HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-10-09 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 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. ITEM/TOPIC: NWCCOG Water Update. (20 min.)
Taylor Hawes
2. ITEM/TOPIC: Continued Budget Discussions. (2 hours)
Bob McLaurin
Steve Thompson
3. ITEM/TOPIC:Donovan Park Community Facility. (15 min.)
Todd Oppenheimer
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Pavilion design update.
Request to forgo LEEDS certification.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
Please refer to the attached memorandum dated October 5, 2001.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Please refer to the attached memorandum dated October 5, 2001.
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Vail Business Index. (15 min.)
Rick Scalpello
5. ITEM/TOPIC: Winter use of Bike Paths in Lionshead and Cascade
Brian McCartney Village. (30 min.)
Bill Jensen
6. DRB/PEC Report. (5 min.)
7. ITEM/TOPIC: OLYMPIC TORCH RELAY FLAGS, PENNANTS,
Larry Pardee AND BANNERS (10 min.)
As discussed previously, Vail has been selected as an Olympic
Torch Relay Celebration and Stopover Site on Friday, February 1,
2002. As a part of the planning process for this international event,
I have been given an ordering deadline of Monday, October 15,
2001, for any decorative banners, flags, or pennants. Attached you
will find pictures of these items, and although black and white here,
in color are blue and white, w/the torch red, gold, and white.
Below are staff recommendations for purchase. The SLOC (Salt
Lake Organizing Committee) guidelines state the banners cannot
be displayed more than 90 days prior to our "local" event, which
would still allow us to hang them as early as the middle of
November or by December 1 st. All three can be customized with
"VAIL" at no additional cost. Staff would suggest these are festive
and decorative, good advertising for both the Salt Lake Olympics
AND Vail, and would underscore our patriotic endorsement and
support of the Olympics at a time the U.S. is pulling together as a
nation, both individually and collectively.
VERTICAL BANNERS
Main Vail Roundabouts/West Vail Roundabouts
3 sets of six pennants each (or 18 poles) for both Main Vail
and West Vail
26"x96"
$618/set x 6 sets $3,708
HORIZONTAL BANNERS
2-2 sided banners
$825x2 $1,650
FLAGS
50 each/Village and LionsHead
$36x100 $3,600
$8,958
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends one of two methods of payment:
1) Using a portion of the $95,000 set aside in Y2002 in Capital
Projects Fund (VAIL TODAY) to be expended in this calendar ; or
2) A supplemental appropriation
8. Information Update. (5 min.)
9. Council Reports. (5 min.)
10. Other. (5 min.)
11. Adjournment. (4:50 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, OCTOBER 16, 2001, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN THE
TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2001, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001, BEGINNING AT 2:00 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
TQUESTIONS 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 BLACK GORE BRIDGE GREG H.: Coordinate w/Pam Hopkins on a suitable
Diana Donovan light design that is in accordance w/approved safety
guidelines.
7-24-01 BIGHORN MOTEL (formerly) EAST DAVID RHOADES: Another one for "the list"!" This David Rhoades will locate this property and report back to Council.
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 4957 JUNIPER LANE, WEST HALF DAVID RHOADES: The list and the letter: Exterior of Matter referred to Gary Goodell to review for Building Code violations.
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.
8/14/01 CONTRACT W/VRD RE: THE ICE BOB: Include "free days" for Council use in contract.
DOME
Diana Donovan
8/21/01 ADDITIONAL HOUSING NINA: Ask Housing Authority whether it would be
AUTHORITY TASK willing to explore development of a mixed-use project
Greg Moffet along the south side of the Village parking structure.
9/4/01 GROSS SALES VS. TAXABLE STEVE: Please attach latest back up.
SALES
F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowup\10-09-01 cfu
October 9, 2001 - Page 1
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 1
2001
Greg Moffet
9/11/01 INCREASE IN COUNCIL BENEFITS JP: Please do a survey of recent comparable council
Sybill Navas compensation(s), to include the cost of providing health
benefits. Schedule a work session agenda item no
later than October 2nd, to allow first and second reading
of an amending ordinance should Council wish to
proceed prior to the November 6th regular municipal
election.
9/11/01 POTATO PATCH HOMEOWNER'S ALLEN: Do we have any recourse in seeking a more In researching the files, it appears that the caretaker's unit was never
DUES just and equitably reflective dues assessment for our separated from the common element and it is not subject to
Council unit at Potato Patch? assessment. A solution with the new town attorney will be
forthcoming and a recommendation will be submitted to the Council.
9/11/01 CONSULTANT TO REVIEW TCI BOB: Hire consultant.
AGREEMENT
Council
10/02/01 RUSSELL: With no kitchen facilities in these units,
VVI LONG TERM RENTALS there is a huge concern of line overloads for
Kevin Foley microwaves, hot plates, etc.
F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowup110-09-01 cfu
October 9, 2001 - Page 2
STAFF MEETING
THURSDAY, October 4, 2001
9:00 A.M. IN THE ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCE ROOM
AGENDA/FOLLOW-UP
1. Review next week's agenda.
3. Council Follow-Up Sheet.
4. Citizen Inquiry.
5. Next Week's Schedule.
Annie Fox out 4/8
Pam B. out 4/8-4/9
Greg Hall out 4/8
6. Departmental Items.
J.P. - Darcy Wilde resigning - effective 10/17/01.
Child Care - 3 more spaces sold. $47/day infants; $30/day pre-school
Eagle Co. approved $65,000 start-up costs.
Unsafe Conditions Report - each dept.'s responsibility to report - J.P. to attend staff
meetings to explain.
John Gulick - Fire Fighters' Benefit - Oct. 17`h - Evergreen Lodge.
Bob/Suzanne - e-mail to all employees being prepared.
7. Other.
8. Critical Strategies.
UPCOMING ITEMS:
October 16. 2001. Work Session
AIPP Strategic Plan
Ski Club Vail Development Update
October 16. 2001. Evenina Meetinq
Wilderness Designation
VLMD Resolution adopting 2002 Budget
Ord. #25, 2nd reading, Building Materials Regulations
Ord. #28, 2"d reading, Timber Ridge Zoning Regulations
Ord. #29, 2nd reading, Middle Creek Subdivision Zoning Regulations
October 23. 2001. Work Session
Development Review Fees Discussion
DRB/PEC Report
October 30. 2001 - 5th Tuesdav. No Meetina
f/mcesrerhxager/agmJ W nldfeg
r
WATER QUALITY I QUANTITY COMMITTEE
QQ Post Office Box 2308 - Silverthorne, Colorado 80498
(970) 468-0295 - Fax: (970) 468-1208 - email: ggwater@colorado.net
~C/V !
MEMORANDUM J 1 ? N1 J `
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION
To: 00 Board
From: Taylor Hawes)nd Barbara Green
Re: CWCB Appeal of Golden Case
Date: October 2, 2001
Background
In December 1998, the City of Golden ("Golden") applied for water rights in Water
Division 1 in accordance with Article 92, Chapter 37 of the Colorado Revised Statutes
("C.R.S.") for an in-channel kayak course ("Course"). Golden then designed and
constructed the white water kayak course in Clear Creek. The course consisted of seven
separate dam structures. The structures were designed to control and concentrate the
flow for boating purposes. All the Objectors to the water rights application settled with
Golden in the Water Court case, except for the Colorado Water Conservation Board
("CWCB") and the State Engineer's Office (collectively, the "State").
The water court found that Golden's water rights application was valid because the City's
structures did "control, concentrate and direct the flow in a manner constituting a
diversion pursuant to section 37-92-103(7), C.R.S," citing Citv of Thornton v. Citv of
Fort CollinsI to support its finding. The court also found the following: the rights for the
kayak course constitute a beneficial use; provide economic benefit to Golden; and are not
wasted.' Golden received both absolute and conditional rights on June 13, 2001. Aspen,
Breckenridge and Vail (including Eagle River Water and Sanitation District) all have
pending water right applications for these type of recreational diversions.
The Fort Collins Boat Chaste case
The Ft. Collins case, decided in April 1992, is the precedent setting case for recreational
in-channel rights ("RICD"). Ft. Collins applied for water rights for a dam in the channel
of the Poudre River that served as a boat chute. Thornton, and other objectors, argued
that the dam was not a diversion, and that Ft. Collins was really attempting to apply for a
minimum stream flow right, a right given solely to the Colorado Water Conservation
Board. The water court rejected this argument and approved Ft. Collins' water rights
application. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld the water court decree holding that
"water may be appropriated by a structure or device which either removed water away
Thornton v. Ft. Collins, 830 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1992).
2 District Court, Water Division No. 1, State of Colorado, Case No. 98CW448, p 6.
1
from its natural course or location and towards another course or location or which
controls water within its natural watercourse, assuming such action puts the water to
beneficial use. The type of beneficial use to which the controlled water is put may mean
that water must remain in it natural course. This is not an appropriation of a minimum
stream flow, an appropriation given exclusively to the CWCB." The facts in the Ft.
Collins case are slightly different than the Golden case, but the Supreme Court made
broad statements in the Ft. Collins case about RICDs that made Golden believe its kayak
course would constitute a legal appropriation of water and not an minimum instream
flow.
Colorado Water Conservation Board's Abbeal of the Golden Recreational Rights
The State appealed the Water Court's decision regarding the Golden recreational rights
on July 30, 2001. The entire list of issues raised in the Notice of Appeal is in Appendix
A of this memo. From our review of the case, we are concerned about five of the issues
raised in the appeal because if the State prevails on these issues, it may hinder or even
preclude local governments from applying for or obtaining recreational rights. These
issues are 1) whether the water court erred in not setting a duty of water for recreational
boating uses; 2) whether the water court erred in allowing an instream use of water
contrary to the provisions of § 37-92-102(3), 10 C.R.S. (2000); 3) whether the Supreme
Court should repudiate a portion of its opinion in the Ft. Collins decision; 4) whether the
water court improperly applied the opinion in Ft. Collins to this case; and whether the
water court erred as a matter of law in defining "control" within the meaning of § 37-92-
103(7) A summary discussion of the issues follows.
1. Whether the water court erred in not setting a duty of water for
recreational boating uses.
Water rights are quantified according to the amount of water that is reasonable to
serve the appropriator's intended beneficial use. This is called "duty of water".
Duty of water is often referred to in terms of what is necessary for agricultural
demands without wasting water. For example, duty of water for agriculture is the
amount of water required for the practical and beneficial irrigation of a given
amount of land (i.e., 1 cfs to irrigate 80 acres). The Appellants argue that the
water court should have quantified the amount of water necessary for boating uses
by setting a duty of water for boating uses.
Unlike agricultural uses for which the amount of water needed can be predicted,
boating uses require varying amounts of water; one size does not fit all boating
uses. An internationally acclaimed kayak course requires more flow per minute
than a family kayak park. Rafting may even require more than a kayak course.
The amount of water necessary depends on the stream segment, the natural
features of the segment, and other factors. As more of these cases appear in water
court, a precedent will develop for what constitutes the proper amount of water
for each type of boating use and stream segment. Additionally, the concept of a
s 830 P.2d at 931.
2
duty of water is related to consumptive use - recreational in-channel diversions
are not consumptive. Therefore, we believe that the water court was correct in
making a case specific determination regarding the amount of water necessary for
recreational boating and that it would be inappropriate, or even impossible, to set
a "duty of water" for such uses in the Golden case.
2. Whether the water court erred in allowing an instream use of water
contrary to the provisions of § 317_92-102(3), 10 C.R.S. (2000).
The Appellants argue that Section 37-92-102(3) prohibits anyone other than the
CWCB from appropriating water for instream uses. That section states that the
"Colorado water conservation board is hereby vested with the exclusive authority,
on behalf of the people of the state of Colorado, to appropriate in a manner
consistent with [the State] constitution, such waters of natural streams and lakes
as the board determined may be required for minimum stream flows or natural
surface water levels or volumes for natural lakes to preserve the natural
environment to a reasonable degree." We do not believe, however, that this
provision would preclude Golden's instream use, based upon the court's analysis
in the Ft. Collins case. There is a significant difference between a kayak course
and a minimum stream flow. The court would have to overturn the Ft. Collins
case to find in appellants' favor on this issue. Note that Greg Hobbs, now a
member of the Colorado Supreme Court, was an attorney for the objectors to the
Ft. Collins instream flow in this case.
In Thornton v. Ft Collins, the court found that § 37-92-102(3) did not bar a
recreational instream flow right. The court in Ft. Collins held that "water may be
appropriated by a structure or device which either removes water away from its
natural course or which controls water within its natural watercourse,
assuming such action puts the water to beneficial use. The type of beneficial use
to which the controlled water is put may mean that the water must remain in its
natural course. This is not an appropriation of a minimum stream flow, an
appropriation given exclusively to the CWCB."'
Golden was not trying to appropriate water solely for instream flows. Instead,
Golden satisfies the test for an appropriation by diversion, as opposed to an
instream flow water right, as set forth in the Ft. Collins case. Therefore, the water
court's decision was not contrary to the Colorado Revised Statute and should be
upheld.
3. Whether the Supreme Court should repudiate a portion of its opinion in
the Ft. Collins decision.
Appellants most likely want the Colorado Supreme Court to repudiate the entire
section of the Ft. Collins decision dealing with what constitutes a diversion.' This
4 Id. at 931.
5 Id. at 929-932.
3
section covered several issues including an explanation of how a "diversion in the
conventional sense is not required -6 This section also includes a statement that
"[t]he exclusive authority vested in the CWCB to appropriate minimum stream
flows does not detract from the right to divert and to put to beneficial use
unappropriated waters by removal or control."7 The Colorado Supreme Court's
decision was based on interpretation of the plain words of the statute in holding
that RICDs are not minimum stream flows as determined by §37-92-102(3)
C.R.S. The Supreme Court's decision should therefore not be repudiated.
4. Whether the water court improperly applied the opinion in Ft. Collins to
this case.
The appellants argue that even if the Ft. Collins case is not repudiated, the facts in
the Golden case are different than those in Ft. Collins and therefore, the Ft.
Collins case does not save the Golden appropriation. We disagree with that
conclusion. In the Ft. Collins case, Ft. Collins did not remove water from the
Poudre River from its natural course. The Supreme Court stated that " it is clear
that the Nature Dam is a structure which either removed water from its natural
course or location or controls water within its natural course or location given that
the Poudre's historic channel may be considered the River's natural course or
location."8 The court in Ft. Collins was very clear that controlling water in its
course by structures or devices constitutes a diversion.9 In the Golden case, the
city installed seven structures that functioned to "concentrate and control the flow
of water, to create waves and jets of water, self scouring pools, hydraulic holes,
large changes in current direction, and other white water features that are used by
kayakers and other boaters for recreational purposes."' ° These features control
water within the sense of the Ft. Collins case. Therefore, we believe the court
properly applied the Ft. Collins decision to the Golden case.
5. Whether the water court erred as a matter of law in defining "control "
within the meaning of § 37-92-103(7).
The elements of appropriation include three things 1) intent, 2) diversion, and 3)
beneficial use. 11 All three elements must exist. The State is arguing that
Golden's kayak course is not an appropriation because it is not a diversion within
the meaning of the Water Resources Administration Act ("Act"). "`Diversion' or
`Divert' is defined by the Act as "removing water from its natural course or
location, or controlling water in its natural course or location, by means of a
ditch, canal, flume, reservoir, bypass, pipeline, conduit, well, pump, or other
structure or device." 12 The CWCB believes that these recreational in-channel
b Id. at 929.
Id. at 930.
s Id. at 931.
9 Id.
Water Division 1, Case Number 98CW448 at 5.
DAVID GETCHES, WATER LAW IN ANUTSHELL, p 88-99 (1984).
12 § 37-92-103(7), C.R.S. (emphasis added).
4
r
diversions are not really diversions as defined by the Act because thev are not
really controlling the flow of the water.
First, the Ft. Collins court spoke directly to this issue of control: "[a]lthough
controlling water within its natural course or location by some structure or device
may effect a result which is similar to a minimum flow, that does not mean that
the appropriation effected by the stricture is invalid under the Act. When the
application of water to beneficial use is effected by some structure or device, the
resulting appropriation is a diversion within the meaning of the Act." 13 Relying
on this analysis, Judge Hayes in the Golden case concluded that "the structures in
the Golden water course control, concentrate and direct the flow of water through
the course in a manner that constitutes a diversion under C.R.S. § 37-92-
103(7)."" As for the beneficial use element of an appropriation, the Golden court
found that "the City of Golden derives substantial economic benefit from the
recreational use of the Course."1' Judge Hayes went on to say, "the Court
concludes that flows of up to 1,000 cfs can and will be put to beneficial use and
not wasted." 16 In fact, Golden presented evidence that the greater the flows, the
greater economic benefit to the city. Clearly, Golden intended to appropriate
water, the water is being diverted via control in its natural course, and it is being
put to beneficial use. Therefore, the court properly decided this issue.
SB 216 - Recreational In-Channel Diversions
QQ tracked SB 216 in last year's legislative session. The bill was enacted and is codified
at C.R.S. § 37-92-102-103 and C.R.S. § 37-92-305. This bill was introduced in response
to and as a limitation on the Ft. Collins case and the Golden recreational instream flows
water court decision. The CWCB claimed it was worried about "mischief applications"
(i.e., entities filing simply to keep water in the stream with no real beneficial, economic
use) and that SB 216 would prevent such filings. The bill establishes criteria for
recreational instream flows and established a second process that an applicant must go
through in addition to water court. SB 216 also provides for a rulemaking to develop
rules for the CWCB's involvement in recreational instream appropriations. QQ is
participating in the rulemaking and informal comment period.
SB 216 was introduced late in the session and it almost did not pass due to opposition
from Golden and our region of the State. To ensure the bill's passage, the CWCB
amended the bill to only apply to water right applications prior to January 1, 2001. This
excluded Golden, Aspen, Breckenridge, and Vail from the requirements of the bill.
These four applications still must go through the water court process, but do not have to
present their case to the CWCB nor does the CWCB make a recommendation to the
water court. The CWCB may still object like in any other water court case. For the
CWCB to now appeal Golden's case after excluding Golden and the other towns
" 830 P.2d at 931.
14 District Court, Water Division No. 1, State of Colorado, Case No. 98CW448. p 6.
is Id.
16 Id.
5
t
mentioned above from SB 216 in order to negate opposition seems disingenuous as the
outcome of this Appeal could negatively impact all of these applications since Aspen,
Vail and Breckenridge's applications are all still pending.
Conclusion
This Appeal could have several ramifications. First, if the State wins its appeal on the
issue that the Ft. Collins case should be repudiated in the Supreme Court, it could
preclude all recreational in-channel diversions including Aspen, Vail and Breckenridge's
pending water rights applications. That appears to be the CWCB's ultimate goal. If the
Supreme Court decides in favor of the State on some issues, it may simply limit these
types of recreational rights or it could preclude certain in-channel diversions, but allow
diversions that take water out of the stream and put it in another channel. Another
possible outcome would be that the Supreme Court could overturn the Golden decision
by imposing a narrow interpretation on the Ft. Collins case. It is difficult to speculate on
all the different possible outcomes. However, it is an attempt by the CWCB to limit the
tools available local governments to protect and develop their water resources in a way
that is beneficial to their economies. We think this is a valuable tool for the headwaters
region and should be protected.
QQ recommends filing an Amicus brief on the issues listed above on behalf of the entire
QQ membership. 17 The list of issues in Appendix A is a preliminary list. Therefore, it is
possible that some of these issues will not be raised in the actual brief filed by the State.
Fiscal Impact
Since this is outside the scope of the QQ contract, we would need to pay for part of this
appeal out of the QQ Legal Defense Fund. Taylor would contribute 20 free hours to this
effort as part of QQ contract. After that, her rate would be $50/hour. Barbara's rate
would be $165/hour. Both rates still provide significant savings to the QQ membership.
The amount spent form the Legal Defense Fund could be capped at $4,500 unless an
increase were authorized by the Board.
Timing
If QQ were to decide to file an Amicus brief on behalf of Golden, the brief would be due
in late November or early December.
CA2001 GeneraRGolden appeal memo_.doc
I' Amicus curiae means "a friend of the court." A person with a strong interest in the outcome of the case
may petition the court for permission to file a brief, usually on behalf of one of the parties.
6
APPENDIX A
ADVISORY LISTING OF ISSUES TO BE RAISED ON APPEAL.
1. Whether the water court erred in not setting a duty of water for recreational uses;
2. Whether the water court erred in allowing an instream use of water contrary to the
provisions of §37-92-102(3), 10 C.R.S. (2000);
3. Whether the water court erred in awarding an impermissible riparian water right;
4. Whether the Supreme Court should repudiate a portion of its opinion in the Ft.
Collins decision;
5. Whether the water court improperly applied the opinion in Ft. Collins to this case;
6. Whether the water court erred as a matter of law in defining "control" within the
meaning of § 37-92-103(7);
7. Whether the water court erred in finding that the City of Golden controlled water
that has overtopped its structure;
8. Whether the water court erred in finding that creation of the whitewater features
demonstrated "control" within in the meaning § 37-92-103(7);
9. Whether the water court erred as a matter of law in awarding the Citv of Golden a
decree for an amount of water in excess of the minimum amount necessary for its
claimed uses;
10. Whether the water court erred as a matter of law in awarding a water right for a
nighttime use or at times when the whitewater course is frozen;
11. Whether the water court erred in finding that the amounts of water claimed by the
City of Golden were reasonable and appropriate for the purposes for which they
claimed, and;
12. Whether the record supported the finding that City of Golden put water to use in
the amount claimed in each month of the year.
13. Whether the water court erred in awarding a water right that allows the City of
Golden to command the whole or a substantial flow of the stream merely to
facilitate its taking the fraction of the whole flow to which it claims to be entitled.
7
f
The Northwest Colorado Council of Governments'
WATER QUALITY & QUANTITY COMMITTEE
(QQ)
PURPOSE
The Water Quality and Quantity Committee (QQ) comprises towns,. counties and water and
sanitation districts in the Headwaters Region of Colorado. QQ's purpose is to enable its members
to protect and enhance the quality of our region's waters while facilitating the responsible use of
those resources for the good of all Colorado citizens and its environment.
QQ monitors water development activities and legislative initiatives that affect water quality or
quantity in the basin of origin. Regularly scheduled meetings of the QQ Committee operate as a
forum for policy formulation and strategy decision-making by QQ Committee members. The QQ
Committee staff provides members with monitoring of legislative activities, water quality
information, litigation and advocacy support, activity coordination, cooperative problem-solving
assistance, transmountain diversion oversight, and technical assistance to further intergovernmental
cooperation and increase political clout with state and federal agencies.
HISTORY
The QQ Committee was first established in 1978 as a cost savings measure designed to coordinate
legal activities regarding transmountain diversions for the headwater counties. In the late 1970s and
early 1980s, elected officials from headwater communities found it difficult, if not impossible, to
have a voice in state water issues that affected their communities.
Today, QQ has worked to turn litigation and challenges which characterized the 1980s into new
efforts promoting cooperative problem-solving approaches to water. The QQ Committee also
works to protect water quality through improved land use practices and changes in water policy on
the West Slope.
CURRENT LEGISLATIVE POLICIES
QQ opposes legislation that would hamper a local government's authority to protect water resources
within its jurisdiction. QQ actively seeks to protect HB 1041 and other land use powers to ensure
that they are not weakened. Water quality protection and watershed management remain strong
priorities for QQ's members as these issues are directly tied to their recreation-based economies.
Other QQ activities include the following:
• QQ staff assisted in the drafting of HB 1041 regulations for member counties and
successfully defended the validity of these regulations spanning 10 years.
• QQ defended Eagle County's denial of a 1041 permit for the Homestake II diversion
project.
• QQ participated in Denver's system-wide EIS and the Two Forks permitting process.
I
• QQ represents member jurisdictions in the State's hearings on adopting the Anti-
degradation Rule, the State's 401 rulemaking process, and stream classification and
standards setting.
• NWCCOG and QQ pushed for a regional quality management plan linking water quality
and quantity which was later adopted by the Water Quality Control Commission.
• QQ initiated and administered the Colorado River Headwaters Forum.
• QQ developed state of the art water quality performance standards for land development
activities. This project was the result of an outreach conducted by QQ and NWCCOG to
identify needs and issues of the headwater communities related to water quality. QQ has
worked with and continues to work with its members to incorporate the model water
quality regulations into their respective land use codes.
• QQ worked with the ski areas to gain their support for the Model Water Quality
Protection Standards.
• QQ conducted a rate study for all the water and sanitation districts in the QQ region.
• QQ has actively worked to block legislation that would impact our members' ability to
protect water resources.
• QQ submitted a coordinated response on the White River National Forest Plan Revision
EIS and its impacts to our region's water resources.
• QQ successfully blocked legislative attempts to gut 1041 authority.
CURRENT QQ PROJECTS
QQ has several ongoing and completed projects in 2001 that are listed below.
• QQ initiated and now manages the Upper Colorado River Basin Project ("UPCO) with
Summit, Grand Counties, the Colorado River District, Middle Park Water Conservancy
District, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, and Denver Water Department.
The Project will examine future hydrological, water supply and water quality conditions
in the basin and related growth impacts and try to develop a coordinated approach to
solving attendant problems. QQ expects that the study phase will be completed early in
2001. Phase III, the solutions' phase, will begin upon completion of the study part of the
project.
• QQ initiated discussions between Headwater and Front Range elected officials,
facilitating education, relationships and cooperation. The goal is to impart an
understanding of the implications to the West Slope due to Front Range growth and
water use to Front Range policymakers.
• QQ is rewriting Summit and Eagle Counties' 1041 regulations.
• QQ will review and approve NWCCOG's 208 Plan.
• QQ is assisting Rural Counties and Development develop a watershed directory of all
water users in the region.
• QQ is participating in the Snake River Task Force to address water quality issues
associated with the abandoned Pennsylvania Mine in Summit County.
• QQ participates in the South Metro Water Supply Study group to promote the use of
non-West Slope water in south Denver.
• QQ actively participates in the Forest Service EIS processes on ski area expansions to
ensure that water quality and quantity is protected.
2
L__
• QQ is tracking Homestake II alternatives including the Ruedi Reservoir pumpback in
Pitkin County.
• QQ worked to mitigate the impacts of a recreational instream flow bill in the legislature.
• QQ presents papers and lectures at meetings, workshops and conferences to advocate
headwater perspectives throughout the State.
ORGANIZATION
QQ's 2001 members, associate members, and participating water and sanitation districts include:
Eagle County Aspen Aspen Consolidated
Grand County Basalt Basalt Sanitation District
Pitkin County Breckenridge Bellyache Ridge metro District
Summit County Dillon Breckenridge Sanitation District
Gunnison County Eagle Columbine Lake Water & Sanitation
Park County* Fraser Copper Mountain Consolidated Metro
Colorado River Water Frisco Dillon Valley Metro District
Conservation District* Granby Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
Upper Gunnison River Water Grand Lake East Dillon Water District
Conservancy District* Gypsum Frisco Sanitation District
Hot Sulphur Springs Granby Sanitation District
Kremmling Grand County Water & Sanitation District
Red Cliff Hamilton Creek Metro District
Silverthorne Kremmling Sanitation District
Vail Lake Creek Metro District
Winter Park Mid-Valley Metro District
Yampa Moraine Park Water
Silver Creek Water District
Three Lakes Sanitation District
White Horse Springs Water & Sanitation
Winter Park West & Sanitation District
* Associate members
CA2001 GeneralTact sheet QQ(O I ),doc
3
TOWN OF VAIL
PROPOSED 2002 REVISED BUDGET
OCTOBER 9, 2001
Work Session
INDEX
Memorandum from Town Manager - Budget Revisions 1-6
Memorandum from Finance Director - Important 2002 Budget Facts 7-8
2002 Budget Summary 9
This single-page schedule reports town-wide revenues and expenditures by category. An
adjustment is made for interfund charges and transfers to illustrate both gross and net amounts.
Summary of Revenue and Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance 10
This report shows in summary what the town's projected fund balances are for all of the
town's funds in 2001 and 2002. It also shows the changes in fund balance is by fund.
Major Revenue Analysis for 2002 Budget 11
This schedule compares percentage and dollar amount changes for 2000, 2001, and 2002
for the town's 10 largest revenue sources.
2002 Proposed Budget Adjustments 12 - 16
This schedule discloses in detail (for affected funds) what the differences are between the
original revenue and expenditure 2002 Budget reviewed by the Council in 2000 and the
amendments that need to be made to the 2002 Budget.
Five Year Financial Projection - General Fund 17
This schedule shows in summary what the impacts are of projecting future increases to various
revenue and expenditures in the town's General Fund, Dispatch Services Fund, and the
Heavy Equipment Fund. The first year is estimated 2001, the second year is 2002 Budget and then we
project out 3 years. The projections are based upon staffs best estimate of future growth for various line
items in the revenue and expenditure budgets.
}
t
INDEX
(Continued)
Five Year Financial Projection - Dispatch Services Fund 18
See explanation for General Fund, above.
Five Year Financial Projection - Heavy Equipment Fund 19
See explanation for General Fund, above.
Summary of Changes in Personnel 20
This report is used to show the cost and additional number of FTE's that will be added to
the 2002 budget.
Five Year Summary of Revenues and Expenditures - Capital Projects Fund 21 - 26
This plan and report is required by the Charter and is a projection of future revenues and
projects for 5 years.
Five Year Summary of Revenues and Expenditures - Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 27 - 32
This plan and report is required by the Charter and is a projection of future revenues and
projects for 5 years.
Summary of Expenditures by Fund and Interfund Transfers and Charges 33
This report shows what the town's total expenditure budget is for each fund including
2000 actual, 2001 original and amended, and the 2002 budget. An adjustment is made for
interfund charges and transfers, to arrive at the net expenditure budget.
Summary of Revenue by Fund and Interfund Transfers and Charges 34
This report shows what the town's revenue budget is for each fund including 2000 actual,
2001 original and amended, and the 2002 budget. An adjustment is made for interfund charges and
transfers, to arrive at a net revenue budget or the actual amount of money that is collected from
outside entities.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FR: Bob McLaurin
Town Manager
DT: October 4, 2001
RE: Budget Revisions
Pursuant to our budget discussions last Tuesday, and subsequent conversations
with individual Council members, I have prepared the attached documents to
provide alternatives to the Manager's proposed budget. Specifically, I have
prepared four different revenue and expenditure alternatives. The alternatives
involve reduction in sales and lift tax of 5%, 10% 15% and 20%. The proposed
budget currently has sales tax forecast at $15.5 million and Lift Tax at $1.9
million respectively. I have also provided recommendations for reductions to
meet each of the revenue forecasts.
The first page of this attachment shows the items I evaluated and considered for
budget reductions as well as the budgeted amount as of the last Council
meeting. Please note that the operating reductions have been divided into two
categories. Operating reductions means expenditure reductions of general
operating expenses such as supplies, travel and training. Reduction in Force
means a reduction in the number of employees. Both of these are undetermined
at this point and we would identify these reductions following the adoption of the
budget.
1
Items evaluated and considered for budget Reductions
Original Amount (as of 10/02/01)
Street Light Improvements $ 75,000
Drainage Improvements $ 75,000
Infrastructure Improvements (Vail Today) $ 95,000
Parking Structure Improvements $ 470,000
General Facility Improvements $ 334,000
Capital Street Maintenance $ 975,000
Technology Upgrade $ 50,000
Software/Hardware Replacement $ 180,000
Web development $ 100,000
PD Lap Tops $ 70,000
Radio System $ 300,000
Document Imaging $ 120,000
Fire Station Design $ 250,000
Town Shop Expansion $ 750,000
Buses (9) $ 2,800,000
Wayfinding $ 100,000
Bearproof Containers $ 40,000
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Replacement $ 565,000
Vail Standards $ 200,000
Parking Hosts (5) $ 75,000
Firefighters (2) $ 120,000
Total $ 7,744,000
2
Alternative A (5% Reduction)
Revenue Reduction $ 850,000
Expenditure Reductions
Street Light Improvements $ -
Drainage Improvements $ -
Infrastructure Improvement (Vail Today) $ -
Parking Structure Improvements $ -
General Facility Improvements $ -
Capital Street Maintenance $ 75,000
Technology Upgrade $ 50,000
Software/Hardware Replacement $ -
Web development $ 50,000
PD Lap Tops $ -
Radio System $ 300,000
Document Imaging $ -
Fire Station Design $ 70,000
Town Shop Expansion $ -
Buses (9) $ -
Wayfinding $ 50,000
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Replacement $ 150,000
Bear Proof Containers $ 40,000
Vail Standards $ 50,000
Parking Hosts $ -
Firefighters $ -
Bus Service Reduction $ -
Operating Reductions $ 25,000
Total Reductions $ 860,000
Total
3
Alternative B (10% Reduction)
Revenue Reduction $ 1,700,000
Expenditure Reductions
Street Light Improvements $ 25,000
Drainage Improvements $ 25,000
Infrastructure Improvement $ 25,000
Parking Structure Improvements $ 60,000
General Facility Improvements $ 30,000
Capital Street Maintenance $ 145,000
Technology Upgrade $ 50,000
Software/Hardware Replacement $ -
Web development $ 75,000
PD Lap Tops $ -
Radio System $ 300,000
Document Imaging $ -
Fire Station Design $ 70,000
Town Shop Expansion $ -
Buses ( less 1 bus) $ 305,000
Wayfinding $ 50,000
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Replacement $ 230,000
Bear Proof Containers $ 40,000
Vail Standards $ 100,000
Parking Hosts (less 1) $ 12,500
Firefighters $ -
Bus Service Reduction $ -
Operating Reductions $ 60,000
Total Reductions $ 1,602,500
4
Alternative C (15% Reduction)
Revenue Reduction $ 2,550,000
Expenditure Reductions
Street Light Improvements $ 25,000
Drainage Improvements $ 25,000
Infrastructure Improvement $ 50,000
Parking Structure Improvements $ 75,000
General Facility Improvements $ 50,000
Capital Street Maintenance $ 175,000
Technology Upgrade $ 50,000
Software/Hardware Replacement $ -
Web development $ 100,000
PD Lap Tops $ -
Radio System $ 300,000
Document Imaging $ -
Fire Station Design $ 70,000
Town Shop Expansion $ -
Buses (less 3 buses) $ 912,000
Wayfinding $ 50,000
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Replacement $ 400,000
Bear Proof Containers $ 40,000
Vail Standards $ 100,000
Parking Hosts (less 2) $ 25,000
Firefighters $ -
Bus Service Reductions $ 45,000
Operating Reductions $ 60,000
Reductions In force $ -
Total Reductions $ 2,552,000
5
Alternative D (20% Reduction) `
Revenue Reduction $ 3,400,000
Expenditure Reductions
Street Light Improvements $ 25,000
Drainage Improvements $ 50,000
Infrastructure Improvement $ 95,000
Parking Structure Improvements $ 80,000
General Facility Improvements $ 60,000
Capital Street Maintenance $ 200,000
Technology Upgrade $ 50,000
Software/Hardware Replacement $ 25,000
Web development $ 100,000
PD Lap Tops $ 80,000
Radio System $ 300,000
Document Imaging $ 120,000
Fire Station Design $ 70,000
Town Shop Expansion $ -
Buses (less 3 buses) $ 912,000
Wayfinding $ 75,000
Equipment Replacement $ 430,000
Bearproof Containers $ 40,000
Vail Standards $ 100,000
Parking Hosts (less 3) $ 37,500
Firefighters $ -
Bus Service Reduction $ 55,000
Operating Reductions $ 100,000
Reductions In force $ 50,000
West Meadow Drive $ 350,000
Total Reductions $ 3,404,500
6
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Steve Thompson
Finance Director
DATE: October 4, 2001
RE: IMPORTANT 2002 BUDGET FACTS
• The net revenue budget is $34 million - the net expenditure budget is $43 million
with a projected use of fund balance of $8.9 million. The use of $8.9 million in fund
balance is to finish Capital Projects including the Donovan Park and Pavilion.
• The ending projected fund balance for all funds is $10.1 million vs. $19 million
projected for year ending 2001.
• 2002 Budget includes 5.6 additional FTE's, however, we have not included the
FTE's that may come from implementing Vail Standards or maintenance of Donovan
Park.
• Sales tax is projected to be $15.5 million which is the same amount estimated for
2001. On Tuesday, Oct. 9t", we will discuss whether this number should be
reduced.
• The 2002 Budget includes an increase in property tax revenue of 9.7% and the base
mill levy would be left at 4.69 mills.
• Total revenues for the town are projected to be $32.9 million in 2002, versus $34.8
million in 2001.
• The 2002 Capital Projects Fund Budget is $15.7 million, which includes the following
major projects: $2.8 million bus replacements, $750,000 for town shop
improvements/storage projects for the town shop, $2.6 million for the Donovan Park
Pavilion, $804,000 in parking structure and general facilities improvements,
$975,000 in capital street maintenance, $2.3 million in debt service payments. The
projected fund balance in 2002 is $504,271.
7
• The Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 2002 Budget is $4.6 million, which includes the
following major projects in 2002: Annual maintenance of parks and bike paths is
$1.2 million, Donovan Park $2.5 million, Open Space Acquisition $500,000. The
projected fund balance in 2002 is $3.5 million.
• The five-year model for the General Fund includes $250,000 starting in 2003 for the
staffing and maintenance of a new fire station and includes $250,000 of
• unidentified revenue to support these expenditures.
• The 2002 Budget includes a 5.5 percent merit increase for full-time employees.
8
Financial Overview
2002 BUDGET SUMMARY
Revenues and Expenditures 2001 PERCENT 2002PERCENT
Annual Revenues by Type:
Local Taxes:
Sales Tax 15,578,820 38% 15,578,820 38%
Property and Ownership 2,567,758 6% 2,807,267 7%
Ski Lift Tax 1,927,800 5% 1,927,800 5%
Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,900,000 7% 2,500,000 6%
Franchise Fees & Penalties on Taxes 605,485 1% 621,875 2%
Licenses & Permits 1,192,100 3% 1,192,100 3%
Intergovernmental Revenue 1,766,667 4% 3,413,643 8%
Transportation Centers 2,000,000 5% 2,000,000 5%
Charges for Services 5,585,084 14% 4,362,116 11%
Fines & Forfeitures 221,798 1% 206,690 1%
Earnings on Investments 998,750 2% 428,750 1%
Miscellaneous 5,537,451 14% 5,430,884 13%
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUES 40,881,713 100% 40,469,945 100%
Less Interfund Charges and Transfers (6,024,192) (6,290,469)
fNet Annual Revenues 34,857,521 34,179,476
Annual Expenditures by Type:
Municipal Services:
Town Officials 1,147,330 1,136,070
Administrative Services & Risk Management 2,441,671 2,359,570
Community Development & Housing 1,308,241 1,340,500
Police 5,071,102 5,335,249
Fire 1,425,328 1,625,926
Public Works & Streets 2,249,109 2,436,452
Parks & AIPP 918,950 935,965
Transportation & Parking 3,188,937 3,514,322
Facility & Fleet Maintenance 4,490,250 4,661,590
Library 753,121 791,826
Contributions, Marketing and Special Events 1,487,120 1,566,552
Health Insurance 1,703,660 1,750,078
Total Municipal Services 26,184,819 58% 27,454,100 56%I
Capital Improvement Programs:
Capital Projects Fund 10,451,452 15,779,436
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund Projects 6,115,838 3,821,544
Total Capital Improvement Programs 16,567,290 37% 19,600,980 40%1
Debt Service 2,324,908 5% 2,328,929 5%I
[TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES 45,077,017 100% 49,384,009 100%~
Less Interfund Charges and Transfers (6,024,192) (6,290,469)
1.NetAnnual. Expenditures 39,052,825 43,093,540
9
TOWN OF VAIL
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
2001 2002
Beginning Revenue Ending Revenue
Fund Estimated Budgeted Over(Under) Fund Estunated Proposed Over(Under) Fund
Fund Type/Fuud Balance Revenue Expenditures Expenditures Balance Revenue Expenditures Expenditures Balance
General Fund 4,724,309 19,584,196 19,754,265 (170,069) 4,554,240 21,078,225 21,078,225 4,554,240
Snecial Revenue Funds:
Capital Projects Fund 8,624,485 9,644,161 10,451,452 (807,291) 7,817,194 8,466,513 15,779,436 (7,312,923) 504,271
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 7,762,562 4,032,917 6,853,570 (2,820,653) 4,941,909 3,151,887 4,597,089 (1,445,202) 3,496,707
Vail Marketing Fund 28,292 336,700 336,700 28,292 336,700 336,700 28,292
Debt Service Fund 170,352 2,324,908 2,324,908 170,352 2,328,929 2,328,929 170,352
Internal Service Funds:
Heavy Equipment Fund 1,329,482 2,063,769 2,365,144 (301,375) 1,028,107 1,975,259 2,162,522 (187,263) 840,844
Health Insurance Fund 477,396 1,578,660 1,703,660 (125,000) 352,396 1,750,078 1,750,078 352,396
Dispatch Services Fund 108,909 1,316,402 1,287,318 29,084 137,993 1,382,354 1,351,030 31,324 169,317
Totals 23,225,787 40,881,713 45,077,017 t4,19~OU5) 19,030,482 40;469,945 49,384,009 (8,914,064) 10,116,419
fundsum02 10 10/5/2001
Major Revenue Analysis for 2002 Budget
Original Revised % Change Revised Budgeted
2000 2001 2001 from 2001 2002 Increase
Actual Budget Budget Original Budget Budget 2002
Sales Tax 15,368,598 15,578,820 15,578,820 No Increase 15,578,820 0.0%
County Sales Tax 517,260 517,500 529,421 2.30% 529,421 0.0%
Property Tax Revenue 2,082,770 2,402,879 2,402,879 No Increase 2,635,958 9.7%
Lift Tax Revenue 1,961,723 1,927,800 1,927,800 No Increase 1,927,800 0.0%
Road & Bridge Revenue 466,024 480,300 480,300 No Increase 489,906 2.0%
Highway Users Tax 225,509 226,544 226,544 No Increase 219,358 -3.2%
Parking Revenue 1,980,421 1,775,340 2,000,000 12.65% 2,000,000 No Increase
Franchise Fees 576,904 581,785 581,785 No Increase 598,175 2.8%
Building Permits 606,671 650,000 650,000 No Increase 650,000 No Increase
23,785,880 24,140,968 24,377,549 0.98% 24,629,438 1.0%1
Total GF Revenues 19,120,357 19,254,911 19,584,196 1.71% 19,820,595 1.2%
RETT Tax 3,518,178 2,900,000 2,900,000 No Increase 2,500,000 -13.8%
RevenueAna12001 11 10/5/2001
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Revenues Expenditures Description
GENERAL FUND
Revenues
Sales Tax (311,281) Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Property Tax 136,964 Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Specific Ownership Tax 1,483 Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Ski Lift Tax (38,556) Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
County Sales Tax 12,338 Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Highway User's Tax (9,451) Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Parking 237,000 Revised estimate based on 2001 collections
Shared Costs 20,163 Community Info Assistant from VVTCB
Administration:
Telephone Use Charges 39,000 Underbudgetd line item
Salaries & Benefits 38,407 Admin. assistants
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 77,407
Community Development:
Transfer CEO position 7,070 Transfer D. Rhoades from PD
Contract Labor 5,000 Temp help
Hardware < $5,000 2,000 Fax machine
Volunteer program 300 Uniforms, flowers, mise items
TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 14,370
Housing:
TOTAL HOUSING 20,520 26,130
Police:
Transfer CEO position (2,450) Transfer D. Rhoades from PD
Food Supplies 1,500 Meetings & training classes
FTO pay (2,800) Reduce estimated training by 1 officer
Contract Services 60,000 CSP, Detox, July 4 & Dec 31, light sources
Radios R&M 10,000 $200/radio
Ammunition (3,500) Reduce estimate
Computer Hardware 6,500 Printer for digital photos
Small Equipment 4,500 Crisis Response Phone
TOTAL POLICE 73,750
101512001
2002 Budget Changes 12 11:16 AM
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Revenues Expenditures Description
GENERAL FUND Con't
Fire:
Salaries & Benefits 120,333 2 FTE's & secretary
Professional Fees 1,000 Legal fees for fire issues
Telephone Use Charges 2,820 Quarterly pager fees of $705
Travel 3,000 For professional development
Fire Protective Clothing 10,000 Revised estimate
Hardware < $5,000 300 Fax machine
TOTAL FIRE 137,453
Public Works
Temporary help 2,400 To cover admin vacations in summer
TOTAL PUBIC WORKS 2,400
Streets:
Flagpole Maintenance 8,075 Replacement flags & flagpoles
Gravel 3,249 Gravel $8,235 sand $1,008
TOTAL STREETS 11,324
Parking:
Salaries & Benefits 56,194 For host program
Uniforms 4,300 For 5 hosts
Radios < $5,000 3,000 For 5 hosts
Printing & Publishing 4,000 Maps
Signs & Sign Materials 15,000 TRC sign maintenance
Signs & Sign Materials 1,500 New rate sign for backlit fixture at TRC
TOTAL PARKING 83,994
10/5/2001
2002 Budget Changes 13 11:16 AM
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Revenues Expenditures Description
GENERAL FUND Con't
Facilities:
Electricity 6,000 Wind power utilization
TOTAL FACILITIES 6,000
Misc. Adjustments:
Allocation of sales tax 1,257,630 From Capital Projects Fund to Balance GF
Contributions 424,643 Contributions over Budget
Deficit in Pavilion Operations 20,000 Estimate Net-Cost to Operate Pavilion
Dispatch Services (33,797) TOV share decreased
Vail Standards 200,000
Salaries & Benefits (All Depts.) 52,320 Adjust to salary spreadsheet across departments
TOTAL MISC. ADJUSTMENTS 1,257,630 663,166
GENERAL FUND TOTAL CHANGES 1,326,810 1,095,994
Original Budget 19,751,415 19,982,231
GENERAL FUND FINAL REVISED BUDGET 21,078,225 21,078,225
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenue 143,281 See 5 year CPF schedule
Sales tax allocation (1,257,630) See 5 year CPF schedule
Project expenses 2,161,000 See 5 year CPF schedule
CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL CHANGES (1,114,349) 2,161,000
Original Budget 9,580,862 13,618,436
CAPITAL PROJECTS REVISED BUDGET 8,466,513 15,779,436
10/5/2001
2002 Budget Changes 14 11:16 AM
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Revenues Expenditures Description
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX
Salaries & Benefits (3,961) Adjust to salary spreadsheet
Overtime 5,681 Increase to an even $20,000
Trash 2,500 New item - Ford Park
Safety Supplies 1,096 Increase to an even $5,000
Flowers 4,000 Increase to an even $33,750
Landscaping Supplies 2,631 Increase to an even $8,500
Improvements Other than Buildings 5,000 Increase to an even $45,000
Total Parks Division 16,947
Revenue (368,500) See 5 year RETT schedule
Project expenses 1,775,460 See 5 year RETT schedule
RETT TOTAL CHANGES (368,500) 1,792,407
Original Budget 3,520,387 2,804,682
RETT REVISED BUDGET 3,151,887 4,597,089
HEAVY EOUIPMENT FUND
Salaries & Benefits 24,688 Adjust to salary spreadsheet
Radios R&M 18,600 Increase 124 radios from $50 to $200 to Eagle Co
Vehicles 18,000 Large cargo van for electricians
Vehicles 21,000 Flatbed for mow crew
Vehicles 20,500 Hybrid Toyota for CD
Vehicles 14,000 Boom mower for Holder
Misc Cap Outlay (8,400) Reallocate to floor scrubber
Equipment < $5000 8,400 Reallocate to floor scrubber
Equipment < $5000 3,500 Wheel balancer for light trucks/cars
Equipment < $5000 2,500 10 ton floor jack
Equipment < $5000 2,400 Misc shop tools, impacts, sockets, contingency
HEF TOTAL CHANGES 125,188
Original Budget 2,037,334
HEF FINAL REVISED BUDGET 2,162,522
10/5/2001
2002 Budget Changes 15 11:16 AM
2002 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Revenues Expenditures Description
DISPATCH SERVICES FITN.D
Contribution revenue (2,608) Reduces in proportion to expense reduction
Salaries & Benefits (14,145) Adjust to salary spreadsheet
Bonus 3,000 Dispatcher recruiting bonus
Telephone Use Charges 1,000 Cell phones/pagers for supervisors
Access Charge 5,385 Fee to access CBI system for wants & warrants
Office Supplies 820 Revise estimate
Food 750 Supervisor & team meetings
DISPATCH TOTAL CHANGES (2,608) (3,190)
Original Budget 1,384,962 1,354,220
DISPATCH FINAL REVISED BUDGET 1,382,354 1,351,030
10/5/2001
2002 Budget Changes 16 11:16 AM
GENERAL FUND
Five year Financial Projection
Budget Budget Projected Projected Projected
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
REVENUE Revised Budget Budget Budget Budget
Sales Tax 8,893,755 10,151,385 10,824,580 11,437,034 12,282,656
Other Taxes 5,101,043 5,356,942 5,451,328 5,734,039 5,834,261
Construction Fees 650,000 650,000 666,250 682,906 699,979
Licenses & Permits 75,400 75,400 77,285 79,217 81,198
Intergovernmental 1,513,174 1,534,378 1,578,217 1,623,344 1,669,797
Charges for Services 291,840 294,489 301,851 309,398 317,132
Parking Fees 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,050,000 2,101,250 2,153,781
Fines & Forfeits 209,458 194,350 199,209 204,189 209,294
New Revenue for Fire Operations 250,000 262,500 275,625
Effect of supplemental #2 80,365
Interest Income & Other Revenues 769,161 821,281 841,813 862,858 884,430
L TOTAL REVENUE 19,584,196 21,078,225 22,240,533 23,296,735 24,408,153
Percent Increase in Revenue 8.19% 7.63% 5,51% 4.75% 4.77%
EXPENDITURES
Salaries 8,498,656 9,112,603 9,568,233 10,046,645 10,548,977
Benefits 2,963,788 3,249,492 3,476,956 3,720,343 3,980,767
Wage & Benefit Savings (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) (60,000) (60,000)
New Fire Station (New Personnel & Mtce) 250,000 262,500 275,625
Vail Standards Program 200,000 210,000 220,500 231,525
Contributions & Special Events 789,420 1,229,852 1,254,449 1,279,538 1,305,129
All Other Operating Expenses 4,226,430 4,345,906 4,519,742 4,700,532 4,888,553
Capital Outlay 231,329 237,441 200,000 200,000 200,000
Rental Operating 153,677 160,547 166,969 173,648 180,594
Contingency 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000
Heavy Equipment Charges Operating 1,342,111 1,408,813 1,507,691 1,580,369 1,656,709
Heavy Equipment Charges Replace 396,162 396,163 387,509 387,509 387,509
Dispatch Services 473,646 464,514 489,584 515,751 543,365
Proposed 2002 Budget Adjustments 237,894 174,400 174,400 174,400
Effect of supplemental appropriations 644,046
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 19,754,265 21,078,225 22,240,533 23,296,735 24,408,153
Percent Increase 8.96% 6.70% 5.51% 4.75% 4.77%
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (170,069) (0) (0) 0 0
L ENDING FUND BALANCE 4,554,240 4,554,240 4,554,240 4,554,240 4,554,240
Wlnproj02 17 10/5/2001
DISPATCH SERVICES INTERNAL SERVICE FUND
Five year Financial Projection
Budget Budget Projected Projected Projected
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
REVENUE Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
General Fund Contribution 451,091 442,395 466,270 491,191 517,490
General Fund Capital Contribution 22,555 22,120 23,314 24,560 25,875
E-911 Revenue 285,640 285,640 299,922 315,758 332,462
Agency Capital Contribution 26,529 30,105 31,736 33,432 35,222
Agency Revenue 530,587 602,095 634,722 668,647 704,447
TOTAL REVENUE 1,316,402 1,382,354 1,455,964 1,533,588 1,615,496
EXPENDITURES
Salaries 790,507 818,695 859,629 902,610 947,741
Benefits 295,211 313,070 334,985 358,434 383,524
Operating Expenses 181,600 198,365 206,300 214,552 223,134
Capital Outlay 20,000 20,900 20,000 20,000 20,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,287,318 1,351,030 1,420,914 1,495,596 1,574,399
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) 29,084 31,324 35,050 37,992 41,097
ENDING FUND BALANCE 137,993 169,317 204,367 242,359 283,456
5yrAnpro102 18 1015/2001
HEAVY EQUIPMENT INTERNAL SERVICE FUND
Five year Financial Projection
Budget Budget Projected Projected Projected
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
REVENUE Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget
HEF Operating Charges 1,373,726 1,441,999 1,557,804 1,632,740 1,711,441
HEF Replacement Charges 411,912 411,913 399,000 399,000 399,000
Body Repair Revenue 43,681 45,647 47,701 49,847 52,090
Misc Trade In 214,450 55,700 58,200 49,900 126,800
Interest Income 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
TOTAL REVENUE 2,063,769 1,975,259 2,082,705 2,151,487 2,309,331
EXPENDITURES
Salaries, Wages 507,713 550,118 577,624 606,505 636,830
Benefits 192,215 213,339 228,272 244,251 261,349
Motor Fuels 282,250 303,750 200,900 208,936 217,293
Vehicle Insurance 37,668 39,551 41,133 42,778 44,489
Parts, Supplies Util., etc 231,200 242,750 252,460 262,558 273,060
All Other Operating Expenses 235,495 247,514 257,415 267,712 278,420
Vehicle Replacement 878,603 565,500 367,300 523,450 740,000
LF-ToTAL EXPENDITURES 2,365,144 2,162,522 1,925,104 2,156,190 2,451,441
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (301,375) (187,263) 157,601 (4,703) (142,110)
ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,028,107 840,844 998,444 _ 993,742 851,632
5yrfinprojQ 9 10/512001
TOWN OF VAIL
2002 Revised Budget
SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN PERSONNEL
2002 2002
Full Time Seasonal Cost
Increase Increase of
Department (Decrease) (Decrease) Positions
Position FTE FTE W/ Benefits
Administrative Services:
Town Manager
Executive Assistant 0.30 15,006
Town Attorney
Legal Assistant 0.30 17,221
Public Relations
Assistant 0.55 6,180 Budget for portion of position reimbursed
Fire Department
Firefighters 2.00 112,273
Department Secretary 0.20 8,060
Parking
5 Seasonal Paking Attendents 2.25 56,194 For host program
Total Increase (Decrease) in FITE's 3.35 2.25 214,934
Net Increase in IFTE's 5.60
This schedule does not reflect the additional FTE's that maybe needed for Vail Standards or for Donovan Park
Personnelchg2002only 20 10/5/2001
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Revenues:
Net Sales Tax 6,685,065 5,427,435 5,299,498 5,251,387 4,989,859 7,671,266
Federal Grant Revenue 66,854 692,625 300,000 230,000 $392,625 is finalized; the rest is estimated
Lease Revenue 149,480 149,480 149,480 149,480 149,480 149,480 Lease revenue from City Market & employee housing land lease
COP revenue 4,400,000 Lease revenue for Fire Station
CDOT Reimbursement 1,000,000 Reimbursement for the roundabout construction
Parking Assessments 12,340 12,340 Revenue from Parking Pay-in-Lieu Program
Buy-Down Program 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Sale of Deed Restricted Units Purchased by the Town
Sale of EHU 225,000 Sale of employee housing unit
Sale of Assets 2,000,000 Sale ofthe Ruins
Sale of Arosa Garmisch Units 1,134,844 Adjust to actual receipts
Project Reimbursement 10,578 84,633 130,000 '03 is for Mill Creek Circle, '01 &'02 are radio tower reimbursements
Interest Income & Other 360,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Total Revenue a 9,644,161 8,466,513 13,378,978 6,730,867 6,239,339 8,920,746
10/512001
CIP 5Yr 2002-2006 21 11 t:19 :19AM
M
!
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Expenditures:
Equipment Purchases
Fire Truck Replacement 653,228 485,000 Replace trucks at the end of their useful lives
Fire truck for new station 400,000 Truck for new station included with building
Document Imaging 117,720 120,000 Estimate to provide imaging hardware and software town wide (implementation staff not
included)
Snow Plow 49,297 Snow plow and sander for frontage road maintenance, only required if we take over
maintenance of frontage roads
3rd Sheet oflce 239,557
GPS System for Buses 280,000 150,000 150,000 375,000 In'04-'05 Outlying and sheltered stops,'06 replacement
Technology Upgrade 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Allocate a portion of capital projects fund to keep up with technology
Software & Hardware Upgrades 166,713 179,135 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Replacement of PC's
Web Page Development/Ecommerce 180,000 100,000 100,000 Web page development and future credit card payments
Laptop project for PD 60,000 70,000 Laptops in police vehicles
Radio System 155,789 300,000 2 new stations and radio towers. Towers are partially reimbursed
Less Project Reimbursement in'01 &'02 (95,211) Informational adjustment only to shoNvnet cost. Subtotal uses $$155;789.
Net Cost 60,57$ Informational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $$155,789.
Bus Ramp \ Wheelchair Lift 50,869
Repower Buses 152,000 126,000 44,000 Replace transmissions and engines to extend useful life
Replace Buses 2,800.000 1,300,000 1,175,000 Replace buses at end ofusefillives for outlying routes only
I-es, projected grunt reimbursements « (692,625) (300,000) (230,000) Informational adjustment only to show net cost, Subtotal uses $2,800,000, etc.
Net cost to replace buses -•2,107,375 1,000,000 945,000 Informational adjustment only to show net cost. SubWtal ttge $2,800,000, etc
800 MHz radio system 152,372 152,372 152,372 Principal and interest payments to lease purchase radios in 1998
Subtotal Equipment Purchases 2,155,545 3,771,507 2,204,372 1,651,000 935,000 619,000
101512001
CIP 5Yr 2002-2000 22 111:19 :19AM
M
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Capital Maintenance
Bus Shelter Replacement 26,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 Replace 1 old shelter each year and add a new one every other year
Bear Proof Trash Containers 40,000 40,000 In the Village
Capital Street Maintenance 474,150 975,000 725,000 740,000 890,000 932,000 Preventive maintenance, patching, overlays and seal coats
Subtotal Capital Maintenance 500,150 1,025,000 795,000 750,000 920,000 942,000
Street Reconstruction
Lupine Dr. 34,459
Vail Road 99,417
Vail Valley Drive - Design 100,000 75,000 VV Drive Golden Peak to Sunburst, and Mill Creek Circle, with bike lane
Vail Valley Drive - Ist Phase 340,000 Reconstruct Vail Valley Drive in segments
Soccer Field to Ptarmigan 800,000 Reconstruct Vail Valley Drive in segments
Ptarmigan East to Sunburst 708,750 Reconstruct Vail Valley Drive in segments
Mill Creek Circle 705,000
Less Project Reimbursement (130,000) Informational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $705,006..
Net cost 575,000 Informational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $705,000:
West Third of East Vail 210,000 2,310,000 Bridge Rd, Columbine Dr, Spruce Way, Spruce Dr, Meadow Dr, Juniper Ln
Middle Third of East Vail 210,000 Reconstruct East Vail in segments
Subtotal Street Reconstruction 233,876 75,000 1,845,000 708,750 210,000 2,520,000
1015/2001
CIP 5Yr 2002-2006 23 11:19 AM
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Buildings & Improvements
Library Building Remodel 75,000 80,000 145,000 500,000 Remodel of the Library Building, Community Room and Public Restrooms
Medians in Frontage Road 50,000 550,000 From roundabout to Blue Cow chute, includes signing, lighting and landscaping - adds
maintenance costs - discuss moving to RETT
New Fire Station 100.000 250,000 4,400.000 Study & review prior studies in 2001; construction in 2002
Less projected COP revenue (4,400,000) Informational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $4,400,000.
Net cost - Informational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $4,400,000.
Municipal Site Design 30,000
Fiber Optics in Buildings 100,000
Dobson Ice Arena 50,000 VRD - to expand capacity
Way Finding Improvements 559,669 100,000 Includes signs in town, on I-70, and in parking structures - adds maintenance. Entry sign is
budgeted in 2005
Town Shop Imp - Storage Project 750,000 Replace the storage at old town shops
Town Shop Imp - Retaining Wall 100,000 Design of back retaining wall to create space for expansion
Donovan Park Pavilion 550,000 2,650,000 $1.7 million funded from CPF, $1.5 million from OF
Community Facility - Financing 58,456
Community Facility - Hub Site 235,000 To design the facility at the Hub site. VRD to share in $66,249 of the cost.
Parking Structure Improvements 502,547 470,000 435,000 535,000 440,000 450,000 Various Parking Structure Improvements
General Facility Improvements 225,000 334,000 305,000 324,000 260,000 450,000 Various Facility Capital Improvements
Subtotal Bldgs / Improvemts 2,385,672 4,634,000 5,435,000 1,909,000 700,000 1,000,000
Streetscape Projects
West & East Meadow Drive 250,000 500,000 735,000 1,323,000 Construct Streetscape plan, drainage lighting public art and landscaping - adds maintenance
from Library to Fire Station
Subtotal Streetscape Projects 250,000 500,000 735,000 1,323,000 0 0
CIP 5Yr 2002-2006 44 10/5/2001
1 1:19 AM
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Housing Program
Mountain Bell Housing 250,000 Legal, planning, & public relations for start-up costs
Creekside EHU's 139,196 Improvements to Creekside water system
EHU for TOV Rental Pool 378,286 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Estimates for rental units, not 'for sale' units
Arosa Garmisch Units 270,000 To Finish Project
Ruins 2,100,000
Less saleprojected in 2003 (2;000,000) lutdrmational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $2,100,000.
Net colt 100,000 Intbiuational adjustment only to show net cost. Subtotal uses $2,100,000.
Buy-Down Program 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 Purchase Price of Deed Restricted Units, Includes $100k Subsidy
Less projected Buy Down revenue (1,000;000) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (I,OOo,000) Informational adjustment only to show net cost Subtotal uses $1,100,000.
Net cost 100,400 _ 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Informational adjustment only to show tier cost. Subtotal uses $1,100,000.
Subtotal Housing Program 2,137,482 3,200,000 19350,000 1,350,000 1,350,000 1,3509000
Other Improvements
ADA Compliance 30,000 Allocate money for unspecified projects
Lionshead Master Plan 213,395 Design costs to implement Town improvements
Lionshead Financing 25,000 To Implement the Lionshead Improvements
Parking Study 11,238
Transportation Studies 9,186
Street Light Improvement Program 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Add new street lights and refurbish residential lighting program
Infrastructure Improvements 95,000 From Vail Today suggestions
Drainage Improvements 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Continue implementation of drainage master plan
Subtotal Other Improvements 463,819 245,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000
Total before Transfers 89126,544 13,450,507 12,5149372 7,841,750 4,265,000 6,581,000
1015/2001
CIP 5Yr 2002-2006 25 11:19 AM
Capital Projects Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
Allocation of Sales Tax to CPF 43% 35% 33% 32% 29% 43%
Estimated Budget
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Transfer for Debt Service 2,324,908 2,328,929 2,334,053 2,332,153 2,331,703 2,331,703 To fund debt service on all Town bonds
Debt Service on COP 368,189 368,189 368,189 368,189 Financed $4.4 million @ 5.5%, 20years.
Total Expenditures 10,451,452 15,779,436 15,216,614 10,542,092 6,964,892 99280,892
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (807,291) (7,312,923) (1,837,636) (3,811,225) (725,553) (360,146)
Transfer from GF for Portion of Pavilion at Donovan Park
Ending Fund Balance 7,817,194 504,271 (1,333,365) (5,144,590) (5,870,143) (6,230,289)
01
111:1:19 9 AM
CIP SYr 2002-2006 26 1
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Revenue
Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,900,000 2,500,000 2,900,000 2,900,000 2,900,000 2,900,000
Golf Course Lease 113,417 117,387 121,496 125,748 130,149 134,704
Lottery Revenue 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000
Project Reimbursement 175,000 Red Sandstone School/Soccer Field
Land Exchange Proceeds 296,500 296,500
Interest Income & Other 400,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000
Recreation Amenity Fee 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000
1Total Revenue 4,032,917 3,151,887 3,259,496 3,263,748 3,268,149 3,272,704
111:21 01
RETT CPSYr 2002-2006 27 1
:21 AM
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Expenditures
Annual Maintenance
RETT Collection Costs 87,000 87,000 87,000 87,000 87,000 87,000 Collection fee remitted to the General Fund
Rec Path Capital Maintenance 195,000 125,000 130,000 135,200 140,608 146,232 Capital maintenance of the town's rec path system
Alpine Garden Support 38,500 56,460 56,460 56,460 56,460 56,460 For maintenance of gardens
Tree Planting & Pine Beetle Control 100,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Provide additional trees to Vail's public areas
Street Furniture Replacement 20,000 20,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Newspaper boxes in 2000 and replace, add street furniture
Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation 21,000
Bear Proof Containers 17,000 18,000 9,500 10,000 In the parks
Donovan Park Operating Costs 67,500 135,000 141,750 148,838 156,279 Maintenance of pavilion and fields
Park, Path & Landscape Maintenance 737,732 775,545 806,567 838,829 872,383 907,278 Ongoing path, park and open space maintenance
Subtotal Maintenance 1,199,232 1,208,505 1,313,027 1,353,739 1,400,288 1,438,250
10/5/2001
RETT CPSYr 2002-2006 28 11:21 AM
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Recreation Path/Trail Development
North Trail 85,000 Construction of trail from Red Sandstone Creek to Middle Creek
Trail Signs 90,000 25,000 Create improved way finding to parks and trailheads
Trailhead Development 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Improve trailheads
N. Frontage Rd. ( School to Interchange) 500,000 Create a separated path from the pedestrian overpass to the north side
of the main interchange in conjunction w/ Mtn Bell
N. Frontage Rd. ( Timberidge to 450,000 Reconstruct the existing at-grade path as a separated path from
Buffehr Cr.) Timberidge to the Brandess Building
Katsos Ranch Bike Path Restoration & 55,000 Repair the path where washouts occur each year.
Soft Service By-Pass
Lionshead Nature Trail/Middle Creek 475,000 Construct the trail as part of the Lionshead and Open Lands Master
Plans, includes bridge
Gold Peak to Soccer Field 335,000 Bike paths - portion of Vail Valley Drive Project
Soccer Field to Ptarmigan 375,000 Bike paths - portion of Vail Valley Drive Project
Ptarmigan East to Sunburst 682,500 Bike paths - portion of Vail Valley Drive Project
Frontage Road Bike Trail 500,000 550,000 Construct widened 6' shoulders along all frontage roads; first priority
is Blue Cow Chute to East Vail, Phase 1
Subtotal Pathways 250,000 45,000 2,155,000 1,202,500 570,000 20,000
10/5/2001
RETT CPSYr 2002-2006 29 11:21 AM
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Park Capital Maintenance
Irrigation Control 76,505 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Last year of automating the town's irrigation system + raw water
Bighorn Park - Safety Imp 60,000 Bring the playground and park up to current playground safety standards
Red Sandstone Park -Safety Imp Bring the playground and park up to current playground safety standards
Stephen's Park 46,401 Stream stabilization project
Pirate Ship Park - Safety Imp Bring the playground and park up to current playground safety standards
Public Art 9,100 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Additional amount for projects. $1OK is for 10 hours of coordinator
Ford Park Projects:
Gore Creek Trail 100,000 Completion by June 2002 of School House Accesible Garden &
Children's Garden expansion
Central Trash 60,000 Consolidation of a central trash dumpster location for all the park users
East Road 1,500,000 Re-engineer east path for access
Nature Center Bridge Replacement 300,015
Subtotal Capital Maintenance 652,021 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,675,000
1015/2001
RETT CP5Yr 2002-2006 30 11:21 AM
i
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Park Development
Buffehr Cr Park Expansion 1,354 Complete construction of the Buffehr Creek Park with tot lot and
possible rest room and natural area
Ford Park Playground Improvements 39,574 Finish project started in 1999
Donovan Park - Community Facility 3,500,000 2,500,000 Complete Project
White Water Park 75,000 Finish project
Gore Creek Promenade Bridge 25,000 Design in '01
Red Sandstone School Soccer Site 350,000 Complete construction
Ellefson Park Development 176,389 Complete park at Arosa Garmisch
Lionshead Park 100,000 690,000 Construction of a park to replace the Lionshead Park and meet the
needs of the Lionshead Master Plan
Booth Creek Park Redevelopment 830,000 Revamp the park
Subtotal Park Development 4,167,317 2,600,000 690,000 0 830,000 0
10/5/2001
RETT CP5Yr 2002-2006 31
11:21 AM
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Five Year Summary of Revenue and Expenditures
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Project Information
Open Lands
Butell 400,000 Land identified in the Open Lands Plan for acquisition to preserve
open space located at the end of Willow Way
Matterhorn Circle 350,000 Land identified in the Open Lands Plan for acquisition to preserve
open space located at the end of Willow Way
Snowberry 135,000 Land identified in the Open Lands Plan for acquisition to preserve
open space located at the end of Snowberry Drive
Open Space Acquisition 150,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Unallocated land acquisition
Subtotal Open Lands 500,000 500,000 535,000 500,000 500,000 500,000
Project Management 85,000 68,584 72,013 75,614 79,395 83,364 Funds a landscape architect/project manager to complete the projects
Debt Service
Total Projects 6,853,570 4,597,089 4,940,040 3,306,853 3,554,683 3,716,614
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (2,820,653) (1,445,202) (1,680,544) (43,105) (286,534) (443,910)
Beginning Fund Balance 7,762,562 4,941,909 3,496,707 1,816,163 1,773,057 1,486,524
Ending Fund Balance 4,941,909 3,496,707 1,816,163 1,773,057 1,486,524 1,042,614
10/5/2001
RETT CPSYr 2002-2006 32 11:21 AM
TOWN OF VAIL
2002 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY FUND
AND INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND CHARGES
2001 2001
21000 Origtnat Amended 2002
Actual Budget Budget Budget
FUND
General Fund 18,048,723 19,110,219 19,754,265 21,078,225
Capital Projects Fund 9,270,671 10,421,030 10,451,452 15,779,436
3,102,176 12,661,232 6,853,570 4,597,089
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
326,562 336,700 336,700 336,700
Vail Marketing Fund
2,321,431 2,324,908 2,324,908 2,328,929
Debt Service Fund
1,661,373 2,275,541 2,365,144 2,162,522
Heavy Equipment Fund
1,533,962 1,703,660 1,703,660 1,750,078
Health Insurance Fund
1,178,773 1,287,318 1,287,318 1,351,030
Dispatch Services Fund
Total Before Interfund Transfers 37,443,671 50,120,608 45,077,017 49,384,009
5,738,724 6,024,192 6,024,192 6,290,469
Less Interfund Charges & Transfers
31,704,947 44,096,416 39,052,825 43,093,540
NET EXPENDITURE BUDGET
Interfund Transfers and Charges: 2,288,506 2,324,908 2,324,908 2,328,929
Transfer to Debt Service Fund 1,569,530 1,785,638 1,785,638 1,853,912
Heavy Equipment Fund Charges 87,000 87,000 87,000
RETT Collection Costs 30,000 30,000 30,000
Information Services Charge 1,036,707 1,323,000 1,323,000 1,526,114
Health Insurance Charge 843,981 473,646 473,646 464,514
Dispatch Services Charge
TOTAL INTERFUND CHARGES AND TRANSFERS 5,738,724 6,024,192 6,024,192 6,290,469
10/5/2001
summaryofexpenditures.xls 33
lip "II~
TOWN OF VAIL
2002 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE BY FUND
AND INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND CHARGES
„
2001
~UU1
(lit) Oii<a,inal rhnend~ 2002
Budget I3«~,ct"~, ~:r Bud~~L
Actual
FUND
General Fund 19,120,357 19,254,911 19,584,196 21,078,225
Capital Projects Fund 8,240,828 9,461,608 9,644,161 8,466,513
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 6,094,639 6,361,417 4,032,917 3,151,887
354,854 336,700 336,700 336,700
Vail Marketing Fund
2,328,052 2,324,908 2,324,908 2,328,929
Debt Service Fund
2,063,769 2,063,769 1,975,259
1,807,429
Heavy Equipment Fund
1,269,280 1,578,660 1,578,660 1,750,078
Health In Fund
1,249,887 1,316,402 1,316,402 1,382,354
Dispatch Services Fund
40,465,326 42,698,375 40,881,713 40,469,945
Total Betbre mterfund Transfers
Less Interfund Charges & Transfers 5,738,724 6,024,192 6,024,192 6,290,469
34,726,602 36,674,183 34,857,521 34,179,476
NET REVENUE BUDGET
Interfund Transfers and Charges: 2,288,506 2,324,908 2,324,908 2,328,929
Transfer from Capital Projects Fund 1,569,530 1,785,638 1,785,638 1,853,912
000 87,000
Heavy Equipment Fund Charges
RETT Collection Costs 87,000 87, 30,000 30,000 30,000
Information Services Charge 1,036,707 1,323,000 1,323,000 1,526,114
Health Insurance Charge 843,981 473,646 473,646 464,514
Dispatch Services Charge
HARGES AND TRANSFERS 5,738,724 6,024,192 6,024,192 6,290,469
TOTAL1NiERFLJNDC
34
summaryofrevenue.xls
MEMORANDUM
To: Vail Town Council
From: Todd Oppenheimer
Date: October 5, 2001
RE: Donovan Park and Pavilion Information
I would like to take this opportunity to provide the Council with an update on the
current work and direction on the Donovan Park and Pavilion. This
memorandum contains that information and requests one Council action, a
confirmation of LEEDS.
Project Update:
On September 25, 2001 Chris Squadra, ARC, and I presented the status of the
construction and projects costs to the Council. At that time, the cost of the
pavilion was approximately $1 million in excess of the budget allocation, and the
overall project cost remained substantially under the total budget.
You were presented with a commitment from staff to bring the project back to the
Council once the costs were at or below the budget amount. The design team
has been directed to modify (specifically simplify) the design of the roof geometry
and structure, mechanical system, electrical system, and certain specification
sections. These items, along with a premium for local contractor selection, have
contributed to the current overage with attendant reduction requirements.
Architectural Resource Consultants, ARC, will work closely with the consulting
engineers as well as the contractor to design and procure building systems which
are as efficient as possible. The consulting fees for the above work will be
funded with the remaining funds in the design budget. No additional design fees
have been approved. Preliminary design sketches have already been started. I
am hoping to bring an update with graphics and revised costs to the Council on
October 23, 2001.
LEEDS:
The LEEDS certification for the pavilion has been a recurring theme in the design
team's discussions over the past 2 weeks. As you know, we entered the LEEDS
program late in this project without a great deal of knowledge of the impacts. Our
initial thoughts that LEEDS would be able to be included within the cost of the
project have been proven incorrect based on previously referenced contributors.
Detailed analysis of the costs of various systems with and without LEEDS
elements have confirmed the cost of $150,000 to $200,000 plus commissioning
fees of over $20,000.
There remain several LEEDS point categories the design team and the
Contractor have not been able to verify that the project will be eligible for. It is
possible we may add the above cost and still not be certain to receive the desired
certification.
am asking the Council for specific direction regarding retaining or forgoing the
LEEDS certification. As Project Manger, with agreement by the design team, my
recommendation is to forgo LEEDS certification. The building design would
remain a very environmentally sound, green project, as evidenced by the high
initial LEEDS score, but there would be no certificate or increased cost from the
LEEDS program.
VAIL BUSINESS INDEX
Dear Vail Business Index Participant:
First, we want to thank you on behalf of the Town of Vail, the Vail Chamber and Business
Association and Vail Today for participating in the Vail Business Index project. The ultimate
purpose of this project is to help you, the business community, by providing another
measurement of the impact of special events. With this new tool, we will no longer have to rely
only on estimates of crowd sizes to determine if an event was successful. It will be possible to
determine whether an event improved sales for town businesses and by how much. It will also
provide information to event sponsors to enable them to modify existing and new special events
to improve sales for more segments of the business community.
Second, we will start collecting data next spring during the week of Memorial Day. However, as
mentioned during our initial meeting, we will be running a test of the process this fail, f he first
steps of that test are to make sure that all of the original businesses are ready to participate and to
gather/verify contact information for your business. Included with this fax is a write-up of the
Vail Business Index and a contact form for you to complete and return. In October, we will run a
live test of the whole process with real data. We will select a week during this past summer, with
your help, to make the test realistic and to get useful information in the process. The results will
then by computed and distributed. Also included is a sample input form to remind you of the
data that will be requested each week next summer.
Some of you do business in multiple business categories. You are being asked to provide
revenues only for the business category (retail, lodging, restaurant) and location(s) indicated on
the Business Index Participants pages of this fax. For example, a hotel might also run a
restaurant and/or retail operation. If your business is listed as lodging, we request that you
provide only the hotel revenues. If restaurant and/or retail revenues are also requested, they will
be indicated separately by name. A separate contact form should be submitted for each business,
even if the contacts are the same.
If you have any questions or suggestions, please contact Rick Scalpello by phone at 479-7131 or
by e-mail at scalpello@attglobal.net
S1/ r
oily Rick Scalpello
Steve Thompson, C.P.A. Ste e C
p~/ /
Finance Director Direct r Director
Town of Vail Vail C amber and Business Assoc. Vail Today
VAIL BUSINESS INDEX
The Vail Business Index is being developed in partnership by the Town of Vail Finance
Department, the Vail Chamber and Business Association and Vail Today. It is designed to help
the Town of Vail, Vail businesses and all special event sponsors to evaluate whether various
events are increasing revenue for our business community. Currently, we use guestimates of the
number of people attending an event, coupled with random surveys, to determine whether a
specific event is beneficial to the town. While not the sole criteria, increasing business revenues
is the major reason that businesses support special events, and increasing revenues is certainly
one of the major reasons that the Town helps fund special events. After all, with half of the
Town's annual revenues being derived from sales taxes, increasing tax revenues without a tax
rate increase is the most painless way to provide significant funds for needed Town services and
facilities.
Our current system of sales tax reporting does not provide needed data in a timely fashion. It
takes about four weeks for businesses to report their sales taxes. More importantly, looking at an
entire month of sales does not help determine whether an individual event contributed to
improving revenues for any businesses and, if so, which ones. The Vail Business Index is
designed to answer these questions.
Approximately 60 businesses have already volunteered to be part of the index and to provide
specific sales data for the nineteen weeks of our summer season, from Memorial Day to the end
of September. Additional businesses are still being solicited, especially for West Vail. A form
will be faxed (later emailed) to each participant every Friday, requesting specific revenue
numbers for that week and weekend. The businesses will fax (later email) the revenue data
directly to the Town Finance Department by the following Tuesday. The Finance Department
will then process the data through a program which will aggregate the data into three categories
(Retail, Lodging, Restaurants) for each of the three major business districts (Village, Lionshead,
West Vail). Reports will show the percent change in year-to-year revenue for each business
category within each geographic area and the number of businesses whose revenues went up and
down. Revenue numbers for individual businesses will not be disclosed. The objective is to
have the data processed by Friday so it can be distributed by the Vail Chamber to all Vail
businesses and event sponsors.
A particular event or type of event may be shown to help only one or two types of business but
not the other(s). That would not be unusual. However, with this knowledge an event sponsor
could modify the event to encompass the other business segment(s). Also with this knowledge it
would be possible for the Special Events Commission to schedule events so benefits could be
distributed more evenly. It may also be shown that some events do a better job of attracting
business than others. With that information it would be possible to reschedule events from
summer to shoulder and vice versa to maximize returns.
More than 70 businesses will be included initially, but it is believed that the number might be
reduced over time as we gain experience as to which businesses are the most indicative of the
overall business communitv. In addition, the plan is to develop a single number, like the Dow
Jones index, to indicate the health of our overall business community. Further work will be done
in this area over the winter.
VAIL BUSINESS INDEX
1. BUSINESS NAME:
2. BUSINESS INDEX CONTACT NAME :
3. CONTACT PHONE NUMBER :
4. CONTACT FAX NUMBER:
5. CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS:
6. WHAT WEEK DURING THIS PAST SUMMER DO YOU RECOMMEND WE USE
FOR OUR TEST OF THE VAIL BUSINESS INDEX PROCESS? YOU WILL NEED TO
PROVIDE 2000 AND 2001 REVENUES FOR THE TEST WEEK, BUT DO NOT PROVIDE
ANY REVENUE DATA AT THIS TIME. A SEPARATE TEST WILL BE RUN IN OCTOBER
AFTER WE RECEIVE THE CONTACT INFORMATION.
Memorial Day Sports Fest
Arts Festival Labor Day
Big Wheel & Chili Oktoberfest
July 4th Other
July 20-21 (4th highest # of cars thru Eisenhower Tunnel)
PLEASE FAX THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE VAIL CHAMBER AND BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION BY OCTOBER 2.
FAX NUMBER: 970-477-0079
Vail Business Index Dates for 2002/2001
YEAR 2002 YEAR 2001
1 MAY 20 - MAY 26 MAY 21 - MAY 27
2 MAY 27 - JUN 2 MAY 28 - JUN 3
3 JUN 3 -JUN 9 JUN 4 -JUN 10
4 JUN 10 - JUN 16 JUN 11 - JUN 17
5 JUN 17 - JUN 23 JUN 18 - JUN 24
6 JUN 24 - JUN 30 JUN 25 - JUL 1
7 JUL 1- JUL 7 JUL 2- JUL 8
8 JUL 8 - JUL 14 JUL 9 - JUL 15
9 JUL 15 - JUL 21 JUL 16 - JUL 22
10 JUL 22 - JUL 28 JUL 23 - JUL 29
11 JUL 29 - AUG 4 JUL 30 - AUG 5
12 AUG 5 - AUG 11 AUG 6 - AUG 12
13 AUG 12 - AUG 18 AUG 13 - AUG 19
14 AUG 19 - AUG 25 AUG 20 - AUG 26
15 AUG 26 - SEP 1 AUG 27 - SEP 2
16 SEP 2 - SEP 8 SEP 3 - SEP 9
17 SEP 9 - SEP 15 SEP 10 - SEP 16
18 SEP 16 - 22 SEP 17 - SEP 23
19 SEP 23 - SEP 29 SEP 24 - SEP 30
FAX BY END OF DAY TUESDAY TO:
SALLY LORTON SAMPLE ONLY
TOV SALES TAX ADMINISTRATOR
FAX NUMBER: 970-479-2248
BUSINESS NAME:
GROSS SALES REVENUE TO THE NEAREST DOLLAR:
SATURDAY 5/26/01 $ SATURDAY 5/25/02 $
SUNDAY 5/27/01 $ SUNDAY 5/26/02 $
MON - SUN 5/21 - 5/27/01 $ MON - SUN 5/20 - 5/26/02 $
CONTACT NAME:
CONTACT PHONE:
FOR QUESTIONS CALL: RICK SCALPELLO PHONE: 970-479-7131
DEFINITIONS:
FOR RETAIL: Gross Sales Revenue is total sales including merchandise shipped out of town,
but excluding catalog sales
FOR LODGING: Gross Sales Revenue is total sales.
FOR RESTAURANT: Gross Sales Revenue is total sales excluding tips.
VAIL BUSINESS INDEX REPORT FOR WEEK OF:
Vail 50 Index #
CURRENT WEEK SUMMER TO DATE
# UP # down # flat Total # up # down # flat Total
Village 32 0 0 32 # # # #
Lionshead 20 0 0 20 # # # #
West Vail 11 0 1 12 # # # #
CURRENT WEEK SUMMER TO DATE
VILLAGE YEAR-TO-YEAR % YEAR-TO-YEAR %
RETAIL - SAT -50.0%
RETAIL - SUN 0.0%
RETAIL - WEEK 50.0%
SAMPLE REPORT
LODGING - SAT -50.0%
LODGING - SUN 0.0%
LODGING - WEEK 50.0%
F&B - SAT -50.0%
F&B - SUN 0.0%
F&B - WEEK 50.0%
CURRENT WEEK SUMMER TO DATE
LIONSHEAD YEAR-TO-YEAR % YEAR-TO-YEAR %
RETAIL - SAT -50.0%
RETAIL - SUN 0.0%
RETAIL - WEEK 50.0%
LODGING - SAT -50.0%
LODGING - SUN 0.0%
LODGING - WEEK 50.0%
F&B - SAT -50.0%
F&B - SUN 0.0%
F&B - WEEK 50.0%
CURRENT WEEK SUMMER TO DATE
WEST VAIL YEAR-TO-YEAR % YEAR-TO-YEAR %
RETAIL - SAT -50.0%
RETAIL - SUN 0.0%
RETAIL - WEEK 50.0%
LODGING - SAT -45.5%
LODGING - SUN 0.0%
LODGING - WEEK 45.5%
F&B - SAT -50.0%
F&B - SUN 0.0%
F&B - WEEK 50.0%
VAIL BUSINESS INDEX PARTICIPANTS
VILLAGE LIONSHEAD WEST VAIL
RETAIL
American Ski Exchange Banner Sports Ace Hardware
Bag & Pack Base Mountain Sports
Cogswell Gallery Cabbages & Kings
Colorado Footwear General Store
Covered Bridge Store Kenny's
Eye Pieces Vail Ski & Bike Tech
Golden Bear Vail Snowboard Supply
Gore Range Mountainworks Vail T-Shirts
Gorsuch Younger Generation
Gotthelfs
Laughing Monkey
John Galt
Polar Revolution
Roxy
Rucksack
Scotch on the Rockies
Squash Blossom
Vail Sports
LODGING
Christiania Lodge Lifthouse Lodge Park Meadows
Evergreen Lionshead Inn
Lodge at Vail Lion Square Lodge
Mountain Haus Lodge at Lionshead
Sitzmark Lodge Montaneros
Sonnenalp Resort Vail Spa
Tivoli Lodge
RESTAURANT
Alpenrose Bart & Yeti
Blu's Garfinkel's
Campo de Fiori Gravity
Daily Grind Kaltenberg Castle
Hubcap KB Ranch
La Tour Montauk
Left Bank
Los Amigos
Ore House
Pazzo's
Russell's
Vendetta's
lit,
Vail,
117
July 31, 2001
Mr. Bob McLaurin
Town Manager
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, CO, 81657
Re: Winter use of Bike Paths in Lionshead and Cascade Village Areas
Dear Bob:
Pursuant to article 6-3E-6B of the Town Code of the Town of Vail, Vail Associates, Inc. hereby requests
written permission from the Town of Vail for VAI snowmobiles to use the bike path from the Sewer Plant
along the south side of Gore Creek to the lower end of Cascade Way ski run on a seasonal basis
(November 1 - May 1). We also request permission to utilize the bike path along the north side of Gore
Creek from the Lionshead Skier Bridge to West Forest Road.
In recent years, VAI, in concert with the Town of Vail and the West Forest Road homeowners, have shifted
snowmobile traffic to the above bike paths to reduce impacts on West Forest Road homeowners. The
Town of Vail staff, including the Town Manager, Town Attorney and various council members have
participated in these meetings with the West Forest Road homeowners. There are really no neighbors on
the route to Cascade Way. The route is not maintained in the wintertime.
We have a critical need in the winter to be able to expeditiously access our equipment and supplies located
at our Vail Associates, Inc. shop when we have problems on the mountain. That critical need frequently
requires snowmobile access.
We understand the objectives of the Town Code with respect to vehicular use of the paths, particularly in
the summer. However, TOV vehicles do plow or maintain certain parts of the bike paths in the winter.
During the fall of 2000, the bike path was closed for several months for tree removal. My point is that
there are numerous exceptions to the prohibitions of vehicular use on the bike paths and for good reason.
I would like to request a meeting with you and your staff to discuss this issue prior to taking it to the Town
Council for a decision. In recent years, we have reduced the size of our snowmobile fleet by fifty percent,
reducing their impacts by fifty percent as well.
Please let me know when we can meet to discuss this issue.
Sincerely,,n \
William A. Jensen
Chief Operating Officer - Vail
BJ/mp
cc: Jim Mandel
Brian McCartney
Eric Stein
Porter Wharton
Clyde Wiessner
Attachments
Post Office Box 7 . Vail, Colorado • 81658
Phone: 970-845-2500
www.vail.com
North America's #1 Resort v. L RESORTS'
no00
b0 a0 00000 000°0°° 0 Ob0 0 Ob oc00oooo
}+###}!+#~##F ooo°o°~e o~ 000400 • 0•oow o0 o ObO~oooo
ob 0 ° o oe eeoo 000 e09lhaoo~
o 0 oeoo ooebooe
00 000 GO 00 00 0 o.4, 00 00 00 00 0000
# ! ! + ! # # 0 00 00 0000000000 o
+ # # # # + + °0 0°0 00 00 00 0 00°°00
# c # # o°.°oa o ° o GO o 0000
,o oso 0 00 0 0 0.• a °
0 Qoo~ o
n } ° 0 1 O 00 0 c°o° ":0000
32
; og 4 - ssis......3° WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST wl~
loo ao z_ w 00 W
# 0000°o H W
+ f ' } 4 4 000°0 0000 000 000 a
0 ea0e 0000000 z
y •h # ! # ! ! + 0~0000~0 00 L POTATO PATCH
0 0c
aopgoo000 AI
AWE, A
:4:.; "'..W ~YO°
SCI fMR ! O OO 0~0.
0 O ,",•w u
r 0° 0000 000 VA1LpOTATO PATCH
900 0 ,y .y SECOND FILING
TOWN OF VAIL BOUNDARY
o. ,~y•~,,,. ya ~a
~LV~::: ° ° ° O ; . su. ML r~ r`r ~a'h. ~ ~ t4 `yA.at, I'•'.•ya.., '•N. ''n.K J•..'~ ?a...h.w... ; yh r h yr!•.. 1
00 0° 0000 ! ~ . ra °...s~ru rh r Y
'±...4•,u,' .+u. .n;°' y., ytiri4,µ r•... .....+•.+h r; :4 .•y..!. J'h,..~K,.. r.'•'h` I.
000 00$000 # # , ``.r. ~o. v, o• y"r ...w"'••`"•r.r r`.•::iy. iti .•h f~+~r:w r 41Mrui~ t• re.: ,.a.~ r
o...::....:••..:.;•:::•.`:;:;: / , o 0 0 #4 } % WfZ1Y1~7 .a4w'" .;h a~ w~ ...o„ xa ,,,rh v..Cw ANyx` r.~:' e~..,`'µ j
raDD # ~ # ~ r. ,a, i ..w.. P4 .+a rr .•h„v. oa ? ...ar•....
! 1 l 1 ! # # #I x r ' r• .+w a /.~iw'+ha. ra h 'W y+xh•. h.•ti `'"+.,h: l I
u1 ti,':.,::: ..ll ! + # # # # ! rh ,a r•. . ,,,h
l 1 # # .w. '^.r, •r,+'~ of r
F; .'`ti.•,,t .'.jwicgto' .l• # k ~ } ,a~;•A~•,r. rh,,.'r;,,,avn '•'rr,•M.c°e. '
i 1..,, ##A} # INTERSTATE 70 N~
Is ZIN
ILLIC)6~1IEAD end FILING
q ? ?i / a` SUN VAIN _ ' _ ° 4„ r
-w t ? CONDOS • • • • ° • •u.•o • • • SDD° 4 ? : ''"`1, a :.ti .
At 40
A, A 11 RT OF
a> # ! } • • At
- D,V l-VILL EE 2nd FILING
Ito SL '7
9th.FILING l . SDD'21
r w, yw .~'xv. 4 S DD'L6
i, 9- - - .ir'~~~iiiiiiiiii/ 'v" p.«~ a ? I Ke ~ x ~:r Y:~y
~a j~ tt' • ' • q ~a , C4`. t 4,ct w
i//r/r N a > 4%....,,~--~• i•!'•Y L~ a
%~7tV `L`•' • • .:~i.-_ rr aiiii iii' °OO iiiiiiiiii' /a....~. a •4 r e a -l,, t"' 2?.i
• ~~-:v:~_ r w /rrrr rr/ O O r/, y,~.r ~ •w !•,'•U.•,~,'
2nd. F{LI • 'ir • w • fh p. ' . /:i:::/r:::::i:: a o°oo o ' . G ~ V
• • • • 'i rh ' .~a./rrrr / ri o 000 00 O " , rh ,;!f. y x ' : -
` * • . , ./r r/iii/i/ 00 ° o o o"o~ °0 °0 0 4 SDD-i21j
• - iii riiri//I//// O O O° O O O O O O • °
• •Y"•~ y„: r•%i I/////„ °O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O$ 00
. r/r/:i:':i///,,,/,, o 0 oa0 Qdo° o„oo 0°00 o~~OO b$ o 0 0
0 o°b oeo oo~o "my,. °~e0o 0 0 ° o ;~ooo # C~ .I
0-moo-.11- LIM, o 0 0 0000
9 ogoo 0 0 000 o o °0 00 0 ~0a V,, ~4'l•'....
0 0. '.6 r r i~~.../ o0g° O° 0 0 000 00 0 00°0 °A°o O" °
'0 a o o° ° o00II
11 101 ° 0°0•
"0-0-0'0- 0 0 0° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~p 0 0 0 o O&O °OC ~w -J~
# 1 j L 00010QO°b°O°0° OOb1 o q i//iii /.r 0p 0 0 0 o O O ~~jjj •
0 0.0 0 ogo 0 ooe°0°0~e°g 00 c~ c a~c cgc g° °~a e e e0e
pp O O O O
O' 0 0 0. 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 000 O 4Q
0 0 lip oO
1 # 0000 °0000°00000 000°O°000°O O° p°e°O 000 °O O ° 0°0 0 qq :i•: • '
y~.y.. c° 0000 .0°0°0°0°0°00 000 000000°YO°o 00 0 , a
g
0 o a . 0 00
o 0 0 o$o°c~//r"' o s o ogo 1
0 00 0$80 0-
. 66 O~O 0 000000000 0 000 0
o00$0oo0mo//rr/„ 0°00
° 0000 m° 0 ~Ao 0 ° goo °,bo
0° 0ppp o0000v/-, o o ° 0 0 0 0 0
o~ o oa o .06-61_,b- "
° 0 oe bae u IN
o°o
0 0 0 00 0 0 0 o y,.~f aga°oob ogo $0°
° ° °DDI~ c
DO
~~pb^o4o0 ooOOF•• 0 0 0 0 0 0 oo o o °oo o°0° x /0 0 0 0 0 oa O o o eo /0 0 0 0 0
° ~o^ f 0
r
o. oPnor'-
LMORCUS W3DIVI5ION YN LIONSHEAD
r'
)st. {LINGY St AOD. ^.r .a r: t r _ - i
WHITE RIV NATIONAL rut<tSlY N.rs YOCR ED DY P"Yr, ii6~ ~
EAGLE VALLEY ENriminY:C A piRVEYINO INC. L 6
YAII. Co ADO 4M-4073 7
A
w ±r w ^N' r~ '°;...,,'h'"' M•:'„"; l ii, jai \
• t;0.wM~, - n ~ 5.1it Yf• ' , ~ 1 \ 1 . 1 ~t nSP N TREE-
WHITE RIVER
NATIONAL pRIVAffi-~OAD~ - ; ti . ~I`
lN,[ FOREST
As; t
' ~pA29 wsl . , ,
LIONS rtw FILING NO.o VAIL BOUNDARY
TOWN „ OF
p ';?:q~ •
::I: O tel.... '7:
.x'
•:1
c
DEL
toSOLAR
Pt~•
E
IV
R
D
T
R
ia•
_ p
E
\MT
I
R
I
D ~}i•
i
5
Q
Q
.L•
,n
r
Or
:Onl3['~t,'• •:C(: yn w`, 00 O 00
M
•[1ti ••P I o4oooEOO ,w pit.• •?rc;
O ° P a
l u M
w eo
•6 v, 0 00000 P'• p.
•••c wa o N p..
ooo
o _
t~ o
,w
_ O -
••IfB W 000 000 T\ a ~ .Y+,~ ,aw•`r'ty Ar N n-~ ~ P - ~'~vr
0o r+ ~ 0 ~;/v
000
1 '~pc:'••'• "~.a.'nri r"Na`•. y,
p. y, r Y. ..'yam, _
r, LL• w ~r,r,.. s"°
:'tii',••pu:.. al"ham ~R'~r.a. r••. t~ p.,N• Kr" n"' ti-_ PRIVATE ROAD
• x,,;,;". •'w:. ?~~,',,,.,'''r~`' r' .f' i~ r a r~~p Y"l~ is w
' y.~..~~r- ~~.+..w ~Rr"~ F. M~ ru: y~-"r,•^,sy ~ Y`• r i'. _ ~ N .
a» w , , o 00o Ooo A y
S__
yaw," , awP o°
'o °Oopooo
d'- J J w
cc o00o VILLAG w
°o
!`^w"w w.. H ; r"y. oo O O 000
1 ,`"N-,,,, r~ n••.k„\sy ~1'• a p0 Op p00 00
+~W y. t.. ° yw Flu p 00 000 ODOO i441~_.....• Q II
~h;, r..r oo°o o° op oo °aoo°ooo 0 0 .'SOLAR GREST 1 D t
o
0
w cooo00 WHITE RIVER
s ~oQboobo \ SDe22 NATIONAL FOREST -
PMKFLO[YINO INC.
wjQ OD O oOl00o .-i.. ^ E~..E vnLLE" E:• I::ECI:) 0~
.NIA •P`\o 000 ° °
MATCH LINE My.110N 5""~
i--
o ° 6900 DAUPHINAIS w M
_33
°ooo~boo SUBDIVISION SE£ SHEET 3 5
:~.1~•~ 'I~f yxAti30, VNq,Ati[. I , TRKi 0 k9~`-^ _
2) 70 IO is V r / " -
N It
k1 li
_ - 4
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, October 3, 2001
3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS
PUBLIC WELCOME
PROJECT ORIENTATION/ NO LUNCH -Community Development Department 1:00 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Clark Brittain
Bill Pierce
Hans Woldrich
Andy Blumetti
Charles Acevedo
SITE VISITS 2:00 pm
1. Breakaway West - 963 Lionsridge Loop
2. Evergreen Lodge - 250 S. Frontage Rd. West
3. Gateway Building - 12 Vail Road
4. Vail Nightclubs, Inc. - 228 Bridge Street, Suite 300
5. Mountain Adventure Center - 311 Bridge Street
Driver: Allison
PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm
1. Gateway Building - Final review of proposed repaint. Allison
12 Vail Road/Lot N, Block 5D, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Owners, LP, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charles Acevedo VOTE: 4-0 (Blumetti abstained)
DENIED
2. Breakaway West - Final review of proposed window change. Allison
963 Lionsridge Loop, Breakaway West #522, 532/Lionsridge 1st Filing.
Applicant: Breakaway West Homeowner's Association
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Charles Acevedo VOTE: 5-0
APPROVED WITH 4 CONDITIONS:
1. That the basic form of window stays the same.
2. That the frame must stay as is.
3. That the center mullion be decreased to 4" and match the glass to the bottom.
4. That the sill of the upper window stays the same.
TOWN OF PAIL
1
3. Evergreen Lodge - Final review of proposed roof change. Allison
250 S. Frontage Rd. West/Tract C, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 2"d Filing.
Applicant: Kenneth J. Maloney
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Andy Blumetti VOTE: 5-0
TABLED UNTIL OCTOBER 17, 2001
4. Mountain Adventure Center - Conceptual review of proposed awning. Bill
311 Bridge Street/ Lot L, Block 5C, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Annie Egan
CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE
5. Vail Nightclubs, Inc. - Conceptual review of proposed awning. Bill
228 Bridge Street, Suite 300/ Lot A, Block 5, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Annie Egan
CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE
Staff Approvals
Orbison residence - Fencing around driveway/retaining wall. Brent
2915 Basingdale Blvd./Lot 5, Block 8, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Alexander O. Orbison
Hill residence - Relocate window. Brent
2664 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Douglas & Colleen Hill
Andersson residence - Change to approved plans/Total of 7 skylights and windows. Allison
4995 Juniper Lane/Lot 9, Block 5, Bighorn 5th Addition.
Applicant: Mats & Andrea Andersson
Village Center Condos - Replace windows & sliding door. Bill
122 E. Meadow Drive, Building B/Lot C,K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Village Center Condo Association
Malone residence - Minor architectural changes & landscape revisions. Allison
87 Rockledge Road/Lot 2, Block 7, Vail Village 1s' Filing.
Applicant: Mary Alice Malone
Steinmetz residence - Site and landscape modification. Allison
1157 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 12, Block 6, Vail Village 7th Filing.
Applicant: Charles Steinmetz
Simba Run - Re-roof. Bill
1100 North Frontage Road/Lot 6, 7, 8, 9, part of 10, Block C, Lions Ridge Subdivision.
Applicant: Simba Run Condominiums, Represented by Richard O'Brien
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356,Telephone for the
Hearing Impaired, for information.
2
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS
Monday, October 8, 2001
PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Galen Aasland Chas Bernhardt
Dick Cleveland Diane Golden
Brian Doyon John Schofield
Doug Cahill
Site Visits : 1:15 pm
1. Lion's Square Lodge - 660 West Lionshead Place
2. Stephen's Park - 2400 Block of S. Frontage Rd. West
Driver: George
Public Hearinq - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm
1. An appeal of an administrative determination regarding the procedural requirements for an
application for subdivision of "the Fallridge Parcel," a Part of Lot 1, Sunburst Filing No. 3 / a
portion of land adjacent to the Vail Golf Course Townhomes in the 1600 block of Golf
Terrace. A graphic map description is attached for reference. Specifically, the appeal
involves a staff determination that the subdivision of land within a recreational easement
requires a Major Special Development District Amendment to the Fallridge Special
Development District.
Appellant: Fallridge Community Association, represented by Berenbaum, Weinshienk
and Eason, P.C.
Planner: Brent Wilson
MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND: Dick Cleveland VOTE: 4-0
OVERTURNED STAFF DECISION
2. A request for a variance from Section 12-71-1-10 ("Setbacks"), Vail Town Code, at the Lion's
Square Lodge located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead 1" Filing.
Applicant: Lion's Square Lodge
Planner: Bill Gibson
MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 4-0
TABLED TO OCTOBER 22, 2001
TOWN O IL
1
3. A request for a text amendment to the Heavy Service zone district to allow for the addition of
multiple-family dwelling units and Type III employee housing units as conditional uses, to
allow for amended setback requirements, to allow for an amended maximum building height,
and setting forth additional details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Alpine Ventures, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects
Planner: Brent Wilson
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
4. A request for a modification to the 100-year floodplain to allow for streambank stabilization
improvements to the Gore Creek streambank in Stephens Park, 2400 Block of S. Frontage
Rd. West/Unplatted. A complete metes and bounds legal description is available for review
at the Community Development Department.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel
Planner: Allison Ochs
MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 4-0
TABLED TO OCTOBER 22, 2001
5. A request for a rezoning from "Special Development District No. 10" to "Housing Zone
District" located at Timber Ridge Village, 1280 N. Frontage Rd. West / Lots C-1 through C-5,
Lionsridge Filing No. 1.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Allison Ochs
WITHDRAWN
6. Approval of September 24, 2001 minutes
7. Information Update
2
VIQ
>i
rr ~ .
1 4f ss„~Z fir.
~ t
}
q ~
r ray
r
pg {yf~~~ ~ tt?4
3
~ Y 3
ss
lk'
r, •a-''Y#rF>''-' •r~t' ti ?;a ~F .1 ! p i a'~S ~ e -
.3.
r, Jok
i nl
,
- o
M
$ .4
low
a
During the Olympic Torch Relay, the Olympic Flame will travel more than 13,500 miles across the United States as it is
carried toward Salt Lake City for the Olympic Winter Games. On 8 February 2002, the last torchbearer will light the
Olympic Cauldron, bringing the Games to life once again.
To generate enthusiasm and to honor the ideals represented by the Olympic Flame, Salt Lake 2002 has produced this
Olympic Torch Relay catalog. Colorful exterior banners will help decorate Torch Relay cities, generating excitement for
the Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Winter Games. Join the country in celebrating the power and inspiration of the human
spirit.
VERTICAL BANNERS Ordering Information
DESCRIPTION: Vertical exterior banner
Vertical banners are made of full-color, weather-resistant, SIZE: 26 in by 72 in or
nylon. They have pole pockets and grommets for secure 26 in by 96 in
display. The banners are available in 8 ft or 6 ft lengths in MATERIAL: Nylon
sets of six. These exterior banners may be customized with ORDER NUMBER: T1014, 26 in by 72 in
the name of your city. The cost for customization is included T1024, 26 in by 96 in
in the price. MINIMUM ORDER: One set containing six banners
COST: T1014, $534 per set
Single bracket hardware is aivilable for the banners. T1024, $618 per set
Hardware Information
DESCRIPTION: Banner hardware
(Top and bottom
bracket included) i
MATERIAL: Steel
ORDER NUMBER: T110-HW ,
COST: $68 each
Single Bracket
Hardware
T110-HW
a
1
37 .388E#$E
118888!8
8111! IIe8
I~ Y ~ $8$181$!
j !!8$1
$1881$
~ 8$8!
~ !S
~•~8 X11 11 I:9 flSl$IEI:
138$!!14
$481i 1:• OLYMPIC Cite Banner
• TORCH Installation
Height
RELAY
BANNER CUSTOMMSD
WRH Ortl' NAME
Sbown: T101-V
HORIZONTAL BANNERS Ordering Information
DESCRIPTION: Horizontal exterior banner
The 24 ft by 3 ft horizontal banner is ideal for displaying SIZE: 24 ft by 3 ft
MATERIAL: Nylon
across city streets. The full-color, weather-resistant, nylon ORDER NUMBER: T102-H, one-sided
banners have grommets at each corner for easy installation T103-H, two-sided
and may be ordered with the image on one side or both. MINIMUM ORDER: One banner
They may be ordered individually. COST: T102-H, $475 per banner
T103-H, $825 per banner
Shown: T102-H
F STATIC-CLING DECALS ` FLAG
Salt Lake 2002 has created Display community enthusiasm for the Olympic Flame with
colorful static-cling decals the official Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Torch Relay logo flags.
to decorate glass windows. These flags may be displayed outside or inside. They are
They are easily applied to made of full-color, double-sided nylon and may be
any interior window and purchased individually.
will not permanently
Ordering Information
adhere to the glass. The w DESCRIPTION: Olympic Torch Relay flag
full-color, one-sided vinyl SIZE: 5 ft by 3 ft
decals come insets of 10. MATERIAL: Nylon
ORDER NUMBER: T105-FL
Ordering Information MINIMUM ORDER: One flag
COST: $36 each
DESCRIPTION: Static-cling decals
SIZE: 20 in by 14 in
MATERIAL: Vinyl
ORDER NUMBER: T104-D
MINIMUM ORDER: One set containing 10 decals
COST: $140 per set
SALT LAKE
STATIC CLING OLYMPIC TORCH RELAY
ON INTERIOR CNIVROLEY
00 026
GLASS
$ PLT LAS
`OLYMPIC TORCH H R RELAY' .
ALL OF THESE ELEMENTS MAY BE PURCHASED IN LARGE VOLUMES THROUGH THREE DIFFERENT PACKAGES:
Package A Qty Package B Qty Package C Qty
Street Banners 12 Street Banners 24 Street Banners 36
Horizontal Banners 2 Horizontal Banners 4 Horizontal Banners 4
Flags 2 Flags 4 Flags 6
Static-Cling Decals 12 Static-Cling Decals 24 Static-Cling Decals 36
Package Cost: 57525 Package Cost: 515,050 Package Cost: $21,626
Items purchased from this catalog are for noncommercial use only. Any exception must be authorized by Salt Lake 2002.
These items may not be hung or used in association with, or in proximity to, any commercial signage.
,E
TORCH RELAY BANNERS-INFORMATION AND USAGE GUIDELINES
The Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Winter Games will combine sport, art, education and culture into a single experience
that captures the world's imagination. Olympic marks, such as the logo featured on these banners, are valuable
properties owned by the International Olympic Committee (ioc), the United States Olympic Committee (usoc),
and Salt Lake 2002. The use of Olympic marks should always reflect the ideals of the Olympic Movement with
impact and integrity.
Usage
• Banners may be placed only on public property (e.g., banner poles or light poles on public streets,
at public schools or buildings). Banners may not be placed directly outside or inside local shopping
centers or on any other commercial property (e.g., banks, service stations, real estate agencies, etc.).
Salt Lake 2002 has contractual obligations to protect the rights of the official Olympic Winter Games
and Olympic Torch Relay sponsors.
• Banners may not be displayed at local events or forums unless sponsored by Coca-Cola or Chevrolet,
presenting sponsors of the Olympic Torch Relay. If you have any questions, please contact Michael Bettin
at (801) 212-2020 or at michael.bettin@saltlake2002.com.
• No commercial markings may appear on or next to the banners.
Placement
The following guidelines have been established to ensure that banners are displayed correctly:
• Place: The design and color strategy have been approved by the ioc. Salt Lake 2002 requires each community to
adhere to this guideline to ensure a consistent Games-time look across the United States. As such, banners from
this catalog may not be placed alongside other banners (e.g., city banners, commercial banners, other
signage, etc.).
• Time: Banners look best if displayed for no more than a three-month period. This is in keeping with the
installation dates of Salt Lake 2002's Look elements. This time frame ensures that the banners are in pristine
condition during the Olympic Torch Relay. Orders from this catalog are accepted until 15 October 2001.
• Manner: Detailed instructions on hanging the banners will be provided when you receive your order. Banners
will be compatible with standard mounting frames for street poles and banner stands.
Approval
• Banners must be placed in accordance with local regulations and public safety. Communities ordering banners
are responsible for obtaining approval and guidelines for attaching the banners from their local jurisdictions
and for obtaining information on the installation method (e.g., poles, brackets, size, wind loading, fixtures
and clearances).
• All requests to hang banners on state or federal roads or highways must be submitted to the proper authority
(state Department of Transportation or U.S. Department of Transportation).
• Communities are responsible for any special consideration required due to any construction taking place in the
proposed banner area.
Other Notes
• Communities may not use the banners in any promotional materials without prior written approval of Salt
Lake 2002.
• Communities are solely responsible for installing, maintaining and removing the banners.
• A limited number of banners will be printed for purchase to ensure replacement of any that are
stolen or damaged. Salt Lake 2002 recommends that communities purchase a few additional banners
for contingency purposes.
Copyright 2001 $LOC. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without prior written permission of SLOC. All rights reserved. Cover photo: 02001 SLOC/John Huet
TO: Council Oct. 5, 01
FR: Annie Fox, Library Director
RE: Library Building, Remodel
Cc: Town Manager
As Bob mentioned, we have a conceptual plan for a library remodel based on user and staff input, however the
plan is conceptual and does not include engineering or architectural data.
Improvements have been scheduled for 2000 & 2001 but due to not knowing if we were demolishing the building or
adding a second floor, improvement activities were delayed.
• $75,000 is scheduled for 2001 to do the RFP, architectural and engineering work.
• $220,000 for 2002 is to construct a Reading Room, tutoring room/ and small meeting (20 person capacity, no
coffee or food service) in the plaza area off the Director's office, The Reading Room area is 318 sq. ft. This will
serve as a quiet reading area when the construction in the atrium, magazine area and Community Room takes
place- Our goal is to be open during most of the construction and simply close off building parts. I did this
when we remodeled the Children's Room and the Magazine Area. A phased approach can be done. Heating
zones and electrical zones would be added in this phase.
o $500,000 for 2003 Change the atrium and Community Room into library facilities. Add another view corridor
into the main library building from the street. The Community Room would change into a Social area with email
stations, browse stations, VCRS & DVD`s for film viewing. Some of the noisier act ivies would move out of the
main library into the community room. This would allow us to increase our materials collection in book, book on
tape and video format.
• For the original library building, patron usage was estimated at 60,000 attendance. Now there are well over
130,000 users a year.
VAIL, LIBRARY BUILDING STATS & CONCEPTAL PLAN INFORMATION
MATERIALS INCREASE WITH REMODEL PLAN
• 28% increase, overall in the Book category. Nonfiction increases more then fiction.
• 10 % increase in Book on Tape category.
• 11%o increase Video DVD 20% increase
SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBERS OF CURRENT BUILDING FOOTPRINT
What footage is area off the Director's office, the proposed new Reading Room?
318 sq. ft. in the current footprint.
What is the sq. ft. in the main building?
10,040 sq, ft.- library + 1,313 sq. ft. in staff offices
Approx. sq ft seating increase in the magazine area?
+ 350 sq ft in addition to current.
What is the sq ft in the unused atrium?
1000 sq ft (not including bathrooms)
Sq Ft. of the Community Room?
1,200 sq ft
Sq. Ft. in the old VRD space downstairs?
1,170 sq. ft. in meeting area only (not bathrooms)
What is the potential sq ft. on the second floor, where the sod roof is?
The sod roof could hold another level. Sq ft gain would be approx. 10,900 sq. ft..
OCT 5,2001 13:1:1 9704770079 FROM ADMINISTRATOR TO PAGE 1 OF1
il
¢.w~ 't
V. 4Y
ustnesso,
~ v W~ d n I
AGENDA NOTICE
Tuesday, October 9,* 2009
Soul 5 am
Town e cif Chambers Upcoming Vail
Special Events
Topics Include: Mark your calendars for
the following events
Customer Service Training and activities.
The VCBA will present current plans for Customer Service Saturday, Oct. 6th
Training for this upcoming season. 5k Run for Victims of
Attacks 8:30a.m. start.
VCBA Elections Register from 7:30a.m.,
with $10 donation
The VCBA election process will be explained. Nominations Monday, Oct. 15th
from members interested in running for the Board of Direc- Vail Symposium Hot
tors will begin on October 10th. There are nine seats avail- Topics: John Stein-
able. beck. Alpine Club at
Visitor Centers $15 eeead 5:31-7p.m.,
Joel Heath and Nancy Kern of the VVTCB will make a presen- Saturday, Oct. 13th
Cation on the visitor information centers. Please come and Vail Library hosts a
find out how you can work with the information booths to en- scarecrow making
hance your business. They will also talk about "Vail 101" event from 11-3p.m.
For
and a concierge walkabout planned for this Fall. 479'2186 nformation, can
Virtual Walking Tour Wednesday., Odt.31
Active Currents will give a preview of this very exciting inter- Halloween Annual Trick
or Treat Trot-ages 2-6
net project. years old from 1 to
4:30p.m. Call 479-
"Values in Vail" Sale Campaign 2290 for furtherinfor-
Discussion about the program that runs from Thanksgiving oration.
through Christmas.
For more it) formation
on any event listed
As a Town of Vail Business License Holder, your business is a VCBA Member FREE above, please visit
of charge. All Vail Chamber & Business Association Members are encouraged to par- www.visitvailvalley.
ticipate in the Monthly Meetings. Get involved and help us make Vail a great place to com.
do business.
A-,;
nr It o ! Cost Sign-up Form
Prices shown reflect the daily rate and include meats Sign up for: Age Days
.a and snacks. Infant name:
F k ` Infant (0-12 months) 47.00 Infant name:
The infant room wilt accommodate a maximum of 8-10 infants Toddler name:
with 2 staff members.
Toddler name:
Toddler (12-36 months) 47.00
Pre-schooter name:
If The toddler room will accommodate 10 toddlers with 2 staff
Pre-schooler name:
you are or soon will be a parent you members.
know that quality child care in Eagle Pre-school (3.5 years) 30.00
County is hard to find. A recent The classroom wilt be set up with either one room for 20 Name
survey shows that while birth rates children and 2 staff or divided into 2 rooms of 15 and 2 staff Address
have increased 60.0 in the last five members depending on demand.
years, the number of child care spaces
has not increased. Only a fraction of Phone
the potential need for children is Frequently Asked Questions Employer:
being met by licensed care.
Preferred Start Date:
The Eagle County Government officials What hours will the center operate?
and the Town of Vail are concerned The Center wilt be open Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5:30pm.
about quality and availability of child How will the center be staffed? Signature
care and have developed an All teachers and aides will be certified or wilt be advancing Registration Deadline: November 15, 2001
innovative solution. These two their early education skills through CMC classes.
entities are teaming up to open the What wilt the teacher/child ratios be? For more information or
Vail Child Care Center. The ratios will adhere to state mandates in order to maintain to register contact:
the highest possible level of quality care. Anne Wenzel
Located in the City Market complex in Is there a waiting list? P.O. Box 2603
Edwards, CO 81632
West Vail, the Vail Child Care Center There are currently spaces available on a first come, first Phone (970) 926-9180
wilt open before the end of the year. served basis. If you wish to reserve a space, flit out the Fax (970) 926-9194
attached form and send it in. a-mail anne@wenzet-mitter.com
With an emphasis on quality care and
How can parents be involved?
_ early education, the center is taking
f" N,. reservations for infants, toddlers and A parent advisory council will be formed to encourage
t
interaction, ideas and feedback among staff, board and
Pre-schoolers. parents.
rn w
7 IV
N v 0tnr
R rri v l
~A >n isTs- M
Ox zz
OD N
Working parents are essential a. w n
to the economic well-being ofi.<; N r'
Eagle County. Therefore, X p
quality child care is also
essential.
rn
The early years of a child's e'
are critical. By age 5 a chip
will develop 85%.of his or her
intellect, personality and sp i
skills.
~
The Eagle Valley Chilii:Care ht Introducing the
Association is committed fib
raising the quality and Vail Child Care
availability of child ca. y++~itr Center
the support of business leiiirsy;
town and county governmei-t: s:
and parents, the.Vail Chlid:r
Center will meet an immel
need in the commum y
become a madet for futura ;
child care centers across thc
'
state.
i
j .J
4 A quality child care
° solution for you and
your family.
COMMUNITY CHILD CARE UPDATE
The Vail Child Care Center re-opening is entering into the final sales push
with direct marketing to parents. This effort was preceded by an appeal to
employers to become Founding Partners in order to purchase in advance
child care space for employees. This would have resulted in employers
receiving a 50% Colorado Tax Credit and a 25% Federal Tax Credit which
would have allowed employers to pass these savings on to employees
resulting in affordable child care costs. Due to the uncertain business
environment, however, the 40-Founding Partner spaces have not been pre-
sold and those spaces are now available to the public.
The Center is now scheduling interviews for the Director position with an
anticipated opening of December 1, 2001.
A parents informational and day rate brochure is attached.
wi-A
a g
'le
_
A -
s
64-
x
~ v ~ M1
~ E g ~
t
a ~ In t
1
s?' ~r x Y
t e. 7 i I
H
9 s
s - ~ ~ - L ( ei .yff P
s- _ - ~n+Ji. xS 'F*
'15 F71,
> s
Kt 1,~
'4 A
yg
'JAL
During the Olympic Torch Relay, the Olympic Flame will travel more than 13,500 miles across the United States as it is
carried toward Salt Lake City for the Olympic Winter Games. On 8 February 2002, the last torchbearer will light the
Olympic Cauldron, bringing the Games to life once again.
To generate enthusiasm and to honor the ideals represented by the Olympic Flame, Salt Lake 2002 has produced this
Olympic Torch Relay catalog. Colorful exterior banners will help decorate Torch Relay cities, generating excitement for
the Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Winter Games. Join the country in celebrating the power and inspiration of the human
spirit.
VERTICAL BANNERS Ordering Information
DESCRIPTION: Vertical exterior banner
Vertical banners are made of full-color, weather-resistant, SIZE: 26 in by 72 in or
nylon. They have pole pockets and grommets for secure 26 in by 96 in
display. The banners are available in 8 ft or 6 ft lengths in MATERIAL: Nylon
sets of six. These exterior banners may be customized with ORDER NUMBER: T101-V, 26 in by 72 in
the name of your city. The cost for customization is included T102-V, 26 in by 96 in
in the price. MINIMUM ORDER: One set containing six banners
COST: T101-V, $534 per seT
Single bracket bardware is cu adahle for the banners. T102-V, $618 per set
Hardware Information,
DESCRIPTION: Banner hardware
(Top and bottom
§ bracket included)
MATERIAL: Steel
ORDER NUMBER: T110-HW
5 COST: $68 each
r
Na, Single Bracket
yam,;;," Hard u-ar yT110-HW
i
ii
4 j ~y --14 aza..
Cttt Bansrc r d ~l
{31Jta1l.7 tlrn `h .r t '3 ~ o
9 i.
M. Hc~Qht
BANNER CUSTOMIZED t
U
WITH CrfY NAME - r - ,
Ku
Show is T101-V
' HORIZONTAL BANNERS Orderine Informatior
DESCRIPTION: Horizontal exterior banner
The 24 ft by 3 ft horizontal banner is ideal for displaying SIZE: 24 ft by 3 ft
across city streets. The full-color, weather-resistant, nylon MATERIAL: Nylon
ORDER NUMBER: T102-H, one-sided
banners have grommets at each corner for easy installation T103-H, two-sided
and may be ordered with the image on one side or both. MINIMUM ORDER: One banner
They may be ordered individually. COST: T102-H, $475 per banner
T103-H, $825 per banner
Shown: T102-H
~ STATIC-CLING DECALS FLAG
Salt Lake 2002 has created
Display community enthusiasm for the Olympic Flame with
colorful static-cling decals the official Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Torch Relay logo flags.
to decorate glass windows These flags may be displayed outside or inside. They are
They are easily applied to made of full-color, double-sided nylon and may be
any interior window and purchased individually.
will not permanently
Ordering Information
adhere to the glass. The = DESCRIPTION: Olympic Torch Relay flag
full-color, one-sided vinyl SIZE: 5 ft by 3 ft
decals come in sets of 10. y - -
MATERIAL: Nylon
ORDER NUMBER: T105-FL
Ordering Information MINIMUM ORDER: One flag
COST: $36 each
DESCRIPTION: Static-cling decals
SIZE: 20 in by 14 in
MATERIAL: Vinyl
ORDER NUMBER: T104-D ,
MINIMUM ORDER: One set containing 10 decals` ,
COST: $140 per set
%ALT LAKE 20 2'
STATIC CLING ° Pl~ TORCH ON INTERIOR CHIVROLET,
GLA55
SALT LAKE 20M
OLYMPIC TORCH RELAY
s40 IZ
ALL OF THESE ELEMENTS MAY BE PURCHASED IN LARGE VOLUMES THROUGH THREE DIFFERENT PACKAGES:
Package A Qty Package E Qty Package= Qty
Street Banners 12 Street Banners 24 Street Banners 36
Horizontal Banners 2 Horizontal Banners 4 Horizontal Banners 4
Flags 2 Flags 4 Flags 6
Static-Cling Decals 12 Static-Cling Decals 24 Static-Cling Decals 36
Package Cost: $7525 Package Cost: $15,050 Package Cost: 521,626
Items purchased from this catalog are for noncommercial use only. Any exception must be authorized by Salt lake 2002.
These items may not be hung or used in association with, or in proximity to, any commercial signage.
I
} TORCH RELAY BANNERS-INFORMATION AND USAGE GUIDELINES
The Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Winter Games will combine sport, art, education and culture into a single experience
that captures the world's imagination. Olympic marks, such as the logo featured on these banners, are valuable
properties owned by the International Olympic Committee (ioc), the United States Olympic Committee (usoc),
and Salt Lake 2002. The use of Olympic marks should always reflect the ideals of the Olympic Movement with
impact and integrity.
Usage
• Banners may be placed only on public property (e.g., banner poles or light poles on public streets,
at public schools or buildings). Banners may not be placed directly outside or inside local shopping
centers or on any other commercial property (e.g., banks, service stations, real estate agencies, etc.).
Salt Lake 2002 has contractual obligations to protect the rights of the official Olympic Winter Games
and Olympic Torch Relay sponsors.
• Banners may not be displayed at local events or forums unless sponsored by Coca-Cola or Chevrolet,
presenting sponsors of the Olympic Torch Relay. If you have any questions, please contact Michael Bettin
at (801) 212-2020 or at michael.bettin@saltlake2002.com.
• No commercial markings may appear on or next to the banners.
Placement
The following guidelines have been established to ensure that banners are displayed correctly:
• Place: The design and color strategy have been approved by the loc. Salt Lake 2002 requires each community to
adhere to this guideline to ensure a consistent Games-time look across the United States. As such, banners from
this catalog may not be placed alongside other banners (e.g., city banners, commercial banners, other
signage, etc.).
• Time: Banners look best if displayed for no more than a three-month period. This is in keeping with the
installation dates of Salt Lake 2002's Look elements. This time frame ensures that the banners are in pristine
condition during the Olympic Torch Relay. Orders from this catalog are accepted until 15 October 2001.
• Manner: Detailed instructions on hanging the banners will be provided when you receive your order. Banners
will be compatible with standard mounting frames for street poles and banner stands.
Approval
• Banners must be placed in accordance with local regulations and public safety. Communities ordering banners
are responsible for obtaining approval and guidelines for attaching the banners from their local jurisdictions
and for obtaining information on the installation method (e.g., poles, brackets, size, wind loading, fixtures
and clearances).
• All requests to hang banners on state or federal roads or highways must be submitted to the proper authority
(state Department of Transportation or U.S. Department of Transportation).
• Communities are responsible for any special consideration required due to any construction taking place in the
proposed banner area.
Other Notes
• Communities may not use the banners in any promotional materials without prior written approval of Salt
Lake 2002.
• Communities are solely responsible for installing, maintaining and removing the banners.
• A limited number of banners will be printed for purchase to ensure replacement of any that are
stolen or damaged. Salt Lake 2002 recommends that communities purchase a few additional banners
for contingency purposes.
Copyright 2001 SLOG No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without prior written permission of SLOG All rights reserved. Cover photo: 02001 SLOCUohn Hue: