Loading...
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~