|
To: Alan
Kosloff, Board of Directors, Membership and Interested Parties
Mayor and Town Council, Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental
Commission
From: Jim
Lamont
Date:
January 8, 2006
RE: Crossroads
Special Development District Application
The VVHA
Board of Directors in a statement presented at its Annual Membership
Meeting, December 29, 2005, urged the Vail Town Council to follow zoning,
covenants, and planning processes so that the approval of the proposed
Crossroads project produces a compromise that builds consensus rather than
dividing the community. The statement said, should the Council be unable to
form a consensus, that there were those in the community prepared to bring
the matter to the voters through a referendum.
The Town
Council on January 3, 2006, overrode a planning staff recommendation by
approving a resolution (5-2), in a rare work session action, which set aside
amendment procedures for master planning and zoning standards. Had the
amendment procedures been followed it could have resulted in bringing the
Crossroads proposal into compliance with regulations that apply to
properties sharing similar circumstances.
The Council
cited the time necessary to complete the amending process would delay the
developer and compliance with the requirement would change the rules in the
middle of the process. The planning staff reported that failing to cause
the developer to undergo the amendment process they could not adequately
evaluate the proposal. It is important to note that the developer of the
Vail Front Door and New Dawn projects complied with both the master planning
and rezoning procedure to gain approval of their projects. The Council’s
decision favoring the Crossroads developer appears to be inconsistent with
requirements imposed upon other developers. The Crossroads developer has
had more than ample time to comply with the amendment procedures, but
reportedly has consistently refused planning staff submission requirements.
The
Association noted to the Council that their unprecedented action purported
to remove from the voters the right to bring the amending master planning
and rezoning ordinances before the electorate by means of a referendum. The
Association remarked that the Special Development District (SDD) was
approved by ordinance and therefore should be as well subject to
referendum. It was observed, if the Town of Vail were to attempt to
override the referendum process for SDD’s the matter could become a legal
controversy.
The Crossroads developer, it is reported, also
consistently refuses the planning staff requirement to provide a scale
“context” model of his proposal. The model will show the relationship
between the project and its immediate neighbors. The developer says it is
sufficient that he has prepared a computer animation of his project and the
surrounding area. The value of the scale model is that it is available for
detailed and lengthy public scrutiny, resulting in informed public
commentary, whereas the computer animation is not. The scale model will
readily show the key relationship of height bulk, and mass with surrounding
properties. These are primary issues of public controversy regarding the
proposal. It is reported that some elected and appointed officials may have
intervened siding with the developer’s claim that preparation of a model
would be an unnecessary delay, even though he has privately shown scale
models to some Council members, the Association and others. Developers of
large projects, in recent years, have provided both the computer animation
and scale “context” models in compliance with public review standards.
It is important for the Town of Vail to avoid the
public perception that it gives any developer preferential treatment. It is
unfair not to treat all developers equally. A review process that is unfair
to all other developers sets a dangerous precedent and is a threat to the
integrity and purpose of the Town of Vail’s planning and zoning processes.
The Association realizes that time is of the essence, but there must be
adequate time and analytical tools for the review process to be conducted
properly and fairly.
|