TC Minutes 07-10-19900 0
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
HELD JULY 10, 1990 - 7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Avon Town Council of the Town of Avon,
Colorado was held in the Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road,
Avon, Colorado, in the Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Allan Nottingham at 7:35 p.m.
A roll call was taken with David, Garton, Albert Reynolds, Mike
Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Jerry Davis present. Also
present were Town Attorney John Dunn, Town Manager Bill James, Director
of Engineering Norm Wood, Director of Municipal Services Larry Brooks,
Director of Community Development Rick Pylman, Planning Jim Curnutte,
Fire Chief Charlie Moore, Police Chief Art Dalton, Town Clerk Patricia
J. Doyle, as well as members of the press and public.
The Mayor called for Citizen Input.
Bruce Kendall, President of the Avon/Beaver Creek Resort Association
cancelled from the agenda.
There being no one wishing to be heard, the Mayor closed that portion
of the agenda.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 90-6, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
CONCERNING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT KNOWN AND IDENTIFIED AS THE
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1990-1,
CREATING SAID DISTRICT, PAT.IFYING ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN; FINDING
SATISFACTORY THE ESTIMATE OF COST, FULL AND DETAILED PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE MAP AND ASSESSMENT PLAT, ALL HERETOFORE PRESENTED
IN CONNECTION WITH THE DISTRICT; PRESCRIBING THE EXTENT OF THE DISTRICT;
THE KIND AND LOCATION OF THE UTILITY LINE IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED, THE
AMOUNT OF PROPORTION OF THE TOTAL COST TO BE DEFRAYED BY ASSESSMENTS,
AND THE METHOD OF LEVYING ASSESSMENTS, AND THE NUMBER OF INSTALLMENTS
AND THE TIMES IN WHICH THE COSTS ASSESSED WILL BE PAYABLE; ORDERING
SUCH IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACT; AND PRESCRIBING
DETAILS IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH MATTERS.
Mr. James stated that the public hearing was continued on the Provisional
Order which created a Special Improvement District.in the Wildridge
Subdivision for the purpose of installing natural gas and cable to that
area. He stated that there were new numbers which would be reviewed
with the public.
0 0
Mr. James introduced Dee Wisor, Bond Counsel with Sherman & Howard.
Mr. Wisor proceeded to review Ordinance No. 90-6,,90-10 and 90-11, with
the Council. He stated that Ordinance No. 90-6 created the Improvement
District. He stated this ordinance now excluded the developed properties
from the District, but now only the properties which did not have a
structure would be included at this time.
He stated that Ordinance No. 90-11, Series of 1990, created a Town Utility
Capital Facilities Fee, which would be imposed only upon the developed
property within the Wildridge Subdivision: That fee would be payable
when, and if, anyone of those properties decided to connect into either
the natural gas line or the cable system. He stated the fee would be
the dollar amount that would be assessed against the property if it
were in the District today, plus interest on that dollar-amount accruing
from the date that they complete the assessments which would be at the
end of August, at the Bond Rate. He stated that the Town was fronting
the costs of construction for those properties now, and when any of
those properties take advantage of the utilities, they would pay the
Town back for those costs. They also included in the ordinance, a
mechanism so that those properties could pay by installments for the
period that the bonds were outstanding. He stated that a property that
was in the District today, could pay back the costs in fifteen install
tents. If a developer decided to tap'_into the line in five years, the
property owner would then have ten years to pay back the costs.
Ordinance No. 90-10 was a technical amendment to the Town's Administrative
convenience."--.It-was decided to add a provision indicating a request that
the County Treasurer collect these fees, in conjunction with the taxes.
Mr. Wisor reviewed the assessments of units 1,2 and 3 of Wildridge.
Stan Bernstein approached the Council. He reviewed some of the
numbers in regard to the Bond Underwriters.
Discussion followed.
The Mayor called for a motion on Ordinance No. 90-6 so as to bring the
ordinance to the floor.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of Ordinance No. 90-6, Series of
1990 on second reading. The motion was seconded by Councilman Reynolds.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing.
Dave Yoder, homeowner of Wildridge approached'the Council. He stated
that at the last meeting he offered to-work with any of the existing
property owners giving them an idea of how they could,convert'to gas
heat. At this time, no one has contacted him. He stated that possibly
this would indicate.no concern, or'they,felt there would a charge for
this service. He stated it was only to help them realize it would not
be that expensive to convert to gas heat.
-2-
s ~
Jack Hunn resident of Wildridge approached the Council. He commended the
Council for being creative in finding a way to help the existing
property owners.
David Lach stated that he was in favor of the natural gas lines
but, was not-in favor of Cable. Cable was a private enterprise and,
he felt they could fund $125,000 to receive 820 new customers.'
Tom Ptach commended the Council on the creative need by which they
had resolved the issue of helping the existing property owners:
Bill Jones was in the process of buying a lot in Wildridge. He was
in favor of the natural gas but not in favor of the Cable Television.
He also commended the Council for their concern of the property owners
in that area.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the Mayor closed the
public hearing and entertained a roll call.-
Those Councilmembers voting aye were-David Garton,,Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall And Jerry Davis. There were
no-nay votes. The motion was unanimously carried.
First reading of Ordinance No. 90-11, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A UTILITY CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE;
AND PRESCRIBING DETAILS IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH MATTERS.
Councilwoman_McRbry moved approval of Ordinance No. 90-11, Series of
1990 on first reading. The motion was seconded by Councilman Reynolds.
The Mayor called for a roll call.
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Jerry Davis. There were
no nay votes. The motion was unanimously carried.
First reading of Ordinance No. 90-10, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
FOR THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, AMENDING CHAPTER 12.08 OF THE AVON
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS TO PERMIT SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY TREASURER.
-3-
0 0
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of Ordinance No. 90-10, Series
of 1990, on first reading. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Reynolds.
The Mayor called for a roll call.
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory,;Jim Stovall and Jerry Davis. There were
no nay votes. the Motion was unanimously carried.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 90-9, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE BY THE TOWN OF AVONOF TAXABLE LOCAL ASSESSMENT
BONDS IN THE MAXIMUM AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF FOR LOCAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1990-1; PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF BONDS;
PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE BONDS AND THE INTEREST THEREON; AND
PROVIDING OTHER DETAILS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of Ordinance No. 90-9,"Series of
1990 on second reading. The motion was seconded by Councilman Reynolds.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no one
wishing to be heard, the Mayor closed the public hearing.
Councilman Garton moved to continue public hearing of this ordinance
until July 17, 1990-at 5:00 p.m. The motion was seconded by'-
Council-woman McRory and-was unanimously carried.
First reading.of Ordinance No. 90-5, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
AUTHORZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, MULTI-
FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS(EAGLEBEND PROJECT)SERIES 1990 IN THE
AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $5,000,000 '.TO FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION'OF-'
A.MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING PROJECT TO PROVIDE MORE ADEQUATE RESIDENTIAL
HOUSING FACILITIES FOR LOW AND MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES AND.PERSONS;
RATIFYING CERTAIN ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN; AU'T'HORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY BY THE TOWN OF A FINANCING AGREEMENT, INDENTURE OF TRUST,
REGULATORY AGREEMENT, NET OPERATING LOSS AGREEMENT, CLOSING DOCUMENTS
AND DEED OF TRUST AND COMPLETION GUARANTY; ACKNOWLEDGING THE USE OF A
PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM, MAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AS TO
THE SUFFICIENCY OF REVENUES AND AS TO OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO SUCH
BONDS; REPEALING ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN. IN CONFLICT HEREWITH.
John Dunn stated that this ordinance dealt with Eaglebend project.,
and Housing Bonds which was"adopted,on first reading two meetings
ago. It was taken off the agenda last meeting rather than being
tabled. He stated that to,-conform with procedures, the ordinance needed
to be placed back on the agenda to be adopted on first reading and be
ready for second reading on July 24, 1990.
-4-
i 0
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of Ordinance No. 90-5, Series of
1990 on first reading. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stovall.
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Jerry Davis. There were
no nay votes. The motion was unanimously carried.
Be it noted that Councilwoman McRory moved to authorize Bill James
or John Dunn to detemine when the Offical Statement would be final
for the Special Improvement District. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Reynolds and was unanimously carreid. This was requested
by the Bond Underwriters.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 90-7, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE WILDRIDGE SPA PLAN BY THE TRANSFER OF ONE RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT RIGHT FROM LOT 87, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION, TO LOT
89, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION.
Rick Pylman reviewed the ordinance with the Council. He gave a brief
history of the project.
After some discussion, Councilman Reynolds moved approval of Ordinance
No. 90-7, Series of 1990 on second reading. The motion was seconded
by Councilwoman McRory.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no one
wishing to be heard, the Mayor closed the public hearing, and
entertained a roll call.
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Jerry Davis. There were
no nay votes. The ;motion was unanimously carried.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 90-8, Series of 1990, AN ORDINANCE
PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF A PORTION OF THE EAGLEBEND SPA
(LOTS 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11 and 12, AND TRACT A, FILING 4); ESTABLISHING
A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ITS CONTENT AND ESTABLISH DETAILS RELATING
THERETO.
Rick Pylman stated that this was a request to amend the Eaglebend SPA
Zoning. Mr. Pylman reviewed a brief history of this project. The
applicant requested to change the design of the development plan. The
proposed density in the new plan consisted of 240 units, providing
360 bedrooms(1,2 and 3 bedrooms). This approval would utilize 117
development rights. There were three excess driveways to the property.
There were proposed 410 parking spaces, of which, 140 were
covered. The developer requested that they be allowed to build in
phases. Phase I would include eight buildings of a total of 96 units;
phase II, seven buildings,84 units; and phase III, would include the
remaining five buildings, of which there would be sixty units.
-5-
W
He stated that staff recommended approval contingent upon five
conditions:
1. The Metcalf Ditch must continue the function of watering the
existing trees along the north bank of the Eagle River.
2. The phasing plan must be amended to show that adequate parking is
provided with each phase of development.
3. Final review and approval' of drainage and grading plans and the
treatment of parking lot runoff by the Town Engineer.
4. Final review and approval of the plan by the public works and fire
departments.
5. Any unused development rights from the 139 total as currently assigned
to lots 2-12 be restricted from transfer to other parcels of-land"within
the Town of Avon.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing.
John Railton was representing the property owners of-the Eaglebend
Subdivision. He stated that they had several concerns of the developer
using prime river front land for the Affordable Housing. They felt-
it would be better left to service the needs of single family
housing(See memorandum attached to these minutes).
Suzanne Railton also voiced her concerns of the proposed project.
The Council discussed the medium income salaries for the proposed
Affordable Housing Units.
Art Weiss reviewed the amenities that would be proposed for the project.
The Community Building would be constructed during either phase II
or phase III.
Discussion followed.
Chris Ekrem also a property owner in Eaglebend voiced her concerns:
Jeff Spanel stated that most,of the concerns of the property owners
have already been resolved. He stated that'he would be happy to
arrange a meeting with the representatives of the homeowners to hear and
work out the concerns.
Further discussion followed.
It was the consensus of the Council to see the developer and the
residents work out the differences and discuss the concerns to see if
they could be resolved. -
The Mayor closed the public hearing and entertained a roll call.,
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Jerr Davis. There were
no nay votes. The motion was unanimously carried.
-6-
0 •
Mr. James stated that the Town had received a request from the
Town Manager from Vail, to consider, as a member of CAST, the concern
of the proposal of Tennenbaum land exchange in Vail(see memorandum
attached to these minutes).
Councilman Davis stated that Council may want to look at this as a
potential problem in other areas. He suggested that the Council
support the.request from Vail.
After- some discussion, Councilman Davis moved to adopt Resolution
No.90-24, Series of 1990, A RESOLUTION BY THE TOWN OF-AVON OPPOSING
THE PROPOSED LAND EXCHANGE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE
AND THE TENNENBAUMS. The motion was seconded by Councilman Garton
and was unanimously carried.
Next-on the agenda was discussion on the purchase of the,Checkmate.
Statue
Mr. James stated that the best way for the Town to own the statue was
to purchase it, outright rather than by contributions. He stated that it
was offered to the Town and could be.bought over a three year period
of time without any interest. He stated that there was in,the annual
budget currently $60,000 and half of 'that was support to come from
private contributions, and in the next five years capital improvement
program, $30,000 each year for the next two years. Mr. James stated
if it was the desire of the Council, he would proceed with setting
up,a lease purchase. The statue was offered to the Town at a price
of $158,000.
The Mayor.stated that he wanted to see the statue left in Avon. He
stated he would be-willing to donate $500 toward the purchase of the
statue the first of the year.
Councilman Garton stated that the money could be used elsewhere.
Discussion followed.
Councilwoman McRory moved to authorize the purchase of the Checkmate
Statue in the amount of $158,000 and direct the Town Attorney to
draft a three year lease, that would provide for the purchase of the
statue. The motion was seconded by Councilman Reynolds and.was
carried with Councilman Garton opposing and Councilman Davis not voting.
-7-
•
The Town Attorney reported on the meeting with the Highway Department
and the Attorney General's office to review a proposed contract
between the Town and the State of Colorado in respect to the underpass
project. He stated that the Town was the lead agency to construct
the project, which normally would be constructed by the State. He
stated that another meeting was scheduled for Friday, July 13, 1990
which a new draft of the contract would be proposed. If the agreement
was finalized, it would be presented to the Council at its Special
Meeting of July 17th.
The Financial Matters were next presented to the Council.
Councilwoman McRory moved to receive item #1 through #15. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Reynolds and was unanimously carried.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of the General Fund of Accounts
Payable for July 10, 1990. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Reynolds and was unanimously carried.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of the Reconciliation Sheet of
Accounts Payable for July 10, 1990. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Reynolds and was unanimously carried.
The Clerk stated that the June 26, 1990 Council meeting minutes would
be presented to the Council at the July 24th meeting.
Mr. James stated that Eagle County was requesting that the Town
fund the expenses in regard to putting out public information for the
referendum in respect to the 1/2% sales tax for the Transportation
System, which would be placed on the August 14, 1990 election.
The Town was requested to pay 1/3 of that cost($4,400).
Councilman Davis moved appoval to authorize the expenditure of $4,400
to help put out the facts in respect to the 1/2% sales tax for the
referendum to be held August 14, 1990. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Garton and was unanimously carried.
-8-
There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilman
Davis moved to adjourn. The motion was-seconded by Councilman Garton.
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Nottingham at 9:43 p.m.
-9-
APPROVED:
7 `7
TO: Town of Avon
FROM: Homeowners in the Stonebridge Development
and Eaglebend Sub-division
DATE: July 9th, 1990
RE: Eaglebend SPA (Lots 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12, and Tract A
Filing 4)
As homeowners whose property as well as life-style will be
affected by this development, we,wish to make the following
comments:
We are extremely disappointed at the lack of commitment
by the developers of this project to the environment and
lasting quality of life for the citizens of the Town of
Avon.
We have no quarrel with the need for affordable and
rental housing in Avon, but we believe it is unfortunate
that prime river-front land is chosen to meet this need
because, as a long term use, it may be better left to
service the needs of single family housing. We believe
its real estate value would better service the Town of'
Avon tax base with such use.
However, on the positive side of this opportunity to
provide affordable housing on river frontage land with
ample sun, mountain views, then we wish to express the
following concerns:
1. The site plan takes little advantage of these site
features, view, sun, and river access for most of
the unit occupants.
2. The site layout provides no variety of form, interest,
or group focus to give any individual identity to the
unit groups.
3. The buildings offer no variety in their.design,
materials, forms, texture, or colors, to provide
interest and humanizing qualities.
4. The landscape areas do not accumulate any larger areas
within the project for recreation and open space.
5. The carport space under the buildings, continuous along
Eaglebend Drive, is likely to accumulate storage
rather than carparking, and should provide lockers for
each car space, to prevent untidy storage visible to the
street.
•
6. An assessment of
and exiting this
the following:
(a) Will a road
through to
-2- 0
where 400 cars will drive entering
project, should be studied to define
be constructed from the west end
Avon Road?
(b) Will most cars enter and exit via Stonebridge
Road over the bridge on to Highway 6?
(c) Will cars enter and exit down Eaglebend Drive,
and across the bridge leading to Nottingham
Sand and Gravel? Is this road a private or
dedicated road?
(d) What effect will 400 cars have on the residential
area of Eaglebend Drive, where there are single
family and duplex homes?
We believe that the Town of Avon and this Council has a responsibility
to attend to the affordable housing demand, but not at the risk of':
1. The investment and quality neighborhood, and environment
developed at Stonebridge and along the river to the-east.
These property owners bought their.units and lots at a time
when this project was zoned to have 76 units. It is now
approved for a 240 unit project which generates a traffic
volume 3 times greater.
2. Approving a project with planning and design aspects that
are certainly less than our best talent-and concerns can
provide.
3. Solving a housing demand now which may create future
environmental problems, such as traffic, unsightly storage
and carparking, and building deterioration.
4. An exact statistical understanding of the project's impact
upon recreation, daycare, age needs, and other social
requirements or problems generated by the project, and how
they are met by the project's facilities-and the Town of
Avon.
We have bought property at a high value, in a development marketed
by these same developers as a quality project, with plans to develop
this land as townhouses. Clearly this project is very different
to the Stonebridge Townhouse environment, and we believe adversely
affects that project..
We have all been misled!
Frankly, we believe at this last moment, for the good of the future
of Avon, this project should be approved for its use, unit numbers,
and facilities,'but with the conditions that the developers come
forward with a superior planning and architectural design that
provides a project-offering:
(a) A more interesting site planning layout with a better
environment for the occupants.
(b) A more varied building type and form with more human, in-
dividual, housing for the occupants.
(c) Better concern for storage, carparking, screening,
.landscaping, and useful open spaces.
What use to this community and its citizen's investment is a
building whose true costs are not just the cost of its materials and
construction right now,.but its cost in environmental and social
problems, traffic, decay, crime, maintenance, repair-, and decreased
residential property value.
i4U~) 2 N1y1~5- Rr~1ER1I1C'W
Gao,*, - 2'40 1 i ~AC?L r 1`iEN
Signatures of Stonebridge Townhome owners and Eaglebend residences.
IOOK
q, & d-c
Below is a list of other homeowners who are not available today
(7-10-90) to sign our proposal. It is our opinion that these
people are also not fully aware of the proposal for the development _
of the west end of the Eaglebend sub-division and the effect that,
the proposed development will have on their property and lifestyle.
The homeowners listed below here will be coming into town tomorrow,
(7-11-90) and we believe it would be wise to provide_an opportunity
for these people to review this project before it is approved-in its
present .form.
1. Dr. Bill P. Loughridge, MD
2. Bill Ramsey
3. 'Duane Godsey
4. Bill Thomas, 4th National Bank of Tulsa.
5. Tony Siebert
Inter-11rl0 twin
Engi I=i gLtd.
July 10, 1990
Town Council
Town of Avon
Box 976
Avon, CO 81620
Re: Eaglebend Apartments
Dear Council Members:
At 3:30 this afternoon, Bill James provided me with a copy
of a letter from several Eaglebend property owners expressing
concerns over the proposed Eaglebend Apartments.
As you know, we have worked closely with the town in
development of the plans for this project. We have appeared
numerous times at public meetings to discuss the project. On
three separate occasions, I have discussed, our plans with Mr.
John-Appleby, a Stonebridge owner and manager of, the homeowners
association, and offered to meet with him and/or his board of
directors.
After several public meetings and extensive coverage in.the
local media; it is unfortunate that these people have chosen to
wait until now to-come forward to discuss their concerns. The
only Eaglebend resident who has ever contacted me with concerns
was Frank Doll, and we were able to make some changes in the
plans at that point.
The application you have before you is for a modification-to
an existing SPA plan. This modification is technically a down-
zoning of the site as we are not fully utilizing the development
rights previously assigned to this site. The existing'SPA plan,
approved in 1986, called for eleven 12-unit buildings and one 90-
unit highrise with some commercial zoning,immediately across the
street from Stonebridge, for a total of 139 development rights.
The modification we are asking you to approve has i19 development
rights.
Most of the questions raised in the letter have been
answered through the review and public hearing process to date.
To provide affordable housing, we must keep our costs within a
restricted budget. As with someone building his personal house,
there are dozens of features we wish we could incorporate, but
simply can't. On the other hand, we're not interested in
Box No. 978 • Avon, Colorado 81620 • 949-5072 Denver 893-1531
1420 Vance Street • Lakewood, Colorado 80215 • Phone: 232-0158
i
Town Council
Town of Avon
Page 2
July 10, 1990
building a "project" with box-shaped buildings. We have tried to
design buildings with architectural interest and to situate them
on the site within the' constraints of existing utilities.
Impacts of this project on traffic flows also were dealt
with in the review process. The SPA modification has only a
small increase in the number of residential units, and eliminates
the commercial zoning. We anticipate minimal changes in the
traffic patterns.as compared to the plan approved in 1986.
The original Eaglebend developers still own the rights to
build 36 additional single-family and duplex residences in
Filings Land 2. They have a continuing interest in the quality
of the neighborhood just as other property owners.
A'professional property management company has already been
hired, and part of its job will be to make sure the property is
well-maintained.
I would be happy to arrange a meeting with representatives
of the homeowners to hear their concerns. I will have the
architect, property manager, engineer, owners, and contractor at
this meeting to answer questions. I would also invite the town
staff to this meeting. We will take the input from this hearing
and address whatever concerns we can.
However, this is the only viable affordable housing project
remaining in-Eagle County, due to a unique combination of
factors. We have asked for no concessions from the Town of Avon,
financial or otherwise. Vail Associates, a partner in this
venture, has seen approximately 20 proposals in the last 18
months, and this is the only one they view as having a realistic
chance for success.- The Colorado Housing Finance Authority and
state Department of Local Affairs have ranked this project as
first priority in the state as a housing project to get the
private activity bonds being used. After all the efforts of
public and private,entities to make this project work, I hope we
will be able to keep this on track.
Sincerely,
J fer, M. panel, P.E.
Vie
JMS:cjn Pr ident
J
Beartree Lot Land Exchange
as Proposed by Mr:.and Mrs. Michael Tenenbaum
BACKGROUND AND VAIL TOWN COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE
BACKGROUND
PROPOSAL: _Mr. and Mrs. Michael'Tennenbaum, part-time Vail
residents, have proposed the purchase and exchange of
approximately, 2,000 acres of private land-for one acre of
United States Forest - Service land on Rockledge Road at the
base of Vail mountain.
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION: Because this proposed land exchange
requires involvement of the United States Forest Service,
Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and private land
owners, congressional- action is being sought to expedite the
process. The Tennenbaums hired the firm of Ray Kogosvek and
Associates to assemble the acreage of=ferings, as well as
lobby Congress to enact the necessary language.
Congressional action must be completed by October 1990 if the
exchange is to proceed as scheduled. if the- congressional
action is not completed, the legislative efforts will
terminate and the specific language must be reintroduced in
the following Congress.
VIEWS OF THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
That is of consequence here are 'the undermining- of Vail's
efforts to preserve open space for its community and the
State of Colorado, national land acquisition policy
implications, the precedent set through such a land exchange
maneuver, subjective weighing of one environment's "worth"
vs. another's, and federal disregard for local land and
zoning control.
The following reflects the Vail Town Council's reasoning for
opposing the Beartree-Lot land exchange. These views are
based on, input derived, from public, meetings held recently and
longstanding municipal policy regarding -land exchange
matters.
0 0
LOCAL DWIPLICATIONS :
Vail Efforts to Preserve Environmental Quality and Open Space
The purchase and preservation of land to be used as open.
space has been a high priority for the -Town of Vail
throughout the last decade. A total of $10 million in public
funds have been spent to protect 1,400 acres from development
in the Vail area. Maintaining Forest Service land as open
space, even when it becomes private, has long been practiced
and the Vail Town Council will not support ' a proposal which
contradicts. these local efforts and priorities.
Preservation of Certain Lands at the Expense of Others
The proposed land exchange threatens Vail It greatest natural
resource, Vail mountain. To state that a parcel of land on
this mountain is not as "environmentally significant" as
parcels located in various other locations is a very
subjective call, particularly since no formal environmental
studies have been conducted. Proponents of the exchange
contend that one acre of land on Vail mountain is expendable
and can be sacrificed for environmental gain elsewhere. The
Vail Town Council disputes this subjective judgement and
urges public land proponents to work toward a net increase of
protected public lands rather than the gain of specific acres
at the expense of others.
Local Control of.Land and Zoning
The Town of Vail, Vail Associates and the Forest Service
have, in partnership, worked to preserve the outdoor
experience which millions of individuals enjoy on Vail
mountain annually. Local planning processes and zoning
regulations are in place to ensure protection of this natural
resource, while providing for controlled growth and
development. The Vail Town Council will not support
subversion of established avenues for such proposals and the
dangerous precedent setting potential of this .action.
Nonbinding Legislation
Those hired by the Tennenbaums contend the legislative
language would be "site specific... and is not to be
construed as precedent for similar exchanges." The fact of
the matter is that no legislative language is binding to
future congresses and such legislation, when approved, serves
as later justification for similar action. The Vail Town
Council will not support efforts which could result in such
future proposals.
I
-.NATIONAL IMPLICATIONS:
Subversion of National Land Acquisition Policy
The Vail Town Council believes public land acquisition should
be dictated by national policy makers, under the auspices of
established national land acquisition priority lists. The
addition or removal of acreage from the public lands system
should not be dictated by private sector-agendas, as is the
case with the Beartree Lot proposal.
Subversion of Traditional Federal Land Exchange Process
The administrative process is the traditional route 'for a
federal land exchange, such as the one proposed, and involves
studies, environmental impact statements, public input from
affected parties, etc. Congressional action to implement
such an exchange by-passes these important steps, leaving no
information regarding the ecological significance of the
parcels of land in question. The Town of Vail opposes the
means being pursued to accomplish the proposed exchange.
Vulnerability of All Public Lands
If the Beartree Lot'land exchange is accepted, it would seem
that perhaps no acre of land is indeed protected. It becomes
evident that if the right offer is made,_ any parcel of land
is fair game. The Vail Town Council will not support an
action which undermines the essence of public ownership and
leaves all parcels of public land vulnerable.
Subjective Judgement of One Person's Wilderness Experience
vs. Another's - Vail mountain provides an outdoor experience
for millions annually and is indeed the extent of many
individuals' outdoor exposures. This swap assumes that
preserving acreage in undeveloped areas is more valuable than
preserving an undeveloped portion of a resort area. The Vail
Town Council is opposed to the exchange as it devalues the
nature experience of Vail visitors in favor of that
experienced by individuals in other locations.
The land exchange p3
option on the lands
is taken. Thus, the
quite different and
than that proposed.
Has No Option on
,oponents will not a
to be swapped until
resulting acreage to
even less desirable
the Proposed Lands
ctually have a legal
congressional action
be swapped could be
for the public good