HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-22 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session
i
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, February 22, 2000
12:00 P.M. AT TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
NOTE: Time of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied
upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item.
Lunch will be served.
START AT NOON
1. Forest Service (1:30 hrs.)
Brent Wilson A discussion regarding the proposed White River National Forest
Russell Forrest Plan amendments.
Dave VanNorman
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Provide feedback on issues that warrant the transmittal of formal
comments to the U.S. Forest Service.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
This is a follow-up discussion on the presentations made last
month by the U.S. Forest Service, the North West Colorado
Council of Governments, Eagle County Commissioners Tom
Stone and James Johnson, Colorado Wild and the Aspen
Wilderness Workshop regarding the proposed amendments to the
White River National Forest Plan. Prior to last month's meeting,
the Town Council had the opportunity to review the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the plan and analysis
provided by both Town of Vail and Eagle County staff.
Staff has identified pertinent forest planning issues and is
requesting feedback from Council in an effort to develop formal
comments on behalf of the Town of Vail. David Van Norman (U.S.
Forest Service) will be present to answer questions and discuss
plan specifics.
2. Market Analysis (45 mins.)
Russell Forrest Community Facilities - Hub Site Market Analysis
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the preliminary
market analysis presented by ERA. Comment on areas of the
analysis that should be expanded or clarified.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
On September 21, 1999, the Town Council and the Vail
Recreation District Board decided to further explore the following
uses: Learning Center, 2nd Sheet of Ice, enhancements to Dobson
ice rink, performing arts facility, event facility for conferences and
special events, and a family center that provides recreational and
learning opportunities for the family. The first step in evaluating
these uses was to conduct a market analysis to determine the
economic viability and the economic benefit of these uses. This
market analysis shall identify the demand for these facilities,
design considerations to make the facilities more marketable,
economic impact to the community, and operational requirements
for the facilities
3. Town of Vail Community Survey 2000. (45 mins.)
Suzanne Silverthorn
Chris Cares Action Requested of Council: Review and modify
questionnaire and select method(s) of distribution.
Background Rationale: Since 1987 the Town of Vail has
conducted an annual survey of its residents and other
stakeholders to monitor customer satisfaction levels and to
identify emerging issues and trends. From 1987 to 1998, a
direct mail format was used to distribute the survey.
However, due to declining response rates and the town's
movement to a two-year budgeting process, the format was
changed in 1999 to a random telephone survey
supplemented by a survey posted on the Town of Vail's Web
site. For the 2000 TOV survey, the following distribution
approaches are available for Council consideration: 1) mail-
back survey to all residents (or a random sample); 2)
telephone survey to a random sample; 3) post card invitation
to all residents (or a random sample) inviting the
stakeholders to call a toll-free number to participate in a
telephone questionnaire or on the Town of Vail's Web site; 4)
Web site survey only; 5) a combination of the methods listed
above. Chris Cares of the research firm RRC Associates will
be available at the meeting to offer additional insights about
the various distribution approaches and to review the draft
survey questions with Council.
4. Joint Work Session with AIPP Board To Discuss Long-Term
Nancy Sweeney Goals. (45 mins.)
Background Rational: To discuss the role of AIPP.
Action: To define the Council's expectations of the Board
and the Coordinator's position.
5. DRB Report. (15 mins.)
Brent Wilson
6. Discussion of the Glen Lyon Office Building (GLOB). (30
George Ruther mins.)
An afternoon worksession to present the proposed major
amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade
Village, Development Area D, Glen Lyon Office Building. The
purpose of the worksession is to provide the applicant with an
opportunity to present the proposed plans for the major
amendment to Special Development District No. 4 and to inform
the Town Council of the input received to date from the Planning &
Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to a brief
presentation by the applicant and then provide any input or
feedback the Town Council may have at this time.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Town Council has requested
that the staff schedule worksession discussions with applicants
proposing major amendments to existing special development
districts. The purpose of the worksession is to provide the
applicant with an opportunity to present the proposal to the Town
Council earlier in the development review process. The Council
then has an opportunity to provide input and feedback to the
applicant on the request prior to proceeding through the entire
review process with the PEG and DRB.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development
Department will not be making a recommendation on the plan at
this time. Staff will provide a recommendation at the time of final
review.
7. West Vail lodge request for direction on converting AU's
Nina Timm (Accommodation Units) to EHU's (Employee Housing Units).
The owners of the West Vail Lodge are proposing an
adaptive re-use of the current hotel. The proposal would
create 42 new, one-bedroom, for-sale, Employee Housing
Units and 19, two-bedroom, free market condominiums. The
proposal also increases the number of retail spaces on site
that would be sold to individual business owners. (30 mins.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Worksession - No action requested of Town Council
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
The owners of the West Vail Lodge are looking to get initial
feedback on their proposal from Town Council, Planning and
Environmental Commission, and the Design Review Board
so that they are able to secure financing to complete the
proposal. The presentation at the work session is to provide
Council with information on the project as well as get
feedback on the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:
None provided as this is a worksession.
g. Fourth of July Alternative Entertainment .
Greg Morrison (30 mins.)
Kurt Krieg
Nancy Kern
Greg Hall
9. Frontage Road Parking. ( 1 hr.)
Mike Rose
Greg Hall Background Rational: Current policy calls for allowing
Bob McLaurin Frontage Road parking only after both structures fill.
Greg Morrison Council wishes to discuss a change in policy that would
allow Frontage Road parking to occur as soon as the Village
structure fills.
10 Information Update. (10 mins.)
11. Council Reports. (10 mins.)
12. Other. (10 mins.)
13. Adjournment. (7:00 P.M.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3107100, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M.. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
.y
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3107/00, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3/14/00, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification.
Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information..
F:\AGENDA.NEVVTC
4
MEMORANDUM
TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2000
1. PURPOSE:
Today's meeting is a follow-up discussion on the presentations made last month by the
U.S. Forest Service, the North West Colorado Council of Governments, Eagle County,
Commissioners Tom Stone and James Johnson, Colorado Wild and the Aspen Wilderness
Workshop regarding the proposed amendments to the White River National Forest Plan.
Prior to last month's meeting, the Town Council had the opportunity to review the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the plan and analysis provided by both Town of Vail
and Eagle County staff.
This memo summarizes issues identified by staff that are pertinent to the Town of Vail.
Staff is requesting feedback from the Town Council today on these issues (and any
additional issues identified by the Town Council) in an effort to develop formal
comments on behalf of the Town of Vail. Staff would also appreciate knowing whether
the Town Council would like to schedule any additional public hearings prior to
commenting on the plan. David Van Norman (U.S. Forest Service) will be present to
discuss plan specifics.
2. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES:
Following is a brief synopsis of the three plan alternatives that will be used for
discussion.
Alternative B - "an updated version of the existing Forest Plan that reflects current
forestwide direction, represents the "No Action" alternative. No Action means that
current management allocations, activities and management direction found in the
existing Forest Plan, as amended, would continue."
Alternative C - "This alternative responds to a diverse range of comments on recreation
issues. It acknowledges the need to provide a range of recreational opportunities to serve
forest customers and local communities while maintaining Forest ecosystems. It
represents a balance of recreational uses with ecological considerations."
F:everyone\brent\wrnfplan\memo 1
}
Alternative D - "This alternative was developed in response to concerns that wildlife
habitat for a wide variety of species, as well as biological diversity as a whole, needs to
be given special emphasis. It addresses the idea that a higher priority be given to physical
and biological resources than to human uses of the Forest."
The U.S. Forest Service announced its preferred plan for adoption is Alternative "D".
The plan that is adopted by the U.S. Forest Service will determine management direction
for the forest for the next 15 years. The deadline for submission of comments on the plan
is May 09, 2000.
3. POTENTIAL ISSUES FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Bulleted below are some substantial issues identified by staff as outlined in the plan
alternatives:
¦ The tonic of "urbanization" and compliance with local eovernment plans - Section 219.7
of the Code of Federal Regulations requires that the USFS assess (in the forest plan's
environmental impact statement) the impacts of forest plan revisions on local government
planning strategies. Although staff believes the issue of "intermix" lands and private
inholdings within the forest is more an issue of county or regional jurisdiction, staff
supports the NWCCOG's position on this issue. Please refer to the attached NWCCOG
position statement for more details.
Additionally, staff believes the issue of urbanization is substantial enough to warrant a
separate revision topic. It would be beneficial for affected municipalities to see how new
USFS policies might impact infrastructure demands and the need for housing in areas
adjacent to White River National Forest. Staff would encourage additional discussion
regarding the potential for housing or infrastructure location on USFS lands.
¦ East Vail Chutes / Two Elk Pass - a change in management direction from "Backcountry
Recreation, Non-Motorized" to "Forest Carnivores" (lynx habitat) under Alternative "D"
could potentially preclude human recreation in the area. The management direction
imposed under this designation places a high priority on habitat and a low priority on
human recreation. The USFS states in the plan (pages 3-66 and 3-67) they do not yet
have the guidance and direction necessary to develop a management plan for lynx habitat.
However, the consequences of this designation could potentially involve the closure of
the East Vail Chutes, the Commando Run, Two Elk Trail, Bowman's Shortcut and other
areas to human activities seasonally or year-round. The lynx was proposed in June of
1998 for inclusion on the Federal Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species list.
¦ Sineletrack HikinQ/BikinQ Trails on Vail Mountain - The Forest Plan's inventory of
travel routes does not include the singletrack trail system on Vail Mountain. Staff
believes written clarification of the status of these trails under each plan alternative is
necessary. This should include information on the potential for trail system expansion
and special event usage (races, demonstrations, etc.). Staff believes this trail system is a
vital component of Vail's summer tourism amenities. Additionally, trail access within
F:everyone\brent\wnlfplan\memo 2
the developed ski area alleviates pressure from trail usage in non-developed forest areas
adjacent to Vail.
¦ Vail Ski Area Permit Boundaries - Under Alternative "D", the "Ski Based Resorts -
Existing and Potential" management area would be limited to what is essentially the
current ski area boundary. Under Alternative "C", the area would also include an area
adjacent to Mushroom Bowl and a small area southwest of Game Creek Bowl. Under
Alternatives "C" and "D", a small area located northwest of Eagle's Nest would be
removed from potential permitted expansion areas. Management area maps will be
available for review at the February 22°d meeting. The ski company has expressed
concern that ski area improvements in the existing boundaries, could be impacted.
Further clarification is needed to determine if Alternative "D" would adversely impact
skier operation in the existing permit area.
¦ General Trail/Road Closures -Under Alternative "D", 62% of the existing (permitted or
social) roads and trails in the area adjacent to Vail would be closed to mountain bikes,
while over 80% of the roads and trails in this area would be closed to motorized vehicles.
Although staff supports many of the proposed road/trail closures, a number of routes-that
significantly affect tourism/recreation in our area are slated for closure under Alternatives
"C" and "D". A detailed analysis of.road/trail management proposed under each plan
alternative is included in the "Road and Trail Management Strategies" section of this
report. Detailed maps of proposed travel management strategies (full-sized motor
vehicles, ATVs, motorcycles and mechanized vehicles) under Alternatives "B" and "D"
will be available for review at the February 22°d meeting.
¦ Aerial Transportation Corridors - Like the existing forest plan, neither Alternative "C"
nor "D" proposes any lift/gondola transportation connections (outside the permitted ski
area boundary) in the Vail area.
¦ Fire/Pine Beetle/Noxious Weed Management - USFS standards and guidelines for
management of these issues under a new plan is attached as "Appendix B". If more
specific information is required, it will be provided upon request.
¦ Timber Hauling, - Under the current forest plan, much of the area adjacent to Red
Sandstone Road is managed under a "Resource Production - Forest Products"
designation. This designation places an emphasis on timber harvest. Under Alternatives
"C" and "D", the designation is shifted to "Forested Flora and Fauna Habitats."
Although logging activity would be permitted under this designation, the primary
management emphasis would be towards forest ecosystem management. Therefore, we
might anticipate a decrease in logging activities in the area north of town - particularly
under Alternative "C". The area south of the permitted ski area would be managed (with
Alternatives "C" and "D") under a philosophy that emphasizes forest carnivore habitat.
Although this designation also permits some timber activities, logging would be limited
to a degree compatible with habitat management prescriptions. Therefore, we should
anticipate limited logging activities south of the Vail ski area.
F:everyone\brent\wmfplan\memo 3
I Overall, the amount of "suitable timber area" proposed under Alternative "C" is
substantially lower than what is proposed under "Alternative D" for the area adjacent to
Vail. Maps of "suitable timber area" will be available for review at the February 22nd
meeting.
¦ Snowmobile Access - Under Alternative "D", snowmobile access adjacent to Vail would
be restricted to designated routes. These include Shrine Mountain Road, Lime Creek
Road, Red Sandstone Road, Red & White Mountain Road, Tigiwon Road and Homestake
Road. Under Alternative "C", snowmobile access would be restricted to the above-
referenced designated routes with an additional unrestricted access area between Lime
Creek and Shrine Mountain Roads. Additionally, snowmobile access along Lost Lake
Road would be maintained under this alternative. Staff will have "winter travel
management" maps available for review at the February 22nd meeting.
¦ Vail North of I-70 - Under alternatives "C" and "D", management of forest lands north
of Vail (from West Vail east to the Gore Range) would change from "Dispersed
Recreation" to "Deer and Elk Winter Range" or "Bighorn Sheep Habitat." This-could
preclude certain human activities (especially in the winter and spring months) in these
areas, although almost all significant trails in this area would remain accessible by the
public during peak user periods.
¦ Game Creek/Couaar Ridae Area - a change in management direction from "Backcountry
Recreation, Non-Motorized" to "Deer and Elk Winter Range" could preclude human
recreation activity in the winter/spring seasons in the Game Creek/"Mintum Mile" area
outside the permitted ski area boundary. However, staff supports the proposed seasonal
closures due to the presence of elk calving areas.
ATTACHMENT 1- FOREST MANAGEMENT AREAS
ATTACHMENT 2 - ROAD AND TRAIL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
ATTACHMENT 3 - ROAD AND TRAIL INVENTORY
ATTACHMENT 4 - DISTURBANCE PROCESSES
ATTACHMENT 5 -NWCCOG MEMO
F: everyone\brent\wrnfplan\memo 4
ATTACHMENT 1
EXISTING AND PROPOSED
FOREST MANAGEMENT AREAS -
VAIL VICINITY
The following five pages summarize the existing and proposed
management strategies for specific areas within the forest surrounding Vail.
Maps for descriptive purposes are on file in the Department of Community Development.
F:everyone\brent\wrnfplan\summary 1
DESIGNATED WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT AREAS
VAIL, COLORADO VICINITY
Following is a brief summary of management area designations proposed for the areas of the forest
surrounding Vail under each plan alternative. The current management area designation is listed above
with the proposed designations under alternatives "C" and "D" listed below.
AREA = EAST VAIL CHUTES / TWO ELK PASS
Current USFS Management Area Desienation Management Direction
(3.32) Backcountry Recreation Primitive, non-motorized
Non-Motorized recreation.
Alternative "C" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(3.32) Backcountry Recreation Primitive, non-motorized
Non-Motorized recreation.
Alternative "D" Management Area Desienation Management Direction
(5.45) Forest Carnivores Recreation restricted to a level compatible
with maintaining the effectiveness of the
area for use by the target species (lynx and
wolverine).
AREA = BOOTH FALLS / PITKIN CREEK (NORTH OF 1-70)
Current USFS Management Area Designation Management Direction
(4.3) Dispersed Recreation Resource management activities are
compatible with, and reduce impacts to,
recreation sources and opportunities.
Alternative "C" Manaeement Area Designation Management Direction
(5.42) Bighorn Sheep Recreation activities that disturb Bighorn
Sheep should be restricted.
Alternative "D" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(5.42) Bighorn Sheep Recreation activities that disturb Bighorn
Sheep should be restricted.
F:everyone\brent\wmfplan\summary 2
AREA = RED SANDSTONE / WEST VAIL (NORTH OF I-70)
Current USFS Management Area Designation Management Direction
(4.3) Dispersed Recreation Resource management activities are
compatible with, and reduce impacts to,
recreation sources and opportunities.
(5.13) Resource Production - Forest Products, Grazing of domestic livestock is
coordinated with timber management
activities to ensure adequate regeneration.
Alternative "C" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(5.41) Deer and Elk Winter Range Restrict recreation activities that would
disturb deer and elk during winter and
spring periods when the area is "occupied
by animals.
Alternative "D" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(5.41) Deer and Elk Winter Range Restrict recreation activities that would
disturb deer and elk during winter and
spring periods when the area is occupied
by animals.
AREA = VAIL MOUNTAIN / PERMITTED SKI AREA
Current USFS Management Area Designation Management Direction
(8.25) Ski- Based Resorts Existing & Potential Resource management activities minimize
impacts to recreational resources within
existing permitted sites and areas planned
for future development.
Alternative "C" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(8.25) Ski- Based Resorts Existing & Potential Resource management activities minimize
impacts to recreational resources within
existing permitted sites and areas planned
for future development.
Alternative "D" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(8.25) Ski- Based Resorts Existing & Potential Resource management activities minimize
impacts to recreational resources within
existing permitted sites and areas planned
for future development.
Please note: Under Alternative "D Vail Mountain ski area operations would be restricted to
the existing permit area boundary.
F:everyone\brent\wrnfplan\summary 3
AREA = GAME CREEK / COUGAR RIDGE (WEST OF SKI AREA)
Current USFS Management Area Desienation Management Direction
(3.32) Backcountry Recreation Primitive, non-motorized
Non-Motorized recreation.
(5.41) Deer and Elk Winter Range Restrict recreation activities that would
disturb deer and elk during winter- and
spring periods when the area is occupied
by animals.
Alternative "C" Manaaaement Area Designation Management Direction
(3.32) Backcountry Recreation Primitive, non-motorized
Non-Motorized recreation.
(5.41) Deer and Elk Winter Range. Restrict recreation activities that would
disturb deer and elk during winter and
spring periods when the area is occupied
by animals.
Alternative "D" Management Area Designation Management Direction
(5.41) Deer and Elk Winter Range Restrict recreation activities that would
disturb deer and elk during winter and
spring periods when the area is occupied
by animals.
(5.13) Resource Production - Forest Products, Grazing of domestic livestock is
coordinated with timber management
activities to ensure adequate regeneration. "
F:everyone\brent\wmfplan\summary 4
AREA = LIME CREEK / TURKEY CREEK (SOUTH OF CATEGORY IIn
Current USFS Management Area Designation Management Direction
(5.45) Forest Carnivores Recreation restricted to a level compatible
with maintaining the effectiveness of the
area for use by the target species (lynx and
wolverine).
(5.13) Resource Production - Forest Products Grazing of domestic livestock is
coordinated with timber management
activities to ensure adequate regeneration.
Alternative "C" Management Area Desienation Management Direction
(5.45) Forest Carnivores Recreation restricted to a level compatible
with maintaining the effectiveness of the
area for use by the target species (lynx and
wolverine).
(5.4) Forested Flora and Fauna Habitats Motorized and non-motorized recreation
opportunities (with seasonally restricted
access). Human use high during fall
hunting seasons.
Alternative "D" Management Area Desienation Management Direction
(5.45) Forest Carnivores Recreation restricted to a level compatible
with maintaining the effectiveness of the
area for use by the target species (lynx and
wolverine).
The following page includes a table summarizing allowed activities in the forest
management areas as proposed.
F:everyone\brent\wrnfpIan\summuy 5
GENERALLY ALLOWED ACTIVITIES AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT AREAS SURROUNDING VAIL
Non-Ski-
Timber Motorized Mechanized Oil & Gas Locatable Developed Based
Category Management Area Harvest Recreation Recreation Leasing Minerals Recreation Resorts
Backcountry Recreation, Non-Motorized summer-no;
3.32 (with winter motorized) yes winter-yes yes yes yes yes no
4.3 Dispersed Recreation yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
5.13 lResource Production - Forest Products yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
5.41 1Deer and Elk Winter Range yes yes* yes* yes yes yes yes
5.42 jBighorn Sheep Habitat yes yes* yes* yes yes yes yes
summer-yes;
5.45 Forest Carnivores yes winter-no yes* yes yes yes yes
decision by
8.25 Ski Based Resorts-Existing and Potential yes yes yes yes area yes no l
" designated routes only; additional restrictions may apply
ATTACHMENT 2
EXISTING AND PROPOSED
ROAD AND TRAIL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES -
VAIL VICINITY
The following three pages summarize the existing and proposed
management strategies for specific areas within the forest surrounding Vail.
Road and trail closures are displayed for 139 routes surrounding Vail.
Maps for descriptive purposes are on file in the Department of Community Development.
F:\everyone\brent\wrnfplan\closure 1
The following is a summary of proposed road/trail closures within the forest for the area
surrounding Vail. An inventory of 139 routes surrounding Vail was compiled and closures or
seasonal restrictions for each route are listed below. Comments from staff regarding specific
trail or road closures are also listed.
Alternative "C" - Trail/Road Closures and Seasonal Restrictions
Trails/Roads Inventoried = 139
Use New Closures New Seasonal Restrictions
Full-sized Motor Vehicles 15 7
Motorcycles 16 7
ATVs 16 7
Mechanized Vehicles 64 21
Horseback 0 0
Hiking 0 0
Staff believes the closure of the following trails to mechanized vehicles under Alternative "C"
should be reconsidered due to user demands and potential impacts to tourism/recreation based
establishments: FDT 1851.1 (Bowman's Shortcut), Way 2133W. I (Commando Run), FDR
734.1/734.1A (Red and White Mountain Road), and Way 711 WA (Minturn to Game Peak).
Staff supports all of the seasonal restrictions proposed for trails/roads in the Vail vicinity under
this plan alternative. _
Alternative "D" - Trail/Road Closures and Seasonal Restrictions
Trails/Roads Inventoried = 139
Use New Closures New Seasonal Restrictions
Full-sized Motor Vehicles 16 8
Motorcycles 16 9
ATVs 16 9
Mechanized Vehicles 65 16
Horseback 1 0
Hiking 1 0
Staff believes the closure of the following trails to mechanized vehicles under Alternative "D"
should be reconsidered due to user demands and potential impacts to tourism/recreation based
establishments: FDT 1851.1 (Bowman's Shortcut), FDR 719.2E (Eiseman Hut Spur), FDR
751.1 B (Fowler-Hilliard Hut), and Way 711 WA (Minturn to Game Peak).
Staff supports all of the seasonal restrictions proposed -for trails/roads in the Vail vicinity under
this plan alternative.
F:\everyone\brent\wrnfplan\closure 2
The following tables summarize the existing and proposed numbers of accessible routes for each
type of user group. The percentages listed at the right of each table illustrate the percent of all
trails within the forest a particular user group would have access to under each plan alternative.
Existing WRNF Plan - Available Roads and Trails
Trails/Roads Inventoried = 139
Use Accessible Routes Percent of Total
Full-sized Motor Vehicles 32 23.0%
Motorcycles 33 23.7%
ATVs 33 23.7%
Mechanized Vehicles 128 92.1%
Horseback 139 100%
Hiking 139 100%
Alternative "C" -Available Roads and Trails
Trails/Roads Inventoried = 139
Use Accessible Routes Percent of Total
Full-sized Motor Vehicles 20 14.4%
Motorcycles 20 14.4%
ATVs 20 14.4%
Mechanized Vehicles 62 44.6%
Horseback 138 99.2%
Hiking 138 99.2%
F:\everyone\brent\wrnfplan\closure 3
Alternative "D" -Available Roads and Trails
Trails/Roads Inventoried = 139
Use Accessible Routes Percent of Total
Full-sized Motor Vehicles 20 14.3%
Motorcycles 25 17.9%
ATVs 25 17.9%
Mechanized Vehicles 52 37.4%
Horseback 139 100%
Hiking 139 100%
F:\everyone\brent\wrnfplan\closure 4
ATTACHMENT 3
The tables on the following pages are an inventory of 139 trails, roads, routes and
ways within the portion of White River National Forest surrounding Vail. Routes to
be impacted by changes proposed under each plan alternative are listed in bold
type. Other symbols used in the tables are described in the legend at the bottom of
each page.
F:\everyone\brent\wrnfplan\closwe 5
ALTERNATIVE B
ROAD/TRAIL MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 711.51) Back Bowls x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1 D Bally Hoo Spur Rd x X X 0 0 0
FDR 728.1A Big Spruce x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2013.1 Bighorn X X X X 0 0
FDT 2011.1 Booth Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 710.1 E Bottom of Lift 11 X X X 0 0 0
FDT 1851.1 Bowman's Shortcut x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1B Buffehr x X X 0 0 0
FDR 787.1 Buffehr 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2111.1 Buffehr Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2110.1 Buffehr Mountain x X X 0 0 0
Way 2133W.1 Commando Run x X X 0 0 0
FDR 709.1 A Communication Site x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2006.1 Cross Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 781.1 Davos Trail (Cortina Lane) 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2014.1 Deluge Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 719.1A East Red Sandstone x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.2E Eiseman Hut Spur x X X 0 0. 0
FDT 2128.1 Fall/Martin Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 751.1 B. Fowler-Hilliard Hut x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1C Freeman Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.38 Game Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2130.1 Game Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.3C Game Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 Gitalong Rd x X X -0 0 0
FDR 710.1A Golden Peak x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2015.1 Gore Creek x X X X 0 0
FDT 2015.1A Gore Lake x X X X 0 0
FDT 2127.1 Grouse Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 713.1 Hanks Gulch 0 0 0 O 0, 0
FDR 713.1 B Hanks Gulch Spur B X X X 0 0 0
FDR 759.1 Holy Cross City 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 703.213 Homestake Reservoir 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 703.2A Homestake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 711.5C Lift 14 X X X 0 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
F:\everyone\brenl\wmfplan\lrailyds.xls "0" = OPEN
ALTERNATIVE B
ROAD/TRAIL MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 710.1 C Lift 6 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 Lime Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 748.1 Line Shack x X X 0 0 0
FDR 791.1 Lionshead 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.213 Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2D Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2E Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2F Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2G Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2H Lost Lake x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1893.1 Lost Lake x 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 Lost Lake Road 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1A Lost Lake Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 B Lost Lake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1C Lost Lake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 D Lost Lake Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 H Lost Lake Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2 Lost Lake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.2A Lost Lake Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 786.2C Lost Lake Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1894.1 Lost Lake to Piney x X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.1 Main Vail x X X 0 0 0
FDR 749.1 Meadow Mountain x X X 0 0 0
FDR 748.1A Meadow Mountain Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2129.1 B Meadow Mountain Tie Through x X X X 0 0
FDR'719.1 Middle Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
Way 2135.1 Middle Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.313 Middle Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.1 B Middle Creek Canyon 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 719.1 C Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.1 D Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.2A Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.2B Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.2C Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.2D Middle Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.As °0" = OPEN
ALTERNATIVE B
ROAD/TRAIL MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 719.3 Middle Creek Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 719.3A Middle Creek Seur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.31) Mid-Vail Water Tank x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 Mill Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 D Mill Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 F Mill Creek Spur 1 F X X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1G Mill Creek Spur 1G X X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 H Mill Creek Spur 1 H X X X 0 0 0
Way 711 W.4 Minturn to Game Peak x X X 0 0 0
FDR 405.1 Muddy Pass 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 720.1 North Sandstone x X X 0 0 0
FDR 720.1 A North Sandstone Spur A 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 720.1 B North Sandstone Spur B X X X 0 0 0
FDR 720.1 C North Sandstone Spur C X X X 0 0 0
FDR 720.1 H North Sandstone Spur H X X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.1 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.2 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.3 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.5 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2107.1 Nottingham Ridge x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1 E Old FDR 734 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 C Old Sawmill Road x X X 0 0 0
Way 2349W.1 Paulie's Plunge x X X 0 0 0
Way 2347W.1 Paulie's Sister x X X 0 0 0
FDR 701.1 Piney 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2012.1 Pitkin x X X X 0 0
FDR 751.48 Ptarmigan Spur 4b x X X 0 0 0
FDR 751.2B Ptarmigan Spur E X X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1 Red & White Mountain 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 734.1A Red & White Mountain 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 700.1 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass 0 0 O' 0 0 0
FDR 700.2 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 700.3 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass 0 O 0 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 B Ridge Road 0 0 0" 0 0 0
FDR 713.1A Shrine Mountain x X X 0 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls "0" = OPEN
ALTERNATIVE B
ROAD/TRAIL MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 709.2 Shrine Pass 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2136.01 Son of Middle Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 737.1 Spraddle Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 711.5E Sunup Bowl x X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.1A Tigiwon Campground 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 707.2A Tigiwon Sale Spur 2A X X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.213 Tigiwon Sale Spur 2B X X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.2C Tigiwon Sale Spur 2C X X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.3A Tigiwon Sale Spur 3A X X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.313 Tigiwon Sale Spur 3B X X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.3C Tigiwon Sale Spur 3c x X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.6A Top of Lift 10 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.7A Top of Lift 7 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.3E Top of Lift 9 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 A Tourist Trap Spring x X X O 0 0
FDR 710.1 B Town Water Tank 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
NRT 2005.1 Two Elk x X X O 0 0
FDR 762.2 Two Elk Trailhead 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 A Upper Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.513 Vail Mountain Spur x X X 0 0 0
NRT 49.1 Vail Pass - Ten Mile x X X 0 O 0
FDR 752.1 Wearyman Spur 3 0 0 0 0 O 0
FDR 752.1 A Wearyman Spur 3a x X X 0 0 0
FDR 752.1 B Wearyman Spur 3b x X X 0 0, 0
FDR 752.1 C Wearyman Spur 3c x X X 0 0 0
FDR 751.4A Wearyman Spur 4a x X X 0 0 0
FDR 751.1 C Wearyman Spur C X X X 0 0 0
FDR 751.2A Wearyman Spur D X X X 0 O 0
Way 2348W.1 Whiskey Creek x X X 0 0 0
Way 2348W.1 A Whiskey Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDA 770.1 A Willow Creek X X X 0 0 0
FDR 770.1 B Willow Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 770.1C Willow Creek I X X X 0 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls "0" = OPEN
ALTERNATIVE "C"
TRAIL/ROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 711.5D Back Bowls x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1 D Bally Hoo Spur Rd x X X X* 0 0
FDR 728.1A Big Spruce x X X X* 0 0
FDT 2013.1 Bighorn x X X X 0 0
FDT 2011.1 Booth Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 710.1 E Bottom of Lift 11 X X X 0 0 0
FDT 1851.1 Bowman's Shortcut x X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1 B Buffehr 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 787.1 Buffehr S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDT 2111.1 Buffehr Creek x X X S* 0 0
FDT 2110.1 Buff ehr Mountain x X X 0 0 0
Way 2133W.1 Commando Run x X X X* 0 0
FDR 709.1A Communication Site 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2006.1 Cross Creek , x X X X 0 0
FDR 781.1 Davos Trail (Cortina Lane) X X X S* 0 0
FDT 2014.1 Deluqe Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 719.1A East Red Sandstone x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.2E Eiseman Hut Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2128.1 Fall/Martin Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 751.1 B Fowler-Hilliard Hut x X X '0 0 0
FDR 734.1C Freeman Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.36 Game Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2130.1 Game Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.3C Game Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 Gitalong Rd x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 A Golden Peak x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2015.1 Gore Creek x X X X 0 0
FDT 2015.1 A Gore Lake x X X X 0 0
FDT 2127.1 Grouse Lake x X X S* 0 0
FDR 713.1 Hanks Gulch X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 713.1B Hanks Gulch Spur B X X X X* 0, 0
FDR 759.1 Holy Cross City S* S* S* S* 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0" = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "C"
TRAIUROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 703.28 Homestake Reservoir X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 703.2A Homestake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 711.5C Lift 14 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1C Lift 6 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 Lime Creek S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 748.1 Line Shack x X X S* 0 0
FDR 791.1 Lionshead 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.2B Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2D Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2E Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.21F Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2G Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2H Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDT 1893.1 Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 Lost Lake Road 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 A Lost Lake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 B Lost Lake Spur 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1 C Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 D Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 H Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2 Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0,
FDR 786.2A Lost Lake Spur X X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2C Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDT 1894.1 Lost Lake to Piney x X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.1 Main Vail x X X 0 0 0
FDR 749.1 Meadow Mountain x X X S* 0 0
FDR 748.1A Meadow Mountain Spur x X X S* 0 0
FDT 2129.1 B Meadow Mountain Tie Through x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.1 Middle Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
Way 2135.1 Middle Creek x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.3B Middle Creek x X X I X* 0 0
FDR 719.1B Middle Creek Canyon x X X X* 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0" = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
= NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "C"
TRAIUROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road[Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 719.1C Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0,
FDR 719.1 D Middle Creek Spur x X X X* O O
FDR 719.2A Middle Creek Spur , X X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.28 Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.2C Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.21) Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.3 Middle Creek Spur X* X* X* X* O 0
FDR 719.3A Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.31 Mid-Vail Water Tank x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 Mill Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 D Mill Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 F Mill Creek-Spur 1 F X X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 G Mill Creek Spur 1 G X X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 H Mill Creek Spur 1 H X X X 0 0 0
Way 711 W.4 Minturn to Game Peak x X X X* O 0
FDR 405.1 Muddy Pass X* X* X* X* X* X*
FDR 720.1 North Sandstone x X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1A North Sandstone Spur A X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 B North Sandstone Spur B X X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 C North Sandstone Spur C X X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 H North Sandstone Spur H X X X X* 0 0
FDT 1896.1 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 1896.2 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 1896.3 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 1896.5 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 2107.1 Nottingham Ridge x X X X* O 0
FDR 734.1 E Old FDR 734 0 0 0. 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 C Old Sawmill Road x X X X* 0 0
Way 2349W.1 Paulie's Plunge x X X S* 0 0
Waif 2347W.1 Paulie's Sister x X X X* 0 0
FDR 701.1 Piney 0 0 0 0 0 O
FDT 2012.1 Pitkin x X X X 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0" = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
= NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xis Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "C"
TRAIUROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 751.413 Ptarmigan Spur 4b x X X X* 0 0
FDR 751.28 Ptarmigan Spur E X X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1 Red & White Mountain X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 734.1A Red & White Mountain X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 700.1 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 700.2 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 700.3 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 728.1 B Ridge Road X* X*, X* X* 0 0
FDR 713.1A Shrine Mountain x X X X* 0 O
FDR 709.2 Shrine Pass S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDT 2136.01 Son of Middle Creek x X X S* 0 0
FDR 737.1 Spraddle Creek X* X* X* 0 O 0
FDR 711.5E Sunup Bowl x X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.1A Tigiwon Campground X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 707.2A Tigiwon Sale Spur 2A X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.28 Tigiwon Sale Spur 2B X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.2C Tigiwon Sale Spur 2C X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.3A Tigiwon Sale Spur 3A X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.3B Tigiwon Sale Spur 313 X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.3C Tigiwon Sale Spur 3c x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.6A Top of Lift 10 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.7A Top of Lift 7 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.3E Top of Lift 9 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 A Tourist Trap Spring x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 B Town Water Tank X* X* X* 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
NRT 2005.1 Two Elk x X X 0 0 0
FDR 762.2 Two Elk Trailhead 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 A Upper Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.51B Vail Mountain Spur x X X 0 0 0
NRT 49.1 Vail Pass - Ten Mile x X X 0 0 0
FDR 752.1 Wearyman Spur 3 X* X* X* X* 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0" = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
= NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brenf\wmfplanVrailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "C"
TRAIUROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 752.1 A Wearyman Spur 3a 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 752.1 B Wearyman Spur 3b x X X X* O O
FDR 752.1 C Wearyman Spur 3c x. X X X* O O
FDR 751.4A Weary. man Spur 4a x X X X* O O
FDR 751.1C Wearyman Spur C X X, X 0 0 0
FDR 751.2A Wearyman Spur D X X X X* O O
Way 2348W.1 Whiskey Creek x X X S* O O
Way 2348W.1A Whiskey Creek x X X S* O O
FDR 770.1A Willow Creek x X X X* O O
FDR 770.1 B Willow Creek x X X X* O O
FDR 770.1 C Willow Creek x X X X* O O
_ "X" = CLOSED
"0" = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xis Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "D"
TRAIL/ROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 711.5D Back Bowls x X X 0 0 0
FDR 734.1D Bally Hoo Spur Rd x X X X* 0 0
FDR 728.1A Big Spruce S S S S* 0 0
FDT 2013.1 Bighorn x X X X 0 0
FDT 2011.1 Booth Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 710.1 E Bottom of Lift 11 X X X 0 0 0
FDT 1851.1 Bowman's Shortcut x X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1 B- Buffehr x 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 787.1 Buffehr x 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2111.1 Buff ehr Creek x 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2110.1 Buff ehr Mountain x 0 0 0 0 0
Way 2133W.1 Commando Run x X X 0 0 0
FDA 709.1A Communication Site S S S S* 0 0
FDT 2006.1 Cross Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 781.1 Davos Trail (Cortina Lane) S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDT 2014.1 Deluge Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 719.1A East Red Sandstone x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.2E Eiseman Hut Spur x X X X* .0 0
FDT 2128.1 Fall/Martin Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 751.1B Fowler-Hilliard Hut x X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1 C Freeman Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.313 Game Creek x X X O 0 0
FDT 2130.1 Game Creek x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.3C Game Creek Spur x X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 Gitalong Rd x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1A Golden Peak x X X 0 0 0
FDT 2015.1 Gore Creek x X X X 0 0
FDT 2015.1 A Gore Lake x X X X 0 0
FDT 2127.1 Grouse Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 713.1 Hanks Gulch X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 713.1 B Hanks Gulch Spur B X X X X* 0 0
FDR 759.1 Holy Cross City S* S* S* ' S* 0 0
"X" =CLOSED
"0"' = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "D"
TRAIL/ROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback. Hiking
FDR 703.26 Homestake Reservoir 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 703.2A Homestake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 711.5C Lift 14 X X X O 0 0
FDR 710.1 C Lift 6 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 Lime Creek S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 748.1 Line Shack x X X S* 0 0
FDR 791.1 Lionshead S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 786.2B Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2D Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2E Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.21F Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2G Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2H Lost Lake x X X X* 0 0
FDT 1893.1 Lost Lake X S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 786.1 Lost Lake Road 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 786.1A Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 B Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.1C Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 D, Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.1 H Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.2 Lost Lake Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 786.2A Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 786.2C Lost Lake Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDT 1894.1 Lost Lake to Piney x X X S* 0 0
FDR 711.1 Main Vail x X X O 0 0
FDR 749.1 Meadow Mountain x X X 0 0 0
FDR 748.1A Meadow Mountain Spur x X X S* 0 0
FDT 2129.1 B Meadow Mountain Tie Through x X X 0 0 0
FDR 719.1 Middle Creek S* S* S* S* 0 0
Way 2135.1 Middle Creek x X X X* 0 O
FDR 719.31 Middle Creek x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.1B Middle Creek Canyon X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 719.1C Middle Creek Spur x = ricFn x X* 0 0
"0"' = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "D"
TRAIL/ROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 719.1 D Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.2A Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.28 Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.2C Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.21) Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 719.3 Middle Creek Spur X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 719.3A Middle Creek Spur x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.31) Mid-Vail Water Tank x X X O 0 0
FDR 710.1 Mill Creek X* X* X* 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 D Mill Creek Spur x X X O 0 0
FDR 710.1 F Mill Creek Spur 1 F X X X - 0 0 0
FDR 710A G Mill Creek Spur 1G X X X 0 O 0
FDR 710.1 H Mill Creek Spur 1 H X X X 0 0 O
Way 711 WA Minturn to Game Peak x X X X* 0 0
FDR 405.1 Muddy Pass X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 North Sandstone x X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1A North Sandstone Spur A X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 B North Sandstone Spur B X X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 C North Sandstone Spur C X X X X* 0 0
FDR 720.1 H North Sandstone Spur H X X X X* 0 0
FDT 1896.1 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.2 North Trail x X X 0 0 0
FDT 1896.3 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 1896.5 North Trail x X X S* 0 0
FDT 2107.1 Nottingham Ridge x X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1E Old FDR 734 X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 728.1C Old Sawmill Road x X X X* 0 0
Way 2349W.1 Paulie's Plunge x X X 0 0 0
Way 2347W.1 Paulie's Sister x X X X* 0 0
FDR 701.1 Piney 0 0 0 0 0 O
FDT 2012.1 Pitkin x X X X 0 0
FDR 751.4B Ptarmigan Spur 4b x X X X* 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0= OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
= NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\lrailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "D"
TRAIL/ROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 751.213 Ptarmigan Spur E X X X X* 0 0
FDR 734.1 Red & White Mountain 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 734.1A Red & White Mountain 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 700.1 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 700.2 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass 0 0 0 0• 0 0
FDR 700.3 Red Sandstone - Muddy Pass O 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 728.1 B Ridge Road X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 713.1A Shrine Mountain x X X X* 0 0
FDR 709.2 Shrine Pass S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDT 2136.01 Son of Middle Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 737.1 Spraddle Creek S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 711.5E Sunup Bowl x X X 0 0 0
FDR 707.1A Tigiwon Campground S* S* S* S* 0 0
FDR 707.2A Tigiwon Sale Spur 2A X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.2B Tigiwon Sale Spur 213 X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.2C Tigiwon Sale Spur 2C X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.3A Tigiwon Sale Spur 3A X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.313 Tigiwon Sale Spur 313 X X X X* 0 0
FDR 707.3C Tigiwon Sale Spur 3c x X X X* 0 0
FDR 711.6A Top of Lift 10 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.7A Top of Lift 7 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 711.3E Top of Lift 9 X X X 0 0 0
FDR 736.1 A Tourist Trap Spring x X X 0 0 0
FDR 710.1 B Town Water Tank X* X* X* 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
NRT 2005.1 Two Elk x X X 0 0 0
FDR 762.2 Two Elk Trailhead 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDT 2109.1 A Upper Turquoise Lake x X X X 0 0
FDR 711.513 Vail Mountain Spur x X X 0 0 0
NRT 49.1 Vail Pass - Ten Mile x X X 0 0 0
FDR 752.1 Wearyman Spur 3 X* X* X* X* 0 0
FDR 752.1A Wearyman Spur 3a x X X X*' 0 0
"X" = CLOSED
"0"' = OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
= NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\trailyds.xis Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ALTERNATIVE "D"
TRAIUROAD MANAGEMENT
Full-sized motor Mechanized
Number Road/Trail Name vehicles Motorcycles ATVs vehicles Horseback Hiking
FDR 752.1 B Wearyman Spur 3b x X X X* O 0
FDR 752.1 C Wearyman Spur 3c x X X X* 0 0
FDR 751.4A Wearyman Spur 4a x X X X* 0 0
FDR 751.1 C Wearyman Spur C 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDR 751.2A Wearyman Spur D X X X X* 0 0
Way 2348W.1 Whiskey Creek x X X 0 0 0
Way 2348W.1 A Whiskey Creek x X X 0 0 0
FDR 770.1A Willow Creek x X X X* 0 0
FDR 770.1 B Willow Creek x X X X* 0 0
FDR 770.1 C Willow Creek x X X X* 0 0
I
"X" = CLOSED
"0= OPEN
"S" = SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS
" NEW CLOSURE OR RESTRICTION
F:\everyone\brent\wmfplan\lrailyds.xls Trails and roads shown in bold type indicate new management under this plan alternative
ATTACHMENT 4
Standards and Guidelines
S E C T I O N T H R E E
Disturbance Processes
Fire
STANDARDS 1. Decisions made concerning vegetation management activities including "no
action" will minimize exposure of firefighters and the public to fire hazards.
2. Human-caused-ignitions will be suppressed utilizing the appropriate manage-
ment response for fire.
3. Lightning-caused fires in areas not covered by a site-specific fire manage-
ment plan will be managed using the forestwide resource direction (fire em-
phasis) map and legend and the appropriate management response.
GUIDELINES 1. Where feasible and appropriate, prescribed fire may be utilized-to accomplish
resource management goals and objectives.
2. Minimize ground-disturbing activities associated with fire management
actions.
3. Fire management activities should be designed to retain the natural character
of the ecosystems.
4. In areas covered by a site-specific fire management plan, lightning-caused
fires may be managed to accomplish resource management objectives.
Insects and Disease
GUIDELINES - 1. Plan management activities with consideration for potential insect or disease
outbreaks. Design management to meet or enhance management area ob-
jectives.
2. Manage vegetation in high-use recreation areas to provide for public safety
and to improve forest health, as needed to maintain or improve the desired
recreation setting(s).
3. Use integrated pest management techniques, including silvicultural treat-
ments, to meet management area objectives. Treatment activities should be
based on values of, and risks to, wildlife habitat and adjacent private lands as
well as public lands. Priority should be given to areas in which values to be
protected exceed the cost of protection.
4. Project plans should consider existing infestations of insects or disease within
a project area. Activities should be designed to minimize the risk of spreading
Proposed Revised Forest Plan 2-21
r
Chapter 2
the infestation while still providing habitat for those wildlife species dependent
upon the presence of insects and disease.
5. Control natural insect and disease outbreaks in Wilderness only when justi-
fied by predicted loss of resource values outside of Wilderness.
Undesirable Species
STANDARDS 1. For all proposed projects or activities, determine the risk of noxious weed
introduction or spread, and implement appropriate mitigation measures.
2. Noxious weeds and other undesirable exotic species of plants and animals
are controlled or eliminated where possible.
3., Only certified and approved "noxious weed free" hay, straw, or mulch used
for feed or revegetation projects shall be used on NFS lands.
4. Contracts and permits for use of NFS lands and resources shall include provi-
sions that are necessary to prevent the spread of noxious weeds.
GUIDELINES 1. Develop a noxious weed and pest management program that addresses the
following components:
• awareness
• prevention
• inventory
• planning
• treatment
• monitoring
• reporting
• management activities.
Priorities for controlling noxious weeds are:
• prevent the introduction of new invaders
conduct early treatment of new infestations .
• contain and control established infestations.
When setting priorities for the treatment of noxious weeds, give consideration
to the following:
• rate of spread of the species
• invasions found within special management areas such as research
natural areas and Wilderness
• probability that the treatment(s) will be successful.
2-22 White River National Forest
ATTACHMENT 5
s~a is y: ` .
<OUNCIL OF GOOVCFR3 )NMEtyvTS • • , ,
To: NWCCOG Members and Interested Parties
From: Gary Severson, Executive Director
Date: 10/27/99
Re: NWCCOG Focus Regarding the White River National Forest Plan
The mission of Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG) is to build multi-jurisdictional,
intergovernmental partnerships to address issues affecting the region and to advocate members' interests and
needs with local, state, and federal entities. NWCCOG will remain focused on this mission in response to the
White River National Forest (WRNF) Proposed Plan Revision and Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS). Therefore, NWCCOG will respond to the WRNF in the following manner.
1. Multi-Jurisdictional Collaborative Planning, Implementation, And Monitoring For Intermixed Lands.
The WRNF recognizes the need for multi-jurisdictional, intergovernmental planning and management given the
intermix of lands of multiple jurisdictions and the National Forest. The WRNF stated, "In order to effectively
manage the Forest in the future, it is necessary to consider the impacts on both public and private lands ...Most
important will be the need to establish cooperative relationships with others to try to deal with issues beyond
National Forest System lands."' The WRNF went on to say that a goal should be to develop a system of
"boundaryless"2 planning by actively involving adjacent jurisdictions in the process. The USDA Committee of
Scientists recommended that a way to improve the management of National Forests is to "...develop more
collaborative relationships with local communities... throughout the planning process.' NWCCOG is in
agreement with the WRNF and the USDA Committee of Scientists.
The stated theme of the WRNF Intermix prescription is to, "...protect natural resources, provide compatible
multiple uses, and maintain cooperative relationships between private landowners and other governments with
jurisdiction. However, the preferred alternative identified by. the WRNF. in the Proposed Plan Revision and
DEIS identifies zero (o) acres of multi jurisdictional intermix lands 'on which to apply intermix prescriptions.
Therefore, NWCCOG will ask the WRNF to revisit the intermix issue. We will ask the WRNF to collaboratively
work with adjacent governmental jurisdictions to identify intermix areas of concern, then to identify issues,
establish goals and objectives, develop multi-jurisdictional management prescriptions, and initiate- a .
management implementation and monitoring system for the intermix areas.
2. The Effects Of Urbanization On Multi-Jurisdictional Planning And Management.
The WRNF stated, 'he current Forest Flan does not address management of resources in the context of this
topic [urbanization]. It is expected that growth in the planning area will continue throughout the period of
r Analvsis of the Management Situation. White River National Forest, 1997.
Z Ibid.
3 USDA Press Release T 0104.99. March 15, 1999.
° Management Area Direction, White River National Forest, 1999.
P.O. Box 2308 + 249 Warren Ave. + Siiverthome, CO 80498 + 9701468-0295 + Fax 970/468=1208 +www.nwc.cag.co.us
revision. This will be coupled by anticipated increases in use of the Forest by visitors. The issues associated
with this topic [urbanization] are expected to continue. In order to effectively manage the Forest in the future, it
is necessary to consider the impacts on both public and private lands. It is also necessary to consider the
effects of development on private lands on the Forest. This will include goals and objectives and Forest-wide
direction. Development of a management area prescription, allocation of some lands to that prescription, and
monitoring of how well actions are achieving established goals and objectives will also be necessary Most
important will be the need to establish cooperative relationships with others to try to deal with issues beyond
National Forest System lands.'s
Urbanization is a topic that all governmental jurisdictions are facing in light of unprecedented population growth
within the region. The WRNF identified urbanization as a separate issue topic in the Analvsis of the
Management Situation, but eliminated it as a separate topic and alternative in the DEIS because,
urbanization is not directly controlled by Forest Service management activities."6 NWCCOG agrees with the
WRNF Analvsis of the Management Situation, but disagrees with the WRNF conclusion in Summary of the Draft
Environmental Imoact Statement.
A plausible argument could be advanced that no local govemmental jurisdiction can directly control urbanization
within its legal authorities. However, if this rationale were used by other jurisdictions in addition to the WRNF for
eliminating the urbanization topic, then urbanization and its effects on the region would not be addressed. It is
the position of NWCCOG that. urbanization is an extremely important regional topic that affects multiple
governmental jurisdictions and must be addressed by all working in cooperation and collaboration with one
another. Therefore, NWCCOG will propose that the WRNF reexamine the urbanization topic in collaboration
with multiple governmental jurisdictions within the region to fully assess the topic on all jurisdictions including the
WRNF.
3. Community Relationships To Sustain Community Vitality And Healthy Ecosystems.
A stated goal of the USDA Forest Service is to, "...build community relationships that sustain both community
vitality and healthy ecosystems, plus enhance the quality of life."' In addition, three main goals apply to the
management of all National Forest System Lands: ensure sustainable ecosystems, provide multiple benefits for
people within the capabilities of ecosystems, and ensure organizational effectiveness.8 Finally, a stated forest-
wide goal, which applies to all National Forests in the Rocky Mountain Region is, "Cooperate with individuals
and organizations, and local, state, tribal, and federal governments to promote ecosystem health and
sustainability across landscapes."NWCCOG is in agreement with the conceptual linkages between healthy
ecosystems and healthy communities through sustainabiiity.
The WRNF is also aware that impacts on an ecosystem extend beyond the Forest's boundaries. The WRNF
stated, "Where multiple ownership exists in a watershed of any level, it is important that the Forest work with the
appropriate agencies and individuals where necessary to protect the watershed. "'0 The WRNF went on to state,
'Cooperative relationships are emphasized with other agencies and adjacent private landowners.""
Ecosystems do not stop at the National Forest boundaries, but extend to lands of adjacent jurisdictions.
However, NWCCOG questions the ability of the WRNF to-manage its lands and achieve its stated goals without
examining complete ecosystems. (The preferred alternative identified zero acres of intermix lands.) In addition,
. NWCCOG is concerned that there are no Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines specifically designed to
address the Forest-wide Goal of "Cooperate with ...local governments to promote health and. sustainability
across landscapes. ,12
S Analvsis of the Ntanasement Situation, White River National Forest, 1997.
6 Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, White river national Forest, 1999.
Rural Community Assistance. USDA Forest Service.
s Government Performance and Results Act, 1993.
9 Proposed Revised Land and Resource i?fanasement Plan. White River National Forest, 1999.
to Draft Environmental Imoact Statement, White River National Forest, 1999.
" Proposed Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, White River National Forest,. 1999.
u Ibid.
Therefore, NWCCOG will propose that the WRNF, working in collaboration with adjacent governmental
jurisdictions, develop a continuing multi jurisdicticnal policy level process, supported by specific Forest-wide
Standards and Guidelines. The purpose of the intergovemmental process will be to address regional issues,
including urbanization, and their effects on ecosystems, community vitality, and quality of life during the
development of the Forest Plan Revision as well as the implementation and monitoring of the approved Forest
Plan.
Conclusion
NWCCOG believes that by focusing on the three aforementioned areas, multi-jurisdictional collaborative
relationships can be developed to address important region-wide issues, producing mutual benefits to the
environment and communities of the northwestern region of Colorado.
f
MEMORANDUM
To: Members of the Town Council
From: Suzanne Silverthor
Subject: Annual Town of Vail mmunity Survey
Date: 2-18-00
Attached is a draft of the 2000 Town of Vail Community Survey as prepared by RRC
Associates. Chris Cares will be on hand at the Feb. 22 work session to review the draft
with you and to add additional questions generated by our discussion.
Additionally, we've asked Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, authors of the Vail Transportation
Master Plan, to draft a block of transportation/parking questions for your consideration.
We'll be circulating those questions to you via e-mail as soon as they become available.
Also, please be prepared to share your thoughts with us regarding distribution of the
survey. There are several techniques from which to choose: 1) mail-back;
2) telephone; 3) Internet Web site; or 4) a combination of the three.
The town traditionally fields the survey during the month of March with preliminary
results available in May.
Vail Community Survey Draft #2
FIRST, A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT TOWN OF VAIL GOVERNMENT...
1 How satisfied are you with the following functions of the Town of Vail government? Use a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means "not at all
satisfied" and 5 means "very satisfied" to rate each of the following items. Please use DK/NO (Don't Know/ No Opinion) as appropriate.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Current Town Council 1 2 3 4 5 x
Planning and Environmental Commission
(also known as the PEC) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Design Review Board (a.k.a. the DRB) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Art in Public Places Board (a.k.a. AIPP) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Town of Vail staff 1 2 3 4 5 x
2 Over the past year, would you say the responsiveness of the Town of Vail government has gotten worse, stayed the same, or
improved?
GOTTEN STAYED THE
WORSE SAME IMPROVED
1 2 3
3 The Town of Vail has identified the following issues as important to the future of Vail. Please rate how important you feel these issues
are to Vail by using the same scale as above.
NOT AT ALL VERY
IMPORTANT IMPORTANT DK/NO
Protection of Vail's environmental resources 1 2 3 4 5 x
Improvement of the sense of community in Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Construction and maintenance of public infrastructure
(roads, sewers, etc) to serve both residents and guests 1 2 3 4 5 x
Improving various modes of transportation in and
around Vail (public, private, pedestrian, bike, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Facilitating a range of housing opportunities for those
who work in Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Sustaining economic viability of businesses in Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
4 Do you think the Town of Vail spends too little, about the right amount, or too much time addressing these issues?
TOO LITTLE ABOUT THE TOO MUCH
TIME RIGHT AMOUNT TIME DKINO
Protection of Vail's environmental resources 1 2 3 x
Improvement of the sense of community in Vail 1 2 3 x
Construction and maintenance of public infrastructure
(roads, sewers, etc) to serve both residents and guests 1 2 3 x
Improving various modes of transportation in and
around Vail (public, private, pedestrian, bike, etc.) 1 2 3 x
Facilitating a range of housing opportunities for those
who work in Vail 1 2 3 x
Sustaining economic viability of businesses in Vail 1 2 3 x
5 Do you have any comments about the Town's approach to these issues?
r
6 Do you feel the Town of Vail needs to take action to improve the community's economic vitality (including retail quality and variety,
keeping businesses in Vail, etc.) in commercial areas?
[ ] Yes [ ] No [SKIP TO Q. 8]
7 How important are the following potential actions the Town could take?
NOT AT ALL VERY
IMPORTANT IMPORTANT DK/NO
Increase commercial space 1 2 3 4 5 x
Increase number of lodging beds 1 2 3 4 5 x
Increase lodge capacity 1 2 3 4 5 x
Improve retail quality 1 2 3 4 5 x
Improve lodge quality 1 2 3 4 5 x
Improve streetscape 1 2 3 4 5 x
Programs for local residents (more cultural events, arts,
family entertainment, etc) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Programs for visitors (more cultural events, arts,
family entertainment, etc) 1 2 3 4 5 x
8 Please rate your satisfaction with the following Town of Vail departments.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DKINO
General administration (manager's office, 1 2 3 4 5 x
finance department, clerk's office, staff)
Information dissemination (meeting notices, 1 2 3 4 5 x
project updates, newsletters, etc.)
Municipal Court 1 2 3 4 5 x
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The Community Development Department provides planning, design review, environmental health, and building inspection services.
9 Have you used the Community Development Department with the past 12 months?
1999 1998
[1 Yes
[ ] [ ] No [SKIP TO Q.11]
10 (IF YES) Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Overall service and efficiency 1 2 3 4 5 x
Courtesy and attitude 1 2 3 4 5 x
Building permit review and inspections 1 2 3 4 5 x
2
11 (ALL RESPONDENTS) Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Cleanliness and hygiene of restaurants in Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Livability of Vail (environment, quality of
development, amenities versus cost to live here) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Environmental quality in the Town of Vail (air, water, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Quality of new development and redevelopment over the past
three years (Austria Haus, Golden Peak, Slifer Plaza, streetscape, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
PUBLIC WORKS
The Public Works Department provides maintenance of public areas including parks, roads and streets.
12 Rate your satisfaction with Public Works services in the Town of Vail:
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Snow removal 1 2 3 4 5 x
Frontage Road maintenance by the State of Colorado 1 2 3 4 5 x
Road and street maintenance by the Town of Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Park playground equipment safety 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall park maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 x
Appearance and condition of town owned buildings 1 2 3 4 5 x
Friendliness and courteous attitude of Public Works employees 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of pedestrian villages 1 2 3 4 5 x
13 The Town of Vail is reviewing street signage throughout the town. Which of the following best characterizes your preference for
neighborhood street signs?
Maintain vertical wooden format for neighborhood signs
[ ] Replace existing wooden signs with horizontal aluminum signs
[ ] No preference
EMERGENCY SER VICES
14 Have you utilized Fire Services within the past 12 months?
Yes
[ ] No [SKIP TO Q. 16]
15 Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Fire Services in the Town of Vail.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Fire response time/ arrival on-scene 1 2 3 4 5 x
Emergency medical or first aid assistance 1 2 3 4 5 x
Courtesy and attitude 1 2 3 4 5 x
Public fire safety education program 1 2 3 4 5 x
Fire prevention/inspection service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Professional in appearance and actions 1 2 3 4 5 x
Firefighters take time to explain what needs to be done 1 2 3 4 5 x
Your confidence in the ability of the Vail Fire Department 1 2 3 4 5 x
3
f
16 Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Services in the Town of Vail.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Overall feeling of safety and security 1 2 3 4 5 x
Visibility of police foot/vehicle patrol 1 2 3 4 5 x
Friendliness and approachability of 1 2 3 4 5 x
Vail police department employees
Overall quality of service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall fairness of police employees 1 2 3 4 5 x
17 Is the level of enforcement for the following violations too little, just about right, or too much?
TOO JUSTABOUT TOO
LITTLE RIGHT MUCH
Traffic enforcement (speeding, DUI, reckless driving, etc.) [ ] [ ] [ ]
Parking enforcement [ ] [ ] [ ]
Code enforcement (signage, abandoned vehicles, etc.) [ ] [ j [ ]
ANIMAL CONTROL
(Contracted from Eagle County)
18 Have you had contact with animal control within the past 12 months?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No [SKIP TO Q. 20]
19 Please rate your satisfaction with animal control services.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DKINO
Response time to complaints 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall quality of service 1 2 3 4 5 x
20 Are patrols for leash law violations too little, just right, Too JUST Too
Or too much? LITTLE RIGHT MUCH
TOWN OF VAIL BUS SYSTEM, PUBLIC PARKING AND STREETS
21 Have you used the TOV bus system within the past 12 months?
[ ] Yes [ ] No [SKIP TO Q. 241
22 How often do you normally use the bus system?
[ J Frequently Almost every day
[ ] Often About once a week
Sometimes Once a month or so
[ ] Rarely Less than once a month
4
23 Please rate your satisfaction with bus service.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DKINO
Bus driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 x
Safe driving habits of bus driver 1 2 3 4 5 x
Dependability of bus service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of buses 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of Vail Transportation Bus Terminal 1 2 3 4 5 x
24 Do you think the frequency of the following bus services is appropriate?
TOO ABOUT NOTFREQUENT
FREQUENT RIGHT ENOUGH
Frequency of In-town shuttle [ ] [ ] [ ]
Frequency of outlying services [ ] [ ]
25 Please rate your satisfaction with public parking services in Vail.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DKINO
Booth attendant courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 x
Speed of transaction at staffed exit booths 1 2 3 4 5 x
Speed of transaction at automatic exit booths 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall parking fees/pricing structure 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness and lighting of parking structures 1 2 3 4 5 x
(Some additional questions about the fee structure for parking to be inserted here)
LIBRARY
26 Do you hold a library card in the Town of Vail?
[ j Yes
No
27 Have you visited, called or e-mailed the library within the past 12 months?
[ 1 Yes
[ ] No [SKIP TO Q. 30]
28 Have you used the Community Room within the past 12 months?
[ j Yes
[ ] No
29 Please rate your satisfaction with the following Vail library services and facilities.
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED DK/NO
Research information 1 2 3 4 5 x
Material Checkout 1 2 3 4 5 x
Fiction and non-fiction books 1 2 3 4 5 x
Magazines and newspapers 1 2 3 4 5 x
Alternate media including video and books on tape 1 2 3 4 5 x
On-line databases 1 2 3 4 5 x
Youth materials 1 2 3 4 5 x
Youth programs 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking/ access 1 2 3 4 5 x
5
30 Over the past two years, has the sense of community within the Town improved, stayed the same, or gotten worse?
[ ] Improved
[ ] Stayed the same
[ ] Gotten worse
[ ] Don't know/no opinion
ABOUT YOU
Please provide the following demographic information. Please remember that all responses remain strictly confidential and are
reported onh' in group format.
31 Where is your residence within the Town of Vail located?
[ ] East Vail [ ] Potato Patch, Sandstone
[ J Booth Falls/ Bald Mountain Road areas [ ] Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, the Valley
[ ] Booth Creek/Aspen Lane [ ] Vail Commons/Safeway area
[ ] Golf Course [ ] West Vail (north of 1-70)
[ ] Vail Village [ ] Matterhorn, Glen Lyon
[ ] Lionshead [ ] Intermountain
[ j Not a resident of the Town of Vail [ ] Other:
32 What is your employment status?
[ ] Employed full time
[ ] Employed part time
[ ] Not employed
33 Do you own or rent your residence?
[ J Own
[ ] Rent
[ ] Other (specify)
34 How long have you lived within the Town of Vail (or owned property if a non-resident)?
[ ] Less than 1 year
[ ] 1-5 years
[ ] 6-15 years
[ ] More than 15 years
35 Do you have computer access to the Internet?
[ J Yes
[ ] No
36 Which of the following best describes you?
[ ] Non-resident owner of business/comm. property [SKIP TO Q. 38]
[ J Year-round resident (12 months/year)
[ ] Seasonal resident
37 (IF RESIDENT) Do you own or operate a business within the Town of Vail?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
38 Are you a registered voter in Vail?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
6
39 Which of these categories best describes your household status?
[ ] Single, no children
[ ] Couple, no children
[ ] Household with children
[ ] Empty-nester, children no longer at home
40 Do you have any additional comments about the Vail Town Government?
Thank vou, for vozu• panicipation in our continuing evaluation program.
Please attach sheet w- additional comments or suggestions.
11RRCSERVERIIDATA2lworddocslVAILITOWN120001Vail Care Survey2.DOC
7
Art in Public Places
Goals 2000
This executive summary outlines the Art in Public Places Program. It includes
the Mission and Vision statements; the goals of the Board and the roles of the
Coordinator, Board Members, Town Council and Public Works Department.
1. VISION, MISSION and VALUES
Vision Statement:
"Enrich our community through the arts."
Mission Statement:
"To develop artistic projects and programs
that involve and educate the community
to enhance its vitality."
II. AIPP GOALS
Goal ft To establish clear job descriptions and expectations
for the coordinator and board members to assure an
effectively functioning board.
Measure: Review and revise as necessary.
Actions: Coordinator's job description.
Expectations and roles of board members.
Description of relationship to Public Works staff.
Committee responsibilities.
. 0 0 0 0 0
. . . . . .
i
r
a
Goal #2: Develop criteria and parameters for type of projects
and programs we most want to do and that support
our mission statement.
Action: Write, present and adopt the master plan.
Analyze where art pieces would be most visible and
therefore most desirable in the core of Town.
Action: Acquire a copy of the small-town AIPP directory.
Action: Evaluate the Temporary Art Program and
increase quality.
Action: Talk to Vail's art teacher to coordinate educational
programs and student participation.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal #3: Have AIPP Coordinator involved in initial planning of
TOV Public Works projects to enhance the aesthetics
of the project.
Measure: AIPP representative as part of the initial programming team.
Actions: Coordinator attends planning meetings.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal #4: Assure that Council, as the board's governing body
supports AIPP's purpose and projects.
Measure: Submit the update Vision and Mission statements and
strategic plan to council and ask them to pass a resolution
endorsing them.
Action: AIPP board member selects Town Council
Representative to keep informed.
Action: Council representatives give Town Council updates.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
r
Goal #5: Funding Source Study
Measures: To develop a percent for art program involving public
and or private funding sources.
Action: Study what other towns are doing.
Action: Meet with TOV Staff and Finance Director to
review 5-year plan.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal #6: Have art become a major part of private development
and redevelopment (Private Developer Initiative Program)
Measure: Have AIPP included in TOV review process for new
applications (DRB, PEC, etc.)
Action: Work more closely with Community Development.
Action: Make art a part of Special Development Districts.
Action: Structure a "policy" or incentives for developers to
include artwork in projects.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
111. ROLES AND TASKS
Coordinator:
• Coordinate AIPP board meetings.
• Representative to Public Works planning meetings.
• Coordinate maintenance of TOV art collection.
• Coordinate Temporary Art Program.
• Execute special events.
• Execute AIPP projects.
• Develop AIPP budget.
• Facilitate AIPP Master Planning process.
• Attend department head meetings.
• Prepare board members for individual meetings with
Council representatives.
• Gather information and data.
• Liaison with TOV, i.e.: administrative staff, Town Council.
• AIPP representative within the community.
• Involved in planning with Community Development
• Keep informed of national art programs and projects.
• Public relations.
• Administrative tasks.
• Report to Town Council.
AIPP Board:
• Run AIPP meetings.
• Keep informed of national art programs and projects.
• Attend regular meetings.
• Participate on special committees.
• Positive lobbing to build support for AIPP within community.
• Generate new ideas and programs.
TOV Council:
• Understand AIPP programs.
• Endorse AIPP and support their decisions.
• Show respect and appreciation for AIPP Board.
• Town Council representative should attend monthly meeting and report
back to council.
Department of Public Works:
• Install and maintain the art collection.
• Include and involve AIPP in the planning process.
• Anticipate needs and estimated construction costs for future projects.
• Provide administrative/secretarial support.
• Endorse and support.
l
Examples of AIPP Responsibilities
Maintenance:
"History of the Gore" Ceramic mural in the VTC Bus Shelter
Children's Fountain (Vail Village)
"Clip Man," Don Wilson (Neon artwork, Lionshead parking structure)
'The Lift,' Susan Raymond (in Lionshead near main bus stop)
"Kaikoo," Betty Gold (Red statue near Library)
"Blue Bird of Paradise," (Large statue at Lionshead parking structure)
"is Anyone Listening," (grass near Subway at Lionshead parking
structure)
Temporary Art Program (TAP):
Willow Park Exhibition 1998
Ford Park Exhibition 1999
Individual Temporary Art Sites through-out Vail Village and Lionshead
Town of Vail Initiated Projects:
Seibert Circle
Check Point Charlie
Ford Park Playground
Exuberance
Mural in Lionshead Parking Structure
Donated Artwork:
10"' Mountain Division Statue
Australia Bronze Skier Statue
"Is Anyone Listening" Don Mitchell
"Terre Haute" Bryan Hunt
Administer process for all gift requests
AIPP Master Plan:
Work with Art Consultants
Review Lionshead Master Plan
Focus Groups
Draft of AIPP Master Plan
Meetings with Community Development regarding "Private Developer Initiative Program"
Participate in Wayfinding Program
AIPP Board Members work sessions to define AIPP Vision, Mission and Goals
Participate in TOV Holiday Lighting Plan
Community Involvement:
Seibert Circle meetings
Temporary Art Receptions, Willow Park and Ford Park
Slide Lecture at Colorado Mountain College
Lecture and discussion on Public Art with University of Colorado Professor, Erika Doss
Mountain School field trip to clean Children's Fountain
Dedication of Australia Donation
Dedication of 10th Mountain Memorial
Christmas Tree Decorations
f
AIPP Budget 2000
Maintenance 10,000
Project Fund 20,000
Temporary Exhibition Program 3,000
Contract Labor 22.000
AIPP Program Budget for 2000: $55,000
VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
July 1989
I. PURPOSE OF THE VAIL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
The program is intended to evolve in a way that reflects a
broad range of community input and involves artists and
art professionals.
Specific objectives of the Arts in Public Places Program
are to:
A. Establish a public art program that is unique to Vail
and therefore has a primarv responsibility to the
community.
B. Enhance the beauty of the Vail community by placing
quality visual art in highly accessible and visible
public places for residents and guests to enjoy.
C. Develop a diverse, high quality public art
collection. The overall program shall strive for
diversity in style, scale, media and artists.
Exploratory types of work as well as established art
forms shall be encouraged.
D. Provide an effective process for selecting,
purchasing, commissioning, placing, and maintaining
public art projects that represent the best in
aesthetic and technical quality.
E. Create a framework for a sustained effort to develop
public art in the Vail community.
F. Develop a strong public education effort in order to
stimulate discussion and understanding about the
visual arts..
G. Provide a public art development process that
encourages and is supportive to artists who wish to
work in the public realm.
H. Encourage support for and inclusion of public art
projects in private sector development.
There will always be varying opinions on what a public art
project contributes to the community. Different opinions
of an artwork are encouraged. This variety.of
interpretations is perhaps what distinguishes public art
as a challenging art form that encourages public
interaction.
1
Art in Public Places Master Plan Outline
1. Executive Summary
A. Goal of the Master Plan
1. To enhance the experience and enjoyment of Vail's highly visible and well
utilized public spaces through the incorporation of artistic elements
2. To provide a framework in which art is integrated into both public and private
projects within the Town
B. Definition of Art in Public Places
1. The integration of art and art programs into Vail's community life
2. Town of Vail owned artwork displayed on Town property
3. Artwork on loan and temporarily displayed on Town property
4. Privately owned artwork adjacent to community hubs, plazas, and pedestrian
thoroughfares
C. Actions
1. Include funding in the capital improvement budget for the integration of art in
Town of Vail projects
2. Require new development and redevelopment projects that impact and are
adjacent to public spaces to integrate artistic elements
II. Introduction
A. Mission and vision statements of AIPP
B. Purpose of the AIPP Master Plan
C. Process of developing the AIPP Master Plan
D. Public focus groups and art consultants
III. Existing Aesthetic and Physical Conditions within the Town of Vail
IV. Discussion of Site Integrated Art
A. Documentation and history of public art
B. Definition of site integrated art
C. References to public art in the Vail Village Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan, and Streetscape Master Plan
V. Integrating Art into Public Sites
A. Information sites
B. Walls
C. Trails
D. Seating
E. Bridges and railings
F. Utilities
G. Recreations
H. Paving
VI. Opportunities to Integrate Art into the Community
A. Town of Vail projects
B. Public and private partnerships
C. Private development
D. Temporary Art Program
E. Gifts and donations
VII. Implementation
A. Integrate the AIPP program with TOV projects and the goals of the Town Council
B. Annual review of upcoming TOV projects by the AIPP board
C. Develop a program for the inclusion of art in private development
weekly
.1~INI~
EDITORIAL
We've got a new
chance for public art;
Let's run with it.
Vail has wasted entirely too much time in its
brief history fighting over art. We wish that pub-
lic art could be decided upon with a method short
of military skirmishes, but the fact remains that
people in this town are touchy and outspoken
about the other guy's taste. It does not make for
strong aesthetics.
But we're seeing a bright spot. The Art in
Public Places program is drafting a master plan
.that will take the focus away from large installa-
tions and instead concentrate on the everyday
sense of place. The plan calls for small touches
such as sculptural benches, redesigned bus shel-
ters, light posts - even sewer lids. It's a. vast
departure from our all-or-nothing approach and a
chance to do small projects as funding allows.
As we see it, it's also an opportunity to bring
local talent to the fore. This valley is full of
artists who could and should make a strong con-
tribution to public aesthetics. Their presence
would make a positive statement about the com-
munity's self-image - something everyone's talk-
ing about these days.
Let's not let the momentum for this project
slide. We just lost the Vail Valley Arts Council,
which does not bode well for art's place in this
community. Still, we have a wonderful opportu-
nity before us. Let's allow public art to flourish in
this town. If people want Vail to have some feel-
ing, let's give it to them. - TF .
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, February 16, 2000
3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS
PROJECT ORIENTATION / LUNCH - Community Development Department 11:30 am
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Clark Brittain _
Bill Pierce
Hans Woldrich
Melissa Greenauer
Doug Cahill (PEC)
SITE VISITS 1:30 pm
1. ERWSD - Black Gore Drive
2. Ski Club Vail - 598 Vail Valley Dr
3. Bridge St. Lodge - 321 Bridge Street
Driver: Brent
PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm
1. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District - Raw water intake structure. Brent
Black Gore Drive/Lot 8, Heather of Vail.
Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
2. Ski Club Vail - Final review of a proposed redevelopment plan. Brent
598 Vail Valley Drive/Tract B, Vail Village 7`"
Applicant: Ski Club Vail, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
3. Mckibben/Walker residence - Final review of a residential remodel. Brent
5095 Main Gore Drive/Lot 213, Vail Meadows #1.
Applicant: The McKibben family, represented by RKD
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
4. West Vail Lodge - Conceptual review of a proposed redevelopment plan Brent
2211 N. Frontage. Rd: (West Vail Lodge)/Lot 1, Vail das Schone #3.
Applicant: Reaut Corporation
CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE
.ti
TOWN OF YAM
1
5. Bridge-Street Lodge - Entry door replacement. Ann
321, Bridge Street/Lots A&B, Block 5A, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Mike Rippy, Rippy Contractors
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 4-0 (Greenauer absent)
APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
1. That the existing beam stay in place.
2. That the exterior door have an unpainted, patined steel finish.
6. Vail Chapel - Conceptual review of revised parking, landscaping and building Dominic
improvements.
19 Vail Road/Portion of Tract J, Block 7, Vail Village 1st
Applicant: Vail Interfaith Chapel
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
7. Antlers - Final review of exterior building materials. George
680 W. Lionshead Pld Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 4th Filing.
Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Robert Levine
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
8. Glen Lyon Office Building - Conceptual review of a proposed amendment to George
Special Development District No. 4.
1000 S. Frontage Road West (Glen Lyon Office Building)/Lot 54, Block K,
Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Dundee Realty, represented by Segerberg Mayhew Architects
CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE
9. Vail Plaza Hotel - Final review. George
100 East Meadow Drive/Lots M, N, & O, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Waldir Prado, Daymer Corporation
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 1, 2000
Staff Approvals
O'Neill - Interior conversion. Ann
1385 Westhaven Circle/Lot 51, Glen Lyon.
Applicant: Patricia O'Neill
Bricker-Window addition. Allison
4516 E. Meadow Dr.#806/Timber Falls, Phase II.
Applicant: David and Michelle Bricker
W&B Development LLC- Minor changes to secondarily unit. Dominic
387 Beaver Dam Circle/Lot 1, Block 4, Vail Village 3` Filing.
Applicant: W&B Development LLC
W&B Development LLC- Minor changes to primary unit. Dominic
387 Beaver Dam Circle/Lot 1, Block 4, Vail Village 3`d Filing.
Applicant: W&B Development LLC
2
Lodge at Lionshead Phase I - Repaint. Allison
380 E. Lionshead Circle/Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 15t
Applicant: Vail Lionshead Condo Association
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. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2356,Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
3
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE
Monday, February 14, 2000
MEETING RESULTS
Proiect Orientation / PEC LUNCH - Communitv Development Department 12:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT DRB MEMBERS PRESENT
John Schofield Bill Pierce
Galen Aasland Clark Brittain
Diane Golden - Hans Woldrich
Brian Doyon
Tom Weber
Chas Bernhardt
Doug Cahill
Site Visits : 1:30 p.m.
1. Donovan Park - Lower bench of Donovan Park
2. Glen Lyon Office Building -1000 S. Frontage Rd. West
Driver: Brent
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 Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m.
1. A joint worksession with the Design Review Board to discuss the proposed
development plan/master plan and a conditional use permit for a park and recreation
facility for an approximate 12 acre unplatted parcel of land, zoned General Use and
Residential Cluster, commonly referred to as the lower bench of Donovan Park, located
south of the South Frontage Road and east and north of Matterhorn Circle.
Applicant: Town of VailNail Recreation District
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
TOWN OF VAIL t
1
2. A worksession to discuss a proposed major amendment to Special Development District
No. 4, located at 1000 S. Frontage Road West (Glen Lyon Office Building)/Lot 54, Block
K, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Dundee Realty, represented by Segerberg Mayhew Architects
Planner: George Ruther
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
3. A request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit, to allow for the
conversion of existing hotel rooms into employee housing units, located at 2211 N.
Frontage Rd. (West Vail Lodge)/Lot 1, Vail das Schone #3.
Applicant: Reaut Corporation
Planner Brent Wilson
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
4. A worksession to discuss the Town of Vail's revised parking generation analysis and
proposed amendments to Chapter 12-10, Town Code.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Brent Wilson
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
5. A worksession to discuss proposed changes to the Town of Vail's parking pay-in-lieu
policy and proposed amendments to Chapter 12-10, Town Code.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Brent Wilson
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
6. A review of a proposed amendment to the Town's Subdivision Regulations (Section 13-7-
7 - "Condominiums and Condominium Conversions"), to allow for the conversion of
accommodation units to employee housing units.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Brent Wilson
MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Chas Bernhardt VOTE: 7-0
APPROVED (RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL)
7. Information Update
8. Approval of January 24, 2000 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. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone
for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
2
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: September 14, 1998
SUBJECT: A request for a worksession to discuss a proposed expansion to the
Dobson Ice Arena, located at 321 East Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 1,
Vail Lionshead 2nd Filing.
Applicant: Vail Recreation District, represented by Odell Architects,
P.C.
Planner: George Ruther
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The Vail Recreation District, represented by Odell Architects, is requesting a
worksession with the Planning and Environmental Commission to discuss a proposed
expansion to the John A. Dobson Ice Arena. The proposed expansion is intended to
accommodate a new team locker room, an administrative office, a multi-purpose room
and storage area addition along with a new gymnastics facility. The new additions are to
be constructed on the east side of the existing arena. The total square footage of the
new construction is approximately 8,460 square feet (6,000 sf. gymnastics center/2,460
sf. locker room, office, etc.). The proposed expansions are intended to help the VRD
meet the ever expanding demands for services in the Valley.
The purpose of this worksession is to identify and discuss possible issues and
concerns which the applicant will need to address prior to final review of this
project.
II. BACKGROUND
On Tuesday, August 18, 1998, the Vail. Recreation District appeared before the Vail
Town Council to request permission to proceed through the public process. The Town
Council's permission is required since the ice arena is owned by the Town of Vail and is
leased to the VRD. Following a brief presentation of the proposal to the Council, the
Council approved the request to proceed through the process.
On Wednesday, August 19, 1998, the Vail Recreation District appeared before the Town
of Vail Design Review Board for a conceptual review of the project. The following is a
summary of the DRB's comments:
• Pull the gymnastic center away from the main arena building and provide a slightly
different form of architecture.
• Create a new identity to the gymnastics center with the creative use of exterior
building materials and colors.
1 -
• Tie the team locker room addition into the existing building.
• The roof form design needs to be better thought out and designed.
• Consider how access and pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow will function.
According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the John A. Dobson Ice Arena is
located in the General Use Zone District. Pursuant to the Town of Vail Zoning
Regulations, the purpose of the General Use Zone District is to,
"provide sites for public and quasi-public uses which, because of their special
characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards
prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards
especially prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are
necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 12-1-2 of this Title and
to provide for the public welfare. The General Use District is intended to ensure
that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi-public uses
permitted in the District are appropriately located and designed to meet the
needs of residents and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and,
in the case of buildings and other structures, to ensure adequate light, air, open
spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses. (Ord.
21(1994) § 10)."
Sections 12-9C-2 & 3 outline the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the General
Use Zone District. The ice arena is considered a,"public/quasi-public indoor community
facility" and is an allowed conditional use in the General Use Zone District subject to the
issuance of a conditional use permit.
Section 12-9C-5 of the Zoning Regulations outlines the standards for developments in
the General Use Zone District. According to the Zoning Regulations,
"In the General Use Zone District, development standards in each of the
following categories shall be prescribed by the Planning and Environmental
Commission:
1. Lot area and site dimensions
2. Setbacks
3. Building Height
4. Density Control
5. Site Coverage
6. Landscaping and site development
7. Parking and loading
A complete zoning analysis of this project will be provided by staff at the time of the final
review by the Planning and Environmental Commission.
2
a
III. DISCUSSION ISSUES
The Community Development Department has completed a preliminary review of the
proposed ice arena expansion. Upon completion our review, staff has identified several
issues we believe the applicant, staff and the Planning and Environmental Commission
should address prior to final review. '
Staff has identified the following issues for discussion:
1. Pedestrian and Vehicular Access
During the Town Council's initial review of the applicant's request to proceed through the
public process, the Council expressed their concerns regarding access. Currently,
access to the arena is provided from the south side of the building off of West Meadow
Drive. During certain events, the bus route on West Meadow Drive is blocked due to
people waiting to get into the arena, or by loading and delivery vehicles parked in the
street. The Town of Vail has requested that the applicant's revisit the loading and
delivery situation particularly and provide better accommodations.
There has also been concerns raised over the proposed location of, and access to, the
new gymnastics facility. The remoteness of the front entry of the facility from the vehicle
drop-off points on East Lionshead Circle could result in parking concerns in the future.
During the review of the Gold Peak Ski Base Facility many parents expressed their
interest in having the entrance to the ski school visible from the drop-off area. A similar
situation might be beneficial to the users of the gymnastics facility.
Staff would recommend that the applicant present the proposed traffic patterns in and
around the project and that the applicant and Planning and Environmental Commission
discuss the issue.
2. Conditional Use
As mentioned previously, the General Use Zone District allows this type of facility
subject to a conditional use permit. The expanded facility should greatly impact the
existing use of the property in terms of activities, numbers of users, vehicle trips, etc.
Staff would recommend that the applicant provide a detailed description of the intended
use of the new facility once the improvements are complete (types of events, frequency.
of events, hours of operation, numbers of patrons, staffing levels, parking needs, etc.).
3. Development Standards
The development standards in the General Use Zone District are to be prescribed by the
Planning and Environmental Commission. While a complete zoning analysis has not yet
been completed, are there any issues that the Planning and Environmental Commission
wishes to express to the applicant at this time?
4 Other
Are there any other issues or information that the Planning and Environmental
Commission wishes to have prior to the final review?
3
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
As this is a worksession to discuss the proposed expansion the Dobson Ice Arena, staff
will not be providing a formal recommendation at this time. However, at the time of final
review by the Planning and Environmental Commission, staff will provide its
recommendation.
4
1 ; AZ
T~ANC~ ; Q
s '-D of
PROP
Memorandum
TO: Vail Town Council
RE: Frontage Road Parking
FROM: Robert McLaurin
DATE, February 18, 2000
At last Tuesday's meeting, there was a discussion by the Council concerning changing the
Town's policies regarding parking on the frontage roads. The current policy, which was
developed as part of the 1992 Vail Transportation Plan, provides that once both of the parking
structures are full, a "parking emergency" is declared and vehicles are allowed to park on the
frontage road.
It is my understanding that the Council wishes to modify this policy to allow frontage road
parking (east of the Roundabout) when the Village structure fills. This would eliminate diverting
the overflow parking to the Lionshead Parking Structure.
While we are exploring this option, there are several factors which make immediate
implementation of this proposal problematic. First and foremost, the frontage roads are owned
and maintained by the Colorado Department of Transportation. Any change in our current
parking regulations regarding the frontage roads would require the consent of CDOT. We
cannot unilaterally change the parking regulations (or any other regulations) on the frontage
road.
Additionally, this proposal would likely have a negative impact on parking revenues, as the
demand for the Lionshead Structure would decrease based on the additional supply.
There is also the equity issue regarding the different treatment of the Village and Lionshead
Parking structures. I anticipate that the Lionshead merchants would view this proposal
unfavorably and would want the frontage road parking extended west to pedestrian bridge.
Another equity issue involves those pass holders which have pre-purchased their parking. When
the Council authorized three days of free parking this December, we heard their complaints from
several pass holders about the devaluation on their parking investment.
For all these reasons, I would ask the Council not to take action on this at this point in time. In
the process of preparing a series of recommendations to modify parking rates, regulations, etc., I
believe this issue is best handled in the context of the overall parking situation and strategy.
MEMORANDUM
To: Members of the Town Council
From: Mayor Ludwig Kurz
Subject: Community Task Force & Vail Renaissance Update
Date: 2-18-2000
There are five activities I'd like to share with you as they relate to the Community Task Force
and the Vail Renaissance effort.
Whistler Fact-Finding Trin. March 22-24
First, I'd like to invite you to join in a fact-finding trip to Whistler on March 22, 23 & 24. Based
on discussion at our retreat in Keystone, we all agreed that we benefit from these trips. The
Whistler trip will include representation from the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, plus any
members of the Task Force who wish to join us. Much like the Carmel trip, we'll be meeting
with our Whistler counterparts to research vision and strategic planning; long range goal setting
and follow through; examples of positive collaboration; interface between ski company and
community operations and functions; and community indicators and measurements. The
schedule includes a 5:40 p.m. departure from DIA on March 22; meetings with Whistler
representatives on March 23; and departure from Vancouver at 8 a.m. on March 24 with arrival
at DIA at 11:40 a.m. The price of airfare is $520 based on availability; lodging prices range from
$185 to $320 per night. We'd like to confirm our Town Council representation by Feb. 25, so
please let me know if you'd like to attend.
Ashen Dav-Trin. March 30
Also, mark your calendars for a day-trip to Aspen on March 30 (we may need to reschedule our
dinner with the Avon Town Council).
Task Force Status
Enclosed is a summary report outlining a transition plan for the Community Task Force. A six-
point action plan has been created to provide the Task Force with a more meaningful structure
and strategic direction to address focused and critical community issues.
Emnl.wPe. Guest Service Recognition
We've been asked to host the drawing for February's guest service recognition recipients at our
March 7 evening Town Council meeting. I hope you'll join me in recognizing these outstanding
employees.
Communitv Ski Dav
The next Community Ski Day will be held on Thursday, April 6 as part of the Vail Renaissance
campaign. We'll meet at 9:30 a.m. at Two Elk.
Also, please plan on a work session on Tuesday, Feb. 29 from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. We have a
number of pressing issues to consider and need that extra time. I hope this does not overly
inconvenience anyone. Thanks for your understanding.
J
VAIL COMMUNITY TASK FORCE
STATUS REPORT
February 2000
INTRODUCTION
Since 1995 the Vail Community Task Force, sponsored by the Town of Vail and Vail Associates,
has experienced much success in launching initiatives such as the Community Host program and
Vail Tomorrow. During the past year, however, representatives from the Town of Vail and Vail
Associates have noted a decrease in the group's momentum and effectiveness. Dr. Caroline
Fisher, an organizational consultant, was hired to analyze the existing structure of the Task Force
and to work with the sponsoring organizations to develop a process that ensures the Task Force
fulfills a meaningful role in the community. A summary of that work, including an action plan
that leaves the Task Force inactive during a transitional period, is presented in this report.
BACKGROUND
On Jan. 28, representatives from the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts met to review the
accomplishments and future purpose and role of the Vail Community Task Force. While the
Task Force, formed in 1995 as part of the TOV-VA managed growth agreement, has had
numerous successes during the past five years, the voluntary group has remained inactive since
the fall of 1999 primarily due to turn-over of leadership by the sponsoring agencies.
This down-period created an opportunity to probe current effectiveness of the Task Force and to
develop strategies for improvement. Caroline Fisher interviewed members of the Task Force to
gain insights from the membership. Most respondents said the Task Force had been ineffective
of late. One solution, they said, is to receive additional clarity from the sponsoring agencies
(TOV and VA) regarding the specific role of the Task Force and general guidelines for action.
This request formed the basis of the Jan. 28 sponsorship meeting, facilitated by Fisher. Attendees
were: Bill Jensen, Porter Wharton, David Corbin, Robin Litt, Ludwig Kurz, Sybill Navas, Bob
McLaurin, Tom Moorhead, Russell Forrest and Suzanne Silverthorn.
RECAP OF SPONSORSHIP PLANNING MEETING, JANUARY 28
The group began by reviewing a vision statement and associated goals developed by the Task
Force in May 1999:
Vail--the Best Alpine Resort in the World
Our community goals to achieve the vision are to:
• Provide an enriching environment in which to live;
• Provide the best guest experience;
• Be the best emplover, a community where the work force is valued and motivated;
and
• Respect and protect our environment
c
The group also reviewed a description of the purpose of the Task Force as outlined in the
managed growth agreement: "to explore additional mechanisms to better utilize existing
resources during the nonpeak periods and to recommend a plan of action. The goal of the task
force is to seek out wars to coordinate events and pricing. for the business community VVTCB
and the Lail Vallev Foundation to enhance nonpeak period visitation. This task force, made up
of four community residents and business ou%neis and the members of the Assessment
Committee... u%ill meet at least, four times a year. "
As the discussion ensued, it became evident that additional clarity is needed to bring more
meaning to the vision and goals--which ultimately will contribute to the success of the Task
Force and the community. A description of intended outcomes and measurements, as agreed
upon by both the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, is an important--yet missing--component
needing immediate attention.
Recognizing the importance of this necessary next step, the group discussed a structure with
which to begin this work. The desire for continued communications with the Task Force and the
community was at the forefront of the discussion.
ACTION PLANS
The following action plans were developed:
• Task Force Transition February
The Town of Vail and Vail Associates are committed to creating a framework to ensure
the Task Force fulfills a meaningful role in the community. To that end, the Task Force
will remain inactive at present while the sponsoring agencies (TOV-VA) address
members' request for clarity of purpose and goals. All previous initiatives, including the
employee guest service recognition award, fact-finding trips and the Vail Renaissance
campaign, will remain in place. The Town of Vail and Vail Associates will resurrect the
Task Force within the year, once roles and strategies are more clearly defined. At that
time, membership of the Task Force will be realigned to meet the strategic goals
articulated by the sponsoring organizations. A meeting has been scheduled for Feb. 29
with the existing membership to celebrate past accomplishments, reaffirm future
commitments and discuss the transition process.
• Fact-Finding Trips March, April
Building upon the insights gained during the Carmel fact-finding trip, site visits to
Whistler, Park City/Sun Valley and Aspen are being scheduled. The trips will include
representation from the Town of Vail and Vail Associates. Members of the Task Force
also are invited to attend. Meetings will be arranged with Vail's counterparts to research
vision and strategic planning; long range goal setting and follow through; examples of
positive collaboration; interface between ski company and community operations and
functions; and community indicators and measurements. The Whistler trip is scheduled
to take place March 22-24; the Aspen day-trip is March 30; the Park City/Sun Valley trip
will be scheduled in April. Call Robin Litt at 479-3019 to RSVP.
M
• Continued Research March, April
The group will meet with Nolan Rosall and Chris Cares of RRC Associates to review
national ski industry trends as well as other recreational trends and how they impact Vail.
• Clarity of Vision and Goals April, May
During April and May, representatives from the Town of Vail and Vail Associates will
talk with Chris Gates, director of the National Civic League, as well as other strategic
planning experts, to determine a process that will bring more clarity to Vail's vision and
goals as well as community alignment and implementation.
• Business Plan Summer
Once Vail's vision and goals are more clearly defined, including key measurements, a
business plan will be developed in partnership with the Town of Vail and Vail
Associates. This business plan will form the foundation for the future role of the Vail
Community Task Force.
• Ongoing Communications February Forward
The Town of Vail and Vail Associates will formalize a process to hold monthly meetings
to discuss issues of mutual concern and to improve communications among the two
entities. In addition, quarterly meetings will be scheduled with the community for
additional dialogue opportunities.
For additional information about this action plan, contact Mayor Ludwig Kurz at 479-1860 or
Vail Mountain Chief Operating Officer Bill Jensen at 479-3020.
Prepared by Suzanne Silverthorn, Robin Litt and Caroline Fisher
February 18, 2000
Insert Task Force member and address here
RE: Task Force Status
Dear
Thank you for taking part in the interview process with Caroline Fisher to offer your insights
about the current status of the Vail Community Task Force. As you've heard, the results of the
interviews showed the group is struggling with focus and effectiveness issues, and in need of
clarity of expectations from both the Town of Vail and Vail Associates.
Representatives from our two entities convened for four hours on Jan. 28 to discuss the interview
results and the role of the Task Force in moving forward. It is clear that both the Town and Vail
Associates are committed to creating a framework to ensure the Task Force's successful
contribution to meaningful community issues. We have drafted a transition plan as outlined in
this document that we invite you to discuss with us at 4:30 p.m. Feb. 29 at Larkspur Restaurant
and Market. Free on-site parking is available through the valet service at Golden Peak.
The dialogue concerning the Task Force has prompted the Town of Vail and Vail Associates to
consider a host of issues associated with our effective partnering and attention to mutual resort-
community issues. A plan has been created to move forward with consideration of a number of
issues regarding the future of Vail--during which time the role of the Task Force will be re-
addressed and re-designed.
We have drafted a transition plan, as discussed at the Jan. 28 meeting, which will leave the Task
Force inactive while additional pieces are put into place. While this next step is underway by
Town of Vail and Vail Associates representatives, we will continue to fund and support ongoing
initiatives of the Task Force, such as the employee guest service recognition award, fact-finding
trips and the Vail Renaissance campaign. However, new initiatives will be put on hold until our
other work has been completed. Given the current inefficiencies and frustrations shared by the
membership, we hope you'll be supportive of this decision. We also invite you to join us on a
fact-finding trip to Whistler on March 22-24 as we continue this work.
i
{
Enclosed is a summary of our Jan. 28 meeting, including a 6-point action plan. Once our
respective roles and strategies are more clearly defined, the Town and Vail Associates will
resurrect the Task Force later in the year. At that time, membership of the Task Force will be
realigned to meet the strategic goals articulated by the sponsoring organizations. In the end, our
hope is to provide the Task Force with a more meaningful structure and strategic direction to
address focused and critical community issues.
Please feel free to call either of us if you have comments or questions about these next steps.
Otherwise, we hope you'll join us on Feb. 29 to celebrate our past accomplishments and look
ahead to a successful future. As well, please consider taking part in the upcoming trip to
Whistler on March 22-24.
Sincerely,
Ludwig Kurz Bill Jensen
Vail Mayor Vail Mountain Chief Operating Officer
Enc.
t
3
S
Vail Community Task Force
INTERVIEW RESULTS
January 2000
Interviews Conducted by Caroline Fisher, PhD - Organizational Consultant
BACKGROUND
The Vail Community Task Force was formed in 1995 under the Managed Growth Agreement between Vail
Associates and the Town of Vail. The goal was to provide a formal structure for ongoing communication
between the two entities on overlapping issues of concern and to support joint consideration of solutions
related to growth, marketing, transportation, guest service, etc. The Task Force was launched under the
efforts of Chris Ryman, Andy Daly, Peggy Osterfoss, Tom Moorhead, and various other town and ski
company officials.
Participation and interest were strong for the fast two to three years of the group's existence with noted
accomplishments including:
• The Vail Tomorrow process
• The ongoing Vail Tomorrow committees
• Community Host program
• Peak Management program (Peak Week Perks)
• Turn it Up! Customer service training program
• Town Crier weekly fax broadcast system
More recent accomplishments include the community ski pass program and the Vail Renaissance launch.
In 1997, it was decided to broaden participation in the Task Force to include business and community
representatives (Vail Valley Foundation, Chamber of Commerce, Vail Village Commercial Property
Owners Association, Vail Recreation District, community at large, etc.) to address overall coordination
more comprehensively. See attached list for current membership.
In the past 18 months, participation by Task Force members and focus of the group has waned, resulting in
few accomplishments over the last year. Clearly there have been many changes within the community, the
ski company, and the Task Force itself that have likely influenced the group's effectiveness. These
include:
I) New leadership within both Vail Associates and the Town of Vail (both staff and elected)
2) Tum-over of leadership within the Task Force
3) New challenges concerning growth (more valleys/less peak times)
4) Increased competition in the marketplace (both valley-wide and beyond)
5) Increased importance of issues such as housing, guest service, and retail success
The question of Task Force effectiveness, as well as the organizational and community changes noted
above, have , . ,,.-pted the question, "What is the best role for the Task Force at this point in time?" This r'
appears to be a positive time to step back and consider the current needs of V.A. and T.O.V. for
communication with each other, for community involvement and input, and for problem solving on issues
facing both the community and resort - and to determine how a forum such as the Task Force might best
serve these needs.
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
t°
GOAL OF it nh IN t ERVIEW PROCESS
The goal of the Task Force interview process was to increase understanding of the issues and perspectives
associated with this group's performance, including:
• Expectations concerning the current and optimal role of the Task Force in ongoing community
challenges
• Ideas on how the Task Force might serve as a forum to meet real needs of the sponsoring entities at
this point in time
• Perceived obstacles standing in the way of the group's effectiveness
• Opportunities for task force performance improvement
• Input on an appropriate structure (composition; leadership; working agreements; support from
sponsors; etc.) for the Task Force
• An appropriate Plan for re-engaging the Task Force around an existing or new role - or disbanding
the group in favor of a better approach for communication, dialogue, community involvement,
strategic planning, etc.
INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS
Interview participants included:
• All Task Force members (see attached list)
• Members of the Vail Associates leadership team (Andy Daly, Porter Wharton, and Bill Jensen - also
Dave Corbin and Chris Jamot as Task Force members)
• Members of the Town of Vail leadership team (Ludwig Kurz, Greg Moffet, Kevin Foley, Chuck
Ogilby, Bob McLaurin and Russell Forrest - also Sybill Navas, Diana Donovan and Rod Slifer as Task
Force members)
• Suzanne Silverthorn and Robin Litt - as leaders of their respective organizations, staff supporters of
the Task Force process, and participants in the Task Force efforts since its inception
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The reasons for Task Force ineffectiveness over the last year are very clear. As the sponsoring leadership
teams changed, Task Force leadership turned over, community and resort challenges shifted, and Task
Force membership expanded, there was no corresponding realignment or recommitment to a specific role
and purpose of the Task Force. Serious disagreement on Task Force goals has led to frustration on the part
of participants - and, as happens in many groups that lack direction, strong personalities and conflicting
agendas have taken over.
During the interview process, there was a fairly consistent request by Task Force members for Vail
Associates and the Town of Vail to decide what specific role the Task Force should fill and establish
general guidelines for action. There also was the repeated request for leadership and support (staffing,
funding, communication, and other resources) from the sponsors, which is in alignment with the purpose
and expectations set for the Task Force. In particular there was a request for "hands-on," high level and
ongoing involvement on the part of both V.A. and T.O.V. regardless of the ultimate defined group purpose.
There was recognition on the part of Task Force members, as well as V.A. and T.O.V leaders, that there are
two distinctively separate yet related tracks of activity to be pursued going forward.
1. Ongoing Dialogue and Communication between Vail Associates and the Town of
Vail
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
r,
The need for regular and open interchange between these two entities on issues of mutual concern
continues to be of critical importance. While the Task Force served as a forum for such dialogue in the
early days, both Task Force members and sponsor .:,r. ;,sentatives believe that today this need might be best
filled in a separate forum. It was suggested that such dialogue take place in the context of monthly
meetings between r. Qsentatives of the senior level V.A. management team and TOV Y.; sentatives
(council members and selected senior staff.) This would allow for shared understanding of the issues
facing both entities, exploration of opportunities to support one another, and clarity around the impact of
one entity's activities on the other. This forum would support strategy setting, problem solving and
partnership - with the goal of creating an ongoing structure to support this critical relationship.
It was suggested that within this forum, reconsideration of/recommitment to the original memorandum of
agreement might take place. Within this document are important strategic guidelines for the relationship
between V.A. and T.O.V. As one interviewee pointed out, "a business reconsiders its strategy every year -
the same should be applied to V.A. and T.O.V.'s strategic working agreements." Given the changes in
personnel within both organizations and the changes in issues facing the resort and community, enhancing
this agreement to create shared expectations of how the two entities will work together might be a strong
first step.
2. Ongoing Dialogue and Communication with the Community and Representative
Interest Groups
Once issues have been considered and discussed between the two primary entities (V.A. and T.O.V.),
understanding, input and buy-in must be generated at the community level. Additionally, it is recognized
as important to have community representatives generating solutions and strategies to solve problems
affecting the extended community. It was suggested that perhaps the Task Force should become an entity
which takes on issues that the above group has defined as critical and then conducts research, gains
community input, and generates ideas for solutions and strategies. Regular meetings (i.e., once per quarter)
could be established between the above mentioned V.A./T.O.V. Forum and the Task Force for dialogue,
exchange of information, presentation of problems and concerns, and establishment of next steps. The
Task Force could also serve as a point of interface with the larger community (both businesses and
residents) via a Vail Tomorrow type process and existing committees.
Optional Group Structure to Accomplish the Above Tracks of Activity
As depicted in many of the interviews, the following group structure might serve the above activities.
Entity: V.A./T.O.V. FORUM
Purpose: Information sharing, dialogue and partnership on addressing ongoing issues of mutual
concern between these two entities
Members: * V.A. senior leadership
* T.O.V. senior leadership (council reps and senior staff)
Success
Criteria: * Open dialogue - not necessarily open meetings
* Frequent and regular meetings (monthly)
Relationship with Task Force:
This Forum:'
* Creates the working vision for the Task Force
* Defines the categories of focus and results for the Task Force
* Has two or more representatives serve on the Task Force
* Meets with the Task Force quarterly for exchange of information and ideas
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
Entity: VAIL COMMUNITY TASK FORCE
Purpose: To generate ideas and solutions to specific problem areas defined by the above Forum
and to act as a link between the Forum and the community at large
Members: * Selected community representatives (some configuration of the existing task force)
Relationship with Forum:
The Community Task Force:
* Is sponsored and supported by V.A. and the T.O.V.
* Moves forward goals and focus areas as defined by the Forum
* Is responsible for bringing information and viewpoints to the Forum from the
community, interest groups and research arenas
Sample Tasks: * Acts as the intermediary for information sharing between the Forum and the
community at large
* Engages key community parties as specific issues dictate (i.e., if the issue is retail .
diversity, the Task Force proactively involves the retail community)
* Acts as a "lobbying" group to help move forward key areas of interest with elected
officials, community members, special interest groups, etc.
Success Criteria:
* Strong internal leadership
* Group commitments to goals and internal group accountability
* Facilitative support (for the fast year at minimum)
* Individual members selected and re-appointed based on the Task Force's defined
purpose and goals (group membership may change over time)
* Attainment of measurable results
INTERVIEW SUMMARY:
The following is a snapshot of the comments provided during the interview process. This summary is
intended to: 1) offer insight into the struggles the Task Force has encountered in the last year; 2) provide
ideas for making the Task Force more effective; and 3) elaborate on the overview presented above.
Current Task Force Challenges:
• Lack of direction and focus
• Unclear priorities
• Lack of group leadership
• Lack of committed and meaningful involvement from V.A. and T.O.V.
• Lack of teamwork
• No tolerance or patience for dialogue, interchange
• No accountability for behavior (attendance; communication; listening; etc.) or results
• No resources (staff, budget; etc.)
• What happens in each meeting depends on who shows up
• We are reactive vs. proactive
• We used to have open dialogue - V.A. and the Town discussed issues and concerns honestly and asked
for input. This does not happen any more.
• Trust issues with V.A.
• No political commitment to the Task Force or the Task Force efforts
:.f
Hiehest and Best Task Force Purpose:
• Dialogue between V.A., T.O.V. and community - to create a link between various parts of the whole
• Strategic planning and problem solving between V.A., T.O.V. and community
• Carry forward resort/community visioning process
• Implementation of projects to improve the community (Vail Tomorrow; Community Host program;
etc.)
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
e .
• Employee housing
• Retail success
• Policy advocacy group
• Peak period logistics/non peak marketing
• Economic development
• Guest service levels
• Employee issues in general (motivation; recognition; housing; training; etc.)
• Business roundtable
• Marketing
• Community facilities
• Macro-level issues
• Lobbying - community groups; town council; V.A. leadership
Desired Task Force Results:
• Dialogue
• Strategy
• Specific projects
• Maintaining communication avenues between the different entities in town
• Getting town council and V.A. to move issues forward (lobbying results)
ODtimal Task Force Comoosition:
• Who ever serves on the Task Force should be held accountable for listening and dialogue
• The composition should be in alignment with the goals
• Composition should reflect the composition of the community
• Composition should not be a "right" but a "privilege" - this group does not need to be representative of
the community at large
• Subgroups of the Task Force should focus on specific tasks and projects - the whole group should not
focus on every issue
• Members must have a vested interest in the success of the group (right now half the members live
down valley; many show up caring more about their agenda than the group's agenda - "turf
protectors")
• All new members should be fully grounded in why the group exists, what the goals are, what the
accountabilities are, etc. (full orientation)
• The community is represented already on the town council - this group should have a membership
designed to achieve specific goals, not just represent the community
Overall Task Force Reauirement for Success
• Must have active involvement by V.A. and T.O.V.
• Reps from V.A. and T.O.V. must have authority and commitment
• Should not expect this group to be all things to all people
• Establish strong leadership within group (perhaps V.A. or T.O.V. rep)
• Define precise direction and goals - and have each meeting's agenda serve those goals
• Should be open meetings with press involved
• Should not be open meetings - press does not need to be involved p
• Strategic orientation - not tactical
Communitv's View of the Task Force:
• In the beginning, the Task Force was high profile in the community and viewed as a positive link
between V.A., T.O.V. and the community. This is no longer true.
• The community does not know who we are - and they don't care
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
• e
• The community feels V.A. has moved even farther from them - and sees the Task Force as a point of
connection. It seems V.A. is working alone now - more than ever.
Input on Next Steps:
• Decide whether or not we even need a Task Force at this point - perhaps this idea has run its course.
Or perhaps the Task Force should be put on hold until higher level issues are worked out (working
agreement between V.A. and T.O.V.; resort/community vision statement; etc.)
• Need to delineate the Task Force's purpose from the purposes and goals of other forums and groups in
town (Where are the overlaps? Where are we competing with each other? What is the best forum to
consider the various critical issues - retail, marketing, housing, transportation, marketing, etc.?)
• V.A. and T.O.V. should figure out what they want with this group - formalize Task Force purpose
• Create a venue for V.A./T.O.V. dialogue - then figure out how the Task Force fits into that
• V.A. and T.O.V. should look at the Managed Growth Agreement and make adjustments as necessary -
similar to a resort/community strategic plan
"
F
Vail Community Task Force January 2000
Interview Results
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
IFTOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP
( 2000
02/17/00 Street Beat Party COUNCIL: Please let Pam know if you are Please let Pam or Kurt Krieg at 949-1999 know if
Council Participation able to emcee any of the Wednesday night you are interested in EMCCEing.
Ludwig Kurz Street Beat Parties,. The dates still
available are: February 23, March
8,15,and 22.
01/11/00 Cranes in residential RUSSELL/GARY GOODELL: Is it possible to
areas prohibit residential construction from
Diana Donovan imposing a standing crane in a private
neighborhood for the duration of
construction, e.g., all winter long?
Can restrictions be placed on building
permits to preclude such inappropriate
long-term placement?
2/15/00 RESOURCE CENTER GREG MORRISON/PAM: Council has agreed
Diana Donovan to review criteria used for Council
Contributions. This has been scheduled
for the June _ work session, will will
occur prior to dissemination of the
applications for Y2001.
Also, two specific questions were
raised:
a) Is there a Colorado law
specific to victim's services and how
these are provided and paid
for, e.g., does the TOV have a state-
mandated responsibility to
provide victim's advocate funding to
the local Resource Center?
b) Does the Vail PD call "domestic
violence" - "harrassment" - in
order to escape complying w/the
above?
02/17/00 Covered Bridge RUSSELL: Is there a way we can This item originally had a December discussion
MBuilding 500 off Sale Sign (legislate businesses from advertising date. The sale signs have been displayed for over
February 17, 2000, Page I
Greg Mofett GOING OUT OF BUSINESS or 50% SALES signs 30 consecutive days. If it was a temporary event,
365 day/year? As a note: Beaver Creek the signs should be removed.
already has legislation in place that
disallows sale signs in the winter.
02/17/00 WATER DISTRICT RUSSELL/TOM/BOB: A water district board Mike Rose will look at this in regards to the
PROPERTY member offered an additional piece of potential use of a bus stop.
Chuck Ogilby land in Matterhorn that could be used as
a bus pull-off as a part of the ongoing
negotiations to expand the district's
wastewater treatment site onto town-
owned land.
02/17/00 WESTFEST PAM: Tom Fenton, primary event Having already spoken to Tom the morning of
Kaye Ferry coordinator for the event, contacted February 15th and having been advised he was
Kaye re: placing booth(s) at the leaving on a family vacation until February 24th,
upcoming venue. Kaye indicated because Pam will contact him upon his return.
TOV merchants already hold business
license fees, they should be allowed to
place booths at no additional cost.
02/17/00 Process to De- Lorelei: Please contact the Secretary Bob will call Jack Taylor and Dave Watterberg to
Gallagher of State to find out how many signatures see whether either would craft this legislation.
Greg Moffet by petition are required to put a
measure on an upcoming election. We
will also contact Jack Taylor and Dave
Wattenberg to see whether they (or he)
would carry this issue through the State
Legislature?
February 17, 2000, Page 2
!d
4
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
MEDIA ADVISORY
February 23, 2000
Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115
Community Information Office
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR FEBRUARY 22
Work Session Briefs
Council members present: Donovan, Foley, Kurz, Ogilby, Navas, Moffet, Slifer*
*Arrived late
--U.S. Forest Service Draft Plan Discussion
As a follow-up to a previous discussion on proposed amendments to the White River National
Forest plan, the Council heard an overview from Brent Wilson, a planner in tl Community
Development Department. Wilson presented a list of key issues affecting the Town of Vail.
Those issues ranged from the possible closure of the East Vail Chutes; clarification on
singletrack hiking and biking trails on Vail Mountain; the topic of urbanization; ski area expansion
limitations; area road closures; elimination of aerial transportation corridors; and limitations on
timber hauling and snowmobile access. Council members have yet to decide if the town will
submit a formal response to the plan by the May 18 deadline. A public hearing will be held
during the evening Council meeting on April 4 to begin collecting citizen comments. Also
yesterday, the Council heard a presentation from Tom Allender and Porter Wharton of Vail
Resorts. They expressed concerns about the proposed alternative D plan, saying it would have
a negative impact on Vail's competitive position as a leading ski resort because, among other
things, it eliminates the possibility of future expansion. This would increase density on ski trails,
could lead to higher ticket prices and provide a diminished quality of experience, they said. To
accommodate future skier growth of 1.75 percent per year, Forest Service projections show the
need for an additional 6,000 acres of skiable terrain in Eagle County by the year 2030, they said.
The alternative D plan would not accommodate those needs; however, alternative C would
provide a better balance, they said. Councilmembers Greg Moffet and Ludwig Kurz expressed
caution in reviewing the draft alternatives, noting the possibility of placing Vail at a competitive
disadvantage if other forests manage resources in a different way, while Sybill Navas wondered
how the Forest Service arrived at a planning philosophy that leaves predicted needs unmet.
Kevin Foley raised concerns about mountain biking restrictions, while Diana Donovan expressed
support for alternative D, noting her confidence in the Forest Service's ability to amend the plan
if it isn't working. Jim Lamont of the East Village Homeowners Association urged the Council to
oppose aerial transportation corridors that would create lift/gondola connections outside the
permitted ski area boundary such as Minturn or Vail Pass. For more information, contact Brent
Wilson in the Community Development Department at 479-2140.
3
--Community Facilities Hub Site Market Analysis
In a joint meeting with the Vaii Recreation District Board, the Council took its first look at a draft
(more)
• RECYCLED PAPER
market analysis for proposed community facilities on the Lionshead "hub" site. Economic
Research Associates (ERA) was hired to determine the economic feasibility of a
conference/learning center, performing arts center, second ice rink and a family entertainment
center. Results show high potential for a conference/learning center that would handle groups
of 700 to 1,300. Recommended components include a 20,000 sq. ft. ballroom; 10 to 12
breakout rooms; a boardroom; a learning/technology center within the same building; and a
business center. A performing arts center is much more risky, according to the report. While
Vail could fill a theater niche of 1,400 to 1,600 seats, it would need an annual subsidy of over $1
million and would be better suited if the ongoing operating costs were handled by private funds.
Demand for a second ice sheet is strong, according to the report, although somewhat risky given
plans in Avon to build a two-rink facility. Also, a family entertainment center would not be
attractive to a national operator due to its small resident market size, the report said. The draft
report recommends consideration of two programming scenarios. The first would include a
conference and learning center for 1,000-plus, a second ice rink and an improved Dobson
"event center." The second scenario would include the three uses listed above plus a 1,400 to
1,600 seat performing arts center with its operating endowment covered with private funds, plus
a 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. family entertainment center located near a retail/entertainment district.
The report will be presented again during a public open house from 5 to 7 p.m. on March 2 at the
Evergreen Lodge. The meeting is the first in a series of community meetings to help determine
how the Lionshead hub site should be developed to renew Vail's economic vitality. For more
information, contact Russell Forrest in the Community Development Department at 479-2146.
--TOV Community Survey 2000
Councilmembers reviewed a draft of the annual Town of Vail community survey and approved a
recommended distribution method. The method will include a blended approach with a random
sample of 3,000 residents to receive a mail-back survey with the remaining stakeholders invited
to participate via the Internet, telephone or mail-back. The survey will be fielded in March with
preliminary results available in May. The town has conducted an annual survey since 1987. It is
used to monitor customer satisfaction levels and to identify emerging issues and trends. For
more information, contact Suzanne Silverthorn in the Community Information Office at 479-2115.
--Joint Session with AIPP Board to Discuss Long-Term Goals
After hearing an overview of the Art In Public Places program and reviewing its draft master plan
which stresses the integration of art into street fixtures and other functional items, the Council
expressed its support for moving forward in completing the master plan and in hiring a new AIPP
coordinator to replace Nancy Sweeney who has resigned. Councilmembers suggested the
possibility of expanding the position to address the need for professional fund raising.
--DRB Report
Councilmembers requested information concerning the Walker-McKibben Residential addition to
an existing duplex in East Vail; the Antlers Redevelopment Plan review of exterior material and
colors; and the proposed exterior door at the Bridge Street Lodge.
--Glen Lyon Office Building Discussion
Councilmembers (with the exception of Greg Moffet who recused himself due to a potential
conflict of interest) reviewed a proposal that would modify the Council's 1999 approval of the
Glen Lyon Office Building redevelopment which called for the addition of 37,000 sq. ft. of office
building space and two employee housing units. Developers have now submitted plans to add
(more)
two free-market condominiums and reduce the amount of office space by 1,500 sq. ft. After
reviewing suggestions made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Design
Review Board, Councilmembers expressed concerns about the overall bulk and mass of the
revised proposal; asked that more employee housing beds be added to the mix; and asked to
t-reserve the strea,: setback in the design. For more information, cc; f act George Ruther in the
Community Development Department at 479-21 45.
--Conversion of Accommodation units to Employee Housing Units, re: Wes' Vail Lodge
With the exception of Rod Slifer who expressed his opposition, Councilmembers gave the go-
ahead to explore an amendrnent to the town code that would allow for the conversion of
accommodation units to employee housing units as a conditional use. The request has been
triggered by the West Vail Lodge, which has proposed to create 41 new, one-bedroom, for-sale
employee housing units and 19, two-bedroom, free market condominiums. The proposal also
increases the number of retail spaces on the site that would be sold to individual business
owners. The lodge currently has 83 hotel units, 6,200 sq. ft. of conference space and 13,660 sq.
ft. of retail space. Although most said they were intrigued by the concept, Councilmembers
agreed to pursue the conversion request with caution, noting the need to hear from the adjacent
neighborhood as well as an understanding of how the entire site would be redeveloped. Slifer,
meanwhile, said he would be opposed to the loss of hotel units within the town. For more
information, contact Brent Wilson at 479-2140.
--Fourth of July Alternative Entertainment
Next, the Council directed Police Chief Greg Morrison to continue exploring costs and other
logistics associated with a ticketed concert at Ford Park on July Fourth (Tuesday) as well as a
possible ticketed concert at Eagle's Nest on Vail Mountain the Saturday before. The concerts,
he said, would provide alternative entertainment for underage residents and visitors who would
otherwise gather on Bridge Street with nothing to do.
--Use of Dobson Arena
The Council heard a request for free ice time at Dobson Arena from Lucy Babcock of the Jimmie
Heuga Center for a fund-raising hockey event. Councilmembers asked to receive additional
information from the Vail Recreation District before granting the request.
--Frontage Road Overflow Parking Discussion
The Council directed staff to increase coordination of overflow parking on the Frontage Road
through improved signage and improved traffic management to include a new valet parking
option on the top deck of the Village parking structure. The topic had been raised earlier by
Chuck Ogilby lc~ suyyestz ` `or free overflow parking on the Frontage Road once the
Vail Village parking structure fills (rather than waiting for the Lionshead parking structure to fill).
But when Rob Levine of the Lionshead Merchants Association raised equity concerns,
Councilmembers asked staff to incorporate the traffic management improvements instead. A
discussion on long-term parking strategies is scheduled for March 21. Last ski season, the Vail
Village parking structure filled 42 times, while the Lionshead structure filled 13 times. For more
information, contact Mike Rose, Vail transit and parking manager, at 479-2349.
--Information Update j
Council members received an updated list of community facilities meetings for planning at the
Donovan Park and Lionshead hub sites. The scheduled discussions extend to May 9 in
partnership with the Vail Recreation Dir;;,'pct. Also yesterday, Council members were notified of
(more)
Executive Session--Negotiations
March 7 Work Session, 2 p.m.
PEC Report
VVTCB - Reservations Information Services
Housing Program for Town of Vail Employees
Vail Local Marketing District
Executive Session - Litigation
March 7 Evening Meeting, 7 p.m.
Vail Mountain School Presentation
Vail Plaza Hotel, Employee Housing Plan
Employee Guest Service Recognition Award
Lionshead Hub Site Program Uses
March 14 Work Session, 2 p.m.
Community Facilities, Donovan Park & Lionshead Hub Site
DRB Report
PEC Applicant Interviews
Council Orientation - Administration, Human Resources and Finance
Discussion of Alpine Garden Schoolhouse Garden & Picnic Area
Council Critical Strategies Discussion, Community Collaboration
March 21 Work Session, 2 p.m.
PEC Report
DRB and AIPP Applicant Interviews
Speed Study Map and Data
Proposed Changes to Parking Pay-in-Lieu
Amendment to Allow for the Conversion of Accommodation Units to Employee Housing Units
Employee Housing Code Amendment
March 21 Evening Meeting, 7 p.m.
Appointments of DRB, AIPP, PEC Board Members
EHU Code Amendments
Vail Plaza Hotel Employee Housing
Memorandum
To: Vail Town Council
From: George Ruther, Senior Special Projects Planner -
Date: February 22, 2000
Re: Glen Lyon Office Building - Proposed Major Amendment to SDD #4
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a brief development history -of the Glen Lyon Office
Building and to inform the Town Council of the input provided by the Planning & Environmental
Commission and the Design Review Board on the current major amendment proposal
Develooment Historv
• On June 15, 1999, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1999, allowing
approximately 37,000 gross square feet of office building and two ehu's.
• In the summer of 1995 the Planning & Environmental Commission reviewed a proposal for a major
amendment to the Glen Lyon Office Building approved development plan. The applicant withdrew the
major amendment request.
• On January 3, 1989, thk Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No' 40, Series of 1988, allowing
approximately 32,500 gross square feet of office building, two ehu's and one free market dwelling
unit.
• The original SDD approval anticipated a microbrewery, employee housing and approximately 17,000
gross square feet of office building on the site.
Planning &Environmental Commission Comments
• The applicant must submit a grading plan so that the impacts on the stream bank and the existing
mature vegetation can be evaluated.
• The additional mass created by the proposed condominiums is unacceptable.
• The scale and mass of the new building is out of context within the surrounding built environment.
• The parking requirement must be met on-site.
• No stream setback encroachments should be proposed
• More employee housing units should be incorporated into the mix of uses on the development site.
Design Review Board Comments
• The design of the building mass is too blocky. More articulation through increased vertical and
horizontal off sets needs to be incorporated into the design.
• The new building bears to relationship to the existing building. The architecture of the entire
development needs to be explored.
• The masses of the new building and the old building could be separated on the site.
• The 50-foot Gore Creek stream bank should be maintained to protect the steeply sloping stream bank
and to preserve as many of the large evergreens as possible.
• Tree loss shall be kept to a minimum.
• The long horizontal ridgeline of the roof needs to the broken up.
• The new building should be stepped down on the east and west ends.
• The view into the proposed parking structure from the South Frontage Road shall be minimized.
ORDINANCE NO.3
SERIES OF 2000
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF FEE TITLE TO THE
FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL AND LOCATED
AT 770 POTATO PATCH, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Care taker unit 770 Potato Patch Drive Condominiums according to the Condominium
map thereof recorded December 23, 1982 in Book 350 at page 903 and as defined in the
Condominium Declaration recorded December 23, 1982 in Book 350 at page 902,
County of Eagle, State of Colorado.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is the owner of certain property known as the Care Taker
Unit, 770 Potato Patch Drive Condominiums; and
WHEREAS, this unit was acquired by the Town of Vail for $76,000.00 by Quit Claim
Deed without deed restriction concerning use or transfer; and
WHEREAS the last appraised value of the property is approximately $225,000.00; and
WHEREAS the monthly assessments and special assessments are excessive for
utilization as an employee housing unit; and
WHEREAS the sale of this unit would provide an opportunity to add an additional unit or
units that would function more appropriately as housing for employees;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO that:
1. The Town Council hereby approves this sale of the property.
2. The Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute such instruments of
conveyance as are appropriate to convey fee title from the Town of Vail to the purchaser.
3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance,
and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
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 shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL
ON FIRST READING this 15th day of February, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of
the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 7th day of March, 2000.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
c:\orinance00.3
Van, ET
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Media Contacts:
Kristin Yantis, (970) 479-3001, kristin@vailresorts.com
Nicky DeFord, (970) 479-3003, ndeford@vailresoits.com
VAIL TO HOST COMMUNITY SKI TOUR OF BLUE SKY BASIN AS PART OF NEW
RENAISSANCE INITIATIVE
VAIL, Colo. - Feb. 2, 2000 - Join Vail Chief Operating Officer Bill Jensen and members of the
Vail Mountain senior management team for a community ski tour of Blue Sky Basin, Friday,
Feb. 11, 2000. Skiers and snowboarders need to meet at Two Elk restaurant at the top of China
Bowl at 10 a.m. for a free continental breakfast and brief presentation by Jensen.
The Vail Community Ski Day is a part of the Vail Renaissance program, a campaign sponsored
by the Vail Community Task Force, with support from the Town of Vail, Vail Resorts, Inc., and
the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau, to strengthen Vail's success as a thriving resort
community.
"The Vail Renaissance program focuses on the programs and initiatives that we're working on as
a ski area, town and community to strengthen Vail's position as the premiere resort destination in "
North America," said Jensen. "Blue Sky Basin is just one example of what we're doing to build
that momentum for the future. We wanted to take another opportunity to highlight Blue Sky
Basin to the local community and give people a personalized tour of the area."
Participants should be strong intermediate to advanced skiers or snowboarders for the tour of
Blue Sky Basin. For more information or to RSVP by Wednesday, Feb. 9, please contact Nicky
DeFord at (970) 479-3003. Space is limited.
VAIL RESORTS"
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Allison Ochs, Community Development Department
DATE: February 8, 2000
SUBJECT: City Market Sign Variance .
At this time, the applicant has withdrawn the application for a variance from Section 11-
46-3, to allow for one additional building identification sign, located at 2109 N. Frontage
Rd. West/Vail Commons City Market, Vail das Schone 3rd Filing. The applicant is
exploring opportunities to create an entry feature over the parking garage entrance,
along with exploring other sign alternatives that would accentuate the garage. The
applicant will re-apply to the Community Development Department at a later date.
TOW*YAIL
FEB- 4-00 TUE 3:44 PM CAST FAX NO. 970 927 8456 P. 1/ 1
Colorado Association
of Ski Towns s~~?
February 4, 2000
The Honorable Dave Wattenberg
200 East Colfax
Denver, CO 80203
RE: SB 96 Vested Rights
Dear Senator Wattenberg:
On behalf of the Colorado Association of Ski Towns, I
respectfully request that you vote no on the vested rights bill.
Last year, local government and its representatives worked
diligently and in good faith to create moderate legislation that
would address the concerns of Legislature while allowing
municipalities a way to implement vesting criteria in a
reasonable time frame. Staff at CML, CCI and DOLA invested
further time to educate 400 local officials statewide on
implementation of the law. We trusted that the hard work of
local government and Legislature would alleviate vesting
concerns. We are disappointed to find that the issue is revived
.and is now more onerous for municipali.ti.es than ever.
We continue to.believe that you share out basic desire to
implement sound land use for the good of our communities. Please
consider monitoring the effectiveness of last year's legislation
prior to further restricting municipalities ability to govern-
Respectfully,
i Bennett,"President
6
Colorado Association of Ski Towns
MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES
Aspen • Avon - Breckenridge • Crested Butte
Dillon • Durango • Fraser • Frisco • Glenwood Springs - Grand Junction • Grand Lake • Gunnison
Mintum • ML Crested Butte • Mountain Village • Park Cty • Silverfhome • Snowmass Village • Steamboat Springs • Telluride • Va# • IWnrer Palk
MEMORANDUM
To: Vail Town Council
From: Russ Forrest
Date: February 8, 2000
Subject Community Development Work Plan
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this worksession is to review the Town Council's rankings for Community
Development projects. These rankings were made individually and staff wants to
ensure that the high priority actions are collectively the priorities of the Town Council.
The attached table summarizes the scores for each action.
2. TOP RANKED ACTIONS IN EACH AREA
Plannina
1. Com Fac/Hub Site (10)
2. Com Fac/Donovan (9)
2. Lionshead Implementation Tax Increment Financing (9)
3. Parking Regulations (8)
3. Notice Requirements (8)
4. General Code Enforcement (7)
Note: Vision Statement, Economic Plan Village Master Plan Update, was a 6
Housing
1. Timber Ridge (10)
2. The Ruins (9)
2. Mt Bell (9)
2. Buy Down Program (9)
2. Arosa/Garmish (9)
2. EHU Code Amendments (9/1 member said not necessary)
3. Berry Creek (8)
3. Create Housing Zone District (8)
4. Lionshead/Village Structures (7)
4. VA/Holy Cross Service Yard
4. Commercial Linkage (7)
4. Enforcement (7)
Buildinq
1. Review Fee Structure and Education, ISO rating, staff certifications
1
Environmental
1. Water Quality (8)
2. Solid Waste (7)
2. Open Space (7)
5. Green Star (6)
Other Environmental Projects identified by individual members
Tree Ordinance
• Streamwalk
Weed Abatement
• Carrying Capacity
• Clean Cities Program
• Provide more opportunities to enjoy the natural environment
3. SUGESTED WORK PLAN BASED ON COUNCIL INPUT
Action Resource Cost Start Finish
Planning
Community Director & Currently Feb 22 April/May 2000
Facilitates- Senior budgeted in choose
Hub Site Planner 2000 preferred
alternative
Community Chief of Currently January 2000 Ground
Facilities Planning & budgeted in breaking in
Donovan Director 2000 2000
Lionshead Chief of Resources will January 2000 August 2000
Implementatio Planning & be needed for
n/TIFF Director legal, financial,
and planning
consultants
Parking Planner II No consultant ASAP Within 2-
Regulations cost in 2000 months of
starting
Notice Senior No consultant March Within 2-3
Requirements Planner - costs months of
starting
Enforcement PD
Housing
Timber Ridge Town Unknown.at February End of Year
Attorney & this time Note: Staff will
Housing review potential
Planner for Timber
Ridge, Ruins,
Mt Bell, &
Structures
within the next
2-3 weeks.
2
'r
The Ruins Town Appraised Begin appraisal
Attorney, value of site- ASAP, would
Housing may require require SDD
Planner, subsidy to amendment or
Director construct new zoning
Buy Down Housing Budgeted at Ongoing
Planner $100,000/year
Arosa/ Housing Currently April, 2000 November,
Garmish Planner Budgeted 2000
EHU Code Chief of No additional ASAP,PEC has 2 readings of
Amendments Planning cost already an ordinance
reviewed
Berry Creek Town Could involve Staff began Council needs
Attorney, consultant to working with to discuss
Housing help with County in completion
Planner, sketch plan December on goals with
Director RFP County
Housing Zone Chief of ASAP
Dist Planning
Village/ Housing Lionshead will Lionshead will - Through a
Lionshead Planner/Senio be roughly start in March. phasing plan
r Planner designed in construction in
community Lionshead
facilities could start in
project/Addition 2001
al design cost
on Village site
VA Service Vail Resorts N/A When Sunbird 2001/2002
Yard will'be & Gondola is
applicant/plan developed
ner will be
assigned
Commercial Council meet $10,000 Fall 2000 if 4-6 months
Linkage with Council wants after start
Commissioner to move
s forward
Enforcement Housing Asst. No Additional Fall 2000 is the
Resources next
enforcement
check
Building
Education Chief Building Staff March 2000,
Official Resources to
educate
building
community
ISO Rating Chief Building Initiate an May 2000
3
- h+
r
Official appeals board
Environmental
Water Quality Director
Study
Black Gore Com Dev & Unknown Water District is
Creek Public Works asking for TOV
support to
encourage
CDOT to take
action
Water Quality Senior Some April 2000 June 2000
Standards Planner & educational
Environmental material. cost
Health ($1000)
Solid Waste Environmental Depends on Staff could
Plan Health Officer actions Council present plan in
would like to- March
implement
Green Star Environmental $8000/year ongoing
Health Officer
F:\EVERYONE\COUNCIL\MEMOS\00\wplan208.doc
1
4
Individual Council Rankings of Projects
Project Kurz Navas Donovan Ogilby Foley Slifer Moffet Total Average
Community
Facilities/Donovan 10 5 10 9 10 10 9
Community
Facilities/Hub Site 10 8 10 9 10 10 10
Lionshead
Implementation/Tax
Increment financing
Urban Renewal 10 9 8 9 10 8 9
Parking Regulations 8 9 8 9 8 5 8
Sign Code Revisions 1 6 4 10 7 8 4 6
General Code
Enforcement Activities
(i.e. signs,
construction, etc.) 2 7 .10 6 7 10 4 7
Notice Requirements 7 8 10 8 9 10 3 8
Vision Statement 9 10 1 10 5 6 3 6
Economic Plan/Vail
Renaissance 8 7 7 10 ? 5 1 6,
Village Master Plan
Update & Land Use
Plan 9 8 2 5 5 7 3 6
Design Guidelines 5 ? 1 8 5 6 4 5
JGRFA 3 5 1 ? 5 10 '3 5
Review Fee Structure 1 6 5 8 7 7 2 5
Education, ISO rating,
staff certifications 6 do it 7 8 5 8 2 6
Mountain Bell 10 1 10 10 ,10 10 9
i Lionshead and Village
Structure 10 1 10 8 5 10 7
F/Everyone/Council/Memos/00/Survey
Project Kurz Navas Donovan Ogilby Foley Slifer Moffet Total Average
Holy Cross/Service
Lot/VA Housing 9 9 10 5 5 5 7
Timber Ridge 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 10
Old Town Shops 10 9 10 Gymnastics 1 5 7
West Vail Lodge 3 10 10 10 ? 5 7 8
The Ruins 9 10 10 10 10 6 9 9
Buy Down 8 9 6 10 10 10 9 9.
Arosa/Garmish 4 10 10 10 10 10 10 9
Berry Creek 10 10 5 8 10 8 5 8
Commercial Linkage 8 8 10 10 8 2 6 7
Create Housing Zone
District 10 10 I 1 10 8 6 8 8
EHU Code not
Amendments 9 10 necessary 10 10 7 8 9
Enforcement 3 8 10 7 10 8 6 7
Open Space 7 6 10 3 10 10 5 7
Water Quality 4 10 10 10 5 10 5 8
Green Star 2 8 5 10 5 7 5 6
Solid Waste 3 9 9 10 10 5 4 7
F/Everyone/Council/Memos/00/S urvey
r
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL - MINUTES
TUESDAY, December 7, 1999
7:00 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Town Council Chambers on
Tuesday, December 7, 1999. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem
Rod Slifer
Chuck Ogilby
Kevin Foley
Greg Moffet
Diana Donovan
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
STAFF MEMBERS ABSENT: Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Peter Apostal, a business owner and
local resident of fifteen years stated he has children in the hockey program. He read a letter
from the skating association and skating club stating the need for a second sheet of ice and
that the Council was holding up the process in getting this done. He said the Dobson ice arena
has been an asset but it is overused and another sheet of ice is necessary. The skating
program has over 500 adults and children in it. During the time the ice arena has been closed,
the parents have had to drive their children to other communities at 5 am and 6 am to be on the
ice somewhere else. He stated that a second sheet of ice is needed now.
Shawn Boris, President of the Skating Club of Vail, stated they have 70 members. She said the
skaters compete in various levels of skating, perform in ice shows, and other events. Skaters
come in from other areas and bring over 400 skaters to Vail. She also said the summer skating
camp continues to grow. She was concerned about the annual Vail invitational Skating being
cancelled this year due to a conflicting event coming to Vail and using Dobson and displacing
the event. They shouldn't have to do this and a second sheet of ice is necessary now.
Glen Davis, President of the Vail Jr. Hockey Association, introduced several people on the
board and hockey players to Council. He said there is no question that Dobson is a successful
facility. However, the facility is over utilized. He said Vail Jr. Hockey has over 100 children in
the program and the mites and mini-mites have even more kids in their program. The programs
are continuing to grow and in addition, there are 60 girls signed up for girl's hockey this year. If
the community doesn't do something quickly, the number of groups utilizing the ice arena will
continue to grow and have an adverse impact on the facility.
Phil Hoversten, stated he has lived in Vail for 14 years. He said there is a frustration from all
the ice programs because kids have been off the ice for the last three to four weeks and
because the request of a second sheet of ice is not being moved forward quickly enough. He
said he offered to build a second sheet of ice, privately funded, for the town a few years ago.
1 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
He said the Vail Recreation District (VRD) said they would do this and said he wants the
Council to approve giving the VRD a 50-year lease and to move forward with a second sheet of
ice now. He stated the VRD and he are ready to put in the basement level of a facility that
would house a second sheet of ice. The structural costs that would be incurred would hold
whatever facility is placed above the second sheet of ice. Everyone wants the Town Council to
move ahead now with the second sheet of ice.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz thanked everyone for coming and not bringing hockey sticks to beat the
Council over the head. He said the only incorrect statement in the letter is that Council has
been holding up the process. He said the community also has a say in the matter. He said
there is an interest and willingness by the current Council as well as the last Council to move
forward on this issue. He stated the Council will make sure to have a discussion with the town
staff, and others involved, to work on how the second sheet of ice can be put in place. He said
there is concern that a better design needs to be in place before the second sheet of ice can be
put in place with other facilities.
Council member Sybill Navas, said it is her absolute number one priority to get a facility on this
site. She said it takes time to put a facility in place. If it takes two years to do this, maybe the
Council should look at another site for the second sheet of ice. She reiterated that putting in
the second sheet of ice would take time.
Council member Greg Moffet said he would love to see more ice time because he can't take his
children to free skate because of lack of ice time.
Mayor Kurz said this is quite a phenomenon of the growing number of children and adults using
the ice arena. He thanked the community members present for attending the meeting.
Moses Gonzales, a resident of East Vail, welcomed the new council. He asked the Council to
consider using the excavated dirt from the Arosa/Garmisch property to build a berm in West
Vail to buffer the 1-70 noise and give relief to West Vail residents. He said the berm could start
from City Market and go West on the north side of the highway.
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, said the dirt is planned for the Donovan Park construction. He
offered to explore the possibility of the buffer proposal.
Council member Greg Moffet said the Matterhorn area could use a berm also.
Moses also stated he liked the tree lights and would like to see them up all the time. He also
said he would like to see the lower bench of Donovan Park be designated a Veterans Memorial
Park.
The second item on the agenda was the consent agenda.
A. Approve the Minutes from the meetings of November 2 and 16, 1999.
Council member Rod Slifer made a motion to approve the minutes from the meetings of
November 2 and 16, 1999. Council member Sybill Navas seconded the motion. Mayor Ludwig
Kurz stated there were typographical errors that needed to be changed and went through them.
2 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Council member Rod Slifer amended his motion to include approval of the minutes with minor
typographical changes to the minutes of the November 16, 1999 meeting minutes and Council
member Sybill Navas seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed
-unanimously, 7-0.
The third item on the agenda was the appointment of two members to the Vail Local Marketing
District Advisory Board.
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager stated there were seven applications for the two vacancies and
at the work session the Council interviewed the applicants; Michael Arnett, Bob Batchelor, Kaye
Ferry, Sally Hanlon, William O'Connell, Hermann Staufer and Pamela Stenmark. A written vote
was taken.
Council member Sybill Navas made a motion to appoint Bob Batchelor and Pam Stenmark to
the Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Board. Council member Greg Moffet seconded the
motion. A vote was taken and the motion was passed unanimously, 7-0.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz thanked all the applicants for their interest.
The fourth item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 34, Series of 1999, an
Ordinance Making Supplemental Appropriations And Budget Adjustments From The Town Of
Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, And Health Insurance Fund Of The 1999 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.
Steve Thompson said this is the final supplemental appropriation for 1999. He stated
supplemental appropriations are needed to account for expenditures that were not anticipated
when the budget was originally prepared. He said many of the Town's required supplemental
appropriations are caused by and funded by unanticipated revenue such as grants and sales.
All of the supplementals in the General Fund are of this type. Supplemental appropriations are
also needed for unanticipated expenditures such as the upgrade to the permit software for
$66,000, as well as for expenditures that will exceed budget estimates such as the $120,000
needed for health claims. He said the Town is self-insured for health claims and they must pay
what is incurred up to a certain point. He stated that for many years, the town's health claims
had done much better than the budget, but that was not so this year.
Further discussion ensued about various aspects of the supplemental request including how the
town covers health claims.
Council member Kevin Foley made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance No. 34,
Series of 1999. Council member Rod Slifer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the
motion passed, 7-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was first reading Ordinance No. 35, Series of 1999, an Ordinance
rezoning for property previously unzoned and owned by the United States Forest Service and
transferred to the Town of Vail, pursuant to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement to
Primary/Secondary Residential District and Natural Area Preservation District (NAPD), for
property located at Rockledge Road/ A replat of a portion of Block 7, Vail Village First Filing and
3 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Lot 2 of Raether minor subdivision affecting lots 2, 4, 7, 8A and 9A, Block 7, Vail Village First
Filing; Lots 3A and 3B, Resubdivision of Lot 3 Block 7 Vail Village First Filing; Lot 10A and 106,
Resubdivision of Lot 10 Block 7 Vail Village First Filing; Lot 13B Resubdivision of Lot 13 Block 7
Vail Village First Filing; and Government Lot 3, all in Section 7, Township 5 South, Range 80
West of the Sixth Principal Meridian.
And
A rezoning for property previously unzoned and owned by the United States Forest Service and
transferred to the Town of Vail, pursuant to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement to
Primary/Secondary Residential District and Natural Area Preservation District (NAPD), for
property located at Ptarmigan Road/ Lots 1 through 6, Block 5, Vail Village Seventh Filing,
replat of Lot 4, Vail Village Tenth Filing and Government Lot 3; all in Section 8, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney, read the title of the ordinance and said this is the final step in
fulfilling the Land Ownership Adjustment (LOA) process. The land will stay in its natural state
and be a buffer.
Dominic Mauriello, Chief Planner, stated there is a plat note stating the property cannot contain
any improvements on the land.
Council member Sybill Navas asked if there were any encroachments on the Ptarmigan fairway
drive areas on the map.
Tom Moorhead said yes, there was approximately one-fourth of the land encroached onto this
area. He said one of the property owners will participate and the other will not.
Further discussion ensued regarding compensation and rezoning of the property.
Council member Diana Donovan asked if the money from the sale would be placed in the Real
Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) fund.
Tom Moorhead stated it would be up to the Town Council to decide in which fund account the
proceeds will be placed.
Council member Sybill Navas made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance No. 35,
Series of 1999 with the comment above. Council member Greg Moffet seconded the motion.
Further discussion ensued. Council member Diana Donovan stated she would be voting
against the motion because she doesn't think the property owners should get additional gross
residential floor area (GRFA). And Council member Kevin Foley said he would be voting
against the motion because he thought the town didn't receive enough money for the property.
A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-2, Council members Donovan and Foley against.
Chas Bernhardt, a resident, said he would like to see the money reimbursed to the town go into
the RETT fund account.
4 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, said this property was purchased with capital project funds.
Council member Sybill Navas said this ordinance concerns the zoning of the property, not the
sale of the land.
The sixth item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 36, Series of 1999, an
ordinance amending Title 10, Building Regulations, of the Municipal Code, to provide for some
relatively minor updates and "clean-up" amendments to the town's adopted building codes.
Gary Goodell, Chief Building Official, said this ordinance provides for the minor amendments
and updates to the town building codes and includes the adoption of the National Electrical
Code 1999 edition modifying the current codes. The proposed changes would go into effect for
all building permit applications received after January 1, 2000. He stated the model codes that
are administered by the town should be updated on a regular basis in order to stay current with
changing construction technologies and the latest nationally recognized minimum safety
standards. He said the major new editions of the eight model codes that the town adopts are
published every three years. The town updated its building, fire, mechanical and plumbing
codes to the most current editions with Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1998, which became
effective January 1, 1999.
The National Electrical Code, or NEC, is published on a slightly different schedule. It is
proposed that the town adopt the most recent 1999 edition of the NEC to replace our current
adoption of the 1996 NEC. In addition, a number of "clean up" amendments are proposed to
eliminate some inconsistencies in the current ordinance, which is found under Title 10 of the
Town Code.
Council member Rod Slifer asked if this ordinance would increase the cost of building a new
structure.
Gary Goodell stated it wouldn't increase the cost.
Council member Rod Slifer made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance No. 36,
Series of 1999. Council member Kevin Foley seconded the motion..
Further discussion ensued.
Gary Goodell said he wants to analyze the fee structure and propose a modified fee schedule
at a later date.
A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The seventh item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1999, an
Ordinance Providing for the Levy Assessment and Collection of Town Ad Valorem Property
Taxes Due for the 1999 Tax Year and Payable in the 1999 Fiscal Year.
Steve Thompson, Finance Director, stated they received the town's property tax numbers from
the county on November 24, 1999 and the numbers have changed. The town was previously
allowed 3.8% and now they are allowed 3.9%. This formula caused the 1999 mill levy to be
5 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
lower than the 1998 mill levy, which was 4.4 mills. This ordinance allows for the mill levy to be
4.064 mills, to be collected in 2000.
Council member Diana Donovan asked if it could be higher.
Steve Thompson, stated the town is limited in what we can do.
Council member Kevin made a motion to approve on second reading, Ordinance No. 33, Series
of 1999. Council member Sybill Navas seconded the motion. Further discussion ensued.
Council member Kevin Foley said the Council should consider asking the town voters to `De-
Bruce" the formula based property tax provision this year.
A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The eighth item on the agenda was an evening work session to present the redevelopment
proposal for the Vail Village Inn. The purpose of the meeting is to update and inform the
Council of the various aspects of the redevelopment application.
George Ruther, Senior Planner, said while the applicant is setting up he is passing out the
updated information of the draft for the proposal comparison and the parking analysis. The
purpose is to inform the Town Council of issues that have come up from the Design Review
Board (DRB), Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) and staff, as well as to identify
the next steps.
George said he gave Council a memo dated December 1, 1999, which outlines several issues
including the Vail Road setback, proposed building height, employee housing and loading and
delivery. The DRB recommends approval with several condition and final review by Council
and DRB would be required. The next steps include final review by PEC on December 13,
1999 and updates and direction from Council on December 14, 1999. The applicant would like
to get feedback from Council about their comments, concerns and issues so they can respond
the each and every issue by Council and PEC as soon as possible. George said Jay Peterson,
Jack Zehren, Connie Dorsey and Tim Losa would be representing the applicant this evening.
Jay Peterson, said he was representing the applicant, Mr. Prado. He said Mr. Prado has been
at every meeting for the past three years and was not able to make this evening's meeting.
He explained that this project was not a condo-hotel and not a fractional fee hotel. There are
213 hotel rooms, which are funded by the sale of some prime weeks. The applicant went to
realtors and lenders to find out what would be necessary to finance_a project like this in Vail.
Over the past years, the lenders that are available to fund the project are now shrinking and
lenders are concerned. There needs to be equity in the project and viability for the hotel. The
time-share or fractional fee scenario benefits owners and exists for members only, and is
member run. The Vail Plaza Hotel has 99 stand-alone hotel rooms that will not be sold.
Council member Greg Moffet asked what was the current number of hotel rooms at the Village
Inn.
Tim Losa said there are 76 hotel rooms now.
6 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Jay explained the various types of rooms that would be available, there are 99 hotel rooms, and
all unsold; and 48 fractional fee club units with a total of 114 separate keys for separate club
units. There is spa space, conference facilities, a 9,000 square foot restaurant and bar, 289
parking spaces, and one free market dwelling unit that would replace the one that would be torn
down. He stated there is no other business in town like it. He reiterated that this project would
not be all things to all people. The needs, wants, desires and whims of all people cannot be met
with this one project. He stated this would be a long-term revenue source for the Town of Vail.
He said the staff, DRB and PEC have been working hard with the applicant. He said this is a
good project and there will be repercussions, however, the positives far outweigh the negatives.
Council member Greg Moffet asked about the club ownership aspect of the project and what
kind of control do they have over refurbishing the project in 20 years.
Jay responded by saying the owners would have majority control always.
Council member Greg Moffet asked if the majority owner will have the ability to assess other
owners for repairs.
Jay said the reserve funds would be set up and passed by the board of directors and the
owners would have to pay for it.
Further conversation ensued regarding the future cost of repairs and who would pay for them..
Jack Zehren, the project architect, reviewed the project from the architectural and design
standpoint. He summarized key items of the project. One of the primary goals was to blend
the project and neighborhood with existing surrounding development. He said there are two
major development areas. The project would continue major pedestrian areas and use
Frontage Road access for service access and us Vail Road for pedestrian access. He
reviewed the service access, scale, height and mass of the project, as well as other aspects of
the project, including the promenade, pedestrian areas, and sun/shade analysis.
George Ruther asked for questions and comments from the Council at this time.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz said the idea was to take notes, and to get to questions and answers later.
Council member Chuck Ogilby said he would like to take a break at this time to review the
model.
A 10-minute break was taken to review the model.
Council member Rod Slifer said he had a couple of comments but would like to reserve the
right to ask more questions later. He is concerned with Vail Road. Currently, it is a two-lane
road and part of the sidewalk is in the right-of-way. He thinks the road between the roundabout
to Meadow Drive would need to be three lanes for turning access. He wanted to know if there
is enough room to do that.
7 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Jay said a traffic engineer has looked at this area and there is room for a three-lane at the
expense of landscaping. He said there would be a traffic report next week.
Council member Rod Slifer said another question he had was in the loading area. The plan
shows there is space for five semi-trucks to be docked. Is there an accommodation for
deliveries outside of this facility or for other areas.
Jay said the loading area accommodates the entire Special Development District (SDD).
Council member Rod Slifer said he has been concerned about the loss of hotel rooms and is
happy to see the increase in the hotel rooms. He thinks the project would be used as a hotel.
He said that currently, the Austria Haus operates at 65% capacity and he doesn't think this
hotel would be higher than the 65-70% range.
Jay said they would double check with the Austria Haus on their numbers.
Council member Chuck Ogilby said he was ready to not like the project originally, but he has
been pleasantly surprised. He said he likes the way it feels and has the same concern as Rod
regarding traffic on Vail Road. He stated the loading situation needs to be worked out with the
staff. He thinks it would be a shame to not share this loading area and make it work with the
rest of the area facilities. With regard to employee housing, he would like to see a housing
requirement that if it is not on-site, it will need to be within walking distance to Vail. He thinks
this is vital.
Jay said he is interested in working on housing issues.
Council member Chuck Ogilby said having the employees on-site is key.
Jay said the applicant doesn't want employee housing on-site, but would work with staff on this
item.
Council member Diana Donovan said her concern was about the existing standards for the Vail
Village Inn and what the underlying zone district would be.
George Ruther said the zoning would be what exists today.
Further discussion regarding zoning and setbacks ensued.
George Ruther said he would supply Council with more information and will copy the PEC
memorandum for next week's packet. The proposal deviates from the underlying zoning in
three areas; there are twenty fewer parking spaces than required; it is 25 feet higher than
normally allowed at the highest point and there are zero setbacks in some areas, as opposed to
the 20 foot setback requirements. .
Council member Diana said there are a number of negatives to this project and wanted to know
more positives. She is also concerned about trash removal, recycling and commercial rent
restrictions.
8 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Council member Greg Moffet said the town would get more housing units.
George Ruther said additional benefits would be the potential increase in sales tax revenue,
willingness to incorporate loading and delivery for the Gateway building, improvements to the
site as well as additional housing units.
Jay Peterson said the hotel would operate the commercial spaces. There would be no outside
commercial rentals.
Council member Diana Donovan was also concerned about Vail Road, the project's parking
structure availability to other guests. She wants this in writing. She also stated the employee
housing needs to be in town.
Jay said the condominium declarations require that guests have a right to access the parking
garage. He said the lower garage is valet parking and there are 116 spaces on the main level
available to the SDD group.
Further discussion ensued.
Council member Rod Slifer commented on the lower valet parking area. He said the Gateway
building originally had valet parking and 24-hour parking service. Now there is no valet parking
and where the spaces were to be two cars deep now there is only one space. He said it may
be very difficult to get vehicles out.
Jay said the valet parking area is a controlled space. He said the valet parking didn't work at
the Gateway building because it was for commercial tenants. The Vail Plaza Hotel doesn't
have commercial spaces.
Council member Sybill Navas stated significant progress has been made. Her concerns are
about traffic on Vail Road, and that employee housing stay in the Town of Vail if possible. She
said it was important that the 1998 proposal was not approved. She is concerned about the
traffic exit on the Frontage Road and where the left turn would be. How are the vehicles exiting
the property and crossing the road. She said this issue has been brought up at every single
meeting and they still have an issue with a left turn off of the Frontage Road. She had a
question about the median on drawings and if this would be added.
Jay said yes that it would be added.
Council member Sybill Navas was glad to see the median on the plans. She had concerns
about the loading and delivery system.
Jay said the loading area has been redesigned and the traffic engineer will walk them through
that in next meeting.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz asked if they have reviewed what works five years down the road and
further into the future when reviewing the traffic on Vail Road and the Frontage Road.
George Ruther said the traffic report addresses some of the needs and will get the traffic
engineer to be at the next meeting to address these issues.
9 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Council member Greg Moffet said he reviewed the comparisons and said there were lots of
reductions. He said the Council is in the business of determining economically viable projects
and the Council has to stop kidding themselves because they do look at financial aspects of a
project. The town needs sustainable economic cycle resistant projects. The lenders have
made that determination of what is economically viable.
Council member Kevin Foley said he shares the concerns of Vail Road; the handicap parking
spaces need to be kept and are needed; and loading and delivery. He asked why can't the
cars go through Phase III, not the trucks but the cars. He wants to know how they are going to
get the vehicles turned left on the Frontage Road, and housing will be needed for a number of
new employees.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz said he thinks the project has come a long way in terms of mass and size of
the project, changing the roof lines, and step back of the building. He also has the same
concerns about Vail Road and traffic in the future. He said diverting traffic through Phase III
might not work.
Jay said the ramp that exits out of Phase III has a 19% grade and doesn't work.
George said staff anticipates further discussions with owners of Phase III to have an alternate
access to their building. Also, Phase III access during construction would need to be
addressed and an operable heating system would have to be provided. He said that
accommodating housing in the Town of Vail, and internal traffic flow make it part of the
community and is good for the community.
John Dunn, an attorney representing the owners of the Vail Gateway, said the owners are
concerned about the height of the project, the relationship to the master plan, and they are
uncomfortable with the process when the applicant has a work session with Council and there
has been no notice to adjacent owners regarding the work session.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association (EVHOA), said the town
has been working on the project for three years and they are definitely making progress. He
said this is a good opportunity for the town to work with the owner of the project to improve the
loading and delivery options in Vail Village. He said there are still unresolved issues with regard
to underlying zoning, and fractional fee club. He said the only other fractional fee club was the
Austria Haus.
George Ruther said the fractional fee club has been within the Public Accommodation Zone
District (PA zone district) since 1995.
Council member Greg Moffet stated it has been since 1996 .
Further discussion ensued on the economy and funding of these types of projects.
Jim Lamont stated the issues that Ludwig brought up today and in the future are valid. He said
when you look at the density in Vail Village and in Lionshead, there is substantial amount of
10 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
density that can be built. The Council needs to look at the pros and cons. There are going to
be more cars and trucks in the future. He is also concerned that private developers can hire
consultants that work for the Town at the same time. He suggests that two or three design
solutions be submitted. The major redevelopment of the Holiday Inn, Gateway Plaza and the
overall mix of traffic will be an issue plus logging trucks on the streets of Vail. There needs to
be safe pedestrian.traffic areas on Vail Road. The loading and delivery system and parking
may be shared with Gateway is a possibility but this shouldn't hold up the project. Between
final design approval and commencement of construction he wants to know how will the project
flow and how does this fit in with the overall loading and deliver system. Can the project be
modified to accommodate changes in the loading and delivery system. The parking structure
needs to be addressed now rather than later. The EVHOA concerns also include the view
alignment from the four-way stop, the decision making process rules in place are accounted for
and justification for changing them is presented. They want to know why the view corridor went
away? They are supportive of a new hotel but the concerns need to be addressed.
George Ruther said the view corridor and building height will be addressed during the PEC
process and will be forwarded to the Town Council.
Further discussion ensued regarding the view corridor and the east exit of the parking structure.
Council member Diana Donovan said she has more concerns. If the Phase III owners are
going to come in later with a project, she wants them to come in as part of this approval.
Jay said he couldn't force them to do this. The owners in Phase III have rights separate from
this project.
Council member Diana Donovan said she would not be sympathetic if they come in to Council
in a crisis mode.
Further discussion ensued.
Jim Lamont stated he has another process issue. He said the town needs to seriously review
what can occur on the site and not have the developer say no out of hand without looking at it.
The process and procedure for final DRB approval should not come before Council can review
it and have a final say.
Jay said they have gone to all the boards, especially DRB, because the board feels they don't
get to approve anything but color and trim. The applicant has gone to DRB before so they have
input in the process regarding roof forms, etc. He said the applicant will follow all the
procedures so no one is left out.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz said it was partly from the direction of Council that this procedure was done.
Council member Diana Donovan asked where they would stage the construction.
George Ruther said that part of the SDD and construction process is a staging plan. Until the
applicant has an approval there is no point in working out a staging plan at this time.
11 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Mayor Ludwig Kurz said that from a practical point, there are more difficult projects than this
one to get done.
George said the next steps are a PEC meeting on December 13, 1999 and then back to
Council on December 14, 1999 with responses to the Council's questions and with PEC
recommendations. He said all the models and plans are public record.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz thanked Jay and the rest of the applicant's representatives for their time
and efforts.
The ninth item on the agenda was a discussion on the proposed public process for
development of a master plan/community facilities plan for Donovan Park.
Dominic Mauriello, Chief Planner, said the Town has entered into a contract with Odell
Architects, Design Workshop, and Sasaki Architects to develop a master plan and building
plans for Donovan Park. He summarized the process and stated they would be scheduling and
working back from the May, 2000 date. Dominic stated there are 15 opportunities for public
review and input. He said this contract includes a public process for arriving at decisions during
the planning process. He said the public process is scheduled to begin in mid-December. The
process includes the a programming work session with stakeholders; two public open houses to
confirm prioritized program; two public open houses to provide input on potential design\site
plan alternatives; presentations on preferred alternatives to the Design Review Board (DRB),
Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC), Town Council, and the public; and a series of
hearings with the PEC, DRB, and Council to approve final plans. Dominic presented a detailed
schedule to the Town Council at the meeting that includes the first public meetings to begin on
January 5 and 6, 2000. He reviewed the conceptual plan tasks. The potential uses to be
considered include a pavilion with meeting space, a community theater, youth center and day
camp, gymnastics facility, community pool, playground equipment, recreational fields, and
possibly the ABC and Learning Tree educational center relocations. He said the completion of
Phase II for Donovan Park is scheduled for March 2, 2000 and Phase III (the contract
construction documents) will be scheduled after review by Council.
Council member Diana Donovan asked if the presentations to the public and to the Council
were held at the same time.
Dominic explained they do the presentations separately to get a variety of input from various
aspects of the community members who can not attend council meetings.
Russ Forrest, Community Development Director, said it was beneficial for town council
members to attend the public meetings so they will have first hand knowledge of community
input.
Dominic said the council presentations were more of a reporting of information of all the public
meetings.
12 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
Council member Sybil[ Navas asked if it was valuable to inform Town Council first and then
have feedback before the public meetings.
Dominic said there was not a lot of time to do that on this tight of a time schedule.
Mayor Ludwig Kurz said the positive point is that both the public and the Town Council hear the
same thing and everyone is on equal footing in the process.
Todd Oppenheimer said having the open houses first allows for incorporation of public
comments to the Council presentations.
The tenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
Bob said he had nothing further to add.
As there was no further business, a motion was made by Council member Kevin Foley to
adjourn the meeting and Council member Greg Moffet seconded the motion. A vote was taken
and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 10 25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Ludwig Kurz
Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson
Town Clerk
13 Vail Town Council Minutes December 7, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FR: Bob McLaurin
RE: Town Managers Report
DT: January 28, 2000
The Town Managers Report will be delivered Tuesday afternoon.
UD Comina Meetinas
2/8/00 WS - 2:00 P.M.
Police Department - Council Walk Through
6 Critical Strategies
Vail Marketing
PEC Report
Appeal of PEC Denial of City Market Sign Variance
EHU Code Amendments
Visit Services to the VVTCB Discussion About Reservations.
2/15/00 TC - 7:00 P.M.
2/15/00 WS - 2:00 P.M.
Donovan Park Project
6 Critical Strategies - Infrastructure to include RETT & Capital Projects.
Council Orientation - Public Works
Carts
FILE COPY
TOWN OF VAIL
Department of Community Development •
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
FAX 970=479-2452 TM
October 13, 1998
Stanley Turner
Odell Architects, P.C.
2922 Evergreen Parkway, Suite 205
Evergreen, Colorado 80439
Re: John A. Dobson Ice Arena Expansion
Dear Stanley,
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a summary of the comments from the
Town of Vail Design Review Board and Planning & Environmental Commission.
Planning & Environmental Commission Comments:
? Provide an adequate drop-off area that takes into consideration the west to east
access.
? The current proposal encourages the use of the hospital parking lot rather than the
parking structure.
? Create a visual connection between the drop-off area and the building entrances.
? Reduce the number of building entrances and create a main entrance that is easily
identifiable.
? A loading and delivery area must be provided that works in context with the rest of.
the building.
? A drop-off area needs to be provided on the west end of the building.
? The design and layout of the building needs to respect the existing topography and
vegetation.
? Provide an improved uuzi stop at the top of the West Meadow Drive Chute.-
? Bury the new gymnastic facility into the hillside like the existing ice arena.
? Reduce the overall building height where possible.
? Provide a grading plan that illustrates the finish grades.
? Provide a visual analysis of tho nronn,;ed additions.
Design Review Board Comments:
? Explore the number and the design of the entrances to the building. Reduce
entrances if possible.
? Consider the context of the existing building in the design of the new addition.
La RECYCLEDPAPER
? Match the geometry of the existing building.
? Pull the gymnastics facility away from the existing building.
? Tie the locker room addition to the existing building with the use of similar materials
? Add more windows into the design of the gymnastics facility.
Design roof forms that are more compatible with one another.
Once the proposal has been redesigned to respond to the comments provided by the
Design Review Board and the Planning & Environmental Commission, please give me a
call so I can schedule the proposal for further review. The next Planning &
Environmental Commission meeting that you can attend is Monday, November 8. You
can reach me at 970-479-2145.
Sincerely,
George Ruther, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Piet Pieters
12:27 FED 10, 2000 TEL N6: 9704766008 #17302 PAGE: 212
L%
February 10, 2000
To: Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Council
From: Frank Johnson
Re: February 17 Meeting Agenda
The next meeting will be held on Thursday, February 17 in the Vail Council Chambers
from 7:30 till 9:00 am...the agenda is as follows:
1. Review/adopt January 27 meeting minutes (already sent out)
II. Discussion ...planning cycle for 2001 program
A. Vendor contract renewal process
B. Timetable
III. Discussion... TCB providing Group Sales support to other clients
IV. Discussion ...Fee structure for TCB services
V. Front Range Plan
VI. Committee Reports
A. Destination
B. Group
C. Public Relations
D. Internet
VII. Adjourn
Hope to see you all there.
V~t d v V 970/949-0555
O •
E x ties s a eS e-.,.,C, .5
at car n-e ans.
0o k' .,F b
.
By.joann Lovigho
AP Staff Writer Considering car phone bans
PHILADELPHIA - :Patricia-- Three states have laws that limit cellular phone use in motor vehicles'-:
Pena gave little thought to using a ce1=. others have considered similar measures. Here is a look at those
lular telephone on the roadbefore,a states.
distracted driver hit her car broadside,
N.H.
fatally injuring her 2-year-old daugh-
VT.
ter. -...-r- MICH. -1 '
WASH` MD ~ W. VA. i .
Now she has devoted herself to MONT. MINN.,F' : s' S MASS.
w13. ~ R.I.
pushing for a nationwide ban on cell . - { S:.
IDAHO I CONN.
phone use in cars, except in emergen- Wyo. IOWA
- l
etes. . IND.
``It's too late for my daughter, but UTAH` COLO. I~ KAN. • 1 NJ , 11
1 . ; TENN . N.C.
led to a
DEL.
I feel nd fo~other peoplebsbabiemy b abd MO
OK LA. ARK. S.C. /
ARR. N.M.
Pena, 29. miss ~ALA.
11++
Lawmakeis in states and cities'... MD.
o :across the•nation are considering leg .a aq Fu
islation to ban drivers from talking on;, HAWAII
cell phones. Without :statistics that 4
track. fatalities related to cell phone ALASKA
i use, c, ntics'point to a 1997 study that
suggests talking on a cell phone while ' states with laws, restricting cell phone use in venicias
proposals in 1999
' states that considered similar
driving is about as dangerous as being`
.close to legally 'drunk behind the . Source: National Conference of State Legislatures AP ,
wheel.
i ,
No state bans. the use of wireless 911 are exempt. An estimated 85 percent of the
phones inautoniobiles, and only.Ca1:,:` The ordinance; and another passed nation's approximately. 80 million- _
ifornia,, Florida and Massachusetts- last month in the Philadelphia suburb . cell phone subscribers: _use the
have laws, limiting cell phone use in of-Conshohocken, is based. on one devices while driving..
moving, vehicles, -according to the passed last March in Brooklyn, Ohio, "I know I probably shouldn't be
National Conference of State Legisla- where police have issued more than using one when I'm driving. You do
tures..Only Oklahoma and Minnesota 80 citations with $2 fines. get distracted on the road, but you
require police to include information Proposals to ban car phone use can get a lot of work done," said
about cell phones in accident reports, have been introduced in Massachu- Jerry Siedlecki, a claims representa-
Morgan•Pena died a day alter the setts and in Nebraska, where talking tive for a Philadelphia insurance
Nov. 2 accident in Hilltown when a ..on a cell phone would be considered,, company.
driver ran a'stop sign and slammed.. contributory negligence in auto acci- Educating drivers about how to
into her mother's. car. The driver,.,' dents:.At'least 300 towns and cities,.` ';use their cell phones responsibly will
admitted hew: distracted while talk including Chicago, are considering do more good that an outright ban,
ing on his cell phone. He was cited for local ordinances. sard Lisa Ihde, spokeswoman for the
reckless driving and fined $50. The 1997 study, published in the Cellular Communications Industry
Hilltown :.now. bans certain cell New England Journal of Medicine, Association, a Washington-,based
.phone uses for drivers. concluded that talking on a cell phone industry. group representing wireless -
"What we're hoping. is 6y.us: and; ; :while dri ving quadruples>the risk .of•; :carriers: and manufacturers
other municij lities taking action the an accident Researchers said losing we-don't want to see anyt,legis-
I, J, state Legtslatvure will understandhow3, ;concentration snot fiddling with thee' ]dtibnthat would deter•drrvers from
C ..Cr glX
i pporttve tfi~rest den.'ts t5f Pe}lpsyl ,phone ;itself creates the hazard so taking,thetr phone with them to their
vania are of thrs'.an d look atpassng atalking on'a hands free:model is just cars,",she said
state' law said .Ken Bennington, as risky:` Last year, 15 states'atteniptc, to
chairman of the Board of Supervisors.. According to 'a National High- address the issue with'legislation. In
Under the ordinance,' which, took way Traffic Safety Administration;* Pennsylvania, the bill call's for the
effect last month,i'0river.cannot be report, a proliferation of more high- state to track accidents' related to
5 stopped for. using a-mobile;phone but tech auto gadgetry. on=board nav-_ ; cell phones, require..dnvers.:to.pull
can be fined:r$75:if pulled-over for igation systems fax,machines :'over when using phones 'and:-fine
another violation.'. Emergency ser- could heighten driver distractions,.?violators. A,hearmg. is"tentatively
vices workers.-and motorists calling and lead to more crashes. scheduled for March.
S1.
~E RT BE.A.VER ("o- R E E K
AT
-
Smoke, mirrors
with Vail councl
By Farrow Hitt feel justified in rewriting between
Guest Column the lines and looking for ways
Prior to our November election around our existing ordinances and
for new Town Council members, I laws. It is almost like a blurring of
wrote the newspaper with an upbeat our laws' intent. ry
letter about the excitement of Why not use ourexistinglaws as
voters who felt that the a boundary for future projects and
many Vail .
endeavors?
running had their pulse To Isn't follow? that why we have
on the many important issues fac- them. To Lately, it seems
- ing our town. One important issue like the town is always swimming
upstream, or drifting downstream,
was the preservation of our open -
r without a paddle. _
space as well as the importance of A common tactic used when
the real estate transfer tax (RETT), controversy arises is to discredit
which is collected by the town for someone or a group. Try to isolate _
purchasing, maintaining and pre-
them from the mainstream. Names
serving our parks and recreation and acronyms like obstructionist,
areas. elitist and my favorite, NIMBY, are SoRR~ Jt/DGE,
Most of our new council mem- but a few of the names bestowed mot! SENTENCED
hers are on the record stating lands on myself and others who believe , AN wt F_v4T
Qoc
that were purchased with real in the preservation of our natural MAN To DEATH
estate transfer tax dollars should be resources. The very resources that Np ypv K040w
used for parks, recreation and open separate our town from others. Is 7 4E, PEn1AL.TY
space. Some are also on record it an obstructionist who asks that
stating that at the time the real FOR KILLING AN
g laws be abided by? Is an elitist i NNoCGW _r MAN
estate transfer tax was passed it someone who wishes to preserve IN 71415 SrATEr.-
was very clear that the intent was land for future generations? Is a
to purchase these lands to PRO- NIMBY a bad thing to be? If you
TECT them from the urban sprawl don't look after your own back
and runaway growth that was cer- yard, who else is going to?
twin to come to our valley. In other If yes is the answer to the above
words, protect these lands from questions, then I guess I am all of
future development so that others, the above. I am proud of the fact -
in years to come, could enjoy what that I care enough to get off my
makes this area so very unique and sofa and do something to preserve
special to most of us. the very resources that affect the
There was genuine hope that ambiance of my town. The actual
' this new council would keep their
things that separate Vail from the
campaign pledges and promises. I rest of "Anytown" USA.
.;p guess this is where politics comes While I am on the subject of
in. It is amazing how quickly things that affect our town, let's '
politicians forget what they say. talk about affordable housing. V6
De t
~rr [-o. O?slfiQ JUDbE'.
Contrary to popular belief, dur- Pteace cc~naiciec thic•. Suhaidized ~¢av~4o ra. r•.yr
Ar
ing the Vail Tomorrow sessions, I housing or a living wage? Are the
and others questioned the legality houses too expensive or is our uses. why we collect the tax. If the tax chased with the RETT should bed
and use of RETT properties for the wage scale too low? I'll bet if you The RETT is in the same vein is to purchase lands for parks and protected, while the town is hes
affordable housing projects being surveyed the work force in town as the new lodging tax that recent- open space, shouldn't the lands tant to make them protected open,,
considered. I was told not to worry and asked which they would pre- ly passed. A specific tax for a very purchased with RETT be used for space because they don't want .t0',
as these were just discussions and fer, a living wage or a government specific use. The freedom to use it that purpose? How can it apply to tie the hands of future councils. ial
foii
nothing was "set in stone." subsidy, the prevailing answer for other purposes is not an option. the money but not the lands pur- case they might need the lands,
Throughout the Vail Tomorrow as would be a living wage. Subsi- Why do current staff and coun- chased with the same money? Typ- some other purpose. This is moW
well as the Common Ground meet- dizing housing and keeping wages cil continue to move forward dis- ical smoke and mirrors. The judge ironic' The very purpose of b'uyi*,
ings, we continued to ask why our low traps employees under the regarding the rules? In the future, will rule on this matter, also. the land in the first place was? td':
parks were being considered for thumb of their employer. Never will the new lodging tax become The RETT is very important to protect it. The RETT is not intettd{
housing when clearly they could having the opportunity to get ahgW victim of the same mindset? In a Vail. We use these monies to ed to be used for land bankinw..:
not be used for this purpose. because they are forever behind the few years will they feel compelled maintain our parks and our bike The purpose of the RETTi is ;.tq;..
By this time, the name calling eight ball. It helps the business to silently change the use of this paths. We use these monies to purchase lands for parks, open`
had begun and we were labeled owner all right, but doesn't do tax as well? Will most people sit at plant flowers and trees throughout space, recreation and similar uses=
NIMBY (not in my back yard), much for the worker. An $8 per home and just watch as tax dol- town. Shouldn't we also be using Perhaps;' in hindsight, the lattti3; b`
obstructionist,- elitist and told to hour job might work in Selma, lars are diverted to whatever cause these monies to build active and question should have been Mitt+.
*&^#@ off by then Mayor Rob Alabama, but not in Vail. catches the eye of the council? passive parks on the lands we pur- chased with TOV general funds) s6
Ford. When the "not set stone"dis- I know there are some that feel There is a passage in the RETT chased using RETT funds? they could be used however r the
cussions became Ordinance9, mak- we should build affordable housing ordinance that states: At the time With $3 million plus in the council sochooses. By using RUM
ing Donovan Park, Arosa Garmish anywhere in town. The need for the town feels they have acquired RETT fund, why aren't. Donovan dollars to purchase land, it auto-,
and Stephens Park top priority f'or affordable housing is apparent, but enough land for open space and Park, Arosa Garmish Park and matically becomes restricted. The
employee housing complexes, we I don't believe at any cost. I don't parks, this tax shall sunset itself Stephens Park already finished? lands we are in litigation over were
had no choice but to file suit to believe we should run to put hous- (go away). The Town Council We need to protect this tax and all purchased with the RETT.
try and stop it. Had we not filed ing on lands that were purchased believes, due to amendments to the the lands purchased with proceeds If the town will protect these
within 30 days of the passage of for parks and recreation. These ordinance, there is no threat of the from this tax. We should be fol- lands, we will settle our lawsuits,
Ordinance 9, we would have lost lands were purchased with tax RETT sunsetting. The town attor- lowing the rules of the ordinance If the town will simply follow tho
the right to ever contest this bla- dollars specifically earmarked for ney has told them not to worry instead of trying to rewrite or read ordinances as they read, we will
tant disregard and misuse of the parks and recreation, collected by about it. I'm not so sure. Perhaps between the lines so that some settle our lawsuits.
RETT. the town in accordance with Ordi- a judge can help clarify this point. staff and council members can, at I don't feel like we are asking
I am one of the citizens here nance 26 and entrusted to our offi- There are just too many ques- will, use this money at their dis- them to do anything other than
who brought litigation against my cials to be handled and dispersed tions. Can properties purchased cretion. what their own ordinances require
own town government. I believe accordingly. with the real estate transfer tax be We are actively trying to settle them to do. We have been waiting
they are ignoring and blatantly dis- Some taxes are collected and used for any purpose other than our lawsuit with the Town of Vail. to settle this for over a year, either
regarding rules, ordinances, com- put in the general fund to be spent those specified in the RETT ordi- There are some who will not be through the courts or via settlw.. w-l
prehensive open land plan and our by the town. We adopt a town bud- nance? I don't believe the amend- very happy I am writing the paper talks. We would prefer the latter:
town charter. All of which were get and try to follow it' the best ed ordinance changes the uses of about this, however. Please just follow the rules. If
adopted and passed by previous we can. Lately we have had to this very specific tax. We want a I feel this is a very public the town wants to rewrite. the
councils after much time, thought, supplement our budget from the judge to rule as to the uses of the issue. There is nothing private RETT ordinance and make it legal
energy and hard work. town reserves. The real estate money from R.M. The town attor- about it. We have been in discus- to use the money any way they
Why is it that new councils feel transfer tax has specific rules and ney has stated that although the sions for over two months now. want, they should do it. Just for-
they don't have to honor past coun- uses in place before the town col- collections and use of the money Although some progress has been low the rules. Protect these. heed),
1:r
cil decisions ? Doesn't the previous lects it. The freedom to change is ,restricted, the lands purchased made, I am not very encouraged a This is all we are asking. :!!Y,
council's hard work count for these rules is not simple. The new with the money have no restric- settlement can be reached. Farrow Hitt is a vice pres" of
something? I hate to see Johnny- lodging :tax is a prime example of tions or attachments, The sticking point seems to be the Donovan Park Homeowners
come-lately tout our mandates and a very +r~.,:fic tax with specific This to me seems to contradict that we believe that lands put- Association.
..)JI I .I Iv L~1.Jl. I/If. Jl Il tl II IUU '(I IL.IU . _ J^
L
GROS5 F~ / c01
O C,r
r < 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • PO. DRAWER 2150
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602
2 (970) 945-5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081
0
3S0a0
February 10, 2000
Town of Vai I
Attention: Mr. Robert McLaurin
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Community Enhancement Fund
1999 Revenue
Dear Mr. McLaurin:
Pursuant to the terms and conditions of both Article 11 "Community Enhancement Fund", Town of
Vail, Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1999) and the Special Agreement dated January 28, 2000, your
calculated fund payment is $101,906.25.
Our calculation is based on one percent (1%) of the gross revenues collected from the sale of
electricity, within the Town boundaries, for 1999. The annual gross revenue collected was
$10,190,625.28. We have also included the amount of $2,000.00 that was never paid as an
initial fund payment upon enactment of the Ordinance.
Future Enhancement Fund payments, for revenue years 2000 through 2018, will continue to be
based on the annual gross electric revenue collected.
The retention of actual fund payments by Holy Cross Energy, as a credit against the "agreed cost"
of $237,000.00 (refer to the aforementioned Special Agreement) will continue until such "agreed
cost" has been completely satisfied by the retention of such fund payments. With the retention of
both the current and initial fund payments, the "agreed cost" balance has been reduced to
$133,093.75.
With these payments, Holy Cross Energy has now contributed a total of $103,906.25 to this
program since its inception on May 18, 1999.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (970) 947-5430.
Sincerely,
HOLY CROSS ENERGY
C 4 f, C,6&7
Stephen B. Casey,
Supervisor of Contract Services
SBC
Town of Vail - Community Enhancement Fund (DR 236.65)
W\Word\Community Enhancement Payments\) 999 Revenue.doc
~II
JFA
" wW"~aman~a Pauuob ~ ~ .r~
Emcomill 'ree seen as ~ti 4
tax threat at Colty Hall 4 t
Municipal revenue could be cut by millions
t r 'w° a
Bryn Lusep Staff writer' t ticular zip code.
Statewide; municipalities are being
STEAM90AT SPRINGS - Shoppers 'encouraged by the Colorado Municipal
,r
in Steamboat Springs may get a sneaky little; . League-to urge Congress to oppose pending
rush from finding great deals on the Internet. federal leglsiation that would prohibit the
yi
14 But what they may not know is that as soon collection of ,Internet and catalog sales tax. `r 14.
. as 2003, Internet and catalog shopping could Steamboat is jumping on the lobbying band-
cost their local goverament as much as wagon. The,City Council recently voted to ,
$1 million annually in lost sales taxes. Those te Ibtters; opposing the bill being consid- ' I. ~
revenues are used to maintain soccer 'fields ' eyed by Congress.
and pay the salaries of snowplow operators; CMt hiyed,a research firm that found the
among many othetmunicipal expenses., city lost sales ;ax revenue of $1.19,675 in
>a"f'
The increased popularity of Internet slid 199$'1dlnte'rnet and catalog sales. It predicts
catalog shopping is giving some Steamboat the community will lose almost $1 million
government officials A% scare. The' downside by 2003, as reported by Forrester Research
yk of avoiding sales tax is that it`$ at the expense 'Inc,
of local goverttmputs' operating revenue. It is
revenue the di't ..woit't,be co0ectin' 'utdetis CITY COUNCIL
4yier Arroyo%staabat.MW Congress decides to rule' that' satellite com- Steamboat Springs City Council is in
for a customer panes .(reailer9'operatidg oUtsifle a taxin$..favor of ,charging sales tax for catalog and
ei 3:5 cents of city di9tnct's'boundaries ,through eatalpSs silo In ternet~purchased goods.
the potentlal fer the Internet.) ril6s4 start charging sales taxes' I ~
Y"° ' ~4 ;qla i ~ttl the c~~tomer, based b# the iiy~tolrter's peT~, t~ a ? See Intemet shoppint 2A F 4
r~i~''~ - +~`'H~{.'.""~,~ ~ '~~_~¢t.~G{~'T hY'3#,3t~'i a - .~'•rl'JC'",~•-'.,`tY~
cy.
- aoamteziance of parks and t~rrals s the city s ..r:..~.tional budget: calls went poli
City .Council passed a resolu- for even more than 70 percent, it's City Finance Director Karen
tion in December opposing federal probably more like 95 percent i..su Feeney has been keeping close tabs
t legislation prohibiting the collec- sales tax. If we're moving to an on the sales tax concern. There are
lion of state and local sales tax- Internet shopping situation nation- two bills in Congress that would
The unanimous resolution stat- ally, cities will rely on the sales tax prohibit local and state govem-
d ed the city recognizes the amount of from Internet goods to ,continue to ments Fw... collecting sales tax on
leakage in sales tax revenue from operate. I think those companies on Internet goods.
purchases through catalogs and the the Internet should have to charge . "If that happens, Steamboat
Internet. In addition, it states that it, just like we do." will need to pursue diversified rev-
Steamboat supports CML's efforts Green is trying to be competi- enue resources," Feeney said.
to counter lobbyists seeking to pro- tive where Internet and catalog "We're hiring a consultant with the
tect e-commerce from local sales shopping is concerned. chamber and the county to look at
taxes, in the hopes of recapturing 'We have a small Web site now the community on a whole, and
some or all of the future lost sales and our two-year goal is to create hopefully make recommendations
tax revenue. more of a presence on the Internet. on areas of taxable revenue that
"We've talked about it numer- We don't have a catalog but we we're not currently taking advan-
ous times and we support the want our customers, locals or tage of. The consultant may be able
CMLCity tourists, to be able to see our items to show us ways to move revenue
Councilman Paulwithout coming into the store, if sources around so that the taxpayer
Strong said. "Our that's what they want," Green said. doesn't feel the direct impact:'
city is -supported by "We're offering a unique and hand- Councilmen Strong also is an
sales tax. More made item, but I've seen our items advocate for diversifying
than 74 percent of appearing more and more in home Steamboat's revenue base.
our operating bud- fashion catalogs, so we're trying to "We need to reevaluate our tax
get comes from keep up and compete with that." policy. We need something else .to
sales tax. As it Green said that she offers com- rely on, but a change of that magni-
erodes, it will petitive, prices and hopes that tude is a tough sell to the voters,"
greatly affect how Paul Strong Steamboat Art Co. is able to main- Strong said.. "And, it's something
we operate" tain its local clientele. But concern that won't happen overnight. It may
over locals looking to the Internet be 10 or 15 years down the road:"
LOCAL BUSINESS or catalogs for the same products, is According to Ken Bueche,
CML officials believe that not driving her marketing strategy. executive director for CML, in 10
only are municipalities losing out Green explained that she years, 25 percent of retail sales will
on revenues from Internet and cata- believes local shopping can offer occur over the Internet.
log sales, local businesses are being advantages to the local consumer. "There is a lot of concern out
What a lot of people don't there from local governments as to
because put at they unfair disadvantage realize is that yes, they don't have how they will finance their commu-
y must collect sales tax to pay sales tax, but they do have to nity's operating budgets without the
on locally sold goods. That expense pay astronomical amounts in ship- use of sales tax . revenue," Bueche
is passed along to the consumer, creating a higher priced local retail ping," Green said. "When the cus- said. "People don't want to pay
item and a lower priced national tomer comes up to the counter with sales tax on Internet or catalog pur-
catalog or Internet item. an item to purchase, we don't tell chased goods, but they also want
When it comes to the city col- them that they have to pay shipping police, fire protection and good
lecting sales tax on Internet and cat- on top of the price of the item. I schools. Sales tax is how local gov-
alog goods, Julie Green, owner of think sometimes customers end up emments offer these things to .their
the Steamboat Art Co., is a support- Paying more for these Internet communities. People need to real-
goods, even though they think ize, the price of community' ser-
er of capturing the taxable revenue. they're getting a deal:" vices is taxes:'
Green is a former City Council Green believes many customers Bueche explained that the CML
member with insights into the gov- will always prefer to see and touch supports the numerous national
ernment process.
"I definitely support the city in an item before they make the deci- associations of state and local.,gov-
Sion to purchase. ernments. It is passing on support encour trying to get legislation that tax o n - "Mail order can be a real has- from the statewide municipalities to
ages the collection of sales t o sle. If your item doesn't fit or isn't those lobbying groups that are
goods purchased through catalogs the quality you wanted, you have to fighting to keep legislation out of
and the Internet," Green said. ship it back. By shopping locally, Congress.
"When n it all boils down, I m sure you kriow what you're going to get "The Internet industry is push-
before you purchase it. It's just so ing bills through Congress and they
much more convenientGreen pose a huge _Ar sk to 19cal goverp-
..-said-_`.'Personall , I refer 'tosho meats .::that are "de eat on e
_ Routt County'S~ locally and I'd rather pay sales tax" sales taxi: What we' Ong to d61 s
newspaper of Tecord than-shipping:' r - - ask Congress to refrain from past- .
since 1885. ing any kind of legislation," Bueche
THE FUTURE said.
® Whether consumers are shop- It is not clear whether the exist-
ping locally or nationally, the sales mg bills in Congress -will be acted
S"I'EA1,MAT pU OT tax issue will impact city govern- on this year. But what is clear is that
state and local government lobby-
ists will be working to keep them
F : out of the law books, Bueche said.
~ ........................................r Via.
c
v-s oppin
g to r ise
-
taxes- cut.:.Services
= _BY J.ms W._BRosNAN tant advance, but if what we have is people
Scripps H, „ d News Service doing retail or wholesale business on the
State and local governments will have to Internet because of if special tax advantage,
raise taxes or slash services if cyber-com they're distorting the economy, not helping
merce continues to be sales-tax-free. the economy."
A new study by the University of Federal law and a Supreme Court ruling
Tennessee for the National-Tax Journal pro- limit the ability of states to tax Internet
Jects that states and localities will lose $20 sales.
billion a year by 2003 in sales tax.collec- In 1992, the Supreme Court said states
tions if a-c,,.. _erce. transactions continue can collect sales taxes from out-of-state
to go untaxed. That's a tenfold increase over vendors only if the retailer has an outlet in
what the . ,...::.i national moratorium on that state. The case dealt with mail-order .
Internet sales taxes cost last year. catalog sales that now total 10 times what e-
Professors William Fox and Donald commerce amounts to, although Internet
Bruce, the study's. authors, note that- only sales are projected to explode in coming
the five states with no general sales taxes years.
would escape. unhurt if the moratorium is In 1998 Congress passed a three-year-
extended indefinitely: The no-sales-tax moratorium on states imposing new
states are Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Internet sales taxes on out-of state purchas-
Hampshire and Oregon. es and new taxes on monthly Internet ser-
- Other states would have to raise taxes on vice fees by providers like America Online.
in-state sales from brick-and-mortar stores, . The moratorium expires in October, 2001.
raise other taxes or slash services to make- Republican Sen. John McCain of
up the difference, according to the study. Arizona, the presidential hopeful, wants to
Hardest hit would be: bar taxes for good on Internet sales, includ-
• . California, Illinois, New York, ing sales by in-state merchants, while the
Tennessee, Texas and Washington. All other presidential candidates favor continu-
would have to hike their existing- sales tax ing the moratorium on taxing monthly ser-
by 0.75 cents on the dollar to make up the vice fees.
.loss. McCain argues that that cyber-sales
• Alabama, Arkansas, Minnesota, should never be taxed so these people that
-Mississippi, Nevada and Oklahoma would are making huge and massive investments
feel the pinch only a little less. Their loss in the L.w.-et will have the confidence that
y would require a 0.6-cents-on-the-dollar it won't be taxed He calls the Internet ''the
sales tax increase. engine of America's economy" and says
"Congressmen are allowing their home- -governors and mayors should understand.
state economies to be hurt by this," said - = that and "get their hands off of it'so
Fox.' "E=c erce is an incredibly impor - that the American economy can
3~. ~ 5• <t.. -Si ~:.a -,~F,y v. 7 "na +'^'y.5 „s',^ iykc :~'S~s~<3Y"-x.'~mw. a.'x
Xc, 8~
•:Y y
+rY?
Dealing with
bureaucracy
One of our readers, concerned about the increase in
bureaucracy in our personal lives and our work, recently forwarded me
the following list. Since we all increasingly deal with new rules which may
or may not have reason on their side, and also have many changes to face in
our own lives, the list may provide you with some food for thought in this
new year.
"Dakota tribal wisdom," my reader e-mailed me, "says that when you
discover you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
"However bureaucracies often try other strategies with dead horses,
including the following:
1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Changing riders.
3. Saying things like, `This is the way we've always ridden this horse.'
4. Arranging to visit other sites to see how they ride dead horses.
5. Increasing the standards to ride dead horses.
6. Appointing a committee to study the dead horse.
7. Waiting for the horse's condition to improve from this temporary
downturn.
8. Providing additional training to increase riding ability.
9. Passing legislation declaring `This horse is not dead.'
10. Blaming the horse's parents.
11. Acquiring additional dead horses for increased speed.
12. Declaring that `No horse is too dead to beat.'
13. Providing additional funding to increase the horse's performance.
14. Commissioning a study to see if private contractors can ride it cheaper.
15. Removing all obstacles in the dead horse's path.
16. Taking bids for a state-of-the-art dead horse.
17. Declaring the horse is `better, faster, and cheaper' dead.
18. Revising the performance requirements for horses.
19. Saying the horse was procured with cost as an independent variable.
20. Raising taxes. And, if all else fails,
21. Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position."
Ruth W. Stidger,
Associate Publisher and Editor-in-Chief
JANUARY 2000 Better Roads 7
f
Co,unty_ :gets:.
hearin s .,for
f o~reTst~ ~ lan =ice uti
yp
'.Daily Trail Staff Report 6:300.m:'
County Administrator
Eagle County. has estab . Jack Ingstad said the `couh-
lished four public he ty's review of the forest plan,
dates in its review of the will be similar to the process
White ;River .National Forest. used toreviewotherland-use
Management Plan. Meetings' ' prop osals..He! said the,,, first
-are scheduled throughout step `was to. complete'staff
the county..,. analysis of the plan. The sec-
The-public is invited to and step was to solicit writ-
attend`meetings on the fol- ten. input' from."stakehold-
lowing dates>..;r ers."r The"county anticipates ,
March 6 -'Berry JCreek completing a summary of
Middle SchoolEdwards' agency. and government
• March 9 Vail Town comments by March 3." .
Council Chamber's County staff will. present .
March 13 = Basalt Town. all public comments and •
Council Chambers. staff, recoinmendations to
' March,. 16 Eagle the country. commissioners
""County Building, " Eagle,, by April 15. Ingstad said the
,classroom ;r7~ ay., t county hopes to have a; for
All imeettngs begin at "mil position YbyfMay 1 t ;
'Ck K 7 `,~•igr,1`re.si fie;'-e eft .{b;` t,.i+!'fi!"'~^'iLi3'firy°'~':r'~.hr Vii, '~x
t DECEMBER 1999
TOWN OF VAIL VAIL BUSINESS REVIEW
February 22, 2000
The December Vail Business Review examines sales tax collections for December and Year to
date collections for 1999.
Overall December sales tax decreased 9.7% with Retail decreasing 5.4%, Lodging decreased
18.8%, Food and Beverage decreased 6.0% and Other (which includes items such as utilities, taxable
services i.e. plumbing and electrical and rentals or leases) decreased 1.0%. Year to date collections
resulted in a 3.7% decrease overall with Retail decreasing 3.2%, Lodging decreased 7.5%, Food and
Beverage decreased 0.5% and Other decreased 0.8%.
The 1.4% Vail Marketing District tax went into effect January 1, 2000. This tax is charged on
the purchase price paid or charged to persons for rooms or accommodations and is only charged on
short-term rentals (less than 30 days). The State of Colorado will collect this tax on a quarterly basis
and questions concerning it should be directed to the Department of Revenue at 303-232-2416.
Sales tax forms and the Vail Business Review are available on the internet at www.ci.vail.co.us.
Please remember when reading the Vail Business Review that it is produced from sales tax
collections, as opposed to actual gross sales.
If you have any questions or comments please feel free to call me at (970) 479-2125 or Steve
Thompson at (970) 479-2116.
Sincerely,
'~q C-~
Sally Lorton
Sales Tax Administrator
i
December Special Events and Groups Included
1998 1999
Ski Industry Week Budweiser Street Beat Concert Series
Vail's 25th Annual President Ford Tree Lighting Vail's 26th Annual President Ford Tree Lighting
Ceremonies Ceremonies
Victory 4 Vail Figure Skating Festival
Vail Figure Skating Festival 5 (a, 5 Nordic Race Series
Hot Winter Nights Vail Alpine Gardens Winter Interlude
New Years Eve Celebration 14th Annual Family Dinner Dance
New Years Eve Snowshoe Race New Years Eve Celebration
Rave in the New Year Mountain Top Millennium Celebration
Vail Mono Ski Camp Rave in the New Year
KYGO Days Citizen of the Year Extravaganza
V4 Snowboard Series Mountain Hospice Tree Lighting
Nordic Adventure Series Budweiser Street Beat Fireworks Series
Hot Winter Nights
DECEMBER 1999 SALES TAX
VAIL VILLAGE
December December December
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
I:
Retail 461362
420 i 3
f
L
od 41 4
3 1
9in9
4
f
Food &
Beverage 251
243 73.
Other 13;594 10,9'16
1
1.- 7 7
T I
ota
.a
LIONSHEAD
December December December
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
:x
Retail 152j4&
125,244,,:.:;;..;.;>:<.::. 1.8.0/0
1
"
Lodging
1~ 4
85 8
f
Food
&
Beverage 74,054 59 824 19.2%°
Other,:..,:` , 6,884
I> 1
T
otal
419 535:::_; 331: 589...
I .
0.
L
DECEMBER 1999 SALES TAX
CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST VAIL/SANDSTONE/WEST VAIL
December December December
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
6 544;''->'~~
Retail 21
224"
.39. /o.
1
1
Lodging
80
Food & -
Beverage
4
Other 33
Total
4 2'24
-405
2
OUT OF TOWN
December December December
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
etail
42 2
5
R-60
Lodging
Food Beverage
,
9
52
3./0'
1 Q5`-`
Other
11
:'i".:",,:% ~.;'Sy„-''<;4~"`7v` ' r• F`~%i;.-" ~~:,:ka~ , ~ _;';::~;c'~ ~°~_4°_?<;~` ~'~~tie~:a.,,~„<i`~~>:`%~; ~;TS;, ;:%<-s~`~ Total
1
53
":17
3
4`0 0%
DECEMBER 1999 SALES TAX
TOTAL
December December December
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
i
Retail i
72
5 .3.
=5:4
l
f: . i=: `7`" <e; ~ `?;;t~~<=i. ` ' i C i i<' c!i"4~>~~':>- i
Lodging
"690" 3 560,940 18,.8 /a
E 3
f
:o
Food &
i
Beverage
371,735
349;338
l
Other
138 044.,.:,., 13fi fi52;. 0%::.
I
l
Total 2. _ o
073.425< 1' 872 664
RETAIL SUMMARY
DECEMBER DECEMBER DECEMBER
1998 1999 %
COLLECTIONS COLLECTIONS CHANGE
FOOD 153,798 155,668 1.2%
LIQUOR 36,847 34,660 -5.9%
APPAREL 119,482 101,606 -15.0%
SPORT 354,420 313,197 -11.6%
JEWELRY 49,738 59,438 19.5%
GIFT 31,956 2801 -10.2%
GALLERY 9,023 7,189 -20.3%
OTHER 116,956 122,574 4.8%
HOME 691 2,721 293.8%
OCCUPATION
TOTAL 872,911 825,734 -5.4%
1999 YTD SALES TAX
VAIL VILLAGE
YTD YTD YTD
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
1
Retail 35 5
59:;~~ =2 ~ --7
sss s:
5.:la
b=::a
a
Lodging 3 2>>;: 7:r
'u
063 6::7':10;
Food &
o:2
Beverage
Othe
Other
37O.~~o-.
80
22P
t
Total
7
88 3
LIONSHEAD
YTD YTD YTD
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
1,2
Retail o,
90.,
:
00'
0
1-
Lodging 6
$35°`
1
a.
Food Beverage
869°~°yti~% '
~fi 56~rt
1
s.
- -
5ii
Other
1°.
2
Total 9
1999 YTD SALES TAX
CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST VAIL/SANDSTONE/WEST VAIL
YTD YTD YTD
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Chan e
;I
.686.31..:;
Retail
6 . 1,716,817 1.8 /01
Lodging 1 1.
0- 1
33
0
I 41
599,
F
i Food
&
Beverage o
Other
059
39 /o.
Total , 3,400;884 3,379,548 0.6%°
OUT OF TOWN
YTD YTD YTD
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change
f-=
21.
Retail
"395
5./0
.
.
1`...
Lodging
Food
1:.
Beverage
46 ~ o`
9./
Other
.1 2
=`1 4
Total
'S 17
5 9:9
:8.:/
1999 YTD SALES TAX
TOTAL
YTD YTD YTD
1998 1999 %
Collections Collections Change Retail
; 23,
.
5 `8
5
fi39 1
3.2 /o j
Lodging
, ,613,290 4,265927-
Food Beverage
3 9
3 8 4
0.5Q`
;
3
l
Oh
>....:A.. 0,f:..:8.:~
:
7:o ;
Total
5 055 085: < ; ; 14:40
470>: ~
5
RETAIL SUMMARY
12/98 12/99 12/99 YTD
YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE %
COLLECTIONS COLLECTIONS CHANGE
FOOD 1,283,390 1,291,515 .6%
LIQUOR 227,224 232,620 2.4%
APPAREL 819,030 799,054 -2.4%
SPORT 1,970,167 1,881,227 -4.5%
JEWELRY 265,151 296,965 12.0%
GIFT 225,581 192,430 -14.7%
GALLERY 73,366 54,191 -26.1%
OTHER 944,998 879,014 -7.0%
HOME 14,962 12,403 -17.1%
OCCUPATION
TOTAL 5,823,869 5,639,419 -3.2%
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657