The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-01-14 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session ~ ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1992 1:00 PM AGENDA 1. Executive Session: Legal Matters. 2. PEC Report. 3. DRB Report. 4. Presentation of Proposed Vail Transportation Master Plan. 5. Fire Department Report. 6. Action on Settlement Agreement for Booth Falls Rockfall Berm Construction Mitigation. 7. Information Update. 8. Council Reports. 9. Other. 10. Adjournment. C:WGENDA.WS VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1992 1:00 PM EXPANDED AGENDA 1:00 p.m. 1. Executive Session: Legal matters. Bernie Sapp 1:45 p.m. 2. PEC Report. 1:55 p.m. 3. DRB Report. 2:00 p.m. 4. Presentation of proposed Vail Transportation Master Plan. Greg Hall Background Rationale: After two years of public meetings, community surveys, and research, Vail's Transportation Advisory Committee is ready to present its proposed comprehensive parking and transportation plan for Vail. The plan was recommended for approval by the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission in November, 1991, and reviewed by the Council in December, 1991. Final consideration of the plan by Council will not be scheduled until final public input is received. The public has been invited to attend this informational meeting. 4:00 p.m. 5. Fire Department Report. Dick Duran Action Requested of Council: Ask questions and provide feedback to staff. 4:15 p.m. 6. Action on Settlement Agreement for Booth Falls Rockfall Berm Larry Eskwith Construction Mitigation. 4:30 p.m. 7. Information Update. 8. Council Reports. 9. Other. 10. Adjournment. C:WGENDA.WSE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION January 13, 1992 AGENDA 12:30 P.M. Site Visits 1:30 P.M. Work Session 2:00 P.M. Public Hearing Site Visits WORK SESSION 5. 1. A request for a work session for an exterior alteration and a site coverage variance in Commercial Core I for the Slifer Building, 230 Bridge Street/Part of Lots B and C, Lot 5, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Rod Slifer Planner: Jill Kammerer PUBLIC HEARING 2. 1. A request for a conditional use permit for a modular office trailer at 846 Forest Road/Lot 31, Vail Village 2nd Filing. Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District Planner: Shelly Mello 1. 2. A request for a density variance in order to allow an addition to an existing non-conforming structure at 864 Spruce Court/a part of Lot 12, Vail Village 9th Filing. Applicant: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Broughton/Steve Shanley Planner: Andy Knudtsen 3. 3. A request for a side setback variance at 254 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Village 6th Filing. Applicant: William Sheppard Planner: Andy Knudtsen 4. 4. A request for a variance from the maximum allowable driveway grade at 16 Forest Road/Lot 1, Block 7, Vail Village 6th Filing. Applicant: Ron Byrne/Jay Peterson Staff: Greg Hall/Jill Kammerer 5. A request to amend the Town of Vail zoning code regarding minor exterior alteration procedures in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II, Section 18.24.065 Exterior Alterations or Modifications - Procedure, and Section 18.26.045 Exterior Alterations or Modifications - Procedure. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jill Kammerer TABLED TO JANUARY 27, 1992 6. 6. A request for a major amendment to Phase IV-A of Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Irin, 100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Josef Staufer Planner: Mike Mollica 7. An update on the redevelopment status of the exterior alteration request for the Golden Peak House, 278 Hanson Ranch Road/Lots A and B, Block 2, Vail Village First Filing. Applicants: Golden Peak House Condominium AssociationNail Associates, Inc. Planner: Mike Mollica 8. A request to allow a change to an approved development plan, Tracts A and B, a part of Parcel A, Lions Ridge. Filing No. 2, commonly referred to as The Valley, Phase II. Applicant: Crossview at Vail Properties, Inc./Steve Gensler . Planners: Andy Knudtsen/Kristan Pritz TABLED TO JANUARY 27, 1992 9. A request for a setback variance and conditional use permit to allow a tow which will transport people and supplies from the garage to the house at 2701 Davos Trail/Lot 15, Block B, Vail Ridge. Applicant: Brian and Sonja Craythorne Planner: Andy Knudtsen TABLED TO JANUARY 27, 1992 10. Approval of PEC meeting minutes for December 16, 1991 meeting. i JAN 14 '92 11:16 FROM BERENBAUM:WEINSHIENK PAGE.001 • BERENaAUM & W~INSSI~xK, P. C. RECD JAN 1 4 1992 . lC~~ wT tiwv? x e : Te SiTN F4~~• RE~N~L.fG PL~2A L AE ~ }7C iEYLMTEiNTF1 iTR~Ct o~av~a, CO~OFtADp soa~E-~ePS ~ v~ PMIONE taOSl ili~OioC TE{.LGp~1~R 170S1 i!Y-74t0 G~PIER G'01~R Y..~: i ~x . , , . - _ . _ - - ---f TSE SN~IRi. ~'1't71C81wr..W+ TO TSIB T~COPJElt COV'ffiR L..+.~~r 7?xD Ti15 40.~~:..~~~8 TSER~O)' ]1RE GD1iY'IM DESTI74L, ARB ZNTBiiDBD ONL? FQIi T8E S$E OT THE 3ELQW ltl~D i~iDIVIT?L1]?i~ OR &1~TITYr IIND ~1Y ~ . SV&TEL"r TO 'I~ 11'i'l`OR]PE?j(~+II~iT PRIOtI.EAE i?RDjOR TBE 71~°l'oRKL'Y NOR][ PRODt3CT f~~tiVILEi~E.7.ID~" sENDiHO QT ~S CQ1~M3]AiC71TiD8 EY TRI~OFIF3t i8 1i0T Y1iT8NDED AS A 1PAZ~IE$ O~ l1~ 1?RIYIL~ yisTSb AaoVa. I! YOII, ~s s'ga RY.At18R OF 'x'ltIS CpV16R =a.*+..r:, 7Ut& ,Nar TSE ..,is~..r«ED RECa[~+ZENr Ol? T~7s .cbVER zr.,._.~c ~?a~n ~s n~?casn z~ottx~?~IO~, sov ~.eaz AR$ 3~OTiFILD IOV ARE g8LI6AT8D TO. bBLIOT:R Il~ TQ '~'1tE I»~=.~iti6D RBCIPISRT NITBOLtI' READI1~tti T88 71TTllC1TS YOVR6EZ.F Q1t DISSEMII4- ATtSG 71t~TY OP Q!~IS Cb1fK[TNICJ1TiR~, SIiQ.DDINtI TSi ATrJ1O~.+~~8, TO At~fY OTi$R PERSOi1 OR ~TtTY. IF ZdV A71V8 ~t8C8IV8D THI6C I~OO~iJNIC,7?TIOA IS SRRQR~ PLE11S7C tI41S$DI11Tffi.Y NOTIFY '1'SS Bs,r«~.A ~Y ' 'IfELEl~OA7S' 71NLi~ ]~8'i'f7R1~t VNRP.AD T82i 'L01/ER L1..Y~...R A?ID T8E i1TxISCB~NTS TO TSE ADO'VE ADb~tEffiS '~A T8S iJ.S. ~ID~.'11I!,.SFRVICE. 'j'8111~ ~QII. F~LBA&E DEL~.VER T0: ~ DATE: J~z~. 14, 1992 Mx. Ran Phillips r,aau+l:• ~ Tokm of 'Vaa.1' Aay~r~SS: V~.il, CO ~ . TELBCOPIER 4792157- ~TELEF~fiOATE~~`: 479-7,07 pRp~: I. H. Kaiser, Esq. 1tE: Vail adv. L&M NpTE:" Copy of proposed Settlement Agreement and Release ~o~r your review. TOTAL NUMBER OF FAGES: ~ INCLUDING THIS COQ PAGE iF ~CQtT DID NOT RECEIV$ ALL aF THE PAGES, PL~iSE CALL I~'lEDIAT£LX. 6r~,tx ~Xt Lindy D. ~ IyA'~: 7.~14~92 'r7[ME: BIGW BILLING ~s 02481.822 Y _ . ~ I ` JAN 14 '92 11:16 FROM BERENBAUM:WEINSHIENK PAGE.002 ._,f' $$T.['I.~NT AGY~.~~ A17t7 R~I.EAHH T~Y6 5~."~`T.~.'~iN'~' A(#RI;i'~ A1~ IO~LS$ ("Ae~7ceemetty*") 38 estt9red into this day cf ~anuazy, 199, by rind .bstw~aen L & M ~~~~1~HH5, INC. ("X. H M") , '11DWb1 bF ~f7A~. ("Town") ~ .~~~..~t A{~130CIA~~~, INC. ("Banrtar") . aAd i~.he3r rae~pectirre agents, employees ~d athera .~:,~.,,.ribsd tuarsn. ~l~r L ~ M hss filed ett action in the Dist~C~.~t Court for . ~agie Crw..~l.~. Gfvf.~. Action Number 90 CV ~4, alleging claims related to the Btioth Creek Rackfall ~ Mitigation L.~~wements Pra9sct lt~ii~ j~.i. R ~ • f ' vrrs,a, #.he TOWri aitd Renner have den~iad liability, and have a].]:agad.eterclaims against L & M; and 1 ~ SAS, the parfiies to this Agree~aent desiz~ to settle a3.1 . r~.ad~:n~: c~hd potential claims ay any party hereto ag~e5.nst any ether pity ~her~a. NOW, YrNC,~$FORI~, is can~sideratian of the mtstssal. cov~tastts coNtaiYtad herein actc~ for other good artfl valuable car~ideratian, t~ part'i~es agree as loll y s 1, ~ or bvlore Febs'tzary $r 19J~, the foilc~wing paXtaerits aha].l be ~mad+s to L H M: a. ~'he Tom aha}.1 pay $$0, OOO.OQ; and b. Banrxer shall pay ~R8~,000.00. • 2. Except far the rights artd obl~.gatior~ set forth in this Agr~ment, L ~ M, the rna~m, and Hartnes hereby release and fully df.tscharge, for themselves, their succeaaars, assiyn~a, representatives, e!liliatea, emgicryees, agents, insurers and any and all other persons, firms and Gorporationa thereof, the fallowing: each ether party hereto, its successors, assignt~, representatives, e.ar~~.itoY`B, adtgirtrators, ermplQyeed, agents, su3~eontractoxs, sopplia..~, mate~rialm~n, servanCS, and insurers, from any anc~ all liability fos aunt' and ad.l alai~ts, demands, damsges, costs, ].iabiiities, lostses, •;,.•~;.~~'+ses, c.~~,y~ansatiort, r~lglbusl3em~rit, actions, rights 8nd cat~sefi of aotic~n, suits, debts, promises, a! whatg~rer nature ~rny. 3tind, resulti»g t~ M~v. ac ire arty way ar~.sing from or flaw#.ng out o! any tran$actioA Qr atetter directly ,ar indirectly i»volved with the Project, whether r~~ . iotssly +aaserted or ar~assextod, and whether pres~atit]~X kxtow'n or uxt3~no~an. '~'httS release shall be broadly construed and shall inclo»e ail claims, whether ma»datory or ~e~mi.s$iae, which could harms been ~~~ted. 3. The payment of any moneys or the ~?rovtsion cf additional se~??icvs is not to be co»strued in aay way ~ an edtnission of Sla~ility an the peact of arty Of the p8rties and, Ca tRe Contrary, eaCtl SAN ' 14 ' 92 8:42 ~nr.~ t~ t~ JAN 14 '92 11:17 FROM BERENBAUM:WEINSHIENK PAGE.003 r of the parties making payment apeetifica],iy denies aAy 1i~tA~.lity or wrongdoirt+g of any kind, on account of the df.aputes involved in th#.e ~1Ct3~on. 4. The parties agree that the signing of this A ement shaYl lee forever binding, and that n4 :~ecis~e9.an, a~odifioat~o~n or release fra~n the terms of trite Agrtreme~tt shall be made for any mistake. S. It is expx.+eaaiy unde~tstood and agreed that all agreema~ and' understandings between the parties hereto are e'mbadieci arn~ e.~.y~S~ed hereirtt and that the terms of this Agreement aro contsaotual and, riot mez~e r~itaXa. ' 6. F..ech party warrants that ne promise or iitducsmeut has~been ofte~d eawept as herein set Earth aria that this Agre+seent is execrated without reliance upon any sttatnt or representation by apposing paxtges, ar their representatives or attorneys, conc~~..sng the nature yr extent of any damages or say 1ega1 liability therefor. . T_ The parties wdxxant that they are legally ..~,~.went to execute this Agree~?ent, aocept full responsS.biifty therefor, and asai~ the risk of any mistake of fact. The Town ~cp~reasly warrants that it has taken the necessary actias~s purauaat to the laws governing towi'~ in the State of Colorado to authorize the execs~tS.tm of this . A~~. ~.ama+nt. 8. The partS.es acknowledge that they have carefully read the contetfts of this Ay..~emerit, know the ca~?ter?ts thereof, and have signe6. . the .e~me ss of their owr~ free ar?d vol~antaxy acts. ~ 9. The parties ackno~vtedgef that they have had the opportunity . to •c4asult tiosth legal counsel prior to the exernstioa of this Agx~ement, and have had their chaste ~.ec~al cou~e~I review this A~eea?e~tt in •its enti.~cety. 10. The undersigned warrant acid rer..~~.sent that they ea+~h have full legal, corpox'ate and/vr 'Town authority to e..~~.ute on behalf of attd bind the .party for ~ahiah each is signing this Agreement. 11. Bach ply offirms that ae of the date o! this Agreement, it has not made any aaaiganteat of claims whfah ~aouid be covered by this Agseeraent tit which wore or c~suld trays been ra#.aed 3n Sagle Ca-nnty ~pxstriat Cast C~.iril Action N>Ymbsr 90 Cv 24, and that no insu..~,. hats beco~te subrogated to its rights of act5.on in connection with the .Project. l~. the ~pa~ctxes agree to execute and file such further doc~..~~:...~at~.on errd pleadings as may reasonably be necessary to ca~ney Doti the terms and objectives of this A~.-~ffient, including, but azvt rteceesar3lx 1im~it$d to, a Qtipulatiaa Of dismissal With ~~~judice Of a3.1 ~ ei.aims in Basle County District Court Ci.vf 1 Action Nrunbex $0 CV a4. • ' Z 1MN 14 '92 8:43 PACaE.6c JAN 14 '92 11:18 FROM BERENBAUM:WEINSHIENK PAGE.004 1~. Each party shall be ~gponsible for Sts own costs a~.~~~~, tA~Iudinq attorneys' fees, incurred in caruieotidr~ with this matter. . 14. This Agr~wmerrt shall b®r governed and aanst~sed in acCardagae ovith the laws of the State of Colorado. 1B. This Agreement sha11 be null ,and void and hav's aQ~effeet whatsoever sbot:id L & M, the Town,' or Banner fai 1 to execwtte the some . 1G . This Agreement may be e~cecutad in ae many couriterpa~rts ~?s ese nocsssary, ~1~.i of which s~hen taken. together will constit~ta a eingl®:a„i8ament. lT , The pasties her~ta a~y~ ~ ~ to xeep all terms of this Agreement oot~£ldeYttia~. Bred agree 13ot to disclose the terms except ass required by 1~ . ar order of oaurt . L S ~ £NT£RPRISES, 1NC. ' ~Lat~eutco L. 8emo prssidee~t THE T bL•` VAXL, COLORACG . ~ aY ' T3.tle : i . ~ HA1~ER ASSOCIAZ'LS, INS:. E i . By IteXU'eeth .T. 8rotsyry Sera~i.or vice President 3 J'AN 1 d. ' 8~ 8:43 aar.~ JAN 14 '92 11:18 FROM BERENBAUM:WEINSHIENK PAGE.005 . S?~ ~',o ~Orgti $'xA1~f~EY • ~AT~(JI~TA$A; P. C. ~ 5t~rtliey T. 14~?taunaksi #983 ~~3 E. 9th Street, Snits X18 .poet . off ~.ae Hox 67~ L~aveiand, Colorado $039 . ~ (~Q3~~ $6~-D856 Att~ptneyx? for L ~ ~ Ente..r~iaea, Ina. . E$FtED~3A~}b~ & WEI~IB~iIEIS'IC, P.C. ~ I: I~. ~Gr1ilser, 91b92 37a 17th Str9e;~r Suite ~C00 ~Dez~ve~. Colvre~ 90802-566 ~~ns) s,a~-aeon ~o~IN ~ sAR~rrx? p~dfes~io~l Corgo~atlon . 8y. L'urtis a. Tayloa', ~i998B Post ~fftae 8aat 4i~ trend ~r~tfoe, Calor~r~ $1508 .~~~pg) ~4a~-4903 rittr~..ey$ tar Bat~n+x Assacliaties, =nc. 4' ' " ' TOTRL PAGE .005 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA JANIIARY 8, 1992 3:00 P.M. SITE VISITS 2:15 P.M. 1 Stevenson Residence - 1230 Westhaven Circle 2 Subway - 395 E. Lionshead Circle/Lionshead Auxiliary Building 3 Vail Reality - 302 Hanson Ranch Road Y x:....~,F.i'ryin .................................................................................................................................:iY•}w::.v::.~:x:::.....':::::: iiii`:ii. hiiw:::::... iiii{:: •i: iiiiiii::...4uL4J'..e%N/• Y:i::ii: ~+:?itiiiiiii r::ii::va'viiiivui:<::i~iJiri:Jl ::::::::::::::::~;::::::::::::'r::.4Y:::::...:•i:::isi~:s~:%:iJil'viiw~i:U+ii~ui'lA..~.........w: M~NI.L............... 4u.4.w........~.. wee AGENDA 1. Subway - Sign BR 395 East Lionshead Circle/Lionshead Auxiliary Building MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Pat Herrington VOTE: 4-0 Approved. Applicant will present color scheme on January 15th. Town must replace light lenses. 2. Vail Realty - Awning BR 302 Hanson Ranch Road/Mill Creek Court Building MOTION: Pat Herrington SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 4-0 Approved with Jockey Red #4603 Sunbrella in a 10' diameter, white letters of a maximum of 7 square feet. 3. Stevenson Duplex - Revisions to previously approved JK plans. 1230 Westhaven Circle/Lot 32, Glen Lyon Subd. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: TABLED TO JANIIARY 15TH MEETING MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Pat Herrington Sherry Dorward Ned Gwathmey George Lamb Diana Donovan (PEC) STAFF APPROVALS: Kloser Residence - Change to approved plans. Lot 2, Block G, Vail Das Schone #2 Herdrich Residence - Revised landscaping plan. Lot 18, Vail Village 3rd Stempler Hot. Tub Addition Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Village 6th Fritzlen, Pierce Residence - Modification to landscape plan A part of Lot 2, Block 5, Vail Intermountain Vail Transportation Master Plan , 1 VA1L TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Prepared for: Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 5299 DTC Boulevard, Suite 400 Englewood, Colorado 80111 (303)721-1440 In Association with TDA Colorado, Inc. FHU Reference No. 89-091 January, 1992 January, 1992 Vail Transportation Master Plan , ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TOWN COUNCIL PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Kent Rose Ma or Chuck Crist Y Thomas Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Diana Donovan Lynn Fritzlen Connie Knight aim Gibson Ludwig Kurz Merv Lapin Kathy Langenwalter Robert Levine Jim Shearer Peggy Osterfoss Gena Whitten DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Ned Gwathmey Sherry Dorward Patricia Herrington 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 TOWN STAFF Rondall Phillips Town Manager Ken Hughey Assistant Town Manager Kristan Pritz Community Development, Director Mike Monica Community Development Steve Barwick Budget Officer Greg Hall Public Works Mike Rose Public Works Jim Marshall Public Works January, 1992 Vail Transportation Master Plan ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i I. INTRODUCTION 1 Overview 1 Purpose of the Transportation Plan 1 Transportation Planning Process : 2 ' Relationship to Regional Transportation Needs 5 II. VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERIES 6 Description of Existing Conditions 6 Goals and Objectives 10 Characteristics of Delivery Systems 10 Alternatives ...................................................11 First Level Evaluation . 12 Second Level Evaluation 16 Recommendations/Priorities 26 III. PARKING .......................................................30 Background ...................................................30 Goals and Objectives . 34 Demand Management Options 35 Future Parking Supply Requirements 38 Parking Rate Structure : : : 39 Special Parking Provisions . 41 IV. TOWN BUS SYSTEM 42 In-Town Shuttle 42 Current Operation 42 Goals and Objectives 44 Capacity Improvement Alternatives . 44 At-Grade High Capacity Bus System 47 Optimal Monorail vs. Special Shuttle Bus 47 In-Town Shuttle Recommendations/Priorities 49 V. OUTLYING BUS SYSTEM 53 Goals and Objectives 53 Route Structure Modifications 53 Route Coverage Expansion Options 54 Service Frequency Improvement Needs . 54 Recommendations/Priorities S5 Down Valley Bus Service 58 January, 1992 i Vail Transportation Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Paee VI. I-70 ACCESS .......................................................59 Background ...................................................59 Goals and Objectives : : 60 I-70 Crossing Capacity . 60 West Vail Interchange Alternatives 62 West Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities : 67 Main Vail Interchange Alternatives . 68 Main Vail Interchange Recommendations/Priorities 73 Frontage Road System 77 Separation of Conflicting Travel Modes 79 VII. TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE 82 VIII. IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS 86 Prioritization ..................................................86 Funding ......................................................89 IX. PLAN MONITORING AND UPDATING 90 APPENDICES January, 1992 " Vail Transportation Master Plan i LIST OF FIGURES Paee I. Existing Goods Delivery System 7 2. Christiania Lot Centralization Site 17 3. Garden of the Gods Centralization Site 18 4. Golden Peak Centralization Site 20 5. Vail Road Centralization Site 21 ' 6A. Recommended Goods Delivery System -Short Term 27 6B. Recommended Goods Delivery System -Long Range 28 7. Existing Parking Supply/Demand Relationships 31 ' 8. Parking Supply/Demand Relationships 33 9. In-Town Shuttle Bus Route 43 10. In-Town Shuttle Directional Peak Hour Demand 45 11. Alternative In-Town Shuttle Systems 48 12. Golden Peak Area Concept Plan 52 ' 13. Recommended West Vail Bus Routes 56 14. Recommended East Vail Bus Routes 57 15. Recommended West Vail Interchange Improvements 66 16. Recommended Main Vail Interchange Improvements 76 17. Frontage Road Concept Plan 78 18. Core Area Concept Plan 80 19A. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 83 19B. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 84 19C. Proposed Vail Recreation Trails Implementation Plan 85 January, 1992 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan ' LIST OF TABLES Pte, 1. Floor Areas of Primary Truck Trip Generators 8 2. Peak Season Delivery and Service Volumes 9 3. Summary Evaluation of Product Delivery Options 24-25 ' 4. Existing Parking Supply 32 5. SAOT by Values for Ski Area Expansion 32 6. Summary Characteristics of Demand Management Options 36 7. Projected Overflow Parking Summary 37 8. In-Town Shuttle Comparison 50 t 9. West Vail Interchange Design Alternatives 63-64 10. West Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary 67 i 11. Main Vail Interchange Concept Alternatives 69 12. Main Vail Interchange Design Alternatives 70-71 13. Main Vail Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Summary 72 14. Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives 74 15. Main Vail Interchange Alternative Ranking 75 16. Genralized Plan Priorities 87-88 January, 1992 ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Executive Summary t , EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vail's Transportation Master Plan documents the entire planning process including data collection, public input, alternatives analysis, and the rationale behind each recommendation. The purpose of this Executive Summary is to consolidate all of the transportation plan recommendations into a single document for easy access and reference. The Vail Transportation Master Plan report should be consulted for a full explanation and clarification of the recommendations summarized herein. The Transportation Master Plan recommendations are summarized into five major categories and include both short-term and long-term actions as listed below. In general, short-term actions should be implemented in a 1 to 5 year time frame while long-term actions may require anywhere from 6 to 20 years to fully implement. VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERIES SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Relocate Check Point Charlie south to the vicinity of Willow Road. 2. Remove existing truck loading zones: Bridge Street (south of Gore Creek Drive) 4 Spaces - Gore Creek Drive (east of Willow Bridge Road) 5 Spaces - Hanson Ranch Road (over Mill Creek) 3 Spaces 3. Retain existin truck loadin zones: g g - Willow Bridge Road (south of Gore Creek) 9 Spaces - Gore Creek Drive (east of Mill Creek) 5 Spaces 4. Provide new truck loading zones: ' - Willow Bridge Road (north of Gore Creek) 6 Spaces - Willow Bridge Road (south of Gore Creek Drive) 4 Spaces Gore Creek Drive (north of Christiania parking lot) 2 spaces Hanson Ranch Road (south of Christiania parking lot 6 Spaces 5. Retain and enforce existing restrictions on vehicle movement in the Village core (Bridge ' Street and Gore Creek Drive) for all vehicle types except for service emergencies and service functions permitted by the Police Department or the Fire Department. 6. Proceed immediately with preliminary actions necessary for the implementation of the long- term plan for close-in, centralized goods delivery and product holding facilities. The first step should be the identification of two sites (one located in the west Village area and one in the east Village area) of sufficient size to accommodate 15 to 20 delivery vehicles each. January, 1992 Page i Vail Transportation Master Plan Executive Summary ' LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 7. Implement aclose-in, centralized goods delivery system in the Village core. Upon selection ' of the appropriate sites, further analysis should be initiated to address: - Land ownership issues including options to purchase, lease, or obtain long-term easements. - Implementation financing issues including various cost sharing options. - Facility operations including product handling options, liability issues, and security. PARKING SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Actively encourage private sector involvement in implementing Travel Demand Management techniques such as: - Price discounts for group arrivals by multi-occupant vehicles. - Enhanced loading facilities for group arrivals convenient to mountain access points. 2. Retain the existing formal, public parking supply of 2,750 spaces. 3. Annually review and adjust parking fees: - Parking structure hourly rates. = Premium parking program (Gold Pass) fees. Discount parking program (Blue Pass and coupons) fees. - Ford Park hourly rates. 4. Annually review and adjust parking controls and restrictions: Valid time periods for various premium and discount programs. Parking locations reserved for various user groups. - Availability of discounts to various user groups. LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 5. Evaluate sites and land ownership issues for potential future expansion of the formal, public parking supply including: - Ford Park parking lot - West Day lot North Day lot Expansion of Lionshead parking structure January, 1992 Page ii ' Vail Transportation Master Plan F~cecutive Summary ' 6. Evaluate remote, out-lying parking potentials including site availability and transit cost impacts to link remote parking areas with the Town. 7. Evaluate replacement sites for parking over-sized vehicles if the existing parking area adjacent to the Lionshead parking structure is redeveloped. Potential sites include: West Vail (Safeway area) Vail Mountain School parking lot - Golf course parking lot - Ford Park parking lot ' _ Athletic field parking lot Red Sandstone School parking lot IN-TOWN SHUTTLE SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Develop performance specifications for ahigh-capacity bus vehicle and submit a Solicitation of Interest to potential manufacturers and bidders. 2. Implement ahigh-capacity bus vehicle operation along the existing In-Town Shuttle route. 3. Relocate the turnaround at Golden Peak to separate auto/bus conflicts. 4. Further evaluate relocating the west turnaround of the In-Town Shuttle to East Lionshead Circle to remove the special shuttle vehicle from mixed traffic operations on the South Frontage Road. LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 5. Conduct a schematic design level technical study of a potential Village to Lionshead people mover to address: New technologies and operating alternatives. Identify alignment location options and station locations. - Define right-of-way and guideway envelopes for long-term preservation. 6. Evaluate the potential extension of the In-Town shuttle system into the Lionshead area in conjunction with future major redevelopment. January, 1992 Page iii Vail Transportation Master Plan Executive Summary ' OUTLYING BUS SYSTEM SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Combine the West Vail routes as opposing loop services utilizing the North and South Frontage Roads operating at 15-minute headways. 2. Continue the Sandstone route at 20 minute headways during the winter season. 3. Reroute the East Vail route along Main Gore Drive to Bighorn Road. 4. Provide separate routes for East Vail (15 minute headways) and the golf course (30 minute headways) throughout the day and combine into one route after the evening peak period operating at 30 minute headways. 5. Provide IS minute headways between Ford Park and the Transportation Center on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 6. Expand service to Chamonix Lane and Lions Ridge Loop pending future improvements to these roadways to allow safe and efficient bus operations. 7. The Town of Vail should continue to work with other public agencies and private sector beneficiaries to define and operate Down Valley transit services. I-70 ACCESS/LOCAL CIRCULATION SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Construct an I-70 underpass in the vicinity of Simba Run connecting the North and South Frontage Roads. 2. Upgrade the West Vail interchange and Frontage Road complex by implementing the following improvements: ' - Realign the west leg of the North Frontage Road between Wendy's and the Texaco service station to intersect Chamonix Road north of the existing intersection. - Realign the westbound I-70 on-ramp to connect with the east leg of the North Frontage Road. January, 1992 Page iv ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Executive Summary ' - Realign the eastbound I-70 on-ramp such that access to I-70 is via the South Frontage Road. - Add exclusive turn lanes for major left and right turning volumes at all intersections. 3. Conduct a controlled test at the Main Vail interchange to evaluate closing the east ramps and the traffic diversion to the East Village interchange. ' LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS ' 4. Provide a connector roadway between the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Road in conjunction with future development in the vicinity of Vail Das Schone in West Vail. 5. Evaluate improvement alternatives at the Main Vail interchange including: - Relocating the east ramps to the Booth Falls underpass. ' - Extending the North Frontage Road east and under I-70 to connect with Vail Valley Drive immediately east of the Transportation Center. - Constructing new ramps to I-70 in the vicinity of the VA shops. 6. Monitor high volume intersections and provide demand responsive traffic control. The Town of Vail's preferred control method is to provide manual control with designated traffic control personnel. 7. Depress the South Frontage Road at Vail Valley Drive immediately east of the Transportation Center and provide side-street, stop-sign control on Vail Valley Drive at the South Frontage Road to allow through traffic on the Frontage Road to proceed without stopping. 8. Proceed with the long-term phased implementation of improvements to the Frontage Road system including: - Implementation of on-street, 6-foot wide bike lanes along the entire Frontage Road system throughout the Town. - Implementation of exclusive left turn lanes at 31 intersections including the provision ' of a continuous center turn lane along approximately 4.5 miles of the Frontage Road system. - Provision of landscaping at major intersections and points of interest. - Implementation of special safety improvements (e.g. guardrail, lighting, etc.) at major intersections, along non-residential roadway segments, high pedestrian activity areas, and at the ends of center medians. January, 1992 Page v Vail Transportation Master Plan Executive Summary ' 9. Evaluate Vail Valley Drive as an eastbound one-way street between the South Frontage Road immediately east of the Transportation Center and a new connection with the South Frontage Road in the vicinity of Ford Park. TRAIL SYSTEM INTERFACE 1. Proceed with the long-term, phased implementation of the Streetscape Master Plan including the separation of conflicting travel modes including: - Vail Valley Drive a _ West Meadow Drive East Lionshead Circle - Relocation of Check Point Charlie - Willow Bridge Road Improvements 2. Proceed with the long-term, phased implementation of the Recreation Trails Master plan including detailed studies of eight key links throughout the Town: a - Study Link 1: Stephens Park to 2154 South Frontage Road West - Study Link 2: West Gore Creek Circle to Matterhorn Circle/Donovan Park Study Link 3: Lionshead/Nail Library to the Vista Bahn Study Link 4: Vail Village to Kaotos Ranch Trail - Study Link 5: Gore Creek Bridge to Lupine Drive = Study Link 6: Nugget Lane to Meadow Drive Study Link 7: Meadow Drive to Bighorn Park Study Link 8: Vail Racquet Club to Main Gore Drive North January, 1992 Page vi Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter f CHAPTER I. 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 a 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. a 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. January, 1992 Page 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter I The Transportation Master Plan is to provide guidance to the Town's decision-makers in developing a coordinated approach to impiementing 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. 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 a 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 and/or controlled by the Town of Vail. o Transportation problems and potential solutions which are outside the Town's jurisdiction or 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 a - Regional access to Vail as it relates to the I-?0 interchanges, new or modified access to I-70 interchanges, new or modified access to I-70, 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. January, 1992 ~ Page 2 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter I 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 tunneling the facility through all or portions of Vail. 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 a 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-70 Access/Frontage Road System a o Recreation Trails Interface To obtain additional input on these topic areas, the Town included these items in the 1990 Citizen a 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 oti 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. 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 Vail, West Vail, and the golf course. - Increase peak period bus service and late night service. ' - Implement a monorail in the long term future. January, 1992 Page 3 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter ! 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 walking path along frontage roads. - Build interchange with I-70 in Lionshead area. - Widen the frontage roads to provide parking. , o Frequently Mentioned Ideas to Improve Recreation Trails (Bicycle and Pedestrian) a - Provide aValley-wide bike path (Vail Pass to Glenwood Canyon) - Provide separate bike paths and pedestrian paths, and streamwalks. a = 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. a 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 a 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 aswell astheir relative priority. The Transportation Master Plan was a 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 amore detailed design evaluation. Steps must be taken to address quality design, with emphasis on landscaping and aesthetic considerations. The planning process recognizes that land ownership is a critical element in evaluating specific transportation solutions. The Town will need to work with private property owners and surrounding neighborhoods to examine existing covenants, zoning, and deed restrictions in finalizing specific land acquisitions to implement needed solutions. Due to the shortage of available land within Vail, land acquisition for the transportation solutions recommended in the plan will need to be addressed in the short-term. ' January, 1992 Page 4 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter I 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. a a a a ' January, 1992 Page 5 a Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II i~ CHAPTER II. VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERIES 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 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 deliveries which are currently located along the west side of Willow Bridge Road south of Willow Bridge (14 parking 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 11:00 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 are compared with similar information documented in a 1980 planning study in the Village' and ® were updated to reflect 1990 conditions. ~I 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. t January, 1992 Page 6 r F E L S B U R G N 0 L T & ULLEVI G, Mea ~ do M, D~ ~ . \ ~ . - ~ 10(1 H.C.) : m 4 5 7 . = co,, ` .v 0 m Gore Creek Dr• S 11 12 16 eKp{. 10 a re G(e 20 G° 4 13 17 S 6(2H.C.~ 4 8 15 ® 19 1 e" 14 Ne"gO" 18 i Not to Legend ~ ~ Scale ? Delivery Vehicle Loading Zones Privale Service Access Areas ~ 4 ~ ~ Figure 1 O Number of Spaces Existing Goods Delivery System 15 Min. Parking , Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II Table 1 Floor Areas of Primary Truck Trip Generators (I 980 Square Footages) Building Floor Area (Square Feetl Number Buildine Name/Address General Retail Restaurant Office 1. Sitzmark (83 GCD) 4,600 3,080 524 2. Gore Creek Plaza (193 GCD) 3,004 3,800 2,102 3. Schober (201 GCD) 3,500 2,937 2,528 4. Creekside (223 GCD) 3,338 5,798 5. Covered Bridge (227 Bridge Street) 8,816 6. Gasthof/Gramshammer (231 Bridge St.) 7,477 6,583 7. Gallery (228 Bridge Street) 5,247 2,342 8. Slifer(230 Bridge Street) 859 3,916 9. Clock Tower (232 Bridge Street) 2,790 4,199 10. Lodge at Vail (158-198 GCD) 9,035 8,997 11. Lazier Arcade (225 Wall Street) 7,371 3,000 12. Casino (250 GCD) 3,744 3,835 13. Plaza (281-293 Bridge Street) 8,000 4,800 14. Hill (311 Bridge Street) 8,056 15. One Vail Place (244 Wall Street) 2,348 9,953 16. Liquor Store (280 Bridge Street) 5,408 1,000 17. Red Lion (304 Bridge Street) 2,194 11,448 18. Gold Peak Hs. (278 HRR) 5,321 1,260 19. Cyranos (298 HRR) 5,434 20. Mill Creek Court (302 HRR) 3.553 2.746 Totals 89,414 66,219 29,310 GCD =Gore Creek Drive HRR =Hanson Ranch Road January, 1992 Page 8 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II ' Table 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 Package Delivery and Pick-Up 8 - 10 Customer Specialty Service 2 _ q 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. This truck volume conducts i approximately 230 to 250 separate deliveries and generates a total commodity volume of 1,900 to 2,100 cubic feet per day. January, 1992 Page 9 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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 (between Check Point Charlie and Mill Creek) and Bridge Street should not carry any vehicular traffic. o Design solutions need to be sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods and the natural 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 d0 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 Vaii, it is important to clarify the two 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) 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 merchant. 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. 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. January, 1992 Page 10 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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. 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 1 -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 similar to the subsurface tunnels stem exce t that the under round tunnels would Y p g 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. January, 1992 Page 11 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II ' Alternative - CPn,traliz~t:ion (Close-In) 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. Alternative 4 -Centralization (Remote) 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 be less, the size of the typical delivery vehicle would be relatively large. Alternative 5 -Decentralization This alternative is similar to the existing situation except trucks would not be allowed on Brid e g 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 screening 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. 1' . January, 1992 Page 12 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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. Alternative 2 -Small Vehicle Subsurface Tunnel Svstem The smaller subsurface tunnel system involves the same basic issues of constructabilit and lia ili y b ty 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 (Close-Inl 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 20% ' 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. l January, 1992 Page 13 l~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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 This may be resolved if, in securing the liquor license, the establishment also obtains a license for an optional premises, such as a warehouse. This alternative (or variation thereof) may be an appropriate solution, but further evaluation is necessary to determine its feasibility. Alternative 4 -Centralization (Remote 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 1 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. 3 Conversation with the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement Division, March 23, 1990. January, 1992 Page 14 i~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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 1 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. 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 Vehicles would be parked for a longer time period. 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. January, 1992 Page 15 ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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 Amore indepth analysis is now required to select the preferred plan. Alternative 3 -Centralization (Close-Inl 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? 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 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 Vail 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 1 in constructing the ramps may adversely affect the structural integrity of these buildings. January,i992 Page 16 FELSBURG H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 Vai! Townhouses Small Vehicle Delivery Access Mill Creek Court Dock Area Access CreeK Or~~e (Lower Level) Gore ~ i ~ ~ ~ / / ~ ~ ~ Dock Area / ~ (Lower Level) / Vi//a ~ ~ Va /halls / / y - so ' d~°~ ,9 oa, a Christiania Christiania Parking (Upper lot Access Level) 1 `Mill ; ' ;C~eek•` 1 Chateau 1 ~ 1 . Figure 2 .Christiania Lot Centralization Site . i FELSBURG c HOLT & ~ °o . \ UL LEVI G1 ' ~ Vail Trails O ~L m~ t/or/aufer 2 ~ ~ \~e ~ K x \ . 0~ ~ ° ~ ,,(Close Parking Access ~ ~ aew m ~ 3 / ~ G~ Clos~ ~ ~ Surface Parking / Gore Gore ~ (Upper Level) / ~ Creek m~ ~ Dock Area ~ ~ I/ail Trails Drive .o / (Lower Level) ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ Apron Area ~ ~ / Close (Lower Level) / / / Parking ~ i ~ ~ ~ / / Access ~ / / / / ~Q 1 / ~ ~ / 5Q \ / / / GG0 \ \ / / ~ Q' I Garden of the ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ,0r`G Gods Club West ~ ~ ~ JOCK ~i sus\~ ~ _ A// Seasons t Rued ass°~ RenGh N Rams Horn Tivoli Lodge Figure 3 Garden of the Gods Centralization Site .i Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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. However, every opportunity should be considered to improve the current status of a proposed site. 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 Valley 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. 1 January, 1992 Page 19 i~ ~ ~ i ~ rl~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T ~ U L L E V I G 1 ,fail yalleY Drive Expansion Area ~ c O Surface Parking « ~ 3 Tennis Courts ~ ~ m ~ relocated to roof N ~ ~ of Delivery Area N n c m N ~ m Surface Dock Area Apron Area Tennis Court Golden Peak x 3 m Em~nkme~t Pedestrian Trail F%gU~e 4 Golden Peak Centralization Site I~ rr ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r i F E L S 8 U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G Lodge at Vail Lodge South d Vail R°a 1 0 ~ ~ ~ \ Small Delivery ~ ~ ~ \ ~ \ Vehicle Access I Dock Area I MO~~~a~n \ ~ ~ ~ (Underground) I Access AOad ~ s ~ ~ ~ Apron Area ~ 1 (Underground) / I I L-- ~ - , I Figure 5 Vail Road Centralization Site Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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. 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 10. 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 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 aone-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: i ' January, 1992 Page 22 ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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. . The area between Cyranos and the Christiania building can be designed to accommodate up to eight 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 17 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. 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. i 1 January, 1992 Page 23 Table 3 Summary Evaluation of Product Delivery Options Item Alternative 3 (Centralization. Close-Inl 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 108 to 112 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 (I) No Customer Specialty Service Yes (I) No Trash Collection Yes (1) Yes (1) Special Circumstances Yes (1) Yes (1) (1) Exceptions can be controlled with existing or modified time restrictions. ~ r w~¦ . ~ C C~ C~ C:~~ G'~ C C~ r'rl ~ ~ Table 3 (Continued) Summary Evaluation of Product Delivery Options Item Alternative 3 (Centralization. Close-Inl Alternative 5 (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) Miil Creek (6-S Spaces) $150,000 to $250,000 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 Vai{ Transportation Master Plan Chapter II 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 aone-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 aperations. o Depending upogthe final combination of official truck loading zones to be designated by the Town Council, Check Point Charlie would be relocated or additional controi points defined to not only control truck operations but also to intercept lost tourists prior to reaching the Village core. RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES The Vail Village goods delivery plan is illustrated in Figure 6 (A and B), and consists of a modified decentralized delivery strategy. Elements of the plan are as follows; prioritized by short-term (Figure 6A) and long-term (Figure 6B) actions. Short Term o Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the short-term is 25 to 30 spaces. a 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. a 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 1 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 below Parcel J Vail a Village 5th Filing (approximately 4 spaces including 2 handicapped parking spaces), along Hanson Ranch Road just south of Parcel J (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 for service emergencies and service functions permitted by the Police Department. January, 1992 Page 26 i• I~ titti~t titer t, tttttt~i ~ . . O i~ D I~'1 ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & _ U L L E V I G 1 _ G Mej~e'ow p~ C-~ _ 1 Retain Existing \ \ Loading Zones / ~ \ ~ ~ ` ~ Convert 15 Minute • • - s ~ 5 m Parking Zones to f 4 7 Delivery Loding Zones . ' m ~~e - . C~ Retain Existing ~ 6 of 8 / - Loading Zon~ . (1 H.C. j•; m 4(2H.C.)~ Creek pr. Gore r.~ 11 12 16 G~eew g(r 10 \ Gate - Remove Gore Creek Drire \ 20 . 4 and Btldpe Street ' Loadfnp Zones 13 17 ~ ~ Convert t 5 Minute \ 1 ~ Parking Zones • to Dellvery 8 ~ ` Loadfnp Zonea. O o~ a 15 14 19 ~ Na^° 18 ~ I Legend ~ Remove Hanson Ranch Road Loading Zone \ m t` ` ~ Delivery Vehicle Loading Zones • Figure 6A Private Service Access Areas O Number of Spaces Recommended Goods Delivery System Not to Scale Short-Term ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~1 ~ r"~ ~ F E L S B U R G HOL T & ~L U L L E V I G, ( ~ 1 I Me4dow D~ ~ - < ~ ~ \ ~ m . ~ m ~ 5 7 4 ~ c or / - 6 y / ~ O m k pr. Gore Cree e~` Ut . 11 12 18 Gee r 10 Gate \ 20 13 17 Hsnso~ e - 15 14 ~ 19 1 1g Le end / ~ 9 ~ Potential sites or ? search areas for future truck ~ loading facilities (i5 to 20 spaces each) ~ Figure 6B ~/j//j,) Private Service Access Areas Rocommended Goods Delivery System Long-Term Not to Scale I ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter II ' o Existing time restrictions on delivery vehicle access to the core would be retained. These times have been established to provide a vehicle free environment for skier access and summertime lunch crowds. 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 Proceed immediately with preliminary actions necessary for the implementation of the long- ' term plan for close-in, centralized goods delivery and product holding facilities. The first step should be the identification of two sites (one located in the west Village area and one in the east Village area} of sufficient size to accommodate I S to 20 delivery vehicles each. o All private service access areas would be retained.' 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 alt of the t short-term changes as soon as possible. LOnE Term ' o Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the long-term is 35 to 40 spaces. o Implement aclose-in, centralized goods delivery system in the Village core. Upon selection ' of the appropriate sites, further analysis should be initiated to address land ownership issues including options to purchase, lease, or obtain long-term easements; implementation financing issues including various cost sharing options; and facility operations including product handling options, liability issues, and security. o Another off-street goods delivery area is necessary on the west side of the core area (perhaps in the vicinity of One Vail Place) and requires further evaluation. Further public input will ' be obtained to identify the potential available spaces. Until such a facility can be implement- ed 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. ' 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 acquisition and landscaping. t January, 1992 Page 29 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III CHAPTER III. PARKING BACKGROUND Throughout the year, the demand for parking in Vail 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 Level 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 Level 3 - 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. January, 1992 Page 30 ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ F E L S B U R 6 H 0 L T & ULLEVI 6, Emergency" Response Overflow Parking 3 Pro visions (e.g. Frontage Road) External Monitoring Temporary Parking 2 Supp/y/Demand Balance Maintained Supp/y (e.g. Ford Park) Self-Monitoring Formal, Permanent ~ Balanced Supply/Demand Pub/ic and Private Parking Supply (VTC, Lionshead, West Day Lot, etc.) Parking Demand Mode of Operation Parking Supply Figure 7 Existing Parking Supply/Demand Relationships Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III Table 4 Existing Parking Supply Approximate Quantities Location Existine Sunnly (1 /921 ,~I Transportation Center 1,300 Lionshead 1,200 Ford Park 250 Frontage Road As Needed . Total 2,750 Existing Parkine Sunnly/Demand Characteristics Figure 8 provides greater detail relative to parking supply/demand 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 6 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- 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 Ski 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 20.696 Potential Future Expansion 24,702 30.096 January, 1992 Page 32 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ F E L S B U R G 4 H 0 L T & UL LEVI G1 B ~ Parkins Demand Curves ~ O1 Existing ~ O2 Approved Ski Area Expansion with TDM _g_ _ g _ _ O3 Approved Ski Area Expansion without TDM Lon Ran arkin 3.2 Supply Expan ~ ®Potentia/ Ski Area Expansion without TDM ~4~~ y ~ ` ~ (~kTravel Demand Management) o ~ O ~ ^ z g ~ ~ Existing Parking Supply - 2750 Spaces - - Q - - - - - --~---y-. J ~ a ~ ~ 1. B y O 1 ~ 6 10 >5 26 34 10 20 ~ 30 I 40 I 50 I 60 . 5 15 ~5 35 45 55 65 Number of Days Parking--Demand Occurs or is Exceeded Figure 8 Parking Supply/Demand Relationships / ~ North Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III It will be noted that the approved long term ski area expansion results in excess of a 20% increase in overall demand levels while ultimate ski area expansion has a potential fora 30°x6 increase in demand levels. Proiected Parkine Sunoly/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. I~ 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 15 days per year. Thus, up to 15 days of overflow demand are considered acceptable by the Town as a reasonable balance between serving the majority of the peak parking demands with a feasible and affordable investment. o Provide reasonably priced public parking to serve the visitor. o Provide price discounted parking to serve Vail resident and employee needs. o Provide limited premium service parking at a price commensurate with the value provided. o Identify candidate expansion areas for additional public parking to accommodate long-term demands associated with the potential ski area expansion. 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. I~ o Provide a simple and easily understood pricing structure which is efficiently administered. o Retain the private parking supply as an important and needed element. 1 January, 1992 Page 34 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III , 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. 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 parking 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. January, 1992 Page 35 r ~ ~ ~ ~¦~r ~ rr a~~, ~ ~ ~ ~ rr ~ ~a arc Table 6 Summary Characteristics of Demand Management Options Demand Primary Potential Management Target Major Incremental Oation Gr~uo (*1 Cost Elements Effect Comments Modified Parking Vail Residents None 3 - 596 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 - 12% Greatest potential impact on parking demand. (52-7296 of Parkers) Discounts Benefits may be partially offset by acceleration of overall increase in visitors. 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 Grouo VTC Lionshead Local 139io 1096 Out-of-State 2396 3996 Rental Car 3396 19°x6 Other Colorado 2896 30% Truck 39'0 29'0 1009'0 1009'0 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III 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 Parking Days of Maximum Average Parkins Demand Scenario Sunoly 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 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 15 700 350 o Managed Demand (TDM) Long-Range Expansion 7 400 200 January, 1992 Page 37 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III ' 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 two-level parking facility with the second level provided below existing grade. o The existing West Day lot and the North Da lot should also be considered in con unction Y J 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 should also be evaluated to provide the needed parking spaces. o The Golden Peak area, in particular the soccer practice fields; the ski school/practice area; and the tennis courts and parking lot should be considered as potential parking expansion areas if the traffic impacts can be mitigated. Approximately 400 to 500 total parking spaces could be provided in one location or combination of 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 any scenario, the maximum below grade parking potential of a site should be considered. 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 beyond what is now known. January, 1992 Page 38 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III 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 purchase 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 1 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 1-1 /2 to 2 Hours $ 2.00 $ 3.00 2 to 3 Hours $ 3.00 $ 4.00 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 11 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 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 $750.00 plus a $25.00 deposit. o Limited to a maximum of 150 Gold Passes. o Guaranteed space availability and unlimited entry/exit. o No restrictions on use. o Gold Passes valid to the following November 1. * 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. January, 1992 Page 39 1 Vait Transportation Master Plan Chapter III ' The following are recommendations for the Discount Parking program and Ford Park in 1990/ 1991. Price levels are recommended to be reviewed annually. Coupons: o Coupons will be sold for $3.00 each up to a maximum of 100 coupons per individual and may be purchased in any quantity. o Coupons are valid to the following November 1. o Coupons are valid at both VTC and Lionshead any day and at any time. o At the VTC, Leve14 and Leve15 will be reserved exclusively for coupon holders (226 spaces). o If Levels 4 and 5 fill, then coupon holders will use Lionshead. o If Levels 4 and 5 do not fill, then general parkers will be allowed to use Levels 4 and 5 provided that the rest of the VTC is full. o Coupons may be purchased by those individuals who have a valid drivers license with a Vail address or verification of employment by a Vail business. Blue Passes: o Blue Passes will be sold for $400.00 plus a $25.00 deposit to anyone wishing to purchase them. o Blue passes are valid to the following November 1. o Blue Passes may be used at the VTC at any time on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday (except between Christmas and New Years Day) and after 3:00 P.M. on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. o Blue Passes may be used at Lionshead any day and at any time. o Blue Passes allow unlimited entry/exit during the valid time periods defined above. Ford Park: o Ford Park will be free and available on a first come, first serve basis on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. o Ford Park will be available to Coupon and Blue Pass holders or to general parkers fora $5.00 flat fee (payable upon entry) on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. January, 1992 Page 40 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III 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 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 Parking Lot o Golf Course Parking Lot o Ford Park Parking Lot o Athletic Field Parking Area o Red Sandstone School -Lower Parking Lot Overflow parking demands of oversized vehicles can be accommodated in the same fashion as overflow demands for general parking or arrangements can be made to park oversized vehicles at one of the above mentioned sites. 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 and possible outlying ' shuttles; most specifically, Golden Peak and the west side of the Lionshead Gondola building. During the day these vehicles should be parked in one of the areas designated for oversized vehicles. January, 1992 Page 41 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV CHAPTER IV. TOWN BUS SYSTEM The Town of Vail currently operates six free bus routes throughout the Town during ski season. Five 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 SHUTTLE 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 also 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- 1 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 19-1 /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 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. January, 1992 Page 42 ~ ~s r ~ ~ ~ .Nr r r ~r a rr ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .r F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 INTERSTait i0 EAST S. FpONTA~E ROAD ~ INTERSTATE 70 WEST ~ I t::. i~~~'I ~ 1 I a: ~ ~ - ~ CQNCERT HALL STOP ~ ? • PLAZA a' i 1' :r. t: - - ;I}:, LIONSH EAD PARKING Q ~ STRUCTURE CROSSROADS 1 LIONSHEAD MALL ~}~1~;R. PLAZP ~ 1 w.~:: ~e:: MARRIOTT'S MARK RESORT MEDICAL ~DOBSON ICE CENTER ~ CROSSROADS O ARENA r, .:.ii4: ~ • • VAIL TRANSPORTATION CENTER VAIL FIRE DEPARTMENT ~ . • , 1 COVERED BRIDGE ~ VAIL VILLAGE ~ I 1 Legend ~ •i ~ L1 ~ 1111 ~ 111 Restricted Auto Areas ~ ` I :Limited Auto Access GOLDEN PEAK ~ • BUS .StOp$ (NAME OF STOP) Figure 9 Not to Scale /n-Town Shutt/e Bus Route 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV ' 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 1989-90 150-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 Vail 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 OBJECTIVES ' 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 Grade 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, 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: January, 1992 Page 44 ri ~r r a~ ~r ~ .r ~ r ~s ~ rr rt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G 3 ' H 0 1 7 ~ 2_B U L L E V I G 1 ~ _ Line Capacity of System Ovtions ~ # 10 4 Dual Station People Movers (8-10 vehicles) y ~ 2O Special Shuttle Coach (14 vehicles) o ~ z O3 10 Station People Mover (20 vehicles) o z = 1 ~ ®Existing Shuttle Bus (14 vehicles) .Q y 1. e ` _ _ U a ~ 1. ~ - 3 - U t - `t - Potential Ski ~ m _ _ _ . _ - ~ - -~`~_a~ Area Demand ~ o t Approved Ski w Area Demand Z a Y a~ B 0 ~ Existing Demand 0 4 6 14 2 6 10 3U I 50 I 70 ~ 9U ' 110 I 1~i0 ~ 1.50 20 40 b0 80 1UO 120 140 Number of Days Ridership Demand Occurs or is Expected l/~ Figure 10 In-Town Shuttle Directional Peak Hour Demand North ~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV 0 10 elevated stations 0 32 foot, 2-car train o Winter Crush unit capacity of 51 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) 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 30°x6 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 This includes 10 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 Figure 10 (line #3), the 30°x6 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 30% 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 10 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 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. January, 1992 Page 46 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV ' 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 mile long 16th Street Mall are an adaption of these buses. Figure 11 illustrates the 16th 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, thus 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. ' 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 16 special low-floor buses (2 spares) including vehicle design development costs, maintenance facility modifications, and allowance for bus stop, streetscape and 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 6..With increases in demand induced by "Approved Ski Area 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 SHUTTLE 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 6396 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 to maintain central shuttle service to these areas beyond the Village Core. January, 1992 Page 47 F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G, 12-15 Seats 35-39 Seats ~?~~~u~ _ ~UNulu~ulu~1! l~~~~lulu~! liul~l~N~II l~uu.~ulu~lu~ ~ I , ` _ , , _ _ , - - F---, ~ . i ~~~i ~;a r:.• ~ . - - . wK ssi wa---'. ~ pR 35-foot Transit Coach lfonorail Low-Floor Nigh-Capacity Bua (Denver 16th St. Mall) Town of Vail Figure 11 Alternative In-Town Shuttle Systems r Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV 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 44°x6 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 13% 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. IN-TOWN SHUTTLE RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES 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 the 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. As 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 55% more capacity than is possible with the existing service, however, fewer stops would be provided under this option. 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, 38%, 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. January, 1992 Page 49 ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV Table 8 In-Town Shuttle Comparison Special Elevated Operation Parameters Low-Floor Bus Peoale 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 - 5. 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) $20.450.000 (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 facilities 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. January, 1992 Page 50 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IV In addition, a new turnaround area should be provided at the Golden Peak area as shown in Figure 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, a low impact 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. A wide range of service and alignment options should be retained for future evaluation including service between the major core areas only and alignments along the Frontage Road on I-70. 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. i t 1 1 t i ' January, 1992 Page 51 F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 ~ ~ ~ Tennis Courts ~ BUS ' Manor Vail Loading ~ Area Golden Peak ~ ~ , Ski Base I - ~ d. L n. N, _ .Ski ~ School ~ - D No Stairs ~ Required "'~~~s Pedestrian Area Pedestrian Walkway Legend Landscaped Areas Parking Spaces Golden Peak ' Bus Traffic Flow Children's Ski Center ~ General Traffic F/ow Figure 12 Golden Peak Area. N ' Not to Scale Short Term Concept Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter V ' CHAPTER V. 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 for 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. January, 1992 Page 53 ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter V ' 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 area for all except the late evening hours. ' 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. 1 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. ' 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. January, 1992 Page 54 1 ' Vaii Transportation Master Plan Chapter V RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES ' The following define the recommended improvements to the outlying bus routes prioritized by short- term and long-term actions. Short-term ' o Combine the West Vail routes as opposing clockwise and counter-clockwise routes utilizing the North and South Frontage Roads, as shown in Figure 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. o Maintain separate East Vail and golf course routes throughout the day and combine these into one route after the evening peak period. o Provide continuous service between Ford Park and the Transportation Center on Fridays, ' Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. o Frequency of service for the revised transit system structure is recommended to be: ' - West Vail Opposing Loops - 15 Minutes Sandstone Route Winter Service - 20 Minutes. - East Vail Route - 15 Minutes - Golf Course Route - 30 Minutes ' - Combined East Vail/Golf Course Route (late evening) - 30 Minutes - Ford Park Weekend Service - I S Minutes Recommended frequencies will need to be adjusted as ridership demands change relative to peak and non-peak hours, late night, and seasonal variations. Lone-term o Expand service to Chamonix Lane and Lions Ridge Loop pending future horizontal and ' vertical geometric improvements to these roadways. ' January, 1992 Page 55 FELSBUFiG liOL T & U L L E V I G 1 REO SANDSTONE ROAD QD Winter service to this area VAIL VIEW DRIVE • ~ ~ provided via separate ~ ° • J,B, .SANDSTONE o Sandstone Route as it currently exists. J~~` E ,REEK rl I IR ~ ,f •E~l FENR CREEK F•t i~ IVM TIMBER SIMBA Q • ~ RI GE RUN VAIL RUN BREAKAWAY WEST EO SANDSTONE ROAD e~7 ~r tl~ PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS La~• VAILDASSCNONE j .~.1)a • • ~ + SAFEWAY O O - REDSANOSIONESCNOOL a ' ~ • Gr r • • INN A( VAIL Wf sl vAIL ••'•N~faONtA ~ Y INTERSTATE 70 @AST ENSTAtF ~B M'ES? , TO•FROM v T C MAL ` • VAIL PROFESSIONA ~ ~ WESTHAVEN BUILDING ~ • ~ •SR • ••fa0~'GE PDE'O MATTERHORN. VLLAGEE DRIVE .,~5 ` TO/FROM V.T.C. ; CNAMONI%-FRONTAGE ~ , ~ @~ ' .CONCERT • ~ ? O L•_ NALL PLAZA F• PTARMIGAN • MANRIOTT'S d , \ MARK RESORT • ~ ~ d LIONSNEAO ~1• ' • STREAMSIOE 7•' UNDERPASS ~«I CE ~ rr([~ ~ n INTERMOUNTAIN C d INTERMOUNTAIN BRIDGE ~ D 1, ~ O ~ Q ~l -a! • ij•~ ••`n~1 MEADOW CREEK Legend Clockwise Route Counter-Clockwise Route • BUS StOpS (NAME OF STOP) Figure 13 Recommended West Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale I .r F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & ULLEVI G, FAILS OF VAIL VAIL MOUNTAIN ~ ~ SCHOOL HALO MOUNTAIN ROAD - ne~..~.a INTERSTATE TO WEST INTERSTATE 70 ~7~JT ; S. FgONTA_GE HOAO ' A~PEN LANE ~ ' PITKIN CREEK PARK EAST VAIL ~r ~ ~ fORD PARK - ,`J :All EAST CONDOS - 1610 SUNBUR T DRIVE LUPINE/ ~ ,COLUMBINE/BIGHORN ROAD 1 ~ ~ GOLF CLUR HOUSE BIGHORN ROAD, ~ • MANOR VAIL ~'i0.~ ~ ~ BjQh r</gll V8//ey Jd ~ STREAMSIDE CIRCLE 1r - O~\ Streeme/dam , _ Roed ~ ~ 1448 VAIL VALLEY DRIVE ~i//C/B EHBf ~ i 5.~:'CER FIELD ~ • ~ t;~~LDLN PEAK PTARMIGAN h , -MAI GORE / JUNIPER ROAD WEST / TARMIGAN ~ VAIL RACQUET ~ CLUB 7 ROAp EAST TIMBER FALLS BIGHORN • ~ ~ PARK i O MOUNTAIN MEADOWS.`. ~ O s ~ Legend *°o~~~ I f . East Vail Bus Route c ~ ~ Golf Course Bus Route MEADOW LANE EAST M - - - Ford Park Bus Route BUS StQp$ (NAME OF STOP1 Figure 14 Recommended East Vail Bus Routes Not to Scale Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter V 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. ti~~ I~ '~r January, 1992 Page 58 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI CHAPTER VI. I-70 ACCESS BACKGROUND Three freeway interchanges along Interstate-70 currently provide access to the Town. Two of the y 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. i o The interchange area processes about 2,200 vehicles during the evening peak hour of which 55 percent are oriented to/from 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 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: 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-70 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 ~4 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, projected 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. January, 1992 Page 59 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI 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: January, 1992 Page 60 Y Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI 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. 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 650 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. r r t January, 1992 Page 61 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVES Interchange alternatives for the West Vail interchange are as follows: 0. No Action 1. Single Point Diamond (Urban) r 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 S. 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. An initial screenin of the West Vail in r _ g to change 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 wo 1 u d somewhat be beneficial to allev~at~ng 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. January, 1992 Page 62 Tab/e 9 West Vail Interchange Desi n Alternatives 9 Alternative Characteristics 0. Existing Situation for comparison. 1 • Combines ramp terminals into one intersection. Reduces turning movement conflicts. Increases intersection spacing. i 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. r Table 9 lcorr`t West Vail Interchan a Design Alternatives 9 Alternative Characteristics 4• ~ Provides additional spacing to I-70 for west leg of North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations on North Frontage Road. Simplifies operations at north ramp terminal. 5• ~ Increases intersection spacing on north side. f ~ 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. i r Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI ' 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 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 Wendy's and the Texaco service station. A revised traffic control scheme is inherent in this 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. 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. January, 1992 Page 65 FELSBURG H 0 L T ~ U L L E V I G 1 1 i F 1 Wendys Texaco Demand responsive control will be required in the future. ~ ~ N. Frontage Rd. 11' ~ ~ a off R n~~ 0~ o 1-70 ~ - r U ~ff,9 $''~~o mP 0~_Ra J r S. Frontage Rd. ~ ~ ~ Legend ~ Lane for Indicated Movement ~ Stop Sign Figure 15 Recommended West Vail Interchange Improvements Not to Scale . Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI 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 (Figure 151 Chamonix/N. Frontage Road 1.41 1.67 1.41 (2) 1.03 (2) i Chamonix/S. Frontage Road 1.20 1.42 1.18 0.87 (1) Future demand is based upon approved ski area expansion levels. ~I (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. 1 o When the vacant lot adjacent to Vail Das Schone develops, provide a connector roadway between the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Lane. 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. Figure 15. January, 1992 Page 67 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI ' 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 -Sin le Point Diamond (Urban) g 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 i 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. January, 1992 Page 68 i Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI 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 Provide New Ramp(s) at VA Shops 4. Relocate EB Entry Ramp 5. High Capacity Diamond 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 8. Relocate East Ramps to Existing Underpass East of Golf Course (Modified Split Diamond) Sunnlemental Actions Previously Considered " 9. Frontage Road Modifications While not recommended as isolated alternatives, (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 January, 1992 Page 69 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. fi ~ ~ 2• Combines ramp terminals into one intersection. Reduces turning movement conflicts. ' Increases intersection spacing. 3• 1\ New exit/entry ramps at VA shops. / //1 Right turns only at EB exit to Vail Road. Y !1?I, Operational analysis to be done without signals. Federal access approval to I-70 exists. 4• Relocates EB entry to South Frontage Road. ' Simplifies operations at EB exit ramp. Complicates directional signing to I-70 east. Table )2 (con'~~ Main Vail Interchange Design Alternatives _ Alternative Characteristics 5, Increases laneage at existing interchange. Retains all existing traffic patterns. i~ 1 6, Relocates EB and WB entries to Frontage Roads. Simplifies individual intersection operations. Complicates directional signing to I-70. 7. \ Provides new I-70 crossing east of Main Vail l interchange. Reduces traffic through interchange area. m s to existin under ass east g. ~ ~ Relocates east ra p g p of golf course. Reduces traffic through interchange and 4- way stop. r r~ ~r r r r r r r r r~ r~s r~ r~ r r r Table l3 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 Network Network Only (A1t.31 (A1t.71 lAlt.8) Vail Road/North Ramps (Left Turns) 1.16 1.33 1.21 1.21 0.96 0.77 (i) Vail Road/South Frontage Road/ 0.94 (2) I.11 (2) 1.09 (2) 0.90 (2) 1.02 (2) 0.92 (2) South Ramps South Frontage Road/VA Shops Area - - - 0.89 (2) - - South Frontage Road/Nail Valley Drive 1.14 1.26 1.26 0.74 (2) (3) 0.76 (2) (3) 0.85 (2) (3) (1) All way stop control along East Frontage Road/westbound off-ramp intersection near Booth Falls. (2) Demand responsive traffic control required (manual control or traffic signal). (3) Intersection modification required (lower South Frontage Road). Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI 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 addition demand response control is required at a total 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 impacts, 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 15 illustrates the results. MAIN NAIL INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES The following are recommendations regarding the Main Vail interchange to relieve traffic congestion prioritized by short-term and long term actions. ' Short-Term, o As a first priority, construct an I-70 underpass in the vicinity of Simba Run connecting the North and South Frontage Roads. o Conduct a controlled test in which the east Main Vail ramps would be closed and sign easterly ' oriented traffic to use the East Vail interchange. Results of this will indicate how well the Long-range solution will work. o Continue to manually control (Nail's preferred traffic control method) the 4-way stop intersection during peak periods. Lone-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. Keeping the east ramps at the Main Vail interchange open during non-peak months may also be a possibility. o Improve the frontage road between Main Vail and Booth Falls as necessary to accommodate increase volumes and improve safety. 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. January, 1992 Page 73 r~ r r ~r r rr r rr ~r r ~ ~ ~ .r ~ r r r Table 14 Implications and Consequences of Main Vail Interchange Alternatives Planning Alternative/Phase R/W Im~licationc Avproval~ Re ui~gd Physical 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 Valley Drive/SFR intersection. Vail Valley R/W required along with No I-70 access approval Retaining walls required for cut area $2.OM 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. Holy Cross/ R/W required in the VA shops I-70 access approval is New intersection on SFR at VA $1.2M VA Shops Ramps 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 be conditioned on the interchange. Removal of large installation of traffic evergreen trees. signal equipment. (1) Costs are in 1990 dollars and do not include land acquistion nor improvements to rl~e frontage roads beyond the interchange area. rr ¦r r~ r rr r rr rr rr r rr rr rr rr ~r rr r r rr Table 15 Main Vail Interchange Alternative Ranking Right- Traffic of-Way Institutional Physical Visual Interchange Alternative Operations lmnact Considerations Impact Impact Cost Rank Sum , Alternative 3 3 3 1 1.5 2 2 12.5 VA Shops Ramps Alternative 7 2 1.5 1.5 3 3 3 14.0 NFR Vail Valley Connection Alternative 8 i 1.5 3 1.5 2 1 10.0 Booth Falls Split Diamond Note: I =Good, 2 =Moderate, 3 =Poor r~ rri r r r r rr rr r r~ rr ~ r ~r rr r~ r r~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G, North Frontage Road Remove Ramps ,µa~`p ~ Booth Falls O~ I_~~ Area ~ 2 off Off _qa,~ ~ `9a A ~-O South Frontage Road ~ i On-Aamp ~v a Figure 16 Recommended Main Vail Interchange improvements Not to Scale I Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI ' 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. 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 road system. ' o Provision of additional crossing capacity of I-70 (as discussed previously) in order to relieve traffic congestion at the West Vail and Main Vail interchange areas. 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 lighting at intersections (and on ' ~ 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 31 intersections; 19 of these intersections currently have no such provisions. Further analysis and design detail will be required prior to implementation. January, 1992 Page 77 c ~ m ~ Q° o, Q a~ `~/0 rO` 100 ~ U T 41~oN Mup Bio~ urBJy v B/11M ' V 13~OJ1'a 7/bit Aqq BoniOS • • Ise3 BN40 BprsweeilS ~ a!p BprVwn/o~ \ v.. • •lsgM Bloip eprtwveq$ ` ' enlp aoni0$ ~aup vulOn7 MBBJ'J vlMl!d ~ . ' pvoa a0pug 1tB3 pvoy BAVluoij~• ' pvoy Vouva rolsvH vPoa mva woos oBOa uwva ruuvly ouB~ ueasy Pvoa urvlunoly Plv9 ~W is C ~ io _ •m V! h v ~ O O m m ('31 Burp .(ellei) I!Bn ~ L rr ~ r0 r0 I~. y Y O O O O ~l ~l ~ I I ;OO >lacd OaO~ ~ ~ o, o, C ~ ~ ~fNl snlp rfN/Wt PBit o a ~ a31N3J NOI1Y1 aOdSNYal C C ' ~PVOy ielua~ eCBll~n N r9 ~ J J ~ pvoy pv~ O O ~ i , ~ . N ~ G C r0 ry O H lley welunO~y J J m 41 ' 1 fjnl OY3HSN017 C C ~ G ~ IN- f31 B/o•r~ pvBVSUnr7 ltelyl ti I? Q ~ J Ioa4oS auolspue$ pBy 1 (iN/ elou,7 peeysuor7 ls~ ` Y ` ~ O m ti J ' pB0 BI/O1 u ` ~GBOa IteiOj N ~ 00 Q1 a w vSpey-~ ~ c c ~ ~ U U ~o aoo7 Bapra ruor7 ~ • ui ui vi ~ N N N ~•~syq uwvulsew m ~ m W J J J earllO ltod~•• > > > O ~ ~ ~ ~ • C L L ~ Bepo7 lvooy •i:~Blo/l~ woVwllvly D i ~ ~ o C O N N ~ m ' {r~B~~ Ban~as ~ ' pvoy r!Beip ~yBlln9 • Bnlp .deep v~o~ ItBM N I J ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ' pvoy rnaou/ey~ • .s v ~ • ~~'~~pbq~o O 6' ~ m ~ W` N H W ~Oy J J J I /Q ~ W O J II{/\u W Z ~ ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI ' Included with the adoption of the Vail 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. 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. Full implementation of 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. 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 geometrics and widening in constricted locations. The area lying easterly of Vail Road along East ' Meadow Drive will require approximately 30 feet of width to properly implement. 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 delivery vehicles are adequately controlled. ' A pedestrian overpass of I-70 in the vicinity of the Post Office would provide an important pedestrian safety improvement in an area where pedestrian crossings of I-70 are currently prevalent. January, 1992 Page 79 F E L S B U R G • H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 Pedestrian Bridge ~ ~ `v' ~ Lionshead j ~d• Perking Structure °Je Ice Arena ~agPi (i#Dttikeugtu::~1il~ Library ¦ ~ Hospital 1~7 Q ~°n y! M F ea ~ • d°~'~'s pr y ` Ford Park i See also Goods ~ Deliver Plan ~ ~ - Y apt V811ey ~ ~ Alnletic Fieid Golden Peak Legend umnmwnun Pedestrian Priority Corridor Potential 1-Way Auto Route ~ Check Point Charlie Figure 18 V~ I Pedestrian Area ~J Core Area Concept Plan North Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VI ' Another element of the core area concept plan consists of a potential long-range revision of traffic flow on Vait 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: ' 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 bicycle/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 0.35 and the new intersection created at Ford Park and the frontage road would be less than 0.60; both of which result in excellent traffic operations. 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. January, 1992 Page 81 ~I Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VII VII. 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 Trail 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 $2,000,000. The feasibility of implementing these improvements will be evaluated in detail as a part of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan and the Main Vail Trails Feasibility Study. ti a Recreation Trail Master Plan, 1988, Winston,Associates. January, 1992 Page 82 8 LEGEND ~ EXISTING TRAILS Donavan Park -`-%~~_-fi _ a' rmmw• FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES - ~ ~ u.o•u FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES ' ~ • • • • ON-STREET TRAIL ~ ' h_= Butler Creek Park` OFF-STREET TRAIL PEDESTRVW PATH i j ir, I ] . ~ • BRIDGE ~ ® REST STATION O - ~ . PHASE OF -RECREATION TRAILS PLAN" x ~ 7 WEST VAIL EXIT / ~ A ~>~'I 1~ •Y . v Tt~ / _ / study unk 2 -s,•a~ i ~ Connects West Gore Creek Circle with Matterhorn Clr- J ~ ^ - ~~:I cle/Donovan Park. This trail would 6e established within available right-ot-way and easements. Trail should be as close to Gore Creek as practical. LLL Stevens Park Ilulurel ~Jr~~~~r~~~~ ~ WEST VAIL 1 _ ~ PROPOSED • ~ IMPLEMENTATION _ 2 PLAN u~~,:~; ~~i~~>~. TraB cormects ( """Q~~~~ to wgnvray s Studv lJnk 1 • • C • • ~ Connect Stephens Park with the trail Just west of 2154 South Frontage Road West; the trail would wind through the Streamslde et Vall property and a bridge Is required from Streamslde to Conoco. Requires a bridge across Gore Creek erg r - o+rE enn r+•• et Stephens Park. Uses parts of the West Gas easement I ' Y,v ^ over tfie hill. Easements required from private prapertles on the east side and permission from the Forest SeMce. { Sensitivity required for surrounding neighborhood and natural Figure 1 .7 a envlronmeM. APPENDIX A EXISTING AND FUTURE PEAK HOUR LINK TRAFFIC VOLUMES i I 1 - 1 i ~ ar ~aa~ ~rJ r ~ r. arr r r ~ rr~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ter, F E L S B U R G R G l T 6 U L l E V l O 0 2 m c O ~ O O O y O 0 Q 420/690 Q N C O ~ 270/540 s n 0 130 sp ~~p 11so/15so 0 a pyO f o :,e 0 m 0 170/390 \h9 a e 0 13Op,~s? 1420/1890 byO O U 550 8$ ~ ^ ~ O ` 150/120 ~ CU e D ~ Sso~~3 p ~ ° xo m 0 OI9~0 ro m ~ ~ ~~~p 0/180 o A~OI69 1g y o ? o 0 39p~4Bp ~ ~ m ~ j V j c ` o 0 0 o ~ ~ 3 a m ~ U ~ 0 N ,QO 0 m p O~~ l 0 U 0j210 o Legend 0 18 O~Ag ~O ryryO 0 o XXX/XXX AM/PM Peak Hour Tra/lic 3ti a O~ 0> 00\ '`p gO~, p ti 0 330/ 0 X00 ~ ~0/~0 0 U 90 m 0 h 3 Existing Road Network Existing Peak Hour Volumes - ~ ~ r r~ r r ~ a.r ~ r~ ~ rr ~r err ~ r F E L S BUR G H O L T 6 U L L E V I G A a m C O O ~ O ~ J b m o Q Q 500~~ N ~ C 320/840 s 1310/1830 O J .90 O '980 syo "a 1370/1810 a 52p '`ro 480 6~p soo/660 pp 2p01 p\ e ~p10 76~'O~"9p /~--188012230 y, `O 6 m p ~ 640/B4p _`170!140 ~~o i V ` m 'SO o V 2040/2470 p A v ~ 1Ap O m m ~ ~ o/9O OO/180 Q a. o m A6pla,p 93p11 ~ e R ~ ~ 440j54 ~ o ~ m o a ~ m ~ m N O ~ 3 ~ O E ; ~ m ~ . t ` ~ 1,,9p b m 3 1 ~p U 0o /25p c`o p Legend 0p 1g ~ _ pplh hp~ ,fl ryp p o o XXX/XXX AM/PM Peak Hour Tral/rc 9 ~ ~ 110 ~ m h0 ^1 ppl ~ ~ ~ 0/420 p 9 m 39 9hp1~~ aoao m 0 ' Existing Road Network Projected Peak Hour Volumes i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e a Q e e 0 a ~°n J O $ x 2ao Q a 3?Q J S.9 O ° O ~ `r9° ¢ Alp © ~ w p~~ Y ~9p 'SSO ` ~seo 1 ~~o _ ~o a I/ O O ~ • ~ ` V ~ ~ h ~ ` 86o O d ~ ~ m 58p Q = e ¢ O ~ c Q° o c ~ e ~ j U M O M ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ e e bpp U 3 a c o e ~ e 1-70 CROSSINGS 9 0 'o° ~ ~ ,~h 1~ a ~ 1/oL % 39~ a° gyp U West l/ail 700 22 Underpass 410 13 0 ~ Main Vail 1100 34 N Booth Falls 510 16 New Underpass East l/ail 500 15 Projected AM Peak Hour lio/camas 3220 100 ~ ~ ~ ~r are ~r ~¦r ~ rr. ~ ~ rr ~ rs r a ~ ~ y J 2~° r 320 J Sy O ° O 6Q 's° o a A ~ ,50 2 19~ ? Sq° ~O ~6B g o e ? ~ ? 890 U rn ~ ° o Q " ~ ° ~ ~ ~ O o r ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ , V j K ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ C 4 ~ ~ U ~ m } ~ S a~ 600 e 0 19 e Abp . 1-70 CROSSINGS ~o ~ e O °o ~ ~0 ~ `e ~y ~ o ~ Vol. ;K 33~ a° ~ ~c}~ V West Vail 700 22 Underpass 420 13 ~ Main fail 1090 34 Booth Falls 510 16 New /-70 Accass-Rad Sandstone East Vail 500 15 Projected AM Peak Hour lio/umes 3220 100 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ •~r ~ ire rr. r ~r ~ ~ r ~ s~ a ~ g J a 4 320 J `s9p O _ 200 ~ ~ X10 © \ Y. ~ ~ 1°.A ~ i ~ e /48p 1620 J ®x420 `'~,O ~ "'ao f( U ~ ~ o M X90 O ~ 70 U rn o v o 7 m 5~ a ~ ~ ~ i a ~ ~ Q ~ 0 0 o y ~ e ~ ~ o ~ U ~ e o O ~o ~ e j E ~ t ~ m h~ U y ti ` g4 U 9 6~ ~ 1-70 CROSSINGS ~g0 ~ o ~ e VOL. % ~~O ~ ~ West Vail 700 21 390 ap ~ Underpass 320 i0 ~~0 U a Main Vail 910 28 ~ 2nd Underpass 360 11 Booth Fa//s 510 15 2nd Underpass/t~isconnsct 1/ai/ Road East Vail 500 15 P~o~ected AM Peak Hour 1/o/umes 3300 100 ¦r. r ~ ~ ~r ~r ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~r s a e a e 8 J D 0 6 ¢ 2g0 R b 0 320 J a p1~ s,~ h 360 O © b t 190 ? ~ 6s ? a lssp lg4p 1 O 0 0 ? : g ~ > 260 °Y ? 86~ U ~ a ?7p v o a o Q m 5$ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ c O ~ ~ ~ o m i U ~h~ m e 3 0~ U c ~y~ c ^o , ~ 1-70 CROSSINGS ~~o o ~ Vol. % 90 a° e ~~p U West Vai! 700 23 Underpass 4 >0 l3 0 ~ Main Vail 570 19 Booth Falls 1000 32 Booth Fa//s Ha/f Diamond Esst Vail 410 l3 Projected AM Peak Hour lio/umes 3090 100 ~ r~ r ~ ~r ~ ~r ~ ~ a~ ~ ~r ~ ~ ~r~r r~ ~ ~ a Q e .g 4 e g ~n J e 480 a r 640 o ~ ~ s'S~ N $ 1 R p ~ 460 A ~ ~2 ~ ~88p 2230 ~ 6~0 ~ e ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 1220 ~ °f e ~ m ~1p °o ~ e ~ 4 o ~ e `c m O y ~ ~ ~ ` ~ • o ~ U ~ ~ e o O ~ e E e m ~ U c 0 N ~0 ~ 3 w ~ U pro c 250 o ~ 1-70 CROSSINGS 5~ ao ~°~o ti~0 ~0 ~ h 9 0 ~ Vol. % ago a° e 3yp U West Vai! 1030 24 ~ Underpass 640 15 0 ~ Main Vail 1280 30 N Booth Falls 670 16 New Underpass East Vail 660 15 Projected PM PeaK Hour loo/umes 4280 100 ~ . rr~ r. r ~ err rr ¦r ~ w ~ ~ ~ rrw ~ a e a ~ ~ J Q 4jO Q w s4o J '''~i~ O N 1 AO yo o Y 12Ap ~ 410 ~ 90 lg ~ 370 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 2230 ra U ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ® o Z ~ 1240 U ~ ~ O $ e m ~~0 ¢ ~ ~ ~ D Cy ~ e ~ 0 O O ~ ~ ~ e ~ j V k \ O y ~ O Q ~ E e > ~ ~ U e w 1000 U so 250 a ~~p ~ oo • e 1-70 CROSSINGS ypp w ti 1~0 p Vol. % 350 ao °e ~y0 U West Veil 1030 24 Underpass 650 15 v Main Vail 1270 30 Booth Falls 670 16 New /-70 Access-Red Sandstone East Vail 660 15 Projected PM Peak Hour 1/o/umes 4280 100 e a a ~ 8 Jp _D ~ Q M _ 640 J ~3O ^O ~ 090 ~'so ~ ~ 0 © 460 ,2° ~ 9 ~ ~ 7jp0 2040 f 175 p 6~~ ~ v 1 ~ /~0 ~OgO ~ o e~ ~ ao 1~0 ¢ c° a ¢ O O " ° ° a, ~ ~ c c `a e e ~ o ~ v e O a ~ o c a ; ~ U ~ y0 0 ~ 0 y~0 1~ e 1-70 CROSSINGS 25~ o e VOL. % l • haO ti 910 ~ ~ West Vail 1030 24 a20 a ~ Underpass 510 12 9h0 U Main Vail 970 22 v 2nd Underpass 510 12 Booth Falls 670 >5 2nd Underpass/Disconnect 1/ai/ Road East Vail 660 15 Projected PM Peak Hour 1/o/umes 4350 100 0 Q e e y 480 Q 4 640 J O a 160 9`so 390 2A0 ~O ac ~ ~ 0 `9`SO ~ m 188p 2570 ~ 13 o e ~ v ~ ~ ° X92 600 oN ~ 1220 U rn ~ h m 1~0 a ~ 0 2 i a ~ e ° b ~ ~ y O ~ ~ b ~ ~ O J ~ V k O ~ b p ~ ~ E o ~ ~ U t e ~ ` h~ ,0~ c 250 ~ o e 1-70 CROSSINGS 'o o • ~o a 9 p ~ Vol. % a20 ° 350 U West Vail 1030 25 Underpass 640 16 ~ Main Vail 1110 28 Booth Falls 730 18 Booth Fa//s Ha/f Diamond East Vail 520 13 Projected PM Peak Hour 1/o/umes 4030 100 APPENDIX B EXISTING PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS i 1 t 1 F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 31 I~ p p ~ 0 72 p I 41 ~ p ~I p 41 Bighorn Road c i r p et M Z N Q I N ~ ~ ,C Figure 1 P.M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 North ~ F E L S B U R G ' H 0 L T ~ U L L E V I G 1 140 98 0 ~ 98 342 175 76 77 202 126 Bighorn Road ~ ~i N ~ r U ~ E cO ro a~ v~ Figure 2 P. M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 North / F E L S B U R G Q N H O L T & U U L L E V I G 1 ~ r ~ ~ ' ~ O N Bighorn Road 3 154 I • 138 ~ 143 2 I 377 349 I 12 223 ~ 203 206 8 I~ o o ao ~ ~ ~ Figure 3 ao a P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 ' North ~ F E L S B U R G H O L T b U L L E V I G 1 ? i 231 I ~ 228 229 1 483 474 I 245 245 252 7 Bighorn Road ~ M ° ro ao r~ 0 ~C a~ I m Figure 4 P. M. Peak Hour TMC ~ March 1990 North F E L S B U R G ~ H 0 L T & ' U L L E V I G 1 II t CD f~ C7 N M N ~ ~ From I-70 Eastbound r' To 1170 Eastbound 69 ~ 63 ~ p 159 o N r N ro o ~ r- aC i N N O m I Figure 5 V~ ~ P.M. Peak Hour TMC ~ March 1990 North ~ N F E L S B U R G N H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 O N . ~ t0 N From I-70 Eastbound ~ N To I-70 Eastbound p 129 ~ 13 ~ I 28 I 126 f` ~ 0 ~o 0 ~ N (h r T ~ N ~ O m Figure 5a V ~ M P. M. Peak Hour TMC July 1990 North ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -s ~ ~ ~ F E L S 8 U R G W ~ H 0 L T & ~ ro U L L E Y I G 1 ~ ~ N C `~t ~ p M r' ~ N To 1-70 Westbound M From 1-70 Westbound 23 38 N 116I~ I 1 15 ao ~ rn M N IM N I ~ Figure 6 V ~ n P. M. Peak Hour TMC ~ March 1990 North / F E L S B U R G ~ ~ HOLT & ~b O U L L E Y I G' ~ O~ C ~ N O ~ O ~ To 1-70 Westbound Fiom 1-70 Westbound 96 I < 12 ~ 30 ~ N O N ~ ~ Figure 6a N P. M. Peak Hour TMC Val July 1990 North . ~ F E L S B U R G H O L T b U L L E V I G 1 ~ N O N ~ ~ N w o I m I I cC ~ N ~ ~ Frontage Road East 2 ~ 164 167 162 l 540 519 373 ~ 19 354 ?I 355 E Figure 7 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 ~ N O ~ .C ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m 1~ N Frontage Road East 3 167 171 164 I 573 540 402 ~ 31 371 - ~ 373 Figure 8 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North _ ~ F E L S B U R G ~ H 0 L T & U L L E V i G 1 i N ~ In C7 N Frontage Road East 4 226 I ~ 144 ~ 174 26 667 591 1 13 441 I 258 > ~ 417 170 ti co ~n ~n T Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N I ~ I j o Figure 9 ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 570 202 60 ~ 262 1320 728 368 466 750 382 Frontage Road East ~ ~ M N CO ~ ~ ~ N I O Figure 10 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North / F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 1083 737 53 ~ 790 1830 1564 747 596 774 I 151 Frontage Road East ~ ago ~ ~ ~ ~ N In L N ~ I U . ~ ~ O~ N ro ti Figure 11 P. M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 - North ~ F E L S B U R G ~ H O L T & N U L L E V I G -I to ~ M ti r O ~ South Frontage Road West M ~ ~ Frontage Road East, 722 701 ~ ~ 289 ~ 1116 105 11524 1886 I 324 823 I 372 770 127 rn rn ~ rn ~ U7 ~ N O ~ ~ M M ~t Figure 12 ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North _ ~ ~ CO ti F E L S B U R G tG r H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 O ~ 00 ap 1~ O South Frontage Road West ~ N Frontage Road East 276 698 ~ ~ 184 I 540 80 1334 1012 352 636 ~ 212 - ~ ` 472 72 ~ ~ ~ ~ N O ~ N j M M ~ Figure 12a `D P.M. Peak Hour TMC V~ July 1990 North F E L S B U R G r r H 0 L T & U L L E V I G, I (O ~ ~ ~ r ~ N South Fionta~e Road West N r N Frontage Road East 196 393 ~ ~ 120 ~ 420 104 754 786 202 361 ~ 104 ~ p 366 55 T r CV N C9 I Figure 126 ~ Saturday Noon Hour TMC July 1990 North ti F E L S B U R G ~ M H 0 L T & ~ U L L E V I G I I ~O ~ ~ N 'd' ~ N From 1-70 Eastbound To 1-70 Eastbound 378 I 373 393 ~ rn M 0 ~ N j ti M ~ Figure 13 ~ o P.M. Peak Hour TMC V V N March 1990 North C~ r F E L S B U R G r N 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 I I O ti ~ ~ ~ (O ~ c~0 From I-70 Eastbound ~ To 1-70 Eastbound 398 387 > ~ 295._ ~ M CO N ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ Figure 13a V ~ ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC July 1990 North ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~i ~ co F E L S B U R G ~ H 0 L T & U L L E V I G' ~ ~ M ~ ~ N From 1-70 Eastbound M To 1-70 Eastbound 263 ~ 254 ~ ~ 120 v rn v ~ ~ rn ~ o M o ~ OC I ,n Figure 136 Saturday Noon Hour TMC V~ July 1990 North ~ ~ M F E L S B U R G ~p H 0 L T & ~ ro U L L E V I G I ~ I I 1 o CO N ~ o ~ O To 1-70 Westbound Z N From 1-70 Westbound 543 ~ < 215 ~ 279 I 00 M M N ~ ~t ~ r. c0 ~t M I ~ Figure 14 M P. M. Peak Hour TMC Val Ma Bch 1990 North rir ~s r~ ~r r ~r ~ rr err ~ r ar. ~ F E L S B U R G O ~ H 0 L T & ULLEVI G' ~ L N M w O ~ ~ To 1-70 Westbound ~ N From 1-70 Westbound 383 21 ~ 218 197 ti ~ (h N O ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Figure 14a P. M. Peak Hour TMC Val July 1990 North ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y F E L S B U R G ro ~ H 0 L T & ~ U L L E V I G 1 ~ I I CO ~ N w O ~ To 1-70 Westbound ~ From 1-70 Westbound 210~~ 192 ~ 212 o ~ N N O cp 00 ~ ch d' Figure 146 co ~ Saturday Noon Hour TMC V ~ July 1990 North ~ F E l S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 Q N N C O I I ~ ~ ~ r r i ~ GO 1~ North Frontage Road West ` 56 502 ~ 416 ~ 472 703 672 J 74 201 127 ~I 200 Figure 15 P. M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 North . ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 Q er O ~ J ~ Qf ~ I I O CC C7 J T T North Frontage Road West 59 528 ~ 438 497 728 696 200 I 78 122 ~ 199 Figure 16 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 O ~ r ~ ~ Y Q~ V t ~ ~ ~ m ~ N C7 et North Frontage Road ?Nest 52 481 ~ 450 ~ 502 671 692 190 ~ 42 148 190 Figure 17 P. M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 North / r r r ~r r~ r~ ~r ~r ~r r r r~ ~r¦ r~ r r r r F E L S B U R G O ~ H 0 L T & ~ ULLEVI G1 .k C o ~ ~ ~ rn U ~ r` ~ ~ ~ North Frontage Road West 33 345 , ~ 91 I 544 420 485 1001 31 140 J 51 > l 457 58 ~ r~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ c0 ~ Figure 18 V.~ N P. M. Peak Hour TMC._ March 1990 North ~ ~ . FELSBURG ~ r"' H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 'C O r. ~ ~ CEO U 1~ O T North Frontage Road West 35 79 ~ ~ 14 I 574 525 168 912 11 89 ~ 15 > ~ 338 63 N c0 R1 O Q ~ 0~0 ~O C9 ~ Figure 18a ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V~ o July 1990 North F E L S B U R G ~ ~ ~ N H O L T & k r U L L E V I G I 0 ~ I U ~i rn ~n co co To 1-70 Westbound N ~ From I-70 Westbound, 455 I < 148 ~ 206 I ~ rn N ~ et C9 ~O ~ ~ ti ~ Figure 19 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V\1 March 1990 North O f EL SBURG ~ r,. H 0 L T & ~O U L L E V I G 1 k .C ~ I O ti t ~ C7 U ~ ~ To 1-70 Westbound Fiom 1-70 Westbound 585 I < 25 ~ 115 ~ rn N N ~ ~ M ~ ~ Figure 19a ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ July 1990 North ~ ~ ~ O r' F E L S 8 U R G ~ ~ HOLT & .mac ' U L L E V I G 1 p m ~ ~ U ~ c+~ r` ~ r` To 1-70 Eastbound N From 1-70 Eastbound 360 ~ ~ 84 > ~ 224 1 ti ti ~ o r ~ N ~ CO ~ Figure 20 V ~ ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC, March 1990 North u7 F E L S B U R G ~ H O L T & p U L L E V I G 1 ~ .C I O E ~ v m c~ ~n U ~ ~ From I-70 Eastbound ~ To I-70 Eastbound 150 • ~ 174 288 138 rn 00 M ~ O ~ ~ ~ C ~ O t O~ m ~ Figure 20a ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V~ July 1990 North ~ ~ U ~ F E L S B U R G p O HOLT & ~ r- ULLEVI G1 'k C O I I .C d' U ~ ~ C7 N ~O ~ O South Frontage Road West ~ ~ 591 178 ~ < 64 ~ 657 2 299 1014 80 121 ~ 41 ? ~ 357 0 ch o ~ ~ r ~ Figure 21 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ i ~ ~ rn F E L S B U R G ~ ~ H 0 L T & ~ U L L E V I G, •k I I O N ~ U ~ ~ ~ °r' rn South Frontage Road West N 368 79 ~ ~ 38 ~ 411 5 164 732 60 85 ~ 21 ? I 321 4 p N ~ p ti N ~ ~ Figure 21a ~ P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ July 1990 North. ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 657 611 20 ~ 631 11014 975 I 357 I 331 344 26 South Frontage Road West ~ M a~ O co vi tr ~n a~ a~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ o Figure 22 P. M. Peak Hour TMC March 1990 North ~ F E L S 8 U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 1 632 587 58 ~ 645 965 984 333 ~ 301 339 32 South Frontage Road West ~ ~ ~ M a~ ~ ~ U a U c o ~ t a~ ~ ti ro Figure 23 P.M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 645 ~ ~ 547 622 75 984 973 I 339 ~ 264 351 75 South Frontage Road West ~ ~ o ~n ao o ~ I ~ Figure 24 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G I ' 382 295 II 49 I 344 684 592 , 226 > 1248 302 76 South Frontage Road West ~ N 00 N N i N O U t ~ ~ ~t .o r~ N Figure 25 P.M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ F E L S B U R G H 0 L T & U L L E V I G 1 344 319 120 ~ 439 592 799 225 360 248 23 South Frontage Road West ~ ~ N r W ~ ~ ~ L r r ro ~ a~ ~ r~ O M J Figure 26 P. M. Peak Hour TMC V ~ March 1990 North ~ APPENDIX C EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERCHANGE TRAVEL PATTERNS i. 1 ' F E L S B U R G NOIT a U L L E V I G' ~ 18(33) j l ~ N r~22(91) r 299(420) 11(31) ~ ~ + r' North Frontage Rd. 34(51)-+ ; .n 70(58) " N ..n v v ~ ~O O N ~r ~ ~ 108 N (158) r... 80(48) s o~ N K1 v v N O ~ ~ Q o ~ L ' U N u h N ~1 v (174 j 4 I ~0 0 v v p t~'f r~ e~ I ~ ~p O r+ e~1 v^.. 314(591) ~ ~ 16(64) .1 ~ l., f-1(2) 75(80) ~ ~ South Frontage Rd. v en o Legend o(o)~ N XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Fi ure 1 9 1, West Vail Interchange Turning Movement Counts March, )990 Noah ~ ~ West Vail Interchange Routing Movements, March, 1990 N. Frontage N. Frontage S. Frontage S. Frontage Road Road Chamonix WB On EB On Road Road Chamonix From/To West Lee East Lee North Lee Ramb Ramn West LeQ East Lee South Lee A.M. Peak Hour N. Frontage Rd. -West Leg - 34 11 28 11 9 22 - N. Frontage Rd. -East Leg 22 - 18 116 48 37 97 1 Chamonix -North Leg 41 20 - 33 13 11 28 - WB Off Ramp 37 54 17 - - 14 36 - EB Off Ramp 36 51 16 - - 63 164 - S. Frontage Rd. -West Leg 13 19 6 24 13 - 74 - S. Frontage Rd. -East Leg 56 80 24 101 53 16 - 1 Chamonix -South Leg 0 5 1 1 5 1 3 - P. M. Peak Hour N. Frontage Rd. -West Leg - 51 31 25 15 4 13 1 N. Frontage Rd. -East Leg 91 - 33 178 87 41 114 - Chamonix -North Leg 43 35 - 38 15 8 18 - WB Off Ramp 48 85 25 - - 13 34 1 EB Off Ramp 60 96 30 - - 47 127 - S. Frontage Rd. -West Leg 11 23 6 27 13 - 41 - S. Frontage Rd. -East Leg 92 165 54 187 93 64 - 2 Chamonix -South Leg - 2 - - 1 1 1 - F E L S B U R G HOLT & U L L E V I G 1 North Frontage Rd. o N ~ 25 (64) 1 r 41g(?15) 1 ao r+ ~+1 N v v O~ ~T v ~Nr N Q. I~~O ^ N O~ ~ S v N ~p n N i l~ 5p1(3j5)~ 3) ~ ~ o o~ r, ;s ~v rn ~ os ~~M °O °1 L 259(722) ~ ~ s f 178(289) rf + ~ ~ 127(105) 121(324) ~ ~ South Frontage Hd. 263(372)i o, o, _ 156(127) v a ~ en a ~n Legend XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Figure 2 Main Vail Interchange Turning Movement Covnts V ~ March, 1990 North / Main Vail Interchange Routing Movements, March, 1990 S. Frontage S. Frontage Road Road EB On WB On N. Frontage From/To East Lee Vail R~~,~ West T,ee Ranan Ramp Road A.M. Peak Hour S. Frontage Rd. -East Leg - 127 178 42 146 71 Vail Road 53 - 99 35 67 33 S. Frontage Rd. -West Leg 263 156 - 67 36 18 EB Off Ramp 204 48 249 - - 2 WB Off Ramp 228 94 156 - - 25 N. Frontage Rd. 111 46 76 26 16 - P.M. Peak Hour S. Frontage Rd. -East Leg - 105 289 117 341 264 Vail Road 55 - 99 73 116 90 S. Frontage Rd. -West Leg 372 127 - 179 81 64 EB Off Ramp 154 34 185 - - 5 WB Off Ramp 104 41 70 - - 64 N. Frontage Rd. 85 34 58 24 5 - F ELS~UpG ~ ~gOY"A ~ l 'lp .~prN 0~~ `tit~l Nom stage Rd. 2~ 4 C3?~0 O~ J rf ~ff N r iP .r ; 37(15) ' 0o a` ~ N ..i ~A ~ ''~O N ~ t'•, O+ r f!9 Q` ~ r N .i ti~~ ~ ~ 9{6)~ 20{63) `i ~o s s ei9horn R d. F;gw Legend AM(PM~ Peak HOUR lraific CO ent xxtxx~ a Turnin9 ~°vcm March, r Va+~ ~nterchan9 Eas North r rr ¦r ~ r Mr ~r fir r~~ ~r ~r ~¦ri r r taw rr ~r rrs East Vail Interchange Routing Movements, March, 1990 N. Frontage Pitkin Cr. WB On EB On From/To Road T.H. Ramn Ramn Bighorn Rd. A.M. Peak Hour N. Frontage Rd. - - 12 84 115 Pitkin Cr. T.H. - - 11 - - WB Off Ramp 54 3 _ _ 37 EB Off Ramp 6 3 _ _ 20 Bighorn Road 349 - 126 6 - P.M. Peak Hour N. Frontage Rd. - - 10 149 166 Pitkin Cr. T.H. 3 _ g _ g WB Off Ramp 18 5 - - IS EB Off Ramp 3 3 - - 63 Bighorn Road 123 - 98 10 - APPENDIX D WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -NORTH SIDE OF INTERCHANGE Existins, = P.M. Peak Existing Volumes -North Side v 4-way Stop Analysis (Highway Capacity Manual) No.~..~• EB and WB Approaches = 544 + 140 = 684 ~,P 6r~ NB and SB Anoroaches 157 + 753 910 fl'` ~ Off-Rama - 206 (add to lower of EB-WB & NB- SB) EW - 890, NS - 910 ~ LOS C is 1,193 (2 x 2 assume V/C = 0.75) Total Approximate Volume = 1,800; Multiply by 5/4 to account for 5-legged intersection (increase driver confusion, etc.) Eff. Total Approximate Volumes = 2,250 2,250/(1,193/0.75) = 1.41 Future - No Improvements Projected volumes are 18% higher than existing 1.41 x 1.18 = 1.67 Future Volumes with Simba Run Underpass Revised volumes with Underpass (Existing P.M.) V/C will still be >1.0 with All-Way Stop Control. Try DRC (Signal) Analysis WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -NORTH SIDE OF INTERCHANGE With existing configuration, a 5-phase signal would be most appropriate (1 phase for each approach). Sum Critical Movements 148 I 140 498 591 206 = 1,583 ~Y ~ _ 18°x6 Growth Yields 1,868 For 5-phase signal, LOS E/F Threshold (V/C = 10.0) is Approximately 1,325 - 1,868/1,325 = 1.41 Future Volumes with Underpass and Reconfieuration (Included Adding Lanesl Revised Existing P.M. Peak ~ Unsignalized intersection analysis done for north "T" intersec- tion -operates OK. (Analysis on Next Page) _ No, F.. 2d n,,,.-~ South intersection will probably require DRC. Sum Critical Movements (4-Phases) o~~_~P 124 + 330 + 591 + 158 = 1,203; x 1.18 for Growth = 1,420 LOS E/F for 4-Phase Signal is 1,375 1,420/1,375 = 1.03 f~c=1::>I~urr~ Ht,lt ~ Ullevir~ C~;?_~`.t-L''~:',.i lJtiS.IGhdaL.IZ.EU Ih11~Ef~'SE:C.~i~Ii:it~ f;af'ai~IT'r Arifil..`r;~i:`.; T I'd 'T E R S E C 'T I O ti ~ C. hi a I 'I : is F.._ ('i L.. ha , F I i •I.I- 1 r'1 E" F'E~IOD~ 1.18 Far.'TUR F'f'1 JCIf~>= U~~~IL. I a i~ I I I t~-' I I I I I i I I I ~ ~I' ~ I i 0 i~ i~ I I I I I I i I I I i I. I i i I I - I r~(a,JOR ROADWAY I r'1IhiOR r,OADWFiY I I I r'1F'Hl I l1.-Wa`r' STOP) I I - I I I I ili'F'h'OaCi-I I NE'. I SE; I EEC i WF; I I I'1 f) U E I'1 E" N T' I L. I I t- R I I i I i I I I I cor~TF,ot.. I IJr~c I I sTnF' STOP I I I U(al_LJI'1f.--: (UF'H 1 I _~~b I I 37 1 I I I UOL.tII"lE I; F'Cf-''fi) I ;i92. I I 41. 1~2 I I ICO1~11=L.ICI"IhiG FLOW I 17~ I I 6~+y' 1~G I I I l::f::ITIC:AL GAF' f SEC 1 I I I d ~'J ~ I I I f'(] il_N'T:LAt_ CAF'ACII"'T i 112!`: I I 1. G %~7 I I II'[::RCEN'I OF CaF'aCIT`r' I 35 ( I ].4 I I 11: 1`IF'k.G~f~(CE:: h ACTOR I G, 74 I I 0, 1 1 I I iaC rUat_ CAF'aCITY I I25 I I s;>o 10:6 ( I I....__....--------_-~------------ I-----__ I I-_.______._.__-------.---.__. i___..._...._.._.._..__~_....---. _ I I ~:~riartiEr.7 t_ar~E s I I I I I I i I i I I ' I4tiaRED Lar~ir: caF'aclT`r I I I I I I r~r-..::~F:ruE car-'FCC I'T`r I ~ i i ~ i3tT,~ i I L..E::UE:t_ O(- SERVICE I ~a I i c a i I i I I I I I FIVE-Fiaf.~E: QI.JE:UE I I I I I (iUI~:Ri~i[:a[- I'_iEl_A'Y ~'=AFC i I I I I I I._.._..._.._..______._._-----__..-__.___. I I i i__•--__.__.._._.___....---___-.. I WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -SOUTH SIDE OF INTERCHANGE Existine •z P.M. Peak Existing Volumes D f~°_~ O ~,,,~P 4-Way Stop Analysis (Highway Capacity Manual) P EB and WB Aooroaches - 657 + 121 = 778 _ 5~ NB and SB Aooroaches - 364 + 14 = 378 Off-Ramp - 360 (add to lower of EB-WB and NB-SB) EW - 778, NS - 738 y LOPS C is 1,184 (assume V/C - 0.75) Total Approximate Volume = 1,516; Multiply by 5/4 to account for 5-legged intersection (increased driver confusion, etc.) ' Eff. Total Approximate Volume = 1,895 1,895/(1,189/0.75) = 1.20 Future - No Improvements Projected volumes are 18°6 higher than existing 1.20 x 1.18 = 1.42 Future Volumes with Simba Run Underpass Revised Volumes with Underpass (Existing P.M.) Try 4-Way Stop Analysis EB and WB Aooroaches - 495 + 121 = 616 NB and SB Aooroaches - 277 + 14 = 291 Off-Rama Aooroach - 360 (add to smaller of EB-WB and NB-SB) ' WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -SOUTH SIDE OF INTERCHANGE EW - 616, NS - 651 ~ LOS C is 1,185 (2 x 2 assume V/C = 0.75) Total Approximate Volume = 1,267; Multiply by 5/4 to account for 5-legged intersection (increase driver confusion, etc.) Eff. Total Approximate Volume = 1,5$4; Multiply by 1.18 for growth ~ 1,584 x 1.18 = 1,869 1,869/(1,185/0.75) = 1.18 Future Volumes with Underpass and Reco 'e nfi uration Included Adding Lanesl r Revised Existing P.M. Peak Unsignalized analysis done for EB on-ramp intersection - operates OK (see next page) D~~~ ~'y° (~.,w~ Chamonix/S. Frontage Road intersection needs to be evaluated -try 4-Way STOP So, F'~ R.~. EB and WB Anaroaches - 402 + 121 = 523 NB and WB Approaches - 277 = 14 = 291 Off-Rama - 360 (add to smaller of - EB-WB and NB-SB) EW - 523, NS - 651, LOS C is 1,425 (assume V/C - 0.75) average of 2 x 2 and 2 x 4 r Total Approximate Volume = 1,174; multiply by (something less than 5/4 to account for multi-leg intersection. Do not use 5/4 since intersection was cleaned up some with relocation of EB on-ramp). Use 1.2 ' 1,174 x 1.2 = 1,409 Multiply by 1.18 to account for growth 1.18 x 1,409 = 1,662 1,662/(1,425/0.75) = 0.87 Fe,l~t~~.~r~:_a Nc~lt h Ulle~,i'_a i,l--.l`~'=1. UNSiGNt=ILIZED INTFRaEf_:TION CAPACITY ANfll...'~Sl:r~ TN"I'~RSECTION= S , Fr , RAJ . iEE, O~-~ Ra~-~p TIME PERIOD= 1.18 tactor F'h1 WiUE' JCIEa~ U~ji 1 f[' - I i? I I I I I I i V I V I ! I { V V t,~ I 1F~ f \ 11(J _x .L 9 - - . - - l 4 ~ V I I { \ I I I I I I I 1 I I l l i i) o i I ( r1AJOR ROADWAY l rl:[NUR I;OADWAti' I I (35 MF'H) I 12-WAY STDF') _ I I I i { AE'F'RUACH I EFL I WE; I NEB I 5E~ I I I I I { I` I l l E 4"I E~ M T' I L I I I { _ - I I I l l (C:ONTRC)L I UNC I I I I U Ll I_ L1 [~I E (!J F' H l I 1~ r.; I I { I { VOL.i_lr'IE ~ F'CF'E! .1 I 171 I I I I {(=C1t~1F[_Tiv .f:CNG FLOW I K84 I I I i { C:F' ITICAL GAF' (5EC } I 4 . I I f I { f'(:1 Tk~td_L F7L CAI'6~C I T`t I 7?~+ I I I I f'E::F;CE_NT aF CAPACITY I 23 I l I I:I:t°IE'EiGE::NCE FACT01{ I D.84 I I 1 I IF1CT~1_lAL CAE-'ACITY I 734 ( I I i I I I { I i I sE~AE;E_[:~ LANE=S { I I i I - I I I { I - { I SHfIE~~~E D LANE CAPt~IC ITY I I I I I { [5'E..`:~ERUE CHF'AC:[ TY I F~i4 I I I I I (..FUEL OF SERVICE I 'A I I I I I l { { { _ I I~+UEF,AGE Ol1El1E= 1 I i 1 I { (a~Jl_h'A~,;E DLL_H`r' (`:CC f 4 { I I I I I { { { I APPENDIX E . MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE ANALYSIS S i 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 t ' MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/NORTH RAMPS Existing Critical movement at this intersection is the left turn off of the ramp. Both A.M. and P.M. volumes were evaluated and it was found that the A.M. peak hour was more critical. Unsignalized analysis (next page) yield a LOS F with reserve capacity at 156. LOS thresholds are as follows: > - 400 LOS A - <0.60 300 - 400 LOS B y 0.60 to 0.70 200 - 300 LOS C • 0.70 to 0.80 100 - 200 LOS D y 0.80 to 0.90 0 - 100 LOS E y 0.90 to 1.00 < 0 LOS F - 1.00 Assign V/C Ratio to Thresholds 1 vehicle of reserve capacity would be equivalent to 0.001 of V/C. So, 156 is 1.156 or 1.16 for left turn in A.M. peak hour. ' Future - No Improvements Volumes were increased 1896 and analysis was redone ' Reserve Capacity is 325 From Above, V/C = 1,325, say 1.33 A.M. Peak Future -With Simba Run LJnderna.¢s Volumes were adjusted to reflect UP (page 4 for analysis) Reserve Capacity is 209 From Above, V/C = 1.209, say 1.21 A.M. Peak 1 f- I:-, b r q H ~ 1 t c< U 1 1 r. i y ~_~,..i 1 ~ ~ LlhicilGtJNL_I2E'D It•I~f~Ef.';~Ff,:l-IOt~i ~AF'H~.IT"r NhiFlf._'(~_~a:':~ 2 ' [tITLF'~~E:1:.1-:[Ut~l~ ha. FhIa1.• IJE. :f;'i~ f'.II~IE: PERICiD~ G0 NOTHIIyG EXIai' art .70F;= iJAII_. Tf' I ii j I I I I I ' i I i • i1 :+78 i,J IJ I I I I I I I I i _I i I I a ? ;.:I. . I I I i I I I`1H•J01; IOHC+WH`t' I r'1.[N017 fiOHC~IJN~t' I ' I I i= r•1 F' H 'i I t i- W A 8 T F' I I I I I I j iih'f'Ftr~HCH I td F; ( ~B ( Ef I WF; ( I I _ I I I I ' I 'I `f t:i ~J f I`1 f ra'r I L I I I L f; i I I I I I - I I f:t:1NT'f}:UL I UNr I I I STOF ':yTOF' I ' j la L_ i I r'I E.' ~ l+ F' H I ~ 'Y' I I I ~::F }3 ' I I+:!fll_Urif_ i F'I=F'H) I 2:'~+ I I I 5~'ci r..'ci I ii.:tiNFL_lt.'1IIaG FL_ULJ I ;i`- I I I ~=,u~-~ 1;:.:~+ I Ir:fS:TTICML GfaF' i;~E.l:i I 4•` I i I ci,0 ~:,~1 I j l=' i:: i 1~ L I`i ~T H L t`~ A F' H ~ T"t I 1 C+ 2~ I I I ~F 5 ~~t 1 iJ n I I F'f::h'C:f.MT UF' CHF'ACITY I 2? I I I I Itl'If'Lf.:~Et~at~E_ Ff~CT(JR I ij,82 I I I i;~:`i I ' If'+l::~i-I_li~l_ C;Af'NCIT'T _I 125 I ( I ?~'0 1~J64 I I......----...._....__._________--.-- I------- I--~._~..___ I..__..__.._.._.._------~~----~~------_ I----._._..------~-----------_.._._.._... I I'~~I-li=iRl•_Ci l_HNE=S i I I i I I.........._..--~------....-----------=--_ I I I------------------------- I----~~--------------------.._.._._.... i ' (Si-i~if:'E Li LFiNE CAF'i~t[:Ii"Y ( I I I II;!:::':~L.F:'UE: CHF'AC:[l-'r' I ;"'1 i I I -_I~,h 10~_~S I I L..L~Uf;L CIF LiEF'VIl":E I •Fl I I I F H I I----~~---__ I j..-----------_.._._-------....____ I------~~-------..__..__--------.._.._.... I i ElUERAi~E r,7Uf-lJE I I I I I I i=il:+1:_hAi;C= CAE LA'i I''~;E:C 1 I I J I I---~-------- I----~--- I--------------------- I I 1 ' F r:' I b r- ~.a f~l 0 1 'C c~ iJ 1 1 e i q , ~ ~i .....t ~ ~ ' jJt15IGt~JAt_I-EG II`ITF'n:SECTTitd CAf'AC:I~T'i' HtI~TL..r'':1:L~:i 3 / I / ' [t,lTEhc~E(:TIOtd~ f~~. FI~'hd_L.~ WE, I;'t:~ T:[i`IE: 1='EFITDD~ DO NOTHING F~i~U('<>= Ar'I JDE~ UHiL. 'f l' I r, I I I r} I I I I I I I I I I . _ - - _ - U t ~ hI I ' V tl l ~ r l i I•I I,~ I I f I I I I I I I I I I i I 1 ~~I r:i I I I I I f1AlOh f+'OHL'~WH`r' I t'1 :f ND F; R(]I~f_~WH'r' j I I t. f'1F'H l I I; 1--WAY STDF') j I I _ _ I I i-tF'f'fl-JAC,H I tJEt I SF~ I EF5 I Wf~ I I _ I I I I ~ IliiiUE:r~lEM1- I t- ! I I L. F;. i I I I I I i I C; (:1t~IT'F;DL. I l.1NC I I I STDF' ;:iTDF' I I t i i:i L.. Li 1=1 f_ i U F' H 1 I L s~ ~t I I I 6 4 C' I IUDI_.(.1P'If= (F•'l';F'Hl I =f~? I I I n20 _3~ I j l: t•I F (..:L '1 T I'a ( f-- I_ (:i W I ~ ~ I I I b !-5 l I I C:hITIt::AL GAF' i SEC:) I 4. 5 I I I 0 0 I ' I E'I:J i Et~T:[rtL f~AF'AC I'Ti' I I I I l~'17`>' I 11-'f::F:C.Eh•IT C1F CAF'AC ITY I 33 I I I ? I I [flPf--: l;f`t~l(:L FACTDF; i 0.76 I I I ~'~`.'S I ' If1C-I-IIAI_ CAE'ACIT'r' I 975 I I I 2~5 l.i.i:'9 ( I S!lAF+'f C! L~~INES I I I I I i I I I I i 14~FiMftiE:D LAhIE CAF'A!::IT',' I I I I I II:,,~E:':_;r.F'l~l CAF'F~IC::(..f..i, I I I I --.7:~~~ LGi:,~ I Ij..E:VEI_ Df" ';~EF.UICE I .A I I I F Fi I I I I I I I fl',!E:f2AC;E CIL.JEI_JE I I I I I I fl l! L•_ h: H E L"~ i:= L A 'i' (`:=.1 _ is 1 I I I I I..._..----------..____.._____----._.--- I------..__ i-------- I----------~------------------ I-------~----...--------~-----....... ~ Fc.ai_~b~~r~_~ Fi~71t c• U11e~~iq ii~~~....i:.~,::-1,'=•~-;i ' UtaSi:GNAI.I:~ED IN-fEF:SE'CTlUi'a C:AF'ACiTr' ANFiI..Y:=~[:; ' I:h~ITEF:`~E:CT:[UN~ N, F'RN.1_,,,UE ['0 1 7:11 F: F' E: R I Q G~ U l7 N Q T H I N G ~ U~UR~ i=i t•1 i,~~ y I~ p,J G A R PRsS ~l t:i F~ ~ U F i T L_ .L. i' 1 • I I.4' I I I J.~,% I i I I I I I I I I i _:i i j 1 I , I I I I I I i I I I I I ,y, I:i " I I I I I I I r1AJr~F; F:oaowA~>• i r~INOF; F,ori~~wA~,~ I I I r~F'Ea , I i I --wA~~' aTaF') I I I I i II'if'F'RQi~iC:N I N~ I SF~ I E.F~ I WI:~ I I I I - I I I ' 11"I Ci E. rl E. N T I C I I I L. f,: I I t'IiI~Il"flJL I LJtdt_ I I I `~;T'CIF' '-i fliF' I I t:i i._ I. I r11=_ (l~ F~ N i I ? t- 4 I I I ~ , , , , I i I +,~fi(_U I"'1E f F'CF'H j I I I I I ~ l.J h~l F L. I tJ. i a I~ L_ I:1 l.J I 1 d I I ( 1 .L I . II::F~,I~fIt.;HL_ GAF' (~CLJ I 4,5 I I I 'ci.U ~~,i;i I ' j l' t i T E' t~l T :F. A L_ t. A F' A t! I T `r' I 1 12 I I I 1 .l :L :i L I I f•'E_F~?CE-NT OF' I;AF'ACIT'Y I 29 I I I I I.[Fif'i_I)E_hlt:E= FAC'Tf]f: I 0,8G I I _ ' I f-ii::.'1"IIAI_ CAE'A~~ ITY I 1124 1 I I ~i I. 1 L I 1 J. I i I I I I _ _ I I I I I I I I ' j _;FiAFtE::E) LAtaE. C.AF'ACITY I I I t I Ili[::'~Eh..".~if~ f_AF'AC:[T'r' I Gut ( I I ia;";; I II_.E::~~~E::l_ OF ~FF~:~,i.ICE I .A I I I F t~ I I I I I I ~=iVEFti=tGE rilaL::l..!~~ I I I I I I ~~~1ER~~i;E [~L-: L..~~', ~ ~:;ILt. i I I I I I......._..---------.._..___..------------ I-------__ I_-------- I------------------------ I--------------------__...__...__.._.. 1 MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/NORTH RAMPS Future -Alternative 3 (Red Sandstone Partial Interchange) and Underpass This interchange alternative does not affect operations along the north side of the interchange. the V/C is identical to the previous calculations 1.21 A.M. Peak ' Future -Alternative 7 (Vail Vallev Connection) and Underpass This interchange alternative simplifies the north ramps intersection; only two movements would be ' occurring -the left turn onto the WB on-ramp and the left turn off of the WB off-ramp. An unsignalized LOS analysis was run (p.56) with a resulting reserve capacity of 45 vehicles for the left turn off. From page 1, V/C = 0.955 or 0.96 A.M. peak ' Future -Alternative 8 (Booth Falls Ramps) and Underoass North ramp operations would be divided in this alternative. The left turns onto WB on-ramp would ' remain at the Main Vail interchange, but they would be the only, movement along the north side of the interchange and would be free flow. Hence, there is no longer an intersection at that location and therefore no intersection LOS problems. The left turns off of WB off-ramp would now take place near Booth Falls. An unsignalized LOS analysis of A.M. peak volumes there yielded a LOS F for left turns off of the off-ramp. Therefore, an all-way STOP analysis was done as follows: 1 1 r= ~ 1, b r.r r cl H ~:r 1 t r~ LJ 1 1~ ~ i y ~.J 9_~ ~ c- . i 9 i:~ L) hI ;'7 i G r~ A I E G [ N T I:. h E L "I" :f. 0 rd Fi 1=' ('i i::C 1~ `r' i~~ rJ F~ L.. 'r' l~ II'~IT'C:f~:SF..CTION~ VAIL.. fiC~/W[:; fiAr1F' i 1- t"I E F' L- f: I 0 G ~ 1 , 1 8 ~ E X T E hl Cr E f~ F R t,' D , f~ 7 W~~ ~ (~,de+Qq~s ;J 0 F~ ~ U A L_ 1- P I ~ I ( I I ~,i i I I I I I I I - I ~ i I t, t,~ U I ~ ~ y U lJ ll lJ U i i I I I I ! I I i I I i I ii I y 1. I I i i I - I r1AaoR ROA[)WAY' I r1IN(?r: F+'OADWAY I I t r•1 I~, I~i i I (1-- W A ~ T nr i i I I I ~ I F -t I iil='F'RiJi~it:.ri ( I~E~ I :af~ { L'-"".L I WF; I I I I _ I I I I rl a u E r•Ir--_ r•I'r I I I I L_ I I I _ I I I I I i:: tJ hl T h o L_ i I I I 'r is r--~ I I l~ f:) L.. 1.1 I"I E:: (U F' H '1 I I I I s 4 I I t!iJl_Ur1G (I'CF'H j I I I I I It::r)hd4l..I{:1"Ira{ FLOW I I I I 31-~> I I ft:[TIt~(iL GAF' (SEC 1 I ( I I r~ . C~ I II'QTENTIAI_ {;AF'ACIT'r' i ( I I ~~i`y7 I I P[::f;cENT iJr- CAPACITY I I I 1 f I l: i•1F'E"[)ENCE FACTOR I I I I I IFif::r(JAL_ C.A1='ACITY I I I I r,"E~ I I I I I I ~7Ei(iRED I._EiraES I I I I I i I I i I I I `.-:i FI Fi [i E [i ra E i. r~ r- A c r. 'r `r' I I I I I I[;E`~iE~r~UF: rAF'ACITY I I I I 4F~ I I[..i-:i!k.t_ iar ':~r.--_'~i~:[i:E I I I I e I I i I i I - _ l i-iUf.:.ftf~{, E, Ca [:.L.H ~ i SEC) I I I I I I.._.._._ I---•--------- i--- I..----------------..._..----__.___.._..- I-••---•-~~------..__..__..._..._....__....._.... i MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/NORTH RAMPS Revise Volumes at Booth Falls Off-Ramp Intersection (Existing A.M. Peak) No, Fr.~, NB and SB Aooroach Volumes - Ss3 C Q EB and SB Aooroach Volumes 34s + 75 = 420 ofd - LOS C is 1,118 (assume V/C = 0.75) Total Approach Volumes = 973 Multiply by 1.18 for Growth » 1,148 l,la8/(1,118/o.7s) = 0.77 MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD (4-WAY STOP INTERSECTION) This intersection is extremely close to the south ramps intersection and could be analyzed as a multi- legged intersection as was done for the West Vail interchange. However, patterns at the south ramps intersection are such that the largest movements are the thru movements along Vail Road and the right turns off of and onto the ramps. Left turns onto and off of the ramps are relatively light, and operations at this intersection will largely depend on operations at the 4-way. Therefore, the 4-way STOP intersection is analyzed separately and is considered to be indicative of the entire area south of the interchange. Existine Existing P.M. Peak Traffic (P.M. Peak Hour is Critical) Gf~. Yp" b+'~ The intersection is STOP sign controlled but is controlled manually during peak periods which is essentially the same as signal control. Therefore, since a peak hour is being evaluat- 50. Fem. ~ ~ ed, this intersection will be analyzed as traffic signal con- trolled. Sum Critical Movements (4-Phase Signal) Total = 1,290 LOS E/F for 4-Phase is 1,375 1,290/1,375 = 0.94 P.M. Peak DRC 1~ MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD (4-WAY STOP INTERSECTION) Future - No Improvements Volum will in wi es crease 1896 and so 11 V/C ratio m this case. V/C = 1,18 x 0.94 - 1.11 P.M. Peak DRC ' Future -with Simba Run Underpass Revised Volumes to Reflect Underpass (Existing P.M. Peak) Sum critical movements similar to that done on page.8 (4-phase) Multiply by 1.18 for growth y 1,494 . LOS E/F Threshold for 4-phase Signal is 1,375 1,494/1,375 = 1.09 Future -Alternative 3 (Re¢ Sandstone Partial Interchansel with Underpass Revise Volumes (Existing P.M. Peak) oho ~ p,~ SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS So, FY, 2d, :r~ MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD (4-WAY STOP INTERSECTION) = 1,045 Multiply by 1.18 for Growth y 1,233 LOS E/F Threshold for 4-Phase Signal is 1,375 1,233/1,375 = 0.90 Future -Alternative 7 (Vail Valley Connection) with Underpass Revised Volumes (Existing P.M. Peak) ~ SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS 1 Multiply by 1.18 for Growth ~ 1,396 LOS E/F Threshold for 4 Phase is 1,375 1,396/1,375 = 1.02 Future -Alternative 8 (Booth Falls Ramos) and Underpass Revised Volumes .(Existing P.M. Peak) SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -VAIL ROAD/SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD (4-WAY STOP INTERSECTION) SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD/RED SANDSTONE RAMPS = 1,077 Multiply by 1.18 for Growth y 1,271 LOS E/F Threshold for 4-Phase is 1,375 1,271/1,375 = 0.92 Future -Alternative 3 (Red Sandstone Partial Interchange) with Underpass Analyze South Frontage Road/Ramps Intersection (Existing P.M. Peak Volumes) o~~ e ~ All way STOP control was originally evaluated resulting in LOS F. Therefore, DRC is evaluated (3-phase ) Sv. Fr. RJ SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS = 1,069 Multiply by 1.18 for growth ~ 1,261 LOS E/F Threshold for 3-Phase is 1,425 1,261/1,425 = 0.89 MAIN NAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD/NAIL VALLEY DRIVE INTERSECTION Several interchange alternatives have a direct impact on this intersection and it is therefore included in the analysis. Existint so, fir Existing P.M. Peak Volumes South frontage road approaches must stop, so conduct an A unsignalized LOS analysis (p. 13). ~ Lowest reserve capacity is 53 (WB approach) and using ~ information derived on p.l, this corresponds to V/C = 1,053 say I.OS Future Volumes are increased 1896 and unsignalized analysis is rerun (p.14). Lowest reserve capacity is 239 ' (WB approach) and using information on p.l, V/C = 1,289 say 1.24 Future with Underpass at Simba Run This underpass would not affect the Vail Valley Drive intersection, » still 1.24 1= F:= 1 t• r '.7 H 1 t h lJ 1 1 e i ~7 - - - - - 9 [ S' ~ ; [ UNSTGMALILEC) INTERSECTION CAF'AC'IT'r' AN?Il..'r'-il:-; I~ [III-LfiSECTI()N~ S. FR.i!~HIL UfiE_1._E`r' l Tl`1E f'ERIOD~ EXISTING F'f1 JCiE- Vill:l... -?"F' ~ I I I I I I I I I I _~hn ~1 s ?~i ~ U U I ( I ! ~ I I I I I I I I I i I I r) ~ . I 3r,'i l3 I I I i I t~lA;.IUR IOADWAY I t°1INOR ROHDWA`r' ( l t1F'fI) I (Z--WHY STOP) I I I I I I fif~'PROHC:.H I NEB ( SF~ ( EE3 ( WE'. I I I I I I ( t~ICtUEI'1f=MT I I I T F, ( T I CC1MTf~:CJI- I I I STOF' STOP I STOP STOP ( (U01._LJt'1E (UF'fi 1 I I I :~bt3 XE37 ( ~4 4'G~ I I VC)LIJt'IE: (F'CF'N) ( ( I ~+t7< <.F20 ( bu Z?Z I ICOI'•IFL_:f.C"I"ING FLOW ( ( I 46"l 1 I 11b£; 41E3 ( I CRITIi~AL GAF' (SEC) I I I ~ , ~ I 6 , ~ . ~ I (F'!:1_LI_ta_L.I.Eit_ L"HI'HCTTY ( I I b'?t~~ 1199 ( ~1 z r~f3i ( I F'EFiCENT OF" C.AF'ACITY ( ( I 62 ( 32 I II: I`IF'Ef::~EhaCE r-HCroR I I I o.4;7 c~.l~:~ I o.,,' I (AC;TIIAL CIaF'AC.ITY I I ( ci50 1149 I ?3 6Ci7 ( I SI-IARE D LANES I I I I TL ( Is;i~ARE:D LANE C:AF'ACITY ( I I I X36 I ( f;'[_'::;[=I'•'±,'E (_AF'Af;I.1'Y ( I I ZEES l9 I --c:Z I ILEU[:L. OF `,ERUICE ( I i C A I F I AUE.fAGE QL1El1L I I I I I I (ilk;"Eh'f-ii;E i)F:[_HY (SEC 1 I I I I I FF:=1~.L~~~rg Holt h IJ1 le~„~i!_a _ _ ~~.1__?~~.._1`'`'.L UNS.IGNALI2EEl INTER:iECTION CAF'ACI-E`r' ANfIL..Y~il~i [I~ITER:~ECTTON~ S. FR,i'VATL UAL_L..EY TTI`1E= F'ERI [l~ ~TURC PM JOE>= VAIL TI' 0 (J I u o I I I 1 I I I I i I I / I I U V U I 4 i4 . :r ~~8 ' ~E5]. 71 U U I ~ A ~ I I i I I 1 I i I I i I 116 4 :i 4 I I I i I ? r'IAJOR ROADWAY ( h1ThdOR ROADWAY j I I (35 MF'H.I I (L--WAY STOP] I I - - I I - I I APF'f:'OACH I NEB I SE:. I EE3 ( WE3 I I - I I I I i I'I L'1 ~J E. M E N T~ I I I T F! I L T I I i I I I - - - I ICOhITROL I I I STOP STOP I STOP STOP I I Vi:)L_l.lMC~ (VPH j I i I 4 i4 451 I 71 ;~:>8 i I Vill...l.)ME (F'C:PH j I I I 477 496 I 7 8 267_ I I (:;ONFL_IChTNG FLOW I I I 551 1 1 1:778 ~F9 I ICE~'ITICAL GAF' (SECj I I I ~•F 5.0 I 6.0 I IF'I:iTENI~IRL CAP'ACI'TY I I I 587 1199 I 156 b_30 I IF'E:RCENT OF CAPACITY I I I E31 41 I 42 I I:Ch'IPEDENCE FACTOR I I I 0, Z5 0.68 I ii.67 I I Af::-fUAL_ CAPACITY I i I 587 1199 I 27 630 I i - I I I I i 15HARE[) LAMES I I I I TL I r I _ _ I I I _ i 15HRf~.'ED LANE CRF'ACITY I I I I 101 I I (;E::SEhVE CAF'RCI 1-Y I I I 109 70 ~ I -~%q I ILEVEI. OF SERVICE i ~ I I D A I F I I I-------- I-----_..-- I------- I I I AVE.F'F~GE QI_IEUE I I I I I I AUEfif~GE DELAY (SEC J I I I I I I----- I I------- I-------------------- I-----------~ I MAIN NAIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS -SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD/NAIL VALLEY DRIVE INTERSECTION Future -Alternative 3 (Red Sandstone Ramnsl with Underpass The Red Sandstone ramps and UP do not affect this intersection. However, part of this interchange alternative would include improving this intersection; i.e. lowering and/or lane additions. Volumes shown on p.12 still apply. All way STOP analysis resulted in a LOS F still, so try DRC with increased lane geometry. Lane Geometry ' ~ ~ - Phasing ~ < ~ ~ > 1 ~ ~ ' SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS = 810 Multiply by 1.18 for growth • 956 LOS E/F Threshold is 1,425 of 3-Phase 9,560j1,425 = 0.67 1 MAIN V AIL INTERCHANGE LOS ANALYSIS SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD/ V AIL V ALLEY DRI V E INTERSECTION Future - Alterna,.tive 7 (Vail Vallee Connection) with Underpass ' We now have a 4-legged intersection. All way STOP resulted in LOS F. Existing P.M. Peak 4 Assumed Revised Volumes ~ 4 ~'C Geometry r SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS (4-PHASE SIGNAL) 811 Multiply x 1.18 for growth y 957 LOS E/F Threshold is 1,375 for 4 Phases 957/1,375 = 0.70 Future -Alternative 8 (Booth Falls Ramnsl with Underpass All way STOP resulted in LOS F try DRC Existing P.M. Peak ~ Assumed Revised ~ ~ Geometry ~ ~ ~ Phasin¢ r- r i SUM CRITICAL MOVEMENTS r Multiply by 1.18 for Growth - 1,134 LOS E/F Threshold for 3-Phase is 1,425 1,134/1,425 = 0.80 i r i APPENDIX F COST ESTIMATES i 1 COST ESTIMATES - VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERY ALTERNATIVES Alternative 1 - Subsurface Tunnel Svstem 1 Tunneling would be about 1,700' in total length. Estimated width to be ~ 35'. 35 x 1,700 x 300 = $18M Need to install ramps, elevators, doorways to basements, etc. ~$5-$lOM Utilit relocation/replacement - Y -$5-$lOM Contingencies, other - 2596 - $7 - $9M r $35 to $47M y say $50 Million Alternative 2 -Subsurface Tunnel Svstem, Tunneling would be identical to Alternative 1 but at about 2/3 the width. Cost should be slightly more than 2/3 of Alternative cost. $35 - $40 Million Alternative 3 -Close-In Centralization Garden of the Gods Site Ramp Excavation - ~ 3,000 Yards3 3,000 X $6 = $18,000 say $20,000 Excavation of Docking Area ~ 14,000 Yards3 ' 14,000 x $6 = $84,000 Removal of Asphalt _ 3,500 Yards2 3,500 x $ 20 = $70,000 ' Retaining Wall _ 25,000 S.F. for Ramps and Docking Area 25,000 x $20 = $504,000 COST ESTIMATES - VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERY ALTERNATIVES Structure ~ $20,000 S.F. 20,000 X $65 = $1,300,000 $1.3M Utility Relocation/Replacement ' ~ $50,000 to $500,000 Contingencies, Other 2096 ~ $400,000 - $500,000 TOTAL $2.4M to $2.9M or $3M Golden Peak Tennis Courts Site Structure - 17,000 S.F. ' 17,000 X $65 = $1.1 M Landscape, Tennis Courts, Misc. ' - $100,000 to $300,000 Contingencies - 2096 $240,000 to $280,000 TOTAL $1.4 to $1.7M Vail Road Site Excavation ~ 14,000 Yards3 1 14,000 X $6 = $84,000 Structure - 22,000 S.F. 22,000 X $65 = $1.4M Retaining Wall ~ 10,000 S.F. 10,000 X $20 = $200,000 Ventilation, Other. - $75,000 to $400,000 Contingencies - 2096 $300,000 to $400,000 TOTAL $2.OM to $2.4M 1 COST ESTIMATES - VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERY ALTERNATIVES Christiania Site ' Excavation ~ 5,000 Yards3 5,000 X 6 = $30,000 1 Structure ~ 13,000 S.F. 13,000 X $b5 = $845,000 Say $850,000 Retaining Wall ~ 5,000 S.F. 5,000 X 20 = $100,000 Driveway revision for parking lot on top, parking considerations, utility, other. $150,000 to $400,000 Contingency - 2096 $225,000 to $275,000 TOTAL $1.4M to $1.7M ' Small Vehicles for Decentralized Alternatives - 7 to 10 vehicles are required Vehicle cost ~ $15,040 each - 15,000 X 7 & 10 = $105,000 & $150,000 ' Decentralized Alternatives Mill Creek Alley Relocate Creek ~ 450' length -assume excavation of 5 SF cross-section ' 450' X 5 X b = $13,000 ~ say $15,000 Culvert Consideration (plug, install) ~ $40,000 New Asphalt for Alley ~ 7,000 S.F. 7,000 X 2 = $14,000 say $15,000 Fence ~ $b,000 Contingency - 2096 $15,000 1 TOTAL $91,000 say $100,000 ' COST ESTIMATES - VAIL VILLAGE DELIVERY ALTERNATIVES Landscaping, Pedestrianization - $10,000 to $20,000 ' Walkway through buildings - impact to structural integrity of building is unknown. Estimated range. Estimated range ' $300,00 - $100,000 Contingency - 2096 $8,000 - $24,000 GRAND TOTAL $150,000 to $250,000 (Approximate) Area over Mill Creek between Cyranos and Christiania Structure over Mill Creek ~ 600 S.F. 600 X $65 = $39,000 New Asphalt ~ 2,000 S.F. 2,000 X 2 + $4,000 Contingency - 2096 $8,600 ' TOTAL $51,600 say $50,000 ' CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE FOR GONDOLA TO COVERED BRIDGE AUTOMATED PEOPLE MOVER SYSTEM w/ SKIS CARRIED ON BOARD & 7 0NE-DIRECTIONAL STATIONS Units # of Units Unit Price Total Cost GUIDEWAY STRUCTURE Single Lane meters 1,900 @ $1,800 $3,420,000 Double Lane meters 790 @ $2,650 $2,093,500 STATIONS each 7 @ $155,000 $1,085,000 SWITCH each 1 @ $30,000 $30,000 TRANSFER TABLE each 1 @ $30,000 $30,000 TRAINS (2-cars each) each 10 @ $355,000 $3,550,000 ' SERVICE VEHICLE each 1 @ $25,000 $25,000 POWER DISTRIBUTION Substation each 3 @ $91,000 $273,000 Electric Service each 1 @ $8,000 $8,000 Feeder Cable meters 2,690 @ $302 $812,380 Power Rails meters 3,480@ $164 $572,720 COMMAND & CONTROL lump sum 1 @ $3,000,000 (1) $3,000,000 ' GUIDEWAY HEATING meters 3,480 @ $250 $870,000 MAINTENANCE Facility square ft 8,100 @ $50 $405,000 Equipment & Part lot 1 @ $750,000 $750,000 Subtotal $16,922,600 ENGINEERING 1596 $2,538,390 TESTING 596 $846,130 CONTINGENCIES 1096 $1,692,260 ROW AND UTILITY RELOCATION (ALLOCATION) $2,000,000 ' TOTAL $23,999,380 ' (1) TDA adjustment based on Lea Elliott Report of 2/ 16/87. Source: Number of units and unit prices from Lea Elliott Technical Memorandum for Town of Vail, 3/22/90, page 7. 1 _ Q 1 LimsHead Sk,er Bridge 1,~1~ /1 Red Sandstone Pedestrian Bridge / ionsHe~Mall CENTRAL VAIL ExIT Sandstone Park - - ~ - _ ~ J ke Arena artl Lbrary r___-.-.-.__ ! - ~~i~ / 7 12 ~ r ' I ~ i Fad Park I Vail Village ~ 1 J _ L-.- _ / ~ I • ~ 10 , _ ~ _ JuJ~ Tol Lot - //J//~/ Head Tennis Courts ~ _ _ Y • GoH Peak Ski 1 ~ ~ ~ J , I Base Facilities J 6 ~ V 5 Alhletc FieNs i ~~/~I~7 ~ ~ SEE CORE AREA DETAIL a ~ f V Studv Unk 3 From Uonshead or Vall Ubrary area to connect with the troll Studv Unk 4 at the Vista Bohn. Either use the existing bridge at Uonshead or provide a new bridge at the Ubrary. Use the stream trail MaJor connection between Vall Village and the Katsos Ranch where possible and acquire easements where necessary to Troll which may need phasing. Troll generally follows the proceed from Uonshead to west of the chapel on the south current Vall trail alignment. If phases are needed, K Is best to side of the creek. Sensltlvity required for the surrounding start at the goH course maintenance facility and tie Into neighborhoods and natural environment. Troll either Katsos. If further phases are determined practical, these connects wtth Beaver Dam Road or crosses the creek and would be from the golf course maintenance facility to West proceeds to Vall Road. Use Vall 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 and use of U.S.F.S. lands is Vista Bahn. required. Senstttvky to the surrounding neighborhood and natural environment Is necessary. LEGEND ExISTtNG TRAILS CENTRAL VA I L armuuq FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES nwau FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES PROPOSED ON-STREET TRAIL IMPLEMENTATION OFF-STREET TRAIL PLAN ry~~ n PEDESTRIAN PATN °I ~QU~~~-nO~~JA^~\ U U~14"dOIS~ BRIDGE ~ ~ lgl REST STATION ~ tl 1 PHASE OF "RECREATION TRAILS PLAN" O r 9GV.[ r - ~ .are mm~ rven - Figure 19b 3 ~f - Boolh Falls Tennis Curls 8 ~ ~ rf rj.r.. ( ' r' Gal c?ehouse ~ ~ - ~ . ~ ( Studv Unk B 1 ' "f ~ - - _ _ l ~ EAST VAII EXIT ~w ~ ' ~ Connectlon from the Vall Racquet Club through Bighorn Park ~ - ~ dr-.- _ r ~ ~ to connect to Main Gore Drive North and requires easements. - _ \ .p i~y~ . Trail section needs to be sensitive to the surrounding _ ' _ r- - r~ _ _ _ ~ neighborhoods and natural environment. ~~2 ~ - - O 'L' _ .~.CaL...' a. y ~ J ~ r' I I ~ _ Studv Unk 5 Direct Ilnk to Lupine Drive which connects the bridge across --L ~ ! ~ Gore Creek to Lupine Drive. The Town would need to acquire ~ 6 Studv Unk 4 Lot 5 Bighorn Subdivision, Second Addition, which has the , =+c~ _ t pond on K to complete the Ilnk. ~ \ \ Golt Course ~ Studv Unk 6 E Maintenance Connects Nu gget Lane with Meadow Drive. Trail requires ~ ~ ~ l facility acquisition of easements. This connection must be sensitive ~ ~ ~ to the surrounding neighborhood and natural environment. ~ ~„1~i~ _i_- - Studv Unk 7 Bighorn Park ConnectlonfromMeadowDrivethroughtheVallRacquetClub property to Bighorn Park and requires extensive easements. _ ~ SensRivlty to the surrounding neighborhood end natural i LEGEND envronment Is Important. EXISTING TRAILS EAST VAIL ~ ~ - humub~ FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE LANES - PROPOSED _ _ Tra"'° Frisc°. Capper Mp4llain, na~.u FRONTAGE ROAD BIKE/PEDESTRIAN LANES Breckaxi°ge DN-STREE7 TRAIL IMPLEMENTATION - OFF-STREET TRAIL PLAN ~ PEDESTRIAN PATH I~~~IQ~~~ryO~~/~I~~p~n~u~~ BRIDGE UllUQ~~LSW Ir'l6WOV ~ ~ ® REST STATgN ~ O PHASE OF -RECREATION TRAILS PLAN' 9['/iLE f MtE AP44 t9rr4 Figure 19c Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter Vill CHAPTER VIII. 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 o Actual Project Implementation PRIORITIZATION The Vail Transportation Plan documents action/project 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. 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. January, 1992 Page 86 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VIII Table 16 Generalized Plan Priorities Time Frame in Years Action /Pro iect 1-5 t5-10 11-20 20+ Vail Village Deliveries Remove Truck Loading Zones o Bridge Street o Mill Creek/Hanson Ranch Road o Gore Creek Drive/Lodge at Vail Add Truck Loading Zones o Gore Creek Drive/Christiania o Hanson Ranch Road/Christiania o Willow Bridge Road Identif Truck Loadin Facilit East Side of Villa e Y g Y/ g Provide Covered Truck Loading Facility/ East Side of Village Evaluate Centralized Goods/Delivery/Small Vehicle Identify Truck Loading Facility Location on West Side of Village i Parking Modify Rate Structure/Administration (On-Going) Expand Public Parking Supply/Ford 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 January, 1992 Pa a 87 9 ~I Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter Vlll Table 16 (Continued) • ' Generalized Plan Priorities Time Frame in Years Action/Proiect 1-5 6-10 11-20 20+ • I-70 Access/Frontage Roads Implement I-70 Underpass/Simba Run _ Implement West Vail Interchange Improvements 1 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 .Local Circr~lation Implement Pedestrianization Improvements, LionsHead to Transportation Center Relocate Check 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 * * j January, 1992 Page 88 ~i Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter VIII 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 o Transit In-Town Shuttle $ 7,500,000 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 wiil need to be identified and worked out by the Town Council and Town staff to ensure the implementation of the above projects. January, 1992 Page 89 Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter IX CHAPTER IX. 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: r 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. January, 1992 Page 90 _ - ~cl s ~ r~ y Y ~c s ORGANIZATIONAL CHART VAIL FIRE DEPARTMENT CHIEF I ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY SUPPRESSION PUBLIC RELATIONS PREVENTION ASSISTANT CHIEF ~ FIRE MARSHAL 4 STUDENT FIREFIGHTERS ~ FIRE INSPECTOR A-SHIFT B-SHIFT C-SHIFT STATION 1 STATION 1 STATION 1 CAPTAIN CAPTAIN CAPTAIN ENGINEER ENGINEER ENGINEER FIREFIGHTER FIREFIGHTER FIREFIGHTER STATION 2 STATION 2 STATION 2 ENGINEER ENGINEER ENGINEER STUDENT FF STUDENT FF STUDENT FF - GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 19 9 2 BUDGET ~ YEAR GOAL ~1: Develop and implement a Firefighter I and Firefighter II program for all personnel. A. Assign instructor on each shift with training schedule and topic. B. Set target test dates for outside proctor. GOAL ~2: Streamline Fire Prevention / Fire Inspection program. A. Develop and implement new check-off inspection form. B. Provide commercial properties with self-check inspection form prior to Fire Department inspection. C. Utilize the computer system to track inspections and violations. GOAL #3: Enhance Emergency Medical Response. A. Acquire portable defibrillator for each station (through EMS grant monies). B. Certify all Emergency Medical- Technician (EMT) personnel on defibrillator. Y 1992 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ' Vail Fire Department Page 2 GOAL #4: Improve I.S.O. rating. A. Prepare for an eva uation by the Insurance Services Office. B. Schedule an evalu tion by the Insurance Services Office. GOAL #5: Continue to improve Haz rdous Materials Response. A. Acquire training f r~new personnel. B. Continue to work ith Colorado State Patrol and other agencies in agle County. Town of Vail, Colorado ~.~~,r 42 West Meadow Drive V A I L FIRE D E P A R T M E N T ~ti,, Vail, Colorado 81657 TOI~V11'OF VAIL (303) 479-2250 FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT Building/Business Name Occ./Suite Street Address Mailing Address Business Phone Date Owner/Manager Phone Time In Time Out Item # ? VIOLATION NATURE OF VIOLATION LOCATION/NOTES 1. ? 2.205 (c) Stop Use/Evacuation of 2. ? 10.105 (a) Obstruction of Fire Hydrants and Fire Valves prohibited. 3. ? 10.302 Key Box /Master Keys required. 4. 10.503 Fire Alarm, Fire Sprinkler, Fire Extinguishers in need of inspection-Testing by licensed contractor. 5. ? 10.505 Install approved Fire Extinguishers as required. 6. ? 10.513 (e) Kitchen Exhaust /Hood System must be cleaned. 7. ? 10.513 (e) Kitchen Hood /Duct Fire Extinguishing System must be serviced by licensed contractor. 8. ? 10.601 Repair Fire-Rated Construction /Draft Stops. 9. ? 10.602 (a) Repair Fire-Rated Assemblies. 10. ? 10.602 (b) Obstruction of Fire-Rated Assemblies prohibited. 11. ? 11.303 (b)1 Provide minimum two (2) feet of clearance from ceiling, and 18 inches below fire sprinkler heads. 12. ? 11.303 (b)3 Remove combustible storage from boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, and electrical rooms. 13. ? 11.303 (b)4 Remove combustible storage from attic, beneath floor, concealed spaces, or provide Fire-Rated construction. 14. ? 11.403 Protect Gas Meter(s) from vehicular damage, snow and ice accumulations. 15. ? 12.104 (a) Obstruction of Exits prohibited. 16. ? 12.106 (c) Exit Doors shall be operable without special knowledge or key. 17. ? 12.109 (c) Storage is prohibited under non-rated Exit Stairways. 18. ? 12.109 (d) Approved Stairway Signs required in buildings with more than three (3) floors. 19. ? 12.110 (a) Exit Illumination shall be maintained. 20. ? 12.110 (b) Emergency Power for Exit Illumination and Exit Lights shall be maintained. 21. ? 12.111 Exit Sign(s) required to be installed and maintained. 22. ? 12.112 Exit Discharge, Dispersal, and Refuge shall be unobstructed and clear. 23. ? 14.108 (a) Fire Alarm System shall be tested and certified annually. 24. ? 14.108 (a) Smoke Detectors shall be cleaned as required. 25. ? 74,107 (a) Compressed Gas Cylinders shall be secured. 26. ? 79,202 (c) Maximum ten (10) gallons of Flammable Liquids allowed for maintenance use in "Group A, B, E, I, and R Occupancies" without Flammable Liquids Cabinet. 27. ? 80.301 Storage of Hazardous Chemicals shall be in accordance with the Fire Code. 28. ? 85.104 Electrical Hazards and Violations shall be abated. 29. ? 85.106 (a) Extension Cords shall not be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. 30. ? 85.106 (c) Extension Cords shall not be affixed overhead; run through walls, ceilings, floors; under doors, floor coverings, or be subject to physical damage. 31. ? 85.109 (b) Electrical Panels must have minimum 30-inch wide access. 32. ? 85.109 (c) Doors to Electrical Rooms shall be labeled and Disconnects shall be legibly marked. NOTES: CITED CORRECTIONS shall be completed by: a.m./p.m. on the day of , 19 . In accordance with Town of Vail Municipal Code Section 15.02, if you fail to abate the violations cited above on or before the required date, your failure may result in further action being taken under the provisions of the Uniform fire Code, edition, which may include the issuance of a summons to appear in Municipal Court or County Court for the violations specified above. Upon a finding of guilty of said violations, you will be subject to the penalties provided by law. X SIGNATURE Of BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER - NAME (please print) X SIGNATURE OF FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICER NAME (please print) ORIGINAL -BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER YELLOW -FILE COPY PINK -FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU . , ~ • - i.r~»-. . h7°"v c• ~,f r•,:: ,.h2e•wl s ~v~, "!is? v ' CY '"~st r,M, "Ucy ~ ~'z- a +tv ECG -,:("`1{^~ ,+1... v " .%a' r Town o'f Vail, Colorado ' 42 West Meadow Drive V A I L FIRE DEPARTMENT .~~t Vail, Colorado 81657 TOYVI`f OF UAIL ~ (303 479-zzso FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT . / I Building/Business Name I Occ./Suite Street Address Mailing Address Business Phone Date Owner/Manager Phone Time In Time Out Item # ? VIOLATION NATURE OF VIOLATION LOCATION/NOTES 1. ? 2.205 (c) Stop Use/Evacuation of 2. ? 10.T05 (a) Obstruction of Fire Hydrants and Fire Valves prohibited. 3. ? 10.302 Key Box /Master Keys required. I 4. ? 10.503 Fire Alarm, Fire Sprinkler, Fire Extinguishers in need of inspection-Testing by licensed contractor. 5. ? 10.505 Install approved Fire Extinguishers as required. ` 6. ? 10.51 3 (e) Kitchen Exhaust /Hood System must be cleaned. 7. ? 10.513 (e) Kitchen Hood /Duct Fire Extinguishing System must be serviced by licensed contractor. 8. ? 10.601 Repair Fire-Rated Construction /Draft Stops. 9. ? 10.602 (a) Repair Fire-Rated Assemblies. t 10. ? 10.602 (b) Obstruction of Fire-Rated Assemblies prohibited. 11. ? 11.303 (b)1 Provide minimum two (2) feet of clearance from ceiling, and 18 inches below fire sprinkler heads. 12. ? 11.303 (b)3 Remove combustible storage from boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, and electrical rooms. 13. ? 11.303 (b)4 Remove combustible storage from attic, beneath floor, concealed spaces, or provide Fire-Rated construction. 14. ? 11.403 Protect Gas Meter(s) from vehicular damage, snow and ice accumulations. 15. ? 12.104 (a) Obstruction of Exits prohibited. 16. ? 12.106 (c) Exit Doors shall be operable without special knowledge or key. i 7. ? 12.109 (c) Storage is prohibited under non-rated Exit Stairways. - 18. ? 12.109 (d) Approved Stairway Signs required in buildings with more than three (3) floors. 7 9. ? 12.110 (a) Exit Illumination shall be maintained. 20. ? 12.110 (b) Emergency Power for Exit Illumination and Exit Lights shall be maintained. 21. ? 7 2.111 Exit Sign(s) required to be installed and maintained. 22. ? 12.112 Exit Discharge, Dispersal, and Refuge shall be unobstructed and clear. 23. ? 14.108 (a) Fire Alarm System shall be tested and certified annually. 24. ? 14.108 (a) Smoke Detectors shall be cleaned as required. 25. ? 74.107 (a) Compressed Gas Cylinders shall be secured. 26. ? 79.202 (c) Maximum ten (10) gallons of Flammable Liquids allowed for maintenance use in "Group A, B, E, I, and R Occupancies" without Flammable Liquids Cabinet. 27. ? 80.301 Storage of Hazardous Chemicals shall be in accordance with the Fire Code. 28. ? '85.104 Electrical Hazards and Violations shall be abated. 29. ? 85.106 (a) Extension Cords shall not be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. 30. ? 85.106 (c) Extension Cords shall not be affixed overhead; run through ' walls, ceilings, floors; under doors, floor coverings, or be subject to physical damage. 31. ? 85.109 (b) Electrical Panels must have minimum 30-inch wide access. 32. ? 85.109 (c) Doors to Electrical Rooms shall be labeled and Disconnects shall be legibly marked. ` NOTES: CITED CORRECTIONS shall be completed by: a.m./p.m. on the day of , 19 , In accordance with Town of Vail Municipal Code Section 15.02, if you fail to abate the violations cited above on or before the required date, your failure may result In further action being taken under the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, edition, which may include the issuance of a summons to appear in Municipal Court or County Court for the violations specified above. Upon a finding of guilty of said violations, you will be w subject to the penalties provided by law. - X SIGNATURE OF BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER NAME (please print) X , SIGNATURE OF FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICER NAME (please print) ORIGINAL -BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER YELLOW -FILE COPY PINK -FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU .~1 Town o~ Vail, Colorado 42 West Meadow Drive ~ V A I L FIRE DEPARTMENT ' Vail, Colorado 81657 TOI~VIVOF UAIL (303) 479-2250 FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT Building/Business Name Occ./Suite Street Address Mailing Address Business Phone Date Owner/Manager Phone Time In Time Out Item # E/ VIOLATION NATURE OF VIOLATION LOCATION/NOTES 1. ? 2.205 (c) Stop Use/Evacuation of 2. ? 10.105 (a) Obstruction of Fire Hydrants and Fire Valves prohibited. 3. ? 10.302 Key Box /Master Keys required. 4. ? 10.503 Fire Alarm, Fire Sprinkler, Fire Extinguishers in need of inspection-Testing by licensed contractor. 5. ? 10.505 Install approved Fire Extinguishers as required. 6. ? 10.513 (e) Kitchen Exhaust /Hood System must be cleaned. 7. ? 10.513 (e) Kitchen Hood /Duct Fire Extinguishing System must be serviced by licensed contractor. 8. ? 10.601 Repair Fire-Rated Construction /Draft Stops. 9. ? 10.602 (a) Repair Fire-Rated Assemblies. l 10. ? 10.602 (b) Obstruction of Fire-Rated Assemblies prohibited. i 11. ? 11.303 (b)1 Provide minimum two (2) feet of clearance from ceiling, and 18 inches below fire sprinkler heads. 12. ? 11.303 (b)3 Remove combustible storage from boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, and electrical rooms. 13. ? 11 .303 (b)4 Remove combustible storage from attic, beneath floor, concealed spaces, or provide Fire-Rated construction. 14. ? 11.403 Protect Gas Meter(s) from vehicular damage, snow and ice accumulations. 15. ? 12.104 (a) Obstruction of Exits prohibited. 16. ? 12.106 (c) Exit Doors shall be operable without special knowledge or key. 17. ? 12.109 (c) Storage is prohibited under non-rated Exit Stairways. 18. ? 12.109 (d) Approved Stairway Signs required in buildings with more than three (3) floors. 19. ? 12.110 (a) Exit Illumination shall be maintained. 20. ? 12.110 (b) Emergency Power for Exit Illumination and Exit Lights shall be maintained. 21. ~ ? 12.111 Exit Sign(s) required to be installed and maintained. 22. ? 12.112 Exit Discharge, Dispersal, and Refuge shall be unobstructed and clear. 23. ? 14.108 (a) Fire Alarm System shall be tested and certified annually. 24. ? 14.108 (a) Smoke Detectors shall be cleaned as required. 25. ? 74.107 (a) Compressed Gas Cylinders shall be secured. 26. ? 79.202 (c) Maximum ten (10) gallons of Flammable Liquids allowed for maintenance use in "Group A, B, E, I, and R Occupancies" without Flammable Liquids Cabinet. 27. ? 80.301 Storage of Hazardous Chemicals shall be in accordance with the Fire Code. 28. ? 85.104 Electrical Hazards and Violations shall be abated. 29. ? 85.106 (a) Extension Cords shall not be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. 30. ' ? 85.106 (c) Extension Cords shall not be affixed overhead; run through walls, ceilings, floors; under doors, floor coverings, or be subject to physical damage. . 31. ? 85.109 (b) Electrical Panels must have minimum 30-inch wide access. 32. ? 85.109 (c) Doors to Electrical Rooms shall be labeled and Disconnects shall be legibly marked. NOTES: CITED CORRECTIONS shall be completed by: a.m./p.m. on the day of , 19 . In accordance with Town of Vail Municipal Code Section 15.02, if you fail to abate the violations cited above on or before the required date, your failure may result in further action being taken under the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, edition, which may include the issuance of a summons to appear in Municipal Court or County Court for the violations specified above. Upon a finding of guilty of said violations, you will be subject to the penalties provided by law. Si~NATURE OF BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER NAME (please print) SIGNATURE OF FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICER NAME (please print) ORIGINAL -BUILDING OWNER/MANAGER YELLOW -FILE CQ~Y PINK -FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU U15 I • r~~ 9~ c~~+~u ~ ~ ~k ~~c~u.a~ tt-u C~ c~-~- REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TOWN OF VAIL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES BY TOWN OF VAIL NOVEMBER, 1991 r INTRODUCTION The Town of Vail is sobciting proposals for Management Consulting1'S,~er~v~i,~cnes. The primary goal of the Town from this project is to a~~~n"d t.`a~"eu~~uo cvu~( . of its current systems, procedures, and thods o eceive ;l.U+~ recommendations which would lead to improved work practices and cost ~ ~mi;~,Gl~~tt~e,~`o-K- savings. The Town of Vail provides services to approximately 4,500 residents and 25,000 guests. The Town's departments include Police, Fire, Public Works and Transportation, Community Development, Library, and Administrative Services. The Town employs 195 regular, full-time employees and approximately 75 seasonal employees. For the purpose of this project, the Town is interested in analyzing only the following departments: • Public Works and Transportation • Community Development • Police • Municipal Court • Adminstrative Services • Town Manager's Office CONSULTANT'S SCOPE OF SERVICES The primary objective of the consultant team is to provide an analysis and opinion of Town of Vail systems, procedures, and methods and work practices. The following tasks are outlined to give bidders a sense of the scope of work and specific output necessary to fulfill the requirements of the project. 1. Preliminary Work A. Familiarize consultant team with the Town of Van's: • form of government • management structure • services provided • facilities • st:.g pi.++°,-r,~ ~ra systems, procedures, and methods • growth patterns in the Vail economy and government • examine job descriptions for all employees to be interviewed This task will be accomplished through interviews with the Town's senior management and study of Town documents. 2. Analysis A. Analyze the essential work functions in each department and the requisite s#~~.ge-~s systems, procedures, and methods to accomplish the work load, assuming a 40 hour work week with minimal overtime. B. C nduct mparis f essential work functions and sag s to s, pr ced. res, an thods th ose of similar~~u~ re or owns o ible ex p incl a eckenri e, pen, Steamboat Springs, South ake Tahoe, and Park City). ~I C. Recommend improvements in work methods,~procedures ~ ~'g-~e~s. Emphasis should be placed upon areas that are ~~K , most likely to yield significant results. ~ D. Recommend cost saving activities, methods, and/or procedures. Develop practical, implementable recommendations for specific actions that will allow the Town to pursue the opportunities identified. Prepare an estimate of the costs and savings associated with adopting the recommendations. E. Analyze level of employee training. Identify areas where additional training would be of clear benefit to the Town. F. Produce draft report of methodology, findings, and recommendations. G. Meet with special interest groups (i.e., builders, architects, retailers, service, bus, etc.) 3. Review Process A. Present monthly status reports to Town management and Task Force. B. Present findings to Town management and Task Force. C. Revise draft report after feedback from Town management and Task Force. D. Present findings and recommendations in a meeting with Town Council. 2 r SCHEDULE All proposals are to be submitted by ,1992. Proposal review and consultant selection by ,1992. Consultant analysis completed by ,1992. Presentation to Vail Town Council on ,1992. BUDGET ft '_c * pr~3~.:1s ~.-i~e 'mac _ All consultant fees and expenses must be included within the proposed budget. FORMAT Consultant proposals shall be prepared using the following format in order to facilitate evaluation: Letter of Transmittal Part 1 ~ Project Organization Part 2 Project Work Plan Part 3 Project Staffing Part 4 Experience Record Part 5 Budget/Cost Proposal Part 6 Appendices Each part should be. clearly defined for easy reference. Six copies of ,the proposal shall be submitted. Letter of Transmittal: The letter of transmittal is to be addressed to: Ron Phillips Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 This letter must contain a brief summary of the key points of the proposal and a statement that the proposal will remain in effect for 60 days after receipt by the Town of Vail. The proposal shall contain the name, title, address, and telephone number of an individual or individuals with authority to bind the company, who may be contacted during the period of evaluation. 3 Part 1: Proiect Organization .y This part of the proposal should contain a concise description of how the proposer intends to organize its approach to the Project. The prime consultant is to be identified as well as other participating firms or individuals whether in joint venture or as subconsultants. The role each firm is to play in accomplishing the identified work program must be explained.. Key personnel to be assigned to the Project by all firms must be identified, including a brief description of their role in the Study. Part 2: Proiect Work Plan In this part, the consultant is requested to outline the methodology for the performance of the tasks identified in this RFP. The work plan should provide a narrative description of the method of implementing the work tasks as well as any substantive or procedural innovations used by the proposer on similar projects that are applicable to the study described in the RFP. Throughout this part, the consultant must clearly illustrate the generalized approach to the Project, and exhibit a clear understanding of the program. Part 3: Proiect Staffing This part shall identify key personnel who are anticipated to be assigned to the Project, for both the prime consultant as well as any proposed subconsultants. Each person listed must also be identified further through use of an individual r~sum~. Each r~sum~ form must be complete and concise, featuring experience which is most directly relevant to the task responsibility which the individual will be assigned. R~sum~s should be limited to two pages per person. Part 4: Experience Record This part should contain a brief history of the firm and the types of work accomplished, an indication of current staff size, and the location of the office of the firm. This information is to be provided on each firm submitting as part of the proposal. A complete, concise and accurate description of each firm's experience which is relevant to this Proiect should be cited. The information provided should be oriented toward a demonstration that each firm or team of firms has had the appropriate experience to undertake the intended work program. 4 r A list of clients for similar projects should be provided. This list should - , include the name and telephone number of an appropriate contact person for each client reference. Again, the Town is interested in the past experience of personnel the firm will assign to the Project. Firms should not submit past experience based on individuals either not with the firm or not assigned to the study. Part 5: Budget /Cost Proposal The proposer should provide a summary of costs for all services and materials anticipated to be incurred within the study. A sununary table should be provided which indicates, for each task, the person-days assumed (broken down by Senior Professional, Professional, and Technical Staff categories) and the dollar amount involved. Materials, travel, and other costs should also be summarized in this table. The consultant should review the work tasks and provide the Town of Vail with a statement as to the appropriateness and adequacy of the budget identified in this RFP and / or a total maximum fee for all expenses to accomplish the work. Part 6: Appendices Information considered by the proposer to be pertinent to this Project which was not specifically solicited in Parts 1 through 5 may be placed in an appendix. The proposer is reminded that this is not an invitation to submit voluminous amounts of extraneous material. GENERAI. CONDITIONS Limitation And Award This RFP does not commit the Town of Vail to award a contract, nor to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of proposals in anticipation of a contract. The Town of Vail reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as the result of this request, to negotiate with all qualified sources, or to cancel all or part of the RFP. After a priority listing of the' final firms is established, the Town of Vail will negotiate a contract with the first priority firm. If negotiations cannot be successfully completed with the first priority firm, negotiations will be formally terminated and be initiated with the second most qualified firm, and likewise, the remaining firms. The Town of Vail may choose to terminate this study at any time. The provider firm will be paid for all expenses incurred up to the point of termination., 5 . ~ EQUal Emnlovment O~nortunity The Proposer will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Proposer will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that applicants are employed and that employees are treated equally during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment upgrading; demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. CONSULTANT SELECTION Proposals received that conform to the proposal instructions outlined in this RFP will be evaluated by a Task Force appointed by the Town Manager and Town Council. Evaluation Criteria The outlined below provides a list of the criteria and scoring system which will be used in the evaluation of the proposals submitted to accomplish the work defined in this RFP. General Compliance With The RFP - 5 Points • Format • Content Proiect Organization - 5 Points • Completeness of the project team • Clarification of management structure and accountability • Appropriateness of the project organization to the project Proiect Work Plan - 15 Points • Creative approach • Demonstration of understanding of the project objectives • Work flow diagram ' • Appropriate methodology for the project work tasks 6 r Proiect Staffing - 10 Points "7: • Qualifications of project manager , • Qualifications of key staff • Commitment to project by key staff Experience Record - 10 Points • Relevant experience of each firm • Experience of personnel assigned in similar projects in both the public and private sectors , • Client references Budget /Cost Proposal - 5 Points ~ ' • State ability to complete project within schedule and budget. Total - 50 Points Interviews In addition to the written proposal, the most promising candidate firms', may be evaluated on their performance in an oral interview conducted by the selection committee. The interview will be limited to two hours or less, and will consist of a presentation (about 1 /2 hour) by the candidate plus an extensive question and answer period. Interviews will be scheduled at a later date. ~ The Town of Vail reserves the right to select a consultant based upon evaluation of written proposals only. 7 United States. ,Forest White River NF P.O. Boor 190 • ~,ov.. Department of Service Holy Cross nD 401 Main - Agricnltnre Kintnrn,.CO 81645 'z ~ 303 827-5715 Reply to: 1580 . Date: January 2, 1992 Pam Brandmeyer . Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Pam: . I would like to give you an update on the status of the new Aoly Cross Ranger District Office and oa our planning efforts for the partnership visitor information center. On September 13, 1991, partners of the new Holy Cross Ranger District Visitor Information Center attended-a stakeholders meeting at Vail, CO. The purpose of this meeting was to update you (our partner) on the .progress of our new office and to discuss potential users of the Visitor Center, their interests, and possible displays.. Discussion also centered on the types of questions encountered bq all of us and how we would incorporate them into our displays. Marcella Wells then consolidated the results into a report (copy attached) which will be used by Linda Hecker. Interpretive Specialist-US Forest Service, in developing an Interpretive Plan for the Visitor Center. Plans are currently on track for Linda to have the Plan to us (the Holy Cross District) for review by January 15, 1992. At that time we will then prepare a contract requesting bids for a two phase contract which will include the following: Developing a theme and theme concepts with supporting narratives for the Visitor Information Center, and Creating and designing specific Visitor Information Center projects in the form of e$hibits, signs, graphics and conceptual and preliminary interpretive ezhibit site plans. . It is anticipated that it will take approximately 6 months to complete the project. I will keep you informed on this planning process as it proceeds. We are currently planning on moving into our new office sometime. after the middle of January. Before we move, however, we are planning on inviting all of you (our partners) to tour the building and discuss temporary displays. At that time we will also discuss our Interpretive Plan as prepared by Linda Recker and potential items for sale. ~ - Thank you for all your. support with our new Visitor Information Center. Carol Hindman will be contacting you soon to set up a meeting to tour the building. ~S . F&8200.28(7.82) f V Sincerely. ILLIAM A. WOOD . District Ranger ~ ~ Enclosure i CAA/csh ~ ....i I, 1 S F&8200-28(7.82) T~^.l :1 '^-r~~l.ry .~t^ r~1~~.i hi A.1 ~"A~n yT=-.Fir J ~ _ L~ _ - 1 : 1 _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ l . T';-I_ n+::+.J=~ ':+j;:tatl':'e r___,:..-... ~ .~F.1 .''y _ - •~=f1-.= _=-tT;;TI_trtlcatll_+n DY;+h1C.^:. t:`:~i~ =r~r_`G•'_:3t+? 7~ccr-tl:^J JE'+-:~1_'~:= :T;~~~. The 1tTpllcCtt l~+n` C.:F~ ~C__+~;t~;~r; '~_L-i+r:5 ~.`.at f'-..~!I.J c: 1'C ~'~ct-_~ il!', a` i~lin.~ ::^s_wl°rlna ah..~'Ltt }F~ ViS~~'='r +-=rtt°r dnd tF1z •~~L:~l_ :r L~:= _ti T F I-~1 r f~ 1 i nl rnin _nf;,• -t - . ~=`.~v+_, :FGY~ clrz l:z~~lrr;~?~ ~t~~ J'e J ~l _n a l: -(~ITf,: 1_'rt -z,,,,i+__~ f:'r t,`:e "?:.nt~,rn 'vlsltc+r t•zntcr. F~=+=!~CP1_3 !-;_tt ~~:lt'<r I_:°rlte~' 15 ~I=`4i C. ."cc_t _.,_nzYi=r:+== ar,ri 5 C y ~ - - C n - . r ± C' . r F t c . ~ ' ^ ~ 1 t . ^ . r: C'r ~ ~ ~l ~ ~ 1 ~ . } 1- . ~ - __.r ~r1U :I_+n-r+zf=~+~'n~~11 ~r:t C~r~-A.~~.~. L~'_t~t _L_ _f Cnd Tt_i'' ":1±11't'z/~~~' ~n +~~.r:tY l~+l:±= +=1 t~aB _'t ~l :'15:1 e:'GC-r :E'!'ll=?. - _ _ th the pzr _nal t'fl~it +r5 'h `~:ta1a f~+=ility c.m tli SD-~r 5+=1`tt° ir, Si+ at=r~tiLtn rind t`'E ~_+..IlTif~lrt.:t~+- ='R.lr't'~'t_lndlnL_-'IS. . r..} ..'r.r:ol r'$+_ +tTt;T°r:dat i+.'r:. _ i. nif+_+r-med ,~er_c+n ~ a+ .r. .;f+.:rt.;a' . __~l_ln er er;rttan+_c ±F;c _rGdi~'.lit•'~ .+f t".:.. y~_iur,tP'F. Suaalznient this servi+_e with lc+cals, r.at;.lr~ cznt°r staff, ' °i~U~=dt_~YS, c+Y L~tl'1eY 5~ic+_lali5ts tc+ interpret Spe+_ial =vents r rzs_+urce5. Train all front line Staff in the t_lsz ctf apprc+pr it~te techniques f~_r .en5ur ir,g a qu;_;lit~~~ _zr•'~i'_e F:::perienl.z. - F~lrniture and De=ion F'e~:+_+mmzr.datic+ns Equip the visit_~r center with adequate ar.d cc+nsistent furniture and display materials (i.e., bra~=hure racks, seating, etc.). :intact Town ~_tf Eaglz recardi.^.g <<_st and pray=educe fc+r c+btaining w_~c~den, wall-mounted br_~chure rac~;s. Contact C-I_+ndit Enternri=zs in Denver regarding cast and prclcedure for pr•+du~=ing velcrct c~lvered alall b_lards and fr=e standing rc~ctm di~rider=. .y~ ' J ~'L!rE,UB l:`;B __=_lu.._''_ f __~n~t~ _,_~1. t_ - i `arches ± ~ ~,__:r ___1~1 i.._yrc:+= ~'=Y'f=" _ -F':1~'~ M1^1;T..__ }1-._ ,iT;? It t_1~.°. .'f yF-.~ -~L~T,}-~7' _+t 1ntt~Y~+_t1='~= 2~. iv,i:~~ 4?1=.iy~+y= ti. Cep ±hcit• CL1O=iii+r',s _~nctwieY='.~. ~n±l+_lpatln0~ t~= fa'='~:~ _ - ~.~Li .•~-=-t-.f __,-;c :.~;t~ ~_:°r=e ^e+_tatl_'n~ r!et__slt•ate= t~? '=~.rFfL.l IJ:Cs'l~n .,s L~Y1~'nl,:,'E''n ma:'.r1Cl.. .:Jr1Cr:l_.1._'~I ':C11_~~~.~" - w :111e`l:~tt= 1~:° ;Jll'f~C.^. ±il _f,r_;':?:~tl='n Stdff, _~n'~ c1t tF:~ =asTl~ 11T:=. !~.'•D •;==lt'.-= ~''r' dn1~= t!''elr CLIeS'-rti~~n5. 1'~1n:ml~lrtC the t1R1E fc~Y 3 '`Jl~:li:Y' .t.~~ Qi-;~ .,n an=_•'w'eY 'T~c1l:T.l~~s tf"~~ ='`i°f=l~ ~C'i_' T-f_.'f .'..;=~}1-, ri r;~ r'r 12nt~tt i'.-. ~'3t EYlal .r-:e+=~+tTimCn~ctt?+.n°_~ __•^=tYL;'.t :'.`°~+-sidcrrl ~+Y lent~tlc'n :ncp as pc+S=lble fY=ant-erd c~Y'7ctn1~BY c+ne slde 1>>LlStYatlYi+7 tF'i~ t'GC'QYaGhi'==t1 and q~_+qra~+hical featL;res of the are- ~:~?_+untains, ri`Je~ fG'f C--tom ~i:_ ; f;Fte .±~..Y Side .11 ~ L;~trat 1^c tht' lt, f'r=_LYL;:=''._,.- fC~tL:YC~. c'f t~:? ?Y'=a aY=~S, 1=''.Jrt~, r_..~~_, B':•=.. n.`J.. :'C' Cl r_i_.._~_'rl'.~". s`~St e:T; fc'Y `Ji=i': +irC, ~h_+L'.lL 1L;Y= _:_i '~°=1r~, 1" desi~:n t`t'-ir =''w'n Vl~lt a+=+='Ydin;; 7 o.J=' ti.== .~=t o ~~1Lid: ~l It 7B _+f v: . ~'n0 V1Slt 43 '~JeE'~: c'r me+r°~. Jse cc+l+.'r +=C+de "Y °V:Tib=1 =Yi=~:=?~ r=_ ^n dGcislc+n tre=. bJlth 5tak:ch:'1deY5, cc':Ttpile a quick: Yeferen'_e nc'tebc'o!?, t±-,a± =c+ntain~ descriptic'n ~!f the '=~+mmEY+_lal G'fc'VlSi~'n4 in ':l~il ' '.~+`:'_'n, ctnd MintUrn, (l.Z. 1C'dginq, Yew=t ell.tr~nt5, e1'=±i~'Ji}1° 58YV1+=es.~ . F'r~_vlde f='Y ~ bL;lletl'.l b='~Y~ ~'Y Y=y'~l^~_ ~Y~a '--'n`.;~.~r,'ior;t visitc'YS which displ_.;:s,cLlrrer,t ~+_tiviti'=~ and e':e^ts as 'ae?'_ as media cc+verage c'f Yelevant is=ues. Design this ;aYea sc• that visit_~rs can cc'mmuni~=ate with the staEce!-ialders' (at large? durinq• busy times when a staff persc:n is nc't available c'r ah~n the Vi51t~~Y wishes t.• e~;press an c'pinic'n c+r idea an'c+nymc'Llsl`/. ~='_ntact Elaine Lanast.aff c'f t!-:e ~:ifle Distri+_t regarding cc+sts and pr _'+_edLire fc'r pr'_'_u•ring ?ntera'_tive Vide' Equipment. ~7 r 1. 1 !'=th .L 3',C~1 L•1 aQ; J=1~ .:'f t1;F' rl t~~L= _ ~F ~ ~ I_,. 'J - _ ' ~o....d13tY2F"'il4tB~•1-syl,`;~ yl__'~:•! ~~';t~ ±~L .a;';_'L•.rit -~f ~i ' '--'R;Glle ~ ua.~i~1~~1 ='Y:~r,}v~tt:_.^. ~~Yi,_~'~ :r= _='1=nt V.1_~:'-~f~ 1_ tF"tB YL~c+d- t' .~']1 r~'_.r:+_ _ ..'-.~;°_f__i. r1 c_.!. ~ =G= f i~.}-.c =r . Yea. Th15 uY~_~=hl.;Ye __'uld 1e ~`,e f:'F t ;n a ~BY~=s ~'Y'J'=F'1!_iY:?s rec.L'~":h2;,C tF'° f.-'~-".-=.' c.=-F' Li15tY1•.t ~t!l Glhite Fiver Pdati'_nal ~_'re_~. A~ =u'_h it ,_~,uld ~•e d:strihut2d :tl: ,:th.r ~~.•YC~•t je('`Ji!.e Vi=..t:!Y _~ent=:'~. 'dit`, st=}::e~i:_,1'der~y ,bet=r~a.:~c the nat~_:Ye ar.d e?:tent ~!f =s =t?Tt~ 1~IClt:'~1rI!''. a't? T'_:~te~ ns~t~!__~t2_'^ ltem~. ' i_ra~~~ .,_-:~~~:=~r;= yF:_tf =_lt_:BtYc:~t= +"!~~:',J t~;ti 41__,.~iY"l '.'~~:t_!Y _,"~'t~Y 1 ...L:° rf _f?1 _'±`'.f _.r;}.Y~ the =r?a. .-.;,_'Y~ rr;:~ ,T..i';-' :'2=:~'=. -=r'-et rG'~,--c:r _.~_ng _ ~I i~ r _ -t`..~ ~ . ^ y l ' - ~ c~.'.• 1 ~ F t .1 n t ~,1 1 ~ • f Y ~ i 11 _ i' p d t a 1 l 'v~.lt.<r .Jnt=Y~. ~CY~i ~p'r,•_ !_titl;yLlt-' ~I-t'=;-;~'- fir.-'~!':V ':~G 1-f=~Y;T.d±~?n r. ir;t C''L'r°±l:'e mat ~'Y ...'S n'Jylt ~r'1C f_~Y ~~i~:~l vt `J =~tt 1. '_?s ~e_~Ct?e tom: V1=?~. • _.Tf_ n?`J=~ ~'L!Rle!~t te'a'- =`Rlf'l E'n l~. tit - r.a it the 'y*_'1~,=mb~Y ~~.~th :T,.?t.ng. ''f 'j'F'i? :-r~~?/. ?!-;c'me T?3m int_'~rate c''~rer ~ . l theirte ~ ~ "iin t i. ~ t_ _ ~ ..e~;es „f . _!ther I-7Cy visit. ~r '.enters. ~ase'~ ~_n ~_verall thefr,e de~_ ided at that mFBt inc. de±ermine ~ rati_' of permanent e:~:hi5it spa'_e t~~ r!_ti~tina e:.hibit ~uct'_° ar,d dis'=LlsS p'_'ssible themes f~!r ea'_h. ~ ' With. staEceh~_~lder5, dis~_!tss the Yan~e _~.f i=_=+_tes a^d, the d=gYee ' t~_~ whi~_h they will 5e di3'_us~ed in the Visit~'r tenter . matey ia15: T=.k:e fuller advantage ~~f 'the intero•retive ~_'tential fc'Y this site,. lth~!uGh this site is .primarily ar. i!-:f~rrmatic'n enter, its e'du!_at i _'nal p_'tent i;.~l sh_!uld r.'t be ~ ~verl _~_~F::ed. ~ As the manager .'f the Eagle Visit~~!r i_enter stated, "Tht!u+~h visit~!r d.• nt!t e~:pe+.t it. ' 3 f .L. 1_. - _ .V L~ . l t _ J 1 dr _ ..,f _1--_. ==J'-.'f =.;~1~'1±_ ~r,~ _^~'°Y J:`_'f 1~, SI?~'=. ....t.° ' r 7 ±~:C ==n±°. " r.r:!~:..i1Q GC'_~:_tt 1~-~r~C. .t. _ _~Et~r=.-1 ~`>i_~`_~'f= '.Viii -_ri=-:~__ ~•_.it:... Y_':.'=~; ~s. fur±~;e;-,,,_.Y~' ~':iy.._nQ LJl.t 1_.yy l~~l:ai IT~'y Cr :ai'- 1:~ ::='F=~, ln'_'f ~'=.5~'~ fhb 1_:I•^r1L_ r.' ~:1;_:.~i=Ln.=_ din _y- F x-1-;0 _ t-,~f i~~~1:~1 - I . _~"~11_ _ L:~:L _i=i r.=--.-..-..E~t~=1_~='r7= t~EE.'"". C'T°^•L::. ~ r'f ~cc ~l.!:~J~ ~~~E~ .'r: Sr't'=tom. ='•i:..'.J ~~'r=~~' ~Er4':~=E 1~E ~t-:d 1_ti:~=Cli~~r: ftr ~:f=~'=•~1F~Q l.:_°_ lrl l:ltt'~.''rlYetl'~e 1Ti=~~=~:E_. , _.'r+_.+ r•-'t??-= ^`F;iit!= irr ~_:!`%E?r ;'2i~'`'!~i11y =JE±=~~,r1~~ =1YL•~=='t. fC~r Cr°a+:r'~ =ni C'-QIZIen'FS for ~~r?L~t.il-llTla•~e ~~.!lei ~ 1__~'J. C..± r_1..__l ,gyp T`i CSC Y':±c In Ler: .~~av v.r.n,yfdln~'. ~.a} :'E~r_li;~ F''~'=--'-'`'-tr==' c'.•'Qavl~t+~ '=~=~ffiGltteY i:Tlaulr:C ar~ ±.r.=,Yc.C.±tir:c f_: r~:t-~±•. an -''=.reir ;fJ.1 i:~tteYing c'ptl.+ns Lt~l^~ the 'y1~.n1_il ~..~':.^O 1. _.t ~:.'.--r -=~:1nq ~Br':1.- sit:_E'1 S }hC ~ E:'tictn ~':t•: =_=rLe^ed techniq~le. - '-1±~=± 18nW~li•d jC'Yln~aS DIY Denver phclti~/fralTilnC sF''='~ . _~-.rdz,;'~ =~f er;l?r-tie:T~en±~., ina':t~~, and fr~tl-ie~ c i i P .-I i c r, 1 `l ~`J ^ f -1 i 1 t 1_I I~ Y ~=l !-1 ~i = . - _ Y _ r ~:f"e ---'L=?.}v f _+_~r1~tY!lti+^Q ~ Sfial? I~i~l~'-_.?5~,',~'tr•~c.:-{ t - - ' _ I ~'~:YEI_!E•~t1= D_~~1fJli 1±'v .f ~:=nstYt_l_t. -.1 ...1':i ,~i=~~iaJ ^~l:TSlle the Gc 1=.S1t711 1t~ ~!f l:S1nQ ~ ~=~r~Q-t 1,T.e 1 ? Y°_8il•r+f`r:!~;_ f._;r =~tppi emerltal interpretive pr'i ~grarrs ci ivinq Hilt _~'r y,'~ Sr'zai~:=-r eriES, special eVCn't interpretive help, eta=. 7. E=_tablish a v151tc~Y C`:_ti1_ta~l!'n DYO~=edl_lr@ f:=~Y tYctC~'inC Vlci}}:rg .~nrl tcIQ11.s clf interest. BBCaI_lsE' incr-e.aSCd v151taticln i5 i 1E;E1~ tl=i . c~c~=ur k'hen the ne'.,' 1=enter c'pens, ~=aref~tl records abclut n~;mbers and inc~tiry topics can serve as pc''.~erful manacea,ent tools ta,de••~ei c•p• c'r enhance visit clr =ervi'.es. v.~ 1~=1't `11~1'~.~'1 1-=''_:'~'.T~C !:`_C _~_'FE ~'f~ 'r,7 _ d :T, _ _ =f'f C~_y 1`1C ~:1j L: +_.t _~c.1C ~~_:f .:r. C .T.~~lvi! ~ ?l:°Ct 1~'Q .Y yY~!=~:1^s7 _V~.t`!'.1 tf'! t'.E'°!? Yc~__v.Ll J AGENDA Present Absent LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY Bishop Simonett REGULAR MEETING ~ Fried Thomas JANUARY 8, 1992 Wilson 10:00 A.M. 1. Consideration of the Authority of a corporate structure change for Majiks Vail Corporation, dba, Club Majiks: a) Stephanie Schwartz, Vice-President and Director - replacing James Ferriman b) Bruce Robbins (currently a Director), Secretary - replacing James Ferriman STEPHANIE AND MARK SCHWARTZ PRESENT. APPROVED: 3-0 2. Consideration of the Authority of a corporate structure change for Palmos, Inc., dba, Palmos Cappuccino Bar: Change in stock as follows: Dietrich Menzel - 100 stockholder ' (formerly 75.5% - 24.5 % stock purchased from William F. Bergmann) DIETRICH MENZEL PRESENT. APPROVED: 3-0 3. Consideration of the Authority of a registered manager for Vail Food Services, Inc., dba, Golden Peak Restaurant: Robert A. Coleman replacing Thomas J. King, III CONTINUED TO 2/12/92 MEETING. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of the Authority of a suspension or revocation of the Tavern Liquor License held by Knuckles, Inc., dba, Ringside. The grounds for suspension or revocation are as follows: 1) Jim Dexter, Vice-President and Secretary of Knuckles, Inc., dba, Ringside, is not of good moral character in violation of C.R.S. 12-47-111, as amended, in the following particulars: a) Jim Dexter was convicted on May 24, 1991, of the crime of disorderly conduct. b) The conviction of Jim Dexter as set forth in paragraph a) hereof was not disclosed on the application for a Town of Vail liquor license for Knuckles, Inc., dba, Ringside, in violation of C.R.S. 12-47-107, as amended. ED GINGRAS, JIM DEXTER, AND TERRY O'CONNOR, ATTORNEY, PRESENT. NO CONTEST OF ALLEGATION; LIQUOR AUTHORITY REQUESTED JIM DEXTER BE REMOVED FROM THE LICENSE, VIA CORPORATE STRUCTURE CHANGE, BY 2/12/92 REGULAR MEETING. I 5. Notification to the Authority of a change of trade name for Pizza & Pane Company, dba, Pizza & Pane Co. New trade name is as follows: Pizza & Pane Company, dba, Gambetta's Pizza Pane 6. Notification to the Authority of recent renewals: a. Austria, Inc., dba, Ambrosia b. The Southland Corporation, dba, 7-Eleven Store No. 20738 c. Bridge Street Restaurant Associates, Ltd., dba, Vendetta's APPROVED: 3-0 7. Any other matters the Authority wishes to discuss. NONE. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:35 A.M. TOWN OF VAIL Vail Local Licensing Authority Martha S. Raecker Secretary to the Authority i eC: REC'~? JA N 1 O~gg~ 5TA1 t, OF COLORADO EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS ~p~Co 136 State Capitol Q~ 'y H~ \ O Denver, Colorado 802 03-1 7 9 2 Phone (303) 866-2471 ~..~l876 Roy Romer Governor January 6, 1992 The Honorable Peggy Osterfoss Mayor, Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: 2585 -Vail Affordable Housing Project Dear Mayor Osterfoss: I wanted to personally congratulate you on your successful application to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs to secure state assistance for your community project. The task for local and state governments to meet the needs of citizens is more challenging today than ever before. I'm glad that we were able to assist you with this important project. Again, congratulations and good luck. Sincerely, Roy er Gov nor JaN -8'92 : .mot '4 4:i~~.~an~~i _ 5TA1 OF COLORAD , ~~~,E~._- Office of the Governor State Capitol faenver, Colorado 80203-1792 The Honorable fiargaret Osterfoss Mayor, Town of Vail • 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 . _ _ tittEtltl~~tf!lti~tjstltt~lltitfltl3titt~!!li!!lt~i~ URIL SECURITIES-MERV TEL~1-303-476-5531 Jan 09 92 16 50 No .003 P.01 E~~ n ~ tit r ~ c.. ~ 1~„''u'~'~5' . M RECD JAN 10 1992 ' s6 ~ ~R ~s TWA [3YEFi i ~ xe : 352 Ii3GA1i'Ek n1f~M C:1<1RGLE /C~~/ 303-47G•5.534 L 9~eR Y Jr+NUA~l' 19U1 P•lk. I•iEI;V LAPiN 2`- 1~'ESl !'1EAf3U'~'f DF(IYE VAII., COLO. f,1 tS:~7 . TI I!1NN, YUU f0(; lNYITIi•dG TI-I!5 LL•TTf.R P,f TCR OUr: f:FCF:I~tI' CONVCRSATION F:F.GAI~f)IPdG 1 f ll. JRltiRf;!>,1.AWSUIT fi,Nf! Tt•1C C:ONCERIV5CIF NHNt:Y ANr, !"iY~~FI.F C~YCR CXTERIn[, I l~:+HTINC~ 1N i(~1Nld 0(" 1'AIJ . Y("~U k:NbV+~, TIC IP,ARt;A'S IN;1ALLt:D SClrtf. FO[;T'l FK1f:fi;l(lt? L131•iTSON TI•iFlic 1'I?(ll'f. R1Y IN 1 hif' FALL OF 1!3g0. AFTEf't ATTCi`1PT~; TG [;F"~?Ol. i~F Tr•iC r1ATTCR bIt~EGT[ Y ~ti'ITI-I Ttif'r~ FP,II Ff), VIE Y?~f:PJT TO THE TpWN OF 1'l;iL ANl? C(j~1PI.A!l•!FC?. T!-lf: T0~'~fN [?['St'(~IJGCf) tiY f(~I:CING TfiE [L'tiP,Rk'S TO GET DE: IGfJ ftEwIF.~Vv ('s('sk(~t17!tilf{3Rt)YAL. Tf•iCY',~df'f-tC TttRi~;Ef~ [?[~1f,'Iv [~~f IGN f,EYIEW AND, A~ YOU K.NUY+', E1' (~UUNO([.. P, i ~~~'r1'~ 111T YV/',S f ILED Gk.r"lh1l~•;(i TI {f pJ;f.~INANGE WA~• YAGUE: AtdD UNGON~y1 I1 U•f itlNF;l RNI7 •.li.t[~GF ~?ONF.S F(?lli~f~ F(1R TI-if IP~f;f'R!~':'~ iN ULCCi78C:F; OF 1 f991. WE. !`,J;E Vk hY kNXIOl15 'CO GEC CITY C.OI.INCI! TCt t~iO~'% C~I~! THE I.1ATTFF; pF FXTFF;ICIft l IGEI'J;~~ 5()[)fd/1'i !'0~~.`J~l WE F'E"EL VfF;I'1'I";ONC~L~' Tl~if•,T Ttif_ CXTE!'IOC? L(til•iT~~ THAT E1l;VF' [~FI l•! IN':•TP,[ LE[) IIJ Ol1R 1dFIGHf30RHO0E~ (NCiT~IU~,T THE It~AF!?A I..I(~HT~, ; p,P,F ()1.1T (?F PI.ArC Ih! TI I!~. f~I:1511NE MGUIJTAIN C:I~lVIROtJf 1ENT. Yf1EY kRC Nl1l I[~; I:E LI'It~}G 1~!I'I H T)-If: ~dP.l ~1['J~.I 11 Ir4i~. •ANf) THEY ~Rf HAVINGA NEGATfYG EFf ECT RN T'I IC OU!'.L ITl' OC LIFE IIJ Tt•IIS V.';L[.f"1`. 1h'l. f I'I [ THAT THE 7pWN HAS ANO~LIGATIOIJ 1() I'FZOTLt;~! 111[. r:'fl Il1:NSOf YAiI.. Ff'.Oin TiJi:~ 1idTItU::IC~rT AN[') tiN(~lll.f) APP[;CCIATC IT IF YOU WOULD SCE TI~1F~T Th115 1SSl1E LETS Pl1T pN GIT1' C~jl1l~dGlf r~.~rJT I~U~N~R„ Oldt~ OTHEfc f'011~lT TH~IT YOU SHOULD 8E Alh'P,RE OF I; THE FACT THAT THC IC1~,~N f~1f7 l.S;?I.Jf~ F~f Itr11'1 pN Sf'P1 [.Mf.,E:[; 1?, 190:) F('1F; UI~J[7Ef'GI',()klldf.~ B!.lf?iAl. Y,'OJ-',I' Fqf' T'FIGtFF F!(TFf?I(~F'. I It-;i l'i;; Rl 'I Hk I(',P,F:f;A fiESIC~EN(;C~ OEsVIt)USLY, if Tl~lf. 1bV,'PJ NAf: f.Efdl11F;E~C= IBAf~I;!~ 1:5 (il I UL IGN IOArGn,F Pf;OVA,L AT TtiAT 11!'~h 1'VE: f'F;G[SAC,(:Y 1A'OULn IVOT BC [.(?;)I:,Ih1(3A1 11•fr "f IGHT SHOW" NI~XT C~OOR. ' WI' f;f'I'k[:CIATt YC~! 1R f~~ti,ISTANCE IN TI-11;,1~1ATTEi: /,Nl) Y'ilf E~RF AI~.k10t15 TL? Olti'L Ul1[t l i~~l'll~l 111 U 1 HE WEU+~ O[:DI NANOE THAT WE /~."~:~llr•1E= WfL I CsE Ff3RTNCt1['11 NC. • SIidCCRI:LY, CY .JC f • i" +t ~ ~ ti~ y i 4~ - 4~Z L ~i3Inl3l sAeP a4~ 'DI aaAo~di~~arasaad ~,en-a~6e3 ~e`a~eldae~ ay; ui uoi;e~o~ ano ;isrn o; ~~n uN?®~ ~o saa/~o~dwa aye o; papua~xa l NOIltfl~3addd b3WOl~f1~ hued ;eanng • sellaaquu~ . ~eenns . afie6Bn-1 . ;ued ssa~Q . s;eH . ¦ S lF.c town of pail Personal Memo from . Pam Brandmeyer T0: TOWN COUNCIL FROM: PAM BRANDMEYE~~ DATE: 07JAN92 RE: SAAB INFORMATION Based on some questions from Bob Buckley during a December work session, I asked for a copy of this article from Scott Miller at THE VAIL TRAIL - because it gives such a complete summary of the logic and history behind continuing with Saab leases. This is simply for your information! cY~s ~t~ their Saab st®~es ?in Carrla ~ I ge COQ $y. SCOTT N. 11iILLER driving these, it was like driv- holes drilled f'or police work `~a~ First-time visitors gawk at ing a whale. These cars are have to be filled to the point of J. the Vail Folice. The officers great in the snow, and they're invisibility. + aren't that unusual, it's their really alnle." That provision requires a ]it- ~ 1! ~ cat•s: sleek, black, late-model tle extra work for filling the r Saab 9000s, holes drilled for shotgun racks _~e I; • . v. Vail and Aspen have the only HUGIiEY IS SOLO on the and light bars, but isn't a big • ~'1~ - two Saab-equipped police de- Saab deal for several reasons. problem. Through some twist partinents in the United States. With front-wheel-drive and of fortune, storage holes :~r-d Cops in Sweden use them, and studded snow tires, the cars town radio equipment art- :.n do through drescenicstreetsoEVail the cars are used in a few other will go nearly anywhere, any- exact match. That elimin::;zs age. countries, but that's it. time. The cars also have anti- the majority of cutting and The cars lend an air~of dif- lock brakes, another important drilling. axis • Picnics • Tours ference to the departments that ncates Available use them. They seem to say,. information, call 476-9422. "Hey, we're out of the ordinary;. "~1eSe cars are great in the snow, and they'tC ' f the mobile hone at 949-7398. we're unique cars for a unique P community." TeallV mile." -Tim Swanson The cars also exude afTlu- - >mpany • Box 513, Va;l, CO 81658 ence. In the last decade, Saabs have acquired ahigh-end im- feature when streets are slick. The cars also lack a coma. age, with window stickers to The real cincher, though, is item of police equipment. a - match. The unmodified cars getting new units almost every screen between the front ar,a Vail cops drive have a list price year. rear seats to keep those undc• of just under $24,000. "When a police car is in its arrest from attacking an ofr`_ But even affluent communi- third or fourth year, it's pretty cer. There are no screens mac.- ties have to be frugal, or at least beat," Hugi~ey said. "This way that will fit across a Saab. look like they spend their our costs are for mostly pre- That isn't a particularly big r,~oney wisely. A 524,000 police ventive maintenance." pt•oblem, either, Hughey said. car is pretty extravagant, isn't So why does Saab cut Vail Instead of riding in the back, it? and Aspen such s•.~~aet deals? suspects in Vail ride in the front J Country Club ~~ell, no. Actually, Vail and The answer is ore word long: seat, handcuffed ar,d seat ,g,• Aspen are getting a pretty im- promotion. belted. C ~q~e ~ pressive deal on their cars. Bi11 D'Iiles of Saab American Hughey said no one had "~~'e've had other menu{~•rc- said the resorts' police cars are tried to jump out of a car re- ~ /-~y tuners come in tr}'ing to get our a strong selling feature for the Gently, but not missing big city- t~i-J L~•.. account. They take one look at company, aiming a wealth of type equipment might also be this deal and walk a~~•ay; the}' in-action advertising at the af- due to Veil's cornparative luck don't even bid," said d<~~s rolice fluent guests of Aspen and'Vail of violent crime. I ~ chief Ken Hughe}'. who come from all over the Saabs aren't the best high- " The deal frn• Vail is this: world. speed pursuit vehicles, either. The 11 police cruisers and Compared to American or Again, it isn't a particularly big E five cars for town staff are Japanese manufacturers, Saab issue. l , ~1(~0~~ leased at 5260 per car per sales represent onl}• a blip in Vail isn't known for high- uu CJ ` month (Aspen has the same the U.S. market. The company speed chases, and if a chase Lingerie deal). I~Tew units come in about simply lacks the resources to does skirt in Vail, the Colorado every year, or when, cars roll spend advertising dollars at the State Patrol (which has ahand- _ ~ up 25,000 miles or so. level of its competitors. fu] of hot-rod Mustangs and _ Town mechanics, who do Hughey said the cars do at- Cameros) is more than likely to \ ~ \ basic maintenance on the cars, tract a lot of attention. join in. are trained by Saab, with war- "A week doesn't go by that And if a chase should head ranty work done in Glemvood we don't have somebody want- west, there are the "welcome :eS50fIeS Springs or Denver. ing to take a pictw•e of the cars, mats".in Eagle, mats with steel The deal seems to have ev- or• have their picture taken next spikes designed to flatten the eryone from street officers to to one," he said. tires of anyone driving over romGcssrocds• ~reeGiftwrap Sa Jb's American,uffice happy. Miles said the police car them. ~ ail police ot•ficer Tim leases have affected sales, and Swanson said he enjoys the have added to Saab's image as THE BIGGEST problem cars, especially their agility. a maker of solid, safe, reliable with Saabs, Hughey said, is if "~'G']ren I was at the (state law cars. one happens to crash. Waiting enforcement) academy, we Although Vail and.~spen are for body par±s can take one of were driving regular. police happy with their Saabs, they the department's cars off the d~ferenee • cars (either old Chevrolet aren't perfect. The lease forbids street for weeks, sometimes a,+ri Caprices or Plymouth Grand departments from making ex- months. w ~t~ Furys)," Swar;son said. "After tensive modifications. Any See next page y:' . ....-.~__.m . ~ r__, ~ ; ~U i- i town o~T raii'~police I ~ i r w! • ~ i • • r r: • t ~ t• (i. ~®~~~~0 Because, in some places, the local police have S~.tabs of their own. ~ In Vail, Colorado, the police have relied on Saabs for patrol work for the last several years. That's because Vail's police cars have to perform well in ! ~ high winds, up steep grades, over snow and ice, and around mountain ~ • switchbacks. Not every car is tough enough, agile en, Hugh and' reliable enough to do that hind of work. • Sa when you're driving through Vail, drive carefully. You aren't the only ! } one in the neighborhood ~vho was clever enough to buy a Saab. ~ i If you don't ha~•e a Saab of your own vet, come in sixm ~ ~ and find out •ust how too h, a ile and reliable a car can he. ~ ~ g Tl,r m.,.;l u,l,'!h ~,'nf ,4~ et rr built. I , The Town of Vail's Saabs have gained national notoriety as the car to beat. Don't take this as a challenge for ahigh-speed chase, though. i From precious page especially clutches and trans- flrturt models, but Saab's Mil;~s A c r nreeting that fate last missions, but overall, the cvs s;~id the con,rpany had its ot'. n winter was out of action for held up fiiirly well. engineers f~;r that job. { almost three months. Although Saab has long The purp~>se of great Ieascs Other than long delays for touted the reliabili±y of its airs, for Aspen and Vail is promo- . body work, the cars are pretty Scholl said the town's units"had tion, and they excel at that. ~ reliable. «'ith some exceptions, improved dramatically in the Saab bills its products as most of the town's work on the last decade. rugged, durable cars, and po- cars is oil changes and switch- "The car's are a lot better now lire use reinforces that image, ing from 3llilllnel' Li, wing r than they were 10 years af,*o," Miles said. tires. he said. "It's been a definite benefit Todd Scholl, fleet manager Scholl said he'd like to think for us;",1liles'said. for the town, said that police tha: intin•mation passed along ken Iiughey would say it's work was hard on the rirs, by his shop is incorporated into bc•nufitted Fail a lot, too. ~ ~ .mow ~~~.~c d®~ c;OSt? ~ ~ Vail leases its police and paid a little more than $15,000 Mueller said'the car was on a ~ town stafT' Saab 9000s fir ~2G0 each. lease-p:n•cha~e pro6n•am. After a month. That•s a good price. paying X357 'a month for four ~ But what do other dep;u•tments The town will keep the cars },ears, the car belongs to the ,r fir five years or 90,000 miles.' in the valley pay for their cars. Avon ,police chief' :art Dalton town. It ~an then keep it in ser- vice or se.l it. Vail's lease zrr:ulaement is estimated that the Jeeps will il4intw•n also provides a f~ attractiv,: by civilian stzmdards, sell for x'1,500 or so when good ex;tinple of the need to 1~ but it ]ocr,a good compared to ti;ey're done «~th pplice work. keep police cars somewhat other local police departments, Over five years, that works . too. out to 5213 a month. fresh. The Ford replaced an ag• ing Chc:v}- Caprice that had 1`~ The Tnwn of Avon recently !1'linturn is paying even more run up n;onthly repair costs 1~$: paid cash for a handful of Jeep for its latest police cruiser, a nearly equal cc, the payments Cherokees. Buying in pool of police-specific Ford Taurus. on tht~ F,n~d. ar other municipalities, the to~~•n To~~ n Alanager lient - SCU'1"1' N. ti1ILLER 18.F DEAT Nf,gpS i~n•4Y AMERICAN SURVEY ~ t r , _ ~ t - ~ ~ : ~ ~ . Going downhill DENVER - 7"'OURISTS are the trouble, American since 1980, and by even more in Aspen a 1` "...Wi - ~ 1 ones mostly. Mountain towns in and Telluride. Automatic banking and Y Colorado that used to depend on ranch- fast food are the rule. Summer festivals ;I • f~` ing and mining are being transformed as bring an array of performers from the t; ~ - never before into resorts. The locals face Bolshoi Ballet to the Grateful Dead. Mer- ~ ~ Vii' the traditional dilemma of relatively chants offer cosmopolitan delights. Cel- r ` ~ poor peoplewho live in beautiful places; lular telephones abound. Vail even rents ~ ` they like the money tourism brings, but the portable telephones to skiers who ' .they resent the tourists. want to chat as th slide. ' _ More than half the ro in fi µ ~ p perty ve But Coloradans still complain. ,~r ` ' , resorts-Aspen, Breckenridge, Steam- Across the state, mountain land is being ' " ~ ' boat Springs, Telluride and Vail-is now taken over by newcomers, who often 4 ~ t 1"' owned by people who live outside Colo- turn out to be more jealous of their prop- ~ ~ r`.~~ ; rado. This is the land of the estate agent. erry than the ranchers were. State offs-. a~ ~ The ratio of agents and brokers to resi- cials ,field regular complaints from " . - i. dents is about one to 20 in Steamboat, mountain sportsmen about lack of ac- one to ten in Vail, one to seven in Aspen, cess to public land. Local towns too are and one to five in Breckenridge and Tel- changing, as planners reshape them into Refugees from Haiti luride, according to the state's property resorts that fit the mar5ceting mould: in- - + commission. In the country as a whole, tegrated, landscaped fun centres for golf- B Oa l p eO p e the ratio is about one to 200. ing, gentle skiing, cycling, video The pastel-paint gentrification ofAs- "camcording"and, above all, shopping. MIAMI pen and Vail reflects the influx of new Locals complain about the pressure to owners-Californians, Texans and New sell land, increasing crime and, most THEY may not be fleeing communism, Yorkers. Some investors come from far- shocking of all, the downgrading of ski but the boat people of Haiti are just as Cher afield: the Japanese have bought slopes to suit visiting novices. desperate as those from Vietnam or Cuba. two ski mountains, and Prince Bandar "The very rapid development of sev- About 3,000 Haitians have fled their homes of Saudi Arabia has built a mansion in eral of our best valleys so often gets since the coup that forced the country's pop- Aspen. Tourism statistics reflect the in- looked at as an economic issue or an ular democratic president, jean Bertrand flux of outsiders. Only one holiday- environmental issue. But it may be that Aristide, into exile on September 30th. They maker in five is a resident of Colorado. first and foremost these are social issues. have ridden rickety boats towards Florida, Many resorts would be ghost towns We are really changing the social fabric 600 miles away. Few make it all the way; without tourism, a $5.5 billion-a year in- of our mountain towns," says Charles ' some probably sink and drown; most are dustry that employs 105,000 Colora- Wilkinson, a professor at the University intercepted by the United States Coast , dans. The growing popularity of the of Colorado. Some Coloradans think Guard. And now, like the boat people of ~ state's mountains has brought money, that higher taxes on out-0f--state owners Hong Kong, they may be sent back. culture and comfort. People living in might be a wayto protect their mountain The Haitian exodus was made worse by mountain towns have seen their real in- valleys. But. a tourist boom is a hard an American trade embargo, imposed on comes increase by an average of 30% thing to control. November 5th, to punish the new govern- ment. But the administration, fearful that " - - allowing some in could encourage a mass were returned before a judge in Miami American politicians also objected to exodus, said that only Haitians with a granted a temporary restraining order to the repatriations; some accused the admin- "well-founded fear of persecution" would stop the repatriations. istration of racism. Florida is full of Cuban be granted asylum. Only 85 have so far been On November 25th the courts will hear refugees. Over 2,000 Cuban boat people ruled to have legitimate claims. arguments against further repatriations have sailed-or floated on inner-tubes- Suchdiscouragement was not enough to from lawyers representing the Haitian Refu- across the Florida Straits this year, and have deter still more Haitians who set sail across gee Centre in Miami. They will argue that been granted visas. Most of the Cubans are the Windward Passage inunseaworthy ves- conditions aboard the Coast Guard cutters skilled workers, and most are light-skinned. sels. With more than 2,000 refugees already did not give the refugees a fair opportunity The Haitians however are almost all poor, sleeping under canvas on the decks of Coast to claim asylum in interviews with immi- uneducated blacks with few skills. Guard vessels, or housed ashore at the gration officials. As if to prove the double standard, just American naval base in Guantanamo on Human-rights groups have jumped to as the Haitians were being repatriated, 244 the south coast of nearby Cuba, America de- the defence of the Haitian boat people. The ~ Cubans were allowed into America on "hu- cided to act in the only way likely to get the United Nations High Commissioner for manitarian" grounds after seeking asylum message back to other would-be refugees. Refugees, Sadako Ogata, also criticised the in Spain, Venezuela and Peru. Cuban exiles On November 18th a Coast Guard cutter "unilateral" decision to repatriate the Hai- have recently supported Haitians over ac- picked up 224 Haitians aboard the Dieu tians. The UN had been co-operating with cusationsofunfairdiscrimination.Ifpreju- Nap Vive, and delivered them back to the the State Department on a plan to find third dice can be overcome in a city dominated Haitian capital, Port-au-Prince. They were countries willing to take the refugees. by Cuban Americans, not previously met by the Red Cross, which gave those Homes had been found for 500 refugees in known for.their racial tolerance, Washing- from outside the capital $l0 each to return Venezuela, Honduras, Belize and Trinidad ton might rethink, too. home. The next day a further 314 Haitians and Tobago. , THE ECONOMIST NOVEMBER 2JRD 1991 33 cc ~ ivw~, C~u~~~. REC'~ JAN 9 1gg~ VAIL VALLEY ARTS COUNCIL Post Office Box 1153 • Vail. Colorado 8 1658• 1153 • (303) 476.4255 Office Located on Leuel One. East End of Lionshead Parking Structure January 6, 1992 Dear Friends of the Arts We hope you will be able to attend this year's Connoisseur Ski Invitational "Evening of Grand Winetasting and Silent Auction". This is the second year that the Vail Valley Arts Council has been chosen to benefit from this exciting event. . In addition to this year's winetasting and silent auction, DRISCOL GALLERY will feature the works of Painter Mark Thompson and Sculptor Marvin Laber. Both artists are scheduled to attend this event. Proceeds from this year's event will benefit the Arts Council's Educational Fund. Tickets are now on sale at Eagle Valley Music (476-1713), located in . the Crossroads Shopping Center, in Vail. For more information please call the Vail Valley Arts Council, (476-4255). We hope you will join us on Saturday, February 1, from 6:00 until 8:00 p.m. at Heritage Hall in Beaver Creek! or th 'G~~%~ Ra y Milh an Pr side Vail Valley Arts Council RBM/jbr Honorary Board Members Morgan Douglas • Arne Hansen • Mrs. Cortlandt Hill • State Senator Sally Hopper • Fitzhugh Scot Connoisseur Ski Invitational ~ou are cordially invited to join us on Saturday, February 1st for a benefit to help support the ongoing work and valuable accomplishments of the `bail Na!!ey Arts' Cotnsci~ Commencing at 6:00 p.m. at Heritage Hall in Beaver Creek we will present "A Connoisseur Evening Crand Winetasting & Auction". This very special evening produced in association with the Vail Valley Arts Council, the Hyatt Regency Beaver Creek and Alpine Marketing & Promotion will include a silent auction, gourmet hors d'oeuvres and exceptional wines and sparkling wines from Romaine Cameros, Romaine Chandon, Frog's Leap Winery; Maison Deutz, Mumm Napa Valley, Pine Ridge Winery, Piper Sonoma, Roederer Estate, Rosemount Estate, Scharffenberger Cellars & Shadow Creek. Tickets: $25 per person and may be purchased through the Vail Valley Arts Council at (303) 47fr4255. "A Connoisseur Evening Crand Winetasting & Auctir~n" will kick-off a weekend that will feature gourmet cuisine, award-winning wines, and ski racing. Other events for the weekend after our fundraising efforts for the Vail Valley Arts Council on Saturday will include: The "Connoisseur Ski Invitational Race" will take place on Sunday, February 2nd, starting at 11:00 a.m. Ski teams consisting of celebrities, and industry leaders from the world of gourmet cuisine and fine wine race head-to-head for fame and Glory in this popular~themed event. The public is encouraged to join us at the base of Beaver Creek to cheer ,on your favorite bon vivants in this hotly contested competition. The weekend festivities will culminate on Sunday night with "A Connoisseur Evening featuring Bradley Ogden". Recognized as one of the most talented and creative chefs working in North America, Bradley Ogden has carved an indelible niche with his innovative and robust American country cooking. Author of the recently released best selling cookbook, "Bradley Ogderi's Brenkfnst, Lurtcli & Di~t~ier"and executive chef/co-owner of the exquisite, Lark Creek Inn, Mr. Ogden will collaborate with Rene Weder of the Hyatt Regency Beaver Creek for what promises to be a magical evening of superb food & wine at the magnificent Hyatt Regency Beaver Creek. Guests will be treated to sumptuous cuisine thoughtfully complimented by specially selected wines and sparkling wines from our attending wineries throughout the evening. Tickets are $85 per person (including wine/sparkling wine and gratuity). Reservations may be made by calling (303) 949-1234. We would also like to acknowledge our sponsor for their valuable support: Courvoisier, Perrier, American Express, Hyatt Regency Beaver Creek, Vail Associates, American Airlines and Snow Country Magazine. The ConnoisseurSl~ Invitational is one of the premiere food R wine events at altitude this winter and is not io be overlooked by those who appreciate great food, great wine, and great skiing. We look forward to meeting you on Saturday, February 1st in support of our' friends at the Vail Valley Arts Council. Bo?r Appetit! Alpine Marketing & Pr~~nu~tic~ns • PO. Bux 571 • Nicasio, Calife~rnia 94946 • (415) 488-9255 • Fax: (415) 479-3526 Tax Limits, Budget Cuts ~ Colorado Municipal League Governmental Immunity " ~ `K" State-Municipal Relationships ~ ~ ~ invites you to attend the Because of the severe fiscal pressures facing a,{.'~;-;~ l.~; Colorado, the 19921egislative session will be mazked by '``'r'.i ~~,~..F:~~.o-y,-~~ 1 .9.9.2 numerous discussions on budget cuts, tax limits, tax in- ~ °Y.~i ; creases, and the demands of Medicaid funding and school ~ : • finance. All of these "hot buttons" will affect cities and ' ~ ~ ~-I t _ towns in many ways. Land use, governmental immunity, ~'.~.r ~ , police Vaining, and environmental quality are among ~ 1 c:~~ municipal interest items up for debate. City and town officials ~ ' - need to be involved in the decision making process. ° c J i,•.. To assist municipal officials in this regard, the Colorado Municipal League will hold a Legislative Workshop on Thursday, February 6. This day-long workshop will focus on those issues coming before the I 1992 General Assembly affecting municipalities, the League's legislative program, and what you as a municipal , o ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ official can do to influence the legislative process. The workshop is an excellent way for municipal offi- ' cials who have not been previously involved with the ~i~i~~i~i~~~f~mirn~i~~iom>ni legislature to learn about the legislative process and its i importance to cities and towns. ~ E K I~• For the fast time, this conference will feature several w r ~ it n c~ r_ o-, concurrent sessions to meet the growing interest in legis- o lative issues by workshop attendees. Municipal manage- ~ ~ ~ ment and finance officials should make special note of the ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ two-hour session on salts taxes. Municipal attorneys " " ~ ~ should consider attending the governmental immunity panel. CLE credits will be requested. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j The CML Policy Committee will meet Friday, ~ ~ February 7, so we urge Policy Committee members to ~ attend the Workshop since the information to be discussed ~ will be relevant to them. Following the workshop, there will be alegislative recep- tion attheLeague's offrce,1660 Lincoln Street, Suite 2100. o0 We also encourage you to arrange meetings with your legislatorsThursday evening, or to stay over and visit with ~ m L e i s I a t i v e W o r k s h o them on Friday. The League staff can help an-ange these c°'u meetings; if you need assistance, call us at (303) 831-6411. ~ ~ The Radisson Hotel Denver will have rooms available o.. ~ ~ " for workshop participants. To make a reservation, contact ~ o the hotel at (303) 893-3333. State that you aze with the ~ c °O Febru 6, 1992 CML Workshop. Rates are $61 single, and $71 double. O Radisson Hotel Denver We look forward to seeing you ~ ~ > 1550 Court Place February 6, in Denver. ~ v ~ o CML Legislative Workshop-Preliminary Agenda g Radisson Hotel Denver-February 6,1992 _d~ 8:30 - 9:00 Registration and Coffee 2:00 _ 4:00 Sales Taxes a ~ Representatives of the state Department of Revenue c ~ 9:00 -10:00 1992 Lea ue _ _ -e - _ _ g_ and- municipal finance_officials will discuss. anew,-_ - - Legislative Program improved state sales tax collection program for ~ ~ League staff will discuss the League's current state municipalities. The workshop will stress ways to in- $3 legislative activity. crease sales tax revenues and compliance. League staffwill also provide an update on sales tax simplifica- ~ ~ 10:00 -11:00 State-Municipal Relations tion issues and the League's sales tax revenue forecast- .c V Governor Roy Romer, current National Governors' ing service. ~ ~ Association Chair, and Larry ICallenberger, Executive ~ L ~ ~o Director of the Department of Local Affairs, will 3:00 - 4:00 General Municipal ~ > z ~ ~ o discuss state-municipal relations in Colorado. Government Issues c ~ 8 v °A Various legislators and League staff will discuss a U 0 ~ ~ 11:00 -noon Tax Limits, Tax Increases, number of issues affecting municipal government. ~ ~ $3 a ° S _ o Budget CUtS There will also be a presentation on the League's new ~ Legislators involved with tax and finance issues will computerized legislative information service. ~ ~ o .d ~ be invited to speak on these subjects. N ~ ~ ~ ~ > .n 4:30 - 6:30 League Open House a~ rn o o 12:15 -1:30 The 1992 Legislature's A legislative reception will be held at the League's N ~ E ~ ~ o ~ ~ office at 1660 Lincoln Street, Suite 2100. l]C o g ~ Municipal Impact ~ N ~ c~ N H a Members of the legislative leadership will discuss I N ~ g ~ 1992 statehouse activities of interest to city and town Elected officials enrolled in the Municipal Leader- I rn ~ ,D ~ officials. Ern ship Certificate Program will receive three credits L. ~ ~ s toward the program by attending this workshop. Enroll- t° ~ ° c a ~ ment forms for the Program will be available at the e ~ '6b M w Afternoon Concurrent Panels o z' ~ ~ s Workshop. cts ~ o o 2.00 - 3.00 Environmental Quality Application will be made for CLE credits. ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ Legislators and state officials will discuss pertinent u- ~ w $ v environmental quality issues, including water quality, Radisson Motel Denver pC ~ .P3 G solid waste, and air quality. 1550 Court Place ~ ~ 2:00 - 3:00 Governmental Immunity / € o ~ Legislators, representatives of the plaintiffs' bar, and ,Sy ~ a° ~ ~ local officials will discuss whether changes should be any sy ' ~ ~ ° ~ 'C made to the Governmental Immunity Act ~4~5 any sY ism ® ~ a ~ c ~ s, a ~ • S ~ es v . © a o CML Connection-CML's computer y ~ ~ o network, which features timely legislative c°'f~ c~~ ~ x o c N " $ information, will be demonstrated Downtown s .b ~ ~ ~ ° ~ N throughout the day. Come see this new Denver ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ E ~ ~ ~ a ~ !x ~ ~ oG z A i WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP January 10, 1992 Page 1 of 2 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 8/8189 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN COUNCIL: Proceeding w/legal requirements for County is not renewing contracts for snowplowing, ANNEXATION annexation. animal control, and police services. (request: Lapin) 7/27 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN LARRY/GREG: Work with Holy Cross Electric to New options for allocation of costs will be presented EAST VAIL establish special improvement district(s) for to Council in a timely manner to be included in the underground utilities in East Vail. required notification of the affected property owners in the proposed special district. 05107 SALES TAX COLLECTION LARRYISTEVE: Research remedies to change this to Draft ordinance forwarded to Forest Service and VA for (request: Gibson/Lapin) a mandatory TOV tax collection. review. Larry Lichliter states review will take another 30 days. Review 1/21/92. 07109 SNOW REMOVAL ON PRIVATE .LARRY: Research ordinance. Larry has been asked to prepare an ordinance for PROPERTY discussion at 2111/92 work session. 09117 STREET LIGHTS PETE BURNETT: The LionsHead Merchants Associatio Public Works will present analyzed data by spring of (request: Levine) would like to see a couple changes, which might '92. include some of the lighting by Montaneros, which is too bright, and placing it in front of Gallery Row in the Treetops Building. 11/19 NEWSPAPER VENDING LARRY: What can be done to make these uniform and Scheduled for discussion at work session on 2/4192. MACHINES locations less prolific? 'i WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP January 10, 1992 r Page 2 of 2 k TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 12/03 RECOGNITION PARTY FOR EVERYONE: A party for Kent has been set for Invitations were mailed 12/18191. Please RSVP KENT ROSE Thursday, January 16, 1992, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to Caroline, ext. 2115, by Monday, 1/13192. at Satch's. Hors d'oeuvres will be provided. Cash bar. 12103 CONSENSUS BUILDING/ COUNCIL: Carl Neu will be conducting an all-day Note,: Dates changed to 1128 and 2118 because GOAL SETTING consensus-building session with council on Tuesday, another council member will be gone on 2/11. These 1128!92. He will then spend ahalf-day working on goal- special sessions will be held in the St. Moritz Room setting on Tuesday morning, 2/18/92. Mark your of The Sonnenalp. calendars. 12/17 LIONSHEAD MERCHANTS MTG. KRISTAN: This group meets the first Tuesday of each Kristan has spoken with Gary Haubert. month. We are attempting to schedule for 2/4/92. 01107 VILLAGE PARKING AND EVERYONE: A special meeting with Arnie Ullevig will LOADING ZONES be held on Wednesday, 1115/92, 8:30 a.m., in the International Room at The Lodge at Vail, to specifically discuss the recommendations for the Village parking and loading zones. 01/07 KINSLEY RON: Schedule a 15 minute presentation by Fred This presentation has been tentatively scheduled for GEOTECHNICAL, INC. "Skip" Kinsley re: oil and gas exploration in the the regular evening meeting on Tuesday, 2/18192. greater Vail area.