HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-15 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
VAVL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING MEETING
TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1997
7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to
determine at what time Council will consider an item.
1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. (5 mins.)
2. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance that
Russell Forrest would allow interior conversions and consolidate references to Gross
Tom Braun Residential Floor Area in the zoning code. (15 mins.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance
No.13, Series of 1997, on first reading.
BACKGROUND R.ATIONALE: The Vail Town Council, on April 15, 1997,
directed staff to implement Alternative 1 after considering the various
alternatives to the existing GRFA policy. Alternative 1 involves keeping
GRFA as a tool to control floor area but would allow interior conversions
for existing homes that have no remaining GRFA allowance. Alternative
1 would only allow interior conversions for homes existing at the date of
the approval of this policy by the Town Council. New construction would
not be eligible for interior conversions. In addition, staff would
recommend consolidating the numerous references to GRFA in the
Zoning Code into one consolidated section. This would help to better
communicate current policy on GRFA to applicants .
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 13, Series of
1997 on first reading.
3. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance making
Steve Thompson Supplemental Appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund,
Facilities Maintenance Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund, and Real Estate
Transfer Tax Fund, of the 1997 Budget and the Financial Plan for the
Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said
appropriations as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (15 mins.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance
No. 14, Series of 1997, on first reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The required Supplemental Appropriations
were discussed and approved by the Town Council on June 24, 1997,
when the interim Financial Report was presented to the Town Council.
The majority of the $1.6 million of the required supplemental is for RETT
projects, $1.1 million.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 14, Series of
1997 on first reading. ,
4• Town Manager Report. (10 mins.)
5• Adjournment - 8:15 p.m.
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
I I I I I I I
THE NEXT VAIL TOWPI COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7122/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/5/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
, WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/5197, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
IIIIIII -
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notiflcation. Please call 479-2332 voice
or 479-2356 TDD for information.
C: WGENDA.TC
- 7• 1Jt ~1~
Free After Three Program Analysis
Comparison of Sales Tax collected By Area & Sector
March & April of 1997 Compared to 1996
Percent Increase or Decrease:
Vail Village Lionshead CV-WV-EV Out of Town Overall
Retail 0.7% 6.6% -2.4% -1.2% ~
1.2/a
Lodging 6.8% 17.6% 26.2% -14.3% 13.5°/a
Food & Beverage 4.6% 20.2% 7.4% -54.6% 7.8%
Other -1.9% 9.7% -19.3% 4.8% 2.7%
Total 3.7% 13.9% 9.5% 2.6% 6.97
Dollar Increase or drecrease:
Vail Village Lionshead CV-WV-EV Out of Town Overa{I
Retail $ 4,317 $ 16,715 $ (6,105) $ (513) $ 14,414
Lodging $ 38,658 $ 52,334 $ 58,183 $ (947) $ 148,228
Food & Beverage $ 20,252 $ 26,270 $ 5,946 $ (1,232) $ 51,236
Other $ (405) $ 1,718 $ (3,547) $ 8,838 $ 6,604
Total $ 62,822 $ 97,037 $ 54,477 $ 6,146 $ 220,482
Budget Comparison:
Budgeted Actual (Under) Over
Increase Increase Budget ,
Retail $ 43,246 $ 14,414 $ (28,832) ~
Lodging $ 39,423 $ 148,228 $ 108,805
Food & Beverage $ 23,692 $ 51,236 $ 27,544 .
Other $ 8,708 $ 6,604 $ (2,104) ~
Total $ 115,069 $ 220,482 $ 105,413 ~
~
~
r. -
tx
Comparison of Sales Tax Collected in March & April of 96 and 97
30.0% ~ .
2s.o%
~
2o.o%
~ 15.0% 13Vail Vllage
e ¦ Lionshead
V E3CV-WV-EV
e ~ OOuerall
d
~
a 10.0%
~
5.0% ~
0.0%
R ail Lodging Food & Beverage
-5.0%
. 7
~
Comparison of Sales Tax Collected in March & April 96 & 97
$160,000 ~
~
$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
O Vail Ullage
¦ Lionshead
$80,000 - OCV-WV-EV
~ O Overall
8 -
$60,000
$40,000 - ~
$20, 000 -
.
$0
R Lodging Food & Beverage i
~
($20,000) -
-
R • ,
~
~
~
Booth Revenue Lost
"Free After 3"
For March & April 1997
March/April March/April
'95/96 '96/97 $ Decrease % Decrease
Village Booth $385,420 $280,928 ($104,492) -27%
Lionshead Booth $217,268 $212,685 ($4,583) -2%
Total $602,688 $493,613 . ($109,075) -29%
Y
Booth Revenue Lost
"Free After 3" Program
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000 ' f . a . j ,
5250,QQQ
$200,000 ~ h . .
, M
. . s ~;H e - .
%
. '
$150,000 w -
y ! E3 March/April '95/96 ;
µ .
~ i
'S March/April '96/97 ~
$100,000 ` _ .
$50,000 -
,
~
$0 .
Village Booth Lionshead Booth
j. - ~
.
History of Discount Pass Rates
Pass Tvae '92193 '93194 '94195 '95196 '96197
Blue $475 $475 $475 $525 $525
Gold $900 $1,000 $1,100 $1,100 $1,100
CouponsNalue Passes $3.75 $4.25 $4.75 $5.00 $5.00
NOTE: Value passes replaced coupons in the'94/95 season
r
Parking Revenue History by Season
'94/95 '95196 '96/97
Village Booth Revenue $906,669 $1,035,386 $940,648
Lionshead Booth Revenue $530,299 $574,201 $611,140
Parking Passes $167,182 $172,064 $191,566
Value Passes $156,852 $188,598 $155,200 *
*"Leases $83,833 $105,037 $61;128
**Pay In Lieu $68,028 $102,137 $431,298
**Other $24,071 $20,727 $36,976
"Estimated for 96/97 - no refunds given
"Reported on a calendar year basis
Parking Revenue History by Season
$1,200,000
$1,000,000 ° . -
,
, s: . . .
.r ,
$800,000 $600,000
¦'94/95 I
~ ¦'95/96 ~ 13 '96/97 ~
$400,000 -
$200,000 •
$0
Village Lionshead Parking Value "Leases "`Pay In ""Other
Booth Booth Passes Passes Lieu
Revenue Revenue
~ •
Parking fee prior to Free after 3
HOURS FEE
0-1.5 FREE
1.5-2 $3.00
2-3 $4.00 3-4 $5.00
4-5 $6.00
5-6 $7.00
6-7 $8.00
7-8 $9.00
8-9 $10.00
9-11 $11.00
11-13 $12.00
13-15 $13.00
15-24 $14.00
Entry between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. receive 3 hours free parking.
Parking fee schedule f'or entries between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.
0-.3 FREE
3-3.5 $3.00
3.5-4.5 $4.00
. 4..5-5.5 $5.00
5.5-6.5 $6.00
6.5-7.5 $7.00
7.5-8.5 $8.00
8.5-9.5 $9.00
9.5-10.5 $10.00
10.5-12.5 $11.00
12.5-14.5 $12.00
14.5-16.5 $13.00
16.5-24 $14.00
First hour and a half free
User Group- Anyone entering the Village and Lionshead structure that doesn't have a pass.
Goal- Encowage quick shopping, drop-off, and use of ice arena.
Discount scheduleoee hour and a half to all entries 24 hours per day.
Revenue Impacts- The revenue lost could be calculated by the multiple of the dollar amount
charged minus reduction of use.
Perforrnance- 40 to 50% of all ticket transactions at both the Village and Lionshead structures.
.
Gold Pass
User Group- Locals who need unlimited use of both Village and Lionshead parking structures.
These passes are never turned away.
Goal- Provide discounted, unlimited parking for no more than 1001oca15.
Discount schedule- For $1100.00 plus a$25 deposit, a gold pass holder can enter and exit the , structures for $7.05 per day.
Revenue Impacts- $64,900 for 1996-1997.
Historical pricing and units sold
1996-1997 59 sold at $1100 $64,900
1995-1996 60 sold at $1100 $66,000
1994-1995 66 sold at $1100 $69,300
Blue Pass
User Group- Locals who need to work in Vail or Lionshead.
Goal- Reduce daily parking rate for the workers and minimize Village parking structure use by
locals on weekends and peak days.
Discount schedule- For $525.00 plus a$25.00 deposit a local can park 156 days. The daily cost
to park is $3.36 per day. Entries and exits are unlimited other than the restricted days.
The blue pass is restricted in the Village parking structure from:
• 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m Friday, Saturday and Sunday
• 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. December 23 to January l, and February 17
Revenue Impacts- $123,900 for 1996-1997 .
EIistorical pricing and units sold
1996-1997 236 sold at $525 $123,900
1995-1996 200 sold at $525 $105,000
1994-1995 214 sold at $475 $95,000
Value Pass / Debit Card
User Group- Local residents who need to work in the Village or Lionshead. Group also would
rather pre- pay for parking in smaller increments that the blue pass.
Goal- Reduce daily parking rate for locals.
Discount schedule- Pre- pay up to 100 days of parking at $5.00 per day. Space in the Village is limited to 225 spaces. Unlimited parking at Lionshead. Proof of residency is required.
Revenue Impacts- $155,200.00 in 1996-1997 ski season.
Historical pricing and units sold
1996-1997 $155,200.00 at $5.00 31,040 debits*
1995-1996 $188,598.00 at $5.00. 37,720 debits
1994-1995 $156,852.00 at $4.75. 33,021 debits
*estimated
Pass History
'94/95 '95/96 '96/97
Value Pass Revenue $156,852 $188,598 $155,200
# Transactions 33,021 37,720 31,040
Parking Pass Revenue: Blue $95,000 $105,000 $123,900
Gold $69,300 $66,000 $64,900
Other: upgrades, etc. $2,882 $1,064 $2,766
Total Parking Pass Revenue $167,182 $172,064 $191,566
# Sold: Blue 214 200 236
Gold 66 60 59
Pass History
250 . , ,
40,000
. ,
- _
d , . , 35,000
200 ' ,
> , ' 30,000
, . . F.; ,
~
.
~ . _
150 25,000
~ • _ 20,000
100
• 15,000
10,000
# Blue Passes
50 ,
# Gold Passes ,
# Value Pass Uses
5,000 - - -
:
0 ` -
'94/95 '95/96 '96/97
Colorado Card and Vail Valley Skier Days
User Group- 100,000 Front range skiers
Goal- Fill in the low ski days by offering discounts on ski tickets and parking. Reduction in
parking matched same percentage discount for a day lift ticket.
Discount schedule-
November 8 to November 26 $4.00
November 27 to December 20 $3.00
December 21 to January 3 No discount
January 3 to April 4 $3.00
April 5 to April 20 $4.00
Correct coupon must be given to booth attendant in order to receive discount.
Revenue Impacts- $20,741.00 in discounts.
Performance- 5900 coupons used. Increased non-peak skiers by 42%. The program was a
success in the view of Vail Associates. Please r•efer to attached memo.
6-9 Free parking
User group- Anyone who enters the structure between 6-9 p.m. (Prior to Free after 3). '
Goal- Encourage people to come back to the Village and Lionshead during the evening hours.
Discount schedule- Any entry between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. free, upon exit, within three hours.
_ Revenue Impacts- Decreased by $69,910 in ski season 1996-97 prior Free after. 3.
Performance
Average length of stay for all vehicles entering the structures between 6 and 9 p.m.
0 to 1.5 hours 32% Free
1.5 to2 hours 18% Free
2 to 3 hours 30% Free
3 hours and up 20%
6-9 Length of Stay Comparison
96/97 Parking Season
0-1 1/2 1 1/2-2 2-3 3 & up
November 586 286 499 301
December 5,051 2,662 4,250 3,254
January 4,935 2,953 4,984 3,293
February 5,249 2,949 5,257 3,512
March 1,644 935 1,775 1,108 April 1,865 1,016 1,461 1,120
, Total 19,330 10,801 18,226 12,588
% of Total 32% 18% 30% 20%
6-9 Length of Stay Comparison
'96/97 Parking Season
6.000
5,000 - " •
4,000
i 0-1 1/2
1 1 /2-2 :
3,000 I 2-3 ~
~
3&up
2,000
1,000 1 ~
0
November December January February March April
,
Free after 3
User Group- Anyone entering the Village or Lionshead structures after 1:30 p.m.
Goal- Encourage people to stay and/ or come back to the Village and Lionshead after 3 p.m. Lost
parking revenue to be made up by increased sales tax in food, beverage and retail.
Discount schedule-
Entries between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m.
0-1.5 hours Free
1.5-2 hours $3.00
2-3 hours $4.00
3-4 hours $5.00
4-5 hours $6.00
5-6 hours $7.00
6-7 hours $8.00
7-24 hours $9.00
ALL ENTRIES BETWEEN 3 p.m. and 7 a.m. are free.
Revenue Impacts- Down $109,075.00.
Performanee- To be determined.
,
"Free After 3" Length of Stay Comparison
96/97 Parking Season
0-1 112 Hours 1 1/2-2 Hours 2-3 Hours 3 Hours & up Total
November Entrances 2,462 838 1,099 763 5,162
December Entrances 3,798 1,196 1,843 2,821 9,658
January Entrances 3,311 1,103 2,248 3,144 9,806
February Entrances 3,673 1,248 2,061 2,951 9,933
March Entrances 26,590 9,816 15,038 17,826 69,270
April Entrances 12,307 4,286 6,110 7,766 30,469 ,
" NOTE: All entrances are from 1:30 PM
"Free After 3" Length of Stay Comparison
'96/97 Parking Season
30,000 _
25,000
,
20,000
~ .
. ~15,000
0-1 1/2 Hours
10,000 1 1/2-2 Hours
i 2-3 Hours
~ 3 Hours & up
5,000 -
I
0
November December January February March April
+ n
s
Operational impacts of Free after 3
Reduced turnover; therefore, it was difficult for customers to find parking after 1:30 p.m.
In the Village structure, former debit card users now use parking spaces intended for the general
public.
Booth attendants aren't confronted about cost to park; however they spent more time directing '
traffic.
Additional parking staff needed later in the day for traffic direction.
Structures stay filled longer, so cleaning and maintenance was difficult.
Cost in labor and gate maintenance is $.47 per transaction, free or charged.
. . 7• 15-y'I
NIEMQRAIdDUM
0. TO: Pam Bmdimier
Town of Vail
FROM: Kurt Metternick
Vail Assodates
DATE: 25,1un-97
RE: Calocado Card and Vail Valley Gub Slders Days
Befouv, I have aoaumulabed some flpures and ststistlcs fior you regarding your request for Cdorado Card ancf Vah
Va[Eey Club siders days. Trie sk6ers days har+e been brolcen out inb each sub-seasnn so you can see hrna v&-
have mwed skiers trorn sub-season bo sub-season over the years.
coLoRaoo cnRn
Adult and C6i{d Sklor Days Com6lnsd (wltih 9L change)
199647 S6 Change 1895-86 96 Chanpe 19"
Prevsason (Nov 8- Nav 28) 9,363 276.6096 2,539 -39.0096 4,161
F-arly Season (Nov 27 - Dec 20) 35,299 0.6096 35,101 -28_2096 48,881
Christmas (Dec 21 - Jan 3) 27,380 56.1096 17,658 43.9096 12,271
Value Seasfln (Jan 4- Feb 13) 70,615 72.0d96 41,053 -22.7096 53.092
~ Peak SEason (Feb 14 - Apr 4) 82,989 50.1096 55.047 -27.1096 75,544
H Late Season (Apr 5- Apr 20) 10,383 4.90% 9,895 -38.6096 16,122
tn
Sub Total 236,209 46.40% 961,291 -23.2096 210,081
~ Adult and Child Sloier Oays Cornbine (as 46 oi Total)
~ 1986-97 9G ot Total 1995-88 y6 of Total 1994-85 9G of Total
Q Pre-Season ((dov 8- Nnv 26) 9,563 4.01Y96 2,539 1.6096 4,161 2.0096
~ Eady Season {Nw 27 - Dec 20} 35,299 14.9096 35.101 21.8096 48,891 23.3096
~ Christmas (Dec 21 - Jan 3) 27,380 11.609b 17,658 10.9095 12,271 5.8096
~ Value Season (Jem 4- Feb 13) 70,615 29.909G 41.053 25.50% 53,092 25.3096
Peak Season (Feb 14 - Apu 4) 82,969 35.1096 55.047 34.1096 75.544 36.0096
+ Late Season (Apr5 -Apr20) 10,383 4.4096 9,895 6.1096 16,122 7.70%
~ Sub-Tofal 236,209-. 100.0096 161,291 1Q0-Q210.0Bt- 1oa_08%
.
r\j
K -
Page 1
TOWN OF VAIL PARKING DISCUSSION
July 15, 1997
RRC ASSOCIATES
~ ~ 7• rs' ~7 .
1 Have you used public parking within the past 12 months?
RESIDENT ABSENTEE
n=841 n=282
1) 94 81 Yes
2) 6 19 No
NOTATALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED mean n
` 1 2 3 4 5
Parkin
Discount parking program
(debit cardlblue, gold pass) resident 11 9 25 29 25 3.5 364
absentee 10 6 27 24 34 3.7 105
Booth attendant courtesy resident 2 5 20 37 37 4.0 801
absenfee 1 5 18 38 39 4.1 219
Speed of transaction at exit booth resident 3 5 23 40 27 3.8 803
absentee 2 4 26 41 26 3.8 223
Overall parking feeslpricing structure resident 19 19 30 21 11 . 2.9 791
absentee 12 19 28 26 15 3.1 226
The "Park Free After 3" experimental
program resident 5 2 4 15 73 4.5 823
absentee - 1 4 15 80 4.7 216
Cleanliness and lighting of parking
structures resident 4 11 29 34 22 3.6 839
absentee 3 7 25 40 24 3.8 245
2 Are you aware of the "Park Free After 3" program in the Vail Village and Lionshead parking stnuctures betvveen
3:00 pm and 7:00 am?
RESIDENT ABSENTEE
n=798 n=267
1) 99 75 Yes
2) 1 18 No
3) - 8 Don't know/no opinion
3 How has the availability of free parking changed your use of the Vail commercial core areas since March 1?
NO GREATLYINCREASED
CHANGE USE OF AREA mean n
1 2 3 4 5
In Vail Village resident 32 6 14 27 22 3.0 814
absentee 36 4 12 30 18 2.9 225
In Lionshead resident 40 7 14 23 16 2.7 748
absentee 44 4 15 24 13 2.6 199
RRC ASSOC[ATES
1
TYPICAL COMMENTS ABOUT PARKING
• "After 3" makes no sense and makes no difference - the merchants look at themselves for the problemisolution - product, cost.
They drive real people down valley to make purchases.
• "Free after 3" was great for locals. Also helped our business - places for staff and customers to park.
• Add more days to park free program next year
• Add more parking levels in Lionshead or Vail Village
• Ail debit card holders should not be scuttled to LH on Fri.lSat/Sun
• As a taxpayer I'm concerned about paying off the mortgage on the parking structure, so accordingly I'm concerned that (no) extra
tax revenue is generated by Park Free After 3
• Attendants' #1 priority should be to get cars out of the structure, not talking to their friends or other employees
• Better signage for tourists and walkway to get to stairs outside without walking between parked cars
• Bottom level of parking structure needs additional lights
• Brighten up the inside of the structure. Terminal buiiding is great, need to light north entrance. Park Free After 3 is a failure,
tumed into a locals-only thing
• Cars which deliberately take 2 spaces should be marked and charged double at the exit; at the moment there's no penalty; those
who occupy 2 spaces should have to pay for 2 spaces
• Con6nue free after 3 promo; perhaps beginning at 3 instead of 1:30 (advertise 4:30) IYs great for merchants and Adventure Ridge
• Debit card does not work well in cold weather; most attendants courteous-one is not
• Debit card too expensive for short term use
• Debit cards are great and reasonable for workers
• Decrease parking fees, even if need to charge 24 hours; increase lighting and safety patrols
• Discount rates for parking structure for locals with proof (drivers license)
• Discounts on parking if ticket is validated at a restaurant/shop in V Vllage or LH
• Does not permitting blue passes on Fridays change anything? How about limiting them only on Saturday and Sunday?
• Doesn't make sense to have free parking when we owe money on structures; also it encourages people to drive not ride the bus
• Don't feel we needed free parking after 1:30; I think that the town lost a lot of money
• Drunks urinate in the parking structure. Yecch!
• During ski season space needs to be made available for shopping and dining not just skiing; we live here and would like to park
here
• Eliminate Free after 3- structure fills up with locals, tourists and shoppers can't find spaces
• Enact charge card payment at parking structure
• Enforce 1 vehicle/1 space especially during busy time; ticket and tow space "hogs"; paint interior white to lighten drab/dark
interior; more frequent trash pickup after idiots leave their messes
• Entering structure after 1:30 to begin free parking is too early; it should be more like free after 1:30, so if you enter after 3:00 it
would be free; also only 1 hour should be free not 1:30
• Express lane in Lionshead; blue pass must park 4 days per week in Lionshead, but only ViIlage has express exit lane! Another
case of favor towards Village?
• Exterior grounds at the structure are often littered with cans/bottles or the remains of sick drunks
• For the current fee, it is absolutely ridiculous not to take credit cards
• Free after 3 has allowed me to come into town earlier and stay longer - workout, dinner - good idea
• Free parking for volunteers supplying services for TOV and VA
• Free parking is no incentive for business usage
• Give locals free patking
• Go back to cards and window stickers and enforce by towing - too many people loan their cards to non-residents
• Great to be able to park for dinner etc.; probably does not need to start until 4:00 and could end at 2:00 a.m.
• Handicapped parking around the town is a joke - location and improper use by non-handicapped drivers. NO ONE EVER tickets!
People on crutches find the distance from parking structures exhaustive even on pavement let alone snow and ice.
• Hard to find a place to park in the winter season without paying outrageous prices at the parking structures; if you want to
frequent bars, restaurants or shops that makes it difficult
• Have 2 booths open at all times for exiting; many times just 1 attendant upon leaving even during key exit times
• Having been in the Vail parking structure almost every day all winter there are always dozens of spaces that are taken up by
sloppy parking. If spaces were better marked you could get more cars in.
• I don't think it was right to take away the deposits of blue card holders to cover Free After 3; this was not discussed at the
Merchants Assoc. meetings. Tax revenue should cover those costs - don't punish the locals.
• I have held a gold pass for several years and am offended that nothing was done about its high prices when TOV implemented
the Park Free After 3 program. At least give us a credit.next year.
• Institute an employee parking program that would ideally offer free employee parking or at least discount rates - employees
should not have to pay tourist rates to park while working
2
• It seems the structure is quite dirty and very unappealing; this is often the visitor's first impression and it is not a very good one. I
don't think it is patrolled enough - we just had our hood omament cut off our car for the 4th time.
• Lionshead, yellow level, west end, far north side has been dark all winter-most unsatisfactory
• Local parking pass is way too expensive for someone down valley where riding the bus is not a viable solution. Certainly the debit
card is a good idea, but if I needed to use it more (but less than a pass) it could be a big chunk of my earnings.
• Many time only 1 booth open when leaving the main Vail structure
• Many times signs say "structure full" even though many cars are leaving, why?
• Many, many lights out in structures. This invites crime and looks bad on Vail.
• Monies lost in the Park Free After 3 are probably not offset by revenues generated; this seems more like a handout to merchants
• My debit card never seems to work - it takes 20-30 jiggles to get it to catch
• One attendant is slow and rude; all others great; can you please watch for cars taking 2 spaces at prime locations
• Open all exit booths in the aftemoon. One 6me it took OVER an hour to get to the one booth that was open. Another day I pulled
in just to pick up the kids, they immediately got in, but it took so long in line I had to pay.
• Parking is the first impression of Vail - brighter lighting, paint, informa6on about where you are in relation to where you want to go
• Parking to visit "Vail" is ridiculous. Why do you even charge for this? Sales taxes should improve if you encouraged people to
come into the ViIlage.
• Plenty of free parking should be available to residents in the structure. This yga basic seNice should be offered by the town long
before much more extravagant spending such as subsidizing some people's housing. Get first things first.
• Probably shouldn't start "park free" until later in the day - TOV needs the revenue, and people could still come in for the evening
• RE: attendant courtesy at parking booth - remember that our out-of-town guests leave with a"last impression " so a pleasant
"thank you" or "see you again" with a smile would be nice
• Securiry and safety in parking structure seems nonexistent - I never see any security people going through
• Should be working toward all free parking
• Special Monday - Friday price structure would be helpful
• Structure too dusty, walls covered with spit in some areas. Hate it when W. Vail red comes 5 minutes early! West Vail should run
on 10-15 minute schedule
• The "after 3" program screwed me. I paid for a pass and the structure was usually packed in the late afternoon.
• The "park free after 3" program did not incent me to shop in the vi{lage or Lionshead. IYs not the parking, it's the exorbitant prices
of goods and services charged by merchants.
• The blue pass was a complete rip-off; even when Vail Vllage was empty you could not park there on Friday, Saturday, Sunday.
Then on busy days you could not park in Lionshead - lot full.
• The parking structure is an embarrassment - disgustngly filthy, poody designed and ma+ntain with a real security problem. Vail
Associates is the main beneficiary - they should contribute far more to improve the situation.
• The problem I have with parking free after 3 is there are not enough convenient spots available for blue card holders. Further, the
safety in the structure to both pedestrians and cars decreased substantially!
• Twice we waited in line to get out and our ticket was 1 min. past the free time and we were charged; the attendant was very rude;
if I were a tourist I would not come back
• We have to buy blue passes for 8 or 9 employees each year - VERY expensive; perhaps a graduated (downward) rate when
buying in bulk
• Weak council caved in to commercial interests on free parking
• Work in West Vail, live in East Vail; to take a bus from one locabon to the other is very lengthy process, thus I never do it
4 Are there any additional actions by the Town or merchants that would increase your use of businesses in the
Village commercial core or Lionshead?
RESIDENT ABSENTEE
n=651 n=204
1) 42 24 Yes
2) 23 28 No
3) 35 48 Don't know/no opinion
3
RATINGS OF TOWN OF VAIL PARKING
1 2 3 4 5
Not at All Very mean n
Satisfied Satisfled
Rate discount arkin ro ram
Overall 15 13 26 24 22 3.2 910
Used arkin last 12 mo. 10 8 25 28 28 3.5 420
Not used arkin last 12 mo. 40 - - 40 20 3.0 5
Rate booth attendantcourtes
Overall 2 5 21 38 35 4.4 1785
Used arkin last 12 mo. 2 4 19 37 38 4.1 930
Not used arkin last 12 mo. - 20 - 60 20 3.8 5
Rate s eed at exit booth
Overall 3 6 25 40 27 3.8 1796
Used arkin last 12 mo. 3 5 24 41 27 3.8 938
Not used arkin last 12 mo. - 25 - 50 25 3.8 4
Rate overall arlrin fees/ rice
Overall 21 21 28 19 11 2.8 1809
Used arkin last 12 mo. 16 19 30 22 12 2.9 921
Not used arkin last 12 mo. 33 17 17 17 17 2.7 12
Rate Park Free After 3 Overall 4 3 8 17 ^67 4.4 n ~ 1839 ~
Used arkin last 12 mo. 4 2 4 15 75 4.5 925
Not used arkin last 12 mo. 8 - - 28 64 4.4 25
Rate Clean/iness/Lighting of ! ' , . • Parkin Sfructures r 3
Overall 4 12 29 36 19 15 1909
Used arkin last 12 mo. 5 11 28 35 21 3.6 976
Not used arkin last 12 mo. 6 - 24 41 29 3.9 17
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNRY SURVEY
Parking Satisfaction Ratings-Overall Results: 1997 vs.1996
5.0
=04.5 - - - - - - - -
d
.y
r
~ y 4.0 - - - - - -
c
~ m
~
-
- 3.5 -
o "
y ~3.0 a - - - - - - - - - - -
~ •N
N Y ~
rnrn2.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _
„ ^ Average Satisfaction Rating 1997
~a
o Average Satisfaction Rating 1996
'a 2.0
0
z
:~-1.5
1.0
Booth Speed Cleanl Discount Overall
Attendant At Exit Light Park Parking Parking
Courtesy Booth Structures Program Feesl
Pricing
4
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY
Parking Satisfaction Ratings-Overall Results: Resident vs. Absentee
5.0
--4.5
"0
d
.y
_ _ _ _ ' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
!O 4.0 _ _ _ _ ' ' _ ' ' _ ' _ _ _ _ _
CM U)
C
M ~ - -I
3.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
o "
.U
~3.0 - -
N
N •N
~ N 2.5
~ Q Resident Average Satisfaction Rating
a o 2 O e Absentee Average Satisfaction Rating _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
z
i~
~1.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
1.0
Booth Speed Of CleanlLight Of Discount Overall
Attendant Transaction Structures Parking Parking
Courtesy At Booth Program FeeslPricing
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNRY SURVEY
Parking Satisfaction Ratings-Overall Results: Own Business vs. Do Not Own Business
5.0
:-4.5
-o
2
2
N 4.0 -----0 ------------0
CD
~r
d
3.5 --O
o "
~
-
w- v 3.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 d
; y=
N y
4) in2.5
~ a Own Business Average Satisfaction Rating
a o Z 0 o Do Not Own Business Average Satisfaction Rating _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
z
i~
~1.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _
1.0
Booth Speed Of CleanlLight Of Discount Overall
Attendant Transaction Structures Parking Parking
Courtesy At Booth Program FeeslPricing
S
VAIL SKIER RESEARCH 1996/97-PARKING RATINGS ~
Parking Ratings
By Month
10
-0-Ease of finding parking
9
~ - - ~ - - Cost of parking
~
H 8
cu
h
~
N 7
s "
~ ~
c a
5 .
w.
~o
H
.y
0 4
;
a~
E
W 3
11
~ 2 -
1
November December January February March April
Source: RRC Associates
6
. . . . : . .
. -
~xil • . _ . . . . .
Length of Stay Trends
1400 . • . ` ~ ~ ~ , ,
1200 . • _ • ' .
. ; , _
. '1':
1000 . , , ' ~ . . : . . , , . ,
. .
„ .
, ' ' " . ~ . . ` ,
, ' . . . - . . , "
800 . , . . . ' . . '
„ .
. .
.
. ,
~ - , ,
.
,
. .
. .
.
, . . <
.
. ,
.
,r
,
~ . . . ,
:
, , ,
' , - ~ • " , . . .
600
< ~ • , . 't; ----Nov
~ ; . , . . Dec
Jan
400 Y . . Feb
, . . . . March
- . , _ . ---Apr
200
.
. ,
.
. ,
, .
. .
, . ~ siK 'i~.,' .
'.c'.
~6.~' i~e' .~k . a~: .
+F+~
~
E ^
7~, w
~.-a.
~ s~;;':' ~Si~, „':y ;.£9. ;s,'',,'•~ s
-~'~^,:.`?~s~;;~;~"~t^:,' j~'° , .''.",~''o~ ,`Pr ~5~%?~;:. Y'~ 'si;n's,_~. ~ias~ .,.A
0-
~
0-1
112 1 1l2-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-11 11-13 ~ 13-15 15-24 24± E
i~
" , ' • ~
VAII SKIER RESEARCH 1996/97-PARKING RATINGS Cost of Parking
By Month by Visitor Type
10
LOCAL DAY SKIER OVERNIGHT
9 -
~o
d
w
H 8
'a.
~
7.0
E 7 6.4
W 6.3 6.2 6.2
0 45.9
~ -5:6-
_ 6 5.9 5.9
& -5
5.2
4.9 4.9
~ d
~ ` 5 --4.8- -4.-7-4.4 - - - 4.4 4.5
w.
~ 4 - - r..
CD s
E
i - : -
W 3 - ~
u
~
2 L sf~:
` n/a
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total
Source: RRC Associates
7
VAIL SKIER RESEARCH 1996/97-PARKIN6 RATINGS •
Ease of Finding Parking
By Month by Visitor Type
10
LOCAL DAY SKIER OVERNIGHT
9 -
a
~
7.8
y g 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.3
7.1
_6.8_
d 7 - 6.8--------6.6 - _ -6.-6- , ~
w
,L 6.3 6.2 6.0
6
cc
~ d 5 4.8 -
~ y - - -
v
cc
h
0 4 -
a~
E
w 3
n =
2 ~ ~Q
d m`
n/a
1
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total
Source: RRC Associates
8
Fill Times vs. Parking Transactions at Village and Lionshead Parking Structures ~
November 27,1996 - January 31,1997
Note: Gridlines indicate Saturdays
2:00 PM 6,000
? Village Fill Time
o Lionshead Fill Time 5,000
1:00 PM
Village + Lionshead Parking Transactions
O
~
12:00 PM _ _ _ ' _ . 41000
~
N
C
L
d ~
E ~
~ Y
~ f..
~
~ . , ~ . , . . . . . 00
0 11:00 AM 3,0 a
-a
J Rf
cm ' N
N
p
a J
t
10:00 AM 2,000 ~
R
9:00AM _ , . 1,000
8:00 AM 0
23-Nov-96 30-Nov-96 7-Dec-96 14-Dec-96 21-Dec-96 28-Dec-96 4-Jan-97 11-Jan-97 18-Jan-97 25-Jan-97
Individual Day of Ski Season (Dates Shown on Axis are Saturdays)
9
Source: Town of Vail. Graph by RRC Associates.
Fill Times vs. Parking Transactions at Village and Lionshead Parking Structures ~
February 1- April 20,1997
Note: Gridlines indicate Saturdays
2:00 PM 6,000
? Village Filt Time
o Lionshead Fill Time
Village + Lionshead Parking Transactions
1:00 PM 5,000
~
, c
o
, . _ _ _ ~
- A _ ; _ _ _ _ ,000
12:00 PM 4
T U)
c
ca
~
a~ F-
E rn
:e
e`o
. _ - - 00
0 0-
3,
0 11:00 AM _
J R
tm ~
C =
N
~C C
cc O
d J
+
10:00 AM - 2,000 cm
~
>
9:00 AM 1,000
8:00 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0
1-Feb-97 8-Feb-97 15-Feb-97 22-Feb-97 1-Mar-97 8-Mar-97 15-Mar-97 22-Mar-97 29-Mar-97 5-Apr-97 12-Apr-97 19-Apr-97
VIndividual Day of Ski Season (Dates Shown on Axis are Saturdays)
10
Source: Town of Vail. Graph by RRC Associates.
•a .
Agenda last reviscd 715/97 10 am
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMM(SSION
Monday, July 14, 1997
FINAL AGENDA
Project Orientation-/LUNCH - Community Development Department 12:15 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
G; eg Moffet Greg Amsden
Galen Aasland
Diane Golden
Gene Uselton
John Schofield
Ann Bishop
Site Visits : 1:00 pm
1. Fiannery - 186 Forest Road
2. Vail East Lodging - 4093 East Spruce Way
3. 10th Mountain Hut Assoc. - Red Sandstone Rd. trailhead
Driver: George
,.o, .
' NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30
p.m.
Public Hearina - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m.
1. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a Type II EHU, located at 186 Forest
Rd./Lot 9, Block 7, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Mike Flannery, represented by Russell Platt
Planner: Dirk Mason
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Gene Uselton VOTE: 5-1 (Ann Bishop
opposed) APPROVED WITH THREE CONDITIONS:
1. That the one-car garage be appropriately deed restricted for exclusive use by the
occupant of the EHU.
2. That the applicant submit for review and approval by the DRB, a construction staging plan, indicating the limits of disturbance and tree protection measures for
the site.
*VAIL
TOWN O
s.,
ngenda last revised 715/97 10 am
3. That a CO or TCO not be issued, until an inspection is completed to ensure
compliance with the EHU requirements and to verify that the building is
constructed according to the approved set of plans.
RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCVL:
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Gene Uselton VOTE: 6-0
"That the Planning and Environmental Commission, in the strongest possible terms, recommend
to the Vail Town Council that they review the Employee Housing Ordinance in relation to
enforcement and that the PEC fully recommend that the enforcement action be funded in an
effort to bring the intent of the Employee Housing Unit into compliance, with the lack of reality
that appears to be in the neighborhood that we're questioning."
2. A request for a variance from Section 18.58.020 to allow for a retaining wall to exceed 6
feet in height, located at 4093 E. Spruce Way/Lots 4, 5, & 6, Block 9, Bighorn #3.
Applicant: Vail East Lodging Association, represented by Larry Summerlin
Planner: Dirk Mason
MOTION: Galen Aasland SECOND: Ann Bishop VOTE: 6-0
APPROVED WITH THREE CONDITIONS:
1. That prior to submittal of a Design Review Board (DRB) application, the applicant
shall provide a proposed landscape plan for the area between and adjacent to the
retaining walls.
2. That the revised site plan, indicating the existing and proposed contours,
be stamped by a registered professional engineer in the State of Colorado.
3. That the overhead utilities serving the exterior lights be placed
underground or removed, as indicated on the site plan.
3. A request for a final review of a zoning code amendment, to allow for outdoor commercial
ski storage, as a conditional use in the CCI and CCII Zone Districts.
Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy
Planner: Lauren Waterton/Mike Mollica
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Gene Uselton VOTE: 4-2 (Ann Bishop and
Galen Aasland opposed, due to overhead doors not being prohibited).
RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO TOWN COUNCIL - With the conditional use criteria on
page 4 of the staff, memo, to include a change in the language in Section 8a, to reflect
that the outdoor commercial ski storage may not be freestanding, but may be attached to
any landscaping or site walls when not obstructing views, from or into outdoor dining
decks or transparent store fronts. Access to the storage shall be at in the applicant's
discretion, per Design Guidelines, with the suggestion that access be via side-hinged
doors and not via overhead doors.
2
.
Agenda last revised 715/97 10 am
4. A request for a conditionai use permit and a variance from Section 18.58.080 to allow for
an unpaved trailhead parking area, located at Red Sandstone Road/Parcel A, Lions Ridge
Filing #1.
Applicant: 10th Mountain Hut Association, represented by Peter Lodram
Planner: Russ Forrest
MOTION: Galen Aasland SECOND: Ann Bishop VOTE: 6-0
APPROVED WITH THREE CONDITIONS:
1. The parking area is required to be paved if, in the future, the area is proposed for
use in the winter.
2. Signage will be limited to USFS trailhead style signs. Additional signs may be
approved by the DRB.
3. That should the applicant be able to move boulders to find additional parking, at
their discretion, that that be allowed.
5. A request for an amendment to a previously approved minor subdivision, located at 2339
Chamonix Lane/Tract A, Vail Heights Filing #1.
Applicant: Robert Hunter, represented by Greg Amsden
Planner: George Ruther
MOTION: Gene Uselton SECOND: John Schofield VOTE: 6-0
APPROVED WITH NO CONDITIONS
6. A request for a minor amendment to SDD #2 (Northwoods), to allow for residential
additions to Units D8, D9 and D12, located at 600 Vail Valley Drive.
Applicant: Richard & Gail Barrett, Bert Nordin, and Jorge & Eugenia Riedel,
represented by Ray Story
Planner: Lauren Waterton
STAFF APPROVED
7. A request for a minor amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow for a skier
bridge, located at 1150 Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-1 and 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Sherry Dorward
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
STAFF APPROVED
3
Agcnda last rcviscd 715/97 10 am
8. A request for a conditional use permit and a variance from Section 18.22.140 (On-Site
Required Parking), to allow for the operation of a real estate office in the Swiss Chalet,
located at 62 East Meadow Drive/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Appticant: Johannes Faessler
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
TABLED TO JULY 28, 1997
g. A request for a major exterior alteration in CC1 and a minor subdivision, to allow for the
construction of a parking garage, 9 accommodation units, 1 condominium and new retail
office space at the Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 E. Gore Creek Dr./Part of Lot
A, Block 513, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, Segerberg, & Associates
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 11, 1997
10. A request for a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow modifications to
allowable GRFA and building height limitations, located at 1150 Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-
1& 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Sherry Dorward
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 25, 1997
11. A request for a variance from Section 18.28.070 (Setbacks) and a conditional use permit
for an outdoor dining deck, to allow for a deck expansion at Crossroads, located at 143
East Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Top Ice Cream (Haagen Daz), represented by Bill Pierce
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
WITHDRAWN
12. Information Update
13. Approval of June 23, 1997 minutes.
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department; 75 South Frontage Road.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
Community Development Department
Published July 11, 1997 in the Vail Trail.
4
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 14, 1997
RE: A request for amendments to Chapter 18.04, Sections 1824.060, 18.26.040 and
18.60.060 of the Zoning Code to add Outdoor Commercial Ski Storage as a
conditional use in the Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II zone districts.
Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy
Planner: Lauren Waterton/Mike Mollica
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTS
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the zoning code to allow for commercial outdoor ski
storage. Since the PEC worksession on June 23, 1997, the applicant has withdrawn the
request to allow commercial ski storage on all building levels in Commercial Core I(CCI) and
Commercial Core II (CCII). The applicant is still requesting to amend the zoning code to allow
outdoor commercial ski storage as a conditional use in CCI and CCII. Additionally, the applicant
is proposing to add definitions for commercial ski storage, outdoor commercial ski storage and ski
racks and to add additional conditional use permit review criteria.
The proposed code revisions include: amending Sections 18.24.060 (Conditional Uses Generally)
and 18.26.040 (Conditional Uses Generally) of the CCI and CCII zone districts; adding definitions of
"commercial ski storage", "outdoor commercial ski storage" and "ski racks" to Chapter 18.04
(Definitions); and amending Section 18.60.060 (Criteria - Findings) of the Conditional Use Permit
Chapter to add specific criteria review related to outdoor commercial ski storage. The proposed
additional review criteria are based upon the elemenis of the Vail Village Urban Design
Considerations and the Lionshead Urban Design Considerations.
II. BACKGROUND
In 1989, the zoning code was amended to allow commercial ski storage as a permitted use only in
the basement and garden level of buildings in CCI and CCII. At that time, there were several
existing ski storage facilities located in basements, that had been approved by the Town of Vail as
an accessory use to an existing ski shop.
There are a number of outdoor ski storage facilities that have been erected over the years. The
existing regulations do not permit outdoor ski storage facilities to be installed. Earlier this year, staff
denied a request by Vail Associates for Design Review Board approval for ski storage in Lionshead,
next to the Gondola l3uilding. Upon appeal of that staff decision, the PEC upheld the staff's
decision that a previous nonconforming use had been substantially changed so that the use had lost
the nonconforming status.
On Jurie 9, 1997 and June 23, 1997, the PEC held worksessions to discuss the proposed changes
to the code, as described above. 7he PEC discussed the appropriateness of indoor and outdoor
commercial ski storage and the propossd definitions. The PEC and members of the public
expressed concern regarding the aesthetics of outdoor ski storage. {n an attempt to address these
concerns, the applicant and the staff have developed specific review criteria for a conditional use
permit for outdoor commercial ski storage. These criteria are in di i n to the existing conditional
use permit criteria. The proposed review criteria relate to location, design and development
standards and are based upon specific design considerations of the Vail Village Urban Design
Guide Plan and the Lionshead Urban Design Guide Plan.
III. CONFORMITY WITH THE TOWN'S RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Ir, considering the praposed amendments to the Zoning Code, staff has relied on several relevant
planning documents. Specifically, staff reviewed the purpose sectians of the CC1 and CC2 zone
districts and the goals and objectives stated in the Vai! Land Use Plan and the Vail Village Master
Plan.
Zonina Code
According to the purpose statements of the CCI and CCII zone districts, these zone districts are
intended to provide sites for commercial establishments which are compatible with other uses in the
district. Staff believes that ski storage can a compatible use with permitted and conditional uses
within these zone districts. Staff further believes that ski storage is a needed service and guest
amenity and will complement the existing uses within the CCI and CCII zone districts.
Vail Land Use Plan
The following goals found in the Vail Land Use Plan support this proposal:
, Goal 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should .
work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more
efficiently.
Goal 4.3 The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be
preserved (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural
setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality).
Goal 6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
Vail Villaae Master Plan
The following objectives found in the Vail Village Master Plan support this request:
Obaective 2.1 Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 subareas throughout the
Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established
land use patterns.
Objective 2.4 Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where
compatible with existing land uses.
IV. STAFF RECDMIVIENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code to allow outdoor
commercial ski storage as a conditional use in the CCI and CCII zone districts, add definitions for
commercial ski storage, outdoor commerical ski storage and ski racks, and add specific review
criteria for a conditional use permit for outdoor commercial ski storage.
2
Proposed text changes:
Definitions
Amend Section 18.04 - Definitions to add the following:
"Commercial Ski Storage" means storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles)
and/or clothing used in skiing-related sports, which is available to the public or members,
operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for
hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. Ski storage that is part of a lodge, or
dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage.
"Outdoor Commercial Ski Storaae" means storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots,
and poles) used in skiing-related sports, which is available to the public, operated by a
business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly or daily
usage. Outdoor ski storage must be either enclosed in an accessory building or be in the
form of vertically installed coin-operated ski locks, subject to design review approval.
"Ski Racks" means racks available to the public for ihe temporary storage of skis, poles and
snowboards, in which a fee is not charged.
Cammercial Core I zone district
Amend Section 18 24 060 Conditional Uses - Generallv to add the following:
F. Outdoor commercial ski storage
Commercial Core II zone district
Amend Section 18.26 040 Conditional Uses - Generally to add the following:
J. Outdoor commercial ski storage
Existing Conditional Use Permit criteria
The following are the existing conditional use permit review criteria that will be used to evaluate any
outdoor commercial ski storage proposal (Section 18.60.060 Criteria - Findings):
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town;
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
faGilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities
needs;
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian
safetv and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and
removal of snow from the street and parking areas;
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses;
3
5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed
use;
Additional Conditional Use permit criteria:
The following are proposed to be added to Section 18 60 060 Criteria - Findinas:
8. Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for outdoor commercial ski storage,
the following shall be considered:
a. Any outdoor commercial ski storage, that is considered a coin-operated ski
lock, and that is not enclosed in an accessory building, must be affixed to an
exterior wall of a building or structure. It may not be free-standing, attached
to any landscaping, or site walls.
b. The architectural character of the building of which the outdoor commercial
ski storage is attached shall not be comprised or negatively impacted.
c. Outdoor commercial ski storage may only be permitted seasonally. Any
outdoor commercial ski storage facility must be removed no later than June
1 st of every year and cannot be installed, or re-installed, prior to October
15th.
d. Outdoor commercial ski storage shall not block any display window on the
. first floor of any building, nor shall it block the view from or into any outdoor
dining deck.
e. No landscaping shall be permanently displaced.
f. Any outdoor commercial ski storage which is enclosed and is less than 120
square feet in area, shall not be considered floor area, for the purposes of
calculating site coverage. Any outdoor commercial ski storage whereby the
combined area is greater than 120 square feet, shall be included in the
calculation of site coverage.
g, Parking shall not be assessed for any outdoor commercial ski storage.
4
Agenda last revised 7/9/97 10 am
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Monday, July 14, 1997
AGENDA
Prolect Orientation /LUNCH - Community Development Department 12:15 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Site Visits : 1:00 pm
1. Flannery - 186 Forest Road
2. Vail East Lodging - 4093 East Spruce Way
3. 10th Mountain Hut Assoc. - Red Sandstone Rd. trailhead
Driver: George
. •
NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30
p.m.
Public Hearina - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m.
1. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a Type II EHU, located at 186 Forest
Rd./Lot 9, Block 7, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Mike Flannery, represented by Russell Platt
Planner: Dirk Mason
2. A request for a variance from Section 18.58.020 to allow for a retaining wall to exceed 6
feet in height, located at 4093 E. Spruce Way/Lots 4, 5, & 6, Block 9, Bighorn #3.
Applicant: Vail East Lodging Association, represented by Larry Summerlin
Planner: Dirk Mason
3. A request for a final review of a zoning code amendment, to allow for outdoor commercial
ski storage, as a conditional use in the CCI and CCII Zone Districts.
Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy
Planner: Lauren Waterton/Mike Mollica
rowNO
*Ya
.y
Agenda last reviscd 7/9/97 10 am
4. A request for a conditional use permit and a variance from Section 18.58.080 to allow for
an unpaved trailhead parking area, located at Red Sandstone Road/Parcel A, Lions Ridge
Filing #1.
Applicant: 10th Mountain Hut Association, represented by Peter Lodram
Planner: Russ Forrest
5. A request for an amendment to a previously approved minor subdivision, located at 2339
Chamonix Lane/fract A, Vail Heights Filing #1.
Applicant: Robert Hunter, represented by Greg Amsden
Planner: George Ruther
6. A request for a minor amendment to SDD #2 (Northwoods), to allow for residential
additions to Units D8, D9 and D12, located at 600 Vail Valley Drive.
Applicant: Richard & Gail Barrett, Bert Nordin, and Jorge & Eugenia Riedel,
represented by Ray Story
Planner: Lauren Waterton
STAFF APPROVED
7. A request for a minor amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow for a skier
bridge, located at 1150 Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-1 and 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Sherry Dorward
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
STAFF APPROVED
8. A request for a conditional use permit and a variance from Section 18.22.140 (On-Site
Required Parking), to allow for the operation of a real estate office in the Swiss Chalet,
located at 62 East Meadow Drive/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Johannes Faessler
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
TABL.ED TO JULY 28,1997
9. A request for a major exterior alteration in CC1 and a minor subdivision, to allow for the
construction of a parking garage, 9 accommodation units, 1 condominium and new retail
office space at the Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 E. Gore Creek Dr./Part of Lot
A, Black 5B, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, Segerberg, & AssociatPs
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 11, 1997
2
J
Agcnda last rcvised 7/9/97 10 am
10. A request for a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow modifications to
allowable GRFA and building height limitations, located at 1150 Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-
1& 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Sherry Dorward
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 25, 1997
11. A request for a variance from Section 18.28.070 (Setbacks) and a conditional use permit
for an outdoor dining deck, to allow for a deck expansion at Crossroads, located at 143
East Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Top Ice Cream (Haagen Daz), represented by Bill Pierce
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
WITHDRAWN
12. Information Update
13. Approval of June 23, 1997 minutes.
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
' regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
Community Development Department
Published July 11, 1997 in the Vail Trail.
3
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council -
Town Manager
FROM: Larry Grafel, D' or of Public Works
DATE: July 11, 1997
RE: Parking Discussions
Attached are extracts from the 1993 Vail Transportation Master Plan and from the April, 1996
Consultant's parking study on Vail Parking Facilities, information regarding parking philosophy and
findings.
These are provided for your background information as we continue our discussions about the 97/98
ski season and the parking programs.
LG/aw
Attachments
RECYCLEDPAPER
jj Standard
Parking
~
CONSULTING REPORT
RELATNE TO THE
VAIL PARKING FACILITIES
VAIL, COLORADO
SUBMtTTED TO
NAR. LARRY GRAFEL
DIRFCTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ~ TRANSPORTATION
TAWN OF VAIL
April 4, 1996
Aenbiance In Parking'
(
;
Review of Parldng Lot Rates and Validation Programs. .
We feel that the best approach to the 1996-1997 season would be to develop a pricing
~ program which meets the financial needs of the TOV, and which setves to promote the use of
the parlang facilities to not only the day slaers, but also to the local business community.
Once this pricing plan has been approved, we believe the presentation to the local
~ community is just as important an issue to address as are the pricing and validation
components of the plan itsel£ Therefore, even though the financial performance of the
parking facilities will improve through the implementation of the plan, it is more important to
~ stress to the local business community those features which will benefit them (e.g., enhanced
free parldng, lower parking rates, etc.). We would recommend the seivices of a professional
marketing organization to aid the TOV with promoting any new pricing plan (and any new
~ customer services offered in the parking facilities) to the local business community and to the
Denver day slder market.
~ A. Parking Rate Analysis.
We have reviewed the- TO`I parking facility product mix reports (parking tickets sold
~ in each rate category) and have prepared a model using the data from November
1995 through February 1996. The model summarizes the parldng tickets sold in each
~ rate category - with the respective revenues - and should represent the product mix
trend for the entire sid season. We then applied to this model various rate structures
with the goals being increased parking revenues, additional firee parking for the local
~ retailers and businesses, a slightly higher cost burden spread to the all-day skiers and
reduced parking rates. We also wanted to detemune the relationship between the
gross revenues, the amount of additional free parking granted and the percentage
~ change in what various groups would pay. The attached Parldng Rate Analysis (see
Tab C) illustrates 4 different scenarios that work towards these goals.
~
-5-
~ .9=0 Standard
~ Parking
.
~
IY
~
.
~ Rate Proposal #1. In this proposal, as with all of the proposals, the all-day rate is
lowered from the cunent rate of $14 to $12, and the opening rate (1'/z - 2 hours) is
raised by $1, to $4. The shift in the pricing structure improves the gross revenues by
~ $181,200 (keeping in mind that the model is based upon only approximately 2/3 of a
season), with 38% of the patrons still parking free, 1R% of the patrons paying $1 or
~ $21ess, lrl% of the patrons paying the same amount, and 61% of the patrons paying
$1 more.
Rate Proposal #2. In this proposal, the all-day rate is lowered from the current rate
~ of $14 to $12, the first 2 hours are free, and the opening rate (2 - 3 hours) is raised by
$1, to $5. The shift in the pricing structure improves the gross revenues by $68,900,
with 47% of the patrons parking free, 12% of the patrons paying $1 or $21ess, 1/2%
~ of the patrons paying the same amount, and 52% of the patrons paying $1 more.
~ Rate Proposal #3. In this proposal, the rate structure is changed &om 1 hour
increments to 1/2hour increments, the all-day rate is again lowered from the cunent
rate of $14 to $12, and the opening rate (1 1/2 - 2 hours) is lowered by $1, to $2. The
~ shift in the pricing structure improves.the gross revenues by $201,900, with 38% of
the patrons parking free,l6% of the patrons paying $1 less,l0% of the patrons
paying the same amount, and 36% of the patrons paying $1 to $4 more.
~ Rate Proposal #4. In this proposal, the rate structure is changed from 1 hour
increments to 1/2 hour increments, the all-day rate is lowered from the cunent rate of
~ $14 to $12, the first 2 hours are free, and the opening rate (2 - 2'/z hours) is lowered
by $1, to $3. The shift in the pricing structure improves the gross revenues by
$145,700, with 47% of the patrons parking free, 7% of the patrons paying $l less,
~ 10% of the patrons paying the same amount, and 36% of the patrons paying $1 to $4
more.
~ Rate Proposal Summary. The benefits with all of these rate proposals are that (n)
the gross revenues are improved over the model (again keeping in mind that the
~ model is based upon only 2/3 of a season, thus a full season's gross revenues will be
higher), (ii) the retailers and business in town will receive the same amount or
increased &ee parking, and (iii) the advertised and posted parking rates will be
~ lowered. Furthermore, the cost burden will be shifted to the all-day sldets from
Denver (or other resorts) who would most likely leave Vail at the end of the ski day
(spending little or no more money), and who normally place the greatest amount of
~ wear and tear on the TOV parking facilities.
Based upon what we know today, coupled with the material above, we suggest rate
~ proposal #4, not only because it increases the gross revenues to the TOV, but it
would also sell well. Its provisions contain a lowered opening parldng rate, a lowered
all-day parking rate, and more free parking (up to 2 hours) for visitors. Furthermore,
~
~ -6-
-=:9 Standard
~ Parking
.
~
Y
~ the change to'/z hour increments is not new to Vail because the current free parldng
program between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. is based upon the hour increment.
~ $4 (Flat) Evening Rate. In the interest of promoting evening business by lessening
patrons' concerns over $12 (or $14) all-day parldng rates and eliminating their
awareness of the "ticking parldng garage clock", we suggest the implementation of a
~ $4 Qat rate after 3 p.m. or 4 p.m. Considering (i) the expected length of stay for this
group, (ii) the cunent average cash ticket value, and (iii) the cunent free parldng
~ program (6 p.m. to 9 p.m.), a p.m. $4 flat parking fee would generate a little more
than what the current average ticket value is generating (and a little less than the
above proposals), an d wo u l d pro ba b ly ma ke t he loca l resi den t s, re ta ilers an d visi tors
~ more comfortable with a paid parldng program.
$1 For Off-Season Parking. We suggest that the TOV consider charging $1 for
~ visitor parking in the off-season because operating expenses such as lighting, security,
maintenance, etc. are on-going and should be recovered through a modest income
stream. The gold and blue passes, however, should be sold at the same rate as
~ currently is in effect to alleviate any concerns from the local patrons. As the summer
tourist season continues to grow, this revenue opportunity could amount to a
significant amount.
~
B. Free Parking 6 P.M. - 9 P.M. and Validation Programs.
~ Free Parking. Currently the TOV offers 3 hours of free parking to any patron
entering the parking facilities between the hours of 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.
¦ Recommendations on this matter are difficult to make because of the importance
placed on the requests of the retailers and businesses, and the Town's interest to
attract evening business to Vail. However, our recommendation would be to
~ s consider rate proposals #2 or #4, which grant up to 2 hours of free parldng to any
patron, any time. With the implementation of one of these rate structures, this
~ evening (6 p.m. - 9 p.m:) free parking program and any other validation program
could be eliminated.
~
~ Promote Evening Hotel Parking. As with the case of the Mountain House, we
suggest the TOV promote overnight hotel guest parking in the TOV parking facilities
for a special rate, such as $9. With the special rate, the participating hotels could
~ have all the evening parking spaces they need for guest parking. The only stipulation
is that this special rate would only apply to vehicles entering and exiting the parking
facilities during specified hours (e.g., entering after 4 p.m. and exiting before 9 a.m.),
~ thus protecting the cunent income from day skier parking. Any hotel vehicles using
the facilities outside of those time limits would be subject to the regular parldng rates.
To facilitate this special program, Parking Management could either have the hotel
~ patrons pay cash each time they exit the parldng facility, or if the hotel wants to offer
~ -7-
, =J Standard
i= Parking
~
.
~
~ its guest the option of hotel folio billing, a Federal APD Power Pad read-write unit
could be leased (sold or rented) to the hotel to use to program either debit cards or
mag-stripe ticket vouchets. With this unit, the TOV would also know what parldng
~ revenues have been generated and have a proper audit trail (more details on this
equipment are included in section VI, Remote Cashiering).
~
III. Suggested Customer Amenities And Emergency Procedures.
~ Currently, the TOV does not provide formal customer amenities or vehicle emergency
procedures. However, to promote the TOV parking facilities and to provide a higher level of
~ customer service, we suggest Parking Management consider the following programs. We
understand that not all of these services may be suitable to the TOV parking facilities,
nonetheless, we want to make you aware of the service improvements in the parking industry
~ and allow you to judge for yourselves, which of these services would be appropriate.
A. Customer Service Vehicle. We suggest the use of a customer service vehicle to be
~ used in the TOV parking facilities (see our O'Hare service vehicles at Tab E).
Amenity and emergency services could be provided by a clearly marked seivice
vehicle operated by a neatly uniformed employee who has been trained as an
~ "ambassador of goodwill" for customers needing assistance.
1. P.R. Customer Service Vehicle Attendants would provide a wide range of
~ complimentary services to assist customers with any minor, vehicle-related
problems they may encounter.
~ Z. Complimentary Emergency Car Services. A wide range of complimentary
services can be provided to assist patrons with any vehicle-related problems
they may encounter.
~
• Complimentary battery jump-starts.
• Complimentary lock-out assistance.
~ • Complimentary tire inflation and replacement assistance.
• Complimentary car search/location assistance.
.
3. Escort Services. Upon request, facility employees would escort patrons to
their cars. This service holds particular appeal for those patrons who may be
concerned about safety and security.
4. Aid to Skiers and Families. The Customer Service Vehicle Attendants will
~ be responsible for ensuring that all customer requests are promptly
addressed. In addition, the Customer Service Attendants should log and
categorize each customer request onto a computer database, which would
allow Vail to monitor and evaluate customers' needs. In addition, Gtistomer
~ -8-
=J Standard
~ Parking
s
~
r
~
~ Service Attendants should periodically conduct customer surveys in order to
further refine the customer profile and obtain feedback with respect to how
the services may be expanded.
~
5. Windshield and Headlight Cleaning. During off-peak hours, parldng
~ attendants can periodically walk through the facility to clean the vehicles'
windshields and headlights, placing a card on the windshield informing the
parker of this special seivice that ownership has provided. This would be an
- especially helpful service to your garage patrons on bad weather days.
6. Maps and Brochures. To assist parking patrons in finding their way through
larger or more complex parking facilities (such as the case with the TOV
parking facilities), informational maps can be designed and provided to
parking patrons. Included at Tab F is a copy of a"You Are Here" guide
developed by Standard Parking for the users of the Grant Park North
underground facility in Chicago - and which has been extremely well received
and appreciated by the facility's patrons.
7. Signage of Above Services. We suggest that additional signage referencing
these emergency vehicle services offered free of charge at Vail (e.g., battery
jump-starts, lock-out service, etc.) be clearly posted at the vetucular and
pedestrian entrances to the parlang facilities. This would serve to not only
aid your patrons in the event of an emergency, but to also promote and
advertise the improvements made at the TOV parking facilities.
B. Garage Porters.
We suggest that Parking Management reconsider the use of in-house garage
porters to provide the daily cleaning of the TOV parking facilities. This
, (reassignment of TOV personnel) would be very helpful (i) the above
- mentioned customer and emergency services could be administered without
any additional labor costs (or at least significantly reduced) by using existing
parking facility personnel, and (u) the parking facilities would be well served
by having maintenance personnel on-site to quickly and routinely address
cleanliness and appearance issues, which we feel would be a priority,
especially considering the rate increase issues.
IV. First-Class Valet Service.
A. Positioned on the 3rcH Level of Lionshead. We recommend that a first class valet
parking operation be considered in the southwest comer of the Lionshead parking
facility (1 level below the rooo because (i) the parking facility is well suited for this
service and could be easily monitored and controlled, (ri) it is in very close proximity
-9-
,.~....r Standard
~ Parking
~ s
~
r •
~ to the West Vail and the gondola, and (iii) valet paddng offers a greater service to
the patrons and generates good will and patron attention.
~ With improved directional and marketing signage at the entrance of the Lionshead
parking facility, the patrons would be directed across the roof and down to the second
~ level of the facility, where they would be greeted by an valet attendant, much like
what would be expected by a doorman &om a first-class hotel. The valet attendant
would issue a valet ticket to the patrons, which contains among other things, the
booth phone number. He/she would also aid the patrons with unloading their ski
equipment, answer questions, give directions and help children with their ski
equipment. The valet parking patrons would be invited to call the attendant 20 minutes before
they arrive back to the Lionshead parking facility, giving the valet attendants the
t
opportunity to start and warm their car, and have it repositioned conveniently near
the attendants booth and southwest stairway. The attendant would also then aid the
patrons with stowing their sld equipment and answer any other questions they may
have regarding other attractions or restaurants in Vail, and perhaps even make
, dinner reservations for the patrons if asked to do so. We would expect the valet
attendants to act as representatives of the Town of Vail and provide as much value
and service to the valet patrons as possible. The valet parldng premium should be at
least $10 per day more than the self park rate (which we have reflected in the
attached pro forma at Tab B) and perhaps as high as twice the self park rate.
'The valet parking charge would be handled by the valet manager or the valet
attendant by taking the Lionshead parking ticket from the patron, inserting it into the
fee computer stationed in the valet booth and determining the valet charge. The fee
computer would re-encode the patron's parking ticket to then be accepted at an exit
device at the Lionshead exit. The patron would drive through the valet area (east)
and exit the Lionshead parking facility past a swing gate adjacent to the third level of
the facility (bypassing the normal exiting traffic on the rooo and proceed up a
normally unused traffic lane to the furthest right hand exit lane, where special
, informational signage would be positioned, instructing the patron to insert the
parking ticket in the ticket accepting device, thus opening the barrier gate.
. With the valet area positioned on the third level of the Lionshead parking facility, (i)
the valet patrons (and Management) would have the benefit of covered parking, (ii)
the valet staging area would be positioned adjacent to the southwest comer of the
parking facility, next to the gondola, and (iii) the exiting valet patrons would have the
use of a special exit lane, free of peak exit traffic and congestion.
~
-10-
-=J Standard
Parking
e
B. Financial Considerations.
We have prepared a revenue projection based upon 140 ski days per year (20 weeks),
of which 6 weeks are considered peak, having 30 peak weekdays and 12 peak
weekend days. The suggested valet rates are $10 for the first hour and a half, and
4 then $1 for each hour thereafter, up to $24. Essentially this is the same as the cunent
self park rate schedule with the exception that the first hour and a half is $10 rather
than free. Our pro forma assumes that the average valet ticket will be $20, which is 9
hours of parking, and factored by 8,210 valet cars, the seasonal gross revenue is
$164,200.
From a staffing standpoint, we suggest a valet manager and an assistant manager with
annualized salaries of $26,000 and $23,000 respectively. These two individuals will
not only manage the valet operation, but be a major part of production on the slower
days, (see the staffing schedule at Tab D). Consistent with our projected activity, we
have scheduled valet attendants to (i) fill-in for the assistant manager on his day off,
and (ii) to provide the necessary coverage as the valet business increases and
decreases.
We have also budgeted other expenses associated with a fust-class valet service such
as valet tickets, employee uniforms, liability insurance, a contingency for auto damage
claims, operating supplies, and an estimate of what the management fee may be if the
service were handled by an outside vendor. Based upon a gross revenue of $164,200,
and operating expenses of $99,600, the net operating income is $64,600.
C. Required Improvements.
• To set up a first-class valet program, the TOV will need to consider the following
improvements and supplies:
• improved graphics at the entrance of the Lionshead parking facility
• improved directional graphics thiough the facility down to the valet area
• special graphics in and around the valet staging area
• 8' x 10' valet booth and patron waiting area
• fee computer
• comfortable patron waiting area chairs
• time clock
} • barricades
~
~
i
~ .
~ -11-
=0 Standard
Parking
~
~
7
~
~ • 20 key locks
- • office supplies such as filing cabinets, etc.
~ • customer service supplies
~ • battery charger
• fax machme
~ • ticket taking device to open the barrier gate at the Lionshead eldt
~ V. Financing Options.
In discussions with Mike Rose, we decided to postpone any work in this area until such time
~ as this consulting work is completed, and after some operating decisions have been made by
City Council.
~
VI. Remote Cashiering.
~ The cunent pay-on-foot program has had little success in terms of patron use and equipment
reliability and we would not, at this time, suggest any stand alone system for the Town of Vail. What we believe has significant potential for the Parking Management, is a modified pay-on-
~ foot system, which uses current cashiering capabilities in remote areas away &om the parking
facility. Our suggestion is to work in conjunction with the select retailers (and hotel
operators) in town, and with the proper signage, have the parking facility patrons pay for
~ their parking fees while in these retail establishments. However, more than just signage will
~ be needed to cause patrons to use these remote "cashiering stations". Inducements such as 1
~ or 2 hours of free parking when their parking fees are paid in one of these select retailers
would greatly increase the probability of patron acceptance and use. Exterior signage would
~ advertise the offer to gain up to 1 or 2 hours of &ee parking, thus encouraging patrons to
~ stop in and pay for their parking, and perhaps also have dinner or drinks in that
~ establishment, all without incuning additional parking charges.
~ To facilitate the remote cashiering program, the TOV would have to lease (rent or give) the
; retailers a Federal APD Power Pad, which is a fee computer less the cash drawer and printer.
c To process a parking charge, the retailer would insert the patron's parking ticket into the
Power Pad and determine the amount of the parking fee, and then use their existing credit
i card systems and cashiering capabilities to process the payment of the parking fee. This
~ FAPD Power Pad would be on-line with Parking Management's Scan system and, therefore,
~ Parldng Management would know daily what each retailer generated in parking fees and
owes to the TOV. As an additional inducement to the retailers, Parking Management may
# extend a service fee (e.g., $.50) to process the parking charges, which would help off-set any
~
~ -12-
~ =J Standard
i ~ Parking
~
~ possible rental fees imposed with the installation of the Power Pad With this program,
retailers would also have the option to pay the parking fees for those patrons who spend a
large amount of money in the establishment, which could provide another advertising benefit.
~ To successfully introduce a remote cashiering system, Parking Management would need to
clearly inform the patrons that they must take their parking ticket wnth them. This can be
~ accomplished by repeated messages and promotional advertising within the parking facility,
the elevator lobbies and other areas, and over time, and in concert with the local retailers, the
usage success rate would steadily climb. The benefit to the TOV is the opportunity to reduce
~ cashiering costs by transferring those functions and costs from the parking facilities to the
; remote cashiering sites where they would be borne by the retailers who already have the
cashiering capabilities. Each night, the TOV Scan system would pole the retailers and ~ generate a sales report, thus giving Parking Management accurate information related to that
day's activity. Parking Management would also have the retumed parking tickets (inserted
into a parking facility exit device by the patrons when exiting) which would also provide sales
~ information. This remote cashiering is really no different than the on-line cashiering system
in each of the parking faciliry cashier booths, with the exception that the retailers' sales would
be a version of a validation system and subject to billing.
~
~ The benefit of this system to the parking facility patrons would be dependent upon the
participation from the various retailers, but in general would include (i) the ability to exit the
~ parking facility through an automatic exit lane, thus avoiding cashier booth waiting lines, (u)
~ the potential of gaining 1 to 2 hours of free parking while having dinner, and (ui) the
potential of having their entire parking charge paid by a retailer in appreciation of their
business.
This remote cashiering system is a relatively new concept, but has considerable merit and
r } potential for all parties concerned, if promoted properly with the retailers. As mentioned
earlier in this report, the FAPD Power Pad, in concert with Parldng Management's Scan
system, will also assist the TOV in promoting local hotel ovemight guest parking as well. The
~ same procedures and software would be involved with the hotel component. We have talked .
with FAPD regarding this application and are confident that the equipment and software are
currently available to facilitate this service, and for the most part, is already in service in the
~ TOV parking facilities. If requested, we would be willing to pursue this matter further and
~assist the TOV with the development and implementation of this or a similar remote
~ cashiering system.
VII. GeneralIssues.
While this material is outside of the scope of our original plan, Mike Rose asked us to
~ comment on some of the issues. Consideration would be of benefit to the TOV because of
F its interest to (i) improve the operating performance of the parking facilities, (u) where
~ possible, implement customer service programs and initiatives, and (ui) improve the parking
J -13-
.9 Standard
. ~ Parking
s
~
~
~ facility revenues through higher (or restructured) parking rates. To successfully accomplish
all or many of the goals would require the implementation of many of these suggestions.
~ A. Painting, Lighting & Security. The parking facilities do not maximize the impact of
available light, and appear extremely dark. This affects not only the facilities' general
~ aesthetic appeal, but also a patron's perception of safety and security.
By repainting strategic portions of Vail Village and most of Lionshead witti a high- .
gloss white paint to reflect the light generated by existing sources, the facilities'
~ brightness (and, therefore, their warmth and general appeal) would be significantly enhanced. The combination of paint and fluorescent lighting serves to generate a
~ pleasing "daylight" look. Consideration should also be given to using high output
fluorescent lighting when any additional light fixtures may be required, especially
where whole bays or floors are intended to be re-fixtured. Aside of the interior
~ painting issues, we suggest that all elevator lobby and stairwell walls be given a fresh
coat of paint to improve their appearance and professionalism.
~ B. Garage Cleanliness. The general appearance of the facility can be enhanced in
several areas. When we inspected the facilities, we found loose trash scattered
throughout, and a rather heavy accumulations of dust and dirt, which is why we
~ recommended the re-implementation of in-house porters.
C. Area Maps and Brochures. We frequently design parking information brochures in
~ order to summarize all relevant parking information, rates, maps and services offered,
and we believe this would be a very good idea for the TOV parking facilities. This
~ would be especially helpful if the customer service vehicles and programs were
implemented. See the example of our Guide to Parktng at O'Hare Intemational
Airport at Tab G.
~ D. Vehicular and Pedestrian Directional Signage - especially at Lionshead. We found
the vehicular and pedestrian signage, particularly at Lionshead, in need of
~ enhancement; and in some areas of Lionshead, we found potentially dangerous
_ conditions caused by poor vehicular directional signage in this two-way traffic system.
~ We suggest the TOV develop a comprehensive signage, graphics and interior
painting program that addresses the noted safety and security issues, as well as
compliments the suggested customer service programs. We would be willing to assist
~ in either providing these services or in suggesting an experienced graphics
architectural firm to provide an effective system of crisp, aesthetically appealing,
easy-to-follow signs that:
• Direct drivers to the aPProPriate Parking area.
~ • Provide safe internal vehicular traffic directions.
~
-14-
~ 'mi Standard
'0~ Parking
~
• Provide pedestrian directions to the slopes or special event venues to assist
the parkers once they leave their vehicles.
• Help parkers easily locate their cars when they return to the parking area.
• Provide directional assistance designed to expedite egress into the external
street network and to I-70.
We routinely assist our clients in developing lot identification and internal signage.
We have included samples of the identification banners and signs that were
developed for Comiskey Park and the new United Center as well as other internal
vehicular directional graphics at Tab H.
E. Hand Car V4'ash Program. This service has been implemented in many facilities and
found to be both a well received ameniry and even sometimes a means to increase
parking revenue. A hand car wash program in a TOV parking facility would be very
unique and could provide a needed service to all patrons using the parking facilities.
The program could be provided with an on-site car wash attendant, or the service
could be contracted out to a local vendor.
F. Repair Lionshead Cash Booths. The Lionshead cashier booths are in need of repair
I both physically and aesthetically, and the vehicular approach and exiting signage
adjacent to the booths is in need of enhancement. Lastly, the red/green traffic
~ directional lights need to be repaired and repositioned so that they can be easily
I viewed by exiting traffic.
G. Business Promotions with V.A. We suggest that special business promotional
programs be developed in concert with Vail Associates, to promote not only the use
of the TOV parking facilities, but also the entire business community. Ideas that may
have merit include:
• '/z half price lift tickets and parking fees on Wednesdays to promote a family
day or a businessman's specials, such as what the baseball parks do on slower
event days.
_ • lift tickets sold by VA that include the cost of the lift ticket and the parking .
fees. The parking fees could be heavily discounted on the slower days such as
Wednesday.
?
-15-
i .9=0 Standard
~ Parking
,
~
ti
~ Vail Transportation Master Plan
~
~
~ .
~
VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN
~
~
~ Prepared for.
Town of Vail
~ 75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
~
~ Prepared by:
~ Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
5299 DTC Boulevard, Suite 400
Englewood, Colorado 80111
~ (303) 721-1.440
In Association with
TDA Colorado, Inc.
~
~
FHU Reference No. 89-091
' January,1993 .
~ -
Town of Vail
'
~
~
~ Vaii Transportation Master Plan Chapter III
~ CHAPTER Ill. PARKING
~ BACKGROUND
Throughout the year, the demand for parking in Vail varies considerably; ranging from very low
~demands between winter and summer guest seasons to very high demands especially during the peak
skiing periods.
~ The total community parking supply is made up of many components including a wide variety of
public and private parking facilities. As parking demand approaches the limits of the parking supply
major public parking facilities such as the Transportation Center, Lionshead garage, and Ford Park
~ fill to capacity. As this condition occurs excess parking demand is accommodated on the frontage
road system.
~ In order to better define what the "parking problem" is, the existing parking suppiy and demand
relationship is schematically depicted in Figure 7. The key points illustrated by the diagram relate
to three basic levels of parking demand.
~ o Level 1- As long as the total parking demand is less than the formal permanent parking
supply, no parking problem exists.
~ o Level 2- During peak activity periods, however, parking demands fill the formal permanent
supply creating a condition where pre-planned temporary parking provisions (Ford Park)
become more fully utilized. While a balance between supply and demand is maintained, the
continued long-term use of Ford Park is not compatible with the park itself or with sound
~ parking management principles, especially revenue generation.
o Leve13 - As parking demands continue to increase, all parking facilities are filled to capacity,
~ and temporary overflow parking spaces (typically the Frontage Road) are utilized to whatever
extent necessary. Not only are revenues lost, but visitor convenience and safety are also
compromised. I The major components of the existing parking supply which are critical include the Transportation
Center, Lionshead, Ford Park, and the Frontage Road. This existing parking supply is documented
~ in Table 4.
~
~
~
~ - -
Town of Vaii Page 32
~
A
Q
~ . Q1
y 7
= N
O
O
~
O
7
w
~
. Emergency" Response Over/low Parking ro
3 Provisions ;
(e.g. Frontage Road)
Exlernal Moniloring Temporary Parking
2 Supply/Demand Balance Mainlarned Supp/y
(e. g. Ford Park)
Sell-Monitoring Formal, Permanent
1 Balanced Supply/Demand Public and Private
Parking Supply
(VTC, Lionshead,
West Day Lot, etc.)
Parking Demand Mode of Operation Parking Supply
Figure 7 0
~
~ Existing Parking Supply/Demand Relationships ~
ow
~ ~r ~ ~.~r ~¦r
n'
~
!
~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III
~ Table 4
Existing Parking Supply
~ Approximate Quantities
Location Existing Suot)lv 0 /92) ~ Transportation Center 1,300 -
Lionshead 1,200 ~ Ford Park 250
Frontage Road As Needed
Total 2,750
~
Existing ParkinQ Suoolv/Demand Characteristics
~ Figure 8 provides greater detail relative to parking supply/demand characteristics. Typical daily
parking demands have been rank ordered (highest to lowest) in order to determine the number of days
that a given demand for parking occurs. It will be seen from Figure 8 that when the existing parking
~ demand is compared with the formal permanent parking supply, overflow parking on the Frontage
Road is needed approximately 6 days per year. The magnitude of the overflow has varied from just
a few vehicles on the 6th day to a maximum of approximately 750 vehicles.
~ Future parking demands are highly dependent upon anticipated future ski activity. The Environmen-
tal Assessment for the Vaii Ski Area Expansion added several new areas to the special use permit and
approved a portion of these new areas for site specific expansion.
~ The primary measure of ski area activity used in the Environmental Assessment is the "skiers-at-one-
time" (SAOT) capacity. Table 5 documents the historical and potential future SAOT values for
~ various conditions.
Table 5
~ SAOT by Values for Ski Area Expansion
Source: Vail Ski Area Expansion, EA, November 25, 1986.
~ Condition SAOT % lncrease Over 1990
1985 15,579 -
~ 1990 (Estimace) 19,000 -
"Manage To" Capacity 19,900 4.7%
Approved Site Specific Expansion 22,917 20.6%
~ Potential Future Expansion 24,702 30.0%
~
~
Town of Vail Page 34
~
~
o ~
:3 ~ - -I
o ?
< rn
Parkinn Demand Curves 0
Existing ;
i , :f_i:i
Approved Ski Area Expansion with TDM
* ~
.-I . w
I Long=Rangb_Parking\.. ` O3 Approved Ski Area Expansion without TDM w
:3
Supp/y Expan~t; Potential Ski Area Expansion without TDM
3 (*Travel Demand Management)
~ 2.6 Existing Parking Supply - 2750 Spaces
- - - _ -
, 6
ro 2.2 ~ ~ 3
-
~ ~~4 ~ 0
' 2
1-6 6 10 [15 26 34
, ..I ----~--i- z(- - I 30 ----~0~ ----~-.----51~ ~---T--.-. 60---.-~ - -
5 1.5 5 35 ~15 .55 fi'.i
Number of Days Parking Demand Occurs or is Exceeded
~
~ Figure 8 ~
~ Parking Supply/Deman-d Relationstiips =
I i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¦~i ~ ~.~..r _ ~
.
~
~ Vail Transportation Master Plan • Chapter III
~ It will be noted that the approved long term ski area expansion results in excess of a 20% increase in
overall demand levels while ultimate ski area expansion has a potential for a 30% increase in demand
~ levels.
Proiected Parkina Suaolv/Demand Characteristics
~ Figure 8 also documents the consequences of the increased demand level on the existing parking supply. For the approved ski area expansion, the expanded parking supply is adequate for all but 26
days. The magnitude of the overflow varies from just a few vehicles on the 26th highest day to a
possible maximum of approximately 900 'vehicles on the busiest day. For the potential ski area
~ expansion the expected parking deficiency increases to 34 days with a maximum short fall of
approximately 1,300 spaces.
~ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The following are the goals and objectives relative to parking needs.
~ o Identify travel demand managemenc techniques to reduce current and future demands for
parking including ride-share incentives, pricing controls, and transit service improvements.
~ o Provide an adequate public parking supply to accommodate future demands associated with
the approved ski area expansion recognizing that maximum peak demands cannot be
economically satisfied. The recently completed parking expansion pro ject was initiated when
~ parking overflows occurred 15 days per year. Thus, up to 15 days of overflow demand are
considered acceptable by the Town as a reasonable balance between serving the majority of
the peak parking demands with a feasible and affordable investment.
~ o Provide reasonably priced public parking to serve the visitor.
~ o Provide price discounted parking to serve Vail resident and employee needs.
o ~ Provide limited premium service parking at a price commensurate with the value provided.
~ o Identify candidate expansion areas for additional public parking to accommodate long-term
demands associated with the potential ski area expansion.
~ o Locate parking areas for charter buses, recreational vehicles, and other over-sized vehicles.
o Maintain an adequate revenue stream to fund implementation of on-going maintenance and
~ operations.
o Provide a simple and easily understood pricing structure which is efficiently administered.
~ o Retain the private parking supply as an important and needed element. ~
~
Page 36
Town of Vail
~
• Vail Transportation Master Plan Chaoter tll
DEMAND MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
The research contains a wide-variety of ineasures for reducing travel and parking demands
collectively referred to as demand management techniques. While the vast majority of these measures
are oriented toward commuter travel in large urban centers, there are techniques which are applicable
to resort areas in general and Vail in particular. An analysis of the research as well as a review of the
several ideas presented in the Public Input meetings has resulted in the selection of three applications
having the greatest potential for reducing future parking demands in Vail.
Table 6 documents three demand management techniques which can be instituted either individually
or collectively. The three options are defined as follows:
o Modified Parking Pricing - This option would include possible elimination of free parking
periods, reduced rate provisions, and an overall higher rate schedule. The objective of this
option is to implement cost disincentives to using the auto and to make transit or carpooling
a more attractive alternative for local residents and employees. While similar effects would
be expected on non-resident day skiers, for example, their average vehicle occupancy is
approximately 3 persons per vehicle already. Thus, fewer mode shifts would be expected
from this group.
o Vail Transit Improvements - This option would include both expanded geographic coverage
and more frequent service. The purpose of this option is to make transit a more attractive
alternative through service enhancements (e.g. less crowding, shorter walks, etc.). These
measures will be less effective in Vail than in other areas primarily because the Vail system
is already generating a significantly higher-than-average transit use. However, when
implemented in conjunction with modified parking pricing, reduced parking demands could
be anticipated primarily from the empioyee user group.
o Discount for Ride-Share Groups - This option would provide discount packages (lift tickets,
local businesses, etc.) for visitors to Vail who arrive via a major ride-share mode. The
primary travel mode would be charter buses but couid also include vans of a minimum size.
Each individual would receive specially designated coupons or other verification that he or .
she came to Vail with an official ride-share group. This option would target the single largest
parking demand element and offer the greatest potential for significantly reducing long-term
parking demands at a reasonable cost.
If the demand management options discussed in the previous section (or others) are successfully
implemented, future parking demands can be significantly reduced. Although there will still be
several days when overflow parking occurs and a fewer number of days when the overflow is
significant.
Figure 8 also documents these reductions for the approved ski area expansion relative to the existing
parking supply. For the approved ski area expansion the expanded parking supply will be adequate
for all but 10 days. The magnitude of the overflow will vary from just a few vehicles on the 10th
highest day to a probable maximum of approximately 400 vehicles.
Town of Vail Page 37
. ~
o a'
~
a
o ~
N
< O
poO
_ ~
w
• o.
Table 6 ~
Summary Cliaraclerlsllcs of Demand M1tanagement OpUons ~
w
N
N
Dcmand Primary Potential T
Management Target Major Incremental ;
Oniion Groun (`1 Cost Elements Effect Comments
Nloclified Parking Vail Residents None 3- 5"Ao Significant opposition from locals and employees.
Pricing Overniglit Visitors . Rescarcli indicates most people pay Ihc increased
(20°0 of Parkcrs) rate and do not shift modes. Major benefit from
new employee carpools.
Vail Transit Vail Residents Additional Buses 3- 5'Hi N1arginal benefit limited by existing high transit
Improveriients Overniglit Visitors Increased O&M use.
(200,6 of Parkers)
Ricle-Sharc Discounls Day Visitor Advertising 8- 12% _ Greatest potcntial impact on parking demand.
(52-72°Nu of Parkers) Discounts Benefits may be partially offset by acceleration of
overall increase in visitors.
Primary target groups developed from "Vail Parking Field Analysis and Survey", July 27, 1989, Rosall, Remmen and Cares, Inc.
which identified the following breakduwn by major use groups for lhe parking structures:
Uscr Groun VTC l.ionshead
Local 13% 1,00%)
Out-of-Siate 23°l0 39'%
Rental Car 33°'0 191/0
Other Colorado 28°Yo 30'3'0
Tr uc k 3'Yo
1009u I 00°U
n
s
w
-o v
w
m
m
. ,
.
Vaii Transportation Master Plan Chapter III t
Table 7 summarizes the preceding parking supply/demand analysis. Projected future overflow ~
parking conditions are documented in terms of the number of days of overflow and the maximum and
average magnitude of the overflow. These measures are also compared with existing conditions. ~
Table 7
Projected Overflow Parking Summary
- Parking Days of Maximum Av.erage ~
ParkinQ Demand Scenario Suor)lv Overflow Overflow Overfiow -
Existing Pre-1990 14 1,000 500 ~
Existing Post-1990 6 750 375
Approved Ski Area Expansion ~
o Unmanaged Demand Post-1990 26 900 450
o Managed Demand Post-1990 10 400 200
Potential Ski Area Expansion ~
o Unmanaged Demand Post- ] 990 34 1,200 600
o Managed Demand (TDM) Post-1990 21 800 400 ~
Potential Ski Area Expansion
o. Unmanaged Demand Long-Range ~
Expansion 15 700 350
o Managed Demand (TDM) Long-Range
Expansion 7 400 200
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
- - ~
Town of Vail Page 39
. ~
~ . .
:
~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III
~ FUTURE PARKING SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
~ The Town Parking Plan consists of a short-range component (consistent with the approved ski area
expansion) and a generalized long-range component. The short-range parking supply plan consists
of the following elements:
~ o The Town of Vail should encourage private sector involvement to actively pursue travel
demand management techniques to reduce the growth in parking de3nand.
~ o Up to 15 days of overflow parking demand is deemed to be acceptable by the Town in
recognition of the excessive capital costs required to meet absolute peak demands.
~ Approximately half of the days will result in very little to minor overflow conditions while
the top 7 days of activity will constitute the most serious overflow conditions.
o As a consequence, the formal public parking supply of 2,750 spaces in place with completion
~ of the expansion of the VTC is sufficient to meet the Town's immediate and short-term future
parking needs. The exact time period when additional parking will be needed depends upon
the success of any travel demand management techniques implemented and the rate at which
~ the ski area expands.
In the longer range future it is recognized that the possibility of ski area expansion beyond the
currently approved levels could occur along with continued general growth of the Town. Therefore,
~ the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee adopted the following long-term parking concept
plan:
~ o The existing Ford Park parking area (east end of park) should be considered for a possible
two-level parking facility with one level provided below existing grade.
, o The existing West Day lot and the North Day lot should also be considered, in conjunction
with Vail Associates, for a possible two-level parking facility with one level partially
depressed below existing grade.
~ o The potential to expand the Lionshead parking structure should also be evaluated to provide
the needed parking spaces.
~ o The Golden Peak area, in particular the soccer practice fields; the ski school/practice area; and
the tennis courts and parking lot should be considered as potential parking expansion areas if
the traffic impacts can be mitigated.
i Approximately 400 to 500 total parking spaces could be provided in one location or combination of
locations at a cost of approximatety $2.5 to $3.0 million. An increase of 500 parking spaces would
retain approximately 15 days of overfiow with the full potential expansion of the ski area with no
' travel demand management techniques implemented (see Figure 8). In any scenario, the maximum
below grade parking potential of a site should be considered.
~ In the future long-term an evaluation of remote, outiying parking and its impact on transit service
costs to link these outlying par.king areas with the Town should be completed if the need arises for
additional parking due to lost opportunities at the sites mentioned above or ski area expansion occurs
~ beyond what is now known.
~ Town of Vail Page 40
. ~
w
~
Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III ,
PARKING RATE STRUCTURE* ~
M
The Town of Vail currently charges patrons to park at the Lionshead and Transportation Center ,
garages during ski season (parking is free in the summer). Charging is primarily oriented towards
visitors, as local residents and employees purchase parking passes for the duration of the ski season.
The pricing structure varies depending on the duration of the parked vehicle and it ranges from free ~
if parked for less than an hour-and-a-half to $7.00 for a 24-hour period. The Town also sells parking
passes and coupons for the two structures which include the premium Gold Pass, the discount Blue
Pass and other discount coupon options. The use of the Blue Pass and coupons is restricted during
peak demand periods. ~
To meet the Town's objectives, a major revision of the basic rate structure, premium service program,
and discount parking program are recommended. The following parking rate structure is recom- ~
mended for the Town of Vail.
1990/91 1991/92 ~
Time Interval Price Price
0 -1-1 /2 Hours $ 0.00 $ 0.00
1-1/2 to 2 Hours $ 2.00 $ 3.00 ~
2 to 3 Hours $ 3.00 $ 4.00
. 3 to 4 Hours $ 4.00 $ 5.00
4 to 5 Hours $ 5.00 $ 6.00
5 to 7 Hours $ 6.00 $ 7.00 ~
7 to 9 Hours $ 7.00 $ 8.00
9 to 11 Hours $ 8.00 $ 9.00
11 to 13 Hours $ 9.00 $10.00 ~
13 to 15 Hours $10.00 $11.00
15 to 24 Hours $12.00 $13.00
The Gold Pass should be continued as the premium service program, but price levels should be ~
increased and reviewed annually to better reflect the costs incurred to provide guaranteed parking.
The £ollowing is recommended for the premium service Gold Pass program in 1990/1991.
o Price set at $750.00 plus aS25.00 deposit. ~
o Limited to a maximum of 150 Gold Passes.
o Guaranteed space availability and unlimited entry/exit. ~
o No restrictions on use.
o Gold Passes valid to the following November 1.
~
* Many of the recommendations presented in this section have been implemented by the Town ~
of Vail for the 1990/1991 season and modified for the 1991/1992 season.
~
- ~
Town of Vail Page 41
~
~ .
w
~ Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter III
~ The following are recommendations for the Discount Parking program and Ford Park in 1990/ 1991.
Price levels are recommended to be reviewed annually.
~ Coupons:
o Coupons will be sold for $3.00 each up to a maximum of 100 coupons per individual and may
~ be purchased in any quantity. •
o Coupons are valid to the following November 1.
~ o Coupons are valid at both VTC and Lionshead any day and at any time.
~ o At the VTC, Level 4 and Level 5 will be reserved exclusively for coupon holders (226 spaces).
o If Levels 4 and 5 fill, then coupon holders will use Lionshead.
~ o If Levets 4 and 5 do not fill, then general parkers wiIl be allowed to use Levels 4 and 5
provided that the rest of the VTC is full.
~ o Coupons may be purchased by those individuals who have a valid drivers license with a Vail
address or verification of ernployment by a Vail business.
~ Blue Passes:
o Blue Passes will be sold for $400.00 plus a$25.00 deposit to anyone wishing to purchase them.
~ o Blue passes are valid to the following November 1.
o Blue Passes may be used at the VTC at any time on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and
~ Thursday (except between Christmas and New Years Day) and after 3:00 P.M. on Friday,
Saturday and Sunday.
~ o Blue Passes may be used at Lionshead any day and at any time.
o Blue Passes allow unlimited entry/exit during the valid time periods defined above.
~ Ford Park:
o Ford Park wi11 be free and availabte on a first come, first serve basis on Monday, Tuesday,
Wednesday and Thursday.
~
o Ford Park will be available to Coupon and Blue Pass holders or to general parkers for a$5.00
~ flat fee (payable upon entry) on Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
~
~
Town of Vaii Page 42
I
Y
Vail Transportation Master Plan Chapter 111 ~
~
SPECIAL PARKING PROVISIONS (
The area adjacent to the Lionshead structure has been used to park over-sized vehicles. In addition, ~
the recent expansion at the Vail Transportacion Center limits vehicle heights to 7'-4". Demand levels
have typically been approximately 30 to 3.5 vehicles with peak demands of approximately 50 vehicles.
It is recommended that this area continue to be used for over-sized vehicles. The potential exists for ~
the Performing Arts Group to erect a building on this site at which time a replacement site will need
to be identified. Some possible sites include the following which would require negotiations with the
entities involved. ~
o Safewav Area in West Vail
o Vail Mountain School Parking Lot
o Golf Course Parking Lot ~
o Ford Park Parking Lot
o Athletic Field Parking Area
o Red Sandstone School - Lower Parking Lot ~
Overflow parking demands of oversized vehicles can be accommodated in the same fashion as
overflow demands for general parking or arrangements can be made to park oversized vehicles at one of the above mentioned sites. ~
In addition, as a part of an overall travel demand management strategy, enhanced loading facilities
convenient to mountain access points should be evaluated for charter buses and possible outlying ~
shuttles; most specifically, Golden Peak and the west side of the Lionshead Gondola building. During
the day these vehicles should be parked in one of the areas designated for oversized vehicles.
~
~
~
1
i
~
I
,
~
;
Town of Vail Page 43
~
.
.
~ f
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: July 15, 1997
SUBJECT: Request to approve Ordinance 13, Series of 1997 that would allow interior
conversions and consolidate references to Gross Residential Floor Area.
Staff: Russell Forrest & Tom Braun (Consultant)
1. PURPOSE
The purpose for this hearing is to review and approve, or disapprove Ordinance 13, which would
implement Alternative 1 in the GRFA analysis (see attached ordinance). The Vail Town Council,
on April 15, 1997, directed staff to implement Alternative 1 after considering the various
alternatives to the existing GRFA policy. Alternative 1 involves keeping GRFA as a tool to
control floor area but would allow interior conversions for existing homes that have no remaining
GRFA allowance. Alternative 1 would only allow interior conversions for homes existing at the
date of the approval of this policy by the Town Council. New construction would not be eligible
for interior conversions. Section V of this memo describes staff's recommendation for ordinance
language to implement Alternative 1, which the PEC supported with several modifications that
are described in Section VIII.
In addition, staff would recommend consolidating the numerous references to GRFA in the
Zoning Code into one consolidated section. This would help to better communicate current
policy on GRFA to applicants. This consolidation would also include the codification of several
staff interpretations currently being used to calculate GRFA. Ordinance 13 would implement
Alternative 1 and consolidate the various GRFA regulations.
II. PROBLEM STATEMENT & GIVENS In 1996, the Vail Town Council directed staff to evaluate the existing GRFA system and
determine whether this is an effective and appropriate tool when compared to other alternatives.
Three reoccurring issues have been raised by the Town Council which include:
A) Is GRFA an effective tool in controlling mass and bulk;
B) Is it appropriate that the Town should be reviewing interior floor space; and
C) Is it an effective use of staff time (both TOV and designers/builders)?
~i'le givens for tnis process include:
Aj The Vail Town Council will make the final decision with input from the community and
recommendations from the PEC and staff.
l
~
TowivoFUUc
~
'
B) There wili be some form of regulatory control of size and mass.
C) This process will only address residential development (single-family, duplex, and
prim ary/second ary type structures).
D) "No action" (i.e. keeping the existing GRFA system) is a viable alternative.
E) Homes should not get significantly larger in size.
F) New design guidelines should not inhibit design creativity.
III. BACKGROUND
A. Initial Public Process
In October of 1996, Tom Braun, the planning consultant for this project, prepared a paper which
addressed the following :
* Reoccurring concerns/issues with the existing system,
* Objectives of having mass and bulk controls,
' Alternative mechanisms for controlling bulk and mass,
* History of GRFA in Vail,
* Analysis of how seven other resort communities control bulk and mass, and
* Analysis of five alternatives to the Town of Vail's GRFA system.
At the public meetings on October 30th and 31 st in 1996, Tom Braun presented the findings in
the background paper. A majority of the time at the meeting was spent obtaining input from the
public on the existing system, discussing pros and cons of alternatives, and identifying new
alternatives. Approximately 45 people attended these meetings.
B. Review of Alternatives
The PEC reviewed the background paper and public input on November 11, 1996 and the Town
Council considered this information on November 26th. At the conclusion of these meetings the
staff was directed to further asses the following three alternatives in greater detail.
* Allow interior modifications to exceed the maximum GRFA allowance for existing
- structures, provided such additions do not add to the bulk and mass of the home.
' Amend the dsfinition of GRFA to exclude basement space from calculation as GRFA.
* Eliminate the use of GRFA for controlling mass and bulk for single family; duplex, and primary/secondary type structures.
C. Choice of Alternatives
Ti. he Vail Town Council was very clear that any alternative ta the existing GRFA system should
not significantly increase bulk and mass. The Cauncil was also very sensitive to any
recommendation that might inhibit creative design solutions. On March 10, 1997, the PEC, in a
4-3 vote, recommended alternative ane with several conditions. At the April 1 st Council
worksession, staff reviewed the alternatives along with the recommendations from the PEC and
staff. At the evening meeting on April 15th, Council directed staff to work on the implementation
of alternative one.
2
`r
IV. PROCESS OVERVIEW
The process for this project is broken into three phases 1) identification of alternatives; 2)
analysis of alternatives; and 3) legislative review of the preferred alternative. The following are
specific steps in the process.
Phase I Identification of Alternatives Time frame
1) Background analysis of existing GRFA system and alternatives. September &
October, 1996
2) Public meetings to review pros and cons of existing GRFA system October 30th
' and alternatives. & 31 st, 1996
3) Presentation to PEC and Town Council to review pros/cons and November 11
public input. The purpose of these public meetings was to & November
determine if any of the alternatives could be eliminated. 26, 1996
Phase II Analyze how to im.plement alternatives and identify the impacts of each alternative
4) Complete analysis of alternative approaches. December &
January
1996/1997
5) PEC worksession to review 3 alternatives. February 10,
1997
6) PEC hearing to recommend an alternative. March 10,
1997
7) Council worksession. April 1, 1997
8) Evening Council meeting to decide on alternative. April 15, 1997
Phase II I Leaislative Review of preferred alternative (assumes code modifications)
8) Staff prepares language to modify Town Code. May/June,
1997
91 PEC: hearing to consider code revisions. June 23, 1997
40) Town Council: worksession to review proposed revision to July 1, 1997
t.h,e existing GRFA regulations.
1 o; Town Council: first reading of an ordinance. July 15, 1997
1 Town Council: second reading of an ordinance. August 5,
1997
* Currently Qn s#ep 11
3
~ V. RECOMMENDED APPROACH FOR GRFA IMPLEMENTATION
The following explains the framework for allowing interior conversions for existing single
family, duplex, and primary/secondary type structures. At the July 1 worksession, the
Town Council identified several issues which include:
1) Maximum length of dormers;
2) Grading limitations;
, 3) Language for garage areas.
Staff's recommendation for responding to each of these issues is explained in italics in
the following sections.
A. Proposed Ordinance - Interior Conversions
The interior conversion amendment will be implemented by creating a section in a new
consolidated GRFA Chapter of the Zoning Code. This new consolidated GRFA Chapter
would incorporate the GRFA definition, current staff policies for calculating GRFA, a
summary of GRFA regulations for each zone district, the 250 sq. ft. additional GRFA
provision, and the proposed interior space conversion provision. The only substantive
change in GRFA policy through this consolidation of GRFA regulations would be the
interior conversion provision_
The following is staff's recommended approach to implement Alternative one.
1. Pur os
The purpose of this section is to provide flexibility and latitude with the use of interior
spaces within existing dwelling units that meet or exceed the allowable Gross Residential
Floor Area (GRFA) without increasing the size of the building. This would be achieved by
allowing for the sonversion of existing interior spaces such as vaulted spaces, crawl
spaces, and other interior spaces into floor area provided certain conditions and
standards are met. This provision is intended to accommodate existing homes where
residents desire to expand the amount of usable space in the interior of a home. The
Town has also recognized that property owners have constructed interior space without building permits. This provision is also intended to reduce the occurrence of interior
building activity without building permits and thereby further protect the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
2. Applicbilitv
Single family, duplex, and primary/secondary type dwelling units that meet or exceed the
allowable GRFA will be eligible to make interior conversions provided the following criteria
are satisfied.
• Any existing single-family dwelling unit or any existing dwelling unit within a structure
containing no more than two dwelling units (exclusive of Employee Housing Units as
defined in the Zoning Code) shall be eligible to add GRFA, via the "interior space
conversion" provision in excess of existing or allowable GRFA including such units
located in a Special Development District, provided that such GRFA complies with the
standards outlined herein.
4
• For the purpose of this section, "existing uniY' shall mean any dwelling unit within a
structure containing no more than two dwelling units (exclusive of Employee Housing
Units as defined in the Zoning Code) that has been constructed and has received a
certificate of occupancy, has been issued a building permit or has received final
Design Review Board approval prior to (insert date of ordinance approval).
. Multi-family dwelling units are not eligible to add GRFA permitted by the provisions of
this Section.
3. Standards
• No application for additional GRFA under the provisions of this Section shall be made
until such time as all the allowable GRFA has been constructed on the property, or an
application is presently pending in conjunction with the application for additional floor
area that utilizes all allowable GRFA for the property.
• Additional floor area established under the provisions of this Section shall be
constructed utilizing the floor area or volume of the building that is in existence prior
to the effective date of this ordinance. New structures or exterior additions to
existing structures built after the effective date of this section will not be eligible for
interior conversions. Examples of how additional GRFA can be established under the
provision of this Section include the conversion of existing basement or crawl spaces
to GRFA, the addition of lofts within the building volume of the existing building, and
the conversion of other existing interior spaces such as storage areas to GRFA.
• Proposals for GRFA under the provisions of this Section may involve exterior
modifications to existing buildings, however, such modifications shall not increase the
building bulk and mass of the existing building. Examples of exterior modifications
which are considered to increase building bulk and mass include, but are not limited
Length of roof plane
Leneth of dormer
• . '"~-~..ty_
_
J-~ - .1r. - ~ JI
` ~ If~~`~- -f•
l"' , ~f
C:LCt?'1.CEEtt3V'f3 Lftfigtti (Tr f1CfCBTte3'(6) 1:'FKS-y !tS]$ B]fL'9kDd 50F%n P9f tt2b
Eengfh reF the raof pianer.
5
to, the expansion of any existing exterior walls of the building, re-grading around a
building in a manner which exposes more than two (2) vertical feet of existing exterior
walls and the expansion of existing roofs. Notwithstanding the two vertical feet
limitation to regrading around a building described above, additional regrading
may be permitted in order to allow for egress to new interior spaces. The
extent of such regrading shall be limited to providing adequate egress areas for
windows or doors as per the minimum necessary requirement for the Uniform
Building Code. Examples of exterior modifications which are not considered to
increase building bulk and mass include, but are not limited to, the addition of
windows, doors, skylights, and window-wells. Subject to design approval, dormers
may be considered an exterior modification in conjunction with interior conversions
permitted by this section. Prior to approval of dormers or regrading for windows _
or doors as described above, the staff or the DRB shall find that they do not add significantly to the bulk and mass of the building and are compatible with the
overall scale, proportion, and design of the building. For the purpose of this
Section, dormers are defined as a vertical window projecting from a sloping roof of a
building, having vertical sides and a gable or shed roof, in which the total cumulative
length of the dormer(s) does not exceed 50% of the length of the sloping roof, per
roof plane, from which the dormer(s) projects.
Council Issue-Grading: Council asked staff to look at how fo ensure adequate
access to crawl space areas that are converted into basements. Language was
added above in bold to allow egress as required by the UBC.
Council Issue - Dormers: Above you will note an addition in bold that explicity
identifies criteria for statf and DRB to review dormers. This wou/d keep a 50%
cumulative maximum on dormers and require design review and approval.
• Proposals for the utilization of interior conversion GRFA under this provision shall
comply with all Town of Vail zoning and building standards and applicable
development standards.
• Floor area within a garage that was originally approved through the garage space
credit may not be converted to GRFA under the provisions of this section.
Council Issue - Use of vaulted space in garages: Council was concerned that
garage space was confusing and could preclude someone from filling in a vaulted
space in a garage. Staff recommends changing fhe wording to refer to f/oor area
so thai it is clear fhai all floor area received through a garage space credit has to
be used for parking. However vaulted space above the parking area cou/d be
filled in and used as interior conversion GRFA.
4. Proce s
Applications shall be made to the Community Development Department staff on forms
prcvided by the Department. Applicatians for interior conversions to single-family, two-family,
and primary secondary type dwelling units located in a Special Development District (SDD)
shall also be allowed without amending the GRFA provisions of the SDD. However,
properties with GRFA restrictions recorded on the plat for the development shall be regulated
accarding ta the plat restrictions unless the plat is modified to remove such restrictions. The
planning staff will review the application to ensure the building has utilized all available GRFA
6
and that the proposed interior conversion would occur in a structure that was built or
approved by the DRB before the effective date of this ordinance.
• Application fees pursuant to the current fee schedule.
. Information and plans as set forth and required by Section 18.54.040, subsection C of
this Title or as determined by the Community Development Department staff.
Applicants would need to submit "as-builY" floor plans of the structure so that staff can
identify the existing building from any new additions that have occurred after the
. approval of this ordinance. • Proposals deemed by the Community Department staff to be in compliance with this
Section and all applicable zoning and development regulations shall be approved by
the Department of Community Development or shall be forwarded to the Design
Review Board in accordance with Chapter 18.54 of the Municipal Code. Proposals
deemed to not comply with this Section or applicable zoning and development
regulations shalt be denied.
e Upon receiving approvals pursuant to this Section, applicants shall proceed with
securing a building permit prior to initiating construction of the project.
• Any decisions of the Community Development Department pursuant to this Section
may be appealed by any applicant in accordance with the provisions of Section
18.66.030 of the Vail Municipal Code.
VI. CONSOLIDATION OF GRFA REGULATIONS IN THE ZONING CODE
A. Purpose for Consolidation:
There are numerous references to Gross Residential Floor Area within Title 18 of the
Zoning Code. To better communicate to the public how GRFA is calculated in different
zone districts, staff is proposing to consolidated references to GRFA into one section of
the Zoning Code.
B. Proposed Changes
Currently GRFA is referred to in the following sections:
18.04.130 -Definitions
18.09.080-HSR
18.10.090 SFR
18.11.080 P/S
18.12.090 TFR
18.13.080 P/S
1$.14.090 RC
18.16.090 LDMF
1$.18.090 MDMF
18.20.090 HDMF
18.22.090 PA
r
18.24.130 CC1
18.26.100 CC2
18.27.080 CC3
18.28.100 CSC
18. 29. 080 AB
18.32.090 AOS
18.57 EHU
18.71 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250)
Staff would like to consolidate the above mentioned references and the interior conversion
provision into one section in the Zoning Code. The following summarizes this consolidation:
1) The reference to GRFA in the Definition section would be moved to the consolidated
GRFA section.
2) The GRFA section in each zone district would remain the same. A summary for each
zone district would be included in a table in the consolidated GRFA section.
3) Section 18.71 (Additional GRFA) would be included in the consolidated GRFA Section.
4) The interior conversion standards, if approved, would be incorporated into the
consolidated GRFA section.
5) Staff interpretations currently used to calculate GRFA would be incorporated into the
consolidated GRFA section. See attachment A to review existing staff interpretations.
It is important to note that this consolidation would not change the Town's current policy for regulating GRFA. It would simply help make the GRFA process easier to understand for
development review applicants. This consolidation would also codify existing staff interpretations
for calculating GRFA. Again, this would not result in a change in how GRFA is regulated.
Specific sections of this new consolidated GRFA Chapter would include:
Section Title
18.71.010 Purpose
t8.71.020 GRFA Requirements by Zone District
18.71.030 Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions
18.71.040 Interior Conversions 18.71.050 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance)
VI9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Town Cauncil has directed staff to implement Alternative 1. This alternative keeps GRFA as
a toal ta contral bulk and mass of structures but allows interior conversions to existing homes.
d}aff rPGOmmends that the approach outlined in Section 18.71.040, of Ordinance 13, Series of
1997, be implemented With this approach, only existing homes on the effective date of this
ordinance that are existing or which plans have been appraved by the DRB could take advantage
of aoing interior conversions. This alternative will address the most pressing issue that initiated
this process, whiGh was to create qreater flexibility for hameowners to make interior conversions
4o thpir existing homes evsn if they do nat have any remaining GRFA allowance. Staff would
recommend that the policy of allowing interior Gonversions bs reexamined after the design
giaidelines have been modified, since staff anticipates that property owners of homes that will be
~
constructed in the future wili want to convert crawl spaces into basements or turn lofted areas
into floor area.
Staff also recommends consolidating the GRFA regulations in the existing Zoning Code to help
clarify current policy on Gross Residential Floor Area. Staff received numerous public comments
during the review of this policy on how difficult the GRFA policy is to understand. This
consolidation would not change how GRFA is regulated but would help clarify how GRFA is
currently calculated.
. The following is a summary of the staff recommendations:
' Only apply interior conversion to structures that are in existence as of the effective date
' of the approval of this ordinance.
* Additions to structures after the date of this amendment would not be eligible for interior
conversions.
* Structures must not have any remaining GRFA allowance (excluding the 250 GRFA
credit) before applying for interior conversion GRFA.
` Implement Alternative 1 as per the other standards outlined in this memo.
' Consolidate all GRFA references in the Zoning Code into one section.
• Reevaluate the GRFA policy after new design guidelines have been adopted.
VIII. PEC RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) reviewed the staff recommendation for
implementing Alternative 1 on June 23, 1997. The PEC recommended implementing Alterative
1, as per the staff recommendation with the following additional amendments:
* That grade provisions be modified to allow access (i.e., a door) to basement
levels. The PEC felt that limiting grading to 2 feet below the existing grade would
prevent safe egress from basement spaces. ` That the 50% cumulative roof dormer limitation be clarified with an illustration.
The following are requests by the PEC for the Town Council to consider:
~ That the amnesty program be pursued.
* That a recommendation be directed to Council to include multi-family structures.
The PEC approved this recommendation 5-1 (Galan Aasland dissenting).
f:\everyonelruss\memo\grfa.714 9
ORDINANCE N0.13
Series of 1997
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 18.71 (ADDR'IONAL GROSS
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA) OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE; AMENDING SECTION
18.04.130 (DEFINITION OF GRFA); PROVIDING FOR THE CONSOLIDATION OF GROSS
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS ItdTO ONE CHAPTER ENTITLED "CHAPTER
18.71 GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA)"; PROVIDING A NEW REGULATION
ALLOWING INTERIOR CONVERSIONS OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, DUPLEX, AND
PRIMARY SECONDARY DWELLINGS WITH NO REMAINlNG ALLOWABLE GRFA; AND
AMENDING CHAPTER 18.40 SECTION 18.40.020 PARAGRAPHS B& C TO ALLOW
INTERIOR CONVERSfONS AND 250 ADDfT10NS fN A SDD.
WHEREAS, controliing the bulk and mass of residential buildings is critical in maintaining
the alpine character of the Town of Vail;
WHEREAS, GRFA is an effective tool for limiting the size, bulk, and mass of dwelling
units;
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to limit the size of residential buildings to ensure . compatibility of structures and to ensure adequate light and air in residential areas and districts;
WHEREAS, interior conversions of existing single family, duplex, and primary/secondary
dwellings that have no remaining GRFA allowance will allow greater flexibility to make
improvements in a structure while not affecting the bulk and mass of the structure;
WHEREAS, allowing flexibility to expand livable fioor space inside an existing home has
been identified as a need by Town residents;
WHEREAS, the Pianning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has
recommended approvai of this arnendment to the Vail Municipal Code at its June 23, 1997
meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council considers it in the interest of the public heafth, safety, and .
welfare to amend said Chapter and Sections of the Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Secsion 1.
Chapter 18.04, Section 18.04.130, is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.04.130 Floor area, gross residential (GRFA).
The totai square footage of all levels of a buiiding, as measured at the inside face of the exterior
walls (i.e., noi including furring, sheetrock, plaster and other similar wall finishes). Refer to
Cnapter 18.71 lor GRFA regulations and requirements for GRFA culculation. (Note: Remaining
section is stricken)
1
Section 2.
Chapter 18.40 Section 18.40.020 paragraphs B& C are hereby amended to read as foliows (note
changes in bold). B) MINOR AMENDMENT (STAFF REVIEW): Modifications to building pians, site or
iandscape plans that do not alter the basic intent and character of ihe approved
special development district, and are consistent with the design criteria of this
Chapter. Minor amendments may include, but not be iimited to, variations of not
more than five feet (5} to approved setbacks and/or building footprints; changes
to landscape or site plans that do not adversely impact pedestrian or vehicular
circulation throughout the special development district; or changes to gross floor
area (excluding residential uses) of not more than five percent (5%) of the
approved square footage of retail, office, common areas and other nonresidential
floor area, except as provided under sections 18.71.040 (Interior Conversions)
or 18.71.050 (250 Additional GRFA).
C) MAJOR AMENDMENT (PEC) AND/OR COUNCIL REVIEVI): Any proposal to
change uses; increase gross residential fioor area; change the number of dwelling
or accommodation units; modify, enlarge or expand any approved special
development district (other than "minor amendments" as defined in this Section),
except as provided under sections 18.71.040 (Interior Conversions) or
18.71.050 (250 Additional GRFA).
Section .
Chapter 18.71 is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows:
CHAPTER 18.71
GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA)
Sections:
18.71.010 Purpose
18.71.020 GRFA Requirements by Zone District
18.71.030 Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions
18.71.040 Interior Conversions
18.71.050 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance)
18.71.010 Purpose
This Chapter is intended to controi and limit the size, bulk, and mass of residential structures
within the Town of Vail. Gross residential floor area (GRFA) regulation is an effective tool for
limiting the size of residentiai structures and ensuring that residential structures are developed in
an environmentally sensitive manner by altowing adequate air and light in residential areas and
districts.
18.71.020 GRFA Requirements by Zone District
GFt~~t Requiremenis bp 2one At&trlci' :
Zone Districts GRFA GRFA
Ratio/Percentage Credits
(added to results of application of
percentage)
HR 20% of lot area of first 21,780 sq. ft. + None
Hillside Residential 5% of lot area over 21,780 sq. ft.
SFR 25% of lot area of first 12,500 sq. ft. + 425 sq. ft. per allowable dweliing unit
Single Family 70% of lot area over 12,500 sq. ft.
Residential
2
.<,.....eE.~iequtrian!a~#s~ky;Zeu,et~€str~et.
. : . . . _ .
Zone Districts GRFA GRFA
Ratio/Percentage CredRs
(added to results of application of
percentage)
R 25% of lot area of first 15,000 sq. ft. + 425 sq. ft. per allowable dwelling unit
Two-Family . 101% of lot area over 15,000 sq. ft. and up to
Residential 30,000 sq. ft. +
5% of lot area over 30,000 sq. ft.
P/S 25% of lot area of first 15,000 sq. ft. + 425 sq. ft. per allowable dwelling unit
Primary/ Secondary 10% of lot area over 15,000 sq. ft. and up to
Residential 30,000 sq. ft. +
5% of lot area over 30,000 sq. ft.
- (the secondary unit shall not exceed 40% of
GRFA on-site prior to application of credit) _
_ RC 25% of buildable lot area 225 sq. ft. for single-family and iwo-family
Residential Cluster structures only
LDMF 30°/ of buildable lot area 225 sq. ft. for single-family and two-family
Low Denslty Multiple stnictures only
Family
MDMF 35% of buildable lot area 225 sq. ft. for single-family and two-family
Medium Density structures only
Mukiple Family
HDMF 60%of buildable lot area None .
High Density Multiple ,
Famlly ,
PA 80% of buildable lot area None Public Accom-
modation
CC1 80°/ of buildabie iot area None
Commercial Core 1
_ CC2 80% of buildable lot area None
Commercial Core 2
CC3 30% ot buildable lot area None
Commercial Core 3
CSC 40% of buildable lot area None
Commercial Service GRFA shall not exceed 50% of totai building
Center floor area on any site
ABD 60%of buildahle lot area None
Arterial Business
HS None permitted None
Heavy Service
A Up to 2,000 sq. ft. total None
Agricultural and Open
Space
OR None permitted None
Outdoor Recreation
P None permitted None
Parking "
F
GU Per PEC approval None
General Use ~
NAP None permitted None ~
Natural Area I
~ Preservation
SBR Unlimited, per Council approval ~ None ,
Ski Base Recreation p
SDD Per underlying zoning or per development plan None ~
Special Development approval by Council ~
District
3
,
18.71.030 Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions
1. Gross Residential Floor Area
The total square footage of all levels of a building, as measured at the inside face of the
exterior walls (i.e., not including furring, sheetrock, plaster and other similar wall finishes).
GRFA shail include, but not be limited to, elevator shafts and stairwells at each level,
lofts, fireplaces, bay windows, mechanical chases, vents, and storage areas. Attics, crawl
spaces and roofed or covered decks, porches, terraces or patios shall also be included in
GRFA, unless they meet the provisions of subsections A or B below.
A. Single-Family, Two-Family, and Primary/Secondary Structures
Within buildings containing two (2) or fewer dwelling units, the following areas
shall be excluded from calcutation as GRFA. GRFA shall be calculated by
measuring the total square footage of a building set forth in this definition above.
Excluded areas as set forth herein, shall then be deducted from total square
footage:
1. Enclosed garages of up to three hundred (300) square feet per vehicle
space not exceeding a maximum of two (2) spaces for each allowable
dweliing unit permitted by this Title.
2. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet (5) or less, as measured from
the top side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the
structural members of the roof directly above. Attic area created by
construction of a roof with truss-type members will be exciuded from
caiculation as GRFA, provided the trusses are spaced no greater than
thirty inches (30") apart.
3. Crawi spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve (12)
square feet in area, with five feet (6) or less of ceiling height, as measured
from the surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members
of the floor/ceiling assembly above.
4. Roofed or covered deck, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or
spaces with no more than three (3) exterior walls and a minimum opening
of not less than twenty five percent (25%) of the lineal perimeter of the
area of said deck, porch, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space,
provided the opening is contiguous and fully open from floor to ceiiing with
an allowance for a railing of up to three feet (3') in height.
B. Multiple-Family Structures
Within buildings containing more than two (2) allowable dweliings or
accommodation units, the foilowing additional areas shall be excluded from
calculation as GRFA. GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square
footage of a building as set forth herein. Exciuded areas as set forth shall then be
deducted from the total square footage. 1. Enclosed garages to accommodate on-site parking requirements.
2. All or part of the following spaces, provided such spaces are common
spaces and that the total square footage of all the following spaces shall
not exceed thirty five percent (35%) of the aliowable GRFA permitted on the lot. Any square footage which exceeds the thirty five percent (35%)
maximum shali be included in the calculation of GRFA.
a. Common hallways, stairways, elevator shafts and airlocks.
b. Common lobby areas.
c. Common enclosed recreation facilities.
d. Common heating, cooling or ventilation systems, solar rock storage
areas, or other mechanical systems. Square footage exciuded from
caicuiation as GRFA shail be the minimum square footage required
to allow for the maintenance and operation of such mechanical
systems.
4
f
e. Common closet and storage areas, providing access to such areas
is from common hallways only.
, f. Meeting and convention facilities.
g. Office space, provided such space is used exclusively for the
management and operaUon of on-site facilities.
h. Floor area to be used in a Type III or a Type IV "Employee Housing
Unit (EHU)" as defined and restricted by Chapter 18.57 of this Title,
provided said EHU floor area shall not exceed sixry percent (60%)
of the thirty five percent (35%) common area allowance defined
above. Any square footage for the Type ill or Type IV EHUs which
exceeds the sixty percent (60%) maximum of allowed common
area shail be included in the calculation of GRFA. If a property
. owner allocates common area for the purpose of employee
housing, and subsequently requests a common area variance, the
Town shall require that the housing area be converted back to
common uses and that the employee housing units be replaced
within the Town.
3. Ail or part of an airlock within an accommodation or dwelling unit not
exceeding a maximum of twenty five (25) square feet, providing such unit
has direct access to the outdoors.
4. Overlapping stairways within an accommodation unit or dwelling unit shali
only be counted at the lowest level.
5. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet (5) or less, as measured from
the top side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the
structural members of the roof directly above. Attic areas created by
construction of a roof with truss-type members will be excluded from
caiculation as GRFA, provided the trusses are spaced no greater than
thirty inches.(30") apart.
6. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve (12)
square feet in area, with five feet (5) or less of ceiling height, as measured
from the surface of the earth to the underside of structural fioor members
of the floor/ceiling assembly above.
7. Roofed or covered decks, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or
spaces with no more than three (3) exterior walls and a minimum opening
of not less than twenty five percent (25%) of the lineal perimeter of the
area of said deck, porch, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space,
provided the opening is contiguous and fuliy open from fioor to ceiling, with
" an allowance for a railing of up to three feet (3') in height and support
posts with a diameter of 18" or less which are spaced no closer than 10'
apari. The space between the posts shall be measured from the outer ' surface of the post.
2. Additional Calculation Provisions
A. Interior walls are included in GRFA calculations. For duplex and
primary/secondary structures, common party walls shall be considered exterior
walls.
6. Greenhouse windows (self-supporting windows) shall not be counted as GRFA.
- Greenhouse windows are defined according to the following criteria:
1. Gistance Above Inside Floor Level - In order for a window to be considered
a greenhouse window, a minimum distance of 36" must be provided
between the bottom of the window and the fioor surface, as measured on
the inside face of the building wali. (Floor surface shali not include steps
necessary to meet Building Code egress requirements). The 36" minimum
was chosen because it locates the window too high to be comfortably
used as a window seat and because it allows for a typical 4' high
greenhouse window to be used in a room with an 8' ceiling height.
5
• 2. Projection - No greenhouse window may protrude more than 18" from the
exterior surface of the building. This distance allows for adequate relief for
appearance purposes, without substantially adding to the mass and bulk of
the buitding.
3. Construction Characteristics - AII greenhouse windows shall be self-
supporting and shall not require speciai framing or construction methods
for support, with the exception that brackets below the window may be
allowed provided they die into the wall of the building at a 45 degree angle.
A small roof over the window may also be allowed provided the overhang
is limited to 4" beyond the window plane.
4. Dimensional Requirement - No greenhouse window shail have a total •
window surface area greater than 44 sq. ft. This figure was derived on the
assumption that the maximum height of a window, in an average si2ed
room, is 4' and the maximum width for a 4' high self-supporting window is .
• between 6' and 8' (approximately 32 sq. ft.). Since the window would
protrude no more than 18", the addition of side windows would bring the overali window area to approximately 44 sq. fi.
5. Quantity - Up to two (2) greenhouse windows wili be allowed per dweiling
unit, however, the 44 sq. ft. size limitation will apply to the combined area
of the two windows.
6. Greenhouse windows do not count as site coverage.
C. Vaulted spaces and areas "open to below" are not included in GRFA calculations.
D. Garage credit:
1. Allowable garage area is awarded on a"per space basis," with a maximum
of two spaces per allowable unit. Each garage space shall be designed
with direct and unobstructed vehicular access. Ail floor area included in
the garage credit shall be contiguous to a vehicular space.
2. Alcoves, storage areas, and mechanical areas which are located in the
garage and which are 25% or more open to the garage area shall be
included as garage credit.
3. Garage space in excess of the aliowable garage credit shail be counted as
GRFA.
E. Crawl and attic space:
1. Crawl spaces created by a"stepped foundation," hazard mitigation, or
other similar engineering requirement that has a totai height in excess of five feet may be excluded from GRFA caiculations at the discretion of the
Director of Community Development.
2. If a roof structure is designed utilizing a non-truss system, and spaces
greater than five feet in height result, these areas shall not be counted as
GRFA if ALL of the following criteria are met:
a. The area cannot be accessed directly from a habitable area within
the same building levei;
b. The area shall have the minimum access required by the Buiiding
Code from the level below (6 sq. ft. opening maximum);
c. Tne attic space shall not have a structural floor capabie of
supporting a"live load" greater than 40 pounds per square foot,
and the "floor" of the attic space cannot not be improved with
decking;
d. it must be demonstrated by the architect that a"truss-type" or
similar structural system cannot be utilized as defined in the
definition of GRFA; and
6
e. It will be necessary that a structurai element (i.e., coliar-tie) be
utilized when rafters are used for the roof system. In an unusual
situation, such as when a bearing ridge system is used, the staff
will review the space for compliance with this policy.
F. Primary/Secondary units:
1. The 425 sq. ft. credit per unit shall be applied to each unit AFTER the
60/40 split has been calculated (i.e., the secondary unit shalt be limited to
40% of the total GRFA + 425 sq. ft.).
2. On Primary/Secondary and Duplex lots, GRFA is calculated based on the
entire lot.
18.71.040 Interior Conversions
1. Purpose
The interior conversion section of this Chapter provides for flexibility and latitude with the
use of interior spaces within existing dwelling units that meet or exceed the allowable
Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA). This would be achieved by allowing for the
conversion of existing interior spaces such as vaulted spaces, crawl spaces, and other
interior spaces into floor area provided the bulk and mass of the building is not increased.
This provision is intended to accommodate existing homes where residents desire to
expand the amount of usable space in the interior of a home. The Town has also
recognized that property owners have constructed interior space without building permits.
This provision is also intended to reduce the occurrence of interior building activity
without building permits and thereby further protecting the health, safety, and welfare of
the community.
2. Applicability
Single family, duplex, and primary/secondary type dwelling units that exceed allowable
GRFA will be eligible to make interior conversions provided the following criteria are
satisfied:
A. Any existing single-family dwelling unit or any existing dwelling unit within a
structure containing no more than two dwelling units (exclusive of Employee
Housing Units as defined in the Zoning Code) shall be eligible to add GRFA, via
the "interior space conversion" provision in excess of existing or allowable GRFA
including such units located in a Special Development District, provided that such
GRFA complies with the standards outlined herein.
6. For the purpose of this section, "existing uniY" shall mean any dwelling unit within
a structure containing no more than two dwelling units (exclusive of Employee
Housing Units as defined in the Zoning Code) that has been constructed and has
received a certificate of occupancy, has been issued a building permit or has
received final Design Review Board approvai prior to (insert date of ordinance
approval). •
C. Muiti-family dwelling units are not eligible to add GRFA permitted by the provisions
of this Section.
3. Standards
A. No application to add floor area under the provisions of this Section shall be made
until such time as all the allowable GRFA has been constructed on the property,
or an application is presently pending in conjunction with the application to add
floor area that utilizes all allowable GRFA for the property.
6. Applications to add floor area established under the provisions of this Section
shall be constructed utilizing the floor area or volume of the building that is in
existence prior to the (insert date of ordinance approval). New structures or
exterior additions to existing structures built after the effective date of this section
will not be eligible for interior conversions. Examples of how floor area can be
established under the provision of this Section include the conversion of existing
basement or crawl spaces to GRFA, the addition of lofts within the building
volume of the existing building, and the conversion of other existing interior
spaces such as storage areas to GRFA.
7
A ~
• C. Proposals for GRFA under the provisions of this Section may invofve exterior
modifications to existing buildings, however, such modifications shaii not increase
the building bulk and mass of the existing building. Examples of exterior
modifications which are considered to increase buiiding bulk and mass include,
but are not limited to, the expansion of any existing exterior walis of the building,
re-grading around a building in a manner which exposes more than two (2)
vertical feet of existing exterior walls and the expansion of existing roofs.
Notwithstanding the two vertical feet limitation to regrading around a building
described above, additional regrading may be permitted in order to allow for
egress to new interior spaces. The extent of such regrading shall be limited to
providing adequate egress areas for windows or doors as per the minimum
necessary requirement for the Uniform Building Code. Examples of exterior
modifications which are not considered to increase building bulk and mass
include, but are not limited to, the addition of windows, doors, skylights, and
window-wells. Subject to design approval, dormers may be considered an
exterior modification in conjunction with interior conversions permitted by this
section. Prior to approval of proposed dormers or regrading for windows or doors
as described above, the staff or the DRB shall find that they do not add
significantly to the butk and mass of the building and are compatible with the
overall scale, proportion, and design of the building. For the purpose of this
Section, dormers are defined as a vertical window projecting from a sloping roof
of a building, having vertical sides and a gable or shed roof, in which the total
cumulative length of the dormer(s) does not exceed 50% of the length of the
sloping roof, per roof plane, from which the dormer(s) projects.
Lenpth of rool piane
lenHth of tlormer
I
`
q:`-~ r~-7 i
~_.a. L Z-~ _ = • ' ~ ` .
1 k ly? . f~,
Cce.:IukssYFVe Leng2h oitlormor(rx) mey oot oxcaed 59°/n o7theY
lnn,gxh of tFie, rnoi pEann.
D. Proposals for the utilization of interior conversion GRFA under this provision shall
camply with all Town of Vail zoning standards and appiicable development
standards.
E. Fioor area within a garage that was originaily approved through the garage space
credit may not be converted to GRFA under the provisions of this section.
4. Process
Applications shall be made to the Community Development Department staff on forms
provided by the Department. Applications for interior conversions to single-family, two-
family, and primary secondary type dwelling units located in a Special Development
District (SDD) shall also be allowed without amending the GRFA provisions of the SDD.
However, properties with GRFA restrictions recorded on the plat for the development
shail be regulated according to the plat restrictions uniess the plat is modified to remove
such restrictions. The planning staff will review the application to ensure the proposed
addition complies with all provisions of the interior conversion section. Submittals shail
include:
A. Application fees pursuant to the current fee schedule.
5. Information and plans as set forth and required by Section 18.54.040, subsection
C of this Title or as determined by the Community Development Department staff.
Applicants would need to submit "as-builY" floor plans of the structure so that staff
can identify the existing building from any new additions that have occurred after
the approval of this ordinance.
C. Proposals deemed by the Community Department staff to be in compliance with
this Section and all applicable zoning and development regulations shall be
8
approved by the Department of Communiry Development or shall be forwarded to ,
the Design Review Board in accordance with Chapter 18.54 of the Municipal
Code. Proposals deemed to not comply with this Section or applicable zoning and
development regulations shall be denied.
D. Upon receiving approvals pursuant to this Section, applicants shall proceed with
securing a building permit prior to initiating construction of the project.
E. Any decisions of the Community Development Department pursuant to this
Section may be appealed by any applicant in accordance with the provisions of
Section 18.66.030 of the Vail Municipal Code.
18.71.050 Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance)
' 1. Purpose
The purpose of this Section is to provide an inducement for the upgrading of existing , -
dwelling units which have been in existence within the Town for a period of at least five
(5) years by permitting the addition of up to two hundred fifry (250) square feet of gross
residential floor area (GRFA) to such dwelling units, provided the criteria set forth in this
Section are met. This Section does not assure each single-family dwelling or dwelling unit
located within the Town an additional two hundred fifty (250) square feet, and proposals
for any additions hereunder shall be reviewed closely with respect to site planning, impact
on adjacent properties, and applicable Town development standards. The two hundred
fifty (250) square feet of additional gross residential floor area may be granted to existing
single-family dwellings, existing two-family and existing multi-family dwelling units only
once, but may be requested and granted in more than one increment of less than two
hundred fifty (250) square feet. Upgrading of an existing dwelling unit under this Section
shall include additions thereto or renovations thereof, but a demo/rebuild shall not be
included as being eligible for additional gross residential ffoor area.
2. Single-Family Dwellings and Two-Family Dwellings
Any single-family dwelling or dwelling unit in a two-family dwelling shall be eligible for
additional gross floor residential area (GRFA) not to exceed a maximum of two hundred
fifty (250) square feet of GRFA per single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling unit in
addition to the existing GRFA or the allowable GRFA for the site. Before such additional
GRFA can be granted, the single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling shall meet the
following criteria:
A. Eligible Time Frame: At Ieast five (5) years must have passed from the date the
single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling unit was issued a certificate of
occupancy (whether temporary or final) or, in the event a certificate of occupancy
was not required for use of the dwelling at the time of completion, from the date of
original completion and occupancy of the dwelling.
. B. Use Of Additional Floor Space: Proposals for the utilization of the additional gross
residential floor area (GRFA) under this provision shall compiy with all Town
zoning requirements and applicable development standards. If a variance is
. required for a proposal, it shall be approved by the Planning and Environmental
Commission pursuant to Chapter 18.62 of this Title before an application is made
in accordance with this Section. The applicant must obtain a building permit withir
one year of final Planning and Environmental Commission approval or the
approval for additional GRFA shatl be voided.
C. Notification: Adjacent property owners and owners of dwelling units on the same
lot as the applicant shall be notified of any application under this Section that
involves any external alterations to an existing structure. Notification procedures
shall be as outlined in Section 18.66.080 of this Title.
D. Garage Conversions: If any proposal provides for the conversion of a garage or
enclosed parking area to GRFA, such conversion will not be allowed unless: 1)
either the conversion will not reduce the number of enclosed parking spaces
below the number required by this Code; or 2) provision is made for creation of
such additional enclosed parking spaces as may be required for the new total
GRFA under this Code. Plans for a new garage or enclosed parking area, if
required, shall accompany the application under this Section, and shall be
constructed concurrently with the conversion.
E. Parking: Any increase in parking requirements as set forth in Chapter 18.52 of this
9
c
Title due to any GRFA addition pursuant to this Section shail be met by the
applicant.
F. Conformity With Guidelines: All proposals under this Section shall be required to
conform to the design review guidelines set forth in Chapter 18.54 of this TiUe. A
single-family dwelling or dwelling unit for which an addition is proposed shall be
required to meet the minimum Town landscaping standards as set forth in
Chapter 18.54 of this Title. Before any additional GRFA may be permitted in
accordance with this Section, the staff shail review the maintenance and upkeep
of the existing single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling and site, including
landscaping to determine whether they comply with the design review guidelines.
No temporary certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any expansion of GRFA
pursuant to this Section until all required improvements to the site and structure have been completed as required.
G. Applicability: The provisions of this Section are applicable only to GRFA additions
to single-family dwelling units. No pooling of gross residential floor area shall be
allowed in single-family dwelling or two-family residential dwelling units. No
application for additionai GRFA shall request more than two hundred fifty (250)
square feet of gross residential floor area per single-family dwelling or two-family
dwelling, nor shall any application be made for additional GRFA until such time as
all the allowable GRFA has been constructed on the property, or an application is
presently pending in conjunction with the application for additional GRFA that
utilizes all allowable GRFA for the property.
H. One Time Grant: Any single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling which has
previously been granted additional GRFA pursuant to this Section and is
demo/rebuiid, shall be rebuilt without the additional GRFA as previously approved.
1. Demo/Rebuilt Not Eligible: Any single-family.dwelling or two-family dwelling which
is to be demo/rebuilt shall not be eligible for additional GRFA.
3. Multi-Family Dwellings
Any dwelling unit in a muiti-family dwelling shall be eligible for additionai gross residential
floor area (GRFA) not to exceed a maximum of two hundred fifty (250) square feet of
GRFA in addition to the existing GRFA or the allowable GRFA for the site. Any application
of such additional GRFA must meet the following criteria:
A. Eligible Time Frame: At least five (5) years must have passed from the date the
building was issued a certificate of occupancy (whether temporary or final), or, in
the event a certificate of occupancy was not required for use of the building at the
time of completion, from the date of original compietion and occupancy of the
building. .
B. Use Of Additional Fioor Space: Proposals for the utilization of the additional GRFA
under this provision shall comply with all Town zoning requirements and
applicable development standards. If a variance is required for a proposal, it shall
be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission pursuant to Chapter
18.62 of this Titie before an application is made in accordance with this Section.
The applicant must obtain a building permit within one year of final Planning and
Environmental Commission approvai or the approval for additional GRFA shall be
voided.
0. Parking Area Conversions: Portions of existing enclosed parking areas may be
converted to GRFA under this Section if there is no loss of existing enclosed
parking spaces in said enclosed parking area.
D. Parking Requirements Observed: Any increase in parking requirements due to any
GRFA addition pursuant to this Section shali be met by the applicant.
E. Guideline Compliance; Review: All proposals under this Section shall be reviewed
for compliance with the design review guidelines as set forth in Chapter 18.54 of
this Title. Existing properties for which additional GRFA is proposed shall be
required to meet minimum Town landscaping standards as set forth in Chapter
18.54 of this Titie. General maintenance and upkeep of existing buildings and
sites, including the multi-family dweliings, landscaping or site improvements (i.e.,
trash facilities, berming to screen surface parking, etc.) shall be reviewed by the
staff after the application is made for conformance to said design review
10 '
S
S
guidelines. This review shall take place at the time of the first application for
additional GRFA in any multi-family dwelling. This review shall not be required for
any subsequent application for a period of five (5) years from the date of the initial
application and review, but shall be required for the first application filed after
each subsequent five (5) year anniversary date of the initial review. No temporary
certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any expansion of GRFA pursuant to
this Section until all required improvements to the multi-family dwelling site and
building have been completed as required.
F. Condominium Association Approval: If the proposed addition of GRFA is for a
dwelling unit located in a condominium project, a letter approving such addition
from the condominium association shall be required at the time the application is
submitted.
G. Deck And Balcony Enclosures: No deck or balcony enclosures, or any exterior additions or alterations to multi-family dwellings with the exception of windows,
. skylights, or other similar modifications shall be allowed under this Section.
H. Applicability: The provisions of this Section are applicable only to GRFA additions
to individual dwelling units. No "pooling" of GRFA shall be allowed in multi-family
dwellings. No application for additional GRFA shall request more than two
hundred fifty (250) square feet of gross residential floor area per dwelling unit nor
shall any application be made for additional GRFA until such time as all the
allowable GRFA has been constructed on the property.
1. Nontransferable To Demo/Rebuilt: Any building which has previously been
granted additional GRFA pursuant to this Section and is demo/rebuilt, shall be
rebuilt without the additional GRFA as previously approved.
J. Demo/Rebuilt Not Eligible: Any single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling which
is to be demo/rebuilt shall not be eligible for additional GRFA. '
4. Procedure
A. Application; Content: Application shall be made to the Department of Community
Development on forms provided.by the Department cf Communiry Development
and shall include:
1. A fee pursuant to the current schedule shall be required with the
application.
2. Information and plans as set forth and required by subsection 18.54.040C
of this Title.
3. A list of the n2mes and addresses and stamped envelopes of all the
~ adjaceni property owners and owners of dwelling units on the same lot as
the applicant. .
4. Any other applicable information required by the Department of Community
Development to satisfy the criteria outtined in this Section.
B. Hearing Set; Notice: Upon receipt of a completed application for additional GRFA,
the Planning and Environmental Commission shall set a date for a hearing in
accordance with Section 18.66.070 of this Title. Notice shall be given, and the
hearing shall be conducted in accordance with Sections 18.66.080 and 18.66.090
of this Title.
C. Compliance Determined: If the Department of Community Development staff
determines that the site for which the application was submitted is in compliance
with Town landscaping and site improvement standards, the applicant shall
proceed as follows:
1. Application for GRFA additions which involve no change to the exterior of
a structure shall be reviewed by the Department of Community
Development staff.
2. Applications for GRFA additions involving exterior changes to a building
11
t .
r '
J
shall be reviewed by the staff and the Planning and Environmental
Commission in accordance with the provisions of this Section.
D. Compliance Required: If the Department of Community Development staff
determines that the site for which additional GRFA is applied for pursuant to this
Section does not comply with minimum Town landscaping or site standards as
provided herein, the applicant will be required to bring the site into compliance
with such standards before any such temporary or permanent certificate of
occupancy will be issued for the additional GRFA added to the site. Before any
building permit is issued, the applicant shall submit appropriate plans and
materials indicating how the site will be brought into compliance with said Town
minimum standards, which plans and materials shall be reviewed by and
approved by the Community Development Department.
E. _ Building Permit: Upon receiving the necessary approvals pursuant to this Section,
the applicant shall proceed with the securing of a building permit prior to
• beginning the construction of additional GRFA.
5. Eligibility
In addition to ail other criteria set forth in this Section, any dwelling unit shaii be eligible
for additional gross residentiai fioor area pursuant to this Section that is in existence as of
November 30, 1995 or a completed Design Review Board application for the original
construction of a dweliing has been accepted by the Department of Community
Development by November 30, 1995.
Section 4
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it wouid have passed this ordinance, and each
part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardiess of the fact that any one
or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 5.
The Town Council hereby finds, determines and deciares th2t this ordinance is necessary and
proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 6.
' The amendment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shali
not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the
effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as
commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision
hereby shali not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repeaied or superseded uniess
expressly stated herein.
Section 7. 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 ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 15th day of July, 1997, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5th day of August, 1997, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipai Building, Vail, Colorado.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Attesi:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Cierk
12
i
~
~
a
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL this Sth
day of August, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Attest:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 13, Series o(1997 13
ORDINANCE NO. 14
SERIES OF 1997
AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE TOWN OF
VAIL GENERAL FUND, FACILITIES MAINTENANCE FL1ND, HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND,
AND REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FLTND, OF THE 1997 BUDGET AND THE FINANCIAL
PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO; AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES
OF SAID APPROPRIATIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN
REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 1997 which could not have been
reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No. 23,
Series of 1996, adopting the 1997 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and,
WHEREAS, the Town has received certain revenues not budgeted for previously; and,
WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are
available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwise reflected in the Budget,
in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and,
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make
certain supplemental appropriations as set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLORADO that:
1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town
Council hereby makes the following supplemental appropriations for the 1997 Budget and Financial
Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure of said appropriations as
follows:
FUND AMOUNT
General Fund $ 482,653
Facilities Maintenance Fund 28,489
Heavy Equipment Fund 32,314
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 1 109 200
$1,652,656
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 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 morg
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.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer sha11 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 15th day of July, 1997, and a public hearing shall be held on this
Ordinance on the Sth day of August, 1997, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail.
Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this Sth day of August, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
C:brinance97.14
. ,
. . , .
_
_ _ - - --.__.~~.._r-->---__-_:_.__ _
TOWN OF VAIL
SCHEDULE OF REQUIRED 1997 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
FUND ADDITIONAL `
DEPARTMENT , 1997 -
GENERALFUND EXPENDITURE OR PROJECT EXPENDITURES
:
Town Officials
Vaii Tomorrow 46,751
Eagle County RecreaGon Authoriry 4,750
VVF - Excellence in Education, Sports, or the Arts 5,000
56,501
AdminisVa6on
Computers & Monitors for Training Room 20.000
Communiry Development
GRFA Phase II 8,000
Design Guidelines 60,000
Environmental Health- Restaurant Ed 600
Environmental Health- Solid Waste 3,349
Environmental Health- Env Quality 649
Environmental Health- Gore Creek Habitat 3,054
75,652 _
Transportation
Salaries & OT for Additionai Service 150,000
Police
Studen[ Police Officer Program 8,500
Transfer Out
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund to Cover Deficit 172,000
_ Subtotal - General Fund 482,653
FACILITIES MAINTENANCE FUND
Council Chamber Upgrades 22,456
Garage Door Upgrades 6,033
Subtotal - Facilities Maintenance Fund 28,489
HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND
, Truck Equipment 32,314
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND
See Projects List (Page 7) 1,109,200
Total Supplemental Appropriation 1,652,656
SUPP7.XLS QE21 . 7/11/97
' ?i~\
4VAIL
TOWN ~
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
.
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager/--
DATE: July 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Town Manager's Report
TCI Update
At the Council Work Session last Tuesday you heard a presentation from Fred Lutz of TCI
concerning proposed changes to the TCI Franchise Agreement. As you will recall, TCI is proposing
eliminating the system upgrade from the current Franchise Agreement and providing enhanced
channel capacity through a digital compression system. This week I received a call from Fred Lutz
inviting the Council to tour the Nationa! Digital Center in Littleton, Colorado. Apparently this is the
headquarters where the digital signals are generated. If you are interested in touring this facility
please let me know and I will make arrangements with Fred to set this up.
1998 Budqet
As you will recall last year the Town, for the first time, prepared a bi-annual budget. This budget
was for the period 1997 and 1998. As we discussed at that time, the budget document is a plan
for the two year period. The actual appropriation of funds for the fiscal year occurs by ordinance.
Because of limitations in the Charter the Council last October adopted only the 1997 budget.
Therefore it will be necessary for you to adopt a budget for 1998 this fall.
Because most of the work for the 1998 budget was done last year, the effort to prepare the 1998
budget will be less significant than in previous years. The following is a tentative calendar for
appropriation adoption of the budget:
August 1 Revise 1997/98 revenue forecast
August 1 Revise 1998 spread sheet
August 15 Departments submit revisions to budget
August 19 Council determines 1998 capital priorities
August 29 Contribution requests due
September 2 Contribution requests in Council packet
September 9 Budget work shop with the Town Council
September 16 Determine contribution budget (work session)
Public budget hearing notice
October 21 1 st reading of the budget
November 4 2nd reading of the budget
RECYCLEDPAPER
.r
Pursuant to our long standing policy the schedule will provide for budget adoption prior to the
November Council elections. Please let me know if you have questions, or need additional
information or desire changes to this proposed schedule.
RWM/aw
u
1y
TOWN OF YAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 10, 1997
Contact: Vail Mayor Bob Armour Jacque Whitsitt, CAST
476-2837 (970) 927-2414
VAIL MAYOR NAMED PRESIDENT OF COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF SKI TOWNS
(Vail)--Vail Mayor Bob Armour has been elected president of the Colorado Association of Ski
Towns (CAST). Armour's election to a two-year term ending in June 1999 occurred during the
Colorado Municipal League/CAST annual meeting June 26 in Snowmass Village.
CAST was created in 1979 and serves to ensure sustainability of Colorado's resort
communities by supporting legislation that reinforces quality resort life and strengthens the ski
industry. This includes support of legislation that promotes transportation and housing
availability. The association also provides a forum for members to share and address the
common concerns of resort communities.
The organization includes representation from 23 ski towns in five counties: Eagle, Garfield,
Grand, Gunnison, La Plata, Mesa, Pitkin, San Miguel and Summit. As president, Armour's
duties include presiding over meetings and providing leadership and strategies on legislative
issues which are critical to resort towns. "I look forward to serving as president and enjoy
working with other elected officials from ski communities to solve problems and share
information," Armour said.
Also during the June 26 CAST meeting, Bob McLaurin, Vail town manager, was elected
secretary of the organization.
Armour has been mayor of the Town of Vail since 1995.
# # #
L~ RECYCLEDPAPER
17/97 MON 12:42 FA% 970 476 6499 Prudential-Vail ~J002
STATE OF COLORADO
D(ECUTIVE CHAMBERS ,oQ•
136 Stace Capicol ti
Denver, Colorado 80203-1792 "
Phate (303) 866-2471 * w
' iaa~ `
Roy Romer
July 2, 1997 Govemor
Anna Fitz
Vail Tomoirow
1455 B. Ridge Lane '
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Ame:
; Congratulations. Vail Tomorrow has been selected as a recipient of a Govemor's Smart
, Growth and Development Award. This year's. judgmg panel, comprised of planners,
govemment, and public and private interest representatives, has recognized qour project as
an award winner in the Regional Award category.
The awards program gives special recognition to outstanding planning efforts azound
Colorado. This year's nommations were based on innovative visions, creative ideas and
unique projects that promote smart growth and development in order to ke.ep Colorado a
unique and special place to live.
You will receive your awazd at the Govemor's Smart Crowth and Developmeat Awards
Lunchean to be held from 12 to 2 p.m. on Saturday, July 19, at the Govemor's Mansion, 400
E. Eaghth Ave., Denver. Pazlang is available in the lot at the corner of Eighth Ave. and Logan
Street. Tfie entrance for the luncheon is the north gate on Eighth Ave.
Although the awards luncheon is a casual barbeque, it is by invitation only: To R S.V.P. for , you and your guest, please eall (303) 866-2771 or (303) $66-3296 by Tuesday, July 8. There
is no charge for the luncheon.
lbis year's nominations will be published in the "Smart Growth and Development Awards
Catalog," wluch can be used as a resource for those interested in smart growth and
development. This cataiog will be available at the awards luncheon.
Agaim, thazik you for your commitme.nt to the smart growth process. I look forwazd to seeing.
you on July 19.
Sincer
Roy Rome
Govemor
t
~
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
MEDIA ADVISORY
July 9, 1997 -
Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115 '
Community Information Office
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR JULY 8
Council members present: Armour, Foley, Ford, Jewett, Johnston, Kurz, Navas
--Parking Program Overview
Public Works/Transportation Director Larry Grafel presented an overview of the town's parking
program as the first step in a series of discussions that will be used to develop a parking strategy
and rate structure for the 1997-98 ski season. Grafel said the Town of Vail-Vail Associates
Community Task Force would be called upon to work with him in developing a recommendation
to be forwarded to the Council. He said the Task Force will be challenged to get to the "hearY" of
the parking issue by asking the hard questions: What are the objectives? How are the
objectives to be measured? What functiun should the parking structures serve in regard to
employees? Who should be a primary user of the structures (guests, locals, employees)?
Grafel said he'll return next week to review parking figures and other statistics in more detail to
assess the "Park Free After 3" program; gold and blue passes; debit cards; Colorado and Vail
Valley cards; and financial and operational impacts. Yesterday, Rod Slifer, representing the Vail
Village Commercial Property Owner's Association, thanked the Council for agreeing to
experiment with the "Park Free After 3" program. Although difficult to quantify, Slifer said a sales
tax gain of $ 136,000 for the ski season was a positive indicator. Jim Lamont of the East Village
- Homeowners Association asked that residential property owners have a voice in the
discussions. To receive a copy of Grafel's presentation packet, contact the Community
Information Office at 479-2115.
--Update by TCI on System Rebuild
After hearing a request by TCI Cablevision to consider a change to the franchise agreement to
allow digital compression technology in place of a fiber optic system rebuild, the Council agreed
to hire an independent consultant--proposed to be at TCI's expense--to advise the town of its
options. During yesterday's presentation Fred Lutz, TCI's regional manager, said the digital
technology would add 42 channels to the existing cable line-up, offering customers a choice to
add the digital channels or stay with the existing system. Several councilmembers wondered if
the digital technology proposal--in lieu of a fiber optic system rebuild--would improve the
system's overall reception. Lutz said TCI proposed to rebuild part of the system which would
improve the existing signal. After probing TCI's capital investment needed for each option, (less
than $500,000 for the digital system and between $3 and $5 million for the system rebuild),
Mayor Bob Armour said it appeared TCI was trying to cut costs at Vail's expense. The current
franchise agreement, a 15-year contract signed in January 1995, calls for completion of the
(more)
RECYCLEDPAPER
c
.
7
TOV Highlights/Add 1
system rebuild by January 1998 with significant penalties for default. For more information,
contact Town Attorney Tom Moorhead at 479-2107.
--Seasonal Housing for TOV Bus Drivers
Mike rose, transit manager for the Town of Vail, discussed preliminary plans for securing master
lease housing for seasonal employees in conjunction with the Eagle County School District, and
perhaps, the Town of Avon. Acknowledging the town's Public Works housing will probably not
be available until late winter of 1998 and in order to secure housing for an important segment of
. the town's seasonal work force, he said the town is working with other entities to explore ihis
option. The Board of Education will hear the concept later today. Rose said an
intergovernmental agreement would be used to solidify the details of the arrangement should
other entities be brought on board. By combining efforts with other agencies, Rose said full-time
use of any potential housing spaces will be maximized. For more information, contact Rose at
479-2349.
--Executive Session Regarding Council Communications with FDIC
Following an executive session, the Council voted 6-0-1 (Jewett abstaining) to send a letter from
Mayor Bob Armour to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) outlining the Council's
"disassociation" with a letter sent previously by Councilman Michael Jewett. In that letter,
Jewett, acting on behalf of the "citizens of Vail," asked the FDIC to hold a hearing on the process
used by City Market to lease space to Alpine Bank for a branch facility. Jewett has alleged
improprieties by a former councilmember in the matter. During yesterday's open session,
Councilmembers admonished Jewett for using his Council position to advance a personal
agenda without consulting the other Council members first. They said the letter, written on Town
of Vail letterhead, was misleading because it implies JewetYs request is shared by the entire
Council.
--Information Update
Council members learned of a series of discussions hosted by Johnson and Wales, the culinary
school, regarding future programming needs and the school's presence in the community.
Other announcements: expect another bustling weekend with the Grundig cross-country
mountain bike race, several bike rides coming through town and the annual Vail Valley Arts
Festival. The events are expected to draw thousands of visitors to town. Also, the Colorado
Association of Ski Towns meeting will be in Steamboat Springs, July 31 and August 1...the Vail
Fire Department won the President's Award for its float in the Fourth of July parade.
--Council Reports
Paul Johnston, who represents the Council on the Eagle County Recreational Authority (Berry
Creek Fifth), gave an update on the board's most recent meeting. He said Vail Associates has
been invited to submit a proposal regarding the potential purchase of approximately 14 acres
set-aside in the property's sketch plan for locals housing. Also, Johnston said talks are
continuing regarding long-term operations of the equestrian center. The group's next meeting is
scheduled for Aug. 7.
Kevin Foley reported that the Vail Recreation District had met earlier in the day. Also, Foley
said, Eagle County representatives are making a presentation this week for a GO CO legacy
grant associated with the railroad abandonment line from Gypsum to Leadville.
(more)
,
TOV Highlights/Add 2
Sybill Navas distributed a request by the Vait Viltage Merchants Association to help cover a
deficit from last year's Turn it Up! custorner focus training. The Council then voted 7-0 to cover
the $596 deficit from council contingency funds.
Navas had indicated at a previous meeting that she felt the streambank issue deserved more
attention from the town.
--Other
Council members received an update on efforts to mitigate the noise of exhaust fans at Vail
Commons.
With more crowds expected this weekerid, Kevin Foley suggested being proactive in getting
cones set out to assist with parking and traffic management.
Bob Armour and Ludwig Kurz complimented police officers and code enforcement officers for
the customer-friendly way in which parking issues and crowd control issues were handled over
the holiday weekend.
Describing the newly-completed Dowd Junction recreational path as "awesome," Kevin Foley
thanked the council for having the foresight to help fund the improvement. Foley also said he
was taking pledges for the Courage Classic, a bike tour benefit.
Paul Johnston presented what he described as his most serious pitch to ban loading and '
delivery in Vail Village and Lionshead by 18-wheeler trucks. Johnston suggested soliciting
comments to a draft ordinance that would ban such vehicles in the commercial core areas. In
response, Town Manager Bob McLaurin said the issue is part of a targer study on loading and
delivery thaYs now underway. McLaurin said the Council may also wish to consider dismount
zones for bicycles and skateboards during peak summer periods, such as the Fourth of July
holiday.
UPCOMING DISCUSSION TOPICS
July 15 Work Session
PEC Review
Housing Action Items
AIPP, Jesus Morales Updated Design(s) Parking Discussion
July 15 Evening Meeting
Seibert Circle Design Approval
First Reading, Ordinance 13, GRFA Revision
July 22 Work Session
DRB Review
Executive Session, Personnel Matters
TCI System Rebuild Update
August 5 Work Session ~
PEC Review f
August 5 Evening Meeting
Second Reading, Ordinance 13, GRFA Revision
. Presentation by TCI re: System Upgrade
Vail Tomorrow Presentation
# # #
- - - -~~-~I"4.a.u~" ' . _
_
D 07/09/97
TOWN OF VAIL
COUNCIL CONTINGENCY
Account # 01-0100-52857
1997 "
Total
. Contingency •
Funds
Original Budget Amount $50,000 .
Rollforward from prior year - Excellence in Education, Sports, or the Arts $5,000
Amended Budget Amount , $55,000 .
Uses:
VVF - Excellence in Educarion, Sports, or the Arts $5,000 paid 2/19/97 •
VRI - Spring Meltdown Program $2,500 paid 3/5/97
Youth award airfare to Australia $2,572 paid 5/8/97
Youth award spending money for Australia $1,000 paid 5/16/97
_ TOV/VA Task Force $6,000 Estimated @ $500/month "Free after 3" parking program $1,927 JE in June
Vail & Eagle Valley Mountain Bike Maps $833 paid 6/11/97
Vail Tomorrow - encourage lodge properties to upgrade $1,000 BJE in June
Fund "Tum It Up! Vail '96" deficit $596
Total Amount Used 21,428
Total Amount Left $33,572
COUCON97.WK3
. ~ . .
C.nrnmunily IlavPlnpmPnt t7epartment ' Fagle County flulld g
(970) 12a-8730 P.U. Oox 179
Fax: (970) :i2H-71N.5 . • . 500 Hraadway 'fDO: (970) :p..p g7p7 • . F'agln„ CabridoalG31~ 179
FAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO !
paW Wednesday, July 9, 1997 , -
To: Town of Gypsum Council and Manager Jeff Shro11 ~
7own of Eagle Board of Trustees and Manager Willy Powell
Town of Avon Councii and Manager Bill EfCing
Town of Vail Councii and Manager eob Maclaurin
Town of Mintum Council and Manager Dick Dangler
Towm of Red Cliff Cauncil
From: Jim Hartmann, Eagle County Administrator
$E: GOVERNOR'S SMARIC GROWTH AWA FOR
THE EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN
Congratulations - together we have vvon the Govemor's Smart Growtli Award. Eaglei
County submitted the Eagle River Watershed Pfan and based on our partnership with
you, we were selected as an award winner in the Public Regional Partnerships ~
category. Eagle County and each of the Trnms wifl receive an award certficate to
honor our cooperative effort. Certainly the topic of protecting the integrity of our watershed resoutces is of interest tn
us all. We hope that we will all continue to work cooperatively tdwards pr.eserving and
enhancing the very important natural resources and community qualities associated
with the watershed_ Thank you far your irrterest and the commitment of your staff's time
for the ptan development, and most importantly, it's continued implementation. ;
We will deliver your award certificate to you as soon as we receive it from the
Govemor's office. .
i /i #!L2I96LiQ0E +-1uamdajanaQA1lunmm0j: BT:Si : L6-6 -L :AS DpS
JUL 09 '97 08:50AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.1
BEAL E9rnre
' rM. R:,be r..o?..
FA4SIMILE
- , - -
, Y
TO:
u
COlVYPANY: ' •
FAX
. FROM: /I v
- ~
bATE• TIME•
T T
I Total of Pages Includxng Cover Page:
1Vless2ge'
~
-
I
.07
1. ~ .
'L'his fpcaimile tr4nami9sioo mntaias doeumenta bdonglng to the scnder tivhtch may be eonfidesitial snd legally privileged.
Yn(ormation ia intended paly for whom thia h•anemiasion waa ecnt ae indicated ebave. Ityou arc not the intendcd reeipient,
nny discloaure, copyin.0, diatri6ution or aetlon taken in relianee an contenta ia strfctly prohibited. If you have reeeived chis trsnamiaaion ia error, plexae notily ua by telep6one immediately po we mny arrenge to retrieve fhia tranRmiss.loti at ao cost to
you. Tha41c you.
~ BRIDGE STREET
DxroGP STxeer A'r V Vru.ncs Omcs • 23O BRIDGE S7R6ET,''?nrt, COWRAnp 81657 • TLPLEpNOrvE: (970) 47I6-2422 • FAx: (970) 47ri-2658
W V ~ s~Knr4 wte . .
,
I
JUL 09 '97 08:51AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.2
Owner List for VAil Commorcial Property Owners
2J21197
Chrlsq? Yiill
' 311 Hridge Steeet
Vsil, CO 81657
G'harICS H. Rosopquist OOOSb
Pp Box 686 Cieeissde Gondo
Va CO 81658 Commaial Unit
Marsad Rosw4u18t 00056
PO Hox 686 cradaidc Condv
. Vail, CO 81658 D Commcrcial Unit
psM T'eng
'hevina, L.P. 00058
600 Sth Avo,, 8th.Floor Cms$raxds of Vail Condo
Ncw Yoc1c, NY 10020
Colorado 51d Setvice. Inc. 00077
PO Box 2796 Gp]den peak gause Cpndo
_ V~il; CO 81658 101 Conunercia! Unit
~
00077
7ohn & Kathlocn Jcan KeomtnCr Goldeo Pealc Hnuee Condo
474 Gore CmeTc Dr ZZO Commercisl Unit
VA c0 81657
cJo Roa Rilc9 00077
' Rilry Vail Cotp GoWen Poek House Condo
228 Hridge Street 100 C,onnnerdal Uaii
vait, co 81657
Itobcrt T. & Uiaae J. Y.azier 00100 PQ Hox 62'~ Lszaer Arcadc condo j
V8i1, CO 8I658 1 I
Jaae and Jvcl Gros !
Colorado Ski Scrvica Inc. ~
400 Bridgc Stroct Lodw
• Vail, CO $1657 , Phil Hovastan
182 E'ione Creek Drive, LLC 00111 '
P(~ Box 3149 I,pdge Apt Cando j
' V~il, CO 81658 lgp
. . Ms. Lily Qarfidd I
Vail. Li.C 00111
'
0036 Roaring Fork Dr Lodge Apt Coado ~
Aapeu, CO 81611 156
i
, . JUL 09 '97 08:51AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.3 s
JohM G. & Pauice N. Cogswell 00111
794 Potsto PaDCh Dt Lodge Apt Condo
VW, CO 81657 166
. Kathleen Denson I.vdgo Apt Condo
PO Hox 2120 142
Esgle,- CO 81631
Carlos V. dt EtvitA M Daminguez 00111
652 TimbeR+c.~t Circ{e I,pdge ppt (;pydp
I.ewisville, TX 75067 154
• Jobn Vclponi
LQdgc Ptopcrpcs, Inc. 00111
174 E. (;ome Crqeic pr L,pdge Apt Condo
. VA CO 81657 132
Paui GouLelf, Rnnaie Lipton
Loclge 5hop Uuit #164, LLC 00111
196 East " Creelc Dr Lodge Apt Condo
57 16
2
Vail. CO ;OIf
M~out~iPropetties. LLC I,cdgc Apt Comtdc
P0 Box 160
Avoo, CO 1620
.
~ w
Pitw Enteqprtses, Inc. 00111
172 East Gore Ce+eelc Dr L,odga Apt Condo
Vail, CO 81657 146
James D& Jeadnine F. Robbina 00111
.184 Fagt Gone Ct+eelc ih La1ge Apt Condo
vau, co s1657 152
c/o sarc cuomo 00126
.HB&C pannerddP Mill Creek Court Condo
'PO Hmx 1585 208 Commerciai Urdt
Vail, 00 81658
• ,
RobcK and Aarba[a Deluca 00126
PO Box 1471 Mi1l Cteelc Couzt Condo
Vail. QO 81658 105 C,omaurcaal Unit ,
CrunWer & Cecilo M Hafler 00126
446 Foccg Road Mill Creek Couri Cando
. Vail, Qp 81657 206 Commercial Uait
Ann B. Loudhan 00126
• PO Box 4966 Mill Cxcelc Court Condo
Va7, Co 81658 110 Commercial Unit i
i
I ~
I I I
i
JUL 09 '97 08:51AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.4
Thomas Freisen, wayne n ward oolzb
. Jerry Patman Mill Cieek Caurt Condo
302 Goze C:eek Dr 208H 108A Coromercial Unit
Rod Rocics, Inc. 00126
' 302 E. Gore Ccpek Dr Mill Creek Ccurt Condo
• Vail, co a16s7 lal commercial unic
William C dt Naiu.y J Andersoe 00129
3545 Huliis Roai MounWn Hms Condo
Elma, NY 14059 1
. Tmvw Btadway
, Hradway finterprises, Inc. 00129
Hpx 369 MpjaWn HaU,q CpndO
, vai], Co.816ss lol Commerasl unic
Barry W. Fomcuc
' 286 Bridge 9trvet, Inc. 00198
701 Smitheast 6th Ave . Vail VillaBe Filing 1
. Deltay HeaCh, FL 33483 A dt B Blk SA
PCpi Ciramsbammcr 00198 '
. . Gasthof Gramsharnmer, Inc. Vail YttlagC Filing 1 I
231 East Gore Cre.ek A psrt of Blk 5-H
Vail, CO 81657
HKC Partnership 00198
1183 Cabin Cit+clc Dr Vaii ViUsge Filitig 1
Vai1, CO 91657 C PC[,IN P314 (Commetcial) Bllc
Fred Mbberd, Jr. 00198
PQ Box 7474 Vail Villm Filing 1
Jpdcspn, WY 83001 K Pgt of 81k S-E I
M/M Hob Fritch
'5itnnark st Veil, inc. 001948
Vsil, CO 81~ 657 ~ A part pf Blk 5•B ;
Johennes F er
$onncoalp 'cs~ Inc. 00198
. 20 Yail Vail Village Filiag 1
• Vai1, CO 81657
Margnxta H. Paifcs vait Vium Filing 1
P(3 Hox 1440 T.ot C, Hlk 2 ,
. F.aglc. CO ~1631 • Lco Brandcss, Marlc Cadmus 00255
. Box 1156 , 13[idge Sueet
H*hland I~'ark, IL 60035 4 Comm=ial tlnit
I
V
JUL 09 197 08:52AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.5
ocro stmlc Vau vuap F;ung 1
2605 Davoe'IYail C& D Part oiBid $-A
. Vail, CO 81657
Ronald y& Paula K Byrne 00255
285 Hridge Strm Hridge St=oct
VA CQ 81657 9 Commetcial Unit
]ames-E. Cotter 00253
PO Box 831 BridgO SUM
Mintiml, CO 81645 5 Commcrcial Unit
Robert E 8C Barbara G Nluca OOZSS
Hox 1471 Bridge Street
Vai1, CO $1659 6 Commercial Unit
i
Edizione Realty Co:p 00255
Box 610 Hridge Street
Bodfprd Hills, NY 10507 2-A Resub of Unit 2
• Hiqis Akiu I
HiUis ciSnowauass, Inc. OOZSS
170 E. Gone Creelt Dr Bridge 3bnet
Vsill CO BldSy 7 Cammercial Unit
Maialahd Compsny, Inc. 00255
2911 DoW AveEwe Bridge SVeet
Tustin. CA 92680 1 Comiuercial Unit
00307
Charles Hsovm Rucksack Condo
1780 so a'c,tlaino strcct, Stc 106 C-1
Denvc,r, 00 80222
Aclam AM. AndY Dals'.
Chris Bymsn, Dave Caebin
Yail Associabes, Inc. 00430
71C Yail Caporation One Vail Plaoe Conda
' P4 Box 7 M-1
Vail. CQ 81658
Pepi I.angc=r
Gm Vallcy Reataurat?t Assoc, Inc. 00453
400 E. Me4dow Dr 'Iymlean Condo
Vail. CO $ 657 9 Comms,rcial Unit
Lendmarh Commercial Dovclopmcat Co 00506
1780 So Betlaire, Ste. 106 Rcd Lioa Inn Condo
Denver, 80222 C-1
Watdir P
V.Ni Cqtporatilm
100 E. Meadaw Dcive
Vai1. C4 81657
i
JUL 09 '97 08:52AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.6 3oc StstfCr 00557
Vaii VillW Ina, Inc. Vlllage Inn Plug
100 F.ast Meadow Dr 601
Vgil, CA 81657
. Vail Athletic Club 00619
3WT 1987 Vail Ltd Pattnerchip dba Vail pub Condo
352 E-Meadow Dr 1(Cammercial)
Vail, CO 81657
, Ray Duncon
T1!c cbspwltw GOor3' 00626
1777 So Hanieon St. Fenthouao 1 Vail Village P1aza Cando
Dvaver, ('A 80210 g
Edaa N& Clmm W Frickc 00626
PO Box 370 , Vail VillW Plaza Condos
Vail, Cp 81658 68 Resub Lots 6 at 7 2nd Amea
. • Bill utd Sally Hanlon
. Fraatpn Family paraneeanip 00626 385 Gore Czer]c br Vail Village PlaTa Condo
V i il, (O 81657 ?A
Luc aad Eliza6eth A. Meyer 00626
PQ Bax 176 Vail Villagc Plaza Gondo
Vjil; CO 81658 6A Rqsub Lpt 6 8t 7 2ad Amen
Clprk w=zm
i
' Tuttle Creek V'tl8p, Ltd 00699
(fne PIaTa Lodg,e Associatea Plaza Lodgc
38778-Oak Iawn Avo C-1
Dallas. '13C 75219-4471 I
Walae Maddeq Ir. '
. PO Hbx 15288
Aaiarillq TX 79105-5288
, Hermenn 5taufer 00705
POBox 5000 ' Bc11'Tower Cotido
Vsil, CO 81658-5000
' Tle Vail 44 Copoistiou 00736
, 44i W Meadaw Dr, Unit 44 Meadow Vail Plaoe Condo
vm
L co'111657 ia officeFOZiiso
Paal and satly 7otmscoa
. ud. Chrigiauia 00932
336 Hanson Itanch Rd Christiania at Vaii Condo
VIIL C4.SI657 1
i
~
' 'JUL 09 '97 08:52AM S.S.F. V.A. LLC P.7
' I.eo Pslmos Gatvwo PlM
Vail Gate,wuy Plaza, LW
2735 lris Avenue. Ste A
Boulder, CO 80304
Cm$e Knox
2918tidge Strcet
Vail, CO 81657
, Rod dt Bc.th $lifer
230 Hridp SUact
Vaik CO 81657
Roger Belilei lst Hanlt
17 Vail Roed
Vai1, 60 81657
• Doug.SurlcCl Vai! Amoco St9rioa
' 93'4 Sb. F=tBge Road
, V~il, CO 81637
WI , Hrugget~an HolItu?
13 Vail Rpad
v 't, co si6s7
I
. I
•I
I i
~
. \
u
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100 .
FAX 970-479-2157
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 8, 1997
Contact: Bob McLaurin, 479-2105
Vail Town Manager
APPLICANTS SOUGHT TO SERVE ON COMMUNITY TASK FORCE TO IMPROVE
TOWN-WIDE COORDINATION OF SKI SEASON PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
(Vail)--The Town of Vail is seeking applicants to fill two at-large positions on the Community
Task Force. The application process, now underway for all seats on the Task Force, is intended
to maximize the group's effectiveness through renewed commitment and representation.
The Task Force was established in 1995 as a provision of the town's managed growth
agreement with Vail Associates, Inc. That agreement provides mechanisms for addressing
Vail's winter visitation patterns, the town and mountain's circulation flows, parking issues,
infrastructure predictions, green space and growth.
As such, the Task Force is charged with creating mechanisms to better utilize existing
resources during non-peak periods and to seek ways to coordinate special events and other
activities. The purpose of the non-peak ernphasis is to strengthen the community's economy
while reducing its dependency on peak days.
Applications for the community at-large piositions are due by 5 p.m. Thursday, July 31. From
there, applicants will be interviewed by the Vail Town Council at the August 5 afternoon work
session followed by appointment at the evening meeting on the same day.
Applicants must be residents of the Town of Vail and available to attend monthly meetings on
Thursdays. Responsibilities include strategizing and making recommendations to
(more)
RECYCLED PAPER
y
.
Community Task Force/Add 1
implementing organizations and actively communicating Task Force strategies.
Persons interested in serving on the Community Task Force should submit letters of interest
to: Vail Town Clerk Holly McCutcheon, 75 S. Frontage Rd., Vail, Co., 81657. Letters should
include availability to serve and an indication of interests, strengths and perspectives the
applicant would contribute to the Task Force.
In addition to the two at-large seats, five other Task Force seats--one each--representing the
Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau, lodging, Vail Village Merchants Association,
Lionshead Merchants Association and Vail Valley Restaurant Association, are undergoing
renewed appointments by the corresponding boards.
Also, the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc., have agreed to expand the Task Force by
adding representatives from other organizations in Vail who can add to the overall coordination.
Those seats include representation from the Vail Village Commercial Property Owners
Association; Chamber of Commerce; Vail Valley Foundation; and Vail Recreation District.
• When the restructuring is complete by mid-summer, representation on the Task Force
will be as follows:
Town of Vail Bob Armour, Rob Ford, Bob McLaurin
Vail Associates, Inc. Chris Ryman, Chris Jarnot ,
WVTCB To be appointed by the organization's chair/board Lodging -To be app.ointed by the organization's chair/board
Village Merchants To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Lionshead Merchants To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Restaurant Assn. To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Community at Large (2) To be appointed by the Vail Town Council
Chamber of Commerce' To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Vail Recreation District` To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Vail Valley Foundation` To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
Village Commercial Property
Owners Assn.` To be appointed by the organization's chair/board
* Denotes new representation for 1997
Vail Mayor Bob Armour says the role of the Task Force will become increasingly important in
(more)
~
.
Community Task Force/Add 2
the future as it seeks to maintain Vail's status as a world-class resort while preserving the quality
of life that Vail offers to the community.
Chris Ryman, senior vice president of mountain operations for Vail Associates and chief
operating officer of Vail Mountain, says the Task Force has already produced some very positive
results, including serving as a catalyst in creation of the "Peak Week Perks" winter management program; the Community Host program; the Town Crier weekly events fax broadcast system;
Turn it Up! `96 frontline guest service training; and the Vail Tomorrow strategic action
collaborative. "We're excited about working together with the community and its organizations
for the coming season," Ryman said. "It is our goal with the Task Force to maximize the use of
the existing town and mountain infrastructure while keeping a balance with the quality of the Vail
experience for residents and guests so that everyone benefits."
Strategic planning and implementation during peak periods will be coordinated by the staff and
leadership of the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, in partnership with the community, as
articulated in the 1995 managed growth ayreement.
For more information, contact Bob McLaurin, Vail town manager, at 479-2105.
# # #
u
1y
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road Office of the Mayor
Vail, Colorado 81657
303-479-2100
FAX 303-479-2157
July 10, 1997
Mr. Keith W. Seibold, Regional Director
Mr. Alan Searsy, Case Manager
Regional Office
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Division of Supervision
1910 Pacific Avenue, Suite 1900
Dallas; TX 75201
Re: Alpine Bank Application to Establish a Branch in City Market, Vail, Colorado
Gentlemen:
I am writing on behalf of the Vail Town Council to clarify any potential misunderstanding created
by Michael Jewett. While Mr. Jewett is an elected member of the Vail Town Council, there was no
Council action that authorized his correspondence.
Mr. Jewett's requests and representations are personal and do not reflect an official position of the
Town of Vail or its Town Council. In fact, there was no discussion of any of those issues by this
Town Council. Mr. Jewett's actions were iindependent and without the knowledge of other Council
members.
Pursuant to the Town's Charter, Council acts by way of ordinances, resolutions or motions. There
was no such Council action taken in regard to any issues raised by Mr. Jewett or that authorized the
letters that he sent to the FDIC.
If additional information would be helpful, please feei free to contact me directly. Also available
for your assistance are Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager at 970/479-2105 and R. Thomas
Moorhead, Town Attorney at 970/479-2107.
Sincer
Robert . Armour
Mayor
RWA/aw
xc: Ms. L. Kristine Gardner
Mr. Rodney Slifer
Vail Town Council
~v RECEi V ED JUL
United States Forest " - White River Holy Cross Ranger District .
Department of Service National 24741'T US HWY 24, P.O. BOX 190
Agricuiture Forest MINTURN, COLORADO 81645
(970) 827-5715 FAX 827-9343
Reply to: 2810 .
Date: July 10, 1997
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Bob:
Thank you for your comments about the proposed mining in East Vail. The 1872 Mining Law applies
- to most National Forest System lands, and confers a right to any miner to enter public lands to search
for minerals. The Forest Service is responsible for managing the ground surface of the mining claims, and working with miners to minimize environmental impacts to the surface resources, under the
regulations set forth at 36 CFR 36.228, Subpart A, Locatable Minerals. Any person proposing to conduct operations which might cause disturbance of the surface resources
is required to first submit a Notice of Inteint or Plan of Operations to the District Ranger. We have not
received either of these documents from the Rock Hard Mining Company to date. .
We will add your name to the mailing list of people who are interested in this project. If you have any
further questions, please contact Kathy Hardy at (970) 827-5715.
Sincerely,
LIAM A. WOOD
. District Ranger
Caring for the Land and Serving the People
R~
a e • firm facS ~Internal upheav
TCl fr. om Page 1G al
During TCPs e$plosive growth our com i6 ~
` ;ment affairs. Thomson's military My rule is: you don't era, Clouston, Thornson and other all toIn paAY~ said'~ibmson. '~It's
cand legal training served }llm Well top TCI officials orbited around hese dea sl a~e t~t's what
:in deflecting the flak that poured in bra about vlctories Malone,
;from the government, the press an the company's master-
you don't b1tC~2 mind for the past 25 years. D~'ing his time aj'TCI, Thomson
•and the public as TCI became one But Malone broke up that con- t°°k his cues from the mercurial
;of the most powerful, feared and about defeats. ' stellation when he took over as Malone, who prefers deal making
:sometimes troubled media compa- chairman and stepped down as and guarding his privacy to play-
;nies in the world. president to bring on Hindery, ge 1°g the public relations game.
'-Some of the damage was self-in- - Bob Thomson, dE3 artin a 1ittle more dif-
flicted. A TCI memo that encour- TCI vice president
aged company managers p 9 had headed his own cable compan
u t of y That ficult to m launch akes a it strategy designed
government affairs and impressed Malone .during
~ to blame years of j o i n t d e a l s w i t h T C I, t o h u m a n i z e h i m or prevent him
c s o m e r price hikes on "~re-regu- i February came as from being demonized," said
lation and the government" ap- for Clinton's speech. The eve:nt bol- debt unmana able in e
: pcared in The Washington Post on stered Hindery's make-over ~~f TCI heIwarpathd ndovoca]lmplode, its Thomson. "It makes it a little bit
; the same da ~ stors on harder. By the same time, I really
y in 1993 that Malone as a good corporate citizen. ustomers 'WOUIdn't have it any other way giv-
, testified before Congress. The next in revolt over price hikes and pro- 9 ality of John's leader-
year, Malone joked that the Feder- Six days later, Thomsori was gram changes. en the u
al Communications Commission gone. ship.'°
chairman, Thomson and Hindery both sa > An Internet site appeared titled, Thomson spoke by phone with
shot.
Reed Hundt, should be that the parting was cordial. In entCI = Totally Cheap & Indiffer- Malone, on vacation in Maine, to
~ Thomson was TCI's oint man fact, Thomson's job as chief tell him that he was leaving the
' durin p spokesman had already been ~!aken people ~~~'~'hen I chased our started 10 trucks years agothe, company by mutual agreement
g the company's chaotic rise over b,y Lela Cocoros, a fo:rmer
to power, knocking heads with mu- down With Hindery. Malone asked him
nicipalities to maintain franchise t Cbecome sen or vice- res denteo~ sti•eet to get cable," Thomson re- What he would do.
agreements, while battlin the en- ~alled. "I haven't the foggiest idea,"
trenched broadcasting, movie and communications. p Now some of them are chasing Thomson told him.
. tele hone "Leo's leading the char e," said TCI to get it pulled out. The sub- A month ago, with rumors rife
P company lobbies in g scriber losses that TCI faces are a
Washington,. Thomson on his last day at TCI, small percent of its total base and that Thomson would depart, two
"Mv rule is: vou don't brag about hisuoff cen a tin y,foblack otballoin1 his cable industry trade reporters con-
victories and you don't bitch about • right hand. "And he's going to suc- t~e price hikes have actuall im-
Y curred that TCI would never get
defeats," said Thomson. "We've ceed. Period. He's a whirlin der_ proved cash flow. But the defec- rid of Thomson because, as one of
tions, particularly of high-paying them said, "He knows where too
had our shares of successes." g customers to satellite-TV services,
Given TCI's skirmishes and Ma- vish." many bodies are buried."
are owedrto plug the drainndery has
lone's own ]ibertarian views, it is Cioustonhto say good-bye Brendan ~
striking that President Clinton ~'hen told this on his last day at
chose TCI's T4 Clouston headed TCI's vast ca.ble TCI, Thomson laughed loudly and
center as a back- operations and appeared to be the Good marks on Wall Street ~s face flushed but he gave no re-
drop for an economic speech to parent com an s Hindery's actions to soften the SPonse - a good soldier to the end.
kick off the recent summit o[ . p y'President•in- company's public image, trim its
world leaders in Denver. Waiting prior to TCI's poor perfor- debt and create partnerships with
mance last year and Hindery's ar- other cable companies have re-
The June 19 appearance was a rival. Now Clouston is an executiive ceived good marks on Wall Stree
coup for TCI, which had contribut- vice president.
F'd $350,000 to the summit host
Thomson It is too early to tell how the shak e- ~
put an ar•m up is playing with customers.
committee and lent its space-age aro nd Clouston's shoulders and is no less than changing the
I
It
white satellite dishes as scenery told him, "You owe me a beer." economic and operating model of ~
i
~
.
_t^~ :.t^• . ' . .
71
Cinp Yaur ButYbsel~(',. . . . .
n BUSINESS
ay; July 6. 1997 SECTION G
Tt?E DErnit Pc
~ • ~ ~ TCI
. urmol s lrs insl eCompan
y
- says it's
back
to basics
By Stephen Keating
oe- vost eus,ness wdfe,
B etore President Clinton
spoke June 19 in the blis-
' tering heat outside of .
TCI's National Digital ~yA
Television Center in Littleton, ~x'
Bob Thomson rose from a front-
row sea[ to get his fellow TCI '
executives some icrcold bo[tled water from a cardboard bos.
That was not unusual. Thom- son had carried [heir warer tor
years as TCI's chiet lobbvist,
spokesman and member of CEO
John Malone's mner circle.
Hut no more. Thomson de-
parted last weeA, joining a '
string of TCI officials who have •
leFt the natiods largest cable- i
TV company m recen[ mon[hs. i
Clintods speech cited TCI's I
satellite cencer as representing
Americas world leadership in rneoenYerposfI LyouWw 'i
entertainment and communica- Bob Thomson, at right in an April press canference, is one of a stnng oT TCI executives whose departures signel turbulent limes.
Yet. within Tele-Communiea- and bilhons of dollars in debt. m five months dubbed by one in- Barbara :Nowrc. senior vice- Thamson served as a U.S. Acmy
tions Inc. is a world ot upheaval. Partnerships wrth other compa- dustrp analcst as "the Clinton ot president ot customer satisfac- infantry lieutenant in Vietnam.
with Thomson and others the ca- nies, cable° [or his in[ellect, quick tion. and Camille Javne. head of He received ttis law degree from
sualties.
In December. TCI cu[ 2.500 The turnabout is remarkable. moves and smooth public rela- cocporate marketinF. Georgetown liniversity in 1972,
jobs. Its founder and chairman. TCI is not only, one o( Culors- Iwns. And now Thumson. whose Korked as a Congressional liai-
8ob Magness. died in 1'ovember. do's largest companies. but once On his first dav on the joh. gruf[ and calcWating manner son for President Jimmy Cartet.
In the past year. TCI has raised µ'as a selt-prodaimed enginecr a'ith Thomson at ~ttis side. Him captured the spirit of TCI's rum then as a lawyer for Moore Mc-
rates while facing compe[ition of the nation's information su- derc apoiogized m its customers and-gun growth years when it Cormick Resources in Connecti-
trom satellite TP. losing more Perhighway. for the perception that TCI and tripled in size, piled on subscrib- cut.
than 200.000 cable-TV subscrib Nou'. with ambi[ions.blun[ed the cable industry were arro- ers. did deals aith Ted Turner
ers and almost two million sub- by overspending and overreach- Bant. and Rupert Murdoch and stitt- Married at age 38 and eager
.
scriptions tor optional channels ing, i[ is going back to basic.<. °We'll do a better job." said armed critics to move his wife. Anita Sanborn,
and their two young sons back
_ like Home kox Oftice. • - And Bob.Thomson doesnY fit Hinder;c. '7 promise 7ou." °Get used to us acting like a west. Thomson joined TCl in
. To narrou• us business and fo- in anymore. Soun gone from TCI were Barv broken-ficld runcer.° Thomson 1987 as vice president o( govern-
cus on customer service. TCI is The new face of TCI 6elungs n* 1larshall, chiet operating ub once said. -
shiftinR [our million suhscriAers. to i.a., ui.,na.., ilz .,...o;,y- of. ficcr of TCl's cable compan}': A native o! N'a.ehinptnn state. PieaseseeTClon3G
u
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FAX 970-479-2157 July 14, 1997
Contact: . Christine Anderson, 479-2119 Town of Vail Finance and Budget Manager
TOV TO BEGIN TAKING NAMES, OF AGENCIES SEEKING GRANTS FOR 1998
(Vail)--Non-profit organizations and agencies interested in applying for project funding from
the Town of Vail's 1998 annual budget are asked to contact the town's Finance Department to
request an application packet. Proposals must produce a positive economic benefit for the town
or address Vail's environmentally sensitive high quality of life. Requests for application packets
are due by 5 p.m. July 25. This step is required for all applicants, including those making new
submissions and agencies who have appllied for funding previously from the town. Those who
fail to request an application by the July 25 deadline will become ineligible for funding.
To request an application, agencies are asked to provide a mailing address, telephone number
and contact person for the project. Requests to the town may be made by mail; telephone, 479-
2122????; or fax, 479-2248. The mailing address is: Finance Department, Town of Vail, 75 S.
Frontage Rd., Vail, 81657.
Once the request for application period has closed, the town will send packets to the
requesting agencies on Aug. 1 outlining the town's review policies and criteria. The grant
submissions will be due by 5 p.m. Aug. 29.
Agency requests for cash contributions, in-kind services and parking pass donations for the
entire 1998 calendar year will be consider2d during this process. Final action on the requests
will take place with adoption of the 1998 budget on Nov. 7.
In the past, the Vail Town Council has awarded approximately $125,000 to fund programs that
address two of Vail's critical strategies: a positive, sustained economic climate; and an
environmentally sensitive high quality of life.
# # #
n~
+ ~ RECYCLED PAPER
r«
. . .
. .
:
.
.
_ , _ . - - -
. . . - . _ _ . •
.
. .
: . _ -
.
. . . . . _ .
- . „ .
. . : .
'
~ : . . ' ' . , '.~CC .'T ~C: - -
, _ ~ .
GREENN'OOD. VILLAGE
_
. -
,,~r
. , : _ _
, • . . ' . - . . . . . - . - •
, July 10, 1997
Cin~ Munager's Office
Citv Hall Mr. Greg 1Vlorrison . - . : . -
6060 South Quebec Street Chief of Police
Greenwood Vllage, CD -
80111-4591 Town. of V ail _
~303~ 7~3-0252 75 S. Frontage Road West .
. .
Fax (303) 290-0631. C0.81657
_ Dear.Chief Morrison: .
, I wanted to take. this time: to comrnend Sergeant Kurt Mulson and your department for the.EXCELLENT customer service extended to my family and me on the
night of June 27, 1997.
At approxi.mately.11:00 p.m. on June 27, 1997, our van's (my wife and three -
: young children were with me)transrnission broke; obviously-rendering the van `
inoperable. We called 911.on our cellulaz teiephone. Dispatch indicated that ehey would have an officer respond and advised us of the estimated time of arrival_of .~..the officer. . Once on the scene, after Sergeant Mulson introduced himself, we discussed
options (towing, accommodaaons;>tine frames7 costs;:etc:).to best.meetour.needs particularly at that late time. Serjeant Mulson let us make the decision best for
. . us, then proceeded to unplement the decisions by calling a tow truck, checking
availability of hotel rooms and securing reservations, and then giving us a ride to
the hotel. I was even more impressed with the service. Sergeant Mulson and yoi:r department provided when I heard the "radio. traffic" in the police car indicating .
that it was a"busy night." I consider this to be exceptional customer service,
particularly since Sergeant Mulson did not lrnow I worked for another municipality. I am sure this is business as usual for the Town of Vail. In Greenwood Village, we strive to provide geod customer service, so I can be . .
somewhat critical of "customer service" actions. I can assure you that the service
provided by Sergeant Mulsom and yoar departrnent was exceptional. '
,
. . . - - - -
.
. . . . - - -
. . , . - - - -
. . . . . . ~:J.•. :.4~ ^.S.jy
~ .
, . _ . . . . . . . . . , . _ . . . ' - ' ' . _
. . . . . . ~ - - . . . _ ' - '
t~Y
. _ . . ~ . ~ . ~ . .
S. ~.:.ti.
. . . . . . ~ . ~
~ . . . . .i ~ ~ - .
. . . . . . ~ ' - - -•~:i =;ir~"- .
. , . _ . . - - , s. .
. . . . . . , _
. ,
. . . . . . ~ . . "
:
- . : . - - - ~ . ~ . . _ . . . - ' - .
. . _ . , . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ , ~
. Chief Greg Morrison , . ~ . : _ : - • ,
. . _ .
. : .
July 10, 1997. ~ • . . . - _ ~ . - ~ - -
Page. 2
I wish.to personally thank SergeantMulson, convey gratitude to the Vail Police Department, and
commend the Town of Vail.on implementing an exceptional level of customer service which ~ -
should be envied by other municipalities:
Sincerely,
. . .
~
Steven. S.. Crowell, TO
City Manager . . . : ~ . . .
~ . SC/mg - : . -
c: 1VIr. Robert McLaurin, City Manager
Sergeant Kurt Mulson - , -
RECEIVED JUL ~ 4 -1997
P.kUL E. B.AETHER
38 HARBOR DRIVE
GREENWIGH, CONNEGTIGUT 06830 01 ~b,~.
,
July 8, 1997 : Mr. William Wood U.S. Forest Service
P.O. Box 190
Minturn, CO 81645 Dear Mr. Wood:
It is my understanding that Vail Associates has applied for a permit to allow night skiing
on Vail Mountain, including lights from top to bottom in the Lion's Head area. I would
like to take this opportunity to advise you that as a homeowner in Vail I would be very
opposed to such a plan. Night skiing on Vail Mountain would change the character of the
environment in the town and, in my opinion, would be very negative. Hopefully, you have received many negative public comments on this subject. If you
need any additional information please do not hesitate to call me at 212-230-9423.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Raether
PER/sms
cc: Bob Amour, Mayor Vail Village?
. . . - . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . , .
_ 3
, , . . . - .
:r , . _
. . .
. . . . Towrr,oFVArt. tii~Rll
• Ingut/Inquiry ~vnse Rerord G~c,(~ ~ "
~
TI~e attached comments were recentIy receiyed by the Town of paiL yye ertcoura yail
. residents artd guests to give us such input amd we strive for timely ge
ADDRESS THESE CONCEF~IVS N,~IT-~~VE WORKnVGDAYS DanRErL
sTHIS
COMPLEZ'ED FORM 1-0 PA.M BR,ANIDMEYM
. ;
DEI'AR 1 ~,?0 HA.?~tDL;E INQUIIZY
. ~ ND 5TIDliAL ?0 HAVDLE 1.NQLTIRY
• ' DATE TO V ItECEZVm 'I'/INQLJIIRY ~I • tr~' -9 7
, . . .
1 `!?'F OF LN~Ti T'/T~jOLiTRY• •
. .
. PL=OINc CALL (indicate date) . ,
. LE! i t: (at:ac.hec) ~~"I,L#~,~'• ~~Gc,y{, ~ ~ Cryt
R:_ ~ 1~~~-t?-~- ,
\.i> I l
r.. ONSE C.-U.M (attaGned)
. ~ VL
i
f,cbb~4
. F . N'-q" (C oC~e
. L :1 r.t (attachcoPY) ' ~ . P1--QN7E CALL (indicate date) .
. , . .
OF RFSPO~VSF' OR A~rc;a; ER Tr,
. ~ DAc OF ~,rOIVSc Fplt;tii R,,.,L-g,\
.47ED BY DEPAR T TO PAjM BR.-vVD.,2y„~
: h eaev oc t4is inq~tizv and Eocrtt wiil errnnin ca BIe at t1:e TO V Cocnttstity Rrlatioas of8~ As jaotf aa l6is Eaeat it retaeZ~¢ t~ ?~t
H~ndrZeyer, thia in4uiry -vij! be cnsidered dcsed.
i1~..Vti •inr•~-~ov..•..-.. -
- ~
RECEIVED JUL 1~ 1997 4
PFAFF, GARNER 8c TERLIZZI
ATTORNEYS
DAVID E. GARNER 202 W. SCHWARTZ ST. WILLIAM A. MILLER
ERIC L. TERLIZZI SALEM, ILLINOIS 62881 c1902-197e>
BRIAN C. WERNSMAN TELEPHONE (618) 548-3306 ALFRED S. PFAFF
(1910_1988)
ROBERT W. MATOUSH FAX (618) 548-3335
OFCOUNSEL '
, july 10, 1997
Mayor
city of vail
75 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Sir/Madame:
My family just returned from a very pleasant vacation in Colorado inclucling six
days in Vail where we stayed at the Vail Cascade Hotel. Our 16 year old son is in an
electric wheel chair and we have a raised-roof, full size van to transport him and the
chair.
' Our pleasant vacation was marred only by the fact that Vail is one of the most
inaccessible places we have stayed at. We have traveled with him all over the country
and are used to dealing with some accessibility problems. We had not even thought this
would be an issue in Vail since so many of the buildings and improvement are new and
modern. It was absolutely shoclcing to us that many stores and restaurants in Vail were
totally inaccessible to my son. Particularly aggravating was that many of the public restrooms were totally inaccessible. While waiting to ride the tram in Lions Head to
Eagle Bahn my son decided he needed to use the restroom. We could find no accessible
public or private restrooms until finally finding one in the Subway Restaurant at least
one-quarter mile away.
In addition, the Vail village parlcing lot has a van accessible disabled parking spot
on the top level (of course none of the parlcing garages could accommodate a raised roof
van).
However, after gettirig my son out of the van, we soon realized there were only
stairs leading down and no way for him to get off the top level except to talce his chair
out on the busy frontage road.
~
[
Mayor of Vail
Page 2
July 10, 1997
I realize Vail caters to slciers climbers, rafters and other physically active people,
but I thinlc it is an absolute disgrace that it is so inaccessible to the wheelchair bound.
There are many things he cannot do. It is, therefore, particularly important to him to
be able to do other things such as go to the restaurant, restroom or store of his choice.
He was denied this ability because of the thoughtless disregard for the disabled.
I wish you or the directors of thP Chamber of Commerce would spend one day in
a wheelchair in Vail and you might understand what I azn saying. As far as we are
concerned Vail might as well put a sign at the City Iimits stating "No handicapped
persons wanted."
Si4rel
,
~
Eric L. Te zi
I-T
ELT/dla
P.S. By the way, the Vail Cascade F[otel itself was quite accessible and the staff very
helpful, pleasant and courteous.