The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-06-07 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session VAIL TO!!!/N COUNCIL EVEN'NG MEETING 44.YESDAIIy aL4.91tlE 7,1994 7:30 P.M. IN TOl9 COUNCIL CHAnABERS , AGENDA 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATIOfti. 2. Approval of the NNinutes of the May 3, 1994, and fiNay 17, 1994, Vail Touvn Council Evening Meetings. 3. Ordinance iVo. 12, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance repealing Section 9.56 - Concealed VVeapons and 8.24.030 - Discharqinq Firearms of the Town of Vail Municipal Code and enacting Chapter 9.56 - Offenses Relatinq to Weapons Criminal Attempt and Complicitv. 4. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Section 18.69.050 of the AAunicipal Code of the Town of Vail, setting forth new procedures for measuring slope of a proposed development site and permitting retaining walls six feet in height in the front setback when associated uvith a permitted garage structure. 5. Resolution No. 15, Series of 1994, a resolution setting fees for revocable right-of-way application and permits. . 6. Vail,Golfcourse Townhomes Hazard Zone change request (Sunburst Filing #3 on Sunburst Drive). 7. Town Manager's Report. 8. Adjournment. N0TE UPCOAN9NG MEETtNG START T9NAES BELOW: (ALL TIMES SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT !/ABL YOWN COUNCIL REGULAR 1AIORiC SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAV, 6/14/94, BEGIPdNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TO!! COUNCIL CH141UBERS. THE F9LLOWINCa VABL 7'OlNBd COUNCIL REL;ULea?R 1AIORK SESSBON iflllLL BE ON TUESDAY, 6/21/94, BEGIidN91VG AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CFBA?MBEEiS. g~~ ~~LLOWeNG VAIL TOVVR9 COUNCIL REGl9Le4R EVEIdifVG MEETINC !A/@LL BE ON TUESDAV, 6/21/94, BEC;11dNING A'P 2:00 P.M. 91V TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. , ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ C:WGENDA.TC . ~ v- VAIL TOUVfV COUNCIL EVENING MEETING ' TUESDAII y 698i1dE ! y 0 99'4 I:30 P.M. ON TOV COIJtVCBL Ctip?NIBERS . EXPANDED A?GEIVDA 7:30 P.M. 1. CITIZEfV PARTICIPATION. 7:35 P.M. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the May 3, 1994, and May 17, 1994, Vail Town Council Evening Meetings. 7:40 P.M. 3. Ordinance fVo. 12, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance repealing Section 9.56 Ken Hughey - Concealed Weapons and 8.24.030 - Discharclinq Firearms of the Town of Vail Buck Allen Municipal Code and enacting Chapter 9.56 - Offenses Relatinq to Weapons, Tom Moorhead Criminal Attempt, and Complicity. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance IVo. 12, Series of 1994, on first reading. Backqround Rationale: Council directed staff to review various possible restrictions on weapons possession and use to attempt to assure public peace and welfare. Consistent with this Section is criminal attempt and complicity. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994, on first reading, with any necessary modifications. 8:25 P.M. 4. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance repealing and George Ruther reenacting Section 18.69.050 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, setting forth new procedures for measuring slope of a proposed development site and permitting retaining walls six feet in height in the front setback when associated with a permitted garage structure. Applicant: Town of Vail. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/mod'rfy Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backqround Rationale: Please see attached PEC memo dated May 23, 1994. The PEC voted 7-0 in favor of the request to amend Section 18.69.050. Staff Recommendation: CDD staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1994. 8:55 P.M. 5. Resolution No. 15, Series of 1994, a resolution setting fees for revocable right-of- Jim Curnutte way application and permits. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Resolution No. 15, Series of 1994. 9:15 P.M. 6. Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Hazard Zone change request (Sunburst Filing #3 on Russ Forrest Sunburst Drive). Action Requested of Council: Portions of the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes (Sunburst Filing #3 on Sunburst Drive) are identified on the TOV hazard maps as being in one or more of the fotlowing hazaard areas: rockfall, debris flow, and avalanche hazard area. After completing a site specific geological survey, the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes is requesting that units 1 through 55 no longer be designated as a geologically sensitive area based on a hazard study by Art Allears, P.E., Inc., dated August, 1993 (Attachment 1). 1 Backqround Rationale: Development in geologically sensitive hazard areas which includes rockfall, debris flow, and avalanche areas is restricted. Section 18.68.052 of the Town Code requires that a site specific geological study be prepared to determine whether development on a site can safely occur in a rockfall and debris flow hazard area. If the report indicates the development can safely occur in the hazard area or that mitigation measures can safely protect the development without increasing the danger to other properties or public right of ways, then the application can be approved. For any hazard, except for a red avalanche hazard, any applicant can develop a site specrfic mitigation plan which must be reviewed and approved by the Town. On May 23, 1994, the PEC reviewed and unanimously approved staff's recommendation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. 9:35 P.M. 7. Town Manager's Report. 9:50 P.M. 8. Adjournment. NOTE UPCOMING AflEETIfVG S7ART TInAES BELOW: (ALL TIMES SUBJECT TO CHANGE) ~ ~ 0 4D ~ THE R9E1tT VABL TOUVN COUNCIL FiEGULAR WOR6( SESS901d li1lILL BE ON TUESDAV, 6/14/94, BEGINNIfVG AT 2:00 P.M. iN T9V COUNC9L CF9AflABERS. THE FOLLOWVNG VAIL 7'OWN COUNCIL REGULAR lfl/ORK SESSBON W9LL BE ON TUESDAV, 6/21/94, BEGIR9NIiVG AT 2:00 P.M. ON T'OV COUNCIL CHAl1ABERS. THE FOLLO1ilIIR9Ca VA96. T'01fl/N COUIVCIL REGl9LAR EVEIdING flAEETINIG lA/GLL 18E 0N TUESDAY, 6121194, BEGIIVIVING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHANABERS. ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ C:WGENDA.TCE 2 June 2, 1994 DEAR TOWN COUIVCIL MEMBERS: Rachael Lenz will be present June 7, for Citizen Participation. Rachael previously submitted a proposal to place a Bravo! Colorado promotional booth in Vail Village during the summer months. According to the Town of Vail Municipal Code, promotional booths are not allowed on the streets of Vail Village or Lionshead Mall. She would like to , address the Council to present her proposal. I have attached copies of the proposal Rachael submitted to the Town Clerk's Office. Sincerely, Town of Vail qTUdaW P. Michelle L. Caster Assistant to Town Clerk June 1, 1994 0 0 . C O L O R A D O PROPOSAL VAILoBEAVER CREEK MUSIC FESTIVAL To: The Town of Vail From: The Bravo! Colorado Music Festival Contact: Rachel Lenz, Director of Marketing Phone 476-0206, Fax 479-0559 The Bravo! Colorado Music Festival would like to request a permit from the Town of Vail to allow Bravo! to set up a small booth in Vail Village (on Gore Creek or Bridge Street.) This booth would provide a service to guests and locals by making Bravo! Colorado Music Festival concert information and tickets, considered to be cultural entertainment and thus enriching the Vail Valley experience, readily available and convenient. The ticket booth, opening July 1 through August 7, would be open six days a week (Tuesday-Sunday) from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Bravo! will construct a visually pleasing booth with a banner not exceeding 3' x 3'. Dimensions of the temporary booth would be 42"W x 31"H x 15"D (see attached diagram.) The Bravo! Colorado Music Festival is entering its Seventh Season of bringing world class music to the Vail Valley. Bravo! brings more than 40 renowned soloists and three orchestras to perform in over 28 concerts in the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Beaver Creek Chapel and other locations around the Vail Valley. If the Town of Vail would like to make information about an event of this magnitude available to all Vail Village visitors, then this would be possible by allowing Bravo! to place a booth, manned by Bravo! employees, in a central Village position. The proposed booth will be maintained and moved as required by the Bravo! Colorado Office. The Bravo! Colorado Music Festival will also be responsible for obtaining necessary oral approvals from any shop or restaurant owner that may be near the booth. Thank you for your time and consideration. JOHN W. GIOUANDO / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR *IDA KAUAFIAN / MUSIC DIRECTOR 0 953 S. FRONTAGE RD. #104 a VAIL, COLORADO 81657 0 TELEPHONE 303 476-0206 m FAX 303 479-0559 o O A C O L O R A D O VAIL*BEAVER CREEK MUSIC FESTIVAL ~ , ~ I ~ 0 s~ F-t---s r INCro~aao~ot-~ Z JOHN W. GIOUf\NDO / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR o IDA KAUAFIAN / MUSIC DIRECTOR ~ 953 S. FRONTAGE RD. NI04 o UAIL. COLORADO 81657 0 TELEPHONE 303 476-0206 O FAX 303 479-0559 , MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 3, 1994 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 3, 1994, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Paul Johnston Sybill Navas Jim Shearer Jan Strauch Tom Steinberg • , TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Michelle Caster, acting on behalf of Town Clerk, Holly McCutcheon TOWN OFFICIALS ABSENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, of which there was none. Item 1Vo. 2 was the Consent Agenda including; A. the approval of April 5, 1994, and the April 19, 1994, Town Council Evening Minutes; B. Ordinance No. 8, series of 1994, second reading, an ordinance of the Town Council designating certain areas within the Town of Vail as fire lanes; adopting a fire lane map as the official map of the Town of Vail; and setting forth details relating thereto. Merv Lapin made a motion that the Consent Agenda be approved, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion was passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Resolution No. 12, Series of 1994, a resolution of the Town of Vail, Colorado, approving the corporate reorganization of Tele-Communications, Inc., the parent company of the franchise holder, and Liberty Media Corporation. Tom Moorhead explained the basis for the resolution since cable companies are required to diversify. He explained that only the corporate structure, and not the local franchise, will be affected. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve Resolution No. 12, with a second by Paul Johnson. The vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item IVo. 4 was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1994, tabled after first reading on April 19, 1994, an ordinance rezoning a tract from Primary/Secondary Residential, Section 18.13 to Low Density Multi- Family Residential, Section 18.16 generally located at 2850 Kinnickinnick Road, more commonly referenced through ownership as the Pedotto property. Mayor Peggy Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudsten gave a review of Planning Commission conditions that had been discussed during the prior meeting. He pointed out under the Vail Land Use Plan, the site is designated as Medium Density Residential, allowing 7 to 33 dwelling units per acre. The applicant proposed 8.1 dwelling units per acre. Rick Rosen, legal counsel to Greg Amsden, member of PEC and developer on the project, explained his reasoning for previously requesting a tabling of the proposal. He explained the following conditions with which the applicants were willing to oblige: 1. A plat restriction eliminating the 250 from all residences on this site; 2. A plat restriction for a maximum of 25,900 sq. ft. for GRFA; 3. Agreed to deed restxict three employee housing units; 4. Agreed to have a Homeowner's Association responsible for landscaping, maintenance, and repair of the project. Rosen then stated the applicants would not agree with the following: 1. They will not deed restrict five units; 2. The applicant will not combine units; 3. They requested Town Council allow DRB to handle - the landscaping plans; 4. The Council Members discussed the various issues of the proposal in relation to the criteria and the designation of the Vail Land Use Plan. Peter Franke, resident, was not in support of the rezoning. Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 5, with a second by Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and the motion was passed 5-2. Jan Strauch and Sybill Navas voted in opposition of the motion. A motion was made by Tom Steinberg regarding the subdivision criteria, with a second by Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion was passed 43. Mayor Osterfoss, Jan Strauch, and Merv Lapin voted in opposition of the motion. Paul Johnston made a motion to adjourn into an Executive Session, with a second by Jan Strauch. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. 1 There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:29 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk ° Minutes taken by Michelle L. Caster 2 - VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 17, 1994 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 17, 1994, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem jim Shearer jan Strauch Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Johnston Sybill Navas TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Michelle Caster, acting on behalf of Town Clerk, Holly McCutcheon Item 1Vo. 1 was Citizen Participation. Diana Donovan, Vail resident, requested modifications to the "250 rule." Rather than allow property additions of 250 square feet after a structure has had a Certificate of Occupancy for a minimum of five years, Donovan suggested limiting the 250 use strictly for employee housing units. Mayor Peggy Osterfoss responded to Diana's request by directing staff to review the suggestion as part of the employee housing work plan. Item 1Vo. 2 was the appointment of two members to the Local Licensing Authority for a 2 year term. Merv Lapin moved to approye, with a second by Jim Shearer, to appoint Don White and Elizabeth Pickett to the Authority. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 3 was Resolution No. 13, Series of 1994, a resalution ratifying and adopting the Mission, Vision, Goals and Objectives for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for 1994/95. Bob McLaurin explained the document had been put into resolution form for formal adoption, and after Council adoption would become a policy document. An action plan will be presented to the Council within the next two to three weeks. Tom Steinberg made a motion to pass Resolution No. 13, with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item 1Vo. 4 was Resolution No. 14, Series of 1994, a resolution approving and adopting the Forest Service Land Ownership Adjustment Plan. Mike Mollica explained the purpose for adopting a common Town of Vail/ U.S. Forest Service boundary. He also explained the Town would be hiring a property manager by the third week of June. Mayor Peggy Osterfoss prioritized the goals as follows: 1. Develop a common boundary; 2. Deannex or trade parcels that are in U.S. Forest Service ownership; 3. Resolve encroachment issues that impact the U.S. Forest Service (legally,or illegally). Rich Phelps, U.S. Forest Service, stated the time line for the Forest Service adoption of the Land Ownership Adjustment Plan, if adopted, would be two weeks. Tom Steinberg made a motion to pass Resolution No. 14, with a second by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1994, second reading, an ordinance rezoning a tract from Primary/Secondary Residential, Section 18.13 to Low Density Multi-Family Residential, Section 18.16 generally located at 2850 Kinnickinnick Road more commonly referenced through ownership as the Pedotto property. Mayor Peggy Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen gave a review of Planning Commission conditions that had been discussed during the two prior meetings. He pointed out under the Vail Land Use Plan the site is designated as Medium Density Residential, allowing 7 to 33 dwelling units per acre. The applicant proposed 8.1 dwelling units per acre. Rick Rosen, legal counsel to Greg Amsden, member of PEC and developer on the project, explained the applicant's proposal into a subdivider improvements agreement with the Town of Vail prior to the development of the project. The curb and gutter would be completed almost immediately, the sidewalk would be completed no later than June 1, 1995, using a letter of credit to guarantee completion. Tom Moorhead, upon completion of the improvements the developer may apply to have a portion of the letter of credit released. Once the premises has been inspected and approved by Greg Hall, Town Engineer, the Town would release with a 10% retainage. If the work has not been completed by the completion date, the Town would have a right to draw upon the letter. The applicants had previously agreed to restrict the plat with 15 conditions that staff had listed in a memo. In addition to those, the applicant agreed to 1) The number of employee housing units shall be increased from 1 three to four. The total number of dwelling units on the site shall remain at 19. 2) The applicant shall agree to adding language to the.deed restrictions requiring that the employee housing units shall be rented and shall be rented at a market rate. 3) The applicant shall add two berm at the additional landscaping on the northwest corner and northeast corner of the site. 4) The applicant shall provide a letter of credits at 125% of the cost of all public improvements. The public improvements, specifically the sidewalk, shall be constructed no later than June 1, 1995. In addition to the public improvements, the letter of credit shall include the expense of burying or removing one foundation. Jim Shearer made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 5, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion was passed 4-1, with Merv Lapin, in opposition. Ifem liTo. 6 was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLaurin discussed the Gore Creek Promenade DTOIPCt The Tnwn wi11 hr~oin rana;rc nn T~fa., 12 IOQt~. T-T~,utCf~ ~c1J2i.S are.an option that_~vill__bz___ .......:...........4...._J....".~.'_"._.".__.~.._.... . ."._`_..:'.~Q-=.:.:~...~.+v v.. _ , r.'~ . . " . considered at a later date. He and Kristan Pritz addressed Jan Strauch's concern with the Town's DRB standards to reflect more alpine architecture. They will further address this issue at the May 24, 1994, work session. A thorough review of the Special Development District (SDD) ordinance will take a minimum of four months. The Council set a June deadline to make minor modifications to the SDD ordinance and agreed to send a clarification to the East Village Homeowners Association, Inc., regarding the expected time line. Merv Lapin made a motion to adjourn into an Executive Session, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 5-0. The meeting was reconvened, and there being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Michelle L. Caster 2 ORDINe4NCE NOe 12 SERIES OF 1994 AN ORD9NANCE REPEALING SECT60N 9e56 - CONCEALED WEAP0NS AGdD SECTEON 8.24.030 - DISCFBARGIN(a FIREARflAS OF THE TOWIV OF VAIL, MllNICIPp?L CODE AND ENACTOF9G Clie4PTER 9.56: OFFEtl~~ES RELb"L 0 BA@IG II O tltl G8`1POAlSy V11IlYI'NP4L P9 6 0EIYII" 6 y F4ND 'leOlU1PL8VITTI . VUHEREAS, it is incumbent upon Town Council to provide for the public peace, morals, health and welfare; and VVHEREAS, there are issues concerning weapons, conduct that constitutes criminal attempt, and complicity that are not presently addressed in the IVlunicipal Code of the Town of Vail. IVOVV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIfVED BY THE TOWN COUIVCIL OF THE TOWIV OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Section 8.24.030 and 9.56.010 are hereby repealed. Section 2 Chapter 9.56 will be enacted as follows: 9.56.090 - DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS DEADLY WEAPONS AND DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES PROHIBITED. It shall be unlavvful for any person to discharge firearms, deadly weapons, explosive devices, guns, pistols, shotguns, rifles, airguns, gas operated guns, spring guns, or a weapon of any kind or description within the limits of the Town; provided, however, that this Section shall not apply to police officers in the discharge of their duties. 9.56.020 - EXCEPTIONS: PERMITS. The Tovun Council may at any time, upon receipt of proper application, grant permits to shooting galleries, gun clubs, rifle ranges, and other establishments for shooting in fixed localities and under specified rules. Such permits shall be in writing attested by the Town Clerk, conforming to such requirements and conditions as the Town Council shall demand, and the permit thus issued shall be subject to revocation at any time by action of the Town Council. 9.56.030 - ILLEGAL WEAPOIVS USE OR POSSESSION PROHIBITED. ' A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess, conceal, or cause to be concealed on their person or in any vehicle, or to use, any blackjack, gravity knife, multi-fixed bladed stellate throwing knife, switchblade knife, nun-chucks, or brass or metallic knuckles. B. IVothing in this Section shall apply to peace officers or to members of the armed 1 Ordinance No. 12, Series oi 1994 forces of the United States or the Colorado IVational Guard acting in the lawful discharge of their duties so long as such weapons have been issued or-approved by their supervisor or superior officer. 9.56.040 - UNLAVVFUL COIVCEALMENT OF DEADLY WEAPOIVS. A. It shall be unlawrful for any person to wear under his clothes, or conceal about his person, any dangerous or deadly weapon. . B. For purposes of this Section only, "conceal" shall mean placement of the dangerous or deadly weapon in question about the person, or within his immediate reach, in such a manner as to be either completely hidden from view or partially hidden to such an extend that another person making normal contact with that person cannot ascertain the true nature of the weapon. C. It shall be an affirmative defense that the defendant was: 1. A person in his own dwelling or place of business or on property owned or under his control at the time of the act of carrying; or 2. A person who, prior to the time of carrying a concealed weapon, has been issued a written permit to carry the weapon by an official lawfully authorized to issue such permit, and the written permit states that it shall be effective in all areas of the State; or 3. A peace officer, as defined in Section 18.1.901(3)(I) of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended; or 4. Carrying a folding-type knife with a blade not exceeding three and one-half inches (31/2") in length. 9.56.050 - POSSESSIOIV WITHIiV LICENSED PREMISES. A. It shalf be unlawful for any person as a patron of an establishment where alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption on #he premises, to possess or carry or display any dangerous or deadly weapon, whether concealed or not, while on the premises of such establishment. B. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of possession or carrying a dangerous or deadly weapon under this Section that said weapon was a folding-type knife with a blade not exceeding three and one-half inches (31/2"). This defense does not apply to a charge of displaying such a weapon. C. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of possession or carrying a dangerous or deadly uveapon under this Section that the person is in that person's own dwelling 2 Ordinance No. 12; Series of 1994 or place of business or on property owned or under that person's control at the time of the act of carrying or possessing. 9.56.060 - SELLIIVG UVEAPONS TO INTOXICATED PERSONS. It shall be unlawful for any person to purchase, sell, loan, or furnish any dangerous or deadly weapon to any person intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or any narcotic or dangerous drug or glue. 9.56.070 - EXCEPTIOiVS. Nothing in Sections 9.56.010, 9.56.030, 9.56.040, and 9.56.050 of this Chapter shall be construed to forbid any enforcement officer of the various law enforcement agencies of the United States government, or the State of Colorado, or any sheriff or his deputies, or any regular, special or ex-officio peace officer from carrying, wearing, or using such weapon as shall be necessary in the proper discharge of his duties so long as such weapons have been issued or approved by their supervisor or superior officer. 9.56°080 - FORFEITURE. Any dangerous or deadly weapon as defined by this Chapter used or possessed in violation of Sections 9.56.010, 9.56.030, 9.56.040, 9.56.050, and 9.56.060, inclusive, of this Chapter, is hereby declared to be contraband and shall be forfeited to the Town upon a conviction resulting from such use or possession. 9.56.090 - DISPOSITION OF CONFISCATED VVEAPOIVS. It shall be the duty of every peace officer, upon making an arrest and taking such a wreapon, thing, or substance from the person of the offender to deliver or cause to be delivered the same to the Chief of Police to be held in his custody until the final determination of the prosecution of said offense. . The Chief of Police, or his authorized agent, shall dispose of weapons forFeited pursuant to ordinance by destruction or retention for Department use in accordance with procedures and regulations of the Police Department. 9.56e100 - CRINIINAL ATTEMPT. A. A person commits criminal attempt if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of an offense, he engages in conduct constituting a substantial step towrard the commission of the offense. A substantial step is any conduct, whether act, omission, or possession, which is strongly corroborative.of the firmness of the actor's purpose to complete the commission of the offense. Factual or legal impossibility of committing the offense is not a defense if the offense could have been committed had the attendant circumstances been as the actor believed them to be, nor is it a defense that the crime attempted wras actually perpetrated 3 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 b by the accused. B. A person who engages in conduct intending to aid another to commit an offense commits criminal attempt if the conduct would establish his complicity under Section 9.56.120 were the offense committed by the other person, even if- the other is not guilty of committing or attempting the offense. C. It is an affirmative def.ense to a charge under this Section that the defendant abandoned his effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances manifesting the complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal intent. 9.56.110 - COMPLICITY. A person is legally accountable as principal for the behavior of another constituting a criminal offense if, with the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the offense, he aids, abets, or advises the other person in planning or committing the offense. Section 3 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4 The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. ' Section 6 All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency: This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. 4 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 IIVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AIVD ORDERED PUBLISHED OfVCE IN FULL OfV FIRST READIIVG this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of , 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AfVD APPROVED ON SECOfVD READIIVG AfVD ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1994. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\ORD94.12 , 5 Ordinance No. 72, Series of 1994 e ~ ?J [ ORDINANCE NO. 13 SERIES OF 1994 AN OFiDONANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING SECTIOIV 18.69.050 OF TIiE MlBNBCIPAL CODE OF THE TOVUN OF VA1L, SETT6NG FOR'TFB NEW PIROCEDURES FOR MEASfl.6R9NC SLOPE OF A PROPOSED DEVELOPMEBVT SITE AND PERIV[ITTINC RETA9NING WALLS SYX FEET 9iV IiEIGHT 9N THE SETBACIC VVFiEN ASSOCIATED WET9-9 A PEFiNi1TTED GARAGE STRUCTURE. WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that the following amendment will result in development that is more sensitive to the site with less site disturbance. WHEREAS the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0 in favor of the amendment. V1/HEREAS, the Town Council believes that the following amendment will streamline the development review process for proposed developments on sites where the average slope is greater than 30 percent. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 18.69.050 - Special restrictions for developments on lots where the average slope of the site beneath the exis4ing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent in hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family residential, and two-family primary/secondary residential zones - of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby repealed and reenacted as follows: . The following additional special restrictions or requirements shall apply to development on any lot in a hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family residential or two-family primary/secondary residential zone district where the average slope of the site beneath the existing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent: . A. A soil and foundation investigation, prepared by and bearing the seal of a registered professional engineer shall be required. B. Foundations must be designated and bear the seal of a registered, professional engineer. C. A topographic survey prepared by a registered surveyor, with contour intervals of not more than two feet, shall be required. D. Structures must be designed by a licensed architect. E. Site coverage as it pertains to this chapter, as permitted by Sections 18.09.090, 18.10.110, 18.12.110 and 18.13.090, is amended as follows: Not more than fifteen percent of the site area may be covered by buildings; and not more than ' ten perc i nt of the total site area may be covered by driveways and surface 'parking. F. A site grading and drainage plan shall be required. G. A detailed plan of retaining walls or cuts and fills in excess of five feet shall be required. H. A detailed revegetation plan must be submitted. 1. . The zoning administrator may require an environmental impact report as provided in Section 18.56.020. J. A minimum of one covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling I unit. K. Setbacks, as they apply to this chapter, as required by Sections 18.09.060 ' 18.10.060, 18.12.060, and 18.13.060, are amended as follows: There shall be no required front setback for garages, except as may be required by the Design Review Board. L. Retaining walls up to six feet in' height may be permitted in, the setback by the Design Review Board when associated with a permitted garage as referenced in Section 18.69.050 (k). 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining porkions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any, prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by ~ virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. , i L 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order; resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof; theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 7th day of June, 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 21 st day of June, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOIVD READIIVG AIVD ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1994. • Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: . Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk • ~ I MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 23, 1994 SUBJECT: A request for an amendment to Section 18.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code to clarify how slope is to be measured and to allow for 6 foot walls to be constructed in the front setback for projects where the average slope of the site . beneath the proposed structure and parking area is in excess of 30%. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: George Ruther V. ENTRODUCT90ft9 Section 18.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code allows garages to be located in the front setback when the average slope of the site beneath the proposed structure and parking area exceeds 30%. This section applies to four zone districts: Single Family, Two Family, Primary/Secondary, and Hillside Residential. Since development on sites with slopes in excess of 30% often require retaining walls to stabilize cut slopes, and since garages are permitted in the front setback when in accordance with Section 18.69.050, staff feels Section 18.69.050 should be amended to allow 6-foot tall retaining walls in the front setback under these circumstances. According to existing zoning regulations, Section 18.58.010 allows walls up to a maximum of 3 feet in height in the required front setback regardless of slope conditions. - Staff also feels that an amendment should be made to this section as it relates to how slope is measured at a qroposed development site. Currently, slope on a site is only calculated for the area under the proposed structure and the code does not address whether to take into account the slope under any existin structures on the site. BB. PFiOPOSED CHANtaES The proposed additions are shown below in the shaded text. The proposed deletions are shown in overstrike. 18.69.050 Special restrictions for developments on lots where the average , slope ofi the site beneath all exisiing;;or proposed structures and parking areas are in excess of thirty percent in the Hillside _ Residenfial, Single-Family Residential, Tvuo-Family Residential, and Primary/Secondary Fiesidential zonese 1 ~ r 0 The following additional special restrictions or requirements shall apply to development on any lot in a Hillside Residential, Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential or Primary/Secondary Residential zone district where the average slope of the site beneath the proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent: A. A soil and foundation investigation, prepared by and bearing the seal of a registered professional engineer shall be required. B. Foundations must be designated and bear the seal of a registered, professional engineer. I C. A topographic survey prepared by a registered surveyor, with contour intervals of not more than two feet, shall be required. D. Structures must be designed by a licensed architect. E. Site coverage as it pertains to this chapter, as permitted by Sections 'i 8 09 090, 18.10.110, 18.12.110 and 18.13.090, is amended as follows: Not more than fifteen percent of the site area may be covered by buildings; and not more than ten percent of the total site area may be covered by driveways and surface parking. F. A site grading and drainage plan shall be required. G. A detailed plan of retaining walls or cuts and fills in excess of five feet shall be required. H. A detailed revegetation plan must be submitted. 1. The zoning administrator may require an environmental impact report as 'provided in Section 18.56.020. J. A minimum of one covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling unit. K. Setbacks, as they apply to this chapter, as required by Sections 18.09.060, 18.10.060, 18.12.060, and 18.13.060, are amended as follows: There shall be no required front setback for garages, except as may be required by the Design Review Board. L`. Retair~ing wa11S shalE not exceed &feet;in height in the reed front setback:; UV. STAFF RECOM6wEND,4T10N Development on steep slopes (greater than 30%) inherently implies site disturbance and the need for retaining walls. Often times, the steep cuts that are made in the front setback for garage construction as permitted by Section 18.69.050 require the installation of retaining walls in excess of 3 feet in height. Under existing conditions, a garage is permitted in the front setback, yet a watl of sufficient height needed to retain any associated cuts requires a _ wall height variance from the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC), thus creating a contradiction in the Code. Staff feels the proposed amendments to Section 18.69.050 allowing 6 foot tall retaining walls in the front setback pursuant to Section 18.69.050, and calculating slope under existin structures, will alleviate any contradiction without jeopardizing the intent of the Code. c:\pec\memosWope.523 2 RESOLUTION BVO. 15 SERIES OF 1994 A RES0LUTIt)N SETT16VC FEES FOR RE!lOCABLE R94aHT-OF-WAY APPL9CAT90R9 AND PEF3MBTS. V1/HEREAS, it is the Town Council's belief that the costs relating to certain services that require recording must be paid by the applicant; and UVHEREAS, Resolution iVo. 10, Series of 1991, did not address or set a fee for recording documents with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office concerning improvements in the public right-of-way. fVOUV, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. That a five dollar ($5.00) per page fee will be collected for recording with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office the application and associated attachments for permits to place improvements in the public right-of-way. 2. That the Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this resolution is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 3. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\RESOLU94.15 Resolution No. 15, Series of 1994 R ~ , „ e4 TO uW oF vAIEL ~ 75 South Frontage Road Department of Community Developrnent Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-21381479-2139 FAX 303-479-2452 AflEMORANDURA T0: Vaii Town Council FROM: Community Development DATE: June 7, 19943 SUBJECT: Vail Golfcourse Townhome Hazard Zone Change Request Applicant: Bill Sargent representing the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Staff: Russ Forrest and Greg Hall (Changes since PEC Meeting on May 23rd are indicated in bold) 1. REQUEST Portions of the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes (Sunburst Filing # 3.on Sunburst Drive) are identified on the Town of Vail hazard maps as being in one or more of the following hazard areas: rockfall, debris flow, and avalanche hazard area. After completing a site specific geological sunrey, the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes is requesting that units 1 through 55 no longer be designated as a geologically sensitive area based on a hazard study by Art Niears, P.E., Inc. dated August 1993 (Attachment 1). li. EXISTING HAZARD DEL1NEATlON To determine the location of hazard areas on the Vail Golfcourse Townhome site, three different Town of Vail hazard maps must be examined. Attachment 2 shows the Town of Vail snow avalanche hazards for the Town of Vail which where prepared by Arthur Mears in 1976. This map was drawrn before the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes wrere built so it is difficult to determine the exact units that are currently shown as being in an avalanche influence area. Attachment 3 displays the debris flow hazard areas and Attachment 4 shows the rockfalt hazard areas. Table 1 describes the units that are in hazard areas based on the Town of Vail hazard maps in Attachments 2-4. If a hazard area was shown to be adjacent to a building or affecting part of the building then, the entire building was considered to be in a hazard area. 1 e + ~ Tabfe 1 Summary of Town of Vail Hazard Maps Units Snow Avaianche Debris Flowr Rockfall 55-76 Possible Avalanche Debris Avalanche High Severity Influence zone High Hazard Rockfall 54-51 Possible Avalanche None Moderate Severity Influence zone 47-50 None None Moderate Severity 43-46 None None None 39-42 None None Moderate Severity 35-38 Possible Avalanche None Possible High Severity Influence zone Rockfall for unit 35 1--34 None None None ° Note: The use of the wrord "none" in Table 1 means that the Town of Vail maps currently do not indicate a hazard based on staff review. It does not imply that a hazard may not exist. BVB. BACKGROUND The Town of Vail debris flow and debris hazard analysis map was developed in 1984 by Arthur Mears and the Rockfall map was prepared by Schmueser & Associates in 1984. The snow avalanche influence zone was developed by Arthur Mears in 1976. Development in geologically sensitive hazard areas which includes rockfall, debris flow, and avalanche areas is restricted. No development is allowed in red or high hazard areas for avalanches (Town of Vail Code 18.69.040). Structures may be built in blue or moderate avalanche hazard areas. Section 18.68.052 of the Town Code requires that a site specific geologically study be prepared to determine whether development on a site can safely occur in a rockfall and debris flow hazard area. If the report indicates the development can safely occur in the hazard area or that mitigation measures can safely protect the development without increasing the danger to other properties or public right of way, then the application can be approved. 2 t ~ VV. CRATERVA FOR DECBSBON The Town Code states that the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town staff shail reviewr ali changes to the master hazard plans (section 18.69.033) and that the Town Manager shall report all major modifications to the Town Council within 1 year. Also in section 18.69.052 (G) (3) it states that if someone disputes the designation of any property as a geologically sensitive area the applicant will have an opportunity to appear before the Town Councit with a site specific geological report and present their case. The Town Council wrould then decide whether to allow the requested modification. Based on the regulations in 18.69.033, and 18.69.052 the Town requires an applicant wishing to change a hazard zone . designation to have the applications reviewed by the Planning and Environment Commission and receive final approval by the Town Council before the map change may occur. Mr. Arthur Mears did prepare a site specific study for the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes that evaluated the risk of snow avalanche, rockfall, and debris avalanche hazards. This study concludes that units 1-55 are "outside the influence" of avalanche, debris flow, and rockfall hazard and require no mitigation (see pages 4-7 in the Niears report). Units 55 through 76 were found to be under the influence of a hazard. The Town engineer reviewed this report and had several questions regarding the calculations used in the report. Arthur Mears responded to the Town Engineers questions satisfactorily in the attached letter (Attachment 5). Based on the technical analysis of the Arthur Mears study, the Vail Golfcourse Towrnhome are requesting that units 1-55 be excluded from debris flow, avalanche, and rockfall areas on the Town of Vail's corresponding maps. V. STAFF RECOMME6dDAT90N The Town Engineer has reviewed the technical analysis and resolved all questions regarding the Mears study. Staff recommends that units 35-54 at the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes be removed from the Town hazard maps. Units 1-34 currently do not appear on Town of Vail hazard maps. Staff does not recommend that unit 55 be removed from the haiard area since it is connected with units 56-60. Units 55 through 60 are identified as being in a moderate hazard area in the Arthur Mears Study. The Chief Building Official for the Town of Vail concluded that if significant structural damage occurred to units 56-60, then it is likely, based on the construction of that building, that unit 55 would be impacted. Therefore, staff recommends the following: ` that units 34-54 no longer be designated in a hazard area ' that units 55 remain in its current hazard designation, and ` that units 56-76 be designated as per the Arthur Mears Report. It should be noted 4ha4 4here are high (red) and moderafie (blue) snow avalanche hazards designated for some of 4hese uni4s along with moderate and severe rockfall and debris avalanche hazards. Future no4ification 4o prospec4ive property purchasePS must reflect 4he finc9ings in the Mears report. 9n addi4ion ex4erior cons4ruc4ion restric4ions and mi4igation requirements per section 98.69 uvilE apply to these uni4s. 3, t ~ The followring disclaimer applies to decisions pertaining to section 18.69. "This chapter is based on scientific and engineering considerations vvhich are continually being developed. Compliance with the provisions herein cannot insure freedom from risk to life, safety, or property. This section shall not create liability on the part of the Towrn of Vail or result from reliance on this chapter, or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. The designation of certain areas as hazard areas or geologically sensitive areas pursuant to maps incorporated into this section does not imply in any way that areas not so designated are free from all risk to life, safety, or property (Section 18.69.036)." ~ t 4 ~w~^ti.: u ' `n:~ . . • • ~ °~-~~,~~;~~z~'° b~ ATTACHMENT ONE :i4:..,.' • ~ . • , ~ V--•~/~; 1 •:i3''^", /I ti;.'x' ~ ; ` •';F° ~ PROPER't'Y l1HAMAGEIiRENT ti•~ x-r.. • ~ August 23, 1993 - Pqro Andrew Knudtsen ' Community Development Tovan of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Andyo Enclosed is a copy of a Geological Hazard Assessment for the Vail Golfcourse Townhomes prepared by Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Ince The study analyzes each specific toumhome in relation to its exposure to snow avalanche, rockfall and debris avalanche hazards. We are requesting that the Town update its maps in accord with this study such that units 1 through 55 will no longer be included in any "Geologically Sensitive" areao Please advise me what is required from the Vail Galfcourse Townhomes to have the maps revised. Thank youe Sincerely, ~ Bill Sargent Managing Agent The Vail Golfcourse Townhomes P.O. Box 1292, Vail, Colorado 81658 / Crbssroads Shopping Center/ 143 E. Meadow Drive - Suite 391A 303-476-4300/FHX 303-479-9534 i ~ ~ ~ 1~~ . i. . . ~ GEOLOGIC H RD ASSESSNIEIVT ~ VA8L GOLFCOURSE TOWNFIOIUIES ~ ~ Prepared For Mro We96iam R. Sargent Prepared By Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc. Gunnison, Colorado August, 1993 i - . AR'THUR I. MEARS, P.E., INC. Naaua! Haaards Consultants 222 FBat C,ot}ric Ave. Gumniwn. Colorado 81230 303 - 641 •3236 "~X"~ • Augus4 4, 1993 Mr. WiIliam.R. Sargent Crossroads Realty, Ltd. P.O. Box 1292 Vail, CO 81657 Dear 11Nr. Sargent: - ;4s you requested during our on-site meeting last month, I am providing the attached appraisal of geologic hazards to all the units of the Golfcourse Townhomes. Please contact me if you have any questions or desire additional consultation. Sincerely, Arthur I. Mears, P.E. Avalanche-control engineer Encl. M¢v Wmting ~ Acnlmzchu ~ AaalancheContmlEngrneering f. • . . ~ STUDX OBJECTaVES AND LlMITATIONS ~ . A.s requesfied by Mr. WiIliam Sargent, this study has the following objectives: . aAnalysis of snow avalanche, debris avalanche, and rockfail potenfial at the Golfcourse Tovanhomes; b. Classification ofi the exposure of each of the 76 units Yo the above processes; and . c. Elimination of some of Yhe unifs from Town of Vail hazard classification. The study also has the following limitations which must be understood by all those using the results: a. iVo attempt is made to evaluate the site-specific parameters required to provide structural mitigation to each exposed unifi; and b. Hazard from rockFall or avalanche processes may injure or kill persons while near or betv+reen the units; structural protecfion will not mitigate this hazard. 2 DESCRIPTION OF HAZ4RDOUS PROCESSES 2.1 Snow Avaianche Snow avalanches resuft from failure of snow slopes on the steep, aspen covered terrain above the Golfcourse Townhomes. Terrain inclination above the Townhomes ranges from 30° to 40° continuously betwreen 8,300 and 8,800 feet elevation; avalanches can begin anyvvhere on these slopes. Snow avalanches may occur in dry or wet snow and are possible anytime after a snowcover more than two-to-three feet thick covers the slope. Avalanches are possible, therefore, during the months of iVovember through May. The largest and most destructive avalanches will begin immediately below the cliff outcroppings at 8,800 feet, however destructive avalanches can begin at lower elevations. For example, an avalanche released from the 8,600 foot level during March, 1993 and uprooted or broke the main stems of numerous aspen trees as it flowed down the slope. This avalanche stopped immediately above the upper units of the Townhomes (in the vicinity of units 71 and 76), but produced no damage to buildings. Although this was the largest avalanche to occur at this location since the Townhomes were built, substantially larger avafanches are possible. They could reach some of the units and produce extensive damage. For land-use planning and engineering purposes the "design-magnitude" or 100-year" return period avalanche has been evaluated. The 100-year avalanche has a constant annual probability of 1%, a probability that is assumed to not change after the avalanche occurs. However, when numerous aspen trees are removed by an avalanche (as, with 1 ; . the 1993 avalanche), the probability of future avalanching will increase because snowpack anchors are removed. Because the design-magnitude avalanche has not been observed at fihis location, the _ dynamics and impacfi characteristics have been evaluated by the fiollowing indirect procedures: a. The avalanche runout disPance, or potential stopping position during extreme conditions vvas determined through terrain analysis, experience with extreme events in Yhe local area, and prediction using a data base of extreme avalanche ' runout events in Colorado; b. The avalanche flo,w thickness, impact pressure, and ve%cify were determined through application of an avalanche dynamics model, given a starting position at the 8,800 foot level and a stopping position determined in step "a." Avalanche runout zones in the vicinity of the Golfcourse Townhomes are mapped on ~ Fgure 1. This mapping subdivides the avalanche ruriout zones into "high hazard" (Red) and "moderate hazard" (Blue) zones which are defined below. a. HIGH HAZ,4RD (RED). Area affected by avalanches writh return periods of 25 years or less or avalanches that can produce impact pressures of 600 Ibs/ft2 or more. Newr construction is generally not permitted in Red zones; existing structures should be reinforced or otherwise protected. b. MODERATE HAZARD (BLUE). Area affected by avalanches with return periods of 25 - 100 years and avalanches producing impact pressures of less than 600 Ibs/ft2. New structures are permitted in Blue zones provided structural protection is incorporated in design. The delineation of avalanche Red and Blue zones are shown on Figure 1 are based on the tdvo-step avalanche dynamics procedure outlined above. The results of the dynamics analysis are summarized in Fgures 3- 11 at the end of this report. The analysis computed avalanche flow thicknesses, impact pressures on flat surfaces normal to the flow direction, and velocities for three locations: (a) immediately above the upper units, (b) approximately 100 feet below the upper units, and (c) approximately 200 feet below the upper units. The avalanche parameters should be used for hazard classification purposes only, not for engineering design. For example, design pressures would be substantially less than those indicated if proposed stru.ctures are..impacted at a small angle to the avalanche flow direction. See Section 4("MITIGATIOfV") for more details. 2.2 Debris Avalanche Debris avalanches occur on the same terrain affected by the snow avalanches discussed in Section 2.1. Major debris avalanches, however, will entrain a larger percentage of soil, rock, and trees but will move more slowly than snow avalanches. While snow avalanches may occur at any time during the snow season, debris avalanches are primarily a late 2 ' , • vvinter and particularly a spring phenomena. They are mos4 likely when the snowpack has become completely saturated with water, a condition most likely during the months of April and NNay (bu2 possible during fiNarch or even June). ; Debris avalanches have not been analyzed separately from snowr avalanches on the y slopes above the Townhomes because (a) both will possess similar destructive energy; and (b) both will require similar mitigation. 2.3 Rockfall Rockfall consists of single or a few falling, bounding, or rolling rocks originating at the upper cliffis (at approximately 8,800 feet elevation) or from the steep slopes between the cliff and the Townhomes. The larger rocks wilf, or course, possess greater energy and destructive potenfiial, wrill firavel farther on gentle terrain, and will move a higher velocity. Inspecfion of available material on the slopes and prior. evidence ofi rockfall in similar terrain in the lJail area indicated a three-foot diameter rock is the design size. Rockfall dynamics vvere analyzed through use of the Colorado Rockfafl Simulation Program (CRSP), a stochastic computer model that simulates rockfall velocity, bounce height, and energy. The results of this analysis enabled rockfall risk to be subdivided into zones of "Severe" and "Moderate" hazard, similar to those used in Town of Vail generalized rockfalf hazard mapping. The rockfall mapping and hazard zonation is shown on Figure 2. 3 EXPOSURE OF COLFCOURSE TOVVNHOfViE IJIVITS Tab1e 1 provides a classification of all 76 units in the Vail Colfcourse Townhomes with respecf to hazard from snow avalanches, debris avalanches, and rockfall. Three levels of severity are indicated for each process: a. "High" (avalanche) or "Severe" (rockfall) b. "Moderate" (avalanche) or "Moderate" (rockfall) ~ c. "None" (avalanche or rockfall). 1 All units classified as "None" are considered to be outside of the influence of avalanche 1 or rbckfall hazard and require na mitigation. Units classified as "Moderate" will require mitigation, however mitigation requirements will usually be limited to a small portion of building surfaces or loads may be easily accommodated. Units classified as "High" or "Severe" may require extensive structural mitigation. Mitigation concepts are discussed in Section 4 of this report. 3 , • , • winteP and particularly a spring phenomena. They are most likely when the snowpack has become completely saturated with water, a condition most likely during the months of Apeil and May (bufi possible during March or even June). ' Debris avalanches have nofi been analyzed separately from snovv avalanches on the ; slopes above the Townhomes because (a) both will possess similar destructive energy, and (b) both will require similar mitigation. 2.3 Rockfall • Rockfall consists ofi single or a few falling, bounding, or Polling rocks originating a4 fihe upper clifFs (afi approximately 8,800 feet elevation) or firom the steep slopes between the cliff and the Towrnhomes. The larger rocks will, or course, possess greater energy and destructive potential, will travel fiarther on gentle terrain, and will move a higher velocity. Inspection of available material on the slopes and prior evidence of roc{<fall in similar terrain in the Vail area indicated a three-foot diameter rock is the design size. Roclcfall dynamics were analyzed through use of the Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program (CRSP), a stochastic computer model that simulates rockfall velocity, bounce height, and energy. The results of this analysis enabled rockfall risk to be subdivided into zones of "Severe" and "Moderate" hazard, similar to those used in Town of Vail generalized rockfall hazard mapping. The rockfall mapping and hazard zonation is shown on Figure 2. 3 EXPOSURE OF COLFCOIJRSE T0WIVHOME UNITS Table 1 provides a classification of all 76 units in the Vail Colfcourse Townhomes with respect to hazard from snowr avalanches, debris avalanches, and rockfall. Three levels of severity are indicated for each process: a. "High" (avalanche) or "Severe" (rockfall) ~ b. "Moderate" (avalanche) or "Moderate" (rockfall) " c. "iVone" (avalanche or rockfall). All units classified as "None" are considered to be outside of the influence of avalanche or rockfall hazard and require no mitigation. Units classified as "Moderate" will require mitigation, however mitigation requirements will usually be limited fio a small portion of building surfaces or loads may be easily accommodated. Units classified as "High" or "Severe" may require extensive structural mitigation. Mitigation concepts are discussed in Section 4 of this report. 3 , . TABLE 9. Geologic Hazard Matrix - Golfcourse Townhomes vNIT NUMBER SNOW ROCKFALL DEBRIS AV,4LANCFiE AVAIANCHE 9 None None None ~ 2 None None None ~ 3 None None None 4 None None None 5 None None None 6 None None None 7 None None None 8 None None None 9 _ None None None 10 None None None 11 None None None 12 None None None 13 None None None 14 None None None 15 None None None 16 None None None 17 None None None 18 None None None 19 None None None 20 None None None 21 None None None 22 None None None 23 None None None 24 None None None 25 None None None 26 None None None 4 TABLE 9 (Continued) ~ flJNIT NUMBER SN01li/ ROCKFALL DEBRIS AVALANCHE AVALANCHE 27 None None None 28 None None None 29 None None None 30 None None None , ~ 31 None None None ' 32 None None None ~ 33 None None None 34 None None None 35 None None None 36 None None None 37 None None None 38 None None None 39 None None None 40 None None None 41 None None None 42 None None None 43 None None None 44 None None None 45 None None None 46 None None None 47 None None None 48 None None None 49 None None None 50 None None None ~ 51 None ' None None 5 , TABLE 1 (Continued) IJNIT NUIUBER SNOW ROCKFALL DEBRIS AV,4LARlCFiE AVAL4NCHE 52 None None None 53 None None None 54 None None None 55 None None None 56 Moderate Moderate Moderate 57 Moderate Moderate Moderate 58 Moderate Moderate Moderate 59 High Severe High 60 High Severe High ~ ; 61 None ANoderate None 62 Moderate Moderate Moderate 63 Moderate Severe Moderate 64 High Severe High 65 High Severe High 66 None Moderate None 67 None Moderate None 68 Moderate Moderate Nioderate 69 High Severe High 70 High Severe High 71 High Severe High 72 Moderate Moderate Nioderate 73 Moderate Moderate Nioderate 74 High Severe High 75 High Severe High 76 High Severe High 6 ~ 4 MiTiGATeoN Mitigation, oP sfirucfiural protection possibilities for the 21 units exposed to avalanche (snow or debris) and rockfiall hazards ranges from "minor" fio "extensive" as indicated in Table 2. When mitigation requirements are "minor" they may consisfi simply of reinforced window or dooP covers or possibly bracing certain exterior walls. To be effective, mitigation of certain units require may require extensive reinforcement Yo protect from avalanche oP rockfall foPCes. TABLE 2. Mitigation Requirement Classificafiion UNIT RlUMBER SN01A! ROCKFALL DEBRIS AVAL4NCHE ,4VALANCHE 56 Minor Minor Minor ~ 57 Minor Minor Minar ; 58 Minor Minor Minor 59 Extensive Extensive Extensive 60 Extensive Extensive Extensive 61 None Minor None 62 Minor Minor Minor 63 Minor Extensive Niinor . 64 Extensive Extensive Extensive 65 Extensive Extensive Extensive 66 None Minor None 67 None , Minor None 68 Minor Minor Minor 69 Extensive Extensive Extensive 70 Extensive Extensive Extensive V 1 Exte nsive Extensive Extensive 2 Minor Minor Minor 3 Minor Minor Minor 4 Extensive Extensive Extensive 5 E;ctensive Extensive Extensive 6 Extensive Extensive Extensive 7 AEAI~~I 1 Il~oz~ ms-~ss x~nwnin~ c' ~ , • , ~ • . Details of mitigation and mitigation design specifications are beyond the scope ofi this study, as discussed with fiAr. Wiliam Sargent. Such defiails can be provided for any of the units by considedng 2he following factors: a Distance frorn the slope; b. Design rockfail oP avalanche velocity; c. Avalanche flow thickness and kinetic energy density; d. Rockfall kine4ic energy or bounce height; e. Shape and orientation of exposed building surfaces. Rockfall protecfion could be designed to protect all of the units by building a special energy absorbing fence or other type of vertical rockfall barrier on the uphill boundary of the property. Such a fence must be designed for rocfcfall velocity, energy, and bounce heighf. Such a fence w?ould not be resistenfi to snow or debris avalanche impact energy, however, and would probably require extensive repair or repfacement after an avalanche. Altemately, each unit could be protected individually. Design parameters (listed above), would have to be derived for each unit. Snovv or debris avalanches will require protection at each unit. Building a wall or berm afi the uphill side of the property would not be effective against avalanches because the uphill side of such structures tend to fill in with deposited snow or avalanche debris. 8 ~ • . • 1 5 TECFiNICAL APPENDIX . ; The following provides fechnical data derived for fihis sfiudy that defines avalanche and rockfall defiense design parameters thafi wrere used in defining 4he hazard boundaries and in classifying the Pelative hazard pofiential at each site. Snovb Avalanche Pages 10 - 98 aPe de4ailed output on avalanche (a) flow thickness, (b) Impact pressure, and (c) velocity, Each avalanche-dynamic parameter is given at 4he upper, central,. and lower portion of the Townhomes. They can be used in any future site specific analysis of avalanche mitigation. RockfaN Pages 19 - 36 are computer simulation output defining roclcfall velocify and bounce heights at the upper, central, and lower portions of the townhomes. They cart be used in any future site specific analysis of rockfall mitigation. ' Report prepared by, Arthur I. Mears, P.E. Avalanche-control engineer i ~ 9 "OLFCOUR. E TOWNHOMES Flow Thickness -m UPper Portson 7 6 ~ LL- 4 ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ o 2 ~ ~ 0 , 14.7 15.9 17.2 18.5 19.8 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) 10 3 . GOLFCOURSE TOWNHOMES Noma0 Impact Pressure -m Upper Portion 25oo 2ooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 500 - u, cn , N ~ 6- U ~ a V 1000 ~ v E 5V 0 O i 14.7 15.9 17.2 18.5 19.8 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) GOLFCOURSE TOWNHOMES Bmpact Pressure -m Centras Portion 1800 ~ 1600 ~ 1400 - `n 1200 ~ ~ u~, 1000 cn 0- 800 ~ U ~ 600 E 400 200 . 0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1 20.4 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) u "OLFCOURSETOWNHOMES , Velocaty Centras Portion 5o 45 - - - - 40 35 ~ ~ cn 30 ` ~ 25 U O 20 ~ ~ 15 . 10 5 0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1 20.4 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) ~ TOWNHOMES Row Thickness Lower Portion 10 _ 9 ~ ~ ~ ; ~ 7 U- ~ - ~ 6 ~ - - ~ U ~ .m ~ 4 - - O ~ U- 2 '6m y 0 17.8 18.9 20.0 21.1 22.1 ~ Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) "OLFCOURSE TOWNHOMES ompact Pressure -m Lower Portion 7oo 6oo ~ 500 CL ~ C) ~ 400 cn ~ ~ 300 U ~ E 200 1\10\0 . 100 o , 17. 8 18.9 20.0 21.1 22.1 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) ~ ~ G G TOWNHOMES ~~~~~ity oe ~ortion 30- 25 ~ 20 - I ~ . ~ ~ ; ~ 15 ~U O C) > 1 o 5 0 17.8 18.9 20.0 21.1 22.1 Time Since Avalanche Start (Sec) \ROCFALL2\T0WNHOME> 1 ROCKFALL SINNLATION LOCATIOR1o Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Upper Edge 2332 LBo SPHERICAL ROC&CS 3 FT o DIAMMETER NLTMHER OF CEI,LS 8 ~ IVUMBER OF ROCKS 100 ; ANALYSIS POSITION 680 FTe ' INITIAL Y ZOIVE o e a 8820 FTe _TO 8800 FTe IIVITIAL X VELOCITY 1 FTe/SECe IIVITIAL Y VELOCITY -1 FTe/SECo SURFACE TP,NGENTIAL IVORM. COEFo BEGINNIIVG ENDING CELL # ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT RESTITUTIOIV X,Y X,Y 1 1.50 a75 .35 0,8800 250 ,8600 2 1.50 .75 .35 250 ,8600 280 ,8560 3 1.50 .75 .35 280 ,8560 300 ,8520 4 1<50 .75 .35 300-,8520 520 ,8400 5 1.50 .75 .35 520 ,8400 650 ,8320 6 0.50 .85 .40 650 ,8320 680 ,8315 7 0.50 .85 .40 680 ,8315 780 ,8305 8 0.50 .85 .40 780 ,8305 880 ,8295 19 i . . - ~ . \ROCFALL2\TOWPIHONlEe 1 ROCKFALL SINNLATIOIV LOCATIONe Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Upper Edge ANALYSIS POIRTT X= 680" Y= 8315 STANDP,RD DE`7IATIOAI (VELOCITY) = 10.76 FPS MP,XINtIJM. VELOCITY = 57 FT./SECo Ri7ERAGE BOUNCE HEIGHT = 1 FEET P,VERRGE VELOCITY = 32 FTe/SECe P9AXIMUM BOUNCE HEIGHT = 6 FEET MIMIMUM VELOCITY = 7 FTe/SECo MAX KIIVETIC ENERGY = 118408 FT.LBSe BOUNCE ANRLYSIS POINT BOUIVCE HEIGHT DISTRIBUTION HEIGHT ~ 6 4 _ i 5 44 4 3 4 2 4 ~ 1 4 O 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY 20 . e \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOMEe3 ROCKFALL SINNLATION LOCATIOMa Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Lower Section DATA COLLECTED AT END OF EACH CELL MAXIMUM AVERAGE STRNDARD AVERAGE MAXINlUM :ELL # VELOCITY VELOCITY DEVIATIOIV BOUNCE HOUNCE (FT/SEC) (FT/SEC) VELOCITY HEIGHT (FT) HEIGHT (FT) 1 75 50 11.56 7 20 2 86 60 11e83 16 38 3 99. 72 12099 28 63 4 67 35 14e80 3 15 5 84 40 12a90 5 17 6 57 32 10.26 1 5 7 51 22 11.18 0 4 8 41 17 9.88 0 5 X INTERVAL ROCKS STOPPED 0 FTe TO 10 3 _ 710 FTa TO 720 1 720 FT. TO 730 2 730 FT. TO 740 3 740 FT. TO 750 1 750 FT. TO 760 2 760 FTe TO 770 2 770 FT. TO 780 3 780 FT. TO 790 5 790 FT. TO 800 2 810 FT. TO 820 9 820 FT. TO 830 3 ' 830 FT. TO 840 5 840 FT. TO 850 5 850 FT. TO 860 3 860 FT. TO 870 3 870 FT. TO 880 2 36 \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOME e 1 ROCKFALL SIMJLATION LOCATIOMe Vail Golfcourse Townhomes U . pper Edge ' ANRLYSIS POINT i7ELOCITY DISTRIHUTIOIV FREQUEIVCY 6 4 [ [ 5 4 [ [ [L 4 4 [ [ [ [ [ 3 4 [ LL[[ I 2 4[ [ [ 1 4[ [ [[[LL[[[[[L[[[[[[L{L[L [[[LL[I LL IL 7 32 57 VELOCITY ~ I 21 \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOMEe1 ROCKFRLL SIMULATION LOCATION: Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Upper Edge BOLJNCE HEIGHT GRAPH BOUNCE HEIGHT 63 4 59 4 [ 55 4 51 4 47 4 43 4 39 4 [L[[[ 35 4 [[[[L[ 31 4 27 4 [[L[[I[ 23 4 [[[[[LL~ 19 4 [[[[L[[L[[[[L[ [L[ [[L L[ 15 4 [[[[LL[[L[[[[[[[[[[[[[ L [[[[[[[[L 11 4 7 4 L[LL[[L[[[[[LLLLL[LLL[[[LL[[[L[[L[[L[[LIL[L 3 ~[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[LLL[[L[L[L[[[[[[II[[L[L[[L[L •L [ 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 22 \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOMEe1 ROCKFALL SIPRULATION LOCRTIONe Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Upper Edge VELOCITY GRAPH VELOCITY 104 4 98 4 92 4 L[L[[L[ 86 4 80 4 L[[[[[[L [ [ 74 4 [ 68 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[L[[[[[[[[[[[[[ 62 4 [ [[[[[[L[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ 56 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[[[ 50 4 [[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[L[[L[[[[[~[[[[~[[~ 44 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[C[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ 38 4 [[[[[[[[[[[L[[[L[[[[[[[L[[[L[L[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[ 32 ~[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[L[[[L[[[[[[L 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 ~ HORIZONTP,L DISTANCE 23 \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOME.1 ROCKFALL SIMULATION LOCATIONa Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Upper Edge DATA COLLECTED AT END OF EACH CELL MRXIMUM AVERAGE STANDARD AVERAGE MAXIMUM CELL VELOCITY VELOCITY DEVIATIOM BOUNCE BOUNCE (FT/SEC) (FT/SEC) VELOCITY HEIGHT (FT) HEIGHT (FT) 1 73 50 11a55 6 21 2 89 62 12070 15 38 3 100 74 14v09 26 62 4 67 37 13.49 4 17 5 74 40 ' 14.42 4 13 6 57 31 10.69 1 6 7 44 22 11,02 0 3 8 32 17 9.00 0 3 X INTERVAL ROCKS STOPPED 0 FT. TO 10 5 380 FT. TO 390 1 700 FT. TO 710 1 710 FT. TO 720 3 730 FT. TO 740 1 740 FT. TO 750 2 750 FT. TO 760 4 760 FT. TO 770 1 770 FT. TO 780 4 780 FT. TO 790 4 790 FT. TO 800 5 800 FT. TO 810 2 810 FT. TO 820 1 820 FT> TO 830 3 830 FT. TO 840 3 840 FT. TO 850 6 850 FT. TO 860 2 860 FT. TO 870 5 870 FTa TO 880 4 24 . \ROCFRLL2\T06dNHOPRE.2 ROCKFALL SIP4ULP,TIOA1 - LOCATIO1Ve Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion ~ e. 2332 LB e SPHERICP?L ROCKS ~ 3 F'T o DIAMETER + kVUMBER OF CELLS 8 NUMHER OF ROCKS 100 Ar1ALYSIS POSITIOIV 780 FT a IIVITIAL Y ZO1VE < o e 8820 FTe TO 8800 FTe ZIVITIAL X VELOCITY 1 FTe/SECo IIVITIAL Y VELOCITY -1 FTe/SEC. SURFACE TANGEIVTIAL NORM. COEFo HEGINNING ENDING CELL # ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT RESTITUTION X,Y X,Y 1 1.50 e75 035 0,8800 250 ,8600 2 1.50 e75 e35 250 ,8600 280 ,8560 3 1.50 .75 .35 280 ,8560 300 ,8520 4 1.50 .75 .35 300 ,8520 520 ,8400 5 1.50 a75 .35 520 ,8400 650 ,8320 6 0.50 .85 .40 650 ,.8320 680 ,8315 7 0e50 .85 .40 680 ,8315 780 ,8305 S 0.50 .85 .40 780 ,8305 880 ,8295 i 25 \ROCFALL2\TOGdA1HOME e 2 ROCKFALL SIMJLATION LOCATIO1Ve Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion ANALYSIS POIIVT X= 780 Y= 8305 STp,1VDARD DEVYATION ( VELOCITY 11 o O1 FPS ' MAXIMUM VELOCZTY = 44 FTe/SECe RVERAGE BOUNCE HEIGHT = 1 FEET AVERAGE VELOCITY = 23 FTe/SECo NIAXIPNM BOUNCE HEIGHT = 3 FEET . MIMIMUM VELOCITY = 3 FTo/SECo MAX KINETIC EATERGY = 70556 FT.LBSe BOUNCE ANALYSIS POIIVT BOUNCE HEIGHT DISTRIHUTIOAI HEIGHT 3 4 2 4 1 4 O 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY 26 \ROCFALL2\TOWAIHOMEe2 ROCKFALL SINNLATION LOCATIONe Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion ANRLYSIS POINT VELOCITY DISTRIBUTION FREQUENCY 6 4 [ 5 4 [ 4 4 [ L C L [[L 3 4[[ [ [ [ 2 4[[ [ [ [ L L 1 [[[C[ [ ' 3 23 44 VELOCITY 27 . \ROCFALL2\TOkTNHOMEo2 ROCKFALL SIMJLp,TI01V LOCRTIOIVo Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion BOUIVCE HEIGHT GRp,PH BOUNCE HEIGHT 63 4 59 4 [ 55 4 [ [ 51 4 47 4 LL[[ 43 4 39 4 35 4 [LL[[[ 31 4 [LLL[L 27 4 23 4 [[[L[[[[ 19 4 [[[L[[[[L[[[[I L[ ls 4 [ ~ 11 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[L[[[[[[ ~ 7 4 ~ 3 ~[[[L[[[[L[[[L[[[[[L[L[[[[[[[LL[[[[LLLLL[[[LL[L[LLLL[[[[ L L 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 28 \ROCFRLL2\TOWPiHOMEe2 ROCKFALL SIPRULATION . LOCATIONo Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion VELOCYTY GRAPH VELOCITY 104 4 98 4 92 4 [L[[[[[ 86 4 L[[[[[[ 80 4 [L[[LLL[ L [ 74 4 [ 68 4 L[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[[L[[L[[L[L[ 62 4 [ [[[[[L[[[[[[L[[[[LL[[[[[[LL[[[[[[[[L 56 4 [[[[[[[[L[[[L[L[[[[[[[[LLL[[[[[[L[[[[[[L 50 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[LL[L[[[[IL[I[[[[L[[[[[[L[ 44 4 ~rrr~rrrrrr~rr~r~rrr<<<<<<<<<<r<<<<<<<<<<<<c<<<<r<< 38 4.[[C[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ttt[[[t[t[[[[t 32 ~[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[[L[[[[[L[[[[[[[[[[C[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[ 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 29 \ROCFALL2\TOWNHOMEe2 ROCICFALL SIMULRTION LOCAT%ONo Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Center Portion DATR COLLECTED AT END OF EACH CELL MAXIMUM RVERRGE STANDRRD AVERAGE MAXIMUM CELL # VELOCITY VELOCITY DEVIATIOIV BOUIVCE BOUATCE (FT/SEC) (FT/SEC) VELOCITY HEIGHT (FT) HEIGHT (FT) 1 73 50 11.55 6 21 2 89 62 12.70 15 38 3, 100 74 14v09 26 62 4 67 37 13.49 4 17 ( 5 74 40 14.42 4 13 6 57 31 10.69 1 6 7 44 22 11.02 0 3 8 32 17 9.00 0 3 ~ X INTERVAL ROCKS STOPPED 0 FTa TO 10 5 380 FTa TO 390 1 700 FT. TO 710 1 710 FT. TO 720 3 730 FT. TO 740 1 740 FTe TO 750 2 750 FT. T0 760 4 760 FT. TO 770 1 770 FT. TO 780 4 780 FT. TO 790 4 790 FT. TO 800 5 800 FT. TO 810 2 610 FTe TO 820 1 820 FT. TO 830 3 830 FT. TO 840 3 840 FT. TO 850 6 850 FTe TO 860 2 , 860 FTe TO 870 5 870 FT. TO 880 4 30 . •\ROCFALL2\TOWATHOME a 3 ROCKFALL SIMNLATION LOCAT%ORTe Vail Golfcourse Tovanhomes Lower Section 2332 LB o SPHERICP,L ROCKS 3 FT o DIAMETER MU1vIDER OF CELLS 8 NUtyIDER OF ROCKS 100 ANALYSIS POSITIORI 880 FT e IIVITIAL Y ZO1VE .ee 8820 FTa TO 8800 FTa IIVITIAL X VELOCITY 1 FTo/SECe IIVITIAL Y VELOCITY -1 FTo/SEC. SURFRCE TANGEIVTIP,L NORMe COEF. BEGINNIIVG ENDING CELL # ROUGHNESS COEFFICIEMT RESTITUTIOIV X,Y g,y 1 1.50 .75 e35 0,8800 250 ,8600 2 1e50 e75 e35 250 ,8600 280 ,8560 3 1.50 e75 a35 280 ,8560 300 ,8520 4 1.50 .75 e35 300 ,8520 520 ,8400 5 1.50 e75 .35 520 ,8400 650 ,8320 6 0.50 .85 .40 650 ,8320 680 ,8315 7 0.50 .85 e40 680 ,8315 780 ,8305 8 0.50 .85 e40 780 ,8305 880 ,8295 31 i ~ \ROCFALL2\TOTdNHOMEe3 RocKFALL saMULRTaoIV ~ LOCATIOIVo i7ai1 Golfcourse Townhomes Y,ower Section , j.~ ANALYSIS PO%RTT X= 880 Y= 8295 STANDARD DEVIp,TI0A1 (VELOCITY) = 9.89 FPS MP,XIMUPR VELOCITY = 41 FT e/SEC. RVERAGE BOUATCE HEIGHT = 1 FEET AVERAGE VELOCITY = 18 FTe/SECe PRAXIMUM BOUIVCE HEIGHT = S.FEET 4 MIMIMUM VELOCITY = 3 FTe/SECe MAX KIIVETIC ENERGY = 61263 FTaLBSe BOUNCE ANALYSIS POINT BOUNCE HEIGHT DISTRIHUTIOIV HEIGHT 5 4 3 4 2 4 1 eg 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY - 32 i , F o • i , i \FtOCFALL2\T06aYVHOME a 3 ROCKFALL SIr4[JLATIOIV _ LOCAT%O1Ve Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Lower Section AATALYSIS POIAIT VELOCITY D%STRZBUTION FREQUERICY 5 4 [ 4 4 [ [ 3 4 [ [L [ [ 2 4[L[[ [ L L [ 1~L[[[[L[L L L L[LL LL[LLL[ [ I 3 22 gl VELOCITY 33 . pr • \ROCFALL2\TObd1VHOME e 3 ROCKFALL SIMLIL,ATIORT LOCATIORTo Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Lower Section HOUATCE IiEIGHT GRPiPH , BOUNCE HEIGHT 63 4 59 4 55 4 51 4 L[[ 47 4 43 4 [[[L 39 4 35 4 31 4 L[[[[[ 27 4 23 4 [[[L[[L[ 19 4 [[[[[[[L[[L 15 4 [C[[ 11 ~ LLL[L[LLLL[LLLLILL[[L[IL[[I[[[[[LLLLL[LL 7 4 3 ~LI[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[L[LL[[[[[[[[L[L[L[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[LL[[ [ 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 , HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 34 E ~ e G s \ROCFALL2\T06dMHOME a 3 ROCKFALL SIMULATIOAT ~ LOCP,TIONe Vail Golfcourse Tovanhomes Lower Section VELOCITY GRAPH VELOCITY 107 4 . 101 4 [j[[[ 95 4 [[LLL[ 89 44 83 4 LL[L[EI[ L[ [ 77 4 [ 71 4 [ [[L[[[[ 65 4 LLL[[[LL[LL[[[L[L [[[[LL[LL[[[[[[L[L 59 4 [[[[L[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[LL[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ 53 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[~[[L[[[[[[[[[ e 47 4 [[tL[LLLL[[[[[[[L[LI[LI[LtILL[[[L[tf[[[I[[[[LLL[tL[ LI 41 4 35 4 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[L[[[[[L[[[[[L[[[L[L[[[[[[[[LL[L[[L 0 146 293 439 586 733 879 \ HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 35 ' i. . , - - - - - - ~ . ~ , . E; a~ 1, i i•` 1 ~ i$,+~~+„ty~!j5jn ry~~,. a a ' , • ' . ' ~ • . Z . ' • _ ~~~.'s ~ " : ~ ~ •t ~s~sa. ~ i i ~ ~ t t$ r,3; w~ v ; . , • ~ T, ` ~ S• . : , , ~ , _ . fl +~S a • , . , ' Y t • . - . iY o. n . .nvl ` ~ ~ J ; . ` i'Yt - '~y~+... • ,,,,i ;r~'~s. .s t~.s"` i~~ v . . . ' • FFti' - r ~ . ~?t' Fy~'- 1.•-1) ' _:t. • . ' ~ ~ ~~r y f~~~ : '~iySr~.~, ~~~3~'~ v,~ nr:. rS ti~ • T ~r ~hyn, . ~ A; Wv;y,y'.• "t~l' t ~.t•- -i "ii,,: t S ,p~ y a.-~ I .~p~zsA7NLw~'-~J~~j~~'l._ 4~. ~„i 1 ~ p `,it ~'3~. i , rli~ , ~ a+. -.~o...a.•r . 9 ,q c ""~`S a. .w'i' 1i 1.•.r. ~ +y r .~t . Y~ w 9a:--+~p^~ ? Y tr sy ~ j,: , r~r1+i~:S~¢ ~ M ~ • ' i ti N ~ ~ at~ v ~w..`S~` y ~ v wL ;c / ~ 1..k1 ' i-•h - ~ ~ v~,~ 4 vy . . M;~ E75'i~ ~.t,~'?'~'~ f~~„~+~ }~r°{' ~qTa-'~, , a„~„~,. t f t y,C'..a^p~'?~ ^ ? ~~t r~ • '$}~,~'C c i~ • ~ • . , t rY.'C ~ ~~v fn '7i '.~,r > . r+ a! . ° P jf .r ~-'-a' i~ 1(~r ~ Y .Y ".Y _ssc-" : _ u, p-r ~{7Q' r~ c ' ~~;a° u,~'~- t s~~''."1 ~.~s. ~.:.~i`~..-. ~~a....._a* • ~'a.., t~ 9~ iT ~ t - . ~ ,'ji"-1 ~ n~ s, YZ ~e» . s' ~ s 7 2: , jr . S ~ ' - • ~ r'^>< .P'i 3~`'~ +1 `Y> ~ y d T . y ? , , 1 ~ ~ ~YYL ~ ~ 5 r as. ~ ~~~,H, 3~`~`~+.~e ''i iM°~ ~~`+r r,~ ~.~~I~~+~ ~ ,•~7_~?,~~' ;•Jt~ r4}~~'. c.,J . , ~-j^'-~4~~.rr~d~~ ; ~ ~t'~`~`~.w .i`M~e'~ ~„yn„"~,y"~.,~'''LT' ^":F~i . .r ~ s €~wd~i~"`,Y:7~ ~..ly~.,r~rry,ss.~ i . f i; - s ~ ~ . r'' ~:zaK r..,` s.r`~'. :"~'4`~.`'~~ .~a w"'"* .?.rF ~ r ~"v~~~.,.Sa !c % it e 1 ! c4 . I' . s ~ t';C.t .«',i.u r: ,.+~e i, ~ ~,„.~~,a ~ ? ~ . : i 1 . ~ .Y `-t Ynw . Ltv, ~ yZ~~~49~~_p•~~zv, ~ ~•,i ~?G.~...`. . : ~ti''' ~ ~ ~'F~ .f. : q 1''~-' ~ „ ~~i.~.'~' ~s . ~"'f u~~ w~ ? ~.-~,,,s ~ on. er • ~ ~~q * ~ ~ - ' c• ts- ~ . ~ : x"~ '~v ~ Y • AN , . ~ . ~ .'xi . ~ ....~r--.r ~ i , f ' : o..t ti{. ~\`,Y"~ v~G'F reY"'t`.. ~~.,~,s-~"~" .r 3 Y:'" - ' P 1..1•• ' ~ t. 1~~... :r f .....,rt r ^ ..r`.. ~ x ~ . ~ a ~ , v , . ~ . ' ~ • . ~ .i~..~.a,w~" .w . . , `4, _ ~1 ~.rt ~ - t J~Cr_ ~r • W 'd . r..- . , ~M~ • _.t . ~ " . i . ~ . . r - ~ . ~f . • ~ . . r . . , - • . . ~ ~ r r~ 'r 3 * r ~ ~ , .rs . . . . . - - ~r. : , ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ :"~.:o ? ~ ~ , # A~ { -7 a. ' t • , . ,a ~ . . ~'~j~ M' 'ti?~~'l ~ S q ~i ~ ; _ - . ~ ~0 'w '~s r#~ t. ~a ...,~1.~, ~ ~'f',~ . . •r ~ 1 ~ - 1 s ~ r ~ ' '1?~~ . ^ a . . RR~' 1 . ' . ~ . . 1 1 ~ . i ! s~~~ ~ YA y#~ j~,~ , r•.'~r^'..s ~ . . ` a• ~t~~~.+ ~ofj/ i :i":,~w~ >~~v , ~ ~ ~^r~,, ~~f ~I ;!f ~ & s ffi~ Yr Is.~7RC'~ r ~a.a.`L ~'-f~ ' ~ ~ ' ' _ ' r.a' e~ ~ 3P~„ ~ / i ~e...~. ~o ~c~e 3 z ~ ~ • ~ ~a° z ~~s`~ • x ~ .:x~~r°s~. ~ : . f r • ~ S"? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 « t ~ { j ~ ' ' , ~ • . . ' x '.1 ~r :t..,~i~ ~ Y. .t ~~HµPZ . r. . . l 1 ; ~0~~~ , i~,el~ tw'~t t.~~ l.~~ ~~.N~y,~Y tl~} ~ ~ . . ~ A ~ Z ~ r « . . i ~A a~. ~y.,~~'~ ? ~ y~~~,`T ~ ~ 1 1~ 'Y? ,~~+•u y.~ 1 ` J • ? " ~ ~"rj.,a'..~~~ _ y d f~y Y ~~a~°`'y, i j a.r ~ ~ ? . Z~ ~ ,i? i.. 1 3 'r ,~,y ',''i t'w a~s- 4 .`z"~, ` 'q^' 1 ~ h ~/s:"' ? s • ~ . e~- ' ~'y ~ ~ • W' `~e Y ~ ~I~u~' T a s a ~ '.~~Zl~~ ~ ~~L .J ~ ~ ' ~r ~r ~t ~rss' :.r. ~3.~i1~~. ~ i 'a ! ~:ti?~.s J . Vo ~~Y{~? .us..~. ~a~~.. +41 w C F~1 3~ J iµ n~ :~~v.? 4 ,r'. ~ • t1 17'f~-S ~a{y~3Tt~Z~T~~•..{ s.f~ tu.?.:y , e;i~Yt r .iS ~ ;y 5i.. .~w?._ _s.:. - s :.a.+ ..5, . 7 ~p N+r ~ ~vYMr , vti .+af ~ li ~ C -~+'a~y~ . ' ~ r:. . ~ .r Ja...l~+. ~,•T3~1 ~ a+~( !=?fa. @ ~ ~ r i~: r. ~fai 7.. y''~ g i r~ 3}' ~7 ,t' t» . , ~ st ~R1 . - ~ 'r• , r,' s? ~ ~g.'"' F'":a,, r~ -~r .srx'a+ s,. :.r`~ r ~ y,~ _ ' ! T i,'}~ ~{f;' ~ a: Y ? ~ ~ t < ~ . ~s .x.. w~ p L ~ S~ s t . r e:: ~r~~~,; ~r.J~.~}•a-~ i~, r~ : i p~+ n~ 3~ ~ 1+yee~~' N;.a~ + y`~`,~ ~ 4 Y 2~ 1i ' t'~,l.a Y~. ti! ~~f . . . ' ' • ' ~,r~`. . ~'~~M11?~ .~.~.-4t.'.~ . . .t• :.y.~..o~ ..f,..v.~sd~ i`..:..i -i;~I`.•~'~...I. ~ ',p,., , ~ • , ~.f ~ < . . . . _ , ~ r~ , . : .~~f ~i Ag`~x_' . . . . ' ^fr. .,L: '~s" • .n a~l.r' . . y+ Y Z d d l',7 v. I, .~"t'~^` -'a 12 4.e i+:~? y~~+~? ..:1;•:°~ .ax~`.'r :~~^°+y~r ATTACHMENT FOUR: ROCKFALL -te..~'~,~'`}*~.~-'~'.~i~i,.•''~''~~4~~*. ':g' .fi k"•s "~3 ' ~ '.~t : u.?~p ' ~e.t~ ~~~}v~f.4:. e '_y_,-.~l°f,+j 4" r'.~•.` t ~Y' + ~A',>Ay+~'. Jr' ~~8 f' ~ . P •3,. ~ ~ r . j t~'? K.S~~'~~:~~1 r: ' ~ T0.7. ^t~ A" ~ ~ ~T~• P ~ j ' r¢4~[~,.. . ~ ~'F7`x~y s"" ~ ,..Di,: .~.Y.-~ ~aa~ •t..:w',,,. xk' ~ ~~",~°~p ~~"s.1 _tir• i.ti . . ~8 . p v ~d s ~l t ~ 9~r~6eLs ~ ~.~i..~~~~^. ~.d+ P°,,T~~.P~ ~ °Z.a.:. ~ •'.~t:l ~ ~~~(~~~'1~C.1 R ~ ~.5~"l ~ k ~ .•a'~- •r ~v~ rth_~ ~••t„'•,"Se~e.~ e!y.I'F ~ ~.'y.'! ,~s ~p,~'0.:~..M. ~ ~1 . ~ ~ { A•~~ .~"t_ a`~.~ ~ ' ~ ~f . . L S.1 ~.~y • ~ ~ _ •?~~:•~jy~91t>:f~'..:Ti,..• ~ ~f~f \ ? ~ P ~ .~J~,4 P o ~ ~ : ~ ~ " . ` .c. iYy~ri~,'~,~.:t` 1. R~ ,i.n1 s ~0 , . 1.~~~~ ;°C?a. '"Et `c ~ " u. ~ ; ~':',.~Q~.. ~'1.Y~-' r•. . .d ~~X i:r ,,-~..y~{~. . ia~~ pa.ic,:.•.. ^y/1- rt~ ~ ;'7• S„•' ~ ~ 0.!4'~ti°-Zlai~~:a,~~~ ~S'. ~,3'*;,~ ti -!a t"~' • at _ ' :.~J ~ ` ~ . ~ . ~ s rY ~sYr3 f.~' ~ ~~9•~ .r ~r ~ Q. ;txa~ p• .A mf~• ' '_~'.,,~Y'~' . L..r.~pr1,~.co.:y"`4r~C~.~^dS.. I ~^~1p~~. ,l,'.r` ' ~~G: b'` ` '~Sa'y'f -T • ~~.~V ~94..'-'y' t~ k ty'~~'-~~+ ~ .'.~+t~( s . _ f s:ii . ~1 o ~-s'!T•• •d,.• - ~ +~'d } ~r i~_.~~~ { '•r A~~ ° ~ ` .9G. - . ~ ~ r. d ~ .C~S+y~` ' . . i ' !i °i` y.~„ ,;t ~d. 'f` ~~''~~r~g ~ 's. '~•`.i ~ r~ - s~ r. ~'a~.;$ a"' ~'`w++ .,.a~. s. .o~,{- :1i''~'' ,7 1Ci a. f.~",'. <~a.:• ,."f,_.i. _ ~r ~iy. ~;`(v- «4aA°v- ^~M 5+4'~° . 'yi`;°~.,m4.e'a.u .•ya r::=v~.r ,~..«.e~r~ ..x'r~~',~~,i~e~(.~'-'~l:aw ~aA.+ '^~B' :i :6 ` ai-gN. ~ . ~_,t Y p~ ; :~.c a ^ .a~ J,^4~ ~ V~: .~i~~t.P r'~1 ~,~__7~•, r~'d ~r'~rR' 1 .~~g. ~'~i ' ~ hJ A-e, . r. -i"' ~~ra~ ~ ~r ~s.~:,• . ,S~ ~ ~~~°y tyd, -?.~94 °a .~+~.`s•~:arP.!~~~~~'Q 4hi4 hi ~ ; . ~ ~ ~C~ ~ =eT.Q~ p:. i- ~ ~ " • a - 4' ~ _ - . P• ~ ~ 0Z ~ ~ J•J4';~~ 4` ~ ~f ..t Y ~=«v r ` P'' " ' Vr - ~ :4~- "~-,t ~ p `,a '~~s- ~ n~~'',~~~ Z ,~11N~r~.}\;f~~' • y~ ' ~35:-° ' A i y~r . ' _ - . ^ ` _F , • ~~L 'L~` t~' a~~'~d"f'~"'~si• • ~ , Y ~i '~~.~{j+~-,) fe~.."'~,~ r. 4 ~ - ~.r ~ . , 4~!i f~ • 'l ~r ? ~ t~"'1. ~ • ~ ~ a ~ :y --a <a~ a-i !~~~y*~',~~ i .C t~"-. ~~f .'i-. tir :a 1. t ~ .T~ a,,~ ~S ~ . y.=~. ~ ^ ` . ~ t. •?ti ~"/~"r, :.:i"_"' ~ r~ - • r~~:. :jr~°-~"3_~• ;~G ~s^ 1a /'~""a.... ~ '••~it.."""' ~9lr ~ F-`Tyy+r~ •~~.~@~ - ~ ~ . r; ` _ < 3~ ~~..y,~~.• .y}- rlk. ~ . 4.~j~' J' t. ~ r~a ~ '~~'019 ~~~~Aa1 S . . Y~y 7~~ , . -a~4" iCi .o~{ t~r " 'i .s~~~c~.,~s.s~' ~y,'j'~'~~• .r: . •;b_!?;i . X ~r ` , 0jo ~ +•~..a.~ ~ ' ~ow~t~. ; 'r I~ ~~~~i,~ ~ o~~ ~ ^"j ~.',t :~?LY. P'~,~~¢7 `T~?+''Q~-i a','~ g+~, ~T ,K.~,~._ . ~ ~°°d'°°r •K~' ' " ~ ~ ~r~:,~~ ~e ~ •,le ..a. ~ v~! 'r:' • ~~`p ~ 1L: ~ :'~~i~ .~r,}" 'p~T _ ye• ~r~ r~~~.. . ~ t. ~ci Ls~ ~ • . 0 . ~ : ....^i:~.. ..{..w . ".Y . . ~ t.. • • . , - , . •om+iyboo~ ' . •t o~~`~~~.~~~-r`,~~'~`"'?,.,.;~ ' ~ ;tttRT ....y.. V.'. " ~ t ~ _J ? ~ ~ `j..$+• ~ ~6 ~~e~ 'Y' z:.~,~ i Y - ` l p(~ , . ~ ` 33 ° o,-: ~ 0 2F4lLR ~ ~ Y.:~ ~ ~ C'`•o%. : ~ IJ - _ T• ~ ~ !i~ a~} ~ - ~7 J ti .a. 7~' •:~jt • ,~.e!'~ ~ ' . . . . i.•~, . - ~r S 3e G I ATTACHMENT FIVE - 5 ~ D~ AR'THUR I. ME,A12S, P.E., INC. Naeural Harards Consulrants ~ 222 Eaet Cothie Ave. Gimni.on. Colorado 81230 April 15, 1994 303 - 641 •3236 ~ Mr. Greg Hall, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Vail 75 S. Frontagc Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Greg: In this ]etter I am t:ying to answcr tl:c thrcc yucstions you had about avalanchc magFing at thc Golfcourse Townhomes. 1) Dynamic pressure is averaged over the thrce periods of maximum flow thickness. This averages variations ("noisc") inherent in the use of the stochastic avalanche dynamics modcl I used and provides a larger pressure than that computed with the standard Swiss avalanche dynamics model. 2) Total pressure is computed by adding dynamic + static pressure in the flowing snow. In the ; "Lower portion" for example, the total pressure P is computed ~ , 1 P = (290+390+505)/3 + (83) (25pco = 602 psf, ~ approximatcly the Red/Blue boundary. Notc that the second term, which assumes "hYdrostatic" pressure is a conservative overestimation because snow shcar strength is not included. 3) Rcd/Bluc boundarics wcrc dctcrmincd from a combination of calculations similar to those abovc and on thc basis of observations I made whilc on the ground and through interpretation of aerial photographs. I also used my own judgment and experience to consider the effect of terrain in modifying thc hazard lines.. Flattcr tcrrain will shorten thc runout distance. The avalanche mappinb should bc considerably more accurate than the original map in which the buildings were iwt iu place. In particular, the new mapping shows how buildings shieId other building surfaccs from impact. You should bc awarc, howcvcr, that dcsibn pressures uscd in mitigation will always differ from those used tu dcfine Rcd/Bluc boundarics. Plcasc Ict mc know if you havc any additional questions. Sinccrcly, Arthur I. Mcars, P.E. Avalanche-control engincer ~ cc: Bill Sargcnt Mav Wasfir4g o Aualancleu o Avalane6e Contro/Erigineedng - cs . _ . . . . : . . , ' ~ .~5. Fti E ~E~:;'` : . ~ -g~°~~ • 0g~QP g°-B~aee BLDG.A 3lDG.N 1 ~ ~ 0~ o g E~ dr 9 ~ g~ 6 ~ as •y p~ cg e a8°S ~ ~ ~ i::::~~::`;''%:i<i:;i:<;;:;,.'::'3:i:;::i~i:;%' ~:;~•:~:;'.t:i ~ o ~ • o e y ~ 9 S Q~ e s ~ ~ ~ f ' .x c g ~ ~ .3 ~a ~ 0 BIDG. / ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a s 9 9 ~ 9 6 8 ~:;;i, . p~: „3.:,•,::: 7.ii'v"ra: ~:y: t::(i • ~ J ~ 9 • 3 'or~" .:8::r,:.:~i;:~:SSi~:: . ~ ~ ~ 9 • y w y 1i 9 ~ 8 0 ~ 'v io~y~9~~99teD3i dFA 0 - C 6 1 ~ , /.i•~i~ • j,// : : G 0 ~ ' ~pT g a9 ~ 0 ~Po 9 ~ 9 g~A 4id ~ ~ ,i •4 6, •2~ o ri// ,I,y. (7 e • ~ s m ~4D a • s BLDG. fi . :{i•~F~.;I~~'~..r ` 2 a 0 40 9 '00 ~ 8 ~ i e~ g BLDG. L ~ ? :::~r::~`~i'sii:':~:::`•?:'•;i:i . . Y . ~ C 0 ~ e s BLD . , S @ ~ . ~ a ~ : 5 a ~ s s . ~ . ~ . : _ . , ;•r;u;' : d~ 9~ >t%!;i'::;yy. - Y V ~ . m 0 8 tD ~ e l ~1 P $ y _ ~e a a ~ fo0Te a aa e aE: m ...r. , q ~ 8LD I 9 ~ 8~2 ~ :>::~:ti::;;~;::::::;>:;;;E>;<;:.1~:::2:>;:;:,~i:: ':'i::~::Si;;2;::~,`.:i;~~t::;•:::ii:;% . Og A IL OeM -s e 8L DG. H HG TR ~.,::,;;;~>;:'•i:;;`<.3r3;`:;?:ii:S?i~:%;:;:::;;ii:ii;; >::i ~ t~ . 0 0f ea :'::i:.ii::ii:;:.'::ii;:.~::;~ ~ J o ~ i;i;:'il:~:i:;;i;~<ii?i ;i:''>;:;: :i'S<;:~ « ~ ~ p '~y ••c~:.>:<•:~:»:•::i:.;'..~:.~::~:;::~~:::::~.::>:.~. ~ ::~~~;:~i:::>.;, :~~:1:::'v:::.:::::',:'::::::::::•:::':;::~:::::i::.'::"':::•:'.. .a :•~::.:i::':: ' ~ ~ S ~ ~~.:::c~f:ii;!<;;:.;;:;:>.`F::'>f.`3::::7; ~ ~~.»;:::r:.~: ~::.~<~~~::::•:s:.~. 0 GOIF LANE ~ U I :.;!:~:~r "m a~~ ~•1:;~~Fis:?<;: :i ?i; t;:.'•::t.i:: •::•;:<•s;~:;;;:;;;;:a... ::;;;:<;::'•:;1.:.^:::;:r~::os :;•:r.;$" ~4 i$i:i;~:f'.. ::<:iG;3~' : . _ ~ a . ~ ;;;.0•;::;:'::z; • _ a .a ' :i::'`~:: •a:: oi cNic :,aea ~:;:'....:t:s::<i::: . : us sToe c ~ EIGHTEENTii ~ 0 9 ~2 ~ a ~ PICYIC AAEA Ga GOLF?ERRACc - ~ GAEEN 8lDG. Am r:s>: ~:;:;?::;o. ~ • ~ ~ ~ ,,~c ~ E:~;:?3:~:~::;8 9LDG. F = 5 ~r a 's3 m BIDG. fi ......f.,`,.'• , v B LD6. 0 .~4R ~ ~ 9 a ~ ~ fla 9 9 d ~ : ~:::~:::~:?':'i•'r.%~~~;;i;i;~+:t~t'::.:%;',c; ~ : o. s 0 .i:. . ~ :s::::•> .:;;~r;;,.,;:;;%~:{.;;;;2<:::'?::::;:i:3:<•, .r•:s<:i:~s:s>:~i::;:;:::~:;: ~::::''<:~:~:Y:i::;•:.%. ~ ~ ~ . E :•:>;;<:~rfrf•::•::i:iti:~:::Si:~:::~R;c.;:t;;<t;:;:.•,'~:. . • . .a.~.~#% ~ .:>i:;;::•;:~:2>.co:~:.:::>;;;;r.;::,:.;•:.::<:•::.:~.: . 6 d ;.:;>:>::::.:~;:::;isii:;;;:;i;;:::itriiri•:>;>:;;:;:;:;;;;:~;:::.~ .;:;;;:~~:;~;:~;:;:>:.::;:<~:;:;:>:.;<:~;:;•:;:;:<;: ~ ^ T 9R1 RS .~:::::.~::•;;:;•::•rr•:;;;•::•>:•>:;;•;:;<•;;•:.:: ~ ::::.::::::::::::::.:::::::~~::r::.:>::.., 6 5 . . . U U e A ~a N • . C ........n., ~ o;.~.~i::::.;.;•:: ~ c:>'4;;;~%j?:^:i2<'~;•'r.+;:`ii:;:;;::{: Si'rriric::ii;:%.`:` ~ : . . ~ ;;..Y.ti:.... B ~ . . . . . . . . _ x•;.;~••: ~ ~--1~ a - ~ ;::::;<:::~<:>::::::;:;::;~. ~ - s:~>rr:•:,,,... :.:r : ' BUS • :::::::•:.~::::::::..~.~:~.r _ _ ii::'r :'.:::i:ii'i. ; STO . -P o>:•,::.~:::::::::.~:.:~:::..~:::.::: _ . - ~ • ' ~ ._m:]~ :.~::::::::.~:}:i:<S~ - ~ -_.f~~" FIGURE 2. Rockfail qHi9hII and IIModerateII severitY boutidaries at the Vail Golfcourse .::>::;:<:.:<::: ~a~w,~rer::;~~, Townhomes. Definitions of the hazard zones, additional quantification of hazard, and generalized description of mitigation is discussed in the text. This mapping supersedes ° all previous rockfall mapping. site pian - September,1983 D ~ Ccdccutsu -tc ir:Uc u.+s ~ ~3'~/ . . ~ b:• ~b e t ' 3 3. FEIR=ST': ~~S~y BLDG. c ~ e~ g ip ~ s e.~ s a ~ c ~8 ?S4 4s 3~ e~ e S s 4'~ ' R 2 S-6 p @ x..::;s:. :•:i..~ • @ ~ . A j~?'/~ ~9 ~~B 8 gdsts~ e9~- ~ A p ~ ~ 9 e g L g g 9 a -0e~ ~ ~ .y,.'~,~',~,,.~,'.I,..'/;.~. J...,.,~°~'•: 0 p p,ee a ~ ns ~ » ~ ~ J s e~ 9 ~ C 8;ga S q 0 Y 92 a i. , ~~a ~ a~ : 9 ...5:.~::',~ . ':<~;:;/s;:•:i' i ~ S ~e 0 a ,9 'g e 8Ig a+~ a b DG. R ~ ~ ~!I ~ ' i • ~ ~Q 6 'r ;z~ssit:i;;a, +Y Z C 0 38tgg S FJ ~ L~'ti i 89 9 d? a e ~ ri~ ELOG.. ';.,~•'',~c::.;.,.y.•.v:~ ~ a~.j g aT. r J~.Er A y' 9 ~ ~~@ e ~ e' ' •3 - cb - ~6 0 6 ~~~x ~?~~T ..C.M.~.~~ a ~ ' •;r>:: o S 20 ~4 BLDG. Jt ' : p _ k . D -e m . $ :.::o: :;:':..,4t.•.:•. Bf! c 01 g - ~ .....,g..SSii:.9.::~::•Q??:;~?ii:~~i:~•:~ i:~.<:'S~'~~?t%~>'::">o"::i:t°i!~.;::~}: , a s a e S ~y - ~ ~ 0 8's a- 9~;:<?i '9 G ' ~ C < <S &Y ~ >:a;~.: ;;~f3:i:8?:~.:;:;::%;;~:r' `~i:~i%?;~' ~'~::`.:aE'•; `i ~ :•.........:~5<~::>;::>:•~.'f' ~?ir:9'~l'i`,;i;3.:.:::•.~:: • ~ ~ _ . `r N B ~FA ~ It ~ e P ~ ~9r ~ . . ~ t~>'o-:5:>:::~:~:•:::::,;..:r:•>::o>:t 3l LQ a DC G. H i . S t i g . • :;;»:::<»>;;>:»:<'>:<:~::5:s:>zs:::<;:, ~ = t'~ ~ y r~a..:.;>x...:~::...;:;:•;: ~.2~:s:;.s:>:>~:»>:.:,,...: > c . ~ 0 t9 I ~ : ::•:#t' ' ~ r. a . * ''iii:~~~'~Ci;~:`•::';2;;;~;`~;;?~>~:;'3~i~;;`?i~'i,:.,. . 0 c.. ~?~'•3:.,:.:;: . :;:9;;::>':, e d b' gr $ ; •o ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~Y.9 A~' $:'~';(:..:•(~:i:~'`~'... . i. 3 ~ `d :.::~.:~:::;;i~;t;•::;:.;:i`~::;:::~;~.:;i::::iiC:s;::;';i:.4ii;: "s~`"p~ 4 R r ~OL.: .~NE ~~'`•::.r`.:::: . ( ` ^ . ~':i"'%S::;i:4:<'".:::~~'~i:.~.. ..~~:~::~':1.'.:.... xr. .3 , ar -!a_ 3 ~ 2 6~ a' ~ ~ m~ ~ 9 2~ 9 ~ • =1C41C AntA 6u5 STOF kTH ~ , PICYIC AR'A S. GaEEb ~g ' ° z GOLFTEnRAC: ~p g BLDG. A- C $ ~ . ~ ~"s Y - ~ ~ . q~, ~8 .'•'x:,`': SLDG. • 9L7G. C 6g9~ ~ eLDG. ~ ~Sif ~ • i A D ~~.,°i ~ a3 ea~ g~r ID ~ Q yy~ ~ ~ S3 q~1 a~ maa: BUS Si,W;: '~s;.. ,a~ BIOG.D $ y ~ a - ~ ..............s.. . ~ s ~ . ~ r` r,:::::•:•xa:sr>::::; ~ . i `••~;r`.:'t G ~a o•. S. d ~ ......•:•~:.~..:.:::::v.•• . ,•:;::•.::::.;•;;:::::'a.::: ~:?•5:,.;; . ~ . ~ ~ ~;":i~~...~.~...~~~~ . ~E: _Q f .1 '~Q .~{~:A ~ ,.;~;;:,•:c.r•:;~>::~:~::r»:c::••:::~:::.::..•::.: ' , . , V o qIE ,:....:r.:~::::::::.~::::o;;>::c.;::~::::»::r:r.;•.:~::>;:c:•;>:a::r.~:;a::.~::::::.::~::..; ~ o::.::•:::,•::~•:::~:•::::::,:::::::.~;:,;t;•r»+:: 4 0 3~ R5~ s :r::;::::;:::::::.~:::::::::•:::::.~:::•:::::,:::• U :•:!•:•>:;::ii;:;:S:S<•::•:r::::::o:;:..>:<.;:;.:i::~il:;:;,;y;,.;• uNB " :::.~~:.:~:::r;:•:::a>;;::o:n:r:a:a>o-s:r;•.;;•::;;yn m, ~ C•' ,a5. g _ NIL- : .o - ~.,~;S;s;:;~:~>:s:''•f::i:;<::;~:;:~i;s:~:•:2~:;;<::%;:i~:''•;:?>:?;::.;;`:::• _ .;~.~:;J}?:;<:•.; a:: ~:•>Yv: ii?iY;.::::.~:: .,;v:....... :~.yn: ......:::::::..:.:..::.~.~:.~.ii'r'4!::Gr . ' ' B h - Q I F - GU _ R E9 _ . , Sno he 11 dII Hi w av al anc _ Re d n _ H _ us azard ) a - - n ~ 9 BI - u e - Mo de rat e H aza rd ~ P ' STO - ~ . ou ndari b _ es at t he Vai _ I Goi f course Town - - h omes. _ Defini ' ttons of t _ he h - azard zones , - diti o - ad - - - a nal qu _ nti - aUon o - - - - fic' - - - - f hazard, and eneralized descri , 9 t~' on ofmiti ation i P g s discussed ma in the text. This mapping supersedes all previous avalanche PP'ng. - ~ ~ - A Revised site plan - Sepfember,1983 ~ , _ ; ~ . _ ~ Q . ' . . „ ~ . . ' . . . . ~ _ . ~ . . . . . . . ~ , ~ _ . . _ . . . . . . . . . ~..._.e n. ;~EBFS 'T~ ~ ~ . _ . . . . . . z ..a , . a - 7 - ~ ' ~;r~:,• . . . . . . . . . . . H•9 ~ - ~ Ir.- Haz rd-- Red ~ ~ Avalanche: requent_ and/orp4erful Whifie River Na4ional For6st - .3 - _ T_- - - _ ~w oz ^ I- ~ ; . h . . . _ ~ ' . , . . . _ . . . . ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ - Moderat Hazard BIt ~Zone ~ nche less f~equenfi an~less power4ul fhan Red Zone F Avala , ~,x • ~ • W Powder 61ast Eztremely rare flowin ~ aValanches and/or powder blast pressures . . ~ ~ t.,. , • EaFurthgr ~.c E Possible Avalanc6i%lifluence Zone quan4ificatior~:q,~'hazard dependent on detailed study ,.,....r • ::..~~b. • Preliminary, S#udy of ihe Vail area by: Ins4itute of Arcfic and Alpine Research - - ~r i .1973 5j . GenePa,E` Cata on Ava~anche Paths by: Colorado Geological Survey, 1975 ~ .~.•`.4.. A Inf(uence Zon~s drativn by ~iears , 1976 . `'qy ~ ~ ' , ~ ~ ~ ' . ~ .1~ t S; I f . . f ~ ` • GOII COV.R9 ~ ~ 4 , ~„i^ r~+'~ j%~ ,l . i . i i i % ~ _ . ~ . _ watt,Ee•~,~ . _ • i.~ :~t-i. ~ ~ ~i~~~. ` r~ v,~ ~ ~ . . ~ ,r' _ • ~i . / /M+4~5 •w/-°`.p"`°~„ ..s~~"' ~I~ ~~_~~i ' ~ ~ "..1.'~ . C ~ ~ . 'r~l 6y / ~ . / _ _ ~V r G. ~ / j~ . 1.r~~ / • ' 4 ~ ~,~i ~ , ~+e5'~' ~ ~ ~'••v ` ` , r;!- ' ~ % . ~ " ~ . ~ - . e i F ~x~ ~n / . -r..~~•?"~ . _ / , t:.. / . ~ ~ ? l` j %C;x~a r . • ~ ~ i . ~ ~ . '~~tir~r _ , ~ , : , ~ ' . ~ ~r i • ~ . . , , • . . - . . ::.:y...- ~ . . ~ ........R. JJ,~ ~ • . . . . - ~ ~ . ~ • . . ~ . / ~ ~ / ~ 1R~ / ` . / ~.t... r'. `r:~. ~.1 ~ "J'."•.r~Jy:.:..: . . .•r. ..t, ~ • ~ - ,'J...... ~t~ ~ ~ . . . . . ~~r, '.::r......:: f^\~c`::::.." :r..... s ~ ~c? il Vfllage 8th F1Nnq ~~;"~--~=~--"r~ ~ d1tfA ~ ? • ~('s''~- \ ' l ~~ft'"" . ~ r / 'p~F "y..~~ r ~ S=` •~J i C V2i 1'tI 15! Fli /~p/L If~..~.,~lf./' Vtll . ~u r/ : . . • , , _ i e~Bth.FiC~ng V ley i ~ . 1. _ _ _ 'f, . q,,, ~ 1 S~ 8 ' •/r . ~ ' 'C ~ ,a"' ~p~ ~i- r'' ~'~~A N~_ ° ~ , ~ / ~ 7p. . i ~ _ `T-_ ' r ~ . . ~ ~ ~:Y" ~ .i' ' 6. ~ ~ i ' ~ , ~ _a..:r T:.. , ~ . a, , r~.! . ~ o.::..~~,,,y- , ~ ,,.r- , ~ . . . . / / , . : 3 P , T~ I~11\ ;d rRE r i( ~ ~l j ~~o' ' ~ , ~ ' . ' ~ ~j , .H ~i ab , ` 3••:• :rn~':~r , ~J ~ o r~~ i r ar 1 ~ . . ~ j. i~~ L~ / . . ' . . ~.f . . . . . o ~ . . , i~ r ; ~~~ORANDUM TO: Va9l T0wQE CoflHHHcIlIl Ft: Bob MelLaaareun, Town Manager DA: .Uuane Il, 1994 • RE: Towue Manager's Report ]Po&ece Bui?ding Upcflate Please fincfl the attasheafl ]Pollnce buaEd'eng buciget. gt reflects actual expenclitaases tterough May 10, 1994. dDespnte seeera? change orders, the projeet continues to be within the project budget. The nevv portnon off the lE'oHnse baaiiclirug addition is substantia9ly complete arad we are schedu?ecf to H'ece9Ve the TCO OYD Fr&da3'y June 3, 1994. Po9ice personael have begaan packing an oraier to prepare ffor the move. We ant6cipate thes move wali began the week of June 6, 1994. Ian order to ffacil'etate the move of the lPo9ace II?ispateh, and not to nnterrupt dispatch serviees, Dispatch 9nas been operating oaat of the blaae waaa pae-ked uun the east parking lot. Tfiais van has beere provided by the Colorado Highway Patroa at a aeieaeimall cost. I expeet the move to be complete and the Polace Department go be faa9ly operational by 1fanne 10, 1994. Following the move, the congractor will begin renovatimg the old ]Police I9epartment spaee. Ttnas phase off the constructeon is scheduled to be complete next 3eptember. , 'd'tee origina? desigau contenap?ated the constraaction of a coaered entry to the wesg entry of the Municepal Baaelding. As sve have aiiscussed, these were a naaaaaber of problems with the origiraa6 design. 'd'hese includeeIl the destruetion of the eacisting te-ees and disruption of exesting office spaces. ]Finaflly, t?nea-e were prob&erns en s9ealing with the exasting entry to the basernent. d hadl the architect prepaa-e another design whech wilV proeide acovered entry and avoid these problems. 'II'his new desfgn 6s less substantial on anature and w611 be far less expensive to sonstruct. It wfi91y hOSWevery provade a covered engrydvay to the west side off the beailding and create gtee "frouet dooe-" aPpeaa-ance requested by the PIEC. 'd'he two a9ternateve desigafls are atgached fo thes meaaeo. The staff's preferred alternateve is Scheme A. I will have the estimated sosf og ghis a?ternatiee for yoaa at the 6/7/94 Woa-k Session. lPlease advise me as to how yoan voish aane go procees9 witfi this gsroject. Budeet Npdaae We ?nave begun preparirag the 'd'owwn budget for isca? year 1995. In 1994, Councg9 agreed to ehange ffrom a kraclitionallane etenn baadgetflrag appsroach to program based buclget. A program baseai budgeg es oaee that de-ernptnasezes speesfc 1'ene ateans and ffocuses oau aandesskantfing the cost off various ~ programs (code enforcemenB, stre~t ma6ntenance, landscaping maintenance, etc.) Bn fiscal year 1995 we WIllB cOntHII69Ae $o HI9ove tOwaIPd tI4As ]DH'0g6'aiYH1 baSed ap]DTO$Ch. 'd'here wil? be, howeeeP, changes to the foraeiat of the budget aIloeuameteg ntse9ff. It as my flntention to Bnake the 'd'OV budget a coiunpe-ehensive policy docaaaneant. I am preparing a memorandum outliniang aa?y approacta and p?nilosoptniea? base go a maanncnpaIl baaaffget. Cntnzen Saarvev 'II'he 1994 Cfigizen Suu-vey was man?ed 9ast week to approa-imately 4,300 residents and businesses. The SIlll9'Vey 9S a coH61(Si'Qhea1SllVe oFlle EBD at$Qgt1ptS $O Rfln(1QF'SQ$nd Ou9' c415$OiA4eII'S9 neecls and desires for the VaH'9o1E~ serVHceS p6'O@lEde2fl by QdHe TOwQIl Off VaDl. As in preveoeas years, we are a?so trying go gauge 9evels of satnsfacfioen wnth the serveces cear¢~ent9y proveded. lE'or your inforaaaataon, I have attached a copy of the Saureey. I exiaecg the survey resuQts being back by the aniddle off Jaane, 1994, and the data will be able to be utalizeel as we prepare the fiscal year 1995 buclget. lFosd Parkfing Lot Ugdate As ymu ae-e we?? aware, gHnere 9aas beeaa significant pe-otesk by the Battle Mountaiea High Schoo? s7aff and stuaients agaanst the 'Il'own's pasking poliey on F'orai Park. The problem arises frona the fact thag the VatD softball toaarnameang eonf9icts vvveth the Battle Moauntaaee graduation. This week I met wegh lEsic Frecfe99 to discaass thes matter. Ken Haaghey, Tom Slaeely, ancfl I.arry Grafel also attended th6s meeteng. Because the sofrtba?l toaaa-naaxaent starts prior go the gratluation, shanging the parking prograun woeald have no effect on the gradaaateon parking. Follovving our d'escussion, IDr. Frede9fl agreec9 that gnven the cflrcaam,stanees, our p?an was a workable one. During the course of our diseeassfon, sve made severaD changes that wou9d enhance the p$ara. These chaaages relate primarnly go loacling auad aaanload'engg Sign`6dgey etc. d believe, gieen the conff9acQ of Qhese two events, our parkang plan is the most woricable so8uteoaa aeaelable to aas. At ns atso raay anndersPandeng that aeow Dr. &'redelll saapport onnr p9ata. C:ITMRPI'67,94 POLICE BUILDING BUDGET PECEIyED MAY y 0'9~ BUDGET CURREiVT ACTUAL UNDER REVISED SINCE THRU (OVER) 4/01/94 5/10/94 BUDGET Architect Fees 240,000 6,620 220,148 19,852, Architect Reimbursables 9,500 515 6,678 2,822 Architect Extra Services 28,500 1,688 26,562 1,938 Printing Costs 7,500 6,539 961 ' Testing - Soils 4,500 3,584 916 Testing - Concrete 3,500 30 1,621 1,879 Project Management Fees 43,000 3,000 31,690 11,310 Project Management Reimb 2,000 0 2,000 Surveying 4,415 4,095 320 Signage 5,000 285 4,715 Existing Roof Repair 44,585 44,585 0 VVest Lot - Clean & Restripe 1,000 0 1,000 General Construction GMP * 3,027,715 382,698 1,715,670 1,312,045 Construction Change Orders: 1 5,839 5,839 2 10,755 10,755 3 (287) (287) 4 (1,421) Other 21,500 3,344 17,191 4,309 General Contingency: 55,114 55,114 TOTAL 3,512,715 397,895 2,078,648 1,435,488 Owner Supplied Items: Electronics 45,956 504 4,077 41,879 Floor Finishes 27,700 0 27,700 Furniture - 59,115 400 58,715 Communications Center 44,000 6,727 8,061 35,939 Telephones & Equipment 12,500 0 12,500 TOTAL OV1/iVER SUPPLIED 189,271 7,231 12,538 176,733 Total 3,701,986 405,126 2,091,186 1,612,221 * Retainage Equals 73,417 POLBLDBD , . . ~ \ - - - - - _ - - ~ • lli .t' % i ~ , J~ , J ; . ~ . ~ . ~ ; _ . . A-T ~ ~ s . ~ ~ • [ . . ' ~ ~rA PJ : . ~UB~ddV d ~ o 0 k ~ P ~ : I , . . . . _ . : > > e L • o. L ' ~ ~ . • J ~ Il . ' ~ . ~ 119W 564A? t~x~tl:Wu 7 . n ~ - eoHG• 4pw K 1 I • ~ I I oo ~ - l ~ . ' ~ ~(r ~ I { Lf) ~ r) W ~ Al'/ • ~--j Y ! y n = ~n y = - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ . co 0) (33 i I' n ~ . ~ 0 ~ ~tLl 4 . . - - . - . ~ ~ i J i . 1_ ~ { L J i ~.1 . . ~ Y ~ L n ~ ~ MEMORANDUM TO: All Town Employees FR: Bob McLaurin, Town AHanager ~ D,4: June 3, 9994 RE: Communi4y Survey Attached is a copy of our 9994 Community Survey which is being mailed 4o registered voters and business owners within the Town of Vail. The sunrey was designed by an independent research firm with input from deparfinent representatives. The results will be used to measure customer satisfaction levels and to help establish priorities for the 1995 budget. Please feel free 4o fifi ou4 the survey and share your own opinions about the Town's service levels. Simply return the complefied survey 4o Desiree Kochera in the Community Information Office, either in person or through inter-departmen4al mail. - 1Ne'll be distributing the results to you in the coming weeks. If you have commen4s or quesfions about this project, please don'4 to con4act me directly at 479- 2105. Thank you for your help. C:\COMMSRW.MEM TOWR1 OF VAIE. ~OMMUNI1CY SURVEY 1994 e' ' TOWId UF v,91L The following questions probe certain issues related Fo the adequacy and performance of the 7'own of Vail government. We would appreciate your response to the extent which you are able. If you hcave Ro opinion, or no knowledge of a particular subject, please leabe blarak or dndicate dn 8he appropriate space. Included in the survey are two "insert pages" pertaining to specafac 7'own services. Please comnlete the main survev Rrst, then comnlete the inserts. 1. How do you rate the overall performance and iesponsiveness of the Town of Vail government? POOR AVERAGE EXCELLENT 1 2 3 4 5 2. What are the most common means you utilize to keep informed about local issues? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 01) [ ] The Vail Trail • 02) ( ] Vail Daily 03) [ ] Vail Vailey Times . 04) [ ] Local cable television OS) [ ] Local radio 06) Attendance at public Town meetings and hearings 07) Mailings directly from the Town of Vail 08) [ ] Word of mouth/friends - 09) Individual contact with local officials and/or staff 10) [ ] None 11) [ ] Other (specify) 3• Which of the above is the MOST effective source? . (INSERT # FROM LIST) 4. To what extent, if any, are the following conditions a problem in your neighborhood? Use a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being "No Problem" and 5 being a"Major Problem." NO PROBLEM MODERATE MAJOR PROBLEM Snow removal from roads . 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal from walkways 1 2 3 4 5 Street disrepair (potholes, cracks, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 Unsafe walking routes 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate street lighting 1 2 3 4 5 Crime, sense of security 1 2 3 4 5 Speeding or reckless automobiles 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate off-site parking 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate enforcement of parking regulaCions 1 2 3 4 5 Trash/litter, abandoned vehicles 1 2 3 4 5 Neighborhood noise 1 2 3 4 5 Animals (running at large, barking) 1 2 3 4 5 Signs (street names, traffic controls) 1 2 3 4 5 Pollution from woodsmoke 1 2 3 4 5 Pollution from road dust 1 2 3 4 5 Lack of recreational facilities (bike paths, parks, playgrounds) 1 2 3 4 5 Other: 1 2 3 4 5 5. Using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 being "Poor," 5 being "Excellent," and 0 being "Don't Know" or "Haven't Used," how would you rate the overall performance of the following services provided by the Town of Vail? General Servaces and Mafin8eaaeece of lPaab?fic Areas - HAVEN'T USED/ DON'T PpOR AVG. EXC. KNOW Snow removal/sanding of residential streets 1 2 3 4 5 0 Snow removal/sanding of frontage roads 1 2 3 4 5 0 Snow removal/sanding of sidewalks/ stairways 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street repair & maintenance on residential streets 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street repair & maintenance on frontage roads. 1 2 3 4 5 0 . Street sweeping 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street lighting 1 2 3 4 5 0 Maintenance of park azeas 1 2 3 4 5 0 Maen8enance and Coendi8uoen off lPaab9nc Baai9dieags/Face?itecs Municipal buildings/facilities 1 2 3 4 5 0 Bus shelters ' 1 2 3 4 5 0 Public restrooms 1 2 3 4 5 0 Ice arena 1 2 3 4 5 0 Library 1 2 3 4 5 0 Visitor. Information Centers 1 2 3 4 5 0 ]Freqaaency and Qanal'eQy of Bus Systea¢a . Frequency of: In-town shuttle 1 2 3 4 5 0 Sandstone route 1 2 3 4 5 0 East Vail route 1 2 3 4. 5 0 West Vail route 1 2 3 4 5 0 Qualiry: Bus driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 Bus cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 ]Parking Amount of available parking in . Village/Lionshead 1 2 3 4 5 0 "Reasonableness" of parking fee 1 2 3 4 5 0 Parking structure cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Booth attendant courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 Coupon/pernut program 1 2 3 4 5 0 Speed of transaction at exit booth 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS ON TOWN SERVICES: 6. As a general policy, with which of the following statements do you most agree? 1) The Town of Vail should concentrate resources primarily on maintaining the present infrastructure (roads, public facilities, etc.) and should not take on new projects or expansion 2) J It is imponant to upgrade and expand the Town's infrastructure in order to maintain Vail's ability to serve its citizens and visitors in a first-class manner 7. Have you directly interacted with the Community Development Department over the past 12 months? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No 8. Based on your ezperience or what you have heard, please evaluate the following aspects of the Community Development Department. DoN•T POOR AVG. EXC. KNOW Hours of operation 1 2 3 4 5 0 Responsiveness to telephone inquiries 1 2 3 4 5 0 Development review assistance 1 2 3 4 5. 0 Zoning enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building permit plan review 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building inspections & code enforeement 1 2. 3 4 5 0 Sign code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Restaurant inspection program 1 2 3 4 5 0 Art in Public Places program 1 2 3 4 5 0 Environmental planning programs 1 2 3 4, 5 0 . Environmental code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Planning & Environmen[al Commission review process 1 2 3 4 5 0 Design Review Board process 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 9. Ranlc the following priorities in order of their importance to you, with 1 being the project which is "most important" and 5 being "the least important." All projects would be funded out of the Real Estate Transfer Tax fund. Due to limited dollars, however, it. is important for the Town to know which of these projects aze most important to you. 1) Acquisition of open space to protect environmentally sensitive areas 2) Acquisition of open space for"future pazks and recreation facilities ~ 3) Pocket/neighborhood park development 4) Large paFk with community facilities designed to serve needs beyond the immediate neighborhood (i.e., Ford Park, etc. ) 5) Bike/pedestrian path development; expansion of stream walk east of Vail Village 10. Local government faces limited funds and must establish which goals aze most imponant in the community's yiew. Thinlang about the significant issues facing the Town of Vail over the next few years, please review the following ` list and rate each item in terms of importance. NOT VERY NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT OPINION 01) Preservadon of open space 1 2 3 4 5 0 02) Provision of affordable housing opportunities within the Town of Vail limits 1 2 3 4 5 0 03) Provision of affordable housing opportuniaes outside Town of Vail limits (Berry Creek Sth Filing, for example) 1 2 3 4 5 0 04) Reguladons to conuol extent of new development and the number of dwelling units . 1 2 3 4 5 0 . OS) Air quality protection . I 2 3 4 5 0 06) Water quality protection Y 2 3 4 5 0 07) Protection of stream flow year-round . • in Gore Creek 1 2 3 4 5 0 08) Water capacity to serve future population needs 1 2 3 4 S 0 09) Improved handicapped access - to all public facilities 1 2 3 4 5 0 10) Solid/hazardous waste management 1 2 3 4 5 0 11) Preservation of view corridors 1 2 3 4 5 0 12) Maintain the unique alpine character of the community 1 2 3 4 5 0 13) Enforcement of.zoning, sign, building, and environmental regulations 1 2 3 4 5 0 11. What other issues do you believe are very important for the Comenuanaty IIDevelopaneaet BDepartment to address? 12. The first responsibility of the Town of Vail is to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens; the Town, whenever possible, is also interested in allocating discretionary funds with respect to quality of life issues. NOT VERY NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT OPINION 1) Expansion of tourism opportunities/ facilities in summer/fall ] 2 3 4 5 0 2) Expansion of tourism opportunities/ facilities in winter I, 2 3 4 5 0 3) Expansion of varietylfrequency of special ' events for tourists and local residents 1 2 3 4 5 0 4) Expanded "regional" govetnmental au[hority to address problems of the entire Vail Valley, including areas down-valley, . 1 2 3 4 5 0 5) Provision of affordable daycare within Town of Vail lunits 1 2 3 4 5 0 6) Construction of a performing arts center 1 2 3 4 5 0 13. What other community issues are very important for the Town of Waet to address? 14. Based on your experience or what you have heard, please evaluate the library in terms of the following: DON'T ' POOR AVG. EXC, KNpW Range of services provided 1 2 3 4 5 0 Size of facility 1 2 3 4 5 0 Access to library (i.e., bus system, parking structure) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Hours of operation 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMEIVTS: 15. How would you evaluate the police and fire protecdon services in the Town of Vail? Fire ' POOR , AVG. EXC. DK Fire protection and response time 1 2 3 4 5 0 Fire code enforcement ] 2 3 4 5 0 Emergency medical services 1 2 3 4 5 0 Police Neighborhood police service 1 2 3 4 5 0 Business area police service 1 2 3 4 5 0 Traffic control (4-way stop traffic direction) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Traffic enforcement (speeding vehicles, pazldng violations) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Attitude and demeanor of Vail Police employees with whom I have had contact 1 2 3 4 5 0 Overall performance of Vail Police Dept. 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: -16. How would you rate the overall performance of the following administrative/management functions of the Town government? DON°T POOR AVG. EXC. KNOW General administration (manager's office, . finance department, clerk's office, personnel) 1 2 3 4. 5 0 Responsiveness to public input/concerns 1 2 3 4 5 0 Information dissemination (newsletters, meetings, announcements) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Efficient use of tax revenues 1 2 3 4 5 0 Overall employee attitudes/friendliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Munieipal court l 2 3 4 5 0 Hours of operation of finance/cashier window 1 2 3 4 5 0 Sales tax and business license services 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 17. Do you support the concept of Park & Ride facilities being constructed in the Eagle Vail/Avon area, and/or Eagle and Edwards, with transit to the Town of Vail? 1) Yes, strongly support it 2) [ l Yes, moderately support it 3) [ ] No 18. If such facilities were constructed, who should be responsible for funding and aclministration? 1) [ ] Town of Vail 2) [ ] Eagle County , 3) Separate regional transit authority funded through a special district 4) [ ] Other: 19. Do you believe a regional transit authority should be created to operate the "Eagle-Gore Valley" bus system as part of a single coordinafed program, or do you support the current system of multiple local entities running their own ~ systems? 1) [ ] Prefer current system 2) Would prefer regional transit authority COIVIMEIVTS: 20. Do you utilize the AvonBeaver Creek transit system serving that azea and Leadville? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ j No (GO TO Q. 22) 21. (IF YES) Please rate that system in terms of the following. POOR AVG. EXC. DK Frequency .1 2 3 4 5 0 Cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 • Cost 1 2 3 4 5 0 Driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 22. How would you rate the importance of each of the following possible transit, circulation and parking improvements? NOT VERY DON'T IMPORTANT IMPORTAAfT KNOW 1) Construct a new parking structure at the site , of the West day lot (west of Radisson) 1 2 3 4 5 p 2) Construct a new parking structure at Ford Park 1 2 3 4 5 p 3) Provide capacity improvements at I-70 interchanges 1 2 3 4 5 0 ' 4) Construct new vehicular underpass connecting frontage roads at Simba Run area l 2 3 4 5 0 5) Develop a car pool program with incentives to participate 1 2 3 4 5 0 6) Expand routes and coverage of local transit system within Town boundaries I 2 3 4 5 0 7) Expand transit system linking Town of Vail with areas outside Town limits 1 2 3 4 5 0 8) Establish a Regional Transit Authority 1 2 3 4 5 0.. 9) Improve loading, delivery &c trash removal facilities in the viilage core 1 2 3 4 5 0 23• Which of the above do you feel is MOST important? 24. Should a Town of Vail cemetery be constructed for $660,000 in Donovan Park (adjacent to the Matterhorn area), with future development and maintenance costs funded through the sale of plots? 1) [ ] Yes 2) No (GO TO Q. 26) 25. (IF YES) How should construction of the cemetery be funded? 1) Out of existing Town of Vail revenues 2) A one-time mill levy of 1.87 mills (the estimated cost for a home with a market vaiue of $100,000 would be $24.00) 3) [ ) Other: Please provide the following derreograp6aic enjorrraatiova. Fcel free to deave blandc any questions you are not comJortable answerirag. flgain, surveys evild rerraaira nraonymous. Pleease do noe wrfte your narne or address on this survey. 0 26. Where.is your residence within the town of Vail located? 01) [ ] East Vail 02) Booth Falls and Bald RRountain Road ueas 03) [ ] Golf Course 04) ( ] Vail Village OS) [ ]Lionshead 06) [ ] Potato Patch, Sandstone 07) Buffehr Creek, Lions Ridge, the Valley 0$) [ l West Vail (north of I-70) 09) [ ] Matterhom, Glen Lyon 10) [ ] Intermountain 11) IVot a resident of the town of Vail • 27. Which of the following categories best describes your residency status? 1) [ ] Year-around Vail resident 2) [ ] Seasonal Vail resident 3) Owner of vacation properry in Vail 4) Non-resident, owner of business or commercial pioperry in Vail 5) [ ] Other: 28. Do you own or operate a business within the Town of Vail? ' 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No 29: , How long have you lived at your current address (or owned your property, if a non-resident)? 1.) Less than 1 yeu 2) [ ] 1-5 years 3) [ ] 6-15 years 4) More than 15 years 30. How long have you lived within the town of Vail (or owned property if a non-resident)? 1) Less than 1 yeaz 2) ( ) 1-5 years 3) [ ] 6-15 years 4) More than 15 years 31. Do you own or rent your propeny? , 1) [ ) Own 2). [ ] Rent 3) [ ] Other (specify) 32. Which of these categories best describes your marita] status? 1) [ l Single 4) Couple, no children 2) Single with children 5) Couple with children at home 3) Single, children no longer at home 6) Couple, children no longer at home . 33. (IF YOU HAVE CFY'iI,DREA1) How many are in the following age groups? 1) 0-5 years ' a 2) 6-12 years 3) 13-18 years 34. Including yourself, how many persons reside in your household? 35. How many cars are owned and kept at your home or place of business in Vail? 36. Vdhat is your primary method of transportation in the Vail area? 1) Private car/vehicle 5) [ j Hitchhike 2) Outlying bus service 6~ Walk 3} In-town shuttle 7) Carpool 4) [ ] Bicycle 8) [ ) Other: 37. Your gender I) [ I Male 2) [ ] Female - 38. Your race 1) [ j African American 2) [ ) Native American 3) [ ] Caucasian 4) [ ] Hispanic - 5) [ ] Oriental 39. Which of these categories best describes your age? 01) 15-17 06) 35-39 11) 60-64 . 02) 18-19 07) [ j 40-44 12). [ J 65-69 03) 20-24 08) [ j 45-49 13) 70 or over 04) [ J 25-29 09) 50-54 14) Do not wish to reply OS) [ j 30-34 10) 55-59 40. Which of these categories best describes the annual income of your household (before taxes)? - 01) [ ] $0-6,999 08) [ ] $50,000-74,999 ' 02) [ ] $7,000-9,999 09) [ ) $75,000-99,999 03) [ ] $10,000-14,999 10) [ ] $100,000-124,999 04) [ ] $15,000-19,999 11) [ ] $125,000-149,999 05) [ ] $20,000-24,999 12) [ ] $150,000-199,999 06) [ ] $25,000-34,999 13) [ ] $200,000-249,999 07) [ ] $35,000-49,999 14) [ ] $250,000 + 15) Do not wish to reply 41. What is your occupation? I'lease complete any of the irasert pages which apply to you. 7'hank you for your participation in our research program. 7he following questronspertaara Bo specsfic Town of Viaa1 servaces whach you nray hhave utilizeddurang thepastyear. Please resporad do ques8aons Pegasding tDaose wDtac9a you persoraally Dtave assed in the das8,ytar, SAcip over those wath which you ° do iaod Daavt persorsad euperierace ad t0ais time. ]LEBRARY i. Do you use the public library in the Town of Vail? 1) [ 1 Yes 2) [ j. R1o (GO TO NEXT SECTIOW--POLICE DEPARTMEAI'1) 2. Do you personally hold a library card in the Town of Vail? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ) No 3.:. In a typical month, how frequently do you visit the library? . • 1) [ ] Less than once 2) Once in a month 3) Two to four visits 4) j Five to nine visits 5) [ ] 10 or more - 4. On a rypical trip to the library, how long do you stay? 1) Less than 15 minutes . 2) 15 to 30 minutes 3) 30 minutes to 2 hours • 4) More than 2 houts 5. How do you typically get to the library? 1) ] Car . 2) ( ) Bns 3) [ ] Bike 4) [ l Wa1k 6. For what purpose(s) do you rypicaity come to the library? (CHECIC ALL THAT APPLI) 1) [ j Read magazines, listen to cassettes, or use other library materials/equipment in the facility 2) Do research for personal, business or school projects 3) Check out books or other materials for use at home 4) Work, study, write letters, etc. in a quiet library setting • 5) Use computer equipment available at library 6) [ J. Attend children's functions/events . 7) Attend seminars or meetings scheduled at the library or in meeting rooms across the hall 8) [ ] Other: 7. Would you like to see increased hours of operation at the library? 1) [ ] Yes (what days/hours?) 2) [ l N0 8. What suggestions or comments do you have about improvements for the library (services, facilities, programs, staffl? 9. From the list below, please ansever the following. A. Check the box if you have used the service in the last year. ; B. For those you have used, please rate the overall quality of ehe service on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means aPoor° and 5 means "Excellent. ° C. Choose five of the services which you would like to see expanded or improved. A. B. c. PROGFYEQM CHECK IF IF USED, EXP,4AiD/ USEbIN PLEASE IMPROVE PAST RATE (1-5) (CHECK YEF?R UP TO 5) INFORMA7'd0N SERVICES Business Information (for example, ARorningstar Mutual Funds) Reference N[ateraals on CD-Rom . Consumer Information • Personal Computers for the Public Public Access Catalog Online Database (RRarmot, Uncover, CARL, ERIC, etc.) Consumer Information Ready Reference/Research Telephone Service CHILDRE1V'S AND I'O(1TH SERQ'pCES Story Times and Summer Iteading Program Children's Materials--Books, Videos, etc. Electronic Children's Books Information for School Assignments ADULT RECREAT'IONAL SERVICES Books, Videos, CDs, Checkout Adult programs--Adventure Speakers Series, Author Appearances Magazines and IVewspapers Books on Tape, Other Audiotapes Tape Decks, CD Players, VCRs (in-house) Other (please identify): GEIVERAL SERVICES Copy Machine . FAX Machine, Modems, AV Equipment Checkout, Income Tax Forms, Typewriters (circle relevant items) • Quiet Reading Space ]Vleeting Room Community Display Space Book Drops at Additional Sites Inierlibrary Loan Other (Please identify): POI[,gC]E IID~PAR'IIM[ER17[' • 10. Have you had any direct contact with the Vail Police Department in the past year? 1) [ ] Yes 2) 1Vo (GO TO IVEXT SECTIOIV--COMARUIVICATIOAIS) 11. (IF YES) What was the nature of your most recent contact? 1) I called to report an accident not involving me 2) I was involved in a motor vehicle accident 3) I was the victim of a crime 4) I was a wimess to a crime or incident 5) I requested information from the police department 6) I was interested in crime prevention seminars 7) [ l I was arrested 8) ( j I was issued a citation 9) I was involved with the police department in another matter (specify): ' 12. In that most recent contact with the Vail Police Department, with which section(s) did you PRIMARILY.interact? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1) , [ ] Dispatch 2) [ ] Records/Clerical 3) [ ] Patrol 4) [ ] Detectives 5) [ ] Code enforcement/safety 6) [ ] Crime prevention . 7) ( ] Administration 13. Based on your most recent contacf with the Vail PoIice Department, please rate how the department employee performed in the following areas. POOR AVG. EXCELLENT n/a Concern 1 2 3 4 5 0 Helpfulness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 0 Fairness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Problem solving 1 2 3 4 5 0 Putting you at ease 1 2 3 4 5 0 Professionalism 1 2 3 4 5 0 Response time 1 2 3 4 5 0 Quality of service 1 2 3 4 5 0 14. What suggestions do you.have as to how the Vail Police Department can improve the quality of its service and operations? ` CONI1lRMCA'g'IIONS/IR1g'ORR4[A'II'IIORI ' 15. Did you phone or visit the Town of Vail offices during the past year to request information, offer an opinion, make a complaint, etc? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No (END SURVEY HERE) 16. (IF YES) Which department(s) did you contact? 01) [ ] Town Manager 02) [ Town Clerk 03) [ ] Finance 04) [ ] Community Development OS) [ ] Public VVorks 06) [ ] Transportation 07) [ J Police ' 08) ( ] Municipal Court • 09) [ ] Town Attorney 10) [ ] Fire 11) [ ] Community relations 12) [ ] Mayor's office 13) [ ) Town Council 14) [ ] Library 17. Were you satisfied with the manner in which your contact was handled? 1) . [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No (please ezplain) 18. Did you request a follow-up action by the Town or department in relation to your inquiry? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No (END SURVEY HERE) 19. (IF YES) Was that action completed to your satisfaction? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ) No (please explain) l e P.O. Box 249 / 750 Eagle Road Minturn, Colorado 81645 (303) 949-4490 ~ Dr. Erik S. Fredell - Principal Mr. Gerald Schmidt Ms. Ronda S. VVoodall - Assistant Principal ftNs. Judy Caligiuri Mr. Robert Isbell - Athletic Director Guidance Counselor d~f v~ TD: Vail Town Council Members D~AY 2 vail Town Manager ,199~ Vail Transportation/Parking Manager FROM: Battle Mountain High School Staff DATE: May 26, 1994 RE: Parking Charges at Ford Park Lot ~ We, the undersigned staff inembers of Battle Mountain High School, request that you reconsider your decision to charge $2.00 for parking at the Ford Park dirt lot on June 4, 1994, the date of our graduation ceremony. While we completely agree that parking along the Frontage Road in that area is both dangerous and undesirable, we do not believe that your decision to charge for parking is in the best interest of our community, given that those attending are local graduates, parents arid relatives, and school district employees. We suggest that a better approach would be to allow free parking at the Ford Park lot on a first come, first served basis, with latecomers being directed to the Parking Structure by appropriate signs. Those choosing to park along the Frontage Road could be ticketed. Thank you for your serious consideration of this request. /10 N~.t ti . i.~'~ ~ "T rid .of Eastern agle County; In a Class by C~u s 1~es'~ , ~ ~ , i - `,q.. e.~ ~ .nc. ,~.ly,'• ' 1 E ~~r. V~ . . ~ A•r~ " ' a "~,:;..~.:r: .`i'..~'x,~:~~"a ~ :s>,.~, s~:z ~ .~x~c ~~i.:a...~C... • . gy. , .e Y s ~g~F' S ~ ' ` x ' g ac ' - ~~','0,~ s° ~.x'µ. %'•s:.. ~~E~~ `''n S^~' , 3~' F e . 'i•: ~ ~ , , . . , ~ . . n. ~ `i ~ 'A ' q , s• ~ ~ ~ b j'a".~. '~nt#1, •s - . • _ • . a~ c~'• ~ i:>. ~ . : ............rt . . . : . . . a~Y . ~ , : tl;~i. 4 . ~j:~. ~.i . .;.^~oF^~. • ~ ~~kY:s.~,',~~)~ii.i:s ~ ~ i.f~ ~'3~~':~~~~~.~:...€:~ f.: ..#,t ~b~"'~ ~ • . , ad a ~rY . ' ~P..t •bm '•8~~'fp„.. ' ~`y~ . f SK~e ~ ~ SB-216 The F CTS Vail Associates Real Estate Group Beaver Creelc' Resort P.O. $ox 959 Avon, Colorado 81620 303/845-5930 FAx 303/845-5945 TO: Town of Vail Council Members FROMa Ed O'Brien, Vice President Vail Associates Real Estate Group, Inc. DATEs June 2, 1994 RE: Senate Bill 216 - THE FACTS At the suggestion of Mayor Peggy Osterfcass and Council Member Tom Steinberg, with whom 2 met Thursday morning, Jtane 2, I am pleased to attach a briefing book describiag.Vail Associates, Inc.'s sponsorship, the reasons, and backgrousad therefor of Senate Bill 216. I will make an oral presentation to you at your meeting on Tuesday, June 7, and look forward to a two-way dialogue.ancl complete response to any questions and concerns you may have regarding this very important piece of legislation,e It is the hope of Vail Associates, Inc. that once you have read the material in the book, and have had an opportunity discuss the issues, that you, as a council body, will vote to endorse this legislation, or at least withdraw your re- quest to Governor Romer to veto it. Thank you for your consi.d,eration, and I look forward to meeting each of you in person on Tuesday, June 70 A&L Developers of Vail, Arrowhead and Beaver CreeV Resort ° Notification to VAI of CCIOA°s problems affecting Bachelor Gulch ~ O°Brien memo to Andy Daly and request to involve CSCUSA MacCutcheon memo to Diane Reimer gequesting help from Colorado Homebuilders ~ SB-216 testimony and informa- tion memo given to Colorado Legislators MacCutcheon notification to Eagle County Commissioners about SB-216 and request for assistance w/Colorado Legislato Eagle County letter to Repa Taylor and Repe Taylor:°s response VAI letters to Governor Romer Z7 Eagle County Commissioners° _ letter to Governor Romer - ~ Andy Daly°s letter to Bud Gates ~ Flap and explanation over reference to Pss e Pat Ratliff ~ ~ OneStep' ~ ~ ~ ~tl~l~i~.l 01/28/84 13:16 V303 866 0200 HRO DENVER N7077 lp OOZ ~ , NMOAMUM TOe Rgrk FdaCctitcY1eoY1 c1&1d Ed OaBr7.e81 FRO~'d8 Q°a c ~evSE'A CO$3viCk DA'I'E: JetSevaayy 240 1994 REo Vail Aseociates, Ince/Bachelor Gulch Project CCIOA Pqatteg~ our detailed revgew of tYae Colorado Comaaon %n+cerest owners,Yxip Act (OCCIOA") indicates that a-t gs uralakely that furadiaxg me-chaxagsms such as real estate transger assessmexats (xRETAm) and assessm.ents an the sales af zaerclaandise tiaithin the Itesort (I'Civi.r- Assessme-nts°) are pemitted under CCIOA a ' Ttais statute (wha.ch becaxae 0-ffective Jugy 1 o 1992) reauireA $hat eacla saleable paxceb of rea3 estate raitlaira the ~ subdivision be ase-igned bva fractien or percexatage of the 0 pCommon EacpensesO o.o Carmaon ExPexeses og the association ....0 are defined as virtually all ].i.abilities fvr expenditures of a hoffieowaaersp asso6batian wlaacla has assessment powers against real estate wit&ai.an the Resorto Abthatxqh CCIOA cvntains some acidif:ionab pgoegsioazs which coaa].c1 be nased to justif}t fuaadixag mechanisms sanch as RETA ancl Civbc Assessmentsg Yhose provisians age specifgcall.y mac1e subject to the mandatory prOiY15i0%iS gequ3.gg%1g °peCg$1~ fraCtb0815 6g' perCe3ltage8 aS AYSt1.lY3ed ak]ogYe. 01/28/84 13:16 -a303 866 0200 HRO DENYER N7077 141003 ~ ~e discuss~ our cancgusioras with RKofe3sor ot ttae urraiversity Sr.hool of Lawe ProfSssor is ane ~f the prinCipal draft5megn of CC:EOA and ae3rees cagth onar antes°pretat3on of CCIOP, as sgt forta abOVe. Pxofessor also agreed with tBae aaathor og this meffivrandtaaa (a) thag CCI9A daes nat take g8ato accaunt garopergy the neecls of majosz resort developments, and (b) that CCIOA should lbe amendecl to allow garad develapments aatblizing modegn concepts siac.,rg as was d.one aai Beaver creeke Professor recoaamends that effogts to amend the statute be started right away so tkaat a~~ ~~tempt can be made to amesnd CCIOA wata3n the ctagrent legasaatave seasoaso He 3"s wil].igac3 to woz;k wbth us gra these ef f orts o ~2- GKCKMs NEMoRANDUM ItE a THE CO%ORADO COMA40N INTEREST OWNERSH%P ACT The Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ("CCIOP,N) as it presently exists would not allow developers of complex multi-purpose projects to adopt many of the features successfully incorporated in several of Colorado's most popular resortse Examples of successful resort areas which were developed using Iand use covenants which would not be allowed under CCIOA include the Beaver Creek'ski area, the Telluride ski area and Purgatory ski area. One of the principal draftspersons of CCIOA has told me that CCIOA's effect on major projects was unintentional and should be ~ addressed bY the legislaturee This memorandum is intended to identify some of the limitations imposed by CCIOA which will almost undoubtedly hamper the future development of similar projectso The matters identified below are thought by the author of this memorandum to be of major concerno There are many other parts of CCIOP, not mentioned in this memorandum which could pose significant problems for major developmentse For convenience, this memo will use the land use covenants in effect for the Beaver Creek Resort as the basis for identifying the provisions of CCIOP, most likely to limit fu'cure projects. ~ go ReRresentatfon og Distinct ownership Grau2s on the Governiag Board of Directorso The land use documents creating the Beaver Creek Resort Company (the homeowners' association which controls most activities at Beaver Creek) allows the owners of distinct types of property to be assured of representation on the Resort Company's Board of Directorse The groups guaranteed board representation at Beaver Creek included (a) owners of residential units, (b) owners of commercial units (such as retail shops and restaurants), (c) owners of hotels and other lodging facilities, and (d) owners of undevelvped lots> While § 38-33.3-207 of CCIOA allows land use declarations to provide nfor class voting on specified issues ~ affecting the class if necessary to protect valid interests of the class,ff this provision does not appear to go far enough to allow class voting for the election of directorsol At the least, the provision is ambiguous on this point and would probably be litigated with potentially unfortunate results for the homeowners' association, whose actions might be invalidated if directors are ultimately disqualigiedee 2. Authority te Utilize Non=Tradatgonal Fuading sourceso Beaver Creek Resort Company was intended to be more lo It is debatable whether the election of directors is an "issueO as used in CCIOA, or whether a ciass vote for directors is "necessary to protect e°o the classop -2- ~ like atown government and chamber og commerce than a typical homeownegs° associationo In that connection, the Resort Company was required to provide, among other things, security services, an extensive transportation system, a central reservations service and to advertise and promote the Resorte In order to accomplish its various functions, the Resort Company needed a variety of funding sources, and it elected to use funding mechanisms similar to those used by incorporated mountain communitiese Thus the Resort Company was given authority to impose an assessment on retail sales (similar to a governmental sales tax), to assess transfers of real estate (similar to the real estate transfer taxes which are ~ increasingly popular in mountain communities), and to impose an assessment on lift tickets, ski lessons and other recreational activities in order to make sure that the owner of the Beaver Creek ski area was contributing equitably to the Resort Companye These sources of funds have been very . important to the success of Beaver Creeka It would appear that none of these non-traditional sources of funds would be available under CCIOA. CCIOA seems to contemplate only the traditional type of assessment imposed by homeowners' associationse Section 3-3303-207 requires a fraction or percentage of common expenses of the association be allocated to each unit, the sum of which must equal 100%. While a clever draftsman might try to draft a provision -3- allowing non-traditional funding sources such as those presently used in Beaver Creek, such an attempt would almost certainly be challenged in court and would run a high risk of being held invalido Consequently, new homeowners' associations cannot rely on those funding mechanisms to provide funds that may be needed to successfully perform its functions in the community which it serves. The need to utilize a variety of funding sources is probably only applicable to homeowners' associations servicing major mixed use land development projects which will provide a broad range of services to its constituents. It may be unnecessary (and perhaps unwise) to allow typical residential- only projects to use these broader revenue-producing techniquesa 3. Identificatfoa of Future Developmeat Rgcthtso Perhaps the most troubling aspect of CCIOA to a developer of a major project, is a series of provisions requiring the developer to lay out in advance, and in some detail, its entire development scheme. Major projects such as Beaver Creek were built over several decadese Beaver Creek - was first platted in 1978 and it is still undergoing development< As times and tastes change, these projects must change with themo Flexibility is one of the developer°s most -4- ~ holy mantras. It is not clear whether appropriate flexibility for major projects can be obtained under CCIOA., For instance, § 38-33e3-209 requires each plat to showo among other thingso (a) name and a general schematic plan og the entire2 common interest community; (b) the location and dimensions of all real estate not subiect to development ricthts, or subiect onlv to development riQht to withdraw eve; (c) a lectally sufficient description of anv real estate sublect to development riQht, labelled to identifv the ricthts applicable ~ to each parcel; (j) -the ap,proximate location and dimensions of limited common elementsa3 2. This is not a defined term. It implies that a plan is required covering more than the initial phase of a multi- phase projecte Can this plan be changed? How? By whom? 3. pLimited coaunon elementso are defined to mean all common elements designated for the exclusive use of one or more (but less than all) unitse pCommon elementso are ciefined to be any real estate owned or leased by the association, other than a unite Thus common elements anci limited common elements as defined in CCIOA are greatly different grom common elements and limited common elements in condominium projectsa This is very likely to lead to confusiono One might wonder why a unit (which may be a lot or a condominium unit) which is owned by the association is not a common elementa Is an easement held by an association a common element? -5- In addition, to the extent not shown or projected on the plats, maps of the units must show or projectt (c) an units in which the declarant has reserved the riqht to create additional units or common elements identified appropriatelv,` Attempting to comply with these mandates in a project covering, say, 1,000 acres, and which may be built out over a 20 or 30-year period is awesomeo Even using the most conservative approach of trying to reserve the broadest development rights over all areas for which specific plans have not been finalized has its hazards because of the very real threat that homeowners may challenge (a) the adequacy of ~ the descriPtion of the development right, (b) whether the real estate subject to the development rights had ga legally sufficient description,9 or (c) whether the real estate was properly Nlabelledn or gidentified appropriatelye'° - In addition to the provisions og § 38-3303-209, § 38- 3303-205 requires every declaration to contain, among other thingso - (f) a description of any limited common elements, e°o and, in a nlanned comm unitv, 4. CCIOA fails to explain what identification will be deemed appropriatea P,nyone for litigation? P,lso, isn't the statute inadvertently using the term '°common elemen'c'° in its condominium sense? -6- ~ anv real estate that is or must become , common elements;5 (g) a description of any real estate, except real estate subject to development rights, that mav be allocated subsectuentlv as limited common elementsb ovoe; (h) a description of anv development rights and other special declarant rights reserved bv the declarant toQether with a leqallv sufficient description of the real estate to which each of those rights applies and a time limit within which each of those rights must be exercised e°e; ~ (1) anv restrictions on the use occupancy and alienation of the units' oee; (m) the recording data for recorded easements ,e, to voe any portion of the common 5e This would seem to require an up-to-date title check to see what real property has become a common element through ownership or lease by the associatione It is hard to imagine any real estate that nmust becomen a common elemente 6e It would seem that all real estate might eventually be pallocatedp as a limited common elementa If a declarant fails to describe such real estate, can it never ever become a limited common element? 7. Can these restrictions later be changed? Eliminated? Could a ban on woodburning fireplaces be imposed lateg bf air pollution becomes a problem? -7- ~ interest community is or may become subject by virtue of a reservation in the declarationo (sic) Once again the developer of a complex project is challenged to look far into the future and to make current commitments with respect to the final outcome of his projecto Any failure to accurately predict the most desirable buildout of his project will likely condemn the developer (a) to his original conception or (b) to years of protracted expensive litigatione 4o Exercise og Development Rightse Under CCIOA § 38-3303-210, each time a declarant ~ wishes to exercise any development rights, the declarant must execute and record an amendment to the declaration complying with the provisions of § 33-33<3-209o In a complex development, this will require hundreds or perhaps thousands of amendmentse The most common amendment will occur when the declarant (or more likely, a developer to whom a declarant has sold a unit for purposes of building a multi- unit stnacture) has completed a new structureo In order for the declarant (or assignee) to amend the declaration in compliance with § 38-3303-209, the amendment must include a new (a) schematic plan of the Oentire common interest communityro; (b) description of the location and -8- ~ dimension og all real estate not subject to development right ,oa and the location and dimension og all existing improvements within that real estate; and (c) so forth through the eight subsections and 14 sub-subsections of that § 38- 3303-209a Since this amendment would need to be accurate as of the date it is filed, the applicant would have to incorporate all the required data of all projects completed in the planned community prior to the date of that amendment even though those projects may have been (and probably were) undertaken by others and may not be readily availablee This provision may make sense in the case of the single condominium project which is typically carried out by one declarant using a very thoroughly conceived plan intended ~ to be completed in a year or twoe As applied to a complex resort, this provision would appear to be, at the least, burdensome and, at the most, unworkableo 5o Subdivision og Unitso CCIOA § 38-33e3-213 allows the subdivision of units under certain circumstancesa In this connection, it should be noted that in most cases the exercise og any development right is likely to result in a subdivision of units. Thus these two sections should be read in unisone In order to subdivide a unit under the cited section, the unit owner must file an application to the homeowners' ~ -9- ~ association, which apparently can refuse to approve the subdivisione This gives an enormous amount of control to the homeowners' association and is likely to be the source of major controversy and litigation in a complex development projecte Even during the period the declarant maintains control of the homeowners' associationo this provision can cause substantial mischiefe For instance, the developer of a completed condominium project which has not sold out may have very good economic reasons to oppose the development of other projects which will compete with hise Moreover, owners of property near new projects often disagree with the exact location, height or appearance of neighboring projects, and ~ oppose themo Hence, the homeowners, association may be under enormous pressure when considering whether or not to approve subdivisions, and the directors appointed by declarant are likely to be threatened with personal liability due to the OfiduciaryO nature of their responsibilities as set forth in CCIOA § 38-33e3-303(a)e S. Miscellaaeouso - (a) CCIOA § 38-33e3-215 allows the declarant Oto maintain sales offices manaqement offices and models in a common interest communitv but only if the declaration so ,provides and specifies the riqhts of a declarant with reaard ~ -10- ~ to the nuffiber, size location and relocation thereofe" (Emphasis addedo) The section goes on to state that any real estate used as a sales office, management office or model and not designated as a unit by the declaration is a common elemento This provision would be extremely difficult to comply with in a large project which will be developed over timeo8 How can a developer tell what size or location a sales office or management office must be some ten years hence, much less where it should be located. Moreover, the provision converting real estate which may for a moment or two have been used as a rosales office" or pmanagement office" (both ambiguous terms) into common elements would be punitive and disruptive to develoPment of a resorte ~ (b) CCIOA § 38-33e3-301 does not allow anyone who does not own a unit in the community to be a member. This is not necessarily a good thinge At Beaver Creek, the owner of the Beaver Creek ski area was required to be a member of the Beaver Creek Resort Company although it owned no property within the Resorto The purpose for requiring such membership was so that the Resort Company could impose assessments on the 8e A cautious declarant might include in the declaration the right to maintain an unlimited number of sales offices, management offices and models of any size anywhere in the planned community, and to relocate them at any time to any other locationo However, such general statements may run ~ afoul og § 33-3303-112 or 33°3303-1130 -11- owner of the ski area to help defray the costs of advertising the Resorte (c) CCIOA § 38-3303-303(5) requires the declarant's control of the homeowners' association to expire '°no later than either 60 days after conveyance of 75 percent of the units that may be created eee, two years after the last conveyance of a Lnit by the declarant in the ordinary course of business, or two years after any right to add new units was last exercisede The author of this memorandum has no quarrel with the first two provisions which require a change in control; however, requiring declarant control to terminate if for two years the right to add new units is not exercised is ~ very dangerouse During a good real estate market, it is entirely conceivable that more than two years' inventory of units would be createdo Thus two years could easily lapse without new units being created, thus triggering a loss of control well before final buildouta No logical reason is apparent for declarant to lose control simply because of a market downturne In fact, during a market downturn it may be more important than ever for the developer to maintain control so that the development theme is not abandoned in favor of short-term interests during the economic downturne (d) CCIOA § 38-3303-303(8) provides that a member of the executive board (other than a member appointed by the declarant) can be removed by the two-thirds vote of all ~ -12- ~ persons entitled to vote at any meeting of the unit owners in which a quorum is presento Ig, as is often desirable, designated classes og owners are allowed to elect their own representatives, it would seem unfair to allow removal of, say, a director representing commercial interests based upon a vote made up primarily of persons owning residential unitsa G. Kevin Conwick Febguary 9D 1994 ~ ~ -13- cxcM/soi r i i \ ~ ~ ~ a ~ e . BeaverCreek° Resart P.O. Box 959 Avon,Colorado 81620 303/845-5800 MEMORANDUM 303/845•5806 FAX 303/845-6677 TO: Andy Daly FROM: Ed 0'Brien Kevin Conwick DATE: February 10, 1994 RE: Bachelor Gulch Development/Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ~ In preparing the land use planning for the Bachelor Gulch development, we have determined that a relatively-new Colorado Land Use Act, the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ("CCIOA"), contai.ns provisions which may prevent us from utilizing many of the features which were successfully incorporated into the Beaver Creek land use documents (and which have been adopted by many resorts throughout the State of Colorado). Consequently, we would recommend obtainin' curative legislation to allow major, complex projects such as Bachelor Gulch to develop along the lines of Beaver Creek. The principal problem areas we see with CCIOA are: 1. Initial Representation of 1)istrict Ownership Groups - on the Communitv Association's Board of Darectors. We will probably want distinct groups of properry owners (hotel operators, merchants, single-family residence owners, condominium owners and maybe raw land owners as well as the Master Developer through substantial sell-out) to be assured of distinct group representation on the Bachelor Gulch Community Association's board of directors. This promotes democracy within the resort development and gives a broader- based point of view than might otherwise be obta.ined. The CCIOA statute as it presently ~ exists does not appear to allow such representation. Vail Associates. Ine.-Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creek° Resorts ~ • 2. Ufllization of on-T'raditional Fu n in urces. In order to provide a variety of services to homeowners, we would like the Bachelor GuIch Community A.ssociation to have authority to use non-traditional fundi.ng sources such as were used by Beaver Creek Resort Company (`BCRC'D. These i.nclude an assessment on retail sales si.milar to BCRC's civic assessment, and an assessment on transfer of real estate similar to BCRC's real estate transfer assessment. These financing sources are not allowed under CCIOA. 3. Identification of Fu4ure DeveIop ment io ta, Perhaps the most limiti.ng (and da,ngerous) provisions of CCIOA are a series of provisions requiri.no the Master Developer to lay out in advance, and apparently in considerable detail, its entire development scheme. In a project such as Bachelor Gulch, which wiIl be built out over a period of at least 15 years, it is enormously difficult to predict the man.ner i.n which the resort will, or should, develop. The provisions of ~ CCIOA seem designed for individual condominium complexes and other projecrs which are Iikely to be completed withi.n a short period of time and can be conceived in its entirety at the outset. We understand that other ski areas, such as Keystone, have also expressed - concerns about the effect of CCIOA on their fulure development Moreover, we have leamed that the national association which sponsored the un.irorm act which Ied to CCIOA is considering amendments which would exempt major resort developments such as Bachelor Gulch. Consequently, we think it is most appropriate to approach the legisiature to seek legislative relief. ~ , ~ ~ ~ MEMORANDUM 3~ ~ ~~06 TO: Diane Reimer Colorado Association of Home Builders Via Fax 733-1206 FRpNL Rick MacCutchelm Va il Associates, DATE: 2 March 1994 RE: Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act Enclosed are two -memorandums regarding the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act and the proposed amendment. The memorandums explain why Vail Associates, Inc. is interested in having legislation acted upon in this session which will exempt master planned communities from the provisions of CCIOA. ~ In Summary: o CCIOA prohibits representacion on the Board of Directors by distinct classes. o CCIOA prohibits non-traditional revenue sources. o CCIOA requires too stringeat of identification of future devetopment rights which inhibits long term land development flexibility. The Home Builders Association may be just as concerned and willing to assist with lobbying because: ! o CCIOA limits the availability of the master ptanned community lands for development. _ ~ o CCIOA prohibits opportunities for better govemance and better rypes of communities. i , o More opportunities for developmenc will occur if CCIOA is amended to not apply : to planned unit communities. A " Please do not hesitate to contact me at 926-3029 should you have any questions or need any further assistance. Vail Associates, Inc. and its legal counsel would be pleased co meet wich you at your earliest convenience. ~ . ii ~ ~ 4 04/15/94 10:29 V866 0200 HRO DENVER N7076 Z002 . ~ CCgOA TESTIMoNY 24 o°arien % o %PT~BD CT 1ORq Good anorning my raame is ' n and am Cxre~e~ °Of Real Estate for Vail Associatesa One o£ any princip3l responsibilitaes is to ovegsee the devegApment gg the new resort comanunity we are creating between Beaver Creek and Arrowhead P2ountaine It is cal],ed Bachelor Gulcha Yt is a very exciting project it°s a very big project [gegeg to lagge ffiap]e Bachelor Gulch will be built on about acres. Tt is currently zoneci for about resiciential units aaad square Feet of commercial spacee It will have a much more residentia1 orientataan than Deaveg Creek and we wang it to have at least the saane, ancl hopefully a better, cgua ligy - ~ The first phase will be located at about this point [regeg to ffiap] and will have about residential unitso We rnrant to start sales on this hase this fall e We are on a tight tametable and we at VA age wogking at gull throttIe on this pgojecga The later phases of the resogt wb11 be built out over time. It°s hard to pgedict how long beCause fihat depends on local, nataonal and even interraational market conditionse We estimate tYaat it will take at least ~ years to reach build ougo During that time the pgoject wall be constantly gevised as publac tastes change and as weo as master developers, get betteg 3nforination and better icieas o This project will prAVide work gor alot of people fog a lot of yearso It will alsa help ]ceep the ski industgy more accurately, the tougisg indtastry healthy aaaci will pgovide a majoac source of gevenue ga Golorado d- virtually in perpetuityo Al1 0f the Pesogt ageas need proj ects of ghi.s kirbd e Some, 1ike us, will build thean themselwese Others will be lucky enough to have baaciependent. developers create sbmilag comanunitbes neag theig resortsa ~ 04/15/94 10:30 °8°866 0200 HRO DENVER N7076 2003 _ ~ g%o TY~ ~O C~%6~ BUT we need youg helpo When we began serious planning of thas caanmunity a few months ago we, Og courseo hired professionals go help us create the cemplex land use docwnents under which these gesorts are managed, and hopefully thrbvea Because we haee been happy with our Beaver Creek project (which is where Y live), we wanted to use Beaver creek as a model for Bachelor Gulcho Accordinqly, we hired the g,ays that put togegher the land use plan for Beaver Creek to help us at Bachelor Gulche Tv our surprise, we were told that we couldn't use a numbeg of the techniques that have helped make Beaber Creek • successgul beeause they are not allowed under the CCYOA law which became egfective in 1992a Let me mention the most important limitations we are faced witho le Figst, at Beaver creek we created a homeowaiers' associatbon with gepresentation from every seetor of that ~ community, The homeow$aers' association has a director elected by the residengial ownegs, a dbrector elected by the lodge ownegs, and a director elected by the otaners of commercial businesses operating at the Rgsort. This creates d very democratac and very bread=based board of direetorsa We want to do a similar thirag at Bachelor Gulche tlnfogtunately, we can°t under CCIOAe a- Secomd, at Beaveg Creek we have imposed a broad base og assessments to generate the funds necessary to supporg the c°mmun1tY's anany .Euractionse This iflcludes assessments on retail sales (similar to sales taxes), aSsessments based ora psoperty values (similar t0 1c-eal property taxes) arad assessments on real estate traaasfers, 6de want to use this foganat at BacheloP Gulcho Unfortunately, under ccIOA we - can°te • 3= gbnally, GcIOA is full of prAyasiens requirang us to specify how tYais massive resort wilI be developeda You can do that in a condominiuan project and in most smaller subdivisions, which will be finished in one or two yeagse However, ig bs extremely hard to comply with these provisgoras in PrAjecgs like BF1ChelQP Gulch, whbch w311 ta}ce years ta evolve $o bts €gnal configuratione We aaeed flexibility to let this gesort grow in an intelligeng waye -2- 04/15/94 10:30 -&866 0200 HRO DENVER N7076 004 _ ~ ~ggo CONeLIIS%ON g haee been told ghat thg focus og CcIOA was directed at a n~er og problems which existed in condominiums, where develope~~ ha~ not properl~ ~rotected the integests og the oumers, We have no quargel with CcIoA. Yn fact, we find znany Pagts of at to be extremely appgopriate. (Thgs ffigght be a place fag the dogphan anagogy,] Moreover, gor the reasons I've cited above, we need some very limited gelief groaa CCIOA so that lsrge, master- planned commuraitaes such as ours and seversl others dahich are being planned near other gesorts can follow modern coaacepts ef comanunity developanent as gef lected in the Beawer Cgeek model, The Amendment you age considerang wss drafted as narPOwly as we ghink possible in ogdes to allow us to gollow tIae Beaveg creek anodebe It as antended to exempt only large projects such as ours and to exemPt thean from only a modest number of the CCIOA reqtairementse We believe thas Amendment is very necessary arad will gurtheg the creation of cguality ~ communities gor the bene€it of alI of the people of Colorado. I have not attempted to get into the specifics of this Amendmento I have asked oug attorney, xevin conwick, to geview it wath you bn as mueri detail as you wisho ~ APPRECYATE YOU12 P,TTEIdTIONo -3- GK,CD/DB4 CQLORADO G9MM9N gNTEREST OWNERSHIP ACT PART M EXEMPTYON FOR MAJOR 24ASTER-PLAATNED CONlNiTJNI'a'IES ~ The Colorado commora znterest Owaaesshig Act (OCCIOAR) was adopged egfective July 1, 1992 fog the purpose of preventbng problems relating partbcularly to coradombnibzm projeets and gma5.1 developments where the developers had nvt adequateiy protecged the angerestss of bomeownerso Howevero ccIoA did not take ango a~~ount the cgmplexity anci xaeed for flexibilit1r a.n major master°Plaraned communitieso These proj ects -dalb be buibt gut oves a period of a decade or ffiore and neeci tv be ab~~ ~o use the ffiost sophisticated land- plannla7c3 t8G$bnbques gequired go meet the desires of the community and the marketglace over this timefraanea Colorado has benef itted greatly fgom the development of many major master-planned commuraities such as Beaver Creelce Telluridep Purgatory and the lbkeo These communities could not be constructed uxadgr CCYOA as it exists today becausee ~ CCgOA does not provide for sophisf:icated earatrol mechanisms such as allowgng digfegent interest groups withbn the resogt (a,eo residential owmers, commerebal ownesso hotel and lodge owners) to have special representati.on on the homeovartessa assoca.agion board og directorso ~ CCIOA does xaet allow sophisticateci baacoane° ~ producing devices sucka as are used by the resorts lasted aboveo These devices iaaclude assessments an retail sales anci assessments an xeal estage transferso * CCIOA imposes eoffiplex requlations requiring the developer to identify at the outset the proposed uses within the deveiopmente ~ A2ajor masi.er-planned eommunities invariably reqtaira resubdivision og units. Under CCIOA logs may only be gesubdivided wath approval og the homeownerse assocBationa %f 311y e1,eEGeB'St Of the COIIIIAu8'blty OppOS@S $1be subdivisaon fog any g'eason, the homeowners s assvciation may be reluctant to approve the gesubdivgsaomm garticularly qiveaa tta~ threat og gersonal liability of any developer°appointed directoro The probbems f~r which CC%oA was adopted have not arisen in major master-planned communitiese Cansequently, a limited exemption far these communities seems appropriate e lNioreouer, coffimuazities of the size coxatemplated by the proposed amenciffient shAtald be subjeet to registragioxi under the Federal ~ %nterstate Land Sales Registratgon Act which affords sagnigieant pgotectaon to purchasers of lots withain those subd.ivi.sions. APR-15-94 FRI 17 :25 ARROWHEAD ADMIN FAX N0. 3039262321 P.02 . , . . . . . . . - QooZ $RO DID~ 1dT0~'Y ~ c'R 15 15225 gT :oa V309 oao~ e ae ~ ( CAHIB Q g~ ~rsr?smiti~t P~erfla G4& ccaora& a ~ Hotne ild~s~~ ~ • ~ ~ ' ~ 24M s E=aoia MMMo CO ua1o (303)a 33-i ~ ~ PAX(303) 93 3-Y a0b T@: $dexbt3rs o~ tIze Ca1orade FRoMa Diarie Rsb~E ancl Mike Beasl8y Cole~aclo Agsacaata.gn ef Roate aua.lciegs ee~.gyi.a~g P~isioa~s [~rid~ Which i~&rga Pl~ed `~~9~p Be ~eveZ~cl ~dler Tha W CoIorado Commorb ~ uSla,~~~ ~ May oumarchi-a i%Ete$°e~t Acta_ _ ABttLnbesg\Repe 4 ~ Colofa taa~~t ~~~ig '~~e ~~1~? ~ 199 by h~ tahe Legi ga~t & to ~etablieh ~a~ ~dop~~d clear, eocnprekaensiveoaild uaiEo= fxatruewosk for t1e creat i.otL a.ss operi.tiosb of CommeL iabGerest csmunuaitieset' ~t i~ ~ ~ z~ 3.ELtege~~ co=unity~ it. can ~ inclucle her ~~a3. est ~eu~.rtd to~B°aottes, coo~ratbves and, ea.ntia].1y, ~y i~pravamenes t2~t arp- subjeeL go a reeox-ded declaration asad ca=aged ~ ari asaoca,atiano . ~ ~wAr- -616 need~~ now? A laarge p7.a=ed eommuaaity sn a resvYt arga of Colo~~ plam to get underway this f al7.. Sevez-al current CCIcLk provisians w$lg ~ecpix~ ths.a pzoject to utili.ze features Laeompatible wieh lBrge scale devp-loPmerats, paxtioularly thoee irL gosort co=„nities wa.th numerous types of usetsp ayecigicallY: 1a CclOA does nog appear ta allow distiaact groupe ot propexty . e~~~s Motel Ckaeratoroa Megclaants, silagle fatnily ownexs, eondn- ewlaers)on ara associatioxL board ef d,irectogs a 2. CC%QA requires the master developor Lo Jay oa.t in advanee and in c~asiderable d~talb tha entire dgvelopmeaa~ acheme regardless ot the tgme frame for develapment. Yn aproject with a bufld-out of at least tan years and likely moge, thera i~ ~o way to e~tab9.fsh Chis degree of de~~~ ~or porgions of the project with lager bv.ild-outo a~~ cu=ent CCgOA pvovr~ken ~ae~~~sa~r ~~g~~tn ~~~edingl}~ difticulta ig ~.ot iffipossa~b~, e 3o TA p~~vida a varaety of sex-ticvo ¢or fu'cure property owmed arge nondtgadi~icna~ ~'~g i ~ ~ ~u~ee~ ~~acheas us~°ba~ed Id ~al est~.~~ com~t~.es ~ ~ ~ specia5 $ssessment~ ~~e iLat curreut~y aLllownd under CCIAAo Notc: 9nce a, portion og the large plarmed d~rlvp ~ to~ +~hat ,p ~~~-on . • the pxovisions of C~0.~ wi1Z applY to this bill and agl cemponents of CC%oA, n~t specifir.s lly adc 1= lo a gn v diaance ~per la~, tigbe and t~cation, ~ enizu-unt domaLn, Y g~~h~~'~) o s i11 s~~ ~prov to gZa~~ m~a~~cae~~ ~r~ plas~~ ~~mm=igigs. 5 VAIL ASSOCIATESo INC ~ MEP40RANDIIPq TOo Jim Fritze Jack Lewis Eagle County Commissionerso Johnnette Phillips George Gates James Johnson, Jr. FROP4e Rick MacCutch44~- DATEo April 28, 1994 SUBJECTa Colorado Senate Bill 216 Because of your influence with state legislators, we would like to take this opportunity to advise you of important pending ~ legislation-SB216e To help create Bachelor Gulch in the first class way that is appropriate, Vail Associates, Inc., Colorado Ski Country USA and Colorado Association of Home Builders have sponsored a bill to amend the Colorado Common Ownership Interest Acte Second reading by the Senate will be on Friday, April 29, 1994 and action by the House will occur next week. Attached are documents which further explain our positiono If you have any questions or want to provide any assistance, please do not.hesitate to call Poncho Hays at Hays, Hays and Wilson, Inc. (303-860-1616) or Diane Reimer at Colorado Association of Home Builders, (303-733-1100). ~ - BeaverCreek' Resort P.O. Box 959 Avon, Colorado 81620 r~ ~~til~ L~ 303I845-5800 MEMOt~UM 303/845•5806 FAX 303/845•6617 TO: An Daly ~ . FROM: Ed O'Brien Kevin Conwick DATE: February 10, 1994 RE; Bachelor Gulch DevelopmendColorado Common Intere~t Ownership Act In preparing the land use plannin' Lan the Use c At~ the u Colordo Common Interest ~ determined that a relatively ne~v Colorado Ownership Act ("CCIOA"), contains provisions which may prevent us from utilizsng many of the features which were successfully inan rPsthroughout the State ofand use documents (and which have been adopted by m, esort Colorado). Consequently, we would recommend obtaining curative legislation to allow major, complex projects such as Bachelor Gulch to develop along the lines of Beaver Creek. The principal problem areas we see with CCIOA are: 1. Initial Representation of Distriet Ownershin Grous on the Communitv Lssociation's Boarcl of Directors. We will probably want distinct groups of properiy owners (hotel operators, merchants, single-family residence owners, condominium owners and maybe raw land owners as well as the Master Developer through substantial sell-out) to be assured of distinct group representation on the Bachelor Gulch Community Association's board of directors. This promotes democracy within the resort development and gives a Uroader- based point of view than might otherwise be obtained. The CCIOA statute as it presently exists does not appear to allow such representation. ~ Veil Associates. lne.-Creators and Operators or Vail and Beaver Creek` Resorts 2. Utilization of Non-'Tradi4ional Fundgng Sources. In order to provide a variety of services to homeowners, we would like the Bachelor Gulch Community Association to have authority to use non-traditional funding sources such as were used by Beaver Creek Resort Company (`BCRC'~. These include an assessment on retail sales similar to BCRC's civic assessment, and an assessment on transfer of real estate similar to BCRC's real estate transfer assessment. These financing sources are not allowed under CCIOA. 3. ydentifieation of F'uture Development Raghts. 0 Perhaps the most limiting (and dangerous) provisions of CCIOA are a series of provisions requiring the Master Developer to lay out in advance, and appazently in considerable detail, its entire development scheme. In a project such as Bachelor Gulch, which will be built out over a period of at least 15 years, it is enormously difficult to ~ predict the manner in which the resort will, or should, develop. The provisions of CCIOA seem designed for individuai condomi.nium complexes and other prajects which are likely to be completed within a short period of time and can be conceived in its entirety at the outset. We understand that other ski areas, such as Keystone, have also expressed concerns about the effect of CCIOA on their future development. Moreover, we have learned that the national association which sponsored the uniform act which led to CCIOA is considering amendments which would e:cempt major resort developments such as Bachelor Gulch. Consequently, we think it is most appropriate to approach the legislature to seek legislative relief. May we suggest that you pass this memo to Doug Cogswell at CSCUSA and Pancho Hayes, CSCUSA's legislative lobbyist and solicit their help in attracting support for reasonable and appropriate amendments to CCOIA as outlined above. Kevin . Conwick and/or others in coordination with Kevin will provide whatever help necessary to explain our requests in detail and draft the legislative changes we propose. 04/28/ 1994 11 :44 I.ULUKMLU Jh 1 %_uu1, 11N1 W__ cd~~~~~ sM countrr~ USX : ~ . VOTE FoR $13 21.6 cOLe~~ COMo~ EST o SMP ACT (CCIOR) MMEM =ORo ~GELY SIIC~SFM lND °$UOYYGM-4F • D OPMEN'%'~ ~ ~~VER CMElCo TET.T.URII~8 VII+IeAC3Z ~ ~MGR'g°ORY V'%LLAtnl~ ~~ULD NDT BE CaNSTRYlCTEDo ~r At informaI meetings, gepres ivSB Z16 f~ae Bar Associatien ~oup oPPosin~3 (the Opposif:ioa) have agreeci that 'chese projec~ts eeuld nosc have beera built undeg CG%Od~ and that C=oA uniratentionally limits the glexiba.litY og developers of these major projects_ . ~ ltepreserxtatives of the Opposition testified iza the Senate Business and Affaiss Commbttea hearing tkiat the Joint ~ Editori$1 Board for the Real Property Acts og the- A8A ac.kaaowledges that tliers be aV !~xesqS " for large, master-planned commtariitbes - and i.s presently wor]cizag aa such aa amendme.aate The Ogapositeon prefers to wait tua~~l the National Board meats befvg~ ~eekirag rebief iaa Colgradoo ~ There are impoa-tarxt projects in the grocess in Colosado wtucla need immediate relief. These inciude Vail Associates' Bachelor Gialch pro7 ect and ICeystone Nountairt ° s .qvnte2uma develop3nento ~~SEETA°g°gVSR OF H%Affi"~S RmCza AN zv6nxOuszY SUC~~SFUL AM HIGHL`g°PR.AYSED gAA.7ECTa TES'%°'IrTED A'1° THE eBIUpI'E BIIS%~~S 23FAIRS C TTEE NEL'TIN[i Tffi gT W~ RAN~ tYNDEROIISIaY 0~~Y6~'I~' F~ TIM ~ BIII%~ ANOTMM CCgOAa ALTH0UGM =G S RANtH Ss SDT AFTIC'g'ED BY 0$ 216, ~5~' . ~Ol~~OY SYBP DMWP~ ~ ~ 9 ~TZ~PRO~S Z~! c~%,~ . 1580 bro"wey, amJ1o 9440 clomer+ cofoeedo 86202 (303) 837-0793 FAX 0(303) 837•1827 c8 OrinfQ6 on reeYcded p&DW TER P ~q~~/~ RSe ~Qy80bEF Sb~ ~i0Oda g~ ~rC1O3'A Is yf~bbuOiisC••yob~Tf~y~" @fl yy~~~p~~ bbv p~p 98d~6?8S 8M£dm9lS"dl^d 4~RE o * The ability to provide more varied and more demorxatiC farsas of government. The resarts mentioned an the reverse side allow dafferent classes of ownegs ( suc,h as rssidesxtial owners P lodge ~ers and cvmmerca.al ~ers ) to ~ ~iractors~~ ~a.s~c~aixzot ~ l~e ~ doeae s uaader o~ . CCIOAo Pirajects such as the ones mentboned on the reverse side use a trariety of reventte sources in order ta provide necessary ameniieies f ar their oeaxaers. 'I'hess revenue sougces ca4ald not be used tarader CCIOA as it presemtly existsa Representatives of ttae Oppasition offered rel~.ly ~Q ~a ea ~,n ~e~ ~end~aent and aPParen oppase thgs modifieatiorae ~ Developegs of large ccmmugaities need relief trom the massive disclosuges ~ reqaired kay CCIOA wta3.ch seem tv reqtaire tiie developers to preciict the caurse of develcpment 9f their prvjects Pe vhich cauZd talge mors thara a. decacle ta complete. SB 215 pr9va.des modest reliet of tkais typeo ~r Wayne Hyatto a former membeg of the ABA Editoria.l Boa.rd and a stsong supperter of CcIoA has stated; Several provisions of [CCIOA] inhibit devel.opmental f lexibil.ity in large, master°plaaaaied cemmuuxgities. I believe tais loss of f7.e'tibility results from tgze application of condomaniuan - pgincbpl.es to largeo Planaaed-°unit developmexats (PUDs ) . T3ae result is injuricras to the indtastxY, the develaper and the consagmeg. TOTRL P.03 COa aDO COMUOPT %NTMIEST OWNERSL ! ACT PARTIAL EXEMPT%ON FOR PAJOR MASTER-PLAtdr7ED CO T%ES The Co1.ogado Coffimon Interest owtaea; shi.g Acg (OCCIOA") ~ was adapted effeetive Jul.y i, 1992 for the purpase of pgavesxti.rag prob1Am re].ating paxt3cularay to coradominium projects and small develapmeaats where the developers had nat adequately pratected the a.aiterests of homeowners o However, CC20A ciid nflt take anto accAtant the complexity and need gor tlexibi5.ity in anaj or master-planned conmunities e These prajects will be btailt out aver a period of a decade or more asad need -to be abbe to use the mest sephisticated land- planrciinq techniques seqtaased go meet the desises of the eammtanitgr and the magketpbase aveg thi.s timeL'game. CvlogadQ has benefittad greatly frona the development Qg many major master-planned cammtmities such as Beaver Creek, Tel.luxide, Purgatary and the like. These communities could raot lae canstructed under CCIOA as it exists today because: ~ CCIOA does nat pgovide for sophi.sticated control mecYaanisms such as al,lowing different interest groups wgthan the resort (i.ee residential owners, commercial oeme.rsg hotel and Zodge owaze.rs) to have specfal representatson on the kaameownGrsp association board of di.recters e ~ CCIoA does not allow sephisticatad income- pseociucang devices such as are used by the resorts listed aboveo These dewf,cas ~ ancbtade assassments oxx ~etail sales and a5sessments on reab estate transfers a ~ CCIOA imposes coffiplex.regalatians reqairing the develaper to identity at the auts~t the pgvposed uses within the 8evelapment. ~ 1iajor ~aster-planneci communities invariably reqaire resubdivisian og units e Under CCgOA lots may anly be resubdivided with approval of the hameotaners ° associat].on o gf any element og the community vpposes the subdivision for ax?y reason, the hamevvasaers' association may be seluctaazt to approve the re$ubdivi,sboaa particalar3,y given the tkageat gf gegsenaa giability ot any deveboger-agpairaged direct9ro T'he prob].ems for which CCIOA was adopted have not • arisen ixi major master-plannefl cammunities_ Consequently, a limited exemption for these conmunities seems appropriate. Xoreover, commuiaities of the sizE conteonplated by the proposed am,exidment should be subject to registration under the Federal Saterstate Larui Sales Registraticn kct which affords . signifi.carst protection to purchasers of lots withisi thase sulxiivisions _ ( 6 ' . 113 P93 P1AY 09 °94 18:07 f .e a,• r~ . ~~~~D DA043 , s~ I SroADmqv LWCE OP 1K P.(~. lfi 0b6 &DARD CIF 0CW010AM , . . &11Gtf. (AALA00 6 J 63I I3Wpjo9-8Ws y ~ , ~ rxsc: R301y,02e7ta7 , ~ Z • ~''~n(t ~i+~-'' . C LE COUNTY. CQLORADO MaY 4, 1998 The HoAorable Jack Taylor House• of Representat Vas +~~~rado st~~e Capitog 200 ~~~lax Denvero Co 80203 soRate Bigl 96-216 We arc~ ~riting to expross oiar c.oacegn atid opposit1.on $o-SEa2 A6 an pressa,t7,y writtesn, Wtaila, wr understand the nseci to ame=?d the colaraa~ ~~cn Xn~~~~~ ownersh9.p Act (°CC,[fli4") to aglov t'ar eosaacaentious develgpneYfL of 1arg8r C4IDtuuJlitiess ve 3ALtst OpPose SEa 216 1" a~~ ~~EJAo Roveyer, as written the Biii allows tLhe Oggatia-n ot 83Oifl-goVerrmef1~ "ti.ties With qoverrasmental tauiTiq POworss DuL dges sact givO gUeraritemd protec;tiOtt for veop~~ vithin tlassLl °aPl,aM~~ CDMuAitiea° khat Other C010rado ci t-i2sasg azs presdict~ ~ ~~~~~~o State ConstLtt$tion and StastaL statqaos. Ne 9061 that tffae ;eollgving provisioa~s need to ~ ~alar.ed or ameaadled to proEPide tha ffirot~~on notod :bovea _ o Th$,s sectfoee allow$ far t}~ ~~cial $nsessmantaa witiai.n the oplann~~ communitlesp, on kataig 94Llew (defacta sa1~B tiax) o Rea1 nata1ee 'i'razoters, and Specified Seb-vicrasso The autharitY to Arlop~ ~~~~s tax ic Y.i.nited to statp- and loeal governmentse aYtd i~ rint. prova,rted to_ epcwa.aa diatricts. Uhi1e0 the . 5tate ara~ ~~al gava~aef~n~~ats arffi yl~ iniy~ted i~r~~ gt?e total t~c ~at ~ay ~ ao~S~~~p bY S`1aLa statL~e ~4tl7~ 61i6e~~09ddyb 1a &d~~~verp N8°216 propOsOO tO qave. to a non~~overtmental eritity tta3s same antftatity ~ithot~t FDny 09 the protaotiono giaaatatioreffi or safeg~aards reqeaired ~00 C~j 0801H 2iaArIHQ 02IH OOZO 9984Z 6Z :bT 66/Ii/50 113 P64 MAY 09 194 iB:OB WJn I ca a - e.laea~ e - - • • • , Honoraml4b Sack Tayaor may 4, 1994 d Also &g concarn are tZe. provisionO providina for elass votinq ~iad maiaatalning declars.nt (develaper) coaetrob e `his ggat~on of the Bill al1aws for the davelopaent oV & class votixtg atru6ture vhich cotalcl #'rustrate the Yi 17 ef a majarity of tt'ia xegidents atsd runs conzrary to the ~ cratic priracfpabs upGn which this ~ation wa¢ fntinded- we rmalize there &e portions ef SSm216 whir..h bLave 7aeri~, w~ ~elieve tha't expegts b-n '~~e r'eal estate anr1 Ponamer pspteatieae cem bettar speak to tttese proV1.siown_ And we Auglaort ttap prov3oiflrLa which provid~ ~dded gleuibi g gty to the atsvslopere oP large plained co=unities wgtffioeat eampromisf.nq tha proteati~n and rbght* af the ~,-wchasers of propat-ties in ghese comtneanitiaao . We Lr+nw theza age roopvneibla develag~n who 7ooiald neaL abum~ ~authrrritlr .pi-avided ika 5R-216e We fee1 that we cwirluL• proviele aa.a opprnr8:un~.ty for. 1~a geapanoible dade~.gpere to take ae~v~tege of tl~&31 r4nL°1:9ffiarv We ux'qe yamz apposigion vo SB°216 In igs present gormo . s1ncerelY r . 50ARD OF COLTN'rY C'eMSSION~ ~GLE COUNTYn COLoRAaO m ~ • ~TA t'.~~ P~S ~~a ~ r~t1 ~ y-m" . T as ta, , comaa ss otaes 0 ~~Or'~ Be ~t~f' C6~a~ffibo23~S aze9 ~~ee ~t~4~sae~~e~g b>~~'~~vg a ~ 600 [n 080LH 2IaANRQ 02IH OOZO 998n 5Z =tT P6/ZT/50 May 10, 1994 County CommissbvnerS of Eagle Cotanty Eagle county Bua,lding 551 BroatiWa.y P.O. BoSC 850 Eagle, ColOrado 81631 Dear commissionsrs: - Thank you for your Nlay 4, 1944 letter expressing some svxpport for and so-me resexvations regarding Senate Bgll 216. 1 thank we all recograize the need to amend the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ("CC%OA,7) to a l. low mucta neecled flexa.bility for the deve2,opers af larqe planned comznunities_ ~ This will allow ithem to continue to create the sorts of communities that have helped our tovrism industry succeede giaving said that, let me deal with your concernsa k'i.rst, you expressed concern x'egarding the prowision of SB 216 whi.Ch daill allow associatboras to levy speCial • assessmer?ts, incluciinq asssssments oxa retas.l sales and real estate transfers. z'hese pawers already exist in associatioYas whach are raot geverned bg CCIOPa anci, I understand, have aontributed to the success of such well tlaought of p]COjects as Beaver Cxeek, Telluride and Purgatory Village. To deny these powers to similar communities wi1.l put these communities at a competitive disadvantage for no apparent reasane Corxtrary to the suggesti.on in your Ietter, I believe that SB 216 maintaa.ns ample protection for consumers with respect to these assessmentso Ntost i,mportant, every director appoanted by a - declarant is a mf iduCiar]Pv cf the ownerse This is a wery high standarclo and goes well beyond the standards for elected officialse Moreover, funds raised by these assessmesats CBll oxbly be speYti: a%1 mattexs whicYi benefit the Comauun1ltyo `I'o t1o otherwise wou].d vi.olate the fiduciary duty mentioned abovee Finallyo SB 215 preserves the requirements tllat the deve].oper cede contro1 0f the associ.ation as sales withira the development progresso , gour letter suggests that the provisions in SB 216 allowing class voting will allow the declarant to maintaira ~ contro2. of the associatione g thanls this is a misunclegstanda.ng of this provisione The pravision actually allows the cieclarant to share cantrol witki various segments of the communi.ty (such as residential owners, commercial awners Z0012] 0801H USANaQ 02iH 0020 998zz bZ:bt P8/TT/80 and Iodge owners) and to obtain the ansights og this diverse group of people. Y understand that thbs has worked well in sevegal well respected resorts including Beaver Creekp Tellurida and Purgatory Villageo I appreciate your interest in this legislatiano I hope this letter responds adequately to your concemsa I wauld be most plessed to speaK tto you about them ira more aletaila and tfliink you will find that the Bill is truly beaaeficial and will lead to the continuecl cieve].opment of qaality aommtaraa.ties withia the State of Colorado 0 Very truly yours, Representative Jack Taylor ~ gkcc _bho E00 [2] 0901H 2I3AAIEQ 02IH OOZO 998.9 bZ :bT b6/TI/90 7 ~ o ~ ~ • • ~ May 17, 1994 ~a'll Assmiates, IIlc. Creators and Operator3 oi e aiI and Beaver Creeko Resorts Governor Roy Fiomer SYate of Colorado SYate CapiYal Building F3oom 136 Denver, Colorado 80203 Dear Governor Romer: The Colorado Legislature recently passed Senate Bill #216. This important piece of legislation amends Yhe Colorado Common Interest OwsnersNp AcY (CCIOA) in a manner vvhich will make it possible for complex developments, such as aup Bachelor Gulch community to proceed. Bachelor Gulch is a community being constructed on 1,400 acres of land betvveen our Beaver Creek and Arrovvhead ski areas. We are trying to open efvs development by the 1995/96 winter season. When we began planning for Bachelor Gulch, vre were surprised to tearn that many of the techniques vvhich vve used successfully in our Beader Creek development could not be used under CCIOA. For instance, CCIOA prevents use of broad-based assessments such as those put in place at Beaver Creek., CCIOA also contains a number of prorisiorls which require developers of large communities to determine, in advance, how their deeelopmeeTes will be built out in finite detail. This is very difficult ~ for developments like Beaver Creek and Bachelar Gulch which are/vvill be developed over a 15- to 20- year period. These large master-planned communities need relief from some of CCIOA's provisions. Senate Bill #216 gives that relief. The tourism industry is enormously imporean2 to the S2ate of Colorado. Senate Bill #216 will allow the creation of vvell-planned communities near existing resorts, and nevv resorts such as the proposed Catamount Ski Area. 'fhis vvill be difficult, maybe impossible, if Senate Bill #216 is not adopted. This legislation vvill help keep our tourist industry h"thb and create jobs for many residents of this State. It is very important that this legislation be implemented. VNe urge you to sign it into law. Very truly yours, VAIL ASSOCIATES, INC. ndrewr P. Daly President 0 Post Office Box 7 ~ ~~i__ 51655 0 I;SA -(303) 476-5601 {Va AssockLtes, • • ~ ~ / , ~ Beaver Creelc9 Resort P.O. Box 959 Avon, Colorado 81620 303/845-5930 Fnx 303/845-5945 Mag' 18y 1994 HouuorabIle Roy Romei°9 Godernou° Sgate of Co?orado Sgage Capfltoll BuIllldlIlng Room Il~~ ~endei°, cCollorado 80203 Bear Goveu°unou° II~omeiro ~ Theu°e has beeun counsIlderabfle mgsunderstandiang about ghe r~~entlly-ew2eted Senate Billl 2Il6 whnch makes only very lirnited modi- ficatIloIIfls to the CoIloIl°ado CoHH'Ilmo&Il Inged°eS~ OwneIl°3hIlp ACt (66CCIOA99)o T]fae purpose of ghns lletster ns to gIlve yoan certagn Ibackground facts and c?~ar-anp any mnsanndei°standnngso IFIlrst9 when tC(CffOA w~~ adopted nn Il99Il9 cCo?ofl°ado9s i°ea? es$ate II]TIlaII°ket was sll9ffeIl°llIlIlg fII°om ll~s woIl°st II°eceSSfloIlIl eveIl°o Anum~er of pro- jects, mostly ~on~omnnnum pu°ojecgs nan ~en~er and Front Ran~e m~tropoflIl~an %reas9 arvei°e nnndlea°gonng foa°ecRosui°es and othei° fnnancgafl uannshapso ~~on 1~~~am~ ap~arent that anaany of these urban condo- mnannanirgn pirojects ]fnad beeun devefloped nn a manner wbach did not pa°otect ghe Ilntei°ests of ~onsanmerso (CCROA was passe~ cure those probYemso Whnlle cC(CffOA was u~~cessau°~ ~nd ~~proprIlate, one of nts prg~ary alllIlthoII°s HgIlIlmedllntt~Ry agICtEed tIlIlat ll~~ appliCabfllity to l$9°ge9 ~~~~er- pIlanun~~ ~ommaenIltnes was unot pi°~~erIly consfldered and macch of ngs afffetCts oflIl tflflese coIlllIlHflllUIlIIIllltlles was ll&IIIlIlIlfl$ended and 9a&appII'opII°Ilateo He Iple~.°ognAzed thaIL `aIln aIIIlIleIIIldIIIlIlenIL ~CIOA w`6Ils 66uE~~entHy EHeedede99 Devehopers of Vail, Arrowhead and Heaver Creek" Resort ~ HonorabIle 1E8oy Ilgomei° - Pa~e Two May Il89 Il994 Vep°y few peop?e reaIlnze t9nat under CCIOA9 a number ~~~ery we9fl thoUllght of coIlBIlIIflIlMHIllltlles sUIlcIlfl ~~aveIl° CE°eek ReSOrt9 Telluride Nioun- tann Vnfllla~~ and Panu°gaton°y Vnfl?age could not h~~~ ~~en builto This Ils becaUIl3e ECCIIOA llYIladVeII°tefl?~~~ proh1b9$~~ the demOCII'atflc a}t&d bE°Oad- based foIC°IlHIl ~oveIC°IIIlI[II'IleIIIlIY pIl'ovIlded fod° llIIl thOSe Il'eSoIl°~ ~ommuIlfl&tfleso CCIIOA `aRIlSo ifl?~dvell'gteHfltfly ADII'oh9bflte~ the use of a vaD°le of owner and meu°chant assessua~~~~s wflnIlCh has he9ped make those areas successfule I~~eryone we talI~ed to aboant thn~ pirolbYe~ ~or faeture master-p9anned ~ommunntIl~s recognn~ed the un~ed to Ilemng the appIlicabilfl~ those pIl'ovllslloIlIls to sIlIIflaIlleIIC° aIIIld IIIl71oIl°e IlIlm9ged hOme0wIbtEII° as30CiatIloHflso SB 216 caares tlln~se ~~fects nn CCffOAo VnrtanaR?y allll of the people IlnvoIlved nn the passage of CECIOA have . ~gr~ed that (CCffOA m~~eded to be amended to gaY~~ into accoaunt the le- ~ gntnmate needs off deaellopers of llarge9 master-p~anflled cOHgIlIIflIlflflflfl9tfleSo 'IChIls IlncIlandc~~ the cCommunanIlfly Associataons gnstfltaate, a ga°oup whgch re- presengs I~om~~wnea°s assocnations, the Colorado Bar Association and the CoflflIl9fl]iIlSsIloIlIleIt°s of NIIIlllfoIl°IfH9 Stage ILaw3o ff n fact9 at the nationa? Ileve?y the ComHIlIlIlssIloHIleII°~ ~f UIIlIlfoIl°m Sga$e ILaws aIl'cE working oHfl aIIfl amendm~~~ the Unnfou°m cCommon Interest Ownership Acgo ThIls a1C9IleIlIldmeHIlt IlIIIlclIlIldes IIflIla1CIlg' of tflfle pIl°ovflSfloFIls of SB 216e ~~~ondy II a'0'oIlIIIld IlIlke to cleallII° U9IlD the Bfl71DS&Il&fldei°StaF9diflII~ that SB 216 was aQ~~~~~~ sptEcIljFllcaIlfl~ ~o helflD Va&Il AsSoc9ateSy gnco This ns not at afl? tlfne caseo SB 216 n~ ~~~te-wIlde RegflsIlat9oHIl aHfld lls s9gpp0r$ed by a - daII°llelly of oII°gaIlDllzatllo1CIlso T~~~~~ony suppou°ting SB 216 was gnven a~ the state llegDsLL`s~tuICe by KeystoIlIle ResoIrty 1LIl$flICOllHIl Westly ff nco Brecken- rndge, tIface deveRopeu-s of p~~?n~a~~ll~ IlHntE"yy, tHH~ ~~~orado Homebnnnlld~ers A~~oceatnon and the ECoYorado Boaa°d of . I[BeaIl~orse HIlghIlaIIIlds RaDDch teStlljFlled $hat Ht could &log ~ave beeIIIl dedeIl~~ed Ilf (CcCROA was nn effe~~ when nt began nts mamm~th andl hllghEg'-pIl°aHstEQD coIIIlIlllflIlUIlIIIlllty, soanth off ~endero ~ Honou°abfle Roy It~omer Page Three May 18,1994 Thnrd, SB 216 ns a detz°y nori°ow amendmento apPlges onIly to cCoIIIlIlIIIlIluIlIlIltIles I[&IleetIlgIlg the foflDowllng $hII°~~ crIlteH°Ilao (a) 00 acres of Rand, (b) 7LoIIflllng ll,~ce foIl° at Re`cll~t 200 dV@'eIfl&ng flflIlflfltSy aidfld icJI ZOnIlHIg HHIl D ffou° at lleast 209000 sqa~are feet off commercnaIl spa eo Their°e are dcEIl°y fe~Y ~DII°ojet~ts ~VI~IIIlc~Il ~'IlflR IIftfleeS~ t~ilese Il'eq~IlIl1C°eItg&eIflt s l~or~~~er9 SB 2Il6 ~~empts these deae?~~~engs ffrom only a few ~ ~ provisgons of cCCROA. IIICll each tCasey tIlIltL' oIIfleICoU6s pIl'odHSIloIlfl3y whIlch the exempt90n . negates9 tC°eqUIlllll°e dev~~opeIl°s of flIIIlajoII° p9°ojec$s to SpecHfy IlF9 ~dvaIIHCe the entnre dedellopment scIlfneme foi° eacIln comm?uanIl4y wntYn ~ery ?gmited possllblllllty to IIIlIlodllfyaIIIld adjUIl3~ the pIlan aS dev~~op~en$ progIl°eSSe3e 'IClrnns boa°deu°~ on benng nmpossib9e9 and at the fleast would lea~ ~ery annsatnsfactou°y dede?opmeuntsa Pa°o,pects of the magngtaade covered by SB 216 `allIl'e typllcalRy bgIlIlflt oUIlt oveIl° a pe9'IlO~ of fl09 Il~ or ~~en 20 y~ars and need to had~ the flexnbnllnty to adjunst as the pubIlie9s taste~ change and ~ addIltlloIlIlaIl kIIIloW~edge kDecoIlgIl~~ avaIllable II'ega?'d9fffl~ the pH°OJec$o B 216 wgllll Ilead to lbe~~er dedefl~pmentse IFoanu°tItn, the gm~ortant consumer pa°otections of CCI0A ?aave been .~~~~ervedo SB 216 does an~t modaiFy CCI0A9s reqaaii°emeng tIlnat the deweIlog~er gnae anp s~~tiroll when 75% of nts Ilots have been so9d9 or tha~ the resauIltIln~ ~ommanunnty owuaee°s assocIlatioans he albYe go termgnate aRIl ann~onscIlouuab9ce countu°ac~~ ~nd tcei°mnnate ~onta°acg~ ~etween nt and the deaellopeu° whean the cllnaunge of counti°oll ~~cui-so . SeveIl'aIl oIl'gaIIIlllzatlloIlIls whflcIfIl ll&Illltflallg' oppo3ed SB 2Il69 sauch as the ComIIIlIlMllIlllty ASsocllatlloIIlls IIIIIlstll$UIltey e9llded IlIlgD wIlthdrawiIIlg tp&eIlII° oppOSIl- tlloIlIl afteII°~ ~ew IIITIlodIlfl~2floIlIls weIl°e gfllflade to Satll3~ theflII° ObjectHoiflso lIlIl ffact9 the FComramanngty AssocnatIlon~ InstIltu~e representatnves a~~~~ ~or modnifncatnons wllnncllfn woaulld aDllow aR? fl~~~~~~ners oi°gannzatflons (not ,pan~~ the ~arge, m~~~er-pIlanu~ed ~ommunnties) to hav~ the derreioci°at~~ ~~irm off govertrntra~ent aund bi°oad assessmen4 powers which SB 216 ~ Honorablle Roy Romei° Page I~our May 18,1994 The Eagfle Countty Board of cCommgssgoners (ECBOC) lby 8etter to II~~presentate~e Jack Tayllor, and copy to Senatoa° Dave Wattenberg, ' expresse~ thenr ~oncei°ns u°egarding an earlg~ draft of SB 2160 Followiaflg sllIIIlcCeIl°e conSHdeIl'a$floHfl of IEQ.BOC9s concerns9 and a coup?e of ~urther amendments, ~~th IlegnsIl~~ors voted in favor of the bafllo SB 216 was II°ev?ewed llIlfl detaHIl fl31 the leg?sla$Hve pB°oCe3Se Once this RegIlsfla$lloIlIl WaS AflndeIl°stoody llt galldIl~d bIl'Oad-basedy non-~artllSagfl 5up- ~orte The bflll passed 1~~th houses of the Co9orado Legis?ature9 in the Senate, d-wenty-five voted in favoir a~nd egght voted agaanst9 and in the Hoanse9 fif$ f-SllR voted llIIIl favoII° ad&d IIflflH~e vo$ed agaInSto SB 216 ns ago~d bIl~R whIlch lls flgIluch ICIleeded llIIIl Cololt°adoo , traafly g~ours9 ~ VAffIL ~~~OCIATES RIEAIL ESTATIE Gg2OUP, gNCe ]Ed~ard D. O9Brien VIlce PIl°eSlldeIIIlt allfld Chnef FnnancnaR Off~n~er i 8 ~ EAGLE COUNTY BUILDING 551 BROADWAY P.O. OF THE . BOX 850 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS EAGLE. COLORADO 81631 (303) 328•8605 FAX: (303) 328-7207 r: C"'o'UNTY9 COLORADO Pqay 23, 1934 ~iA pAx 866-2003 The Honorable Roy Romer Governor State of Colorado Colorado State Capitol 200 East Colfax Denver, CO 80203 ~ Ree Senate Bill 94°216 Dear Governor Romere 6de are writing to join Summit County i.n encouraging your veto of SB-216 as presently writtene While we understand the need to amenci the Colorado Common %nterest Ownership Act (°BCCIOP,00 )to allow for conscientious development of larger communities, we must oppose SB-216 in i.ts present forme Iiowever, as written, the Bill allows the creation of non-government enicities with goverrunental taxing . powers, but does not give guaranteeci protection for people within these °OPlanned Communities°° that other Coloracio citizens are ~-a.t!?t:QP_ a?la S¢3tH statLtcg t ; .a .a i.... b.~., nviv.-.y~666 .a., ctCi~ ~,a ~°O~:r.+ ~i~r d 1\acu s/a rid~. vsWV v.v bde feel thatc the following provisions need to either be deleted or amendeci to provide the protection noted abovee Sectaomm 3 g38-3303~207Qc8 Q4D QaD QIflQBD] o This section allows for the special assessment, within the °OPlanned Communities00, on Retail Sales (defacto sales tax), Real Estate Transfers, anci Specified Servicese The authority to adopt sales tax is limited to state and local governments, and is not provided to special ciistrictse While the ~ state and local governments are limi.ted ih the total tax that may be assessed, by Sicate statute and Amendment lo However, SB°216 proposes to give to a non-governmental entity this same authority without any of the protection, limitations or safeguards required of governments. ~ Honorable Roy Romer Fqay 23, 1994 Page Two o Also of concern a?re the provisions proviciing gor class voting and ffiaintaining declarant (developer) controlo This section of the Bill allows for the development of a cl.ass voting structure which could frustrate the will of a majority of tYae resgdents and runs coretrary to the ciemocratic principals upon which this nation was foundede bde realize there are portions of SB°216 which taave merit, we believe that experts in the real estate and constamer protection can . . better speak to these provisionso And we support the provisions which provide added flexibility to the developers of garge planned communities without compromising tae protection and rights of the purchasers of properties gn these communities> We are willing to work with Vail Associates and othex° responsible clevelopers who desire to secure legitiYnate amendment to the Colorado Common %nterest Ownership Acto Iiowever, as Senate ~Bill 216 is currently writteno we ffiust urge you to veto the bill in its present formo Sincerelye BOFRD OF COiTNTY CONIA2ISS%ONF:RS EAG%E COLTNTY p COLORADO •7 E Johr±so . ~ o r ~ - Georg o Ga es, Commissioner xc: Vail Associates Edward D. O'Brien 1\romer.sb B ~ 9 ~Vaff 0 ~ Vall s~c'lates9 Inco ~ Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creek' Resort May 24, 1994 I~ lBol !Z ~ Mr. George "Bud" Gates, Commissioner Eagle County Board of Commissioners r P.O. Box 850 / -J J" Eagle, CO 81631 Dear Bud: The purpose of this letter is to resp n e concerns you have'raised with respect to Senate B'll 216. The bill, if adopted, will amend the Colorado Com n Inte est Ownership Act ("CCIOA") in only certain limited ways. ~ First, you expressed concern about the proliferation of "Special Districts". Bud, CCIOA and SB 216 have no connection with metropolitan Special Districts. CCIOA ~ regulates common ownership associations such as condominium homeowner and community owner associations. CCIOA was passed in 1991 largely in response to financial difficulties experienced by, and developer abuses of, individual building condominium ass ciations. Unfortunately, large master- planned commun'ty associations were captured in CCIOA's "net" in a mariner not contemplated by its sponsors and authors. Its restrictions, intended primarily to regulate individual building condominium associations, are simply too narrow vis-a-vis large master-planned community associa- tions. Secondly, you expressed concern regarding the provision of SB 216 which will allow large master-planned community owner associations to levy special assessments, including assessments on retail sales and real estate transfers. These powers already exist in associations which pre-date and are thus not governed by CCIOA yet have contributed to the success of such well thought of communities as Beaver ['c~sc Office Bux 71 0 \';iii. Colorado 81658 o USA -(303) 476-5601 ~ Mr. George "Bud" Gates Page Two May 24, 1994 Creek Resort, Telluride Mountain Village and Purgatory Village. It is important for large community owner associations to have solid financial underpinnings and broad based assessment powers help assure this is so. These types of community associations perform functions such as common area maintenance (including park and grounds beautification), intra-resort transportation, public safety, design and review board functions and resort special event sponsorship and promotion items not normally provided by a single building condominium owner association which was the primary object of CCIOA's regulation. It is our belief that the spreading out of such costs over each of such community's constituents by way of multiple but specific assessments is most appropriate. The Beaver Creek Resort Company uses four separate assessments: a two percent real ~ estate transfer assessment (generally paid by buyers), a five percent civic assessment on retail sales made within the resort (most frequently paid by non-residents), a common assessment paid on real property values (mostly paid by non- resident owners of second homes) and a mountain/recreation assessment of five percent on lift ticket, ski school, tennis and golf fees (paid by Vail Associates, Inc.). Further, this allows the Beaver Creek community members to make choices regarding service levels within the resort that could not be responded to by a city or county government; and such service demands are self funded relieving Eagle County of any such burden. Bud, I am not aware of anyone believing that the existence of such broad assessment powers - in Beaver Creek Resort does anything but benefit the Beaver Creek community specifically and Eagle County in general. Even single building condominium associations have the power of assessment so I would hope that the issue of multiple assessments verses single assessments would not cause concern. ' , Thirdly, you expressed concern about SB 216's provision allowing large master-planned community associations to elect directors from various elements within the community. ~ Mr. George "Bud" Gates Page Three May 24, 1994 Beaver Creek Resort Company, the master homeowner association for Beaver Creek Resort, for instance, provides for the tenants in commercial/retail space, owners of lodging facilities, owners of improved residences, and owners of unimproved properties to each elect a director to its board of directors. Further, effective in December 1994, an "at-large" member will be elected to the board giving independent representatives a majority on the board of directors. This assures that Beaver Creek Resort Company receives input from different sectors of its community and is regarded as a more democratic form of government than would exist if all directors were elected at large. I believe that Beaver Creek Resort Company has served its community well and know of no criticism of its form of governance. ~ Finally, I would like to assure you that SB 216 does not in any way change the requirement that the developer give up control of the owner association when seventy-five percent of the total number of lots in the community have been sold. We believe it is very important to preserve this provision, which we consider a proper and appropriate form of consumer protection. If I may make one more point, I would like to assure you that SB 216 is very narrow in its scope and makes only very limited changes to CCIOA. In supporting this legislation, we made sure that most of the provisions of CCIOA were preserved and will apply to all of our projects. If you would like confirmation of the fact that SB 216 has no adverse consequences on counties, you might call Pat Ratliff. Pat had this legislation reviewed to determine that it had no negative impact on local governments. Pat's telephone number at Colorado Counties, Inc. is 303-861-4076 and her home number is 719-635-5208. ~ Mr. George "Bud" Gates Page Four May 24, 1994 Bud, I sincerely hope this letter adequately addresses your concerns. I would look forward to discussing this matter in more detail with you. Very truly yours, 4AndrewP. il Associates, Inc. a y esident cc: Commissioner Johnnette Phillips Commissioner James Johnson County Attorney James Fritze ~ County Manager Jack Lewis ~ w i t I0 • 994-05-26 11:31 303 845 5728 VAIL, MARKETING 008 POi ; d BY=Fkau' CA ~o°~ : g 0 = 38 ; 30332871.., 303 845 5`~28; # 2/ 2 i11~ aoda aae~ dt~oc5 P~ ~~I~ Im 90~0 ~S • F~~~S~a C~~ ~a~~St " ll~~,v ~~a Q ~ava zaedive& ~ * of the letter seat ~ you iby iLr o Audy L~17e Prs'id~oto of V&il ~ov~a~, ~ 24thq ~oesAUaq b 2~.8_ d O '7 . 1od that he bm assd sy Rros tbLis lettaso • 1 haV~ movow mcm spokemm ~itk ,1RCo Dalyo mmar ~ ~ ~~anAvisI . AatuZ~~~ ~ @r 1ogi9u V!1 go&L&a Whet$er intlt~ti l ug act, ~ has ~ mah as implied that g aD a £nvoleed vitffi Va" As• tse as 21i o nsfther of! w~eb Le tztmo M Z • tt~~ ~ rev ~ tcw C=Y Q Q~ aocatain Lt the k)il1 h" liNd ui~ ing4joatime &ad to brl.a~ ~t t~a the attantiomm (98 the =g gono~aL zbvazmnsnt tteso ~ ¦uqger~~ t 9 ~ ~ ~..eta~st in bill ~ ~y otber ~ J1~eociatem° whollap a.aaaeursto and ustsuoo Mgo Da].y ha~ riofg to imme NW zzaw aoffer my phone numbewso oae QDeheswias refar wqc~~ ~ ~ tbLe mattaro, and s aw oooaoraod tkar. ~ ~a.~ g~ti t ~bva had a~a ~tos~e.t ~'~tae~b~l°s go ~aa o II can ~y asswoa ~.h+at Lreit Aaiaerteon ~g Pi~o Baya o t zogLuterw and lobb9tiots 0 paanecf ai~ ~ ~ nams o~ ~ ~nclu•sto ased sig yoit ba~ *cen in the gay 24 P~ease 4cC•p~ ~ ~~~ere ~ that tkLis hag accttrz-oda ~ Qapso nenr. m1y tltrss c]imataQ t9e mjlor alisaS be" ~ '~CCZot&e - o~ar t~ ~in~ the ~l ~y Nurses ~ t and Uba 'Nomen6s imbby of.9a4gc o ~3 g have any u~~~~~ abmt is mattw ple"e oont&6-L my . ~ B~b9 63 m52~,o S'°~~ ~ t at the eQate Buti1 Jm. 3,e ~ d an 504M a• E r, - XC rvlw • MAY 2 6 - 05/26/90 16:20 '&866 0200 HI30 DENVER N7083 Q002 ~ MEM9RANDVM 7C0 e ~dy Daly FROMe G. Kewin Cv3awiCk DaBaT€ a IKay 26 o 1994 . REe Senate Bill 216 Durbng the everiing of Ptay 5, whesa SB 216 was meir?g debated in ttae Cologado House of Represesztatives, awas intgoduced to Pat Ratligfo a gegistered gobbyist for Colorado Counties Ince bde got gallzing about SB 216 and in the course of thag convessation Pait ffienti,oned that she had I1ad SB 216 geviewed by the County attorney for Boulcier County, who advised her that the bill had no iaapact on county authority or activitiesm She said she haci repogted this to the Counties. I was awage that Eagle county was expressing some concerns about SB 216o and we got tallcinq about the various Eaqle County commissionerse I mentioned that I had the highest Pegard gor Bud Gates and Johnette Philips, both of ~ whem I had worked with exterasively e (James J'ohnson was just e3ecteci Comangssioneg and I have nvt yet hacl an apportunity to work witl.i himo) Pag agreed that the commissioners were reasonable people and suggested if they had any coracerns with respect to SB 216, I should urge them to give hex' a call< It vias beeause of this coneersation that IfeZt comfortable with the suggestioxa in your letter f.e Bud Gates o that he eall Yber if he had arly coneerns abotlt sB 216 0 gt ° s as sfanple as that o bcc: Ed 0'Brien 0 4 MEMORANIDUM 'd'O: Van? 'II'ovvn Counca? lF][8: Bob Ms]Lanarin, 'd'own Manager DA: ,Ueaaae ll, 1994 RE: 'd'ovvea Manager's Report Police Baailding gJpdate ]PIlease finaf ghe atgached Police build6aag budget. IIt refleets actaaal expenditures through May 10, 1994. Despite seeeral c}aange ordea-s, the pro,pect eontinues to be within the project budget. 'd'9ne nesv portion of the Police bnai9aiing add'etion fs substantiaIl@y cotnplete and we are schedulecf to receeve the 'fl'CO oen Friciay, Jaane 3, 1994. Police personnel have begran packing in order to prepare for the rnoee. We angicapate Bhas move wn19 begin the dveek of June 6, 1994. gn oa-der to facilitate the move of fhe Police Dispateh, anci not to interrupt dispatch services, Dispatctn has been operating out of the blaae van parked in the east parking lot. 1'his van has been provided by the Colorado Highway PaQrol at a preirnimal eost. I expect the move to be cognplete and the Police Department to be fuldy operational by June 10, 1994. Follownng the anove, the contractor well begin renovating the old Police Depastgnent space. 'll'his phase off the corestructaon is scheduled go be complete nexQ September. T?ne origdrual desegn eontemp?atetl the constraaction off a covereai enta-y to the west entry of the Maunacdpa? Bue?dirag. As vve have efiseussed, there were a rnaamber of problems with the originafl design. These anc9uded the destraaction of the exdsting trees and disruption of existing office spaces. lFenally, there were pu-oblems in dealing with the existeng entry go the basement. I had the architect prepare another design which will provede a eovered entry and avoucl these problems. Thns u?ew desigen as 6ess snnbstantaa? nrn nature ancf va~vill Ibe ffar less expensive to eonstruct. It wi19, however, proeide a covereafl enta-yvvay to the west s6de of the buelding and create ghe "froeet door" apgaearance requested by the PEC. 'd'he two alternatflve des6gns are attachetl to this Yneino. 'd'he staff's preferred a?ternateve is Seheme A. I wfl9 have Qhe estitnatedl eost of this a9ternative for you at the 6/7/94 Work 5ession. Please advise me as to how yoaa wish aaae to proceed weth this project. Budget Update We haee begaan preparing the Town lbeadgeQ for feseal year 1995. In 1994, Counei? agreed to change from a trad'ational line lgem Ibuslgetang approach to prograari based budget. A program based budgeg as mne that cle-emphasizes speeiffuc line atems and focuses on understand'eng the cost of varnoeas 0 programs (eode enforcernent, street maintenance, landscapfing anaintenance, etc.) gn fiscal year 1995 we wi?1 continue to raiove tovvard this program based approach. There w611 be, howeeer, changes to the fformat of the budget document itself gt is my intention to make the TOV budget a comprehensive policy docuaaaent. I aan preparia?g a memorandum outlining my approach and phi?osophneaE base to a Ynunicipal budget. Citizen Sua-vey 'Il'he 1994 Citizen Survey vvas maeled last vveek to approxianately 4,300 residents ancl businesses. 'd'he survey is a compsehensive one aun attempts to eanderstand our eustoiners' needs anal desires foe- the vareoaas services prov8cfesf by the Town of Vail. As in previous years, we are also trying to gauge levels of satesfaetaon wiQh the services current?y provided. For your informatiorn, I have attachecIl a eopy off the Sue-vey. I expeet the survey a-esults being back lby the Bniddle of June, 1994, and the data vvelfl be able to be utnl'ezed as we prepare the fiscal year 1995 budget. lF'oe-cf 1Parking ]Lot Update As you are we19 aware, there has Ibeen signifucant protest by the Battle TYlountain High School staff and stnadents against the 'd'owal's parking policy on Ford Park. The problegn arises from the fact that the VRD softball tournauaient sontlicts with the Battle 1Vlountain graduation. This week I rnet with lEric ]Frede9l to diseaass th6s matter. Ken Haaghey, 'g'om 3heely, anai L.arry Grafel also attended this aneeting. Becaaase the softball tournament starts prior to the graduation, changing the parkirag program woealcfl have no effeet on the graduation parking. Following our discussion, Dr. F'redell agreed that given the circumstaaaces, oaar plaaa was a workable one. During the course of oexr diseussion, we made severaG cIlaanges tteat would enhance the plan. 'd'hese chareges relate pe-imarily to ?oading and aanloading, signage, ege. I believe, given the conflict of these two events, our parking plara is the most workable solution available to us. It as also my ennderstand'ang that now Dr. Fredell support our plan. C:\TMRPf67.94 ~~O A/(, - POLICE BUILDIfVG BUDGET ~~cleiV,~D flAY 9 1991 BUDGET CURRENT ACTUAL UNDER REVISED SINCE THRU (OVER) 4/01/94 5/10/94 BUDGET Architect Fees 240,000 6,620 220,148 19,852 Architect Reimbursables 9,500 515 6,678 2,822 Architect Extra Services 28,500 1,688 26,562 1,938 Printing Costs 7,500 6,539 961 Testing - Soils 4,500 3,584 916 Testing - Concrete 3,500 30 1,621 1,879 Project Management Fees 43,000 3,000 31,690 11,310 Project Management Reimb 2,000 0 2,000 Surveying 4,415 4,095 320 Signage 5,000 285 4,715 Existing Roof Repair , 44,585 44,585 0 1lVest Lot - Clean & Restripe 1,000 0 1,000 General Construction GMP * 3,027,715 382,698 1,715,670 1,312,045 Construction Change Orders: 1 5,839 5,839 2 10,755 10,755 3 (287) (287) 4 (1,421) Other 21,500 3,344 17,191 4,309 General Contingency: 55,114 55,114 TOTAL 3,512,715 397,895 2,078,648 1,435,488 Owner Supplied Items: Electronics 45,956 504 4,077 41,879 Floor Finishes 27,700 0 27,700 Furniture 59,115 400 58,715 Communications Center 44,000 6,727 8,061 35,939 Telephones & Equipment 12,500 0 12,500 TOTAL OWIVER SUPPLIED 189,271 7,231 12,538 176,733 Total 3,7012986 405,126 2,0912186 1,612,221 " Retainage Equals 73,417 POLBLDBD I ~ ~ ~ ' --~°C-[~`~ r ~ • - \ . - - - - - - - ~ ~ I , ~ ~ t; ~j • 11, l . J ~a.?~u~- ~ _ , . . ; pov colic. W*z-Y- r~'tJ ~ ~15 4A6A ~ vao coc v~o U)/ Awp4L- WCDD wdwj!~;7 A--[ ~ ~ NA E~ ~ . ~ f~ 6 06t" ~ ~ - - - - - - ~ viv P ~ ~ :I, . . - , ~ ~ ~ e . a. ~ o CO n . ' ~ . e k6 i o~? ~ i 1 ` i ~ . n ~ - ~,~t~ ~IG • ~a ;I~Y~f"?,~ i , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I " ~ ~ r $ ~ ~/A~.`?~` ~ ok , L.~ H Y S taY • ~ - i 3 u7 L = ~ ~ LY co (3) . LM s I Y1 Q l~;} I 041Tt ~-sFf~~~~ ~ . r - . ~ L woosp~r - - ~LAtJ ~ / OF~. , I ? ~ , , ~c~o c~~. - I ~ _ ~1 i. . - ~ ~V . C 1 • r ~ L C ~ n n . . . 1-- = o d j [,,f T 4 ^a 3 ~~~i. ,i~TywF 'N+~ ~{f~; ~ • MEMORANDUM TO: All Town Employees FR: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager~ DA: June 3, 1994 RE: Community Survey Attached is a copy of our 1994 Community Survey which is being mailed to registered voters and business owners within the Town of Vail.. The suroey was designed by an independent research firm with input from department representatives. The results vvill be used to measure customer satisfaction levels and to help establish priorities for the 1995 budget. Please feel free to fill out the survey and share your own opinions about the Town's service levels. Simply return the completed survey to Desiree Kochera in the Community Information Office, either in person or through inter-departmental mail. . We'll be distributing the results 4o you in the coming weeks. If you have comments or questions about this project, please don't to contact me directly at 479- 2105. Thank you for your help. C:\COMMSRW.MEM TOWR1 OIF VAIIL COMMUNI[TY SNRVEY 1994 . e9 TOWN UF VAIL The following questions probe certain issues related to the adequacy arrd performance of the Town of Vail government. 68'e wou[d appreciate your response to the extent which you are able. If you /aave no opinion, or no knowledge of a particular subject, please leave blank or indicate in the appropriate space. Incladed in the survey are two "insert pages " pertaining to specific Town services. Please covnnlete the main survev fiirst then comnlete the inserts. 1. How do you rate the overall performance and responsiveness of the Town of Vail government? POOR AVERAGE EXCELLENT 1 2 3 4 5 2. What ue the most common means you utilize to keep informed about local issues? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 01) [ ] The Vail Trail 02) [ ] Vail Daily 03) [ ] Vail Valley Times 04) [ ] Local cable television OS) [ ] Local radio 06) Attendance at public Town meetings and hearings 07) Mailings directly from the Town of Vail 08) [ ] Word of mouth/friends " 09) Individual contact with local officials and/or staff 10) [ ] None 11) [ ] Other (specify) 3• Which of the above is the MOST effective source? _ (INSERT # FROM LIST) 4. To what extent, if any, are the following conditions a problem in your neighborhood? Use a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being "No Problem" and 5 being a"Major Problem." NO PROBLEM MODERATE MAJOR PROBLEM Snow removal from roads . 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal from walkways 1 2 3 4 5 Street disrepair (potholes, cracks, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 Unsafe walking routes 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate street lighting 1 2 3 4 5 Crime, sense of security 1 2 3 4 5 Speeding or reckless automobiles 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate off-site parking 1 2 3 4 5 Inadequate enforcement of parking regulations 1 2 3 4 5 Trash/litter, abandoned vehicles 1 2 3 4 5 Neighborhood noise 1 2 3 4 5 Animals (running at large, barking) 1 2 3 4 5 Signs (street names, traffic controls) 1 2 3 4 5 Pollution from woodsmoke 1 2 3 4 5 Pollution from road dust 1 2 3 4 5 Lack of recreational facilities (bike paths, parks, playgrounds) 1 2 3 4 5 Other: 1 2 3 4 5 5. Using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 being "Poor," 5 being "Excellent," and 0 being "Don't Know" or "Haven't Used," how would you rate the overall performance of the following services provided by the Town of Vail? General Services and lihtaintenance of 1Paablec Areas HAVEN"r USED/ DON'T POOR AVG. EXC. KNOW Snow removal/sanding of residential streets 1 2 3 4 5 0 Snow removal/sanding of frontage roads 1 2 3 4 5 0 Snow removal/sanding of sidewalks/ stairways 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street repair & maintenance on residential streets 1 2 3 4 5 0 , Street repair & maintenance on frontage roads. 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street sweeping 1 2 3 4 5 0 Street lighting 1 2 3 4 5 0 Maintenance of park areas 1 2 3 4 5 0 M[aintexeance and ConcHefnon of ]Penblic Beanldimgs/Facelities NTunicipal buildings/facilities 1 2 3 4 5 0 Bus shelters 1 2 3 4 5 0 Public restrooms 1 2 3 4 5 0 Ice arena 1 2 3 4 5 0 Library 1 2 3 4 5 0 Visitor Information Centers 1 2 3 4 5 0 1Frequency and Quality of Bus Sys4eun Frequency of: In-town shuttle 1 2 3 4 5 0 Sandstone route 1 2 3 4 5 0 East Vail route 1 2 3 4. 5 0 West Vail route 1 2 3 4 5 0 Quality: Bus driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 Bus cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Parking . Amount of available parking in . Village/Lionshead 1 2 3 4 5 0 "Reasonableness" of parking fee 1 2 3 4 5 0 Parking structure cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Booth attendant courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 Coupon/permit program 1 2 3 4 5 0 Speed of transaction at exit booth 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS ON TOWN SERVICES: 6. As a general policy, with which of the following statements do you most agree? 1) The Town of Vail should concentrate resources primarily on maintaining the present infrastructure (roads, public facilities, etc.) and should not take on new projects or expansion 2) It is important to upgrade and expand the Town's infrastructure in order to maintain Vail's ability to serve its citizens and visitors in a first-class manner 7. Have you directly interacted with the Community Development Department over the past 12 months? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No 8. Based on your experience or what you have heard, please evaluate the following aspects of the Community Development Department. DoN"r POOR AVG. EXC. KNOW Hours of operation 1 2 3 4 5 0 Responsiveness to telephone inquiries 1 2 3 4 5 0 Development review assistance 1 2 3 4 5. 0 Zoning enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building permit plan review 1 2 3 4 5 0 . Building inspections & code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Sign code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Restaurant inspection program 1 2 3 4 5 0 Art in Public Places program 1 2 3 4 5 0 " Environmental planning programs 1 2 3 4 5 0 Environmental code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Planning & Environmental Commission review process 1 2 3 4 5 0 Design Review Board process 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 9. Rank the following priorities in order of their importance to you, with 1 being the project which is "most important" and 5 being "the least important." All projects would be funded out of the Real Estate Transfer Tax fund. Due to limited dollars, however, it.is important for the Town to know which of these projects are most important to you. 1) Acquisition of open space to protect environmentally sensitive areas 2) Acquisition of open space for future parks and recreation facilities 3) Pocket/neighborhood park development 4) Large park with community facilities designed to serve needs beyond the immediate neighborhood (i.e., Ford Park, etc.) 5) Bike/pedestrian path development; expansion of stream walk east of Vail Village 10. 'Local government faces limited funds and must establish which goals are most important in the community's view. Thinldng about the significant issues facing the Town of Vail over the next few years, please review the following list and rate each item in terms of importance. NOT VERY NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT OPINION 01) Preservation of open space 1 2 3 4 5 0 02) Provision of affordable housing opportunities within the Town of Vail limits 1 2 3 4 5 0 03) Provision of affordable housing opportunities outside Town of Vail limits (Berry Creek Sth Filing, for example) 1 2 3 4 5 0 04) Regulations to control extent of new development . and the number of dwelling units 1 2 3 4 5 0 OS) Air quality protection 1 2 3 4 5 0 46) Water quality protection 1' 2 3 4 5 0 07) Protection of stream flow year-round . ' in Gore Creek 1 2 3 4 5 0 OS) Water capacity to serve future population needs 1 2 3 4 5 0 09) Improved handicapped access to all public facilities 1 2 3 4 5 0 10) Solid/hazardous waste management 1 2 3 4 5 0 11) Preservation of view corridors 1 2 3 4 5 0 12) Maintain the unique alpine character of the community 1 2 3 4 5 0 13) Enforcement of zoning, sign, building, and environmental regulations 1 2 3 4 5 0 11. What other issues do you believe are very important for the Corvimunity Developmeret HDepartment to adciress? 12. The first responsibility of the Town of Vail is to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens; the Town, wheneyer possible, is also interested in allocating discretionary funds with'respect to quality of life issues. NOT VERY ~ NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT OPINION 1) Expansion of tourism opportunities/ facilities in summer/fall 1 2 3 4 5 0 2) Expansion of tourism opportunities/ facilities in winter 1 2 3 4 5 0 3) Expansion of variety/frequency of special ' events for tourists and local residents 1 2 3 4 5 0 4) Expanded "regional" governmental authority to address problems of the entire Vail Valley, including areas down-valley 1 2 3 4 5 0 5) Provision of affordable daycare within Town of Vail limits 1 2 3 4 5 0 6) Construction of a performing arts center 1 2 3 4 5 0 13. What other community issues are very important for the '8'own of Wail to address? 14. 'Based on your ezperience or what you have heard, please evaluate the library in terms of the following: DON'T POOR AVG. E{C. KNpW Range of services provided 1 2 3 4 5 0 Size of facility 1 2 3 4 5 0 Access to library (i.e., bus system, parldng structure) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Hours of operation 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 15. How would you evaluate the police and fire protection serviees in the Town of Vail? Fire ' POOR AVG. EXC. DK Fire protection and response time 1 2 3 4 5 0 Fire code enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 0 Emergency medical services 1 2 3 4 5 0 Police Neighborhood police service 1 2 3 4 5 0 Business area police service 1 2 3 4 5 0 Traffic control (4-way stop traffic direction) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Traffic enforcement (speeding vehicles, parking violations) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Attitude and demeanor of Vail Police employees with whom I have had contact 1 2 3 4 5 0 Overall performance of Vail Police Dept. 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 16. How would you rate the overall performance of the following administrative/management functions of the Town govemment? DoN°T POOR AVG. EXC. KNOW General administration (manager's office, finance department, clerk's office, personnel) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Responsiveness to public input/concerns 1 2 3 4 5 0 Information dissemination (newsletters, meetings, announcements) 1 2 3 4 5 0 Efficient use of tax revenues 1 2 3 4 5 0 Overall employee attitudes./friendliness 1 ' 2 3 4 5 0 Municipal court 1 2 3 4 5 0 Hours of operation of finance/cashier window 1 2 3 4 5 0 Sales tax and business license services 1 2 3 4 5 0 COMMENTS: 17. Do you support the concept of Park & Ride facilities being constructed in the Eagle Vail/Avon area, and/or Eagle and Edwards, with transit to the Town of Vail? 1) [ l Yes, strongly support it 2) Yes, moderately support it 3) [ ] No , 18. If such facilities were constructed, who should be responsible for funding and aclministration? 1) [ ] Town of Vail 2) [ ] Eagle County 3) Separate regional transit authority funded through a special district 4) [ ] Other: . 19. -Do you believe a regional transit authority should be created to operate the "Eagle-Gore Valley" bus system as part . of a single coordinafed program, or do you support the cunent system of multiple local entities running their own systems? 1) [ ] Prefer cunent system 2) Would prefer regional transit authority COMMENTS: 20. Do you utilize the Avon/Beaver Creek transit system serving that area and Leadville? - 1) [ ] Yes 2) No (GO TO Q. 22) ' 21. (IF YES) Please rate that system in terms of the following. . POOR AVG. EXC. DK Frequency .1 2 3 4 5 0 Cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 0 • Cost 1 2 3 4 5 0 Driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 0 22. How would you rate the importance of each of the following possible transit, circulation and parking improvements? NOT VERY DON'T IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW 1) Construct a new parking structure at the site of the West day lot (west of Radisson) 1 2 3 4 5 p 2) Construct a new parking structure at Ford Park 1 2 3 4 5 p 3) Provide capacity improvements at . I-70 interchanges 1 2 3 4 5 0 ' 4) Construct new vehicular underpass connecting frontage roads at Simba Run area 1 2 3 4 5 0 5) Develop a car pool program with incentives to participate 1 2 3 4 5 0 6) Expand routes and coverage of local transit system within Town boundaries 1 2 3 4 5 0 7) Ezpand transit system linking Town of Vail with azeas outside Town limits 1 2 3 4 5 0 8) Establish a Regional Transit Authority 1 2 3 4 5 0.. 9) Improve loading, delivery & trash removal facilities in the village core 1 2 3 4 5 0 23• Which of the above do you feel is MOST important? 24. Should a Town of Vail cemetery be constructed for $660,000 in Donovan Park (adjacent to the Matterhom area), with future development and maintenance costs funded through the sale of plots? 1) [ l Yes 2) No (GO TO Q. 26) 25. (IF YES) How should construction of the cemetery be funded? 1) Out of existing Town of Vail revenues 2) A one-time mill levy of 1.87 mills (the estimated cost for a home with a market value of $100,000 would be $24.00) 3) [ ] Other: Please provide the following demographic information. Feel free to leave blan& any questions you are not comfortable ' answering. Again, surveys will remain anonymous. Please do not write your narree or address on this survey. 26. Where.is your residence within the town of Vail located? 01) [ ] East Vail 02) Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas 03) [ ] Golf Course 04) [ ] Vail Village OS) [ ]Lionshead 06) [ ] Potato Patch, Sandstone 07) Buffehr Creek, Lions Ridge, the Valley 08) West Vail (north of I-70) 09) ( ] Matterhorn, Glen Lyon 10) [ ] Intermountain 11) Not a resident of the town of Vail ' 27. Which of the following categories best describes your residency status? . 1) [ ) Year-around Vail resident 2) [ ] Seasonal Vail resident 3) Owner of vacation property in Vail 4) Non-resident, owner of business or commercial property in Vail 5) [ ] Other: 28. Do you own or operate a business within the Town of Vail? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No 29: . How long have you lived at your cunent address (or owned your property, if a non-resident)? 1) Less than 1 year 2) [ ] 1-5 years 3) [ ] 6-15 years 4) More than 15 years 30. How long have you lived within the town of Vail (or owned property if a non-resident)? 1) Less than 1 year 2) [ ] 1-5 years 3) [ ] 6-15 years 4) More than 15 years 31. Do you own or rent your property? 1) [ ] Own 2). [ ] Rent , 3) [ ] Other (specify) 32. Which of these categories best describes your marital status? 1) [ J Single 4) Couple, no children 2) Single with children 5) Couple with children at home 3) Single, children no longer at home 6) [ ] Couple, children no longer at home 33. -(IF YOU HAVE L`IiiLDREN) How many are in the following age groups? „ 1) 0-5 yeazs 2) 6-12 years 3) 13-18 years 34. Including yourself, how many persons reside in your household? 35. How many cars are owned and kept at your home or place of business in Vail? 36. What is your primary method of transportation in the Vail area? 1) [ l Private car/vehicle 5) Hitchhike 2) Outlying bus service 6) Walk 3) [ l In-town shuttle 7) Carpool 4) [ ] Bicycle 8) [ ] Other: 37. Your gender 1) [ ] lViale 2) [ ] Female 38. Your race 1) [ ] African American 2) [ ] Native American 3) [ ] Caucasian 4) [ ] Hispanic 5) [ ] Oriental 39. Which of these categories best describes your age? O1) 15-17 06) 35-39 11) 60-64 02) 18-19 07) 40-44 12) 65-69 03) 20-24 08) 45-49 13) 70 or over 04) 25-29 09) 50-54 14) Do not wish to reply OS) [ ] 30-34 10) [ ] 55-59 40. Which of these categories best describes the annual income of your household (before taxes)? - O1) [ ] $0-6,999 O8) [ ] $50,000-74,999 ' 02) [ ] $7,000-9,999 09) [ ] $75,000-99,999 03) [ ) $10,000-14,999 10) [ ] $100,000-124,999 04) [ ] $15,000-19,999 11) [ ] $125,000-149,999 O5) [ $20,000-24,999 12) [ ] $150,000-199,999 06) [ ] $25,000-34,999 13) [ ] $200,000-249,999 07) [ ] $35,000-49,999 14) [ ] $250,000+ 15) Do not wish to reply 41. What is your occupation? Please complete any of the insert pages which apply to you. Thank you for your participation in our research program. 17ae followfng questioras pertadra do specafac T'oevn of Vail servaces whic% you may have utilued drering the past year. Please • respooacd do questions regarding those evhich you personally have used in the last year. Skip over those with which you do hot have persoreal experierace at ehu time. ILIIBRARY 1. Do you use the public library in [he Town of Vail? 1) [ ] Yes 2) IVo (GO TO NEXT SECTION--POLICE DEPARTIVYENT) 2. Do you personally hold a library card in the Town of Vail? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No 3. . In a typical month, how frequencly do you visit the library? . 1) [ ] Less than once 2) Once in a month 3) Two to four visits 4) Five to nine visits 5) [ ] 10 or more 4. On a typical trip to the library, how long do you stay? 1) Less than 15 minutes . 2) 15 to 30 minutes 3) 30 minutes to 2 hours • 4) More than 2 houLs 5. How do you typically get to the library? 1) ] Car . 2) [ ] Bus 3) [ ] Bike 4) [ l Walk 6. For what purpose(s) do you typically come to the library? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1) Read magazines, listen to cassettes, or use other library materials/equipment in the faciliry 2) Do research for personal, business or school projects 3) Check out books or other materials for use at home 4) Work, study, write letters, etc. in a quiet library setting 5) Use computer equipment available at library 6) [ ] Attend children's'functions/events 7) Attend seminars or meetings scheduled at the library or in meeting rooms across the hall 8) [ ] Other: 7. Would you like to see increased hours of operation at the library? 1) [ ] Yes (what days/hours?) 2) [ ] No 8. What suggestions or comments do you have about improvements for the library (services, facilities, programs, staff)? 9. - From the list below, please answer the following. , A. Check the box if you have used, the service in the last year. B. For those you have used, please rate the overall quality of the service on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means "Poor" and 5 means "Excellent." C. Choose five of the services which you would like to see expanded or impmved. A. B. C. Pjj~GR" CHECK IF IF USED, EXPAND/ USED IN PLEASE IMPROVE PAST RATE (1-5) (CHECK YEAR UP TO 5) I1VF0RMA7'IOIV SEIPVICES Business Information (for example, Momingstar NTutual Funds) Reference Materials on CD-Rom . Consumer Information ' Personal Computers for the Public Public Access Catalog Online Database (lYTarmot, Uncover, CARL, ERIC, etc.) Consumer Information Ready Reference/Research Telephone Service C'HILI)~hl'S .41~II~ 1'Ot17'l~ SER~/ICES ~xx# Story Times and Summer Reading Program Children's 1Vlaterials--Books, Videos, etc. Electronic Children's Books Information for School Assignments ADULT REClPEAT'IONAl, SERVICES #m# Books, Videos, CDs, Checkout Adult programs--Adventure Speakers Series, Author Appearances Magazines and Newspapers Books on Tape, Other Audiotapes Tape Decks, CD Players, VCRs (in-house) Other (please identify): GENERAL SERVIC'ES *~x~ Copy Machine FAX Machine, Modems, AV Equipment Checkout, Income Tax Forms, Typewriters (circle relevant items) ' Quiet Reading Space Meeting Room Communiry Display Space Book Drops at Additional Sites Interlibrary Loan Other (Please identify): II'O1Lfi'CE IIDEPART'1Y21EN7[' 10. Have you had any direct contact with the Vail Police Department in the past year? 1) [ ] Yes 2) Wo (GO TO NEXT SECTION--COIVTMUNICATIONS) 11. (IF YES) What was the nature of your most recent contact? 1) I called to report an accident not involving me 2) I was involved in a motor vehicle accident 3) I was the victim of a crime 4) I was a witness to a crime or incident 5) I requested information from the police department 6) I was interested in crime prevention seminus 7) [ ] I was arrested 8) I was issued a citation 9) I was involved with the police department in another matter (specify): 12. In that most recent contact with the Vail Police Department, with which section(s) did you PRIMARILY.interact? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1) [ ] Dispatch 2) [ ] Records/Clerical 3) [ ] Patrol 4) [ ] Detectives 5) [ ] Code enforcement/safety 6) [ ] Crime prevention 7) [ ] Administration 13. Based on your most recent contacf with the Vail PoIice Department, please rate how the department employee performed in the following areas. POOR AVG. EXCELLENT n/a Concern 1 2 3 4 5 0 Helpfulness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 0 Fairness 1 2 3 4 5 0 Problem solving 1 2 3 4 5 0 Putting you at ease 1 2 3 45 0 Professionalism 1 2 3 4 5 0 Response time 1 2 3 4. 5 0 Quality of service 1 2 3 4 5 0 14. What suggestions do you.have as to how the Vail Police Department can improve the quality of its service and operations? COI!"NfUN][CA'II'IIONS/INFO]EtM[AT~ON 15. Did you phone or visit the Town of Vail offices during the past year to request information, offer an opinion, make a complaint, etc? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No (END SURVEY HERE) 16. (IF YES) Which department(s) did you contact? 01) [ ] Town Manager 02) [ ] Town Clerk 03) [ ) Finance 04) [ ] Community Development OS) [ ] Public Works , 06) [ ] Transportation 07) [ ] Police 08) [ ] Municipal Court 09) [ ] Town Attorney 10) [ ] Fire 11) [ ] Community relations 12) [ ] Mayor's office ' 13) [ ] Town Council 14) [ ] Library 17. Were you satisfied with the manner in which your contact was handled? 1) [ ] Yes 2) [ ] No (please explain) 18. Did you request a follow-up action by the Town or department in relation to your inquiry? 1) [ ) Yes 2) [ ] No (END SURVEY HERE) 19. (IF YES) Was that action completed to your satisfaction? 1) [ ] Yes , 2) [ ) No (please explain) ~ I - j,~,. r.. K•:.. c~sd!/ i~~ ~~C~/~ P.O. Box 249 / 750 Eagle Road Minturn, Colorado 81645 (303) 949-4490 d Dr. Erik S. Fredell - Principal Mr. Gerald Schmidt Ms. Ronda S. Woodall - Assistant Principal ,Ms. Judy Caligiuri Mr. Robert Isbell - Athletic Director Guidance Counselor ~V~ g~y 11 ~6ce/ V&D 'IO. Vail Town Council Members ~'/A y 2 Vail Town Manager ,1994 Vail Transportation/Parking Manager FROM: Battle Mountain High School Staff DATE: May 26, 1994 RE: Parking Charges at Ford Park Lot----yQ We, the undersigned staff inembers of Battle Mountain High School, request that you reconsider your decision to charge $2.00 for parking at the Ford Park dirt lot on June 4, 1994, the date of our graduation ceremony. While we completely agree that parking along the Frontage Road in that area is both dangerous and undesirable, we do not believe that your decision to charge for parking is in the best interest of our community, given that those attending are local graduates, parerits and relatives, and school district employees. We suggest that a better approach would be to allow free parking at the Ford Park lot on a first come, first served basis, with latecomers being directed to the Parking Structure by appropriate signs. Those choosing to park along the Frontage Road could be ticketed. Thank you for your serious consideration of this request. f ~ ~ . , IZZ -2~ ~ _ :2 . ~ "T rid ~of Eas~agle County; In a C/ass by I s~l ees" . C~ ~7 , : ?I. ~ i ~ P ' ~ I I I II ~ . • , /d~//~~'{~~ ~`~~1/~ I~ / / \ I J ? ~ il vi, a i, ~ ."ijr'? ~ _ r r , I vwv~v e~an~E 'i ~ : ~ : - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , / j`, i / ~ . , . ~ ~ ~ ~ ey ~ J ~ , , ~ l~ "~~'V r ~ a i ~ . I ~ 1 ` ` ~i'iVb~r1 1 V ~ Aw+ y ~ J" ~~~•2 D ~J U rr ~r~ ~ , - ~ f1~ ~ . Dcml tjMtAC4---,( dC4 ~ GG v 7s . / . ~ / 42.~ r . ; r ~ ~ . ~ _.--~(~t}' ~ • - . , ~ , ~ . . , , ` , ~ t~~ - - ao,- Ac1f ~ Voh Am Acelo . , ~ v;~P%w, n~ o ~J ~--k n a r2- S. c ? ~ GZ`"~ AA LAN XCAd LrJ4 y>,~e Ge: be~ sw~o .60 /1 ~ ~ ~"CO , D \ I J 0 r I I ~ ~ I' , / C~ I ~;~J ~ ~.i,? f ti--~ ~ I C(V~o , ; i~ i ~ ~ , ~ , , . , . , Ia~,~~I , kC~L~1 ~dc~~~ ~ , ~ ~4 r . „ ~ - ~2~~~ ~v~s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~2~~.Gr~ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ . . 2d~ I , . ~ ~ , • . ' , ~ , re,, • • ~ ` : ~~:`.~~~`t~...~~..,~.-~`o~=a,'' --~~.i.j,,.~~!`. . - ~ ~ Ki~ ~ . ~ _ . _ . . - . ~ \