The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1991-12-03 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1991 2:00 PM REVISED AGENDA 1. Report by Fred Ammer on Pepi's Soccer Club Trip to Europe. 2. Report by Frank Johnson on Special Events Task Force. 3. Additional Discussion on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1991, an ordinance amending Title 17 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 17.17 -School Site Dedications; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 4. Discussion of Master Transportation and Parking Plan Final Draft. 5. Discussion of Council Meeting Format. 6. Information Update. 7. Council Reports. 8. Other. 9. Adjournment. C:~AGENDA.WS ~ - R ~ . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1991 2:00 PM AGENDA 1. Report by Fred Ammer on Pepi's Soccer Club Trip to Europe. 2. Report by Frank Johnson on Special Events Task Force. 3. Additional Discussion on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1991, an ordinance amending Title 17 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 17.17 -School Site Dedications; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 4. Discussion of Master Transportation and Parking Plan Final Draft. iscussion of Cou eeting Format. 6. Information Update. , ~.Q Other. Adjournment. 0~ -~~\~~~\\\```~~\`wµ` .3 Il Z ~a ~ ~ C:IAGENDA.WS ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1991 2:00 PM AGENDA 1. Report by Fred Ammer on Pepi's Soccer Club Trip to Europe. 2. Report by Frank Johnson on Special Events Task Force. 3. Additional Discussion on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1991, an ordinance amending Title 17 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 17.17 -School Site Dedications; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 4. Discussion of Master Transportation and Parking Plan Final Draft. 5. Discussion of Council Meeting Format. 6. Information Update. 7. Other. 8. Adjournment. C:~AGENDA.WS VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1991 2:00 PM REVISED EXPANDED AGENDA 2:00 p.m. 1. Report on Pepi's Soccer Club trip to Europe. Fred Ammer Backaround Rationale: Fred Ammer has requested a few minutes of Council's time to present a brief video highlighting the soccer club's trip to Europe this fall. At the time, the group was awarded the following items, i.e. $500.00 cash and Vail-related mementos including 3 TOV flags @ $53.00 each ($159.00), 12 Kate Ride books Cad $9.00 each ($108.00), 100 TOV pins $3.00 each ($300.00). Jim Gibson had requested Fred Ammer return to let Council know how the trip had gone. 2:10 p.m. 2. Report on Special Events Task Force. Frank Johnson 2:20 p.m. 3. Additional discussion on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1991, an Larry Eskwith ordinance amending Title 17 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 17.17 -School Site Dedications; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Discuss fee in lieu of the dedication of land for school sites and direct staff. Backaround Rationale: Council requested staff bring back this ordinance for review to determine under what circumstances the fee should be paid. 2:35 p.m. 4. Discussion of Master Transportation and Parking Plan Final Draft Greg Hall as adopted by the Planning and Environmental Commission, 6-0, on November 25, 1991. Action Requested of Council: Staff would like to gain the Council's concerns and comments regarding the final draft of the Master Transportation and Parking Plan. The PEC Commissioner's conditions of approval will also be passed on to the Council. Backaround Rationale: The Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee, PEC, Town Council, and staff have been working on the Master Transportation and Parking Plan for over two years. The plan covers Village loading, parking, Town bus system, I-70 Access/Frontage Roads, and recreation and pedestrian improvements. Through the numerous input sessions held with the public, PEC, and Town Council, staff has prepared this final draft for the plan. 1 Staff Recommendation: Provide staff with input for the final draft of the Master Transportation Plan. Consider the PEC Commissioner's conditions and any additional public input. Direct staff to prepare the final draft to be considered for Adoption by Resolution at the December 17, 1991 regular evening meeting. 4:35 p.m. 5. Discussion of Council meeting format. Backaround Rationale: Mayor Osterfoss requested this item be discussed. See enclosed material. 4:50 p.m. 6. Information Update. 7. Council Reports. 8. Other. 9. Adjournment. C:WGENDA.WSE 2 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1991 2:Oa PM , EXPANDED AGENDA 2:00 p.m. 1. Report on Pepi's Soccer Club trip to Europe. Fred Ammer Backaround Rationale: Fred Ammer has requested a few minutes of Council's time to present a brief video highlighting the soccer club's trip to Europe this fall. At the time, the group was awarded the following items, i.e. $500.00 cash and Vail-related mementos including 3 TOV flags @ $53.00 each ($159.00), 12 Kate Ride books @ $9.00 each ($108.00), 100 TOV pins @ $3.00 each ($300.00). Jim Gibson had requested Fred Ammer return to let Council know how the trip had gone. 2:10 p.m. 2. Report on Special Events Task Force. Frank Johnson 2:20 p.m. 3. Additional discussion on Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1991, an Larry Eskwith ordinance amending Title 17 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 17.17 -School Site Dedications; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Reauested of Council: Discuss fee in lieu of the dedication of land for school sites and direct staff. Backaround Rationale: Council requested staff bring back this ordinance for review to determine under what circumstances the fee should be paid. 2:35 p.m. 4. Discussion of Master Transportation and Parking Plan Final Draft Greg Hall as adopted by the Planning and Environmental Commission, 6-0, on November 25, 1991. Action Requested of Council: Staff would like to gain the Council's concerns and comments regarding the final draft of the Master Transportation and Parking Plan. The PEC Commissioner's conditions of approval will also be passed on to 'the Council. Backaround Rationale: The Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee, PEC, Town Council, and staff have been working on the Master Transportation and Parking Plan for over two years. The plan covers Village loading, parking, Town bus system, I-70 Access/Frontage Roads, and recreation and pedestrian improvements. Through the numerous input sessions held with the public, PEC, and Town Council, staff has prepared this final draft for the plan. 1 Staff Recommendation: Provide staff with input for the final draft of the Master Transportation Plan. Consider the PEC Commissioner's conditions and any additional public input. Direct staff to prepare the final draft to be considered for Adoption by Resolution at the December 17, 1991 regular evening meeting. 4:35 p.m. 5. Discussion of Council meeting format. Backaround Rationale: Mayor Osterfoss requested this item be discussed. See enclosed material. 4:50 p.m. 6. Information Update. 7. Other. 8. Adjournment. C:IAGENDA.WSE 2 y. ORDINANCE N0. 1 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TOWN OF VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 17.17 SCHOOL SITE DEDICATIONS; AND SETTING, FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS the Town Council of the Town of Vail is of the opinion that the subdivider of land in each major residential subdivision or portion of a major subdivision which is intended for residential use shall allocate and convey sites and land areas for schools when such are reasonably necessary to serve the proposed subdivision and future residents thereof; NOW THEREFORE be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: ' Section 1. Title 17 of the Town of Va~:l Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 17.17, Sc!~ool Site Dedications, to read as follows: 17.17.010 PURPOSE It is hereby declared t:. be the policy of the'Town that whenever there is a major subdivision, which is subdivided for• residential rrse or partial residential use, the owner or tl~e land shall pro~,~ide land for school needs generated by the proposed residential use. It is the purpose of this chapter to require the dedication of land or the payment of fees in lieu thereof or both to fulfill such needs. Section 17.17.020. School land dedication or cash in lieu thereof. The subdivider of land iri each residential major subdivision or portion of the subdivision which is intended for residential use, shall allocate and convey sites in land areas for schools when s~.ich are reasonably necessary to serve the proposed subdivision and future residents thereof, by the application of the formulas set forth below: Single family and duplex or primary secondary. Nr~mber of units x .014495 = dedication requirement in acres. Multi-family. Nr~mber of units x .002676 = dedication requirement in acres. Wtien land is dedicated for the purpose of providing a school site, it shall be that which is useable by the Eagle County School District for such purpose, and shall be maintained by the School District in a reasonable manner until I developed. Said land shall be held by the Town of Uail for the School District until required by the School District. In the event that the School District determines subsequent to dedication that the dedicated school site is not reasonably necessary, the Town Council may, at the request of the School District, sell the land. When sites and 1 and areas for school s are not reasonably necessary to serve the proposed subdivision and future residents thereof, the Town Council, with recommendations from the School District and other affected entities, shall require, in lieu of such conveyance of land, the payment in cash by the subdivider of a amount not to exceed the full market value of such sites and land areas for schools. The full market value shall mean the current market value of unimproved land. This value shall be set annually by the Town Council on an acre basis with recommendations from the School District. The same value per acre shall be used throughout the town. If the subdivider does not agree with the val~~e per acre, the subdivider may submit the report by a qualified appraiser who is M.A.I. designated, which establishes a new value. The Town Council shall review the report and determine if the value is reasonable. Based upon their review, the Town Council will determine the value of such land. Wren money in lieu of land is required or when monies have been paid to the Town Cou~icil from the sale of such dedicated sites for schools, it shall be held by the Town Council for the acquisition of ,reasonably necessary sites for the construction of school facilities, for the construction of employee housing required by tt~e school district, far the purchase of employee housing units for the school district, or for the development of such sites. If housing units are purchased, a deed restriction restricting their use to school district employee housing shall be required and ownership shall remain in the name of the School District. A subdivision school dedication shall apply only once to the same land area. Dedication shall not be required of re-subdivisions of the same land on a dedication that has previously been made. Section 17.17.030. Town Exempted. The Town of Uail is specifically exempted from the requirements of this chapter 17.17. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not -2- affect the validity 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 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants hereof. Section 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision 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 section commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or' repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall riot revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. Repealar. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part hereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING THIS T9th day of February , 1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of February 19 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Orered published in full this 19th day of February 1991. \,~J~ J J oZ~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pan~<:1 a A. Brandmeyer, Town C1 erk INTRODUCED, READ, APdD APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED by title only this 5th day of Marcli 1991. ~ ~~2~y J J o2~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Towh Clerk -3- ~ c~~~ ~1 VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Pre ared for. P Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 1 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 5299 DTC Boulevard, Suite 400 Englewood, Colorado 801 I 1 (303)721-1440 In Association with TDA Colorado, Inc. FHU Reference No. 89-091 November 25, 1991 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Transportation Master Plan is the result of the participation and active involvement of numerous citizens, elected officials, volunteer groups, and Town staff. TOWN COUNCIL Kent Rose, Mayor Thomas Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Lynn Fritzlen Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Robert Levine Peggy Osterfoss PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Chuck Crist Diana Donovan Connie Knight Ludwig Kurz Kathy Langenwalter Jim Shearer Gena Whitten DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Ned Gwathmey Patricia Herrington Sherry Dorward George Lamb PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Lynn Fritzlen Town Council Merv Lapin Town Council Peggy Osterfoss Town Council Chuck Crist Planning and Environmental Commission Kathy Langenwalter Planning and Environmental Commission Diana Donovan Planning and Environmental Commission Dave Gorsuch Citizen Representative Lee Hollis Citizen Representative James Johnson, Jr. Citizen Representative Kevin Clair Citizen Representative C. Lee Rimel Citizen Representative Joe Macy Vail Associates Jim Fritze Eagle County Rich Perske Colorado Department of Transportation Bill Wood U.S. Forest Service i~ TOWN STAFF Rondall Phillips Town Manager Ken Hughey Assistant Town Manager Kristan Pritz Community Development, Director Mike Mollica Community Development Steve Barwick Budget Officer Greg Hall Public Works Mike Rose Public Works Jim Marshall Public Works 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Overview 1 Purpose of the Transportation Plan 1 Transportation Planning Process : 2 Relationship to Regional Transportation Needs 4 VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERIES 5 Description of Existing Conditions : : 5 Goals and Objectives 9 Characteristics of Delivery Systems 9 Alternatives 10 First Level Evaluation 11 Second Level Evaluation 14 Recommendations/Priorities 24 PARKING 27 Background 27 Goals and Objectives 31 Demand Management Options 31 Future Parking Supply Requirements 34 Parking Rate Structure : 35 Special Parking Provisions 37 TOWN BUS SYS'T'EM 38 In-Town Shuttle 38 Current Operation 38 Goals and Objectives 40 Capacity Improvement Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 40 At-Grade High Capacity Bus System , , , . , , , , , 42 Optimal Monorail vs. Special Shuttle Bus 44 In-Town Shuttle Recommendations/Priorities 45 OUTLYING BUS SYSTEM 48 Goals and Objectives 48 Route Structure Modifications 48 Route Coverage Expansion Options 49 Service Frequency Improvement Needs 49 Recommendations/Priorities 49 Down Valley Bus Service 52 I-70 ACCESS 53 Background 53 Goals and Objectives 54 I-70 Crossing Capacity 54 West Vail Interchange Alternatives 55 West Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities 59 Main Vail Interchange Alternatives 61 Main Vail Interchange RecommendationsJPriorities 66 Frontage Road System 70 Separation of Conflicting Travel Modes 72 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Paae TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE 75 IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS...•.....••....•••...•......•.•.....,•...• 79 Prioritization 79 Funding 82 PLAN MONITORING AND UPDATING 83 APPENDICES i LIST OF FIGURES Page 1. Existing Goods Delivery System 6 ntralization Site 15 2. Christiania Lot Ce 3. Garden of the Gods Centralization Site 16 4, Golden Peak Centralization Site 18 S. Vail Road Centralization Site . . 19 6. Recommended Goods Delivery System 25 7. Existing Parking Supply/Demand Relationships 28 1 8. Parking SupplyjDemand Relationships 30 9. In-Town Shuttle Bus Route 39 10. In-Town Shuttle Directional Peak Hour Demand 41 11. Alternative In-Town Shuttle Systems 43 12. Golden Peak Area Concept Plan 47 13. Recommended West Vail Bus Routes 50 14. Recommended East Vail Bus Routes 51 I5. Recommended West Vail Interchange Improvements 60 16. Recommended Main Vail Interchange Improvements 69 17. Frontage Road Concept Plan 71 ' 18. Core Area Concept Plan 73 19A. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 76 19B. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 77 19C. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 78 t LIST OF TABLES Page 1. Floor Areas of Primary Truck Trip Generators . 7 2. Peak Season Delivery and Service Volumes 8 3. Summary Evaluation of Product Delivery Options 22-23 4. Existing Parking Supply 27 S. SAOT by Yalues for Ski Area Expansion 29 6. Summary Characteristics of Demand Management Options 32 7. Projected Overflow Parking Summary 33 8. In-Town Shuttle Comparison 4b 9. West Vail Interchange Design Alternatives 56-57 10. West Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary S9 11. Main Vail Interchange Concept Alternatives 62 12, Main Vail Interchange Design Alternatives 63-64 13. Main Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary 6S 14, Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives 6? 1 S. Main Vail Interchange Alternative Ranking 68 16. Genralized Plan Priorities 80-81 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW Vail has established itself as one of Colorado's most unique and successful communities. Its geographic location, physical setting, and development history have all contributed to the Town's current character and international recognition. An important contributing factor in Vail's growth and universal appeal is its planning philosophy within which multi-modal transportation planning, with a pedestrian emphasis, has been a key element. This is evidenced by: o Vail's transit system is one of the most successful and innovative systems in Colorado consisting of a high quality core area shuttle complimented by an extensive outlying bus system. o Vail continues to expand upon an extensive trail system which provides both transportation service and recreational opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle users. o The Town provides large, close-in parking facilities to intercept automobile traffic and to provide immediate accessibility to exclusive busways and walkways to its base pedestrian villages. o The Town continues to emphasize vehicular roadways separated from pedestrian facilities and shuttle bus routes which provide easy access between I-70 and major visitor parking facilities. The Transportation Master Plan is intended to continue and expand upon this historical, multi-modal philosophy. Together with other planning activities (e.g. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Streetscape Master Plan, Urban Design Guide Plan, Vail Village Master Plan, Recreational Trails Plan, Signage Plan, etc.), the Transportation Master Plan will focus upon all travel modes to develop along-range implementation program to assure Vail's continued position as one of the world's premier resorts. PURPOSE OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Transportation Master Plan is one part of an overall strategy to develop a Comprehensive Plan for Vail. As indicated in the foregoing, many portions of the Comprehensive Plan have been completed which will be further clarified with the addition of the transportation elements. The approved expansion of Vail Mountain by the United States Forest Service in 1986 brings with it new opportunities as well as new challenges for accommodating increased skier visits while maintaining and enhancing the Town's unique character. Vail's planned growth and the associated increases in travel demand requires that the existing transportation system be evaluated for available capacity, expansion needs, and new transportation alternatives to reduce peoples reliance on private automobiles to meet their transportation goals. The Transportation Master Plan is to provide guidance to the Town's decision-makers in developing a coordinated approach to implementing transportation improvements. It will allow the Town to resolve, monitor, and accommodate the growth the Town desires while preserving those characteristics which have made Vail a leader in transportation planning. 1 1 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS The Transportation Master Plan has been developed under the direction and guidance of the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee. Several activities were conducted throughout the course of the study to obtain input, identify issues, and define potential solutions. A series of meetings with individuals and small groups were initially held with a broad cross-section of citizens and community leaders. This input, which is documented in a separate Technical Appendix Report, was summarized into major areas of concern for subsequent analysis. Two broad areas of transportation issues were initially identified: o Transportation problems and potential solutions which are within the Town of Vail's jurisdiction or which can be directly influenced andjor controlled by the Town of Vail. o Transportation problems and potential solutions which are outside the Town's jurisdiction ar probable funding capacity or which can only be partially influenced by Town initiatives. Within each .of these two broad areas, the transportation problems and potential solutions can be grouped into eight distinct categories as listed below. o Transportation Issues within Vail's Jurisdiction - Regional access to Vail as it relates to the I-70 interchanges, new or modified access to I-70 interchanges, new or modified access to I-74, and the frontage roads. - Parking provisions within Vail relating to parking supply deficiencies, improved control of the operation of Vail's parking supply, and the modifications of the pricing of Vail's parking supply by user group. - Transit services provided by Vail including improvements and modifications to both the In-Town Shuttle and the outlying routes. - Delivery and service vehicle modifications desired or needed primarily within Vail Village to reduce congestion and to improve upon a wide variety of pedestrian and vehicular conflicts. - Pedestrian and bicycle facility enhancements needed to expand and improve the existing systems. o Transportation Issues External to Vail's Jurisdiction - Regional transit services extending to Denver and the Front Range as well as to down valley communities as far as Eagle and the Eagle County Airport. - Remote parking facilities including Dowd Junction and Vail Pass, - Major modifications to I-70 such as depressing the facility through all or portions of Vail. 2 Because the Transportation Master Plan is under the jurisdiction of the Town of Vail and must be largely implemented by the Town (including inter-agency coordination when necessary), the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee determined that the planning process should focus on those issues which the Town could control or over which the Town could exert significant influence. Thus, the transportation analysis addresses the following topics: o Vail Village Goods Delivery o Public Parking Facilities and Operation o Transit System Operation o I-?0 Access/Frontage Road System o Recreation Trails Interface To obtain additional input on these topic areas, the Town included these items in the 1990 Citizen Survey to further define citizen concerns and to identify potential alternatives and solutions. The complete results of this survey are also contained in the Technical Appendix Report. Some of the more frequently mentioned suggestions within each topic area included the following: o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve Traffic Conditions on Vail's Local Streets - Restrict or limit cars in Vail's major activity centers. Improve traffic control methods utilizing more personnel or equipment. Restructure truck deliveries in Town. - Improve overall signage. 1 o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve Parking Conditions in Vail - Continue free outlying parking. = Build an additional parking structure. Develop shoulders on frontage roads for additional parking. o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve Transit and Bus Service - Provide frequent summer service to East Vaii, West Vail, and the golf course. - Increase peak period bus service and late night service. - Implement a monorail in the long term future. o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve I-70 Access and Frontage Road Operations - Install traffic lights; increase traffic control personnel. - Control speeding. = Plant additional trees to buffer highway noise. Provide bike and walk path along frontage roads. - Build interchange with I-70 in Lionshead area. - Widen the frontage roads to provide parking. 3 o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve Recreation Trails (Bicycle and Pedestrian) - Provide aValley-wide bike path (Vail Pass to Edwards) - Provide separate bike paths and pedestrian paths. = Provide a walking path between Vail Village and Lionshead. Extend existing bike paths and add new bike paths. - Improve signing and enforce existing rules and regulations. Based upon this broad-based input the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee focused upon the specific analyses required to address each topic area. This included detailed quantitative evaluations, analysis of feasible alternatives, and short-range and long-range recommendations developed over aone-year planning period. The final recommendations were then included in the 1991 Citizen Survey to obtain further input on the specific recommendations as well as their relative priority. The Transportation Master Plan was then finalized to reflect both citizen input and the Town's ability to proceed with implementation. The results of the 1991 Citizen Survey are also documented in the Technical Appendix Report. This plan reflects the broad public input gained from the community and is not solely a study based on engineering standards. The recommendations contained in the Transportation Master Plan do not constitute approved projects. Each project, prior to implementation, will require full public review and must undergo a more detailed design evaluation. Steps must be taken to address quality design, with emphasis on landscaping and aesthetic considerations. Due to the shortage of available Iand within Vail, land acquisition for the transportation solutions recommended in the plan will need to be addressed in the short-term. RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS While the Vail Transportation Master 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 infrastructure to serve this demand. 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. i 1 1 4 VAIL VILlJ~GE DELiVERlES DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS While the Town of Vail was originally conceived as a pedestrian oriented village, goods delivery and various service functions have resulted in significant and undesirable truck activity in designated 1 pedestrian areas. This problem is partially the result of inadequate service and delivery facilities, especially alleys, which requires that goods and services be provided via "front-door" access points. This condition is most evident in Vail Village in contrast to the Lionshead area which was designed with delivery access systems. This situation, combined with Vail's greater than expected growth, has magnified the problem of service and delivery vehicle conflicts with pedestrians. The result is not only an inefficient delivery system but also an adverse effect on Vail's appearance and image. The specific area of concern for this analysis is shown in Figure 1 and generally lies south and west of Gore Creek Drive and Mill Creek. This area is accessed by Willow Bridge Road, Gore Creek Drive, Bridge Street, Vail Road, and Hanson Ranch Road. There are 31 designated loading zones for i deliveries which are currently located along the west side of Willow Bridge Road south of Willow Bridge (14 pazking spaces: 9 vehicle spaces plus 1 handicap space near Summers Lodge and 4 near Riva Ridge), the south side of Gore Creek Drive (10 parking spaces, 5 near Lodge at Vail and 5 near Mill Creek Court), the west side of Bridge Street adjacent to the Plaza Building (4 parking spaces), and on Hanson Ranch Road (3 parking spaces). Fifteen minute parking zones for all vehicles are also provided adjacent to the Christiania parking lot. Larger delivery vehicles are currently prohibited in the Village area from 8:30 AM to 10:30 AM and from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM during ski season and 11:30 AM to 2:00 PM in the summer season. All delivery vehicles are required to pass through Check-Point Charlie located on the west end of Gore Creek Drive. A survey of land uses within this area was conducted by Town staff to determine floor areas of primary truck trip generators. Table 1 summarizes this data. Because of the many different establishments represented in the area, it is not possible to define a typical delivery pattern. However, a cumulative demand level for the entire Village can be established with reasonable accuracy. The quantity of goods and associated truck volumes generated is based upon typical delivery orders and standard truck trip generation rates by land use type. These data aze compazed with similar information documented in a 1980 planning study in the Village 1 and 1 were updated to reflect 1990 conditions. The analysis of goods delivery operations indicates that peak summer activity is approximately 13°~ less than peak winter activity. While this is not a major difference in magnitude, winter operating conditions are much more severe indicating that the winter season is clearly the critical design period. In addition to basic goods delivery, however, there is a considerable amount of related vehicular activity consisting of autos, vans and pick-ups, as well as large trucks. These vehicles are typically performing a variety of functions including maintenance and repair, customer service, and trash pick-up. Table 2 documents each of these functions along with their relative daily activity levels. 1 Technical Report (undated), Town of Vail, Department of Community Development, 1980. 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,,r wr r r r ~ ~ F E l S B U R G H d L T & U L L E V I G 1 I t J - ,Neaa t~_' OW Of . _~1 r d \ < 4 ~ Go v i 0(1 H.C.) m \'B ~ a ~ 6 ~ 8 - ' ~ ~ m ~ ~ 1 2 3 0 .n~ s % m Gore Creek Dr. 11 12 16 ee 10 ~ 5 Go(e 20 4 13 17 ~ 3 6t2H.C.~ \ 4 l~ 8 ~ l ~ - 18 \ Henson 15 14 n F 18 ~ J l 1 Not to Legend Q ' ; Scale L_ Delivery Vehicle Loading Zones m~ 1 ~ Figure Private Service Access Areas - 0 Number of Spaces Exist/ng? Goods Delivery System (W 15 Min. Parking ~ ~ i Table 1 Floor Areas of Primary Truck Trip Generators (1980 Square Footages) Floor Area (Square Feet) Buildin¢ Name General Retail Restaurant Office ' 1. Sitzmark 4,600 3,080 524 2. Gore Creek Plaza 3,004 3,800 2,102 3. Schober 3,500 2,937 2,528 4. Creekside 3,338 5,798 5. Covered Bridge 8,816 6. Gasthof/Gramshammer 7,477 6,583 7. Gallery 5,247 2,342 8. Slifer 859 3,916 9. Clock Tower 2,790 4,199 10. Lodge at Vail 9,035 8,997 1 11. Lazier Arcade 7,371 3,000 12. Casino 3,744 3,835 13. Plaza 8,000 4,800 14. Hill 8,056 I5. One Vail Place 2,348 9,953 16. Liquor Store 5,408 1,000 ' 17. Red Lion 2,194 11,448 18. Golden Peak Hs. 5,321 1,260 19. Cyranos 5,434 20. Mill Creek Crt. 3.553 2.746 Totals 89,414 66,219 29,310 1 i i 1 Tahle 2 Peak Season Delivery and Service Volumes (Estimates of 1990 Activity) Average Delivery Function Trios Per Dav ' Emergency Operations Priority (Police, Fire, Ambulance) As Required Non-Priority (Maintenance, Repair, Service) As Required General Maintenance, Repairs and Service Major (more than 1 day) As Required Minor (less than 1 day) 2 - 4 Product Delivery 140 - 170 General Retail Goods Food/Perishables Vending (Soft Drinks, Confections, Tobacco) Liquor and Alcohol Taxi Services 8 - 10 1 Package Delivery and Pick-Up 8 - 10 Customer Specialty Service 2 - 4 'Trash Pick-Up As Required ' Totals 162 - 202 ' Product delivery activity of 140 to 170 vehicle trips (half of the vehicle trips enter the Village area and half exit the Village area) is made by 70 to 90 trucks. "Phis truck volume conducts approximately 230 to 250 separate deliveries and generates a total commodity volume of 1,900 to 2,100 cubic feet per day. 8 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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. o Design solutions need to be sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods and the natural 1 environment. Demand estimates indicate that approximately 25 to 30 delivery and service parking spaces are required to accommodate the existing delivery demand during the peak season. In the future ' approximately 35 to 40 delivery and service spaces will be needed. These new loading zones should be located in response to both environmental constraints as well as pedestrian and retail space needs. CHARACTERISTICS OF DELIVERY SYSTEMS2 In order to better understand the consequences of the alternatives which are available to Vail, it is important to clarify the three basic characteristics of any goods and services delivery system which fully or partially fulfill the previously stated objectives. These characteristics are: o Surface vs. Subsurface Operations ' o Direct Service or Decentralization vs. Non-Direct or Centralized Operations Subsurface (or underground) delivery systems may be applicable when (as is the case in Vail) 1 insufficient space is available on the surface level to separate incompatible delivery functions from other activities. The primary factors affecting the feasibility of subsurface delivery systems are constructability, liability, and costs. If these factors can be overcome, the primary objective can be satisfied. Direct service delivery refers to the situation in which individual merchants order their products from multiple vendors who are responsible for bringing the product directly to the customer. This type of delivery system emphasizes a high level of service to the merchant and can, therefore, result in excessive truck volumes in the core area due to multiple product types and varying delivery times. The entire product delivery effort, however, is the responsibility of the merchant and the vendor. ' By contrast, the application of a centralized delivery system in Vail Village would be done in order to: o Transfer less-than-truck-load (LTL) deliveries to smaller vehicles, and o Consolidate small deliveries onto fewer vehicles. Z Much of the material presented in this section is based upon conversations and meetings held with vendors and truck transportation providers during March, 1990. 9 To accomplish these objectives of smaller and fewer trucks in the Village core, service to the customer is typically reduced primarily in terms of delivery times and frequency. This is due almost solely to the fact that a third party is involved in the product delivery system. Construction of a warehouse facility, purchase of down-sized delivery vehicles, personnel to operate and maintain facilities, insurance, and product replacement are all third party responsibilities. In most instances, this third party would be the Town of Vail or a private business under contract to the Town. In any case, the Town would be responsibly involved in the product distribution system. Time restrictions on goods delivery is a means by which competing uses of limited physical space can be monitored and allocated to priority functions. As such it is a compromise which is imposed on the area in order to avoid excessive capital expenditures while retaining a certain level of convenience and efficiency for delivery operations. In addition, the Town's involvement is restricted to its typical regulatory and police powers. The Town currently has time restrictions for product delivery and intends to continue these restrictions. ALTERNATIVES Five alternatives have been identified which address, in varying degrees, the objectives listed previously to reduce vehicle/pedestrian conflicts in Vail Village. These alternatives are defined as follows; ' Alternative I -Subsurface Tunnel Svstem This alternative consists of tunnels directly below Gore Creek Drive, Bridge Street and Hanson Ranch Road. The tunnels would be large enough to accommodate full-size trucks such that direct service to all merchants is retained. The tunnel entrance would be located north of the current site of Check Point Charlie and exits would occur in the vicinity of Mill Creek, with underground traffic oriented one-way in the eastbound direction. Underground access to buildings would be provided via installing basement doors, staircases, and service elevators to the surface level. Alternative 2 -Small Vehicle Subsurface Tunnel Svstem, This alternative is similaz to the subsurface tunnel system except that the underground tunnels would ' be sized to accommodate smaller vehicles (such as Cushmans) to reduce costs. Such an operation would require centralization of deliveries where goods would be transferred to third party vehicles. Alternative 3 - Centralization (Close-Ind This alternative consists of a central receiving area at which delivery trucks would transfer product to smaller vehicles. The idea is to replace larger trucks currently being used in Vail Village with smaller vehicles. To make this feasible, a warehouse should be within close proximity of the Village; preferably 1 /4 mile or less, and in no instance greater than 1 /2 mile. A],~ernative 4 -Centralization (Remotel This alternative is identical to close-in centralization except that the warehouse receiving area would be located away from the Village area where land prices would be more feasible. The idea is to consolidate goods so that fewer delivery trucks would be needed. However, it is unlikely that small vehicles would have sufficient torque and gearing to pull the larger loads over the longer distances inherent in this alternative. Thus, while the number of trucks would he less, the size of the typical delivery vehicle would be relatively large. 10 Alternative 5 -Decentralization This alternative is similar to the existing situation except trucks would not be allowed on Bridge Street. The loading zone currently located on Bridge Street would be relocated to either the Christiania parking area or to a newly constructed site in the vicinity of where Mill Creek passes under Hanson Ranch Road. ' FIRST LEVEL EVALUATION An initial screeaing of the five alternatives was conducted in order to identify key factors which may make an alternative unacceptable. This "fatal flaw" evaluation is summarized below. Alternative 1 -Subsurface Tunnel Svstem The subsurface tunnel system would be a major undertaking involving three major issues: o Constructability o Liability o Costs ' The construction of such a project would require the excavation of approximately 32,000 cubic yards of material, and 58,000 square feet of new support structure for the pedestrian areas above. All utilities and other infrastructure that are currently below the surface such as storm and sanitation ' sewers, water, gas, telephone, and electric would need to be relocated. Construction would take a minimum of 2 years and more likely 3 to 4 years. Portions of the Village would be entirely closed off to pedestrian traffic, and businesses would be required to shut down during certain critical periods of the excavation process. Town liability would be significantly affected. Tunneling in close proximity to existing development would have to be done utilizing special procedures to minimize potential damage or weakening a building's structural integrity. Even upon completion of the project, it is possible that structural damage to adjacent buildings may not be evident for 10 to 20 years or more after project completion. The liability consequences of this alternative would continue indefinitely. The cost of the tunnel project can only be grossly estimated at this time. Basic excavation, structural components, and utility relocation would be approximately $30 to 40 million. Costs associated with building access modifications, insurance, material disposition, and portal treatments would increase total project costs to $50 million or more. Although this alternative achieves the primary objective, its construction, liability, and cost implications make it impractical. Therefore, this alternative is recommended to be eliminated from further consideration. 11 ' Alternative 2 -Small Vehicle Subsurface Tunnel Svstem The smaller subsurface tunnel system involves the same basic issues of constructability and liability but at a reduced project cost of approximately $10 to $15 million. In addition, this alternative would involve maintaining a central receiving area where goods would be consolidated and transferred to smaller vehicles for ultimate access to the customer. Given the fact consolidated loads would be carried by small vehicles, this kind of delivery centralization would be just as appropriate on the surface. As a consequence, tunnel excavation would not be financially necessary if delivery centralization was to occur. Therefore, this alternative is recommended to be eliminated. Alternative 3 -centralization /('lose-Ind The centralization alternative utilizing aclose-in receiving area (within one-quarter to one-half mile of the Village) would make use of smaller vehicles in lieu of larger trucks within the Village to complete the delivery. Delivery trucks would unload their cargo onto smaller vehicles (such as ' Cushmans or tractor units similar to airport luggage trains) and then transport it to Village destinations. Operators of the vehicles could either be the truck driver himself or a third party employee. Delivery vehicles within the pedestrian area would be smaller in size, and the number of vehicles required to deliver the same volume of goods would decrease by approximately 15% to 2096 over the existing situation. ' Advantages o Many or all of the larger delivery trucks would be removed from the core area. o Total truck volume in the core area would be reduced. Disadvantages o Land acquisition costs would be extremely high for aclose- in receiving area and a warehouse operation may not be considered a compatible land use with adjacent properties. ' o All delivered goods would need to be "double-handled", that is, they would need to be unloaded at the receiving area and reloaded onto another vehicle before delivered to an establishment. o The Town of Vail would likely become financially and legally involved in the goods delivery business. Maintaining the loading facility; purchase, operation, and insurance of vehicles; and product liability would all be elements of the Town's involvement. o This alternative may not be appropriate for all types of deliveries, and therefore may only be a partial solution. For example, special arrangements would likely be required for liquor ' deliveries, since the law requires liquor to be delivered directly to liquor-licensed establish- ments.3 3 Conversation with the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement Division, March 23, 1990. 12 This alternative (or variation thereof) may be an appropriate solution, but further evaluation is necessary to determine its feasibility. Alternative 4 -Centralization (RemoteZ The idea behind a remote centralized facility is to locate the facility away from the Village where land acquisition is less expensive and construction is more feasible. Such a facility would have similar ' ~ characteristics to a close-in site, and many of the advantages and disadvantages would still apply. However, a remote site would introduce additional problems which include: o Less flexibility would exist for merchants requiring essential deliveries. If a particular establishment has placed an order that it needs as soon as possible, the delivery truck may be punctual in delivering the item(s) to the warehouse facility, but the final delivery would be ' subject to the loading of the third party delivery truck, That is, a delivery from the ware- house to the Village would not occur to accommodate just one merchant. The truck must be sufficiently loaded to warrant making a delivery trip to Vail Village. ' o Smaller delivery vehicles would not be appropriate for a remote site. A larger truck would be required to efficiently consolidate products and to operate in mixed traffic conditions between the warehouse and the village. Therefore, large delivery trucks would still access the Village. o Delivery of perishables, food, or vending products may need individual attention and they ' may not lend themselves to be consolidated into a common truck. As a result many special trips to the Village would be required which is contrary to the objective of reducing truck volume in pedestrian areas. ' For these reasons, Alternative 3 (close-in centralization) is a more practical solution than Alternative 4 (remote centralization). Therefore, this alternative is recommended to be eliminated from further consideration. Alternative 5 -Decentralization The primary focus of a decentralized delivery system is to maintain the current delivery scheme, but to prohibit all delivery vehicles from the Village core. This concept could be implemented with continuing time restrictions so that trucks would not be allowed during heavy pedestrian traffic periods. In addition, restrictions could be imposed such that no delivery vehicles would be allowed in the Village on certain days of the week. Additional loading and unloading areas could be provided at the Christiania parking lot and/or a newly constructed loading zone which would be located on Hanson Ranch Road in the vicinity of Mill Creek. Advantages and disadvantages of this alternative are as follows: Advantages o Bridge Street would be free of all delivery traffic. o Goods are not "double handled". o Town of Vail would not be financially or legally involved in the delivery business. 13 ' Disadvantages o Does not relieve Gore Creek Drive of delivery activity. ' o Drivers would be required to handcart goods further for deliveries destined to establishments on Bridge Street north of Gore Creek Drive. o Impacts on surrounding neighborhoods and the natural environment which may result. This alternative or a variation thereof may be an appropriate solution, but further evaluation is necessary to determine its feasibility. SECOND LEVEL EVALUATION The preliminary technical analysis conducted to this point suggests that two basic goods and service delivery alternatives have sufficient potential to warrant more detailed investigation. These alternatives are: o Alternative 3: Close-in Centralized Delivery o Alternative 5: Decentralized Delivery with Bridge Street, Gore Creek Drive, and Hanson Ranch Road Loading Zones Relocated A more indepth analysis is now required to select the preferred plan. ' Alternative 3 -Centralization /Close-Ind A review of this alternative yields several issues and concerns to be addressed as follows: o What is the best location for a decentralized warehouse? 1 o How big should the "small-vehicle" fleet be? o To what degree would the Town of Vail need to be involved and be responsible? 1 Alternative locations for a central receiving area are limited to the tightly spaced build out of the Village area. Four alternative sites have been identified for additional evaluation which include the Christiania parking lot, the parking area east of Garden of the Gods, the Golden Peak tennis courts, and an area just off of Vail Road immediately south of the Lodge South condominium tower. The Christiania parking lot site illustrated in Figure 2 is characterized by having the dock area below the Christiania guest parking area. The grade difference between Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive lends itself to construct atwo-level structure on this site in which the lower level would ' be used for unloading and the upper level would be used to replace the parking that currently exists on that site. Access to the lower level would be on Gore Creek Drive and access to the upper level would be provided via Hanson Ranch Road. The Garden of the Gods site shown in Figure 3 is characterized by having the dock area entirely underground below the surface parking at Vail Trails. Since this is a relatively flat area, a significant amount of "ramping" is required to transfer delivery vehicles from the surface level to the lower level. The single unit delivery truck ramps would need to be a minimum of 330 feet long to traverse the 14 ' F E L S 8 U R G HOLT & U L L E V I G 1 'T nhu Va/l ow o ses Small Vehicle ' Mi// Creek Court Delivery Access Dock Area Access eeK pr'~e (Lower Level) Gore Gr ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ / ' ~ Dock Area / ~ (Lower Levei) / Villa \ ~ ` ~ Valhalla / / 'Sd '~s o,~ ~'a ~°~S 9o~a Christiania Christiania Parking (Upper Lot Access Level) 1 ~ ' Mill ;Crsek• I ` Chateau I 1. 1 Figure 2 ' Christiania Lot Centralization Site i5 ~ F E L S B U R G G, HOLT b ~ o~ \ ' U L L E V I G I f C ~ l/ai! Trails a ~ ~or/a ufer ~ . G G w p a 'A ~ Close Parking Access / ~ ae~' m QD3 / ~ ~ is G~ Clos~ ~ ~ Surface Parking ~ ~o Gore ~ (Upper Level) Creek m \ 3 ~ ` Dock Area ~ ~ Vail Trails ' Drive .o / ~ (Lower Levei) ~ / ~ ' ~ A / Apron Area ~ ~ / ) / Close (Lower Lever ~ / / / Parking' ~ ~ ~ \ ~ / / Access ~ / ~ ~ / / ~FQ ' ~ / ~ 5~ / G0 Garden of the ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J~r`a Gods Club West ~ ~ 0\\a0 a~~ ~ All 5~ Seasons r RanGn Rued He~scn Rams Horn ' Tivoli Lodge Figure 3 Garden of the Gods Centraiiza tion Site_ 16 , ' elevation difference, and the small delivery vehicle ramp would need to be approximately 220 feet long. The single unit truck ramps would have to begin descending immediately south of the Gore Creek bridge along Yail Valley Drive. Consequently, Gore Creek Drive and other parking accesses would have to be closed off from Vail Valley Drive due to the access ramps. In addition, these ramps ' would be located very near existing buildings (Vorlaufer and Vail Trails), and the excavation required in constructing the ramps may adversely affect the structural integrity of these buildings. The Golden Peak tennis courts site shown in Figure 4 is characterized by a loading area located on the current tennis court level. The embankment along the south and west sides could be used to support a roof over the loading area in which 3 tennis courts could be replaced. No tunneling would be required since the loading area and ramps would be at about the same level as Vail Valley Drive. The Vail Road site shown in Figure 5 would essentially be located into the side of the mountain. Delivery vehicle access would be via tunnels located off of Vail Road. The southern side of the dock building would be 35 to 40 feet below the ground surface, and the northern side of the dock building would be partially exposed. Items of concern regarding aclose-in facility site include the following; o The site should be located as close to the Village core as possible to shorten the small delivery ' vehicle trip length and to minimize intermixing with regular traffic. o The site should be sufficiently large to accommodate the maneuvering of combination unit trucks off of the public street system. o The facility should be covered and concealed to the extent possible for aesthetic reasons. ' o The site should not significantly affect the surrounding neighborhoods and natural environment. 1 o Constructability and costs of the site should be reasonable. Of the four sites, the Christiania site would be located closest to the Village area which is its biggest advantage over the other three sites. Planning level costs are estimated to be $1.4 to $1.7 million. The Garden of the Gods site would be totally underground. However, installing the necessary ramping would close off key access points onto Vail Valley Drive (e.g. Gore Creek Drive) as well as impacting adjacent buildings. This alternative conflicts with many goals of the Streetscape Plan for Vail Palley Drive. Because this site requires extensive tunneling and excavation total implementation costs are estimated at $2.4 to $2.9 million. The Golden Peak tennis courts site is located furthest from the Village core, but would be easier and less costly to implement since minimal excavation is required. The structural needs for the roofing ' at this site would also be less stringent since roof loading would be much less. In addition, the impacts on surrounding parking and the tennis court area are easily mitigated and additional space is available to expand the dock and apron area if future needs so dictate. Total implementation costs are estimated to be $1.4 to $1.7 million. The Vail Road site south of the Village core also requires extensive tunneling and excavation on a difficult construction site. While nearly totally concealed, implementation costs are estimated to be ' $2.0 to $2.4 million. 17 r n¦r• r~ r~ iri• ~ i. r i. ~ r i~ ~ iiii~ ~ F E L S B U R G MOLT ~ U L L E V I G 1 Vail Valley Drive Expansion Area ~ c v Surface Parking ~ m ~N x s ~ 3 Tennis Courts ~ ~ m v relocated to roof N ~ ~ of Delivery Area N n n ~ N r- m Surface Dock Area Apron Area Tennis Court Golden Peak ~ Embankment Pedestrian Trail F%gU/6 4 Golden Peak Centralization Site r ~w .r ar ~ r r ~ ~ ~ r ~ r - f E L S 8 U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 Lodge at 1/ail Lodge South oad Va if A ~ \ ~ - ~ a - _ \ ~ \ Small Delivery ~ _ ~ \ ~ ~ Vehicle Access / Dock Area ~ M°un~a~n ~ G \ i (Underground) ~ Access ROad \ n \ , _ CC9 ~ / MS`S, \ / ~ Apron Area I ~ (Underground) / L-_ ~ - , _ ~ Figure 5 - Vail Road Centralization Site In the event that Alternative 3 is implemented, the Christiania site would be the most desirable of the four since it is located closest to the Village area, it is not as disruptive to the surrounding area as the other alternative sites, and would be one of the more inexpensive alternatives to construct. Implementation will require extensive treatments to deal with the many aesthetic concerns of the site. The size of the Cushman fleet is dependent upon vehicle delivery times; that is the time that each vehicle is away from the warehouse making deliveries. These times will be higher for warehouses located further from the Village core. Based on an estimated quantity of about 2,000 cubic feet of delivered goods and an effective small vehicle capacity of 40 cubic feet, aclose-in site such as the Christiania lot will require a fleet of 7 vehicles whereas the other sites would require 8 to ] 0. The only logical third party would be the Town of Vail which would ultimately need to construct the warehouse facility, acquire land for the facility, acquire the Cushman vehicles, and maintain the entire operation. The Town would also be directly or indirectly responsible for the condition of delivered goods. The financial burden of implementing and maintaining a centralized delivery system could be placed upon Village merchants or the delivery companies. Alternative 5 -Decentralization Three areas were discussed as potential locations for new truck loading zones under the decentralized delivery system. These areas are: o Development of a combined alley/pedestrian corridor along Mill Creek between Gore Creek Drive and Hanson Ranch Road. o A formalized truck loading zone between Cyranos and Christiania. o A lower level loading zone beneath the existing Christiania parking lot. The Mill Creek corridor is sufficiently wide to accommodate cone-way alley, provide an open water area, and retain a landscaped pedestrian corridor. Relocation of the Mill Creek channel would occur from a point north of Hanson Ranch Road to Gore Creek Drive. The ability to provide a walkway connection through the buildings along Bridge Street (North of the Red Lion) is complicated by ' stairways to upper level dwelling units and other building elements which would have to be re- constructed and modified. If access between these buildings cannot be provided, the alley concept still performs two important functions: o Close-in replacement space for the loading operations which now occur on Bridge Street, and o A connection between Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive which enhances truck access to the south end of Bridge Street and the area north of Gore Creek Drive. Up to six 35-foot truck spaces and nine 25-foot truck spaces can be provided along the alleyway. Basic construction costs are estimated to be approximately $100,000. The amount of landscaping and pedestrian improvements desired and the structural modifications involved in providing a pedestrian access through the buildings facing Bridge Street could increase the implementation costs to $150,000 to $250,000. 20 r The area between Cyranos and the Christiania building can be designed to accommodate up to eight 1 truck spaces; but more realistically five spaces in consideration of the natural environment. Cyranos would be only moderately affected with the major change occurring to the small parking area and trash container holding area next to Christiania. Exclusive of any right-of-way costs, this area could be constructed for approximately $50,000. The area under the existing Christiania parking lot results in approximately I? additional truck parking spaces under a simple parking deck structure to replace the Christiania parking area. Product delivery to the core area would also be via handcarts. Implementation costs for an informal truck loading zone at this sight is estimated to be $750,000 to $850,000 exclusive of land costs. Implementation will require extensive treatments to deal with the aesthetic concerns of the site. Table 3 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. Details of the planning level cost estimates for all of the alternatives are presented in the Technical Appendix Report, Alternatives 3 and 5 were presented to Vail Village merchants and representatives from various product vendors. Two meetings were held for discussion and a general agreement was made regarding the following items: o Elimination of goods delivery operations from Bridge Street was agreed to be an important objective. o The truck loading area between Cyranos and Christiania was generally considered a good replacement area for Bridge Street. 1 o The truck loading area on Gore Creek Drive immediately east of Check Point Charlie was desired to be retained in order to keep walk distances and truck dwell times to a minimum. o Existing short-term parking areas were suggested to be converted to truck loading zones only and adequately enforced. This includes the areas on Gore Creek Drive next to the Mill Creek ' building and the Christiania parking lot and on Hanson Ranch Road next to the Christiania parking lot. o The idea of connecting Hanson Ranch Road to Gore Creek Drive with cone-way roadway behind the Red Lion was suggested to be further considered, recognizing that extensive landscaping and pedestrian amenities would also be included along Mill Creek. o The truck loading areas on Willow Bridge Road in the vicinity of Check Point Charlie were recommended to be retained with major landscaping and amenities provided to separate pedestrian movements from truck operations. o Depending upon the final combination of official truck loading zones to be designated by the Town Council, Check Point Charlie would be relocated or additional control points defined to not only control truck operations but also to intercept lost tourists prior to reaching the Village core. ' 21 rr rr r rr r r rr r rr rr ~r rr rr rr rr rr r rr rr Table 3 Summary Evaluation of Product Delivery Options ~IS'cP~ Alternative 3 (Centraliz~on. Close-lnl Alternative 5 (Decentralization) Basic Characteristics o Retains loading zones on Village Streets o Loading zones are eliminated on certain while reducing the size of the delivery Village streets (i.e. Bridge Street and vehicle. Gore Creek Drive). o Town of Vail is a participant in the o Town of Vail continues its basic goods delivery system beyond its typical regulatory and police powers. regulatory and police powers. Delivery Vehicle Trips on !O8 to ! 12 Small Vehicles Per Day None on Bridge Street Village Streets Plus Exceptions (emergency, maintenance, Plus Exceptions (emergency, maintenance, etc.) etc.} Product Liability None General Retail Yes Food/Perishables Special Equipment Product Exceptions None Liquor/Alcohol Not Currently Allowed Vending Products Money Collection/Security Package Express Time Guarantees Other Exceptions Emergency Operations Yes Yes Maintenance/Service Yes Yes Taxi Services Yes (1) No Customer Specialty Service Yes (1) No Trash Collection Yes (I) Yes (1) Speciai Circumstances Yes Yes (1) (1) Exceptions can be controlled with existing or modified time restrictions. Table 3 (Continued) Summary Evaluation o[ Product Delivery Options jj~i ;Alternative 3 lCentralizaiion. C~nse-jL A rn ive S (Decentralization) Capital Costs (Planning Level Estimates) Small Vehicles (7-10) $105,000 to $150,000 None Warehouse (10 Berths) None Christiania $1.4M to $1.7M Garden of the Gods $2.4M to $2.9M Golden Peak Tennis $1.4M to $1.7M Lodge South $2.OM to $2.4M Loading Zones (40-47 Spaces) Mill Creek (6-8 Spaces) $150,000 to $250,000 4i Cyranos (7-8 Spaces) $ 50,000 + R/W Christiania (17 Spaces) $750,000 to $850,000 Check Point Charlie (10-14 Spaces) Existing General Operations Mandatory Warehouse Scheduling Retain Merchant Control of Schedule Retain Delivery Time Restrictions ' RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES The Vail Village goods delivery plan is illustrated in Figure 6, 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 Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the short-term is 25 to 30 spaces. ' 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 south of Willow Bridge Road and along the north side of the Mill Creek Court Building would be retained for delivery purposes (approximately I S spaces including 1 handicapped parking space). The area south of Willow Bridge Road may need to be expanded to handle trucks. ' 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) and on Willow Bridge Road north of the bridge (6 spaces) and near Check Point Charlie (4 spaces). o Restrictions on vehicle movement into the core area apply to all vehicle types except far service emergencies and service functions permitted by the Police Department. o Existing time restrictions on delivery vehicle access to the core would be retained, for the ' purpose of maintaining a vehicle free environment. Enforcement of these restrictions needs to extend over the entire time period to insure vehicles are removed from the core area at the designated times. o Immediate actions should be taken to resolve land ownership issues (portions of Parcel J and K of Vail Village Filing #5) associated with the Christiania lot/Nail Associates and the Town of Vail as it pertains to Town right-of-way and its current use. Resolution of this issue with the right for a loading dock to be included with any development of this site 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. ' o All private service access areas would be retained. 1 Approximately 29 spaces (including 3 handicapped spaces) can be provided under this alternative to serve the short-range demand. 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 most of the short-term alternatives, it is recommended to implement all of the short-term changes as soon as possible. Lon¢ Term ' o Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the long-term is 35 to 40 spaces. o The Christiania lot should be retained for a potential goods delivery loading area providing !7 spaces. The potential of converting it to a centralized loading facility to transfer cargo to smaller delivery vehicles should also be retained as a future option. This removes all on-street truck loading within the East Village area. 24 _ - - ¦r - - _ - - ~ ~ ~ i ~ . r ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H O l Y b U L L E v l G 1 I _ ~ Me4dO 6 Or _ Retain Existing ~ \ Loading Zoned / ~ / \ ~ Convert 15 Minute • • • ~ 5 7 Parking Zones to 4 ~ . Delivery Loding Zones a' ~ 8 owe CAB Rateln Existing • $ 6 ~ / 1a~ Loading Zons (1 H.C. m 4(2H.C. Creek Dr. Gore 5 r 11 12 16 GreeK 0 10 1 Gore • Remove Gore Creek Orire \ 20 ~ ~ • 4 and Brldge Street Potential Fulur~ Loading Zones 13 17 ~ Truck Oock Facility Convert 15 Minute (17 Spaces) 1 ~ Parking Zones \ ~ ~ to !)slivery 6 Loading Zonea. O e ~ 15 19 ~1 Nanson 14 18 ~ Legend ~ Remove Hanson Ranch Road Loading Zone Delivery Vehicle Loading Zones m~ Privale Service Access Areas ~ O Figure 6 Number of Spaces Recommended Goods Delivery System Not to Scale o Another off-street goods delivery area on the west side of the core area (perhaps in the ' vicinity of One Vail Place) requires further evaluation. Further public input will be obtained to identify the potential available spaces. Until such a facility can be implemented 14 spaces on Willow Bridge Road south of Gore Creek and approximately 6 spaces on Willow Bridge Road north of Gore Creek will provide a total of 37 spaces (including 3 handicapped spaces) to serve long-term needs. 1 As a simple, two-level parking/loading area, the long-term alternative has a planning level cost of approximately $750,000 to $850,000 plus land acquisition and landscaping, and provides approximate- ly 17 truck loading spaces. As a centralized delivery facility including warehousing facilities and a small vehicle fleet, the planning level costs are estimated to be $1.4 to $1.7 million plus land 1 acquisition and landscaping. 26 1 PARKING BACKGROUND t Throughout the year, the demand for parking in Yail varies considerably; ranging from very low demands between winter and summer guest seasons to very high demands especially during the peak skiing periods. The total community parking supply is made up of many components including a wide variety of public and private parking facilities. As parking demand approaches the Limits of the parking supply ' major public parking facilities such as the Transportation Center, Lionshead garage, and Ford Park fill to capacity. As this condition occurs excess parking demand is accommodated on the frontage road system. ' In order to better define what the "parking problem" is, the existing parking supply and demand relationship is schematically depicted in Figure 7. The key points illustrated by the diagram relate ' to three basic levels of parking demand. o Level 1 - As long as the total parking demand is less than the formal permanent parking supply, no parking problem exists. o Levei 2 -During peak activity periods, however, parking demands fill the formal permanent supply creating a condition where pre-planned temporary parking provisions (Ford Park} ' become more fully utilized. While a balance between supply and demand is maintained, the continued long-term use of Ford Park is not compatible with the park itself or with sound parking management principles, especially revenue generation. o Leve13 - As parking demands continue to increase, all parking facilities are filled to capacity, and temporary overflow parking spaces (typically the Frontage Road) are utilized to whatever extent necessary. Not only are revenues lost, but visitor convenience and safety are also ' compromised. The major components of the existing parking supply which are critical include the Transportation ' Center, Lionshead, Ford Park, and the Frontage Road. This existing parking supply is documented in Table 4. 1 Table 4 Existing Parking Supply Approximate Quantities Location Existing Sµnniv Transportatioa Center 1,300 ' Lionshead 1,200 Ford Park 250 Frontage Road As Needed Total 2,750 27 r . . . r r . ~ . . . r . . r . . . F E L S B U R G HOLT & U L l E Y l G 1 Emergency' Response Over/low Parking 3 Provisions (e. g. Frontage Road) External Monitoring Temporary Parking 2 Supp/y/Demand Balance Maintained Supp/y (e.g. Ford Park) N Self-Monitoring Formal. Permanent ~ Balanced Supp/y/Demand Public and Private Parking Supp/y (VTC, Lionshead West Day Lot, etc.) Parking Demand Mode of Operation Parking Supply Figure T Existing Parking Supply/Demand Relationships I 1 Existing Parking Supply/Demand Characteristics Figure 8 provides greater detail relative to parking supply jdemand characteristics. Typical daily parking demands have been rank ordered (highest to lowest) in order to determine the number of days ' that a given demand for parking occurs. It will be seen from Figure 8 that when the existing parking demand is compared with the formal permanent parking supply, overflow parking on the Frontage Road is needed approximately 5 days per year. The magnitude of the overflow has varied from just a few vehicles on the 6th day to a maximum of approximately 750 vehicles. Future parking demands are highly dependent upon anticipated future ski activity. The Environmen- t tal Assessment for the Vail Ski Area Expansion added several new areas to the special use permit and approved a portion of these new areas for site specific expansion. The primary measure of ski area activity used in the Environmental Assessment is the "skiers-at-one- ' time" (SAOT) capacity. Table 5 documents the historical and potential future SAOT values for various conditions. Table 5 SAOT by Values for Skl Area Expansion Source: Vail Ski Area Expansion, EA, November 25, 1986. Condition SAOT Increase Over 1990 1985 15,579 1990 (Estimate) 19,000 "Manage To" Capacity 19,900 4.796 Approved Site Specific Expansion 22,917 20.6% Potential Future Expansion 24,702 30.096 It will be noted that the approved long term ski area expansion results in excess of a 2096 increase in overall demand levels while ultimate ski area expansion has a potential fora 3096 increase in demand levels. ' Projected Parkine Supply/Demand Characteristics ' Figure 8 also documents the consequences of the increased demand level on the existing parking supply. For the approved ski area expansion, the expanded parking supply is adequate for all but 26 days. The magnitude of the overflow varies from just a few vehicles on the 26th highest day to a possible maximum of approximately 900 vehicles on the busiest day. For the potential ski area expansion the expected parking deficiency increases to 34 days with a maximum short fall of approximately 1,300 spaces. 29 ~ r r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F E t. S B U R G ~ _ HOI. T & u t. t. t: v t G ~ a Parking Demand Curves O1 Existing :t.6 - _ O2 Approved Ski Area Expansion with TDM Long-Rang arking~•,, ~3 Approved Ski Area Expansion without TDM ;3.;Z ~ Supply Expan ®Potential Ski Area Expansion without TDM ~y 0 (~kTrave! Demand Management) O _ ~ ,?.B ~ Existing Parking Supply - 2750 Spaces ...6 , _ . w C - _ _ _ - 3 4 ~ - ;z _ ~ 0 1_t3 ~J 1 _ 6 1 D 15 26 34 ~ ..t , - .--_.-r._.___ _ _ ~ I l ty ~U T 30 CEO ~ 5U - I - 60 5 t 5 ~~5 35 ~t5 ~~5 fi'~ Number of Days Parking Demand Occurs or is Exceeded Figure 8 V ~ Parking Supply/Demand Relationships North ~ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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. The recently completed parking expansion project was initiated when parking overflows occurred I S days per year. Thus, up to 15 days of overflow demand are considered acceptable by the Town as a reasonable balance between sewing the majority of the peak parking demands with a feasible and affordable investment. o Provide reasonably prsced 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. o Locate parking areas for charter buses, recreational vehicles, and other over-sized vehicles. 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. DEMAND MANAGEMENT OPTIONS The research contains awide-variety of measures for reducing travel and parking demands collectively referred to as demand management techniques. While the vast majority of these measures are oriented toward commuter travel in large urban centers, there are techniques which are applicable to resort areas in general and Vail in particular. An analysis of the research as well as a review of the several ideas presented in the Public Input meetings has resulted in the selection of three applications having the greatest potential for reducing future parking demands in Vail. Table 6 documents three demand management techniques which can be instituted either individually or collectively. The three options are defined as follows: o Modified Parking Pricing -This option would include possible elimination of free parking periods, reduced rate provisions, and an overall higher rate schedule. The objective of this option is to implement cost disincentives to using the auto and to make transit or carpooling a more attractive alternative for local residents and employees. While similar effects would be expected on non-resident day skiers, for example, their average vehicle occupancy is approximately 3 persons per vehicle already. Thus, fewer mode shifts would be expected from this group. 31 ~ » ~ r ~i ~ rr a~ >r r r it r. Table 6 Summary Characteristics of Demand Management Options , Demand Primary Potential Management Target Major Incremental Qntion f:r~un (*1 ('nst Elements Ef„ferr ('nmments Modified Parking Vail Residents None 3 - 546 Significant opposition from locals and employees. Pricing Overnight Visitors Research indicates most people pay the increased (2096 of Parkers) rate and do not shift modes. Major benefit from new employee carpools. Vail Transit Vail Residents Additional Buses 3 - 596 Marginal benefit limited by existing high transit Improvements Overnight Visitors Increased O&M use. (2096 of Parkers) Ride-Share Discounts Day Visitor Advertising 8 - 1296 Greatest potential impact on parking demand. (52-7296 of Parkers) Discounts Benefits may be partially offset by acceleration of overall increase in visitors. N Primary target groups developed from "Vail Parking Field Analysis and Survey", July 27, 1989, Rosall, Remmen and Cares, Inc. which identified the following breakdown by major use groups for the parking structures: User Groun VTC Lionshead Local 1396 1096 Out-of-State 2396 3996 Rental Car 3396 1946 Other Colorado 2896 3096 Truck 396 296 10096 1004'0 o Vail Transit Improvements -This option would include both expanded geographic coverage and more frequent service. The purpose of this option is to make transit a more attractive alternative through service enhancements (e.g. less crowding, shorter walks, etc.). These measures will be less effective in Vail than in other areas primarily because the Vail system is already generating a significantly higher-than-average transit use. However, when implemented in conjunction with modified parking pricing, reduced parking demands could be anticipated primarily from the employee user group. o Discount for Ride-Share Groups -This option would provide discount packages (lift tickets, local businesses, etc.) for visitors to Vail who arrive via a major ride-share mode. The primary travel mode would be charter buses but could also include vans of a minimum size. Each individual would receive specially designated coupons or other verification that he or she came to Vail with an official ride-share group. This option would target the single largest pazking demand element and offer the greatest potential for significantly reducing long-term parking demands at a reasonable cost. If the demand management options discussed in the previous section (or others) are successfully implemented, future parking demands can be significantly reduced. Although there will still be several days when overflow parking occurs and a fewer number of days when the overflow is significant. Figure 8 also documents these reductions for the approved ski area expansion relative to the existing parking supply. For the approved ski area expansion the expanded parking supply will be adequate for all but 10 days. The magnitude of the overflow will vary from just a few vehicles on the 10th highest day to a probable maximum of approximately 400 vehicles. Table 7 summarizes the preceding parking supply/demand analysis. Projected future overflow parking conditions are documented in terms of the number of days of overflow and the maximum and average magnitude of the overflow. These measures are also compared with existing conditions. Table 7 Projected Overflow Parking Summary r~ Parking Days of Maximum Average Parkins Demand Scenario Suooly Overflow Overflow Overflow Existing Pre-1990 14 1,000 500 Existing Post-1990 6 750 375 Approved Ski Area Expansion o Unmanaged Demand Post-1990 26 900 450 o Managed Demand Post-1990 10 400 200 t> Potential Ski Area Expansion o Unmanaged Demand Post-1990 34 1,200 600 o Managed Demand (TDM) Post-1990 21 800 400 Potential Ski Area Expansion o Unmanaged Demand Long-Range Expansion I S 700 350 ' o Managed Demand (TDM) Long-Range Expansion ? 400 200 33 FUTURE PARKING SUPPLY 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. o 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 in place with completion of the expansion of the VTC is sufficient to meet the Town's immediate and short-term future parking needs. The exact time period when additional parking will be needed depends upon the success of any travel demand management techniques implemented and the rate at which the ski area expands. ' 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 1 two-level parking facility with the second level provided below existing grade. o The existing West Day lot and the North 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. o The potential to expand the Lionshead parking structure could also be evaluated to provide the needed parking spaces. Approximately 400 to 500 total parking spaces could be provided a location or combination of 1 locations at a cost of approximately $2.5 to $3.0 million. An increase of 500 parking spaces would retain approximately 15 days of overflow with the full potential expansion of the ski area with no travel demand management techniques implemented (see Figure 8). In the future long-term an evaluation of remote, outlying parking and its impact on transit service costs to link these outlying parking areas with the Town should be completed if the need arises for additional parking due to lost opportunities at the sites mentioned above or ski area expansion occurs 1 beyond what is now known. 34 PARKING 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 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. 1990/91 1991/92 Time Interval Price Price 0 -1-1 /2 Hours $ 0.00 $ 0.00 (-1 J2 to 2 Hours $ 2.00 $ 3.00 2 to 3 Hours $ 3.00 $ 4.00 I 3 to 4 Hours $ 4.00 $ 5.00 _ . 4 to 5 Hours $ 5.00 $ 6.00 5 to 7 Hours $ 6.00 $ 7.00 7 to 9 Hours $ 7.00 $ 8.00 9 to l 1 Hours $ 8.00 $ 9.00 11 to 13 Hours $ 9.00 $10.00 13 to 15 Hours $10.00 $11.00 15 to 24 Hours $12.00 $13.00 The Gold Pass should be continued as the premium service program, but price levels should be 1 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 in 1990/ 1991. o Price set at 5750.00 plus a $25.00 deposit. o Limited to a maximum of 150 Gold Passes. o Guaranteed space availability and unlimited entry/exit. 1 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 in 1990/1991. Price levels are recommended to be reviewed annually. * Many of the recommendations presented in this section have been implemented by the Town of Vail for the 1990/ 1991 season and modified for the 1991 / 1992 season. 35 i 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 packers will be allowed to use Levels 4 and S 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 packers fora $5.00 flat fee (payable upon entry) on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. 36 SPECIAL PARKING PROVISIONS The area adjacent to the Lionshead structure has been used to park over-sized vehicles. In addition, the recent expansion at the Vail Transportation Center limits vehicle heights to 7'-4". 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 i to be identified. Some possible sites include the following which would require negotiations with the ! entities involved. 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 Qverflow 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. In addition, as a part of an overall travel demand management strategy, enhanced loading facilities convenient to mountain access points should be evaluated for charter buses; most specifically, Golden Peak and the west side of the Gondola building. During the day these vehicles should be parked in one of the areas designated for oversized vehicles. 3 7 TOWN BUS SYSTEM The Town of Vail currently operates six free bus routes throughout the Town during ski season. Five i of the six routes serve outlying areas of Vail while one, the In-Town shuttle, serves the Vail Village and Lionshead Village areas. The In-Town shuttle provides service to a relatively small area, but yet it comprises about three-fourths of the ridership for the entire bus system. As such, its operating characteristics differ from the outlying routes. The following sections of the report address operations of the In-Town shuttle and outlying routes. IN-TOWN SHL ~ i LE This free bus service operates year-round and carries over 2.2 million riders annually along a 1.75 mile route between Golden Peak and West Lionshead Circle (see Figure 9). A portion of the route is restricted to bus traffic only. The route serves the high-density, commercial lodging and retail core of Vail. On peak winter days up to 30,000 riders use the In-Town shuttle on a single day. Visitors, mainly destination and day skiers, make up the bulk of the winter day ridership. Destination visitors use the shuttle to travel between the slopes, their lodging, and, dining and shopping attractions within Vail and Lionshead villages. Day visitors, local residents and employees use the shuttle as an internal circulator after having parked in either the Vail or Lionshead parking structures. The In-Town shuttle is the backbone of the Vail transportation system. Because of the rather unique linear nature of Vail's mountain-town-highway orientation, the shuttle performs singularly what is typically parceled out to separate transit services in most other North American resort communities. ' In the typical resort community bed base, skier-mountain, nightlife/retail, and day skier parking are separate and distinct, sometimes several miles apart- Snowmass Village, Steamboat, Jackson Hole, Sun Valley, and Crested Butte for example. In these cases separate routes and services provided for day- skier parking shuttles, destination visitor shuttles and in-village circulation. In Vail the In-Town shuttle bears the brunt of each of these functions. Clearly, the quality of experience for Vail visitors is tied closely to the operation of the In-Town shuttle. CURRENT OPERATION The village shuttle operates 19-I/2 hours a day between the hours of 6:30 AM and 2:00 AM. Frequency of service is eight minutes or less with the most intense service provided during the 3:30 - to 5:30 afternoon hours when skiers departing from the slopes create the greatest demand for transportation. Ten vehicles are regularly scheduled for shuttle service during the afternoon rush. Occasionally four additional vehicles are pressed into service to respond to heavy demand. With 14 vehicles in service on the shuttle route the frequency between vehicles is often less than the dwell time at the major boarding points. This results in "bunching", i.e. buses running in tandem rather than uniformly spaced along the route. Operation efficiency breaks down under these conditions as passenger loads on the lead bus are usually greater than the trailing bus (or buses) and system speed is governed by the slower vehicle. As system speed slows more passengers accumulate at stops between bus arrivals, dwell time increases accordingly thereby further reducing system speed and r ensuring that incrementally more passengers will be waiting upon arrival at the next stop. Although, not documented, it is believed the usual daytime average system speed of 7 to 8 MPH degrades to 3 or 4 MPH, or even less, during peak season afternoon hours. At these speeds and crowding conditions many prospective riders will opt to walk. 38 r rr ~ FEI_S13UEiG H O L T 3 U 1. L E V l G 1 INTERSTATE 70 EAST , l S. FRONTAGE gOAD INTERSTATE 70 WEST - i~~- ~ 1 i ~ i~ I ;E STOP % , CCTNCER7 HALL ~ ~ • PLAZA - i ' , ~ is Q UONSHEAD 1'AHkINIi 1 • STRUCTURE CROSSROADS _ ~~i 1 LIONSNEAD MALL PLAZA AgARRlOTT'S MARK MEDICAL RESORT •DOBSONICF • CENTER GHUSSROAUS O ARENA ~ • ~ ~:!G%~~'`~~"^~'h. VAII (RANSPORSA(IOtJCE~JTER y W VAIL FIRE ~ DEPARTMENT • • 1 I COVERED BRIDGE VAIL VILLAGE ~ • i •i I Legend ~ III ? I n ~ I I u Restricted Auto Areas - _ Limited Auto Access GOLDEN PEAK • Figure 9 In-Town Shuttle Bus Route Not to Scale I 1 While not documented precisely, it is estimated from daily boarding counts that the current shuttle system was seriously overloaded between 27 to 30 days during the 1989-90 I50-day winter season or about one day out of five (see Figure 10, line #4). What is important to note by the slope of the curve depicted in Figure 10 is that relatively small increases in annual skier days spread out uniformly over the entire ski season, trigger a major increase in the number of days the current system will be overloaded during the afternoon peak. This means destination skiers in the future will experience more occasions of overcrowding on the current shuttle system. Whereas peak week, high season visitors probably anticipate and will tolerate some overcrowding throughout Yail or any other major destination resort, this condition will prevail more frequently on the shuttle system during isolated days, probably weekends when higher day-skier volumes are added to moderate-occupancy destination visitor volumes. These destination visitors may be unpleasantly surprised to experience overcrowding on the shuttle system during "non-peak" weeks. As a matter of policy it should be clear that if the "status quo" condition for shuttle riders is deemed appropriate and cost effective, to maintain this condition will require an 1896 increase in system capacity if the "Approved Expansion" growth scenario evolves. Alternatives for achieving this, or several other system capacity expansions, are discussed in a subsequent section. GOALS AND OBJET. ~ i DES The following represent the Town's goals and objectives relative to the In-Town shuttle. o Provide increased passenger capacity. o Improve operations at physical bottlenecks. o Identify along-term concept plan for passenger demands beyond 2010. o Maintain high quality transit service while being sensitive to the quality and character of pedestrian areas. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Several alternatives have been developed for addressing shuttle system capacity improvements to alleviate current overload conditions and/or provide improved conditions in the future. For ease of comparison these have been grouped as "fixed guideway" or "at-grade" alternatives. Fixed Guideway Shuttle System (Above Gradel Recognizing the need to address eventually the inherent limitations of the conventional transit coach shuttle service, the Town of Vail in 1987 commissioned a nationally recognized transit systems technology firm, Lea Elliott, McLean and Company, to conduct a feasibility study of replacing the existing shuttle service with an elevated people mover system. The study recommended ashort-range, 1 medium-duty, automated monorail-type people mover system as the most appropriate replacement solution. Some of the key operating parameters of the "generic monorail" replacement as described in the Lea Elliott report are as follows: 0 10 elevated stations 0 32 foot, 2-car train o Winter Crush unit capacity of S 1 passengers o Outboard ski placement 0 6 mph average speed during crush conditions 0 1580 passengers per hour per direction line capacity at winter crush conditions (20 vehicles) 40 . ¦r r r r r r i rs r r ~r r r ar r. r ~r ar F E L S 8 U R G U L L E V I G 1 b Line C~aacity of S~#em Q~ions 1 1~ 4 Dual Station People Movers f8-10 vehicles) y 0 Special Shuttle Coach (14 vehicles) b ~ ' ~3 10 Station People Mover X20 vehicles) ~ = 'l hi les 1 ®Ex~st~ng Shuttle Bus (14 ve c ) `r 4 -C 1.8 1 U L ~ ~ U ~ ~ -'t _ - - ~ Potential Ski ~ _ . _ . - - .r - - Area Demand -c ~ 1 ' - 4 - - _ - ~ 0 1 ~ ~ - Approved Ski Z - _ ~~~ti,. Area Demand ~ i~. s - ~L- m . Existing Demand-~~`, ` ` cL ~ tl. b - ~ , 4 -ti-~, (I..t 6 ,14~ 2 6 ' 1`~ 0.;7 0 1 3u - 70---_ I_ _---~~~1, ------I----- 11 ----1 i0 -i..._._..1.5U._.._. 2Q A 0 6U 1l0 1 UO 120 !-#(l Number of Days Ridership Demand Occurs or is Expected V\ I _ Figure f 0 In Town Shuttle D~rect~onal Peak Hour Demand North 1 o Capital costs estimated to be $30.3 million o Annual operating costs estimated to be $950,000. When comparing the "crush" capacity of the replacement monorail system with that of a fleet of fourteen 35-seat conventional transit coaches, the representative replacement monorail system, using 20 2-car trains, would provide about 3096 more line capacity than the conventional bus system. In either case it is assumed skis are carried in racks mounted outside the vehicle. The cost to construct, equip and test the 20-train automated people mover system is estimated to be $33.8 million (1990 S). This includes !0 single platform stations and a special maintenance facility. ' The annual operating cost (manpower, energy, supplies, etc.) is estimated to be comparable to the annual cost of operating the shuttle bus service. As shown in Figute !0 (line #3), the 3096 benefit in line capacity over conventional transit coaches would reduce the number days currently operating over capacity from 27 to 8. If increases in demand attributed to "approved expansion" is factored in, the number of over capacity days would be 20 instead of a projected 62 days. While a 3096 increase in line capacity is significant, it would seem disproportionate considering the relatively high capital costs of the elevated, automated system. Visual and pedestrian impacts aside, the elevated people mover system is hampered in achieving its full potential by several external constraints. These are: 1. The number of stations. Any automated system follows a rigid standard of deceleration, docking, door opening and closure, and subsequent controlled rate of acceleration. In trying to duplicate the existing bus service by providing !0 stations along a 3.5 mile pinched loop, the time spent stopping is too high to take advantage of grade separated operation. 2. Stowing skis outside the vehicle. The assumption that skis need to be carried in racks outside the vehicle adds to the dwell time and precludes the ability to use doors or either side of the 1 vehicle separately for boarding and deboarding passengers. Single-sided boarding also adds to dwell time. A variation on a more effective use of an in-village automated people mover system is discussed later in this report. AT-GRADE HIGH CAPACITY BUS SYSTEM As an alternative to a capital intensive replacement for the existing shuttle service, the use of special high-capacity buses designed specifically for short-haul shuttle service of this type was investigated. Designed with low floors, multiple wide doors and high interior compartments for standee comfort, these vehicle types have been used for a number of years in Europe as airport apron service shuttling passengers between airplanes and terminals. The vehicles used in Denver for shuttle service along the 1 1.1 mile long 16th Street Mall are an adaption of these buses. Figure 11 illustrates the l 6th Street Mall vehicle along side the existing Town of Vail transit coach and a generic elevated monorail vehicle. Either bus is about two feet wider than this class of monorail vehicle. The special shuttle bus has a ' limited number of perimeter seats catering more to standees. A newer generation of low-floor shuttle bus has wheel base dimensions similar to the Town's existing buses and thereby should be able to operate over the same route with minimal adjustment needed. 42 ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ r r ~ ~ rs F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & ULl.EVI G1 12-15 Seats 35-39 Seata _ ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ - ~ uu~uu~u~u ~liulul~l~ll~ ilul~~~~~ ~I~u~lul~ ~I~~I'-~IuII~\ 3 ~ I e , A.d ` ' »ia wra--~ Low-Floor Nigh-Capacity Bus 35-Foot Transit Coach Monorail (Denver 16th St. Mall) Tawn of Vail Figure 11 Alternative !n-Town Shuttle Systems I 1 The main attribute of the special low-floor, high-ceiling bus is reduced dwell time at stops and ability to accommodate more passengers on board than either the conventional 35-seat bus or the 2-car generic monorail. Dwell time is minimized by the multiple doors, one-step entry/exit and ability to ' carry skis on board. The net effect of these features is an estimated 2596 improvement in system speed as compared to the existing bus operation and about a 3596 increase in line capacity of a comparable size transit bus fleet (14 vehicles) due to the combination of higher average system speed and more passenger capacity per vehicle. The cost of adding a new fleet of 1 b special low-floor buses (2 spares) including vehicle design development costs, maintenance facility modifications, and allowance for bus stop, streetscape and 1 utility improvements along the existing route is about $7.5 million (1990 The line capacity achieved by using these special shuttle buses would reduce the number of days currently experiencing overloads from 27 to b. With increases in demand induced by "Approved Expansion" the special bus fleet would be overloaded 14 days per year, or about half the current experience. Even under the full "potential" ski area expansion overloading would occur approximately 24 days per year. OPTIMAL MONORAIL VS. SPECIAL SHU i i LE BUS Analysis of the special shuttle bus shows a line capacity benefit over the existing bus service to be somewhat higher than the "replacement monorail" alternative. However, stipulating that the monorail serve the same route as the existing at-grade bus system, puts monorail technology at a competitive disadvantage. Amore practical application of an elevated people mover for in-village shuttle service would be the route described as the "Starter System" in the Lea Elliott report. This truncated route ' would connect the Covered Bridge area of Vail Village with the Gondola area of Lionshead Village via an elevated people mover. The loop would be 2.2 miles, or b396 of the existing bus route, but would encompass about 7896 of the existing boardings. Presumably a "background" bus route would continue to operate between Golden Peak and Marriott Mark (or even Cascade Village) on the west 1 to maintain central shuttle service to these areas beyond the Village Core. Within the "pinched-loop" route there would be a maximum of four stations. Each station would have a center as well as side platform to permit separate boarding and deboarding operations. Vehicle interiors would be adapted to facilitate carrying and stowing skis on board. This concept has ' been used successfully on a 4-station, 0.8 mile (each way) underground people mover system in the resort community of Serfaus, Austria. The net effort of station consolidation, dual-platform stations, and onboard skis will increase line capacity about 4496 as compared to the "starter line" capacity referenced in the Lea Elliott report. This would equate to a line capacity of 1,950 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd). With a shortened route and a higher average speed this line capacity is achieved with fewer vehicles. Ten, ' or possibly 8, 2-car trains would be needed for this "optimal" people mover configuration. The line capacity of the optimal monorail of 1,950 pphpd would be about 1396 higher than the ' maximum capacity of the high-capacity, at-grade shuttle bus system. As shown in Table 8 the cost to develop the 2.2 mile "optimal" monorail system would about $24 million. 44 ' IN-TOWN SHU i ~ LE RECOMMENDATIONSJPRIORITIES A reliable, convenient, and safe in-town shuttle is essential for mobility in Vail Village. Transit coach delivery of this service has sufficed, for the most part, for the past decade. However, if increases in visitation experienced the past few years continue into the 1990's, overcrowding and dissatisfaction with the current system capabilities will become commonplace during afternoon peak travel times for destination and day skiers. Two avenues have been explored in this study for expanding the capacity of the in-town shuttle system to match growing demand. A previously analyzed monorail system, when adapted to its most effective application, could achieve ' faster, quieter and more reliable service than the existing bus system. The Lionshead to Covered Bridge monorail as described would offer about 559b more capacity than is possible with the existing service. This would allow the shuttle system to operate without overloads on all but about six days ' per year well into the future. Not withstanding the visual, environmental, and pedestrian impacts of introducing the elevated monorail system, the development costs would be substantial about $24 million. Although not as dramatic in capacity improvement and still subject to at-grade interference, the high-capacity fleet alternative does achieve a substantial, 3896, increase in capacity at a considerably lower, $7.5 million, development cost than the monorail, see Table 8. Part of this cost is new vehicle ' acquisition a cost which will be experienced to some degree in a few years to replace existing vehicles regardless of what shuttle system decision is reached. It is recommended that the high-capacity bus alternative is the appropriate shuttle system solution for the 1992-2002 service period. The 16 vehicles needed for the shuttle fleet can be acquired over a two-season period as replacements for vehicles scheduled for retirement. In the interim period, a technical committee should develop the performance specifications for these special use vehicles and a solicitation of interest should be sent to all potential bus manufacturing bidders. In addition, a new turnaround area should be provided at the Golden Peak area as shown in Figure 1 12. Consideration should also be given to relocating the Lionshead turnaround such that the special shuttle bus would not travel in mixed traffic along the frontage road. In addition, extension of the shuttle system into Lionshead should be considered in conjunction with any potential major redevelopment of the Lionshead area. Looking beyond 2005, toward the end of the useful life of the special shuttle fleet, there may be a ' real need to advance to a grade separated people mover system because of growth in visitation and pedestrian activity at street level. To preserve this option, we suggest commissioning a follow-up technical study, at the schematic design level, of the Core Village People Mover alignment. The product of this work would be an alignment and station envelope that could accommodate a variety of future, undetermined people mover technologies which are environmentally sensitive. Not unlike future roadway widening projects, adjacent redevelopment proposals would honor the formally adopted people mover envelope in terms of set backs, subterranean construction, and architectural treatments. 45 Table 8 In-Town Shuttle Comparison Special Elevated Oaeration Parameters Low-Floor Bus Peoele Mover ' 1. Route Length (miles) 3.5 2.2 ' 2. Service Area Mariott Mark Lionshead to to Golden Peak Covered Bridge 3. Ski Placement on board on board ' 4. Avg. System Speed (mph) 7.5 10.7 ' S. Line Capacity (passengers per 1,720 1,950 (1) hour per direction) 6. Max ~ Vehicles in service @ Peak 14 8 7. Vehicle Unit 40' bus 32' 2-car train 8. Estimated Development Cost Vehicles @ 16 = @ 10 = $4,000,000 $ 3,550,000 ' Other $,3.450.000 (2) X20.450.000 (3) Total $7,450,000 $24,000,000 ' Source: TDA using Lea Elliot reports for Town of Vail dated 2/16/87 & 3/22/90. Detailed calculations are presented in the Technical Appendix Report. ' (1) Optimal capacity, assumes 4-station, dual platform system. (Stations would be established based upon a more detailed operations and feasibility study.) (2) Includes an allowance for expanded maintenance faciiities for special buses, minor roadway improvements, enhanced bus loading facilities as outlined in the Streetscape Plan, engineering, and contingencies. ' (3) Includes fixed facilities, engineering and contingencies. 46 F E L S 8 U R G HOLT & ULLEV{ GI ~ - ~ ~ tennis Courts ~ Bus r Manor Vail , ~ ; \ \ ~ , ; Loading Ares 1 r" _ Golden Peak , , Ski Base ~ ~ L Ski ~ ~ ~ School aL L No Stairs ~ Required ~ ~ F+ , \ Pedestrian Area ~ = . Pedestrian Walkway Legend andscaped Areas Parking Spaces Golden Peak Bus Traffic Flow Children "s Ski Center • ~ General Traffic Flow Figure 12_ Golden Peak Area Short Term Concept Not to Scale 47 I ' OUTLYING BUS SYSTEM Vail currently operates five bus routes serving outlying areas including the East Vail area, Golf Course, West Vail north of I-70, West Vail south of I-70, and the Sandstone area. All routes originate at the Village Transportation Center which serves as a transfer point between Town routes as well as to Down Valley routes. ' The Vail bus system as it currently exists provides a high degree of mobility to the Town in both geographic coverage and service frequency. However, there are certain problems and concerns, in the way the system functions which require improvements. o The East Vail route, which has the highest ridership (other than the In-Town Shuttle), runs every 15 minutes during the peak hours of the day. During the busiest times, this bus fills ' completely by the time it reaches the Vail Racquet Club. Many riders must wait for another bus or try to enter an already overloaded vehicle. o The two West Vail routes are segregated by Interstate 70. While service provided to each side of the freeway is good, service between the north side and the south side of the freeway is not. To cross I-70, riders must take the bus back to the Village Transportation Center and transfer to the other West Vail route resulting in unacceptable travel times. o There is a general desire to expand service throughout the Town in terms of frequency as well as geographic coverage. o Improved and expanded service is required far Ford Park. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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 ' West Vail requires improved service between the north side and the south side of I-70. The most appropriate service concept is an "opposing loop" configuration in which one bus route would circulate clockwise along the frontage roads between West Vail and the VTC, and another route would circulate in the counter-clockwise direction. Riders in West Vail would be able to cross the freeway by simply boarding the appropriate bus. In addition, these routes could also serve the existing Sandstone route. Service to East Vail should be structured such that combining it with the golf course route should occur only in the evening after the peak period. Currently, these routes are separate during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods, but are combined during the midday and evening periods. Ridership from the East Vail area and the golf course area is substantial enough to warrant a separate route to each 1 area for all except the late evening hours. 48 ROUTE COVERAGE EXPANSION OPTIONS Several areas within the Town have been considered for formal bus service expansion. These areas and their expansion potential are described below: o Lions Ridge Loop -There is a general desire to route a bus along this roadway. However, there are grade and geometric deficiencies which require upgrading before a bus can operate safely along this road. Therefore, it is recommended that when the necessary roadway improvements are accomplished, service along Lions Ridge loop be examined in detail. ' o Chamonix Lane -There is also a desire to route a bus along this road west of Chamonix Road. There are also grade and geometric deficiencies along this road which require upgrading before a bus can be operated safely. As was the case on Lions Ridge loop, bus service on this ' road should be re-evaluated upon completion of the necessary physical improvements. o Ford Park - A separate route will need to be provided specifically to Ford Park on Fridays, ' Saturdays, and Sundays during the ski season to accommodate visitors as well as residents and employees. During non-peak times, Ford Park will be served by the East Vail route. o Lupine Road/Columbine Drive in East Vail -The possibility of rerouting the East Vail route ' along these roadways was evaluated. However, it was determined that this change would add travel time to the route with no increase in ridership. Potential passengers along this segment are served via Big Horn Road. r o Main Gore Circle North -Rerouting the East Vail bus once it reaches Main Gore Drive is necessary to reduce travel time back to the Transportation Center. This bus generally fills completely during the A.M. peak hour by the time it reaches the Vail Racquet Club, and it is best at that point to route it directly back to the Transportation Center. SERVICE FREQUENCY IMPROVEMENT NEEDS The entire outlying bus system requires increased service frequencies to accommodate projected ridership levels. Pending implementation of the various recommended route modifications a revised ' frequency plan should be implemented. RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES ' The following define the recommended improvements to the outlying bus routes prioritized byshort- 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 13. 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 14. 49 ~ ~ ~ r ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 l T & U L L E V I G 1 REII $ANI151UN6IIOAD X00 winter service to this area VAII VIEW UIIIVE • A " ~ provided via separate y°~,~~°; •~~";~;',~;;A o Sandstone Route as it currently exists. :c .S~ e JJ~~1 11 un ~.Ip1A • IIMBfN SIMBA• :1 Q , RUN VMC R=N ~'•0REA1(AWnv WE51 :~~EII `,nNI1C1ilNE ROAD ~t PEDESTgIAN OVERPASS LAEfe~~~-VAII OAS SCNONE , - _ SAfEWAY At-A° -1~~.- RFfI SANDSTONE SCUDOI Gr°,•' , wl •.1 vnn "~M,fPGN"G ~ INTEHS7AiE ~OEASiERSi~iE ~o WESi - Io.IRDM V I c INN AI VAII ~ MAf T ~ I ..J VAII Ylil )EI :i`~IIINA 7 , ~ WESTIIAVCN BDII DING E _ DRIVE • , 'O M411FIIr1ORN CASCADE L TO/FROM V T C :E .••5 E ~ CIIAMONIx-ERONTAGE ~ ~ P „ ~ • •ryd ~~p •~i'D' •IIAI'l(~P~••) ~ ' ° LI InI1nIDrtS O ~//A PTAl1Al11iAN .\Iln llf '~~IRT ~ f1ONBNEAO srREAATSIDE ~°s ~i ,,0 ~ ~ UNDE RI`ASS , OO/O CE O :I INTERMOUNTAIN --t~- INTERMOIINIAIN .E BRIpGE , G D ~ O T ~ ii: • ~i~~L~ ~ ~rAE PfIOw CREEK Legend Clockwise Route Counter-Clockwise Route • Bus Stops Figure 13 Recommended West Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale F E L S 8 U fl G HOLT ~ 11 L L E V I G FAILS ur vnu VAII MOUNtAtN • ~ SCHOO/IL BALD MUUN 1 AIN HUAU ~Q; f.~-~ ~ l INTERalATE TO WEST • - • r--------- INTERSTATE 70 ~A ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ S=RONTAGE ROAD ~ A.PEN LANE PIT~N CREEK PARK EAST VAIL FORD PARK _ lAIL EAST CONDOS ..r~ - - 1 t UPINEi C~LUMBINEiBIGHORN ROAD 14 1610 SUN9URST DRIVE • GOLF CLUB HOUSE E11GriURN ROAD / MANOR VAIL • " ~Or. is • ~ ~ B ' yell a/!ey ~ ~ ~ V ye STREAMSIDE CIRCLE /Oho ~ Roa d ~N~~CCER FIELD 1448 VAIL VALLEY DRIVE ~ • ~ Clrcle East ~ - - t u~~LhtN PtAn ~ PTARMIGAN' , MAIN GORE- TARMIGAN ~ ~ VAIL RACQUET .IUNtPER ROAD WEST ROAO EAST TIMBER FALIS CLUB BIGHORN ~ • ~ PARK ~ ~ Q• ~ MOUNTAIN MEAOOWS.~`• s ~ ~ Legend ate.,, ~ East Vail Bus Route ~ Golf Course Bus Route ~ MEADOW LANE EAST fAeeeAe - - - - Ford Park Bus Route ~ • Bus Stops Figure 14 Recommended East Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale 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 - I S Minutes - Golf Course Route - 30 Minutes - Combined East VailJGolf Course Route (late evening) - 30 Minutes ' - Ford Park Weekend Service - I S 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 horizontal and vertical geometric improvements to these roadways. DOWN VALLEY 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. ~ ~ 52 1 I-70 ACCESS 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. The East Vail interchange, though used some by day skiers, is not utilized to the extent that the other two are and has not historically been known to be congested. Physical and operational characteristics of the West Vail interchange are as follows: o Extremely close spacing of ramp intersections and frontage road intersections. o All approaches into the interchange area are single lane including the roadway through the overpass. No exclusive turn lanes are provided at any of the intersections. ' o The interchange area processes about 2,200 vehicles during the evening peak hour of which 55 percent are oriented toJfrom I-70 and 45 percent are vehicles crossing I-70. Of the I-70 traffic, about two-thirds are oriented towards Down Valley. Existing peak hour traffic 1 volumes are shown in the Technical Appendix. o During peak conditions, excessive delay can be experienced on the westbound North Frontage Road approach. The Main Vail interchange experiences even heavier vehicular use and is characterized by the following: 1 o Extremely close spacing of ramp intersections and the South Frontage Road intersection. 0 4-way stop intersection south of the interchange with multi-lane approaches serving nearly ' all I-?0 oriented traffic as well as serving as the merging point for the north and south frontage roads. During peak periods, this intersection "bottlenecks" the interchange area and frequently requires manual officer control. o The interchange processes about 3,250 vehicles during the evening peak hour of which 75 percent are oriented to/from I-70 and 25 percent are vehicles crossing I-70. Existing peak hour traffic volumes are shown in the Technical Appendix. o During peak conditions (particularly P.M. peak conditions), excessive delay can be experienced for "I-70 bound" vehicles at the four-way stop (i.e., eastbound lefts, northbound throughs and westbound rights). As mentioned, existing peak hour traffic volumes indicative of peak season conditions are presented in the Technical Appendix. In addition, pro jected future peak hour volumes are also presented which reflect ski expansion that has been approved. Future projected traffic volumes are 15 to 20 percent higher than existing traffic. 1 53 1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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 4596 of the traffic volume at the West Vail interchange and approximately 2596 of the traffic volume at the main Vail interchange is crossing I-70 as opposed to entering or exiting the freeway. In addition, I-70 is currently crossed at-grade by a significant number of pedestrians resulting in major safety hazards. An analysis of interchange turning movement patterns was conducted using actual peak hour traffic counts at both the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges in order to determine how much utilization a new crossing of I-70 would receive. Clearly many trips which currently cross I-70 would not divert to a new I-70 crossing if it would require longer travel distances and greater travel time. On the other hand if a new I-70 crossing provided either a shorter travel distance or a reduced travel time for a significant number of trips, then another crossing of I-70 would provide significant benefits. The results of the analysis of actual traffic counts resulted in the identification of two major travel patterns and several minor travel patterns which would benefit from a new crossing of I-70. The two major travel patterns are: o Trips between the South Frontage Road/Nail Road (passing through the 4-way stop) and the North Frontage Road amount to nearly 600 vehicles in the peak hour alone. While not all of ' these trips would divert to a new crossing of I-70 it was calculated that approximately 240 of these trips would experience both a shorter travel distance and a reduced travel time and that approximately another 120 vehicles would experience a reduced travel time during peak congestion periods by utilizing a new I-70 crossing. This results in a diversion in excess of 5096 (360 trips out of 600) which is an extremely high diversion potential. 54 o The second major travel pattern benefitted by a new crossing of I-70 includes trips between the North Frontage Road (east of the West Vail interchange) and the South Frontage Road (also east of the West Vail interchange). This volume amounts to nearly 300 trips in the peak hour of which 100 trips would experience a reduced travel distance or a reduced travel time by utilizing a new I-70 crossing. Together, these two major travel patterns provide an expected volume demand of 460 trips which would use a new I-70 crossing if it were in place immediately. When these trips are combined with other minor travel patterns and when future growth in travel demand levels is included, it is conservatively estimated that 600 to b50 vehicles would utilize a new I-70 crossing during the peak hour of travel. Therefore, an intermediate crossing of I-70 is anticipated to result in the following benefits: ' o Volume demands at the Main Vail interchange will be reduced. o Traffic using the 4-way stop will be reduced. o Volume demands at the West Vail interchange will be reduced. - o Pedestrian and bicycle safety will be enhanced. o Shorter trip lengths and reduced vehicle miles of travel will occur for travel across I 70. 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 Interchange alternatives for the West Vail interchange are as follows: 0. No Action 1. Single Point Diamond (Urban) 2. Relocated EB and WB Entry Ramps 3. Relocate West Leg of North Frontage Road 4. Relocate West Leg of North Frontage Road and Relocate WB Entry Ramp 5. Relocate West and East Legs of North Frontage Road 6. Relocate West Leg of North Frontage Road and Provide New Connection Between Frontage Road and Chamonix Road; Restrict East Leg of North Frontage Road to Right Turns Only These alternatives are shown diagrammatically in table 9. 55 1 Table 9 1 West Vail Interchange Design Alternatives Alternative Characteristics p, Existing Situation for comparison. L , Combines ramp terminals into onesntersection. Reduces turning movement conflicts. Increases intersection spacing. 1 _ 2, Relocates EB and WB entries to Frontage Road. Simplifies individual intersection operations. Complicates directional signing to I-70. 3, ~ Provides additional spacing to I-70 for west Leg of North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations at east Leg of North J Frontage Road. 4 1 56 Table 9 lcorr`t) West Vail Interchange Design Alternatives Alternative Characteristics 4, ~ Provides additional spacing to I-70 for west 1 leg of North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations on North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations at north ramp terminal. 5. / 1 Increases intersection spacing on north side. J 6. ~ Provides additional spacing to I-70 for west leg of North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations on North Frontage Road. Requires access to Chanonix Road from / commercial area. r ~ 5~ ' An initial screening of the West Vail interchange alternatives and input from the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee indicated that certain options are not financially or operationally feasible. The following alternatives were eliminated from consideration. o Alternative 1 -Single Point Diamond (Urban) This alternative would alleviate some of the intersection spacing concerns, but it would have little affect on operations at the adjacent 4-way stop intersections. Though an urban interchange would be more beneficial at West Vail than Main Vail since intersection spacing is a concern on both sides of the interchange, the benefits would not be justified by its excessive cost. o Alternative 2 -Relocate Eastbound and Westbound Entry Ramps This alternative would somewhat be beneficial in alleviating intersection spacing concerns, but it would force additional traffic through the adjacent 4-way stop intersections, particularly the North Frontage Road intersection which is the primary bottleneck of the interchange area. Therefore, this alternative may actually worsen traffic operations on the North Frontage Road. Relocating the eastbound on-ramp does benefit the South Frontage Road and remains a viable option. o Alternative 5 -Relocate West and East Legs of North Frontage Road This alternative would be beneficial to alleviate intersection spacing concerns along the north side, but it would be very difficult to relocate the east leg of this road. Grade differences would be very difficult to negotiate and the roadway would need to be located extremely close to existing buildings. Relocating the west leg of the intersection remains a viable option. o Alternative 6 -Relocate West Leg of North Frontage Road and Provide New Connection Between the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Road; Restrict East Leg of North Frontage i Road to Right Turns Only This alternative would be very beneficial in alleviating congestion along the north side of the interchange. It was also determined that a new "connector" roadway between Chamonix Road and the North Frontage Road in the vacant lot adjacent to Safeway would alleviate congestion at the interchange. However, the additional traffic that this alternative would introduce to Chamonix Road was deemed undesirable. The remaining Alternatives 3 and 4 are essentially identical with the only difference being where the westbound on-ramp would be located. This is not a significant difference since Chamonix Road, North Frontage Road, and the north ramps operate as a single multi-legged intersection. The important element in these two alternatives is the realignment of the North Frontage Road between Wendv's and the Texaco service station. A revised traffic control scheme is inherent in this 1 configuration where both legs of the North Frontage Road would be stop-sign controlled at their respective "T" intersections, and traffic along Chamonix Road would have the right-of-way. Demand responsive control may be necessary during peak hours, however at the Chamonix/North Frontage Road/north ramps intersection. 58 1 The remaining option to potentially improve the south intersection is the relocation of the eastbound on-ramp as was shown as part of Alternative 2. 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 illustrated as avolume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio which documents the percent of available capacity used and are shown in Table 10. V/C ratios greater than 0.9 indicate that roadway segments are experiencing undesirable levels of delay and congestion. These analyses for the proposed modifications reflect turning lane additions as is shown in Figure 15. Table 10 West Vail Traffic Volume-to-Capacity Summary Future Demand/ Existing Network w/ Future Existing Future (1) New I-70 Demand/ Demand/ Demand/ Crossing Future Existing Existing (Simba Run} Network Intersection Network Network Only (FiQUre I51 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 (1) Future demand is based upon approved ski area expansion levels. (2) Demand responsive traffic control (traffic signal or manual control}. Manual traffic control is the preferred option and method used by the Town of Vail. WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES Given the results in Table 10, 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 I5. o When the vacant lot adjacent to Vail Das Schone developer, provide a connector roadway between the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Road. Construction costs for the West Vail improvements as shown in Figure 15 are estimated to be approximately $225,000 plus landscaping, engineering, contingencies, and land acquisition. 1 59 FELSBUFiG H 0 L T ~ U L L E Y I G i+ ~ wendys Texaco Demand responsive ' control will be ~ required in the future. f' N. Frontage Ad. 1 1 ,(~~~p off Ram 1 ~n a; 1 ~ x - o l-TO E r U ~ff,R d~~ j ~~_RamP ~ f t . J S. Frontage Rd. 1 Legend ~ Lane for Indicated Movement I -s.- Stop Sign Figure )5 Recommended West Vai! Interchange Improvements Not to Scale 60 , ' MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVES The range of alternatives for the Main Vail interchange is summarized in Table 11. Shown are alternatives that have been previously considered for Vail as well as new and modified alternatives and supplemental improvements. Table 12 shows the Main Vail interchange alternatives diagrammati- cally. ' An initial screening of the Main Vail interchange alternatives yield several that should be omitted from detail analysis. The following illustrates which alternatives are no longer considered and the reasoning for omitting it. o Alternative 1 -Close Vail Road at 4-Way Stop This alternative would force Vail Road traffic to reroute along East Meadow Drive to Village Center Road in order to reach the Frontage Road. Traffic would be detoured through a pedestrian area. "De-pedestrianizing" East Meadow Drive has been considered unacceptable and is sufficient reason to drop this alternative from detailed analysis. o Alternative 2 -Single Point Diamond (Urban) This alternative would alleviate some of the intersection spacing concerns, but it would have little affect on operations at the 4-way stop intersection. Therefore, any benefits that would be gained by this alternative would not be justified by its excessive cost. o Alternative 4 -Relocate Eastbound Entry Ramp ' This alternative will simplify some of the traffic operations that are occurring under the interchange, but basic travel patterns will not differ significantly and the 4-way stop intersection will remain congested. o Alternative 5 -High Capacity Diamond This alternative provides minimal operational benefits but it will not improve turning movements off the ramps nor will it have any affect on operations at the 4-way stop intersection since its travel patterns would not change. Therefore, this alternative is dropped from further evaluation. o Alternative 6 -Relocate Eastbound and Westbound Entry Ramps This alternative has the same impact as Alternative 4 along the south side of the interchange and would further enhance north ramp intersection operations. However, basic travel patterns will not be altered significantly and the 4-way stop intersection will still be congested during peak periods. The remaining alternatives (3, 7 and 8} have been evaluated as to their impact on interchange operations. Table 13 shows the volume-to-capacity ratios at key intersections for each alternative. In addition to the 4-way stop and ramp intersections, other intersections are presented whose operations are an important consideration. in evaluating each alternative. 61 Table 11 Main Vail Interchange Concept Alternatives Alternative Comments Previously Considered Alternatives, 0. No Action Used as base case for comparative analysis. ' 1. Close Vail Road at 4-Way Stop To be re-evaluated in terms of the entire I-70 2. Single Point Diamond (Urban) access system for the long-range transportation 3. Remove/Modify EB Exit Ramp; plan 1 Provide New Ramp(s) at VA Shops 4. Relocate EB Entry Ramp 5. High Capacity Diamond 1 Traffic signals were proposed to be included in all of the alternatives previously considered. New or Modified Alternatives, ' 6. Relocate EB and WB Entry Ramps 7. Extend North Frontage Road East 1 8. Relocate East Ramps to Existing Underpass East of Golf Course (Modified Split Diamond) Sug~lemental Actions Previously Considered 9. Frontage Road Modifications Whilenotrecommendedasisolatedalternatives, ' (One-Way, Widen, Relocate) these actions are an integral part (in varying 10. Additional I-70 Crossings degrees) of any future improvement option. 11. Signing Modifications ' 12. Expanded Peripheral Parking 13. Expanded Bus Services 14. Manual Traffic Control 62 Table 12 ' Main Vail Interchange Design Alternatives Alternative Characteristics 0. ~ Existing situation for comparison. 1. Converts 4-way stop to 3-way stop. Diverts traffic to Village Center Road. Impacts Meadow Drive pedestrian zone. 2. Combines ramp terminals into one intersection. ' _ Reduces turning movement conflicts. Increases intersection spacing. ' 3. New exit/entry ramps at VA shops. A Right turns only at EB exit to Vail Road. / Operational analysis to be done without signals. 1 Y Y ~ Federal access approval to I-70 exists. f d. Relocates EB entry to South Frontage Road. Simplifies operations at EB exit ramp. Complicates directional signing to I-70 east. 1 63 Table 12 lcon't1' . ' Main Vaif Interchange Design Alternatives A{ternative Characteristics 5. Increases laneage at existing interchange. Retains all existing traffic patterns. 6. Relocates EB and WB entries to Frontage Roads. Simplifies individual intersection operations. Complicates directional signing to i-70. 7. T ~ Provides new I-70 crossing east of Main Vail ' interchange. Reduces traffic through interchange area. 8. ~ ~ Relocates east ramps to existing underpass east of golf course. Reduces traffic through interchange and 4- way stop. 64 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1? Table 13 Main Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary Future Demand on Existing Future Network w/ Future Demand Future Existing Future New I-70 Demand/ Vail Valley Demand/ Demand/ Demand/ Crossing VA Shops Connection/ Booth Falls Existing Existing (Simba Run) Ramps Underpass Split Diamond intersection Neh~~nrk Ngtwprk nnty (Alta 31 {Alt, 71 (Alt. 81 Vail Road/North Ramps (Left Turns) 1.16 1.33 1.21 1.21 0.96 0.77 (1) 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 RoadJVA Shops Area - - - 0.89 (2) - - South Frontage Road/Nail Valley Drive 1.14 1.2b 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. (2) Demand responsive traffic control required (manual control or traffic signal). (3} Intersection modification required (lower South Frontage Road). It can be seen from Table 13 that Alternative 8, relocating the east ramps to the Booth Falls underpass, would yield the best intersection operations given the appropriate traffic control and intersection improvements. Alternative 3 is significantly over capacity at Vail Road/north ramps ' intersection without demand responsive control. In additioa demand response control is required at a tots! of three other intersections while Alternative 7 and 8 require demand responsive control at only two intersections. While Alternative 7 results in significant overall improvements to traffic operations, it is the least effective in eliminating congestion at the 4-way stop even under demand responsive control. In addition to traffic operations, right-of-way considerations, approvals required, physical and visual ' impacu, and construction costs are also important. These aspects are summarized for each alternative in Table 14. In addition, each aspect has been subjectively rank ordered by alternative, and rankings have been summed for an overall ranking of each alternative for comparative planning purposes. Table 1 S illustrates the results. MAIN V AIL INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORY r ~~S 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 f Long-range solution will work. Long-Term o Relocate the east ramps to the Booth Falls underpass as shown in Figure 16. The westbound off-ramp/East Frontage Road intersection will require stop sign traffic control in all directions. o Continue to manually control the 4-way stop intersection during peak periods which is Vail's 1 preferred traffic control method. o Depress and modify the South Frontage Road in the vicinity of Vail Valley Drive and manually control the intersection during peak hours. This is required because the existing grades on Vail Valley Drive necessitates that the minor roadway have the right-of-way. This greatly impacts the capacity of the major roadway and will only worsen in the future. 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. The Town's preferred control method is to provide manual control ' with designated traffic control personnel. 66 Table l4 Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives Planning Alternative/Phase R lW Implicaxionc Aanrovals ReauirP~ Phvsical implications Level Cost 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. A facility of the Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District will have to be maintained on the south side of the interchange. Visual and noise impacts on adjacent neighborhoods. Lowering of Vail Palley Drive/SFR intersection. Vail Valley R/W required along with No I-70 access approval Retaining walls required for cut area $2.OM o, Connection/ slope easements north of required for NFR extension. on 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. Lowering of Vail Valley Drive/ SFR intersection. VA Shops Ramps R/W required in the VA shops I-70 access approval is New intersection on SFR at VA $1.2M area (Holly Cross site). 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 he conditioned on the interchange. Removal of large evergreen trees. installation of traffic signal equipment. (1) Costs are in 1990 dollars and do not include land acquistion nor improvements to the frontage roads beyond the interchange area. it ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ Table 15 Main Vail Interchange Alternative Ranking Right- Traffic of-Way Institutional Physical Visual Interchange Alternative n era ions Imnar_,( Conside~a,(i,~ns Imoac( Im a Cyst Rank Sum Alternative 3 3 3 1 1.5 2 2 12.5 VA Shops Rarnps Alternative 7 2 1.5 1.5 3 3 3 14.0 NFR Vail Valley Connection Alternative 8 1 1.5 3 1.5 2 1 10.0 Booth Falls Split Diamond ~ Note: 1 =Good, 2 =Moderate, 3 =Poor ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G North Frontage Road Remove Ramps Damp ~ Booth Fal{s Area n I-70 ~ ~ ti o off`Ra ~ / f~\~d mp South Frontage Road ti ~~~Ramp 0 Qr y Figure 16 Recommended Main Vail Interchange Improvements Not to Scale ' FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM 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 toad system. o Provision of additional crossing capacity of 1-70 (as discussed previously) in order to relieve ' traffic congestion at the West Vail and Main Vail interchange areas. 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 between them. Figure 17 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 center turn lanes are recommended to occur along approximately 4.5 miles of the frontage roads and landscaping is recommended at major intersections and interest points. o Special safety improvements including guardrail and street li htin at intersections and on 8 g ( several roadway segments in high activity areas where pedestrians are present), non- ' residential segments, and at the end of center medians are recommended. o Exclusive left turn lanes are recommended for 23 intersections; 19 of these intersections ' currently have no such provisions. Further analysis and design detail will be required prior to implementation. ' Included with the adoption of the Yail Transportation Plan, 50-scale functional drawings will document specific locations and dimensions for implementing the Frontage Road Concept Plan. The planning level cost estimate for implementing the frontage road improvements is approximately $4.5 to $5.0 million. 1 1 _ 1 ' FELSBUAG HOLT b U L L E V I G O O o ~ ~ m o y c h t W 0 C O ~ ~ m 0 ~ O ~ lL 0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ t 2 O a ~ m ~ N p O 0 0 O ~ m ~ m ~ ~ m o ~ ~f ~ Y o m O o • ~ ' ......••a Q U 0 m 0 r'~ ~ r O° •••.•r•••..••••Fro0ta9e - m ••ri Q ~ 0 0 ~ m o ' ~ ~ ''•M....... W . 3 3 o ~ ~ o 0 3 0 m U Q c o 3 e - m om; Y p m v° m o D 2 ~ c 2: ~ o m E m r' ~ ~ h 0 m 2~ p ~ o m 'm •r U ~ ~ • pc O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ m 4 3 m V r m ~ ~ U ~'~o • Q ~ m 3 ~ m ~ ~ g. mQ m v0~ 2 9a • • m , ~ ~ E ~ ~ m o /9horn ey.~ U y ~ ~ ~ J m Oa~~ •~0y` o m ~ .a a40~.~~P°~ m c~ 0 3 c ``rF`~ ~`oc`a4 50 ~o ,`r Legend 4-Thru Lanes, Center Lett Turn Lane or Landscaping, 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides ' 2-Thru Lanes. Center Left Turn Lane or Landscaping, 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides ?-Thru Lanes. 6-Foot Bikepath Both Sides ' • Provide Exclusive Left Turn Lanes Figure 17 V ~ Frontage Road Concepf Plan f North ~ ' 71 ' SEPARATION OF CONFLICTING 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 18. Three key elements of the core area concept are described below. ' Pedestrian improvements are proposed to occur along significant portions of East Lionshead Circle, East Meadow Drive and West Meadow Drive from Lionshead to the VTC. Separation of pedestrian areas from the In-Town Shuttle consist of delineated walkways and busways with improved geometries 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. The Master Streetscape Plan is currently underway to specifically identify pedestrian improvements on 20-scale drawings. In addition to the improvements to Meadow Drive, implementation of the streamwalk as mentioned in the Master Recreation Trails Plan also improves the pedestrian connection between Lionshead and Vail Village. 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. 1 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 at Ford Park and modification of the Athletic Club bridge. 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: i 72 1 ~ ~ ~ r r r N 0 L j & ULLEVI G, Pedestrian Bridge ~ Lionshead d ~ Parking Structure e ~FF~~E Ice Arena ~`O~~a~ eQ`~ ~Eat'shaa~~r~~i~ba Library¦ ~HOSDiIaI r_7~ . ~`o~~a~ ~ Meadows pr. ~ Tc ~ ~ ford Park See also GPfa S `a~~ VaII~Y~` •AthteticFleld Delivery Golden Peak Legend - luiunq~u+wn Pedestrian Priority Corridor Potential i-Way Auto Route Figure 18 ~ Control Point t Plan Core Area Concep ~ _ ~ Pedestrian rea ~ North _ ' 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 an exclusive separated pedestrian/transitway to Golden Peak by eliminating or minimizing the need for acquiring additional right-of-way and improving the efficiency of the In-Town Shuttle along this segment of roadway. o Beyond Golden Peak, the width gained could be used for a separated bicycie/pedestrian path without the need to acquire additional right-of-way or roadway widening. 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 035 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. o The Golden Peak turnaround area for the In-Town Shuttle would function more efficiently because buses would have an exclusive drive lane and traffic would not require a turnaround due to its one-way flow. ' 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. 74 1 TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE The Town of Vail has adopted a Recreation Trail Master Plan a which specifies a broad range of trail types. 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-street, separated recreation trails were recommended along the Valley and are included in the Implementation Plan as illustrated in Figures 19A, 19B and 19C. These figures are followed by narrative descriptions of eight study links requiring more detailed analysis. In addition to the 6-foot bike paths along all Frontage Roads, there was strong community support evidenced in the public input process and community surveys for a separated trail from Vail Pass to Dowd Junction. The following areas have been identified as important additions to the Recreation Trail Master Plan in order to ultimately provide a fully separated system. o Dowd Junction to Intermountain o Stephen's Park to Donovan Park o Library to Vail Village o Golden Peak to Katsos Ranch o East Vail Interchange to Gore Creek Campground Meadow Drive and Vail Valley Drive currently exhibit safety problems and are two priority areas requiring improvement. These issues are being addressed in the Streetscape Master Plan currently underway in the Village area. The planning level construction costs of these additional trails is estimated to be in the range of $2,000,000. 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. ' a Recreation Trail Master Plan, 1988, Winston Associates. ' 75 r r--~---' 8 ~ LEGEND E%ISIING TRAILS _ _ Donovan Park , uunnur~ FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES l - ~ ' ' , n•n.n FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES i, • . • • ON STREET TRAIL ~~j ' ~ 1 OFF SINEEI TRAIL &dlu Geeh Park ` L PEDESI RIAN PAIR 'T;"~~., ~ ~ I • BRIDGE Q ~ \ r, , ® REST STAT101J 3 ~ , ~ i WEST VAIL E%li ~ \ T ~ c~.J~~r R ~ . IIJ! r ` Studv Llnk 2 ~ ~ :L,'- Connects West Gore Creek Circle with Matterhorn Cir- • _ cle/Donovan Park. This trail would be established within y, 1 available right-of-way end easements. Trait should be as Y close to Gore Creek as practical. '----_'.T i+ SIWGMrS Parts Ilul urcl .,1~,'~r ~ ~ ~ ~ WEST VA I L 1 ~ _ PROPOSED • , , IMPLEMENTATION ~ " ~ PLAN _ / / 2 Ln3/1,~~ '3[~Qu'~c>1rJ `u~3l~l~l~. Trail cmnecls / ~IA7lIQ~ U lSW I>"ISlY.1{IV_-' - lo HgKway 6 ~ Studv Link 1 ~ Connect Stephens Park with the trail Just west of the Conoco ' y " station; the troll would wind through the Streamslde at Vall property and a bridge is required from Streamslde to Conoco. ~ r, ~ o~E:.ru rase Requires a bridge across Gore Creek at Stephens Park. Uses parts of the West Gas easement over the hill. Easements ~ required from private properties on the east side and permission from the Forest Service. Sensltlvity required for ~i f1 u r e 1 9 a surrounding neighborhood and natural environment. :7 ~ r ~ ~ ~iansH~Bridge _ ~ar,~t~l,~, Bar ~ 2 ~r ~r s~ ~ ~ ~ r o ~ l_ ionsMead t.Aall CENTRAL VAIL EXIT Sandstone Park • ~ 4 1V~~'w ke Arena and Leary I ~ Fad Park 12 ~ ~ ~ 1 I I 1 Vad Vdtag! 7 • _ _ •.a~~~ llll~ t r, Tol Lot j~ Head Tenni! Canl9 _ / ~ ti .1 ~ Gatl Peek Ski -.-)J/ 111 1 . Base Facilities ~Y' i ~ 5 Athletic FieltlS i a >>>>,~~I,. SEE CORE ARfA OfiA0. 8 Studv Llnk 3 b From UonsheadNall Ubrary area to connect with the troll at Studv Llnk 4 the Vista 8ahn. Either use the existing brtdge at Uonshead or provide a new brtdge at the Ubrary. Use the stream tract MaJor connection between Vall Village and the Katsos Ranch where possible and acquire easements where necessary to Trial which may need phasing. Trail generally follows the proceed from Uonshead to the west o} the chapel on the current Vall trail alignment. If phases are needed, Ills best to south side of the creek. Sensltlvlty required for the surround- start et the golf course maintenance }aclllty and tie Into Ing neighborhoods and natural environment. Troll either Katsos. If further phases are determined practical, these connects with Beaver Dam Road or crosses the creek and would be from the golf course maintenance facility to West proceeds to Vall Road. Use Val1 Road and the forest access Ptarmigan Circle and from West Ptarmigan Circle to Golden with minor widening to provide the trail connection to the Peak. Extensive easements end use of U.S.F.S. lends Is Vista Bahn. required. Sensfllvky to the surrounding neighborhood end natural environment Is necessary. LEGEND EXISTItJG TRAILS CENTRAL VAI L dluauW FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES rr•rr•n FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES PROPOSED ON~STREET TRAIL IMPLEMENTATION OFF STREET TRAIL PLAN PEDESTRIAN PATN G°3[~C~G3C~QuDOnM ~~Q01~~ BRIOGE ~ r ® REST STATIDN . ~ / II~\\' aor.! r~• rev an uer nor I . 1e• M Figure 19b rr r ~r r r ~r . r ~r ~ r r r r r r~ r r 3 - Booth Falls iaviis Cams 8 Gdl c?,bnwse I ~ I Study Llnk B 1 - R rt . - ~ L EAST VAIL E%IT 1=• Connection hom the Vall Racquet Club through Bighorn Park _ , off T . ~ G - t to connect to Main Gore Drive North and requlres easements. - ~ - - - - ~ _ Trail section needs to be sensitive to the surrounding _ 4~~~~EIF~ s_ trees neighborhoods and natural environment. o ==~~~.3:_. 5 ,~,T.: . y ~ r ~ r I I ~ Study LJnk 5 " ~ Direct Ilnk to Wplne Drive which connects the bridge across ! Gore Creek to alpine Drive. The Town would need to acquire ~ 6` Study Llnk 4 Lot 5 Bighorn Subdivision, Second Addition, which has the _ ~ pond on tt to complete the Ilnk. \ Goll Course 7 Study Llnk 6 / Rt Maintenance Connects Nugget Lane with Meadow Orlve. Trail requlres ~ ~ ` Faculty ecquisttlon of easements. This connection must be senslUve to the surrounding neighborhood and natural environment. .y.__ Study Llnk 7 $k,¢rp'n Paik e~ Connection from MeadowDrive through the Vall Racquet Club property to Bighorn Park and requlres extensive easements. _ _ Sensitivity to the surrounding neighborhood end natural \ LEGEND envronment Is Important. E%ISTING TRAILS EAST VAIL ~ ~ - punuuy FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES - PROPOSED Trail to Fresco. Copper Manlain, u•u•n FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES 8recke+vidge • ON-STREET TRAIL IMPLEMENTATION OFF-STREET IAAIL PLAN ~ . w•»»., PEDESTRIAN PATH UULSl~ilf OlSQ111Il~JUV II Ul1QOLL-~ I • • BRIDGE E ~ ® REST STATgN ~ ~ r EGLE f • w W7E MR f9eE . Figure 19c ' IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS ' Along-range plan, by its very nature, is implemented over an extended time-frame sometimes as long as 20 years. During this period it is often found that priorities change, funding capabilities vary, and new ideas are developed. Therefore, the implementation process for the Vail Transportation Plan must, like the plan itself, be flexible -able to respond to changing conditions and new funding opportunities. The implementation process typically consists of three elements: o Prioritization o Funding Identification 1 o Actual Project Implementation PRIORITIZATION The Vail Transportation Plan documents actionJproject priorities within each travel mode or topic area including short-term and long-term recommendations. On the other hand, priorities among travel modes (for example, implementing transit improvements before or after pedestrian ' improvements) is a more subjective process ultimately defined by local elected officials with input from the community. During the course of the study, however, the projects that generated a substantial level of interest and general support for implementation include: o Removal of truck loading zones on Bridge Street and control of trucks throughout the Village area. i o Implementation of an underpass of I-70 in the Simba Run area. o Implementation of a consolidated truck loading facility at the Christiania parking lot. o Continued implementation of the trails plan. o Improvement to the I-70 interchanges including landscaping, safety and capacity improve- ments, and pedestrian and bicycle considerations. These recommendations are based upon the planning process outlined in this report. Prior to any actual implementation, afull public input process and detailed design would need to be undertaken for each project. General plan priorities are listed in Table 16 by travel mode or topic area as detailed in the body of this report. 79 ' Table 16 Generalized Plan Priorities ' Time Frame in Years . ActioniProiect 1-S 6-10 11-20 20+ Vail,Village Deliveries Remove Truck Loading Zones * o Bridge Street ' o Mill CreekjHanson Ranch Road o Gore Creek DriveJLodge at Vail Add Truck Loading Zones * o Gore Creek DrivejChristiania o Hanson Ranch Road/Christiania ' o Willow Bridge Road Resolve Land Ownership/Christiania Provide Covered Truck Loading FacilityJChristiania * Evaluate Centralized GoodsjDelivery/Small Vehicle Identify Truck Loading Facility Location on West Side of Village ' Parking Modify Rate Structure/Administration (On-Going) ' Expand Public Parking SupplyjFord Park and West Day Lot Select Area for Over-Sized Vehicles Transit Modify Outlying Bus Routes * * Expand Outlying Bus Service * * ' Revise East Shuttle Turnaround Implement High-Capacity Shuttle Bus System Evaluate New Transit Technologies for Shuttle Route 1 I-70 Access/Frontage Roads Implement I-70 UnderpassjSimba Run Implement West Vail Interchange Improvements Conduct Ramp Closure Test at Main Vail Interchange Select Main Vail Interchange Concept ' Implement Main Vail Interchange Improvement Plan Phase and Implement Frontage Road Improvements * * * * Per SO-Scale Functional Plans 80 ' Tabfe 16 (Continued) Generalized Plan Priorities ' Time Frame in Years Action/Project I-S 6-10 11-20 20+ Local Circulation Implement Pedestrianization Improvements, LionsHead to 1 Transportation Center Relocate Checlc Point Charlie Evaluate 1-Way Traffic on Vail Village Drive and Implement as Appropriate Trail System ' Implement Recreation Trails per Recreation Trails * * * * Master Plan Implement Streetscape Plan * * * * $1 i FUNDING Because most of the plan elements do not have a committed funding source at this point in time, project funding opportunities need to be continuously monitored. Existing funding sources exist for several project areas, however, including the Colorado Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration (I-70 and frontage roads), the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (transit) and local revenue sources (local improvement projects). The total, planning level, capital cost estimates to achieve full implementation of the long-range ' transportation plan consists of: o Vail Village Delivery System $ 1,700,000 o Public Parking Facilities $ 3,000,000 i o Transit In-Town Shuttle $ ?,500,000 o I-70 Underpass $ 2,000,000 o West Vail Interchange $ 250,000 ' o Main Vail/Booth Falls Interchange $ 500,000 o Frontage Road System $ 5,000,000 o Recreation Trails $ 2.000.000 $21,950,000 These costs represent 1990 dollars and are necessarily approximations of actual future costs. Any land acquisition costs and costs for buffering, landscaping, and aesthetic enhancement are in addition to ' these basic implementation cost estimates. In addition, the preliminary design process for each project may identify special or unique problems (such as unsuitable soils, unusual drainage requirements, special underground constraints, etc.) which could significantly alter these planning level cost estimates. This level of capital expenditure over a 20 year time frame, is not an unreasonable long-term investment in Vail's total transportation system. Possible sources of funding will need to be identified ' and worked out by the Town Council and Town staff to ensure the implementation of the above projects. 82 1 ' PLAN MONITORING AND UPDATING ' The Vail Transportation Plan will guide the implementation of the transportation system over the next 20 years. In order to keep the plan a viable document over this time period, continuous monitoring of the transportation system and periodic updating of the plan are needed. Vail currently maintains extensive data relative to transit system performance and operations at the public parking facilities. These data have proved invaluable in the preparation of the Vail Transportation Plan and should continue to be maintained for on-going plan evaluation and ' modification. In addition, it is recommended that Vail institute a traffic counting program including the following ' activities: o Coverage Counts -Daily traffic volumes should be obtained every two years on the frontage ' roads and important local streets at the same or similar locations conducted in March 1990. Hourly recording counts should be taken for 48-hours to obtain a daily average and peak hour volumes. To be consistent with historical data, counts should be obtained in December or ' March. - o Turning Movement Counts Intersection turning movement counts should also be obtained every two years at the ramp terminals at the three I-70 interchanges and at intersections immediately adjacent to the ramp terminals in West Vail and Main Vail. Other turning movement counts should be obtained periodically with the interval between counts dependent upon volume increases determined from the coverage counts. ' o An evaluation of the transportation plan should be conducted annually to document major changes in project priorities or implementation. A formal plan update should be conducted every five years. ' In accordance with Section 2.24.060 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, this plan shall be adopted by the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail and approved by the ' Town Council. The Planning and Environmental Commission may adopt additions or amendments to the Plan for approval by the Town Council. Before the adoption of the Plan, or any such amendment or addition, the planning and Environmental Commission shall hold at least one public ' hearing, thereon, notice of the time and place of which shall be given by one publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Vail no later than seven days prior to the date set for the public hearing. The adoption of the Plan shall be by motion of the Planning and Environmen- tal Commission recommending approval of the Plan by the Town Council. Approval of the Plan or ' any amendment or adoption thereto shall be by a resolution of the Town Council at a regular or special public meeting. i 1 1 83 ~ i~ - c ~ -c. ~ , t 9 c it. Now he was forced into it and metropolitan area. "The fact that condition of the family should im- found the money to pay for it. treatment begins immediately, close prove. The family should not need Jack, like most of the others, spent to the date of the offense, is impor- to contact police or visit the emer- a good portion of the 26 weeks taut. It ismuch harderforthe defen- gency roorfi as often. The problem denying that he had a problem. In dant to deny the action while it is may not'be totally solved, but the fact, it was 15 to 16 weeks before fresh in his mind. As a result, the costs to the community will be de- he realized how much he was deny- likelihood of repeat violence is much creased. ? ing it. He has continued in counsel- less." ing on a voluntary basis and has From a social standpoint, the pro- now been in counseling for almost gram can be considered a success a year. He feels he has learned to That success can be measured,i'n control his anger, and he also is the lowering of society's involve- teaching his son to talk about his ment with these families. As~their feelings. condition improves, there ,will be, for example, less truancy and other He feels he has learned delinquency problems with the chil- dren ofsuch families. The economic to control his anger, ~ and he also is teaching his son to talk about Aurora Domestic Violence Program his feelings. / *Victim Follow-up Interview • Is it a total success? Preliminary Results In a word, no. The program is June 1988 successful with those, like Jack, Nu ~er of Respondents 40 who come to realize that they can change their behavior and control 1 • Relationship with batterer has improved 80% their anger and emotions. Other /since court appearance batterers, however, have no fear of / jail and would rather spend six ~/2. Report feeling good or very good about 85% months behind bars than enter a / ~ the police response six-month counseling program. Nearly 50 percent of the officers` 3. Report that going to court had a very 90% surveyed believed that the sentences positive or somewhat positive effect imposed are not effective in deter- on the victim's family ring furtherviolence. Ironically, one- third of the judges, those who im- 4• Going to court had a very positive or 85% pose those sentences, shared that somewhat positive effect on the victim same belief. ~ (individually) There have been repeaters, in- cludingsome who have completed 5. Report feeling good or very good about 88% the counseling. To assist in deter- their interaction with the court victim mining those who would benefit advocate at arraignment from probation and counseling and those who would not, a court eval- 6. Believe court-ordered counseling had 95% uator has been hired. Now, prior to helped the batterer sentencing, an assessment is con- ducted to weed out those forwhom Report physical abuse since last 1% counseling is not the answer. incident According to the evaluator, clinical psychologist Sidney McDaniel, per- 8. Report verbal abuse since fast incident 60% haps 40 percent of the batterers will complete the program and not 9• Would be very likely to call the police 85% repeat their violent behavior. For in the future if batterer becomes violent the others, prompt punishment is the only answer. *Conducted by Gateway Criminal Justice Project Staff and Volunteers Based on his experience, McDaniel 6 months to one year after the victim's appearance in court for the believes that the Aurora program is defendant's arraignment. working better than any other in the Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 17 C ~ r ' ~1 ~ ? . Gerald E. Dahl Le islature enacts CML General Counsel (Editor's note: This topic has been the subject of two prior articles in new rules on Colorado Municipalities. The first article appeared in the September/ October 1976 issue and was au- thored by Tad Foster, Assistant City conflicts of interest Attorney for Colorado Springs. The second article appeared in the March/ April 1986 issue and was authored by Susan GriffifhS formerCMl Gen- eral Counsel.) . /Assume that you are a member of the board of trustees in a small municipality. Your community is 30 miles from the nearest town and often isolated in winter by mountain passes. In February, a water main freezes and breaks. It needs to be dug up immediately and repaired, or the entire system will freeze, Council and board memlbers need to costing the town thousands of dollars understand new votin ri hts and to repair, with nowater in the mean- g g time. You own the only backhoe in procedures in situations where town. The town board asks you to do the excavation work and bill conflicts of interest exist. them. Can you do the job? A second example: You own the only gas station in town. Can you sell gasoline to the town, in orderto save the expense of driving the police cars on a 60-mile round trip to fill up at the next community? Under the law as it existed in Colorado prior to the spring of this year the answer to both questions would be no. Both contracts would have been prohibited conflicts of interest. No written or oral disclo- Editor's Note sures or abstentions from voting would have cured the problems. After this issue of Colorado Municipalities went to press, the Both would have violated a portion Colorado Revisor of Statutes issued 1988 Replacement Volume of section 31-4-404, C.R.S., which, 10A, in which the material enacted by HB 1209 appears. For until March 18, 1988, read in part modification purposes, the revisor renumbered the new article of as follows: Title 24 enacted by H B 1209. All references to article 17 in H B 1209 (nj or shall any such member be inter- should be changed to article 18, as they appear in the codified ested,directlyorindirectly,intheprofits statute books. (Example: 24-17-101 becomes 24-18-101). of any contractorjobforworkorservices to be performed for the city or town. 18 Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 c c . The above language was deleted interested in the discharge of his official by the Colorado General Assembly The General Assembly duties. On the record he did not serve during its 1988 legislative session. eriaCted tW0 b111S with an eye single to the public weal. In place of this blanket prohibition, [hje took advantage of the favorable the General Assembly enacted two containing significant action of the board to work his own bills containing significant new rules new rules which allow enrichment and the county's undoings which allow municipal officials to mun1C1 al officials to disclose such interests and to ab- P The most recent decision in Colo- stain from voting on them. This pro- disclose such interest rado on this subject is Berkley Met- cedure now allows the official to and to abstain from ropolitan District v. Poland,' a 1985 retain the interest in the contract. Colorado Court of Appeals case in This article will describe the new voting on them which a member of a water and rules for the identification and dis- sanitation district board also served closure of conflicts of interest, as public officers contracting with them- as a paid consultant to the board • well as their legal implications from selves and for their own benefit"~ over a period of several years. After the perspective of the Colorado In the 1933 case of People v. some changes in its makeup the municipal official. Naturally, this arti- Brown,4 the Colorado Supreme board elected to abrogate the con- cle cannot serve as the substitute Court relied upon School District v. tract and brought suit to recover for legal advice from the municipal Pomponi for the proposition that a the compensation and expenses attorney. It is intended only to alert public official may not contract with Paid. The Court of Appeals applied Colorado municipal officials to sig- himself to his own profit. In that the common law rule that public nificant new limits of permitted ac- case, a county treasurer had specu- Policy forbids public officers from , tivity. You should consult your attor- lated in tax certificates belonging contracting with themselves fortheir ney for advice in specific cases. to the county. The Court held that own benefit, citing School District v. the actions of the treasurer"did not Pomponi and People v. Brown. Colorado Case Law effect any change as to the rights of The fact that the board member A quick review of the significant the county to the funds realized had excused himself from voting or ' cases decided by Colorado courts from the redemptioni5 and stated deliberation on the contract each on public officials' conflicts ofinter- the common law rule inthese mem- time it was discussed by the board • est may be helpful before describing orable terms: was held to have no effect on its the recently enacted statutes. The invalidity. Neither was it significant general rule at common law (law Brown was a minister of the law, bound that the district had ratified the derivedfromdecisionsofthecourts) by his oath and every canon to be dis- (continued on page 20) was that public officials were com- pletely prohibited from entering into ` any contract with the government they served. No amount of disclosure, " ~ I abstention, stepping down, or other Ili ~ ` 3 8 YEARS YOUNG! 7 safeguards were felt to be adequate 11., to protect the public from self-dealing ~ I i- 'tl ~ ~ by public officials. `4f ~ r The Colorado Courts adhered to this common law rule. In the 1926 _ _ _ Concrete streets- case of School District #98 v. Pom- ~ ~ a wise investment poni,' two members of a school district board were officers Of a Seventeenth Stree4 Denver company with which the school dis- trict had contracted. The statute An example of a long lasting concrete street in Colorado. prohibited officers of school districts Concrete streets last longer, and require less maintenance. from making contracts in which they Specify concrete pavements-the best value over the long ! had an interest. The Colorado Su- term. preme Court invalidated the con- tract as "against public policy and void or voidable irrespective of any For more information, contact: statute.i2 The fact that the school district had benefited financially from the contract and had not in any manner been cheated by the officials COLORADO READY MIXED CONCRETE assoc. -o~ r.. F~• 5~-~~~~ 925 South Niagara Street. Suite 200 was immaterial in the face of "the Der+ver,Colorado90224 rule of public policy, which prohibits ~1O^e: (303) 321.07735 Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 19 Conflicts of interest ~ ~ . payments to the board member as Municipal officials may now par- they were made and had, in fact, Municipal officials may ticipate in contracts involving their received value for its money. The now participate in municipality if they make proper Court upheld the trial court's deci- disclosure of their interest and ab- sion that the agreement itself was contracts involving their stain from voting and from attempt- illegal and therefore void at the munici alit if the ing to influence other members of outset. p y y the governing body on the issue. This common law rule, in concert make proper disclosure This obviously includes refraining with the prohibition in (former) sec- from participation in any delibera- and albstain from voting tion 31-4-404, prior to its amend- tions, meetings, or conversations ment in 1988, has proved a source and from attempting to leading up to the actual vote on the of real hardship to Colorado munici- iriflUence Other meml7erS contract or other matter. Finally, pal officials. Many situations exist, new subsection 31-4-404(3) allows particularly in small communities, of the government body. themembertovotenotwithstanding where the only provider of a vital his conflict if participation is "nec- municipalneed (construction equip- essary to obtain a quorum or other- ment,gasoline, mechanical repairs, sled on the provision ofthe Colorado wise enable the body to act;' but office supplies) has been a business Constitution applicable to members only if the member complies with owned or operated by a member of of the General Assembly. the voluntary disclosure provisions the board of trusteesorcitycouncil. The League drafted the measure of section 24-17-1 10. This latter Local businessmen in Colorado's and actively supported its passage. section was enacted as a part of HB communities have a long and proud As amended, new subsections 31- 1209 during the 1988 legislative tradition of public service. It is not 4-404(2) and (3), C.R.S. now read: session. surprising that conflicts of interest (2) Any member of the governing body under the prior statute and case of any cityortownwhohasapersonalor HB 1209 (July 1, 1988) law have been a problem. private interest in any matter proposed or pending before the governing body Structure of the Act HB 1057 (March 18, 1988) shall disclose such interest to the gov- The 1988 session of the General The General Assembly changed erning body and shall not vote thereon, Assembly also saw the enactment the statutory rules applicable to and shall refrain from attempting to in- of a significant and somewhat com- conflicts of interest of Colorado fluence the decisions of the other mem- Alex statute setting forth standards municipal officials with the passage tiers of the governing body in voting on of conduct for public officials and of HB 1057, signed into law on the matter. employees at all levels of govern- March 18,1988, by Gov. Romer. HB (3) A member of the governing body of ment in Colorado, both state and 1057, sponsored by Rep. Sam Wil- any cityortown mayvote notwithstand- local. HB 1209, sponsored by Rep. ing subsection (2) of this section if his liams of Breckenridge and Sen. Sally participation is necessary to obtain quo- Chris Paulsen of Englewood and ` Hopper of Golden, eliminated the rum or otherwise enable the bodyto act Sen. Jeff Wells of Colorado Springs, absolute prohibition of the former if he complies with the voluntary disclo- specifically applies to officers and law, replacing it with a rule of dis- sure provisions of section 2a-17-~ ~o, employees of local governments, closure and abstention, closely mod- C.R.S. which are defined to include the government of a county, city and county, city, town, special district, or school districts HB 1209 can be broken down into four groups of new standards applicable to government officials: • • . , . _ 1. Absolute rules of conduct, 2. nonbinding ethical principles, ' ~ 3. written disclosure rules, and 4. new rules relating to 'interests _ - . ~ ~ ~ ~ - by public officials in government contracts. • - • - • • The General Assembly's effort to ~ . ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ distinguish between binding rules of conduct and nonbinding "ethical - • • • • - principles" is generally described ~ ~ ~ ~ in the legislative declaration, which .provides in part: 20 Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 c c ~ ~ i The general assembly hereby declares tion acquired in the course of official that the prescription of some standards duties when used to "further sub- Section 24-17-104 of conduct common to those citizens stantiate personal financial inter- involved with government is beneficial est."" This section also prohibits Prohibits the disclosure to all residents of the state. The provi- accepting a gift of substantial value of confidential information sions of this part 1 recognize that some or Of Substantial economic benefit actions are conflicts per se between acquired in the course public duty and private interest while if it would "improperly influence" a other actions may or may not pose such reasonable person or if a reasonable of official duties when conflicts depending upon the surround- person should know it is primarily a used tO "further ing circumstancese reward for official action12 This pro- hibition has a parallel in the Colo- SL1bStaritlate Personal While it is helpful that the ethical rado criminal code at section 18-8- financial lriterest." principles are described as nonbind- 302, concerning bribery. Section ing, including both binding and non- 24-17-104 goes on to prohibit a binding rulesfor conflicts of interest public official or employee from ac- Subsection (3) of section 24-17- maylead to some difficulty ininter- cepting economic benefits, includ- 109 duplicates the changes made preting and applying the act. Be- ing loans issued at lower than the to section 31-4-404 by HB 1057. cause of its complexity and poten- commercial rate and compensation That is, a member of the governing tial interrelationship with other pro- for services rendered which exceed body of a local government who visions of law (including section 31- the fair market value of those serv- has a personal or private interest in 4-404, applicable only to municipal ices.t3 any matter proposed or pending officials, and the criminal code sec- Happily, section 104 fists a Hum- before the governing body must tons dealing with bribery and cor- ber of "safe harbors" items not con- disclose the interest to the body, rupt influences), the municipal of- sidered gifts of substantial value or not vote thereon, and refrain from ficial is cautioned to seekthe advice gifts of substantial economic bens- attempting to influence the other of the municipal attorney in comply- fit. These include campaign contri- members of the body." Also, and in ing with H B 1209. butions, occasional insignificant gifts, parallel to section 31-4-404(3}, it is nonpecuniary awards for public serv- permissible to vote despite the con- . (Mandatory) Rules of Conduct ice, actual and necessary travel, flict if the official's participation is Two separate portions of the act and subsistence expenditures for necessary to obtain a quorum or establish mandatory rules of con- public duties, perishable or non- otherwise enable the body to act, duct. Section 24-17-104 establishes permanent items (including tickets but only if written disclosure is made ' rules of conduct for all public officers, to sporting, recreational, education, to the Colorado Secretary of State members of the General Assembly, or cultural events), honoraria, and under the written disclosure provi- and local government officials and payment of salary from other gov- sions enacted by section 24-17- employees, while section 24-17- ernment employment 14 110.78 109 establishes additional rules only Section 24-17-109 also contains for local government officials and some"safe harbors." It is permissible employees. Section 24-17-104 pri- Section 24-17-109 is entitled to use local government facilities or marily concerns prohibited conduct 'Rules of Conduct for Local Govern- equipment to communicate or cor- m connection with a "personal fi- ment Officials and Employees." It respond with constituents, family nancial interest," which in turn is should be carefully reviewed by members, or business associates, defined as including: municipal officials and municipal and to accept or receive a benefit employees. Prohibited conduct as an"indirectconsequenceoftrans- 1. An ownership interest in a busi- under this section includes: acting local government business.s19 Hess; Both sections 24-17-104 and 109 2. a creditor interest in an insol- 1. Engaging in a substantial fi- employ the standard of proof "be- vent business; nancial transaction for private busi- yond a reasonable doubt.i20 This is 3. an employment or prospective Hess purposes with a person whom a relatively high standard of proof. employment forwhich negotiations the local government official or em- In trial practice this standard would have begun; ployee inspects or supervises in favor the government official. It is 4. an ownership interest in real or the course of official duties; a or more than a mere "preponderence" personal property; 2. performing an official act directly of proof and requires that the over- . 5. a loan or other debtor interest; and substantially affecting to its whelming majority of the evidence or economic benefit a business or other point toward a violation before .t 6. a directorship or officership in undertaking in which the local gov- will be considered proven. a business.10 ernment official or employee has ` either a substantial financial inter- Ethical principles Section 24-17-104 prohibits the est or is engaged as counsel, con- Section 24-17-105 of HB 1209 is disclosure of confidential informa- sultant, representative, or agent.16 (continued on page 22) Colorado Municipalities/November-December )988 21 -Conflicts of interest ~ ~ ' entitled "ethicalprinciplesforpublic in the private sector after leaving • officers, local government officials government service(onlywheresuch and employees." By the terms of employment would be specially ad- Section 24-17-110 the section, these principles are vantaged by the official's having requires the written guidelines to conduct and do not served in government)24 necessarily constitute violations if disclosure to the they are not followed?' Naturally, Written disclosure: Secretary of State be the municipal official would be wise Section 24-17-110 - to observe these guides to avoid This section is referenced bysec- made ~~pri0r to acting in any appearance of impropriety. Seo- lion 31-4-404(3), which in turn al- a manner which may lion 105 setsforth threesuchguides: lows municipal officials to vote on a impinge on his fiduciary matter in which they have an inter- 1.The official should not acquire est, if their participation is necessary and the public trust." or hold an interest in a business or to obtain a quorum or otherwise undertaking which he orshe believes enable the body to act. The permis- may be "directly and substantially sibility of such a vote is specifically If the official chooses to perform affected to its economic benefit" by conditioned bythe terms of sections the official act he or she must "state official action by an agency over 31-4-404(3) and 24-17-109(3)(b) forthe record the fact and summary which the official has substantial upon making thewritten disclosure nature of the interest disclosed at authority22 to the Secretary of State under the time of performing the act."25 2.The official should not perform section 24-10-1 17. Thiswritten dis- Section 24-17-1 10 requires the an official act directly and substan- closure must include the following: written disclosure to the Secretary tially affecting a business or other of State be made"priorto[emphasis undertaking to its. economic detri- 1.The amount of the interest, added] acting in a manner which ment when the official has asub- 2.the purposes and duration of may impinge on his fiduciary duty stantial financial interest in a com- services rendered, and the public trust." Significantly, peting firm or undertaking?s 3.the compensation received, and if this written disclosure is made, it 3.The section recommends a six 4.such other information as nec- constitutes an affirmative defense month moratorium on employment essary to describe the interest. to any civil orcriminal action or any other sanction?s Prohibited acts relating to contracts and claims HB 1209 enacted a series of new sections, at section 24-17-201, et COLORADO CORRECT10:1rAL l~VDUSTRIES seq., entitled"Prohibited Acts Relat- ing to Contracts and Claims." This section generally prohibits mem- bers of the General Assembly, public MARKETING OFFICE - 100 E. 66th Ave. officers, and local government of- ficials or employees from being in- ,Denver, CO 80221 (803) 428-5297 terested in a contract made by them • CHEMICAL PRODUCTS General, Automotive, Bathroom, Disinfectants In their official capacity Or by an agency or board of which they are • CUSTOM METAL Beds, Footlockers, Park Benches, Sign Posts members Or employees?7 • FLAGS Americap Flags, Colorado Flags, Customized Banners ~bVIOUSIy, if this rule were absolute • FURNITURE SYSTEMS Modular Systems, Computer & Otfice Furniture and WIthOUt exception, It WOUId • GENERAL SERVICES Building Remodeling, Concrete work, Painting completely set aside the ability to disclose a conflict and abstain from • MATTRESSES Pl'RO-TEC, IS 200 Neoprene and Fireseal Mattresses voting, as discussed above. How- • PRINTING Forms, Brochures,Newsletters, Stationary, Envelopes ever, S2CtIOnS 24-1 7-201 of seq. •SIGNS Outdoor and Wooden Signs, Office Signs, Name Tags specifically incorporate the disclo- • SURPLUS PROPERTY Colorado State Surplus Property is a newly acquired sure and abstention rules. VISIT us at our program transferred from the Department of Adminis- LOCaI government officials and New Denver Address tration to Correctional Industries. Items include: Futni- employees are permitted t0 have 100 E. 66th Ave. lure, Office Equipment, Hospital Items, Woodworking an interest in the following contracts: Phone 428-5297 Equipment, Machine Tools, Heavy Equipment... and more. 1. A minority interest in a corpora- tion, 2. contracts awarded to the lowest 22 Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 c ~ , responsible bidder based on com- ficial action on the matter? It is petitive bidding, Generally, the mere possible to read the phrase in sub- ~ 3. merchandise soldtothe highest fact that an interested section (1) "to which he is about to bidder at public auctions, member has voted will act in his official capacity," to limit 4. investments or deposits in fi- the required disclosure only to those nancial institutions which are in the render the ordinance circumstances in which the action business of loaning or receiving Void, even though it is (the vote or other positive action) is money, taken. The more conservative, and, 5. a contract with an interested beneficial to the city. in this author's opinion, better-rea- • party if, because of geographic re- soned view is that the written disclo- strictions, it would cost greater than Statutes, orthe standards of conduct sure to the Secretary of State should i 10 percent to contract with anon- for persons involved in government be made in either case: whether or interested party (if the contract is established by HB 1209, in title 24 not the official chooses to disclose forservicesthat must be performed of the Colorado Revised Statutes, his interest and abstain. This course within a limited time period and no may not constitute compliance with of action has the additional benefit other contractor can provide those the requirements of the criminal of avoiding any potential violation services within that time period), code in title 18. of subsection (3), which makes fail- and Under the "bribery and corrupt ing to disclose such a conflict of 6. a contract with respect to which influences" article,18-8-301 et seq., interest a class 2 misdemeanor. the local government official or em- "pecuniary benefit" is more broadly ployee has disclosed a personal defined than in other statutes and Void or voidable? interest and not voted thereon, or includes anything "the primary sig- What happens to a contract which voted thereon but made written nificanceofwhichiseconomicgain:¢9 is entered into by an official who disclosure under 31-4-404(3), 24- The criminal code's approach to has a conflict of interest and either 17-i 09(3)(b), and 24-17-1 10. required disclosure of a conflict of does not disclose that conflict or, interest is somewhat different than after disclosing, votes on the matter? Finally, section 24-17-202 pro- that set forth in either HB 1057 or The common law,whiledivided,clear- f hibits localgovernment officialsfrom 1209. Section 18-8-308 governs ly leans towards a majority rule that being purchasers at any sale or the disclosure of conflicts of inter- the contract is void. The Colorado i vendors at any purchase made by est of public officials in the following Supreme Court has so held in School them in their official capacity, manner: District v. Pompom and People v: The important point to be made Brown. The Colorado Court of Ap- concerning sections 24-17-201 1s-s-308. Failing to disclose a conflict peals as late as 1985 has so held in through 24-17-204 is that they spe- of interest. (1) A public servant commits Berkley Metropolitian District v. Po- ' cifically include the ability of a local failing to disclose a conflict of interest if land. Other states have come to he exercisesanysubstantialdiscretion- 30 official to disclose an interest and aryfunctioninconnectionwithagovern- similar Conclusions. . not vote on the matter. ment contract, purchase, payment, or An issue that is often raised in other pecuniary transaction without this context is whether the govern- Criminal code requirements having given seventy-two hours' actual ment actually obtained a benefit Several sections of the Colorado advance written notice to the secretary from the contract. Even so, the courts criminal code also affect the obliga- of state and to the governing body of the and commentators tend toward the tions of elected and appointed mu- government which employs the public view that this does not affect the nicipal officials. These sections are servant of the existence of a known determination and that the contract generally found at section 18-8- Potential conflicting interestofthe public is still void. In some Cases, this will 301, et seq. entitled "Bribery and servant in the transaction with reference mean that the public entity will gain Corrupt Influences," and section to which he is about to act in his official an unjustified benefit. Such was capacity. 18-8-401 et seq. entitled "Abuse of (2)A"potentialconflictinginterest"exists certainly true in the Berkley case Public Otfice." when the public servant is a director, described above. One commentator A detailed discussion of these president, general manager, or similar has expressed the rule in this way: sections is beyond the scopeofthis executive officer or owns or controls ~ article. Municipal officials should directly or indirectly a substantial inter- Where the ordinance was passed only Carefully review these Sections in est in any nongovernment entity partici- because of the vote of the interested consultation with a municipal attor- Dating in the transaction. member, it iseverywherevoid.Generally ney to ensure Compliance with all (3) Failing to disclose a conflict of inter- too, the mere fact that an interested applicable Statutes. est is a class 2 misdemeanor. member has voted will render the ordi- nance void, even though it is beneficial H B 1057 and 1209 do not make Is the local official excused from to the city By the majority view, the any internal cross-references to the making the written disclosure to resolution or ordinance is void even ~ criminal code. Compliance with pro- the Secretary of State under section though the vote of the interested official ' visions of the municipal statutes in 18-8-308(1) if the official abstains was not necessary to passage37 title 31 of the Colorado Revised from voting or taking any other of- (continued on page 24) Colorado Municipalifies/November-December 1988 23 Conflicts of interest Interestingly, HB 1209 appears pointed officers and employees in to take the minority view, that the Some home rule munici- Colorado's municipalities can be contract is voidable ratherthan void. polltleS Iri COIOrdC~O justifiably proud of this fact. At section 24-17-203 HB 1209 pro- hdVe eridcteCl COCIeS Of In the final analysis, the amount vides: of time, attention, and energy spent ethics which ira some evaluating the potential for acon- Voidable contracts Every contract made flict and attempting to deal with it in violation of any of the provisions of cases are more stringent properly under the law before the section 24-17-201 or 24-17-202 shall that requirements set issue is discussed or voted upon be voidable at the instance of any party will always be Substantially less tothecontractexcepttheofficerinterest- fOr$h Ill HB 1209. " ed therein. than that required to attempt to comply with the law after the discus- ethics which in some cases are sion has been held or the vote Home rule municipalities more stringent than requirements taken. ? HB 1057 and HB 1209 apply, by set forth in HB 1209. Municipal their terms, to all municipalities in officials in home rule municipalities Footnotes the state of Colorado. However, a are advised to consult with their well-established rule of law is that municipal attornsy to determine statutory enactments by the Colo- whetheralocalcharterorordinance 17g Colo. 658, 247 P. 1056(1926) rado General Assembly, while ap- provision establishes standards in 21d., 247 P. at 1057 plying absolutely to all statutory addition to, different from, or more 41d:, 247 P. at 1058 cities and towns, apply to home rule stringent than those discussed In 593 Colo. 182, 24 P.2d 759 (1933) municipalities only until those mu- this article. 61d.~ 24 P.2d at 760 nicipalities enact charter or ordi- '705 P.2d 1004 (Colo. App. 1985); cert. Hance provisions on the same sub- None of the reported appellate denied, 1985 ject. decisions in Colorado concerning 924-17-102{5), c.R.s. Some home rule municipalities in conflicts of interest have involved ,04-17-101, c.R.s. 24-17.102(4), C.R.S. Colorado have enacted codes of municipal officials. Elected and ap- ".2a-17-1oa(1>(a>, c.R.s. 1224-17-104(1)(b), C.R.S. 's24-17-104(2), C.R.S. 1424-17-104(3), C.R.S. Checklist for ethical behavior 1524-,7-,os(2)(a),c.R.s. 1624-17-109(2)(b), C.R.S. 1724-17-109(3)(4), C.R.S. The law of conflicts for municipal officials in Colorado, never 1924-17-1os(3)(b), c.R.s. 24-17-109(4), C.R.S. crystal clear, has been both improved and complicated by the 2024-17-104(1) and 24-17-109(1), C.R.s. General Assembly's adoption of HB 1057 and 1209. While not by 2124-17-105(1), c.R.s. any means an exhaustive list, the following checklist is at least a 2324-17-105(2), c.R.s. starting point for ensuring compliance with these two important new 2424-17-1o5(a), c.R.s. laws: 24-17-105(3), C.R.S. zs24-17-110, G.R.S. 2sld. A Always disclose your interest at the earliest stage. 2724.17-201(1), c.R.s. 1. Make oral disclosure tothe governing body under31-4-404(2). 2924-17-201{1)(b), c.R.s. 2. Safer. Make written disclosure under 18-8-308 as well. 301a-a-301(3), c.R.s. Delta Electric Const. Co., v. City of San Antonio, 437 S.W.2 d 602 (Tex. Civ.App. 1969); B. Don't vote (or take any other action). Milrbrae assn. rot Residential survival city o/ Millbrae, 69 Cal. Rptr. 251 (Cal. App. 1968); C. Don't influence others. Newton v DemaS 107 N.J. Super. 346, 258 1. Make sure disclosure recedes discussion on the matter. aid 376 (1969); Sutttord RealtyCorp vBoard P of Education, 55 A.D. 2d 652, 390 N.Y.S. 2d 2. Leave the rOOm. 155 (1976). 3. Don't participate in discussion (at the time of the vote or earlier). 31 Antleau, Municipal Corporation Law, sec 4.04. D. If you vote, do so only if: 1. Participation is necessary to achieve a quorum or otherwise enable the body to act (31-4-404(2) and 24-17-109(3)(b)). 2. Written disclosure is made prior to, not after, taking action: a To the governing body under section 31-4-404(3) and 24-17- 201(1)(a)(V), with the information as described at 24-17-1 10. b. To the Secretary of State under section 18-8-308(1) (72 hours before action) and 24-17-110. 24 Colorado Municipalities/November-December 1988 . ~ REC'D NOV 2 5 1991 MEMO TO: Ron Phillips ~ FROM: Frank W. Johnson~"~ DATE: November 22, 199 RE: Special Events Commission *~~~**************,~************>rt*~t*>k~t*~t*~~r*~>k**>k>k>k**~r~r Ron, attached is the final draft of the recommendations for the Special Events Commission. We'd like to present this to the council as soon as it's appropriate. Please let me know regarding ] ~~~0~~-1~/~~CO~~ timing. Central Reservations Also enclosed is a copy of some info from Telluride 1-800-525-3875 which started a similar program 5 years ago. Might be Group Sales helpful in getting started and makes interesting (303)479-2360 reading regardless. We're also getting some info from FAX (303)479-2364 Lake Tahoe which has a similar group. Business Office (303) 476-1000 FAX (303)476-6008 Please let me know when to proceed. Denver Line 595-9488 100 E. Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 u u 4 R~C'0 NO!! 2 5 ~~91 The Special Events Commission Task Force is composed of the following representatives: John Hazard - Town of Avon Rob Robinson - Vail Recreation District Rom Phillips - Town of Vail Ted Martin - Marketing Board Special Events Committee Steve Shanley - Vail Associates John Garnsey - Vail Foundation Frank Johnson - Vail Resort Assn/Nail Valley Marketing Board The group was constituted to formulate a plan for the establishment of a commission to organize and handle special events on behalf of the Town of Vail and potentially, in the future, the Town of Avon. The following are the group's recommendations: 1. Constitution of commission 5 participants 1 - appointed by the Vail Valley Marketing Board 1 - appointed by Vail Associates 2 - appointed by Town Council of Vail 1 - appointed by Town Council of Avon 2. Method of selection Solicit resumes from the community at large. Schedule interviews with interested parties Ratings and selection should be based on the following criteria: A. candidate must have lived in the Vail Valley for a minimum of 2 years fulltime. B. candidate must demonstrate, through previous work/committee experience, the willingness to leave their "personal agenda" out of commission activities. C. candidate must demonstrate, through previous work/committee experience, the ability to work effectively in groups for consensus decision making. D. additionally, the following are criteria which will help establish the potential success of the participants: 1. demonstrated past success in the planning/production of any or a combination of the following: a. sporting events b. cultural events c. entertainment d. press relations 2, background in budget planning and execution 3. marketing/sales experience 3. Mission The mission of the Joint Commission on Special Events is to improve the use of special events and activities within the Vail, Avon and Beaver Creek Resort communities as marketing tools to enhance the image of the Vail Valley as defined in the positioning pursued by the Vail Valley Marketing Board and thereby attract increased destination vacationers. This will be achieved by: A. developing a set of criteria by which to evaluate events, both current and proposed, based on their media value, participant attractiveness, spectator appeal, or other criteria as selected by the commission. B. Developing a code of ethics and an operating plan to assure that events are judged without prejudice caused by special interest groups and individuals C. developing a schedule for the review of funding proposals for events D. evaluating all events and activity proposals according to the criteria outlined above and recommending to the town councils in Vail and Avon which proposals merit funding consideration. E. assisting event planners by recommending other potential funding sources F. conducting post event critiques on events recommended for funding G. developing a plan to attract and/or develop new events which would contribute to the community strategic positioning as developed by the VVMB 4. Timing: The task force recommends that the publication of criteria and solicitation of resumes begin in early December with interviews and selection finalized by early January. ~H~E !~ElU ~EIl~~E1~ ~R 1 EI~ITIITI NEW EVENTS CASE encourages new events and will fund them. New events are encouraged to apply for funding through advertising, word of mouth, mailing list. CASE also has an emergency grant process by which the applicant may fill out a regular CASE grant application at any time. ENVIRONMENT CASE considers a good festival and special event environment to include more facilities, money and equipment and good business and community support. CRITERIA Some criteria for CASE funding includes: non-profit status, available dates, educational, cultural, economic, recreational, quality of life, whether or noi'the event is in the lunatic fringe, whether it will broaden the off-season. But there is no set criteria, each event is based on its own individual merits and presentation. DATES CASE must have a~clear understanding from Town Council as to the determination pf detes for events. Seniority must be taken into consideration as weA as the caliber of the event but CASE intends to give equal consideration to all. ECONOMIC IMPACT Every stngle event has shown to have good economic impact on the Town. The bigger the event, usualJ,y,.the better the impact. CASE wants to balance arts versus economic but wants to stress arts. Everything judged on case by case basis. MONITORING SYSTEMS The most CASE can do, as an advisory board for the Town, is send out and receive grant applications, follow t~rreports, and interview the grant applicants. TCRA would like tapro9f brochures before they are printed in order to make sure all potential questions are answered, including ticket policies and kids prices. FUNDING POLICIES' Funding policies are fncluded in the grant applications and the funding contracts. NUGGET THEATRE CASE took over the operation of the Nugget Theatre because no private entity wanted to do it and CASE felt the Town needed a movie and show theater. CASE would be more than willing to tum over the movie business to anyone who wanted it. For three years the Town paid the full rent. Last year CASE asked the Nugget operations to try and pay half. There was a small Nugget savings account that has been wiped out this year but the ~ / Nugget has been paying their share of the rent. But it is not a profitable ' business opportunity. NON-PROFIT Events that apply for funding must be non-profit. Bluegrass has been allowed to slide, but no more. MARKETING -VS- CAPITAL FUNDING CASE has no hard and fast rules regarding how funds are applied for. CASE hopes events will market their event and will sometimes allocate funds specifically for marketing or poster or such. Also CASE realizes that capital acquired must then be kept up and will grant maintenance funds. TOWN BUDGET The Town Council decides on the CASE budget along with all the other line items. On a good year, the arts wiN benefit. It looks like CASE will have to fight in the future for its share. The Town has a lot of debt service to ` repay. CASE MEMBERS Case members are appointed by Town Council for two year terms. They are chosen from the Town electorate. CASE members must be members of organizations asking CASE for funding. Jf a member resigns before his term is ended, Council wit( appoint a new member to fill the rest of his - term. CASE meets the first Wednesday of every month and the time commitment is basically those two hours, except for the yearly funding process. The funding process consists of reading the grant applications {about 35) and giving a 15-minute interview to each applicant. Then deciding how much money to allocate to each event. This process is approximately ten 2-hour meetings in the month of September. A list of CASE members and the ordinance is attached. M Administration and Personnel -2.24.010 Chapter 2.24 224.04x7 Organization -Meetings. A The members of the Commission COIti~ffSSION FOR ARTS AND for Arts and Special Events shall elect SPECIAL E;VEIVTS from its regular membership a chairperson whose term of office in such capacity shall 2.24.010 Established, be For one (1) year with eligibility for 2.24.020 Membership. reelection. The Commission shall adopt 2.24.030 Term. rules for its organization and for the 2.24.040 Organisation -Meetings. transaction of business. Such business 2.24.050 Employees -Expenditures. shall not conflict with the ordinances of 2.24.060 Mission. the Town or applicable laws of the state. 2.24.070 Duties. B. AI! meetings shall be open to the public, and the Commission shall keep a Z?s1.010 Established public record of its proceedings, except There is created a Commission for that C.AS.E. may hold executive sessions the Arts and Special Events (C.AS.E.). as authorized by Section 4.6 of the (Ord. 720, 198b; Ord, 861, 1989) Telluride Home Rute Charter for the purpose of discussing personnel matters 2.24.020 Membership. and contract negotiations, Meetings shall The Commission for Arts and Special be held at least every month, or mare Events shall consist of five (5) regular frequently as the Commission deems voting members who shall be residents advisable. (Ord. 720, 1986; Ord. 861, and duty qualified electors within the 1989) Town, and shall be appointed by the Town Council. Of the five (5) members, 224.050 Employees - Fjcpenditures. three (3) members shall be appointed The Commission shall recommend from the membership of arts and special appointment of employees and events groups which recently applied for professional staff members, and contracts ' funding from C.AS.E., one (1) member for professional services and consultants. from the Telluride Chamber Resort All hiring, supervision and firing of such Association, and the final member From employees shall be accomplished by the , the public at Large. In addition, the Town Town Manager, subject to prior review Council shall appoint two (2) alternates and recommendation of C.AS.E. who are residents of the County. (Ord. Additionally, the Commission may expend 738, 198b; Ord. 778, 1987; Ord. 861, 1989) funds for municipal rental, Lease or ,purchase of office space and attendant 2.24.030 Term. facilities and equipment. Expenditures Each C.A.S.E. member shall have one may include, but are not limited to, the (1) vote. Members shalt be appointed for purposes stated here. All expenditures two (2) year terms. Vacancies far shall be within annual budget.- amounts unexpired terms sha1I be filled by the and for the purposes approved by Town Council for the unexpired portion Council. (Ord. 720, 1986; Ord. 861, 1989) of the term. (Ord. 720, 1986; Ord. 778, 1987; Ord. 861, 1989) 2.24.060 Mission The Commission shall function for the following purposes: A. To promulgate and administer policy for arts and special events funding allocations for the Town Council; 2-9 Administration and Personnel -2.24.060 l B. To seed new events; F. To provide a monthly accounting C. To develop, maintain and to the Town Treasurer and a quarterly encourage the expansion of an accounting to the Town Council in a environment conducive to festivals, format and with supporting documents as performing arts, visual arts and special required by the Town Treasurer. events. G. To develop, maintain and update D. To assist in the development of a resource directory of what equipment major networks to support and nurture and services are currently available in the ' the arts and special events. (Ord. 720, Town. 1986; Ord. 86I, 1989) H. To further develop and maintain the Town's resource inventory. 2.24.Q70 Duties. I. To oversee the management of The duties of the Commission shall the Town's special event equipment and include but not be limited to the storage facility. following: J. To provide advice concerning the A. To hold annual hearings for all management of the Nugget Theater and arts and special events organizations and other municipally owned or leased to prepare annual recommendations for properties used for arts and special Town funding allocations and in-kind events. (Ord. 720, 1986; Ord. 778, 1987; service allocations in a timely manner for Ord. 861, 1989) the budget process, to be approved by the Town Council during the budget process. B. To form a subcommittee of three (3) C.A.S.E. members to work towards the goal of establishing a Performing Arts- Conference Facility for the Town. C. To coordinate activities with the Telluride Council for . the Arts and Humanities or any other organization which operates as an umbrella organization for arts and special events in ` the Town. D. To present quarterly reports to the Town Council outlining the condition of arts and special events within the Town. E. The duties of staff/contract labor r . may include, but are not limited to: 1. First-line interface for all requests from arts and special events. 2. Creation of a calendar. 3. Planning. 4. Budges preparation and control. 5. Coordination of goods and services. 6. Fund-raising assistance to organizations. 7. Advocate for the arts and special events. 8. New events consultant. 9. Secretary to C.A.S.E. meetings. 2-10 , ~a u~C_ t,vhl~; -t-- IY~`~ I L _`~1~ ~~J I ~~Y~C~~ r C..A•S ORDINANCE NO. 720 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING 'i'fiE COMMISSIOt1 FOR ARTS AND SPECIAL EVENTS AND SPECIFYING ITS DUTIES AND POWERS. WfiEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Telluride recognizes that support for arts and special events is a legitimate function for government in a community like Telluride, where such activities constitute an integral part of the resort product and thus contribute to the Town's tax base; and WfiEREAS, the Town Council wishes to develop, maintain and encourage expansion of ati environment conducive to festivals, performing arts, visual arts and special events in the Town of Telluride; and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate support for arts and special events, the Town of Telluride desires a Commission to accumulate information, evaluate requests for aid, recommend levels of funding and support and to provide for an orderly process for accomplishing these objectives; and WHEREAS, that there is no permanent Town of Telluride Commission in existence for the purpose of administering funding allocations and overseeing the development of arts and special events within the community of the the Town of Telluride. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of Telluride, State of Colorado, that: Section 1.00 CCtEATION OF COliNISSION FOR ARTS AND SPECIAL SVSN'PS There is hereby created a Commission for the Arts and Special Events for the Town of Telluride. Section 1.01 HSlQ3IIRSIIIP The Commission for Arts and Special Events shall consist of seven (7) voting members wlio shall be residents and duly qualified electors within the Town of Telluride, and shall be appointed by the Town Council. Of the seven members, one member shall be appointed from the membership of the Town Council, three members shall be appointed from the membership of arts and special events who applied for funding or in kind from the Telluride Arts and Special Events Task Force and in the future CASE , one member shall be appointed from the Telluride Theatre Commission, one member from the Telluride Chamber Resort Association, and the~~ final member shall be from the public at large. Any member missing three meetings over a period of one year, without good cause;' shall be removed from the commission. Section 1.02 ~~~~S: Each member shall have one-vote. The Town Council member's term shall coincide with his/hex term of office. At the outset, the three members from the arts and special events groups shall be appointed for one year terms and then for two years thereafter. 7'he remaining members shall be appointed for two year terms. Vacancies for unexpired terms shall be filled by tl~e Town Council for the unexpired portion of the term. Section 1.03 ORGANIZATIONIl,L h~,a~INGS The members of the Commission on Arts and Special Events shall elect from its membership a chairperson whose term of office in such capacity shall be for one year with eligibility for' reelection. The Commission shall adopt rules for its organization and for the transaction of business. Such business shall not conflict with the ordinances of the Town of Telluride or the statutes of the State of Colorado. All meetings shall be open to the public and the Commission shall keep a public record of its proceedings. Meetings shall be held at least every month or more frequently as the Commission deems advisable. • Section 1.04 H!!1'IAYLES/SXP$l7DI'i'URES: The Commission may appoint and supervise employees and professional staff members and make contracts for professional services and consultants. Additionally, the Commission may expend funds for the rental, lease, or purchase of office space and attendant facilities and equipment. Expenditures may include, but not be limited to, the purposes stated here. All expenditures shall be within annual budget amounts that have been approved by Council distributed by the Town of Telluride. Section 2.00 PURPOSBS: The Commission shall function for the following purposes: (A) To promulgate policy for arts and special events funding ' allocations for the Town Council; (B) To seed new events. (C) To develop, maintain and encourage the expansion of an environment conducive to festivals, performing arts, visual arts and special events. Section 2.01 ..W~IIIS The duties of the commission shall include but not be limited to the following: (A) To hold annual hearings for all arts and special events organizations and to prepare annual recommendations for Town funding allocations and in-kind service allocations in a timely manner for the budget process, to be approved by Town Council during the budget process; (H) Upon the creation of`the Commission for Arts and Special Events, they shall meet monthly with the Theatre Commission. After six months the Theatre Commission and the Commission on Arts and Special Events shall recommend to 'T'own Council how they intend to integrate operations, structure and function; (C) To work with The Telluride Council for the Arts and Humanities or any other organization which purports to be an umbrella organization for arts and special events in Telluride to achieve that goal; (D) To present quarterly reports to ttie Town Council outlining the condition of arts and special events within the Town of Telluride. (E) The duties of staff/contract labor may include, but are not limited to: (a) First-line interface for all requests from arts and special events; (b) Creation of a calendar; (c) Planning (d) Budget preparation and control (e) Maintain bank accounts (f) Coordination of goods and services; (gj Fund raising assistance to organizations; (h) Advocate for the arts and special events; (i) New Events consultant. (j) Secretary to CASE meetings. (F) To provide a monthly accounting to the Town Treasurer and a quarterly accounting to the Town Council in a format and with supporting documents as determined by the Town Treasurer Section 3.00 SnvnnAIIILITY: If any section; subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Federal or State court or administrative or governmental agency of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof, so Iot~g as the part held invalid or unconstitutional shall not go to the essence hereof. , . • Section 4.00 EFPSCT1vS ?11TS T}1is ordinance shall become effective on the 28tt'day of January 1986. INTRODUCED on t}11s 23rdday of Decetnber , 1985. ATTEST: T~ ~ 4 Gf U / ~Jj~ i Leslie Sherlock, Town Cler}~ Johr~7 Micet3q'", Mayor " READ AND PASSED on this 281:11 day of January , 1986. ATTEST: eslie Sherlock, Town Clerk JohC/ Mic~t~ ;'Mayor • REC'rJ NOV 2 5 1991 MEMO TO: Ron Phillips ~ FROM: Frank W. Johnson'~"1, DATE: November 22, 199 RE: Special Events Commission ******~***********>k**~******~*********~*************** Ron, attached is the final draft of the recommendations for the Special Events Commission. We'd like to present this to the council as soon as it's appropriate. Please let me know regarding - ~ . . timing. c~„n„~~es~„~~,~i~„s Also enclosed is a copy of some info from Telluride i-s0o-s2s-387s ~ .which started a similar program 5 years ago. Might be Groupsa~cs helpful in getting started and makes interesting (.03)479-2360 reading regardless. We're also getting some info from F.a.~ `303) 479-2364 Lake Tahoe which has a similar group. Bu~i„css OfJicc • (303) 476-1000 FA.I' (303) 476-6003 Please let me know when to proceed. Dcn~cr Linc 595-9458 100 E. Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 u R~~''`! NOt! ~ a 1~9 The Special Events Commission Task Force is composed of the following representatives: John Hazard - Town of Avon Rob Robinson - Vail Recreation District Rom Phillips - Town of Vail Ted Martin - Marketing Board Special Events Committee Steve Shanley - Vail Associates John Garnsey - Vail Foundation Frank Johnson - Vail Resort Assn/Nail Valley Marketing Board The group was constituted to formulate a plan for the establishment of a commission to organize and handle special events on behalf of the Town of Vail and potentially, in the future, the Town of Avon. The following are the group's recommendations: 1. Constitution of commission 5 participants • 1 - appointed by the Vail Valley Marketing Board 1 - appointed by Vail Associates 2 - appointed by Town Council of Vail 1 - appointed by Town Council of Avon 2. Method of selection Solicit resumes from the community at large. Schedule interviews with interested parties Ratings and selection should be based on the following criteria: A. candidate must have lived in the Vail Valley for a minimum of 2 years fulltime. B. candidate must demonstrate, through previous work/committee experience, the willingness to leave their "personal agenda" out of commission activities. C. candidate must demonstrate, through previous work/committee experience, the ability to work effectively in groups for consensus decision making. D. additionally, the following are criteria which will help establish the potential success of the participants: 1. demonstrated past success in the planning/production of any or a combination of the following: a. sporting events b. cultural events c. entertainment d. press relations 2. background in budget planning and execution 3. marketing/sales experience ~A ~ 3. Mission The mission of the Joint Commission on Special Events is to improve the use of special events and activities within the Vail, Avon and Beaver Creek Resort communities as marketing tools to enhance the image of the Vail Valley as defined in the positioning pursued by the Vail Valley Marketing Board and thereby attract increased destination vacationers. This will be achieved by: A. developing a set of criteria by which to evaluate events, both current and proposed, based on their media value, participant attractiveness, spectator appeal, or other criteria as selected by the commission. B. Developing a code of ethics and an operating plan to assure that events are judged without prejudice caused by special interest groups and individuals C. developing a schedule for the review of funding proposals for events . D. evaluating all events and activity proposals according to the criteria outlined above and recommending to the town councils in Vail and Avon which proposals merit funding consideration. E. assisting event planners by recommending other potential funding sources F. conducting post event critiques on events recommended for funding G. developing a plan to attract and/or develop new events which would contribute to the community strategic positioning as developed by the VVMB 4. Timing: The task force recommends that the publication of criteria and solicitation of resumes begin in early December with interviews and selection finalized by early January.