HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-10 Support Documentation Town Council Work SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 1990
2:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Planning and Environmental Commission Report
2. Design Review Board Report
3. Update on Status of Vail Transportation Center Expansion and
Renovation
4. Symphony of Sports 1990 Update
5. Capital Improvement Projects Update
6. Discussion of Vail Village Inn Space Lease
7. Discussion of Zone Code Revisions
8. Action on Letter Supporting the Town of Minturn in Their Efforts
to Clean Up the Eagle River
9. Presentation of Potential Affordable Housing Project under HUD
Section 42
10. Information Update
11. Other
12. Discussion of Request to Amend View Corridor #1 and Site Visit
to the Red Lion Building
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 1990
2:00 p.m.
EXPANDED AGENDA
2:00 1. Planning and Environmental Commission Report
Kristan Pritz
2:05 2. Design Review Board Report
Mike Mollica
2:10 3. Update on Status of Vail Transportation Center Expansion
Michael Barber and Renovation
Stan Berryman
Action Requested of Council: None. Informational only.
Background Rationale: Four pre-qualified general
contractors have picked up plans and specifications for the
project (G.E. Johnson, PCL, Gerald Phipps, and Weitz
Cohen). Bid opening is scheduled for April 24. Architect
Michael Barber will update the Council on the status of the
project including all bid alternatives.
2:40 4. Symphony of Sports 1990 Update
Rick Chastain
Action Requested of Council: Act upon resolution of April
3, 1990 meeting.
Background Rationale: Rick will update the Council on
negotiations between S.O.S. Inc. and UMRD regarding
television exposure for Vail in the 1990 presentation.
2:55 5. Capital Improvement Projects Update
Steve Barwick
Action Requested of Council: Give direction to staff on
approved 1990 capital projects.
Background Rationale: The Council added several large
capital projects to be 1990 priority list during their
previous discussion of this matter. Town staff has altered
the 1990 capital projects list in order to accommodate these
additions.
3:25 6. Discussion of Vail Village Inn Space Lease
Steve Barwick
Action Requested of Council: Review proposed lease
arrangements and tenant for the Vail Village Inn space owned
by the Town. Give direction to staff as necessary.
3:45 7. Discussion of Zone Code Revisions
Tom Braun
Action Requested of Council: Offer input on the proposed
work program and give authorization to the staff to finalize
arrangements with Tom Braun for his involvement in the
project.
Background Rationale: At the Work Session in February, the
Council strongly suggested to the staff that the zoning code
revision project be done predominantly "in-house." The
staff has developed a preliminary work program with Tom
Braun serving as project manager. While Tom would be
working as a consultant on this project, his familiarity
with the community and existing codes will allow him to
essentially operate as an extension of the staff.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council
authorize the staff to formalize arrangements with Tom and
begin refining the proposed work program.
4:05 8. Action on Letter Supporting the Town of Minturn in their
Ron Phillips Efforts to Clean Up the Eagle River
Action Requested of Council: Approve/modify the letter.
Background Rationale: The Town of Minturn is working to get
more state government attention on the mine runoff pollution
of the Eagle River. This is really a county-wide problem
and the Town of Vail needs to be supporting Minturn's
efforts.
4:15 9. Presentation of Potential Affordable Housing Project under
Pete Parry HUD Section 42
Pat Brown
Ron Phillips Action Requested of Council:. Give direction to staff as to
whether we pursue this project further or drop it.
Background Rationale: Developers Pete Parry and Pat Brown
would like to work with the Town on an affordable housing
project under HUD Section 42. About $3,000,000 is available
in State funds and Section 42 tax credits with the
application deadline of April 27. Parry and Brown will
explain the details.
4:30 10. Information Update
Ron Phillips
4:35 11. Other
4:45 12. Discussion of request to amend view corridor #1 and site
Tom Braun visit to the Red Lion Building
Action Requested of Council: Offer any comments on the
proposed amendment.
Background Rationale: The proposed ridge line of the Red
Lion remodel will encroach into view corridor #1, but will
remain below the existing ridge of the Golden Peak House
(view #1 is from the Parking Structure looking to the south
over Vail Village). The applicants have requested an
amendment to this corridor to allow for this redevelopment.
Staff Recommendation: Staff supports amending this
designated view corridor.
-2-
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
April 9, 1990
12:00 Site Visits
3:00 Public Hearing
SITE VISITS
1. Approval of minutes from March 26, 1990
meeting.
3 2. A request for an exterior alteration and a
setback variance for the Lifthouse Lodge,
located at Block 1, Tract C, Site C (555 East
Lionshead Circle)
Applicant: Lifthouse Condominium Association
TABLED 3. A request for a final plat for a major
subdivision and for SDD No. 22, a
resubdivision of Lots 1-19, Block 2,
Lionsridge Filing No. 3.
Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, Dauphinais-
Moseley Construction.
6 4. A request for a side setback variance at
Bighorn Terrace Unit #D-7, 4242 East
Columbine Way.
Applicant: Kathryn Benysh
TABLED 5. A request for a major subdivision and for a
major amendment to SDD No. 16 on a portion of
Parcel A, Lion's Ridge Subdivision, Filing
No. 2 (The Valley - Phase III)
Applicant: Brad and Susan Tjossem
2 6. A request for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 7 (The Marriott
Mark) in order to add 57 timeshare units and
8 employee housing units.
Applicant: Marriott Corporation.
4 7. A request for a conditional use for a
Learning Center Lab in the lower level of the
proposed parking structure and to add .two new
half levels of parking to the parking
structure at the Vail Valley Medical Center
on Lots E and F, Vail Village 2nd Filing (181
West Meadow Drive).
Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center.
5 8. A request for an exterior alteration, stream
setback variance, view corridor amendment,
site coverage variance, and conditional use
for a deck enclosure and new outdoor patio
for the Red Lion Building.
Applicant: Frankie Tang and Landmark
Properties
9. NWCCOG Mtg. - Wilderness Legislation; April
12, 1990 from 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. (Silver
Creek)
10. Reschedule PEC meeting of May 28 (Memorial
Day) to June 4th.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
APRIL 4, 1990
3:00 p.m.
SITE VISITS
12:45 P.M.
9 1. Daily Grind Menu Box BR
Stork Building
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO APRIL 18TH MEETING
8 2. Byrne - Color Change and Window Modifications.
Lot 6, Block 7, Vail Village 1st BR
MOTION: Jamie M. SECOND: Pat H. VOTE: 5-0
Approval
13 3. Ledges - Addition of Garage. MM
East Vail Interchange/old Getty Oil site.
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: George L. VOTE: 5-0
Consent approval
4. Gateway Plaza - East Elevation Modifications.MM
Parts of Lots N & O, Block 5D, Vail Village 1st
MOTION: Jamie M. SECOND: George L. VOTE: 4-0-1
Approved as submitted. Ned Gwathmey abstained.
5. Kirch/Berg - Proposed Duplex. MM
Lot 3, Gore Creek Park Subdivision
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: Jamie M. VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
6. Anderson - New Single Family Residence. SM
Lots 1 & 2, Lionsridge Filing #4
MOTION: Jamie M. SECOND: Pat H. VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
7. Campbell - New Single Family Residence. SM
Lot 4, Block 1, Lionsridge Filing #4
MOTION: Ludwig SECOND: George VOTE: 5-0
Approved with changes: 1) green reailing on decks
2) 8x8' min support on decks 3) trees changed
according to plans
8. Spruce Park - 7 Single Family Homes BR
Part of Lot's 6 & 7, Block 1, Bighorn 3rd
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO APRIL 18TH MEETING
4 9. Russell - New Primary Secondary (Conceptual) SM
Lot 15, Block H, Vail Das Schone Filing #2
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
Conceptural
7 10. Vail Glo Exterior Alteration TB
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: George L. VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
10 11. Gunn Residence Remodel. TB
Lot il, Block 1, Vail Village 1st
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: George L. VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
6 12. Grubbs Addition. TB
lot 6, Block 1, Vail Village 6th
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO APRIL 18TH MEETING for review of
landscaping
3 13. Aasland Residence - Loft addition, approval of
secondary unit. SM
Lot 3, Block D, Vail Das Schone Filing #3
MOTION: Jamie M. SECOND: George VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
12 14. Leary - Single Family on a Primary Secondary lot.
Lot 19, Block 7, Bighorn Subd. Filing #5 SM
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: Jamie M. VOTE: 5-0
TABLED TO APRIL 18TH MEETING
15. Warner Properties - 3 New Primary/Secondary Resid.
Lot's 3, 4 & 5, Vail Valley 3rd TB
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO APRIL 18TH MEETING
1 16. Alpine Townhomes V - New Single Family Home.
Lot 34, Vail Potato Patch Filing #1 TB
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: Jamie M. VOTE: 5-0
Residence approved, final landscaping to be reviewed
April 18, 1990.
11 17. Lindsey/Nilsson - New 2 Family Residence. SM
Lot 3, Bighorn Estates
MOTION: Ludwig SECOND: Pat H. VOTE: 5-0
Approved as submitted
5 18. Cleaners Sign Variance. SM
West Vail Ma11
MOTION: Jamie SECOND: Ludwig VOTE: 5-0
Reccomendation of approval of request for variance:
1) 2 sq. ft. sign area at a height of 14 feet on
the east facing parapet wall.
2 19. Dowd - New Primary Secondary Residence. SM
Lot 2, Lionsridge Filing #3
MOTION: Pat H. SECOND: George VOTE: 5-0
Conditions:
1) Completion of engineers requirements
2) Hazard report
20. Schuman Dormer Addition. TB
Lodge at Vail Unit #365
MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
Keep on agenda subject to height determination.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ned Gwathmey
Pat Herrington
Jamie McCluskie
Ludwig Kurz (PEC)
George Lamb
MEMBERS ABSENT•
STAFF APPROVALS:
Nevin Nelson sign - 7-Eleven Building, West Vail.
i
lows o
75 south frontage road
veil, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2116
MEMORANDUM
T0: Ron Phillips ~ w
FROM: Steve Barwick ~.-~-
DATE: April 5, 1990
RE: 1990 Capital Projects
Please find attached revised budget summaries and project lists for
the Capital Projects Fund and the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund.
The project lists have been revised to allow for the addition of
the East Vail bike path completion and the relocation of the Town's
snow dump.
The following is a summary of the most recent changes to the 1990
capital project lists.
Change to
1990 Budget
Holy Cross Purchase ($ 65,000)
Communications System Maint. & Replacement ( 15,000)
Pedestrian Overpass ( 50,000)
New Snow Dump Site 152,000
Landscape Improvements ( 40,000)
Ford Park Lower Bench Improvements ( 32,000)
Donovan Park Design ( 60,000)
Golf Maintenance Parcel Purchase* ( 156,000)
East Vail Bike Path Completion 255,000
($ 11,000)
*Assumes a three year lease/purchase with annual payments of
$94,000
PROPOSED BUDGET REVISION
1990 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Fund Balance 01/01/90
Revised 1990 Revenue Budget
Original Budget $6,474,000
Additional Post Office Rent 15,200
AT & T Lawsuit Funds 182,295
RETT Loan Repayment 509,156
Subtotal 1990 Revenue
Revised 1990 Expenditure Budget
Transfer to Debt Service
Capital Projects (in proposed priority order)
1. WI Interior Finishing $ 3,000*
2. Communications Equipment 358,000*
3. Signage Program 74,000*
4. Underground Electric Lines 10,000*
5. Design/Eng Pulis Bridge 9,gOp*
6. Village Streetscape Design 25,000*
7. Arena Heat Exchanger 9,000*
8. W. Gore Creek Bridge Design 3,900*
9. W. Meadow Drive Survey 1,100*
10. Bus Interior Refurbishment 8,500*
11. Fire Station Kitchen Remodels 700*
12. Bus Wash/Fueling Facility 5,000*
13. Computer Project 107,000*
14. Handicap Access Van 36,600
15. W. Gore Creek Drive Bridge
(grant match) 182,500
16. Finish Interior of New Ski Mus. 160,000
17. Post Office Remodel/VRA Move 35,000
18. Fire Truck Purchase 350,000
19. Bus Replacement 481,000
20. Forest Service Joint Visitor Cen. 15,000
21. Street Maint. and Improvements 1 ,345,000
22. New Snow Dump Site 175,000
23. Street Light Improvements 30,000
24. Misc. Building Maintenance 90,000
25. Recreational Paths Maintenance 77,000
26. Parking Structures Projects 30,000
27. TOV Shop Maintenance & Improve. 110,000
28. Library Children's Area Remodel 29,000
29. Bus Interior Refurbishment 26,000
30. Municipal Building Remodel/Study 55,000
31. Fire Dept. Furniture & Carpet 25,000
32. Bus Shelter Improvements 30,000
33. W. Meadow Drive Conceptual Des. 27,000
$1,113,018
$7,180,651
$3,414,404
Capital Projects (in proposed priority order continued)
34. People Mover Study/Grant App. 13,000
35. Dobson Arena Flooring 15,000
36. Willow Bridge Replacement. 50,000
37, Holy Cross Purchase 10,000
38. Parking Structure Contingency 500,000
Subtotal Capital Projects 4,512,100
Total 1990 Expenditure Budget $7,926,504
1990 Surplus/(Shortfall) (745,853)
Projected Fund Balance 12/31/90 $ 367,165
*Indicates 1989 project rollforward previously discussed with Council.
PROPOSED BUDGET REVISION
1990 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND
Fund Balance 01/01/90
1990 Revenue Budget
Revised 1990 Expenditure Budget
Pulis Golf Purchase Payment
Transfer to Debt Service
Loan Repayment to Capital Projects Fund
RETT Projects (in proposed priority order)
1. Ford Park Entry $ 55,000*
2. Ford Park Construction (lights} 30,000*
3. Lar,dscare Improvements 150,000*
4. Vail ~t'rail Safety 2,20G*
5. East Vail Bike Patti (bridge) 90,000*
6. Intermountain Pool Site 41,000*
7. Spraddle Creek Parcel 500,000
8. Golf Maintenance Parcel 94,000**
9. East Vail Bike Path Completion 255,000
10. Stevens Park 30,000*
11. Gore Creek Promenade (design) 5,000*
12. west Vail Pocket Park Purchase 85,000*
]3. Vail Valley Drive Paths Design 30,000
14. t~owd Junction Path Design 30,000
15. Parking Structure Community Impr. 125,000
Subtotal RETT Projects
Total 1990 Expenditure Budget
1990 Surplus/(Shortfall)
Projected Fund Balance 12/31/90
$2,033,865
1,373,400
340,432
200,000
509,156
1,522,200
$2,571,788
(1,198,388}
$ 835,477
*Indicutes 1989 project rollforward previously discussed with
Council.
**Assumes a three year lease/purchase with annual payments of $94,000.
CAPSCHDG xevisea: 1/ib/laau
1990 - 1994 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
REQUIRED PROJECTS
----------
--- 1990
----------- 1991
----------- 1992
----------- 1993
------------ 1994
---------- CONDITIONS/COMMENTS
--------------------------------
---
1. -
---------------------------
Handicap Access Van 36,600
2. W. Gore Creek Dr. Bridge (grant match) 182,500 $160,000 in State revenue
3. Finish Interior of New Ski Museum 16(1,000
4. Post Office Remodel/VRA Move 35,000
5. Fire Truck Purchase 350,000
6. Bus Replacement 481,000
7. Forest Service Joint Visitor Center 15,000
--
-
-----------
------------
----------
--------------------------------
---
S -----------------------------------------
UBTOTAL REQUIRED PROJECTS -----------
1,260,100 ---
-----
CI 0 0 0
ESSENTIAL PROJECTS 1990 1991 1992
-------- 1993
------------ 1994
----------
-----------------------
--------
---
1. -----------------------------------------
Street Maint. & Improvements -----------
1,345,00(1 -----------
1,676,000 ---
1,280,000 1,810,000 1,957,000 -
Per street maintenance plan
2. New Snow Dump Site 175,000 ,
3. Street Light Improvement 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Per street light plan
4. Communications System Maint. & Replcmnt 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Ongoing radio replacement
5. Misc. Bldg. Maintenance 90,000 90,0CJ0 90,0(10 90,000 90,000 Per RAM Committee plan
6. Bus Replacement 651,000 513,000 897,000 1,125,000 Per bus replacement schedule
7. Recreational Paths Maintenance 77,0(10 81,0(10 85,0(10 89,000 93,000 Per paths maintenance plan
8. Parking Structures Projects 30,000 30,000 80,000 60,000 275,000 Per structures maintenance plan
9. TOV Shop Maint. & Improvements 110,000 120,0(10 150,000 235,000 125,000 Per maintenance plan
10. Library Children"s Area Remodel 29,00(1 Acoustically separate children
11. Bus Interior Refurbishment 26,000
12. Municipal Bldg Remodel/Study 55,000
13. Fire Truck Replacement Program 0 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000
14. Fire Dept. Furniture & Carpet 25,000
15. Bus Shelter Improvements 30,000 4(1,00(1 40,000 40,000 40,000 Replacements & additions
16. W. Meadow Dr. Conceptual Design 27,000
17. Additional Buses 163,000 179,000 Addition to bus fleet
18. Pedestrian Overpass 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Partial cost of new overpass
19. People Mover Study/Grant Application 13,000
20. Dobson Arena Flooring 15,000 15,000
21. Willow Bridge Replacement 50,(100 300,000 $280,000 in State Revenue
22. Parking Structure Contingency
- 500,000
----
-----------
-----------
------------
----------
--------------------------------
--- ---------------
-------------------------
SUBTOTAL ESSENTIAL PROJECTS -------
2,627,000 3,316,000 2,388,000 3,550,000 3,855,000
DESIRABLE PROJECTS 1990 1991 1992
----- 1993
------------ 1994
----------
--------------------------------
---
1. -----------------------------------------
Holy Cross Purchase -----------
10,000 -----------
45,000 ---
---
45,000 45,000 45,000
2. Sidewalk Improvements 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
3. Sidewalk: Muni Bldg to Village Parking 10,800 124,200
4. Pulis Bridge Widening 2(1(1,000
5. Village Improvement District 25(1,000 250,000
6. Traffic Control Gates 20,000
SUBTOTAL DESIRABLE PROJECTS 235,000 275,800 389,200 15,000 15,000
CAPSCHD9
Revised: 1/16/1990
TOWN OF VAIL
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX
1990 - 1994 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED PROJECTS
------------------------- 1990
----------- 1991
---------- 1992
------------ 1993
------------ 1994 CONDITIONS/COMMENTS
-----------------------------------------
--------------------
Rollforwards
Ford Park Entry 55,000
Ford Park Construction 30,000
Stevens Park Improvements 30,000 30,000
Gore Creek Promenade 5,000 26,(100
East Vail Bike Path (Bridge) 90,000
Vail Trail Safety 2,200
Landscape Improv. Plan Implementation 50,000
Mill Creek Landscaping 15,000
Land Purchases
Intermountain Pool
1 41,000
.
2. Spraddle Creek Parcel 500,000 Estimated purchase price
3. Golf Maintenance Parcel 94,000 94,000 94,000 Estimated purchase price
4. West Vail Pocket Park 85,000 Estimated purchase price
Recreation Trails Per Recreation Trails Plan
1. East Vail Path Completion 255,000
2. Village Pkg Struc to Athletic Fields 30,000 250,000 250,000
3. Dowd Junction 30,000 ?
4. Mountain Recreation Trails Plan ?
5. Vail Das Schone 85,500
Landscape Improvements 100,000 10[1,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Per Landscape Plan
Ford Park Lower Bench Improvments 32,000
Donovan Park Development 6[1,000 500,000 250,000 250,000
Open Space Purchase & Development 40,000
Tot Play Area - Buffehr Creek Park 6,000
Ford Park Skating/Fishing Pond 84,000
Parking Structure Community Improvements 125,000
Ford Park Parking Lot 100,000
Athletic Field Restrooms *
------
---------- 150,000
------------
-----------
------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
TOTAL ------
1,522,200 798,500 1,094,000 390,000 434,000
* Source of funding undecided.
To: Town Council
From: Tom Braun
Date: March 16, X990, revised March 24
Re: Revisions to development codes and design guidelines
The following outlines my proposed work program for revisions to
the Town's zoning code, sign code and design review guidelines.
The project has been designed in response to input received
during informal discussions with the Town Council and PEC. Both
of these groups were strongly in favor of the project being done
"in-house", with outside consultants used only for specific
elements of the project on an "as needed" basis. This proposal
accomplishes both of these objectives.
The wor'~ program I have prepared is presented as a "consultant
proposal". However, given my familiarity with the community,
knowledge of existing codes and the manner in which I have
structured the scope of services, I will essentially be working
as an extension of the staff during the course of this project.
My role in this project will be to initiate the process, conduct
research, prepare reports, draft ordinances, and coordinate
involvement from the staff, Town Council, PEC, DRB, a task force,
the public, and outside consultants. At this point, my
involvement is scheduled to run from May 1 to September 1. As
proposed, I will be working full time on this project during this
time p:ariod.
As outlined in the accompanying flow chart, the project would be
structured in three phases:
Phase I. Inventory and Research
Phase II. Public Participation
Phase III. Ordinance Development
Phase I involvES a ccmrrehensive e~~Gluation of existing codes,
the identification of problems and the development of preliminary
alternatives for solving code problems. Public participation and
input from other sources generated during Phase II will provide
the basis for refining the reports produced during Phase I. A
final report and ordinances will be drafted during Phase III.
Many problems have been identified in the existing codes that may
warrant immediate attention. The response to these "high
priority" ordinance revisions, as determined by the Town Council,
will be fast-tracked. Revisions to these items can be initiated
during Phases I and II. Research is already being gathered
concerning some of these issues, which may include:
* Parking in CCI and CCII
* GRFA
* Single Family minimum lot size
* Site Coverage and building height interpretations
The Council, Commission, and staff appear to be in basic
agreement on the general direction of this project. It is
assumed that we are to approach this project from the standpoint
of refining and fine tuning, as opposed initiating a major
overhaul of the Town's codes. I do not anticipate that this
effort will result in changing the zoning of specific parcels of
land or significantly changing development standards (i.e.
densities, setbacks, etc.). Rather, I envision a process
designed to refine, clarify and strengthen the Town's development
codes and the procedural mechanisms inherent in the development
process.
At this time the extent and type of specific amendments that will
result from this project are unknown. For this reason, it is
difficult, if not impossible to establish a firm time frame and
completion date for the project. I do not anticipate that all
code revisions will be completed prior to September 1. In
response to this, I am proposing that the final products
resulting from my involvement be determined as this planning
process evolves.
At a minimum, all areas of the codes to be amended will be
identified and summarized in a written report detailing both
current problems and revision alternatives. This report will
provide the staff a "cookbook" for the preparation of ordinances
to be drafted and approved after September 1. High priority
revisions, as determined by the Council, and other revisions as
time allows, will be completed through ordinance approval during
my involve°°:ent .
The opportunity to extend my role in this project beyond
September is certainly a possibility. The September 1 ending
date for my involvement date simply allows the Town an
opportunity to evaluate the progress of the project and determine
whether the planning department is back to full staff and capable
of completing the project in-house.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Phase I.
1) Conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the existing
zoning code, sign code and design review
guidelines. This preliminary analysis will be
done with input from the town staff. The purpose
of this evaluation will be to identify
discrepancies, conflicts, ambiguities, and other
problem areas based on the current interpretation
and utilization of these codes.
2) Research APA and ULI resources and
design/development guidelines from comparable
communities. This analysis will provide a
benchmark from which to evaluate Vail's codes and
also provide alternatives for potential
amendments.
3) Develop ordinance alternatives for "fast-tracked"
amendments.
4) Based on the findings of steps 1 and 2, develop
preliminary alternatives for code revisions.
These alternatives will provide a basis for
subsequent discussions with the Council, PEC,
public, etc.
Products
1) Written report summarizing evaluation of existing
T.O.V. codes.
2) Written report outlining potential alternatives
for code revisions.
3) Draft ordinances for high priority amendments.
Phase II.
1) Formulate a small group of citizens to serve as a
Task Force during the course of this project.
Membership of the Task Force should include
representatives from the Council, PEC, DRB, staff
and public (4-7 members).
2) Conduct a public involvement process to gather
input on the Town's development and design
guidelines. Small group (3-5 people), meetings
will be scheduled with people who work directly
with the development review process: property
owners, architects and designers, realtors,
merchants and contractors. Open invitations will
be made to anyone interested in participating in
these meetings.
3) Formal retreat or series of work sessions with the Task
Force, Larry Eskwith, the Town Engineer, Building
Department and planning staff to further refine problem
areas and potential solutions {written reports from
Phase I will provide the basis for these work
sessions).
4) Refine implementation schedule for code revisions
based on the priorities of Council, Task Force
public, etc. This process will also evaluate the
need to bring in additional consultants to assist
in specific areas of the project (i.e., sign code,
design guidelines, legal).
Products
1) Revisions to reports on existing codes and
potential amendment alternatives.
2) Summary report of public input.
3) Prioritization plan and refined schedule for rest
of project.
4) Draft and distribute RFP for additional consultant
assistance (if needed).
Phase III.
1) Coordinate/manage outside consultants (if applicable).
2) In conjunction with Town Attorney, draft ordinances and
initiate approval process for high priority amendments.
3) Draft final report summarizing existing problems and
recommended solutions for code amendments to be
implemented after my involvement ends.
Products
1) Ordinances for amendments to high priority items.
2) Final written report of remaining amendments.
SCHEDULE
The accompanying flow chart provides a general indication of when
project tasks will be completed over the next four months. As
indicated on the flow chart, I anticipate that my time will be
equally divided between Vail and Boston in 2-3 week periods.
Generally, I plan to do research and report writing while in
Boston. The review of ordinances, public processes and staff
coordination will obviously be done in Vail. Amore definitive
schedule will be developed dependent on PEG and Council meetings
dates during the course of this project.
COSTS
Compensation for my services will remain essentially unchanged
from our present arrangement; $5,000 per month based on a 40 hour
work week. Hours worked in excess of 40 in any one week will be
billed at the pro-rated rate of $31.00 per hour. I estimate
three to four trips between Boston and Vail during this four
month period, resulting in travel expenses of approximately
$1,600. Correspondence, photocopying and related expenses will
be billed directly to the Town as reimbursable expenses. The
Town will provide a NEC portable computer for my use while in
Boston.
I am essentially committing 100% of my time to this project over
the four month period. Assuming 14 "billable weeks" at 40 hours
per week, my cost to the Town would be $17,500 plus expenses. If
T were to work 50 hours per week over this period, the total cost
of my time would increase to $23,840.
I realize that the nature of this compensation arrangement
presents some difficulties with how my time will impact the
overall budget for this project. One solution to this would be
to establish a "maximum/not to excede" number of hours and review
my time and the overall budget on a a weekly basis with the
Community Development Department. On a more clearly defined
project, I could provide you with a maximum dollar figure based
on my estimate of time required to complete the project.
However, the nature of this project ma<,~s estimating time a very
difficult proposition.
It is important to understand that it is very likely that other
consultants will be brought in during the course of this project.
The role of these consultants would primarily be to advise the
Town on alternatives for solving the problems we have already
identified, and critiquing solutions we have generated. We would
not be paying these people to learn our codes and tell us what
our problems are, rather, their role would be advisory.
There are a number of specific areas where the Town could benefit
from the input of an "outsider looking in" at our codes and
guidelines. Some of these areas include design guidelines, the
sign code and legal/procedural issues.
I anticipate that these consultants would be used on a limited
hourly arrangement as opposed to being hired on a contract or
project basis. Another possibility may be to bring in a
consulting team for a one or two day charette to work directly
with the Council, PEC or DRB to further identify and refine
solutions to specific problems.
I will look forward to discussing the goals and direction of this
project at Tuesdays worksession. As you know, this project is
very important to not only the planning department, but also the
entire community. I hope to have the opportunity to work on it
with you and the Town staff.
4/5/90
WP/CODEREVI
SOW 1J o ~ U P ~~--
Go~~ -~Ev~S~o~ ~o~s~c.-~'
'3~~1\Ao
TASK AQ~~L mRy -SAN ~ ~ -svt-y . ~ A ~ c.-
• Z`~'~A GA~2 i N G
~
.'1".D.~. Ca~~ n~U1~
w I ~
• ~=~A`~ct~
~
A
~) f
• ~~.A r ~ ~.~'Pc ~. ~ ~
i
!
I
_,
• ~~'MJ(-.new ~,r~`~
Tl)~L.'~ '
~
~
~
• SSA=F i.Jo~`~S=SS~o~S
~
d
nr ~ \~-~ ~ G-~ ~-, ~~ S (
~ I
i
• ~rnr,F'i i2~~ ?
~
I I
1
• •~,^r1 ~
~"~^~
~
t~G~.~iN t~CT\p1J I ~ I I I I I I I
` ~
~~~ R ~ C~~ \NRt~C:.
.
1y ( I I I I
. yN \'C \ A ~ C oR~ `~hEJ\Ic4 I
• vRAr ~ Y\~ AL
~~o~ ~
~..
,...
~
_
.,......
I
, ~ n .r
~~ A I
_ 'M
r,..i a I I
f
A. YAtL ( ~
~"[ ~ge5-toN ~! ~ ~ I
~ ~lAl~ ? i
tawo of uai
75 south ftontage road
vail, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2100
office of mayor
April 6, 1990
The Honorable Roy Romer
Governor
State Capitol Building
200 East Colfax
Denver, Colorado 80203
Dear Governor Romer:
I am writing to you on behalf of the Vail Town Council to express our
grave concerns about the heavily polluted condition of the Eagle River
from south of Minturn through Eagle County to the Colorado River. We
believe that we are joining a collective expression of all Eagle County
local governments and residents about the condition of the river, and we
are of the opinion that the governments and residents of this county
deserve more action and positive r^~aponse from the State la~rpl addressed
to this issue.
We are sure that you have seen the r~ocumentation provided by the Town of
Minturn concerning the problem, so we will not repeat all of that here.
We want you to know, however, that we support every effort the Town of
Minturn is making to bring more State attention to this matter and get
the problem resolved soon. It is our understanding that the Colorado
Department of Health representatives have told the Minturn Town Board
that there is very little that could be done to improve the situation.
That seems to be an unacceptable response from a powerful State agency
which is supposed to be concerned with protecting the State's
environment. 'The Eagle River is one of the State's beautiful headwater
rivers, and it is a very key ingredient of Eagle County's resort based
economy. The Eagle River is also the primary water source for a good
portion of Eagle County's residents. With turbidity levels four times
the average and severe chemical pollution which kills the fish life and
Governor Roy Romer
April 5, 1990
Page 2
has stained the riverbed, rocks, and shore, these historic uses are
being severely limited and will quickly begin negatively affecting the
Eagle County economy and the livability of the area.
We wholly support the concern expressed by the Minturn Town Board for
the drinking water, the safety of Eagle County citizens, the beauty of
this headwater river and how it affects our community, and the ultimate
economic costs to the communities in this valley. It is our firm
opinion that certain action must be taken immediately to address the
intolerable issue which has occurred as a result of the Eagle Mine
pollution. It is also our firm opinion that some type of treatment is
possible to clear up the river and protect the environment, and those
responsible for the Mine must be made responsible to address this
problem and clear up the river immediately.
Sincerely,
KRR/bsc
Kent R. Rose
Mayor
(Similar letters will be sent to Colorado legislators, Congressional
delegation, Attorney General, Executive Director of Colorado Health
Department, and EPA.)
TOPIC
8/8 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION
(request: Lapin)
8/15 UVCWD/TOU LAND CONTRACT
2/20 JOINT MEETING COUNCIL/UMRD
2/27 SATELLITE POST OFFICE (request:
Osterfoss)
3/13 TRIANGLE OF .GREEN SPACE ADJACENT
TO VILLAGE CENTER
3/13 EUROFAIRE/JOHN HORAN-KATES
(request: Rose)
3/21 COMPENSATION FOR PEC, DRB,
LIQUOR AUTHORITY
4/3 SDD PROPOSALS (request: Fritzlen)
4/3 SENIOR SERVICES MEETING
WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP
LARRY: Proceeding w/legal requirements for
annexation.
RON: Contract in final stages of negotiation.
PAT: 1. Develop design/cost structure for construe-'
tion of public restroom/shower facility/storage
at athletic field - return to Council for
reprioritization for capital projects.
2. Apply in writing to Council re: ground lease
of Booth Creek 9 hole par 3 golf course.
LARRY: Prepare amendment to TOU/UMRD agreement re:
transfer of mill levy and not holding an election
within the required 2 year period of time.
RON: Pursue station "in town" and/or increase
summer bus service?
RON/LARRY: Contact re: possible gift to the Town?
LARRY: Contact Pat re: copy of UMRD's contract?
Council approval of stock transfer clause
inclusion.
RON/KRISTAN/LARRY: Should additional compensation
be considered for appointed, standing Town board;
4/6/90
Page I of 2
Petitions are being circulated.
Letter on possible soil contamination problems sent to
VUCWD. Return letter received. Kent and Ron met with
Bill George and Ed Drager, and the land swap will be put
on hold for a year.
Pat has developed these and Ron has a copy. Proposed cost is
now $160,000.
Kent sent letter outlining proposed process to Tim Garton.
UMRD is reviewing and will respond after 3/28.
Proposed amendment sent to UMRD.
Meeting to be set up with Ernie Chavez.
Will do.
Pat has sent to Larry. Contract to be reconsidered in April
when John Horan-Kates sets date.
Will prepare alternatives and recommendation for Council.
KRISTAN: It would be helpful for Council to receiv Done.
reductions of these prior to hearing, rather tha
having to rely on blueprints during the meetings.
KRISTAN: Lynn Fritzlen to attend, Thursday, 4/12,
1:30 p.m. -location?
WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS
4/3 NWCCOG ENUIRONMENTAL MEETING I KRISTAN: Merv Lapin to attend in SilverCreek on
Thursday, 4/12.
4/6/90
Page 2 of 2
4/3 WOODY BEARDSLEY LETTER (request: IRON: Request further detail on 6 parcels available
Lapin) for land trade with Forest Service.
town of uai
75 south frontage road
vail, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2100
office of mayor
April 4, 1990
Mr. Don Welch
Chairman
Eagle County Commissioners
P. 0. Box 850
Eagle Colorado 81631
RE: Tennenbaum Land Exchange
Dear Dcr:
I am writing on behalf of the Vail Town Council to request that the
Eagle County Board of Commissioners take a strong public stand in
opposition to the proposed Tennenbaum land exchange. We have enclosed
copies of the position paper approved by the Vail Town Council and a
copy of the letter sent to all the Colorado Congressional delegation
concerning this matter. We would certainly appreciate it if the Board
of Courty Commissioners would consider adopting a resolution in support
of our position and against this land exchange.
We also would appreciate your consideration of encouraging the County
Community Development Department to work together with the Town of Vail
Community Development Department to establish a process through which
the Town of Uail would have substantial input or say over development
occurring outside Town of Vail boundaries but within a one or two mile
radius. yI believe Colorado Statutes allow for this kind of an
arrangement to occur through intergovernmental agreement and we would
like to pursue the possibility at the earliest possible date.
h1r. Don Welch
April 4, 1990
Page 2
Thank you for your consideration of these requests. We have appreciated
the opportunity to work with the Board of County Commissioners over the
past few months concerning the County recreation proposal and are hoping
for a good election result next Tuesday.
Sincerely,
~i2~i / ~ ~
Kent R. Rose
Mayor
J KRR/bsc
Enclosures
cc: Jim Fritze
Ron Phillips
Kevin Lindahl
Larry Eskwith
Kristan Pritz
ri__,~=_.w s~~-~.
posal. Pioneer passed,
Sony Corp., fresh from its $3.4 bil-
lion purchase of Columbia Pictures
Entertainment, is also believed to
have declined, although it did strike a
deal in February to distribute the next
SO Orion movies abroad in both the-
aters and videocassettes. That deal-
which advances a sorely needed $175
million to Orion--diminishes Orion's
attractiveness to some would-be buy-
ers who feel that Orion mortgaged
part of its future.
Marvin Davis, former owner of
20th Century Fox Film Corp., also
reportedly has been approached, but
Orion lacks the real estate and other
hazd assets that made Fox amactive
to Davis almost a decade ago.
Along with Krim, Orion was long
run by Eric Pleskow (president and
chief executive), William Bernstein
and Morris (Mike) Medavoy. The
quartet had worked together in the
movie business for 16 years, first at
United Artists Corp., where Krim had
taken the helm in 1951. For continu-
ity of management, their record was
unmatched in recent Hollywood hi3+
tory until Medavoy-at 49 the your-
gest member-bolted seven weeks
ago to head Tri-Staz Pictures.
Of the eight majors, Orion has
tanked last at the box office for the
past two yeazs, despite critical ac-
claim for such movies as Mississippi
Burning and Crimps and Misdemeanors.
At this point the company does
have projects in the works that even
rivals concede may pull big money:
upcoming films starring Robin Wil-
liams and Cher, and a RoboCop sequel.
Even so, Onon's bank borrowings aze
secured b}~ Orion's assets-an indigni-
ty seldom imposed on big studios.
Of the major film companies, Orion
has a reputation for the most aggres-
sive accounting. For example, any
.buyer would have to take a hazd look
at the company's high film costs
(called inventories by the industry)
that ultimately must be offset by rev-
enues. The inventories quadrupled, to
$448 million, in the five years ended
Feb. 28, 1989. And if Orion has been
overly optimistic, as skeptics suspect,
in forecasting the revenues to come
from its films, the company would
face future writedowns, depressing
net income.
And Orion just revised upwazd its
revenue forecast foz the basic cable
and foreign pay rv markets. Without
the change, the firm couldn't have
mustered its $2.3 million pretax prof-
itfor the quarter ended Nov. 30, 1989.
All the indications, then, aze that
the company is drifting, an impres-
sion strengthened by what happened
on Feb. 15, when Orion told the New
York Stock Exchange that it knew of
no "corporate" reason for a surge in
its stock price; the next day Kluge's
Metromedia said it was in "extremely
preliminary" talks with several po-
tential buyers of its stake.
As before, when under siege, Orion
executives have drawn up the bridge
to their fiefdom, leaving the remain-
ing shazeholders swimming confused-
ly in the moat. Many, no doubt, aze
hoping Kluge will find a buyer who'll
take them out, too. ^
TV mogul and ski resort owner George
Gillett narrowly averted bankruuptcy court
in February. He isn't out of the woods yet.
On the edge
By Gretchen 1[or~eensan
Ir wnsrr'r EnsY for George Gillett to
go hat in hand to his creditors a few
months ago. But he had little choice if
he wanted to revive his once-lucrative
media empire, which includes nine rv
stations, some in prime markets like
San Diego, Detroit and Atlanta, as
well as a Wisconsin meatpacker and
two Colorado ski resorts: Beaver
Creek and Vail.
~ - fORBFS, APRIL 16,1990 ;.
.:~
. ;~
` ,;
George Gillen of SCI Television and Gillen Holdings
Wftlt the easy-money era over. he's out in the cold. .
On y
.ge
n- "
:d-
~re
,'ll
~e
v
,r
Like many another ambitious en-
trepreneur, Gillett is caught in the
collapse of the era of easy, leveraged
financing. In his desperate effort to
hold on to his empire, he fought his
most recent skirmish, in February,
against bondholders in his scl Televi-
sion, Inc., owner of six former Storer
Inc. television stations. scr had de-
faulted on $153 million in principal
payments to its banks and $100 mil-
lion in interest on public -debt, due
last fall. But Gillett managed to
sweet-talk 95°'° of the bondholders
into restructuring the concern's more
than $500 million in public debt rath-
er than forcing scr into bankruptcy.
In return, however, the creditors
forced the proud Gillett to cut his
equity stake in the company from
SS°'° to 41%. As the deal stands, no
interest or principal need be paid on
most of the debt until 1995, and then
bondholders receive payment in kind,
not in cash. The only bondholders
getting regulaz payments of any sort
are owners of the old 15.5% senior
paper, which pays 10% in kind until
1992, when it converts to a coupon
Paying 259'° in kind until 1994. Origi
Wally, scl bonds paid interest rates
ranging from 15.5% to 17.5%.
At a conservative estimate, given
the haircut they've taken and the cur-
rent state of the junk bond market,
the bondholders have a loss of $350
million on their original commitment
of $S00 million-plus. But Gillett still
Wins the show.
Gillett declined to be interviewed
for this story, but friends and asso-
ciates insist that, having averted the
sci bankruptcy filing, Gillett is home
free. Others azen't so sure. They base
their skepticism on several factors
One is that come 1995, set will still
be carrying debt with hefty interest h
rates-between 12% and 15%. Sure,
the business may get better; almost
no one thinks television advertising
revenues will remain as stagnant for
the next few yeazs as they have been
for the past few. But will it be gang-
busters? Gillett needs gangbusters if
he is to be able to resume cash inter-
est payments and meet maturities
starting in 1995.
At the moment, most stations
show revenue growth from only one
source: local advertisers. National ad
spending continues to be soft, and
network compensation-what the
network pays an affiliate to carry its
shows-could actually start dropping
soon. Even if national advertisers
were to increase their television ex-
penditures, there is another problem:
Cable ~rv will likely steal more and
more revenues from network and 10-
FORGES, APRII. 16, 1990
m ~ ail i~~~ ~ :, ~ ~
F r
_ ; ~~
' .;.
Skiers and shoppers on the streets of Vail, Colo. -
The Mils an altos ~oith ~oorried ~ohtspe's
~'~ eorge Gillett` is CitizeQ Va>L ~ m 1988 by the American subsid- ti
- ~ Waitresses bow and scrape be a-iaxy of a Japanese concern that also
'-~forehim,skiiastructorshapsodize -=owns `Stratton .:Mountain. in Ver-
-,-~abouthawhe fumed the resort into mont<,The Japanese are speeding
the pinnacle of ski chic,, amactuig ~ big~to egpandtlift capacity and res-
Wall Streeters and other moneyed ~taurants. newterrain"being,opened
Easterners to its slopes. Gushes a ~`"on 'the: very pear of .''one of the
native, "Vail just"wouldn't be Vail mountains at Breckenridge will
;without Mr: Gillett.". ~ give skiers the highest altitude-
• But now that Gillett's triumphs , 13,000 feet-alpine ski-experience
m slci`country are, being overshad- in the U.S: David Peri; vice. presi-
owed by his tribulations in zv land, dent for marketing at ` the'iesort;
the hills at Vail aze alive with wor- -praises: -his transpacific bosses:
,-Tied whispers.,Wil[',fie have to"seIl "Now we have thefreedom to look
his beloved mountain?"Who would „aC longer-term investments 'that` ,
the bu er bete,:'.< ~ , _- ~ z. _
y "'~ -~~"`"~`~, _ will increase oui market shale."w
.t Unfortunately for Gillett, just as ~~Talk around Vail is that other ;, .
e 'finds himself short of .cash, to ~. a
__ . _ . ~ J panese would love fo buy in. One ".
cad ~ capital improvements at.?umor is that Hideo Morita, son of
~, ..,
hail and Beave~Crcek,;a nearby :the"cfiairman of Sony, has offered
petitor-t.]ze resoit~ofBrecken- : to buy,yail.for $600 milliAn~ Mor-
~dge-finds~tseIf x~ee-deep.:. in ` ita has'=resort `
eaperience-~:He has
ough` Breckenridge, just down In- ti been developing one in the Niigata -
~tmstate= from~.,~Vail,' was bought x prefecture ~n Japan --G.1K. ~* ux~
cal stations every yeaz.
One solution to a downturn in any
business is to cut costs. But Gillett
has been chopping expenses merci-
lesslysince hebought scl, and accord-
ing to Bishop Cheen of Paul .Kagan
Associates, there's a little fat left.
Neither can Gillett ease his burden
by selling an scz station or two at a
substantial profit. Although the bond
indentures would allow him to sell,
prices for even the best stations have
dropped nearly 30% since Gillett
bought the former Storer properties.
zv stations recently have fetched just
10 times cash flow, versus the 14 mul-
tiple common a few years ago.
scr is just one piece of Gillett's em-
pire. His other company, Gillett
Holdings, owns three rv stations out-
right in such markets as Baltimore
and Salinas-Monterey, Calif., plus the
Wisconsin meatpacker and processor,
l?ackerland Packing. Its most glamor-
ous, if not its most profitable, holding
is ownership of the Vail and Beaver
Creek ski resorts.
Could Gillett Holdings keep sci
afloat? Doubtful. Because both sci
and Gillett Holdings are private, fi-
nancials aze hazd to come by, but aT
of Gillett's non-rv companies aze it
low-mazgin or low-growth industries
Take meatpacking, for instance.
Even the low-cost producer-ISP,
Inc.-nets around 0.5% of revenues.
With estimated sales of $500 million
a yeaz, Packerland's earnings probably
trickle in at about $2.5 million a yeaz.
In the tough world of meatpacking,
the company may be too small to be
an effective competitor. Perhaps rec-
ognizing this, Gillett has tried to ex-
pand the business by acquisition. He
bought Peck Foods, a division of Saza
Lee, in 1988. But his run last fall at
Wilson Foods, abrand-name pork pro-
ducer, failed. While Gillett's friends
say the acquisition failed when Wil-
son's earnings fell below expecta-
tions, others say Gillett had trouble
getting financing.
Gillett's rv stations-the ones out-
side of scr face many of the same
problems the scI stations face. Which
leaves the crown jewels: Vail and Bea-
ver Creek. His ski resorts give Gillett
immense ego gratification, and he has
proved to be a masterful operator in
the resort business. Last season Vail
was voted the number one ski resort
in the nation in Snow Counn~~ and Ski
magazines. (It was on the slopes of
Vail that Gillett reportedly struck his
ill-fated deal for scI with fellow pow-
derhound Henry Kravis of Kohlberg
Kravis Roberts.)
But increased competition for the
ski dollar is making skiing an increas-
ingly capital-intensive business (see
box, p. 41). Deep pockets-something
Gillett no longer has-aze needed
now more than ever before in the ski
industry. Thus it is unlikely Gillett
can tap the resorts for enough cash to
service his ~rv debt.
Besides the half-billion dollazs scI
owes, Gillett Holdings has junk bonds
outstanding to the tune of $870 mil-
lion in maturity value. Two of the
issues currently wade as badly dis-
tressed merchandise, one fetching 23
cents on the dollar, another 17 cents.
If the bonds looked at all secure, they
wouldn't wade at anything like such
steep discounts.
Does Gillett want to sell Vail? Not
on your life. But having played lever-
age roulette and lost, he may have no
choice. Betting is that Vail could fetch
as much as $500 million, more than
enough to make Gillett liquid again-
and make his bondholders happy. He
has sworn he will never seIl Vail. In a
recent Sports Illustrated article, Gillett
says, Wail is the last thing I will
sell-ever." But never doesn't mean
never anymore-just as bonds azen't
really bonds anymore. ^
Having lost one company to a raider, Alan
Miller built a second one. 7~is one he
doesn't expect to lose.
Once. burned .:
By James Cook .
LAN B. MILLER WdS SO1Vent but
out of work after Humana Inc.
in 1978, with a hostile bid,
snatched from him American Medi-
corp, the hospital chain he had built.
"We were out in the sweet, and we
had to start all over again. I wasn't
sure what I wanted to do, but a lot of
people wanted to give us money, so
we went back into the business."
And with a vengeance. Miller and a
couple of other former Medicorp exec-
utives joined $750,000 of their own
money with $3.2 million from Citi-
corp, First Chicago, Security Pacific
and Allstate. Thus was born Univer-
sal Health Services, Inc. Based in King
of Prussia, Pa., it is today the U.S.'
third-largest publicly traded hospital
chain, after Humana and National
Out in the eta+eet and starling all over again.
42 FORBES, APRIL 16, 1990
Universal Health Services' Alan B. Miller
a,~
RESOLUTION N0. 9
Series of 1990
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH CERTAIN RULES RELATING
TO PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to make public hearings held become more
efficient and less lengthy by adopting certain rules governing public hearings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF UAIL,
COLORADO, as follows:
1. Before any speaker shall be permitted to speak, the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem,
or any other Chairman of the meeting shall announce a time limitation., and all
speakers shall adhere strictly to such limitation. However, no speaker shall be
permitted to speak for longer than five minutes, exclusive of time required to
answer questions of Councilmembers, except upon the affirmative vote of the majority
of the members of Council present. No speaker shall be permitted to speak more than
once on any subject until everyone desiring to be heard has been allowed to speak.
2. When several individuals wish to express a shared opinion, it is encouraged
that they choose a spokesman to speak for all members of the group.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
1990.
Kent R. Rose, Mayor
ATTEST:
Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk
~~
C+flNTINENTAL EXPRESS
OPERATED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN AIRWAYS
March 29, 1990
Ron Phillips
Vail Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Ron,
'G APR - 2 ;~90
Your concerns and support of the Vail/Beaver Creek
STOLport are very much appreciated.
We are now approaching the point of no return. We
will either resume service or it will be closed forever!
Should negotiations by the Town of Avon on the
Nottingham Ranch not go forward, we are prepared to start
service this June based on the following agreement with the
community
Rocky Mountain Airways would:
- Continue to pay its lease liability on the property
- Maintain and operate the terminal
- Provide snow removal of the roadway, parking
area, ramp, taxiway and runway
- Provide seasonal service as previously submitted
to the Task Force (copy attached)
- Commit to a 5 year operation of the STOLport
- Maintain and operate landing/navigational aids
The community would commit to:
- Maintaining the runway systems (overlays seal
coats, etc.)
- Enter into a revenue guarantee for the level of
activity attached
- Enter into a revenue sharing agreement for revenue
in excess of those guaranteed
At this point, we believe the next step is for the
Task Force to formalize the group into an Airport
Authority, establishing a source of revenue.
HANGAR NO 6 • STAPLETON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT • DENVER, COLORA00 80207 • (303) 388-8585
Page -2-
We believe this proposal would be a "win win"
situation for the community as well as Continental Express.
This program would insure that you keep the. vital link with
the present Denver Airport as well as the new airport.
With the community working with us as partners in this
venture, success will certainly be more readily attainable.
As time is of the essence, we would ask you to give us
a formal reply no later than April 30, 1990.
Sincerely,
1~~s R Heap
ice Pre /
General Manager
DRHjslw
cc: Mike Carda
Jerry Davis
Steve Dwyer
Gerald Flynn
George Gilette
Bill James
Bruce Kendall
Merv Lapin
Larry Lichliter
Ed McManus
Neal Meehan
Kent Myers
Allan Nottingham
Ron Phillips
Arnie Ray
Mike Shannon
Don Smith
f_ohrrrraEN"rAL_ E"xF•RE:_~:_; - b!E:=;TEEN t:f!'iIUFJ - RUCk:Y rJO~_1hrrAlrJ F1IFa.~AV:_;
:-;"fOLF'OR-f (. VAIL/AVOhJl !~,~HR
GRAF 1" # 1 - APJNUAL_ :=~ERV I CE
I-fE.f9 ANNUAL .?ANC!1/AF'R15 AF'R].C,/MAY 1 Jt."tfdF:i':;[=F'T OC-(/M1JOV' hJ~.'~V'4/C?EC:=. 1.
DA'{'3 ~~F =:VC: :'_F.5 1i!.5 tj 1::::= i; - _
F~."f' = RAIL.`{ 7 ! t! ~~
DEP'ARTURE'=~ :_'S~::~ 1.17Q rj _._ ~; _ _;rj
AL+A I L SEAT''=~ 1'~::'~+35 7O5t•! Q ='~ 1:~ ~
t C! 1 ~= ~'4U
A~s;U(•1ED L/F"% 57.11 !_, ~,U% 20.C!l ~;i!.0% '~i.C!'~ 4O.C!~
E3'(.F'A'=;~. 7Q7:= 45.=: r.4 U 175F,;"; t! 7:?`ar=.
E'S1".FARE `~4F=..tjtj ~4F_..pi~ ~O.tjtj ~4F;.tt) ~:c),~;tj ~46.iic;
E'.~1".FEVE'NUE 3:~,~;.5:~:,4:c::=_: ~'~,1U'~,744 y,i! ?ic:Oc~,1<_~ $i! ~:=t_5,f_~1r=,
EXF'EiJ:=;Eg t:~) ~3,4F=,5,115 3,1,95'x,.;95 $r`;,~,i)5 ~=~9~,!:~~. =F:,,.SC!5 s.5i!i!,:==_
PJET RF_'a)L_T (~211.,F•;%'7) ~t5i!, 4':~! l3•C.,~,i~.5:! fhl_:4,1'4? (=~!:_,,;~;.5) «1r_•4,77~i
F'EF: DEF'ARTUR[= ~1 ,:c)4'~ =1 , __~_: ERR E 1. ,:?55 F:RF' ~ J ,37.7
F'f_R F'A'.:3ENGI=R ~4 =, .99 'a4:.' . 7'~ EF:R X5!3 . n=; ERR 38:3. (_
FEF: R.T, $:_,F.•34 3'~,SrJr• EF:R ~r',77.1. ERR ~v',54
INCREMENTAL
PA:=:c;EPJGER
RELATED c.A) ~1C!.="
A/C: RF_LATED
DEF'FiRTVRE CEt7 3.574
RUtJfJDTRIF' t 81 31 , 14~
#-3F-ii~-,~~~~F-iF ~3f~*~~iF 3r iE ~3E ~3t ~3F 1E iF iF it#~7F iF*-7F iE ~F ~F it"#tiF dF#~#jF aE -!F iF ~c iF ~F -!f-~*#* 3F 3E it#jF iF ~F#~E~##iF#~3E it#~3i -e! x#ie jr ~3F#'x k-li ~ iF~jF~3F jt ~F ~~!t ~3t ~t~##~*
FUUThJUTE=~:
A) F'ASc:ENGER RELATED ~ COt3T S AF'F'L I CABLE ARE ~ C:OM[•i I SS I O N'=; , RF =;EFiVA"f I ON Si C . (i . c; . , AhdD G~+A .
B j A: C RELATED ~ CU: "f:.. INCL UDE FUEL , i REW3 , NA I NTEhdFahdC F_ , C~ROt"!ND Et=tl! I F' MENT .?a 1 ALJ D I N~:=i FEE'-! .
w) TOTAL.. FXF; IN ADDITION TO F'A'=::=E-NGER °, AIRCRAFT C:Uc~ T:=; t:hJOTE:=; A!B) INCLI!CiES; '3"fA"(ION,AIRCf:AFT REN-(,F=ACILIT`r' F'E::h!-(', E: i~.":.
CGN1":[tJEhdTF,t_ EXI'RE=:3 - 4JE:TEfitJ F;Et:i:[OtJ -- RGCk:Y t-1UUtJTAIPJ AIf~:blri'Y:i;
:-TUI_f='URT CVAiI../Ab`GN> rh~F-IR
DIAf-T #1 - r-jl•JNtJAL_ .`.-Ef~VICE
'.•.TEt1 ANN~JAL JANU1 /APR15 AF'RlF;/t•1F,Y':31 _rUhJE/:=;EF'T GC'f!hJUV~:::a tJO~la:'A.!C;r.C31
R . T "_ CiA I t._Y 7 i;r ij IS
DEF'AFiI-l!RE`. ._ :. ldic_! ci ti -=u";
AVAIL 3EAT3 1<3~=;:,C, jij~r.Cr p =F~1'E. > 1;=~~'4Cr
A_~:Ea!t•1F_D I__lf='h ~Q.ti;;
_ t=~cj.<?l 'ij.~!l ='y.ci;
_ _, ;'ii.<i;?
_.
~lij.lil
F=t_~"f . F'A:=;'=; . F~ 1'~:=~i> q:' =~:=~r~ ; 1'_~' i,_; i ~ 7'::_'-;r".'~
ESl'.FARF_ x4E>.OU ~45,i?ir ~ij.cji; ~4F,,C,C; ~i;.tjO ~gF.,i:;i;
E: 'f.REVE:NUE ~'_,,;q;=~,76~'_ ~1,'1117,d.5r. ~Q $~;r~.5~t=,yi:; xir ~._;:_~.~,,t=~1F~
-------------
E~;F'EPJ:=,E=t C~i ----------------
~:=:~=;EE.,3'.5 -------------------
gal,'-;1g'„1t=> ------ J-•------~-
~r,5i;~ ---------------------
~y_;:c,,1,7 -----------------
~r.~~C;.S -------- ------
=F~,i!t!,:===
NE I" RE_;t!L1" (~~17,i=.:=;?7 $27,k.Qg (~r.=.,~.cj) <~:aE,7,4'~7) (~~c-,,~,ij~,) f:i$1F.i1,77<':;
UNTT r:081_~:
F'ER DEPARTt_!RE ~1 "~r4 ~1 "~"~F, F:RR ~i. °'75 FF:f; ~ >
F'ER F'A:=;=ENC~ER ~.5d.35 ~45.~5 ERF: ~75.c= ERR #i_•:=t.~;
F'ER R.T. $',t.)=; ~''<,F1~: FRF: ~:%,515C> E:RR -SC:,F,_4
I NCFEMENTAI_
CU:_:T;:
F'A3:3EtJCiER
fiELATED CA) ~1i;.$8
Ai C REI_ATFD
DF:F'ARTURE (F+? X574
RUl!NDTRIF' (Ft :; ~i,lh8
x~*rF~~*-~*~~*~;i~~i~*~**~****;~*~-~*~;i->E~~*ai•r~*#-~>E~;~~t~~~~*~****~*~•rc-~**#-x*~~-~*~~*~-~x~~~~*a~~~#~*~*~~
FUUTNUTES:
A? F'A _::=~ENGER RELATED ; CG37:~; AF'F'L I CABLE ARE ; GGhit•1I:33I GN3 , REc~Ef":VAT I ON'=~/C . R . S . , AtJD u~;A .
1_, :; A/C: RF_LATED; C:G3TS ItJCLUDE FUEL, C:REW3, MAINTENANCE, GRGI!PJD Et!ll:fF'MEt•JT ?, lr1NI:jItJC~ FEE`S.
~> TGTAL EXF'; IPJ ADDI-PION TO F'A:;:.cENGER °~ AIRCRAFT C:U:..T:=, CNUTE:=: A/P1 IPJCLUDE3; :=.TA"fIOhJ,AJ.RCRh7FT RENT,FACILIT`f F:Ei•JT, F.TC:.
Manor Vail Condominium
Review and .Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County
Confidential:
March 7, 1990
Association:
Recreation Tax:
The following is a review of materials authorized by the
Earle County Recreation Task Force concerning its activities
to solicit the approval of a tax increase. The review
concerns doct~:ments distributed and discussions held since
February I5, 1990. Also, included is additional information
gathered in order to authentic or analyze the specifics of
the election proposal.
The Eagle County Recreation Task Force has been the
principal forum through which several municipal, county, and
special district interest have determined the specifics of
the election. propositicr. as well as the terms of ether
collateral acreements.
I. Election Issue:
On April I~~, i990 a county wide s~eciai election will be
held in Eagle County. The purpose of the el_ction is to
approve or disapprove a tax incr=ase or. all forms of taxable
property in Earle County. An estimated Il,^CO el~cters are
eligible to vote in the special election.
Ballet Question:
"Shall the Board of County commissioners of Eagle County
be granted authority to levy ad valorem taxes on aI1 taxable
property in said County in an amount exceeding the limitation
imposed by 29-I-301, Colorado Revised statutes, as amended,
or successor previsions, sueh additional tax levy to be made
in the year 1990 for collection in 1991 in ar. amount not
--~ exceeding $1,800,000 and the revenue derived there=rpm to be
included ir. de'~ermiring such limitation ir. subsequent years,
in ender to establish and operate a system of pu~.;lic
recreation. f aciiities and playgrounds ir, said county and to
acquire up to tan acres of real property in said county for
the purpose cf providing a site for the development of
affordably housing?"
The election proposition grants the Eagle County
Commissioners authority to levy an increase in ad valorem
taxes begirnirg in 1990, in an amount not exceeding
$1,800,000.00.
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
Marc; 7, 1990
Page 2
The tax increase will be accessed at a rate of $45 per
$100,000 of market value on residential property and of $87
per $100,000 of market value on commercial, industrial, or
vacant property and personal property.
"The revenue derived therefrom to be included in
determining such limitation ir. subsequent years." The exact
meaning of t:~e language ors the ballot proposition is obscure
and confusing, the foregcinc phrase is particularly
enicmatic.
The estimated revenues are based on an estimated total
assessed valuation of $600,000,000. Actual valuation for
1990 is $567,391,930.00.
If the additional tax Levy is approved, the estimated
total County mill levy for taxes due and payable in 1991 will
be 12.559 mills. If the additional levy is not approved, the
estimated total County mill levy will be 9.559 mills.
T:~e electicr. propositicr. states two purposes for the tax
lncreaS2:
1. To provide funds tc the Eagle Coi,:nty government to
establish and operate a system of public recreation
facilities and playgrounds in the county.
2. To provide funds to the
acuuire up to ten acr?s of real
the purpose of providing a site
affordable housing.
Eacle Co~~nty government to
property in the county for
for the development of
II. Financial Plan:
according to information provided by a financial
consultant to the Recreation. Task Force projected revenues
generated by 3.00 mills tax increase applied to an assessed
valuation of 615,000,000 will generate $1,845,000.00 of
revenue in 1992. The financial plan assumes a 2.5~ increase
per year in assessed valuation yielding $2,877,570.00 of
revenue in 2010.
The overly complex language of the election proposition,
indicates that tze tax increase is net dependent upon a fixed
mill levy. P_ fixed mill levy would cause revenues to rise or
fall based upon increases or decreases in the assessed
valuation. The election proposition provides that in the
event that there is a decline or levelinc off of increases in
assessed valuation. at least $1,800,000 in tax revenues will
Revi.-a and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Pace 3
be collected. The ballot proposal obscures the fact that the
Countyr Commissioners can unilaterally increase the revenue
base by 5.5% per year, every year. Revenues increases are
cumulative and are calculated upon the revenue base from the
prece~ing year.
^~~ election propcsition does not provide for the
termination of the tax. The election proposition does not
identify a specific capital improvement program. The ballot
propesitior, does not specify a timetable for the completion
of a capital improvement program. The ballot proposition
does net protect the recreation fund from inclusion in the
General fund. The election issue does not bind successive
Boards of County Commissioners to administrative,
operational, or capital ia-:provement budgetary commitments of
preceding Boards of Commissioners. The ballot proposal does
net provide for subsequent voter approval of Large capital
improvement projects. The propcsition does not provide for
the a~cuisiticn cf larger amounts of lands for affordable
emv l c~~ ee .
cc:,ru_rlc to infore..w~___.~ provided by the Eagle Ccunty
Recr=aticn 't'ask Force, r s-. ~.azs gene= a red by the. tax increase
may b= pledced towards ~he follcwinc p~ sects if the tax
increase propositior. is approved. ~e Board of Ccunty
Com.::_ssior:ers have not adopted ap j° lecaily binding agreement
to car ~- cut the followir_g task force proposals .
_. The formatior. of a Eagle County Recreation
Decarcment.
~rnual administrative expenses to operate the Eagle
County Recreation Department are projected at
S115,440.00 in 1992. Financial projection estimated an
increase of 4~ per year yielding an administrative
budget of $233,860 in 2010.
e. The funding of a twenty year financial program tt.at
would provide for the ac±uisition of lard and the
cor.structior. of recreation facilities.
"_"::e formula for the distribution of funds for Phase I,
according to the Eagle County Recreation Task Force, is
as follows.
_errv Creek-Miller Ranch/Edwards $8,386,520.00
m;.J?e/Gypsum 800,000.00
=salt/Ed Je~el 700,000.00
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
Marc:: i, 1990
Page 4
Available information does not indicate a specific
inventory of facilities and construction costs for each site.
3. The funding of operational expenses for parks and
balif_elds.
Cperational expenses for parks and ball fields are
projected at $356,720 for 1992. Financial projections
estimate an increase of 4% per year yielding a budget
for operational expenses in 2010 of $722,649.00.
Financial projections do not include any operating
revenues from user fees.
available information. does not indicate sufficient
information to evaluate operational costs for facilities
shover: in conceptual site plans. Additionally, operational
and maintenance estimates cannot be derived from conceptual
site plans as major changes have occurred in the development
program within recent days.
~. Creation of a reserve f~~nd.
Reserve fund for Development cf additional facilities on
all sites (Phase ~T) is~estiTated at $331,840 in 1992
and $1,220,061 in 2010. The reserve fund is created
~rom funds available after administrative expenses,
c^erational expenses, and debt service.
The financial plan indicates that each year the reserve
fi::nc plus earned interest is to be included in contingency
fund.
~. Creation of a Contingency Fund.
Cumulative funds, is reserve fund including interest
earned at ar. esti~:ated 7% annually. The saving of
..~.:x~ulati ve funds provide an a°~ailabie contingency fund
cf $1,291,999.0 in 1992 and $23,694,028.00 in 2010.
Financial studies indicate that with a mill Ievy of 3.5
mills, the construction and operation. of a $3,500,000.000
indoor recreation center at Edwards and a $1,500,000 indoor
recreation center at Eagle is feasible. Once a 3.5 mill levy
is achieve, through ar: average increases of between 1.Og and
5.5°s annually, the contingency fund will be large enough to
per:,zit t::e funding of the indoor recreation centers.
S:-:culd the Bcard of County Commissioner determine that
increases in tax revenues are sufficient to authorize
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page 5
a $5 million construction program for indoor recreation
centers at Edwards and Eagle, operational expenses would be
$338,000.00 in 1992 and $684,725 in 2010. The resulting
contingency fund balance would be $1,203,381.00 in 1992 and
$9,607,635.00 in 2010.
To date there has been no legally binding plan adopted
by the Eagle County Commissioners that would require
subse~uert Boards of County Commissioners to adhere to the
recommendations of the Eagle County Recreation Task Force.
No financial infor:Nation is available to determine a
-~" financial plan to retire the debt on the acquisition of ten
acres for employee;affcrdabie housing.
III. Intereovernmental Acreement.
On February 20, 1990 the Town cf Vail entered into an
inter~overnmertal agreement with the Town of Avon and Eagle
County. The intercover::me,°~tal agreement stipulates the terms
under wr:ich each aovern~r,ental entity can Durchase an interest
in the Berry Creek 5th F~1_ng and the Miller P.anch .
Should the Town of Vail obtain title to the Berry Cree.~c
parcel and the Miller parcel, the Town of Vail wishes to sell
and the County wishes to purchase both the Berry Creek and
the Miller parcels llnder the terT~S and CCnditlOIiS Set forth
in ~:~e ___-ergovernmental agree*.nent.
According to the intergovernmental agreement:
"If at the election, the registered voters of Eagle
County approve an increase in the County general fund mill
levy in a sufficient amc~~r.t for the County to purchase the
property and develop the property for employee/affordable
housing and recreational purposes, the Ccunt~l shall ourchase
the property from the Tew.l of Vail for a purchase price equal
to the price paid by the Town of Vail for the Berry Creek
parcel cr the Berry Creep and Miller parcels, plus loan
carrying cost and other direct cost incurred by the Town of
Vail to purcha<~ and hold either the Berry Creek parcel or
the Berry Creek and Miller parcels to the time of purchase by
the Ccunt_v. If the Tocar: of Vail purchases the Berry Creek
parcel or the Berry Creek and miller parcels with cash on
hard rather than borrowed funds, the County shall purchase
the property from the Tcwab cf Vail for a purchase price equal
Revie=a and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page 6
to the price paid by the Town of Vail for the Berry Creek
parcel or Berry Creek and Miller parcels and interest thereon
at the rate of eight and one-half percent interest per annum
until the time of purchase by the County."
The terms o.f the intergovernmental agreement gives the
Town of Avon and Eagle County five years to complete a
purchase agreement with the Towr. of Vail. If the voters
disapprove the tax increase, Eagle County has the options to
purchase fifty percent of the site. If both the Town of Avon
and Eagle County wish to purchase interests in the property,
they are obligated to purchase one-third interest each as a
tenant-in-common. There is ro language in the agreement that
would require or obligate any of the governmental entities to
devele~ employee/affordable housinc on either parcel should
the vete_rs not approve the tax increase.
If the Towr. of Vail owns both the Berry Creek 5th and
the Miller Ranch, the Tcwn cf Avon cr the County shall be
required to purchase the specified interest in both parcels.
If the site is cwred by more than ore government, a
commi~_~_ to manage and develop the property will be formed.
No owner shall have the right of partition unless otherwise
mutually agreed to by all owners. No owner shall have the
right to sicn ary petition for an annexation or ar. annexation
electi~.. or petition for inclusion _._ env special district
wit heat the mutual consent of ail t:~ owners.
According to information provided b~- the financial
consultant to the Recreation Tas~ Force, the foliowirg
estimated-land costs were as follows: ~.
Berry Creek 5th filing 105 acres $1,870,000.00
P•L'Iler Rancn 115-120 acres $1,500,000.00
Tie intergovernmental agreement provides for the three
participating governments to share consultant and election
costs. Infor~:aticr: found in the agreement and discussed by
the recreation task force indicates t:~at between $60-$75,000
will be spent bringing the proposal to election. This
estimate does not include executive staff time from each
government for the past several months, nor private donations
to ccr.d~.:ct an advertising campaign .
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eacle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page 7
IV. Evaluation:
For the past several months the Eagle County
Commissioners in concert wit: the Eagle County Recreation
Task Force has been discussinc the recreation and employee/
affordable housing issue. The ballot proposition is a result
of these discussions. The complexity of the ballot
proposition is a reflection of the political deal making
which has been taking place during the deliberations of the
Eagle Ccunty Recreation Task Force.
Recent meetings of the Eagle County Recreation Task
Force indicate that confu_=ion and a lack of clarity surrounds
the ballot proposition. The confusion arise from the lack of
an approved and legally binding plan by the Eagle County
Commissioners for the spending of the '_^~~rease ___ to
revenues.
It is apparent that the tax increase proponents are
trying to make the election proposal extremely complicated.
T'_ey .cue t~G voting public wi 11 row understand the
underlt~ing issues and lon ~erm implications of the ballot
propositior_. The promise of recreation facilities and
affcrdab'_= employee hcus~r:g atipears to be a ploy to turn out
a positive vote. It is e~~~dc:^t ~r~:m informacior. eiven or. a
spool al election. fact sheet that prcpone^ts are tr~~ing to
limit circu_ation of factual infar~;ation and avoid public
r®view of their proposal until ar~er the election is over.
The ulterior motives behind the proponents strategy is
to use the Eagle County Recreation. Departr:ent to absorb the
management and administrative structure of existing `
recreation, districts, such as Vail Nletropelitan Recreation
District. Should they succeed, it could allow for the
existing management personnel to control recreation programs
and budcets for the entire county. Preser_tl_v, ad.,~ini strative
persorr_el are l~~:ited to their Own districts or
intergovernmental agreements between metropolitan districts.
The VNIRD has beer. aggressively seeking to ta.'tie over the
management and administration of other metro~~litar. districts
such~as Eagle Vail.
After an affirmative election, Eagle County could step
aside, turning the administration cf recreation programs and
facilities over to Western Eagle County Metropolitan
Recreation Disurict and Vail Metropolitan Recreation
District. The board members of each of the_=e districts,
because of their control ever adm_.^.istrativz personnel, could
indirectly control policy f ermulation and implementation.
~i
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page 8
Attempts to consolidate with Eagle County can be viewed
as a means to escape scrutiny by the electorate on major
capital improvement projects. According to the election
propcsiticr_, voters will have no control over approval of
major capital improvement project financed by the tax
increase. Lack of voter oversight could lead to excessive
and eytravagant recreational developments.
T::".e argument that there will be an economy of scale due
to c~rtralized management of recreation services and
facilities is not apparent in the eiecticA proposition or
the proposed financial plan. Eagle County recreation
expenses, when combined with the similar expenses of existing
recre_~ion districts, would be considerable larger than the
financial plan would indicate. T.e efforts of the Eagle
County Recreation Task Force have dcne nothing to demonstrate
the financial and operational efficiency gained by
establishing a Eagle County Recreation Department.
^' he r_arrow scone of respor.sibi liti es assigned
to rec_e.ticn distr? ct tends to e.~accera~e file 1mOCrt~nCe Of
recre__icr. services ar~d facilities advocated by the
distric~~s staff and board of di_rec=crs. The needs of
_~___~_icr: ~__yerests should be balanced with other public
priori~ies such as transportation and affordable residential
house.
"":~ consolidation of existing manage:~,ent and
admini~tr~tive system, within a Eagle Co~~nty Recreation
Department, would mere than likely result in an even greater
ever e~accerated emphasis upon recreatienal services and
faci__~i es .
E_.cept for Eagle County sales tax vote, no county wide
taxinc proposal has succeeded. Each generation of resort
entrerreneur attemc.ts to over ceme histo_-ica1 voter
attitudes. At issue is what proportion cf revenue generate
by the recreation tax, derived from municipality, will be
returned to to municipality for the financing of similar
services?
This Eagle County recreation tax proposal will
concer.~rate ail recreational facilities en unincorporated
lard. It will deprive municipalities of recreational funds
to develop their owr. recreational programs and facilities.
For es~mple the Town of Avon will be deprived of an estimated
$100,0~3.0u annually for improvemer.1 to its recreational
facili~ies. The Town of Vail will lose a:-: estimated
$849,705.00 annually which could be used to complete
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation. Tax:
Marc:, i , 19 9 0
Page 9
recreational amenities which would have a direct benefit for
the community's residents and guests. The Town of Red Cliff
wculc be deprived of $2,x35 annually, money that is badly
needed for the repair cf its deteriorating community center.
Incorporated municipalities within Eagle County will
gerera~e an estimated two-thirds of the recreation. tax
revenues. The municipalities will receive no rebate from the
recreation tax revenues. The proposed regional recreational
facilities are targeted at a very narrow segment of the local
reslQe.^.t and guest population. The predomir~arce of field and
team sport facilities emp::asis athletics. The remote
location from residential and visitor population centers will
inhibit use of the facility by younger children and guests
wro de not have access to transportation.
Recreation tax revenues siNhoned off from municipalities
will bleed funds for non-athletic recreational programs and
_., _ . ~ ~_ __ . A pr~oonder=.^ce cf ~^e nroper1~° c~.-:e_ s payyng
t:__ ,..~:~ ~,~_ _ for the prc:pe.=~.. ~~ l _ __c facility`s will not
benefi~ from them. The incre~..ing age of property owners and
reS~Ge~_t pCpulatlCP. 1ndiCateS that team Spprt athl°tiC
facilities will do little to meet their recreational needs.
The ~`-:oe to^ation of Lhe roc; c:-.~1 faci 1__+es I_c~^ exi stira
urb,n centers ;gill do little to increase property values J
th:roug~: t:~e i°°.`restment or publ_c funds .
The conslr°action of recreation facilities on prime
residential land is not an efficient use of the Eerry Creek
and Miller Ranch property. Alternative sites for athletic
field such as floodplain areas are more appropriate and cost
effective. Alternative sites have been identified and are
available for recreational development. The leapfrogging of
recrea=~ional facilities over more appropriate sites, closer
to urban population centers, is nail^~er good land use
planning, nor sound land development economics.
The specifics of various development and financial
scer:arios for the three recreation sites are still fluid.
Items are still being included er excluded from the
develc_,,.ent proposals. The financial and development plan
for expenditures and administration is incomplete. There is ~-"
---• no termination date for the recreation tax. There is no ~ ~
r..~ fixed cafe for completion, of phase I. There is no plan for ~~i
.~ experc_ture on proposed phase II. Future tax increases are - t
unde°ine~u and open ended. Thar` ys no legally binding plan
adopter to insure that recreation. tax revenues are expended
for the purposed intended.
Review and Evaluation:
Proposed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page IO
The election proposition confuses too many unresolved -'~
issues. The functional connecticrt between recreation and
affordable employee housing on the same ballot proposition is
obscure and insignificant. _
The concept of affordable employee housing that has been
introduced on the ballot proposition is obtuse. The vague
cor_cent of "affordable" employee housing, which has no
legally binding definition, has been limited to ten acres
somewhere in the county. The election proposition does not
stipulate need, according to any binding housing plan which
ide_t^.tifies the amount of "affordable" housing to be built on
tze ten acres .
The lack of an ill-defined development plan for
affordable housing has engendered a "not in my backyard"
respcrse from neighboring property landowners. Property
owners fear the construction of ar. employee housing ghetto
adjace^tt to up scale suburban residential neighborhoods.
Real estate developers in the Vail Valley have used
acvernmer_tal purchases of oven space as a consistent land
development strategy over the pass several years. On several
occ~:sicns they have enticed Local government to buy up large
vacant-~. parcels of prime residential land. The developer not
or_Iy benefit for the proceeds of the land sale to trte
govern_^ient, but also benefit by driving ua the value of their
remair_ing holdings on nearby vacant land. This strategy,
while financially successful in the short term, has been and
is detrimental to improving oppcrtanity for affordable
rtcusi.:c for the resident population. and Taber force.
yt is a cuestionable proposition to expect the tax
payers of Eagle County to provide tax revenues so that the
Town. cf Vail can provide housing for its labor force. The
means by which the ballot proposition proposes to elevate the
affordable employee housing problem is suo_erfluous and
inccraecuential .
The multi-million dollars expenditures for
adr;:instratior., operating expenses, and capital improvements
of proposed recreational facilities is unarecedented in the
history of Eagle County. Cautioned should be used by the
electorate in evaluating the cost/benefits of apparent
construction costs versus the enormous magnitude of long term
hidden costs for administrative and operational expenses.
Review and Evaluation:
Prepesed Eagle County Recreation Tax:
March 7, 1990
Page I1
Assessed Valuation and Recreation Tax Suirsnary:
I. Eagle County Assessed Valuation:
Tcwn of Avon:
Town of Basalt:
Town of Eagle:
Town of Gypsum:
Town c f Mirturn
Town of Red Cliff:
TOwTl o'i Vai 1
Total Municipalities:
Unincorporated:
Total Eagle County:
2.
A
Valuation:
$35,344,450.00
7,707,140.00
11,324,660.00
5,675,040.00
4,775,890.00
811,910.00
283,235,320.00
$348,874,410.00
$218,517,520.00
$567,391,930.00
3.00 mills
Recreation Tax
$106,033.35
23,121.42
33,973.98
17,025.12
14,327.67
2,435.73
849,705.96
$1,046,623.23
$655,552.56
$1,702,175.79
Valuation by Geographic Areas in Eagle County:
Uper Valley:
Valuation:
Arrcwead Metropolitan
Beaver Creek Metropolitan
Berrv
Eagle Vail Metro
Edwards Metro
Lake Creek Meadows
Su~total
Municipalities
To`~1
B. Lower Valley:
$10,948,600.00
72,352,870.00
12,413,130.00
30,203,650.00
7,543,570.00
2,532,420.00
$135,994,240.00
$324,167,570.00
$460,161,810.00
Western EC Metro Rec Dist $44,276,370.00
C. Roaring Fork:
Basalt & Rural Fire Dist $29,180,700.00
D. Rural/Agricultural $33,773,050.00
Total Eagle County: $567,391,930.00
3.00 mills
Recreation Tax
$32,845.80
217,058.61
37,239.39
90,610.95
22,630.71
7,597.26
$407,982.72
$972,502.71
$1,380,485.43
$132,829.11
$87,542.10
$101,319.15
$1,702,175.79
Not`: Assessed Value is determined by market value
multiplied by 15~ for residential property and 29% for
commercial property.
TF'Htd'_.f~l l TTEC~ FF'Ut~l
`~ M C
hAtl6 (~
MAR z 8 1990
Honorable Ben Nighthorse Campbell
House of Representatives
Washington, n.C. 20515-0603
Dear Mr. Campbell:
0'. ~U. t'iJ 1U: ~~ F'. ~J2 »:
UNITED 5TATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
euraau of th• Csnaus
Washington, O.C.. 20233
pFFICE OF THE DIRECTQR
Thank you far your letter regarding local community oifexs to
supplement the census Bureau's enumerator wage rates in several
counties of your Third Congressional District in Colorado. we
also received a similar letter from Ms. Marsha Osborn, Northwest
Council of Governments, an this subject. we deeply regret the
misunderstandings that resulted in the hiring of many enumerators
who thought their census wage could and would be supplemented by
the local government.
we cannot accept funds frarn communities to supplement enumerator
wages nor do we condone the communities directly subsidizing
these wages. we axe concerned with the potential management and
perceptual problems that might arise if we use enumerators hired
or paid by the community. This could lead to perceived or even
real inequities in the outcome of the census for different areas
depending on the local communities' economic resources. To
preserve both the appearance and reality of objectivity, the
pexsons who conduct our canvassing, coverage checks, and
household interviews must be employees hired and paid by the
Census Bureau.
Yau are correct that Title 18 United States Code, Section 209
does not subject Federal employees to criminal sanctions if they
receive additional funds from state or local govexnmentg. The
statutory exception, however, does not amount to an authorization
to accept supplemental funds, especially when doing so would
create a conflict of interest. We designed our policy to assure
that the census is conducted consistently and objectively.
We believe that we have adequate funds to hire sufficient
enumerators to complete a timely and quality census. we are
committed to da so. we based our pay rates upon an assessment of
the overall economic condition within a distract office area.
These rates also are influenced by local enumeration
difficulties. Although local conditions may vary somewhat
throughout a district office area, we believe our rates are
competitive for the total area.
TF'Rfd_:t~11TTEC:~ FROM l~'.5l?. 90 10: ~c F.O
Honorable Ben Nighthorse campbeil 2
Local communities can continue to be of assistance by helping to
identify potential census employees. Local involvement in
publicity and vutreaah cfforts also is important. We have
encouraged local governments to use available funds to supplement
national outreach efforts with locally-tailored campaigns. In
this respect, we greatly appreciate the efforts made thus far by
the communities that you represent. As you know, we still need
assistance in completing the census especially in the area of
recruiting and staffing.
We appreciate your assistance in helping us make this the most
accurate and complete census ever and hope you will continue to
support us in this endeavor.
Sincerely,
.... 1 _ -
a~."c..~.. ~~.,
_~
Barbara Everitt Bryant
Director
Bureau of the Census
(F'Hfd'=:(~11TTEG FROl,i ia~ , i:?, `;rr li~l: ~~~ F. ~?=+ +'
. MEA6t 11fPLV tp.
~$EN NIGHTNQRSE CAMPBELL
[~ wAy~«ItcTONOFFICE.
/7i4 Lor~ytpa7H ev1~01NG
3D DISTRICT. COLORADO
~ WA6RINGT~N, OC 20615
Ij021 2Y 5J 101
COMMITTiEt: ~angre~~ at wC
t~je 'i~niteb ~t~t~~ ~ OIGTpICT OiME6:
720 N PAIN s7.
AGRICULTURE 9UiT[ 100
INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS .yr_ ~~~~ ~e
i
'
p ~~Y~s~sxZ~Fj(~~wi
Ti
I 6+ L`- `lY
, PUEIIO. CO e1003
43
9821
T
Y T -
(71036
r~
~~ ~~~ ~+'
tan
in
~i ^ t15 E 6ECON0 AVE
~
~a ,
~
March 29, 1990 su1T! 126
DUnANG0.C0 61301
130! 217-630D
4I6 M, fiN 6TRCT
Ur . Barbara $ryartt lUITE 711
Q11AND ~uNGTIbN. CO 81501
Director, Is02,:42-2,00
Bureau of the Census
Room 2049
Federal office Building 3
Washington, D.C. 20233
Dear Dr. Bryant:
As a follow-up to my March 16 inquiry concerning the payment of
supplemental wages toourseuofeacti~ators, Y am interested in the
legality of another c
While my office has been informed by telephpno of the Sureaus's
apparent decision to '.stand firm on its opinion regarding the
payment o:~ supplemental wages, as of the date of this letter, I
have not received a wri~h~nwrittenmresponse will bestheosame.
Nevertheless, I assume
Zf a state or
This being the case, Y make the fallowing inquiry.
local government entity deinationobonustbasednuponetheenumber of
their locality a past-term
bourse worked and performance, would this action confli~g~wafter
the Bureau's position an supplemental wages. That is,
an enumerator has been t~bi~ionetaftihe ~a~alegovernmentorewarding
there be any Bureau prop
that local citizen for his or her work?
I would appreciate a timely review of this matter and an opinion
from the Census Bur;sau.
Thank you for your continued assistance.
Sincerely,
~~
1
Ben Nighthor~
Member of Cor _
BNC/k11
~~>
~~~
~~~ ~ .
~~~
,~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~d~
~`~~`~
~~'~ ~r'Q
REC'o APR - 21990
AGENDA ~ `~~ ~°,~
`f ~ .
REGIILAR MEETING
' VAIL METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 1990
VAIL TOWN COIINCIL CHAMBERS
3:00 PM
3:00 PM REGIII,AR MEETING
1. Call to Order 3:00 PM
2. Approval of Minutes: Feb 28, 1990 and March 14, 1990
3. Financial Report - Brian Jones (see attached)
4. EVMD/VMRD joint study -Jeff Winston and EVMD Board members
5. VMRD/EVMD Reciprocal Letter of Agent - (see attached)
6. Free Recreation Program with hotels/condos proposal - Dodson
7. US Canoe & Kayak Team - Rick Chastain (see attached)
8. Symphony of Sports up date - Rick Chastain
9. Reducing TOV subsidy to VMRD (see attached) - Brian Jones
10. TOV/VMRD process for use of TGV land (see attached Rose
letter)
11. Golf sub committee report (see attached) - Pat Dodson
12. Approval of Director of Tennis Agreement
13. Approval of Head Golf Pro Agreement & Concession Agreement
14. Approval of PO's
15. Adjournment
ATTACHMENTS: 2/28/90 and 3/14/90 minutes
Financial Report - Ending 2/28/90
~VMRD/EVMD Reciprocal LOA
Free Rec Memo
US Canoe & Kayak Team
Impact on Budgeted Fund Balance
Kent Rose letter
Dodson Memo - Golf Cmtee
Jones memo-1990 salary merit increases - FYI
Beartree Lot Land Exchange - FYI
VAIL METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
FINANCIAL REPORT
FOR MONTH ENDING FEBRUARY 28 1990
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BIIDGET-ACTUAL .......... .....PAGE 1 - 3
42/28/90
SCHEDULE OF GENERAL RECREATION REVENUE & EXPENSES .....PAGE 4
SCHEDULE OF ICE RINR REVENUES & EXPENSES
FOR PROGRAMS & ICE RENTALS .................. .....PAGE 5
SCHEDULE OF ICE RINK REVENUES & EXPENSES
FOR SPECIAL EVENTS .......................... .....PAGE 6
CASH SIIMMARY ..................................... .....PAGE 7
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District PG i
Reverxxs end Expenditures Budget-Actual
Montfi Ending FEBRUARY 28, 1990
CUR PER CUR PER CUM YTO CUM YTD X of 1990 1990
FEB 89 FEB 90 FEB 89 FEB 90 BUDGET BUDGET
Golf Revenues
Golf passes 0 0 0 0 0.0 111,600
Green fees 0 0 0 0 0.0 650,000
Cart rentals 0 0 0 0 0.0 157,000
Clubhouse lease 2,750 2,750 8,250 5,500 16.7 33,000
Net Range 0 0 0 0 0.0 12,000
Total Revenue 2,750 2,750 8,250 5,500 0.6 963,600
Golf Expenses
Golf Course Maintenance 11,736 13,722 27,493 29,698 9.6 309,426
Equipment Maintenance 575 902 2,199 3,243 5.6 57,900
Clubhouse Operations 1,622 6,333 4,615 10,6951 4.9 218,158
Carts 0 0 0 275 7.6 3,600
Total Expenses 13,933 20,957 34,307 43,911 7.5 589,084
Golf Revenue Over (Under} (11,183) ( 8,207) (26,057) (38,411) •10.3 374,516
Expenses =----------- ----=---------
--------- ------------
------------ ------------
------------ --------
-------- ----------
----------
Tennis Revenue 0 0 0 0 0.0 35,100
Temis Expenses 173 620 553 701 0.9 77,259
Terms Revenue Over (Under)
Expenses (173) (620) (553) (701) 1.7 (42,159)
° 3 3
Ice Arena Reverwes 55,502 (2,540) 91,782 50,640 9.1 556,830
3
Ice Arena Expenses 67,835 46,197 116,876 87,517 13.2 662,728
Ice Arena Revenue Over (Under) '
Expenses (12,333) (48,737) (25,094) (36,877) 34.8 (105,898)
Gen Rec Revenues 4,837 4,197 12,569 13,320 5.3 250,530
Gen Rec Expenses 21,275 25,763 39,258 50,628 9.4 537,642
General Rec Revenue Over
(Under) Expenses (16,438) (21,566) (26,689) (37,308) 13.0 (287,112)
CUR PER CUR PER CUM TTD CUM VTO X of 1990 1990
FEB 89 FEB 90 FEB 89 fE8 90 BUDGET BUDGET
Other Expenses:
d
i
i ''ll
~T 4~
`
strat
on
VMRD A
min 31,262 26,998 77,012 55,601 13.2 420,900
Aquatic Center 2,411 7,965 0
Park Maintenance 198 198 0.7 29,182
31,262 29,607 77,012 63,764 14.2 450,082
Total Operating Revenue Over
(Under) Expenses (71,389) (118,737) (155,405) (177,061) 34.7 (510,735)
Non Operating Revenues
Interest income 1,432 1,996 3,263 2,601
5 13.0 20,000
To+m of Vail Contract 31,322 0 31,322 0 0.0 543,243
Other TOV Payments 0 0 0 0 0.0 24,000
Property taxes 8 specific 6,499 3,567 6,499 5,585 1.2 451,925
Lottery proceeds 0 0 0 0 0.0 5,200
Misc Revenue 0 224 0 640 6.7 9,500
39,253 5,787 41,084 8,826 O.E 1,053,868
Non Operating Expenses
Debt Service 0 0 75,163 0 0.0 238,374
Net Non Operating Revenue 39,253 5,787 (34,079) 8,826 1.1 815,494
PG 2
PG 3
Capital Projects
Loan Proceeds-temis constr
Capital Outlay
Golf Course Improvements
Ford Park Terris Courts
Running Track
Dobson Water Heat Exchg
Dobson Heat Exchanger
Dobson Rinktex Ftoor Repl
Golf Carts-Cap Res Accrual
Dobson-lamb/Refrig Cap Res
Net Capital Outlay
Total Revenue Over (Under)
Expenses
Begi wing Fund Balance 1/1/90
Ending Fund Balance 2/28/90
Budgeted Fund Balance 12/31/90
CUR PER CUR PER
fEB 89 FEB 90
250,000
CUM YTD CUM YTD X of 1990 1990
FEB 89 FEB 90 BUDGET BUDGET
250,000
0
0 2,315 0 2,315 1.4 165,708
100 142,842 ~ 100 153,476 0
0 0 0
0 0 D.0 9,000
0 0 0.0 17,000
0 0 0.0 15,000
3,000 6,000 17.1 35,000
742 1,484 16.7 8,896
100 (101,101) 100 (86,725) -34.6 250,604
(32,236) (11,849) (189,584) (81,510) •150.5 54,155
91,149 91,144
9,639
145,304
Schedule of 1990 General Rec Reverxus ~ Expenses
Month Ending FEBRUARY 28, 1990
•••••••-- REVENUES -•••••-•• •••••---- EXPENSES • ---••-••
ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV
BUDGET Cum YTD YTD BUDGET Cum YTD YTD OR <LOSS>
GEN REC PROGRAMS
VOLLEYBALL TOURN 510,750 50 0.0 56,340 264 1.0 (264)
SOFTBALL LEAGUES 530,000 50 0.0 528,253 50 0.0 f0
SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT 514,300 SO 0.0 511,138 SO 0.0 SO
SOCCER LEAGUES 53,950 SO 0.0 55,225 SO 0.0 SO
SOCCER CAMP 565,800 50 0.0 560,350 53,556 5.9 (53,556)
FOOTBALL CAMP 5880 f0 0.0 5880 SO 0.0 SO
BASKETBALL CAMP 51,050 5210 20.0 5750 5245 32.7 (S35)
VOLLEYBALL CAMP 52,800 5360 12.9 51,650 SO 0.0 5360
SPECIAL PROGRAMS 510,500 SO 0.0 512,250 5353 2.9 (5353)
GEN REC RACES 510,000 51,383 13.8 27,970 5429 5.4 2954
5150,030 51,953 1.3 5134,806 24,647 3.4 (52,694)
RED SANDSTONE PROGRAMS
OPEN GYM 51,800 5732 20 SO 5732
SOCCER 5800 5830 103.8 5570 5792 138.9 S38
BASKETBALL 54,800 51,280 26.7 52,400 S1,285 53.5 (55)
VOLLEYBALL 52,880 51,230 42.7 51,000 5994 99.4 5236
AFTER SCHOOL 58,300 51,902 22.9 51,550 51,593 96.5 5309
GYMNASTICS 513,200 51,870 14.2 516,320 51,511 9.3 5359
GYMNASTICS CAMP 520,000 SO 0.0 517,390 234 0.2 (f34)
551,780 57,844 15.1 539,330 56,209 15.8 51,635
POTPOURRI CAMP 533,520 SO 0.0 233,518 S178 0.5 (5178)
OUTDOOR ICE RINK SO 52,913 50 54,775 (51,862)
NATURE CENTER 57,000 SO 0.0 560,609 5882 1.5 (f882)
GEN REC OVERHEAD/MISC 5117,663 516,061 13.7 (f 16,061)
_~__~___~~ __~__~_____ ~_~_____~____exasoseexxc=x____ ______~__ ___ecoexxxsa
2242,330 512,710 5.2 5385,926 532,752 8.5 (520,042)
YOUTH CENTER 58,200 5610 7.6 2151,716 517,876 11.8 (517,266)
5250,530 513,320 5.3 5537,642 550,628 9.4 (237,308)
PG 4
Schedule of 1990 !ce Rink Revenues t Expenses
Pr ograms and Ice Rentals
Month Ending F EBRUARY 28, 1990
--------- REVENUES •- •------ --•-- DIRECT EXPENSES ••-•--
ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV
BUDGET Cum YTD YTO BUDGET Cun YTD TTO OR <LOSS>
PUBLIC SKATING
PASSES 55,400 5467 8.6
GUEST FEES 540,000 512,394 31.0
SKATE RENTAL 515,000 54,964 33.1
560,400 517,825 29.5 517,825
FIGURE SKATING SCHOOL 581,000 SO 0.0 S39,800 SO 0.0 SO
SKATING CLASSES 55,000 54,453 89.1 25,000 52,900 58.0 51,553
JR HOCKEY 519,000 SO 0.0 21,100 SO 0.0 SO
LADIES HOCKEY S5,000 SO 0.0 SO
HENS HOCKEY 59,000 22,815 31.3 52,815
SKATING CLUB OF VAIL S18,000 5125 0.7 5125
SUMMER HOCKEY CAMPS 528,750 SO 0.0 517,375 SO 0.0 SO
EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL 52,500 SO 0.0 SO
CONCESS & VENDING 565,000 511,333 17.4 544,338 57,073 16.0 54,260
SKATE SHARPENING 52,000 5880 44.0 Sgg0
LOCKER REVENUE S1,500 5286 19.1 5286
RINK RENTAL 528,080 5960 5960
HOUSE SERVICES 56,000 5182 5182
5331,230 538,859 11.7 5107,613 59,973 9.3 528,886
SPECIAL EVENTS
(See Page c•, 5221,600 511,765 5.3 51b1,608 55,802 3.6 55,963
5552,830 550,624 9.2 5269,221 515.,775 5.9 S34,849
DOBSON OVERHEAD/MISC 54,000 216 0.4 5393,507 571,742 18.2 (171,726)
5556,830 250,640 9.1 5662,728 587,517 13.2 (536,877)
PG 5
Schedule of 1990 Specisl Event
Revenues end Expenses
Month Ending FEBRUARY 28, 1990
--••----• REVENUES •••-•---- -•--- DIRECT EXPENSES •••---
ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV
EVENT DAYS BUDGET Cum YTD YID BUDGET Cua YTD YTD OR <IOSS>
HBO Show 4 54,800 56,265 130.5 51,867 54,398
Vail Rocks 1 52,500 52,500 100.0 52,500
American Ski Classic 1 52,500 51,500 60.0 51,500
Volleyball Tournament 2 52,400 SO 0.0 S79 (S79)
No Check Tournament 4 54,800 50 0.0 SO
Symph of Sports 7 591,000 SO 0.0 592,585 5600 0.6 (5600}
PSGA 2 22,400 SO 0.0 SO
Figure Skating Comp 4 54,800 SO 0.0 SO
Kent Feeds Ice Show 1 22,500 51,500 60.0 51,500
Ice Dance weekend 3 53,600 SO 0.0 SO
world wide COG 9 59,600 SO 0.0 SO
Ski Swap 3 53,600 SO 0.0 SO
VJH Tournament 4 54,800 SO 0.0 SO
Kraft westman 3 57,500 SO SO
Nutcracker 4 54,800 SO 0.0 SO
Christmas Show 4 570,000 SO 0.0 S52,817 SO 0.0 SO
New Year's Eve 1 SO SO 50
Spec Event Overhead Si6,206 53,256 20.1 (53,256)
S221,600 511,765 5.3 5161,608 55,802 3.6 55,963
PG 6
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
Cash Summary
Month Ending fEBRUART 28, 1990
NOW Payroll
Accent Account Total
Beg Balance 2/01/90 !78,277 11,591 179,868
Receipts 5182,694 198,368 t281,062
Disbursements {S173,175) (598,182) (5271,357)
Ending Balance 2/28/90 187,796 51,777 589,573 ~
* NOTE: This excludes a capital reserve of f70,884.
PG 7
2/90 FINANCIAL REPORT FOOTNOTES
1) Higher in '90 primarily due to allocation of Worker's Comp
premium, and repair & maintenance of clubhouse (about $1,000
of which was a result of the recent water damage).
2) A 17k payment out of previously recorded revenue for HBO show
resulted in this negative revenue figure.
3) The Brian Orser show .and World Championship special events in
1989 were primarily responsible for the disparity between '89
and '90 cumulative revenues and expenditures.
4 ) Just a reminder, disparity is due to allocation of general rec
overhead out of VNII2D Administration.
5) VMRD received 113k in early March which covers the January,
February, and March payments. The contract between VN'42D and
TOV is currently being modified based on the new figure of
$543,243 (includes 23k for Park Maintenance).
6) Funding for the Ford Fark tennis project finally occurred in
February.
7) This figure includes work performed in January; payment to the
contractor was delayed until the performance bond was in
place.
VMRD/EVMD RECIPROCAL
LETTER OF AGREEMENT
This agreement is made and entered on this 28 day of March, 1990
by and between Vail Metropolitan Recreation District a Colorado
Quasi Municipal Corporation (VMRD) and Eagle-Vail Metropolitan
Recreation District a Colorado Quasi Municipal Corporation (EVMD);
which agreement is effective when fully executed below.
Whereas, VMRD and EVMD agree to cooperate with the other for the
benefit of their constituents the parties agree to the following:
SECTION 1 - TERM OF THE AGREEMENT
Term of this agreement is for eight months, April 1, 1990 through
November 30, 1990.
SECTION 2 - GOLF PRIVILEGES
Nine or eighteen hole rounds
will be eligible to play on
through one of the following:
of golf. Golfers from one district
the other district's golf course
1. PUNCH CARD
- A pass holder would be eligible to purchase one punch pass,
good for six eighteen-hole rounds of golf at the golf
course he is not eligible to purchase a resident pass.
Restrictions:
Vail golf course - Good pre-season, post-season, and
Monday through Friday during the season (June 1 -
Septenber 20). Restricted on weekends and holidays during
the season.
Eagle-Vail golf course - No restrictions
- One punch card per pass holder per season
- Cost of card $75
- Non-transferable and non-refundable
2. GREEN FEES:
- A pass holder from either district would be eligible to pay
resident green fee rates at the golf course not in his/her
district by displaying their pass.
Vail golf course - Green fees $40 - eligible to play
Monday through Friday, pre and post-season)
Eagle-Vail golf course - Green fees $32 - 7 days a week
all season
3. A non pass holder - Residents of either District would
be eligible to pay: Resident green fees at the other
district's golf course if they are a resident ID card
holder in their own district.
Vail golf course - $10 ID card $40 green fees
Eagle-Vail golf course - $10 ID card $32 green fees
SECTION II - TENNIS:
Resident tennis passes of both districts will be honored at all
tennis facilities in both districts. Residents of each district
will need to purchase a tennis pass in their own district.
SECTION III - MISCELLANEOUS:
All financial transactions/remuneration for services stay with the
district giving the service. All responsibilities for proof of
residency stay with the applicant district.
SECTION IV - AGREEMENT MADE IN COLORADO:
This agreement shall be deemed to have been made and construed in
accordance with laws of the State of Colorado.
In Witness whereof, the parties hereto to have affixed their hands
on the date first above written.
VAIL METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
CHAIRMAN, TIM GARTON
EAGLE-VAIL METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
CHAIRMAN,. HOWARD GARDNER
vmrd~evmd-agent
TO: VMRD BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: PAT DODSON
DATE: March 23, 1990
SUBJECT: FREE RECREATION HOTELS/CONDO PROGRAM
I met with the VRA members at one of their regular meetings and
introduced the free recreation program. I told them this was an
idea the staff has been talking about for two years. We are in the
preliminary stages and trying to put it all together. I asked them
for input and was hoping to start the program in 1990. If the
lodging community thought. there was merit to the program we would
look forward to working with them to make it a win/win situation
for everybody.
There were approximately 20 people in attendance. I have attached
a copy (labeled VRA) of what was handed out at the meeting and
another more in depth version of the program for your information.
All the hotel representatives were invited to come to the 3/28/90
VMRD Board meeting to express their opinions. If the program is
approved and the Board would like to start it this year I recommend
the following:
-Length of program - May 1 to October 1
-cost - each participating hotel would pay $1 per room, per
night, based on occupancy levels of 1989.
-Payment schedule - on a monthly basis.
-ID system - VMRD staff will work with the hotel/condo in
developing a guest ID system.
-Marketing - hotels would immediately start marketing VI~2D
recreation facilities.
-Golf package - operate the same as in 1989 allowing any hotel
to participate by depositing $1,000 in order to make advanced
tee times. No hotel/condo should be deprived of advance golf
tee time reservations. Participating hotels in the free
recreation program would receive a discount of $10, non
participating hotels would pay full green fees of $50.
-Evaluation of program - the program should be evaluated at
the end of the first year. The program should have started
at $2 in 1990, but because t:~e hotels had already published
their rates, they would have to take the cost of the program
from their current budget. Next year they will be able to
build in the cost of the free rec program into their room
rates.
-Program success/surplus revenue - if the program is
successful and there is surplus revenues, I would suggest that
the Board look at:
1) reduce property tax in proportion to the surplus
received from the program, thereby helping the
hotel/condos reduce their operating costs.
2) Expand or develop new recreation facilities/programs.
-All participation in the free rec program is strictly
voluntary
-Guest participation in rec. program - all guest
participation in the recreation programs will be on a space
available basis, whether at the golf course, tennis, ice
arena, nature center, youth services or potpourri day camp.
Hotel guests need to make arrangements in advance to insure
participation.
The program is based on the majority of the people staying in hotel
rooms not taking advantage of the free rec program during their
stay. The program should entice more people to come and stay in
Vail during the shoulder seasons, truly helping Vail to be more of
a year round vacation center.
Some of the concerns of the hotel representatives were:
-Bad weather may be experienced during the pre and post season
closing both the tennis and golf course operations and the hotels
would still be paying for a service they cannot receive.
-Large conventions groups could not take advantage of the rec
amenities because they would be in meetings, but the hotel would
have to pay the fee.
-If the~~ were excess dollars would VMRD be willing to take a look
at reducing property tax or expanding recreation facilities?
-Would VMRD assist hotels in marketing the program such as
brochures, posters, etc?
-One hotel felt it was another way of extracting dollars from the
hotels that were already paying heavy property taxes and was not
in favor of the program.
-Some members felt the timing may be too tight for this summer and
should work toward 1991, when they can include it in their room
rates.
VALUE TO VMRD:
-Increased marketing of all VMRD programs at no cost. Marketing
would be picked up by hotels enticing guests to stay at their
facility and receive free recreation.
-The financial impact to VMRD if all the hotels and condos join the
program and the occupancy levels were based on 1989 during the
months of May - October (see chart on page 3-Report I) with VMRD
receiving $1 for each occupied hotel room (203,765) and condo unit
(100,408) would be somewhere around $300,000. These are estimates
based on one hotel's history.
-Increased revenues that would not other wise be received.
-Increased use at the Vail Golf Club during pre and post season.
-Helping Hotel/Condo community - VMRD would be helping them by
encouraging guests to come to Vail at non peak times.
-Helping local merchants - increased recreational participation
would mean increased revenues to merchants.
-Financial resource - If the program is successful VMRD may have
found new financial resources that would assist in expanding
recreation facilities or creating new ones without going to the
tax payers.
VMRD may have also found a valuable resource that would help the
eliminate the property tax all together.
work\freerecl
REPORT I
VAIL I~TROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
Free Recreation Program
HOTEL / CONDOMINIUM PROPOSAL
February 9, 1990
VMRD FREE RBCRF•ATION PROGRAM
For Hotel and/or Condominium Visitors
GOALS li.'~'TJ OBJECTIVES
The objective of the VMRD Vail Visitor Free Recreation Program is
to make available to the guest community all recreational
facilities within the District at no cost or at discounted rates in
order to encourage increased usage of the facilities and to present
an attractive amenity to the Vail guest experience.
The goal of the Vr]Ri; r'ree Recreation Program is to create a win /
win situation for the Vaii guest, the hotel/condominium community,
the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District and the Town of Vail:
* The Vail guest will be the greater beneficiary
of the p.o7ra:,; :,y Virt•.~,: of the enhanced
recreational experience at no cost or at
discounted rates.
* The hotels and condominium facilities taking
part in the program will benefit by way of
enhanced marketing through their ability to
offer additional recreational amenities to
their guests at little or no cost.
* The VMR.D will receive increased attendance and
revenues from existing and future facilities
and programs.
* The Town of Vail will experience increased
sales tax collections as a result of
increased revenues.
HOTEL AND CONDOMINIUM POPULATION DENSITY:
The total Vail hotel room availability is 1,916 units with a total
maximum capacity cf 3,707 guests •per night. The total Hotel bed
count is 3,168.
The Vail rental Condominium properties total 4,959 rooms with a
maximum capacity of 16,749 guests per night. The total Condominium
bed count is 14,295.
(2)
VP'IRD FACILITY / PROGRAM CAPACITIES AND USAGE ANALYSIS:
Of specific interest to the Free Recreation Program as
initially conceived; are the following recreation programs:
The Vail Golf Club - User activity of 28,517 golfers during 1989
represents only 64.4$ of available golf course capacity of 44,281
for the Frcr.:a-^ period P^~;~ i - Octobe_ 32. Cf the total 28,517
golfers, only 2,108 are attributable to use by hotel properties
presently utilizing the VMRD discount incentive program.
John A. Dobson Ice Arena - User activity of 1,838 skaters during
"public skating sessions" represents only 9.0$ of the facilities
capacity of 20,480 during those periods. This leaves available
91.Oo of public skating sessions to be utilized as a part of the
Free Recreation program.
Vail Tennis Club - The Tennis program has grown to a total court
count of 23 in 1990. The total court capacity is now 42,320
players. The 1989 season usage by 9,071 players represents only
21.4 of total available court times; allowing 78.6$ of court times
to be shifted to the Free Recreation program.
Vail Nature Center - No specific capacity numbers are available;
however it is felt that the facility has adequate room for
increased usage.
Vail Youth Services - No specific capacity numbers are available;
however it is felt that the facilities have adequate room for
increased usage.
Potpourri Dav Camp - The 1989 average day usage at Potpourri Day
Camp was 60; wit'.: a maximum of 76 children. Capacity of the
facility is 90 per day. Adequate additional space is available for
substantial new usage.
(3)
HOTEL OCCUPANCY LEVELS:
During the proposed Free Recreation program season - May 1 through
October 31, hotel occupancy can be defined with some approximations
as follows:
Period Occupancy Hotel Rooms Condo Units
Rate Occupied Occupied
MaY 20% 11,879 5,933
June 60$ 34,488 17
226
July 820 48,705 ,
24 327
August 830 49,299 23,829
September 600 35,638 17
226
October 40$ _23,758 ,
11,867
203,767 100,408
REACHING THE ECONOMIC GOALS:
The present Vail Golf Club discount incentive program makes
available to the Vail hotel/condominium guest a $10 green tee
reduction in order to encourage the guests to stay in Vail, and to
extend their visit with a Vail lodge while using the Vail Golf Club
facilities. The 16 Vail properties taking part in the golf program
represent 1,437 hotel rooms and 957 condominiums; incorporating
2,14K rooms.
* Encourage the present participants in the Golf
Course discount program to become a part of
the Free Recreation Program at a contribution
rate of $1.00 per occupied hotel room and
condominium room per night of occupancy.
* Eliminate the condominium rooms from the
formula and accept a contribution level of
$2.00 per occupied hotel room per night.
expected.
(4)
VALUE TO THE HOTEL / CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY•
The Free RAcreatien Program offe_s tc the hotel/condomini:~~n
property a number of incentives:
* An additional Marketing tool with considerable value to
the hotel/condominium guest.
* Guaranteed advance tee times at the Vail Golf Club.
* Free guaranteed tennis court times.
* Free general admission ar.d skate rental at the John
~+. LOCijJa. Ice Arena.
* Free Use cf the Vail Nature Center.
* Free use of the Vail Youth Center.
VALUE TO THE GUEST-
The value to the Vail guest can be viewed in more than one
dimension:
* The perceived value of free recreation.
* The real recreational value through actual use of VMRD
faai'_ities and programs.
* The dollar value of the program as follows:
Non-Resident Guest Fees
(exclusive of season passes)
Dobson Arena
Youth Services
Nature Center
Vail Golf Course
Tennis
S*_udent Adult Rental
$ 2.25 $ 4.00 $ 2.00
$ 2.00
$ 3.00 $ 5.00
$10.00
$ 8.00 $ 8.00
We can hypothesize from this that an average recreationally active
family of 2.5 persons visiting Vail for an average summer stay of
3.5 days may participate in at least two programs. For example:
Factor Activity Savings
Two Adults Tennis $ 16.00
* Two Adults Golf 20.00
One Child (X2 days) Ice Skating 8.50
w/Rental
Gross Savings $ 44.50
Guest Actual Cost (3 days) 3.00
Net Total Savings to the Guest $ 41.50
ts~
FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THE TOWN OF VAZL:
The financial impact to the TOV will be present in the form of
increased sales tax revenues collected from the Hotels and
Condominiums participating in the program.
The additional $1.00 per guest room per occupied night will
generate additional sales tax revenue collection of $15,102 for the
TOV, based on the 4~ sales tax presently charged.
Sri'-yid ~''° p=c;r=~~ bE iuced :.n Hotel rccr, occupancy only; as
described in Reaching the Economic Goals; based on a $2.00 per
occupied room per night; thereby generating additional sales tax
revenue to the TOV of $2,120.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed Free Recreation Program has great potential for
meeting the Goals and Objectives as stated above.
* The Vail visitor would be the greater beneficiary of the
Program by way of the enhanced recreational experience at
no cost or discounted rates.
* For the Hotel/Condominium community it offers an
opportunity to offer their Guests an enhanced
experience by way of free or discounted recreation
amenities.
* The VMRD will experience substantial financial
benefit and facility usage from the Program.
* The Town of Vail should experience substantial
sales tax revenue increases as a result of the
Program. The approximate level of additional tax
revenue would be $12,000 to $15,000.
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
HAND OUT TO YRA MEETING 3/?.?/90 YP,A PROPOSAL
VAIL ~TROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
Free Recreation Program
HC+`I'EL / CONDOMINIUM PROPOSAL
February 9, 1990
VNg2D FRBB RECREATION PROGRAM
For Hotel and/or Condominium Visitors
GOALS R'r'D O$JECTIVES:
The objective of the VMRD Vail Visitor Free Recreation Program is
to make available to the guest communit•~ all recreational
facilities within the District at no cost or at discounted rates in
order to encourage increased usage of the facilities and to present
an attractive amenity to the Vail guest experience.
The goal of the VhlRi; Free Recreation Program is to create a win /
win situation for the Vail guest, the hotel/condominium community,
the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District and the Town of Vail:
* The Vail guest will be the greater beneficiary
c_' the pro;ra„~ bs Vitt;:;: of the enhanced
recreational experience at no cost or at
discounted rates.
* The hotels and condominium facilities taking
part in the program will benefit by way of
enhanced marketing through their ability to
offer additional recreational amenities to
their guests at little or no cost.
* The VMRD will receive increased attendance and
revenues from existing and future facilities
and programs.
* The Town of Vail will experience increased
sales tax collections as a result of
increased revenues.
.'
VI~2D FACILITY / PROGRAM CAPACITIES AND USAGE ANALYSIS;
Of specific interest to the Free Recreation Program as
initially conceived; are the following recreation programs;
The Vail Golf Club - User activity of 28,517
represents only 64.4$ of available golfers during 1989
for the Frc~.raT moo.- golf course capacity of 44, 281
iod Ms_~ 1 - October 3i . Cf the total 28, 517
golfers, only 2,108 are attributable to use by hotel properties
presently utilizing the VMRD discount incentive program.
John A. ~bson Ice Arena - User activity of 1,838 skaters during
"public skating sessions" represents only 9.0$ of the facilities
capacity of 20,480 during those periods. This leaves available
91.0$ of public skating sessions to be utilized as a part of the
Free Recreation program.
Vail Tennis Club - The Tennis program has grown to a total court
count of ~j in 1990. The total court capacity is now 42,320
players. The 1989 season usage by 9,071 players represents only
21.4$ of total a•/ailabie coin; times; allowing 78.6$ of court times
to be shifted to the Free Recreation program.
Vail Nature Center - No specific capacity numbers are available;
however it is felt that the facility has adequate room for
increased usage.
Vail Youth Services - No specific capacity numbers are available;
however it is felt that the facilities have ade
increased usage. Quate room for
Potpourri Day Camp - The 1989 average day usage at Potpourri Day
Camp was 60; with a maximum of 76 children. Capacity of the
facility is 90 per day. Adequate additional space is available for
substantial new usage.
REACHING THE ECONOMIC GOALS;
The present Vail Golf Club discount incentive program makes
available to the Vail hotel/condominium guest a x10 green tee
reduction in order to encourage the guests to stay in Vail, and to
extend their visit with a Vail lodge while using the Vail Golf Club
facilities. The 16 Vail properties taking part in the golf pro ram
represent 1,437 hotel rooms and 957 condominiums; incorporating
2,244 roams.
* Encourage the present participants in the Golf
Course discount program to become a part of
the Free Recreation Program at a contribution
rate of ;1.00 per occupied hotel room and
condominium room per night cf occupancy.
* Eliminate the condominium rooms from the
formula and accept a contribution level of
$2.00 per occupied hotel room per night.
expected.
VALUE TO THE HOTEL / CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY
The Free Recreation Program offers tr the hotel/condominiW~n
property a number of incentives:
* An additional Marketing tool with considerable value to
the hotel/condominium guest.
* Guaranteed advance tee times at the Vail Golf Club.
* Free guaranteed tennis court times.
* Free general admission and skate rental at the John
A. DOL~v.. Ice Mrena.
* Free Use of the Vail Nature Center.
* Free use of the Vail Youth Center.
VALUE TO THE GUEST:
The value to the Vail guest can be viewed in more than one
dimension:
* The perceived value of free recreation.
* The real recreational value through actual use of VN1RD
facilities and programs.
* The dollar value of the program as follows:
Non-Resident Guest Fees
(exclusive of season passes)
S*_u~ Adult Rental
Dobson Arena S 2.25 ~ 4.00
Youth Services 5 1.00 = 2.00
Nature Center 5 3.00 5 5.00
Vail Golf Course 510.00
Tennis $ 8.00
5 8.00
We can hypothesize from this that an average recreationally active
family of 2.5 persons visiting Vail for an average summer stay of
3.5 days may participate in at least two programs. For example:
Factor Activity Savings
Two Adults Tennis 5 16.00
* Two Adults Golf 20.00
One Child (X2 days) IcP Skating 8.50
w/Rental
Gross Savings $ 44.50
Guest Actual Cost (3 days) 3.00
Net Total Savings to the Guest 5 44 51. 00
• CONCLUSION•
The proposed Free Recreation Program has great potential for
meeting the Goals and Objectives as stated above.
* The Vail visitor would be the greater beneficiary of the
Program by way of the enhanced recreational experience at
no cost or discounted rates.
* For the Hotel/Condominium community it offers an
opportsnity to offer their Guests an enhanced
experience by way of free or discounted recreation
amenities.
* The VMRD will experience substantial financial
benefit and facility usage from the Program.
* The Town of Vail should experience substantial
sales tax revenue increases as a result of the
Program. The approximate level of additional tax
revenue would be 512,000 to $15,000.
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
Pan Amen~an P.,;ra
Suite 470
?01 South Capitol Avenue
lndranapol~s Indiana 46715
317 ?37 5690 ~
March 19, 1990
Mr. Rick Chastain, Program Coordinator
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
292 West Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Rick:
=~_
U. S Canoe and Kayak~am
It was a pleasure to talk with you and I am excited about the opportunity we
have to work with you to develop a high quality whitewater race in Vail. As
we discussed, our aim is to develop a high profile event that in 1991 can
become the kick-off event for the Champion International Whitewater
Series.
For your 1990 event we can offer the following:
1. U.S. Canoe and Kayak Team sanction of the race, accompanied with the
rights to use marks and logos for advertising and promotions.
2. Technical consulting services under the direction of our Slalom
Program Manager, Patti Cashman.
3. Participation of National Team athletes.
In exchange for these 1990 arrangements, we would require the following:
1. Rights fee for sanction and use of marks and logos.
2, Travel, housing and expense funds for consulting services.
3. Travel and housing for National Team athletes and coaches.
4. Approval of all sponsors and percentage of sponsorship payments.
Patti Cashman will caii you soon to arrange a .meeting. Thank you for your
time and consideration. I am confident we can develop an exciting, annual
event that will become a major component in the development of Olympic
style whitewater racing in the United States.
Sincerely,
Chuck Wiel
Executiv Director
Enclosure
cc: Mike Beckley
Leslie Klein
Patti Cashman
A~~-ated µvth t,~e Ame. scar, Cane Assccratron
IUu~a~~d1 ~~~~~s ~~~m~ morjdl 1~~~~1~ If~~uu
I. Introduction
Purpose of team: to recruit, support, and train national caliber
athletes for competition in the following sports:
Whitewater Slalom
Flatwater Sprint
II. USCKT goals for Vail
A. 1990 Memorial Day (Monday, May 28) Demonstraton event
* featuring 6-8 national level athletes
* location: Gore Creek (in Vail Village )
B. 1991 and Beyond
* establish Vail as a permanent venue for the Champion
International Whitewater Series:
- one of 5 U.S. locations
- ABC television contract under negotiation
- large spectator draw
* Establish Vail as a USCKT "Center of Excellence"
- training facility for international athletes
- coaching facility for up and coming paddlers
- Vail as a "paddling mecca" in the Rocky Mountain region
III. Roles of key players in 1990
A. V MRD
* Act as a local liason
- work through TOV channels
- coordinate volunteer forces
- set course
- coordinate local publicity
* Provide funding
- transportation, hospitality, and lodging for 6-8
athletes, 2-4 staff.
B. USCKT
* Provide consultation and support
- operations director will design course
- provide athletes
- carry title sponsorship from Champion Paper Products
* Provide funding
- pay for operational costs of setting course
C. In cooperation with:
* Vail Associates
* Town of Vail
^
O
Gold Peak
Vail
Athletic
Club
Transportation
Center
Crossroads
Gore Creek
Covered Bridge
Sitzmark
O
Chec~~
Charlie
IMPACT CMI BUDGETED FUND BALANCE:
Beg fund balance 1/1/90
'90 Budgeted revenues over expend
Budgeted fund balance 12/31/90
Additional expenditures not budgeted:
• Cross•trsining camp
• Childcare task force
• 2amboni for outdoor rink
• Outdoor ice rink (1990 portion
of 90.91 season, based on
89-90 season)
• Additional Prof fees Ford Park
tennis court project
• Potential health ins for GCM
91,149
54,155
145,304
1,000
750
1,500
5,000
20,000
3,400
31,650
Foregone ID Pass reverxx (7,500)
(originally budgeted)
Revised 12/31/90 fund bal estimate 106,154
Less proposed 25k payment to TOV (25,000)
81,154
Less additional 25k payment to TOV (25,000)
56,154
Fund balance is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. It
should closely correlate wish Cash. The difference between the Cash balance
and the Fund balance is equal to the difference between total current liabilities
and the total of all current assets except cash.
Recommendation: The projected fund balance sinks to an unacceptably low level
based on two 25k payments to TOV, it is tower than it should be
even with only one 25k payment. I feet 150k fund balance is the
minimua acceptable level. This would imply that some rebudgeting
might be in order depending on the VMRD Board's objectives and
priorities.
The irrigation project is budgeted at t33k, 80k of which has already
been approved by the Board. That leaves 53k of original irrigation
budget available.
Additionally, any payments to TOY increase the likelihood that VMRD
might have to secure s credit line to cushion against cash flow
fluctuations due to the cyclical nature of our business, particularly
during the spring months prior to golf season.
SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(with regards to returning funds to TOV)
IMPACT OH SHORT•TERM CASH FLOW:
As of 3/20/90 (figures in thousands)
- Cash balance 165
- Plus additional cash from 78
capital reserves
Total cash balance 243
less 25k payment to TOV (25)
Remaining cash balance 218 '
* NOTE: This figure includes TOV contract payments through 3/90.
Some salient revenues/expenditures anticipated during April 8 May include:
Expenditures
- Payroll of approx 70k/mo 140
• Employee insurance of 8.Sk/mo 17
• Debt payment in May 23
180
Reverwe
- TOV contract payment 32.Sk/mo 65
Net cash outflow (115)
town o(uai
75 south hontage road
vail, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2100
office of mayor
March 13, 1990
Mr. Tim Garton, Chairperson
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
292 West Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Joint VMRD Project Review
Dear Tim:
At our recent joint work session, the idea of a project check
list was recommended to allow for better coordination between the
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District and Town Council when VMRD
projects are proposed on Town of Vail land. The following steps
are suggested to streamline project development:
1. VMRD staff meets with the Community Development
Department to determine the appropriate review process
and information that would need to be submitted for the
project.
2. VMRD discusses proposal with Town Council at a work
session. At this point, the Town Council should hold a
public hearing to determine if the project should
proceed through the planing process. Information that
would be helpful at this point in the review would
include a general written description of the project
idea, cost estimates and a justification for the need
for the project.
3. If the Council agrees, the project should proceed
through the planning process, a lease agreement should
be drafted and approved by both groups prior to
considerations by the PEC/DRB.
4. The VMRD staff would prepare a submittal for the
Planning and Environmental Commission if necessary as
well as Design Review Board.
` 5. Once PEC approval has been obtained, the project would
proceed to the Design Review Board.
6. After DRB approval is obtained, the VMRD would present
the proposal to the Town Council for final approval.
7. Once DRB has approved the project, the VMRD staff would
prepare a submittal for building permit review.
For most projects, it is necessary to provide the following
information:
1. Owners approval.
2. Title report showing schedules A & B.
3. Survey.
4. Site Plan.
5. Building elevations.
6. Floor plans.
7. Landscape plan.
8. Parking plan.
9. Geologic hazard report, if necessary. (Submit as soon
as possible but no later than building permit stage.)
10. Colors and material samples (for DRB).
11. Drainage plan.
12. Grading plan.
Certain projects will not require all of the submittal
information. I suggest that your staff schedule a meeting with
the Community Development Department staff as soon as possible to
ensure that you know exactly what submittal requirements will be
necessary for a specific proposal.
We feel that outlining and agreeing upon the review process for
joint VMRD/TOV projects is a positive step forward. Please
contact Kristan Pritz if you have any questions about the project
review process.
Sincerely,
Kent R. Rose
Mayor
cc: Pat Dodson
Ron Phillips
Kristan Pritz
Mike Mollica
Shelly Mello
T0: VMRD BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: PAT DODSON
DATE: March 23, 1990
SUBJECT: GOLF SUB COMMITTEE
The golf sub committee met on Wednesday, March 21, 1990 and is
asking the Board to consider the following:
-The current policy and fee for advance tee times are as follows:
Tee times may be made with a credit card prior to 48 hours (MC or
VISA) for $5 per person. Cancellations must be made 48 hours in
advance and a $10 service charge will be assessed on the golfers
credit card, unless the tee time can be resold.
The golf sub committee recommends:
-increasing the $5 advance tee time rate to $7.50 per player
-The young life golf tournament. Scott Hovey requested to use the
Vail Golf Club as a fund raiser for students ages 13 to 17 years.
There are approximately 15 to 25 kids who would benefit from the
donation. The tournament is proposed as follows:
-early evening or night tournament
-on a Friday night in June
-$10 cart and green fee
-offered to adults - not anticipated that students would
participate.
-Satterstrom will work with Hovey on all the arrangements to make
the tournament successful.
-Anyone playing the tournament would have to sign a release waiver.
-The Board may want to require supplemental liability insurance.
work\subgolf
PETITION FOR
NOMINATION OF DIRECTORS TO SERVE ON THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Ross Davis, Jr.
2875 Manns Ranch Road, B-4
Vail, CO 81658
Timothy Garton
P.O. Box 705
Vail, CO 81658
Colin Gleason
3931 Bighorn Road
Vail, CO 81657
Lewis Meskimev
2041 Old Highway 6
Unit 8D
Vail, CO 81657
Hugh A. Paine
4496 E. Meadow Drive #1505
Vail, CO 81657
Herman Staufer
1067 Ptarmigan Road
Vail, CO 81657
C. Lee Rimel
1817 Meadow Ridge Road
Vail, CO 81657
John "Popeye" Brennen
3796 Lupine Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Tim Savage
4093 E. Spruce Way #7
Vail, CO 81657
Colleen McCarthy
2059 Chamonix #12
Vail, CO 81657
Erik John Steinberg
4021 Highway 6 #7B
Vail, CO 81657
;M-onday, April 2,1990
k s
. oe eep
~an a eon
y
Ana or o
Y
. ~
B ue
e eq
apparent periscope
aimed over fence.
By Kit Miniclier
penver Post Staff Writer
~'DE BEQUE -The "Great Wall of De
Beque" is the newest tourist attraction
in this quiet old Western Slope comm~~
oily and a divisive symbol of the choice
facing. voters tomorrow.
Locals compare it jokingly with the
.Great Wall of China or the Berlin Wall,
which also were built defensively to
.keep out hostile eyes.
But voters here know#his wall was
erected in a Western democracy, during
~an' ongoing feud- between incumbent
Mayor James Lownds, 53, and perennial
mayoral candidate Fred Froehlich, 74.
~ktE ~ErJUE/~ Po ST
They go at it again in municipal elec- '
~~'ions this week.
o It all began when Froehlich cut a hole
ln' his greenhouse, which faces the
mayor's house. When the mayor put up
' ' a„burlap curtain in his window to block
the view, Froehlich cut a second hole in
his' greenhouse.
"'After the mayor erected an eight-foot
' fence of barn timber to .block both`
~ views, Froehlich erected what appeared
tia be a periscope to peer over the fence.
Glass is visible inside the stovepipe, but
` Froehlich denies it is a periscope. ,
'°R Froehlich, who has lost five previous
mayoral elections -including one in
which he was the only person onthe baI-
lot -sees himself as the community
watchdog; keeping a critical eye on the;
mayor and city council.
Froehlich and his wife Harriet, who
arrived in 1970, are proud of their dupli-
eate collection of town records; ranging
from minutes to monthly accounting re-
cords, and they report their perception
~ of errors in their typo-ridden, mimeo-
I . ' `graphed, hand-delivered newsletter.
.'."They say i antagonize people. I just
Please see WALL on 6B
The Denver Post! Kit Minlclier
EIP 'SCOPES James Lownds, mayor of De fence went up, so did apparent periscope atop
Beque, stands near fence he erected. But after neighbor Fred Froehlich's greenhouse.
1 ri k e e on ma or
iva t es to p y y
WALL from Page 1 B
tell the truth," said Froehlich,
who is running on an open-meet-
idgs ticket and insists that some.
town meetings are' closed:
~~ He'admits,'however, that the
k, second window and "periscope"
were "just pure cussedness on
~: my part," and that he .has
~° climbed into a chair atop. anoth-
er fence with a pair of .binocu-
'lar5 to spy on the mayor.
` Incumbent Lownds, who
moved to town in 1983 and has
been mayor since 1986, is run-
ning on his record and sees
Froehlich as a nosy neighbor and
a busy-body who has already
cost the town b14,000 in legal
fees responding to his suits.
And Armand de,Beque,. son of
:' fawn founding'father W;A.E: de
,' Beque; says impatiently that he
doesn't know
what Froeh•
Lich wants.
"He's. hat-
ed every
mayor we've
ever had..
He's hated
the .town
managers.
He's against
all projects,"
Fred Froehlich said de Be-
que. He says Froehlich has been
responsible for three town clerks
leaving their posts, "often in
tears."
"This has always been a peace-
ful; quiet town until Froehlich
came along," he added, and he
ought to know. At 78, de Beque
lives in his father's 112-year-old
home on Denver Street; and he
has watched as .the eight-square
block shrinks, losing two hotels,
stockyards,- three mercantile
stores, a butcher shop and a bank
over the years.
Many of the town's 176 resi-
dents still charge their groceries
until the end of the month at the
only store in town. The only re-
maining businesses are a service
station and the Kozy Korner Bar,
which de Beque says has far more
patronage than all three of the
town's churches..-
But Froehlich, like many an-
other politician, plans to keep
stirring the municipal pot,
"I will not fade into the twilight
regardless of the outcome," he
says in his latest newsletter.
"When the grim reaper calls to
escort me to Hades, I'll probably
have to put him off as my work
here is not done."
~{P~.tY~
,~ To: Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Date: April 10, 1990
Subject: Potential Town of Vail owned sites for Affordable
Housing
Below is a preliminary list of Town of Vail owned sites that have
some potential for affordable housing. Other sites may be
identified at a later time. Prime open space land, parcels with
severe geologic hazards, and developed park land were not
considered.
*A unit is defined as one to two bedrooms with a maximum square
footage of 900 s.f.
1. Donovan Park (upper bench north of Matterhorn Circle):
Zone: Agricultural and Open Space
Land Use Designation: Park
Acreage: Approximately 2 acres
Estimated No. of Units: 20 units (more units possible if
land to the south of Matterhorn Circle
is utilized, approx. 37 acres)
Hazards: Steep slope on south side of Matterhorn Circle
Issues: Rezoning required
Proximity to existing residential area
Possible cemetery site for area south of Matterhorn
Circle
2. Public Works Shops to the east of main office:
Zone: Public use
Land Use Designation: Public and Semi-Public
Acreage: 17.3 acres
Estimated: No. of Units: 10 to 15 units
Hazards: Rockfall, Debris Avalanche, Possible slope
Issues: Potential Conflict with Public Works operations
Amendment to conditional use section of Public Use
District necessary
I-70 underpass extremely narrow
CDOH permit probably required
3. Mountain Bell Site (east of ABC school and south of tower):
Zone: Ag~riculutral and Open Space
Land Use Designation: Open space and Public/Semi-Public
Acreage: 25 acres
Estimated No. of Units: 20 units
Hazards: Debris Moderate, Medium Severity Rockfall, Steep slopes
Issues: Possible Hazard Mitigation Costs
Possible traffic circulation problems
Rezoning Required
CDOH permit probably required
Visiblity from I-70
4 . Old 't'own Shops
Zone: Az-terial Business District
Land Use Designation: Community Office
Acreage: exact acreage pending survey
Estimates! No. of Units: 8 units
Hazards: Possible floodplain
Issues: Need for buffer between housing and surrounding uses
Possible Frontage Road improvements required by CDOH
Employee Housing allowed as a conditional use
5. Holy Cross Site:
Zone: Az-terial Business
Land Use Designation: Community Office
Acreage: exact acreage pending survey
Estimateci No. of Units: 10 units
Hazards: Possible floodplain
Issues: Need for buffer between housing and surrounding uses
Possible Frontage Road improvements required by CDOH
Employee housing allowed as a conditonal use
Easement may bisect site, survey/title report needed
Land not owned by Town yet
6. Vail Village 13th Filing, Tract A, (east end of parcel):
Zone: Aciriculture and Open Space
Land Use Designation: Open space
Acreage: 14 acres
Estimateci No. of Units: 6 units
Hazards: Drainage area
Issues: Rezoning and Resubdivision
Neighborhood desire for open space
Visibility from I-70
7. Stephen's Parcel west of Kinnickinnick Rd.:
Zone: Greenbelt and Natural Open Space
Land Use Designation: Park
Acreage: 1 acre approx.
Estimated No. of Units: 6 units
Hazards: Floodplain
Issues: Rezoning and subdivision necessary
Neighborhood desire for park for entire parcel
8. Vail Village 12th Filing, Tract C:
Zone: Duplex
Land Use Designation: Low Density Residential
Acreage: 1.2 acres approx.
Estimated No. of Units: 6 units
Hazards: No rockfall assuming special imp. district
Issues: Rezoning required
Neighborhood desire for open space
9. Golfcourse Maintenance Parcel, Parcel E:
Zone: Greenbelt and natural open space
Land Use Designation: Open Space
Acreage: 10 acres approx.
Estimated No. of Units: 10 to 20 units
Hazards: High debris avalanche, medium rockfall, avalanche
Issues: Land not owned by Town, Forest Service owns land
Traffic impacts possible
Possible conflicts with golf operations
Amendment to Public Use District and possible subdivision
10. Lionsridge Filing 1, Block D:Zone: Public Use District
Land Use Designation: Medium Density Residential
Acreage: 1.8 acres
Estimated. No. of Units: 6 units
Hazards: Possible floodplain
Issues: Land not owned by Town of Vail, UEVWSD owns land
Possible neighborhood desire for open space
Amendment to Public Use District
Please keep in mind that the unit estimates are only estimates.
Factors such as design, landscape requirements, parking,
covenants, exact site size, and easements have not been
verified. In addition, community support for rezoning may be
lacking f'or many of the parcels.
I B.L.M. ~~/
'. B L.M. 4~.,r~~~
~~.~y
w VAII DAS-SCHONE 14„, ,,,,o y~
'~ '+ 'o~ FILING NO. 2
r° '~",
z I ~~ a\, - ~.F
~~~.~~ .S ~ s. /, ~o.. F R~FfrEEK ~` ~~•, r_
•+r+ o VAIL DAS SCHO~JE p.~+, °'~" I ~ ""' ~ ~~
FILING N0 3i ~ ,~ s '~
.. x+r. r ~ri .~~.•. >^^ ,ii ,g
,COLRDIVISIONTH M Il •` .r.
INTERSTATE TO ^iJ
~ ~ . .,
_ _ _ ~ yyy r l' ' , i.
, ~ y '/{ '
~~ ~~t ~` ~~~ ,A
HIGHLAND l,ly:' ~-~11L•VI~.-LA(i!_W~ 7F' ••6•, ~~,•:,` ~ b~>? s r•J'`
MEADOWS ~ H > f
.. „r " ~ .l. f ;.,. ~ ~~ ~...,
., ~.*, •«., .` .. 1. ' . '• .,1:.;:~r~ ~ * '~
DONOVAN
PARK
I 1 r i• / , I ~ F141NG NQ F ', MAT ltl4-~OR~ VQ.L~Ci I ! y~• ,..
a~ ~ '
= 4 ~ a ~ r ~ °' \~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Mel //
t' 1
+9
' + ... HIGHLAND ~„ ~~~~
MEADOWS --- , . / c "9 ~ v •~ ~ s ' .
FILING N0. 2 .+s ~ ~, ~ •
, > ,.
' •., ~ DONOVAN
PARK
WHITE RIVER NATIONAL ,"
FOREST
~;
~IW
W =
W J
I =
'~ U
W Q
W ~
B.L.M.
~~
scuc ;.m¢ ~, ,m -- - - -.~.
,:: i ~,
o", ~ /` :~
~ / ~ s~ +
w+
~° J ~ x •'
~/ ~.+. ~ r?s~ ...c.
I 4/
- -1__, r, e r~~
' ~ ~ ~ ~,,~
P~ cy~.r
GLEN LYON SUBDNISION ~O `~\
r+¢+ o
(.Gl[ ,l11~` /NG"BFI+~ S 511I1V[rM6 1N[' ,
C °^ _
t_.-__ Nr~5~0+~-__- --~ Tom'
~I.r.• I 4
~.
! '
i
f,
•, ~ ~ ~.
~ ,,
.;
,~ ~
A ~
F W s< M z. z• a =• ~r
~.
N= •na l , -~ 1 i W
_ ~ ~ TTT -- ^~ WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST
_ V '~ - ~\ ~~ _ Ir _
V ,j~ --~ \- I ~ 1 u~v=i
~ \\ \'.,.rT , L ~' ~f , . ~ r '° _. (2ESUBDIVISION OF. r' W
•'^• ^'+ ~y • I i I ~ ! , LOT 7, BLOCK 2 ,VAIL POTATO PATCH ~ ~ ~
~~ `~-y` ~ - - ~
..rtr . n•cr w ~-~~--~ti _-_
yr sans -- - n+..o R, o• -- 1 rw.cr c ~•tF I'•=_-_
/'~'. ~:~t;:~• s 1.,. VAIL POTATO R-TCH_ r°° '°° 'a°~°°
'~{k: r ~ ''.*., r ; - . .+ • :. ~~-- SECOND FILING < J
"-- `~ ~~ ~ " , " •~~ - J 1~'- TOWN OF VAIL BOUNDARY
~• ..~
m ao ..~ .., j~., - ~ ~ , H.. rrn
n n :.ter . c.•~ 'u.a.r,rR " ~ - L . »r•
I °
••+r• ""x jO"` INTERSTATE 70 ~
_ ^ r !.^"
••yst y~ ~~~
r
~u.+ ~ r $rr•w sw•c*t_ ,VAIL LI(JNS~IId FLING sr.. ~r»rr.
r t . . - i~v~nss wn - m ,rr ~
• r • n~: '"' VAI r ~SHEAU.~ ~ r~"`.r •~ 6 l»rr.».`.vw 'et~[[~ a ~,
. ~,, --
• o I 1_ ~ --_ ~vnlL" ~ ~ ~ ,vi ~i~ ~~FNG
VA ONSHEAD °'°
IR1. ~ ~ dlfi ING •~»w or na a ~~~ r• Ufly~~p - s IONSNE ,~ '° ~r
.e •~ rwru» ..~ .....-t,~. s ~r•~ N ~ rcr s?»rw. 2nd FLING
\ 1R 1 \
., V[114yIL~AGE ~~' ® »'~R.Srr ~.. ..: ~ 1._ nnc,c ~`~ ;.n ,.o- atr Oa ~r._ a«xs Uw.~ryL
91h FILING ~ ~J *.•crc 1- . v.f .r .. r.n r»•c, ~ _ n e...
r M„I.~L
/~ • wrosw a r•.rv ~ I I rums ,»~ • • ~- _
,»R, v •
•, I
» » • - r. M o
pp t our ~ ao.
w»R)rr I .~. ~ -_ _ ,~IAI L. - c°R - IMC »rLw - `~_" _
» ~ __
s •»nc `
I »Ut _.-~1 .~w.'. ` --. .»•c.R // on •r.ro. _\\\nac, • Ra• .. _r[•°an ":i unwww ~r se• ° r.° ~ __.
»..,~s»R. i . n; c • t.. ~ ,».s~ r --- ~ . VIL AG _ ~ ,a~. ..~,sr r ,.. '~_
s. w,L ~
r R r» r» ~~
VgiLVIL AG ~_°~ _, s A6cre I a ., a \„ .»c.a »•rr»re
2nd- FILI G .Lr >.: •. •• ,"`c ~'4'~
• • w/~' ~1 ~ ~/SIL AD,2nQ Ft]NG a.•+ ne• u~ • r
VAL LION _ °»` •° N1LLpGE I n - - .n s A •' ®~ ";;r
~~- ~ ~ 3 FILING ~ ~ r a » » !, » ss .;.5"» . «. ` .w
J Q-lJ ~ rw - a
L{ - _ . 1f ,• ,• •ee if '}'• ! a'~d+ • q `a•. N_ s•r ,Kl u ff. l rr l l / K)i~;
_ -_ ~, ~ •r~3, I _ `«Y , ~ .~», ~ 2) -t ,p a•) jr~ !! ~N ~ ~ •. - •a (rY[, •f , ~i•r I ~ -~
» _
,.
1
. l- , - ~ ».
. L
uetnT[• I i~~ /{///) ~ ~ ) «. s. ~ ~ ,•. : _ pjt>~_~ ~: 1~ rr •, 'F ~ . 1~, ra.N• ~~
,»•c.. ~ <~ ! ; .:. »' n » :• .. ~ ..r moor " t c
_ ~ ,>.,~
+.cr. c
MORCUS SUBDMSION. VAIL LIONSHEAO RESUB. LOT C, BLK. SC--~
~sLFILING,Is1.A0~. WHITE RIV _ »,~ __- _ ___~-~-
~ r.AC VeLLIr f».v!~iv~.%» y.vrrna., wrc _ 5
\ nn'~~~ w. ,~
rr.~.. ,... ~ .,
,~rJ ro.QU..TCw I / .i ^
i" ~ LION'S RIDGE / 1 , /~ (~~~ rs •" ~ •..• ••'r
~~~, 7 ~ ~ WHITE RIVER FILING No a/. / 1 \ \•!,,,/ .~ ,
"~ NATIONAL ~ ~ Y ~4;;~r,.r ^ _~..q.«.r«.. r, rw~,..w..,~,.
n.. ;.
FOREST ~ ..~ .,..% .,. , r ~>,°'° ..f-~~~
~ ,' jt ~,a,r..r .., ' .
•
~y~ AR ~ : '~ ., `' "• RIDGE '4 =->~ S
. ~' .' ~:n +w~'.bi' •~_"':1'-~ r K ING.NO.I _ «~recTnr
PARCEL A ~ ..~ ;;
~ LION S kIS~;E FILING N0.2 RIDGE ' '± ~ ,;•`~~~SOyAR_NAIL' "" «re 'r~ ,~,•„ '°a~°" •, w r
^•. )tJQ'. ~ s RE $URCIVISIDN f1F lQ ~ ~~ /rtlr ren 1~~' r•n..... •
TOWN OF VAIL BOUNDARY AT VAIL ~«~. . •9B •9,Ltw5 RgGE /: `~ =J~""' 1 '0'% wT•
~`/ EILMG N 1 4en ~+4
~\ \\:ic~ ~ ... ,~ __~\ ~ , ri~v rte j ~s~ ,y .w~~n. /
B.LM. ~ .,.1r~ ~p n •/ L.
', ~{` ....xo ~i~~~
rrx tt ,T`~~~TME/`/)L~Ex ,..cT O „ ~~r ~]~~J A ,
i y ~. ~ ' '' ,. .r.
41 ~~. ~ .x ^ •. ~~.cS•' ~ '~ CLIFFSIOEI ~;. ~' ,,,,,, r"'N.se aw
zed ~' \
~^ t V.
E ~ "' ~ .» t `,ice ~ ~ 10 s•
•~ LIONS RIDGE FILING NO 3 ~ ~~ ^t,`,~~t" '~~,'rr ~~Qh~ GLEN L N SU~IVISION
4 RE SUDdVI$1(1! 6 vnR(;E15 R.C,E. -
8 p1Ri Ot D, LION'S RIDGE fLLING 2 ~,r~~ j j.', `~.~' .r ~a
PART OF (,ION'S w°+ ~ "°• >
RIDGE FICTNG NO. I j ~„o --- ~
' Nth E~~ , CASCA~ n M,~,'ww. ' .t .:e r-
T ,- ..n ~ + ll VILLAGE / ~~~, .`•a`raio'~ _ x z
crwtrw.nwf
EES~EE ~ . 1 ~~ ~^j •, > r~ `rs /.'~ • 1 w.r•,~+r•..~ . 7
+ r «..•r r ~ ' r .~ 1 r r.r ..°'F' ;~:' ¢ , ~ B.L.M.
~ ~ +.t .'m" ~ ~ . r ~ ws. ~r ~EAGIE_ COIIEIT7 ~ 1 µ+.•qa >r ~~/ '~'~ ~ . .r.1 n• ~ `~ . j1 3
rz;\\ • reps I m. a we / . :~~ ii. ;•r w»~ xyr ~.~ of
' DJ h
„.(..er ': nr'e ,.q J WLpST11tW !., _' dit •. / f~•'~ o
r m n n -_ -__f v ~. i°.e've / /~: /r' `\ tn.at wttr~ r , •. tw~rsw •~ ---•
_ _ _ MATdI IN_E
ter e ~~'~ ~ ~ ~ .atiwc ."nrn: ~ //'r~`'m~'_ M~;,'~ ,~~ ` -SEE 9NEET S _.._.... wrt'a! -•~,~ _
/ / 1 ' nKT • }' ~
~~_J . r. 5
I
~~
e ~
__.. i N11Ctl r ..
w„~ ~'~-_ RESJBDIVISION OF l0T 2 BLOCK 2
~:7 °~i'- „r,o,. ,,,,, c,„,.-. ~~ f VAIL VILLAGE 12th FILIN~i
•..,
VAL VILLAGE 13th. FILING ~ ' ' " n "" VAIL VILLAGE i2M+ FIUNO
r.re »n »r_._
~•
wl ; ~ ~~ . , ~ •, t ,rwrq o 'LJ ;~ ~ i~ - RESUBDIVISION OF LOt 7, ~LQS,~S~.
+~~;•„ ~ », ,( / ~ VAIL VILLAGE 12th. FILING
" f• i• \ •owr sr, ~ w,n
RESUBDIVISION OF_GOT_7,~, ~
~'BIOGK 2,vA1L VILLAGE RESUBDIVISION OF TRACT •. S P~ U
VAIL VILLAGE 11th. FILING ~~ r MTEttSTATE TO
j13th.FIIING ~ •~k•i . ••••
i » ~ ~• . ~
.,
~,. ~ ~ , - z
~~
' ~ VAILVIL_LAGE 11th. FILING ~-
i
' L VAItUVOLIIAGEN ~1hTF1UNG~
1
~ ,,,.,..,.e
i
of
I
f'i
W J
~'7
'~
.+rti`
1 ~ i
' WHITE RIVER
NATIONAL FOREST
w,•rns
\.
I
I
IQ
~j r
W
CIZ
~iu~ I
1,
a1GHORN SUQQIVISI
~ FIRST AOOITION ~
u..•,no
o ~~~ ,
..rn
,..
/•
BIGNORN SUBOIVISIO(~_ .. '' „!
SECOND ADDITION ~ 4
~r» lJ ,.
< ! ~y ~~
- r ,,,.
„~• • ' rn
•,~~~
/~ ~ ~
TOWN OF VAIL 60UNUAHY
I
'~4t ~_
r . we ••e
~M nno `
SS B.L.M.
:.., Fq,M6; N6 2 ..
~..
.o,une EAGLE COUNTY \'' •- _cM t-e- 1 • °{ ti ev ~ t ~-~'at~ e ' i ~ ~ ~; ~. ~ W~.,,J~
,.e / :~ ~ ~1y-,Me~T~~~:~`/`e "CC c"ra~nj~e .r ./ "r'~ I'~-
,,. \s %~ ~ _ 7. ~ 111, ~„y'y~ `,~.ry (~•. y±~ •.i:.. `l•' :.. nV.,e,.. ewr. 0 1 0
~,e N O 9 ~ ~:
- ~_ G~,~-.~~.,. .~ ,e~ ~..~,~,,._ , , ~~;~
INTERSTATE 70 ::.
~~ ~ e... ~ ~ .:. _ woo
,.. Mri ..
....
`,... ~ ,.r _ ~. ..;:.,r .~_ art
_ _-_. ...
,. ,
e
' Ay'u~ re ~., ~ e - ~: _ ~ ., Jr~-^~ ~LI~IOTT _RAI~y .wn nne•'• /~"-= ~.: r:.
.-~.. ~ o f/~. ,,., '~c ~..CT~ ~ ~ ~~;~" ,.. ,, w„.., T MEADOW_CREEK ... _ '..~ ,, I
% ,,17~ e •S~~"*.\~"a o~ ,,,, ..,.o .~ ,.. ~»~'~•~ ~ SUBDIVISION r .~,.)' ~~~ \
,..., t 1« j,..~f , ~ ,.. H ,ND J
1 ~ r•
~~i""'~ ~~(:~ ~«~.. ~~•~ ~~t ,en nao ~~~ ~ - ~~~~( I. MEADOWS ti
l7/H ~~\1 ~- ., 3_> iw ~o, 1- ~y"l xl}V ~~t.: . ~ ~.. ~~• nr.
,{ , ~J c.
B.L.M. '"%~~ ".I} J ~p~ B.L.M. '
~~
I '~' I , >. '~'
fcei4' ~.~ .. .oo / ,
.. ~ ~.,... ..r, 3
». av
N
EAGLE COUNTY
~ WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FORES
~ TOWN OF VAIL t~uulvur->,r~ r _
I ..f r T
ww Y .
~e.R• rr° v.w
~. -,
.e.c e
VAI, V_I_LLAC~E Ist. FILING ' ~__
~i•sT 22 --
°" ` ~"'~ ~ ;r ~~ ~i I v f ~"ni0. "'"" INTERSTATE 70 r ~ "
.Kh
r s\ ~ NG '"'•r. - _- -. - VAIL VILLAGE 8th. FILING
\7 ~_ ~ " , .•:; ''eE `L-_ war` ~ U.EYJst. F ~ ,
a' Vp~ LAGE_ ~ - ~ -
I,.rQS ~' ' ~f .~ 3 . , -dik~iLWG sje J i z > .. r
~ .. ~~ ~ ~ FORD PART( ~.`r M •a '. ,'Z"~` °z zz •zr zo
- Y., fi~ }M '1~ ,~ ~ .` ( t~ m.t• 2 use r ~ ~ 2 l er if.e
..va ~ Ly M'„.. ~ I \ •: a r. ar.t
VAIL VILLA(iFjSth.__-- / '' ~ _ „ _-~ /////~//I
r. f '•.,.'.~
-~ ` i ~~ .
t1/ A I
~~~ ~~ ; J, ~M ~-- wcf • .5~ . ...~. .
VAIL VILLAGE 7th. FILING VAIL VILLAGE 7th FILING
e • bey ..r. e - /
w 8// ~ aK[_ °
rDl ~ ' \2,~ N^
VAIL VILLAGE IOtR FILING
Z~ rnn •~ r. o
N'F EAGLE CONNTY
NIA '1 :e In"." `
-.K*
~irf~ -_ sf.~S~Oti
. .. _. .. . „ _ . ~ .w I I
=Im
J W
~W
~IVt
aW
~~
- 5r~ ~
,. ,
°. °..r~
.l. /
~~~-~: ~ 5 ~~e l D
B.LM
ce !hu V•~/ ,~
,.c, . / ~ .,.e;
• ~ ~ ~-i
< •, j .
LION'S RIDGE ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,.• ~~ ," w, -
FILING N0 4 •t `/e %.
WHITE RIVER ""' (, , "
NATIONAL ., ~~ . ,rs~..,rl . ,-..tom.. -.~•. I - - _
FOREST ,,. ,~,;,. ' '.:• ~-:~ ;° I -;p~.t
F •'LASOLAR II , " b+'<LIONS<RIDGE "•• '
. - F - a 61LING NO.I °a
PARCEL A /~ ~ • "~!` ""~ -_ '~
'"`LASO~AR VAI '
LION S-~E FILING N0.2 RIDGE , ",.~' ~ ~ ~ e »M ""„ +.
TOWN OF VAIL BOUNDARY ' r"•~'~~P~~ ^pE;~~PfI~IsION~FLO ll• o
AT VAIL ~ i° e9.PF9.lIf+N5R10fiE~~~° •'t , t rwa y. ~s- e••~,.~..+ '
~,°04 FILING N/O I e .quit _ I _ ..
°••sr a _. _ -- THE VALLEY ,e•. 's1 .+o~ -,e 'Ii . ~ 'T J-
° '° C~IFFSIDE `°`'~~.
/ ,E ~ „ . -
LION'S RIDGE FILING N0. 3 ~~~`~ 4 j GLEN LYAN SUBDIVISION
~ r,F.5U9fHV~<6YI Or 'nviELS A.ff.. x "` • ~ I
B DAFT fJF L, LION 5 RUNE Fn.INO 2 ~ - \
'wu, . ~" ~ ,. ....,.?
.. • ... .r °s~ °~
Ac1RT OF ~~W'$
. • ...
__.-
/ RIDGE FILING N0. t ,; ~
• N»~ r~ ° CASCADE _ °° R - ~
' ~ ( VILLAGE .,, d'` ~, ~ . e x W
,.> „°5 ~ N
W ~ ---- :,, ,:,, .: ,. ~ rY., ~ B.L M.
i.~ a,. ~ •,~_~~/ ~ EAGLE COUNTY ~ ~ ~ w ~. 1' I ~)
^I' \\ \ /I ~~ _ Tt ~~ • 41
,' ~ ; i ~ td.OST,r[•M M.,,,tp- \ ~:.e• ~^ H F-
`' ~~ rr• /
to \ i,• M • • .r .r r j ~ ~ ~ N .
a ~.. -, ~.._ _ ~ ,
_ _ ~diir rn, j_ ~. _ __ _. ' _ _ _, i~ ~i ' .. is MATp1 UNE r+.~r vr+.r ~ r ~ ~~ newnyt~~er. mt
• ° n"~~'~ salt WF unw i. __ .~ „ $FF SHFFT i .__.._.
01030 - 2
PART 3 -EXECUTION
3.1 SCHEDULE= OF ALTERNATES:
Alternate No. 1
VAIL TRANSPORTATION CENTER
22289
Add interior renovation of transit terminal building. Reference items noted "ALT 1' on drawings.
Alternate No. 1 includes but is not limited to the following:
a. Remove the east exterior wall and door at Level 4, reconstruct both at a new location.
b. Construct new aluminum and glass wind screen wall to west of existing building.
Provide infrared heater, connection for pay telephone (telephone to be provided by
Owner), and new bench seating.
c. Remove infill floors at one elevator hoistway, modernize existing Elevator 1, provide new
Elevator 2.
d. Remove portion of retail counters at Level 4 and Level 3.
e. Remove various interior partitions between grids A and B, 9.5 and 11 at Level 3.
f. Existing plumbing fixtures at toilet rooms to be removed, cleaned and replaced in
original location. Ceramic file wall finishes at toilet rooms to be removed, provide new
ceramic file wall finishes. Remove existing toilet partitions and vanity, provide new
partitions and vanity.
g. Remove existing lockers and return to owner. Provide new lockers.
h. Remove existing stair treads and landing at main stair, provide new treads and landing.
i. Repaint interior of transit terminal at Level 3 and 4.
j. Remove various interior and exterior fluorescent light fixtures and incandescent
downlights, provide new light fixtures.
k. Provide new fin tube radiator and cabinet unit heater shown on mechanical drawings.
I. Provide revisions to heating and ventilating duct system.
m. Remove existing cabinet unit heaters indicated on mechanical drawings.
Alternate No. 2:
Add site improvements adjacent to E. Meadow Drive. Refer to items on drawings noted as "ALT
2". Alternate No. 2 includes but is not limited to the following:
a. Remove island planter and included landscaping. Reconstruct planter at new location,
patch paving, install new landscaping.
VAIL TRANSPORTATION CENTER 01030 - 3
22289
b. Remove existing street lighting base and poles, install relocated and new street lighting
base and poles.
c. Construct concrete sidewalk, adjacent retaining wall, catch basins and storm sewer.
Regrade swales and provide new landscaping, including irrigation.
d. Remove traffic gates and wood bollards, reinstall gates on concrete curb at new
locations, reinstall bollards at new locations, patch pavement.
e. Construct two concrete paver crosswalks, in place of painted crosswalks, extending
south across East Meadow Drive from stairs 10 and 12.
Alternate No. 3:
Add site improvements adjacent to South Frontage Road and Blue Cow Chute. Refer to items
on drawings noted as "ALT 3". Alternate No. 3 includes but is not limited to the following:
a. Construct attached and detached sidewalk along South Frontage Road
b. Construct concrete plaza, provide flagpoles, lighting and landscaping within planter, at
South Frontage Road.
c. Construct attached concrete sidewalk with curb and gutter at east side of Blue Cow
Chute from South Frontage Road and driveway of Tyrolean Inn.
d. Construct concrete curb and gutter at west and north side of Blue Cow Chute from
South Frontage Road to Stair 12.
Alternate No. 4:
Delete Level 5 parking ramp overpass. Refer to items on drawings noted as "ALT 4". Alternate
No. 4 includes but is not limited to the following:
a. Do not remove sections of slab on grade at Level 1 between grids 18 and 30, excavate
below slab, and construct spread footings for new columns at grid 69.
b. Do not remove sections of concrete topping and tee flanges for new columns at Levels
2, 3, and 4 between grids 19 and 30.
c. Do not construct precast concrete columns, wall panels and double tees of Level 5 ramp
between grids 18 and 38, B and 69.
d. Do not provide interior lighting and fire protection at ceiling over Level 4 ramp between
grids 19 and 38, B and 69.
e. Do not provide Stair 8 and Stair 9 connecting Level 5 ramp with Level 4.
Alternate No. 5:
Not used.
01030 - 4
Alternate No. 6:
VAIL TRANSPORTATION CENTER
22289
Provide interim parking during construction. Parking is to be provided as described below:
a. Provide the Owner with the use of 200 parking spaces on Mondays through Fridays
during June, July, August and September; and
b. Provide the Owner with the use of 400 total parking spaces on Saturdays and Sundays
during June, July, August and September; and
c. Provide the Owner with the use of 400 total parking spaces from July 1 through July
7; and
d. Provide the owner with the use of 850 parking spaces, and the use of Level 4 transit
deck between grids 1 and 8, from November 21 through the date of substantial
completion; and
e. Maintain all life safety requirements per code and emergency egress. Owner will allow
use of emergency generator to be maintained.
Alternate IVo. 7:
Without providing interim parking during construction, change date of substantial completion from
21 December 1990 to 1991. Proposed date to be determined by Contractor
based on their evaluation of Project requirements..
Alternate No. 8:
Provide interim parking during construction and change date of substantial completion from 21
December 1990 to 1991 (date determined by Contractor). Parking is to be
provided as described below:
a. Provide the Owner with the use of 200 parking spaces on Mondays through Fridays
during June, July, August and September; and
b. Provide the Owner with the use of 400 total parking spaces on Saturdays and Sundays
during June, July, August and September; and
c. Provide the Owner with the use of 400 total parking spaces from July 1 through July
7; and
d. Provide the Owner with the use of 850 total parking spaces, and use of level 4 transit
deck between grids 1 and 8, from 21 November 1990 through the date of substantial
completion; and
e. Maintain all life safety requirements per code and emergency egress. Owner will allow
use of emergency generator to be maintained.
VAIL TRANSPORTATION CENTER
22289 01030 - 5
Alternate No. 9:
Provide all new 'Type A" light fixtures throughout the parking structure. New lights are provided
in lieu of relocating existing high pressure sodium fixtures to Level 1 and Level 2.
Alternate No. 10:
Replace concrete topping on the ramp from Level 4 to Level 3. Alternate No. 10 includes but is
not limited to the following:
a. Excavate 1-1/2 inches of concrete topping on the ramp from Level 4 to Level 3 from grids B
to C between grids 18 to 30. Replace with new microsilica concrete topping. Seal new topping
with clear penetrating sealer.
b. Defete shotblast and seal of existing concrete tcpping on the ramp from Level 4 to Level 3 from
grids; B to C between grids 18 to 30.
c. Delel:e route and patch of delaminations in existing concrete topping on the ramp from Level
4 to Level 3 from grids B to C between grids 18 to 30.
END OF SECTION 01030
MEMORANDUM
T0: Pat Dodson
FROM: Ron Phillips
DATE: April 9, 1990
SUBJECT: TOV/VMRD Joint Project Review
Thank you for the report on the VMRD Board's reaction to Kent's letter. I suggest
we take those comments to the TOV/VMRD Committee, discuss the issues there, and take
a final recommendation to both Boards.
RVP/bsc
cc: Vail Town Council
Larry Eskwith
Kristan Pritz
TO: RON PHILLIPS
FROM: i ~ `~~ PAT DODSON
1
DATE: April 2, 1990
SUBJECT: JOINT VMRD PROJECT REVIEW
The VMRD Board met at their regular meeting and discussed the
process between the TOV and VMRD when VMRD projects are proposed
on TOV land. Major comments came on items 2 and 3.
Item 2. It was felt that the entity proposing or supporting the
project should hold the public hearing. Therefore they recommend
that VMRD should hold a public meeting to determine if the project
should proceed through the planning process. They also recommend
attendance by TOV Council and staff at the public meeting.
Item 3. It was felt that if the public supported the project then
the council should develop a lease agreement for use of the land
at that point in time. The project should then go through PEC and
DRB. The rest of the process and steps that were proposed in
Mayor, Kent Rose's letter were acceptable.
The major concern was that VMRD did not want to spend any tax
payers dollars prior to having a land commitment (lease) from the
Town of Vail. They felt VMRD should go through the TOV process
(PEC & DRB).
VMRD looks forward to working-with the Town staff, Town Council and
yourself toward recreational improvements in the Vail community.
work\land
~ i.~ ;L~~
tawo at uai
75 south frontage road
vail, coiorado 81657
(303) 479-2100
office of mayor
March 13, 1990
Mr. Tim Garton, Chairperson
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District
292 West Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Joint VMRD Project Review
Dear Tim:
At our recent joint work session, the idea of a project check
list was recommended to allow for better coordination between the
Vail Metropolitan Recreation District and Town Council when VMRD
projects are proposed on Town of Vail land. The following steps
are suggested to streamline project development:
1. VMRD staff meets with the Community Development
Department to determine the appropriate review process
and information that would need to be submitted for the
project.
2. VMRD discusses proposal with Town Council at a work
session. At this point, the Town Council should hold a
public hearing to determine if the project should
proceed through the planing process. Information that
would be helpful at this point in the review would
include a general written description of the project
idea, cost estimates and a justification for the need
for the project.
3. If the Council agrees, the project should proceed
through the planning process, a lease agreement should
be drafted and approved by both groups prior to
considerations by the PEC/DRB.
4. The VMRD staff would prepare a submittal for the
Planning and Environmental Commission if necessary as
well as Design Review Board.
5. Once P' approval has been obtaine the project would
proceed to the Design Review Board.
6. After DRB approval is obtained, the VMRD would present
the proposal to the Town Council for final approval.
7. Once DRB has approved the project, the VMRD staff would
prepare a submittal for building permit review.
For most projects, it is necessary to provide the following
information:
1. Owners approval.
2. Title report showing schedules A & B.
3. Survey.
4. Site Plan.
5. Building elevations.
6. Floor plans.
7. Landscape plan.
8. Parking plan.
9. Geologic hazard report, if Tecessary. (Submit as soon
as pcssible but ro later than building permit stage.)
10. Colors and material samples (for DRB).
11. Drainage plan.
12. Grading plan.
Certain projects will not require all of the submittal
information. I suggest that your staff schedule a meeting with
the Community Development Department staff as soon as possible to
ensure that you know exactly what submittal requirements will be
necessary for a specific proposal.
We feel that outlining and agreeing upon the review process for
joint VMRD/TOV projects is a positive step forward. Please
contact Kristan Pritz if you have any questions about the project
review process.
Sincerely,
~' c
~~
Kent R. Rose\ ~ ~~~
Mayor
cc: Pat Dodson
Ron Phillips
Kristan Pritz
Mike Mollica
Shelly Mello
lowo 0
75 south frontage road
veil, Colorado 81657
(303) 479-2158
department of public works/transportation
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ron Phillips
FROM: Skip Gordon
DATE: 4/3/90
RE: 1990 Ridership Compared to 1989
TM
\~
~'
VAIL1989
Below are statistics showing total ridership for 1990 compared to
that of 19 89 for the month of MARCH.
INTOWN EAST VAIL WEST VAIL SANDSTONE
1989 482,022 68,807 86,587 43,237
1990 402,059 76,887 71,761 44,068
DIFFERENCE 79,963 8080 14,826 831
16% DOWN 12% UP 17% DOWN 20 UP
GRAND TOTAL
1989 Intown, East Vail, West Vail, Sandstone 680,653
1990 Intown, East Vail, West Vail, Sandstone 594,775
DIFFE]~ENCE 85, 878
12% DOWN
SG/pa]~
cc: Stan Berryman
Charlie Wick
Caroline Fisher
~EC't~ APR 101990
TUWN OF VA I I. G'QUNC ]: L.
r 5 ;; . FRONTAGE ROAD
VAIL. CO 8157
DFAF.. CUtINCIL MEMBERS:
WHILE I MUST COMMEND 'THE VAIL TUWN COUNCIL FOR FINALLY
SEEI1~iG THE NEED FOR A NO SrIUKING URDINAI`ICE I AM DTSAYPUINTED
YCU ST~~PPED SHORT OF GIVING THE HEALTHY KESIDENTS AND
GUESTS OF VAIL WHAT THEY REALLY WANT.
I F TIDE COUNCIL FEELS SO STRONGLY TETAT S~;COND EIAND SMOKE 1 S
HARMFUL AT CI'T'Y HALL. BANKS. HOSPITALS. AND LAUNDRAMATS,
WHAT MAKES IT OKAY IN RESTACJRANTS AND BARS?
IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET A GOURMET MEAL IN A BANK OR LAUNDRY
AND NOW THE COUNCIL WANTS 'I'O Ft~RCE SMOKERS 'T'Cl SNEAK OUT OF'
PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND HOSPITALS TU INDULGE 'THEIR NICOTINE
HABI`T'S IN THE NEAREST RESTAURANT.
AN ACROSS THE BOARD BAN OF SMOKING IN ALL O1:'C~UR FINE EATING
ESTABLISHMENTS WILL BE FAIR TO LARGE ANT) SMALL BUSINESSIa'S
ALIKE. THE REVENUE LOST BY OFFENDING A r'EW INCONSIDERA'T'E
SMOKERS WILL CERTAINLY BE RECOVERED T3`i F~'I'TRAC!'INv HEALTH
CONC I OUS VISITORS W1.3C) WILL BF: HAPPY TO SPEND T'HE I R VAC;AT I UNS
AND 'T'HEIR DOLLARS IN A CLEAN ENVIkONMEN7'.
SINCERELEY.
~ ~_
BRUCE A . HAI;']~ I S
11:5 SANDS'T'ONE DR .
VAIL, CO. ~31e5~