ET s~ ~l~~n~ ~ , ~~ ~/v PRINTED NAME SI NATURE ~ ~j ~ S-GREET ADDRESS /, , ~RiNTEO NAME ~~ ~~fURE STREE-f ADORESS ~~~ ~ ~_~~ PRINTEp NAME SIGN U E ~ STREET ADDRESS -~i. ., _.. ~` ,.- ~, -~Ic~t ' ~~y~~~~ PRINTED NAME PHONE MAILING Abf)RESS PHDNE MAaLING ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING AppfIESS I~li,1~-ur~~ PHDIIIE MAILING ADDRESS lGN TUBE _ ST ET ADDRESS P y~e~-~-t ~ ~l MAILING ADDI~SS~~ ~`., ~ ~ ~~ PRINTEp NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRIN1'Ep NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS ~PRiN•fED NAME SIGI'JATURE STF~EET ADDRESS PHDNE MAI~_ING ADDRESS ~~ -~ ~ ~~ TO: V/11L TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL • LIMITS, HOWEVER, W#THIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREE3Y OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, LE., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY NEGATIVELY~FFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. PRINTED NAME SIGN TURE ~ STREET A~DCD~RE)SS ~ ,~ f PHr~ONE MAILING /ADDRESS ..G ~7 ~ ~i?.-vt.~~//~a s 1 ~ ~~ `t) k/~.r ~ "~~i ~n q {1L1J 7 r~~5 ~ ~r~/ n ~~'' F/,~1 ~ ;~ ~ ~j PRINTED NAME ATURE STREET DDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~.,.._ F~ o r~ ~ c.. ~~1R ~- rluc PRINTED NAME SIG TURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS d,,~, t~(umtcc}~ c~Sil BAG {~~P~C2 ~~(~°~c)~Co pa. ~c~~~~ ~J.~15 Un~~.lcv ~ ~c~5~ PRINTED NA SIGMA R ~ S'CREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS l } PR~I"fE jNAME ~ /~~~ C['J SIB tfR ~ ~ S~R~ET ADC{iESS PHDl11E ::~AILING~I~~RESS ~/ PRINTED NAME SIGNATUP~~.. J `~ ='STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS r ~ ~ - L_ „r ~ - ~- PRINTED NAME Si1~11ATURE STREET~DDRESS ~ PHDNE PRIM,-ED' 1! E SIGNATU ~- :,_.~, PRIN~FED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE MAILING ADDRESS S7 REET ADDRESS ~ _ PHDNE C~2~ t! v~l~h c~ t..~ ~~~-Gv~ ~c STREET ADDRESS PHDNE STREET ADDRESS PI~DNE M~~E~ING ADDjjfjyESS ~I1UN, GG S~CZ(J MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS ~. ~i; i ~~ ,' '~ ,` ,~~~ `' f::~ ~ d,~~,t ... C~J'~ ~'~ ~~~N L7j TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL • LIMITS, HOWEVER, WITHIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARF~ET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, LE., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. -'fir!' ~~_ i/fl i~r PRINTED NAME SIG TURF ,"l7 STREET ADDRESS ~ PHONE . MAILING ADDRESS ~~~,~a 1 71 / ~~ ~ / Ile: ~~lc_- P N ED NAME S1G TUBE ~~~ STREET ADD~SS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS .1~ir/z~>, CL ~(~._ .~ c. ~IfL-~ ~s "3-~3v, ~r/vR1. ~5~~-1~~~:~ ~~~~~!~7~~-~-~ /~~c~nJ ~j''' /~L.,~~ 1~~~/~~i ~rCC c ~ PRINTED NAME SIGNAT~I.fAE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~i ~~5~, ~it~r~ ~ u~,~ PRINTED NA~JI1= SI fVATUR STREET ADDRESS PHONE -r~~-~-~ ao33 c~C c~4~. ~~-3~ PRINTED NAME SI NATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE PRINTED NAME SIG TEJ E STREET ADDRESS ~~~ /G~ f~'I ~/~CtJ~c~r'c PRINKED NAME MAILING ADDRESS ~~~i~ ~~i ~31~ ~- o~. MAILING ADDRESS PHONE MAILfN ADDRESS SIG ATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAlLIN ADDRESS ~ FlJCt 3 r ~y~~~O.~~r- . _ ._.._ PRINTED NAME SIG~~~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ,~ ~,~U CPr~~n ~~ dG ~ PR1N"fED NAME SI TUR STREET ADDRE . ~ _ - ~ ~]~~ ~ ~-k.f w f L Ili G~ L~ C~ r' l ~j -P_~ PRINTEI] NAME SIG TUBE ~~~-~'a ~~~ILP~ d PHDNE M NG DDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDR S ~j6 3~ ,, 1 C.~ v ~. ~'~~ ~ G~i.~i~ ~~ TO: V/11L TOWN COUNCIL MEMBEKS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE: TOWN OF VAIL . LIMITS, HOWEVER, WITHIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREE~Y OPPOSE THE CDMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VA1L COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, LE., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY EGATlVELY AFFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. ~. PRINTS AME SIG ATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE a MAfLfNG ADDRES,~ ~~,, ~ I~l'L,s~-,r--~v~..v-~ , 4~.' `7'12C,.1.:~'~Nt.~~ Crt~ C~SZ. r~ ~ c~~ ~1^~ v ~ (-~ ~' / ~ ~ ~ ~' /fir .PRINKED NAME S!G ATU STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~~iT~cr 1.70 ~~i~trol~trs ~IrC {~ `~.~~,~~~ 5' ~7 S' ~~~j X I ~7~ ~ti,~~tLVZ~. ~ c I!'~,.~~~ PRINKED NAME SIGH;'~ RE ~~ STREET ADDRE55 PHONE ~ ~1~5~ ~ ~d~~~ ~~~r ~ s ~~~ ~I~3 L MAILING ADDRESS Id~~ ~ Cv ~ fE ~ +~' PRfNTF~1 NAME SIB TUBE ST ET ADDRES H NE MA{LING DRESS i _' PR~N~E~ N M E SIGNAL / ~ ~,~,~.~ , / sTREET ~q~~ sS ~~ PHONE ~ !7l ~ ~ PING ADD ~~ ~~G~~r ~~~.~~ ~~~lL ~ ~~~~~ PRINTED NAME ~ ~~7~?)~"~~~c~s~~r URE .' STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS f_ ~~' ' . ~r~ ~rnl ~ ~~4t~ C'e f~r9~ ~"~r'~f~ ~'- ~ -f~~c~,9.,2~ 3:.~ (I~~ ~. / ~ ~ L~.fJ i C.IJ. L ~. PRINTED NA'~IE , SIGNI~Tf,~~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~~ , ._~ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNI; MAILING ADDRESS PRiN~I-ED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS I HDNE MAILING ADDRESS • pRIN~fED NAME S1GNA~fURE STREET ADDRESS PHG~JE MAILING ADDRESS OUT v~I~" `~-a w' A.~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEM8ER5 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL LIMITS, HOWEVER, WITHIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, I.E., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE E3EST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY ~GATIVELY AFFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFEGT US. PRINTED NAME GNATURE ~ STR T Ap RESS PHONE MA NG, DpRESS .y h ~~ ~7 ~-~ U~ ~ ~D`t ~' ~ ~ w or l ~ ~ ~~7 ~ PRIN~CED NAM~~ ~,~ ~ l~,„jJ SIG T~l.UE "°°~~TREET ADDRESS ,~ PHONE MA,I~ING DRESS ~. , PRINTED NAME 51GNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING AppRE55 PRIN~~ED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PI~IONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRIN~fED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS ~ PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNA~FURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS ~, , .~-~~~ TO; VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OE VAIL • LIMITS, HOWEVER, WITI~~iIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, l.E., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY NEGATIVELY A~ECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. PRINTED NAME SIGN~~'URE /~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS [[ --~- ~" Obi ~ ~7z~~:- a,~lD ~G `~4~9 c~r.~r,~ ~i> ~ i ~ ~`~~ ~~~~ / ~? ' ) ~~ u~ t_ PRINKED NAME ~` SI ` TUNE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRE55 ~j~ ~~vC'. LP~~r PRiPJTED NAME , S NAf~U~RE ~t J STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS p ~11~'f,f., l . 1~-Q, I/tJ 71 r~ I~~f'r. ~ ~'~,>~~[.~ (1.~1,c, ~,~ ~ % ~l' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~. ~~~`. s ~l ~ r r' c`~1 i.til G~ ;/ G ~' 1 }~ ~ r ~. ~ ~ i, 1(~LQ 1 ~ ~ ~L.~ PRINTED NAME ~ a.-~ S NATURE STREET ADDRESS 4i ~~~~PH~N~ ~ }MAILING ADDRESS ~~ ~ ~. Q ~~ 1~ ~ ~/ ~'r~ ~v~ ~ C~`a ~., t:~~ ~~- ~"~ ~, {~~ r~ I C.; ~~ P~(~1.,~,fr~-> > ~-. ~ri:t.~,.~t.~; ~~v PRINTED NAME SIaaGNATURE / STREET ADDRESS /~~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ /~,1:/.~( /G'"L~~~~/~1~4, t7/IC~GC~ Cr~G%/~I~~ ~~/'16~c.c~ ~1G<~~C.%C~~. ~v~~~i.~~'~/ ~.~'''~' ~lc~:~-- ~f`G,`~ f~__1 _~~ ` RfN~ED.,Nn SIGNAT[~R TREET ADDLE PH ~: MAILIN ADORES ~ ~ - ~~ - /~~1rLlP PRINT_Ep-rV"AME ~SIu~V~_ ~ STREET ADDRESS PHONE -- r1P ~ _ 1_ . \c p ~Q =rilNl D DAME S GI~sT'~RE STREET ADDRESS C ~att~ C:~~ 131 ~Mo~-~ n ~-- ~~~c~ ~~~~;~ -~ PRINTE A E 51G v ~~~ ~~~REET~AD~~~ ~ ~ r ~ f/ N~J NAME y GNATU E STREET ADDRESS ~~ ~`~/3,~~/172~s", M~,ILING ADDRESS PHONE M DING ADDRESS PHONE MAILf ~ ADDRE~S.._, ~~ ~1~~C~ ~~ ~oZ PHONE MAILING ,ADDRESS ~~~-urn ~` ~ ~- (~~-i. s } (~ V T ~7 ~` ~ ~} e~I ~-~ TO: V/-11L TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL LIMITS, HOWEVER, WITHIN EAGLE COUNTY, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF TI-~E PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET. DUPLICATING SERVICES, I.E., ANOTHER SUPERMARKET, IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL COMMUNITIES CONCERNED. THEREFORE, WHAT MAY NE ATIVEt.Y AFFECT VAIL, MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT US. p.~i~ C~-1- N ~~ ~;~ QED N E ' SIB E STR,E~T ADDRESS PHONE MA~NG ADDRESS Z - ~ i Lo S~' ,!~~a~ra~ %~tt ~~r n PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~'1 /~?~ S'~ ~~ ~ old 6.~- . PRINTED NAME ' ~1G~N~~~,TUR STREET ADDRESS _~~~PIi NE PRINTED NAME ~I NATURE STREET ADDRESS PH01'uE ~ C~ ~-~ PLC ~' ~ rr ~ ` PRINTED NuME . , _) MAILING ADDRESS J ,~1~4'S MAILING ADDRESS' MA;LIiVG ADDRESS SIf;~V~rTURE ~/~ STREE~i ADDF~ESS ~. PFs~DNF I1.fNG ADDRESS ~ -~h PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PIiDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED IUAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PHDNE ~ MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME 31GNATURE STREET ADt~RESS PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNA'fI,RE STREET ADDRESu PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ "t' ~~~-~ ~~.. THE QI~OI~~.~ o~ ~~~~. ~~E-~~~ ~ w ~ ~.~~ I~c~ ~ ~u~~.~~ ~~T~ uN TRH fRR`t°fM OF ~~~ PARCEL t~F 4RNp KNG1fl1<~ ~S T~i~ ~R6~, COM~UIflNS--THE ~.~laT LRRCE PP-RCEL OF ®E1~El.0AR@LE LRNi] PUR~CH~ISED f~Y THE TO"Wi~ OF VAIL, W1TF1 TAM "f O: V~IIL TOWN COUNCIL MtEMC3ERS WE, THE UNDERSfGNEU, ARE f'ROI~ERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VCITERS, ANI]!OR RESIDENTS WITHIN "~ I-IE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREHY UPPI3SE THE Ct3iltiMERC(/~1~ [~EVELOf7MENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO A5 Ti-iE VAII, GOI~iMONS WITII A SUPERMARi~.ET. WE PET1TlON ThfA.T THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO WIT' ! CITY ~tIAR.~ET E'E HALTED AND THE RECOMC~ENDATkONS OF THE `t'AS!~. FORCE Q CONS1DERfrD FOR T~a~E FATE OF `~"r=li LA.S`f REM' ";wINC Iw.ARGE PARCC~L OF F.AND. WITHIN SHE TOWN OF VAIL. VILE BELIEVE IT IN9f'ERATIVE Tfr1AT THf~ TOWN GOVERNMENT F31 RESI~ONSIVE TO ITS CONSTlTUENGY, AND THAT TI-II5 BSSUE RE ~RDUGHT ~'0 A '4~OTE OF REGiSTEFtE1 ELECTORS REFE3RE PROCEEDING WITH ANY REVELOI'I~#ENT OF Tt-IE VAIL COMMI?NS PRO6~ERTY. ~~~ ;r~r~l~x,~~;~_ ~ ~-~ PIiINTE NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS (, PRONE . MAILING ADDRESS] fI }i ~nr?.~L~ t:l.~f'j ~{ ~~ ~~~ ~r_'f~ ~~~_-. ~ ~ r' ,. ''~I / ~~ l (/f ~r,~ C_~f~a i PRINKED NAMk: SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PIIUNE MAILING ACJEIRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET AI)DI~ESS .PkIQ~fE MAILING ADDRESS ~ - - - PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PIkONE MAILING ADDRESS PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET AfIdRESS PHONE M1IlLiNG AUgRE55 I'RINTEt] NAME SIGNATURE ~ STREET AQDRFSS PIIt?i~E MAILING AplnEcc PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS PF{ONE MAli.Ii~JG ADDRESS ~, J PRINTED NAME SiGNATUkiE STREET AD~fiESS PRONE MAILING AC]I7CiESS C~ s ` ~~ ~ ~ r ~-f- THE PEOPLE OF VAIL ARE ENTITLED TO A PUBLIC VOTE ON THE FATE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS THE VAIL COMM®NS-THE LAST LARGE PARCEL OF DEVELOPABLE LAND PURCHASED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH TAX DOLLARS. TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDlOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND HEREBY OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO AS THE VAIL COMMONS WITH A SUPERMARKET, WE PETITtON THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YOU HAVE ENTr*RED INTO WITH CITY MARKET BE HALTED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FATE QF THIS LE`iST REMAINING LARGE PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WE BELIEVE IT IMPERATIVE THAT THE TOWN GOVERNMENT BE RESPONSIVE TO ITS CONSTITUENCY, AND THAT THIS ISSUE BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF REGISTERED ELECTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY. PRINTED NAME ~ IGN T RE ~~ _ STREET ADDRESS f PI~NTED NAME ATURE r, STREET ADDRESS ~_ PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS STREET AI3DRESS STREET RDDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PHONE M ILfNG ADDRESS '~ PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~ /~~ f5~ ,~~ 5~"Yif PHONE PHONE PHONE PHONE PHONE PHDNE MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRE55 MAILING ADDRE55 MAILING ADDRESS THE FE~Pl.E QE 11~11~. d1~tE E~9TiTI"E~ ~`~ J~~ PVRt,#C ~DTE Q~ 'Tt~E E~TE f>~~ '~#-# ~ARCEI. UIF ~A~D iiNOW@I# CIS ~'~#!~ ~f~#~. CDMM~~S-wT#~#I~ ~.A~~' i~J~-1~~E ~'A#tCl~~ OE t]EVELCfI~~R~.l~ LA'I~lil f~1.11RCk~ASEC~ RY TIE T~i!!~[+# DF ~lA!#~ WI'f~# TAB DUI.#.J~RS. . TU: V~11L TUWi~J COUNCIL MEMBERS WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, A'RE PROPERTY OV1I'NERS, BUSINESS OWNERS, REGISTERED VOTERS, ANDIOR RE5IDEN~TS WITHIN THE: TOWN aF VAIL., AND HEREBY OPPOSE T}-IE COMMERCIAL UEIIELOPL~ENT ©I~ TF-iE PARCEL OF LAND REFERRED TO A5 TI-iE VAIL COMMONS WI-I"fi A SDPERJ~ARICET. 1NE PETITION T~fAT THE NEGOTIATIONS YC}l.l t-fAVLw ENTE¢~ED LNTO ilVITH CITY MAR~~FT E'E N~1L~'ED AND TI-~E RECOM~r~ENF7AT10NS OF TFILw '1"AS".~. FORCE DE CONSIDERED F=OR TE'E FATE OF ~'r-IIS LAS~i~ REM' WING LARGE PARCEL GF LAND. WI1CHiN THE TOWN OF' VAIL. 1~UE ~3EL{EVE tT IMPERATIVE THAT THE Tt~WN GfJVERNMEI~~T DE RESPCa!NStVL~ TD ITS C4NSTI'fIJENCY, AND THAT TFiiS ISSUE RE ~ROI.IGHT TO A '~OTF OF REGISTERED ELECTORS HEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ANY QEVELOPMEi~T OI~ THE VAIL CCIIVIMONS PROL'ERTX. Ri~INTED NAME SlGN,I~TU>'IE ~7 ' ,STREE ADD~iES5 ~ ~~ ~~ ' jr ~. -~ PRINTED E ~. PEIQI~E MAILING ADDRESS , , '7 SIGfJA1fJIlE STIiLk:T AI1DfiESS f Hf~D}NE I'IJ1iVTEl7 NAME SIGNATURE STFJEET ADDRESS PRINTED NAMk SIGNATUi~E STREET ADDRESS FRIf~TED NAME 54GIVA~Uf~E Srrzl~Irr ADDRESS f'RINTEI] NAME SIGNATURE ~ Srf3EIMT AaDf~F55 PRIN~~En taAMl; SIGNATURE STfJEET ADDRESS #'i-Igt~JE PIIJNE P~IaNE PIIDr~r» FIIQNE ~,/ ~'~.~ MAILlI~1f~ ~1UClFiI:SS ~-/C? vim. ~c'.7 MAII_iNG ADpIiESS MAILING ADDRESS MAILING AIJaI~CSS MAILINr AIaD!?EuS MAILING AI)DR£SS PRLNTED NAME SlGNATUIIE STREET ADDRESS PIIDIdE IdIAILLNG ADDRESS . • • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 1, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 1, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Jim Shearer Paul Johnston None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob Mcl_aurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meeting of July 18, 1995. Mayor Pro-Tem Lapin asked for a motion on the minutes. Steinberg moved to approve the minutes of July 18, 1995 with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0 (Osterfoss not present for vote}. B. Resolution No. 18, Series of 1995, a Resolution Declaring September 2 - 4, 1995 as the First Annual Vail Jazz Party Weekend. Howard Stone, event coordinator, thanked the council for this resolution in support of the First Annual Vail Jazz Party Weekend. Mayor Osterfoss read Resolution 18, Series of 1995 in full. Johnston moved to approve Resolution No. 18, Series of 1995 with a second by Lapin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-D. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995, first reading ofi an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.71 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area. Tom Moorhead and Mike Mollica presented this item. Staff is recommending this item be approved. Art Abplanaip asked Council to clear up the language regarding which dwellings must have a TCO, possibly add "if required at the time of construction". Bob Armour Pikes the Ordinance, but wants a 5 year time frame instead of 10 years. Galen Aasland stated the Ordinance is better written than last draft, however it does not address the catastrophic loss. Strauch made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995 on first reading, with the following changes - fix the typos, change the 10 years to 5 years of time passed that the building was issued a certificate of occupancy, redefine the dwelling units which must have a certificate of occupancy, clarify whether applications should go before the Design Review Board or the Planning and Environmental Commission, eliminate 250 eligibility for new dwelling units constructed after November 30, 1995 and address catastrophic loss with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed 4-3, Strauch, Osterfoss, Navas and Johnston voting in favor and Shearer, Lapin and Steinberg voting against. The fourth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. The PulislGolf Course Bridge project is proceeding on schedule with construction to occur this fall. The project is funded through an 80-20 match with the state. Ali street projects are going weN and the north side of the roundabout will be paved next week. He is working with VA to prepare a parking ~.~ .. incentive program. Mcl_aurin met with the engineer who designed the roundabout to work on a feasibility study regarding a roundabout at the West Vail Interchange. A conceptual design from Leif Ourston is due September 15. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Mintues, August 1, 1995, Page 1 ~ ~ • Steinberg moved to go into executive session to discuss legal matters, second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. There being no further business, Johnston moved to adjourn at approximately 9:30 P.M. O`~~`N~uiOFrrn~~i'ii~~~ Respectfully submitted, ~ Margar t A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATT T: ~~LOR~~~ ~u i r r r u ~ u u u u+ t- ~-~~~" Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk (`Names of certain individuals who gave pubiic input may be inaccurate.} r: Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes, August 1, 1995, Page 2 x • ~ • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 15, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 15, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifier Paul Johnston Tom Steinberg TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob Mcl_aurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda swearing in of the newly appointed Town Council Member, Rodney E. Slifer. Mayor Osterfoss thanked applicants Bob Fiske, Ludwig Kurz, Greg Amsden and E.B. Chester for their interest and support of the Town of Vail. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation Willa Scott, an activist from San Francisco is traveling the United States on three issues a) police harassment, b} concern for global warming and c) lack of help for the homeless. Daniel Frederick asked the Town Council why he has not received his building permit. He has gone through the process and is still being denied the permit. Tom Moorhead indicated there is a meeting set for next Thursday to meet with Frederick. Frederick had agreed to a deed restriction condition which he is now unwilling to meet. A transcript of the meeting is being made. Osterfoss advised Fredrick that the Council could not respond to this issue during Citizen Participation, and advised him to continue working through the process with s#aff. • The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Proclamation No. 3, Series of 1995 proclaiming the week of August 14, 1995 "Team Sunrise Week." B. Resolution No. 5, Series of 1995, a resolution commending Bill Anderson for his contribution to the Planning and Environmental Commission. C. Resolution No. 7, Series of 1995, a resolution commending Kathy Langenwalter for her contributions to the Planning and Environmental Commission. D. Resolution No. 8, Series of 1995, a resolution commending Allison Lassoe for her contributions to the Planning and Environmental Commission. E. Resolution No. 17, Series of 1995, a resolution commending Sally Brainerd for her contributions to the Design Review Board. F. Resolution No. 19, Series of 1995, a resolution designating Christine B. Anderson, Controller, as an additional signer on the Town of Vail's checking account #229-570-0037 as permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes of the State of Colorado. G. Resolution No. 20, Series of 1995, a resolution designating an additional checking account for the Town of Vail with Carol Fax, Susan Boyd; Walter Ingram, Katie Laubengayer, and Kelly McCrae, as the designated signers an that account, permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes • of the State of Colorado. Vail Town Council Meeting, August 15, 1995, Page 1 Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Paul Johnson moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. Bili Anderson, kathy Langenwalter and Allison Lassoe were present to receive their resolutions. The fourth item on the agenda was, discussion of desired use of community building in the Vail Commons Development. Andy Knudtsen and Susan Connelly presented this item to council to review options such as a day care or a community meeting room, and provide direction to the Vail Commons Development team as to the use of the community facility. Andy Knudtsen reviewed the results of the Town survey regarding a day care center ar community center. Nancy Nottingham, who manages ali the day care centers for Vail Associates and is a member of the Eagle Valley Child Care Task Farce gave the Council her recommendations as to what would be involved in developing a day care center on this 3,400 square foot area within the Vail Commons. Child care needs from Vail to Gypsum is growing, especially for infant care. There are 2,000 children under the age of five years from Vail to Gypsum. Cherie Palley, from the Resource Center and Family Center stated the Family Center is in need of space and the proposed day care center could have great potential of shared space with other social service providers and the Center. Nottingham thought this a great idea to share the space because it~ would generate additional revenue to cover the costs. Nottingham added that 750 square foot of fenced outdoor space would be required for a day care. Colleen McCarthy stated the Council was not listening to the people's.desires, nor are they open to the local's ideas. At a neighborhood meeting she attended it was important that a good sized community center be built and the neighborhood people did not want a grocery store. She questions if there are 40~ 52 kids in Vail to utilize a day care center. Nottingham responded there are enough kids to support another day care center from parents who work in Vail, but live between Vail and Gypsum. Dick Peterson questioned if it is the Town of Vail's responsibility to use Vail tax dollars to supply day care for non-resident children. Nancy Rondeau asked where the proposed West Vail Fire station would be located. Bob Mct_aurin responded that currently three sites are being looked at and the Commons site is not one of them as the Fire Chief has determined this site inappropriate. Rondeau wants to charge a higher fee to non Vail residents utilizing the Vail child care. She would like to provide more free parking on this site and start a park-n-ride. Lynn Fritziin, resident of West Vail feels the traffic is at capacity and questions adding a large commercial complex space to this congestion. She would like a large community room. Jeff Christensen representing the Common Sense for the Vail Commons wants a master plan of the site first, then move ahead with getting a developer. Since the Council is not responding to this request, his group is forced to do an initiative. Andy Knudtsen stated they are looking at the Master Plan and how to make it work with the commercial site. Jeff Christenson supports a day care center, but wants the council to reconsider their position. Martin Waldbaum wants a day care and add sufficient square footage to accommodate a community center on the second floor. Alice Cartright asked if the initiative process defeats the City Market what then. Tom Moorhead stated it first needs to be determined if this is an • administrative or a legislative issue. The Council agreed to continue exploring a combination of day care and community room uses for this site and asked staff to research size, site coverage, cost and operational needs. Mayor Osterfoss invited all citizen to attend an upcoming work session regarding the development of other elements of the Vail Commons project. The exact date will be advertised in the paper. Discussion will include use of the revenue from the development and the criteria to be used for selection of the community members who want to purchase one of the 53 homes in the proposed development. The fifth item on the agenda was , Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1995, second reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.71 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area. George Ruther and Tom Moorhead presented this item for Council to approve, deny or modify Ordinance No. 6 as presented. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1996 passed on first reading with the following provisions: five years must have passed since the unit was issued a Certificate of Occupancy (whether temporary or final) or , in the event a Certificate of Occupancy was not required #or use to the dwelling at the time of the completion, from the date of the original completion and occupancy of the dwelling. We believe this addresses the issue of the requirement for a Certificate of Occupancy. The ordinance reflects that these applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental. However, all proposals will still be required to conform to the Design Review Guidelines. This ordinance eliminates 250 eligibility for any dwelling unit not in existence as of November 30, 1995 or one for which a completed Design Review Board application for the original construction of a dwelling unit has not been accepted by November 30, 1995. In regard to "catastrophic loss" it would be inappropriate to address Vail Town Council Meeting, August 15, 1995, Page 2 • ~ • that issue in this provision as it is properly addressed in Chapter 18.&4 of the Municipal Code. Section 18.64.090 provides that : "whenever a nonconforming use which does nat conform with the regulations for the district in which it is located or a nonconforming structure or site improvement which does not conform with the requirements far ....density control.... is destroyed by fire or other calamity, by act of God or by the public enemy, its use may be resumed or the structure may be restored, provided the restoration is commenced within one year and diligently pursued to completion." This provision would pertain to any structure that has received the benefit of 250 additional GRFA from that amount that would normally be allowable within its zone district. Staff recommendation is to approve this ordinance. Tom Moorhead stated additional language needs to be inserted regarding that the demolrebuild is not available for additional GRFA, demolrebuilds must meet present zoning requirements for GRFA. Tim Driscoe, a local attorney, represen#ing his parents stated this ordinance hurts people and is against the ordinance. Jan Strauch moved to approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1995, on second reading with the modification that language will be inserted stating that any single family dwelling or two family dwelling which is to be demolrebui[t shall not be eligible for additional GRFA and the removal of the requirement of a dwelling to have received its final certificate of occupancy prior to receiving its additional GRFA be made, with a second by Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and passed 4-2. Lapin and Slifer voting against the motion. The sixth item on the agenda was Town Council call-up of a Design Review Board approval of an amendment to the sign program at the West Vail Mall. Lauren Waterton presented this item for Council to uphold, reverse or modify the decision made by the Design Review Board. At the request of the Subway Restaurant located in the West Vail Mall, the West Vail Mall Corporation has applied for an amendment to the existing sign program far the West Vail Mall. The current program requires signs to be white wall-mounted letters, with an allowance for the addition of a logo using corporate colors to be not greater than 20 percent of the sign area. The West Vail Mall Corporation has requested that corporate color may be used in 50 percent of the total sign area. On July 19, 1995, the Design Review Board approved (by a vote of 4-1 } a change to the West Vail Mall sign program, allowing the sign area for the Subway sign to be 50 percent color and all remaining signs will continue to be restricted to 20 percent. At the July 25, 1995 Town Council worksession, this item was called-up by the Town Council. Tom Moorehead read the motion made by the DRB and stated this variance was not appropriate because it was for one specific sign (Subway) and not for the entire West Vail sign program. One of two choices can be made a) allow all the signs to have 50% color or b) allow no signs at the West Vail Mali to have 50% color. Mike Arnett, Chairman for DRB indicated the DRB wanted to allow for this one time variance for this one shop (Subway}. Paul Johnston moved to send this item back to DRB for further consideration of changing the sign program for all West Vail Mall shops to have 50% color, second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed 5-1 with Johnston, Navas, Osterfoss, Lapin and Strauch voting in favor of the motion and Slifer voting against. The seventh item on the agenda was appeal by an adjacent property owner, Neal Groff, of an approval by the Design Review Board for an addition using an additional 250 square feet at the Stevinson Residence, located at 1498 Springhill LanelLot 16, Block 3, Vail Valley 3rd Filing. Lauren Waterton presented this item to Council #o uphold, reverse, or modify the decision of the DRB. At the August 2, .1995, Design Review Board meeting, the Board approved (by a vote of 4-1) an addition to the Stevinson residence, located at 1498 Springhill Lane. The adjacent neighbor, located at 1468 Vail Valley Drive has appealed the decision to approve this application. Waterton stated Groff is appealing this addition because it will obstruct his view of the Gore Range. Tom Moorhead stated the TOV does not have adopted view corridors for this lot and there is no legal basis to intervene based on a priva#e view. The Council must apply design review guidelines. Larry Eskwith, representing the Stevinson family, stated that Mr. Groff was notified of the two DRB meetings and failed to appear both times. There is no alternative spot to place this addition. The Stevinson family would like to accommodate Mr. Groff, but there just is no practical way to do this. Neal Groff stated he had no knowledge of the first DRB meeting and learned of the second DRB meeting the day before and when Groff spoke to Larry Stevinson, Stevinson indicated he would postpone the meeting for two weeks, which he did not do and moved ahead with the scheduled DRB meeting. Osterfoss stated Council has to follow DRB guidelines and there are no legal view pro#ection laws for this property. Lapin made a motion to uphold the DRB approval for the Stevinson residence addi#ion at 1498 Springhill Lane, second by Johnston. A vote was taken and passed 5-1 Vail Town Council Meeting, Augusf 15, 1995, Page 3 .~.- ~ ~ ~ ~ with Johnston, Navas, Osterfoss, Lapin and Slifer voting in favor and Strauch voting against. The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. McLaurin stated he will be attending a Cast Meeting the end of this week and a Legislative Workshop sponsored by the North West Colorado Council of Governments is upcoming and anyone interested should contact Anne Wright to register. Paul Johnson wants the pay schedule for council addressed and suggest $12,000 per council member and $1$,000 for the mayor. He would like this addressed prior to the election so we can attract more candidates. The additional money may encourage people to apply knowing the money would offset the cost of hiring help to cover their businesses while they attend Council matters. McLaurin pointed out that all TOV wages have been frozen for this year. Tom Moorhead will report to the Council what the requirements are to change the pay. There being no fur#her business, Lapin moved to adjourn at approximately 11:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, `~~~~~D~~N OF ~` ~,hl,~ qi~ ~~ SE~~ ~~ ATTEST~q~/,`~~.,cQL ORA~~ a~' ~~ ~ Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk ("Names of certain individuals who gave publio input may be inaccurate.) Marg ret A. Osterfoss, ayor Vail Town Council Melting, August 15, 1995, Page 4 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 5, 1995 7:30 P. M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 5, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:3Q P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston MEMBERS ABSENT: Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT; Bob McL.aurin, Town Manager Tam Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assist. Town Manager -~ Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Bob Fiske, a Town of Vail bus driver complained of improper hiring practices in the bus department. Fisk has taken his complaints to the Human Resource Department, but does not feel his concerns are being taken seriously. Mayor Osterfoss thanked Fiske for this information and directed him to take his issue to the Town Manager where it will be resolved. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of August 1 and 15, 1995. B. Approval of modification of previously granted sign variance request for Cutin Hill Sports, located at 254 Bridge StreetlLot 1, Block 5-C, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Jack Curtin. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Johnston moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. `• The third item on the agenda was a presentation to Jim Shearer - Award of Appreciation. Osterfoss presented Jim Shearer with a plaque representing the Town Council's appreciation for his three plus years of service to the Town of Vail. Shearer stated his time on the Council was very special and enjoyable. He greatly appreciated serving with the best minds, hearts and dedicated TOV people over these past few years. He stressed the fact that employee housing still remains an important issue in the Vail valley and wants everyone to continue working on this issue. The #ourth item on the agenda was discussion of Vail Commons issues presented by Tom Moorhead and Andy Knudtsen. Tom Moorhead first read a letter to Council from Merv Lapin stating he will excuse himself from Vail Commons issues due to a conflict of interest. Moorhead summarized the contract negotiations from the afternoon worksession with John Caldwell, City Market real estate director. There are two documents the Council is negotiating for this property. The contract provided that the base rent would be paid annually in arrears. Council has requested quarterly in advance and City Market's proposal suggests they will compromise and pay quarterly in arrears. The CPl index as an increase to the base rental is considered as a hedge against inflation. John Caldwell presented the documentation concerning the breakdown of CPI increase and the half of one percent of store sales above 24 million per year. Bath of those adjustments would address the inflationary potential of the rent. City Market is suggesting the one-half percent of store sales which will give a true reflection of how the store is performing and that is a better method of getting a rent that is consistent with the performance of the store. Create a partnership between the Vait Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes, September 5, 1995 Page 1 TOV and City Market. As the store does better, the TOV clearly benefits in increased rental revenue that is received from that property. John Caldwell reviewed some exclusions from the gross sales that had been questioned by the TOV and also concurs . that in regards to licenses and rentals that those items should be included within the gross sales cost that could return additional revenue to the Town in the form of one-half percent of everything sold over 24 million. The City Market owned and managed employee housing rental units were discussed. John gave an overview of how those 24 bedrooms would be administered and will guarantee that 90% of those units would be filled at all times by City Market employees. City Market has agreed to put a 3% cap on appreciation of those EHU in the event they were ever sold. If a sale takes place, the sale must be in conjunction with sale of the entire commercial property. Those are not units subject to sale independent of the commercial unit. It was discussed that City Market would like made available for store manager employees, the right to purchase 3 of the for sale housing units. These employees would not have to qualify as prior residents of the TOV. The rental rate for the day care operator was discussed. John Caldwell had suggested a possible rent formula that would provide the lower of 80% of the average rental rate for other day care centers located in Vail town limits, or 50% of the average rental rate for the other commercial spaces. The first right of refusal was discussed up to 30 days prior to a new tenant taking possession of the property. The TOV suggested that this negotiation should start several years before the end of the term. City Market is willing to discuss a formula which would better provide for a transition period. There were discussions concerning the store not being in operation during a period of time that the City Market was not in default of its lease, but that the store was simply not~open. John Caldwell offered an alternative to the 365 day provision of a graduated formula of the first three years 90 days, 3 to 10 years would be 180 days and after ten years, 365 days. Bob Warner had comments in regards to the 2% commission and what services would be offered far that 2% commission and how he would handle the marketing and sale of the residential units. Andy Knudtsen reviewed the transportation improvements. Adjacent to the Vail Commons property the developer will provide curb and gutter, accelldecel, 2 lanes each direction, center turning lane, bike lanes and paths. Vail Commons will provide at the West Vail interchange a center turning lane. They will hire an engineer to create al! the drawings and design the road improvements, they will design plans to integrate the ideal sec#ion adjacent to the Vail Commons property with the existing improvement and in addition they will pay 50% of additiona! costs that might be incurred if there are cost overruns with the improvements down to the West Vail interchange. Criteria used far the for sale housing is 1) individuals with the longest consecutive record of employment within the Town of Vail boundaries, 2) individuals with the longest consecutive record of residency • within the Town of Vail boundaries, 3) employers who may purchase a unit specifically for employees of a Vail business, and 4) individuals who reside and are employed outside the Town of Vail boundaries, but inside Eagle County. A lottery would be set up using this criteria. Osterfoss discussed the results of the.research on combining a day care center and communitylmeeting room. Space is very tight. Adding a second floor would exceed height restrictions in this zoning and applying far a variance is not appropriate as a hard ship must exist. Council wants to address the day care needs at the Commons site. Steinberg indicated the survey 2 years ago said the people could go back to work if they had day care. Staff is recommending putting the meetinglcommunity room space in the proposed West Vail Fire station. McLaurin stated #here are three sites under consideration for the Fire Station and it will be built in 1997198. Cindy Steitz suggested the need for a community building or recreational center, citing such amenities in smaller communities, including Rifle, Rangely and Meeker. Martin Waldbaum expressed concern about the risk to the Town if City Market defaults on its construction loan. Lars Burghardt said a new grocery store, needing more employees, will put a crunch on an already tight housing situation in Vail. He would like to see a swimming pool or park built to help attract locals to remain in Vail. Jen Wright, Housing Authority Chairman, encouraged Council to move ahead with the . City Market plan, noting that the most important aspect of the development is the employee housing and thanked the Council for doing this project. Wright urged the Council to reduce or eliminate residential land lease fees to help reduce a home buyer's monthly mortgage payment. Slifer concurred that there should be no land lease on the for sale housing or a very low fee of $25 per year. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes, September 5, 1995 Page 2 „ r The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1995, an ordinance amending the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado to protect Designated Open Space. Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council and stated this ordinance would go before the voters at the November 21, 1995 election. Slifer moved to approve Ordinance No. 13, 1995 on first reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The sixth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 21, Series of 1995, a resolution amending the Town of Vail Deferred Compensation Plan. Steve Thompson presented this item to Council. Steinberg moved to approve Resolution No. 21, Series of 1995, with a second by Slifer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The seventh item on the agenda was Resolution No. 22, Series of 1995, a resolution approving and authorizing the acceptance of a settlement agreement and release in Civil Action No. 93-CV-88, the Town of Vail vs. Chevron USA, Inc. and Amoco Oil Co. Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council. The settlement agreement and release provides for an equitable resolution of a cause of action brought by the Town against Chevron and Amoco for an alleged release of petroleum products stored on the ChevronlAmoco property onto the Old Town Shop lot. The agreement provides that Chevron will be responsible for remediation of the groundwater contamination. The Town will take the responsibility to provide any remediation required of any soil contamination. Staff recommends approval of settlement agreement and release. Steinberg moved to approve, Resolution No. 22, Series of 1995, with a second by Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The eighth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. $, Series of 1995, to provide changes to Area D requirements for SDD No. 4 that concern the development plans for the Glen Lyon Office Building site (GLOB); and setting forth details in regard thereto. Navas moved to table un#il the November 7, 1995 meeting Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Johnston. A vote was taken and passed- unanimously, 6-0. The ninth item on the agenda was the Town Mahager's Report. There was no report. There being no further business, Strauch moved to adjourn at approximately 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~. _ - Margaret A. Osterfoss, May ATTEST: . C'~ ~~ Q ~ Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk ('Names of certain Individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate.) ,tats;°.fs ~::G 9~, ~~~i S E A~, ,t 4 ~i ~:. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes, 5eptemder 5, 1995 Page 3 .° MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING • • September 19, 1995 7:30 P,M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, November 19, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7':30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joseph Staufer expressed his concern to council regarding the Denver Post article on the possible privatization of ski area lands. Staufer feel if this is approved, it would be the end of Vail. He would like the Council to use all their energy to fight against privatization. Steinberg stated council has already sent a letter to the Colorado delegation. Osterfoss then read the letters sen# to the Colorado delegation stating their feeling against privatization. lapin indicated he has spoken to Colorado's senators, representatives and has also contacted Channel 4 & 9 in Denver. Mike Jewett from East Vail requested a copy of the Resolution or Ordinance used to acquire the Vail Commons property, a copy of the contract between the TOV and the Vail Commons Developer and any other pertinent information to the Commons project. Mayor Osterfoss stated such information is available from the Vail Town Clerk`s office. Osterfoss stated the Council is taking very seriously the 600 signatures turned in by the Petitioners. The Petitioners needed 434 valid signatures and there are only 370 valid signatures. The Petition is insufficient. Jeff Christensen was also present and asked what the next steps would be for the petition process. Mayor Osterfoss asked if he had received the Statement of Insufficiency yet. Christensen stated he had not. Pam Brandmeyer responded that the Petitioners have 24 hours after receipt of the Statement of insufficiency to file a notice of intention to amend with the Town Clerk, then supplementary petitions should be turned in by the Petitioners to the Clerk within 10 days. The Clerk then has 5 days to verify the new signatures. Jeff Christensen indicated the Petitioners would file a supplement to the Petition. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Ordinance No.13, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado to protect Designated Open Space. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full and noted this item will be on the November 21, 1995 ballot. There was one change from first reading to second reading. At the suggestion of Joe Macy from Vail Associates, the provision will no longer apply to properties leased by the Town of Vail. Only properties to which the town has title could be considered for the designated status. Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Navis. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance providing for the major amendment of Special Development District No. 31, Golden Peak House; amending an approved development plan for Special Development District No. 31, in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 278 Hanson Ranch RoadlLots A, B, and C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mike Mollica presented this item to Council. Applicant: GPH Partners, Ltd. On September 11, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted (by a vote of 4-2, with Armour and Pratt opposed) to recommend approval of the applicant's requests. The staff recommendation is for approval of the applicant's request to modify the density section of the SDD, with regard to the overall number of dwelling units. Additionally, staff recommends denial of the applicant's request to modify the densitylGRFA portion of the proposal. Mollica handed out a memo from the East Village Homeowners Association, Inc. stating they are sympathetic with the planning staff's position. Craig Snowdon representing Golden Peak House Partners, Ltd. thinks when the PEC gave approval of this they felt it bene~tted the Town. He agrees and wants the request approved. Slifer moved to approve Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Strauch. A vote was taken and failed 2-4 with Ostertoss,~ Steinberg, Navas and Lapin voting No. Steinberg made a motion to reject Ordinance No. 14. Lapin noted Council just did that. The motion was withdrawn. Lapin made a motion to support the staff's recommendation and not the PEC's recommendation. A vote was taken and the motion failed with a tie of 3-3. Osterfoss, Strauch and Slifer voted yes and Navas, Lapin, and Steinberg voted no. The Ordinance failed and the council directed staff to continue negotiations with the applicant. The fourth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance correcting Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995 which amended Chapter 17.26, Condominium Conversions of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council. This is a "housekeeping" measure. In process of re-codification it was determined that Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995 did not contain the correct regulations as in effect at the time of passage. Staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 15. Strauch moved to approve Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance regulating roundabouts andlor rotary traffic islands and one-way roadways. • Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council and is recommending the ordinance be approved. The Model Traffic Cade, which the Town of Vail uses, does not address rotary traffic islands which is necessary to regulate the roundabout. Colorado State Statutes however does address this provision and Moorhead has used this language in drafting the Ordinance. Strauch moved to approve Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1995, with a second by Lapin. A vote was taken and passed 5-1 with Slifer voting no. The sixth item on the agenda was the Local Licensing Authority appointment to fill Liz Pickett's seat. Said appointment wilt expires June, 1996. The applicants are David Chapin and Connie Knight. Lapin moved to appoint Connie Knight until June, 1996 with a second by Navis. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Assistant Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer reviewed four items with the Council: 1 } a cost estimate has been prepared to improve the bus stop in front of the Haagen-Dazs ice cream store; 2) a developer based in Omaha is interested in working with the town on an affordable rental housing project at the Town Shops; 3} the Seibert Circle project has been delayed unfiil 1996; and 4} roundabout paving will be completed this week, weather permitting. There being na further business, Slifer moved to adjourn a# approximately 8:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, • Marg ~~~, f,f OsterFoss, May r ATTEST: ~`,~,,,,~o~~~a o~ 'y~~~,,,~~,~' .. y ~ w, C?~1u Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk ('`Names of certain individuals who gave public input -~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING October 3, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 3, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager _~ Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pameia A. Brandmeyer, Assist. Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was no citizen participation. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of September 5 and 19, 1995. B. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance correcting Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1995 which amended Chapter 17.26, Condominium Conversions of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. C. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance regulating roundabouts andlor rotary traffic islands and one-way roadways. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Rod Slifer moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1977, Special Development District No. 7, The Marriott Mark; amending an approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 7; amending the Title of the Special Development District to the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort SDD in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 715 West Lionshead CirclelLots 4, 7, C, and D, Block 1, VaiilLionshead Third Filing;.and setting forth details in regard thereto. George Ruther presented this item to Council. The first reading of a proposed ordinance for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 7, the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort, to allow for the conversion of 17 dwelling units to accommodation units. Pursuant to Section 18.40.020 (Major SDD Amendment) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code "any proposal to change uses; increased gross residential floor area; change the number of dwelling or accommodation units; modify, enlarge or expand any approved Special Development District is defined as a major SDD amendment." A major amendment to an SDD is reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved y-- ~ upon two readings of an ordinance by the Vail Town Council. The applicant, the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort, represented by Mary French, is currently proposing to convert 17 dwelling units to accommodation units. Prior to the actual conversion of the 17 dwelling to accommodation units, the applicant first needs an approval of their major Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/3/95 amendment to a Special Development District request approved by the Town Council. Section 10 of the approved Marriott Vail Mountain SDD establishes the development standards for the project. According to subsection 10(E), Density Control, "the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed 34 and the total number of accommodation units shall not exceed 304". Currently, 49 dwelling units and 259 accommodation units exist at the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort. An approval of the applicant's request to convert 17 of the dwelling units to accommodation units will result in 32 dwelling units and 277 accommodation units. Pursuant to Section 18.68.140, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on September 25, 1995 with regard to the major amendment to the SDD proposed by the applicant. Upon review of the applicant's proposed major SDD amendment request to convert 17 dwelling units to accommodation units, the Planning and Environmenta! Commission voted unanimously in favor of recommending approval of the applicant's request to the Vail Town Council. The planning staff views the major SDD amendment request as having a public benefit for the Town of Vail, therefore, the staff is recommending approval of the applicant's request to convert 17 dwelling units to ,accommodation units. The staff believes that the applicant's proposal will have a positive effect upon the number of available short term rental units within the Town of Vail. The staff also feels that the reduction in density and the resulting surplus parking spaces will help alleviate parking problems that may currently occur at the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort. Additionally, staff finds that~the applicant's proposed major SDD amendment request meets the SDD review criteria as . outlined in Section 2 of the Planning and Environmental Commission memorandum dated September 25, 1995. (See attached PEC memo dated 9125195.) Paul Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0. The fourth item on the agenda was Vail Commons Discussion presented by Tom Moorhead. On September 24, 1995 The Vail Town Council received a letter from Carol L. Curtis, who is the attorney for the Common Sense for the Vail Commons. The letter contained numerous factually incorrect assumptions. Prior to responding to Carol Curtis' letter, Moorhead gave a through review of the Vail Commons project process. The TOV acquired rea! property as set forth in the Vail Charter. The Charter clearly sets forth what actions need to be taken by ordinance, resolution or simply by motion. The Town Charter enables the Town Council to lease the Vail Commons property through an administrative action to any private or governmental entity without enacting a legislative ordinance. If the Charter property were sold, the Town Charter specifies such action would require an ordinance. The Vail Commons land was purchased based on the resolution dated February 2, 1993. The land consisting of 6.6 acres, and purchased for 3.2 million dollars was purchased from Hud Worth. The land was purchased using general funds as opposed to the real estate transfer funds. This resolution authorizing the purchase of this property was preceded with 4 executive meetings. Council then reviewed a draft of the contract at a public session. The February 2, 1993 minutes reveal what the discussion was as council considered the terms of the contract. There were no restrictions put on the use of this property. This property is zoned as "Community Commercial" and allows for employee housing. The Master Land Use Plan which was adopted in November, 1986 includes the Vail Commons land. Moorhead reviewed the public meetings and discussion on commercial growth, ski industry, and residential growth leading up to the Master Land Use Plan. Employee housing needs were addressed extensively, existing land uses in the TOV were reviewed. The commercial uses which have traditionally been in the core area were discussed and it was agreed that commercial development needs to diversify to outlying areas. The proposed land use map was developed based by input from public meetings. Existing buildings were analyzed, preservation of open space became a high priority, and parks were also a high priority. The study revealed a need for balanced residential, commercial and recrea#ional land. No one wanted to create new commercial areas, however it was agreed to locate them adjacent to existing commercial spaces. The uses would #hen be controlled by zoning. Moorhead said its important that there is an extensive land use plan in existence and it has been followed closely by the Town Council during the process of the Vail Commons. Next, Moorhead addressed certain items from Carol Curtis' letter. The third paragraph states "why has Vail Town Council Eveni»g Meeting Minutes 10/3/95 Council chosen to approve the City Market development plan by the mere passing of a motion and with no master plan in place" Moorhead indicated this statement is very inaccurate. The letter goes on to state a council member has a conflict of interest. Moorhead stated Merv Lapin recused himself due to conflict of interest from the Vail Commons proceedings. He has not participated in this process and therefore, this is not an issue. Curtis' letter is concerned with the WHEREAS clause in Resolution No. 2, Series of 1993 sta#ing the uses for the property are specifically prescribed to be "open space, parks or other purposes." Moorhead indicated this is purely editorial language in the resolution. The council followed the charter i.e., they can purchase property and there would have had to have been deed restrictions on the property to limit the use of this Vail Commons Land. There are no deed restrictions on this land. The wording in the Resolution does not restrict the uses of the Vail Commons land. Curtis' letter states Council acted outside the scope of its charter by entering into a 49 year lease with City Market and 99 year lease for employee housing. Moorhead replied that the authors of the Charter clearly stated a lease can be entered into with a motion and does not require an ordinance. The letter states that a formal bidding process should have occurred and council has proceeded behind closed doors and to date has refused to allow public review of the contract involved. Moorhead said this is a misstatement to say council has not entered into a public bidding process. A formal bidding process was in fact conducted and 20 people responded at which time narrowed to 7 then to 3 finalists, ending up with City Market. The bidding process was a competitive process ~, and the council did study different alternatives. The letter says the voters are gathering of "super market use". Jeff does not feel it is masking their real question. In summarizing the Town Council's decision to continue moving forward with the development, Osterfoss regrets deeply there are 700 people who do not agree with the vehicle of City Market to provide employee housing. Employee housing is very sufficient signatures for an initiative process. Moorhead stated an initiative is for legislative acts only and not appropriate for administrative actions such as the Vail Commons decision. The committee has submitted their amended petition. The sufficiency is being assessed currently and will be brought to council when complete. Tom Steinberg asked if Council should discuss tonight the items discussed in the executive sessions leading up to the purchase on the Vail Commons property. Moorhead said it is entirely up to Council. To date all the contract negotiations with City Market have been conducted in public meetings. Steinberg recalls the then current Council discussed using general fund money to purchase the land and the land was to be used as commercial development ~ possibly a fire house site, employee housing, or TOV offices. They discussed that the source of funding for the housing should come from the commercia space, Osterfoss asked for public input. Mike Jewett spoke and thanked his fellow committee members for their hard work and financial support on the Common Sense for the Vail Commons committee. The committee feels this project is the wrong project for this property. He wants council to reconsider their decision in light of those who have signed the petition against the project. Jewett wanted to know if an Invitation to Bid was published? Moorhead indicated the Request For Proposal (RFP) was the vehicle used fvr this purpose. McL.aurin stated staff, and Chris Cares a consultant from Boulder put the list together of who would receive the RFP. Jewett is concerned several key individuals were left off the RFP list i.e. Cub foods, Village Market, Biggs. McLaurin spoke to several people prior to sending out the RFP and up front said they were not interested. Cub foods was not interested so no RFP was sent to them. McLaurin will defend the list as being a valid list. Osterfoss said grocery stores were never a target and not every grocery was contacted. Steinberg asked Jewett if he revealed that he is a union steward at Safeway and that City Market is a non-union shop and that he may have a conflict of interest in asking citizens to sign the petition. Jewett did not declare this to petitioners as he feels he does not have a conflict of interest. Jeff Christensen, chairman of the Common Sense Commitfiee asked what the time frame is to verify the supplemental petitions. Pam Brandmeyer responded the Town has a 5 day period to verify the signatures. Christensen feels it would be unethical of the Council to move forward on this project given the amount of signatures they have gathered. Christensen stated the petitioners do not like the idea of two supermarkets in West Vail. Jan Strauch asked Christensen since they are against the supermarket, why does their petition mask this by saying "land use" instead Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/3/35 • important to all as well as the Common Sense committee. However there are many people in support of the Council's decision and the Council will never please everyone. Kathy Douglas stated she too circulated petitions and the people signing the petition did not want two grocery stores. It would be unfair to force one to close down. The fifth iitem on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was none. Paul Johnston received clarification from Tom Moorhead on restricting the placement of newspaper boxes on public property. McLaurin said he was working with representatives from the newspapers to address the issue and would be reporting back to the Council soon. There being no further business, Johnston moved to adjourn at approximately 9:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ATTEST: .~ ~~0~~~ Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk (`Nemec of certain Individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate.) Mar rat A. ~~~y~~s ~r Ygil. s ~4iiv,C~LJRF~~.~"`~ OsterFoss, yor Vail7own Council a=vening Meeting Minutes 10/3/95 r a t -~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING October 17, 1995 6:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 17, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston Nane TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Administrative Hearing On People's Ordinance No. 1, 1995. Merv Lapin recused himself from this item due to a conflict of interest. Tom Moorhead presided over this Dearing.. Carol L. Curtis, Attorney for the Common Sense for the Commons committee was present and participated in this hearing. Candace Stutson of Candace Stutson Reporting was present as stenographer for the hearing. All original exhibits are on file with Stutson and copies are attached to these minutes. Moorhead called Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk, to identify three documents and entered them as exhibits. Exhibit 1 -Statement of Sufficiency far a Petition to Initiate A people's Ordinance #1, Series of 1995, Exhibit 2 -Resolution No. 27, 1986 A Resolution Adopting the Master Land Use Plan for the Town of Vail Exhibit 3 -Vail Land Use Plan Adopted November 18, 1986. Morrhead called Rick Pylman, former Town of Vail Planner from 1985-1989 who was the project manager on the Vail Land Use Plan. Pylman indicated this land Use Plan does in fact include the land known as Vail Commons. The land use plan covers from approximately Wendy's up to the Brandess building and is zoned Community Commercial. Next to testify was Jay Peterson, local Vail attorney specializing in real estate, zoning and land planning for 20 years. Peterson testified that in his opinion the Land Use Plan is administrative in nature and the Peoples Ordinance No 1, 1995 is a legislative action. Carol Curtis argued the Town Council actions were legislative and entered three exhibits. Exhibit 1 - Resolution No 2, '1993 A resolution authorizing the purchase of an unplatted piece of land commonly known as The Vail Commons Property. Exhibit 2 - A cite from CRS 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity or converted to a private use without a public hearing process. Exhibit 3 - Resolution No 13, 1991 A resolution changing the Town of Vail Land Use Plan. Curtis read to council from Resolution 2, 1993 "WHEREAS, the Town Council believes it will benefit the public health, safely, and welfare to .purchase the property far open space, parks, or other purposes". This conflicts with the use of commercial space and housing which the Council is now proposing. Resolution 13 modifies the 1986 Land Use Plan and Curtis feels fihis is an admission the plan has changed. Curtis would like to see a voter-approved master plan for the Vail Commons property. Moorhead had the following comments. The Colorado Constitufiion and the Vail Town Charter state clearly that the people can initiate proceedings. Master Land Use plans are an administrative act, so states case law. To put an administrative act on a ballot is not appropriate. All the negotiations pertaining to the lease of the Vail Commons property was held in open, public meetings. Mayor Osterfoss asked for other council questions. Strauch asked if y Vai! Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17/95 the Commons was excluded from the land use plan. Rick Pylman stated no it was not and was always included as part of the plans. Curtis said Resolution 2, 1993 stated the land use was for open land or parks. Moorhead admits Resolution 2, 1993 was poorly drafted however there were no deed restrictions applied to this land and the Town Council made sure this land was purchased with general funds assuring no restrictions were placed on this land. Peggy Osterfoss and Tom Steinberg were bath on council at the time of the land purchase. Osterfoss and Steinberg both agree the possibilities discussed prior to purchase of this land was employee housing, a fire house, Town offices, and commercial space. Rob Levine, former counci[ member at the time of the land purchase, stated the funds used to purchase this land was from the "general fund" so as not #o restrict what the property could be used for. Bob Buckley, also on Council at the time of the land purchase stated the land was purchased to create employee housing and a commercial site. Osterfoss summarized by stating Council will need to take all of this testimony under advisement in executive session at the end of this meeting and they will then come back with their decision. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Lew Meskiman asked that since Sunburst Drive to the Fall Ridge Condominiums an Vail Valley Drive is being resurfaced, could a line be put on one side designating a pedestrian way. Peggy thanked Meskiman for the suggestion and asked Bob McLaurin to check into it. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: Merv Lapin joins the meeting. A. Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1973, Special Development District No. 7, The Marriott Mark; amending an approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 7; amending the Title of the Special Development District to the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort SDD in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 715 West Lionshead CirclelLots 4, 7, C, and D, Block 1, VaillLionshead Third Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. B. Resolution No. 23, Series of '1995, a resolution designating additional signers on an imprest checking account for Library deposit transactions for the Town of Vaii with Russ Johnson and Kathleen Winfield as signers on that account, permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes of the State of Colorado. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Slifer moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995, first reading of an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1995 tax year and payable in the 1996 fiscal~year. Steve Thompson presented this item to the Council. The Council has been reviewing the 1996 budget for several weeks. The ordinance summarizing the expenditures is required by sta#ute. Staff recommends the Council approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No.20 of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Navas . A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7~0. The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance to change the zoning of 67 properties in the Town of Vail from their current zoning to the Natural Area Preservation District, Outdoor Recreation District, or the General Use District. Russell Forrest and Jim Curnutte presented this item to Council. On August 22, 1994, staff received approval to amend the text of Chapter 18.38, Greenbelt and Natural Open Space District {GNOS) and Chapter 18.36, Public Use District {PUD), of the Vail Municipal Code, and to create a new Chapter 18.33, Outdoor Recreation District {OR). These text amendments and the proposed zoning changes, 2 Varl Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17/95 as identified in Ordinance No. 19, are intended to insure that the uses allowed in these zone districts are consistent with their purpose statements, and that properties throughout Town, especially those with open space characteristics, are located in the appropriate zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed zoning changes on September 24, 1995 and voted 4-2-1 to recommend approval of these changes. The two dissenting members stated that they wanted parcel #21 {proposed par 3 site) to be rezoned to the General Use District. Staff also reviewed issues and public comments concerning the proposed rezoning of the Mt. Bell site (#34). The PEC felt strongly that the entire Mt. Bell parcel should be rezoned to the General Use District as per the staff memo. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995. Hermann Staufer expressed his concern that the golf course was not properly zoned or the designated zoning was confusing. Jim Curnutte feels the zoning is appropriate for the golf course. Osterfoss asked staff to contemplate Staufer's point by second reading and spell out a golf course zone specifically. Bob Lazier asked for protection for Sun Vail from adjacent Red Sandstone School noise. Osterfoss noted that by second reading the line designations between the two properties would be more specific. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No.19 0# 1995 on first reading, with staff looking at clarifying the Golf Course zoning and the designation fine between Red Sandstone School and Sun Vail, with a second by Steinberg. Navas does not believe the zoning placed on some of the parks and golf course is correct and feels a zoning should be used which would provide greater flexibility to plan for future community development needs. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1 with Navas in opposition. The sixth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Section 5.04.120 Transfer of License and Section 5.20.100 Exemptions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Tom Moorhead, Steve Thompson and Sally Lorton presented this item to Council. 1) Council requested staff to prepare an ordinance that would allow some relief from the Annual Business License fee when a new owner occupied an existing space and began a new operation in a space that a prior owner had paid the annual business license fee. 2) Council requested staff to prepare amendments to our special events license to guarantee that exempt, non-profit organizations will significantly benefit from such special events. This direction was provided as a result of a special event that was perceived to be nothing more than a retail sales event that did not provide significant benefit to an exempt organization. Staff Recommendation: 1) Staff recommends a more equitable approach is to prorate the annual business license fee far the initial year of operation. 2) Staff advises that the change may significantly impact special events and sales tax revenue from those events. Bob Lazier supports pro-rating the fee on a quarterly basis. Meskiman would like it so a seasonal business does not have to buy a full year license. Andre de I_ucinges suggested running the license period with the ski season. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 21 of 1995 on first reading, with the quarterly proration of the business fee to be addressed by second reading, a second by Strauch. Johnston amended his motion to include that a special event must be sponsored by a non_profit organiza#ion, second by Strauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The seventh i#em on the agenda was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance providing for the major amendment of Specia! Development District No. 31, Golden Peak House; amending an apprQVed development plan for Special Development District No. 31, in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 278 Hanson Ranch RoadlLots A, B, and C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Jim Curnutte presented this item to Council. Applicant is requesting that Council rescind the action taken in regard to this Ordinance on September 19, 1995. To Rescind the previous action there must be a motion made by a Council member who voted with the prevailing side upon first reading. If such motion to rescind carries, then Council can reconsider the ordinance. On September 11, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted {by a vote of 4-2, with Armour and Pratt opposed) to recommend approval for the applicant's requests. The staff recommendation is for 3 Var! Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 70/il/95 approval of the applicant's request to modify the density section of the SDD, with regard to the overall number of dwelling units. Additionally, staff recommends denial of the applicant`s request to modify the densitylGRFA portion of the proposal. Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 14, of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The eighth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Section 9.22.101A. which contains the definition for larceny. Tam Moorhead presented this item to Council. On July 1, 1995, the State definition for theft was amended by increasing the value of the thing involved from $300 to $400. It is necessary for the Town of Vail Ordinance to remain consistent with the State provision. Staff is recommending that Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1995 be passed. Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 18, of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Navis. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The ninth item on the agenda was a request fora 30-day extension of the hearing process on the appeal of the Cook 250 addition proposed afi 1012 Eagle's Nest CirclelLot 2, Block 6, Vail Village 7th Filing. The applicant, Mr. Cook, is requesting that the appeals process hearing be extended form the October 17, 1995 Vail Town Council meeting to the November 21, 1995 evening meeting. On September 27, 1995, the Town of Vail Office of Community Development received a written request from the Cook's adjacent property owners, Tom and Flo Steinberg, requesting that the Design Review Board decision to approve the Cook 250 addition be appealed to the Vail Town Council. Pursuant to Section 18.54.090(c), appeal to Town Council, the Vail Town Council may grant a 30-day extension to the appeals process if the Council find that there is sufficient information available. The applicant is requesting that the appeals hearing be extended to the November 21, 1995, Vail Town Council meeting to provide the opportunity for the applicant's architect and legal counsel to be present at the hearing. Staff is of the opinion that the unavailability of the applicant's architect and legal counsel be interpreted as insufficient information. Upon consultation with Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead, staff would recommend #hat the Vail Town Council grant an approval of the applicant's request fora 30-day extension of the appeals process hearing due to insufficient information. Lapin moved to grant a 30 day extension with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The tenth item on the agenda was an appeal of a DRB decision to deny an application for a reroof of the Stevenson Residence, located at 3897 Lupine DrivelLot 4, Block 1, Bighorn Subdivision, 1st Addition. Applicant: Mark and Maureen Stevenson. Lauren Waterton presented this item to Council. At the October 4, 1995 DRB meeting, the DRB passed a motion #o deny (4-1) a request for a reroof at the Stevenson residence, replacing cedar shakes with a metal roof. The DRB based its denial on the incompatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends that the DRB decision be overturned and the request to reroof using a metal roof be approved by the Town Council. Eric Hill, Architect for the Stevenson showed the council samples of the proposed roof and asked for their approval. Strauch moved to overturn the DRB's decision and approved the metal roof, with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1 with Osterfoss against. The eleventh item on the agenda was a request fora 30-day extension of the hearing process on the appeal of the Dews demolrebuild using two 250's, located at 278 Rockledge RoadlLot 15, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Julie Dews. The applicant is requesting that the appeal hearing be extended from the October 17, 1995 Vail Town Council meeting to the November 7, 1995 meeting. Lauren Waterton presented this item to Council. Pursuant to Section 18.54.090(c), appeal to Town Council, the Vail Town Council may grant a 30-day extension to the appeals process if the Council finds that there is insufficient information available. Julie Dews has requested that the Design Review Board decision to deny the demolrebuild using two 250's be appealed to the Vail Town Council. The applicant is requesting that the appeals hearing be extended to November 7, 1995, Vail Town Council meeting to provide the opportunity for the applicant to be present at the hearing. Staff is of the 4 Vai! Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 90/i7/95 opinion that the unavailability of the applicant could be interpreted as insufficient information. Upon consultation with Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead, staff would recommend that the Vail Town Council grant an approval of the applicant's request for _~ a 3D-day extension of the appeals process hearing due to insufficient information. Lapin moved to grant a 30 day extension, with a second by Slifer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The twelfth item on the agenda was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) denial of a request for a density (GRFA) variance to allow for the conversion of attic space to GRFA located at 3130 Booth Falls CourtlLot 6-A, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Jeffrey & Eileen Shiffrin. Randy Stouder presented this item to Council. The applicants converted an area above their garage to habitable space (GRFA) without design review approval or a building permit. Staff became aware of the unpermitted construction after the Fire Department responded to an alarm at the subject property. Construction was on-going when the Fire Department arrived, and no building permit was in evidence. The Fire Department alerted fihe Community Development Department of the unpermitted construction and the job was red-tagged (stop work order issued) on July 26, 1995. A letter was sent to the applicant requiring that the unpermitted GRFA be removed (copy attached). The applicant decided to request a density variance in an attempt to gain approva! to allow fihe GRFA to remain. On October 9, 1995 the PEC unanimously denied (by a vote 5-0) fihe applicant's variance request. The applicant is appealing the PEC decision to the Town Council. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request for a density variance. Jeff Shiffrin asked council to grant a density variance. Osterfoss explained the Town of Vail has clear guidelines to follow on density. Council must follow these guidelines. Strauch moved to uphold the PEC decision and deny the density variance, with a second by Lapin. A vote was taken and passed, 5-2 with Navas & Slifer against. The thirteenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was no report. Vail Commons Discussion & Decision. The Councii agreed as a whole to remain in public session. Lapin once again recused himself and left the meeting. Osterfoss asked for public comment. Jeff Christensen thanked Carol Curtis for her help. He did not appreciate the Town releasing to the press a letter from William D. Rosell, as he felt this to be a smear campaign. Lew Meskiman agrees the master plan is administrative, however he feels the people should vote on the property use. Bob Fiske does not feel the Council pursued all avenues before deciding on City Market. Rob Levine believes this is a administrative issue. Paul Johnston believes this to have been an administrative process. Navas agrees with Johnston and truly believes council should move ahead with the project. Steinberg does not feel it necessary to have everything go to a vote. We would never need a land plan or a Town Council if this was the case. Wants to proceed ahead with the project as it is administrative. Slifer said this is clearly an administrative project. If this went to a vote wha# would the wording be on the ballot? Peoples Ordinance 1 asks for a master plan to be approved by the electorate. The Peoples Ordinance 1, 1995 is very badly written and would have to go to court to have it interpreted before it could go on a ballot. Strauch has heard no evidence the process has been legislative. He called 30 people who signed the petition asking them why and he received 30 different answers. He votes to proceed with the project. Osterfoss stated based on the information presented. this process is administrative. It is not good news to hear that the Councii has not communicated well with the public. Council will continue to try and do a better job at communication. Peggy thanked the Commons group for all their time put into the process. She hopes the council and community can now apply their energy and enthusiasm to other issues. Steinberg made a motion to not vote on Peoples Ordinance 1, 1995 nor refer it to an election, because #his process has been administrative in nature and not legislative, second by ~, Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-0. There being no further business, Steinberg moved to adjourn at approximately 10:25 P. M. 5 Vai! Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/77/95 Respectfully submitted, CJ~ Margaret A. Osten ATTEST: C~.r'dLJC~ ~ r ~? ~ r Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk _ i ~ ~, ~ ('Names of certain Indlvlduals who gave public input may be Inaccurate.) ~f ~~~ ~~~ i i r C G' L~ R A~ ~ o ```"ac n l~ ass, M~ior Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/77/95 RESOLUTION N0. 2 SERIES 1993 A RESOt.U~'ION AUTHOFIIZlNG THl~ PUI~iCliASE {al' Ate! UNPt.ATTE.D PIECE 01= LAND COMMONi_Y KNOWN AS ~3-iE VA1L COI'~MONS PROPERTY, Ai`!i] MORE PIARTICULARLY DESCRIBED !N ExHIaIT A ATT11C~3l~D HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF ("T1-!E PROPERTY"}. WHEREAS, illo Town Counril believes it wild benefit the public health, saialy, and wefiarv to purchase ilte property for open space, parks, or other puR~oses. NOW, TF~iEREFORE, be ~i# resolved by the Town Council of tl~e Town o! Vail, Colorado: 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to enter kr~ta the contract to buy ~xnd loll iho proporty which is attached io iris Resolution as 14.xhlbit "A" and made a part heree#. 2. Tt1e Town Manager and the Town staff are aethvrizad io lake ~,vl~alever steps aro r~caessary to carnpiote lhv purchaso ai the property by the Town of Vall #rorri Vail Commons, Lid. 3, This rasoluiion shall lake effect Immediately opon its passage. INTI~ODl1ClwD, READ, APf'AOVED ANU ADOPTED ibis 2nd day of February, 1993. (.~ , u-- Margar A. Osterfoss, Mayo ATTFS~': ~~ c,l~~~~ .~~l~u.d~}1l~-{mac--~ ,, ~ Pamela A. 13rar~cirneyer, Acting-Tav~rn Clerk ~~ i 9 ~,~ /l~_~z~~ .~ .. r 1.9 ~lational Forest ]and which is exchanged, sa]d ar otherwise falls into ~4 private ownerstri p shoo] d remai n as open space and noC be zoned for private development. ir, ?~ l.lp Development of Town awned lands by the Yown o` 11ai1 father than parks and open space} may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such S development is far pubic use. }' ~ 1.11 Town awned lands sha]1 not be so]d to a private entity, ]ong term ~ I eased to a pry vote entity or converted to a private use wz tnou L a •` public hearing process, 1; 1.12 hail should accommodate most o` the additional growth in existing :' deve]oped areas (in~il] areas}. ~. ' 1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirab3e land feature as ~. well as its potential for public use. 1 :' 2. Skier/Tourist Concerns ~ 2.1 The community should emphasize its tale as a destination resort while ~~ accommodating day visitors. . 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should ~, work together ciosely to make existing facilities and the Town func- tion more e`ficient]y ~. 2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve facilities far day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural oppor- tunities to encourage summer tourism. 2.5 The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve ~~` year-round tourism. ' 2.6 An addi ti anal gol ` course i s needed. The Town shoo] d work with the down val]ey communities to develop a pubic golf course as well as other sports facilities.to serve the regions] demand for recreational. facilities. t. 2.7 The Town of Vail shou]d improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space, ~ 2.8 Day skier needs for parking and access should be accommodated through Creative so]utions such as: d} b} c) d} Increase busing from out of town. Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional bdSe portals. Continuing to provide temporary Surface parking. . Addition of structured parking. 3. Corrmerci al 3.1 .The hotel bed base shou]d be prQserved and used more efficier 7 • RESOLUTION NO. 13 Series of 1991 A RESOLUTION MOflIFYING THir TOWN OF VAIL t_AND USE PLAN, CHANGING THE LAND USE D1=51GNATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENI;RAL.L.Y.t_QCAT>`D WEST OF TI-tE TOWN Olr VAIL, Si~OPS FROM QPEN SPACE TO Si=M!-PUBLIC, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS 1N REGARD 7HER>:TO. WHER>=AS, conditions In ttza Town of Va41 have changed since the Land Use Pian was originally adoptad; and • • WHEREAS, Pol[cy 6.1 0[ the Land Use Plan states that services should keep pace with Increased growth; and • WHEREAS. Ihs Town of Vail has a Head for additional land with the desEgnalion of s~m~- • public In order to meet the standards of policy 6.1. " NOW, THEBEFORE. 8E IT RE50LVED f3Y THlW TOWN COUNCIL OF-THE TOWN OF .. • VAIL, COLORADO THAT: .i .~ 1, The Town Council lands the procedures for amending the Land Use Plan, as set forth In Chapter V1ll, Section 3 0[ the Land Use Plan have been satisfied. 2. The Town Council hereby amends Ihs Land Use Pian: • A. Changing the Land Use Designation shown on the midsection of the Plan from Open Space l0 5emi-Public [or the property more particularly described In Exhibit A, and B. Changing text o! Chapter V[I, 5ecllon 2, "Public Works' to read: "The • Public WorkslTranspartatlon Doparlmenl is housed at Ure Town o! Vail shop property which is located north of I.70 in the vicinity of the golf course. Ths Pubilc Works Town Shops may need !o be expanded to accommodate iuturs space needs to allover !or addlilonat services to be •• located at the shops. Also, In the previous spats use study, It was recommended that a smap satellite lacl111y Iv accommodate under storage and a snowplow be develop©d In West Vail.' INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this o21 ~ day o[ ; 1991. • ~~~ J ~ •. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ~ ATTEST: ~ • ~.~~~ Pamela A: Brandmeyer, Town Clark Name of Petition: STATEMENT OF Si1FFICIENCY Petition to Initiate A People's Ordinance #1, Series of 1995 Petitioner's Committee: Jeffrey K. Christensen, 230$ A Garmisch Cynthia Steitz, 1895 Meadow Ridge Road Barbara Moser, 1880 Meadow Ridge Raad Lars Burghardt, 963 Lionsridge Loop #513 Barbara Feeney, 3145-A Boath Falls Ct. Date Petition Submitted September 12, 1995 Valid Signatures: ~ 370 IJate Supplemental Petition Submitted: October 2, 1995 • "' Valid Signatures: 82* Number' of Valid Signatures:. 452 Signatures Required by Town Code: (15% of 2,887 } *Clerk stopped checking signatures after sufficiency of signatures was met. 434 T hereby certify that the attached Supplemental Petition to Initiate a People's Ordinance #l, Series of 1995, does meet the requirements of Article V, Section S.3a of the Town Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, and is sufficient in the required number of signatures of registered electors of the Town equal in number to at least fifteen percent (1 S%) of the total number of electors registered to vote at the last regular municipal election. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~~~{ , C~/CX/L Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk B E ~ ~ • ~~w ~~Q1.ORP+00 ~~-wuukuunu+~ F:IFIOLLYI W PFILE5IUSERSIIN1TiAT115UFFICI. W PA 1 /O ~ Cp " qv~ SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION TO INITIATE A.PEOPLE'S QRDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 1995 INSTRUCTIQNS TD CIRCULATClR 1. You must be~a registered voter of Vail, Colorado, to~circu{ate this petition. Specifcally, you must be. a. . At least 18 years of age; and b A citizen of the United States; and c. A resident of the State of Colorado and have resided in the state at leas# . twenty-five days; and d. A resident of the Town of Vail for at least twenty-fve -days. 2. Do not in any case unstaple this petition or remove a page or part of a page-from this petitian. ~. Be sure the elector signs in ink, or indelible pencil hislher name and address (street and stree# number, not a post office box number), city, county, and date in your presence. 4. Only signatures of registered voters of the Town of Vai! wilt qualify. 5. No one can sign for another person, unless the registered elector is physically disabled or illiterate and wishes to sign, in which case the elector shalE sign or make his or her mark in the space so provided. Any person other than a circulator may assist the disabled or illiterate elector in completing the remaining information. The person providing assistance shall sign his or her name and address and shall state that such assistance was given to the .~ disabled or illiterate elector. 6. Married women should use their awn given first name, such as "Mary Jones," NOT "Mrs. Thomas Jones." 7. When the petition is complete with Signatures (or time is up), the circulator should sign the affidavit before a notary public and have the notary public complete the affidavit. Date. of notarization, notary's signature, seal, and ,expiration date must be included. 8. As soon as affidavits are completed, the committee should return the petition sections assembled as one instrument for filing to: Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk 75 S, Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 97Q-479-2136 "WARNING: IT IS AGAINST THE LAW: Far anyone to sign any initiative or referendum petition with any name other than his or her own or to .na~gly sign his or her name more than once for the same~measure or to knowingly sign a petition when nat a registered elector who is eligiible to vote on the measure. DO NflT SIGN THIS PETITION UNi.ESS YOU ARE A REGISTERED ELECTOR AND ELIGIBLE TO VOTE ON . ~ ~ ~ THIS MEASURE. TO BE A REGISTERED ELECTOR, YCrU MUST BE A CITIZEN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AND REGISTERED TO VOTE. Do nat sign this petition unless you have read ar have had read to you the proposed initiative or referred measure or the summary of an initiated measure in its entirety and understand its meaning." SUMMARY OF PROPOSED INITIATIVE is proposed that the Vai! Tawn Council create an Ordinance establishing a Master Plan for the West Vail popping M~?l area and the Vai! Commons parcel of land. No contracts shall be entered into by the Town Vail for the West Vail Shopping Mall or Vail Commons untiE a Master Plan is created and approved, All easures shall be made consistent with this Ordinance and any inconsistent measures shall be repealed. FULL TEXT OF INITIATIVE PETITION ie undersigned representing at least fifteen percent {~ 5%} of the total number of registered electors, ~gistered to vote at the last regular municipal election of the Town of Vail, Colorado, hereby demand that e Town ~ouncil of the Town of Vail, consider People's Ordinance #9, Series of 1995, which appears :low in its full text, and failing to approve said Ordinance the matter shall then be,referred to a Regular or ~ecial Town Election. A PEOPLE'S ORaINANCE #1 Series of 1995 ',TLE: ,n Order to Revitalize the Vail Community, an Ordinance Creating a Master Pian by the Town of Vail r the Redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mali and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. . Stall be Ordained that the Town Council of the Town of Vaii, Colorado shall create an ordinance >tablishing a Master Plan for the Wes# Vail Shopping Mali Area and the Vail Commons parcel of land. it her ordained .that no contracts far redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall or development of e Vail Commons parcel be entered into by the Town of Vail until such a Master Plan is created by the awn of Vai[ and approved by the electora#e of the Town. f E3y1~~ws, orders, resolu#ions and ordinances or parts thereof, shall be made consistent with this ~dinartce. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this ordinance 'e hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. PROPONENTS REPRESENTATIVES: :ffr:.y [:. Christer isen, 23Ci8 A Garmisch, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado ~nthia Steitz, '1895 Meadow Ridge Road, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado s RINTED NAME SIGNATURE f~~ED NAME ~ SIGNATURE RINTED NAME ~ . SIGNATURE RINT'wD NAME RINTED NAME SIGNATURE SIGNATURE RINTED NAME RINTED NAME 'R1~D NAME 'RINTED N^~ME 0, 'RINTED NAME 'RINTED NAME 'RIN~~~ED NAME 3. 'RINTED NAME 4. RIND NAME 5. RENTED NAME I'AT1= OF COLORADO AUNTY OF EAGLE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE } } SS. STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET AD©R~ESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS AFF{DAVIT OF CIRCULATOR CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY CaUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE C1TY coUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY. COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE CITY COUNTY DATE (PRINT NAME) , (STREET ADDRESS} !CITY}, (COUNTY}, (DATE}i is a rwgisterec' vot;.r of iii, being duly sworn hPreh; S?ts f^rth the follcwi~~g; I personally circulated the petitian. ' There are signatures on this page. All signatures on said page were affixed in my presence and !believe them ko be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be. Each signer thereaf had an opportunity before signing to read the full text of the Ordinance proposed, natu ~ Date ascribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1995. 'COMMISSION EXPIRES: . TARY PUBLIC ADDRESS RESOLUTION N0, 27 Series of 1986 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MASTER LANG USE PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL WHEREAS, the Town Council finds it important to develop and adopt a Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Vail; and . WH;~REAS, the Town Council is of the opinion that a Master Land Use Plan is a critical element within the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Master Land Use Plan will be used as the principal long range planning document guiding decision making regarding land use matters within the Town of Vail; and ^. WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has considered the Plan and recommended its adoption to the Town Council. E~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIt, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A. -__. B. .~'- C. r D. E. The growth of an orderly, viable and healthy community is dependent upon long range planning for appropriate land uses throughout the entire town. That providing a framework for land use decision making is a critical ~~ need for the community. - That pressure for growth and redevelopment is ..anticipated to continue and planning efforts should respond in a posiiive and proactive manner. The Land Use Map and policy statements contained within the Master Land Use Plan shall serve as the principal guide to decision making regarding land use and zoning proposals. That the Master Land Use Plan has been developed through a tremendous amount of public participation and the plan esseni.ially reflects the goals and desires of the citizens of the Town of Vail. V ai} hereby . Tawn Caunc'i1 of the Tawn a'F MaF and the >ect~ above, the Land Use accamp~ish the the Master p'1 an. in order t° plan inc1udin nt of the Vail ComPrehens~ve _adopts the Master Land Use document as an official e~eme associated ~,g8.6 ..-- da of THIS ~_.`.-...~ ~ ~ f „_,- ApPRQVED AND ~ % :~ _, r ~~~' 3~hnst°I Mayor Pau I j~fa,ST ( '' ' - 11 ~'~ r lawn _ C ark `~-_. randmeye ' Pamela A. ,, ~; w { ~• ~..~. -v~3u- ~.~NO use PLAN CQMPLETEO FOR THE TOWN.OF VAIC COMMUNITY DEYEL4PMENT DEPARTMENt Ado#ted tdovem~er ~8, 1g86 ' ~. a MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS: . . LAND USE PLAN TASK FORCE • Mr. Dan Carcaran, Town Council • Mr. Jim Yiele, Planning b Enviranmental Commission Mr. Jae Macy, Vail Associates - ~ • , t±ir. Bob Poole, Forest Service . . . ~ Mr. Rad 5l i fer, At Large: ~~ ~ ~ . TOwN COUNCiL Mayor Paul Johnston • Mayor Pro Tem Kent Rose Mr. Eric Affeldt • Mr. Dan Corcoran Mr. Gordon Pierce • Mr. Hermann Staufer . Ms, Gail wahrlich-Lowenthal • PLANNING 8 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Mr. Duane Piper, Chairman _ Ms. Diana Donovan ~ . ~ Mr. Bryan Hobbs . lbs. Pam Nopki ns Ms. Peggy Osterfass• • Mr. Sid Schultz - Mr. Jim Yiele . _ CONSULTANTS ~~ THK Associates, Inc. I+Ir. Rabe~•t Gi,l tner, director of Urban b Regi ono] Planning ,. Ms. Leslie Freeman, Senior Urban Planner Mr. Roy Fronczyk, Senior Planner STAFF _ Ron Phillips - Town Manager Larry Eskwith - Town Attorney. Mr. Peter Patten,' Director - Community Development Dept. tlr. Rick Pylrnan, Planner II ANO MOST OF ALL • CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY TABL~.OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I CHAPTER II CHAPTER IIi CHAPTER IV CHAPTER V CHAPTER VI CHAPTER VII CHAPTER VIiI APPENDIX A . APPENDIX Ci • APPENDIX C APPENDIX 0 APPENDIX E PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 LAND USE PLAN GOALS ~ ~ OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ~ ~ 9 EXISTING LAND USE 11 SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE ~, ~7 PROPOSED LAND USE - 29 COt~iMUNITY FACILITIES ~ 41 IMPLEMENTATION ~ ~ Sy COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE - SUMt1ARY RESULTS ~ A-1 - 6 ADDITIONAL GOALS H-1 - 2 AOOITIUtJAL St3URCES C-1 ECON0~1iC AND i3EMOGRAPHIC OY£RVIE~! D-1 - 12 TO`~ltJ OP PAIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY E-1 - I6 LIST OF~ TA8LE5 Page Z., Existing Land Use 15 2. Projected Yai] Area Skier Yisits by Type - 21, 3.. Projected Popu] a~tion and Househo] ds by Type. ' ~ 22' R. Projected Town of Yai1 Housing Unit Demand by Type ~~ ~~ 23 5. Projected Tawn of Yai] Retai]~Sa]es by Category ~ ~~~ 24 6- Statistics] Summary Skier Vi sitslPopulation/ Housing/Retai] Sales 25.. - - 7..~ land Use Demand - Year 2D00 - 27 8. Approved Units - Unbuilt ~ .. 28 9. Proposed Land Use - "Preferred Land Use P]an" - ~ 39 ~~ 10. Preferred Land Ilse Plan Ana]ysis - 41 - LIST pF EXHIBITS Figure 1 -Constraints Figure 2 - Town StrUCture/Concept Figure 3 - Land Use F1~n Figure 4 - Inventory of Town Properties r • CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTON . 1. Purpose of Project , During 1985, the Town of Yail, Community Development Department initiated the process of developing a Comprehensive Plan for the Town. This process teas involved the analysis and design of a series of plan elements includ- ing:. ~ ' A. Master plans for Ford and Donavan Parks. completed in 1985; d. The Yaii Yiliage Master Flan, presently being completed; and C. The Land Use Plan, contained in this document. Following adoption of this key element of~ Lhe Plan, other components are scheduled to be undertaken including a Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan and a Transportation Element. These elements, when integrated toget- her, will serve to guide the development of the Town 'of Yail for the next fifteen years. This document is intended to serve as a basis from which future decisions may be made regarding land use within the Valley. The primary focus of the Land Use Fian has been to address the ]ong-term needs and desires of the Town as it matures. The Town of Yail has evolved from a small ski resort founded in 19b2 with 190,0001 annual skier visits and virtually no per- . manent residents to a community with 4,500 permanent residents and 1,223,450 annual skier visits in the short time span of twenty-four years. Tne Town i s now faced with the ch'al 1 enge of creatively accommodating the projected growth, while preserving the important qualities which have made Yail successful in the past - a~ a ski resort, as a permanent place to live, and as a yrowing year-round resort. This is a considerable cha.l- ~lenge, given the fact that land within the Yail Yalley is a well-defined . "finite". resource,' with much of ,the Bevel opabl e i and having already been developed at~ this . juncti on. 'Thi s Land Use P1 an has been undertaken with the goal of addressing this challenge. A secondary purpose of the Land Use Plan project was to analyze a series of properties owned by the Town of Yaii, to determine their suitability far various types of community facilities. Selected community facilities were analyzed for future needs and then matched with a series of suitable sites owned by the Town. . 1 1~~~-r;~ Annual a~~ea 'nisi ~- '~~'~ ~°~tribution of Skiing to the Colorado Economy -Eagle County Case sL~uy -~ t:c~~urado Ski Country U.S,~'s,, 1182. 2.. Planning Process The process which was utilized to complete the Land Use Plan has been a dynamic one, with citizen participation playing an' important role. The process has involved: • A. A systematic inventory of the physics] properties of the Town, includ- ing the land conditions and the statistical components of~the socio- economic base. B. A thorough analysis of the inventory to Qetermi'ne the bong-term•impli- cations of such data, C. An interactive public participation process to solicit goals, desires, and needs of the citizen, business and political communities within• the Town. p. A creative interpolation of the public input combined, with the devel- opment opportunities and constraints, into a realistic and achievable • Land Use Plan for the Town. 3. Public Participation ~ _ The public participation process has bean a major factor in shaping the preferred Land Use Plan. A. The participation process was initiated with the following goals: 1) To develop an understanding of the forces which will direct the future of the community. 2) To heap discover the various futures which the community could have. 3) To help develop a "collective" vision for the future, which could be~supported by the community at large. T ~ ". .8. The public participation has•~involved.the following steps: . 1) ~A Land Use Plan Task Force was established to act as a steering ca~~mittee to guide the plan development process. This Task Force included a representative from the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Town Council, Yail 'Associates, the Forest - Service, a Citizen/Business Community Representative and Commun- ity Development staff. 'This Task Force met regularly throughout the duration of the project to develop pal icy and, refine the plan _ as it progressed. 2 u u 2) A Town Meeting was held early on in the process to introduce the Land Use P]an project. There was a brief presentation of the purpose of the project and the project schedule, which was followed by an open discussion of growth issues. The meeting was well attended with a total of b0 participants. Those in attend- ante were asked to breakup into smaller groups of about ten and then each group discussed:. a) Likes and dislikes about the Town as it exists now. b) Level, location and type of growth: . ~ c) Hat Spots - areas of specific concern re~ar~~ling land use. A community survey was also distributed which was tabulated and is included in Appendix A. The results of this first meeting were tabulated and categorized, then used to formulate an initial set of goal statements. This information also then used as input in the generation of several Pi an alternatives. 3) A second public meeting was held one month later to review the findings of the project to date with respect to the socioeconomic data base, the Plan alternatives, and the goal statements devel- oped from the first meeting. This meeting was also well attended, with approximately 6U people: Small groups were again formed and each group voted an and responded to the goal state- Enents and finished by critiquing the proposed Land Use Plan alternatives. The results of this meeting were tabulated and used to refine the goal statements and to develop the preferred Plan. ~1 4) A meeting was then held with the Planning/Environmental Comrni s- cion and the Town Council to obtain their feedback to the socio- . economic base data and the preferred Plan. 5) A third public meeting was held to obtain additional input on the preferred Plan and begin the discussion of the various community facilities within the Town.. This meeting was attended by 40 .people and the input was again util.ize.d to refine the P1 an .' The draft report was then written. . 4. Growth Issues The Land Use Plan was intended to help address the following growth related questions identified by~the Task force. 3 A. General lI What are the various existing philosophies, issues and problems ' which have shaped growth in the past and will continue to influence the future? 21 What are the major constraints to growth and how may these change or be changed in the future? 3) What are the market demands .for growth and how should these be directed by public policy decisions7~ 4) What type of growth is necessary and desirable for. the economic well being of the Town? S) iiow should environmental quality of life concerns play a role in directing growth? 6). Where is there room for growth, where do growth pressures exist versus where growth should optimally occur? 7) How should the .Town of Yail approach the issue of annexation and ~ National Forest land transfers. 8) What types of general administrative changes are necessary to address the issue of growth (i.e., land use regulation revisions, S zoning changes, etc.)? B. Level of Growth I? Given that Vail Mountain has approved plans for expansion of its capacity gradually over the next 25 years (annual average 3~}~ how will this growth be accommodated and when? • 2} What growth rate~is appropriate? ~. ~ ~ a} No growth (expand parking for day use of mountain); ~~ b} Slow growth; and . . c) Keep expanding at current rate. 3) Should growth accommodations be steered toward day use or over- ~ .night use? t• Location of Growth - Should growth be accommodated through: :~ 11 Increased density in Core Areas; 2} Growth up hillsides/forest servile land transfers; 3) Growth in existing multi-family developed areas; andlor 41 Growth in undeveloped areas. ~~ d r ~~ C. location of Growth - Should growth occur primarily in: ~) Hotel s; 2} Accaarnodation units; 3} Condo~ninums; ' 4} Townhouses; 5} Single family/duplex residences; S} Commercial facilities; and/or • 7} Balances in all sectors. The series of ublic meetin s al on ~with• in ut~ from the P&EC .Town Council P 9 9 p and Task Force have effectively answered many of these questians,~ as will be evidenced in the later chapters of this document, specifically in the Goals Chapter and in the design of the Plan itself. 1 5 ' ~ CHAPTER II - LAND USE PLAN G{1ALSlAOLICI£S The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then sub- stantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus, once the public had had the opportunity .to reflect on € Lhe concepts and ideas initially presented. The goo] statements were then revised through the review process' with the 'Cask Force, the ~ P1 anni ng and Environmental Commission and Town Counci] and now represent a policy guide- ' line for the Land Use Plan. These goals are to be used as adopted polity .guidelfines in the review process for new development proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Ilse Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposa]. The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows. i. General GrowthiDeveloprnent, 1.1 Yail should continue to grow'in a controlled environment-, maintaining a balance between residential, connercial and recreational uses to serve both, the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.Z' The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3 1'he quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible 1.4 The original theme of the old.Yillage Core. should ,5e carried into new development in the Village Gore through continued implementation of _ the Urban Design Guide P1 an. 1.5 Cor~nercial strip development of the Yal]ey should be avoided. 1.6 Development proposal s on the, hi 1 ]sides should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Limited development may be permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not highly visible from the Valley • floor, New projects should~be carefully controlled and developed with sensitivity to the environment. 1.7 New subdivisions should r~ot~be permitted in high geologic hazard areas. 1.8 Recreational and public facility development on National Forest lands may be permitted where no high hazards exist if: a) Community objectives are met as articulated in the Comprehensive P] an. b~ The parcel is adjacent to the 'Gown boundaries, with goad access. c? The affected neighborhood can be involved in the decision-making . process. 1.9 f~ational Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownershi p shoal d remai n as open space and not be zoned for private development. 1.10 Development of Tawn owned lands by the Town of Yail (.other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such ~~ development is for public use. 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity. long term 1 eased to a private entity or Converted tC~ a private use .without a . public hearing process. ~ ~ ~ . 1.12 Yail. should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing ,developed areas (infill areas). 1,.13 Yail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as. well as its potential far public use. 2. 5kierjTourist Concerns ~ - -, 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day visitors. 2.2 The ski area owner the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing Facilities and the Town func- tion, mflre efficiently. 2.3 The ski area owner the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve facilities for day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural oppor- tunities to encourage summer. tourism. 2.5 The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve year-round tourism. 2.6 • An additional gol f course i s .needed. The Town should work with the down val ley cammuni t~i es to Bevel op ~ a public gol f course as wel 1 as other sports facilities to serve the regional demand far recreational facilities. 2.7 The Town o. Yail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open Space. . 2.8 Day skier needs for parking and access should be accommodated through creative solutions such as: a) Increase busing from out of town. b) Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional base portals. c) Continuing tv provide temporary surface parking. d) •Addition of structured parking. 3. Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 7 3.2 The Yillage and l.ionshead areas arg the~best location for hotels to serve the future needs oi' the destination skiers. 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success oi' the Town of Yail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. • ~ 3.5 •. Cntertainment art ented businesses and ,.cultural acti~vi ties shout d be encouraged in~ the core areas to create diversity. More night time businesses, on-going events and sanctioned "street happenings" should be encouraged. 4. Yi ~ l age CorelLi onshead 4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial deve]opment.in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to' facilitate access and delivery. 4.2 increased density in the Care areas is acceptable so long as the . existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Alan and the Yail Village Master Plan. 4.3 The ambiance o` the Village is important to' the identity o` Yai1 and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate sire, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) r 4.G The connection between the Yillage Core and Lionshead should be , enhanced through: a) Installation of a new type of people mover. • b) improving the pedestrian system with a creatively designed ~~ ~ connection, oriented toward,~a nature walk, alpine garden, and/or scu•1 pture plaza. ~ • ~, c) flew development should be controlled to limit commercial uses. 5. Rest de.nti al . 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted .areas 'and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private e " orts, assisted by limited incentives, prpvided by the Town o` Yail, _ with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands i'or .a full range of housing types. , 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. 'b. Community Services 6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth. 5.2 The Town of Yail should play a role in future development through balancing growth with services. 6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods. A number of additional goals mere developed as a result of the public meeting input. These goals were related to other elements of the Compre- hensive Plan such as Parks and Recreation, 3ranspartation and Economic Dev2l,opment. These are. included only for informational purposes in Appendix B. These goals are not considered as a part of the goals adopted i n this Land Use Plan.. 8A GHAPTER III ~ QPPORTU~lITIES AIWA GOf1STRAINTS Before an accurate picture of potential land use in Yai]~ could be devel- aped, it was of critical importance to assess both the constraints and opportunities, with respect to development potential ,which exist ~in the Town of Yail. These constraints/opportunities included an analysis of: ~. F] oodpl ai ns/iii ver Corridors/Mater Bodies These were ma ed within the Yalle and were considered an area which would pP y '. preclude new development activity; except as related to open space and park • development. The source for this information was the Gore Creek Floodplain Map, 1971, Nydro-Triad, Ltd. 2. Steep Slopes All areas over 40x s]ope were mapped. These areas were also classified to ~' preclude development, as the Town of Yail presently has adopted~(as a part of the zoning ardinance~'requirements far development on scopes greater than 40~. 5lope.maps were also obtained-from the source listed above. 3. Major Barriers `. The I-70 right-of-way was design ted on the Existing Land Use Map as an area which would not 'be availabl •for future deve]o.pment. I-10 right-af- way maps were provided by the T9. n. - .. ' 4. Rockfall, Debris F]o-~, Aebris Avalanche, Snow Avalanche Rockfall, debris flow ,and debris avalanche areas were mapped on a separate 1"=400' map for low, moderate and high hazard areas. A composite map which included snow avalanche, geologic hazards, steep slopes, and floadp]ain areas was then compi]ed at a sma]]er sca]e of 1"=1,000'. The composite map . showed only high hazard avalanche, debris flow and rockfali areas.' These - high hazard areas were considered areas in which new development shau]d not . ~ occur. The source of this i~nfarmatian was the Environmental Ganstr.afnts . ~1ap, 1977, Briscoe, Maphis', Murray and ~.amorit and Royston, fianamata, Beck and Abbey.' 71ie Debris Flow and Debris Avalanche Hazard Analysis, 1980, by Arthur T. Mears and the Rockfall Study, 19$4, 5chmueser and Associates studies and maps +rere also uti]ized. 5. Open Space/Park t.ands All areas which were designated as permanent park and open space ]ands were identified as a part of the Existing Land Use Map~Exhibit. These lands . included active parks owned by the Town of Yail and passive open space and greenbelt areas owned by the Tawn and by homeowners' associations. These areas were considered to be unavailable for any future development, other than park-type developments. The Community Development Department provided -- a list of these sites. Q .i , .. s D ~ ro rq ~ O~ ~a° a o ~ a ,n ° xm ~ r ~ 4 0 o+da=b ~ ~ ti1~i1 •~ nro nneav.,n t~ ~ °~ a "~ I l ,r, o >~ H~ ~ a:;;,:,;~ a' ~+ s-<$S b 'N o n~~=°a~4 a ~x ~ wa a xm gM ~ ~~ w ~ ~ x~ S ~ ~~ ~ q• om w ~ ~ N j O ~ /+ A d 3 , ~ _ S~ d ~ Y ~ ~ ~n i ii i~` ~~ ~ ` ;A ,~ ~ ~~" ~~ ~' . ~ G ~ ~.+ -~ `. • l © na (CD N ~ r._ r-r a` -, ,~ ~ m 1 ~ ~ I ~ N L.. O~ I I k r r r ~--- r-- r-- ~ ~.•. r r-- r--- r ~ ~~ .~ r- ,-- ~ -- - t . .~ '~ ~ ,~ .~ ~ b o 0 ~ ti x °~' x M ti4 is ]obObO~W ~ayyc'iJ o b• s s n wD n'6 n ~o b v rn ~ } ~ o a •~ ; w` u .i ~ 1 w O ~~ x p * p ~ • Nre ~~ s•} 1r T} m q y x N •~~aa.v ~°N ~ : •xoa4 ~ yG1 V N'" .~~ ;, ` ~ i a a ~ ~x H ° ~~°, z ~ ~ t • O N YA- N N M :ate M ~ N 3 m b - • o ~ ~ a r o m a o .i ~ '[ ~ i ~ ~ K ~ j . o .~ . . n i 6Ar S 5 Z} 0 .~ Z vn~ W C ~ ro~~ ~o.~~ ~-ucsv ~ , ~. >,,>^^ V` r1+ ~~ Q 1 .. .: . ,` ~ :~:.:. 1 ~~ I ..::... ~ .: .~ /! .'. .~ II ~ ~ i I 1 I 1 ( a ~ I i ~~~ <. ~.;. .~ /• ~..~_ ... °'~. ..:..,;- ~ ... g 1 • r i ~.. i i !. L. ~' ~ ~L. 1 U,s ~ N fl .. ~ . ~~• ~~ `>~ ` '~~ ::;` 1 .:,,: a„~~~ dl ` .. ,~~ I ~ I r_ ~ ~ ,., ~ .. ~ I ., Qj d ~ ~ ~ s 1• ~: .. ~ I ~ ~ ~ .'`~ N '~^ ~: ~j t ~: ~ I / 4 ~ i .ice Y' ` i ~ ~~<~. ~ r '~'~ ~ ~~ ~~ mS' .:~ . , .. . ... '? 4+f ., :~ ~• `~ .~~:.~ ~•'' ~ .. ~ -,~ :_ '~: '~ ~ ,:. ..... : • . , ~. .~ r r- • . .; ; • ~. - ~: ~. ..~,. •~ ,„ .'rig ~,•;:...:~,{ . I } ;„ •.s ~. ~ .~r ? a L >? :' ~'i ~} a~a I' • I -•~ . low • .~ .~ ' ,:~ •~ 4 .T\{ • :'~i l.:'~~I u~u;`•Y''ti ~ Vii;-' I ,,~ti .I • `-'"- ~- r'- r f--' a 1 ~~ r~ i ~- r• { • • • '''ti ~. > ~ ' ~- ~~ ~ I ~. j •{~:. I ~` .. . `~. 1 ~ ~• b1 ~ L7 A C7 A . m ~ Ob ~, _ ~1 • ~.. ~ ..h.. ' f`. ~ '~I ~t r r~ ;~~ ~ o ~+ . ~ 7 a 9 O C p ~ ~ d'79 . ; ~ . . W O d,F ~~ ~ ., ~C o O ~ O ~ m ~ d~• I e w L =~ a ~` 4 d a' tail ~ / ~+ A ~ I ti q ~ Y M M M`c 4~ r~*~~va ' xT ~ ~ ~ 7 o`N ~ : ~w o`o ~9 v h~ . ~ b v A Q 1 ~' a t:~ ° • s „m n xm °= ~ • ° H n2 s ~ ~x ~: • ~ ~. m m ~ i' ~ . to $ .. COl ~ 1~~ r 1 ~ M o a S -+ ~ ~ N ~ s v_ m a o m s ~ ~ ~ M O e ~~ ~ ~ d T O • ' ~ • ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ V ~-- r- • r- r, r r; r~ n m ~~ Z} "'O Z ~o "~ ~ ~ _. ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ,.y. ~ ~ 0 ~ ' 1 1 ' ~~ ~ . . ' . . ~, f ~ 1 . . . ~ "' ' ..... ~: ,, ~• • • 1 ~ '7 ~ mss, }~ •;; ,~ yx a' r ) ,c l > ~ / T h Xy { ~ ~ w ~ 1L1 r£ -r ~, I 2 ' P r, r l ~ ' ~t ~ N ~ ! a ~ • :'~~ r ~ 1 ~ ~ . • ~•~k C~~.~;x.• :3• .. ~: ~::y , + . q +r ?~~ ~ei~~. ... (.; .. ~ ~ fi, Yacant lands Areas which contained no development as of 1986 were identified, mapped and quantified. Yacant lands were quantified with and without constraints according to the composite map which Showed high geologic hazard areas, avalanche, floodplain and slopes over 40~. Yacant lands were identified ~, through field observation and cross-checked with aerial photographs. 7. ~iational Forest Lands An,important component of the Land Use Plan study was to .help ;the Town, develop a process whereby National Forest lands, proposed for exchange or sale, could be evaluated at a time prier to transfer,~annexation and zon- ing, The Town of Yail Council and staff had identified this as an area of primary concern at the time requests for proposals were issued for this Plan. The main motivation for investigating this issue was for the benefit of both the town and the Forest Service, so that both entities would be able to develop a cooperative approach to evaluating proposals on National Forest lands, having carefully evaluated the long term needs and desires of both entities. •~ In order to evaluate these lands the following analysis was performed. A. As a starting paint, lands which had been designated by the Forest Service on the"National Forest Land Disposal Map" were identified.and added to the plan boundary. B. The Task Farce decided, after discussions with the National Forest representative, to analyze al 1 parcel s adjacent to the Town that had areas less than 40$ slope which could be feasibly accessed. These areas were evaluated by a study of U.S,G.S. quad maps, combined with the knowledge of the Forest Service, as to areas which should be analyzed. These areas amounted to isolated small parcels south of the Town boundaries, as we7i as parcels north and east of Potato Patch. These parcels were added into the plan boundary. $. Yail Mountain Expansion Plans The Vail Mountain Master Plan provided by Vail Associates, was carefully studied and where the plans affected lands within the Town boundaries, these were identified and mapped. In particular, a new area for the ski portal at Cascade Village and planned improvements south of Lionshead were shown as Ski Base Facilities, to indicate that these areas would not be available for other uses. A more detailed list of all reports utilized as a part of this study is provided in Appendix C, A map which iil~istrates the combined constraints is contained an Figure "1". Niare detailed large sca]e maps are available for review with the Town of Yail Community Development department, IO I ,~ CHAPTER IY -EXISTING LAND USE An important step leading to the development of the proposed land use plan is to analyze the pattern of existing land uses within the 'fawn. Th~,s analysis al]owed fo.r,a definition of the opportunities for future growth, where it could be located, and why based on compatibility of surrounding land uses and physical constraints, , 1. Inventory Process •~ .. Existing land uses within the Town were inventoried through the combination of: a} field recannaisance; b} analysis .of 1911 existing ]and use maps; c} aerial photo interpretation; and d1 verification with the Community Deve1- op~ent Department. This information was then mapped and land uses were 'measured by land use category. The categories which were used to'classify land use were chosen to be consistent with ear]ier ]and use inventories, as well as to accurate]y reflect the array of land .uses within the Town. The ' land uses were classified as follows: A. Residential 1} Single Family Detached/Two' Family - includes single family and duplex units, at a density of less than 3 units per acre. 2} Multi-family Medium Density - includes townhames, raw houses, condominiums. and cluster housing when individual units are not detached. .Densities range from 3 to 18 dwelling units per acre. 3} Multi-family High Density - includes apartments and condominiums a~t densities of over 18 dwelling units per acre,. B. Hotels, Lodges and Accommodation Units Includes all units which are occupied on a short term basis, other than c'ondominiu~ns and apartments. ~. . t. 'C.. Village and Lionshead Core Areas . Includes a mix of uses including: retail, office, hotel, condominums and public/semi-public facilities such as: the ~nunicipal complex. post office, hospital and fire station. D. Commercial 1} business Services - includes offices, clinics, banks, savings and ` loans. 2} Commercial/Retail - includes retail uses, restaurants and per- ' sonal services. ~} 'Intensive Commercial - includes commercial recreation, service j stations, vehicle repair shops and sales, and general ,storage ! ' facilities. ' 11 r i ~ Pu51ic and Semi ublic E. p Includes fire stations, churches, schools, water and sewer service and storage faci]ities, communication facilities, and municipal facilities such as maintenance and storage facilities. F. Parks • - ~ Includes designated parks and athletic fields. - G. Open Space Includes greenbelts,.stream corridors, drainageways and other 'areas which function as passive open space. M. Ski Area Development- • Includes ski trails and ski base facilitiessuch as ticket purchase ~ areas, restaurants,-ski school facilities, etc. I. Vacant/Platted Includes all lands which are within recorded subdivisions that are presently vacant. J. Yacant/Unplatted Includes all undeveloped lands that are unsubdivided, including National Fa rest lands administered by the Forest Service, as weal as private Moldings within the present municipal boundaries. K. Interstate 70 Right-of-Way _ includes all lands designated interstate right-of-way as. it traverses - the Vail Valley within the Town boundaries. L~. Areas o.f' Less Than 40q Slape Outside of Town Boundary Includes lands adjacent to the-Town boundaries presently within the national forest, which have areas of less tl~an 40~ slope. In the analysis of existing land use, a series of documents were studied. These documents included: 1? The Corrnnuni ty Action P1 an - Tawn of Yai 1, 1984. 21 Development Statistics - Community Development Department, 1985. Y ~ 3) Vail Plan - Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey, 1973. 4) Final Report - Economic Development Con~nission, 1984. 51 Tne Yai1 Village 14aster P1 an - Draft, 1986. 6) Vail ~dountain Master Plan - Yail Associates, 1986. - 7) Land Development Regulations and Codes - Community Development Department. -- . 8? Numerous other technical reports supplied by the Community Devei- _ opment Department, as noted in~Appendix C. 12 The study of these documents led to a clear understanding of the various forces that have influenced the development of 'Vail and will play a part in its future develo ment . p . 2. Land Use Pattern r l T he pattern of existfing land uses in Yail has been shaped by the natural characteristics of the Yalley in concert with the man-made features that have been constructed over the years. The predominant features of the Valley which have played a major role in Yail`s design, include the proxi-. mity of steep siapes,~the location of Gare Creek and' its floodplain, the location of the ski mountain and attendant ski facilities and the presence . of a major transportation Corridor i Interstate 70 and its interchanges. 'The primary nodes of urban development have developed at~the base of the ski mountain at the Yail Pillage and Lionshead. with the ski access points planned at Cascade Pillage along with the construction of the hotel, and its attendant retail uses, a third node of urban development is being . created, These nodes are presently the focus of the majority of the 'tourist oriented ' ~ retail, service and hotel activity within the Town. A fourth urban node ~ ~ has emerged at the I-70 interchange at West Yaii, which is primarily oriented toward serving the consumer needs far local residents. The areas outside of these urban nodes have been shaped by the combined forces of the steep slopes, Gore Creek and I-10, Gare Creek has remained as an open space spine through the Yalley and along with the golf course, has served to influence the location and type of growth. Residential land ~. 'uses have developed over the years east and west of the urban Hades, pri- marily south of i-7p, due to the proximity of steep slopes to I-70 on the north. Same development has also occurred.in West vaii, north of I-7U where suitable development conditions have existed. The faces of the most intensive residential development has been to the south of I-70.between the freeway and Gore Creek. less intensive development has occurred south of L tl~e Creek, where more sensitive land conditions and less suitable access to I-7Q have continued to influence the type of growth. These factors have significantly shaped the pattern of grooth in the Yail Yalley ,and wi l l Conti Hue to do'''so throughout the i i fe of Chi s P1 an. As Pail is, at this point in time, already fairly intensely developed, with land being a finite resource within the confines of the Valley, these past land use patterns are not expected to change drastically with the design. and adoption of this ~r~lan. The community, at it's public meeting process, expressed a desire to Conti Hue to bui 1 d an these wel 1 established trends and far this reason, these trends have been used as a foundation for 'the 3 design of the proposed Land Use Plan. 1 Figure 2 - Town 5tructurelConcept - illustrates these patterns in a cancep- teal way. A, Residential Aeveiopment = The most important farce which has directed the mix of land uses in Yai] has been the ski industry, which' is dependent on an adequate supply of lodging units, tourist-related retail uses and areas for parking. These demands, when combined with the physical components of the Yail Yalley and a relative scarcity of suitable land far development, have treated a fairly I3 intense pattern of development within the Town ofi Yail. This is reflected in the fart that b0~ of all dwelling units are devoted to multi-family, with an additional 20x in accommodation units. densities range from 18-20 dwelling units per acre for multi-family and up to 50 dwelling units/acre. for hotels in the core areas. While multi-family accounts for the majority of the types of units, single family uses still cover•more land area, with 408.6 acres (or 12~) of the rota] land area in Yail devoted to single family and duplex uses. Multi-family uses account for 11X of the land area i n Ya~i.l outside of the care areas of tF~e Yi 11 age and I.i onshead. B. Parks and Open Space The residential areas are broken up by significant amounts of open space. greenbelt and park areas in both public and private ownership. These com- bined areas account for i7~ of the land area within the Tawn or 555.7 acres. The park acreage inc]ude.s bath developed and undeveloped parks and the golf course. These park areas include Stephen's Park and Donovan Park in west Yail, Ford Park in the mid-Pail area and Big Horn Park in east Yail, ail south of F-7D and the Buffehr Creek, Red Sandstone and Booth Creek Parks,north of I-70. Areas designated as open space, which account for 296.6 acres, include the iCatsos property east of the golf course, owned by the Town and several other parcels which have been designated to remain permanent open space, i.e., the Gore Creek stream tract. C. Ski Base Facilities/Public and Semi-public Uses Ski ,based facilities within the Town of the Town. Public and semi-public of open space within the Tawn. Uses vice and storage facilities make up Town's ]and area. boundaries add up to 43.6 acres or 1~ facilities also serve as partial areas such as churches, schools, water ser- a total of 56.6 acres of 2~ of the D. Core Areas As previously indicated, the Yillage and l.ianshead Core Areas are the most intensely developed areas. These cores contain a mix of uses including hotels, condominiums, offices, retail ~busi~nesses. and personal services, often all within the same building. Other types of uses such as pedestrian plaza areas, municipal services (town ha11 and fire station}, semi-public uses (hospital and chapel), and multi-level parking structures are also found in the core areas. The two urban cores total 131.5 acres or•4~ of the land area. This land use document did not analyze land use for these areas on a parcel or building-by-building level because of the in-depth study the Town has given these areas in the past (completion of the Lians- head ttroan Design Plan and The Yai1 Yillage piaster Plan currently being completedl. As a consequence, land uses for these areas are only addressed in a general way in this document. ~ r. :' .... ' , j . E, . ,• •:;;erci al Uses Most ;,r the commercial, business, retail, office and hotel uses have been tr,~.s~tionally located within the core areas. With the steady growth of the ~ p~rrwnant population, Yai] has experienced the need for diversification urist-based ret a br f t il i t ad f d d to i I o a o goo rom n er range o s an serv o ces serve both the needs of the local residents and the Yong-term visitor. These types of services, while found ,to some degree in the core, occur primarily in west Yail. ~~hese business and commercial. areas make up a total of 26.4 acres, which is a very smal] proportion of the Town. ~ In addition, there is •a~n 8 acre site in use as hotel and accommodation units in west Yail. In terms of the more intensive commercial• uses, which include mostly service stations, vehicle repair, maintenance and storage areas,. and areas of commercial recreation (outside of the sKi area); there are 11 acres altogether. These 'combined commercial areas make up a total of 27 acres, which is only 1~ of the total land area. This small propor- tion nay be attributed to the fact that Yai1 is a ski-based Community, therefore, the demand and the range of non-tourist,relat~d commercial uses . in general is limited in~Yai1. ' . F. Interstate Right-of-Wa.y . Cne of the mast significant areas within the Town, is the Interstate 70 r~ ;"t-af-way. The right-of-way takes up an area of 505.5 acres or 15~ of • t ~~~ 1 and area, wi thi n the study area. Thi s i s the 1 argest proportion i n ~": ~~"° type of use. ' ~• tational Forest Lands 1 °•, ~-~ortant aspect of the Viand use analysis was to assess National~Forest ••:s adjacent to the Town boundaries, within the White River National ' "~~~~., whicy may be considered in'the future for an alternate use other ~• `~ ~"dn Puoiic. it was determined by the Task Force, after discussions with ~ ~: ~~~'~=t' tie Forest Service, to assess areas that: 1) had been identified for disposal "~~• ' by the Forest Service;, 2) could be feasibly accessed; and 3) t ~~ onta~necf acreage of 40~ slope or less. These areas for the mast part were s~ii ~ parcels along the corners. of the Town on the south side, with two 1 ~~~t '~ • ir;er Parcels identified north and east of the Potato Patch club area. ir'eS ~ ry ~ :~#-` ~. e land areas came to a total of 125 acres, or 4~ of the land within the t.:~ f are . , ~~; a ~ ~ ~'"~'~ ~• "~~ ~' ~ `t' "~ i.and Use i s shown an a 1 ar a seal a ma oval 1 abl a at Town of Yai 1 °~~ ~t"= ~ g " "`•~,~.- '-' = ~ • Thi s map shows the confi uration of 1 and use withi n tine Town, i 11.1 t rat ••~; ~, ` ~ a, ; ~ • ively. Land-use categories have been generalized into broader Lots ;dri , ~ ~ ~ ~ • es such as residential , co+rnnercial., parks, open space and ski base ~ ~ ~ ~ *`' : . ~Z , `~=ant for ease of illustration at this scale. A larger scale map ' • ~ ••- 1 is on file with the Community Uevelop;ment Department in both ' ~ ''~d bl ~ ' ~ , ack and white, which shows 1 and uses by parcel far the more aa• ~ i ..• ~~~~ categories contained on Table i. , • `.~ 15 .- ~ Tabl e 1 EXi5TIlaG LARD US€ LAt~D l1SE CATEGORY Single Family/Two Family fonder 3 units per acre) Multi-Family Medium Density idol ti -Fami 7 y iii gh Density ' {Over 18 du/ac} Yillage/Lionstread Core Areas {Mixed-use Areas} Hotels, Lodges, Accommodation Units ~ • • (Units far lease ar rent on regular basis} BUSinesS Services ' {Offices, Clinics, Banks} .~ • Commercial/Retail • (Retail Uses, Restaurants, Personal Services} :~ Intensive Conxnercial {Commercial Recreation, Service Stations, Vehicle Repairs, Storage} Pualic/Semi-Public - {Sc~~ools, Water & Sewer Service & Storage Facilities, Communication Facilities, and Municipal Facilities? - - ~ Parks • (Designated. Parks and Athletic Melds}~ r Open Space {Greenbelts, Stream Corridors, Drainageways} - Ski Area Development (Trails and Ski Base Facilities} _ Vacant/Platted (Subdivided, undeveloped lots} • ~ Vacant/Unpl ~t.ted - (l~r;s~:i~divi~~u, undeveloped land}~ Interstate 70 Right-of-way .. {Within the limits of the Tawn} Areas of Less than 40A slope outside of Town Boundary {~lational Forest Lands} Tatal • l~ ACRES 408.6 287.+4 57.5 131.5 3.5 12.9 11.0 5b.6 259.1 29b.5 43.6 412.5 76'7.8 505.5 125.0 3,360.1 PERCEtJT i2 .9 2 4 0 0 0 a 2 ~$ 9 1 12 23 15 4 100 CHAPTER Y - SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE At the sam t e ime that the physical characteristics were being analyzed, the socioeconomic profile of Yai1 was being investigated. This process involved an in-depth analysis of the historical patterns of growth within the Town of Yail~ Eag]e 'County, and in the ski industry as a whole. This process required, developing a clear understanding of the complexity of fac- tors which have interacted to influence development over the .years. After assessing the historical growth characteristics, projections were developed for both the permanent and visitor populations to the year 2000. The Yai1 Mountain expansion plans were carefully studied because ski area growth is the single most important factor which drives growth within the Yai1 Ya11ey. These projections were then utilized to determine overall demands far the different types of land use which would need to be accommo- dated within the proposed Land Use P1 an. These projections represent THK's best professional forecast for growth ~. within the Yail Palley over the next I.5 years. The assumptions used in the • forecasting model were carefully reviewed with the Task Force and the ~' Community Development Department staff and were accepted to be the most ~ appropriate data from which to make projections. The forecasting projec- tions and assumptions should be analyzed and adjusted periodically as market conditions change throughout the life of the Plan. Presented in this chapter is a summary of the methodology used to generate ~~ the projections of the most important findings of the analysis. The com- plete.socioeconomic report is included in Appendices D and E. For the purpose of ana]yzing the differing effects on housing and retail space demand*, three ratios of destination (overnight) skiers were assessed, These varied from 5U~ to b0~ up to 70t destination skiers, with the local percentage remaining fixed at 20~; while day skiers varied from 304 to 204, to 10~ respectively. As the percentage of destination skiers ,~ increase's, the demand for housing and the amount of annual retail sales, ~~ and hence retail space needs increase proportionately. For the purpose of fixing land use demand, the 6Ub destination skier scenario was chosen, • because it most accurately represented the percentage of destination skiers visiting the Yail area in I9S6 The other two scenarios are includ d i . e n the Appendix and can be used to adjust projections far land use demand~in the future, should Yail Associates reorient its marketing to increase or decrease the percentage of destination skiers. Before presenting the projections, it is important to understand the metho- ~ dology used to generate the numbers. "`Office demand was not projected due to the tack of adequate inventory information. 17 1. Forecasting Model The Town of Yail Forecasting Model was prepared by THK Associates in order to assist the Department o.f Community Development in their efforts to develop a Master Plan for the Town of Yail. In genera, the model utilizes estimated skier, population, housing and retail characteristics in order to project additional housing unit and retail space demands for the Town of Vail through the year 2000. All assumptions are based on existing studies and surveys availa5le from the Department of Community Development, Yail Associates, Inc., Yail Resort Association, and Colorado Ski Gauntry .USA with adjustments made based on review and discussion with Task Farce members. The following is a brief overview of the sources and methodology employed in the Town of Yail Forecasting Model. The entire model keys off the projected deli yn day* skier visits made iri the Yail Master Development Plan (VA, Inc. and RRC, 1935}, From the design day skier visits, average day, peak day and total skier visits are calcu- lated based on conversion formulas provided by YA, Inc. The design day skier visits are then allocated into day, destination and local skiers based on proportions available from The Yai1 Mountain/Gore Yalle~+ Capacity Study (Gage Davis Associates, 1980) and the Itepart of the Yap tcanomic Development Cammission~ (1985}. Although not activated in the model cur- . rently, the model has the capacity to allow an incremental change in the proportion of day, destination and loco] skiers over the length of the pro- jection period; rather than a constant proportion throughout. The day visitor and overnight visitor populations and permanent population are derived fro~n different methodologies. The day skier visits and desti- nation skier visits are adjusted upward to reflect non-skier members of a skiing party which results in the. day visitor population and the overnight visitor population. The non-skier adjustEment factors came from The Yail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study, the "Village Study Assumptions" IRKC, 15d5f and the Department or Community Development. The Tawn of Yail perms- Went pvp~lation is based on the historical ratio of the permanent popula- . tion (State Division of Local Government, 19$5 and Department of Community Devel o.pment} ~ to the total 'skier vi~si ts. The number of households i s then determined by dividing the overnight visitor population and the permanent population by the weighted average number of persons per household in visi- for lociyiny and permanent housing,~respectively. * "Design Day" is defined as that leve] of skier attendance which will be exceeded on only lOp of the days of the ski season. 18 i ` The additional housing unit demand projections incorporate numerous assume- . tians from several studies and surveys. Assumptions pertaining to the dis- tributian of permanent population by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate are from the study Affordable Housing £a~le County-1984 (£agle County Community Develop- . ment Department and RRC, 194). Assumptions regarding the distribution of overnight visitors by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate by unit type are from The Yai1 Mountain/Gore. Valley Capacity Study, Department of l~ommunity Develop- ~ment and VItA. {o calculate the addl~t~anal housing units required by type each year, the additional overnight visitor households and permanent house- holds per year are distributed according to the proportion of each unit type indicated by previous studies. Concurrently. additional units by type • are adjusted upward by the appropriate occupancy .rate. fihe retail sales projections for the Town of YaiT are based on average day . skier Vi51t5 rather than design day skier visits. Average day skier visits are used because the goal is. to determine the total winter visitor sales - over the entire five month ski season rather than looking at sales on a . "one day" design day. Day skiers and destination skiers have different total dollar expenditures per day., and the allocation of their total expen- ,- ditures among various rtaiT categories .is also different. The day skier t ~ and destination skier expenditure patterns are from The Contribution of ~ Skiing to the Colorado Economy (CSCUSA, 1984 Updatel and are adjusted upward to reflect the pricing structure of Yail (per Task Force discussion ' l/17/8b). Ta arrive at the total winter visitor sales, the day skier and destination skier expenditures by retail category are aggregated. The "Town of Yail Monthly Retail Sales" (TOY, 19afi) was utilized to determine the proportion - - of total winter sales made by the local population, the ratio of total winter Sales to total annual sales, and the proportion of total annual sales +nade by the local population. Industry standards of dollar support _ per square foot of retail space are applied to the lodging, eating and . drinking,, and entertainment.categories for the day and destihation skiers and to the total annual sales to the local population category in order to translate the. '.average annual additional dollar support into average annual - ~ additional square feet of retail space required. It should be noted that the terms "local population" and "permanent popuTa- tion" do not define the same group. Retail purchases in the Town of Yail are made bath by the permanent population of Vail and by residents of sur- rounding communities. Since it is the total additional dollar support in the' Town of Vail which determines the fatal additional retail space required, it is irrelevant for the purposes of this model from where those dollars come,. Therefore, the local population refers to both the permanent population of Yail~and residents of surrounding communities who make retail purchases in the Town of Vail., 19 2. Summary of Forecasting Results Fallowing is a discussion of the specific tables which led to the develop- ment of the land use demand figures. A. Projected Yail Area Skier Visits by Type (Table 2) Total skier populations have been projected from the Yail Associates Master Plan, which then translates into skier numbers, broken down by day, desti- nation, and local skiers. Table 2 shows average;'design~dayl, and peak~day s;:ier population projections for all three skier groups projected to the year 200. ~ '. As can be seen from the table, by the year 2000 total skier visits are pro- jected to be~ 1,517,000, up from 1,223,450 in the year 1985, with the total 'number of average skiers per day being 10,780 in the year 2000, up from 8,160 per day in 1485. B. Projected Population and Households by Type {Table 3a These numbers are then Converted into population projections for overnight visitors, day visitors, and the permanent population. This table shows increases of approximately 25t for all three population groups. Day visi- tors increased. from 2,670 in 1985 to 3,530 in the year 20i}0, overnight visitors increased from 9,2UU to 12,150, and the permanent population goes from 4,400 in 1985 to 5,92U.in the year 200U. C. Projected Town of Vail Housing Unit Demand by Type {Table 4) The household numbers from Table 3 are then assigned a person/household number and occupancy rates {based on historical occupancy ratios) and~hous- ing demand can then be estimated for the different types of.residential housing and for lodging, for bath the overnight visitor and the permanent resident. This is reflected in Table 4 which shows the additional demand for housing each year by housing type. The. total residential housing demand for bath permanent and the overnight visitor by the year 2000 is 1,523 units and fo.r lodging the fatal demand is 395 units by the year 2U00. D. Projected Town of Yail Retail Sales by Category (Table 5? Retail space demands were estimated based on annual retail sales projec- tions. This is accomplished- by converting annual sales {Dy looking at industry standards for sales per square foot? into future demand far retail space for visitor and locally oriented retail needs. This table shows total retail sales growing from 5173.8 million in 19B5 to 5229.5 million in the year 2000. The estimated amount of sales attributed to the permanent population is 25~ of the total annual sales. 1 See "Design Day" defi ni t.i on i n ~nethodol ogy secti on. 20 O yl yw F a N Y AC W N K K L k s 0 .r Y 6 tJ 4J 4 r Y .+ L i /./ O N } L N . 4' v O 6 /4 N N SY N N N N f 5f M N N }1/ N N N ~ 01 r -~ } W eo oa eo .. ~S r a~~ '~~~ ~~ ~ 9i ~ =1 .~ . v In er r N tn1 N N N N IY N N N /'1 '1 M nl A M M MM ~1 y1 ~1 M M ~ C S b ~ ~ Q ~ O , O ~ G O O Q G O y ~i pa po pO po p p p Q p p O p ~ ~D ~ ~ 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O ~ 10 S W N ~ . Y ~ r V ~ ~ ~D ~ .1C ~10~o e~~n'7i~o~r7+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h o eo4o oa ' ' ~ wl. ~ www w + w ~ ~ w+ M ~ r r~ ~ ~ ~ r M~1 MM MM 11~1~ M~11 M~1 pp M~1 MM ~! O~~ O O a O~ G a LI Q~ C a~ N ~ ~ pp pO pp pp pp pp ~~}} pp pp pp p pp pp N N N, ~ M Y iv h N N N N F N N M N h1 IV l~ r 04. ' ~ ~ r W w • ~ • +~ M 3 ~'~m o ~Nrl/~l ~ow~.^ nw ~~ . . v ~ .~ N h N M1 M N N h N N 1'1 1^ /A h Al r1 ~ r rw w M y ~ >'+ +1 ~ • O O O O Q C O O O Q O 0 0 O 0 0 ~ f h 1!I J'~ N N1 M 111 N J1 b +'r h ~ O ~ a O ~ ~ . V W= ~ 0= 1r~ 1~ ~ 1n 1n 14 ~O h A w h O p r ~ 10 n aa y w L 1 ~ 1!T ~ 10 1O n n V1 r O1 N M N ~~ r+ w ... r 1.n 4 `+ N W o i r ~ O ~ W ~' r y Q = pp Cp .C p o p Q pp S pp pp p $ C~ O ~ ~ Can 8 O ry ~ 3 G 1a 100 N ~ r[ ~ T : V N N n wt a~rn ~•M r~+~ w~+w.~.. r~i ~ ~~ w r r w.r ~ ~ y w _ tea. 4 +1 K f G N 1- ~f N V >+ h s q O O O C O~ g~ O P 0,O~ 0 0 0 01 m m +~f 1H 1A •, om a a r~ y p~ a o n .. w .. rv . ... O t ~ 1n .e~ 4 •• n «, r. r ~. r O. q ~C m O P O~ C1 O. T 01 1.0.1 O_ O w e .. K r • 4 4 yy i 21. C • . > N K ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ Y w~°~m88Fg88$S8~$ ~ ~~~ ~ ~+ o ~ 4 A A n A I. N N H1 N 111 1f1 n O ~ ID ~ n rn M N N ~ ~ 01 o w -. N tiD ~ r s /+ r1 N J1 P~ J1 w^ P n n N N N N n ~ ~i n 4~~ 1/~ N N tD 10 r~~ Y r r r~^ w~ r1 i~1 w~ i y M1 A te! 4~~ ~ INi/ Y L L pp pp. app p, p~ ~ M +O r. ~ ~ 01 P T ~/1 P P' ~ r 1 P Q1 O1 Y~ O u n. a~ i r ~ pp p1 p N 10 ~ ~ ~ b~ P p~p ~ P ~T T pAp~~ ~ p• O P a ~ P P ` r~ N . .. r r « r r . r ~ i p 1' 1 1. 1// 1 1 1/ 1/ 1 1 1 Y w 1~ ~ 1A 1p -. ~ P IS N n p. lpny pW. /pw 0 01 ` ~ ~ ~r w ~ 01 P1 P O~ ~ w « w ~ P P r ~ 1 ! . ~. . . S 1~ L ., TAKE 3: PROJECTED TOUR OF VA1L POPULATION ANO NOUSEli0lp5 BY tYPE, 1984--1985 TO.I999- 2000 Population Househalds Calendar pay Overnight Gvsrnight Sea son Year Visitors Visitors Permantnt Yisitars Permanent 1984 1985 1965 2,670 9,200 4,400 2,560 1,600 1985 - 198b 19$6 2,100 ~ 9.280 ~ 4,500 2,590. 1.630 198b - 1981 1987 2,780 9,55Q 4,670 7,660 1.709 1987 - 1988 1968 2,7$0 9,560 4,760 2,560 1,730 1988 - 1989 1989 2,850 9,840 4,910 2,740 1.780 E 1989 - 1990 1990 2,950 10.150 4,970• 2.830 1.810 1990 - 1991 1991 2,950 10.150 4,9y0 2,830 1.810 -.... ~ 1991 1592 1992 3,040 iD,4b0 5.050 2,920 1,630 1992 - 1993 1993 3.130 10.760 5.200 3,000 i,89D 1993 1994 - 1994 •3.130 10.750 5.2,40 3,000 1,690 - 1994 _ - 1995 1995 3,230 11,I2O 5.390 3,100 1,960 1595 - 1996 1996 3.320 11,410. 5.540 3,180 2.010 1995 - 1997 1997 3,320 11,410 5.540 3,180 2.010 . 1497 - 1998 1998 3,400 11.710 5,690 3,260 2,470 1998 - 1539 1999 3,530 12,150 5.920 3,390 2,150 1999 - 2CL0 2000 3,530 12.150 5-.920 3,390 2,150 Average Annual Change: .. (1985- 200C) 60 200 1DD 60 4D Sources: Gage Davis Assot., YAIL MOUNTAIN/ GORE VALLEY CAPACITY STUOY,( 198D); Eagle County Ptanning Oept., EHPLDYEE~ HOUSING SURVEY, (1984); _ CSCUSA,THE CONTRIBUTION OF SKIING TO THE COLORA00 ECONOMY, (Va rious 1982 to 1985); Yai1 Associates. lnc. 5 RRC, PAIL MA5TER OEYELDPHENT PLAN, (19 85?; and THK Associates, lnc. 22 ,+ C N m °: r r u Irl t O u i N K Y ai ~$ Y _. 4 d u ~ ~ ' ~ ~! A N N tl f11 N Q M N tl N M O ~~ . V _Y h or N e d w~i ~ Q N M o N h q w M ~ w ~ .. w ~ ~ g .. • } ' w ~ 1 ~O p ~ i ~ n 1~+. tl~ -Nq d~ n q~ •tf D N • CC ~ 1 y $ u / f1 ` V nwnr nd nl+l+o for olne. a r+l~n W y a ' 3 4 4 0~ o ~ o 0 /- N 4 N~ p N N tl wl 1~/• n i G c y N y d ~ • -1 n+ yy C C' O N 1 N n N O r A o w n 4 h r o ~ o r n ~+ n •!! n NI ~O N ~O ~ n O p S 4 w at w m r i W P 9 r C 4 ' ~ p C r n 0 o n o A c O n b o aQ /~ o .+ n n r r n r n n Ip IO w 1 N ^~~ o ~ ' a :` °; f. .r ~ _ N ~ K M F ~ u r ' - ~ ~ ..,o v n 1++G1.~ O /~.o~l~oel,«a p n m rn w: n '/r . pin urq L ~ . n ~ ' Vl ~ } yl ; a ~a' ~' ~ ~u t r a _ ~ M a ya[ w L '~ ~ `!) ~ O i _ _ W o o ~O ^ O ~7 ~D o 6~ o !e M O .. 1~1 r w+ n w~ y N ~ 4 W ~ r ~ L i F } ~ y o ~ u ~ ^ tivorlnolnroln•orr+o n= ~16a°Cc r. 4 V C ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ N yy ~ a i y r O r , ~ N aYr ' r ~ .~ r. N 8 yp i H N ~ o ~.. W 1 ' L 4 4 L N d v A p' P C B a P P O~ ^ P .M •I ^ ~ V w ~ V _ 4 9Q R v o '' M N u 1 I IH ~O Pr 69 O~ O r N N r Y• ~p A •1 O~ C C~¢ W R P T P pp~~ T T 01 p w w r w r~ r`. w r P 1 1 1/ 1. K M 1 1/ 1 1 1/ 1 1 1 y P _ _..~ Y ~ ~ ~ w ~ w h~~r« =Y s7 y!. 4 Y ~L • Y :t-.~~ ~~:.~r~ i r . i :ir:::R~ ' ~;» - ~, :: ~ Y " « _ ~ v ••y i w ~ _ ~ . . _~~- ~ ~ i~~~$xac~ss~~xo~ra, ~ ~~Ma~~ww..a SSA+~. .N. n r.nn N... wins n w :wS~~St~:SirSSSS6 ~ e~: r~~ ! i! ~ ~ i x~ h ~ w~ M~ r M r M •~a ~ r r~~ N 8 h N N 8 H~ F ~ w ti n^ N «+~ .o M N w ~ ~I yw~ r A /hi Sr /~ / h N r y~y~~ pp S r w 1~~~ M ~ •• . ~ . ' ' . fii IG w1'w N M w N M M w~ M M M•• M M M M M M r rr.n~%w.. a e ~..°~~ .h r3• ~: ~~ ~'~:-'~S~$~~~xe"a: ~ 4 g ~~ ~~.~~~5t5t~x~gg:~l~ h h h h w w r + ~ ~ it ~ P w __r.h'• ° O+`.. w r N w ~ F i S~$ ~$ ~ Q$~~~ i ~ F ° 7 x r i O O O~° Q~ p a w w .. ~ + N ~ e YWti ~~~bf 8S_~INyn: V w V F Ya r.w~ rMM w w A www~Y S ~ N ~g~':~tS«~5~~~~~ a S t' K ' p C h h h H w H h h h A w w ~~ ~ ~ ~ - _ M ~.~rr rr r M rrw~ ~» ~ . . ` `: o w :: r E g +` a+ o R w R :: s e` r ' • ~ N_ w_ r_ r_ w _ w w N r 1r i ` ` e i • S rX~, owns 25~ w o _~~_.. ..~--.. .. ..~~. .. .. .. s ~_ e ` ~ 6 0 ~ ~ ~~ N` -~ w 2 ~ i . Nn.n NNNN~' »'. r rrw r s' ~ r = ,,, a ;» RJR€~8~~o0°~Ol~$ a s• r a o a a-- S fa: w e „ r r w ... ~. _ _ ... .. ~ ~ ~ . _ 1y h h h h ~ R • ~ i V ~ ~ N ~ _. ~ .s ~ r ~rrs.rw $--.. + ~ e r e ' Y ~ a • ~ .~. 3~- + fS rSfR__;~ R . ~ ti__ r T .-. - S O • • N S ~ M i u ~ _ ~ pp_ h_. N w w r' a ~ r _ r r r _ . _ - _ . . _ N S _ _ - - _ .~ .. _ .. .. _ - - - _ 4 24 ... ~. Statistical'Suiamar -Skier Yis rs 1a Ho in .Y ito /Popu tion/ us g/Retail Sales t cable b? This table is a composite of the four preceding tables showing projections by five year increments. As the table indicates, tota] population for bath the visitors and permanent groups is projected to be 21,60D by the year 2080 generating a need for ]..534 residential units and 39§ lodging units. i Retail sales wit] increase 24t over the 15 year time period. 3. Land lfse Demand ' ~ These housing unit and retail sales numbers are then converted to addi- tional acreage demands and broken down as shown in Table 7. The results of the projected unit and retail space demands then become the amount of growth which is expected by the year 2UU0. This growth may be accommodated in several ways: 1) by adding additional dwel]ing and lodging units and comtnercia] space; z)~by increasing the occupancy rates for dwe]1- ing units and lodging units; 3) by directing growth down valley, outside of the Town of Yail; and/or 4) through a combination of the three alternatives above: The obi 1 i ty of the town to meet the growth demand wil 1 be defined by the physical constraints su ch as geologic hazards, steep slopes,. floodpla#n areas. tl~e availability of undeveloped land and the development policies of ~ ~ the Town. The land use. plan has been developed keeping these factors in r mind. Tile projected growth is moderate overall and necessarily follows an average of 3~ ski area visitor growth with same peaks and valleys occurring in certain years). Due to the existing inventory 'of approved and undeveloped lots, a majority of the residential and lodging units may be accommodated ~, through development in these already approved subdivisions and development projects. The Town of Vail has the following number of units already approve d but unbuilt as shown in Table 8. L 1 25 TABLE b STATISTICAL 5llldiyfARY Skier Vi sitslPoAulationJ~iousing/Retail Sales - 60~ Destination Skiers } ~ Year ' i Characteristics ly~~ 1J~J '1~~~ 1UUu ' .A. SKIER VISITS ~1~. Average Skiers/Day $,160 .9,0009,870 10;780 ' 2. Design//Skiers/Day 12,560- 13,860 15,200 16,600 , ' 3. Peak Skiers/nay 15,910 17,550 19,250 21,020 B. POPIJLATIOH PROJECTIONS 1. Overnight Visitors (winter only) 9,200 10,150 11,120 12,150 2. Uay Visitors ~ ' ~ {winter only) 2,670 2,950. -3,230 3,530 3. Permanent 4,400 4,970 5,390 ~ 5,920 Tots] Population Yr. 2000 - ~Overn~ght/Day/Permanent) 21,60U 1 ~. •1985 1990 1995' 2000 Total C. ADDITIONAL HOUSING l1NiTS 1. Residential Units 67 465 467 535 1,534 2. Cadging Units 14 114 129 138 395 . ~ Total~llnit Demand - Yr. 2000 i,9Z9 D. RETAIL SALES {~ni]]ions? Annua] Sales 5173.8 5191.5 5209.9 5229.5 Source: THK Associates, Inc., June 21, 1986. 26 Table 7 LAN!] USE DEMAND - YEAR 2000 Land Use Type 1. Single Familylpuplex~ 2. Multi-family ~ - a. Townhouses b. Apartments/Condos 5ubtotai Multi-family Total Residential 3. Lodging ~ . .~ Hotels, lodges, accommodation units Unit Demand 232 du 214 du 1, 088 du 1,3U2 du 1.534 du Acreage Demand 78 acres+/- . 22 acresl 73 acres2~ 95 acres 95 acres 4. Commercial/Retail a. Ski itel ated Demand b. Local Demand 7ota1 Retail Demand 1 Demand at 10 du/acre. 2 Demand at 15 du/acre. 3 Demand at 50 du/acre. 395 du S acres3 Square Footage Demand 131,850 sq.ft. 89,122 sq.ft. 220,972 sq.ft. These densities were chosen to reflect average. existing densities within the Town of Yail. 27 Table 8 _ APPROY£a U~fiTS/UNBUiLT Land Use Category i 1. Single Family/Duplex Z. Townhomes/Apartments/Condos . Total kesidential Units ~ . 3. Lodging Dumber of Units 1,00 ti19 1,959 447 These numbers include all residential lots and ~rajects presently approved within the Town of Yail, including those which have development constraints and would most likely never be built upon. Further analysis to determine haw many of these are actually buildable was undertaken and is discussed in the next chapter, Proposed Land Use. However., these numbers indicate that a substantial amount of the projected land use demand may be accommodated through infill within existing platted projects. .~ .~ 28 CHAFTER.YI - PROPOSES LARD USE The proposed Land Else Map was develaped through utilization of: - Public input at the three meetings; - Analysis of existing land use conditions; - Analysis of opportunities and constraints; and - Projected market demands for residential, lodging, and retail uses. 1. Land Use Alan Alternatives Far the purpose of initial discussion, three land~use alternatives were develaped. _ A. ~ ~ The first alternative was one which showed. ai ] areas containing Con- _ ~~•straints as undeveloped open space. These constraint areas covered parcels within already platted subdivisions, This, alternative was . essentially a "~!o Growth" option, allowing for only limited infill in unconstrained areas, ~' 8. The second alternative was called the "Existing Trends" alternative ' which took constraints into consideration but would allow for Continued infill within already approved subdivisions, so long as existing Town land use regulations could be met, with respect to slopes and hazards, Some areas of increased density were shown as a way to meet market demand for multi-family during the planning period. . C. The third option showed new development outside of existing developed areas, irrespective of constraint areas. These options were reviewed with the Task Force and the "Existing Trends Alternative" was chosen as the preferred alternative. Option #A, the "Ho Growth" option was eliminated because: 1) it would have required a change in policy by the Town to prohibit future development within existing platted areas; and 2) it would nut have provided enough areas for new growth, needed to accommodate projected market demands throughout the plan- ning period. Results of the first public meeting indicated the importance of accom- modating"balanced" growth to meet ,the needs generated by expansion of the 'ski mountain. It was generally recognized that growth of the ski area was tied to the economic stability of the Town and growth should be accommo- dated, preventing major sources of revenue going outside of the Town, down valley., Option C, the,"Unconstrained" alternative was not chosen as the preferred alternative due to: 1) The fact that. development of hazard areas would have required major changes to development regulations in the Town. 29 2} The market projections, combined with available undeveloped land did not indicate a need to develop highly sensitive areas. The ~~ land use analysis showed that mast of the new demand could be accommodated within existing platted project's. 3} The opinions expressed by the public about development of hazard areas. The consensus was that development should not occur within high hazard areas. The "Existing Trends" alternative thus became the preferred option.• This • alternative most accurately reflected the market demands an~f the dQSires of. the citizenry. The public input had shown a general satisfaction with the location of existing land uses, which was used as the foundation for the preferred alternative. ~ 2. Key Goals The most important goals culled from the public meetings were used to forte mutate the ,Trends Alternative. These key goals are as follows: A. Commercial Uses 1} Commercial strip development should be avoided. 2) Commercial growth should be concentrated primarily in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor.needs. 3) New hotels should continue to be located primarily in the Yiliage and Lionshead areas. B. Residential Uses 1) Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas.. Z) New subdivisions should not be permitted in proven high geologic hazard areas. . •3) Development proposals on the hillsides may be appropriate, in a limited number of~cases, 'for low~~density residential uses. These proposals would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. with development being carefully controlled as to sensitivity to the environment and visibility from tl~e Palley floor. C. Vil]age/l.ianshead Care Areas 1) Increased density for commercial, residential and lodging uses in the Core areas would be acceptable so long as the existing charac- ter of each area is being preserved. 2) The connection between the Pillage Core and Lionshead should be strengthened, through the creation of a natural pedestrian corridor which could contain garden areas and sculpture plazas. 30 D. Parks and Upen Space ~) tirhile an additional golf course was identified as being necessary, no site within the Town was pinpointed as a desirable Site. 2} The preservation of open space was ,determined to be a high prior- ity, The improvement of existing parks and open space areas, in concert with continued purchase of open space by the Town were both identif#ed as priorities. E. General Growth 'and Aevelopment 1) Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintain- ing a balance between residential, commercia] and recreational uses _ to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 2} The quality of the environment should be protected as the Town grows. .. ... -- ..:... .. .. .. 3} Recreational and public facility development on iational Forest 1 ands could' be appropriate i f: '..~. a. No high geologic hazards exist; b, Community objectives are being met with the proposal fas articulated in the Comprehensive Plan}; . c. The parcel has adequate access and is adjacent to Town bound- aries; and d. The a"ected neighborhood could be i nval ved i n the deci si on- . making process. _ ~ q} Mationa] Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls " into private ownership should remain as open spate and not be zoned ~ ~ far private development. • ~) Aevelopment may also•be appropriate on Town-owned lands by the Town " o. Yail (other than park and .open space) where: . a. • No h•i h eol o i c "hazards exi st• and 9 9 g b. Such development is for public use'. 3. E.and !!se Plan Assumptions With the consideration of these goals, the following parameters were estab- lisped for the Trends plan. A. hlew development would for the most part, occur within and adjacent to already developed areas. S. No new commercial districts would be created, but commercial activities would take place adjacent to or within existing commercial areas. ~ C. That substantial areas of open space would remain in the Town. D. That constraint areas sh:auld,be considered in the designation of areas far suture development. • r: E. That National Forest lands should continue to remain as open space, accommodating only public facilities orsrecreational uses.. ' .,, r r r. r r F. That hillsides should also be assessed, taking constraints into con= sideration. G. That the Yillage and Lionshead Core Areas would remain essentially the 'same, with the addition of a transition area to strengthen the connec- tion between the two core areas. Several new land use categories aimed .at strengthenng hotel and other tourist-oriented uses were a7 so added. 4. Proposed Land Use Categories thew land use categories were defined to indicate general types of land uses which should occur within the Town during the planning period. These cate- gories were varied from the existing lanQ use categories to reflect the goals of the community more accurately.. The specific land uses are listed as examples and are not intended to reflect an all-inclusive list of uses. ,Uses would be controlled by zoning. These categories are indicated below. LDR Low Density Residential This category includes single-family detached homes and two family dwelling units. .Density of development within this category would typi cal iy not exceed 3 structures per bui l dabl a acre. ~~ ~ Al so wi thi n this area would be private recreation. facilities such as tennis Courts, swimming poGls and club houses for the use .of residents of the area. Institutional/public uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space related facilities. MDR Medium Density Residential The medium density residential category .includes housing which would typically be designed as attached units with Gammon walls. Densities in this category would range from 3 to 14 dwelling units per buildable acre. Additional types of uses in this category would include private recreation facilities, private parking facilities and institutional) pualic uses such as parks and open space, churches, and fire stations. L HDR •High Density Residential . The housing in this category would typically consist of multi-floored structures with densities exceeding 15 dwelling units per buildable acre. Qther activities in this category would include private recrea- tional faci]ities, and private parking facilities and institutional/ L public uses such as churches, fire stations and parks and open space facilities. HR Hillside Residential This category would allow for single family dwelliny units at densi- ties no more than two dwelling units per buildable acre. Also permit- ted would be typical single family accessory uses such as private recreational amenities, attached caretaker units, or employee units and 'garayes. Institutional/public uses would also be permitted. These areas would require sensitive development due to slopes, access, visibility, tree coverage and geologic hazards.' Flinimum buildable area of 20,D00 square feet would be required per dwelling unit. (See Chapter VIII for mare specific discussion ~f implementation.) 32 TC Tourist Commercial . • The Tourist Commercial designation is aimed at preserving areas to accommodate commercial activities oriented toward the visitor to the area. Activities which would, be appropriate to this area include lodges, retail businesses and off#ces, restaurants and personal ser- vice establishments. A high density of development is suitable for . the area, with the emphasis on .the pedestrian.' Vehicular access would be limited to emergency and service requirements. RAS Resort Accommodations and Service This area includes activities aimed at acc anmodating the overnight and short term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, . service stations, and parking structures. (with densities up to 25 dwelling units ar 50 accommodation units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward vehicular access from I-70, with other sup- port commercial and business services inc]uded. Also allowed in this r category, would oe i nsti tuts anal uses and .various. municipal uses,- CC Community Commercial 7hi s area i s designed, to meet consumer demands from c6mnunity resi- dents. Primary uses would include supermarkets, dry cleaning estab- lishments, hardware stores, service stations, financial institutions and medical offices. The design of these facilities would be oriented toward vehicular access and parking. L L L Ca Community Office This area is to include primarily office uses of all types. Some limited commercial uses, such as retail businesses; including general merchandise, apparel and accessories and auto service facilities would also be permitted. T Transition The transitican designation, applies to the area between Lionsnead and the Vail Pillage. The activities and site design of this area is aimed at encouraging pedestrian flow through the area and strengnten- ing the connection between the two commercial cores. Appropriate activities include hotels, lodging and other tourist oriented residen- tial units, ancillary retail and restaurant uses, museums, areas of public art, nature exhibits, gardens, pedestrian plazas, and other types of civic and culturally oriented uses, and the adjacent proper- ties to the north. This designation would include the right-of-way of ~4est f~eadow Drive and~the adjacent properties to the north. PSP Pu61iclSemi-Public The. Public and semi-~~l.~blic category includes schools, post office, water and sewer service and storage facilities, cemeteries, municipal facilities, and other public institutions, which are located through- out the community to serve the needs of residents. L 33 P Parks r r. Included in this category are town owned parcels intended for bath active recreation activities such as athletic fields, golf courses and playgrounds, as well as areas for various passive recreation activities. OS Open Space Passive recreation areas such as green~eTts, stream corridors and '. drainageways are the types of areas in this category. Hi]lsides which were classified as undevelopable due to high hazards and slopes aver 4U~ are also included within this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted by existing zoning, such as one unit. per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning. Ai so, permitter in this area wa,uld be institutional/public uses. S@ Ski @ase Ski trails and facilities related to a.ski base are included in this category. I-7D Interstate 7D Corridor This category includes the right-af-way devoted to Interstate 70 and would be reserved for permanent public use as a roadway. C~ NF - National Forest Lands National Forest lands not designated within the Land Use Plan boundary are assumed to remain as open space due to steep slopes, inaccessi- bility, high hazards and not having adjacency to the town. _ ~ 34 5. `PreferreQ Plan" nd Patter • . La ttse n The "Existing Trends" alternative was chosen as the preferred land-use plan and was carefully reviewed area by area to assess feasibility and compatibility with adjacent existing land uses, Same modifications were then made in proposed new areas of medium and high density because of potential land use and neighborhood Conflicts. The pattern which is reflected on the "Preferred Plan"•is discussed below. A,~ Residents al tfses~ ~ . ' , - 1. Low pensity uses. Law density residential uses are now planned far a total of 6y9.f3 acres, or about 21X of the land in the'plan area, which is an increase of 8S over the area presently in low density residential use. these areas refi,ect the completion of existing platted pro- jects, with some additional areas added adjacent -to the•-single family areas at low densities. The $~ increase reflects the large number of undeveloped, platted lots already existing in Yaii. 2. Medium and High Den si ty Uses. t Rdedium and high density residential areas now account for a total _ of approximately 15~ of the land in the plan area, with 421 acres in the. medium density category and 6E1.5 acres in the high density category. This is a 4'~ increase in land area devoted to these two • land use designations, reflecting a need to accommodate additional market demand for multi-family uses. For the mast part, these multi-family areas have .been kept consistent with .the pattern of existing land use with additional multi-family occurring within unfinished projects and adjacent to these multi-family areas. Some new areas of high density residential have been added, specifically in east Yail between the frontage road and I-7O, where access is . goo d. and surrounding land uses would be compatible for this type of . use. Other areas, ,north of I-7.O where existing land uses are mixed ' containing bath low and .m'edium density uses have been shown as ' medium density to meet tfie demand far additional multi-family dwelling units within the 15-year Manning period. 3. Hillside kesidential. The new category of land use types "Hillside Residential"covers a portion of two large parcels. These parcels account for 33.3 acres or a total of 1.0~ or' the land use area within the plan area.. These parcels were designated in this category to allow the passi- bility for limited development if certain criteria could be met. . Any development proposed would require the evaluation on a case- by-case basis, accomnani~ri by an in-depth analysis, to assure yen- - sitivity to constraints, provision of adequate access, minimization of visibility from the Valley .floor, and compatibility with sur- rounding land uses. Any such development would be required to meet - all applicable Tawn ordinances and regulations. ~5ee Chapter VIII for mare specific information on implementation.) i 35 8. Commercial Uses 1. Vail Yillage. The Yail Yillage area has been designated separately as a mixed-use area and accounts for 77 acres or about 2~ of the plan area. This area has not been analyzed in~~this Plan document because the "Yail Yillage Master Plan" study has addressed this area specifically in mare detail. 2. ~ Touri st Commerci a1. The area planned for commercial uses oriented toward products and services far the tourist includes the Lionshead conmercial area-and totals 16 acres ar .5~ of the Land within the plan area. 3. Resort Accommodation Services. This area has been designated for the area which extends from the Lionshead hotel/accommodation unit area east along the frontage road to Yail Road. Cascade Yillage has also been designated as Resort Accommodation. These are the areas where hotel uses will be concentrated during the planning period, reflecting the Camrnunity goals to concentrate hotels within the core areas. These areas total 52 acres, or about 2a of the land area studied. 4. Cortnuni ty Commercial . This new category has been designated for the west Vail commercial area, which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the perman- ent resident and the long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate commercial uses within existing corr~nercial nodes, no new commercial areas have been designated, The CC ]and use area contains 24 acres or 1~ of the land area. 5. Corcnunity Clffice.~. This' area has been designated a mixture of office and support retail uses and is located to the west of the Lionshead RAS area. here areas will affect a transition from the more intense commercial and resort uses to less intense uses outside of these areas. There is a total of 16 acres (about 1~} in this land use category. C. Transition Area A transition area h~ ~ bt~E~, uts'3Cna'~ed for the ~;rea to the north of West Meadow Drive (inr.lu„ing the roadway} between the }tAS area to the north and the medium density residential area to the south, between Yail Road and the Lionshead Tourist Commercial Area. This area is intended to provide a strengthened pedestrian link between Lionshead and Yail Yillage. There are 11 acres (.3~} shoxn in this land use category. 36 D. Parks and Qpen Space Parks, open space, greenbelts and stream corridor areas account for 1:,278 acres or approximately 3$t of the land area within the plan boundary. The area designated as parks has stayed consistent with the areas shown on the Existing Land Ilse Map and include major and minor parks owned by the Town along with the golf course. This makes up a total of 266 acres. Qpen space areas have increased significantly from 297 acres to 1,822 acres reflecting the community goats of preserving open space in sensitive environmental areas on the hillsides. Areas shown as open space .include both public and private land ownership patterns. - 6. Public/Semi-public Land Uses These areas, scattered throughout ing land use pattern.• The acreage or 2p of the total land area due site in east Vail. • F.. Ski Base Area the~Town, are consistent with the exist- has increased from 57 acres to 72 acres to the inclusion of a possible cemetary• This area has remained consistent with the location of the existing ski facilities. New areas have been added at Cascade Village and Lionshead for planned ski-related improvements, bringing the ski base acreage from 44 acres up to 86 acres (about 3~ of the ]and area). G. Interstate. 10 Corridor This acreage remained fixed, although the new access point west of Lions- head is shown on the Plan. The corridor accounts far 505.5 acres or i5p of the land use in Vail. This area is intended to remain as right-of-way during the planning period. All National Forest lands outside the plan boundary are assumed to be open space, with the best use considered to be National Forest. Table 9 shows the acreage ~ "Land Use Plan" shows il]ustratively. A larger land use in more detail. Department and should b Bevel op~nent proposals, breakdown of the proposed Land Use Plan a Figure the conf~guratiori of the proposed land use plan map (1"=4U0') also hereby adapted shows proposed This is ovailable at the Community Development e consulted prior to time of preparation of 6. "Preferred Land Use Plan" Analysis Tine "Preferred Plan" acreac~~,~ ~•~~~re then compared with projected demands to tr-e year 2000 for permanent housing, lodging units, comrmercial and office square footage. The resulting figures are shown in Table ~D. Thus table compares the demand in units or acres with the supply of undeveloped land both platted and unplatted, which is unconstrained. Unconstrained lands are those areas which do hat contain high hazard avalanche and geologic areas, floodplains~or slopes over 40x. This table shows that the Preferred Plan will be able to provide enough lots/land area for all of the projected demand for single family and duplex lots, with a surplus remaining of 316 dwelling units. u 37 There will be a shortfall of area for multi-family dwelling units of 17 _ acres, which may be accommodated through increasing the occupancy rates of existing multi-family units or encouraging the down valley communities to ,supply a portion of this demand. This shortfall occurred because of 1) the need to assure that new areas designated for multi.-family were. compatible ' ~ ~ with surrounding land uses; 2 ) the desire of the community to discourage development in sensitive, undeveloped lands; and, 3)'the general satisfac- Lion of the community with the existing land use pattern. It was thus -decided that it would not be appropriate to increase densities, in unsuit- able areas just to completely fill marl~et demands.' 38 ~ . TABLE 9: PROPOSED AND - L U5E " ~F PREFERREp LAND 115E PLAN , ~ , L d ~ an Use Category Acres Percent f Low Density Residential:' 698.8 20.8 i Mediu~~ Density:kesidential 420.8 ~. 12.54 High Density Residential',; 68:5 ~2.0~ Hillside ~tesidential 33.3 1.{I4 x Pillage Master Plan 77.0 2,3~ .~ ~ ,. .Tourist Commercial ~ 15.8 0.6~ Resort Accommodation Services 51.9 ~ 1.64 ,' ~ Transition Area ~ 11.4 0,34 Commt~~ity Commercial ~ 24.4 __ ~ 0.74 Corrrnunity Office ~ 15.6 ~ U.54 Park ~ 255.9 7.fiq . Open Space 1,022.9 30.54 Public and Semi-public 72.0 2.14 Ski Base 86.3 2.6b ~. Interstate 70 ~tig~t-of-Way 505.5 '15.04 . ~_ ~ ' 3,3b0.1 lOU.Ub . .~ ~L 39 .This table also shows that there will be a deficit of 70,272 square feet ar approximately 3.3 acres of ]arid for comnerciallretai] uses. This may be ~T accommodated through: 1} increasing intensities of use within the co"re areas; 2) adding commercial square footage within Lionshead through the relocation of the Gondola building and possible addition of commercial space to the parking structure. These are boat options being discussed but are not yet quantified. These two options could then provide the addl- . tional 5i,8SU square feet of skier related retail space; 3} addition of support retail outside of the core areas within the Community Office. ]and use area; and, 4) increased intensity of use in the west Vail Community ~, Com~tercial undeveloped area. These two options could be utilized to accom- _ modate the I&,422 square foot shortfall of local related retail space. It was decided to rely on the marketplace to accommodate this additional retail demand through these types of options, rather than designating new ~comnerci al areas away from existing nodes, which would have .been contrary to the desires expressed by the community at large. In summary, the preferred Land Use Plan reflects a balancing of existing conditions, community opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands. ~ .. This Land Else Plan, adopted as a part of this document and shown as a " graphic representation in Figure 3 is intended to be used along with the goal statements, as a general guide for the review of new devel aprnent pro- . jects which may be proposed in Vail. The Land Else Plan illustrates in a general way the categories of "land use which would be appropriate through- out the town. The small scale (1"=1.,Oa~'? map contained herein should not. be used to determine the suitability of uses on a parcel by parcel basis. The larger scale map I"-400' is also hereby adopted and is on file with the Town of Yaii community Development .Department. This larger reap is more suitable for identifying specific parcels, through this map does not deter- mine land use based on property boundaries. ~~ a~ N i~ ~ ~ M N u Yom. ~ ~ ~ 4 a.• w ~ + 11 a p~ N ~~Cj} w~ Y'1 1f\ ~ ~ p '~ ~ 11 ~ .. ,.. ~. In ~ 1~ i r ~ uu ~ m ~ .N. ~ a~+ ~ ~ r ~ r to y ~ «. ... ~. ' ~ ~ ~~, ~~+ r~ r . . A ~ ~ @ 4 p~ ~ W o ~ 1/~ 4! 5 ~ ~' .. n 'a Mi R v. ~ rn ~ ~ ... f _ a9 ? ~ ~p.• ~ ~ ~6 ~ /~ H t ~ ~ ~+ r - N r m a F P. ~ ~ n+ c r~ g r ~d 5d fil bd ~ ~ a ~ ~~~ r N ~ w f ~ c g` r ... $ r ~ p J • ~ N ~' ~ . '~ ~ m •~~•11 $ ~~ iv .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ . ~ $1d ~ ' • N 1 b+ . w L ~ ~ ~ y ~ . ~ ~ ..r r+ LJ ~ ~ e a ~ •. O r. ~ fs a v ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ + ~ • ..~ • . . • y ~ r. .a .r ~` aFi y ~. ~ Z`' ~ ++ r .. M • .+ « .~y .-+ • ~ Q ~ ~ ~ -~ ~5 ~ W : ~ ~ a ~ C S `~ a r T ~ N Q n ~ m m .r ..y 14 m ~ O .~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~r A ~ ', :~ r~ + r- r r-- r- r- r-' r- r- r- r ~~ ~ _ ~+ p ~ n n ~ Y b v ~ ~ e s X p ; • N 'r ro w ~ * 3 ~ L ~ p G 7 4 C ~ ` o ~ o Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' < w s o ~ ~= a .'t A n 3 E ~ ; ~ y s ; ~ iF= c . ~ ; :. o"~ ~~ t ~ ~ _:: ~ 3 :1i ~ ;,;~ ~ ; x:- ~ r. ~ ~ ~t: =*' _ ! i 'r ~ ~* ,... .~~: :'. .. `i ^ l :!. its ,• fF,.,•~~ ~ '~~ +. '~; ' 4.,i.17~ ~, . "' ~'. i.; r 1~ ~~. -j<.-.~~ . ~~ ,iii.. _.~,,-t^• ~~. ~:~;;...~j,;~...;,, 1~.~ .~i~..~~ISS I V, .~.O f~,~ `. i~r7~1 ~ ~~ ~ rr.; ~:~•;! .~a ~ . Y ;~;,rj c Y •.~', s . ice,' ~.~ ± • .t L ~~ ~.~. r .' .~ ,:. ~r•~ I`+ '_ ~•~ ~ ~ 1 R ' r__.~ L ~~ ;..~ r r ~ rr r-- r r r- r r- t-~- r ~ r r-- r-- r- r- !!1 1 1 y1 5511 ~\ }} P~ ~ ~~~I {F`F` ~~fI lyy' j ] ~~1 111 ~~1~1 ~~ \\ `` " ~ \~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~~ ~ a N ^ N to y r g ~ b h ~ q h `~ ~ b A r p ~ x T ~ v r' g i ~. ~ 3 ~ ~. N ~ ~ W N y 4 ' s ~ b ~ ' C ' ~ c1 _ a + ~ e ~ ~ y r r C Q D ~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ o ~ a ~ b 4 n ~ „~ O , n ~ + p 3 ry y ~ q b 4 N, ~ c 3 n ~ b ~ N ~ ~ y w ~ ~ 4 N C LL n ~ ~ d 7 ,y' A ~ N M ` a 4 a M r Scx y p Y O V~1 a ~ • o rn ~ o 0 : 7 ~ ~ ' ~ W 0 ~Od 4 4 y i (/) C 7 M ~ ~ 6 b 4 M ~ ~ O ~ ~ M ' 4 a ~ '~ i ~ ~ o I a ro Mw N o ' e r. ~~ ~ ~ as ` •. J r . - •~•. •~j. ~~~ i 'p . ,{ . ~?. it ~w~; i ~\ ~,. JJ JJ J_ ~- 'I', ~\ I f ;[':.~. ~ .k •L 6 ~ ~_ `.::~:;:;:; ~ 7 ^'.;': ~.:::::` ~~~~~ ,. ~~ m `~,~ ~ t~- ~ ~ ~ S \\ . ~, pnn, . 1~~ . 1~ ~ \ I({.° ~ ~ / ~,, Y~ 1 • ~' _ ~_ ~ r ~_ S a :. . m-- C j ' ~""`~` ~~ _ 1 O •i~~ ~ 0.y • . .'1+. ~ . +.y a.'.. ..vt / ~•~ a w •~~ ~Ji. J. I.. „~,~ ~;~ i (7. ~ ;•;v~.: ~ -"' J J'J , JJ ,I J~~ j ~,: ~^~~~t^ r L ; ~. m o m ~ n~ W O< ~ m ~` ~` A o 3~ w ~ O n o ~ 3 ~ m ~ o ~ ~ o n' b ~ w a m ti 4 ~ ~ m 7 m w a 4 y m e n m w ~~2 ~ a a °~Q ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ m ~ s } W :ti3 r ~ ~ ~ ~Om ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ 0. ~ ., ao m m w o "rC .( ~ 'K C •' wC .~+ ~ d p ~ ~ ~ 'a 7 ° m m ~ `~ m ~ ~ ~o w ~ Cr ~' ~ n 0 ~ j as ~~ o -~~ m v ~~, z- 0 m `o Z r ;~ C a~a~a~~:E~~t~a __ ~Y '•Y ~- r r r r r- r. r- r r r- r ;- r°~ ti N ~~ I^'r r-- ~~~ :~ ~, ~,~. 1 ~'r.:. "1": Y i i Q ~2.:. i r. I , `. 1 "I '.">? ~I o 4kti~ ...:.~ L. .~ iNa ~~y~~~~~ y.. . ~O ~ f` R ~,.';> J ~ ~ ; ~. ;~..... ,~ . ~ j ~ • ~, i :~ _ - {' ;~ '~ 1 ~ ~ t''' ~~ .'•. / .b 1 ...:n.}i.. ~ ~ I 1 1 r . m ~._.3 i. ~ ~! ~ ~,rF ,P R I ~ ! l '~ z ::; ~-- • • __ j I .~ ~> ~, $ I ~ a~ _.,....I a ~ 'n { ~• .~*• ~ ~ ~ ~ R • ~~ ' a j ~'! : ; ~ .~' I ~ ~ ~ M ..._r.:..»...~ ....i i ~ ~ . i ~ ~ ~ dr ' { •A % ~ p ~~- ,• ~ ~ N ~ a• / i r. E Q •~.~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~« _ '. r rCNn ~ ~ ml ~ :~ ~~ ro ~ I ~ ~ 8 a a -~ ~'_ _'~_ ~r ~i 3 o ~f ~ i ~ 3, •a I ~ ~. ,... '+'I ~ y Lr_. .r'I R x r 3 ~p . ,}I e~•u4~. ~•n:.. : I k ty .i_, •} ~ 3:.~ ~~ :, .; -:~.. I " ~ ~~~ t I :>.. ~ R M., ` t, ..L._t f ' ~.., ~a :. r. . a ~~ V .._ t i ~ ^: 4ti ~:~'. f. r ...~n: i :.: ~. ~`t ': .I . ~~~.~ ~y i • • i ~~ :, r r r- ~ ~ t- s--- r--~ ~ r r r r r r- r~ r r- ~ ,- ~.~~ ~ i ,. . ~ ~~ .. ..: .~ ~• N Y P' O ~ W 7 e. N ~ a s 3 as ~ s o y e ~ a " v m ~ ~ o n ~~~ ~ I ~.~ s 1 N 1 7 ~ O I a i ,, s t ~ v I~ i~ 0 r- a 4 a m m I i i [ ~ m /f ~~ / I I I m I i I ~ 11 ..__ ~ I 0 ~ y ~ m Y I ~ , ~ n ~ iN ,N l 1 .. ~ 1 ! 7 '~..r.y~ (~ ~M\ , I y~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ Z. D ~ ~ _ ~ ~ , A p ~ .o~ m -v = ..t ~ I p Z N O ~ .. LZ., I Y .0 ( a ~ t ~.. rM n -~ I 0 m N ir. r...~ I L...r ....1 ...,.. ~ - ~ .~ ~ j .i ~~ ~ j. ;;::; ~, : I ::;:;,, ~I pj I ' ~' ~ ! j :~ ~ ~ .~ :~j j ~ ;~., _ I TN r~ ~ i 4 ~ ~ I i I I m . i I I m d ti ..~ '. G V! ..' • .. , r r r r r~ i r I r r- r r r r- r r-~ r-•^ rr-- r- r- r-- ~ . .~ i•• i '~ ~ ~ ~ '~. ~ , ! ¢ ~ '`~~ 0 ~ e '~~ ~ / ~ ~,` ~ ~ ~~° ~ • h i c~ ;~ /~ am Q ~ y' J°r ,,o ~~ ~ ~ . ' ~ ~ ~ `~ amp , J '`.`~ ~. N ~.. O w~~ w~ ,C~ ~~e C~ ~~* .~ . ;~ ~ L. .^ •~~ Q,~ ~ `, ~ mJ~~ ~ d II ~ ~ °- ~~~ tie 3 ~ / mm c~ ~ ~, 'L, ~ ~ ~ ~`.' 9o- ~ ' ~~ `' `•`~ ~ m n 5 ~ y~ ~ d~ m' a a a ~ ' ~, ~ 0 N ~ w '"r `~ ' x ~ .~ °' ~ ~ mC • c A ~ ~~ J0 m m o m ~ ~ m v ~' 1 '~ ~ r ~. ° a m ~ ~ ~ ` D ,~ 7 I ~ ~~ / r . _ - ` ^ "t ~ . r"7 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ C • © .: ': ~ ,, I ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~. I !D O ~ ~~,. ~. ~ Z Q, --w ~'tif ' ~; ry ~ ~ ~ •~) a ! ~ ~ , ~ , I I p AI ~~ ~ ~ " '•. ~ ~ ~ r-e / ~ i .`,\ m a P~ CHAPTER YII - CQhVdUHITY FACILITIES i. Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property ' The initial section of the study provides a general evaluation of the suit- e ability of the numerous town awned sites to accommodate development. The term development is used in its generic sense in that land which may currently be void of any activity or cou10 be improved or developed to accommodate a public~or private use. An initial screening of the properties is presented in which the site-and location is presented. The physical character of the site is briefly described as is its current. use. Finally, an assessment of the suitability of a site is based on a number of factors including the following: . - Sixe. The site may be too small to accommodate any active or passive function. ~ _~_ - PhVSiCai Constraints. The site may be subject to flooding, may con- tain geologic hazards or severe scope conditions. - ~ Accessibility. The site may contain significant limitations on access whacn may suggest only certain types of use. { Existing Use S There may be an existing public use on the site which is providing a vaiu- abie service to the community and likely not to change. (Note: for pur- poses of this assessment, the planning horizon of the Year 2000 is used as the basis far commenting on future needs of the cammunity.)~ Restrictions on Use ' A number of parcels of land which have been deeded to the Town of Yail con- main convenant restrictions as to their use. These restrictions could pre- clude certain activities and dictate site utilization. This initial evaluation would be termed a coarse screening of the town properties. The intent is to identify those parcels which are likely not _ to change from their current use or activity and to eliminate them from further discussion. Conversely, those tracts of land which do represent opportunities for change or development will be analyzed further far their potential. Coarse Screen of Sites Following is a listing of identified Town of Yail owned properties and comments as to their character and suitability. The parcels are numbered generally from the east part of the co~rmunity to the west and are located _ ~on Figure 4 - Inventory of Town Properties. 42 Tract 1 - Bighorn Park 1 This fi.43 acre parcel of land is improved as an athletic field and play» i ground for younger children. It serves~as a neighborhood park far area residents and will continue as a park and recreation site. i ~ Tract 2 - King Arthur`s Court This site is located across Meadow Drive from Bighorn Park. The site pra- y ~vides public pedestrian access to the~.mauntain side on Forest Service lands to the south. The 'site i s i dents f i ed as hei ng an area of high envi ron- . mental constraints and would appear to be most suitable for park and open space activities. .. Tract 3 - East Yail Fire Station Located on Columbine Drive in the. Bighorn Subdivision, the station provides far the fire protection needs of the east Yail area. Tract 4 - Bighorn Subdivision, Third Addition This area is north of Interstate 7q in the Pitkin Creek area. The tract of land had been subdivided into 18 lots. a. dedicated road and a 5.73 acre unplatted parcel. The parcel has limited access and it is located in an . area of high environmental Constraints. No conversant restrictions .have . been identified with the site,"however, its inaccessibility and development limitations suggest that open space is its most appropriate use. Tract 5 - Pitkin Creek Stream Tract This is the streambed and associated flaodplain area of Pitkin Creek located between I-7d and Bighorn Road. It is also the site of the Historic ~_ Circle K ranch house which is used as a~bus shelter. The open space char- acter of Pitkin Creek should remain as would the historic site and thus no change is anticipated. _ L Tract 6 - Katsos Ranch This parcel of land has been the sub3ect of much community-wide discussions since its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 146 acres and lies immediately east of the Yail Golf Course and south of Gore Creek. A study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of alternative development scenarios far the property. The alternatives ranged from a "da !~ nothing" ar "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style golf course. The study concluded that a moderate level of develop- ment is the most desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running trail, cross-country skiing trails and picnic ` areas. Many of these improvements have been constructed and ire used by ~ area re~i '.^~,~~;~ and tourists alike. .Based on this expression it is assufi' ~c~ that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate use far the parcel. 43 Tract 7 -East of Booth Falls Raad This area consists of three separate tracts of land which were dedicated to the Town of Yail for open space as part of subdividing. Of the separate tracts of land that have been dedicated, Tract G has little in the way of development constraints. its location at the intersection of Katsos Ranch Road~and the east Frontage Road has good proximity to roads and utilities. -~ There are other public and private recreation facilities in Booth Creek and the site offers no apparent unique visual or environmental benefits. This is a possible site for disposition by the town. However, it should be noted that there has been no confirmation of covenants or deed restrictions associated with the property. No alternate use has been identified for ' this site at this time. 1Tact 8 - nest of Booth Falls Road This area is similar in formation to Tract 7 in that individual parcels of land were dedicated to the Town of Yail as part of park and open space ~ requirements. Two of the parcels are within high environmental. hazard areas and are likely to remain as open space areas.. The third parcel of land in the subdivision has frontage along I-70 and back ups to the resi- ~ dential area along Sald Mountain Road. This parcel is attractive for ~ development because of its visibility, access to the frontage road, rela- tive large size (14 acres)~and only a portion~of the property is within a moderate environmental hazard area. There is, however, some questions as to the conversant restrictions on the property which may limit the. use to open space. This tract has been discussed in the past as a possible loca- tion for an executive par 3 golf course, however it is not large enough to accommodate such a use. A well planned 1H-hole pa.r 3 course requires 54 to 60 acres. A 9-hole par 3 course could possibly be accomplished on as lit- tle as 20 acres, however this site is only ].acres and therefore would nat • accommodate "executive" type course very adequately.* While it is a possi- ble candidate for some type of development, there are no current public facility needs which could be accommodated at this site. Tract 9.- East of~5unburst Dave This site contains just aver 2B acres and is~]ocated south of the Yail Golf Course. The site is entirely within a high hazard area.and is viewed .as designated open space far the community. Just to the south of Sunburst Drive are several small parcels which are avalanche chutes, scheduled to remain as open space. Tract 10 - Yail Golf Course The Vail Golf Course comprises jUSt over 94 acres of land alo~;g Gore Creek in the east-central part of the ronmunity. A portion of the course winds through a resi denti al area along Yai 1 Yal l ey Drive. Ko change i s antiti- pated in the function and extent of the area. * DeChaiara, Joseph and Lee Koppelman, urban Planning and Design Criteria, Pg. 380;-and THK Associates, Inc. ~ ~~ Tract 11 - Bus 9arn Public Works The Town of Yail bus barn and public works shops are looted on a 17.3 acre site north of I-70 in the vicinity of the golf course. There is no change anticipated in this area and there appears to be sufficient room for expan- sion of the facility. This site is a~potential candidate for the location of a 1 imi ted use, specs a7 event on ented~ hel i post. Tract 12 - Ptarmigan Road Avalanche Chute A 1.5 acre area has been designated as a safety area to accommodate poten- tial avalanches. The site would remain as open space in the community. ' Tract 13 - Fairway Drive Avalanche Chutes A 2.15 acre site to accommodate avalanche hazards has been dedicated to the town along Fairway Drive i n the Yai l' Yi 1 l age .10th Filing... This site pro- vides a safety area and would remain as open space for the community. Tract 14 - Ford Park The Ford Park is the focus of outdoor summer recreation activities in the community. It contains athletic fields for softball, soccer.and lacrosse, tennis courts, a picnic pavilion, barbeque gril]s, bike paths and a nature Center. A Master Plan was recently adopted for the park and an amphi- theatre is currently under construction. During the past winter seasons, '_ the athletic fields of the upper bench of the park has served as a day use parking area for skiers. The use oi* special WWII vintage .landing mats have been used to protect the turf from damage. There is no change, other than on-going facslixy development for the park. •Specsfica1ly, a community indoor swimming pool has been proposed for the east end of the site.- Tract 15 - Golden Peak Athletic Field . This five acre .athletic field~accammodates soccer, rugby and lacrosse o activities during the summer. ~ Tt~i s athletic fief d i s anticipated ta. con- tinue to serve as 'a site fo'r active recreation functions in the community. Tract lb - Vorlaufer Park, aka Roger Staub Park The small .5 acre open area is located off of Gore Creek Drive in Yail Village serve as a passive pocket-park adjacent to Gore Creek. This passive area is landscaped and contains boulders far resting and provides a _ pleasant relief from the dense built-up nature of the Yiliage. It is viewed as a positive attribute likely to continue to~function as such. Tract 17 - Mill Creek Stream Tract. This area extends from Hanson Ranch Road to Gore Greek Drive in back of the Red Lion Building. The tract serves as a drainageway and. should be pre- - served in its open state. Development along Bridge Street has turned their back to the stream and rehabilitation and/or renovation in the area should be encouraged to take advantage of this pleasant open area. 4S Tract ~8 - Gore Creek Stream Tract The stream tract extends from Ford Park in the east to sorest Road on the "west and consists of a series of dedicated parcels as development pro- gressed within the Town. The area serves as a invaluable environmental and - ~ aesthetic component to the Pillage tore. The primary uses of this area are . linear open space and recreational paths. - Tract l.9 - Slifer Square Slifer Square consists of the covered bridge, the ]andscaped plaza"and the "vest pocket" park between the Pillage parking structure and the bridge. The area serves as an entryway to the Village core and is unlikely to change. It has also been identified as a possibie~ site for the Town of Pail Christmas Tree. Tract ZO - Village Parking Structure The site of the parking structure contains dust aver +,i.5 acres of land not al] of which is occupied by the three level parking structure. The top of the structure serves as the Vail Transportation Center and is the focus for regional and town-wide bus routes. The east• end of the structure is undeveloped and this area represents an opportunity for development.. Tract 2I - Pirate Ship Park This facility is Located along Miil Creek in the vicinity of the Yista $ahn chairlift. The tot Iot and p]ayground serve the recreational needs of smaller children in the community and would likely remain unchanged. Tract z2 - Willow Circle Landscaped Area This 3.8 acre area serves as an open relief far residences which surround i t and would remai n as such. Tract 23 - Ski Muse cam Located at the intersection of Vail Road and West Meadow~Drive, this 1.23. acre site serves as one of the many tourist attractions in the Community. The site is at one of the more congested vehicular intersections in town and there are numerous vehicular/pedestrian conflicts in the area. There , are approved plans (related to the Yail Pillage Inn Special Oevelopment District} far the relocation of the museum. The plan calls far this site to become a small park/open space with opportunities for public art,. to serve as a window into the Lransition area, between Yail Pillage .and Lionshead. The plans for .this site may be modified in the future, with.the intersection improvements noted in the Yai] Yiilage Master. Plan, ~~ Tract 24 - Yi]lage Firestation The station site is likely to remain unchanged, 4b r ,~ ' Tract 25 - Interfaith Chapel Land south and west of the chapel is owned by the town and currently is used for parking for Lhe chapel. Unless there is a change in the chapel . activity then there appears to be no need to affect this tract. Tract 26 - Municipal Building and Past Office This site contains ~2,$1 acres and is located along the frontage road west of thQ Vail interchange, There are numerous options available .for change in use of this site which are discussed later in the study. Tract 27 - Dobson Ice Arena and Adjacent Lat to East T'~e site and use appears to be fairly well fixed for the near future. There have been discussions .about expansion and/or modification of the building to accommodate smal] conventions. To date, no firm plans have been identified, and thus there is no change expected for the arena site. A possible use of the adjacent Sat may be an outdoor ice arena. The lot is now planned to accommodate additional hospital parking needs.._ Tract 2$ - Yail Library and Adjacent~Park Area The library is located south of the Dobson Ice Arena and 1i~ke the arena there are no known expansion plans or relocation plans which would affect the site. There~is a small park area adjacent to the library, which will ~~ ~ remain in its. pre sent use. Tract 29 - Lionshead Parking Structure "~ The Lionshead parking structure site is one which. offers an opportunity to include sorne additional activities. The structure presently contains a number of uses including the Teen Center. The types of activities are tied in with the options which may result from activities at the municipal . center. ~ .~ L Tract 30 - Pedestrian Overpass The landing areas for the pedestrian overpass which connects Red Sandstone Elementary School and Lionshead are the two sites of this tract. No change is expected for this area, other than realigning the south approach. Tract 31 - Lionshead Entryway/Rights-of-Way This "tract" is actually a series of parcels in and around Lionshead which are entryways and landscaped bus turnarounds. ~1o Change is expected in this area. Tract 32 - Lionshead Mall The pedestrian mall of the Lionshead .tamnerctal area t~s the site of this tract. The tract winds in and around the mall and connects the parking structure with Lionshead Circle. The "Urban Design Guide Plan" addresses potential changes in this area. 47 Tract 33 - Lionshead Centre This site is located directly south of the Lionshead Centre building, adja- cent to the Gore Creek stream tract. It currently is part of the open space and trail system in the area and no changes are likely. -~ ' Tract 34 - Old Town Shops This site is. used for Town of Vail recreational programs and for storage. This site may have same potential for redevelopment at the time the nex access to I-70 becomes a reality. r _ Tract 35 - Mountain Bel] T,he Mountain Bell microwave facility and two day care centers are located• or a 25 acre site awned by the Town of Vai 1 which i s north of I-10. A portion of this site under the microwave facility, is owned by Mountain Bell . Part of the entire site is Located` in an area of medium environ- mental hazards and should continue to remain in its present use, with passible expansions of the day care centers. It may also be an option for the cemetary, further discussed later. Tract 35 - Red~Sandstone Elementary School The Town of Yaii leases the site to the Eagle County School District for educational purposes. This arrangement will likely continue through the planning period. Tract 37 - Potato Patch - An irregular shaped area above Red Sandstone Elementary School was dedi- . c'ated to the Town as open space. This area has a variety of high and medium environmental constraints as well as Some areas with na identifiable _. development constraints. There are no apparent deed restrictions for use . of the property, however, the site is. relatively difficult to access and seems to~be most appropriately left in open space. ' Tract 38 - Lion's Ridge The Lion'sRidge parcel is designated as open space and because of the - severe topographic and environmental conditions is not suitable for other uses. _ Tract 39 - Casca~F village Stream Tract This is an .,pct-: along Gore Creek in the vicinity of the Westin Hotel which serves as flood protection and provides some open space for the area. 48 ' 1 Tract 40 - ponovan Park The undeve]oped park CO~15i5t5 of a I2-acre lower bench area north of Gore Creek and a 39•acre upper bench south of the Matterhorn Subdivision. The park has been the subject of a Master P]an which outlined ,the prpposed park faci]ities far the site. The community intends to proceed with development ~~ of the project as funding becomes avai]ab]e. The upper bench has a]sa been identified as a potential cemetery site. • • •~ Tract 41 - Suffehr Creek ~ ~ ~ :. ' A site of approximately one acre in size has been identified as a park site i ~ for neighbor#~Ood residents. The use of this site is likely to continue 1 throughout the projection period. . f Tract 42 - Stephens Qroperty ~ , f This is a ten acre parce] of. land located along Gore., Creek in. the Inter- mountain area of West Vai]. The tract is currently undeveloped and.cauld be a ,possible cemetery,site. 49 ~' 2. Facilit /Service Y Requirements In this sect# on of the study the existing facilities used by the ToNn of Yail s service providers will be discussed. In general, a majority of the municipal sources offered by the town are well situated to serve the growth • needs of the community. However, as the community grows and matures therE are likely to be demands for additional services end/or facilities. For example, there has been an expressed need far an indoor aquatic center in the conrnunity. This facility would be difficult to justify under normal measures of demand tone pool per 25,000 population is a typical National . Park and Recreation standard}. .However, community interest is extremely high in a facility of this type due to the higher recreational participa- tion rates and the higher guest populations found in Yail and a site is recommended for its development. Following then is a brief discussion of status of existing services/facilities. (Note: a significant amount of 'information reported in this section is a result of a Space Needs Study conducted for the town in December of 1984.) ~~ Vail Police Qepartment - ~ " The Yail Department of Police is currently housed in the Municipal Build- ing, The department occupies a' portion of upper and lower-levels of the building with approximately one-third of the structure used far the law. enforcement function. The department is in need of additional space for personnel, facilities and storage. The 1984 study indicates that between 1,504 and 2,000 square feet of additional Space is needed.. ~'i re Protecti an Currently, two fire stations are serving the community: the East Vail Station on Columbine Drive in the Bighorn Subdivision; and the Centre] Station on East Meadow Drive which is adjacent to Lhe Village. The determ- L ination of fire protection adequacy involves a complex formula which incor- porates construction type, building height, water flow rate response time and service radius. The American Insurance Association (former]y the . . National Board of Fire ~inderwriters), prepares the evaluation. A rule of thumb for protection of r~si'dential areas is a radius of one and one-half miles for engine companies and two miles for ladder.* Applying this stand- ~ ard suggests that an additional .station could be proposed to~serve the Test Yail area. Library ~ . The lib ith f ilit i h t d t rary ac y w apparen s a equa oused in a new e space to accommodate the present and near future needs of community residents. L 50 Public Wor ks T The Public works/Transportation Department is housed at the Town of Yail shop. property which is located north of Y-70 in the vicinity of the golf course. The site ~is of adequate size to accommodate future space needs, however, the site would require extensive preparation to be usable. .Also, in the previous space use study~it was recommended that a small satellite facility to accommodate under storage anal a snowplow be developed in nest Yai]. .. Recreation The administrative function of the recreation department is currently located in the lower level of the library. There has been no indication that the current space is inadequate and thus it is assumed that the near term space needs of the department are satisfied. The second component of the recreation function is the land and/or facili- ties required to meet the recreational needs of community residents.~.This investigation has not included a parks and recreation master plan which would examine in some degree of detail these needs, However, there are some general indications of recreational desires as expressed by residents invo]ved in the public meetings associated with the ~.and.Use Plan project and during the completion of the Master ?lens for Ford and Donovan Parks. Park and recreation standards have historically been the means by which park requirements for future population have been estimated. The applica- tion of a ratio, typically expressed in acres per 1,OU0 population is often the point of beginning in projecting needs for a community. Also, these standards tend to be based on national trends as monitored by the Rational Park and Recreation Association. Often these national standards are not applicable to a community's situation -- in the case of Yail this is most certainly true. The unique location of the community and its recreation/ tourist base tends to skew the national standards. However, using a ratio as expression of future requirements is a technique which has some validity in this case. The results of the- survey conducted as part of the land use plan indicated that there are over 555 acres of land in the area devoted~to park and open space use. A further breakdown indicates that 296 acres of Lhe 555 acres are classified as open space and the remaining 259 acres are used for park purposes timproved parks and athletic fields}. A major component of the parks acreage is devoted to the golf course which is just over 94 acres of land. The current permanent population in the community is estimated to~be 4 500 persons. Applying this population to the current park and open space acreage results in the following: *UeChaiara, Joseph and Lee Koppel man, Urban Planning and Design Oriteria, Pg. 356. LJ 5I 1. Open Space Land = 65.8 acres per 1,flD0 population. - 2. Park Land {including golf course? = 57.5 acres per 1,000 population 3. Park Land (excluding golf course) 36.7 acres per 1,000 population Total Park b Open Space Land {1•~2) = I23.3 acres per 1,fl00 population As a means of comparison, the most frequently used ratio in expressing the requirement for park needs for urban conditions amounts to 25 acres per 1,000 population. The Town of Yail far exceeds this "normal" standard for the provision of park and recreation space. Throughout the public meetings associated with the ]and use. plan and the - results of a community services questionnaire, there appeared to be general satisfaction with the ]evel and amount of park and recreation facilities and areas. (A notable exception is the desire for an indoor aquatics center.) Thus, as one measure of the future needs in the community, 'today's standards of providing park areas could be used to determine future demands. The year 2000 population projections for the community indicate that the permanent population is 5,920 persons, or an increase of 1,420.persons above current levels. Using the existing ratio of park land now'provided t^ the increase in population-results in the following: ~ ~ Additional Park and Open Space Land Required Open Space Land i65.8 ac, x 1.42?* = 93 acres Parkland-Excluding Golf Course ~ = 52 acres ~ ~ (36.7 ac. x 1.42? . Total 145 acres• *Note: the ratio which excludes the golf course was used because there are no additional areas which could accommodate a golf facility in the planning area.) Using the above stated assumptions on level of service, one could antici- pate an additional need for 52 acres in parks and 93 acres in open space. . This is only .a general indication of need -- it does not include important factors such as location, down-.valley activities, or the availability of `" private recreation facilities in the community. This aspect of community facilities will be the subject of further study by - the Town as a separate component of the Comprehensive Plan. This will be accomplished through completing a "Recreational Strategic Plan" which will - study-needs for all types of recreational and parks amenities and identify locations for such needs. This effort will complement the already com- pleted Master Plans for Ford and Donavan Parks, which programmed specific L uses and locations for recreational facilities ih each park. Cemetery A cemetery site has been identified as a high priority item far the commun- ity. Fn the process of~ identifying potential sites, contacts were made with agencies who may have regulations affecting the siting of such a facility. The Colorado State Department of iieaith was contacted and there - are no regulations from their prospective which would affect siting of a cemetery. The only agency which does have an affect on cemetery operations ~ is the Colorado State •Division of Insurance, which is concerned with S2 r i~ i~ i~ i~ i~ internment, general maintenance of the facility. and administration organs= nation necessary to operate the facility. There are several key considera- tions in site criteria for a cemetery including: 1) the suitahility of the terrain far internment such as the nature of the subsoil; 2) drainage; 3) proximity to comnunty water sources; and, 4} accessibility. Also, there is the sensitive iss;~e of the "feeling" of death that is associated with a cemetery and the inclination an the part of same people to avoid living in the vicinity of a cemetery. Fina]ly, it is likely that a cemetery site will be used in perpetuity. Burial grounds are rarely moved due both to the practice]-and .legal difficulties.involved. Four sites have been identified as~meeting the above outlined criteria; Lhere are. however, some unresolved questions with each. Parcel H Thi s tract of l and i s 1 orated i n East Yai 1 under an elevated sects an of Interstate 70. The portion of the site appropriate for internment is north of Gore Creek and has direct access from Bighorn Road. utilities, specifi- Gaily water service, is available in the area. The site is presently within the White River Hationa] Forest and acquisition of the tract would have to conform to a complicated and lengthy set of pracedi~res. Also, it is unknown at this time what rights the Colorado State Highway Department may have an the tract. Even though I-70 is elevated as it tranverses the parcel, there may be some restrictions on use of the space under the freeway, Mountain Bell Tract The 25 acre tract of land, currently owned by the Town of Yaii, with a por- tion owned by Mountain Bell, which houses the telephone microwave transmit- ting facility, is recon~mended as .a second potential cemetery site. The site has many positive attributes including access, availability of utili- ties and isolation. The one negative factor of the site is the terrain type. Presently, a portion of the area is identified as having moderate environmental constraints. It does appear that .a carefully designed site plan could adequately overcome some of these constraints and provide a Suitable cemetery site. This site is also intended to continue to be used by the two day care centers with additi.anal area to accommodate necessary expansion of these centers. Stephen's Property The Stephen`s Property, in West- 11ai1; is the third site which has been identified as a possible cemetery. Gore Creek tranverses this triangular shaped tract of land with the south portion being more flood prone and sub- ,~ect to moderate environmenf.~l constraints. As suitable as the site is it may face competition fiar use from the recreational requirement to meet future demands. Donavan Park A portion of the upper bench of Donovan Park was also previously identified as a possible cemetery site through the Master Parks Pian process for Donavan Park. L~J c~ General Governmental Services General governmental services include those municipal functions such as town administration, community development, finance and personnel. The _ ~ previously Cited space needs study indicated that, with the exception of the Police Department, department needs are primarily in the area of addi- tional storage. The individual needs of the departments are comparatively minor, however, when they are added to the Police Department requirements and the current site constrainxs of the municipal building and post office . site there becomes a cumulative effect and/or requirement which is dis- cussed in a latter section of this report. Schools While education services are not provided by the Town, it is important to' address the question of whether or not new sites for schools should be planned. According to conversations with Dr. Charles Schwann, Superintend- ent of School District RESDJ, there are no projected needs for additional school sites within the Town of Yai]. There are currently several school sites in Avon and Edwards which have been dedicated to the district. pue to the projected population distribution, in combination with the bus cir- culation routes, it is anticipated that needs for new schools will be met through the placement of facilities on these sites. 3. Locations for Other Facilities During the course of this investigation there have been a number of special facilities or cc- ~ 'ons which have been identified as being appropriate for comment. These items along with a summary of the key findings of the previous sections are presented as follows. Aquatic Center - Concurrent with this investigation the Department of Community Development conducted an evaluation of alternative sites for an aquatic center. The . evaluation used a checklist of .seventeen different items which were applied _ ~ to six separate sites in the community. The analysis resulted in an area at the east end of Ford Park as scoring the highest in a1^~st all of the evaluation categories. The results of the evaluation confirms the recam- mendatians which were made as part of the Ford Park Master Planning pro- - cess. Therefore, should plans proceed for such a facility it would be most •appropriately located at the east end of Ford Park: _ Golf Course The only site in the community large enough to accommodate an executive - ~ style, Par 3 course is a portion of the Katsos Ranch pr•uperty as a well- planned 18-hole par 3 course requires 5D to 50 acres of land. As mentioned previously in the discussion of tract 8, a 9-hale par 3 course Could possi- bly be built on approximately 20 acres. Tract 8 in the Booth Falls area - could not accommodate this acreage requirement.* At the public meetings held during the development of this plan, there was overwhelming community opposition to the use of the Katsos property to accommodate a golfing _ facility. . * DeChaiara, Joseph and Lee Kappelman, Urban Planning and Design Criteria,, Pg. 3$Q; and SH3C Associates, lnc. 54 Seasonal Surface Parking Areas In support of the impact assessment of the Ya#i Mountain Master Plan, a parking and bus utilization analysis was Conducted. This analysis identi- fied the magnitude of the increase associated with skier expansion, as wail as the internal shift in ski portal use because of the location of mountain expansion. It was projected that a shortfall of 597 public park#ng spaces would occur in the YillagelGoiden Park area while a.surpius of spaces would result in the Lionshead/Cascade Yillage area. A variety of solutions to . 'the pro3ected shortfall were identified inclwding:. - Expansion of the Transportation Canter by 450 spaces. - Relocation of the rental car operation to free up spaces in the Trans- . portation Center. - Increased parking as part of the Golden Peak base facility redevelop- ' ment. - Expanded parking at Ford Pdrk. - Increased use of remote parking facilities such. as the golf, course : : . lot. ~. - Leasing of private spaces by employees. - Greater utilization of the bus system. .. The variety of options available to accommodate this growth suggests that there is likely no need to immediately look for additional surface parking areas. The experience with using Ford Park as a temporary solution has not be fully evaluated. However,~from the communities perspective, there was no significant apposition to ~cse of the upper bench of the park, as a temporary .solution to the parking problem. Ons of the concluding recommendations of the parking and bus utilization study involved the on-going activities of the Parking Task Force which would continue to monitor and document the adequacy of the parking system in the peak February-March period. . Village Parking Structure . The Yillage parking structure was previously mentioned as being one' means by which to•part~ially meet the additional parking requirement generated Dy the mountain expansion plan. The east end of the parking structure site is This area has been viewed as a possible site for numerous undeveloped . activities. It is recommended that since the parking structure has been designed far expansion and that the Yillage/Golden Peak ski portals are to be the focus of mountain expansion, that the east end site be designated ~_ far parking structure ezpansi.on. Extending the existing parking structure . would create a building area of 31,250 square feet on top of the struc- lure the length extends 250 fAet, which is 50 feet short of the west pave- r,r,,~, 1 i ne of Vai 1 Yal l ey Dri vc and the width i s hel d at the current I25 ` feet). This area could then be utilized for, some other type of use. The landscaped slope facing south of the existing structure, along East Meadow Da ve, has been discussed as possibly having same redevelopment potential. During the public meetings held to review this plan, the resi- dents expressed a desire to keep this area in its present use, as permanent open space. 55 Lionshead Parking Structure The.Lionshead parking structure offers some of the same opportunities for joint use development a5 those of the Village structure. The types o` activities and possible point uses are somewhat different however. The ~~ east end of the parking structure site is currently not developed as a parking structure but is utilized for parking for large recreational vehi- cles or buses. This area has been suggested as a possible site for a new municipal building or town hall. The site could easily accommodate a bui 1 di ng of 2Q,U00 square feet i n ~ single or multi -level structure and could Use either the existing parking ~struCture for employee and/or busi- Hess parking ar could incorporate structured parking of its own. This potential building, along with the adjacent Dobson area and library, could form the Components of a municipal center or Complex, along with the exist- ing Teen Center in the structure. Another potential point use for the site would be an extension of the commercial space along the south face of the structure. There is currently 5,000 square feet of commercial/office spate and sore additional square footage of space could be incorporated in.the structure. .Unlike the Village structure, however, the depth of the space (i.e.; from street f~.O.1t. to parking structure) i s relatively shallow. Commercial uses requiring a more square rather than rectangular shape may have to extend into the parking structure. The deed of transfer from Yai] Associates to . the Town of Yai] specifically prohibits nonpublic uses for the structure. It should be noted, however, that existing Commercial space is not physi- cally attached to the structure - they are two separate buildings-which may be a means to be in compliance with the deed restrictions. The restriction may preclude any extension of commercial space into the structure. In the discussion of using the east end of the parking structure as a bui 1 di ng site, i t shoal d al sa be noted that the parking structure i tsel has been designed to accommodate additional roof top loads. Thus, a new building could almost be placed anywhere on the parking structure site. The `uture use o.f both parking .structures is now the subject of further i ~nvesti gati on by the Town. A feasi bit i ty. study has been initiated to address whether the structures should remain in their present use or be positioned for the addition of commercial, office and or parking uses. Municipal Uuildinq/Post Office Site The suggestion that municipal functions be relocated, as discussed in the previous section, would then make available the municipal building and municipal building site. Added to this is the desire of the post office to relocate its distribution function to an outlying location (the Community would like to maintain a "retail" func~'.~^°' in Commercial Core I or II haw= ever) could possibly "fr~P ~~p" both bui~uings as well as the site. Some o` the passible scenarios fur site use and activities include the fallowing: 3V A. Municipal Function Relocated: 1. Use of the eastern part of the existing municipal building as a visitor's center. This portion of the building tpolice depart- menta has goad visibility as weal as parking. As a supplement to the visitor center, a historical display area and/or the ski museum could also be provided. The post office could operate its retail presence in the building it presently occupies. ~2~. Another general option would-be to abandon the existing struc- t~res and develop a multi-purpose co~munity building to accommo- date .the visitor center; Vail Resort Association, as well as space for other community service organizations. 3. Along the same lines as 2 above, the private sector could be ' ~, encouraged to participate by offering the parcel for deve]opment, in exchange for the provision of a visitor center in the develop- - meet. ~ ~ - ~~ The combination of uses are alraast too numerous to ]ist. Also, there needs to be some assessment of the size requirements of these facilities and whether any specific types of space are needed, as well as additional parking requirements. Fi. Municipal Function Remains 1. Ff the municipal functions remain at the current site, then there would likely be a reallocation of uses among the two buildings. The Police Department's need for additional space plus their need for communication equipment suggest .that they remain in the existing municipal building. The post office building could become an "annex" to the main building in which some municipal functions could be housed. The post office retail function would probably have to find a new facility. 2. A variation to the above would be to demolish the post office building and build an .addition to the existing municipal build- ing. ' 3. Another variation could demolish both buildings and construct a new municipa] complex. Locations for Public Art The presence of public art in a community add's to the quality of life of its citizens. Public art can be commemorative by reminding the viewer of an i ndi vi dual or event of si gni fi car,cc i ~~ t~~e comrnuni ty or i t can be created to evoke an emotional response on the part of the viewer. Because of the diversity ,of the types of public art, it is difficult to prescribe specific locations whir.h are appropriate and suitable for ail objects of art. Thus, the following items of consideration are provided as a means to review each proposal for .the siting of a piece of public art, as further discussed on the following page. 57 j' The piece of art proposed for public viewing has characteristics and quali- ties which should be examined prior to its siting. The following should.be examined:. - Size and Scale: Is the physical size of the piece of art such that it requires a certain amount of distance for the object for proper view- f' ing? or example, a kinetic sculpture the size of a small vehicle would likely require a pedestrian plaza area. = . Shape and Form: Whether the piece of art has a symmetrical . shape or has a tree-form has an influence on the most appropriate area from which to view it. ~ . - Material: The material of the piece of art should be considered. For example, a high tech material of glass ar polished metal may be out of place in a natural setting along a streambed or in a forested area. Conversely, this type of material may provide a dramatic contrast to a natural forested setting. - Mass and Density: The bulk and volume of a piece of art is also a factor which should be evaluated. There is a natural affinity between the mountainous terrain features of the area and a sculptural piece which expresses the mass and bulk. But again, a complimentary . sculptural piece could provide a interesting contrast to the mass of the mountains. In addition to aesthetic and design concerns associated with individual pieces of~ art, there are some very practical questions which should be. addressed. The placement of a piece of art in a public place should be evaluated as to its effect on public health, safety and we]fare. The types of issues include the Safety of the piece of art from the standpoint of the viewer. Are there any sharp edges ar delicate construction techniques which have the potential to cause injury to the viewer? Is the piece of art Secure, and well fastened to its viewing area not sutject 'to easy ~removai? is there some measure of protection against Yandalism associated • with the piece? Can the piece be easily defaced or shou~d vandalism. occur, . ~ can the defacing be easily removed? Finally, how does the piece of public art and it's location relate to the Public Works function of the town? * Specifically, are there any conflicts with snow removal, emergency service L access and bus transit routes? The above criteria is suggested as a means to evaluate individual piecel~f L art. There are, however, general locations which are more appropriate for public art. Nithin the Yail Pillage Master Plan, specific locations have been identified. Beyond the village area, locations should focus around pedestrian concentrations or movement. Bus stops make excellent locations for art because of the congregation of people, Similar,ily, formal plaza areas and areas where pedestrian pathways intersect are s~~itable loca- tions. Siting areas along the pedestrian pathways associated with Gore Creek also are appropriate. In any of the above areas, the piece of public art should be selected and plaeeci to compliment the urban or natural . setting and should act as a magnet to draw people to an area. ~~ CHAPTER VIII - IMPLEMENTAIION ~' The Land Use Plan d eveloped as a result of 'this effort will become a part of the Yail Comprehensive Plan, which in its entirety will serve to guide growth within the Town of Yail for the next 1S years. The Land Use Plan is ,not intended to be regulatory in nature but is intended to provide a general framework to guide decision making. Specific implementation measures should be undertaken to assure that .the intent of th Plan is .~ carried forward throughout the life of the Plan. Such measures should include changes to ordinances and regulations or pfllicies•adopted by the Town. These measures should also include develop- . ing a system by which the P]an may be continuously monitored and periodic- ally amended. This is important because the planning process •is one of continuous evolution with data, public opinion and market forces changing over time. 1. Land Ilse Regulation Analysis The zoning and 5ubdi vi Sion regulations should. be analyzed carefully ~ to assure that objectives of the Land Use Plan may be met. While an in~depth analysis of these regulations is not within the scope of this project., some general recommendations may be made concerning new land use categories developed for the Land ~ Use Pl an.~ Ttie following categories shoal d be reviewed for compatibility with the zoning regulations. A. Hillside Residential ~ This new•category will require the adoption of a new zoning category,- , which would allow for single-family residential units at a maximum density of two 'per acre, with a minimum buildable area of 20,000 square feet of contiguous area per unit. Allowance should also be made for an employee or guest hausing•unit to be built as an accessary unit attached to the primary living unit or garage. The existing regulations for access to subdivisions and far control of hazard areas • should still be applicable. - - ~• B. Community Office ,' This category would require a review of the Arterial 8usine~ss District zoning category to ensure that permitted and conditional uses were broad enough to be consistent with the objectives established with the Land Use Plan. L •C. Transition This area would require an analysis of the actual zoning along West hleadoar Drive to ensure that the purposes of the transition district cou] d be rrret, ~ D. High Density Residential The actual location of the parcels of high density residential should be analyzed to determine a suitable minimum lot area permissible for high density development. The present high density zone district has the requirement of a minimum lot size of X0,000 square feet of'build- able area. It is conceivable that this minimum would not be adequate in some cases and may need to be increased to 20,000 square feet. . 59 2. Procedural Method of Itapl ementati on The general method of developing implementation measures should be as follows: . . A, Define P]an/Zoning Differences . Cpmpare hand Use Plan Map with Zoning Map and identify areas of can- . flict between categories as. described in the Plan and the Zoning .Ordinance. 8. ~ Evaluate Zo.ni ng Ordinance ' Segi n evaluating the zoning ordinance as compared with the Land Use Categories. adopted in~ this document and develop new categories or wording/use changes .Lo bring the xoning document into conformance with general spirit of the Plan. This should include an ana]ysis of~the four categories mentioned pre- viously, proceeding from A through D in that order. The Hillside Category should be the first area of consideration since no zoning category exists presently to accommodate this Lype of use. The balance of Lhe zoning and land use categories should be compared at a later time for compati bi 1 i ty. C. Refine Plan It i s anticipated that after the P1 an has been adopted and has been used as a working document for some time, the Town may identify refinements which will need to be made to the Land Use Categories, Map and Goal Statements. These should be undertaken after the zoning code revisions and other imp]ementation documents have been prepared and are ready for adoption to "fine-tune" the Plan. It is recommended that these changes take place within the first year after adoption and occur as an amendment to the Plan, initiated by the Town. Amendment . ~ ~ procedures are described on page '62. a. Rezonings The Tawn may wish to consider initiating select rezonings, when the community interests would be met through bringing areas into conform- ance with the Plan. Where conflicts arise between existing zoning and proposed land use categories land changes have not been made in the development of the implementation measures described herei nD existing xoning shal l con- trol. Then new applications far zoning ar rezoning are made and the b0 requested tonin is not consistent wi h 9 t the adopted Plan, the s nor,- conformance shall be addressed by the applicant. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to dearly demonstrate hove conditions 1 have changed since the Plan was adopted, how~the Plan is in error or haw the addition, delet#on or Change to the Plan is in concert with the Plan~in general. Such nonconformance shall then become a factor j. for consideration in the rezoning process, along with all other fac- tors considered fin such cases, with respect to Town ordinances and ~ policies. E. Annexation of National Forest Lands In the future, the Town may desire to annex National Forest lands for the purposes of recreational and/or public facility development. This will involve close coordination with the Forest Service. However, National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into ` private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned far private development. F: Parks and Open Space Consideration should be given by the Town to amending_the ordinance which regulates the real estate transfer tax to allow funds to be utilized for the development of parks and open space, in addition to the purchase of.these lands. 3. Amendment Process The amendment process is one which is intended to assure the Plan's efrec- tiveness with periodic updates to reflect current thinking and changing market conditions. The process includes amendments which may be initiated in any of the following three ways: A. By the Community Development Ae~artment. B. By the Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council. C. _sy the Private Sector. A. Community Development Department Amendments The Community Development Department should update and revise the Plan every three to five years, whenever possible. However, if the plan is not updated within such timeframe, this shall not jeopardize the validity of the plan. This should include analysis of the goals and policies; updating of the forecasting model and review and revision of the Land tlse Plan map. The Community Development Department would then make recommendations for proposed changes to ,the Planning and Environmental Commission where these changes would then be considered in a public hearing format. The Planning and Environmental Commission would then make recommendations to the Town Council, which would also hold a public hearing on the proposed changes. If adopted, the changes would then became a part of the Plan. I L s~ r r 8. Planning and Environmental Commission ar Town Counci] Amendments These entities could also initiate plan amendments periodically, as deemed appropriate. These amendments would also require public hear- ings with both the Commission and the Council, and upon adoption then became a part of the Plan. . Private Sector Amendments The private sector may also initi~#.e amendment requests. These should be i n i ti ated i n the fallowing a~?~~ 1. Make application with the Community Development Department. Application may be made by either a registered voter, a property owner or a property owner's authorized representative. Such application may be made at any time. 2. Such applications will then be considered at a meeting with the P&EC. At the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing, a recommendation shall be made to the Town Council, whereupon a decision shall then be.rendered. To Change the Plan by this pro- cedure, it will be the responsibility. of the applicant to clearly demonstrate how conditions have changed since the Plan was adopted, how the Plan is in error or how the addition, deletion or change to the Plan i s i n concert with the Plan i n general . Such decision may include approval, approval with conditions or denial. Amendments may be requested for changes to the goals and policies and/or Land Use Plan map. If such request is approved, such change shall be made to the Plan document and/or map. If such request is denied, no such request that is substantially the same as that previously denied shall be considered for a period of one year. ~~ c. 1• 4. Use of the Land Use Plan Map ~The•Land Use Plan map and the goal statements are intended to serve .as the L~ primary focus far the review of development •proposals, along with Town ordinances and regulations. The Plan Map and goal Statements are founded upon the supporting information and data contained in this document and L • therefore should not be utilized as the cote instrument for analysis of a project. Any project should be reviewed within the context of the intent of the overall Plan Document. The Community Development Department, along L with the Planning and Cnvironmental Co~'mission and Town Council will be responsible for the interpretation and implementation of the Plan. i~ b2 >~here the 404 scale Land Use Plan map tadopted b reference herein does y ) -not adequately define a land use category boundary, the boundary shall be ~~ interpreted by the Community development Staff. It should be•noted that the boundaries established on the Plan Map are general in nature and were not determined based on parcel by parcel property boundaries. When ar~biguity exists, generally, roadways, natural barriers and property edges shall define such boundaries. When a property fin single ownership is divided by a land use Category such that the property 'cannot; be developed . in a feasible and logical way for either land use, the staff may determine which use is appropriate, based on compatibility of surrounding: land uses, . both exs sti ng and .proposed, and physical site characters std cs,~° Where a disagreement between the staff and the applicant occurs, appea] s may be made to the Planning and Environmental Commission. In conjunction with the use of the Plan Map, the constraint maps adopted by 'the Town for geologic hazards, snow avalanche and flood plains referenced, herein shall also be utilized in the review of any, development proposal. Areas which may fall within the I-70 corridor_ shall _be,.determined by consulting the Town right-of-way maps also referenced herei~i: L 63 ~. .~ APPENDICES Page A. Community Questionnaire - Summary Results A-1 - fi B. . Additional Goal Statements .B-1 - 2 C. Additional Sources ~ C-1 . 4. Economic and Uemographit Overview ~ ~ D-1 - ~12 E. Town of Yail Forecast.t~ethadology , E-1 - 16 L I ST OF TABE.ES Appendix D 1. Historical Skier Visits to Yail, Beaver Creek ar~d the I}-2 State of Colorado, 1962-53 to 1985-86 2, H.istorica] Population and Household Gro~rth Trends in 'D=4 Vai] and Eagle County, 197U-1985 . 3. Housing and Household Characteristics of Yail and D-5 Eagle County, 1970-1980 ~ ~ 4. Historical Eagle County Average Annual Employment by -. rk 1975-1985 d a d Pla f M I t ~ D-7 . n , us ry n ce o o 5. Historical Average Annual Employment by Place of Work D-8 for Yai] and Eagle County, 1975-1985 6. Historical Eagle County Personal Income by Industry D-9 ~ ~ and Place of Wark iS000's?, 1974-1984 . ~ 7. Historical Eagle County Business Establishments by D-il '~ .~ Industry and Employment - Ski Class, 1974-198.4 8. Historical Retail Sales by Month in Yail and Eayle D-12 F County (50U0`s), 1975-1985 Appen dix E , - Table 1-A - Town of Vail ForQCast Assumptions E-4 1-50, 1-b0, 1-7U -Projected Vail Area Skier Yi5its by Type, 1984-85 to 1999-2000 f 1 P l 5 Yai opu a- 2-50, 2-50, 2-70 - F ..,,~ ~.~~. i~d Town o , E- 9, 13 tion and Househol ~P '.. ~'•~°~~~, 1984-SS to 1999-2000 . -' 3-50, 3-60, 3-10 - Projected Town of Yail Housing E-7,11,15 Unit Demand by Type, 1984-85 to 1999-2000 _ 4-50, 4-50, Q-70 - Projected Town of Yail Retail E-8,1 2,16 . Sa? ~ ,.,y Category, I.S~~~-1.985 to 1999-20U0 APPENDIX A YAIL COhL'~IllNITY QUESTIONNAIRE SUMF+IAkY RESULTS 1 i `~ - I 11PPfH}IX A - VAIL CDhH.I~lITY ~3TItMYIIRE - 9lf~RY R~SU.TS _ ~. • i. Growth cm be ..,,,.....,,;sled in ~ variety of ways. . 4~hich of the following area or areas do you consider cost appropriate? ' . i ~ • •. In the Ylllage Care ales thty ~ _:_:el~,.. _ ..t, if naccssary. • b. On vacant lard !n already developed stR~divinims " .` that the Cormtiitity. c. (h vacant land at the edge of the built-~c~ area. i d. On land suitable for devel..r,~.,t regardless of ~ oYriership. Total e. Other: hillsides (no growth on) limit tlrowth and improve rAiat we have • Pillage, Lionshead, N~estin tin valley [I leave softball Fields glare 2. khat type of growth should be encouraged? a. Fbtel/lodge .,.....,. b, G..l..,,inlu~ (short-tern rental or long-term or+ie r/user ? . . ._ c. TowYia^~es. .. t d. Single family/duplex resiJ~._.:y. L e. Ccmir rcial uses. _ Total t. Other: limit growth, focus on i..,....:ing what wa hav+~ affordable family living space mare time-sham _,_ .,;..s recreational facilities low cost housing for locals Stm~gly ~ 5trmgly 1laree ~.._.• ttutral Disaom Disagree Total 9 6 3 2 _2 ~ 22 6 t0 4 - '! 2t Z ~ 6 ~,: 3 4 ,.. 19 2 b i 5 7 21 ~~ 26 ~a ~o to e3 B 5 S 2 2 22 2 2 4 7 6 21 1 8 7 S 7 22 a 7 7 3 1 2z 5 7 ~a ~ ~ 18 2U 29 27 t8 'it 1D5 A-I 3. What do you like about the Town of Vail? Ambiance ambiance of village core natural setting friendliness of locals mountain character _ ..~ well kept and prosperous . people scale»public areas are accessible a,nd naturally landscaped everything . • ~ ' freedom - . the people surroundings -mountains climate mountain location the look of the Vail area neighborhood - community ambiance ~ ~' rural character ~ .~: ,. ... .~.. <<,~} ._ .... ~ - ... setting, location, variety of people and interests summers .' it's clean. scenic, wel l pl anned~ -- small town flavor with cosrnopolitan flavor its location natural setting atmosphere - design and location original and architecture Recreation availaoility from village to ski mountain {su~nner and winter) skiing community support for conservation of open spaces skiing . recreation (paths and facilities? proxi mi ty to nature cultural ac ti v.i ty ~ .~ ~ - open space ,(what 1 i tti a there i s) , library Ford Park, tennis Pillage Core/Lianshead pedestrian care pedestrian areas and Tyrolean design - excellent landscaping like pedestrian streets when there are no trucks good atmosphere for tourist business ~ . flowers in Sumner shopping . ~-z r r fa General Growth/Development size ana variety economic viability controls to keep greedy under control growth potential Government/Public Services tree bus management good building codes ~ •~ 4. What do you find undesirable about 1~ai1 as it now exists? Commercial economics of commercial areas 'lower cost restaurants expensive shops . high rents for retail shop owners ~ .. ::. restaurants too expensive Roads/Parking/Traffic . 4-way intersections with bad visibility poor road conditions {weaver Dam and Forest Road fow exar~ple) parking in winter traffic contra] Q-way stop parking commercial vehicles in CCI cars•in core lack of traffic organization lack of core parking in Yillage for work force Yi]]age Core/Lionshead quality diminishing - need for upgrade of structures high-rise buildings near ski mountain growing congestion ~ - no activity in ~ionshead -need vendor carts, night life no cohesion between Yail Yillage and l.ionshead too much care construction during sujrmer months Lionshead overbuilt high rises in old Yail quit tearing up town in summer village activities lack variety Residential family living space {owner occupied) housing too expensive A-3 pecreation ntgnt time recreation emphasis on adult rather than youth activities teens drinking and disorderly no swimming pool Government/Public Services public rest facilities , na rest rooms in restrictions of governmental bureaucracy the willingness of Council to grant variances overbearing of fire and police I-70 - too many cops General Growth/Development too many opportunists wishing to make fast buck and leave the area before many of the problems of overdevelopment occur not growing being all things to all people - sports vs. culture ~ ..~ ~- . .,. If old Yail goes like Lionshead - it will be a disaster. Hi rises and overbuilding thru variations will ultimately hurt the image and experience of visitors. Stability and control is necessary -looseness fn the plan- Wing - zoning - variations is bad, As a condo owner in -old Yail~ we must keep the open areas open for summer fall and winter use. Because Yail has grown at an usually fast rate and because many developers wanted a fast buck, it seems that the focus on growth should begin imprav- • ing what we already have. This concept would help to better utilize our limited space as well as make our town more attractive and cohesive. What has- become of the original architecture and standards of building? Lions- head~ in my opinion, will never reach its potential as a town center, a retail center or an arts center. Pail Pillage looks like its seen its pay- day as the quality of some of the older buildings deteriorates and the new ' ones like Lionshead, just don't fit in to the warmth our Pillage is ' supposably protraying. As a ~potenti al shop owner myself ~ I am sorry, I can't say that the rents they are asking in town for store space are wort~i~it. I've seen tao many good businesses and business people run out of town because 'of the high costs here. ~If Town of Yaii would realize its the little people who have made a commitment to live and work here who count, we'd be making progress in the right direction. ~ ' General eye Sores signage dogs loose • large groups with special rates who feel they can control the village to their liking ~ ~ . no major complaints details need attention for quality - the last lU~ don't take care of everyones needs -just the "haves" ' tOUrlStS A-4 Satisfied t+kutral Oissakisfied Total 5. Please irdicate your satisfaction xith the following ~ aervices•or facilities. ' Public Facilities and Services: . Sidewalks and Street Maim . _. 8 4 10 22 Roads sid.lticjnraya ~ 8 ~ 3 13 ' ~ 24 • Mater Service 12 B 3 23. Fine Protection 16 S 1 2Z Sewer Systatn ~a ,7 - 21 Parks and Recreational facilities and P._,,...... 1a S ~ a 23' tsw F~fa., .. _ .t ~ 7 13 2 22 . Traffic Control a 6 13 23 Animal Control S 31 7 - 23 Ir-9ect Control ~ _ ~ S 13 2 ZO • Lzbra:y facilities ~19 2 - - 21 • Other Corrnxoity Facilities and Services .. Sanitary la-d Fills a 14 3~ 21 Tel~r..~, Service 10 10 2 Z2 Utility Services 8 10 3 21 - ~ 5fnppLng FaciliC:e3 '40 4 B Z2 Professional Services (physicians, la+~ryers} 13 7 Z 22 Restaurants 20 1 1 Z2 Total ~ 177 123 74 374 _... • R-5 6. Uf the categories of public and community facilities and services above, which do you caRS{der to be the most important to you? Public facilities and Services traffic at peak periods road maintenance snow plowing - street repair ~~ ~. maintain pedestrian core with delivery access _~ ~ , bike paths, waking,paths parks and recreation facilities ~ ' more golf open space along base~af ski mountain '` mare gol f . _ . _.:.. ,. , more community facilities - parks, swimming pool, etc. 'library fire and police protection . ' - animal control ~ . -.. __ Other Community Facilities and Services ' utility services restaurants ' professional more shopping facilities are needed but not big mal] professional services Y.A. {tt~e mauritainl . A-6 Il I' u h APPENDIX $ • ADDITIOtJAL GOALS ' Related to Other Elements of the Comprehensive Flan} Parks/Open Space I. Yai1 Should develop the parks system. 2. Forest Service properties should remain as open space or may be used for public ar recreational facility development; where appropriate. 3. More bike paths, which are separated from walking trails, should be~ developed. 4. Qpen space areas and Gore Creek should be preserved and ]eft unde- veloped. ~~ 5. High quality 1 andscapi ng .should be encouraged i n al 1 deve3 opment pro- ~ects. Recreation Facilities 1. More youth activities should be provided by the Town. 2. Construction a` a~public pool should be a high priority tar the Town. 3. Nonskier, ramify activities should be encouraged. 4. Cultura] experiences should be enhanced. . . 5. Construction of a vi5itar center should be a high priority for the Tawr~. Transportation 1.. Vail should improve opportunities ror group transportation Pram Denver to Yai 7 : 2. Parking and bus service should be improved. 3. Adequate parking should be provided to accommodate day skier growth. 4. The traf`ic flow, especially obstructions caused by truck traffic, should be improved in the core. 5. Pedestrian/vehicle conr]icts should be reduced through transportation improvements. 6. Surface parking should be reduced and provided underground where~possi- ble. 7. Construction of a p~~~ple rriover should be a higf~ priority for the "i'o~rn. B-Z Y Econamic Development . 1. The community should.help create a business environment which can serve middle income clientele and accommodate affordability for small businesses. I. New growth should also be made affordable for families living and working in Yail. ~ ' 3. The Town of Yail should consider .developing some type of mechanism to control tenant mix, so that a balance between tourist and convenience type of commercial uses is maintained. B-2. :APPENDIX C ADDITIONAE. SOt1RCES . ,. ~. .. • j .- APPENDIX C - ADDITIOhIAL SOI;RCE5 STUDIED IN TFlE PkEPARATIOH OF THIS REPDRT ]. "The Vail Village.- Urban Design Guide Plan", June 1980. - ~ 2. "Vail Village Design Considerations", June 1980. 3. "The Yail Lionshead - Urban Design Guide Plan", .lone 198U. • 4. "Yai~l Lionshead Design Considerations", June 198U. 5. "Lionshead Improvement District - Economic Benefit Analysis.Addendu~n" - Larry Smith d~ Company, LTD., February 1983. 6. ~ Zoning Code b Official Zoning ldap - Town 'of Yail, 1985. 1. Land Transfer Tax Ordinance - Town of Yail. 8. "Parks and Recreation Feasibility Analysis" - Community Development Dept., 1984. 9. "Vail Bikeway Plan" - Recreation Dept., 1984. ~ • . 10. "Vail Traffic Counts" - Centennial Engineering, Inc., March 1986. il. "final Report I-7O/Vail Feasibility Study" - Centennial Engineering, inc., April 1984. 12. "Transit Bevelopment P1 an 1918-1983 - Summary Report" - Coinnunity Qevelopment Dept., 191$. 13. "Transit Development Plan Update, 1981-1991" - Town of Yail, April 19$b. 14. "statement of Reasons of Town of Vail Appeal - Vail Land Exchange Proposal" -Town of Vail, 1986. 15. "Vail Master Development Plan" - Yail Associates, Inc. and Rosall, Remmen ~ Cares, Inc., October 1985. 16. "Transportation Work Program: Vail Master Plan" - ~tosall, Rerronen & Cares, Juiy 1985. 11. "Parking and Bus Utilization - Vail Mountain Master Pi an Update" - __ Rosall, Remmers, Cares, January 1986. ' 18. "Air Quality Analysis - Expansion of Yail fountain and Development of the Palley - 19dfi to 1993", Air Sciences, Inc., October 1985. C• i APPENaIX G ECONOMIC ANa i}EMDGRAPHIC OVERVIEW OF THE TOW~f OF PAIL • • ~• APPENDIX D: •ECONOMIC AND DE~~1pGRAPHIC OYERYIEW OF THE TOWN OF PAIL iNTRODlJCTION From its opening season in 1962-1953, the ski industry has fueled and shaped the growth and development of the Town of Yail. Today, Yail is the largest ski resort in the State of Colorado, Although composed of only one-fourth of the total permanent population of Eagle County, Yail provides approximately 60~ of all fobs and accounts for approximately SQL. of all • ~ retai 1 'sales i n the county. Yai ] is clearly .the center and dri of ng force ~ of economic activity in Eagle County. ~ The following economic and demographic overview begins with a .review of historical skier visits to Yail, Beaver Creek and the State of Colorado'. ,Next, historical population and household growth trends as well as housing and household characteristics in Yail and Eagle County are examined. Finally, the economy of Yail and Eagle County is analyzed through history- ~ cal employment, income, business development and retail data. Skier Visits Skier visits are the 1 eadi ng indicator of the Yai l econo~ny. From fi5,000 skier visits during the 1952-1963 opening season, Yail experienced nearly 1.3 million skier visits over the past 1985-1966 season as presented in Table 1. This increase represents a substantial 14.5 annual growth rate over Vail's twenty-three year history. With increased competition, varying snow conditions and changing skier demographics, Pail's skier visits have fluctuated over the past decade; nevertheless, Yail has shown a steady 2.04 annual growth rate over the past decade, 2.1~ over the past four seasons, and~2.24 since last season. Pail consistently increased its share of skier visits to the State of Colorado from 10.0 in 1962-1963 to 18.8 in 1976-1977. Since the ly7b- 1977 season, however, Yai]`s share has declined over time to 13.1 by the 19,85-1936 season. Much of this decreased share can be directly attributed to~the~opening of the nearby Beaver Creek ski resort during the 198U-1981 season. When combined, ~Yail and Beaver Greek have captured between 17,44 and 19.~Ot of the State's skier visits over the past six seasons. There- fore, a significant proportion of State skier visits continue to occur in the Yail Palley, but no longer exc]usively at Yail F~Iountain. L w _• D-1 1Ait( is M1STOl1[At S11E1 9131r3 TO 1a1L, RarER p((X AIID r>" frArl a caolam, Ifi2-!fq i8 1lIS•1f1i 3111 Ind f/awr enet • 11111 1} ,. Iilr/r Cryai pll IM Grfeed as f111e H hKent N li 1t-irnl 11a»r creel fetrteat f! fa1/1ar G11raM 1111 gllra/e Ia1Me ear}3 itt Calanal W1n11 glarlla • . lflt•Ifif ~ iq,lfl M,lN 10.01 N.3H 10.01 1163-ili/ IOI.p! 1/,111 1D.i3 M,i22 10.If 1111.1l/S 1,10f,1}0 111,]N 97.71 11{,711 11.71 1113.1111 1,1f1,1S/ 1M,1f7 li.ri llfrll] 11.19: 1111-Ilbt I,II1,Sti 2]S.t9T li.ri 27i,p7 11.71 IIi7.1fN 1.11],210 =7],400 11.11 177.000 11.11 1111.1311 2,7!1,}11 710,000 11,13 710,000 11.11 Uihlll0 2,H1,10i 177,!11 11.1'1 477,171 1S.1f 1170.1}11 2,!}!,K] A1,0H 11.01 /II.OH ILOf ' IlTI-1112 7,210.510 f/i,b02 li•ri 1!1,101 Ii.T1 1172.1117 7,111.250 H],t10 11.33' 111,710 N.fi 111]•117/ /,701,711 ;7],171 1f.N ~ A7.171 11.1E 1171-1171 1,11a,770 III,It] •11.11 111,12] If.n 1175-1171 1,t3S,171 _ 1.D2i,0i1 -37.11 - ... 1.021,011 •.. •U,if ' 1111-1111• 7,IS7,IOf 117,000 11.11 ~ gT,000 U.K 1177-1111 i,H1,lb1 1,D5/,000 13.}3 •• l.D1/.000 1S.lf t}tb11~f 7,215,311 1,112,000 11,13 1.II2,OOD 11.11 ]173.1910 7,p7,I11 l.I6S,000 l/,ri 1,SIS,D00 Ib.3f 1910•Nll• 5,191,}62 19!,000 I6.f3 112,000 2.Ci 1,011,000 11.01 Hf1.111t 7,122,112 1,125,000 N.I1 211,3bt 2.11 1,3U.3b2 U.bf 1lI2.1lu 1,lD0,122 1,23S,iti 71.73 !7}.31] i.i3 LQS,11f 11.11 . 1!f]•11N 1,117,]11 1,211,bI1 Il.n 717,]11 1.03 1.30T,N2 LL.7T 1311.1965 1,011,a61 1,iil,llb 11.33 7i],blt 1.0'1 1,311,01] l7.bf 1fIS-ifK 1,131,7St 7,210,000 J3,T1 710,000 7.71 1,534,000 11,13 arlra}r Annual [~1nfe 1962-196] to 1915.1916 ' {23 rer-11 a..on ]12,594 31,960• 1].91 •. Ii,JiO 17.93 6ra.[n fete ~• 1].Ot 11.51 .• .. .• IS.If -. 19J5.1916 to 1415-1114 (]0 te,rsl Muc•~er 315,]b0 12,]90 7.13 -. -. 16,790 17.11 Grarea Bate /.J3 2.01 .. .. .. 4,Sf .. 1f I1-1912 to lllS•1116 ~ ~ • . ~ ~ 11 Tearfl • Mwoer ]11,110 71,250 • L al 70,710 LIf 11,1!0 ]i.S3 ' Iresn late a,43 2.J3 -• IL T3 -- 1,31 •. 1311-1965 to 1f/S•1914 {1 rear) a~aprr TT,230 21,SS0 ]1.11 (11,6501 •]0.43 2,3]0 7.01 Gr1rt* late 0.33 2.23 •• -6.51 ., D.tf .. •roor lnar cendltlana, '•Lta^~ovnC annual nt1 of eMn¢e, 7 Sa,rce: }a 1T Astxlates, 1nt„ U.S. iorrtt Senlee, Colorado Sal Cowrtry If.f.A., and TMC Astotlleet, Int. F +-• TA8lE 2: HIS1'ORICAI POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROW'~N TRENDS _ IH YAI! AND EAGLE COUNTY, 1970-1985 ls7a lsao (April ~.) (April 1} Yail Permanent Population ~ 485 Permanent Households 191 Average Persons Per Household 2.54 €ag~ a County Permanent~Nopulation 7,498 Permanent Households 2,302 Average Persons Per Household 3.25 Yai7 as a Percentage of Eagle County ~t~ermanent Population 6.5~ Permanent Households 7.0~ Average Annua'~ Chanqe 196b~' 3970-3986 1980-19$e tAprll 1) (16 Years? (6 Years) 2,261 9$8 2.28 4,500 1,630 2.76 250. ~ 370 ~a 110 670 810 250 170 13,320 18,200 ,. 5,217 6,230 2.54 2.92 17.0 24.7 18.9 25.2 *Estimate 37.3 45.7 36.OS fi4.7~ Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census; Colorado State Department of local Affairs, Division of .local Government; Eagle County Planning Office; Town of Yaii, Department of Community Development; and THK Associates, Inc. population and Households Typical of many Kestern Slope ski resort communities, Yail has experienced rapid population and household growth since 1910. As shown in Table Z, from a permanent population of 485 in 1970, Yail's permanent population increased to 2,261 by 1980 and is currently estimated at 4,500 in 1986. These figures represent an increase of 25a persons per year, or a 14.9`5 annual growth rate, over the sixteen year period and 370 persons per year, or a~ 12.2x annual growth rate, over the most recent six year period. Ho~~seholds in Yail have also increased at a rapid pace from 191 in 1970~ta 988 in 1980 to the current estimate of 1,630 in 1986. These increases represent 90 additiona3 households per year, or a 14.31 annual growth. rate, over the sixteen year period and 110 additional households per year, ar a 8.?t annual growth rate, over the mast recent six year period. The slower growth rate of households in recent years reflects the Increase in the average household size in Yail. Although bath state and national trends show a continuous decline in the average household size since 1970, an increase in the average household size is not unusual in a resort community such as Vail. More persons per household portrays the preference of employees to live in Yail but the reality of a limited supply of afford- able employee housing. Eagle Gounty has also experienced strong population and household growth since 1970 although not at the same. rapid pace a5 the Town of Yai1. The. population of Eagle County increased at a 5.7x annual rate from. 7,498 in 197U to an estimated 18,200 in 1985. This growth was, nevertheless, signi- ficantly faster than the State of Colorado growth rate of 2.bx over the sane period. Fouseholds in Eagle County increased from 2,342 in 1970 to an estimated 6,230 in .1986, representing a 6.4~ annual growth rate. As in Yail, the average household size in Eagle County decreased over the 1974 to 1980 period, but increased over the 1980 to 1986 period. The Town of Vail has substantially increased its share of the population and households in Eagle County from 1970 to 1985. Vail's permanent popula- tion comprised 6.5~ of Eagle County's total population in 1974 but rose to 24.7 by 1986. ~ Similarly, ~Yail'~s households accounted for 7.0~ of Eagle County's total households in 1970 but rose to 26.2 by 1~J66. Fn recent years, approximately one-half~of all growth in Eagle County has occurred ih Yail. LJ C~ D-3 The housing stack and households of Yai i and Eagl a Caur~ty are characteristic of corrrnunities and counties dominated by the tourism industry. Tab}e 3 indicates that Second-home households comprise a significant proportion of .the total year- round housing stock in both Yail and Eagle County. Nhereas in the State of Colorado only 1.9~ of the total year-round housing stock is classified as second homes,, in Yail 65.7 and in Eagle County 33,7 of the total year-round housing stock are in the second-home Category. Soth Yail and Eagle County have high pro- portions of renter-occupied households with 59.51e and 43.1$, respectively. In comparison, in the State 35.5 of households are renter-occupied.. The generally young and mobile population attracted to ski resort cor~rnunities results in a high proportion of nonfamily .households. I~; Yai], 57.4 of households are nonfamily whereas in Eagle County 43.1 are nonfamily, Only 30.04~of households in the State, however, are nonfamily. TABLE 3: HOUSING Ari1D HO!lSEHOE.D CHARACTERISTICS OF YAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY, 1970-1980 .Eagle l~ounty Vai 1 lJlU ~ ~ 198U iydU Number Percent dumber Percent ~umoer Percent Total Housing Emits 3,257 100.0 11,06E} lOO.O~ 5,029 100.0 Seasonal and Migratory 4SS 14.Ob ~ 389 3.5t 397 3.9p Year-round .. 2,802 86..0 10,671 96.5 4,832 96,1p Year-Round Housing units ~ Permanent Houser~olds 2,802 2,302 100.Ob 82,2 10,671 5,223 100.0 49.Ut 4,832 99fl . 1U0.04 20.5 Second-home i~ouseholds* ~. 295 10.5b 3,599 33.71 3,114 65.71. Other 20S 7.3~ 1,849 17.34 bb8 13.8 Permanent Households 2,302 100.0 5,223 lOD,Ot 990 100.04 Family Households 1,828 79.4 2,913 56.9 422 42.6a ton-family Households 474 20.bp 2;250 43.I~ 568 57.44 Average Persons per 3.25 2.54 2.28 Household Permanent Households 2,3U2 100.04 5,223 10U.0$ 990 IQ0.04 Owner-occupied. 1,2by 55.1b '1,973 56.9p 401 40.Sb Renter-occupied ~ 1,033 44.94 ~ 2,250 43,14 589 59.54 * Second-home households are defined as housing units held for occasional use regardless of the annual periods of occupancy. . Source: U.S. department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census and TKK Associates, Inc. d-5 The Economy ~ ` The driving force of a local economy is Chase industries, known as basic industries, which derive their support from nonlocal dollars. These new dollars brought into the community generate income in the wholesale/retail • trade, services, construction, tran5partatian, camnunications, public utilities, real estate and finance sectors. In mast rural economies, agri- culture, mining, manufacturing and tourism account for the great majority of basic economic activity. Kithin Eagle County, Dasic economic activity ' i.s centered almost exclusively in tourism led by the ski industry of. Yai]. Reflecting the rapid growth of the ski industry in Yail, Table 4 shaves tha substantial increase in the 'Eagle County employment base from 1975 to 1985. Over this period, the average annual employment increased from 4,12,4 in 1975 to 11,085 in 1985, representing a significant annual growth rate of • 14.4 or 700 new jobs per year. Hew jabs in Eagle County formed at .the rate of 740 per year over the 1982~to 1985 period and 80U over the 1984 to 1985 period, reflecting continued healthy economic growth. The dominance of the tourism economy in Eagle County is evidenced by the composition of employment. The services and retail trade sectors Dave con- nistently provided the majority of jobs in Eagle County witFi~73.1~ in 1975, 62.5 in 19$0 and 61.4 in 1985. The finance, insurance and real estate, gavernrnent and construction sectors all place a distant second, each sector with approximately 104 of all jobs in 1985. Approximately 8Ob of ail jobs in Eagle County are estimated to be either directly ar indirectly related i to the ski industry.*~ The center of economic activity in Eagle County is the Town of Yail. Over the 1975 to 1985 period, approximately b0~ of all jobs in Eagle County were located in Vaii. As presented in Table 5, Yail`s emp]oyment base increased #ram 2,470 in 1975 to 6,870 in 1985 for an annual growth rate of 10.8, or 44J jabs per year. Over the 1982 to 1l8S period, new jabs~~ir~ Yail formed ~_ at the rate of 460 per year white nearly 500 new jobs were created over the 1984 to 1985 period. Ai though data by industry were oat available for the Town of Yai'i , i t is expeeted that the .praporti on of services and ~ retai~~ ~' ~ trade sector employment is higher ~in Yail than for Eagle Coun~ty.as a whose. Personal income data also reflect the dominance of tourism in the Eagle L County economy. Table 6 indicotes that persana.l income in Eagle County increased from 539.5 million in 1914 to 5198.5 million in 1984. Approxi- mately 80t of fatal personal income in Eagle County is estimated to be 'derived either directly or indirectly from the ski industry.* The majority of personal income has consistently been derived from the services and retaii trade nectars with 43.4 in 1974, 47.41 in 1979 and 50.9b in 1984. The emergence of Yaii as a "mature resort" is evidenced by the decline in the proportion of constructs an sector i nco~ne and the i ncrease i n the pro- portion of services sector income in recent years. In 1979, construction represented 21.4 of personal income; by~1984, this proportion had declined ~ to 17.5A. In contrast, services accounted for. 27.91 of personal income in ~ 197y; by 1984, this proportion had increased to 31.5. *CSCUSA, The Contribution of Skiing to the Colorado Economy: Eagle County Case Study, 11d't, p.v. • D-6 b a_ 1 N P Y[ i p~ K F Q N f 0 d T~ S a X M u s K• ~„ ~u/ V N u 1~ Z r 7~ H y Y r K t w Y ~ H y~ V b r N Y w ~ ~ N w ~ w ~ w ~n N w A L - f8 h ~ d• ~ - 4~ Vt F v~p P e P P a A ti A w h w b N i r I w L M N I d w wrwN^.w~a~'~ E: M N '- Q Dryen.d.~nei ~ r.y N A h 40 ON ~.r e+iPh ~ ~O - N + 16 • r •pp ~~•pp + "+ w O Mir q ~J P O F w w N O~ N a~ A ~I b~ N pMp o N ~ N M w n w~~ C py nw p~v OwO~~~ N o ~¢ N N- O p N p N .~ ri ^i n w M ~NMOf ~On4f m hn~ ~e au+N~. • O N N q e }~ O N r Nr N ..r w P N g a f O h- Y~ ~ ~ Yf b N Q N~~ h h NI O. awr N N w r0 O M N_ b ~O /A ~O N -0 p N O h~ W r n r 0 r. N N r ~ ~R N C Q~ d P~ ti .~!~ ~ ip N .v Mf v 0 P ti ti .+ w r1 N J~ ~ N,N P ti 0~ N q N w N N r1 W n N N ~. n ~. ~. .n M+ - O p n- n A- N J~'.~ w C N I.. O ~O N - O ~I ~O w V N N b N N ~O /! ~I P q Jf ^ q ~ n f N P N P~ o W O w - /f n~.~., .oi+w ti.iOOw~ n w ~ M ~O r1 '. r+ N w '~ ti .O N C H J+ ~ w n M f I"1 ~A ~. .~. .r N rV. w y V t ` M r u A V `J ~ .~ 'O Y L ~ C O V ~ r C V• ~ ~ 7 V O ~ ^` P C ~ F V ~ ~ - 1+ a r a .. V S. t O r u w ~ r. ~w w a v O• _~ V V V[ wi ~. ~ V ~ C L~ ~ ~ C C yF o O k=` Y p K i V L~~ s a r O~' u V G r ' y B 9 N Y ECV 3 'y w . O N _ `p f = Y M ti r L M C w e Y V ~ yya _P P p f ~ V M _ C V V V O C ~ y L O « a • C y O M ~ W O • P' V ~ ! N M • V V C . O d ~ O ~ N ~ _ r 'b O N r C V C (p yy~ r N O Y Y - « 4 O _ .{.r 6 C M ~ ~ o `. ~. ~- w ~ ~ Y O C A Y V ~ ~ - tl O yy r r P V M ~ N V y V ~ Y 7 P a ~ p C 4 F V C - .. ~ = M M C C e ECY p - G C Y r Y C ~ pp p Y' ~ t~ • L G F h i /~ { w pp a 1a a y V r L ~ ~ dt Y w z ~ ~ ~ TABLE 5: HISTORICAL AVERAGE ANNI~AL Et~PLOYt~ENT BY PLACE • OF WORK FOR VAIL AND EAG~.E COUNTY, 1,915-1985 ,Year €a91e Count.Y Vail 1975 4,120 ~ 2,470 197b 4,700 2,820 1977 5,020 3,01u 1978 ~ ~ 6, 4U0 ~ ~ 3, 84f1 . 1919 7,350 ~ 4,410 • 15180 7.970 4, 780 1981 ~ 8,380 5,190 1982 8,870 S,SOU • 1983 9,250 5,730 1984 ~ I0,29U 6,3$U 1y85 11,090 6,870 Average Annual Change ~i5~75-1985 (ZO Years? 700* - 44J* 1980-1985 (5 Years} 620 - 420 1982-1985 (3 Years) 740 450 1984-1985 (1 Year} .800 490 * Higher than actual annual average due to the exclusion of state and local govern,me~nt employees i n the 1975 employment data. Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Ert~ployment; 7oun of Vail, Department of Community Development, Transit Development Plan 1978-19x3; Rosall Remrnen and Cares, Inc.,• transportation work Program; Y.A. Master F]an, July 1985; and THiC Associates, Inc. N r A R qpM P M 4 •f W u K ~. F H .~ O V w R s h =Y 4 W I.i u fr O S b V O K F i K ~+ N no w rw~nA o.n~nR M i ~ i N M •-N -. • /r nom. tl b n n I~w +n~ ww nq N •. Y~ e - y • M N R A r M M M w w M +: w ~, ~, ~ ~~'- M O N f h N.O q N N/~R ry O b N h n O N R M N '. _ ~ w w • !~ N y~ f •• 4 V • ~,,. • M • w ~ M tl b P M M •r - w M M M ~ n w N v • M f !n N /r P~~ g pppp w ~V A ~ Mw e ~ ~w~a tl~ N ~ b w h r R ~ V ~ • •. . r „ • M •Ib• •~i- M ~ M w w ! O M wRi v ! !pp P L +~ ~~ ~ .+. •+r Fps we wr rp ._+~e ~. M M ~- •D r g N N M ~ ~'- ' spy ~1 r r ~ r ~N ~M V •~!M w v N wi -N r M • F A i~a w M M M M M ' M wo f P b r~ y N= A A A ~ M ti • M N n .....r W O N tl w N r ~ R A ~- n w~ r n r ~p N M w M r M M R r w •• N A w A N N tl R n W tl ~ ~ R ti H (y Q p N w ^ r r tl r~i b y ~ w M O ~P • ~M r. n `0 tl N r ~ P~ f M R ~- M M n 1 r ~P •,• M •• N M M M M N 10 O A A P'1 f~ A tl A Itli O w pp N N~ N Y•1 O A R ~O ~'A1 M rl w M • M M • • p A nwP ~O ti ~ SPA ~ Hi4 h wMl~ /1 MA • r N M M M !~ M w •+ M ~ N A• pp O~ N~~~pp p~ tlpo Y. ~ w R P r R 1/~ M P P • O N a N • • 1 f M N Q b M N N M M~ ~~Y M N • M ~- M M ~ Ce PA VlPORr N NNM $ M P . ~ M ~ P I w O r ~ r O tl N 4» h V• • N P A N N N 4•• N w w N•• n w r y ~- wr N M M ~- R A n P O O W n~ r N r tl r O A o 0 O i s b fv b~ O ~ • w O~ w P d . . n~ o r N w h ~ O P N Y M M w hr O M M M w w `• M A b tl P ~ ~ ~ P tl ti o ~ ~ i~ ^ O r. n r 0 g . . tl .. w . ~ e r ~ M h ~ n •. w r ~w M w M O w y '. ~O O O tl N p A ~p N r ~O A M O~ ~ w +r ~~ P O ~/+ • N n P O~' M w M w ~ n rr w ~ b •. b _w M M M M ~-wM ~ w y G M •a W n n P P N..~ n M n e• • r W P- .p w u+ h O~• N tl tl n A O• b b~• M ~ N t n J1 N ~+ •~ Y1 a t ' w N tl~ n .C N ~ ~ /1 = b M b .n ~ v r ~- .. ~.. •.. .w M w M V1 M C ~ -. P O P H .. • r r tl ~O ~+ P tl .O • H H n q• N•~ n w `" ' h O ~ ma w., N• .'s..~ « ~e N.hr. a M M M M N •- « w ~e . c w w M w Y • A O +~ b b t C~ n ~+ n n w n r ~P !CC P Jt m ~/t N P 4 M N P rf « ' n A n tl n• n b o r N W r _ ~e n M- ~e nr O r a ~ w wt M M M M M M ~Mr r M M M h M O A L N r y ~ _ 4 ~ y M 6 Y Y V V 4 ~ r y rc ' ~ ro ~ ~ ` + ~ O y ~ 4 M' A v C 'C 4 C c- w y i CC ^ L y _O ~ ~ Q C L L • ~ ~ M L ~+J .+ y V M C 2 P- ~ ~ H~ V y t p _L r em ., u ~.. C •I ~ w 7 i r 1 1~ N M Y [ C P. N O .+ C • > ~,I V Y~~ s r H ; A ti N ~ 6. R, y ~ ~ ~ ~ ! 4 J M W p ~ i V M r The growth and composition of business establishments . in Eagle County is~• another indication of the strength and orientation of the area's economy. t Table 7 shows that in 1474, there were .. 365 firms in Eagle County. The number of firms increased to 695 by 19$0 and reached 1,022 by 1984, or 657 new business establishments over the ten year period. Reflecting the tour- ism, orientation of the economy, retail trade and service business estab- lishments dominate, accounting 'far 58.9 (215 firms) in 1974. 51.81 (360 firms) in 1980, and 51.8$ (530 firms) in 1984. Although the proportion of retail trade and service firms has declined slightly .over the. ten year period, it has been offset by a significant inrrea~se in the proportion of finance, insurance 'and real estate firms from 9.6t (35 firms) in 1974 to , 13.$~ (141 firms) in 1984. The vast majority of business establishments in Eagle County are small; ,nearly 90~ of all firms employ fewer than 20 ,persons. The largest employer in the county is Yail Associates, Inc. with peak employment of over 2,OU0. Other major employers (l0U-BOO employees) are concentrated in the lodging, restaurant and real estate industries and the Yail Yalley i~edical Center. The cyclical nature of a tourism economy based on the winter ski season is clearly demonstrated in Table 8. 'Over the 1975 to 1985 period, two-thirds of total retail sales in Yail consistently occurred during the five month winter ski season of November through idarch With the remaining one-third occurring during the seven month off season, Overall, Yail has consistent- ly accounted for approximately one-half of total retail sales in Eagle County on an annual basis. As expected, this proportion is substantially higher during the ski season and substantially lower during the off season. . The influence of the ski industry on Eagle County retail safes is pro- found. Approximately 90~ of total retai] sales in Eagle County are esti- ' mated to be either directly or indirectly related to the ski industry.* The high level of sucrnner tourism in Yaii, for example, is generated by the ~ ski-oriented amenities, lodging, second-home industry, retail shops and -~ marketing base. * CSCUSA, p.v. 0-10 f r• d F •w rr 2 • z ~ w r + V + _~ w r w Y e e 4 e o e o e e e e v e e a e0epee a 0400 fJ04 O I e e O P e 0 a r e g e e 4 e - I ~ r Oeo p e O n 0040 OHO ~+ w fi I g •- e r w. O w O b e w M A M M ~ 1 aeo-w.: ~ ew.ww,e~r . i ~ I ~ ~ O 4^ n b w ~ • M- n O h w w M N h r w« w~ n w ^ w~+ w w ti~ F r ~ h M ~ i F~ w ~ i r r H C O ~ i w y -O ~w• wi ti Mina O ~•~p r $ ~ r -~ w ..«F w w N w w~«~ •.~ r Y ~ ~ - • T N V~ FP t u Y M A n i~~ O ~ Y W ~ p ti N ~ r =~ y ~ w O w .. ti N ~ N N O n N w w ~ r r V - r ~ w 1 ` ~ ~ .. rrw. ~.- .`~. ~wq'w~ h r P ` - - V r {~ 1+ ~ h .Yn w w h n ti O~+ q P P A~ . 4 ~ 1 ~ O ~ wi N w ^ - wI ~ w ~r p F ~ tFl w ~ •' ., M1 a~ ~ o 0 0 « tl ~ o+ a .M. ~' ~ ~ -O~ww w - •r h.ne ^» w P r a ~ r~~~~ n .e.ti~hi rw o r I1 ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~oe~~ Y r 6 O~ N M w .• O n n O O ^~ F v II .+ v ~ w . ~ ~ w .~. N H pia Y L F ~ ~1 r~ Y r w •: = - N C ~ . s ~ ... ,: M w Y 1tl~ N • ~ : w Y F ~ :+ _ = q ; f _ r V _CC = Y Y ~' 3 ~ = ~:v.:o~ ~ FS r Y Y C A Y ~ sO +Y N ~ w i u ~«: Y ~ r O i t« ~ ~ r~ g~ ~ ~ i ct c' s ee ~ :.ic r 4 = y = _ i ~ ~ w a e o- v e v a .. 0 O 0 0 p O O e e O p 0 w ~.O O eOOO 4 N wI O M • 0 0 0 r e O O ~ O M h e 0 4 0 0 e f ~ Y .N+ r e n-- w o w ~ ~`i w M ^ A A« w h w O ne - .°. ^ M~ M h N r w ~ ~ ~ M e h w F~~ ~ M P w ~ M M pp A. ~ w H. wl ~ C O N pp O ~ G w ~ ~ ~wi ~ 5 ' o w ' h N e N w A~- p r w O O ° a ' H tl n M Y~ ~ ti O y~ 6 i O- r- w N i' 1 ~ pp ~ 9 • 0 M ~ ~ w h ~ N r w M N Y w M M w M M M nr ~p N tl r O ^~ I H p h F ..n~ww F • O C w •' ~~a~o~o.wa ~~ 4 r n ti r~-~Ow A g. N s ~ x ~~o.ras x o w .,; ~i - .. a o w g ., i • N w= N F i 8 ti r Y n e s A r • ` M ~ + e !~ ~ ~ Y • ~ :~ ~ i ~ r V ~ Y = V N r «N ~ ~ • ~ ~ Y • ~ r C N ~= ~ N ~~~,r~. Y • .. q i ~ + ~' M t W M w W O~ r• h 04 W r M v r r LJ ~' t 4.J _~ • s i ~p Y r C N _~ i d V a 0 s m W 1 CO { r O P .. 4/1 r v M M M N~ M M K N M N M M M A/ p p. fr m N 40 4(1 I'1 04 4~ f O 04 4A C4 I 4' • • • 1 N w y .r N n g n A• 4n N 7'ti N N OI w V 4 b 10 b N N n f • n N n Y1 ~ y r. r L OI Y y Yr 4 W M b m T r N 4NR ~~ a~ h p O M f7 f~7 ~ W N• 40 A~ N h N O r _ ~Y .. ba•bnbn•4nnnA ..Y ' A A b N W n 46 n i7'1 4!1 b a ~.+ # ~ ` d~ b r+ 4R~ N n A m M b N m N N M r+ w •~ H r 9 ~ MM M MM 4NI1 4NP1 A ~ ~ O ~+ ~ 4N1'1 NW eNYf Iv O • • w Q O! A n b w A I. • N• O C, ..1 •.4 .y. M O Y +~ u • L p V V A. {1 ~- N M1 w w N Mt 4A R4 M G 1A 1ff .M. @ f b KJ w A H r+ n tV 01 a a ~ ., 40 .~ a a it ~. n .+ •. W ~ ~ n O ~e N t7i 1V Ye ~ 4th A b • ~ M M a~! M M M M MM M i4 M ~ p p• p~ PO P O b M~ N n O O V V 10 b b 1f/ N n h ~- N N N• f u ~- 4. P • Y ^ i d W N 'M M N M M N N M M M M O- N N W'4 tl N N r7 O f n t ++ tia M H`4 ^ A 40 N f b b 4- ~'1 4'1 1/1 O 4 4 L Y (i. PI N fr r 10 • b4 m .••• m ~ Q w i 4. f f ~ tl N N n O f N f n • ~ 4nw4otif bb v nn~ C r ~ N M M M N M M M N^ M ~f N m m n r. m n ~o o+ • 11 ~+ a r O 4 N 4M1 M 40 A~ f~ A b b r p F .. rr .-~ r Q y "'~ u • 4 O V u a Y d4 N O C6 M N b O b N 4p w O r`1 4A y ti« b~ b i n V'1 40 n N b~ O O N tl N W A O M N1 O 1o L • • Y 1.1 .p N N. ti N m n~^ V1 +R n~ N E7 ... w .. w ... N s ~ ~4 N M N N M M K .N M M M M y 0 n 411 m Al n tl O n tl m •. O~ ~+ M .+ V V4 411 -~ 9 ~O 4A 4H 1r N N h 4A N • Y 4 ~O /'r m N .~ f 411 • ~'1, M t 40 N'1 u ~- .- L 44 ~ rr 7 i d W M M N^ N N N r4 its M M M M O4 n iC m N r~r 4p fa P! C C ~~.A-.~..n4pw ~ ri~.~. g u u Y 0. ~ n .~~. N r rM. 4/'f N tl m N th Pn+ ~ ~, • ~ Y 4A ~O 'n N r N P1 w w .. 40 r r a . ~ N N M y MM N M K M N M K M ' N N V1 ~D tl O~ Y- 1'1 !~ O P O .+ -~ pri4rivu~si-.~4ri~.1 C r M 4 ~4 V p 4 v d V n 4h 4q O Q M n M• op A W ~ O 4D n O rti 4(1 C>+ iC t0 .+ N p N r+4 ~! `- 4D IA n A M M 01 W Y IO m W d f /'7 f 4p Y1 n r W f'r ~ ILi r~, ~ ~ ~v`, z ~a 4i. we ~o4a4~«1~~7~ 4+ « i v h • ~pE~u~x £ ~ _ : . L ~U~~QAS7 M~j~QQQLQ~Y `~41~~ OF VAI f APPENDIX E: TOWN OF VAIN. FORECAST METHODOLOGY Forecasts for the Town of Yail were prepared by THK Associates in order to ' assist the department rof Community Development in their efforts to develop a Master Plan for the Town of Yai1. In general. Lhe methodology utilizes . estimated skier, population, housing and retail characteristics in order to project additional housing unit and, retail „space ,demands for the Town of . '' Yail through the year 200U. Ail assumptions are based on existing studies and surveys available from the Department of Community ~Develapment, Yai1 Associates, Inc., Yail Resort Association, and Colorado Ski Country USA with adjustments made based on review and discussion with the Vail Zand Use Plan Task Force members. Note that all estimates utilized in this approach. represent current conditions in the. Town of Yail; no attempt is made to adjust current conditions to reflect subjective "preferred" conditions. ,~ The fallowing is a brief Query#ew of .the sources and methodology employed in the Town of Yail forecasts. The methodology keys off the projected design day* skier visits made in the Pail Master Development Pian (YA, Inc. and•RRC, 1985). f=rom the design day skier v}sits, average day, peak day and total skier visits are calculated based on conversion formulas provided by YA, Inc. The design day skier visits are then allocated into day, destination and local skiers based an proportions available from The Yail Mountain/Gore Palley Capacity Study (Gage Davis Associates, 1980) and the Report of the Yail Economic Develop- ment Commission (1985)• The day visitor and overnight visitor populations and permanent population are derived from different methodologies, The day skier visits and desti- nation skier visits are adjusted upward to reflect non-skier members of a [ skiing party. These adjustments result in the day visitor population and L the overnight visitor popu]ation. The non-skier adjustment factors come from The Yai1 Mountain/Gore Palley Capacity Study, the "Pillage Study } ASSUmptiD'ns" IRRC, 1g~5}.and the Department of Community Development. The L Town of Yail~permanent population is~based on the historical ratio~af the perr~anertit popuia~tion (State Division of Local Government, 1985 and Depart- ment of Community Development) to the total skier visits. The number of households is then determined by dividing the overnight visitor population and the permanent population by the weighted average number of persons per household in visitor lodging and permanent housing, respectively. ~' * "Design Day" is defined as that level of skier attendance which will be ;~xceede*~ ~~n n-+~~~ 1.~"~ of the days of the ski season. E-1 The additional housing unit demand forecasts incorporate numerous assump=~ _ tions from several studies and surveys. Assumptions pertaining to the dis- tribution of permanent population by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate are from the _ ~ ~ study Affordable housing Eaq, le County-]984 (i±agle County Community nevelop- ment Department and RRC, a9$4?. Assumptions regarding the distribution of ~~ overnight visitors by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate by unit type are from The - Yail Mountain/Gore Yalley Capacity Study, pepartment of Community Develop- ment and YRA. To calculate the addjt~onal housing units required by type each year, the additional overnight visitor households and permanent house- . holds per year are distributed according to the proportion of each unit type indicated by previous studies. Concurrently, additional units by type are adjusted upward by the appropriate occupancy rate. The retail sales forecasts far the Town of Yail are based 'on average day skier visits rather than design day skier visits. Average day skier visits are used because the goal is to determine the total winter visitor sales . over the entire five month ski season rather than looking at sales on a "one day " design day. Day skiers and destination skiers have different total dollar expenditures per day, and, the allocation of their.tatal expen- ditures among various retail categories is also different. The day skier and destination skier expenditure patterns are from The Contribution of skiing to the Colorado Economy (CSCUSA, 1984 Update) and are adjusted upward to reflect the pr~c~ng structure of Yail (per Yaii Land Use Plan Task Force discussion 7/17/8b). . 7o arrive at the total winter visitor sales, the day skier and destination Skier expenditures by retail category are aggregated. The "Town of Yail Monthly Retail Sales" (TOY, 1986) was utilized to determine the proportion of total winter sales made by the local population, the ratio of total winter sales to total annual sales, and the proportion of total annual sales madQ by the local population. Industry standards of dollar support per square foot of re vs~3 space are applied to the lodging, eating and drinking, and entertainment categories for the day and destination skiers and to the total annual sales to >;ne local population category in order to translate the average annual additional dollar support into average annual additional square feet of retail space required. It~should be noted that the terms "local population" and "permanent popula- . tion" do not define the same group. Retail purchases in the Town of Yail are made both by the permanent population of Yaii and by residents of sur- rounds ng ca~rniuni ti es. Since i t i s the total additional dollar support .i n the Town of Yail which determines the total additional retail space required, it is irrelevant for the purposes of these forecasts from where. those dollars come. Therefore, .the local population refers to both the permanent population of Yaii and residents of surrounding conxnunities who make retail purchases in the Town of Yaii. . E-2 The following tables present the quantitative assumptions incorporated into the methodology and the results of the three series of forecasts. Since it is the destination skier which has the greatest impact on the Town of Yail in terms.of lodging and retail requirements, three different proportions of destination skiers were uti-lazed in order to determine a range of values for planning purposes. Table 1-A shows the quantitative assumptions used in the methodology. Note that the only variables which change in the three scenarios are the propor- tions of destination skiers and day skiers. Tables ~-~D to 4-50 present the results of the SOS proportion, of destination skiers scenario, Tables 1-6D to 4-6D present the results of the b04 proportion of destination skiers scenario, and Tables 1-70 to 4-74 present the results of the 104 proportion of destination skiers scenario. For each scenario, forecasts of skier visits by type, population and households by type. housing units by type. and retail expenditures by category are made.. ~- 3 • f 3u 3 on . 2!w . ues 1li5 - 1li/ 2le6 - 1161 f llil - 1!a/ fled - 1le4 J!/! - Il4D 2!!D - 1!!1 1!!1 - 1!!I 2!9] - 1l94 :l+ . 1l4s 1!!S - 1!!i Il9i - 1lP1 1l41 - 1lPJI 1l9i 1!9! Je4! 2000 SUr• Cm rerf10n3: Otstyn Der A•evpe Oa7 Itu Dai Total La+s s+a^' fl ifrf D'e f Drss. ~~ Itrr +tnt /oa. Sssr• Ie•+w-t-t rap./Noel De, - Dt3t•~atron ~Iao./Lnet • ,• Ocrvos^cr: Singlr To,nrarr AOt./C6nto ~ lodgeng Stltr Aetael Sales Cha raCtf rfltltf: LocalMnn„ai Dar Otstsnatlon Y+nttrJAnn~al tAdtE 1-4r TOYY 0- rA1l IOtI(CASI JlSS1AA710Nf GTtnder Dtflgn Dtr Tter Stlert/0!! 1NS 12;560 Hii• 1I,ii0 ll17 U,060 »u ' ll,DdD glee la,+sD !!90 11.Ie0 IHI 1],ed0 1ri2 ld•]00 llf7 14.100 1rid ti.700 1l1S IS.200 1l9e IS,epO 1lP1 IS,e00 1P91 1i,D0D 1!9! Ii,t00 2004 Ii,d00 l.Sd D.et9+ 1.95 154 O.ab 0.1e O.DC]6 O.OC19 Karltt Shart Trot of Mo~sln4 Cu•rtnt AnnueT l4alt+tn . -r*tans S4ng1e/ Ta.*• ADt./ SMrr Tntreatr Sharr -!r Vnft D~alea howl ContO 100yirq 0.7 t.7S1 0.323 OOPS O.S9 D ].2 2.1 :.s a a.r D o.2 D.b a D.e ].sae o.D] D.17 D.st D.]1 S.2 5.2 5.2 7.<7 Ylsfta* IrrVenent O.SS 0.95 D.SS 0.45 0.55 8.lS O.bS A.trayr Oellr 11et SlT Ea~4a. Iatlnq L (nttr- ~ Othtr Eapenset Ticett School Jlrru } laQglnq •Orinatnq SatrRnt Jlrtail .x.21 13e.04 0.575 0.025 0.075 D D.7 4 0.175 1155.00 0.l2+ 0.011 0.011 0.25b 0.191 O.bt3 D.1a! O.i7 . Swrtr, lo.n Of Ye t1, bf0artrent of Cts•t+a,nttr De.r1aDK^t; Yatl LstDCiatrs, InC.I YaiT ina*t AtfOClatlan; Yall lan/ SJIt Ilan Ta31 iprCt; L0lora o0 Dfaa rte nt a7 tafaJ A}/e 1rt, 01-1s ton O} lxal GOrfrrrgnt; YA, lnc, tM eRC, rJtiL kAST(e pEr[IaYsfEsfT f~AK, 1le5; W9t Oa.41 Assoc +aer3, TKE vs [l rt7vrTAJr/fO+C r3tl[r CAretlTt STppT, 1le0; ttt, r1lEAS[ STypr 1lSSts+ATJOsrS, 1405; A1r0AT Dt 7!tl: YAJL (ta~awJC DErEII?rrt[+1 CON1S5[6w, t9P5; Eagle COrnt~ Corry^ttr Drrefowrnt Otaartaaent ane etC, AttOtOAetL s+0>JS1fK, LAyI[ CDIJMTT, 14dt; CSCUS+, 1++L Q~]tJtulfOK Ot Scti++'r 70 7'xL iLlOt+tDO LCW+O+r, 19ta uatltt; and TMC +t33ulase3, Inc. TOta 1 i 1 . 1 Ih Y M M ~_ • N r ~ _ _ _ _ ~. r r r r ww r r r wr -. r H r b YO ~tl ~D ~D ~p r0 ~A W ~O 10 ~C tiP ~O ~O +C ~D b IO ~C ~O W ~O ~p ~O OI pQ~1 ~ p1 Lt7 m m O~ N i W N r+ O b m V O~ y~ + 1 A Ap A p @ tit f 1 1 f 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N r. ~OblQiomW ~0+610~O+D'tiAbae r ~p ~~qq ~ ~O ~O b 10 ~O b ~G ~Q m ~ W m a1 ~O p1 V V~ N i W N w O W 0/ V OI 1!1 (q r N 1 A ~R J ` `~ ~• r w r r r^ r M r r M r r r ~n ~ ~e a ~o ~n ~e ~o ~ o ~o ~e ~o ~o a 1 .f w ~pp ~ ~ p b~ V O N~ W~ +~+ 1 v~ N ~ '7 1 ~ p G r..rr rr..rrrrrwr r rrr i ~ } } W W W W W I~f yNyf~ N N+ 6!1 N ~!~ . N 01 1pp r d v ~ W 0 q W W V m m + O W VV N N O pp 6 ppp jj Qp pp p p p p ~ O ~ O O S C O Q q 0 p S S 0 0 4 4 4 r ~ . K r w ~ A O 00 C RHO ~O IO rO lO 100f 01 latmdl ++ o V V W `+ r~ U~ N N o V i i N~ V CJ pp W m m W T l16 m ~O W W V N b O d C O Q p~ 0 0~ D 0 0 0 0 0 In r K Ii .+ M r r r r r r .r r ... r r r r l {rl X71 {T a i W W W W W N N q q p q w 1 ~O M O pppp p p p ~ S O S 4 0 0 C Q Q O p 0 ~f ~i O ' N w A _ _ _ _ .N.. w O W ~4 U m m OD +.~ ti M P A O~ 41~ M Ir i.i v v N P P~ V~ V` d U~ to d ~4 d G p N N O~ W ~.n i.n N N ry to V~ N i i N ooaopoaooop t~oopo Y Y ~+e ~ a }' ~y j a i} /~ i~• W W W W ~ ~O ~O m P P V~ A w N ~+ ~ O b ~Q p3 V O p~ O O p p O O O G p 4 0 0 0 Q K O p O A N ~o W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0 o n p o 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 o n o 7 A ~ a t~t~o 0000ooooopc~~M ~+ M M M ua tI of M M N M N -f M M M ' v m m eo .d .:~ v V tiI r P ifa 0~ P a P w r ~ 0 W V O Oe CG P W W~ W b V N~ V1 W M ° $ S S~$ o 0 o a o a o 0 0' o N a '. 0 A i to U~ y~ V~ N 'Jq N w N N N N W 47~ tP yN o p O C O O O O 4 o Q O O O O G A Es ~ ;-. ooar~oc~aaoooooc~c .. M M M M w M M M If N N N M N N M W W W W W W N N N N N N N N N N !~ • l.! 4~ N r ~+ C1 4} ~D M ±.~ W Ua ~ d1 111 VI R Ul C~ _ N l~ ~ C.1 N ~'V da tri W V ~ + ~ Cd ~~ f.1 . Cy ® O d U K1 G L] O O [~ W W M a w m N ++> N N N N N N N N N N ooao~ 'ct~ oa eo ~e A ~ o o ~ N jj pp pp M M N M N d M N M M M M y j M I A M M M Y P .,~ wNN 4 M H !~ O N ., NI Y N >t a~ ro ~ p N 4 n N A A 6 "1 v W M W + r~ 1 7 N N y ~ a M ' n ~' ~_ e t N N r G44 n N • Table 2-50: PROJECTED TOVdIt 0#: YAIL Pf}PULATI01! AHD HOUSEHOLDS 8Y TYPE, 1994-1985 TO 1999-2000 Population Households Calendar Qay Overnight- - Dvernight Seato n fear Ylsitars Visitors Per~rsanent Visitors ~ Ptrrr~r.ent 1984 - 1485 1985 a,0t0 7,560 4,4D0 2.130 1,£c0 1985 - 1986 1986 4,C40- 7,130 4,50D 2.150 1,630 I98b - I987 1987 4,170 7,960 4,670 2,220 1,700 1481 - 1988 1988 4.110 7,960 4,760 2,220 1,730 1989 - I989 1989 4.300 8,210 4,910 2.290 1,780 1989 - 1990 1490 4,430 8,450 4,970 2,350 1,8I0 1990 - 1991 1991 4,430 8,450 4,970 2,350 1,830 199I - 1992 1992 4,550 8,720 5,050 2,430 ~ 1,830 1992 - 1993 1993 4,690 ~ 8,950 5,200 2,500 1,890 • 1993 - 1994 1994 4,690 8,950 5,200 2.500 1,590 1994 - 1945 1945 4,850 9,270 5,390 2,580 1,96D ` . 1995 - 1996 1995 4,980 4,510 5.540 2,650 ~ Z,O10 I996 - 1497 1947 4,980 9.,5I0 5,540 2,650 2.,.OIO 1497 - ,1998 1998 5,110 9.,760 5,690 2,720 2,070 ~~ ~ 1998 - I999 ~ ~ ~ 1999 5,]00 ~ 10,120 5,920 2,82D 2,150 1999 - 200D 2000 5,300 I0,120 5.920 2,820 2,150 Average Annva.l Change: i (1985- 2000) 90 I6D I00 50 40 i Source: THK Associatts, Inc. I . a 3 ~_ 3~ O i `i " •- ;~~-~~ -rrws e r ~. :~===p-p=~=sYSaa:;i~ O --Y ti • •. i +i . ~ ~ y w I ' . w wa ^ ^ N w ~ .. 1 .~3 .. r.. ~..~:. ... 5.:: r.».r. . r~.w s#:~_i: ~a'S:Y RR .noehaa~.~ ,., iti . r°w rw ..~. Z • :fit"S3::zz3:'S!X M w ~Y. M w w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r M. wM M +M r + w ~ r w Y r + + ^ ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w fie! ~~ r ~ ~ .:~ : : : : " w ~ ~Sw¢~ . . RR : ' r` ~.~..e nNN~Mw ~ S ~ ` ~ w wMri r~ ~ tiff rwN ti ~+~w ~r ~ w~wwr~r.~~ i ~ •' ~~ w 'x x~ r 0 3 y Y~ x ~ ~ ~ % 3 ~ r r r i ..-.:~.: .. --~.: :.:.:~ • • :.: C_~::~ i --~ -:...+.. .. ~... j~~[yy~~qq~:g~S6R M.roba+3 iSX r ~ ° :. w S : ~~ ~w o `Q. rr~` }~ pp .. Fb~'wr~8 3g~iC~J~~ wig 44 X Z ~ w,~ ve.yr~ sdS .~nw~ ~R~r'bs: w. e,~' • M w N ~ w N w N ~ M M~ r ~ r i t E M= w N Ip~ V- rNi S» .1 ~ ~ r. a ~ w. ~ I~~ r ~ +~hw ~ • ~r ' R r r ~ y v r~ r~ w w i w .w i + r ~ . .. rw.~. .. ~..rwawr~ w ri -. SS ., ~~852~=~.3 ~t~t W3 _ ~~ `:` M _ ~~ + ~~ N~ S i ti r~ ° N r° Q w n r ~ ~ ~ ! ~ F F - Z ^ ~ ~ 1p - ~ M N J .~ . ~ 1~ ~ ~ S O .. I. ~. M hr .V H ti tel. ... ..» ww w.. r.~ rrr r - - h y - . x - s.» 8- w r r r ~~ w. o o i S g g w w M w w w Y~ r .. r r r w w w Y .. - M w N M r ~°~-.~ O ~ r ~ r - ~ w ' ::e~M1_ ~.~ •:. J~ w ww r» wM Y ~."i. M I! ~.o. w r ~~~~ ew s w. Y . : x r t E t; ~ ~ ~ . L a"" i~ y ~ 3• i r Z 57~~3eewoFKg°:R~' +~~»~ ~ ~.nww:. w'www.i wee .. n w ~~rrr r r w r i~ rri riMM eoRe°8$RsOS°:_$S~t tiww:ww wwi ... ..w wi -i~wn: •i YRS3R~~$RS°RRA;~ «.; ... i~s'~i wwtwww~$~^« mix=wR~wLr~~i~w~ ri * w~ i~ ~ w~= w x~ w F - w • t~ ~~ Q ~~ ~ r~~~ ~r~~ ~M S wZ =. • v.. r 8 it Yi i _ ~ V - • Y S L L w 8 w NO M O~ ~ O~ 4 a r nn Y 4 L ~ y O 1 _Y M r a ~ r JI 1!+ H s- ro r u .+ N V r 4 ~'7 N O L > iL K w K N 1~ S i ' CI N W a b 1 d y r i -1 ' O A~ O C7 O O Q~ 4 C ~ O O i! Q ~~f! 4 O Q O Q 4~ ~! C O O Q 0 0 0 0 0 r y 4 N 1r N N N ry 1V N N N N N N N N N V L ' r p~ K O N N O N N~ ~ 1~1 O~ p h b 1{1 N f w 1f~ ~ 10 ~O 10 h w~ ~ 4~ 01 ~ n'~ . N eA 1N' r N NN N'N NNNNNMl 1'11'11'1 Af'f ~ O O A o O ~ O ~ O P O 1N9 C V pp C p pq Cpp aaO p p p p p 0 ~ ~O b ~O ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ L v !O ~O ~4 ~O ki 1 ! fd' C? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ 8 0 N N M •+ .r h w1 ~O P Or '1 M 1f4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O O @ Q f .+ r:r+r:+:woommm'aoaae~ via e. Y C C O y~ N N M N M N M M q~ 0 0 0 0 0 G p p 4N1 Y , 0 4 0 O g 0 0 0 q A Q O 0 0 C1 d b N NNN N N N N N N f N N V CCU '+ V 1+ .Y l n1 V N N s tf O O O d_ O O p d d O O CI O O O q • O~ h h ~O r f •- N N N 6 Y7 y O w VI +!1 ~O ~G 10 h h m 01 IT Q •r N n 1'1 N N N N N N M N N N Iy rf 1°1 r•1 11 n i~ 7~ A A Q Q d O O P O 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 C7 ++ ~- r N ~I7 t1 N N N 1 ~'1 ~1 d N N d • O 4 ~ 1 r y v! O N 1H C H1 4'1 .+ ~O ~O N h h N Q O • • r A Y M V1 ~O b b h h h O m W 'O~ 01 O1 p .+ Y Y 4 ~ y N {O~ .Q ~p pC p aO pp OO ~ A~ 0 0 ff ~O O O f~ m f'1 I N ~R ~ O ~6 b • • r • N ~ C N 1. N N.M M AI A FT f •/ f 4'1 V1 1A ~ ~ U « w w .~ -+ .4 n w w W .- ~ w r .ti M ~ y ,n s, r, •~ A aonO o~Qdeoaoa no' 1D M d7 m A O~ 1f fl d a O CY w ~ h ^ ^ CJ W N f f -+ N HS ~!1 m M h h !~ wq u o ai W A O i7! ~ a O! OI tl1 O 4 ~ O t L O L ~ .~ w f H K .- o~ o dor~g ~pp~ pop pp p$ ~ m S p + I' T h - '1 h h y'1 Y1 V 1 IC Y! O O • N ~ pp M JI O~ CD vmi A A A PN1 n ~ r~r 01 ~ « ~ N N N N h rl P1 ff P'! f f f Y1 N ~fl b ~Q a • • - • • w A N w.1 w w W w wa w wr « wy ti M wy w fw L • y N1 ~p h mm O O •r N /"D ~ 111 w. h pl 01 ~ In fq CO !OQ O~ 01 !'r O~ 01 CI1 O~ 41 9CC M Y F O~ OI O~ C~ O~ 01 O! O~ p O! C1 01 ~ Q~ 04 00 8 n+ ~. w .~ K w ~r .~ r r• r-1 .~ w N . r ~ _ u ~ pp Y O °' ~ N i y 1 y1 ~G h Q1 d N 1'1 +r t/1 b h CO C~ G7 fp 00 ~ SO {~ 4~ P T a 01 01 p~ T ~l 8 C~ H1 C~ T Qf ~~ p1 01 A OI OI 41 P O~ p r' fa M a rw. w .r w+ .~ r w ~w ..~ .~ ++ .r r N w ~ C ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 V y ~ p p ~ NY m 41 m ~ d A a A V N ~ O 1 O! A 01 OI b~ 01 T O~ = 01 P 01 O! O~ 01 OI O~ P V~ 01 O~ w W A ~ h A r w w« '• r• w w A y i . S Y y N N 1! r V L O !R • f f f ~i i w ~ ~ ~Xw~i. i1 a u ww « ~ -~•~ ~s~w~ w=nw~~~~~rr .Ti~~O~~ r. ~ .+ ~ ~ ~ - M M V~ V w w ~ r+ r~~ wV. w w~iww • A _ r w~~xw.~ .w ? .r ev ~r~~ ~r ~rw ~ ~ssw~ s: ~ ~x~~~ .3_-.~ .S ..~$~ ::^:Y~M ~,~= 3wR5~n~7C sy«~• nww~fi.w-. .. r e r p _ ~[ w A wpi ti N w~ ~ I ~ M~ ~ Y~r ap eY r ap w yp~w yw~M~i ~ • ` ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ « ~ ^ R S 8 ~ 5 ~ $ ~ i ~ ry V r r _w N ~ [ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ S w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M A w Y" a ~ S r i v• ~ w w .. i t 6 w w+ ~ S O O S S S--~ w N w N~ A w r MAMM ~ -~M ISM M M w M w M w~~~~ M~~ w w w :r =~:r;gstsras~~~~x~ = r r. O p ti w N w t M p whirr V w rrr w r w -~ www~M ~M~V+r ~ ys~ V{ h~ n n°~~~ A~ ~~ r r- • ~ O O M w F N w~ x Y• Y± ~ F~ Rg7°.7A.~~'~ ~SS:iSS E ~a ... - 6p N h W N • ~ ~ r~i ' ~ ~ i ~ R r - r w w a w. Y r r w~ w N w w 1 w F ~~$SS~~:SS°SSS°p s°~rs~~aa~i_ss~ -ss ~ . ^ h . - I ~ V ~ a ~~~ w~~ w w I~ w w Y Y r Y w N - r ~ w ' i ~ g4 w ~n gggg r ~~..wwR~~ "~ ~ r Soe~Slr$iw~wa- M li •~": $ m a: ~ 75~.. r• .. ww ~~ ~.. wwww~ r~w.n+ i 4 ' r i.~ 2fsiv~ ~ wwi~~~»~lS~ ww~~ :.'".~~....: ~~.h.."'. r r~r . ~^.~'. w i .+ w H.° ~ w A ~ V' • 0 0 ^ w ~ n• ~~ w w .~ www~~+wRw~".~wrr ..~ .. ~~ Y ~ sg_~~^_sr S~t-~Rr __ ,._n 1 i~ • N i • L :3 t ~x .. iwM 3 R p w 8w S s a. S 8 88~5'w~aS8~S~g~7~ 8 v v v.~ v ~ wriwwr:www.w ~ ° ~sx~~~Ra° ~: waen.8$w..~r. ..•: 8 l w i~wwww.w w.~w r~ir r+r ~: BRXX~~~~°p.~p~~$ ~ Y r r - ~ ~ O p ~ ww---~-w w. --N N ti M w: Z Y s ?^ e 3~°SSi~$RStR°~Xg~~ w - ~ ~ 8 w kw ~ iiiiirr:wwi who ~e-e ~~ ~ M V ° ~ ~. w .. ~.. I y u I 3~ ' ~ ~w w =w gar' ~~~ x,'r„ ~~~ ~ N ~ i y ~ ~ ~ r Ti ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ F 1 r M ' d H r tle i x y~ C Y L `M O ~/ } _P r ~ .. . ' N r . $ L .~ i ^ g r «N~ r~N~ hlMa Nly~ N PI a v ^ w i • .~. wl`i .a..N.~. O.: ~rla ~ilnOw~•w a ~ +~' €~ N ~ • ~ PI ~ w O N ~ ~ W ~ C ^ = ~ nn 6 ~. .. ~°S 33 Y ~~ ~n~~~n4inpnrei a M .. ti o P ~ M ~1 A r PI O p N O r r 9 N !w d r1 .A Y _M w N r~ w a ~` N a ti w O N H a n s w N p6p ' w p M n N r M IV q r O! h O n s' O w~~1 ^ O ~ r t'1 ti n N M N ~ Iti Ifl ~ / R ~pp A n a r~ i 0 rn n a r n O n .NO a M n n a n ./ ~~ V ~ ilr a.1". Aai~a$Iw °~~° ~1 ~~ ~ ~~ F /.rw0r~pww0~~0~ra N ,n ~+ ~ Hr prln a~.llr all~r or+s a n~ P ~ » ~ w_o^werr~o^Ro^n.a g ~ ~ a ~ .. ~+ w ~ +~ Y ~+ _• br y S~ 11~~ pp '~ ~ O !li ~ P y« r~ Obi A P A / w w« R ~ w ~~ w M ` r . r w u ~ r ~ = r V ~ J1 ,.w wp IV nr ~w/p~~w1 / A O~/ P ~1 P P P P P w p//~11 w# ~ ~ w w w A. w r~ w ~~ A w r y 1 ~ ..r ~ ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 1 ! 1 1 1 . Y pp , X 1 p w a M w ~ A ~ ~ P w ~ P ~ ~ N I~ P I 1 ~1 O 1 /~ / 1 Table Y-70: PRGJECTfD T01rH OF YAit POPiR~IT101i ,4?ID MOtJSEHOL05 BT TYPE. 1484-1985 TO 1999-2000 PopulaLlOn _- Households Cale-+dar Oay Overnight Overnight- Season lreasr YisitOrs YisitOri Permanent YlS3LOr5 Per-anent 1484 1985 1985 1,340 ID,72d 4,400 2,990' 1,600 1985 - 1986 198fi ~ 1.350 10,830 4.500 3,020 I.63D t486 - 1987 1987 1,390 11,150 4,670 3,110 i,7DD 1987 - 1988 1988 1.390 11,150 4.760 3,110 1;130 1988 - 1989 1989 1,44D 11,490 4.910 3.ZC0 1,780 1989 - 1990 I990 1.x80 11,830 4,970 3,3DD i.BID 1490 - 1991 1991 1.480 11,830 4.970 3,300 t.?10 ' 1991 - 1992 1992 1,520 . 12,210 5,C50 3,40D I.830 1992 - 1993 1993 1,560 12,550 5.2130 3.500 1,890 1993 - 1994 I994 1,560 12,550 5,200 3,5DD 1.890 1994 - 1995 1945 1,620 12,980 5,390 3,520 1,950 ,1995 - 1995 1996 1,660 13,320 5.540 3,7I0 ~2.OI0 1995 -~ 1997 1947 1.660 13,320 5,540 3,110 2,010 1997 - 1998 ~ ~ 1998 ~ 1,70D ~~. 13,660 5,690 3,810 2,C7D 1998 -~ 1999 1959 1,770 1a,170 5,920 3.950 2.150 1999 - 2D00 2000 1,170 14,170 5,920 3,95D 2.150 Average Arsnual Change: {1985- 2000) 30 T30 100 60' 40 Source: iFiK Associates, Inc. M V w N M 1 01 Y ~ V r y y O a. Ir R an L a LO .r .d r m N a w ~ 0. .~+ 11~ dM ~' an W 4 ~+ N U ~- Y ~'1 N O L } d Ii N L W i O h ' u . ^W~ O a d O A w _Y A w r MM i~1 /f N K M g M M M M N N -! M M M M Q 0 0 0 4i C 0 0 6 0 tl tl 0 0 0 tl N{ ~ Cf O 0 0 a O O G p p 4 o d S7 0 0 aq ~ N N N N .+ N N N N N N N N N N N .~+ Y d y 4~ O Q~ 4 0$~ ~ Cy7 N ~ O N N ^ N 17- 1,/ ti I i/~ ~ ~O b 1 -~ (p a P` Q •~ N n e'1 ~ ' •i N N N N N N N N N N IR fM 1"- 1'f I'1 1.1 M ~ O O O 19 ~~ O O O O O O C O G Y f ~ 0 0 O, O O g Q 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 O L Ir 1ti I~ 1\ 1'~ A A !~ A Fr A Ir fr A A A f~ W a ~~ a°m.~~8~8°~~~°°8~~ a •~ Ir m r+ .! A A O N N 14 OI Q~ N s0 ' 0 a . ` w ~ aoaoo~aaivioio oae ~o~~..; w ~.+.~ w www M M M M N N M MM M M NN M ~~!! M M M M O O O O O P O tl O O W p g O tl v ~ O O O O tl^ O O r O O 0 w V L w .+ wr .~ ..q . r . i w . . n w w ~1 Y 4 Ih • O 41 p p p p O O O p O Q O tl O OQ b •. Vl Ci Pi Pi n A N a0 iO O 1{j a4 q f`1 Q N N n n Ih n n~ r r N 1ff N_ ~O `D vi r r r .r wa .r n w w ..• w •r w w ~ ~ w f+~+ oeaooooaeoaoor~aa a a a Oi C 1A 1'fI N Vl 1A N N N W V1 sn N N 4 N in r. i0 iD N ti n N Q 0 f"1 • • y y '+ r+ N N N d M N .>i >1 y ~ . d O• O O O p tl O O tl tl 0 0 0 0 O +6 m y i0 H'1 .u ip O O 8 Cp 1A b O O N~ tl ~ O ^ ~ W Is: n n ~- i a C ~O { y C, M N N n n n n n~~~ y1 ya ~ ;p ip b r •y r ~ ~ • w w .r w w r ..y .y ..• w r H r O N >ta >•• 0 0 4 O ap q O O a O Q O Q 0 6 ' ~ ~ O C O q N ie s r~r n w of m W w N~ h 0 0 A 01 ~ W m W p) IY Oi Os Of OI A Oa 0 0 0 0 0 Y Jt >r N s M pQ pp pp pp oo pp N `~' ~~~ Q O O Q tl O e q tl O r tl ~ A h ti ti N N \I'I VI N ~i1 u'f i7 O N h n a •- m m n. ."1 n N N O O~ O1 CO ~ ~ N Va a .. v!1 r. n P n n CO .r N .r .y ae~ ay N N N n n rl rt n~ .f ~ an w Hi b ~O • w ~ w .+ w .., w w w w .~ .r r. w w r.. .~ i.. L. ~ .: i s-. ,_1 4~ O N /'1 ~ Y1 b Iti Ib O . .ns n s Q a) '.s r:s qy pa Ci Oi tli a 0/ O~ A OI O~ O C~ G 01 ~ r W ~i C! y ~~ Y ra W N w 1V w A ""~ 'w "+ w HI ~ u n v al c N W 1 Ip m m m i[1 ~ 01 G~ 4+ ui O~ Ch pi C + ~ r G Oi a Oa. O~ w Oa w Oi w -+ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ J C v w ..y .y ..q N .. . . i w . . . .. r C M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Y a O ..r N M I H1 b A m Ai 0 W ~ ~ ~ m O~ 01 Qf Oa Oa 01 A Oi O w o f I O 1 Oi _' 01 Ci A Oi ~ W L . . ~ . w ~.., ..r .r .y •y w.• i ~ w P w w ~ Y • K ~' Y ~u D N K ~~ v L Q .J ~ ~ r • r N/.vw r~s vwNp ! i 1 i 1 1/ i/ 1! 1 f f/ i } -+ ~ r +~ i~ V d r r ~I r ~O ~O v ~O r V C +e +O y ~o ~O r ~C ~O ~O O s M A O N r O r~ V w N /i w i ~ ~ v M M ~/ N ~ A Np ~ >t w i_ ~ ` Ip ~e ~n r .i ~e y ~ r r M r v M ~I r w ~, G p Q V~; V~ N~ v N~ P r' ~ V P M ; 1 ' P w i ~ pp O ~ q .~ •.r r r ~ ~ ' ~~ 0vu0uwOwrii pN~pw ~ y '~ ~~ M W O r M O M V O P N O N N b M N i \ _ e6~ :V r p y ~/ O~ N O O h O N N O N g O p V ~ i ~ M N ~ O ~ ~ = y C~ ti r r r r M r o o O p d O M M O M e O M r ~ P \ ~ • r 8 v tl u Mr w . • .n .. ... ... qvr o`+rOMMOMrOrr 3 8 C . r M 4+~ Orr O r~ O N r N • H r M 8y v ~q ti _ _ _ _ a iu O r ' sj .rr M V w 4 iPpNN O `+v o~v 0 0 ~ O r W p v M O r s M,~ M ~S \ ' N~ N N N w q. O~ y N N N p r P p O w O w w O M r M 0~ ' N ti3 ~ o ' r~ BMrpNSe~NO wwN.4rti ~ ~ ~ ~ N •O` ~ M r ~1 00 ~ O pN0 r+0 yew ~r wr i y q } ~ w ~+ P M O ~ N q .~ ~ O N r 0 v r r N M ' S\ G O r_ M r _ O V M O r r O• O O M ~ O r 3 ~_ ~' V A ~ M A O ~ e~ F K } r xOZs G y w w n ~ e n a i CC ~ ~j b N w O b r r N O 1+ r ! _ _ ~ ~~7~~~S~x~3iT~~= ~~ ~~~S~~YSSS~~i~~~~ . n ~~ ..,. •• ~ _ ~35Y5 :SS~~i~irS'~ r v w M~ W w oa~aor••+rrr~rrr ~ saasuuo~~asf$~a$us wM rrrww~s~wwww.wMr _ sg gg r x S ~~~dbiSS~i3i~~Si M M V M Y. M M M w• P P•• P~ ~ ~rdESS~~~~7~ii~~~' ii n • ~~ ~g I it r_i ~!~ 3 - w "VM • sx fj Z w •-• r~ W W ti Y M 4 ti~ r~~ ~~~i~~~~i~ii~i~~Y I ~ ~ ' r rw Y w.w~~ rrww ~~: rw~r .`~~~~~~~~ir d y~ r i~rio ~f ~.`. ::: ;.~Z4i~1 r ~Si6ar:~xseMiCiC~gR~~ n ~ S.: W N r N .rV 4 V Y Y M Y 11 ti k M Y y~ V ~ ~ r~!! w' P D r O ~ X • ~ ~ -• M ~ O 6~ N H N D O! ~ V V~ ~ i x~ r3~ r: :e~~~x zr z .... ~~c~Y_~ ~«« o,'s~,s§~a~~s~~~~ ~i w. ~ ~ sa:.:~s~~~x~:er := r :: = r _ ~ ~_.... ti Y Y " r ~ • d ~ w M M ~ V y O ~~ •• wv r + ti r ~ y V~~~ ~ v Y~ M~ M M r + o ~~~Ega~~ ~~~oSS~i ~ 3 r y . y V M~~ W V~ i V r r~~~ r~ ~ M M y" • • • . ~ w 1 M y!y r 1yI ~ r~ r r M 4 .M M J~ r! t~ w~ r s M1^ f r s y - i r . r ~ r r~'~ 1~ M V M M ti ti • ~ w :.. .. w ~~~i.~ti iiY~wi ~i ~i w ~ S rr r w. ~ ~ r. Pr~~r ~~SY, .~. ~~ =~Yi C"•"vY rya 5~:: ~.~ ..n ~~~r i ~e 4ypp VYp E + M V O P 9~ ~~ O O ~ N y M r M a O ~ M w x +=-~ r ~ ~ w~ r~ ~.~~8x~~~.$'-«C r r r w .~ V YY~~S~xX1~ •~ R Y • ~ M ~ ~ ; y - ~ ~ ~ ~ S r P rS~__ __ O p ` v ~ ~ w ~ M ~W ~ Y V~ w V p ~ ~ . M ' M . R My~ M J ++ Vy M M• } p O g O Y w`~~ M ~ f 63 • :.••::, ~~~ M M yr f a 4 r r ~ M M w ' rxr ,: ~~= Z\~ yy • M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y x ~. F ~ ~ O . Ii + k N E L M ~ V~ M M r M N: • P w~ N w~i Y wril 4 r Y~~ r sa ,~., :; .. a ~ 1y Y F Yy p M M E ~i ~: u v a P~ ~+ ~ Y S .•. pe rrd V ~. ! r ~' f6 p My~ MM V /~ M ~V ~ y ~ ~ N M L ~ ~ ~ YY y : ~ ~ ~ V = V ~ ~I M YYY Y M t~ M N ~I r• ~ ~ i ~ ~ r! r r r r~ R 4~ r a ti M y~i ~ r ~~ r= M~ y Y ti P! S P r w w I i ~ r ~ ~ V M M M+ M~ y x~ 4 M ~ - • ~ A ~ ~ M N w 7 w + « ~ ~ • D y !! .~1 M ~ rr~if~' ~ i~ ~iXa`~~~e 1{ ~ ~ ~R.. w n s A S M " z ~' ., • I I i •- 1 1 •~ •i ~~Y `OWN OF VAIL 7S South Frontage Roast v •' ,Colorado 81657 -47'9-2107/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney DATE: October 17, 1995 Office of the Town Attorney RE: Use of Initiative For Land Use Purposes Which Are Administrative Acts Article V of the Colorado Constitution reserves the initiative and referendum powers to the people: "Section 1. General Assembly-initiative and referendum. The leoislative Dower of the state • shall be vested in the generaE assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, both to be elected by the people, but the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and amendments to the constitution and to enactor reject the same at the palls... The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people by this section are hereby further reserved to the legal voters of every city, town and municipality as to all local, special and municipal leaislation of every character in or for their respective municipalities. The manner of exercising said power shall be prescribed- by general laws, except that cities, towns and municipalities may provide for the manner of exercising the initiative and .- referendum powers as to their municipal leaislation..." (Emphasis added) These constitutional provisions permit the free exercise of legislative power by the people. However, the clear intention evidenced by Article V of the Colorado Constitution is to vest only legislative power directly in the people. Initiative applies only to acts which are legislative in character. Aurora v. Zwerdlinaer, 571 p2d 1074, 1076 (i 977). The Charter of the Town of Vail also reserves the power of initiative to the people. Article V, Section 5.1 (a) Initiative. provides: 'The registered electors of the Tawn shall have the power to propose any ordinance to the Council..." ,~ ~ "The Council shall act only by ordinance, resolution or motion. All Eeaislative enactments shall be in the #orm of ordinances; all other actions, except as herein provided, may be in the form of resolutions or motions:' (Emphasis added) Article IV, Section 4.6 Charter of the Town of Vail. ~•~~ RE'CYCLED PAPRR ~~ The substance of the petition to be evaluated is as follows: "A People's Ordinance No. 1: TITLE: In Order to Revitalize the Vail Community, an Ordinance Creating a Master Plan by the Town of Vail for the Redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. It Shall be Ordained that the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado shall create an ordinance establishing a Master Plan for the West Vail Shopping Mail Area and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. Be it further ordained that no contracts for redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall or development of the Vail Commons parcel be entered into by the Town of Vail until such a Master Plan is created by the Town of Vail and approved by the electorate of the Town. All Bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances or parts thereof, shall be made consistent with this ordinance. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency." Pursuant to the Town of Vail Code it is the function and duty of the planning and environmental commission to make and adopt a master plan, for the approval by the town council for the physical development of the town. The plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts and descriptive matter, shall show the commission's recommendations for the development of the subject territory. Section 2.24.060 Vail Municipal Code. This provision is consistent with state law. Pursuant to Section 31-23-206 C.R.S., it is the duty of the planning commission to make and adopt a master plan for the physical development of the municipality. Consistent with the Vail municipal code a master land use plan was adapted by the planning and environmental commission and the Vail Town Council by Resolution No. 27, Series of 1986. This land use plan is an element of the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan and specifically provides for the physical development of the West Vail Shopping Mall and Vail Commons parcel of land. Based upon the nature of the act and the municipal code, this act is administrative in nature and immune from initiative. A master plan is advisory only as is evidenced by the statutory and municipal code scheme for creation of municipal planning commissions.... An amendment to the master plan, which may be accomplished by resolution, as contrasted with an ordinance, is not regarded to be legislative in character. Being advisory only, an amendment to a master plan is not legislative in nature which can be proposed by initiative. Marcolis v. District Court. etc., 638 P2d 297, 306 (1981). As cited above, the Supreme Court continues to consistently rule that actions which are administrative matters are not subject to the constitutional right of initiative and referendum. Vlritcher v. Canvon Citv, 716 P2d 445 {1986); City of Idaho Snrinas v. Blackwell., 731 P2d 1250 {1987). 2 .' MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING November 7, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, November 7, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assist Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was no citizen participation. The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: . A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of October 3 and 17, 1995. B. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance Amending Section 9.22.101A. which contains the definition for Larceny. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Steinberg. Navas asked that a typo be corrected and that her vote on item five have an explanation added as to why she was opposed. Johnston noted on item one that Steinberg's name be inserted instead of his name where reference was made to previous council members present at the time of the land purchase. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The third item on the a enda was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1995, first readin of 9 9 an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Parking Structure Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, Facilities Maintenance Fund, Vail Marketing Fund and the Vail Housing Fund, of the 1995 budget and the financial plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Steve Thompson and Christine Anderson presented the Third Quarter Financial Report and list of required supplemental appropriations. Staff is requesting approval of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1995 on first reading. Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 22 of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 2.48, Compensation of Town Officials, Town of Vail Municipal Code. Tom Moorhead presented this item to council. Council is asking for a raise of $200 to $500 per month for Council members and $500 to $1000 per month for the Mayor. Said change, if approved would start January 1, 1998 with pay adjustments made every 4 years per the Denver CPI. Hermann Staufer encouraged the council to vote no on this Ordinance. He challenged next years Council that if they donate their money to charity, he would match a like amount to the same charity: Money should not i ~u~r~,~cwr~;rc~.,, m..~, ~~w~, ~,i~i~~s i be the reason a Council member serves. The main reason must be they want to make a contribution to the community. Sfifier noted the last time council received a raise was 1981. Slifer made a motion to increase Council's pay to $1,000 per month and the Mayor's pay to $1,500 per month, with a second by Pau! Johnston. A vote was taken and failed 2-5. Johnston and Slifer were in favor of the motion and Navas, Strauch, Steinberg, Osterfoss and Lapin against. Bob Fiske encouraged the Council to vote for a pay increase as he believes it would encourage and enable more individuals to run for council. Lapin made a motion to approve Ordinance 23, 1995 on first reading allowing for a Gouncil pay increase to $500 per month and the Mayor's pay increased to $1000 per month; said increase and CPI calculations to start January 1, 1998, with a second by Steinberg. The motion passed unanimously 7-0. The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance. No. 20, Series of 1995, second reading of an annual appropriation ordinance adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vaif, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for .the 1995 tax year and payable in the 1996 fiscal year. Steve Thompson presented this item to Council. The Council has been reviewing the 1996 budget for several weeks. The ordinance summarizing the expenditures is required by statute. Staff is recommending approval of Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995 on second reading, with a second by Strauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The sixth i#em on the agenda was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance to change the zoning of 67 properties in the Town of Vail from their current zoning to the Natural Area Preservation District, Outdoor Recreation District, or the General Use District. Russ Forrest and Jim Curnutte presented this item to Council. On August 22, 1994, staff received approval to amend the text of Chapter 18.38, Greenbelt and Natural Open Space Dis#rict (GNOS) and Chapter 18.36, Public Use District (PUD), of the Vail Municipal Code, and to create a new Chapter 18.33, Qutdoor Recreation District (OR}. These text amendments and the proposed zoning changes, as identified in Ordinance No: 19, are intended to insure that the uses allowed in these zone districts are consistent with their purpose statements, and that properties throughout Tawn, especiaNy those with open space characteristics, are located in the appropriate zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed zoning changes on September 24, 1995 and voted 4-2-1 to recommend approval of these changes. The two dissenting members stated that they wanted parcel #21 {proposed par 3 site} to be rezoned to the General Use District. Staff also reviewed issues and public comments concerning the proposed rezoning of the Mt. Bell site (#34). The PEC felt strongly that the entire Mt. Bell parcel should be rezoned to the General Use District as per the staff memo. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance . No. 19, Series of 1995. Steinberg wants to change the Red Sandstone site boundary lines and Johnston wants to change the Mountain bell site boundary lines. Hermann Staufer encouraged Council #a create a zone just for the Vail Golf Course. The Golf course needs to run as a first class operation and a zone just for a golf course could assure this. Moorhead stated the Outdoor Recreation zone district allows for golf courses as a permitted use and provides for the needs of a golf course. Navas is concerned the new zoning on the recreation parcels may make it difficult to place any community buildings on these parcels. She thinks Outdoor Recreation is inappropriate far some parcels and General Use may allow for greater flexibility. Slifer wondered. if this item should be tabled pending resolution of these questions. Moorhead stated it would be appropriate to table the issue if Council wants to reconsider Outdoor Recreation vs. General Use, or the questionable parcels could be removed from this Ordinance and continue with a motion. Lapin made a motion to Approve Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995 on second reading, excluding property no. 51 (upper bench of Donovan Park} and west of Red Sandstone School create a line to allow for NAPD on the steep section of that parcel, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1 with Navas opposing. v;r~,~nc~~.;r~..,w,9 m..,~,y ~~,w~~ „i7i~~5 ~, r The seventh on the agenda was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance amending Section 5.04.120 Transfer of License and Section 5.20.100 Exemptions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Tom Moorhead and Steve ThOmpsOn pi'eSented this item to council. 1) Council requested staff to prepare an ordinance that would allow some relief from the Annual Business License fee when a new owner occupied an existing space and began a new operation in a space that a prior owner had paid the annual business license fee. 2) Council requested staff to prepare amendments to our special events license to guarantee that exempt, non-profit organizations will significantly benefit from such special events. This direction was provided as a result of a special event that was perceived to be nothing more than a retail sales event that did not provide significant benefit to an exempt organization. Staff is recommending the following: 1) Staff recommends a more equitable approach is to prorate the annual business license fee for the Initial year of operation. 2) Staff advises that the change may significantly impact special events and sales tax revenue from those events. Moorhead stated this ordinance provides for a quarterly, prorated business license, but does not reduce the fee to less than $100 and will take affect October 2, 1995. lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1995 on second reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The eighth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995, second reading of an ordinance providing for the major amendment of Special Development District No. 31, Golden Peak House; amending an approved development plan for Special Development District No. 31, in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 278 Hanson Ranch RoadlLots A, B, and C, Block 2, Vai! Village 1st Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing, and setting forth details In regard thereto. Mike Mollica presented this item to.Council. On September 11, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted {by a vote of 4-2, with Armour and Pratt opposed) to recommend approval for the applicant's requests. The staff recommendation is for approval of the applicant's request to modify the density section of the SDD; with regard to the overall number of dwe{ling units. Additionally, staff recommends denial of the applicant's request to modify the densitylGRFA portion of the proposal. Please see the attached staff memorandum, dated September 11, 1995, to the Planning and Environmental Commission. Steinberg moved to approve Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995 on second reading, with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The ninth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 24, Series of 1995, A resolution adopting the Intergovernmental Agreement Concerning the Implementation, Operation and Maintenance of the "E-9-1-1"Telephone Service. Tom Collins presented this item to Council. Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 24, Series of 1995, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-D. The tenth item on the agenda was an appeal by an adjacent property owner of a DRB approval of changes to a previously approved set of plans and an appeal of a PEC. approval of a Conditional Use Permit for an employee housing unit located. at 126 ~ ~ - " Forest Road/Lot 5, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. Lauren Waterton, Mike Monica and_ Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council. At the October 18, 1995 DRB_ meeting, the DRB approved changes to a previously approved set of plans for a new PrimarylSecondary residence to be located at 126 Forest Road. The DRB originally- approved the project at the June 6, 1995 DRB meeting. At the October 23,1995 Per meeting, the PEC approved a Conditional Use Permit for a Type I1 employee housing unit. The adjacent neighbor to the west, Mike Flannery, has appealed both of these decisions to the Town Council. Please see the attached letters of appeal, as well as the staff memorandum for further information. Staff recommends that both the DRB decision and the PEC decision be upheld. Dave Lenyo and Lawrence Levine attorneys for the Flannery's presented to council testimony as to the history of events and facts particular to the PEC and DRB appeals. Jay Peterson objected to listening to the full presentation. Council should only hear evidence directly relating to the two appeals. Dave Lenyo gave Council background information on the boundary lines. These lines are still under litigation. He wants Council to address whether this r~ ~t i~ proposed building would I'It on the property. Lawrence Levine did participate in the, DRB &PEC process regarding the "changes". However he stated the Flannery's were not present for the original presentations last summer. Levin stated the proposed plans do not comply with the TOV codes pertaining to "buildable square footage". Mike Mollica stated the applicant met the zoning code requirements to place a Type II EHU on the lot. Levine stated the GRFA calculation on the building exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA. Lauren Watterton stated the GRFA on this building is below the maximum and Levine is incorrectly calculating the stairs. Levine said the landscaping calculations do not meet the TOV's code and that hardscape is not to exceed 20%. Mollica stated the hardscape is within the guidelines. Levine believes wall heights are incorrect per the Code. Mollica stated prior to a building permit being issued staff will carefully review all wall heights and they must comply prior to a building permit being issued. Levine stated the building height exceeds the 33' maximum. Mollica stated the building height does not exceed the maximum allowable of 33'. Moorehead instructed Council to vote separately on the two issues. Lapin moved to uphold the PEC decision with PEC's conditions of 1) This Employee Housing Unit shall comply with all future regulations pertaining to Type II Employee Housing Units that may be adopted by the Vail Town Council. 2) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed structure, the applicant shall sign a deed restriction using the form provided by the Town of Vail. This document will be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office and will require #hat the employee housing unit be permanently restricted for employee housing, with a second by Strauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 7-4. Lapin moved 'to uphold the DRB decision with DRB's conditions of 1) Provide staff a new landscape plan with special attention to the retaining waif and the area in front of the building. 2) Remove the blast protection screen immediately upon completion of excavation. 3) Should the PEC approve the EHU on October 23, 1995, the design of the north elevation with the EHU may substitute far this approval; plus any incorrect wall heights shall be corrected, with a second by Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 7-0. Levine would like the plans he used for this meeting to be submitted for the record. The eleventh item an the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was no report. There being no further business, Strauch moved to adjourn at approximately 11;15 PM. Respectfully submitted, (~ `~ ~ Mar~aret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: ~tlt.l /77~'C~l~.af~l l~e~4l~ Town Clerk ('Names at certain €ntlwldusls who gave puhf€c Input may qe Insccurafs,) • r r MINUTES VAfL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING November 21, 1995 ~:3a P.M. ~~ A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, November 21, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P. M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybil! Navas Tom Steinberg Jan Strauch Rod Slifer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Acting Town Manager R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Larry Grafel made a speech honoring Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg and the work they have done for the town in their tenure. Jim Hoza presented Merv Lapin with a box of numbers, since he always asks for them and a mini live Christmas tree to Tom Steinberg. Sammye Meadows of the Vail Alpine Garden Foundation formally requested a 49 year lease with an option to renew another 49 years. Second on the agenda was the DRB Review. There was no need to discuss any of the items. Third on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1995, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Parking Structure Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, Facilities Maintenance Fund, Vail Marketing Fund and the Vail Housing Fund, of the 1995 budget and the financial plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Steve Thompson and Christine Anderson presented changes to the list of required supplemental appropriations. Also included, Jeff Layman provided background information on the 530 AM /Radio Station with a request for $7,000 in additional funding. Other funding sources include CDOT and VA at equal contributions of $7,000 each. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance 22, Series of 1995 on second reading with a second by Sybiil Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Forth on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1995, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.48, Compensation of Town Officials, Town of Vail Municipal Code. Tom Moorhead presented this Ordinance for second reading, There was discussion among Council as whether or not to put conditions on getting the increased salary, such as attending at least 85% of all work sessions and evening meetings. Jan Strauch moved to approve Ordinance 23, Series of 1995 on second reading with a second by 5ybiil Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. 1 Vail Tuwn Cunncil Evening Meeting Minutes 11!21195 Fifth on the agenda was the reading of Resolution No. 25, Series of 1995, Adopting the Eagle River Watershed Plan. Paul Reeve and Mike Moliica presented #his Resolution which had been discussed at the 11/14/95 work session. The Eagle River and its tributaries are geographic features that are a shared resource in Eagle County. Gore Creek and the Eagle River are sensitive natural features that provide habitat for a multitude ~~ of plants and animals. The fundamental purpose of the Eagle River Management Plan is to develop a common philosophy for managing and protecting this critical resource in our region. Participants in this plan include recreational interest groups, developers, water districts, Federal, State, County, and focal agencies. Each agency is currently reviewing the Plan to determine if they would be willing to pass a resolution committing themselves to implement the Plan, as practical and feasible. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed this Plan on August 28, 1995 and voted unanimously to recommend to the Vail Town Council that a resolution be adopted to implement the Pian, as feasible, for the Town of Vail. On October 23, the Town Council reviewed the Plan and directed staff to develop a resolution to adapt the Plan which would specifically state the areas the Town would implement. Tom Steinberg moved to approve Resolution 25, Series of 1995 with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Six#h on the agenda was a update discussion about I-70 chain enforcement. The Council approved an operational plan presented by Acting Police Chief Jeff Layman for enforcement of the state chain law on I-70 during inclement weather. In addition, the Council supported a recommendation by the president of the Colorado Motor Carriers Association to establish a task force to continue working on solutions at the eta#e and local levels. The operational plan presented by the Vail Police Department includes: • Enforce existing state chain law, which assesses a $39 fine for violators, as opposed to immediate consideration of a local ordinance. Layman said he wanted to test the deterrent aspects of the $39 fine "for a few more storms" before recommending any additional action at the local level. Since November 1, the Vai! Police Department has written six tickets to truckers who have violated the chain law on 1-70. Layman said the six were probably the most his officers--and possibly the Colorado State Patrol combined--had issued in recent years. • Assignment of a Vail police officer to work overtime at the East Vail exit area for chain law enforcement on weekdays when the chain law is enacted. This action, Layman said, would supplement the Colorado Department of Transportation and Colorado State Patrol enforcement programs, which will be operated on Saturdays and Sundays only. • Draft a local ordinance that mirrors the state chain law ordinance, in case compliance with existing laws is ineffective. • Layman said the department has been experimenting with an enforcement presence on the interstate since November. And already, he says, police presence has had an immedia#e effect on voluntary compliance with the chain law. The. Council then heard from Greg Fulton, president of the Colorado Motor Carriers Association, who gave an update on the organization's efforts to become part of the solution. Fulton said CMCA is pursuing actions, such as: • Providing a "pusher-truck" at the top of Vail Pass to expedite clearing of the roadway when mishaps occur. A similar program is in place on Donner Pass in California. • Implementation of an education campaign to inform out-of-state truckers as to Colorado's chain law and the need for chains under certain conditions. • Assisting in passage of new state legislation to toughen the chain law to increase compliance. • Working with CDOT and others toward an overall plan for I-70 to address increasing traffic on the corridor. • Investigating development of a "command center" to dispatch weather and road condition/closure information to various trucking companies. VailTnwn Cauncil8veningMeeting Minutes 11121M5 ,~- ,~ In suggesting a task group to continue the dialogue, Fulton said the association was particularly interested in relocating Vail's chain-up area "farther up the hill" beyond the East Vail exit. He said a new area would preserve wear and tear on the highways, increase safety and prevent damage to the truckers' chains. Joe Macy, from Vail Associates, also participated in' the discussion. VA has been a partner with the town and other state agencies in working to address last year's record closures along 1-70. Seventh on the agenda George Ruther presented acall-up of a DRB decision regarding .. the Cook residence located at 1012 Eagles Nest Circle/l_ot 2, Block 6, Vail Village Seventh Filing. ~. On September 26, 1995, the Town of Vail Department of Community Development received a letter from Tom and Florence Steinberg requesting the call-up of a Design Review Board decision made at the September 20, 1995 Design Review Board meeting. The request for the call-up of the item, for review by the Town Council, is in accordance with Section 18.54.090 (Appeal to Town Council) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Council is asked to uphold, uphold with conditions, or overturn the Design Review Board's decision of September 20, 1995 to allow #or an addition to the Cook residence On September 20, 1995, the Town of Vail Design Review Board approved a residential • ,addition to the Cook residence using two 250's. The vote by the DRB was 4-1 in favor of the request. DRB member Bob Borne cast the dissenting vote. On October 17, 1995, the Vail Town Council approved the request of Sam Cook fora 30- day extension to the appeal process. Prior to the review of the Cook residential addition at the September 20, 1995 DRB meeting, staff completed a zoning analysis of the property. The purpose of. completing the zoning analysis was to make a determination as to whether or not the property was in compliance with the Town of Vail Zoning Code. Upon completion of the zoning analysis, it was determined that the property and the application were, in fact, in compliance with the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Since the application is in compliance with the zoning code, staff is recommending that the Town Council uphold the DRB's decision of September 20, 1995. Tom Steinberg stepped down from the Council table. Tom had come up to the podium to speak when Rick Rosen stated he did not think that Tom, as a Council member, could address the Town Council on this issue. Tom Moorhead agreed. At this time Flo Steinberg presented the Steinberg's protest of the DRB's decision. George Ruther went over the code requirements. Sybill Navas requested background information from the DRB presentation. Rick Rosen spoke on behalf of Sam Cook. He went through the code requirements and stated that this addition did not have a kitchen, but only a sink and small refrigerator. Sybill again requested why the Council was not provided more background information and wanted #o know why Bob Borne dissented to this item. George Ruther explained that in his opinion, Bob Borne voted against the motion not because the addition did not conform with the Design Review Guidelines, but instead because he felt the property owner may use the addition as a lock~off apartment, thus creating a third dwelling unit on the property. Tom Moorhead stated that #his should be referred to the PEC far their review of the staff zoning analysis. Rick Rosen asked for a motion and a vote on the DRB decision that they were there for. Paul Johnston moved to uphold the DRB approval with a second from Rod Slifer. A vote was taken and failed 3-3, with Merv t_apin, Sybill Navas and Peggy Osterfoss opposed. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 1112E1H5 ~' Peggy was asked to leave the meeting to canvas the election votes at this time. Paul Johnston moved to recess this issue until the Town Attorney could do some research and until Peggy returned to the meeting. Sybill Navas seconded this motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 5-0. (Steinberg recused, and Osterfoss out to canvas election votes). At this time Tom Steinberg rejoined the Council at the table and they went on to the next item on the agenda. Eighth on the agenda was a request for a Sign Variance from Section ifi.20.040{a), Free Standing Signs, Joint Directory Signs for aMulti-Tenant Building, Purpose. The applicant is Leo Palmos, owner of the Vail Gateway Plaza being represented by Craig Klemz. George Rather asked the Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny the applicant's sign variance request. On Wednesday, November 15, 1995, the Town of Vail Design Review Board (DRB) heard the applicant's request for a sign variance from Section 16.20.040(a) of the Sign Code. According to Section 16.20.040{a), the purpose of a free standing, joint directory sign for amulti-tenant building is to allow for the display of the names of each interior tenant within the building. The applicant is seeking a variance from the Sign -Code to allow for the display of the general nature of each of the tenants within the building, rather than specifically listing the tenants by name. {See attachments in memo dated 11/15195). Section IV of the staff memorandum to the Design Review Board (dated 11/15/95) includes staff's recommendation on the proposed sign variance request. Staff is recommending denial of the requested sign variance. Staff has reviewed the sign variance application and believes that the applicant has not met all the criteria listed in Section III, Findings and Criteria for Approval. Specifically, staff believes that the applicant has not adequately addressed findings A and C. Craig Klemz addressed Council stating the need for the sign being that the public was confused as to the nature of this building. Rod Slifer moved to uphold the DRB decision with a second from Jan Strauch. There was discussion and then Rod amended his motion to uphold the DRB decision with a condition that "Parking" be removed from the sign, with a second from Paul Johnston. Discussion continued as to placement of the sign. A vote was taken and passed 4-2 (Lapin and Steinberg against) to approve a sign variance request for the Gateway Plaza. The Council attached a condition that it shall be the responsibility of the Design Review Board to resolve sign location and parking sign issues. The .applicant sought to install a directory sign which would display the general nature of each of the tenants, rather than specifically listing the tenants by name. At this time Peggy Osterfoss returned to the Council table, Tam Steinberg stepped down, and Council went back to item No. 7 on the agenda regarding the Cook residence. Tom Moorhead gave a recommendation on the process that would be appropriate. Sybill moved to uphold the DRB approval conditioned upon additional review of the project by the Planning and Environmental Commission of the staff's zoning analysis. Paul Johnston seconded the motion, a vote was taken which passed 5-1-1 (Slifer against, Steinberg recused). The PEC review will take place on Dec. 11. Adjacent property owners, Tom and Fio Steinberg, have protested the project due to visual and density concerns. . Ninth on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was no formal report although Larry Grafel went over a memo regarding the Eagle County Commissioners' meeting regarding regional highway issues, which was in the packet. Veit Tnwn Council Evening Melling Minutes 11121!95 .~ Tenth on the agenda was the information update. Eleventh on the agenda were Council reports. Merv reported that the Sister City visit by the St. Moritz delegation when very well. He said the discussions, which focused on joint marketing and public relations; special events; and employee exchanges would produce good results for the future. He hope that Council will continue to support this program. Twelfth on the agenda were any other items to discuss. Tom Steinberg suggested the Council sponsor a meeting with environmental groups, Vail Associates and the Forest Service to discuss the EIS report for the proposed Category III expansion. Thirteenth on the agenda was an executive session. Paul Johnston moved to approve Bob McL.aurin's employment contract far one year with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 7-0. There being no further business the meeting was adjourn at approximately 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Q~ Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor . - A i~"EST: ouc~~ l]'1 ~i~~C Holly McC,utcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names of cettaln individuals who gave public Input may be Inaccurate.) • • VaS Town Council Evening Meeting Minmes 11/21/95 f ~ • f r ~ _... ` ~ REVISED 41.Q2.95 ' MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING December 5, 1995 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 5, 1995, 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 Paul Johnston Kevin Foley Michael Jewett 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 an their recent appointments and presented a brief update on district projects which included: efforts to consolidate the water distric# 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, 1995. 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 {Ski BaselRecreation Zone District) of the Vail Municipal Code and approving the Development Plan for the Golden Peak Ski Base, 485 Vail Valley DrivelTract F, Vail Village 5th Filing, and Tract B, Vail Village 7th Filing. Applicant Vail Associates, Inc., was represented by David Corbin. Mayor Armour read the title in fuH. Town of Vail planners Jim Curnutte 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.) It 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 1995 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, ti~ ~~ e~ ~ ~ rr~„.,~,, , z/a~/~~5 ~. ~ • i ., representing the applicant, explained that the parking structure would possibly be - phased in aver a two year period. He stated parking issues were complicated and suggested more detail on its operation be brought to the December 19 council evening meeting for possible approval. Discussion continued regarding the proposed parking structure and what would happen should Vail Associates not build it. Additional topics of discussion included street scape improvements, cost sharing and maintenance of proposed street scape improvements. Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, asked for clarification of who would be responsible for maintenance of proposed new sidewalks. Diane Milligan, representing the Ramshorn Condominium Association, commented on snow removal for the area. Tom Moorhead informed Council that Public Works does not maintain sidewalks and that by ordinance it is the responsibility of the individual property owners. Vail resident, Nancy Rondeau asked questions and expressed her concerns. Council members agreed the development plan would be subject to Council's approval at the time of the second reading on Ordinance 25, Series of 1995. The fourth item on the agenda was Resolution No.27, Series of 1995, a Resolution setting the date for a Special Election for the purpose of electing a Council member to complete the unexpired term of Margaret A. OsterFoss, term to expire November, 1997. Paul Johnston moved to approve the resolution, with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and approved unanimously, 7-0. Item number five on the agenda was the appointment of Local Licensing Authority Member. Dave Chapin, Gene Uselton, and Terry Walker were applicants far one position crea#ed by the resignation of former chairman, Davey Wilson. Ballots were distributed and Holly McCutcheon tallied the ballots. Sybill moved to appoint David Chapin to fill the vacancy on the Local Licensing Authority, with a second from Mike Dewitt. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. Sixth on the agenda was 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 Subdivision12832 C Kinnikinnick Road. The appellant, Bob Borne, represented by Sally Brainerd of RKD Design lnc., was appealing the Planning and Environmental Commission's denial of the front setback variance request, pursuant to Section 18.62.070, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Town of Vail planner George Ruther reviewed the background of the appeal and the November 27, 1995 PEC meeting and the Commission members vote of 3-2 {Armour and Moffet Dissenting) to deny the proposed front setback variance request. George explained the members voting in favor of the motion to deny, felt that the granting of the variance would result in a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the Zoning Code. Applicant, Bob Borne explained the had requested the setback due to a surveying error and the error had caused a 3.5 foot encroachment into the front setback. Mr. Borne respectfully requested the council's consideration to overturn the PEC decision. Vail resident, Michael Arnet spoke in favor of Mr. Borne and cited human error. A motion was made by Peggy Osterfoss to overturn the PEC's decision based on the fact that the request did meet variance criteria and did not create a special privilege. Sybill Navas seconded the motion, a vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. PO amended her motion to include the staff recommendation and was approved by all council members. Item No. 7. on the agenda was an appeal of a DRB decision to approve the International Wing at the Lodge at Vail, located at 174 E. Gore Creek Drive. Town of Vail Planner, Andy Knutdsen reviewed the history surrounding the project and explained that on 1111195 the DRB voted 5-0 to approve the International Wing, and that three work sessions with the DRB preceded that decision. An exterior alteration • approval by the PEC was made on 10110183, and the PEC approval was based on the v~ .~~ ec ~ rites ~ z/os/~s r' ~ ~ ~ .. ,~: -` criteria fior 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, inc., 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 #hat relying on a 83 planning approval was inappropriate after 12 years. Peggy Osterfoss asked what the time fine was fior 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 effect. Those opposed to the approval of the International Wing who gave input included: Attorney, Art Abplanalp, representing owners of Unit #527, Mr. & 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 owners and stated that Rick Rosen represented the Cabinas, also adjacent property owners: Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, requested council members take -into consideration a new opportunity, and requested this project be withdrawn. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, Lodge properties, Inc. addressed concerns and answered questions. Mike Arnett, Design Review Board Chairman, 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 staff 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 mail system 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 11:10 P.M. Respe ully submitted, R bert W. Armour, Mayor . EST: bc~frl~ Holly NicCutcheon, Town Clerk (Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate ) 9f~1 ~`Tou„,, ~'m~unci~ f:,, ~ ~r7~,~.G~ i 2~U5~95 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission S FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 27, 1995 SUBJECT: A request far a setback variance to allow for a residence under construction to encroach into the front setback located at 2854 KinnickinnicklLot 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision. Applicant: Am. Bras. Development Inc., represented by Bob Borne Planner: George Ruttier I. DESCRIPTION OF THE VARIANCE RE(lUE5T The applicant, Bob Borne, representing Innsbruck Meadows Development, Inc., is requesting a front setback variance for a new single family residence currently under construction on Lot 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision. A Building Permit far the residence was issued on September i 8, 1995, and construction has proceeded since that date. Ors October 19, 1995, the applicant submitted to staff an Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) ' for review and approval. Staff requires the review and approval of an ILC to insure that the structure under construction complies with the relevant development standards prior to the Town's Building Inspectors completing a framing inspection. When staff reviewed the ILC for Lat 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision, it was determined that the northwest corner of the residence was encroaching 3.5 feet into the front setback and also into the platted 2Q' pedestrian, utility and drainage easement (see Attachment i). Since encroachments into any required setback require an approval from the Planning and Environmental Commission, the applicant is seeking a front setback variance to allow far a 3.5' encroachment into the required 20` front setback. on Lot 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision. !h BACKGROUND Staff conditionally approved the ILC submitted on October 19, 1995. This allowed the contractor to receive a framing inspection and continue work on that portion of the structure not in the front setback or platted easement. A condition of approval required the contractor to submit a letter to the Community Development Department acknowledging that should a front setback variance not be approved by the PEC, nor should the encroachment into the platted easement be approved by the Town of Vail Public Works Department and the utility companies, that portion of the structure encroaching into the front setback and the platted easement shall be removed. This shall occur regardless of additional expense incurred as a result of continued construction on the residence, any inconvenience to the contractor, or staff's previous approval of the ILC. A second condition required that the contractor submit a variance application. The contractor has complied with each of the conditions of approval. According to the applicant, the 3.5' encroachment is a result of a surveying error. Several months earlier, the contractor contacted Intermountain Engineering and requested a "property line stake-out." (see Attachment 2) The reason for the "property line stake-out" was to allow the contractor to place the foundation of the structure within the required setbacks. The surveyors fr\everyone\pec\memoa\innabruck.n27 ' staked out the four corners of the lot as requested, but according to the applicant, did not place any points along the front property fine to indicate a radius along that line. With no such information physically staked out an the ground indicating a radius, the contractor assumed a chord along the front property line and struck a straight line from property corner to lroperty comer. Therefore, the building foundation was located based upon an incorrect front property line location, The amount of encroachment into the front setback and platted easement corresponds with the difference in feet between the radius of the front property line and the assumed chord line {3.5'). Ill. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS, Upon review of the Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommends denial of the requested front setback variance based on the following factors: A. Consideration of Faictnrs: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or poten#ial uses and structures in the vicinity. The impact of the requested front setback variance on the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity, in the staff's opinion, will be minimal. The front setback encroachment on Lot 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision, is such that it would appear no other homes would be effected. The nearest residence to the encroachment into the north across Kinnickinnick Road. According to the approved sitellandscape plan, the building corner would be 24.5 feet from the back of the curb line and 11 feet from the pedestrian sidewalk. The landscape plan shows eight, two-inch caliper aspen trees in the area immediately adjacent to the point of encroachment {see Attachment 3}. No spruce trees are proposed for Lot 6. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity ar to attain the objectives of this title wi#hout grant of special privitege. The degree to which the applicant is requesting relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of the front setback regulation is the minimum necessary to allow the structure to remain as constructed. Many of the older existing structures in the Vail Intermountain area are non- conforming as they relate to setbacks. An example of such non-conformity in the area of the Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision is the Camelot Tnwnhomes. The Camelot Townhnmes are non-conforming as they relate to the front, sides and rear setbacks. Other examples of non-conforming setbacks in the Vail intermountain Subdivision are the Bellflower Condominiums {Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Subdivision), the Westridge Condominiums {Lot i, Block 8, Vail Intermountain Subdivision}, and the Rush Condominiums {Lot 9, Black 8, Vail Intermountain Subdivision). f~\everyone\pec\memea\innahruck.n27 ,~ 'As the applicant has pointed out, and staff addressed earlier in the memorandum, the 3.5 foot encroachment into the front setback is a result of a surveying error. While staff understands how the error occurred, and why the building is encroaching into the front setback, it is staff's opinion that the granting of the requested front setback variance may be a grant of special privilege. It is staff's belief that if the applicant had requested the variance prior to construction, rather than after, the structure was completely framed, the requested variance would not be supported by staff since it appears no physical hardship or extraordinary circumstances or conditions exist an Lot 6. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. In the staff's opinion, the requested variance to allow the structure to encroach 3.5 feet into the front setback will have minimal, if any, negative impacts on the criteria described above. The structure will still be 24.5 feet from the back of the curb trine. This distance should still allow for adequate sunlight to reach Kinnickinnick Road. Thus, avoiding any icing problems on'the street due to shading. Additionally, the Utility companies have provided an encroachment agreement acknowledging their acceptance of the building encraachrnent into the .platted pedestrian, utility and drainage easement (see Attachment 5). 13. The Planning ~i Environmental Commission shall make the following findinq~ before granting a variance: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the #ollowing reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or condirions . applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. f i \av®ryone\pac\memoe\innabruck. n27 IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of this front setback variance request. Staff believes the . request does not meet the Griteria and Findings, listed in Section 111 of the memorandum, in order to grant an approval of the variance. .Staff believes that the applicant has met Criteria and Findings Ai , A3, 62, B3 a, b & c. Staff does not believe, however, that the applicant has met Criteria and Findings A2, and B1. Staff is specifically concerned that the granting of approval of the requested variance may result in the grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone district. Should the PEC choose to grant an approval of the requested variance, the staff would recommend that the approve! carry with it the following conditions: 1: The applicant shall proceed through the proper procedure to vacate that portion of the pedestrian, utility and drainage easement into which the building is encroaching prior to receiving a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy far Unit #6. 2. The applicant shall revise the proposed landscape plan which illustrates eight two- inch caliper aspen trees in the vicinity of the encroachment, and propose a minimum of two additional eight-foot evergreens. it is the staff's opinion that the two evergreens will help mitigate the additional 3.5 foot encroachment upon the pedestrian sidewalk. f~J f:\everyone\pec\memos\~.nnsbruck.n27 4 8` ~~~~ ~~` 7• F+I • ~~~ ~~~ ~~P ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~z axe ~~~ n~o n ~ao ~~ °o "I :~~~t~ 8' ~ ?~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ =ga 0 ~ O n 3~C~ ? ~ 3 ads ~~ ~'C ti ; ~2 a ~~ ~ aa ~ Rsfl •i~ ~a Sp9 ry i ~p~~~ O N 4 S ~ L ~ 4 ~ cn 4 ^i o, A ~ # i~ ~~ # ~ ~ ~ ~ e 3 / ~_ y~ fJ ~ Q~ ~_-~' _ __-gin ~~.. ~,. „ _ { ~ :~.:~_ :: ~-:~ ."fit==~:~: s• ~ ~. ~ • , 4 , ~j 1 6s ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~Op ~ `~ ~b ~ ~ ~ `+ a a 2 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~M1 -, ~ a• ~~ s° ~~~~~~~~~ pQ6 ~ M Q; py 'e~t} ~~ ~ ~ ¢r ~ S~i ~+~ ~S }~ ~~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~O 0 0 ~ ~m ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~`. ~~ 1 s ~~ ji-% ~~ Inter-Mountain F11~iIle`erln~ Ltd. October 1$, 1995 Mr. Sob Borne P.O. Box 42t?5 Vall, CO 8IG$8 Re: Lot b Innsbruck Meadows Project No. 95-01735 Dear Hob: Several months ago you requested Inter-Mountain Engineering to stake out proposed Loi 6, Innsbruck Meadows so your contractor could lay out a foundation for the proposed house. Fer chat request --•e did stake out the four corners of the tot but did not lay out any points on the front lot line along the carne. When --~e did the Improvement Location Certificate -ve found that a sma11 portion of the foundation intruded into the required front yard setback by about the same distance as the radius of the curve or some 3.5 feet, ~'Vhat I beIier•e happened is that since there ware no curve points staked it appears the house --~as laid out from the chord line bet-vicen the property corners and not from the cun~e, which resulted in the encroachment into the easement and setback. If you have any further questions, please ca11 me at 949-5072. Sincerely, P.E. ATTACHMENT #2 '~ 77 Metcalf Road, #201 ~ 8ox 978 • Avon, Colorado 81620 • Phone: 970-949-5D72 From Denver Direct: 893-1531 1420 Vance Street Lakewood, Colorado 80215 •Phone: 3D3-232-0158 ,~~ ~ .. ^ . r' ~ - -- '. • r r ~t~. WALK TYP. ~r ~ i~F '~~ :_i.~., :y^ \ 1 ~~ .n 8e.~ ~ E~O~F~ GA . 7834. $' 1 1 1 r INNSBRUCK MEADOWS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION P.O, BOX 4355 VAIL , COLORADO SZ658 303-475-5253 Oct 30, 1995 Tp whom it may concern; This is to confirm that Innsbruck Meadows Homeowners Associa#ion has no problem with the proposed Variance submitted by Innsbruck Meadows Development, Inc., with regard to an encroachment of the Northwesterly corner of the home being built on Lot 6 ,into the front yard pedestrian, utility and drainage easements. • ,~Qc~t(~~v ~ca,~ ATTACHMENT ~P4 ENCg4ACHM1rNT AGREEMENT ~T,~IIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into this _,~ ~ day of ~v dv , 1995 by~ti'N e~~~Ec..m~°itP~ r~ and ~Ue~l~;~uc~ the aquasi-municipal corporation~f the State of Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "District". WHEREAS, Progeny Owner(s) isla~c presently the owner{~) of certain real property described as i ~VvC.+ S ~ Q.c9 ~'+~ 1LiPf~s~c~eJ=s S'~=loL~rU~s-~ ,located in Eagle County, Colorado; and Wl'-ir~tcFAS, the District is presently in possession of an easement ~-d feet in width, running through the af.,,~u.entioned ~.~.~f-erty, which easement is described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and VVhrttEAS, Property Owner{s) desires to construct a p,:~.,~.anent structure that will encroach upon the described easement in an area approximately ~l2 x $` ', said encroachment being described on Exhibit A; and W~i~xEAS, the easement is an active easement presently in use by the District. NOW, TkIEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and promises herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. The District shall permit the permanent structure to encroach upon the aforementioned easement. 2. The Property Owners} shall indemnify the District from the costs of any repairs to the District's utility lines which may occur as a result of the construction of the p~~.,~anent structure over and upon such easement. 3. The Property Owners} shall hold harmless the District from the cost of repairing any damage to the structure, which damage may be caused by the installation of new utility lines in this easement, ar by a break in present and future- utility lines of the District, or by the repair of such break by the District or lay other maintenance of the lines. 4. The Property Owners} shall ind4..~,ify the District from any increase, in the cost of construction of any new utility lines or in the cost of any repairs to the District`s utility lines, such increase, if any, due to the proximity of the p~~~.anent structure to the utility lines. ATTACHMENT ~~ 5 ~. This Agreement shall bind the successors and assigns of the Property Owner{s), and shall be appurtenant to and deemed to run with and for the benefit of the aforementioned property in Eagle County, Colorado until such time that the District abandons said easement, This Agreement shall be recorded against said property in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above written. PROPERTY OWNER{S} By ~-~ r ~S ~~.eS,, ~i= ~NAls®~-cacf~.. /u~a4.~~S By - ~~ Dennis Gelvin, General 1'vlanager A ~ ~. SST: By Assistant Secretary • • STATE OF COLORADO } } ss. COUNTX OF EAGLE ~ } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~~~day of ~ovstK~¢¢r _„_, 1995, by '~~1n~.} ~,ir~ c Notary Public My Commission expires: _„~_~~ ~/~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ss COUNTY OF EAGLE } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~}d'~ay of 1\]c-~~t~~ar ,, 1995, by Dennis Gelvin, as General Manager of the Arrowhead Metropolitan Sanitatian District. Not~y I'u is My Commission expires: ~ ~/-'~~ U INNSBRUCK MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT, IlVC. P.O. BOX 4zQS VAIL ,COLORADO 81657 3d3-476-5253 October 30, 1995 Background: Innsbruck Meadows is a multi family project which is currently platted as one big lot. It is planned for a total of fourteen homes ,nine of which are single family, four of which are primary/secondary with the secondary unit being an EHU and the last being a true primary/secondary and which is being built far the original seller of the land. Prior to delivery of title to units, new plats will be created which show Improvement Locations and the individual late which are to be transferred to purchasers. At this time no units have been transferred and all of the property is owned by Innsbruck Meadows Development., Inc. The variance that we are requesting is as follows: There are presently five homes under construction. One of the homes ,building six recently had an ILC issued which showed a small encroachment of the Northwesterly corner of the building into the front easement. This encroachment extends about 3.5 feet into the easement at the very corner of the building and travels on a diagonal for eight feet where it crasser out of the easement. Thus the encroachment is about fourteen square feet. The error in the Southwesterly corner's location was occasioned by an omission on the part of the projects surveyor who was directed to stake out the proposed lot and easement so that a foundation could be installed on that Lot. The surveyor through some . sort of omission staked out the four corners of the lot but omitted to stake out any intermediate changes in direction of those Lines. In this case the relation of the property line to the curb ranged from eleven feet an one side to four feet on the other, thus making the Northerly lot Tine a parabola or uneven curve and not the straight Line he indicated by his placement of corner lot line stakes. He provided no intermediate points at all in that Tine. We Gave included in this submission a letter from the surveyor indicating the accuracy of this statement. With no intermediate points to indicate something other than a straight lot line, the ATTACHMENT ~~6 contractor struck a line from lot corner to lot corner and set the front corner of the home on that chord. Since the home was not designed to follow the lot line ,but rather move away from it, only that Northwesterly corner intrudes into the easement by some 3.S feet and gradually decreases to zero encroachment in a length of eight feet. The variance request therefore is to allow a triangular portion of the two story building, of approximately fourteen square feet, to intrude into the easement as shown on the ILC. We feel that the request meets the criteria necessary to qualify for such a variance in that it is surrounded on three sides by other homes within its subdivision and only faces Kinnikinick road on the Northerly side and therefore has no effect on other excisting or potential uses and structures is the area. We feel that it would qualify, as a hardship as in its present state to take down a seventeen hundred square foot home and garage would be an extreme solution to the problem. We feel that since this error was occasioned by an omission by the surveyor for the entire project and that the hardship was imposed upon us by a party employed to prevent just such a happening and was not a willful or knowing act on our part, that the hardship of knocking down the building or removing one of its outside walls would be an extreme punishment for another entity's error. In addition it should be noted that an additional hardship would occur to the purchaser of the home who has plans to close on the home in early December. I would also like to refer to a similar case in which the Board reacted favorably to a variance request caused by a surveyors error in laying out an incorrect elevation far a building in East Vail and thereby caused that building to exceed the required height restriction by two feet. Additionally we believe that the encroachment is of a minor nature and the granting the variance would have no effect on ligh# and air , distribution of population, transportation, traffic facilities, utilities and public safety. We also feel that the variance request is within the spirit of Vaii's comprehensive plan. It should be noted that since the building's garage door faces a Westerly interior street, the side is question is actually a side yard and not a front yard. In most similar . single family subdivisions the side yard requirement would. only be fifteen feet and therefore the preseat condition would not be an encroachment. I enclose the following: 1) Faur copies of the II.C indicating the encroachment 2} Four copies of a letter from Inter Mountain Engineering indicating the facts of this issue. 3) Four copies of the Architects statement regarding same. 4} Four copies of over all site plans, specific site plans as well as elevations and floor pleas. S) Four copies of the variance application 6) The required fee for the application Respectfully submitted, Innsbruck Meadows Development, Inc. By: Robert Borne, Pres. • DRAFT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 27, 1995 Minutes MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: . Bob Armour Tom Moorhead Greg Arnsden Mike Mollica Greg Moffet Jim C~arnutte Henry Pratt Lauren Waterton Jeff Bowen Randy Stouder Dalian Williams George Ruther Kevin Deighan {1 hour late} Judy Rodriguez Public Hearing 2:Oa p.rn. The meeting was called to order by Bob Armour at 2:Ob Kevin Deighan was not present. Mike Mollica asked for a Commission discussion and vote on the VA temporary tent in Lionshead. Randy Stouder stated that the VA temporary tent is made of vinyl rather than canvas and felt the PEC should review the change in fabric. He said there would also be rough log siding on the lowerportion of the tent. He asked the Commission to confirm that the material is appropriate. He was looking for the Commission to decide on whether the term should be changed. Bob Armour said we now have a new tent with different material. Jack Hunn said the current tent was not portable, however, the fabric is of the same quality. Dalton Williams had a problem with the rough wood siding and with the fabric. He stated that it looked like an old beat up shed. Last year's canvas was OK. Dalton said to put back what was approved, the size, construction etc. Jack Hunn said the new location was approved. Dalton Williams said the approved tent was a roll up and this new system, precludes that. VA is modifying an approval. He is not in favor of approving this change. Jack Hunn said the rough siding gave a western look character and was why it was chosen. Randy Stouder also added that staff recommended the rough siding far a western look. Greg Moffet asked if the same material from last year was still available. Jack Hunn suggested going with sample 3 rather than switch manufacturers. Jack Hunn requested going through one year looking like it does. They did make a mistake by putting the shiny side out, instead of the dull side. Sample 1 was fast years fabric and sample two Is this years, with the exception that the shiny side mistakenly was put on the outside and can't be turned inside out. Dalton Williams said sample 3 is acceptable. Greg Moffet moved that the tent fabric be submitted to the DRB, with a recommendation to change to sample 3 and use the rough siding this year. Greg Amsden seconded the motion. ~ . The vote was 5-1, with Dalton Williams opposed, because the wood siding is not in the same taste as the rest of Lionshead. ~ . A request #or a setback variance to allow for a residence under construction to encroach into the front setback located at 2850 KinnickinnicklLot 6, Innsbruck Meadows Subdivision. Applicant: Am. Bros. Development Inc., represented by Bob Borne Planner: George Ruther Greg Amsden abstained from this item. George Ruther gave an overview of the request and stated that in the staff's opinion, Criteria A2 and Bi had not been met and staff is recommending denial. Bob Borne, the applicant, expressed embarrassment and gave an apology for this error. He stated that he has been doing this type of work far 35 years and this is the first time a surveyor has done something like this. Bab Borne mentioned that he has established a new procedure in his company because of this error. He explained that his company would request a preliminary ILC everytime a foundation was located near a setback line. He feels with this new procedure, a mistake like this can be avoided in the future. This is a result of an error in the surveying techniq~le. The hardship of taking down the building is extreme and the punishment does not fit the crime. Bob Armour asked if the spacing between the buildings would be compromised. Bob Borne said the lot fines are imaginary and it would not compromise anything. George Ruther asked if the building was pushed back, would it not encroach into the required building separation. Bob Borne said no. Henry Pratt recommended denial, because he thought there may be a grant of special privilege. Dalton Williams recommended denial because ofi a special privilege. He stated that Bob Borne is in the business and should not make mistakes Nke this. • Mike Mnllica stated we are all human and mistakes happen. Jeff Bowen had nothing to add. Greg Moffet recommended granting a variance with conditions as listed in the memo. Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes ]November 27, 1995 2 Bob Armour noted that a letter that Bob Borne sent was now in the packet. Bob Armour said a preliminary ILC adds another step in the already long process . He sees no harm in this building being 3.5' in the setback and he is in favor of it. .leff Bowen made motion for denial. Dalton Williams seconded the motion. Dalton Williams asked if he missed something similar that had been previously been approved during meetings in the past.. Dalton said his concerns were that in his 6 years on the Commission they made someone take a roof off for a similar situation. Bob Armour reminded the Commisioners that there is a motion an the floor and discussion should have been taken up in the worksession. George Ruther mentioned the Musyl residence and the Michael Lauterbach residence on Sandstone were similar situations where surveying errors caused buildings to be non- conforming, however, the PEC had granted a variance. Dalton Williams said that errors and omission insurance should cover this loss. Bnb Borne said with regard to the Musyl residence, the surveyor made a 2.5' error in height. The Board granted this variance. He stated that the home (Unit 6, Innsbruck Meadows} is sold and the owners want to move in. It cannot be moved. Bob Armour reminded Bob Borne that there is an appeals procedure after the PEC vote. Dalton Williams asked the staff if there is any such thing as a penalty to the surveyor because of this error. George Ruther said he is not aware of any way for the Tawn to penalize the surveyor. The vote was 3 in favor of denial and 2 opposed far denial. Mike Mollica stated that Bob Borne had t0 days to appeal to Town Council regarding the PEC vote of denial. .] Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes November 27,1995 INNSBRUCK MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT, INC. P.O. BOX 4205 . VAIL ,COLORADO 81657 303~47G-5263 Town of Vail Town Council Nov. 27, 1995 Re: Variance request Innsbruck Building 6 Honorable Ladies and Gentlemen, I am writing this letter in support of the appeal to Council that I have requested be placed on the Council agenda of Dec. 5, 1995. This appeal is based upon the rejection of a variance request by the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail , with regard to a 3.5 foot front yard setback encroachment . • I would like to start by reciting the general facts. Innsbruck Meadows is a multi family development in which I amsnvolved and is located on Kinnikinick Road in the Inter Mountain section of Vail. The project which has nineteen dwelling units in fourteen buildings, provides four type 3 employee housing units, the first of which is under construction and is sold to a full time Vail resident and employee. The project has also provided , as part of its previous approval an underground storm sewer system, curb and gutter along Kinnikinick road and a 20 foot pedestrian easement with a planned bicycle or walking path along its entire length. During the construction process of one of the early units in the project, the developer requested of the project surveyor, a stake out of the lot lines of the above lot and more importantly the boundary between the lot and the front yard) pedestrian and utility easement which has been previously discussed. The surveyor, by his own letter which accompanies this request, acknowledges that he staked out only the corners of the property and did not place any . intermediate stakes along that line even though the line was an arc and had three changes of direction in that line. When the foundation contractor set the foundation he assumed the line in question was straight, as indicated by the surveyor and he set the corner of the building on that line and built the foundation accordingly and which resulted in an encroachment of a triangle with a maximum depth of 3. S feet reducing to zero in the length of 8 feet. I respectfully submit that this error in the survey was inadvertent an his part and certainly was not an intended act on the part of the developer. I firmly believe that a surveyor is an entity that one has the right to believe in and follow the guidelines that he sets. In this case he made an error and most certainly, we as developers made the ultimate mistake as obviously the buck stops with us. I therefore offer the fact that we are ultimately wrong, but being human, sometimes make mistakes . We therefore, due to the following reasons, respectfully request your consideration of the following: 1) Our error was based upon the previous work of a professional who had been hired specifically to locate where or where not the building corner had to be and we had to assume this information provided was correct ar why than should we hire such a professional. 2) We acknowledge that we erred but we ask who, other than us has been harmed by the act. 3) We had no gain to obtain by placing the building into the setback and now stand to suffer many thousands of dollars in damages if either we are unable to deliver the sold unit to its purchaser ion a timely basis ar we are required to reconstruct or tear down the building. 4) We offer to more than make up for the fourteen square feet of encroachment into the pedestrian easement by increasing that easement by one hundred square feet at the intersections of Kinnikinick and Bellflower and at the intersection of Kinnikinick and Basingale, where we believe the space is far more useful. We also propose to add two eight foot Colorado Spruce trees to that above mentioned corner to screen the encroachment. We have aslo secured the approval of Upper Eagle Consolidated Utility system of the encroachment. I believe that it is time to assess if the punishment of removal fits the crime, even if we disntiss the fact that the error was caused by a professional that we are entitled to believe in. I ask who is harmed ? I ask that this issue be assessed on a common sense approach. Is this project which is and has been obviously good for all concerned ,required to face a law suit from a purchaser who has contracted with us in good faith and to whom we will no longer be able to . deliver what we are obliged to do? Does common sense dictate that a resident of Vail, who has provided many goad things in the Town of Vail, be severely penalized for an admitted error that has no value to him and has no negative effects upon any part of the community? I also respectfully submit that this issue has been addressed on at least three occasions during the past year and in each case the Planning and Environmental Commission has granted the request for such a variance due to a surveying error. I fully understand that precedent is not a reason for approval of a new request such as this one is but in the hopes that you ladies and gentlemen of the Council do take these previous events into consideration I submit the following • similar variances that were granted and the similarities that make this request more understandable. A) A residence in East Vail... The applicant sought and obtained a two & one half foot foot variance in the overall height of the building due to an error in a bench mark set by the surveyor. b) A project under construction on Sandstone Road received a change in building envelope location and a utility easement vacation since the structure was built in the wrong location due to a surveying error. As you can see ,each of the above events have a distinct similarity to what happened in this case. All of the above were decided based upon an analysis of the cause, the lack of damage to any other outside party and to the relationship of the admitted error to the punishment. As previously stated , I fully understand that the ultimate responsibility lies within us but I respectfully submit that some mitigation which benefits the Town is more appropriate than demolition or cutting of a corner of a virtually completed structure is more appropriate. I greatly appreciate your consideration of the facts outlined herein. Respectfully, 1 ~° 6 Innsbruck Meadows Development, Inc. n U 'OWN OF PAIL 75 South Frontage Road i Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney DATE: December 1, 1995 RE: Proposed Development for the International Wing Off ce of the Town Attorney On August 9, 1983 there was an agreement reached between Lodge Properties ("LPI") and the Town of Vail ("Town") (Exhibit A). 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 CC1 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 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 Tawn 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 LPI. This matter was scheduled for consideration by the Planning and Environmen#a! 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 10th 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 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). ~,~~ RECYCLED PAPER .. ..,.~ ...~sr-`r's.y,.,..~~st ' ~ ~ ~,t~•..tc.X ~.f3 83 ' ~ 7'1tJ :~ AC3!{L•'I:AIl: '!.' i:n Lercvti J ii I.n Luis ~ daY a!' v,..-. - ' l~1~ urrQ l~uLwc:Ci1 tho Lodgtt PrnnartiiQ~;, Znc• ,. n Cr,lorrLdo C:csrpc,r:~Lion, ("'!'!io Cc~rl~ur:~tion"} ar]d i!]e Town oi' Ya3.I, :~• Colorado k:unicilral Curporai.ion, - Y riECITAX,S • 1. The: Cax'poration is the Orvt]ex aY ccrtz}:in reAl prroperty and imprpvc- .ment5 Ipcatod thaxoon which are `cal.l.ectively knpwn a6 th.e Lodgc.at Vail ("The l,,adga" } . Being morn particulnrxy dcccribed on the attached Exhik~i'L' "J1" e.ntl containing 2.090 ss.axes. ~ ' 2. Thc3 I,,odgc is located within the Carnu}crcial Coxe 1 Zane Distx-ict uS the Town of Va3.l. 3, A di.sputo has rs.risen bctweeu the, Corporation and the Tawn ub` . to ~vl]ether Zha xvning ordinances of the Town wvuxd allow the addition of 39 spew nccon~rr}odatian units and one dwelling unit { cvllect3,vely reSc~rred to A6 "Units" ~ t0 tl]e Lodge'. •' 4. Tl]o dispute xelatos i:a whcthax cextn~,n v~ the dwe~.l3.n~ units the Lodge Apartments Condominiums located on a. pare] oS air spacsr • ~~=c, the real property owricd by 'the Lodge . .1.s attx•ibut.ablt: to ~tihc: land own<~+d by tl]~ Carparazion itself. 5. T7]e parties now wash to compromise and settle a.11. ditS'erances which rcrnain bcLween thorn. XI AGREEMENT NOSY T}iERE FORE, the parties ~.gxee as xt~llows 7,. '1'!~c p:,_rties :7,gres that the desssity central seeti.an a:C ~:hc:~ z,bninG~ ~rd•ina.riee Sor Commercial Core S shall riot prc7hib~ t the Lodge rx'om •bui 1di rye. ha Una,ts . 2. F3ei'orc the Ladgo shall proceed with tho col~stz-uetion or t)ie Ut]i.i:; L• shall, be required t+~ comply wi'Ch a].1~ the appi'opxiate ardinn.nccs oi' tt1+~ awn and oUtai.n permission Srotn Chia a.n,~z•ag.ri.s}te boa~:dG n.nd commissions of ]e Tawn attc2 further abtai.n all xequired a.nd ne'ces;st~.ry permits. ~ t:c~u xd t~hQ 7~oQgc~ go i'orwaxd wiili` ti]c co`nstructioi] oi' thr~ Units ] t, Doll be fus•t}yer retlua.reci to const.z•iset' expanded coni'erenc~_, ar]d meeti.r7g raarn •ilii.i.cs 9.:] t!]o Lnd~e yo that when suds expsir]sion is cor»I?3e~e the Y.,acJl;e gxhibit A 4 ... ,.~ f.1J v~~~~ti.Jn t.utud a:unP~. l,•711:1~ t~ltt,1 11H~iel.jil~f !'ue/lll FitJlil:C: WAY{1.511 Iri 1.11." ~.O;J,1i) , ~~oo ~'~:c: i. ~ n s~.xr.,, niorc3 ctr J.ccra:a nS whivli ~~nc: z•onm shat 7. ,c1~~~ ~.st i n at l~n.-,:'L ' G,~00~ scl~iurv .~cr.•t mUi•a ox• lrfi~;. , 4. TI~e corriaraLion shall nat ].nstltute ar-y legal actin ugainsC t.1sc~ Tr,wn eonccsi•riing ~.ny of the clisputod issues rant Sarth herc:in._ '!'he Lode Uy cnterinl; into this A~recmcnt dAVS not wal.va i.Cs rights t:o rc:quasL' an udc3~i:i.anq: six accomrnadat;ion ~unzts nnr tlot~s the Town waive its right to oppose such requost, ~ n • IN, ~5'ZTNF.SS W1iEREOT'~ tho parties have signal this Agreement i,his f r day aS 1983. , • THE LOI}Gl~ SyI30PERTxES , INC. yL'`E~mu Drragex', Jr. • V.ic~re~Gideszt . TOti~N OF VAI L ' .,~' A Calorudo ?aunici~al Gox'pnxB.Lion ., ftiC2iaard' Caplan. ,'Z'awri Manages: `?`i", . .. - __ .. ..-... -.. ...~.w.. ... _. ._. A. ~'v.n..w.Ma. .. hiTNUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING mrtESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1985 3o P.Ai. . On Tuesday, August 2, 1983, a regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Herman Staufer Paul Johnston Chuck Anderson* Bill Wilto, Mayor Pro--Tem Rod Slifer, Mayor ' Ran Todd Gail Wahrlich* ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Caplan, Town B4anager* Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney * (arrived late) The first item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance #27, Series of 1983, an ordinance making it illegal to obtain control over any stolen thing of Value. Larry Eskwith stated that this Ordinance makes it illegal to knowingly retain stolen property. Paul Johnston made a motion to approve Ordinance r~27 and Ron Todd seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously and the ordinance was ordered published in full. The next item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance #28, Series of 1983, an ordinance amending chapter 10.080 impoundment of vehicles. Larry Eskwith stated that the words "by auction" have been stricken from this Ordinance, which allows the Town to enter into a contract with an organiza- tion who will salvage the cars and the Town will not first have to offer the cars at an auction. Herman Staufer made a motion to approve Ordinance n2$ and Chuck Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously and the ordinance was ordered published in full. The next item of the agenda was the .first reading of Ordinance ','29, Series of 19$3, an ordinance repealing sections 17.26.060 (C) 4 and 17.26.060~(C) 5, " lating to condominium conversion projects independently metering utilities. . .rry Eskwith stated this ordinance eliminates the need for individual metering when units are converted into condominiums. Ron Todd made a motion to approve Ordinance #29 and Chuck Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously and the ordinance was ordered published in full. There was no citizen participation. The next item on the agenda was continued discussion of proposed speed dip on West Gore Creek Drive. All Weis presented the Council with additional. signatures supporting the speed dips. Ellen Knox stated she was in favor of the humps, but that they should be marked clearly. Larry'Lichliter also stated he was in favor of speed bumps. Stan Berryman presented to the, Council his views against the speed bumps. H.e stated they would be a drainage problem, damage the heavy equipment, would increase the Town's liability and would be expensive to install. After discussion $ill • Wilto made a motion to install three speed dips on West Gore Creek Drive. Ron Todd amended the motion to install "at least three" speed dips on West Gore Greek Drive. Herman 5taufer Seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. Exhibit B ~ITNUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL M)JETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 2 , 1983 7:30 P.M. ...e next item on the agenda was the appeal of Vail Associates Snowmaking Prajec' Pettey Patten presented the proposal to the Gouncil, He stated this is an application for a Conditional Use Permit which had been called up by the Council due to concerns over minimum stream flow. There has been discussion with Vail Associates, the Forest Service and the Planning Staff, The Forest Service and Flanning staff statistics showed that minimum stream flow would be protected. The Planning Department recommended approval with these conditions. A) Meter Gald Peak, LionsHead and New Facility, B) Review the data at the end of 1 year to assure VA is .not exceeding to water use causing the stream flow to go below minimum. After much discussion Ron Todd made a motion for approval•of a temporary conditional use permit of Vail Associates Snowmaking pump house for the Phase I portion of the work, This approval should be for a 1 year period at the end of which time we will review the facts and with the stipulation VA install meters. The snowmaking should be monitored close, and with the conditional direction that the communication that is currently going on between the TOV and VA and the Forest Service continue sa that we can have some sort of ongoing idea what impact snowmaking is occurring on the creek. Seconded by Chuck Anderson. Bab Parker stated that he could not live with this motion as stated, VA is investing too much money to risk having the permit removed far whatever -mason in one year, Tt was agreed that Larry Eakwith would get together .th Vail Associates (Bab Parker) to draft a document which reflects Ron Todd's motion. Ron Todd restated his motion to read: Appaval of a conditional use permit for Vail Associates snowmaking pump house conditional upon an annual review as relates to minimum stream flow for Goxe Creek to be reviewed by Tawn of Vail, Forest Service, Vail Associates and the Water District, That VA will install a meter to monitor flows and again on the condition that there be ongoing dialogue between the Town, Forest Service, Vail Associates and the Water Iistrict. Chuck Aderson seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. The next item on the agenda was approval of an agreement relating to the Lodge at Vail air rights, harry Eskwith presented the matter to the Council. A motion was made by Bill Wilto for the Town Manager to execute this agreement. Second by Ron Todd. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. The next item was approval of vacation of drainage easement of Lot 16, Glenlyon subdivision. Pettey Patten gave the report to the Council and expressed his approval. This is just a formality to .abandon this drainage easement. Sill Wilto made a motion to approve the vacation of drainage easement of Lot 16, Glenlyon sibdivision. Seconded by Herman Staufer, Chuck Anderson stained from giving his vote due to the fact he had a conflict of interest. btotion approved. • Under Town Manager Report, Mr. Caplan asked the Council whether the following Tuesdays work session should be cancelled due to the Jerry Ford Golf Tournament. The Gouncil agreed unanimously not to meet. There was no Town Attorney Report. As there was no further lousiness the meeting was.ad~ourned at 9:00 P,M. Respec ly submitted, r .~ /~ '.. F~odney E .513 ya3~ ATTEST. W ' y"'~wr Pamela A. Brandmeyer Town Clerk ~~ The next item is approval of an agreement relating to the Lodge at Vail air rights. Mr. Eskwith. Thanks Mr. Mayor. To give some background on this issue the Lodge at Vail came in pursuant to the urban design guidelines and applied for some redevelopment of the Lodge itself, and that redevelopment was to include 34 additional units, almost of all of them except one accommodation units under one dwelling. The staff reviewed the request and denied the request on the basis that the zoning, particularly the density section of the Commercial Core One Zone District prohibited the addition of those new units. I then was informed by Jim Bailey of the law firm of Cawkins, Kramer and Grimshaw (firm name?) who represents the Lodge as well as Jay Peterson who also represents the Lodge, that in fact something unusual happened in 1972 which to them indicated that the densities hadn't been built out at the Lodge. This occurred prior to the time we had our zoning ordinances in place and what happened is that the owners of the property on which the Lodge is built deeded some property to the Lodge and they also deeded by meets and bounds a parcel of air rights over the Lodge to the Lodge Apartment Condominiums. The Lodge Apartment Condominiums built in that air parcel and their claim to me was that the units which were built in that air parcel could-not be attributed to the Lodge itself because it was a separate parcel under different ownership. They provided me with brief, cited a lot of law. I then proceeded to research the law myself in some detail, including talking to the National Institute of Municipal Law Offices, the Colorado Municipal League and a woman who lectures on air rights, the name of Geraca Goldhammer(?) from Hyland Park. My feeling after discussing the issue with all those people and researching it myself is that while I didn't think Mr. Bailey and Mr. Peterson were entirely correct in their assumption, Z felt it was a legally debatable and arguable dispute and of course I brought that up to the Town's attention and we've discussed it in some detail. The Council asked me to draft a possible settlement agreement for consideration tonight which would provide that in order to.forego the necessity of.a law suit with the Lodge at Vail, that we would accede to their being allowed to build those certain accommodation units and dwelling units so long as they did certain things for the Town. One of the chief things they would do for the Town if this agreement were entered into, is as a part of the redevelopment build and refurbish convention space in the Lodge and that convention space would provide for at least 7,400 sq. ft. in total and that 6,000 sq. ft. would have to be contained within one room, so it would have one large convention room in the Lodge which would handle that 6,000 sq. ft. Both parties agreed to forego a law suit. The Lodge agreed to comply with all the zoning requirements of that Zone . district as well as all the requirements of the submittal under the Urban Design Guidelines. I think its important to note for the Town Council that if the Council enters into this .agreement and compromises this issue, it means that the Lodge would have a site containing 2.090 acres and that site would allow additional units than the units they are proposing to build now. They would be entitled to six additional units. The Town by entering into this Exhibit C agreement, pursuant to the agreement does not waive its right to contest those additional. units, nor does the Lodge waive its right to come in at a future date to ask for those units. T've been assured informally by representatives of the Lodge that they have no intention ofi building those units but I think it s. important for the Town Council to know that they are not precluded from doing that by this agreement. T'd be glad to answer any questions from the Council or from the members of the audience. Larry is this a unique situation as far as this subdivision by air rights within our community? Larry: The exact situation at the Lodge Inn to the best of my knowledge and its based on research because Z went over to Land Title and started pulling condominium declarations like crazy, the only condominium association that T know of that's positioning a solid black parcel over a lodge that's under separate ownership but connected to that Lodge is the Lodge at Vail, before zoning, before zoning, that's right that occurred before zoning. But I think to that this whole theory necessitates and has necessitated a review on my part of our density control section because Z think when the Colorado statute relating to air rights, and that's what their theory, the Lodge's theory is based on, a statute in the State of Colorado. It state that air can be conveyed in parcels, that a parcel of air rights is entitled to all the same considerations as any other parcel of real estate. When you read that statute in conjunction with our ordinance it raises some not so palatable possibilities that T think need to be addressed and I'm in the process of addressing that now and hope to have an amended ordinance for your consideration at your next meeting, hopefully or the meeting thereafter, As soon as possible because T think it has to be considered. Any questions from the Council? Any questions from the floor, from Jay? {could not hear short response} If there are no discussion or any take is a motion authorizing the agreement, if there are no changes Motion by Bill Wilt o, second by Ran comments T think all it would Town Manager to execute this or other questions. I j • Any further discussion? Tf not, all in favor vote saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. c. MEMORANDUM T0: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 6, 1983 SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a request for an exterior alteration and modification for the Lodge at Vail containing lodge rooms, retail space, conference space and a deluxe dwelling suite. The proposal includes modifications to the "Lodge Plaza" adjacent to Founders' Plaza and to the parking lflt on the west side and additional storage space on the parking lot level on the north side of the Lodge South building. Applicants: Lodge at Vail and the Lodge South Condominium Association REQUEST: LJ The request is to add 34 new luxury accommodation units and one luxury dwelling unit containing approximately 30,000 square feet along with new plaza level commercial space containing approximately 3,600 square feet, additional conference space, and a ski storage room to the Lodge at Vaii. In addition, new storage space for the condominiums i~ being proposed for the Lodge South building. Other modifications are a new gate house on the west, reversing the auto circu- lation into th.e parking lot, and a new entry court. Over on the mountain side, the parking lot would be expanded and new stairs added for skiers to get to the ski lift chairs. The east plaza would be redesigned to complement Founder's Plaza. At the Lodge Plaza there would be a temporary canvas pavi7lion removable during the winter. The new International wing would contain additional conference space, lodge rooms, one luxury dwelling unit and commercial space on the plaza Ievel. BACKGROUND On Jury 25, T983, the two restaurant expansions were approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Approved were a 730 square foot expansion to the Salt Lick restaurant to be renamed the Wildflower and a 375 foot expansion to 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 maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with ids mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The commercial Core I district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses. The district regulations in accordance with the Vail Village Urban Design Exhibit D Page 2 i0/5/83 Lada,. ~: Vail ;. and Design Considerations prescribe site development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the village. - _ The Community Development Department considers that the ~praposai is in conformance with the purpose of the zone district. The Lodge at Vail is the anchor for Vai] Village and needs to be .upgraded to insure the quality of Vail Viilage and the community. Without a strong heart, the Village will suffer. The Community Development Department feels that the long and short term success of V~ai] Village is partially based on a quality Lodge at Vail. VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN #22 Pocket park. Screen fence to close off alleyway tgate required) and continue streetscape. Pocket park with benches, planters; snow storage in winter. 4 Service vehicle zone aptiona]. The proposal contains an improved area of iandsc~aping and walk between the Lazier Arcade building and the Lodge at~ Vail. Closing off the area is riot possible because~it is afire lane. #i4 Viilage Plaza. Feature area paving treatment, central focal paint visible from Gore Creek Drive. Major sand farm/planting in N.W. for quiet corner, ~ with evergreen screen planting to define west edge. Wail street stairs, ~ with mid-level jog landing, opens entry area to Lazier Arcade shops. This proposal actually expands the Founders' Plaza area and makes this into an exciting space within Uail Viilage. VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR TNE.NEW INTERNATIONAL WING Pedestrianization: By having new commerciaT~shops at the new plaza level, the potential for pedes- trianization has increased by the propose]. Vehicle Penetration: There will be no change by this proposal. 5treetscaRe Framework: As noted in the app]icatian, there is no direct frontage by the proposal on a public street. The proposed shops and plaza do add to the pedestrian experienc in Vail Vil]age. .. Street Enclosure: The proposed International wing would have generally two heights, one fourth ~~ the width of the enclosed space it faces and one sixth the width of the enclosed space it faces. Street Edge: The irregular facades proposed for the shops and restaurants me~:t this element of the design considerations. Building ~ieight: The proposed height of the new International wing from the new plaza ranges from ~24 feet to 33 feet. At the pedestrian plaza 7eve1 the proposal meets the intent of the height section of the Design Considerations. From the south side, the height would be 35 feet and 43 feet. The Community Development Department fees that the heights proposed meet the intent of the Design Considerations and provide for the mix in building heights as perceived in Vail Vi]lage. Views: There are no designated view corridors in the area of the proposal. Service and Delivery: 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'~Piaza) as shown on the sun/shade study. One concern of the staff is the amount of space between One Vaii Place and the Inter- ~ational wing on the third floor. The staff considers that the top floor be shifted five or six feet to the west to open the space between buildings. For the proposed storage at the Lodge South, the Community Development Department feels that there are no negative impacts. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS Parking: At the time of a building permit, the. applicable parking fees for each type of use will be required. Architectural and Landscape Considerations: The proposal complies with the intent of the Design Considerations. Detailed design issues will be more specifically discussed at the Design Review Board meeting. Fire Department Considerations: A new fire hydrant will be necessary along the south side near the new International wing because of the new residential and commercial space. • i ~ , v~ v/ ., .. L.vt~ 'L U i, r u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~\ 1 FECOM~lENDATION: ' The Community Development Department recommends apprvva] of the Lodge at"Vail request for 34 new lodge roams, a luxury dwelling unit, new commercial space and new storage space. In addition, we consider the site improvement very positive for the Lodge at Vaii~and Vail Vil]age. As noted previously-in the memorandum, the Lodge at Vail is the anchor for Vail Village. The.Cammunity Development Department feels the upgrading and expansion is positive for Vail~Village and the community. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSON ACTION ON OCTOBER l0, 1983 Donovan moved and Viele seconded to deny the application with the exception of the Lodge South proposal with the main reason being the closeness of the Lodge property to One Vail Flace. The vote to deny was 5-0. _` ~~ • t+ F^ ,- .- PEC -2- 10/' ~S He added that he had told the applicant that the board would act on the proposal today, and had recommended denial with the suggestion that the applicant apply again in November. Donovan moved and Piper seconded to deny the aoplication for lack of information. The vote was 5-O in favor of denial, i 3. A request for an exterior alteration to the Viilac~e Center pro,iect at 122 s East Meadow Drive to~ add a new retai] addition on the east end, to revise the entrance to Tovmaker's Trail, to construct additions to the retail shops, and to construct a new sidewalk along .the north side of the pro,7ect. Applicant: Fred Hibberd " Corcoran read a letter from the applicant asking to table this item until lQ/24. Vieie moved and Piper seconded to table until the meeting of October 24.,Vote was 5-O. 4. A request for a conditional use permit in Com~ercial Core II in order to construct, commercial storage units in the lower level of the Concert.Hall Plaza., Applicant: Eagle Valley Investments, Inc. The applicant asked to table until October 24.' Donovan moved and Corcoran seconded " to table the item until October 24. The vote was 5-O in favor of tabling. 5. Are nest for an exterior alteration for the Lo eat Vail to add a ew win q q to the hotel between One Vail Place and the Lq_dge containing lodge rooms, retail _ space, conference space and a deluxe suite. //t~he proposal inc]udes modifications to the "Lodge Plaza" adiacent to Founders' Pi~aza and to the parking floc on the west side and additional storage space on the1..street level on the ~brth side, of the Lodge South building. Applicant: Lodge at Vail and Lad South Condo Association. " Dick Ryan reviewed the memo. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, showed a model and asked if the PEC could vote first on~just the storage for the Lodge South, Alan Tafoya, representing Ruoff Partnerships, the architect, showed where the storage in the parking area of Lodge South would go. He added that there would be 16 lockers, which would be minimized with doors facing into the garage. The garage would be " . kept an open ventilated garage. Trout moved and Viele seconded to approve the storage lockers. The vote was 5~0. Jay then discussed the model and its different aspects: the new entry and rearranged . parking Tat, ski storage and employee cafeteria, and the new International suite. Viele asked what would happen to the 2 spruce trees next to the entrance when the parking lot was rearranged, and Peterson responded that they would attempt to move the trees to another location. Concern was expressed about the closeness of the International wing to One Vail Place. Peterson said that One Vail'Place overhung its property line. He added that the architects had considered moving the top story of the International wing to the west, and were dissatisifed with the appearance. Viele asked if there were technical problems with the buildings so close together, and Peterson said that they would have to use special glass Trout said that he had difficulty with having only two feet between the buildings. He suggested taking space from the other end.of the wing and move the whole building. He approved the rest of the proposal. .Martha Fritzlen, a resident of One Vail Place stated that everyone who lived in CCI was concerned about narrow alleyways and all of their problems. Donovan stated that she felt that the building had been designed Exhibiti E s _ ~ PEC -3- 2 . ~ i83 to conform to the Urban Design Plan, but that not everyone .felt that the Urban Design Guide Plan was goad, and that the building was being designed with the UDCP in mind, whether or not it worked, She added that it appeared that the commercial section was drawing people to a dead end. Donovan .felt that in the summer the plaza would be a ]iveiy place, but not in winter. She was concerned about the heights and conf about how they were figured. Peterson said that on the plaza side, 60°v of the roo f were below 35 feet, in the back, the roof was 48 feet at the highest point. F!e fait that if the guidelines were specific, they would need a variance. More discussion followed concerning the height of the east end of the International wing. Donavan pointed out that the proposal should deal with the whole complex, not just with 6 rooms (regarding the closeness of the building to One Vail Place). Piper liked the new entry, but felt that flowers in the middle of the parking lot would not be visible when cars were parked there. .He agreed with Donovan concerning the closeness of the building to One Vail Place, and wondered why the roof garden had to be a certain size. Ron Grant, .representing Warren Piatner, architect, stated that he and his coworkers • had worked with a large model and had tried the top floor of the new wing in several different places, but that they were dissatisfied with any but the ]ovation shown.• Piper said that he would like to see other solutions. Peterson showed elevations with the high roof six feet west. Viele liked the entrance, but fe]t that it was unfortunate that the landscaping were to be changed so that the cars had become more visible. He agreed with Donovan regarding softening of the plaza, and felt that he could not go along with a two foot alleyway. Corcoran agreed with the concerns expressed, except that he did not have any problem with the feeling of the dead end in 'the plaza. Patten pointed out that One Vaii Place had built to and over their property ]ine with an agreement with the Lodge. Martha fritzlen said that when the Schoeb~r building was built, they did the same with the west side. The Gore Creek Plaza buildi~~~y ~ was completely blacked on the west side, ~~, Donovan moved and Viele seconded to deny the application with the exception of the Lodge South proposal with the main reason the closeness of the new wing addition to One Vaii place. The vote to deny was 5-0. Jim Morgan arrived. 6. Request for a setback variance in a Primar~-/Secondary zone district to construct a garage with a deck on tap at Lot 4. ~]Ock 3, Intermountain. Applicant: £]iza- beth J. Kuehn Jim Sayre showed plans and elevations and explained that the staff recommended approval because there would be no detrimental effect on the adjoining properties, there was a physical hardship, and there were other variances granted for the construction of garages in West Vail. Kuehn, the applicant, explained that to place the garage • elsewhere would also change the appearance of the house. Viele moved and Piper seconded to apprnve the request per the staff memo. Vote was 6-.0. 1 ~..• ~~ - i( Vv J Donovan felt the commercial space request was excessive, that the commercial space should be an accessory to the lodging. Nforgan asked Eskwith whether or not he felt the applicant was asking for a'change in the substance, and Eskwith replied that he was questioning the same thing. He stated that the Town had the inherent power to change the SDD but was not obligated to. Patten stated that this was more of a rezoning with the reshaping of the SDD, and that it would be a recommendation to the Town Council who would have to pass an ordinance. Morgan liked the mall, but found the magnitude personally offensive, Piper felt that this was a major change to the original 5DD~ because of the addition of the Amoco site and the request for additiona] GRFA. He felt that there was a strong impact on Vail Raad. He felt the view corridor was a personal opinion, and also felt that on approaching the 4-way one observed the immediate area or the area nearby. Ne felt that the landscaped corner was good, and had no problem with the parking spaces proposed, and wanted to see the conditional uses remain d5 is. Ryan stated that the. staff did their best to listen to the old tapes and to get information from them. He felt that there were several positive aspects of the propasaT, but was basically concerned with the magnitude, The staff felt that the Amoco site should be rezoned to PA and there .should be an amendment to the SDD, specifically for phases IV & V, that they were not just minor changes. The staff did not recommend changing to permitted uses the conditional uses .listed, they did recommend deleting the section concerning distance between buildings, as this had been eliminated from alT other SDD's, did not recommend item D, using average height, did not recommend item E, changing the GRFA and allowing additional floor area for commercial type use, but needed to know which rules would apply. Ryan said the staff approved the amount of parking. Piper suggested there be a vote on the proposal with the exception of the allowance of changing conditional uses to permitted uses. Morgan moved and Donavan seconded to deny the request based on the magnitude and scale. The vote was .4 in favor of denial - 1 (Trout) against denial, with ~ierc~ . abstaining. 3. A reouest for an exterior alteration for the Lodge at Vail to add a new wing to the hotel between One Vail Place and the Lodge. The proposa] includes modifications to the "Lodge Plaza" adjacent to the Founders' Plaza and to the parking lot on the west side. Dick Ryan stated that when the Lodge at Vail went to the Town Council they were asked to return to PEC with their changes. Jay Peterson said that the applicant was now proposing 14 feet between the International Wing and One Vail Place, by taking 5 inches out of each room. He listed distances between buildings in Vail and stated that "this~is not an entrance to anything." Patten disagreed, saying that it was a major walkway. After more discussion, Donovan moved and Morgan seconded to approve per staff recommendation. The vote was 4 in favor with Ranson and Trout abstaining,. • ~/4 Exhibit F l~~C~i11ED ~Q~ ~ ~ ]~ Jacobs C~iASE FRick K~EINkOPf November 9, 1995 & YIA FACSIMILE and US MAIL KE~~Ey Mayor Osterfoss and Town Council Attn: Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead 75 South Frontage Road «c Vail, Colorado 81657 Al10RN£YS AT ~AIV Re: Appeal Lodge at Vail, Proposed Interna#ional Wing Gentlemen: AnN B. Feick 892.4422 On behalf of our client, Luanne C. Wells, an adjacent property owner, we • hereby appeal to the Vail Town Council.the November 1, 1995 decision of the 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 objectives and prior conditions of approval. On behalf of Ms. Wells, we also object 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 prnnnsed deve~or.*x??nt. INdEPENdENCE PiA~A 1050 17Tk Sr, SUITE 1500 • DENVER, CO~ 80265 3o3-b85.4800 Fnx 303.685.48b9 ABF/kb rc~3nc•nai-t Very truly yours, rACOBS CHASE FRICK KLEINKOPF & I{ELLEY LLC P`-, T-/C 1 G~ Ann B. Frick I~O~SON ENTERI~INMENT November 7, i 995 Mayor Osterfoss and Town Counei! Attn: Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 FAX: {970) 479-2157 .~EC~jv~a ~rov ~ 3 ;~ RE: Appeal Lodge at Vail, International Wing, as proposed. Dear Tom: As an adjacent property owner, I hereby appeal to the Vail Tawn Council the November 1, 1995, decision of the Town of Vail Design Review Board regarding the Lodge at Vail, International Wing. I wish the Tawn 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 the owner of Units 52~ and 52S in the Lodge at Vail and am adversely affected by the proposal. Sincerely. t~~ ~~~ Sybi1~4. Robson 345 North Maple Drive Suite 208 Beverly Hills, CA 9f?210 (31 Q) 246-4688 34s HaRr~l MAFEE E}RIVE S U I T E~ 2 0 E BEYfREY HlEES, CA 40210 TEE:13I0124d~4688 FAR: I)lU1 2418882 • • • rti ~i~t~ ~~tta¢ ~~iu ~a-ck.~. ~, i1~I~2~ 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: International Wing at The Lodge at Vail I am the owner of Condoninium 363-365 at the Lodge. My wife Sydney, our four sons, and I spend a good deal of time 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 of these facilities • should be planned with consideration for all affected parties and the citizenry as a whole. i .. Ms. Susan Connelly Town of Vail Page 2 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, the requirements that commercial use be limited to plaza levels, underground parking to be located at the site, required passage ways between adjacent structures, etc. To the extent possible, views over, and privacy of, existing 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 submit these comments with the hope that they will be of assistance to you in the course of your consideration of the proposed International Wing. Very truly yours, ~'' ~~ ~~ Stanley S. Shuman enclosure a Sil ~jiEt~ ~Ii.:~.....~ K G : ~~ ~ ~' ~xhr lack, ~. ~.1ItiI~~ 1{ • ~! • 4 S CA-~~k~J FAX {970) X179-~57 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 the November 1st, 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 363365 in the Lodge at Vail and am adversely affected by the proposal as set forth in my letter of October 17th, 1995, copy enclosed. I very much appreciate your consideration. Very truly yours, /~ ff /~ ,~% ~~ C2~~ `~~- ~ ' ' ';'~ „vim. . - enclosure ~ c~.tr~ a.~ s ~rr~,b ~ a ~ Cis rcn.~:.-Q ~ s ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ j Chapter 18.39 n LJ r~ U GOLDEN PEAK SKI BASEIRECREATION DISTRICT Sections: 18.39.010 Purpose. 18.39.030 Permitted Uses. 18.39.050 Conditional uses. 18.39.070 Accessary uses. 0.09~L [~reHilv;tEd usa:,: 18.39.080 Location of business activity. 18.39.090 Development plan required. 18.39.110 Development plan -Contents. 18.39.120 fles'tg~ Der-elopment Standards 1 Cri#eria for evaluation. 18.39.130 Lot area. 18.39.150 Setbacks. 18.39.170 Height. 18.39.180 Density control. 18.39.190 Site coverage. i 8.39.210 Landscaping and site development. 18.39.230 , Parking. 18.39.010 Purpose. The Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District is intended to provide for the base facilities necessary to operate the ski mountain and to allow multi-family residential dwellings as a secondary use if certain criteria are met. In addition, summer recreational uses and facilities •are encouraged to achieve multi-seasonal use of some of the facilities and provide for efficient use of the facilities. (Ord.38 (19$3) § 1.} 18.39.030 Permitted uses. A. The following uses shall be permitted within the main base lodge building in the Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District: 1. Ski lockerslemployee locker rooms. 2. Ski school and ski patrol facilities. 3. Lift ticket sales. ~. Tennis pro shop. 5. Ski repair, rental, sales and accessories. 6. Fjestaurant/barlsnack barlcandy sales. 7. Summer seasonal ~'ev.n :.f ~'~recreational, cultural and educational programs and offices. 8. ttlleeting rooms far owner use and community-oriented organizations. 9. [n~ury prevention and rehabilitation facilities far owners' use. 10. Basket rental 11. Special community events. B. Retail and%meeting room space limitation. 1. Rail sales space, wta~ .t b;. ~. ~~ed 3r asnditter~~.l :;3;:, in the first two flew~rs shall be limited to a maximum of fifteen percent of the non-residential gross sc~.+are footage of the main base lodge building. Under Section 18,39.434, retail shall be defined as tennis pro shop, candy safes, ski repairlrental sales, a~essories and clothing, a~ basket rental, ski lockers and storage for the p~!lhlic. 2. Meeting rooms shall be limited to a maximum of #fve ten .percent of the non- re~dential gross square footage of the main building. C. Multi-fam~y dwelling units within the main base lodge building if the following requirements are met: 1. Tt~e dwelling units shall be a secondary use within the main base lodge building if ti~:y meet the following criteria: ~ No residential use on ground level. t~ Visual impacts such as surface parking for the dwelling units shall be minimized by providing at least forty percent of the required parking within the main base lodge building or iln an attached parking s#ructure. c~ The maximum gross residential floor area (GRFA) devoted to dwelling units sha#I not exceed thirty percent of the total gross square footage of the main ~~ base lodge building. 2. More acting on multi-family dwelling units, the Planning and Environmental C.mmmission shall consider the following factors in regard thereto:. ~ Relationship and impacts of the use on development objectives of the town. b~. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks, and recreational facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. ~,. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking area. d`. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. 3. Tlr~e Planning and Environmental Camrnission shall make the findings set forth in Section 18.60.060 B before permitting multi-family units within the main base lodge building. D. Permitted uses within the a~c~r~e-rp Children's Ski School building: 1. Year-round child care and children's ski school and appurtenant recreational facilities and programs. 2. Citildren's ski school services and programs. 3. C'®mmunity events and programs. 4. Sr~mmer recreational, cultural and educational programs. E. The follou~r"~ng uses shall be permitted outside the main l~tilElit~g base lodge and Children"s Ski School buildings as shown on the approved development plan: 1. Ski trails, slopes and lifts; 2 2. Snowmaking facilities; 3. fps and skier dropoff; 4. Surface parking lot; 5. S~+ci racing facilities; 6. Public parks, tennis and volleyball courts, and playing fields, playgrounds; 7. Voter-treatment and storage facilities buildings; 8. ~11li~untain storage buildings; 9. Ski school activities; 10. Speciai community events; 1 i . Fcaod and beverage service; ~ 2, inadoor and outdoor ski storage. (Ord.28 {1y988} § 1: Ord. 6 (1988) § is Ord. 38 (1988} § 1. 18.39A50 Goi~~aditional uses. A. The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Golden Peak Ski ' BaselRe~reation District, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordare+ce with the provisions of Chapter 18.fi0: 1. Recreation room/minor arcade. 2. Rddition ar expansion of storage buildings for mountain equipment. 3. Summer outdoor storage for mountain equipment. 4. Redevelopment of water storage extraction and treatment facilities. 5. Redevelopment of ski racing facilities. 6. Redevelopment of public parks, playgrounds. • 7. Summer seasonal community offices and programs. 8. additions or expansions of public or private parking structures or spaces. be'g"e~~'•avrad u~V~~~:.~~19~'i'F7;-~l£~FF. 9. Seasonal structures to accommodate athletic, cultural, or educational activities. 10. Fliedevelopment of ski lifts and tows. 11. Food and beverage cart vending. 12. Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310. 13. Type 111 EHU as defined in Section 18.57.060; 14. ~'ype IV EHU as defined in Section 18.57.070. 75. Public, private orquasi-public clubs. ,.~}~,,A R. Tl:e ~~„-~~r~~a#rato,~ ~l-[i:fl ra cl impaet-~-as-pub U~ tm~-eer~itter ~ I uaes: i`t3`oaooa fur ~n~: f~l.i. .~.. • i'~bHe-ar~pr: ~ ~.tc ~u°l~it~g-stiu3t~e3: ~. future-reereatierra~-t~~tl fire-repo~t~:-;~.ll as~s~e~~ t~ [e-#eiFewsrg itc1 I~ .,,.,,,~~~p~ ~ A[i['ty~ 1~t+` GY~V 14vV [[ u~~~ r:~U~33&l•t~ i:~~';i:EF~''~ b, P. ~ ~i tc ~zc the in~aet: . ;,. f to tf [E proposed-aetie~t: . ~ Lat~aveerr-sfrefiE-tsrtY: a~-IGr'[g tee-ases3f tE~[~ ~:i~a~t: • ~. l; ~ti~ t83ttitift~-#rE~ ;~:~~',.;mc,~E~4~:,"r~~ 3f tl'[3 • ryr-epo3~l. . . .ins G# the ~•a~o~€: {~-~`J2) ~ ~3: ©r~3-#{~-98[J) ~ :0: ©rd. ~#{~-9~0) ~ ' : flrd. 30+33} ~ :.) 3 18.39.070 Accessory Uses . The foflov~+ing accessory uses steal! be permitted in the Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District: A. Accessory uses customarily incidental to permitted and conditional uses and necessary for the operation thereof. B. Home occupations, subject to the issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.58.130 through 18.x8.190. {Ord. 38 (1883) § 1.} 7 L.7.tJ.T.07'v ~~~.~,.u T"e # tl;e zafre~: • t~ :r~}fiEr }th~~i I~{~,.~rsG}v#tHi~1 ~.3~.8$F}8~:,.~ r ~. i~~~~L :. l`~~`ir u~Y'Yl iYi GILTGT~~i.~.u sr~fa'ei}i#te., ,:::1~.r `h+...~ ~a~ N~ui~iiiii~V~~ vv1+LIV~t.~ r~ , , T. ! N~~f IY4i y~ w~~~ Y [~~. ~1~.,q'kq~.V-~L-I Ip~14i JI {]Mr~J• ./• ~..~~~VVV vaJ4~lIY11141 y11~ ~. u~ ~I:t ~I&19: .4~at~; ~i~~; ~sE ~~# 3;~aei#ie.~lly p~rt~r+tted ~r ~3F:.':tis~al ir. thia ~s;e--'~t~: .} 18.39.080 f_ocation ofi business activity. A. Ap offices and retail sales conducted in the Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building except for approved special events and food and beverage vending. {Ord. 21 {1986} § 2: Ord. 38 (1983) § 1.) 18.39.090 Development plan required. A. T© ensure the unified development, the protection of the natural environment, the compatibility with the surrounding area and to assure that development in the Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District will meet the intent of the district, a development plan shall be required. B. The proposed development plan shall be in accordance with Section 18.39.110 and shall be submitted by the developer to the zoning administrator, who shall re#er it to the planning and Environmental Commission, which steal! consider the pPan at a regularly scheduled meeting. A report of the Planning and Environmental Commission stating its findings and recommendations shall be transmitted to the town council for approval in accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code. C. The approved development platy shall be used as the principal guide for all development within the Golden Peak Ski BaselRecreation District. D. Amendments to the approved development plan which do notes-ita ~~ alter the basic latent and character of the approved development plan may be approved by the zoning administrator or by the Planning and • Environmental Commission at a regularly scheduled public hearing in accordance wlify the provisions of Section 18.66.060. E. ~EeeF~h~se-e€~ye appr The development plan and any subsequent aryaendments thereto shall require the approval of the design review board in 4 accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.54 of the Municipal Code prior to the commencement of site preparation. (Ord. 38 (19$3) § 1.) • n f.~J 1$.38.110 Development Plan -Contents .., lvr,a'~+s-l~et-E+t~tted #~ il~~ #~iE~t+~g: y'~. 1~ei~g-e~e:,ts upen-~+tf:c E~~y r~}', (~` ~,~p I • Illy 4~./~~{.{,.~ ~iti..~ I 411 ,.J Jf~I ViC..~VY~ t~l,,.IV t 11;tI~1.Jt undu3 >v~r-dtir~ ~F :,. '.:1~ ~~ ~E~ M`~ z . [~&ti9r~ 3f c ~}~, "~~ ~ -rl ~n~ ~~t~ ~:.;::I~ ~-3 fl~r,~~11~;n-sfld v. .~k-det~i~~ 1.131t~ ~, al~~t°~ .,,rt:., .. f ti ;. F~ stettri`e('~ ~. ~-rnasstn~ a;EdEl ~ rr~A,~etc~:e~~}-a~rd 4 : ~.F ;,i ~1 ~e-~i~:E(s}-,,~,,f,,,,,,ros~a#s: ,~,,tt~ TJ. ©t~l"rt[{LfOC~t~iTGa"fivi {~l~"'dP'v~L+}~1~~~~ ~j(~ .{ I J, CAy~IL41 ~ trip/~~ a~i~1 `1 V 1 `I,, ((~~ }pp ~p 41 V} ~/• ~ vt I~.,~Vpv L~ `~{~ry`,~+.~• [T ^}~ }-. .B~Vrly~ nnJlt4 141 r1 w,` C+.~.pJ V~4pn lj'v Y ltrt eAp~~Li ~+ tly~J CiJ`1 ~~.~.~~~4{~4la.i #Ilpt3~+ t~ tl,u .A~~ IVl/Q1{ar1,S (1.1/1.1 VII Ii~il IS1411,~ \!f RAi1~Q770T~~N 41 ~~ s~ae#~ec, inns-ttr4rLil:, r~-ali principal ~.tur,:,;,, ~aefr ;.~, !'c ~ea:l;:;~ui faeiit#~ :Ci, piv+~`j'aY1 ~Yi~"$~ fps-:,w.-4;~E w: ~:r~eway~s-a~t1 a`# :.t: s~t ~4rl:i~~ ~g seas: 3. .F~-pre#i~i~ary~~r:d , ~,~,I~ r{.E~t~,sn{~~Fi~1~. ~a;..; i ,cf; ~~~aJ#}s p~,~,f~}v~gvptt .1 '~iJtl ~o~yl ,~E #Y ~tCA{G,7 LU ~JV •v~G~`1^YL ~G1~.V Yv.~' Gl{IM V,sVwlr~-~v ~~+M it1114 ,..~ VItV ~L'3J :,t,Jl~ $.~ ~~lt~VJ1 r~8r~ea~,rl7ali#~~3, L1~y~lE ~~thy, Cl~l..tl3, i~yw~e~sy#~'~3r~,p~i µ~,{g1.g~'`wl :d .oaf p}~p~~yf fE{:.-t~~":~:~ys, ~ ~~ eyt"cCr c1 ~1{:~~t~::'.:~} ~• f F~il l,il ,l?~~ N4„M'I IC~. ,~r~.I 1~C'.Z L7II~~J, ~v VT1V 11V, [4.1M ,iV~ ~ii.IJ, Lat M Jv~a1V 11~` x FL 81~! <t` l~-e~tlals E.,~ f,..r:, Ir: ,.,u#~ie~-det..l1 to ~eter~it~. fla,,r~ krL~, ~r Ems' emu, i~t-~r~-~ reu'latM°rg . ioca#tens-of usc3--vv+;,'~i- bu' - ~~ 1~~ ~.1 s~# t::~. pr •• yy.. .~".~. w• pia. r'~i1~.~. ~.~. ~...rt yr t.~F. I ur./1Y1 G11L Fil clri3'#@t fiG ~~.,ift fi~ee~a~is ; !a' ~',ei lift up$rLdir~w;, p;~;~ia~ rlee~ea~r31 fa'~i#itiE~ wqd pa~ei#itiE:, tL 3eeE~ ;::.:.~.;~e ,~.r.r. ,. I a.~~Cill ~~ rd~: The following information and materials shall be submitted with an application for a proposed development plan. Certain submittal requirements may be waived or modified by the Director of the Department of Community Development if it is demonstrated ghat the material to be waived or modified is not applicable to the reviiew criteria or that other practical solutions have been reached. A. Applica~aon form and filing fee. 5 B. A written statement describing the project including information an the nature of the development proposed, proposed uses, and phasing plans. C. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing conditions of the property to be included in the development plan, including the location of improvements, existing contours, natural features, existing vegetation, wa#er courses, and perimeter property lines of the parcel. D. A title report, including schedules A and B. E. Plans depicting existing conditions of the parcei (site plan, floor plans, elevations, etc.), if applicable. F. A complete zoning analysis of the existing and proposed deveiapment including a square footage analysis of ail proposed uses, parking spaces, etc. G. A site plan at a scale not smaller than 1" = 20', showing the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, all principal site development features, vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems and proposed contours and drainage plans. H. Building elevations, sections and floor plans at a scale not smaller than 118" = ~', in sufficient detail to determine floor. area, circulation, location of uses and scale and appearance of the proposed development. 1. A vicinity plan showing existing and proposed improvements !n relation to alt adjacent properties at a scale not smaller than 1" = 5El'. J, Photo overlays andlar other acceptable visual techniques for demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed development on public and private property in the vicinity of the proposed deveiapment pian. K. An architectural or massing mode[ at a scale sufficient to depict the proposed development in relationship to existing development on the site and on adjacent parcels. l_. A Landscape plan at a scale not smaller than 1" = 20', showing existing landscape features to be retained and removed, proposed landscaping and other site development features such as recreation facilities, paths and traits, plazas, walkways and water features. M. An Environmental impact Report in accordance with Chapter 18.56, unless waived by Section 18.56.Q3q. N, Any add[#ional information or material as deemed necessary by the Director of the Community Development Department. With the exception of the model, four complete copies of the above information shall be submitted at the #ime of the application. When a model is required, it shall be submitted a minimum of two weeks prior to the first formal review of the Planning and Environmental Commission. At the discretion of the Director of Cotnmunlty Development, reduced copies in 8.5" x 11"format of ail of the above information and additional copies for distribution to the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council may be required. 18.39.120 fles~t Development Standards/Criteria for evaluation. fEr t>;~ Dlri ~,.._'^__._,::~;, Di~~ii i..eh ~f the :~t eit~e~-aye :.r . , ti~~.t ~ Nt~aet#c;,,l sJ ~ ~ubFi~e-ir,~,,,..:,t itiaw l:.~rae~tieveeef: ~'1. T. .: ~, ~e~:: i~~ :,ryas-vv+~er~ t`~ict--B~.,:,:.,`1ee~#is~t b • ~J • ~t-l~vu ~~t t:, a r~~id.. ~f b~tl ,r~a~•~~. Tr:, r~t"r~ ~ttwt ~., I~a~l: €.L., ~# I/ull~i~-e~r~r~~u;r~ ~,~~ ~:u3t-..e I~#seaped; s~r~e-pt'$t~l:.-f ~E Ly 1~c~ar~-€e~€uf~,:. ~3 tl.~~~:.~' su~r~dsi:g ~r~ EE'. T:~i~ :gay r:,w u to€€~r ~e;~,e _j =~r~:.. ---` ---- #3 ~flF~t?.:,tEij 3E~i`a4o ~ pl•uN~~o~ uSC-[r3~ t. ~~:. 19 t8t'FIi3 of~tell;~,~~Y&::y, ~~~~ua#~ 1i~i-~rii,, a+~-peHtrt+ar', ::~~:~s ~.r~-e~e~ j 8~8bfar ~...~tn•9t„r~~. 1 ~,., ^: ~;.~,~ `$r tlx:, type-e€-tr:..€f~`~~-gefiE:,..t°el; tr.l~~1'~-i•~tB E~IflstE~ef£~t6F'~ 3~;3@~,.ic,.~l..t3 #I'..gi .~ ..~, 8'E4's~, :'..Ion; e~-e3~rs~s~t ..e .t. al. C'~Mt~ l~zwl ~3.L~~ f~:;,r'~.s rs~i~ed--i#~-fkre~...u . `..., ts.,ed sihafF-~.:::~~r~~~ 13r~od e-:`~~t„e~,•t:, is t3-ba u~e~fJ~ res~~virr;t~l ~~ ~. 1-'t~rri.,~-,ol o~e~ ~peee--f+~~r;~s--efj-epti::u~' pr-e~~l~,,..:,. ,.~ ...,.. ..f f~;~t-~:~es . QR1.3. t, v .ri~, . ~ie't ., ~~1:, r , , ~'~ Ill iC ffll.1 v'~":"f ~~:+u J~f~,~~ Y~ , .~. ... a, ~v.~ , ~. ~r in tcrrna 3f-tl~:: ]~1~~~:, ~~;-itsit,r~l:.,`-a~il:o;. ~.;~ , r. i''4ede3tri:.~ tra~'t.: i : ~el~:w ~f : Ezi~a;x$,un, ~a+~~l,;~,,~~, a°ees3 tE p;,ir;t~ :.# r LL~``~ti~;, ; ~1. pIEQRQlT7~i ~~ E~.~'a~' .~f. ~.a~,J'~r'~r"i&te~'~i~u` S Lv 17GT7:S,ty, ~~????OY'YSi ~I ", , f-f. ~~,,l ~~#{{~ 1- ~t~l Elt~ 1::,,1-:,~R~M3-@~: p~rr~83c~, {YNE;E, ~~~~~f~tE~3fle~, :,'..l:t~bfiitt'¢; ;!~~TflGt+l V1~ tiiV rive The foltawving criteria shall be used as the principal means far evaluating a proposed development plan. It shaft be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed development plan complies with 'ail applicable design criteria. 1. wilding design with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing and orientation is compatible with the site, adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood, 2. t~ildings, improvements, uses and activities are designed and located to ~oduce a functional development plan responsive to the site, the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a whole, 3. @~pen space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed tm preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opfportunities fior access and use by the public, provide adequate buffering I~tween the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, atne integrated with existing open space and recreation areas. 4. ;1~, pedestrian and vehicular circulation sys#em designed to provide safe, eciient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development. 5. Eervironmental impacts resulting from the proposal have been identified in the project's Environmental Impact Report, if not waived, and all necessary mii•'tigating measures are implemented as a part of the proposed development pl,~n. 6. C',~mpliance with The Vall Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. 7 i 8.39.130 Lot area. The minimum lot or site area shall be forty acres of site area, at feast one acre of which shall be buildable area. (Ord 83 (1983) §1.) i8.39.i~0 Setbacks. fn the Golden Peak Ski 13aselRecreatlan District, front, side, rear and stream setbacks . shall be as indicated on the approved development plan. (Qrd. 38 (1983} § 1.) 18.39.170 Height. f-~e~-a~at v; .~.arts~;! rc~`; #~-Height ~ ti~irty i~rL flat: Up to sixty percent of the building (building coverage area) may be built to a height of thirty-five feet, or Tess, ldo more than forty percent of the building (building coverage area) may be higher than thirty-five feet, but not higher than forty feet. Towers, spires, cupolas, chimneys, flagpoles, and similar architectural features not useable as gross residential floor area may extend above the height limit a distance of not more than twenty-five percent of the height limit nor more than fifteen feet. (Ord. 3l3 (1983) § 1.) 18.39.180 Density Control. Total density shall not exceed one dwelling unit per eight acres of site area. (Ord. 38 (1983} § 1.} ,,, 18.39.190 Site coverage. Site coverage shall be as shown on tEie approved development plan. (ord. 38 (1983} § 1.) 18.39.2'10 Landscaping and site development. Landscaping requirements shall be as shown on the approved development plan. All areas within the area(s}~of disturbance in the landscape plan not occupied by build#ng, ground level decks or patios, or parking shall be landscaped. (Ord. 38 (1983) § 1.) 18.39.230 Parking Plan and Program £3## ~tr~9 ~"cll Ire ~:r~ieled ;r `J: r~~ sPeei#teel Parking Plan and Management Program shall be as shown on and described 1n the approved development plan. f:levaryone~imisicibass.wpd ~J + I ~ • I . MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING December 19, 1995 7:30 P.M. Are ular meetin of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesda ,December 19, 1995, in g g Y the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT Robert W. Armour, Mayor Sybill Navas, .Mayor Pro-Tem Pau! Johnston Kevin Foley Michael Jewett Rob Ford MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney Anne Wright an behalf of the Town Clerk The first item an the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joel Heath of the Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau encouraged the Town Council to help find alternative sites for volleybakl courts, in light of the fact that the existing courts at Golden Peak are proposed to be removed with the redevelopment. Second on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1995, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 1$.39 {Ski BaselRecreation Zone District} of the Vail Municipal Code and approving the Development Plan for the Goiden Peak Ski Base, 485 Vail Valley Drive/Track F, Vail Village 5th Filing, and Tract B, Vail Village 7th Filing. Jim Curnutte explained that the ordinance was the same as the Council reviewed at their last meeting with the exception of one change on page 5, paragraph D. Staff recommended passage of this ordinance wi#h this change. Dave Corbin on behalf of the applicant stated he had reviewed the change and had no objection to that revision. Jim Lamont representing the East Village Homeowners Association stated that the change met their needs. Sybill Navas made a motion to pass Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1995 on second reading with a second by Mike Jewett. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-4. At this time Fred Wyman, a resident of All Seasons Condominiums approached the podium and expressed his concern with the parking. Bob Armour informed him that that matter would be addressed a little later in the meeting. Jim Curnutte and Lauren Waterton initiated discussions regarding the Developer's Agreement, including agreements on cost sharing, the transfer of easements, the establishment ofi a neighborhood assessment committee, etc. Bob McLaurin talked about the realignment of Vail Valley Drive before any decision is to be made on the Manor Vail pedestrian crosswalk. Paul Johnston stated he thought the sidewalk along the west side of Vail Valley Drive should be heated. Several neighboring residents and condominiums expressed their concerns about the following: lighting of Vail Valley Drive and the pedestrian walkways heating and definition {color) of sidewalks in the areas maintenance of the area 1 Vail Tnwn Council &vening Mectin~ Minutes l2f 19195 A clean copy of the recommended Conditions of Approval was provided and the items were discussed. Bob Armour said that VA would like to amend the parking structure portion of the Golden Peak operational management plan. VA has requested that 25 spaces be added to tier one. Various neighboring residents and condominiums voiced their concern about additional traffic and congestion on Vai! Valley Drive and that perhaps some type of electronic signing could be utilized. Dave Corbin thought the children's center sidewalk and parking lot design in condition No. 3 was taken care of, however after same discussion he agreed that it should stay as written. Sybill Navas moved to approve the .Golden Peak Redevelopment Plan with the conditions recommended by staff, as modified at the meeting, with a second by Rob Ford. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-0. Third on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1995, an ordinance amending Section 18.24.050 {B} of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, setting forth new procedures for eliminating any existing dwelling unit or accommodation unit or any portion thereof above the second floor in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II Zone Districts. George Ruther presented this ordinance. Staff believes that an amendment should be made to Section 18.24.050 (B) to include text requiring a Conditional Use Permit for any use which eliminates any existing dwelling or accommodation unit or any portion thereof above the second floor, similar to that which is required for uses on the second floor. Staff believes this amendment should be made to create consistency within the Zoning Code and to help carry out the intention of the Permitted and Conditional Use Sections of the Commercial Core I and Commercial Core 11 Zone Districts. A copy of the Planning and Environmental Commission memorandum dated November 27, 1995 has been provided for reference. On November 27, 1995, the Town of Vail Community Development Department presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission, the above described amendment. After a lengthy discussion, a motion to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to Town Council was made. The Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-2 in favor of the recommendation. Planning Commission members Greg Amsden and Dalton Williams voted in opposition. Staff feels the proposed amendment to Section 18.24.050 {B), will create consistency within the Zoning Cade and will help carry out the intention of the Permitted and Conditional Use Sections of the Commercial Core l and Commercial Core 11 Zone Districts. Staff believes it is the intention of the Zoning Code to permit dwelling or accommodation units to be eliminated above the second floor in the Commercial Core !and Commercial Core !I Zone Districts to allow for another Permitted or Conditional Use, subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Chapter 18.60 of the Zoning Code. The proposed amendment will ensure that a request to combine or enlarge existing accommodation or dwelling units into one or more units will be reviewed by the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission. Sybill Navas made a motion to pass Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1995 on frst reading with a second by Kevin Foley. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-0. Forth on the agenda was the Appointment of Special Election Judges. The list of judges is Karen Morter, Mary Caster, Holiday Cole, Jeannie Tilkmeier and Pam Story as alternate. Paul Johnston made a motion to approve the list of Election Judges, with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-0. Fifth on the agenda was a Town Council call-up of a PEC approved Conditional Use Permit to allow fora "quasi-public club" in the Commercial Core I Zone District, to be located on the 3rd and 4th floors of the Serrano's Building, located at 298 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Glen Heelan, representing Margaretta B. Parks. At the December 5, 1995 Town Counci! meeting the Town Council members approved a motion to call-up the PEC approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow far a "quasi-public club" to be located on the 3rd and 4th floors of the 5errano's Building. The Conditional Use Permit request was approved by the PEC an November 27, 1995, by a vote of 5-1. . Tom Moorhead and Jim Curnutte presented this call-up. Glen Heelan was present on behalf of the applicant, Margaretta 6. Parks. VaiS Taiwn Council8veniug Meeting Mumles 12/19195 t ~ Paul Johnston asked Mr. Heelan how many members he anticipated to be in this club. Mr. Heelan said approximately 400. Paul Johnson asked how Mr. Heelan anticipated these members would access the club. Mr. Heelan replied by walking from the parking structure. Paul expressed his concerns that the club members would be dropped off on Hanson Ranch Road, creating more traffic and congestion in that area. Michael Jewett asked why the change in plans for the use of this building from residential and office space on the top two floors to the current plans. Mr. Heelan said it was looked into and this was a needed service for Vail guests and that use seemed to make better sense. Jim Lamont voiced his concern regarding policy issues. He stated that staff was biased against dwelling units as opposed to accommodation units and commercial uses. Bab Armour asked about the horizontal zoning and Tom Moorhead and Jim Curnutte explained the same. Paul Johnston made a motion to overturn the PEC approval of a Conditional Use Permit with a second by Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and the motion failed 2-4, with Kevin Foley, Michael Jewett, Rob Ford and Bob Armour opposed. Kevin Foley then made a motion to uphold the PEC approval of a Conditiona! Use Permit with the two staff conditions. Michael Jewett seconded the motion. were two additional PEC conditions which were that Jim Curnutte informed Council there the applicant have only a public liquor license and that the Conditional Use Permit run concurrently with the other approvals that were granted 'in April. Kevin Foley amended his motion to also include these two additional conditions and Michael Jewett seconded the amendment. A vote was taken and passed 4-2, with Paul Johnston and Sybill Navas opposed. Paul Johnston wanted it noted for the record that Hanson Ranch Road is one way going east. Sixth on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLaurin asked Council if they were willing to have an all day retreat on Tuesday, February 27. Council agreed. Bob also asked members of Council to let Anne Wright know if they were interested in attending either the CAST meeting or the CML -Elected Ofificials' Workshop. There being no further business the meeting was adjourn at approximately 10:02 p.m. • Respectfiully submitted, Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: ~Y~~~ Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Anne Wright on behalf of the Town Clerk. ('Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate.) t VaiS Town Council Eveuiug Mceting Minutes 121IH195