Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-12 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 1991 1:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. Planning and Environmental Commission Report 2. Design Review Board Report 3. Town Council/Planning and Environmental Commission Joint Meeting Regarding Comprehensive Master Transportation and Parking Plan 4. Sales Tax Exempt Group Policy 5. Deck Expansion onto Town Property for Russell's Restaurant 6. Vacation and Abandonment of Easement Located Between Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive and Villa Valhala and Garden of the Gods 7. Vail Village Inn - Special Development District #6 Discussion 8. Joint TOU/Avon Town Council Marketing Board Presentation 9. Information Update 10. Other 11. Executive Session - Legal Matters VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 1991 1:00 P.M. EXPANDED AGENDA 1:00 1. Planning and Environmental Commission Report Kristan Pritz 1:05 2. Design Review Board Report Shelly Mello 1:10 3. Town Council/Planning and Environmental Commission Joint Greg Hall Meeting Regarding Comprehensive Master Transportation Study Action Requested of Council: Have Council brought up to speed on the study and make recommendations to it before it goes to PEC and Town Council for adoptions. Background Rationale: The Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee has worked with the consulting firm of Feldsburg, Holt and Ullevig over the last year on the Town of Uail's Comprehensive Master Transportation Study. The Committee has recommended that the plan is complete up to this point, and would like to update the Council and Planning Commission on the report and also receive feedback from the Council and Commission. The report covers five areas, which include: 1) Vail Village Goods Delivery; 2) Public Parking Facilities and Operations; 3) Transit Systems Operations; 4) I-70 Access/Frontage Road Improvements; and 5) Recreation Trails Interface 3:00 2. Sales Tax Exempt Group Policy Steve Barwick Action Requested of Council: Town Staff would like additional direction from the Town Council regarding qualifications for tax exempt status and enforcement procedures. Background Rationale: Certain charitable organizations are granted tax exempt status when conducting business in Vail. It is estimated that $45,000-$50,000 of sales tax revenue is lost annually due to these exemptions. This item is being brought before Town Council in order to further clarify certain policies and procedures. 3:30 3. Deck Expansion onto Town Property for Russell's Restaurant Andy Knudtsen Action Reauested of Council: Give preliminary approval/ denial to the applicant to proceed through the planning phase for this project. If conceptual approval is given, the applicant will proceed with the request, providing floodplain information and additional survey information. Background Rationale: The deck would extend off the north side of Russell's Restaurant onto Town of Vail property adjacent to Gore Creek. At this time, staff has several questions about this proposal. Questions include: 1) Will the expansion encroach into the floodplain or the 50-foot Gore Creek stream setback? 2) What are the other Town Departments' Concerns? 3) What landscaping should be added? Should the stream tract be left open? Should be deck be reduced in size? 4) Are there any easements that cross this parcel in the area of the deck? 5) How does the deck impact the pocket park? Staff Recommendation: Community Development staff recommends that the proposal be allowed to proceed through the review process, with the understanding that the applicant address all of the questions listed above. 3:45 4. Vacation and Abandonment of Easement located between Shelly Mello Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive and Villa Valhala and Garden of the Gods Action Requested of Council: Approve request. Background Rationale: All utility companies involved in this easement have relinquished any right to use. It appears that the utilities were vacated in 1967, but the Town never legally vacated the easement. Staff Recommendation: Approve the request. 3:50 5. Vail Village Inn - Special Development District #6 Mike Mollica Discussion Action Requested of Council: Josef Staufer, President and Managing Director of the Vail Village Inn, has requested to appear before the Council to discuss the possibility of modifying Condition No. 7, as listed in Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, Section 11 (See attached). Background Rationale: Staff has informed Mr. Staufer that the 8 conditions listed in Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, are still valid and would apply to any redevelopment at the VVI. Before proceeding through the SDD-Major Amendment process, Mr. Staufer would like some direction from Council regarding the conditions, specifically Condition No. 7. 4:10 6. Joint Town of Vail/Avon Town Council Marketing Board Presentation 7. Information Update 8. Other 9. Executive Session - Legal Matters -2- r PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Marsh 11, 1991 AGENDA 1:00 Site Visits 2:00 Public Hearing Site Visits 1. Air Quality - PEC update on road sanding practices in the Town of Vail. Susan Scanlan/Pete Burnett 3 2. Notification of PEC of staff approval of Minor Amendment to SDD #6 - Vail Village Inn to allow for the installation of a satellite dish in a setback. Applicant: Satellite Receiving Systems 3. A request to amend Ordinance No. 13, 1983 to establish an additional View Corridor and to clarify wording in the ordinance. The view to be protected extends to the east down Hansen Ranch Road over the Red Lion in front of Frivolous Sal's. Applicant: Town of Vail 4. A request for a conditional use permit to expand the Vail Mountain School, located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School 1 5. A request for a worksession on setback and site coverage variances and an exterior alteration to the Lifthouse Lodge at 555 East Lionshead Circle/ Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 1st Filing. Applicant: Robert T. and Diana Lazier 2 6. A request for a front setback variance for the Perot residence, located at 64 Beaver Dam Road/ Lot 31, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Ross Perot 7. A request to amend Chapter 18.04 of the Municipal Code - Definitions; to add a new definition for affordable housing unit. Applicant: Town of Vail s. 8. A request to amend Chapters 18.10 - Single- Family District, 18.12 - Two-Family Residential District and 18.13 - Primary/ Secondary Residential District to allow affordable housing units as a Conditional Use. Applicant: Town of Vail 9. A request to amend Chapters 18.14 - Residential Cluster District, 18.16 - Low Density Multiple Family District, 18.18 - Medium Density Multiple Family District, 18.22 - Public Accommodation District, 18.24 - Commercial Core 1 District, 18.26 - Commercial Core 2 District, 18.27 - Commercial Core 3 District, 18.28 - Commercial Service Center District, 18.29 - Arterial Business District and 18.36 - Public Use District, 18.39 - Ski Base/Recreation District; to allow affordable housing units as a Conditional Use. Applicant: Town of Vail 10. A request to amend Chapter 18.58 of the Municipal Code - Supplemental Regulations to provide specific development/zoning standards for affordable housing units. Applicant: Town of Vail 11. Approval of minutes from February 11, 1991 meeting. 12. Approval of minutes from February 25, 1991 meeting. 13. Date for PEC workshop/dinner. Tentatively scheduled for April 1, 1991 at 5:30 p.m. at the Golfcourse Clubhouse. 14. Upcoming joint meetings with Town Council: a. March 12, 1991 - Master Transportation Plan. b. March 19, 1991 - Streetscape Plan. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA MARCH 6, 1991 3:00 P.M. REVISED 3/6/91 SITE VISITS 12:15 P.M. 11 1. Gramm - Repaint BR 303 Gore Creek Drive, Vail Rowhouses MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry Dorward VOTE: 3-0-1 Denial. Ned Gwathmey abstained. 2 2. Vail Run - New awning & sign BR 1000 Lionsridge Loop/Lot 10 & 11, Block C, Lionsridge Subdivision. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Applicant did not appear. 5 3. Blockbuster Video - New sign BR 1031 S. Frontage Road/Cascade Crossing MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO MARCH 20TH MEETING. 4 4. Stott Residence - Deck Addition BR 2339 Chamonix Ln/Lot 11, Blk A, Vail Das Schone #1 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO MARCH 20TH MEETING. 5. Review of Banners BR MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Direction was given to the staff to decide an allowable amount of signage and then to allow 25$ of that signage for sponsors' names. - f~ 6 6. Breeze Ski Rentals - Sign Variance JK Montaneros Commercial Condominium Unit #100. 641 W. Lionshead Circle/Part of Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 3rd. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO APRIL 17TH MEETING. 12 7. Christiana Remodel JK 356 Hanson Ranch Rd/Lot D, Block 2, Vail Village lst MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Pat Herrington VOTE: 4-0 Motion to approve with the following conditions: 1. When ownership of parking across the street from north is resolved, applicant will pave and landscape. Landscape plan for this lot to be submitted to staff for approval. 2. Aspens to be installed on Christiania Lodge owned property shall be 2 1/2" to 3" caliper. The board also recommended the spruce to be installed on Christiania Lodge owned property be 10 feet to 12 feet in height. 15 8. Stanley - Addition JK 1816 Sunburst Drive/Lot 1, Vail Valley 3rd MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Pat Herrington VOTE: 4-0 Motion to approve subject to the following conditions: 1. Resolution of site coverage interpretation issue by Community Development Department staff. 2. new stone work match existing or existing stone work be removed and all new stone be installed. If new stone is to be installed, material must be presented to DRB for review and approval. 2 1 9. Red Sandstone Elementary School - New facade JK and minor changes to site. (Conceptual Review) MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Conceptual Review. 9 10. Ski Museum - Plaza Development Review SM Vail Village Transportation Center MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Conceptual Review. 14 11. Vail Trails East SM 433 Gore Crk Dr./Lot 7-15, Block 4, Vail Village 1st MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO MARCH 20TH MEETING. 8 12. Josey - Addition SM 97 Forest Road/Lot 3, Block 7, Vail Village 1st MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO MARCH 20TH MEETING. 3 13. Buffehr Creek Townhomes - 5 Units on SM existing portion of Lionsridge, Tract B. (Conceptual Review) MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Conceptual Review. 14. Review of neon/gas-filled signs SM MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: DRB directed staff to prepare a proposal which will prohibit neon signage in Town. Will be reviewed at March 20th meeting. , 3 x r 15. Schofield - New Garage AK 1448 Vail Valley Dr/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Valley lst MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Pat Herrington VOTE: 4-0 Approved with the condition that prior to issuance of building permit, applicant shall obtain a right- of-way revocable permit form the Town of Vail or redesign the proposal. 16 16. Lockton - New Single Family Residence AK 3994 Bighorn Road/Lot 2, Gore Creek Park MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry Dorward VOTE: 3-1-0 Approved with 6 conditions prior to issuance of building permit, applicant shall: 1. Provide approval from Army Corps of Engineers to alter wetland condition. 2. Show grading that matches neighbor's driveway and meets Town of Vail Engineer's approval. 3. Enlarge drainpipe specs to 10". 4. Insure bay window encroachment meets code or is pulled back. 5. Meet Town of Vail Fire Department requirements. 6. Applicant is strongly encouraged to use materials other that glass block. 7 17. Peterson/Bossow - Conceptual Review of 250 AK addition & remodel. 332 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 6, Block 3, Vail Village 3rd. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Conceptual Review. 4 f 17 18. Graubart - New Addition AK 4394 Streamside Circle/Lot 9, Bighorn 4th MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Pat Herrington VOTE: 4-0 Approved with the 4 conditions that prior to issuance of building permit, applicant shall: 1. Provide topographic survey, showing 100 year flood plain, referencing to FIRM. This approval becomes void if new information shows project violates section 18.69 Town of Vail Zoning Code. 2. Show proposed drainage plan. 3. Secure right-of-way revocable permit for all encroachments. 4. Provide signature from owner with 1/2 interest in Lot 5. 13 19. Manor Vail - Addition AK 595 East Vail Valley Drive/Lots A, B, C, Block 1, Vail Village 7th MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Conceptual Review. 10 20. Coldwell Banker Display Box AK 286 Bridge Street/Lots A & B, Block 5A, Vail Village 1st MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED AFTER DISCUSSION. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Pat Herrington Jim Shearer (PEC) Ned Gwathmey George Lamb Sherry Dorward 5 STAFF APPROVALS: Potato Patch Townhomes - Change in approved plan. Lot 6, Block 2, Potato Patch Gottieb Addition - 62 sq. ft. addition. Bedroom expansion on north side of building. Lot 15, Block 1, Vail Village 13th 6 - - ~ town ofi uaii 75 south frontage road veil, Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2113 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Counci%i~~ FP.OM: Steve Barwick DATE: March 8, 1991 RE: Tax Exempt Groups Please find attached a brief explanation of the Town's current situation regarding tax exemptions for groups visiting Vail and our recommendations on the matter. Also attached is a list of the policies of others ski towns. As you can see, the enforcement level varies dramatically from town to toy>>n. Since this matter may impact group Uusiness activity and involve a sizable amount of revenue, we felt that Council should provide the staff with additional guidance. SHB/ds • TOWN OF VAIL TAX EXEMPT POLICY The Town of Vail is losing sales tax revenues because area businesses are granting tax-exempt status to organizations that are not tax-exempt. We estimate that the total amount of sales tax from lodging that is exempted is about $ 45,000 per year. The amount of lost revenue from businesses granted tax-exemption in error is difficult to estimate. Recommended Solutions 1. Enforce our current policy, requiring the Town's written consent for all tax-exempt sales. If a tax-exempt sale is granted without the Town's consent, the vendor is liable .for the tax. 2. Change our ordinance so that a tax-exempt organization does not have to have a Colorado or Federal tax-exempt number in order to get tax-exempt status. 3. Create a new consent form to obtain additional information from tax-exempt organizations. 4. Train local businesses about granting exemption from sales tax. 5. Clarify our policy by giving specific examples of guest types that would be exempt from tax. Questionable Organizations and Activities that are currently receiving tax-exempt status 1. Fund raisers i.e. Crystal Ball 2. Ski clubs 3. Professional seminars 4. Private universities 5. Non-profit groups 6. Church groups TOWN OF VAIL SURVEY OF TAX EXEMPTION ENFORCEMENT IN SKI AREAS ENFORCEMENT AND APPLICATION PROCEDURES AVON No application for tax-exemption required and no enforcement of policy. STEAMBOAT No application for tax-exemption required and no enforcement of policy. BEAVER CREEK No application for tax-exemption required and no enforcement of policy. BRECKENRIDGE Each vendor must have a affidavit signed by the organization on file for proof of tax exemption. If, discovered during an audit, that a group did not fill out an application, then the vendor is responsible for the tax. KEYSTONE Each group claiming tax-exempt status must have a Colorado Certificate of Exemption letter to the area accountant prior to group arrival. Each group must pay with an organization's draft. No exceptions. No application is required to be filled out. State of Colorado Enforcement of tax-exemption policies is through auditing procedures. Each group must always pay on the organization's draft and they must have a Co. tax-exempt number. No application is required to be filled out. ' APPLICATION & AFFIDAVIT FOR TAX-EXEMPTION ORGANIZATION NAME ADDRESS GROUP PHONE NUMBER EXEMPT NUMBER state Federal LODGE NAME DATES OF STAY NUMBER OF PERSONS AT LODGE PURPOSE OF VISIT 1 All of the following statments must be true for the purchase to qualify as tax-exempt TRUE FALSE The purchase is included under and is part of the regular religious, U governmental or charitable functions and activities of the organization. I I I I The transaction is billed directly to the organization and payment is made I_J t-J from an organization draft . Purchases by an individual do not qualify for the exemption even though the individual will be reimbursed by the organization or governmental agency. The participants at the event have not and will not reimburse the organization in any way for the event such as by payment of a fee or contribution or purchase of a ticket, etc. AFFIDAVIT OF NON-TAXABLE SALE TO TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATION The undersigned declares, under penalties of perjury, that the tangible personal property or tax- able service purchased without payment of otherwise applicable Town of Vail tax(es) from: (Name of vendor) is to be paid from the tax-exempt organization's fund and that said organization has not and will not receive any reimbursement through either direct payment ,collection or "donation" from any person(s) for the use or consumption of said tangible personal property of services. Print Name Title Signature Date Town of Vail Approval Yes No Date To verify CO exemption number: 866-5600 Ext. 240 ~~i VAIL VILLAGE INN Village Inn Plaza Condominiums The Mayor and Towa Council Vail Municipal Building Vail 81657 Match 5, 1991 Dear Mr. Mayor, Gentlemen and Ladies of the Council: This letter is to request an addition to the Council Work Session Agenda for Tuesday, March 12, 1991, in order to discuss the following: 1. The proposed face-lift for the existing lobby building of the Vail Village Inn. 2. How such a proposed face-lift would relate, if at all, to re- quirement 7, Section 11, SDD 6. More specifically, the require- went that Vail Village Inn, Inc. shall reimburse the Town of Vail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum of an amount not to exceed X75,000.00. Thank you very much for your time. Sincerel , Jo S er Pre~s'de nd Managing Director cc: rf/jjs-gc 100 East Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-5622 FAX (303) 476-4661 . ~ + ti w , - ORDINANCE N0. 14 Series of 1987 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0, 1, SERIES OF 1985_ TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IU OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6, ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; CHANGING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV AND V OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as - follows: Section 1, Legislative Intent is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 1. Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vaii passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No.6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail. C. In 1985, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance #1, Series of 1985, providing certain amendments to the development plan for SDD N0. 6. D. Application has been made to the Town of Uail to modify and amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 6 which relate to Phase IV and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. E. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has recommended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even mare unified and more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. . - .i Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning~Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, PTanning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan Contents is hereby amended to read as follows; The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, II, III, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the environmental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, (plans dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IU may be constructed in two phases with the first phase to be referred to as Phase IV and the final phase to be referred to as Phase V. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I, II, and III, a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documented by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the development to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phases IV and V, a volumetric model as amended by Gordon Pierce, F Architect, of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phases IV and V, to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted uses in Special Development No. 6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses The permitted uses in phases I,~II, III, IV and V of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in • < < ~ r - the Town of Vail Community Oeveiopment Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.060 Conditional Uses in Special Development District No. 6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional Uses for Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza level of Phases IV and V. . Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I, II and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. For Phase IV AND V, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted by Gordon Pierce, Architect, (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I, II, and III the al]owable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. -For Phases IV and V, the maximum building height shai.i be as set forth in the approved development plan by Gordon Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and U of Special Develoment District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I, II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phases IV and V, building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987). Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments as follows: 18.50.180 Parking and Loading Following the completion of Phases IV and V, there shall be not less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987). The proposed site plan dated February 19, 1987-reflects the interim parking plans between the development of Phases IV and V. Section 11 is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phases IV and V of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon Pierce (dated February 9, 1985, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Vaii Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phases IV and U to a future commercial expansion at the Sonnenalp Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for reconfiguration of the pull-off area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to , the hotel prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase V. 4. The developers and/or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, such condominium unit of approximately 3,986 sq. ft. in size and to be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There shall be no provisions placed on the condominium unit restricting the Town of Vail's use of the unit or the subsequent subdivision and/or sale of the unit. -4- ~J 5. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phases IV or V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as part of Phases IV or V has been obtained. 6. Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. 7. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any phase of SDD~16 subsequent to Phase IV, the developer and/or owner of said phase shall reimburse the Town of Vail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum (into Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed X75,000. 8. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining portion of SDD6 commonly referred to as Phase V shall include parking as required by Ordinance 1, Series of 1985. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the valildity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 13. The repeal or the repeal and reenaction of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. ~ . . ~ ~ - J - . • ~ . "c~ ~ - INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of Mav, 1987 and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of Mav 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Order d p lshe 'n ul~his 8th day of Mav 1987. V ~ / / / Paul R.~ Joh"~ ton,rMayor A ST: ,G a~1t.1,1~J~.6WI~~il.~.v~u,C.~~[,r~.J Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 19th day of Mav 1987. ' A • 1 n Paul R. ~hf~ston, Mayor ST: a~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP 3/8/91 TOPIC -QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS vago i ~f ~ 8/8/89 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION LARRY: Proceeding w/legal requirements for Marijke Brofos will be circulating petitions when Larry (request: Lapin) annexation. gets them to her. Larry is holding off so annexation will occur closer to end of next year far tax purposes. 5/1 AMEND CODE, 12.04.240, STREET CUT GREG/LARRY: Per Council direction, proceed. Proposed ordinance being redrafted after joint meeting with PERMITS Public Service and Holy Cross. 7/11 BIKES/ROLLER BLADES AND SKATES/ KEN/LARRY: Should bicycles, roller blades, etc. be Researching appropriate ordinances for application to be SKATEBOARDS ~ prohibited from highly pedestrianized areas in discussed in May, 1991. the Village and Lionshead, and also including the parking structures? 7/27 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES IN LARRY/GREG: Work with Holy Cross Electric to Revised estimate of costs to property owners to be EAST VAIL establish special improvement district(s) for mailed. Undergrounding may occur in fall of '91 or undergrounding utilities in East Uail. spring of '92. 9/20 LIONS RIDGE FILING 4 RON: Homeowners Assn. would like Town to buy Ron contacted Jim Fritze about tax abatement if Town takes common area for back taxes and penalties. ownership. Tax liability only about $5,500. County Attorney says no tax abatement is possible for a property such as this. 11/27 HERITAGE CABLEVISION RON: Schedule meeting with Ron/Larry/Lynn Johnson Will do. Lynn Johnson is out of town for a few weeks. to discuss limited franchise agreement. 12/18 MILLRACE CONDO. ASSN. LETTER KRISTAN: Respond. Vail ,Ventures will respond in writing to our letter. 1/11/91 SNOW DUMP RON/GREG: Workout site acquisition with VA. Final negotiations on land lease underway. Design Complete design. has begun. 1/11J91 AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE LAND KRISTAN: Locate all Agriculture open parcels. All located.. There are approximately 12 .pieces privately owned not including VA parcels. Council will review at Work Session, March 19, 1991. 1/11/91 OLD TOWN SHOPS/HOLY CROSS LARRY/GREG: Environmental investigation. Drilling completed. Waiting for final lab reports. SITES 2/5/91 CHUCK ANDERSON/YOUTH ROB/RON: Are we 2 or 3 years behind on this? Last year nominations were solicited twice and none ' RECOGNITION (request: Rose) Let's be prepared to award this spring. reeived. Rob will proceed. Process has been outlined by VMRD. WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP 3/8/91 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS aa~o ~ ~f ~ 2/5/91 AUSTRIA HOUSE PARKING LOT LARRY/MIKE BRAKE: Research policy for encroach- Staff to seek Council direction on encroachment issue (request: Lapin) ment on Town of Vail property. during March 19 Work Session, after Larry, Ken & Mike Mike discuss. i 2/26/91 COUNTY-WIDE SALES TAX LARRY: Can this issue be voted at the regular Copy of the bill requested. Summary says RE: TRANSPORTATION municipal election in November? election can be held any November. 2/26 CD'S STEVE THOMPSON: Are any of the Savings and Loan No. ~ (request: Gibson) institutions where we are banking on the RTC "hit" list? RECD MAR 1 9 19 91 ~ ,~iu,l 111 South Frontage Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 Mar ch 18, f'~'91 cr u F:un F'hi1 1 i p~ M Town Manager . To~•:n of 'Jai .l 75 S. F'runta~e f~:d. 'Jail, Cu 8167 Dear Counci 1 Merr~ber-s, Rt. a special meeting of the t?ail F:esnr-t r-"tssec i ~t i nn >nar-d nt Directors , Thy crsday March 7th wie revi et•:ed al 1 a~~ai 1 ab 1 e rel acati nn si. tes for thFa ,r'ai 1 F:esor-i: Rssnci at i nn ~•:i th sp~:ci al considera'tinn n•t tt-,c F'i'tEcin Cre~=E: Farb:: cnrrimercial space. The F'itk:in Cr-eei:: space t•:as fo~_cnd ~.cndesirable fc+r tt-:e foll.nr•:ing reason: 1 . F'hysi cal. 1 y ton s:iia7. 1 an~:J rio space. fur e::pansi un. . Hi Qt-IP_r tJ! lI 1 d-nut cost rer~±ii red ti loin d=?-:e ',?'•?1 =pace- InarlE~ycfuate parE~:i.rig. 4. 1'n<~deq~cate a•vai l rafJl e pl ~oi;e ser~,ri ce. Q~ct of killsi Hess traffic f i or•1. Rl1 other spaces considered had prohibiti~ae rental and CRf`1 costs. For these reasor-:s we coot 1 ~.cde ti-~at the best pussi bl e 1 nca~t i on i s the Vai 1 Vi 1 .l age inn =.pace. R= stated before, the membership is committed to raising the necessary funds for 'tl-:e move as loriy as the toaan will grant us an initial ~ year ter:r: at na cost increase from that now being paid with 1ti years to fnl.low t~eith a CF'I annual increase not to e>:ceed 7°I. per year-. We look: •forward 'tn your- approval. F:egar-ds , ~ William H. 1`liller Cheri rmar~ Wf-~1~1/ 1 j r CENTRAL RESERVATIONS 1-800-525-3875 GROUP SALES / BUSIIVESS OFFlCE (303) 476-1000 Denver Line 595-9488 .J =M HEYHR Illlilllllllllilllt111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 F.O. Box 404 Conifer, CO 80433 January 4, 1991 Chief of Police TOWN OF VAIL POLICE DEPARTMENT Vail, Colorado Dear Chief I am writing to compliment and thank your staff for their helpful and friendly attitude in a recent situation I experienced while passing through Vail. During the height of the dust-past Christmas Holidays I was forced to leave my sick motorhome in Vail, having come from Grand Junction headed toward home in Conifer. After being told by ail of the gas stations in the valley that they had no place to keep our motorhome and no one available to work on it until after the holidays, I was at wit's end. I stopped in at the Police headquarters to ask for a lace, anyplace, where the unit could be left for several days_ The duty sargent CI believe his name was Dan Moison> directed me to an outlying lot and made arrangements to preclude my being ticketed for the next few days. This was done at the height of the activity that _ accompanies the Holidays, but despite that the sargent was concerned, friendly and a bright light on an otherwise dim day. On Christmas five I returned to attempt minor repair (timing adjustment>, was unsuccessful, and was again forced to leave the motorhome for another two days until the overworked folks at West Vail Conoco could come and retrieve it. I again contacted the Police to explain the situation and was received by a different duty sargent who was as sympathetic and concerned as the first. As I write this I am struck by the parallel to the Mary and Joeseph in Bethlehem story. The Vail Police staff were the good innkeepers in my version; my heartfelt thanks to all of them, and a Merry Christmas! My family and friends will make it a point to visit Vail more often in the future as a direct result of their kindness. Cordial , /Ji m H~yer (,c: ayor s Office, Town of Vail F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G Q DRAFT VAIL TRANSPORTATION STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ' Prepared for: Town of Vail ' 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 i 1 Prepared by: ' Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 5299 DTC Boulevard, Suite 400, Englewood, Colorado 80111 ' (303)721-1440 In association with: TDA Colorado, Inc. ' FHU Reference No. 89-091 March, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 ' RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS 1 VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERIES 2 Background 2 Goals and Objectives 2 Concept Alternatives 2 ' Close-in Centralized Options : 2 Decentralized Options 4 Recommendations/Priorities 4 PARKING 7 Background 7 ' Goals and Objectives 7 Travel Demand Management (TDM) Options 9 Future Parking Supply Requirements 9 ' Parking Rate Structure 10 Special Parking Provisions 11 TRANSIT 13 In Town Shuttle System Characteristics 13 ' Goals and Objectives 13 Shuttle System Alternatives 13 In Town Shuttle Recommendations/Priorities 17 Outlying Bus System Characteristics 17 Goals and Objectives 17 Route Structure Modification and Coverage Expansion Options 17 ' Recommendations/Priorities : 19 Down Valley Bus Service 19 I-70 ACCESS/FRONTAGE ROADS/LOCAL CIRCULATION 22 Background 22 Goals and Objectives 22 I-70 Crossing Location 22 West Vail Interchange Alternatives 23 West Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities 25 ' Main Vail Interchange Alternatives 25 Main Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities 29 Frontage Road System 29 Separation of Conflicting Travel Modes 30 TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE 34 LIST OF FIGURES Page ' 1. Existing Goods Delivery System 3 ' 2. Recommended Goods Delivery System 5 3. Parking Supply/Demand Characteristics 8 ' 4. In-Town Shuttle Bus Route 14 5. In-Town Shuttle Directional Peak Hour Demand 16 ' 6. Golden Peak Area Concept Plan 18 ' 7. Recommended West Vail Bus Routes 20 8. Recommended East Vail Bus Routes 21 9. Recommended West Vail Interchange Improvements 24 10. Recommended Main Vail Interchange Improvements 28 ' 11. Frontage Road Concept Plan 31 12. Core Area Concept Plan 32 13. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 35 ' 14. Central Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 36 ' LIST OF TABLES ' l . In-Town Shuttle Comparison I S 2. West Vail Traffic Volume-to-Capacity Summary 23 ' 3. Main Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary 26 4. Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives 27 ' INTRODUCTION This Executive Summary highlights the technical analyses, alternatives evaluation and major recommendations of the Vail Comprehensive Transportation Plan developed over cone-year planning period under the direction and guidance of the Vail Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee. ' The purpose of this document is to summarize the important aspects of the planning process and to present consolidated background information on the range of alternatives considered and the final recommendations made. ' A companion document, "Vail Transportation Study, Final Report", presents detailed information on the entire technical work program as well as complete documentation of the field inventories and committee meetings. The full report should be consulted to obtain any needed information not ' contained in this summary. The Executive Summary is organized into five sections covering the following topics: ' o Vail Village Goods Delivery o Public Parking Facilities and Operations o Transit System Operations o I-70 Access/Frontage Road Improvements o Recreation Trails Interface Each section presents a brief background on existing conditions, a statement of goals and objectives, summary information on the alternatives considered, and documentation of the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee's recommendations for short-range implementation and for the long-range concept plan. RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ' While the Vail Comprehensive Transportation Plan documents long-range concept plans and short- range improvement projects for the Town, the planning process also recognizes the role of the Town's Plan within the greater regional context. It is recognized that transportation to and from Vail involves multi-agency cooperation throughout the Vail Valley, adjacent counties, and the Front Range. Vail is supportive of a broad range of alternative transportation modes which address resident, employee, and visitor needs. These alternatives should be compatible with environmental constraints ' and should encourage reductions in travel demand as a means to reduce the need to expand the transportation supply. ' Monitoring and updating activities are recommended which will allow future regional transportation decisions to be incorporated into the Vail Comprehensive Transportation Plan. These regional transportation decisions may include expanded mass transportation services throughout the Vail Valley ' as well as new technologies implemented regionally and statewide. 1 1 ' V RIE VAIL VILLAGE DELI E S ' Background Goods delivery and various service functions within Vail Village have resulted in significant and ' undesirable vehicular conflicts with pedestrians which is partially the result of inadequate service and delivery facilities such as alleys. Designated loading zones are located sporadically throughout Vail Village as shown in Figure 1, providing approximately 31 truck parking spaces. Larger vehicles are currently prohibited in the Village from 8:30 AM to 10:30 AM and from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM during ski season, and all delivery vehicles must pass through Check-point Charlie. Approximately 185,000 square feet of floor space exist in Vail Village which generates an estimated 160 to 200 vehicular trips per day during ski season of various deliveries and service functions. Approximately 25 to 30 ' delivery parking spaces are required to accommodate delivery demand during peak conditions. Goals and Obiectives ' Basic planning objectives relative to the goods and services delivery system are ordered in the following hierarchy: ' o Pedestrianization should be emphasized as a priority. Ideally, therefore, all trucks and service vehicles should be eliminated from the Village core. o If this is not feasible, the number and size of trucks in the Village core should be reduced. o Gore Creek Drive and Bridge Street should not carry any vehicular traffic. Future demand estimates indicate that approximately 35 to 40 delivery and service parking spaces are required to accommodate delivery demand during the peak season. These new loading zones should be located in response to both environmental constraints as well as pedestrian retail space needs. Concert Alternatives ' Five delivery system alternatives were identified which addressed, in varying degrees, reducing vehicle/pedestrian conflicts in the Village. Two of the alternatives involved a subsurface tunnel system and were dropped from consideration due to their constructability, liability, and cost implications. Two other alternatives involved a centralized facility to receive deliveries located either ' near the Village or at a remote site. The remote site centralized option was dropped from further consideration since it was determined that if a centralized system is to occur, aclose-in site would be more desirable since some of the benefits of centralization would be lost if located away from the Village. The fifth alternative involved a decentralized system which consists of modifications to the current delivery scheme. The Close-in centralized alternative and the decentralized alternative were evaluated in more detail. ' Close-in Centralized Options Issues concerning the centralized alternative include the following: ' o Best location. o Size of the "small vehicle" fleet. ' o Responsibility and involvement of the Town of Vail. o Aesthetics ' 2 r - ~ r ~,M, r r' r r F E L S B U A G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G' ~ ~ ~ Meadow p~ ~r. ` ~ / / m . ~ 5 7 co / . 0 4 ~ \re, Cre 1 ~ 1 2 3 O D 9 O- ~ Of" sore Creek D~ GteeK 11 12 t 6 G°f e ~ 20 10 13 17 1 a~ . ~ Hens°n a ,9 15 14 18 1 ~ r Legend . Figure 1 Vehicle Loading Zones Delivery ~ stem Private Service Access Areas Existing Goods Delivery Sy ~ Not to Scale ' o Impacts on the natural and man-made environments. o Compatibility with surroundings. ' o Size of facility (large enough to accommodate maneuvering of single unit trucks). o Feasibility of land acquisition. ' Four potential site locations were identified for aclose-in facility in which the docking area would be covered or concealed below ground. These locations include the Christiania Parking lot, Garden of the Gods parking lot east of Garden of the Gods (located northeast of the Hanson Ranch Road/Nail Valley Drive intersection), Golden Peak tennis court, and just south of the Lodge South Tower. It ' was determined that if a centralized system were implemented, the Christiania site would be the most desirable since it is located closest to the Village area, is less disruptive to the surrounding area and it would be one of the least expensive alternatives to implement. A Cushman or "small vehicle" fleet of 7 vehicles would be required. Decentralized Options Three areas were discussed as potential locations for new truck loading zones under the decentralized delivery system which include the Mill Creek area between Gore Creek Drive and Hanson Ranch Road, the area south of Hanson Ranch Road between Cyranos and Christiania, and a lower level ' loading area beneath the existing Christiania parking lot. In addition, conversion of existing short- term parking areas along Gore Creek Drive and Hanson Ranch Road were discussed as potential truck-only loading zones. ' Recommendations/Priorities The Vail Village goods delivery plan is illustrated in Figure 2, and consists of a modified ' decentralized delivery strategy. Elements of the plan are as follows; prioritized by short-term and long-term actions. ' Short Term: o The Bridge Street loading zone, the Mill Creek loading zone on Hanson Ranch Road behind ' the Red Lion, and Gore Creek Drive loading zone near the Lodge at Vail would be removed. o Loading zones on Willow Bridge Road near Check-Point Charlie and along the north side of the Mill Creek Court Building would be retained for delivery purposes (approximately 19 ' spaces including 2 handicapped parking spaces). o Additional loading areas would be provided along Gore Creek Drive next to the Christiania lot (approximately 4 spaces including 2 handicapped parking spaces), along Hanson Ranch Road just south of the Christiania lot (approximately 6 spaces including 2 handicapped parking spaces), and along the south side of Hanson Ranch Road between Cyranos and ' Christiania (approximately 6 spaces). o All private service access areas would be retained. 4 ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O F E L S B U R G HOLT ~ U L L E V I G 1 ~ Mew ~w p~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ Retaln Existing ~ 5 7 Losdinp Zonea ~ 4 ~ ' c d ~ 1 m ~ p~ RetaM Exlatlnp ~ m 8 h 8 / • Loading Zonea . k pr. Gore Cros 1 11 12 16 G~eeK ~ . 10 \ G°~e Remove Gore Creek Drlve \ 20 • and 8rld4e Street Potential-ftifun Loading Zonea 13 17 ~ Truck Dock Facility ~ Convert 16 Mlnuts 1 Parklnq Zones \ • to DeliMery Loading Zonea. O a 19 • ~ Ne~sOn 15 14 18 ~ ! , Construct New Loading Legend ~ Zone Area k•''~~~~=~~~~~~~ Delivery Vehicle Loading Zones m,~ Private Service Access Areas ~ Figure 2 Recommended Goods Delivery System Not to Scale e ' Approximately 35 spaces can be provided under this alternative at a cost of approximately $75,000 to $100,000 plus land acquisition. The major cost component is the development of a truck parking ' area off of Hanson Ranch Road next to Cyranos. Protection and enhancement of Mill Creek will be an integral component of this improvement. The implementation of this short-term recommendation does not prohibit the future implementation of a centralized delivery strategy. Because of the ' relatively low cost of implementing the short-term alternative, it is recommended as an immediate solution to be further evaluated after operating experience is gained. Long Term: o The Christiania lot should be retained for a potential goods delivery loading area including the potential of converting it to a centralized loading facility to transfer cargo to smaller ' delivery vehicles. o Immediate actions should be taken to resolve land ownership issues associated with the Christiania lot/Nail Associates as it pertains to future Town right-of-way needs. This will allow the long-term solution to be implemented more quickly if the short-term solution provides minimal benefits relative to the environmental and cost consequences. ' As a simple, two-level parking/loading area, the long-term alternative would cost approximately $750,000 to $850,000 plus land acquisition and provide approximately 17 truck loading spaces. As a centralized delivery facility including warehousing facilities and a small vehicle fleet, the total costs ' are estimated to be $1.4 to $1.7 million plus land acquisition. i 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 6 t PARKING ' Background The major components of the existing parking supply which are critical include the Transportation ' Center, LionsHead, and Ford Park which provide approximately 2,750 public parking spaces with the recent Transportation Center expansion. During the peak skiing periods, these parking facilities are filled to capacity and temporary overflow parking (typically the Frontage Road) are utilized to whatever extent necessary. Not only are revenues lost, but visitor convenience and safety are also ' compromised. Prior to the expansion of the Transportation Center expansion, the parking supply/demand characteristics were such that overflow parking occurred approximately 14 days per year. The expansion is estimated to decrease this overflow to approximately 6 days per year. ' A detailed analysis of existing and future parking demand characteristics was conducted and is summarized in Figure 3. It will be noted that for four different parking demands the existing public parking supply of 2,750 spaces will result in increasing frequency of overflow parking. Under existing demand conditions overflow parking will occur 6 days per year while future demand conditions will result in overflow parking of: ' 0 10 days per year if travel demand management strategies are instituted by the time the ski area expands to its approved limits, 0 26 days per year if no travel demand management occurs by the time the ski area expands to its approved limits, and 0 34 days per year if the full potential expansion of the ski area occurs. (This level of expansion could not occur until an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared.) Goals and Obiectives The following are the goals and objectives relative to parking needs. ' o Identify travel demand management techniques to reduce current and future demands for parking including ride-share incentives, pricing controls, and transit service improvements. ' o Provide an adequate public parking supply to accommodate future demands associated with the approved ski area expansion recognizing that maximum peak demands cannot be economically satisfied. Up to 15 days of overflow demand are considered acceptable by the Town as a reasonable balance between serving the majority of the peak parking demands with a feasible and affordable investment. ' o Provide reasonably priced public parking to serve the visitor. o Provide price discounted parking to serve Vail resident and employee needs. ' o Provide limited premium service parking at a price commensurate with the value provided. o Identify candidate expansion areas for additional public parking to accommodate long-term ' demands associated with the potential ski area expansion. 7 F E L S B U R G ~ - _ _ - - H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 \ X3.8 ~ P~rkin4 Demand Curves O Existing O Approved Ski Area Expansion with TDM ~..t O3 Approved Ski Area Expansion 3.~ ®Potential Ski Area Expansion _y _ O ~ ~ ~ z.B ~ Existing Parking Supply - 2750 Spaces n z. ~ - 1.B O1 ~ ~ 6 10 26 34 1 4 - , .-i-_._.- , --r----~-~ - , - 5 15 25 35 45 ~~5 6:~ Number of Days Parking Demand Occurs or is Exceeded Figure 3 Parking Supply/Demand Relationships North o Locate arkin areas for charter buses recreational vehicles, and other over-sized vehicles. p g ' o Maintain an adequate revenue stream to fund implementation of on-going maintenance and operations. ' o Provide a simple and easily understood pricing structure which is efficiently administered. Travel Demand Management (TDMI Options ' A wide variety of travel demand management measures exist for reducing travel and parking demands, but most are oriented toward commuter travel in major metropolitan areas. Three options, however, have potential application to Vail. These options include modified parking pricing, transit ' improvements, and discounts for ride-share groups. Collectively, these measures could reduce parking demand from 14 to 22 percent if successfully implemented resulting in 10 days of overflow conditions under the approved ski area expansion demand. Figure 3 illustrates the supply/demand ' characteristics for various demand scenarios. Future Parking Suonly Requirements ' The Town Parking Plan consists of a short-range component (consistent with the approved ski area expansion) and a generalized long-range component. The short-range parking supply plan consists of the following elements: ' o The Town of Vail should encourage private sector involvement to actively pursue travel demand management techniques to reduce the growth in parking demand. 1 0 Up to 15 days of overflow parking demand is deemed to be acceptable by the Town in recognition of the excessive capital costs required to meet absolute peak demands. Approximately half of the days will result in very little to minor overflow conditions while the top 7 days of activity will constitute the most serious overflow conditions. o As a consequence, the formal public parking supply of 2,750 spaces to be in place upon completion of the expansion of the VTC is sufficient to meet the Town's immediate and short-term future parking needs. In the longer range future it is recognized that the possibility of ski area expansion beyond the currently approved levels could occur along with continued general growth of the Town. Therefore, the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee adopted the following long-term parking concept plan: o The existing Ford Park parking area (east end of park) should be considered for a possible two-level parking facility with the second level provided below existing grade. o The existing West Day lot should also be considered, in conjunction with Vail Associates, for a possible two-level parking facility with the second level partially depressed below existing grade. ':;Approximately 400 to 500 additional parking spaces could be provided at a cost of approximately $2.5 to $3.0 million. 9 ' Parkins Rate Structure* The Town of Vail currently charges patrons to park at the LionsHead and Transportation Center garages during ski season (parking is free in the summer). Charging is primarily oriented towards visitors as local residents and employees obtain parking passes for the duration of the ski season. The 1' pricing structure varies depending on the duration of the parked vehicle and it ranges from free if parked for less than an hour-and-a-half to $7.00 fora 24-hour period. The Town also sells parking passes and coupons for the two structures which include the premium Gold Pass, the discount Blue Pass and other discount coupon options. The use of the Blue Pass and coupons is restricted during peak demand periods. To meet the Town's objectives, a major revision of the basic rate structure, premium service program, ' and discount parking program are recommended. The following parking rate structure is recom- mended for the Town of Vail. ' Time Interval Price 0 -1-1/2 Hours $ 0.00 1-1 /2 to 2 Hours $ 2.00 2 to 3 Hours $ 3.00 3 to 4 Hours $ 4.00 4 to 5 Hours $ 5.00 5 to 7 Hours $ 6.00 7 to 9 Hours $ 7.00 9 to 11 Hours $ 8.00 11 to 13 Hours $ 9.00 ' 13 to 15 Hours $10.00 15 to 24 Hours $12.00 The Gold Pass should be continued as the premium service program, but price levels should be ' increased and reviewed annually to better reflect the costs incurred to provide guaranteed parking. The following is recommended for the premium service Gold Pass program. o Price set at $750.00 plus a $25.00 deposit. o Limited to a maximum of 150 Gold Passes. o Guaranteed space availability and unlimited entry/exit. ' o No restrictions on use. o Gold Passes valid to the following November 1. The following are recommendations for the Discount Parking program and Ford Park. 1 * Many of the recommendations presented in this section have been implemented by the Town of Vail for the 1990/ 1991 season. i 10 Coupons: ' o Coupons will be sold for $3.00 each up to a maximum of 100 coupons per individual and may be purchased in any quantity. o Coupons are valid to the following November 1. o Coupons are valid at both VTC and LionsHead any day and at any time. o At the VTC, Leve14 and Leve15 will be reserved exclusively for coupon holders (226 spaces). o If Levels 4 and 5 fill, then coupon holders will use LionsHead. o If Levels 4 and 5 do not fill, then general parkers will be allowed to use Levels 4 and 5 provided that the rest of the VTC is full. ' o Coupons may be purchased by those individuals who have a valid drivers license with a Vail address or verification of employment by a Vail business. Blue Passes: o Blue Passes will be sold for $400.00 plus a $25.00 deposit to anyone wishing to purchase them. o Blue passes are valid to the following November 1. o Blue Passes may be used at the VTC at any time on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday (except between Christmas and New Years Day) and after 3:00 P.M. on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. o Blue Passes may be used at LionsHead any day and at any time. o Blue Passes allow unlimited entry/exit during the valid time periods defined above. Ford Park: ' o Ford Park will be free and available on a first come, first serve basis on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. o Ford Park will be available to Coupon and Blue Pass holders or to general parkers fora $5.00 flat fee (payable upon entry) on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Special Parkine Provisions The area adjacent to the LionsHead structure has been used to park over-sized vehicles. Demand levels have typically been approximately 30 to 35 vehicles with peak demands of approximately 50 ' vehicles. It is recommended that this area continue to be used for over-sized vehicles. The potential exists for the Performing Arts Group to erect a building on this site at which time a replacement site will need to be identified. Some possible.sites include the following which would require negotiations with the entities involved. 11 ' o Safeway Area in West Vail o Vail Mountain School o Golf Course o Ford Park o Athletic Field Parking Area ' o Red Sandstone School -Lower Lot Overflow parking demands of oversized vehicles can be accommodated in the same fashion as overflow demands for general parking or arrangements can be made to park oversized vehicles at one ' of the above mentioned sites. ' 12 ' TRANSIT ' In Town Shuttle Svstem Characteristics This free bus service operates year-round and carries over 2.2 million riders annually between Golden Peak and West LionsHead Circle as shown in Figure 4 with the peak winter ridership near 30,000 riders per day. The shuttle operates 20 hours a day from 6:30 A.M. to 2:30 A.M. with up to 14 vehicles in use during the afternoon rush. During peak periods, ridership and consequently dwell times, increase significantly causing poor operations and a significant drop in average system speed 1 to 5 or 6 MPH from an estimated 10 to 12 MPH. During the 1989-90 ski season, it was estimated that the system was seriously overloaded between 27 to 30 days. Given the "Approved Expansion" growth scenario as mentioned in the previous section, an 18 percent increase in system capacity would be needed to maintain the "status quo". Otherwise, overloading is estimated to occur about 62 days per ski season with the existing system. Goals and Obiectives o Provide increased passenger capacity on the In-Town Shuttle. o Improve operational characteristics at physical bottlenecks. ' o Identify along-term concept plan for passenger demands beyond 2010. Shuttle Svstem Alternatives ' Shuttle alternatives to alleviate existing and anticipated overload conditions can be classified as either elevated "fixed guideway" or "at-grade" alternatives. Previously, an automated mono-rail "fixed guideway" system was recommended as the most appropriate replacement solution costing an estimated $30 to $34 million. This system was estimated to provide a 30 percent improvement in line capacity which would reduce the future number of overloaded days from 62 to 20. The best "at-grade" alternative was determined to be the use of special high-capacity buses designed specifically for short-haul shuttle service similar in concept to those used on the 16th Street Mall in Denver. This vehicle is oriented towards standees with low floors, high ceilings and multiple wide ' doors which contribute to quicker loading and less dwell time. Special provisions to allow all ski equipment to be brought on board safely which would further lessen dwell times. The system would effectively operate as a "moving sidewalk" which is the kind of service required along the shuttle ' route. The high capacity bus system as described would result in a 35 percent increase in capacity for a cost of $7.5 million (see Table 1). Under the "Approved Expansion" growth scenario, the shuttle system ' would be overloaded only 14 days per year. In comparing the elevated and special bus system, it can be seen that the special bus would be significantly more cost effective. However, stipulating that the elevated system serves the same route as the existing at-grade bus system puts it at a disadvantage. Amore practical application of an elevated people mover would be a truncated route between the Covered Bridge and the LionsHead Gondola. With fewer stations (approximately four) and the ability to carry skis on board, this system ' could increase line capacity 55 percent over the existing system for an estimated price of $24 million. The system would be overloaded approximately 6 days per year. Figure 5 illustrates the comparison between shuttle systems superimposed with the existing demand and approved expansion demand ' curves. ' 13 r . . . ~ . . . . ~ . . . . . . . F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 i INTERSTATefOEAST s. FRONTAGE ROAD _ INTERSTATE 70 WEST ~ ~ i I ~ p p ~ / ATBf ~ ~ CQNCERT HALL f ~ ~ • PLAZA f ~ ~ / / ~ ~ LIONSHEAD PARKING t ~~~I A CROSSROADS LIONSHEAD MALL i~ • STRUCTURE PLAZP MARRIOTT'S MARK MEDICAL ' RESORT ~ •DOBSONICE • CENTERI CROSSROADS • ARENA • • -~~~~'~~~\VAIL TRANSPORTATIOIJ CENTER LIBRARY ~ I~ • VAIL ~ ~ DEPARTMENT \ • • ~ -_`j COVERED BRIDGE ~ VAIL VILLAGE ~ • I ^ • \ r Legend ~ II~IIIII~I~I Restricted Areas GOLDEN PEAK • Figure 4 In-Town Shuttle Bus Route Not to Scale ' Table 1 In-Town Shuttle Comparison Special Elevated ' Operation Parameters Low-Floor Bus People Mover 1. Route Length (miles) 3.5 2.2 ' 2. Service Area Between Mariott Mark Gondola/LHV And Gold Peak Covered Bridge ' 3. Ski Placement on board on board 4. Avg. System Speed (mph) 7.5 10.7 5. Line Capacity (pphpd) 1,720 1,950 (I) ' 6. Max # Vehicles in service @ Peak 14 8-10 (2) 7. Vehicle Unit 35' to 40' bus 32' 2-car train ' 8. Estimated Development Cost Vehicles @ 16 = @ 10 = $4,000,000 $ 3,550,000 Other $3.450.000(3) $20.450.000(4) Total $7,450,000 $24,000,000 Source: TDA using Lea Elliot reports for Town of Vail dated 2/ 16/87 & 3/22/90. ' (1) Optimal capacity, assumes 4-station, dual platform system. (Stations would be established based upon a more detailed operations and feasibility study.) ' (2) 10 vehicles for 7-station scheme, 8 vehicles for 4-station scheme. (3) Includes an allowance for expanded maintenance facilities for special buses, minor roadway improvements, engineering, and contingencies. ' (4) Includes fixed facilities, engineering and contingencies. 15 F E L S B U R G - HOL T ~ .~B U L L E V I G ~.5 Line C~~ity of Svstem Options 1O 4 Dual Station People Movers (8-10 vehicles) ;?_;1 y ~ ~ ~ O2 Special Shuttle Coach (14 vehicles) ~ o ~ O3 10 Station People Mover (20 vehicles) ~ o. = 1 ®Existing Shuttle Bus (14 vehicles) y l. B _ 2 ti \1~ U ~ R3 ~ 1. F~ - 4 ~ U L 1~ Rs ` a, j O _ y` _ o t Approved Ski _ ~ ~ ~ _ Area Demand . a ~ ~ 20 Existing Demand O 0..1 6 14 2 g O. ? 0 i -~---r---- ~ - i ~ i -1----~-~ 10 3U I 50 ~ - 70 ___.~..~91I ( 11U ~1~C1 ~ 1.50 ~%0 ~ 0 ~i0 f!0 1(10 l 20 1~U Number of Days Ridership Demand Occurs or is Expected Figure 5 In-Town Shuttle Directional Peak Hour Demand North . ' In-Town Shuttle Recommendations/Priorities ' For the next ten to twelve years, it is recommended to pursue the high-capacity bus alternative where the required fleet could be acquired over atwo-season period as replacements for vehicles scheduled for retirement. In addition, a new turn around area should be provided at the Golden Peak Area as ' shown in Figure 6. Consideration should also be given to relocating the LionsHead turn-around such that the special bus would not travel in mixed traffic along the frontage road. Beyond year 2005, there may be a need to grade separate the shuttle and it is suggested to conduct ' a follow-up technical study at that time to determine the appropriate alignment, station envelop and technology. ' Outlvine Bus Svstem Characteristics Five other bus routes originating at the Transportation Center serve the remainder of Vail. This ' system provides a high degree of mobility to the Town, but there are certain problems and concerns which include excessive crowding on the East Vail route, poor service between the north and south sides of I-70 in West Vail, a general desire to expand service throughout Town, and a need to improve and expand service to Ford Park in conjunction with the revised parking program. Goals and Obiectives The following describe the Town's objectives concerning the outlying bus routes: o Revise the basic route structure to more efficiently serve West Vail and East Vail. o Identify additional service areas for future transit coverage. o Improve frequency of service where ridership demands warrant. Route Structure Modifications and Coverage Expansion Options The most appropriate service concept for West Vail is an "opposing loop" configuration in which one route would circulate clockwise along the frontage roads, and another route would circulate counter- ' clockwise. This configuration would allow riders to cross I-70 without having to transfer at the VTC. During the summer months it will be possible to incorporate the existing Sandstone route into the opposing loop system as well. However, during the peak winter season, the opposing loop service is recommended to remain on the frontage road and be supplemented with a separate Sandstone route as it currently exists. The East Vail route should be structured such that combining it with the golf course route should ' occur only in the evening after the peak period rather than combining them during the midday period as well, which is the current practice. ' Several coverage expansion possibilities within the Town were evaluated which include Lions Ridge Loop, Chamonix Lane, Ford Park, Lupine Road/Columbine Drive and Main Gore Circle North in East Vail. It was found that geometric improvements are required along Lions Ridge Loop and ' Chamonix Lane before service can be provided there. Providing service to Lupine Road/Columbine Drive would add travel time to the route with no significant increase in ridership. Ford Park will require-exclusive service on Fridays, .Saturdays and Sundays in conjunction with the parking programmed to occur there, and Main Gore Circle North should be served simply because it routes ' the East Vail bus back to the Transportation Center quicker via Bighorn Road rather than back down Meadow Drive. ' 17 ' FELSBURG H 0 L T & U L L E Y I G 1 ~ ~ ~ , . ~ ~ Tennis Courts ~ Bus , Manor Vail ' ~,~~~\til~,~\~,,:~.~•~~~~~~~~ Loading ¦ Area r, ' Golden Peak House / L W Golden Peak o ,,1~, t-, ~t• ~ ~ Pedestrian Area ~ \ f;: ~ ' Legend L`a~`~'°;~ Landscaped Areas ~~~~~~~j Parking Spaces Golden Peak Bus Traffic Flow Ski School ' General Traffic Flow 1 Figure 6 N Golden Peak Area Concept Plan Not to Scale ' Recommendations/Priorities The following define the recommended improvements to the outlying bus routes prioritized by short- term and long-term actions. ' Short-term: o Combine the West Vail routes as opposing clockwise and counter-clockwise routes utilizing the north and south frontage roads, as shown in Figure 7. During the peak winter season, ' ridership demands on the existing Sandstone route will require that service on this route be provided separately from the opposing loop service. ' o Reroute the East Vail route such that it extends along Main Gore Drive to Bighorn Road, as shown in Figure 8. ' o Maintain separate East Vail and golf course routes throughout the day and combine these into one route after the evening peak period. o Provide continuous service between Ford Park and the Transportation Center on Fridays, ' Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. o Frequency of service for the revised transit system structure is recommended to be: ' - West Vail Opposing Loops - 15 Minutes Sandstone Route Winter Service - 20 Minutes. - East Vail Route - 15 Minutes - Golf Course Route - 30 Minutes - Combined East Vail/Golf Course Route (late evening) - 30 Minutes ' - Ford Park Weekend Service - 15 Minutes Recommended frequencies will need to be adjusted as ridership demands increase including peak ' hours, late night, and seasonal variations. Long-term: ' o Expand service to Chamonix Lane and Lions Ridge Loop pending future roadway improvements to these roadways. ' Down Vallev Bus Service The need does exist to provide transit service to/from Down Valley communities. Many Vail day skiers residing Down Valley utilize the transit system. In addition, a significant number of employees ' working in Vail also reside Down Valley who rely on the transit service. Eagle County has been providing Down Valley transit service until 1990 at which time it discontinued ' service. The Town of Avon then initiated continuing this service during the 1990-91 ski season with Town funds and other contributions. The Town of Vail has contributed $90,000 to maintain this service during the 1990-91 ski season. Amore permanent solution for Down Valley service will need to be established in the future in cooperation with both public agencies and private sector beneficiaries. 19 i r s ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U ~ ~ E Y ' G , REO $AND$IUNE ROAD VAIL VIEW DRIVE . Win ter service to this area r ~ provided via separate 1 ~SAND$IONE Sandstone Route as it currently exists. 1 .PEEN ~'.I IIP ~`I t :1 1 :1 ,11111 ('.RE11( 1-- :1 TIMBER SIMBA. ~1 RI GE RUN yAIL RUN BRE ANAWAV WESI RE.11 SANIIS ILINE ROAM '-------1' ;1 • PF.DEST RIAN OVERPASS • VAIL OAS $CHONE C '1 ~ ,SAFE WAY - --11--.. REII SANDSTONE SCHOOL ~ .n•RO'O ~ ~ . PONT AOE ~ IN7ERSTAT FW7EgS7A7 D INN AI VAIL wl •.I vnn. ''•N.f E 70 EAST E ~ wESi IO~f ROM V 1 C , MAL ••"•~t• VAIL PRUFE$SIONA ?/11;-, 1 ` 0 WESIHAVEN BUILDING 1 DRIVE ~ 1••• ,.•PO'O MAI iFRMORN CASCADE TO/FROM VTC ~ ••.•'•'O(r, / l VILLAGE 1 v ~ •PON? 1 •••5 f •CONF:E~••~ CNAMONI%-FRO:-AGE ~ D MAIL PLAZA • PTARMIGAN :1 MARRIOTT$ MARH IIE`.11RT fffrrr"www-FFI"~--- 1`~- $TRE AMSIDE 7f •1 •Y •'f. UNDERPASS f:~ ~ INTERMOUNTAIN .1~ r - .1 INTERMOUNTAIN P BRIDGE 1; .1 t; 1• l1 1• 1: /i: 'v'. Legend MEADOW CREEK Clockwise Route Counter-Clockwise Route Figure 7 Recommended West Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale f E L S 8 U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V 1 G 1 BOOTH FALLS FALLS OF VAIL VAIL MOUNTAIN ~ ' ~ SCHOOL BALD MOUNTAIN ROAD ~D~ L. _ ~ --f i T o v sr+oPS a eus BARN - _ INTERSTATE Tp WEST IrJ 1 tM~ In ~ e iU BAST ~ Qr? •••'1 ASPEN LANE _---5_FRON7AGE ROAD - . PITKIN CREEK PARK EAST VAIL TYROLEAN WREN ~ ~ ~ FORA PARK .VAIL EAST CONDOS APOLLO PARK BET TV FORD LUPINE~~ C LUMBINE/BIGHORN ROAD 1610 SUNBURN DRIVE • GOLF CLUB HOUSE BIGHURN ROAD ` ~ • ALPiI/E . GARDENS N I--' • STREAMSIDE CIRCLE NATURE r CENTER 1448 VAIL VAI L EY UHIVE ~'CER FIELD ~ ~ - i:L~LDEN PEAn ~ ~ • ~ ' P7 AHMIGAN ~ ~ JUNIPIERGORE- ROAD WEST r ? TARMIGAN ~ ~ VAIL RACQUET ROAp EAST TIMBER FALLS CLUB BIGHORN F' ~ PARK ~ ~ MOUNTAIN MEADOWS,,, i ~ ~ Legend East Vail Bus Route _ i./~ Golf Course Bus Route i ` MEADOW LANE EAST - - Ford Park Bus Route Figure 8 Recommended East Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale ~ I-70 ACCESS/FRONTAGE ROADS/LOCAL CIRCULATION ' Background Three freeway interchanges along Interstate 70 currently provide access to the Town. Two of the ' three, the West Vail interchange and the Main Vail interchange, are heavily utilized as they are located near activity centers and are oriented towards Down Valley motorists and day skier use. Both interchanges are characterized by close spacing of ramp intersections and frontage roads which together with excessive traffic demands cause excessive delays during peak conditions. ' The three interchanges are interconnected by a frontage road system which serves inter-community trip-making and which provides access to major parking areas. The segment of I-70 between the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges is paralleled by frontage roads on both sides while east of the Main Vail interchange I-70 is paralleled by a single frontage road which crosses from the south side to the north side and back to the south side at the East Vail interchange. ' Goals and Obiectives The following reflects the Town goals regarding access to I-70. o Provide additional capacity for crossing I-70 between West Vail and Main Vail. ' o Relieve existing congestion and accommodate future demand at the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges, especially at the ramp terminals and at nearby adjacent intersections on the frontage roads. ' o When possible, increase intersection spacing and reduce traffic conflict points at interchange areas. ' o Document the implications of alternative demand responsive traffic control options (traffic signals and/or manual officer control). ' o Enhance safety characteristics along the frontage road system by providing exclusive turn lanes at major intersections. o Provide improvements which emphasize pedestrian priorities in key local circulation areas and ' which separate conflicting travel modes. o Provide significant areas in the frontage road cross-section to develop meaningful aesthetic ' and landscape improvements. I-70 Crossing Location ' Providing additional capacity for crossing I-70 between West Vail and Main Vail is a major goal. The travel demand analysis indicated that approximately 40% of the traffic volume at the West Vail interchange and approximately 25% of the traffic volume at the main Vail interchange is crossing I-70 ' as opposed to entering or exiting the freeway. Therefore, a significant improvement in traffic operations and levels of service can be achieved at each interchange if an intermediate crossing of I-70 is provided. In addition, I-70 is currently crossed at-grade by a significant number of ' pedestrians. Thus, another crossing of the freeway will serve pedestrian needs as well. ' 22 ' The preferred location for an underpass has been identified near the Simba Run condominiums, though both frontage roads would need to be lowered. Since the I-70 interchanges currently serve ' as the only I-70 crossings between West Vail and Main Vail, providing this additional crossing will relieve the interchange areas and is an important consideration when evaluating interchange alternatives. The planning level cost estimate for constructing a new underpass in this location is ' approximately $2.0 million exclusive of any right-of-way major drainage requirements, and frontage road revisions. West Vail Interchange Alternatives Six interchange alternatives were considered for West Yail which included a single point diamond interchange, relocation of ramps and/or frontage roads, traffic control changes and turning ' restrictions. Four of the six alternatives were eliminated from consideration due to financial, operational and/or physical constraints. The remaining two alternatives are similar in that they entail relocating the west leg of the north frontage road between Wendy's and the Texaco service station to ' intersect Chamonix Road to the north. The only difference between the remaining two alternatives is the specific location of the westbound on-ramp at Chamonix Road. A revised traffic control scheme is inherent in this configuration. The relocated North Frontage Road would be stop sign controlled at Chamonix Road while the reconfigured intersection of Chamonix/North Frontage Road, ' and westbound entrance ramp to I-70 would operate as a 3-way stop controlled intersection. On the south side of the interchange, the option to relocate the eastbound on-ramp is recommended. ' Intersection capacity analyses were conducted to determine the impact of relocating this on-ramp as well as the proposed improvements along the north side of the interchange. Results are shown as a volume-to-capacity ratio, which compares peak hour traffic volumes to the capacity of the roadway, and are shown in Table 2. These analyses for the proposed modifications reflect turning lane ' additions as shown in Figure 9. These modifications will require the approval of the Colorado Department of Highways and the ' Federal Highway Administration in view of the typical geometries. Table 2 ' West Vail Traffic Volume-to-Capacity Summary Future Demand/ ' Existing Future (1) Existing Future Demand/ Demand/ Network w/ Demand/ Existing Existing Underpass Future ' Intersection Network ?~igtw~rk Qnly Network Chamonix/N. Frontage Road 1.41 1.67 1.41 (2) 1.03 (2) ' Chamonix/S. Frontage Road 1.20 1.42 1.18 0.87 (1) Future demand is based upon approved ski area expansion levels. ' (2) Demand responsive traffic control (traffic signal or manual control). ' 23 F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E Y I G 1 ~ ~I wendys Texaco Demand responsive ' control will be required in the future. ~ N. Frontage Rd. ~ ' - ~ 11' 1 1 0 r U i J S. Frontage Rd. -1 ~ J r Legend ~ Lane /or Indicated Movement ' i Stop Sign ' Figure 9 Recommended West Vail Interchange Improvements Not to Scale ' / 24 ' West Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities ' Given the results in Table 2, the following is recommended for the West Vail interchange. o As a first priority, construct an I-70 underpass in the vicinity of Simba Run connecting the ' North and South Frontage Roads. o Realign the west leg of the North Frontage Road between Wendy's and the Texaco service ' station forming two "T" intersections with Chamonix Road. o Realign the westbound on-ramp to line up with the east leg of the North Frontage Road. ' o Realign the eastbound ramp such that access to it is via the South Frontage Road. o Demand responsive control will be required at the Southern "T" intersection during peak periods. o Add exclusive turn lanes at all intersections as shown in Figure 9. ' Construction costs for the West Vail improvements as shown in Figure 9 are estimated to be approximately $225,000 plus engineering and contingencies. ' Main Vail Interchange Alternatives Eight alternatives were considered at the Main Vail interchange which consisted of closing Vail Road, a single-point diamond interchange, variations of ramp modifications and additions, and an additional nearby I-70 underpass. Five of the alternatives were eliminated from further consideration due to adverse impacts on the 4-way stop intersection or forcing traffic through pedestrian corridors. ' Three interchange alternatives were then analyzed in more detail which are described as follows: o New exit/entry to eastbound I-70 near the VA shops and only right turns would be allowed ' at the eastbound Main Vail ramp onto westbound South Frontage Road. o North Frontage Road would be severed from the interchange and extended easterly ' connecting with Vail Valley Road via a new I-70 underpass. o The east ramps would be relocated to the existing underpass located near Booth Falls creating an elongated split diamond or two half diamond interchanges. Table 3 shows the volume-to-capacity ratios at key intersections for each alternative. It can be seen that the Booth Falls elongated split diamond would result in the best overall intersection operations. ' Table 4 summarizes the other key issues such as right-of-way, institutional approvals, physical impacts and construction costs. Taking all these issues into account it was determined that the Booth Falls split diamond alternative was the best solution as shown in Figure 10. 25 Table 3 Main Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary Future Demand on Future Existing Future Existing Future Demand Future Demand/ Demand/ Network w/ Demand/ Vail Valley Demand/ Existing Existing Underpass VA Shops Connection/ Booth Falls intersection Netwgrk Netwgrk Onlv Ramps Underpass Solit Diamond Vail Road/North Ramps (Left Turns) 1.16 1.33 1.21 1.21 0.96 0.77 (I ) Vail Road/South Frontage Road/ 0.94 (2) 1.11 (2) 1.09 (2) 0.90 (2) 1.02 (2) 0.92 (2) South Ramps South Frontage Road/VA Shops Area - - - 0.89 (2) - - South Frontage Road/Nail Valley Drive 1.14 1.26 1.26 0.74 (2) (3) 0.76 (2) (3) 0.85 (2) (3) (1) All way stop control along East Frontage Road/westbound off-ramp intersection near Booth Falls. N (2) Demand responsive traffic control required (manual control or traffic signal). (3) Intersection modification required (lower South Frontage Road). ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Table 4 Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives Planning Alternative/Phase R/W implications Anbrovals Reouired Physical implications Level Cost (11 VA Shops Ramps R/W required in the VA shops I-70 access approval is New intersection on SFR at VA $1.2M area. required, has been pre- shops with restricted movements at viously granted, and is Vail Road and EB exit ramp. still valid. Approval may Modifications at Main Vail be conditioned on the interchange. installation of traffic signal equipment. Vail Valley R/W required along with No I-70 access approval Retaining walls required for $2.OM Connection/ slope easements north of required for NFR extension. portions of NFR extension of I-70. Underpass I-70. Standard review of I-70 Walls would be approximately bridge construction is 40-feet in height with approxi- required. mately 20-feet above the grade of I-70. Booth Falls Minimal or no R/W required I-70 access approval Minor relocations of EFR north of $O.SM Split Diamond at Booth Falls. required for Booth Falls. I-70 and local street access may Currently FHWA policy be needed at Booth Falls. prohibits half diamonds. (1) Costs do not include land acquistion nor improvements to the frontage roads beyond the interchange area. F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 North Frontage Road Remove Ramps 2 I-70 N I l ~ ~ South Frontage Road m 0 o= Figure 10 Recommended Main Vail Interchange Improvements Not to Scale ' Main Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities The following are recommendations regarding the Main Vail interchange to relieve traffic congestion prioritized by short-term and long term actions. ' Short-Term: o As a first priority, construct an I-70 underpass in the vicinity of Simba Run connecting the ' North and South Frontage Roads. o Conduct a controlled test in which the east Main Vail ramps would be closed and sign easterly oriented traffic to use the East Vail interchange. Results of this will indicate how well the Long-range solution will work. Long-Term: o Relocate the east ramps to the Booth Falls underpass. The westbound off-ramp/East Frontage Road intersection will require all-way stop traffic control. o Continue to manually control the 4-way stop intersection during peak periods or install traffic signals. ' o Depress and modify the South Frontage Road in the vicinity of Vail Valley Drive and manually control the intersection during peak hours or install a traffic signal. ' o Retain as possible future options, the extension of the North Frontage Road under I-70 to connect with Vail Valley Drive, and the addition of new ramps to I-70 in the VA shops area. o Traffic signal control versus manual control at high volume intersections remains an issue. In the future some form of demand responsive control will be required on the South Frontage Road at Vail Road and at Vail Valley Drive even if the east ramps of the Main Vail interchange are relocated. ' Frontage Road Svstem ' The modifications recommended for the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges will require that certain modifications be made to the I-70 frontage roads serving these interchanges. In addition, existing traffic counts and anticipated future travel demand levels will require that several improvements be implemented in order to maximize the efficiency of the existing street system. The major objectives of the frontage road improvement recommendations include: ' o Provision of exclusive and separated areas for bicycle and pedestrian use to enhance the users experience and to improve safety. ' o Provision of significant landscape areas and user amenities along the entire length of the frontage road system. o Provision of additional crossing capacity of I-70 (as discussed previously) in order to relieve traffic congestion at the West Vail and Main Vail interchange areas. ' 29 o Provision of turn lanes (primarily left turn lanes) to reduce congestion and to improve safety at critical intersections serving the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges as well as at major access points to LionsHead and Vail Village. Figure 11 documents the conceptual improvement plan for the I-70 frontage roads. Major elements ' of the concept plan include: o On-street, 6-foot bike paths are provided along the entire frontage road system throughout ' the Town of Vail. o New landscaped areas and center turn lanes are recommended to occur along approximately 4.5 miles of the frontage roads. ' o Special safety improvements and exclusive left turn lanes are recommended for 23 intersections; 19 of these intersections currently have no such provisions. Upon adoption of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, 50-scale functional drawings will be prepared which will document specific locations and dimensions for implementing the Frontage Road Concept Plan. Until these more detailed drawings are completed, the planning level cost estimate for implementing ' the plan is approximately $4.5 to $5.0 million. Senaration of Conflictin¢ Travel Modes The Town of Vail is characterized by an extensive system of multi-modal transportation facilities including pedestrian-only areas, bicycle paths, shuttle transit system, and numerous recreational trails of all types. In order to fully implement a total system of separated facilities for each of these various user groups requires that: o Sufficient width and right-of-way be made available to adequately serve each travel mode. o Control points be defined which maintain, and where necessary, enforce the desired degree of separation among modes. o Where joint use of a right-of-way by more than one travel mode is unavoidable, proper delineation, adequate signing, and physical control elements must be provided. ' These principles are especially applicable in the core area of Vail which generally extends from LionsHead to Golden Peak. This area is served by the In-Town Shuttle and is the area where pedestrian activity is highest, auto access to private properties occurs, and goods delivery by truck is significant. To provide basis for future improvements geared toward enhancing the desired pedestrian ' environment, a conceptual framework plan has been prepared for the core area as shown in Figure 12. Three key elements of the core area concept are described below. ' Pedestrianization and pedestrian priority are proposed to occur along significant portions of East Meadow Drive and West Meadow Drive from west of the library to the VTC. Separation of pedestrian areas from the In-Town Shuttle consist of delineated walkways and busways with improved geometrics and widening in constricted locations. The area lying easterly of Vail Road along East ' Meadow Drive will require approximately 30 feet of width to properly implement. A special design analysis is currently underway to specifically identify pedestrian improvements on 20-scale drawings. 30 ' FELSBUAG ' MOLT & U l l E V I G I 0 c ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ `a ' m m ~ ro ~ ~ W m ~ m ~ y ° o r m ro ° o m ° ~ ~ r m ~ m y ~ m J ro D ° ~ ~Y o m o ' _ v V O ro ` J y 1 Q ? j e E m ~ o o{? ~ Ci U p a m ~ m • O v ~ h ~ ~ t y ~ ~ U m 0~ 0~ J v ro .~~'l.. 0 3 2 m m ' N ~ • m m m ~ C ~ • 0 3 ~ E ~ • • m ~ m A Bi ~i m ~ v`) y \jQl' ~ 9hor ' 8i•? o _ ro Qp~ 2 n9a ~~`~~••0y~ m m ]eV m P ~ a~ ~ ~ ¢ D ~~°ca4g\s9 Pa 3 ~ ,r yo Legend ' 4-Thru Lanes, Center Left Turn Lane or Landscaping, 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides 2-Thru Lanes, Center Left Turn Lane or Landscaping, 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides ' 2-Thru Lanes, 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides • Provide Exclusive Left Turn Lanes ' ~ ~ Figure 11 Frontage Road Concept Plan ' North / 31 r ¦i¦ r ~ ~ r rl~ ~ ¦¦s ~ w r s w~ r• F E L S B U R G MOLT b U L L E V I G 1 .Pedestrian Bridge ~ ,,aa ~ ~ (1V• Parking Structure ~ 0 ~ ` 5 • Ice Arena l <o~~ag pd• ¦ ¦ -w1 ` gage Lionshead Mall Library ¦ ¦ Hospital I~ V`~•~to~ Meado P wS k~'Y. N I ` Ford Park See also Goods , Delivery Plan ~ ~ _ ~ ~ apt Val12Y • ¦ Athletic FI91d Golden Peak Legend uunnnumm~ Pedestrian Priority Area Potential 1-Way Auto Route ~ Control Points Figure 12 V ~ Core Area Concept Plan North / ' Control points will remain necessary to insure that the core area system functions properly. It is proposed that the existing Check Point Charlie be relocated southerly to Willow Road to reduce the ' volume of traffic on Willow Bridge Road exiting Vail Village and to insure that the goods delivery is adequately controlled. A second control point is also being evaluated as a part of the special pedestrian area design analysis. This control point, if needed, would be located on Village Center ' Road between the frontage road and East Meadow Drive. The third element of the core area concept plan consists of a potential long-range revision of traffic ~ flow on Vail Valley Drive from the frontage road past Golden Peak and to the Ford Park area. To implement the concept, a new connection is required between Vail Valley Drive and the frontage road including a bridge across Gore Creek. Further analysis is required to determine the physical and financial implications of constructing this connection. However, if such a connection should prove to be feasible and politically acceptable, Vail Valley Drive could be converted to one-way traffic flow to the east. The potential advantages of this revised circulation pattern include: ' o Roadway widths to accommodate auto traffic could be reduced if traffic flow was in one direction only. o The width gained from the conversion to one-way traffic flow could be used for a separated bicycle/pedestrian path thereby eliminating or minimizing the need for acquiring additional right-of-way. ' o Auto traffic would be directed away from the core area, away from the 4-way stop intersection on Vail Road, and toward the East Vail interchange; all of which are historic Town objectives. ' o The existing grade up Vail Valley Drive to the frontage road would no longer be an issue and the non-standard traffic control at this intersection could be corrected. ' o Preliminary estimates of volume to capacity ratios indicate that the intersection of Vail Valley Drive and the frontage road would be less than 0.35 and the new intersection created at Ford Park and the frontage road would be less than 0.60; both of which result in excellent traffic ' operations. This concept would require extensive environmental analysis, preliminary engineering analysis, and extensive public review prior to being implemented. However, the concept has sufficient merit to warrant further investigation. l ' 33 ' TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE 0 The Town of Vail has adopted a Recreation Trail Master Plan' which specifies a broad range of trail types designed for various user groups. In addition, the trails plan locates certain trail types along the frontage roads and several Town streets. The trails inventory also identifies problem areas which ' includes areas that are congested, areas where pedestrian and non-pedestrian uses should be separated, and areas where geometric deficiencies exist. As such, several additional off-road "bypass" trails were recommended along the Valley and are included in the Implementation Plan as illustrated in Figures 13 and 14. Because of the strong community support for a separated trail from Vail Pass to Dowd Junction and the concern with bike traffic through the West Vail interchange, the following areas have been identified as important additions to the Recreation Trail Master Plan in order to ultimately provide a fully separated system. One section of bike trail would begin just south of the LionsHead skier bridge and would traverse easterly south of Gore Creek crossing Beaver Dam Road near Vail Road and continuing alongside and just south of Vail Road until meeting with the existing trail just south of the Lodge Tower South. Another section of bike trail would be located south of the golf clubhouse and would begin off of Ptarmigan Road extending east to the end of Sunburst Drive where it would meet the existing off- street trail. These new sections of trail would relieve Meadow Drive and Vail Valley Drive of bicycle ' traffic. There are also several shorter sections of trail which should be constructed to provide better continuity without having to continually cross Gore Creek or use the Frontage Road. Three such ' sections are located in East Vail and one is located just west of Donovan Park to Stephen`s Park. Meadow Drive and Vail Valley Drive currently exhibit safety problems and are two priority areas ' requiring improvement. These issues are being addressed in the special design analysis currently underway in the Village area. ' The construction costs of these additional trails is estimated to be in the range of $1,000,000. The feasibility of implementing these improvements will be evaluated in detail as a part of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan and the Main Vail Trails Feasibility Study. ' Recreation Trail Master Plan, May, 1988, Winston Associates. ' 34 ' FELSBURG ' IIOIT b U L L E V I G See Figure 14 for Detail of Central Vail ' Liona Head Red Sandafone parking Garage Pedestrian Bridge Lions Heed Mell Transportation ' / / Central Vail Exit Center East Vail Exit r Ford Perk - / • ~ • phi t~~ Donovan Park . \ ~ qeY ' Q~0 ' ;1 Ice Arena tit ..~.::r•~° s~ Buffer Creek Park and Library ~•••J~ ++(iolt Clubbouee ^ ~ ~0 Vail Village 'r;'•. 0~• Gold Penk ew 3ki Base Facilities pce Athletic CIS\`, West Veil Exit ~e Fields A \l ~ ~Go ao ifs or ~r I • - ~ ' A~: /r+. ,r . ' y•` Legend Frontage Road Bike/Pedestrian Lanes On-Street Trail Oft Street Trail ' Pedestrian Path Gore Creek New Trai! Segments for Improved Off-Street Continuity 1 Figure 13 Proposed Vai! Recreation Trails Implementation Plan Not. to Scale 35 - ~Sa~~~ ~ ` ,~.T ~`E~~G Pedps~rlar~.~3r.¦...r...rr.rrrr.rrrrrrrr• r r ....err •.r•rrr S«UCt~uA rrrrrrrrrr•• , • ..:fir •rr• parklnp AT81~ •rrr ' .~1Cl8 •rrrrrrr~rrrrrrr rrurr~r•rrrrC/rrrrr~urrarrrr••rrr•urrrrrrrr r~rrrrr rsrrrrrr • : ' ' ~ sheadM 'n' 1 9 ~ ~ for Ps k j ~ , • ~ - : . ? ` S the 6 ' • t;'%~~ ~ ' i ~ •r. ~e9end ad Bike/Pedestrian La ta9e R° rrrrr Fron - pn-Street Trail - 1~ Off Street Trail :~1~ F~g~re Pedestrian Path .t ntatl0n Phan -Gore Creek Street C°ntinu~ v its ImP~eme imPrOyed pff reat1On Tra ~-70 ~ 1/aii Rey e,r„ Trait Segrrients for Gentra N rv