Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 Vail Town Council Minutes~~` r MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 7, 1992 7:30 P. M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 7, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vaii Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Shearer Jim Gibson Rob Levine Bob Buckley Tom Steinberg Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Tnwn Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, of which there was none. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda consisting of four items: A. Approval of Minutes of December 3, 1991, and December 17, 1991, evening meeting minutes. B. Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.60.080 - Permit Issuance and Effect of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, and Section 18.62.080 - Permit Issuance and Effect of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance No. 49, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.60, Conditional Use Permits, Section 18.60.020{G)Application -Contents and Chapter 18.62, Variances, Section 18.62.020(F) Application -Information Required; and setting forth details in regard thereto. D. Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 3.52.060 of the Town of Vail investment Policy, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Ostertoss read the titles in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve all items on the Consent Agenda, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. item No. 3 was Ordinance No.1, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance declaring the intention of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, to create a Loeal Improvement District within the boundaries of the Town of Vail for the purpose of converting existing overhead electric facilities to underground locations; adoption of details and specifications therefore. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith reviewed the history of this ordinance. When Tawn Council passed a resolution to proceed with a hearing to obtain input from the property owners in the proposed District, information was reviewed re: original request for formation, associated casts, and the proposed formula for assessment. If it was decided the District should be formed, individual property owners would be formally notified about a separate hearing at which they would be advised of their specific assessment. Larry said, before moving to assessments, the first step was to form the District, and that would be up to the Town Council after hearing public input. Larry stated assessments were not part of the tax bill, but would be issued by the Finance Department of the Town of Vail. The bill could be paid either within thirty {30) days in its entirety, or spread out aver twenty {20) years, according to statute. Peggy Osterfoss asked for public input. Speaking against the ordinance were Jefl Bowen, Roger Tiikemeier, John C. Ohrt, Dr. Steven Thompson, and Tony Reiterson. They agreed the undergrounding would be aesthetically pleasing, but felt the estimated assessments were too high, and they felt everyone who would benefit should pay. Speaking in favor of the concept, but not the economics, was George Lamb. Larry and Greg Hall explained how properties were selected to be part of the proposed District. Greg noted there were four (4) types of property owners in the area: {1) vacant lots, {2) existing residences with underground service connected to an underground primary system, {3) existing residences with underground service connected to an overhead primary system, {4) and properties having overhead service connected #a the overhead primary system. He said of the 42 '~ selected lots, there were actually 73 services or meters, and the cost would be for each meter. Greg explained vacant lots and houses already connected to the underground system did not add cost to the District because the District was picking up only secondary costs. Upon future construction, owners would pay on a per lot basis. Also speaking in favor of formation of the proposed District was Art Abplanalp, speaking far Landis Martin and Jim Schink, residents willing to be included in the District for aesthetic and safety reasons although their lots had no overhead utilities. Greg stated the amount absorbed by Holy Cross would be $70,000, making the total project cost $240,000. Dean Gordon, from Schmueser Gordan Meyer, inc., said his engineering firm had been working with Town staff to define the scope and limits of the District and identify the cost associated with it. He explained if the proposed District was formed at some point in the future, the total cost could never be assessed to the District at a higher figure than what was represented to residents of the District during this public hearing or at subsequent public hearings for individual assessments. As a result, he felt it was necessary to be conservative but realistic in calculating the total estimated cost. He said the $170,000 represented costs in four areas: j1) the actual construction cost of the secondary service lines and the division point between primary service and secondary services, (2) administrative costs, ~3) bond costs, and (4) engineering costs. Holy Cross would be responsible for the transformer; beyond the transformer was secondary service, with costs for calculation of the individual assessments from that point. In response to a citizen request for the Town of Vail to pay for this improvement, the Mayor restated the request had come from the neighborhood. Ron Phillips stated there was no staff advocacy for the project and the staff had resisted getting involved with this because of the extensive time commitment it entailed. Nancy Gibson spoke about the process over the past 2112 years, and her current attempts, along with Dave Rogers, to get recent feedback. She said she realized $2500 could be a hardship to a let of people in the project area, and one of the reasons for approaching the residents about splitting the costs equally was to help defray the high cost same homes would have. Peggy said the first thing to be decided was whether there was interest informing the District. Secondly, they would iron out the fairness and equity issues. A! Weiss, although not involved with this issue at the present time, said he could foresee a future time when forma#ion of other Special Districts would be requested for the same purpose, and he wanted to know, if once a Special District was established by ordinance, there would be recourse for residents or would residents have to accept whatever assessments were set in such other Special Districts. Larry stated if a different form of assessment than had been suggested was selected, it could be incorporated into the next step. Larry advised Council there was a formal step to set a certain date for another hearing, as required by statute. Council agreed to set March 3, 1992, as the date for another public hearing. Notice about that hearing would be prepared and sent to residents as required by statute. Ron Phillips said there were possibly three viable formulas far alternate methods of dividing up the project's cost and suggested Council allow staffi 2-3 weeks to develop those to bring back far discussion. Bob Buckley stated there was a very real hazard with overhead powerlines breaking in the mountains. Rob Levine stated it required more than a simple majority to go forward with this, although he shared Bob's #eelings about the aesthetics and safety concerns. Further, he said he was interested in expanding the District to include some of the lots not included at a different assessed level. Merv felt there was a benefit to be had by all by forming this District, including the vacant lots and #hose who have already undergrounded because of the aesthetic aspect, but he wanted to be able to offer an alternative to fully underground and encapsulate the power lines, not just compress the equipment into above- ground green transformer boxes. Peggy's impression was there was support for undergrounding. The question was about the fairness of the allocation of the casts. Merv Lapin moved Ordinance Nn. 1 be continued until the March 3, 1992, evening meeting, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. A five minute recess was taken. • Item No. 4 was Resolution No. 1, Series of 1992, a resolution designating a public place within the Town ofi 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 Vaii. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 1, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 5 was a Public Hearing commencing a needs assessment for Heritage Cablevision. Mayor Osterfoss explained Council's action was to listen to public input relating to the future needs of the Tawn of Vail cable television system. Larry Eskwith clarified this was the first step in the formal renewal process of the cable franchise agreement with Heritage Cablevision. He emphasized there would be further evaluation of the cable company's performance by the Town. If the Town did not accept the proposal, an administrative hearing would follow, but that was not carte blanche for a municipality to refuse to renew the franchise. Larry stated Heritage had asked the Town to institute the formal renewal process but also asked the Town to pursue informal discussion with them. AI Weiss briefly explained the reasons for his discontent with Heritage Cablevision. Merv Lapin asked Larry what the Town's powers were and what the Town could do in terms of rates or programming under the present franchise agreement with Heritage. Larry said Heritage had the right to impose a 5% increase per year, and with regard to the programming mix, the Town had the right to designate the types of programming the Town wanted broadcast, adding Heritage could change the stations on the cable, but they had to keep generally the same mix approved when the franchise was entered into, and they have done that. There were four (4) specific reasons not to renew the franchise, and these do not have to do with ~~ whether the cable company had raised rates. He spoke briefly about the Federal Cable Television Act of 1983 and pressure Congress was reacting to from cable operators who maintained they were concerned because of the amount 2 ,:. of regulation they felt municipalities were placing on them. The Act deregulated ail municipalities' abilities to have much influence on cable rate structure, and it became much more difficult not to renew a franchise. For municipalities similar to Vail, one of the biggest problems was competition was very limited. In the last franchise agreement, they agreed Vail is in an area known as an area without effective competition, which meant they could no longer raise rates without the permission of the Town except to the extent of 5%. Larry added that was defined by federal law, but in order to prove Vail is an area without effective compet~~on, the Town would have to go through a process which Heritage said was unnecessary as they would stick to the agreed annual 5% increase. Larry stated Council needed to determine if the Town should demand more from Heritage in terms of upgrading the system technically. Merv was particularly exasperated by the fact the Town did not even have the alternative of having free TV due to the mountainous conditions and wanted staff to solicit opinions from E.B. Chester and Jack Crosby. Jim Gibson asked Ron Phillips for an update on competitor who had expressed interest in a franchise in Vail. Ron stated the interested party was asked to bring the Town a proposal but had not. Ron said he believed the reason a proposal was not submitted was because a great amount of the fee for the channels the interested party wanted to put on a separate system were controlled by the same company as Heritage. The price for #hat was more than the interested party felt he could afford for the investment needed for the infrastructure. Rob Levine confirmed that, and emphasized it was not the Town being unwilling to issue a franchise. Jim Gibson recalled this poten#ial franchiser was planning on using a wireless reception and transmission method. Rob recalled that also, but pointed to the expense involved with that, and the potential #ranchisee would still have to buy the service as it originated from TCI. Jim Gibson and Merv agreed the monopoly Heritage had was abusive and should not exist, but Peggy noted the free market just does not exist in this case. Ron felt a replacement program for cable currently buried should be considered because the cable now installed was not technically advanced and was old. Al Weiss asked i# Heritage Cablevision was obliged to produce an audit of their books to the Council. Larry said the Town can ask to review an audit. Larry felt it was Important to get an audit of what the Town had and its quality. Merv Lapin moved these proceedings be oantinued indefinitely. This continuance may include, but shall not be limited to the following: (1) The taking of additional evidence from citizens of the Town, t2) The mailing of appropriate surveys to the citizens of the Town, (3) Obtaining reports from engineers and other consultants relating to past performance of the cable operator under the existing franchise, and helping to identify appropriate future cable-related community needs and interests. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-t). Item No. 6 was an appeal by applican# of a denial by the PEC regarding a request for a Conditional Use Permit far an outdoor dining patio for Russell's Restaurant Deck at The Gallery Building, 228 Bridge Street, a part of Lot A, Block 5, Vail Village First Filing. The applicantlappellant was Ron RileylD.R.R., Inc. Mike Mollica said the proposal was in two phases with the applicant proposing a "winter version" of the dining deck on TOV property, as well as a "summer version." He reviewed a description of the proposed deck use, background information, related policies in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan, criteria and findings, and staff recommendations as fully detailed in the Community Development Department's memo to the PEC dated December 9, 1991. Mike Mollica noted one of the key issues of the project was the narrowing of Bridge Street at the proposed deck site. There was discussion about the specific measurements of various areas on Bridge Street. Mike spoke about three issues staff had with the project: (1) There would be a constriction or narrowing of Bridge Street creating possible pedestrian safety issues, specifically in the summertime, (2) Public Works expressed concerns about s#reet sweeping in the summertime, and (3) Staff had concerns regarding views. Mike said staff recommended denial of the request as they did not feel it had met findings 3 and 4 in the December 9, 1991, memo. Mike said staff discussed an op#ion they . could support, basically the "winter version" of the deck. Staff could support that with two conditions of approval, although the PEC had voted 3-1 #or denial. Mike said staff was very positive about dining decks and understood their economic necessity. The applicant, Ron Riley, addressed the issue of a street constriction, and said he would redesign the deck to avoid problems with the Fire andlor Police Department. He believed the encroachment of the summertime version deck was minor, stressing lower Bridge Street was sterile, and the dining deck would add interest to help the area to come alive. He felt, due to the popularity of outdoor dining, a restaurant was almost required to have a dining area outdoors. He felt his business could no longer survive only during the winter, and he wanted some viability for summer. Patios on Town property were all over, and he felt they were called for in the Master Plan to help bring a street alive through interaction. Rfter further discussion about seating capacities #or the summer and winter versions, Kristan reiterated staff`s position was more than just concern about the constriction and the design of the deck, there was concern about views which would be obstructed by the deck, but she felt it could work. She wanted Council to know this was important, as this was the kind of issue locked for in urban design guidelines and concepts related to the Village regardless of what store or type of business would be in there. Merv Lapin moved to approve the applicant's request and overturn the denial by the PEC based on the findings listed on page 7 of the December 9, 1991, memorandum items 1,2, and 3, that are necessary for a conditional use permit and the conditional use permit be for one year. Further conditions to mee# conditions 1 and 2 from the staff recommendation were the applicant was to be responsible for cleaning the street from the edge of the bridge to the end of his building on a daily basis, such sweeping to be finished by B:QD A.M. the next morning, and snow from the deck would not be cleared onto the adjacent Town right-of-way, preferably, the applicant was to work out arrangements to have snow privately hauled from the sight, and the applicant was to install 2-3 aspens in the planter north of the proposed dining deck. Jim Shearer seconded the mo#ion. The applicant agreed to contribute to general upkeep of the street area, but nosed aspen trees previously planted in the planter north of the proposed deck had died, and asked #or flexibili#y to plant something else 3 ~M equally attractive. Peggy requested the DRB decide that issue, and to look in#o seeing that adequate lighting in the area was addressed. Peggy recalled Merv's motion to overturn the decision by the PEC, with findings and conditions as stated in the staff memo, with a primary additional condition being the deck be approved for ane year on the summer deck and a permanent approval on the winter deck, and the radius of the deck be pulled back 15 feet. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 1 Q:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Margar~' A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST; ~.~~~~~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken aY Dorianne S. Deia G:IMINSJAN7.92 r ~~>~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ z°~ ~~ cs=~~ ~. ~~~~~~'. ~~~y m n.~ ~~, $ '~ ~~ ~~ ~ . ~~ O~ ~~-~ ~ ~. ,~~ ~~~ .~~ . ~ ~~ a ~- p ~~~~ a~^ro~~ ~ ~ d A ~ ~.~ ~ .~ ~ $v ~,} ~ ~ ~~ m ~~ ~~ ° ~ ~- r o~~~m _~ ~ m o o, } omamoeflp $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c p ~, ~L~ •y ~ C 3 _ dmLdp~Q~jC ~ ~ ~~I ~ yd`~~d~3~ H ~ ~ 3 ~ w ~' w d -~ ...._ ~ a._} ~ V a c c ~ '~ 'p_ ~ ~~ v ~~~~~~~o~o ~ o ~ - ~ d ~ d ~`~ ~ t~~'~}°~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c mzy~ d,o a ~ H Fa C_UC~~pC~C_U ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r.. tJU ~ ~C3~• ~~CyO ~ ;~ V ~ ~ao~o'p~p~ D ~ O ~ (~ d , E v „~ m ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ C ~jj:: m w ~-c~ 0 ~ ~C Q ~ ~c~0~0~~~~ ~ p~ ~p '~ ~' ~ ~n U - .«..dOU~C~~iT-~ m 8$ a ~ ~~ m .~ D U ~ ~s MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 21, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 21, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: • ,~ Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Rob Levine Jim Gibson Bnb Buckley Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Tawn Clerk The first item on the agenda was TOV Ten Year Employee Recognition presentations for Mike Vaughan and Martha Raecker. Ron Phillips introduced Mike Vaughan, Fire Department Fire Technician, and presented him with his ten year service award. Mike was thanked for his years of dedicated service to the Town of Vail, and congratulated by Dick Duran. Martha Raecker, Community Relations, was unable to attend the presentation, and would be recognized on February 4, 1992. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Par#icipation, of which there was Wane. Third on the agenda was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Steve Thompson said first reading was on July 1 rz, 1991, and second reading had been overlooked. He Hated the ordinance required annual review, and any changes since first reading were inform, not in substance. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 22 on second reading, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-0. Item No. 4 an the agenda was Resolution No. 24, Series of 1991, a resolution approving wetland mitigation sites in the Tawn of Vail for the Black Lakes Reservoir Expansion Project, with certain conditions. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen reviewed the Community Development Departmen#'s memo to Town Council dated January 7, 1992, and briefly described the project and the resolution, highlighting infiormation outlined in a fetter from Bob Weaver, the wetland consultant for the Vail Valley Consolidated Water District ~VVCWD), dated November 15, i 991, regarding responsibilities the Town would assume by passing this resolution. Additional background information was available in an earlier Community Development Department memo to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated October 14, 1991. Andy noted the resolution included a condition of approval that required the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to review and approve any changesto the flood plain which might be caused by this project. Jim Gibson suggested Todd Oppenheimer make arrangements needed to revitalize the area, and asked if the Rotary could be considered for assistance. Kristan Pritz fielt due to the technical nature of the project, the advice ofi consultants was needed. After brief discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 24, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-0. item No. 5 an the agenda was a hearing to consider the removal of the Booth Creek Local Improvement District from the Rockfall Hazard Map. Larry Eskwith advised the engineer and geologist were not present, and felt the item needed to be continued if they did not arrive. He explained the ordinance for #his issue stated anyone interested in having the hazard map amended could bring in their own experts to report on reasons why the area was safe. The item was continued to February 4, 1992. Item No. 6 on the agenda was a discussion of Weritage Cablevision rate increases. S#an McKinzie spoke at some length about Heritage's desire to work with the Town, explaining they were anon-exclusive franchise operator, and they wanted to better understand the Town's cable needs. We spoke about increased programming costs experienced by Weritage aver the last four years, and annual losses shown by TCI, but noted according to FCC regulations, Weritage was only able to increase ra#es 5°/° per year unless approved otherwise by Council. We said plans were being ~ ~ reviewed for bringing in fiber optics and other upgrades to their system. After discussion about service rates in Vail as opposed to other areas, the level of service in Fast Vail, and general maintenance and equipment oanditions, Jim Gibson expressed concern about the monopoly Heritage holds in Vail. Stan said Heritage was trying to keep costs down, and they welcomed competition. Stan was asked about an exclusive deal Heritage had made with Marriott's Marx Resort, and he explained tfiat that deal was made in terms of hotelslgroups, not individuals/residences. He said over eight units were required in order to receive a bulk ra#e. Jim Gibson asked Stan about acall-in complain-about- cable-TV 800 number he had seen advertised on Channel 4. Stan said that advertisement was backed by networks in support of Bill 512 now under legislation in Congress that would have Heritage and other cable operators having to pay additional fees to networks. Peggy Osterfoss said this franchise renewal discussion would continue over a period of time, and asked Stan to establish credibility about increased programming costs by producing an audited statement for Council review. He agreed to supply audited financial statements to Council, but added the statements would be TCI statements based on statewide figures. Jim Gibson asked far an operating expense report based an Vail figures, but Stan said as of this year, Heritage was fully owned and operated by TCI, they purchased programming on a national level and Heritage received its programming via satellite. Merv Lapin asked how competitive the marketing in Vail could be if the only competitor was TCI, Heritage's own majority owner. Stan only restated it was Heritage's desire to improve its relationship with Vail. Peggy thanked Stan for this educational opportunity and added discussion would be continued. item No. 7 on the agenda was appointment of two Design Review Board members. Ballots having been reviewed, Rob Levine moved to re-appoint George Lamb and Pat Herrington to the vacant two yearterms on the Design Review Board, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-0. There not having been a quorum at the afternoon's work session, Rab Levine moved to continue work session agenda Item No. 5, a discussion re: Pitkin Creek Bond Refinancing, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-D. Steve Barwick asked Council to review his memorandum to Council dated January 17, 1992. The memo outlined details of the failure by Kirkpatrick, Pettis to refinance the 1979 Pitkin Creek Bonds, and why the Town sent the item out for bid again. Four proposals were received, and the capabilitiesladvantagesldisadvantages ofthree ofthe four responding firms were summarized. After discussion about the three firms recommended by Steve, George K. Baum & Company (Kirchner Moore), Coughlin and Company, Inc., and Kirkpatrick, Pettis, Palian, SmithlFirst Interstate Bank, Merv Lapin moved to approve Kirchner Moore conditional upon renegotiation with Kirkpatrick, Pettis, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 4-0. Before adjournment, a special public Council meeting to continue discussion about the East Vail Undergrounding issue was scheduled for Friday, January 24, 1992, at 8:D0 a.m. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Respectfiully submitted, ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minuses taken t}y borianne S. Dein C;hM INSJAN.21 Marg~r'et A. Osterfoss, MayoC~r `j" ~/ 2 ~'r .. MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 4, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, February 4, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tam Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Rvb Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was a TOV Ten Year Employee Recognition presentation. Pam Brandmeyer introduced Martha Raecker, Deputy Town Clerk, and thanked her for the years of dedicated service. Second an the agenda was Citizen Participation, of which there was none. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, #irsf reading, an ordinance repealing and re-enacting Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1992; to provide for the amendmen# of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6 {Vail Village Inn); adopting a revised development plan for Phase IV-A of Special Development District No. fi; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Mollica reviewed the request, detailing background and history, zoning considerations, SDD criteria, and staff recommendations. Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1991, had previously approved Phase IV-A of Special Development Distrlct No. fi. Mike said after staff's detailed analysis of the applicant's request, they concluded the requestfor one additional dwelling unit at 3,100 square feet of additional GRFA was warranted far reasons described on page 9 of the January 13,1992, memo from staff to the PEC. Mike added staff wanted two additional key issues addressed: a provision for a pedestrian connection to the existing sidewalk at the adjacent Gateway Plaza Building and additional landscaping. Lengthy discussion about the proposed free-market dwelling, GRFA issues, parking requirements, rental restrictions, and potential liability problems with the grade change of the sidewalk from the Gateway property followed. Bill Pierce, architect far the applicant, spoke about the substantial upgrade of the building appearance, but added financing the project had been difficult, so the proposed free-market dwelling unit was integral to help finance the project. Josef Staufer said he could not take the financial risk on the project if Council placed any restrictions on the dwelling unit, even though Kristan Pritz felt the unit would only be acceptable to staff with rental restrictions. Larry Eskwith responded to a question about setting precedence with regard to not placing rental restrictions on the unit by noting all SDDS are different, and this was a massive project that already had many res#ricfions. After further discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, on first reading with the following conditions: {a) that ail three employee dwelling units be provided with full kitchens, and that the dwelling units be permanently restricted as employee units, per Section 18.13.080{B){10){b-d); {b) that the applicant provide additional landscaping along the northern property line of the Vail Village Inn, as discussed in Section IV{H) of the January 13, 1992, staff memorandum; {c) that the applicant provide screening of the existing trash compactor located immediately to the north of the Pancake House Building and said screening shall be subject to approval of the DRB; {d) that the applicant provide a pedestrian sidewalk, adjacent to the South Frontage Road, from the Vail Gateway Plaza Building sidewalk to the western boundary of the Vail Village Inn Phase Ill property, to be constructed within five years, at which time the Town of Vail would be required to have a sidewalk extending from the corner of Crossroads property to the western boundary of the VVI Phase III property subject to either cash for the sidewalk or an unconditional letter of credit for the sidewalk; {e) that of the $75,000 which is still due as part of the original agreement for the ski museum relocation, $27,500 be paid at the time of the issuance of the building permit, and the balance of $47,500 be paid either at the closing of the sale of the free-market dwelling unit, or not to exceed two years from the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for any of the accommodation units. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion failed, 3-2, Peggy Osterloss and Tom Steinberg opposed. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, on first reading including ail conditions set forth in Merv's motion with the exception of the sidewalk condition {d), which he #elt should be delayed until such time as the sidewalk could be continued all the way to the VTRC, but with the addition of the condition that staff's recommendation to have the pedestrian connection to the Gateway be completed. Jim Shearer seconded this motion. There was additional discussion about the sidewalk issue, and then a vote on this motion was taken and the motion failed, 3-2, Peggy Osterfoss and Tom Steinberg opposed. Before another motion was made, Tnm Steinberg said he wanted a sidewalk, but not a sidewalk that led nowhere. Further, he agreed with the applicant that it was not their problem, and Gateway should solve the problem there. Peggy Osterfoss then moved to approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, on first reading with the PEC and staff recommendations (January 2i, 1992 staff memo to Council}, and the approval would be based on findings as presented in the staff memo, and that the proposal is in compliance with the elements in the Vail Comprehensive Plan, also with SDD requirements G and A. The motion died far lack of a second. Tom Steinberg moved to use Merv Lapin's original motion but to delete the recommendation that had anything to do with sidewalks, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-1, Peggy Osterfoss opposed. Item No. 4 was Resolution No. 2, Series of 1992, a resolution of the Town Council designating the President's Moliday Weekend, February 15, 16, and 17, 1992, as the 12th Annual Smokeless Weekend, and setting forth details relating thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 2, with a second from Peggy Osterfoss. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. After the note was taken, Tom Steinberg objected to the wording indicating Vail's air pollution was increasing each year. Fle requested the wording be changed to read "air pollution in the Gore Valley has not been improving with each winter season." Merv Lapin then moved that Resolution No. 2, Series of 1992, be reconsidered, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and that motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Merv Lapin moved that Resolution No, 2 be approved with the change as previously noted, with a second from Peggy Osterfass. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. 3, Series of 1992, a resolution opposing the enactment of Senate Bill 101 in the Colorado General: Assembly concerning the change of condominiums from residential to commercial fortax assessmen# purposes. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Tam Steinberg moved to approve Resolution No. 3, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Merv suggested the item receive editorial attention because the issue could have negative effects on this community if condominiums were taxed at the commercial rate. Item No. 6 was the appointment of four Planning and Environmental Commission members. Meru Lapin moved to appoint Diana Donavan, Dalton Williams, Greg Amsden, and Ludwig Kurz to two year terms with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 7 was the appointment of two Art in Public Places Board members. Merv Lapin moved to appoint Laura Nash and Karen Smith to three year terms and that staff be directed to advertise for a third member, and that Roselyn Swig be appointed to a special advisory Board of Directors. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. item No. t3 was the appointment of two Vail Valley Special Events Committee members. Merv Lapin moved to appoint Margie Plath and Ken White to two year terms an the Vail VaNey Special Events Committee. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 9 was Ratification of Articles of Association of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG). Tam Steinberg moved to ratify the Articles, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Q Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: s ~ . •~.t~ `~ Pamela k. grandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Darianne S. veto C:WIINSFEB4.92 2 / t~ • z i MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, February 18, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley Ran Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, of which there was none. Second on the agenda was approval of the minutes of the January 7 and 21, 1992 evening meeting minutes. Merv Lapin moved #o approve the minutes, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 on the agenda was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance repealing and re- enacting Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1991; to provide for the amendment of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6; adapting a revised development plan for Phase IV-A of Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village inn; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Mollica briefly reviewed discussion from first reading and indicated changes and conditions to the ordinance had been made as directed. Additional dialogue followed regarding the underlying public accommodation zoning, the definition of "lodge" (18.D4.210), the expiration of previous approvals, the issue of tearing down this new Phase IV-A to accommodate the final Phase IV accommodation unit development, and the structured parking requirements. it was indicated there was the opportunity far Council to further modify the ordinance at second reading. Josef Staufer reviewed the SDD history of the Vail Village Inn (VVI), and said he hoped Council would not pass the ordinance on second reading i# rental restrictions would be part of the ordinance because he could not risk the large investment involved if there were rental restriction conditions. Additionally, he did not want the Gateway pedestrian connection indicated as a condition of approval, although he said he would take care of it. Bill Pierce spoke about parking concerns, noting the Applicant's parking study showed 30-50 spots were available. He said he felt the Town's parking requirement was too high. Peggy Osterfoss asked how it would be known public parking was available there. Bill said they would furnish ample signage to advertise the fact, but felt "word-of-mouth" would more than adequately spread news of available public parking. He also re-emphasized the VVI's need to build the free market dwelling unit in order to build the additional 14 hotel rooms. Merv Lapin moved to disapprove Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992 on second reading in that it was not in compliance with the parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52 under the Special Development District criteria. Peggy Osterfoss secondedthe motion. Before a vote was taken, Peggy said she wanted it stated as part of the motion the project was net in conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, with regard to the restriction of residential units, and improving pedestrian ways and adding sidewalks. Merv amended his motion to include that the ordinance was also not in compliance with 2.3.1 and 3.4.2 of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. A vote was taken, and the motion failed, 2-5, Jim Gibson, Jim Shearer, Tom Steinberg, Bob Buckley, and Rob Levine opposed. Merv Lapin then moved that Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, be approved with the following modifications to the SDD in order to meet the SDD criteria: (1) tha# the Tawn restrict the residential unit in order to conform with the Vail Comprehensive Plan 2.3.1. according to Section 17.26.075, (2) that the previous condi#ion 13, which was the sidewalk along the Frontage Road that was deleted be reinstated which was to provide a pedestrian walkway adjacent to the South Frontage Road beginning on the west end of the Vail Village Inn property where the Gateway sidewalk ends and continue the sidewalk east to the western boundary of the Vail Village Inn Phase III property and this condition of approval was to be subject to the Colorado Department of Highway's approval of the sidewalk, (3) that the square footage of the dwelling unitlcondo unit be removed from the required GRFA left in the project, (4) that signage which was acceptable to the staff and DRB be provided so the public was aware of the 65 spaces of available public parking. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Jim Gibson, Rob Levine, and Jim Shearer stated opposition to the restriction placed on the dwelling unit. A vote was taken and the motion failed, 3-4, Jim Gibson, Rob Levine, Jim Shearer, and Tom Steinberg opposed. Rob Levine then w r ,~ moved to use Merv Lapin's second motion as stated with the elimination of the restriction on the condominium unit. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion failed, 3-4, Tom Steinberg, Bob Buckley, Peggy Osterfoss, and Merv Lapin opposed. Rob Levine then motioned to table Ordinance No, 2, Series of 1992, for a period of two weeks, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Larry Eskwith advised the ordinance could not be tabled after defeat on second reading. Rob Levine moved to withdraw his motion to table the ordinance. Jim Shearer seconded that motion. Jim Gibson then moved to approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1992, using Merv Lapin's second motion without restriction on the dwelling unit and elimination of the sidewalk requirements, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-3, Bob Buckley, Merv Lapin, and Peggy Osterfoss apposed. Mayor Osterfoss next moved ahead to Item No. i; an the agenda as the engineer, Ken Brotsky, and geologist, Nick Lampiris, both from out of Town were both present to give testimony in accordance with 18.69.050, regarding removal of the Booth Creek Area from the Rock Fali Hazard Map. L&M Contractors had now completed the Rock Fall Mitigation Berm, and Banner Engineering had certified the berm as substantially completed. As the berm was now completed, Larry Eskwith asked Council to hear testimony from the engineer and geologist, and to consider removing the area from both the high and moderate hazard rockfall zone. Mr. Brotsky, representing Banner Associates of Grand Junction, identified himself as the engineer on the project. He said he was responsible for designing the berm financed by the local improvement district in question. Larry recalled Mr. Brotsky had spoken to the Town in the past about how the berm was designed, but had never testified as to the construction of the berm and whether it had been completed in accordance with the specifications set forth in original plans. Mr. Brotsky said L&M had now rebuilt the berm almost in its entirety, and it was now built in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Jim Gibson asked if there was any immediacy required to remove the area from the rock fall hazard map. Larry explained the residents in the area would shortly be asked to start paying for the berm, and those residents wanted their property removed from the Rock Fall Hazard Map. Mr. Lampiris testified he had constructed the area maps and he felt 98-99% of rock fall in the . area would be stopped by the present berm. He said he had no reluctance in removing the area from the Rock Fall Hazard Map. Ron Phillips added the berm had been in place far two years and was working satisfactorily. Further, the ordinance regarding removal of an area from the Rock Fall Hazard Map indicated Council was to make a decision to do sa based on a hearing of expert testimony concerning the design wnstruction and mitigation efforts. Rob Levine moved to approve removal of the Booth Creek Area from the Rock Fall Hazard Map and the area maps be amended, with a second from Tam Steinberg. Before a vote was taken, Jim Shearer asked if the Town assumed any extra liability by removing the area from the Rock Fall Hazard Map. Larry said it would not. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Mayor Osterfoss returned to item No. 4 on the agenda, Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 8.24.090 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vaii, Colorado, to provide far the owner or occupant of any property within the Town of Vail to keep the sidewalks in the public right-of-way on adjacent or abutting such lot or parcels free and clear from ice, snow, and other obstructions. She read the title in full. After brief discussion regarding individual property owner's obligations, Tom Steinberg moved to approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1992 on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 5 was Resolution Na. 4, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town of Vail to open a Franklin Adjustable U.S. Government Securities Fund, of the Franklin Group of Funds ("Funds"), and to depositor withdraw such funds of the Town in the account as the Town deems necessary or desirable. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in . full. Steve Thompson noted Council had previously approved the Town's use of #his type of fund, and briefly explained investment plans and expected results for the next year. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 4, Series of 1992, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was a brief presentation requested by Steve Miller from Channel 23, Vail Valley Community Television. He welcomed Jim Shearer as the Town's liaison to Channel 23. Mr. Miller said he wanted to educate the community and expand Council interest in community access TV. He invited Council to view operations at Channel 23, recently relocated to Avon. He expressed concern about lack of use of the opportunity to use the level of media Channel 23 offered as a community access station, and encouraged its use. Tom Steinberg inquired about its use to help promote public radio. Mr. Miller also provided some general information regarding Heritage Cablevision's franchise renewal. There was brief discussion regarding Channel 23's uncertainty about lending support to Heritage. Council thanked Mr. Miller for his presentation. Item No. 8 was a presentation by Fred "Skip" Kinsley of Kinsley Geotechnical, Inc. Council had requested presentation from Mr. Kinsley regarding the proposed Forest Service position on ail and gas exploration in the Town's surrounding areas. Mr. Kinsley briefly discussed oil deposit formation facts, and concluded there was no chance of ail and gas being found in this area. Council thanked Mr. Kinsley for his input. Item No. 9 concerned conditions far funding of the Dowd Junction Recreation Path. Ron Phillips referred to a letter he received from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) dated February 13,1992, advising him they had recommended to the Colorado Transportation Commission #unding be budgeted for construction of a bicycle- recreational trail extending from the South Frontage Road at West Vail to Highway 6 at Dowd Junction, primarily to 2 ~{ r ' :k help remove bicycle traffic from I-7D to enhance safety. This funding was proposed under the Surface Transportation program. The recommendation was made based on the understanding the Tawn of Vail was currently funding the design of the trail and had agreed to acquire any necessary right-of-way in areas where the trail would be outside of current Cf]OT right-of-way. Further, the recommendation requested the Town commit to the operational maintenance of the proposed trail, leaving long term capital maintenance to CDOT. Jim Gibson moved #o approve the conditions set forth in CDOT's F=ebruary 13, 1992 letter, committing the Town to funding design of the proposed trail and taking responsibility for operational maintenance of said trail. Tam Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Before adjournment, Ron Phillips announced, effective February 10, 1992, Martha Raecker was named Town Clerk. Council congratulated Martha, There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Q ~ ~ Margare Ai~~ 0 terfoss, Mayor ATTEST: ~ ~. I~~ Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. C}eto C:IMINFEB18.92 3 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MARCW 3, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 3, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tam Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Tawn Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg were not present as the meeting began. The first item on the agenda was a TOV Ten Year Employee Recognition for Rick Onorato. Mayor Osterfoss moved an to the second item on the agenda as Rick was not present as the meeting began. Second on the agenda was Citizen Participation. In response to Josef Staufer's inquiry about the cemetery, Ron Phillips advised a management plan was underway. Mr. Staufer also commented on a recent news article concerning the Town's 5-year financial projection. He did not fee! the Town should base a 5-year financial projection an recession year figures. Ron explained the news article mentioned did not accurately represent the information presented to Council, and clarified for Mr. Staufer there would have to be new revenue sources to fund any new projects. Item No. 3 was a Consent Agenda consisting of two items: A. Approval of Minutes of February 4, 1992, and February 18, 1992, evening meetings. B. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 8.24.090 of the Municipal Code of the Tawn of Vail, Colorado, to provide for the owner or occupant of any property within the Town of Vail to keep the sidewalks in the public right-of-way on adjacent ar abutting such lot or parcels free and clear from ice, snow, and ether obstructions. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve both items on the Consent Agenda, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. As Rick Onorato arrived, Mayor Osterfoss returned to Item No. 1 on the agenda. Pam Brandmeyer introduced Rick Onorato, Detective Sergeant for the Town of Vail Police Department, and thanked him for his years of dedicated service. Acting Police Chief Corey Schmidt congratulated Rick. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No.1, Series of 1992, continued from first reading January 7,1992, an ordinance declaring the intention of the Tawn Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, to create a Local Improvement District within the boundaries of the Town of Vail for the purpose of converting existing overhead electric facilities to underground locations; and adoption of details and specifications therefore. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Greg Hall reviewed results of the East Vail Utility Undergraunding Property Owner Pall report dated March 3, 1992. Of 104 polls sent by certified mail, 80 polls were returned _ a 77% return rate. 60% responded as not in favor of the project, 38% responded in favor. Based on those results, Rob Levine moved to defeat Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Nancy Gibson acknowledged cost allocation of the project seemed to be the primary reason for the negative poll response, and asked Counci! if there were any alternatives tar dividing the cost among property owners in the area. She appealed to Council to further examine this and seek other options. Peggy Osterfoss said the options had been examined, and asked Nancy for ideas, but she could offer none. Nancy asked if the Town would look at the issue again. Larry Eskwith advised another ordinance organizing a local improvement district for the area was possible. Dave Rogers, co-originator of this effort, thanked Council forsupporting the effort. He felt it was a shame they could not take Holy Cross Electric up on their offer to participate in the undergrounding project. He felt property owners liked the idea, but were nervous about costs getking out of hand. He noted early polls he had taken indicated 80% of property owners were in favor of the project at a lower dollar figure, and appealed to Council to again table the ordinance. Ann Louthan felt property owners had not all received and responded to the poll, and offered to help Nancy with future efforts to see the utilities undergrounded and to work with the cable company. Roger Tilkmeier said he had sent in a "no" vote because he wanted everyone who would benefit r from the project to share in the cost. Jim Gibson asked Roger if he could chair a committee #o further pursue the project, but Roger advised he would be unable to at this time. Jim Gibson felt most East Vail residents wanted the undergrounding, and it was a matter of cost. He wanted to table the ordinance in order to keep the project alive. At this point, Rob Levine withdrew his motion to defeat the ordinance. Jim Gibson then moved to table the ordinance until August 1,1992. That motion was seconded by Bob Buckley. Before a vote was taken, Ron Phillips pointed out the poll sent out clearly indicated response to it would decide the Issue. Peggy agreed, and added the Town was not killing the concept of undergrounding. Roger felt he would rather see this ordinance defeated at this time, feeling if it were tabled it would be presented again in the same farm. Jeff Bowen emphasized the poll results clearly indicated a strong statement from property owners no# to proceed. Jim Shearer felt if the Town defeated this ordinance at this time, more property owners would rise to help see the project become a reality. Bob Buckley suggested enlargement or redefinition of the District. Larry indicated that would require another study by the engineer. After further discussion, a vote was taken on Jim Gibsan's motion to table the ordinance until August 1, 1982 and that motion failed, 2-3, Jim Shearer, Peggy Osterfoss, and Rob Levine opposed. Rob Levine moved to defeat Ordinance No.1, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and that motion passed, 3-2, Bob Buckley and Jim Gibson opposed. Ron encouraged the property owners to get together to inspire additional community involvement for further review of different cost allocation formulas. Council members Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg arrived at 8:20 p.m. as discussion began on agenda Item No. 5. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. 5, Series of 1992, a resolution designating Colorado Surplus Asset Fund Trust, 1800 Glenarm Place, Suite 400, Denver, Colorado, 80202 as a depository far the funds of the Town as permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes of the State of Colorado. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. After a brief review by Steve Thompson, Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 5, with a second from Bob Buckley. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 6 was a Town Council appeal of the Design Review Board (DRB) decision to grant final design approval for a project at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater which included an expanded seating area and weatherproofing. The applicant was the Vail Valley Foundation. Mike Mollica explained the DRB voted to approve the request on February 19, 1992, 4-1, Diana Donovan opposed, with three recommendations: (1) that lighting at the north end of the amphitheater be at the lowest possible height and be coordinated with TOV when locating, (2) that consideration be given to installation of a sound walllbaffle along the north berm, and (3) that a matte finish on fabric screens be used. He said Diana felt the suggested remodeling plans were not comps#ible with existing design at the amphitheater. Harry Frampton noted two primary reasons for remodeling: (1) the seasonal use of the amphitheater, now July 1 to late August, could be extended by three weeks at each end of the season, and (2) performers had expressed concerns about direct sun light interference, rain and wind conditions, lack of evenly dispersed heat on stage and in basement dressing roams, and a need for increased lighting. He said same performers had refused to perform there again under present conditions. Jim Morter, the original architect, spoke about his considerations while reviewing the amphitheater design to accommodate the reasons mentioned by Harry. He noted he was under strict direction not to destroy the present outdoor amphitheater ambiance, but was asked to come up with compatible designs to protect the stage and audience. He displayed a model of the proposed redesign, and said he felt the architectural changes he described fully addressed Diana's concerns. Ned Gwathmey, Chairman of the DRB, said, afterthe DRB's review of the redesign, the DRB felt, given the technical problems, the redesign was in compliance with the DRB guidelines and they approved it. Merv Lapin asked if Bravo felt their conditions were met by the redesign, and Pat Herrington said they were. Flo Steinberg spoke about her concerns as expressed in her letter to Council dated March 4, 1992. She asked fora thorough review of the project, feeling the redesign was inconsistent with the original architecture. Jim Morter reassured her all of the redesign had been prepared with concentrated effort to be as consistent as possible with the original design. Merv Lapin moved to uphold the DRB's decision to grant final design approval for the project, with a second firom Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was the appointment of a Local Licensing Authority Member. Jim Gibson moved to re-appoint Bill Bishop to the Local Licensing Authority, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respeetfu[ly submitted, ATTEST: 1'~1t.e~.. ~ . ~a.~.Cd~r.J Martha 5. Raeoker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto G:1MlM1f5MAR3.92 f / ~-_ Margo et A. Osterfoss, Mayor 2 t ~. a O ~-~ 0 1 • ~ ~ _ ~ Q ~~•~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~,~~~~4Q ~ .~ ~ ~Q~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ fy q ~Sy ~ ~~ SO C ~~ ~ ga. ~ ~' ~ ~ 4 ~ ~, ~ ~ s.~~ g ~ ~'~ ~ ~ 3 ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ Q ~. ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ m ~ ~~W~'~ ~ ~- a ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~. ~. ~ ~ a „~s T '~'~, Q 6 ': ~.0, 9 ~ i4 gg 9:: g ~' _~. ~ . ~ d : O,. :. a ~ . .~~ ±~ n MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 17, 1992 7:30 P.M. j~ A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 17, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRI=SENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Jan Strauch inquired about a house an S. Frontage Road which appeared to be in same phase of construction. He had noticed the house had what appeared to be exposed aluminum insulation for quite some time. He wanted to know haw long the exposed insulation would remain that way. Kristen Pritz advised him the property owner had an active permit, and thought the project was being delayed due to financing problems. She said the Community Development Department was aware of the situation. item No. 2 was a required report by the Vail Valley Marketing Board (VVMB) on the effectiveness of the marketing and promotional program financed by funds raised pursuant to Section 5.04.140 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Introductory comments were delivered by Frank Johnson, President, VVMB. Dave Reece, President of RSA Advertising Agency, gave an overview of strategies. Shari Fowler, Account Executive with RSA, narrated a slide presentation and reviewed details of four marketing strategies the VVMB was now using including Front Range marketing, destination marketing, marketing to groups and meeting planners, and wintedsummercross-sell marketing. Frank spoke about the VVMB's marketing response tracking and addressed market share facts and figures related to the summer market share of Colorado resorts. Dave recognized the VVMB's $650,000 budget, and proceeded to itemize the VVMB's "wish list" which included additional funding to reach other U.S. markets, as well as Mexican and international markets, a desire to utilize travel agent marketing, more winterlsummer cross-sell activity marketing, an expanded destination marketing media campaign, more collective Valley-wide promotional efforts, and more research to track marketing results. Frank pointed out the ordinance funding the VVMB would expire this year and he asked Council for their commitment to extend it, and for their enthusiastic support, leadership, creativity, open mindedness, and dedication to upkeep and maintenance of the product: Vail. Peggy Osterfoss thanked Frank and the entire VVMB for the creative and professional role model #hey set for the Valley as a whole. Jim Gibson expressed his appreciation for all the VVMB had done. He added one observation regarding marketing Vail as a great place for active seniors. . He felt this was a fast growing market which needed attention. Frank felt there would be more focus on this market in the future. Jan Strauch said a detailed plan was to be prepared by early July for Council's review. Dave added assistance might also be available through the Colorado Tourism Board. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 18.34 of the Vail Municipa[ Code, adding construction staging sites as a conditional use. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance Na. 4 on first reading, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Resolution No. 6, Series of 1992, a resolution designating The Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust as April 26 through May 3,1992. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 5, with a second from Rob Levine. Before a vote was taken, Tom Steinberg spoke about the importance of this item and applauded the organization who brought this resolution topic to the Town's attention. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. 7, Series of 1992, a resolution designating the week of April 5 through April 11, 1992, as Week of the Young Child. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution Na. 7, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. fi was an appeal of a Design Review Board (DRB) decision denying applicant Leroy Schmidt's request to separate a proposed primary unit from an existing secondary unit at the Schmidt residence, Lot G-1, Lionsridge Filing No. 1 at 1410 Buffehr Creek Road. Council had visited the site during work session. Shelly Mello reviewed the February 19, 1992, DRB decision. She said the DRB unanimously voted to deny the request, finding there were no substantial site constraints, per Section 18.54.050(1) -Design Guidelines, Duplex and Primary/Secondary Developmer~, which warranted the separation of the units. She added the Schmidt residence was the only PrimarylSecondary lot in the area. It had originally been zoned for six units, then was down zoned. Stephen Richards, original architect of the Schmidt residence, presented a drawing of the site showing topographical detail, and discussed design guidelines. Me explained the current situation at the Schmidt residence involved a very steep site and an existing single family residence on a PrimarylSecondary lot. hlis letter dated February 25, 1992, stated he interpreted Ordinance 18.54.0501) to say units may be separated If site constraints existed. Following discussion about duplexing, slopes, density issues, and the definition of site constraints, Tom Steinberg moved to uphold the DRB decision denying the applicant's request and to reaffirm the DRB's interpretation of the ordinance. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item fda 7 was a presentation by Herb Rath, Roth & Shepard Architects, regarding the Police Department space expansion issue. He recalled previous discussions, and said the options had been narrowed to two: "Scheme B", a 9,000 square foot addition to existing space; or "Scheme C", a 17,000 square foot new facility. Jim Gibson asked if there were any compromises between the two schemes. Herb felt there was not, saying the compromises already reviewed would cost considerably more than either Scheme B or C. Alter further discussion about the cost of the project and what priority the project would take, Jim Gibson moved to accept Scheme C. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-2, Peggy Osterfoss and Merv Lapin opposed. There being no fiurther business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~. ~~. Margal~t A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: MarthallS. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by ~orianne S. deto r1 ~J G:IMINMARI T.92 2 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 7, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 7, 1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: CJ Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was a TOV Ten Year Employee Recognition. Pam Brandmeyer introduced Kevin Whelan, Fire Technician for the Town of Vail Fire Department. Ron Phillips and Dick Duran congratulated Kevin, and thanked him for his years of dedicated service. Second on the agenda was Citizen Participation. President and resident of The Falls at Vail, Bob Baker, inquired about issues he had discussed with Council at the December 17,1991, evening meeting. He felt the issues he raised at that #ime, including concerns about road maintenance, landscaping, drainage problems, and the desire for a covered bus stop at the I-70180 East Vail exit had not been addressed. He asked when these projects would be completed. Ron Phillips advised these undertakings were scheduled for completion during Spring, 1992. Bob added there had also been no improvement regarding traffic speed and noise in the area. Tom Steinberg noted the Town had been working with the Highway Department on those issues, and suggested Bob communicate with the State as well. The issue of a road, which was determined to be a private road in the East Vail area, currently not maintained by TOV, was discussed. Tom suggested if the road was brought up to Town Code, Bob's group could apply to have the road become part of the Town's road system. Bob added he felt the 65 mph speed limit at Dowd Junction should be lowered to 45 mph. He felt it was too difficult fo decrease driving speed an I-7D from 65 mph to 35 mph on North Frontage Road to reach the Post Office. Ron noted the Highway Department controlled both Frontage Roads, and speed limits there were set by #hem, not the Town. He suggested Bob also discuss this with the Highway Department. In conclusion, Bob asked that consideration be given to opening an East Vail Past Office Branch, and stated he wanted a new cable system, or that Heritage Cablevision have competition. Item Na. 3 was a Gonsent Agenda consisting of two items: A. Approval of Minutes of March 3, 1992, and March 17, 1992 evening meeting minutes. B. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1992, second reading, an amendment to Chapter 18.34 of the Vail Municipal Code adding construction staging sites as a conditional use in the Parking Zone District. (Applicant: Johannes Faessler) Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Tom Steinberg moved to approve both items on the Gonsent Agenda, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, ii-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 9, Section 5 of the Vail Municipal Gode by the addition of Chapter 9.54 - Restrictions on the Possession of Glass Containers. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith explained the Vail Recreation District's safety and litter concerns about glassware in public parks and athletic fields. He also noted this ordinance would still allow glass containers and bottles on the premises of any liquor licensed establishment and an the premises of any event which had obtained a special events liquor license. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Bob Buckley. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, S-0. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance adopting the Town of Vail Art in Public Places program policies and guidelines; establishing a board for the process of reviewing proposed public artwork for the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1992, on firs# reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-D. ltem No. 6 was Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1992, an ordinance providing fior the establishment of Special Development District No. 28, Christiania at Vail; adopting a development plan for Special Development District No. 28 in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vaii Municipal Cade and setting forth details in r~ard thereto. Mayor Osterfvss read the title in full. There had been a site visit during the afternoon work session. Mike Mollica reviewed the description of the request and explained the zoning cvnsideratians, as detailed in the Community Development Department's memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated March 23, 1992. (Jay Peterson requested the memorandum be made part of the official record of this ordinance, and a copy is attached herewith.) Mike referred to the site plan illustrations he had displayed to indicate this SDD's departures from the underlying Public Accommodation zone district. He discussed the nine SDD development standards set forth in the SDD chapter of the Zoning Code. There was general discussion about parking and loading. Mike said staff felt the Christiania redevelopment metthe criteria forthe establishment of an SDD, ands#aff recommended approval of the request, noting the applicant had incorporated the five elements listed on page 12 of the March 23, 1992, memorandum into their proposed development pion. Jim Gibson asked i# the SDD process was appropriate for this proposal, and Larry Eskwith advised it was. Rnb Levine asked for examples of other SDDs which had dealt with redevelopment, rather than new development, through the SDD process. The Marriott, Evergreen (Doubletree}, and Vail National Bank were cited as examples. Tam Steinberg inquired about options available to the applicant, and Mike advised the applicant could have chasers to conform to underlying zoning, apply for variances from the development standards, or apply for the SDD. Discussion followed about the fiexibilky SDDs gave the Town. Tom, as an example of the expressed flexibility, asked if the garbage bin area could be upgraded as part of this SDD, and was told it could. Mike said it was staff's opinion the proposed redevelopment met the goals and ob}ectives of the Vail Village Master Plan whivh emphasized the upgrading of lodges, the improvement of the pedestrian experience, and the enhancement of open space. Applicant Paul Johnston spoke about the design concepts they reviewed while preparing this SDD request, including parking issues. He referred to the 1968 agreement regarding parking, and spoke of Veil's aging guest population and landscaping issues. Jim Lament, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, Ina (EVHA), said he had no objections tv the plan as approved in 1991, but was concerned with a number of issues with respect to the establishment of SDD No. 28. Mark Mathews, representing the Mill Creek Caur# Building Homeowners Association concurred. Mr. Lamont referred to his letter to the PEC dated March 9, 1992, on behalf of the EVHA, • which detailed their reasons for feeling there was insufficient justification for the establishment of a SDD at the Christiania at Vaii. He also referred to a letter to the Mayor and Town Council dated April 6,1992, from Robert Galvin. That letter, also written on behalf of the EVHA, expressed their view that the Christiania proposal was an inappropriate application of the SDD provision. Further, the EVHA was concerned if this SDD was approved there would be a precedent set that would confuse the purpose of the SDD provision. Mr. Lamont added the Board of Directors of the EVHA felt the Special Development District criteria needed to be redefined/claritiedlmodified regarding new developmentlredevelopment applications. Peggy Osterfoss Hated the SDD process had been thoroughly reviewed. Larry added the applicant had applied under the ordinance currently in effect, and reminded Council their decision must be based on the existing criteria therein. Discussion followed regarding setbacks, common areas, the streetscape issue, the proposed parking issue, and a suggested public improvement program in the neighborhood, George Knox, Vail Rowhouse resident, spoke in support of the proposed ordinance. Jay Peterson noted the Tivoli Lodge was also in favor. Tom asked about wrapping up the P3 parking issue with Vail Associates. He said the Christiania should defer starting construction on the P3 parking lot until such time as VA and the Town agreed on ownership. Pat Graham asked that Bill Morton's letter dated April 3,1992, be addressed, particularly regarding setbacks. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1992, on first reading, based on compliance with the criteria for Special Development Districts. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, there was a brief discussion about dumpsters, walking paths, and additional landscaping. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7 was Resolution No. 9, Series of 1992, a resolution approving the Vai! Transportation Master Plan for the Town of VaN; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 9, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Jim Lamont advised Bob Galvin had called to inquire about building an alley way along Mill Greek. Mr. Lamont asked whether passage of this resolution was for the adoption of the full Vail Transportation Master Plan previously reviewed by Council, or a short term recommendation plan. He was advised passage of this resolution would approve the full plan with changes as submitted after previous Council review. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-D. Item No. 8 was the appointment of an Art in Public Places Board member. Jim Gibson moved to appoint Kenneth M. Robins to the Art in Public Planes Board, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6~0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~~~ . Margaret . Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: ~. ~, Q~ Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:WIINSAPR7.92 Z MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 21, 1992 7.30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 2i, 1992, at 7:34 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Ostertoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine MEMBERS ABSENT, TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bab Buckley Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raedcer, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Tom Fitch, representing the Eagle Valley Humane Society, gave a brief update on the trapping and leghold setback issue activity at the Colorado Division of Wildl'rfe (CDOW). We advised CDOW was considering 15-30' setbacks, as opposed to the minimum 50' setback footage temporarily in place and supported by TOV. Further, he added CROW was not clear as to whether they wanted to enact a statewide rule regulating the setback footage, or have individual communities approach them with custom-tailored setback requirements. Mr. Fitch asked Council to write to CDOW again to reinforce TOV's desire to keep at least the 50' setback from trails for all leghold trapping in the Vail area. He also asked TOV to send a representative to CDOW's next meeting on May 14, 1992, in Durango. The final regulation will be read and enacted in Ft. Collins in July, 1992. Peggy Osterfoss indicated there was Council consensus regarding the Humane Society's requests. She thanked Tam for the update, and for the time and effort he had invested. Second on the agenda was a presentation of grants from the Colorado State Forest Service to TOV. Todd Oppenheimer introduced John Laut, local representative to the State Forester. Mr. Lout first presented a check for $1,D00 for the Trees for Vail Project in response to a grant request prepared by Todd. Mr. Lout indicated those funds came from the general fund appropriation of the State Legislature. Mr. Lout next presented an additional $500 from the Colorado State Forest Service in conjunction with the Colorado Parks and Recreation Association Foundation, the delivery agents in the State of Colorado for the Global Relief Program, an international program of funding for tree planting programs. Finally, Mr. Lout noted Todd had proposed putting together a brochure to be distributed to the residents of Vail about haw to plant and care for trees in this area, and had submitted a grant request for this project to the Colorado State Forest's Galorado Tree Coalition. In response to that grant request, Mr. Lout presented a third check in the amount of $1,096 from the America the Beautiful Program for the creation and distribution of the proposed planting brochure. Finally, Mr. Lout noted TOV met all criteria to qualify far national recognition as a Tree City, and encouraged TOV to submit an application by Fall'92 to become a Tree City. Peggy Osterfoss thanked Mr. Lout, Tadd, and members of the community who had organized the Trees for Vail Program. Merv Lapin noted $20,OD0 had been collected for that program to date. The program was expected to culminate in a massive planting of 300-400 trees between Frontage Road and I-7D by a group of approximately 1,000 volunteers. The planting was scheduled to begin June 13, 1992. Item No. 3 was a presentation by TCI Cablevision, parent company of the local cable company, Heritage Cablevision. Stan McKinzie, General Manager of Heritage, thanked Counci! for the time to allow TCI's upper management to address concerns expressed to him. He said TCI wished to continue open lines of communication, and proceed with franchise renewal negotiations that would benefit TOV, its residents, and TCI. He introduced the TCI attendees: Scott Hiigle, TCI Central Division Office V.P., Jim Dagenhardt, Division Engineer, Earl Jones, Division Governmental Af#airs Director, Dave Hashisaki, TCI Sta#e of Colorado Office Engineer, Mike Carrillo, Assistant S#ate Manager, Juan Herrera, State Marketing Coordinator, and Brian Shirk, TCI Colorado State Manager. Mr. Shirk gave a brief slide presentation which included graphs showing Vail vs. Denver product and housing cost comparisons, and a graph of TCI's Basic Plus Expanded Basic Package rate comparison for a variety of other Colorado systems. Mr. Shirk proposed, in the near future, informal negotiations far a new franchise providing a long term commitment on both TCI's and TOV's part. TCI would commit to rebuilding the system in Vail with astate-of the-art fiber optics systems to greatly enhance channel capacity, and provide the ability to offer pay-per-view on multiple channels. He believed fiber optics would allow them to tier their services. In the meantime, he said they were committed to continuing to reduce charges Heritage had been charging for addi#ional outlets, totally eliminating the charges within 2-3 years maximum. At the conclusion of TCI's presentation, Mayor Osterfoss called for Council questions and comments. Tom Steinberg stated - having so many representatives at this presentation sent a negative image of TCl to people whe were already complaining about paying such high rates for service. He advised TCI not to present this type of image in the future, and suggested one representative would be sufficient. Merv Lapin asked a variety of technical and financial questions. Merv estimated 98% of TCI's revenue was from cable-related fees, of which TOV received a 5% franchise fee, and he asked TCi if they would reduce their rates by that 5% if TOV eliminated the 5% fee. They said they would. Mr. Hiigle said TCI did not have separate financial statements for Vail, but such a local report could be prepared, and Merv requested such report showing income and expenses be prepared and sent to Ron Phillips. Merv then estimated the total system revenue for the Vaii area at approximately $4 million, i30% being from TOV alone. Merv commended TCI on their contributions to local organizations, but estimated less than 1 % of their revenues were going to bcaf non-profit groups, and encouraged them to do mare. Merv also asked if TCI was planning a "lifeline" service for the Vail area, a service with a grea#ly reduced rate available for subscribers who only wanted to receive ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, ESPN, or whatever could be included. TCf said they were open #o that, and in fact, had recently negotiated a franchise in Sterling with such a service offering a twelve channel package with just the off-air broadcast signals at rate of $10.75. Jim Gibson expressed concern with the cost of what TCI was delivering to subscribers. He asked to see a simplified, direct cost breakdown of one home, detailing how a $3 product cast escalated to over $22 per month. Mr. Hiigle said that detail wuld be provided. Peggy Osterfoss summarized by indicating TOV's basic concerns were improved quality of service and increased benefits to members of the community, including cost benefits. She felt a number of suggestions had been made by Council, and appreciated the fact TCI had attended to them, particularly the lifeline service and some modification of their tiering system so that it would be possible, perhaps at a subsidy level on their part, to have more popular stations in the basic expanded $23 service. She also apprecia#ed their good faith gesture of offering to supply the specific financial information for the Vail area. Further, she requested a detailed timeline for rebuilding the system, but TCI said they wanted #o discuss that as part of renegotiating the franchise. Item No. 4 was a presentation by Trout Unlimited. Bruce Keep advised the Eagle Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited had recently completed a survey regarding Gore Creek's stature as an angling and recreation resource. He summed up the survey results which indicated Gore Creek was an the decline, and detailed the major reasons iar the decline emphasizing use of illegal tackle, lack of ac#ive patrolling and regulation enforcement at the site, and pollution from silver contamination. He noted Gare Creek, running from the influx of Red Sandstone Creek to the confluence of the Eagle River, received Gold Medal designation in 1978, and he was concerned with the steady decrease of the original qualifications which earned the creek that status. He said Trout Unlimited felt current trends needed to be addressed, and requested TOV's assistance with implementation of a long term public education, assessment, and maintenance program, as well as Vail police involvement in public relations and enforcement of regulations at Gore Creek. Peggy Osterfoss said she appreciated Mr. Keep's presentation, and suggested educational efforts be spearheaded by Trout Unlimited and encouraged self-policing by that group. She added Council would ask staff to meet with the group to help find agencies more appropriate than Vail police to assist with fishing violation enforcement. The Recreation District was mentioned as one such agency. Item No. 5 was a Consertt Agenda consisting of three items: A. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Title 9, Section 5 of the Vai! Municipal Code by the Addition of Chapter 9.54 -Restrictions on the Possession of Glass Containers. B. Ordinance No. 7, Series 1992, second reading, an ordinance adapting the Town of Vaii Art in Public Places program policies and guidelines; establishing a board for the process of reviewing proposed public artwork for the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance No. 8, Series 1992, second reading, an ordinance providing for the establishment of . Special Development District No. 28, Christiania at Vail; adopting a development plan for Special Development District No. 28 in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Gode and setting forth details in regard thereto, {Applicant: Paul Johnston) Mayor Osterfoss said there had been a number of requests for additional discussion of item C. Jim Gibson moved to approve Consent Agenda items A and B, and he read those titles in full. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was #aken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Discussion of item C followed. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Kristan Fritz detailed additional information from the applicant regarding location of the trash dumpster. It was confirmed the change in location was made to decrease the impact on Hanson Ranch Raad. Discussion about encroachments and view corridor impacts followed. Merv Lapin asked if any of the five staff recommendation on page 12 of the Community Development Department's March 23, 1992 memo had been unanswered. Kristan advised the issue of the curb and gutter had not yet been finalized, but the applicant had agreed to all ofi the recommendations and all five were covered in the ordinance. Briefi discussion regarding the curb and gutter issue, paver edgers, and drainage specifics followed. Tom Steinberg asked if any progress had been made on any agreement about the parking issue. Applicant Paul Johnston said they had agreed to enter into a developer's improvement agreement whereby they would escrow monies for anything not completed by the time a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (T.C.O.J needed to be issued. Kristan added when the applicant wanted a T.C.O., the parking area and other site improvements would need to be finished off the way it was on the present approved plans ar they would have to provide a letter of credit. A final Certificate of Occupancy would not be issued on the project until the work was finished. Kristan detailed parking requirements in response to additions! questions Merv had about P3 and Lot J. Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, said he was still concerned about the setbacks and, in his letter of April 21, 1992 to Town Council, requested the sections he indicated of TOV's Streetscape Master Plan as it affected the Christiania and P3 sites be taken into consideration. After brief discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1992, on second reading, with the 2 dumpster modification. Rob Levine seconded the mo#ion. Before a vote was taken, Tom Steinberg indicated he felt there should be as much compliance as possible with the S#reetscape Master Plan. George Knax expressed support for the project. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 6 was Resole#ion No. 8, Series of 1992, a resole#ion recognizing "June as Recycling Month." Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 8, Series of 1992, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7 was an appeal of a Design Review Board (DRB} decision regarding exterior de#ailing of the George Caulkins, Jr. residence at 3010 Boo#h Creek Drive, Lot 4, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing. Werner and Gllda Kaplan were the appellants. Shelly Mello explained the chronology of the project starting with initial July 11, 1990, DRB approval of this residence which specified the shuttersldoors were to be a washlstain treatment versus opaque. There was na mention of the detailing being required to be solid in color. The DRB decision was appealed and on Rugust 7, 1990, Council voted 4-3 to approve the residence with a number of conditions, including the shutters be done in a solid color. On April 1, 1992, the DRB unanimously approved a request by the owner to allow the exterior shuttersldoors to remain as they currently exist with blue and white detailing. The applicant had, in fact, violated their approval and painted the details blue and white. The DRB found the scale of the building, the landscaping, and the exterior finishes were compatible with the neighborhood, but adjacent property owners, Werner and Gilda Kaplan were appealing that decision. Jim Morter of 2985 Booth Creek Drive specifically recalled Council's August 7,1990 approval stating the shutters were to be done in a solid Dolor. Mr. Morter said his primary concern with this issue was the process, and he felt the owners should be required to abide by the original ruling made. Werner Kaplan showed Council recent photos of the shutters and distributed a petition signed by Mr. Morter, the Nystrom's, and the Liston's, neighborhood residents opposed to the blue and white striped shutters. Mr. Kaplan also reminded Council of their August 7, 1990 vote #o approve the residence with the condition the shutters be done in a solid color, added no evidence of hardship existed at the Caulkin's residence, and encouraged Council to uphold the decision. Nancy • Nystrom of 3470 Booth Creek Drive said she had gone to added expense and time building her home in order to abide by all rules she was required to follow, and had a problem now observing another resident just doing what they wanted. She felt consideration far one's neighbors was a key, as well as following the process of regulation. George Caulkins, spokesperson for George Caulkins, Jr., referred to the First Amendment of the Constitution, and spoke about artistic freedom. He indicated the shutters and doors were now painted in traditional Tyrolean style, and had been painted that way to preserve the architectural integrity of that style. He added he had offered to paint the shutters on the side facing the Kaplan residence solid, but Mr. Kaplan had refused that offer. Mr. Kaplan explained he refused the of#er because he felt the original ruling should be enforced. After additional discussion, Jim Gibson moved to overturn the Design Review Board's decision of April 1, 1992. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Jim Shearer noted he appreciated Tyrolean archi#ecture, but felt the rules needed to be followed by all. Mark Nachtigal, representing the applicant, said he told the contractor to paint the shutters of#er the DRB had approved the striping. He added that the painting had been the result of misunderstanding and had not been a deliberate action against the ruling. A vote was then taken, and the motion to overturn the DRB's decision passed, 4-2, Peggy Osterfoss and Tom Steinberg opposed. Item No. 8 was the reappointment of Mark Ristow to serve a five year term on the Town of Vail Housing Authority. Merv Lapin moved to reappointment Mark Ristow to serve a five year term on the Town of Vail Housing Authority, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. There being no further business, a mo#ion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, t- ~ ~~.~. Margaret A. sterfoss, Mayor ATTPST: ~~ ~ Martha Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:WI INAPR21.92 3 r MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY ~, 1992 ?:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 5, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at '1:55 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda was two TOV Ten Year Employee Recognition presentations. Pam Brandmeyer introduced Janeil Turnbull, Administrative Secretary for the Community . Development Department, and Sergeant Joe Russell, Town of Vail Police Departna.ent. Second an the agenda was Citizen Participation. Byron B~ ~ W ~~, resident of the West Vail area kn.,~~~ as Vail dos Schone, presented a petition containing sixty-nine signatures ofother property owners and/or residents of that area. He said the petition carried the message of those individuals concerned with recent proposals before Council regarding the rezoning of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Vail dos Schone, k~ling #2, Block H. The petition states the signers oppose rezoning of that property as they felt it would be inappropriate and out of character with existing uses within. the neighborhood. Peggy Osterfoss said there was evidently a misunderstanding about the issue, since when that land was bought, it was bought with mixed-use in mind. It had been purchased with RETT funds which would be reimbursed. She noted there was a possibility no zoning changes would be involved unless one was needed to create green space, and there would be a public process associated with that. Item No. 3 was a Consent Agenda consisting of one item: Approval of the minutes of the April 7, 1992, and April 21, 1992 evening meetings. Jim Gibson moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. • Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 5.08 -Business and Occupation Tax -Ski Lifts, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Bob Buckley stepped dawn due to conflict of interest. In Larry Eskwith's absence, attorney Tom Downey, from the firm Downey & Knickrehm, briefly explained the ordinance would impose a 4% admissions tax on the purchase of lift tickets from any ski area within the Town. Merv Lapin, Torn Steinberg, and Rob Levine asked for clarification of several areas of the ordinance as presented. Jae Macy, Mountain Planner with Vail Associates, said they were not philosophically in agreement with this ordinance and asked it be tabled for several weeks. Tom Steinberg moved to table the ordinance until May 19, 1992, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0-1, with Bob Buckley abstaining. Bob Buckley then rejoined Council. Item No. 5 was the review of a Town of Vail Agreement far Fire Prevention Services between the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc. Vail Associates had approached the Vail Fire Department to conduct fire safety inspections on property out of Tawn limits. Dick Duran explained the agreement details, and added Vail Associates wanted to start as soon as possible. Jim Gibson inquired if the service fee to be charged included equipment use cost. Dick explained the fee would cover Vail Fire Department cost and was the same rate charged other entities requesting the same service. Ron Phillips pointed out the agreement was for inspection purposes, not for fire suppression. Bab Buckley advised he would again forego voting due to conflict of interest. Jim Gibson moved to approve the agreement, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0-1, with Bob Buckley abstaining. . Item No. 6 was a discussion regarding proposed Forest Service policies for the Eagles Nest Wilderness Area. In a letter dated March 24, 1992, from William Woad, Haly Cross District Ranger, and Jeff E. Bailey, Dillon District Ranger, it was explained the Hoiy Cross and Dillon Forest Service Ranger Districts were in the process of developing a Wilderness Implementation Schedule (WIS) far the Eagles Nest Wilderness, White River, and Arapaho National Forests to identify and analyze projects and policies to help achieve and maintain the quality of the Wilderness areas. The Forest Service letter included the Eagles Nest Wilderness Implementation Schedule Questionnai,re/February 1992, and requested input from TOV. Andy Knudtsen said the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC} had discussed the issue on Apri127, 1992, and had summarized their comments in a draft reply letter #2320, dated April 30, 1992. Andy said Council's comments would be added to the reply. Council agreed with the PEC's decision not tQ regulate access to wilderness areas through the use of a permit system or to reduce the number of heartbeats unless there was severe impact, but disagreed with PEC's decision to close overused areas altogether for a period of a few years. Council felt reduction of parking areas was not viewed as a solution at all. Bob Buckley said the trail system in Eagles Nest Wilderness was inadequately maintained and the Forest Service needed to better mark the trail system. Further, altexx~.ative trails were not being built as they were in the past. Bob wanted to see the Forest Service spend significant dollars on the Booth Creek Trails, the Pitkin Creek Trail, and the Gore Creek Trails. He felt these had been woefully neglected over the last 10 years. Tom Steinberg said he would agree to go with a permit system if there were no other way to get the dollars to improve the trails, but only if the permit system's fees were returned to be used directly in the wilderness area here. Jim Gibson noted the Hecla Junction area was now managed by the State of Colorado and was still part of the U.S. Forest Service. He said funds collected were managed by the State axed $7% of them came back to the Hecla Junction area. Bob said that was not the case with the trails in Eagles Nest, and Jim Gibson asked Kristan Pritz to pursue those same arrangements for Eagles Nest. Tom suggested putting up signs asking for donations if the donations go back to the trail maintenance of that particular section of the mountain. Council felt areas should not be closed, but restricted by suggesting alternate trails. Improved trails were noted as a priority. Permits were agreed to be a last resort measure. Before adjournment, several items not on the agenda were raised. Mayor Osterfoss announced the results of the Vail Recreation District Board election. She advised Ken Wilson and Gail Molloy were both re-elected for four-year terms. Kristen Pritz and Mike Mollica updated Council on ongoing Streetscape improvement issues • related to the Christiania project. Council reviewed the project site plans. Kristen reminded Council when the plans were approved, they had given staff direction to be certain the plan complied with the Streetscape Plan. Kristen now sought Council's approval to continue with the project with the current proposal involving paver edgers, curbs, landscaping, sidewalks/walkways, and lighting. She also said staff would review the lighting at night to determine the number of additional lights. She said Jim Lamont had written a letter dated April 30, 1992, on behalf of Jack Morton Associates, Inc., and Bill Marton, owner of a condo unit in the Mill Creek Court Building, expressing further concerns of the East Village Homeowner's Association. She wanted to address Mr. Lamont's concerns and be certain Council felt the proposal Paul Johnston, Jay Peterson, and she had detailed were adequate solutions in line with the Streetscape Plan. After further discussion, Jim Gibson moved to change the condition of approval relating to the sidewalk by adjusting that specific condition sa the funds for the sidewalk would be added to the landscaping and edging improvements an the north side of Hanson Ranch Road. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Kristen Pritz and Shelly Mello asked Council to clarify their intent with respect to their April 21,1992, decision pertaining to an appeal of a Design Review Board (DRB) decision regarding exterior detailing of the George Caulkins, Jr., residence at 3010 Booth Creek Drive, Lot 4, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing. On April 1, 1992, the DRB had unanimously approved a request by the owner to allow the exterior shutters/doors to remain as they currently existed with blue and white detailing. At the Apri121, 1992, Town Council meeting, Jim Gibson had 2 moved to overturn that DRB decision. Merv Lapin had seconded that motion. Council said their intent was to overturn the April 1, 1992 Design Review Board decision, and therefore, the blue and white detailing was not to be anywhere on the building, including the doors. . Ran Phillips briefly commented on several topics: The Countywide Goal Sharing session date had been changed to Monday, June 22,1992, frox~n. 2:00 P.M. to 9:40 P.M. He asked Council to think about the parking on Frontage Road at Ford Park issue. He recalled Council had indicated a desire to enforce no parking along there. He advised the City Council of Aurora would be coming to Vail for their retreat. In the past, it has been their custom to invite Council members from TOV to attend a dinner with them. That dinner has been set far June 5, 1992. He said Real Estate Transfer Tax for April, 1992, was considerably above budget. He noted the Wildlife Commission was considering Statewide regulations with regard tc- trapping. He would be attending the Wildlife Commission meeting an May 14, 1992, in Durango. Another letter signed by Peggy was sent to them, emphasizing Vail Town Council's position on 50' minimum setbacks. • He suggested the Ski Museum pocket park be named "St. Moritz Park" after TOV's Sister City and asked for input. He noted Council had voted unanimously to do away with restrooms in that park. Ran encouraged Council to discuss this further, but Council had already determined they did not want bathrooms in the park. Merv Lapin felt something needed to be lane about the process of where we vote on days like today. He felt it would behoove us to have bath Districts vote at the Municipal Building ar some place more accessible than the sanitation facility in Avon. He wanted a letter written and Warren Garbe said that would need to be addressed to the president of the Board. Further election results were announced by Merv Lapin. Walter Kirsh was re-elected and Andrew Armstrong and Darrell Wegert were elected to serve four-year terms on the board of the Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District. Paul Testwuide and Byron Brown were re-elected and Rick Sackbauer was elected to serve four-year t~~~s on the board of the Vail Valley Consolidated Water District. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. • Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~ Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by parianne 5. Deto C,WtINSMAY5.92 3 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 19, ].992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 19,1992, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Gibson TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk Ken Hughey, Chief of Police The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Item No. 2 was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 5.08 -Business and Occupation Tax -Ski Lifts, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. First reading had been tabled to this date at the May 5, 1992, evening meeting. Bob Buckley stepped down due to conflict of interest. Larry Eskwith provided brief background inf..l,llation, noting this ordinance would impose a mandatory 4% tax which would replace the 2% tax on gross profits from the sale of ski lift tickets and the voluntary 2%a payment which is presently made to the TV W 11 by Vail Associates to help pay for the Town bus system. After brief discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1992 on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0-1, with Bob Buckley abstaining. . Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance rezoning a parcel of property (commonly referred to as the "Ski Museum Pocket Park) f'i,,,.. Public Accommodation District to Public Use District, generally located at the northwest intersection of Vail Raad and West Meadow Drive, and legally described in the attached Exhibit A; and amending the official zoning map in relation to the rezoning of said property. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Mollica summarized the background and description of the request. After brief discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 16 on first reading, finding the change in zoning would be a furtherance of the Town's Master Plan, specifically the Streetscape Master Plan. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 4 was a discussion of Pitkin Creek Townhome bond restructuring. Steve Jeffers, representing the investment brokerage firm of George K. Baum, extensively addressed all areas and options related to this issue, and distributed a proposed time schedule for completion of refunding and a document detailing cash flow and the economics of refunding. Council instructed staff to investigate the ramifications of having the Town guarantee the mortgage loans. After discussion, Merv Lapin moved to direct staff' to proceed with the proposal from George K. Baum that will save the Town of Vail approximately $725,000 on the refunding of the 1979 Pitkin Creek bonds. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. .~ After adjournment, Peggy Osterfoss introduced Jamison Smith, who was running for a seat in the Colorado House of Representatives. Council wished Mr. Smith luck. Respectfully submitted, ~'~ _ ---z Marg et A. Osterfoss, Ma~ior • ATTEST: ~~ ~ ~,v~ Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne 5. Deto C:1MiNMAY19.92 r' • MTNUTE S VATL TOWN COUNCTL MEETING JUNE 2, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Tovcm Council was held on Tuesday, June 2, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley R.on Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Martha Raecker, Town Clerk. The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Ann Marie Mueller and Flo • Steinberg both detailed recent attacks by unleashed packs of dogs. Ron Phillips said the, owners of the dogs in the areas of Town described by Mrs. Mueller and Mrs. Steinberg may have been in violation of present laws which required pet owners to be in voice command of their animals, but Mrs. Steinberg recalled she had came to Council before to ask for a leash law for all areas of the Town. She specifically noted confusion over what areas required pets to be leashed. Mayor Osterfoss advised Ken Hughey would follow up an the incidents reported here. Contact with Eagle County Animal Control would be maintained. Second an the agenda was an update by Blondie Vucich on the trapping issue presently before the Wildlife Commission. Her update indicated the Wildlife Commission was, through recommendations from the Colorado Division of Wildlife, considering a statewide trapping regulation of a 25 foot setback limit on either side of the trails up to 500 feet from the trailhead, and she urged Council to remain steadfast tQ TOV's current 50 foot setback limit on either side of the trails to destination points. She asked Council to prepare further correspondence to the Colorado Division of Wildlife emphasizing this community's needs and how oversimplification by institution of a statewide regulation could result in ineffective regulations. In fact, another letter dated June 2, 1992, based on Mrs. Vucich's notes and recommendations from Colorado Wildlife officer; Mark Konishi, had already been drafted and was before Council far review at this meeting. The letter was approved and signed by Mayor • Osterfoss. Mrs. Vucich noted the final Division of Wildlife work session on the issue would be on Monday, June 15, 1992, in Denver and asked for TOV representation at that session. The final decision is scheduled to be announced at the Wildlife Commission meeting in Ft. Collins on July 16, 1992. Ttem No. 3 was a brief presentation by Eric Affeldt, a Republican Candidate for County Commissioner. He cited several of the general issues of his platform and distributed a flyer containing basic biographical information and qualifications for his candidacy. Item No. 4 was a Consent Agenda consisting of three items: A. Approval of the Minutes of the May 5, 1992, and May 19, 1.992, Town Council evening meetings. B. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 5.08 -Business and Occupation Tax -Ski Lifts, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. C. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance rezoning a parcel of property* from Public Accommodation District to Public Use District, generally located at the northwest intersection of Vail Road and West Meadow Drive, and legally described in the attached Exhibit A; and amending the official zoning map in relation to the rezoning of said property. {*Comma~y referred to as the "Ski Museum Pocket Park".} Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Two motions were made on the Consent Agenda. Since Bob Buckley had previously stepped down from discussion involving Consent Agenda item B due to conflict of interest, first Tom Steinberg moved to approve Consent Agenda itezxis A and C, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Merv Lapin then made a second motion to approve Consent Agenda item B, Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1992, on second reading. Tom Steinberg seconded that motion. A vote was taken. on the second motion and the motion passed, 6-0-1, with Bob Buckley abstaining. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 3 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 3.42 establishing a Use Tax; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Steve Barwick discussed a shortfall in TOV's 5 year budget projection and cited Americans with Disabilities Act expenses, annual minor capital items, bus depreciation not funded in 1997, sales tax revenues currently being below projections, and tax and spending limitation proposals as some of the items which might exacerbate the shortfall. He also noted shortfalls in funding of essential Capital Improvement Projects beginning in 1995. Steve presented options far addressing the Capital Projects funding shortfall to Council including a reduction in planned capital projects, the use of reserves from the Capital Fund and/or Band Reserves, a use tax on construction materials, and extension and refinancing of existing debt. He emphasized staffs recommendation not to rely upon any one option. It was noted TOV was one of three municipalities in the State of Colorado without a use tax on construction materials. Council asked staff to concentrate on the use tax on construction materials option and extension and refinancing of existing debt. Steve explained Ordinance No. 15 would require 4% of estimated construction materials cast be collected at the time of issuance of a building permit. Construction materials would be calculated at one-half the value of the permit, i.e., for a building permit on a $200,000 project, 4% would be collected on $100,000. Steve estimated the use tax an construction materials would raise $500,000 in revenues annually. Bob Buckley asked how much impact that would have on the shortfalls Steve mentioned. Steve said it would help, but, he emphasized again, no single solution would solve the problem. One question of concern, to Council involved the definition of "charitable organization" as set forth in Section 3.40.020 of this ordinance. Charitable organizations would be exempt from the use tax. Bob Buckley asked if the Vail Valley Medical Center was included in the definition. After discussion regarding what specifically constituted a charitable organization, Council asked for furthe"r investigation and clarification of that Section of the ordinance, particularly with regard to determination of exempt status. Jim Shearer felt the more exemptions incorporated into the ordinance, the less effective it would be. Merv Lapin felt the ordinance presented a conflict. While TOV encouraged locals to build and make improvements, he felt taxing those efforts was a deterrent. Mayor Osterfoss . suggested further research on this aspect of the ordinance, also. Residents and builders Nels Peterson, Jim Guido, Bruce Yanke, Galen Aasland, and Ted Simonett all spoke against passage of this ordinance. Bob Buckley commented on the high cost of living in TOV and felt addition of this use tax was too much, He suggested TOV look into increasing the number of uses of RETT dollars. Mayor Osterfoss said she wanted to review TOV's whole financial picture in depth. Steve said the material for such review could be prepared for Council by the June 9, 1992 work session. At this point, Jim Gibson moved to table Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1992, indefinitely. This motion went unseconded, and after Larry Eskwith and Steve expressed concern about possible passage of the proposed Bruce Amendment and requested tabling of the ordinance to a specific date prior to the first week of August, 1992, Jim Gibson recalled his motion. Rab Levine did not feel there had to be another exhaustive review of TOV's financial picture. He moved to pass Ordinance No. 15, 1992 on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-2, Merv Lapin and Bab Buckley opposed. Second reading of the ordinance was set far July 7,1992, to allow time far the requested investigation and clarifications. Item Na. 6 was Ordinance No. 17, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 2 - Administration and Personnel of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, by the addition of Chapter 2.56 concerning disposition of unclaimed property. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson explained the State was requiring a ten year accounting of i unclaimed deposits. All unclaimed money was to be returned to the State. He added this ordinance would allow TOV to deduct costs involved with processing of this accounting. Jim 2 ~ T r Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 17, 1992, on first reading, with a second from Merv Lapin. Before a vote was taken, Tom Steinberg asked the value of unclaimed property. Steve said the write off was a couple thousand dollars last year. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was Resolution No. 10, Series of 1992, a resolution opposing a statewide initiative to raise the Colorado Sales Tax from 3% to 4%. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Ron Phillips briefly explained the content of the resolution. Rob Levine requested a wording change in paragraph 4 to indicate the one cent sales tax could, not will, increase visitor and guest resistance to travel to Colorado. Jim Gibson objected to the resolution altogether, saying he felt education was of utmost important. Ran pointed out this was a tax policy question. Rob Levine moved to approve Resolution Na.10, Series of 1.992, with the requested wording change. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, Jim Gibson apposed. It was agreed a letter from Mayor Osterfoss would be prepared and mailed to other municipalities requesting they adapt similar resolutions. Item No. 8 was the appointment of two Local Licensing Authority Applicants. The first ballot taken resulted in the selection of Mitzi Thomas with 6 votes, and a tie vote between Davey Wilson and Don White at 4 votes each. A second ballot for the tie selected Don White. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. • ATTEST: ~l ic,a,.~u,, ~. MartHa S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne 5. Deto C:WIIN5JUN2.92 Respectfully submitted, Cif . ~S~-~[ _ ~ d Margret A. Osterfoss, M~or l' ~ ~.A MINUTES VATL TOWN COUNCTL MEETING JUNE 16, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, June 16, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfass, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Buckley Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: none Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Towza Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Tawn Clerk • The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Jeff Bowen, representing the Vail/Eagle Valley Rotary Club, reported on the success of the 1st Annual Tree Planting Project along I-70. Jeff read a letter of thanks to all sponsors and participants. The second item on the agenda was a Colorado Public Radio update by Montine Clapper, head of the local committee working to bring Colorado Public Radio {KCFR-NPR} to Vail Montine reported that the planning group has decided to raise the $21,000 funding needed to bring the translator for signal into the Vail Valley in the early fall of this year. That funding will be solicited from private donations. In time, the committee hopes to establish a studio in Eagle County, which would cost approximately $75,000, including the expense of the first year's operating budget. The group has applied to the National Telecommunications and Inf~~,,~ation Agency for a grant for this facility, and will also be seeking further community support. Ms. Clapper asked that a liaison from the Town of Vail be appointed to work with the local Colorado Public Radio committee. Ron Phillips was appointed to serve in that capacity. Third item on the agenda was Sandy Davies. Mrs. Davies introduced herself as the Democratic Candidate for County Commissioner, and briefly discussed her campaign strategy. Fourth item on the agenda was the appointment of a Planning and Environmental Commission member. Voting was done by paper ballot, with Jeff Bowen receiving the highest number of votes. Tam Steinberg moved to appoint Jeff Bowen to the PEC, such term to expire February, 1994. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Fifth item on the agenda was a motion to rescind approval on first reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1992, an ordinance amending Title 3 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 3.42 establishing a Use Tax; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Following a nine hour work session on June 9, 1992, at which the use tax was discussed extensively and then decided against in lieu of extending the term of Town debt and cutting numerous capital ~..,.,;ects f~~,.. the general fund and RETT, Merv Lapin moved to rescind the approval on first reading of Ordinance Na. 15, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken, and the motion passed, 5-2, Tom Steinberg and Rob Levine opposed. Merv Lapin then moved to deny Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1992. Jim Gibson seconded that motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed, 5-2, Tom Steinberg and Rob Levine apposed. Item number six on the agenda was Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Title 2 -Administration and Personnel of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, by the addition of Chapter 2.56 concerning disposition of unclaimed property. Steve Thompson reported to Council that no changes had been made to the ordinance since the first reading. Jim Gibson. moved to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1992, on second reading. Tom Steinberg seconded. There was some discussion regarding the procedural aspects of the property disposition. Larry Eskwith and Steve ~y Thompson stated it was important the Town have an ordinance in place prior to July of this year, or all property would have to be turned over to the state. They said specific procedure could be developed at a later date. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Item number seven on the agenda was Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.32 of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Section 2.32.135 -Court Costs, empowering the Municipal Court Judge to assess court costs to be paid by defendants in the Municipal Court of the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Larry Eskwith inf.,x.ued Council that this ordinance increases court costs to $15.00 for trials to the court and $30.00 for jury trials, bringing our municipal -court charges in line with those of other municipalities. Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992, an first reading. Merv Lapin seconded that motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Item number eight on the agenda was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 10 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 10.28 -Parking Infractions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Larry Eskwith stated that this ordinance provides for a late fee of $5.00 if parking tickets are not paid within 21 days. Merv Lapin asked if there was any relationship between the $5.00 charge and the actual cast. Larry Eskwith said this figure was requested by the Court, and was similar to charges used by other municipalities. Steve Thompson said this additional fee had not been considered during the budgeting process. Jim Gibson moved to ar,r~~,ae Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1992, on first reading. Jim Shearer seconded. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. .Item number nine on the agenda was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1992, f rst reading, an ordinance concerning the refunding of certain outstanding obligations; authorizing the issuance and sale of $7,900,000 single family revenue refunding bonds, 1992 Series A, to refund such obligations; ratifying certain action heretofore taken; authorizing the execution and delivery by the Town of a trust indenture, bond purchase agreement, assignment and amendment of origination and service agreements, option to purchase mortgage insurance, closing documents and such bonds in connection therewith; zx~,aking determinations as to the sufficiency of revenues and as to other matters related thereto; exercising the Town's option to redeem certain outstanding obligations; and repealing action heretofore taken in conflict herewith. Keith Tully, of George K. Baum, was present to give Council an update on the status of refunding the 1979 issue. Mr. Tully reported a projected $775,000 net savings tca the Town, and indicated they were working for an A rating. Because of the high concentration of the Pitkin Development, the fact that they are all condominiums, and that this is a resort town, additional mortgage insurance and over-collateralization of the bond issue was needed in order to satisfy Moody's requirements. Upon questioning by Merv Lapin, Mr. Tully indicated that George K. Baum would realize a $102,000 fixed fee in this endeavor. Any profit generated through trading would go to the Town of Vail, and all bonds will be Bald, with nothing held in inventory. In order to meet George K. Baum's timetable in offering bonds the week of June 29th, it was decided to call a special za.eeting on June 30th for the public hearing on this ordinance. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance 19, Series of 1991, on first reading, with the second reading scheduled for a special meeting on June 30, 1992. Merv Lapin . seconded this motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Item number ten on the agenda was the Town of Vail and Vail Resort Association Visitor Centers Agreement. As council was running ahead of the projected schedule, and Frank Johnson of the VRA was not yet in attendance, it was decided to move to item twelve on the agenda. Item twelve on the agenda was a call up by Town Council of the Design Review Board (DRB) decision approving the installation of an awning located on the west side of the Clock Tower Building (Gorsuch building) for the Ore House Restaurant, 232 Bridge Street, Lot A, Block 5, Vail Village First Filing. Shelly Mello gave a brief overview of the project, stating the ~w~~ers of the Ore House Restaurant made a request to locate a green awning approximately 12' in depth with a combined length of 55' along the west side of the Clock Tower Building adjacent to Bridge Street. The Design Review Board voted 3-2 to approve the request, with Sherry Dorward citing in her motion the installation would extend the use of the deck and add vitality to the area. Ned Gwathmey and Gena Whitten of the DRB opposed the motion, finding that although the request did conform with a number of the Vail Village Design Considerations, it would enclose and narrow Bridge Street to an unacceptable level and would not comply with several of the Vail Village Design Considerations. Ore House owners Larry Anderson and John Beaupre presented their r,...,ject and stated they had full support from .David Gorsuch, the building owner. Rod Slifer, owner of the adjacent building, stated he was concerned with the permanency of the year-round awning and the protrusion of the building into the street. Peggy Osterfoss said several Design Guidelines had not been met, specifically, there was no varied height, no irregular street edge, and the sun and shade issue on the deck had not been adequately addressed. After further discussion, 2 ~ ~ w 1Vlerv Lapin moved to uphold the DRB decision. Bob Buckley seconded that motion. A vote was taken, and the motion was defeated, 8-4, with Jim Gibson, Jim Shearer, Tom Steinberg, and Peggy Osterfoss opposed. Following further discussion, Merv Lapin moved to modify the DRB's a~.~,~~.~al to a one-year temporary approval with the plan as proposed. This motion also called for Larry Eskwith to draft a written agreement between the applicant and the Town regarding this temporary approval as it relates to the removal of the awning should it be determined that the installation does not meet the Vail Village design considerations. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed, 4-3, Jim Shearer, Tam Steinberg, and Peggy Osterfoss opposed.- At this time Council returned to items ten and eleven on the agenda. Item ten was the Town of Vail and Vail Resort Association (VRA) Visitor Centers Agreement providing far staffing of TOV's Visitor Centers by VRA. Item eleven was the Town of Vail and Vail Resort Association {VRA) Visitors Centers Agreement retaining VRA to act as a central reservations and marketing agent for TOV. Frank Johnson of the VR,A was present to address Council. questions on hours of operation. Frank responded that the VRA intends to extend operation hours on weekends during the summer. He also said the minimal number of calls between 6:00 P.M, and 8:00 A.M. do not make it cost effective for reservations to stay open during that time, that calls for information are handled by a recording, and that virtually all international business is done by FAX. Following further discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve both the Visitor Centers staffing agreement and the central reservations and marketing agent agreement. Bob Buckley seconded. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. There being no further business, Merv Lapin moved to adjourn to Executive Session, seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, a~ ~ G~._ Margaret A. Osterfoss, Ma~br ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Martha Raecker 3 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JULY 7, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Tawn Council was held on Tuesday, July 7, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:55 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson were not present as the meeting was called to order. First on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Item No. 2 was a Consent Agenda consisting of three items: A. Approval of Minutes of June 2, 1952, and June 16, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. B. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.32 of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Section 2.32.135 - Court Costs, empowering the Municipal Court Judge to assess court costs to be paid by defendants in the Municipal Court of the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance Na.13, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Title 10 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 1028 - Parking Infractions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Jim Shearer moved to approve the Consent Agenda • with one correction to the fourth item of the minutes of the June 16, 1992, evening meeting to indicate newly appointed Planning and Environmental Commission member, Jef1'Bowen's, term would expire in February, 1994. Tam Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0, Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson not yet present. Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson joined the meeting at this point. Item No. 3 was a presentation of the 1991 audited financial statement. Steve Thompson introduced Jerry McMahan, President of McMahan, Armstrong, Novosad and Anderson, P.C., the firm which had performed the audit. Mr. McMahan indicated the audit was now completed, adding the audit had gone very well with very few item adjustments having been required. He advised a letter regarding minor accounting housekeeping issues had been delivered to Steve Barwick, and commented on the drastic improvement in the Towxz's accounting system over the last six to seven years. The audit materials and report had been assembled by the Town, resulting in unspecified savings to the Town. Mr. McMahan advised the a~.N~~,ximate cost of this audit was $19,000, about the same as last year's audit. After brief discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve and accept the 1991 audited financial statement as presented, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the matian passed unanimously, 7-0. Steve Thompson in1'~,~~ed Council the report contained two minor typographical e~,..,,. s which would be corrected. Before adjournment, Ron Phillips officially introduced TOV's new Director of Public Works, 1 .~ Larry Grafel. Council welcomed Larry. ln. addition, Jim Gibson moved to schedule an Executive Session, regarding the GHI Bankruptcy status, for Thursday, July 9, 1992, at 6:40 P.M, at the offices of Kutak Rock & Campbell, 2400 Arco Tower, 707 17th Street, Denver, Colorado. Merv Lapin secox>.ded this motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0-1, Bob Buckley abstaining. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Marga~t A. Osterfoss, Mayor ~/ ATTEST: 1{/I.~ ~. IQa,ec~. Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by dorianne S. peto i r-, C:1MIN5JUL7.92 2 ., r MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JULY 21, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council. was held on Tuesday, July 21, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro-Tem, Tom Steinberg, at 7:30 P.M. Mayor Osterfoss arrived after Tom read the title of agenda item No. 6, Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992. ' MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Buckley Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jim Shearer Merv Lapin TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Davey Wilson, forxner ~n.ember ofthe Liquor Licensing Authority, expressed his concerns relative to the May 26, 1992, Council interviews of applicants for two positions which became open on the Authority in June, 1992, due to term expirations. Mr. Wilson was not reappointed to ~ the Authority after the interviews. He questioned the effectiveness of the interview process, and asked Council to explain the decision making process for selection of new members to the Authority. He also noted there were n.o longer any members on the Authority in the liquor service industry. For the record, Larry Eskwith said there could not be a licensee sitting on the Authority, but there could be individuals working in the liquor distribution industry. As it was agreed this was not the forum for individual questioning of Council members, Jinn Gibson advised Mr. Wilson to contact Council members individually to discuss their personal votes. Next, Blondie Vucich advised the final adoption of the trapping regulation would take place on Thursday, 7/23/92, at the Holiday Inn/University Parkin Ft. Collins. She state there was still concern the proposal recommended by Division of Wildlife staff was not in line with what had been agreed upon through numerous meetings with Division of Wildlife representatives and Vail's community representatives. She felt it needed to be kn.awn that, in the event a statewide regulation failed, Vail's regulation could remain in place. Ms. Vucich thanked Council for their most recent letter dated July 16, 1992, to individual members of the Colorado Wildlife Commission. Item No. 2 on the agenda was approval of the minutes of the June 30, 1992, Special Evening Meeting minutes. Jim Gibson waved to approve the June 30, 1992, Special Evening Meeting minutes, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-0, Mayor Osterfoss not yet present. Item No. 3 was the appointment of Building Board of Appeals Members. Gary Murrain asked Council to appoint all six applicants interviewed on July 14, 1892, for the five positions on this Board. He Hated the first ct+a»enge for this Board would be to write up the Board's procedures for presentation to Council far adoption. Rob Levine moved to appoint all six applicants, Bill Anderson, Robert L. Arnold, David M. Floyd, Mark J. Mueller, David M. Peel, and Saundra Spaeh to the Building Board of Appeals with the understanding that Gary would return to Council with the rules and regulations developed for the Board before they were finalized. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-0, Mayor Osterfoss not yet present. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Section 18.24.055, controlling undesirable plants within the Tawn, declaring such plants a nuisance, setting forth penalties for the violation of this ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Pro-Tem Steinberg read the title in full. Mayor Osterfass arrived at this time. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Bob Buckley stated the penalties shown for violation of this ordinance were too severe. He requested the penalties be modified to eliminate the jail sentence, and reduce the indicated fine to be more in line with what it would cost Town or the State to have the weeds removed. Larry Eskwith advised the penalty Shawn was a standard penalty listed in the Municipal Code for an ordinance violation, but Council could set whatever minimum or maximum penalty they felt was appropriate. Ran Phillips explained the penalty shown covered the range of penalties set in the Municipal Cade, and the appropriate penalty within that range would be determined by ~he judge. Larry indicated the State, in the 1991 Legislative Session, passed a statute whit required both counties and municipalities to either have an undesirable plant management plan for all lands within their jurisdiction, ar pass an ordinance outlawing the undesirable plants by January 1, 1992. Todd Oppenheimer explained the state legislation came about primarily as a result of large agricultural industry economic production losses determined to be caused by the weeds identified by the State. Tom Steinberg initiated discussion regarding the four weeds identified by the State, and also the use of herbicides and their potential non-point source water conta~+~nation. Todd noted the State Act was very clear about integrated management techniques including educational preventative measures, good stewardship, and mechanical, chemical, and biological control methods. He said TOV presently used all three control methods. James Johnson was concerned about the enforcement section of the ordinance. He felt it should be clarified that proper notice should be given during reasonable . business hours prior to TOV's entry upon any premises, public or private. Larry indicated the State statute specifically gave the right far entry as indicated. He noted that could be deleted, but that would make it very difficult to enforce the ordinance. Discussion followed regarding the need for public education, and Jim Gibson agreed to add the need far an educational program to his original motion, and Jim Shearer agreed to second the motion with that addition. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-3, Tom Steinberg, Rab Levine, and Bob Buckley opposed. Rob Levine then moved to approve Ordinance Na. 11, Series of 1992, on first reading, with elimination of the ninety day potential jail sentence, deletion of the Russian and Canadian Thistle, and the addition of an educational program. Peggy seconded that motion. Before another vote was taken, the general penalty clause in the Municipal Cade was again explained, and it was determined no precedent would be set if the penalty was changed far this ordinance. A final vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-2, Bob Buckley and Tom Steinberg opposed. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the Town of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen explained • this ordinance was passed on first reading on May 7,1991. Since that time, staff had worked with concerned individuals, and revised the ordinance significantly. He noted the Town had updated the monumentatian for all of the view corridors, and a new ordinance, Na.18, Series of 1992, was written which included different legal descriptions for each view corridor. Andy said staff now recommended Ordinance No 13, Series of 1991, be denied on second reading, and indicated the revised version, Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, was prepared for first reading as agenda item Na. 6 at this meeting. Tom Steinberg moved to deny Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1991, on second reading, with a second from Bob Buckley. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 6 was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the Town of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Cade of the Tawn of Vail to provide far the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. 1Vlayar Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen advised staff and a public committee worked on this new ordinance, and he said three major areas were discussed during their meetings. The first was identifying criteria for evaluating requests to alter view corridors, second was addressing fatal points such as the clock tower within this ordinance, and third was establishing the appropriate processes to allow for variations to the proposed standards. Jim Lamont suggested there be an appeal process for consultants the Town may hire to ,evaluate a proposal for view corridor alterations. Council agreed the process to hire a consultant far an SDD that involved revzew by Council would be acceptable 2 for this process and decided to add wording consistent with the SDD section. Andy spoke next about the second issue raised by Mr. Lamont which concerned height limitations. Andy said Mr. Lamont and he were basically in agreement at this point that when an SDD • application was submitted, it would still need to conform to the view corridor boundaries, and anyone applying for an SDD which would exceed the identified boundaries would simultaneously have to apply for a view corridor amendment or an encroachment. Andy advised na encroachments, including vents, elevator shafts, chimneys, pipes, etc., were allowed within the view corridor without and a~.endment or an encroachment. Andy then briefly reviewed the entire ordinance item by item, e~N~~ssly indicating the Notice and Hearing Procedure section as a key element of the ordinance. After further discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7 was Ordinance Na. 20, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 16.24.010{G) of the Vail Municipal Code, setting Earth provisions relating to signs displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event within the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tim Devlin reviewed research done on how other resort communities were dealing with the cold air balloon issue. Tim noted input was also received from Tom Davies. Discussion followed concerning the number of cold air balloons allowed for any special event, details concerning the time and ~~„~k involved for inflation and deflation of the balloons, and tightening of the ordinance verbiage to specify limitation of inflation time. Jim Shearer asked if the Vail Valley Foundation had made any input on the issue. Joe Macy stated this issue came up in the Vail Valley Foundation's planning for the • World Cup Mountain Bike Finals. He said sponsors involved wanted recognition of their participation, and he thought some events might be last without the option of the cold air balloons available for sponsors to showcase their products. He noted the special events were a great financial benefit to Vail. After discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, on first reading with the added provision that the balloons could only be inflated during the special event and related ceremonies, with reasonable time allowed for set-up and take-down of the balloons; also, the ordinance was to be reviewed in one year. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. After brief discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-2, Tom Steinberg and Jim Gibson opposed. item No. 8 was Resolution No. 11, Series of 1992, a resolution adopting a Joint Paratransit Plan with the Town of Avon and the City of Leadville. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Mike Rose advised July 26, 1992, was the deadline for adoption of the plan in order to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. After brief discussion, Tom Steinberg moved to approve Resolution No il, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Before adjournment, Mayor Osterfoss acknowledged receipt of a gift of $x,040.00 from the Vail Valley Foundation to be used toward the Art in Public Places project at the Vail . Transportation Center. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, G'/~-tic.-r 1.u.C/D (Y Margar~ A. Osterfoss, Mayor r~ L ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Uorianne 5. Deto C;IMINJUL21.92 3 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 4, 1992 7:30 P.M. • A regular meeting of the Vai] Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 4, 1992, 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 Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jun Shearer Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Tawn Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, ,Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk . The first item on the agenda was Citizen Paxticipation. Kim Langmaid, Tim Luskow, Pat Mcllveen, Evie Nott, and Paul Rondeau voiced mutual concerns about the Far 3 Golf Course/Booth Creek development. They each felt there was a lack of public knowledge about the issue, and requested a community-wide public hearing and review of the issue. Mayor Osterfoss stated there had been ample public process, but Council agreed to schedule a final joint CounciWail Recreation District (VRD) public meeting to receive additional public input. Hermann Staufer agreed to work with Ron Phillips and the VRD to organize a public meeting to be held after the Planning and Environmental Commission {PEC) public meeting scheduled for August 10, 1992. Larry Eskwith advised there would not be a problem with delaying execution of the lease with the VRD an the project until after the final public hearing and review. Next, Diana Donovan expressed concern about the condition of the road between Gold Peak axa.d the soccer field. Peggy Osterfoss advised funds for imY~~~ements to that road were in the budget. Lastly, Josef Staufer asked for an update oxz the Vail. cemetery issue. Kxistan Pritz informed Mr. Staufer candidates had been interviewed for re-activation of the Cemetery Task Force. Paul Rondeau noted he had reviewed the Cemetery RFP, and felt the RFP should have been . mare concise in stating overall objectives. Peggy Osterfoss encouraged Mr. Rondeau to speak further with Kristan about participating on the Cemetery Task Force. Item No. 2 was a Consent Agenda consisting of three items: A. Approval of July 7, 1992, and July 21, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. B. Ordinance Na. 11, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Section 18.24.058, controlling undesirable plants within the Town, declaring such plants a nuisance, setting forth penalties for the violation of this ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance No. 18, Series of X992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the T~~u of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Cade of the Town of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Tam Steinberg requested item B, Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, be removed from the Consent Agenda for additional discussion. Jim Gibson then moved to approve Consent Agenda items A and C, with a second from Tom Steinberg. 1 A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5=Q. Discussion of item B, Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, followed. Larry Eskwith noted the potential jail penalty for violation of this ordinance, and the inclusion of Russian and Canadian Thistles as undesirable plants had been deleted from this ordinance since first reading. He suggested the request from Council to include a public education program as part of this ordinance be taken care of separately by the Public Works Department through announcements, meetings, and a photo campaign. Todd Oppenheimer stated the purpose of this ordinance was to fulfill a State mandate, part of which required an educational program as part of an integrated weed control management plan. Todd indicated the educational program was something he could organize. FIo Steinberg initiated discussion xegarding environmental hazards related to chemical spraying of weeds. Peggy Osterfoss explained the weeds named in this ordinance had very negative potential with regard to agriculture, and added that was the reason the State had asked TOV to cooperate with removal of them. She specified this ordinance had nothing to do with chemical spraying of weeds ar any policy of how weed control was accomplished. Flo agreed, but noted TOV had been spraying for years, and was concerned spraying would continue without question. She felt Council should consider that issue. Nancy Rondeau, volunteer coordinator at the Vail Alpine Garden, also expressed concern about chemical spraying in Town. She felt the chain. reaction after use of these chemicals was not fully understood. Rob Levine agreed, but repeated Peggy's note that spraying control was not the intention of this ordinance, and added this ordinance clearly indicated removal of the four specified weeds was to be accomplished zn an "ecologically feasible and environmentally safe manner." Council agreed the issue of chemical spraying should be an issue to be addressed separately. Peggy asked Tadd to prepare a report on TOV weed control practices far discussion as a separate issue at a work session. • Hermann Staufer wondered if Council had considered the TOV as the biggest landowners in the Valley, and asked if TOV would have tc} hire someone to make sure the weeds were removed from all TOV property. Tam Steinberg noted this was a State mandate without any funding source, and felt the only reason it was in place was for the agricultural interests. He expressed desire to challenge the State on it. Rob Levine agreed the agricultural community was asking for cooperation, but felt the tourism based economy may need coopexation from other parts of the state at some point. He felt cooperation and working together within reason was appr.,~,~~.ate. Jim Shearer agreed with Rob, and felt if TOV was responsible with its eradication methods, this ordinance should be passed. Jim Gibson felt cooperation with the State was in order because the issue of the four weeds in the ordinance had presented problems elsewhere. Peggy felt when TOV could cooperate with the State, she was ix~. favor. Jinx Gibson then moved to approve Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, on second reading, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-1, Tam Steinberg opposed. Peggy noted the public education program, weed control, chemical spraying and fertilizer use reports to be organized by Todd were awaited. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 2Q, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 16.24.010(G) of the Vail Municipal Code, setting forth provisions relating to signs . displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event within the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tim Devlin briefly reviewed the revisions to this ordinance since first reading. Peggy noted that fallowing a discussion of this ordinance, the next agenda item was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, an emergency ordinance setting forth a special review process to allow for staff approvals for temporary signage, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements far the 1992 Mountain Bike ~Varld Cup Finals. Ron Phillips suggested both ordinances be discussed simultaneously. He explained there had been considerable concern expressed by a number of people in the communty about Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, and, therefore, emergency Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, had been proposed for consideration as an option to Ordinance No. 2U. He noted Ordinance Na. 21 was patterned after an emergency ordinance adopted by Council in 1988 to allow for this same procedure to take place for the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships in Vail. Peggy explained Ordinance No. 20 would allow cold air balloons in a fairly controlled setting on an ongoing basis in conjunction with special events, whereas Ordinance No. 21, would allow cold air balloons in conjunction with one upcoming event scheduled far September 3-7, 1992, Labor Day weekend. Ron said, after having met with John Garnsey of the Vail Valley Foundation (VVF), substituting a compromise would be apprw~,~~ate as an emergency at this point, due to the time frame involved with a second reading. Discussion followed about the nature of cold air balloons and their place in Vail. John Garnsey said the VVF was philosophically in agreement with Council regarding cold air balloons. However, he advised for this particular event, three sponsors representing $30,QQQ toward this event, would not support this event if they could not use this form of advertising. He said the VVF resisted, 2 but, based on what the VVF perceived as minor opposition to Ordinance No. 20,1992, which passed an first reading, the sponsors signed agreements to participate. Mr. Garnsey said the VVF did not have the capability to find replacements for these sponsors if they pulled out, and subsequently, the loss of $30,000 for the event, and possibly loss of the event was there. The VVF now asked Council for help because of the predicament the VVF was in. Josef . Staufer, Eric Affeldt, Jim Lamont, and Hermann Staufer spoke against allowing the cold air balloons. Further, Mr. Staufer did not feel emergency ordinaxzces were designed for this type of circumstance. Pat Mcllveen, professional mountain biker, stated there had been cold air balloons, hot air balloons, banners, and all different types of signage as part of races he had participated in, and he felt all of these forms of advertising were part of the excitement of the events. After Council members voiced fiirther individual feelings regarding Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, Tom Steinberg moved to deny Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1:992, on second reading, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-1, Rob Levine opposed. Further discussion followed about Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992. Jim Gibson felt an emergency ordinance should be a very rare occurrence .for something very crucial to the Town and the citizenry of Vail. Tom Steuzberg agreed. They felt this was a misuse of emergency ordinance rulings. Peggy said there was Council, consensus for approaching this as a regular ordinance rather than an emergency ordinance. Discussion of Ordinance No. 21 as a regular ordinance allowing cold air balloons for this single event culminated in a motion by Jim Shearer to approve Ordinance Na. 21, Series of 1992, on first reading, as a regular ordinance with the inclusion of the cold air balloon limitations previously incorporated into Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, before it was denied on second reading. Rob Levine seconded the • motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-1, Jim Gibson opposed. Peggy added, because TOV was working with the VVF, and because Council had passed Ordinance No. 20 an first reading, it would be appropriate to support the cold air balloons for this specific event. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. i3, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town of Vail to hire certain consultants to provide expert advice to the Town for the purpose of protecting the Town's interest in the proper operation and management of Vail Associates, Inc. {VA.) Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. She explained the future success of VA was inextricably connected to the future success of Vail, and TOV felt it was important for the Town to be kept informed of the options for working with VA to further the interest of all community members by fulfilling TOV's fiduciary responsibility to the community. She strongly emphasized this resolution in no way indicated any decision or predisposition. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 13, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Eric A~'~1dt asked whether a dollar limitation had been set for the cost of this research. He also asked what had been spent to date. Larry Eskwith said approximately fifteen thousand dollars had been paid to Kutak Rock for monitoring the GHI bankruptcy proceedings. Joe Macy also inquired about the cast. Larry indicated potential cost was dependent on actual tasks to be accomplished, and Ron Phillips noted potential cost . for this work had been discussed in Executive Session. Peggy advised estimated potential costs ranged from $25,000 to $50,000. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 6 was Resolution No. 15, Series of 1992, a resolution recognizing Madame Sophia Galovkina as an honorary citizen of the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 15, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item Na. 7 was selection of an und~~ Y~L~ter for the planned refunding of some of the Town's existing debt issues. Steve Barwick noted Hanifen Imhoff had been hired by TOV as financial advisor to evaluate proposals from unde1w~~ters. Steve introduced Nate Eckloff, Senior Vice President of the investment banking firm, Hanifen, Imhoff, Inc. Mr. Eckloff explained a memo from his firm to Council dated August 4, 1992, regarding their evaluation of proposals to refund the Town's sales tax revenue bonds. He detailed the background, methodology, and analysis procedure of the proposals received. He explained his firm's recommendation to combine Kemper Securities as senior managing und~2 wL.ter and George K. Baum as co-manager. Steve said negotiations had been conducted with both firms, and an agreement had been reached on how this arrangement would be structured and split between the two firms. After brief discussion, Rob Levine moved to adopt stafl°s recommendation to hire Kemper Securities as the lead underwriter, and George K. Baum as the co-manager. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. 3 _, Prior to moving to the next agenda item, Tam Steinberg asked Steve Jeffers, representing George K. Baum, about the status of the Pitkin Creek bonds. Mr: Jeffers advised the bands closed with no last minute problems. Item No. S was the review of a Town of Vail Agreement for Fire Su~.~,~,,ssion and Protection Services between the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc. Dick Duran briefly explained the agreement. Tam Steinberg moved to approve the agreement between TOV and VA far fire suppression and protection services, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-4. Item No. 9 was review of a proposed contract for Tawn of Vail 1992 Street Seal Program. Larry Grafel explained the upcoming maintenance program, and noted this was a new investment for a program to extend the life of roadways included in the project fi~,,,,. five to eight years. Memos dated July 24, 1992, and July 44, 1992, from Public Works listed bidder results, project time frame, and explained the street seal program process. Ron Phillips added it was felt this was a major maintenance program Council should be informed of and have the opportunity to review before execution of a contract to proceed. After discussion primarily concerning heavy construction equipment impact on the roadways, Council unanimously agreed to approve execution of the contract, 5-4. Item Na. 10 was a Town Council appeal of the PEC decision to approve a request to amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration relating to the CCI parking pay-in- lieufee for the Red Lion Building, located at 344 Bridge Street. The pay-in-lieu option allows businesses in Vail Village and Lionshead to pay the Town a fee instead of building parking ' • spaces in pedestrian areas. Mike Mollica briefly reviewed the background and description of the applicant's request as described in the Community Development Department's (CDD} memo to the PEC dated July 27, 1992. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, Vencura, Ltd., requested Council uphold the PEC decision to delete the previously accepted condition requiring the applicant to pay any incremental increase in the Town's pay-in-lieu parking fees established within two years from the time a building permit was issued for the Red Lion Building redevelopment. The applicant, through Mr. -Peterson, had accepted that condition of approval at the April 17, 1994 Tawn Council evening meeting. After accepting this condition and completing the Red Lion redevelopment, Mr. Peterson said he became aware of two other projects, the Gasthoff Gramshammer and the Lancelot additions, which were not required to pay the increased pay-in-lieu fee. Mr. Peterson felt it was unfair that the condition was not placed on all additions. Jim Gibson said there was a difference i.n this case in that the owners of the other developments said, at the time of the review of their plans, they were unwilling to pay the higher fee, and the applicant in this case agreed to pay. After discussion, Jim Gibson moved to overturn the PEC's decision of July 27, 1992, approving a request to amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration relating to the CCI parking pay-in-lieu fee for the Red Lion Building. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-4. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed • unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Ma~or ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:\1VdiN51#UG4.92 4 r w TRANSCRIPT OF THE RECORDED PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGULAR EVENING MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO AGENDA ITEM #5: RESOLUTION NO. 13, BERIES OF 1992 COUNCIL CHAMBERS VATL MUNICIPAL BUILDING 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD VAIL, COLORADO (303} 479-2100 TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: CITIZENS PARTICIPATING: Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rondall V. Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Martha S. Raecker, Towa Clerk Erin Affeldt, representing RSL Joe Macy, representing Vail Associates ~~ TRANSCRIPT OF AGENDA ITEM NO. 5, RESOLUTION N0. 13, SERIES OF 1992, OF THE TQWN COUNCIL MEETING OF THE TOWN OF VAIL HELD ON AUGUST 4, 1992. PEGGY OSTERFOSS: Next item on the agenda is Resolution 13, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town of Vail to hire certain consultants to provide expert advice to the Town for the purpose of protecting the Town's interest in the proper operation and management of Vail Associates, Incorporated. This resolution has arisen based on the fact that, as we are all aware, the future success of our c~s,u„unity is inextricably connected to the future success, of the ski company, and, to be specific, the Town is concerned with being informed regarding options far working with ownership to further the interest of all members of our community. This resolution in no way, in no way, shape, or form indicates any mind set or decision or predisposition. It is simply because of the importance of the ski area to the Town of Vail, and let me underscore once again that nothing should be read into this other than fulfilling our fiduciary responsibi~.ity to the community. 2 f JIM GIBSON: • JTM SHEARER: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: ERIC AFFELDT: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: • ERIC AFFELDT: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: ERIC AFFELDT: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: LARRY ESKWITH: I move for approval of Resolution No. 13, Series of 1992. Second. Moved by Jim Gibson, seconded by Jim Shearer, Zs there discussion? Eric. Just a quick question, whether this calls for an open checkbook or whether it is a dollar limitation, or whether, who knows, have you all discussed that? I think that is a difficult and appropriate question and a difficult one to answer. There is no question that it will require the expenditure of some money. But at this point the council hasn't determined that it's worth fifty thousand or five hundred thousand dollars to do this research. That's true. O.K. What has the council spent to date on this type of research? I think Larry can confirm, I think, is it fifteen thousand or something? I think that we've paid Kutak Rock approximately fifteen thousand dollars to both monitor the bankruptcy proceedings which involved going to various hearings, reviewing 3 various court pleadings, and, in addition, they have also done a certain analysis of various plans that have been filed with the court for reorganization and an analysis of the final plans as well for that sum. ERTG AFFELDT: O.K. Thanks. PEGGY OSTERFOSS: Thanks, Eric. Other comments? Joe. JOE MACY: I am Joe Macy with Vail Associates. Has the Town seen the proposal from these lawyers or from this investment bank and if so what are the amounts for these services that you are soliciting and putting out an RFP, what's • going on? PEGGY OSTERFOSS: Well, there has been, I'm not sure that, maybe • Larry can answer that. LARRY ESKWITH: There have been discussions with various potential attorneys, there have been no discussions with investment bankers, there have been estimates of a potential cost with various types of tasks depending on what tasks we need to have accomplished. JOE MACY: I think Eric asked a very good question. Are you looking at spending fifteen thousand, five thousand, five hundred thousand? I mean I . spend as much time here as many of you do and I know that you don't go ahead in other 4 • PEGGY OSTERFOSS: RON PHILLIPS: JOE MACY: • PEGGY OSTERFOSS: JOE MACY: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: JIM GIBBON: PEGGY OSTERFOSS: situations and make decisions with a blank check. . You know - I don't think there's a blank check, Joe. T think the council has an idea of what it may cost to do this work. That's been discussed in executive session. Maybe the public would like to hear the magnitude of that number, whether it's small, large or medium. I mean you talked about your fiduciary responsibility just a moment ago. Naw you're basically saying you're going to go out and da whatever it is that you want to do and you don't know how much it's going to cost. I mean I think the citizens of this Town, Peggy, I think have a right to know how much you're going to spend on this thing. Maybe twenty-five thousand, maybe fifty thousand. I mean, I think, Joe, that you know I guess that I can name a number here and I think that it would be in that range. Thank you far that answer. Other comments. Call the question. O.K. The question has been called. All in favor of passing Resolution 13, Series of 5 r 1992. JIM GTBSON: Yes. ' ROB LEVINE: Yes. JTM SHEARER: Yes. TOM STEINBERG: Yes. PEGGY OSTERFOSS: Opposed? (pause) PEGGY OSTERFOSS: And T'm in favors that passes unanimously. Thank you very much. 6 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETIlVG AUGUST 18, 1992 8:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 18, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 8:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pra-Tem Bob Buckley Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Tawn Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Tawn Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second an the agenda was an update on the Town of Vail management systems review being conducted by Browne, Bortz & Coddington {BBC). Bob Mach introduced Dave Keen, Director of BBC. Mr. Keen advised BBC had been working with a Task Force comprised of Council members, TOV staff, and Vail residents to reassess TOV systems and identify ways TOV might improve its operations. He emphasized this review was not a personnel review. After a brief slide presentation, Mr. Keen indicated BBC had applied the Total Quality Management process in their review of approximately 100 individuals to date, and added after further confidential meetings with TOV employees and a randomly selected cross-section of Vail citizens, BBC expected to return to Council in early October, 1992, with a full preliminary report. He said a strong set of findings and recommendations far action would be available to Council in late October, 1992. Item No. 3 was a presentation by Ted Martin regarding the Celestial Seasonings Bicycle Classic scheduled for 8120-23/92. Mr. Martin gave an update on the race, including inf~~~atian about participants in the race, team sizes, promotionaVadvertising efforts made, and sponsor information. He noted there was only one local in this year's race, and the race . was apro-only team race with a $25,000 cash prize for the winner. Mr. Martin said 7,500 - 10,000 spectators were anticipated in Vail Village on Saturday, 8/22, and requested a Council member help hand out awards that day. Item No. ~ was a Consent Agenda consisting of one item, Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance setting forth a special review process to allow for staff approvals for temporary signage, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements far the 1992 Mountain Bike World Cup Finals. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson asked the item be removed from the Consent Agenda for additional discussion. Tim Devlin then explained the ordinance was no longer an emergency ordinance, and the guidelines specifically related to cold air balloons fi „~ previously denied Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, were incorporated into Ordinance No. 21. Jahn Garnsey again asked for Council's support because of the precarious position the VVF was in with regard to the sponsors of this event. It was noted this ordinance was for this one event only. But, Mr. Garnsey indicated, as the market became more competitive and it became more difficult to bring in the corporate dollars to run these types of events, he could not say he would not be before Council again with this same type of request. There was brief discussion about the equipment needed for filling up the cold air balloons, and potential noise factors. Jim Shearer moved to approve Ordinance Na. 21, Series of 1992, with a second from Rob Levine. Before a vote was taken, Jim Gibson spoke of his reluctance about cold air balloons, and recommended voting no on • the issue now in deference to what may happen. in the future. He recalled TOV had sent Kent Rase and John Garnsey to Italy to get this race here, that TOV wanted the race here, 1 ~' but felt the race and need far the balloons were not inextricably bound. Merv agreed, but said he viewed this as an opportunity to see how the cold air balloons were handled, how they looked, and for after-event public input. He stated he would have no trouble saying no in the future if he found these balloons detracted from the quality of Vail. Mayor Osterfass felt a positive aspect to Ordinance No. 21 was it set up a precedent for case by case review. She felt it would be helpful if TOV could have feedback after this event to be utilized in the future. She felt it was important, until there was additional evidence indicating this was appropriate on a regular basis, this kind of approval be linked to a specific event rather than being a blank approval. Jim Shearer called the question. A vote was then taken and the motion passed, 5-2, Jim Gibson. and Tom Steinberg apposed. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance creating a new Chapter 18.57 -Employee Housing and setting forth details in regard thereto; amending Chapter 18.10, 18.12, 18.13, 18.14, 18.16, 1.8.18, 18.20, 18.22, 18.24, 18.27, 18.28, 18.29, 18.34,18.36, and 18.39 to provide for the addition of employee housing units as permitted or conditional uses within certain zone districts within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto; amending Chapter 18.4, setting forth certain definitions for an. employee housing unit, a bathroom, and a kitchenette. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Kristan Pritz said she understood some Council members wanted more time to review this ordinance. Both Kristan and Mayor Osterfoss noted the ordinance concepts were familiar, but, since there had been 10-12 revised drafts since Council last saw the ordinance, the wording was different. Staff felt it was important for Council to review the ordinance as now presented. Merv Lapin wanted tQ review it with staff during the next scheduled work session, primarily because Council had two new members who were not fully familiar with . the potential impact of this ordinance. Tom Steinberg and Bab Buckley supported the idea o£reviewing the ordinance at next work session. Jim Gibson did not want any further delay, and asked for first reading of the ordinance at this meeting. Abe Shapiro felt the concept of employee housing units {EHUs) was good and absolutely necessary, but he felt Agricultural Open Space zoning was omitted from the ordinance from being entitled to EHUs. He Hated he had spoken with Kristan, and she had advised him the Community Development Department did not foresee any problem with including ag open space property under Type II EHUs. There was discussion about keeping ag open space out of the ordinance because of the character and intent of that zone district. Further discussion followed about the use and allocation of 250s. Council took a series of straw votes, and decided each side of the duplex in Primary/Secondary and Duplex Zone Districts should be entitled to a 250 and the property should be entitled to a total of 500 additional square feet of GRFA. Council unanimously decided Type II EHUs should not be eligible for credits. They also voted in support of Abe Shapiro's request to include Type IT EHUs as a conditional use in ag open space zoning. There was same discussion as to whether the 425 square foot GRFA credit should be available to Type I EHUs. Staffadvised Type I EHUs as proposed in the ordinance were what was currently allowed in the present zoning code, and these units were being constructed today with the 42a square foot GRFA credit. Staff believed the proposed Employee Hauling ordinance should not alter the formulas used to determine GRFA on properties. Staff reemphasized the potential amount of GRFA an lots would not increase as a result of this ordinance. The only impact this ordinance would have on GRFA was that it would allow a property u~~~er to use the 250 earlier than what current coda provided for. To be certain there was full understanding of the ordinance, Peggy suggested the ordinance be gone through at this meeting to evaluate the number of questions needing clarification, and based on that, make a decision whether or not to table the ordinance to next work session. It was further noted TOV wanted to encourage development of EHUS, and therefore, waxa.ted to move f.,~ ~w and in a timely manner. Using the chart an the back of the ordinance which displayed standards for each of the five different types of EHUS in the ordinance, Andy Knudtsen explained the meaning of Employee Housing Unit, and discussed each EHU-type criteria. Council questions and comments followed Andy's description of each type of EHU. Comments included expressed questions about 425x, 250 credits, parking requirements, ag open space, and connecting doors. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992, on first reading with modification to include agricultural open space utilization as part of Type II EHUs, that no additional credits would be added far a Type TI EHU, that a second 250 could be utilized an the five year time frame in addition to the 250 that could be used up front or pooled for 500 up front for Type II EHUs. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, there was additional discussion concerning credits for Type I and Type 5 EHUs. Tt was agreed to keep 425 credit for each of these EHU types, and wording needed to be changed to indicate there needed to be separate enbt y mays. Bob Buckley stated he was uncomfortable voting for this ordinance until he had further understanding of it. He 2 ~ - planned to meet with Kristan and Andy for explanation prior to second reading. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-3, Tom Steinberg, Merv Lapin, and Bob Buckley opposed. It was agreed a work session discussion particularly focused on Council's question regarding agricultural open space would be scheduled for 8/24192. Additionally, Merv Lapin expressed concerxa. about potential increased traffic and density as a result of this ordinance. Jim Shearer said he felt it was TOV's responsibility to increase employee housing as much as possible, and to encourage the private sector to follow suit. Item No. 6 was Resolution No. 12, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute a contract between the Department of Transportation and the Town of Vail providing far the cooperation in. an enhancement project for design and construction of a bicycle recreation trail, which will be a new bridge south of I-70 slang Gore Creek between West Vail and the Dowd Junction interchange, Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to ar~.....~e Resolution No. 12 Series of 1992, with a second fi~,u. Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0, Jim Gibson temporarily away from Council Chambers. Larry Grafel briefly explained that minor changes to the negotiated contract centered around clarifying the difference between capital maintenance and the operational maintenances as far as responsibilities, to make sure the right-of--ways TOV purchased or made easements against remained with TOV and not with the state, and any-right-of--way licensing that would have to take place between the railroad would be done between the state and the railroad itself. Item No. 7 was action an a proposed contract with Telecommunications Management Corp. to analyze the application by Tri-County Television, Inc. far a Tawn of Vail franchise. Larry Eskwith explained because of potential conflicts with TCI, he felt it would be wise to bring in a consultant with overbuild experience. The consultant would be paid fi,,,,. part of the $10,000 fee the applicant was required to pay for administrative services. By using the consultant, Larry felt TOV might be able to mitigate conflicts between this overbuild and TCI. He would like, if possible, to avoid a litigation situation. After brief discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve the contract with Telecommunications Management Services, Inc., with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion. passed unanimously, 7-0. Before the meeting was adjourned, Pam Brandmeyer reminded those present about the following meetings: * Wednesday, 8119192, at 5:15 P.M. - Speak-Up Meetings ~ C.J. Capers. * Thursday, 8/20/92, at 7:30 A.M. - Symposium Breakfast ~ The Lodge at Vail. * Thursday, 8120192, at 7:00 P.M. - Special Evellillg Meeting: Par 3 Golf Course. * Friday, 8/21/92, ~ 11:30 A.M. - International Bridge Ribbon Cutting. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Margaret A. Osterfoss, May46r ATTEST: II/l•unt~~. ~ . P ~~ Martha S. Raecker, Tawn Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:WIINAUG18.92y MINUTES SPECIAL EVENING 1V~~TING, AUGUST 20, 1982, 7:00 P.M. A JOINT PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL AND THE VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT REGARDING THE PROPOSED BOOTH FALLS PAR 3 GOLF COURSE PROJECT A joint public meeting with the Town of Vail and the Vail Recreation District regarding the proposed Booth Falls Par 3 Golf Course project was held on Thursday, August 20, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tern Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ken Wilson, Chairman of the VRD Rob Robinson, Director of the VRD Mayor Peggy Osterfoss gave a brief meeting overview. In response to community residents questions and concerns, the Vail Town Council and the Vail Recreation District (VRD) organized this meeting for input on this proposed project before final Council approval of a lease between the TOV and the VRD for devel„N,,,ent and subsequent operation of a Par 3 Golf Course on a parcel of land in Booth Creek. Ken Wilson, Chairman of the VRD, reviewed the chronology of the Par 3 Golf Course planning and public meetings from August 9, 1989, through August 12, 1992. Mr. Wilson gave a detailed analysis and follow-up to the results of a 1991 informal survey used to obtain public input regarding organizational changes the VRD was contemplating. He stated the VRD prioritized its funding endeavors in response to the survey results, and noted the Par 3 Golf Course was ranked as item 13 on that survey. Rob Robinson, Director of the VRD, gave a financial update on the proposed project, including estimated construction costs. He later indicated this course would pay for itself and produce additional revenue for the VRD. Ernie Bender, Vail Golf Course Superintendent, discussed environmental issues related to the proposed golf course, specifically water use and use of fertilizers and chemicals as part of an integrated pest management program. Dick Bailey, Golf Course Architect, displayed a preliminary site plan of the proposed course design, reviewed the course layout, and discussed safety factors figured into the design. Jim Morter of Morter Architects, the firm selected to design the proposed course starter house and parking layout, displayed the proposed site plans for both the building and the parking area. He said the starter house would be less than 2,000 square feet, and indicated the Planning and Environmental Commission had determined 24 regular and 2 handicap parking spaces would be sufficient at this time. Following the VRD presentations, Council questions focused primarily on concerns about environmental impacts, water use, safety issues, TOV's legal liabilities, problems with the bus stop and turning of buses on Bald Mountain Road, parking in general, and winter usage of the starter house. There was brief discussion about what permitted and conditional uses were allowed for the site. Kristan Pritz later briefly addressed permitted zoning uses. After Lou MesKimen, memiber of the VRD, first spoke in favor of the project, Charlie Langmaid spoke in opposition. He read, in full, a letter dated April 1, 1992, to Rob Robinson from Richard M. Phelps, golf course designer. Mr. Phelps had originally been selected by the VRD as one of three finalists being considered to design the proposed course, but, after his review of aerial photos of the proposed course site, he wrote to ask the VRD to withdraw him from further consideration as a possible • • designer of the course. His letter elaborated on a number of concerns regarding safety issues related to site limitations. Mr. Bailey, the architect chosen for the project, said Mr. Phelps' response was based on preliminary sketches. Rob Robinson stated the VRD, had taken that letter very seriously, and he advised the Ietter had been reviewed point by point. Larry Eskwith spoke briefly about legal liability and governmental immunity. Public input followed. Paul Hay, Liz Webster, Robert Ansel, Flo Steinberg, Evie Nott, Larry Benway, and Barbie Christopher expressed mutual concerns in opposition of the proposed course. Their concerns ineiuded landscaping issues, bus stop and bus turn-around problems on Bald Mountain Road, fertilizer and chemical use, water use, terming problems, noise issues, safety issues, course design problems, parking problems, concern about potential changes to neighborhood characteristics, and a desire to maintain open space. Paul Rondeau, resident on the Championship Golf Course, inquired as to where the proposed Par 3 Golf Course would be in relation to the ].,400 acres of TOV open space, and how the 1,400 acres were categorized. He felt many residents were unaware of where TOV's open space areas were. Evie Nott, Founder of the Nature Center, displayed recent photographs of the proposed golf course site, and included a list of wildflowers now there. Ms. Nott proposed a joint stewardship between the Nature Center and the Vail Alpine Garden to preserve the site. She stated Helen Fritch, Founder of the Vail Alpine Garden, was interested in that concept. Peter and Joan Jaffee, Dennis Nichols, Hermann Staufer, Rick Pirog, and Scott Darrel all spoke in favor of the project. Diana Donovan said she was not against the project, but asked for groof of its need. She felt there was a need to create a process to address the use of agricultural open space, and felt strongly that the safety concerns expressed by Mr. Phelps needed much further consideration. Ken Wilson called for Council to confirm their original approval by making a decision on the signing of the lease. Mayor Osterfoss advised the approval or disapproval of the lease would not take place at this meeting. Mayor Osterfoss called for final input, and then Council members were individually polled for their response. Jim Shearer was for the project, feeling this project was a good blend of use for the site; Jim Gibson was 100% in favor of the project, and believed the VRD would do everything possible regarding expressed safety concerns. Tom Steinberg stated he was not ready to make a decision. He noted Larry Eskwith had been directed to look into a land trust with abuilt-in required vote of the people, and he wanted to know what would be done with the $1 million cost of this project if the golf course was not built. Merv Lapin said he was 75% in favor, but indicated he still had some unanswered questions, primarily about use of municipal water. Rob Levine was for the project, tut expressed concern stout the bus turn-around situation. Bob Buckley, who resides on Bald Mountain Road, said he was for the project, primarily because he was for development of Booth Creek. Mayor Osterfoss spoke of the importance of maintaining balance, and said she felt a golf course was a form of open space. She advised there were still issues to be addressed before approval of the lease, particularly the safety and environmental questions raised by many in attendance. The meeting was adjourned at 10;30 P.M. ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clexk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Data C:IMINSMAY5,92 Respectfully submitted, ~~ --~ Marge e~t O~sterfo~s, Mayor 2 .. HISTORY OF PAR 3 PUBLIC MEETINGS, AUGUST 9. 1989* VRD places a par 3 golf course on its agenda to begin discussing the feasibility of a par 3 course located at the Booth Creek 13th filing. Correspondence is sent to the Town of Vail asking for information concerning the TOV project review process. • SEPTEMBER 25. 1989* Par 3 course appears on VRD agenda as preliminary review. Staff is instructed to send out letters via certified mail to all homeowners in 3rd, 11th, 12th and 13th filings announcing a public meeting scheduled for December 13, 1989 at 6 PM, Town Council Chambers. OCTOBER 23, 1989 VRD staff sends out certified letters to all homeowners in the 3rd, 11th, 12th and 13th filings announcing a public meeting scheduled for December 13, 1989 at b PM,_Town Council Chambers. The certified letters cost the District $320 to mail out. LIECEMBER 13, 1989 Public meeting held on tentative par 3 golf course as well as a public presentation of Vail Aquatic Center. Community members overwhelmingly support the idea that the best use of the Booth Creek land is for a par 3 golf course. DECEMBER 2d, 1989* Par 3 golf course appears on VRD agenda to discuss planning process and options to lease the Booth Creek land from the Town of Vail. FEBRUARY 14. 1990* Par 3 title search, covenants, zoning and cost estimates for conditional use permit was discussed. APRIL 16, 1990 Lee Hollis and Susan Rychel petition homeowners in 12th and 13th filings to obtain support for the par 3 golf course. VRD receives 55 letters supporting the development of a par 3 golf course at Booth Creek 13th filing. JULY 11. 1990* Presentation to VRD Board on 9 hale course budget analysis. JULY 26. 1990 Ran Phillips sends memo to Brian Jones, VRD business manager stating that Kristen Pritz from the Community Development staff will set up a public meeting in the near future and the Town Council will then decide on a lease agreement. OCTOBER 24, 1990* Budget analysis revised by new Executive Director and public meeting set for November 6, 199t], 7:30 FM, Vail Town Council Chambers. NOVEMBER 6. 1990** Public hearing was held during the Vail Town council meeting to seek public input concerning the Par 3 golf course. Minutes from the meeting indicate that resident comments were supportive of the 1 District's efforts. Merv Lapin made a motion to :3,],ow tt~e vRO tv, `` proceed through the planning process including any re$oninq that may be necessary to allow the Diatriat to build employee houainq on the project if so desired. Peggy Oaterfosa seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 7-O. ~CEMBER 11. 199Q Robinson, VRD Executive Director, sends letter to Ran Phillips and . the Vail Town Council thanking them for the approval to utilize the 13th filing for the development of a par 3 golf course. Letter outlines the development process with a statement that construction and architectural plans should be completed by Spring 1992. JANUARY TO MAY. 1991 VRD researches feasibility studies to include environmental analysis, construction feasibility, pro forma and bonding regulations. JuN~ ast i99i** Rob Robinson and Ken Wilson approach the Town Council to discuss the terms of the ground lease for the 13th filing in order that VRD can complete the pro forma. The Town Council agreed that the District should look at a rent free agreement in exchange for Town of Vail employees receiving free golf and tennis passes. After this period of time a rent based on a percentage of the gross should be implemented. A 7~; figure was generally agreed upon. Ken Wilson, VRD Chairman of the Board, emphasized that he would like a letter of agreement signed by the Town Council prior to the upcoming council election and a sign of support from the council before the district begins spending money on the project. The Vail Town Council members again voiced unanimous support for the par 3 course to be constructed on Town of Vail land at Hooth Creek. OCTOBER 19. 1991** Ron Phillips presented to the Town Council a letter of understanding that he and Rob Robinson drafted concerning a general understanding of agreement that would be the basis for a ground lease for the par 3 golf course. NOVEMBER 13. 1991* Robinson presents letter of understanding to the VRD Board which the Town Council had directed Ron Phillips to sign which states the basic conditions of the lease including a provision that the land be rent free for a minimum of 5 seasons or until the golf course realizes a net profit for an entire season, whichever occurs later. In exchange for the free rent, the VRD will provide the Tawn of Vail full-time employees golf and tennis season passes. At such a time that the golf course realizes a profit the District will pay a percentage of gross revenue (7$ was discussed) and the Town will revert back to paying the District for its employees' golf and . tennis passes. (see attached Letter of _Und~rstanding).. _VRD Board _ members authorize staff to begin expending budgeted funds~on the Par 3 course now that we have a signed agreement from the Town of Vail. NOVEMBER. 1991 TO JANUARY 1. 1992 VRD hires Dick Bailey to do a disaster check and routing plan for the Par 3 golf course to insure it can be safely constructed within 2 the 13th filing land parcel. ~ANt7ARY 8 . 19 9 2 Dick Bailey presents disaster and insures the Board that a safely constructed within the . opinion can be accomplished in check and routing plan to VRD Board 9 hole, par 3 golf course can be land parcel and in his professional a first rate manner. JANUARY 22, 1992* Brian Jones, VRD Business Manager, updates the Board on the par 3. FEBRUARY 26. 1992* Robinson updates the Board on the selection process for the starter house and course architects. MP.RCH 11. 19 9 2 VRD Board interviews building architects and tables decision until next meeting. MARCH 25. 1992* VRD Board selects Morter Architects as the starter house architect. APRIL 8. 1992* VRD Board interviews golf course architects and pick Bailey is awarded the contract. MAX 13. 1992* Colleen McCarthy is selected, with Gail Molloy as the alternate, as the Board representative to attend planning meetings as they relate to the course and starter house construction. MAY 26. 1992** VRD appears at Town Council work session to discuss specifics of the lease. The consensus of the Council is to sign a long term lease, either 40 or 49 years. A percentage of gross will be utilized to determine the rent basically at the same rate as the championship course {roughly 7~;~. Council indicates to Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, that he and Rob Robinson and Ron Phillips can work out the details of the lease and they feel no further Council input is necessary at this time. MAY 27, 1992* Robinson reports that the wetlands hydrologist will be here next week to perform the wetlands analysis. A soils testing will also occur shortly. Robinson received input from the Board members on their concept of the starter house. JUNE 24 . 1.992 Jim Morter and Dick Bailey give the Board a par 3 update, The wetlands review is completed although the report has yet to be written. Indication is that there is minimal designated wetlands where the starter house and parking lot are proposed to be situated. The next step, once the formal report is written will be to contact Mike Claffee of the Corps of Engineers in order to initiate any necessary mitigation. Robinson stated that he assumes we will have to mitigate with the Corps, but that we can hopefully stay on schedule to break ground this fall. 3 JUNS~.„_•19 9 ~ VRD hosts another public input session for the par 3 golf course. VRD mends $535 in advertising the meeting, an article appears in the Vail Daily discussing the meeting, letters are sent to all Booth Creek homeowners and VRD staff visits all homes in the vioinity of the course and delivers flyers by hand and/or tapes notices on doors if no one is home. At the public meeting VRD receives majority support to build the par 3 golf course. A show • of hands has a count of 54 individuals supporting the course and 6 opposed. JULY 2 2 ~,7,. 9 9 2 Robinson reports that the Corps of Engineers has been on site several times inspecting the wetlands. While mitigation is going to be necessary the total amount of wetlands amounts to roughly 1/2 an acre. The area designated as wetlands may actually be considered head waters run off by the Carps of Engineers which will make the approval process even easier, Marter will follow through with Claffee on the mitigation process. The Par 3 is scheduled to go to PEC on August 10, 1992 to discuss parking. AUGUST 10. 1992 VRD expends $344 in advertising for the PEC meeting and sends letters to Booth Creek homeowners. PEC designates that the parking area should consist of 24 parking spaces and 2 handicap parking spaces with room to expand up to 30 spaces. AUGUST 12. 1992* Robinson updates the Board on the PEC meeting and informs the Board that the Town Council has set another public input meeting to occur on August 20, 1992, 7 PM, Vail Town Council Chambers. To date the Vail Recreation District has sessions concerning the Par 3 golf course meeting). The Par 3 golf course appears 18 the VRD publicly posted agenda. The Par 3 minimum of 4 times on the Town of Vail Cc agenda. held 4 public input (includes the 8/20/92 times since 8/9/89 on golf course appears a ~uncil publicly posted *Vail Recreation District published meetings per the Colorado State Statute. **Appears on the Vail Town Council meeting agendas. w\work .... ,, 4 TOWN OF YA1L 75 South Fronloge Road Vary Colorado 81657 -479.2100 AX 303-479.2157 LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING This letter of understanding is to confirm the Vail Recreation District Board's understanding of the agreement reached between the Vail Recreation District and the Town of Vail at the June 26, 1991 sub-committee meeting. Our understanding is that in exchange for continuing to allow free resident golf and tennis passes {on which certain restrictions concerning times of play may apply) to Town of Vail full-time employees, the Town agrees to lease the Booth Creek parcel of land to the District free (or for nominal consideration) for development and subsequent operation of a PAR 3 Golf Course. The rent-free arrangement described here would continue far a minimum of five seasons starting with and including the initial season of play, or until the golf course realizes a net profit for an entire season, whichever occurs later. At such time, the Town and the Vail Recreation District could elect to extend the agreement under the same terms or renegotiate. In the latter case, the Town would revert to paying the District for its employee golf-tennis passes, and the District would pay a percentage of gross revenue (7% was discussed} at the PAR 3 course, to the extent this amount does not exceed net profit, to the Town. The dates of initial development of and play on the proposed PAR 3 golf course are uncertain at this time. Yt ie understood that this Letter of Understanding is a conceptual and broad outline of the parties agreement and that the details of the possession and use of the property known as the Booth Creek parcel shall be set forth in a written lease between the District and the Town and that this Letter of Understanding shall be subordinate to the lease. Rondall V. Phillips, Date Robert Robinson, Date Town Manager Executive Director Town of Vail Vail Recreation District c~~~~ .~ VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT POSITION STATEMENT SUBJECT: 1991 SURVEY RESULTS CONCERNING FUNDING PRIORxTIES In~992 the Vail Recreation District employed a recreation student intern to assist the District staff in conducting an informal survey. The District was contemplating several new organizational changes and was desirous of public input prior to implementing these changes. As a result of the survey the following specific action occurred. Tha District prioritised ita funding endeavors in response to these survey results. RANKING FUNDING PRIORITY ITEM VRD ACTION TAKEN 1 More teen programs -Addition of new teen special events -Renewed cooperative relationships with high school groups -expanded teen center hours 2 & 8 Nature Center/Environ- -Hiring of a full time outdoor specialist mental Programs/ -Expanded outdoor programs Outdoor programs -Addition of new outdoor youth programs -Nature Center fund raisers (duck race} to help improve Nature Center displays and trails -In 1993 we will begin administering environmental youth camps and outdoor adventure camps -Currently the VRD subsidizes the Nature Center and its environmental programs by $18,000. -Currently the. VRD subsidizes Outdoor recreation programs by $35,376 3 Community special Events -Hiring of a full-time special event supervisor -Addition of new events -VRD took over control of all events previously administered by the VRA and TOV 4 & 5 More Youth Sports Pro- -Reorganized Youth Services to create a full- grams & camps time youth sports coordinator. -Greatly expanded youth sport programs & camps 5 Dobson Arena -$20,000 spent on capital projects . -Recently hired two new full-time skating pros to expand Dobsan's role as a skating mecca. Currently VRD subsidizes the Dobson Arena by $1$3,339 7 More 6-12 year old programs -Youth programs have increased by 400$ over the past two years 9 10 11 12 13 -Spent $35,000 on the renovation/construction of a youth service room dedicated to this age group. -Currently VRD subsidizes Youth Services by $136,279 • Improve Athletic Fields -Funding of $24,500 for new fencing project -Reorganized golf maintenance staff to create an athletic field maintenance branch -Purchased several new capital project items an order to improve athletic field conditions -Currently in the process of spending $50,000 fvr athletic field lavatories Vail Golf Course -In the past two years the VRD has spent $709,140 to improve conditions and upgrade the Vail Golf Course Programs for the 1-5 year old -The VRD continues to run its Potpourri Camp and Pre-Potpourri nursery at a subsidized rate lower than most valley day care centers, The Eagle-Valley task force on this issue recommended more day care centers, but suggested they should be operated by certified day care administrators . Funding of Tennis -Construction of Ford Park tennis facility at a cost of $500,000 -In 1992 the District sponsored a professional team tennis franchise to help promote tennis in the Vail Valley. -The Distract reorganized its tennis branch to add additional staff in order to increase league and tournament play. Par 3 golf course .~ ~T t1KELY 5CENARIO) (NON-GREEN fEE REV PROJECTED TO INCREASE 10XlYR) REVENUE: G11EEN FEES (BASSO ON 10,000 ROUNDS} PASS REVENUE (BA5ED ON 50 ii f100) MISC CONCESSION REVENUE TOTAL REVENUE: YA1L RECREATION DISTRICT PROPOSED PAR-3 COLf COURSE s15 GREEN !15 GREEN 318 GREEN f20 GREEN 520 GREEN FEE FEE FEE FEE FEE 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 150,000 150,000 180,000 200,000 200,000 5,000 5,500 6,050 6,655 7,321 7,500 $,250 9,075 9,983 10,981 1b2,500 163,750 195,125 21b,638 218,301 (EXPENSES PRDJECTED TD INCREASE 5X/YR) EXPENSES: 5ALARiES (6 MO. SEASON, 2 STAFF N-AUG, 0.11. 1 STAFF) KER'S COMP IN5 MEDIGRE, FICA PRINTING (BROCHURES, BAG TAGS, ETC.} ADVERTISING BUILDING REPAIR & MAINT ALARM FEES UTILITIES/MATER 8 SEVER UTILITIES/ELECTRIC ~ GAS TELEPHONE CHARGES TRASH REMOVAL (1100 MO X b MO) JANITORiAI SUPPLIES GDLF OPERATING SUPPLIES (SCORECARDS, PENCILS, TEES, ETC.) MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES (FIRST AID, LiGHTBULBS, TRASH CANS , ETC.) BANKING SERVICES CLEANING SERVICES OPERATING EXPENSES: 25,000 26,250 27,563 2$,941 30,388 1,100 1,155 1,213 1,273 1,337 1,915 2,011 2,111 2,217 2,328 1,500 1,575 1,654 1,736 1,823 500 525 551 579 608 500 525 551 579 608 280 294 369 324 340 750 T88 827 868 912 1,200 1,260 1,323 1,389 1,459 600 630 662 695 729 600 630 662 695 729 500 525 551 579 648 3,000 3,150 3,308 3,473 3,647 800 840 8$2 926 972 2,006 2,100 2,205 2,315 2,431 1,000 1,050 1,103 1,158 1,216 41,245 43,307 45,473 47,746 50,134 ~1 C-C~ {~ U~` `~ ~~~V` ~ ~ ~'~ ~~~ YAIL RECREATION DISTRICT PROPOSED PAR-3 GOLF COURSE SALARIES (2 STAFF/DAY X 8 HR5/DAY X 225 DAYS + 3/4 ASST SUPT TINE} SUPERY1510N, IRRIGATION CHECKS FERTILIZER, HERBICIDES, FUNGICIDES MISC MAINTEIIANCE 5UPPLlES SOIL, SAND, ETC, IRRIGATION MAINT 8 REPAiR LANDSCAPE 5i1PPLlES MAiNTENAHCE EXPENSES: TOTAL EXPENSE5: FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE: (REVENUE LESS EXPENSES) DEBT SERVICE (10 TRS, 3750K DEBT) NET PROFIT (DEFIC)T) 1994 1995 45,675 47,959 4,OOD 4,200 3,000 3,150 1,000 1,050 1,500 1,575 500 525 1,000 1,050 56,675 59,509 97,920 102,016 1996 50,357 4,410 3,30$ 1,103 1,854 551 1,103 62,484 107,957 1997 1990 52,575 55,518 4,631 4,862 3,473 3,647 1,158 1,216 1,736 1,$23 579 608 1,15$ 1,216 65,608 68,089 113,355 119,022 b4,580 60,934 $7.168 103,283 99,279 ssa~apaitxc7tF~z~ase~ae~_eesass_cs_eaoa_cxass«s~cze~a~eas 102,584 1D2,S84 102,584 102,584 102,584 (538,004) (341,650) (:15,616) 3699 {53,305) aooo~..~o~~xesa~aaaa a~arxmsssaosc_tanne~_ocr=~=xaxz_eac SOME DEBT SERVICE SCENARI05: (111TH INTEREST RATE = 5.5X) DEBT = 3750,000 5 TR PER100: AHNUAL DEBT SERVICE = 5176,898 7 TR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE = 3134,213 10 YR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE = 5102,584 15 TR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE = 17$,649 ,~ ~~ ICJ PAIL R£CREATIDN DISTRICT ESTINAT£D COMSTRUCTiON COSTS - PAR 3 GOLF COURSE (AS OF 8f20f42) COURSE CCirSTRUCTION: Nisc ConsultingfProfessional Fees Architecture( Fees • RBI Construction Bid: Clearing Excavation Topsoil Grading Rock Picking Lake Sealing Orsinage Grassing Maintenance Paths Bridges Retsining Wall Landscaping Irrigation TOTAL Conatr Bid star ~ Sewer Tap Fees Total CLUBl10USE: Arthitect Building Constr Costs tandscspe Paving Furniture Pater A Sewer Tap Fees Phont Total OTHER: Bond Issue Cast (est ~ 3X> PC, ETC Machines Misc Startup Costs TOTAL ESTiIU1TED CONSTRUCTION COSTS NDST LIKELY SCENARIO 15,000 75,D00 16.950 33,000 4,115 444,200 8,000 8,000 40,000 31,575 11,400 12,000 8,820 22,500 165,125 530,b85 93,000 713,b85 15,000 150,000 15,000 27,500 3,000 1D,DOD 1,000 221,500 24,000 4,OOD 2,000 30,000 465,1$5 * NOTE: This bid amount is contingent upon starting construction by no Later than September 15, 1942. Delaying the project until spring of '93 will result in additional costs. Booth Creek Par 3 Environmental Review The goal of VRD's golf/parks maintenance program is to produce ~xcellent playing conditions in an economical and environmentally sound manner. This goal is accomplished by responsible use of climatically adapted turf and plant species, water, fertilizer and pesticides (if required). Our professional approach university proven cultural management (I.P.M.). T.P.M. health, proper diagnosis of effective control (chemical or the landscape. to turf/landscape management is based on practices including integrated pest involves constant monitoring of plant pest injury, selection of the safest otherwise) to prevent economic damage to The staff combines college level training, Coloradn pesticide applicator licenses, regular turf industry seminars, and years of experience to professionally maintain our facilities. In addition to consulting with Colorado State University, U.S. Golf Association agronomists, a sports turf consultant help us use the best up to date technology to accomplish our goals. Water IIse Considerations • Irrigation for golf turf is based on its needs for adequate growth to recover from wear and provide an aesthetically pleasing landscape. The cool season grasses we use require about 35 inches of precipitation annually. We attempt to replace 75-80$ of evapotranspiration daily or as needed. Excessive watering that would cause run off is avoided. The 8 acres of irrigated turf on the proposed Par 3 course would require approximately 217,000 gallons per week to supply 1 inch of precipitation. Based on 20 weeks (or 5 months) of possible irrigation the course would require about 4,340,000 gallons annually. supply will be a 3" tap from municipal supply lines near the east end of the site. This tap will have no affect on water pressure in the Booth Creek area. Fertilizer/Chemical Use Considerations Fertilizer use is based on annual soil analysis reports. In addition, nitrogen (the primary nutrient used by turf) is applied at the rate of (1) pound actual N per 1,000 sq. ft. per growing month. {The averages 60-65 1b. Nitrogen per acre per growing month). Pesticides used include herbicides (broadleaf and grassy weed) and fungicides (primarily for snow mold, a winter/spring disease}. Pesticides are used .only as needed with preventative treatments used on greens, tees, and fairways for snow mold. No restricted use pesticides are used although they are legal for golf course use. Sprayers and spreaders are calibrated for exact rates according to label instructions. Virtually all pesticides we use are available to the general public as are Material Safety Data Sheets outlining potential hazards and preventative safety methods. The presence of deer, foxes, marmots, waterfowl, squirrels, beavers, and the abundance of birds is clear evidence that we are preserving the environment and not destroying it as some would have us believe. ..._ _~ ---.- M~w_ _.... _.. _.. _..-- ----- -- ---_ --- - - Challenge Of The '90s_ Safeguarding Golf's~Future ~ Understanding Groundwater's Vulnerabilityr Careful pest management and chemical handling practices - coupled tuith identifying and protecting points of potential ~ulnerabflity - can reduce the potential for contamination. i Groundwater is water that lies below the soil surface and fills the pore spaces in and around rock, sand, gravel and other materials. Contrary to popular belief, ground- water does not move through vast underground rivers and lakes, but through water-saturated zones called aquifers. The upper level of an aquifer is called the water table. The level of a water table fluctuates throughout the year, lowering as water is removed from wells or discharged at streams and springs. The water table rises through recharge from rain and melting snow that seeps through soil into the aquifer. Groundwater is subject to con- tamination from many sources, including industrial and municipal waste, leaking underground storage tanks, road sal#s, agriculturak fer- tilizers and pesticides. For years it was #hought that the natural filtering of water during its slow movement through the soil, sand, gravel and rock formations was adequate to cleanse it of con- taminantsbefore it reached ground- water. Today, many chemicals, including some pesticides, have beer detected in groundwater. Studies have shown that recharge can carry pollutants down to aquifers. Further• more, it seems clear that Kumar activities can lead to contamination of the recharge wa#er. Not all groundwater is similarli vulnerable to contamination by pes ticides. The deeper the water table is below the soil surface, the less likely pollutants are to reach ground- water. Adeep aquifer provides more opportunities and time than does a 48 shallow aqui#er for pesticide adsorp- tion, degradation and other processes to occur. The permeability of the geologic layers between the soil surface and the groundwater is also important. if the materials above the water table are very coarse, such as sand or gravel or highly fractured rocks, water can move #o groundwater more readily than if less permeable layers of clay or solid rock are present. Carbonate bedrock, such as limestone, can make groundwater particularly susceptible to contamina- tion because it's easily dissolved by water to form solution channels and depressions in the land surface. The depressions, called sinkholes, can provide a direct connection between the soil surface and the groundwater below. Contaminated water that drains into a sinkhole can readily enter groundwater because the soil that lines the bottom of a sinkhole is often thin and provides little filtering of pollutants that enter it. Wells A well is a direct conduit from the land surface to groundwater. The method of wet! construction, the fre- quency of well inspection and main- tenance and the proximity of a well to a pesticide source are important factors determining the potential for contamination. Pesticides can reach groundwater by moving along the outside of the well casing or by entering the top of an improperly capped or sealed well. The well casing forms the wall of the well and keeps the borehole open. A cement compound or grout is Continued on p. 50 Go!! Course Management /February ?~ Sa/egaardMg golf's future through environmental understanding calls for an awareness of the permeats!!!ty of geo- logic layers, among other factors. s~ ~~ ~~~ a ~ ~~~ ~ ~ `~ ~~ ,~~ ~: .~ ~ ~'~ ~ s g 4~-~~. ~ ro' ~~~~~ 6, i0 ~%~ A~ ~» i ~ ~ ~ .. x ~. ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~ . ~~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~~~R~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~~~ .~ ~ tae 0 ~~~ .r~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~. ~' ~ ~. • ~ N - ~y R IE~ iMJ c yt~ ~~0$, `J S ~~~ ~, ~ Pte.' ~ " ~ .$ ~~ +~ ~ ~• s. S~.o~. ~. ,~. <~a7/p~~ ~ ~ ~A,~~P'y ~ypQ~~~ai go ~~6~p ~~~.di~~ ~~ ~ ~K*~~,~• ~~~ $$ ~j LG ~ c5' y. cn $. ~e~.Y ~ OR a of 3¢X{'K i0 ~i •..4 (y' 7. ~ 7 N E ~i S7-• 6 ~gC ~~ $ . ~ ~ S 5 ~ A noE so.~ n ~ we g' ~ d 5a~ y~ a ~F ff C R 5' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. i g M ~ ~. A ~ ~ 0. ~ d q ~ d ~.~ ~ -I n ~ ,~ @a~ ~ R ~1Qg0 ~ ~. ~ e w ~ ^a D~~L __A p0. gyp g•~ yS ~~qc TO~~~•~~t~p^~~~N_~ ~~ »~ b D E ~ ~ 7' `~ P~ 7 ~ ~ ~ AAA y'~ ~. O ~ ~ ~ 7 _ A A ~" ~ SR w w d. A .a,. Io ~. T D ? ~ ~ ~ -`~ ~ ~10 - 3 ~, O. O 7 d .r ~ 7 E gc ~ g K ~ gp ,~. ^ a v () ~P f F ~ p ~ `S F ~ 0. ~ ~ R C ti'~ G ~ ~ ~ar' ~ R ~ m ~C ~ `~ p ~ w ~~#i{ `~~~'~Cry~ ~ ~~N ~ [[[~~~p ~ ~Fi~ O.Q. '^ tL~fi~S ^~~1Lf ~~~A. ~4GMp d°~•~ d~ r a~ d ~ a +. ~ 4 7 ~+ d ~ W 7 W Y ~ q A ~ ~ ~ ~ q~ ~ 7 ~ a ~ II s~ p E ~, ~'~~M C ,~~Q{ i ~~ 1 ~~~~ ~~ ~d d ~~ •~ ~y u ~ ,Qn, a G. ~. 4.R Ei ~ d ~ ~~.~g ~ w ~ ~ E ~~ ~R~ ~. ~.~~~~ '~ A 7 Ii , -- ...__..,---- T The Environmental Fate Of Pesticides . A working knowledge of what happens to applied chemicals is essential for superintendents to answer questions. n this day and age, the environ- I mental soundness of a golf course is constantly being questioned. Whether the course has been in exis- tencefor decades or is simply being pro- posed, concem over the use of fertilizers and pesticides dominates much of the public's attitude toward it. One-sided mass media coverage of pesticide use in general has helped fuel much of that concern. Unfortunately, occasional instances of irresponsible abuses of pes- ticides on golf courses and other turf areas occur and only serve to fan the .flames of public outcry. Fertilizer and pesticide use on golf courses is necessary to provide aplay- ingsurface #hat is adequate to satisfy the requirements of the game. Proper choice and use of fertilizers and pest's- cides isfundamental to sound manage- ment strategy and provides the back- bone to which o#her maintenance practices are connected. At the focal paint of fertilizers and pesticides is the golf course superinten- dent, who makes the decisions con- cerning their use. As a result, it is incumbent on superintendents to he as conversant and literate about fertilizers and pesticides as possible. Central to the issue of pesticide literacy is having a working knowledge of pesticide fate. With this knowledge, golf course superintendents can appropriately answer questions about pesticides and the environmen#, whether the questions are posed by a golfer, a club official, .local citizens or even members of the media. Common Perception Most people assume that when fer- tiltzersand pesticides are applied to golf courses they either move off the site in runoff water or move downward with percolating water until coming in con- Continued on p. 22 1$ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ i~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~,~~ ~ ~ r ~' ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ r . ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ _ ~ ~.. ~ m ~~ '~ s~ ~' ~. '~ tea ~:~~~ ~~ ~ ~ .~.~~+ 7ti a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ - Ci Y ~ a' ~ p R ~ 6 ,7. L 3. 3 ~ ~o ~ ° 0. ~ ~ ~p A ~ n O ~ ~@3 p ~ ~ S ~ ~ r ~ ~ g~ i ~ a g ~ !~ G. ~ l~ 'O 8 ~~ iO q g ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ ~ 7a ,n 76 ~ ~aSS ~~ 5C O ~ ~ h ~ f R F' A A d `J R ige g. ~• R ~p ~3 ~ ~'r ~AV ~ ~q ~~r S ~ '~'~~A y y q '~ ~ ~ n~~ q ~~~~a~r ~~~ '~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~S~# ,~ ~~ saw ° ~ ~~~~s g ,fix ~~ $b +~ '~ ~,eW~a.n ~, ~ r ~ Q, R 5. ' ~ £ E a~& ai'~~ ~~~~.~ }~i6 ~ ~q pFSp4~$r y¢~ ~ ~q$xc ~ ~i~.~ p C~ ~ n~3 ~ ~yCp~~ p di' S~ ~ ~ 7 A ~3 p- ~M T- ~ ~ R w~~~ I R .R ~. ~~ A ~'J~ ~~ ~OS~ ~6 ~~~ EeF~a'~R& £s °' '012^~ ~ +~~~ s $=r~ 5 ys4 y~'7SS' p ~ ~~p°~gspg r3.~~3~ g esp~~~_S~~ ~~ ~$3 N ~~ ~p$p O 3 S ~Q d ~ 0.[L b ~ ~ rn S~ ~~ " y~ A ~~ •• a ii ~ ~A ~.. ~- ~g q ° j INi ~i S O ~ ~ ~ y~~ ~ ~. G S 7. ~ ~ rT :~ ~ C 'd ~ 'A ~ ~^ ~ ~ C* ~ a: Q, ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o_q ~~~~~~~~~~~~a~~~s~w~ ~° ~o~~,~~ ~ ~QO ~ ~~ ~o ~Ag 7 p ui ~ ~~~~~-- ~a ~ ~ ~~~a~~~„~~~ . K ~~~ 5~ a3T . Jw » ~;~ ~ ~ ~ F~ o ~ ~ ~ g g. ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~p~p e A 0. ~ a ~ O `° R ~q a ~~~ ~a~a~ o ~ ~ r r' a ~.~aoEO o~~~ .; ~a ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~~ p~ ~Q Cdr ~i ~' 7 ~, ~ ~^ n N ~~ ~.~~ J ~ S' Q, A ~ ~.~f ~>~.~~-a~ ssz. G S ~ L. A $ a~a.~~~~~~'~~~ ~ n ~~~~ .~~~ _ ~ad A =~ 7 ~ X755 C ~7'X~ r n ~ ~gR~y~gA O N ~ n' Ty ~ ~ O ~ ~p fA ~ ~ ~ N N_ j~ 4i 1~ N O A H tt ~~ ~ f~ ~ S ~ C Y~ ~~ N ~ N ~ 5 iR r 7 m T ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~.' ~ ~.~~~~~' N, s ~~~~ S. ~~~~ ~~~_ ~ v ~ g °' ~ $ ~ c ~,~ w ~ ~ ~Sd~~~b~~~ p r ,tj yp 0 ~ ~ O ~~ V ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ 3~ a 4 ~~ ~= +0 a 9 ~ ~ ~ t ~ Q1 u ~ ~i9~"'~' x~~Ea~ v~'i " ~ a c ~U'I ~~ 3 a+ h ~ ~ a`4 a ay~.~c s~~oci a o a ,~ .. .~'~ ffi Q~ "~ ~~~ L~~ id~. V1 4? ~~7Gx'fn~~ 01'+~ ~ O *- „f03 ~=~cp.c~ ~~~ w wd ~ E p a u ~} agcc q v `" ~ ~ $ CS N ~~. 7[~~N~~ rn Y`A ra d ~ d"'^ GG~ ~s tlf E ~ -a '° ~. ~ c_ O `«.+ a t t ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 3 ~~ ~~ _ ~~ M O ~~~ u p o5 ~cy4 ~~ u y~ Q;Y 3 ~^~ ~~ d v, `~~~~an4 Boa... ~AG~~y;,cc10¢g4 ~ ~ J+~ 9~ C ~ ~' A ~ .t 66 pp ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ' ~ o p~ m~~ p a 3, G N ~, 3 F~ O G a O. p ~4+ 3 7~ ~0 ~' ~ a d m .n G' .'2~a"' d E'" vi O 'm fJ ~ a a ~ ~ ~ ~Y1 x v~ YY~~, 3~ O ~6 c~y~ A ~' C6" t~ad~G6 'Q ~ O N N C ~"'p. ~ ,u rt e" a ~" a ~ T ~ .^ ~Gcc S N ~yy ~~ U~ Y w ~ F ~ = ~ a T Y+ ~~ y `• '~11~ ~ ~ ~ ,„ E ~ ~ V L i~ u~ ~~ .,. ,~ ~ ~ . a~~ s ' M ~} ~.~, rrA ,~ a ~ 'L '~~ . ~ ,- ` ~ ~ H v ~~~ ~' ~ o d ~ ~ C ,C {a~ ~1Fpy} gr~ ~~~ya N~T~~"~'~$~~~.~~~o~ ~~~ y~~~~'.gg'ag'y* ~~ .~~Q}~~ -~~,yEyE~ ~ aC~ ~~~~ c ~`~E~~'~~',S'V,c(•°C~C c~~~'CyJ 2~'3~J.,~cc y~Y~~aY3 ~~=°$'3 ~:°~~"~` ,~~u y ~' ~ x ~ q ~,~ ~ g O V y 'O' ° 'p - ~ V 'g a C 7 L. O ~ V ~ QI L ~ V ~ ~ ..4. C q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a K E ~1Y~ C ~,C ~c 1y~ C C C 9 r + D ~~ '~ A d .. ~ q 9 7 ~. v V F~ '~ A U +~ .~ O C q~~ m- C +~ ~ V ~i u E 4 "3 ~ ~ ~ ~q ~ V ° g .' 4 E ~ ~ ~ t ~ M ~ . r ~ ~+ A ~ ~ o pip F ~ `a ¢! q E o ~ ~ 0. ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ 5 L a ~ ~ O . ~cVt yyqo~,?~G4L.p~p ~:~V`[ ~,~~..~~A ~p~44O°8 yfp~n~~oo~~c_A4~n~roa~Ap~g~_~~'~ - a .-i q~ N L '~ \ L ~ •° C O q 9 ~~ a~ q C 3 ~~ E~ V ro r+ a~ C .C 4 ~I t O V 0~ ~ a royy u di 7~~ "~ d C C O~ OT ~ C E 7 d] b~ d ~YS w C L m s 0 'l7 ~ M g q~ L ~' N° a t 0 C q~ 0 U L S O N 4 c~v" 3 dg'u~ ~ a u q 3 ~ ~.~ ~~ ~ ~ c~a y aC ca, u y>.~ ~ E d ~J.~ n d a y m e `~~ ~ m3 c~ 7 a 4 Y F o x O-~ > O~ p Y d~q9}qs>~E E0~3 ~u~du'sS.4 `o3EOcQi 7, 3~~~Z d$q$~-~ iSi~s ~5 E.d.E~. o` $.Y ~,~°~ ~cL~Fc3 a `v.'~a ~~«aSoGVq~°~~' 4y~d'rat~ p ~~ q o Ji C ~~ q C q ~ Y ~ q ~ O y g 0 j 3 'O '~ 9` c~~~ ~~ '~ro~i ~'~ 6 O 4q 3~> ~°~6c~ a`~.GCgEd•+ ` a ?: v u~`coC q br d C ~ ~ '• c ~~q.~-°mo ~ 4qY°~£ cng0= TydaAr rp'CI~ ~° E~ Cd°N'w ~~ EQd.~'• u u'N °E~i°, `~~E~t,~~ ~ G F T ~'p-'C r~°~0~~~ ~.x 'cac ~r y4 °~ uc~Y d ~k,«3+o ~ 73 y -• Qa p r"S, Y~+ 43~`c0.a,~am~ ~' '-.t4 Y d ~ O &, q ~ d (~ d > C ro~ a y~ C C }~ a q~ C E ~ q L ,~„ O b~y~~ yRE•°o3c ~MC3N .Ya".4 q'~~~ 8$~^gE~ZaFi•a~Y'ea _d?t"a E ~i R ~ 9t ~ ~r R ~ ~j 10 7 '~ O O ~' 7 $~ ~ ~ 0.ro O ~ .~i 9 p ~ ~ s eCi S, ~ A ~°~ m~ c d +~aEE Ca q C j6 C 'cN~ ?,~ Y z 3 Qb ro R p ~G.St~ ~ ~ Y c a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +C' ~ o•$ ~ o m ~ ~ h? c Y ~ c y m _~ }~ ca ~ ~ eqi ~ r :~kp~ ro•-~~ ~~~ y d.:.•C: $q Y~.~d•o e~~v',5~~3ucs~~:ee. ~a 4.. v° E~~a•~~a~01St~'$ 'til ~~+ ~C7~ ,~2V4N e0.o'Oa~~qu~~~.«•°-j9 ~acp-°d q `°aa- $H ~• •~• •• • H ~ V~'~ ao q c --tima''AC~E $,~«°~~n ~`~aa~'~ 'S _~' $ ur3~ dd~ c L?moc°~ rE ~ ns ~ L a ~ :::' yy,~ }.~ A y V v ~' d q E d 0 0~ a C~ .~ !- C "p /; .Y .!C^'$ .t ~. a C m m m 01y OI C G 4 ~~ -j = S A ~' p y ro .O ~> d 7 C~ vNi ~ a N~ ~ a i~ « m C E 4 F' C L_ - O v ~ F ~~ ~ 6 1C-. dj ~ E «+oc a$ U.a° o~ya C ~-9~ ~~ `da...Edd~. gz ~°~ a eae odcc~e-, ~ ~' ~~- ~ ~ a °~,• _cEq r/~ o omE-°°'c•$`~arn_~A o=EcmE$ a a.3 °~o q - ° d v >g~~Nq~6t NE nF` 9~'OC OO~'a yr O„q mCEp~q~ ~t ~y a~O~~E gRCq ~C _- q~ 9 ,0 a O C F+ a p < 9 C V e~ .Y a :°. v j 9~~ Q ~ m A~ q C q ~i ~ d ~0 ~ g a d ~+ ~. ~E % Ecg'Ag.~.~tn m E.sq?c mdm'D «`~L'a s'~~E ..c .. m ~f'~'c'^- C~ '~, m g :! q' t ~' Y R t N C Y U R g E Y= ~ •p a ~' =e C L a O. OF ro 4~ -~ F 3 a O E a L N '~ d u g ro •C Y V -~ ~= a .0. % a 5 c si •_ ° U L Y U F 3 C G m y °~~ .• N N o~ A b d N 3 d E~ O? ~ d~ at ~ ~~ M 0. C m O v a ~ g c 7 A y F u~ ~ O O 4~ N m D Q. g ~ vA'cao °qu do F M E'ro cnu aw'= a rn ._v~b ~'..•S o ~i.. c ~ $s rn- A ", q ~ aro o oy,: ~ x m A u „ ~. ~ -~=8ro~~'4"A°~E ~~=m3'~OSacLd N'-a~•3..-- ~_~-„S s'4 ~v c c E ~' ~- $, c=~.a ~.ya9yt yt°«y~~o9A~„sE°~cq q N q C! j C ~ ... w a~ q 7 L C ~ q "' a EO. E~ ~ ~'~ Qn~,„,C ~ d C&~ cc~ccon=E~~d"y µ, ?; k '~' y~ 9 V~ O. V D `y C 0 .a ~ '~ A v F C ..~ a~ ~ O a >y y~ C q d Fj .-. N > N 7 u. 8~~~ fin? ~A O.Y~~y d i "0."''3 n w3 A 3s ~ E ~ .Y4 ~ -O ~ y °~'Ca sdEecn~ yCmo~ goAEa.s Est V~~cd ~ipva~` ~~caY~1W_c `~ L L q q f' d ~V ~~ E~ d Q m~ +r~ H m n g R O r ~ N "N C V~ q~ W t~ O C V P O A~ A ~ a~ ~ C C W C C %.`yC~j.o SLd i Ya7Y.4~N mt~ ay and EccEOr 00.0E Ou ~H A+' 3~ O g 0 a 0 a c a q n MQ O v a ~v - `~ a u~ u e r 0 Y w 4 e `c i 0 .•. i ~ n C V o, i O _o ~.. Y C C a r C U a~ ~~ n° V H ~~ 0 yS ~§ z E o 4 ~ ~'o L x u ~_ t 3 u T T~gNb n9 Ted ~~'6 nZx.YgJAN.~' ~G OA OI __~ o~ mom-~i~o~`~ q4 a~2cfAhSxc« '" d $~«n .3 'coooF+aaq~~,aa~aN ad a~o?;S 3:rot ~~y3 p`o d da€~ob~38}cad ~~$$$~~~N~,~' m'a.~~~~ L'L O Yl ~av/ d Q C a t~ pa1 A ~ ~ 's y r/i ~ ; q p ~ 4 c ^5 _ E ~ ~ ~ u G R ~ ~ ~ ~ C a G ~ 'C ~ ~ V 7. _ '~. d ~ x SM• V7 d- y C ~ N 7 y~ a uuJ~ O! O ((~~ ro 7 m w 8 a R~ ~ ~~i ~ ~ O _3' m} ~ a6 c-.3 " O c C }'may d e ~~ d 'C d 9 q T N r0 ~~ ~ d q 7 P N V a a 3-~«C7 «v.'^.~~adAr ~E a. C~« c a~pO dY ic~O q y°y ~ O ,Cra T a °~~ C+ q p Wp C p a 7 q~~ F O y W a u~ C '~ ~ a~ X 7 7 ;'9 3 ° C q a t~ C C E A$ x a~ g Y ~ C C q `~ 88 u ~~ d ~~ c ~ E, a^x A.Q~ 9 0.0 i RW °~ ro O~ aro q M~aEauo.c~iu~dGa h»gcEmmaam3v+ m~-N+E3 ~'uc3~$. m"c.y~E~ ~i~~~~q am~~A6 a. ° $~ A q = .~ ~ d q d ~~ p° E c 3~ w d d~ q .. 07 6 p,'~ w 7 T 't 0. O b d~do~O 3pDyCo q gmE~,S2 c^YE~d~~ CpaC~~,j $ c~~~og~5° c` i~'O ydr 4N~N~~i. - dl C O E ~ .p ~' ~ ,~ Q q 0.'a00. O G ~+y Cw s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ a. ~ fl' ~ A '~ ~'17 Ch ors aa~ C ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~~~~~ M ~~ ~ 7 a ao L" a v.O q ?$I -°'d'~~baa~ cO1 p1yc O g T N? C q .O~°ro _q '~ rn,yy ~' O d C b°LCNacOd C g N q c. ~ d ~ _ ~ C ~. ~ ~~-}R m 3~~' E ~`^ C E ~9 C O G N ~ OL C C. qro ~~ _ yay 4~ L.. ~ d Q 0. b q y N A" V G x F ~' ~ -O - b C T O C d q ~~c3E~ o «ad e° u..;~aE 9i6~`°~ a ~En~vHr~' cgxlR'-a.E'Q«p~c~ E' q; y y, g d q q N N ro~ ~" 9 ~ d 1C7 ~~ ~~ A 01 ~ E p y~ q O •C d = m- E g C N C> 6 7 ~ oE~o "pea3'cNo'~`°c ~c a3p~4'N°E' ~. v s d d~a E°=~'`"'ao d rn`g d V ~ ~~~~ ~q c g c d 3 o q rn.01 E w '~ ~i O ~ O G ~ of C 0.s d ~ a ~ ~Si ~« ~' bS C y ~ m ° °? E ~~ N V C E q- ~ q i O d O }'p y y C ~ q?'E U h p M '^ q 7 F « gi d L N N, E y A gi a= ~•'• c zi i T~ O 'O C d y ~u~j ' "' d 41 ~ M t,'~ C a 41 d j t C d° A~ ~` W y~ ~ 3 ^S d H N ~.~ Lq o a jq~T~ z~T~LG~CIa~~gCq~~L NrC y~yn V~Vi q O C- 4 .Y Y~ Q Tn d ~ q 0} m u m t q 'O Y ,O 'd v\~ '0 ~s d °S ~~ ~9 E ~ ~F-v d ~ q b $io ~i &~ w ~ o.__ 3q r• F- Y ~ ~~ ~ ~~.~ ~~ ~s ~~ W ~~ ° ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ z~ ~~ ~~ r: ~fi~ ~~ ~~~~ ~Va °~~ ~a ~~~_eq~ 4~~~~ a~ O Ao ~p '~~ J~4m ~a r~~= ~ ~s~~~~u^s~r. t_ ale ~~~ ~ ~„fib' ~°~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~° ~Q ~~ ~~ 4 ; ~, ~~~ ~~ ~~F ~~ ~~ a~ o~ ~~~~ ~ x ~~~ R 0 F 3 a 1~~r ~~ 4 A N~ O .N y~~ ~ y~ ?~ T N T a ~ F w y qP O ~ O ~ E T b F R ~^ ~~ ~ a Of C d O Q q ~ N ,~ ba•v~o ~"~Eg, m Q° c c c a•• A E Ab z ,°~ d w m q~ n ~' ~, ~L R~~ ~ a a~ Ta e N~ - ~n 0 p d~ L o dNgc3 ~3~wTQO~y, dr C9vu0$d" Fyq o.L~` O d ~ 7 a a c xna c a p y r g R ~ O~{' O'^>'° Od1 ~.O~ a 0.t D o r b g, ~ '^ w a r C a v 3 N~ q 0 5~~,c,~d~GO9sn~ "RVF hh d a ~. « a 0 S O N Oi ~ ~Y d v ~' q 3 '6 ~ d .q b q i V q ~ w ~ b ~ d^ N .Y~ ~ ~ O Sy 'O G ~' ~ d a V~ 7 d „ ~ M ~ ~ u9iamwvo~ dACCmao~3•oc 'g b e .~ ~ A ~ ~ a h O `q a q .- ~ ~/ G VyR V ~~ c o~pd,~Ny 3 ~ q m~ q'g' a~~ 3 c ^' a'9 !~y ~ mn 7 p M 6 y 4~ d EI O C ~y + T Oy C~ w is W ..' L S~ 3 ~~ N~~ ~ w ./~ ~~ a o Sty ~s°'ocbE ° °~,oa !s ~ ~~~ar d~ cL q~ ~~ ~~. ° E ~~ca 4jO°Eaa3gayts°~4 ~i O d O g c` O ~i a~17~ G ~W u d ~t C_ ~] L C CI 3 o d y CL. d d K .° T Sa~94cv•a3 0 ~id,c ~0°~~-01E~ a_ud t~«. -a. ~'.n ::off V qa- a w~ 'O a b V a , b '~gnaddFn~~Xa3o~e'i °:3 ~~ro c~v $c M 4 R: .~ ~~ YY~ ya a~ .a e~ ~o ~. i. a~ _ ~ E O v ~p~ ! O v ca wi ~~~ `p0V a~i a=`o S py O8~ ~ ~ S x 'O a T a ~~~ C C S C T C a ~, L y ~, N a ry ~( gY r C a~ V a d M ~ N? ~¢ ~ OIa O NrYy q~$ o n ^ s.~~~cZ~$c~d~w~.~ aLO ''0c'3 ~cca,-$ V 6>: Ol j~ Lu C 6 q V T ~` H O C .7. y~ C~ a C a 'rl R C a , c ab ~'ay~ 3. ^ o a , o^ C rOj q y~ Q T Vi ~~ 01 •` Q q rda u n O~~ ~' ~ y c$ ~^ °w x m0~ G0. ~ 0 3~~ rno Qr yycGcu '~ `o C y g E a 0 'd O b tl O . L~ C b ~ .c C 'd c r p O q~ b u ~~ E ~ wa1 a.Y ~ E q E ~ ~ p.D ~ u ~ .~ ~ b ° ° a 5` 2~'« dEc~'3i~yd^Gm~GEbc~t~a~'~'.eE~~aa c ~3~7w+~ Igi'cnab7d~ c~$+A~:ea ? cc~y3 ~ O N~ ~~ O~ L q 7. ~' tl .0 N~ 'C° ~ d~ y~ N C~~ p a 7 j T ~ p t F. C 7_ P N b E C N L :.. s0.d~f.cEr ~ nv_d~~°wx~ ~ A `v...a~.?~q U V b .9Vp qy O T C ~ y E C~ O d T~ G G L L. C O T C C M a R C(~ 17 L d V 7 ~2 "y ~ V D g q 0 .p.. F~ tl b~ A O' V b U Ja+ p 3. ? L in ti C G 0.G ~ ro~~ :.: E A O. ? .C O w. ~ 7 t V Ol W A -, y~ ,w., u~ i a a O d' G C$ M~ C L Y OI N O G S Ay ~ W .q. ~3~~~V~~dd5g7.c~0~3Tr~o`?O~o ~LCC~NgA. D43 ODN\~ a~N ~ dp T L d ~aD O G~ q C d A~'6 ^A a~~pA~ Oi ~ d ~ M V~~ T~ C GO d a C~ O 0. C d q pp G .C a Q L e'.dp ... st E d 3 .G '~ r d t~~ ~[ d O c .~-, E~ O p O u O N w 0 'G OI ej d ^6 V~~ C S d 'O Ef ~vL i~~q?~7.Nt~L ~~ C OVSO ar+ dC NqC °•w~PLC ~ ~ 4 ~ ~' ~ o y~~0O y ~. a 0. 3 6 G V ~L T ~'O G a C V r w V d a~- v .o .4 ~ a a u c A ..~ °~~ ?! v u~ E a G as d ~" 'a g G a 3 A 3 3 c v d ~ ~.~ G E a . ~~'E 5v G C ~ a._ ~ a a c ~ og' .xi°v x :°. a •c b y A~_ ~ a ~+''~= ~ r i s Fw "y L ya qa b p„ ~ as d o Vii .pY~ E r E w Y 7 G~ b ~; C W x •~ C 'O M d~ ~~ b TS a G Y E a ~ ~0 F: O c C .t- ~~La~;:c~~a'a2°c~A"'_'oc'KigoaEga ds~uvud'=p~u~o ~p -~- C C 'O C O q~ b Q• E .~ OI # .q a s ~ C ~~ d c q V ~^°ca\~v'v4~ ~n N;c~-&dycw~Av~Aa~\g'Arn~dc~~oai-.aa~ S~ 3 Cp ~~ A ~ T..C. N T O T w a O d V U ~_ a s ~_ N lf] t~ d p rr L j A~$ « q y g G a~~ d °' ~ y? O d p F a~ V ~ .... t R C N E", S S G ~s y e a V° W q d V o 3-~'d a.g 3 0- w ~ ~ o..,n a o 3 n..~ a.~ E vv.. os n b= b O O C v Ol ~? ~O v C O "- ~ N '~J ~ d O ,: C p u~~CO ~ dGE' a0 Ybd Ob m`a.dc~ a .fib a C w~. ~~ C C L 9~ = y E n'C~ u O p~ C G O 9 V p, w a y ~ q a3 V ro q0 ~~ O y~ rn a 7 q? v op~O~~d aN°~ E " .ne ~' ~'oa av'~F:s bt y'~ e'~cm y~ ~c ~VaciNmagyy y-°'w°c bQ °'~.~ n d E_°' E c d 3 a ~ " `d' ~~D ~^$,~ at ° ~y a.G C ~ E ~~.c o'a°=9ddc '~5~3 ~ m«b~a~~'~RmL Ea~m d ~ wo~aa ~°'~~Oa~~m~~- c'c yZ'v°ccr ~+~as~D y'° uE~r .b. ~+'d~ a~oL Os ~:.: ~bm 'd'c'c •. $'.tig ~'s arnEE oc C O L d 3 p d A 3 S r G~ G .... ~ a~ V~1 A a r O C~ b~ ~ d q 'C ~ G S~ ,0 ""Cwo ~Ldoacbv_~.3 o~m~na d=dap OCq~^dgOV O av O q q.~~ C S~3_ O D. y a 7 F' b ¢~' ~ d> b E ~ u~i.r"'-~ = d ~Er .°^-.. °y am°~ a y•ry d~ N O ..3' cy~o~ aaa a~a~'."9t 'Zxd~~ 3cd ag Y~oa Z G as.^°'7~~~3~a~~~y~~c~ aSccr ':.`~O a'x"e EbHm ~ q y w C a d d m d p d ~, n y d o v_ pC ~W ~u.~s ~°,u=~2~~c ~~~t,= ~'Oa a~aQ3 a2.~3~~P 'v u b S • ~c r n4 C V •• e£ e~ ~. ~ ~c~ p O1 r .~ 0 ti$ ~. d1 C b a a x.11 V O 01 C a U ' tl~~ q 'N, b~ C r q q G m p ~ v~ w d 3 p T ~y~o O b~ z 3 S. L OY 9 .v ri ~ V q .,~ p~ r+ .q.. q y .Q a W `6 w ~ +~ ,cc 3 d ~ a ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ G N c o d t~ a 'q d~ ~ V 3 m~ ~ 9 $ 1 ~~ ~ ~ pLrp~", broj ~ u C G p O q O. ~ 0.~, C tl C~ O t~a b fit. L~ d D S R g q q fl ~~ ~' R ~O tl y~c drn~iii¢LLL°.pgv d~u q."' U O ~ 7~ q L p 3 d~Q 3 C V C~ A E m ! ~ ~ R Q ~ ~qgr ~ y Cs W p ~ p ~ ~N OG ~'~ m ~~,c=g2pofF r50 ~ C eee...~tt yy qq y„ ~~ SS G 'S ~ A~ fl. ~~ A G L~ {~ V ~ • a d C ro U ro d q q 'dy' F~ d U a G b~ m .~ d« C L 3 ~ D Z~ q 'q « C ~ ~ < * s' ~~ N ~ q~ C c d a 3L 5°E y ro 'G .- c c ri ~`s 3 $ Q.Q.Y.-'-'. ~ ~' ds y ° H k ~' ~, ~ R ~~ ~ rii 5 d~ d$C ~ ~ t c ~T~u~~~a ° q ~' ~ L q ~i S, w yy yp4 C ~~ "°' X11 d ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~' ZIy d C ~ ~ ~ ~ y w r°j ~~ ~~ O ~p C 7 a q Ct ~ d w } q R ~~ „tl 0.^7.}Cq V bCo a~n.O vpO 'D ~1ry w n ay~ ' v O ~• L tl r d tl A= a N OOaO br~pb«q tl«°°3m°3 ~~d~ '~goCp+~~i ~'00~~. d ?~°y~iG7yFc~gY3 ~p j~,,' ~op~~°E4Q ~'Agq'p ~y0~ wa-q; E i2 s -~ d a~ t1 .~ pi.a °ui q d .E ° .Y •~ a ~ ~~'•-'g~"9t$.Eagc ~a.. ~~ ~~iG~~~~o%i 3"~' a ~, cm ~e s°ba yu~vRRV ° p~ ~4c~. 3~~ o! gE~5c7pa~ w~ ps LC~~ ~.3:~~Eg iq~r~01q~.°~'.p4'°g ~ s'~"' ,~ ~g,gai~~yq ~'3~ ~ Eb Gq -~~.S.~q6 ~~~o~~dV°'~rod~o a,~d.~. 'J~m~~Enz ~~~Is° :x~5bm°E~ Q~ p -~ C71 . pq ~ N G}~ 3= H dl C .a d u tl y d N % w C v.^~~ q q q~ _ ~'-'- .c ooecy; aQ O~y ~ o.Y~r-b'"° b b sdwO~~'.Y s~ qq ~ ~v- c ~ a9g~3 tl u ie ~ sg ~ ~ ~ g~3 ~ `~.. N~ n b ob ~'c„a~^, A c V b ~~V7ic'..~~5 sia ~ nygaQ~oy~=$'~~~o'~,3Z'c'c°e~°u~uo~'c~ Y ~y~~~ ~~ro` nSs w b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~« ny ALL «'F~~~ uLz ~~p m °' p' a~ o;~'~ f~ ~U ~~`o~~c~rnm I ~~cdi~a3u~ °u ~G. d-0 ~+... 3 b3~ N v o',,CCU~'o~'T,b '»~~caaa~40~~$a w ~.., « CFC 4~q~.5lF ~baaip ES~++u~'L C j~~'a c a q ~Si~'~i u N s o ~cA,goa"~~a'.:'aoE oS~ Ear. v ~~rv~n g~5cd2' b~ ~ o3d ~ .o p d Fy E y' b __ '; ~ O 8~OgA tlr-O ~y~°y!93's q; ~3 u U° roy. ~ y~~ ~ b C& q G D~ $ ~p p q O~ p p g 3 7 q L= .y ~ y~ 0 W 6~ E~" a L ~ N ~ d O q ~. tl~ .~ T ~ db~A ~'QyyyyY ~~`FN°C~~.. .may Cvi~A ~ 3 ~~ T d E~ tl q~ `~ « W Q C q q~`« ~ d 3 ~ u~ Y yhtq E ~ e N yXR~a Es,c ~ d f q~~~~ ~ ~ ~~'^C ~&~~~5 ~G3~~o~~~3v~3.y o~q N ~ yJ ~ ~ T _a_ C i0 .__ ~ C ~ ~, v~ g C ['~ !~•~ Cif C '~ giiy ~~~ ~y' Ay ~O~w~ h y.a ~ ~ ~ d O tl 'n ~ ~ ~ ~ G O. • q ~ ~ d C ~ C 0 F~. 'mo'd Sa~c~~Y a"~ ~ a yc3~ E /~ v~ 01 da~3~16 ~ Z++o'~+ roroy~ pyC~ q c /~ ~ 3 CS y .9c •Y ~ b l o w s ~ 9 ~ C rj .C 3i'~^ o~c Nx r~« rry~jjyr~r~b~ec~r "~~ ~' ~cctgp$'~ ~~~c~r;SC~ plc •O ~~.~, f~3ro~~~~! y, ~wry1 C7 ~ ~ g~~~~S~+ o aci c b~ 3s ~ @ u95t! ~~ o 'ZS ~ .. v &~' '~ 6 d s ~~ ~. E q~! a3 d~ u c d ~. s~~~~~~~~~~~~?~3~ x~~~ ~~ ~ ~g~~~~~.~~ ~~~ o~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~Q~d ~ ~~ ~"~ ~~~ ~'° ~ ~ ~ e a a 0 i Q d`~ C Z !`u a`- a c e ~E O p a :• a ~ e 'sue •o' S np 7 >' ~ Q 3~ ~» ~~ o~ o~ Oce ~= o~ cs e ~o' ~a ~~ ~~ Y x l3 N '" ' q m g ~ r ^~ f f! t t f e~ ! f '~ ~~ _ x~ i 1 -Y i f! f 9 Y i c ~ _ w p mug ,~ ~ d~d~~~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ gp `a:, ~ ~ Lod ~.%1 Q f, ~; i ~- f f i / /?~~$ t ! 1 y~ ~~~ ~^ / f! f 4 Itri 0 Y f ~L~ _ sr ~~ Q~g 4 ~~' 9 4 Y Y i Y ', ~ 9 Y i I y ~ f ~ + 7 .ti (,1 - 6 ~SG~sR ~ ~ o!e! Y*~ ! P-~ 9 1 t ~~i ~ '~ •~ '~ # S• fi t V ~ ~~~ 3~g ~' y 0 C~ k.p~, e~~~ din ~ { x5 k ~ r ,gyp SSS ~ i ~~ ~ ! ', ~ a _ ~ '~ ,~• •~ r act P --LL ~y ~~y5 qL ~~j~~ l .°. q O C " _ ~` ~ ~ xx 3' 4 ~ ~ ~ a~,g ~ g~ a s,~ ~St~ E ~ a ~~ J u i_ G 5 d c d d L^1 d `a U r--~- [4 C7 :~ 6 OI ~~ a Ci q~c~~~~~~Y~33„~..C E; v:~ ~~~~~dLN mac..+~~ 3~0~'~°~~5i~z«:3vg~e ~.dv~i3d,3~ffi~$a.4;a s .~ yy acx UdF~ ~c~cy.Y 3'%r3oO3~~.~'3`~'QCa a~~Cna°5.ro sgc'o~ ~ ~ql aaa GibHo ~oou2,' ~ ~'~or 'o A~5 a 'F a .9 ~ OIL a N C W i6 O .St y C }'C C 3 ~ ~~ 7 ~h c iO 7 3 a" b MgY °~q CMy M qa ~ Eaa a g IE3a °u '~puwroEa~cO o H 2 rob w 6 O r }co ba ca ~' a b-m m~3yy y~ ~ O c A C rp..^ ~ '. O ~ ~ L 3o P, ro u~ Q .C a ~l C~ .p .`. y C- .~ V a Z- ~'G d C Old.' L d ,p a u° ~E~~ yg~a ~' dsa as .ouzo d~'a aZ 4~~0~ oZc~G af',ctg ~~ a~ ~ ,~~_ ~ 3 m ~ ~ 3^ o`SE- pO V 1~,,11 ,a,G ~ tags a~Jn ~.a .ri ~ ~~ 4 d R ~ 0. ~ O.T. ~ C ._ O ~a, ~ b m R U ro` ~ a x es 3 d d C _ ° d /; 'tl Rio ~1T.``'ro~ ,~ ~ rouaro _q ~r .d. ~' Iryy~ERBI^ 3 ~> ~a°c~ A~ ., a a C w n a ~'aO ~' C aFi a •~ y l n c ro d i '° c s ~ ~'yY A :~ ~ a~ 3 m~ '~-' ~ g C 3 e^ a 6 c ~. ~ b :~ a •a 'g atyopybuad..~3m ~~Aw~N~~0.c2'_~,3~ m~'aio03 ~r g. '~w~C3c•-M~~Sc '~S~"~5 .~'~3~~bg~~V '~cg.5lt~'ab~°~,c~ ~~ ~dro.c~~.?~ c~ a ~'C os $,cd~;a~~`dd urnC'~mo y~c ~v-ro~3n~EdF~ R R ~~~~~ axvgE~",o~~~a3 ~a o Nd ~ c a. ac~dau~~cYA e A O 'c 'c c rnro d ~ tit c ~r c ~y~ d t ~ C q ~ ~ 9 i. d d Y 3 r' 2l T'- y~ .a E~'~~'~a 3 °2 a~~Eroti°. 3 E,a,9~doo tJ~ ~~,:: tia~~vryb Vm~od_oi(pd~u .~d°•c>.dY~Fa p N NpI 7« ~V T L N p~ ~_ ~. N N~ Y p 0. a E d E C T 3« yp~ ~~ 1 L y A C ~ (." L C• C A .C C C C C W I/I 0. ro ro 'C ro F 0. .- c •p d~ .n • ~ y• rn d• O~ 7 y O d~ ~O p dl ~',r.° cgge oar ~5 1 •~°u~u ~ ~S`.in °ro°Q,-', Iv ~'.$ ~ ~ 5rb-QZ ~'c $3.c $°3u°,'°3 O 01 a.G ~ n F q C ro a t C L C O b ' E S L ~ ~ R A O° c'ti yOj N V 'O d N W d CTj O O O s a O uN Y daa .c ~ m as ~o~~ ~ u°Y 'd 16cro c 3 3 uu:. b ~Ar&R ro d d b q y ,.. ~' a+ ~ ..d R G y 3 'tf 7 C~` y C a o .~. u C C C V ro C t IG itl ~ ~ c Rro ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b O1 ~ aro '-g~ M ~~ ~ 3 ~ Q d c-~ cti~ .~b.G g m z qsi E ~ a F ~ x v c a0 C 3X 6~'A a~ N'~ O'~ t... ~ ~Ca Yc ~deiaAa =.d pro y C ~ •y yp~ a~ «c~ ~'°~c~c oo ,GQOGp A sRp ~ w 7 Sv r ~ac¢ °oN •"~ds, o"y° I ~u pu d~u~EL~ d.$b nwa 0..._m ~ A J Vii. ~ ~~~ p`~~a~~uC ~'c cdC pj G'~~Md C?~dO >?~d ao; R -b +'~ Q 01 r' bAV_ NNx'~ ~Rro.4cv~d cy 3 p,~oo~ ~Eo3N~ ~~bo~~lHi° ~ o~i~ ~~ m aE3 ndo°''°a:yoyq~R~°,o~E~ACacr'o~o,S~v~~-°dEc N ~3~ i~2 oi~ ~ ~ r W~ °Cd agm3G~v x~'dd~ b~~oi.~a_c_Ga~a~ tc°i a~~~ L~ Ab ~ w 1? v Cy p S,°, o ~ro~ '.~ gr_d;5! ° 4 oa~T d~ ~ c~ro ~"v .,yA ac ~ y c m ooc~~c p~d vroU~ ~-~.owy~ ei °=d=aid u V CL'~ q cv ~_.`suv m«CmociCroa°+~'dac~l~"I~EcE~m~~- dc~a rna 0 .+ 3Bsa-~R,-aa- dd E~ c v~u'W o 3E ~ yo#3.vt~rna7y ~p ~~E 'a$~d~~_a ~ygam~yyvu ;?odc c~ycdac.N~ C Q y g C= C= Yp r ~ O d 9 a N c .e G~ yi 3 m Q a~ O A C y a 7 C V O R L ~~= nova 'r Li~~ O'~t7bv b u~O~~ro~~nro -.~F~ a d ro ~ d,c ~~ ~ c a C' ~.. b ` o Y~~ L R CC LCC ~¢S E .o '° d c ' ' F q u b ~ a s ~ '° 3 qro c ~ ~ ~•.~ ~ YI Cro '° ~5i Vi0.~ d pq~p O ~j fib ,~C >.S 4~ ~ q~~ ~ ~ Q ~~ ycy dE.~ G ao' ~~~ q ao~ ~ az u~~ ~~S~,y ~Tn~3~ Tip q~~a 1 aa~ 'C7 n L 7 OI O N -^ 7 b i .a. ~' ~ q M ~ n ~e ,~ ~ ~ ;? o n ; s 3 Yi q~~rnw 3~~D ~d Qb ar ti ~ ~ '6Q '[7 a6 '"~rv ~ e°~ m m o d a~ 9 9r Q$~ rti`v2~~« '~ cu°i~ ~a s c'n 3 ~c ~~a ~ ~" ~ ~g~ _ V o + n yR ro t u°° ~ ~ o c_ A ° N .~ c ~O .C ~ o ~'$ ° d '~'~ c ~ E m ~ yx ,~ ~ Q ~ c~ g ~ I 117 3~'a ~~a ~..d o a~ ~ $m ~-~ A ~ ~~ ~~ ~ o a r c ~ro e s e°i q o E ~_L~S,E ~~ ~ C g ro ~~,~ V e10i~ m~~ 3 0~ u3 i : oc o ~~ E ~ ~' g' ~,~~ ~ ~ aa~ > n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~+ S O ' 9 3S l~ g ` ` m r~ ~ 1V CG~C O Orsn ~n (V I ~ C O ~ 0011. ~ $ ~ a p p StHg ~ p '~C`~ 5~ ~ ee °~OQ $ ~ o o $$535 g~~~ ` y~ ~ s ~ $d~ ~ ~ Z2 e d Z ~ O G ~IfOr G .. OO ~ ; ~ M„ $538 5t °SR8 °~3 3$ w °RS;R OrNr ~ C~ ~b~ Cm ~ OG~~7 +0 4 3i•s ~ # N853 n ogees a$ 8 R88o E~~ o ~~~~ ~ .eio- o eeuni o6~o cco,~ ..d ~Y_ u ~ ~'~• ~ ~ _ ~~ 8R8 ~ °Sig$ ~ °r?~S °R535~ w E o; _ . ,~o y s~d •..~ ~ m~~ o~~s oe ~r tai ri r. ~~ ''" ~; yy V~~T'9~ ~ 9 Q ~ ~ 7' ~ m ~NO p V 'l ~y y~ Qaq ~'l Or ~y ~r 1'. i0 OG [1 ~y ~~~V CNf'~~. ~ ~~r a b ~ y L b / 1 rr o, ~s a ~'~ ~' ~ ~mru ~~ o mrat7 m>-~v mr~v a ~~ ~ ~~~~= ~ ~ s ~ ~ x ~ A a ~ #°zm r ~a ~5's Grob ~ ~ ~ ~ .. p x ~~~~~~~Y ~~~s . ~~~ qd,"~E`~~~~` pc~pY xs °~ffi N ° _ g ~3~j~ya~ro ~~~~ Q s`-~~ ~+'~ is ~ ~ .n n ~ *' ~ Qc .a o ~ x u e V. e ~ ~ ~ T ~ ~~ ~ d ° ~& `pq ~ ,S~ Ega~c !S 3 'g a~ F.~~ ~~3 :,_.a935c~s~ e ~~~ ~ ~ ~' 4~~ ~M ~ ~~p3 ~ ~ C y~~~ YA/7 b .~~1 C' ~~ Q+ ~ ~~ g~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~ . 3 0 ~ 9 . b ~ R.~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ °~ ~° ~ ~ ~~ ~ d ~~ ~~~ . w ~ ~ ~3 ~~~ ~~~;.~~ ~ :: ' j ~ ~' 3 _~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~.~~ ~~ a 4 x 3 U Y V _~ r~ i m •~ V C 'tl v a~ '~nx VQJ Q5 0 v U I~ ~~ c~ ~ n i, ~ l ~,~, i 1~. S- ~. U Z 3LL .S Y rlda ~~g n ;~ ~~ ~~ a~~~go 33fgy~~ ~~~~ ~~am ~3~. a_'~~~a LAg~e~ ~~6~ .Y Y~ w C.~~_ a~0 3'J ~ _ _ pp Q{1,, yyq/ N ~ ~ C Q „R 1~ ~ 0.A ,~ y C - $$ 2$y~ gdd~R a R ~'x ~ C~a ~{L'd a; ~t8 ~y ;~~~~ C~~Yr,O ~.R~~3 ~C upR1~ d OI ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ vii q~+~'L rg. ~p~ ~ yN~ ~~.. Q ~ C R C ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g V'L ? YNi u ~LLL i ~ q i M V ~ u G ~ {~,'+ ~~~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~~~.k~3,.E ~~ cISS~c#3~~ b tn~ ~ ~ a cO~TC~CP ~~O~.pC00'a 333 a ~j] ~ _ '~. ~ ~"y ~~a~ ~c~::"~CJY42C~ Y ~ ~'~ y F ~~ C ~ o ~e .Y ~ C ,~ ~ Ly~3 Sf d d~CWb V~ ~~~C d ~ d ~ ._ 41 ~a'oC.Q~ 03~s~y O ~" O Q. ~" 2cg~ y~ scO EN .a. ~ d v~ ~ o ~.6~ .5.'dd~ ° ~~ ~~~~~q~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ E ~L ~.~ ~~ q~~. ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ E ~f ~ ~ W '~ 3 .9~ z ~° ~ ~ M ~ 'O E ~ ~ ~ N N ~. ~ ~ ~ ~A~d~, d~~~ ~a~~ a ~~N I ~a° '«~ ~7 r ~ c ~~ ~ ~~~ a ~'~ 3 ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~o~~`~~~ ~~. A ~ i~ e,~ ~ ~ rod' ~~~~~ $~A~~~~~~~ ~.d U o a f~ c ~3yo~~~~~a@3 6ao"~a'~~~~3si7~ O q,~Q f/~i y ~~~ ~ ~ yp iSiY ~ .SR! { y a ~i s a c .'R Oi ~~ u ~~p ~ &~~ y ° ~ 'O~ yC ~~4p~~Cy~ d s ~ ~ ~ ~^a O N ~ N p A .5 ~p1 ~ y q~~ w ~ dV ~~ ~ .~~~ F C E ir'F e. yx~ ~~~ ~a~ 0p~p C Cj~~ F 4 J~ C ~ ~ ~ O q .Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ACV N .5 Y V ~ ~~'~~~Td ~~ ~~~~~M ~. ~~~~Cy ~~Qr ~~ d RR ~ ~~1~ ~ ~ ~~ l]V ~~~ ~~~~aa6~~8 e - ~~ Y ~ ~ g, ~,- L~ A A~ dw ~ Li A 4= V 90 S~ 'A ~ ~ ~O O p V C N .a G ~ ~ ~ A y C .s .b .r ~ b N S~~+cd'~A _~~qy 3 ~ }~ ~i L' y~ ad•• W t ~ •«~' C3 N ~~ C ~ R C ~ a ~ 3 ~ a z ~'~ " V d~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ Q E .~ z O e fl C ~ G'O ~ C O eTa ~C9~~~~ O~ S x C y GG 3 0.0.0. ~~9 A~~~ ~0.0~~~ oo, 3dv... ~' ~'`~o 0 ~ .~~~ ~? r ~ ~ 3 e 3 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ q o« E ~S y q a 9~~ ~!~4y~ ~~ ~~ b~~ ? 3 N L~ a E'" T C~ d s~~~~~~. L ~ ~ d ~~ G d p d~~ ' ~ ~- ~i ~ ~$~ ~~~ ~~ g'` ~ o g ~13~~~ 3~~.C•..nb s Y ~ ~s ~,~~~ ~ ~ G~ 4 ~s ~ v~~~~ ~ ~a e ~9 ~ a ~V ~ ~~~~ b g ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ . ~.~ y a ~ ~ T ~ ~ C 7 ~~ ~ ~ d ~~ b ~ ~ _ .~ a ~ V ~ ~~w s .~~~ +~ ~ ~ .~ E"` ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~' ~$ O ~ ~ 8~~ ~~~ ~~ c ~s 3 ~ ~o~~~~ ~ ~~ ~. U i' RICHARD M. PHELPS, LTD. " GOLF COURSE ARCHITECT ~~ P.O. 80X 3295 EVERGREEN, COLORADE} 80439 303-670-0478 • April 1, 1992 Mr. Rob Robinson Executive Director Vail Recreation District 292 West Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81b57 Dear Rob: Thank you for your letter of March 24, 1442, informing us that we were selected to be one of three finalists for the proposed 9-hole par-3 golf course in Vail. We are always honored to be in serious consideration. However, now that we have received the aerial photos and copies of the preliminary sketch done by Mr. Bailey, we must beg your forgiveness and ask that our name be withdrawn from consideration. Had we been aware of the site limitations earlier we would have spared ourselves and you kind people this embarrassment. • In our opinion, the site js ~~t I n ugh tp design. cor~stnl~r ~.nd operate a safe golf facility. In tQciav s litigious socieiv, we are very concerned that senous accidents and disruptions will occur that will result in lawsmts against the District, t f course archit~f and goners. A number of our concerns are enumerated below. 1. Existing homes -the existing homes on the north side of the site have enjoyed the luxury of a peaceful, quiet, safe environment Constructing the course will undoubtedly result in golf balls entering these propenies; noises of maintenance eo~Ii meat 1a}..t'n the morni, ng will be noticeable and "strangers" ~ain~ by t eIr back yards will be an annoyance. This is always the case when agol~ course i~Uilt_a_fter housing has been established. The mains nn~e trr~w^eut ..^n ;ty po*.erti til of rntraduckng these i~ItPrferences and dangers next to existing homes. ~..- -- 2. Interstate 70 is a high-speed highway f65 m.n.h.1,,,~djacent to the proposed course. Noi only is it very close to.th~ golf sj~jr ~~ hetn•u rhe_site...makivg it tit much more suscet~tible to errant olf balls. A sha~.ter~d windshield at b5 m.p.h. could be devastating,_= $l~ouduyou~ go ahead with this course we would suggest a ctocxwise roupng of the o es to xeep the s ice s anx on the . site rather than allowing it to fly onto the interstate or into the homes. 3. The corridor width is 150'0' _throu~h the center of the site which is considerably less that that recommended by the American Society of Golf Course Architects and the National Golf Foundation. A corridor for a regulation hole is a minimum of 300',,...x. even consideri~,th, e,Wp~ar-3, it should not be less than 200 feet. Aside-bv-side golf hole scenario has a minimum of SUU' with consideration for the par~3 holes, his might drop to AMERICAN SOCIETY OF GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTS AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION Mr. Rob Robinson April 1, 1992 Executive Director page 2 Vail Recreation District . 400 feet. Once again, the Courts are well-versed in these dimensions and, should injury or damage occur, an "expert witness" familiar with these standards will testify as such. . 4. Walks cy~h as those between 1 to 2~,,,~ and '~ to $ are al# don emus ~onsidenng those peopte httttng balls directly at the "walker.`r`""~ . -~-~-~ 5. Several centerlines of fairways are within 30 to 40 feet of the property line. Even assuming perfect shots from the type of clientele who will be playing this course, this is entirely to close. 5. Sketching in realistic green shapes and sizes further creates extreme dangers. Considering a.5,000 to 6,000 square foot green, the right sides of those greens on most holes, but particularly 3 and 4, would be within 10 to 15 feet of the property line. There is no room to move those greens left as they would fall dangerously in front of holes playing the opposite direction. The same -sized green on hole #5 would not leave room for tee #b. Greens at #2 and #7 would likely be combined into a double green which, again, is ex-,;,~„ely dangerous on a course such as this. 7~. The topography or slope of land from side to side further complicates construction and will result in some difficult fill slopes on the downhill sides of greens and tees which will cause more extreme bounces toward 1-70._ _ These can be mitigated by excavating on the uphill side but they cannot be .; , totally eliminated. $. The area shown for parking, entry and starter shack is extremely limited. Grading would be crucial for this to work -- required setbacks from the entry . ,. road could likely limit available, space and neighbor objections as to the starter building aesthetics and pla;ement could be obstacles as well. Rob, we just feel there is not enough room to fit what you would like into this site. We detest turning down possible work, but in clear conscience, we cannot recommend that you do this project. Thank you mast sincerely for invititfg us w be interviewed. L'Ve hope your #4 candidate may be willing to take our place. We wish you good luck on yow project, but we also hope that you will strongly consider the comments above. We realize ,that we are commenting on a preliminary sketch plan, but after 30 years in the business, we do not see a reasonable solution that would vary that much. Please dori t hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions. • sine a y, Richard M. Phelps, ASGCA . RMP/trop ~.~ -~ 71 a .~... ., • --~ ,~ ~u~u s~ ~a, /9~.Z ~/ ~~ . _ G~- ~~ ~. > n . z~ vim.. ~ti~ ~~ 1 ~,~.~ ~-~~ ~ ~~2~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~s ~-- - j,~,~~ {~~x~~~r~~ - ~~~z r~A~~. ,~~S~Cyfc/ t/~~~vT~N~.. _ ~~ ~ G ~ ~ ~m~ 1 L~~SJ~"-pJ ~- ~n ;, _~ ~~~~5 ~ ~~~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~~ - ~~s~~c~~~c.~-.~~./y~~-~ Z~a~~ ~ ~~ U ~s ~~ : ~~ ~7~5 ~~ ~~ ~ yz jr. ~r ~ ~ s ~~. r~ c.L~ ,/~. ~~ ~~~~ ~~30 ,69-~~ ,Grp ~~ w, z ~~~ Qu 1~ ~~~. ~ 3 5 0 ~,i'.~.r.~ ~~v . ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~,~5 ~~ J G~-~~ C~~' C ~~ ~p~3 q .S~i1iV~~'~S ~D2 , .. .. i l .. • ~ . . r r --- - __ f . _ _ _ -- --- - -...---- - ---- i1j ~~ --- - -- _ _._ _ f ~ ,_.. - -- --- - --- --- - ---- I - -- -- - -- - -. i i_ .._. __.._ _... _ .. - - !, _. _ ._. -- j ~ . _ __ _ _ . _ --- - - f __ - --~-._..__.~__------ -___.~_-___-^______~-.__.-- !~ :; MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 1, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held an Tuesday, September 1, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:45 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Tawn Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. • Second on the agenda was approval of the minutes of August 4, 1992, and August 1$, 1992, Regular Evening Meetings, and August 20, 1992, Special Evening Meeting minutes. Merv Lapin moved to approve these minutes, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was a request fora $1,400 contribution to victims of Hurricane Andrew in Miami Beach, Florida. Mayor Osterfoss noted this item resulted from discussion at the Eagle County Regional meeting on 8126/92. Ron Phillips explained the Florida Municipal League had been contacted for inf,.~u.ation on assistance efforts, and they assigned Miami Beach as the proposed recipient of any assistance from Eagle County communities. Merv Lapin moved to approve the contribution of $1,000 from Council contingency funds to Miami Beach, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance creating a new Chapter 18.57 -Employee Housing and setting forth details in regard thereto; amending Chapter 18.10, 18.12, 18.13, 18.14, 18.16, 18.18, 18.20, 18.22, 18.24, 18.27, 18.28, 18.29, 18.34, 1$.36, and 18.39 to provide far the addition of employee housing units as permitted or . conditional uses within certain zone districts within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto; amending Chapter 18.4, setting forth certain definitions for an employee housing unit, a bathroom, and a kitchenette. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen reviewed seven recommended changes made to the ordinance since first reading. He placed emphasis on the changes primarily related to EHU GRFA credits (425 sq. ft.) and the use of the 250. He noted a proposed change to allow a Type II EHU as a conditional use with Flanning and Environmental Commission approval in the Agricultural Open Space District. Rob Levine asked far clarification regarding separate entrances. After discussion, a suggested wording change to clarify that each EHU would have a separate entrance and would not be connected in any way was agreed to. Mayor OsterFoss noted she and Kristan Pritz had the opportunity to meet and exchange ideas about this ordinance earlier with representatives of the Vail Board of Realtors including Bill Wilto, Dave Cale, Doug Ketchum., Larry Agneberg, and Jahn Slevin. Kristan outlined the recommendations made by that board. There was discussion about enforcement of permanent restrictions, and it was agreed the existing system would be adequate. After further discussion regarding impact and parking on small lots, and the conditional use process, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992, on second reading with incorporation of the recommendations from the Vail Board of Realtors. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Dave Cole encouraged Type III EHUs be offered far sale as an incentive fox long term locals who want to buy rather than rent to stay within the Town. Kristan said those provisions were already in the ordinance for Type I EHUs, and the same wording would 1 .~ be used for Type III EHTJs. Further discussion included Tom Steinberg's concerns about increasing density, parking problems, and pressure being put on open space owners, Jim Gibson than called the question. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-2, Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg opposed. Item No. S was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance authorizing and directing acquisition of certain property more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance by reference, for bike path purposes by negotiation if possible, and if negotiation is not successful in obtaining the property, by eminent domain proceedings. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith explained this ordinance would give authority to Town staff to negotiate for parcels of land TOV needs related to the bike path through Dowd Junction, an ongoing cooperative effort between TOV and the State. Larry Hated time was of the essence, and if negotiations with property owners could not produce mutually acceptable prices, it would be necessary to move f„~ ward with condemnation proceedings. After brief discussion about negotiations vs. condemnation proceeding, appraiser bids and selection, and whether the bike path was within the 100 year flood plain, Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. Before a vote was taken, there was short discussion about the location of the parcels in question. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 6 was Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance authorizing and directing acquisition of drainage easements over, across, and under certain property more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein, for public . drainage purposes by negotiation, and, if negotiation is unsuccessful, by eminent domain proceedings. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Grafel explained these were drainage easements existing between four lots an Davos Trail and Arosa Drive, Larry advised negotiations were presently underway for these. If negotiations with r~.,~,erty owners could not produce mutually acceptable prices, this ordinance would need to be in place to allow condemnation proceedings. Jim Gibson asked that reference to the fact that an independent appraisal had been made or was part of the negotiations be made part of the ordinance. After brief discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 23, Series on 1992, with the requested change, on first reading. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-1, Merv Lapin abstaining due to possible conflict of interest. Item No. 7 was a presentation of safety option recommendations for access to bus stops on Bald Mountain Road in regard to the VRD Proposed Par 3 Golf ,Course. Larry Grafel introduced three options, and thoroughly discussed the advantages, disadvantages, and preliminary cost estimates for each. Safety was agreed to be the primary concern. Mike Rose discussed some of the technical problems with the bus turnaround at the site, and noted there was a problem with overcrowding on that bus last year. After individual discussion of each option, Larry Grafel said he would use Council's input to develop a specific proposal. • Rob Robinson, Colleen McCarthy, and Gail Malloy, Vail Recreation District (VRD} Board members, participated in the discussion of the proposed options. Merv Lapin felt Bald Mountain Rd. bus stop area residents should be kept informed of proposed changes, and Larry Grafel was directed to initiate a PR effort to residents of the area prior to ice and snow. Discussion turned to the proposed Par-3 Golf Course. Mayor Osterfoss noted she had been contacted by Evie Nott, opponent of the proposed golf course. Ms. Nott informed her Mr. Phelps, the golf course designer who withdrew from the Par-3 project, was willing to come to Vail free of charge to discuss the safety concerns expressed in his letter dated 4/1/92. Ms. Nott advised she had also spoken with Ken Wilson, who expressed no abjection to a meeting with Mr. Phelps. Merv Lapin asked if Mr. Phelps would discuss his allegations that it was not safe to put a golf course there. Gail Malloy said Mr. Phelps would not comment an Mr. Bailey's design or any other architect's development. Jim Shearer suggested obtaining a letter f,.~,,. Mr. Phelps to that effect. Tom Steinberg felt there was no down side to having Mr. Phelps speak with the VRD Board. Colleen McCarthy suggested Council sit dawn with the proposed plan, and hole by hole, see how Dick Bailey had addressed each one of the concerns expressed by Mr. Phelps' letter. Several Council members felt that was a good idea, but agreed to leave the decision in the VRD's hands. Mayor Osterfoss felt Gail's idea was a good one, and directed the VRD to improve their public relations situation by putting that issue on their agenda, and inviting people still concerned with the safety issue to review the S proposed golf course plans in that same manner. 2 '~ .. Item No. 8 was a discussion regarding capital projects and future debt service levels. Steve Barwick discussed the most recent version of the Capital Projects 5 Year Plan. He noted the only change to the plan since Council had last seen it was in the Heavy Equipment Fund, Capital Equipment section. He said all of the broad assumptions in the plan as presented • were the same as in past TOV 5 Year Plans. As the underwriter needed to be contacted shortly to tie up the refunding, he asked Council to finalize new projects needs. Jim Gibson stated the debt level right now was equal to approximately 150% of anticipated annual revenue. He felt that was a manageable debt and recommended TOV make a conscious effort to maintain that level. Ron Phillips felt Jim Gibson's concerns were consistent with TOV's plan to require a new revenue source for any new debt taken on. There was discussion regarding bus d~N~~ciation and replacement, operational maintenance items, special event funding, PW building expansion, municipal building addition, land purchases, cutting of safety items such as the Vail Road sidewalk, and the Simba Run Underpass was mentioned as a high priority item. Mayor Osterfoss felt, under the scenario presented, TOV needed to announce it was not moving toward a central loading facility. Additionally, Ron explained TOV was proposing the cemetery be a private function and TOV would not be budgeting expenditures for it. A brief discussion about potential impacts of the proposed Bruce Amendment ensued. Jim Shearer suggested a presentation explaining the Bruce Amendment be made to Council, and Steve was directed to prepare for this. Mayor Osterfoss noted an educational process regarding the Bruce Amendment had been discussed at the Eagle County Regional Meeting on $/26/92. Ron added a three person committee to represent the County, Avon and Vail, was appointed at that meeting and assigned the task of preparing an educational process of the issue to include meetings with the press. . Before adjournment: Ron Phillips advised he had attended a public hearing held by CDOT on the new statewide transportation planning process rules and regulations. The proposed planning process would require a statewide transportation planning process, to be handled by region. TOV was to be in the Summit, Eagle, Fake, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties transportation planning region. Ron asked Council for approval to draft a letter to CDOT including questions about the relationship of planning vs. project funding, how districts related regarding planning vs. maintenance, a suggestion about facilitating a process to involve the state planning regions such as NWCCOG and other councils of government in discussion about how to coordinate the planning process, and haw a past requirement for transportation development plans for those receiving UMPTA funds ties in with the new process. Ron Hated each planning region would have a representative on the transportation advisory committee for the state. After brief discussion, including comments on intermodal transportation,Council agreed to drafting of this letter far Mayor Osterfass' signature. Mayor Osterfoss suggested a letter be sent to the Colorado Municipal League Boaxd of Directors to commend them for their courageous and thoughtful stand in opposing the sales tax initiative for education. Council had no objections. Council agreed to send CAST a copy of the draft position paper concerning the Public School Finance Act of 198$, for consideration. as an agenda item for the October, 1.992, CAST meeting in Aspen. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 1.0:!00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: II.Gta. d'. I~-echw Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk iNinutes taken by 13arianne 5. Deto C:UAINSEPT1.92 3 MINUTES 'NAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 15, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:50 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ken Hughey, Assistant Town Manager Larry Eskwith, T.. w~~ Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda consisting of two items: A. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance authorizing and directing acquisition of certain property mere particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein ("the property") for park and recreation purposes, and authorizing and directing the acquisition of a certain p~,_...anent easement more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein ("the easement") to be acquired by negotiation if possible, and, if negotiation is not successful, by eminent domain proceedings. B. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance authorizing and directing acquisition of a permanent easement more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein, {"the easement") fox public drainage purposes by negotiation, and, if negotiation for acquisition is not successful, by eminent domain proceedings. • Mayor Osterfass read the titles in full. Larry Eskwith noted correction of a typo in Ordinance No. 22, and stated the word "permanent" was to be added before the word "easement" in the titles of both of these ordinances before next publication. (Note: The addition is shown in bold above.} Jim Gibson moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the correction and additions as noted by Larry, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of the Town of Vail, Colorado, General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1992A in the total aggregate principal amount of $7,000,000 far the purpose of refunding a portion of the Town's outstanding General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1985; prescribing the form of said bonds; providing for the levy of general ad valorem taxes to pay the principal of and the interest an the Bonds; providing other covenants and details in connection therewith; and repealing all ordinance in conflict therewith. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson explained the purpose of this ordinance and of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992. Larry Aubrecht, representing Hanifen Imhoff, Jack Wolfe, representing Kemper Securities, and Steve Jeffers, representing George K. Baum, discussed the band details, and the rationale of splitting into two bond issues -general obligation refunding bands and sales tax revenue refunding bonds. After discussion concerning repo amounts, ratings, and call periods, Merv Lapin noted these ordinances were not final until after second reading. There was discussion concerning potential consequences should these ordinances not pass on second 1 reading, Merv then moved to approve Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance authorizing the • issuance of Town of Vail, Colorado Sales Tax Revenue Refunding and Im~,l„~ement Bonds, Series 1992B; providing the form, terms and conditions of the Bands, the manner and terms of issuance, the manner of execution, the method of payment and the security therefore; pledging sales tax and parking revenues of the Town for the payment of the bonds; providing certain covenants and other details and making other provisions concerning the Bonds and the sales tax and parking revenues; ratifying action previously taken and appertaining thereto; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Noting the purpose and particulars of this ordinance had been discussed in conjunction with Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1992, Merv Lapin waved to approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Second readings of Ordinance No. 24 and Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992, were scheduled for a Vail Town Council Special Evening Meeting on Tuesday, September 29, 1992. Item No, 5 was Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing Section 11 of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, Subsection 9 concerning the Vail Village Inn Special Devel„r~.ent District regarding a use restriction on a dwelling unit, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The applicant was BSC of Vail, Colorado, L.P./Frank Cicero. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Mollica explained the applicant's request was far a major amendment to Special Devel.,r~ent District (SDD) No, 6 (Vail Village Inn) in • order to remove a rental restriction upon Unit No. 30 of the Vail Village Inn Plaza Condo~+~+~~iums. Mike briefly outlined inf~s,uation covered in the CDD's mama dated August 2~, 1992, regarding the background and history of the planning process which occurred in 1989, allowing Unit No. 30 to be converted from commercial use tti residential use. He noted the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC), at their August 24, 1992, public hearing, had unanimously voted (7-0) to recommend denial of this applicant's request. Ken Wilson, Branch Broker for Vail Associates Real Estate, representing the applicant, distributed a letter dated September 15, 1992, which questioned whether or not Unit No. 30 should have ever been placed under the Condominium Conversion ordinance, and whether or not the ordinance had been consistently applied over time. At this point, Bob Buckley stepped down from discussion of this agenda item due to a potential conflict of interest. A lengthy exchange followed with Mr. Wilson and applicant, Frank Cicero, alternately voicing opinions about lack of consistency in enforcement of the Condominium Conversion ordinance, referring to the Gateway and Vail Village Inn as adjacent properties without the rental restrictions, and questioning the legality of the ordinance. Council and staff repeatedly emphasized each SDD stood on its awn merit, and each SDD had different restrictions and development standards. Tom Steinberg and Rob Levine painted out concessions other SDDs had made as part of the creation of their SDDs. When asked if he would consider putting in employee housing units as part of his request, Mr. Cicero said he would, but had not . previously contemplated that idea. Rob suggested Mr. Cicero return to Council with a comprehensive plan far further discussion before asking for a major SDD amendment again. After discussion about the option of reopening negotiation discussions with the PEC, Mr. Cicero asked Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, be tabled so he could explore alternate proposals, At this point, Jim Gibson moved to deny Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Before a vote was taken, Mayor Osterfoss noted at the time the rental restrictions were placed on Mr. Cicem's unit, she was on the PEC and she felt the current request did not meet criteria B and D of the nine SDD criteria, Mr. Cicero again asked for a motion to table the ordinance as he did not want to start the process for this amendment request from scratch. Jim Gibson withdrew his motion to deny Ordinance Na, 26, Series of 1992, and Tom Steinberg withdrew his second of that motion. Jim Gibson then moved t{o deny tabling ar postponing of Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, with a second from Tam Steinberg. A vote was taken and that motion passed, 4-2, Rob Levine and Merv Lapin opposed. Mike Mollica indicated an additional $1,Q00 application fee would be required of Mr. Cicero to reapply far an SDD amen~m Pnt, and there would be a time delay of approximately five weeks. Jim Gibson moved to deny Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, on first reading, as it did not cantv~ ~ " with SDD criteria and the Vail Village Master Plan. Tom Steinberg seconded this motion. A vote was taken, and the motion to deny Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1992, on first reading passed, 6-0-1, Bob Buckley abstaining. Bob Buckley then rejoined Council. 2 Item No. 6 was review of proposed Tawn of Vail contract with Alpine International, Inc. to design the master plan for the Town of Vail cemetery and provide the accompanying management report. Andy Knudtsen noted the proposed contract was before Gouncil for approval because it involved a fee greater than $50,000. He briefly reviewed a Community Devel~N~ent Department (CDD) memo to Council and Ron Phillips dated May 12; 1992, which included information about progress on the cemetery project. He also reviewed the details of the RFP process and tasks, hours, and estimated fees for the project. The budget figure arrived at was $60,000, with a contingency of $5,400 to cover possible cost overruns. Kristan Pritz advised the budget would come from salary savings in CDD's budget. Jim Gibson pointed out the cemetery area was originally intended to be open space, and, although Sherry Dorward, Vice President of Alpine International, Inc., advised no definitive guidelines had yet been set, she indicated the cemetery was being planned to be natural and unobtrusive. There was brief discussion regarding a geologic study planned for the cemetery site. Tom Steinberg suggested the cemetery mana~G~.,ent be consolidated with the Minturn Cemetery District, and the private cemeteries at intermountain and Nottinghaxn. It was noted that Larry Sloane, the project management consultant, would be at the October 6, 1992, Council work session, and Andy asked Council to provide direction to Mr. Sloane at that meeting. Jim Gibson then moved to approve the Town of VaiUContractor Agreement with Alpine International, Inc. to design the master plan for the TOV cemetery, with a second frown Bob Buckley. Before a vote was taken, Kristan emphasized this agreement was for $60,000 plus the $5,400 contingency. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was an appeal of the Design Review Board (DRB) decision to approve landscape • changes far the Byrne Residence, Lot 1, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing/1 Forest Rd. The applicant was Ron Byrne. Shelly McIIo briefly explained Council had expressed concern with existing site development encroachments onto U.S. Forest Service land. Jay Peterson discussed the history of developments on the Byrne property, including discussions with Vail Associates, Inc. regarding development of a plan to divert water around the property. Joe Macy, of Vail Associates, Inc. (VA), recalled discussion of development of this lot with staff and Ned Gwathmey, the architect for the project at the time, had taken place approximately two years ago. The plan resulted in the installation of a water diversion system which encroached on Forest Service property. Jay acknowledged no approval had been received f.,,... the Forest Service before the water diversion plan was implemented. Tim Grantham, Lands Forester with the Forest Service in Minturn, noted there had been a site visit to the Byrne property, and most of what the Forest Service had asked to be done at that property to correct the encroachment situation had been done. Additionally, Mr. Grantham said the Forest Service recognized there was a water drainage problem in that area, and had agreed to a Special Use Permit arrangement with Mr. Byrne under the condition the Forest Service was not liable for any damage due to the change in the drainage pattern caused by Mr. Byrne's water diversion system. There was technical discussion about the water flow and run-off, and further plans for re-routing the water. At this point, Larry llskwith indicated this agenda item concerned an appeal of a DRB approval of landscape changes, not the water . drainage issue. Larry said two separate motions would be required. Rob Levine than moved to uphold the DRB decision to approve the landscape changes, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and that motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Larry suggested a second motion regarding a written agreement between the Forest Service, Ron Byrne, and TOV about Mr. Byrne's water diversion structures and other encroachments be required prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) After additional technical discussion about the underground diversion pipe installed on Forest Service land by Mr. Byrne, ground water movement tendencies, catch basins, and the culverts VA had the right to open or close, Tom Steinberg suggested the Forest Service have their hydrologic engineer look at the whole situation an that slope. Tom also expressed offense at Mr. Byrne's having put in structures an Forest Service land without permission, and without having advised TOV, thereby placing TOV at liability for what damage might occur. Tam Steinberg then moved that staff be instructed not to issue a permanent C.O. until such time as satisfactory results were received on a hydrologic study by a hydrologic engineer as to the effects and safety of the engineering structures that had been built by Mr. Byrne, and until (1) a plan for revegetation of the cut slope and other areas of impact was received, (2) satisfactory results of a mechanical engineering study done during the next maximum run-off in the area was received, and (3} a written agreement with the Forest Service was worked out about Mr. Byrne's water diversion system. Jim Gibson seconded that motion. Larry suggested the Uniform Building Code be checked to ascertain if the studies requested in this motion were appropriate requirements. Jay stated the applicant would give TOV a letter holding TOV 3 harmless. A vote on that motion failed,l-6, all Council apposed except Tam Steinberg. Rob Levine then moved to direct staff not to issue a permanent C.O. until such time as staff had determined whether ar not additional studies were necessary and appr„~~ late, and there was evidence of an agreement between the Forest Service and the property owner regarding the encroachments on Forest Service property. Merv Lapin seconded this motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Staff was directed to return to Council regarding the water diversion issue an this property. Item Nos. S, 9, and 10 were Inf„~~ation Update, Council Reports, and Other. The following issues were raised: * Jim Gibson and Jim Shearer had visited the Public Works Department (PVC on September 15, 1992. Jim Gibson noted Larry Grafel and Pete Burnett had asked to be included in original plan reviews of DRB and PEC decisions affecting snow plowing and snow storage. Jim Gibson noted PW requested assistance with development of a PW PR campaign. * Merv Lapin asked Kristen Pritz for a list of restricted rental properties. * Tom Steinberg advised Colorado Public Radio had installed some of their translator equipment, and Hated the FCC had turned dawn their request fora $40,000 federal grant. He anticipated Colorado Public Radio would be making a contribution request to TOV. * Merv Lapin inquired about paved parking at the soccer field. Joe Macy stated that area was VA property, and thought there was an agreement between TOV and VA regarding the usage of that lot. Staff was directed to research existing arrangements. * Merv Lapin asked what became of the flag pole planned to be erected outside VRA offices in honor of Paul Johnston. * Jim Shearer felt appointed TOV board member terms should be limited to 8 consecutive years. Larry Eskwith was directed to draft an ordinance far Council review. Before adjournment, Larry Grafel spoke briefly about results of bids received far development of the Ski Museum Park. He noted the two bids received exceeded estimated casts by 70 to 100°l0, and were rejected. He said bids for the project would be resolicited in January, 1993. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianna 5. Deto C:IMINSl=P15.92 Margaret A. Osterfass, Mayor 4 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL EVENING MEETING SEPTEMBER 29, 1992 7:30 P.M. A special meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 19, x992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. Mayor Osterfass, Jim Shearer, and Bob Buckley were not present as the meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Merv Lapin. MEMBERS PRESENT Peggy Osterfass, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk • The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was Ordinance Na. 24, Series of 1992, an emer~;~:,saey ordinance authorizing the issuance of the Town of Vail, Colorado, General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1992A far the purpose of refunding a portion of the Town's outstanding General Obligation Refunding Bands, Series 1985; prescribing the form of said bonds; providing for the levy of general ad valorem taxes to pay the principal of and the interest on the Bonds; providing other covenants and details in connection therewith; and repealing all ordinances in conflict therewith; and declaring an emergency. Merv Lapin read the title in full. Mayor Osterfoss, Jim Shearer, and Bab Buckley arrived at this time. Steve Barwick briefly explained the rationale behind this ordinance, and then introduced Larry Aubrecht, representing Hanifen Imhoff. Mr. Aubrecht discussed marketing of the bonds, and distributed documents showing comparisons of Colorado Municipal Issues for the week ending September 25, 1992, and the Telerate matrixes for 9/23/92 - 9/25/92. He stated the bonds in this ordinance and in Ordinance l~l'o. 25, Series of 1992, had been xnarketed on Thursday, September 24, 1992, based on their observations of the market during that week. Input on marketing of the bonds was also given by Steve Jeffers, representing George K. Baum, and Jack Wolfe, representing Kemper Securities. After discussion about different strategies for bond marketing, Jim Gibson moved far approval of Ordinance Na. 24, Series of 1992, as an emergency ordinance. Rob Levine seconded that motion. Before a vote was taken, Randy Garman suggested there was a need for TOV to approach these issues differently in the future. Mr. Garman commented on bond years, timing, repricing, concessions, coupon yields, sinking funds, and serial and long term bonds. Mayor Osterfoss commented that Colorado bonds were more attractive to Colorado buyers due to double tax exempt status. At this point, Rob Levine called the question, but two-thirds Council consensus to do so was not achieved. Tom Steinberg felt there was a need for guidelines for Council to follow during any future marketing of bonds. Jim Gibson then called the question again. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992, an emergency ordinance authorizing the issuance of Tawn of Vail, Colorado Sales Tax Revenue Refunding and Improvement Bonds, Series 1992B; providing the form, terms and conditions of the Bonds, the manner and terms of issuance, the manner of execution, the method of payment and the security therefore; pledging sales tax and parking revenues of the Town for the payment of the bands; providing certain covenants and other details and making other provisions concerning the Bonds and the sales tax and parking revenues; ratifying action previously taken and appertaining thereto; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith; and declaring an emergency. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. There was Council consensus for action on Tom Steinberg's request that staff develop future guidelines far Council to follow during any future marketing of bands. After brief discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1992, as an emergency ordinance. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was 1 taken and the oration passed unanimously, 7-0. There being no further business, a oration to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margret A. Osterfoss, Maya ATTEST: ~ ~- ~a,Q,c,~.w Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Data C:\MIIVSEP29.92 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 6, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held an Tuesday, October 6, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. Merv Lapin called the meeting to order at 7:45 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley Jim Shearer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk C The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. John Mueller requested Council reconsider TOV policy prohibiting street-cuts ix1 newly reconstructed roads within the Town. Council agreed to hear this issue since Mr. Mueller's situation was considered emergent. He required astreet-cut permit in order to access a sewer line for 3130 Booth Falls Road. Mr. Mueller indicated he had been given incorrect sewer inlet elevations by UEVW&S, and his access far sewer service connection was now too law to connect. Council, Larry Grafel, anal Mr. Mueller reviewed site plans of the lot and area in question, and reviewed three options for correcting the situation. During discussion, it became clear the sewer inlet elevations provided to Mr. Mueller by UEVW&S were incorrect, and, in fact, caused the resulting current problem. Council advised Mr. Mueller to pursue relief from UEVW&S. After discussion, Rab Levine moved to allow Mr. Mueller an emergency exception to TOV policy regarding street-cuts in newly reconstructed roads if there were no other alternatives for resolving Mr. Mueller's problem, and with the condition that Mr. Mueller try to coordinate the possibility of connecting at Lot 11, 3010 Booth Falls Road with UEVW&S. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-2, Mayor Osterfoss and Tom Steinberg apposed. Item No. 2 on the agenda was approval of the minutes of the September 1, 1992, and September 15, 1992 evening meetings, and approval of the September 29, 1992, Special Evening Meeting Minutes. Jim Gibson moved to approve the minutes of these three meetings, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion gassed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 3.48.40 and 3.48.090 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide that the Real Estate Transfer Tax may be used for the acquisition and improvement of real property within the limits of the Town or within a mile of the Tawn boundaries; providing more specificity as to what the funds received by the Town pursuant to the Real Estate Transfer Tax can be used for; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith explained this ordinance would amend the RETT ordinance to allow RETT funds to be used within the limits of the Town or within a mile of the TVYV 11 boundaries. It would also clarify purposes for RETT funds. Jim Gibson expressed opposition to use of the term "public rights-of--way" in this ordinance. He felt the concept implied was too broad, and landscaping of public rights-of--way was a Public Works Department project, not something to expend RETT funds vn; however, Mayor Osterfoss felt landscaping was appropriate in conjunction with devel~~,l~lent of recreational bike paths. Bill Wilto said he had no objection to the use of RETT funds for appropriate projects within a mile of the Town boundarios, but was strongly opposed to use of RETT funds on public rights-of--way. Jim Gibson, Bill Wilto, and Jo Brown asked for a clear definition of "public rights-of-way." After brief discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance Na. 10, Series of 1992, an first reading, with the addition of landscaping of recreation paths as an appropriate use of RETT funds. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-1, 1 Jim Gibsan opposed. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending . Section 5.04.140 -Termination, of the Municipal Code of the Tawn of Vail, extending indefinitely Chapter 5.04 -Annual Business License for Marketing. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. Before a vote was taken, Merv Lapin stated he wanted the four year sunset provision to remain as a means of keeping the Vail Valley Marketing Board (VVMB} accountable to TOV. After brief discussion regarding whether those business owners paying the tax could be specified as residents and qualified voters, particularly if Amendment No. 1, "the Bruce Amendment" passed at the General Election on November 3, 1992, Jim Gibson called the question. A vote was then taken and the motion passed, 5-1, Merv Lapin opposed. After the vote, it was noted this change could be amended at any time. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. i6, Series of 1992, a resolution declaring Vaii Tawn Council's opposition to Amendment No. 1, which will appear on the November 3, 1992, General Election Ballot. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Barwick spoke briefly about potential drawbacks of Amendment No. 1, including the possibility of jeopardized state funding far the Dowd Junction Bike Path and widening of Highway 6 planned for 1993. Jim Gibsan moved to approve Resolution No. 16, Series of 1992, with a second from Bob Buckley. Before a vote was taken, Larry Eskwith indicated there were some general provisions in this resolution which dealt with Amendment No. 1's potential curtailment of home-rule and local . municipal powers. Further discussion included concern regarding voting timeframes that wauid be required if increased budget needs evolved. Rob Levine asked to go an record as saying there was another tax limitation measure that was proposed and supported by the Colorado Municipal League (CML} which did not get on the ballot. Rob felt that proposal was palatable compared to Amendment Na. 1 because it offered the flexibility far municipalities to address local situations and retain local control, with some amount of tax limitation. Jim Gibson then directed staff to add information from a document prepared by CML dated September 22, 1992, indicating passage of Amendment No. 1 would severely injure Coloradans without having any impact on federal taxes and spending. Merv Lapin called the question. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0, with the addition requested by Jim Gibsan. Item No. 6 was a discussion regarding a request by applicant Irwin Bachrach to amend the TOV Master Rackfall Hazard Map. Tim Devlin explained this request was to amend the Town's Master Rockfali Hazard Map by removing specific properties from the "Moderate Rockfall" designation based on a recent on-site investigation by Dr. Nicholas Lampiris, the consulting geologist, who had assisted in preparation of the Rockfall Map prepared in 1984. During the recent on-site investigation, it was revealed the properties in. question, Lots 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, Block 9, Vail Intermountain, were net in an.y rockfall zone. Dr. Lampiris subsequently submitted a letter recommending the Moderate Rockfall designation be removed from the above referenced properties. Merv Lapin moved to amend TOV's Master Rockfall Hazard Map as requested based on the July $, 1992, letter from Dr. Lampiris to Irwin Bachrach. Rob Levine seconded the motion. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Before adjournment, several items not on the agenda were raised. Ron Phillips reviewed a memo from Larry Brooks, Director of Municipal Services at the Town of Avon, to Bili Jaxnes, Avon Tawn Manager, regarding the Transit Budget/County System. Ron noted the memo addressed two changes in the proposed operational budget for the County system: (1) termination of leases on two buses used far the Leadville route which would be replaced by two 1979 buses TOV afl'ered to lease them, and (2), delay of refurbishing of two buses since raew buses would be available via an FTA grant. After additional review of the proposed changes, Tam Steinberg proposed Leadville be encouraged to incorporate a loop system there, even if TOV had to loan them another bus to improve and increase Leadville ridership. Council agreed that idea was worth exploring, with Town. of Leadville paying for operation and maintenance of the bus. A request was made for a ridership survey to respond to Tom's inquiry about why there were more riders to Vail from Leadville than from Leadville to Vail. Mayor Osterfoss asked that the proposed survey instrument be made . available to the task farce for their input and later analysis of the compiled results. In addition, she expressed interest in the selection of a more all-encompassing name for this transit system. Tom also requested Steve Barwick become involved in the budgeting oversight. Council consensus was reached to direct staff to change the budget to reflect the 2 revised budget figures as detailed. Next, Tom Steinberg advised there had been a meeting with Sonny LaSalle, Regional • Forester, and local foresters of the U.S. Forest Services {USFS). Tom said they had discussed appraisals on Spraddle Creek and Golf Course Maintenance parcels, but he did not think they reached any consensus. Tom reported the USFS was talking with Summit County and the rest of Eagle County about an environmental plan to examine the vegetation in the two county area. Ron Phillips noted he was working with Summit County regarding the clear- cutting plan. Summit County and Vail were proposed as two demonstration areas, if approval for the modelling technique for vegetative cover was obtained. Jim Gibson asked that areas where clear-cutting had been completed some years back be part of a public awareness program pointing out the period of time in which that growth had taken place. Tom agreed these issues needed to be publicly addressed. He felt, after the recent meeting, the USFS was responsive to the local recreation needs, the game needs, and improving the forest. Tom Steinberg reported on the Headwater's Forum meeting in Copper Mountain. One of the big concerns discussed at the meeting was continued funding after the first of the year. He said, after much discussion, each organization present agreed on equal basis funding. He advised he also went to Durango to plead before DOLA for funds for NWCCOG's 208 water planning. He advised $35,000 was a~.~,~opriated, and approval to attempt development of a permanent 20$ funding plan, as well as a plan to tie into the whole State system, was received. • Tom Steinberg noted he had turned information over to Todd Oppenheimer about a wildflower farm near Alamosa that was giving away its seed-filled straw. Tom felt the straw could be used to introduce a greater wildflower population on the Interstate. Merv Lapin advised the School District had expressed interest in putting a middle school on 10 acres of the Berry Creek 5th land. The proposed facility would contain recreational facilities. Merv asked if Council was interested in donating the land. Tom Steinberg inquired about infrastructure the School District would build. Merv inf~l wed Council the School District would have to take care of the entrance and the problem of access to the property, and there would also be a ,~y ~..nasiuxn. He said he told the School District it was felt an appraisal should be done an the land. Ron Phillips felt, if the School District was willing to put in the improvements necessary for access, plus water and sewer requirements, donation of ten acres of the Berry Creek 5th land to the School District might be worthwhile. Merv said negotiations were current, but further consideration and more information were needed. At 9:40 P.M., Merv Lapin. moved to adjourn the Council's regular evening meeting to an Executive Session regarding land negotiations. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote • was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Margare A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: /,fit-a.. ~. ~A¢c".kw Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:4MINSOCTfi.92 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held an Tuesday, October 20, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. Mayor Osterfoss called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pra-Tem Bob Buckley Rob Levine Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Jim Gibson TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joe Taylor, Republican Candidate for the Colorado House of Representatives, 56th District, introduced himself, and briefly discussed his experience. Next under Citizen Participation, Bill Wilto requested "No Vehicular Traffic" signage be posted at the area near Crossroads and the Vail Athletic Club. He had observed broken gates were trapping tourists driving cars in the area. Ron Phillips was directed to follow-up. Item No. 2 on the agenda were introductory comments by Rod Slifer, Republican candidate for Eagle County Commissioner, District 1. When asked, Rod said he was in favor of the We Recycle program, and felt it was appropriate for the County to provide continued fundixzg. Item No. 3 was a presentation by Lyndon Ellefsan of Vail Associates, Inc., on behalf of "Team Vail." Mr. Ellefsan discussed Team Vail's participation in the 8th Annual Mountain Running World Championships in Susa, Italy. He advised the team took first place, and thanked Council, TOV, and the Special Events Commission for helping make the team's participation possible. He then presented TOV with Team Vail's winning trophy. Mayor Osterfoss said TOV would find a place of honor for the trophy, and acknowledged the team's wonderful accomplishment. Item No. 4 was the appointment of one of four applicants to the Design Review Board (DRB) to complete Pat Herrington's term. Applicants Bob Borne, Eddy Doumas, Laura Nash, and Carmen Weiner had been interviewed at the October 13, 1992, work session. A ballot vote was taken, and when the results were in, Tam Steinberg moved to appoint Bob Borne, with a second from Jim Shearer. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 5 was a Consent Agenda consisting of two items: Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 3.48.40 and 3.48.090 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide that the Reai Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) znay be used for the acquisition and improvement of real property within the limits of the Town or within a mile of the Town boundaries; providing more specificity as to what the funds received by the Town pursuant to the Real Estate Transfer Tax can be used far; and setting forth details in regard thereto, and Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 5.04.x40 -Termination, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, extending indefinitely Chapter 5.04 -Annual Business License for Marketing. Merv Lapin waved to remove both items from the Consent Agenda for additional discussion. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Mayor Oster#'oss read the title of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1992, in full. Larry Eskwith noted, since first reading, language was changed to limit landscaping of public rights-of--way along the I70 corridor, that landscaping was to be limited to tree planting and related improvements to keep the trees healthy and well maintained. There was also language clarification regarding landscaping of recreation paths. Bill Wilto reiterated comments he 1 made on first reading. He still felt landscaping public rights-af--way was an unacceptable stretch of RETT funds beyond the original intent for those funds. Mac Hodge, President of the Vail Board of Realtors, Ken Wilson, member of the ad-hoc subcommittee for realtors, Hermann Staufer, John Nilson, Rod Slifer, and Jo Brown also spoke in opposition to any change in the RETT ordinance which would expand use of RETT funds beyond their original intent. Mayor Osterfoss said it was in a spirit of compromise that Council suggested an first reading the landscaping included in this ordinance be limited to something permanent which would add visually to Vail's open space experience. Mr. Wilto felt the addition of landscaping rights-of--way made the use of RETT funds too broad. He added landscaping was desirable, but from another fund. Rob Levine initiated brief discussion about current budget details related to the TOV RETT fund balance, and then suggested removing landscaping along I70 from this ordinance, with a change in the TOV budget to move $10,000 far the tree planting program from the RETT Fund into the General Fund. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1992, on, second reading with a change in item 2c to read only, "Landscaping parks and open space." Additionally, he moved, as part of this ordinance Council instruct staff to move $10,000 for the tree planting program from the RETT Fund into to the General Fund landscaping budget. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mayor Osterfoss Hated she felt for $10,000, in the interest of future compromise and flexibility from all parties involved, she was willing to support Merv's motion. Tam Steinberg called the question. A vote was taken anal the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Next was additional discussion of Ordinance Na. 28, Series of 1992, second reading. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith noted one change in the language of Section 5.04.140 of the ordinance indicating the Council appointed Marketing Board would report to Council on or before August 31, 1996, rather than on August 31, 1996. Merv Lapin stated he was uncomfortable extending the annual business license fee for marketing indefinitely, and wanted a four year sunset provision as a way of holding the Vail Valley Marketing Board (VVMB) accountable. Tom Steinberg felt it would be helpful to strengthen the ordinance language requiring evaluation of the marketing program.. Rob Levine suggested instead of on or before August 31, 1996, the language be changed to read, "annually on ar about August of each year." Mayor Osterfoss noted the problem with putting the four year sunset provision on at this point in time was, in fact, part of potential complications should Amendment No. 1 pass. Hermann Staufer emphasized the business community was in support of this tax because they recognized the need to market Vail, but he urged Council Hat to make the annual business license fee indefinite. Ken Wilson spoke in favor of the four year sunset provision. Mayor Osterfoss suggested addition of language in the ordinance to indicate there would be a merchant poll on an annual basis. This would allow the merchants a voice, as Tom Steinberg had suggested, rather than just the voice of second homeowners and others who might not be interested in marketing Vail. Merv Lapin moved that Ordinance Na. 28, Series of 1.992, be approved on second reading with the following changes: Section 5.04.140 - Termination, would read, "The Town Council, having evaluated the marketing program in this Chapter, hereby extends this Chapter until November 1, 1996, from the effective date of this ordinance." The fallowing paragraph would read, "At a regular or special Tawn Council meeting or Town Council work session, on or before August 31 of each year, the marketing board appointed by the Town Council shall report to the Tawn Council members on the Marketing Board on the effectiveness of the marketing and promotional program financed by funds raised pursuant to this Chapter, and shall make recommendations to the Council in regard thereto. Subsequent to this report, the Town Council shall evaluate the program and this Chapter. There shall be anon-binding poll of business licensee payees on or before November 1, 1996." Jim Shearer seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Larry Eskwith suggested inclusion of language in the ordinance to indicate if the Han-binding pall was inadvertently not taken, the ordinance would not be invalidated in any way. Merv added that to his motion. Tom Steinberg suggested an additional language change extension of the Chapter by either three or five years, in order to avoid having to re-discuss this issue at an election time, particularly should Amendment No. 1 fail this year and return in four years. Consensus was reached on a five year extension, and Merv added that to his motion. A vote was taken and the motion failed, 3-3, Rob Levine, Bob Buckley, and Mayor Osterfoss opposed. Rob Levine then moved to make a motion similar to Merv's except the Chapter would be extended indefinitely rather than until November 1, 1997. There would be an annual VVMB review and anon-binding merchant poll every four years. Bob Buckley seconded this motion. Before a vote was taken, Rob moved to change his motion to Hat include the non-binding pall in the ordinance and that staff be directed to perform the poll as frequently as Council desired. Bob Buckley seconded this change to Rob's motion. A vote an Rab's motion was taken. and the motion failed, 3-3, Merv Lapin, Tom Steinberg, and Jim Shearer opposed. Rab Levine then moved to table this ordinance. Larry Eskwith was uncertain if tabling was possible at this time, and needed to check the timeframe involved. 2 Considering the possibility that Amendment No. 1 might pass, Ron Phillips suggested adopting this ordinance now without a sunset provision, and that Council make a commitment that if Amendment No. 1 did not pass, they would revisit this issue in November or December this year and place a sunset provision on it. At this point, Larry Eskwith • established there was time to table this ordinance, but action had to be taken before December 31, 1992, or the business license would expire. Rob amended his motion to add an unwritten understanding that should Amendment No. 1 fail on November 3, 1992, Council would revisit this issue and add a sunset provision. Bab Buckley seconded this amendment to Rob's motion. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 6 was Ordinance Na. 29, Series of 1992, first reading, annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, anal liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1993, through December 31, 1993, and providing for the levy assessment and collection. of Town ad valorem property taxes due far the 1992 tax year and payable in the 1993 fiscal year. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson noted the one change to the budget since Council had reviewed it was that $10,000 had been transferred from the RETT I+~ind to the General Fund. There was discussion regarding savings found as a result of payroll overtime reductions and the institution ~of a safety program to provide training to help reduce workman's compensation costs. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Rob Levine. Before a vote was taken, Steve discussed some of the areas of safety measure controls TOV had aver the budget. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. . Item No. 7 was Resolution No. 14, Series of 1992, a resolution setting a fee in lieu of the dedication of land for school sites as provided for in Ordinance Na. 1, Series of 1991. Mayor OsterFoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 14, Series of 1992, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Larry Eskwith noted the ordinance provided a per acre fee would be set annually, and that fee had not changed from last year. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 8 was Resolution No. 17, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the purchaso of that unplatted plat of the southeast one-quarter of the southeast one-quarter of Section 1, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, lying northerly of the Lion's Ridge Loop as shown on the recorded plat of the Lion's Ridge Subdivision recorded July 25, 1969, in Case 2, Drawer L, and Book 215 at Page 649, County of Eagle, State of Colorado ("the property.") Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved that Resolution No. 17, Series of 1992, authorizing the purchase of the parcel of land now known as the "Shapiro 6.844 acres" be approved, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Merv added to his motion staff be directed to fund the purchase of this parcel out of the RETT fund. Mayor Osterfoss suggested a language change to indicate "other municipal purposes" be changed to "other purposes as specified in the RETT ordinance. The motion was modified tc} incorporate that change. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. • Item Na. 9 was a review of a sign variance request for the Lodge Tower, 204 Vail Raad, Lot A. Block 5C, Vail Villago First Filing, applicant: Lodge Tower Condo Association. Mayor Osterfoss noted this request received unanimous recommendation for approval 1'i,,,{,.- the Design Review Board {DRB} at their October 7, 1992, meeting. Tim Devlin said the request was far additional signage as well as an increase in signage area. Mayor Osterfoss advised, if this request was approved, findings of special circumstances or conditions that constituted a physical hardship were required. Merv Lapin moved this sign variance request be approved per the staff memo of October 7, 1992, from the Community Development Department {CDD) to the DRB indicated the Lodge Tower had proven physical hardship because of identification problems due to the location of the project in relationship to the Lodge at Vail, that special circumstances were not created by the applicant, that granting of this variance would be in general harmony with the purpose of this title and would not be materially detrimental to the persons residing or working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the xaeighborhood, ar to the public welfare in general, and the variance would not depart from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify the applicant's business or use. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 10 was an appeal of a Planning and Environmental Committee (PEC) decision to deny a request to modify the landscape plan associated with the previously approved exterior alteration and site coverage variance for the Slifer Building, 230 Bridge Street, Part of I.ats f. Band C, Block 5, Vail Village First Filing. The applicants were Rod and Beth Slifer. Tim Devlin said the originally approved landscape plan involved two planters, but the second planter was never built. A chronology of events pertaining to the landscape plan in question 3 ,~ was available in the PEC memo from CDD dated September 28, 1992. Tim noted the PEC had suggested, and would allow, a modification to the planter that would be less costly to the applicant and not require any alterations to the building itsel#: The PEC voted unanimously to deny the request to Pl~*rinate the planter, 6-0, but would allow far the suggested modification. Mr. Slifer said he willingly did not build the planter as indicated on the approved plans, and expressed concerns about costs of remodelling in Vail Village and meeting what he considered excessive requirements set by TOV for modifications and upgrades. Mayor Osterfoss noted the requirements Mr. Slifer mentioned were addressed in the Vail Village Master Plan. Kristan Pritz added many of the regulations cited by Mr. Slifer were part of the Uniform Building Code. After additional discussion about several specific upgrades and modifications in the Village, Kristan said she felt the building code gave building officials guidance to determine what was appropriate. At this point, Jim Shearer stepped dawn due to conflict of interest. When asked by Rob Levine what Mr. Slifer would have TOV do differently, Mr. Slifer felt staff should be given more responsibility and more decision making power in small decisions. Regarding Mr. Slifer's appeal, Mayor Osterfoss indicated Mr. Slifer should have raised his concerns when the original exterior alteration and site coverage variance was approved. Rob Levine moved to uphold the PEC decision with regard to the Slifer Building per the exterior alteration originally used, with a second from Bob Buckley. Tim added the PEC felt the planter should be completed by Thanksgivixag, '92, and staff' was directed to decide on the apps „~,~ iate time schedule for the planter completion date. Mr. Slifer said the planter was not a hardship for him. A vote was taken and the xn.otion passed 4-1-1, Merv Lapin opposed, Jim Shearer abstaining. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayo II A~11 r.ST: h/1~.~.at. ~ • ~u.~ew Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Dato C:WIIiVOCT20.92 4 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 3, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, November 3, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:45 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Buckley Jim Gibson Rob Levine Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Shearer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joe Macy, Vail Associates, Inc. • announced, due to the early snowfall, Chair 8 on the Born Free run would be opened to skiers on Friday, November 6, 1992. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda consisting of one item: Approval of the mizautes of the October 6, 1992, and October 20, 1992 evening meetings. Merv Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, S-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1992, second reading, 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, 1993, through December 31, 1993, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1992 tax year and payable in the 1993 fiscal year. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson noted the only change since first reading of this ordinance was that $10,000 for the tree planting program had been moved from the RETT Fund into the General Fund. He advised, as required by law, this budget was balanced. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1992, on second reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Before a vote was taken, Merv suggested staff re-think the planned addition of staff to administer a TOV safety program designed to lower TOV workman's compensation insurance rates. A vote was then. taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.57.020 -Employee Housing Units (EHUs} generally, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Paragraph 18.57.020 (C} and (D) to clarify restrictions on the leasing and sale of Employee Housing Units, and Paragraph 18.57.020 (K}, Section 18.57.040 (B} 5, Section 18.57.040 (B} 9, Section 18.57.060 (B) 18, Section 18.57.050 (B} 7 to clarify the meaning. Mayor Osterfass read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen noted staff felt some of the language used in the recently adopted Employee Hauling Ordinance (Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992) could be improved for clarification. He discussed five paints of clarification in Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992, as further detailed in the Community Development Department's memo to Town Council dated November 3, 1992. The proposed changes clarified ownership potential for each type of EHU, interior access requirements for EHUs which were connected to part of another dwelling unit or structure, details related to conversion and sale of EHUs located in garages, a language correction of the work "perspective" to "prospective" throughout Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1992, and a reduction of the age limit of children in Type II EHUs from 16 to 5. After brief discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992, on first reading with the Type II EHU child age limit left at 16, and a change in the maximum number of bedrooms in Type ITI EHUs changes from 3 to 2 with a maximum number of 4 residents allowed instead of 6. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. It was noted 1 w' ` second readixa.g of this ordinance would be an December 1, 1992. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, y.~-- Marg et A. Osterfoss, yor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taften by Dorianne 5. ~atn C;IMINSNOV3.92 2 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 2992 6:00 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail T.. ~~ ~~ Council was held on Tuesday, November 17,1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ran Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk The f rst item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Rick Sackbauer spoke about an • unpleasant parking and trafl'i.c situation he had encountered over the past weekend. He was concerned guests in Town would experience confusion with parking and traffic directions, and hoped arrangements for clarifying this situation were underway. Item No. 2 an the agenda was an inf~~~..ation sharing and public input session regarding the proposed Police Department (P.D.) building expansion. Ken Hughey posted and explained the P.D. Mission Statement. He advised the P.D. changes from 1975 to 1992 had been dramatic, and discussed current program space needs as components. He said the P.D. building expansion was a need at this time, not a luxury. He noted a room by raom/space by space review of the current P.D. had been done, and proposed solutions had been examined. Jeff Layman discussed a number of factors impacting TOV P.D, service demands, and presented a brief historical perspective of percent changes in fatal reported crimes/arrests/case reports/police dispatch incidents of 1987 v. 1991. There was mention of police services shared by communities in the County. Patrolmen: Mike Warren (from Dallas? and Jim Applegate (from Chicago) spoke about their experiences in other jurisdictions in relation to their police work for TOV. JefF Sheppard and Herb Roth of Sheppard & Roth Architects explained the programming process -the needs for realization of this project. Mr. Rath explained haw their firm had evaluated the existing organizational structure of TOV P.D., including an objective observation of the P.D., the fostering of apro-active relationship with TOV P.D. officers, examining the physical space need to support the TOV P.D. Mission Statement, and projecting maximum growth for the next twenty years. He indicated a 14,000 to 17,000 net square feet expansion would satisfy the P.D. needs for 1991; 28,000 square feet would satisfy needs for 2010. Mr. Roth then made a slide presentation showing the present P.D. facilities on and ofl=site with proposed square footage increases and changes for each P.D. area. Sheppard & Roth's calculations indicated a need for at least a gross building area of 18,605 square feet, which did not including parking facilities. Jeff Bowen, as a representative for TOV's Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC} Police Building Task Force, discussed the PEC's concerns, and noted all previous plans for this project had been rejected by the PEC, but said the facility proposed at this meeting met all PEC criteria with only three issues still under question: parking, trash, and landscaping. He encouraged Council to approve the facility design presented at this meeting. Lynn Gottlieb initiated public input by acknowledging it was apparent more space was needed, but felt a more economical site for the facility should be found. She was concerned with the cost of excavating for parking, as well as with visual impacts of this proposed expansion at the central entrance to Vail. Mayor Osterfoss and Rob Levine advised there had been extensive site selection review. They noted Mountain Bell site, the Holy Cross ~; Electric site, and sites at the T.iansHead Parking Structure were among ten original sites considered. They indicated P.D. response time and access to T-70 were two reasons the proposed site was chosen. Hermann Staufer, Larry Benway, T)iana Donovan, George Knox, Colleen McCarthy, and Gabby Armstrong all agreed the expansion need was obvious, but all expressed the same cost and location concerns as Lynn Gottlieb. Joe Chesman felt the infrastructure should be built now instead of having to reconstruct and restore the facility aver time. Mike Warren pointed out a number of major safety and legal problems with the present facility. Tom Steinberg briefly addressed the issue of a centralized or consolidated police facility for the County, but noted those options did not seem feasible at this time, although they were continuing to be pursued. Hs said the Towns of Avon and Minturn wanted their own police departments, and noted the volume of peoplelP.D. services were in Vail. Council members all agreed an the need for the P.D. expansion, and felt the proposed site was the appropriate site, particularly for P.T). access and efficiency reasons. Rob Levine felt it was shortsighted not to expand to the full 2$,000 square feet now because growth in Vail, particularly off-season growth, should be considered and planned for now. Merv Lapin, Jim Gibson, and Tom Steinberg expressed concern with safety and legal problems at the present facility. Jinn Gibson stated the holding facility should be closed immediately due to liability issues. Merv observed sharing police facilities with other entities did not work right at this time, and requested a report on the dispatching TOV P.D. does for other entities. He added those entities should be paying for their share of the operational and capital expenses involved with that. Jixn Shearer felt the financing of the project should not overshadow its need. Jim Gibson, Mayor Osterfoss, and Tam felt TOV should maintain this piece of property as the entrance to the Town, however, they did not feel there was a need for on-site underground parking for the facility. Merv suggested the parking issue be further reviewed and reported on. After discussion, Jim Gibson moved that Council approve a budget not tv exceed $3,000,000 for additional space for the TOV P.D. Merv Lapin seconded that motion. Rob Levine felt $3,000,000 was an arbitrary figure, and suggested Sheppard and Rvth be directed to research what that dollar figure would be able to produce. Mr. Sheppard thought, without underground parking, $3,000,000 seemed feasible, but was skeptical about getting the construction of the ~~,.,;ect underway by the summer '93. Mr. Roth felt parking issue compromises would have to be made to avoid later difficulties over parking requirements. Mayor Osterfoss advised Mr. Roth to work with the PEC on that issue. A vote on Jim Gibsan's motion was then taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed una~~mously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, /} Q Mar et A. Osterfoss, N~ayor ATTEST: Martha S. R,aecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Dato C:IMIiVkI0Vt7.92 i_ ~= Y MIlVUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 1, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 1, 1992, 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 Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron. Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Tawn Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk i The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Joe Staufer spoke agaixast TOV Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1992, regarding private snow removal on public sidewalks. He felt such snow removal should be a function of TOV, and felt the ordinance should be repealed. Larry Eskwith noted most cities throughout Colorado and across the country required property owners to clear private sidewalks adjacent to public properties. Ann Waller, representing Eagle County citizens opposed to recently passed Amendment No. 2, expressed that group's support of TOV Council's passage of TOV Resolution No. 10, Series of 1992, opposing that Amendment. Mayor Osterfoss noted, in addition to TOV, a number of other organizations in the community, including the Vail Valley Foundation (VVF) and Vail Associates, Inc. {VA), were also supporting efforts in opposition of Amex~.dment No 2. Second on the agenda was the appointment of a member to the Local Licensing Authority to complete Steve Simanett's term. A ballot was taken, and Merv Lapin moved to appoint David Wilson to the Local Licensing Authority until June, 1993. Tom Steinberg secoaded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. At this time, Mayor Osterfoss noted this was Vail Town Clerk, Martha Raecker's last evening • meeting with the Vail Town Council. Mayor Osterfoss thanked Martha far her contributions to TOV, and wished her well in her new location. Item No. 3. was the appointment of a member to the Design Review Board (DRB) to complete Sherry D..x rv ard's term. A ballot was taken, and Merv Lapin moved to appoint Michael Arnett to the DRB until February, 1993. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 4 was an update and disclosure of information TOV had received from consultants regarding research on TOV's options related to the Gillett Holdings, Inc. (GHI) and VA bankruptcies. Mayor Osterfass stated TOV had, at this time, completed its legal research of this issue, and emphasized the correlation between the success of the ski company to the success of the community. She summarized the chronology of events related to the bankruptcies and actions taken by TOV. (February, 1991: GHI was forced iota bankruptcy by its creditors; June, 1991: GHI declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy; August, ].991: TOV Council passed Resolution No. 16, Series of 1991, authorizing TOV to take all steps necessary to investigate and evaluate what TOV might need to do to protect its interests; August, 1992, TOV Council passed Resolution No. 13, Series of 1992, authorizing the hiring of additional consultants to provide further expert advice to protect TOV's interests, including engaging legal consultants who would be able to take any necessary action.) She advised Executive Sessions were utilized by TOV Council because of the need for discussion about negotiation and legal strategy, but na action was taken, nor would or could have been taken, without ~/ *~ public review and discussion. Mayor Osterfoss stated TOV spent $13,000 to monitor the bankruptcy and $21,26 for legal research in 1991. In 1992, $17,000 was spent on legal research. She said Council felt the information gathered had value today and was a resource . of information with long term value for TOV. She noted, although continued monitoring of this issue was necessary to protect the interests of the community, Council was optimistic about the Apollo Group ownership, and felt the management now in place at VA would be successful with the operation of the ski area. She advised VA representatives had told Council they were committed on a long-term basis to operating the ski area successfully, and indicated they felt it was necessary and appropriate to work cooperatively with the community to address matters of mutual concern. Mayor Osterfoss said VA representatives had stated several times they understood their actions would continue to be observed as the community evaluated what they did. Before a detailed presentation by Chuck Borgman, attorney with Kutak Rock, Mayor Osterfoss noted Council member Bob Buckley at no time participated in any of Council's discussions of this issue based on the fact he was part of the executive group working with VA. Chuck Borgman fully described the nature of Kutak Rock's engagement, and the engagement of two other law firms by TOV to monitor this issue. He discussed highlights of the legal efforts taken over the past eighteen months by the law firms, and explained in detail the chronology of events of this issue beginning with the involuntary bankruptcy proceeding filed against GHI in February, 1991. He noted Kutak Rock was engaged after the time of the initial filing of the involuntary bankruptcy proceeding and prior to the time that proceeding was converted to a voluntary bankruptcy proceeding in a~.r~~,.umately May, 1991. He said • Kutak Rock provided ongoing monitoring of the proceedings, and researched and advised TOV an issues related to how the bankruptcy could impact TOV, as well as how TOV might have had to respond. Mr. Bo~~~an advised Kutak Rock was assisted by Marlin Opperman, recognized eminent domain expert, with the law firm of Opperman & Associates. The two firms looked at issues Mr. Bo~e.~.an described as defensive in nature, given the importance of the industry to the fawn, concerning what TOV could do, if necessary, to acquire assets or regulate the operations of the ski area if the bankruptcy proceedings did not ga as the debtors hoped. He said the legal issues research focused in two general areas: (1) whether or not there was legal basis for TOV to acquire VA assets if it had to, and {2} whether or not TOV could impose any kind of regulatory procedure on VA operations or require minimum capitalization or other requirements to assure either ongoing operation or capital expenditures at a certain level or some level of service. Mr. Borgman noted it was relatively unprecedented for a municipality to exercise those kinds of powers with respect to this particular kind of industry, however, lengthy research concluded that, in each case, there was legal basis for TOV to move forward with either or both actions. Mr. Borgman recounted technical details about the course of events of the bankruptcies and the potential resulting danger of interruption of operations of the ski area. Mr. Borgman advised in. May, 1992, Council asked Kutak Rock torecommend co-counsel with • experience in hostile takeover matters. Kutak Rock recommended the firm of Wilke, Farr & Gallagher, a p~~~inent Wa11 street law firm, be engaged. He said there were three reasons for the engagement of this additional law firm: (1) the stakes were so high and the area of concern had so little precedent, both TOV and Kutak Rock felt mare comfortable with a second opinion from Wilke, Farr & Gallagher, (2) it was believed if TOV had to act in this arena it would have been akin to a hostile takeover setting, and {3) it was anticipated if action had tiQ be taken it would ultimately unfold in New York where many of the involved parties were, where the financial camzr~unity was centered, and where Wilke, Farr & Gallagher was based. At this time, Mr. Borgman indicated a joint amended plan of reorganization was filed in the spring of 1992, the final confirmation order was in August, 1992, and having now passed the final confirmation date, GHI anal VA had now emerged from Chapter 11. He reiterated that a great deal of expensive legal research was done for TOV over the past eighteen months. In addition to the research, there was strategic planning involving an important legal component on which time was spent. He believed the bulk of the legal work done had continuing value for TOV and would be valuable in the future, when any sitting Council might have to review the situation. The available information might have to be updated, but was not work that would have to be reproduced in total. His understanding was, as the bankruptcy proceedings had been concluded, Kutak Rack's enga~~~,ent would become • dormant at this point. He indicated Kutak Rock had received no direction to move forward, and felt any Council observation of VA operations would no longer require a legal component 2 .,: , at this time. He gave an overview of the bankruptcy arena, and pointed out the tremendous power of bankruptcy judges, who could, in fact, affect existing relationships between debtors anal third parties, including the capacity to void existing contracts, as well as the possibility • of affecting TOV's ability to collect taxes and enforce existing agreements. That, he indicated, would clearly have had direct impact on the ongoing operation of the ski area. He concluded his presentation by recalling Mayor Osterfoss had earlier mentioned most of TOV's communications regarding this issue had been in Executive Session, and added that was intentional. All of the work product produced had been submitted to Larry Eskwith as Town Attorney with the protection of attorney-client privilege. He concluded his presentation by indicating the amount of strategy involved and Council's desire to avoid having its actions or threat of actions have a negative impact upon VA ar upon the successful culmination of the bankruptcy proceedings were the primary reasons for TOV's internalization of this issue while research was underway. Merv Lapin then explained he had personally taken on the job of following GHI's financial condition, and said he took full political responsibility for encouraging fellow Council members to monitor and understand the implications of this bankruptcy issue and the resultant actions taken. He felt that was Council's fiduciary responsibility, and said he personally saw no other alternative but to suggest TOV follow the course of the bankruptcy and know the alternative choices of action available to it. He mentioned numerous dealings TOV had with VA a bankruptcy could affect, including the 4% lift ticket tax (9% of TOV's budget), the 60-year lease VA had with the Vail Recreation District (VRD) for the lands around Gold Peak, the zoning greenbelt and open space, and the possibility that Vail and Beaver Creek could have been separated and sold or liquidated. He noted it was always Council's intention to bring this issue to the community for a public hearing before any action was taken. He agreed with Mayor Osterfoss about Council's optimistic view of the future of VA's new management, but added he was concerned because the new ownership there had no track record operating a successful ongoing company. However, in the short run, ha felt TOV should be pragmatic and judge the new management by contributions they made to keeping Vail Number 1, including contributions not only to the quality of the skiing experience, but contributions toward solutions for problems related to employee housing, public transportation, parking, and the expansion and repair of Veil's infrastructure. Merv encouraged Apollo Group to increase their Board of Directors to include meaningful representation of outside directors representing the interest of the Vail community. Merv also expressed concern that, although GHI's debt had been reduced for the present owners, what assurances were there that this trophy asset would not be overpaid for by the next buyer, or that bankruptcy would not once again become an issue. Merv stated many people in Vail had everything both financially and emotionally invested here, and felt it was necessary for the community to stand together to continue to make Vail Number 1. Mr. Bergman spoke again briefly in response to Bill Wilto's request far clarification of TOV's options. Mr. Bay e~an said the choices would have been dictated by what happened in the • bankruptcy, but s»m*narized the options previously explained. Andy Daly, President of VA, inquired as to why there had been na investment banl~ng advisory role advising TOV on its financing strategies. Mr. Borgman stated a number of investment banking firms had been interviewed during the summer of 1992, but none were engaged due to the turn of events. Mr. Daly asked if the conclusions of TOV's research would be public record, and Mayor Osterfoss advised information beyond what was being reported at this meeting was confidential attorney-client information which would not be publicly available. Larry Eskwith confirmed the attorney work product would not be public record. Mr. Daly commented about the process of TOV's research, and added he was relieved by the conclusion reached. He commended Council for taking the action now being taken. He believed the element of trust that had been nurtured during the last sixty days could continue, and had every expectation it would. He stated there was a new vision, as the community moved forward, that all entities had to work together, and VA was open to discussion and participation where it made sense from a good business perspective as well as from the perspective of a good corporate citizen. Mayor Osterfoss concluded by noting Andy Daly and the rest of the new VA management group had shown a great deal of interest in ~.,~king and communicating with TOV, and clearly, she said it was felt there was more to be gained by working cooperatively with VA. • Item No 5. was a Consent Agenda consisting of two items: 3 4 r {a} Apra. gal of Minutes of November 3, 1992, and November 17, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. . (b} Ordinance No. 27, ,Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.57.020 -Employee Housing Units (EHUs) generally, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Paragraph 18.57A20(C) and {D) to clarify restrictions on the leasing and sale of Employee Housing Units, and Paragraph 18.57.020(K}, Section 18.57.040(B)5, Section 18.57.0~0(B}9, Section 18.57.060{B}13, and Section 18.57.060(B)6 to clarify the meaning. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Consent Agenda Item A, but to table Consent Agenda Item B, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Jim Gibson asked Kristen Pritz to explain the reason far tabling Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992. Kristan stated she understood this meeting's agenda was too full to review the second reading of this ordinance, and that a number of people interested in the ordinance were told it would be discussed at the December x5,1992, evening meeting. Jim Gibson inquired if any changes to the ordinance were anticipated on second reading. Kristen advised no changes were anticipated, and the changes Council had requested on first reading had been made for second reading. To clarify the issue, Mayor Osterfoss asked Kristan if the people concerned with this ordinance were concerned with the way it read on second reading, or whether they were concerned about any changes that could possibly be made on second reading. Kristan indicated there were not any concerns about the ordinance as it read now regarding the issue of lots under 15,000 square feet. She confirmed that interested parties would have no objection to the ordinance if it was passed as presented on second reading at this meeting. A vote was then taken an Merds motion, and the motion failed, 2-4, Mayor Osterfoss, Jim Gibson, Jim Shearer, and Rob Levine apposed. Jim Gibson then moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Merv Lapin noted he was concerned Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992, was allowing and encouraging too much development on lots smaller than 15,000 square feet, and was also allowing development an 15,000 square foot lots of two or more units to be separated and sold. He felt the ordinance would add to an already crowded lot density and increase the impact. Kristen explained, on lots of less than 15,000 square feet, the current ordinance allowed two units assuming the second unit was a restricted year round employee housing unit. The proposed ordinance would not add density on those lots. If both units were permanently deed restricted as employee housing unite they could be sold separately. If not, they would still fall under existing rules. There was brief additional discussion regarding smaller lots. A vote was then taken and the motion to pass the Consent Agenda passed, 4-2, Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg opposed to Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992. Item No 6. was Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance accepting certain improvements constructed and installed in and far Booth Creek Local Improvement District, determining the total cost thereof, receiving and accepting the assessment roll . apportioning the cast thereof to be paid by special assessments among affected parcels within the District, assessing the cost as apportioned therein against each assessable parcel within the District especially benefitted by the improvements, prescribing the method of paying and collecting the assessments, describing the lien securing payment thereof, making necessary findings with respect to the satisfaction of all cgnditions and requirements relating to the foregoing, and limiting actions challenging the proceedings. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson explained this ordinance was for the levying of assessments for work done an the mitigation ditch at Booth Creek. He said the net assessed amount was $487,187, which was being divided over 26 different units, approximately $18,737 per unit. The assessment could be paid in fiill by January 18, 1993, nr in ten equal installments at 9.5% interest. Larry Eskwith noted there would be a public hearing for input and/or protests on this ordinance and on the assessments on December 15, 1992. He advised the people to be assessed had been notified by certified mail of the hearing, and public notice of the meeting would be published in the newspaper. Merv 'Lapin moved to ap~,~~~e Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Gibson. Before a vote was taken, Pat Dauphinais, resident of the area targeted for assessment, asked far an explanation of the history of the mitigation project. Larry Eskwith gave a brief review of the f„~,.k.atioza of the local improvement district, and noted the formula for the assessment was established at the time the district was formed. Ron Philligs also described details of the formation of this district, noting most of the owners in the Booth Creek area had been involved in the formation . process. Ron advised the owners had come to TOV asking for assistance with financing of the needed improvement. There was discussion about the original assessment amount, 4 .~ ~~ construction problems the project had encountered, additional monies spent because of problems related to the construction and cost of litigation as a result of that, and the cost of interest on bonds covering the project. Ned Gwathmey said the project now worked, .but . asked for an accounting of the project's costs. Steve Thompson indicated a breakdown of the requested accounting inf.,,.,,~ation was available. Jim Gibson then called the question. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7. was a review of Town of Vail's Third Quarter Financial Report and Proposed Supplemental Appropriations. Steve Thompson advised TOV's financial condition far 1992 remained in line with what had been projected all year. He noted there were approximately $2,000,000 worth of projects between the Capital Projects Fund and the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund that would need to be rolled forward into 1993. He briefly reviewed the revenue and expenditures of the General Fund, Capital Projects Lottery Fund, Real Estate Transfer Tax, Special Parking Assessment Fund, Marketing Fund, and Police Confiscation Fund budget cate~.,~ies. Mayor Osterfoss inquired about the number of Ya..jects being rolled forward, and there was discussion about possible affects of Amendment No. 1 an thane projects. It was explained funds could be put into a reserve which would be viewed, under Amendment No. 1, as expenditures in the year the reserve account was established, but Steve Barwick added this option was dependent on court rulings regarding reserves and other operations under Amendment No. 1 regulations. Item No. 8 was Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance making supplemental appr„y~~ations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, Vail Marketing Fund, The Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, LionsHead Mall Project Fund, Conservation Trust Fund, LionsHead Mall Debt Service Fund, Booth Creek Debt Service and Construction Fund, Heavy Equipzaaent Fund, Town of Vail Debt Service Fund, West Vail Debt Service Fund, and Police Building Construction Fund of the 1992 Budget and the Financial Plan for the Tawn of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said app~~~,~iatians as set forth herein; establishing a reserve fixnd balance of $5,740,000; creating an emergency reserve of $550,040; and setting forth details in, regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance Na. 32, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Before a vote was taken, there was discussion about requirements of Amendment No. 1, including use of the terns "emergency reserve," and further discussion regarding pledging of assets for that reserve. Mayor Osterfoss noted the $550,000 emergency reserve was not usable under any circumstances short of physical emergencies. It was noted the reserve could be invested long- term. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 9 was Resolution No. 18, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing employees of the Town of Vail to purchase, sell, resell, to or from Gill & Associates; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 18, Series of 1992, with a second from Merv Lapin. After brief discussion, a . vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 10 was Resolution No. 19, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing employees of the Town of Vail to purchase, sell, resell, to or from RAF Financial Corporation; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 19, Series of 1992, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 11 was Resolution No. 20, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing employees of the Town of Vail to purchase, sell, resell, to or from Stifel, Nicolaus & Ca., Inc.; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved tQ approve Resolution No. 20, Series of 1992, with a second fi.,~ Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passes unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 12 was Resolution No. 21, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing certain Town employees and officers to sign checks drawing on a health insurance debit account to be opened by the Town at the FirstBank of Vail, and further authorizing certain employees of the Town to make deposits in said account. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Shelly Shanley explained TOV needed to establish this new account to pay out health insurance claims from TOV's new health insurance carrier, Fortis. Rob Levine moved to approve • Resolution No. 21, Series of 1992, with a second from Tom Steinberg. After brief discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. 5 r~-~ Item No. 13 was review of a request for a sign variance far The Antlers Condominiums, 680 W. Lionshead Place, Lot 3, Block 1, Vail LionsHead 3rd Filing. The applicant was Rab LeVine/The Antlers Condominiums. Rob Levine stepped dawn from discussion due to conflict . of interest. Tim Devlin advised this request was, i.n fact, for two variances; the first being far size of signs, and the second being for height of signs. He explained the description of the request as detailed ixx the CDD memo to the DRB dated November 4, 1992, including a proposed change in the lettering style and lighting of the existing 36 square foot legal non- conforz~a.ing sign. He indicated TOV Municipal Code stipulated the right to continued use or operation of any legal non-conforming sign terminated whenever a sign was altered in any way. Therefore, The Antler's needed a variance even though the size and height of the proposed sign would remain the same as the existing sign. Tim noted there were precedents for this type of variance, and staff and the DRB believed there were special circumstances applying to The Antler's building, particularly its concave physical location. After discussion, Merv Lapin waved to approve the sign variance as requested with the findings of special circumstances as called out in the above-referenced memorandum including proof of physical hardship, that special circumstances were not created by the applicant, and that granting of the variance would be in general harmony with the purpose of the TOV Sign Code and would not be materially detrimental to the persons residing or working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare in general. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, ~-0-1, Rob Levine abstaining. Item No. 14, was an appeal of a Design Review Board {DRB) decision denying the request for a color change for the residence located at 1628 Vail Valley Drive, Lot 1, Warren Pulls • Subdivision. The appellant was Mr. J.P. Molyneaux. Kristan Pritz reviewed the criteria from the DRB's October 7,1992, vote to deny the color change request as detailed in the CDD mama to Council dated December 1, 1992. The memo included background on the request, including the fact that Mr. Molyneaux had not received DRB approval prior to painting his house red. Mr. Malyneaux acknowledged he had first painted the house without knowledge that authorization to da so was required, h„~,~~er, after being contacted by staff, he had agreed to try to obtain DRB arr., aal. After discussion regarding the alternatives and compromises examined by the DRB and Mr. Molyneaux since August, 1992, Mayor Osterfass indicated the DRB's decision to deny the color change had been appropriate as the DRB's decision was based on the parameters set forth in TOV Municipal Code. Jim Shearer moved to uphold the DRB's decision to deny Mr. Molyneaux's request for a color change for the residence at 1628 Vail Valley Drive, Lot 1, Warren Pulls Subdivision, based on the DRB findings that the request was not in conformance with Sections 18.54.030 (A) and (B) (Design Approval) and 18.54.050 (A1} and {C3) {Design Guidelines) of TOV Municipal Code as set forth in the above referenced memo. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Rab Levine noted there was no malicious intent on Mr. Molyxa.eaux's part, and directed the DRB to continue to work with Mr. Molyneaux, who agreed to repaint the residence by the end of June, 1993. It was stated the time between now and then was a reasonable amount of time to repaint, and that it was not reasonable, during the winter months, to require the repaint. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0. • There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Ma~aret A. Osterfoss, M or ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Ac ing Town Clerk . Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:WI INSDECi.92 ..t_. MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 15, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 15, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:45 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICLALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda Citizen Participation. Josef Staufer submitted a petition fi.,~.. Vail residents urging the repeal of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1992, an ordinance amending Section 8.24.090 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Cnlarado, to provide for the owner or occupant of any property within the Town of Vail to keep the sidewalks in the public right- of-way on adjacent or abutting such lot or parcels free and clear from ice, snow, and other obstructions. He felt this ordinance placed an unfair burden on property ~wuers in Vail, and snow removal should be a legitimate function. of TOV as a service residents could expect. Pepi Gramshammer, Hermann Staufer, and Kent Williams also expressed concerns about snow removal, plowing, and storage issues. Ron Phillips advised TOV was examining possible procedural changes to address these concerns. Pepi Gramshammer inquired as to why there had been no celebration in recognition of Vail's 30th anniversary. There was no discussion. Richard Carnes advised the Precision Lawn Chair Demonstration Team of Vail had been accepted as participants in the January 19,1993, Inaugural Parade in Washington, D.C. Jeff Atencio felt this was an opportunity for promotion of Vail and the ski industry, and indicated the group would appreciate any assistance from TOV to help cover casts associated with the group's participation ixi the parade. The airfare and accommodation cost for eleven participants was estimated to be $6,600. Merv Lapin moved to contribute $1,000 from Council contingency to the Precision Lawn Chair Demonstration Team of Vail, with a second fl.,,.. Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Josef Staufer and Hermann Staufer spoke against removal of the pedestrian bridge. They felt its removal detracted from pedestrianization of the Vail corridor. Mayor Osterfoss indicated recent public meetings concerning the pedestrian bridge showed support for its removal, however, as a number of citizens present at this meeting seemed to share feelings similar to Joe and Hermann, further consideration would be given to this issue. Bob Buckley noted he had received numerous calls from neighbors concerned with safety at the Bald Mountain bus stop. Larry Grafel explained some of the alternatives offered to residents of the area, and indicated this issue would be revisited in the spring. In the meantime, the underpass pathway would be opened to riders who chose to get off the bus at Aspen Lane to go over to Bald Mountain Road. Larry advised westbound bus service on that route would be continued. Item No. 2 on the agenda was a discussion regarding the proposed TOV Cemetery management plan and conceptual design. Andy Knudtsen advised that before the cemetery master planning process could be completed, Council review and agreement of work done to date was needed. He introduced members of the Cemetery Consultant Team: Eldon Beck, . President of Alpine International, Sherry Dorward, Vice President of Alpine International, Steve Perkins, Vice President of Alpine International, Jack Goodnoe, Landscape Architect with HEPY f~ „~ Southfield Michigan, and Larry Sloane, President of LF Sloane Consulting Group from Del Mark, New York. Members of the Cemetery Task Force, Dave Cole and Cissy Dobson, were unable to attend this meeting, but had submitted letters supporting the proposed design and management plans of the cemetery. Background details, evaluation of the design, evaluation of the management options, neighborhood involvement, staff conclusions, and character image drawings of types of plots, cenotaphs, and crypt designs were included in the Community Development Department's (CDD) memo dated December 15, 1992. Eldon Beck briefly reviewed results of the October 27, 1992, public meeting held at the golf course where the consultant team, the task force, staff, and neighbors had discussed a variety of issues regarding the cemetery. Sherry Dorward displayed aerial photos of the cemetery site and character image drawings developed in response to public input. She discussed the conceptual plan, noting there were five types of grave sites proposed to be located on a very small part of the upper bench of Donovan Park at or around the tree line. Jack Goodnoe reviewed details of the site selection process, design impact at the site, and cemetery burial requirements, as well as the special needs associated with memorialization and meditation in the intended naturalistic setting. Paul Hymers, resident of the area adjacent to Donovan Park, felt public concerns about the cemetery had been taken into consideration and he was pleased with the proposed design, but he was concerned about future plans for use of the rest of the park. Mayor Osterfoss felt there was full intent to keep this area designated as a permanent type of open space. Larry Sloane then discussed six management scenarios for the cemetery. He felt the entity best equipped to manage the cemetery was the Cemetery District, and reco*ri~+ended TOV enter into a management agreement with the Cemetery District. TOV should continue to control or awn the underlying • real property, but the District should be the entity to provide capital funding to develop the first phase of the cemetery, assuring TOV by contract that it would do so within the approved master plan scope. He felt the District, not TOV, should provide operating funds ti ~~ its existing mill levy and revenue from sales activity at the cemetery, both here and in Minturn. There was brief discussion about how Amendment No. 1 might affect funding of the project, after which Tom Steinberg moved to accept the preliminary Vail cemetery design and management report as presented and proceed with the project as recommended. Rob Levine seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, note was made that the Minturn Cemetery District's name had been changed to the Eagle Gore Cemetery District, and that District had indicated a willingness to manage the Vail cemetery. Hermann Staufer inquired about the capital outlay for the project, and was advised cost estimates were not finalized at this time. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item Na. 3 was Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance accepting certain improvements constructed and installed in and for Booth Creek Local Im~,~~aement District, determixung the total cost thereof, receiving and accepting the assessment roll apportioning the cost thereof to be paid by special assessments among affected parcels within the District, assessing the cost as apportioned therein against each assessable parcel within the District especially benefitted by the improvements, prescribing the method of paying and collecting the assessments, describing the lien securing payment thereof, making necessary findings with respect to the satisfaction of all conditions and requirements relating to the foregoing, and limiting actions challenging the proceedings. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Larry Eskwith explained this hearing regarded the levying of assessments for the Booth Creek Improvement District, which had been farmed to construct mitigation for rock fall in the Booth Creek area. He noted the rack fall berm was now completed. TOV had previously issued bonds to pay for construction of the berm, and the issue now at hand was the amount of the assessments being levied to pay far those bands. Larry called several TOV staff members to testify about history related to this improvement district. He explained this was the legal approach he would use to produce evidence about essentials required by the ordinance. Ron Phillips was called first to testify about background information regarding formation of this improvement district. He described the f„~u.ation of this improvement district in depth, beginning in 19$3. Ron stated the mechanism that was discussed as primarily a financing mechanism was f.,~ ~atiox~ of the improvement district. He indicated property owners asked Council far financial participation fem.,,.. TOV, and Council had approved a $20,000 contribution from TOV's budget t4 assist in paying for part of the engineering required. Eagle County also approved $20,000 tv,~ard this project, but the State of Colorado declined to participate financially. Larry stated at the time the district was formed, a formula for how assessments would be levied was established and • accepted by property owners. Ron described how the f~~,uula for reaching the assessments was established. He said the homeowners had strongly encouraged TOV to adopt an 2 assessment that would divide the total cast equally among all of the ownerships, and at the hearing held to set up the improvement district, property owners were present and expressed support of that formula to Council. . Before public input on background inf,....., atian related to formation of this district began, Ron confirmed written notice of this evening's public hearing had been mailed to the property owners as they appeared on the assessors list of ownership on November 24, 1992, and notification of this hearing was published in the Vail Trail on December, 15, 1992, and all notification of this hearing was in conf„~,uance with Section 20.04.180 of the Municipal Cade of the Town of Vail. Ray Story asked Ran if he felt the primary issue with accepting the berm was property value. Ron stated he believed the primary issue was the safety of those living, renting, ar staying in the properties in that neighborhood. Ned Gwathmey raised questions about a document received by homeowners in the district on June 6, 1989, which indicated the project cost was estimated at $12,116 or 15% more if there were cost overruns, but assessments could not exceed that amount. He was advised financial issues would be addressed during TOV Controller Steve Thampsan's testimony. Greg Hall, Town Engineer, was called next to testify about the nature of the improvement this district was f.,L~ed to pay for and to supply engineering information related to the project. It was established Greg was not employed with TOV when this project was first discussed, but was the Town Engineer at the time construction commenced on the project. . Greg recalled construction commenced in August, 1989, and involved excavation of a trench, building of a berm, minor drainage work, and revegetation work. Greg testified the improvement in this district was substantially completed at the present time, appeared to be working, and the engineer who designed the structure had appeared before Council and stated in his opinion the berm was completed and working as planned and designed. Greg described problems with construction of the berm; the primary problem being a lack on the part of the contractor to meet compaction requirements as specitzed in the contract. Banner Engineering, the project supervisor, managed the project for TOV, and subsequently TOV hired Chen Northern of Glenwood Springs to do the actual soils testing. Greg confirmed when he was told by the engineer that the compaction did not meet design standards, TOV shut the job down and refused to pay the contractor. The contractor filed suit against TOV for breach of contract; TOV filed suit back for breach of contract for the contractor not meeting contract specifications. TOV and Banner Engineering had hired attorneys and commenced the litigation process during which expert engineers were retained to provide testimony and to aid in reconstruction of the berm. Greg confirmed that all of the properties included in this local improvement district were within a high rock fall hazard area on TOV's rock fall hazard maps, and since reconstruction and completion of the project, those properties had been removed fi „~ any rack fall hazard designation. • .Questions concerning future maintenance of the berm were raised by Fred Otto, and Ron stated TOV had committed to maintain it. He said anticipated maintenance would mainly consist of removal of rocks caught by the structure as often as needed, repair of any sloughing, and enhancement of the vegetation on the berm. At this point ixa. time, no annual cast estimate for this maintenance could be determined. Mr. Otto also inquired about the outcome of the previously mentioned litigation. Larry Eskwith indicated the litigation had been a favorable settlement tiff TOV, and the contractor completed the berm to specifications at his cast. Discussion followed about collection of the contractor's perf„t~ance bond, and Larry Eskwith explained due to the fact that the contractor had expressed a willingness to complete the jab and never refused to perform, TOV was technically unable to collect the bond. There were a number of questions as to whether or not TOV was appropriately vigilant in supervising the contractor and the engineer. Larry Eskwith explained the contractor's job was to perform as he agreed to by completing the project to jab specifications; the engineer's job was quality assurance. Larry felt TOV staff performed responsibly when advised by the engineer that the berm was not compacted properly. TOV shut the project down and refused to pay the contractor until the bG~ , ., was brought into conf„~ Dance with compaction specifications. Mayor Osterfoss felt this was an important distinction. TOV's role was to respond to the report given by the expert in the form of the engineer as apposed to going out • on a daily or weekly basis to check the compaction. Chen Northern was hired to do the soils testing, and did. Ran reemphasized the project was shut down by TOV as soon as the 3 problem was brought to TOV's attention by the engineer. Sybill Navas initiated further discussion about compaction requirements and the time factor involved with discovery of the compaction problems with this project. • Larry Eskwith next called Steve Thompson, TOV Controller, to testify about the financial records related to this improvement district. Steve confirmed TOV had issued bonds in the amount of $365,000, presently outstanding, to pay far this improvement. The estimated total cost to be assessed against the affected property owners which had been set forth in the notice for the second reading of this ordinance was $366,756. Steve confirmed the actual cost to construct the improvement had exceeded that amount. The actual cost an the original construction budget was $41,486; the amount of the additional construction costs was $51,'700, approximately 12-13% of the original cost. Larry noted TOV Code provided for the potential assessment of additional construction costs up to the amount of 15%, and also allowed TOV to assess additional costs where there were separate elements of a nature not foreseen and included in the original estimated cost. Steve distributed and explained a financial report entitled Booth Creek Special Assessment District Budget dated December 15, 1992, detailing the total revenues, and expenditures including total construction casts, engineering costs, legal costs, band issuance costs and interest on bonds, shortfall amounts, bonds payable, and the total amount currently being assesses at $487,187. Greg Hall gave technical explanations about those sections of Steve's report reflecting construction and engineering costs overruns. Discussion about interest cost on bonds followed. It was explained that a majority of the costs of this matter were interest costs of carrying this project without having assessments • for three years because the assessments could not be made until the r~..,;ect was substantially complete. Further discussion regarding interest income, whether bids were opened prior to second reading, when partial payments were made to the contractor and the engineer, and at what point in time monies were spent on redesign of the project. Ron Phillips advised partial payments to the contractor and the engineer had been made on a percentage completion basis, and xzo payments were made after the engineer indicated the project was not being done correctly. Steve Thompson confirmed he had prepared the assessment role showing the amount of each assessment. Larry Eskwith then called real estate appraiser, Basil Katsaros, to testify. He confirmed he had acted as an expert witness in previous hearings and court cases. He discussed his appraisal assignment with respect to the Booth Creek Special Improvement District, which included evaluation of enhancement to ~.~.,rerty values in Booth Creeks as a result of this project. It was his opinion the effect upon the fair market value of the properties in this improvement district had been enhanced in value in excess of the special assessment amount. Larry indicated Council had to make a finding relating to the probable influence from the improvements relating to the protection or preservation of the values of the property in the vicinity of the improvement, and asked Mr. Katsaros for further opinion as to fair market value. Mr. Katsaros said the improvements also added to the protection of the individual homes from rockfall damage evidenced historically, and a primary benefit of the improvements was the loanability in the neighborhood as wells as the elimination of buyer concerns. He said he had reviewed the assessments for each individual property owner in the district and, in his opinion, each property in the district was benefitted at least to the extent of the assessment levied against it. Mr. Katsaros confirmed he would bill TOV for his consultation. There was discussion about the motivation for the formation of this district, and it was agreed the original motivation was safety and peace of mind. Ran Phillips explained when a local improvement district was established, it was a legal necessity far retards to reflect that property owners paying assessments had received value far the assessment. Larry Eskwith confirmed one of the requirements of the ordinance was to show Council that properties in the local improvement district had especially benefitted and that there was an effect on the fair market value. After additional input from George Clowes, Pat Dauphinais, and Ed Gunn, specifics of the litigation were again discussed, as well as the series of events leading to the need and decisions surrounding formation of the district. There were additional financial issue questions, and a suggested review of possible bond renegotiation and assessment payment 4 options. Tom Steinberg then moved to pass Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, on second reading, with direction to staff to examine possible renegotiation of the bonds. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Pat Dauphinais submitted a proposal fnr a mare equitable way of dividing up the costs. Rob Levine expressed concern about changing the original formula, and Hated people in the district had understood and agreed to the original formula. Council indicated if members of the district wanted to rework the formula amongst themselves, that was something they could do. Larry Eskwith confirmed the members of the district could work out a private agreement amongst themselves, but it would be without the involvemexa.t of TOV and would not be affected by what the ordinance said. The assessments, however paid, were still due. Tom Steinberg called the question. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Discussion of Item No. 5 on the agenda preceded discussion of agenda Item No. 4. Item Na. 5 on the agenda was Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 2 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 2.36 -Limitation of Terms, to provide for the limitation of terms for all members of permanent T,.~.~ of Vail Boards and Commissions. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance Na. 30, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Jim Gibson. Before a vote was taken, there was brief discussion regarding encouraging wider citizen participation on the various boards. Merv Lapin then. xn.oved to amend his motion to approve Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1992, on first reading with a change to Section 2.36.010 of the ordinance to indicate a Board or Commission member who has served eight (8) consecutive years may serve again after a period of one (1) year of non-service. Jim Gibson seconded the amended motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unar~*rausly, 7-0. Item No. ~ was Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, Vail Marketing Fund, The Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, LionsHead Mall Project Fund, Conservation Trost Fund, LionsHead Mall Debt Service Fund, Booth Creek Debt Service and Construction Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund, Town of Vail Debt Service Fund, West Vail Debt Service Fund, and Police Building Construction Fund of the 1992 Budget and the FSi.nancial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein; establishing a reserve fiend balance of $5,740,000; creating an emergency reserve of $550,000; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson explained changes made since first reading. Jim Gibson asked if assets could be used as part of the emergency reserve. After dialogue concerning this option, discussion led to a unanimous vote, 7-0, to approve Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1992, on second reading, with specific clarification that the emergency reserve of $550,000 to be created be an eme~s~~~cy cash or asset reserve in the value of $550,000. Item No. 6 was Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 18.32 of the Vail Municipal Code, adding sledding and tobogganning parks as a conditional use. The applicant was Vail Associates, Inc. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Bob Buckley stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Kristan Pritz Hated this ordinance was unanimously supported by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC.) She explained VA intended to return with a conditional use request to put a tobogganning park in Lianshead on the south side of Gore creek. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Art Abplanalp, representing property owners adjacent to the proposed site, asked the records to reflect there had been little publicity about this, and mentioned a variety of reasons as to why he felt there were going to be a significant number of objections from property owners who would be impacted by this amendment. He asked if this was an appropriate amendment within this zone district, and asked Council to seriously consider the scope, location, anal the way it was being incorporated into the broad skiing zone district. Joe Macy, VA, clarified this proposal would allow VA the opportunity to apply for a conditional use permit. He said VA was willing to work with the neighborhood on what the proposed facility would actually entail when applied for. He said VA felt this would be an. additional recreational amenity for the community, and VA understood the sensitivity of the neighborhood and did not want to da something that would diminish their enjoyment of their property. Mr. Macy indicated that when an application was actually made, it would probably include a request for nighttime use until 8:00 or 9:00 P.M. He noted that the proposed • facility was on VA property and was fairly removed from the property lines an the east represented by Mr. Abplanalp. Mayor Osterfoss asked Kristan if the proposal was a 5 reasonable conditional use in the context of other conditional uses within this zone district. Kristan said it was felt that it was, and referred to a memo from the CDD to the PEC dated December 7, 1992, detailing the description of the request, background, proposed code amendment, analysis of the proposed code amendment, and staff recommendation regarding p~~,..itted uses and conditional uses. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Abplanalp added it was his understanding VA had already filed an application for the conditional use permit, and again asked Council to fully consider the proposal's full scope and impact. Jim Gibson called the question. A vote was then taken and the motion passed, 6-0-1, Bob Buckley abstaining. Item No. 7 was Ordinance No. 34, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance repealing Section 11 of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, Subsection 9, and setting forth details in regard thereto. {The ordinance concerned a major amendment to SDD #6, Vail Village Inn, to remove a previous condition of approval for Unit No. 30, Phase I, Vail Village Plaza Condominiums/100 East Meadow Drive.) The applicant was BSC of Vail, Colorado, L.P./Frank Cicero. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Bob Buckley stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Kristan Pritz noted this unit was originally the Good's Commercial Space which had been converted to a 6,000 square foot condominium. Full Details were included in the CDD'S memo to the PEC dated December 7,1992. Kristan said in September, 1992, a request to remove the use restriction on the condominium had been denied by Council. At this time, the applicant was ~,,...~,osing to provide an employee housing unit in place of the use restriction. Staff and the PEC recommended approval. Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 34, Series of 1992, on first reading,. with a second from Merv Lapin. Before a vote was taken, it was established that the employee housing unit was a permanently restricted full-time employee housing rental unit. Ken Wilson noted that before the deed restriction could come off of VVI #30, a deed restriction had to go on this property. A vote was then taken and the motion passed, 6-0-1, Bob Buckley abstaining. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~. - Marg t A. Osterfoss, Mayo ATTEST: Pamela A, Brandmeyer, Acting Town Clerk Mlnates taken by 13orianne S. Aeto G:WIIN~EC15.92 ~, :•t • PETITION TO REPEAL ORDINANCE N0.3, SERIE ~~~w.~~.:~ ~i~,~C~.j ~~ ~f'~6 J Z We, the undersigned, urge the Town of Vail to repeal Ordinance No. 3: t -~ __~ 2. ;` 3 , ~ ~ ~•,-.y~ ~- v Sri- ~~~ ~. ~1~~ °~ /J/~_ 5 . / A ~ .r . ~Ylrs~m ~. ~~ g. ~~ti ,~~ ~~~~~~~~ v - ~, n ~ ~fS ~~~ C'D g!~ ~d~ S 1992 ~( l r V c 12 . ~ fix,,- ~~da-~ ~7.3G ~~ ~~ (,'G~ 13 . (Q~ n_ ~L~CS~L r~ r~~ ~ ~~~~Q ~~ $l ID Y ~~ ~ 15 . ~-lr~Y~~SL-. f ~i~1-... t~ ~~ ,V 16. 0~~_~ 7aZW ,~c~~~n,'a~w'~~. ~~'r. r ~, ?~. ~8. ~ ~~ 19. 20. Via;/ .~. Continued.. n • • • Page 3 Continued.. We, the undersigned, urge the Tawn o~ Vail to repeal Ordinance No.3: 41. ~ C~~ 42. c 43. 4 4 . ~/1/1/~ ~~ 4 6 . .r J ~/ /rfil~~,~ .~ 47. 111 ~ t r 4$. ) ,~i _ . ~, .Piro r..i~ L 4 9 . ~ .~ ~ ~~,t1117~~~'1 51. .~ , _ 52, 53. 5 4 . ~I[~ ~~ '~~~ 5 5 : ~. ter-.. (~,( `~ ~~ .~ ~ ~- 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. Continued.. ~~ ~~_ .L~.~ G • • Page 4 Continued.. We, the undersigned urge the Town. of Vail to repeal Ordinance No.3: 62. 63. 6~. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. ~~ 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. .~ Continued . . Lik~r r ~fi 0~~~ ~~ ~+" • a lv Page 5 Continued.. ~~~~~~ We, the undersigned, urge the Town o~ Vail to repeal' Ordinance No. 3: v 82. 84. 8 86. ~~~~ ~. ~o~l . ....~ ~ ,~ -~ a /i f ~'~ / r ~`~ 9 3 . l.~ !~ ,~,ct`~ `o /fir % .R~~ ~ . ~. z ~_ - _._ _~'~- i 9 7 . ~~" _ ~/% ,~~ f ~ 10 0 . J ~ ,~ - , ~ ~~ -J ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ Continued.. s8. ~, gage 5 • Continued.. We, the undersigned, urge the Town of Va~.1 to repeal Ordinance No. 3: 81. ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~-NC. 83. 8.4 . ~ I~ l~1~Ait~z.< , ~~r~ _~ ~~~~ 85. 86. 87, 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. . 95. 96. 97. . 98. 99. } 1Q0. Continued.. -. • • Page 5 Continued.. We, the undersigned, urge the Town of Vail. to repeal Ordinance No. 3: ,' 81 ,{ _ ._ I 82. 83. 84. $5. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 9Z. 92. 93. 9~. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. Boa. r-~ Continued.. DEC-1 ~-92 TUE 13 , 54 BRA~[D~ CADMUS FAX M0, 3034 188 P. 01 T~ a~r~~iee~ ~.~~ 12-15-199 ~~~4J3PM Fi~OM VRiR&1~ r K.-Cz. i~1C. ~ { ~~ .. ,, gage 5 Continued. , ... ~ig-Y ~ ~ ~ •. '~ (~ ~ . ~ r.~--- '~~, the undersigned, urge the 'own et V~.~I. ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~e~~s]. O~~di~narc~ N~. ~: ~~~ 8~.. •~~ 83. .~ . 8~. 94. 86. • 8~. . • ~9, 90. ~~, . 9~. J w ~~~ 9 :7 r 9 {~ 97 a} II ~ . I~• ~~~ . u`~': hk.: Continued. . n Td1'!~ R. FJ1 h. Fade b ~ant1nue~. - Va~-1 to edt u~~e the ~Ow~ °f ~e i t le pxdi~ari en~a - 3 - ~epea ~. a ~. - 142 14: 1~ _ ~ ~ ~~ . 148. ~ r`'"__~ 149 - , ~~ 7.10 . m 111 • t~-~` 1 112• 11~~ 11 ~} , - 7.7.5 116' ~ ~~~, 11~ 7.18 ~~~ 119• 7.24 . Page 7 Continued.. [nTe, the undersigned, urge the Town of Vail to repeal Ordinance No.3: 121. 122. 7.23 . 124. 125. 126. 127. ~~~/ 128. ~ ~ 1 ~`~ 30 _ . ~~ 1374,/ ~ _ Gt ~~dy~~` , 133. t lyr i r ~~,s~~/L.,T~7iC/.~ _. 13 4 . ~~~ ~~ 135. (/" 13 6 . /~~1 ,: /~ f 137. n~ ~ - ~~ i 138. e . 13 9 . ~ ~/,~i ~~/ ~~ ~~ .~ 'I 14 0 . ~.. P ~~~ ~~~ • ~ ..:* ~: j~ i~ 7'Qi~V OF FAIL 75 Soutb Frontage Road Pam Brandmeyer Y '1, Colorado 81 GS7 ~-~79-2113/FAX 303-479-21f7 ~~~' t~d.~'d ~'!I.~CF,t.~U~{,~, 5' G~.~.~ ~ftiC~ ~-v~ 1~d ~-'~v8~~ t --~ (~ ~lr~,a.,C~,i..~.l., - '~ ~~~`' 7 w~ Q l~ ~,d,,uc,~~a • 4 ~~v~m.~-'~ • ~ '~ 1~~~~~~+~.~~ r~ ~~•[o •ro ~_ .~-~o ~~,,cc.cu.~ -ta ~~ ~~_ c~ Cclu,~- rQ ~ - [i ~~ie• ~~ C~c.(.~,ct~- r 5 Z e ~ RECElVE® ~~. ~ ~ f99~ ~ ~~- ~Q e. ~U ri~1/1 / ~~ Gt~~ Y~ ~l ~f~ Gl~l G dF ~' ~ t r~~ ~ ~ ~O~'G'~ ~oc~ ~'~i r ~~ ~i ~ ~ y d --~ ~- % awn ~ !~~ , ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ ~~ 05~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 5 ~l~©s~ ~~~ J~~~ ~ ~' ~ , ~ ~ ` r ~ / n urn ~5 ~~ ~ ~` ~ ~~, ~d~ ~ .~ ~ ~~' per:` ~,v,~~~ ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~' ~i'n~~ ~¢r~G°~ ~ _ ~ .~ ~ Cam- , ~ j s~,` ~ ~~ ~ ~1 ~ y!'L9r ~O n~ ~°f ~~ ~ ~- 11?GV~y~ tin [~ ~~~~'~~ t ~~~ ~~'Y~L~~ ~7~ ~ 17 ? ~a ~ /~n~~i~/ ,~ • H r.~` `~'' i~' ~ w cNn ~~ ~'" -, o ~ ~ _ ---~-,. rt ~d ~, f ~ ~~ Q w ,'^- ~ `~ r...~ _ ~~~ ~~ e `\ V i Town Manager's office unicipal Building ail, Co 81657 Gentlemen: ~ wK ~,a. u/,c-c~v 6 Dec 92 2 This letter is my formal protest against the special assessment on my property at 3226 Iiatsos Ranch Road. Block 1, Lot 2, Unit A, Marquez Duplex, Vail Village 12th Filing 1) I find it improper for the property awners to be charged for the mistakes of others. As I understand it, the original estimate for the creation of the trench-berm complex was in the neighborhood of $10,000 to which the property owners agreed. I see nothing of an unforeseeable or technical nature that should have prevented this estimate from being firm. Then because of errors by the contractor, errors in supervision, interest, & legal fees, the cost overrun was nearly 1000. None of these additional costs were the fault of the property owners an thus they should not be held responsible for them. The overrun costs should be apportioned to those who caused them. If agreement as to this apportionment cannot be made, then this is what the courts are for. For an area of disagreement of a quarter of a million dollars, I am sure, the legal profession is anxious to assist. Since this will surely add to the already egregious overrun, X suggest every effort be made to avoid this. In the meantime, I suggest that the agreed on assessment be collected so as to eliminate unnecessary interest costs. These should have been levied as costs were incurred anyway. I am willing to pay tomorrow or whenever specified my proper share, but I am not pleased to be paying for the incompetence of others. 2) I object to what I interpret as the proposed payment plan. I read that if the entire sum is not paid bar 18 Jan 92, then it must be paid in ten installments at an interest of 9.50 per annum. I agree that minimum of 10~ far the first payment & a minimum of 10o per annum thereafter is reasonable, but feel that no one should be obligated to maintain a debt if he prefers to reduce or eliminate it sooner. Yours very truly, • a,~.F-{~l ~~-~ Robt S. Carpenter RSC:rc ~f=iC-- 'i'-J2 M>~N ].;ASS, S~_ t=1 fx_ P'~~i~£. Li ~ r''~ P. 01 i ,A - M .~ ~, 1 ~~{- ;~ ~~ - ~' 'P.~ .ii" 6DC9 . Tawas Manager ~ s o~fi.ve ~~,' ° ~, Municipal Su~.l.d~.ng N~ ~~. ~~ t' veil., Co 81657 ,~ ~ , ~~ Gentlemen. 1~ '7L'n~r.~ utter is my forM~i pre 'gist aga~.nst 'thy Speafai ass~ssman`~ on my property at ~~~~ hK~tsOs Raxfc~ 4 Road, B~,ock 1, Lot 2, ^nit A, Margin ~ ~xplex, Vail Yiglage 7.~th Fi.l~,ng 1) ~ find it improper for the p~ pe~y owr-ers to be charged far the mistakes of ethers. As ~ understand iit, the original estimate far the creation of the trench,-beret camp~.ex ro,ias in the ae3ghborhood ai' ~10, 000 tp whir~h the pxoparty -owners ae~read. ' I see riathing of ~ an unfo~r~seeabl;e~ ar teahnia+~cl nature that ~hs~uld =ha~re~~ pr~rit~d t1~is'=~~e~ta:mate ~raa~"~be~mc~ Firm. Them because of errors by the oorrtr~.ctor, errata in ~upcx~'is~.an, interest. & legal fees, the cast awerrun wras near3.y l.€~0~. None of thest~ additional casts were the fat~l.t c~~ the property owners ari thus they ,should not be held responsible for them. The r~vexxun ~scrsts should be apportioned to those whu caused them. ~f agr~emertt as to this appc~rt3anment cannot be made, man t~z~.~~~`:~':s.~~i,~hat the courts are for. Far E-n area a~ d~.sagreeme~it of ~': quarter o~ a milif~iri dollars. T am ears, th¢ legal, px~Qfe~ss3.an ie ax~xiaus to ass~,~t. Sinoe this will • surely add to th~a already sgr,~gious averruM, I suggest ovary effort be made tO avoid this. : ~. ~M the meantime, 1 s:xgges`~ that the agre~ad on assessment lee collected so as to eliminate unnecessary interest c~rsts. fihe~se should have been levied as costs were incurred ~.nyway.. ~ a~A willa.ng to pay tamarx~Qw ar whenever ~bpea~xfiedpiYi~~~p~~~p~:~~" sk~i~re=A,.,but:;~'~ ~~.mV'-not. p1~~~ed tv be pay~.ng for the .ri~o~-petex~~'~~of:~a~thexs. ~) T abject to what ~~ E~nttrprets'.a~~'~''th~~propo~ed~ pay~orit'~pl~axi'M' T' r#ad that if the entire sum i~ not paid by 1~ Jan 9Z, then it mint be paid in ten insta].~.ments at ° airy inter~~t '.:off 5.:~~~~~~pe~ ~nn~un. _~, ~~~ a~tre~ ~ tY~it minimum o~ 10# for tYic~ .'~irst ~~ent r&-,~ a' minimum of '~~iD~ ~'.p~:~ `:~anzi~m ttxex'eafter is reasbnabl~;7~ but f°e~e¢1" that `rya''-cane '~li~ul;d~ h~`'~c-]~~,gated~'~to maintain a. debt .i~ he',~pac~~srs t~~ rsdu'~e nr e-l.i.~ninate~ it' '~a+~~nh`, ' x. -'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1. ,.. .~. i.. ;; ~ .,~ '' ,.. 't I .,~i ~ r .fiS .LFV\i~.7 V~Y'-~ trLiiy+'{7 ~ ~ e .. ` ,p • 1. { ~~ ~ ~„ ~ `Rtrbt ~~ r ~axpeIlte~r .: ~ E D~C-~- 7'-'~2 i"IQN 1S S~ ~'~ ~ 13 1 i ~~ Pr~i`. L ~ ~a.r~ r. r~,c • ~ - r ~ " BA~i~ll~ wtrnr_mw ~~C~.rrtiw.d I,TSEtARY (LAID ~790dC~ ~, I~ ~ ~T. ~TSAB~~ ~O$1P~."J.`~iT. bIUE~xC,AI. ~.aa~~+s~ ~ospftal~ ~4ic6 ~haae: 3i7~~~3-611 ~.ib~ary Voice 2l~anet 3f7/4~3-G/~~ ~3.ta~'az~+;'FAX l~ueber; 3'37'/74-576 ~~X t~gala#.x~e Mode], ~ S~~ .~'0~500Q Lya~.I.~.xug A;ddxes~~ ~h3,~-~i~q Ac'1c~reers. P,4. 80~ 7~Gt 9544 l3art~ard St~ee~C T,ei'ayetta, TN .47903 La~aystte, ~N 479U4 T1'AG~T~ ~Sk'fIS5T4Y~ Gb1rF.[{/~SAG~ ~~ac.w~ zo: ~'exear~ : i a.~.~~, Itty-.n ~. u~ `s ~ ~ fix.. ~ompan~-l7~net~.tution= c/o D~,vir~~.ox~lDegxes±tm~nt: t~o~ . ~} , RecaiWirig' ~Al~' Numbed '< ~:~•~ ~''~~~-•_,~ 1 ~-~'-~.:.. :,. ~' .. ~::°~ ; ~zc~t; ~e~son : Qua ~, S' . ~ ,.~ .. ~., ~c~apanylT~nst~.tutinns~,,rt..,. _...~ ~ .,. ,~.._, .. , =~. ~; °,~"r~. „ 3~f vi.s~.onll3epertment .: . ( ~ Piease $enc3 Con~xt't~n~tia~ Re~jr# " `~ ( ) Gall. Voice ghaie i~umb~z~'; '. ~' '`. ~$3~FCI3;S~ ~'A7CING REP~,Y ~ I Vance ~ax~, Not t~eacs~~ax~r . ',' ,. ,. . , (") ~T4~El~C Aeknc7+wledcji3 ~lecefp~C O~ t[ai.t~ ~as-~missi+~~t: ';' : s ;~', _ :.'~ Ta parsons :,:. , .. ~fil:. _ ._. ... I. ,.. ~'. ' r' M.. ..a. r, 7~Z. ~ ,. .~..., 'P'+~icv l~horle= _ . ,~ n,:.!_ ~ 3?:.: T~`u~nl~":.~~: ~.~~ ~..... . ".S'~ ,. `' i Ncmmbe~C 4~ Pag'es~ Heiny' Seats i 7LnC~.u~3~ng ..9~4~#. Ca~rc~ _,53xcet.; .. ~ .., ,. ., . ., ~ -. ,: .,~ ,, .. ,,.. ~ a. " .... , ,. , e _. ,,,. ..,. __. _ ._.__.. _ .... .. ~ ~.. ~ ,,,. D~Ite ~ ~ tea. ~.~-'1..,. i ~. ` ~ ~ . ~. I ~- '~ ~".~ -, :. ,a agar ~ ; , , ~~~ ,; T~aae 5~at a .. ... ... , ,.; r . :~ .. ; . • 3 ' ~~4d1~9Y~~ ~d..E,v m t • JOIiIY GALT 193 East Gore Creek Drive + Vaii, Colorado 81657 • 3031476-1212 December 4, 1992 Mr. Rondall V. Phillips Town of Vail South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mr. Phillips; Reference is made to then notice of a pu?alic hearing on special assessments for the Booth Creek Local. Improvement District. Please take note that any and all future notices regarding the property located at 3215 Katsos Ranch Road and owned by John Galt Mountaineering, Ltd, should be sent to 193 Gore Creek Drive Vail, Colorado Si657. • The documentation provided to property owners at the time the District was created set forth the obligations of the property owners in the then proposed District. Tt was on the basis of the information provided that the property owners evaluated the facts and made their determinations. At this time the Tawn of Vailis attempting to increase these obligations by in excess of ~~1,000 per property owner. This proposed increase arises from a number of factors including but not limited to the following: 1. Failure on. the part of the Town. of Vail to adequately monitor and inspect the progress of the work being performed. 2. 1egligence on the part of the Town of Vail to properly admin- ister the contract while permitting the contractor to circumvent the requirements of the contract. 3. Willfull misconduct oin the part of the Town of Vail to properly advise property owners in the District of contract negotiations which awarded additional monies to the contractor for his failure to properly adhere to the work specifications. • Property owners in the District are, therefore, being asl~ed to pay additional sums arising from the negligence of the Tawn of Vail. These proposed increases are in direct violation of the provisions of the recently enacted Amendment # 1. {The Bruce Amendment). The hearing scheduled for December 15, 1992 fails to comply with the provisions of the Amendment and violates the constitutional rights of the property owners in the District. Sincerely, ~o an J. Las n f r n alt Mountaineering, Ltd. 12-09-92 10.34ANf FROM C,ON~7g ~~ i , ~! ~' .~N, ~'~DEEYED ~~~ 9 X992 r U 3241 Katsas Ranch Raad Viii, CO i3i857 i~ecember ~, i992 Mr. Steve Triompson Tawn of Vaii , 78 South Frontage Ra~~ ~~~~ e ~ ... .._.. . Vaii, GC? 81857 °y ~ ! Dear hAr. rhampsESrt: ~. As ov~rnsrs and res[dents ire the ®ooth creek Local lrr'~}~rpvement District of the Tawn of Vail, Coiarada, we do hereby offer pretest to casts of the assessment far the tranch- berm complex far the mEtigatian of rock fail damage etiecativa January # 8, 1993. This assessment is not cc~nSistant witi~ the previc-us agreements discussed an May 2fi, . 1988 and ,lone 29, 1989 and is therefore unacceptabie to the L7istriot. We do net Intend tv compiy with any assessment ire excess of the iatest agreement effective dune 29,1989. Sincerely, i7augias L. w~ii Brandy MaLar~ghlin Wei! F02 12-09-92 10:34AM FROM I,ONGA~~ ~' • n L J ^ ~ ~ it k' h ; ~,. cerat~al by ~'' '' ; BARD SY$TLMS ~' sate ~~ ~: Time ' ~~~I~ '~ .~ "~ `~ IN+C~ .ON ~~V~R HET Number of ~"~tgee, ~' ; Inciudin~ this one ;~ ~~ ~: person: ~1t. ~~. ~,~~~ ... Company , , Address: `~ ~'°-"'~ _ ~"~' ,~ ~ ,~, . ~ ,. ~° Voioe Pht~ne: ~~ jn ~. II, ! { ~ ~,1, tit ~ 4 ;.: ~, ~ Person: ~d~ ~~..,. t ~'~ t. ~ , „ ,. ,,, . ~,.. Company: ~'~~~~. :~~ , ~, ,,..., t ., Current lnoetion: , ::.::......~ .:..:._.::...:. ., ~, ~ . _„ .. .. ,, ,`,~ `'` ~~ This Put'iia Fax Gen#er .Num~ar~.~ Q'~ ] .... . ~., ° ~ r ' ~i ,* • • • • ++ :~ .. -~ I,I~~ .. ~~ ;. ,,• j~ ~ ..... ....... .... i,' ~, I ) ~. I " .... .i ......... ~ ... .. ........ • V ,q. F ,,,.. . , ~.. i.. ~ k ,k TNANK_.Y~U FAR U5l1VC C~~IR SEF~VI~E ,k ~,. ...,. ..,~ ;: ns -.y, .,- ~ ~~ .. ~, .. .. ..,,.... ... ... .. . [,M1 ,. ~. .. ~~1 ~a .,1. ...- ~~ .. .,.,.., .. --, .,. ..~ ... 1 .. ~ - .... - ... ... ... .. ~E .... I .~ ~ ~ ~.~ , ,u:. PO1 ~~~'~ ~ ~ ~ Sybill R. Navas 3255 Katsos Ranch Road Vail, Colorado 81657 December 6, 1992 Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd. West Vail, CO 81657 Mr. Rondall V. Phillips Dear Ron, The proposed special assessment is based on an expenditure greatly in excess of what was approved in the summer of 1989, and we do not agree to pay the increased costs which the Town of Vail incurred without the approval of the residents of this district. We both plan to be present at the public hearing concerning this issue on December 15, 1992 and tv vocalize our objections at that time. which the residents of this district approved by vote. How is it possible that the Town of Vail can allow an expenditure so much in excess of that which was agreed to by the voters of this district? And, how is it possible that the Town of Vail can have allowed the trench-berm complex to have been completed before deciding that it had been improperly compacted; an oversight which required the complete reconstruction of the protect in the summer of 1991, two years after the project was initiated Jorge A. Navas and Sybill R. Navas; who reside at 3255 Katsos Ranch Road, (Block 1, Lot 9, Resub of Lat 7, Vail Village 12th Filing) hereby register the following objections to the proposed levying of special assessments against this property located ~n the Booth Creek Local Improvement District of the Town of Vail. The proposed special assessment of $18,737.97, based on a total cast of $507,187 ~s substantialky in excess of the $12,116 per unit based on a total of $335,000 proposed in June 1989, and which was the figure on which we voted to form the above mentioned local improvement district. A July 1989 budget indicates that this estimate was revised upward to a total cost of $386.766, with individual property owners each paying $14,106. We would tike to know how the final cost came to be 54% higher than the amount Sincerely, / ,,~' urge A. Navas ' ~~,~.~~, ~sybill R. Navas cc. Owners in the Booth Creek Local improvement District, Town of Vail, Colorado ~_ U w C~ i7~ cr, ~ ~~ ~ ~ C') r-r ~, o~~ o~~ ~ ~~ adz ~~~ ~~~ V ~ A3 r ~ ~J Ra -.-i .~ w 0 N ~ v -~ ~ ro ~ ~ rtl w ~: a ~ ~ ~ ~ a o H H 3 Q1 ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ O ~- ~ Qo w ~ o ~ t~ o ~ ~ .~, ~ ro r~ ~ r E~~'D ~~~ °' 9 ROBERT P =•AMMERTS 12 ~ PARK AV EN U E ~ OKLAHOMA CITY, pKLA.73102 December 7, 1992 Town Manager's office Town of Vail, Municipal Building 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81567 Attn: Randall V. Phillips, Tawn Manager Re: Nance of a Public Hearing of Special Assessments for the Booth Creek Local improvements District of the Tawn of Vail, Gd Tawn of Vail, I am the owner of lot 4, block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing, $aoth Greek Tawn of Vail, Colorado and in accordance with the Notice of Public Hearing I hereby object to the proposed assessment as set out in schedule one attached to the Notice of Public Hearing to be held Decembex 15, 3992 at 7:30 pm in Council Chambers, Vail, Ca. A Public Hearing on this subject was held July 18, 1989 at which time the total estimate of Cost was 5386,766, which cast was a maximum amount but in no event to be 35% greater than that amount. Zt is my understanding that the boulder berm was cpnstructed, that the construction was not properly monitored by the City engineer, that the berm was not compacted in accordance with Construction and engineering requirements and that consequently overruns have been experienced. Z abject to the increased assessment from the July 18, 1989 hearing and assessments. It appears that the assessments have been made in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner, not taking in account the size of the lots, the location of the fats or the lot's suseptability to boulder damage. Tt also appears that • certain lots in the 12th filing are not being assessed, being lots 1, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of block 2 and Tract C of black A. I cannot determine the location of "Black - tat parcel A", l object to the arbitrary and discriminatory method ^f assessment. i 1 December 7, 199 Page Twa Town of Vail • Lot 4 is a vacant lot. In recent years na boulders have fallen on this lot and it is highly unlikely that any boulders wi11 ever reach this lat. I object to the assessment to the lot in view of the unlikely event of boulder damage. I cannot be ~aresent at the meeting to be held December l~, but reserve unto myself all legal remedies that may be available to prohibit any excessive, arbitrary and/or discriminatory assessment that may be made by the Town of Vail as a result of said meeting. Respectfully submitted, ~,.. - ~ - ~ obert Lammer s RPL/pb • • ROBERT P LAMMERTS 12 5 PARK AV E M LJ E ~ OKLAHQMq GIT Y, ~KLA.73102 December 7,. 1992 Town Managers Office Town of Vail, Municipal Building 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO $1567 Attn: Randall V. Phillips, Town Manager Re: Native of a Public Hearing of Special Assessments for the Booth Creek Laval Improvements District of the Tawn of Vail, CO Town of Vail, • We are the owners of lot 3, block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing, Booth Creek Town of Vail, Colorado and in accordance with the Notice of Public Hearing, We hereby abject to the proposed assessment as set out in schedule one attached to the Notice of Public Hearing to be held December 15. 1932 at 7:30 pm in Council Chambers, Vail, Co. A Public Hearing an this subject was held July 18, 1989 at which time the fatal estimate of cost was $3$6,766, which cast was a maximum amount but in na event to be 15~ greater than that amount. It is our understanding that the boulder berm was constructed, that the construction was not properly monitored by the city engineers that the berm was oat compacted in accordance with construction and engineering requirements and that consequently overruns have been experienced. We object to the increased assessment Pram the July 18, 1983 hearing and assessments. It appears that the assessments have been made in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner, not taking in account the size of the lots, the location of the lots ar the lot's suseptability to boulder damage. Tt also appears that certain lots in the 12th filing are not being assessed, being lots 1, 9, 10, 11 and l2 of black 2 and Tract C of black A. We cannot determine the location of '°Black -- Lot Parcel A"• We abject to the arbitrary and discriminatory method of assessment. i , December 7, 1992 Page Two Town of Vail Lot 3 is a vacant lot. In recent years no boulders have fallen on this lot and it is highly unlikely that any boulders wi11 ever reach this lot. We object to the assessment to the lot in view of the unlikely event of boulder damage. We cannot be present at the meeting to be held December 15, but reserve unto ourselves all legal remedies that may be available to prohibit any excessive, arbitrary and/or discriminatory assessment that may be made by the Town of Vail as a result of said meeting. Respectfully submitted, George A. Clowes, Jr. Robert P. Lammerts I By: Robert Lammerts i RPL/pb h ~ ~f't~ ~~ • q -~,,, ~ ~-- --_ ~-- -~- ~--- ~~ ~~' ~ 'gr~~~ --- 'aA.~..,~1~ `~ .~ __---- T. ~~~- ~~ ~ _ _1 ' °~ -- ,k -~ '~ ~ ~ E1 ~ . ~ I ~- ~ ~ Y 1 ~ , `~ ~.,~,~ ~- , ~,~.. ~,,~-dam ~ ~,~.,~~~~ r ~} _----- ~ iG.'.:4r ~~~~ r 1~ ~ 4 --- L~ ~' ~~ ~ ~ ~ "' ~! ~~ - ~~ t ~~, r ~ ~ c ;~ ~-- I~ ~ -----~---~- --- I~ ~ y J~ ~ ~ j f l9~~~ ~- .~.-- r - ' ~ ~ - ~/~ --~----~--'f z ~ ~ ~ s f ! __ _.- - ~`' ~T ___ V __- -___ i ~ ~ f ~ . _--- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~- ~ ~- ~ -- _--~ ~. _~_- 1 ~--~ __~----" l ~- ~ Y-._ - '~ -~ I ~ ~'- iF'1 /. ~ • NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON A SPECIAL AND LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE BOOTH CREEK AREA OF VAIL, COLORADO A public hearing will be held on the creation of a local improvement district for the construction and installation of certain improvements to mitigate rockfall damage in the Booth Creek area of Vail, Colorado on Tuesday, June 6, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard} at the Council Chambers in the Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. The general nature of the improvements proposed include, but are not limited to, berms for the mitigation of rockfall damage. The total estimated cost of the improvements is $335,000. Of this amount, $20,000 will be provided by the~Town of Vail and $37,5,000 will be provided by assessments to be levied against specially benefited parcels. The general area to be assessed is Blocks 1 and 2 of Vail Village 12th filing, which is known as the Booth Creek area of the Town of Vail. The legal description of the parcels to be assessed appears on the attached schedule. A map showing the boundaries of the local improvement district is available for public inspection in the Town Manager's office. The Town proposes that the cost of the improvements to be assessed against the specially benefited parcels be apportioned among such parcels so that an equal amount of the total cost to be assessed will be assessed against each parcel of land within the proposed Booth Creek Local Improvement District. "'Parcel"' means any lot, tract, or parcel of land within the district which is separately identified on the property tax records of the Eagle County assessor's office. The estimated assessments to be levied against each parcel appear on the attached schedule. These are the maximum amounts that may be levied against the respective • ~ - ', ' r NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING ., ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 800TH CREEK LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO A public hearing will be held on the le in of s ecial vy g P assessments against property located in the Booth Creek Local Improvement District of the Town of Vail, Colorado on December 15, 1992, at 7:34 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard) at the Council Chambers in the Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. The general nature of the improvements constructed in the District include a trench-berm complex for the mitigation of rock fall damage. The total cost of the improvements is $507,1.87. Of this amount, $20,400 has been provided by the Town of Vail and $487,187 will be provided by assessments to be levied against specially benefitted properties. Objections to the proposed assessment must be logged in writing by the affected property owner with the Town Manager's office at the Municipal Building, in Vail, Colorado, no less than five (5} days prior to the date of the hearing before the Town Council. The objections must be framed so as to identify the specific issue{s} involved, the grounds therefor, and the witnesses who will present the evidence at the hearing and the general nature of their testimony. The writing must also include the name of the owner(s) and description of the affected property. Prior to the hearing, the Town Manager will forward to the Town Council the written objections which he has received. He may at the same time forward his comments in writing in respect to the project and the ;^ BOOTH CREEK ASS~/ESSMENT SC/HrEDULE 1 Owner and Address. Mara Grasis Bassow Box 5055 Vail, CO 81658 Rodnie W. Garton Lynne Erion 15x5 Lake Drive Loveland, CO 80538 • Roy A. Johnston 3135 Booth Falls Court Vail, CO 81657 Johann Mueller 910 Fairway Drive Vail, CO 81657 Brandess-Cadmus ~ Real Estate, Inc. 281 Bridge Street Vail, CO 81657 Amount of Parcel Owned ,Assessment Block 1, Lot 5, Vail Village $18,737.97 12th Filing Block 1, Lot 10, Unit B, $18,737.97 Resub of Lot 7, Vail Village 12th Filing Townhouse Lot 1, Parcel B, Vail Village $18,737.97 12th Duplex, Resub of Lot 2 Block 2, Lot 6, Vail Village $18,737.97 12th Filing Black 1, Lot 10, Unit A,Resub $18,737.97 of Lot 7, Vail Village 12th Filing George H. Clowes, Jr. ~ Block 2, Lot 3, Vail Village $18,737.97 Robert Lammerts 12th Filing c/o Lammerts 125 Park Avenue Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Crown Corr, Inc. `~ Block 1, Lot 11, Resub of Lot $18,737.97 Box 1750 7, Vail Village 12th Filing Highland, IN 46322 Robert S. Carpenter Block 1, Lot 2, Unit A, Marquez $18,737.97 2170 Tecumseh Park Lane Duplex, Vail Village 12th West Lafayette, IN 47906 Filing Daniel J. and Barbara v A. Feeney 3145A Booth Falls Vail, CO 81657 Block 2, Lot 2, Unit B, Vail $18,737.97 Village 12th Filing John W. Gray ,~z~//e~-l~ Block 1, Lot 6, Unit B, Vail $18,737.97 `Er Q . 3819 Janitell Road ~d Village 12th Filing Townhouse Colorado Springs, CO 80946 J. Edward Gund '~ Block 2, Lot 8, Vail Village $18,737.97 3100 Booth Falls Court 12th Filing Vail, CO 81657 ]~ ~ ~ 1 ~A , (w~/j" r * i~rJ 7, /49? ~~~L~1V~®~ ~ ~ ~ ® ~ ~~~ '%a;D L°a ~~ • • ~Q%~J ~l~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~. a~ z tee~~, ~~~~ - 'pbwe lJOd~G,e~~~~[e~~ at fZc lU~u-~c~- ..~.,~~ ~" tt. lGma.wn~ Vic, ~~~,~ D~ir~ ~ zee ~~t:~ , Qmia.u~n~ ~C~~~.e~ C~- 'l~, 77.97 ~~.~ ,P,~ ~~e~ l x~~vrn~~- u C~n~e ~ /9d~' ~ ~ i`~~ Y~'l~fc~t~ 7,ll~lo tz a.~~ '~; ~ Q, ~ t~~`~f, G~l• 97 1A' ~e-u~-~ CC1~1 ~ g~y~ ~~~~~ C ~ ~, ~ .. .... ........... _.. . ,~ ~ ~ ~ ;~ i= i'i ihl • i C ~,,,u,~ ~ ~..__ _ ~,, CU a 0 M K U ° W -~._, o Ua o M o n ~ N VJ ~0 ao 0 d 0 0 V 0 D 0 ~o x 0 w a~ 12!9192 ,1 Ron Phillips Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd. W. Vail, CO 81 fi57 Steve Thompson Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd. W. Vail, CO 81657 a~c~iv~~ ~ ~ ~ a Re: Notice of a Public Hearing for the Booth Creek Improvement District Ron and Steve: In November of 1989, I purchased my home that I had been previously renting. The purchase was from a partnership dba Margem -III. I was informed by Margem III that an assessment of $12,000 woukd be made upon property owners in the vicinity due to the rockfall mitigation. It was further negotiated that I would pay this assessmen#. imagine my surprise when, three years later, I receive a notice of assessment for just under $19,000. As best as I can figure out ,not having been a direct party to ear#y notices and forming of a district, we trusted the Town of Vaik to act as our agent and the town blew the budget. The increase sure makes me pucker, fiQw ~bo~-ycQu? ! am not a happy camper. Sincerely; Duane L `' ~ ,r J ~`~~r 3230 Katsos Ranch Road Vail, CO 83.657 December 3, 1992 Mr. Steve Thompson Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 bear Mr. Thompson: In response to the notice of a public hearing on the levying of special assessments for the Booth Creek Local Tmprovement District of the the Town of Vail, Colorado, we do hereby offer protest to the suggested costs listed. We have agreed to a Special Development District as per previous meetings and the established budgets of May 26, 1989 and June 29, 1989. The referenced assessment notice of January 18, 1993 is not consistent with any previous agreements, meetings, notices or budgets and therefore not an acceptable cost far the .District as previously approved. We do not understand when, why or haw the Town of Vail could expend money in excess of the agreed to and. approved costs. We have not agreed to or approved any costs after the June 29, 7.989 budget and listed assessment and do not now. agree to the additional, unapproved costs. SiryG~er~.y ...~~~ . Story amela V. Story '~ cc. Owners in the Booth Creek Local Tmprovement District, Town of Vazl, Colorado " Uai1 ~/[ountain Scht'ool r December 10, 1992 HAND DELIVERED Rondall V. Phillips Town Manager Town of Vail Vail, Colorado Re: Protest of Special Assessment Dear Mr. Phillips: Vail Mountain School {"VMS"), as the record and beneficial owner of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing, herein submits its objections to the proposed special assessment against property located in the Booth Creek Local Improvement District of the Town of Vail. OBJECTIONS 1. The increased special assessment is limited to 516.221.90,. By notice on or before July 18, 1989, the TOV notified VMS of a proposed special assessment of $14,106 against its property (referenced above) predicated on a total cost of $386,766 for the construction of a "Rock Fall Berm". The notice further states that the Special Assessment represents ". the maximum amounts that may be levied against the respective parcels, unless (1) actual construction costs exceed estimated construction costs, in which case the assessments may be increased by not more than 15 percent; . ." The notice recently received by VMS references a public hearing to be held December 15, 1992 and states "[t]he total cost of the improvements is $507,187" and levies a special assessment against VMS of 18,737.97, an amount substantially in excess of the 15~ limitation. 2. The Town of Vail is solely responsible for the increase. The TOV has characterized the excess as "construction costs". The Objector believes the excess. cost may emanate from the Contractor's failure to adhere to compaction standards established by the TOV and the inability of the TOV to force compliance. When the resultant litigation was "settled", the TOV undertook the additional financial obligation to cause the berm to be compacted or re-compacted as originally specified. At the public meetings in 1989, staff members of the TOV made numerous representations 3160 KATSOS RANCH ROAD ~ VAIL, COLORADO 81657 ~ (303) 476-3850 ~~ Rondall V. Phillips December 10, 1,992 Page Two re ardin the abilit of the Contractor and construction quality) g g Y ~ and cost controls to be implemented by the TOV. It was these representations that caused VM3 to accede to the TOV's request and join the special Improvement District even though the TOV had previously forced VMS to spend in excess of $90,000 to provide the same protections afforded by the rock fall berm. Assuming the foregoing facts to be accurate, property owners should not be responsible for any excess as these costs do not reasonably fall in the category of ". additional elements of costs of a nature generally not foreseen ." Very trul yo s ~. Fre rick S Otto Treasurer FSO/rgl Mr. Steve Thom son p Town of Vail. 75 South Frontage Read Vaii, CO 81657 Dear Mr. Thompson, December 9, 1992 T wish to express my objection to the manner in which this assessment is to be levied against the property owners in the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. I am including what T believe to be a more equitable and comprehensive formula. for cast sharing. I have used the dollar amounts as set Earth in Ordinance No. 31 Series of 1992 but I do not agree that they are apprapri.ate. Based upon conversations with other property owners in the district, since I was not involved in any of the original discussions, it seems clear that the town has exceeded the figure which was agreed to in the 1989 meetings. Sincerely, -1 Patrick ~. Dauphin is .. Booth Creek Local Improvement District Fn order to create an equitable cost sharing of the expenses associated with this district, I suggest the fallowing categories of dwellings and assignment of shares. CATEGORY 1 Vacant Lot One share to be paid by January 18, 1993. No additional share is due if a single family residence is built. One additional share is due if second unit is built prior to January 18, 2003. LOTS IN CATEGORY 1 Lot 11, Black 1 Crown Corr Tnc. Lot 3, Block 2 Clowes{Lammerts Lot 4, Block 2 Lammerts CATEGORY 2 Single Family Residence One share to be paid by January 18, 1993. One additional share is due if a second unit is built or existing building is divided and said separately prior to January 18, 20Q3 LOTS IN CATEGORY 2 Lot 1, Black 1 Stiemle Lat 3, Black 1 Story Lat 4, Block 1 Hallenbeck Lot 5, Black 1 Bossow Lot 9, Block 1 Navas Lot 7, Black 2 Dauphinais Lot 8, Block 2 Lund CATEGORY 3 Duplex Residence CJ One share to be paid by each of the two units by January 18, 1993. A total of two shares per Int. LOTS IN CATEGORY 3 Lot 2, Block 1 Lat 6, Black 1 Lot $, Block 1 Lot 1O, Black 1 Lot 1, Block 2 Lot 2, Black 2 Lat 5, Block 2 Lat 6, Block 2 Gwathmey/Carpenter McLaughlin/Gray Galt/Piper Branders-Cadmus/carton Leavitt/Johnston Feeney/Lied Garton/carton Mueller/Mueller CATEGORY 4 Vail Mountain School, Lot 12, Block 2 One share to be paid by January 18, 1993. Any future Residential Development will be charged at one share per unit built prior to January 1$, 2003. ~~ ~ + ~ Using the categories shown above, there are presently twenty seven assignable shares, When the first additional share is due, the dollar amount will be arrived at by dividing the original cost, $ 4$7,187.00, by twenty eight shares, $ 17,399,53. This amount will be charged f'ar the twenty eighth share and refunded to the twenty seven current shareholders in equal payments of $ 644.42 per share. When the second additional share is due, the dollar amount will be arrived at by dividing the original cost, $ 487,187.00, by twenty nine shares, $ 16,7}9.55, This amount will be charged for the twenty ninth share and refunded to the twenty eight current shareholders in equal payments of $ 599.98 per share. And sa on,,, These funds will be collected from the new shareholder by the Town of Vail upon issuance of a building perma.t fiat the additional unit or upon transfer of same portion of an existing unit. The additiaxzal share must be paid for in full at this time. These funds would then be distributed by a title company at the expense of the new shareholder. Initial payments may be paid in fu11 ar amortized aver ten years as indicated in the ordinance. If at anytime in the future this berm a.s extended to protect additional properties in the neighborhood, appropriate compensation will be paid to alb shareholder in this district. 1 R~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ 19 • December 10, 1992 (Hand Delivered) Edward M. and Katherine P. Gwathmey 3226 Katsos Ranch Raad Vail CO 81657 Re: Special Assessment for the Booth Creek Local Improvement District Block 1, Lot 2 Unit B Marquez Duplex Concerning the assessment of $1$,737.97 for our property, we are not opposed to an assessment and feel that the mitigator has merit. We object to the increase of $4700 aver the last adjusted budget figure that we were told. The fact that the compaction was not acceptable to the Engineers and that the job was not completed in a timely fashion was the responsibility of the town and we should not have to pay for it. T feel that we had a contract with the town for the job to be $14,000. So Miss Bitty and T object in part. I also feel that the questions raised by Pat Dauphinais regarding the distribution, especially the Mueller duplex should b discussed. ED GUND l4~CEfVED ~~C 1 ~ 192 iL ~ Mr. Rondall V Phillips Town of Vail Vail, CO 81657 Dear Ran: ~ want to abject the berm, recently constructed7does n~~completely protect Block 2, Lot 8 Vail Village 12th Filing. This was brought to the attention of Stan Berryman during construction. There was a small addition made, but not to provide full protection. Alsa, no mention has been made when the restriction that has been applied to this area will be removed. 3100 Booth Falls Court Vail, Colorado 81657 303-476-1985 ED GllND 3100 Boath Falls Court Vail, Colorado 81657 ,~,, Mr. Rondall V. Phillips Town of Vail Vail f~ ~'L~~lu~D ~~~ ~ ~ 1992 December 9, 1992 Mr. Rondall V. Phillips Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd. West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mr. Phillips, • Daniel J. Feeney and Barbara A. Feeney who reside at 3145-A Booth Falls Court (Vail Village Fit 12, Block 2, Lot 2, Unit B) object to the levying of special assessments against this property located in the Booth Creek Local Improvement District within the Town of Vail. The proposed special assessment of $18,737.97 is substantially more than tha $12,11b assessment proposed in June 1989 which was agreed upon. A July number indicates an increase to $14,106 but never more than this was approved. T would like to know how the increase can be justified, and the reasoning behind the increase in cast. Was there an oversight in supervising and evaluating the project? Lde do not agree to pay this increase in cost without your seeking approval from the residents o.£ this district. S' cerely • Daniel .. ~ ~ -. a~ Barbara A. Feeney • Mike Cindy Steimle 3220 Katsos Ranch Road Vail CO $1657 Mr. Ron Phillips Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd West Vail CO 81657 Dece~tber 11 1992 Dear Mr Phillips In response to the $18,737.97 assessment for the Booth Cheek rock fall mitigation, we do file protest to the suggested costs. The costs are not in accordance with the previously established budgets of $12,116 and finally $14106. We do not feel responsible for any incured interest on the bond as a result of delays due to the General Contractor or mismanagement by the town of Vail or or for any reason without notice or explanation. Sincerely, Michael Steimle "~~.I~ I ~,, Cynthia Steimle., %~~ l:~ ~~ ., ~F~~lv~®~'~ r ~ • ~ ~„~ ~ ~~)t tr <, a~~~-k i December 9, 1.992 PROTEST TOWN OF VATL, COLORADO BOOTH CREEK LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DTSTRTCT Property Owners: Rodnie Garton PO Box 1182 Vail, CO 81568 Lynne Erion 1545 Lake Dr. Loveland, CO 80538 Legal Description: Block 1, Lot 10, Unit B, Resub of Lot 7, Vail Village 12th Filing Townhouse We the affected property owners, do hereby protest the proposed assessment amount of $18,737.97. This amount by far exceeds the proposed assessment of $12,116.00, proposed in 1989. Rodnie Garton being our legal witness when we purchased said property in October of 199].. Lynne Erian ~ ~~ J Rodnie Garton ~~ ~~ ~,.,~..~ .. 221 South Route 41 Schererville, IH 46375 December 14, 1992 Mr. Steve Thompson Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mr. Thompson: Consider this letter a formal protest on the levying of special assessments far the Baath Creek Local Improvement District of the Town of Vail, Colorado. The assessment notice of January 18, 1993 is not consistent with prior meetings ar budgets and therefore not acceptable for the District. Were the additional costs due to the fact the contractor did not follow the original specifications? Why did the Town of Vail spend the additional monies? ly- ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ,duos p J. Pellar for awn Corr, Inc. cc: Owners of Hloak 1, Lot il, Resubdivision of Lot 7, Vail, Village 12th Filing JJI'/sw T L ~, i ~~ ? ~ ~~'~ z ~~~ ~ ~y ~~ b i i ~ ~V~~; `Z~^ T £ ~ ~ iN ~~ ~ j ~ ~ ~. f i 4 ~ ~~ $~ ~ ~ ~ 7 im ~ x ~1 y ~~~ - , ~ ~ ~ ~ _ 1 ~ s` ' 1 ~(; H 4Y~•.1. ' s~ ~~. ~ a ~~ l,~ ~~~", ~ ti :' F ; _) ll .U U ~ .Z i pp 6 .:1'.O E ~ ~~ +_ z i . ; ' ~ I,u W . ' ~ a Z i ' ~ s5 ~ ~~ . --. ~ ~' r 3 ~ : i4 a [t hq ;~ ~ p ~~ ~w{~ ~ ~a . ~ ~ U ~ ~~--yy ..+ ~ Z f '~ ~, r• Q ~~ YYY --- '~ ~ ` r ~~ W , ~ ~ - ~~ ~ b ~ ,~ ~ ; , ~ ~ ~' ~ E - _- - ~- p .. 1 '~ ~ ~~ ,J ~ °.U ll 'ra N ry~ i7 ` dpi ~ ~U ~ E ~ ~ v ll ~ N .~ ~{{Er ~! `a ;~ m. •~ LL Y :N jCy ?o.~F ~ 4'D .oi a N z ~ I $yy. ~1 Y~ E :~~ a w ,~ ~ ~ ~~ ~; ! m v ~Xa ~ ~~ ~ ~ -... Stu ,~ ~ ~ x ~ S ~ ~ ¢ Op v m U ~ ~ ~ ¢ $ a ~ _ ~F W ~ X U O n ;~ a ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^^ ~ ~~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~~~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ UQ ~ ~ ~f~i 4 ~ ~' 4b° ~'' O h~. i Y~ x ci ~ ^ ~^ ^~~^ 4 Q N ~ n g 2 ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~_~ ~ ~ us ~ ~ ~'~ ~ a~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ _~~ ~~ x ~ ro ti~~~ !.~ 44 ~ }w~ ~ G~q ~i y'~ W ' O~ ~~ ~. U