The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-02-06 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2001 NOTE: Time of items is approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. VAIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1:00 P.M. 1) Update on Proposed Use of Bright Horizons Space for John Power Infant through Pre-School Childcare. (15 min.) 2) Update on Community Facilities. (30 min.) Russell Forrest - Discussion of Design Team ITEM/TOPIC: Review Contract for Design Services for the Vail Center. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide direction on the design team. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: A concept paper has been prepared that provides a vision for the center and a description of how life long learning can provide a unifying vision for the recreational, meeting, cultural, and community uses contemplated in the center. On December 12th the Town Council indicated their support for the "concept." On December 19th the Town Council developed a square footage and use "wish list." Based on that wish list staff has developed a budget that includes both anticipated revenue and costs. Staff would also like to receive the Town Council's authorization to enter into a contract with EDAW, HGA, and Zehren and Associates after a budget is approved for the project. In addition, staff has received a proposal from Scott Smith of Sasaki and Associates to provide a peer review of the design team. Council requested that staff facilitate a meeting with representatives of the design team to again review their qualifications and to discuss an agreement for services. 3) Discussion of Ord. #3, Creation of Housing Zone District. Allison Ochs (30 min.) BACKGROUND RATIONALE: As part of the Town of Vail's objective to encourage affordable employee housing, the Town Council directed staff to create a zone district with the primary purpose of providing sites for employee housing. The development standards of this zone district would be prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of a development plan, similar to the General Use zone district. On January 8, 2001, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed Housing Zone District. They had specific requests, including to clarify the roles of the Design Review Board and Planning and Environmental Commission in the review of setbacks, and to amend the parking section. They voted to table the request until the clarifications were made. At their January 22, 2001, meeting, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed Housing zone district to the Town Council. The recommendation of approval carried no conditions. Please refer to the staff memorandum for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance #3, Series of 2001, on first reading. 4) ITEMITOPIC: A final work session to discuss proposed Brent Wilson changes to the Town of Vail's parking pay-in-lieu policy and proposed text amendments to Chapter 12-10, Town Code. (15 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide direction to be used in the drafting of amendments to Chapter 12-10, Town of Vail Zoning Regulations ("Off-Street Parking and Loading"). BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On January 16t", the Town Council provided final direction regarding amendments to the Town's "Parking Pay-in-Lieu" policy. The purpose of today's meeting is to review the proposed ordinance adopting the changes and to work out final details of the ordinance prior to first reading at the evening meeting. 5) Presentation of 1-70 Noise (45 min.) Greg Hall - Contour Map - Mitigation Options ITEM/TOPIC: 1-70 Noise Study Report Out. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the presentation and review the results, ask questions, and discuss future steps. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: In December, Staff presented the preliminary results of the noise readings and noise modeling. Staff will now present the complete noise contour mapping and discuss noise mitigation options. Staff would like to specifically discuss the various structured noise mitigation options and will show where there are opportuntities to provide berms and where berms are not appropriate and where walls are the only structured option. Staff would also like to examine different wall type options and discuss the appropriateness of noise walls in Vail. In addition noise mediation can be modeled to see the effectiveness of various noise mediation devices. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Listen, discuss, and detail next steps. The problem areas are based on the current situation. Determine how to address those properties in excess of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards. If the two structured solutions are acceptable, Staff will then model mitigation to determine the net result of constructed noise mitigation. 6) Discussion of Upcoming Joint Work Session with County Bob McLaurin Commissioners (15 min.) (Please see attached Memorandum to Town Council) 7. ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of proposed Land Use Plan amendments Allison Ochs for (1) Mountain Bell, (2) Lots 15 and 16, Bighorn 2nd Addition, (3) other properties. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide staff direction on pursuing these Land Use Plan Amendments. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Community Development Department has identified certain designations in the Vail Land Use Plan that are no longer consistent with Town of Vail goals, existing zoning, existing uses, or the Comprehensive Open Lands Plan. The Vail Land Use Plan is intended to be an ever-evolving document, updated periodically to reflect changing conditions and changing goals of the community. The Vail Land Use Plan has been successful in guiding growth and development within the Town of Vail. However, due to changing conditions, changing goals, and certain land use actions, staff believes that the land use designations of certain properties in the Town should be re-evaluated. Please refer to the staff memorandum for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As this is a discussion item for Council to give direction to staff, there is no staff recommendation at this time. 8 Review Council Critical Strategies. (15 min.) 9. Information Update. (10 min.) 10. Council Reports. (10 min.) 11. Other. (10 min.) 12 Executive Session - Land Negotiations (20 min.) 13. Adjournment. (5:05 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, 2/13/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/20/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/20/01, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/27101, 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. YEAGLE COUNTY CHILD CARE NEWS i ; , •:$3:,`',': <:'s ."''•'ti:`•;3ri•';- ..:^:,sthT•'•}^~•.,''Si%3'9''Y:.s't"` g2•_ IN W", KYT ~ The status of child care in Eagle County What's Available? What does child care cost? here are nearly 3000 preschool children in Eagle County and only 630 licensed Average cost in Home Center child care spaces. With four out of Eagle County five women in the workforce, the real need for Infants/Toddlers $27/day $33/day preschool care is between 1500 and 2000 spaces. The picture for before and after school care is 2 - 5 years $21.50/day $23.50/day even more difficult. The estimated need for children between 6 and 13 is around 4000 spaces. Child Care Costs = up to 30% of income Yet, only 494 licensed child care spaces. are A single mother with one child in full day care available. will spend about $6000 a year for child care. If What happens when there is not enough her income is the average wage $25,969, child quality, licensed care? care equals 30% of her take home pay. > about 25 /o of parents use unlicensed care A two parent family with two children in full and worry about quality and dependability. day care will spend $ 12,000 a year for care. > school-aged children are often left home With income at the Eagle County median, alone or in the care of older children. $64,300, child care takes 25 % of their pay. > many parents who would work are unable to do so because they cannot locate child care. Child Care or Stay at Home? > employers have difficulty hiring and retaining working parents. When a mother takes a job outside the home her net wages are minimum wage or less. Those additional dollars often help pay the rent. If she Quality is Number One stays at home and becomes licensed to provide care for her own children and four neighbor In the recent Eagle County employer child children, she will clear more dollars than working care survey, parents and employers alike rated outside the home. QUALITY, the number one concern. Cost, location and reliability followed as priorities. If you are interested in becoming a licensed day care home, call 1-877-963-6779. Child Care - A Report to the Community December, 2000 ECONOMICS of CHILD CARE "Affordable child care needs to be viewed in the same terms as affordable housing." - Vince Cools, Chairperson, The Family Learning Center- Child Care is a Workforce Issue Who Pays for Child Care ? The decision of whether to work is Parents devote an average of 30% of often dictated by the cost of living, or by the their income to child care. Child care reality that single parents need to work. workers struggle with wages below resort Rural Resort businesses struggle with service industry standards. Experienced, staff vacancy rates that are often in the trained teachers earn only $ 11 an hour. double digits. Parents are needed in the Parents and child care workers, those least workforce to keep our businesses running. able to "subsidize" child care, are the ones Neighbors and extended family are also at who pay for child care. work and not available to provide child care. Parents miss work and frequently need to The Business of Child Care leave a job because of unavailable or Even when child care is "run like a unreliable child care. In the 2000 Eagle business", the economics of the consumer County child care survey, parents reported and the provider are such that child care that they missed an average of nine days of does not make money. work each year because of child care issues. Child care competes with other Would parents be able to continue work if ...Floyers for staff. Child care competes their child care arrangements fell apart? with other businesses for land and space. Almost 75 percent of parents answered NO. To make ends meet, quality child care programs often require donated goods and Child care is a Long Term Investment services or the contributions of concerned When children are able to participate in adults whose children are grown. quality child care... > they enter school ready to succeed - Credits for Contributions to Child Care saving the taxpayer in areas of remedial or Colorado recently enacted legislation special education. that provides income tax credits for > they are connected to preventive health contributions to child care. Up to 50 percent care services - saving the taxpayer special of the contribution may be claimed as a health care expenses. credit by individuals or businesses. The > their parents are supported in caring credit is available for the tax year that began for their children and are able to work. January 1, 2000 and continues through 2004. Talk with your accountant or check out For every dollar spent on quality early www.revenue.state.co.us/fvi/htn-d/incoine childhood programs today, seven dollars is 35.html. saved in future spending on criminal If you would like to make a contribution justice, welfare, education and other social to quality child care in Eagle County, call programs. Kathleen Forinash, Eagle County Health & Human Services at 328--8858. Child Care - A Report to the Community December, 2000 Importance of Quality Care & Parent Involvement Research emphasizes the importance of the first three years of life to brain development, social and emotional development, physical development and motor development. Family centered early childhood programs have shown positive outcomes in the levels of intelligence, wellness, physical competency, success in school and social relationships and positive self-esteem. Quality child care helps avert delinquent and violent behavior, school drop-outs and teen pregnancy in later years. Quality Care - What to look for Child - Caregiver Relationships Everyone agrees, poor care is not good for Relationships of a child with parents, children How can parents rate their child care grandparents and other care givers provide provider? Look for these signs... infants and toddlers with the support, > frequent, positive and warm interactions encouragement, continuity and emotional among adults and children. nourishment necessary for healthy emotional > smaller group size and high staff/child ratios attachments. Within care giving relationships, so children get the attention they need. infants and toddlers build a sense of what is > a program to train staff in caregiving and age expected, what feels right in the world as well as appropriate activities. skills and incentives for sharing, reciprocity and > stable staffing to maintain consistent and cooperation. Through repeated interactions with continuous relationships with children. capable care givers, children learn basic skills of > learning environments and programs that self-c.,..l. ol, empathy for others, and positive encourage exploration and small group activities. self-esteem- > attention to basic health & safety standards. Windows of Development Opportunity AND, parent involvement, so there is a shared Pre 0 I 2 3 relationship between the most important adults in each child's day. motor emotional Quality Child Care is Day Care + vision During the early years of life, proper nutrition, attachment routine well-child health care, immunizations, safe environments and health-promoting vocabulary~? no, behaviors are necessary to support physical and 2nd language I mental growth and development. Child care programs should be able to put parents in touch math/logic I I with comprehensive services that they and their music •r children need to grow strong and healthy. To check on immunizations and health For developmental screening of your child, concerns, call Public Health at 328-8840 in call 926-6858 (Eagle County School District) Eagle, 926-9026 in Avon and 927-3947 in or 384-6000 (Roaring Fork School District). Basalt. Child Find offers special screenings for children birth to three years of age. Child Core - A Report to the Community December, 2000 Regional Child Care Pilot Begins Work The Rural Resort Region counties of Eagle, Garfield, Lake, Pitkin and Summit Counties have been awarded designation as a Colorado Consolidated Child Care Pilot. As a Pilot program, the Region has the opportunity to request state waivers of rules and regulations that stand in the way of creating quality child care resources. Representatives from the child care community are now meeting monthly to develop plans that can benefit child care throughout the five county region. If you would like to be a part of this work, call Kathleen Forinash @ 328-8858. Infant-Toddler Homes Sought Additional Information available Eagle County is looking for family day on child care. care homes that want to specialize in the care of infants and toddlers. To receive information on: A special quality improvement grant has > the Employer Adopt-a-Home project. been received from the Division of Child > the Infant Toddler Quality improvement Care to develop 10 new family day care project. homes. Family day care homes that agree to > Community Child Care Action participate in quality coaching will receive Activities. grants for supplies and equipment as well as > the Eagle County Employer Child Care a monthly training subsidy. Survey. Family day care homes will be able to > contributions to Child Care. observe infant-toddler care in child care > or to volunteer for Child Care. centers. Caregivers will be connected to public health for special consultation on Call Kathleen Forinash at 328-8858. infant and toddler needs and will be able to attend Early Head Start parent development activities. Call Karla Stuckey with Child Care Information and Referral'@ 1-877-963-6779 to get started. This child care report to the community Building Wellness in Our Children is a service of Engle County A special workshop on fostering Government. resiliency and wellness in children will be held the morning of January 12, 2001 at the Eagle County School District Office in Eagle County Health & Human Services Eagle. Nan Henderson, MSW, will be the Eagle, le, CO Box 86601631 featured presentor. The workshop is sponsored by the EagleCounty CARES Task Force on the Prevention of Teen Depression Main number (970) 328-8840. and Suicide. Call Sarah Ladd @ 926-7485 to register. To: Vail Town Council From: Russ Forrest Date: February 6, 2001 Subject Update on the Development of a Project Budget Two different cost estimators, ARC and Hansel Phelps, have reviewed the Vail Center program elements identified by Council in December and developed cost estimates for those uses. Pleasantly, the estimates only varied by 2%. However the financial cost estimate is not complete since the one remaining challenge is determining the required parking for the facility and the associated costs of additional parking. The question has also been raised that if major modifications to the Lionshead structure are made, will there also be an increase in available parking to the general public. Completing the parking demand analysis has involved completing the operational plan that would include determining how many people would use the facility and when they would use it. We recognize there is a great desire to discuss "the numbers" and move forward with the design process. However, staff believes it is critical to resolve the remaining questions regarding the financial plan. In looking at previous community facility initiatives that have failed, one of the major reasons for failure was due to a lack of detail given to the capital and operational financial plans. As you evaluate the budget, staff would like to confidently ensure you that all the options have been reviewed and that you are getting a complete and accurate picture of the financial implications. We would like to request that we take the month of February to complete the financial planning and answer the following questions: Parkina: - What is the total demand generated by the facility compared to availability of parking spaces in the Lionshead Parking Structure? - What is the true cost of the additional parking given that additional structural reinforcement may be required to develop above the parking structure? - Are there creative ways to finance the parking and additional public parking spaces that are needed. Private Contributions: - What is the economic value of naming rights for the facility? 1 Verifv all private revenue opportunities We have essentially completed a verification process regarding for-sale parking and condominiums and/or fractional fee units to help pay for the public uses. Determine level of support for a mill levv or other tax chanae? Staff would like to survey Vail registered voters to determine the level of acceptance for a tax increase to support the facilities. Vail Resorts has offered to pay for this independent research. We can split the cost or the Town could fund the survey if desired. Other revenue options Steve Thompson will be meeting in the next two weeks with other financial experts and investment bankers to ensure that we have looked at all revenue options to finance the facilities. We still believe there is adequate time for the design team to complete the necessary design work for the political and fund raising campaign. However, it will be important to engage the design team immediately after the Town Council approves the financial plan for the project. \\VAIL\DATA\cdev\COUNCIL\MEMOS\01\com 0206 costupdate.doc 2 To: Vail Town Council From: Russ Forrest Date: February 6, 2001 Subject Design Team 1. INTRODUCTION: Attached is a copy of the draft agreement with the EDAW, Zehren, and HGA. This purpose of this worksession is to have representatives of the design team, review the team's qualifications and staff will review the draft contract. In addition a letter is attached from Scott Smith of Sasaki and Associates who is willing to provide a peer review of the design process. Staff is again looking for affirmation of the Council's previous direction to move forward with the existing design team and whether an additional contract should be developed with Sasaki and Associates to provide a peer review of the design. This review as outlined would include providing input at the beginning of the design process and during the process. Staff would recommend that the Town Council not execute a new contract until a program budget has been approved. 2. BACKGROUND ON DESIGN TEAM In 1999 the Town, VRD, and community members went through an extensive selection process to choose the current design team. This included advertising nationally for design teams to respond to an RFQ and over 10 teams responded. Three teams were choosen to particapate in a design charette. After the June 1999 charette, EDAW, HGA, and Zehren were selected as the design team to move forward with the project. The Town Council has reviewed their decision on two different occasions to determine the effectiveness of this team. The Council has also asked that staff obtain the names of other "visionary" designers and we have brought forward several other names such as Robert Stern, Kirt Fentris, Harry Teague, Scott Smith and others. Portfolios on these teams have been forwarded to the Town Council. See Council decisions below regarding design teams. 3. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL DECISIONS TO-DATE: • On September 21, 1999; November 16, 1999; and on March 14, 2000 the Town Council affirmed the list of public uses that would be considered further, primarily a 2"d sheet of ice, a family activity center, learning/meeting/performing arts facility (convertible floor space which can convert into either a meeting space or a performing arts/event venue), and affordable housing. • On July 18th the Town Council eliminated alternative 3 from further consideration. 1 • On August 1, 2000 the Town Council directed staff to move forward with a 2001 ballot initiative. • On August 1, 2000 the Town Council directed staff to: - Foster the redevelopment and enhancement of existing hotel properties near the project site. - Work with VVTCB to encourage existing hotels to commit rooms at a competitive price for meetings and functions. - When refining the design for the project site, identify phasing plans that could allow the expansion of the meeting center and a future hotel in a phase 2 plan if the market demonstrated in the future that an on-site hotel was necessary to make the meeting center operate successfully. - Identify alternative mass transit technologies to move people more efficiently along the in-town route • On August 15th, the Town Council directed the Town Manager to sign a contract with the White River Institute to assist in the development of a fund raising campaign for all the public uses and to also help refine the concept of a "learning center." • On September 5th 2000 and on May 23, the Town Council decided to stay with the existing design team. The Council did indicate that obtaining a third party designer to provide a critique of the design and to enrich the thinking of the design team would be valuable. • On December 12, 2000 the Town Council indicated their support for the concept paper. • On December 19, 2000 the Town Council developed a square footage and use "wish list." FAcdev\C0UNCIL\MEM0S\01\com 0206.doc 2 TOWN OF VAIL and EDAW COMMUNITY FACILITIES DESIGN-DEVELOPMENT OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made is entered into on January 2001, by and between the Town of Vail, a Colorado municipal corporation "the Town", and EDAW, ("the Consultant"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, a goal of the Town is to create an outstanding learning, recreational, cultural, and meeting facility for our guests and residents. The Town envisions creating an extraordinary network of community facilities that will be a bold attraction for citizens as well as visitors and furthers Vail's standing as a world-class resort. The Town Council and Vail Recreation District initiated a public process in February of 1999 to determine how to best site these uses in the Town of Vail. These uses were identified as needs through community surveys and multiple public meetings. Design teams in a charette identified various solutions to siting these uses in June of 1999. A market analysis was completed for the uses in March of 2000. Between March and June of 2000 three alternative designs were developed. The Town Council in August of 2000 eliminated "Alternative 3" from further consideration. This agreement involves engaging the design services of the Consultant to develop the preferred alterantive based on the instructions and square footages outlined in attachment A. This agreement will result in design plans that will successfully enable the community to clearly envision the uses and the preferred design of these community facilities. These designs shall be of adequate detail as to clearly convey the proposed use and design to community members and potential donors. They shall include architectural renderings of the project both externally and internally NOW, THEREFORE, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND USES The sites and uses that will be addressed in this agreement include: Location Uses The charter bus lot Meeting/Learning/Performing Arts Event Facility, Family Center, 2nd Sheet of Ice Library Potential 2"d Floor Lionshead parking structure Recreational uses, housing, meeting space learning center 1 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES: The following objectives shall be achieved in developing the overall community facilities program: 1) The facilities programming will build upon the community facility ideas and lands that have been identified through the Vail Tomorrow, Common Ground, Lionshead master plan, and other community processes. 2) The facilities programming will complement both recreational (e.g., skiing and mountain sports) and cultural (e.g., art, performing arts) amenities that exist in the Vail Valley so as to create a world class network of community facilities in the Valley. 3) The facilities shall be outstanding in their design and programming. Potential residents and guests would be drawn to Vail because of them. These should be unique facilities that compliment Vail's mountain environment. 4) The facilities will serve both. Vail Valley residents and guests. 5) Public-private partnerships will be pursued to finance the development of the facilities. 3. SCHEDULE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES Develooment of a Preferred Alternative Task 1: Refine project schedule and process: Working with Town staff, complete a project schedule and a process for completing the next steps. This shall include a 2-3 hour meeting in Vail to refine the work plan. Task 2: Design Preparation: A. The design team will carefully review the draft concept paper that will provide the final instructions for the design team. B. The design team will spend 1-2 days in Vail meeting with stakeholders (Town, VRD, adjacent property owners, community groups) in small groups to develop design parameters for the preferred alternative. This would also include developing design goals. C. The Design team shall review the attached list of adjacent property concerns and make every reasonable and practical attempt to address those issues. The Town recognizes that not all adjacent concerns will able to be effectively addressed. D. The design team will identify specific design ideas to make the facility environmentally friendly. This could involve discussions with energy and green construction experts such as the Rocky Mountain Institute. A goal of the design should be an award winning environmentally friendly design. Task 3: Develop Preferred Alternative: Based on the approved concept plan and input on the final design, the Design team shall develop the preferred alternative. This shall include developing the following: A. Revised colored site plan B. Architectural Sketch Plans which includes color renderings and view perspectives from 1-70, Vail International, from the Lodge at Lionshead, and Vantage Point C. Floor plans. The preferred alternative shall conform to applicable zoning, subdivision, and building codes. The consultant shall also work with and accept the input of an additional consultant architect that the Vail Town Council shall choose. The primary role of the consulting architect shall be to: A. Provide suggestions to the design team on the architectural direction and parameters of the project. B. Participate in critical meetings as the architectural plan is developed. C. Provide constructive input on the preferred alternative as it is developed. After completing the draft design proposal. The design team shall review the plan with the Town and receive input on the design before moving to Task 4. Task 4: Stakeholder and Public Input: Obtain public and stakeholder input on the preferred alternative in the following ways: A. 2 days of informal meetings with stakeholders and adjacent property owners B. Public Open House C. Joint worksession with Council, DRB, and PEC to receive specific input on the design to receive preliminary approval. Task 5 Assist with the development of a construction and operational plan: The consultant shall assist in developing a phased construction plan with cost estimates for construction. Attention shall be given to identify opportunities to phase construction if necessary. In addition, a representative of the design team shall participate in 1-2 meetings to finalize the operational plan. Task 6: Refine Preferred Alternative: The Design Team will further refine the alternative design concepts based on input from the public and the Community Facilities Team. The preferred alternative will be presented to: 1) representatives of adjacent property owners, 2) the general public, and 3) receive final approval by the Town Council to move forward with Phase II. This could involve 3 public meetings in Vail. 4. CRITERIA: The consultant shall identify programming ideas that are consistent with but not necessarily limited by the following criteria: 1. Innovative and creative multi-use design facilities 3 2. Facility design should be boldly creative and conform to the spirit and intent of applicable master plans 3. Design emphasis on a connection with Vail outdoors, lots of windows and views 4. The overall design needs to integrate recreational and cultural uses. 5. Inclusion of mountain recreation activities 6. Facilities should be multi-generation. Certain uses (e.g., youth center, skate park, adventure facility) will emphasize and celebrate youth 7. Compatibility with existing sites and adjacent uses 8. Accommodation of parking needs 9. Cost effectiveness and revenue generating potential 10. Environmentally friendly with energy, water, and use of sustainable building practices 5. PERSONNEL The Consultant agrees that the principal personnel responsible for the performance of this project will be: EDAW HGA ZEHREN & ASSOC. Russ Butler Greg Haley Jack Zehren Mike Conlon Dan Avchen Brian Sipes Jim Hyatt Bill Blanski Staff Doug Lamson Administration Greg Weykamp The Consultant agrees that no substitute of these personnel shall be made without the prior approval of the Town. The Consultant represents that its personnel engaged in this project are fully qualified and properly trained to perform the services related to this Agreement. None of the services provided for in this Agreement including personnel shall be modified without the prior written approval of the Town. 6. TIME OF PERFORMANCE The services set forth above in Phase I shall commence on the date of this agreement and shall be completed by July 301h 2001. Phase II actions shall be completed by August 1, 2001. 7. COMPENSATION Total payments for the completion of this scope of service and riembursable costs shall not exceed $161,300. The consultant will be paid based on monthly bills that will include individual hours worked and incidental costs. The hourly fee schedule for the project will be: EDAW HGA ZEHREN & ASSOC. Russ Butler $206 Greg Haley $155.25 Jack Zehren $210 Mike Conlon $220 Dan Avchen $155.25 Brian Sipes $ 92 Jim Hyatt $185 Bill Blanski $151.60 Staff $ 65 Doug Lamson $123 Administration $ 50 4 Staff Landscape *Note: HGA billing rates Architect $ 84 subject to change Jan. *Note: Zehren & Assoc. Staff Landscape 1St each year. Billing rates subject to Architect $ 69 change Jan 1" each Staff Landscape year. Architect $ 55 Administration $ 60 Economic Analyst $90 *Note: EDAW billing rates subject to change Jan. 1" & July 1 at each Year. Cost for the project shall be based on the following estimates for the scope of service: Phase 1 Task 1- Refine project schedule and process $1,250 Task 2- Design Preparation $4,200 Task 3- Develop preferred alternative $93,700 Task 4- Stakeholder and public input $7000 Task 5-Assist in the development of the operational $15,750 And construction plan Task 6- Refine preferred alternative $24,200 Total-Labor $146,100 Not to exceed expenses $15,200 Grand Total: $161,300 Reimbursable expenses totaling over $500 shall be approved by the Town of Vail prior to that cost being incurred by the consultant. Approval can consist of an email notification to the Town of Vail and an approval or denial of that expense occurring from the Town of Vail point of contact via email, fax or written correspondence. 8. DESIGNS. PLANS & DOCUMENTS All designs, plans, digital files, and documents produced by the Consultant relating to this scope of service shall become the property of the Town and it is agreed that the Consultant shall not retain any proprietary rights of said designs, plans and documents. 9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The Consultant is an Independent Contractor, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute or designate the Consultant or any of the Consultant's employees as agents or employees of the Town. Further, it is agreed that: A. The Town does not require the consultant to work exclusively for them; 5 B. The Town for whom the services are to be performed, do not establish a quality standard for the Consultant; C. The Town may supply documents and plans, identify sites, suggest uses, and provide instructions as to the what the Consultants work should include; but will not instruct the Consultant as to how the work will be performed; D. The Town can terminate the Agreement if the Consultant violates the terms of the Agreement or fails to produce a result that meets the specifications of the Agreement; E. The Town does not provide training for the Consultant's employees or workers; F. The Town does not provide for travel, transportation, overnight accommodations, meals, offices, tools or benefits to complete the Agreement although some copies of documents, plans and maps may be supplied; G. The Town does not dictate the time of performance except that a completion schedule has been established, as referenced above, with which the Consultant must comply; H. Payment for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement will be made to the trade or business name of the provider of services, rather than to the individual; and 1. The Town does not in any way combine their business operations with those of the Consultant. THE CONSULTANT AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR IS NOT ENTITLED TO WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND THE CONTRACTOR IS OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY MONIES EARNED. 10 INSURANCE The Consultant shall obtain and maintain in force for the term of this Agreement the following insurance: A. Comprehensive general liability (including personal injury) in an amount not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per individual and not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. B. Ensure any subcontractor also has a general liability provision (including personal injury) in an amount not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per individual and not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. 11. NO WAIVER 6 No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement, no such waiver shall constitute a continuing waiver unless otherwise expressly provided, nor shall the waiver of any default of the terms of this Agreement be deemed a waiver of any subsequent default. 12. INDEMNIFICATION The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save the Town, its officers, directors and employees harmless from and against losses, claims, demands, liability, damages, suits, actions or causes of action of every kind and nature, including court costs and reasonable attorney's fees, defending such claim, which may be brought or asserted against the Town, its agents or employees to the extent caused by the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 13. TERMINATION The performance of the work provided for in this Agreement may be terminated at any time in whole or, from time to time, in part by the Town for its convenience. Any such termination shall be effected by delivery to the Consultant of a written notice specifying the date upon which termination becomes effective. This Agreement may also be terminated by the Consultant in the event of a material default of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the Town, provided the Consultant has first provided the Town with written notice of the default and the Town shall have failed to cure the specified default within one (1) day of receipt of the notice. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall be paid on a pro-rata basis for work satisfactorily completed prior to the date of termination and for the expenses prior to the date of termination. 14. JURISDICTION. VENUE. ATTORNEY FEES The jurisdiction and venue of any suit or cause of action to enforce the terms of Agreement shall lie in Eagle County, Colorado. Should either party to this agreement bring suit to enforce this agreement, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs, expenses and reasonable attorney fees. A prevailing party is a party that shall have obtained a final judgement or order no longer subject to appeal. In the event of a settlement before final adjudication, both parties shall bear their own respective costs, expenses and attorney fees unless otherwise agreed. 15. NOTICE Any notice provided for in this Agreement shall be deemed given if received by the parties at the following addresses: Town of Vail ATTN: Russell Forrest 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, Colorado 81657 ph (970) 479-2146 Consultant 7 ATTN: Russ Butler EDAW 1809 Blake St, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80202 303-595-4522 16. ASSIGNMENT This Agreement is for expert services of the Consultant that may not be assigned without the prior written consent of all parties to this Agreement. 17. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW The Consultant will not perform any of the services provided specified in this Agreement contrary to any local, state, federal, or county law. 18. SEVERABILITY Should any section of this Agreement be found to be invalid, all other sections shall remain in full force and effect as though severable from the part invalidated. 19. DISCRIMINATION The Consultant shall not discriminate against any employer or applicant for employment because of disability, race, color, age, sex, religion, or national origin. 20. INTENTION OF THE PARTIES This Agreement contains the entire intention of the parties and may only be changed by a written document signed by the parties. 21. EXECUTION The parties have executed this Agreement on '1999. TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager 8 Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk CONSULTANT By: Print: Title: \\VAIL\DATA\cdev\COMFAC\CONRFP\EDA WCON2.doc 9 Vail Center Adjacent Property Owner Issues DRAFT 0 O o a, y ~0 o S ~4-- H N > as H > > View over Dobson Arena should be maintained X View west from Vail International should be X maintained Concern over Affordable Housing-appearance, X X X operation, balconies (specific concerns about housing on the south side of the structure) Pedestrian Access should be maintained from Vail X International to and through Vail Center New Access Road needs to be designed to X ` accommodate Vail International traffic Improvements on East Lionshead Circle should be I X done at the same time as Vail Center Vail Center should step back as called for in the X I X ( X I X X Lionshead Master Plan Development over the library may impact views X from Phase III Lodge at Lionshead (see attachment 1) Maintain vehicular access X X X X X Don't move road between Vantage point and X Parking structure west- Save mature trees Be careful where skate park is located to avoid use I X and noise conflicts Vail Center should only use TOV lands X (Alt. 3 has been eliminated 4 All loading and delivery for Vail Center should X occur on the Frontage Rd. Large glass structures should be avoided X _ Vehicular access, loading, and deliver should be X 1 maintained to Condominiums No impacts to existing landscape south of East Lionshead circle. No elevated pedestrian boardwalk between the Library and the Lodge at Lionshead. I f No use of a financing tool that would designate the X Lodge at Lionshead or Lionshead in General as blighted ' Support high end condos to pay for public uses X Additional weight on Lionshead parking structure I f X may increase seepage into Tree Tops Reduce traffic along East Lionshead Circle-This is I X I X X a positive (Please review to determine completeness and fax changes to Russell Forrest at 970-479- 2452/email russell(avail.net) Attachment 1: Critical view over Library Ry! ~A 1 III ! , 1 yy~~ w fi ' .09 Q fi r S .h ti January 9, 2001 • Mr. Russell Forrest Director, Community Development Town of Vail Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 re: Professional Services for Hub Site Peer Review Dear Russell: Following is a proposal for services for the role of Consulting Architect/Peer Reviewer for the Town of Vail (TOV) Hub Site project. For this project, I will work with the selected design team to develop the architectural direction and parameters for the project and to provide overview of the development of a preferred alternative. My participation will be in the form of review, critique, and visioning in workshop and meeting formats. Sasaki Associates Inc. SCOPE OF WORK 900 North Point St. Suite 8300 Phase I: Development of a Preferred Alternative Ghirardelli Square Task 1 - Schedule and Process San Francisco California Participate in discussions with the Design Team and the TOV to assist in 94109 USA determining dates and work products for Team and Stakeholder workshops and presentations. t 415 776 7272 f 415 202 8970 Schedule - One-half day review of material by electronic and phone formats. Task 2- Design Preparation • Review the draft concepts developed for the project. • Meet with the Design Team to define goals and guidelines for the architectural development of the project. • Attend the town meeting to hear comments and discussions regarding preferred alternatives. • Review the design team goals for the development an environmentally sensitive facility. Schedule - One-day review of draft concept material One-day goal setting workshop with Design Team Two-day workshop/town meeting January 9, 2001 Page 2 Task 3- Develop Preferred Alternative • Work with the design team to review and contribute to the development of the preferred alternative. Provide recommendations that contribute to the achievement of the overall goals and guidelines for the architecture. Schedule - Two one-day workshops with the Design Team Task 4- Stakeholder and Public Input • Participate, with the Design Team, in public meetings and joint work sessions to receive Stakeholder and public comments. Schedule - One-day town meeting/workshop One-day workshop with Design Team Task 5- Construction and Operation Plan • No participation in this phase Task 6- Refine Preferred Alternative • Review final development of the preferred alternative. Sasaki Associates Inc. Schedule - One day workshop review with Design Team Phase II: Preliminary Development Review Preparation of material that is the foundation for presentations to DRS, PEC and Town Council will occur in the Phase I portion of the work. I do not anticipate participation in the Phase II portion of the work. Fees We understand the scope outlined for Phase I of the project is scheduled to occur over a two-month period, to be completed by March 30, 2001. For the work outlined, Sasaki will bill you at a daily rate of $1,800.00 for N. Scott Smith's professional services. Time for other professionals will be billed according to the attached Schedule. We estimate total fees to be $20,400.00. Reimbursable expenses are additional and will be billed at 1.1 times the direct expense. Reimbursable expenses include costs for travel, printing and reproduction, and telephone, fax, and delivery charges. The scope does not include the preparation of renderings or models. January 9, 2001 Page 3 Rate Schedule - Effective to July 2001 Principals $175 to $250 Project Architects $85 to $150 Project Staff $70 to $85 Project Support Staff $55 to $70 Russell, I hope this is the information you need. I would be pleased to have a conversation with you about details of the proposal or the work program. I look forward to talking with you. Sincerely, N. Scott Smith, AIA Principal Sasaki Associates Inc. ns\c:\windows\temp\p-forrest.doc M : .UAL C9 d~•oc 1~S ,~f~ll.~~ Z E H R E N AND ASSOCIATES, INC. February 2, 2001 Russell Butler EDAW 1800 Blake St. Suite 200 Denver, CO 80202 Dear Russ: Enclosed you will find examples of a wide range of projects Zehren and Associates has either completed or is currently exploring. I have included work in mountain communities (both local and regional), coastal resorts and some of our international work. We have always seen our role in the design of the Vail Center as that of the definer of the character of the building. We have received strong input from the community that we should help to create a building that blends into the regional character of Vail and the surrounding area while setting it apart with quality in the detailing and finishes. We feel we versed in the "mountain style" of architecture. This "style" is more than shape or form or materials but the creation of a visual timelessness that equals the natural beauty of the surrounding mountains and the history of people building in these regions around the world. We have been asked to author many design guidelines for towns and resorts in the mountains throughout the country in which we have endeavored to create that feeling of timelessness. It may be surprising to learn that many of these communities do not look alike. They are all products of their surroundings and regional history with respect to building form and materials. What they share is a sense of "place" unique to their area. We feel that Vail already has a strong sense of place rooted in the European mountain tradition. Although perhaps we do not need to strictly adhere to the Bavarian style, deviating from the mountain tradition would weaken, in our opinion, Vail's image in the minds of our visitors. That being said, we are no strangers to many other ways of designing. We are currently performing work for the Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs and we have ongoing projects in Charleston, South Carolina both of which are more classical in style. Our Santa Barbara office is completing many exciting projects including a house on Mussel Shoals that is very contemporary. Our two offices work seamlessly together to create these designs. All designs created today are contemporary in their planning and use of space. It is in the choice of materials and exterior building form expression where the decision is made to say something about the area the building occupies. One can augment the surroundings or be bold and strike a contrasting vision. Both can serve to provoke thought and help visitors to see the surroundings in a new light. We feel very comfortable that we can shape the building to create any vision that the council may desire. Zi re les, AIA Senior Associate ARCHITECTURE-PLANNING-INTERIORS-LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE P.O. Box 1976 - Avon, Colorado 81620 - (970) 949-0257 - FAX (970) 949-1080 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Town Council review of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001, an ordinance adopting the proposed Housing Zone District Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs 1. BACKGROUND The Planning and Environmental Commission recommended approval of the proposed Housing Zone District at their January 22, 2001, meeting. The staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission has been included in the Town Council packets. First reading of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001, will be at the February 6, 2001, evening meeting. The purpose of the worksession today is to review the proposed Housing Zone District, and provide direction to staff should the Town Council have any changes to the ordinance prior to the evening meeting. In addition, staff has identified a few discussion items, as outlined in Section II of this memorandum. II. DISCUSSION ISSUES Staff has identified some discussion items which we would like input on prior to first reading of the ordinance at tonight's evening session. A. Setbacks A statement has been added hat the variation to the 20 ft. setback shall not be allowed on property lines adjacent to HR, SFR, R, P/S, and RC zoned properties unless a variance is granted. If an applicant can meet the criteria necessary for variations to the 20 ft. setback, is this requirement necessary? B. Site Coverage Site coverage shall not exceed 55% of the total site area. However, site coverage may be increased if 75% of the required parking spaces are underground or enclosed, and the minimum landscape area (30% of site area) is met. No maximum site coverage has been identified. With the 30% landscape area, site coverage could be increased to 70% of the site area. Is it necessary to identify a maximum site coverage amount? MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: January 22, 2001 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend Title 12 (Zoning) of the Town Code to allow for the creation of a new zone district, the Housing Zone District. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs 1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST As part of the Town of Vail's objective to encourage affordable employee housing, the Town Council directed staff to create a zone district with the primary purpose of providing sites for employee housing. The development standards of this zone district would be prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of a development plan, similar to the General Use zone district. On June 15, 1999, the Community Development Department presented to the Town Council a proposal to create a new housing zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposal at a worksession on August 23, 1999, and gave the general direction that the new district was needed. One Planning and Environmental Commission member suggested that the district depart from the General Use district format and have specific development standards created. On November 13, 2000, the Community Development Department again presented the proposed Housing Zone District. The Planning and Environmental Commission gave specific direction regarding the new proposed zone district. On November 14, the Housing Zone District was presented to the Town Council, who also gave direction to staff. December 19, 2000, the Town Council directed staff to return to the Planning and Environmental Commission with the proposed changes to the Housing Zone District. On January 8, 2001, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed Housing Zone District again. They had specific requests, including to clarify the roles of the Design Review Board and Planning and Environmental Commission in the review of setbacks, and to amend the parking section. The meeting today serves as the final Planning and Environmental Commission discussion on the Housing Zone District. Staff is requesting that the Planning and Environmental Commission make a final recommendation to the Town Council regarding the proposed amendment to the zoning regulations. TOWN OF Y 10~ 1 11. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Plannina and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is advisory to the Town Council. The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council on the compatibility of the proposed text changes for consistency with the Vail Comprehensive Plans and impact on the general welfare of the community. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided. The staff advises the applicant as to compliance with the Zoning Regulations. Staff provides analyses and recommendations to the PEC and Town Council on any text proposal. Town Council: Action: The Town Council is responsible for final approval/denial on code amendments. The Town Council shall review and approve the proposal based on the compatibility of the proposed text changes for consistency with the Vail Comprehensive Plans and impact on the general welfare of the community. 111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Title 12 (Zoning) of the Town Code to allow for the creation of a new zone district, the Housing Zone District subject to the following findings: 1. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the development objectives of the Town of Vail as stated in the Vail Land Use Plan. 2. That the proposal is consistent and compatible with existing and potential uses within Vail and generally in keeping with the character of the Town of Vail. IV. TEXT OF THE PROPOSED HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT ARTICLE I. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT All additions from the Jan. 81h memo have been underlined. SECTION: 12-61-1: Purpose 12-61-2: Permitted Uses 12-61-3: Conditional Uses 12-61-4. Accessory Uses 12-61-5. Setbacks 12-61-6: Site Coverage 12-61-7: Landscaping and Site Development 12-61-8: Parking and Loading 2 12-61-9: Location of Business Activity 12-61-10: Other Development Standards 12-61-11: Development Plan Required 12-61-12: Development Plan Contents 12-61-13: Development Standards/Criteria for Evaluation 12-61-1: PURPOSE: The Housing District is intended to provide adequate sites for affordable and employee housing which, because of the nature and characteristics of affordable and employee housing, cannot be adequately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other residential zoning districts. It is necessary in this district to provide development standards specifically prescribed for each development proposal or project to achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 12-1-2 of this Title and to provide for the public welfare. Certain nonresidential uses are allowed as conditional uses, which are intended to be incidental and secondary to the residential uses of the District. The Housing District is intended to ensure that affordable and employee housing permitted in the District is appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents of Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the allowed types of uses. 12-61-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the H District: Deed restricted employee housing. Passive outdoor recreation areas, and open space. Pedestrian and bike paths. 12-61-3: CONDITIONAL USES: Generally: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the H District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Commercial uses which are secondary and incidental (as determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission ) to the use of deed restricted employee housing and specifically serving the needs of the residents, and developed in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing, in which case the following uses may be allowed subject to a conditional use permit: Banks and financial institutions. Eating and drinking establishments. Health clubs. Personal services, including but not limited to, laundry mats, beauty and barber shops, tailor shops, and similar services. Retail stores and establishments. Dwelling units (not employee housing units) subject to the following criteria to be evaluated by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Dwelling units are created solely for the purpose of subsidizing employee housing on the property. B. Dwelling units are not the primary use of the property. The GRFA for dwelling units shall not exceed 30% of the total GRFA constructed on the property. C. Dwelling units are only created in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing. D. Dwelling units are compatible with the proposed uses and buildings on the site and 3 are compatible with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. Outdoor Patios Public and private schools and educational institutions Public buildings and grounds. Public parks. Public utilities installations including transmission lines and appurtenant equipment. 12-61-4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the H District: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-14-12 of this Title. Minor Arcades Private greenhouses, tool sheds, playhouses, attached garages or carports, swimming pools, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. 12-61-5: SETBACKS: The setbacks in this district shall be 20' from the perimeter of the zone district. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, variations to the setback standards outlined above may be approved during the review of a development plan subject to the applicant demonstrating compliance with the following criteria: A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. B. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. C. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. Variations to the 20 ft. setback shall not be allowed on property lines adjacent to HR, SFR, R, PS, and RC zoned properties. D. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 12-61-6: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty-five percent (55%) of the total site area. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, site coverage may be increased if 75% of the required parking spaces are underground or enclosed, thus reducing the impacts of surface paving provided within a development, and that the landscape area reauirement is met. 12-61-7: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be ftfteen feet (15') with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. 12-61-8: PARKING AND LOADING Off-street Darkina shall be provided in accordance with Chaoter 10 of this Title. No oarkina or loadina area shall be located within anv reauired setback area. At the discretion of the Plannina and Environmental Commission, variations to the oarkina standards outlined in Chanter 10 may be approved durina the review of a development plan subiect to a Parking Management Plan. The Parkina Manaaement Plan shall be approved by the Plannina and Environmental Commission and 4 shall provide for a reduction in the Darkina reauirements based on a demonstrated need for fewer Darkina spaces than Chanter 10 of this title would reauire. For example. a demonstrated need for a reduction in the reauired Darkina could include: A. Proximitv or availability of alternative modes of transportation includina, but not limited to, Dublic transit or shuttle services. B. A limitation Oaced in the deed restrictions limitina the number of cars for each unit. C. A demonstrated Dermanent Droaram includina. but not limited to, rideshare Droarams. carshare Droarams. shuttle service, or staaaered work shifts. 12-61-9: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY: A. Limitation; Exception: All conditional uses by 12-61-3 of this Article, shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building, except for permitted loading areas and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. B. Outdoor Display Areas: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. 12-61-10: OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Prescribed By Planning and Environmental Commission: In the H District, development standards in each of the following categories shall be as prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Lot area and site dimensions. B. Building height. C. Density control (including gross residential floor area). 12-61-11: DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIRED: A. Compatibility With Intent: To ensure the unified development, the protection of the natural environment, the compatibility with the surrounding area and to assure that development in the Housing District will meet the intent of the District, a development plan shall be required. B. Plan Process And Procedures: The proposed development plan shall be in accordance with Section 12-61-12 of this Article and shall be submitted by the developer to the Administrator, who shall refer it to the Planning and Environmental Commission, which shall consider the plan at a regularly scheduled meeting. C. Hearing: The public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission shall be held in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of this Title. The Planning and Environmental Commission may approve the application as submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission may be appealed to the Town Council in accordance with Section 12-3-3 of this Title. D. Plan As Guide: The approved development plan shall be used as the principal guide for all development within the Housing District. E. Amendment Process: Amendments to the approved development plan will be 5 considered in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-9A-10 of this Title. F. Design Review Board Approval Required: The development plan and any subsequent amendments thereto shall require the approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 11 of this Title prior to the commencement of site preparation. 12-61-12: DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONTENTS: A. Submit With Application: The following information and materials shall be submitted with an application for a proposed development plan. Certain submittal requirements may be waived or modified by the Administrator if it is demonstrated that the material to be waived or modified is not applicable to the review criteria, or that other practical solutions have been reached. 1. Application form and filing fee. 2. A written statement describing the project including information on the nature of the development proposed, proposed uses, and phasing plans. 3. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing conditions of the property to be included in the development plan, including the location of improvements, existing contours, natural features, existing vegetation, watercourses, and perimeter property lines of the parcel. 4. A title report, including Schedules A and B4. 5. Plans depicting existing conditions of the parcel (site plan, floor plans, elevations, etc.), if applicable. 6. A complete zoning analysis of the existing and proposed development including a square footage analysis of all proposed uses, parking spaces, etc. 7. A site plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'), showing the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, all principal site development features, vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems and proposed contours and drainage plans. 8. Building elevations, sections and floor plans at a scale not smaller than one- eighth inch equals one foot (1/8" = 1'), in sufficient detail to determine floor area, circulation, location of uses and scale and appearance of the proposed development. 9. A vicinity plan showing existing and proposed improvements in relation to all adjacent properties at a scale not smaller than one inch equals fifty feet (1" = 50'). 10. Photo overlays and/or other acceptable visual techniques for demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed development on public and private property in the vicinity of the proposed development plan. 11. An architectural or massing model at a scale sufficient to depict the proposed development in relationship to existing development on the site and on adjacent parcels. 12. A landscape plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'), showing existing landscape features to be retained and removed, proposed landscaping and other site development features such as recreation facilities, paths and trails, plazas, walkways and water features. 13. An environmental impact report in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title unless waived by Section 12-12-3 of this Title. 14. Any additional information or material as deemed necessary by Administrator. 6 i B. Copies Required; Model: With the exception of the model, four (4) complete copies of the above information shall be submitted at the time of the application. When a model is required, it shall be submitted a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the first formal review of the Planning and Environmental Commission. At the discretion of the Administrator, reduced copies in eight and one-half inches by eleven inches (8 1/2" x 11 format of all of the above information and additional copies for distribution to the Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board and Town Council may be required. 12-61-13: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS/CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION: The following criteria shall be used as the principal means for evaluating a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed development plan complies with all applicable design criteria: A. Building design with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing and orientation is compatible with the site, adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood. B. Buildings, improvements, uses and activities are designed and located to produce a functional development plan responsive to the site, the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a whole. C. Open space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the public, provide adequate buffering between the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, are integrated with existing open space and recreation areas. D. A pedestrian and vehicular circulation system designed to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development. E. Environmental impacts resulting from the proposal have been identified in the project's environmental impact report, if not waived, and all necessary mitigating measures are implemented as a part of the proposed development plan. F. Compliance with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. V. REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by the Town of Vail Municipal Code. A. Consideration of Factors: 1. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the development objectives of the Town of Vail as stated in the Vail Land Use Plan. Staff believes the following land use plan goals/policies are applicable to the 7 proposed zoning code amendment: 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. Staff believes that the Housing District is compatible with the Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential land use categories, as identified within the Vail Land Use Plan. Medium Density Residential allows for densities of 3-14 dwelling units per buildable area, while High Density Multiple Family allows for densities of 15 or more dwelling units per buildable acre. 2. That the proposal is consistent and compatible with existing and potential uses within Vail and generally in keeping with the character of the Town of Vail. The provision of affordable and employee housing has long been held to be a goal of the Town of Vail. This zoning code amendment will allow for housing sites to be developed in a manner compatible with existing and potential uses in the Town of Vail. Generally, meeting the need for affordable housing in other communities has been accomplished through inclusionary zoning or incentive zoning. Inclusionary zoning is a planning technique which encourages or forces the private sector to provide housing which is deemed "affordable". Typically this is done by: (1) providing bonuses, often in the form of additional density, for the construction of affordable housing; (2) pay in lieu fees or; (3) to require a developer to set aside a certain percentage of the units as affordable housing. The Town Code already has numerous incentives within the Zoning Code, including allowing Type III EHU's in many zone districts without effect on density or GRFA. In addition, within LMU1, LMU2, PA, and SDD, employee housing is a requirement of development approvals to mitigate the need for employee housing created by the development. Many communities accomplish similar goals by establishing a PUD designation (similar to our SDD process) whereby developers apply for this designation and receive bonuses (often in the form of additional density) for the provision of affordable housing. Very few, if any, communities, apply this type of designation as the primary zoning on the property. 8 ORDINANCE NO. 3 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN CODE, TITLE 12, CHAPTER 6 TO THE TOWN OF VAIL ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF ARTICLE I. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT; AMENDING CHAPTER 4, DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED; AMENDING SECTION 12-15-2: GRFA REQUIREMENTS BY ZONE DISTRICT; AMENDING TITLE 12 SIGN REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 4, SIGN CATEGORIES, SECTION 11-4A-1: SIGNS PERMITTED IN ZONING DISTRICTS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of these amendments at its January 22, 2001 meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the proposed amendments further the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers housing a high priority and recognizes the Town's role in providing quality living conditions for the community's workforce. WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council recognizes the need to provide for adequate sites for affordable employee housing; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it reasonable, appropriate, and necessary to adopt a new zone district to encourage and facilitate the development of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt these amendments to the Zoning Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The purpose of this ordinance is to adopt the Housing Zone District, which is intended to provide for adequate sites for affordable employee housing, which, because of the nature and characteristics of affordable employee housing, cannot be adequately regulated by the development standards of other residential zoning districts. Section 2. Title 12, Chapter 6, adding new Article I. Housing District, to read as follows: ARTICLE 1. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT SECTION: -1- r 12-61-1: Purpose 12-61-2: Permitted Uses 12-61-3: Conditional Uses 12-61-4: Accessory Uses 12-61-5: Setbacks 12-61-6: Site Coverage 12-61-7: Landscaping and Site Development 12-61-8: Parking and Loading 12-61-9: Location of Business Activity 12-61-10: Other Development Standards 12-61-11: Development Plan Required 12-61-12: Development Plan Contents 12-61-13: Development Standards/Criteria for Evaluation 12-61-1: PURPOSE: The Housing District is intended to provide adequate sites for affordable employee housing which, because of the nature and characteristics of affordable employee housing, cannot be adequately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other residential zoning districts. It is necessary in this district to provide development standards specifically prescribed for each development proposal or project to achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 12-1-2 of this Title .and to provide for the public welfare. Certain nonresidential uses are allowed as conditional uses, which are intended to be incidental and secondary to the residential uses of the District. The Housing District is intended to ensure that affordable and employee housing permitted in the District is appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents of Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the allowed types of uses. 12-61-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the H District: Deed restricted employee housing units. Passive outdoor recreation areas, and open space. Pedestrian and bike paths. 12-61-3: CONDITIONAL USES: Generally: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the H District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Commercial uses which are secondary and incidental (as determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission ) to the use of deed restricted employee housing and specifically serving the needs of the residents, and developed in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing, in which case the following uses may be allowed subject to a conditional use permit: Banks and financial institutions. Eating and drinking establishments. Health clubs. Personal services, including but not limited to, laundry mats, beauty and barber shops, tailor shops, and similar services. Retail stores and establishments. Dwelling units (not employee housing units) subject to the following criteria to be evaluated by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Dwelling units are created solely for the purpose of subsidizing employee housing on the property. B. Dwelling units are not the primary use of the property. The GRFA for dwelling units shall not exceed 30% of the total GRFA constructed on the property. C. Dwelling units are only created in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing. D. Dwelling units are compatible with the proposed uses and buildings on the site and are compatible with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. Outdoor Patios Public and private schools and educational institutions Public buildings and grounds. Public parks. Public utilities installations including transmission lines and appurtenant equipment. 2 12-61-4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the H District: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-14-12 of this Title. Minor Arcades Private greenhouses, tool sheds, playhouses, attached garages or carports, swimming pools, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. 12-61-5: SETBACKS: The setbacks in this district shall be 20' from the perimeter of the zone district. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, variations to the setback standards may be approved during the review of a development plan subject to the applicant demonstrating compliance with the following criteria: A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. B. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. C. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. D. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. Variations to the 20 ft. setback shall not be allowed on property lines adjacent to HR, SFR, R, PS, and RC zoned properties, unless a variance is approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission pursuant to Chapter 17 of this Title. 12-61-6: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty-five percent (55%) of the total site area. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, site coverage may be increased if 75% of the required parking spaces are underground or enclosed, thus reducing the impacts of surface paving provided within a development, and that the minimum landscape area requirement is met. 12-61-7: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. 12-61-8: PARKING AND LOADING Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 10 of this Title. No parking or loading area shall be located within any required setback area. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, variations to the parking standards outlined in Chapter 10 may be approved during the review of a development plan subject to a Parking Management Plan. The Parking Management Plan shall be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission and shall provide for a reduction in the parking requirements based on a demonstrated need for fewer parking spaces than Chapter 10 of this title would require. For example, a demonstrated need for a reduction in the required parking could include: A. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation including, but not limited to, public transit or shuttle services. B. A limitation placed in the deed restrictions limiting the number of cars for each unit. C. A demonstrated permanent program including, but not limited to, rideshare programs, carshare programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts. 12-61-9: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY: A. Limitation; Exception: All conditional uses by 12-61-3 of this Article, shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building, except for permitted loading areas and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. B. Outdoor Display Areas: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. -3- 12-61-10: OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Prescribed By Planning and Environmental Commission: In the H District, development standards in each of the following categories shall be as prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Lot area and site dimensions. B. Building height. C. Density control (including gross residential floor area). 12-61-11: DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIRED: A. Compatibility With Intent: To ensure the unified development, the protection of the natural environment, the compatibility with the surrounding area and to assure that development in the Housing District will meet the intent of the District, a development plan shall be required. B. Plan Process And Procedures: The proposed development plan shall be in accordance with Section 12-61-12 of this Article and shall be submitted by the developer to the Administrator, who shall refer it to the Planning and Environmental Commission, which shall consider the plan at a regularly scheduled meeting. C. Hearing: The public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission shall be held in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of this Title. The Planning and Environmental Commission may approve the application as submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission may be appealed to the Town Council in accordance with Section 12-3-3 of this Title. D. Plan As Guide: The approved development plan shall be used as the principal guide for all development within the Housing District. E. Amendment Process: Amendments to the approved development plan will be considered in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-9A-10 of this Title. F. Design Review Board Approval Required: The development plan and any subsequent amendments thereto shall require the approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 11 of this Title prior to the commencement of site preparation. 12-61-12: DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONTENTS: A. Submit With Application: The following information and materials shall be submitted with an application for a proposed development plan. Certain submittal requirements may be waived or modified by the Administrator if it is demonstrated that the material to be waived or modified is not applicable to the review criteria, or that other practical solutions have been reached. 1. Application form and filing fee. 2. A written statement describing the project including information on the nature of the development proposed, proposed uses, and phasing plans. 3. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing conditions of the property to be included in the development plan, including the location of improvements, existing contours, natural features, existing vegetation, watercourses, and perimeter property lines of the parcel. 4. A title report, including Schedules A and B4. 5. Plans depicting existing conditions of the parcel (site plan, floor plans, elevations, etc.), if applicable. 6. A complete zoning analysis of the existing and proposed. development including a square footage analysis of all proposed uses, parking spaces, etc. 7. A site plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'), showing the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, all principal site development features, vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems and proposed contours and drainage plans. 8. Building elevations, sections and floor plans at a scale not smaller than one- eighth inch equals one foot (1/8" = 1'), in sufficient detail to determine floor area, circulation, location of uses and scale and appearance of the proposed development. -4- 9. A vicinity plan showing existing and proposed improvements in relation to all adjacent properties at a scale not smaller than one inch equals fifty feet (1" = 50'). 10. Photo overlays and/or other acceptable visual techniques for demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed development on public and private property in the vicinity of the proposed development plan. 11. An architectural or massing model at a scale sufficient to depict the proposed development in relationship to existing development on the site and on adjacent parcels. 12. A landscape plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'), showing existing landscape features to be retained and removed, proposed landscaping and other site development features such as recreation facilities, paths and trails, plazas, walkways and water features. 13. An environmental impact report in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title unless waived by Section 12-12-3 of this Title. 14. Any additional information or material as deemed necessary by Administrator. B. Copies Required; Model: With the exception of the model, four (4) complete copies of the above information shall be submitted at the time of the application. When a model is required, it shall be submitted a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the first formal review of the Planning and Environmental Commission. At the discretion of the Administrator, reduced copies in eight and one-half inches by eleven inches (8 1/2" x 11") format of all of the above information and additional copies for distribution to the Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board and Town Council may be required. 12-61-13: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS/CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION: The following criteria shall be used as the principal means for evaluating a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed development plan complies with all applicable design criteria: A. Building design with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing and orientation is compatible with the site, adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood. B. Buildings, improvements, uses and activities are designed and located to produce a functional development plan responsive to the site, the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a whole. C. Open space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the public, provide adequate buffering between the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, are integrated with existing open space and recreation areas. D. A pedestrian and vehicular circulation system designed to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development. E. Environmental impacts resulting from the proposal have been identified in the project's environmental impact report, if not waived, and all necessary mitigating measures are implemented as a part of the proposed development plan. F. Compliance with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. Section 3. Title 12, Chapter 4, Section 12-4-1: Designated is hereby amended to add the following zone district: Housing District (H) Section 4. Title 12, Chapter 15, Section 12-15-2: GRFA Requirements by Zone District is hereby amended as follows: -5- Modify by adding the Housing Zone District to table as follows: Section 12-15-2: GRFA Requirements by Zone District Zone District GRFA Ratio/Percentage GRFA Credits H Housing Per PEC approval none Section 5. Title 11, Chapter 4, Section 11-4A-1: Signs Permitted in Zoning Districts, is hereby amended by adding the Housing Zone District to the first category of signs. Section 6. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 7. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 8. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 9. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 6th day of February, 2001 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 20th day of February, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. -6- Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Final review of proposed changes to the Town of Vail's parking pay-in-lieu policy and Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2001. Planner: Brent Wilson Applicant: The Town of Vail 1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST On January 16th, the Town Council provided final direction regarding the fee structure for land uses within the town's parking pay-in-lieu zones. The purpose of today's work session is to review the proposed parking pay-in-lieu zone maps and to discuss the content of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2001. II. CHANGES IMPLEMENTED WITH ORDINANCE NO.4 1) Identification of New Parkina Pav-in-Lieu Zones: The new zones will be identified according to their proximity to pedestrianized areas and parking structures, in accordance with master plan provisions and the direction given by the Vail Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission. The new maps will be incorporated into the ordinance by reference and will be on display at the Department of Community Development and the town clerk's office. Please refer to the attached maps for details. 2) Amendments to the Fee Structure: Pursuant to the direction given by the town council on January 16th, the following fee structure will be adopted: Option A -Maintenance of Current Fee for Residential Uses, Reduction of the Fee for Commercial Uses. ¦ Current Fee = $18,597.80 per space (adjusted annually - a 48% subsidy) ¦ Proposed Residential Fee = $18,597.80 (no change - a 48% subsidy) Proposed Commercial Fee - $6,137.27 (66% fee reduction - an 83% subsidy) ¦ The fee would continue to increase annually based upon the consumer price index for the Denver/Boulder/Greeley metro area. 4 VAIL`.DATA',cdev',COUNCIL'(MEMOS\O(\ParkingPay[nUeuFeb6.doc TOW:tiOFVAIL k 3) A Condition that Properties Must ComDIV with the New Proaram UDon Demolition/Rebuild - Properties that have been removed from the pay-in-lieu program will still need to pay-in-lieu for minor commercial "bump outs." For example, Concert Hall Plaza has been removed from pay-in-lieu but does not currently have space on their site for on-site parking. Therefore, it is necessary to allow them to continue to pay-in-lieu for minor alterations until they demolish/rebuild and can provide on-site parking. 4) An Abilitv for Properties Outside the Pav-in-Lieu Zone to Aooly for PEC Review for Inclusion - Properties not included in the pay-in-lieu zones may apply to the Planning and Environmental Commission for review if the provision of on-site parking on the property would circumvent relevant objectives of applicable master plan documents including, but not limited to, parking, pedestrianization, and vehicle penetration elements. V,VAIL',DATA cdc\ COUNCCIL'N1FM0S\01 ParkingPaylnUeuFeWdoc Paymin=Lieu Properties Lionshead \l~ - ~IRACT PARKINGSI RUCTURE 508 i! VVEST-VVINDS 508 UNPLATTED 385 NORTH DAY 548 LION'S VANTAGE RARKINGLOT- . PRIDE POINT t1 vAtt. GLO =uO lot I ! LANDMARK EAST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE 7 TRCI 6t6 TRACT f C P a,a"Q C EPd:L1Ald ` 452 n I LODGE AT LIONSHEAD c_ i.l@ 705 - MON fAAJEROS SUNStRQ - TICKET GONDULA S TREETOPS J TRAGT I - J 6 684 ' \ II ~ ! I 1 2 hl 4 f rI~1: P'il1 I_ 675 600 } r, t :LE _ --f I I ! - S - 714 l LJOldS SQUARE ' t G TRAIL " - , MARRIOI T 635 C/~~Sy - , ,11 Q~' / UNPL.ATTED 560 (RAGT D + 3 LION'S SQUARE 630 I LODGE ANTLERS A 660 I GONDQL-A , TRACTR Pay-in-Lieu Properties Paymin=Lieu Properties - Vail Village CR065RUti05tlHVAiL ( LG'1 CONDOMINIUM TRANSPORTATION LOTP PARKING LOT LOT P 1 - f CENTER TRACT B & C; 241 141 1, - 122 ALSr\ i l _ - - EAST MEADOW DR c LL.kGE GEFJTER _ _ - i C VI K & L AUSTRIA HAUfS ( \ r 1-01 K 242 AtiUUNT'ABJ II-IS ' CORM 'E_ - 1- - S20 CONDO I C 113 .2 VAIL ATHiFPIC'~. S1. \ 124 CLUB \ \ - m-.h _ i / _ _352 •A r f 1 t ft I L:_ 2 4 J r LWE'16S " J\ 4 - f<F 7 n YW q `'.'1 1'11 ._I ~.-r r 5 r 1:13 - 17 ( .,I i N, I IY. rl - , C.c I. i12t 3~4 5~! 1 ( f i>13`, V I I r IA O/ s , - _ Y AI Y ~ .O~\,,~,HL FC It LJ~ _ _ 1 4 OB 123 1 _ _ I I •J ~ ".1~„ ~i 4 - cREEK. y 5 y L GII - ` s {21Vh •'-AC bK r C~ i,l - _.Jif K 1 ' RIDGE CHECKPOINT 302 VI L,4 365 It 3 . L WEST ; aTARLIE a LLA V .C ! 1 CC JDO '133 360 RAM'S r A,B,C ;1 •Y CHRlSTIANk - - Rp.N ( HORN LOUD RIOi$E'~ 174 ATVAIL _ T'0/OI.1 1r l GOtdDO U'Ytrd THE I, ODGE AT VAII. r' .I ITT , 278 }t 386 A 356 _ 21 L \ \ D t D1 _ _ 476 LODGE TOWER 1= CLUB ~r 200 FTREET Y LODGE TRACT E 11 2 3A 3l3 ,r 1 ,I 315 305 ' 303, 7 Pay-in-Lieu Properties ORDINANCE NO.4 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12-10, TOWN OF VAIL CODE (OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING); WITH SPECIFIC REGARD TO THE "PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU" POLICY APPLICATION AND FEE STRUCTURE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council recognizes a need to re-evaluate parking obligations for properties within Vail's commercial core areas in an effort to provide accurate and practical off-street parking requirements; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission and Town of Vail staff have worked with consulting experts at public hearings in order to examine the issue of parking in Vail's commercial core areas; and WHEREAS, The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of these amendments at its March 27, 2000 meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt these amendments to the Zoning Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Purpose: The purpose of these amendments is to provide a pay-in-lieu program that is consistent with master plan goals and objectives while providing feasible and convenient provisions for off-street parking. Additionally, the pay-in-lieu program is intended to direct development in commercial core areas in a manner that is of substantial benefit to public and private interests. Section 2. Section 12-10-16, Vail Town Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: (Added text is shown in bold type; deleted text is st6ek) 12-10-16: EXEMPT AREAS; PARKING FUND ESTABLISHED: A. Criteria: The Town Council by resolution may exempt certain areas from the off-street parking and loading requirements of this Chapter if alternative means will meet the off-street parking and loading needs of all uses in the area. Prior to exempting any area from the off-street parking and loading requirements, the Council shall determine the following: 1. That the exemption is in the interests of the area to be exempted and in the interests of the Town at large. 2. That the exemption will not confer any special privilege or benefit upon properties or improvements in the area to be exempted, which privilege or benefit is not conferred on similarly situated properties elsewhere in the Town. 3. That the exemption will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity of the area to be exempted. 4. That suitable and adequate means will exist for provision of public, community, group or common parking facilities; for provision of adequate loading facilities and for a system for distribution and pickup of goods; and for financing, operating and maintaining such facilities; and that such parking, loading and distribution facilities shall be fully adequate to meet the existing and projected needs generated by all uses in the area to be exempted. - I - B. Parking Fund: in GemmeFG[al-Gefe 1, Ce 3 2, For projects located within the Town's "Parking Pay-in-Lieu" zones (as identified on the Town's official "Parking Pay-in-Lieu Zone" maps, incorporated by reference) property owners or applicants shall be required to contribute to the Town Parking Fund, hereby established for the purpose of meeting the demand and requirements for vehicle parking to the extent outlined in applicable master plan documents and the zoning regulations. At such time as any property owner or other applicant proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel of property within an exempt area which would require parking and/or loading areas, the owner or applicant shall pay to the Town the parking fee hereinafter required. 1. The Parking Fund established in this Section shall receive and disburse funds for the purpose of conducting parking studies or evaluations, construction of parking facilities, the maintenance of parking facilities, the payment of bonds or other indebtedness for parking facilities, and administrative services relating to parking. 2. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant shall be determined by the Town Council. 3. If any parking funds have been paid in accordance with this Section and if subsequent thereto a special or general improvement district is formed and assessments levied for the purpose of paying for parking improvements, the payor shall be credited against the assessment with the amount previously paid. 4. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant is hereby determined to be fifteen #~euJa~dsti!~ c eighteen thousand five hundred ninety-seven dollars and eighty cents ($15,009:88 $18,597.80) per space for residential uses (including, but not limited to, accommodation units, timeshares and fractional fee units) and six thousand one hundred thirty-seven dollars and twenty-seven cents ($6,137.27) for commercial uses. This fee shall be automatically +nc; cased adjusted annually by the percentage the Consumer Price Index of the City of Denver has increased over each successive year. 5. For additions or enlargements of any existing building or change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, an additional parking fee will be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire building or use. No refunds will be paid by the Town to the applicant or owner. 6. The owner or applicant has the option of paying the total parking fee at the time of building permit or paying over a five (5) year period. If the latter course is taken, the first payment shall be paid on or before the date the building permit is issued. Four (4) more annual payments will be due to the Town on the anniversary of the building permit. Interest of ten percent (10%0) per annum shall be paid by the applicant on the unpaid balance. , If the owner or applicant does choose to pay the fee over a period of time, he or she shall be required to sign a promissory note which describes the total fee due, the schedule of payments, and the interest due. Promissory note forms are available at the offices of the Department of Community Development. 7. When a fractional number of spaces results from the application of the requirements schedule (Section 12-10-10 of this Chapter) the parking fee will be calculated using that fraction. This applies only to the calculation of the parking fee and not for on-site requirements. (Ord. 3(1999) § 11: Ord. 10(1994) § 1: Ord. 6(1991) § 1: Ord. 30(1982) § 1: Ord. 47(1979) § 1: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.800) Section 3. Section 12-10-21, Vail Town Code, is hereby added to read as follows: Section 12-10-21: PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU ZONES ESTABLISHED: The "Parking Pay-in-Lieu Zone" maps (attached to Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001, and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk) shall be used to identify properties within the parking pay-in-lieu zones referenced in Section 12-10-16 above. Properties will be required to comply with the amended program upon demolition/rebuild. Properties not included in, the pay-in-lieu zones may apply to the Planning and Environmental Commission for review if the provision of on-site parking on the property would circumvent relevant objectives of applicable master plan documents including, but not limited to, parking, pedestrian ization, and vehicle penetration elements. -2- Section 4. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 5. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 6. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 7. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 6th day of February, 2001 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 20th day of February, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk -3- READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 20th day of February, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk -4- Paymin=Lieu Properties Dons ea TRACT E 1 1 t I 506 PARKINGSTRUCT'URE 506 VVEST-WINDS UNPLATTED I . NORTHDAY I 548 LION'S VANTAGE 3~ ( I BARKING I^OT i PRIDE I POINT I _ VAII VAIL GLO j 701 _ LANDMARK I - EAST lIONSHEAD CIRCLE ~ ~ ~ 610 a 010 l 1RCi ~ 616 1 7.RRCTC 310 F G 1 -l -1 1 6 ENZ'IAN 463 C) r I GONDOLA~L I LODGE AT LIONSHEAD t.lE SUNBIRQ 705 MONTANEP.O,, - I L- TICKETS TREETOPS TRACT I - J 6 664 -.J6) 360 I A I _ r ? LE _ . 'I 676 N 600 6. 71 h -TRACI-c-- r LION'S SQUARE NORTW t f NORTH MABBIO'PT 4/0 635 4,~' Q~'Q TRACT D f UNRLATT'ED I , ~ I 3 E) LION'S SQUARE I 1 680 LODGE 660 11' GOPlDOkr1 TRACT B ANTLERS A i Pay-in-Lieu Properties Pay-in-Lieu Properties Veil Village 143 CROSSROADS OF VAIL ILOT P'~ CONDOMINIUM TRANSPORTATION LOT y _ LOT P j PARKING LOT LOTP 111 CENTER TRACT B&C I - i 241 141 zz EAST MEADOW . IALE7 DR TG( VILLAGE CENTER i~ l t K & I. 1 AUSTRIA HAU S - f LOTk MOUNTAIN HAU5 'CORNICE- 420 I 242 l~ CONDO A 362 f . 130 VAIL ATHLETIC 124 a2 I_'..-•-' CLUB •L - - 7 IKA 'r_ TRACTS&0 ~ C-, :3 3 7~ r^ I 18~~~ 7~~~ 4-i IWEISS 11J, 1siy.17 103 'L 1AI <O~i S ~ 1c! Fcu n4?~ L ~7 4 ~s~T~~81)gj1d71r11~~ i3 ~ 1; y., a A, Lo ~~L s`; L I~ ~I l crr uR~ 9. _ L"ARE CON, K RI lA I RIDGE ; CHECKPOINT r['L i• _ ~7 2 _ V1LLri V{1LHALLA ;N6y {n CHARLIE CCC~JJDO i 183 Ak- &A 360 RAMS CHRt5TIAiVA - RPM I HORN IAOP RIDGE AB.C1.. '(N ,..4. 1 CONDO 174 UTH , _ p AT VAIL ..1 386 TIVOLI THE: LODGE AT VAIL v,y T18~ A I ~ 856 E 416 I"' p i A uB~lA6t` 1SD D LODGE TOWER 3rlOIGE CLUB - 200 214 A ~ ~-'a`TREET t LODGE - - _ ~ TRACT E 2 3B 1 . ; 315 305; 36s 3215 T m Pay-in-Lieu Properties Washington r infrastructure Seroces, Inc. 31 January 2001 Greg Hall 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, CO 81657 Greg, Here is a summary of the enclosed contour mapping and the effect of engine "jake" brakes, rumble strips, and future traffic volumes on those contour maps. Also included in this memo is a list of mitigation strategies. CONTOUR MAPPING Enclosed are maps displaying the existing 2000 noise level contours. The contours include the 60 decibel (dB(A)), 66 dB(A), and the 70 dB(A) contours for the existing noise levels produced by I-70. The contours are displayed only where there is current land use. SHORT DURATION POINT SOURCE NOISE The noise produced from engine "jake" brakes and rumble strips were measured and analyzed to determine the effect of short duration point source noise on the overall noise levels produced by the general I-70 traffic. The average increase in noise based on short duration point source noise generated from "jake" brakes and rumble strips is shown in the tables below. The tables reflect the average dB(A) increase to be added to each of the existing contour lines to reflect the presence of short duration point sources. In general, "jake" brakes add 6 dB(A) at the source and rumble strips add 9 dB(A) at the source. This incremental increase in noise becomes smaller as the distance from I-70 increases. Table 1 shows the effect of jake brake noise and Table 2 shows the effect of rumble strip noise. Table 1 Decibel Increases Based on "Jake" Brake Noise Noise Contour (dB(A)) Relative Decibel Increase dB(A) 70 2.0 66 1.0 60 0.5 Table 2 Decibel Increases Based on Rumble Strip Noise Noise Contour (dB(A)) Relative Decibel Increase dB(A) 70 4 66 3 60 1 10822 West Toller Drive • Littleton, Colorado USA 80127 • Phone: (303) 948-4001 • Fax: (303) 948-4010 • WWW.Wgi-is.com Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc. FUTURE TRAFFIC Future traffic volumes will also have an additive effect on the existing noise contour lines. The 2020 traffic predictions show the average traffic on I-70 is to increase by 57% of the existing traffic on I-70. This increased traffic produces an average increase of 2 dB(A) to the existing contour lines for the 2020 condition. MITIGATION STRATEGIES There are many possible ways to reduce the noise levels produced by the traffic on I-70. Below is a list of possible mitigation strategies. These mitigation strategies will be presented in more detail to the Council on Tuesday, February Oh. • Barriers • Berms • Concrete walls • Form liners • Wood walls • Glass walls • Metal walls • Absorptive • Bury or cap I-70 • White noise • Noise Cancellation • Pavement type • Speeds • Enforcement • Lower speed limits (all) • Lower speed limits (trucks) • No passing for trucks • Reduce volumes • Noise Ordinances • By time of day • Engine Brakes • Horns • Speeds • Insulation If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks, . )-C)~ica Slaton, IT 10822 West Toller Drive • Littleton, Colorado USA 80127 • Phone: (303) 948-4001 • Fax: (303) 948-4010 • www.wgi-is.com IT99tro0 F 29tB5M [ I9L90M [ 17x7900 [ TB000O [ 2190)00 [ IhIp00 [ M F I I I I I I 8 v \ r ry^ \ \ \ \ \ I I I, Ri- \ r \ \x' - 01 F ~ , " A0 SCALE: C ; \ / l f j F+C 1 S. iri 1 ~I. ~••.1 5A' t' 1~2 \ I INCH = 900 FEET - \\,\X\: \5\\ \ \ \ . \ l \ µr- /IY ~fv-L-.•-~ ~Y \ \ e a r°/ I of - ~f ?t t, t~\ ;\{\0, 'vx/~4; ,f.:..h\' DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: I \ \\.4\\\ \ 1 \ OCTOBER 7, 1997 \ \ \ \ 11y , { r LEGEND . \ \ / K~x r a„ " I-70 Estimated \ r \ k \ \ \ _ v [ \ \ Noise Contours"' . \ 5 F \ \ \ 70 dB(A) 66 dB(A) r ;J ii111 y``',,yC\~ 60dB(A) *only I-70 noise r x~,~ rsu; h y modeled, 2000 In. s 004 /ate... f \•~y,~ rF ',!~b. A _ { -f f ` ' I\ \ \ • - , . i A • : i / /i: i'~., W90x MEET B 9180 aMV[r CMll10. Brl 9[K Laxp SMVEr1x0IK. vxlL• E0.MK0 _ 2 .1 O.i= OW IL[B Br 1x15 EOPUi[B RM1F0 W9 BBS 4E9[a[ 9 Stta[MxMOMExBETB10 9ElxM5 USIBO KPI1L K I xMO0a9xxr iu[x OETM[a 1. 1999 111L ® T 0 W N 0 F V A I L 22 651: 9aL1l.IY[=[~1~4 W~, .Kr 5i.~.~ x9~a .5[BEe aF5aM51BILllr 9M iK KOMKr 6 Txl O0i wKMaUS CIiM ixE x.x ix[ IxttxOE0 i -E M MEN O5E0 At -EN T- TxE [WILCO'-E•a T rxOro[xaurt l0 wnxmnx..x-nn~ 9 )B OMOIWlES .K a[l.ilvF 10 Tx[ c0.Mx0O xIM x[cUaacr p[iEBEx[[ V A L, COLORADO SHEET 2 OF 37 Ri.Ba9 lxuxl. xM1EOIT L BSTM M xK ATEvz .xB IE-11 B. ux a E es. LIZ E.' wMBlx=tts sE- ME s. ixE caM.BB sT.tt .L9W aMau :ME .xB .a iissspD [ 21NppD [ F-W E 3rN00p E 3rsr500 [ FIl- [ F".1. [ 3 [ I I T + + + + + + E ~ , iDD 9CALE: 1 INCH = 400 FEET - DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHYI \ / - OCTOBER 12.1994 LEGEND J I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* s a { + 1 70 dB(A) 9 e 1 -{FYI '4x` *.f'tb~/err 5 r r~/.~ ,2.`Ya x~\ - Y r r r r 66 dB(A) • x i 7 ~ J 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise ,,rr?i a modeled, 2000 WICx sw[l IS !I[LD spxvFi [pNT[0. Bit - }l _ IdMt.lx wss'Fi1M 6 xVVlx4. IM. [NL[xp0o. fOLM.00 I { rxls -Ill Pl-EO x.v ws MMx.IEp [Epu D.1. [ps 10 Dr „M04 MMf, M ® T 0 W N OF V A I ;M~ xD ~x TwD roIxDD[ p[Iro .FMµ piNxuxr I.•[x al~FS .i. v s cplsn[D *p x[[r x•ilwuL w..[fus.c. n.roups rDD . cmwx . o ro ,,,f ~ N.L a 2• r• use •r . sc.LE a I•.lop. .FSa .Erslc. IM . suss L MSPoxsIDlLlll ipr lw MNDNi a Txl[ D.i. xx[x In[p !a pTxFD rx•x rxE ro N..~.ro I I Ixi[xD[D PwvpiE DE xqx Ds[D •I pix[P Tx.x ixF fOw ILED s<.LF. F 1D S ss .L[ CWNIx Rs w[ ML lx[ ppL•.00 xIN .fcpx.cr vErEx[MF VA L p COLORADO Mi.px• Ix.w 1. x4xl:w u wiux v x o nnz .ro Fxrlc.L pnpx a x p se. .xprND..N,xr 411 l.LfDx .ID w.[ fD. W SHEET 4 OF 37 sl .alrl[p rp Mn[n olsiwc[scn c•auro ttF•.rlDx. ix.L :wF •N u[ i 9px C ZienpD [ 3rioo4p [ 2TTR54p [ I111p4p [ 3nls4p F 21T30po f i [ ~ I 1 I I I 8 8 ~ ~ ~ T T T 8 T T T ~ T T Y>, ~y~y y • t ~ \\s~~~\ loo I b \ \\\9_ - SCALE: ) ! ~ • 1 ~ \ \ 1 INCH = 400 FEET FIB': \ a \\"a M \ ` \ \ \ 007E OF PHOTOGRAPHY: h /I \ t \ X \ a4 +a\ ~'i, OCTOBER 12.1994 % x - ~i >T" x r\''~:~{ ; , LEGEND \i . sty ~i \ Li \ t, \ I-70 Estimated y t/ ` y• \ Noise Contours* + 70 MysMn= J - - - - 66 dB(A) 60 dB(A) . i e. , . \ t tt( Syr y~~\k'*t. V .`'Px. ` r ;,r n\ \ ~f ;~s\eN *only I-70 noise I", t t~ t, y r5. ' ~rr ` modeled, 2000 T' ~Mf '~rz- - , i !.c`. ~I~ •1' j "r~° a ~t sw~.~wiaa prs e4i[X fM[t I[ 2 l~ I IMl[Ix IM 4 xeaalM. Ix[. [,W[Fxpw. C0.wZw TNIS c0.e`pT[p Mwl[p IIV xxs MMRelfp saw p.l[ COlslaro pr Ie i ,i. In.. TOWN O F A I pT[MpaXp a a1[ Ml bDS pplx[ ~al.a aXpM., TuEx aTw[a j W. ® I[ n xs I x 21~ ixlsaxM .ps cw.nfp ip sen xanwu xsa .ccwa[r sulo.aosxrw [cwiwa e.c.R~.,-x n vu ar x' rw us[ RT . scu[ w I•-,oo•. .[ao-s[ralc I c . s TO siwrcleuln rw Tlp Mcaa.cr s TXIS on. rx[x us[o rw mXEa Txpx TM a~~,- ~ sp I I „ IMin[xxo rwaw[ w .Mx us[p 4TMR Txax TM 1-[A 1-1- 1 RM MaxTIW M TM C0. SF SHEET 5 OF 37 .w. lxx[""~y xwlxwTUrc[siw aawroMECO TI"ON w. Y[R - EMEx11 u[ e. o,Rp...[,a. r.a[w ..a x ap ~.x V A L , COLORADO ~/Jicoiio a[c i o Ix t,..so0 [ ileS000 [ [,.,SOD [ IT- [ .L,cx 1 , [,.6[00 [ [,.TODD [ El- [ [ [ r r / 4: - ~ ~ ~ - i~ %::'!:j//~/l "/iii//''~~ / , ~.x 1 ,f {r`4•`" r ~ ~ it/% //j/~ ~j / / j' it %/~_~j ~r, / ' w/F;?. L/ \ J,rt . Ilr~x ro+, i~ i'//~ .jar/i?/%/ Yf/r/i -"/%/~///////~h/ y/~/.Y~'~i k~) :.7 Jr ~i rrirr / r r / /.y/~/ 9s !rr"- / r t 1 tf, `ice 'r i/ /r r - / / / / /r / fr1~ I J7+II I(I' - Ji ~r //rrJr/ / ~i.///rj/ /'/y`%~J/,,irk°!. e ;'/~~'J~ .J II IIII~ uf,'~\ _ "a.'' r..} = ~ ~~~.999///.>f/ ~~r/ ~ ~ r,~l` ,!?/'/r II III, S i-- / "e" '!/.,y5 r°. f r/ !i i /9 ,r'/ s ~ rr I I' i ' ~ !i - / ~ ~ L. ~ ' y~ `i / /j/ r '~sa ~ k'~ ~5 ! / ~ / /,y~ 1 1 - Sj„/f v1J`~/ ~(a/'.//r//''r,/ L`'.~Ti/ / ,~i tvi - 1 / _ , s . / / r r d~ r zoo , - it 4, /~T• t \ ~ 1<#~ ,y,/~r ~ /i,,y/y ~'r/~ ~ / i D s f / DSCALE: ' " - . - ' ~ 7 ~ , t'`' w 1 INCH = 400 FEET ~y , ti Y z z1r lia c I.,.P~ /r/-~ /i /y" ' ~tr~/ yg "~'R j'xA, '1'" I + I ' 1 `rl i' rl 1 /ida y / , r ._r Rt 9 ,c '"SS R "'.'?'/!rr iii /,'/'r s / :/'4:~. Z' 'CK~(/ ~~~4 5 f/ ~+4t'if k 4 r~ j 1 j~P"y{.( !_l~l tlr ~t~/'.'~,!'1 mf' r t + DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHYe / / dY". -~lJ'. t, j `C L.4 `(K'r ,rf / J J + fi j % / ~~I OCTOBER 7.1997 f r h ( tyv E fi ~.t"'r P ~A ~ 7 ~ ^E ~ ~ y f y , / f I.' I ` A , p ~r~// .'v 1 ° 0.k > d r k / / r 1 ~eJ~ v , ,!i f r._._ f,- ' 'i/ a,r h4..,, tis f'}'r , a 7 •r K ~I ;ii//i'i ri ~i~' 7D - LEGEND rv - a / ~$`"i ` % b I I-70 Estimated / pro \ / t ' u'"~ / t ' e7 . Ix 7d ° •r/i Z Q d= Y ~d 4,L x N,~ x I r ; r j,/i r / r i t,-` s•'' /''''pY.` Noise Contours r r z L / / x t t raI r i. i v y / ~ / 1 rrl , y / r S k JDy i 'ft a, /,cr / r , / / p T,y7`~c'! r~ /r' $ / 4; ! / r/r p l 1 iy- ,.f~~~ wf i / ,y /rz. ~{,,r ' / .F~r r~ ///i t I 'P ij~ i/i/ ` ? L / i-•~-- 70 dB(A) ; r 9 ? ' r t'/ /f /i/`y y Jey / 66dB(A) J *I/i i.r~/i % .t"5 i ~f i r r: j, /////i/i/ " ~„.?Y 7 n. i 'r /'1 jiiirrj ii:' %//iX t. ! 7j 60 dB(A) a ' i .'i / 5 i/r. s J *onl I-70 noise j, / r :.y/ ,r /r " / • r :C' r jrv"~ ! i/ i / - modeled, 2.000 ~ ~ /~'w i / / O %/fin- /J' ~ /'l ~ ~~~F.s' /.l ' j % / % /i Y' .,.Y.... "c/, , , ,i', k~, /mar , , ( / I' f°..'"r I,-~~5~ /r' . r'/+^'~'3 d`~ uLl[x SMF[T .T [ ~ iIRD SMV[v cdlx0. OT. rtes L•xp suxvFTlxO. Ixc. vIL. c0.Ox•oO P/uT[x rtarrzo ,ur x e N...T[D rxw o•T• car,L[D e• T 0 W 0 F A L ' ei,=~~ ~r~, xLtxD ~.t.L .xD,ax..x• ,L.,x oc,~[. AlRO~IIafItlC. 0K. A " I I , Da.,L[D ,D [[,Dx.,tDx x ..a a.L. ,,.xD..D xra .e o TO x axstenr*. rou rx[ .cAND ATiMIT xus[orrw Dixie rw : r s xu D,«[. I • . I I tx [x~xDD nxna [ u M x x [D o x[x`p ~,x[ Da.cL[D ,D.L[. V A i L , C 0 L 0 R A D 0 ~A SHEET 7 OF 37 xnxw• ,x•xx,. xwtxw,•L D•,w a x•D nnz •xD v[xrtcu D•rw o< x•D ee. nD~ix•,[s sxo• • tsrµx[sc S,•,[v.*'•w FA.-I z.1 AID uF t[o ,D •[rL[c, o tx a •T A. _ E z,•.DOO E zr•esoo E :nseoD E TE.fsW c x.z x srrtc* z nsosoD E :zsvsoD E zniooD E zzsi>oD E / wf of 1 J -77 / n 1 n / r'-!sue - r. vvz ~.r ~C ,fit i , Gki -t=_ r_r ~ Lr ~..c~ i tr•' SCALE t4~ l `..a 1 INCH 400 FEET 7- 1 Jam- /ri STS \ t - • n -~i 401 DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: a` g^, 4'~ I ! - / / k OCTOBER 7, 1997 00 i - - - f1 LEGEND r per, / I-70 Estimated a Nose Contours* r y.. r I., izz a 70 dB(A) oee / / _ - - - - 66 dB(A) t € r-r 7 ~r t f, - ytrl 1. 60 dB(A) r' ? _ µ { i=f_r 4k *only I-70 noise ~i N modeled, 2000 8 xncx sxcn to rraD suxsE. -M rc.• LAND ..1 wxvE•ixc ixc E caw.oo _ ~ e.• ,ll . TOWN OF V A I L E ML A 'FSPxxxslel-E 1.. EDP M NNENDM•Dr Al Tx[xs DA•axE wfxxUSE DPV1ED 5 'AN 1. 11•EE. nmccn••u[t xIExCFD P1MPO5[ - us D D[s ME xfl.trvL iO ?xE _EN.DO x~Dx cc x,r(P, ~ - V A I L , COLORADO se SHEET B OF 37 wunon• ~iux . xmizws.E wwx E' x•D esnz AND xfxslc.E D - rc xw cODNDIM11Ce Sx-X •xE Ix' - A. s.•*[ PLANE 'Ell E xoxE AND ..ntnfD *D xfnECS v n n AN_ ~ r x,5,500 [ iTSxaOO F xr5i STC]DDe [ .TM -11 C IT- [ xTNmD F xl]aCM [ SSCCODO F COD r E..-- \ S .ti i _ Yv --v. mow', i~9. • I~ ~,-K~i ~ i ~ _ i <Sy „ _ j1p J ` % 0 1. SCALE: i ! 1 INCH - 400 FEET r _.j itj 'x oat E OF PHOTOGRAPHY: OCTOBER T. 1997 LEGEND a I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* ~ , w t ..fir c> 70 dB(A) 66 dB(A) 60 d °s""~. °~*r cn. YTS r°'~'•w. :3C"v ,s Cox <a4,K+~-rl~... C i - ~ ~ ~ _ ash f:.\ •w.^:,,, - ~ ' . ' f \ 7 v . ~ only I-70 noise 4°''_ , At, modeled, 2000 . wTM swn n nno swnr cwraDt e+ sMV[nxc uc vut caM.oo _ x ~ a[ax LixD OLw /~-may ~ ® TOWN O F V A I ' S[ : X sTFa[MH Tx:a~OTTO4.C~ EDrl ` HEEL L AiA0xx[axx.xV x~4 R i~trwt , SCLL[ta ~•wao.ciux.cr s,..Dw...aOCx 1.rA 1 CCdr- ST HEaO-xCralt. I C sU:Ee w rx.x rxF oursFO rw 1, °C .aslea[r. rw r .ce o .r or a :..a1M rwew 1-1, .xx,xax.,.xr I w txrzxxD xuxrmF ttFD . aHS. six•+x[s n ae b C ML COMO:xHrCS CCE .L." TO THE CMMx00 xIM iCCUaxtr aFr[a[xGE V A 1 L, COLORADO SHEET 9 OF 37 xETxMx .x ax, xMtxox Dsrux M x D ssni wD v oarw M xm [e. Lv--' wotrt1O Ta xES c o:s~.xc[ .1 WOU. Et[ 111M. x,au xdE ..D.1[ 1155000 [ iMSSOD F iMa,Dp [ i1565R0 F inIODD [ in150p [ IT- F i F \i \ \ Y \ k \ \ a "NANA w T` >a. \ ,3•~„a. Yy~ ,fie 4',~ $ ~ \ vr„g`4 ANN r I i '4!h ai. illb- AAA. r ~ C! ANIA z 'I';-* ANN A 1. nD \ \ . \ "v v 10.. ,~.~t- kY=C: SCALE: 1 INCH = 400 FEET \\i~ 4 .v . Q'I DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY Ni~~'. ..•.•a.. 4 1 a. \ - fj - _ _ OCTOBER T. 1997 RN 1 \ - • _ _ w• is \ . \ l - +"NNAAN•' LEGEND ANA- I-70 Estimated 1 • A Noise Contours* a ~ 1 F='-,M. i• `t Y ~ ~ ~ Y. _ ~ S AN;, t.'. .,std ' t b Jx v \ i s ! r \ ANNNNAAAAAANNAAAAA 70 d - - - - 66 dB(A) AN. 60 dB(A) r 1 *only I-70 noise - ANN ANN modeled, 2000 ANNA, oe ° w ` ~ANNi tom-°i ix x T[x HAFT :D [IE[D „R [R DDx Ro a...[ R F.xD I.-IND. Ix[. x.,[. [o[DR.DD n/U,FP RDnFO x.v us OFxFR.iFD v.al D.n tanl[[0 R. a sttREVxmaa..xxnRlc x[rxoos uslxD .ERIn vxoroD..Rx. ,..Ex Ic-11. M51 R.. ® TOWN O F V A I : IR w as ~.I[[D ~[::.~Dxw .1 « :D~aEO E. A.: . .[IRI[I.. ,a DTI . ,..F[ a r; r~; ~R~.[nl[ I F;., ,R~[, "'t r-q x...rti..r.R I AN n I NTANAMID voR I AN wsx Us[D AT OTHER q1111 •1,xE C-LED I-E. .RC RnNINN - ° ° I/4 11 5a l SHEET 10 OF 37 AEAFN"Dlx '.I•Ma ,D IN - ."'1 1. ve w.[..11 IN o es. V A I L , COLORADO I. IN TNA MAIM STATE nla ia4 ZME ..UDA.E [nED, xnesEO [ 3n90[D [ i,seeW [ Y,eDDeD [ i,aD,DD F in:OEO [ Ynie00 t i,axaaD [ I I I I I 1 + + + + + + • /,_I \ - .y." SCALE: i INCH = 400 FEET _ ` ~o I// r X - ? i~ _ '~"`t° f GATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: w°.:. y~ OCTOBER p 1994 as • r r - ~ ~ , LEGEND a` ~a'yii` „r ,;.[sXyC ,.y, ail. • f, r. ~'r ,.r>.~, - r... t. P r' . a _ ' _ I-70 Estimated rr 6.4 V Noise Contours* ~ "a ~ c* tr~a--..,,,,.a.',°~` awl[i'~ M ~ sip ' r.d ~ ~ 's„a~, ~.},^M»"'-^~^~° ~ g . r .~rr[y~ r tr~.,L d e • r e iv..~~~ ~,.,.~'~~i:.aa ~+rs~ : - ""^a.-.-~- - 1~ ,y. ~ kn~..+.~ r ~ ' i • •1 L a= 4 D ~ 70 B(A) r Y q 41 y.Jx ii r ! y~ 60 dB(A) • • • • r ` 0, U"\ *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 t c 5! % 8 _ _ . wnn s.[, it ~ - nL :i: ~su~[inxoa u[v:v1xE. rxc. FxcL[.DED 8 [ClOx.00 I nls wv tas cbPIL[D ,0 LEF, w,IP,4 wv .ttDe ps F `.W T 0 W [\l 0 F AIL sroraa.uxr n _ R II{t\y.-tiill~ x[sexu¢I , [a w[ .,C [[4F arxi'•oro .~feD[fini[•~u[ a•„-,.~..•~,,,,~, I I Ix,[ND[DMrosF U x K[ Y-1-1 .1 oftxF4ww .Ex~IL[DDS[p[r a • . *x SHEET a ae. ~,x. e.. r.L[Ex ..x we, E.w DDn ¢D ,e x[ ¢n urnn Dwux v x D n V D x' [ Dn x o x D ee V A I L , COLORADO V 11 OF 3T ?.+,t plx~M [0.Dx.~in,F rt.w CF 4 1axF .x .eF x+sxooD f 216- F fisspso [ inHDD F xiHwp [ nD.soD [ xisspoo E n [ I I I I I 8 8 -f- -F- -1- + I xf _ d l f- z p e] f t ? .n:t.k f bE/It x SCALE: se.e t INCH 400 FEET „ ,r I s'E5 ~~rs:~ t ! ;r x ° $ ? " v ' .s ~,yi"IF~~ Y -"j `?I^LF ex <ffb '~"".r' `t:J a y c _ DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: i~ i z~ A OCTOBER 12. 1994 ibl LEGEND Y, ` ? rJ f I-70 Estimated 8 - .r y 1: + j_ j 1` i t x- , Noise Contours* 70 dB(A) r ~ ar ; - - - - 66 dB(A) 4~, 60 dB(A) ' 77- \ \ t~ 1 ` , y Y J i. • f i' ~y~ i *only I-70 noise f ~yiy' modeled, 2000 rf,'etj'1 zz a y, J ) ~ I < \ - ~ ark I wl[x RrtEI ix wvFMIlNP0. ~x^ - I~ wlx x tw. txc. FwlFxpxp. col . wP EEFS w Duel. W ® TOWN OF V A L z xs OxslDilitt rOIwTU tw. x[ q,-...we i,.mwwnA I N TI ~ l) 1Nx`ExoFp PwPpsF wCx[USfO[.l piUasix.x TUE[WILFpps[~f.a i x. e. (VVVH>sH LpoPPIwzFS ulF Ul.itvF m ix[ p*ax.uEin x m ..a w.F xp.w SHEET 12 OF 37 [0.d.DD xlpx .w.cv xErfx[xE VA I L, COLORADO xF .oaa Ix a l xwtmrtu Deiw a x p nnx .w ai n eFp E I~iz .f WaD1wRF Fxpw NF Ix lxF t0.pa.pp FT.iF PI.U [Fxtxu i0x ~LJ wplr lFp ip xfRf[z plsiul[FS .i Dagmp EIFV.TIM. i26s500 F 2166000 F 21-SOD [ 2262000 E -TM [MEET 4 In2B00 F T- [ TTMI. 220sm0 E oR. c>.? qua \ i / ~Y/ - - L Z5 4~ lC g ate' r L - i~ s ? _ \ t w. L+-~ " _ s#~ , Q rtes I J?' 5.-'~ xx ^ iX, , 3'4'--r: zr. -w,? ? iI 6~r`~l`~'>„ - 1i ! ? ? y: m7,Ga~/"~//'/ i j / ''.7'J~y. ~.'y a -d ' i I ? ? y r - i _ ~ ~~i%/r / i r° oz~ ; ` ,;,j'\ k~` ~ 7s,~.. ~5'="'S"` - "x - '~a.'~ ' „ ? ? ? ~ ? I~'A._ `!;/fit':. ;/j//~ _ ' "v.„s.~, `11~ „r-x,..,~~ ~L: + - I F +fd r//z i SCALE: - _ / I INCH - 400 FEET z - s. } DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHYI + OCTOBER 12.1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* - 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 s I I i i ~ ~ 1- P p SBxv[T FMTB0. BTI 0.~ Y NOBxIBIx fUIISE2IME a MwPlxO• ixi. [-lExOpp. [0. PITT[p MV xPS O[xF-TEp PPM 0.12 CUSILFO B. . xP - I_/ 0 F AI ' ` 1 IMB .EMIti PCl,-T- T=.Fx 1.. I'BwB~~BBwB ~ SAP ® IB i 22 f `t y~5~ ~t~ILI0 ip2s~f .1- wP .c[ux.2. sT=M.xps POM 1 tMTpM T0 W N Pp6f d x„E .W _ _ s .Tix°BFO PuMi ca m Tn n T - xP r6µ91. ow1-n =x 11.- a mws6xa Px0[ecMPUE2xr B.~ ~tOM wPS FP/wT M Plt pm-I-T, S PPE IM[IPTIK1 Tx[ p0.0M, xl. ~ T'O MFx [ VA I L , COLORADO SHEET 13 OF 37 Ix . o M x-BI6T Ilan AT PMMxo EtEMP=IM. - -1 - ME xwlPl ,ro xN-E - V 4 x i siooB F o0 00 [ f Boo [ r , w._. a rx ix. ,L ou.. i 77 , ~ _ ~ a .I ~ ~ , ~ t L 7 7 f ~ ' < ~ ~ ~ ~ z ,VP ~ - - ~?.i ~L~jst ,n m _x ~ t.'I '.e. ~ , ax k x - L f _ f l ~.i d L , A- _i .w r r t , , 3 x y4 , , , f , ;FE Zt M - r / t w , f w, r, SCALE: 1 INCH = 400 FEET + + + + + + DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. OCTOBER 12.1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated + + + + } + Noise Contours* - 70 a8(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 f1~FL :SUxBFV [d,x0. Bv, _ 2 t Ix slwv[rlw 6 wxxlw. Ixc. [xil[xmp. [0.M.D0 AaogM= ,MLA [ I2 ~ m.y~m ` IL[o ,o x[n x ws r sr.xx.nns orw . -TOM TOWN OF VA IL a. x •x° °°P 'sr[ 11Z.1 1111 fP 1KK xRwN NBf . B.* MxosFUfFOn D,xF vux>YSF Ox xwx BSEO .l x1xFRixBx ixE [MILFB ic4E.x i wits ME ftlttlx[ i0 SHEET N OF 37 n ~ ID ~rNxwKKffxoxlxwius ' e ww n,s,l.. [xixxazxax[x.xB BxF se. V.i .f i Ylwrtf Sxpn .NF Ix iw -T, [0.M.OB i vL.xf [x VA L , COLORADO K/I ,o._ oii F ax J ittiSM F 2,7,000 F 2113500 E 2,7.000 F 211.!00 [ 2775000 F 211"" E 2776000 [ 1 1 I I I I 8 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* ti 70 dB(A) 66 dB(A) + + + + } - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 n tit Ru ? n z n \i ~i _ _ t '.9r ~l r DSCALE o0 ..°:~,1 3.„oy~ v. ~rt'V. ,ter F.'~~• ? ' ` 1 ` .a. f~ 1 INCH 400 FEET v 1~s T~ t t DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, ' `d.,... ~Lr':. 1 ~ ? J ] ~ ~ ~ OCTOBER 12. 1994 `.v y yr > 71 T11 OLII T T ` sx[ti 3, `i psi i« s~MT n~ of - x . v n w.rwc. lw. Fxw[woD. cam.DD = D.RfP T 0 W N 0 F A I x19 ED.D,Fx PfDi ED x~ fEN[R.ifD fRa D.,. FD~1FF0 xr . A4010-1119M. Nr ® ixISF w xtOVT_ s(,.pDS Ys ISO .Fx11 vxO 11:1HT tufx a[,oxFn ti. t99. ST lO IF~[Y.tld14 pr 9Twp.R 2 26 1N,FRV.L ? 2' fox 1.T NF Of 1 . AAAE. FIS.01 VL fO i.x[ 6 w1UssO -gym l- ~ _I 'FSxwslBisl Tr .s =DAi oix[x•,xwSStx[ ,1 x,FxOED PUMP Aft wEN DS[DO., pixFRSiwx wF[OwilED D S 5f4F r[tuR.crRFffx[xcf e.. I.C. .1R wrs cosawr sF SHEET 15 OF 37 ALL 00.MDINITFS wF x[unv[ ,a ixF caw.DD xlcx .cR, V A I L, COLORADO _ 1.,fDw 1X'°".. M0R120M4 D I Nw .,,9i .1E 1E.F D., x a ..D x ;1.T;n .11 DII-IFS 11 D... ,x FD wD wF E r eee [ E,.[eee [ I,.- E se[E, x ..I- E ,,.,,ee [ 21"M E ,,..,ee [ a 1 - f q,//, 3r J ~ fr wil" r/r,.ri// r, /n p !I~ r r'f 1f f r r j, 77' II,,) r 1~ r erg 01 i~' r' i SCALE: / II t t' / tJ S f ~ 1 al 1 INCH = 400 FEET DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER i, 1997 /X LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* 114 \ s Z. i• 70 dB(A) - - - - 66dB(A) Nx~ 60 dB(A) ~lV/ oely I-70 noise f ~/f f /pvf • * modeled 2000 w,c. sxee, n E I FIELD smve, [emxa e,. FEU uxe suxre„xc. Ixc. velc. cane.oe [mrto wr us aExExum rxol A.u ca.u[o e. -TT „ . ® T 0 W N 0 F V A L _ ALL ILEE "WE' .[Ix[ .1- r'e,eex.rx. ,.x`x [ _ j~ 't n~s:aaleicli, Fox ,ic .ccl~m.i~ae*x~s o.*. w¢r[i uuo~snx[poi.inp,«.[x,x[o IF "I - ~,•p A V AIL , COLORADO r SHEET r OF 31 &L o x[n=tu All ITT TW E[EV.,IOx C.....z .....CE es. V . ii>.xe0 [ Yi[SeDe [ Sixssax F Si.[[[e F W1M vEfl i 31x65[0 [ YrviOeD [ Yl.isco F iixeoex f oo' % ' ~I y' r - ~ ~ : ..,i'' ~.~~~M..' v/ 9E^? r',!s fr~sd~ f /r 7 ! lY r~'/ y r • Zr'f ,rte r Y ~ y r 1 / ~"'.6 t~ . 1,~. .y . ~ r dp ' ~r a ~t ~i,pis. t I fr ! 10 '8 / y ~Y ~ / rr y a >Jl 11 rrf/.9 rf v.r J li f a w \ r x~. ? r r r~i rJ \ l` ~ tl `a < t ,1' '.~'s.r° 6r Q if / r r /i Vr+~Al~, ' ..''°.r .t' & / ? r, je_ p t 4 SCALE: / "l. 1 INCH - 400 FEET f ,/Jr. ',r ,F / ff? f x r g 'iI i j //!ice' /J/ Ni ~~a`,V J'e~i ~:..y,2~'~ • / / r r j' r • s i, I f v i 1 o"C,Ar t yv°`°-\ r" f ~y'.-, r( '7l ~k , r I 1 ty Nit j n " Y tN r a/ y ! DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, _ / /r -r p r:'T '3 / ,al / / _ / / t OCTOBER 7.1997 /;r,f' ~,,-1, ~ ~ r w i/ r"l' /r rJ / n,/s r':,r x.y-/il//////~ ? j _ r LEGEND iY ' ei.I Y: l xs, I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* -,o ;o01 70 dB(A) F / y£'~ f~ / y x r r' y f7A 66 dB A) a ? ;.e j _ f w_ P ~r : i ~ - . ` 'Y/~` X!w ~fN 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise r? f? i ~c~( j>>~;//i i,~% f modeled,-2000 t/s I? ' . , I n fi., s~ t`Y /1~. -T' , , :I ' / vrl i~'~ z 1 'F`t1 I s..,, t/ „II„~ . ~ ..r ; i~ !i r Wi[x sxEFl ii iIElO suxvFi CO,I[0. evl O[ss LYw sWV[vixE IxL v.il c0.w500 ~y I lx~s WS Ws CPSIL~O 10 14:FS x. /fEMI~[Fa[ [ary MYA PFSIASilllliv Sp, M .CW[.LiLO[4ix cWEx YsFUi[WeOi xsx ixF TOWN OF VA I L ,,,o,ax,,,,,, I {I~ IxrzxxO .w.os[ ul WEx us 0 .~li~xE0.,x.x ixE ca.ILEO suL[. -a xx V A I L , COLORADO SHEET 17 OF 37 -.1 iv µia ex xo ne ec. i[0 10 eFFI[Li 0 Ix ix[ cOLOx.OV s,si[ xi L[x ~ NFeI ~ipsiex ~ixl onauxo FLFVnIw i,ssctw [ irn5x, [ nseooo [ x+xsoo [ w+tx SMET + I+S+xOD [ t+S+iW [ i+sexOx [ 2+sesxx [ 8 1... , l as a"'-- w}31r^•w..,_:0. °a,. , 4 r , ` p ,r y., p I ° a ...^6' "N.. t. r _ ?'""f ,,,tom a"g a*x ".•..a +-:+a°^x Y`.J. I-S y \ - - y , 41 _ L a SCALE: I t I} }t I} ti.F S I I I 1 I DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER 7,1997 LEGEND I-70 Estimated ~ + + + + + + Noise Contours* 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 _ ~ riflU ixe'rtv tAX+[q 0•, If.. Luro sIMVFrIxG. Ixt, v.IL. cOLM.UO s -1. -D ,ur xs Xx[xn[o rxw o... mMUro e• TOWN OF VA IL f1M~r/ENi ~Yy Me ® x SE 1 I 1. x+[IIV4 6 1' IMLUX+.+ . stiL[ xr I "•,xx'. Kn0-M,xtt. Ixt. zssUl45 +xix ,M x0 R If~vy~I ufsrono tiv rxp iM MP -6 +xis 05+. vx[x IL ron 1. exn,wa IE sl I ,s A'. P Ixl[xx[o WuvDS[ P xN[x Ys[Y O+MR +x.x ixF CdiiL[0 1-1. 'O'•'en°"-'°"'°"~` M ALL ttaiU1-1 u[n o iM c4ou. xtOx zctW.t• x[ xo nx .xx V A I L, COLORADO SHEET 19 OF 77 M,-. mall «,u t w v wo .'r' w s + F'nutxaxF xo Lx[ '-1~-' S4UV,FOrto xSSIECixo l s+.xt[siti woUppEl[v ilpx.t Eu 1 H ~ x,55040 F i,n500 F S1n000 [ i15e500 F Wicx SxEEI FO 5,5,000 [ ilnSDD L iiSeCOD E S, e E I ' r X, ji f- 8 - , P'p u/ F E SCALE: \ i\(\ 1\\ 4' ~,Il L - / / k 1 INCH = 400 FEET DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: OCTOBER 7, 1997 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* + + + 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 g I I I I 1 I ri[LO sWVF? [Oxia0. er. aFSx [5x0 SIMV[, Ix4. ix4. vSiE00.4x500 w.urtx x[mim w! .u 4fx[a5tt4 [a4x 45i. cm.iEE x[x 4 m-/ T 0 W ~l 0 F A ' ::«~~-IDDxLL.l,a14 5!,x445 DS,x4 exm-...x...Fx T. F55,. Ill AMI~ILW .~.y A SF e ix 15 X AT GVVilf4 TO St,'[FAL ixllxvLL Q I' eq m[ 511 5 LL0.1 VFW a0 SE,a I[. Ix 0ix1[xU i.tw xt M VS[D r0a 0*x[n,x x~ix[ ex0racx5w[,-~I~~x~ 1 I x*[xDlD'xMx[NOV1E0xix4 O.,W a-x.Oisl~vxx0 vFa,[44t0 iux a x50 ee. SHEET V A I L, COLORADO 20 OF 37 x[ .D" ' Er E4i D111 x1, A. n v., o ie5 ~4,rtt4 x a E ,.,E ~ E i4„[ .xDW . h ~ 31S90DD F 3il95aD E i DDDD [ Wl[x sM[t If 1.AGDD E EnIDDD F ita lGEN F 3 F GIG III ;I., _ - 's 7 4 a GGPGW'rte g 9 'a. l`~ r o f t ~ u f r f< A ,r' r 1.:; 3 s'~y . W.- GWN~ y { 71- [ GNNN- NNINGNIN, 9 J A r k i - Y' I ! A f o ~ • - SCALE: I INCH = 400 FEET C + + + + + + DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: OCTOBER 12.1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated I + + + + + + Noise Contours* 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 S I I 1 I I I rR[D sIMMI comp. n, - ~ xuwlxlx sMM,IM a •xxlxD. Ixc. x E . camplD ,..K.a T O W N OF VA I L~ :~u:..~~x~:'.;D.ap:l.:[~iDx=.3. 1114. 1x15 W xps [DISHED TO MEl 11TIEGN xw Sc[wpcr STpMppOS rq . [wEDM ~3.r•~[.,.u Fal..f~..EDw1[ I[..SM! MslllIN rP iM lccxxpcl R ixli 0.1. xx[xpUSFD rdr 1, ix.xUiM A.x,exr,orr.+m.~ I ' 1cmWln[ lES MF wSx D xt mMp ixpx lx[ x xccxpxcrcp[Rp[M[ .xmDGNS,.[lpl rHDDx x ,s D.pxi V A I L , COLORADO , ~SHEET MOF 3T xp•I. xuxlE- D iuxla w Dp*[9>[:x[ vFp'p.4iDDfS .'E [pp:r 1E0 10 p[RFR OIS,SxRS !i cppmDlfs[v[ilax,c[x iTSiO.O E Sl.[see t iTNeDD [ [lslxe0 F -Tw MFl li lTN0OO [ iTi.fW [ S1New [ 3,65500 F % 7~ w- •r~ v q 8 + + + + + + + + + + + + y SCALE: i INCH - 400 FEET DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: OCTOBER 12. 1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* 70 dB(A) + + + + + + 66 dB(A) 60 dB(A) "only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 6 ovUlt. K IF LW ..S 0Fx[.r.w Dm CurILEO er . .hu-115..--T. -.1- r[. ' . ® 1Y,.. 6 I, x15-. NS LOwIL TO 70 le WET MFT x.'Iwo .[[Ux.[S,M.w rw w,o. US[ .l . 5[4F M I ••teO . M.e-M T.I[.I IFn OTxx[. ISSUMS H. TOWN OF VAI rw ,x.x TM y S6 R xFSYpKIB~ITY rw TMM =."T.- 1x15e.-T. TM wEx CE-usEe110 5NL5 . wnw-sir...wm~ l0 N .11a ttw.OS[ w : 4l eOwOlx.iC6 uF .FL.TIVE Te M C0.w.OO xlOx .[[u..[~ .Fr[.E.E c[sl 6.wxo [LS192 D W D- OF 11D $8. eTec.. -T., x.r r.L[w [s.. V A I L , COLORADO >d SHEET 22 Of 3T mlrlm To .Fnl.nT xTHE ZV.T w pTNLLZOrt .xo .1 ~LJ n.OW W. :„xW [ \ WWf \ r, - t xy~ W + r _ SCALE: i INCH 400 FEET It` _,~t`~\ ti;y ()41E Of P"ol Y I OL70RER 12.14gA L 'I 1 LEGVND } I-70 Estimated Contours* Noise 70 dB(A) + 66 dB(A) + 60 dB(A) + .Sonny 1.70 noise + modeled, 2000 1 1 L P0. Bv. W41.fvtlux. [uWFPO y"`~ ~t CMU,E~ tP~41~[IMpS Y{M4 f[P~~N ~ ~t1~~5Wf0Y. 1%SU[C ~v. ~l [Rxfxxx6l py1EfC ,6 v[EUCi[Iffµ W 'vxfx U[Ex ftM x1xFP ixxx m[ 1 6 xE xCGM ,1¢x [ xx1F xxiW 6f x10 1[. f _ 24 2 PCfvxx~ px t[Cx x[W 11 xm2f M1~ xl[x~C[x [[11F. Rs 4R x[E1,IVf i0 xd C,/92 fx0 vCxtlfl[ ~ 1xx 1x[ I N 7• MEl,M1 1x1M~' xxxlLWt4 IT . s,1i[ [[x,x1[ 2 1 { ~plf1/xC[[ 1, . CC[v... lilOx• O ~ ,t SHEET Zi Of 31 U 1 Lt~Ft O COLORADO 1,13000 [ 1116500 [ i1„000 [ iT15O0 E -7- 21ta500 E i1,900D F in350O [ u a' ? + 1 ~'a• l ~ ~ l ~ \ ` \ ~ ~ loo SCALE: @ \ 1 INCH = 400 FEET } 1~; / " S `•ry\ t / ? \ D \4`' \ DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHYI OCTOBER 12.1994 J J ` ti's LEGEND < w r ` \ \ \ \ \ I-70 Estimated > / \ \ + Noise Contours* \V, 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) 60dB(A) only I-70 noise t w A modeled, 2000 w,p sx[Fl A ttD i t- SWYFV [vrta0. evt c Oa.00 Y WMT•Ix SDavE+lx0 a wPPIxO• [x . [x0Lfa000. c0. ~~~y~ y lxls C03PUlfa PLO,i[D wP x.3 OEN[a.,FO raw ~x~rxx[M x~xV I~/~~ • `l I 3,[a[0PxOl0Ea•IaEla1O 1ETxW3 us[x0 •FPI.L VxOtaa.~[i..Fx aciae[a ~2. 159[. x~.a.... TOWN OF V A n~~ f i ml ~u .,F=tw~[R~ woD. EDti o-K aD,x:~ :3. H, w PbnI01LIT tDa,xE •ttua• v ,xls D.,: w ,,,,,„,,,,e+,-,e„-, I M )1 I I 35 I«l[xo(D rua.DU m w[x us[etn o,xFx lI ca3.n[D suL[. x.x ,xF ma01wiF3 MF a[L•TlvD ,0 I E0.0a.0O xlcx .OCW.c+ aFr[aFxt[ x°[ixoa• 1x.xxl. Snalxw,n w+DF x.o n Pxo,DCa..•[,a. e.1 rucw •Ia -1 -.1 ~ x SHEET 29 Of 37 • o•T V A l Lnz .xo v[a+ICU D•lw or x.o ee. , COLORADO o,x. f3 SxD.xt a<llx x[3[D Da DD S,.IFa.L.xF EFx a.L L~[ .w .aF P iTTTSRO [ i1HE0D F zTNSW C infooo [ 2TInn [ iIxEROR E 2-AISS E L xtooR E I I I I I I 8 ,t scALE: r \ \ G' //'l1 j~i~ / DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER 7.1997 / ~l. /J/ f/a '"fir a'/~~ '/J i ~ LEGEND I-70 Estimated . 1 ~ a f •,Jix/~ j!' ~ rv Noise Contours* T T \ \ \ \ . ` \ 'Fs i r / J I 70 dB(A) 66 dB(A) ' I r ryas ,•"`~'\/(j 1 \ . 60dB(A) o- d a p! ;I ! I n (~~f f j *only 1-70 noise t a" .~~iL d yi ti a , y g! v modeled, 2000 /z sib r /J t a J` $ I 1 .l~'X: . /.r,~r `'i/, t ~ ~ i,l `~~~~.d ~ ~;,`~,.'~~\f-l ~i~i' f';m ' r,-r ..>f: I. ~r "r'~i . AST" WET ST 2 IIELD SURKV Ld+RIX x+, RCH [An SSRHF+,MF. Ixt. NIL. LIXaxApp C ; .2 n[R m [0 x s H1.- [EO LS ~ / TOWN O F V A I ....T ,~,.IS A, A ILE M I o ~ -T.1 ;oF. IS A II MRO-IIIARIC, WR A ii ~e E NT-,gE;~KTLUx "I LE ; n ST , THT[W[0 E x YSEY AT ITHER N.x THE [nRIEED SL4E.R + +-.x.m,.,xA,,.l N L ISEECHHTES ARE R[LATITE TS THE MORHO HIRx ACCURACY xEFEHEICE V A L COLORADO SHEET 25 OF 37 W,- IHH.T. «aTZVna onw EF A. nnz xo .EHI-L R.- RF 9 3? =;HAM SASHIS ASE IN THE STATE vlAxE CENTRAL ioxE AxU AIL ( 2i.l DDO [ Siell00 [ BT[(DDO F iix[!DD [ wlcx [xFFi 16 (ip]DDD [ ii[)!pp ( i+[x00D [ 2 DD [ % t : l \ t Y ' / l f r / err _ , r,r' ~'',as' M l /S. _ r / r j \ v 4' / I / . r. r~+^ I ~3 r ` /,(r c / fir _ r r / r _.q, I Y/ , ! ~ ~ s ~ /r ~ \ r~ r , r . tif/ X it < \ '~'r-r //'//i' p :\\/7~Xi/ 'r Jr..,o` l{ ,~..,~-f r'' Jt/. l"' .,_Tjf_'. ' rf / " / / ' / rJ \ r % i i r./ / `f~f' r . e. n.c-.N ' / ~~/a X3'1'1 ~1 f/I \ f r / l / //,•j / K ' / i/ - r r= f ',I /jJ / Y e ~[j(~t ~'.rf Ir.. /r/, r • S r , /^t P~ / / ~ ~,~/r•~ / J d' / I,A'~ ~k , ~F I d y ~j C.,C ' 1r~~ a`/ri/''~~'/,I/r l r~ ///!//~•>~'.,1. f"/ / ~~Z i'/ rF /r, / /~/,~•r + f~'r} ~~".r~/%. ///aPr ~~./1'4+' f,~ /rJ~C.I /,/~\Z~~ l~~\\~// 1 f ~~'~}l~/~/!s~//~~'~ tie / 65 ~ J r V - A /rte / / "/"\R ..'~yr 7'a" it .i ,A/,." f s ~~A / / j~ r -.~rC y, f /rr,,f' B r' r rfJ % I,!~"'~tqq,, . iS~''_"\ `r \ \ m~f r`r/ i /r''p t - ,..517 f ~Jf'` r r ~ ~.tF ~ e3 yam, l / ~ u / e^Re9'~~`~ ~ S f / - r - ~ 1 ~ r / rC / a '!/r ~ o a ~ ~ ~ i`~ _ / . ?r, d / ~ ~ K , vI~ ' ~ ` t / / s",.°`~ '/'/ip t~ j r~''Y\,` -ll ` °''a,~ z°~- ~";6' i,/r r ~,:I 'rJ`rhx I_. ~xf~r ~t~1 J~f / / YFFl / C f /i a, •s \ ,o r' J 's>~ / , 4'r', 1`` 'v r~/' i . r'~ B y ~(?j/ 6 / a,l l / r ~ JF•%~ ~ 1' ~L~ r / //'a'`- , f f r tr` 1 a ; s r fI / a ,a / I .rd s/` , M ,A ~ / I r r~ a„h? ~f+\ ~ ~i, /f/%,///q y`s b~,.1,k... / i a~'~r', I ,~'rd/~.'it, a~ ~ 3~.~ ~ I :DD .%Z !J i r/ P r r c7'.N'y ,f i r / ,T,. r+I j' r/.' / g a r, t ,~f~^ ..74 / /D,/., S f( '6, .,~1J t',, r"~ 1.'. ti ~'l/ / ,,,fff X" n"1 / JE -.X".r f J+ . ' / I~ I`' t'~ 'J1`2"' . / ~,1 _ PI.a \i/~~ /d."''/ - 1 INCH 400 FEET y/ i , j / v y~ / /,/J,. /;.n' %`r~,., ,f f Y,.~' < w. f ,r j~/ ' r 7"r ,r~ i/ ~ / / r~. % J~~ ~y~..,ur r/ i/ rf' ,~S,..r `{G~ ~,°.y/' r~'//'~ ~"s./ / u •~r J ' 1 ...x,.7!' r , J //,[r" 6 /~/~^'/g r' 'br?/ ~r / P _ _ , ,'J' /~i'r DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: P J7\ r, / ~rf. 'g; rya;/(.,\ ! - ~r/i! a' - , r /v /''r' Yr / d / / l OCTOBER T, 1997 a. / _~r/., j / ~.v'' ry9 / -~'1 ?~'j'" !.r r/'S,' r ,r' i ~~y-k J / / J ,.ff/rA / j/ / f/ r / y _ a/ r / / :i / / 5I j //f~, r~ /rii Y,' / / 1 - / / :,r / / r/, / j. r/fir t; /s / j; / LEGEND / ,r /J i"` .r , ~ / • ~ ~ l r ~ r r j";°ti I-70 Estimated / / { .Y ' /j/ / r Noise Contours* ! r N/ f'r y'[,/r~, r/ l / R i / / t , , , r J r B ~ F/\,#, //t''rs/r/ /k j~ ~~t r y~H ~ i~hp / ~/r / Jd ~ ~ ~ ~ r !1-~/// / ft. % ' / s ffs u r j / y _ _ 66 dB(A) J i 3id'".~=rr°'/[w[Y~~rf.. f: i, f i i i// i^t r h r j ! / / r/ a JH : i~ rr r l x J 1' ' % K "r~~ S ` / ~1 it Pt i / % / } 60 dB(A) c=F,/% .'~'j~'TI~, y""..`.ff`'~l/iii~'r r oc (,`[t'~ ..Rr~.,r ~sc'• 1.{ Jr !}^r.*p/// / r~rj / •/r r / r aaf° / Yq" / r / t" y-7 ~~'f/ ~i .n~.'•I`" i/j~J///` / r / ' 1l , / / / J ~ .A •r x~ j / I^1 ' r It['6 Z~ l rya/ r 'F " r ~ /i r~i/ ' r/ / I i { Y / ' r ~ only I-70 noise / 1 , / I; l , / r r , / / / ; f i % / / modeled 2000 k. / / \`~r~hf ~ i f t ~@ 'z" ~ Y. Fr ' ~i~ ~ ~ //f iisj'~~/ / / j i • ~ j~', ?.~3D~i .r., •v.~./ tl,x: +~.?~fiY~~~~,-•, 71 ~i .J v~.....ya 1. ..YI ^./r'/,///i'i 'ii/l~i r7/~ /r r./r .T .r/% I r/ pettx sx[F, u "I r .xD supv[.Ixc Ixc v.n cuwloD S l' (p SMH• [p,B0. B I BFU ( L 1x15 BO/u,[p .[B,iFD p.1FD rpw D.i. Cbvi[FD B• ~x~~~ T O W N O F V A L ~ e,[p[mxmD~.. -~,.1:p!.D~p 1..F.DDI'1,..Fx 1. .,l, ~v ' IxM,[p LL V ; I Bs[ .T~FlL.L[I~IL x[~eccu.[pp-I.EiR1[B.Dlxc...ssul(SDxO A to R D! MI~M,~ xw ix[ sxp+oDx.uu[•a...~.~e....ma.nn ~lD I I Ili [.i I DI' O5[ ; BsF.cI p,xFAL.L . [D[v ILFODS[.LF[x t x.W eB. SHEET 26 OF 3T [BillE TD wF [am.ro xtcx [ccun.n p[rFpFxc[ V A i. L ! COLORADO ~Ir o,F! lxD.(u~~ x" xEl:am _,:::~.::E ~:;a:~[E x~ ..F 1 r 8 / ANN / / of . • l ENNNEIII , ie, x ~ l SCALE: / y 1 INCH = 400 FEET z , - DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY; OCTOBER 7. 199T t LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* } + + 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 ae 1w F. Cmnxn eY, rc LAND sxxvF IxC I C. v.H -0Nee x x l 1 slfxFevxe105x• ,RIC x[- esf lFN~1-ft~-TOG-111•.FxvDE-Ex 1. 1191. ALRO~IIRTRKW-A TOWN OF V A S x1,w...1x«.Iffe TxMFTx.llxx.x w C Ss IxTExv4 Q xex xsE •i . sC.Cf Is e~*.xKn us _E aixFaxi s E wsleulTT Fw cxF •ccw.c0 1x .xo.ac.,~.z1 11e e I I N Ixrzxofx ruwosF AN .xx usfx IT mxfx 1x.x 1xf cwvnfx sc.CF. rze of Lan lxf Tx TxF cuon.oo xICx -AC. xFlFxxxCF + M ax cooxxlw V A I L, COLORADO SHEET 27 OF 37 xflxxIN TELL,. NEE V- 6 IM 11„x AND CENT- xE IN 01 MD nE fe011eTNE 111 7 1 Sxew CME•xF IN ISTN•xtFS 11 Gn~ st.rz FIDE C[ t ey r :ns.oo [ zrn9oo [ nnooo t x,+„w [ x sw<n z[ xneooo F :ns9oo c 2-M E nnsoo E xa~ rf .r e /L' b 7 \ \ z Vv- {'x-.0. \ a"/\a / .7- A M ,.rYv'Kt< J'- s I tx 4 r v m \ (/J 1 ,asjE S - SCALE: -41 1} ,y / v -W 1 INCH = 400 FEET x r /h ` '~'C 3y~"iz5 ?Jy~'r'~ I 1 i >j(/' y\`\i~•\ l~ I / x p 1• DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: I 1 i~ ! \J CJf.( OJT / OCTOBER Q. 1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated i { j 4 \ Noise Contours* e + + 70 dB(A) 60 dB(A) ' *only I-70 noise C, modeled, 2000 e wrcx w[FT „ x o. r~zua++~rtiixo a •wx x[ rmo. ca CaNUiFa rLa,i[A w01w9 LF.FawtFax,ad 0.+. ow EE. 22 CPSiFEA Ta If[T w,laetl wv a[ 99 ~°Wao-S SL iM usF al . Sx4[ R , .ssuEES x0 A M M M M M C ELA T O W N OF V A I L a[ua9slennr Lae sc .eFwur v x o,. ruxauuo+[m`m t b,~..m 1xTEro[o ruarosE • a s aT [a ,.w , cwn[. sc.sE. Iwm .M aF[ail F +a +xE Co oa W. xlp K wat. a[FFa xcE ~o[a. ~,a. EaEEO» ..a w., [a. w 514EET 28 OF 37 x;90~x.aar. xwlEwTU unw o -.1112 .w -Tux nnu. VA I L , COLORADO o e.n e[. o1a [ao..[•El;~,moa 9,.,F .;,.E EF Ta.E E~.E .aF i )t 3[r95°D ( ile00Dp [ ireOSDp E 2M1OOe [ 31e15DD [ 3MMDD [ 3MiscD [ SS [ I I 1 I I I 8 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) + + + + + + - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 + + + + + DD o 1. a \ - SCALE: 1 INCH = 400 FEET a fia { Yi Mme` ``x + + + 4 DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: OCTOBER 12.1994 e ? i x,\ a t4b .ALL All W~E l ~ / ~ .sr ~ w\ ~ rf~ r , k ~ . ~ - i ~ j F' t\ °y+l 4 \ ``n'..` ,ems,{ °~.5 ~r~ - 'r ~ ~ / - t., fL_} fit, .i?.,4, 1`i 7:ti 1 r^- k~2 ti~ I~'' r. _s?`j, g{ x / :1! % e \,:p"*.s~";~,~' ~ ~ ~ \ { t,. ° ~a~ < \ \y r~'~ ~•,~`7' j v /.rls'f i- ~4y~ ^s' . r . wlcx ncn s( r~Fm swK. cwMa en - 3 ~ 1•Ix fIMDFVIxc 6 wsa1K. IXL. FMCLFKDD. c0.M•DD s C•IDIFe %mtt0 wx X•s KKe•tte rXd D•r• cwsllEO er xlD K,xDm mIK .FXI.L .xDraa•.xr r Fx ~iD~= .3.1 1[ tt fY MIS Wa ws CDKILFD M KFr wliuW XN .cFWCr si.xD.aDS rM • cOxrWX ~Me{reeeee e~e~~ 0•A TOWN OF VA IL W(. S6-~ Ix+FMLL 6 S' rq x5F •1 • ac•LE T i'~~ao'. •FaO-Kraic. 1 SInES xD 1 Msagslelllrv r•1 iK LL[xa•m 6 1x15 D•i• wFx US[D rp D+xFa rxw +xE IxttXOro amaxa[ w rxx os[D •r mKx +x•x +K co-x•Il[D sc.LF. V'S 4L [DD[Dix•tts M~F KL•i1K M M c0.d•oO xicx •DM•cr a[rEa[xc[ x SHEET 29 OF 3T K .D.[ M xx. Izan+n wrxx a xw nnz •w EI- Dnw D x•D sE. xmDDa.KF,a. r.LDM .law. cox xr A L , COLORADO ALA .xD rl i[o+io aE ME [I •xc[s •s E.- FLFV.rloi. 1"n 3DK MD .x[ - ~ %/r / ryJ f r~ 9r~ / e/,: ,q f , ~f~ Y/ /,r ! / . Z 1 / h .!.rt r'n , J r L a , b' ^ 60:7' t'~r bi '1 J` { d J/yv w~ k Sr~,%•~~ its 8 `g!~y / %3 r < r fr/ .'O'• / !r>E 3' : j~"` J f'~J , r - _ \ Y.. ~ ~ '`t '2 y~~ ~ ' r !r '~tf/~"~~ o-~• ~ I..` . r l , f !/~°r' - t Jr®fl;61~1__ mar r`, 8 - ara - I- / /r k i /J rffr ar'ir/ LJI, t \ \ ` ~ { ~ /rfj' • ~ f~, rid do, 0 A/ W+ •i / SCALE:x Ir 1 INCH - 400 FEET _ ,J t r/! f'/, \ ' 1 ~ r `\T _ _ II''~ 7 ~ r? r rJr I I $ ~ -',II ~ :/fr r i lil'' 10 ;l Jf i vt 1.. r r - it / / i 1 J / J s t if l DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER 7.1997 rtf , gL' iJ, LEGEND tell q I-70 Estimated Noise Coetoers 11- '/JJ//J i/ f''' - / n l ; tm`r:. 1F •C Ifr+1 70 dB(A) 66 dB(A) r / /i r ! //J/ r ; j% 1 z z Yf J ~W a Pr`. 60 dB(A) "qj - *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 8 " - r.. 4~; i. A~ . ~ - _ i 4..'~•.-~• .,1%v..•Y" r ra ;I~,r /r.. ~ w , ulr' s"}9 i? ~ ~ I !J ; w,cx sxtn n Y _ ~ nno swK+ mxnn xr, rcu sue swvEnxc" IM. oR. caw.xo A PL-D W W KKx•,[p rRxx 0.,• -ILEU xr y N IS [PSe,~.u~,xlt x[,~x, l.M~~t.wh ...~P M.® 'l IS CoFIL[VE,Ur,E[, x.,10x.L ,u..CCw.Cr ,,.xU.w,xrw .SCw,ow ~~~y TO W [ \ l OF V A I L x. M[uoxslx~l r ea ,wa .ccuR.w vc x s o . Rxex uuA w oix R „.„uKi xx ..P,Pw.~.N,a,~..m._...,., ` w Ix,<xM..w..[ w .Mx us[. n aRM. ,xw ,M cavlu. ,uLE. ` ` pits MF R[L•lIK 10 ,M E0.w.x0 xl0x N[w.[. R[rcRFN[E V A I L, COLORADO V SHEET 31 OF 37 xn w ,wex,• xwltw, D•,w v xw nns .xo Kn,IC o.,uu b xWlr l[O ,R RSF [[,MII '1MSC0.0R.U0 ,i•Mr.r,w IINIR.L IME .xp uF 3,1 1000 [ 1,.1,00E T1L00O F il[ri0D E M,Ox Sxf[, Is 2,1]000 E i,1N0O F [,N00O [ S,u,pO F / yr ~~.,v 'a- ~?ir/ /r` _ / a z~ i'1!/r//i/ /~j/// / / / / r , 'f / ~ I / / ~ I ( r - ..max t / x P ~ i ~ f' fro SCALE: DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER 7,1997 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* $ { + + + 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - - 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 s I 1 I F ~ I a ~f-,, I f,aR sMV[, wRnoL e.. fFU uxP sMn.lxc. wc. ..IL. caM.Ro 1 s J ^'_'I~I. RFMx0~1FR 11 * R.s OEx[R.,FOIfIdxO.,.RCPV-A v O1.. ,f„ s,[ T O W N O F V A I L t R [Rx~l~u KL,R,IRxLL„.~.aA,f~ .x,xL t[ OO0BIT,RRL[ f ,RIO NOCM AT R N f O,E-1.T1. O,xFR ,x MIK . ' x LxRLA M' M 0 ,xLx Mx[R' x.x1, L o :.L[. Ki COOx01M [s .xF R[UTItt ,0 ,xL CO M100 xi0x .OCM , REf[R[xL[ 36 SHEET 32 OF 37 x[ RMS ,MMx,. xMIi0M4 D. M M x p [,n1 uM ..T 11.O1,Ux a x10 VA I L, COLORADO COOROIMIE 11 S MfLEtI Els,.xC[s1l ORPmO`[LE 1-11.-11 Ill 1x0 11 i,T9,00 [ 31epW0 [ xttVAe [ 3ie,OW [ Wl[x fM[l 3, 2TAW [ xtez0op [ xtexSK f i,s0p0p fsr' \ r i .yf- rk`r. J. .,,k„~\( < Y...cs ~fc - j w 5 •r~'s <'1y % r ~1 u+w A a y' i \\\I ti, 4 'a 3•. c z /J { f / / 2. } / 1,'" Y tf t S f/,; 1 ~r f l ;1 Y \ Y+x is 3 ` i h ~ J ~ j f IT. 3i 46 L 1 k"- 1 N y per,. IX, i 77 a k 55J3 / f , j, i '0 SCALE: ? jy ••r 1 'I ( / / //%%i 1 INCH = 400 FEET l y t 1._ rJ x + y ! a d A ,r# i R ij r` 4 s4f 471 1 l ~ I _ t % DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, 4\ v. J"'C D• ` {-i. ~A! 1r. I ff / 1 ' / / / OCTOBER 12.1994 LEGEND I-70 Estimated re Noise Contours` ~ :v K } ffz 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 s I I i f i I _ 3 . r1 (wxf.pm. camxpp n ,y ,HIS coxruKa x(mrzp Tux ws ax[an[p wpx p•i. co.lup mH. F, , o.Ea W. ° TOWN O F A I L ~,';NEO u,Iw Kai.[ .H ~ar `t 0 left x•T,dK xw[l s,•M•ep5 tqr • cw,w• H• H IN x' aAN US[ •i . S[KF ar i•.,00'Ktp. Ia6H4,a,F. I.- •SSNES ND R ~ YO~x[1e1(ITT IN THE KFWU1 OF THIS p•Y. SHEN Us (p IM 17- THIN THE (xxp 1-AR, AN -N U.. IT .Ka THIN ,x[ -ILIA stKE. lC tO0011 •K K[ITINE M ,N[ FF[0x100 HIGH KFUNK1 KIEx[K[ vHm,wwua,a. e~ rw A--' x SHEET 34 OF 3T ' ,KCiena• THIN,.T[S How .TUB IN HID wni •NI N[ i- D". of _ ex. I[cw x .11 V A I L , COLORADO ~"1w (Hpax[ ao x<e[p paKp [T.,[ F[ INK ipK .Np SIT T. NE- IT F- iT]•o5x [ 3TXX0 E in50x5 [ ]TXXO [ WT[x u[FI X ST]605D [ 3,XSxe [ S»,OeD [ "I". E ji, \ \ 9'`,: *f !,I?/Y~_ !r/ ///l///, l eSCALE:~ / x y 1 INCH 400 FEET DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. OCTOBER 7.1997 'iz i% Ili IIISt / 1/ p///l / f/ x /i / d LEGEND 1-70 Estimated Noise Contours* $ /r/i~r/! Illill I I 111 ~i A~ / J rf w/' / J 70 dB(A) if/ i~~ ii// 1 / l f l ~ r t /i / ~ / ~ o' . / / / f l!// f / / ..•r"` . _ 66 dB(A) 60 dB(A) *only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 j / e lam, / ~g~j ~ / i/! //i.,~" i . ~ r V, x 6ME, fl IL [0.0[•tO I ~ iIEL] SUMV tdlx0. eT, M•[ Lw0 swv[vlx[. IM. v x15 C ~MYIFP ]LyKOirzO uLS w5 4FMx•,[Y TPw o•t• tanILEY [ , TrzxE x X,C M,xWS Us,M •[xl•t xxoto[x•Exv TuFx OtTOeEx 159,. ao .~ftoxIlRTR1c.W-A TOWN OF V A I L x Tt, ,F w ~5[: raL E:, E.t ~l~.; . tx ue;x w:5: tine ]olSXIL„v ]A ,M •tgM•tr a ,x, P•, vKx xs[p rw x,M. Txw TM ex5r5rt o MR, w LA x5E0 •1 o,M[T,x•x'TxE CASIIFx st•lE. L tmxolwrz5 ME Ku„M ER ,M -.M.- txx•c• x[rex[xcE ao~~ V A I L , COLORADO ) SKEET 35 OF 57 M,xw• ,xum.. xwlxw,u w,ux a x•A e]nT .xA Exrlc Tn x o x[o ee. •mlr,io m M t, x,5,•xtLS E=, TIw. iac a5 •x 7 [ s t T Tsoo [ il]eooo F ii)e)ee [ ET)9O0O [ wlt. X(Fl )T)feee [ ti)eeee [ iT.a]ro F 3TV,We [ s \ 9 r JJ j> ~,+'.c ~ ? ~ / ~F •;V ~ N~~, / //ill, . J./"may r. Cr'y' ti'a"~~ Ldp /+Ci /,/I// ~Y~ - ?i[v? t~ f, l °~''~r 1r ; r` ' a+Yr ( ,3.~t.. ; i % „y,-•'"'xt,!'Y / / I. / ;,tom ,,.F S,Lfy[t~~._'..aly~ n ,J ~,C r ~i i j,; W,f J Ct Y'd.r'aTZ~JI I 1 _i .C.y ''`R - A yo ' _~I•r,^I' f ! • ' / /J/i,% / / . . f 6 w"-" _ r / - /r{y; rte, X ? ) , / j '001 L y,. 44 7 rr 'JJ i - SCALE 1 INCH = 900 FEET Jl f f _ / DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, OCTOBER 7,1997 LEGEND I-70 Estimated Noise Contours* } 70 dB(A) - - - - 66 dB(A) - ww- 60 dB(A) "'only I-70 noise modeled, 2000 S I I 1 I I I 8 1. 'IT _ ~ zzI rl[le XMVFr W~T.eL [v: R)e lMp -TI.. I.t. v)IL. t0.m)eo =s OF.F.)v[e rM. A— -LID er TOWN O F V A I M,- K - 1--A-1 -1. ,TIED[. 1. roiETtwnwu W -CC""' sT..tum rw [ cmTam i ® I = .T[m)L a TR1j%1LRT [e Arl..:i. w. TW w E~ 6 °c PESFPRI[Illlr rpl ixE .C<wKUUr M [ vxma==,u[ dn~.ne,m=~~ M.*LM)Fe ru.PesE Yllw[. eS[sN. 6 N)Oie]N92 M w K.TID R . Nl MF RL.T,vF ro <ooPPix)lFS LIZ SXEE7 36 OF 37 a'w[o o a[rLFc o~ . [s M [eamo u[.=T,w Tn 41.1 UMO NR Ill. ee. V A I L , COLORADO • White noise - This type of noise abatement is not used for highway noise. It is typically an indoor background noise generated to mask other noise. • Noise Cancellation - This is accomplished by creating an opposite and equal sound pressure wave to a known noise generator. It can be effective on very specific pieces of machinery or equipment that are enclosed. This cannot be used for pavement noise and could only be used for engine and stack noise if each individual vehicle has a noise cancellation device installed. These devices are very specific and are not available for vehicles. • Pavement type - Open graded asphalt is generally considered to reduce tire noise by 2 to 4 dB (A) over dense graded asphalt. Noise reduction is due to the voids in the pavements caused by open (or uniform) grading. However, since there is no hard data or research on the subject, the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) official position is that they will not allow any adjustments in noise analysis or noise abatement (or allow states to do the same) until additional research is done. It is thought that the noise abatement benefits are lost as the voids get filled up with dust, sand, and other material. Other benefits of open-graded asphalt is that is provides better drainage and therefore better traction in wet conditions. Europeans have been known to wash and vacuum their open graded asphalt for these reasons. Asphalt is generally considered quieter than concrete pavement although studies by the State of Washington indicate that after 7 years, concrete pavement becomes quieter due to wear. • Speeds and Lower Speed Limits- Traffic speeds directly affect highway noise. This is primarily due to tire noise and is affected more for cars. In general, a 10 mph reduction in average highway speed will reduce noise by 1.5 dB(A). If the average speed for only trucks was reduced by 10 mph, the average noise would drop by about 0.7 dB(A) • Enforcement - Recent speed data by the Vail Police Department indicated that average speeds on 1-70 are approximately 70 mph. It is unknown if the presence of the radar trailer caused drivers to slow down. If better enforcement of speeds along I-70 resulted in a 5 mph reduction of average speeds, the expected noise reduction would be 0.7 dB(A) • No passing for trucks - This mitigation was suggested by a focus group of Vail property owners and residents. If restrictions on passing reduced overall speeds for trucks, noise could be reduced. This is not expected to result in any significant noise reduction. • Reduce volumes - This mitigation option was also raised by the focus group. The discussion considered that restrictions be placed on trucks such that a greater majority would take alternative east - west routes such as I-80 through Wyoming. A 10% reduction in truck traffic is estimated to reduce noise by approximately 1.5 dB(A). • Noise Ordinances - Although the Town of Vail already has noise ordinances in place, additional ordinances or better enforcement could provide additional noise abatement. For I-70 traffic, noise ordinances could include reduced speeds, restrictions on engine "fake" brakes, and time restrictions. These would have to be coordinated and potentially approved by CDOT and FHWA. Washington Page 6 of 7 . • By time of day - In general, most people are affected more by noise during nighttime hours than daytime hours. Federal agencies that recognize this typically penalize nighttime noise by 10 dB (A) when analyzing noise impacts. This could be recognized by incorporating restrictions on nighttime traffic. • Engine Brakes - Commonly called "Jake" brakes, these compression brakes on trucks generate higher levels of noise. In general, "jake" brakes add 6 dB(A) at their source. However, since this is a point source, it dissipates more rapidly than a continuous line of traffic. At most receivers close to I-70 (at the 70 dB(A) contour), a jake brake adds about 2 dB(A) of noise. This noise generated from a jake brake has a distinctly different sound than typical traffic noise and is therefore more noticeable. At receivers farther away, the relative increase is less, 1.0 dB (A), at the 66 dB (A) contour, and 0.5 dB (A) at the 60 dB (A) contour. If engine brakes were prohibited in Vail, these point source noises could be eliminated. • Insulation - A form of noise mitigation that is very uncommon for highway traffic noise and is somewhat common for airport noise abatement is insulation. This technique only works for enclosed buildings and its effectiveness depends greatly on the insulating materials used. This is generally considered the most expensive form of mitigation. Since Vail is in a cold climate, most buildings are typically well insulated. Further insulation may require significant reconstruction. ® Washington Page 7 of 7 r 'COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CDOT) NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT GUIDELINES FEBRUARY 1, 1995 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSruniATION NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMERr burr i.INFS FEBRUARY 1, 1995 These Noise Abatement Guidelines are intended to supplement Title 23, Article 772, Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 772) and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Procedural Directive 1606.1 in addressing traffic generated noise impacts. These Guidelines, which are applicable to both Type I and Type II projects, provide the basis for statewide uniformity in consideration of noise abatement while providing flexibility for decision making. I. Lr r tiv1T10NS The following definitions shall be used in these Noise Abatement Guidelines: 1. Abatement shall mean measures used to reduce traffic noise levels. Under normal circumstances, abatement measures will not be implemented where noise reduction will be less than 5dB(A). 2. Approach as used in 23 CFR 772.5(g), shall mean noise levels (L (h)) which are one decibel (or dB(A)) below the levels shown ineQ Table 1 (page 16) of these Guidelines. 3. Barrier shall mean a solid wall, earthen berm or a combination of the two. vegetation is not considered a barrier because it is rarely acoustically effective. 4. CFR shall mean the Code of Federal Regulations. 5. Design Year shall mean the future year used to estimate the probable traffic volume for which a highway or noise barrier project is designed, typically 10 to 20-years into the future. 6. Existing Noise Level shall mean the noise resulting from the natural and mechanical sources and human activity considered to be usually present in a particular area. 7. Insertion Loss shall mean the predicted reduction in noise level resulting from implementation of noise abatement measures. 8. L shall mean the equivalent steady-state sound level which in a sued period of time contains the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level during the same time period. 9. Leq(h) shall mean the hourly value of Leq. 10. RAC shall mean the Noise Abatement Criteria as shown in Table 1 of these Guidelines. NOISE ANALYSIS AMID ABATEMENT GUIDELINES 11. Parallel Barriers shall mean noise abatement walls or earthen berms constructed on both sides of a roadway on a parallel alignment. 12. Receivers shall mean locations where highway traffic noise may affect frequent human activities as shown in the NAC. Normally, the areas of frequent human activity are outdoor areas such as, patios, swimming pools, playgrounds, front porches, balconies, etc_ If no frequent outdoor active use areas are present, interior living or work areas may be considered. 13. Significant changes in either the horizontal or vertical alignment, as cited in 23 CFR 772.5(h), shall mean changes in the profile grade of 5 feet or more, or halving or doubling of the horizontal distance between the highway centerline and the receiver. 14. Substantially exceed the existing noise levels, as cited in 23 CFR 772.5 (g), shall mean increases of 10 dB(A) or more above the existing noise level. 15. Traffic Noise impacts shall mean impacts which occur when the predicted traffic noise levels approach or exceed the NAC or when the predicted traffic noise levels substantially exceed the existing noise levels. 16. Type I Projects shall mean proposed Federal or Federal-aid highway projects for the construction of a highway on new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway which significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through traffic lanes. 17. Type II Projects shall mean proposed State, Federal or Federal-aid highway projects for noise abatement on an existing highway which is not associated with any Type I improvement in the latest approved Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). II. ANALYSIS All CDOT highway transportation projects shall have a noise analysis done when potentially impacted receivers are present. Analysis, whether by nomograph,. NOISE 4, STAMINA 2.0 (Colorado version) or narrative, should be done even if potential abatement may not be feasible or reasonable. An analysis should be performed when any one or more of the following occur: FOR TYPE I PROur_iz,: - where there are receivers within 350 feet of the centerline of a proposed Interstate, freeway or expressway project. When the average daily traffic (ADT) exceeds 70,000 (existing or forecasted) -2- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEHM touxvniuIVES vehicles per day, the area of concern shall be expanded to 500 feet of centerline. - Whenever additional through lanes are planned and there are receivers present within 300 feet for roadways with current or projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) less than 70,000 or within 500 feet where current or projected ADT is 70,000 or greater. Addition of continuous Acceleration/ Deceleration lanes on controlled access facilities (Access Categories 1 or 2), in excess of 0.50 mile in total length will be considered as addition of a through traffic lane. - When there are 'Significant changes in either the horizontal or vertical alignment'. As a guide, changes in the profile grade of 5 feet or more or halving or doubling of the horizontal distance between the highway centerline and the receiver shall be considered reason for performing an analysis. - Whenever the design year noise levels are likely to be within the 'approach' range or exceed the NAC as defined above. This situation may occur when existing loudest hour field measurements are within 4 dB(A) of the NAC. Whenever the predicted noise levels 'substantially exceed the existing noise levels' as defined above. This situation is only likely to occur when a new highway alignment is involved. FOR TYPE II PROurA.io: - Whenever the statewide Type II Noise Barrier Location list is revised in accordance with the Colorado Department of Transportation Procedural Directive on Noise Abatement. - Prior to placing a proposed project from the Noise Barrier Location list in the STIP. The analysis shall be done using STAMINA 2.0 (Colorado Version). - During preliminary engineering design after the field survey information is available. The analysis shall be done using STAMINA 2.0 (Colorado Version). Whenever a noise analysis is performed for an individual project or location, a Noise Abatement Worksheet will be completed for documentation purposes (see Section V, pages 7 and 8). Project information, a signature and date, and Parts A, E and F of the Worksheet must be completed for each potential noise abatement project. Additional sections of the Worksheet should be completed as needed to support the decisions made. -3- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT uu"r.LINES III. ABATEMENT: FEASIBILITY AND REASONABLENESS There are two main elements in the consideration of noise abatement: feasibility and reasonableness. The criteria and procedures used to determine feasibility and reasonableness should be objective enough to be quantifiable, but flexible enough to allow the decision-maker to make meaningful judgments on a case-by-case basis for unusual or special circumstances. Abatement measures include traffic management techniques, providing sufficient distance between the roadway and receivers, or construction of physical barriers. Traffic control devices, prohibition of certain vehicle types, time-use restrictions for certain vehicle types, modified speed limits, and exclusive lane designations are difficult and costly to enforce. Acquiring buffer zones of open space, or planting sufficiently-wide (200 feet), densely vegetative areas is extremely expensive. Vegetation less than 200 feet in depth only provides aesthetic and psychological benefits. The noise insulation of receiver structures is limited to public or non-profit institutions, unless extremely unique circumstances and severe noise levels are present. Under these conditions, building insulation will only be considered when it may be more cost effective than barrier construction. Usually, insulation will not be installed in combination with another form of noise mitigation. The most common noise abatement is the construction of noise walls or earthen berms. In urban areas, earthen berms are not usually an option due to their spatial requirements and restrictive right-of-way. The following discussion concerning feasibility and reasonableness draws heavily upon the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidance issued in Field Review Report: Highway Traffic Noise Identification and Decisionmakinq (June 1989) and Highway Traffic Noise Analysis: Reasonableness and Feasibility of Abatement (May 1992), and CDOT environmental policy. FEASIBILITY: Feasibility deals with the engineering considerations which would produce a noise reduction given the specific site conditions. Such considerations include whether: (1) a barrier can be built given the topography of the location; (2) a substantial noise reduction can be achieved given certain access, drainage, safety, or maintenance requirements; and (3) other noise sources are present in the area (aircraft or trains, for example). The decision-maker needs to determine the most effective noise barrier location for front row receivers. The noise barrier would usually be located: (1) at or near the right-of-way line, (2) along the outside edge of the roadway shoulder, or (3) beyond the right-of-way line closer to the receivers. -4- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT GUIDELINES REASONABLENESS: The reasonableness evaluation of proposed noise abatement mitigation measures is more subjective than feasibility. Reasonableness implies use of common sense and good judgment by the decision-maker and is based on a number of factors. The viewpoints of affected-individuals and the specific characteristics of the proposed project should also be considered. .-A noise reduction of 3.0 dB(A) to 4.9 dB(A) for front row receivers is normally considered NOT REASONABLE. Mitigation measures which produce a 5 dB(A) or greater noise reduction for front row receivers are usually considered REASONABLE. The following items should be considered in determining the reasonableness of proposed noise abatement measures: - Number and type of receivers - Future traffic noise levels - Difference between the future traffic noise levels and the existing noise levels - Cost of the proposed abatement measures - Viewpoints of the impacted persons (both property owners and renters) - The percentage of development that occurred prior to and after the last major change in highway capacity (or initial construction) - Extent to which zoning or land use.is changing - Existence of land use controls implemented by local officials to prevent incompatible development A-determination of feasibility and reasonableness will be made on a case-by-case basis after consideration of a wide range of criteria. The Noise Abatement Worksheet, which begins on Page 7 of these Guidelines, shall be used by CDOT to determine the feasibility and reasonableness of proposed noise mitigation measures. Further explanation of the reasonableness factors follows the two page worksheet. Each factor for determining reasonableness can have one of four possible values: VERY REASONABLE - The proposed noise mitigation can be accomplished without excessive financial or social costs or engineering difficulties, and will be highly effective in resolving noise issues. REASONABLE - The proposed mitigation can be accomplished -.::zhout excessive financial or social costs or engineering difficulties, and will be moderately effective in resolving noise issues. -5- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT t ultjrj.INE,S MARGINALLY REASONABLE - The proposed mitigation involves questionable financial or.social costs or presents considerable engineering difficulties,. and will be of moderate or limited effectiveness in resolving noise issues. UNKr,MNABLE - The proposed mitigation involves unacceptable financial or social costs or presents unacceptable engineering difficulties; or will be of no value in resolving noise issues. IV. ABATEMENT CRS it rCU FOR PARALLEL BARRIERS In addition to the reasonableness criteria defined in the pages following the Worksheet, potential insertion loss degradation should be investigated if proposed parallel barriers are closer together than 200 feet. This analysis should be accomplished using the methods described in Chapter 4, 'Noise Barrier Design Handbook," FHWA-RD-76-58, or in the REBAR option included in STAMINA 2.0. If this analysis indicates a degradation that would bring the overall insertion loss below 5 dB(A), then the height of the noise walls will need to be raised or an acoustical absorptive material will need to be added to the top portion of the noise barriers, or both. -6- COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOISE ABATEMENT Dt i ERMINATION Instructions: To complete this form refer to Noise Anaylsis and Abatement Guidelines (23 CFR 772 & CDOT Procedural Directive 1601.1 supplement) Ict# I Project code (SA#) ISTtP4 yProjectlocaton: ~ 4 I A. Feasibility 1. Can a continuous noise barrier or berm be constructed? .0 yes O no 2. Can a 5 dB(A) noise reduction be achieved by constructing a noise barrier or berm? O yes 0 no 3. Can a 5 dB(A) noise reduction be achieved by insulation of the receiver? (Normally limited to public and non-profit buildings.) O yes O no 4. Are there any "fatal flaw" safety or maintenance issues involving the proposed noise barrier or berm?.. O yes O no B. Reasonableness:. Very K.,y K11 reasonable reasonable reasonable unreasonable 1. Build level dB(A) 2. Build level dB(A) greater than existing - - - - 3. Cost/receiver/decibel - - - - 4. Impacted persons' desires 5. Development type - - - - 6. Development vs. highway timing - 7. Development existence - - 8. Land use control - - - C. Insulation consideration 1. Are normal noise abatement measures physically infeasible or economically unreasonable? .................0 yes O no If the answer to #1. is YES, then: 2.a. Is private residential property affected by a 30 dB(A) or more noise level increase? 0 yes O no b. Are private residences impacted by 75 dB(A) or more? 0 yes ? no 3.a. Does this project have noise impacts to public or non-profit buildings? ...............................................0 yes ? no b. If yes, is it reasonable and feasible to provide insulation for these buildings? ......................................0 yes 0 no D. Additional considerations: J E. Decision: 1. Are noise mitigation measures feasible? ...............................................................................................0 yes O no 2. Are noise mitigation measures reasonable? ..........................................................................................0 yes O no 3. Is insulation of buildings both feasible and reasonable?(if C-i=yes) .......................................................0 yes O no 4. Shall noise mitigation measures be provided? .......................................................................................0 yes O no F.- Decision description and justification: Completed by I Data 1 CW -orm 11209 4/95 NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT GUIDELINES VI. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF NOISE ABATEMENT WORRSh=1 A_ FEASIBILITY: The following questions should be answered to assess the ability to engineer .a noise mitigation system to address noise impacts. 1. Can a . continuous noise barrier or b be constructed? Noise barriers or berms are most effective when they are continuous and do not have any breaks for driveways, sidewalks, streets, roads, utilities, drainage facilities, irrigation ditches, etc. 2. Can a 5 dB(A) noise reduction be achitvtd by constructing a noise barrier or berm? This question addresses two concerns in the construction of a noise barrier or berm. First, is the line of sight broken between the active use area (normally 5 feet above the ground level) and the highway traffic noise generator (normally a truck with the top of the exhaust stack at 10 feet above the highway driving surface)? If this line of sight is broken, a 5 dB(A) reduction is usually achieved. Secondly, when a continuous noise barrier or berm can not be constructed, can construction techniques such as overlapping barriers or sufficiently wrapping the ends (extending the barrier around a corner) of the noise barrier or berm achieve a 5 dB(A) noise reduction? 3. Can a 5 dB(A) noise reduction be achieved by insulation of the receiver? (Normally limited to public and non-profit buildings.) If number A2 above can not be achieved, can the building be modified by adding insulation or changing openings treatments (air vents, special windows, special doors, etc.) to achieve the desired minimum of a 5 dB(A) reduction of the interior noise impact associated-With the highway traffic generated noise source? Caution should be exercised in evaluating this solution because extensive building modification may be required to accommodate this potential option. Additional insulation considerations are .addressed in Section C of this Worksheet. 4. Are there any 'fatal flaw' safety or maintenance issues involving the proposed noise barrier or berm? These 'fatal flaws' would usually involve creating an environment which would present a danger to the traveling public or CDOT personnel, or creating major maintenance problems. Examples of situations which could be fatal flaws include, but are 'not limited to, excessive restriction of sight distance, continuous shadow causing icing of driving lanes during the winter months, excessive glare or reflection of headlights or sunlight off the noise barrier, directing large volumes of water across the driving lanes, other severe drainage situations, etc. -9- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT GUIDELINES B. REASONABLENESS: 1. nuJ.i.D LEVEL dB(A): The future build noise level without noise mitigation should be at least 66 dB(A) for the majority of front row residential, school, hospital and recreational receivers for a reasonable-project. VERY REASONABLE = greater than 70 dB(A) REASONABLE = 66-70 dB(A) MARGINALLY REASONABLE = 63-65.9 dB(A) Uhux-m ONABLE = less than 63 dB(A) COWUM: Noise levels typically found along controlled access highway facilities, 63-75 dB(A), may cause complaints from adjacent receivers. FHWA considers it acceptable to give these areas more consideration. When analyzing areas classified as Noise Abatement Criteria Category •C' areas (business and commercial),-add 5 dB(A) levels to the dB(A) shown above. This item should not be used for Type II projects. 2. nuu,U LEVEL GREATER THANLLJiuvb: The future build noise levels without additional noise mitigation measures should be at least 5 dB(A) above the existing no-build noise levels for a reasonable project. VERY REASONABLE = greater than 10 dB(A). REASONABLE = 5-10 dB(A) MARGINALLY REASONABLE = 3-4.9 dB(A) UNREASONABLE = less than 3 dB(A) C0HMENT: This item gives greater consideration to highway projects on new locations and major reconstruction projects than it does to projects of smaller magnitude along existing highways. A three to five dB(A) increase in noise levels is barely perceptible and is normally considered a minor increase in noise impact whereas a five to ten dB(A) increase is readily perceptible and is normally considered a moderate increase in noise impact. A ten or more dB(A) increase at least doubles the perceived loudness and is normally considered a significant increase in noise impact. This item should not be used for Type II projects. 3. COST PER IMPAt.iru ArA.alvnn PER DECIBEL: In consideration of each potential barrier or berm segment, the cost (indexed to 1990) should be less than $3,000 per receiver per decibel reduction for a reasonable project. VERY REASONABLE = less than $2,500 per receiver per decibel REASONABLE = $2,500-2,999 per receiver per decibel MARGINALLY REASONABLE = $3,000-3,500 per receiver per decibel UNREASONABLE = greater than $3,500 per receiver per decibel -10- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT bulur.1,IN S COMMENT: All receivers which would receive 3 dB(A) or more of noise reduction should be counted in the cost analysis because this will include all.receivers which will have a perceptible reduction in noise levels. Usually, only first floor receivers are counted. However, second floor receivers which have balconies or decks can be counted if they have different ownership/residents than the first floor receivers and the line of sight is broken by the proposed noise abatement. The cost for the barrier shall be based upon historical data from CDOT projects, if available. Whenever a combination of more than one type of noise abatement is being considered, the entire combined system must be cost effective. Individual components of the combined system may be considered to determine if any one alone would satisfy the abatement requirements and be cost effective. 4. IMPb-irw PERSONS' DE->iimS: At least 60% of impacted people, both property owners and renters,.should want the proposed.noise mitigation measure for the project to be considered reasonable. VERY REASONABLE = greater than 751 REASONABLE = 60-75V MAR".LLw id.Y REASONABLE = 40-59.9% Uh"_-%SONABLE = less than 40% C *D E[1P: The viewpoints of impacted persons (usually residents or other active area users) should be a major consideration in the analysis. Commercial establishments usually prefer to be visible to motorists rather than have noise barriers. Residents may prefer to preserve a viewshed rather than have noise mitigation installed that would destroy it. All individuals who are forecast to receive a 3 dB(A) or greater insertion loss should be-surveyed. The percentages above should refer to the percentage of persons responding to the survey rather than the total affected persons. 5. DEVELOPMENT TYPE: The mixture of development types plays a major part in determining the reasonableness of noise mitigation. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 45% of the development should consist of Category B receivers (see Table 1). VERY REASONABLE = greater than 70% residential, schools, hospitals, parks, etc: REASONABLE = 45-70% residential, schools, hospitals, parks., etc. MARGINALLY REASONABLE = 25-44.9% residential, schools, hospitals, parks, etc. UNREASONABLE = less than 25% residential, schools, hospitals, parks, etc. COMMENT: Greater consideration should be given to the development types which are primarily residential. -11- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEKWr vU1LELutr-b NOTE: Items 6, 7 and 8 only apply to Type II noise abatement projects. 6. DEVELOPMENT VS. HIGHWAY TIMING: This item compares the date of the residential or commercial development of the impacted receivers to the date of construction of the roadway improvement which contributes transportation generated noise levels. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 50% of the impacted receivers should have development dates which predate the initial highway construction or last through lane addition project. VERY REASONABLE = greater than 75% REASONABLE = 50-75% MARGINALLY REASONABLE = 30-49.9% UNREASONABLE = less than 30% COMP: The date of development should be an important part of the determination of reasonableness. It is•appropriate to give more consideration to development that has experienced traffic noise impacts as a result of the initial or expanding highway facility construction than to development that occurred after a highway facility was completed. All receivers which are forecast to experience a 3 dB(A) or greater insertion loss should be counted as part of the impacted development base in determining this answer. The date ofbuilding permit issuance shall be considered the date of development for each site. When building permits do not exist, then the date the development was first shown on the tax assessors records shall be used. 7. DEVELOPMENT EXISIU4CE: This item addresses-the length of time impacted receivers have been exposed-to transportation related noise impacts. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 50% of the impacted commercial and residential receivers in a development should have been in existence for more than 15 years. VERY REASONABLE = greater than 75% REASONABLE = 50-75$ MARGINALLY REASONABLE = 30-49.9% UNREASONABLE = less than 30% COMMENT: It is acceptable and desirable to give more consideration to impacted receivers who have experienced traffic noise impacts for longer period of time. 8. LAND USE CONTROLS: This item addresses the degree of land use planning which occurs in an area which attempts to minimize transportation related noise impacts on new development. For a project to be considered reasonable, local officials must either routinely coordinate new subdivision proposals with CDOT or have local land use restrictions in place which control incompatible land use adjacent to highway corridors. ' -12- NOISE ANALYSIS AMID ABATEMENT GUIDELINES VERY REASONABLE = strong land use controls exist and local officials routinely refer new subdivision, re-platting and zoning requests to CDOT for comment. - REASONABLE = land use controls exist but local officials do not routinely refer new subdivision, re-platting and zoning requests to CDOT for comment. MARGINALLY REASONABLE = land use controls are. weak or not in effect but local officials routinely refer new subdivision, re-platting and zoning requests to CDOT for comment. UNREASONABLE = land use controls are weak or not in effect and local officials do not routinely refer new subdivision, re-platting and zoning requests to CDOT for comment. C02*1ENT: This item specifically addresses the requirements set forth in 23 C.F.R. 772.13(b) and 772.15(b) and (c). Where reasonable efforts have been or are now being made to limit development adjacent to existing roadways which might lead to unacceptable noise impacts, noise abatement projects shall receive a higher priority than in areas where these efforts are not occurring. Type II projects are not eligible for federal participation in areas where land use planning does not attempt to limit future noise impacts. C. INSULATION CONSiLv=,LATIONS: 1. Are normal noise abatement measures physically infeasible or economically unreasonable? COMMENT: Insulation measures should not be considered if other normal measures (ie, barriers or berms) will provide adequate noise abatement. Where these measures cannot be provided, insulation of private residences and public or not-for-profit institutional buildings should be considered. 2.a. Is private residential property affected by a 30 dB(A) or more noise level increase? COMMENT: An increase of traffic generated noise of 30 dB(A) or more is one of the possible criteria to justify consideration of insulation noise abatement for private residential property. This situation will seldom occur. However, it can potentially occur on new alignments or when substantial increases in traffic are anticipated on an existing lightly traveled local roadway. 2.b. Are private residences impacted by 75 dB(A) or more? COMMENT: If the existing or design year traffic noise impact is 75 dB(A) or more, it will be considered as a potential criteria for demonstrating that an activity is affected by traffic noise impacts to a far greater degree than other similar activities -13- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT uuxuruINES adjacent to highway facilities. The consideration of insulation of private dwellings can be made only after all other possible noise mitigation measures are eliminated as being reasonable or feasible. This type of impact most likely will be limited to receptors adjacent to high speed multi-lane highways such as interstates and urban freeways. 3.a. Does this project have noise impacts to public or non-profit buildings? COST: The insulation of noise impacted public or non-profit institutional buildings such as government offices, schools, hospitals, etc. is acceptable if other more conventional noise mitigation measures are not reasonable or feasible. 3.b. If yes, is it reasonable and feasible to provide insulation for these buildings? COMMENT: The feasibility of providing insulation for public or not-for-profit institutional buildings has already been established in Section A, question 3, of the Worksheet. To determine reasonableness, the decision-maker should estimate the costs for providing insulation to these receivers and then consider the eight factors for evaluating reasonableness. Factors 3 and 4 may be different for insulation than for normal abatement measures; the others will be the same. D_ ADDITIONAL CONSxvrtcATIONS: Other relevant factors may influence the reasonableness and desirability of providing noise mitigation measures. For example, safety and maintenance issues involving the proposed barrier which are not `fatal flaws' should be documented here. COMMENT: Projects sometimes have special or unusual circumstances which have significant influence on the reasonableness and desirability of noise mitigation. This item is provided to allow the person doing the analysis to enter other pertinent items which were considered-during the analysis. Normally, factors listed under this category will not outweigh those listed factors contained in Sections A through C above. However, on rare occasions-the factors listed by the person doing the analysis may be so unique and of such importance that they would outweigh the other factors. Additional pages may be attached to the worksheet to complete this narrative. E. DECISION: Four questions are asked to outline the decision to be made about providing noise abatement on the project. COMMENT: Questions 1, 2 and 3 draw a conclusion from the Worksheet entries made in Sections A, B and C. Question 4 indicates the final decision to be made which incorporates any discussion made in Section D. -14- NOISE ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT buj-u"INES F. DECISION DESCRIPTION AND JD--,11rICATION: Space is provided on the Worksheet to describe the noise abatement measures to be taken or to justify the reasons why noise abatement will not be provided. Additional pages may be attached to this Worksheet to complete this narrative. COMMENT: A narrative statement may or may not be necessary. If all four answers in Section E are 'NO•, a narrative justification shouldn't be necessary. If one or more of the first three answers is 'YES' but the answer to number 4 is •NO' then a written justification is warranted. If the answer to question 4 is 'YES', then space is provided on the form or continuation sheets may be used, to briefly describe the noise abatement measures which will be constructed. If more than one area is being considered for noise abatement, the answer to E4 may be Yes and No. This situation would require a narrative description. How much information to.provide in this space is determined by the decisionmaker and-will-vary-from one project to another. -15- v r 3 TABLE 1-NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA [Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level-decibels (dBA)"] Activity Category Leq(h) L10(h) Description Of Activity Category A 57 (Exterior)........ 60 (Exterior)........ Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B 67 (Exterior)........ 70 (Exterior)........ Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. C.• 72 (Exterior)........ 75 (Exterior)........ Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above. Undeveloped lands. E.................... 52 (Interior)......... 55 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums. 'Either L,o(h) or Leq(h) (but not both) may be used on a project. SOURCE: Federal Highway Administration 16 TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 Fax: 970-479-2157 www. ci. vad. co. us MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Steve Thompson Finance Director DATE: February 5, 2001 RE: INFORMATION REQUESTED ON EAGLE COUNTY BY THE TOWN COUNCIL Percent of sales tax and property tax collected by Eagle County that comes from Town of Vail property owners or vendors: Property Tax 34% Sales Tax 34% The amount of revenue generated for the County from Town of Vail taxpayers: Sales Tax @ 1 % $3,064,426 Property Tax @7.463 mills $3.412.443 $6,476,369 Less rebates back to the Town: 15% of Sales Tax 459,664 County Road and Bridge Mill Levy 423.671 $883,335 Net Amount of Revenue to the County from Town of Vail Tax Payers $5.593.534 This data is based upon 1999 actual numbers. F Absalter\steve\memos RECYCLED PAPER OFFICE OF THE - COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR (970) 328-8604 FAX (970) 328-7207 JACK W. INGSTAD TDD (970) 328-8797 Administrator Email: Eagleco@vail.net http: //www.eagle-counry.com EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO August 10, 1999 Mr. Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Bob: Thank you for the very cordial lunch meeting last Friday. I look forward to working with you and the Town of Vail in the future. I understand manv of Mavor Ford's concerns as outlined in his memorandum of June 16, 1999. In the hopes of working together on future projects, let me attempt to answer some of his questions. The Town of Vail is and will continue to be an economic engine for Eagle County. The County collected in 1998, within the town's borders, $3.4 million from the 1% county sales tax, $3 million from property tax and $1.9 million in ECO transportation sales tax. As you can imagine, the County has a strong interest in keeping Vail financially healthy. Our Finance Director Terry Lowell provided Jim Hartmann three worksheets which appear to answer many of the Mayor's questions. I am enclosing them for your review. Vail residents benefit from many county provided services, some examples are as follows: ¦ 512 miles of county roads used to access rural/urban residents and rural/urban recreation. These roads are maintained by Eagle County. ¦ Health and Human Services - numerous social service and public health programs to help all county residents regardless or residence. ¦ Clerk and Recorder services such as-motcr vehicle registration, voter registration, and property recording. In most cases revenues generated for these services do not cover county expenses. In fact, Eagle County plans to purchase our Avon Annex office this December at a cost in excess of $ 1 million. ¦ Uniform property appraisal, performed by the Eagle County Assessor, used by the Town of Vail to determine the Town of Vail's property tax requirements. Assessor computer Eagle County Building, 500 Broadway, P.O. Box 850. Eagle, Colorado 8 1 63 1-0850 Page 2 August 10, 1999 Mr. Bob McLaurin enhancements alone in 1999 will total $135,000. ¦ "One stop" property tax collection, performed by the Eagle County Treasurer, ¦ Law enforcement services from the Eagle County Sheriff and the 5th Judicial District and law enforcement on Vail Mountain -U.S. Forest Service land in Eagle County is Eagle County Sheriffs jurisdiction. ¦ Liquor license authority for Vail Mountain restaurants and bars. ¦ Detention facilities used by local law enforcement. ¦ The Eagle County Regional Airport generates 5380 million a year in economic activity and an estimated 6,200 jobs for the local community. ¦ The Eagle County Transportation Authority and the counrv's new maintenance facility will serve all the residents of Eagle County. ¦ Our new animal shelter was built with county funds and houses the humane society. ¦ The county's fairground provides entertainment for all county residents. ¦ Land rent agreements with recreation authority provide land opportunities for county- wide recreation for many residents that work up-valley. ¦ The County has just begun a new space needs study for the Sheriff, detentions, courts and district attorney. Eagle County's Capital Improvement Fund paid $3M for the 800 'NIlzz radio system. This cost was not charged back to users. Only the cost of operations of the centralized dispatch service center in Vail is charged back to users. This charge back is so high that county animal control was forced to identify other means for dispatch. The Sheriff informed me last week that the county will need to make an additional investment in our 2000 budget to address some technical issues with the system. The request by the Town of Vail to share-buck sales to : derived from Vail Mountain would be a Board policy decision. As I indicated at lunch, I believe a joint project approach would be a more acceptable and responsible approach. The community has supported joint government projects such as the Dowd Junction bike path. In regard to the Road and Bridge Fund, counties in Colorado are required to return 50 percent of the property tax collected within municipal boundaries back to these municipalities. Many counties in the state have drastically reduced or eliminated property tax as a source of revenue to pay for county road and bridge services. It is lawful to do so. The Eagle County Commissioners, however, have not taken this step. I am unaware of any GIS staff direction concerning not dealing with municipalities. I would be happy to meet with your staff and our GIS Director to assist you with your GIS mapping efforts. I am enclosing a copy of John Staight's memo to Jim Hartmann on this matter. John is our GIS project coordinator. Page 3 August 10, 1999 Mr. Bob McLaurin The County had a brief discussion last month with the Minturn Town Council concerning consolidation of fire services. I hope to meet with Alan Lanning next week to better understand his concerns on this issue. I am sure Alan wouldn't mind if you joined us for this discussion. We appreciate your interest in county-wide recreation funding and will be sure to keep you and your staff in the loop on future dialogue in regard to this issue. Again, thank you for the opportunity to address some of the Town of Vail concerns. If you need additional information, please don't hesitate to call me. My direct line is 328-8602. Sincerely- a VG. InSstad. County Administrator Enclosures cc: Eagle Board of County Commissioners JWI/IR'/cd interoffice M E M O R A N D U M to: Tim Hartmann, C dministrator from: Terry Lowel subject: TOV Revenue/Expens Analysis date: June 22, 1999 In order to determine what portion of Eagle County revenues and expenses are attributable to the Town of Vail, the following statistical assumptions were used. 1. Property tax revenue is in proportion to the assessed valuation: Eagle County-Assessed Valuation = $1,335,160,350 TOV - $ 457,248,230 34.25% (Source: 1998 Abstract of Assessment) 2. Sales tax revenue is in proportion to total sales tax received, less 15% returned to towns. Eagle County-Net Sales Tax = $ 7,706,233 TOV-Net from TOV = $ 2,772,058 35.97% (Source: 1998 receipts from St. of CO, cash basis) 3. Population @ 7-1-97 Eagle County = 32,099 TOV = 4,454 13.88% (Source: State Demographer's Office) 4. Active Voter Registration: Eagle County = 12,766 TOV = 3 1 aC0 + 2'1.55% 14% (Source: EC Cleric & Recorder) 5. Bedroom Support: Number of Employees in Eagle County = 31,785 % of EE's working in Vail - 29% Number of EC residents working in Vail = 9,218 % Vail EE's living outside Vail = 65% Number of Vail EE's living in county = 5,715 Divide by county population / 32,099 - 17.80% (Source: 5/20/99 Draft, Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment) These assumptions are used in the calculation of Eagle County revenues and expenses attributable to the Town of Vail shown on Worksheet #2. . Eagle County Govemmertt • WORKSHEET # 3 1% Sales Tax Capital Improvement Fund Prepared by. Finance Depa. ,.-..t 06r22M 08:38 AM Actual (Auditer 1999 Oescriotion. 1994 1996 1996 _ il 1997 1998 Budget Beginning Fund Balance $1,451,526 52.942,058 $3,759,854 34,758,674 $5,437,089 32,722,834 Source of Funds 2-9% of I % Sales Tax $2,138,911 $2.271,268 $2,513,597 $2,779,766 $3,012,764 $3,212,770 Intergoverrin--rtal $7,800 Fedl Aid-CCPS Gent $1,309500 State Aid-G-0CO $10,000 Gravel Royalty-Frgrds $250,000 Interest $6.824 $21,612 Lease Purchase r,-...:. 31,864,044 Other $14.570 sub-tot3l $2,168,105 32,292,880. 54 397,641 32,T79,766 $3.012,764 $4,782270 Transfers In: From - General Fund $703,800 $8-08,985 $151,500 $3.615,865 32,250,000 - Soc Svcs Fund 3329,543 ' -Motor Pool Fund $400,000 - Consvtn Trust $18.000 $19.081 $61.502 $2.500 $150.000 $225.000 Sub-total 3721,800 $918,066 5213,002 $3,618 365 3150,000 $3,;04,543 Total 32,889,945 53210,946 $4,610,643 $6,3.98,131 $3,152,764 37,986,813 Use of Funds Transfers Out To - Debt Svc Fund WC) $819.3m $823,378 4717,517 $713,783 3718,365 3651,413 Airport Fund (CIO) 3107.255 554.703 $142.100 Sub-total 3926,638 3878,081 4859,617 371--,783 $718,365 $651,413 Berry Creek 5th 325.211 3:5,2M 324,853 $24,908 $24,913 $28,311 BCC_- Unallocated 32,508 Lease Pyrrt-Micrcywove Eq $1,025,486 $1,025,486 $200.000 Sheriff-Light Trk&Veh $17,778 $97,985 354,516 $25,000 350,000 -Detentions-Mach/Eq $38,860 $170,138 -MaWEq $116,965 $137,534 5669,237 $2,046,000 -Mictwreve Equip $1,884,044 Comptr HrdwrelSftwre-17' 3221,509 $117,565 352,711 $78,727 371,519 $30,000 -CIk & Rec 321,362 $136,418 $11,582 -Treasurer 31,667 $24,007 534,892 3231108 -Assessor $4,089 $49.000 _GIS $136363 $149,946 Pub. Trstee-FumJFocures $14,570 Engineering-Light TrksNeh 316548 Bldg hiss-tight TriWVeh $16,900 $34,000 Planning-Light Trks/Veh $20,287 Weed d Pest-light TrkAoeh 328229 Grds 8 Bldgs: Public Works 37,076 $23,137 5548.378 $256,145 Fair Grds ktprovnm 325,269 $19,081 315,244 $5,295 $87,812 $346,775 Fair Grd-Bidg3 397,930 $788 $46324 $4,617 $20,208 Frgrds Grandstands $82,222 $2,177,411 Gan. Bldg hvrovrrwft $8,085 $1,124,594 $472S SM= $524,870 Old CA Hse Remodel $164,960 $2,835.160 3216,375 East Satellite Ctfice 3741,672 353,137 Fum/Fncures 3264177 319,781 $2,870 Light TrksNeh $49,i 23 $30.000 MachinerytlEq 539,697 $26,000 Tree Farm $27,881 321,095 $7,402 $2,162,000 ADA Upgrades $3,985 $5,494 $40,000 Planning-Land Acq 3176,736 $151,128 EastM/est Brush Crk $2.000,000 R&B ShopslBldgs 3180,848 $92,486 Engineenng-Macn/Ea $81.488 Sub-Totai $472,735 $1,515,069 42,752,206 $5,005.933 33,922,319 $9,947,544 Total $1399,373 $2.293,150 $3,611,823 35,719,716 $4,640,684 310,598,957 Ending Fund Balance $2,942,058 $3,759,854 $4,758,674 $5,437,089 $3.959.170 $110,490 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2 F 001 1/15/00 ACCESSORY BUILDING IN FORD RUSSELL/GEORGE/TODD 0.: The VRD needs a George Ruther will write a letter regarding accessory building. PARK building to house athletic equipment/supplies. Although the Ford Park Management Plan calls for no "above DIANA DONOVAN ground" buildings, VRD has noted the construction of the Alpine Garden's "tool shed." What are the parameters for approval and construction of buildings in the park? Maintenance shack by Manor Vail Bridge is an abomination. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LUDWIG: Contact Tom Stone re: timing on their Bob McLaurin wrote a memorandum to Town Council regarding Rod Slifer strategic goal-setting session 1/29/01, which is PRIOR meeting with County Commissioners. Please see attached. to their meeting w/Council (2/13/01) and would appear to disallow inclusion of Vail's needs in their discussions of future goals. Also, contact Jack Ingstead to find out what the process is to included in the county's capital projects evaluations. 1-70 NOISE BOB: Upon advice of Scott McGinnis, a proposal for Will be addressed at February 6c" work session discussion. Rod Slifer noise mitigation along 1-70 should include the entire corridor from Vail Pass to Glenwood Springs and should be submitted to the "fells" under the auspices of the entire Eagle County. OUTDOOR SKATING ON THE GOLF BOB: Contact the VRD to see if they would cooperate Insurance company will not cover liability. COURSE POND in providing an outdoor skating opportunity at the Golf Diana Donovan Course island pond. VAIL VILLAGE WALKABOUT, 1/23/01 RUSSELL: These are "good" for the village ambiance Does Town Council want to dedicate time for discussion on this? February 2, 2001, Page 1 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2 001 J F VILLAGE POPCORN WAGON and energy; more would be a good idea. Are there Need to go through list. possible locations, both in the Village and LionsHead for further vending wagons? PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (to the East of the GREG H.: The load capacity continues to be an issue; Staff is currently getting an updated engineer's rating. International Bridge) is it time to remove the bridge altogether, continue to monitor and control "load", or take steps to buoy up the foundation/support? VACANT STORES RUSSELUBOB: As retail spaces become vacant, it is Staff proposes this could be an appropriate mediation by the Vail supremely better to have storefronts with displays from Chamber and Business Association. adjacent stores UNTIL the vacant space is rented, rather than allow them to stay empty. Can the town take a more active role in encouraging landlords to allow this interim practice? EXAMPLE: Covered Bridge Store/Village. ALLEY BY VAIL PROPERTY GREG M./RUSSELL: Encourage property Patrick Hamel is calling Vail property management to request that MANAGEMENT OFFICE management company to move hose/salt/planter stand, they clean up the planters that are located on the site. etc. all of which are unsightly from Gore Creek Drive. We are waiting to get a job description from HR and we will advertise. ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIP WNAIL PATRICK HAMEL: Schedule for evening televised To be rescheduled. RESORTS, INC. presentation. Council NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS RUSSELL/GREG M.: Of the following need of repair- The Club-the corner of the building near the entrance Bob will follow up in writing. has crumbling plaster Clark's Market - dried out wreaths on wall Bob will follow up in writing. February2, 2001, Page 2 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC _ QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2 F 001 VILLAGE PARKING STRUCTURE GREG H./LESLIE FICKLING: Consider a mural or This will be looked at with completion of AIPP Master Plan. Sybill Navas billboards inside the parking structure, specifically in the underground west end "donut." Involve AIPP? February 2, 2001, Page 3 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2001 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (5 min.) 2) Discussion of Donovan Park Project (1 hr.) Todd Oppenheimer - Cost Update George Ruther - Request to Award Bid Package 1A ITEMITOPIC: The purpose of this meeting is to provide an update to the Vail Town Council on the status of the Donovan Community Park construction process. The design team has made significant progress since last appearing before Council and believes an update to the client is beneficial. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the design team's presentation and then provide direction and input to the team on items of concern or question. The team is also requesting that the Council authorize the staff to proceed with the awarding of the site work package 1A to Continental West Construction. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Vail Town Council directed staff to proceed with the construction of the Donovan Community Park Phase I improvements. These improvements include the construction of a new soccer field, playground, community pavilion, parking structure and appurtenant facilities. The proposed total park construction budget is approximately $10 million dollars. The initial phases of the construction process are well under way. The first of three separate construction bid packages (1A - C) has been sent out for competitive bid and a potential contractor for the site work package (1A) has been informed of our intent to construct. The latter packages (1 B & C) continue to be formulated. Start of construction of the site work is tentatively scheduled to begin this spring. Subsequent work will follow throughout the summer and fall. A preliminary construction estimate has been completed. The construction cost figures continue to be refined. Early value engineering options are being considered and dollar amounts are being assigned. Most importantly, the design team remains committed to bringing this project in on time and on budget. RECOMMENDATION: If the Town Council wishes to proceed with this project on the current schedule and to approve the award of Phase 1A, Council will need to approve a minimum budget of $10.5M. If Council approves of inclusion of any other "wish list" items, the overall budget may have to be increased to include the cost of those items. 3) Consent Agenda (5 min.) - Minutes of January meetings - Second Reading, Ord. 1, Order of Business - Second Reading, Ord. 2, Subdivision Exemptions 4) ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance #3, Series of 2001: Allison Ochs AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN CODE, TITLE 12, CHAPTER 6 TO THE TOWN OF VAIL ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF ARTICLE I. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT; AMENDING CHAPTER 4, DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED; AMENDING SECTION 12-15-2: GRFA REQUIREMENTS BY ZONE DISTRICT; AMENDING TITLE 12 SIGN REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 4, SIGN CATEGORIES, SECTION 11-4A-1: SIGNS PERMITTED IN ZONING DISTRICTS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with conditions, or deny Ordinance #3, Series of 2001, on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: As part of the Town of Vail's objective to encourage affordable employee housing, the Town Council directed staff to create a zone district with the primary purpose of providing sites for employee housing. The development standards of this zone district would be prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of a development plan, similar to the General Use zone district. On January 8, 2001, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed Housing Zone District. They had specific requests, including to clarify the roles of the Design Review Board and Planning and Environmental Commission in the review of setbacks, and to amend the parking section. They voted to table the request until the clarifications were made. At their January 22, 2001, meeting, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed Housing zone district to the Town Council. The recommendation of approval carried no conditions. Please refer to the staff memorandum for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance #3, Series of 2001, on first reading 5) ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance #4, Series of 2001: amending Brent Wilson Chapter 12-10, Town of Vail Code (Off-Street Parking and Loading); with specific regard to the "Parking Pay-in-Lieu" Policy application and fee structure; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications or deny Ordinance No. 4 on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: If approved, Ordinance No. 4 will adopt the changes to the Town's "Parking Pay-in-Lieu" policy requested by the Town Council over the past six months. Please refer to the staff memorandum and draft ordinance for complete details. 6) Adoption of Resolution #1, Series of 2001, Land Use Plan and Map George Ruther (5 min.) Ann Kjerulf 7. ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution #2, Series of 2001, to provide the Town Council shall ex-officio Be Appointed the Commissioners of the Vail Housing Authority. (5 min.) Tom Moorhead ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Consider adoption of Resolution BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Vail Housing Authority was created pursuant to Section 29-4-201 et seq. of the Colorado Revised Statutes. On February 21, 1991, the Vail Housing Authority was sworn in and adopted Resolutions necessary for the governance of the Authority. The Vail Housing Authority is a distinct, independent governmental entity from the Town of Vail. The powers of the Vail Housing Authority are set forth in Section 29-4-209 C.R.S. which include exercising public powers and having all the powers necessary to carry out and effect the purposes established in the "Housing Authority's Law." The Housing Authority has the capability of developing financing scenarios through unrated affordable housing bonds which give investors a strong project but without pledging substantial financial resources of the town. The Housing Authority Board had consisted of five voting members appointed in 5-year intervals and an additional non-voting member from the Planning and Environmental Commission. The five voting members also included a representative of the Vail Town Council. If this Resolution is adopted, the Vail Town Council would then convene in a meeting as the Housing Authority to conduct the business of that entity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution. 8. Town Manager's Report (5 min.) Bob McLaurin 9. Adjournment (9:05 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, 2113101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/20101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/20/01, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. vo~: d•tc•ot ~ DONOVAN COMMUNITY PARK February 6, 2001 Three Critical Questions 1. The Design Team has presented an overview of the estimated budget for construction of the Phase I, of the Donovan Community Park improvements. Based upon the current construction cost estimate and the information provided, does the Town Council wish to make any budget adjustments at this time? 2. The bid process for the Phase 1 A sitework improvements to Donovan Park has been completed. Based upon an analysis of the cost estimates of the five participating bidders, Continental West Constructors, Inc., of Eagle, Colorado was the lowest responsible bidder. The range of bids varied by approximately 20%. The Design Team is recommending that the Town award Continental West Constructors, Inc. with the contract for Phase 1 A for $722,269.00. Should the Design Team prepare and award a contract to Continental West Constructors, Inc.? 3. The Donovan Park Design Team has identified a potentially less expensive way of constructing the "garden wall" in Donovan Park. This would require a design/build approach to the construction. Should the Design Team prepare an RFP for a design/build approach to the construction of the "garden wall". Vii, Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Ave - Suite 220 - Boulder, CO 80303 - (303) 443.0330 - Fax (303) 443»1508 Donovan Community Park Facility Summary Budget Report Construction Costs 81023,999 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment 277,000 Municipal Fees and Expenses 94,667 Professional Fees 11352,965 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Costs 38,500 Project Contingency 712,869 Grand Totals: 10,500,000 TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 1 of 1 0 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Budget Report AArchitectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Draft Worksheet 4410 Arapahoe Ave -Suite, 220- Boulder, CO 80303 - (303) 4430330 -Fax (303) 4434508 Donovan Community Park Facility Group Headings Descripti[on • . • Approved Pending Revs Project'd Project'd Cost Comments Budget General Requirements Building As-Builts on CD ROM 15,000 15,000 15,000 Quality Control Materials Testing (GC 15,000 15,000 15,000 Assumed not in cost estimate Provided) - Phase 1C Construction - Phase 1B 3,732,906 3,732,906 3,732,906 5,131,769.00 Construction - Phase SC 3,450,000 3,450,000 3,450,000 Quality Control Materials Testing (GC 10,000 10,000 10,000 Assumed not in cost estimate Provided) - Phase 1A Quality Control Materials Testing (GC 15,000 15,000 15,000 Assumed not in cost estimate Provided) - Phase 1B General Requirements Subtotals: 71237,906 7,237,906 7,237,906 5itework Earthwork - Phase 1A 770,093 770,093 770,093 Includes All Work. Water Line & Manholes - Phase 1A 139,776.00 - With construction cost estimate Sanitary Sewer and Manholes - Phase 1A 98,136.00 - With construction cost estimate Gas/Fuel Lines - Phase 1A With construction cost estimate Telephone/Data Cabing 10,000 10,000 10,000 Includes $10k for Qwest - Pull Cables. - ARC to verify. 35,190 - Balance with construction cost estimate Cable TV 12,621.00 - With construction cost estimate Storm Drainage and Structures - Phase 1A 48,572.00 - With construction cost estimate TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 1 of 8 Budget Report Draft Worksheet Budget Electrical Lines (Primary Trenching and 6,000 6,000 6,000 Holy Cross Material Only - Primary runs Backfill) - Phase 1A & 1B 31,824.00 (total - With construction cost estimate Electrical Conduit - Secondary Runs Currently Includes Trenching & Conduit 29,547.00 - With construction cost estimate Pedestrian Paving/Bike Paths (Includes 7,656.00 - With construction cost estimate Relocations & Closures) - Phase 1A Sitework Subtotals: 786,093 786,093 786,093 Construction Costs Subtotals: 8,023,999 8,023,999 8,023,999 Owner Furniture Pavilion Common Area Furnishings 18,500 18,500 18,500 Moveable Furnishings (Incl. $1,000 for rolling coat hangers/racks) Pavilion Office/Back-of-House Furnishings 3,500 3,500 3,500 Collapsable Bleacher System Allowance 25,000 25,000 25,000 Owner Furniture Subtotals: 47,000 47,000 47,000 Information Systems/Technology Network Equipment (Routers & Hubs) 30,000 30,000 30,000 Three, two-line, phones @ $100 each, one router and other network equipment. Telephone, CATV and Data Cabling (Inside 7,500 7,500 7,500 Buildinq) Computers, Software and Network Hardware 2,750 2,750 2,750 Includes office computer and printer Telephone System/Equipment 300 300 300 Three, two-line, phones @ $100 each Information Systems/Technology 40,550 40,550 40,550 Audio/Visual Light Dimming System 20,000 20,000 20,000 Lecturns, easles, special tech. equipment, etc. Owner Supplied Audio Visual Equipment 2,000 2,000 2,000 TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 2 of 8 0 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Budget Report Draft Worksheet Budget Meeting/Presentation & Specialty Equipment 8,750 8,750 8,750 Lecturns, easles, special tech. equipment, etc. Audio/Visual Subtotals: 30,750 30,750 30,750 Food and Beverage Owner-Supplied Kitchen Equipment 7,000 7,000 7,000 Owner-supplied, General Contractor Installed Dishwasher, Microwave, Refrig, Commercial oven, Vent Hood (Not incl. mech), Ice Machine Kitchen Supplies 1,500 1,500 1,500 Flatware, Dishes, Pots & Pans, etc. Food and Beverage Subtotals: 8,500 8,500 8,500 Athletics Playground Equipment 60,000 60,000 60,000 Site Furnishings 30,200 30,200 30,200 6 picnic tables, 18 benches, 12 trash receptacles Athletic Equipment/Supplies Provided by Parks and Rec. Athletics Subtotals: 90,200 90,200 90,200 Artwork and Accessories Artwork/Display Items & Accessories 60,000 60,000 60,000 Artwork and Accessories Subtotals: 60,000 60,000 60,000 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment Sub 277,000 277,000 277,000 _J. Local;Fees ToV Grading Permit - Phase 1A ARC to confirm fees - 313AN01 - ToV to waive this requirement. Building Permit (DRB & PEC) ToV permit fees to be waived. Water Tap Fees - Pavilion 94,667 94,667 94,667 Costs include sewer tap fee and meter packages. Sanitary Sewer Tap/PIF Fees Included with Water tap fees TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 3 of 8 Budget Report Draft Worksheet Budget ToV Plan Review Fee ARC to confirm fees Water/Sewer Tap Fees @ Park EWRSD Waived - None Required Local Fees Subtotals: 94,667 94,667 94,667 State Fees CDoT State Highway Access Permit Fees ARC to confirm costs with AEI CDoPHE Stormwater Discharge Permit Fees ARC to confirm costs with AEI State Fees Subtotals: Federal Fees ACoE 404 Permit Fees ARC to confirm costs with AEI. AEI not sure. Need to determine requirements. Federal Fees Subtotals: Municipal Fees and Expenses Subtotal 94,667 94,667 94,667 Architectural Fees (Including Consultants) Architectural Fees - Basic Services (All 885,000 885,000 885,000 Phases) Civil Engineering - Basic Services (All With Architectural Fees Phases) Landscape Design - Basic Services (All With Architectural Fees Phases) Structural Engineering - Basic Services (All With Architectural Fees Phases) Mechanical Engineering - Basic Services (All With Architectural Fees Phases) Electrical Engineering - Basic Services (All With Architectural Fees Phases) TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 4 of 8 © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Budget Report Draft Worksheet -rMM7MM9rUMTMMon Comments Budget Cost Estimating - Basic Services (All Phases) With Architectural Fees Architectural Fees (Including 885,000 885,000 885,000 Traffic Engineering Traffic Engineering None required (ToV to confirm) Traffic Engineering Subtotals: Environmental Engineering and Testing Environmental Phase I/II Report Per ToV - None required. Confirmation? Environmental Engineering and Geotechnical Engineering Geotechnical Engineering 13,000 13,000 13,000 Geotechnical Engineering Subtotals: 13,000 13,000 13,000 Surveying Existing Conditions Survey - Phase 1A 12,000 12,000 12,000 Construction Survey/Staking - Phase 1A 20,000 20,000 20,000 Construction Survey/Staking - Phase 16 17,500 17,500 17,500 Construction Survey/Staking - Phase 1C 8,500 8,500 8,500 Surveying Subtotals: 58,000 58,000 58,000 Materials Testing Quality Assurance Materials Testing (Owner 2,500 2,500 2,500 Provided) - Phase 1A Quality Assurance Materials Testing (Owner 4,000 4,000 4,000 Provided) - Phase 113 Quality Assurance Materials Testing (Owner 4,000 4,000 4,000 Provided) - Phase 1C TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 5 of 8 © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Budget Report Draft Worksheet Budget Materials Testing Subtotals: 10,500 10,500 10,500 Systems Consultants Information Systems/Technology Consultant ToV provided, In-house consultant. Systems Consultants Subtotals: Construction Management Project Extranet 25,000 25,000 25,000 Project Control Services During Construction 158,860 158,860 158,860 Ongoing Project Control During 66,510 66,510 66,510 Pre-Construction One-time Tasks During Pre-Construction and 35,595 35,595 35,595 Construction Construction Management Subtotals: 285,965 285,965 285,965 Project Specific Fees (Not Incl. Above) Arborist 8,000 81000 8,000 FF&E Procurement Agent 7,500 7,500 7,500 With ToV Assistance (Limited Involvement) Reimbursable Expenses for Consultants 85,000 85,000 85,000 Project Specific Fees (Not Incl. Above) 100,500 100,500 100,500 P.,.::...sional Fees Subtotals: 1,352,965 1,352,965 1,352,965 Owner Costs During Construction (Repro/Reimb/Travel) Advertising 5,000 5,000 5,000 Meeting Sundries/Food for Public Meetings 3,500 3,500 3,500 Printing and Reprographics - Phase 1A 3,500 3,500 3,500 TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 6 of 8 Budget Report • Draft Worksheet -%3TffffP'RMings Description 0nginaU_tKKFgeU_ •r • -r rUUjt:LL • Comments Budget Printing and Reprographics - Phase 1B 4,000 4,000 4,000 Printing and Reprographics - Phase 1C 17,500 17,500 17,500 Public Relations Expenses/Printing 5,000 5,000 5,000 Owner Costs During Construction 38,500 38,500 38,500 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Costs S 38,500 38,500 38,500 Owner Contingency Owner's Contingency - Phase 1C 5,467 5,467 5,467 Owner's Contingency - Phase 1A 5,000 5,000 5,000 Owner's Contingency - Phase 1B 5,000 5,000 5,000 Owner Contingency Subtotals: 15,467 15,467 15,467 Design and Engineering Contingency Design Contingency - Phase 1A w/Owner's Contingency Design Contingency - Phase 1B w/Owner's Contingency Design Contingency - Phase 1C _ w/Owner's Contingency Design and Engineering Contingency Co•.~pt• action Contingency Construction Contingency - Phase 1A 45,000 - Currently Included with Construction Construction Contingency - Phase 1B 330,294 330,294 330,294 153645 - Currently Included with Construction Construction Contingency - Phase 1C 367,108 367,108 367,108 Construction Contingency Subtotals: 697,402 697,402 697,402 TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 7 of 8 r Budget Report Draft Worksheet Group Headings • Original Budget Approved Revs Pending Revs Project'd Project'd Cost Comments Budget Project Contingency Subtotals: 712,869 712,869 712,869 Grand Totals: 10,500,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTPLIES THE EFFECT... © 2001 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Printed on: 2/1/2001 Page 8 of 8 Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Master Summary Sheet Description Direct Construction Indirect Costs Total Cost Total Total Total Medians @ Accel/Decel Lanes 57,883 14,581 72,464 Landscaping @ Frontage Road 60,000 15,114 75,114 Shoulder Width @ Frontage Road 16,688 4,204 20,892 Site Restrooms 87,412 21,145 108,557 Fire Pit 38,269 8,547 46,816 Lobby Fireplace - Medium Size 23,309 3,968 27,278 Lobby Fireplace - Large Size 54,026 9,198 63,224 Snowmelt @ Drop-Off Court 158,350 22,699 181,049 Snowmelt @ Terrace 158,350 22,699 181,049 P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ © 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xis Page 1 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Medians @ Accel-Decel Lanes Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Division 02 - Sitework Frontage Road Island Curb & Gutter 3,107 LF 18.63 57,883 Subtotal Sitework: 57,883 Subtotal Direct Costs: 57,883 Performance Bond (1.3%) 752 General Contractor Fees 3,762 € Contingency @ 6% 3,699 Escalation @ %%/mo 1,158 Design, Material Testing 5,210 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 14,581 Total Construction Cost for Medians @ Accesl/Decel 72,464 Lanes I P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ 02001 All Rights Reserved Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 2 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Landscaping @ Frontage Road Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Division 02 - Sitework Landscaping Allowance @ Frontage Road Islands 1 LS 60,000.00 60,000 Subtotal Sitework: 60,000 Subtotal Direct Costs: 60,000 Performance Bond (1.3%) 780 General Contractor Fees 3,900 Contingency @ 6% 3,834 Escalation @ 1/z%/mo 1,200 Design, Material Testing 5,400 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 15,114 Total Construction Cost for Medians @ Accesl/Decel ~I I I 75,114 Lanes I P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/OTO/ ® 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 3 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, lnc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Shoulder Width @ Frontage Rd. Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Division 02 - Sitework Additional Shoulder @ Frontage Road 5,600 SF 2.98 16,688 Subtotal Sitework: 16,688 Subtotal Direct Costs: 16,688 Performance Bond (1.3%) 217 General Contractor Fees 1,085 Contingency @ 6% 1,066 Escalation @ %2%/mo 334 Design, Material Testing 1,502 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 4,204 Total Construction Cost for Shoulder Width @ 20,892 Frontage Road P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ ©2001 All Rights Reserved Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 4 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Site Restrooms Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Division 02 - Sitework Site Restrooms to Include: Continuous Footing Concrete @ CIP Retaining Walls 21 CY 139.20 2,923 Subgrade 288 SF 0.27 77 Sideform 192 SF 5.32 1,021 Keyway 96 LF 2.46 236 Float 288 SF 1.33 383 Cure & Protect 288 SF 0.07 19 Rebar 403 LBS 0.57 232 Pump & Place 5 HR 247.50 1,114 4" Slab on Grade 20 CY 253.29 5,066 Subgrade 540 SF 0.15 82 Construction Joint 18 LF 1.61 29 Trowel 540 SF 2.26 1,221 Cure & Protect 540 SF 0.08 43 Edgeform 96 LF 4.66 447 W W F 6X6 W 2.9 X 2.9 540 SF 0.41 223 Pump & Place 4 253.29 1,013 Cedar Panel Exterior Wall System to Include: 534 SF 22.69 12,116 Native Stone Veneer Exterior Wall System to Include: 544 SF 45.34 24,665 3/4" Native Lyons Sandstone Panel Veneer w\ Dovetail Anchor 12"x12" Glass Block System 30 SF 23.53 706 4'-0" x 7'-0" Exterior HM Door w/HM Frame 2 EA 849.35 1,699 Door Hardware @ Exterior HM Doors 2 EA 325.61 651 Standing Seam Zinc Roof System @ Roof to Include: 310 SF 37.10 11,501 3x6 T&G Glue-Laminated Decking w\Stain & Seal @ Underside (1) Layer Bituthane Ice & Water Shield 2x4 Sleeper System @ Cold Roof 3/4" Plywood Decking @ Cold Roof Nailable R-30 Rigid Insulation (1) Layer Bituthane Ice & Water Shield Standing Seam Zinc Roofing Typical Interior Gyp Board Partition Type B w\Epoxy Paint to Include: 1194 SF 8.04 9,601 3-5/8" 20 GA Metal Studs 5/8" Type "X" Gyp Board - Each Side 3-'Y2" Fiberglass Batt Insulation P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ ©2001 All Rights Reserved Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 5 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Site Restrooms Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Acoustical Sealant @ Top & Bottom Tape & Finish (Knock Down) - Each Side 4" Rubber Wall Base Epoxy Paint Suspended 5/8" Gyp Board Ceiling w/ Epoxy Paint 597 SF 5.61 3,349 2" x 2" Ceramic Floor Tile @ Restrooms (Standard Color) 540 SF 3.53 1,906 Toilet Specialties (Average per Women's Stall) 5 EA 195.15 976 Toilet Specialties (Average per Men's Stall) 5 EA 95.05 475 Steel Toilet Partitions w\Baked Enamel Finish 8 EA 377.51 3,020 Steel Toilet Partitions w\Baked Enamel Finish ADA Toilet Partitions 2 EA 436.34 873 SS Sanitary Napkin Dispenser 1 EA 309.56 310 SS Paper Towel/Waste Receptacle 2 EA 300.60 601 SS Paper Towel Dispenser 2 EA 220.35 441 36"x 54" SS Corner Grab Bars 2 EA 96.92 194 SS Soap Dispenser 4 EA 50.25 201 Subtotal Sitework: 87,412 Subtotal Direct Costs: 87,412 Performance Bond (1.3%) 1,136 General Contractor Fees 5,682 Contingency @ 6% 5,586 Escalation @'/2%/mo 1,748 Design, Material Testing 6,993 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 21,145 Total Construction Cost for Site Restrooms 108,557 P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ ©2001 All Rights Reserved Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 6 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Fire Pit Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Sitework 10'-0" Dia. Gas Stone Veneer Fire Pit (Allowance) 1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Gas Line Service to Outdoor Fire Pit 180 LF 18.16 3,269 Subtotal Sitework: 38,269 Subtotal Direct Costs: 38,269 Performance Bond (1.3%) 497 General Contractor Fees 1,818 Contingency @ 6% 2,405 Escalation @ 1/2%/mo 765 Design & Material Testing 3,062 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 8,547 Total Construction Cost for Fire Pit I II II 46,816 M MAIN P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ ©2001 All Rights Reserved Donovan Park Shopping List -01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 7 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Lobby Fireplace - Medium Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Fireplace Stone @ Fireplace 224 SF 53.15 11,906 CMU @ Fireplace 224 SF 14.65 3,282 Marble Mantle @ Fireplace (Allowance) 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 Heatilator Fireplace (Allowance) 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 CIP Foundation Pad @ Fireplace 1 LS 1,122.00 1,122 Marble Flooring @ Hearth 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500 Subtotal Fireplace: 23,309 Subtotal Direct Costs: 23,309 Performance Bond (1.3%) 303 General Contractor Fees 1,107 Contingency @ 10% 2,442 Escalation @'%%/mo 117 Design Fees Not Needed Subtotal Indirect Costs: 3,968 Total Construction Cost for Lobby Fireplace (I I I~ 27,278 P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ © 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - AlhertAs Page 8 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Lobby Fireplace - Large Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Fireplace Stone @ Fireplace 621 SF 5115 33,006 CMU @ Fireplace 621 SF 14.65 9,098 Marble Mantle @ Fireplace (Allowance) 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Heatilator Fireplace (Allowance) 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 CIP Foundation Pad @ Fireplace 1 LS 1,922.00 1,922 Marble Flooring @ Hearth 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 Subtotal Fireplace: 54,026 Subtotal Direct Costs: 54,026 Performance Bond (1.3%) 702 General Contractor Fees 2,566 Contingency @ 10% 5,659 Escalation @ 1%%/mo 270 Design Fees Not Needed Subtotal Indirect Costs: 9,198 Total Construction Cost for Lobby Fireplace II II II 63,224 PIC-t Projecta/Dom- Park/ Schammsi DesigNOTC/ ® 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - AlbeM.As Page 9 of 11 Architectural Resource ConsWtants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Snowmelt @ Drop-Off Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Sitework Heated Plaza Pavement @ Drop-Off Court 5,000 SF 31.67 158,350 Subtotal Sitework 158,350 Subtotal Direct Costs: 158,350 Performance Bond (1.3%) 2,059 General Contractor Fees 7,522 Contingency @ 6% 9,952 Escalation @ Yz%/mo 3,167 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 22,699 Total Construction Cost for Snowmelt @ Drop-Off II I (I 181,049 P:/Current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ Q 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 10 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. i • Donovan Community Park Facility 01 FEB 01 Wish List Donovan Park Shopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Sitework Heated Plaza Pavement @ Terrace 5,000 SF 31.67 158,350 Subtotal Sitework: 158,350 Subtotal Direct Costs: 158,350 Performance Bond (1.3%) 2,059 General Contractor Fees 7,522 Contingency @ 6% 9,952 Escalation @'Y2%/mo 3,167 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 22,699 Total Construction Cost for Snowmelt @ Terrace I~ I 181,049 PICurrent Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/OTO/ ® 2001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Stopping List - 01 FEB 01 - Albert.xls Page 11 of 11 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. VAIL TOWN COUNCIL - MINUTES TUESDAY, January 9, 2001 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Town Council Chambers on Tuesday, January 9, 2001. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tern Chuck Ogilby Diana Donovan Rod Slifer Greg Moffet COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Foley STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Manager Under the first item on the agenda, Citizen Participation, there were no items brought forward. The second item on the agenda was a request for Intranet Funding from the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau (VVTCB). Mayor Kurz suggested the Council defer action on this item to a later meeting to allow for an evaluation of a list of other funding requests was provided by the Town Manager. The third item on the agenda was a request for funding for Special Events: Councilmembers Moffet and Navas discussed allocating the following funding for special events: - 3 On 3, Aug. 3 - 5, 2001 - $5000 - approved - Street Beat, 2001 - $10,000 -approved Vail Precision Law Chair Demonstration Team in Bush Inauguration allocate $5000 out of Town Council contingency and $1000 out of Town Manager's Contingency Fund. A vote was taken on the motion and it was passed unanimously, 6-0. An additional request for $25,000 for the 2001 Mountain Bike Championships was put on hold until the Council received further information regarding the event. The fourth item on the agenda was a discussion regarding Meadow Drive Streetscape Improvements Project. George Ruther, Chief of Planning, presented the Meadow Drive Streetscape Improvements Project Kick-Off proposal to the Council, stating the purpose of this meeting was to inform the Town Council and the community of the scope of the proposed project and the intended results. Ruther stated the Town Council had approved funding for improvements to the Meadow Drive Streetscape and this would be the first step to review and amend the existing streetscape improvements proposed in the 1991 Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. Todd Oppenheimer, landscape planner for the town, made a presentation to the Council, outlining work being planned along this route. Joe Kracum, representing Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc., addressed the Council, noting his company's commitment in working with the Town of Vail to insure a quality project completed in a minimum amount of time. The project will include pedestrian walkways, landscaping, drainage, roadway and utility work along Meadow Drive. Kracum stated planning would begin the week of February 26, 2001, then they will conduct week-long sessions to obtain input from property owners and residents affected by this project. On March 2, 2001, following the week long session, a public open house will be held to present three design alternatives. Todd stated a budget of $2.5 million had been allocated to complete this work, including utility relocation or renewal, implementing a storm sewer master plan, evaluation and implementation of the 1991 Streetscape Master Plan. Also being considered for renewal was roadway design, landscaping, lighting, and public art. Todd stated a team of designers had been hired, after the Town issued an RFP with 4 teams responding. He stated these teams did interview with business owners and residents. Mayor Kurz asked how the team had been selected. Todd stated the design team had been selected not as low bidder rather than on qualifications as this was a very detailed proposal. No specific design solutions were asked for in the RFP. Councilmember Navas stated she was pleased the Art In Public Places was taking an active role in this as well. Todd stated an additional consultant - Richard Hanson - had been appointed to work with the team as a liaison between design team and the AIPP board to define opportunities for signature pictures and art incorporated into overall project. Oppenheimer stated the goal was to go through the public process, adopt an amendment to the streetscape master plan, and move forward with the implementation plan. Kracum stated his company was looking at materials that are more up-to-date. He stated there were pending changes being proposed to the ice arena, medical center, and redevelopment of several developments including the Vail Valley Medical Center and Vail Plaza West. Several other areas of concern were mentioned by the Council, including the Haagen Daz bus stop, the turnaround by the fire station , a possible gate in front of La Bottega with some signage or planters to deter motorists from driving down Meadow Drive towards the hospital. Mayor Kurz stated he had worked with Joe in another resort with the same type of impacts and that he was pleased with the way it was handled and phasing was admirable. Kracum stated he would like to start the last day of ski season and finish before Memorial Day weekend. Councilmember Donovan stated there were a number of big projects happening along the green area and inquired as to how do we would coordinate these into the project. Kracum stated that during the workshop he would have developers/contractors meeting with the town to integrate their projects into planning process, working together toward one common goal. Mayor Kurz inquired if the $2 million included utilities. Oppenheimer stated the utility companies will pay for their portion of it and will have to work around our schedule. Mayor Kurz stated he found the document well put together with a good sense of what the Town is trying to convey. Jim Lamont addressed the Council, expressing his interest in working with staff who are interested in this project, stating he felt it was good to get the neighborhood involved and bring a change to character of neighborhood. Councilmember Donovan suggested this would be an opportune time to come up with a plan to eliminate curbs and obtain a safer environment. The fifth item on the agenda was a roll out of Town of Vail/Vail Resorts, Inc. joint meeting held the previous week. Mayor Kurz gave an overview of items discussed in regard to a partnership with Vail Resorts, Inc., stating feedback from within the community and between the two entities should result in a closer and better relationship. Kurz stated the Council had spent two days with Vail Resorts, Inc., and Town of Vail senior staff going over issues of importance to both. Mayor Kurz stated this meeting was not a one- time shot, the two parties had agreed to meet again in April to discuss seasonal housing, Vail Center, infrastructure, parking, transportation, and Lionshead redevelopment. Kurz stated the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts felt it was okay to agree to disagree on some items. Both groups agreed that retaining the #1 position was most important and planned to work towards retaining this position for some time to come. Councilmember Slifer stated it was the first time the Town Council had had sat down with the senior management at VRI in its entirety and felt it was a step in the right direction and very productive. The Council felt it was important to involve other groups in their discussions, with plans to hold open house meetings, as well as meetings with commercial property owners and second homeowners. The sixth item on the agenda was the appointment of Managed Growth Agreement Task Force Members. It was decided to defer this appointment to a future meeting, as Porter Wharton and Bill Jensen were out of town and were integral to this appointment. The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Town Manager McLaurin stated the temporary bubble at the Vail Gold Course was installed and an open house would be scheduled for next week. McLaurin commended Greg Hall for getting the bubble in place in such a short period of time. Town Attorney Tom Moorhead introduced his new legal assistant, Maryanne Best, to the Town Council. Councilmember Moffet made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Ogilby seconded the motion. Councilmember Navas requested an expanded agenda item be discussed at the next meeting regarding a request for discussion of identifying space within the town for a recreation/exercise area for dogs, rather than being confined to Bighorn Park. A vote was taken on the motion and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0 The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Mary A. Caster VAIL TOWN COUNCIL - MINUTES TUESDAY, January 16, 2001 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Town Council Chambers on Tuesday, January 16, 2001. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem Chuck Ogilby Diana Donovan Rod Slifer Greg Moffet Kevin Foley STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager The first item on the agenda was citizen participation. Kaye Ferry addressed the Council, speaking on behalf of the Vail Tomorrow Affordable Housing Team and the business community. Ferry thanked the Town Council for agreeing to pursue the Mountain Bell site for seasonal employee housing. She also thanked the Council for approving the temporary bubble at the Vail Golf Course ice rink. The second item on the agenda was the approval of the December 5t" and 1 gt", 2000, Town Council minutes. Corrections to the minutes were noted. Sybill Navas made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected and Kevin Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The third item on the agenda was a funding request presented by the Vail Chamber and Business Association. The Town Council has agreed to fund $240,000 over a period time to the newly formed organization, with Mayor Kurz stating the Town Council had agreed to fund the organization initially for the first year of its operation. He stated the Council had discussed their intentions again today and did want to continue with this agreement. Mayor Kurz stated he would like Kaye Ferry to review the plan briefly with the Council. She stated the three business organizations - the Vail Village Merchants Association, the Lionshead Merchants Association and the Vail Community Chamber merged last year to create the new chamber of commerce. Ms. Ferry was asked if the board had been elected or appointed by its members. Ferry replied that the general feeling of the members was to hold its election at the annual meeting in October and that she would serve as president of the board until that time. Mayor Kurz also questioned the name of the organization, feeling there was a potential conflict to the outside with the word "chamber" and the Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce. He suggested the organization might consider some other name that would not confuse the customer as much. Kaye Ferry stated the organization felt the ability to use the name "Vail" with the chamber was more directly related to Vail and that perhaps the Vail Valley Chamber might consider using another name. Ferry also stated their name had been registered with the State of Colorado. A list of callers to the newly formed Chamber was presented to the Council, stating the callers were asked how they acquired the number and the stated it was through the information service. Councilmember Moffet stated he was delighted the Council could offer funding, but expressed concern about duplicating services that already existed in the community. He also stated he expected to see a budget brought back to the Council showing how this funding would be spent. Councilmember Slifer stated he hoped in the year 2002 the organization would become self-funding from its members. Slifer stated he had talked with Town Manager McLaurin and Town Attorney Moorhead requesting they draw up an agreement for funds to be paid over a period of time. Vail Chamber board member Steve Rosenthal stated he felt the organization had already shown success by the representation at their meetings. He stated the members of the board were intelligent, hard working people, and wanted the Council to know they have a good business sense. Rosenthal stated the second homeowners have been excited that we have jointed together in a partnership. Mayor Kurz reiterated to the Board that the Council doesn't mean to criticize the Board, they are merely being sensitive on this issue due to the criticism the Council receives for spending public funds. After further discussion, Councilmember Moffet made a motion to release $50 thousand immediately for chamber operations and to proceed with a contact prior to the next funding. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. Mayor Kurz asked for public comment. Jen Brown, Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council and Vail Chamber board members expressing her full support of Vail Chamber, and their willingness to work together for the benefit of the community. Councilmember Donovan asked what the "drop dead" date for the contract should be. Town Attorney stated a contract adopting the business plan and scope of service would be prepared prior to the next evening meeting. A vote was taken on the motion and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance #1, Series of 2001, an ordinance amending section 1-5-11C. of the Town Code establishing the order of business at regular and special meetings of the Town Council. Town Attorney Moorhead presented the ordinance to the Council, stating this was prepared at council's request to restructure the order of the meetings to accommodate the general public during certain items up for discussion. A suggestion was made to remove the last portion of the sentence of the ordinance to eliminate any confusion on the intent of the ordinance. Councilmember Moffet made a motion to pass Ordinance #1, Series of 2001, on first reading. Councilmember Donovan seconded the motion. Councilmember Foley stated this change to the ordinance was done mainly for public convenience. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0 The fifth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance 2, Series of 2001; an ordinance amending the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations to allow for the creation of a subdivision exemption and correction plat review process. Brent Wilson, Town Planner, presented the ordinance to the Council, stating the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations currently limit applications for basic land subdivision to two types of review: 1) major subdivisions, and 2) minor subdivisions. However, the town frequently handles applications that fall outside the purview of these processes. Under the current code, minor plat changes (corrections, plat note amendments, etc.) are routed through the minor subdivision process, even though a formal subdivision of land may not occur. Additionally, applicants who wish to plat existing unplatted properties must create a minimum of two parcels in order to comply with current code requirements. This has proven problematic for applicants. In an attempt to make the subdivision review process more "user friendly," staff is presenting a proposed new chapter that allows for an administrative review process for "exemption" and "correction" plats. The process is modeled after our existing "minor amendment" process for special development districts. This new process would allow for staff review of certain plats with a PEC affirmation/denial at a public hearing. Brent stated the PEC had requested this ordinance mainly as a "housekeeping" ordinance to provide an appropriate review process for exemptions. There was discussion following regarding the issue of additional development potential. Brent advised the Council this was more of an administrative procedure, and any request for additional development potential would need to go through the procedures now in place. Councilmember Donovan brought up the issue of additional GRFA in the Lionshead redevelopment. It was determined that more language needed to be added to Item #7 of the ordinance to further clarify the intent. After further discussion, Councilmember Moffet made a motion to approve Ordinance #2, Series of 2001, on first reading with the additional language to be added before second reading. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The sixth item on the agenda was the appointment of Barbie Christopher to the unexpired term of Trish Kiesewetter for the Art in Public Places Board. Councilmember Navas made a motion to approve the appointment, stating that Trish Kiesewetter had moved out of the area. Councilmember Foley thanked Trish for serving on this board. Councilmember Moffet seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, stated he had nothing further to add to his report. Councilmember Moffet made a motion to adjourn. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken the the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. At that point, Councilmember Navas stated an item needed to be added to the agenda. A motion was made by Councilmember Moffet to reopen the meeting. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. The motion was voted on and passed unanimously. Councilmember Navas then made a motion to put into place a 6 month leniency on the dog leash laws at Bighorn Park, with a review at the end of six months. During this time, dogs would be allowed to use the area for exercise, trianing and as a play area while on voice command. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. As there was no further business, Councilmember Moffet made a motion to adjourn. Councilmember Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ludwig Kurz ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Mary A. Caster ORDINANCE NO. 1 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-5-11 C. OF THE TOWN CODE ESTABLISHING THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AT REGULAR AND SPECIAL MEETINGS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL WHEREAS, the Town Code establishes the order of business at regular and special meetings; and WHEREAS, upon occasion there are public hearings for items of great public interest which attract attendance by a large number of the general public; and WHEREAS, in those matters of great public interest it facilitates the orderly process of the meeting and is to the advantage of the general public for the Council to consider those other matters earlier in the agenda than established by the section directing the order of business. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: 1) That Section 1-5-11 C. is amended as follows: Order Of Business: In regular and special meetings of the Town Council the order of business shall be as follows: 1. Call to order by the Mayor. 2. Determination of quorum. 3. Citizen participation. 4. Consent agenda including minutes of preceding meetings. 5. Consideration of ordinances, resolutions, and motions. 6. Consideration of other matters on the agenda. 7. Reports from Town Manager and Town Attorney. 8. Statements, observations, and inquiries by the Mayor and Councilmembers. 9. Concluding statement by the Mayor. 10. Adjournment The Mayor has authority to vary the Order Of Business when it is in the public interest and to facilitate the orderly hearing of matters of great public concern. 2) If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3) The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4) The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision 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 extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this day of 2001, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of , 2001 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-5-11 C. OF THE TOWN CODE ESTABLISHING THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AT REGULAR AND SPECIAL MEETINGS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL WHEREAS, the Town Code establishes the order of business at regular and special meetings; and WHEREAS, upon occasion there are public hearings for items of great public interest which attract attendance by a large number of the general public; and WHEREAS, in those matters of great public interest it facilitates the orderly process of the meeting and is to the advantage of the general public for the Council to consider those other matters earlier in the agenda than established by the section directing the order of business. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL. COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: 1) That Section 1-5-11 C. is amended as follows: Order Of Business: In regular and special meetings of the Town Council the order of business shall be as follows: 1. Call to order by the Mayor. 2. Determination of quorum. 3. Citizen participation. 4. Consent agenda including minutes of preceding meetings. 5. Consideration of ordinances, resolutions, and motions. 6. Consideration of other matters on the agenda. 7. Reports from Town Manager and Town Attorney. 8. Statements, observations, and inquiries by the Mayor and Councilmembers. 9. Concluding statement by the Mayor. 10. Adjournment The Mayor has authority to vary the Order Of Business when it is in the public interest and to facilitate the orderly hearing of matters of great public concern. 2) If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3) The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4) The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision 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 extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this day of 2001, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of , 2001 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO.2 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN OF VAIL SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND CREATING A NEW CHAPTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CREATION OF AN EXEMPTION PLAT AND CORRECTION PLAT REVIEW PROCESS WHEREAS, the Town of Vail has been regulating the subdivision of land under statutory and home rule authority since 1970; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail wishes to provide reasonable and efficient development review and subdivision review services to the public; and WHEREAS, The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of these amendments at its January 8, 2001 meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt these amendments to the Subdivision Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. A new Chapter 12 is added to Title 13, Vail Town Code to read as follows: CHAPTER 12 EXEMPTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTION PROCEDURES SECTION: 13-12-1: Purpose and Intent 13-12-2: Consultation Required; Preliminary Review 13-12-3: Exemption Criteria and Review Standards 13-12-4: Exemption Plat Requirements and Procedure 13-12-5: Filing And Recording 13-3-1: PURPOSE AND INTENT: To establish criteria and an appropriate review process whereby the Administrator may grant exemptions from the definition of the term "subdivision" for properties that are determined to fall outside the purpose, purview and intent of Chapters 13-3 and 13-4 of this title. 13-12-2: CONSULTATION REQUIRED; PRELIMINARY REVIEW: • Prior to the submittal of an exemption request, the applicant shall meet with the Administrator to determine if the request meets the exemption criteria outlined in Section 13-12-3 of this chapter. If the Administrator determines that the subject application would circumvent significant and relevant elements of the subdivision review process, the applicant shall be required to comply with the requirements of Chapter 13-3 and/or Chapter 13-4 of this title. 13-12-3: EXEMPTION CRITERIA AND REVIEW STANDARDS: A. Exemption Criteria: Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 13-1-3 of this title, the Administrator may exempt from the provisions of Chapter 13-3 and/or Chapter 13-4 of this title an application that meets any one of the following criteria: 1. Designated Open Space: Any plat that would result in the division of property for the purpose of creating or maintaining designated open space. 2. Condemnation: Any lot created pursuant to the powers of condemnation. 3. Pre-existing Properties: Any plat for the purpose of establishing and/or correcting lot boundaries for properties in existence (and established in the records of the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder) prior to January 12, 1970 where no additional parcels are created and conformance with applicable provisions of the Vail Town Code has been demonstrated. 4. Public/Quasi-Public Use: Any plat that would create a parcel for public or quasi-public use such as community facilities, including but not limited to: utility facilities, parks, open space, fire/police stations, libraries, hospitals, municipal offices. Community facilities which include dwelling units or employee housing units shall be required to process the appropriate plats to delineate ownership of residential properties. 5. Boundary-line adjustments (including right-of-way adjustments) where no additional parcels are created and conformance with applicable provisions of the Vail Town Code has been demonstrated. 6. Plat corrections that do not alter the general character and intent of the originally approved plat including, but not limited to: address changes, plat note amendments, plat title corrections and other minor corrections. 7. Vacation and/or replatting of a building envelope, easement or common single-family or duplex lot boundary. B. Review Standards: The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Administrator deems applicable. The Administrator shall review the application and consider its appropriateness with regard to the applicable criteria for review and evaluation. The Administrator may approve a plat pursuant to the provisions of this chapter upon the findings that: 1. That the approval of the plat would result in the creation of a lot that conforms to the provisions of the Vail Town Code and/or relevant master plan documents. In the case of non-conforming lots, non-conformities have not been expanded or increased by the approval of the plat, unless approved in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.1-7 ("Variances and Amendments") of this Title. 2. That the approval of the plat will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The amended plat is consistent with the Town's established site development guidelines and with the character and intent of the originally approved plat. Provisions for adequate infrastructure and site access have been clearly demonstrated by the applicant. 13-12-4: EXEMPTION PLAT REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURE: A. Submission: At any time within one year after the Administrator has completed its review of the preliminary plan, a final plat shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. If more than a year has passed from the date of the Administrator's review, the proposal shall be reviewed on a preliminary basis again. Exemption plat format and content shall be as outlined in Section 13-3-6 of this Title. B. Requirements and Procedure: Exemption plats consistent with the review criteria outlined in Section 13-12-3 of this Article may be approved by the Department of Community Development. All modifications shall be indicated on a completely revised plat. Approved changes shall be noted, signed, dated and filed by the Department of Community Development. The Administrator may waive certain submittal requirements outlined in this Chapter if they are deemed inapplicable or irrelevant to an exemption plat application. 1. Notification: Notification of a proposed exemption plat application shall be provided to all affected property owners within or adjacent to the subject property. Notifications shall be postmarked no later than five (5) days following -2- staff action on the amendment request and shall include a brief statement describing the application and the time and date of when the Planning and Environmental Commission will be informed of the staff decision. In all cases the report to the Planning and Environmental Commission shall be made within twenty (20) days from the date of the staff's decision on the requested exemption plat. 2. Appeals: Appeals of staff decisions may be filed by adjacent property owners, owners of the property, the applicant, Planning and Environmental Commission members or members of the Town Council as outlined in Section 12-3-3 of this Code. 13-12-5: FILING AND RECORDING: The Department of Community Development will record the plat and any related documents with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder; however, no plat for land shall be recorded unless prior to the time of recording, the applicant provides the Town with a certification from the Eagle County Treasurer's office indicating that all ad valorem taxes applicable to such subdivided land, for years prior to that year in which approval is granted, have been paid. Fees for recording shall be paid by the applicant. The Department of Community Development will retain one mylar copy of the plat for their records. Section 2. Section 13-11-1, Vail Town Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: (Added text is shown in bold type; deleted text is 6Vieken) 13-11-1: PLAT TITLE FORMATS: The Title Format as required on all plats is as follows: Type of Plat SUBDIVISION NAME, FILING OR PHASE NUMBER LOT, BLOCK, TRACT Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado The tvoe of plat should appear first in the Title; Final or Amended Final, Single-Family, Duplex, Condominium Plat. The font size should be small. The main title is the next line or lines of the title and will be in a large font. The main title is in two parts: the first part will have the name of the subdivision, townhome(s) or condominiums(s); the second part of the main title is the lot, block and tract information as shown in the order above. Plats of existing platted parcels require the Lot, Block and/or Tract information; on original plats the Lot, Block and Tract information are omitted from the title. When resubdivisions occur, the first part of the main title is identical to the parent subdivision and the second part identifying the replatted parcel(s), except when the intent of the plat is to create a new and separate subdivision, townhome or condominium with a new name. The sub-title comes after the main title, and it contains the Section, Township, Range and/or County and State information. The font size should be smaller than that of the main title. The Certificate of Dedication and Ownership, as well as the Surveyor's certificate should match the above formatted main title. The following are examples for each type of plat and the exact format for each: Minor Subdivision Final Plat Meadow Mauriello Subdivision A Resubdivision of Lot 32 Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado -3- Condominium Plat Condominium Plat Connelly Bridge Condominiums Vail Village, First Filing Lot c, Lot d and the south four feet of Lot b, Block 5-B Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado Townhouse Plat Townhouse Plat Mollica Mountain Townhomes Vail Potato Patch A Resubdivision of Parcel A, Lot 34, Block 1 Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado Amended Final Plat/Sinole Familv Subdivision Amended Final Plat Glen Lyon Subdivision, 2nd Amendment to the 1 st Filing Lot 15, Block 2 Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado Duplex Plat Duplex Plat Ruther Ridge Estates Subdivision, Filing No. 1 A Resubdivision of Lot 29, Block 1 Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado Final Plat Final Plat Curnutte Creek Gulch Subdivision Filing No. 1 • Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado Exemotion Plat Wilson Willows Exemption A portion of the SW 1/4 of the SW Y4 of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6fh P.M. Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado -4- Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 16'6 day of January, 2001 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 6th day of February, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk -5- READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 6m day of February, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk -6- RESOLUTION No. 1 Series of 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 1, A RESOLUTION REPLACING THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL LAND USE MAP. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Community Development Department wishes to replace the Town's existing paper map format; and WHEREAS, the new map format utilizing present day technology improves our ability to manage data and enhances service to our customers; and WHEREAS, the replacement of the map is in accordance with the procedures outlined for said replacement in the Vail Town Code; and WHEREAS, this map replacement does not amend or alter the content of the existing paper map; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds it in the best interest of the residents, visitors and guests of the Town of Vail to replace the Official Town of Vail Land Use Map. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Vail Town Council approves by resolution the replacement of the Official Town of Vail Land Use Map dated February 6, 2001. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor, Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail RESOLUTION NO. 2 SERIES OF 2001 RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THE TOWN COUNCIL SHALL EX-OFFICIO BE APPOINTED THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE VAIL HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Vail Housing Authority was appointed by Resolution No. 25, Series of 1990; and WHEREAS, the Division of Local Government and Department of Local Affairs has certified the receipt of a certified copy of the "Certificate of the Housing Authority for the Town of Vail" on March 4, 1991; and WHEREAS, the terms of office of the Vail Housing Authority Board have expired. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: 1. All members of the Vail Town Council shall ex-officio be appointed the Commissioners of the Vail Housing Authority. 2. The terms of office of such commissioners shall be co-terminus with their terms of office on the Vail Town Council. 3. The Mayor of the Vail Town Council shall ex-officio be Chairman of the Commissioners and the Commissioners shall select from among their members a Vice Chairman. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of February, 2001. Sybill R. Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem ATTEST: Lorelie Donaldson, Town Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FR: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager RE: Town Manager's Report DT: February 2, 2001 CONSOLIDATED MUNICIPAL CENTER As outlined in Council's 14 month Critical Strategies, and then as further underscored during the recent VRI/TOV retreat, staff has solicited a feasibility study to review the possibility of locating the following functions on the current Municipal/Community Development site: underground parking; two company fire station (the police department would remain); town administration offices; court; council chambers; community development; centralized information services; and affordable housing. The feasibility study is attached. As a first phase, the architects are currently reviewing the topographical maps the town has already shot. Estimated cost of the actual study itself would be $20,000-$25,000, although such items as additional surveying, soils investigation, interior design, and structural/electrical/mechanical engineering may be required at an additional cost. Staff is requesting direction from Council to proceed since this would be funded through a supplemental appropriation. FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND 2001 This year the Fourth of July holiday falls on a Wednesday, and this has led to some complications for the 2001 Vail Village/LionsHead construction hours. In the past, staff has not allowed any outside construction activity in the Village or LionsHead during the holiday, but most of the time the holiday has fallen on a Monday or Tuesday, or a Thursday and Friday. This still allowed for a 3-4 day holiday weekend. This year, staff is looking for Council direction in scheduling the construction hours. Possible scenarios: 1) NO CONSTRUCTION from 4:00 P.M. Friday, June 29, through Wednesday, July 4 2) NO CONSTRUCTION from 4:00 P.M. Friday, June 29, through Sunday, July 1; NO CONSTRUCTION Wednesday, July 4 3) NO CONSTRUCTION from 4:00 P.M. Friday, June 29, through Sunday, July 8 As well, the Arts Festival has moved forward to the last weekend in June (June 29-July 1); the parade, fireworks and Patriotic Concert at the Amphitheater will all be held on Wednesday, July 4th. UPCOMING ITEMS: February 13. 2001 - WS Meeting/Lunch with Eagle County Commissioners Boards and Commissions Sign Code Presentation Lionshead Public Financing DRB/PEC Report Discussion of Design Team Vail Plaza Hotel West SDD Februarv 20. 2001 - WS PEC Interviews (4 vacancies) Paperless Packets Februarv 20. 2001 - TC PEC appointments (3 - 2 year; 1 - 1year) Resolution #1, Land Use Plan Amendments Ordinance #5, 1st reading of Text Amendments to the Town Code Ordinance #3, 2nd reading, Housing Zone District (consent) Februarv 27. 2001 - WS Walkabout/Lunch - Lionshead (11:30 a.m.) Special Events Process PEC/DRB Report Village Parking Structure G' tJb'b • A Frotessional Corporation 71 N Frocage FCad W SuAa _ MORTERAI(ERCOLEARCH ITECT Va!I, cobjad08'E57 970/476-5105 FAX 970/476-0710 MAC•c' MorterAH, rC,,Ie.com January 22, 2001 Ms. Pamela Brandemeyer Assistant Town Manager 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Dear Pam: Thank you for considering using Morter Aker Cole Architects to help you achieve your aspirations and goals and I appreciate the opportunity to present our proposal to you. If I might summarize, you want to examine the feasibility of a new town government center as follows: 1. You envision the idea of "scraping" the existing town government site from the west end of the new police station through the helipad at the far west end of the site. This would include the administration building and the community development building as well as the helipad itself. 2. The helipad is being examined by others to be re-located to the roof of the Hospital. 3. The new government center would include: a. Underground parking structure to house as many cars as is feasible. b. Two company fire station. Local Architect Bill Pierce has done some work on this idea and we may be able to incorporate some of his thinking into the overall study. c. Town Administration offices. d. Courts. e. Council chambers. f. Community Development g. Centralized Information Center. h. Affordable Housing. More than likely long-term rentals. 4. The study should consider phasing strategies. 5. Displacement of personnel during construction is a critical issue to be assessed. 6. Construction costs and scheduling shall be included within the study. 7. We need to conclude our reviews and study for presentation to the council no later than April of 2001. MorterAkerCole com MORTERMERCOLEARCH ITECTS Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Page 2 of 3 We will deliver to the Town of Vail the following: Phase I: Site plan options Floor plan diagrams for each site plan option (Town of Vail staff meeting and approvals) Phase Il: Site plan Floor plans Elevations Massing/presentation sketch Budget Study (Town of Vail Council meeting) Schedule: Deliver Phase I package to staff February 23, 2001 Staff review and comment period February 23, 2001 to March 9, 2001 Deliver Phase 11 package for Council presentation and review March 23, 2001 Information required from the Town of Vail: Site Survey Plat information Fire Department information/programming Soils test if available Housing component information . MORTERAKERCOLEARCH ITECTS Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Page 3 of 3 With that in mind, I would like to propose the following as the basis for the agreement between you the Owner and Morter Aker Cole Architects for the Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center: I would like to propose an hourly arrangement. I would estimate our total fee to be in the range of $20,000 to $25,000. Our hourly rates are as follows: James R. Morter, FAIA $210.00/hr. Kirk Aker, AIA $170.00/hr. Thomas A. Cole, AIA $160.00/hr. Licensed Architects .................................$84.00-$100.00/hr. Draftspersons $60.00-$80.00/hr. Clerical $38.00/hr. Not included within our Fee: surveying of the site, Soils Investigations, Interior Designer, Structural, Electrical or Mechanical Engineering if required for this study In addition, reimbursable expenses shall be itemized on each billing and billed at 1.10 times their cost to the Architect. They will include such items as: photography shipping reproductions and printing costs Again, we are pleased that you are considering us as your Architect and we look forward to starting the process. Sincerely, Kirk er, AIA Morter Aker Cole Architects As well, the Arts Festival has moved forward to the last weekend in June (June 29-July 1); the parade, fireworks and Patriotic Concert at the Amphitheater will all be held on Wednesday, July 4th. UPCOMING ITEMS: February 13. 2001 - WS Meeting/Lunch with Eagle County Commissioners Boards and Commissions Sign Code Presentation Lionshead Public Financing DRB/PEC Report Discussion of Design Team Vail Plaza Hotel West SDD Februarv 20. 2001 - WS PEC Interviews (4 vacancies) Paperless Packets Februarv 20. 2001 - TC PEC appointments (3 - 2 year; 1 - lyear) Resolution #1, Land Use Plan Amendments Ordinance #5, 1St reading of Text Amendments to the Town Code Ordinance #3, 2nd reading, Housing Zone District (consent) February 27. 2001 - WS Walkabout/Lunch - Lionshead (11:30 a.m.) Special Events Process PEC/DRB Report Village Parking Structure A Proress.nnal Cniporat. on 1271 "F Colorado 8 91PR657 oadW site , Vail MORTERAKERCOLEARCHITECTS 9701476 5105 FAX 970147E-0710 MAC (a MnrterAkerCOle.com January 22, 2001 Ms. Pamela Brandemeyer Assistant Town Manager 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Dear Pam: Thank you for considering using Morter Aker Cole Architects to help you achieve your aspirations and goals and I appreciate the opportunity to present our proposal to you. If I might summarize, you want to examine the feasibility of a new town government center as follows: 1. You envision the idea of "scraping" the existing town government site from the west end of the new police station through the helipad at the far west end of the site. This would include the administration building and the community development building as well as the helipad itself. 2. The helipad is being examined by others to be re-located to the roof of the Hospital. 3. The new government center would include: a. Underground parking structure to house as many cars as is feasible. b. Two company fire station. Local Architect Bill Pierce has done some work on this idea and we may be able to incorporate some of his thinking into the overall study. c. Town Administration offices. d. Courts. e. Council chambers. f. Community Development g. Centralized Information Center. h. Affordable Housing. More than likely long-term rentals. 4. The study should consider phasing strategies. 5. Displacement of personnel during construction is a critical issue to be assessed. 6. Construction costs and scheduling shall be included within the study. 7. We need to conclude our reviews and study for presentation to the council no later than April of 2001. MorterAke,Cnle.COm MORTERAKERCOLEARCH ITECTS Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Page 2 of 3 We will deliver to the Town of Vail the following: Phase I: Site plan options Floor plan diagrams for each site plan option (Town of Vail staff meeting and approvals) Phase II: Site plan Floor plans Elevations Massing/presentation sketch Budget Study (Town of Vail Council meeting) Schedule: Deliver Phase I package to staff February 23, 2001 Staff review and comment period February 23, 2001 to March 9, 2001 Deliver Phase II package for Council presentation and review March 23, 2001 Information reouired from the Town of Vail: Site Survey Plat information Fire Department information/programming Soils test if available Housing component information MORTERAKERCOLEARCH ITECTS Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center Page 3 of 3 With that in mind, I would like to propose the following as the basis for the agreement between you the Owner and Morter Aker Cole Architects for the Feasibility Study for a New Town Government Center: I would like to propose an hourly arrangement. I would estimate our total fee to be in the range of $20,000 to $25,000. Our hourly rates are as follows: James R. Morter, FAIA $210.00/hr. Kirk Aker, AIA $170.00/hr. Thomas A. Cole, AIA $160.00/hr. Licensed Architects .................................$84.00-S100.00/hr. Draftspersons $60.00-$80.00/hr. Clerical $38.00/hr. Not included within our Fee: surveying of the site, Soils Investigations, Interior Designer, Structural, Electrical or Mechanical Engineering if required for this study In addition, reimbursable expenses shall be itemized on each billing and billed at 1.10 times their cost to the Architect. They will include such items as: photography shipping reproductions and printing costs Again, we are pleased that you are considering us as your Architect and we look forward to starting the process. Sincerely, C1-4 //Kirk l er, AIA Morter Aker Cole Architects MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM Bob McLaurin Town Manager DATE: February 2, 2001 RE: Meeting with County Commissioners We have been discussing for several weeks the proposed agenda for our joint meeting with the Eagle County Commissioners. At this point, it is my understanding that we have three broad topics that we wish to discuss with the Commissioners. The first is the feasibility of doing a county-wide employee generation ordinance. The second issue involves the funding of capital projects in unincorporated and incorporated Eagle County. Specifically, we will be discussing how the County's capital projects funded, how can the Town of Vail play a role in the allocation of the County's capital resources, and what, if any, capital improvements are anticipated to be built and incorporated within the Town of Vail. The third and final item the County wishes to discuss with the Town Council is the Berry Creek Fifth Filing affordable housing project. I believe this summarizes our discussions to date. As requested, we will have for you at Tuesday's meeting a summary of the County's budget including the amount of revenue prorated by the Town of Vail and forwarded to Eagle County. Attachment f/mcaster/bsalter/twnmgr/memos/TC-CoCommMtg. MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council Bob McLaurin FROM: Brent Wilson, Department of Community Development DATE: January 30, 2001 SUBJECT: Eagle County's Proposed Road Impact Fee Ordinance Eagle County is in the process of amending its Land Use Regulations to incorporate new road impact fees. The proposed fees would apply to both unincorporated areas of the county and incorporated municipalities that choose to participate. The purpose of a regional county-wide impact fee would be to "avoid competitive concerns and allow pooling of resources to expedite state road improvements in the county." The towns of Eagle and Basalt have adopted their own impact fee ordinances. The Town of Vail exacts impact fees from redevelopment projects (under SDD, PA or LMU-1 zoning) based upon the development's projected new road impacts. As you are aware, nearly $15 million worth of public improvements are proposed with the implementation of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. A substantial portion of these improvements includes road projects. Under Eagle County's proposal, the Town of Vail would collect impact fees (typically at building permit) and transmit the fees quarterly to Eagle County. Eagle County's "Road Impact Fee Board" would then disburse the funds for projects prioritized in the county's five-year road capital improvements plan. Fees collected in Vail would be utilized within a proposed "Central Valley Benefit District" (please refer to the attached exhibit). Although Eagle County's road impact fee study and proposed methodology are rationally sound, the Department of Community Development has significant concerns about the proposed benefit districts and the transmittal of fees to another entity. We can not support the proposed impact fee program unless it is amended to provide more appropriate benefit districts to better ensure the completion of road projects in Vail. We applaud the County's desire to achieve a regional approach to planning, but we believe it is in the town's best interest to maintain control over funds received for the mitigation of development impacts within Vail. We strongly believe the town should not participate in the proposed intergovernmental agreement (attached) with Eagle County at this time. 1 Exhibit D ROAD IMPACT FEE BENEFIT DISTRICTS ROUTT co 2T I GRAD COUNTY LEGEND, a (1~~} T 4T .p}1[ ryy ~ v ~J u.m .me i..m L p om Ywm W1C MtAYO $ + w.a w fA~ ~w Nifl maeuvfs Z AVON V U o ~ o 0 Central Valle 13~nefit Dist Y aD<r i fRN1111l8f OV > w Roaring F~rk Benefit Ttrj'ct Y Y S.LLr - ~ c • ~PfTKJN COUNTY LAKE ..COUNTY 29 ROAD IMPACT FEE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT This Road Impact Fee Intergovernmental Agreement is entered into, made, and enacted this day of , 2000, by and between the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado (hereinafter "the County") and the Governing Body of the [City/Town] of (hereinafter the "Participating Municipality"); WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the County, in cooperation with the Participating Municipality as well as otter Participating Municipalities have prepared a Transportation Plan and Road Impact Fee Study for the county; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Plan and Road Impact Fee Study indicatethat there will be a significant amount of new growth and development in the county over the next ten (10) years; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Plan and Road Impact Fee Study have determined that the new growth and development in the county will require a substantial expansion in capital road facilities if an adequate Level of Service (LOS) is to be maintained; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Plan and Road Impact Fee Study have identified the improvements required to maintain adequate LOS on the Major Road System; and WHEREAS, the Road Impact Fee Study demonstrates that the existing revenue generated by the new growth and development will not be adequate to fund the needed Road Capital Improvements necessary to accommodate new growth and development in this area if the desired LOS on the Major Road System is to be maintained; and WHEREAS, in order to address this problem, the County and the Participating Municipality have determined that new Traffic-Generating Development in the county shall bear a proportionate share of the cost of the provision of new Road Capital Improvements required by such development; and WHEREAS, the County and the Participating Municipality have determined thatthe imposition of a road impact fee is one of the preferred methods of regulating land development in the county in orderto ensure that new development bears a proportionate share of the costs of the Road Capital Improvements necessary to accommodate new development while at the same time maintaining adopted LOS on the Major Road System and promoting and protecting the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the County and the Participating Municipality have the authority to adopt a road impact fee pursuant to the Colorado Constitution and the Colorado statutes; and -1- WHEREAS, the Transportation Plan and road impact fees will assist in the implementation and are consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the Master Plan of the Participating Municipality; and WHEREAS, it is the objective of the County and the Participating Municipality to make the most efficient use of their powers by jointly implementing planning, zoning, and subdivision requirements by the adoption of a road impact fee program for the provision of Road Capital improvements in order to maintain an adopted level of service on those roads; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Art. XIV, Sec. 18(2)(a) and (b), Col. Const., and Secs. 29- 20-105 and 29-1-102, C.R.S., the County and Participating Municipality desire to enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement to implement joint planning, zoning, and subdivision requirements bythe adoption of a road impactfee program fortheir respective jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to this Intergovernmental Agreement, the County and the Participating Municipality desire to designate this joint responsibility of planning for and administering this road impact fee program; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the provisions of Art. XIV, Sec. 18(2)(a) and (b), Col. Const., and Secs. 29-20-105 and 29-1-102, C.R.S., and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Agreement to Jointly Exercise Powers. The Countyand Participating Municipality agree to jointly use their planning, zoning, and subdivision authority to plan for and implement a road impact fee program. B. Purpose. The purpose of this Intergovernmental Agreement is to make the most efficient use of the powers of the County and Participating Municipalityto implement a road impact fee program to ensure adequate road facilities are available on the Major Road System to accommodate new growth and development. C. Eagle County/ Coordination. The Intergovernmental Agreement provides the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County and the governing body of the Participating Municipality along with other Participating Municipalities the authority to workjointly in this effort to coordinate the administration of the transportation planning and road impact fee program. The administration of the road impact fee program shall be carried out as follows: -2- 1. Road Impact Fee Committee. A Road Impact Fee Committee shall be responsible for the administration of the road impact fee program. The Road Impact Fee Committee shall consist of the public works directors, county/city engineers and planning directors of Eagle County, the Participating Municipality and other Participating Municipalities. The Road Impact Fee Committee shall be responsible for administering independent fee calculation studies, credits, and refunds under the road impact fee regulations that implement the road impact fee program. 2. Road Impact Fee Board. A Road Impact Fee Board shall serve as the appeal board for all decisions on independent fee calculations, credits, and refunds made by the Road Impact Fee Committee. The Road Impact Fee Board shall consist of one elected official from Eagle County and one elected official from each of the Participating Municipalities. Each Road Impact Fee Board member shall be appointed by a majority vote of the Governing Board of the member's respective local government. Members of the Road Impact Fee Board may be removed by their governing bodies at any time, and shall cease to be members when their term of elective office expires. 3. Collection and Transfer of Fees to County's Road Impact Fee Trust Fund. The Eagle County building official shall be responsible for collecting road impact fees in unincorporated Eagle County and placing them in the County's Road Impact Fee Trust Fund. The Participating Municipality shall be responsible for collecting the road impact fees within its jurisdiction and then transmitting the fees on a quarterly basis to the Eagle County finance department. The Eagle County finance department shall deposit the fees transmitted from the Participating Municipality into the County's Road Impact Fee Trust Fund. 4. Expenditure of Road Fee Funds. The expenditure of road impact fee funds shall be recommended by the Road Impact Fee Committee on an annual basis to the Road Impact Fee Board, which shall review the recommendation and make the final decision on the expenditure of road impact fee funds. Road impact fee expenditures shall be limited to projects included in the Road Capital Improvements Plan (hereinafter "Road CIP"). The funds shall also be spent within the Benefit Areas from which they are collected. 5. Annual Report on Expenditures. The Road Impact Fee Committee shall prepare an Annual Report than shall be provided to the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and the governing bodies of the Participating Municipalities. It shall identify the road projects for which the Road Impact Fee Board has approved road impact fee funds. 6. Five Year Review. Every five (5) years the Road Impact Fee Committee shall be responsible for initiating a review of the Transportation Plan, Road Impact Fee Study, Road CIP and the Regulations of Eagle County and the Participating Municipalities to determine if any modifications need to be made to the plans, studies and regulations for the road impact fee program. The results of this evaluation shall be submitted to the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and the Governing Bodies of the Participating Municipalities. To be amended, the Transportation Plan, Road Impact Fee Study, Road -3- CIP and the Regulations must be approved by the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and the Governing Bodies of all the Participating Municipalities. D. Effective Date. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall become effective 2000. E. Termination. 1. General. Eagle County or the Participating Municipality may terminate their participation in this Intergovemmental Agreement if either the County or the Participating Municipality materially modify the Transportation Plan, Road Impact Fee Study, Road CIP or the Road Impact Fee Regulation within their jurisdiction. 2. Written Notice of Termination. If Eagle County or the Participating Municipality terminates its participation in the Intergovernmental Agreement, they shall provide written notice of their termination to the Governing Bodies of the other participating local governments and the reasons therefor a minimum of 120 days prior to the termination. The terminating local government shall have no right to a refund of any road impact fee funds collected. 3. Use of Fees if Program Disbanded. If for any reason the road impact fee program is disbanded, any remaining funds after refunds, shall be spent on Road Capital Improvements in the Road CIP. F. Duration. The duration of this Intergovernmental Agreement shall be for ten (10) years. G. Renewal. This Intergovemmental Agreement may be renewed pursuant to State law. -4- u. ADOPTION Approved and adopted this day of , 2000. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO By: CHAIRMAN ATTEST: Deputy and Clerk of the Board GOVERNING BODY OF PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITY By: MAYOR ATTEST: Clerk -5- MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Discussions on various Vail Land Use Plan Amendments Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTS The Community Development Department has identified certain designations in the Vail Land Use Plan that are no longer consistent with Town of Vail goals, existing zoning, existing uses, or the Comprehensive Open Lands Plan. The Vail Land Use Plan has been successful in guiding growth and development within the Town of Vail. The Community Development Department recognizes that due to changing conditions, changing goals, and certain land use actions, land use designations of certain properties in the Town should be re-evaluated. The following properties have been identified by the Community Development Department for evaluation: 1. Mountain Bell site 2. Lots 15 and 16, Bighorn 2"d Addition 3. Other properties More detailed descriptions of each site are outlined in Section IV of this memorandum. II. BACKGROUND The Vail Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a basis from which future land use decisions may be made within the Town of Vail. The goals as articulated within the Land Use Plan, are meant to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. In conjunction with these goals, land use categories were defined to indicate general types of land uses which were then used to develop the Vail Land Use Map. The Land Use Plan is not intended to be regulatory in nature, but is intended to provide a general framework to guide decision making. In contrast, the zoning and subdivision regulations are the regulatory tool to control development. Where the land use categories and zoning conflict, existing zoning controls development on a site. To be effective, the Land Use Plan must be updated to reflect current thinking and changing market conditions. The Vail Land Use Plan can be amended in three ways: 1. The Community Development Department can update and revise the plan Y^ 1 ii FOWN OF VAIL periodically. The Community Development Department then makes recommendations for the proposed changes to the Planning and Environmental Commission, where these changes would then be considered in a public hearing format. The Planning and Environmental Commission would then make a recommendation to the Town Council, where another public hearing would be held. The Council then adopts the changes by resolution. 2. The Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council can also initiate amendments to the Land Use Plan. Again, both boards hold public hearings and the changes are adopted by the Town Council by resolution. 3. The private sector can also initiate amendments to the Vail Land Use Plan. Applications may be made by a registered voter, a property owner, or a property owner's authorized representative. The amendments are then heard by both the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council. The Town Council then adopts the changes by resolution. The Community Development Department has reviewed the Land Use Plan, in accordance with the plan's recommendation, and taken a proactive role in identifying several properties for consideration of a change in land use designations. Those properties are discussed in Section IV of this memorandum. 111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION As this is a worksession, staff is not making a recommendation at this time. The Community Development Department is requesting direction from Town Council regarding the properties discussed in Section IV of this memorandum. IV. PROPERTIES FOR CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE IN LAND USE DESIGNATION A. Mountain Bell In 1993, the Mountain Bell site was recommended by the Housing Authority as a potential location for employee housing. Recently, the Town Council has considered this recommendation to locate employee housing on this site. According to the Vail Land Use Plan, the site is currently designated "Open Space" and "Semi-public". Those land use designations are defined as follows: Open Space (OS): Passive recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream corridors and drainageways are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were classified as undevelopable due to high hazards and slopes over 40% are also included within this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted by existing zoning, such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning. Also, permitted in this area would be institutional/public uses. Public/Semi-Public (PSP): The Public and semi-public category includes schools, post office, water and sewer service and storage facilities, cemeteries, municipal facilities, and other public institutions, which are 2 located throughout the community to serve the needs of residents. The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan identifies the Mountain Bell Site as "approximately half of the property is intended for affordable housing and the remainder of the site will remain open space." If employee housing is the desired use on this site, staff would recommend amending the Land Use Plan to change the designation on this property to "High Density Residential." "High Density Residential" allows for: The housing in this category would typically consist of multi-floored structures with densities exceeding 15 dwelling units per buildable acre. Other activities in this category would include private recreational facilities, and private parking facilities and institutional/public uses such as churches, fire stations and park and open space facilities. With this change in land use designation, other zone districts would be applicable to the site, including HDMF, MDMF, and the proposed H districts. Staff is not proposing a rezoning at this time. The existing zoning (GU and NAPD) still controls the use of the site, until any rezoning is approved. Site Analysis: Zoning: General Use and Natural Area Preservation District Hazards: Moderate Rockfall Hazard, Moderate Debris Flow Hazard, and Steep Slopes. Lot Size: 7.71 acres Existing Use: ABC and Leaning Tree schools, tower, open space. B. Lots 15 and 16, Bighorn 2nd Addition A recent application was filed on Lots 15 and 16, Bighorn 2"d Addition which would have resubdivided and rezoned the lots. Lot 15 is currently zoned Primary/Secondary while Lot 16 is zoned Agriculture and Open Space. The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan identifies Lot 16 for acquisition by the Town. Because the Land Use Plan is the primary review tool for any rezoning proposal, staff believes that it is necessary to change the Land Use Designation for both lots to Open Space. According to the Land Use Plan, Lots 15 & 16 are designated 'low density residential'. The purpose of the low-density residential designation is to provide sites for single-family detached homes and two-family dwelling units. Density of development with in this category would typically not exceed 3 structures per buildable acre. Also within this area would be private recreation facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools, and club houses for the use of residents of the area. Institutional/public uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space related facilities. Staff is recommending that the land use designation for Lots 15 and 16 be changed to "Open Space". Open Space would allow for the lots to be zoned NAPD, A/OS, or OR. The Open Space designation allows for the following: 3 Open Space (OS): Passive recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream corridors and drainageways are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were classified as undevelopable due to high hazards and slopes over 40% are also included within this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted by existing zoning, such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning. Also, permitted in this area would be institutional/public uses. Site Analysis: Lot 15 Lot 16 Zoning: P/S A/OS Hazards: high severity rockfall, high severity rockfall, high hazard debris flow, high hazard debris flow, blue avalanche blue avalanche Lot Size: 83,653 sq. ft. 125,797 sq. ft. Existing Use: open space open space C. Other Properties for Consideration for Changes in Land Use Designations Staff has identified other properties for consideration in changes in land use designations. While there are no recent activities in these properties, staff is prepared to consider changes in their designations. These properties include: 1. Properties recently de-annexed as part of the land exchange with the Forest Service. Specifically, the "Trapper Run" parcel, and Parcel C, adjacent to the Mill Creek Subdivision are properties staff has identified. These properties are no longer within the Town of Vail limits. While it is common to have land use designations adjacent to Town property, the current land use designations may not be appropriate. 2. Lots 5-12, Vail Meadows Filing 2. These lots were acquired by the Town and are identified in the Comprehensive Open Lands Plan. They are currently zoned Natural Area Preservation District, but have a land use designation of Low Density Residential. In addition, Lots 1-4 are identified in the Comprehensive Open Lands Plan as a high priority for acquisition. They are currently zoned Agriculture and Open Space, but have a land use designation of Low Density Residential. 3. Lots 1-4, The Valley are residentially zoned lots but have a land use designation of Open Space. These lots may be more appropriate with a land use designation of Low Density Residential. 4 Lots 15 and 16, Bighorn 2nd Addition X -,x 7 i 2 ^,TA 392 3776 / 3627 / \ \HIHIN CFfE1( 7 pgftk 3616 6 / 3947 1 \ \ 6 3x26 3931 3677 \ \ \ 10 Z 5A 3626 13!]_\ 3B37 7 \ / 3646 3944 \ \ 4A \ \ st tz ~ / s4B s. 3B97 i \ 6 3B34 3WS 3954 4 6 . f X77 3764 / BIGHORN U 4 ITI 1~ s s 3997 j /3%4 2B s $ 3647/ 2A \ o- 4 f / X47 s 5-B 3916 v 4, 3816 \ \ 3667 , i 4 \ . 3677 / 3 Lots 15 and 16 are designated LDR. BIGHORN SUBDI sION Current zoning for Lot 15 is P/S. Current zoning for Lot 16 is Ag/OS. N Proposed land use designation is OS. Mountain Bell Site Mountain Bell is designated OS and PSP. Current zoning for the site is GU and NAPD. Proposed land use designation is OS and HDR. S:. = 3 R. y f ESf-YAKS vE.q VNL NLWGE LING2 a \ VNLNON~~FlLINGI . ~sruasewnrme VNL LIOfAJJ1EPD ~~tqn m/ I x FlLING2 ~ m .attic A \ Fe e ~FST .ac.en.~a wsr eE mru' VNL NLV2 a s.V urvc @ mre ~ im VNLL~V RLING2 ~"e*«swow~ Lots 1-12, Vail Meadows Filing 2 ® „P ® ~ , ® Po~ ppp ere r~ p u " DIMS Ag 5 y, . CEMR tt71MTONM10US6 RLM2 150 4 'M ae an „m i O CN n ~ H ~f4 „ ~ ~i n° ~nTneanac9 roiar+rlous~,s \ i "eFA~~ VlVL a 2 m LM ~r ~ Lots 1-12 are designated as LDR & a ,-~~flu' Lots 5-12 are zoned NAPD. Lots 1-4 are zoned Ag/OS. N Lots 1-4 1 he Val I e These lots are designated OS These lots are part of SDD 34 and RC zoning. RIDGE AT VAI '.ATM lwcrn 4vsEe 1iY! ~ 3~ ' mecrc ~ ~L 1610 /~V~ {may 1161 C.~ li 1511 441~ ~.,3a7,.:. Ism v 5 p19 1618 `iof Pi 1818 E C 184 1B9 p 1BA ry1 mf iNL1 C \ 'p 1 r a '~7& ' lsre ,FSCrz a p a° oft z \ fns 0 / / \ 0 idY v 1 S 14d 15x5 1811 8 8 p K 16Fv 410 Im N x~ ~ Demmannexed Parcel 1 wLN~~, J = - f ~ W,NU.~ ~ ® LN,~AN 1M.yr- a A s W® LJ ^ wN° eY yy --'T~ a~~ P, z`t S ^ a. wLNU.~nuws WvN~~Va Not within TOV Boundaries N Designated as Ski Base parcel ed ~Z/7, ndaneS y Within To and VAR Not Hated as OS ..e pesi9 f' I ~ !r ~ 51 TOWN OF VAIL Town Council Critical Strategies Action Plan September 2000- November 2001 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Community Alignment & Partnerships • Set CouncilNRI 14 month Meeting notes and 4110/01 Suzanne Silverthorn retreat matrix tracking format distributed. Next steps include adding detail to the matrix. • Begin report out to community at "Peer 14 month Additional meetings for 2001 TBD Suzanne Silverthorn Resort"meeting to be scheduled Redefine TOVNRI CouncilNRI to clarify Task Task Force 14 month Force role as outlined in TBD Ludwig Kurz Managed Growth Agreement; then develop appointment process. • Define desired outcomes by Process to be designed as Bob McLaurin creating a vivid 14 month next step in constituent TBD Suzanne Silverthorn description for 2005, partnership efforts. Russell Forest 2010, 2015, 2020 Morter Architects working to Consolidate 14 month identify possible locations. TBD Pam Brandmeyer Information Booths This project is unfunded. • Work w/ Merchants On going to define approval 6 month 2/27/01 Pam Brandmeyer procedures for Another meeting with event special events producers, merchants, vendors set fdheads.matrix Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee 1-70 Noise Abatement 14 month . Noise map complete • Identify Options 01/15 Greg Hall • Identify Funding . Presentation of contour map and potential mitigation locations along 02/06 Greg Hall with mitigation options • Determine to what extent the TOV is willing to fund TBD Town Council noise mitigation 2 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Maintain natural environment and town Maintenance infrastructure • Water Quality • Foster stewardship Solid Waste & partnership 6 & 14 On going Everyone months • Noxious Weed • Achieve Disney standards • Clean Pedestrian Areas • Reinstitute "Adopt-a- Path/Street" • Well lit, clean parking structures Village Parking 14 month Structural engineering Nina Timm Structure (retail) report. states $2-4 million to 02/13 Greg Hall stabilize beam Council to get public feedback on commercial space built by TOV. TBD Town Council Review Uniform Gary Goodell Building Code and 14 month Presentation to Council on Mike McGee Fire Code 12/12. Staff preparing 03/6 Tom Moorhead appeals procedure. Greg Morrison • Parking Pay in Lieu 6 month Staff is preparing ordinance setting higher fees for residential uses and lower (if 2/6/01 Brent Wilson any) for commercial uses. • Community 6 &14 Concept paper presented to Review design Facilities Hub Site month Council on 12112. Council contract, budget Russ Forrest developed wish list on 12/19 and square footage on 02/06 3 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Special Events • Brief Council from a first-time promoter's 6 month & neighbor's 2127/01 Pam Brandmeyer perspective • Solicit input from 6 month on going event organizers • Identify additional 6 month Currently available venues venues identified and occupancy 4/03/01 Mike Vaughan load to be determined for each site by 3/31 Wayfinding Greg Hall • Approve drawings Substantially complete Suzanne Silverthorn • Install upon arrival 6 month Phase-one signs will be 03/01 Greg Hall delivered in March with Suzanne Silverthorn interior parking structure signs first to be installed. All remaining phase-one signs will be installed no later than Memorial Day. • Trail identifiers installed by 4/15/01 04101 • Lionshead Public 6 & 14 Staff is evaluating revenue TBD Russ Forrest Financing month potential and legal issues, Bob McLaurin required improvements and Steve Thompson costs associated with these Tom Moorhead improvements. Also monitoring Broomfield case. 4 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee • Donovan Park 6 & 14 • Pavilion design under February 2001 George Ruther month way (Review architecture) • Phase I site development package out to bid Todd O TBD • Execute project financing ($3 million) Steve Thompson • Property owner plans on Nina Timm • Ruins 14 month reapplying for the same Tom Moorhead development approval Russ Forrest that expired (1/9/01). February 2001 • Town has expressed intention to purchase property for affordable housing. Will consider re-establishment of Housing Authority to move forward with project. • Berry Creek 14 month Mayor & Sybil to meet w/ Nina Timm developer & Commissioners 02/5/01 Tom Moorhead to review site plan Russ Forrest • Buy down program Staff will begin looking for 3 When suitable (3 bedroom units 14 month bedroom units immediately. unit is found Nina Timm for families) Tom Moorhead Meet w/ Commissioners Meeting with Commissioners • Employee 6 month scheduled for 02/13/00 February 2001 Russ Forrest Generation Capital Projects Nina Timm 5 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Timber Ridge 6 month Ordinance drafted. Initial February 2001 Allison Ochs review by PEC and Council Tom Moorhead • Housing Zone complete. PEC reviewed on District 6 month 1/8101 and requested one more review on 1/22. Identify impacts of Telluride Tom Moorhead housing decision Decide on fire Bob and John Gulick to station locations and 6 month prepare memo summarizing 02/01 Bob McLaurin staffing. and framing issues. • Discuss impact fee Discuss possibility of February 2001 proposal to fund hiring Rocky Mtn. Group to Tom Moorhead fire dept. capital conduct impact fee study. projects and (Tom researching legal John Gulick equipment issues) • Red Sandstone Preliminary design/cost Todd O Field 14 month estimate complete Tom K TBD • Staff met with School Todd O District on 1/29- School Tom K Board to consider proposal on 2/14/01 Bob McLaurin Todd O. 6 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee In-town Transportation • Staff has investigated the • Review alternatives 6 months smart bus stop 2/01 Greg Hall to replace in town technology and is Mike Rose shuttle meeting with the vendor to determine feasibility • Explore possible 14 month and cost implications funding partners • Staff has contacted Mike Rose (demo project) various custom muffler Greg Hall manufacturers and will get proposals on "quiet" muffler technology • GPS implementation Mike Rose underway Greg Hall Summary of Completed Actions • Mission, Vision and Values Statement Posted in Council Chambers • Notification of Town's intent to strengthen partnership with Vail Resorts • Establishment of schedule for monthly Council "walkabouts"; two walkabouts held. • Affordable Housing Zone District drafted; reviewed by PEC & Town Council • Donovan Park Agreement for design services complete. • Donovan Park zone Change 2nd reading for Council approval 12/19 • Vail Center 501(c)(3) formed • 15t Community meeting held • 2nd Community meeting held • TOVNRI Retreat held • Completion of special event "shadowing" by Greg Moffet Unfunded Capital Projects • Ruins Housing Project • West Vail Lodge • Information Center • Lionshead Public Improvements • Vail Center Improvements • 1-70 Noise Abatement • Gymnastics Facility • Gore Creek Sediment Clean Up 7 TOWN OF VAIL Town Council Critical Strategies Action Plan September 2000- November 2001 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Community Alignment & Partnerships • Set CouncilNRI 14 month Meeting notes and 4/10/01 Suzanne Silverthorn retreat matrix tracking format distributed. Next steps include adding detail to the matrix. • Begin report out to community at "Peer 14 month Additional meetings for 2001 TBD Suzanne Silverthorn Resort" meeting to be scheduled • Redefine TOVNRI CouncilNRI to clarify Task Task Force 14 month Force role as outlined in TBD Ludwig Kurz Managed Growth Agreement; then develop appointment process. • Define desired outcomes by Process to be designed as Bob McLaurin creating a vivid 14 month next step in constituent TBD Suzanne Silverthorn description for 2005, partnership efforts. Russell Forest 2010, 2015, 2020 Morter Architects working to • Consolidate 14 month identify possible locations. TBD Pam Brandmeyer Information Booths This project is unfunded. • Work w/ Merchants On going to define approval 6 month 2/27/01 Pam Brandmeyer . procedures for Another meeting with event special events producers, merchants, vendors set f:dheads.matrix Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ • Action Timeline Date Lead Employee 1-70 Noise Abatement 14 month . Noise map complete • Identify Options 01/15 Greg Hall • Identify Funding . Presentation of contour map and potential mitigation locations along 02106 Greg Hall with mitigation options . Determine to what extent the TOV is willing to fund TBD Town Council noise mitigation • 2 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact) Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Maintain natural environment and town Maintenance infrastructure • Water Quality • Foster stewardship Solid Waste & partnership 6 & 14 On going Everyone months Noxious Weed Achieve Disney standards Clean Pedestrian Areas • Reinstitute "Adopt-a- Path/Street" Well lit, clean parking structures • Village Parking 14 month Structural engineering Nina Timm Structure (retail) report. states $2-4 million to 02113 Greg Hall stabilize beam Council to get public feedback on commercial space built by TOV. TBD Town Council • Review Uniform Gary Goodell Building Code and 14 month Presentation to Council on Mike McGee Fire Code 12112. Staff preparing 03/6 Tom Moorhead appeals procedure. Greg Morrison • Parking Pay in Lieu 6 month Staff is preparing ordinance setting higher fees for residential uses and lower (if 2/6/01 Brent Wilson any) for commercial uses. • Community 6 &14 Concept paper presented to Review design Facilities Hub Site month Council on 12/12. Council contract, budget Russ Forrest developed wish list on 12119 and square footage on 02/06 3 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Special Events • Brief Council from a first-time promoter's 6 month & neighbor's 2/27/01 Pam Brandmeyer perspective Solicit input from 6 month on going event organizers • Identify additional 6 month Currently available venues venues identified and occupancy 4/03/01 Mike Vaughan load to be determined for each site by 3/31 Wayfinding Greg Hall • Approve drawings Substantially complete Suzanne Silverthorn • Install upon arrival 6 month Phase-one signs will be 03/01 Greg Hall delivered in March with Suzanne Silverthorn interior parking structure signs first to be installed. All remaining phase-one signs will be installed no later than Memorial Day. • Trail identifiers installed by 4/15101 04/ 01 • Lionshead Public 6 & 14 Staff is evaluating revenue TBD Russ Forrest Financing month potential and legal issues, Bob McLaurin required improvements and Steve Thompson costs associated with these Tom Moorhead improvements. Also monitoring Broomfield case. 4 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee • Donovan Park 6 & 14 Pavilion design under February 2001 George Ruther month way (Review architecture) • Phase I site development package out to bid Todd O TBD • Execute project financing ($3 million) Steve Thompson • Property owner plans on Nina Timm • Ruins 14 month reapplying for the same Tom Moorhead development approval Russ Forrest that expired (1/9/01). February 2001 • Town has expressed intention to purchase property for affordable housing. Will consider re-establishment of Housing Authority to move forward with project. • Berry Creek 14 month Mayor & Sybil to meet w/ Nina Timm developer & Commissioners 0215101 Tom Moorhead to review site plan Russ Forrest • Buy down program Staff will begin looking for 3 When suitable (3 bedroom units 14 month bedroom units immediately. unit is found Nina Timm for families) Tom Moorhead Meet w/ Commissioners Meeting with Commissioners • Employee 6 month scheduled for 02/13/00 February 2001 Russ Forrest Generation Capital Projects Nina Timm 5 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ > Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Timber Ridge 6 month Ordinance drafted. Initial February 2001 Allison Ochs review by PEC and Council Tom Moorhead • Housing Zone complete. PEC reviewed on District 6 month 1/8101 and requested one more review on 1122. Identify impacts of Telluride Tom Moorhead housing decision • Decide on fire Bob and John Gulick to station locations and 6 month prepare memo summarizing 02/01 Bob McLaurin staffing. and framing issues. • Discuss impact fee Discuss possibility of February 2001 proposal to fund hiring Rocky Mtn. Group to Tom Moorhead fire dept. capital conduct impact fee study. projects and (Tom researching legal John Gulick equipment issues) • Red Sandstone Preliminary design/cost Todd O Field 14 month estimate complete TBD Tom K • Staff met with School Todd O District on 1/29- School Tom K Board to consider proposal on 2/14/01 Bob McLaurin Todd O. 6 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact! Action Timeline Date Lead Employee In-town Transportation • Staff has investigated the Review alternatives 6 months smart bus stop 2101 Greg Hall to replace in town technology and is Mike Rose shuttle meeting with the vendor to determine feasibility Explore possible 14 month and cost implications funding partners • Staff has contacted Mike Rose (demo project) various custom muffler Greg Hall manufacturers and will get proposals on "quiet" muffler technology • GPS implementation Mike Rose underway Greg Hall Summary of Completed Actions Mission, Vision and Values Statement Posted in Council Chambers Notification of Town's intent to strengthen partnership with Vail Resorts • Establishment of schedule for monthly Council "walkabouts"; two walkabouts held. • Affordable Housing Zone District drafted; reviewed by PEC & Town Council • Donovan Park Agreement for design services complete. • Donovan Park zone Change 2nd reading for Council approval 12/19 • Vail Center 501(c)(3) formed • 1sr Community meeting held • 2nd Community meeting held TOVNRI Retreat held • Completion of special event "shadowing" by Greg Moffet Unfunded Capital Projects • Ruins Housing Project ¦ West Vail Lodge • Information Center • Lionshead Public Improvements • Vail Center Improvements • 1-70 Noise Abatement • Gymnastics Facility Gore Creek Sediment Clean Up MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Brent Wilson, Department of Community Development DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Modifications to Ordinance No. 2 (Exemption Plats) Since First Reading The following two changes have been added to Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2001 since first reading: 1) Pursuant to the Town Council's request on January 16th, the words "single-family or duplex" have been added to the lot boundary adjustment language in item #7 on page 2. 2) A sample title format certificate for exemption plats has been added to our existing plat title format section. Please refer to the bottom of page 4 of the ordinance for details. 1 Memorandum TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Tom Moorhead Russell Forrest Nina Timm DATE: February 2, 2001 SUBJECT: Meeting with Board of County Commissioners and Auerbach Southwest to discuss housing site at Berry Creek 5`h Filing On Monday, February 5`h, at 1:30 pm until 3:00 pm Auerbach Southwest, the developers selected for the Berry Creek 5`h housing site, will be in the Community Development large conference room to present their ideas regarding the housing at Berry Creek. The members of the Board of County Commissioners will also be present at this meeting. The meeting will begin with a presentation by members of Auerbach's staff and will be followed by a discussion with Auerbach, elected officials, and staff. This meeting has been posted as a public meeting. VAIL TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE Mondav. Februarv 5. 2001 1:30 P.M. - 3:00 P.M. Community Development Large Conference Room 111 Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado A special meeting has been called to hear a presentation from Auerbach Southwest in regard to the Berry Creek Fifth housing site. A question and answer session will follow to allow discussion. In attendance will be the Eagle County Commissioners and the Vail Town Council. TOWN OF VAIL Pamela A. Brandmeyer Assistant Town Manager PUBLIC NOTICE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE (AS OF 1/31101) FEBRUARY, 2001 In an attempt to respond to scheduled meeting demands, as well as adhere to mandated ordinance and charter requirements, Council meetings are scheduled at the following times: EVENING MEETINGS Evening meetings will continue to be held on the first and third Tuesday evenings of each month, starting at 7:00 P.M. These meetings will provide a forum for citizen participation and public audience for conducting regular Council business. WORK SESSIONS Work Sessions, which are primarily scheduled for Council debate and understanding of issues before the Council, will now be scheduled to begin at 2:00 P.M. (unless otherwise noted) on every Tuesday afternoon. THE FEBRUARY. 2001 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE IS AS FOLLOWS: Tuesday, February 6, 2001 Work Session............ 1:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Evening Meeting........ 7:00 P.M. Tuesday, February 13, 2001 Work Session 2:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Tuesday, February 20, 2001 Work Session 2:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Evening Meeting......... 7:00 P.M. Tuesday, February 27, 2001 Work Session 2:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) TOWN OF VAIL Pamela A. Brandmeyer Assistant Town Manager Sign Language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. I MEMORANDUM DATE: February 1, 2001 TO: Town Council FROM: R. Thomas Moorhead SUBJECT: Town of Vail and Vail Chamber & Business Association Agreement Attached is the contract which has been forwarded to VCBA for execution. If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call. Thanks cc: Pam Brandmeyer Attachment Town of Vail and Vail Chamber & Business Association AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into on this _ day of February, 2001 by the TOWN OF VAIL, Colorado municipal corporation ("the Town") and the VAIL CHAMBER & BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, ("VCBA"). WHEREAS, the Town has a vital interest in the economic health of the Town;and WHEREAS, THE Colorado Revised Statutes and the Vail Town Code provide the Town with the power to appropriate money for the purpose of advertising the business, social and educational advantages, the natural resources and the scenic information attractions of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to assist the VCBA in its effort to promote and support commerce and enterprise in the Town of Vail and to be a strong advocate and speak with a unified voice for the business interests of its members while remaining mindful of the interests of the community at large; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement to establish the amount, duration, terms and conditions for the VCBA to provide such services to the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE AND PI IRPOSE The Scope and Purpose of this Agreement are set forth in the attached Business Plan (Exhibit A) II. CONSIDERATION The Town will donate to the VCBA two hundred and forty thousand dollars ($240,000) for the calendar year January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001. Prior to execution of this Agreement as directed by the Town Council on January 16, 2001, fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) has been paid. The remaining one hundred and ninety thousand dollars ($190,000) will be paid in quarterly installments. III. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF FUNDS A. The VCBA shall keep or cause to be kept true, accurate and complete accounting records of all business and financial transactions relating to the aforementioned functions and shall make such records available to N%VAILIDATAMbest\ATTORNEYIDOCUMEN7Wail Chamber Agreement.doc the Town upon reasonable request therefore without delay and without expense. The VCBA agrees the Town shall have the right through its duly authorized employees, agents or representatives, to examine all pertinent records at any and all reasonable times for the purpose of determining the accuracy thereof and other reports required to be provided and filed with the Town pursuant to this paragraph. B. The VCBA shall submit to the Town an accounting of funds received and expended by it for each month during the term of this Agreement within 30 days after the end of each month. C. The VCBA shall submit to the Town its unaudited financial report no later than March 1, 2002. IV. TERM This Agreement became effective on January 1, 2001 and shall terminate on December 31, 2001. This Agreement has been executed on the day and year first written above by the parties hereto. V. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The VCBA is an independent contractor, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute or designate the VCBA or any of it's employees as agents (except as expressly set forth in this Agreement) or employees of the Town. Further, it is agreed that: A. The Town of Vail does not require the VCBA to work exclusively for it; B. The Town of Vail, for whom the services are to be performed, does not establish a quality standard for the VCBA; C. The Town of Vail may supply plans and specification, but will not oversee the actual work or instruct the VCBA as to how the work will be performed; D. The Town of Vail can terminate the Contract if the VCBA violates the terms of the Contract or fails to produce a result that meets the specifications of the Contract; E. The Town of Vail does not provide training for the VCBA's employees or workers; F. The Town of Vail does not provide tools or benefits to complete the Contract although materials and equipment may be supplied; 11VAILIDATA%mbest\ATTORNEYIDOCUMENT\Vail Chamber Agreement.doc r. G. The Town of Vail does not dictate the time of performance except that a completion schedule and range of work hours may be established; H. Payment for services rendered pursuant to this Contract will be made to the trade or business name of the provider of services rather than to the individual; and 1. The Town of Vail does not in any way combine its business operations with those of the VCBA. THE VCBA AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. IS NOT ENTITLED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND THE CONSULTANT IS OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY MONIES EARNED. Vl. INSURANCE The VCBA shall obtain and maintain in force for the term of this Agreement the following insurance; A. Comprehensive general liability (including personal injury) in the amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per individual and not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence. B. Worker's Compensation and employer liability in accordance with the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Colorado for employees doing work in Colorado in accordance with this Agreement. C. Automobile liability (including owned, non-owned, and hired) in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per individual and not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. D. The above coverages shall be obtained from Companies acceptable to the Town. Certificates of Insurance evidencing automobile liability coverage shall be furnished to the Town at the time of the signing of this Agreement. The general liability policy shall include the Town as an additional named insured by policy endorsement and a copy shall be provided to the Town. VII. NO WAIVER No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement, nor shall such waiver constitute a continuing waiver unless otherwise expressly provided, nor shall the waiver of any default of the terms of this Agreement be deemed a waiver of any subsequent default. \\VAILIDATAMbestVATTORNEY\DOCUMENTVVaiI Chamber Agreement.doc VIII. TERMINATION The performance of the work provided for in this Agreement may be terminated at any time in whole or, from time to time, in part by the Town for its convenience. Any such termination shall be effected by delivery to the VCBA of a written notice specifying the date upon which termination becomes effective. This Agreement may also be terminated by the VCBA in the event of a material default of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the Town, provided the VCBA has first provided the Town with written notice of the default and the Town shall have failed to cure the specified default within seven (7) days of receipt of the notice. In the event of termination, the VCBA shall be paid on a pro-rata basis for services satisfactorily completed prior to the date of termination and for expenses prior to the date of termination. IX. JURISDICTION. VENUE AND ATTORNEYS FEES The jurisdiction and venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie in Eagle County, Colorado. If it becomes necessary to bring any cause of action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be awarded its legal costs including investigation and attorney fees. X. POINT OF CONTACT An points of contact for both parties and any notice provided for in this Agreement shall be deemed given if mailed to the respective parties at the addresses below: Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Attn: Robert W. McLaurin Ph. 9701479-2105 Fax: 970/479-2157 Vail Chamber & Business Association 241 S. Frontage Rd. Suite 2 Vail, Colorado 81657 Attn: Kaye Ferry Ph. 970/477-0075 Fax: 970/477-0079 XI. ASSIGNMENT It is anticipated that many of the services described within this Agreement will be contracted for by the VCBA. The VCBA will advise the Assistant Town Manager of contracts entered into for services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. NVAIL%DATAImbest\ATTORNEIIDOCUMENT\Vail Chamber Agreement.doc XII. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW The VCBA will not perform any of the services provided specified in this Agreement contrary to any local, state, federal, or county law. XIII. SEVERABILITY Should any section of this Agreement be found to be invalid, all other sections shall remain in full force and effect as though severable from the part invalidated. XIV. INTENTION OF THE PARTIES This Agreement contains the entire intention of the parties and may only be changed by a written document signed by the parties. XIX. EXECUTION The parties have executed this Agreement on day of February, 2001. TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk VAIL CHAMBER & BUSINESS ASSOCIATION A Colorado not-for-profit corporation By: Kaye Ferry, President \\VAIL\DATA\mbestATTORNEY\DOCUMENT\Vail Chamber Agreement.doc