Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-22 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL TUESDAY, May 22, 2001 NEIGHBORHOOD WALK-ABOUT STEPHENS PARK - WEST VAIL 12:00 P.M. Council to meet at TOV - van will provide transportation to Stephens Park Council will have lunch provided (Other participants are encouraged to bring a sack lunch) WORK SESSION NOTE: Time of items is approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 2:00 P.M. 1. Vail Valley Exchange Update. (30 min.) Merv Lapin 2. John Power ITEM/TOPIC: Determine if the former Bright Horizons day care space will be reopened as a child care facility. If yes, will TOV authorize an inter-governmental agreement with Eagle county to co-manage the facility. (15 min.) 3. Discussion of 4th of July Curfew Ordinance. (15 min.) Greg Morrison John Gulick 4. Todd Oppenheimer ITEM/TOPIC: Donovan Park Community Facility: (45 min.) Introduction of Architectural Energy Corporation, LEEDS consultant Brief update on environmental certification (LEEDS program) Brief update on value engineering, DRB/PEC, and LEEDS program project cost impacts Discussion of general contractor procurement options for Phase 1 B. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approval to continue working toward LEEDS certification Approval to begin negotiation process to procure general contractor for Phase 1 B BACKGROUND RATIONALE: As presented at the April 17, 2001 meeting, the design development cost estimate included a reduction of $180,571 for a total hard construction cost of $7,591,923. Evaluation of value engineering items and PEC/DRB conditions has resulted in a net increase of approximately $150,000. These adjustments impact only the design contingency. The costs and benefits of the LEEDS program will be presented by the design team. Generally, while the estimated cost impacts are significant, the program brings many direct and indirect benefits to the project. The estimates are necessarily worse case at this time. It remains likely that a portion of the current $1 million project contingency will be able to be applied to LEEDS items. Please refer to the attached letter from ARC regarding contractor procurement options. Staff supports the negotiated method of general contractor selection over hard bidding because of the potential time savings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge cost impacts of the LEEDS program as appropriate to the Town Council's goal of environmental leadership and direct the design team to continue finalizing construction documents. Authorize staff to begin the negotiation process to procure a general contractor for Phase 1 B. 5. ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of Vail Center next steps. (20 min.) Russ Forrest BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On May 15th, the Town Council expressed interest in having a retreat to discuss the Vail Center. Staff is requesting input on when the Town Council would like to have that retreat. 6. ITEM/TOPIC: Appointment to Parking Task Force (5 min.) Bob McLaurin BACKGROUND RATIONALE: An outcome of the joint VRI/Town Council April 10th work session is the formation of a parking task force to be composed of the following: 2 members from Town Council; 2 members from Vail Resorts; 2 members from the Vail Chamber and Business Association (VCBA); 2 members from the community-at-large; and two members from Town of Vail staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Appoint 2 Councilmembers to this board. 7. ITEM/TOPIC: REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH UNBUDGETED RETT PROJECTS (10 min.) Greg Hall Larry Pardee Pam Brandmeyer BACKGROUND RATIONALE: At Ford Park, staff would request Council consider two additional unbudgeted RETT projects that have come to our attention. 1. Access Road to Lower Bench (east and west of the Amphitheater). In conjunction with the renovation of the Amphitheater, the town has the opportunity to do a 1-1/2 inch overlay on the east side to provide consistency to the overall finished Amphitheater entrance(s). As well, staff has been concerned on the west entrance about damage done to the adjacent turf because of the access road width. Staff recommends that along with the overlay the Vail Valley Foundation (VVF) has already budgeted for the west entrance to the lower bench ($33,000), that the town partner in this effort by widening this access road prior to the VVF overlay. Staff had not received the estimate by noon on Friday, so the estimate will be presented at work session. 2. Playground Paver Repair. Because of the cottonwood trees, we have substantial heaving and settling of the pavers around the restroom. They have not been maintained since the playground was built in '88289. To pull up 1450 sf of pavers, replace 1300 sf of pavers and install 150 sf of colored concrete in front of the restroom doors, and to cut out the inner ring of 3 tree grates where the existing trees have overgrown the inner hole, the total cost is $16,060. This # includes pulling existing pavers, cleaning them, cutting out tree roots, recompacting the base material, and replacing the pavers. In order to generate extra pavers for the cuts around the outside edge, it is necessary to add a concrete pad so we'll have extra pavers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve RETT funding for both projects and authorize staff to include these projects in the upcoming second supplemental appropriation. 8. DRB/PEC Report. (5 min.) 9. Review Council Critical Strategies. (15 min.) 10. Information Update. (10 min.) 11. Council Reports. (10 min.) 12. Other. (10 min.) 13. Adjournment. (5:00 P.M.) NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 6105101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M., IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 6105101, BEGINNING AT 7:00 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. COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2001 1/23/01 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (TO THE GREG H.: The load capacity continues to be an issue; Staff will supply estimate for replacement. 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? 4-24-01 DONOVAN PARK FRONTAGE BOB/GREG H.: What is the status of the access permit It is approved. We have a notice to proceed. We are preparing ROAD ACCESS PERMIT from CDOT for Donovan Park? construction design documents for their approval to include in final Diana Donovan construction package. 5/8/01 PLANTERS ACROSS FROM PEPI'S I LARRY: Three dead trees in planters across from Trees are out and are being replaced. Diana Donovan Pepi's should be removed. 5/8/01 ROAD REPAIR FROM GREG HALL: A sloppy job was done and needs to be This work was performed late fall, November by Qwest. They have NORTHWOODS TO THE NATURE cleaned up, repatched, whatever. been contacted to come in and repair/revegetate the area. CENTER Diana Donovan 5/15/01 EASEMENT W/CASCADE CLUB GREG H.: What is the status of the easement between Diana Donovan the town and Cascade in re: to construction grading at Donovan Park? 5/15/01 SPAETH DESIGN COUNCIL: What are next steps? Pam Brandmeyer 5/15/01 STREET LIGHT IN EAST VAIL GREG H.: Neighbors are requesting a different Tom Hopkins location from that proposed for the Main Gore Bridge in East Vail. 5/15/01 PUBLIC ACCESS CONNECTION GREG H./RUSS: Can a public access point (a bridge) Need further direction from Town Council. across Gore Creek from the south side of the library to the public space on the opposite side of the creek be created to allow the public access to the "other side?" F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl5-22-01 du May 22, 2001 - Page 1 VAIL DAY CARE OBJECTIVE: Determine if the former Bright Horizons day care space will be reopened as a child care facility. If yes, will TOV authorize an inter-governmental agreement with Eagle County to co-manage the facility. ACTIONS SINCE APRIL 17: • TOV and Eagle County staff have developed suggested operating principles to be covered under an inter-governmental agreement and a 50103 operating entity. Those principles are: 1) The Entity: Develop a 50103 organization whose purpose shall be to increase licensed child care capacity in Eagle County. The umbrella organization would potentially serve other licensed providers in order to accommodate economies of scale to include brokering space availability; provide for coordinated recruiting; and design, negotiate, and process payroll & benefits etc. 2) The Board: Board members would include 1-staff representative and 1-elected representative from both TOV and Eagle County. 3) Revenue/Cost sharing: All revenue will be retained and reinvested in the operation. Operating deficits will be divided equally between TOV and Eagle County. 4) Termination: Either parry may terminate the agreement with six-months advance notice. • The State licensing specialist has provided verbal opinion that the existing facility will accommodate 50 infant/toddlers and pre-schoolers, and 40 if infant/toddlers only (see infant/toddler mix option) • Aspen Ski Company has discontinued its infant/toddler program citing operating losses (see attached Aspen Times reprint) DISCUSSION: Infant/toddler care only, as evidenced by the Aspen Ski Co. decision to exit the business, cannot support itself on an affordable basis to working families. As discussed in the April 17 Council memo, the infant/toddler and pre-school mix allows day care centers to achieve more acceptable returns. However, more customer information is needed prior to making a product mix decision. There is limited risk in proceeding. One, TOV is already paying for the unoccupied former Bright Horizons space. Two, there are no irreversible long term commitments involved and, three, the public sector international recruiting team (Vail, Avon, Eco Transit, & Eco Schools) is already scheduled and budgeted to be in Australia and New Zealand in July and could support the recruiting strategy. However, on the liability side, unanticipated start-up costs are inevitable and would need to be reviewed as they occur. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that TOV support the IGA/501O3 principles and authorize the parties to begin a "community challenge" marketing campaign to pre-sell child care space. It is further recommended that child mix and pricing decisions be delayed until customer input, current market data, and grant/Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) funding are determined. Infant/Toddler Mix ($35 per day) Staffing Assumptions Operating Assumptions Number Hours per day (7am- # Children Age group Caregivers 6pm) 10 0 Preschool 0 Days per week 5 20 Toddler 4 Weeks per year 52 20 Infant 4 Days per year 260 40 8 Total caregiver hours each day caregivers x Total caregiver Average Total caregiver hours/day) hours per year hourly wage salaries 80 $ 20,800.00 $ 12.00 $ 249,600.00 Costs Base Salaries $ 249,600.00 Director Salary $ 45,000.00 Total Salaries $ 294,600.00 Benefits (20%) $ 58,920.00 Total Employment costs $ 353,520.00 Other Misc. Expenses $ 65,000.00 Total Operating costs $ 418,520.00 Revenue Total kid days per Year 10400 Average Daily rate $ 35.00 Total revenue @ 100% capacity $ 364,000.00 Revenue @ 90% capacity $ 327,600.00 Revenue @ 85% capacity $ 309,400.00 )nt Page News tile:///Cl/WINDOWS/TEMP/05I00I.c.htm 1 i Aspen Skiing Co. pulls the plug on child-care program By Janet Urquhart Aspen Times Staff Writer Local parents are scrambling to make new arrangements for child care after receiving word this week that the Aspen Skiing Co.'s Kid's Club program could shut down in August. The company is hoping the program can be reorganized as a nonprofit entity that is eligible for Aspen tax dollars that subsidize child care. But the fate of Kid's Club - and child care for those with children in the program - remains up in the air at this point. "I think many of the parents are panicking," said Nell Arthur, whose 19-month-old daughter, Lelia, is enrolled in Kid's Club. Like many parents, Arthur was busy Tuesday getting Lelia's name on waiting lists at other facilities, just in case, after receiving word that the Skico would cease subsidizing Kid's Club after Aug. 24. Jeanne McGovern, mother of an 18-month-old daughter. waited endlessly for a spot at another provider before an opening at Kid's Club became available. "Now I'm faced with finding another spot for her. It's going to be very hard," McGovern said. "For infant care, it's very hard to find care." And providing that care is very expensive, noted Sue Way, children's director for the Ski and Snowboard Schools of Aspen. The Skico has been losing about $40,000 a year on the Kid's Club program, she said. Cutting the program comes on the heels of other Skico budget cuts - most notably last month's elimination of up to 22 full-time, year-round positions - in response to another lackluster ski season. Kid's Club provides child care for Skico employees and the community at large. When the company took over the program four years ago, it envisioned a child-care center for both employees and guests. But the children of c 1,loyees and other locals have pretty much filled its classrooms at the Yellow Brick School, according to Way. The Skico's seasonal child-care programs for guests, like this summer's Camp Snowmass, will continue, she said. Kid's Club is the only provider of infant and toddler care in the valley that does not receive financial support from the Kids First Child Resource Center, Way said. Kids First, funded by an Aspen sales tax, provides per-child subsidies to nonprofit child-care providers for infants and toddlers. The high ratio of teachers to infants and toddlers required of licensed providers makes the care costly. It's impossible to recoup the costs and keep fees to parents affordable, so the Skico ends up subsidizing the operation, Way explained. of 2 5/11/0I 10:39 A.'~i 'ont Pag_-Nevi tile:!//Cj/WINDOWS/TEN1P/051001.c.htm If Kid's Club can be reorganized as a nonprofit organization, Kids First, rather than the ski company, could subsidize the program, she said. As a for-profit company, the Skico cannot receive Kids First funding for its day-care operation. "Even though there is no profit, we can't tap into those sources." Way said. Kid's Club fills three classrooms at the Yellow Brick School and uses a fourth for overflow, according to Christina Docimo, Kid's Club director. There are typically 30 to 40 children enrolled in the program at any given time. About 60 percent of the kids are the children of Skico employees during the winter; the rest of the year the general public uses about 60 percent of the spots and Skico employees account for the rest, she said. Kids First is aware of the pressing need for care and is willing to fund Kid's Club if it becomes a nonprofit provider, according to Amy Fustanio, provider coordinator for Kids First. The Kids First advisory board met with Kid's Club representatives Tuesday. "We are very concerned about keeping the infant and toddler spaces available in Aspen," Fustanio said. "The wait lists go up to three years. It's a serious situation in terms of working mothers finding a place for children under 12 months of age." In Aspen, only Kid's Club, Little Feet Day Care and the Early Learning Center offer care to infants, ages 2 to 18 months, and toddlers, ages 18 months to 3 years, she said. On Tuesday, the Kids First board also indicated it could assist Kid's Club with funding during its transition to a nonprofit enterprise - a process that will probably take at least three months, Fustanio said. The Skico is also willing to provide whatever help it can in restructuring the program, Way added. "I know I personally feel bad about it and so does the company," she said. For parents, the uncertainty about their child-care arrangements is "mentally exhausting," said Arthur. "I think it goes to the bigger picture of what's going on in Aspen," added McGovern. "People are trying to raise their families here and it's increasingly difficult." Back To Home Page Comments about this article? Send them to maNdIasoentimes.com Looking for a particular article? Search our Dailv Archives Posted: Thursday, May 10, 2001 )f 2 5/11/01 10:39 AM VAIL POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager FROM: Greg Morrison, Chief of Police DATE: 05/18/01 REF: Fourth of July Event Planning Following last year's New Year's Eve, the Town Council directed staff to develop strategies to "break the back" of the large, unruly crowd on Bridge Street for upcoming New Year's Eve and Fourth of July celebrations. BACKGROUND Twice a year, Vail is faced with an influx of teenagers bent on partying the night away in the town core. Unsupervised and unsanctioned, these youth descend on Bridge Street for both the Fourth of July and New Year's Eve. Many arrive downtown already intoxicated, while others bring backpacks full of beer and liquor in every imaginable container. Some are legal drinking age. Most are not, and therefore cannot get into any of the local establishments. Instead, they fill the street from the Covered Bridge to Seibert Circle, spilling onto Gore Creek Drive in both directions. The crowd on New Years Eve, 1999, was estimated anywhere from 7,000 to 10,000 people. Unfortunately, Vail is experiencing a trend similar to other areas of the country. Specifically, a marked increase in the level of violence associated with these events and a greater threat to public safety as a result. Assaults are commonplace in the crowds, as are vandalism, high levels of intoxication, drugs and disturbances. Medical incidents are on the rise as well, including tramplings in the crowd. One inebriated individual was dragged beneath a bus when he tried to force open the rear doors, and two others have had to be resuscitated with CPR as a result of injuries sustained at these events. Three Vail officers were injured during contacts just this past New Year's. Trash litters the streets, and businesses are utterly inaccessible. Historically, the Vail Police Department has simply attempted to contain the revelry. Recent years have seen a "zero tolerance" decree brought by the Town Council, resulting in the hiring of multiple officers from nearby jurisdictions for added police presence. The sheer number of people and offenses, however, easily overwhelms law enforcement's ability to truly exercise zero tolerance. For every enforcement action taken, untold numbers of other infractions must be bypassed, for officers to focus on the most serious. APRIL SUMMIT INITIAL STRATEGIES DISCUSSED On April 25th, 26th & 27th, a summit was held in Vail to discuss the national trend of unruly youth crowds and successful strategies implemented by other law enforcement agencies around the country. In attendance at this meeting were representatives from the Boulder, Colorado Police Department, the Palm Springs, California Police Department, the Fort Lauderdale, Florida Police Department and the Police Executive Research Forum. The initial two days of meetings were restricted to the law enforcement representatives and Vail Police staff, to discuss commonalties in youth violence, successful police tactics, successful community strategies and developing alternatives and suggestions for Vail's upcoming July Fourth celebration. The law enforcement representatives identified the following elements common to all situations in the different communities: • The crowd gathering was an event in and of itself; it's members come for the sole purpose of joining the large crowd, not for some other sanctioned event • Alternative events such as concerts, dances and other entertainment have failed to disperse the crowd to other venues • The crowds generally consist of middle and upper class, suburban, 13 to 21 year olds who individually are not typically prone to criminal activity. However, when placed in a confined area, with large numbers of other youths, anonymity sets in and the ensuing mob mentality results in property damage, fire-setting, looting, violence and personal injury • The mob mentality is easily sparked into chaos by the irresponsible actions of only a few instigators, and often fueled by various levels of intoxication After viewing videotape of Vail's July Fourth and New Year's Bridge Street crowds, all of the law enforcement representatives agreed that Vail is on the brink of a major conflagration. Representatives provided a detailed account of their own successful resolution of similar activities. Working with Vail PD staff, the panel presented the following strategies for implementation of the Vail Town Council's direction: • An aggressive, straightforward and blunt media campaign aimed at dissuading unsupervised youth from coming to Vail, clearly identifying the criminal consequences of un-civil behavior • Special court dates with severe fines for defendants arrested during the event • A constant and overwhelming presence of uniformed police officers, taking a zero tolerance stand for all violations of law. Physical arrest and removal from the area for any and all illegal transgressions • Request Colorado State Patrol conduct a DUI sobriety checkpoint in close proximity to the Vail Transportation Center • Establish a curfew for those youths 17 and under • Enact an ordinance authorizing "Special Event Designation" for the Village core, restricting access to adults 21 and over • Extensive video surveillance of the crowd for identification and future prosecution of violators • Use of police barricades to divide the crowd into manageable pockets, maintain control of crowd density and provide easy access for emergency service vehicles and personnel • Modify in-town, outlying and County late-night bus service to eliminate the introduction of additional revelers after 10:30 or 11:00 PM • Modify access to the municipal parking structures after 10:30 or 11:00 PM to allow access to actual patrons of Vail businesses, while eliminating the introduction of non-patron revelers DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL At this time, staff requests direction from the Town Council on the following three issues: 1. Media Campaign - does Council wish staff to design a media campaign intended to actively discourage unsupervised juveniles from coming to Vail for the Fourth of July? 2. Curfew Ordinance - does Council wish staff to draft a curfew ordinance, and if so of which of the three following options? a. New Year's Eve and July Fourth nights only b. One week surrounding each holiday night, respectively c. Year-round 3. Special Events Designation - does Council wish staff to prepare a Special Events Designation ordinance for Vail Village, which will restrict access to Bridge Street to those 21 and older, after a certain time? To: Vail Town Council From: Russ Forrest Date: May 22, 2001 Subject Vail Center Next Steps 1. PURPOSE The purpose of the May 22"d worksession is to discuss a council retreat focused on the Vail Center. On May 15th, the Town Council indicated their interest in having a retreat to resolve several critical Vail Center questions outlined below. Staff would specifically like to ask Council's direction on: • When would you like to have a retreat? • Would 1-2 Council members like to work on the agenda for the retreat and the question of who will participate in the retreat or does the Council as a whole want to decide that now? • What additional information would you like at that retreat? 2. FACILITATIOR Michael McNally is available on May 30th, May 31 st, and June 1. He can also be available during the 1st week of June. If Council would like to meet sooner to help ensure a November election, another facilitator can be found. Staff would suggest that a component of the retreat is with the facilitator and the Town Council. Another component should include stakeholders (arts community, Vail Resorts, Vail Recreation District, White River Institute). Technical experts could be present such as Greg Haley (HGA), Bill Anderson (ERA), and cost estimators. We could also look at how supporters and individuals with concerns about the project could participate and provide input to the Council (somewhat like the Vail Resorts/TOV retreats). It would be suggested that staff work with 1-2 Council members and the facilitator to develop a specific agenda for the retreat that meets the Council's objectives. 3. QUESTIONS FOR A RETREAT The major questions that the Town Council discussed on May 15th included: • Do you want a separate 20,000-sq. ft. meeting space and a separate performing arts space? • What type of performing art facility is desired? How many seats does the facility have? Is there a fly on the performing arts space? • 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. • The facilities will serve both Vail Valley residents and guests. • Public-private partnerships will be pursued to finance the development of the facilities. 6. 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 2nd sheet of ice, a family activity center, I earn i ng/m eeti ng/performi ng arts facility (convertible floor space which can convert into either a meeting space or a performing arts/event venue), and affordable housing. • On July 18, 2000 the Town Council eliminated alternative 3 from further consideration. • 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 it 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 15, 2000 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 May 23, 2000 and on September 5, 2000, 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." • On February 7th, 2001, the Town Council reviewed a draft contract with EDAW and reaffirmed their interest in moving forward with the existing design team. • On March 6th the Finance Team reviewed the capital and operational plans with the Town Council. • On April 17th the Town Council gave direction to move forward with a design contract with EDAW to design the Vail center to include a: 2nd Sheet of Ice, Skate park, Youth Center, climbing wall, meeting facility with break out space, limited retail to support the facility, 300 seat theatre, and approximately 15 units of affordable housing. • On May 8th, the Town Council directed staff to evaluate eliminating the 300-seat theatre and to place a theatrical fly on the 20,000 square foot meeting room. Staff would suggest that the Council might also need to reconfirm several other critical questions including: • What is your overall goal for the Vail Center - Economic development, build community amenities, create a community crossroads, all of the above. Five objectives have been used for the project. Are those five objectives still pertinent and applicable? • Evaluate Vail Resorts current level of involvement. Is Vail Resorts comfortable with participating in a new parking structure at Lionshead? Does the Council support the private development that goes with that participation? • Do you want the project to at least break even from an operational standpoint? • Do you have a goal for completion of the project? Phasing is possible with a plan that integrates the Vail Center with a new parking structure. • Members of the Town Council have questioned financial and market analysis information (ERA) data that has been presented in the past. What additional credible information is required by the Town Council to make a decision on the Vail Center? • Is a November 2001 election a goal? Is it still viable? 4. POTENTIAL OUTCOMES: With input from the Mayor, staff has contacted the design team and asked them to stop further work until the Town Council has a greater level of consensus on the uses in the project. This will make a November election on the Vail Center more difficult. With that in mind, possible outcomes from a retreat could include: • Agree on the program and move forward with design and financial planning and evaluate progress in July. • Delay the vote until 2002 and work on refining the program, communication, design, design phasing, financial planning, evaluating VR involvement, fund raising potential, and enhancing support. • Look to a third party to move the project forward. • Focus work on other-critical strategies. • Hold a series of community meetings to evaluate the mandate for the Vail Center and to reassess community priorities. • Other? • Other? Staff can prepare an analysis of pros and cons to a variety of outcomes for the Councils consideration if that would be helpful. 5. PROJECT OBJECTIVES TO DATE: • The facilities plan will build upon the community facility ideas and lands that have been identified through community surveys and the Vail Tomorrow, Common Ground, Lionshead Master Plan, and other community processes. • 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. utp/id/ u1 11:24 VAX 303 443 1502 A R C [A o01 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Ave. ¦ Suite 220 ¦ Bourdgr, CO 80303 0 (303)443-0330 ¦ Fax (303)443-1508 Ms. Nina Timm May 18, 2001 Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Nina- I wanted to give you and Council a quick update on the Town of Vail Affordable Housing project, as follows: ARC has solicited over 80 developers directly by FAX, as well as running ads in all the local papers. ? We have distributed over 35 RFPs (not counting distributions to TOV staff and Council). Over half of these were to developer candidates. We believe we have three or four developers expressing strong interest, and are actively working with them to maintain their focus on this diffioWLand complex site. ? ARC suggests the project and the ToV would be best served by extending the due date for submittals to June 1,1P. Two reasons lead us to this conclusion: • A request was recei I ed late in the process for an RFP from a capable candidate (McDermott Properties, LLC), and they will be hampered by the current deadline. I • Key decision-makers at two other qualified firms were on vacation last week (Gerry Flynn at Corum Development and Doug Fgleston at American Multi-Housing Partnership). This prevented their participation and contribution in an essential portion of the proposal preparation: we may be able to encourage them to submit with a more relaxed deadline. ARC will be issuing Addendum #Two on Monday, addressing the extension, as well as answering developers questions received recently. We will copy you and Council on this for your files. Nina, if you have any questions please feet free to call me or give me an e-mail. zs rely, adra c c: Russell Forrest George Ruther Town of Vail Council Packets DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA Wednesday, May 16, 2001 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS PUBLIC WELCOME PROJECT ORIENTATION / LUNCH - Community Development Department 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Clark Brittain Andy Blumetti Bill Pierce Hans Woldrich Charles S. Acevedo SITE VISITS 2:00 pm 1. Dauphinais Residence - 1936 W. Gore Creek Drive 2. Sun Vail Condos - 655 N. Frontage Road 3. Summers Lodge Condos - 123 Willow Place 4. All Seasons Condos - 434 Gore Creek Drive 5. Golden Peak - 458 Vail Valley Drive Driver: Allison PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm 1. Edelweiss Condos - Final review of proposed roofing material. Brent 103 Willow Place, Edelweiss Condominiums/Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Edelweiss Condo Association, represented by Nedbo Construction MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 4-0 TABLED UNTIL JUNE 6, 2001 2. Summers Lodge Condos - Final review of proposed roofing material. Bill 123 Willow Place/Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Summers Lodge Condo Assoc., represented by Rick Halterman MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 4-0 TABLED UNTIL JUNE 6, 2001 3. Sun Vail Condos - Final review of proposed repaint with color change. Bill 655 N. Frontage Rd./ Lot 9, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: Sun Vail Homeowner's Association, represented by Kent Krohlow MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 3-0(Woldrich recused) CONSENT APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION: 1. Approved in accordance with the submitted paint chip samples, not the paint sample applied to the building. 1 TOW *YA& 4. All Seasons Condos - Final review of proposed roofing materials and repaint. Bill 434 Gore Creek Drive/Lot B, Block 3, Vail Village 5th Filing. Applicant: All Seasons Condominium Association MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION 1. Approved in accordance with the submitted tar and gravel roof and brown metal fascia sample. The red trim color is approved in accordance with the submitted paint chip sample. 5. Mentlik residence - Final review of new single-family residence Ann 2437 Garmisch Drive/Lot 12, Block H, Vail das Schone Filing 2 Applicant: William L. Mentlik, represented by John G. Martin MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED WITH 4 CONDITIONS: 1. That the garage shown on the south elevation be faced with stone up to the deck rails; 2. That the driveway entrance be reduced to 24 feet at the edge of Garmisch Drive; 3. That a revocable right-of-way permit be required for the landscaping, driveway, concrete pan, and snow storage to be located in the Town right-of-way; and 4. That stamped engineering drawings be required for retaining walls between 4 and 6 feet tall. 6. Lazier residence - Final review of a new single family residence and EHU. Bill 1290 Westhaven Circle / Lot 26, Glen Lyon Subdivision. Applicant: Buddy & Kera Lazier, represented by William Reslock MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 4-0 CONSENT APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS: 1. No outside comer material changes are allowed. 2. Add 10 aspen trees, 6 to 8 feet in height, in the area between the house and driveway. 7. Petrus residence - Final review of new single family residence with EHU. Bill 84 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 28, Block 7, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Petrus Management, represented by JMP Architects MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 3-0 (Acevedo recused) CONSENT APPROVED WITH 3 CONDITIONS: 1. Resolve retaining wall height issues with staff; 2. Meet all Public Works Department requirements; 3. In lieu of low level plantings, provide 10 spruce trees, 8 to 12 feet in height, in the front of the site with the intent of screening the view of vehicles parking in the driveway. 2 8. Golden Peak - Conceptual review of proposed addition Ann 458 E. Vail Valley Drive/Tract F, Block 3, Vail Village 5th Filing Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Patrick Him CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 9. Daupinais residence - Conceptual review of new single-family & Type I EHU. Allison 1936 West Gore Creek Drive/Lot 1, Strauss Subdivision. Applicant: Pat Dauphinais CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 10. Red Sandstone Athletic Field - Final review of proposed athletic field. Allison 610 N. Frontage Rd. West/A portion of Tract C, Vail Potato Patch. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Gregg Barrie MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 11. Vail Valley Medical Center - Final review of proposed Phase I additions. George 181 West Meadow Drive/Lots E & F, Vail Village 2"d Filing. Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun Associates MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Acevedo VOTE: 3-0 (Woldrich gone) TABLED UNTIL JUNE 6, 2001 Staff Approvals Vail Glo Lodge - Replace fiberglass swimming pool with smaller fiberglass pool. Ann 701 W. Lionshead Circle / Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3. Applicant: Maximum Comfort Pool and Spa Fleischer residence - Changes to approved deck design. Bill 1765 West Gore Creek Drive, East Unit / Lot 7 Vail Village West 2"d Applicant: Chad Fleischer Manart residence - Front entry change, new deck railings, new garage door. Ann 2945 Manns Ranch Rd / Lot 4-B, Block 1, Vail Village 13th Filing. Applicant: Frank C. Manart Tyler residence - Addition of bay window. Allison 433 Gore Creek Dr. / Lot 7 Vail Trails East. Applicant: Tim & Nancy Tyler Hormel residence - Addition of patio area, 2 hot tubs, additional landscaping. Allison 1527 Vail Valley Dr. / Lot 10, Block 3, Vail Valley 1st Filing. Applicant: Geo. A. Hormel & CO La Bottega - Addition of operable windows. Allison 100 E Meadow Dr. / Vail Village Plaza Condominiums. Applicant: Jamm LTD. Vail Chamber of Commerce - Temporary directional signage for Village and Lionshead. Russ 241 E. Meadow Dr / Vail Village and Lionshead. Applicant: Town of Vail 3 Brandess Building - Installation of air conditioning unit. Allison 2077 N. Frontage Rd. / Lot 39, Buffer Creek Subdivision. Applicant: Dental Center of Vail, PC White residence - Addition of split rail fence. Allison 1833 Lionsridge Loop / Lot 4, Block 3, Lion's Ridge Subdivision. Applicant: Kenneth L. & Kathryn White Billingsley residence - Address monument. Allison 1170 Ptarmigan Rd. / Lot 3, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 7. Applicant: Lucy C. Billingsley Timber Falls Condos - Installation of bay window on unit #404. Ann 4496 E. Meadow Dr. / Timber Falls Condominiums Applicant: Carolyn Brown Dikeou residence - Change in dormer. Allison 352 Beaver Dam Rd. / Lot 5, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 3. Applicant: Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz, Architects 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. 4 May 22, 2001 To: Town of Vail Council Subject: Vail Center The Vail Center is a complicated project. Decisions on one aspect can affect another and can have unintended side effects. This letter approaches the Vail Center from three different directions, all of which point to the conclusion that more work is necessary. The first annroach is a financial analysis of the April 17 version of the Vail Center (attached). I have read the ERA Study several times, reference it frequently in this analysis and know of no example where the ERA document refutes this analysis. I have been told that two convention center operating firms have reviewed the Vail Center operating projections and found them reasonable, but I have no information on the thoroughness of those reviews. My conclusions are the following: 1. The Convention Center, as proposed, is unlikely to be profitable and also unlikely to produce the projected sales tax revenues. Additional revenue sources are needed. If the Center can be made profitable and if the Council decides to build it, the Center's size should be increased: • The pre convene space should be doubled to 10,000 square feet per the ERA Study. • Two Boardrooms should be added to facilitate executive meetings that are often held in conjunction with conventions. • A Business Center should be added with reproduction facilities and with computers and phones so attendees can maintain contact with their offices. • An additional 6,000 - 7,000 square feet of breakout space should be provided to improve scheduling flexibility. 2. A separate Learning Center is not justified and should be removed from the Vail Center. This space is greatly underutilized. It competes directly with the Colorado Mountain College, which is also subsidized with property taxes. If it makes any profits at all, which is unlikely, they will flow to the private concerns that will be renting Learning Center space to host their classes, and not to the Vail Center. The limited needs of the Learning Center can be satisfied without building a new facility by utilizing breakout rooms in the Convention Center, the Performance Center, the Community Room in the Library or the Pavilion in Donovan Park. All of those facilities would benefit from additional usage. 3. A Performance Center should be provided as a community facility. It should be a "rental facility", however, as described in the ERA Study. The Town should not take on any of the risks associated with programming. The construction cost should be funded by private donations and a sufficiently large operating endowment provided to ensure that the Town will not have to subsidize operations. The size, i.e. number of seats, should be determined by a formal study that documents the types of uses and the frequency and volumes of each. Any other approach relies on personal opinions and is more likely to be wrong than right. 4. Being a "premier mountain resort community", the TOV should provide an abundance of recreational facilities. However, the era of Vail providing facilities for the entire Vail Valley is nearing an end. With the growth already experienced "down valley" and projected future growth, it is realistic to assume that recreational facilities will begin to appear in the main population centers of Avon/Edwards and Eagle/Gypsum. A formal study should be completed to assess the impact of probable future "down valley" facilities on existing and planned Vail facilities before any new facilities are built. The second annroach: I believe one reason the Council is having difficulty reaching consensus on WHAT should be in the Vail Center is because the members do not agree on WHY it is being built. Going back to basics, some possible reasons for building a Vail Center are the following: I . To increase retail, restaurant and lodging revenues 2. To increase the Town's sales tax revenues 3. To provide amenities so current guests will stay longer and spend more money 4. To provide amenities that will attract new guests to Vail 5. To provide amenities for residents The Council will want to consider others but these could be a start. Then each proposed component of the Vail Center should be tested as to how well it satisfies two or more of the "whys". Do all four components of the current Vail Center proposal satisfy two or more of these? I think not. A third annroach is to use a set of objectives, like the above or another list, to develop a completely fresh direction. A Convention Center might do a good job of increasing the Town's tax revenues, but it might be less efficient in increasing retail and restaurant revenues. Most of a conventioneer's time is spent inside a room without windows instead of in our streets, shops and restaurants. And, there are already a number of convention/conference centers in the mountains to compete with us (Keystone, Snowmass, Telluride, Taos, Copper, Beaver Run near Breckenridge). As an alternative, increasing tourism might do a better job of growing both business and town revenues. Also, competing against the Keystone Conference Center could be challenging (if you haven't personally visited this facility, you should), whereas few mountain towns could compete against Vail as a tourist Mecca. Attracting tourists would also be considerably less expensive. Vail should be a leader, not a follower. Overnight tourists would also be more likely than conventioneers to utilize amenities. The proposed Performance and Recreation Centers would have minimal impact on attracting large numbers of visitors to Vail, but they could do a terrific job of keeping tourists here longer to spend more money. With more planning it might be possible to expand these centers to attract many new visitors. Tourists could then help pay for resident amenities, like they always have. One possible conclusion is, therefore, that Vail should work hard to find a way to significantly increase off-season tourism. Then all five of the above objectives could be accomplished with a smaller, less expensive and more focused Vail Center, that might rally community support. Vail could become the "premier mountain resort and tourism community" in the U.S. In its fifth year of operation the proposed Vail Center projects a total of 203,783 visitor days and 81,470 lodging nights. Even a modestly successful tourism campaign could generate many times those numbers at a fraction of the cost, and without a property tax increase. It's an idea that is at least worth exploring. Forging ahead to meet a self-imposed deadline could irreparably damage the chances of anything ever being built. In an attempt to please everyone, the current design evolved from a "wish list" instead of a "needs list". This project is too big and too costly to move forward without a substantial majority of the community behind it. Even if a thin majority could be mustered in this November's election to pass some variation of the current proposal, it could destroy the Vail "community" for years to come. The May 8 Council meeting, when a major change to the Vail Center design was approved with little discussion, indicates that there is relatively little commitment to the current approach. My observation is your differences run deeper than some are willing to admit and a facilitated retreat focused on "what" instead of "why" would at best create superficial agreement. Everyone (Council members and involved citizens) needs to focus on what the community needs and not on what individuals want. This will probably take more time than is available for a November election, but $75 million is a lot of money to spend on a project that does not appear to enjoy overwhelming community support. As Rod Slifer eloquently stated, "We have one shot here. If we don't get it done, we're cooked for the next ten years". Forget the deadline. Let's get it right. P I 6eiz, Rick Scalpello P. 1 Vail Center Financial Analysis The Vail Center is composed of four sub-centers: Convention, Learning, Performance and Recreation. An earlier projection of $97 million for construction and endowments was reduced to $75 million by removing operating endowments and the cost for additional perking Otherwise, the plan is unchanged. At the Town of Vail Council review of the current proposal, the team was instructed to incorporate employee housing into these plans, but those costs are not yet available. Voters will be asked in November to approve an increase in the Town's portion of the Property Tax. They deserve financial projections that are realistic and achievable. To do otherwise may burden taxpayers with even larger tax increases in the future because of unexpected operating deficits. The Convention Center: The financial projections include 59 conventions or events booked into the Center while the Economics Research Associates (ERA) Study, for which the Town paid several hundred thousand dollars, recommended two alternatives: one with 47 events and the other with 49 events. A key question is: will booking 59 conventions into the 20,000 square foot Vail Convention Center require a utilization rate that is unachievable? # of attendees 100-400 400-700 700-1000 1000-1500 Total # of events 24 18 15 2 59 # of days 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 Assuming that all setup/tear down for the smaller events (100-700 attendees), can be completed overnight, and that two of the smallest events (100-400 attendees) could be held concurrently, it might be possible to schedule three events each week. The larger events (700-1500 attendees), require advance teams to come in and set up banners, decorations, special audiovisual equipment and lights, and show presenters how to use the teleprompter, etc. and then tear them down, will require one week each. Together it will take 32 solid weeks to stage the 59 conventions. If a further assumption is made that conventions could be held in the Vail Center ten months of the year, from April 1 through the following January 31, there are 45 weeks available, for a 71 % utilization of the convention facilities. A survey of three major Vail hotels, who account for almost half of all the hotel rooms in Vail, resulted in a 35% conference facility utilization during the shoulder seasons and 77% in the summers, for an April through January average of roughly 50%, substantially lower than the projected 71% for the Vail Center. Is it likely that the Vail Center can achieve a ro'ected utilization that exceeds the performance of Vail's hotels, Pagel especially when two-thirds of the Vail Center's business will be overflow from alreadv booked hotels? If the Convention Center fails to make its financial projections, taxpayers will be asked to subsidize the losses, as is happening right now in Snowmass Village. The Snowmass facility is owned and operated by the Snowmass Village Resort Association, but a series of annual operating losses has caused its management to ask the town for help with bond debt payments. Recommendations: I . The most direct beneficiaries of the Convention Center are Vail's hotels and condominium owners. The Convention Center would be performing the role of a travel agent. booking guests into their accommodations. and a `travel agent' fee would be iustified for each night rented to a conventioneer. This fee should be added to the operating Dian as it could be the difference between making a Drofit or reauiring a subsidv from taxpavers. 2. Virtually every convention has at least one night when everyone is brought together for a sit down dinner or buffet. The current operatine plan has no evening dinner/buffet revenues. Thev should be added as most convention planners will require this service. The additional food and beverage profits could be the difference between the Convention Center operating at a profit or requiring a subsidv from taxpavers. 3. The Convention Center needs additional functional space for efficient operation. Two Boardrooms, the 3,000 square foot Business Center and a 6,000 square foot Breakout space from the Learning Center should be incorporated into the Convention Center. 4. All of the assumDtions used in the financial proiections need to be validated by an indeDendent third Dartv. The Learning Center: The Learning Center has un.nrpal finaniri,al numbers. Its revenue remains flat for the first five vears. but its nrofts increase each vear to 52%. a level bevond the dreams of virtually everv American comDanv. The profitability of the Banff Centre, which has been touted by Vail Center supporters as their goal, is only 2%. When its $10 million government subsidy and on-site hotel profits are removed, Banff loses $12 million on $12 million of revenue. And it stated in the Banff annual report that this was one of its most successful years in recent history. The learning center nrojects that two-thirds of its student davs will be from "locals". Is it realistic to Dian on 6.700 "local" davs at the Learning Center every veer? When was the last time you attended a class at the Colorado Mountain College, which provides similar classes? In addition, the Vail Center will compete with the CMC, which is also funded by Vail property taxes. Is that desirable? Page2 The size of the Learning Center is breathtaking. Its 29.520 square feet of special nurnose rooms will be used by an average of approximately 32 students per dav. The ERA studv recommended a facilitv of 1.000 sauare feet. How did it grow to 29,520 square feet? Except for 2-3 times a year when the Convention Center is booked for groups of over one thousand, there will always be space for meetings of all types and sizes in the Convention Center. The largest class in the Learning Center projections is 75 participants and there are only 3 classes per year that exceed 40 students. Does Vail really need a Learning Center that will cost $14 million to build, be underutilized and likely run a deficit? The limited needs of the Learning Center can be satisfied without building a new facility by utilizing breakout rooms in the Convention Center, the Performance Center, the Community Room in the Library or the Pavilion in Donovan Park. All of those facilities would benefit from additional usage. Recommendations: 1. A senarate Learning Center is not iustified and should be removed from the Vail Center Wan. Performance Center: The only revenues shown for this facility ($300,000) are 5% interest each year from a $6 million endowment. There are no ticket sales, no equipment rentals, no facility rentals and no food/beverage sales. It is, therefore a "rental facility" without rentals. The expenses coincidentally exactly equal the $300,000 of interest each year. The Vilar center received substantial construction donations and operating endowments and it recently changed management for what are rumored to be financial problems. Performance centers typically lose money, and even the best financed facilities can lose money. A detailed business plan is necessary before proceeding to the design stage. The ERA Stud stated "Given the relatively small number of local arts groups and their limited capacity to nay rent. and the lack of a professional renertorv theater companv to develop in-house productions, the Town, would have to identify other community uses for the theater to warrant its develonment". Have these other community uses been identified and studied? If so, what are they and what usage is projected? Operating revenues will be limited and the $6 million endowment may be insufficient to carry the operating expenses. A lareer endowment is desirable and, like the urivate contributions to capital cost, it should be fully committed before construction or implementation of anv Property Tax increase. Recommendations: Page3 1. Identifv and document all the community uses that will warrant construction of the Performance Center. A listing of anecdotal uses such as graduations and children's plays is insufficient. The type of use, number of participants and number of occurrences per year for each use is necessary. 2. DevelOn a detailed business plan with all uses and fundine. Test the feasibility of a larger facility. Obtain a commitment for a larger operatinLy endowment. 3. Add the commitment that all endowments will be fully funded before construction begins or before implementation of the oronosed Property Tax. Recreation/lee Center: The revenue associated with the Recreation/lee Center appears to be optimistic and the expenses understated. With the aggressive ponulation Lyrowth beinu experienced "down. valley". it is reasonable to assume that recreation facilities will eventually be built there. What will be the impact of those facilities on the nroiected Recreation/Ice Center revenue? If the Recreation/Ice Centers become unprofitable, is there a commitment from the Vail Recreation District that it will continue to onerate and fund the facility? If not. what will the Town do with these facilities? Between the Convention and Ice Centers, 98 special events are projected out of 177 convention nights, or more than one out of every two nights. The ERA Study projected a total of 25 special event days. Projections for the Family Recreation Center show that one-third of its visitors will spend the night in Vail. The Family Recreation Center includes a climbing wall, arcade games, indoor skate park and youth center. These are not generally considered to be activities that would generate a visit that includes an overnight stay in a hotel. The expenses for the Recreation Center include only one attendant overseeing the entire 69,000 square foot facility which includes a climbing wall, arcade games, indoor skate park, youth center and birthday celebrations. This attendant would receive a wage of $11.54 per hour including benefits. Is this a safe environment to leave children or should additional supervision be included in the operating plan? Recommendations: 1. Develop a written agreement between the Town of Vail and the Vail Recreation District that specifically addresses the commitment of the VRD to continue to onerate the recreation/ice facilities regardless of n_n_ eratinu deficits for the twenty-five vear life of the bond debt. 2. Perform a formal assessment of the revenue imn_ acts "f otential future "down vallev" facilities. Page4 • r 3. All of the assumptions used in the financial proiections need to be validated by an independent third narty. Summary: The business community was surveyed by the Vail Center team and was basically asked if it would support a project that would bring additional visitors to Vail in the off-season. It is surprising that only 48 of 58 respondents said yes. In conclusion. kev assumptions in the financial plan are optimistic. and possibly unachievable. Financial assumptions should be slightly conservative to allow for uncertainty and unforeseen situations, like a weak economy or corporate belt-tightening. Even with these optimistic proiections. the Vail Center is hareiv a break-even operation. Failing to achieve ALL the proiected revenues would likelv cause operating losses and/or would reduce Town sales/lodging tax collections. Now is the time to fully explore unanswered questions and change optimistic assumptions, before the plan is turned into concrete and steel. Once the Vail Center is built. deficits could lead to higher taxes or possibly reouire reducing Town services. At $75 million the cost of the Vail Center (without parking. without employee housing and without endowments). is too large for the Town to make a mistake. The bond debt would last twenty-five years and, cast $2.6-$ ' 3 _2 million of tax revenues everv year. while the sales tax benefits are o timistically proiecteo at only $1.8 million. An independent review is needed now. before the Town spends more hundreds of thousands designing a building that taxpavers may find unaffordable. Pages + ^ ~ k Attachment to Vail Center Financial Analvsis Other Key Assumptions and Questions A. Food and Beverage income: This is the most important assumption in the operating plan because the Vail Center could lose about $1.3 million without a profitable food and beverage business. The financial Dian assumes the Vail Center will make a 27% profit on its food and beverage services. without any mention of how this will be accomnlished. Hotel conference facilities achieve these, and even higher profit levels, but they are full time operations with their own restaurants. The Vail Center will experience periods when no events are booked and large fluctuations in the sizes of booked events. Full time staffing of key personnel will be challenging and expensive. The ERA. Studv suggested that food and beverage service be subcontracted to an outside vendor for a concession fee of 1;5% of gross revenue paid to the Vail Center. Without a detailed elan on how an in-house food and beverage service would be managed, the Drudent approach would be to use the ERA recommendation of outsourcing. This one change in assumptions would reverse the profit oroiections of the Vail Center from a gain of $266.306 to a loss of $289.120. B. The Vail Center will be a $75M facility with kids and teenagers in and out all day and evening. It will have computers and expensive audiovisual equipment as well as possible artwork in the Performance Center, and there is no cost for security in the operating plan. Is there an assumption that the Vail Police Department will provide security? If so, have they agreed and what is the cost? If not, how will it be provided? C. It is unlikely that transporting 400-1500 attendees around town can be accommodated by using the scheduled bus system. Is there a commitment on the Dart of the Town to provide dedicated buses for conventions? If not. how will daily transD_ ort be accomDlished. esDecially in inclement weather? What will this cost? D. Two-thirds of the Vail Center Convention events are of a size that could be accommodated by existing/planned hotel facilities. Therefore, they are overflow from hotels who would already have committed a sizable percentage of their hotel rooms. The remaining one-third of events are large to very large and would likely exceed the available Vail hotel base in all but a few rare occasions. Large numbers of convention attendees will therefore have to be housed in condominiums. The ERA Studv Doints out that "the lodging inventory has aged and manv DroDerties. especially among the condominium units. are in need of renovations". The financial Droiections assume that these condominiums would be acceptable to Dlanners of large conventions. This assum tion needs to be rigorously tested as it could severely limit bookings if it turns out to be invalid. E. Vail hotel convention facilities are already fairly well booked in the summer. They need help attracting more conventions to their own facilities in the shoulders. Therefore, there should be limited need for the Vail Center's convention facilities during the shoulders except for events Page6 that are too large for Vail's hotels. Large conventions mean people are generally coming from greater distances and the need for convenient air travel increases. Eagle airport has daily flights from major cities in the winter but a much reduced schedule in the summer and shoulders when it would be most needed. According to the ERA Study "The two most common reasons given for not wanting to book in Vail were the relatively high expense of holding meetings in Vail and the lack of frequent and uninterrupted commercial air flights into the Eagle-Vail regional airport". Is the Town for VRII prepared to guarantee / subsidize flights if that becomes necessarv? F. The cost of interest payments on the bonds during construction does not appear to be included in either the bond amount or the operating costs. Is this an additional burden on the Town's sales tax collections? This should be computed and added to the financial projections. G. Percentage of attendees who are accompanied by spouses/family: This assumption is important because it affects the off-site spending numbers that are used to calculate the sales taxes collected. The Vail Center projections assume 40%. The range of numbers from the three hotels surveyed was 10-45% with the average well below 40%. While some hotel conference facilities do experience this higher rate, a more typical, average percentage should be used in the projections. H. Neither the Convention Center nor the Learning Center expenses include any costs for marketing. While there is an argument that conventions are already being marketed, there is no current spending for a Learning Center. It is unclear if any tax money is going to be diverted from existing marketing efforts to support the Learning Center. If so, it should be included in the Learning Center expenses. I. Every attendee to the Convention Center, Learning Center, Ice Rink and Recreation Center is projected to spend $134 per day for dinner and retail purchases, even if they do not spend the night in Vail. Spouses are projected to spend an additional $134 per day. Ice Rink Tournament and Family Recreation Center attendees, who are projected to pay only $85 for a hotel room, are also projected to spend $134 per day for off-site food & beverage and retail purchases. Are these assumptions realistic? The proiected annual revenue of $16 million for retail and off-site food & beverage purchases is twice the corresnonding total in the ERA Studv! Pagel