Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-02-27 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 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. LIONSHEAD WALKABOUT LUNCH: 11:30 A.M. - NOON KALTENBERG CASTLE BREWERY 600 LIONSHEAD MALL WALKABOUT: NOON -1:45 P.M. VAIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS PUBLIC MEETING VAIL LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 2:00 P.M. The Vail Town Council, sitting as the Vail Local Housing Authority, will hear a presentation by Kathy McCormick, to be followed by discussion. Kathy McCormick Vail Housing Authority. (1 hour.) Nina Timm ITEM/TOPIC: Kathy McCormick of McCormick and Associates, Inc. will be here to outline the role of a housing authority and its statutory power. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Participate in discussion and provide direction as appropriate. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Vail Housing Authority was created in 1991. On February 6, 2001 the Vail Town Council ex officio appointed themselves as the current housing authority members. Kathy McCormick will be here to provide information about the role of a housing authority, its statutory powers as well as the financing tools available to a housing authority. RECOMMENDATION: None as this is a work session. TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION 3:00 P.M. 1) Recreation Instream Flow Legislation. (15 min.) Glen Porzak BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Staff has enclosed a copy of a letter from Glenn Porzak to Dennis Gelvin and Rick Sackbauer , with an additional attachment of the proposed "Recreational Instream Flow Legislation." Passage of this legislation could substantially limit or even prevent the recently completed whitewater kayak course on Gore Creek. Porzak met with the Board of Directors for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) on Thursday, February 22nd, and this board agreed to cost-share up to $2,000 of the expense of a lobbyist to jointly represent the interests of ERWSD, the Town of Vail, the Town of Breckenridge, and the City of Golden. The estimated cost to hire this lobbyist is $6-8,000. Porzak is requesting up to $2,000 from the Town of Vail to pursue this lobbyist, as well as like amounts from Breckenridge and Golden. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve up to $2,000 from Council Contingency. 2) DRB Report. (PEC Meeting Cancelled). (10 min.) 3) Bright Horizons Update. (15 min.) John Power 4) Donovan Park. (45 min.) Todd Oppenheimer George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: The purpose of this worksession meeting is to provide answers to the questions that the Council members asked at our presentation to the Vail Town Council on Tuesday evening, February 20th. As promised, the design team has taken each of the questions asked by the various Council members and is prepared to respond to them. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the design team's presentation and then use the remaining time to ask any follow up questions the Council has of the design team. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The design team presented a Donovan Park construction process update to the Vail Town Council on Tuesday, February 20th. In order to ensure that there was adequate time to present the project and to get all of the Council member's questions on the table, the design team simply wrote down all the questions asked by the Council with the agreement that all the questions would be responded to at the February 27th worksession meeting. The team anticipates that more meetings will be scheduled on a regular basis throughout the duration of the construction project. RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department staff is not making a recommendation at this time. 5) Review Council Critical Strategies. (15 min.) 6) Information Update. (10 min.) 7) Council Reports. (10 min.) 8) Other. (10 min.) 9) Site Visit to Snowberry Lane. (35 min.) Russell Forrest Greg Hall 10) Executive Session -Land Acquisition. (10 min.) 11) Adjournment. ( 5:55 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, 3/6/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3/6101, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3/13/01, 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. McCormick and Associates, Memo To: Town of Vail, Town Council From: Kathy McCormick CC: Nina Timm Date: 02/22/01 Re: Housing Authorities Purpose It is my understanding that the Town of Vail has re-instituted its housing authority and wants to explore some options for how it might be organized and what it may be able to accomplish vis-a-vis affordable housing in the area. The purpose of this memo is to provide a brief overview of the powers assigned to local housing authorities and a sample of some of the financing techniques that are available to authorities. This information provides some of the background for our discussion on February 27, 2001. Overview Housing Authorities are described as "a body both corporate and politic, exercising public powers and having all the powers necessary or convenient to carry out and effectuate" its purposes. We will discuss some of the practical applications of the powers provided to local housing authorities, including board/staff structure, project development and financing and asset management. This overview provides some of the background information that may be useful in this discussion. Much of this information has been extracted from the enabling legislation. Following are some of the questions I anticipate Council may wish to discuss: 1. What role would the Council like to see the housing authority play in influencing local housing policy? 2. What are some of the options for the housing authority to own and manage projects? 3. What are some of the short-term hopes for the housing authority? 4. Is there a long-term vision for the authority? 5. What types of projects does the Council anticipate the housing authority might undertake and how does Council retain some control over these projects? 1 6. Is it important that the authority reach financial self-sufficiency over time? 7. What are some of the advantages/disadvantages of the following: a) Naming City Council to act as the board of commissioners versus naming a separate board; and, b) Assigning City Staff to act on behalf of the authority. Housing Authority Powers The powers of a housing authority are broad, but focused on positively affecting the plight of low-income persons in a community. This becomes clear when reviewing some of the housing authority enabling legislation which provides authorities with the ability: ¦ To investigate living, dwelling and housing conditions and the means and methods of improving such conditions; ¦ To determine where unsafe, unsanitary or substandard dwelling or housing conditions exist; ¦ To study and make recommendations concerning the city plan in relation to the problem of clearing, re-planning and reconstruction of areas in which unsafe, unsanitary or substandard housing conditions exist; and, ¦ To provide for the dwelling accommodation for person of low income. Housing Authority Organization Housing Authorities have a board of commissioners that are either: 1. Members of a governing body, with terms of office that are coterminous with the terms of office for the governing body. This would be the Town of Vail Council; or, 2. Five members that are appointed by the Mayor, with no more than one of the commissioners being a city official. Most housing authorities have a separate board of commissioners that is appointed by the Mayor. This option is generally favored for several reasons, including: ¦ The time required to be both a commissioner and elected official; ¦ The desire to have some "separateness" from the local government. This becomes very important when a housing authority is pursuing a potentially controversial project; and, • One of the commissioners is an elected official, who keeps the balance of the Council apprised of local housing authority activities. McCormick and Associates, Inc. • Page 2 Staffing patterns for local housing authorities vary, depending upon the goals of the organization, current and future activities and existing resources. Some authorities have staffs that are completely separate from the local government, whereas others have staffs that perform duties for both the city and the authority. Following are two examples: 1. Until recently, the Housing Director for the City of Boulder was also assigned to act as the Executive Director of the Housing Authority. This position was fully funded through the city. The balance of the staff is "housing authority" staff and is paid through authority revenue; however, they are also part of Boulder's personnel system. Although a separate Executive Director has been named, all staff continue to be included in the city's personnel system; and, 2. The City of Loveland has a separate board and staff. They are completely autonomous from the City of Loveland, although there is a history of a good working relationship between the two entities. Projects Generally, housing authorities provide a voice for the housing needs of low-income households and undertake a variety of projects to address these needs. Authorities may do "mixed-income" developments, which means that a portion of the housing is set aside for low income households, with the balance done as market rate housing. This has become more commonplace over the last ten years or so, as federally subsidies to support low-income housing have diminished and mixed income developments are needed to be financially feasible. Authorities are able to: 1. prepare, carry out and operate projects and to provide for the construction, reconstruction, improvement, alteration or repair of any project; 2. take over by purchase, lease or otherwise any project undertaken by any government or by the city; 3. manage as agent of the city any project constructed or owned by the city; 4. lease or rent any of the dwelling, land, buildings, structures or facilities embraced in any project, and to establish and revise the rents; 5. purchase, lease, obtain options upon or acquire by eminent domain, gift, grant, bequest, devise, or otherwise any property, real or person, or any interest therein from any person, firm, corporation, the city or a government; and, 6. sell, exchange, transfer, assign, or pledge any property, real or personal, or any interest therein to any person, firm, corporation, the city or a government. This allows the authority to buy, sell, develop and redevelop property. It supports housing authorities in obtaining properties through a variety of methods. For example, one authority agreed to maintain an older single-family home, with the understanding that the home would be bequeathed to the authority upon the death of the residents. This language also provides an opportunity for a city, or other entity to enter into an agreement with a housing authority to manage a property on its behalf. For example, if the city owned a piece of land that it wanted McCormick and Associates, Inc. 0 Page 3 to develop into housing, it could enter into an agreement with the authority to manage the property while the city retained ownership. Another option might be to enter into a ground lease that would allow the authority to develop the property for a specific purpose, with the local government retaining title to the land. One advantage of having a housing authority own and manage properties separately from the city is that the liability accrues to the authority, not the local government. It also keeps the city from being involved in day-to-day management and operations, which can be complex and contentious. This usually happens if someone must be evicted for non-payment of rent or for disturbing others. Another advantage of having a housing authority develop properties is that the city is in the position of reviewing the project and acting on the merits of the proposed development, much as it would for any private sector development. Financing One of the benefits of a housing authority is that it is able to incur debt, and is generally treated outside of TABOR. The effects of TABOR are important, as they limit the ability of local governments to incur debt for more than one year, without a vote. Housing authorities, on the other hand, are treated as an "enterprise". An enterprise is essentially a government owned business, where no more than 10% of annual revenues are from grants from all Colorado state and local governments. This includes direct cash grants, as well as other services such as legal advice, staff paid by the city and space the city may provide for offices. It is important to keep this fact in mind, as the authority must meet this test each time it issues bonds or enters into some other form of debt. Also, this is an area that appears to be contested consistently, requiring legal guidance about how to manage the authority so it is in compliance with TABOR. Housing authorities are able to: 1. borrow money upon its bonds, notes, debentures, or other evidence of indebtedness, and to secure the same by pledges of its revenues and by mortgages upon property held or to be held by it; and, 2. make and execute contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to the exercise of the powers of the authority. Housing authorities are able to take advantage of several financing techniques. The choice of financing is often dependent upon the size (cost) of a development and the type of financing that is best suited for the development. This provides a sample of some of the financing that may be available. ¦ Private Activity Bonds- are tax-exempt bonds that can be issued for specific purposes. Allocations of bonding authority are granted to states each year. In Colorado, half (50%) of the state ceiling is allocated directly to state authorities, including CHFA, the Agricultural Development Authority, Colorado Post-secondary Education Facilities Authority, and the Colorado Student Bond Authority. The balance is allocated to local governments with a population of 40,000 persons or more. There is not an allocation provided for Vail, or Eagle County. This means that McCormick and Associates, Inc. 0 Page 4 applications for use of PAB's are made through the State. These bonds may be used for a variety of purposes; those that are housing related include: single family mortgages, mortgage credit certificates and qualified rental projects (those that meet the Low Income Housing Tax Credit requirements). It is possible to use PAB's when considering a for-sale development. They offer below market interest rates, but usually carry a requirement that the buyer pay at least one point making them more expensive. Depending upon the underwriting for the bond issue, potential buyers may be able to purchase the home with 3% down and can add closing costs to the loan amount. Mortgage revenue bonds are only attractive in high interest rate environments because of the financing costs, and CHFA does a fair amount of mortgage revenue bond issuance for this purpose. PAB's, may also be used to finance rental projects. One advantage of using PAB's for this purpose is that the development is automatically eligible to receive a 4% low income housing tax-credit. Tax credits are a means by which developments can raise equity needed to buy-down the cost of a development so that it is more affordable. At this time, competition for the 9% tax credits is fierce, making the 4% credit option more attractive. It is important to note; however, that tax credits have stiff administrative requirements that must be met for at least 15 years, or longer depending upon the time commitment of the developer. ¦ Essential Function Bonds -are also tax-exempt bonds that are available where a project is owned by a public body (housing authorities meet this requirement). These bonds are usually used where there is not enough private activity bond allocation available. Essential function bonds are issued by the housing authority for projects that it will own and/or manage. These bonds have not been used extensively; however, there is an increase in this type of use as private activity bonds become more limited. ¦ Portfolio Loans-several housing authorities have had success in working with local lenders to create a portfolio loan for a specific development. These seem to work best in smaller communities, where the lender understands the goals of the authority and is able to work with a loan committee to understand how the risk on this type of loan can be managed. What is attractive about a portfolio loan is that a housing authority can issue "double tax-exempt" debt. This means that the interest paid to the lender on the loan is exempt from both state and federal taxes. Using portfolio loans in this manner is very similar to the essential function bonds, without the headache of doing a full-fledged bond issue. It can usually be negotiated with a local bank, as long as independent counsel will issue an opinion that the loan is tax-exempt. Lenders are able to meet their Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requirements when making these types of loans. Summary Clearly, housing authorities have a broad range of powers that can be successfully employed toward achieving more affordable housing in the community. There are advantages and disadvantages to different approaches, which we will discuss in greater depth at our meeting. I am looking forward to working with you all and sharing some insights and perspectives on how housing authorities can be helpful in supporting local communities in achieving housing goals. McCormick and Associates, Inc. 0 Page 5 Porzak Browning & Bushong LLP A T T 0 R N E Y S A T L A W Glenn E. Porzak Michael F. Browning Steven J. Bushong 92.a Pearl Street suite 300 Thomas A. Carr Boulder, CO 80302 Kristin Howse Moselev 303 443-6800 =ax 303 4a3-6364 P. Fritz Holleman, Of Counsel February 1 5. 2001 Dennis Gelvin S46 Forest Road `'ail. CO 51657 Mr. Frederick P. Sackbauer P.O. Box 3='67 `-ail. CO 8165S Gentlemen: Enclosed is a cope of draft legislation that will be soon finalized and submitte:: by the State Department of Natural Resources for late bill status for this legislative session. This bill would effectively prevent or severely limit anv water rights for recreational boatingr`ka~ak courses. This proposed legislation would also be applied retroactively so as to affect :he Vail boating course. We urge you to immediately contact the vour area state representatives and pus out the word to have this bill killed. Serious consideration should also be given to hiring a lobbyist to oppose this bill. Other cities. towns and resort areas might be willing to participate in funding a lobbyist. A few- talking points that might be used in discussing this matter are as follows: 1. The proposed legislation violates the State constitutional right to diver the unappropriated waters of any stream (Colorado Constitution Art. XVI. Sec. 6). 2. The bill relegates recreational use of water to a second class status. Recreation is one of the State's largest and cleanest industries. It is a kev to the State's economic well being. Boating courses have proven to be a substantial economic benefit to local communities and an important element of preserving or revitalizing core downtown areas of cities and towns. 3. The bill empowers the Colorado Water Conservation Board (dominated by large municipal and agricultural users) as a quasi water court. This is an unacceptable precedent that vests far too much control in a state agency. The cur.-..-it water allocation system has worked well since statehood where water decisions are made by an impartial water judge. fd6110 Dennis Gelvin Frederick Sackbauer February 15, 2001 Paae 2 -l. This bill is the first step toward a State permit system for the allocation of surface water. If you set up such a system for recreational use, the precedent has been set to empower a state agency to decide how much water is reasonable for local municipalities and irrigators. 5. Existing law provides adequate protection to ensure that recreational boating courses are not located and used in a manner that will adversely affect Colorado's compact entitlement. C.R.S. 37-81-101 through 104. Moreover, the use of water in connection with recreational boating courses is nonconsumptive. The water that passes th l-ough the Breckenridge. Golden and Vail courses is used and reused over six times by downstream Colorado water diverters before that water leaves the State line. Time is of the essence and please call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerelv, +7 nn E. Porzak GEP:fd Enclosure cc: Chuck Oailbv Tom Moorhead N61 10 RECREATIONAL INSTREA_ti1 FLOW LEGISLATION SECTION 1. (ADD § 37-92-102(6) as follows]. (5)(a) AT LEAST ONE YEAR before initiating a water rights filing for the adjudication of a recreational instream flow, any county, city, town, home rule city, home rule county. special district, water conservation district, or water conservancy distric: shall submit to the Board for review following a public hearing thereon, a copy of the water rights application. In determining whether it shall recommend the approval or rejection of such application by the water court, the board shall consider the following factor and make writte endings thereon: (1) Whether the adjudication and administration of the recreational instream. flow water right would impair the ability of Colorado to fully develop and place to beneficial use its compact entitlements: The aropriate reach of stream required for the intended use- 1, (3) Whether the recreational irstrearn flow water right can be placed to beneficial use in view of the ownership of lands abutting the reach for which the right is sou,Lnr, (4) Whether exercise of the recreational instream flow water right would cause mate, al hare: to other instream resources or values. (6) Whether such recreational Instrearn flow water right car, be exercised without material injury to the vested :eater rights or decreed conditional water ig_zs of others; and (6) Such other factors as may be determined appropriate, and adopted as rules by the Board, after public notice and comment. (b) The Board shall not RECOtiLti1END THE APPROVAL OF A CH.-~_NGE OF conditional water rights for such recreational instream flow purposes. (c) WITHIN THE PERIOD ALLOWED FOR THE FIL- 2, G OF STATEMENTS OF OPPOSITION, THE BOARD SHALL REPORT ITS F2 DIiiGS TO THE WATER COURT FOR REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 922- :06(13). SECTION 2. [;Modify § '17-92-103(4) as follows]. (4) "Beneficial use" is the use of that amount of water as reasonable and appropriate under reasonably efficient practices to accomplish without waste the purpose for which the appropriation is lawfully made and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes the impoundment of water for recreational purposes, including fishery or wildlife, OR THE DIVERSION OR 34POUNDNIEN T OF WATER BY A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, HONIE RULE CITY, HOh1E RULE COlitiTY, SPECIAL DISTRICT, WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, OR WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, FOR RECREATIONAL D ;STREAM FLOW PURPOSES. For the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations, "beneficial use" shall also include the appropriation by the State of Colorado in the manner prescribed by law of such minimum flows between specific points or levels for and on natural streams and lakes as are required to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. SECTION 3. [Modify § 37-92-103(7) as follows]. Food Prom on • water Project Plan=g and Financing • Scream and Lake Protecaon Water Saapiy Proteenon • Consemaon Planning O "Diversion" or "di:e. means removing wave; =om its natural course or location, or controlling water in its natural course or !ecation, by means of a ditch, canal. 'Zu :.e, reservoir, buss, oioeiine, conduit, well, oumo, or other strucaire or device; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, Tr--'-%T ONLY A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, HUME RULE CIT' O,%IE RULc COL-~;7'f. S?ECi.-kr DISTRICT, WATER CONSERVATION DISTZ;C T, OR WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, tii.,Y CONTROL WATER [NITS `+aTL' -kL COURSE OR LOCATION FOR REC?=1.7'i0:N.=k.L I` STR.: `•I :..OW PUR20SES EXCEPT, W"HER A DEC?E= T -.z-.p :CIS HAS EL=N E. -RZ-D PRIOR TO SECTION -l. [ADD 3 37-92-103(10.3) as followsj. (10.3) `'Rec.eat:eral 1nstrea:-r: flow" means the minis-nu.: and/or maxim urn stream Flow (deleted or surface water level for lakes and reservoirs) as is livened and placed to benef:ctal use pursuant to aocllcaricn Filed by a county, c:t;i, town. ncrre rule c hor-ne county, Syec.... d st: C:. rSe. ration:s, or w _ tor: 'arC; u ;:.C:. fOr the pr.se. .0.. Of recreational Ot C,^::1 t:e5. SECTION, 3. [ADD 37-92-305(13) as follows]. (i 3) L-! L:e case of aP. ac::Hcation for recreacenal L:s ea =-coatis as Elea by a counri, ci " tow;:. none :%ie ^r, her e rule counr , special ware cons.:-%a: on discact, or ware: oft.- water)udv? shall be baSCd uxon ::z i01i0W'L7~: ~ (a) The ads°c:.uac; of t.e Board's ad::iratrat : -.,°cerd, wT-` -;.ec c reference to ^e Beard's coatde:a:.c 'a °r ti_= ed in _g_ (5)(a)(11 a., r. of those . c:ors ~d- . i Sec:er. 3" 102,?and o), u::i:r:n- rte C:::e- Or ; eC CIIS 4-lvE1.0) and (r): =-d Cc) A de :.eco re• :e+.o of the cueszion of ir,,--;r to the vested water ria~u or dec.eed cordit crai :vale. 'znrs ofot:ers. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA Wednesday, February 21, 2001 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE PUBLIC WELCOME PROJECT ORIENTATION / NO LUNCH - Community Development Department 1:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Clark Brittain Bill Pierce Hans Woldrich Melissa Greenauer Andy Blumetti SITE VISITS 2:00 pm 1. Donovan Park - Lower Bench of Donovan Park 2. Young residence - 1452 Lionsridge Loop 3. Tang residence - 185 Forest Road 4. Flinn residence - 245 Forest Road 5. Ford Park - 580 S. Frontage Rd. East Driver: Ann PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm 1. Flinn residence - Final review of a new primary/secondary residence. Ann 245 Forest Road/Lot 21, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1. Applicant: MOTION: Andy Blumetti SECOND: Melissa Greenauer VOTE: 4-0 CONSENT APPROVED 2. Young residence - Conceptual review of a new single-family residence. Brent 1452 Lionsridge Loop/Lot 4, Ridge at Vail. Applicant: Mike Young MOTION: Andy Blumetti SECOND: Melissa Greenauer VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: 1. The applicant shall resolve any zoning and engineering issues at the staff level. 2. The applicant shall return for final DRB review of a site access and landscaping plan for the feeder road at a later date. A 1 TOWN OF VAR 3. Tang residence - Conceptual review & separation request for a new Ann single-family residence & EHU. 185 Forest Road/Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village 1S' Applicant: Fieldstone MOTION: Clark Brittain SECOND: Melissa Greenauer VOTE: 4-0 DENIED - SEPARATION REQUEST / NO VOTE ON CONCEPTUAL REVIEW 4. Donovan Park - Conceptual review of proposed park improvements & pavilion. George Lower bench of Donovan Park/Unplatted. Applicant: Town of Vail CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 5. Ford Park - Final review of central trash enclosure. George 580 S. Frontage Rd. East/Vail Village 7'h Filing. Applicant: Town of Vail MOTION: Melissa Greenauer SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 6. Information Update • DRB appointments Staff Aogrovals Barad residence - Living room wall extension with skylights and window. Bill 770 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch. Applicant: Cindy Barad Robins residence - DRB extension of final approval. George 154 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 27, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1. Applicant: Kenneth M. & Judy Robins Freeman residence - Revisions to plans. Allison 1220 Westhaven Lane/Lot 42, Glen Lyon Subdivision. Applicant: Michael Freeman The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356,Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. 2 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, February 26, 2001 MEETING CANCELLED PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 am MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1:00 pm 1. 2. 3. Driver: NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearinq - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm 1. A request for variances from Section 12-613-6 (Setbacks) and Title 14 (Development Standards- locating required parking in the Right-of-Way), to allow for a residential addition and remodel located at 2955 Bellflower Dr. / Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain. Applicant: Alan Peters, represented by Braun Associates Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL MARCH 12, 2001 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published February 23, 2001 in the Vail Trail. 1 TOWN OF YAIL 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 4/10/01 Ludwig Kurz Managed Growth Agreement; then develop appointment process. ¦ Define desired By the end of outcomes by Process to be designed as February staff Bob McLaurin creating a vivid 14 month next step in constituent will have a Suzanne Silverthorn description for 2005, partnership efforts. framework for Russell Forest 2010, 2015, 2020 creating a vivid description. 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 Edheads.matrix Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee 1-70 Noise Abatement 14 month • Noise map complete and ¦ Identify Options reviewed by Council NA Greg Hall ¦ Identify Funding • Staff identifying short term options 03101 Greg Hall • Staff preparing cost estimate for wall 03101 Greg Hall mitigation • Determine to what extent the TOV is willing to fund TBD Town Council noise mitigation 2 Council Status Next Council Point of Contactl 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 2"d Reading on residential uses and lower (if 02/20 Brent Wilson any) for commercial uses. ¦ Community 6 &14 Concept paper presented to Complete Facilities Hub Site month Council on 12/12. Council Budget in Feb Russ Forrest developed wish list on 12/19 and present to Council on March 6th 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 03101 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 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) Todd O ¦ Phase 1 site development NA bid awarded • Execute project Steve Thompson financing ($3 million) TBD ¦ Property owner plans on Nina Timm ¦ Ruins 14 month reapplying for the same February 2001 Tom Moorhead development approval Russ Forrest that expired (1/9/01). ¦ 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 Council to meet with Berry Nina Timm Creek Developer and County 02120101 Tom Moorhead Commisioners 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 February 13, Russ Forrest ¦ Employee 6 month held on 02/13/00 2001 Nina Timm Generation Timber Ridge 6 month Council to vote on 1t reading 02/20/01 Allison Ochs on 02/20/01 Tom Moorhead ¦ Housing Zone District 6 month Identify impacts of Telluride TBD housing decision Tom Moorhead 5 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee • Decide on fire Bob and John Gulick to station locations and 6 month prepare memo summarizing 03/06 Bob McLaurin staffing. and framing issues. • Discuss impact fee Discuss possibility of 03/06 proposal to fund hiring Rocky Mtn. Group to Tom Moorhead fire dept. capital conduct impact fee study. John Gulick projects and (Tom researching legal equipment issues) Preliminary design/cost Todd O ¦ Red Sandstone 14 month estimate complete TBD Tom K Field ¦ Staff met with School Board on 2/14. Staff TBD Bob McLaurin developing agreement Todd O. with District on cost sharing. In-town Transportation ¦ Staff moving forward to ¦ Review alternatives 6 months purchase Next Bus 3/06 Greg Hall to replace in town Technology for In Town Mike Rose shuttle Shuttle. ¦ Explore possible 14 month 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 6 ¦ Donovan Park Agreement for design services complete. ¦ Donovan Park zone Change 2nd reading for Council approval 12/19 ¦ Vail Center 501(c)(3) formed ¦ 1st Community meeting held ¦ 2nd community meeting held • TOV/VRI 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 ~L ~f2c / ~1 ~ T c~~- r~~~ 7~ n L 3-~. ~f. t'Y] t . .Z • w V . u ~ J uJ -L . v '4 v ~ t n. L t / COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2001 _ J 1/23/01 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (TO THE GREG H.: The load capacity continues to be an issue; Staff is currently getting an updated engineer's rating. EAST OF THE 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? 1/23/01 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. 1/23/01 ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIP PATRICK HAMEL: Schedule for evening televised Scheduled for the evening meeting March 20th. WNAIL RESORTS, INC. presentation. COUNCIL 1/23/01 NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS RUSSELL/GREG M.: Of the following need of repair- The Club-the corner of the building near the entrance has crumbling plaster. Bob will discuss with property owners. Clark's Market - dried out wreaths on wall. 2/6/01 SKI STORAGE SIGN RUSS: There is a large ski storage sign on the steps to the Kaltenberg Brewery for the lower ski storage. Is KEVIN FOLEY this legal? F:\master\bsalter\agenda\followup\022701 du February 27, 2001 - Page 1 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP _ 2001 2/13/01 VVTCB'S 2002 WINTER GUIDE PAM: Left a voicemail for Kelly Layton Wednesday, Suzanne Chardoul has referred Kelly to a meeting with Ron 2/14, in re: to whether this is a duplication of a Weinstein (Roxy's) who is head of this sub-committee for the VCBA. SYBILL NAVAS fulfillment piece that could be coordinated w/the Vail They will meet Thursday (2-22-01) and Kelly will follow-up on the Chamber and Business Association's "The Guide." result. 2/20/01 BUSINESS LICENSE FEE STEVE/SALLY/PAM: Are "guides" and delivery A Beaver Creek Business License (BL) is required for all businesses REQUIREMENTS services exempt? What are the differences between physically located there and a business license is required whenever Beaver Creek's licensing policy and ours? How do we someone accesses the roads (goes through the gate) more than four SYBILL NAVAS ensure we get all relevant sales tax? times a month for business purposes. BL's are $200.00 a year. Beaver Creek Security sells them at the gate. This means everybody delivery companies for restaurants, linen companies, delivery companies to retail stores, everybody! They have over 600 business licenses, generating about $120,000 annually. Jean Dennison says Beaver Creek is required by the Forest Service to control parking, privately owned roads, and emissions, therefore, the gate. Jean will fax the BL requirement paperwork over to Finance. 2/20/01 SKI PASS RESTRICTIONS ON BOB/SUZANNE: How can ski pass restrictions be PRESIDENT'S WEEKEND designed during peak periods to strike a balance in the community? SYBILL NAVAS 2/20/01 TOWN SERVICES VS. COUNTY BOB: Supply list for County of Town of Vail services provided, in response to their list of county-wide DIANA DONOVAN services provided to the town. F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowup1022701 du February 27, 2001 - Page 2 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2001 2/20/01 LIONSHEAD VIEW CORRIDOR #2 RUSS: When does this return to Council? DIANA DONOVAN 2/20/01 "KODAK" MOMENT GREG H.: Would it be possible to place informational INFORMATIONAL SIGNS signs (possibly "Kodak" moment) at inspirational times/settings along our bike and pedestrian paths? DIANA DONOVAN 2/20/01 PARKING REGULATIONS FOR GREG H./MIKE ROSE: A note of concern is the 2001-2002 perceived "subsidized" parking rates for down valley residents (from a Vail local). DIANA DONOVAN 2/20/01 NATURE CENTER BRIDGE SIGN PAM: The professional closure sign promised has not FOLLOW UP: Pam spoke w/Kurt Krieg Thursday, 2/22/01; he appeared. apologized for the delay and said the sign would be immediately DIANA DONOVAN forthcoming. 2/20/01 DEMO-REBUILD VS. REMODEL RUSS: Provide an work session agenda item to review the definition of a demo-rebuild vs. a remodel, based on DIANA DONOVAN the fact several homes the size of "hotels" have been built recently on the golf course. 2/20/01 IN LIEU OF PAPERLESS PATRICK: Bob had suggested Patrick was putting Patrick Hamel is currently conducting a comprehensive town-wide PACKETS together a list of things we can do in lieu of paperless environmental audit which will not be complete until early summer. At packets (at a price tag of $100,000) to further our that time, Patrick will present Council with a "shopping list" of possible environmental and recycling goals. When will this be choices. COUNCIL available for Council discussion? F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowup1022701 du February 27, 2001 - Page 3 Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: Todd Oppenhiemer, Project Manager George Ruther, Chief of Planning Date: February 27, 2001 Re: Vail Town Council Inquiries from 2/20/01 Meeting The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a written list of the questions the Vail Town Council members asked regarding the Donovan Park Construction Project. ? Can the park program be accommodated with 90 to 100 parking spaces rather than the 150 spaces that are proposed? ? How much additional paving is required if the parking structure is not built? ? What is the estimated cost of building all surface parking now and then building the deck of the structure at a later date? ? What is the height of the wall in the "parking structure vs. no parking structure scenarios"? ? How will direct sunlight and solar gain be addressed? ? What alternatives exist to the proposed zinc roofing material and what are the cost implications ? Compare and contrast the community pavilion to the Eagle-Vail Pavilion? ? How is the roof structure being supported structurally? ? What is the area of the exterior deck on the south and west sides of the pavilion? ? What is the cost breakdown in general terms of each of the respective facilities proposed (i.e. pavilion, parking structure, recreation field)? ? How do you clean the three story tall windows? ? What are the long-term maintenance costs of the pavilion as proposed? ? What will the anticipated fees be to use the pavilion? ? How do you mitigate the negative aesthetic appearance of the tall retaining wall? Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Soft Cost Breakdown Description Construction Cost Soft Cost Total Cost $/S F $/S F Sitework Construction Cost GSF = 539,011 2,852,226 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment - Municipal Fees and Expenses - Professional Fees 933,965 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 8,000 Project Contingency 694,608 Total Sitework w/Soft Costs 5.29 2,852,226 1,636,573 8.33 4,488,799 Parking Structure Construction Cost GSF= 36,148 2,126,079 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment - Municipal Fees and Expenses - Professional Fees 250,000 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 8,500 Project Contingency 347,304 Total Parking Structure w/Soft Costs 16.76 2,126,079 605,804 75.57 2,731,883 Pavilion Construction Cost GSF = 7,046 2,285,048 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment 130,300 Municipal Fees and Expenses 94,667 Professional Fees 250,000 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 22,000 Project Contingency 347,304 Pavilion w/Soft Costs 324.30 2,285,048 844,271 444.13 3,129,319 Total Summary Budget 10,350,000 P /current projects/donovan park/ Schematic Design/ownersbudgeu Soft Cost Breakdown xls Page 1 of 1 0 2001 All Rights Resen.ed by Archsleclu,al Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Roofing VE Description Cost/SF 27-Feb-01 Gross Square Footage: 12,991 $/SF Total A - Substructure Excluded Excluded B - Shell (1.28) (16,693) C - Interiors Excluded Excluded D - Services Excluded Excluded i_ E - Equipment and Furnishings Excluded Excluded F - Special Construction and Demolition Excluded Excluded Z - General (0,10) (1,252) Subtotal Direct Costs: ll (1,38) I (17,945) Performance Bond (1.3%) (0.02) (233) General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees (0.09) (1,182) Contingency @ 10% (0.15) (1,936) Escalation @ %2%/mo (0.08) (1,065) Subtotal Indirect Costs: l' (0.34) (4,416) Total Construction Cost: I (1,72) I (22,361) (I P Current Projects0onovan Park\ Schematic Deisgn\ ©2001 All Rights Reserved By OTO\Donovan Park Master File SD Estimate 27 FEB 01 -Add Deductsxls Page 1 of 2 Architectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Roofing VE Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Standing Seam Zinc Roof System w/Std Kynar Color Finish 12,991 SF (11.35) (147,443) Berridge Standing Seam Roof System w/Std Kynar Color Finish 12,991 SF 8.78 114,057 (16,693) p:/currentprolects/donovan park; schematic design/gro 2 of 2 (Donovan Park Master File SD Estimate 27 FEB 01 -Add Deducts.xls © 2001 All Rights Reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. O D E L L ARCH I T E C T S, P. C. FAX TRANSMITTAL D a t e s October 30, 2000 T o t a l # of Pages: 4 To: George Ruther T OV Department of Comownity Development 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 P h o n e: 970.479.2 145 Fax Phone: 970.479. 52 c a :Russell T Todd OppeWmimer, Scott Smith 415.202.8970, hflum Moore 970.476.8409, Tobias 970.926.3390, Chris Squadra 303.443.1508, Jeff ScWethala 303.694.9144, Greg Reizian 303.575.9515 R f 9955 - Donovan Community Park Facility F ram : I Stanley B. Turner Odell Architects, P.C. 32065 Castle Court, Suite 150 Bi Colorado 80439 Phonc:303.670. 80 Fax Phone: 303.670. 162 R a m at r It s : For Your Use ¦ For Your Review ¦ Please Comment ? Urged ? George. 4. Please find attached the our letter re,& I:ng our recollection of the Vail Tv Council discussion held on October 20 for your review. Do not hesitatt tog e me a call with any questions that you may have. Thank SbWay B. 7'urt~pr Project Manager Odell Architects, P.C. ODELL ARCH IT}:(;TS. P.( October 27, 2000 W. C „ . 6. Rutter Chief of Plan Community Development Department Town of Vail. 75 Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Donovan Community Park Fadilty - October 24a, 2000 Van Town Couaeil Meedag Deu C.. ,,6a: Tlr OdeU Architects, P.C. design Wean is excited to be roving forward with fir Schematic Design and Phase 1A Six work package of the D,. n Community Patio project On Tuesday, Oc... - 24th, design team and the T.O.V. Pleming Department requested verification and confirmation on the Phase building pad, comaamity pavilion progmin, and the proposed 150 vehicle parlang spaces. The To Council tnade t :.nals Prod comments on the following items: • A pad site shall be preserved for future (Phase 11) recreational programming; the size of the pa I Wall be consistent with the building area identified wi the approved Donovan Park Mss Plan Amendment dated October 3, 2000. Odell ArchiMts shall presents,., sed laodsca design for the Phase 0 building pad for PEC and Town Council ...,.,r,- val as a part of our ov l services for the project. • Ile design team shall provide , jamtely 150 parldng spaces with the Plisse 1 work. parking layout and parking structure design shall be consistent with the i,,r,,... ied Donovan P Master Plan Amendment dated October 3, 2000. • The Cortsmunity Pavilion shall be designed with a tm lti-u3e space 3000sf) a,.-- .adorn activities including but not limited to a small musical ! theatrical performane , wedding reception, art exhibit, and community , . _ .:.,gs. See attached Faddbit 01. • The wd COMMUDity Pavilion program was presented by Odell Architects and was r r.: v with comments by the Vail Town Council (see attached Exhibit #1). The final building s square footage will be established upon __.:...g with the Donovan Puk stakeholders group a d find= refining the pIrogrsm rcgL.... s; the design team shall strive to provide a fi:aal bull . arcs between 6,500 and 7,000 gross square feet. Tie Town Council .....,....du:d the des' team plan for a conmtncreisl sized stove/ovw fm food :ng purposes; the kitchen way similar in $ize (approx. 200sf) to the Eagle Vail Pavilion. The Town Council rec,.. Jodi design team study the storage requi;....... is to accommodate s multi-pc,., . ~'a facility mood provi adequate starago area as required. • The design team shall , ,e a design solution to provide additional public „ours for users of the ,.....::oza field, playgmumd and basketball areas. The design team shall study potca locations for site „ oar contiguous with the Comity Pavilion or as a separate pavilion located in close pm, a with the outdoor.,.domak uses. • During tlve whmudv design piasa the design team will present exterior and interior mated options for Town Coloacil nvim and comment ARcHI -rECTI - kF. P I.ANNING IN -rvNIo R s (:F;VTF;kPi)IV'1' 1• 32065 GAbTt.>: Caa:sT. Svrrr: 150. Evexc:NF.F;n. COLORADO 80439 PHoNe (303) 670-5980 1'.+,x (303)670-7162 I.a~et Vail Town Council b4fdOS page 2 of 2 and directions given by the Vail 6c s=NA= the - a' its W COMIDOU attacbed the cOwNMwty Pavilion To dW best of Off loswledOa Taws Coune0 duri* our atsW6 October 24 , 2000. ,,dshect (reaved to as "Exhibit #1") for yo program, squint footage analym* 80°d PotAg v4JWOU molleetion of the discussion with refecetLCt. if > feel &C itM h"W above do riot r--ZO Vail Town Council, pkm do not bo tste m give us a ca regstd any We loop forvvsrd to moving ahead whl? this out B project Do not hesitate to give us a call with questions "t you nay love. sincerely, • i stsnley B. T, n. Associate Odell Architects, P.C. cc: Russell Forrest - TOV Todd Cs w -130imer MV OA Desip Team Members ( Exhibit lies) Donovan Community Park FsC1111Y Pavilion Program and Pailki g summary communmy Pevmon fMaao dtd "we Mob0a AtA"b AM (64 Ca" ner bs T"M or spa" Entry 33b d Lcbbyfiln taAcn 7#O d 8000 of Fls)dbls space to sawnmod~ a vorl* of a~doffi s MA-use 9Lslos dish , ~ "q end Mftarslor. bd nu KWW 120 d As wn a oven or food wan" - Iknitsd prep only Restrvorres 400 d Aosumes 3 toW Axtures and 2 W4010ries Per 105110 n 8brs0s no of Tab" drab "MM s dapende on OMW 100 of T.O.V. to provide Tk W boolVCOUnW Bout Net ! Sgttas Foompa =5 d G.S.F. at 75% EfAdency +We* d Indudss drouletlon, sna mechanical ad elsdrlcai spaces Pw Wns Validation OuWas (10 ler*NIf~ spouse Clrrter VV Provdled? pea;" *"w ft" to anti is of par" Stella Funsdlons raw peso rMW ftequNd Comments Community PavlNan Armes a. Muskull0wsesr po mom 120 100 2:1 75 Theater style sudnp V4 slaps onangernent b. wedding reception ad tatrle 1:20 160 2:1 75 Sk-down dining wrongemsM seating c. VViddircg reception wds table 1:15 IM 2:1 100 Assumes buffat table and sestlng danckV d. Art exhM IM 100 2:1 50 Revolvkrp foot troflle over extended period of time 8. Cornmti* meetlnq 1.20 150 1.6:1 100 Cia woven style seating f. tarps Gather" uwft 1:20 375 2.5:1 15O Spedal event terrace Recreation Add s. Triple Crown Sopo r - - - 4,1t O Daft r . ,led by VRD ToumsmMrt b. Leogup soccer play - - - go Dada provided by VRD a. Vag Lacraimo Shoot-out - - - 120 Dugs provided by VRD Ploy shut t unp - - - 8 Basko#W court - - - 8 Reasawrial use only Open hrrf - - - 5 Assumes meJorky of local use Ratio data provided by ERA Donovan Community Park Facility Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Parking Structure 5 - Year Plan Description Cost/SF 1-Feb-01 Gross Square Footage: 36,148 $/SF Total A - Substructure 6.49 234,683 B - Shell 30.86 1,115,677 G - Sitework 8.81 318,531 Z - General 3.46 125,167 Subtotal Direct Costs: 49.63 1,794,057 Performance Bond (1.3%) 0.65 23,323 General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees 3.52 127,217 Contingency @ 10% 5.38 194,460 Escalation @'/2%/mo (5-Years) 17.75 641,717 Subtotal Indirect Costs: ~l 27.30 I) 986,716 II (I Total Construction Cost: 76.93 I 2,780,773 1 1 Total Soft Cost: 16.76 I~ 605,804 Escalation @ 1/2%/mo (5-Years) 5.03 181,741 Total Construction Cost: 98.71 3,568,318 (I P:/Current Prolects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/OTOI © 2001 All Rights Reserved by Donovan Park 5 Year Parking Plan.xls Page 1 of 4 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 A - Substructure - Prkng Strctr 5 - Year Plan Description II Quantity II Unit Cost I~ Total A - Substructure Building Excavation Excavation @ Footings 203 CY 12.31 2,499 BackfiIl @ Footings 103 CY 14.66 1,516 6" Gravel Base and Mirafi @ SOG 16,325 SF 1.18 19,330 Subtotal Building Excavation 23,345 Foundations 6x6 Pad Footing (a) Columns 40 CY 139.20 5,568 Subgrade 720 SF 0.27 192 Sideform 480 SF 6.65 3,192 Float 720 SF 2.66 1,915 Cure & Protect 720 SF 0.08 57 Rebar 516 LBS 0.53 273 Pump & Place 8 HR 247.50 1,980 4x4 Pad Footina (a) Columns 20 CY 139.20 2,784 Subgrade 320 SF 0.27 85 Sideform 320 SF 6.65 2,128 Float 320 SF 2.66 851 Cure & Protect 320 SF 0.08 26 Rebar 344 LBS 0.53 182 Pump & Place 4 HR 247.50 990 5" Slab On Grade 621 CY 167.58 104,013 Subgrade 16758 SF 1.31 21,953 Construction Joint 110 LF 1.61 177 Trowel 16758 SF 2.26 37,890 Cure & Protect 16758 SF 0.08 1,337 Edgeform 723 LF 4.66 3,366 WWF 6X6 W 2.9 X 2.9 16758 SF 0.41 6,909 Pump & Place 35 HR 247.50 8,663 Subtotal Building Foundations 211,337 Substructure Total 234,683 P IC-- P .,-WD-- Parke S--.a O-W'OTO, Z 7001 All Rights Re tittj By D-.- Pad 5 Year Rad,ng Plan ay Page 20f 4 A-i.-.,. Rtt- C- Wtants. i- Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 B - Shell - Parking Structure 5 - Year Plan Description II Quantity 11 Unit Cost I) Total B - Shell Superstructure Column Concrete 1'-0"x 1'-6" Reinforced CIP Columns 40 EA 867.99 34,720 Concrete Retaining Wall (Allowance per Architect) 4,638 SF 30.21 140,114 6" Tight Batter-Stack River Rock Veneer @ Retaining Wall 4,638 SF 30.65 142,155 6" Stone Cap Paving on Sand Bed @ CIP Retaining Wall 230 SF 26.21 6,028 1'-6"x 2'-0" CIP Beam 129 CY 653.14 83,961 10" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck 9,729 SF 23.84 231,942 12" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck 9,661 SF 23.84 230,322 2" Std Steel Pipe Wall Rail 15 LF 23.84 358 2" Std Steel Pipe Guard Rail 623 LF 81.27 50,631 2" Std Steel Pipe Stringer Rail 45 LF 133.21 5,994 Stair Tower 6 CY 741.17 4,447 Backfill @ Retaining Wall 2,643 CY 11.08 29,282 Waterproofing @ Retaining Wall 4,638 SF 4.18 19,387 Traffic Topping @ Upper Deck 19,390 SF 6.09 118,087 Striping, Graphics, Painting & Signage (Allowance) 1 LS 18,250.00 18,250 Superstructure Subtotal 1,115,677 Shell Subtotal 1,115,677 P:ICurrem ProjxlslD-.an Parkl $che-C Design/OTOI 5 2001 All R,ghts Reserved by Donovan Park 5 Veer Parking Plan. xls Page 3 of 4 Arcn 1-ral Resource ConsWtarns. Inc Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 G - Project Sitework 5 - Year Plan Description II Quantity II Unit Cost I! Total G - Building Sitework Site Preparation Subtotal Site Preparation Excluded Site Demolition and Relocations Subtotal Site Demolition and Relocations Excluded Sitework Earthwork Silt Fence @ Site 900 LF 4.25 3,825 Construction Fence @ Site 880 LF 5.89 5,183 Haul Off to Town of Vail Site 7,181 CY 12.35 88,685 Mass Cut @ Parking Structure 7,181 CY 11.75 84,377 Topsoil Removal to Stockpile 70 CY 20.63 1,436 Topsoil Replacement 70 CY 14.85 1,034 Subtotal Site Earthwork 184,540 Site Improvements Landscaping Allowance 1 LS 100,000.00 100,000 Demo Existing Asphalt 36,990 SF 0.65 24,044 Demo Curb and Gutter 637 LF 0.13 82 Demo & Remove 5-0" Concrete Wall @ Parking Lot 230 LF 42.89 9,865 Subtotal Site Improvements 133,990 Site Civil Mechanical Utilities Subtotal Site Site Electrical Utilites 0 Building Sitework Subtotal 318,531 PIC-- PoJeGS 00-n Pam/ Sen 11e DesiVIOTOI C 2W1 All Rlgnls Reserves By D.,-.,, Palk 5 Year Parking Ran Als Page 4 of 4 A,-lural Resource CO-tall, - Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Parking Revisions Description Cost/SF Building Cost Gross Square Footage: 36,148 $/SF Total A - Substructure (623) (225,147) sa B - Shell (7.57) (273,460) C - Interiors Excluded Excluded D - Services Excluded Excluded E - Equipment and Furnishings Excluded Excluded F - Special Construction and Demolition Excluded Excluded Z - General (1.03) (37,396) Subtotal Direct Costs:I (14.83) ' (536,002) Performance Bond (1.3%) (0.19) (6,968) General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees (0.98) (35,293) Contingency @ 10% Excluded Excluded Escalation @'/%/mo Excluded Excluded Subtotal Indirect Costs: ll (1,17) II (42,261) I~ I) Total Construction Cost: (16.00) I (578,264) I~ P Current Projects0onovan Park\ Schematic Deisgn\oTO\ 02001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Master File SD Estimate 16 FEB 01 - Parking n Site Adjustments.xis Page 1 of 3 Architectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Parking Revisions Substructure Description Quantity Unit Cost I Total A - Substructure Excavation @ Footings (203) CY 12.31 (2499) Backfill @ Footings (103) CY 14.66 (1.516) 6" Gravel Base and Mirafi @ SOG (16,325) SF 1.18 (19,330) Mass Fill @ Parking Structure (Assume onsite fill) 2,394 CY 1.14 2,729 Subtotal Building Excavation (20,616) Foundations 6x6 Pad Footino 0 Columns (40) CY 139.20 (5,568) Subgrade (720) SF 0.27 (192) Sideform (480) SF 6.65 (3,132) Float (720) SF 2.66 (1,915) Cure & Protect (720) SF 0.08 (571 Rebar (516) LBS 0.53 (.273) Pump & Place (8) HR 247.50 (1,980) 4x4 Pad Footina an Columns (20) CY 139.20 (2,784) Subgrade (320) SF 0.27 (85) Sideform (320) SF 6.65 (2128) Float (320) SF 2.66 (851) Cure & Protect (320) SF 0.08 (26) Rebar (344) LBS 0.53 (182) Pump & Place (4) HR 247.50 (990) 5" Slab On Grade (621) CY 167.58 (104,013) Subgrade (16,758) SF 1.31 (211953) Construction Joint (110) LF 1.61 (177) Trowel (16,758) SF 2.26 (37,890) Cure & Protect (16,758) SF 0.08 (1.337) Edgeform (723) LF 4.66 (3.366) WWF 6X6 W 2.9 X 2.9 (16,758) SF 0.41 (6.909) Pump & Place (35) HR 247.50 (8,663) Subtotal Building Foundations (204,531) Substructure Total (225,147) P,c-f P.ox..oo"o.aPam; By cew o.~ van M .,e. oT : F.* se Esa,e ,-n .=_s s.ft aawsn~~ ns Page 2 of 3 aa,,ecc, a, a w oo ~0e.~ ~ c-s~~~m I- Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Parking Revisions Shell Description IL Quantity I) Unit Cost II Total B - Shell Superstructure 1'-0"x V-6" Reinforced CIP Columns (40) EA 867.99 (34,720) Precast Retaining Wall w/ Tie-Back System (1.473) SF 30.21 (44,484) 6" Tight Batter-Stack River Rock Veneer @ Retaining Wall (1,473) SF 30.65 (45.132) 6" Full Depth Asphalt Paving @ Lower Level Parking (Includes Base) 30,690 SF 3.09 94,832 10'-0" Concrete Walkway 1,135 SF 3.78 4,290 V-6" Vertical Curb and Gutter 265 LF 13.21 3,501 1'-6"x 2'-0" CIP Beam (129) CY 653.14 (83,961) 10" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck (9,729) SF 23.84 (231„442) 12" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck (9,661) SF 2184 (230,322) 0 2" Std Steel Pipe Wall Rail (15) LF 23.84 (358) 2" Std Steel Pipe Guard Rail (523) LF 81.27 (42,504) 2" Std Steel Pipe Stringer Rail (45) LF 133.21 (5.994) Dry Stack Boulder Retaining Wall w/Geo-Grid 2,100 SF 53.34 112,014 Landscaping Allowance 1 LS 150,000.00 150,000 Site Focal Allowance 1 LS 50,000.00 50,000 Site Lighting Allowance 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 Striping, Graphics, Painting & Signage (Allowance) 1 LS 6,320.00 6,320 Superstructure Subtotal (273,460) Roof Construction Roof Subtotal Excluded Exterior Enclosure Exterior Closure Subtotal Excluded Shell Subtotal (273.460) P'IC-m P oimisd!3-n Part! Scbemarc OevrdOTOI G 2001 All R, - Reserved by Donovan Parw Maver Foie SD Esumae 16 FEa 0- aarxmq n See Adlusrmen,s ,IS Page 3 of 3 Arcbnec1- Resowce Consultams. inc Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: George Ruther, Chief of Planning Date: October 17, 2000 Re: Donovan Park - Questions & Clarification PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to outline several key questions that the staff needs answers to as we continue to prepare a construction contract for the final phases of development of Donovan Park. As you are aware the Town Council has identified the completion of the Donovan Park Master Plan process and the start of park construction in April 2001 as two critical projects to be completed over the next six and fourteen months periods. The master plan process concluded on October 3, 2000 with the adoption of Resolution No. 13, Series of 2000. The next step in the development process is to prepare a construction contract and begin work on the development of design and construction documents. Answers and clarification to several key questions will move the town one step closer to accomplishing the stated goals. BACKGROUND On October 3, 2000, the Vail Town Council adopted Resolution No. 13, Series of 2000, a resolution amending the Donovan Park Master Plan. In order to ensure the start of construction in April of 2000, the design team is on track to complete a biddable package for sitework December 1, 2000. Biddable packages for foundation, buildings and site development will follow in the coming months. In order to complete the biddable package on time, the staff is requesting answers and clarification to the following questions and issues: ¦ The Master Plan amendment anticipates the development of the park in phases. The community pavilion, parking and outdoor recreation components are to be completed in the first phase with the recreation and youth center to be completed in the second phase. QUESTION: Should a pad site be preserved for a future Recreation Center? Should a pad site be preserved for a future Youth Center? If no to either of the two questions above, then should the final location of the community pavilion be reconsidered? If yes, should the intent of the relocation be to maintain more of a "preserve area"? ¦ There has been a question regarding the need for +/-150 parking spaces. The Master Plan site plan accommodates 149 parking spaces in a two level structure. According to the Town's zoning regulations the parking requirement for parks in the General Use zone district shall be determined by the Planning & Environmental Commission. A final decision from the PEC is anticipated in late December or early January. Staff will be presenting a rational for the need for 150 spaces to the Council on October 24`". QUESTION: Should the design team proceed forward at this time in the absence of a final decision by the PEC with a design proposing 120-130 spaces? ¦ The initial size of the community pavilion was 12,000 square feet. At the request of the Council, PEC and input received from the community during public meetings the size was reduced to 7,700 square feet. On October 3rd the Council suggested that the size be further reduced to approximately 6,500 I square feet. Given the input on the possible future uses of the pavilion (weddings, public meetings, small conferences, community theatre, etc.), staff believes that the pavilion should be designed to accommodate 100 people in a roundtable fashion and 150 people in a conference-seating fashion with accessory storage and back of house spaces. QUESTION: Are the occupancy figures suggested by staff the appropriate number given the anticipated future uses? If yes, staff would recommend that occupancy should control the final size. Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: George Rather, Chief of Planning e Date: October 17, 2000 Re: Donovan Park - Questions & Clarification PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to outline several key questions that the staff needs answers to as we continue to prepare a construction contract for the final phases of development of Donovan Park. As you are aware the Town Council has identified the completion of the Donovan Park Master Plan process and the start of park construction in April 200las two critical projects to be completed over the next six and fourteen months periods. The master plan process concluded on October 3, 2000 with the adoption of Resolution No" 13, Series of 2000. The next step in the development process is to prepare a construction contract and begin work on the development of design and construction documents. Answers and clarification to several key questions will move the town one step closer to accomplishing the stated goals. BACKGROUND On October 3, 2000, the Vail Town Council adopted Resolution No. 13, Series of 2000, a resolution amending the Donovan Park Master Plan. In order to ensure the start of construction in April of 2000, the design team is on track to complete a biddable package for sitework December 1, 2000. Biddable packages for foundation, buildings and site development will follow in the coming months. In order to complete the biddable package on time, the staff is requesting answers and clarification to the following questions and issues: ¦ The Master Plan amendment anticipates the development of the park in phases. The community pavilion, parking and outdoor recreation components are to be completed in the first phase with the recreation and youth center to be completed in the second phase. QUESTION: Should a pad site be preserved for a future Recreation Center? Should a pad site be preserved for a future Youth Center? u If no to either of the two questions above, then should the final location of the community pavilion be reconsidered? If yes, should the intent of the relocation be to maintain more of a "preserve area"? L1..~-C+T,r-n:...,..,.h.r .~~.t.M='.~ ,#.z.~ ,r''.i%~r ~ ~'~u.- c.,.,d ~,K.,.^~. ~,4. t!.,2 e.~ ¦ There has been a question regarding the need for +/-150 ~'arking spaces. The Master Plan site plan accommodates 149 parking spaces in a two level structure. According to the Town's zoning regulations the parking requirement for parks in the General Use zone district shall be determined by the Planning & Environmental Commission. A final decision from the PEC is anticipated in late December or early January. Staff will be presenting a rational for the need for 150 spaces to the Council on October 24`x. dQ cad Qo P3 a-~ r Y W te•-'-u~',.., rCU~ ,u~~:. :s-n,~.,yy,.x.~y. ~~,„.<t w:~.,.. :r..,.t_"F, k- °F ' QUESTION: Should the design team proceed forward at this time in the absence of a final decision by the PEC with a design proposing 120-130 spaces? ¦ The initial size of the community pavilion was 12,000 square feet. At the request of the Council, PEC and input received from the community during public meetings the size was reduced to 7,700 square feet. On October 3rd the Council suggested that the size be further reduced to approximately 6,500 _lei ~f r L square feet. Given the input on the possible future uses of the pavilion (weddings, public meetings, small conferences, community theatre, etc.), staff believes that the pavilion should be designed to accommodate 100 people in a roundtable fashion and 1_50 people in a conference-seating fashion with accessory storage and back of house spaces. QUESTION: Are the occupancy figures suggested by staff the appropriate number given the anticipated future uses? If yes, staff would recommend that occupancy should control the final size. r. • r ' f,~ts d •d~ bt ~I~f~ut-~ ~ Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: Todd Oppenhiemer, Project Manager George Ruther, Chief of Planning Date: February 27, 2001 Re: Vail Town Council Inquiries from 2/20/01 Meeting The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a written list of the questions the Vail Town Council members asked regarding the Donovan Park Construction Project. ? Can the park program be accommodated with 90 to 100 parking spaces rather than the 150 spaces that are proposed? ? How much additional paving is required if the parking structure is not built? ? What is the estimated cost of building all surface parking now and then building the deck of the structure at a later date? ? What is the height of the wall in the "parking structure vs. no parking structure scenarios"? ? How will direct sunlight and solar gain be addressed? ? What alternatives exist to the proposed zinc roofing material and what are the cost implications ? Compare and contrast the community pavilion to the Eagle-Vail Pavilion? ? How is the roof structure being supported structurally? ? What is the area of the exterior deck on the south and west sides of the pavilion? ? What is the cost breakdown in general terms of each of the respective facilities proposed (i.e. pavilion, parking structure, recreation field)? ? How do you clean the three story tall windows? ? What are the long-term maintenance costs of the pavilion as proposed? ? What will the anticipated fees be to use the pavilion? ? How do you mitigate the negative aesthetic appearance of the tall retaining wall? Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Soft Cost Breakdown Description Construction Cost Soft Cost Total Cost $/SF $/SF Sitework Construction Cost GSF = 539,011 2,852,226 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment _ Municipal Fees and Expenses _ Professional Fees 933,965 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 8,000 Project Contingency 694,608 Total Sitework w/Soft Costs 5.29 2,852,226 1,636,573 8.33 4,488,799 Parking Structure Construction Cost GSF= 36,148 2,126,079 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment - Municipal Fees and Expenses _ Professional Fees 250,000 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 8,500 Project Contingency 347,304 Total Parking Structure w/Soft Costs 16.76 2,126,079 605,804 75.57 2,731,883 Pavilion Construction Cost GSF = 7,046 2,285,048 Furnishings, Fixtures & Equipment 130,300 Municipal Fees and Expenses 94,667 Professional Fees 250,000 Owner/Operator Pre-Opening Cost 22,000 Project Contingency 347,304 Pavilion w/Soft Costs 324.30 2,285,048 844,271 444.13 3,129,319 Total Summary Budget 10,350,000 P-../current projects/donovan park/ Schamaric Design/ownersdudget/ Soft Cost Breakdown. xis Page 1 of 1 ® 2001 All Rights Reserved by Arcnnectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Parking Structure 5 - Year Plan Description Cost/SF 1-Feb-01 Gross Square Footage: 36,148 $/SF Total A - Substructure 6.49 234,683 B - Shell 30.86 1,115,677 G - Sitework 8.81 318,531 Z - General 3.46 125,167 Subtotal Direct Costs: 49.63 1,794,057 Performance Bond (1.3%) 0.65 23,323 General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees 3.52 127,217 Contingency @ 10% 5.38 194,460 Escalation @ Y2%/mo (5-Years) 17.75 641,717 Subtotal Indirect Costs: 27.30 986,716 Total Construction Cost: 76.93 2,780,773 Total Soft Cost: 16.76 ' 605,804 Escalation @'h%/mo (5-Years) 5.03 181,741 Total Construction Cost: 98.71 3,568,318 4 P /current Projects/Donovan Park/ Schematic Design/QTO/ © 2001 All Rights Reserved by Donovan Park 5 Year Parking Plan.xls Page 1 of 4 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. i Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 A - Substructure - Prkng Strctr 5 - Year Plan Description Quantity II Unit Cost (f Total A - Substructure Building Excavation Excavation @ Footings 203 Cy 12.31 2,499 Backfill @ Footings 103 CY 14.66 1,516 6" Gravel Base and Mirafi @ SOG 16,325 SF 1.18 19,330 Subtotal Building Excavation 23,345 Foundations 6x6 Pad Footino (a) Columns 40 CY 139.20 5,568 Subgrade 720 SF 0.27 192 Sideform 480 SF 6.65 3,192 Float 720 SF 2.66 1,915 Cure & Protect 720 SF 0.08 57 Rebar 516 LBS 0.53 273 Pump & Place 8 HR 247.50 1,980 4x4 Pad Footina 0 Columns 20 Cy 139.20 2,784 Subgrade 320 SF 0.27 85 Sideform 320 SF 6.65 2,128 Float 320 SF 2.66 851 Cure & Protect 320 SF 0.08 26 Rebar 344 LBS 0.53 182 Pump & Place 4 HR 247.50 990 5' Slab On Grade 621 CY 167.58 104,013 Subgrade 16758 SF 1.31 21,953 Construction Joint 110 LF 1.61 177 Trowel 16758 SF 2.26 37,890 Cure & Protect 16758 SF 0.08 1,337 Edgeform 723 LF 4.66 3,366 WWF 6X6 W 2.9 X 2.9 16758 SF 0.41 6,909 Pump & Place 35 HR 247.50 8,663 Subtotal Building Foundations 211,337 Substructure Total 234,683 P:la,-t ProgectslDono Pan; Schematic De&gnl0T0/ ® 1001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Pan 5 Year Paning Plan as Page 2 of 4 Archaecmai Resowce C-Hants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 B - Shell - Parking Structure 5 - Year Plan Description ILQuantity II Unit Cost I) Total B - Shell Superstructure Column Concrete 1'-0"x 1'-6" Reinforced CIP Columns 40 EA 867.99 34,720 Concrete Retaining Wall (Allowance per Architect) 4,638 SF 30.21 140,114 6" Tight Batter-Stack River Rock Veneer @ Retaining Wall 4,638 SF 30.65 142,155 6" Stone Cap Paving on Sand Bed @ CIP Retaining Wall 230 SF 26.21 6,028 1'-6"x 2'-0" CIP Beam 129 CY 653.14 83,961 10" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck 9,729 SF 23.84 231,942 12" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck 9,661 SF 23.84 230,322 2" Std Steel Pipe Wall Rail 15 LF 23.84 358 2" Std Steel Pipe Guard Rail 623 LF 81.27 50,631 2" Std Steel Pipe Stringer Rail 45 LF 133.21 5,994 Stair Tower 6 CY 741.17 4,447 Backfill @ Retaining Wall 2,643 CY 11.08 29,282 Waterproofing @ Retaining Wall 4,638 SF 4.18 19,387 Traffic Topping @ Upper Deck 19,390 SF 6.09 118,087 Striping, Graphics, Painting & Signage (Allowance) 1 LS 18,250.00 18,250 Superstructure Subtotal 1,115,677 Shell Subtotal 1,115,677 PJCunwt Proje nwD- an Park/ Schematic DastgnlOTOI ~s 2001 All Rights Reserved by Donovan P: 5 vaar Parking Plan .IS Page 3 of 4 A¢hitecNrai Resource Consultants. Inc Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 G - Project Sitework 5 - Year Plan Description (I Quantity Unit Cost II Total G - Building Sitework Site Preparation Subtotal Site Preparation Excluded Site Demolition and Relocations Subtotal Site Demolition and Relocations Excluded Sitework Earthwork Silt Fence @ Site 900 LF 4.25 3,825 Construction Fence @ Site 880 LF 5.89 5,183 Haul Off to Town of Vail Site 7,181 CY 12.35 88,685 Mass Cut @ Parking Structure 7,181 CY 11.75 84,377 Topsoil Removal to Stockpile 70 CY 20.63 1,436 Topsoil Replacement 70 CY 14.85 1,034 Subtotal Site Earthwork 184,540 Site Improvements Landscaping Allowance 1 LS 100,000.00 100,000 Demo Existing Asphalt 36,990 SF 0.65 24,044 Demo Curb and Gutter 637 LF 0.13 82 Demo & Remove 5'-0" Concrete Wall @ Parking Lot 230 LF 42.89 9,865 Subtotal Site Improvements 133,990 Site Civil Mechanical Utilities Subtotal Site Site Electrical Utilites 0 Building Sitework Subtotal 318,531 P.IC-- Prgecrs/O P-1 Scl,-'c Design/OTO/ C 2001 An R gnie Reserved By D-- Pan, 5 Yee, P -q Aar J. Page 4 of 4 awledm,ai Reedume c~wnadis. 1,. F. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Parking Revisions Description Cost/SF Building Cost Gross Square Footage: 36,148 $/SF Total A - Substructure (6.23) (225,147) B - Shell (7.57) (273,460) C - Interiors Excluded Excluded D - Services Excluded Excluded E - Equipment and Furnishings Excluded Excluded F - Special Construction and Demolition Excluded Excluded Z - General (1.03) (37,396) Subtotal Direct Costs: (14.83) (536,002) Performance Bond (1.3%) (0.19) (6,968) General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees (0.98) (35,293) Contingency @ 10% Excluded Excluded Escalation @ %%/mo Excluded Excluded Subtotal Indirect Costs:' (1.17) I (42,261) II Total Construction Cost:l (16.00) (578,264) P Current ProtectsOonovan Park\ Schematic Deisgn\OTO\ 02001 All Rights Reserved By Donovan Park Master File SD Estimate 16 FEB 01 - Parking n Site Adjustments.zIs Page 1 of 3 Architectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Parking Revisions Substructure Description Quantity Unit Cost Total A - Substructure Excavation @ Footings (203) CY 12.31 (2,499) Backfill @ Footings (103) CY 14.66 (1.516) 6" Gravel Base and Mirafi @ SOG (16,325) SF 1.18 (19,330) Mass Fill @ Parking Structure (Assume onsite fill) 2,394 CY 1.14 2,729 Subtotal Building Excavation (20,616) Foundations 6x6 Pad Footing ) Columns (40) CY 139.20 {5,568) Subgrade (720) SF 0.27 (192) Sideform (480) SF 6.65 (3,192) Float (720) SF 2.66 (1,915) Cure & Protect (720) SF 0.08 (57) Rebar (516) LBS 0.53 f273) Pump &Place (8) HR 247.50 (1,980) 4x4 Pad Footino o(7 Columns (20) CY 139.20 (2;784) Subgrade (320) SF 0.27 (85) Sideform (320) SF 6.65 (2,128) Float (320) SF 2.66 (851) Cure & Protect (320) SF 0.08 (26) Rebar (344) LBS 0.53 (182) Pump & Place (4) HR 247.50 (990) 5" Slab On Grade (621) CY 167.58 (104,013) Subgrade (16.758) SF 1.31 (21;953) Construction Joint (110) LF 1.61 (177) Trowel (16,758) SF 2.26 (37,890) Cure & Protect (16,758) SF 0.08 (1.337) Edgeform (723) LF 4.66 (3,366) WWF 6X6 W 2.9 X 2.9 (16,758) SF 0.41 !6,909) Pump & Place (35) HR 247.50 (8,663) Subtotal Building Foundations (204,531) Substructure Total (225.147) v-rc..«„i a.gec,wrow,oa" aan; S.:nem.,K Desgn;OTO; Wgn4 Reserved By ou e~ aan m:h,e. c,e so Esr,..,,e ,w, FEe o, Pa,x~o sn" narveme„s..is Page 2 or 3 annewreC'--"-. I- Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Parking Revisions Shell Description (I Quantity II Unit Cost II Total B - Shell Superstructure 1'-0"x V-6" Reinforced CIP Columns (40) EA 867.99 (34,720) Precast Retaining Wall w/ Tie-Back System (1,473) SF 30.21 (44,484) 6" Tight Batter-Stack River Rock Veneer @ Retaining Wall (1,473) SF 30.65 (45.132) 6" Full Depth Asphalt Paving @ Lower Level Parking (Includes Base) 30,690 SF 3.09 94,832 10'-0" Concrete Walkway 1,135 SF 3.78 4,290 1'-6" Vertical Curb and Gutter 265 LF 13.21 3,501 1'-6"x 2'-0" CIP Beam (129) CY 653.14 (83,961) 10" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck (9,729) SF 23.84 (231,942) 12" Mild Steel Reinforced CIP Concrete Deck (9.661) SF 23.84 (230,322) 0 2" Std Steel Pipe Wall Rail (15) LF 23.84 (358) 2" Std Steel Pipe Guard Rail (523) LF 81.27 (42,504) 2" Std Steel Pipe Stringer Rail (45) LF 133.21 (5,994) Dry Stack Boulder Retaining Wall w/Geo-Grid 2,100 SF 53.34 112,014 Landscaping Allowance 1 LS 150,000.00 150,000 Site Focal Allowance 1 LS 50,000.00 50,000 Site Lighting Allowance 1 LS 25,000.00, 25,000 Striping, Graphics, Painting & Signage (Allowance) 1 LS 6,320.00 6,320 Superstructure Subtotal (273,460) Roof Construction Roof Subtotal Excluded Exterior Enclosure Exterior Closure Subtotal Excluded Shell Subtotal (273,460) F`:/Cu,- P,gmW0O-- Park) 5che DesignK)TD s 2001 All R~ghis Reserved by D-- Park Master Fne SD Estimate 16 FEB 01 Parlor, n Site Ad,ustme- r.ls Page 3 of 3 A,lhile t-I Reswrce Cmsultanls, Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Summary - Roofing VE Description Cost/SF 27-Feb-01 Gross Square Footage: 12,991 $/SF Total A - Substructure Excluded Excluded B - Shell (1.28) (16,693) C - Interiors Excluded Excluded D - Services Excluded Excluded E - Equipment and Furnishings Excluded Excluded F - Special Construction and Demolition Excluded Excluded Z - General (0.1Q) (1,252) Subtotal Direct Costs: 1.38 (17,945) Performance Bond (1.3%) (0.02) (233) General Liability Insurance w\Owner's Budget Building Permit & Fees w\Owner's Budget Water/Sewer Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Gas/Electrical Tap Fees w\Owner's Budget Street Cut/Patch Fees w\Owner's Budget Storm Drainage Fees w\Owner's Budget General Contractor Fees (0,09) (1,182} Contingency @ 10% (0.15) (1,936) Escalation @ %%/mo (0.08) (1,065) Subtotal Indirect Costs: (0.34) II (4,416) II Total Construction Cost:I (1.72) II (22,361) I P Current ProjectstDonovan Parm Schemauc Deisgm ©2001 All Rights Reserved By QTO\Donovan Park Master File SD Estimate 27 FEB 01 -Add Deducts. xis Page 1 Of 2 Architectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Donovan Community Park Facility 27 FEB 01 Roofing VE Description Quantity Unit Cost Total Standing Seam Zinc Roof System w/Std Kynar Color Finish 12,991 SF (1135) (147,443) Berridge Standing Seam Roof System w/Std Kynar Color Finish 12,991 SF 8.78 114,057 (16,693) p:icurrentprotects/donovan park: schematic designigto 2 Of 2 /Donovan Park Master Flee SD Estimate 27 FEB 01 -Add Deducts.xls © 2001 All Rights Reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants. Inc. Feb 27 01 02:22p Carrie Podl 9709636081 p•1 WS ,4)41-61 X43 ? Carrie Podl Post Office Box 580 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (970) 963-6080 fax 963-6081 RRR c i j~Ct To Mr. Mayor and Members of Vail Town Council; I am the administrator for the Rural Resort Region Childcare Project and facilitator for the state pilot group representing the five counties of Eagle, Lake, Summit, Pitkin and Garfield. I am unable to attend your meeting today on the use of space in Vail for a child care site and am hopeful you will continue to consider this option for your employers, employees and general public. Childcare is a $15 million dollar a year industry in Eagle County. However, the support it offers your citizens is immeasurable. Adequate, quality care and education for young children is the sign of a healthy community. On the other hand, the lack of licensed childcare can lead to employer turnover, young children in unlicensed settings, and citizens moving out of Vail. I work in coordination with many other organizations and individuals interested in promoting your increase in capacity in Vail. The State Licensing Specialist for Eagle County, Dana Damm, and Karla Stukey, your local Resource and Referral -Ql,,esentative have also been working towards a solution. Neither of them were available to attend today but have asked that I express their support. Quality childcare programs do not happen overnight. The economics of this business does not lend itself to quick fixes. Doing it right necessitates time for this community to coordinate the financial support, logistics, and quality staff it takes to run a program that will be an asset to the Town of Vail. I encourage you to take advantage of the momentum and direction your locally concerned consortium has taken in this effort. Give childcare a chance-it will be time well spent in your community in the long run! Sincerely, 1 C Carrie Podl Administrator Rural Resort Region Childcare Project Facilitator Rural Resort Region Childcare Pilot