Public Comment 03-27-2018 Traer Creek27 March 2018
Avon Town Council.
RE: Traer Creek, Parcel F, Avon, CO
Dear Avon Town Council members,
As a 45 year residential mortgage banker in the Vail Valley with a 13 year Avon located business, I
follow the town, its development and your work on our behalf. Thank you for your continued efforts.
Pursuant to Sunday's Vail Daily article and virtually every discussion I have every workday. There is a
shortage of affordable housing in both the rental and purchase marketplaces. As it relates to Traer
Creek's proposal before you tomorrow, I am in favor of more residential—especially apartments —as
they are proposing on Tract F.
Housing here is essential and Traer Creek's proposal seems to have no significant impact on adjoining
neighbors. Requiring more commercial development, in my mind, is unnecessary as Avon, as we see,
has loads of empty commercial space. My family and myself own both residential and office space in
Avon and would love to see more residents than empty commercial space. Let's rather bring more
residents and consumers to Town!
Please support the Traer Creek Tract F proposal.
Many thanks.
Sincerely,
Jimmy Brenner
President
Blue Sky Mortgage, LLC
100 West Beaver Creek Blvd. Suite 121 Avon, CO 81620
P.O. Box 1040 Vail, CO 81658
Phone 970/476.0602 Fax 970/251.7113
www.Blue-Sky-Mortgage.com
w
Commercial Heal Estate Services, Worldwide.
May 8, 2018
Avon Town Council
RE: Traer Creek, Area F
Dear Avon Council Members,
tel 970 476 6415
fax 888 230 9544
www.naimountain.com
245 Chapel Place, Suite C201
PO Box 8690
Avon CO 81620
Unfortunately, I am unable to attend tonight's meeting. This letter is to reiterate the points I made at the April
100' meeting. As a commercial real estate broker who has handled approximately $7Om worth of leasing and sales
transactions in the town of Avon over the last five years, I believe any commercial development in the mid -valley
is unnecessary at this time, and for the foreseeable future.
There is currently approximately 120,000 square feet of vacancy in the mid -valley. The clear majority of that is
within Avon, and those are spaces ranging in size from 500 to 20,000 square feet. The town core, east, and west
areas all contain high vacancy rates. The depth to this market is very thin by normal standards, with perhaps one
or two prospects at any one time looking for space. Adding additional square footage will likely sit vacant or
cannibalize the existing space that we have.
We need to bring more residents to Avon, and the way to do that is with increased residential density. I believe
the increased residential will help fill the existing vacancies. Requiring unviable commercial development will
provide no economic benefit to the town and will likely stall or prohibit much needed residential development.
When more residential has been developed in the Village and other areas of Avon, then it would probably make
most sense for valley floor commercial to be built on planning Area A next to Chapel Square, and closest to the
existing core. Please support the Traer Creek Area F proposal.
Best Regards,
Erich Schmidt
NAI Mountain Commercial - Managing Broker
Build on the power of our network JM Over 350 offices worldwide. www.naiglobal.com
Preston Neill
From:
Tamra <underwoodavon@comcast.net>
Sent:
Tuesday, March 27, 2018 12:02 PM
To:
Avon Council Web
Subject:
Fwd: The Traer Creek Amendment
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
From: "Tamra" <underwoodavon@comcast.net>
To: dhoppe@avon.org, towncouncil@avon.org
Cc: "Matt Pielsticker" <mpielsticker@avon.org>, "Preston Neill" <pneill@avon.org>,
dmcwilliams@avon.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 11:59:50 AM
Subject: The Traer Creek Amendment
Dear Town Council,
Without waiving my right to proper Notice of this matter (see #1 below), I am writing you in opposition
of the proposed Traer Creek PUD amendment.
1) Violation of due process — I own property within 300' of Lot 1 Traer Creek. I was Notified by mail of
the October 17, 2017 Planning & Zoning hearing, and spoke out against the application at that
time. However, I was never Notified of the January 2018 P&Z hearings for this re-application; this
failure makes the process flawed as it violated my due process rights. Please refer to the email I sent
your Planning Dept. on Jan. 16, 2018 when I learned, second hand, about P&Z's hearing having
occurred without Notice to me (see page 177/637 of your e -packet). About ten days ago I received a
written Notice of tonight's March 27, 2018 Town Council meeting however such Notice does not cure
the failure to Notice me of the P&Z hearings.
2) Town's Development Code Finding's cannot be made — Do not forget: the Traer Creek water tank
still sits abandoned, un -usable and in complete disrepair, waste and nuisance - much to the burden of
our whole community and its hydrology system! This is an open wound that Traer Creek has
decided drag through the court (as it their method) instead of simply fixing the promised infrastructure
per the requirements of the water and sanitation district. What an embarrassment! The soils, tank
pad and tank failed Memorial Day weekend 2015, and yet this developer has refused to abide by its
warranty to ERWSD and make its subcontractors fix the tank. Without a usable tank, there is no way
your council can make Finding No. 4 in accordance with your development code.
The developer also attempts to gloss over your other required Findings by saying that this
amendment for Parcel F is just a tiny part of the behemoth PUD and therefore you need not hold
strictly to your code. This is incorrect. Read your criteria closely and you'll see that your Findings
cannot be found.
3) On Merits - While I can appreciate that 58' -height is less than 66' -height, nothing on Parcel F should
be higher than 48'. Pay attention to your Comprehensive Plan (also Finding No. 1 under your code)
and you'll recognize that 58' -heights out on Parcel F in the Village of Avon is not in accordance with
your Built Form goals and policies set forth in your Comp Plan. In addition, allowing 58' here could
serve as a slippery slope for future councils to allow increased heights throughout the Village at Avon;
remember that parcels surrounding Parcel F have a max. height of 48' and 35'.
In addition, this PUD is being treated like it's a developer's grab-bag of density amongst 2,400
dwelling units; what an absurd notion! Remember that Traer Creek has never submitted a master
development plan and so we are left with this ad hoc approach which will result in poor development.
Also, the developer tries to justify increased density by saying that Parcel F is proximate to
transportation routes; if it is proximate to the town and county bus that is only because the Town and
the County are paying for the transportation. Don't forget that Traer Creek was supposed to pay for
bus service to and through its PUD.
These comments in opposition of Traer Creek's application are submitted without waiver of my right
to proper Notice of this amendment.
Sincerely,
Tainra Nottingham Underwood
Resident
Avon, Colorado
Preston Neill
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Dear Avon Town Council,
Anne Barnett <hamlet@vail.net>
Monday, March 26, 2018 3:15 PM
Avon Council Web
Traer Creek
Follow up
Flagged
As a board member for the Salvation Army Vail Valley, we would like to speak on behalf of the project on Tract F.
Traer Creek principals have been our landlords since May 2011. In our role at Salvation Army Vail, we see that housing,
particularly apartment housing, is a dire need right now. We have witnessed huge increases in requests for assistance
with rent and continue to serve clients living in their cars and camping in the woods due to the lack of affordable
housing.
We thank Traer Creek for providing us land for our efforts, for free and for assisting us in benefiting the many
underserved in the community.
Sincerely,
Anne Barnett
Salvation Army Service Extension Committee Chair
Sent from my iPad
April 6,2018
DearAvon Time Council members,
avonmPirtk-f
I an) Wrifirig as a long time local, indepetulew builder and proponent ofhI&vYiIalproperty
rights
I am infill support of Traer Creeksproposedproject on Tract F.
Iklow the Council and p&zfillty, consider "public benefits" as they dirt when Traer Creek
front-end loaded numerous ones stab as emp/qvre housing and commnity it1frastructurt,
The proposal to shift densis vioPlanning Area Fis apositive move and Iroue whv,
* In general, the Town needs iafoffow development treads and allow, more dense
developments to occur.
* III MY View, the changes have no impacts to triv rpt the adjoining neighbors,
* There is absolutely no need for more commercial space in Avon, We havepleni�v qf
vacancies azul need wality to activate the commercial we do have. 07ty not bring more
con trimers and residents to the Toun and allow for residential space that is "allwhie and
bikeable to and through Town?
Thank you for ,kvw work- on behat(qfAvon and our comnizinity
zr
TOnfyV langahs
m4jomes@,romra.#Aet
Preston Neill
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Town Council:
Tamra <underwoodavon@comcast.net>
Tuesday, April 10, 2018 12:04 PM
Avon Council Web
Preston Neill; Virginia Egger
Re: The Traer Creek Amendment
I'm not sure you understand the point I've been trying to make: your Development Code is being
violated by applicant Traer Creek -RP LLC. The argument about violation of due process is not
just about me - its about everyone who should have been told about the January
2018 Planning & Zoning Commission hearings.
I never received the Notice of Public Hearings attached at a -page 89/570 of your packet. I notified
the town of this failure of sufficient notice under the Development Code back at 12:02AM on
1/16/2018. If I did not (and the town was told of that fact), then it is completely reasonable for the
town to ask "who else did not receive the notice"? The town has been on notice of the developer's
faulty formal written notice since 12:02AM on 1/16/2018.... and now that very email by which I
informed the town of an error is being construed as "constructive notice" under Section
7.16.020(d)(4)? That's ridiculous.
The town council needs to look into this. What proof does the town have that the developer complied
with Section 7.16.020(d)? Who sent the notice? Perhaps the mailing was only partly faulty and it
was only those who spoke against the application in October 2017 who where not mailed notification
in January 2018? The town council needs to look into this.
To be clear: I have never received a written notice (let alone 11 days in advance as required by
Section 7.16.020(d)(2)) of any of Planning & Zoning's hearing of the revised application of Traer
Creek -RP LLC and I have never appeared at any 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission hearing about
the revised application of Traer Creek -RP LLC. Please investigate who did and did not receive
proper notice under your code. According to Section 7.16.020(d)(4) "In all cases, however, the
requirements for the timing of the notice and for specifying the time, date and place of a hearing shall
be strictly construed."
Without waiving my right to proper notice I provide the town council with the following input:
58' -heights on Parcel F in the Village of Avon is not in accordance with the Comprehensive
Plan Built Form goals and policies; you cannot make Finding No. 1 required under the Avon
Development Code.
The Traer Creek water tank still sits abandoned, un -usable and in complete disrepair, waste
and nuisance - much to the burden of our whole community and its hydrology system. Without
a usable tank, there is no way your council can make Finding No. 4 in accordance with your
development code.
The developer also attempts to gloss over your other required Findings by saying that this
amendment for Parcel F is just a tiny part of the behemoth PUD and therefore you need not
hold strictly to your code. This is incorrect; read your criteria closely and you'll see that your
Findings cannot be found.
The PUD is being treated like it's a developer's grab-bag of density amongst 2,400 dwelling
units. Remember that because Traer Creek has never submitted a master development plan,
the town is left with this ad hoc approach which will result in poor development.
The developer tries to justify increased density by saying that Parcel F is proximate to
transportation routes; if it is proximate to the town and county bus that is only because the
Town and the County are paying for the transportation. Don't forget that Traer Creek was
supposed to pay for bus service to and through its PUD.
Very truly yours,
Tamra Underwood
From: "Tamra" <underwoodavon@comcast.net>
To: dhoppe@avon.org, towncouncil@avon.org
Cc: "Matt Pielsticker" <mpielsticker@avon.org>, "Preston Neill" <pneill@avon.org>,
dmcwilliams@avon.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 11:59:50 AM
Subject: The Traer Creek Amendment
Dear Town Council,
Without waiving my right to proper Notice of this matter (see #1 below), I am writing you in opposition
of the proposed Traer Creek PUD amendment.
1) Violation of due process — I own property within 300' of Lot 1 Traer Creek. I was Notified by mail of
the October 17, 2017 Planning & Zoning hearing, and spoke out against the application at that
time. However I was never Notified of the January 2018 P&Z hearings for this re-application; this
failure makes the process flawed as it violated my due process rights. Please refer to the email I sent
your Planning Dept. on Jan. 16, 2018 when I learned, second hand, about P&Z's hearing having
occurred without Notice to me (see page 177/637 of your e -packet). About ten days ago I received a
written Notice of tonight's March 27, 2018 Town Council meeting however such Notice does not cure
the failure to Notice me of the P&Z hearings.
2) Town's Development Code Finding's cannot be made — Do not forget: the Traer Creek water tank
still sits abandoned, un -usable and in complete disrepair, waste and nuisance - much to the burden of
our whole community and its hydrology system! This is an open wound that Traer Creek has
decided drag through the court (as it their method) instead of simply fixing the promised infrastructure
per the requirements of the water and sanitation district. What an embarrassment! The soils, tank
pad and tank failed Memorial Day weekend 2015, and yet this developer has refused to abide by its
warranty to ERWSD and make its subcontractors fix the tank. Without a usable tank, there is no way
your council can make Finding No. 4 in accordance with your development code.
The developer also attempts to gloss over your other required Findings by saying that this
amendment for Parcel F is just a tiny part of the behemoth PUD and therefore you need not hold
strictly to your code. This is incorrect. Read your criteria closely and you'll see that your Findings
cannot be found.
3) On Merits - While I can appreciate that 58' -height is less than 66 -height, nothing on Parcel F should
be higher than 48'. Pay attention to your Comprehensive Plan (also Finding No. 1 under your code)
and you'll recognize that 58' -heights out on Parcel F in the Village of Avon is not in accordance with
your Built Form goals and policies set forth in your Comp Plan. In addition, allowing 58' here could
serve as a slippery slope for future councils to allow increased heights throughout the Village at Avon;
remember that parcels surrounding Parcel F have a max. height of 48' and 35'.
In addition, this PUD is being treated like it's a developer's grab-bag of density amongst 2,400
dwelling units; what an absurd notion! Remember that Traer Creek has never submitted a master
development plan and so we are left with this ad hoc approach which will result in poor development.
Also, the developer tries to justify increased density by saying that Parcel F is proximate to
transportation routes; if it is proximate to the town and county bus that is only because the Town and
the County are paying for the transportation. Don't forget that Traer Creek was supposed to pay for
bus service to and through its PUD.
These comments in opposition of Traer Creek's application are submitted without waiver of my right
to proper Notice of this amendment.
Sincerely,
Tamra Nottingham Underwood
Resident
Avon, Colorado