HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-06-27 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session~Q
~-
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 1989
12:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Vail Community Theatre Request for Funds "
2. Town Council/Planning & Environmental Commission/Design Review Board
Joint Meeting
A. Density Issues
1) Brief introduction
2) Site visits
3) Discussion (back in Council Chambers)
B. Vail Village Master Plan
1) Overview and update of plan
2) Distribution of final draft
3) Discuss approval process
3. Pro Kick Off USA Request for Funds
4. Review of Art in Public Places Draft
5. Planning and Environmental Commission Report
6. Information Update
7. Other
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 1989
12:00 p.m.
EXPANDED AGENDA
12:00 1. Vail Community Theatre Request for Funds
Action Requested of Council: Receive presentation and
approve/deny request for TOV funding.
12:15 2. Town Council/PEC/DRB Joint Meeting
Peter Patten A. Density Issues
1) Brief introduction (Peter Patten)
2) Site visits
3) Discussion (back in Council Chambers)
B. Vail Village Master Plan
1) Overview and update of plan
2) Distribution of final draft
3) Discuss approval process
Background Rationale: The following are problems/issues
that have been mentioned by Council members in recent
months:
1) The 250 sq. ft. ordinance should not apply to
demolish/rebuid projects.
2) Recently built residences on Forest Road/Beaver Dam Road
area are too large for their sites.
3) Our GRFA system does not address above ground mass and
bulk or volume.
4) Allegations of "illegal" spaces being built into
residences.
We feel that any major overhaul of our system should be part
of our zoning code revisions scheduled to begin later in
1989. The 250 sq. ft. ordinance could be amended at this
time to eliminate its applicability to dems/rebuilds. We
are taking affirmative actions, including additional
staffing in the building division to deal with the
enforcement issues, and we feel they are well under control.
3:45 3. Pro Kick Off USA Request for Funds
Karen Aldretti
Action Requested of Council: Receive presentation and
approve/deny request for TOV funding.
4:00 4. Review of Art in Public Places Draft
Kristan Pritz
Action Requested of Council: Decide how the Council would
like to participate in the AIPP decision-making process.
Background Rationale: The staff is requesting that the
Council determine what role they would like to play in the
AIPP selection process. Once this decision is made, the
staff will propose that the program be established on a
temporary basis for 2 years. This approach allows the
project to begin and make it possible to fine tune the
program. The staff would like to present the project for
approval on July 11th.
4:2.0 5. Planning and Environmental Commission Report
Peter Patten
4:30 6. Information Update
Ron Phillips
4:40 7. Other
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: June 27, 1989
RE: Art in Public Places Program
The purpose of the discussion is to get final comments from the
Council on the AIPP draft. The staff would like the Council to decide
the following questionso
1. What role would the Council like to play in the program?
Originally, when the idea for an art review process was
discussed, the Council did not want to be involved in the
aesthetic review of an artwork. The draft has been written so
that one Council member serves on the AIPP Board. Also, the
Council must sign off on any expenditures in the review process
for commissioned artwork. In respect to appeals of AIPP Board
decisions, the Council reviews the decision to ensure the review
procedures were followed by the board. The appeal process does
not address aesthetic issues. (Please see pages 13, 23, 25, 26,
and 27, for sections involving the Council).
2. Does the Council want to allow for any staff approval of
temporary artwork on public land?
Temporary would be a period of time not to exceed thirty days.
The staff would like to present this program to the Council on July
11 for approval for a period of two years. This approach allows for
the program to be refined and also allows the Town to work on public
art projects in a positive way.
DG~a~~
VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I• PURPOSE OF THE VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM . , .1
II. A DEFINITION OF PUBLIC ART
, , • . • _ • • . • .2
III. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COLLECTION POLICIES. .4
IV. VAIL .ART IN PUBLIC PLACES INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE POLICIES .
• , • , _ . , , 7
V• VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES RELOCATION POLICIES. ,g
VI. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES DEACCESSIONING POLICIES. • .g
VII. ADMINISTRATION OF THE VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
PROGRAM • . .
. . . • . . . . • . . .11
VIII. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REVIEW PROCEDURES . ,20
IX. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA. .29
F
I. PURPOSE OF THE VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
The program is intended to evolve in a way that reflects a
broad range of community input and involves artists and
art professionals.
Specific objectives of the Arts in Public Places Program
are to:
A. Establish a public art program that is unique to Vail
and therefore has a primary responsibility to the
community.
B. Enhance the beauty of the Vail community by placing
quality visual art in highly accessible and visible
public places for residents and guests to enjoy.
C. Develop a diverse, high quality public art
collection. The overall program shall strive for
diversity in style, scale, media and artists.
Exploratory types of work as well as established art
forms shall be encouraged.
D. Provide an effective process for selecting,
purchasing, commissioning, placing, and maintaining
public art projects that represent the best in
aesthetic and technical quality.
E. Create a framework for a sustained effort to develop
public art in the Vail community.
F. Develop a strong public education effort in order to
stimulate discussion and understanding about the
visual arts.
G. Provide a public art development process that
encourages and is supportive to artists who wish to
work in the public realm.
H. Encourage support for and inclusion of public art
projects in private sector development.
There will always be varying opinions on what a public art
project contributes to the community. Different opinions
of an artwork are encouraged. This variety of
interpretations is perhaps what distinguishes public art
as a challenging art form that encourages public
interaction.
1
II.. A DEFINITION OF PUBLIC ART
A. Public art or Art in Public Places defined in its
broadest sense is any original creation of visual art
1) that is acquired with public monies, or a
combination of public/private funding; 2) that is
donated or loaned to the Town's Art in Public Places
Program; 3) that is a privately sponsored artwork
that is proposed to be located on publicly owned
land. The public art may be:
1. temporary or permanent,
2. located inside or outside of a public building,
3. located outside on public or private land.
B. For the purpose of the Art in Public Places Program,
works of public art may include but are not limited
to the following:
1. Sculpture: in the round, bas-relief, mobile,
kinetic, and electronic, in any material or
combination of materials.
2. Painting: all media, including portable and
permanently affixed works.
3. Mural: A mural is defined as a painted scene,
figure, or decorative design not including
written trade or place names or advertising
messages.
4. Graphic Arts: printmaking and drawing.
5. Mosaics: A picture or design made by setting
small pieces of material in mortar.
6. .Photography, film and video.
7. Crafts: in clay, fiber and textiles, wood,
metal, plastics, glass, and other materials;
both functional and nonfunctional.
8. Mixed media: any combination of forms or media,
including collage.
2
9. Fountains: an artifically created jet or stream
of water that is incorporated into a man-made or
natural setting.
10. Earth works and environmental installations:
that are site specific
C. For the purpose of further definition, the following
elements are not considered works of art under the
Art in Public Places Program:
1. Directional elements, signage, or color coding
except where these elements are an integral part
of the work of art.
2. Objects which are mass produced in a standard
design, such as playground equipment, benches,
drinking fountains, and light fixtures.
3. Reproductions, by mechanical or other means, of
original works of art, except in cases of film,
video, photography, printmaking, sculpture
editions or other media arts.
4. Decorative, ornamental, or functional elements
which are designed to be part of the
architecture unless designed by an artist or
that are part of a collaborative design team
process in which architects, landscape
architects and/or other designers collaborate
with artists on an artwork project.
5. Landscape architecture and landscape gardening
except where these elements are designed by the
artist and are an integral part of the work of
art.
6. Artwork which serves as advertising for a
business (such as a mural depicting services of
the business). This type of commercial art is
considered to be advertising and is reviewed as
signage by the Design Review Board.
7. Temporary or permanent artwork that is privately
sponsored and located on private land.
8. Artwork that is displayed in booths as a part of
an arts festival such as the Vail Valley Arts
Festival.
3
III. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COLLECTION POLICIES
A. INTENT OF POLICIES
It is in the interest of the Vail community to
acquire only works of art that will be appreciated by
the community now and in the future. The intent of
this program is to enable the community to possess a
collection of works of art in public places which is
educational, attractive to residents and visitors,
and of an overall aesthetic quality equal to the
excellent international reputation the Town enjoys as
a resort. This policy is intended to guide the AIPP
Board in the acquisition of public art and to provide
for the community's general understanding of the Vail
Art in Public Places Program.
B. APPLICABILITY OF POLICY
This policy applies to all works of art presently
owned by the Town of Vail and future artwork acquired
by the AIPP Board either through purchase,
commission, gift or loan. Works of art presently
commissioned by the Town of Vail may be relocated or
deaccessioned according to the AIPP policies.
C. COLLECTING LIMITATIONS
1. Works of art will not be accepted or otherwise
acquired for the community collection unless the
following conditions are met:
a. The artworks are relevant to and consistent
with the purpose and artwork criteria of
the AIPP program.
b. The community can provide for the
exhibition, protection, maintenance and
preservation of the objects under
reasonable conditions that ensure their
availability to the public and are in
keeping with professionally accepted
standards.
c. The artworks shall have permanency in the
collection as long as they retain their
physical integrity, their identity, and
their authenticity, and as long as they
remain useful for the purposes of the
community.
4
d. A legal instrument of conveyance, setting
forth an adequate description of the
artwork involved and the precise conditions
of transfer, will accompany all gifts and
purchases and will be kept on file at the
Town of Vail Municipal Building. In the
case of purchases, commissions and
conditional gifts, this document must be
signed by the seller, artist or donor and
by an authorized Town representative; in
the case of unconditional gifts, it need be
signed only by the donor.
e. Title to all artworks acquired for the
collection should be obtained free and
clear, without restrictions as to use or
future disposition. If artworks are
accepted with restrictions or limitations,
the conditions shall be stated clearly in
an instrument of conveyance, and shall be
made part of the accession records for the
artworks, and shall be strictly observed by
the artist and the AIPP Board.
D. REQUIREMENT FOR COMMUNITY INPUT FOR AIPP SPONSORED
PROJECTS
Public art often significantly alters public places
by becoming a major new presence in the environment.
Informed debate among community members will be
fostered through the AIPP program. Specifically,
AIPP sponsored projects shall be presented and
discussed at one or more public meetings in which
open participation of the community is encouraged.
E. ARTIST(S)' RIGHTS
The Board will do its utmost to maintain the intended
character and appearance of works of art acquired for
public exhibition in order to uphold the artist(s)'
concept. Questions of copyright, installation,
maintenance, and deaccessioning will be considered in
any contract to acquire an artwork.
F. ARTWORK LOANED TO THE COLLECTION
Acceptance of loaned artwork to the collection by the
Art in Public Places Board will be subject to all of
the provisions pertaining to acquisitions except the
purchase price. In addition, such loans will be
evaluated against the costs and risks associated with
proposed length of loan and benefit to the community.
5
G. ARTWORK LOANED FROM THE COLLECTION
Agreements to loan artwork from the
may be entered into with tax-exempt
such loans are approved by the AIPP
Council and allowed in the contract
The time period for the loan shall
in the loan agreement.
H. TEMPORARY ARTWORK EXHIBITIONS
AIPP collection
institutions if
Board and Town
with the artist.
~e clearly stated
Temporary special exhibitions of AIPP sponsored works
of art will be reviewed by the Art in Public Places
Board in consultation with appropriate Town
departments such as Public Works, Fire, Community
Development, Recreation and/or Police.
I. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
1. This statement of policy and related procedures
will be made available to donors or other
persons upon requested.
2. The AIPP Board will make available the identity
and description of collection materials acquired
and deaccessioned. All other facts pertaining
to the circumstances of acquistition, relocation
and deaccession will be adaequately documented
in the AIPP's records of the collection.
J. REVISIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF COLLECTION POLICY
Any revisions of formal interpretations of this
collection policy shall be made in the form of
addenda to the policy in order to provide continuing
documentation of such changes. Amendments to
policies shall be reviewed by the Town Council and
reviewed by resolution.
6
IV. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE
POT,TC`TR~
A. Works of selected art may be placed in, on, or about
any public place or, by agreement with the owner of
any private property with substantial public exposure
in and around the Town of Vail. Works of art owned
by the Town may also be loaned for exhibition
elsewhere, upon such terms and conditions as deemed
necessary by the Art in Public Places Board and Town
Council.
B. No work of art financed or installed either wholly,
or in part with, Town funds or~with grants procured
by the Town shall be installed on privately owned
property without a written agreement between the Town
and the owner specifying the proprietary interests in
the work of art and specifying other provisions
deemed necessary or desirable by the Town attorney.
C. Installation, repair, alteration, and refinishing
of art in public places shall be done in consultation
with the artist whenever feasible. In the event
repair of work is required, the responsible artist(s)
shall be notified and given the opportunity to do the
repair for a reasonable fee after the warranty
period. If the artist is unable to repair the
artwork within a reasonable time period, the Town
shall be free to arrange for the repair work as the
Town deems appropriate.
7
V. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES RELOCATION POLICIES
A. The AIPP Board may consider relocating an artwork to
a new site within the Town of Vail. Artworks may be
relocated upon a majority vote of approval of the
AIPP Board and approval by the Town. Council.
B. Before relocating any artwork, the AIPP Board shall
comply with all terms and conditions relating to
relocation which are found in the acquisition
contract or any other agreements which may exist
between the artist and the Town.
C. Criteria for relocating a work of art may include,
but are not limited to the following factors:
1. The artwork's condition or security cannot be
maintained.
2. The artwork endangers public safety.
3. Significant changes in the use, character, or
design~of the site have occurred which affect
the integrity of the work.
4. The artwork would be enhanced in the opinion of
the AIPP Board if sited in a new manner that
would improve the public's ability to appreciate
the artwork.
8
VI. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES DEACCESSIONING POLICIES
A. Artworks in the collection will be retained
permanently if they continue to be relevant and
useful to the purposes and activities of the
collection and if they can be properly exhibited,
preserved and used. Deaccessioning of objects may be
considered when these conditions no longer prevail or
in the interest of improving the collection.
B. Artworks in the collection will.be deaccessioned only
upon the recommendation of a ~~ vote of the
Art in Public Places Board and approval by the Vail
Town Council.
C. In considering the disposistion of deaccessioned
artworks, the AIPP Board should consider the
following:
1. The manner of disposition is in the best
interests of the Town, the public it serves, the
public trust it represents in owning the
collection, and the scholarly or cultural
communities to which the artwork may be
important.
2. Preference shall be given to placing the
artwork, through gift, exchange or sale, in a
tax-exempt public institution wherein the
artwork may serve the purpose for which it was
acquired initially by the AIPP Board. If
artworks are offered for sale elsewhere,
preference shall be given for sale at an
advertised public auction or to the public
marketplace in a manner that will best protect
the interests, objectives and legal status of
the collection.
3. Artworks will not be given or sold privately to
Town of Vail employees, AIPP Board members, jury
members, members of the Town Council, or to
their representatives.
4. All monies gained from the disposition of
deaccessioned artworks shall be placed in a
purchase fund to be used for acquisitions ~,Q Cl~wd/'~•
D. Before deaccessioning any artwork from the AIPPUU
collection, the AIPP Board shall comply with all
terms and conditions relating to deaccessioning which
are found in the acquisition contract or any other
agreements which may exist between the artist(s) and
the Town.
9
E. Criteria for deaccessioning a work of art may include
but are not limited to the following factors:
1. The artwork's condition or security cannot be
maintained.
2. The artwork requires excessive maintenance or
has faults of design or workmanship and repair
or remedy is impractical or unfeasible.
3. The artwork has been damaged and repair is
impractical or unfeasible.
4. The artwork endangers public safety.
5. Significant changes in the use, character, or
design of the site have occurred which affect
the integrity of the work.
6. Significant adverse public reaction toward the
artwork has continued unabated over a five year
period.
7. The authenticity of the artwork is
questionable.
8. It is desired to replace the artwork with a more
appropriate work by the same artist.
10
VII. ADriINISTRATION OF THE VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
A. DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE AIPP BOARD
1. Implements the AIPP policies and selection
procedures as set forth in this document. This
specifically includes designing the appropriate
selection process for public art projects,
appointing selection panels for specific
projects, and approving the final selection of
artist or artists for a project.
2.. Acquires public art by purchase, donation, or
other means for Vail's permanent Art in Public
Places collection.
3. Oversees the maintenance and preservation of art
works displayed in public areas.
4. Develops a public art master plan which defines
sites that are appropriate for public art and
may also address the general artistic concept
for each site.
5. Assists the Art in Public Places coordinator in
obtaining grants to fund public art projects.
6. Promotes public art through a public education
program that will further community appreciation
and understanding of the visual arts.
7. Publicizes Art in Public Places projects and
recognizes the artist(s) involved with the
project.
8. Oversees the maintenance of detailed records of
Art in Public Places projects in order to
document project development.
9. Evaluates the Arts in Public Places program
annually and sets program goals on a five year
basis.
B. DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE AIPP COORDINATOR
The Art in Public Places Coordinator shall be
responsible for assisting the AIPP Board in
administering and managing the Vail Art in Public
Places Program. The AIPP Coordinator serves as a
non-voting staff person to the AIPP Board.
11
Responsibilities include:
1. Administers all AIPP projects to ensure that
projects meet the requirements of the Vail AIPP
Guidelines and specific project prospectus.
2. Presents potential projects to the AIPP Board
for their review.
3. Guides the AIPP Board in the development of the
project prospectus and selection jury.
4. Oversees AIPP projects to ensure the artwork is
erected per the approval of the AIPP Board.
5. Researches and writes grants for proposed AIPP
projects.
6. Coordinates all publicity, communication, and
public meetings for the AIPP program.
7. Coordinates AIPP Board meeting agendas and
ensures that accurate meeting minutes are
maintained.
8. Manages the advertising and appointment of AIPP
Board members per the AIPP guidelines.
9. Serves as the AIPP Board's liaison to Town
Council, Planning and Environmental Commmission
and Design Review Board as well as other Town
Departments and community organizations.
10. Documents the AIPP Board's evaluation of the
AIPP program annually and writes AIPP Board's
program goals on a 5 year basis.
11. Maintains records on all existing AIPP projects
that include site plans, design drawings,
models, slides of the artworks, minutes of AIPP
meetings related to the project, background on
the artist(s), names of the parties involved
with the project, records of any legal
conditions on the work (copyright, relocation
issues) .
12. Maintains records of the conditions and
circumstances under which artworks are acquired,
relocated, or deaccessioned.
13. Informs the AIPP Board of developments in Public
Art Programs and keeps the AIPP Board up to date
on new information related to AIPP programs.
12
14. Assists the AIPP Board in any special project
work such as the development of an Art in Public
Places Master Plan.
C. AIPP BOARD MEMBERSHIP
1. Number
The board shall consist of seven voting members
appointed by the Vail Town Council:
a. Five members at large
b. One Town Council member
c. One Design Review Board member
2. Qualifications
The Board will be made up of members who have
demonstrated expertise in architecture, art
criticism, art education, art history, fine
arts, graphic arts, interior design, landscape
architecture, or other art/design related
backgrounds not specifically mentioned, or who
have demonstrated a strong interest in the
visual arts and/or civic improvement.
Board members shall be one of the following for
at least one yearn
a. a resident of the Town of Vail and/or
b. owner of property within the Town of Vail
and/or
c. an owner of a business within the Town of
Vail
All members shall serve without compensation
unless otherwise provided by the Town Council.
3. Term
The 5 at-large members shall serve for periods
of three years each, except that the initial
terms of two such members shall expire two years
from the date of appointment, and the initial
terms of three such members shall expire three
years after the date of appointment.
The appointed Town Council member and DRB member
shall serve for two year terms.
13
Any member appointed to fill a vacancy shall
serve the remainder of the unexpired term. All
members shall be eligible for reappointment.
4. Vacancy
A vacancy on the AIPP Board shall occur whenever
a member of the Board is removed by the Town
Council, dies, becomes incapacitated and unable
to perform his/her duties for a period of sixty
days, resigns, ceases to meet the qualifications
for AIPP Board membership outlined in this
document, or is convicted of a felony. Whenever
a vacancy occurs, the Art in Public Places
Coordinator shall promptly advertise for
applicants to fill such vacancy. The Vail Town
Council shall -eflmchr~t-~n-}~=o=~T~s-aid appoint
members to the Art in Public Places Board.
D. AIPP BOARD MEETING CONDUCT
1. Chair, Vice Chair
The AIPP Board shall select its own chair and
vice chair from among its members. The chair,
or in his/her absence, the vice chair, shall be
the presiding officer of its meetings. In the
absence of both the chair and vice-chair, the
the members present shall appoint a member to
serve as acting chair at the meeting.
2. Attendance at meetings
Absence from three consecutive regular meetings,
or a total of four regular meetings in any
calendar year, without justifiable cause, as
determined by the Town Council, shall constitute
grounds for removal from office.
3. Regular Meetings
Meetings may be held at the Municipal Building
on any day of the month at such place as may be
determined from time to time by the Board, and
set forth in the minutes. At such meetings, the
Board shall consider all matters properly
brought before the Board as set forth on the
agenda.
4. Notification
The AIPP Coordinator shall publish the meeting
14
date and agenda in a local Vail newspaper of
no less than 7 days prior to the date of each
meeting.
6.
7.
5.Special Meetings.
Special meetings may be called at the request of
the Chair of the AIPP Board or a majority of the
Board members. The Board will endeavor to
publish a notice of the agenda of the special
meeting in a local Vail newspaper; provided,
however, that the publication shall not be
required in the absence of adequate time or may
be dispensed with for good cause.
Open Meetings
All meetings of the Board shall be conducted in
accordance with the provisions of Colorado law
pertaining to public meetings.
Documentation of the AIPP's Board Meetings
The AIPP coordinator shall be responsible for
keeping accurate recordings and minutes of Board
meetings. The AIPP Board shall review the
minutes for their accuracy. The Board must
approve the minutes by a majority of its
members.
E. AIPP BOARD VOTING
1. Quorum
2.
3.
The quorum for the conduct of business at any
meeting shall be four voting members of the
Board. No action shall be taken in the absence
of a quorum, except to adjourn the meeting to a
subsequent date.
Manner of Voting
In all matters coming before the Board, the
affirmative vote of a majority of those present
shall be the action of the Board, provided that
a quorum is present. A tie vote is a negative
or denial action.
Appointment of Special Committees
The Board may establish
may be necessary for the
of the Board. The Board
special committees as
conduct of the business
shall appoint members
15
of special committees. All members of the Board
shall be entitled to attend meetings of
committees created by the Board.
4. Conflict of Interest
In the event any member shall have a financial
interest of any kind in a matter before the
Board, he/she shall disclose his/her interest to
the Board. The member shall not vote or give
opinions or recommendations on the matter under
consideration.
F. SELECTION JURY
1. Appointment of Selection Jury
The AIPP Board may choose to appoint a jury to
review artwork. Juries are required for all
permanent commissioned or direct purchase AIPP
projects.
2. The size of the jury is determined by the AIPP
Board.
Jury members shall serve
the Art in Public Places
be removed by the Art in
The Art in Public Places
as the nonvoting resourc~
selection jury and shall
project management.
at the discretion of
Board and members may
Public Places Board.
coordinator shall serve
a person for each
be responsible for
The jury shall include but is not limited to:
a. one professional artist;
b. one visual arts professional which may
include an artist, art historian, museum
curator, or arts coordinator;
c. one community lay person interested in the
project;
d. one person who either lives or works in
close proximity to the proposed site for
the artwork;
e. one AIPP Board member.
Additional jurors may be chosen for the jury if
appropriate. As an example, jurors may be added
who are art educators, lay citizens interested
in the arts, art patrons, art critics,
architects, landscape architects and designers.
16
3. Jury Advisors
The jury may solicit comments and advice from
individuals whose comments the jury may find
helpful in the development of the project
concept and actual selection of a particular
artwork. It shall be especially important for
the jury to seek comment from those persons who
because of the location of their residence or
business will be in frequent contact with the
artwork selected. Advisors do not vote.
4. Consultants to the Jury
Occasionally professional consultants may be
needed to advise and/or assist the jury with
specific projects for such purposes as:
a. Professional appraisal of art work
b. Performance of feasibility studies,
specific to execution of proposed art
works
c. Packing and shipping of art works
d. Review of engineering specifications
e. Conservation and maintenance
f. Collection documentations
g. Installation design
h. Presentation assistance
i. Landscape architecture design
5. Jury Voting Rights
Each juror has one vote and no juror has the
right of veto. If a consensus cannot be reached
by the jury, then the majority vote carries the
decision. The jury has the right to make no
selection if there is no proposal judged to be
of sufficient merit.
6. Documentation of the Jury's Decision-Making
Process and Accession of the Artwork
The AIPP Coordinator shall be responsible for
keeping accurate records and minutes of the
decision-making process and criteria used to
17
select each AIPP project. The Jury shall review
these records for their accuracy. The Jury must
approve the records by a majority of its
members. After approval, the records are
presented to the AIPP Board for t-}~-tz resew,
~~i ~ ~ ~~ 2UC~. Ot' ~1dl,~Ci~
7. Conflict of Interest Concerning Any of the
Review Bodies
Any artist selected to serve on the Selection
Jury is precluded from having his/her work
considered for inclusion i e y~-.¢S-'~r.'t4-
-ar~~ project during his/her term of service.
Persons other than artists who would receive
financial gains from the selection of work are
ineligible for jury appointment (gallery owners,
brokers, artists' representatives, etc.) on a
project by project basis.
8. Jury Member Representatives File
The Arts in Public Places Board shall maintain a
file of potential representatives for selection
juries. This file shall contain the
professional qualifications of each potential
representative and a current resume.
Individuals wishing inclusion in this file
should submit a resume to the Arts in Public
Places Board for consideration.
G. ARTIST'S RESPONSIBILITY
If selected to create an AIPP sponsored project, the
artist shall:
1. Execute and complete the work in a timely and
professional manner and transfer title of an
existing work of art to the Town.
2. Maintain a close working relationship with the
AIPP Board, jury, AIPP coordinator and
community, including participation in public
meetings related to the art proposal.
3. Return to the Board for review and approval
should any significant change occur in the
scope, material, design or siting of the
artwork. The coordinator shall monitor the
process of the completion of the artwork and if
he or she determines that a significant change
has occurred in the project, the coordinator
shall require the artist to return to the Board
for review and approval of such change.
18
4. Be responsible for all phases of the design and
execution of the work, including installation,
unless otherwise stipulated in the contract.
5. Warrant that the design or work being submitted
is an original product of his/her own creative
effort.
6. Guarantee and maintain the work from defects of
material or workmanship for a period of time
mutually acceptable to the Town and artist.
7. Adhere to the conditions of the AIPP contract as
entered into by the artist and AIPP Board on
behalf of the Town of Vail.
19
VIII.VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. AIPP DESIGN APPROVAL AND REVIEW PHILOSOPHY
No AIPP sponsored artwork shall be erected, removed,
or altered without the prior review and approval of
the Art in Public Places Board. The review process
is based on the premise that Art in Public Places'
projects should reflect professional judgement and a
sensitivity to the interests of the public. The
process is designed to be as streamlined as possible
to encourage public art while still allowing for
community involvement in the project.
B. GIFTS OF ARTWORK OR PRIVATELY SPONSORED ARTWORK
PROPOSED FOR A PUBLICLY OWNED SITE
1. Pre-application Conference: Prior to the formal
filing of an application, the applicant is
encouraged to meet with the Art in Public Places
coordinator to obtain information and assistance
concerning the review process. Topics of
discussion may include, but not be limited to:
a. The purpose of the Art in Public Places
Program
b. Review procedures for Art in Public Places
gifts and donations
c. The type of artwork and proposed site for
the project
d. Conditions of the gift as well as any
copyright or deaccessioning requirements
e. Submittal requirements
2. .Submittal Requirements: The project proponent
shall submit the following material to the Art
in Public Places coordinator, unless the
coordinator determines that some of the
following material may be excluded:
a. A completed application form
b. A written description of the proposal which
includes background on the artist and
details on the specific artwork to include
material, colors, media, dimensions and
supporting structure.
c. Photograph, model, or drawing of the
specific artwork.
20
d. Any conditions of the gift
~f ~he a i~~~Y
plic-ant proposes the project for a
I specific site,'?~he following information
'~,~Q, R ~1~i[a~T~~a~ c~~S~ may Aso be required but may not be
~JpD~'rC +J ~Qi~P ~ necessary for every project
r~u,T ~~ ~°~~G~~ ~~ 1) Site Plan
Q~'~.U C~ 0. 2 ) Survey
~O`~~~ Sl~~ 3 ) Title report, Schedule A and B
'~` 4) Landscape Plan
5) Lighting
6) Photos of the proposed site
7) Land owner's approval
8) Preliminary budget for the project to
address installation costs,
identification plaque, maintenance
requirements for artwork and site,
insurance costs
9) Site preparation costs including
grading, landscaping, seating,
lighting and signage.
3. Staff/Board Procedure
The Art in Public Places coordinator shall check
the submittal for its completeness. The Art in
Public Places coordinator may require any
additional information from the applicant as may
be necessary for complete and proper review of
the proposal. If the application is found to be
in compliance with the Art in Public Places
submittal requirements, the project shall be
placed upon the agenda of the next
appropriately scheduled Art in Public Places.
If the application is found not to be in
compliance with applicable submittal
requirements, the application and materials
shall be returned to the applicant with an
explanation of the Art in Public Places
coordinator's findings.
The AIPP Coordinator shall also submit the
project to the appropriate Town of Vail
departments so that the following factors may be
reviewed: Public Safety, interior and exterior
vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns,
impacts on operational functions of the Town
such as snowplowing and traffic control,
environmental impacts and planning issues.
a. The Art in Public Places Board shall review
the application and supporting material,
21
and if the project is found to comply with
the policies and the criteria of the AIPP
Program, the Art in Public Places Board may
approve the project. Once the AIPP Board
has voted to give final approval to an
artwork, the AIPP Coordinator shall inform
the Town Council and Town Manager of the
AIPP Board's final decision in writing or
in a presentation at a public meeting
within 10 days of the AIPP decision on the
artwork.
If additional items are needed to determine
if it is appropriate to approve the
project, the Art in Public Places Board may
table the project until the next scheduled
meeting. If the project is tabled, the
Board shall specify the conditions and
additional and/or modified materials which
must be submitted by the applicant to the
Art in Public Places Board, including any
change in the submittal. The applicant may
also table the application to a future
meeting for any reason.
b. If the project is found to conflict with
the policies and criteria of this chapter,
the Board shall disapprove the proposal.
Any disapproval shall be in writing and
shall specifically describe the policies
and criteria with which the project does
not meet and the manner of noncompliance.
c. The Art in Public Places Board shall have
30 days to consider and approve or deny an
application. The time for action may be
extended at the request of the applicant.
d. If changes in the proposal are requested,
the Board shall approve, disapprove, or
request further changes within 30 days of
the meeting at which the Art in Public
Places Board receives the changes unless an
extension is agreed to by the applicant.
e. The applicant or authorized representative
of the applicant shall be present at the
Art in Public Places Board meeting.
f. The AIPP Board may appoint a jury to review
a specific project if deemed appropriate.
Jury procedures shall be followed as
outlined in Section VII F.
22
C. COMMISSIONED~~OR DIRECT PURCHASE ARTWORK THAT IS
SPONSORED BY TOWN OF VAIL FUNDS THROUGH THE ART IN
PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
1. Submittal Requirements:
The Art in Public Places Board and coordinator
shall be responsible for developing proposals
for commissioned or direct purchase Art in
Public Places projects. Members of the public
may suggest appropriate projects, however, the
AIPP Board and coordinator are primarily
responsible for developing the preliminary
project prospectus. The AIPP Board and
coordinator shall also be responsible for
developing the selection process and public
participation component for each project. The
project prospectus will ;s the following
points: ~d~15/~U'
a. Project concept
b. Type of competition if applicable
1) Open Competition: The project is
advertised and all interested artists
may submit preliminary ideas for
proposals. No fees are paid to
artists for their initial proposal
submissions; however, a small number
of finalists may be selected to submit
detailed maquettes for the project for
which they shall be paid an
appropriate fee determined by the
AIPP; or
2) Limited Competition: A selected
number of artists are invited to
submit proposals, An appropriate fee
shall be allocated for the artists'
participation as determined by the
AIPP Board; or
3) Invitation: One artist is invited to
submit a proposal for which he/she
shall be paid an appropriate proposal
fee as determined by the AIPP Board.
c. Eligibility
d. Site description explaining in detail any
special design constraints related to the
site
23
e. The selection process
f. The selection criteria
g. Jury membership: The number of members and
names of jury members shall be listed
h. Public participation process and
responsibilities of the artist in public
hearings and informal community meetings
i. Application materials to be submitted such
as site plan, elevations, models, etc.
j. Budget: Define overall project budget and
eligible and ineligible expenditures
including site work, lighting, signage,
insurance, etc.
k. Payment plan to the artists}
1. Dedication/publicity responsibilities of
the artist
m. Allowed signage for identification of the
artist and artwork
n. Project schedule for decision making and
completion
o. Contact person
p. Notification of action on proposals
q. Copyright/Deaccessioning requirements
r. A list of appropriate jury advisors shall
be provided
s. A list of pre-screening panel members shall
be provided if the pre-screening panel is
part of the process
t. A list of appropriate consultants shall be
provided if deemed necessary by the
coordinator or AIPP Board
u. Determine the role of Design Review Board
if the artwork is part of a municipal
construction project that must also be
reviewed by the Design Review Board
24
The AIPP Board and coordinator may work on the
development of a project prospectus at informal
work sessions as well as regularly scheduled
meetings.
The AIPP Coordinator shall also submit the
project to the appropriate Town of Vail
departments so that the following factors may be
reviewed: Public safety, interior and exterior
vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns,
impacts on operational functions of the Town
such as snowplowing and traffic control,
environmental impacts and planning issues.
2. Staff/Board Procedure
a. Once the Art in Public Places Board has
established the written project prospectus,
the coordinator shall place the project
prospectus on the agenda of the next
appropriately scheduled Art in Public
Places Board meeting. The AIPP Board shall
review the written project prospectus at a
regularly scheduled meeting.
Once the Art in Public Places Board
approves the project prospectus, the
coordinator shall present the project
prospectus, the coordinator shall present
the project prospectus to the Town Council
for their approval or denial of the project
prospectus and any associated funding
required for the projects
After the Town Council has approved the
project prospectus and associated funding
required for the project, the Art in Public
Places Board shall implement the project as
approved by the Town Council.
D.
RELOCATION OF EXISTING AIPP OWNED ARTS40RK
1. Submittal Requirements
The AIPP Board or concerned citizen may initiate
a request to relocate an artwork. The
Coordinator is responsible for compiling a
summary report that lists all the background
information on the artwork, any special legal
conditions which relate to the artwork, artists'
rights, information on the new location for the
artwork, property owner's approval for the new
location, time frame for relocating the artwork,
and a review by the Town Attorney outlining any
legal issues related to the request.
25
2. Staff/Board Procedure
The AIPP Coordinator will schedule the proposal
on the agenda for the next appropriately
scheduled AIPP Board meeting.
The AIPP Board will review
respect to policies and cr
to determine if relocation
the artwork. The decision
must be approved. ta-r~a~rrimQtrs
members . ~"~ ~ ''•`~~'~f ~~(
the proposal with
iteria in this chapter
is appropriate for
to relocate a project
~y-by the AIPP Board
~.~
Once the AIPP Board has voted to give final
approval to the relocation of an artwork, the
AIPP Coordinator shall present the proposal to
the Town Council for final approval within 10
days of the AIPP decision.
Once the Town Council has approved the
relocation of the artwork, the AIPP Coordinator,
the AIPP Board and the Town attorney are
responsible for implementing the relocation of
the artwork.
E.
DEACCESSIONING AIPP OWNED ARTWORK
1. Submittal Requirements
The AIPP Board, or a concerned citizen may
initiate a request to deaccession an artwork.
The AIPP Coordinator shall be responsible for
compiling a summary report which reviews how the
artwork was acquired, conditions of acquisition,
artists' rights, and a review from the Town
Attorney identifying legal issues related to
deaccessioning the particular artwork.
2. Staff/Board Procedures
Once the written summary relating to the artwork
has been completed by the Coordinator, the
Coordinator will place the deaccessioning
proposal on the agenda of a regularly scheduled
AIPP Board meeting.
The AIPP Board will review the proposal with
respect to policies and criteria in this chapter
to determine if the deaccession of the artwork
is appropriate. The decision to deaccess an
artwork must be approved the AIPP
Board members . ~ ~. r~a~ct ~~
26
Once the AIPP Board has voted to give final
approval to the deaccessioning of an artwork,
the AIPP Coordinator shall present the proposal
to the Town Council for final approval within 10
days of the AIPP decision.
Once the Town Council has approved the
deaccession of an artwork, the AIPP Coordinator,
the AIPP Board, and Town Attorney are
responsible for implementing the deaccession of
the artwork.
F.
G.
TOWN COUNCIL REVIEW OF THE AIPP BOARD'S DECISION ON
AN ARTWORK.
(~ 2 UiGY~
1. Once the AIPP Coordinator has informed the Town
Council and Town Manager of the AIPP Board's
decision on an artworks the Council and Town
Manager may determine it is appropriate to
review the AIPP Board's decision at a regularly
scheduled Council evening meeting.
2. The artwork project proponent or applicant may
also request that the Town Council review the
AIPP decision on the proposed artwork. The
request shall be filed in writing within ten
days following the AIPP Board's decision on the
artwork.
3. The Council shall schedule the review within 30
days of their vote to review the AIPP Board's
decision with a possible 30 day extension if the
Council finds that there is insufficient
information.
4. The Council, in considering the AIPP's decision
on the artwork, may overturn the decision only
if they find the review procedures of the AIPP
have clearly been violated. The Council shall
not overturn the decision due to the
disagreement with the AIPP over the
appropriateness or other aesthetic concerns
related to the artwork.
ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REVIEW FEE
The Town Council shall set a fee schedule, sufficient
to cover the cost of Town staff time, and incidental
expenses to artwork proposals.
27
H. LAPSE OF AIPP PROJECT APPROVAL
Approval of an artwork as prescribed by this chapter
shall lapse and shall become void one year following
the date of final approval of the project unless
prior to the expiration of one year, the proposed
artwork construction is commenced and diligently
pursued toward completion. However, if there have
been no revisions or amendments to the AIPP
guidelines which would alter the conditions under
which the approval was give, the AIPP Board may
extend the period of approval.
28
. ~
IX. VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA
A. SITE SELECTION CRITERIA
1. Prior to selecting a site for an artwork, the
Art in Public Places Board and/or selection
jury, shall take into consideration the
following factors:
a. The visibility of the site by the general
public
b. Public safety
c. Interior and exterior vehicular and
pedestrian traffic patterns
d. Relationship of proposed site to existing
or future architectural features and to
natural features
e. Facility for users and/or interaction of
users with proposed artwork
f. Future development plans for the area
g. Site design, including landscaping,
drainage, grading, lighting and seating
considerations
h. Relationship of proposed art work to
existing artworks within the site vicinity
i. Environmental impact such as noise and
light associated with the artwork
j. Public accessibility to the art work,
particularly handicap access
k. Impacts on adjacent property owners' views
1. Impacts on operational functions
(snowplowing, etc.) of the Town
B. ARTWORK CRITERIA
The AIPP Board and/or selection jury shall use the
following criteria when reviewing an artwork. The
AIPP Board may include additional criteria for a
specific project.
29
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ualit and Innovation
The consideration of highest priority is the
inherent artistic excellence and innovation of
the artwork.
Timelessness
Each artwork should be viewed as a long term
acquisition that should have relevance
aesthetically to the community in future years.
Due to the high visibility of public art by
residents and guests who frequent public places,
artworks should be selected that reflect
enduring artistic quality.
Compatibility With Site
Works of art should be compatible in style,
scale, material, form, and content with their
surroundings, and should form an overall
relationship with the site.
Permanence
Works of art shall have structural and surface
soundness, and be resistant to theft, vandalism,
weathering. Artwork shall not require excessive
maintenance or repair costs. Artworks that
require expensive and/or continual maintenance
are discouraged.
Public Safet
Artwork shall not create inordinate
problems or liability problems for
public or Town of Vail.
safety
the general
30
Planning and Environmental Commission
June 26, 1989
2x00 Site Visits 3000 Public Hearing
to An amendment to the Municipal Code
correcting Ordinance Noo 26 of 1987 to allow
employee units in Lionsridge Fourth Filingo
Applicants Town of Vail .
#1 20 A request for a Conditional Use permit to
allow a dining deck at Rocky Rococo
Restaurant in the Lionshead Gondola Building
Applicanto Rocky Rococo
#2 3o A request for a Conditional Use permit .to
allow commercial storage at the Concert Hall
Plaza Buildingo
Applicanto Vail %nvestment Company
4o Work session on Bed and Breakfastso
5a Appointment of PEC board member to DRB for
July, August, and,Septembero
~ Red Lion tabled to July lOtha
75 south frontag®roa~
ball, colorac4o s, ~5~ VL 1989
(303) ~7g-a9 58
departm®nt oY public works/transportation
MEMORANDUM
TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
RON PHILLIPS
FROM: STAN BERRYMAN
DATEe JUNE 22, 1989
REe PETE BURNETT - CITIZEN AMBASSADOR PROGRAM TO THE SOVIET
UNION
Pete Burnett has been invited to be a member of a delegation of
public works professionals to visit the Soviet Union in conjunction
with the Citizen Ambassador Program of People to People
International. The delegation will leave on October 8 and return
October 23, 1989.
It is quite an honor for Pete to be selected as one of a very
limited number of top public works professionals in the United
States. The program will provide a great opportunity for mutual
exchange of innovative methods and procedures relating to a wide
variety of public works projects.
The Town of Vail will receive additional international exposure by
having Pete representing Vail in such a prestigious program.
We request $_ ._~ /~ ~ funding so that Pete may attend this
most amazing event.
Please refer to attached material for additional information
relating to the program.
SB/njm
Ac~°IlCa>~ Public ®~°s Ass®cIla~~
"Dedicated to the Protectic)n anc~ Enhancement of the Human Environnrenr "
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
rrrrrJer,r 1313 East 60th Street, Chica o, Illinois 60637-2881
s ''~~~
I':.I
'
Chewer J. Funnyr ' ~
~''
Cummusn,ncr of f'uhhc Nbrks
Atlanl a. Grnrelu
1 ~n~r Pr,aJrru
Harald F.. smith
Ciq Enguucr
Des .Mumc~. law~a
Pucr Prr.uJe^r
Raper A. Brawn
l~ommu~u,ncr ~,I µ'arko
tirvharuupn. Onuaw
DIRECTORS
"~''""'' June 7 1989
James Gruftre+ Greenuuph
Cuc hnglncu
Moncron, ~cw Brunsw,ck
Hren,n ll
Harry Bisco
Dlrrcwr of Punlic Works pdr, Harold P. Burnett
Allemuwn. Pennc}Icama
H
,
,
/l/
Superintendent of Streets
.
A
,,,n
Mark H. ~1cCaio Town of Vad
1'nhhc K',ak•. 4dmmutratar
C,rren,Illr. warn Carallna ,'~
$JUth Frontage Road
k„-,,,,, fl Vail, C® 81657
Patricia :1. Fre(well
Pnnapal P;:mner
Ve.. Urlr,n.. I omslana py~1,,,,,,,,~ AA
y/G41 )iiir. BLYIIett
Hr•fo,n 1.
Vitas I.. Whitman
Iluerr~u °~ Panh; ..,,.", In conjunction with the Ministry of Urban Economics, the Citizen Ambassador
Nlnner A;,, lilmun
,
Program of People to People International is selecting a team of public works
,
,.,,,,,, „
t:rarpr .I, Nilliams resource specialists to visit the Soviet Union this year. The team will have an
""""" "'''°h''' N"`"'
I
~ o rtuni to assess the massive rebuildin efforts now underwa within the Soviet
PPo n g Y
,~.~.
a,.Iel~.r.
F•,e,,.,, ,,; Union's urban infrastructure. I believe that your background and interests would
Runal,l N. Jensrn contribute to the delegation, and aS the appointed delegation leader, I invite you
Ptlnli: ~~..r... t.,:rec:m
Pnarnl,. .fir,; Iln~
t0 join me lII this project.
k„-tI,^ 1 ffr
lhumas :1. Tidrmamon
(l~rri l„r ,II Pu n!I~ l\IIr"~ The invitation for our group to visit the Soviet Union comes at an exciting time aS
La..~nceir• c ~Iant}. Cal;rarma the USSR 15 undertaking many positive changes within its society, and is doing SO
K~~'"'^" in an atmosphere of openness unknown in recent times. This public works visit will
;`n 'tor",~11P~nr~ Wark. provide an unparalleled opportunity for mutual exchange of innovative methods and
`-"'arada sPring.. c"'orad"
' procedures relating to a wide variety of public works projects and programs. The
TORS-AT-LARGE
UIKEC Schedule will provide an excellent opportunity for 11S to exchange ideas, concepts,
Nnj. C.en. nrn Kilhrn. Jr.
Uepwy Chmf of Engmeen and proven methods through technical sessions and field visits. Immense rebuilding
'' ~ '''my
' activijp is challen n Soviet industrialists in infrastructure maintenance, technolo
"~ ~ g gY
W
ashingron. D. C.
Jame, H. Schnub transfer, solid and hazardous waste disposal, transportation systems, public utilities,
Diwngwshcd Senlce Prafrssar water supply, computer-aided design, organizational structure, municipal administrative
C]til Engmccnng
Gnrvcrsny of Florida
management, transportation, utilities, water and sewerage design and treatment, and
C:ainrsvllle. Florida resource deveiopment. The opportunity for American resource managers and public
Ronald l.. tiurris
Dlrcc(ar 5:erT$S Speciolist; tc meet with our Soviet counterparts Srd revieti• these ch211engeS 15
Dn-uian of Devgn and unique within this context of political, social, and economic change.
Can~lruelian
M1:.rir of Mlssaurl
Jefferson Cin. Missouri We wdl aSSeSSS the current status of various rebuildin
g projects and development
ADVISORl' COUNCIL plans as we are received by the Ministry of Municipal Economies, the Soviet
Noper ~. Bra»n
Half Academy of Sciences, and the Council of Ministers (RSFSR). These officials will
Ra, W. Rargrss brief is on public works trends and other industrial expansion projects throughout
">r°^ D `~''k'"'
C
J
h F the comntry. For those delegates who have an interest in establishing economic linkage
a,fp
.
a~a/Ja
Vick N'. Diu;a
with the SotRetS, through perestroika we will have opportunities to expose products
Harrison P Fddv. Jr.
Ranen C. F.;erbraak, ,
~ equipment, and technology to the attention of municipal leaders, political
W'llllam W'. f-ayan heads, and other policy and decision makers in the Soviet Union, some of whom may
Ilrrnen n. c..,r(,~n
(.ruin F. Ilrn,cn
~ lYt 8 position i0 initiate future business exchanges.
Ronert 5. Hop,un
W'Illiam D. Hunr
Jame, L. Af artin
Jame, F.. ~1cCarts'
Jamn J. McDonough
Lamhrn C Mims
Rus N'. More
M lcharl Prnder
John J. Roark
Paul R. ticrcc one
June tipence
Jran I.. ~'inccnr
Carl Kill, 19>341nttmational Public Works Con ress & E ui ment Show -Orlando, Florida - Se tember 23-2>3
g 9 P P
T7teme: "Public 14'urks Chu!lenges jor the l990s"
Our delegation will convene on October 8 and return October 23, 1989. We will visit Moscow,
Odessa, and Tallinn in the U.S.S.R. and Helsinki, Finland. The estimated expense per delegate is
$4350 (lea.ving from and returning to New York); this includes all meetings and activities, trans-
portation, accommodations, most meals, and substantially all other costs. For U.S. citizens, the
project is designed to comply with Section 162 of the tax code for deduction as a business expense
or as an educational expense to maintain or improve one's professional or business skills. To
comply with the substantiation requirements of Code Section 274, a journal will be maintained, and
following the conclusion of the project, it will be published and supplied to each delegate.
People to People was founded in 1956 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to improve communication
between Americans and the citizens of other countries. President Eisenhower initially assigned the
program's management and operation to the U.S. State Department. When he left office in 1961,
the organization was restructured as People to People International, a nonpolitical, private-sector
activity. Since that time, Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan have supported
its goals by serving as Honorary Chairman. The Citizen Ambassador Program, one of several People
to People International activities, administers professional exchanges involving such disciplines as'
medicine, building science, law, agriculture, energy, finance, industrial technology, and the basic
sciences.
The informal exchange of ideas which is characteristic of such international projects will allow us
to share our perspectives regarding public works, compare approaches to common problems in our
profession, and share concepts and practices of mutual interest with our fellow delegates and with
our Soviet colleagues. This will be an excellent chance to meet with our professional counterparts
while at the same time observing firsthand the Soviet government's very different system of public
works. There will also be a supplementary program of cultural activities; a separate program will
be arranged for accompanying spouses who do not wish to attend the professional sessions.
The size of the delegation will be limited; because of the extensive planning and communication
involved iri this mission, I ask that you let me know as soon as possible whether or not you can
join the delegation. My office telephone number is (602) 262-7251. Mr. Michael Lehan, Director
of Energy and Resource Development for the Citizen Ambassador Program, is administering the
exchange and can be reached at (509) 534-0430 in the Pacific time zone. We look forward to
hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Ronald W. Jensen,
Public Works Director
RWJ/bh
cc: Michael E. Lehan
Director, Energy and Resource Development
People to People Citizen Ambassador Program
Dwight D. Eisenhower Building
Spokane, Washington 99202
., ' ~pp ~pp~~,'~~pp~~ pper~,, qq~~
' l~ll9'll~!'~S~!"~df'®JL~
]P~®~~tf11+~
Diri.iun of Intrrnatiunal
Amhi.ador F'ruKrams. Inr.
A Program of
People to People International
Dwight D. Eisenhu~.•rr. Founder
President Ronald Reagan, Honoran Chairman
June 12, 1989
Mr. Harold P. Burnett
Superintendent of Streets
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Burnett:
A few days ago you received a letter from Mr. Ronald Jensen regarding the People to
People Pudic Works Delegation to the Soviet Union this fall. The purpose of my letter is to
provide additional information about the project and the procedures involved in joining the
delegation.
Delegation members will participate in technical meetings and discussion sessions,
institution and facility visits, and informal gatherings with Soviet colleagues. Mr. Jensen
has indicated that some of the following subjects will be the focus of discussion sessions:
1. Evaluation of Resources: personnel, facilities, and equipment
2. Modern Management Techniques: participative management and team building
3. Business Practices in Government: public/private partnerships and employee
ownership
4. Transportation Systems: streets and highways, public transit, and coordinated
transportation
5. Economic Development: market development, public services, and facilities
In consultation with Mr. Jensen, these topics will be further refined as the team is formed,
incorporating the specialized interests and expertise of the individual delegates. This
information will assist us in arranging meetings of the most value to both sides. As a
delegate, you will be involved in bilateral technical exchanges with your professional
counterparts involved in public works positions.
In the event that you are unfamiliar with the history and purpose of People to People
International, 1 have enclosed a pamphlet that provides an historical overview of our
organization and outlines the importance of these professional exchanges, why they benefit
international relations, and how your personal involvement contributes to the success of
these efforts. It is in keeping with this tradition that Mr. Jensen has invited you to
participate in this exchange.
Dwight D. Eisenhower Building Spokane, Washington 99202 509/534-0430 Telex: 326328 FAX: 509/534-5245
Page 2
The success of any People to People project is due, in large part, to the individual
delegates themselves; the make-up of this delegation will have a direct impact on the
professional benefits derived by each team member. Although the major criteria for
invitation of delegates are their professional backgrounds and experience, the ability and
willingness to contribute on apeople-to-people level are also of considerable importance.
The enclosed registration form for membership in the delegation should be completed
and returned to us as soon as possible. Once your participation is confirmed, our staff will
be in touch to coordinate the development and dissemination of biographical and technical
information.
Both Pvlr. Jensen and I hope that you can become a member of this delegation. If you
cannot, I vvould appreciate your advising either him or me. I look forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
Michael E. Lehan, Director
Energy and Resource Development
MEUkb
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Ronald Jensen
TOWN OF VAIL MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council Members
FROMe Steve Thompson
Finance Department
DATEe June 22, 1989
RE: 1988 Audited Financial Statements
Enclosed is the 1988 Audited Financial Statement for your review.
Jerry McMahan from McMahan, Armstrong, and Associates, and staff,
will be presenting the report at the July 11th Council meeting.
In the meantime, if you find something in the report you think is
incorrect, please let me know so we can make any changes before
the Council meeting on July 11th.
Thank you.
REC'~ JUN 2 Z 1989
~lATURAL ENERGY RESOURCES C0~/1PANY
~.s.~.~~~-,,,moo _s~.. __
P. O. Box 561 Palmer Lake, Colorado 80133 (719) 481-2003 FAX (719) 481-d013
June 15, 1989
Senator Bill Armstrong, 6Vashington, D.C. 20510
Representative Hank Brotm, ~Jashington, D.C. 20515
Representative Joel Hefley, >;4ashington, D.C. 20515
Representative Dan Schaefer, 6dashington, D.C. 20515
Dear Senator Armstrong and Representatives Brown, Hefley, and Schaefer:
Your public support of Denver's controversial Two Forks Dam is based
primarily on two false technical arguments:
1. Threat To Agriculture Colorado State University sources are being
misquoted when you say tl'iat 50,000 acres of Northern Colorado land will be
dried up for urban areas, if Two Forks is not built. The City of Thornton's
1986 purchase of irrigated farms is often cited as your main case in point.
However, information from Thornton and CSU confirms that this conclusion is
erroneous. Thornton's innovative City-Farm Kecycling Project is being aided
by CSU water experts, because it is specifically designed to return 60,000
acre feet (100%) of irrigation water to the farms after it is first used by
Northern Metro Denver. It should be noted that Thornton's ongoing City-Farm
Project was illegally ignored by the Corps in its f?TS 64ater Supply Analysis.
The real ~~estern water story is that modern techniques have improved
irrigation efficiency by at least 10% in recent years. This savings more than
doubles the amount of water that could be allocated for urban use via normal
marketing forces iaithout adversely impacting Colorado's agriculture. CSU
water engineers and economists generally agree with the above assessment.
2. Losses To Down River States You accept Denver's contention that Two
Lorks is necessary to save Colorado's entitled water from being lost to down
river states. However, Two Forks and its related follow on transmountain
diversion projects are all designed to take more water from the currently
over-depleted Upper Colorado Basin tributaries. Meanwhile, the untapped, but
"overlooked", Gunnison Basin is losing almost a million acre feet of Colorado
entitled water to Arizona and California. Arapahoe County's advanced Union
Park Reservoir alternative for Metro Denver is specifically designed to
economically help Colorado correct its serious unbalanced water usage. In
addition, Union Park's high altitude, off river Gunnison reservoir will
provide needed drought protection for Colorado's river environments on both
slopes. The Gunnison's surplus water vas illegally ignored in the ItS to
protect Metro Denver's 50 year investment in its outmoded Two Forks Project.
Suggest a re-evaluation of your public position on Two Forks before these
technical errors become even more political and damaging to Colorado's
national enviro-economic image.
Sinc rely ~A
~ , i`~
~i D. (Dave) Mil er, President
ADM/bm
cc: Pres. Bush, U.S. Congressional Delegates, LPA, Colorado Legislators.
~®
Uni~~crsin•
June 16, 1989
The Honorable Hank Brown
1424 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D. C. 2051
Dear Congressman Brown:
Gtllef;e of A);ricultural Sciences
O(ficc ~rf the 1)can
P~rct (:~illins, (:nltir:~d~i v11.5L.3
(.ill.il 441-hZ7Z
Dr. R. A. (Bob) Young of the Agricultural and Resource Economics
Department of Colorado State University has been cited by staff members in
some of the Colorado delegations' offices in regard to the effects of the
Ttao Forks dam. He has been quoted as saying that 55,000 acres (or more)
of irrigated land would be de-watered if the Two Forks permit were to be
denied. Fie has used the 55,000 acre figure in informal talks. However,
the matter is cx~nplex and Dr. Young tells me that the 55,000 acre figure
is a worst-case scenario.
lfie 55,000 acres was arrived at by assuming alT water would have to Dome
from agriculture at a rate of 1.75 acre feet per acre, ~tfe net figure
would be much smaller because the 1.75 acre feet does not take into
account return flow of sewage effluent. Also, the 1.75 figure is a rough
estimate and the actual figure must be resolved by the relevant court
under Colorado water law.
`Ilze Thornton example is a case in point. 'IY)e city of Thornton has
purchased water in northern Colorado and the city's plan calls for
building a pipeline to return effluent back to northern Colorado to be
used for irrigation purposes. In most other cases the effluent would be
available only for downstream users.
I~hope this clarifies what is a very ccnrplex issue.
Sincerely,
Merle H. Niehaus
Dean
BXC: Mr. David Miller r"
Note to Mr. Miller: Same letter sent to Representative Joel Hefley,
Senators William Armstrong and Tim Worth
lIANK f)HOWN
ETH DISC R+C1. CDLOR.DO
COM MI1 trr ON
WAYS AND MEANS
~o~tgt•e~~ of t~je ~~tite~ ~tAte~
~1ou~e of ~e~rc~c~ttntiUeg
~lt~~iji~tgtoit, ~D~C 20515
May 30, 1989
Allen D. Miller
President
Natural Energy
P.O. Box 567
Palmer Lake, CO
Dear Dave:
Resources Company
80133
OI/IC[ A00 R[SS
1424 LONGWORIN BuHOiNa
WASHINGTON. DC 20515
(2021 2 25-4 8 78
DISTRICT OFFICES:
1015 37TH AVENVE COURT
SUITE 101 A
GREELEY, CO 80834
(303) 352-4112
301 5. EIOWES, Roots 203
FORT Cou+HS, CO 80521
1303) 493-9 132
243 POST OrriEE BHILDiNG
U JUN1A, CO 81050
(719) 384-7370
311E PLATTE AvE.
FORT MOR('.AN, CO 80701
(303) 867-8909
ADAMS AND ARAPAIIOF COUNrIFS
1303) 486-3443
Thank: you for your letter requesting a Congressional
inve~;tigation of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Two
Forks Project. I appreciate your taking the time to come back
to Wzlshington recently to give a presentation on alternatives to
Two Forks .
As you know, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
William Reilly has initiated a veto of the permit for Two Forks
Dam. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Metropolitan Water
Providers now have until July 14 to consult with EPA and propose
changes in the scope of the project or increase the
environmental mitigation measures.
Administrator Reilly has indicated that during this process
alternatives to the Two Forks proposal will be investigated. It
appears that in light of the EPA's review of the Two Forks
Project and alternative projects that a Congressional review is
unnecessary.
Again, h~~you for contacting me.
~ I
Sines e~'~, _,~
';:.
% June 16, 1989
Hank, Many thanks for your last night's telephone
''I k Brown call. Appreciated the 40 minute opportunity to
r Member of Congress give a firsthand account why the Two forks ETS is
an unlawful decision document. Also, I welcome
H B/ja c your offer to encourage Colorado water experts to
take a fair look at the superior, but "overlooked",
City-L arm and Union Park (Gunnison) alternatives
being developed for Metro Denver by the City of
Thornton and Arapahoe County.
~-e~
Pnt;c~ B/.lone, 1989
LITIC~iTION/WATER RIGNfS
~, Denver bu s mountain land
ms RANCH CREEK
~~"~r ~
9. S COLLECTION CONDUIT
.p< ~/ / ~ 296 acres $f`l/A
G°
l~ ~\ ~ Wintor Park
/ \ i ~
Wolcott R HERT IUNNEL
COLLECTION SYSTEhI
Fs.' j \ 108 acres 3600.000
~~^ ~ ~ DENVER
Frisco
AREAO
EAG1-E COLORADO ~ ~ LOST PARK ~
COLLECTION SYSTEP.9 ~ RESERVOIR e TtiVO FORKS
1,r,29 acres 34.8 million / J \ 319 acres OAP•t
/ / \\ $150.000 5 B00 acres
S-f.9 rndlion
1~ ~ ®Fairplay Q~z ~ Dadcars
/ / \~ ~ ®g.
enver to®ks to other pr®jee~s
DF,NVER, Colo. - hiost of the
trnnsmountain water diversions
planned by Denver and its suburbs
would lie useless if the controversial
Two Forks dam ie not built, several
water planners agreed recently.
Thn Denver Wntcr 13onrd has lonq-
rangc plans for major diversions
from the Blue, Eaple, and Fraser
Rivers on Colorado's Western Slope,
while the City of Aurora and Ara-
pahoe County are vying over the
rights to take watr_r from the Gunni-
son River basin. Most of these proj-
ects need a lame holding pond on the
Eastern Slope.
The proposed Denver projects
would take water from the east and
NOTL;: The "overlooked" Union Park alternative from the un-
tapped Gunnison Basin will increase the safe yield of Metro
Denver's existing system 40'~ more than Two lorks for about
half the unit cost. This massive, high altitude,_off river
reservoir. will also provide balanced, multi-year drought
protection for Colorado's river environments on both slopes.
Two forks and its related future diversions would worsen the
current over-depletion of Upper Colorado Basin headwaters.
Although the Gunnison Basin currently loses almost a million
acre feet of Colorado entitled water to the down river states,
this vast surplus water source was illegally ignored in the
Metro Denver T;IS. Union Park has a 1999 completion date, and
is certain to be Colorado's next major water project.
west sides of the Gore Range, obove
the towns of Vail and Dillon, and
transfer this water by• gravity to
Lake Dillon in Summit County, then
under the mountains through the
Roberts Tunnel to the South Platte
River, Denver has already rspent $5.4
million to acquire properties for the
projects, which would not be built
until the year 2030.
Ed Reutz, spokesman for the Den-
ver Water Bon rd, confirmed the
problem but said the converse is not
true: T~vo Forks does not necessarily
need the Western Slope projects. But
,the additional trnnsmountain diver-
sions would allow the giant Eastern
Slope dam to operate more efTi-
ciently.
Planners for Arapahoe and Aurora
recently came to the same cronclusion
about the Collegiate Range Aurora
Project, which would take water
from the the Taylor River, a tribu-
tary to the Gunnison.
llowever. one proposed proiect
called Union Pnrk mieht work with-
out Two Forks. Union Park is a lame
subalpine meadow at 10.000 feet in
the upper Tnylor drainage. Promot-
ers of the project, including Ara-
ahce Count which bo ht the idea
Inst vent, sav n dam there could hol
up to a million acre feet, enough for
both Eastern and Western Slopes`
usnpe• -
6-10-89, (719}981-2003
-- - U. S. Via TER NEl~YS _ _ - --- - -
ugh vuant~ Forks aiterna~~~;~e
By PAM MAPLES .
Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer
President George Bush indicated
this week he'd like to find an alter-
native to the Two Forks water pro-
jest, Nebraska Gov. Kay Orr said.
"He is hopeful that there is some
other way to meet the water needs
of Denver," Republican Gov. Kay
Orr said after discussing her oppo-
sition to Two Forks with Bush dur-
ing his visit to Lincoln on Tuesday.
"It is an uncomfortable position
for the president."
Bush was in Nebraska to pro-
mote his clean-air proposalsoOrr,
one of his political allies, told re-
porters she didn't ask for, or re-
ceive, acommitment from Bush.
Orr said Bush "feels in the mid-
rile" of fF,e fight between Cvivrad0
and Nebraska officials over the
project. to dam the South Platte
But Nebraska
governor says
president didn't
commit himself
River, which joins the North Platte
River in Nebraska to form the
Platte River that flows eastward
through the_ state.
Meanwhile, officials of Colorado
political and water groups contin-
ued lobbying for the $500 million
project, which would flood Chees-
man Canyon southwest of Denver.
GOP Reps. Dan Schaefer, Hank
Brown and Jcel Hefley met for
more than ahalf-hour yesterday
ir-orning wiih White House chief of
staff John Sununu to brief him on
Two Forks. Sununu also attended
Bush's discussion with Orr.
Also, two Denver Water Board
officials flew to Lincoln yesterday
to give their side of the Two Forks
issue to Nebraska water officials.
The project has bipartisan sup-
port in Colorado, but bipartisan op-
position in Nebraska.
It received initial approval of
regional Environmental Protec-
tion Agency officials and other fed-
eral agencies while President Rea-
gan was in office.
But Bush's EPA administration
William Reilly indicated 6e was
starting the process to veto Two
Forks. That touched off lobbying
by Colorado to get Bush to reverse
Reilly's decision and to counter
Nebraska's lobbying efforts. ~
Colorado supporters downplayed
Bush's remarks as reflected by Orr
and said 'they remain optimistic
the dam will be approved.
"Here's a guy (Bush) passing
through town, riding around in a
limousine with the governor of
that state and talking about this.
That's not a decision," said Sen.
Bill Armstrong, R-Colo., a leader
of Colorado Republicans' efforts to
lobby the White House. "We don't
know what he said, or how he said '
it, or what he meant."
A White House spokesman said
"the president's remarks (to Orr)
stand. We are not in a position to
amplify at this point."
Orr was traveling and could not
be reached for comment. Her
spokesman, Doug Parrott, said the
governor talked to Bush about
three or four issues during his vis-
it, including Two Forks.
"It wasn't like an hour-long dis-
cussion of this, but she felt very
good about it," Parrott said.
Urr also told Bush about a re-
cent Rocky Mountain News poll
that showed Denver residents op-
pose the project. She said it sur-
prised him and seemed to have
"made quite an impression."
Sununu asked the Colorado dele-
gation about the News poll, which
showed 47% of city voters opposed
Two Forks, 32% supported it and
2l% were undecided, the congress-
men said. Schaefer and Hefley said
they told him the poll reflects the
mood during a time of adequate
water supplies but does not take
into account growing demand or
the impact of droughts.
Nebraska water officials were
not swayed by the Denver water
officials' presentation }-esterday,
said hydrologist Ann Bi~td. The
Denver officials requested the
meeting, she said, apparently after
Nebraska officials disputed the
conclusions of a water board docu-
ment, "Myths about Two Forks,"
that is being used by the Colorado
lobbyists.
~:~~
June 15, 1989
The Honorable Hank Brown
U.S. House of Representatives
1424 Longworth Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Brown:
1®
University
Cooperative Extension
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
RE: Impacts On The Rural Sector Of Colorado If 'l~ao Forks Dam Is Postponed Or
Rejected.
It has been brought to my attention that I am cited by your staff as the source
of estima*_es that 55,000 acres of irrigated land would be de-watered if the Two
Forks permit were to be denied. While the estimated acreage tradeoff is a figure
I have used, when hedged with careful qualifications, I do not wish to be
associated with the further implication that market solutions to Colorado water
problems should be rejected out of hand.
The matter is, of course, complex, so the purpose of this letter is to indicate
my position more clearly.
I have not given detailed study to the Two Forks issue nor have I published any
specific figures on potential alternatives. However, because it appears to me
that more reliance on market forces might be benei;icial to both rural and urban
interests in the west, I have studied the potential impacts of water markets over
the last several years. Because of this research, I have been called on to meet
with several interested groups regarding the impacts a Two Forks rejection during
the past few months, and have made some informal estimates of impacts.
The 55,000 acres is my worst case estimate, arrived at by assuming all water
would have to come from agriculture at a rate of 1.75 care feet per acre. (Any
such estimate can only be an educated guess, because the actual amount per acre
must be resolved by the relevant court under Colorado water law.) Because the
1.75 acre feet per acre doesn't allow for return flows (largely sewage) from
cities, which could go back to downstream farms, the net acreage loss could be
much less than the abo~~e "*.~~orst case," even if all water came from retirement
of irrigated lands.
Secondly, I do not believe that irrigation water is the only alternative to Two
Forks. A number of other options exist. For example, urban conservation, Windy
Gap and further imports from the Colorado River Basin could shoulder part of
the growth in demand.
Thirdly, market-type options exist for obtaining water from rural Colorado
without completely drying up farms. These would require some change in basic
Colorado water law and traditional management practices to encourage changing
irrigation patterns by farmers, but they seem to me to hold promise to, in Ray
Moses' phase, "Have our water cake and eat it too." Hence, the most optimistic
scenario could involve withdrawing water from the least economically productive
uses (forage crops) and not drying up lands other than those being taken by
growing cities.
Colorado titatc l ~niversit)', 1'.S. Department of ;\sriculnue and (i>lorado counties a«iixratin¢.
CeN+pcrati~r Iixtcneion prnrrams are availahle m all without discrimination,
The Honorable Hank Brown
Page 2
June 15., 1989
Next, tlZe third party impacts of even the worst case scenario may not be all
negatives or very large. For example, I would think farmers who own water rights
would actually have an interest in opposing dams. This is because in the absence
of dams;, urban demands give strong support to the market value of their water
rights, whether they are the immediate sellers or not. (Windy Gap, built much
in advance of need for its water, likely reduced the value of water rights of
irrigation companies in Northern Colorado by several hundred million dollars.
Water rights prices in the Poudre Basin, when adjusted for inflation remain below
their values of twenty years ago.) Also, in today's post-industrial economy,
the small change in South Platte Valley farm production represented by even the
worst case alternatives to Two Forks would have a hardly discernable impact on
the local economy. Our statistical studies suggest that about 600 (six hundred)
local oi'f-jobs would be associated with 55,000 acres but could supply water to
400,000 more urban residents.
I would suggest that the appropriate policy for the state to pursue is to update
its water law so that market farces can better operate, while giving whatever
attention is necessary to protecting interested third parties in the potentially
affectecL rural communities. In such a framework, dams can be built when they
are the least-cost source of water, and markets relied on in other cases.
Your i.ncerely,
C,~ ~
R.A. Youin
Professor
RAY/mep
4
~,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
JUNE 21, 1989
1:30 P.M.
SITE VISITS
11:00 A.M.
8 1 Vacation Properties & Golden Bear Awning/Signage
A & D Building (Kristan)
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO JULY 5TH MEETING
7 2 Kitchenworks Sign (Betsy)
Vail Village Inn
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO JULY 5TH MEETING
3. Ram Residence (Final) (Betsy)
Lot 3, Block 2, Lionsridge Filing 2
MOTION: Herrinton SECOND: Sante VOTE: 4-0
Make columns 8'° x 14", raise chimneys, fascia
to match roof.
10 4. Gunn Residence (Mike)
Lot 10, Block 1, Vail Village 1st Filing
MOTION: Osterfoss SECOND: Sante VOTE: 4-0
Approved final colors and materials to be worked
out with staff members.
~.
~~
18 5. Louthan Remodel (Mike)
Lot 8, Block 5, Bighorn 5th
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Osterfoss VOTE: 4-0
Approved as submitted.
13 6. The Ledges - 6 Single Family Homes (Mike)
Getty Oil Parcel, East Vail
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Herrington VOTE: 4-0
Final - approved as submitted.
3 7. Cascade Crossing (Mike)
MOTION: Herrington SECOND: Saute VOTE: 4-0
Approve with conditions:
1. Roof detail be submitted for staff review.
2. All mechanical equipment on roof be painted
to match roof color.
3. Coordiate with vail professional building on
berm along east property line.
1 8. Sandstone Road Improvement Project (Mike)
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Osterfoss VOTE: 4-0
Consent approval.
9. Litchfie:Ld Residence - changes to approved plans
Lot 8, Block 2, Vail Village 3rd (Mike)
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
WITHDRAWN
17 10. Gwapom Single Family Homes (Rick)
Lots 6 & 7, Block 1, Bighorn 3rd
MOTION: Herrington SECOND: Osterfoss VOTE: 4-0
Approved as submitted and revised.
~ Y
2 11. Cahill Residence (Rick)
Lot 6, Block 9, Intermountain
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Herrington VOTE: 4-0
Approved as submitted.
14 12. East Vail Bike Path (Rick)
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Osterfoss VOTE: 4-0
Consent approved.
4 13. Vail Glo Lodge Sign (Rick)
MOTION: Osterfoss SECOND: Herrington VOTE: 4-0
Approved.
12 14. Booth Creek Rockfall Hazard Mitigation (KP)
MOTION: Osterfoss SECOND: Pat H. VOTE: 3-0-1
Approved with conditions.
11 15. Gore Creek Project Sign (Kristan)
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Pam O. VOTE: 4-0
Consent approved.
9 16. Vail Athletic Club - Color Change (Betsy)
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Pam O. VOTE: 4-0
Consent approved.
J'
~a
16 17. Oelbaum Residence
Lot 3, Block 1, Bighorn 1st
MOTION: Saute SECOND: Pam O.
Approved with conditions.
15 18. McComic
Lot 1, Bighorn Subdivision
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: Saute
(Betsy)
VOTE: 4-0
(Betsy)
VOTE: 4-0
Subject to approval by Public Works.
6
19. Gore Creek Plaza Building Alteration
(Conceptual) (Betsy)
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
20. Sarratt Residence Alteration (Betsy)
2949 Booth Creek Drive
MOTION: Pam O. SECOND: Pat H. VOTE: 3-0-1
Ned Gwathmey Abstaines.
5 Montaneros, Site Visit Only (Betsy)
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
,T
r
MEMBERS PRESENTo
Ned Gwathmey
Peggy Osterfoss
Pat Herrington
Roy Sante
STAFF APPROVALSe
Richard Strauss Gallery Sign - 201
Sue Dugan Residence Repaint - L 5,
Vail Trails East unit #2, addition
Alpine Townhomes III - addition of
MEMBERS ABSENT°
Jamie McCluskie
Gore Creek Drive°
B 2, Intermountain°
of skylight°
deck on lower level°
IOWn 0
75 south frontage road
vail, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2136
PUBLIC NOTICE
To be published in THE VAIL TRAIL Friday, June 30, 1989.
Because the July 4th Holiday falls on the first Tuesday of the month,
i.e., the regularly scheduled Town of Vail Town Council evening
meeting date, the Town Council will convene its first regular meeting
of the month on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, 75 South Frontage Road West,
.Vail, Colorado. The second regularly scheduled meeting will follow
on the third Tuesday, July 18, 1989, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council
Chambers. This change is pursuant to 2.04.030 Regular Meeting -
Deferment. MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL.
All members of the public are invited to attend.
TOWN OF VAIL
Pamela A. Brandmeyer
Town Clerk
MEMORANDUM
T0: Pat Dodson
FROM: Ron Phillips ~~
DATE: June 27, 1989
SUBJECT: Vail Town Council/VMRD Committee Meeting
The following is a recap of what I understand the outcome of the Committee meeting
to be regarding VMRD capital improvements and other issues.
1. The Town is to be responsible for paving the Ford Park parking lot when it
is appropriate. This lot serves the tennis courts, softball fields, amphitheater,
and alpine garden. The Town will also be responsible for landscaping the parking
lot, but not the tennis courts. The VMRD plans for building two additional tennis
courts and a tennis pro shop building may be carried out in late 1989 or early 1990.
2. The ice arena heat exchanger .needs to be replaced now according to your
assessment. The Town staff will discuss this with you further and examine what can
be done under the lease agreement and within our budget. We will address it and
resolve it before the end of July.
3. You stated that the Rink Tex floor needs to be replaced soon. I would
appreciate it if you could give us the background information on this such as the
recommended life of the floor, what kinds of problems you are experiencing, at what
point do maintenance costs become prohibitive, etc. Also, can replacement be
approached in phases over a number of years?
4. The Committee discussed the possibility of the Town waiving building permit
fees for VMRD. We will examine what has been done with other special districts and
discuss this with you further.
5. The VMRD members on the Committee agreed to present to the full VMRD Board
the request that restricted golf passes be provided to the Town for employees and
board members at no cost. Accounting for use of the passes will be done as in the
past. The Town passes would not be upgradable to unrestricted passes.
6. You stated that some levels of supervisors in the Public Works Department
have not been as cooperative as they should be. I am addressing this issue with
Stan Berryman.
I think it was a good beginning meeting. The members discussed meeting quarterly,
so we should begin thinking about a date for the next meeting sometime in late
summer or early fall.
RUP/bsc
cc: Town Council
o
MINUTES
VAIL VALLEY MARKETING BOARD
Thursday, June 22, 1989
7:30 a.m., Town of Vail
ATTENDEES: Committee Members
Alan Aarons
Mike Beckley
Jerry Davis
Frank Johnson
Kevin Payne
Alternate Members
Tom Britz
Others
Sylvia Blount
Charles Wick
Schenkein (Sharon Sherman, Shari
ABSENT: Kent Myers
Jan Strauch
Fowler, Ellen Senkier)
JUNE 15 MINUTES
Motion: Mike Beckley Second: Tom Britz All voted yes to approve minutes.
Jerry -
Went to Roger Brown's studio to review the film and footage; he reviewed what was
missing:
1. If convention piece, need facilities shots/transportation shots.
2. More kids/older folks involved in activities.
3. More "regular people" shots.
Need to:
1. Decide if we want film/video.
2. Get bid from Roger and others.
Allen - what are we going to use it for?
Sharon - need visual piece for conferences/meetings.
- great footage, but needs to be scripted, directed, and edited to focus on
audience.
Sylvia - trade shows.
- fulfill requests from meeting planners.
Jerry - need decision to proceed or not.
- may be able to get coop money to help.
- do not need to deal with budget money now.
Mike - address special events in video ... "This is a great place to have an
event."
Motion: Tom Britz Second: Mike Beckle Board supports the concept of developin
video for specific purposes - sales subcommittee back with recommendations. All
voted yes.
Kevin - develop use plan with specific budget, timetable, responsibilities - script,
direction, priority list with costs attached.
o ~
VRA contract discussed.
Motion: Kevin Payne Second: Tom Britz Larry Eskwith to include verbia a June
15-October 31, 1988 baseline be adiusted to reflect new commission structure in
place now.
Financials reviewed.
Jerry - need expenditures from Dave Reece.
Shari - first invoice will break it down.
- should have breakdown at July 29 meeting.
Public Relations -
Sharon - one general news release gone.
- black and white photos accompanied.
- 4th of July release delivered to Front Range papers.
- media blitz on Alpine Garden dedication out the first part of July.
- showed art concepts letterhead/press kits.
Kevin - discussed local P.R.
Jerry - papers have covered us well in the last week and we do not need effort now.
Alan - should focus on promoting Vail outside.
- board has no promotional value.
Sharon - will do a release with ads in it and send to local papers.
- has talked with Pat Peeples regarding Shauny National clipping service. We
will be charged for clips relating to summer.
- will report monthly on what has run.
Jerry - should compile at the end of campaign and copy for all entities that
contributed.
Reviewed copy for 4th of July release. Mike to review with subcommittee for
accuracy, and get back to Sharon.
Reviewed ads -
Ellen played radio spots.
Rob - showed polaroid of "wake up in a different world."
- models need to be older. ..
- background bland ... does not say "a different world."
Ellen - reviewed and revised "calmer body of water" ad copy.
Shari - will review research in detail next week.
Kevin -future meeting schedule.
Jerry - should develop recommendations of the Board for community to deal with,
i.e., facilities, Convention & Visitors Bureau, etc.
Mike - should not stop meeting until we are unproductive - continue meeting weekly
until we do not have anything to cover.
Special Events - Mike needs local P.R. on subcommittee to heighten awareness of its
function.
Kevin - need to send letter to focus group participants. Sylvia will coordinate
lodging for them.
Ellen - Focus groups
Dallas - people with experience in Colorado sceptical ... liked old west character.
- Vail least favorite with people - same feelings as Denver group.
- people without experience had no impression.
-2-
~ e
- believed Vail not a place for kids.
- plan vacations months in advance, but may try spur of moment.
Reviewed copy for Dallas ad - Ellen to revise and get Kevin's approval.
Motion: Frank Johnson Adjourn meeting. Second: Mike Beckley All voted yes.
Minutes Approved
~~~
Motio
"an
Second
a q_ ~4~
Date
-3-
0
`\\~ ~
1 F~1
_~f.'='~
r
~~/~ W'
, ~r i
.~
YCt~.'~ i. ~ ~?
~~~. ~.~a;Y ~..r..
--i:~I~~rTf~
p~e0 ° ~ ~
u
~~~ -~A ~ 1
u: Lip +:.r ~ ~ ~ .
~~ ~~
-- -
._._
t
Something magica} }~appens when you spend t}~e nig}~t in t}~e Vai} Valley.
ter }paving a great men} in one o~ a }~undred restaurants,
re}axing in a poo} or ~-ot tali, taxing in a s}iow, and just lireat}ping the ~res}~ mountain air,
you're ready ~or a good nig}~t s s}eep.
~~
But w}ien you wa}xe up in t}~e morning and seG
t}~e towering mountains outside your window and t}~e European arc}~itecture a}} around,
you eou}c} swear you were in a ~araway }anc}.
.~'E
It's a p}ace to escape }i~e s pressures and enjoy its p}ensures. A„d it's ready {or you this summer.
m1989 Vai~ Va~~ey 1~1ar~eting R,anl
°Age reotrictio~u vary by pmpcrty.
Pkaae u~ ~ur ~etai~e.
Rooms ~rom ~~9
per nib}it, yids free`
Ysl
For reservations or information, call
1-800-525-3875
a
Sc~e~r~
'.~~`. i'; il:;itl;;,~::~ii'1~tIlI1~T ~'ti~~~i~ ~~~ ~~ICiI't
~.
D~~TYNA'I'IN AIZI~'I'
I~~C~JS BIZLTP IZESEAIZCFI FIN INGS
~LJNE 29® 199
KANSAS CITY
Two focus group sessions were held in Kansas City on June 20, 1989 at Quality
Controlled Services. Group 1 consisted of people who had taken a summer vacation
to Colorado (but not to Vail) within the past three years. Group 2 consisted of
people who had not taken a summer vacation to Colorado within the past three
years. About one-half were either single or married with no children under 18. The
participants with children had an annual household income of at least $75,000,
while participants with no children had an annual household income of $60,000 or
more.
Participants in both groups were active vacationers and nearly all were taking an
out-of-state vacation this summer. The participants who had taken a summer
vacation to Colorado were fairly familiar with the State. The second group (had not
visited) was less familiar with Colorado as a vacation destination but nearly
everyone had some experience vacationing in the State. In general, the Kansas City
focus group participants were less familiar with Colorado than those from Dallas.
.The weather/climate was the most important criteria in selecting a summer
vacation destination for people in both groups. They also rated uni ue
atmosphere/ambiance, si htg seeing, activities/sports available and type of lodging as
important criteria.
Shopping opportunities and distance from home were not important criteria for
nearly all of the participants. Some participants considered events such as concerts
and festivals to be important, while others considered events to be not important.
Most of the participants were very positive about Colorado as a place for a summer
vacation and spoke highly about their past experiences. The weather/climate (cool
and dry relative to Kansas City in the summer) and the beauty of the mountains
were the two things that most attracted these people to Colorado.
Those who had taken a summer vacation in Colorado during the past three years
(Group 1) were most positive about Vail, Aspen and Breckenridge as places for a
summer vacation in Colorado. All of those who rated Vail (8 of 10) considered it an
"excellent" place for a summer vacation. When asked which one area they would
,'.irn!irr \;u i~a;.~i ~'~citeru,uig r\_^'n!.~ ;~er,rnrle ~rnh nft!~r> in ur.nr!ir;l 1. ~ i ,:n.t~i!an. !'_!tr~~i~;;tn ,uul :\>e:n .
I l ~~) ~/i~1 ~Lt:'cC. _ J:f~.' i-rilll ~~~PtIA'~'I~. LU~Uf:!~~(~ ~l''-~1 7 I,JI~i) )U")-(~~ )~
f
prefer, four out of ten preferred Breckenridge, two selected Aspen and one chose
Vail. Those preferring Breckenridge mentioned the ambiance of the town and the
activities available as reasons why they liked it.
The participants who had not taken a summer vacation in Colorado during the past
three years (Group 2) had no opinion about most Colorado resort areas as places for
a summer vacation. However, most of these participants did have opinions about
Vail, Aspen and Breckenridge. They rated these three areas as either "good" or
"excellent." Vail was the preferred area for three of the participants compared to
two for Aspen and two for Estes Park.
Most participants do not perceive Vail to be a good place for a family vacation -they
view Vail as primarily fora "couples" vacation.
The majority of participants (6) in Group 1 preferred the "International Resort"
concept statement over "Luxury Getaway" (4). None of the participants liked
"Fantasy" because it sounded like a "story book" and provided no information.
Those preferring "International Resort" thought it was a more accurate description
of Vail. These people did not have the same concerns as the people in Denver and
Dallas about Vail being "glamorous" or "world class." The people who preferred
"International Resort" also thought that the "Luxury Getaway" statement was trying
to be all things to all people.
All of the participants in Group 2 preferred "Luxury Getaway." They felt that the
statement presented the best of both worlds (i.e. outdoor activities with comfortable
accommodations). They were also attracted by the term "reasonable priced." A
couple of participants asked what was meant by "Vail Valley." They were confused
about this term and thought it might refer to a specific development within the Vail
area. Participants in Group 2 did not like the use of "high .class" in the
"International Resort" statement. They also found "Fantasy" to be lacking in
substance.
In general, the Kansas City participants were more positive about the concept
statements than either the Denver or Dallas participants.
The Kansas City focus group participants were most favorable to the ads which
emphasized rest and relaxation or the scenic beauty of the mountains. Specific ads
that received the best responses were:
1. Therapeutic Waters
2. Escape the Heat, Closer to the Sun
3. Escape to Another World
4. Let Nature Take Its Course
5. Balloons (With Mountains)
6. Apres Ski
Participants liked the event ad (Apres Ski) because it gave them more information
about Vail as a summer vacation destination. However, some participants said they
might not read it because it was very wordy. They suggested that the ad should
focus more on the "other daily activities" and less on the events. It was also
recommended that the "800" telephone number be identified with the agency that
one would be calling.
0
Sce~~r~
!.
,:,ci~-~;~ i ~;irt_~;, _.,farl:etin~. ~'ttl~,.c ~{C.i<l~i:~ttt
~~ES~'INA'I'IN AIZ]~T'
~~C~JS ~®U IZSEAI~CI-I FI~TI~II~GS
~~.JNE ~9~ ~9~9
~~la~
Two focus group sessions were held in Dallas on June 15, 1989 at Focus on Dallas.
Group 1 consisted of people who had taken a summer vacation to Colorado (but not
to Vail) within the past three years. Group 2 consisted of people who had not taken
a summer vacation to Colorado within the past three years. About one-half were
either single or married with no children under 18. The participants with children
had an annual household income of at least $75,000, while participants with no
children had an annual household income of $60,000 or more.
Participants in both groups were active vacationers and nearly all were taking an
out-of-state vacation this summer. The participants who had taken a summer
vacation to Colorado were very familiar with the State and had visited many of the
resort areas including Vail. Although several of these people had traveled to
Colorado to visit relatives, they also had stayed at resort areas and paid for lodging.
The second group (had not visited) was less familiar with Colorado as a vacation
destination but nearly everyone had some experience vacationing in the State. .
The weather/climate was the most important criteria in selecting a summer
vacation destination for people in both groups. Si htseeing was also very important
to most people. Activities/sport available was very important to those in the first
group, but not to those in the second. In general, the first group was somewhat
younger and appeared to embrace a more active lifestyle. (This may also be a reason
why they had visited Colorado so often.) The top rated selection criteria by group
were:
Group ~
(i-iave Visited)
Group 2
(Piave Not Visited)
Weather/climate
Activities/sports available
Sightseeing
Type of lodging
Unique atmosphere/ambiance
Weather/climate
Cost of lodging
Sightseeing
Unique atmosphere/ambiance
Cost of air travel
'.ICnll)il" i~ ~ur~ral :1,1~~, rn,:r.;~ :;~_ m.~ ~~~~,~~-~ ui; ~~: nh ullirr> in p. nu il!:! ti.5 . ir,!n,ulian. i~.un ~pran .u!,I .-1~inn ~ ui <..
~._ ~ 1 .i1 !i'_t. ~. ,..' t1{'1~. ~:Cl1 A'i 1~. t.!tit rl-dtitU i5t ~i_l.' ~ till)) ~~l ~'?`~~ j
.~ ~ I ;
All of the participants were very positive about Colorado as a a place for a summer
vacation and spoke highly about their past experiences. They were enthusiastic
about returning to Colorado for another vacation. The weather and climate (cool
and dry relative to Dallas in the summer) and the beauty of the mountains were the
two things that most attracted these people to Colorado.
Participants in Group 1 had the most positive perceptions about Aspen, Durango
and Estes Park as places for a summer vacation in Colorado. They were least
positive about Winter Park and Telluride. Most participants rated Vail as a "good"
or "excellent" place for a summer vacation but they really did not know much about
Vail for summer vacations. A couple participants thought of Vail as "too
expensive" or "too snobby."
The participants in Group 2 typically had no opinion about specific Colorado resort
areas for a summer vacation. They were most likely to have an opinion bout either
Aspen or Vail and they usually rated these areas as good or excellent. Again, a few
participants thought Vail was too expensive or was for the elite.
The focus group participants had mixed feelings about the three concept statements.
Most participants in Group 1 preferred "The Fantasy" over the other two, but they
said that it lacked substance and did not provide enough information about Vail.
These participants did not like "Luxury Getaway" primarily because of the reference
to the shopping at Ralph Lauren, Giorgio of Hollywood, etc. They did not like
"International Resort" because they thought it was "snobbish" and excluded people
like themselves.
Most participants (7 out of 10) in Group 2 preferred "The Luxury Getaway" concept
over the others, although they had the same reservations about the references to
high-end shopping. Shopping was not something that people in Dallas associate
with Vail nor was it a reason why they might select Vail over other Colorado
resorts.
Many of the participants felt that the concept statements were trying to make Vail
into a place that was not consistent with Colorado or the reasons they would take a
summer vacation there.
The focus group participants were most favorable to the ads which emphasized rest
and relaxation or the scenic beauty of the mountains. Specific ads that received the
best responses were:
1. Therapeutic Waters
2. Escape the Heat, Closer to the Sun (Group 1)
3. Escape the Heat, Sweater (Group 2)
4. Let Nature Take Its Course
5. Take 18 for Relief (particularly the golfers)
6. Apres Ski
Participants liked the event ad because it gave them more information about Vail as
a summer vacation destination. Among the three titles, all of the participants
preferred "Apres Ski" instead of "Civilized Colorado" or "Where the World Comes
to Play." Participants strongly suggested that more emphasis be given to the general
activities (those listed under Other Daily Activities) and less emphasis on the
cultural events. They also recommended that the pictures in the ad include more of
Mail and its mountains and less of the cultural objects (i.e. ballet dancer and violin).
a
r
a
~°~~8~~ ~6~~~~~T~~,T6.y 11.J MA~1~~~ ~ T
~tTa H 1G l~l S.' ~® ~~C9S EHe SE~.ll li®N L-'81LJ SHG~E ~®-~ ll
7/12 Wed Dallas Morning News Main Apres Ski 4 col x 10" $ 3,854.24
Kansas City 'l'imes Main 2,856.00
7/14 Fri Kansas, City Star Entert. Guide 2,856.00
Dallas/Ft. Worth Wall St. 1,580.32
7/16 Sun Dallas Morning News 'Travel 4,205.80
Kansas City Star 'T'ravel 2,856.00
7/18 Tue Dallas Morning News Business 'Temperature 2,890.68
Kansas City 'Times Business 2,856.00
7/21 Fri Kansas City Star Entert. Guide 2,856.00
Dallas/Ft. Worth Wall St. ~ " 1,580.32
7/23 Sun Dallas Morning News Travel 4,205.80
Kansas City Star Travel 2,856.00
7/26 Wed Kansas City Times Main Apres Ski 2,856.00
7/28 Fri Kansas City Star Entert. Guide 2,856.00
Dallas Morning News Friday Guide 3,854.24
Dallas/Ft. Worth Wall St. 1,580.32
7/30 Sun Dallas Morning News Travel 4,205.80
Kansas City Star Travel 2,856.00
8/2 Wed Dallas Morning News Main Temperature 3,854.24
Kansas City Times Main 2,856.00
8/4 Fri Kansas City Star Entert. Guide 2,856.00
Dallas/Ft. Worth Wall St. 1,580.32
8/6 Sun Dallas Morning News Travel 4,205.80
Kansas City Star Travel 2,856.00
d
°~
r ~t1~ 1V lL' VV all tb191L'HA S~~ll ll®!tl MdJ' SH6..~ ~®~
8/8 'g'ue Kansas City T'irnes Business 2,856.00
8/11 1Fri Kansas City Star Enterk. Guide 2,856.00
8/13 Sun Kansas City Star 'g'ravel 2 56.00
0 437.88
MEMORANDUM
T0: Town Council
FROM: Ron Phillips
DATE: June 29, 1989
SUBJECT: Special Event Funding
I attended the Vail Valley Marketing Board meeting this morning, and we had a
discussion about requests for funding assistance for special events. The Marketing
Board agreed that for any requests continuing through this season, the applicants
should be sent through the Special Events Subcommittee of the Marketing Board which
would then make recommendations to the Avon and Vail Town Councils pertaining to any
appropriate funding. The Special Events Subcommittee has developed criteria on
which they would base those recommendations.
The Marketing Board will meet with both Town Councils prior to budget time to
outline their recommendations for how to deal with these funding request situations
next year.
RUP/bsc
cc: Kent Myers
Bill James
Charlie Wick
ra
75 south frontag® road
vail, Colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
office of the town manager
June 29, 1989
Mr. Robert C. Johnstone
President
Colorado Ski Museum
P. 0. Box 1976
Vail, Colorado 81658
Dear Mr. Johnstone:
VII. ~9~9
Thank you for your letter of June 27 concerning the new.. budget information
for the Ski Museum move to the Vail Village Inn Plaza. The next meeting
of the Vail Town Council will be on July 11, and we have scheduled the Ski
Museum to meet with the Council at the Work Session at 2:00 p.m.
In looking over the $85,000 cost estimate provided with your letter, it
appears that there are costs included for moving the entrance to the new
Ski Museum space. The lease between the Ski Museum Board and the Town of
Vail does not include costs for moving the entrance as a part of the
Town's responsibility. If those costs are, in fact, included in this
estimate, I request that you prepare an additional estimate without them.
It would be helpful if we could have the new cost estimate by Friday, July
7, 1989.
I believe a review of the correspondence from the beginning discussions of
this move will show that the Town of Vail agreed to provide finished space
for the Museum to move into. We have discussed previously the fact that
the exhibits and how they are displayed would be the responsibility of the
Museum. The Colorado Ski Museum Board. has entered into a lease agreement
with the Town of Vail which mentions nothing about financing new exhibit
galleries for the Museum. The last we had heard from you, the Museum
would be moving after the World Championships and before the summer
season. Also, the last information we had was that the Ski Museum would
move into approximately half of the available space with expansion to take
place at a later time when the Museum could afford it. I am concerned
Mr. Robert C. Johnstone
June 29, 1989
Page 2
that further requests are arising at this late date. It may be that the
new entryway and use of the entire space, which I am sure would be
desirable for you, could be postponed to a later phase when the Museum
Board finds it more affordable.
We still feel it is very important that the Ski Museum retain Vail as its
home and want to discuss how to work through these problems with you.
Sinc ly,
Rondall V. Phillips
Town Manager
RVP/bsc
cc: Vail Town Council
Steve Barwick
Gary Murrain
x~ ' ~
C®~® ® ~ s
S ®~' ~
JAN ~ 7 ~~~
..w,j .. .
:._,..
...,°
~ J _ _..
27, 1989
Mre Ron Phillips
Town Manager
Town of Vail
75 So Frontage Road
Voile CO 81658
Dear Mro Phillips
I am writing to request further consideration by the Vail Town
Council regarding the proposed move of the Colorado Ski Museum -
Ski Hall of Fame to the Vail Village Inn Plazao
From initial discussions with the towne the Museum staff and
Board of Directors were under the impression that the new loca-
tion offered to the Museum would be finished spaces and would be
ready to be occupied by new Museum gallerieso As you will re-
call, our intent from the beginning was to comply with the wishes
of the Town of Vail, while not incurring any additional expendi-
ture from the Museum°s limited budgeto
Preliminary architectural, finishe and design work figures indi-
cated that approximately $200®000 was required to adequately fin-
ish the space and recreate Museum exhibits in the new locationo
After considerable review and changes to the interior finish
works we have been able to reduce these finish costs to $85,1450
Attached for your review is a budget submitted by Duddy Viele
Constructions Inco on this projecto
In addition to finish costs, the Museum is now placed in a posi-
tion where we must raise up to $85,000 simply to recreate our ex-
hibits in the new spaced I am sure you can understand that our
existing galleries will not be appropriate to-move "as is" into
the Vail Village Inn Plazao The galleries have been constructed
to fit perfectly into our present Museumo Howevers there is less
amount of useable wall space in the new locations and exhibitry
display cases must be constructed to accommodate many artifactso
I am requesting that the relocation of the Colorado Ski Museum -
Ski Hall of Fame be scheduled for the next Town Council meetings ~'
to review the status and reconsider the financial contribution
available to the Museum from the Towno The Museum Board of Di- •
rectors feels that the Town of Vail must pay the full amount of
$85,145 to finish the interior of the space; and must work out
some financing arrangement with the Museum to allow us to com-
plete the move in a timely and professional mannero We do not
want to be relocated and forced to open in a new space with old
exhibitry designs; which will reflect poorly on not only the Col- ~--~
orado Ski Museum but the Town of Vail°s planning and Town Council ~:;:.f:c~~:
,,
motives as wello ,:. ~ ~ r ,,~ ~ t 1; ~~u~ ~ ~ ' _
3
- jai', :ttt . ''r ~ ~,~ti :w ,....E-.~; ,. P .N „i. ~ r„Yr ~ ~.5 _L- t ~i ti. ~'- >
..
' ~• P.O. Box 1976, Vail, Colorado 81658 ® 303/476-1876 ''
ri
I look forward to an opportunity to disucss this further with you
and the Vail Town Councile
Sincerely,
~~Ii~-~ ~. JGii.~'t S ~~e ~C55
Robert Co Johnstone
President
Encla
cce Executive Committee Members
Relocation Committee Memebers
Kent Rose
.,
..
~
. ,
,; .
.. ;.,,
.
~
;
{
'
r~J! ~,, f t' ' ~~ ~ -' ~ ~ '';
,. ~ ~~' ~~s.i P y /
/
~ ~_ k,
~
:+ fY: p'~ y~ 4 i~ ~ t. ~
j V
W. N
J
^
~ ~
,
-. p~
.
~ r
' i 5 ~~ ~ 9
~. ~, .t.r t J 4~ '
'~ tku? t "
{ k' ~
~ y
. .
...
x +
it Pf f S .o .
.
c e
t' Y ~
~
. .1. / y ~ ~ ~ _ ~ -t 1 ~ T 7 ~ ~ 7 ~ v ~ n i ~ v 1 ~ ~ ~' j ~i % e H'-'1 n ~.._ o C 1 ~ C ~ ~ L% r
Page 1 of 4
DUDDY-NIECE CONSTRUCTION, INC
1000 S. FkOkTA6E RD. d"t ST
NAIL, COLORADO 816`,7
~0.;-4; 5-382
Project: COLORADO SM::I FIUSEUN
Architect: BD6 FULLER
RL'N DATE: t%2-Jun-89
~ l,~,~ 5
~tL :. ~ u ~ 2 7 ~9~
~~
;~
~~ DIV I DE5CRIfT10N
~ .QUANTITY
~ ~
~ TOTAL ~ P~~'~`' NOTE5
- ;
,
~~ - ~
~; 02 ~5ITE tlORK ; 4,422 ~ SGS~i (nv 5 ai:r-`,> ;
; U3 ;CONCRETE ; ; 538 ; I ~ 15 ~ e~4. Sta,~ri~ ;
U4 ~IiASONRY ~ 0 . i H5 ~ C ~.~~;-"~ in D~~v ~t t,1 ~S~~cv> ;
05 ;STEEL ; 2, 684 ; -T k ~ (~ ~ ~ _ ~, s Fai- neSt~S , Sc:~
~
;. 06 ItID06 & PLASTICS I 18,018 . -1 ~. 6~L+, ~nS i
~ ~~ G ~~~~ a;F~,ce
II 07 SHOISTURE PROTECTION; ; 807 , 2 Y 2 { ~-i ct~bb o..tcc~n
inSc~.~,~r, . i" S~ '
I G8 ;DODRS & dINDDli5 ; 3,955. ;
; 2~ I ( I J„g r~,w u;~~pc,i; _ ~~,,p ~ ;
09 FINISHES ,_ ; 23,641 ; I"f .2y5 ` (1arR.pfac.l~r~ - b
~ ~~.~ ~ - e~;ec~.~~ Q(c~
5>
~; 10 ISFECIALITIE5 ; ; 3,286 . ~
-I, ~tsS (r.~o mcmo~Le~c~ s
~ 5 ``=<<'
;~ I1 fEOIIPEaENT ; 0 ; ;
II 12 ~FURNI5HIN65 I 0 ; ;
.. 13 (SPECIAL CONSTRUCT'N ~ ; 0 ; ;
' ' 14 ICONVEYIN6 5Y5TEIIS k
~~
15
; fIECHANICAL
11, 592 ; ,', m a
c-
~ g , i 5 v L Sirn.p~y..f CsiL~-~~- i v 7n,, '
,
.. 16 IELECTk.ICAL I 1b,192 ~ jt~,335 ( ' ;
18 ;PERpITS,FEES,INSUR ; ; 0 ; ;
..
~~
~~
_ ; TOTAL
~
~ ; 85,145 ; ;
,
'RUN DATE: U2-Jun-89
DUDDY-NIECE CONSTRUCTION, INC Project: COLORADO 5k1 pUSEUt1
1000 S.•FRQNTASE RD. BEST
NAIL, COLORADO 81657 Architect: BO8 FULLER
3i~Y-476-3~~82
,1 ,
„ ; ;
;
;
;;DIN ; DESCRIPTION ;AUANTITY ;
11 ,
; ; TOTAL ; NOTES ;
11_1 ; ;
~; U2 ; SITEdORK ;
;; ;dedalition ; ; 3,824 ; ;
;; ;landscaping ; ; 59B
1
;;----;-------------------;---------;---------------; 1
~; 02 ;tot. Division 2 ; I 4,422 ;
1149rb444444444b441r 444'Y444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444441
11
~; 03 ; CONCRETE ;
; 1
;; ;footings & calls ; _ ; 119 ~ ;
;; ;slabs en grade ; ; 359
,
'- '- 1 1
~; U3 ;Total Division 3 ; 539 ;
1144441r444444M44444444444444444444444444i44444b444444444444444444441r4444444444444444444444444444444444 44444444441
~~ 04 ; HASONRY ; 1
1
;; ;flagstone/payers ; ; 0 :see div. 9 '
,
,
~~ 04 ;Total Division 4 ; ; 0 '
I
,
44444444b44444444444444444444444444b444444444444444444i4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 44444444444
~~ 05 ; STEEL ; ;
~~ structural ; ; 1,135 ~ ;
;; ;hand rails ;
, 1,554 ;
,
;;----;-------------------;---------;---------------; 1
,
~~ 05 ;Total Division 5 ; ; 2,b89 ;
,
1
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444!444444444 44444444444
;; 06 CARPENTRY ; ~
1 1
,
;; {fraaing & materials; ; 8,544 ;includes scaffold rental '
,
;; ;fasteners/hangers ; ; 418 '
1 '
1
~~ .cabinets & vanities; ; 9,05b ;includes counter tops '
,
;;----;-------------------' --------' --------------'
1 1- , 1
;; Ob ;Total Dlvlslon 6 ; ;
18,018 ; ,
,
444444441r44444444444444444444444444444444 44441r4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 44444444444
.I O7 ;NOISTUP,E PROTECTION; ;
~~ caulking ; 137 ;
,
~~ insulation ; Y3q 1
1 ~ ,
1
;; ;flashing ; 329 ; ,
1
;; ;bituther;e ; ; 102 ; ,
1
;;---~;-------------------;---------;---- -----------'
1 1
;; 07 ;Total Division 1 ; ;
801 ; ,
,
44444444444444444444444444444444444444444 4444M14444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444414 44444444444
Page 2 of 9
' ~ RUN DATE: 02-Jun-84
DUDDY-NIECE CONSTRUCTION, INC Project: CDLDRADC Sk:I F•USEUH
100U S. FRDNTA6E RD. tfEST
NAIL, C~~LDRADO 81651 Architect: BDB FULLER
30'-476-3082
„
„ -,
~~DIV
„ ,
DESCRIPTION ~OUANTITY ~ TOTAL ~ NOTES ;
,
~ ~
„_
.I 08 ,
,
~ DDDRS'IiINDONS '
,
„ , 354 ~ ,
,good doors ,
~~ ~hardaare ~ ~ 4%8 ~ '
,
;~ Iaindoas ~ ~ 1,434 ~ '
Foetal fraoes ~ ~ 1,434 ~ ;
~~ ;interior glaring 251 ~ '
,
08 Total Division 8 ~ ~ 3,955 ~ ;
444444414444444444444441 b4444444444444444444444444444444444444b4444444444444444i44444444444444444444444444444444
~~ U9 ; FINISHES ~ ; ;
stucco ~ ~ 2,629 ~ ;
~~ ~dryaall ~ ~ 15,318 ~ ;
.I ~tiie ~ ~ 2b3 ~ ;
~~ .painting ; ; 4~4L2 ; ;
~~ ~aallcoverings ; ~ 0 'by oaner '
, ,
„ ,
,carpet ~ ~ 0 .by oaner ,
~~ final cleanup ~ ~ 1 016 ~ '
~ ,
f.---- ~-------------------~---------~---------------~
~~ 09 .Total Division 9 ~ 23,641 ~ ;
44144414144441444444144444444144444144444114444444444444444 b•.1r44144444444441444144444444444444141444441444444444
~~ 10 ~ SPECIALTIES ;
, ,
;~ ~sigrage ~ ~ 299 (exit k cede related signs to be allo~ance ;
~~ ;flags: banners 2,390 ~alloaance installed ;
~~ .sign Materials ~ 5qg '
,
~~ 10 ~Tctal Division 10 ~ ~ 3,28b ~ ;
4141b444444444444144444444414444114444114 i4414444441444444445441414444414444441441141444414144114141444141411444
111 ~ EOUIF'HENT ;
~~ ;appliaeces ; ; p ; '
,
~~ 11 ,
Total Division 11 0 '
, ,
441444144444414444444444141444444441444444414114444444411444444444144h44441444141444144444441444i444111144414416
~~ 12
„ ~FUF;NISHIN65 ;
, ,
,
„ ; ; ,
,
,
~~ 12 ,
Total Division 12 ~ 0 '
, ,
441444 4444144414444411444444444444444444441144144111414414441444444444444141444414414411114444444441144444111414
I; 13 .SPECIAL CDNSTRUCT'N1 ; ;
„
„ ,
,pool ; 0 ; ,
,
13 Total Division 13 ~ ; 0 ;
414144 1441444144444444444444444444414144444444414414114441111144414411414141144111141141414444114441441414444444
Page 3 of 4
,~FP.UN DATE: 02-Jun-S9
DUDDY-NIECE CONSTRUCTION, INC Project: COLORADO Sk:I MUSEUM
1000 S. FRONTAGE RD. tiE5T
NAIL, COLORADO 8?657 Architect: BOB FULLER
303-416-3062
~~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --
~ ~ ~
;;DIN
~~
; DESCRIPTION ;QUANTITY ; TOTAL ; gDTE5
~ ~ ~ ,
;
,
~~ _ ~ ~ ~ ; ,
;; 14 ~CONVEYIN6 SYSTEMS ; ; ;
;; ;jack holes ; ; 0 ; ;
;; 14 ;Total Division 14 ; ; 0 ; ;
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 444444444
;; 15 ; MECHANICAL ; ; ; ;
;; ;ventilation b pluob; ; 8,126 ; ;
;~ ;sprinkler ; ; 3,466 ; ;
;; 15 ;Total Division 15 ; ; 11,592 ; ;
441r4444444444441r4414441r4444444444444444444444444444444444444r44i4444444444441r444444444444444444444444444 444444444
~; 16 ; ELECTRICAL ; ; ;
;~ ;electrical ; ; 15774 ;
;; ;phones ; ; 418 ; ;
~~ ---'
;; lb ;Total Division 16 ; ; 16,192 ; ;
4444444444444444444b44444444444444444444444444444444444444i444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 i44444444
;; 18 ; FEES $ PERMITS ; ; ; ;
;; ;Building Peroits ; ; 0 ;by owner '
~; ;Bldr's Risk Insur ; ; 0 ;by owner ;
;; ;Tap Fees ; ; 0 ;by owner '
~-
;; 18
;Total Division 1B ; ; 0 ; ,
;
4444444441r44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444b4i44Sr44Y444444444444b4444444444444444444444444 444444444
;;
~~
~~ TOTAL B!iD6ET ; 85,145 ; ~
; ; ;
Page 4 of 4
9
/1
t~
.~
it /~ ~~
(~~~
P ~~ f`~
PLAYER REVENUE COMPARISON
Thru June 12, 1989
GF (18)
(9)
Passes
After 5
Men's 6
Ladies Club
Hotel (18)
(9)
Jr.
2718
247
1824
28
22
74
3
3
TOTAL
Green Fee Revenue
VMRD Cart Revenue
4919
1989
$66,783.50
$22,602.46
Thru June 12, :x_988
1590
354
2169
26
127
22
0
7
4295
1988
$55,722.00
$20,538.08
..
vn~~~
PASS SALES 1989 AS OF 6/12/89
Pass # Passes Sold
Revenue
Res. -- 6 day 131 $52,400.00
Res. -- 7 day 10 5,250.00
Res. -- Unlimited 3 2,550.00
Res. -- After 5 7 875.00
Non-Res. - 6 day 12 9,000.00
Non-Res. - Unlimited 0 -0-
Jr. - 24 1,200.00
Res. Sr. - 6 day 15 3,000.00
Res. ].D Card 2 20.00
Punch Card 3 ~~~ nn
T07'AL $74 , 520.00
Total for 1988 - $110,682.50
GOLD EAGLE USAGE
1987 1988 1989
April 49 0 33 ~q M}
~~~
May 164 155 155 _
X33 -~~ ~
June 131k~,~„ 6~iz~Q9 63'{he~~~h~ 83 40 - i8~
July 160 Q 3 - `~ N
August 154
September gg
October _ 12
Passes used 5-10 times 15
Passes used 11-20 times 6
Passes used over 20 times 1
l
~ U n ~ " { uJ~,lti~;~
JUN 2 1 1989
City of Vail Colorado
Vail, Colorado 81657
Attns Manager of Transportation
Dear Sir:
Two weeks ago we were in your fair village for the
Square Dancing Convention and had a super time primarily
for the excellent bus free system that you provided
in getting us around where we wanted to go, Of course
the system is only as good a.s the people who run the
buses, especially the late night shift, Please convey
our heart filled thanks to the guys and gals who did
a magnificant job for us,
Sometimes we fail to thank those who do so much for us,
so this letter is to all "THANKS TO ALL WELL DONE',
~~ ~
Ross B. Collins,
3450 So. Poplar Street
Unit 109,
Denver, Colorado 80224 .
"Member of the Grand Squarest1
I~° ~ ~~
"Thursday, June 22, 1989- Summit County Journal - 3
r~illi~ ~sitor ~~ . center~~ ro ose
~.. p
By BIII flflltChell
Swnmit Newspapers StaHWriter
A multimillion dollar, mul-
timedia visitor extravaganza
center proposed for somewhere
in Summit County is being met
by business leaders with csu-
tious optimiarir.
"This thing is big, it's im-
mense," Bob Jappe, Summit
County Chamber of Commerce
executive director said.
The 10-acre complex, "Sum•
mit Place,". complete with
waterfalls, pools, a theater and
scenic overlooks, is intended to
draw tourism trafTic off Inter-
state 70 and be privately con-
structed and operated.
It is proposed by STM. Mar- :.
keting Services of Denver, Unit
1 Productions, a Denver. pro-
motional graphics company,
and by Downing, Thorpe,
James a Boulder architectural
firm.
Those firms were not availa-
ble for comment on the project
by Tuesday noon.
Designed to be an attraction
in itself, backers hope the com-
plex will generate 3 million
tourists in the first three years ,
of operation and generate
$12.96 million in admission
fees.
Although Jappe said there
were no cost estimates for the
project because the size of it is
yet to be determined, $6 mil-
lion is "somewhere in the ball-
park."
"Right now, it's all up'in the
air. The magnitude of it de-
pends on support from ,. the'
community," he said.
?xAt:a•dune .6-meeting,•,35.re-,
pi•esentatives' ~ from' the' 'ski' .
areas, towns, county and local
businesses were told by back-
ersthat the project needs a fea-
sibility study.
"'this is not achamber-go-
beg-for-dollars project;' Jappe
commented. "It's beyond the
chamber of commerce. It's truly:
the one thing this county has
never had: It brings all the
things in the county together.
The director continued, "I
hope the feasibility study will
show that it will generate the
sort of revenue to support the
promotion that this county
needs."
Jappe will begin asking area
business and governments for
funding of the $20,000 to
$30,000 feasibility study
within the next two weeks.
The first study would deter-
mine funding options, site stu-
dies, project costs and interior
design concepts.
Jappe said a site for the cen-
ter should be somewhere that
"makes sense to promote
Summit County, not simply
placed on neutral ground for
the sake of neutrality:'
He said the complex could be
"something to focus on Summit
County, something that can be-
come abona fide attraction in
itself that people will be aware
of before they even get here:'
As a tourist attraction, the
center could be privately or pu-
blicly owned, but Jappe said he
would like the community tc
have an interest in it.
"The truth of the matter is
that the chamber is involved tc
secure our aspect and input
into what the media production
involves. We have a big job in
supporting business, both large
and small. But our dues spon-.
sorship is inadequate to the
needs of our constituency.
"This is a way to do some-
thing better, make it the best it
can be to support Summit
County:'
Jappe said. the proposal.
could become nationally known
as an attraction as well as pro-
videinformation about:lOcal at-
tractions, hesaid. .;,, ~,
Billed as a focal, p0i~tt for the
entire state , bµt r:gpecifically
promoting SumTnit,County, the
facility woulii:house,a variety
of functions.; '
Although, Jappe ..cautions
that the proposal is entirely
"conceptual" at.this point and
that no solid. plans are in.place,
the "Disney.•Cypd':.. facility
would include:' ,! : ,~: rumii;:
o A viewer room with sudiov
isual exhibits and a'number of
separate seating areag.
There would be many small
screens capable of providing
data on Summit County cover-
ing numerous topics .such as
hotels, restaurants, activities,
shopping, recreational oppor-
tunnies and scheduled events. '
This viewing area for fami- .
lies and groups would also pro-'
vide ahigh-tech series of pre-'
sentations covering activities
such as skiing, rafting, golf,
boating and other information.
All would be available at the
touch of a button' and in several
foreign languages.
A multi-image audiovisual
extravaganza that consists of
-.several distinct presentation
features.
-'~`"~i theater t$at would provide
•h. ... ..
an attraction on Colorado with
multiple screens, projectors,
special effects and an advanced
sound system.
In the span of an hour, an
audience would be exposed to
Colorado's many natural at-
tractions, including popular
tourist attractions, lifestyles,
historic settings and special
events.
Historic and scenic profiles
in the state and county would
be featured in exhibits that are
viewed ~ by .visitors who would
take a walking tour of displays
featured in a special exhibit
area.
An area would be reserved
for corporate display s~r.,ce and
reservation desks that would
feature the resorts. A visitor
would be able to obtain bro-
chures, ask questions or make
a reservation at any of the
county's lodging facilities.
Presentations of the "See
Colorado" show will be in n
special theater designed to ac-
commodate advanced projec-
tion equipment required for
multimedia presentations by
35 to 50 slide and motion pic-
ture . projectors, multiple
screens, special effects and .a.
sound system.. .
The theater would seat 250
people for each 'showing and a
large exhibit lobby area and a
video wall with individually
controlled video screens.
Elements that reflect Co-
lorado scenery such as water-
falls, streams and pools inside
a sort of atrium with native
plants. _
Areas where tour buses could
drop ofE'large givups~of people
and ~outdoor-exhibit ai~c:is ari:.
also in the conceptual drawing.
Based on attendance figures
from other Colorado attrac-
tions, the proposal estimates
that 800,000 people would visit
the center the first year, 1 mil-
lion the second and 1.5 million
the third year.
Revenue from the complex
would provide funding for the
total cost of construction, pro-
ducing the shows and operat-
ing the center, according to the
proposal.