HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-07 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, AUGUST 7, 2001
1:00 P.M.
TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied
upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item.
1. ITEMITOPIC: VVTCBNail Valley Chamber of Commerce Merger.
Frank Johnson (45 min.)
2.
Steve Thompson ITEM/TOPIC: Review of 2002 Budget Calendar and Budget Issues.
(30 min.)
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
Attached is the budget calendar for the creation of the revised Y2002
budget. Staff has identified the following issues which will need to be
addressed in putting together the 2002 budget.
Property Tax Revenue. Since the town de-Bruce'd property tax
revenue in 2000, the town has the ability to collect an amount equal
to the increase in the assessed valuation for 2002 or a lessor amount
if the Town Council desires. That increase for 2002 could be as high
as 15 percent, based upon preliminary numbers from the County
Assessor.
Deficits in the General Fund. Attached is the 5-year financial
projection for the General Fund that was in the 2002 budget
document. As you can see, the deficits from 2002 start at $230,000
and go up to $1.9 million in 2005. The deficits are primarily caused
by the growth in revenue being projected at half of what the growth in
expenditures is projected to be.
The Vail Chamber and Business Association (VCBA) has proposed
that the Business License Fee be increased by 20 percent and that
the revenue from the Business License Fee become a dedicated
funding source for the VCBA. The VCBA would like the business
license ordinance amended to reflect this. The VCBA's proposed
2002 budget does not include any dues revenue from participating
members of the Chamber.
When the Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Council presents
their operating plan and budget for Y2002 at their quarterly meeting
at the September 11th work session, this advisory board will be
asking the Town Council, sitting as the Board of Directors for the
Vail Local Marketing District (VLMD), to return the full $300,000+
from the Business License Fee back to the VLMD to fund a $2M
Y2002 annual marketing budget.
The VCBA would like to bid on services that are currently being
provided by the VVTCB, including information services, special events
and the administrative services for the Vail Local Marketing District,
if the proposed merger of the Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce and
the WTCB goes ahead.
Merger of VVTCB and Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce. There has
been a request for additional annual funding in the amount of
$100,000.
Vail Today has requested $325,000. We have included this on the
Council Contribution List. This issue will be addressed on August
28th when Council Contributions are discussed.
An employee salary increase may be needed in excess of the amount
budgeted for 2002. John Power from the Human Resources
Department will meet with the Council in Executive Session on August
21St to discuss current market analysis for salaries and wages.
Increased funding costs for cleaning the commercial areas. Currently,
the Public Works staff is providing additional services to keep the core
areas clean (Disney-like standards). In order to continue this level of
service, the budget may need to be increased in 2002 and 2001.
3. ITEM/TOPIC:
George Ruther
First reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2001, an ordinance
amending the Vail Town Code, title 12, chapters 2, 6, 14 & 16,
section 12-2-2 definitions, section 12-14-12 home occupations,
section 12-16-7 conditional use specific criteria and standards,
section 12-6a-3, section 12-6b-3, section 12-6c-3, section 12-6d-3,
section 12-6e-3, section 12-6f-3, section 12-6g-3, section 12-6h-3,
section 12-7d-2, section 12-7e-4, section 12-7f-4, section 12-7i-5,
section 12-9c-3 and section 12-8d-3 of the Town of Vail Zoning
Regulations to allow for home child day care facilities to be
operated as home occupations, subject to the issuance of a
conditional use permit, in eight residential zone districts and to
allow child day care centers to be operated in four commercial and
business zone districts, one special and miscellaneous zone district
and one open space and recreation zone district, subject to the
issuance of a conditional use permit, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (20 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Approve, approve with conditions, or deny Ordinance No. 17, Series
of 2001, on first reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
On July 9, 2001, the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental
Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
proposed text amendments to the Vail Town Council. A copy of the
staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission,
dated July 9, 2001, and the approved meeting minutes have been
attached for reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail
Town Council approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2001, on first
reading.
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Verification status of existing ordinances, policy, and
Greg Morrison direction for New Year's Eve. (15 min.)
5. ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session Recording Requirements. (5 min.)
Pam Brandmeyer
6. DRB/PEC Report. (5 min.)
7. Review Evening Meeting Agenda. (5 min.)
-8. Review Critical Strategies. (5 min.)
9. Information Update. (10 min.)
10. Council Reports. (10 min.)
11. Other. (10 min.)
12. ITEMITOPIC: Donovan Park Middle Bench. ( 15 min.)
Neighborhood request to create a children's community park.
Neighborhood partners include: Matterhorn Neighborhood; Glen Lyon
Neighborhood; Eagle Valley Rotary Club; Betty Ford Alpine Garden
Foundation; Gore Range Natural Science School; and possibly the
Viet Nam Veterans.
13. Executive Session - Personnel Matters and Contract Negotiations.
(1 hour)
14. Adjournment. (4:55 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, 8/14101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/21/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/21/01, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/28/01, BEGINNING AT 11:30 A.M. WITH A
NEIGHBORHOOD WALK-ABOUT AT ELLEFSON PARK. THE WORK SESSION
WILL BEGIN AT 1:00 P.M. IN THE 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
FTOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP
2001
6/26/01 VRD PARKING SPACES AT FORD COUNCIL: Agreement was reached for Council to
PARK observe and review these signed spaces for a possible
Piet Pieters continued allowance of not moving them to the east lot.
(Kevin/Rod: Piet said they are requesting this because
it is very difficult to monitor the spaces, as is, and if
they're in the east lot, staff will not be able to see them.)
6/26/01 5) USE OF TENNIS COURT BOB/PAM: What is the "actual" use of this tennis court Mike Ortiz reports the VRD does not have stats on use of this facility,
(as it could relate to the proposed joint partnership although their understanding is that it receives nominal use. The
wNMS in making this a multi-purpose environment and VRD board would welcome a future discussion about this park's use
park)? and functions.
6/26/01 DOBSON CONSTRUCTION BOB: Meet with Piet Pieters to discuss allocation of VRD Board/Town Council need to agree on who is paying for what.
COSTS construction costs for the additional exits, ventilation
improvements, etc., at an estimated $100,000, which
will increase capacity to 3,500.
6/26/01 BLACK GORE BRIDGE GREG H.: Coordinate w/Pam Hopkins on a suitable
Diana Donovan light design that is in accordance w/approved safety
guidelines.
6/26/01 CRANES IN NEIGHBORHOODS GEORGE/BOB: Schedule discussion re: current See attached letter.
Diana Donovan regulations that would limit the duration of crane use in
Vail (when Russ returns).
6/26/01 NEWSPAPER BOXES SUZANNE/LARRY: Place a sign at the Ore House, Larry is waiting to hear back from Steve Pope of the Vail Daily with
once boxes are removed, directing customers to the suggested language for the sign.
nearest location for publications.
7/17/01 DONOVAN PARK TODD: When will the bike path be re-opened? And Weather permitting, roadbase will be laid on Wednesday, August 1St
Diana Donovan will the pile of rocks near the path at the west end of the with paving on Thursday, August 2nd. Further, the entire site is under
park remain? construction. At the west end of the park, the rocks will be used,
along with other materials, to backfill the edges of the path and son
F:Imcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl8-07-01 du
August 7, 2001 - Page 1
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP
2001 )
on. The project will be completed as designed.
7/17/01 SALES TAX ON SKI LOCKERS ALLEN CHRISTENSEN: Can we extend the rental
Council period for sales tax collection beyond thirty days?
7/17/01 LAND LEASE FOR TOV NINA/RUSS: Why do projects other than the Vail
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS Commons not pay land leases to the town, e.g., Red
Kevin Foley Sandstone, North Trail Townhomes, etc.
BIGHORN PARK WALKABOUT GREG H./BOB: CDOT is repairing a majority of joints CDOT has been contacted. Site visit performed 811. Results of site
7-24-01 1-70 JOINT/SPRUCE WAY along 1-70 over Vail Pass with this one exception. The visit will be reviewed. Joint repair may not make the joint quiet.
Council/Anne Esson noise is deafening and distracting. Additionally, the Fence to be removed or repaired.
CDOT fence needs repair.
7-24-01 BLACK GORE/GORE CREEK GREG H./RUSS: Unfortunately, CDOT sanding has CDOT received an additional $75,000 this year for sand cleanup.
SAND PLUME resulted in a re-shaping of the creeks. Continue
Council/Dr. Fred Distelhorst working with the state to clean up and correct this
environment problem.
7-24-01 JAKE BRAKE SIGNS ON VAIL GREG H./BOB: Work w/CDOT to provide signs re:
PASS jake brakes for the descent into East Vail and on.
Council
7-24-01 QWEST/AT&T BROADBAND RON: East Vail residents are very concerned about Ron Braden stated the Town has no way of controlling what Qwest
Council future installation of high speed cable. Does the town will do in regards to future services. The market is not large enough
have any way to help make that happen? in Vail for Qwest (or anyone else) to put the money into the
infrastructure for improvements. Aspen and Glenwood Springs are in
the same boat, so they decided to build their own fiber optics
backbone throughout the entire city to provide high speed broadband
services. They are now in the fiber optics utility business.
Ron stated this is why he pushed so hard back in '95 for not only the
fiber backbone to our municipal buildings, but also the rebuild of our
cable system to provide broadband services. According to the
F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfol lowupl8-07-01 du
August 7, 2001 - Page 2
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP J
2001 J
amended franchise agreement, they have until December 31, 2001 to
complete the build out of the new fiber based 450Mhz system which
includes digital service and the capability of high speed internet
access via cable modem. Ron will call Rick Boone to find out what
the status is on the upgrade. The town can basically hold their feet to
the fire with monetary punitive damages until they provide the
services as promised. The drawback is that they will own the market
and can price accordingly. The positive is it keeps us out of the utility
business.
7-24-01 BIGHORN MOTEL (formerly) EAST DAVID RHOADES: Another one for "the list"I" This
VAIL property is owned by the Sonnenalp for employee
Council/Susan Pollock housing. complaints were made re: trash, weed
problems, and it is looking generally unsightly and
unkempt.
7-24-01 NUISANCE DAVID RHOADES: Provide the definition of a
Council/Blondie Vucich "nuisance" so adjacent property owners can better
understand how to tackle this issue in their
neighborhoods.
7-24-01 4957 JUNIPER LANE, WEST HALF DAVID RHOADES: The list and the letter: Exterior of
the building is a mess, including deteriorating facia,
siding, holes in the deck surrounding the hot tub.
Owner: Hugh Ferdows, SCIC, INC., 801 Corporate
Avenue, Lamar, CO 81052.
7-24-01 BENCH ON GOLF COURSE PATH BOB: Request that no more private benches be So noted.
installed along the path. What appeals to some as art,
is hideous to others.
F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl8-07-01 du
August 7, 2001 - Page 3
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP
2001
7-24-01 HIGHLAND MEADOWS BOB/PAM/MARY/RUSS/GREG H.: Schedule Scheduled for 9/4 Work Session.
discussion time re: the annexation of Highland
Meadows.
7/24/01 NEXT BUS SYSTEM MIKE ROSE/GREG H.: Schedule update at work Scheduled for 8/21 Work Session.
Kevin Foley session.
7/24/01 COUNCIL ATTENDANCE LORELEI: Include in prospective Council petition
Diana Donovan packets the importance of attendance at all work
session and evening meetings.
F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl8-07-01 cfu
August 7, 2001 - Page 4
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: August 7, 2001
SUBJECT: Regulations on the Use of Construction Cranes in Residential and
Commercial Areas in the Town of Vail
1. PURPOSE
The Community Development Department has received an inquiry regarding the
use of construction cranes in residential and commercial areas in the Town of
Vail. In response to this inquiry, the staff has completed a review of the Town's
existing regulations and how they pertain to this issue. To that end, the purpose
of this memorandum is to provide a summary of the current regulations and an
outline of possible next steps.
II. CURRENT REGULATIONS
The Vail Town Code does not regulate the use of construction cranes on private
property in residential or commercial areas within the Town of Vail. However,
the Town of Vail Public Works Department regulates construction activity in the
Town's public rights-of-way. All construction activity that occurs in the public
right-of-way requires the issuance of a Public Way Permit in accordance with the
requirements and provisions outlined in Title 8 of the Vail Town Code.
The Town of Vail does not regulate the operation of construction cranes. The
operation and safety aspects associated with construction cranes are regulated
by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA's
requirements dictate and address the occupational health and safety concerns
regarding the use of construction cranes (i.e., loading of materials, limitations on
boom paths/clearances, allowable activities below a loaded boom, etc.).
III. CURRENT CONDITIONS
Currently, there are two tower construction cranes erected in the Town of Vail.
One of the cranes is located at the east end of Rockledge Road on a private
residence construction project and the other is in Lionshead on the site of the
Antlers 2000 redevelopment project. In the past, cranes have been used for
other residential and commercial construction projects. Cranes are often used in
Vail due to the often confined nature of the construction sites and staging areas,
the structural requirements of the buildings and the inability to impact the public
right-of-way for extended periods of time.
1
III. NEXT STEPS
The Town of Vail could adopt regulations limiting the use of tower construction
cranes. Regulations limiting the use of construction could be placed in the Vail
Town Code under Title 12, Zoning Regulations. According to Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, Section 12-1-2, Purpose, the purpose of the.Town's zoning
regulations is:
A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the
health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town, and to promote
the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner
that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established
character as a resort and residential community of high quality.
B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more
specific purposes:
1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public
facilities.
2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of
snow, and other dangerous conditions.
3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic
circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets.
4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off-street parking and
loading facilities.
5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and
economic values.
6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among
land uses, consistent with Municipal development objectives.
7 To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the
land with structures.
8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the Town.
9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other
desirable natural features.
10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other
amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters.
11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable
community.
Should the Community Development Department pursue options for
regulating the use of tower construction cranes in the Town of Vail?
2
~ r I 4 rf l~ ~ y
I
j !J
v b lw~-
~ my
r
x;
e `
n
, 1111,
,n
i
1 ~
1
J
- 1 ~I~Ut~ K~,V 40119
- ~ n r~ 1LII,I
I
' ~ ~ ~ ` ~ It and
i • , I ~~i ~F _ 'Gale 1'~
r
rl; r0~s5 A A,1~ 'd'~ i ati T Wk V"6~~, Y a"Ty ti 7 ~ 1 w.. I , II ~ •R~I i V~~ ar ~ G!' i ~
l P Y ",r~^'~'b!""&~1' u.1~G~~ ~ ~ i a'i'1 i ~n,•`.. ~ 1 Jf~p r'~l" k ~ ~ i rf~{~ r i C ~`.'I~
I i M ylk , i~ v .911 , i 7
'~w"io'~,,,., r" it 1~~ F ~i~t ~\I +•+C'G ~ i
I1,i~~IVd 1 li 4drx' 1;'I Gnu `F
alr .
,i
1
f..
I
aA
4
JI w ~7~ I °,fh 4 "u h
f I S I Ir~r it I III „
i io- ~ 1 ~r s a h r h 1 ~I~~I I I 4 ti
l~I v I ;h~~ ~ I p ti
' •11~I 1 Ilw,,Ili d
i
`2 I k
- ~ I
h
d. I
, ~ I ?1 ~ i I r'i I rrr uh Ili
.i_ 4 ,,'r 4 ^4 rl _ i. 4 FYI~V,. I,, i ,I ~h yllY ff hhl
11uLL ~,l• _'Si Xi J s ~ ,as ^ n~x~ ~ s~~t+;1.y ~ k^ I ~i s` r N f~~>• r~~
~'r rtcl~d' w~ ' ~f'~~rti', ~ ~kf4'` ~ ~ "~'~I~ ° r' I J I" Pv,°k3t ~'ti'pll,~~'~}" r '1,~, II,'I~ rl L~,!~, ti I„15~~, a• ~ I ;w 4s, k s ml ~.rl f~ ~]~I I i a s~~'.°.G,'I%~.~
4 ~ r misr G' II ^n N, 111,1 ~ r~.1 I; i; I, ~,,1 ",•`y lo~ri,• a„~ a,n~~Sl ~j~. ,IBS 7:se `a?.:~.o G~,,. ~k ''sIti ',n~ u ~ I I a!1'Ir Fs Se;~,'s:~ r,J`~ I~ wrrwr~F.e
J~?, 4yr~ h ~ ~ ~ e. ~.i~nil 11 ^ ;r s I II tµ r.. ~,;',1 ~ ~ z~s'~,[ i ~ I .,r~_~ h~~ ae.~ti,' ~ • c.,r,,n 'n x ~ ,..,!t',~~fsC~A:a.k.-", ' ~.~JR'~+. tiu~, i>nt „,u~"~ i ~ I I . ~jI ~,~jl.
JlaltaS° ~j M 4 u~Wl'h'~j 'fir li
h
IINI~rM1
` "V ill
pN I~ „ „~~t 4 r~Jl 7'~JIJ ~,,X { in °W
mom
}
I
3
I
r( `~Py aI~I:~
I {l~' ~ ~ ~ r~, t~ I
r~ ~ W_ ~,ul 2 S 1.,~3 ~ t I I'll
I,
h III
L. I 1
I
r
~ h 11 1" ~'I
f, I 4
Alll 1
~I
1
h t i i N }r r7 Y n I kIH I III:~~-
_ v ~ - bc~ R;F _r Pt a `yx ~~41" P,J' ~h'0.~ ~ 3^ (+>W ~I ~,h asy §a+ ~d ~~tM.l~
r a V Md S n n~~ w 1 ~z : ah k h11''f C~ c 4 IJ..
,i, r4 Y 1 ~ ft k. ~r,• 1 It I ti^'h -'°1 U~^''~A Fry a,I ^.Nyu'.
,Sayh} os'S~'' Je t.17i'If~~i'~r~ i~'„i~', ~k 6 ~111FI 11 '•dl~ ed.~''l', ~..~~1'4 d,1I r s'8'~ye~fT "~"n III I+&~?';~:, IE'4°~r.~°~`e~IIC~~,f~ dfm°~1,4~fi"~
~ n tiw 7 7 R a ' ~ ~ i+ ni ' u~r~~aa ~ ~ m .x+rv~ t a I I~,: B 7pwi t w,r,' I IrI'Cr+° x' q I ~
9 •,..~+,Y7^ w~- +w 1 , oeu.I ~rR* r,w.r V A k; r'r+"' M w e7 u
1T'^rR 7 ~ ,SG, Z k IJt'.. A9.,~~ C'E ~.Cr:3^ y ?~Iwi? ~ Vn.G.* K! ~ .r'. L . `J~ S~til'w' , d..'3k-.
~~~c ;~~r ~ I ~ .l ( ~I~ ~ I{ ~ ~ v U i,' S ~ ~ G~ ~ I j~lf I~r~l I~ S~, C`~ •d, ~ i.
pl,
_f~~ 'Nw~', lI J.JF~ i r N~ 4~~ 'I y k ~1~~ 1r` 4~''kl {'I r i'.
SAN I~ ~ rJ I Ik. ~T I j1 X a ~I
`r I.Glr it 5'i C dV~ 11~-u~"~f n~~ i + p~I~ ~r r u ~l ~ krr'r ~,~1 Sr ~'7^f~ II ~
My~;,onR r.', ~.In . f1 ,~a'l~;r • • f ~N~n. , r _ yy t ,Y.J,p~I,w .r I ~ t~ ~ ~I I~ ~i ~ i~~~'
I
I
f
I
I
7
. S
I
I
I
,
~ III
,I
YZ"d
T
A 4A
V Jlrllil~i
r
{M
i
T" A
jvy phll III{'
~J
I~ II
r, la
1~1 I Ill, 11
10
v6 r
1 r•: 'f~ r. r t ~Y.y~l.~ n I N'~' ~l~ dr~'~
'1 1' t L I Pl eisr
e* ~ v ~4 , t .do ~ "~1 f ~IrrFr I 'V~ u ~ rs •1',w 'u JI'N ~ . I a ~ ~ud +i~i~S ~ •
ill 1
( C'' ' x & „ war,!': n^ DI rCa r~l~ APP fz Ff N r lya k wl u,e ' ryf~~j fP~,`ff l ~ ? 4 a ~I d h u.' b ~I ~U: h J r,11~171 d k3i1 wF o "Io r"' d`d m ~ :`Ikr
r
TY'r ViC
p am i.u ti yr-.t~i+ IG qtr r +~q+;J-r~r'.,'.,Y _
JF • r 'y :7,,r r lrn a+i r ';M r s'~`, 7 you ; '`In
sw ~oac ~~~r?u~lrw~ .u s
'ism u'+
~ ~
9rR',.sb`w~i ef` 6 4A 7 ~1E{d1c r 1 u,:' y ,I :I ~I x.^r .aJUy sA L V
l;i~~'~,,":;<r~IF~~ le ~d
AI•~I11 _„,~I y~~•~~yI7 ~~I,
r~4~r'
6 OKI ' f ~ MAP °"rn
m ~ 5 ,M,1 r~ k ' X J ~I ~ >y ~ ~ ~I 'l N ~,r'td 1l+Jly~F ul r rv u ~ ~ al
~^777hTJ„ri~~:, ~*t, 1,~,J!11'' n ^r~'' ,J 1 J., f ~~j ,irn ~ i ^•eru _ ~ - _ a~~ ~r _ _ _ ,~~ri!Ir 71 'r~: " fN. H. d ~ "D n7 ~ d rr4,F~:~',' . _ V'p7!b. ~r~~~~~ _ _ ~~~ry~.w~ I dr Ilu,r
'H y : ~ 1d I ~i'
I
,
I-
- ' + i ~ hlr I I i
I Y~; a
r
u
i r
r
r d ~ ~ +~i. ~ 1 0 - 'yd L. I I ~ ~1 y 111 al~~~
ti
d
1 r'~
a
tf' ,
Id~~~
Ih I~ SP
X11{II'11
i
1 w q.4
' ydl~l 1
•
s yIIII a I?I
r
~p~S n w
F ~ ro h Nm'whi,~,ws
V y~
~ ~ Sr r 15".+ ~ J#~f a ,rs~•i~ ~>d " a r.~s~ ~'16,
I
Y.y ~F s i •~~I S^~ d:, L.,' n.. r~,' X r~ ' J„"+7'', ~ r-,', f r~l
L ''dr r vn TM S~ d ia`i'' st ! 41r' t. Ue.
Ia Al '34~ mow. ;'a i u ."'S .r a+Y ~xiv n I I r h'+ Ah r'~~, '''a'in~y^^d kr~lrr's ~rr~~ , c _
'a! "4~n(. M' 'nM c t I r 1 N Jr ~4f'. ~ T;;, ~~CF4 M7~~l F' i X •i!I ~,~'IF"
v 5
G.1G R7~!i , r ,I V + ~ff i 'y'„C r . 4 rt. Ir e'.Jx d . +1~..< b r; t ..wu, ~ ~I+,:'1,x a4, y i I 4'.," ..y~ r,.a3 r I ~ .d' ~ I ~~IIH
~°u;kt r,J•,, a t~ ~ ti d ~ ~I ran ti, I ip~tr I ~ h, F ~a.I .fir x ;
wl c , ~,i,, ~~~~V ~i 1• ;~J~"+~»~.'" ~I 'r`',E ~ c~ yu.'f~`t4'" ~ . 1i1µ r fp~,ti ,9 I ` ~ ~d d w 1 ~1;1~'
Y ~P ~''I {Hh '"Sx'~r 5~1 11 11'1 T~ il~ i ~,5+ y 1 L d~~ L y~ r
lj~
r u 1
~2 a u ~ h ~`S~~Y1PJ I r q~ t r!~
~ 41
r,
1
I y p I~ i'I
- I~ ~s 11 I~4
i
° a
r
r , f'II I
I
rr s,
I
ji,
.r 4 I
r f P ' t Ir ',a t 41 FY'N J Ilh by n7~
I htllU
' rte, ~d@t
i
L.
fml ~r
I,rs'Jlr
~ s
!a'wl' q
I 1
uh
IAN
9
gin, rlkl~~Y
r~
~I
14
~r
i
i
v,r
e d;, hi lw~l~lln
a f Ij~
' w 1 1 } i ~ Rvaw w% ~ 1 F t ,n 1r y1¢.it f ~/'~~Y~yJ a ~ d^iMJ
r *1 y rYt rt
IK 1 ~r 3 4.: 5 NA I I' y4 ~ f r r~ „ I L l MG1 rV ~1
~~x 'ui, 'Ar ~k+,i#~~f ~61y2 i ~04~ ~"~I r ~'ry 1 r'' i ~I*'~'V~~,n4< ym, !'.3 ls~l ~:,rb 1h~ w~ I ,i? y ~•~1 t Ik?f42!)Po
y<.. r I~ y ~ I y..r.' I +w P I~w
~ I c i ~ ~ i 1 ff .3 1 r i~#P? „ 1'w v J ~s , ~~fy'.. JI W1 fi I I,I~.. -~f ~x•~,r I~ t r i I rvv, fi x ~&v~, w'.3f I rxnvr,.:v nay f 4~' r c~ : ~:~riRr ,
'i 4. W. 41'4 171"i' .u77~11 1' ":3 714ig fdC .W1.i+•I '"I'MY 'AOC' S 'Y'>'L' t^. 1', ~I~' 1J7 V l 4I~~i i~
~y'1 i ~ r' :2ti rD 1L.'r {'1 o i S'ir'' F I W -y. ~ h r Z~ nt"4 1„,ri r r lr4$ y 4 W. , ~ ',FJ°,• l x ~~1 1'.r~ d ,y9... ~ ~
i ~ l ~,Vy I
~ r ~r A ~ i MC I rv 1R 'w~h `S ~ .r 1V
S, .aid y I iJ ~ f~~' J cF„~ I l.F:` r, c4 ~I ,k•'~
4 ~ , a r a 1 K
r, r
.>I
:
r1 J i, I ` I
ei
v
I~
r,
F ~~~'r r ~ 1 r! f ~ I rill
~ l I t i r w ~ J 1 1 `5 ~ ~ S~ rs a~l S
r, 1~p! 't r I~ ~ ~ Y ~r ~ ~ t ' !i I'I'I I~J~NF II
1
,t~ r I I
ti
Ir
5
F1
t
111
I u,
! x~lkl ~ 14
' the
non , y ;~'IIII,I[
I I
I ~ ! ~ I
b wr .'Va., r ~J. c z`' ~ iFj1 9 1 ``d I`, ~.1 r ro r I', r ,~~~'I +,~.h•Y fi ~ ~I; ~ ~V'.
w'fn Jim'' ~ Iln A Y,1 ~ •[n. I'„~ ~ y ',tik~L ~S "''9 rt s.~'rp!',l ; ~ ~A:.JJ,'S~'h^iZ ~ 'JI'~^ ~dt "1'~a its va''I~Ma'~IF'~'f"s1'~~
S C 11 ?
'F' I •
s''~ r
'?~"'>f~
et+r Js ''.rer i'if~ 1, v o ,.r aw v r>'• t'4rn,t „w v' , r 4^ , +.a`vs- a • ~3, r,~.~+a r ''''a s ? m'x !
rp a ~u rr n ,1 i.lv ^n. nNsr v aK am. r;'. '^„nyF , IgtiaG^c+ v ~u x5i. u'S 'tt
Ir i ' 6 'drrLC kstiv yr., P 1..?- r ; a ~ 5~:.w:. T y 't v 41 , ^r'r hG^MS ~ 'r ~"~w hl .tis!r'p r
>n3 .VdW1+>rk-'2 L1L ~ .,u .1 i~f1'~Jlli YII NF. 'Tn ~.l k4 'I ,'~N I S/' Qr, , ,h 'IIT
vt ! r p"' 7r - Ir 1 ~r y r 4~ f 11~ ~h'r~~~~y~' Wr F Y 1.y..f Ja f,i ~~,~tttl~~ a hbb{~elr +Ilp 1 )
1
jjry; r ~ n! r< + ~ I rtiu h a 5, _ _•_IJ it 'S f' 'fir ti_,1'1~ :till ,iti* ""i~:+Yi- ,ly r.
l l i ,
'ir p t url • - ,Ue. i n 4n d'
I,
~h .
,,SCI, r ~ ~ I J,•', ~ ~ ~ ~ F n Ire ~',~''I "r.~J~
~r, acv
~f
.
-
.
r
c
x
.
~ I•
' ~ ,.,•I~ III ~~I a~~~
T
r
i
i
1 ~ 1 ~=:z r I
aK ~
1
"a
a
,
IIN` .
P
r
' ~ ~ r I~ r 'iti lv e
x ~ , N S, 1 c I L Tq' ~ ~ pMd ' u
rr-3.R
,r ZxdM
ti. ~ 'i T '3~2~ ~v~,n µ vr~? v "i+w 1 XH~we `2 ~ Y '.1'1 F>Y i v~@~nyD ~i16 I ~ s f
'j, a 1. 1 •a k'+v IK+a e n~~ l 'li 4-'e 'U Yk 4'14..
r { ~ £q7 ~ N F u4 r ~ d{
r ~
L+,, V, i - l k N , Mtl ~ 9 1F,r'~Y~ri?~,z I V, ° i-0+ ifc f 4y~ w '
~Vio ~a 3 Jak 'ice .
d w
Y4 N N _ 4~ try W~~•,~, S,I iti, ,~P"".
BUSINESS PLAN
COMBINING THE RESOURCES OF
THE
VAIL VALLEY TOURISM AND CONVENTION BUREAU
WITH THE
VAIL VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
August 3, 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Through the proposed merger of the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau with
the Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce, the leadership of both organizations will create
the business organization prepared to lead the community into the next 30 years of resort
growth.
The combined organization will have a broad base of business support, serving over 900
of the 1400 businesses in the Vail Valley. By consolidating the marketing and visitor
services operations of the VVTCB with the business support services provided by the
VVCofC, efficiencies can be realized that will serve to enhance and expand the already
successful programs offered by both organizations. The combining of Boards of
Directors and memberships also provides the support base necessary to begin offering a
range of new actions on behalf of the business community.
Proposed new programs for the combined organization include
? Economic Enhancement
? Service Quality Assurance
? Tourism Advocacy at the State and National Level
? Leadership in Expanded Small Business Services
The focused efforts of the new organization's leadership will provide coordinated action
on behalf of the business community, and a renewed emphasis on the guest experience
that is compatible with our World Class goals!
The vision and strategic direction of the new organization will rest with the Board of
Directors, composed of funding partners, representatives of business community groups
throughout the region, and elected business leaders. The proven executives of the
VVTCB and VVCofC, supplemented by specialists in public affairs, economic
development, and other disciplines, will manage the organization's activities.
New programs will be funded by investments from the most significant governmental
f 'entities, who will gain from incremental sales tax generated by the enhanced programs,
and major business entities within the area. An initial incremental finding requirement
of $600,000 has been established.
The Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau and the Vail Valley Chamber of
Commerce are proposing a merger to create a regional business organization with
extraordinary leadership, credibility, and the necessary experience to prioritize issues of
the business community and act toward their achievement. A consolidation of the
resources and membership bases of the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau,
and the Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce will produce the synergy and efficiencies
required to address common issues and produce positive results.
Two primary recurring community values, which were first articulated during the Vail
Tomorrow process, have lead us to this decision:
The economy sustains us ...every community is dependent on its economy to provide
for the needs of its citizens, though each micro-community within the Vail Valley must
define, develop and constantly re-evaluate its' niche and its' purpose for serving the
community at large.
Regional problem solving works best.. overlapping issues affect all of the various
micro-communities throughout the Vail Valley, and it is therefore most effective to
pursue a valley-wide approach when it comes to planning and problem solving.
VISION
TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF THE CITIZENS OF THE VAIL
VALLEY BY IMPROVING THE CLIMATE FOR DOING BUSINESS IN EACH
COMMUNITY.
The vision for the new organization is to create a unified, strengthened business
leadership organization with over 900 supporting members. This organization will act as
the conduit among the business community, our guests, local residents, and the world. It
will work to enhance the success of each business community within the Vail Valley,
thereby bringing about the greatest chance of success for the entire region.
Merging the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau (VVTCB) with the Vail Valley _ . , .
Chamber of Commerce (VVCC) will enable the combined organization to offer a new
array of business services while at the same time continuing to improve current programs
at a much greater efficiency. The new organization can provide one focal point for
consumer inquiry of all types, and more efficient distribution of accurate information.
The focus of energy, resources, and programs will benefit the greatest number of
businesses most effectively. In addition, through the elimination of duplicate requests for
funding of various programs, we can attract higher levels of finding from key
stakeholders to produce a better service product.
1
Proposed Merger Benefits
" Outlined below are the benefits that will be recognized by the business community
through the proposed merger of the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau and the
Vail Valley Chamber of Commerce. Existing services provided today by both
organizations have the ability to improve and expand, while we are adding services that
do not currently exist in our community.
Simplification: -Offers "one stop shopping" for business and resident
_y information
-900-business member base
-Cohesive/credible business community leadership
-Increased Effectiveness/Efficiency/Productivity
Economic Enhancement: -Blueprint for long term community planning & visioning
-Expanded support for existing businesses (health insurance
childcare, INS and visa assistance)
-Air Service Expansion
-New Business Recruiting
-Business Diversification
Service Quality Assurance: -Continued/expanded lodging quality improvement
-Retail service quality improvement
-Improved/expanded guest service education
Business Support: -Employee Recruitment
-Service training
-Employee Reinforcement/Recognition
-Retention through benefits enhancement programs
Public Affairs: - Focus on most significant issues affecting community
-County issues information
-Business community representation-- county, state, and
national level
2
F~ i ) ! o r
Proposed Organization Functions
Information Networking/
Destination Special Events I Business I rvice:i;t:: I'> ` :
Services (calendar, Community " i?abir Affa)rS'.'.
Sales & Mktg (Pnod I ) -traction Services »:Assiirarice cem... .
Publications) Activities
I is{•}}}?: .
f-
Leadership GrouIndividual Pnoducton V sdor Centers Vail R' IN~ttfe [Annual
Awards Lodging Quality I.:.LOcal M'tehaM I.:.:,:irg~d Vision
J II IPn.. t~armi "JI
i
Advertising I Advertising C Calendar , bn Guestl
1 Vls tar Center Awn I Ezistin j:Btis riess.l
Information B to B Discounts B to B M6 ers ` R6ta 1 Qualtty.. State.Lobbjring:..i SUPPOrt
I I I.
Direct Sales I Public :...•...i:
1 Relations I........ -;cn Intranet I Canm4rncation 9 -
Health Insurance I I Parties { I SeanceSt-Tdards ........f .orums .l ::NewR ntrt> t
{ 11 rrrr
Trade Shows/ I I .
Missions 1 1 Internet
Business Consum q~rlayernerx r.ervice:.
VVo*eesComp I Flo rimpioyee9 :•:.BUSih9Ss:•;:.:,
I Traihngl::: Diversifcatori.,..l
Program
Internet Promotions 1 :•:•iiaiirinior:~:':1 M
i
`ree:tued nv
Merchant Ski Pass l ajar nce.. .
Fulfillment
(Con Res) I IIII
' I
I.N.S.
{
I
i f
i IAmbass~ors! N
t I Bus. Welcom.
"a
i
i
i
i
,f
M,
1~~ i f {
i
1 ~ g '
FIRST YEAR PRIORITIES OF NEW DEPARTMENTS
Outlined below are the proposed first year responsibilities and goals of the new
departments created by funding from the proposed funding partners. Shortfalls in funding
of the new programs will cause revisions in the scope of work proposed.
Economic Enhancement Department
Principle Responsibilities
1. Establish Economic Develop collaborative task force to identify direction of effort
2. Develop blueprint for diversifying business base in the resort community
3. Encourage expansion of year round air service into Eagle County Regional
Airport
4. Work with area landlords to establish "business friendly" practices.
5. Promote active community reinvestment among all local financial institutions.
6. Provide creative financing and affordable capital for business growth through
public/private partnerships
7. Establish working knowledge of grant/financial aid opportunities relating to
economic development projects
4
Service Quality Assurance Department
Principle Responsibilities:
1. Expand Lodging Quality Assurance program and concepts to include overall
service quality improvement
2. Lead in the continued development and implementation of year `round service
quality "shopping" programs in the business community.
3. Develop Service Quality Assurance program utilizing objective "shopping",
manager/employee training and reinforcement techniques.
4. Improve Manager/Employee leadership, management skills, and guest
relationship skills training opportunities to reinforce standards established by
service quality assessment programs.
5
Business Support Department
Principle Responsibilities:
1. Develop community-wide recruiting programs to assist in developing qualified
} employee pool.
2. Establish relationships with "hospitality" programs at major universities to
explore internship opportunities.
3. Research and develop employee recruitment opportunities through "Work Keys"
program
4. Develop working relationship with INS officials to assist in securing alien
workforce.
5. Develop process for procurement of visas for work-training programs in hotels
and restaurants
6. Working with Service Quality Assurance program, establish incentive/recognition
program to reinforce extraordinary service.
7. Develop reduced cost health insurance program and other similar benefits to assist
smaller employers with employee retention
6
Public Affairs Department
Principle Responsibilities:
1. Develop relationships with other lobbying organizations within Vail Valley
community and at the county and state level to leverage dollars
2. Establish relationships with elected officials at local, county, state, and national
level, and local business groups.
3. Determine county, state, and national "hot issues" list based on input from VRI,
VVF, Merchant Groups and determine who follows these issues at the legislative
level.
4. Attend all County commissioner meetings
5. Attend town council meetings in Vail, Avon, Eagle, Minturn as needed to
represent the interests of business members
6. Develop "One Community Leadership Coalition" to help define and address "hot
issues" within the region
7
GOVERNANCE
The Board of Directors of the organization will be comprised of between 21 and 25
business persons, representing the entities that have supported the new organization with
funding, the legally constituted organizations representing the business interests within
each community in the region, and the supporting businesses that are members of the
organization.
The responsibilities of the Board will be to set the strategic and policy direction for the
organization, establish the budget each year for operations and approve major changes
thereto, and approve organizational changes within the operation.
A seven person Executive Committee will be elected by the full Board of Directors
annually. No more than three of the Executive Committee members may represent the
funding entities. The responsibilities of the Executive Committee will be monthly
operational oversight and direction to staff, the administration of personnel issues, and
any emergency decisions that must be made prior to the next full Board of Directors
meeting.
A chart outlining this Board structure follows.
8
I
s
f
Governance--Consolidated Organization
R
Board of Directors 21 Initial seats
Strategic Direction, Policy Direction, Financial Responsibility, Organizational Changes
Class A--Funding Partners Class B--Business Association Partners Class C--At Large Business Partners
(Based on long term funding (Legally constituted not for profit corp. (Must be a member in good standing of organization)
commitment of $100,000) Investment of $1 per business member)
I'
Up to 10 seats as determined 6 seats 9 seats
by Board of Directors
Initial seats representing: Initial seats representing: Initial seats appointed by transition task force:
Beaver Creek Mountain Ops Avon Business Assn. Election of 9 seats at 1st annual meeting
Beaver Creek Resort Co. Beaver Creek Merchants Assn.
~o Eagle County Commissioners Eagle Valley Chamber of Commerce
Town of Avon Edwards Business Association
Town of Vail Minturn Business Association
Vail Mountain Ops. Vail Chamber/Business Association
Executive Committee 7 Seats
Operational oversight, Personnel issues, Emergency decisions, Monthly direction to staff
t Elected by Board of Directors at first meeting
Class A: No more than three Exec. Board positions
Class B and C: No less than 4 Exec. Board positions
. Fi
t ~ 1
IS
A
r 3 ~
I
i
I
i
}
Immediate Priorities-Transition Task Force
Recruit Funding Partners
? Complete By-laws with legal counsel
? Convert membership and dues structure to new organization as of 1/1/02
? Prepare for new board to be in place by 1/1/02
? Establish broad goals and work plan for 2002
? Begin job search for key personnel additions
First Year Priorities of Board of Directors
? Finalize priorities/work plan for 2002
? Finalize personnel hiring, assignments, etc.
? Establish standards of performance for all new programs
? Evaluate ongoing programs for value delivered to community
? Review proposed budget for income and expense adjustments
? Communicate first year goals and objectives to business community/stakeholders
? Implement actions to contribute to economic prosperity
? Develop research to increase awareness of the role of Tourism in Eagle County
and State of Colorado
? Build foundation for meaningfiil dialogue between the Vail Valley and our State
Government
10
Budget
A preliminary working budget for the consolidation of the VVTCB with the VVCofC and
the implementation of the aforementioned new programs follows. This budget assumes
that income and expenses of both organizations remains the same for Contracted and
Non-contracted services, except as noted below. Since both the VVTCB and VVCofC
are not-for-profit corporations, both operate on a break-even or slightly below break-even
basis. Highlights of the attached "Working Budget Summary-Operations & Contracts"
are as follows:
? Destination Sales & Marketing Functions includes Group Sales, Central
Reservations, Communications, and Cooperative Marketing programs of the
VVTCB. It does NOT include marketing expenditures of the Vail Local
Marketing District administered by the VVTCB Staff.
? Special Events and Information Services functions are carried out by the VVTCB
under a contract with the Town of Vail (illustrated on the Working Budget for
Contracted Functions), and Information Services functions are carried out by the
VVCofC under a contract with the Town of Avon.
? Business Services income reflects a decrease in the combined organization due to
the elimination of overlapping dues paid by members of both organizations (16%
overlap in membership), and the elimination of existing contributions to the
VVCof C by Vail Resorts, the Town of Vail, and Beaver Creek Resort Company
replaced in the Funding Partner Support category.
? The reduction in Undistributed Expense is a result of elimination of duplication in
expenses as a result of consolidation.
A detailed budget for implementation of the aforementioned new programs also follows.
In order to bring on staff at the appropriate expertise levels to execute successful Public
Affairs, Economic Enhancement, Employee Attraction/Retention, and Service Quality
Assurance programs and provide them with the tools and resources to accomplish their
goals, a budget of $600,000 is required.
_ . _ _,.__.,gym ,
Equal financial investments of $100,000 from the following entities will make these
enhanced services possible. These investments represent incremental new finding.
Beaver Creek Mountain Operations
Beaver Creek Resort Company
Eagle County Government
Town of Avon
Town of Vail
Vail Mountain Operations
11
Working Budget Summary - Operations & Contracts
I I I II I
I I I
- Combined Totals Combined Totals 2001 INCOME: Budget: Chamber t Combined Totals less duplicate including new
Budget: Budget income functions
I I I
Destination Sales & Mktg Functions $1,864,444 $0 $1,864,444 1 $1,864,444 1 $1,864,444
II ~
Special Events Functions- Vail Specific $694,543 $0 $694,543 I I $694,543 $694,543
I II I
Lodging Quality Assurance Functions $259,500 $0 $259,500 1 $259,500 1 $259,500
I I II If
Information Services Functions $251,900 $73,700 $325,600 $325,600 1 $325,600
I
4-
Public Affairs Functions 1 $0 $o I $o $o 1 $0
II II
Economic Development $0 $0 $o I I $o I 1 $0
I I I II
Business Services I $215,770. 1 $237,994 $453,764 1 $354,764 I I $354,764
I 1 I II
Networking/ Community Events ? $o I $31,000 $31,000 $31,000 $31,000
I I I I
Funding Partner Support I I 1 $600,000
I II
TOTAL INCOME: $3,286,157 $342,694 $3,628,851 I $3,529,851 $4,129,851
I I I II
EXPENSE:
Destination Sales & Mktg Functions I $1,645,637 $0 $1,645,637 $1,645,637 1 $1,645,637
I
Special Events Functions- Vail Specific I $783,321 $0 $783,321 $783,321 1 $783,321
I I I I I
Lodging Quality Assurance Functions I $254,629 $0 1 $254,629 $254,629 I $254,629
I I ~I
Information Services Functions I $344,381 1 $100,175 $444,556 1 $444,556 $444,556
I I I I I
Public Affairs Functions 1 $o $o $0 1 $o 1 $127,425
Economic Development I $0 $o $o I $o I $146,975
I I
Business Services I $o $157,592 $157,592 I 1 $157,592 ( $351,492
I II
Networking/ Community Events I $o 1 $27,500 $27,750 1 $27,750 $27,750
I I I
Undistributed Expense I $214,104 1 $82,723 $296,827 I $270,577 $270,577
TOTAL EXPENSE: 1 $3,242,072 $367,990 $3,610,312 1 $3,584,062 $4,052,362
I I
NET INCOME: 1 $44,085 ($25,296) $18,539 1 ($54,211)1 1 $77,489
12
Working Budget for Contracted Services
7/26/01
I ( WTCB 2001
Chamber 2001 Budget l
Budqet
Income from Contracts
IBeaver Creek Marketing Program $78,484 $0 f
Local Marketing District Fees I $140,000 $0 J
Special Events Functions- Vail Specific I
Y lCopporate Sponsorships $83,000 $0 J
IEvent Revenue $328,043 $0 I
(Town of Vail Contracts $366,500 $0
l Total $777,543 $0
~ I 1
!Information Services Functions J
(Town of Avon Contract _ $65,000 J
(Town of Vail Contract $155,800 $0
ICorporate Sponsorships $25,000 $0
(Vail Visitor Center Income $96,100 $0
l Relocating Magazine Income I $7,500
Map Commission Income I $1,200
Total $276,9001 $73,700
Total Revenue: $1,272,927 $73,700
Expense from Contracts
Weaver Creek Marketing Program $78,484 $0
(Marketing Contingency Fund (Local Mktg. District) $122,000 $0 I
I J
Special Events Functions- Vail
ISpecial Events (contract svc.) $783,321 $0
I Total $783,321 $0
I
!Information Services Functions
Visitor services $344,381 $0
NVisitor Center Personnel/ Taxes- 100% of budget $0 $62,440
Internet (includes total for chbr. budget) $0 $3,600
Office Expenses for Info Ctr. (minus copier/computer) $0 $13,854
Occupancy Expenses for Info. Ctr. $0 $20,281
Total $344,381 $100,175
Total Expense: $1,328,186 $100,175
Net Income: ($55,25911 ($26,4751]
13
Working Budget for Non-Contracted Services
7/26/01
WTCB 2001 Chamber 2001 Less plus new
Combined Totals
Budget Budget Duplication programs
INCOME:
Destination Sales & Mktg Functions
Co-Op Programs $602,041 $0 $602,041
FIT Commissions $464,760 $0 $464,760
Package Commissions $54,214 $0 $54,214
Cancellation & Service Fees $115,000 $0 $115,000
Group Commissions $288,145 $0 $288,145
Miscellaneous Income $13,800 $0 $13,800
Total $1,537,960 $0 $1,537,960 $1,537,960 $1,537,960
Lodging Quality Assurance Functions
LQI Inspection Fees/Ad Sales $259,500 $0 $259,500
Total $259,500 $0 $259,500 $259,500 $259,500
Public Affairs Functions
l Income side $0 $0 $0
Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Economic Development
I Income side $0 $0 $0 1
1 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $01
Business Services
Membership Dues & Programs $210,750 $175,000 $385,750 $333,750 $333,750
(Contributions (TOV, BCRC, VRI, TOM) $0 $49,000 $49,000 $2,000 $2,000
(Conference Room Income $0 $2,400 $2,400
1 Other Income $0 $2,020 $2,020
Service/ Management Training $0 $0 $0
Interest Income- CD $5,020 $9,000 $14,020 I
+Other Commissions/ Callboard, W. comp, etc $0 $574 $574
Total $215,770 $237,994 $453,764 $354,764 $354,764
Networking/ Community Events
Business Consumer EXPO $0 $1,000 $1,000
Blue Jeans Lobster Party $0 $7,000 $7,000
Scholarship Income $0 $1,000 $1,000
Beverage Income $0 $7,000 $7,000
Community Mixer $0 $15,000 $15,000 1
Total $0 $31,000 $31,000 $31,000 $31,0001
Funding Partner Support $600,000
TOTAL INCOME: $2,013,230 $268,994 $2,282,224 $2,183,224 $2,783,224
EXPENSES:
Destination Sales & Mktg Functions
Meetings & Conventions $350,918 $0 $350,918
Partnership Servies (Co-Op exp.) $516,693 $0 $516,693
Central Reservations $481,104 $0 $481,104
l Communications $96,438 $96,438
1 Total $1,445,153 $0 $1,445,153 $1,445,153 $1,445,153
1 Lodging Quality Assurance Functions
(LQI $254,629 $0 $254,629
1 Total $254,629 $0 $254,629 $254,629 $254,629
Public Affairs Functions
IPublic Affairs Director $0 $0 $0 $105,525
1Issues/ Forums/Lobbying $0 $0 $0 $21,900 I
1 Facilitation of coalitions $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,425
Economic Development
Economic Development Director $0 $0 $0 $93,525
14
Working Budget for Non-Contracted Services
7/26/01
WTCB 2001 Chamber 2001 Less plus new
` - Combined Totals
- - - Budget Budqet Duplication programs
(Attracting New businesses $0 $0 $0 $53,450
Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $146,975
Business Services
Employee Recruitment/ Internships- NEW $0 $0 $0 $92,400
I Health Insurance- NEW $0 $0 $0 $0
TINS- NEW $0 $0 $0 $0
!Merchant Association Coordination $0 $0 $0 $0
Service Standards/ Employee Recog- NEW $0 $0 $0 $101,500
a B to B Discounts $0 $0 $0 $0
Business Welcome Program $500 $500 $0
Service/ Management Training $0 $2,500 $2,500 $0
Personnel $0 $147,992 $147,992
Other Expenses (Advtg., dues, mbrshp., photos) $4,500 $4,500
Ambassadors $0 $2,100 $2,100
Total $0 $157,592 $157,592 $157,592 $351,492
Networking/ Community Events
Business Consumer EXPO $0 $200 $200
Blue Jeans Lobster Party $0 $7,000 $7,000
Scholarship Expense $0 $1,000 $1,250
Beverage Expense $0 I $4,300 1 $4,300 1
Community Mixer $0 $15,000 $15,000
B to B Mixers $0 $0 $0
I Leadership Awards $0 $0 $0
1 Total $0 $27,500 $27,750 $27,750 $27,7501
OccupJ Personnel Expenses
Occupancy Rent, Rep./ Maint., Utilities, F&E $0 $39,244 $39,244
Other- taxes, fees, postage, ins./ legal $0 $17,229 $17,229
Personnel- wages/ taxes/ benefits/ training/ w comp $0 $26,250 $26,250 $0
Undistributed Expense $214,104 $0 $214,104
Total $214,104 $82,723 $296,827 $270,577 $270,577
Total Expense: $1,913,886 $267,815 $2,181,951 $2,155,701 $2,624,001
Net Income: $99,344 $1,179 $100,273 $27,523 $159,223
Total Net Income for Contracts
and Ops $44,085 ($25,296) $18,539 ($54,211) $77,489
15
Budget of New Functions
Expense Details
Public Affairs
Salary Expense (1.5 FTE) 78,500
Taxes 6,025
Benefits 9,000
Contract Exp 12,000
Misc. Office / Dues 6,250
Travel 1,450 . .
Entertainment 3,000
Publications 11,200
Total Expense: 127,425
Personnel 105,525
Operating 21,900
Economic Development
Salary Expense (1.5 FTE) 78,500
Taxes 6,025
Benefits 9,000
Misc. Office / Dues 6,250
Travel 4,500
Programs 20,000
Entertainment 3,000
Publications 19,700
Total Expense: 146,975
Personnel 93,525
Operating 53,450
Business Services Guest Satisfaction/Service Quality
Salary Expense (1.5 FTE) 63,500 Salary Expense (1.5 FTE) 58,500
Taxes 4,900 Taxes 4,450
Benefits 9,000 Benefits 7,800
Education 1,000 Misc office 3,250
Misc. Office /dues 6,000 Programs 25,000
Travel 5,000 Travel 1,500
Entertainment 3,000 Entertainment 1,000
Total Expense: 92,400 Total Expense: 101,500
Personnel 77,400 Personnel 70,750
Operating 15,000 Operating 30,750
Total New Functions Expense: 468,300
16
GENERAL FUND
Five year Financial Projection
Budget Budget Projected Projected Projected
2001 Incr 2002 Iner 2003 Iner 2004 Iner 2005
REVENUE Budget Factor Budget Factor Budget Factor Budget Factor Budget
Taxes 13,994,799 14,462,087
Construction Fees 650,000 650,000
Licenses & Permits 75,400 75,400
Intergovernmental 1,501,253 1,531,491
Charges for Services 291,840 294,489
Panting Fees 1,763,000 1,763,000
Fines & Forfeits 209,458 194,350
Interest Income & Other Revenues 769,161 780,598
TOTAL REVENUE 19,254,911 19,751,415 20,245,200 20,751,330 21,270,114
Percent Increase in Revenue 2.47% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50%
EXPENDITURES
Salaries 8,498.656 5.0% 8,923,589 5.00% 9,369,768 5.00% 9,838,257 5.00% 10,330,169
Benefits 2,963,788 7.0% 3,171,253 7.00% 3,393,241 7.00% 3,630,768 7.00% 3,884,921
Wage & Benefit Savings (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) (60,000)
New Fire Station (New Personnel & M(cc) 250,000 5.00% 262,500 5.00% 275,625
Contributions & Special Events 789,420 2.0% 805,208 2.00% 821,313 2.00% 837,739 2.00% 854,494
All Other Operating Expenses 4,226,430 2.8% 4,345,906 4.00% 4,519,742 4.00% 4,700,532 4.00% 4,888,553
Capital Outlay 231,329 2.6% 237,441 200,000 200,000 200,000
Rental Operating 153,677 4.5% 160,547 4.00% 166,969 4.00% 173,648 4.00% 180,594
Contingency 95,000 0.0% 95,000 0.00% 95,000 0.00% 95,000 0.00% 95,000
heavy EquipmentCharges Operating 1,342,111 4.97% 1,408,813 5.20% 1,482,137 4.81% 1,553,378 4.82% 1,628,196
Heavy Equipment Charges Replace 396,162 0.00% 396,163 -2.18% 387,509 0.00% 387,509 0.00% 387,509
Dispatch Services 473,646 5.2% 498,311 5.37% 525,079 5.36% 553,227 5.37% 582,935
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 19,110,219 4.6% 19,982,231 5.85% 211150,758 4.83% 22,172 557 4,85% 23 247,995
Percent Increase 5.41% 4.56% 5.85% 4.83% 4.85%
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) 144,692 (230,816) (905,558) (1,421,227) (1,977,882)
ENDING FUND BALANCE (See Note) 3,483,753 3,252,936 2,347,378 926,152 (1,051,730)
Mluimum Fund Balance 1,925,491 1,975,142 2,024,520 2,075,133 2,127,011
Difference Actual Minimum FB 1,558,261 1,277,795 322,858 (1,148,981) (3,178,741)
5yrfinproj0l 1 1/2212001
C5
2001 Proposed Budget Calendar for the Revised 2002 Budget
(Participation in bold is with Town Council)
Discuss Contribution Philosophy with Town Council June 12, 2001
Ad in Paper for Contribution Packets June 25, 2001
Non-Profit Groups Request Funding Packets July 1, 2001
Staff discuss RETT & CFP Projects and 5 year plan July 6, 2001
Deadline for Non-Profit Groups to Apply for Funding July 31, 2001
Complete Revenue Forecast used to Revise Budget August 3, 2001
Departments Submit Requests for Additional Personnel or Increased
Services August 3, 2001
Update Salary Spreadsheet August 3, 2001
Share Budget Calendar with the Town Council August 7, 2001
2nd Supplemental 2001 Interim Financial Report August 21, 2001
Complete Department Budget Revisions August 10, 2001
Meet with Town Council to Discuss Budget Issues August 21, 2001
Town Manager Submits RETT & CPF Budgets to Town Council August 28, 2001
Town Council Determines 2001 Contribution Budget August 28, 2001
Town Managers Budget is Complete August 31, 2001
Preliminary Draft of the Town Manager's Budget Presented to the
Town Council September 11, 2001
Vail Marketing Board Presents Budget September 11, 2001
Budget Workshops with the Town Council (as needed) September 18, 2001
Budget Workshops with the Town Council ( as needed) September 25, 2001
Public Hearing/First Reading October 2, 2001
Second Reading/Budget Adoption October 16, 2001
Budget calender 2002 1 8/3/2001
Original Message
From: Pamela Stenmark
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 11:40 AM
Subject: Business License fees
Mayor Ludwig Kurz and
Vail Town Council Members:
I will not be in town when you address the Vail Marketing Advisory Committee budget and the use of
Business License fees for either VMAC or the Vail Chamber Business Association. Thus, I would like
to express my thoughts as a business operator and owner via this email.
Discussion of VCBA receiving funds versus the funds being included in the VMAC/VVTCB budget
makes me uncomfortable. First, as a business owner and operator, I do not believe VCBA speaks
for our business. The opinions expressed by Chamber leadership very often do not agree with our
business and, I am led to believe many other community businesses, therefore, I struggle with the
idea of even being a member of the Chamber.
Next, the idea of switching management of VMAC to VCBA is not reasonable at this time. The
Chamber is in start up mode and would have to create an entirely new structure to manage this vital
account. The efforts of VMAC cannot afford to go through the growing pains and endure potential
mis-steps. A Vail Chamber could be of great benefit to shop owners, restaurants and eventually to
the lodging community. For example, research indicates shopping is high on the list of preferred
activities for vacationers. The Vail/Lionshead shopping experience is disappointing and rather
lifeless. There are too many empty store fronts and run-down looking approaches to our shopping
experience. Unfortunately Main Street in Frisco offers more variety, life and enthusiasm than do
many shops in our town. Perhaps the Chamber should focus on influencing re-creation of the
Vail/Lionshead shopping experience. This would be a valuable improvement as we compete with so
many other vacation destinations and try to attract visitors year-round.
In conclusion, under current circumstances, I would prefer the business license fee be included in the
VMAC budget rather than being diluted by an organization that is still defining its identity and
structure.
Thanks for allowing me to provide input in this fashion. Sorry about missing this important meeting.
Regards,
Pamela Stenmark
General Manager
Evergreen Lodge
i
Memorandum
TO: Planning & Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 9, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on text
amendments to the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations to allow for the
operation of home child day care facilities and child day care centers in
the Town of Vail.
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
This is a request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend the
zoning regulations to allow home child day care facilities and child day care
centers as conditional uses in thirteen of the twenty-four zone districts, to amend
Chapter 16 of the zoning regulations to establish additional conditional. use
review criteria for home child day care facilities, to amend Chapter 14 of the
zoning regulations to establish additional requirements for home occupation
permits to operate home child day care facilities, and to amend Section 12-2-2 of
the zoning regulations to establish definitions for "home child day care facility'
and "child day care center".
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide:
? a brief background on the existing legislation regulating home day care
facilities in the Town of Vail,
? an analysis of how the Town of Avon and Eagle County regulate the
operation of home child care facilities,
? responses to the questions raised during an earlier worksession meetings,
and
? a recommendation for amendments to the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations
that would allow for the operation of home child care facilities in the
community.
This text amendment initiative is a result of a worksession discussion with the
Vail Town Council. On May 8, 2001, the Town Council directed the Community
Development Department to prepare a memorandum to the Planning &
Environmental Commission outlining a recommendation for text amendments to
the Zoning Regulations. Staff will provided a summary of the comments
generated by the Commission during the worksession to the Town Council on
May 15'h at the regularly scheduled DRB/PEC report.
i
II. BACKGROUND
The purpose of Section II of this memorandum is to provide an analysis of the
regulatory measures that the Town of Vail, State of Colorado, Town of Avon and
Eagle County have adopted and relied upon for the operation of child care
facilities within their respective jurisdictions.
Town of Vail
The Vail Town Code does not specifically list child day care facilities as an
allowable use in any of the Town's prescribed zone districts. Instead, the Town
has determined that a child day care facility such as the ABC School or Learning
Tree are similar in nature to `public and private schools and educational
institutions ; and therefore, are allowed in certain zone districts subject to the
issuance of a conditional use permit. According to the Vail Town Code, child day
care facilities are allowed in the General Use and Housing Zone Districts. There
are currently 18 properties zoned General Use. No properties in the town have
yet to be zoned under the Housing designation.
A home occupation permit does not allow home child care facilities.
The Town has historically followed the state statutes and determined that home
child care for two non-related children or less does not require day care licensing
or permitting.
State of Colorado
The Colorado Revised State statutes address home child day care facilities.
According to the statutes, a Family Child Care Home is defined as,
"a facility for child care in a place of residence of a family or person for the
purpose of providing less than twenty-four-hour care for children under
the age of eighteen years who are not related to the head of such home.
"Family child care home" may include infant-toddler child care homes,
large child care homes, experienced provider child care homes, and such
other types of family child care homes designated by rules of the state
board pursuant to section 26-6-106 (2) (p), as the state board deems
necessary and appropriate".
Additionally, an attachment has been provided that further outlines the regulatory
provisions of the state statutes.
Town of Avon
The Town of Avon allows the operation of a child-care home as a home
occupation, subject to Special Review. According to the Town of Avon land use
regulations,
2
a "home occupation" means an occupation, profession, activity or use that is
conducted within a dwelling unit and is meant to produce income or revenue, or
any activity associated with a nonprofit organization which:
A. Does not produce noise audible outside the dwelling unit where
such activity is taking place;
B. Limits the amount of customers, visitors or persons, other than the
occupants, to no more than five per day. In the case of day care, no
more children than allowed by the state of Colorado license for a child
care home (a state of Colorado license is also required to operate a
child care home);
C. Does not cause the visible storage or parking of vehicles or
equipment not normally associated with residential use, which shall
include but is not limited to the following: trucks with a rating greater
than three-fourths ton, earth moving equipment and cement mixers;
D. Does not alter the exterior of the property or affect the residential
character of the neighborhood;
E. Does not interfere with parking, access or other normal activities on
adjacent properties, or with other units in a multifamily residential
development;
F. Does not require or allow employees to work on the property;
G. Does not require alteration to the residence to satisfy applicable
town fire or building codes, or county health regulations;
H. Does not require or allow any signs to be visible from the outside of
the property. (Ord. 98-3 §VI: Ord. 91-10 §1 (part)).
Home occupations are allowed in the following zone districts, subject to a Special
Review Use Permit:
• Residential Single Family
• Residential Duplex
• Residential Low Density
• Residential Medium Density
Residential High Density
• Planned Unit Development
Home occupations are not allowed in the Government, Park & Employee
Housing Zone District.
A special review use shall require a special review use permit prior to
the issuance of a building permit or the commencement of the use
identified as a special review use in the appropriate zone district(s).
A special review use shall not be considered a use by right without
3
review and approval, as set forth in Section 17.48.020, nor shall the
use vest unless a development plan is approved for the property. (Ord.
91-10 §1(part)).
The staff and the planning and zoning commission shall consider the
following criteria when evaluating an application for a special review use
permit.
A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements
imposed by the zoning code;
B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town
comprehensive plan;
C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses. Such
compatibility may be expressed in appearance, architectural scale and
features, site design, and the control of any adverse impacts including
noise, dust, odor, lighting, traffic, safety, etc. (Ord. 91-10 §1 (part)).
Eagle County
Eagle County regulates two types of child day care facilities; Day Care Centers
and Day Care Homes.
According to the Eagle County land use regulations, a Day Care Center is
defined as,
"a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day or a portion of a day, for seven or more children who are not
related to the owner, operator or manager thereof, whether such facility is
operated with or without compensation for such care. A day care center
shall comply with all applicable standards for child care centers of the
Colorado Department of Social Services."
A Day Care Home is defined as,
"a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day, for more than two but not more than six children from birth to
sixteen years of age who are not related to the owner, operator or
manager thereof, whether such facility is operated with or without
compensation for such care. Care also may be provided for no more than
two additional children of school age attending full-day school. Residents
of the home underl2 years of age who are on the premises and all
children on the premises for supervision are counted against the
approved capacity. A day care home shall comply with all applicable
standards for child care centers of the Colorado Department of Social
Services."
Eagle County allows the operation of Day Care Homes in 14 of their 16 zone
districts as a "use by right" upon the determination that all applicable
requirements have been met. In contrast, Day Care Centers are allowed in the
same 14 zone districts; however, the review and approval of a Special Use
4
Permit is required. The two zone districts that do not allow these facilities are the
Backcountry and Fulford Historical Districts respectively.
According to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Special Uses are those
uses that are not necessarily compatible with the other uses allowed in a zone
district, but which may be determined compatible with the other uses allowed in
the zone district based upon individual review of their location, design,
configuration, density and intensity of use, and the imposition of appropriate
conditions to ensure the compatibility of the use at a particular location with
surrounding land uses.
Upon receipt of an application for a Special Use, the Community Development
Department shall prepare a report for presentation to the Planning Commission
and cause public notice to be provided. The Planning Commission shall conduct
a public hearing on the application and based upon the review of the application
for compliance with the relevant and applicable criteria, forward a
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to approve, approve
with conditions, or disapprove the Special Use application.
The issuance of a Special Use permit shall be dependent upon findings that
there is competent evidence that the proposed use, as conditioned, fully
complies with all the prescribed standards. The prescribed standards include
consistency with the applicable Master Plans, compatibility, zone district
standards, minimization of adverse impacts, impact on public facilities, site
development standards and other provisions deemed necessary.
III. RECOMMENDATION FOR AMENDMENTS
Staff is recommending text amendments to the Zoning Regulations to allow for
the operation of home child day care facilities and child day care centers. Staff
recommends that a definition of Home Child Day Care Facilities be adopted
along with a definition of Child Day Care Centers. Staff recommends that
Section 12-2-2, Definitions of the Zoning Regulations be amended to include the
following terms:
"Home Child Day Care Facility" -
"a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day, for more than two but not more than six children from birth to
sixteen years of age who are not related to the owner, operator or
manager thereof, whether such facility is operated with or without
compensation for such care. Residents of the home under 12 years of
age who are on the premises and all children on the premises for
supervision are counted against the approved capacity. A day care home
shall comply with all applicable standards for child care centers of the
Colorado Department of Social Services."
and,
5
"Child Day Care Center" -
"a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day or a portion of a day, for seven or more children who are not
related to the owner, operator or manager thereof, whether such facility is
operated with or without compensation for such care. A day care center
shall comply with all applicable standards for child care centers of the
Colorado Department of Social Services."
Staff further recommends that the operation of a Home Child Day Care Facility
be classified as a Home Occupation, as defined in the Zoning Regulations, in
certain established residential zone district subject to the issuance of a Home
Occupation Permit and a Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, staff is
recommending that a text amendment be adopted allowing Child Day Care
Centers in certain established residential and commercial zone districts.
Section 12-14-12: HOME OCCUPATIONS. of the Zoning Regulations,
establishes the procedures for the issuance of a Home Occupation Permit.
According to Section 12-14-12,
A. Permit Required: The conduct of a home occupation, where permitted as
an accessory use by the provisions of this Title, shall be subject to
issuance of a home occupation permit by the Administrator. Application
shall be made on a form prescribed by the Administrator, and shall be
accompanied by a statement fully describing the nature of the home
occupation, including hours of operation, equipment or machinery to be
used, anticipated number of customers, clients or students, and other
features of the home occupation. The application shall describe in detail
the manner in which the home occupation will conform with the
requirements of this Chapter.
B. Application Contents: An application for a home occupation permit
shall be made upon a form provided by the Administrator. The
application shall be supported by documents, maps, plans, and
other material as requested by the Administrator to evaluate the
proposal. Application materials may include but not be limited to
floor plans, site plans, parking and traffic circulation plans,
verification of liability insurance, and title reports.
C. Permit Issuance And Findings: After review of the application, the
Administrator may issue a home occupation permit if he/she finds that the
proposed use will conform with the requirements of this Chapter. The
permit may be subject to such conditions as the Administrator deems
necessary to guarantee operation of the home occupation in accordance
with the requirements of this Chapter and compatibly with other uses in
the vicinity. The Administrator shall deny the application if he/she finds
that the proposed use will not conform with the provisions of this Chapter,
or would be injurious or detrimental to other properties in the vicinity.
D. Permit Time Limit; Renewal: Home occupation permits, when issued,
shall be for a limited time period not exceeding t-wfe-12) y3- ars one (1)
6
year. Permits shall be renewable upon application, subject to such
regulations as shall be in effect at the time of application for renewal. The
Administrator shall make the same findings with respect to an application
for renewal as for the original issuance of a home occupation permit.
E. Requirements For Permit: Where permitted, home occupations shall be
subject to the following limitations:
1. The use shall be conducted entirely within a dwelling and carried on
principally by the inhabitants thereof. A home child day care facility
shall be exempt from this requirement to allow outdoor play
areas.
2. Employees, other than inhabitants of the dwelling, shall not exceed
one person at any time.
3. The use shall be clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the
dwelling for dwelling purposes and shall not change the residential
character ihereef of the property and neighborhood.
4. The total floor area used for the home occupation shall not exceed
one-fourth (1/4) of the gross residential floor area of the dwelling, nor
exceed five hundred (500) square feet. Home child day care facilities
shall not exceed one-half (1/2) of the gross residential floor area of
the dwelling, nor one thousand, two hundred fifty (1,250) square
feet.
5. There shall be no advertising, display, or other indication of the home
occupation on the premises.
6. Selling stocks, supplies, or products on the premises shall not be
permitted, provided that incidental retail sales may be made in connection
with other permitted home occupations.
7. There shall be no exterior storage on the premises of material used in
the home occupation.
8. There shall be no noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odor, heat, or glare
noticeable at or beyond the property line, as a result of the home
occupation. A home child day care facility shall be exempt from this
requirement to allow outdoor play areas.
9. A home occupation shall not generate significant vehicular traffic in
excess of that typically generated by residential dwellings and shall not
interfere with parking, access or other normal activities on adjacent
properties, or with other units in a multi-family residential
development.
10. No parking or storage of commercial vehicles in association with
a home occupation permit shall be permitted on the site.
E. Interpretation:
1. For purposes of this Chapter, provided that all requirements
prescribed in this Chapter are met, the following examples shall be
considered home occupations:
a. Activities conducted principally by telephone or mail order.
b. Studios and activities producing light handcrafts or objects of art.
c. Teaching and tutoring instruction limited to two (2) pupils at a time.
7
d. Dressmaking or apparel alterations.
e. Home child day care facility
2. A home occupation shall not include: a clinic, funeral home, nursing
home, tearoom, restaurant, antique shop, veterinarian's office, or any
similar use.
F. Permit Revocation Or Discontinuance:
1. A home occupation permit may be revoked by the Administrator if
he/she determines that the provisions of this Chapter or the limitations
prescribed as a condition of the permit are being violated.
2. A home occupation permit shall become void if not used within two (2)
months of issuance, or if the use for which it was issued is
discontinued for a continuous period of six (6) months. (Ord. 8(1973)
17.301 -17.306)
Chapter 16: CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, of the Zoning Regulations,
establishes the procedures and criteria for the issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit. According Chapter 16,
12-16-1: PURPOSE; LIMITATIONS:
In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this Title,
specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a
conditional use permit. Because. of their unusual or special characteristics,
conditional uses require review and evaluation so that they may be located
properly with respect to the purposes of this Title and with respect to their effects
on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in this Chapter is
intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between
conditional uses and surrounding properties and the Town at large. Uses listed
as conditional uses in the various districts may be permitted subject to such
conditions and limitations as the Town may prescribe to ensure that the location
and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with development
objectives of the Town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties.
Where conditions cannot be devised to achieve these objectives, applications for
conditional use permits shall be denied. (Ord. 8(1973) § 18.100)
12-16-2: APPLICATION; CONTENTS:
Application for a conditional use permit shall be made upon a form provided by
the Administrator. The application shall be supported by documents, maps,
plans, and other material containing the following information:
A. Name and address of the owner and/or applicant and a statement that the
applicant, if not the owner, has the permission of the owner to make
application and act as agent for the owner.
B. Legal description, street address, and other identifying data concerning
the site.
8
C. A description of the precise nature of the proposed use and its operating
characteristics, and measures proposed to make the use compatible with
other properties in the vicinity.
D. A site plan showing proposed development of the site, including
topography, building locations, parking, traffic circulation, usable open
space, landscaped area, and utilities and drainage features.
E. Preliminary building plans and elevations sufficient to indicate the
dimensions, general appearance, scale, and interior plan of all buildings.
F. Such additional material as the Administrator may prescribe or the
applicant may submit pertinent to the application and to the findings
prerequisite to the issuance of a conditional use permit as prescribed in
Section 12-16-6 of this Chapter.
B. A list of the owner or owners of record of the properties adjacent to the
subject property which is subject of the hearing. Provided, however,
notification of owners within a condominium project shall be satisfied by
notifying the managing agent, or the registered agent of the condominium
project, or any member of the board of directors of a condominium
association. The list of owners, managing agent of the condominium
project, registered agent or members of the board of directors, as
appropriate, shall include the names of the individuals, their mailing
addresses, and the general description of the property owned or
managed by each. Accompanying the list shall be stamped, addressed
envelopes to each individual or agent to be notified to be used for the
mailing of the notice of hearing. It will be the applicants responsibility to
provide this information and stamped, addressed envelopes. Notice to the
adjacent property owners shall be mailed first class, postage prepaid.
(Ord. 49(1991) § 1: Ord. 50(1978) § 15: Ord. 30(1978) § 1: Ord. 16(1978)
§ 4(a): Ord. 8(1973) § 18.200)
12-16-3: FEE:
The Town Council shall set a conditional use permit fee schedule sufficient to
cover the cost of Town staff time and other expenses incidental to the review of
the application. The fee shall be paid at the time of the application, and shall not
be refundable. (Ord. 8(1973) § 18.300)
12-16-4: HEARING:
Upon receipt of a conditional use permit application, the Planning and
Environmental Commission shall set a date for hearing in accordance with
subsection 12-3-6C, "notice", of this Title, shall be given, and the hearing shall be
conducted in accordance with subsections 12-3-6C and D of this Title. (Ord.
8(1973) § 18.400)
12-16-5: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ACTION:
A. Possible Range Of Action: Within thirty (30) days of the application for a
public hearing on a conditional use permit, the Planning and
Environmental Commission shall act on the application. The Commission
may approve the application as submitted or may approve the application
subject to such modifications or conditions as it deems necessary to
9
accomplish the purposes of this Title, or the Commission may deny the
application. A conditional use permit may be revocable, may be granted
for a limited time period, or may be granted subject to such other
conditions as the Commission may prescribe. Conditions may include, but
shall not be limited to, requiring special setbacks, open spaces, fences or
walls, landscaping or screening, and street dedication and improvement;
regulation of vehicular access and parking, signs, illumination, and hours
and methods of operation; control of potential nuisances; prescription of
standards for maintenance of buildings and grounds; and prescription of
development schedules.
B. Variances: A conditional use permit shall not grant variances, but action
on a variance may be considered concurrently with a conditional use
permit application on the same site. Variances shall be granted in
accordance with the procedure prescribed in Chapter 17 of this Title.
(Ord. 16(1978) § 4(b): Ord. 8(1973) § 18.500)
12-16-6: CRITERIA; FINDINGS:
A. Factors Enumerated: Before acting on a conditional use permit
application, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider
the following factors with respect to the proposed use:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
Town.
2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities,
and other public facilities and public facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to
be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to
the proposed use.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an
environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title.
B. Necessary Findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission shall
make the following findings before granting a conditional use permit:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the
purposes of this Title and the purposes of the district in which the site is
located.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it
would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
10
3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable
provisions of this Title. (Ord. 10(1998) § 9: Ord. 22(1996) § 3: Ord.
36(1980) § 1: Ord. 8(1973) § 18.600)
12-16-7: USE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AND STANDARDS:
The following criteria and standards shall be applicable to the uses listed below
in consideration of a conditional use permit. These criteria and standards shall be
in addition to the criteria and findings required by Section 12-16-6 of this Chapter.
A. Uses And Criteria:
1. Bakeries And Confectioneries: The use shall be restricted to
preparation of products specifically for sale on the premises.
2. Barbershops, Beauty Shops And Beauty Parlors: No exterior frontage
on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area is permitted.
3. Brew Pubs:
a. There shall be no exterior storage of supplies, refuse, or
materials on the property upon which the brew pub is operated.
b. The operator of the brew pub shall comply with the Town's
loading and delivery regulations as set forth in this Title.
c. Brew pubs which sell beer or ale at wholesale or which sell beer
for off-site consumption are allowed so long as the total of
wholesale sales and sales for off-site consumption do not exceed
forty five percent (45%) of the product manufactured by the brew
pub on an annual basis.
4. Commercial Storage: No exterior frontage on any public way, street,
walkway, or mall area is permitted.
5. Convenience Food Stores:
a. Maximum store size shall be eight thousand (8,000) square
feet.
b. No more than thirty three percent (33%) of the gross building
area of the entire structure on-site.
6. Major Arcade:
a. No exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall
area is permitted.
b. Amusement devices shall not be visible or audible from any
public way, street, walkway, or mall area.
7. Television Stations:
a. The production room/studio shall be visible from the street or
pedestrian mall.
b. The television station shall be "cable-cast" only, requiring no
additional antennas.
8. Time-Share Estate, Fractional Fee, Fractional Fee Club, Or Time-
Share License Proposal: Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit
for a time-share estate, fractional fee, fractional fee club, or time-share
license proposal, the following shall be considered:
a. If the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an
existing facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an
equivalency of accommodation units as are presently existing.
Equivalency shall be maintained either by an equal number of
units or by square footage. If the proposal is a new development,
it
it shall provide at least as much accommodation unit gross
residential floor area (GRFA) as fractional fee club unit gross
residential floor area (GRFA).
b. Lock-off units and lock-off unit square footage shall not be
included in the calculation when determining the equivalency of
existing accommodation units or equivalency of existing square
footage.
c. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a high
level of occupancy.
d. Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density over
that allowed by zoning. The number of employee housing units
required will be consistent with employee impacts that are
expected as a result of the project.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of
existing units within the project or building; and written statements
from one hundred percent (100%) of the owners of existing units
indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed
fractional fee club. No written approval shall be valid if it was
signed by the owner more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of
filing the application for a conditional use.
9. Transportation Businesses:
a. All vehicles shall be parked upon approved parking areas.
b. All vehicles shall be adequately screened from public rights of
way and adjacent properties, consisting of landscaping and
berms, in combination with walls and fences, where deemed
necessary to reduce the deleterious effects of vehicle storage.
c. The number, size and location of vehicles permitted to be
stored shall be determined by the Planning and Environmental
Commission based on the adequacy of the site for vehicle
storage. Consideration shall be given to the adequacy of
landscaping and other screening methods to prevent impacts to
adjacent properties and other commercial and/or residential uses.
d. Parking associated with transportation businesses shall not
reduce or compromise the parking required for other uses on-site.
(Ord. 10(1998) § 11)
10. Home Child Day Care Facility:
a. The maximum number of children shall be no more
children than allowed by the State of Colorado licensing
authority for a child care home or a total of six (6)
children, which ever is more restrictive.
b. A State of Colorado license is required to operate a child
care home and a current copy of the license shall be kept
on file in the Town of Vail Community Development
Department.
c. A conditional use permit for a home occupation to operate
a home child care facility shall be valid for one year. The
permit holder shall be responsible for requesting
renewals and maintaining all permits as current.
12
12-16-8: PERMIT APPROVAL AND EFFECT:
Approval of a conditional use permit shall lapse and become void if a building
permit is not obtained and construction not commenced and diligently pursued
toward completion or the use for which the approval has been granted has not
commenced within two (2) years from when the approval becomes final. (Ord.
10(1998) § 10: Ord. 48(1991) § 1: Ord. 16(1978) § 4(d))
12-16-9: CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:
In addition to the conditions which may be prescribed pursuant to this Chapter, a
conditional use shall also be subject to all other procedures, permits, and
requirements of this and other applicable ordinances and regulations of the
Town. In event of any conflict between the provisions of a conditional use permit
and any other permit or requirement, the more restrictive provision shall prevail.
(Ord. 10(1998) § 10: Ord. 8(1973) § 18.900)
Zone Districts For Consideration
There are currently 24 zone districts in the Town of Vail. Of the 24 different zone
districts:
eight (8) are residential districts,
? nine (9) are commercial and business districts,
? four (4) are open space and recreation districts, and
? three (3) are special and miscellaneous districts.
Child care facilities are currently only allowed, subject to the issuance of a
conditional use permit, in the General Use zone district (special and
miscellaneous district). Staff recommends that the Planning & Environmental
Commission consider the appropriateness of allowing Home Child Day Care
Facilities in each of the eight residential districts, as a conditional use, subject to
the issuance of a conditional use permit and a home occupation permit. We
further recommend that Day Care Centers be allowed as a conditional use in four
of the commercial and business districts (Commercial Core 3, Commercial
Service Center, Arterial Business and Lionshead Mixed Use 2) in one special
and miscellaneous district (General Use), and in one open space and recreation
district (Ski Base/Recreation). Due to the potential for unintended
consequences of child care facilities and impacts on the residential character of
neighborhoods, especially in the residential zone districts, staff is recommending
that child day care not be a "use by right" in any district.
13
This is a checklist to assist you in preparing for the Home Visit
HOME VISIT
O Yes O No 1. Current First Aid/CPR card? Training in Universal
Precautions? 12 clock hours of pre-licensing training?
O Yes ()No 2. Trash cans covered or inaccessible?
O Yes ()No 3. Sharp knives kept up or latched?
O Yes Yes O No No 4. Furnace & hot water heater free of flammable material?
O Yes Yes O No No 5. Furnace and hot water heater blocked of f if it is in an
area used for child care?
O Yes O No 6. Fire extinguisher? (5 lb. 2A, 1OBC minimum)?
O'Yes O No 7. Smoke detectors in working condition on each level of the
house where child care is provided?
O Yes Yes O No No 8. Each child has his/her own place to rest, with a bed, sofa,
cot or mat not less than 2" thick?
O Yes O No 9. Basic first aid items-bandaids, thermometer, ice packs,
Syrup of Ipecac, rubber gloves? (Do not use Syrup-of Ipecac
until you have contacted Poison Control)
O Yes O No 10. Safety plugs in all unused outlets?
O Yes O No 11. Gates for all stairways?
()Yes O No 12. Safety latches on doors, cabinets, drawers where there is
anything that could hurt a child? (e.g., cleaning materials,
perfumes, scissors, razors, medications, shaving lotions, hair
products, matches, curling irons)
O Yes ()No 13. Emergency numbers posted near the phone? Include police,
fire, Poison Control, 911, parent emergency numbers, hospital
or emergency medical clinic and child's doctor.
O Yes Yes O No No 14. Basement-2 exits-permanent installation of escape route if
window sill is above 30" from floor?
O Yes ()No 15. Guns, bows and arrow, slingshots, etc. locked up and the
ammunition locked up separately?
O Yes ()No 16. Individual towels, wash cloths, and cups?
D Yes Yes O No No 17. Fireplace, inserts, wood burning stoves fenced or not used
during child care hours?
()Yes ()No 18. Swimming pools or trampolines in yard fenced away from
children? Hot tub covers bolted & securely locked?
O Yes ()No 19. 75 sq. ft. per child in fenced play yard?
O Yes O No 20. Window wells in play area covered?
O Yes ()No 21. Tool sheds and garages locked?
O Yes O No 21. Yard free of unsafe materials? (e.g., lawn mower, - tools,
propane tank, uncovered cooking grills, wood piles)
()Yes O No 22. Decks more than 12" high have a protective railing or
barrier with slats no wider than 5" apart?
O Yes ()No 23. Swing sets stable and in safe condition with no uncovered
protruding bolts, screws?
O Yes ()No 24. 35 sq. ft. per child of usable space INSIDE?
()Yes ()No 25. Hot water heater turned down to a safe level?
()Yes O No 26. Bars and railings around decks, stairs, and upper levels
inside the home less than 5" apart? .
()Yes O No 27. Plastic bags out of reach of children?
()Yes O No 28. Emergency medical care authorization, admission record,
child's medical, original immunization card on all children in
care, complete and up to date?
O Yes O No 29. Dogs/cats have current rabies shots?
()Yes ()No 30. Designated diaper change area with durable, smooth,
nonabsorbent, cleanable surface?
O Yes Yes O No No 31. Arrangement for a capable substitute (age 18+) ?
O Yes ()No 32. Written statement of the home's policies of admission and
registration of children, holidays, payment of fees,
discipline, emergency and security procedures (natural
disasters, e.g., floods, fires) meals and snacks?
O Yes Yes ()No 33. In event of injury, illness, is there a room or area to
separate the child?
O Yes O No 34. For children under 2, adequate number of high chairs and
other suitable equipment that meets standards of Consumer
Product Safety Commission?
O Yes ()No 35. For each child under 12 months are rest periods in a crib
or a playpen with a pad and clean washable cover? Do cribs
meet federal Consumer Product Safety Commission standards
(space between crib slats no wider than 2 3/8" apart?
O Yes ()No 36. Exposed light bulbs have protective covers?
O Yes ()No 37. House free of poisonous plants? (e.g., Diffenbachia,
philodendron, pothos)
Approved 7/23/01
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Monday, July 9, 2001
PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Galen Aasland John Schofield
Diane Golden Chas Bernhardt
Doug Cahill Brian Doyon
Dick Cleveland
Site Visits : 1:00 pm
1. Gateway -12 Vail Road
Driver: George
~o
NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30
Public Hearina - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm
1. A request for a rezoning from Commercial Core I to Commercial Service Center, a major
amendment to Special Development District No. 21, a text amendment to Section 12-7E-4
of the Vail Town Code, to allow for private clubs as a conditional use in the Commercial
Service Center zone district, a conditional use permit for a private parking club in the
Commercial Service Center zone district, and a conditional use permit to allow for
residential dwelling units in the Commercial Service Center zone district, located at 12 Vail
Road / portions of lots O and N, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Owners, L.P., represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
Due to a lack of a quorum the item was heard as a worksession
Allison Ochs gave a brief overview of the staff memorandum
The applicant gave a brief presentation of the proposal. The applicant indicated that there
was a net reduction in the number of employees in the building, and as such, no employee
housing units should be required as recommended by the staff.
Diane Golden apologized for the lack of Commission members.
Dick Cleveland supports the change in zoning designation as justified by the Vail Land Use
Plan. He stated that he believed it was important that the employee housing needs of the
proposal needed to be met.
A
1 TOWN OF PAIL
Approved 7/23/01
Doug Cahill agreed with Dick on the issue of employee housing. He stated that it was time
for this project to help address the employee housing issues. He believed that there could
be latitude in the number of units required.
Diane Golden stated that she looked forward to seeing office uses in the building. She
didn't believe that employee housing would be compatible in the building. She felt an off-
site location for housing was more acceptable.
Tom Braun defended the applicant against having to provide employee housing. He argued
the economics of the project prevented the ability to provide housing.
Doug Cahill felt the applicant should be required to address the issue and that eight was too
many however, something was required. He believed that maybe only one unit would be
needed.
Kevin Deighan described the difficult economic situations of his purchase deal and believed
that employee housing would break the back of this project. He stated that the building was
poorly designed and a redesign costs too much when employee housing is required.
Diane Golden stated that she would be willing to forego the requirement, but believed that
employee housing was needed.
Dominic Mauriello stated that the applicant disagreed with the condition preventing the sale
of parking spaces. He stated that the condition on parking should be removed from the
memo, as he felt the applicant had addressed the issue. He suggested that the building
could support additional parking spaces as necessary if changes in uses were proposed.
There would be six spaces available.
Diane Golden suggested that the owner reserve the right to buy back all parking spaces
when or if they are put on the market for sale.
Dick Cleveland stated that he supported the parking club concept.
Dominic Mauriello explained the applicant's concern with a coordinated loading dock with
the Vail Plaza Hotel.
Dick Cleveland stated that the applicant needed to work out the loading dock issue.
2. A request for a final review to amend certain residential zone districts in the Town of Vail to
allow home day care facilities subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit and a
home occupation permit.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
George Ruther highlighted the changes proposed since the previous PEC review of this
item. The changes included language regarding occupancy by children under 12, home
occupations occurring outside the dwelling used for child care, provisions regarding noise,
dust and odors, and the number of children allowed within a day care facility in a residential
neighborhood. George stated staff's recommendation was to allow home day care in
certain zone districts, subject to the issuance of-a conditional use permit in all cases. Given
the potential impacts to neighborhood character, staff did not think it would be appropriate to
allow home day care facilities as a permitted use in any district.
Various commissioners expressed concerns about allowing outdoor play areas and
2
Approved 7/23/01
associated noise provisions.
Dick Cleveland stated he supported the changes.
Doug Cahill had no additional comments.
Diane Golden had no additional comments.
Doug Cahill moved to recommend approval in accordance with the staff memorandum.
Dick Cleveland seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-0.
3. A request for a final review of a minor subdivision proposal, located at 3834 & 3838 Bridge
Road/ Lots 11 & 12, Bighorn Subdivision 2"d Addition.
Applicant: Gary Weiss, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
TABLED UNTIL JULY 23, 2001
Doug Cahill moved to table.
Dick Cleveland seconded.
The motion carried 4-0.
4. A request for a final review of a minor subdivision proposal, located at 3816, 3826, and
3828 Bridge Road/ Lots 8, 9, & 10, Bighorn Subdivision 2nd Addition.
Applicant: Jeff Dahl and June Frazier, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
TABLED UNTIL JULY 23, 2001
Doug Cahill moved to table.
Dick Cleveland seconded.
The motion carried 4-0.
5. A request for a final review and a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the Town of
Vail's proposed Meadow Drive streetscape improvement project, located at East/West
Meadow Drive, Vail Village.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL JULY 23, 2001
Doug Cahill moved to table.
Dick Cleveland seconded.
The motion carried 4-0.
3
Approved 7/23/01
6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Arts in
Public Places Master Plan.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
TABLED UNTIL JULY 23, 2001
7. Approval of June 25, 2001 minutes
TABLED UNTIL JULY 23, 2001.
Doug Cahill moved to table.
Dick Cleveland seconded.
The motion carried 4-0.
8. Information Update
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
4
ORDINANCE NO. 17
SERIES OF 2001
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE VAIL TOWN CODE, TITLE 12, CHAPTERS 2, 6,14 & 16,
SECTION 12-2-2 DEFINITIONS, SECTION 12-14-12 HOME OCCUPATIONS, SECTION 12-
16-7 CONDITIONAL USE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AND STANDARDS, SECTION 12-6A-3,
SECTION 12-613-3, SECTION 12-6C-3, SECTION 12-6D-3, SECTION 12-6E-3, SECTION 12-
6F-3, SECTION 12-6G-3, SECTION 12-61-1-3, SECTION 12-7D-2, SECTION 12-7E-4,
SECTION 12-7F-4, SECTION 12-71-5, SECTION 12-9C-3 AND SECTION 12-8D-3 OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR HOME CHILD DAY CARE
FACILITIES TO BE OPERATED AS HOME OCCUPATIONS, SUBJECT TO THE ISSUANCE
OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, IN EIGHT RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS AND TO
ALLOW CHILD DAY CARE CENTERS TO BE OPERATED IN FOUR COMMERCIAL AND
BUSINESS ZONE DISTRICTS, ONE SPECIAL AND MISCELLANEOUS ZONE DISTRICT
AND ONE OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION ZONE DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE
ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN
REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Planning & Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held a
public hearing on the proposed text amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town
Code of the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail
unanimously recommended approval of the text amendments at its July 9, 2001 public hearing,
and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the proposed text
amendments further the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the text amendments is to establish requirements and
procedures to allow child day care centers and home child day care facilities in the Town of Vail;
and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed amendments are consistent
with the development objectives of the Town and that these amendments are necessary to
ensure the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Vail.
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety,
and welfare to adopt these amendments to the Zoning Regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 11. The purpose of this ordinance is to amend Sections 12-2-2, 12-14-12, 12-
16-7, 12-6A-3, 12-6B-3, 12-6C-3, 12-6D-3, 12-6E-3, 12-6F-3, 12-6G-3, 12-6H-3, 12-7D-
2, 12-7E-4, 12-7F-4, 12-71-5, 12-9C-3, 12-8D-3 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations
to establish requirements and procedures allowing child day care centers and home
child day care facilities within the Town of Vail.
Section 2. The following sections of the Vail Town Code are hereby amended:
(Deletions are shown in strikeou and additions are shown in bold)
Section 12-2-2, DEFINITIONS,
"Home Child Day Care Facility" -
a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day, for more than two but not more than six children from birth to
sixteen years of age who are not related to the owner, operator or manager
thereof, whether such facility is operated with or without compensation for
such care. Residents of the home under 12 years of age who are on the
premises and all children on the premises for supervision are counted
against the approved capacity. A day care home shall comply with all
applicable standards for child care centers of the Colorado Department of
Social Services.
"Child Day Care Center" -
a residence or facility that provides regular care and supervision, for an
entire day or a portion of a day, for seven or more children who are not
related to the owner, operator or manager thereof, whether such facility is
operated with or without compensation for such care. A day care center
shall comply with all applicable standards for child care centers of the
Colorado Department of Social Services.
Section 12-14-12: HOME OCCUPATIONS,
A. Permit Required: The conduct of a home occupation, where permitted as an
accessory use by the provisions of this Title, shall be subject to issuance of a
home occupation permit by the Administrator. Application shall be made on a
form prescribed by the Administrator, and shall be accompanied by a statement
fully describing the nature of the home occupation, including hours of operation,
equipment or machinery to be used, anticipated number of customers, clients or
students, and other features of the home occupation. The application shall
describe in detail the manner in which the home occupation will conform with the
requirements of this Chapter.
B. Application Contents: An application for a home occupation permit shall be
made upon a form provided by the Administrator. The application shall be
supported by documents, maps, plans, and other material as requested by
the Administrator to evaluate the proposal. Application materials may
include but not be limited to floor plans, site plans, parking and traffic
circulation plans, verification of liability insurance, and title reports.
C. Permit Issuance And Findings: After review of the application, the Administrator
may issue a home occupation permit if he/she finds that the proposed use will
conform with the requirements of this Chapter. The permit may be subject to
such conditions as the Administrator deems necessary to guarantee operation of
the home occupation in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter and
compatibly with other uses in the vicinity. The Administrator shall deny the
application if he/she finds that the proposed use will not conform with the
provisions of this Chapter, or would be injurious or detrimental to other properties
in the vicinity.
D. Permit Time Limit; Renewal: Home occupation permits, when issued, shall be for
a limited time period not exceeding two-J^) ye one (1) year. Permits shall be
renewable upon application, subject to such regulations as shall be in effect at
the time of application for renewal. The Administrator shall make the same
findings with respect to an application for renewal as for the original issuance of a
home occupation permit.
E. Requirements For Permit: Where permitted, home occupations shall be subject
to the following limitations:
1. The use shall be conducted entirely within a dwelling and carried on
principally by the inhabitants thereof. A home child day care facility shall
be exempt from this requirement to allow outdoor play areas.
2. Employees, other than inhabitants of the dwelling, shall not exceed one
-2-
person at any time.
3. The use shall be clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the
dwelling for dwelling purposes and shall not change the residential character
thereef of the property and neighborhood.
4. The total floor area used for the home occupation shall not exceed one-fourth
(1/4) of the gross residential floor area of the dwelling, nor exceed five hundred
(500) square feet. Home child day care facilities shall not exceed one-half
(1/2) of the gross residential floor area of the dwelling, nor one thousand,
two hundred fifty (1,250) square feet.
5. There shall be no advertising, display, or other indication of the home
occupation on the premises.
6. Selling stocks, supplies, or products on the premises shall not be permitted,
provided that incidental retail sales may be made in connection with other
permitted home occupations.
7. There shall be no exterior storage on the premises of material used in the
home occupation.
8. There shall be no noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odor, heat, or glare noticeable
at or beyond the property line, as a result of the home occupation. A home child
day care facility shall be exempt from this requirement to allow outdoor
play areas.
9. A home occupation shall not generate significant vehicular traffic in excess of
that typically generated by residential dwellings and shall not interfere with
parking, access or other normal activities on adjacent properties, or with
other units in a multi-family residential development.
10. No parking or storage of commercial vehicles in association with a
home occupation permit shall be permitted on the site.
E. Interpretation:
1. For purposes of this Chapter, provided that all requirements prescribed in this
Chapter are met, the following examples shall be considered home
occupations:
a. Activities conducted principally by telephone or mail order.
b. Studios and activities producing light handcrafts or objects of art.
c. Teaching and tutoring instruction limited to two (2) pupils at a time.
d. Dressmaking or apparel alterations.
e. Home child day care facility
2. A home occupation shall not include: a clinic, funeral home, nursing home,
tearoom, restaurant, antique shop, veterinarian's office, or any similar use.
F. Permit Revocation Or Discontinuance:
1. A home occupation permit may be revoked by the Administrator if he/she
determines that the provisions of this Chapter or the limitations prescribed as
a condition of the permit are being violated.
2. A home occupation permit shall become void if not used within two (2)
months of issuance, or if the use for which it was issued is discontinued for a
continuous period of six (6) months. (Ord. 8(1973) 17.301 -17.306)
Section 12-16-7, USE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AND STANDARDS,
The following criteria and standards shall be applicable to the uses listed below in
consideration of a conditional use permit. These criteria and standards shall be in
addition to the criteria and findings required by Section 12-16-6 of this Chapter.
A. Uses And Criteria:
1. Bakeries And Confectioneries: The use shall be restricted to preparation of
products specifically for sale on the premises.
2. Barbershops, Beauty Shops And Beauty Parlors: No exterior frontage on any
public way, street, walkway, or mall area is permitted.
3. Brew Pubs:
a. There shall be no exterior storage of supplies, refuse, or materials on
the property upon which the brew pub is operated.
b. The operator of the brew pub shall comply with the Town's loading and
-3-
delivery regulations as set forth in this Title.
c. Brew pubs which sell beer or ale at wholesale or which sell beer for off-
site consumption are allowed so long as the total of wholesale sales and
sales for off-site consumption do not exceed forty five percent (45%) of
the product manufactured by the brew pub on an annual basis.
4. Commercial Storage: No exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway,
or mall area is permitted.
5. Convenience Food Stores:
a. Maximum store size shall be eight thousand (8,000) square feet.
b. No more than thirty three percent (33%) of the gross building area of
the entire structure on-site.
6. Major Arcade:
a. No exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area is
permitted.
b. Amusement devices shall not be visible or audible from any public way,
street, walkway, or mall area.
7. Television Stations:
a. The production room/studio shall be visible from the street or
pedestrian mall.
b. The television station shall be "cable-cast" only, requiring no additional
antennas.
8. Time-Share Estate, Fractional Fee, Fractional Fee Club, Or Time-Share
License Proposal: Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-
share estate, fractional fee, fractional fee club, or time-share license proposal,
the following shall be considered:
a. If the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an
existing facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an equivalency of
accommodation units as are presently existing. Equivalency shall be
maintained either by an equal number of units or by square footage. If the
proposal is a new development, it shall provide at least as much
accommodation unit gross residential floor area (GRFA) as fractional fee
club unit gross residential floor area (GRFA).
b. Lock-off units and lock-off unit square footage shall not be included in
the calculation when determining the equivalency of existing
accommodation units or equivalency of existing square footage.
c. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a high level
of occupancy.
d. Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density over that
allowed by zoning. The number of employee housing units required will
be consistent with employee impacts that are expected as a result of the
project.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of existing
units within the project or building; and written statements from one
hundred percent (100%) of the owners of existing units indicating their
approval, without condition, of the proposed fractional fee club. No written
approval shall be valid if it was signed by the owner more than sixty (60)
days prior to the date of filing the application for a conditional use.
9. Transportation Businesses:
a. All vehicles shall be parked upon approved parking areas.
b. All vehicles shall be adequately screened from public rights of way and
adjacent properties, consisting of landscaping and berms, in combination
with walls and fences, where deemed necessary to reduce the
deleterious effects of vehicle storage.
c. The number, size and location of vehicles permitted to be stored shall
be determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission based on
the adequacy of the site for vehicle storage. Consideration shall be given
to the adequacy of landscaping and other screening methods to prevent
impacts to adjacent properties and other commercial and/or residential
uses.
d. Parking associated with transportation businesses shall not reduce or
compromise the parking required for other uses on-site. (Ord. 10(1998) §
11)
10. Home Child Day Care Facility:
a. The maximum number of children shall be no more children than
allowed by the State of Colorado licensing authority for a child
care home or a total of six (6) children, which ever is more
restrictive.
-4-
b. A State of Colorado license is required to operate a child care
home and a current copy of the license shall be kept on file in the
Town of Vail Community Development Department.
c. A conditional use permit for a home occupation to operate a
home child care facility shall be valid for one year. The permit
holder shall be responsible for requesting renewals and
maintaining all permits as current.
Section 12-6A-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a
conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this
Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Equestrian facilities located on five (5) acre minimum lot size area on property
bordering public land.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Section 12-613-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a
conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this
Title.
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Type II employee housing unit as set forth in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-6C-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the R District, subject to
issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or private schools.
-5-
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Type II employee housing units as set forth in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-6D-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a
conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this
Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Type II employee housing unit as set forth in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-6E-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the RC District, subject to
issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Private clubs.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-6F-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the LDMF District, subject
to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
-6-
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Private clubs.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-6G-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the MDMF District, subject
to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations.
Public buildings, grounds, and facilities.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Typb 111 employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-61-1-3, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the HDMF District, subject
to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Churches.
Dog kennel.
Home Child Day Care Facility as further regulated by 12-14-2 of this Title.
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public or commercial parking facilities or structures.
Public or private schools.
-7-
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public transportation terminals.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 12-7D-2, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Commercial Core 3
District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with the
provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title:
Any use permitted by Section 12-7D-1 of this Article which is not
conducted entirely within a building.
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Brew pubs.
Child Day Care Center
Commercial laundry and cleaning services, bulk plant.
Commercial storage.
Dog kennel.
Drive-up facilities.
Major arcade.
Massage parlors.
Outside car wash.
Pet shops.
Public buildings, grounds, and facilities.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Radio and television signal relay transmission facilities.
Theaters, meeting rooms, and convention facilities.
Transportation businesses.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this
Title.
Section 12-7E-4, CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the CSC District, subject to
issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 16 of this Title:
Any use permitted by Section 12-7E-3 of this Article, which is not
conducted entirely within a building.
-8-
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Brew pubs.
Child Day Care Center
Commercial laundry and cleaning services.
Dog kennel.
Major arcade.
Multiple-family dwellings and lodges.
Outdoor operation of the accessory uses as set forth in Section 12-7E-5 of
this Article.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Theaters, meetings rooms, and convention facilities.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this
Title.
Section 12-71F-4, CONDITIONAL USES:
A.Enumerated: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the
Arterial Business District, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit
in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title:
Any use permitted by Section 12-7F-3 of this Article, which is not
conducted entirely within a building.
Bed and breakfast as further provided by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Brew pubs.
Child Day Care Center
Micro-brewery.
Private off-street surface parking.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public services uses, including screened outside storage.
Service yards.
Transportation businesses.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this
Title.
B. Subject To Review: The following uses shall be permitted on the
first (street) level floor within a structure subject to the issuance of a
conditional use permit and are listed as such due to their potential individual
-9-
and cumulative impacts of generating traffic in the Arterial Business District
and will receive review under the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title with
specific emphasis on the criteria of traffic generation:
Apparel stores.
Bakeries and confectioneries.
Banks and financial institutions.
Brew pubs.
Business and office services.
Camera stores.
Child Day Care Center
Cleaning and laundry pick-up agencies without bulk cleaning or dyeing.
Convenience food stores, restricted to a maximum of eight thousand
(8,000) square feet and no more than thirty three percent (33%) of the
gross building area of the entire structure.
Furniture stores.
Hardware stores.
Health food stores.
Hobby stores.
Household appliance stores.
Liquor stores.
Music and record stores.
Nursery and garden supply.
Outside car wash.
Pet shops.
Public and private health facilities.
Service stations.
Small appliance repair shops, excluding furniture repair.
Theater.
Yardage and dry good stores.
12-71-5: CONDITIONAL USES; GENERALLY (ON ALL LEVELS OF
A BUILDING OR OUTSIDE OF A BUILDING):
The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a
conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this
Title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Brew pubs.
Child Day Care Center
-10-
r
Coin-operated laundries.
Commercial storage.
Gasoline and service stations.
Private outdoor recreation facilities, as a primary use.
Public buildings, grounds, and facilities.
Public or private parking lots.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Television stations.
Vehicle maintenance, service, repair, storage, and fueling.
Warehousing.
Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in
this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-3-4 of this
Title.
Section 12-9C-3, A.Generally: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the
GU District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title:
Child Day Care Center
Churches.
Equestrian trails.
Golf courses.
Helipad for emergency and/or community use.
Hospitals, medical and dental facilities, clinics, rehabilitation centers, clinical pharmacies,
and ambulance facilities.
Major arcade.
Plant and tree nurseries, and associated structures, excluding the sale of trees or other
nursery products, grown, produced or made on the premises.
Public and private parks and active outdoor recreation areas, facilities and uses.
Public and private schools and educational institutions.
Public and quasi-public indoor community facility.
Public buildings and grounds.
Public parking facilities and structures.
Public theaters, meeting rooms and convention facilities.
Public tourist/guest service related facilities.
Public transportation terminals.
Public utilities installations including transmission lines and appurtenant equipment.
Seasonal structures or uses to accommodate educational, recreational or cultural
activities.
Ski lifts, tows and runs.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Water and sewage treatment plants.
Section 12-8D-3 The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Ski
Base/Recreation District, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title:
Additions or expansions of public or private parking structures or spaces.
Addition or expansion of storage buildings for mountain equipment.
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12-14-18 of this Title.
Child Day Care Center.
Food and beverage cart vending.
Public, private or quasi-public clubs.
Recreation room/minor arcade.
Redevelopment of public parks, playgrounds.
Redevelopment of ski lifts and tows.
Redevelopment of ski racing facilities.
Redevelopment of water storage extraction and treatment facilities.
Seasonal structures to accommodate athletic, cultural, or educational activities.
Summer outdoor storage for mountain equipment.
Summer seasonal community offices and programs.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title.
Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof,,
regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or
phrases be declared invalid.
Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the
inhabitants thereof.
Section 5. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this
ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that
occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or
12-
proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of
any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or
superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall
not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 7th day of August, 2001 and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 21st day of August, 2001, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
Attest:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
13-
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 5, 2001
TO: Town Council
Bob McLaurin
FROM: Pam Brandmeyo
SUBJECT: New Executive Session Recording Requirements
Attached, for your review, is a summary of HB 01-1359 enacted by the General Assembly,
which made several amendments to the Colorado Open Meetings Law and Open Records Law that
affect executive session procedures. These changes will take effect August 8, 2001.
After a review of the attached CML and Collins, Cockrel & Cole memos with Allen
Christensen we recommend the following:
1. Announce the purpose(s) of the executive session in the open meeting, citing the
section(s) of the C.R.S. that authorizes each topic. (i.e. "We will be meeting in
executive session to discuss the purchase of real property as allowed by §24-6-
402(4)(a) of the Colorado Revised Statutes.")
a. If in the opinion of the Town attorney, any portion of the executive session
is attorney/client privileged communication, there is no need to record that portion.
2. Tape all executive sessions rather than preparing time consuming written minutes.
3. Dispose of the taped record after the required minimum 90-day retention period.
4. Return to the open meeting to state, for the record, that only the authorized items
were discussed.
Attachments
cc: Lorelei Donaldson
Mary Caster
F:knbestATTORNEYWemo 20011exec session record.doc
New Executive Session Procedures
After Enactment of HB 01-1359
Effective August 8, 2001
I. In open meeting, before going to Executive Session
- Announce what the "topic for discussion" will be, identifying the particular matter to be
discussed without compromising the purpose of the executive session
- Announce the citation (s) that authorize the session
- Affirmative vote of two-thirds of quorum present required after the announcement
If. During the executive session
- The executive session shall be at a regular or special meeting and for the "sole purpose" of
considering any of the topics for which an executive session is allowed.
- "No adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, rule or regulation," nor any
"formal action" may occur except adoption of the minutes of the executive session.
- A "record" of the "actual contents" of the discussion in the executive session, using the
"same manner and media" as are used to record minutes of open meetings. (Can use any form
of electronic recording or prepare written minutes.
- The record must also contain a citation to the provision(s) that authorize the executive session.
- Written minutes must include a signed statement by the chair of the executive session that the
record "substantially reflects the substance" of the discussions.
Exception:
- If in the opinion of the public body's attorney, who is present at the executive session, "all or
a portion" of the discussion constitutes attorney-client privileged communications:
- No record need be kept of this part of the discussion
- If an electronic record is being made, the attorney must state on the record that, such
discussion constituted privileged attorney-client communication
- If written minutes are kept, the minutes "shall contain a signed statement" from the
attorney attesting to attorney-client privilege. This is in addition to the signed statement
of the chair of the session.
III. After the executive session
- If written minutes are utilized, the law now makes an exception to the prohibition on formal
actions for narrow purpose of reviewing, amending , and approving executive session
minutes.
- The record must be retained for at 90-days following the executive session. It may then be
destroyed pursuant to the municipality's records management policy.
- The executive session record is not available directly to the public for its review and is not
subject to discovery in any admin. or judicial proceeding. (Only in camera review by a judge
is allowed.)
Taken from Memorandum of the CML
CML
~KU ~u:+:ui~itau~~ i iy i~~~ ¦ ¦a,~rt,ia
1144 Sherman Street • Denver, Colorado 80203-2207 • Phone (303)831-6411, Fax (303)860-8175
MEMORANDUM
TO: Municipal Attorneys, Managers and Clerks
FROM: Geoff Wilson, General Counsel
SUBJECT: Enclosed Memoranda Regarding HB 01-1359
DATE: June 18, 2001
During the General Assembly's consideration of HB 01-1359, and since the bill's enactment, we
have received a large number of inquiries from officials in municipalities across Colorado
concerning this legislation. The enclosed memoranda summarize executive session procedures
with the new HB 01-1359 requirements included, and provide some overview and commentary on
the Act, based upon its major elements.
I hope you will find the enclosed information useful. While the League did not advocate or support
this legislation, we were nonetheless involved in the legislative discussion of the bill and were able
to secure a number of amendments. Should you have any questions concerning HB 01-1359 or
these memoranda, please give me a call at the League.
cc: CIVIL Executive Board
CIVIL Municipal Caucus
FAGEOMOpen Mtgs Open Records\1359 cover memo to 2001 leg memo.wpd
CML
'NUUi:+•~iu •~Iit llttll~a~~~•+nn~
1144 Sherman Street • Denver, Colorado 80203-2207 • Phone (303)831-6411, Fax (303)860-8175
MEMORANDUM
TO: Interested Persons
FROM: Geoff Wilson, General Counsel
SUBJECT: Synopsis of Executive Session Procedures After Enactment of HB 01-1359
DATE: June 18, 2001
HB 01-1359 made several amendments to the Colorado Open Meetings Law that affect executive session
procedures. This memo briefly summarizes those changes, which become effective August 8, 2001, and presents
them in the context of current executive session requirements. However, nothing in this memo should be
considered a substitute for advice from your own municipal attorney concerning the matters described herein.
I. In the open meeting, before going into executive session
(a) Announce what the "topic for discussion" will be in the executive session (current law; 24-6-402(4),
C.R.S.).
(b) Announce the citation to the provision or provisions of 24-6-402(4), C.R.S., (paragraphs (a) - (h))
that authorize the session (NEW: Id.).
(c) Identify in the announcement the "particular matter to be discussed in as much detail as possible
without compromising the purpose for which the executive session is authorized." (NEW: Id.).
(d) An affirmative vote of two-thirds of the quorum present, following the above described
announcements, is required before going into executive session. (current law: Id.)
(e) If the session is for consideration of a "personnel matter," the law now provides expressly that such
matters do not include discussion of members of a local public body, including any elected official,
nor the appointment of any person to fill a vacancy on such body, including in an elected position.
Discussion of personnel policies that does not require discussion of matters personal to a particular
employee is also expressly not a "personnel matter." (NEW: 24-6-402(4)(f)(II), C.R.S.)
II. Once the body is in executive session
(a) The executive session shall be at a regular or special meeting, and for the "sole purpose" of
considering any of the topics for which an executive session is allowed pursuant to 24-6-402(4)(a)-
(h), C.R.S. (current law: 24-6-402(4), C.R.S.).
(b) "No adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, rule or regulation," nor any "formal
action" may occur in the executive session (current law, Id.; but see exception described in III(a),
below).
(c) Make a "record" of the "actual contents" of the discussion in the executive session, using the "same
manner and media" as are used to record minutes of open meetings (i.e., written minutes or an
electronic record are acceptable). Regardless of the way in which minutes are recorded in open
meetings, however, the law permits "any form of electronic recording" of the executive session to
satisfy the statute. (NEW: 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(A), C.R.S.)
(d) The executive session record must also contain a citation to the provision or provisions of 24-6-
402(4), C.R.S., that authorize the executive session. (NEW: Id.)
(e) If written minutes are made of the executive session, these minutes must include a signed statement
by the chair of the executive session that the record "substantially reflects the substance" of the
discussions during the executive session (the law states that the requirement that the record reflect
the "actual contents" of the discussion does not mean that a verbatim transcript of the discussion is
required). Presumably, this statement could be signed after the written minutes are reviewed,
amended and approved, which may occur in a subsequent executive session (see below). (NEW: Id.)
(f) If in the opinion of the public body's attorney, who is present at the executive session, "all or a
portion" of the discussion constitutes attorney-client privileged communications:
(i) No record need be kept of this part of the discussion.
(ii) If an electronic record is being made, the attorney for the body must state on the record that,
as to the unrecorded portions of the executive session, no record was kept because, in his or
her opinion, such discussion constituted privileged attorney-client communication.
(iii) If written minutes of the executive session are kept, the minutes "shall contain a signed
statement from the attorney attesting that the unrecorded portion of the executive session
constituted, in the attorney's opinion, privileged attorney-client communications. The
minutes must also include a signed statement from the chair of the executive session attesting
that the discussion in the unrecorded portion of the session was confined to the topic or topics
for which the executive session is authorized pursuant to the Open Meetings Law.
(NEW: 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(B), C.R.S.)
III. After the executive session
(a) If written minutes were utilized, the law now makes an exception to the prohibition on formal actions
in executive sessions, for the narrow purpose of reviewing, amending, and approving executive
session minutes (NEW: 24-6-402(4), C.R.S.).
(b) The public entity must retain the record for at least ninety days following the executive session
(NEW: 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(E), C.R.S.), after which it may be destroyed pursuant to the
municipality's records management policy (see 24-80-101-112, C.R.S.).
(c) The 2001 amendments establish a procedure through which a judge may privately review the
executive session record to see whether the body's discussions strayed substantially off topic or
whether the body took prohibited formal actions in its executive session (NEW: 24-72-204(5.5),
C.R.S.). However, the executive session record is not available directly to the public for its review
and is not subject to discovery in any administrative or judicial proceeding (NEW: 24-6-
402(2)(d.5)(II)(D), C.R.S.).
rc
CML
I
LKIIlUGI;UUIYi=I V•I A i7I t111J
1144 Sherman Street • Denver, Colorado 80203-2207 • Phone (303)831-6411, Fax (303)860-8175
MEMORANDUM
TO: Interested Persons
FROM: Geoff Wilson, General Counsel
SUBJECT: Overview of HB 01-1359, Requiring an Executive Session Record and Making Other
Changes to the Open Meetings Law and Open Records Act
DATE: June 18, 2001
Introduction
BB 01-1359 was advocated during the 2001 session of the Colorado General Assembly primarily by the
Colorado Press Association. The centerpiece of the legislation was its requirement for preparation of an
executive session "record," for purposes of "policing" compliance by state and local public bodies with
requirements in the Open Meetings Law that such bodies confine their executive sessions to deliberations (as
opposed to decision making) on those topics permitted in the law.
The bill was sponsored in the House by Rep. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, and cosponsored by House
Minority Leader Dan Grossman, D-Denver. In the Senate, the bill was sponsored by Senate President Stan
Matsunaka, D-Loveland, and cosponsored by the Senate Minority Leader Sen. John Andrews, R-Centennial.
From the outset, this legislation enjoyed broad, bipartisan support in the General Assembly; it was generally
agreed among local government representatives that some form of the bill was very likely to pass (the League
took a neutral position on HB 01-1359 because the League's Executive Board recognized that outright
opposition to the bill would cast municipal governments as enemies of "openness in government" and could
substantially limit our ability to secure amendments to the legislation). Consequently, local government
representatives focused their efforts on attempting to amend HB 01-1359 to make it as workable as possible
for local government. While we were successful in obtaining a number of amendments to the bill, we did not
get everything we wanted, nor were all issues that were raised addressed. The bill passed the House on a vote
of 55-9 and passed the Senate unanimously, 35-0.
HB 01-1359 will take effect August 8, 2001. This memo is intended to acquaint you with this new statute
and provide you with some background and commentary concerning its provisions, subject to the caveat that
nothing in this memo should be considered a substitute for advice from your own municipal attorney
concerning the interpretation and application ofHB 01-1359. The focus will be on those portions ofHB 01-
1359 that affect local governments (thus, provisions of the bill amending sections of the Open Meetings Law
pertaining to "state public bodies" are not discussed; rather, only those sections concerning "local public
bodies" are covered).
1. Requiring that a "record" be made of discussions in executive session
Background
The proponents of HB 01-1359 explained that this portion of the bill was intended to create a mechanism to
"police" compliance with existing Open Meetings Law requirements that executive session discussions be
limited to topics presently set forth in the law and that formal action not occur in the executive session (see:
24-6-402(4), C.R.S.). The proponents emphasized that it was not their intention to limit the discretion of
public bodies to utilize executive sessions or the purposes for which executive sessions are permitted under
current law (see, however, section VII of this memo, below).
The executive session recordation requirement involved amendments to both the Open Meetings Law and the
Open Records Act. The Open Meetings Law was amended to require that the record be kept, while the Open
Records Act was amended to provide a procedure for in camera review (that is, private review by a judge)
of the record.
(a) The recordation requirement (24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(A), C.R.S.)
The intention here was to permit the local public body to use the same manner of recordation in executive
sessions that it uses in its open meetings. Thus, electronic recording of executive sessions would not be
required in jurisdictions that prepare written minutes of their open meetings (even if these written minutes
are derived from a tape recording made in the course of preparing the minutes) but would be required in
jurisdictions that utilize an electronic recording as the actual minutes of their open meeting. However, a
number of jurisdictions that utilize written open session minutes expressed concern about being required to
prepare written executive session minutes; consequently, this section was amended to provide that "any form
of electronic recording" of an executive session will suffice. The allowance of "any form" of recording was
also intended to provide flexibility to jurisdictions in which open meetings are recorded using electronic
equipment that is not available in the room where executive sessions are convened.
Several of our members have asked whether this section of HB 01-1359 could be read to require jurisdictions
that videotape or cable broadcast their open meetings to do the same with executive sessions. We have said
"no," as these are not the "manner and media" by which minutes of the open meeting are prepared.
The requirement that the record reflect the "actual contents" of the discussion in the executive session raised
concerns that, in situations where written minutes are being used, this could be construed to require that an
expensive verbatim transcript of the executive session be prepared - which would seriously diminish the
utility of written minutes as an "option" to electronic recording. This led to addition of the language
providing expressly that a verbatim tran,,"yt is not required. Any written minutes must instead include a
signed statement by the chair of the meeting that the minutes "substantially reflect the substance" of the
discussion in the executive session; this will apparently satisfy the requirement that such minutes reflect the
actual contents of the executive session discussion.
(b) Attorney-client privileged communications - exception to the recordation requirement (24-6-
402(2)(d.5)(II)(B), C.R.S.).
This part of the bill anticipates that "all or a portion of the discussion" in an executive session may constitute
attomey/client privileged communication and provides that whenever, in the opinion of the local public
body's attorney, discussion is of this nature, no record need be kept of this portion of the executive session.
The attorney must state his or her opinion in this regard on the tape, if electronic recording is being utilized.
If written minutes are being prepared, the minutes roust include a signed statement by the attorney that the
portion of the session not recorded was privileged, as well as a statement by the chairperson that the
unrecorded portion of the session stayed on the topic for which the executive session was called.
2
I
(c) Executive session record - process for in camera review (primarily 24-72-204(5.5), C.R.S. [Open
Records Act]; see also: 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(C), C.R.S. [Open Meetings Law]).
While the Open Meetings Law amendments provide generally that, following in camera review of the
executive session record, the judge may declare open that portion of the record reflecting either substantial
"off-topic" discussion or impermissible decision making, the process for this in camera review is more fully
set forth in the Open Records Act amendments.
A major local government focus was assuring that the in camera review process is not freely invoked by those
in our communities who view the mere occurrence of an executive session as somehow "proving" that
something improper is occurring. This is why it is not sufficient for the person requesting in camera review
to simply recite his or her own personal suspicion; an applicant must instead show "grounds sufficient to
support a reasonable belief' that the body got substantially "off-topic" or made an improper decision in the
executive session. If an applicant fails to satisfy this objective "reasonable person" standard, the court is
required to deny the application. Furthermore, if the application is found to be frivolous, groundless or
vexatious, the court is required to award attorneys fees and costs to the government.
Note that the applicant must initially demonstrate a reasonable belief that the public body engaged in
"substantial" discussion that is off a topic for which an executive session is allowed, in order to trigger an in
camera review. If an in camera review does occur, the judge must then find that "substantial" discussion that
was off-topic did indeed occur, before that portion of the executive session record will be made open for
public inspection. Local governments had been concerned that too stringent a standard could result in in
camera review, disclosure and potential award of attorneys fees in cases where "off-topic" discussion was
incidental or non-substantial. Passing comments concerning how the Broncos did yesterday or the quality
of donuts provided at the meeting are not the evil that the statute was designed to prevent. Addition of the
modifier "substantial" was intended to assure that the in camera review process is not utilized to publicize
such hyper-technical "violations" of the Open Meetings Law.
Note that the in camera review will focus on whether the body engaged in substantial discussion of "any
matters not enumerated in § 24-6-402 (4)." (emphasis added) While apparently the in camera review
should not focus on whether the body kept its discussion to the particular topic announced in the open
meeting prior to the executive session (pursuant to 24-6-402(4), C.R.S.; see (II), below), but instead on
whether the body confined its discussion to some topic on the Open Meetings Law list of permitted topics,
any issue in this regard would be avoided by thoroughly listing all of the topics to be discussed, as well as the
authorizing statutory sections, in the open meeting announcement of the executive session.
(d) Executive session record - retention requirement (24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(E), C.R.S.)
The bill requires that the record be retained for at least ninety days following the date of the executive session.
After that time, the record may be destroyed pursuant to the jurisdiction's records destruction policy (See: 24-
80-101-112, C.R.S.).
The practical effect of this provision, in jurisdictions whose records destruction policy permits such
destruction, is to require that requests for in camera review be brought within the ninety days following the
executive session.
Note that this records retention requirement is made part of the Open Meetings Law.
Local government interests successfully sought to avoid inclusion in BB 01-1359 of any additional specific
requirements regarding how local governments would manage and safeguard their executive session records.
Our preference was to leave this to the local governments themselves.
(e) Executive session record - not available for public inspection or discovery (24-6-402(2)(d.5)(H)(D),
C.R.S.).
This section is designed to prevent access to the executive session record for any purpose other than the in
camera review provided for in the Act, without the consent of the local public body. Specifically mentioned
in the course of discussions concerning this section of the bill (for which local government interests pushed
hard) was avoiding release of executive session records through discovery in litigation, even though such
records are not public under the Open Records Act, as occurred in Martinelli v. District Court, 612 P2d 1083
(Colo. 1980).
(f) Written executive session minutes - authorization for approval and amendment in executive session
(24-6-402(4), C.R.S.).
Local government representatives explained that, for those jurisdictions utilizing written minutes, the
prohibition on "formal action" in executive session would result in executive session minutes having to be
amended and approved at a subsequent open meeting, potentially frustrating the purpose of the executive
session (this issue is avoided, of course, in jurisdictions using electronic recording). Thus, this amendment
creates a narrow exception to the "final action" prohibition, in order to permit review, amendment and
approval of executive session minutes in an executive session. Presumably, the chairperson of the executive
session would sign his or her statement that the minutes "substantially reflect the substance of the discussions"
(see (a) above; 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(H)(A), C.R.S.) following this final review and approval of the session
minutes.
II. Provision affecting announcement of the topic of executive session in open meeting before executive
session is convened, (24-6-402(4), C.R.S.).
This amendment adds a requirement that the specific statutory provision authorizing the executive session
be part of the announcement in the open meeting prior to the executive session (existing law requires that the
"topic" of the session be announced). Although stated in the singular, it was never suggested that an executive
session could not address a number of topics for which such sessions are authorized by the Open Meetings
Law (i.e., a session could, for example, concern a personnel matter, acquisition of real js.,,erty, and receipt
of advice from counsel on specific legal questions).
The proponents ofHB 01-1359 originally soughtto require specific identification ofthe topic to be discussed,
arguing that the public really is given little idea of the purpose of an executive session when the topic is
announced simply as a "personnel matter" or "acquisition of real property," for example. Local government
representatives responded that, in many cases this additional specificity, such as identifying the individual
who is the subject of an executive session on a "personnel matter" or the particular piece of property that the
government is considering acquiring [these examples were actually discussed in negotiations], would defeat
the public policy purpose for which the executive session is allowed in the first place.
4
The requirement that the body identify the "particular matter to be discussed in as much detail as possible
without compromising the purpose for which the executive session is authorized" is an attempt to require
additional information in the announcement of an executive session, while leaving the government sufficient
discretion to assure that the session serves its purpose. For example, a municipality would not have to
announce that an executive session is for the purpose of discussing acquisition of the "Mockingbird property"
for open space purposes, because such an announcement would likely result in the price of the property being
suddenly increased, to the detriment of local taxpayers. On the other hand, an announcement that the
executive session is to discuss acquisition ofproperty "for open space purposes" may be advisable, unless the
Mockingbird property is the only local property available for acquisition for open space purposes, in which
case an announcement that the session is simply for discussion of "acquisition of real property," would
suffice.
These amendments supplement the statute that has for some time required that the "topic" of an executive
session be first announced in the open portion of the meeting. Although the "in as much detail as possible"
language is undeniably vague, it is unclear, just as it has been for years with respect to the requirement for
announcement of the "topic," what the consequence of a violation might be, other than perhaps issuance of
injunctions against future such violations, pursuant to 24-6-402(9), C.R.S.
III. Open Records Act: Changes to attorneys fees provisions (24-72-204(5), C.R.S.)
Prior to BB 01-1359, the Open Records Act provided that the custodian ofpublic records could be personally
liable for attorneys fees and costs of the applicant, if the custodian was found to have been arbitrary or
capricious in denying access to a public record. In the BB 01-1359 discussions, the local government position
was that this provision provided sufficient incentive for custodians to be very careful when denying access
to records. The proponents of the bill argued for award of attorneys fees and costs to a prevailing applicant
in all cases, saying such applicants were serving .the public interest and pointing to a long-standing
comparable provision in the Open Meetings Law (see: 24-6-402(9), C.R.S.). Local government
representatives pointed out that the Open Records Act is a much more complex statute, which requires non-
disclosure of certain records, and is subject to various reasonable interpretations; local taxpayers should not
have to foot the bill if the custodian, in good faith, makes a reasonable decision to deny access with which
a judge subsequently disagrees.
As enacted, the bill provides for award of reasonable attorneys fees and court costs to a prevailing applicant.
If the court upholds denial of access to the record and finds the application frivolous, groundless or vexatious,
the court shall award fees and costs to the government. The potential personal liability of the custodian is
repealed, however.
This section of the bill also contains language which provides that attorneys fees and costs shall not be
allowed to a person who has filed a lawsuit against a jurisdiction and then seeks access to records pursuant
to the Act even though such records are discoverable under the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. This
language was of particular interest to Rep. Shawn Mitchell, the House sponsor of HB 01-1359, who, as a
private attorney, experienced the gambit addressed in this amendment while representing a local public entity.
IV. Open Records Act: Written notice of intent to sue required (24-72-204(5), C.R.S.)
d In response to local government concerns that applicants might start running up attorneys fees and costs
without the government having a sufficient opportunity to review its custodian's denial of access to a record,
language was added to the bill requiring three business days written notice to the government before the
5
applicant may go to court. The purpose of this provision is to permit time for further consultation between
the custodian and the local government's attorney concerning whether the records should be released.
V. Open Records Act: Custodian may seek direction from court as to whether record must be released
(24-72-204(6), C.R.S.)
In recognition of the fact that the Open Records Act is amendable to varying reasonable interpretations, the
General Assembly sought to provide a process that would enable a government to seek court direction and
avoid paying attorneys fees to an applicant. The utility of the language in this section providing for avoidance
of attorneys fee awards under the Open Records Act is questionable, however, because the Act imposes fee
and cost liability on the government (24-72-204(5), C.R.S.) in any action brought by an applicant, whereas
the proceeding authorized by this new provision is initiated by the custodian. Put otherwise, the new language
apparently insulates local governments from awards of fees and costs to which they are not subject in the first
place.
Nonetheless, this new provision could be useful for jurisdictions that wish to receive judicial direction on an
open records question in a proceeding to which the attorneys fee award provisions of the Act do not apply.
Such an action could be initiated at any time, including after an "intent to sue" notice has been received by
the jurisdiction. In the latter case, it maybe possible to secure a stay in proceedings brought by the applicant
(in which the government would have fee and cost exposure) while a determination as to whether the records
in question ought to-be released is made in the proceeding brought pursuant to this provision.
The language creating this new procedure was grafted into the subsection of the Open Records Act that has
for years permitted a custodian to ask a court for authority to restrict release of an otherwise public record on
the grounds that such release would do "substantial injury to the public interest." This prerogative of the
custodian was recently addressed in Bodelson v Denver Publishing Co., 5 P3.d 373 (Colo. App. 2000).
VI. Open Records Act: Changes to provisions concerning materials submitted by applicants for
"executive positions" - when applicants for certain such positions become "finalists" (24-72-
204(3)(a)(XI)(A), C.R.S.).
In 1994, the General Assembly added to the Open Records Act provisions concerning how materials
submitted by applicants for executive positions would be handled (1994 Colo. Laws 936, Ch. 168). Records
submitted by "finalists," defined as anyone who was given an interview or was under consideration twenty-
one days prior to the appointment (whichever carne first) were public; records submitted by non-finalists were
also public, unless the applicant requested confidentiality, in writing and at the time of initial application.
Subsequently, the Open Meetings Law was amended to require that a list of "finalists" (as defined above)
for "chief executive officer" positions be made public no later than fourteen days prior to the appointment
(1996 Colo. Laws 691, Ch. 147; 24-6-402(3.5), C.R.S.).
The definition of "finalist "resulted in this provision making it extremely difficult to attract quality applicants
for executive positions in local government in Colorado. Any currently employed applicant for, say, a
superintendent or city manager position, would have his or her application made public as soon as even a
screening interview was conducted. Consequently, many potential applicants simply would not apply in
Colorado, rather than jeopardize their current employment situation.
The bill retains the current law's broad definition of "executive position" (see: 24-72-202(1.3), C.R.S., which
includes any non-elective employment that is not part of a "classified" or "civil-service" system), but
eliminates the requirement that non-finalists for such positions request confidentiality in writing in order to
6
protect their application materials from release. Thus, with enactment of HB 01-1359, application materials
for non-finalists in any position that fits within the broad definition of "executive position" are not subject
to release.
The bill also repeals the provisions that caused an applicant to be classified as a "finalist" if he or she was
selected for an interview or was under consideration twenty-one days prior to the appointment. A "finalist"
is now limited to those applicants for "the chief executive officer position of a state agency, institution, or
political subdivision or agency thereof' who are in the group made public as finalists pursuant to the Open
Meetings Law fourteen days prior to appointment. Reference in the bill to "the chief executive officer"
utilizes language presently in the Open Meetings Law, and is intended to significantly narrow the reach of
this provision and thus the universe of "finalists" whose application materials would become public.
VII. Executive Sessions on "Personnel Matters" - Change in Definition of "Personnel Matters" (24-6-
402(4)(f)(H), C.R.S.).
This amendment modifies the portion of the Open Meetings Law that permits executive session discussion
of "personnel matters." The amendment clarifies that "personnel matters" shall not include discussion
concerning any member of a local public body, an elected official or the appointment of a person to fill a
vacancy on a local public body or in an elected office. Further, this language will not permit executive
sessions for discussion of personnel policies that do not require discussion of particular Q...ployees. This
language was inserted in the bill in response to allegations that various public bodies had invoked the
"personnel matters" basis for holding an executive session in connection with filling vacancies occasioned
by resignation of elected officials from such boards. These amendments did not cause much concern among
the various local government attorneys who were consulted, because the matters addressed in the amendments
had not previously been considered "personnel matters" anyway.
FAGEOFF\Open Mtgs Open RecordsUO0[legislation overview.wpd 7
COLLINS COCKREL & COLE
PAUL R. COCKREL A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION TELEPHONE
303-986-1551
JAMES P. COLLINS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800-3545941
ROBERT G. COLE 390 UNION BOULEVARD, SUITE 400
PAUL C. RUFIEN DENVER, COLORADO 80228-1556 TELEFAX
303-986-1755
TIMOTHY J. FLYNN
E-MAIL
JCOLLINS@CCAN DCPC.COM
HEID{ A. EVAN D. E ANDERSON MEMORANDUM
t May 11, 2001
TO: All Local Government Clients
FROM: James P. Collins
RE: Change in Executive Session Law
On May 8 the Legislature passed the revision to the Open Meetings Law
regarding executive sessions. The Governor is expected to sign the Bill, and the
effective date will then be August 7, 2001. As regards "local public bodies" the
significant provisions of the changes are:
1. Discussions that occur in executive session shall be recorded in the same
manner and media that the local public body uses to record the minutes of
open meetings. Thus, if you do not make a tape recording of open meetings,
you do not need to make a tape recording of the executive sessions; but you
do at least need to keep minutes.
2. The minutes of an executive session shall reflect the specific citation to that
portion of the Open Meetings Law that allows the board to meet in executive
session. For example, one might cite the following:
a. §24-6-402(4)(a), C.R.S., "The executive session concerned the
purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or
other property interest".
b. §24-6-402(4)(b), C.R.S., "Conferences with an attorney for the
public entity for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific
legal questions".
No JeffeOunemoskxec session 050901
Exec session 051001.doc
COLLINS COCKREL & COLE
All Local Government Clients
MAY 11, 2001
PAGE 2
c. §24-6-402(4)(c), C.R.S., "Matters required to be kept confidential by
Federal or State law, or rules and regulations" (must cite the specific
statute or rule).
d. §24-6-402(4)(d), C.R.S., "Specialized details of security
arrangements or investigations".
e. §24-6-402(4)(e), C.R.S., "Determining portions relative to matters
that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for
negotiations; and instructing negotiators".
f. §24-6-402(4)(f), C.R.S., "Personnel matters except if the employee
who is the subject of the executive session has requested an open
meeting, or if the personnel matter involves more than one
employee, all of the employees must request an open meeting".
g. §24-6-402(4)(g), C.R.S., "Consideration of any documents
protected by the mandatory nondisclosure provisions of the "Public
Records Act"".
3. When minutes are taken and written, they must have affixed thereto a signed
statement from the chairman of the executive session attesting that the
minutes substantially reflect the substance of the discussion during the
executive session.
4. No record or minutes need to be kept of any part of an executive session that
constitutes a privileged attorney-client communication so long as the
attorney for the public body provides a signed statement by the attorney in
any written minutes or a verbal statement in any electronic record that the
unrecorded discussion was attorney-client privileged.
5. If a person brings an action in District Court seeking access to the minutes of
the executive session, then the Court will conduct an "in camera" review of
the minutes of the executive session. This means the Court will privately
review the minutes and reach a conclusion.
6. If the Court finds that the local public body engaged in substantial
discussion of any matters not authorized by the Executive Session Law, or
COLLINS COCKREL & COLE
All Local Government Clients
MAY 11, 2001
PAGE 3
that the body adopted a proposed policy, position, resolution, rule,
regulation, or formal action in the executive session, then the portion of the
minutes of the executive session that reflect the substantial discussion of
matters not authorized shall be open to public inspection.
7. The minutes of an executive session shall be retained for at least 90 days
after the date of the executive session. No portion of the minutes shall be
open to the public or subject to discovery in any administrative or judicial
proceeding, except with the local public body's consent.
There were also amendments to the Public Records Act, partly to implement
portions of the above. These amendments include the following:
A. There was some more protection given to applicants for the position of
chief executive officer of a political subdivision, in which his or her
materials are kept confidential unless he or she is a member of the "final
group of applicants".
B. If the custodian denies access to a public record (including, but not
limited to, minutes of executive session), then the person who is denied
inspection of the record must file a written notice with the custodian who
denied the right to inspect the record informing the custodian that the
person intends to file an application with the District Court. This must be
done at least 3 business days prior to filing an application with the Court,
so the local public body does have one more chance to review the
decision to deny the record.
C. If the application was frivolous, vexatious, or groundless, the Court can
award court costs and attorney's fees to the local public body. If the
Court finds the denial of the right of inspection was improper, then it
shall award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing
applicant in an amount determined by the Court (unless those records
were discoverable pursuant to the rules of civil procedure and some
litigation).
COLLINS COCKREL & COLE
All Local Government Clients
MAY 11, 2001
PAGE 4
As a final note, we remind you of the importance of establishing the official
custodian of your public records. This should be documented so that there is no
confusion either within your organization or by the public seeking some record.
Please let us know of any questions.
JPC\dvo
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 7, 2001
7:00 P.M.
TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied
upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item.
1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. (5 min.)
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of July 10 and 17, 2001 minutes (5 min.)
2"d reading, Ordinance #15, Series of 2001, Vail Village Inn SDD
Amendment. (5 min.)
3. ITEMITOPIC: Emergency Ordinance #18, an ordinance regarding
weed management control as it pertains to animal safety. (5 min.)
4.
George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2001, an
ordinance amending the Vail Town Code, title 12, chapters 2, 6, 14 &
16, section 12-2-2 definitions, section 12-14-12 home occupations,
section 12-16-7 conditional use specific criteria and standards,
section 12-6a-3, section 12-6b-3, section 12-6c-3, section 12-6d-3,
section 12-6e-3, section 12-6f-3, section 12-6g-3, section 12-6h-3,
section 12-7d-2, section 12-7e-4, section 12-7f-4, section 12-7i-5,
section 12-9c-3 and section 12-8d-3 of the Town of Vail Zoning
Regulations to allow for home child day care facilities to be operated
as home occupations, subject to the issuance of a conditional use
permit, in eight residential zone districts and to allow child day care
centers to be operated in four commercial and business zone districts,
one special and miscellaneous zone district and one open space and
recreation zone district, subject to the issuance of a conditional use
permit, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (20 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Approve, approve with conditions, or deny Ordinance No.17, Series
of 2001, on first reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
On July 9, 2001, the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental
Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
proposed text amendments to the Vail Town Council. A copy of the
staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission,
dated July 9, 2001, and the approved meeting minutes have been
attached for reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail
Town Council approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2001, on first
reading.
5. Resolution #3, Series of 2001, Reimbursement Resolution. (5 min.)
Steve Thompson
6. ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion on Vail Center Next Step (30 min.)
Russ Forrest
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On July 24th, Town Council
directed staff to develop a preferred Alternative "C" and to pursue a
2002 election.
7. Town Manager's Report. (5 min.)
Bob McLaurin
8. Adjournment (8:20 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, 8/14101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/21/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
'THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/21/01, 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.
i5'GCat.+~
BRIAN WAGNER
292 East Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
970.476-2434
Tuesday, July 27, 2001
Vail Town Council
Re: Parking Structure Crime
For the second time in less than three years my automobile was vandalized in the Vail Village Parking
Structure.
Talking to other visitors and residents, it became apparent that this is not a unique occurrence. In fact,
many visitors and residents do not feel personally safe in the Parking Structure and many are concerned
about the safety of their vehicles.
I spoke to a number of police officers and found that they are also concerned about safety in the Parking
Structure. The officers I spoke to all believed that video cameras in the Parking Structure would increase
safety and would make their jobs much easier. The Police Department was eager to make their records
available to me in hopes that I would bring the concern to the attention of the Town Council.
The Police Department records tell only half the problems with safety:
Not all Property Loss and Offenses are reported to the Police.
Property Losses are probably more than twice than the records show.
Each $1.00 is a loss whose dollar amount was not reported.
Many of the Losses and Offenses have happened to visitors to our town.
These are visitors who have had their vacation ruined.
These are visitors who will probable not return to Vail.
These are visitors who will no have nice thing to tell their friends about Vail.
Losses are only part of the cost of the lack of safety in the Parking Structure
The expense for the Vail Police Department is considerable.
Revenue lost from those guests who do not feel safe in our Parking Structure.
Around the world, cities have placed video cameras in parking structures and subways. People have
gotten used to them being everywhere and they make them feel safe. The manufactures of the systems
say that they pay for themselves in just a few years.
I would like to see the Town Council make placing video cameras in the Parking Structures a priority and
have them installed as soon as possible.
Vail Police Department Records:
Property Loss Vail Village Parking Structure 2001: $23,194.00
Property Loss Vail Village Parking Structure 2000: $19,429.78
Property Loss Lionshead Parking Structure 2001: $2,279
Property Loss Lionshead Parking Structure 2000: $1,750
Offenses Vail Village Parking Structure 2001: 144
Offenses Vail Village Parking Structure 2000: 240
Offenses Lionshead Parking Structure 2001: 45
Offenses Lionshead Parking Structure 2000: 51
Sincerely
Brian Wagner
structurecrime010727.doc
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, August 1, 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
Bill Pierce
Hans Woldrich
Andy Blumetti
Charles Acevedo
SITE VISITS 2:00 pm
1. Sodergren residence - 2449 Arosa Drive
2. Balas residence - 5047 B Ute Lane
3. Pinos del Norte - 600 Vail Valley Drive
4. Vail Trails Chalet Condos - 413 E Gore Creek Drive
5. Edelweiss Condos - 103 Willow Place
6. Summers Lodge condos - 123 Willow Place
7. Lazier Planter - 600 W. Lionshead Circle
8. Marriott - 714 W. Lionshead Circle
Driver: Allison
PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm
1. Joint worksession with PEC - Discussion of alternative building materials. Bill
NO VOTE
2. Vail Trails Chalet Condos - Final review of a new re-roof. Bill
413 E. Gore Creek Drive/Lots 1-15, Block 4, Vail Village 1s' Filing
Applicant: Vail Trails Chalet Condo. Assoc., represented by Master Sealers, Inc.
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charlie Ascevedo VOTE: 5-0
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
1. That the roof material be fire-retardant cedar shakes.
3. Summers Lodge Condos - Final review of a proposed re-roof. Bill
123 Willow Place/Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1s' Filing.
Applicant: Summers Lodge Condo. Assoc., represented by Rick Halterman
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 4-1 (Acevedo opposed)
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
TOWN OF VAIL
1. That the roof materials be either fire-retardant cedar shakes or a two-tone metal
shingle (per the submitted sample) with portions of the building painted to match
the color of the metal roofing material.
4. Scalise residence - Final review of proposed roofing material. Allison
2567 Arosa Drive/Lot 9, Block B, Vail das Schone 1St Filing.
Applicant: Dennis Scalise
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Andy Blumetti VOTE: 5-0
DENIED
Finding: That it does not comply to the Design Guidelines, as it is an imitation product.
5. Edelweiss Condos - Final review of proposed re-roof. Bill
103 Willow Place/Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing
Applicant: Edelweiss Condo. Assoc., represented by Rick Halterman
MOTION: Andy Blumetti SECOND: Charlie Ascevedo VOTE: 3-2
(Pierce & Woldrich opposed)
APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
1. That the lower entry roof material be cedar shakes.
2. That the upper roof material be a dark colored built-up roof or a dark colored metal
roof. Any proposed metal roof must be reviewed by the Design Review Board.
6. Sodergren residence - Final review of a proposed repaint. George
2449 Arosa Drive/Lot 13, Block C, Vail das Schone 1St Filing.
Applicant: Brian Sodergren
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 5-0
CONSENT APPROVED
7. Balas residence - Final review of proposed deck enclosure and garage addition. Bill
5047 B Ute Lane/Lot 33, Vail Meadows 1St Filing.
Applicant: Robert Balas, represented by New/West/Architecture
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Hans Woldrich VOTE: 5-0
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 15, 2001
8. Lazier Lionshead Arcade Bldg - Final review of removal of proposed existing Brent
landscaping planter.
600 W. Lionshead Circle / Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 1st Filing.
Applicant: Robert T. Lazier
MOTION: Charles Acevedo SECOND: Andy Blumetti VOTE: 4-0 (Pierce recused)
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 15, 2001
9. Pinos del Norte - Final review of proposed residential addition. Brent
600 Vail Valley Drive / Pinos del Norte Subdivision.
Applicant: First Colorado Investment Trust
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charles Acevedo VOTE: 5-0
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 15, 2001
2
10. Meir residence - Final review of a proposed repaint. Bill
4267 Nugget Lane/Lot 9, Bighorn Estates.
Applicant: Dennis & Linda Meir, represented by Duane Piper
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Andy Blumetti VOTE: 5-0
TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 15, 2001
11. Marriott Redevelopment - Final review of a proposed change to exterior building George
materials.
714 West Lionshead Circle/Lots 4&7, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 3rd & Lots C&D,
Morcus Subdivision.
Applicant: HMC Acquistion Properties
MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Charles Acevedo VOTE: 3-0
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
1. That the applicant uses asphalt Grand Manor Colonial slate shingle on the main
roof and pre-patinaed random copper shingles on the two turrets.
12. Arts in Public Places Strategic Plan - Review. Ann/George
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
NO VOTE
Staff Aoorovals
Millrace - Exterior stonework and repaint. Ann
1320 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Development Area B.
Applicant: Millrace Condominium Association
Dore' residence - Landscape modifications including retaining wall & water feature. Brent
100 Vail Road/Lot 35, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: William Dore'
Billingsley residence - Demo, regrade and revegetate site. Ann
1518 Spring Hill Lane/Lot 15, Block 3, Vail Valley 1st Filing.
Applicant: Lucy Billingsley
Vail Run Resort - Repair pool fence, same for same. Judy
1000 Lions Ridge Loop/Lot C-11, Lion's Ridge 1st Filing.
Applicant: Vail Run Resort Community Association
Fleischer residence - Re-roof, same for same. Judy
1765 Gore Creek Drive/Lot 7, Vail Village West Filing 2.
Applicant: Chad Fleischer
Logan residence Gallery - Temporary site development sign. Ann
814 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch.
Applicant: Logan Family Trust
Brandt residence - Deck extension. Bill
1148 Sandstone Drive/Lot A-7, Block 10, Casolar Vail.
Applicant: Scott & Claudine Brandt
3
Ferry residence - 250 sq. ft. addition. Bill
1390 Westhaven Drive #6/Lot 6, The Cascades on Gore Creek.
Applicant: Terrance & Gail Ferry
Meir residence - Interior conversion (530 sq. ft.) Bill
4269 Nugget Lane/Lot 9, Bighorn Estates.
Applicant: Linda & Dennis Meir
Mountain Dog Biscuits & Gifts - Double door addition. Brent
100 E Meadow Drive #33/Vail Village Inn Plaza Condos.
Applicant: Wendy Losasso
Mountain Dog Biscuits & Gifts - Wall and hanging signs. Brent
100 E Meadow Drive #33/Vail Village Inn Plaza Condos.
Applicant: Wendy Losasso
Wren House - Replace windows/siding. Allison
5024 Main Gore Drive #10/Lot 7, Block 3, Gore Creek Subdivision.
Applicant: Halstead & Associates
Fritschel residence - Addition of 3 skylights & change utility room into bathroom. Bill
2975 Manns Ranch Road/Lots 5&6, Block 1, Vail Village 13th Filing.
Applicant: Donald Fritschel
Miller residence - Landscape improvements. Brent
1415 Westhaven Drive/Lot 52, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Gary & Eileen Miller
Golden Peak Lodge - New joint directory sign. Ann
458 Vail Valley Drive/Golden Peak Condominiums.
Applicant: The Vail Corporation
Hochtl residence - Tree removal. Russ
890 Red Sandstone Circle/Lot 5, Block 3, Vail Village 9th Filing.
Applicant: Christie & Karl Hochtl
Caples residence - New stairway, dormers, residing and garage apron expansion. Allison
2537 Arosa Drive/Lot 6, Block E, Vail das Schone Filing 1.
Applicant: Richard F. Caples
Silver Moose - Hanging sign. Ann
288 Bridge Street/Lot D, Block 5A, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Todd Keleske
Remax - Hanging sign. Ann
356 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot D, Block 5A, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Remax Vail, Inc.
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
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, July 10, 2001
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem
Kevin Foley
Diana Donovan
Chuck Ogilby
Rod Slifer
ABSENT: Greg Moffet
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager
Allen Christensen, Acting Town Attorney
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Mayor Kurz announced that
under Citizen Participation, a discussion of the events over the 4th of July holiday would
take place. Chief Morrison addressed the Council, giving an overview of the events of
the evening. Chief Morrison stated the goals that were established were to create a
family environment on Bridge Street. Morrison stated that a 6-month process had been
in place to come up with this plan. Morrison reported there were 41 officers in the
Village, along with others held in reserve. Morrison reported there were 13 arrests,
minimal property damage, and the bus department was pleased with the results.
Councilmember Kevin Foley questioned the cost of bringing in additional officers for the
Fourth. Chief Morrison estimated the town incurred an additional cost of approximately
$40,000. Joel Heath, Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau, stated no negative
impact was felt because of the curfew and saw no difference in crowds or occupancy
levels Heath stated mid-week holidays usually result in a strong week. John Kaemmer,
here since 1965, commented that Vail Village looks better today than it has in years.
Kaemmer stated other ski areas are coming to Vail to see what's going on here also
expressed support of the July 4th curfew and special events district.
George Knox, Vail business owner, stated he was originally opposed to the curfew, but
felt It worked, and suggested not making any more publicity about it, acknowledging
there will be a curfew for New Year's Eve, if asked.
Bill Jensen, Vail Resorts Inc., addressed the Council, stating he felt it was a great week
for Vail. Jensen complimented the police department for creating a safe environment.
Jensen stated he felt the media had painted a picture more restrictive than what the
curfew entailed. Jensen felt the Council has a challenge in striking the right balance to
ensure Vail is safe but still fun. Jensen agreed that New Year's Eve was a different
type of event and people that traditionally come to Vail to celebrate need a place to
i
gather.
A representative from the Red Lion expressed success in the numbers, and the crowd
control, citing no underage drinkers, and felt everyone had a good time. Concern was
expressed regarding the media's take on the advertisement. Suggestions included
limiting numbers and creating a beer garden environment on Bridge Street, or a Mardi
Gras event, stating "this year's 20-year-olds are next year's 21-year-olds."
Stephen Connelly, contract employee of the Vail Chamber and Business Association
for special events, stated he had contacted business owners and the consensus was
the town was forced to take steps to control the crowds, but felt it could be done in a
less negative way in the future, so as to not turn people away. Connelly stated he had
heard the front range crowds had chosen to go to Breckenridge to celebrate the 4th
Mayor Kurz asked Town Manager Bob McLaurin to comment on his take of the
celebration. McLaurin stated he felt the Council was successful in achieving their
objectives. McLaurin also stated the New Year's Eve crowd will be a different situation
and the Council and staff should begin planning in the next 30-45 days with the local
merchants on how to do it differently from the 4th. McLaurin commended Police Chief
Morrison and Community Information Officer Suzanne Silverthorn for an outstanding job
in getting the word out, stating this was the hardest thing the town has ever done, and
we needed to get control of the situation. McLaurin commended the Council on having
the courage to do the right thing.
Mayor Kurz stated that comments from the business community at the afternoon
meeting as well as this evening's meeting would be given thoughtful consideration by
the Council. Kurz agreed that Vail needed to provide fun and safety to the community.
Bill Suarez, manager of the Ore House Restaurant, expressed concern about the image
of Vail while controlling it. Suarez stated the town does not want to present the image
that people are not welcome here.
Councilmember comments included Chuck Ogilby's reassurance to everyone that the
Council had listened to the community and would take all comments into consideration
and hopefully make the process better. Councilmember Diana Donovan stated she had
received a letter from the Golden Bear stating a customer had commented they
understood the need for the policy, but felt unwelcome in Vail Village.
Councilmember Rod Slifer agreed with comments from the Council and the community,
feeling the town had done the right thing in setting the curfew, feeling the town was
close to having a real disaster. Slifer agreed that a "lighter touch" should be used in
the future.
Councilmember Sybill Navas agreed it was a difficult decision to make, but after looking
at tapes from last New Year's Eve, felt the town would have had a major problem if
nothing had been done.
Councilmember Kevin Foley reported Lionshead was relatively quiet on the 4th. Foley
did express concern regarding activities for the 18-20 year old crowd.
The second item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series
of 2001, an ordinance adopting a revised approved development plan or Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase II, to allow for the consolidation of
two existing residential dwelling units. Brent Wilson, town planner, presented the
ordinance to the Council, stating the applicant's request involved the consolidation of
two existing second-story residential dwelling units along East Meadow Drive into one
unit. Pursuant to Section 12-9A-2, Vail Town Code, any request to change the number
of dwelling or accommodation units within a special development district constitutes a
"major amendment" request. The design review portion of this application involves the
addition of dormer elements to the existing roof ridges. The Design Review Board's final
review of this item is pending PEC/Town Council review of the major amendment
request.
Wilson stated at its June 25th meeting, the Planning and Environmental Commission
voted to recommend approval of the applicant's request, subject to submission of a
revised condominium map to reflect the approved amendment for review. Mayor Kurz
stated an overview was presented at the work session earlier in the afternoon.
Councilmember Kevin Foley made a motion to approve Ordinance #15, Series of 2001,
on first reading. The motion was second by Councilmember Rod Slifer.
Councilmember Diana Donovan stated she would be voting against this ordinance
because it goes against everything the Council was trying to do, by eliminating units. A
vote was taken on the motion and the motion passed 4 - 2, Councilmembers Ogilby and
Donovan opposing.
The third item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2001, an
ordinance amending the Vail Town Code, Chapter 11, Section 12-11-8 Performance Bond,
Section 12-11-11 Enforcement; Inspection, and Section 12-2-2 Definitions to provide for
procedural changes to the performance bond process as prescribed in the Vail Town Code;
Mayor Kurz stated a lengthy discussion had been held on this ordinance in the
afternoon work session and the Council had asked the staff to do some additional work
on the ordinance. Kurz stated the ordinance was too restrictive for what the town was
trying to achieve. Councilmember Kevin Foley made a motion to table Ordinance #16,
Series of 2001. Councilmember Sybill Navas seconded the motion. A vote was taken
and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The fourth item on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series Of
2001, An Ordinance Providing for the Establishment of Special Development District
No. 36, Vail Plaza Hotel West, And Adopting an Approved Development Plan for
r
i
Y
Special Development District No. 36 in Accordance with Chapter 12-9A, Vail Town
Code. Brent Wilson, town planner, presented the ordinance to the Council. Wilson
stated the ordinance was approved on first reading two weeks ago. Wilson stated the
changes included square footage numbers in employee housing units and easement
agreements submitted prior to building permit requests. Also included was a draft of
the developer improvement agreement for review.
Project manager Tim Losa, of Zehren and Associates, reviewed key issues for the
benefit of absent council members at the June 19th meeting. Waldir Prado, owner of the
Vail Plaza Hotel West, addressed the Council, outlining additional work that had been
done to meet Council's requests. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners' Association,
spoke regarding the interconnection between the Vail Village Inn and the Vail Plaza
Hotel, both being owned by Prado. Brent Wilson stated a Development Improvement
Agreement (DIA) was being drafted and he would be meeting with the adjacent
property owners over the next two weeks. Wilson stated the DIA was a standalone
document and would not affect the passage of this ordinance on second reading.
Wilson was commended by Jim Lamont for his thoroughness in understanding this
complex issue.
Richard Kent, President of Scorpio and Alpenhorn Condominiums, addressed the
Council voicing concern regarding the overall bulk and mass being too much. Gwen
Scalpello, Nine Vail Road Condominium president, echoed the Council's compliments
to town planning staff, Waldir Prado and Connie Dorsey. Scalpello did have concerns
over the extent of excavation and the Spraddle Creek containment, as well as the bulk
and mass.
Councilmember Chuck Ogilby made a motion to approve Ordinance #14, Series of
2001, on second reading. Councilmember Rod Slifer seconded the motion.
Councilmember Diana Donovan stated she appreciated having her concerns
responded to. Comments from the Council included concern over the bulk and mass,
put the general consensus was that there were more positives than negatives
associated with the project. Councilmember Kevin Foley stated he would be voting
against the project because of the size of the building. Councilmember Donovan
voiced concern over creating a Special Development District and traffic concerns. A
vote was taken on the motion and the motion passed 4-2, Councilmembers Donovan
and Foley opposing.
The fifth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Town Manager
McLaurin invited council to attend a neighborhood barbeque hosted by the town's
Public Works Department at noon on Thursday, July 12th, at Bighorn Park.
Councilmember Donovan questioned how the town was going to fund the Donovan
Park Pavilion and "the Ruins." Town Manager McLaurin explained the town had filed a
lawsuit against the owner of the "Ruins" and when the determination of the property
value was received, the Council would need to decide whether to pay cash or cut a
capital project. McLaurin estimated a cost of $2 to $2.5 million to purchase "the Ruins."
Councilmember Ogilby questioned whether it could be paid off and if the proposed
Mountain Bell for-sale housing could be used for this purchase. McLaurin explained
that staff would be researching the possibility of a pay-off from Mountain Bell.
Councilmember Donovan asked McLaurin to prepare a list of all capital projects with
alternatives and costs.
As there was no further business, Councilmember Kevin Foley made a motion to adjourn
the meeting. Councilmember Rod Slifer seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the
motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Minutes taken by Mary A., Caster
9
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
Evening Meeting - Minutes
TUESDAY, July 17, 2001
7:00 P.M.
PRESENT: Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-tern
Greg Moffet
Rod Slifer
Diana Donovan
Chuck Ogilby
Kevin Foley
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Allen Christensen, Acting Town Attorney
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
The first item on the agenda was citizen participation. There was no citizen participation.
Mayor Pro-Tem Sybill Navas thanked Chief Morrison for his leadership, efforts and time as the
Town of Vail Police Chief during the past six years. Also, on behalf of the Council, she wished
him well in his new endeavor as the Grand Junction Chief of Police. (Greg Morrison was not in
attendance at this time.)
The second item on the agenda was the consent agenda.
a. Approval of the June 5, 2001 and June 19, 2001 evening minutes.
Council member Greg Moffet made a motion to approve the meeting minutes of June 5 and
June 19, 2001 and Council member Kevin Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and
the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The third item on the agenda was an update of the Meadow Drive Streetscape.
Todd Oppenheimer, Town of Vail Landscape Architect, said, at the April 17, 2001 council
meeting staff presented 2 conceptual design alternatives for the Meadow Drive Streetscape
project, the 20/6 Solution and the Promenade Solution. Council favored the Promenade
Solution and requested further study of possible configurations. The results of that study are to
be presented to council. In addition, staff wishes to present alternatives for the Vail
Road/Meadow Drive intersection, and provide the council with information regarding
encroachments into the right-of-way, impacts to Mayor's Park, utilities, and construction
schedule.
Joe Kracum, representing the project team, stated that the team held neighborhood open
houses and met with most of the people in the neighborhood. The team received several
comments at these meetings. He said there are drainage issues and concerns about the
proximity of the road to residences and businesses in the area and concerns about green space
1 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
f
and the foss of trees. Most of these issues can be resolved by realigning the road and the
sidewalks. Joe said the majority liked the 20/6 solution. There were numerous comments that
the 20/6 solution was the best solution, however some of the neighbors liked the promenade
solution.
Mayor Pro-tem Sybill Navas asked for public input. Steve Connolly, representing the Vail
Chamber & Business Association (VCBA), stated the business community fully endorses this
project and hopes they proceed soon.
Jim Lamont, representing the Vail Village Homeowner's Association asked Todd when this
process was started.
Todd Oppenheimer stated it started in January.
Jim Lamont stated this is one of the only projects he has worked on that has had so much
positive support. He said the team did an effective job working with the adjacent property
owners. He said if council has to make choices, he wants this project at the top of the list
because of the positive energy put in this project by all parties involved. Jim said the Vail
Village needs this project and is a direct link to Lionshead. He stated the council should move
forward with the project and set aside funding for this project.
A resident of 9 Vail Road stated he had a concern with the proximity of the road to the
promenade to the 9 Vail Road building.
Paul Schultz, President of Skaal Haus, and the homeowner's met and liked the 20/6 Solution to
this project. He stated the Skaal Haus homeowner's endorsed and approved this project
Joan Norris, Vice President of Skaal Haus, stated the council has done a wonderful thing and
has brought a neighborhood together. She applauds the team and said the public relations
were tremendous.
Mayor Pro Tern Sybill Navas clarified the council was being asked to validate the design on the
table and to move forward.
Joe Kracum stated this was correct and they wanted to move forward on the next logical step to
work on the design phase.
Council member Greg Moffet asked if this was budgeted for this year.
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, stated it was included in this year's budget.
Council member Kevin Foley asked about the Talisman access.
Todd Oppenheimer stated the Talisman has a 35-foot easement. The Sonnenalp and the
Talisman are coming through the redevelopment process. The access would be worked out in
conjunction with the redevelopment process. If agreeable with Council, this part of the
streetscape process would be worked out during the redevelopment process of these two
projects.
2 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
f
Council member Kevin Foley stated that made sense.
Todd Oppenheimer stated the timing of the projects should work out with the streetscape
project.
Council member Chuck Ogilby stated that the water feature looked great to him.
Council member Diane Donovan asked about the cost to the hospital and if the town is paying
for this entire project.
Joe Kracum stated this had not been discussed yet.
Council member Diane Donovan said one concern is the entry into Meadow Drive. The
configuration of the entry needs to be reviewed. The crossings across Vail Road need to be
reviewed and reconfigured to align with the path. She also stated that Mayor's Park needed to
stay intact as much as possible. She liked the project but reiterated there needs to be other
partners from the neighborhood to fund this project.
Joe Kracum stated that during the design process they would be in front of council several
times to go through each portion of the project.
Council member Rod Slifer said he supports the 20/6 solution. He is concerned about the
'roundabout' in front of the fire station.
Council member Greg Moffet said his only concern is coordinating effectively with other
redevelopment projects with this project.
Mayor Pro Tem Sybil Navas complimented the group on their efforts. She said she concurred
with Diane's comments to stay out of Mayor's Park. She also stated a concern is working with
the Vail Plaza Hotel and how this project ties in without delaying their project.
Joe Kracum said it would be a matter of lining up their project with the redevelopment of the
other projects.
Mayor Pro Tem Sybill Navas asked when construction would begin.
Joe Kracum stated it could probably start in early Spring of 2002.
Bob McLaurin asked if there was any sewer work that needed to be done.
Joe Kracum said he didn't know yet.
Council member Kevin Foley added the hotel redevelopment needed snowmelt for shaded
areas in the winter and the need to keep pedestrian walkways clear.
Todd Oppenheimer said the current budget doesn't include snowmelt but they will coordinate
with adjacent property owners.
3 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
1
Council member Greg Moffet made a motion to direct staff to move forward with design 20/6 as
presented and move through the approval process. Council member Kevin Foley seconded the
motion.
Council member Diane Donovan stated and clarified the projects needed to comply with this
plan not the other way around.
A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The fourth item on the agenda was a presentation of the costs for the Red Sandstone Athletic
Field.
Gregg Barrie, Project Landscape Architect for the town, stated this presentation included the
final design and budget for the Red Sandstone Elementary School Athletic Field project. He
stated the budget increased from $250,000 to $350,000.
He reviewed the various design concepts and explained the basic idea was to provide the kids
with turf area for activities. The smaller area located closes to the school will allow easier
access from the school for short recess periods. The large turf area would allow for activities
such as kick ball, soccer, and t-ball. Also, the Vail Recreation District (VRD) could use this field
as a practice facility for younger kids. There is almost an acre of turf (.9 acres) for the school to
use.
Gregg said there is an aggressive revegetation process along with this project. He said there
would be 10,000 plants planted on site to establish the natural area within 5 years. Aspen trees
will be planted to have a visual barrier between the school and SunVail Condominiums. The
fence proposed is 6-foot high chain link fence to stop balls and kids from going down the slope.
There are other materials for fencing that may be used that could help which would be 8-10 feet
high but it also costs more. The material is a lighter weight wire (Invisible coil fence) that is
stronger than the netting fences, and more aesthetically pleasing than chain link.
Gregg explained that during the preliminary analysis, it was found that the slopes to the north of
the field contained several seeps and springs. Part of the increase in cost is for engineering
techniques that were not included in the original plan. The engineering report stated the water
is not an issue and the upper hill is not an issue but the fill on the lower side will need to be
terraced in and compacted. This area is where the major cost would be. The proposed budget
would need to be increased to $350,000. Greg stated he is confident that entire project would
come in on that budget.
Gregg stated the Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) between the Town of Vail (town), the
Eagle County School District (school district) and the Vail Recreation District stated the cost of
the construction for the field will be split between the town and the school district, 50/50.
Originally, the Town was going to pay for all the costs up front and the school district would
reimburse the town one-half of the cost at the completion of the project. However, the school
district has the money to pay the $175,000 now.
Council member Greg Moffet asked when was the start date of construction.
4 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
1
Gregg Barrie said the work could start next Monday, July 23, 2001. He said the majority of the
work would be done before school starts on August 27, 2001. The contractor will put in turf
that is resilient for kids to be on.
Council member Diane Donovan said the color of the fences that were brown or a dark color
would not be a good color to use. She said the fence needs to blend in during the snow season
too.
Gregg Barrie explained that the aspens and the service berry bushes that would be planted
should hide it some of the fencing.
Mayor Pro-tem Sybill Navas asked if the school district would be responsible for the
maintenance of the grounds at all times.
Gregg said the VRD would provide for the maintenance of the fields if the VRD could use it as a
practice field. This would allow students to use the field for soccer practice without going
anywhere after school. The IGA sets forth the use requirements. The school would have first
priority of use and it will be closed to the public during school hours. The town would have
second priority and VRD would have 3' priority.
He said the concerns about maintenance issues such as trash and maintaining fencing could
also be added to the IGA and VRD would maintain them. He said the restrooms are also a
concern. Typically, the restrooms in schools are not available to the public. When the town or
VRD uses the fields, the restrooms at the school would be available during those times. He
said that adding a restroom at the fields would cost an additional $60,000-$70,000.
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, said if there is a problem with the VRD doing the maintenance,
the school district would step in and do it.
Council member Greg Moffet said the VRD is desperate to have additional fields and they are
willing to do the maintenance if they get to use the field.
Council member Rod Slifer said the VRD would have the option to open up the school's
restrooms.
Council member Diane Donovan reiterated that this needs to be in the contract.
Allen Christensen, Acting Town Attorney, stated none of the areas of concern are
insurmountable. He stated staff wanted direction from Council on how to proceed.
Council member Diane Donovan stated she would like to see the changes discussed added to
the IGA before signing it.
Council member Greg Moffet made a motion to execute the IGA now and add the amendments
to the IGA at the next town council meeting, as well as approving the increase of the budget to
$350,000 and approving the start of the construction on July 23, 2001.
A clarification of the amendment to the IGA would be held at the next regular town council
evening meeting on August 7, 2001.
5 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
f
Council member Kevin Foley seconded the motion.
Further discussion ensued.
Council member Kevin Foley thanked Harry Gray and Karen Strakbein for representing the
school district in this project.
A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, stated one item to discuss was an update of the capital projects
list. Steve Thompson, Finance Director handed out a memorandum for their review and
discussion at the next town council meeting in August.
Steve Thompson stated that each year the town updates the capital projects list and there is a
5-year list per the Town Charter. He said this list is the beginning, and on pages 13 & 14 were
the adjustments to the 2001 capital projects numbers. He stated those were the most relevant
changes and staff would be going before the town council for a supplemental adjustment and
moving money to various projects. This memorandum brings the town council up to date with
capital projects. Steve also stated that from 2003 out they have added capital projects for the
year 2006. Staff has looked at various projects and had made additions to the list.
Bob McLaurin, reiterated this is the beginning of the capital projects list. He said that the
elected officials place every project that gets funded on this list. This memorandum allows the
town council time to review the list prior to the August meeting
Council member Diane Donovan asked if the critical strategies list could be separated out of
this list.
Steve Thompson stated the problem with separating it out is projects like Vail Center because
the town doesn't have costs on these types of projects.
Bob McLaurin said he would try to come up with a list of specific projects as an exhibit to the
capital projects list.
Further discussion ensued about various aspects of the capital projects list.
Steve Thompson said the capital projects list would be presented to council on August 14. He
said there are other factors such as Donovan Park leasing and the town needs to keep options
open.
Council member Greg Moffet said there were additional upcoming items and a variety of
unaddressed items in the critical strategies list that need to be addressed.
Council member Diane Donovan asked where PEEP gets their funds.
6 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
Russ Forrest, Community Development Director said PEEP gets their funding from the county,
the Town of Vail ($8,000) and other contributions.
Mayor Pro Tem Sybill Navas asked that the Vail Center be taken off the list and look at it
separately.
Further discussion ensued. Additional time on the August 7 and August 21 evening meetings
will be needed to discuss these in further detail.
Chief of Police Greg Morrison entered the council chambers. Mayor Pro-tem Sybill Navas
again offered thanks to Greg Morrison for his many years of service and wished him well in his
new endeavors. She said his leadership and the police department's recent efforts with the
July 4th celebration were successful. She also stated that the town council and community
would miss him.
Council member Greg Moffet stated Greg had been a great asset to the community.
As there was no further business, a motion was made by Council member Greg Moffet to
adjourn the meeting and Council member Kevin Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken
and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sybill Navas
Mayor Pro-tem
ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Minutes taken by Lorelei Donaldson
7 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes July 17, 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 15
SERIES OF 2001
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A REVISED APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6, VAIL VILLAGE INN, PHASE II, TO
ALLOW FOR THE CONSOLIDATION OF TWO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DWELLING
UNITS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, In 1976, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976,
establishing Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn; and
WHEREAS, Section 12-9A-10 of the Zoning Regulations permits major amendments to
previously Approved Development Plans for Special Development Districts; and
WHEREAS, Patricia and Gerardo Schroeder, as owners of the subject Phase II
property, have submitted an application for a major amendment to Special Development District
No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase II; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinance is to adopt a revised Approved Development
Plan for the Vail Village Inn Special Development District, Phase II to allow for the consolidation
of two existing residential dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, the revised major amendment to the Special Development District is in the
best interest of the town as it meets the Town's development objectives as identified in the
Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions outlined in the Zoning Regulations, the
Planning & Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the major amendment
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Environmental Commission has reviewed the prescribed
criteria for a major amendment and has submitted its recommendation of approval to the Vail
Town Council; and
WHEREAS, all notices as required by the Town of Vail Municipal Code have been sent
to the appropriate parties; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the best interest of the public health,
safety, and welfare to adopt the revised Approved Development Plan for Special Development
District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase II; and
1
Whereas, the approval of the major amendment to Special Development District No. 6,
Vail Village Inn, Phase II and the development standards in regard thereto shall not establish
precedence or entitlements elsewhere within the Town of Vail; and
Whereas, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed major amendment to Special
Development District #6, Vail Village Inn, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in
Section 12-9A-8 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The applicant, as required, has
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Council that any adverse effects of the requested
deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the
public benefits provided or has demonstrated that one or more of the development standards is
not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Puroose of the Ordinance
The purpose of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2000, is to adopt a revised Approved Development
Plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase II. The Approved
Development Plans for Phases I, 111, IV & V remain approved and unchanged for the
development of Special Development District No. 6 within the Town of Vail, unless they have
otherwise expired. Only the Approved Development Plan for Phase II is hereby amended and
adopted.
Section 2. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled. Planning Commission Report
The approval procedures described in Section 12-9A of the Vail Municipal Code have been
fulfilled, and the Vail Town Council has received the recommendation of the Planning &
Environmental Commission of approval for a major amendment to the Approved Development
Plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase ll. Requests for amendments
to the Approved Development Plan shall follow the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A of the
Vail Municipal Code.
Section 3. Special Develoament District No. 6
The Special Development District and the Major Amendment to the Approved Development Plan
for Phase 11 are established to assure comprehensive development and use of the area in a
manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open
space and recreation amenities, and promote the goals, objectives and policies of the Town of
2
Vail Comprehensive Plan. Special Development District No. 6 is regarded as being
complementary to the Town of Vail by the Vail Town Council and the Planning & Environmental
Commission, and has been established since there are significant aspects of the Special
Development District that cannot be satisfied through the imposition of the standard Public
Accommodation zone district requirements.
Section 4. Development Standards - Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village
Inn, Phase II
Development Plan--
The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn,
Phase fl, prepared by Royston, Hanamoto, Back and Abey on February 12, 1976, shall be
hereby amended to include the following plan amendments prepared by Fritzlen Pierce
Architects, Inc., dated May 25, 2001 and stamped approved by the Town of Vail, dated
August 7, 2001:
A. Proposed Entry Plan;
B. Proposed Second Level Plan;
C. Proposed Third Level Plan;
D. Proposed Roof Plan;
E. Proposed South Elevation;
F. Proposed North Elevation;
G. Proposed West Elevation.
Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in Phase II of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as set forth in the
development plans referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance.
Conditional Uses
Conditional uses for Phase II shall be set forth in Section 12-7A-3 of the Town of Vail Zoning
Regulations. All conditional uses shall be reviewed per the procedures as outlined in Chapter 12-
16 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations.
Density-- Units per Acre - Dwelling Units
The number of units permitted in Phase II shall not exceed the following:
Dwelling Units -Two
3
Density-- Floor Area
The gross residential floor area (GRFA), common area and commercial square footage permitted
for Phase II shall be as set forth in the Approved Development Plans referenced in Section 4 of
this ordinance.
Specifically:
Gross Residential Floor Area: 4,098 square feet
Commercial Floor Area: 6,473 square feet
Setbacks--
Required setbacks for Phase II shall be as set forth in the Approved Development Plans
referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance.
Height--
The maximum building height for Phase II shall be as set forth in the Approved Development
Plans referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance. For the purposes of SDD No. 6, Phase II,
calculations of height shall mean the distance measured vertically from the existing grade or
finished grade (whichever is more restrictive), at any given point to the top of a flat roof, or
mansard roof, or to the highest ridge line of sloping roof unless otherwise specified in Approved
Development Plans.
Site Coverage—
The maximum allowable site coverage for Phase II shall be as set forth in the Approved
Development Plans referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance.
Landscaping--
The minimum landscape area requirement for Phase II shall be as set forth in the Approved
Development Plans referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance.
Parking and Loading--
The required number of off-street parking spaces and loading/delivery berths for Phase II shall
be provided as set, forth in the Approved Development Plans referenced in Section 4 of this
ordinance. In no instance shall Vail Road or the South Frontage Road be used for
loading/delivery or guest drop-off/pick-up without the prior written approval of the Town of Vail.
The required parking spaces shall not be individually sold, transferred, leased, conveyed,
rented or restricted to any person other than a tenant, occupant or user of the building for which
the space, spaces or area are required to be provided by the Zoning Regulations or ordinances
4
of the Town. The foregoing language shall not prohibit the temporary use of the parking
spaces for events or uses outside of the building, subject to the approval of the Town of Vail.
Section 5. Approval Aareements for Special Development District No. 6. Phase II
1. The applicant shall submit a revised condominium map to reflect the approved
amendment for review and approval by town staff by no later than June 25, 2002.
Section 6.
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and
each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared
invalid.
Section 7.
The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as
provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any
other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or
repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 8.
All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are
hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. The repealer shall not be construed
to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed.
5
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 10`h day of July, 2001, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 7`h day of August, 2001, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 7th day of
August, 2001.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
6
EXHIBIT A
ZONING / DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS -
SCHROEDER MAJOR SDD #6 AMENDMENT
Lot size: 3.45 acres or 150,282 sq. ft. (All Phases)
Development 2000 SDD Major 2001 Schroeder
Standard Amendment Aooroval Maior Amendment
Lot Area: 150,282 sq. ft. no change
Total SDD6 GRFA: 121% or 181,719 sq.ft. 121% or 182,325 sq. ft.
Phase 11 GRFA: 3,927 sq. ft. 4,533 sq. ft.
Unit 335/337 GRFA: 1,647 sq. ft. 2,253 sq. ft.
Dwelling
units per acre: 13.0 du/acre 12.75 du/acre
Site coverage: 61% or 92,036 sq. ft. no change
Setbacks:
front: 16' no change
sides: 5', 2', & 0' no change
rear: 5' no change
Height: 77.25' sloping no change
Parking: 291 parking spaces no change
Loading: five berths no change
Commercial
sq. footage: 25% of GRFA or 45,228 sq. ft. no change
RESOLUTION NO. 3, SERIES OF 2001
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE INTENT OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO ENTER
INTO A TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATION IN THE APPROXIMATE AGGREGATE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $3,500,000 TO FINANCE A COMMUNITY CENTER; AND
AUTHORIZING THE OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS OF THE TOWN TO
PROCEED AND CONTINUE WITH STEPS PRELIMINARY TO THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF SUCH LEASE.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town"), is a municipal corporation duly
organized and existing as a home-rule municipality under Article XX of the State
Constitution (the "Constitution") and laws of the State of Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council") have been
duly elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town intends and proposes to issue a tax-exempt obligation (the
"Obligation") to finance the acquisition of a community center at Donovan Park (the
"Project").
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, IN THE COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO:
Section 1. All action (not inconsistent with the provisions of this resolution) heretofore
taken by the Town Council and the officers, employees and agents of the Town directed
toward the Lease is hereby ratified, approved and confirmed.
Section 2. The Town intends to issue the Obligation in the approximate aggregate
principal amount of $3,500,000 to pay the costs of the Project, including the
reimbursement of certain costs incurred by the Town prior to the execution and delivery
of the Obligation, upon terms acceptable to the Town, as authorized in an ordinance or
resolution to be hereafter adopted and to take all further action which is necessary or
desirable in connection therewith.
Section 3. The officers, employees and agents of the Town shall take all action
necessary or reasonably required to carry out, give effect to and consummate the
transactions contemplated hereby and shall take all action necessary or desirable to
finance the Project and to otherwise carry out the transactions contemplated by this
resolution.
Section 4. The officers and employees of the Town are hereby authorized and
directed to take all action necessary or appropriate to effectuate the provisions of this
resolution.
Section 5. If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this resolution shall for
any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such
section, paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions
of this resolution.
Section 6. All acts, orders and resolutions of the Council, and parts thereof,
inconsistent with this resolution be, and the same hereby are, repealed to the extent
only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revive any act, order
or resolution, or part thereof, heretofore repealed.
Section 7. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this August 7, 2001.
Ludwig Kurz
(SEAL)
Attest:
Town Clerk
To: Vail Town Council
From: Staff: Russ Forrest & Bob McLaurin
Date: August 7th, 2001
Subject Discussion on Vail Center Next Steps
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of the August 7th worksession is to determine next steps for
pursuing a preferred alternative that works with the physical constraints of the
charter bus lot. On July 24th, Council directed staff to pursue the development of
an alternative "C" and a 2002 election.
2. LESSONS LEARNED TO DATE
In moving forward it is helpful to reflect back on the last year to determine what
we have learned regarding the Vail Center:
• Two of the three major (recreation, meetings, arts) uses fit on the Charter Bus
Site. Building significant program on top of the existing Lionshead parking
structure could result in an additional $25 million just for structural
reinforcement. Demolishing the existing parking structure and building a new
underground parking structure with a net increase of 500 parking spaces will
cost approximately $60 million. A private partner, who would require
significant private development on the site, is needed to create additional
land area to build on the parking structure. That private partner does not exist
today. An RFP could be issued to solicit private partners.
• Soils reports conclude we have a buildable site. Development 30 feet below
grade will result in dewatering which is not unusual for Vail.
• Parking is only a critical issue with the Vail Center as it relates to large
community events. Arnie Ullvig calculates that we need another 165 parking
spaces for the Vail Center with the conference facility, recreational program
and a small performing arts facility (We will need to calculate demand for a
large facility). Alternative B would reduce parking by 50 spaces because a
new entrance to the structure would need to be developed.
• Ongoing Council commitment and participation in planning meetings and
public, meetings is critical.
• A schedule needs to be maintained. Revisiting critical decisions such as the
fundamental uses will result in delays.
• Public surveys to date show that there is generally positive support for the
Vail Center uses. This needs to be further tested as a preferred alternative is
developed. There also appears to be growing interest in further distributing
the public cost between homeowners and the business community and/or
guest.
1
z
• The performing arts community agreed to the development of a cultural arts
plan and a phased approach to a facility. It is critical to move forward in the
development of this plan
• A 100% project manager is needed given the complexity of the project. This
manager needs to have the necessary planning and project management
experience while being politically savvy and have a good sense of how to
engage the public.
• A business plan needs be completed. How the facility is used is a critical
question to the community. There will continue to be debate on the
operational numbers since they are based on assumptions.
• Additional public discussions are needed on the financing of the facility.
• Simplifying the program and the communication of what the project includes
is critical to the success of the project.
• Our competition is building facilities (recreation and conference facilities).
They have generally focused on one use at a time (Breckenridge, Whistler,
Aspen (new rec. center). Closer to home, there will be possibly ice sheets in
Eagle and Edwards in the next 4-5 years.
3. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO MOVING FORWARD
Staff is still working on the direction received from Council on June 19th that resulted in
four motions related to the uses of the site:
• space for conferences and learning, including a 200-seat auditorium with stage
suitable for community theater and other performances;
• space for recreation, including an ice rink, a climbing wall, an indoor skate park
and a youth center;
• additional space for future expansion of conference and learning activity that
could form a second level on top of the existing Vail Public Library and that would
be funded primarily through private donations; and
• Reservation of space that could be used in the future, if demand warranted, to
build a performing arts center seating upwards of 1,300, also to be funded
primarily with private donations.
Right now we don't have a physically and financially viable way to accommodate all the
uses mentioned above. Vail Resorts is looking at how they might be able to assist with
the development of the Vail Center program. If another site could be found for the
conference facility, the 2"d sheet of ice could be built below grade and then a performing
arts facility could be built over it at a later time. Alternatively, if another site could be
found for a performing arts facility, then the recreation and the conference facility could
be created on the charter bus lot site.
Given that information there are several alternative approaches:
Approach 1: Identify New Land Opportunities:
This approach involves taking until August 21th to determine if there is any
additional land opportunities that may be viable to support at least one of the
three uses. The basic process for this approach includes:
2
• Develop an alternative C (This could include using additional sites,
creative ways to phase alternative A, or other design ideas.
• Determine if Council supports the hybrid alternative.
• Develop alternative C design further (Opportunity to add to design
team).
• Cost out alternative C.
• Have the Renaissance Foundation start the Ten Year Cultural &
Learning Plan
• Complete operational planning for the Vail Center.
• Develop a series of public discussions on design and financial plan for
alternative C.
• Council input and direction on hybrid alternative.
• Refine design for alternative C.
• Implement communications and support building program.
• Implement fund raising program (private money, grants, sponsorship).
Attempt to find a major donor prior to a public vote on bonding.
• Community Survey on preferred alternative.
• Community endorsement.
• Council election in 2001.
• New Council validation of the Vail Center program
A specific time chart is attached.
Approach 2: Work with the 66,000 square foot Charter Bus Lot and Library:
This approach assumes the Council does not want to pursue other sites and/or
public private partnerships. The first step would be to evaluate the uses
considered on June 19th and determine the two uses to be located on the
Charter Bus Lot and move forward with the additional learning and meeting
space above the Library. This approach would involve deciding the two priority
uses immediately to be located on the Charter Bus lot. A possible location for
the third use could be above the Frontage Road and/or a future cap above 1-70.
After that decision was made then the Town could move forward with the
physical and financial planning. The process and sequence of steps would be
similar to the alternative above.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the direction received on June 19th, the only approach that
would is approach number 1 that would involve taking the next 2-3 weeks
to determine if other land and/or partnership opportunities would work to
achieve that direction. If by August 21St other land or partnership
opportunities did not exist then approach 2 would be the most viable
approach.
3
I
4. RESOURCE ISSUES
There are a number of resource issues the Town Council will need to consider:
Project Manager: Do you want to hire a project manager? The time
commitment would be close to 100% in the next 3 months and then could be less
after a viable alternative has been framed. The cost per month of a project
manager could be approximately $16,000 or $48,000 for a 3 month period.
Criteria for a project manger would include: proven ability to work on complex
public projects, strong public involvement skills, project management experience,
development experience, and ability to commit the necessary time.
Design Team: Do you want to make any changes in the design team? The
Town has spent approximately $81,162 of the $157,300 contract with EDAW,
HGA, and Zehren. They have performed very well to date from staff's
perspective. The question has continued to linger at to whether additional
design experience is needed. If this were an interest, staff would suggest the
Council along with representatives from DRB and possibly others from the
community interview a number of designers.
Financial Planning: Economics Research Associates has prepared a market
analysis and also reviewed that analysis with the most recent changes to the
program. In addition, a variety of individuals such as Frank Johnson, John Garth,
and Stan Cope have worked on the numbers with financial professionals like
Stan Bernstien. Greg Moffet has also participated in these meetings. A retired
CEO, Bob Vanorak, who has prepared numerous business plans was
volunteering to put together a draft business plan. He has stopped work on that
plan until the Town Council defines a series of next steps. If Council wanted to
get additional third party validation on the operational numbers, Ford Frick could
be a possible candidate to assist with the operational planning.
Fund Raising: A 501 c-3 has been developed. A board is established with the
mission of raising private dollars for the Vail Center. The White River Institutes
role has changed. WRI only wants to be involved as a member in the 501-c3
and would like to advocate the learning center concept. Therefore, if private
dollars are needed, another fund raising entity will need to be engaged. Other
professional fund raising companies will charge between 10% to 15% of the total
revenue from donations. It is unlikely that any private interest will give to the
Town of Vail. Therefore a 501 c-3 will be critical if private dollars are needed
(primarily for the arts). Other sources of funds can also be pursued such as
foundation and governmental grants. A decision on fund raising can be deferred
until after the Council and community accepts the preferred alternative.
5. CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
1. What general approach does Council want to pursue? Do you want to
take another 2 weeks to determine if additional land/partnership
opportunities exist?
4
2. What resource changes does the Council want to make and pay for? It is
recommended that 2 members of Council participate in a selection
process for any resource changes and that the preferred choice be
reviewed with the entire Town Council. From a time standpoint the most
critical question would be whether to bring on a project manager to
augment staff.
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,
learning/meeting/performing arts facility (convertible floor space which can
convert into either a meeting space, or a performing arts/event venue), and
affordable housing.
• On July 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, 2001, the Finance Team reviewed the capital and operational
plans with the Town Council.
• On April 17th, 2001, the Town Council gave direction to move forward with a
design contract with EDAW to design the Vail center to include: a 2"d Sheet of
Ice, Skate park, Youth Center, climbing wall, a meeting facility with break-out
space, limited retail to support the facility, a 300-seat theatre, and
5
approximately 15 units of affordable housing.
• On May 8th, 2001, 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.
• On May 22, 2001, the Town Council decided not to have a facilitated
meeting, but rather to vote on each element of the Vail Center program on
June 19th
• On June 19th, 2001, the Council passed four motions related to the uses of
the site:
• space for conferences and learning, including a 200-seat auditorium
with stage suitable for community theater and other performances;
• space for recreation, including an ice rink, a climbing wall, an indoor
skate park and a youth center;
• additional space for future expansion of conference and learning
activity that could form a second level on top of the existing Vail Public
Library and that would be funded primarily through private donations;
and
• Reservation of space that could be used in the future, if demand
warranted, to build a performing arts center seating upwards of 1,300,
also to be funded primarily with private donations.
• On July 24th, Council directed staff to pursue the development of an
alternative "C" and a 2002 election.
\IVAI L\DATAIC DEV\CO U NCI L1M EMOS1011COMFAC807M EMO. DOC
6
b
August September UctoDer INovember December
ID TaskName Duration 1 09 J UJ 15 118 1 21 1 24 j 27 130102105108 Ill 1 14 1 17 1 20 j 23 f 26 J 29 01 164 1 Ul j 10 1 13 1 16 19 1 22 ~ 25 j 28 01 104 1 07 1 10 j 13 ~ 16 19 22 2b 28 1 31 X 03 ~ 06 ~ 09 12 ~ 15 ~ 18 ~ 21 24 ~ 27 ~ 30 03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
1 Develop alternative C 31 days
2 I Determine if other land opportunities exist 20 days
3 I Develop capital costs for alternative C 20 days I _
4 I Determine Council Receptivity to alternative C 1 day I F
1
5 Frame other alternatives or determine 2 uses
for Charter Bus Sit 5 days
6 1 Resolve Resource Issues 15 days
7 Determine Design Team for further develop design 15 days
6 I Determine if a 3rd party Project Manager should be hired 15 days _ -
9 I Determine if financing assistance should be obtained 15 days ;
10 I Determine if a private fund raiser should be engaged and when 15 days -
11 I Refine Design Plan 20 days I - `
12 Refine Design 20 days -
I 13 I Concurrent cost estimating 20 days i -
~~~LLL
14 Investigate alternative Funding Ideas 26 days
15 Meet with Andy Cane on District concept/other financing 3 days
16 I Discuss with Dee pro and cons on Districting 1 day 1
17 I Meet with Dee on Surcharge 2 days
18 I Explore other funding alternatives 15 days
I 19 I Refine Operational Plan 34 days
20 Obtain opinions from ERA, and other operators 10 days
21 Finish business plan 30 days
22 Public Meetings-1 5 days
23 Review Design in Workshops 4 days
24 Public meeting on operational considerations 4 days
25 Financing Meetings in Workshops 4 days
26 Council input on preferred alternative 1 day
27 Refine Design and Financing Plan 15 days
28 Refine Design and Capital Plan 15 days
29 Public Meetings - 2 6 days
30 Review Design in Workshops 2 days
31 Public meeting on operational considerations 2 days
32 Financing Meetings in Workshops 2 days l
33 (communication 30 days
34 Survey on Project 10 days
e , :s:tt "1
35 Direct Mail 30 days
36 Internet 30 days
n
nM Y ~ '
37 1501 C-31l'und Raising 85 days
38 Develop cultural and learning plan 60 days ° - : -
39 Select Fund Raiser 20 days TOV Stag
40 I Contract 5 days N Y
41 Obtain 1st Major Donor 60 days - --m-m _
42 2001 Candidate Election 1 day
43 New Council affirmation of Vail Center 1 day
44 I Campaign for Election 51 days
Page 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
RE: Town Manager's Report
DATE: August 7, 2001
UPCOMING ITEMS:
TOV Environmental Monitorinq
As part of the Town of Vail's mission of providing environmentally sensitive
services, the Town Manager has asked the Partnership for Environmental
Education & Programs to develop a proposal for monitoring environmental quality
within the Town Government. Critical indicators would include electrical and
natural gas, water, petroleum, hazardous materials, and solid waste. This
monitoring program could be expanded to also include community wide
indicators such as air quality, water quality, and community wide utility usage.
This program would be similar to the Vail Resorts monitoring program and would
allow the Town and the Company to evaluate and communicate environmental
indicators jointly. Russ Forrest is working on the implementation of this contract
with PEEP.
UPCOMING ITEMS:
Auaust 14. 2001 Work Session
Craig Davis -10 year anniversary
Fire Services Update
Lionshead Redevelopment Discussion
New Year's Eve - set alternative entertainment agenda with Budget
Building Materials Regulations Update
PEC Report
Executive Session - Land Negotiations
Auaust 21. 2001. Work Session
AIPP Strategic Plan Presentation
Next Bus Update
Appeal of a DRB decision re: Scalise Residence
New Year's Eve - present alternative entertainment & venue
DRB Report
Executive Session - Personnel Matters
Auaust 21. 2001. Evenina Meeting
Alpine Garden Presentation & Request
Community Survey Results
Special Events Tracking
Supplemental Ordinance, Vt reading
Auaust 28. 2001, Work Session
Neighborhood Picnic - Ellefson Park
Spaeth Design Discussion
Disney Trip Report
RETT and Capital Projects Discussion
Contributions Requests
PEC Report
W5 S-1-ei
'~cOult
Date: August 6, 2001
To: TOV Council, via Rod Slifer
From: Paul Kuzniar, pk-uzniar Mao1.a-on)
Vail: 970-479-0554, L.A.: 310-396-6115
Opinions & Solutions for the Vail I-70 Noise Problem
PUBLIC Opinion of NoiseWalls
page contents 1
2. Ohio
3. West Boca, Florida
4. Salt lake City
5. Quincy, Massachusetts
6. Unsightly Highway Noise Barriers
PROFESSIONA-1 Opinion of NoiseWalls
rage contents
7. A Sound Solution?
a. Sorvig, Kim, Grob, Jeffrey, Planning journal
b. Peter Yost, Environmental Building News
C. Val Viers, Colorado College
8. Vegetative Noise Barriers, CDOT
9a. Highway Traffic Noise, Policy & Guidance, FHWA, 1995
9b. Highway Traffic Noise, Problem & Response, FHWA, 1997
10. What should Vail do?
Methodology: With the help
of VPL,1 surveyed over 500
citations on the Intemet, and
chose a representative
sampling to provide a cross-
section of opinions on noise
abatement. The solutions on
a; p.10 represent a balanced,
pragmatic and affordable
; • path forward, for the short-
and long-term.
Paul Kuzniar 8,6,01 1
LIC Opinion of NoiseWalls
2. Ohio
"Ohio Residents Are Split On Freeway
Noise Walls; Some Say They Are Ugly
but Effective, Others Say They'd Rather
Have Their Views, And Some Say Walls
Actually Worsen the Noise"
The Plain Dealer, November 14, 1999
[paraphrased from i"w.NoNoise.oz 41tech -ItY11
The Plain Dealer reports that residents of Ohio don't hold the same opinions about the 92
miles of walls in the state. Despite many people's praise of the walls, some neighbor-
hoods like Warrensville Heights say that they want their walls torn down; although
residents have never pushed for something like that in the state, one wall was removed
after a car dealership said it blocked their visibility from the road. In that case, the
dealership helped to pay for the $80,000 removal of the 400-500 feet of wall, and others
nearby were consulted.
Some say the walls are "an eyesore," and can actually worsen the noise. Most say that
they are thankful for the walls, though they are admittedly ugly.
The article notes that the walls not only reduce noise by up to ten decibels an audible
halving of the noise but help to block dirt from the road.
The article goes on to say that wooden walls, used in the past, are a poor choice because
they age "badly, shrinking to open gaps that greatly reduce their effectiveness."
Paul Kuzniar 8/6101 2
PUBLIC Opinion of NoiseWalls
3. West Boca, Florida
"Residents in West Boca, Florida
Frustrated with Noise Study that
Says Noise Walls Are Too Ineffective
and Expensive to Be Built"
Sun-Sentinel, September 17, 1999
[paraphrased from www.NoNoise.org/tech.html
The Sun-Sentinel reports that the "bottom line" of a recent public meeting in West Boca,
Florida on the subject of noise walls along U. S. 441 was that the walls could not be built.
While many residents want the sound walls, some say that their property values will be
hurt by the walls. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT ) officials said that their
study's results which calculated a cost of $57,000 per home protected, and a reduction
of less than five decibels at most of those homes most affected do not justify sound
walls. Local politicians told residents at the meeting not to give up, and said that "this is
not over. "
The article continues, noting that a list of 21 standards for justification of a soundwall
includes stipulations that require a cost of less than $30,000 per home affected, homes are
considered "affected" if they experience more than 67 decibels. In addition, the walls
must result in a minimum of a 5 decibel noise reduction. FDOT officials said that neither
of those conditions are met by the currently proposed soundwalls.
The article notes that state politicians are optimistic that FDOT will find a way to pay for
the walls. They note that one reason that the walls would not be effective is the fact that
FDOT owns land . They also note that the road is scheduled for widening next year,
which may nudge noise levels to a point that would more strongly justify the noise walls.
The article also notes that some residents don't want the noise walls because they fear
their ugliness would result in reduced property values.
Paul Kuzniar X3.6 '01 3
PUBLIC Opinion of Noise Walls
4. Salt Lake City
"Sound Walls in Salt Lake City,
Utah Cause Controversy"
Salt Lake Tribune, December 10, 1999
[paraphrased from ~u~v.NoNoise.orite_iii_TrJ
The Salt Lake Tribune reported that the Utah
Transportation Commission rejected a plea
from residents to tear down sound walls between
Interstate 215 and Wasatch Boulevard in Salt
Lake City even though residents hate them.
The article said that Utah Dept of Transportation Director Tom Warne said that removing
the walls could set a costly precedent for the state's 26 miles of sound barriers.
The article said that many residents have called for removal of the walls because they
obstruct views of the Salt Lake Valley. In addition, the article said that department
noise tests showed sections of the walls reflected traffic noise into other areas.
The article said that the majority of people attending a public hearing on the walls
attended to ask the UDQT to tear the walls down. The article added that some of the
neighbors nearest the freeway said the walls were their only hope for peace and quiet.
The article said that people calling for removal that before their construction, the state
assured them the walls would reduce noise for everyone.
The article said that commissioners said their decision to build walls was final, and that
the people nearest the freeway and most in favor of the walls deserve the most attention
even if they are in the minority.
Paul Kuzni ar 8i6'01 4
PUBLIC Opinion of NoiseWalls
5. Quincy, Massachusetts
"Noisiest Section of Expressway
in Massachusetts to Get Noise
Walls After 11 Years"
The Patriot Ledger, July 31, 1999
[paraphrased from ivA w.NoNoise.or t ~a 'ntni
The Patriot Ledger reports that a $2 million construction of noise walls along the
Expressway in Quincy, Massachusetts is scheduled to begin soon, 11 years after the
highway section was rated noisiest in the state. 190,000 vehicles use the section of the
Expressway every weekday. (Trail 1- 70 carries 40, 000 vehicles per day.)
The article reports that construction of noise walls along the Expressway in Quincy,
Massachusetts is scheduled to begin soon. This action comes 11 years after this section of
highway was rated noisiest in the state. Officials predict that the walls will allow
residents to have a conversation in their yards at six feet without raising their voices; the
current distance is only 18 inches. The project will be completed in two phases spread
over this year and next year; no work will be done during rush hour.
The article continues, noting that the first phase of the project will cost $2 million.
Senator Michael Morrissey says: "If this small effort in any way improves the quality of
life, this is one of the things we should be doing." 190,000 vehicles use the section of the
Expressway every weekday, helping to make it the loudest section in the State.
The article discusses the structure of the walls in more detail than most articles do. The 8-
inch-thick wood and concrete walls will be 8- to 15-feet-high. They will be filled with
shredded rubber tires that dampen traffic noise, Foundations for the walls are steel and
concrete; the foundations were begun last year, but delayed when workers found several
large boulders in the way. The next step is the installation of wooden posts, which will
hold up the ends of each panel
Paul kuzniar &6/01 5
RLIC Opinion of NoiseWalls
6. Unsightly Highway Noise Barriers in U.S.
USA Today, September 21, 1998
[paraphrased from www.NoNoise.org/tech.htmI
USA Today published an editorial charging that while highway noise barriers block traffic
noise for nearby residents, they also block scenic views for motorists. According to the
editorial, acoustic engineer Michael Stocker recalls how, young and adventurous twenty
years ago, he drove from Los Angeles to New York, "checking out this big, expansive
country we live in. When he encountered a sign that read 'Entering Elizabeth, New
Jersey,' " Stocker recollects, there was no city in sight. "The highway was lined by
concrete walls," he said. "It was like being in a tunnel. I had no sense of where I was."
That's the fate to which more and more segments of American highway have since been
consigned. From 228 miles of noise barriers in 1980, the total length along federal
highways grew almost sixfold, to 1,326 miles of barriers by 1995, the latest year for
which the Federal Highway Administration has figures. The barriers, which rise 12 feet
and, in some instances, more than 30 feet above the road, cost more than $1 million/mile.
The editorial contends shielding nearby residents from the whine of tires and the roar of
truck engines is admirable. But the federally mandated noise -abatement program exerts
another, less desirable effect: Increasingly it takes the pleasure out of traveling. Surely,
it's time for state governments to realize they're blocking more than sound. The barriers
typically are chosen by engineers in state transportation departments. "These folks
Wren't exactly known for basing their decisions on their projects' effect on the
landscape or on the experience of travel. They tend to see their job as moving as
much tragic as fast as is safely possible. Then they compensate for the bad effects by
adding devices such as massive, ungainly noise barriers." Engineers are to blame for
eliminating slices of life-such as neighborhoods and business districts-and severing the
connection between travelers and their surroundings.
The editorial goes on to say if Americans want to improve the traveling experience, they
need to change the criteria by which highway projects are judged. "If a road moves large
volumes of traffic, but provides drivers with a miserable experience, it has failed." To
reduce these failures, state transportation departments should establish procedures that
make aesthetics one of the factors emphasized during the design process. In a few places,
such as Phoenix, governments have started commissioning artists, architects and others to
work with the engineers. They are also planting more vegetation in front of walls.
Paul Kumar 8,"6'01 6
PROFESSIONAL Ouinion of NoiseWalls
7. "A Sound Solution" from Planning, April 2001, Vol.67 Issue 4
a. Sorvig, Kim, Grob, Jeffrey (authors of the article)
"In many cases noise wall performance itself is questionable. "
b. Peter Yost, Environmental Building News (cited in the same article)
"Walls offer at best a I0-decibel reduction. "
C. Val Viers, Colorado College (cited in the same article)
the barrier significantly reduced noise only at locations within 20
yards from the wall the right of way, in effect. Beyond about 200
feet, protection comes primarily.from distance, not the wall. "
d. Sorvig, Kim, Grob, Jeffrey (authors of the article)
"Substitutes for noise walls do exist, although none of them will solve
the above problems. Earth mounds, or berms, are slightly more
effective than walls, and more natural looking, but require a much
wider right of way.
"Public "greenwalls" can also serve as noise walls, and often win
public favor. Like berms, they also help to mitigate air pollution.
But simple plantings do little to screen noise; a 100 foot band of
dense trees and shrubs reduces noise S decibels or less. "
Paul Kuzniar 8/'61,01 7
PRO-AESSIONAL Opinion of NoiseWalls
8. Vegetative Noise Barriers
[paraphrased from www.interstate25.com/ncdot/noise/noisemit.htmll
Vegetative barriers, defined here as a series of narrow and dense trees or shrubs
planted near a roadside, have long been applied with the purposes of landscaping and
visual shielding. Use of vegetative barriers to attenuate roadway noise has been
classically rejected due to the commonly accepted requirement that plantings must be
sufficiently deep, up to 100 feet in some instances, to provide noticeable results.
However, as traffic volumes and congestion continue to increase throughout the
world, the use of vegetation as a roadside noise barrier has gained interest. The
effectiveness of conventional rigid noise barriers is well understood and proven, however
there is a growing movement to avoid the institutional look and feel of these structures in
favor of more natural product. Hence, the use of vegetation and foliage to attenuate
roadway noise has recently been studied more vigorously. These attenuation
effectiveness studies have been conducted in the laboratory as well as in-situ
environments. The majority of the recent research efforts have been centered on two
categories - the study of vegetative barriers as measurable road noise attenuators, and the
investigation of the psychological or perceived effectiveness of vegetative barriers.
The majority of the research directed towards quantifiable noise attenuation has
been conducted in the laboratory using anechoic chambers to model the free-field
environment. The researchers have tested several configurations including natural plant
material applied to mesh screens, silk and vinyl plants in a simulated planting area, and
natural plants in clay pots. The general conclusion of these efforts is that vegetative
barriers are not an effective mitigation measure when compared to conventional
rigid barriers, but do contribute some limited attenuation as well as providing an
aesthetic improvement. Hendricks [1] found that strips of oleander shrubs
approximately 8-ft high and 15 to 20-ft wide provided attenuation of 1 to 3 dBA at
distances of 50-ft from the roadside. Similar tests using pine trees, with each tree
approximately 40-ft tall and 30-ft in diameter, spaced 10 to 20-ft apart, provided a
maximum of only 1 dBA reduction at a distance of 18-ft from the roadside.
In more qualitative efforts, a significant amount of research has been conducted to
understand the psychological affects of vegetative barriers in regards to roadway noise
attenuation [4, 5]. These studies have typically consisted of non-technical surveys and
questionnaires, although some have taken strides to educate the participants of noise
behavior and characteristics to better answer the survey questions. In unrelated studies,
Hayashi et al and Ishii found that vegetative barriers created a perceived
attenuation of road noise of 3 to 5 dBA. Both teams of researchers also concluded
that visualization of the noise source impacted the perceived sound levels
significantly; with small portions of a test vegetative barrier removed, participants
felt that noise levels increased disproportionately.
Paul Kuzniar 8,16/01 8
P ®FESSIONAL Opinion of NoiseWalls
9a. Highway Traffic Noise, Policy & Guidance, MWA, June 1995
[paraphrased from www.nonoise.org/library/higbway/policy.htm]
Vegetation, if it is high enough, wide enough, and dense enough that it cannot be seen
through, can decrease highway traffic noise. A b 1-meter width of dense vegetation can
reduce noise by 10 decibels, which cuts in half the loudness of traffic noise. It is usually
impossible, however, to plant enough vegetation along a road to achieve such reductions.
Roadside vegetation can be planted to create
a psychological relief, if not an actualr
lessening of traffic noise levels. Since a ALAL_
substantial noise reduction cannot be obtained
M.&CIM rr
for an extended period of time the FHWA does to ves Neaucriarr
not consider the planting of vegetation to be a
noise abatement measure. The planting of trees AMA Mfia
and shrubs provides only psychological benefits 140 AWeAeAuctM(PSlxW09MW)
and may be provided for visual- privacy or Vegetation and Noise Reduction
aesthetic treatment. not noise abatement.
9b. Highway Traffic Noise in the US, Problem & Response, rttWA, June 1997
[paraphrased from www.nonoise.org/library.htm]
Vegetation, if it is high enough, wide enough, and dense enough that it cannot be seen
over or through, can decrease highway traffic noise. A 61-meter width of dense
vegetation can reduce noise by 10 decibels, which cuts in half the loudness of traffic
noise. It is not feasible, however, to plant enough vegetation along a road to achieve such
reductions. If vegetation already exists, it can be saved to maintain a psychological relief,
if not an actual lessening of traffic noise levels. If vegetation does not exist, it can be
planted for psychological relief.
Federal Participation: Federal funds may be used for noise abatement measures where:
1. a traffic noise impact has been identified,
2. the noise abatement measures will reduce the traffic noise impact, and,
3. the overall noise abatement benefits are determined to outweigh the overall
adverse social, economic, and environmental effects and the costs of the noise
abatement measures.
The Federal share of the abatement costs is at the same participating ratio as for the
system on which the project is located.
Paul Ikuzniar 8,6•%`01 9
10. What should Vail do?
a. Long-term solution - Continue to work with CDOT to develop plans for the
"cut-and-cover" of the interstate. This is an ideal solution for a Town, State
and Fed partnership. Together, they can create value by adding new land, a
new tax base, and new opportunities for recreation, housing and parks.
b. Short-term solution - Plant trees. Yes, federal, state and technical specialists
maintain that vegetation does not reduce the sound problem. But even among
the specialists there is agreement that trees and shrubs are aesthetically
pleasing and psychologically satisfying to the general public, i.e., voters.
Why not do something visible for voters and visitors? The voters want action.
Trees are affordable, expeditious and will generate reams of print coverage
and minutes of broadcast PR coverage. Suzanne Silverthorn will have a de
heyday with stories such as "Hoity-toity town goes natural to solve man-made
problem."
C. What Vail should NOT do - Build a wall. A noisewall that blocks views,
divides the town and looks like the Jersey Turnpike is not what voters want.
This is Vail, not New Jersey. Let's not be hog-tied by conventional thinking;
let's be bold and creative and implement a simple, cost-effective means of
beautifying Vail and reducing noise at the same time trees.
If that doesn't persuade you, then I urge you to heed the advice of two memorable poets:
Apbett crtost Jo Ce 9(ihnet
"8omethingq there is "4 thank that 9. shall nevet see
that doesn't love a wall. " a poem lover as a free. "
Paul Kuzniar 8'6'01 10