Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-12-18 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2001 7:00 P.M. TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. (5 min.) 2. Presentation of Youth Recognition/Ambassador Awards. (10 min.) Pam Brandmeyer - Christopher Atencio - BMHS - Youth Recognition Award Sybill Navas - Ariel Pierce - VMS - Youth Ambassador Award 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (10 min.) Steve Thompson a. Ordinance #34, Series of 2001, Supplemental #3, 2nd reading. AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, DISPATCH SERVICES FUND, AND THE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND OF THE 2001 BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO; AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF SAID APPROPRIATIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. Steve Thompson b. Ordinance #35, Series of 2001, Deferred Compensation, second reading. FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN OF VAIL DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 4. ITEM/TOPIC: Newspaper Bids. (5 min.) Lorelei Donaldson BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The town annually establishes a newspaper of record for all public notices. We have requested the two daily and weekly newspapers in Eagle County, the Vail Trail and the Vail Daily, respond to our bid request The bids will be opened at the work session on Tuesday afternoon, December 18, 2001 and the newspaper of record will be appointed at the evening meeting at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard. 5. Bob McLaurin ITEM/TOPIC: Donovan Park Community Pavilion cost and design update. (45 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: • Pavilion design update. • Request to approve change order of Pavilion into JL Viele Construction contract at $2,462,000. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Please refer to the attached memorandum dated December 12, 2001. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Please refer to the attached memorandum dated December 12, 2001. 6. ITEM/TOPIC: Approval of Ford Park Managed Parking Plan for Summer 2002. (5 min.) Pam Brandmeyer BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Ford Park Management Plan was adopted by Council in April 1997. A component of that plan calls for a "managed parking" initiative during the time the park has multiple venues, e.g., the summer. A managed parking committee consisting of all user groups - the Vail Recreation District, Bravo, the Vail Valley Foundation, the Vail Alpine Garden, and the town - historically meets 3-6 times a year to iron out the details of when paid parking should occur. This calendar is based on equity and access to parking for all venues, with an approach to limit paid parking days to the least number possible. Consensus on all dates for paid parking is a requirement of the process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although there may be additional modifications to this calendar for the Summer of 2002, staff recommends Council approve this calendar as submitted. User groups have asked for this timely approval of the calendar in order to include this schedule in upcoming mailings. 7. Resolution #15, Series of 2001, Inducement Resolution Bond - Mountain Bell. (15 min.) Nina Timm ITEM/TOPIC: Coughlin and Company, the developer selected by the Vail Local Housing Authority for the Mtn Bell Site, is going to be applying to the State of Colorado for Private Activity Bonds. In order to have a complete application an Inducement Resolution must be passed by the local, sponsoring municipality. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve or deny Resolution 15. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: In order to achieve affordable rents the Developer of the Middle Creek project (aka Mtn Bell) will be applying to the State of Colorado for tax-exempt Private Activity Bonds. The Tax Code requires that a municipality issue these bonds. The Town of Vail would be acting simply as a conduit for the issuance of the bonds and will not assume any financial obligation for the repayment, nor will the Town have any liability to the purchasers of the bonds. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 15. 8. ITEM/TOPIC: Ordinance #33, Series of 2002, second reading, 5 min.) Steve Thompson AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF TOWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 2001 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE IN THE 2002 FISCAL YEAR. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The final Assessed Valuation for 2002 did go down by $1,214,380 or.2%, this will lower the 2002 property tax revenue budget by $5,695. 9. George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001. A resolution by the Vail Town Council adopting the 2001 Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan, prepared by the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority with the participation of the communities within Eagle County. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to a brief presentation on the proposed Resolution No. 14, Series of 2001, and move to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the resolution. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On April 9, 2001, supporters of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan made a presentation to the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission on the aspects of the trails plan. Upon listening to the presentation and engaging in a discussion about the Plan, the Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the plan to the Vail Town Council for adoption. A copy of the plan has been attached for reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Vail Town Council approve Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001. 10. George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 14, Series of 2001. A resolution by the Vail Town Council expressing the Town of Vail's support for the proposed Colorado Wilderness Act of 2001. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to a brief presentation on the proposed Resolution No. 14, Series of 2001, and move to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the resolution. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On December 4, 2001, supporters of the Colorado Wilderness Act of 2001 made a presentation to the Vail Town Council on the aspects of the legislation. Upon listening to the presentation and engaging in a discussion about the Act, the Vail Town Council directed staff to prepare a resolution that expressed the Town's support of the Colorado Wilderness Act of 2001. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Vail Town Council approve Resolution No. 14, Series of 2001. 11. Town Manager's Report. (5 min.) Bob McLaurin 12. Adjournment (9:25 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, JANUARY 8, 2001, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN THE TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2001, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. ORDINANCE NO. 34 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, DISPATCH SERVICES FUND, AND THE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND OF THE 2001 BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO; AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF SAID APPROPRIATIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 2001 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No. 28, Series of 2000, adopting the 2001 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwise reflected in the Budget, in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and, WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make certain supplemental appropriations and budget adjustments as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO that: 1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Council hereby makes the following supplemental appropriations and budget adjustments for the 2001 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure of said appropriations as follows: General Fund 347,099 Capital Projects Fund (52,356) Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 11,000 Dispatch Services Fund 27,500 Total 333,243 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution con-mienced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of December, 2001, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 18"' day of December, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 18"' day of December, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE #35 SERIES OF 2001 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN OF VAIL DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Town of Vail adopted, effective January 1, 2000 a deferred compensation plan known as the Town of Vail Deferred Compensation Plan (the "Plan"), for the purpose of providing retirement benefits for certain of its employees; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail desires to amend the Plan to provide additional options for the distribution of termination or retirement payments; NOW THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective January 1, 2000, to amend and restate Section 5.2, Benefit Payments, Form of Payment, as follows: 1. ' 5.2 Form of Payment: A Participant or Beneficiary may elect payment in one of the following forms: (a) Lump Sum: A single payment of the entire balance in a Participant's account. (b) Annuity: Monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, or annual payments contingent on the life expectancy of the Participant or Beneficiary, or over such life expectancy and a guaranteed period of time. (c) Installments: Subject to the limitations of Section 5.3, monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual payments over a specified period of time or in specified annual dollar amounts. (d) Combination: A lump sum cash payment of a portion of the balance in a Participant's account, with the remainder of the account to be paid in substantially equivalent monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual installments as specified by the Participant. The election of a schedule of installment payments is irrevocable. 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of December, 2001, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 18th day of December, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 18th day of December, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk U ~ O ~ v ~ o o ~n v? cn ~.A' 4b~ 4• A o ~ O M N Vi y r+ CIA r, Z v Gol~ U T4e.."&THAIL "Follow The Trails... they lead to results! (970) 328-7245 Drawer 6200 - Vail, Colorado 81658 December 15, 2001 Town of Vail Attn: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Lorelei: We are hereby submitting a bid for both legal and display advertising for the year 2002 and thereby becoming the Town of Vail's formal newspaper of record for the calendar year of 2002. "BID 2002-1 - LEGAL ADVERTISING" Our submitted rate for all Legal and Display Advertising will be $3.50 per column inch. This rate is based on a 5-column format which is 1 3/4" wide x 1" in depth and using 6 point helvetica type on a leading of 7 on all legals. In addition, as part of this bid, we will provide certification of publication notices and invoicing as per your instructions. We are extremely proud of our record of serving the Town of Vail for the past 36 years as the legal newspaper and look forward to many more years of continued service. Thank you for the opportunity to submit a bid for the legal and display advertising of the Town of Vail and I look forward to your response. If you need any further information, please feel free to contact me at 328-7245. My fax number is 328-0573. Thank you, len x Publisher Y'm Z f W~ . m+ w,,,.= `,`sue' December 13, 2001 Town of Vail Attn: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Lorelei The Vail Daily bid for the 2002 Town of Vail legal and display column per inch price is $3.50. The Vail Daily will provide a notarized proof of publication will be sent after the last publication date of the legal or public notice. A receipt with the amount due for that specific legal or public notice will also provided with the proof of publication. Additionally, by the 5`h of each month a monthly invoice will be mailed with tearsheets. The Vail Daily offers a 5 column legal and display format. Special deadline consideration may be needed for 2 pg plus legal ads for processing and proofing to insure accuracy of the ad. Legal and public notices are best received electronically, again to insure accuracy. The Vail Daily is excited to submit this bid and offer the Town of Vail an unmatched opportunity. Interesting Statistics about the Vail Dailv: • 75% of consumers turn to the Vail Daily first for local news about their community. • 84% of readers with income over $20,000 report that they read daily newspapers more thoroughly than weeklies. • 12,000 to 15,000 daily circulation depending on the season. The #1 source for local advertising. • Daily readership compared to weekly or 1 x per week readership habits. • Daily newspaper; can run ads any day of the week. Sincerely, i CVkk__, Andrea Palm-Porter Advertising Director 40780 U.S. HIGHWAY 6 & 24 A V O N C O. 8 1 6 2 0 970.949.0555 • FAX: 970.949.7094 NEWS FAX: 970.949.7096 A custom presentation prepared for: Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson Proposed by Andrea Palm-Porter December 13, 2001 Vait Dat -1 40780 U.S. Highway 6&24, Eagle-Vail P.O. Box 81 Vail, CO 81658 (970) 949-0555 FAX (970) 949-7094 Email: vdadvertising@vaildaily.com. Town of Vail Proposal The Vail Daily delivers Eagle County. Eagle County Wolit } agle/ Edwards Vail Gypsum Eagle Avon..., Vail Gle~woormg Arrowhead Minturn Beaver Creek 4 Lake ounty' eadville • The Vail Daily is distributed throughout Eagle County, Colorado, with additional circulation to the adjacent Lake and Garfield counties. Eagle County is located along the Interstate 70 corridor, approximately 100 miles west of Denver, Colorado. Year-round population in 1997 is estimated at 31,500, with the annual population growth rate averaging 5 percent. The "Upper Valley" winter population, which includes the major ski resorts is 40,000. The Vail, Beaver Creek and Arrowhead ski areas are located in Eagle County. Skier numbers in 1996 were 2.2 million, with a 2 percent yearly increase expected. The occupancy rate for lodging is 64 percent, with some 41,000 available pillows. There are more than 200 restaurants and bars and 4,800 hotel and condominium units. The median family income was $51,900 in 1995. Ninety-seven percent of the residents who live in Eagle County also work in the county. Retail sales in 1996 were $1.1 billion, a 13 percent increase over 1995. Real estate sales totaled $939 million in 1996, up about 15 percent over the previous year. The average price for a single family home in 1997 is listed at $529,800 with the average condominium/townhome currently $439,000. Eagle County is serviced by the Eagle County Airport, which reported 80,000 enplanements in 1996 with an average annual increase of 50 percent expected. The county is also serviced by Denver International Airport, located approximately two hours from Vail. Recreational amentities abound, including skiing, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing and snowmobiling in the winter. The busy summer season offers hiking, backpacking, camping, rafting and bicycling. The Vail Daily publishes 12,000 free newspapers a day, seven days a week to more than 600 distribution points. Eagle % County Reach Read Daily 15,800 55% Total Adults 28,900 Source: Consumer Data Service, 2001 .i Di Town of Vail Proposal Survey Methodology- Eagle County Research Company Consumer Data Service Area Covered Eagle County, Colorado. Period Covered Interviews were conducted in 2000. Method Telephone interviews in homes using a uniform questionnaire, conducted from a central location. Respondents Men and women, age 18 and older. Sample Design Probability design, using a systematic random selection of telephone households and respondents within households. Sample Size 601 interviews, weighted to balance properly for day of week the interviews were conducted, number of adults in the households, and several known population characteristics. Sample Tolerance Numbers under 100 (unprojected), use with caution; numbers under 50 (unprojected), use with extreme caution. Population Projection Results are projected to represent 28,900 adults 18 and over residing in Eagle County, Colorado. Data Presentation The numbers in the survey are projected from sample numbers and rounded to the nearest 100. Because of that, numbers do not always add exactly to the total market figures, and percentages do not always add exactly to 100%. The numbers and percentages in the tables do not necessarily add up to the total market line, but instead are intended to represent the relationship of the individual categories in proportion to the total market. Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches adults of all ages daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by age: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach 18 to 24 3,000 10% 1,200 42% 25 to 34 6,000 21% 3,000 51% 35 to 44 7,100 24% 4,000 57% 45 to 54 7,700 27% 4,500 58% 55 to 64 3,200 11% 1,600 50% 65 or older 1,200 4% 1,000 81% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by age: 8,000 7,700 Total Adults 7,100 I Read Daily 7,000 6,000 6,000 5,000 4,500 4,000 4,000 3,200 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 1,600 1,200 1,200 1,000 1,000 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 ~al Daily Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 8,600 adults ages 35-54 daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by age: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach 35 to 44 7,100 24% 4,000 57% 45 to 54 7,700 27% 4,500 58% Subtotal 35-54 14,800 51% 8,600 58% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by age: 16,000 14,800 ¦ Total Adults 14,000 u Read Daily 12,000 10,000 8,600 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 , Subtotal 35-54 Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... More tourists ages 35=54 read the Vail Daily during their visits than listened to radio or read the Vail Trail. Eagle County Adults by local newspapers read or radio listened to Weekly Tourists % during visit: Ages 35-54 Mkt. Vail Daily 7,000 39% Radio 3,700 20% Vail Trail 900 5% Adults in market: 17,800 100% Adults by local newspapers read or radio listened to during visit: 7,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,700 3,000 2,000 900 1,000 0 Vail Daily Radio Vail Trail Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 ka-diOly Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 5,800 adults daily with children in the household. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults with children in the household: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Children in household 10,500 36% 5,800 55% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults with children in the household: 11,000 10,500 Total Adults 10,000 Read Daily 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,800 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Children in household Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 V'a-1; Da PY- Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches adults of all education levels daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by education level: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Some high school 1,300 4% 600 48% High school graduate 5,300 18% 2,900 54% Vo tech 600 2% 400 62% Some college 5,900 20% 3,100 53% College graduate 11,200 39% 6,600 59% Post graduate 3,500 12% 1,800 52% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by education level: 12,000 11,200 Total Adults ~ Read Daily 10,000 8,000 6,600 5,900 6,000 5,300 4,000 3,500 2,900 3,100 1,800 2,000 1,300 600 600 400 0 LaSome high High school Vo tech Some college College Post graduate school graduate graduate Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 a1 Dg aai'fly~ Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 11,500 college educated adults daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by education level: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Some college 5,900 20% 3,100 53% College graduate 11,200 39% 6,600 59% Post graduate 3,500 12% 1,800 52%- Subtotal college educated 20,600 71% 11,500 56% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by education level: 22,000 20,600 Total Adults 20,000 Read Daily 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 11,500 10,000 8,000 w 6,000 . r 4,000 2,000 0 Subtotal college educated Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 ,Va il Daily y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches adults of every employment status daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by employment status: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Employed full time 17,100 59% 9,800 58% Employed part time 2,500 9% 1,100 44% Self employed 4,300 15% 2,300 52% Not in workforce 4,200 15% 2,300 53% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by employment status: 18,000 17,100 Total Adults 16,000 1.+ Read Daily 14,000 12,000 10,000 9,800 8,000 6,000 4,300 4,200 4,000 2,500 2,300 2,300 2,000 1,100 0 Employed full time Employed part time Self employed Not in workforce Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 Vail Dai Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 7,800 men daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by gender: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Male 14,300 49% 7,800 55% Female 14,600 50% 7,900 54% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by gender: 16,000 14,300 14,600 Total Adults 14,000 Read Daily 12,000 10,000 8,000 7,800 7,900 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Male Female Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 h,Wil Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 7,900 women daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by gender: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Female 14,600 50% 7,900 54% Male 14,300 49% 7,800 55% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by gender: 16,000 14,600 14,300 Total Adults 14,000 Read Daily 12,000 10,000 8,000 7,900 7,800 t 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 _ Female Male Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 a~l :Dail y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches adults of every household income level daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by total household income: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Under $25,000 1,700 6% 500 31% $25,000 to $50,000 6,200 21% 3,600 57% $50,000 to $75,000 5,200 18% 3,300 62% $75,000 to $100,000 3,900 14% 2,400 61% Over $100,000 3,700 13% 2,400 65% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by total household income: 6,200 Total Adults 6,000 Read Daily 5,200 5,000 4,000 3,600 3,900 3,700 3,300 3,000 2,400 2,400 2,000 1,700 1,000 500 0 Under $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000 to $75,000 to Over $100,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 11,700 adults daily whose household income is $25,000 or more. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by total household income: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach $25,000 to $50,000 6,200 21% 3,600 57% $50,000 to $75,000 5,200 18% 3,300 62% $75,000 to $100,000 3,900 14% 21400 61% Over $100,000 3,700 13% 2,400 65% Subtotal $25,000 or more 19,100 66% 111700 61% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by total household income: 20,000 19,100 Total Adults 18,000 1;, Read Daily 16,000 14,000 12,000 11,700 10,000 8,000 r r 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Subtotal $25,000 or more Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 p. T h y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 8,100 adults daily whose household income is $50,000 or more. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by total household income: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach $50,000 to $75,000 5,200 18% 3,300 62% $75,000 to $100,000 3,900 14% 2,400 61% Over $100,000 3,700 13% 2,400 65% Subtotal $50,000 or more 12,900 45% 8,100 63% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by total household income: 14,000 12,900 Total Adults 12,000 Read Daily 10,000 8,100 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 Subtotal $50,000 or more Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 nll gDal_ y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 4,900 adults daily whose household income is $75,000 or more. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by total household income: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach $75,000 to $100,000 3,900 14% 2,400 61% Over $100,000 3,700 13% 2,400 65% Subtotal $75,000 or more 7,700 27% 4,900 63% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by total household income: 8,000 7,700 Total Adults i 7,000 Read Daily 6,000 5,000 4,900 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 , Subtotal $75,000 or more Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 i ~"Da m tloy Va. . ~ Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches adults daily who live in households with various numbers of adult members. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by number of adults living in Total % Read % the household: Adults Mkt. Daily Reach 1 5,400 19% 3,000 55% 2 17,400 60% 9,800 56% 3 or more 5,500 19% 2,800 51% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by number of adults living in the household: 18,000 17,400 0 Total Adults 16,000 L"J Read Daily 14,000 12,000 10,000 9,800 8,000 6,000 5,400 t ` 5,500 4,000 3,000 2,800 2,000 0 1 2 3 or more Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 R V-6.4-11 Datly Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches both area newcomers and long time residents daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Adults by length of residence in the area: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Less than 1 year 2,400 8% 1,000 42% 1 to 5 years 6,200 21% 3,300 53% 6 to 10 years 5,100 18% 3,000 58% 11 to 15 years 3,400 12% 2,300 66% 16 to 20 years 3,000 10% 1,300 44% More than 20 years 7,700 27% 4,500 58% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Adults by length of residence in the area: I L3 Total Adults 8,000 7,700 Read Daily 7,000 6,200 6,000 5,100 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,300 3,400 - 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,400 2,300 2,000 1,300 1,000 - 1,000 0 Less than 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 15 years 16 to 20 years More than 1 year 20 years Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 4 • • Y ~ y Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily reaches 6,000 working women daily. Eagle County The Vail Daily Women by employment status: Total % Read % Adults Mkt. Daily Reach Working women 11,000 38% 6,000 55% Adults in market: 28,900 100% 15,800 55% Women by employment status: 12,000 11,000 Total Adults 10,000 } Read Daily 8,000 6,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 + Working women Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 al~Da u r Town of Vail Proposal In Eagle County... The Vail Daily is the primary source of news about communty events. Eagle County Adults by primary source for news about events Total % in your community: Adults Mkt. Vail Daily 21,400 75% 'IV 1,000 4% Radio 800 3% Internet 500 2% Other newspaper 4,800 17% Adults citing a source: 28,400 100% Adults by primary source for news about events in your community: 22,000 21,400 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,800 4,000 2,000 1,000. 800 500 0 Vail Daily TV Radio Internet Other newspaper Source: Consumer Data Service, 2000 :Vail ally MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Robert W. McLaurin Town Manager DATE: December 13, 2001 RE: DONOVAN PARK PAVILION Attached to this memo are documents which provide cost estimates and design changes to the Donovan Park pavilion. As you will recall, the original price (with 100% construction documents) was $3,556,000. On October 9, 2001, the Council directed that we value engineer this project in order to reduce the costs to the original budget which had been was $2.5 million. The Council also required that this building meet LEEDS certification within the $2.5 million budget. Since that time, the design team has been working to reduce the costs of this building without substantially changing the form or structure. We believe we now have a project that meets the Council's requirements. At Tuesday's meeting we will be prepared to discuss the items removed from the project and to discuss with the Council how they wish to proceed with this portion of the Donovan Park project. We look forward to discussing this matter with you Tuesday evening. Attachment o ~ p a~ t _ C m O CL mo~m cow m N o m m ~'a o m O m C O Cl) O j U C m Uco V e, d > O m N Q C E c W as E ° C° m `m o V ` L c .2 m U N O ° m m m m _ m N m m fA ~ C m M fll m > > L Co CL 0 3 m V ~ C C L (D o co0) c>o(D Tri !t°v CD m a r~ ate o MD: 3t m > mom o Env mm m Q,mccom cns~ Zm -i m u- $ u S ° oc~ ° o Y CV) o a U M v IT v v N EH C CL O O U w C ~ N r CL 0 E O O a ° 'C O D C O U co S a) o tu v :3 157 CL m m m m m Q co Ill U w Y~ A M Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Ave. ¦ Suite 220 ¦ Boulder, CO 80303 ¦ (303)443-0330 ¦ Fax (303)443-1508 December 12, 2001 Mr. Todd Oppenheimer Town of Vail Public Works Department Vail, Colorado Dear Todd: The Donovan Park Pavilion project has reached the Town of Vail Council's target of $2.5 million for hard construction cost. The process used to date has been as follows: 1. Initial Scope Verification A. Odell Architects, PC (OA) released a pricing set on June 15, 2001 and J. L. Viele Construction (JLV) submitted a construction cost estimate containing $2,808,000 for the Pavilion on July 17, 2001. B. OA released Construction Documents on July 30, 2001 to JLV, and a new estimate of $3,556,000 was submitted to the team on September 20, 2001. II. Value Engineering A. The project team identified value engineering opportunities and dollar targets for each in October. B. OA produced design documentation for these value engineering options, and JLVWARC worked together to confirm the actual deduction for each using subcontractor input. C. The final design changes were run through the LEEDs certification model by the LEEDS consultant, Architectural Energy Consultants, Inc. This independently confirmed the LEEDs certification is still in hand; in fact, the actual LEEDs score is higher now. D. The value engineering achieved a new construction cost of $2,462,000 by making the following changes: 1. Lowering the height of the roof and rotating it slightly to eliminate structural redundancy and reduce exterior skin. 2. Replacing the stone pavers at the terraces with unit pavers similar to other Town of Vail projects. 3. Changing the roof material from zinc to a standing seam metal roof in a similar color. 4. Eliminating concrete at foundations. 5. Reducing the snomelt at the exterior from about 8,000 sf to approximately 3,000 sf. 6. Removing redundant heating and cooling systems, and using more cost-effective systems in their place. 7. Changing the lighting fixtures to a more cost-effective package, without losing the function or quality of the lighting design. 8. In addition to the above major items, many other, much smaller savings were accrued (e.g. changing the manufacturer of the revolving door, using a very slightly different spec on the exterior wood siding, etc., etc.). Todd, as you know, the project team all put their shoulder to the wheel together in a very impressive group effort to get here, and we all are comfortable with the result. More specifically, the Architect has blessed the current design as in keeping with the original design intent, the LEEDs consultant has re-confirmed certification modeling works, ToV staff has indicated the program is the same as the previous design, and the general contractor is ready to sign a contract for the new number. ARC recommends we still use the original $2.5 million for hard construction and $700,000 for soft costs (i.e. total project budget of $3.2 million) going forward. This will allow $28,000 more than the current estimate of $2,462,000 for pending owner decisions, DRB approval process (see below), final design detailing, etc. We still have a process to go through going forward, which will involve going back to the Design Review Board for a blessing of Items 2 and 3 above, preparation of construction documents, testing and retesting the estimate, etc. In March, the team will take new construction documents to the subcontracting community and receive final pricing, which will be at or below the $2.5 million budget, and request final Town of Vail Council approval for a Notice to Proceed on April with the project for an April ground-breaking. The Council should also be aware that an approval on December 18th means expenditures of as much as $150,000 of capital funds now budgeted for the Pavilion. These monies will be come from both the $2.5 million hard cost amount (shop drawings, ordering of long lead items, etc.) and the $700,000 soft cost budget (printing costs, shipping charges, consultant's fees, etc.). These funds need to be expended in any scenario using the current design. Let me know if this is the information you need, and feel free to ask any questions that may arise about this project or the process. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Sincerely, Chris Squadra Cc: Tim Brekel John Craig Greg Hall Otis Odell Bob McClaurin Via: Email with verbal confirmation US Mail r~ CATCH BASR! LIKE OF ROOF ABOVE SERVICE AREA I'- • .f J 2 MECHANICAL KT(CHE1 I :f I - ST RAGE JI cc) 4 I yYOMEN PAVWON SPACE 1 ~ i OTflCE i LOW ~I i I i I ~ I I I I ~ I / 1 1 CATCH BASW \~I 0 PAVILION FLOOR PLAN SCAIL. f ~ CATCH BASN UNE OF GOLD ROOF SNON GUARDS; M. F ~ ® \~l I ~ \ F. ~ I ' ' ' I l I I 7 1 . - 1-1 nil CATCH BA9N ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 PAVILION ROOF PLAN SCALE t BLDG. ELEV. - EAST 0 BLDG. ELEV. - NORTH scut:1'=W-o' All 1 11 11 BLDG. ELEV. - WEST SCALE: f--16'-0' 17 v I f BLDG. ELEV. - SOUTH SCALE 1'=16'-0' ORDINANCE NO. 33 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF TOWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 2001 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE IN THE 2002 FISCAL YEAR. WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to provide for the levy, assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 2001 year and payable in the 2002 fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses of the Town of Vail, Colorado, during its 2002 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property tax of 4.696 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $563,606,480 for the 2001 tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of $2,646,694, calculated as follows: Base mill levy 4.690 $2,643,312 Abatement levy .006 3,382 Total mill levy 4.696 $2,646,694 Said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, as directed by the Colorado Revised Statutes (1973 as amended), and as otherwise required by law. 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 1 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 4"' day of December, 2001. A public hearing shall be held hereon on the 18th day of December, 2001, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in this 18"' day of December, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 2 RESOLUTION No. 13 Series of 2001 A RESOLUTION BY THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTING THE EAGLE VALLEY REGIONAL TRAILS PLAN, PREPARED BY THE EAGLE COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COMMUNITY WITHIN EAGLE COUNTY WHEREAS, the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan was created to specifically describe the vision for an Eagle Valley Regional Trails system that will connect the communities of the Eagle River and Gore Creek Valleys; and WHEREAS, the primary focus of the Plan is the creation of a paved arterial "core" trail, to be known as the Eagle Valley Trail, that will span the county from Vail Pass at the east end to Glenwood Canyon at the west end; and WHEREAS, the goals of the Plan, in part, are to promote cooperative partnerships for trail planning, funding, design, construction and maintenance between local governments, organizations, businesses and citizens; to provide alignment and design details for a valley-wide, shared use, non-motorized, off-road trail system that is safe and enjoyable; to provide recommendations and guidance for land use development review by local governments and supports the goals of existing land use plans regarding the provision of trail facilities; to promote the improvement of local roadways and revision of standards to accommodate certain non-motorized uses; and WHEREAS, the Plan provides for three types of trails which includes off-road shared use trails, unpaved trails and shared roadway trails aimed at providing trail use opportunities for recreationalists, cyclists in training, commuters and equestrians; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail actively participated in the formulation of the Plan through citizen participation on the Eagle Valley Trails Committee, representation on the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority and through town staff support; and WHEREAS, on April 9, 2001, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the Plan and has forwarded a unanimous (5-0) recommendation of approval for the adoption of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the citizenry of the Town of Vail wishes to express its support for the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the implementation of the Plan is considered an important action by each partner for enhancing the transportation and recreation opportunities available to the citizens and guests of our community and region. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: The Vail Town Council hereby adopts the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan, dated August 2001. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of December, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor, Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail J I ,x is s i E Ve, e ((e Reyte0AIA(. r ah for the Towns of Gypsum, Eagle, Avon, Vail, Minturrn, fled Cliff and Eagle County August 2001 EAGLE VALLEY REGIONAL TRAILS PLAN Table of Contents Chapter 1 Plan Overview Page Introduction 1-1 Geographic Scope of the Plan 1-1 Location Map 1-2 Goals of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan 1-3 Types of Trails 1-4 Types of Trail Users 1-5 Implementation of the Regional Trails Plan 1-6 Relationship to Other Planning Documents 1-7 Amendment of the Regional Trails Plan 1-7 Recommended Related Studies 1-7 Trails Plan Process 1-8 Funding the Trails System Construction 1-8 Chapter 2 Estimated Costs and Construction Priorities Summary of Estimated Costs of the Planned Core Trail 2-1 Criteria for Core Trail Construction Priorities 2-2 Core Trail Construction Priority Projects 2-3 Priorities for Shared Road Improvements 2-4 Chapter 3 Planning (Naps for the Eagle Valley Regional Trails System 3-1 to 29 Chapter 4 Design and Construction Standards Introduction 4-1 Fundamentals of Trail Design 4-1 Design Standards 4-2 to 16 Chapter 5 The Railroad Corridor as a Trail Corridor Background 5-,1 Options for Trail Use of the Corridor 5-1 Summary of Options 5-2 Corridor Analysis Maps 5-3 Analysis by Section 5-6 Summary of Rail Corridor Analysis 5-10 Chapter 6 Trail Maintenance Recommended Core Trail Maintenance Program 6-1 Other Considerations 6-2 Appendices: Appendix A Detailed Cost Estimates by Trail Section Appendix B Trail Plan Process Participants Appendix C References Appendix D Recommended Core Trail Furniture CH Fx APTER 1 - i I f v giro ,x• - Plan Overview Y n Introduction As the population of Eagle County has grown over the last twenty years, so has the demand for walking and bicycle trails for transportation or recreation. This regional trails plan was created to specifically describe the vision for an Eagle Valley Regional Trails System that will connect the communities of the Eagle River and Gore Creek Valleys. The primary focus of this Plan is the creation of a paved arterial "core" trail, the Eagle Valley Trail, that will span the county from Vail Pass at the east end to Glenwood Canyon at the west end. The Plan also depicts a major "spur' trail traveling from Dowd Junction to the town of Red Cliff, through Minturn. Additionally, links to other existing or planned public trails, paved and unpaved, are included in the Plan information. Shared use of roads by bicycles, pedestrians and motor vehicles is also an important part of the total system. Together, these components will create a network of non-motorized transportation routes and recreation opportunities throughout Eagle County. Geographic Scope of the Plan The Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan pertains to the portion of Eagle County that coincides with the watershed boundaries of the Eagle River and part of the Colorado River valley. The specific focus of this Plan is the Interstate 70 and Highway 24 corridors. The Roaring Fork River and Fryingpan River watershed area of Eagle County is not included in this plan. That portion of Eagle County is addressed in separate Eagle County or Town of Basalt planning documents specific to the Roaring Fork Valley side of Eagle County. The following map depicts that area that is specifically addressed by this plan, the valleys of the Eagle River and Gore Creek, but the mission to create a safe and enjoyable trails network applies to the whole of Eagle County. Ch. 1 Pg. 1 •F ? a le Valley w Regional " .~•w~ _ ~ ~ Trails Plan Core Trail Location Co Map I~nLIJ^nIJ } ~ ~ ~ Y - " ? - Legend Eage Canty Boundary Public Lands g ~~"s," • O Col sate d N lavers Of'ddD BLM Roads Trails Flan Are USFS 44D widerress ^ LI r T~f 4y„' 4'h ~ aF fix.. I U L o ~ s~ ~yi5h<K x ~ 3 :'„N~~: s,,y:~,~,s ...q~~:. ,:a~?'~: o-a^,.:. ,y ss _ .,n'. ,«.o aZ:-.,:-: b; - :.~j. :Ata~:i:•- :'s: ;Tw2%~~; ~~r;~~\.~~': 5~-,?i-~ y. , rN2q '-.CfOrr, .,v,:i".f'Y ~.,yw, ~ •PfOa~e~` 4.~'yF,+-'~"' q'3.3- y , 's w,., ' asa te- :::.~xi% rr~. F~-.w.:.. x ; s;;, - y7+.a h. •`-"-5?,>:r-'..4 £s";, >,4~ss,.~•.-:. •:3':a,° ••4•'~41r s ,:~~.r, y;-z.e..~ .°.n;~~' ..z,~,s -'~_n., ..r.~.ar.w.re,{r.o,~.~ a- i xN Kz? - h _ GIS n ; f Y'%'-,•,;:-"% °3: e~'< ~ Nl3pQeated:Feb6.20011rtic e:\teTp\prcj '1.apr This rmp was created by the Faye County Use E 8000 0 8000 16000 24ODD Feet b for general eu,is s rrep should be for gene-al purposes only Faye Canty does nd warrant the aavaW of the data contained herein. Goals of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan -x ,fy ~t This plan is intended to:` 1. Promote COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIPS for trail planning, funding, design, construction and maintenance between local governments, organizations, businesses and citizens. 2. Provide ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN DETAILS for a valley-wide, shared use, non-motorized off-road trail system that is safe and enjoyable. 3. Promote IMPROVEMENT OF LOCAL ROADWAYS and revision of standards to accommodate certain types of non-motorized uses. This plan promotes both the creation of a valley-wide trail system and the improvement of local roads with wider shoulders, bike lanes or bike routes to improve safety overall. 4. Provide information on TRAIL SEGMENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS for capital improvement budgeting and annual work programs. This baseline information is formatted for periodic updating, every three years recommended. 5. Provide a PRIORITIZED LIST OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS which can be periodically evaluated and updated as necessary. 6. Provide recommendations and GUIDANCE FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW by local governments and supports the goals of existing land use plans regarding provision of trail facilities. 7. Provide documentation that can be referenced and presented while FUNDRAISING from private sources and grant agencies. 8. Serve as a PUBLIC INFORMATION AND SUPPORT BUILDING TOOL for efforts by ECO Trails, the towns and Eagle County. Ch. 1 Pg. 3 Types of Trails For the purpose of this plan, the word "trail" is used to refer to both paved and unpaved routes, and the exact type differentiated as necessary in the text. Path is commonly used to describe paved bike trails (e.g. bike paths) but for consistency in this plan, only the word "trail" is used. The regional trail system is planned to be a three season system, with some sections remaining usable throughout the year. Types of trail in the system include: Off-Road Shared Use Trail - typically a paved trail from which motor vehicles are prohibited and is shared by bicycles, pedestrians, joggers, equestrians, in-line skaters and other non-motorized users. Where such trail or path is ;icet m ~ f" 4 r 'YI7f 1~ part of a highway right-of-way, it is separated from the roadway and from motor-vehicle traffic, b an open sace, grade separation, or barrier. A 2000 report issued by the Colorado Department of Transportation documents that " - paved off street bike paths are preferred over roadways for recreation or commuting by bicycle. UnpauedTralls - In Eagle County, hiking trails on U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management public lands are the most common form of this trail type. Most common use is for recreation. Some jurisdictions in Eagle County have constructed unpaved nature walks or pathways along waterways which are typically narrow and meandering and not open to bicycle use. Trail links to, and into, the backcountry are shown on the trail plan maps and additional backcountry detail is available on other maps prepared by Eagle County and ECO Trails. Some sections of the core trail route may remain unpaved until demand warrants the expense but at eight to ten feet, the planned core trail and the major spurs will be much wider than the typical unpaved three to four foot wide hiking or nature trail. Shared Roadways - most roads in Eagle County are open to both ' motor vehicle and bicycle or pedestrian travel. In some. locations, signed bike lanes or bike routes (see Chapter 4 for definitions) exist but generally travel is relegated to the shoulder of the road which is not specifically designed or ~,'4:` - ? striped to accommodate non-motorized users. Sidewalks are also part of a shared roadway system but are typically for - pedestrian traffic only. Users of shared roadways include all types - commuters, fitness trainers and for casual recreation.' Ch. 1 Pg. 4 Types of Trail Users The following types of users will be considered during the planning, design and management of the Eagle Valley Regional Trail system: Pedestrians, joggers or runners, equestrians, in-line skaters, cross country skiers, hikers, fishermen, boaters and bicyclists. These user types can be grouped into four distinct categories based on the type of use, why they choose that type of use and where they prefer to do it: The 'Recreational" trail or shared-road user primarily includes walking or cycling children and families or adults out for social or exercise reasons. Recreational users are generally local residents but may include tourists from outside of the area that want to enjoy some exercise and exploration. In general, recreational users prefer separated trails and low volume streets. Children account for a large percentage of users in neighborhoods and on routes to schools, recreation areas and some commercial centers. Typically, a large percentage of children under 16 ride or own a bike. The "Trainer" category defines cyclists training for competition who generally prefer to travel faster and longer distances than the recreational cyclist. Trainers tend to prefer roads over shared-use trails separated from roads because of allowable higher speeds, fewer intersections that require the road traffic w °`r~ fi s to stop, and conflicts with other paths users. Once in motion, °Y~X f -,f ti trainers like to keep up their momentum. The Trainer category also applies to runners, joggers and in-line skaters. Those users have influenced shared-use trail design in the.. last ten years to include adjacent soft-surface running paths or increased width to accommodate in-line skating patterns. ' The "Commuter" or "Utility" user walks or bikes to work or school on a trail or road. This category is usually local residents and they prefer the most direct routes with the least stops and delays. Low volume streets or trails are ideal but a high volume street may be part of their route because of being more direct. Utility trips include trips to the store, library, bank, etc. The perceived benefits of bike and pedestrian commuting includes financial savings, improving health and environmental stewardship. The "Equestrian" trail user warrants specific mention because they have different needs or preferences than the other user types. Equestrians generally prefer not to mix with vehicular traffic, especially avoiding busy roads. Horses and bicycles, or horses and pedestrians with pets are sometimes not compatible. Paved trails are generally not designed for use by horses and not preferred by riders. Surface maintenance issues may also arise if the trail is swept on an infrequent basis. Opportunities do exist within the proposed system to construct bridle paths alongside the core trail but located at a safe, compatible distance. The planning maps identify trail sections where a bridle path or horse trailer parking can likely be accommodated. The use and enjoyment of horses is a large part of the region's history and present day lifestyles and this plan advocates accommodating that use where compatible with more common types of users listed above. Ch. 1 Pg. 5 Implementation of the Regional Trails Plan Implementation of this plan will require close coordination among local, state and federal government agencies and private interests. There are essentially two methods through which the public trails system will be developed: 1. Initiated by Local Government on private land with public use easements or on public land, including road rights-of-way. Local government includes towns, Eagle County, metropolitan districts and the multi-jurisdictional ECO Trails program of the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority. ECO Trails acts as the general coordinating agency to facilitate communications between all involved parties regarding trail issues, but will also be available for specific project tasks such as design coordination, grant applications, construction management, etc. Trail construction will be managed as applicable by towns, county or ECO Trails. 2. Initiated by Private land Development, either voluntarily or as part of an approved development. The specific requirement for trails shall be determined by the local jurisdiction based on the criteria in their land use regulations and typically linked to the scale of the development and it's associated impacts. Either a trail easement or trail easement and construction may be required. Existing trail connections to public lands should be identified on development plans and jurisdictions are encouraged to require retention or replacement of the existing access trails. Creation of new access to adjacent public lands is also encouraged where none exists, provided it is compatible with the character of the public land. Paved surfacing is not recommended for this type of trail. This Plan identifies potential trail routes but options are not restricted to what is shown on the planning maps. If other opportunities present themselves or obstacles prevent implementation, the route is flexible. The core trail and spur trail alignments depicted within this Plan are conceptual until constructed. If a trail alignment is shown on the following route maps as traveling through a property, the trail should be included as part of the overall development plan. The development plan should also show how the trail, sidewalk and shared road circulation system internal to the property will link to the overall trails system. Areas Outside of the Core Trail Corridor: If a developing area is not addressed by this plan (i.e. tributary side valleys), the specific local government land use plan for that area should be consulted for guidance. If no specific guidance exists, trail construction and/or easements should be required if trail sections exist in that area to which connections can eventually be made and/or a new trail connection is warranted by the scale of the development project. As stated in the design standards in Chapter 4, spur trails should be at least eight feet wide and the minimum recommended trail easement at least 20 feet wide unless exceptionally wide road rights-of-ways can accommodate a portion of the trail corridor without future road widening threatening the trail. Ch. 1 Pg. 6 Relationship to other Land Use Management Plans Existing land use and trail plans for local governments in the Eagle Valley were consulted as part of this plan preparation, including the Eagle County Trail Plan 1993, Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan 1994, Minturn Parks and Recreation Master Plan 1992 and Town of Avon Recreation Master Plan 1992. This plan is intended to supplement the specific trail component of the existing plans, particularly to clarify the location of the core trail route, for the purpose of coordinating local efforts. If a conflict is found to exist between any of the above referenced documents and this plan, this plan does not necessarily supercede the previous trail plans. The underlying jurisdiction will need to evaluate and render the necessary decisions. The language in the adopting resolution by each town and the county should be reviewed for further guidance in these decisions. Amendment of the Regional Trails Plan Trail alignments may be subject to change for a variety of reasons such as establishing more effective connections, protection of natural resources, elimination of conflicts, better land use buffering or siting, or because of difficulties in construction or acquisition. As a policy document, this Plan must be open to amendment in order to remain viable and accommodate changing conditions. Minor amendments, such as altering an alignment in order to improve it's usability or mitigate a land use issue, will be reviewed and acted upon through the standard development review process or through administrative review that can be thoroughly documented and defended as meeting the following criteria: 1. There is justification for the proposed change 2. The proposed change conforms with the goals of the Trails Plan 3. The proposed change would be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Review of the plan should take place every seven years,or more frequently if necessary (e.g. revise the maps to show significant alignment changes or construction accomplishments, etc.). Major revisions should be processed through the same type of inter-governmental agreement process as this original version. Recommended Related Studies BadcountryTraft: The effort to document and plan new routes to and from the public lands in Eagle County, referred to commonly as the "backcountry" , should be continued and gradually integrated with this plan through updated mapping. As the population grows, there will more use demand on existing backcountry trails and increased pressure for new trails to be created. The term "frontcountry" trails which appears in this plan refers to trails that may be located on undeveloped or lightly developed private land between the densely populated urban area and the public lands. Ch. 1 Pg. 7 Tributary Valley Trails: This current planning effort is very specific to the main valley of the Eagle River. However, all tributary valleys and the Colorado River valley should be included in future trails planning efforts given the aggressive rate of development and population growth in those valleys which include: • Lake Creek Valley • Brush Creek Valley • Gypsum Creek Valley • Colorado River Valley, including Dotsero, Burns, McCoy and Bond A recommended project is the mapping of all existing trail sections and easements in these areas (and currently there are few). This project should be undertaken in the next two years (by 2003). For the short term, the process outlined in the previous Plan Implementation section should be followed for making trail decisions or recommendations for land development in the tributary valleys. Trail Plan Process The Eagle Valley Regional Trail Plan process began in January 2000 and was initiated by a request made by the Eagle Valley Trails Committee to the ECO Trails staff. The Eagle Valley Trails Committee, created in 1996 as part of the passage of the %2 percent transportation sales tax served as primary steering committee for the creation of this plan. The Committee membership represents bicycling, pedestrian, equestrian and family interests. The Committee works with the staff and board of the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority, known as ECO, to accomplish it's mission to develop, promote and cooperatively maintain a scenic and safe urban and backcountry multi-use, non- motorized trail system throughout Eagle County. County and town government staff contributed specific information and guidance on feasible and preferred routes. Public meetings were held at the outset of the process with elected officials from each of the partners in the planning effort which included the towns of Gypsum, Eagle, Avon, Minturn, Red Cliff, and Eagle County. Representatives from state and federal government agencies provided valuable input as well. The local engineering firm was hired to create planning maps and prepare cost estimates of each segment. Final map work was performed by the Eagle County Geographic Information Systems (GIS) department. A complete list of participants is included in the Plan Appendix B. After a series of final public worksessions and hearings with each of the partner jurisdictions, the collective adoption of the Plan through Intergovernmental Agreement in 2001. Funding the Trails System Construction Paying for the creation of the trail system will require a combination of funding sources and methods since no existing single source can fully pay for the estimated cost to complete the system. It will require partnerships, creativity and aggressive fundraising. Ch. 1 Pg. 8 Sources of funding include: Local Governments: • 10% of the revenues from the local mass transportation sales tax, as authorized by Eagle County voters, managed by Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority (ECO) and available to the towns and county for trail projects • Matching funds from the towns and county towards building trails sections within their jurisdictions • Matching funds from other local governmental entities such as metropolitan districts Grants, including: • Colorado State Trail Program Grants • Great Outdoor Colorado grants from lottery proceeds • Colorado Department of Transportation "Enhancement" grants • Federal cost sharing grants (i.e. through Forest Service or BLM) • Private local, state or national foundations such as the Vail Valley, Gates or Taylor Foundations Contributions from citizens, businesses or corporations of cash, labor or supplies. Incidental projects such as development, highway projects, utility projects or improvement districts may also help facilitate construction of some sections of the trail. Other potential funding methods that have been or can be explored further include: • Voter approval for bonding for the final sections of the trail. The possibility of selling bonds to raise funds for construction was explored in 2000. Study determined that annual revenues did not generate enough income to pay off a 20 year debt, if bonding for entire cost of the trail system. The final decision was to remain with a "pay-as-you-go" approach and revisit bonding at a later date. • Dedicate annual lottery entitlements received from the state by the towns and county to fund local trail projects • Adopting development impact fees for trail construction (sometimes combined with parks and recreation or open space fees) within each jurisdiction • Minor fees such as trail use fees or bicycle registration fees • "Sale" of trail items such as benches or landscaping in return for a plaque on that item • Sales of trail program items (t-shirts) • Non-profit group events that name the trail project as the funding recipient and trail race sponsorship. Ch. 1 Pg. 9 CHAPTER Z r k 1 F'i' Z Estimated Costs and r y Construction Priorities MIS The following information includes a summary of the estimated cost of construction of specific sections of the planned core trail, the list of construction priorities through the next five years and a summary of the priorities for road improvements that would augment the regional trails system and core trail route in particular. Summary of Estimated Costs of the Planned Core Trail: The boundary limits of each cost-estimated trail section is marked on the maps in Chapter 3. See Appendix A for the detailed cost estimates for each section. The estimates include design and construction costs but are preliminary estimates. Prior to final budgeting, each section should reevaluated to determine current and accurate costs of construction. Trail Section Core Trail GLENWOOD CANYON to DOTSERO $10,603.00 DOTSERO to GYPSUM $2,176,271.00 TOWN of GYPSUM $316,558.00 GYPSUM to EAGLE $1,113,216.00 TOWN of EAGLE $1,061,103.00 EAGLE to WOLCOTT $2,677,261.00 WOLCOTT to WEST EDWARDS $2,686,248.00 WEST EDWARDS to AVON $480,000.00 TOWN of AVON $600,000.00 AVON to DOWD JUNCTION to NORTH MINTURN BRIDGE $3,552,455.00 DOWD JUNCTION THROUGH VAIL to VAIL PASS Missing links: a. Vail Valley Drive Separated Trail $1,300,000 Ch. 2 Pg. 1 to Vail Valley Drive East b. Lionshead Bypass $225,000 c. Vail Village Bypass $40,000 d. Golf Course Separated Path $260,000 MINTURN NORTH BRIDGE to MINTURN $162,822.00 TOWN of MINTURN $1,232,647.00 MINTURN to RED CLIFF $903,489.00 TOTAL $18,797,673.00 Criteria for Core Trail Construction Priorities In establishing the priorities for trail system construction, the following criteria were reviewed by the team working on the Plan including local government staff and the Trails Committee. The projects were compared to these criteria but it is also important to note that priorities do change - opportunities arise, funding abilities are limited, or incidental issues create obstacles or amend the timing of the project. The list of priorities that follows this criteria should be considered as a conceptual list, based on current desires and available funding. 1. Links population centers (communities, neighborhoods) and traffic generators (commercial centers, schools, recreation sites) 2. Minimal physical constraints (low level of natural hazards, amenable topography, room for re- vegetation and stabilization, etc.)/construction will not be extremely difficult 3. Minimal ownership constraints and disruption of existing property use 4. Accommodates a mix of user groups/benefit the most people 5. Improves existing safety issues by reducing conflict with automobiles and incorporate design features that mitigate hazardous conditions 6. Without immediate acquisition/construction, is lost as an opportunity 7. Multiple entities can share costs, design, construction, signs, maintenance, right-of-way, etc. 8. Creates no or minimal impact on the area's wildlife or habitat 9. Is critical link in the establishment of a continuous system or connects existing trails 10. Services an existing heavy demand by commuting or recreation traffic 11. Maximizes opportunities to view or pass through scenic features such as unique land forms, waterways, vistas, vegetation, wildlife 12. Provides non-motorized, appropriate access to public lands (open spaces, trailheads, waterways) 13. Can be constructed and maintain at a relatively reasonable cost in a reasonable amount of time 14. Creates a variety of trip options via connections 15. Meets funding agency criteria 16. Provides an-opportunity for historic or natural feature interpretation without disturbance 17. Is able to be used year round or at least in three seasons 18. Facilitates the development of a inter-county or statewide non-motorized network of trails. Ch. 2 Pg. 2 PRIORITY TRAIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS -five YearP/an Potential Trail Section Location Partners GYPSUM TO EAGLE - PHASE 1 ' Gypsum & County Town of Gypsum from Red Table Acres to Gateway Center Maps # 5 & 6 Eagle County ECO Trails NORTH MINTURN TRAIL Town of Minturn Town of Minturn from North Minturn bridge through railyard Map #20 ECO Trails to downtown Minturn WEST AVON - PHASE 11 Avon Town of Avon from West Beaver Creek Blvd to Avon Road Map #17 ECO Trails VAIL CORE TRAIL MISSING LINKS Town of Vail Town of Vail Shown on Town of Vail Maps Maps #26 & 27 ECO Trails AVON TO DOWD JUNCTION - PHASE I Eagle County Eagle County from entrance to River Run Apts Map #19 ECO Trails to Dowd Junction Pedestrian Bridge AVON TO DOWD JUNCTION - PHASE II Town of Avon & County Town of Avon from Village at Avon 1-70 interchange Maps #18 & 19 Eagle County to River Run Apts entrance Developer ECO Trails GYPSUM TO EAGLE - PHASE II Town of Eagle & County Town of Eagle from Gateway Center to Brush Creek Road Maps #6 & 7 Eagle County State/Federal ECO Trails AVON TO DOWD JUNCTION - PHASE III Town of Minturn & County Town of Minturn from Dowd Pedestrian Bridge to North Minturn Map #19 Eagle County bridge over Eagle River ECO Trails WEST EDWARDSTRAIL -PHASE II Eagle County Eagle County from Eagle River mobile home park to Hillcrest Drive Map #15 Edwards Metro ECO Trails Remaining Trail Sections to Prioritize: 1. Downtown Eagle 2. Eagle to Wolcott to West Edwards 3. Through Minturn to the base of Battle Mountain 4. Battle Mountain to Red Cliff 5. Dotsero to Gypsum 6. Gypsum to Glenwood Canyon Ch. 2 Pg. 3 Priorities for Shared Road Improvements: To resolve safety issues on shared road improvements, the following list is provided as a record of what the participants in this planning process, some of them frequent users of local roads for running, biking or walking, believe to be the highest priorities for widened shoulders, bike lanes or bike routes on the primary local travel routes through the length of the Eagle Valley: Highway 6: 1. Avon to Edwards - widened shoulders 2. Eagle to Gypsum - widened shoulders 3. Edwards to Wolcott - widened shoulders 4. Wolcott to Eagle - widened shoulders 5. Gypsum to Dotsero - widened shoulders Highway 24: 1. Minturn to Red Cliff - widened shoulders Highway 131: 1. Wolcott to State Bridge - widened shoulders Other Major Roadways: 2. North and South Vail Frontage Roads - Ford Park to East Vail Exit - widened shoulders 3. Pedestrian Bridge to Main Vail Roundabout on North Frontage Road - widened shoulders 4. Brush Creek Road -widened shoulders and/or separated trail 5. Lake Creek Road - widened shoulders and/or separated trail 6. Colorado River Road - widened shoulders "Share the Road" Sign Priorities: 1. Highway 6 from Gypsum to Glenwood Canyon 2. Lake Creek Road 3. Brush Creek Road 4. Highway 131 All local roads administrated by town or country government should be evaluated for bicycle and pedestrian issues when improvements are under consideration. This includes widening with either asphalt or recycled asphalt (rotomill), improved signing, removing hazards such as grates, ditches, drop-offs, revised striping and timing chip seal projects to accommodate other users besides vehicles. Ch.2 Pg. 4 CHAPTER 3 Planning Maps for the Eagle Valley Regional Trails System l ~Y Y. Y A a - " Planned trail route near Dowd Junction Edwards trailside park Riverwalk pedestrian bridge in Edwards ; ~ k ~ r Planned trail route from Mintum to Dowd Junction ~ 're w . a f`p~ I a-i~~y' ~ , ~ ~F'•it ~ r r.' w ~ Yyy,'v tier' ' faF Trail at Eagle River Villas in Eagle ; a Old Highway 24 near Gilman :k Hurd Lane trail in Avon f jeCOtrailsl CORE TRAIL p Index Sheet Entrance of Glenwood Canyon to East Vail r Legend Proposed Core Trail Alternative to j ` Proposed Core Trail g r IV Existing Core Trail Proposed Spur Trail O/coff s i Existing Spur Trail 'a . Contrained for Rail and y W a t Trail Shared Corridor i M • N Railroad -Rail and Trail x. ; ss A VOl1 ~x 3 Can Share r - gle 117 Proposed Backcountry Trail Existing Backcountry Trail Gypsum 0 Exhibit Index hry ,,~?3w¢ 3 Trails Plan Area ® F j //1fUM Town Boundary 0 Eagle County Boundary BLM ~p s ` ? y State of Colorado y USFS aT ~ , b ~,g Wilderness -Red-Cliff A r' f k, l \e (o ~ i J - XZ .axg ~ _ ~ y N GIs Department 't:I..,v-•--~ . - r-. _ Q cTa~ c°s oawnn;e ~i Ythe ~ ao°, ` with Johnson Kunkel and Aasooafes 1 - ~ ~'~rt(7~) q{ l ~ 'ySl Use of I is map slwold be for 9ene21 I - - - „ ~a~- - --''~J pa w~aaamUaa~~ayaa,e deranm 4 Map Reft d: 2-22-00 e:bpepymskm halls OOR'blanl ..o n Jap_falder-"il-i1 re s.apr leeotraiis~ CORE TRAIL Exhibit 1 Entrance of Glenwood 'f Canyon to Dotsero Sheet 1 of 29 {A - West of DOTSERO°=`_ unincorporated LEGEND n N Existing Core Trail < , - Proposed Core Trail Existing Backcountry J~ w~ nibuolponatructlpaepereedtra,m Trail r edstft Highway S m same Bum Dmaem _ mcie awoa cony-fti. uremiywayl Bridge/Underpass ldtle tramp volume. sst COCiatrlgng sad a~~ ~ aka ~ Ravlsd In - 2010 far separated trek needs. 5 © Parking ® Trailhead ® BLM r Q Town Boundary Contours are at 10' Intervals Railroad conMlor _ / still aNve 1' = 000' ra F ,c R\c CoWi r t y GIS Department ? I 3 This map we, produced by the Eagle ( aunty GIS Dew- In coepmadon Gbmvood GOf ye - ! N Jenne., Kunkel and AeeeaeteseeMVOe p 'm lot y 2 use of the map should W ter general mpraiuvl. , ~ purposes ors - Eagle County does not _ warrant the a=MCy al the Gals -Wlned herein. Mep Revised: &1 M1 e:1apecymisbco_tnsff. ellslplan\ ecoyrq'ed_taWerbpMrallacdt revls.apr leeotreilsl CORE IL >4. ColoredPR Road.` Exhibit 2 Deer and Elk Winter Range'., \ ;t" 4.1y°~ Entrance of Glenwood m~Pa~ Canyon to Dotsero DOTSERO rj ` t'$ Sheet 2 of 29 - _ Unincorporated Det,mo Crew ute Trail LEGEND Proposed Core Trail Retrofit wasting tuphway/elmetl bdtlpe tit 'f. rem came-.. pedectdem a R trofd as tlng highway bridge r replace and orinare. b T W`' 4 ? Alternate to F 3 t i' t cmmmod t pee m rro one evrrala. o- = - f y ? Proposed Core Trail Proposed Spur Trail c. L Q Dimwn trio I To. vadatym - rte "r LI .F} \ & Vaffic rtpvemerda F Nro ad ~ In lieu of comeniathng 6 as a from separated frm mall. Oa use I M Licata trail madmum distance ho y naca.9s0ry Highway 8 Obtain e easements th agh sting d CanCan Syon as trail. Currently w Sero 1 \ .-.,P-. .,P low ` r process. 2 x Existing Backcountry lucanwvad fmadwaa RaquestuestC DOTTeVis am, signing il in Trail arw alemry of maaaay.s aka route Rewu.n m zo1o. s s~om Possaopuamawereutem ~ ~ y m .y' „y cYPSrm oat 1-70 nghtbf-aarand lboeplain. , Ei Driveway / tee' Sy ~..+C` aMrem T x: Wcukl also rWeln nl4oatl - r P Intersecting Roads Busy Intersection Bridge/Underpass a Publktrailaand perk pl trod Park E >.'~e:. ti' ydth eaealoprrrorn or a,la property ~ ~ C. .r~ i.. Y © Parking D ear a nd E Wint R g :e•' I m er an e z R' alIroed C ' rosslng by TraI 'I Nesting Site BLM till asu~ xt Q Town Boundary w~ a Contours are at 10' Intervals ' N 1' = 1000' GIS Department This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS Department In ooopamnen with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. Use of this map should be for genarel purposes only. Eagle County does net wwrant the -cy of the date contained herein. Map R.A.W: 61301 e:\aPacyrefs\eco_malls\tmlls\pmn\ - amyroJect_/older\ecMreilactll reWe.epr lecon 14 .CORE TRAIL Exhibit 3 Dotsero to Gypsum Sheet 3 of 29 U J 4k EastDf LEGEND N Deer and Elk Winter Range Proposed Core Trail Dw bApol 30 _ a re ...1 Alternative to fa trail. In Nls area ? • Proposed Core Trail Driveway ' Park d River & Wetlands Area Avoidance or Mitigation f w k Required / -Ja -a2~._'°s•.°'r ...ter-:., ® BLM aEas is ftlvar Town Boundary a rg' Private parcel, aNuire - tra4 dava %mart Contours are at 10' I l ntervals Lomt tr I I m disbnca from Highway 6 „sir - H passide Obta to snaceaaary arq Nrough 6 f` ;qy~ Lowtatral guide ` - ~ ~2~ I Bevel p t p s when poaelCle {c y ' - i of riparlyl . I N x 4 =t - °a~°~ ' 1' = 1000' cease sits. r, GIs Departrnent This map was praducad by iha Eagle Cauniy GI3 Department m moparegon vdlh Jahncon, Kunkel end Aasoaw- Use al ills map should ba for genbml purposasonly. Eagle Counlydoesnot warrant iha eaou W the dais c-.inad herein. Map P,m,d:6A3 l ~ a:laPacymisiaoo trel4Vrsl1sV1anl amymfecLiokerbcatrailaM7_reNs.apr Meearaihl CORE TRAIL Exhibit 4 Dotsero to Gypsum Sheet 4 of 29 LEGEND Proposed Core Trail Alternate to Proposed Trail T~.aeda^gaoaghelM~w~a + F q. N Existing Core Trail Emlmnm°ntal Aaceasmenl and Appmvd mYnm. emn \ g,~ ~ .i~ s 6 etM campmwnd Taanar~ _ ~^jF ,v ° 4 _ ~~t • Existing Spur Trail Proposed Spur Trail za Driveway - t - eud Eagle Rlaan aaaeaa - Intersecting Roads Busy Intersection Lorate t, lI ar eway from Hlgh-,y 6 as poasible ~ ~ L rte. ~ a ~ R ~ \ y+' + Bridge/Underpass s' 4' sla Ikea aemwae brltlg wy~ r unel trail n a~an 9e ® Park I ~ Pwalq~ - Restroom entl © Parking f` ® BLM Town Boundary Town of EWhrylTalh6ASphaC W~ Contours are at 10' Intervals . GYPSUM m,amrawmdataa~noreposaml. S~j~`f ~ ~ ` EDHC Cafy~4 N GIs Department 1' = 1000' Map Revised: 1&1341 This map wet produced by the Eagle e:%SP--PMjS% _taila%1raQ plan% County GlS D°paNnam in wope Wen ewyrofect_bWerlemaalkW l revia.epr ' '0,J., nuon, K-W an~ yu.odatm. Use of in, map -W be far gmreml piapmm only. Eagle Cwnty does nal warren! Na amumry of One data -tW-d nemin. lecot.11A - CORE TRAIL t ~ ~"ar t ~ ,t °S. - ,yyw.,i~X.,`•,X~ ~ ~ 'aa C~ 'E-r, - n #F ,r,~ 2 S a :.3 4€ -4w _ a Yr! T §Y J p' 1! _.r r t`' *.:a hibit a Exhibit 4 Gypsum Sheet 4a of 29 ?..'X~ys`~'j sJ._.. ~ \ ~t - ,i. h`'~~1 "~r~l,y "t a k nt~C ~ a q~ ''v. t R ^ t 'tr"8.s ~ LEGEND Proposed Core Trail . r Existing Core Trail a yy, Pmalb PvkaM V Existing Spur Trail 4tr_ ~ ! ~•1*y„ti ~ avtr II ntl dyer. ' J r } g~. , o~®o Proposed Spur Trail " 1. J a Y y omsiw of w ItlIHe -Gyp.. Pptla•. ,:r ~ w HadmtiFwnoandBWHUntlrq Driveway f SdewakOn hddEddpe® r., S PMPOW Sparrreb,Pawd anPa Intersecting Roads 'A°.1ty lurctioru p trail wrvreu5on. {.r+r..r - apPropn be Lomb outsld of ii v l aKltwe d d i Busy Intersection o tad trap n 0n rceP 1 t Bridge/Underpass Park PotmaalFU MPaik © Parkin R" -4.1 - dpl.wvta - g X' + Paiadrq r I b e• yuPhalt. wla n a+'r~~ -rN'{ a t~; { ~ to 10' ti Nre date where ~Ible~ ~':,>y , ~ Y BLM Town of I E I ~ ~i r i ` GYPSUM ' . 4s Y Q Town Boundary . . ~ ~~~,a,~s ea-•• - ~~5{~ y . y r i~V - `t`;.. E . r Pe~a1~W ~ road r~ r. n ~ t Contours are at 10' Intervals `at r r A P 0 i~, :Ted' a' r9 _.YE ~ ~ -y ~•x 1 tt , E~ ~4 .ti, ,1 / \ ` p~y, + 4' Ynd L t K a ! a {'P;I' ' 1 ~iq a N "+T t•'.~. ~t4~}y~,.y •{Jr-S?A~:.A t!''~ t,"'tt r F 1 i. ~•g' 7'; -::.5 }y ~',.y-:'tz'. * I~ ~,y/'_~. 1' = 1000' ? 'a ~I'o-i,~ f' r 'SI'n9"' o''~,qf•~ ~rl ~"~~~ll~' ! i ~r~ ~ t C`~,a' `-."~_-a...~. 3 ~ ~ ? S ` ~ .its" 4~,.' d~~ f " ~ 6 .w _ y`h ¢ , x caw N,~r, a~ ~ + ~i 1. «I-; ro ~ ? _ y ~.,`s. - i ~ _ \c Coy m•t ~+1~-,as 't',~, f - -,~.~r y e EaR_, o~ X F ztr iJ ~'sy`~tplt~Y}Ji{,r ~~y Sri . . 'gy4-1 1.~t fi ~'4~~~~~~ k , 5`a ~y :a,~ If`witq.yo- j ~ `Ira 1 ° ~-'."'?~v~r ~ ' ' , Cooby. Road tre I cyst it w 4 3 } 5y`M\'+>G'~ t / gr+tr " tQPl y f' i/ - i ! -.~'a' A•~" be included In Coley Me Road imgovemanb Gyps- M Eag uldor GIS Department C-y' 2000 za e m this ca~,e.lw kq ` to ` q t a ir•` R' .-,r i. cTwnatyccsoew artree dNyt.Fw ll. cu~w .~.,,ios'^2''" Xi t k FL 1 tC"..~- l i 7. . ~ - M• . ' ~.~,•3' a - U.; .f W - p ai o ld f iV- I P.--only. Eagle County clop not -ant fie a-W fft data contained herein. Map %wadd: 6-13-01 .n.Pdey.J.ka._traiblbepdplaM eco a.i.d folderlecolralbcdl rena.a.r Eecarag~ <x>~ ~ - CORE TRAIL Exhibit 5 Gypsum to Eagle Sheet 5of29 LEGEND ;7y "M } F k i t• s- N Proposed Core Trail Alternate to a a,w: _-2~,'••T.%'~n`.i~ P P (angel M1RUe -~°`a~ . . • ,a,bn„9,ena,;,g Proposed Core Trail S P k y N Existing Core Trail Lowtapansl np-dspur U V Existing Spur Trail nsonat• asmrg and bird NrAing. -law. of a n,wbre risen. rF r on bench abwe mar. Proposed Spur Trail Driveway 6 d l t , .~~,s~ 4 ~~p uwoc dYe la prepares ~ ~ Intersecting Roads -11 wore rear a oppom,mty _ ~ . t ' k, i+ t. -•,1, - f park a ng wo spur Val route Thi aa°w or iooma« "dripadanknpasta .an Busy Intersection tE4c+'~.- still in operetbn. Eesamsm neadad Vanws mlo east E s t Aepha w ~a 6 Ewsnrgr 'I .-W W,a wnaR Wide - yy_._.-_•+• - _ _ mm~tr~ ateaposCl n~ .'t~~` - ,r s •r _ '4,„-•=_ t,~ ~ Bodge/Underpass t ~f `s j~a r, cG`Dman a Use e.laurmr m Park 3y 5 k eMww sort use ek cg p town - Lehrea pmperty. _ 1S , G-snm Eerie Vehind CrazyM a5epereta Val e~N+r 7 ` ewt emeb . I distance from Highway 6 y - •:g' dwinq lanes. Stee reds will IeawRMV © Parking _ wore ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ z s•, a,,.~.. ~ f tai' Fay t rt ® BLM r Town Boundary r a- _ Contours are at 10' Intervals ' a6L"~ l~ s..1 ~ • 1 x mpfe°w ' d~~om,e bdl m«w ~ ~ ~ T ~ `i» ~ i r a Town of r - y v. Iaa~a T " J~- k~:::aw - •aY. / I Eagle County Regio INrpdrt If.:r t- r t d GYPSUM a 4 - j ~yq ~ \\kh pi~+~»~A_t1~,'l 1 EaRc Cope '7 .0t .1 A, l • ,:.S.,t'7 ~ ~ y; } 5'y t r ~ v::#•'xi.+s` to?,c~~... ~ _-`'~`-~"--'F.e~"-a?'a' ~r.: r..... ..~i ~ MAN y_"? 't+".~ rt- 1' = 1000' ~N w k,~t~tey'~ .•d may, r ~V , ~1 ~ y, ~ }t~.~, " ~ r+ GIS Department 71 '1 no.d rrell sot t l +J 1~" ~.'C / • ~ ~]F' „~,a, -;.-`Ei~' r~ ~~f FJ. 4, Cooley n duded m mco;61e.s k#' 9 4? lnuud , n M m m • p 5 c Eagle CCouraynty Cu rennY »~sf .F t ' b This rnep was a by the Eagle and r b ~c I a r ti asanwneroam.Wsw. pw s m. 1y IMF v co mnanit m in soo re- sh h.-, .I 1 . +~r - tf i • t (KYf Use of IN, m Kunkel should and be i« Aawcle aarel Wxeae. EagleCeu DumdaesonlyEagle omy. & tloea nm 7 . -,•'•>fk 1 ` t3 y ,~"P'";. t ^'-'++n"` 'rF o c Y^ ly t 1 warraataauroryduw aaia faired herein. '~'x' -ar^~ T L~'>' X fi' _s1-r` :,tai,.: 3¢R-.ice- - htaPaawsaa.sosoi .yam .5'f el w-proistew_eeilsVregstplam . aw_proled_fokladawirailscdt_ravie.apr ~eeotreitsl CORE TRAIL Exhibit 6 Gypsum to Eagle Sheet 6 of 29 Y r _ ' LEGEND ' N Proposed Core Trail • Alternative to • Proposed Core Trail N Existing Core Trail r & Existing Spur Trail yam. Poulble future eowss into aalawm wblic L i 'u • ' . aLM land Deer migration under entry reW should be timed Dec 7 WApol g0 Proposed Spur Trail 1 .K7. TNSena0 Ipig Care Trail l aD.Mf Oe tattle ~~Prograpr 1ese ark final M~ n ~ea nactbn for ~ F ~ .70HgOf-M bw -y T-potetialIoca N Existing Backcountry Trail a N Railroad -Rail and Trail f Y {p Lewtetrailan north side of Can Share IT"olld lof'a?Yfermto Driveway Ralreetlb dge,vnden,add Intersecting Roads ..-a SWto~~f potan Irei reatl \ pe ~lel bid adpe or cautrucl ~ ebandanmaM. Repo t - ~ 1 _--y ~ T Irq where ~ tc° • uaoorrellreadtoakellcreak n.~~ p08~b1 ~r y l Busy Intersection y bridge b 11 k the tr II sect - i~ti Pdabne Wagantl Area Cross reil d bell u rd' I ! ~Ir'. a~y* b , of Interchup ¦ "f Bridge/Underpass Railroad Bridge i * 1 • A ~ia.~ F'&. u W bias W~ •"'4. is, s ~ akell cree it o0xingo ro:aa If bail -mom f5 Easement exisb auws bunderpass Into 170lnixrhanpe - hrY a Railroad Crossing by Trail eMe •awale• oreaeln a ~ pnyect, r ~"r- i 1~j5 pwel a'^_s m~a wl ror trait um iren on~ Hgrarere ~r~Eaaurwevay.tlbeat lnmm.l tr i~ ~ I Or p ~ i, 6 Sd Y To A. h bDateaaY Center. DrNewaya BLM - - J•e -om II ed of S\T' ut to aces as praj-develow. Town Boundary ~y ~ ~ ~ ~ +~tr~ ~ ""¢t•- e... r"^",-+kTSi ~ _ Y~y..7S"rG~+.~'d s cr"~ Contours are at 10' Intervals s;i V ! <!.r q}1'V r t ~1 \c Cn Eagle County Ragumal N. Cooley Mau Road Eby F.ple' County T of GYpsuu lar4rg m 2092. r3- nd in read w m yvf///vVVV VV\\\ kl- .1 i ?F, r a r n+ 1 1' = 1000' GIS Department Fl k T ;5 '9 L y ,frya~ylf~sf• This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS O K-WM in A on Johwon, Kunkel and Ass-ird i t}+! r4`.t Use of this map shook be for for general 1 r ~k l purpwaao Eagle County data net mmnw~ ara n in. data of the S r trait to a ckhom vane. Map Revised 605-01 a:lspocyre~sbco_traYSVrellslplen\ amSrWect eokerVCOtren.mt_revl..apr lecotrails CORE TRAIL Exhibit 7 Gypsum to Eagle Sheet 7 of 29 LEGEND Proposed Core Trail Q.~ 46 Alternative to 1 { Proposed Core Trail 1.., ~f h k f a Existing Core Trail ,vt't' tt sue- y1'. 7,y4, . t :t~~'r p ~ P u Existing Spur Trail T o 0o Proposed Spur Trail ~ b 10 o, 17 in lub N Railroad - Rail and Trail . S Part of CaeTral. r s 1 Can Share Constrained for Rail and 480 to EaWe RNess r. , . EdadpBpeadha wd Trail Shared Corridor -Trail a from Dao 1 ~WWl30 mwwed. „r to tamruwresspv[mcae r -j~ Drivewa I _ Treil. y a'W Id Par°"""° - Intersecting Roads ;d Eagl CeurdY Felrg rWSaM Park yi Busy Intersection Icy~r` e Bridge/Underpass t_ ~n `"~3•-.. Ifs 6'~` fir; ~ s e z Railroad Bridge Park A"'> oaeaanwrweaPOaal ' a`~ L ~`"~=4' jay Ci~:~} © Parking ~a e r Bush Creek N Restrooms ~ ampFSgato ` ti. Town of ~ a 1' = 1000' a aan ® Equestrian Use unaorPnaareaglredanderHigh'aayb - - Tenacnpl. EAGLE sou<n also m n gmar too nanow.,m gg `~2. CDUp _ aihs. Trail must crwa road b north Me T ppsW n backmunhy b i=' { . matatlmde. { Hoacep GuIM npeda to to resdve0 •`~iYrt, o. BLM J { d tNa alignment follonetl Puraua though pumJutx develWinant r rosy .a .e LJ Town Boundary _ Contours are at 10' Intervals GIS Department Thie map wan produced by the Eagle County GIS Department in caoparafion with Johnson, Kunkel and Assuaatss. Use of MIS map should be for general purposes only. Eagle County does not vrenant the e-ra y of the dale contained herein. Map Revised: 60501 . e:\5pxyrojslaw_Irai4Wa11$*lanl emyrojen faltlerlemheilaMt ravia.apr ;?U ;~x~ ' ?Sr ~?5.%S2 ~ u ~>S~4`S2~'~2515?S.X~ ~ecovails CORE TRAIL y' Deer and Elk Winter Ran9e y f `4 r I dow X Oec°toW130 h Exhibit 7a l~,+i j for trails l this area ;s. Eagle Sheet 7a of 29 Eby CreekRaad~~ LEGEND 10 N Proposed Core Trail P F A ~ Alternative to j Proposed Core Trail 4Y Existing Core Trail s >K SowwlwouW atron Pro osed S urTrail a.iw f' mall PTO re.Not I1. A0`~ ^ a ?}:o. 5' tfi r QaaaPrea~tra s v 1 o y p P. I t biryd t w • ` IV Existing Backcountry u separated and attached -aad. ~ Trail • ,/,p~ S/ Replace - oner li a wild trail ay o-pletely ~arre~^raekJ ~arotl^,~way«oa.l /V Railroad -Rail and Trail Can Share Y yy f P Constrained for Rail and install ewpedastnan, gab q Trail Shared Corridor aaemadate Pacee,;ans and adiata. Tau pies on I- wm x.d. Driveway f a~ Eu tlng lr pedestr in bridge Intersecting Roads £ wW to 10 a 1rre~ hrdr ~ ~k. Pan rCOreT I °kY X 3j' Busy Intersection EW ung Pa ee w l wiaen l to a * i F a_ _ ® - in Bridge/Underpass dllu w pad of Core Troll S Tf Town Qf .aAec¢aebP bl~ RLMI rWa CannecfsWT IIGaIMIn Z Railroad Bridge EAGLE i. auadC k sulamearearoreR manwila Box Culvert - Under Railroad in caNu-ti.. Wit, bel *u (retrofit for trail, add small bridge or construct Texas crossing where possible) N ° I 1' = 1000' Equestrian Use Tan mnned- tdnxgd Eagle will [ad,R a. A .•n s~ `1 ® Park ~C c0~ r •ry yy r ~fa oor ou t a on-abeet bike aM pedeatrlen route Avoldsmelyenddlflwn nn.ouondaaPwacadwldmE,y / ~;.q,31 © Parking fifirra. Cro k Road aurWaboul Oowntown ,d' •t,' T rY.. •r . y dsarewide, low tame ePaed, M 1'•`~ .~SeLY } _~g . d.ve atop-watinteraecbonsr" `J ®B Restroom d u~• ~ tt~p"~"",„°~~ 1~~" t f Raule wouw aVubo add,onal a Braga, F ~ 15~C P. paveeight d.-a -rkings and ovaluatlond 4W ~'"`s^p1 + 'l- r a4 9~ n<to as. a.e ¦ Railroad Crossing by Trail GISDepartment3>e Iowkau- ,all sensaa to dowmonnEagle. ti. 0 BLM e Tha map Waducetl by the Eagle ~'''v 3 B h Creek Road County GIS Dapannwre in coobea,on Town Boundary w,u, aodneon. Kunkel and Associates. ?~i Use or Nu map should bo for general k+t ! ~'p~&r.;•_ to r pu-m only Eagle y of the warreoon ^w dale L 3 ' try. pr x x x 119 P .s 1 t• ~.a~ " Contours are at 10' Intervals ap Rawsed 605-00 r i- M . e:~veoyalaem wnataauablant 'J~, ,j,. -r ,+r qt L_ S..a~ ~ =a .,.:ti•.,.~ s towno(eagleTe_reviel lximew.aPr jecotmils CORE TRAIL Exhibit 8 F Eagle to Wolcott r Sheet 8 of 29 LEGEND N Proposed Core Trail t; Alternative to " Proposed Core Trail Existing CoreTrail Obtain trail through development "1144" Proposed Spur Trail jay ~r pmmss if Feasible. ` Existing Backcountry A/ Trail • Route to Trailhead EWToenofEg. ' " < N Railroad - Rail and Trail - mataa,;mde eta, „6 ; • .~'M , Eagle to woloo° .tw"t' y/? ' Can Share "wy 131 bMpa Constrained for Rail and Trail Shared Corridor 3 T lItA sbrg eesaneds for ball Railroad Crossing by Trail Driveway Intersecting Roads , 61- o Busy Intersection 1Yn.`• 1~ Esbti^g troll weal f> tx Bridge/Underpass Spur troll uld require[ P~ 4~•' °"'01 etlanpa' Railroad Bridge 4 • r -n dad to aafely accommodate M' T.] eaisb [[sough aparbnanl oxnplex 9 pradesldens rk biryd e<! , F dashed to road Replace over tlme ~~r ~ ~vr,,r ~ ~ ~ ¦ Box Culvert Under Railroad. (retrofit for trail, add small N bridge or construct Texas crossing where possible) 1' = 1000' 4~a j ..l y rr E,~~\c Cog~r. s s. ~r ~ mol~ran~oaam ~ a~rwg~wlaa. r ~ y J River & Wetlands Area er.r Treg I m lass tralackad ,„p,p,A Avoidance or Mitigation r. 3 r of x f rf Required BLM T Trail oon edron~rough Eagle Wit "Town Boundary GIS Department i Ist or [real bilre and . art podea'i -teAvoids coedy Contours are at 10' Intervals 3~a 5 - and dimgJt mnn°ctlon of sapareled Acceee to Publk BLM lands. y. s This map was produced by the Eagle 1j- path al mw reundebout 3-moem Conneda to Troll GulM In es r~ , County GIS Oapartmmin moperal on LP'. _ 'r.F l roads am wide, low ba°Ic speed. w N Johnson, Kunkel .,A Aamualas. Town of orb stop signs at Intasecb=- Route B h Crmlc. •«+1r Use of this map should be for general would requlm addigmal slgnaga, ts,' pureosea only. Eagle Cm My does not , EAGLE avement maddnge aw evelaadm y{3~. } t. wananl= amurery of gw data s 1 fight dle- Wely Issues. Alm talned herein -^•'m E6'1a/a1 .~.;i Inb°duces vall vWtors b ddmtown Eagle. ~,n'• a"1.'JPiC4Ii'CraliYl. Map Revised: 6-0501 °:tapecyreJs\em_treila\trailslplan\ emyro0d_/older\emlreilsctl2_revis.aPr _ I > ecot aiia CORE TRAIL Exhibit 9 Eagle to Wolcott g r.' Sheet 9 of 29 ! n r ~ y r J+ M I LEGEND N Proposed Core Trail East of Alternative to Town of EAGLE Proposed Core Trail Unincorporated Grp sG.. %ey v Proposed Spur Trail ~H s ti'• N Railroad - Rail and Trail Can Share Proposed Backcountry Trail Drivewa comakteeapropaemtrau. _ Y Equestrian Use ¦ Box Culvert Under Railroad (retrofit for trail, add small K _ o t bridge or construct Texas _ crossing where possible) River & Wetlands Area Pow Avoidance or Mitigation 3h deVappmaat Va111 , .::h r T Required Thic ag nt fdlovvs Hlghwey 6 and f-h BLM ° >r..... canttralnts due to wouana. dght-of Y and tare '_.a .A." oacnleVOOPUmaaePaeron u O Town Boundary ham HlgtrvvaY 6 tava larm. mtours are at 10' Intervals r s:. N GIS Department 1' = 1000' m ~ This map urea produced by the Eagle Map Revised: 60 l County GIS Depa-m in cooperation r'd - Assodeles. -P cymfs\em t Iftoailslpbnl vdlh U- of John Nla son, ma Kunkel and for 1 .wy.roJ aa_falaenocaranad] rovls.apr map h a aId W Wn`r` l Purposes only. Eagle CauMy does iwl ? warreM co atamrmed heran Kamm. data jecotraits xvx CORE TRAIL • Exhibit 10 " ti•. Eagle to Wolcott ,Sy <Y proWee rest area mr wa mrq eecdon baMean Eagle erd X? Sheet 10 of 29 i ~ t 1 f t, ~ l ~ ~ ~I ~ wolma Not mlo by ' .tl aeMaesolreovimpwomonm x i k' ~ c bee G eut ppprev.l you fired. No bash cenn (beers) East of LEGEND Town of EAGLE Unincor orated ' N Proposed Core Trail ?i, • Alternative to m~ Proposed Core Trail o Proposed Spur Trail N Existing Backcountry Trail ry Proposed Backcountry al Trail k Obmnieltlaough h N Railroad - Rail and Trail novel p tp~oeesa <<.i , l i-`i`i' 1 t E:mtrrebaps mryreed,provldesecess ,ible Can Share to publl lend S-M does mt Trail f Red ea Csemeomant assts e btlM Iona- Irenmpe < Cora Trell section due m wlldllm and .gyp, ~ ~ ? j Constrained for Rail and Trail Shared Corridor i Park /e~ - Twa atl~.~ra dlmwltm,.onons ae nwtta © Equestrian use >0.u romrmal ror eoaoemon ripmar or, Awas" 6 eW eye oladmal oPYmel eewrelnperetlan fm. nan wplway 9 "~V?MI?s m alM lend. rol evaileblo X08 tray In rdyumtian wiM t tw umo. bat po:awr ew i Dore boll mate vevol mm.. / mreonneovelo~mmproogss ~ Driveway Bridge/Underpass River & Wetlands Area d~ s I > Avoidance or Mitigation > ~XRequired BLM Town Boundary Potonnd troll part a Y . eevelopmentortheaepamda# Yh n = a Contours are at 10' Intervals y~ xiN F"E~M-- h 1000' ? , ihmmap Ped."" by the Eagle Caunry . GIS Oapartment h, cooperation w h unkel and Aaa. Map RaNsed:lit ftl Use ee of of Mi K.map anoamoutor Qe gersMrel e Praj,SroaarWc eWIaW]_aliatpm purpwes only. E.W. dossr acoyredfomermcobelmreNs. apr warrant Neautthedam cmtairealtmd M nereln. F!GOUSiIs CORE TRAIL r Exhibit 11 Eagle to Wolcott Sheet 11 of 29 This roman -y repulre use of tact- d reil,-d -,Id- LEGEND "ighwaye '9obea"bdd°° ~ N Proposed Core Trail taidge sdbduled 0 be mpl 1 In 2 1 001. M Ind" s ahwme,+. woo • Alternative to RED CANYON y Proposed Core Trail East of Eagle N Existing Backcountry Unincorporated Trail Railroad -Rail and Trail ti Can Share Constrained for Rail and ' Trail Shared Corridor Railroad Crossing by Trail Easmrod pnpmaapopartype ar INK ® Possible Shared Use waula~nead b W eammao if trpll raqu'ved far Cus eeman. da t~ 11 by Equestrians R r Bridge/Underpass 4'- River & Wetlands t Impacts t ~ a ,E ` J ® BLM ` - i > Thi:.ngNaaN aim~u to and ~ c I duo b wegand dghtofwNy, and Iertaln aarutreiNe. DdnadtmfY",+ Q c ew. Town Boundary wgh =yp",,el Contours are at 10' Intervals Y 1~a N a' 1' = 1000' EaR\c fo~~ 5 r3 :~R;1 y - GIS Department This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS Daparimenl in caaperegpn with Johnean. Kunkel and % od,laa. Use d Nis map should be far general purpwaa only. Eagle CWNy does not warreN -Lined .,ad of die data wn herein. Map Revised: 60501 e:lspecyiojslem_treilsltrablplan\ ecpyrpiad folderkwbaibW2_rew;sap( jecovaile I CORE TRAIL Exhibit 12 Eagle to Wolcott Sheet 12 of 29 Deer and Elk Winter Ran e LEGEND N Proposed Core Trail r r y - t . Alternative to Proposed Core Trail a N Railroad - Rail and Trail ,f a s _ Can Share elM Campgroam *1 Constrained for Rail and Hans bddeo balav enahng I-70 bndg i' Immediately above papal ~e pitla gqs _ Trail Shared Corridor n Driveway .;+ry . - ~ . YQ- ~y'Y Dif ft d- HHiglamver6 ~Y bhle . ~ _ Bridge/Underpass b reeuiro ? _ . tlwagh arose eectbn. Whs 13 reta f1o II p bNy bN bbl I. Z Railroad Bridge yl'2 v` 'a] hall along HlglwaYB 3 he p epoPaMr ~.a o Park ad for V, Restroom RED CANYON AREA; © Parking West of Wolcott R' River & Wetlands Area Unincorporated Avoidance Mitigation Required EE:3 BLM ap1- & a l is n 1 t .ftsectlmoftreu I/abigHplnrey8. 'X11 Town Boundary Diffi steep barJa either side Wwltl regwm etr - 'W temlr~vrell or lore r y - Contours are at 10' Intervals -ire V~ . i. x<X / FaFk ve`t y ~!V ra N 1, = 1000' GIs Department map p~~ by Eagle Camty GIs - In -p-0. vdm of Jh. n. IN, map and ae-lal. of Uae IN, map ahcd ba far 9 general Map Revised: S9-01 puryoap Doty. Eagle CpurM1y dose rwt e:bpecymfsbm_iraileWallalplanl vrenanl the ac -yefthedala acoy-J.q_foldaMcpbellacd2_r .apr contained herein. ecotw. CORE TRAIL Deer and Elk Winter Range Exhibit 13 Dec 1 to April 30 closure recommended Wolcott for trails in this area. Sheet 13 of 29 WOLCOTT = LEGEND Unincorporated N Proposed Core Trail b ` ,t1, Alternative to Proposed Core Trail Proposed Spur Trail • E~~ N Railroad - Rail and Trail sayer a ;~,.If Mlphway 131 Dn16e 4 repo d. 1tka . 'r - ' • Can Share _ emoo aesi9n arrow I,~r,4 * - r y r' `mom"' Constrained for Rail and ` Trail Shared Corridor Locate troll d-.1 rdto High-y S. If b. . am~~e * Railroad Crossing 6 ~ -aid. alla-d! Railroad Crossing aen~ sleep m river reQUhes We emd,emonb Intersecting Roads appoximataly soo reel. Safe Busy Intersection of Hlphped ba cross rp with q wa May rpm tlevelap6 W b meM. May uka y j eignalimlbn. Rlpadan.ntlwenam.ree Bridge/Underpass petlestdan Inipetbn sit lh Wo emb q mmuoIN. ~ _ ¦ Box Culvert (Under railroad, retrofit ® for trail, add small bridge Easement needed from private property -Ey y„ L or construct Texas caner far W, care tmll rout. If development o aaed tral locetlom can be datIamm&I et M., bma. tapate to minimize conflicts with crossing where possible) otar veNdea. River & Wetlands Area % Avoidance or Mitigation ~s 4 Required V ® BLM p Town Boundary Contours are at 10' Intervals JPOsslble fork tm sl e-trerk eels. N Deer and Elk Winter Range 1' = 1000' Dec 1 to April 30 closure recommended GIS Departrnent for trails in this area. TNs map was prodoaod by the E,I. Comfy GIS Da"rimem in oooperat Map Revuetl: 6-0501 with Johroon. Kunkel end Aasodatee. a:4pecymja4m frzi4ltrel4tp4n\ Use or th4 map ah.1d be for pananl acoyroled_foldeMCOtraIIaW] revls.epr pumoses only. Eapla County does not wanant the e-..y d 6m dale po W-d herein. 4xY+ lit it a ~ ~ . .r - r ~ a - . r ~ ` `f~ 1 ' ~ mart 0 0 P 7~` o C o e' rn m N m W N m 3 a W " v. ° a° W o Z N m C~7o NO oo Q r i' o jp7'70 m y~°='w p N' ~mO'o G C m J r W W G G N n; W W ID I wry.. • w S7° ° °v a W W p. n tL to ~ N O. N O. , ~ g. O W W W W N N O W c8 d O Q1 W dN W O N i W. CD CL s a g r« ~ ~o o_ CD ? W 8 ~ b~ Y~33 ~ N 7 :Affil 1 a.§1 ecrnrBn6 CORE TRAIL Exhibit 15 t~ Wolcott to Edwards a:r pasb,am ocaanW oRadCan~onROed. 4i v Sheet 15 of 29 eon-mina tna o-al wtwean ma reli canaar ~ . ntl tlo duet would be poaslbb but mwa • ~ . - '~3 ddrwn. Eeseaentalsoneaded. LEGEND 40V Proposed Core Trail a*' r ! V Alternative Alternative to Proposed Core Trail Existing CoreTrail ' • ~ Etl:drp aged 6• wm tMOaan '°=~r 'a ` Lake creak vn em eren Rana, Tatga uaM ..rot ^ r ~ ~ aw _ ~ ,gam Existing Spur Trail Hilo-t Drive in Nture ba, traffic Iwre. a_ O 4 o Proposed Spur Trail & Railroad - Rail and Trail Can Share Deer and`Elk Winter Range rJO°"`SUre +m'""l30 ~ Wra oConstrained for Rail and etl - , - T rort~"'"rewmmend °eda>~an ngrgMeM ' rail Shared Corridor " t rZ. I iY f naada ' r* Existing Backcountry Trail h ti EWkq+g allgsadm Route to Trailhead Har~w.yaow,nda„ m ~ Driveway Intersecting Roads - j, oror l..ko creak. fi a BackmuMy Bridge/Underpass s used by a a Railroad Crossing by Trail t 6powdisprowl.b ® USFS ' Edwards YYlaae Bookwand pTown Boundary Contours are at 10' Intervals F'~> EDWARDS Unincorporated x f/V 1' = 1000' _ GIS Department c County CIS oodw'~ Communard irbmot Esgi. wb o Us. Jo ft. . K K.01 1andb c~~i purpoem onty. Eagle County does not warrant the acouacy of Ma data conts,ned hera,n. Map Rav,ead: 6-5-01 s:waac_Palalacu_bailaltallswam amyrajecLloldadacdrailaW2 revis.apr lecohailsl CORE TRAIL n Exhibit 16 Edwards to Avon Sheet 16 of 29 o r 9 s.., LEGEND a F N Proposed Core Trail - - N Existing Core Trail Existing ball bridge for Old Edwards Estates. - „ .l y v Existing Spur Trail Proposed Spur Trail = M t When Edwards 4706 Sp Road redesigned, Include padmUlen a a mwgm.ndadiacmttomedwey. N Railroad - Rail and Trail Can Share Constrained for Rail and ! Trail Shared Corridor Existing Backcountry Trail e~~' ~ v/~ Ing d railroatl be4a a tall. Busy Intersections i t ti r. J ~v _ l eye y Bridge/Underpass EDWARDS e m~.dr~d'r° plnWnod henecea,ery. !i't i Oy adios dufnd tell troeelp efo~r v~due'dm Driveway Unincorporated ExsggEageRhre TaI& a e _ ® Park l Roatl find - ~ ~ schm oe mple~md ? P anepearolxefednne. Parking e Restroom i ® Equestrian Use Railroad Crossing at Trail a, ® USFS Arrowhead „ Town Boundary + r~ ` Contours are at 10' Intervals ~A%c Co }J8 N .r i 1' = 1000' 'fig { GIS Department E.gla Map Revised: &0541 ihla map a'ae p nnenttl by the rsti e:ltpecymi. trails\oailatplanl County GIs Oepadment n moperelian amyro7od_romenenotranxd>_reWa.apr w y I g.n.l Us. ith Johnson, Kunkel and d We map RoAwI p., gk, - n uryosm only. Eaagle C-tourtly d dsus w.naM the actor ei t eats ca a . nwned e nereln. Iecotranal CORE TRAIL e Exhibit 17 Avon Sheet 17 of 29 s LEGEND `s A Proposed Core Trail Alternative to 4 Proposed Core Trail Existing Core Trail > 4: A/ Existing Spur Trail _ - Tmgbecomeasmawalk Town of ~ ~ r,~. e <p _ +rlRl AVON' o Proposed Spur Trail Railroad - Rail and Trail Can Share p... / / °r» • ' 1 t:j7~ FAanslve sitlowalk eyetem smpweat p r L~ BuouBhou doenmvnAvon' • Constrained for Rail and / Edwards toA"°" akngbomd Trail Shared Corridor -.0 Ama a. potential trail nark. I E Torn of ;.Am I MINN. Avon cost Driveway estinnate. Intersecting Roads Bridge/Railroad Crossing ~'`,k~ . ~ . ~4... ~ parade reiocauon a core trap mum m norm p rt amaorvecka. EaWbbaneDmmeavelovment - L..-~~a:" Iimimiheabllttymmrtliwaaepareletltrall. ® Public Park Esker; T pawtl hel on Tha_ Railroad Crossing by Trail pevad Ball m Beewr Croak Confl- property. Pmaily The apadflc core bag rode tlvough .menmfaalmrmardeal, ® " - 1„ V 'ate ice. 4+d ry0 The Milagia (at try Awn) pmparlY ahaA Not In pull -hip at W fl S3Y+ .,•-5- R'll steW p EY The own andl U$FS gdsbrre. pdwtaapard Imprgnn» Town Boundary ~~a? aawtopmea rwbwprows. 4 Trap bevels under Bob Pre Bridge. Steep mitchback up m Nod Lena Rebofil in 3 future wltlirnoragradual mmp swft.M. Contours are at 10' Intervals ~ 4-,.+e ~ Ertaurlg vau names m ro fa ~q~~ta`e` t>FU r °~i~ Z 5 Hub lens Seven Inmreecnrp r,(1,! .ny~ a'•rt p' tlrwewy. knpedasmoolh floc. 1' = 1000' 3 GIS Departrnent TN, map was poduostl by ft Eagle County GIB Department in coopyalion • th.mhnaen, Kunkel ene Asaodatea. Uaa W tlua map should be mr general L puwarrayH ma aa-ila dthe da g mes conminad ner~n. Map Revised: Mi D e: acoyr0roject_ eGLfoeaAecoaamldeAe trallslblmllsW3W$ ' _revls.epr leco" lsl CORE TRAIL Exhibit 18 Avon Sheet 18 of 29 LEGEND N Proposed Core Trail N Existing Core Trail Existing Spur Trail - The specific aoretreil reuetlaopgh Proposed Spur Trail Tha Wage cal Avon)VoPaNY area teedHertow ardtod, ofI-70. p Peop" Q \o be defined by The roan of Awn arm de, Only ly op roperty - - P,,ndePrepedyowrdr,laoughdha - natliel°° p°onfatra0m°°ef~70 N Railroad - Rail and Trail development rMew procxs Can Share t At-gnda, edngof11rwd This station of cone Mrequlresapprovelof mxrarge Constrained for Rail and >v" x,; P.:f requ4atl unlma bW b Dad of aM pwnute M1am P -he Voperty land sums and US ICS ` - new rued under or oar the Forest Servka. Prlvada Property ovndr aPPmval Is subject r v reltnNo. musFares saMCea. mare ratelam bell Trail Shared Corridor S owe US Forest SaMw I.W. r" d v Existing Backcountry Trail 7M a Deer and Elk Winter Range Driveway Seasonal he AP -re a~'d far treils t In f. elree l` • .~Y SmD Tovrti %t I follow ed ` C Preposed re adng _ _ _ Intersecting Roads dh of A WS! Ee , ~a mad grader Wa NlWde. P*=:wL'a, 9l te, ugh m ~ eaanffie. Stet section neno« am tnstrelntoa-.. M Busy Intersections Cow by ewsllrg dew,.Pmant Path - a~ could be bulgin dah4or-wey If ne eery Bridge/Underpass 4 . - ® Public Park - . 111111 Railroad Crossing by Trail ~ 6 a ® USFS "'"sat Town Boundary - - a sap.redm core rreu letrm opDerbwhea Contours are at 10' Intervals edema 1' = 1000' GIS Departrnent TNs map was prodatd by the Eagle dm..llanrlu son~.; Wnnkko an,l ..deiel l Uea of ml. map would be for generel P eeae. only. Eagle County does net warrard the a=my of t dada emldned ranter. . Map Revised: 50500 .:l p.aym)abt aaiIsoensalanl atyrgaa_fpldtAsawallswg_raw..avr Iecarads] n" r CORE TRAIL Exhibit 19 f' ~Avon to Vail ~NI Sheet 19 of 29 LEGEND Proposed Core Trail Alternative to Proposed Core Trail 4111111 Core ° alternative i cos Existing Core Trail - Highwayyhway6 Very difficult cultarea -Y'~~ at concrete retaining wall above pM~S-'" ~,y 4 ° 3 K r. 0 nver. 61 -4 Railroad -Rail and Trail All Deer and Elk Winter Range ?~~~~~~0~~? xr Dec1toApril 3g ~1 i 'h. Can Share closure recommended r kv ~ ~ , E, for trails in this area Constrained for Rail and Trail Shared Corridor Existing Backcountry Trail Old rail bed. This alternative core route would require a bench above or below ~~,r the cliff area to go west and a bridge Busy Intersections across river below Dowd Chute. Sceni . but difficult to access. Trail crossing of tracks and rriver required h'lsalignmen.At~~ Bridge/Underpass raderallroadcrossirrpp roferred. 9 t\p. Core trail alternate would C , ~~'t'Ti --r' d v f 'd h beadjacent toHighway 6 Railroad Bridge ty with barrier, such as guard rail (see trail through G psum) i Easement from pnvate property A underpass. Junction _ Trail wildlife owner reqwredtorthis section. ~4 ~ dosed through venter Permanent E Railroad Crossing by Trail ati l a r,~ TK h, ~ r - Trail through State Land Board and screen for wildlife migration s wre permitting nd rotectlon to be constructed wk ; USFS land vnll reg p here. © Public Park study ofimpacts 1 wildlife and piaant !r'Qnlp- per 4 species, and mitigation. State land . { a currently leased to Division of Core route would re re a trail section cantilevered' Ifny't. Wildlife forwildlife habitat. Deer ~ rl qra Parking x Lan.,d elk winter range. Elk ralvi 4 under the railroad br dge (or on piers) parallel to Ih} sK >r . -re y` :r"'b calving { railroad bride abutment. x y require closure until July 1 on a f ( - Restroom this side of river. 'q(?,. ~11L '~"~r~ F~ p y. q( i State Land Board v y hk 4~ I USFS I Town Boundary Contours are at 10' Intervals Planned Dowd Junction *00 * v y C Trail Park. Consider bear i t {?'yy issues in ,;d!er~sig1n. troll bridge w k Ir ll~ ^ I ' a rr, ~ 7 1~ i~ a c 4Y ~F~~ ~nU9 Narrow area under 1-70 bridge. Trail must ~1 be can11I Wered in this section r--' '°y'!['`s•R - Stop Avon to ne ~.'Cv N # r Dowd cost w a x~ estimate. Start T 6 a 1' - 1000' " + i, Mlntum cost P , f' GIs Department E; ka' V L r" x eshmate. This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS Department in cooperation with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. r Use of this map should be for general * purposes only. Eagle County does not warrant the accuracy of the data . " , • " ' contained herein. Map Revised. 7-18-01 e..lspec-pmjsleco_Irailsltrailslplanl eco y roj ect_folderlecol rai I scd3_revi s.a pr jecotmilsl P xiaog.anlcanrtdeWdoain CORE TRAIL >G sign for snort tans ansd wlaen in ruturem safalya".. ° - vmroike ase. _ Exhibit 20 Tre0 thrmrgh USFS and will requlra pannatting Dowd Junction to Minturn mKga - Sheet 20 of 29 LEGEND \ N Proposed Core Trail usFS MeadawMOU rain -1.. - Deer and Elk Winter Range • Alternative to D-t W A01 3g closure - • Proposed Core Trail 4Y Existing Core Trail Easamant ,lred from reilreed ro waWreo-auaawon. Proposed Spur Trail s Railroad - Rail and Trail ' Can Share _ Y • Constrained for Rail and Trail Shared Corridor Existing Backcountry P t a ® Trail X, Trailhead X, WHO © Parking 24 ~yy> + Busy Intersections Ste' Bridge/Underpass <<~~ ` ~tlI ® Park Use existing mil mad cmsarIg with °°'°'y signing far peft1kaa. ® Equestrian Use /h\ Sbp DOwtlt ply a / \ estimate. Start ¢ 00 11 eras. Steep ebpes up m •1///_V\\ -X-~ - T wM1~ r ^,,t- `1 t , tiandi swddb,*I s. rrymuaa Railroad Crossing by Trail " . • cast esti t t 'Z an11 gas kne Dlaponn wtaxa rmslnl _ , 5 w,•l, y~. ~1 _ River 8, Wetlands Area 1' = 000' y~x \~~`i„ irpau " b nededam°twgh Avoidance and Mitigation to It rereaaaodam. Required E,~~e fooor X\ X o~\•\ `y1~5~ _ . ® U$F$ t t Deer and EIk Winter Ran a Town Bounds ry 0 1 m Ap 30 G mended ~ ~'•~X,~>~~ ~ y ~ r s,~ h~\ ~ Contours are at 10' Intervals { < > ~G v . . ~ " i i + ' 'Yr I u \ owned Oy the GIS Department M X r ad M. Town of ° This ma \ \ p was pmducad by the Eapie <`:\1YJ~ 4~ :>G>~, y .°I MlnA I na..ayaaamee >,t ~y~ , MINTURN Caunly GlS DapartmeninwoDeret an U X>' .~!j ~.~~x dawa•_.,.- nom Y-.Z•` \ wim Jahnsan. Kunkel aM Assoaams >l n\ X a T CCOT 110-y 24 Use or this map ahould be /or go. I a,m„gh tw,nY ai \ puryoses only. Eagle Cnty doe nm ! "h / \ want th...... y or Ina data ar v _ .y oonmmedneranr. w Map Revised: 69 l alsDacymfsteou traft%b ilsplan\ ewyrolecl_folderkm4dlacd3_re s.apr lecovadsl CORE TRAIL Exhibit 21 Dowd Junction to Minturn Sheet 21 of 29 s~ rye, Deer and Elk LEGEND v. . - . rnb p~paM ownaa n W inter Range MlnNm hm raqumted B' phi s" bYTOwn of Mintum. Tral tvough USFS1,M MI require Dec l to April 30 N Proposed Core Trail edwvalk imp arrwnb from sWtly, P We and species. doaure d N Existing Backcountry rnitgation of i~ CDOT mpapp to o adwkfa am plard Plv,l spetlm. lo<o-ails in *,is arm tvo,ph town. y N (b W~ • .o. Possible shared use alit, honor Trail R , ~':'r •y if fdatarm inn Ee metle wAde anwgh toad eccommnodata. Railroad -Rail and Trail 4 Can Share y Town of = ? Constrained for Rail and MINTURN Trail Shared Corridor Park ~t Cemetery , 'yy Srwwmobile bevel popular throughtda ® Trailhead 1 cons corridor. Allowed ty?es or use on the ? bell wit need to be determined as P 9 e=~' Pert of final wruWCtl and It Parkin - Pus Ina. Equestrian Use USFS Q Town Boundaries I II Ik i Contours are at 10r Intervals Build trail b paned"' esiatrg road to Two Elk Creek USFS beilhaad. - 1T i\ Upper pert of Two Elk ~v Y?% XV: t. Y 1 ~il$ Trail dosed for elk-Mrg \C apt ra a t s 8 rromM eto JutNv 1. ELF -'1°y N 11= 1000' GIS Department This map was producetl by the Eagle County GIS Depennan in coopenbon with Johnson. Kunkel and Acsucistes. Use of ihia map should be for general purposes only. Fame County does rwt wanart the e¢uncy of Um data contained herein. Map Rw sed: 6-05 1 e1spacyro~abco_tnllaW aft%planl emyroied_IaMerbwVailacd3_rwis.epr leeotra'le1 CORE TRAIL _ ~ ~ ii ~ % I ~ smPp clove rral mPac aaamnbe x - -7 uP hlldnot an reel congor. ' ~a r te! =RF Exhibit 22 f or-A- Minturn to Red Cliff a , = Sheet 22 of 29 Deer and Elk W inter Range mPp eag .J ` fw trebl Ws eroa ,r LEGEND Proposed Trails - Railroad -Rail and Trail Can Share Constrained for Rail and II ~GI route through mie map. - / r,;~ 1 • Trail Shared Corridor r / Existing Backcountry S Trail I. I f^~I 1 f N Highway 24 ~ v:~ Q~u j' n e Busy Intersection Railroad Bridge s_+ ~ NrlMrstueypbrmimpmmantetl ~ Y I ® Trailhead l Pave mre ball onl m here unl more demon and run s wanam padre m ~ Red Cliff. Provide parking area far I ® Equestrian Use L Gk' ` t ~^'-"".='-y , ~ . M~Nba~n b R dd, az +"trail anent.( rI J ' t;. N_ GuRmteawnal ! ~~~~~~t1 ' I /_l ¦ Box Culvert Under Railroad i'= j. F r• PoaslblashaadusexNhoaee j (retrofit for trail, add small 4 { ~~PUaMann mn be made wide ; ghmaarelyemanmoeete. r~1 ~ ~ t ; ~ bridge or construct Texas crossing where possible) 'adtrarxnmtiormposalme w { - Ppdm USFS _ wherereuantrllcprcd I/~ iroaemrdearavelmbmforba0 - _ / \ I I Town Boundary Eagle Countyalrphoto mapph . - \ { W available fgun .1. Id RlghwaY P4 pmM C ~g 9 x ~ _ 8 ! anpaveetrall d Regretllre ~ I.. ~ u ' 1 slope mmlo-au end loge - ~ ~~I I ~ r.' 2, ' naeeea Reilnpplacementm ~ ~ ~ ~}a' f Q1 team wlleum. - t I 000' - L ` GIS Department Thl, GI8 rtm~by ~the Eagle -panafion 4 Co \ } - U e of Wa map ahoum be for gamrel j purpeses only. Eagle County does mt MalanMe hezvds in tha wanaid the a-1c, oI dam \ ree Wmmr travel rot Lr \ ed hardn Map p Raised: trd,3II e %specyroismw bakaltralle\pen\ -m ,J~n foldermmbalaalpolsk5 rovlet.apr CORE TRAIL Exhibit 23 I Minturn to Red Cliff Win old Highaay 24 platform paved roll mmdor. Regratlinp, ' Sheet 23 of 29 Mopeat =mill erne rgs _ I 24 needm. RMling placement to _ cansWervAWlNa. l , 'g0~ I ' I GILMAN f unincorporated LEGEND _ (Abandoned) .r N Highway 24 Gilman Is a dowmmted EPA •SuparluM•Mfa. Proposed Trails Y. Canu minaban, mine ahafla arM Steep Metal require fuller Mudr re. .Maly Issuers of local, \ stab ene federal mncam. N.M. and Mkaa". t ? Alternative to .1 could be mnlMned H 1fr %noed oom ce ~ ? Uwu h Gilman all lncluee lnterpreteUor, Mgna Proposed Core Trail Eagle County airphoU, mapping I M not aver IaWe far Nis arm. Ronda route thr mar G-AM il on edge of Glllll ~3 reggr than through Gilman, but steep eblea pes l.'? • )y, vnll Da mathy b negotiate. r N Railroad -Rail and Trail Can Share fith e~;` ~c • Constrained for Rail an R ad ae a mrdr aaammod I Trail Shared Corridor _ oea am Mk wnm .pe.nd 15: EPA Superfund Site Mgrawy mWmtmoagtaat oe ti' r route. oo at o wIN troll or Busy Intersection Entire tell corridor Nragh Nla arm .W.WW dharamousduetoW- =gam - h~, l ® Equestrian Use ofrmne anafts and ooma nation. Tres - AralarNia tuvarda k1 des on rell come, through this am .aree , , afBB' Wirller bavM net ® USFS rattumlgniflrant turner Mudy re: a Is MMy _..-ed. ere. err mm, Maw and federal aancem. _ Q Town Boundary Eeaemanb neededs~ 1j M arNre route Nrdgh ,1 r ~ 'V M ~ • ` 9 E~~la Cpy~~ i \ VMude site dlata- m loam g t w e vM~aaam mad. N ~mui 1' = 1000' -9 ~ t•• i GIS Departrnent I \ ~C This neap rn produced Na Eagle County GIS DMonmerm r, otoaaretion Wb J has I< nkel wW Anodatas. f - ( 1 t \ Uaa MNIs map should ba far ganmal p .d heroin. y aoea rem _ _ _ , Map Revised: 6-1641 e:lapecy emy erWooL traisV Is _m ' rgaa_ramsnamp~llanpaiskiaks_wtepr ~ecovans CORE TRAIL Exhibit 24 Mintum to Red Cliff Sheet 24 of 29 24LEGEND t N i t Proposed Trails Railroad - Rail and Trail rg 4u.l. Count.1milrotn- pInu Can Share Constrained for Rail and Landslide Ma ere.e alon ulg mute s(~ h ` u1~,~ ° • Trail Shared Corridor I } Deer and Elk Winter Ran a Existing Backcountry Trail. Mound be dosed f., 9 r ,t 1- uad' h- Dec.IWAW30 and edge Trail i' rows eluted ioa ee made Mod. pro,i W. De rot block \ ~Wa r wAdl re nth Y iay.epamnaa.e. ratings. , Highway 24 Aealand,enp~meweere.. wader Busy Intersection yr F, ~sd?s tread not ~A~~\\~ ~1\~~ t1~ ps ® Equestrian Use - ~ I I mate ~ Me uSFSSbrmeRCaRned ® USFS Enure o-av pddd« woven .roa ~ , \ ~ \ ~ - u41 of nn-Inaft and! Trail on realcorridor Moownmgere. Town Boundary wwwrem„rosromrrammmhorw,dy vt 1 /L' a ~raty ~aes. u~ti. iF x r ail Town of Contours are at 10' Intervals ti Red1.1 Enm RED CLIFF - rI I N 1000' ri ~ ~Raareaa VJr*;' GIS Department This map waa produced by Me Eagle County CIS Depenment In cooperation vii Jhneon; Kunkel end Aaaodatae. U.. or lots map should loll for general purpoew only. Eagle County dose not -am" _M dthe data contained herein. M. ReA lld: 5-1SU1 c PMJM co oallftaialplam amyroledUoldenewtrallfan_ra rs.epr [ecotrailsl North N Arosa ad to CORE TRAIL rosa North Trail teSandstone Exhibit 25 1h 4k, WE I --~~r v ~ ' 7~TL~~' Buffehr Creek S 1 Vail ,>r Tratl e Sheet 25 of 29 '`c rY' Y~ ~1 r North Trail , ;'~~d' ~Q rp (Approximate North ball/ i ie , Huffehr Creek Irailhead DR P w f " q~ LEGEND ~sf~ Existing Core Trail x • 8uffehr Creek Perk P P' +1" Existing Spur Trail Donovan Park R Y. r - /y ~r •N.. ,J'' - To be consWCted Proposed Spur Trail 'N 2001-2003 ~r y-s Existing Backcountry West Vail North Trail r - recreation th d To Red and ~ LIWhde Mountain J Ale i Route to Trailhead y i,.tz. ' 'R'k r l J"cs I. r 7• n !a ~r Park Parking Ellefson Park n ? t o ar e ~ " ' W Restroorn !y ,5 rr North Trail . t/AWproximate) P Tral lhead i eis 6 it q~y k rfjv Intersection Separated path starts again <il USES !Davos Tratl to d ' Jr`' f F f r Y g s .®e L _J Town Boundary Davos/North North Trail .v Davos Trail", r y,~ t• -.a - Trail N Tratlhead Trailhead t Contours are at 10' Intervals r Davos Trail a r s ~ End ~ ~ t While Mountain While Mountain - ' ' fir ,yam rP y y{ S :v~'. 4j ~~C StephensHark r q +V~44W • x r ~ _ =1000' GIs Department WL • a , This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS Department in cooperation with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. ®0 . Use of this map should be for no purposes only. Eagle County does does not Road shoulder functions as two-way warrant the accuracy of the data trail. Marked as route with paint 5 contained herein. symbols on asphalt Map Revised: 5-14-01 easpec_projskeco_trailsltrallslplanl Separated th stoDS . tq^~°ky eco-project _foldedecotrailscd3 revis.apr l [eCCKrails~ r CORE TRAIL Exhibit 26 Vail ,r- Sheet 26 of 29 ~ r z.:~~Y +Hx t F'~ t~~Son of Middle Geek Trail r North Trail treilhead '•.y'•a° x at switchbacktx LEGEND (Red Sandsstone Road)~y*pp"+i Y?y y~ y t ~f r'.'°Y. ~~Mw f, u Proposed Core Trail { , .x X Existing Core Trail l Aa it r d ri, Son of Middle Creek Trail y Towards Piney Ranch on Miss core RedSandsloneRoad. To r ~ Existing Spur Trail yy i r ? Son of Middle Creek Trail Exis4ing-70 Vain Isom ! }'t'1 r ga pedestrian OVerpaas separate cost { H", North Trail estima!esn f ! sr~ IIwpO(imgjebcabon)~ appendu "Y Proposed Spur Trail a; t>4.~+ ` e :~,q'` s` y'i~ t a, Red Sandstone Park Existing Backcountry Town of VAIL P , t I ? ` tir Trail {G•YZ "a "~b ` r I~• 1 ! ''di ~k ~ } < Son of Middle Route to Trallhead Y k! f''•+ . " d ,G,~.ri 'ya"• ~r~t 4 Creek railhead Intersecting Roads i nr i r q }E Y 1 C9! ~ 1 y 1Sn ' ` F ~ ~ J . ~1 hf pedi ass li ,t - Prn ne,d~Yp y Bridge/Underpass trail, to better accommodate , jey1 r 1'~ w r n.C { a f r , ! ,aJl -sL4~ ) bicycle traffic. p'A- 0'. - 114 B 4' ~ ,7NY~ r i? 4~+~185; f{'Esr~t`t9`s T P•""A Y p , ~i , ? Parking re y 1 a a Vail Mountain trails lw oposed Vail V page Lwnshead Tmilhead + v .t r rt ~y Bypass for through bicycle traffic. rr~~~estrool I I ~.9,.. F +b by { 4~4. ,1~{k~ 'A 'R i ~,Iyq~~lf~ A a4 `~l ; J!V'R.t1 •j f.. / y ' i ~B I \rye Is l- ~ ~~/ir•" r? , / yes. ' ,/,,~i f,+l~. A i•' 4^}q' } Y ,t' S{A!r''3' 1~1 l lr't ~~V r~ ~`~'/Y~,S Trailhead :7 "K # h r S y/,+ . { fie." h Vail mountam biket:,~i ak 11 x , t A`',~ 4 - t - aos aeai 2Mi at - a h 1 4, r'„. VailMounlalntrails Vista Bahn lrailhead + Park . , it ~ f e~~~~~~~.e~ - ; - y,+ k , ~~~~s~~~uy~;~~?s~~~..?i k USFS Towns r~? Ott Contours are at 10' Intervals L' Y J/ A ~ a~ r r'.~ ' Yr.IA~ r r fT ~l 1, k•~:, r tr N r 1' =1000' GIs Department This map was produced by the Eagle - - - - - - - County GIS Department in cooperation with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. Use of this map should be for general purposes only. Eagle County does not warrant the accuracy of the data contained herein. Map Revised: 15-05-01 - - - - - - - - e:lspec-projsleco trailsltrallslplanl eco project_foldertecotrailscd3_revis.apr I ecofrajjs CORE TRAIL Exhibit 27 Vail Sheet 27 of 29 1 111 IN Booth Falls ~A' _ Trailhead r k 4' { Booth Creek Park h a,t t ' 1.4 '•xtxrkT~ .r .r J k y r { 34, 101 OWN I'M lA ? • .~?•SH"5 r d J .L~ i. .F~' 1~•j , t "'a.+ti x, r 1 Y . . ? iu L s ,ems. ww,A % WE Town of Vail l "p`"""""~" - uv rT- 1 o' ;iiii ~Fk Frontage Road p °e r bike lanes I "r- Y K' yy' y,.~. e,'.y' e X w' • v a S,. r i Fi t _s", - :r _ r°~5C'. ~C~` , ak '~f. as .a - .r.s`, A:~y ~n7^, ~r~ y wa ruo S~Y~v„~C q. ~ ~ wp p" _ Eventually, the Town of Vail will widen the shoulders on the Frontage Road for t i 1 d - Re lace on road'Uad 5r bike lanes from Ford Park east to East with this separated trail dap,.:. • j, Vail exit. .!E section alongside golf '4 nrY 3d Ford Parks ur - . c 1 k{ Jas e e• Ford Park course. r rj i s Start at Katsos Trail which ek, is separated from all roadways 'F'f 34• LEGEND ~ 41 Id ...~61 Streamwalk ~ r 'm o+ ~y~~ ' ~ ~mw i ~ t t . ' i r r . "cwt ear `-r / .+4' Lf iv f° ` °e (Pedestrians Only) I (~P Proposed Core Trail dd kr ! 7 ,m 1 1 i ti'' -Nature Trail' r •A dg°wro ` Alternate to Center 1 A' 1 w Jt~~a' -rr n"'"y+~ \s •,,,~,r,~ t„~...;~ Pedestrians Only) n c oep r •.w v d Args M4aw,a w r r 5 r 4 Proposed Core Trail JA - n ~M N Existing Core Trail "y Vail Trail r M -:ae ~ rp° ~ rr•..,y ~ gc-- ~ !(approaima%e loc2rlon Existing Spur Trail r Trail in this area is currentlt f to s atwowayroadshoulder y , +t°',' Proposed Spur Trail 1.~ Separated trail proposed fw, , Vail mountain bike trail -)along this section of Vail Existing Backcountry j' maps available at Vail Valley Drive to Katsos Ranch t'. ~r Trail ' activities desk. Trail ) N"I N Route to Trailhead 1 -1000 ~I ® Park 88 Restroom t3 © Parking cis Department ® Trailhead This map was produced by the Eagle l I US I' S County GIS Department in cooperation Town Boundary with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. Use of this map should be for general purposes only. Eagle County does not Contours are at 10' Intervals warrant the accuracy of the data contained herein. Map Revised: 515-01 e:kspec_projskeco_trail sltrailskplan% eco_project_foldeAecotrail scd4-revis.apr GENa Core Tr Existing spur Tr ,w r,: ~?y' Route to e ,s s x ' ~ ` ,?'~?i'~'~?~~''*~ ~}r+,?~?s~'i? , stVail «n r i, r ~`4+a#i,(?~!~j~ ' ~UnderP! eridg 6„ r ~raJhead b 8.S' Ira~i~ead f = ~ `~a;aw °r, °ko ye Sb .4k~ I n -To USFS ~tl 4k,z~ ~'y It91, -TONNn BeunC~ h'-y a !e~lhead 4+/ r VaSt • ` 4 ti ~A~~ 4i i ~4 i r , parkinJlod / -ask Nm ParxN9 Lot~~i v be impro u ntours are at . , / co pt ' §e 1M5 seerde + ~1.'~ ' *lR F, ra +'rd eke - 11 Oder vadtee m '`4w h road Ilk ~ 4'''+ -~.k~. ~ ~A 'y pr.±A R L ~ rim • 3, ~~l~'~ ~,1't~ N y z- .K ffijaW4b r } 4!a4 erg aN t} x. f i # Z I k~Y k ~ln t. Y~v-s ~ i i s J 41 - ? ~ ; w ~ a ~ t~ ~vp; X f ~1 yl '~i' IS~P ~t~ ~t h t~ e w Prode all Cpunly GIs pe nW With J011~10n. .4 Asa of thi o~yP ESC Pu~ ant the accr Mapp~sle x. esy e~lsrole folds © mp eco.P ec ofrail5 ] CORE TRAIL Exhibit 29 Vail Sheet 29 of 29 % Ns % a; k;''+ ` errK}Y ,1 r Ifi fir'} 3 > Of '74, 1s Xy {s,. l+L~~ 2 r- j r - ti., syevl<' rxiY I This map section of core LEGEND t N E ~i G rya 6 { trail is a widened road shoulder, both sides riY k, p']~ N Existing Core Trail r -r a f r4 I. h 'fieIn y. Gore Creek and 'll W~ % - Existing Spur Trail F Kr4 r Deluge Lake Bighorn Park M 1 7X Trailheads i 00 Park k f .~e~®~~~~° t `1~,t;} c i:. ' h l _ j ? w . 11 ~ ` ~ r~° ~r rf ~,n +'4 R;13 ,her portrail A fr r ~VP Trailhead r ° 'qp X71;, r~~~ ' L~ u ' Parking 4 ,ir ~ i~~fi, rF ~ X1;7 rli' Ile ~~+~::A_?~~~~ _ Town of ! m i Restrooms ?®~~~e~~~? VAIL USFS ?O!®~~~? ?t r r ' t t '~y, p' slap of Vail Pass trail. Closed to motor vehicles with kckedgate. Managed Town Boundary ' a~ r » of 1 by Colorado Department of TransportaLOn Contours are at 10r Intervals r g p br ,~,.y+ 1, a `P $3?~® ~r r t c j i 1.~" ~ t N 1' =1000' r ~gmm-,v,-,-,W--®'?O i g., r v GIs Department This map was produced by the Eagle County GIS Department in cooperation with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates. Use of this map should be for general purposes only. Eagle County does not warrant the accuracy of the data contained herein. Map Revised: 5.15-01 e:Ispec_proj sleco_lra I I sltrai I sip l a n l em_projed_rolderlecotra iisrd4_revis. apr I CHAPTER 4 {w e Fa Trail Design and _ Construction Standards Core Trail at Riverwalk in Edwards Introduction This chapter includes recommended standards for design and construction of the Regional Core Trail and connecting Spur Trails that are separated from roadway and offer a transportation option and recreation opportunity. These trails are intended for use by the public. Also addressed in this section are standards for unpaved trails, private trails, sidewalks, and safely sharing roadways with non-motorized uses. Fundamentals of Trail Design These standards are based primarily on the 1999 guidelines from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) for the development of bicycle facilities, particularly their recommendations regarding shared use paths and shared Roadways. Several other studies and standards resources were consulted in the formulation of this chapter as well (see References, Appendix C) . In addition to following the detailed design recommendations, implementation of this plan should reflect several basic design philosophies. In developing the route for the Core Trail, these philosophies were considered: 1. CONSIDER THE POTENTIAL USER RANGE OF ABILITIES, and carrying capacity when designing a trail segment. Trail width, slope, surface and accessibility determine the type of trail user (e.g. road bike vs. mountain bike) and overall carrying capacity (e.g. 6' trail vs. 10' trail). The Core Trail project, for example, is being designed with a certain user in mind - a family on a bike ride with children either in a burley or on their own bikes. That image helps define the level of safety, grade, design speed, and overall quality of experience. 2. LOCATE TRAILS IN THE MOST EFFICIENT, DIRECT TRAVEL ROUTE WHERE POSSIBLE except where the purpose of the trail has been determined to be primarily scenic and recreational. 3. DESIGN TO AVOID OR MITIGATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS by not encroaching upon wetlands or riparian corridors, critical habitat areas, and erosive landforms. Follow natural contours to minimize cut and fill activities. Meander around fragile or established features. Make every effort to preserve existing vegetation. If environmental impacts are unavoidable, mitigate with proven successful methods. Where possible, utilize areas of existing disturbance such as utility line easements, abandoned rail corridors or ditches. Ch. 4 Pg. 1 4. MINIMIZE OR MITIGATE IMPACTS OF TRAIL UPON ADJACENT LANDOWNERS. Some trail sections may be in close proximity to residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural development. These conflicts must be identified as part of the analysis for each trail segment. Mitigation measures shall be identified and may include but are not limited to realignment, fencing, berming, and screening. This aspect of the trails segment analysis and design is very important to the community success of the system. The "good neighbor" policy is particularly important during the construction period. 5. MAXIMIZE SCENIC VIEWS. Site the alignment to view scenic features while actively using the trail and at rest stops. 6. CONSIDER SAFETY IN ALL LEVELS OF SITING AND DESIGN. Safety is the primary focus of the following recommended design standards. 7. DESIGN FOR EASE OF USE AND NAVIGATION. Keep construction (uniform surface type and width) and accessories (signs, striping, lighting, striping, trailheads) consistent throughout the system to promote an image of reliability and ease of use. 8. DESIGN FOR EASE OF MAINTENANCE. If possible, avoid constructing trail sections through areas of poor drainage, unstable soils, rock or snow slide areas, through shaded icy spots, immediately adjacent to winter sanded roadways, vehicular use areas or snow storage sites, or in areas of mature vegetation that is prone to deadfall, debris or surface roots. Consider vandalism susceptibility and prevention when selecting materials and accessories (lighting, bollards, furniture, etc.). 9. DESIGN AS A FOUR-SEASON TRAIL, if possible, in the most heavily populated areas. This will require prior commitment to winter maintenance by the managing agency and mitigatable wildlife issues. Design Standards For Trails In certain cases, deviation from these recommended standards should be allowed by the managing jurisdiction where safety or user experience are not compromised, and the rationale for the deviation is defensible. For example, narrowing the core trail to less than the recommended width in areas where there are exceptional property or environmental impacts may be allowable if minimized to the greatest extent possible. For more specific guidance or for items not addressed in the following standards, consult the most current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and Colorado Department of Transportation guidelines. Trail Width: • 10 feet wide for the majority of the Core Trail System for medium levels of use by a variety of user types, with 1 to 2 foot clear areas, graded for drainage, on each side of the trail. • 8 feet wide for Spur Trail sections connecting to the Core Trail, or on other public trails where traffic is expected to be moderate, even on typical peak days during peak hours, and there are safe opportunities to pass. Provide 1 to 2 foot clear areas, graded for drainage on each side of the trail. Ch. 4 Pg. 2 TYPICAL TRAIL CROSS SECTION 1• 10• MADE ASPHALT BIKE PATH 1.0• LD ER SHOULDER r.H.d0 27G MIN 2x CROSS SLOPE O 2% MIN ~ X. X LLW - I III 3' ASPHALT MAT - , SUBCRADE COMPACTED TO 93fi MIN9AUM BASE COURSE SHOULDER MINIMUM 6•• BASE COURSE CRUSHED STONE COMPACTED TO 95% OPTIMUM. ~ COMPACTED TO 95% OPTIMUM • 12 feet wide for trail sections with expected heavy use by a variety of user types (pedestrians, bicycles, occasional maintenance vehicles, cycling two abreast, roller skaters), with 1 to 2 foot clear areas graded for drainage on each side of the trail. • For any width of trail listed above, where demand exists and budget allows, a 3 to 5 foot soft surface trail is recommended for separate jogging use, either immediately adjacent to the trail or separation. Adjacent Slopes • Adjacent uphill slopes, 3:1 preferred, 1:5:1 maximum • Adjacent downhill slopes, 3:1 preferred, 2:1 maximum. Railing, fence or dense landscape barrier required for greater than 2:1 slopes. Surfacing: • A minimum of 3 inches Bituminous Asphalt over 6 inches of compacted CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course (ABC) over a compacted subgrade. A soils report is advisable to determine appropriate pavement and submaterial thickness. • Concrete trails are encouraged when feasible and constructed with 4 inches of reinforced 3,000 psi concrete over 6 inches of compacted CDOT Class 6 ABC. In areas prone to erosion or flood, concrete may be required. • Transitions between different surfacing types (e.g. new asphalt to existing asphalt, asphalt to concrete, asphalt to base course) should be flush with no more than a 1/4" differential. Compaction: • All asphalt, base course (including shoulders) and subgrade material to be compacted to 95% of maximum density obtained at optimal moisture content as determined by AASHTO T180-57, Method Ch. 4 Pg. 3 A, Testing. Subgrade and base course must be dry and free of frost when asphalt is placed. Shoulders may require additional treatment to retain compaction and methods include adding lime or sakrete to base course in areas where shoulders are exceptionally prone to erosion. Design Speed: • 20 mph for the paved trail specified above/15 mph for unpaved paths Bicyclists can travel faster than 20 mph but it is inappropriate to do so in a mixed-use setting. Meanders may be used to encourage reduced bicycle speed. Raised surface methods, such as speed bumps and upright barriers, such as bollards, should not be used to reduce speeds as they create more of a hazard than a deterrent. (See Barriers section below). Sight Distance: • All alignments should incorporate safe sight distance in compliance with the AASHTO design guidelines, especially at narrow sections, intersections, curves and shall give special attention to wet, shaded, unpaved or otherwise hazardous sections. Minimum Curve Radius: • The recommended minimum curve radius for a 20 mph design speed is 36 feet, based on a 15 degree lean angle. • When substandard radius curves must be used on shared use trails because of right-of-way, topographical or other considerations, standard curve warning signs and supplemental pavement markings should be installed. It is advisable to widen the trail in order to increase the lateral space available to bicyclists as they lean to the inside of the turn. Cross Slope: • 2 - 3% maximum cross slope, may be increased to up to 5% on curves but overall disabled access should be evaluated as part of the design decision. Grade: • 2% to 3% slope preferred, 1 % acceptable but drainage should be considered. • Grades on shared use trails should be kept to a minimum; especially on long inclines. Grades should be kept to 5% or less as much as possible. On shared use paths, where terrain dictates, designers may need to exceed the 5% grade recommended for bicycles on some short section. Ch. 4 Pg. 4 Accessibility: • The summarized American with Disabilities Act trail guidelines adopted in 2000, are as follows and should be accommodated. This list also includes AASHTO standards for the category of 5% to 8.33% which are not specifically addressed by the ADA standards. • 5% grade or less for any distance • 5-6% for up to 800 feet (per AASHTO) • 7% for up to 400 feet (per AASHTO) • Up to 8.33% grade for 200 feet maximum. Resting intervals no more than 200 apart. • Up to 10% for 30 feet maximum. Resting intervals at 30 feet. • Up to 12.5% maximum. Resting intervals at 10 feet. • No more than 30% of the trail may exceed a running slope of 8.33% • Passing Space: provided at least every 1000 feet where trail width is less than 5 feet. • Signs shall provided indicating the length of the accessible trail segment. Good signing at trail access points that identify situations that could be difficult to negotiate will help users determine for themselves whether to use the trail. • ADA guidelines recognize that in some cases it may be difficult to meet the recommended standards. It is understood that it may be very difficult to build fully accessible trails but every effort should be made in design and construction to accommodate disabled access. • Excessive grades may be mitigated by widening the trail, signing to alert trail users to grades and allowable speeds, providing longer sight distance and wider clearance, installing railings, or incorporating short switchbacks where possible. Equestrian Trails/Bridle Paths: • Bridle paths separated from paved shared use paths are recommended because of potential conflicts between horses, bicycles, dogs, in-line skaters and pedestrians I • Recommended width is 5 to 8 foot, graded to drain properly. Surfacing should be soil, fine gravel, crusher fines or wood chips. 10 " • Recommended separation between a paved shared-use trail and a bridle path is 10 feet or greater. rnMUM Standard Trail Easement Width: • 20 foot minimum for off-road, paved trail • 30 foot minimum for combination paved, off-road trail and unpaved, equestrian trail • It may be acceptable to request less than 20 feet, depending on the location. Ch. 4 Pg. 5 • Abandonment of any easement required for a portion of the trail system may be requested by the property owner or initiated by the local government if it is determined that the easement and trail segment are no longer necessary as part of the trails system. Clearance: • Lateral: 1 foot to 2 foot graded clear area with a maximum 6:1 slope should be maintained adjacent to both sides of the trail. 3 feet or more is desirable to provide clearance from trees, poles, =~I[~ll~~l(llt< retaining walls, fences, railings, guardrails or other lateral obstructions. 11111IM1111{1G=IIIIII • Where the trail is adjacent to ditches or slopes down steeper than 3:1, a wider separation should be considered. A 5 foot separation from the edge of pavement to top of slope is desirable. Depending on height of embankment, and condition at bottom, a physical barrier such as a railing, fence or dense shrubbery may need to be installed. • Vertical : 10 feet or higher is optimum, 12 feet minimum for equestrians for passing under structures or vegetation. • For existing structures (i.e. bridges, underpasses) with substandard clearances, hazard signs and dismount signs should be posted where necessary. Railings/Fences: • 54 inches (4.5 feet) minimum height recommended when, the trail users include bicyclists. 42 inches is the minimum railing height for railings on pedestrian-only trails. • Smooth surfaces recommended including sanded and painted steel or wood or vinyl coated chain link. • An attractive yet safe railing and fence design should be selected for the Core Trail and used consistently throughout. • Railing or fence should extend 4 to 8 feet beyond the edge of the drop-off or hazard area. • Railing ends should be flanged or flared to prevent users from colliding with the exposed of the railing. The flanged end also helps to visually tie the railing to the site (also see Bridge section below). Separation from Adjacent Roadway: • 10 foot minimum, wider separation strongly recommended. 5 foot minimum from parking lot and trail separation. • In extreme cases of less than a 10 foot separation, a barrier a maximum of 42 inches high such as guardrail or shrubs may be required. Attention must be paid to sight distance during design and Ch. 4 Pg. 6 placement. Other structures designed to withstand vehicular impact may also be used, upon review and approval. Trail and Road or Driveway Intersections: • Crossings should be 90 degrees and feature a flat approach. • Trail users should come to a complete stop at appropriately signed intersections. Signs will include Stop Ahead, Stop and for minor driveways (i.e. single family residences), Yield. • Establish exceptionally clear sight lines to and from roadway for safe crossing. Remove or mitigate visual obstructions. • For crossings of high traffic roadways, consult AASHTO for detailed guidelines. Traffic control devices such as timed or user-activated signals may be necessary at certain crossings. • Where possible, trail crossings should be placed at existing stop-signed or signalized road intersections. • Commercial or industrial driveways that are paved as part of the trail should be evaluated to determine need for thicker pavement to withstand higher loading, a wider path section to prevent edge raveling and curve radius to prevent scattering of road shoulder gravel across the path by motor vehicles. • Overpass or underpass structures, while the optimum method of crossing high volume roadways, are often cost prohibitive. If an overpass or underpass becomes a real option, consult AASHTO and CDOT standards (see section on Underpasses/Tunnels below). Drainage: it • Sloping in one direction at an optimum of 2% (5% on curves) is preferred over crowning to provide drainage and simplify construction and maintenance (see section on Cross Slope above). • Hillside trails may require drainage swales on the uphill side to intercept downhill drainage. Swales should be located outside of the shoulder area. An exception to this recommended t guideline is when the area available to construct the trail is very constrained and the trail must be narrowed for a distance. The uphill shoulder could be deleted and the uphill disturbed area revegetated to the edge of asphalt. The revegetation will control some drainage and debris coming from the uphill side prior to sheet flowing across the path. • Design should include retention of natural groundcover or revegetation to aid in drainage retention. • Catch basins and cross culverts may be necessary. Culvert openings should be protected and hidden if possible. Stone facings are recommended but flared end sections shall be used at minimum. Ch. 4 Pg. 7 Clearance between the edge of the culvert and the trail surface should be 3 feet so as not to create a hazard. • When box culverts are used as part of the trail system, drainage must be considered in design or retrofitting. Erosion Control: • Erosion control regulations and best management practices adopted by the pertinent jurisdiction shall be adhered to during the trail construction. Barriers to Motor Vehicles: • Shared use trails may occasionally need some form of physical barrier at highway intersections to prevent unauthorized motor vehicles on the trail. Because barriers are sometimes a hazard, they should only be used where encroachment by vehicles is a chronic problem, enforcement is difficult and they can be clearly seen by trail users. • Common barrier types in include bollards, boulders, low landscaping, plastic breakaway posts or fencing and should be at least 3 feet tall. Barrier selected should be vandal resistant and able to be moved. • Bollards should be of the removable, lockable variety to permit authorized vehicles. • All barriers other than landscaping should be reflectorized for visibility and a painted a bright color for daytime visibility. Striping an envelope around the barrier is recommended. • Barriers should be spaced to allow wheelchairs and bicycles with trailers to pass through. Utility Structures: • Utility structures such as valve boxes, manhole frames, lids and grates, sanitary sewer clean outs and storm drain inlets shall be located outside of the trail corridor. If they cannot be removed, they shall be flush with pavement, non-skid and bicycle safe. All other utility structures should conform to the lateral clearance standards noted above. Bridges: • New bridges should be 2 to 4 feet wider than approaching path and a minimum of 12 feet for shared pedestrian/bicycle bridges. • The top horizontal rail should be a minimum of 54 inches high (4.5 feet). Rub (hand) railings mounted below should be a minimum of 42 inches 73 y~~'4 /i~J}r H 1 i ?c high (3.5) and of a smooth material such as sanded, stained wood or steel. ' ~_1 07' Z Ch. 4 Pg. 8 • Bridge railings should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond end of bridge and flare out away from the bridge and match the approach grades. Longer approach rails between 12 to 15 feet are recommended when the connecting path is on an incline. • New bridges should be built for weight loads associated with maintenance vehicles, a minimum of 10,000 pounds with the weight limit posted. 12,500 pounds is preferred. • Decking shall be of a high friction type and laid perpendicular to the direction of travel. Joints should be bicycle safe. Drainage off of the bridge must be considered in the bridge design. • Bridges shall be designed in accordance with local flood regulations and other pertinent state and federal regulations. Clearance for rafting and other watercraft should be considered in the site design. • Highway bridges undergoing renovation or reconstruction should be designed to accommodate bike traffic if a bike lane or route leads bikes to that bridge. Underpasses or Tunnels: • Minimum width should be 10 feet with 12 feet or more desirable. • Minimum overhead clearance should be 10 feet or more if vehicles will use the structure, 8 feet is sufficient if no vehicles likely. 1 ' r r • Walls should be coated with epoxy paint for easy graffiti removal. • Include gutters on one or both sides for drainage. j- • Where possible, vandal resistant lighting should be mounted on the walls. • Signs shall be mounted in the approach zones to warn of hazards. • All of the above should be considered in retrofitting existing underpasses (e.g. box culverts) but if minimum width and height will remain substandard, reflectors and black and yellow hazard symbols and signs should be posted. At-Grade Railroad Crossings: • Crossings are typically subject to specific standards per railroad policy and state regulations. Signs, signalization, widths and type of crossing will typically be specified in the railroad's conditions of approval. • In making a proposal for a crossing, design the trail crossing at a right angle to the railroad tracks and with a flat approach (0.5% to 2%) to the crossing. Ch. 4 Pg. 9 Lighting: • Lighting of the entire Core Trail system is not proposed. However, lighting of certain sections that will service commuting traffic or are areas of potential hazard or conflict (tunnels, road intersections) should be considered. Placement should be considerate of adjacent land uses. • Light standards should be at a scale appropriate for pedestrian uses (e.g. 12' high posts with lights shielded to shine downward upon the path), meet minimum clearances and be vandal proof if possible. Maintenance responsibility for the lights must be established prior to installation. • Style of lighting fixtures should remain consistent throughout the system. Signs: • The Core Trail system is proposed to pass through several jurisdictions and consistency of sign type and design becomes an important issues in order to promote reliability and continuity particularly since one goal of the system is to link existing and proposed trail systems together. • Construction plans for each trail segment should include specifications for location and type of signs necessary for the specific trail. There are generally three types of sign types: Safety (Caution or Regulatory), Etiquette, and Information. • 18" x 18", 24" x 24" or 12" x 18" are the standard sizes for trail safety signs, per the MUTCD. Regarding the Core Trail Sign Plan: • The current Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should be followed as closely as possible for standard sizes, colors, and shapes but custom signs are sometimes necessary to address a specific trail situation. • Trailhead signs should be coordinated for similar design and content along the trail with the pertinent jurisdictions. • A Core Trail symbol should be affixed to select signs at various intervals along the Core Trail route to promote the identity and continuity of the trail system e.g. 4" x 4" rounded edge square with name of trail - The Eagle Valley Trail - inscribed. • Post mile markers approximately every two miles in rural areas and every mile in developed areas. However, sign clutter should be avoided and the mile marking program should not commence until several long sections (3+ miles) have been established. Ch. 4 Pg. 10 • Signs to community centers should be installed at select locations along the Core Trail including mileage. • Locations where the trails ends temporarily, informational signs should be installed to direct users to the safest route through the gap in the system • Signs should be installed in a consistent manner along the trail according to the following specification for free standing poles. Low profile monument signs may be appropriate in certain locations such as for trailhead signs or at activity center entry points. Signs will be placed to avoid conflicts with vegetation growth. • Each trail segment should be evaluated for appropriate signs, such as the following commonly used caution or regulatory signs: Slow, Hill Ahead, Curve symbols, Posted Speed, No Motor Vehicles, Railroad/Road Crossing, Trail Narrows, Narrow Bridge, Bridge and Trail May be Icy, Rough Pavement, Low Clearance, Trail Ends Ahead, Trail Ends, Stop, Yield, Signs advising motor vehicles of trail (Watch for Pedestrians or Trail Crossing). • Common information and etiquette signs are: Bikes Yield to Peds, etc., Keep to the Right, Name of Trail, Bridge, River or Creek, Share the Trail, Directional Signs to Towns, Activity Centers, City Limits, Please No Trespassing, Trailhead Signs. • Off-road paved trails that end and become either shared road trails or unpaved trails should include a Trail Ends warning sign. Depending on the particular location, a directional sign may also be warranted to direct users to the next section of trail. Sign Installation: • Core Trail sign installation should remain consistent with the following installation specifications: • Signs should be mounted on 4" by 4" treated posts that are either pretreated or coated with sealant prior to installation. • Post will be six feet measured from ground level. • Post should be buried at least 2 to 3 feet in the ground. • Top of backfill should be ramped slightly away from post for drainage. • Mix dry cement into backfill before filling in the hole And tamp. • Top of sign shall be flush with top of post. • Sign will affixed with lag bolts, vandalism proof variety recommended. 'frail Accessories: • See Appendix B for styles selected for the Core Trail System. Place furniture to meet the recommended clearance of 3' feet or farther from the trail. • Bicycle racks - at trailheads and access points. Developers shall be encouraged to provide bicycle racks where applicable. Ch. 4 Pg. 11 • Furniture - Benches and picnic tables should be made of durable material, in a style that reflects the natural setting and is consistent throughout the system. Benches should be placed at rest areas and at trailheads along the trail. • Trash containers - located in rest areas and at trailheads, made of a durable material and consistent in style throughout the system. Consider containers that encourage recycling where feasible. • Restrooms - locate facilities or direct trail to public restroom facilities at 10 mile intervals. Design should be easily maintained, environmentally sound and reflect the natural surroundings (e.g. no blue plastic "pooo-potties"). • Drinking Water - facilities or access to potable water every 10 miles. Where restrooms with a water and sewer system are proposed a spigot, handpump or post type is acceptable. • Pet Waste "Stations" - dispenser for bags to pick up pet waste so not left on trail or in shoulders. Trailhead or Rest Area Design: • Trailhead sites should be selected based on access, least impacts on adjacent neighborhood, ease of maintenance and no environmental impacts. Parking lots, restrooms, signs, etc. should be sited so as not to obstruct scenic views. Construction materials should blend in with the adjacent surroundings. • Rest areas along the trail should be located in areas of likely need, such as at the end of an incline or at a shady spot after an exposed stretch, but they should also be considerate of the view opportunities. • Trailhead accommodations will vary but the following items should be considered: • trailhead sign • parking • bike racks • trash receptacles • benches • picnic tables • landscaping • restrooms • drinking fountains • Trailhead Signs should include pertinent usable or interesting -xr information such as a trail map with distance information, Trail r Rules, Contact Information, Flora and Fauna information, Trail KA Contact Information (e.g. for comments or reporting maintenance or enforcement issues), special considerations i.e. handicapped t accessibility, hazards or interpretation, rest room or rest area locations. This photo is of a trailhead sign in Edwards. .C Ch. 4 Pg. 12 Landscaping: • Construction plans for each trail segment shall address landscaping. Prominent existing vegetation shall be indicated on the plan in relation to the trail location and protected in the field for preservation. Areas of landscaping for mitigation or general beautification (e.g. around rest areas or restrooms) shall also be identified on the plans with emphasis on native, low maintenance species. Supplemental irrigation to aid in plant establishment and first year survival must be specified on the plans. • All areas disturbed during construction shall be revegetated with an appropriate groundcover seed mix (see Appendix C for sample mixes). Steep areas may require additional stabilization (fiber matting, etc.) during plant establishment. Pavement Striping: • In areas where traffic is steady or high at peak hours, a center stripe is recommended. • Center striping is also recommended on curved or straight inclines to manage flow of uphill and downhill traffic. • Crosswalks should be painted at all road and major driveway intersections. Maintenance and Emergency Access: • If new trails are designed with proper clearances, bridge weight loads and trail width, trail maintenance should be efficient and relatively uncomplicated. However, special attention should be paid to maintenance vehicle access points and turnarounds and turning radius for vehicles through trail curves. • Emergency Access points should be identified during planning for construction of each segment, if not within 100 feet of a roadway. Standard Specifications and General Notes for Trail Construction Plans: • Available from the ECO Trails Program for inclusion in construction plan set. Use of similar construction techniques and management practices is encouraged among jurisdictions cooperating in the trail building program outlined by this plan. As-built Construction Drawings: • Shall be required at the discretion of the particular jurisdictions. As-builts should at a minimum include the surveyed final path location described by centerline or edges, culverts with inverts and sign location and type. Private Trails: • Designers of trails which are contained within a new or existing development and are for the exclusive use of its residents or owners are encouraged to use these standards for design. Ch. 4 Pg. 13 Unpaved Trails: • These standards are for trails not built adjacent to a paved trail but built as independent hiking, biking or equestrian trails in the frontcountry or backcountry. • Desired minimum width is 3 feet. Overhead clearance for bike use is 8 feet. Maximum sustained grades should not exceed 10%, for stretches of less than 150 feet, grades should not exceed 15%. • Include structures necessary to prevent erosion of surface material, such as concrete pans at cross drainage locations and water bars or short paved sections on slopes. • Accessibility to these types of trails should be evaluated per current ADA standards and designed accordingly. Shared Roadways: • For the purposes of this plan, shared roadways refers to essentially all roads in all jurisdictions in Eagle County except those where non-motorized users such as pedestrians and bicyclists are expressly prohibited. • Non-motorized users are typically not in the vehicle travel lanes but on the edges of the road platform in the shoulder, or on bike lanes or a bike route. These terms are often used interchangeably, but are defined as follows by the Colorado Department of Transportation Bikeway Design Guidelines: Bike Lane: "A portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists". Bikes lanes should be incorporated where possible into new street design or retrofit of existing streets. The minimum width of any bike lanes should be 5 feet excluding the gutter pan. Additional widths are desirable when substantial truck traffic, parallel parking, speeds over 55 mph or curves are present. Bike lanes should travel in one direction with traffic. Two way bike lanes on same side of roadway are not recommended. Consult current AASHTO or local road standards for bike lane specifications. Bike Route: "A roadway distinguished by (bicycle-related) signs only, which provides continuity to other bicycle facilities, or is designated as the proposed (bicycle) route through high demand corridors Each jurisdiction is encouraged to incorporate bike routes into their comprehensive streets plan. Establishing bike routes, that are fairly direct, with relatively few stop signs or intersections and well signed, can reduce hazards to bicyclists on other ~y shared routes. Signs and symbols painted on the road surface will also improve vehicle awareness of alternative modes of transportation. Shoulders often function as a de-facto bike lane or bike route and should be inspected for hazards prior to establishing a route (manholes, sewer inlets, blind driveways, etc.). Bike routes should travel in one direction with traffic. Incorporating bike routes into a streets system is typically easier than a bike lanes system because it utilizes existing pavement. Consult current AASHTO or local road standards for bike route specifications. Shoulder: "That portion of a roadway exclusive of the travel lane designated and ordinarily used for vehicle travel. It is that portion of the roadway to the outside of the white line. Colorado Bicycle Law 42-4-106.5-(5) states "...where a paved shoulder suitable for bicycle riding is present, persons operating bicycles shall ride on the paved shoulders." A paved shoulder is a de facto bikeway when present, but is different from a Bike Lane in that it is not signed nor Ch. 4 Pg. 14 meant exclusively for the use of bicycles". Shoulders should be provided and maintained on roads where is anticipated that cyclists will ride, pedestrians may walk and no off road facilities are available. A minimum of four feet of shoulder width is recommended, 6 feet or greater is preferred. If rumble strips are present, that area should be not be included in the above widths. If funding or right-of-way is limited, shoulder widening should occur first on uphill sections of roadway. Consult AASHTO or local road standards for additional specifications. See comment regarding two-way shoulder traffic below in Retrofit of Existing Facilities. Sidewalks: • Sidewalks are typically intended for pedestrians, built in conjunction with a roadway and generally six feet wide or less. Bicyclists are typically not legally permitted on sidewalks. Sidewalks are not considered safe for higher speed use because of width, pedestrian conflicts, copious intersections, poor sight distance and inconsistent maintenance levels. • Sidewalk design standards are not addressed in this plan. Sidewalks are encouraged throughout the developed areas of Eagle County as conduits to and from neighborhoods, community centers and other activity areas. Direct sidewalk connections to the Core Trail and Spur Trail system are also encouraged. Consult the pertinent Town or County improvement standards for sidewalk requirements. • The requirement for a sidewalk system (generally 6' wide or less) or a separated trail system (8' wide or greater) or a combination of both shall be the decision of the individual jurisdiction. Retrofitting Existing Facilities: • Non-compliance with the recommended standards listed here does not imply that an existing trail facility is unsafe. It may be very serviceable for the level of use or compared to other trail systems. These standards are primarily a guideline for new trail development. Retrofitting of trail segments and structures throughout the entire system is encouraged over time. Retrofitting will most often apply to these items: curb ramps, clearance to obstructions or marking as unavoidable hazards, signs, intersections, edge drop offs, vehicular bridges without bicycle or pedestrian facilities. • Road shoulders that have been designed, widened or striped and signed to accommodate two-way non- motorized traffic should be modified for improved safety. Separation between the roadway and the two- way shoulder by a barrier or grade change (i.e. adding curb and gutter and elevating the platform) is recommended. Wildlife Protection: Trails improperly located or designed can have negative impacts upon resident wildlife including the initial impacts of construction disturbance, trampling of habitat, fragmentation of habitat and introducing humans into areas previously not accessible. The Colorado Division of Wildlife recommends the following design and management principles for the regional trail system to help reduce impacts on wildlife. The intent is to cause no significant impacts on our local wildlife population and if impacts are not mitigatable, the route should not be pursued: • Try to locate trails in already disturbed areas • Disturb as narrow an area as possible when constructing the trail • Consider screening trails with vegetation in known habitat areas • Try to curb opportunities to create casual spurs off of the main trail, particularly along stream Ch. 4 Pg. 15 banks • Be particularly sensitive to wildlife routes to local water sources and avoid crossing those routes • Include interpretive displays along the trail about respecting wildlife and habitat • Trails traveling through winter range should be closed during the critical survival period of December 1 to April 30. If a trail is adjacent to a major roadway, closure may not be necessary • Dogs should be restricted or not allowed in sensitive habitat areas • Railing and fences should be constructed to not impede wildlife movement • Riparian corridors and wetlands should be protected during and after construction, with no negative impacts to these prime habitats • Bear proof trash cans should be installed if trash cans are included trailhead or trail rest area facilities Ch. 4 Pg. 16 CHAPTER 5 The Railroad Corridors;. s as a Trail Corridor The intent of this chapter is to identify how the rail corridor, if n = r E ~ 1.: i f. i t S available for lease or purchase in all or part, could be ? F z ~ a incorporated into the core trail route. A range of potential scenarios is described below and each section of the corridor evaluated for feasibility as either a part of the core trail route or F~ ti ~W s „Y•_ replacing the core trail route. Background The Union Pacific Railroad and Southern Pacific Railroad were approved for merger in 1997 by the federal government's Surface Transportation Board (STB). Included in the merger application was a request to abandon the 179-mile Tennessee Pass line from Canon City, Colorado to Sage (Gypsum), Colorado. Operational difficulties associated with the high altitude portion of the line were cited as the major reason for the abandonment request. The merger was approved but the abandonment was not. The STB questioned Union Pacific's ability to reroute traffic from the Tennessee Pass line to other track lines north and south of Colorado. The STB stated that they would reconsider the abandonment after the traffic rerouting had successfully occurred. Despite solving problems associated with that transition, UP has opted to not resubmit their request for abandonment of the Tennessee Pass line because of concerns about future demands for service and issues related to the Moffat Tunnel near Winter Park, Colorado. At this time, the portion of the line through Eagle County remains wholly under the ownership of Union Pacific Railroad (UP). Options for Trail use of the hail Corridor Each of the options defined below is entirely dependent on approval action from UP as current owners of the corridor. As of October, 2000, representatives stated that the company is not interested in selling the entire corridor at this point in time. However, if their position were to change at some time in the near (1-5 years) or long term (5+ years), the following options could become possibilities: Option 1: Railroad sells to another railroad or non-railroad private sector owner. Impact on Core Trail Plan: The Core Trail can be constructed without using the rail corridor, but along many sections would be more expensive and less direct than if railroad corridor were available. The Core Trail Plan does depend on obtaining Ch. 5 Pg. 1 permission to cross the railroad corridor in a minimum of four locations so cooperation from the railroad or other owner is critical for implementation. If a private, non-railroad party were to acquire ownership, negotiations for purchase of sections, edges or crossings would occur with that entity. Option 2: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and the existing rails remain intact for future commuter rail use and some possible freight traffic. Impact on Core Trail Plan: There are many locations along the length of the track line through Eagle County where rail and trail can share the corridor. There are other sections where it is extremely difficult or impossible. The section by section analysis below addresses those locations. Option 3: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and the rails are removed but future rail transit use is planned. Trail shares the corridor. Impact on Core Trail Plan: Same comments as above. Option 4: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and rails are permanently removed with no future plans for rail. Bridges can be easily retrofitted if only for trail use. All other constraints can be addressed with the exception of the contamination and hazard issues that exist in the area of the Gilman mines. Impact on Core Trail: Trail could be constructed directly on existing rail platform. From a trails implementation viewpoint, this is the ideal scenario. Option 5: Railroad agrees to sell selected portions of the corridor to local government for purposes of completing critical sections that are difficult to construct along the non-rail core trail alignment. Impact on Core Trail Plan: This option would allow bottlenecks in the core trail route to be resolved. By purchasing outside edges of the corridor in key locations, the rail operations would not be impacted and the trail implementation would not be curtailed or halted in certain areas such as Avon, Sage to Eagle or Minturn. Summary of Options: Option 4, trail on rail corridor after rails removed, is most ideal from a trail building perspective and since is the easiest option to implement, it is not part of the section by section analysis that follows. If at any point in the life span of this plan any of the above options become available, the rail corridor should be employed as the way to close the gaps that remain in the trail system at that time. Option 2 and 3 feature transit options which can blend easily with trails, although a rail freight component complicates matters. The following summarized analysis identifies issues that would be faced under Option 2 and 3 "Trail with Rails"; and Option 5 - pursuing purchase of narrow corridors on the outside edge of the corridor in the most critical locations. The following maps depict the width of the railroad right-of-way through Eagle County and constrained areas for shared rail and trail. Ch. 5 Pg. 2 i Railway Corridor D ECO Trails Plan Analysis t f is ~t d ~ S U Sheet 1 of 3 # I f , 3 I 4 1 r Legend h ra i s I I -rte rs / 1 , Eapb Canty aouMUY Major HlBhwaVS Railroad Track ~/~`v~ RmE9 ".~-a• SL-,_ Towmhlm HVdroBrephY - POIYBOns .F..;d sections RNaz E r \J Nydropraphy- Lh. Late r « d = 0l , • I MOad ROW Widths Pubic Lands State of CdoraOo - 4 ~ v i ~ e E yr L ' 2008 and zson uses t ~ I ~ ~1t ~ ~ . s t Y/ntlemess y \ h ! ~'-i~ _f - 60 rf+~ l 22 a T 5000 0 5000 Feel ~~~v~!_ 7,~,... B - . ,„.q.....-.°.-._._.. 1 f,.!.»1l _4`~-'4 ..-...,_......v.. . .,,,...__...f 4 4A 2 '0 # s snlr Key MaD 3 a •n 6 y r'' ~w.~~..~~_' ~ ,Y . .-.G= + - / p s 1 X Constrained Area Detail A re a Bridge, diff• sleep slope '1=7 or wetlands on both sides' ' " . t _ le _ f' " t }V -Railroad box culverts/small bddges ~ s ~ w,~m_ 1 by \l<rti4 exist but in most cases can be retro-fitted r 1~+ J - AP 2 z to ac v comodate a parallel trail. See Eagle ' - :~a~.,'~ \ y[~~_~ •n. Valle Trails Plan Maps or Union Pacific _.9r Railroad Ma , .vM _I r3 Sg h . -ra. `•ti w;rd, Ra ps for these types of features. 1 I , _t\ d ~I' ~ 7 I L4F Yr ~ i"-a ki { cr j ~ tl ± + yv I f ! l ~ r_. , o ~ r.~a i I ~ r ~ ay ~ , _ i y- y F ' \ t T s r .nglw eawrh .gyp. mY bWe Mrm•• . v. . / ! y:a- D oTnbm:Per~lae--PP/Y/Yi T, eldshe rNroy a rune Nroueh l uaer.I;2ldk.ro6 3,01 19' - Eh\ GIS Department Ee Ie Co doeemlw-dthaema 2m { - 1 dlM mu mmaa lrreln For mom aow Map aedecember 11 2000 Imk meaeuremenb.please mmullr RIpM of WaY lBials jrgslecotransM -.-snd•Trick Maps- Dwvar,B RIR Oiende Reikoad c .y v~v Y Railway Corridor r F ` ECO Trails Plan Analysis Sheet 2 of 3 Legend . ` i 74 EaWe county li-wV Major Highways } _ / _ I_ , _.J. :I Ralkoad T-k Roads , 7ownsNOS HVdrograohV -Polygons f. Sectl- RNer J~ ~ ••v_ Yy v ,0I< yJ L N M'dro7raGhY -u- ® Lake N /f Pubic Lands Road ROW Widths 00 R BLA state of Colorado looft d 2 - - • i 250 H ; USFrkS mess All L t I s l T°' u _ 3000 0 3000 Feet ~j T RUM is R111 7T9 e l t T5S R82L ? n` 7 r 1 f l ' - 1155 r €"Iyj 1 i ti J :<r~ ~l 9 1 / j + 'k 4*b rt x EaKey Ma Minturn Rail Yard X • yL ~li~ )q 11/ef i~ Constrained Area 9 / SQ { MAP Bridge, cliff, steep slope r .r A bfit I or wagands on both sides' GIS Department Railroad box cWvertslsmall bridges „rt}~i Il exist but in most cases can be retro-fifted 'Map Re sad: D 11; 2060 [Mk If to accomodate a parallel trail. See Eagle fff111 , 6 ~e s~epecyrol lecatrenem s Valley Trails Plan Maps or Union Pacific a Garrido 11x1] demo epr• . Railroad Maps for these types of features. . r w. r.. M JIlA 3 241 phpatl G m r ECO T II as in ro a Inc: J~ I i :Warn Tway .rtnm mrtM y.: Eagle County does sa: '+c. y.~ M. , v4. \".ot me dau, widal edrwaln::C-o m. "{v`'y}''~. .,A '•sv/++.' h,+ +ab a',s F~.S .y., .v t. 7~., ~ti~ _ U., l; wur end aca'dsluldl Me'. •yv,r£ v ,~U`~ {v;Yi '^.+vY y ,sY -.'"kr ,io-.~.. / _''F.i .m ps '.c,,~j,{ ;i KS a v.'G`c,}`' '•`%y~{'"F` ~,+r " n r"~F J ada:rrxkMa~s-.o«w:rawo ..:.,....r f.. n.,.r..-J: ..n ..A.. -p'.,, :._.;~.i•>•. ~'W:XV;:~> ~fj'f.>i:{iiv.. -:.NY^": "S:~ft=6.`'~'.}.'-: r. {fit r, x2)22 >.C t t~ f~ sJU r \ !r orridor -;fw,~ ~ : ~ ~ • Y Railway C , ~;{ma l J~ ECO Trails Plan Analysis l I F\ ~i ; ;f\' ; 2 a v > Sheet 3 of 3 r r v ? T5$: nm ? 2 e dffi .r\ t r iF+•' fa. Legend 2 jS!"xT k- ; l a r ^ Fapkcounty BOUrldary ~ Highways r j fill 3 ''{(ya> r i• J i_ Y Y t Z;J r? _ lr J f T xakoad Track . \Y eJad° \ '1ti{ .J+1> T T > Zi?:}{-??:::C \ h sN a''rt41~OS HYdfOg2phy"S '~s N ¢GG~~ 4 uc,,,Ytiv rtr\{~,i'.~,.~~, saebre :a•---i }t, ~~Jr#>3 ~ ~ 't 1 < 5 ? (-\J Rvaop mnv-ones . <<fx? zh~x•<f}> \iT >.'r i v ! 4> Public Lands L2< a~ y2'i? A \ ' > n (road ROW WMths f f:,„\4. > ,1~.,,t fh t fi { 4 Jy r, { doorc stateorcomsdo BLm ;Y>fa °f{~2}i Ywy v>~t ~~7 > R v \ t`_; 200 ft t. oi' LSY'}+T,v ; 6t,wl r'?MO{ T+ ^\l+) ~S{ a sS<R 9 > v4 > i- xsort uFs >E~{' t{ f?>s3 !F t~f ~y{>{<{> r *+t+ Track on both sides of the river so ft ! 5>~~ r>~4 ;f f ,{zs f \ through Eagle River Canyon ? } k< > 1 S$J'~+.+•F4<• C!~'^'b~,J'~~'! ~b~'{0 =~vi y4C X2,'1 n' f~^~' J ~>T ~ \ 5~:+{r'{Y~, y~-o ~~T,,'c`~~~{+, ~ S f > d',•+~i, Y334.OyYJ:'Ct ~''C>~r{,J+2~+, _ g r \ ~ , cwi~y.Yh,x'4 3 4 a}a ` r / ; l._.... .w 3 3000 0 3000 Feet '~•n't i,~'~V ..t?~3 ~TLh, ' ,tY.ytY~3~~5 >;Sr~<~ w':~-wl - :;1 1 ~ J rr ~'v}~vr'{ 14• S •Y 7 v 2' I t j r ~Y2•. +~`+``s'+ PpcY~. Y''~•rr's, > ~ r~nY t- < 1 \ s; r' ~T.. r? ~ ti rv v>~ r!; i. R. f -.''}^,'~f• . dy,. •RK \'S,,} J a J > z v { wr_ ,.,f... ! 5 a r,v< JF {K; ~r ST 'i ~ )5 c ~v i~ h • • .~:C.` r ~S,{v r-. ,r J fl,,•,;»::,;,• .~h.•f r +`F 3 u + p.. i4{r[, ~::r; ...;~~J,.IS:?>;<:}' ~t< 1 -~3 '~I: '.I Jr nii ~ .-4t:,'vt~v ~;.r •v I:h.r...}. .1..\.: n. - .iT2.~>~:'.; C:»ri'•::::: •::2-, i.Y: }.:.f?.vi:?, .y•, •Y! :.e C•ff. S". 2y `/X• 4 ~ ~ r ` I f ~ r E ! ~'h-~;~i'+:: J!l. ~ r. 2> ~ --kc,..-?i>[+•c`*ae~•~... ~~g' ~e'`N,, ysts-+~ eJ.- +lii t .o.L'"~ -,*R;"<rr~~ J..-.a, Fj~:ayo•. .t. \ f r < ~r~~ Shared rail and trail constraints not yet ;y s: ^ X Constrained Area vr4 ; 441 r., field studied from Red Cliff to Tennessee 4t s < vJ } t Bridge, difl, steep slope Pass. T -e - - - T or wetlands on lath sides' s T 24 .,r ~v.!,, i •:ijY~Z:i.\ :~~(,v-Ji'i v.~:;i~:tpii :)•i v>?_ri -:i'r r ,:^'<:1:3{f., ".::<1± :.C ili.!r;~.. r (J -Railroad baz adverts)sma bridges 5:{-: 'V •>f'':•. Ji n hc;o .rf.:. ''z : •--'.'?r. Y ~ftiG{),'•Yik'{?5-.^Y.. :f. 'Y! to reOro-fiCed !ay ; r: .J l.. i:';•t.: -::f, . L:. r.:<i>, + 'f•:Ji:~~: exist tart In east eases can ~ . ~ ":n _.n f.~x:;~>: .>2~:{jj.;:. 'f?' YO:..: ,..":~<f ..,2,.:,., ~i Y y } . `f t { : S > ri \ < zk Y as r ' to aewnadate a parallel trail. See Eagle i Valley Trails Plan Maps or Union Patdflc f : r 4r3 ~ t - T r u~ '+,~SY,y r r~s! ? ?yam p r . • Railroad Maps for time types of features. 3Ja`rrm~ - , 4 r1 S + ~ / ~ , ~ i . ~ r\ ,,,,,~,5, -rftFR++dF ~r ` l f Jt>. 4i A y < \ f t' r{ r! t , S rf, r ~T F' tz 4 ~.+.d r ;g . ~ • , r,^. T' r ~ F 2,v { \ r ,v> r h Y Yc ,r % d (}.,1::,\.23'!x';{'':f~<:;: 2.'•2i:{: {!i%:3~ 4. -t- f 1;.}-:., ri:.:.v;rr i .~!•:;vi!''',>,{.,$..:i,>,`n~j:nT-"y:v»?':v {f?: -MY{iSF 4 .{:n?:!,:.v f 3• y4'?,.'t•.i.: ~..~y :}>::>i:5 J:S;;~vY:C!1,y~: \ ^i ~~i:!f `~:7:..::fh n+ " t{4i{ ..S.w.. i{L': +:•F `°"'d :-ii:vYrLiW; r::"-.:±!r.4..v,.o.w:.:. \,y +ii~li>:;; ,.>:tf,.: n'l.r:•. rQ. r.t•v5:.h-v-:;{.,;,:.>: }:':"A•>:!-,f :,.{:r v•/r.. J.a r>^F!:'.i~\!>`Y :y 2 'f:i S ~ > f ~~~r`" ..1 j:.6.'r.; ~:v.$;_~l t~ •,h.~. ..,'•';2.:•: ? s s'~ f ' r > .r X. r:~'>l};;wT'n:Fr.,,.:r { -tvv', {t"".t;! ,•2~:?,••f:•i!r:.. ,2f ~ +2. r0.• < Ke Ma >'!i'f> ::{{{¢,f >,z > s:;,; :.,.5.- »-J; •J. sh f l >4;,- t: rj Fw,fd- ,a..a.. a'+'.s1.~ ? JT Y Sa . sr \ { r. - ?,'v\t\..;. ~ ! : Tr ~ 1 ',Y 2 t ~r>,~ •Y\' V T r` v `C'\ r,,> !lj L r hf4Y\ y - f\ 1. f T~'l'+, 4 T 3a yy r T De•tt . ? : r„f, r*.',,"{Jp,a•>r war,!„ r j tf\ iy.~f. J.. 1> , ,.~%?,i%t •e - :.u-:r.. :i.~ r..:..... :.1l+ii%:'~:`i''+"YiTT ::Sg:.: a>:.;o};:.: %`.+3;:i ;s2 m,~n;,;,•,•:,.;rry.~??3:.. ._~a','4ji+-',•'6,'' ~.i ~i, ~•i,~::::;: 'Y•`vt1. f°,+~:{.~':,<~k:;+.•,:~'{... t. v. _:!.v.•`:.?' -:.a:.,:.5: y" ` -:.'~.r r ;3>9~:Y`2'.'t:•T j..,• i:'f!':'i f'•:i j F:~ 2 - r.F>). 'r J h•:: t r'Sy. { 888 , ~s " - r y > -T . ].r ~ > 1 ~ ' > r1T 4i R$Ri~/ i~,7 f+:~i~,~~/, a }s^•,.y ;.Si f • ~ 1 ~ •C. r, i "i.!i ~ .G..:Yr.:i` r r.2.. - >2:;v' v ` ' ' m r, _T f : ~2Y . w ;;at7S /~8 ~'$5 ::l.. r. •>;r,~J.!v r'•.: ^ r~:~ .rA r: 2r.r v ~'~S ~~:4'a: K C"• ,'$yy > r .....r r..-n.;: n. {i 2... ~:v: ,r: ::ir~^ y'~ ^:.J1:~ i:•...r.•:;:r,-.: i, .s5..r: ;:aT :'.;Y:, ,'.i.. .4..,•: ~'S;i.:.j::'.`i>. ;:.,-v'.,'<i ff y~ Yi•> r+nr> •a.v •YYi:.:. n,•J. ,::a:'•: V ?{{j!'i <>Wri F v / p{ ;l ii z.as: <~:w:s, J~•',"+c. + r?Ct,: r: >r: t' s 7hW -p --W by East. C-ty GIs ti' rr"'L.' 2rj ' et K Z• } DsDarbr-t for ECO Trails. R t. kdended m _ damanetrelstM Vabue wldltadtlle rakoad ~,:~,'~Y,.:~ ~---•••M dgra of wry m ft n auouah Erik County. ls.arw. nepdauIdbenmforaarladgeneral PLq- GIS Department trailf ty Eep c,,tWnydae.th.as y d harek. For nnn acclxak dlhad#amdyn an :June 74, 2007 Imk n,.asoron,erna, pease -k the wgnl of way Map Rstspe .aye aewrp roelenal tram snhar d Teak Liam - D-er a Rio Grande Ra9mad. fe I ~nPr~iidp~17_demo p Analysis by Section: The majority of the corridor can accommodate the rail and trail together but in many areas a separation barrier should be installed and in all cases minor and larger bridges will require retrofitting. There are some segments where it is not feasible for the rail and trail to share the corridor due to severe constraints such as steep banks above and/or below the platform, sensitive areas such as wetlands on both sides, or hazard areas such as in Gilman and Belden. In these areas, it would be necessary for the trail to depart the corridor and be located in another alignment in existing road-rights of way or on private property easements. These areas include Eagle-Vail to Minturn North Bridge and Battle Mountain to Red Cliff. The railroad was evaluated from Sage to Red Cliff. Red Cliff to Tennessee Pass was not included in this evaluation because trails in the populated areas are the priority focus of the current version of this trails plan. Each section of railroad corridor was evaluated in the field and with railroad maps for widths (varies from 75 feet to 250 feet), terrain constraints, demand for trail from the surrounding population, cost to mitigate shared rail impacts or costs to retrofit for trail, comparative cost of the non-rail core trail route, and ability to transition back and forth from the rail corridor to the core trail, if necessary. Sage to Downtown Eagle [Eby Creek Road]: Railroad corridor is very conducive to shared use with trail on outer edge of corridor, northern edge best. Rail power lines located on south side from Sage to Brush Creek. Width is 100' for the majority of the distance between Sage and Eagle. "A' There are some short sections of double track line. Obstacles include narrow Brush Creek railroad bridge and Eagle River railroad bridge, bridge over Eby Creek Road and two other small bridges/box culverts along the route., ,y Y There is high demand by the local population to link w r y_` F - Gypsum and Eagle via a trail. Non-railroad Core Trail routes are hampered b timing issues e. off ' ` airport interchange in 2004, Cooley Mesa Road in 2003) or property ownership issues (e.g. Highway 6 S trail near airport). Eagle [Eby Creek Road] to Wolcott: The railroad corridor is generally very conducive to shared use with trail on outer edge of corridor, best on the northern edge because of railroad power lines along the south side of tracks. Width varies from 100 feet to 200 feet, with a section of 60 feet on the west side of Red Canyon, but the terrain is relatively flat through the 60 foot wide section. Pockets of wetlands exist on the north side of the tracks, including man-made near irrigated fields and natural wetlands near Milk Creek. Ch. 5 Pg. 6 Small bridges and box culverts do exist along this stretch including one bridge over a perennial stream, Milk Creek. It is possible to retrofit all spans for t rs shared trail use. Closer to Wolcott, a bigger challenge exists to retrofit two Eagle River rail bridge crossings between Milk Creek and Wolcott. Also just west of Wolcott, the rail corridor is ~tyuf Ott f constrained by steep slopes on the north side of the river near the BLM campground and across from the Department of Transportation yard. ,.E At this time, there is low demand for this trail section . for transportation purposes because there is no nearby population center. This section would function primarily as a very scenic recreational route for the foreseeable future. If the corridor is not available, there are Core Trail route options through planned development in the Red Canyon area east of Eagle. Public land through Red Canyon and into Wolcott could x' accommodate some sections of the core trail, but in several locations it would have to follow the '*~r _ Highway 6 corridor because of the steep terrain and narrow valley through this area. ~ Y 4 ~~#r yr _ A ~~~*,"+A' -?-'LTT'~-Y"AY ~ ~ rK51}rid i.-~yF~ i r#'L~~: Wolcott to Edwards: The railroad corridor through this section is the best route option for the trail because of the narrowness of the valley from Wolcott to Edwards. The other routes for the core trail are very constrained by the locations of Highway 6, Interstate 70, the _r, k 4 5 Eagle River, and the hilly terrain. There are several constrained areas along this portion of rail corridor but they appear to be mitigatable." Obstacles include the Eagle Springs Golf Club, cliff areas and close proximity to the river in a few locations. There are no major railroad bridge crossings of the Eagle River on this section that Kt,;` would require a bridge retrofit to accommodate the trail. Width varies between 100 feet to 200 t,w4= feet. The south side of the tracks is more conducive to a trail platform. At this time, this section ranks as low demand because there is not a population center nearby but it is very likely Ch. 5 Pg. 7 that Wolcott will experience development within the life of this plan and demand for a trail route will increase substantially. Edwards to Avon: If the railroad corridor were to become fully available for public uses, this section would be part of providing a continuous trail experience through the valley. If it is an interim matter of purchasing the outside of edge of the existing corridor to create links between communities, this section is not a high priority for acquisition because a continuous separated trail that parallels Highway 6 and the Eagle River will exist from West Edwards to West Beaver Creek Boulevard in West Avon by mid- 2001. Avon to Eagle-Vail: i Use of a few select portions of the rail corridor in Avon would be very helpful in creating a continuous trail through Avon to E Nottingham Ranch Road such as near the wastewaterw treatment plant in West Avon and crossing Avon Road. a significant portion of the trail through the town of Otherwise, y n' Avon can be realized through development that is planned on land adjacent to the railroad corridor. At least one crossing of the railroad corridor will be necessary to create a continuous l r r ter'' r system in the Chapel Square area. Because Avon is a population center, the dormant track line already is heavily 7F used by pedestrians. The corridor through Avon is 4J y{N ",;^+~`i predominantly 100 feet wide with short 200 feet wide sections. The railroad power lines are generally located along the north 3 'mss a 5 side of the tracks making the south side more viable for locating the trail. Eagle-Vail to Dowd !unction Pedestrian Bridge: A This rail corridor section is seriously constrained by either man-made or natural x # x obstacles including Interstate 70 structures r u. Jk. „'M.; causing narrow underpasses, cliffs, falling rock, 3 Y steep river banks, retrofit of long railroad 1 y bridges and adjacent cut slopes. Widths vary h , . F from 100 feet wide to 200 feet wide. 1~ 1 26 I' 7 iF Ch. 5 Pg. 8 I »"{L. S i ;tF iF e:x. ='y' , ~"~m;, 's nz'Y•.u r Demand is very high for a safe trail route through this narrow area of the valley but if the corridor must be shared with rail, it is impossible except for y a °trnb a few short stretches. The non-rail core trail route in this area is also very difficult and will involve expensive construction but Ji few route options exist through this area. Dowd )unction Pedestrian Bridge to Downtown Minturn: This rail corridor section is physically too narrow for a shared rail and trail location until it intersects with the County Road bridge over the Eagle River. At that point, the rail corridor is wide and level, ranging from 100 feet wide to over 250 feet wide. There are multiple track lines because of the rail switching yard that formerly operated in Minturn but the corridor could be shared and still maintain distance between all of the track lines in place and a trail. The corridor is already used by pedestrians, bicyclists and even vehicles. Demand is high and constraints to construction are minimal. The other Core Trail routes are difficult because of terrain, such as on the Highway 24 side of the Eagle River, or would be relegated to following the right-of-way of the county road on the east side of the railyard. The ideal location for the trail, as reflected on the core trail maps in Chapter 3 is on the western edge of the railroad property, paralleling the Eagle River. Downtown Minturn to Battle Mountain: At the south end of the railyard, the rail corridor ^ „ " r becomes constrained by cliffs on the east side for approximately %2 mile. It becomes more conducive s for shared use after that cliff section and remains viable until west of the Two Elk trailhead area where there is another cliff area. These two sections could possibly be mitigated for shared use (e.g. cantilevered trail or separated b fence depending on the type of rail use. Otherwise it requires costly sections of trail to be built away from the rail corridor r., rHNe, on the hillside benches above. The rail corridor r through this portion of Minturn ranges between 100, 200 and 250 feet wide. Demand is potentially high. n Dormant corridor already heavily used by local i residents walking driving or snowmobilin , gF Ch. 5 Pg. 9 Battle Mountain to Red Cliff:;~ * 1s~` This section of rail corridor is very dramatic and scenic but rti w ` also features several types of natural and man-made hazards including cliffs, rock fall, mining shafts, mine building and hazardous or "hot" tailings piles. For much of , the distance between the base of Battle Mountain and Red Cliff, there is a track on both sides of the Eagle River which would seem to allow for train traffic to occur on one side's :Its f x while a trail occupies the other side but the issues noted prevent that seemingly simple solution. r fit `L .'14 r ~ 4 ~ The corridor through this section is 200 feet wide. The use would be as a recreational route as opposed to transportation although a few hardy citizens may use it to commute to and from Red Cliff in the summer season. Winter use of this section would not be recommended due to avalanche hazards. The other Core Trail route into Red Cliff features it's own set of issues, primarily navigating around or through the abandoned mining town of Gilman, also a hazardous waste site. In this case, the issues associated with the Core Trail route may be easier to overcome than those that accompany the rail corridor down in the canyon. Red Cliff to Tennessee Pass: This section is very scenic and it would function as a recreational route only since it is well removed from population centers. There are sections of the corridor that lend itself to shared use and others that are constrained by adjacent slopes. Additional study would be required on this section, if it were to become available for rail with trail or trail only use. The majority of the corridor through this section is 200 feet wide. Summary of the Rail Corridor Analysis: At this point in time, the highest demand for Core Trail completion is in the Minturn to Edwards area and the Gypsum to Eagle area. If the entire rail corridor is not available, and only narrow edge portions of these individual sections can be obtained (as depicted by the illustration below) from the railroad either by lease or purchase, the recommended priorities for partial acquisition are: 11Y T 1. Dowd Junction to Downtown Minturn through the railyard 2. West Avon from West Beaver Creek Boulevard to Avon Road 3. Sage to Downtown Eagle Ch. 5 Pg. 10 If the entire rail corridor is available and it is not financially or physically feasible to develop the trail as one project, the recommended priorities for construction of a trail with or without the tracks left in place are: 1. Dowd Junction to Downtown Minturn 2. West Avon to Avon Road 3. Sage to Downtown Eagle 4. Minturn to Battle Mountain 5. Wolcott to Edwards 6. Eagle to Edwards Finally, if neither of the two above scenarios materialize within the life span of this plan, at minimum the following at-grade trail crossings are needed to successfully complete the Core Trail on it's non-rail corridor route through the valley: 1. East of Eagle at Red Canyon (convert existing private crossing to public) 2. From Hurd Lane to proposed Village of Avon (new pedestrian-only crossing) 3. West of Dowd Junction, across the river from the Colorado Department of Transportation yard (new crossing) 4. In Dowd Junction, a new crossing under the railroad bridge at east end of River Run condominiums. Ch. 5 Pg. 11 CHAPTER 6 h n }~dLr..'4-,7 Core Trail Maintenance Maintenance of the trails systems is essential for safe and enjoyable use. And if not maintained properly over the long s" term, the infrastructure of the trail system may be become a wasted investment of invaluable financial and natural resources. Spring Clean-up on the Vail Pass Trail The Core Trail Maintenance Program envisioned by this plan is comprised of two basic approaches: 1. A short term maintenance program for the core trail system 2. A long term maintenance program for the core trail system after it has attained some connectivity For the purposes of this plan and it's described system, trails other than the Core Trail and select spur trails, shall be the responsibility of the entity that constructed, currently maintains or otherwise controls that route. It is not the intent of this planning document to recommend a method of maintenance for every paved or unpaved, urban or backcountry trail or neighborhood sidewalk in incorporated and unincorporated Eagle County. The program recommended below applies to the core trail and select spurs only. Recommended Core Trail Maintenance Program Short Term: up to 5 years: Each jurisdiction that is part of cooperative effort to construct the core trail system will be responsible for the maintenance of the portion of the core trail located within their boundaries. Long Term: 5 years + Cooperatively develop a single-entity maintenance program to serve the need for coordinated multi-jurisdictional trail maintenance. Work towards combining equipment needs through the different jurisdictions and hire the necessary staff to handle associated maintenance tasks. Recommended Maintenance Schedule: • Sweep trail once a month, starting in April, but sweep sections that are heavily impacted by debris from adjacent road, hillsides, etc. every two weeks as needed. • Inspect trail surface, shoulders and structures such as bridges, walls, sign posts, Ch. 6 Pg. 1 etc. periodically using a checklist, every two weeks is suggested. A meticulous inspection should take place in the spring after the snow has fully melted and the path has been swept for the first time. • Perform weed and vegetation control including mowing up to 2 feet on each side of the trail as needed. • Repair and retrofit trail surface cracks or holes, shoulder erosion, structure damage, etc. or arrange for repair as needed. • Clean culverts as needed. • Install or replace signs and trail furniture as needed. • Empty trash containers as needed. • Remove trash from adjacent ground as needed. • Repaint trail or road crosswalk striping as needed. • Plowing is left up to the discretion of the individual jurisdiction. • Seal coating is left up to discretion of the individual jurisdiction but is encouraged every 5 years minimum. Other Considerations: 1. The Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority is currently committed to an annual per mile contribution to individual town and county jurisdictions to maintain their sections of core trail, subject to approval by the Authority Board. Authority partners may also request maintenance contributions as necessary for periodic overlays or reconstruction. 2. The Authority will coordinate annual forums with maintenance personnel to review the core trail maintenance program, issues and funding. The towns and county will collectively determine when it is financially feasible to create an independent maintenance entity to care for the entirety of the core trail system. 3. Annual inspections of the trail should be performed by each jurisdiction to determine potential internal budget issues and Authority trail maintenance funding requests for the following year. 4. Non-public sections of the core trail should be converted to public sections through grant of easement to the underlying jurisdiction to eliminate issues of inconsistent or inadequate maintenance and potential loss of access. Trails should be brought into conformance to safety standards prior to acceptance. Endowment for maintenance from the grantor should be sought to defray the additional costs of maintenance for the responsible jurisdiction. 5. Jurisdictions should avoid responsibility for the maintenance of trail easements until a trail has been constructed upon them. Until that time, easement maintenance (weeds, drainage, etc.) if necessary, should be the responsibility of the easement grantor unless otherwise specified by the easement document. Ch. 6 Pg. 2 I 6. In the case of widened shoulder or specially designated bike lanes on Town, County, State or Federal roadways, maintenance should include increased attention to debris clearing, pavement repair of edges and potholes, and scheduling of chip seals. 7. Volunteer maintenance shall be encouraged wherever appropriate. Volunteer efforts may be limited to clean-up of trash, sign and trail accessory placement or vegetation control, but certain minor construction or drainage projects could be undertaken by volunteers at the discretion of the pertinent jurisdiction. 8. Maintenance responsibility should be determined as part of the construction planning process and publicly documented. Ch. 6 Pg. 3 Appendix A Detailed Cost Estimates by Trail Section TRAIL SECTION GLENWOOD CANYON TO DOTSERO Total Section Length: 14,838 feet - all on Highway 6, to be retrofitted with striping, signs (2.8 miles) Item Estimated Quantity Oohs Onlt Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cast PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $726.00 $726.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $181.50 $181.50 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub - AC $0.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) - CY $0.00 Unclassified Excavation - CY $0.00 Embankment - CY $0.00 Subgrade Grading - SY $0.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" - TN $0.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" - TN $0.00 Topsoil Slopes - CY $0.00 Revegetation AC $0.00 Traffic Control / Signage 6.00 LS $175.00 $1,050.00 Striping 1,597.00 LF $0.50 $799.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" LF $0.00 End Section, CMP - 18" EA I $0.00 Rip Rap CY li $0.00 Erosion Control LS $0.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing LF $0.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA 1 $0.00 Bridges (10' width standard) - LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls - SF $0.00 Tunnels - LS I $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $205.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $205.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $82.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $8,482.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (20%) $2,120.60 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $10,603.00 I TRAIL SECTION DOTSERO TO GYPSUM Starts at Colorado River Road and ends at West Gypsum Town Boundary Total Section Length: 29,347 feet / none built at this time (5.5 miles) Item Estimated QuauUty Uults Oult Price la Yr 2001 Estimated Cast PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $170, 295.00 $170, 295.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $42,573.00 $42,573.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 13.101 AC $2,000.001 $26,200.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 2,100.001 CY $5.001 $10,500.00 Unclassified Excavation 850.001 CY 1 $4.501 $3,825.00 Embankment 850.001 CY 1 $2.501 $2,125.00 Subgrade Grading 38,000.001 SY 1 $1.251 $47,500.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 16,000.001 TN 1 $20.001 $320,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1 5,350.001 TN 1 $50.001 $267,500.00 Topsoil Slopes 2,100.001 CY 1 $7.001 $14,700.00 Revegetation 1 5.201 AC 1 $4,000.001 $20,800.00 Traffic Control / Signage 1 57.001 LS 1 $175.001 $9,975.00 Striping 1 360.001 LF 1 $0.501 $180.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION 1 I 1 Culvert, CPP - 18" 1 855.001 LF 1 $35.001 $29,925.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 114.001 EA 1 $200.001 $22,800.00 Rip Rap I -1 CY 1 1 $0.00 Erosion Control IJ 1.001 LS 1 $3,000.001 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES 1 1 1 Guard Rail Railing 600.001 LF 1 $20.001 $12,000.00 1Guard Rail End Anchors 4.001 EA 1 $650.001 $2,600.00 Crossing Warning Lights -1 EA 1 1 $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) -1 EA 1 1 $0.00 Bridges (Colorado River, RR) 1.00 LS 1 $575,000.001 $575,000.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls 1 CY 1 1 $0.00 Retaining Walls 2,509.001 SF 1 $20.001 $50,180.00 Tunnels 1 -1 LS 1 1 $0.00 Relocate Utilities 1 -1 LS 1 1 $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION 1 I I Surveying ( typ. 5%) 1 1 LS 1 1 $70,956.50 Material Testing (typ. 5%) 1 LS 1 1 $70,956.50 Construction Management (typ. 2%) 1 LS 1 1 $28,382.60 ~ I I 1TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE 1 1 $1,812, 475.00 1TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) 1 I $363, 796.00 11TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE 1 1 $2,176, 271.00 TRAIL SECTION TOWN OF GYPSUM Starts at West Town Boundary and ends at Jules Drive Total Section Length: 10,736 feet (2.0 miles) / 5,540 feet built/ 5,196 remains to be built (.98 miles) Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $24,771.00 $24,771.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $6,192.80 $6,192.80 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 2.40 AC $2,000.00 $4,800.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 400.00 CY $5.00 $2,000.00 Unclassified Excavation 500.00 CY $4.50 $2,250.00 Embankment 500.00 CY $2.50 $1,250.00 Subgrade Grading 7,100.00 SY $1.25 $8,875.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 3,000.00 TN $20.00 $60,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,000.00 TN $50.00 $50,000.00 Topsoil Slopes 400.00 CY $7.00 $2,800.00 Revegetation 1.00 AC $4,000.00 $4,000.00 Traffic Control / Signage 12.00 LS $175.00 $2,100.00 Striping 750.00 LF $0.50 $375.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" 165.00 LF $35.00 $5,775.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 22.00 EA $200.00 $4,400.00 Rip Rap - CY $50.00 $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 300.00 LF $20.00 $6,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00 Crossing Warning Lights 2.00 EA $500.00 $1,000.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00 Bridges - LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls 2,000.00 SF $20.00 $40,000.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION (Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $10,321.25 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $10,321.25 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $4,128.50.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $262,160.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) $54,398.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $316,558.00 TRAIL SECTION GYPSUM TO EAGLE Starts at Jules Drive in Gypsum and ends at Brush Creek Eagle Town Boundary (Estimate for alignment along Highway 6. Interchange alignment not feasible to estimate at this time) Total Section Length: 41,084 feet (7.78 miles) / 36,936 feet (6.99 miles) remains to be built Item Estimated Quantity Volts Unit Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cast PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $87,110.00 $87,110.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $21,777.00 $21,777.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 7.40 AC $2,000.00 $14,800.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 3,960.00 CY $5.00 $19,800.00 Unclassified Excavation 250.00 CY $4.50 $1,125.00 Embankment 250.00 CY $2.501 $625.00 Subgrade Grading 43,200.001 SY $1.251 $54,000.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 1,820.001 TN 1 $20.001 $36,400.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 610.001 TN 1 $50.001 $30,500.00 Topsoil Slopes 3,960.001 CY 1 $7.001 $27,720.00 Revegetation 3.701 AC 1 $4,000.001 $14,800.00 Traffic Control / Signage 65.001 LS 1 $175.001 $11,375.00 Striping 110.001 LF I $0.501 $550.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION I I I Culvert, CPP - 18" 975.001 LF I $35.001 $34,125.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 130.001 EA 1 $200.001 $26,000.00 IRip Rap -1 CY 1 1 $0.00 Erosion Control 1.001 LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES I I Guard Rail Railing 400.001 LF 1 $20.001 $80,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 4.001 EA 1 $650.001 $2,600.00 Crossing Warning Lights -1 EA 1 1 $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.001 EA 1 $20,000.001 $20,000.00 Bridges (Brush Creek) 1.001 LS 1 $90,000.001 $90,000.00 16ridge Abutment and Wing Walls -1 CY 1 1 $0.00 Retaining Walls -1 SF 1 1 $0.00 Tunnel at Highway 6 1.001 LS 1 $250,000.001 $250,000.00 Relocate Utilities -1 LS I I1 $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION I I I (Surveying ( typ. 5%) 1 LS I + $36,296.00 IMaterial Testing (typ. 5%) 1 LS I 1 $36,296.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) I LS 1 1 $14,518.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE 1 I I $921,918.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) I I $191,298.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE 1 ' $1,113,216.00 TRAIL SECTION TOWN OF EAGLE From Brush Creek to East Town Boundary at end of Chambers Avenue Total Section. Length: 15,420 feet (2.9 miles) / 3700 feet exists / 11,720 feet left to construct/retrofit Item Estimated Quantity Units Unlt Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Celt PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $83,032.00 $83,032.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $20,758.00 $20,758.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 3.40 AC $2,000.00 $6,800.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 550.00 CY $5.00 $2,750.00 Unclassified Excavation 400.00 CY $4.50 $1,800.00 Embankment 400.00 CY $2.50 $1,000.00 Subgrade Grading 9,750.00 SY $1.25 $12,187.50 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 4,100.00 TN $20.00 $82,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,400.00 TN $50.00 $70,000.00 Topsoil Slopes 550.00 CY $7.00 $3,850.00 Revegetation 1.40 AC $4,000.00 $5,600.00 Traffic Control / Signage 15.00 LS $175.00 $2,625.00 Striping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" 225.00 LF $35.00 $7,875.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 30.00 EA $200.00 $6,000.00 Rip Rap - CY I $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 200.00 LF $20.00 $4,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00 Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.00 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Bridges (Eagle River) 1.00 LS $390,000.00 $390,000.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $500.00 $0.00 Retaining Walls 3,000.00 SF $20.00 $60,000.00 Tunnels 1.00 LS Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $34,596.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $34,596.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $13,839.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $878,761.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) I $182,342.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $1,061,103.00 TRAIL SECTION EAGLE TO WOLCOTT From East Town Boundary at Chambers Ave. to Highway 131 Bridge in Wolcott Total Section Length: 44,552 feet (8.4 miles), none built at this time Item Estimated 1108GUty Oa1ts Oak PrICe In Yr 2001 Estimated Cast PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $170,378.00 $170,378.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $42,594.00 $42,594.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Clean Up 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 6.00 AC $2,000.00 $12,000.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 970.00 CY $5.00 $4,850.00 Unclassified Excavation 7,700.00 CY $4.50 $34,650.00 Embankment 7,700.00 CY $2.50 $19,250.00 Subgrade Grading 17,500.00 SY $1.25 $21,875.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 7,350.00 TN $20.00 $147,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 2,475.00 TN $50.00 $123,750.00 Topsoil Slopes 970.00 CY $7.00 $6,790.00 Revegetation 2.40 AC $4,000.00 $9,600.00 Traffic Control / Signage 27.00 LS $175.001 $4,725.00 Striping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION I Culvert, CPP - 18" 405.001 LF $35.001 $14,175.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 54.00 EA $200.00 $10,800.00 Rip Rap -1 Cy ( $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 8,100.00 LF $20.00 $162,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 8.00 EA $650.00 $5,200.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade Exists w/Horn Ranch Road) - EA $0.00 Bridges - LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls 41,700.00 SF $20.00 $834,000.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $70,991.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $70,991.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $28,396.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,803,115.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (33%)* $874,146.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $2,677,261.00 "Higher contingency percentage used on this and next section due to many variables in selection of final alignment. TRAIL SECTION WOLCOTT TO WEST EDWARDS From Highway 131 Bridge in Wolcott to Hillcrest Drive Bridge Total Section Lengtl24,385 feet (4.6 miles) to be built, none built at this time Item Estimated QaaOvty 901ts 9111tPrICe IR Yr 2000 Estimated Celt PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $190,838.00 $190, 838.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $47,709.00 $47,709.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Clean Up 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 6.00 AC $2,000.00 $12,000.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 970.00 CY $5.00 $4,850.00 Unclassified Excavation 3,400.00 CY $4.50 $15,300.00 Embankment 3,400.00 CY $2.50 $8,500.00 Subgrade Grading 17,500.00 SY $1.25 $21,875.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 7,350.00 TN $20.00 $147,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 2,475.00 TN $50.00 $123,750.00 Topsoil Slopes 970.00 CY $7.00 $6,790.00 Revegetation 2.40 AC $4,000.00 $9,600.00 Traffic Control / Signage 27.00 LS $175.00 $4,725.00 Striping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" 405.00 LF $35.00 $14,175.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 54.00 EA $200.00 $10,800.00 Rip Rap - CY $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 400.00 LF $20.00 $8,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00 Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00 Bridges (over Eagle River at 1-70 Bridge) 1.00 LS $510,000.00 $510,000.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls 34,000.00 SF $20.00 $680,000.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $79,516.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $79,516.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $31,806.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $2,019,736.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (33%)* $666,512.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $2,686,248.00 'Higher contingency percentage used on this and next section due to many variables in selection of final alignment. TRAIL SECTION WEST EDWARDS TO TOWN OF AVON Hillcrest Drive Bridge to Town of Avon West Boundary Total Section Length: 26,596 feet total (5 miles) 19,874 feet built/6,722 feet remains to be built. The 5000 foot trail section between Hillcrest Bridge and the Eagle River Mobile Home Park is currently in the planning phase for construction in 2002. Given the imminent status of project, no detailed data is shown below to substitute for the accurate construction estimating that is underway. Previous preliminary estimates for the that section are $250,000 to $300,000 depending on necessary utility relocations. The remaining 1722 feet to be built is in the area of Cemetery Road and will likely be incorporated into the reconstruction of Cemetery Road and bridge. Item Estimated Quantity units Unit Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Clean Up 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub - AC $2,000.00 $0.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) - CY $500.00 $0.00 Unclassified Excavation - CY $4.50 $0.00 Embankment CY $2.50 $0.00 Subgrade Grading SY $1.25 $0.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" - TN $20.001 $0.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" - TN $50.001 $0.00 Topsoil Slopes - CY $7.001 $0.00 Revegetation - AC $4,000.00 $0.00 Traffic Control / Signage - LS $175.00 $0.00 Striping - LF $0.50 $0.00 Curb and Gutter - LF 1 $0.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" - LF $35.00 $0.00 End Section, CMP - 18" EA $200.00 $0.00 Rip Rap - CY $0.00 Erosion Control - LS $0.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing - LF $20.00 $0.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $650.00 $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA $500.00 $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $20,000.00 $0.00 Bridges LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls - SF $20.00 $0.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $0.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $0.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $0.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $336,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) $81,600.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $480,000.00 TRAIL SECTION TOWN OF AVON West Town Boundary to Village at Avon Interchange Total Section Length: 18,196 feet (3.4 miles) /8102 feet built/10,093 remains to be built/ 2,700 feet located west of Avon Road and estimated below, remainder in Village at Avon The trail section between West Beaver Creek Boulevard and Avon Road 2,700 feet) is currently in the planning phase for construction in 2002. Given the imminent status of project, no detailed data is shown below to substitute for the accurate construction estimating that is underway. Previous preliminary estimates for the that section are $500,000 to $600,000 total. Given the preliminary status of trails through the Village at Avon development, no estimates are shown for that trail section. Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing LS $2,000.00 $0.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) LS $19,707.00 $0.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) LS $4,927.00 $0.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) LS $3,000.00 $0.00 Clean Up LS $1,500.00 $0.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub AC $2,000.00 $0.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) CY $5.00 $0.00 Unclassified Excavation CY Embankment - CY Subgrade Grading SY $1.25 $0.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" TN $20.00 $0.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" TN $50.00 $0.00 Topsoil Slopes CY $7.00 $0.00 Revegetation LS $4,000.00 $0.00 Traffic Control /Signage EA $175.00 $0.00 Striping LF $0.50 $0.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" - LF $35.00 $0.00 End Section, CMP - 18" - EA $200.00 $0.00 Rip Rap CY $0.00 Erosion Control - LS $0.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing - LF $20.00 $0.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $650.00 $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA $500.00 $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $20,000.00 $0.00 Bridges - LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls - SF $20.00 $0.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $500,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL PROJECT COST IESTIMATE 20%) $600,000.00 TRAIL SECTION AVON TO DOWD JUNCTION Village at Avon Interchange to Town of Minturn North Bridge Total Section Length: 16,653 feet (3.15 miles), none built at this time Item Estimated Quantity Units Unlt Prlee to Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit'Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $279,940.50 $279,940.50 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $69,985.00 $69,985.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 9.30 AC $2,000.00 $18,600.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 1,500.00 CY $5.00 $7,500.00 Unclassified Excavation 3,200.00 CY $4.50 $14,400.00 Embankment 3,200.00 CY $2.50 $8,000.00 Subgrade Grading 26,950.00 SY $1.25 $33,687.50 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 11,350.00 TN $20.00 $227,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 3,800.00 TN $50.001 $190,000.00 Topsoil Slopes 1,500.00 CY $7.001 $10,500.00 Revegetation 3.80 AC $4,000.001 $15,200.00 Traffic Control/Signage 41.00 LS $175.001 $7,175.00 Striping 1,500.00 LF $0.50 $750.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" 615.00 LF $35.001 $21,525.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 82.00 EA $200.001 $16,400.00 Rip Rap - CY 1 $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 500.00 LF $20.00 $10,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors 4.00 EA $650.00 $2,600.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) 2.00 EA $20,000.00 $40,000.00 Bridges - 2 (Eagle River, Under Railroad Bridge) 2.00 LS $325,000.00 $650,000.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 Retaining Walls 52,400.00 SF $20.00 $1,048,000.00 Tunnels (Railroad Tunnel may be required but not LS $0.00 included in this estimate - $200,000) Relocate Utilities LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $116,641.90 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $116,641.90 `Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $46,656.80 I TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $2,962,704.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) $589,751.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $3,552,455.00 TRAIL SECTION DOWD JUNCTION TO MINTURN From Minturn North Bridge through Railyard to Minturn Downtown (Turntable Restaurant) Total Section Length: 9,887 feet (1.8 miles), none built at this time Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price In Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $12,741.00 $12,471.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $3,185.00 $3,185.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 1.20 AC $2,000.00 $2,400.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 100.00 CY $5.00 $500.00 Unclassified Excavation 2,700.00 CY $4.50 $12,150.00 Embankment 2,700.00 CY $2.50 $6,750.00 Subgrade Grading 3,500.00 SY $1.25 $4,375.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 1,500.00 TN $20.00 $30,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 500.00 TN $50.00 $25,000.00 Topsoil Slopes 100.00 CY $7.00 $700.00 Revegetation 0.30 AC $4,000.00 $1,200.00 Traffic Control/Signage 38.00 LS $175.00 $6,650.00 Striping 100.00 LF $0.50 $50.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP -18" 60.00 LF $35.00 $2,100.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 4.00 EA $200.00 $800.00 Rip Rap - CY $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing - LF $20.00 $0.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $650.00 $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00 Bridges - LS $0.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00 (Retaining Walls - SF $0.00 Tunnels - LS $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $5,309.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $5,309.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $2,124.00 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $134,843.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) $27,979.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $162,822.00 TRAIL SECTION TOWN OF MINTURN From Downtown Minturn at Turntable Restaurant to Tigiwon Road at Base of Battle Mountain Total Section Length: 19,641 feet (3.7 miles), none built at this time Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00 ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00 Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $96,456.00 $96,456.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $24,114.00 $24,114.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $4,000.001 $4,000.00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.001 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1 1 Clear and Grub 6.001 AC $2,000.001 $12,000.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 1,400.001 CY $5.001 $7,000.00 Unclassified Excavation 2,000.001 CY 1 $4.501 $9,000.00 Embankment 2,000.001 CY 1 $2.501 $5,000.00 Subgrade Grading 25,200.001 SY 1 $1.251 $31,500.00 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 10,600.001 TN 1 $20.001 $212,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 3,550.001 TN 1 $50.001 $177,500.00 Topsoil Slopes 1,400.001 CY 1 $7.001 $9,800.00 Revegetation 3.401 AC 1 $4,000.001 $13,600.00 Traffic Control/Signage 38.001 LS 1 $175.001 $6,650.00 Striping 1 200.001 LF 1 $0.501 $100.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION I 1 1 1 Culvert, CPP - 18" 1 570.001 LF 1 $35.001 $19,950.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 1 76.001 EA 1 $200.001 $15,200.00 Rip Rap 1 -1 CY 1 Erosion Control 1 1.001 LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES I I I Guard Rail Railing 1 - LF 1 1 $0.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA 1 $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights - EA 1 $0.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade Exists at Taylor Road) 1.00 EA 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Bridges (Two Elk Creek) 1.00 LS 1 $90,000.001 $90,000.00 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY 1 1 $0.00 Retaining Walls 8,000.00 SF 1 $20.001 $160,000.00 Tunnels - LS 1 1 $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS 1 1 $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION 1 Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS 1 1 $40,190.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS 1 1 $40,190.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS 1 1 $40,190.00 1 TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE 1 $1,020,826.00 TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) 1 $211,821.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE I $1,232,647.00 TRAIL SECTION MINTURN TO RED CLIFF From Tigiwon Road/Battle Mtn. to Downtown Red Cliff Total Section Length: 27,447 feet( 5.2 miles),none built at this time Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2001 Estimated Cost PLANNING AND DESIGN ROW and Land Purchase AC ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $70,699.00 $70,699.00 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $17,674.00 $17,674.00 Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000:00 Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Clear and Grub 3.00 AC $2,000.00 $6,000.00 Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 460.00 CY $5.00 $2,300.00 Unclassified Excavation 2,250.00 CY $4.50 $10,125.00 Embankment 2,250.00 CY $2.50 $5,625.00 Subgrade Grading 44,150.00 SY $1.25 $55,187.50 Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 7,200.00 TN $20.00 $144,000.00 Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,200.00 TN $50.001 $60,000.00 Topsoil Slopes 460.00 CY $7.001 $3,220.00 Revegetation 6.00 AC $4,000.001 $24,000.00 +Traffic Control/Signage 66.00 LS $175.001 $11,550.00 Striping 200.00 LF $0.501 $100.00 DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION Culvert, CPP - 18" 990.00 LF $35.001 $34,650.00 End Section, CMP - 18" 132.00 EA $200.001 $26,400.00 Rip Rap - CY 1 $0.00 Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.001 $3,000.00 STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES Guard Rail Railing 2,000.00 LF $20.001 $40,000.00 Guard Rail End Anchors - EA 1 $0.00 Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.001 $500.00 RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA 1 $0.00 113ridges (Two Elk Creek) 1.00 LS 1 Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY I $0.00 Retaining Walls 7,500.00 SF $20.001 $150,000.00 Tunnels - LS I $0.00 Relocate Utilities - LS I $0.00 INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS I $29,458.00 Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS I $29,458.00 Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS 1 $11,783.00 I TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE I $748,231.00 (TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (17%) ' $903,489.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE TOWN of VAIL CORE TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS "The Missing Links" TRAIL SECTION Length 2001 Preliminary Estimate' VAIL VALLEY DRIVE TRAIL 5600 feet $1,300,000 from Gold Peak to Sunburst Lane LIONSHEAD BYPASS TRAIL 435 feet I $225,000 VAIL VILLAGE BYPASS 383 feet $40,000 VAIL GOLF COURSE SEPARATED PATH 2137 feet $260,000 * Summary of Preliminary Cost Estimates provided by Town of Vail staff. Appendix B Trail Plan Process Participants Eagle Valley Trails Committee Avon Town Council Dick Cleveland Avon Planning Commission Ginny Culp Vail Town Council Louise Randall Vail Planning Commission Amy Losa Minturn Town Council Fred Haslee Minturn Planning Commission Thomas Gutherie Red Cliff Town Council Paul Gotthelf Red Cliff Planning Commission John Bailey Eagle County Board of County Commissioners Buff Arnold Eagle County Planning Commission Ken Rhoads Edwards Metropolitan District Jeff Auxier Arrowhead Metropolitan District Leslie Kehmeier Eagle-Vail Metropolitan District Bill Fisher Mike Toughill Local, State and Federal Government Staff: Martha Miller Norm Wood, Town of Avon Kip Mayer Anne Martens, Town of Avon Chip Tallon Vern Brock, Town of Eagle Katherine Nannin Larry McKinzie, Town of Eagle Lisa DeGraaf, Town of Minturn Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority Greg Hall, Town of Vail Kevin Foley, Town of Vail Gregg Barrie, Town of Vail Debbie Buckley, Town of Avon Todd Oppenheimer, Town of Vail Bob Mcllveen, Beaver Creek and Town of Avon Brent Wilson, Town of Vail Larry Grafel, Beaver Creek Brad Higgins, Eagle County Willy Powell, Town of Eagle Bob Narracci, Eagle County Donna Meyer, Town of Eagle Joe Forinash, Eagle County Tom Stone, Eagle County Keith Montag, Eagle County Mike Gallagher, Eagle County Helen Migchelbrink, Eagle County George Roussos, Eagle County Peter Sulmeisters, Eagle County Jeff Shroll, Town of Gypsum Mike Gruber, Eagle County Francis Barela, Town of Gypsum Leslie Kehmeier, Eagle County GIS Jim Kleckner, Town of Minturn John Staight, Eagle County GIS Alan Lanning, Town of Minturn Sean Koenig, Eagle County GIS Robert Slagle, Town of Red Cliff Ellie Caryl, ECO Trails Janet Field, ECO Ann Allums, ECO Private Sector Participants: Bill Heicher, Colorado Division of Wildlife Johnson and Kunkel Engineering Bill Andree, Colorado Division of Wildlife Monroe and Newell Engineering Keith Powers, Colorado Department of Transportation Union Pacific Railroad Brian Hopkins, US Bureau of Land Management Riverwalk at Edwards Beth Boyst, US Forest Service Joe Doerr, US Forest Service The Citizens Serving on the: Eagle Town Board Eagle Town Planning Commission Gypsum Town Council Gypsum Town Planning Commission Appendix C References • AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999 • Florida Bicycle Facilities Planning and Design Manual 1996, Florida Department of Transportation • Colorado Department of Transportaton's Bikeway Design Guidelines, 1994 • Bicycling info.org website, Produced by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Exerpts from January, 2001 • National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearinghouse, Technical Assistance Series Number 9, August 1996 • Successful Strategies for Trail Development, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, Workshop Proceedings, November, 1998 • Commentary and Text, Section 14, ADA Accessibility Guidelines • Bicycle Facility Planning, Planning Advisory Service, Report Number 459, American Planning Association, 1995 • Summit County Recreational Pathways Master Plan, 1989 • Trails 2000 Program, Jefferson County Open Space Master Plan, 1998 • Scottsdale (Arizona) Bike Path Improvement Study, 1992 • Historic Union Pacific Rail Trail Master Plan, 1991 • Heart of the Rockies Historic Corridor, Trail Feasibility Study, 1996 • Eagle County Land Use Regulations 1998 • Eagle County Trail Plan 1993 • Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan, 1994 • Minturn Parks and Recreation Master Plan, 1992 • Town of Avon Recreation Master Plan, 1992 • Boulder's Stream Corridors Design Guidelines, 1989 • Bicycling and Walking in Colorado, Colorado Department of Transportation, 2000 • Yampa Valley Trails and Recreation Conceptual Plan, 1992 • The Intermountain Connection, Rails and Trails Report, 1998 • Glenwood Springs Park, Recreation, Open Space, Greenway and Pathway Master Plan, 1998 • Heart of the Rockies Historic Corridor Trail Feasibility Study, 1996 • Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind, Colorado State Parks, 1998 Appendix0 Recommended Core Trail Furniture and Accessories { 1 r R { ~ t-I ~ it%•'~' .F milt ~ 'Sy _ `E Q~J ~w ~ l L Recommended Picnic Table Style Order in Forest Green Recycled Plastic with galvanized base for low maintenance. Anchored in concrete to discourage vandalism. Available from RJ Thomas Manufacturing DBA Pilot Rock Products. x • r' Recommended Bench Style Order in Forest Green Recycled Plastic with galvanized base for low maintenance. Anchored in concrete to discourage vandalism. Available from RJ Thomas Manufacturing DBA Pilot Rock Products. RESOLUTION No. 14 Series of 2001 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE TOWN OF VAIL'S SUPPORT FOR THE COLORADO WILDERNESS ACT OF 2001 WHEREBY DESIGNATING CERTAIN BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LANDS FOR WILDERNESS DESIGNATION WHEREAS, Congressional Wilderness designation provide permanent protection to the natural, scenic, recreational, and biological values of federal land and certain lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management in Colorado that possess such natural, scenic, and biological values of an outstanding nature; and WHEREAS, A variety of uses, including high impact activities such as resource extraction, and low impact activities such as non-motorized recreation are appropriate on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management; and WHEREAS, Wilderness designation of such sites as Castle Peak, Bull Gulch, Deep Creek, Pisagh Mountain and Hack Lake (Flat Tops Addition) that are administered by the Bureau of Land Management would leave many other lands open to higher impact uses; and WHEREAS, These potential wilderness sites are highly valued by Colorado residents along with our guests and visitors of the Town of Vail for activities such as hunting, hiking, horseback riding, site seeing, wildlife viewing, camping and grazing; and WHEREAS, Colorado residents, including many in the Town of Vail and our guests, place a high value on natural and scenic landscapes as an important aspect of their quality of life, and protection of land in its natural state helps to preserve our quality of life; and WHEREAS, Many Colorado residents, including the Town of Vail, support permanent protection of additional Bureau of Land Management lands in the State of Colorado for wilderness area designation; and WHEREAS, The Town of Vail wishes to express its support for the designation of sites such as Castle Peak, Bull Gulch, Deep Creek, Pisagh Mountain and Hack Lake (Flat Tops Addition) as some of Colorado's newest wilderness areas; and WHEREAS, The Town of Vail represents the voice and concerns of its citizenry to our state and national wilderness area decision-makers who value local input. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Vail Town Council, of Vail, Colorado, supports the wilderness designation of lands in Colorado and urges our state and national wilderness area decision- makers to support the designation of Castle Peak, Bull Gulch, Deep Creek, Pisagh Mountain and Hack Lake (Flat Tops Addition) sites as wilderness areas, as described in the "Conservationists Wilderness Proposal for Bureau of Land Management Lands". INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of December, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor, Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail 12/12/01 17:41 FAX 3038444996 DIANA DEGETTE ' fA 002 Colorado Wilderness Network Pisgah Mountain Citizens' Wilderness Inventory f i Preliminary Results, June 2001 Well below the elevation of most Colorado Wilderness Areas, the steep topography along the Colorado River includes red sandstone cliffs. and rock grasslands and aspen groves. 4 BLM Resource Area: Grand Junction RA Inventory History Pisgah Mountain: 15,667 acres The Pisgah Mountain unit was inventoried by Location the BLM in the late 1470's. The BLM d...rr.3 Pisgah from further consideration for Wilderness Three miles southwest of McCoy and four mules because they found the area to lack outstanding west of Bond, this unit's northern boundary is opportunities for solitude and unconfined the Colorado River. recreation. The BLM's funding was based on steep topography, a narrow configuration, and Wilderness Qualities sparse vegetation- The hand of man is noticeably absent within the Citizens' inventories found the area to contain Pisgah Mountain unit. Except for traces of early ample Wilderness Characteristics. The unit's human settlement, game identified as Ute, the topography, configuration and vegetation make area is primarily affected by the forces of nature. for an outstanding Wilderness experience. Pisgah Mountain rises 2,000 feet from the Resource Information Colorado River, which has carve& an extensive and scenic canyon on the north and east sides of The cutting of pinyon juniper forests for wildlife the unit. The presence of the river's riparian habitat, notably sage grouse,' has impacted the ecosystem affords a great variety of fl~ra and Pisgah Mountain unit. fauna and adds to the unit's outstanding scenic 1 qualities. There are vestiges of an old stagecoach road off the old Colorado River road, both of which are This is a diverse area in the foothills and lower foot trails. There is potential for significant montane life zones. The 8,600-foot elevation of Ute/Paleo :artifacts, though no survey has yet Pisgah Mountain, which is the unit's high point, been performed. puts Pisgah well below the altitude of most 'designated Wilderness areas in Colorado. Developed" Y.;..gs, ditches and stock ponds for livestock exist, but are quickly being revegetated The rugged topography of the Pisgah Mountain by natural progression. There are no dams or unit reduces the frequency of visitation. This waterAiversions. gives the area a wild, unpopulated feeling and makes it a prince resource, for non-mbtorized, There;are no active oil and gas leases in the unit. non-developed recreation. Red rock cliffs of the. State Bridge formation fringe Pisgah Mountain dosed roads have been ripped and reseeded as and add to its sense of isolation. part of the Castle Peak Travel Management Plan. Motorized use is limited to designated, Ponderosa pines grow along the Colorado River summer-only routes. The one road within the and arid, rock grasslands cover the flanks of unit (Road 8585) could quickly and easily be Pisgah Mountain. Scattered aspen groves add closed and reduced to foot trail status. An old diversity to an otherwise austere desert water trough and water tank at Balanced Rock environment. The unit proi-ides a "habitat Spring could be hauled away to eliminate signs u linkage zone" for the lynx. of man_ i i _r - DI D DEGETTF- 17.42 _ - .1 - ~2~ -r 1+ _ 12j41 - ' ~ - unto - ~ ~ _ _ ~ 2a , r - _ _ ~r~' - Jr .`rte- - bii . j = ~f I, l ~ _ • J y(f ....'1 " . ~ ~t7 ~ :yt• ` , it .J f _ ~ ~1f r,• /J , ~ / i • - j_ `'i` - ltd' 1_ - ! I f' - : f~a..., • rte. - / _ ; _ r.,_- - y,I-. 1 S,(•' . _ ( - l I •1 _ 4, ip fi= _ , • _L_ I ! I .,,i ,J,~'^:f',t- _,t•- --...'f.,.:`` - .lpy//`rJ( ' `4J~_. I~ZA'J _;~I+•~_ ,7. ;t, - '".'f' ~ +J,,,f-- • _..x.3=4*' _ _ _ rt _ - 7• - `.J.- • tali t - - ^,wj i Y~ X11 ~ ~ ~t ,~1. t F.yc`7~•ti.`[,=~ j •-t i- _ 1~- i . .j stow$ lam Travelwa TV4 ~~.~•j lei Q _ _ _ ~ •j ?wl~ ~YP•oY~°rariWl - • . - --.rte MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager RE: Town Manager's Report DATE: December 18 2001 COUNCIL CALENDAR In responses to the proposed "next steps" including the Council Strategy Session (originally envisioned for January 22, 2002), it appears this date will not work. The next potential opportunity would be Tuesday, February 12, a date staff is still in process of confirming with Michael McNally. Please let Bob or Pam know if you can tentatively pencil in this day for discussion of Council strategy. The TOV Executive Team Retreat will be re-scheduled, as well, to occur following Council's Strategy Session. UPCOMING ITEMS: January 1, 2002 - HOLIDAY - NO MEETING - RESCHEDULED TO JANUARY 8, 2002 January 8, 2002 - Work Session Appointment to (merged chambers) January 8, 2002 - Evening Meeting January 15, 2002 - Work Session January 15, 2002 - Evening Meeting Berry Creek 5th Update r MINUTES REGULAR MEETING VAIL PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT d/b/a VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 9:00 A. M. Tuesday, November 13, 2001 Vail Golf Club House, Seasons at the Green Restaurant 1778 Vail Valley Drive MEMBERS PRESENT Ross Davis, Nancy Stevens, Tom Saalfeld, Chris Moffet MEMBERS ABSENT Hermann Staufer TOV COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT None STAFF PRESENT Piet Pieters. Bob Trautz, Jim Heber, Wendy Cheff, Sean Riley, Tom Gaylord, Jean McGuey, Diane Johnson, Jim Myers, Mike Ortiz OTHERS PRESENT Len Bloom CALL TO ORDER Chris Moffet called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. PUBLIC INPUT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Lenny asked if the VRD was running the golf clubs and if membership fees would be going up. Sean replied that he and Randy looked at other clubs and all others run events for their members. This is a service that they want to offer and is a professional responsibility to take care of leagues, tournaments and events. There will still be club representation and handicap committees. Plan is to have the pros meet with the league representatives once a month. Sean has spoken to everyone except the Seniors, and sent a letter explaining the details of the plan. Tom commented that he believes it will be easier on the people who run the leagues. It is a service that the golf club will offer. Sean added that he expects the players to gain quite a bit - it will be a better experience for them. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chris asked for approval of the minutes of October 9", 23`d and 24'. Ross moved to approve, Nancy seconded. Approved unanimously. 1 r PUBLIC INPUT ON Lenny asked if the budget had been revised down or up compared to last 2002 BUDGET year, and Bob replied that the whole budget had been revised downward - 10% overall and 15% in some cases. It is very conservative. BOARD MEMBER INPUT Nancy asked about the restrooms in Dobson and Jim Heber stated they were now finished. September I I'h affected the long-lead items, and slowed everything down quite a bit. The Bubble opens Thursday and is ready for the tournament. Tom thanked Randy and Sean for the letter that they sent to passholders. Piet pointed out that the letter had not yet been sent, as he wanted Board input. Ross said that the Club committees should handle all social affairs other than the opening party, and employees should not be involved in any wagering. Sean added that normally a fee would be charged for a cocktail party. Tom next asked about De-Brucing and when things would have to happen. Bob answered that the Board has already committed to do it, and he has the language from Collins. Chris asked when it would be on the agenda and Piet replied that the information would come from Collins. Chris then asked about the layoffs and Piet said that should be discussed in an executive session. Nancy asked about the status for moving Gymnastics, and Piet said that no official notice had been received. ADJOURNMENT Ross moved to adjourn at 9:20 a.m. and go to executive session to discuss personnel matters. Tom seconded. Approved unanimously. oss Dais; Jr , an McGuey;Administrative Assist j/0 1 BOD/11-13-01 minutes.doc 2 MINUTES WORK SESSION MEETING VAIL PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT d/b/a VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 9:00 A. M. Tuesday, November 27, 2001 Vail Golf Clubhouse, Seasons at the Green Restaurant 1778 Vail Valley Drive MEMBERS PRESENT Chris Moffet, Ross Davis, Tom Saalfeld, Nancy Stevens MEMBERS ABSENT Hermann Staufer STAFF PRESENT Piet Pieters, Bob Trautz, Jean McGuey, Mike Ortiz, Tom Gaylord, Diane Johnson, Wendy Cheff, Lisa Isom, Randy Houseman, Jim Sanders, and Jim Heber TOV MEMBERS PRESENT None OTHERS PRESENT Rick Sackbauer CALL TO ORDER Chris Moffet, in Hermann Staufer's absence, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. GYMNASTICS DISCUSSION Piet opened the discussion by saying that the Gymnastics building will be coming down in April 2002. Currently there are 225 children in the program, 50% of which are Town of Vail residents. Two competitive Gymnastics programs have come on line recently. In 1997, the PEC rejected a design concept that cost $75,000. Various efforts to find other locations - Racquet Club, Cascade Hotel, etc. have not worked out. Red Sandstone is still a possibility, but there are problems with parking and scheduling classes. The cost for design fees for the second phase of Donovan Park was $150,00, so that all together, the District has paid $225,000 in design fees. The options available at this time seem to be only two: 1) To disband the program, or 2) To go to an election in May to increase the mill levy. Chris asked Rick Sackbauer to respond. Rick stated that five years ago, the Sanitation District approached the Board regarding taking down the shops building. At that time, the Sanitation District's drive to stay ahead of the curve was based on wastewater. They have enough wells for water for now and in the future. Have gone through many renditions to purchase the site from the Town of Vail. The Lionshead renovation project seems to be slowing, so now they don't think anything will happen immediately, but regulations are driving the need to build a micro filtration plant so that they can take water from Gore Creek. For this, they can use VR's snowmaking pipes. Their Board will begin discussion on plans for the site but he is 99% sure the building will not come down in April, because design is not complete. 1 r They are proposing a three-story building at the back of the site. The first floor would be their plant, the second floor would be parking for 50 cars, and the top floor, at the Town's request, could be a 9,000 square foot shell that could be finished for a gymnastics facility. Rick quoted costs of $1.8 million, with another $300,000 for contingency to build 18,000 square feet for tenant finish. Someone will have to foot the bill for $2.1 million to build this portion of the plans. Pointed out that the estimate does not include anything for acceleration and deceleration lanes. The $25,000 item for Frontage Road site work is light. Understands that at Donovan Park, the cost was $3.00 a square foot for 78,000 square feet. Ross asked about employee parking, and Rick replied that adding a computerized wastewater and micro filtration plant would add minimal staff. He believes that 50 spaces will be more than enough for whatever staff they need and for a gymnastics facility. Chris asked about their wastewater capacity needs. Rick answered that they don't have to build this building to meet current needs of their constituents. At some point in the near future they will have to expand into the footprint of the old Town shops. With future development of Lionshead and Mountain Bell and other locations, it probably makes economic sense to do the whole site all at once and they are willing to wait a little while. Chris noted that there will be an election in May , and asked when the Sanitation District would be ready to go ahead. Rick replied that they planned on building the micro filtration facility in the summer of 2002, and the wastewater portion in 2003. This will impact the site around the shops, but not the facility itself. Ross asked about the time frame for construction, and Rick said he would have to have staff answer the question. Nancy asked if there had been consideration given to providing two levels of parking, given the Town's parking problems. Rick replied that the Town would like to be able to hold gymnastic meets to bring people into town. The 9,000 square feet allocated is large enough to allow meets. Tom asked about the Sanitation District's needs. Rick replied that the water plant is to meet, exceed, and plan to meet State regulations. Wastewater is a little ahead of the curve on capacity. The Town owns the land, and the Water and Sanitation District has offered them the appraised price. Tom asked about the other sites under discussion. Piet said, that of all sites, Donovan Park was the best. It is already designed, and parking will be available. We need to make up our minds which way to go. 2 Mike added that there are two other Gymnastics program currently operating down-valley. From a programming prospective it would not be wise to terminate our program as there is potential to lose our students. It is imperative that a decision be made as it affects both staff and participants. Tom inquired about leasing a spot down valley. Piet responded that anything outside the Town boundaries is in conflict with the Town's mission to bring people into town. Ross asked if there was any possibility of combining with other governments. Piet replied that there had been no response from anyone on a county-wide facility. Tom asked about the status of the Pavilion, and Piet said that the Town has been holding off, and he believes that discussions will begin again, now that the election is over. Chris asked what the next step would be - should the Board discuss whether to go to an election to build something? Talk to the Town Council about Donovan? Piet replied that nothing could be done without Council's approval in writing. Nancy said that she wanted to make sure that everyone on the Board wants to continue with the Gymnastics program. Mike commented that the space is not good, too small and too noisy. Unless the facility is improved, the other programs will continue to take people away from the VRD program. Piet recommended writing a letter to Council, advising of the intent to pur$ue Donovan Phase H for Gymnastics and Youth Services. The original proposal for this portion was $2.5 million, he can ask the architects for an estimate for a gymnastics facility only. Chris agreed that Donovan should be pursued, but for both entities, including a camp site. Suggested that David Cunningham talk to the Board about how to approach the election. Took a straw vote - Nancy Yes Ross Concerned about financial liability, could be another $50-100,000 in debt service. Would need a high enough amount for construction and ongoing operations. How will it carry itself? Tom Agrees with Ross - needs answer to questions before going to the people. Wants to see programs continue. Chris Has been a priority for her and wants to continue to move forward. The Youth Services piece has gotten lost. Nancy suggested approaching the School Board, but Mike said they will not support a sports team. Nancy added that more marketing is needed to advertise the fact that martial arts and ballet classes are available in addition to gymnastics. Piet said that the design has always been multi- use. 3 t Ross stated that the best long-term solution is an inter-governmental facility, but the County cannot include any Home Rule districts. Chris thanked Rick for his presentation. BOARD INPUT Ross noted that it is good that the Nordic track is in operation and in good condition. Nancy thanked everyone for putting up the bubble and having it ready for the third weekend of the hockey tournament. Chris reported that she has heard from the parents of some middle- school-age children that they love 20 Below. It is hugely popular and very appreciated. Also personally thanked Kari for the birthday parties - this is a great service. STAFF INPUT Lisa Isom reviewed the Nordic Ski Club that she will be managing this winter. She has sent out a flyer to the schools. The program will run from 3:45 to 4:45 p.m. to be finished by dark. It is for children aged 5- 12 only and for classic skiing only. The limit is 6 children per instructor. Dan Wieland will be doing competitive things and his program is being paid by Vail Mountain School. He will be training kids to compete in both classic and skate skiing. Chris asked that the non-competitive flyer also be distributed to VMS. Lisa asked for $10,000 to establish security for the website to allow for registration via credit card. Paul Wertin can help do a lot of work for next summer. To encourage sponsors, wants to be able to list the sponsor and move to their website and back again. This will be an added bonus for Sports and Youth Services. Invited the Board to come to the office and show them how this would work. Wendy stated that they had just placed the new golf pieces, and she, Lisa and Randy are very pleased with them. Still working on the summer brochure to be launched in March. Randy had no updates on golf. Tom Saalfeld asked if Randy had had any calls as a result of the letter, and Randy said that he had only a few out of 2,500 sent out. Tom complimented Randy on the thoroughness of the letter. Diane reported that Youth Services has reorganized a little bit, and Kari will be working with younger children, and Paul with middle school and high school youth. Kari has done well on birthday parties, pre-school and play groups, and did an excellent job with Pre-Kamp. Paul has been assisting the Town and Vail Resorts with New Year's plans. He has also been doing computer work - helping Lisa and setting up a computer lab at KidZone at Red Sandstone. Diane also reported that Youth Services has received two grants from the Town, $1,000 for Family Carnival and money for the grant account. 4 i f ` Tom Gaylord reiterated that the Nordic track had been set and is in excellent condition. The snowshoe track is also set and signs are up. A flier will be distributed this week. Mike reported that the April issue of Runner's World will have a small story on the Vail Mountain running series. Lisa added that this is very valuable PR, as a small ad in Runner's World costs $15,000. Chris suggested trying to get an item in the "My Favorite Run" section of the magazine. Piet invited the Board to attend the staff Christmas party on December 6t1' at Wendy's house. Tom asked about the status of Dobson, and Piet replied that the project is near completion, however, there are some outstanding issues between the Town, the architect and the contractor. We are working to resolve these issues. Ross asked about the fire doors on the upper level and Piet said they were due to be installed on December 150'. ADJOURNMENT Ross motioned to adjourn at 10:15 a.m. Nancy seconded. Approved unanimously. _ -fro oss D rs~r.,~` ( J McGue3,"Administrative Assistard j/ol BoDn 1-27-01 minutes.aoc 5 Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: Nina Timm Vail Local Housing Authority Date: December 18, 2001 Subject: Proposed development at Middle Creek Village Attached to the memorandum is the initial project program that the Vail Local Housing Authority conditionally accepted from Coughlin and Company. This initial project program will be used as the baseline for all changes made to the project by the Developer, the Design Review Board, and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission. This will be used to judge the cost as well as the benefits of the changes to make sure that the project program is still in line with the goals established in the Request For Proposals. The plan that is included in this packet has already been revised based on input from the Planning and Environmental Commission. The total number of units has gone from 148 to 142 and the parking spaces now provided meets the letter of the law, with 63% of the spaces being covered. Additional changes will be made, but this is the baseline for the Housing Authority to either accept or deny the changes. This is packet is being provided to Council simply for information purposes. Middle Creek Village Initial Project Program Submission November 2, 2001 1 Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Ave. - Suite 220 - Boulder, CO 80303 - (303) 443-0330 - (303) 443-1508 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL PROJECT: VLHA - Mountain Bell Site Site Office: P.O. Box 3133 Vail, CO 81658 Tel: 970-949-5100 Fax: 970-949-5599 Reference Number: 0001 TO: Town of Vail FROM: Tim Brekel Vail, CO 81657 DATE: 09 Nov 01 Tel: 970-479-1860 Fax: ATTN: Diana Donovan WE ARE SENDING THE FOLLOWING: Via:: Hand For: Submission Qty Item # Date Description 1 Project Program 02 NOV 01 Mountain Bell Site Project Program 1 Development 30 AUG 01 Development Agreement Agreement 1 Amendment 05 OCT 01 2nd Amendment to the Development Agreement 1 Amendment 31 OCT 01 3rd Amendment to the Development Agreement 1 Master Deed Draft of Master Deed Restriction Restriction 1 Memo 06 NOV 01 Status Update of Land Lease and Deed Restriction 1 Memo 08 NOV 01 Status Update of Land Lease and Deed Restriction #1 1 Memo 08 NOV 01 Status Update of Land Lease and Deed Restriction #2 1 Meeting Minutes 08 NOV 01 VLHA Meeting Minutes from Conference Call 1 Market Study October 2001 Middle Creek Village Market Assessment 1 Letter 26 OCT 01 Letter from VLHA to Coughlin & Co. 1 Letter 09 NOV 01 Process letter from ARC TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTIPLIES THE EFFECT... ® 2000 All Rights Reserved By - Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. ~ I I I REMARKS: Diana, Enclosed please find the above listed information for the VLHA Mountain Bell site project. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. CC: Mike Coughlin Jim Mulligan Nina Timm VLHA Board SIGNED: Tim Brekel File Code: TEAMWORK DIVIDES THE EFFORT AND MULTIPLIES THE EFFECT... ® 2000 All Rights Reserved By Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE AND AGREEMENT Middle Creek Village Initial Project Program THIS CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE AND AGREMEENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into effective as of 11:30 AM Denver, Colorado time on November 12`h, 2001, by and between Vail Housing Authority, a Colorado statutory housing authority ("VLHA"), as special agent for the town of Vail ("Vail") and Coughlin & Company, Inc., a Colorado corporation ("Coughlin"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, VLHA, as special agent for Vail, and Coughlin entered into that certain Development Agreement dated August 30, 2001, as subsequently amended effective on September 4, 2001, October 5, 2001 and October 25, 2001 (collectively, Development Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires the parties to reach mutual agreement and execute an initial Project Program ("IPP") on or before noon on November 12, 2001; and WHEEREAS, VLHA is willing to approve the IPP as submitted by Coughlin, a copy of which is hereby incorporated herein by this reference, expressly subject to certain specific conditions to which Coughlin would agree; and WHEREAS, Coughlin is willing to agree to said express conditions of VLHA's approval of the IPP as submitted; now therefore FOR TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. VLHA hereby accepts the IPP delivered herewith, which IPP is hereby attached hereto and incorporated herein and into the Development Agreement, expressly subject to the following: a. Coughlin hereby acknowledges and agrees that any increases in rents contained in the current IPP attached hereto, except such increases that are expressly provided for in the Deed Restriction provided for under the Development Agreement, shall require the prior written approval of VLHA, which approval shall be in the sole and absolute discretion of VLHA. b. Coughlin further agrees that any increase in the Project Budget as contained in the IPP as attached shall require the prior written approval of VLHA, which approval shall be in the sole and absolute discretion of VLHA. c. Coughlin shall use its best efforts, taking into account prudent business judgement, to incorporate all of VLHA's comments regarding the IPP as set forth on the attached listing of comments, plus any other comments provided to Coughlin by VLHA prior to the final Project Program. 2. To the extent that any provisions herein conflict in any manner with the terms of the Development Agreement, the provisions herein shall control at all times. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunder set their hands and seals on this 12`h day of November, 2001 in full understanding and agreement to the terms hereof and with the full intent to be bound hereby. [Signatures are set forth on following page] VLHACond Vail Housing Authority, a Colorado statutory housing authority BYJA ~MAAr' `AA Nina Timm, a thorized agent Coughlin & Company, Inc. a Colorado corporation BY: V UUVI~ , Michael P. Coughli', ecutive Vice President VLFIACond ree- t2 /VOJO Middle Creek Village The Economics of Rent Caps Monthly Rental Rates, per unit Annual Middle Total Middle Creek vs. Per Unit for All Creek_ Market Market Difference Units Starting Rent $1,141 $1,141 Annual Increase 2.00% 5.00% Year 1 1,164 1,198 ($34.23) ($410.76) ($60,792) 2 1,187 1,258 ($70.86) ($850.27) ($125,840) 3 1,211 1,321 ($110.01) ($1,320.14) ($195,381) 4 1,235 1,387 ($151.84) ($1,822.05) ($269,663) 5 1,260 1,456 ($196.48) ($2,357.77) ($348,950) 6 1,285 1,529 ($244.10) ($2,929.17) ($433,518) 7 1,311 1,606 ($294.85) ($3,538.21) ($523,656) 8 1,337 1,686 ($348.91) ($4,186.96) ($619,670) 9 1,364 1,770 ($406.46) ($4,877.58) ($721,882) 10 1,391 1,859 ($467.70) ($5,612.35) ($830,628) 11 1,419 1,951 ($532.81) ($6,393.69) ($946,265) 12 1,447 2,049 ($602.01) ($7,224.10) ($1,069,167) 13 1,476 2,152 ($675.52) ($8,106.25) ($1,199,724) 14 1,506 2,259 ($753.58) ($9,042.92) ($1,338,352) 15 1,536 2,372 ($836.42) ($10,037.06) ($1,485,484) 16 1,566 2,491 ($924.31) ($11,091.74) ($1,641,577) 17 1,598 2,615 ($1,017.52) ($12,210.21) ($1,807,111) 18 1,630 2,746 ($1,116.32) ($13,395.88) ($1,982,591) 19 1,662 2,883 ($1,221.03) ($14,652.34) ($2,168,547) 20 1,695 3,027 ($1,331.95) ($15,983.36) ($2,365,537) TO: All VLHA Members FROM: Kris Friel DATE: November 5, 2001 RE: New Project Program In order to save time, costs, and trees, Coughlin has not reprinted several items that are unchanged from the Initial Project Program Submission. To complete your new Project Program, please remove the following items in their manila folders from your old binder (yellow) and put them behind Tab 6 in the new binder (blue): ALTA Survey Preliminary Plat Existing Conditions Survey Topographic Map Slope Analysis Conceptual Utility Plan (although this will most likely change) You do not need to save the conceptual site and grading plans, as new plans are included in the new binder. I have printouts of financing scenarios #2 and #3, which are NOT included in your binders. Let me know if you would like copies. I also have the primary components of the Project Program in electronic form (which I think we required.) Mike Coughlin gave me a brief overview of the new submittal. Please call me at 479-2454 if you have questions. I am happy to forward comments to Mike. It would be helpful if I could pass along any concerns you may have before the end of the week. s Middle Creek Village Initial Project Program Submission • November 2, 2001 NOTE: All materials included herein represent the best information available to the Development Team as of November 9, 2001. Per the • Development Agreement, budgets, schedules, and plans will be updated periodically as appropriate. • The Initial Project Program is hereby accepted and is incorporated into the Development Agreement, dated August 30, 2001 between Coughlin & Company, Inc. and Town of Vail Local Housing Authority as Exhibit A. Executed to be effective as of the of November, 2001. Town of Vail Local Housing Authority, a Colorado statutory housing authority By: Its: Developer: Coughlin & Company, Inc., a Colorado Corporation By: Its: 0 Middle Creek Village Initial Project Program Submission Table of Contents 1. Overview 2. Unit Mix and Unit Floor Plans 3. Financing Options (Narrative) S 4. Project Budget for Selected Financing Option Includes Unit Mix, Sources and Uses of Funds, 20 Year Operating Pro Forma S. Preliminary Parking Management Plan 6. Project Plans 7. Project Schedule • Middle Creek Village Project Program Submission Coughlin & Company is pleased to submit the Initial Project Program, as required under Section 2(a) of the Development Agreement, as executed on August 30`h, and as amended thereafter. As you know, this program represents the unit mix that the Board and staff of the Vail Local Housing Authority and Coughlin & Company agreed to submit to The Housing Collaborative, which occurred on October 23, 2001. The Housing Collaborative has completed an assessment of the this unit mix and has concluded that this mix is supported by the demand in Vail. In addition to responding to the market assessment, this submission also attempts to respond to the recommendations and comments that have emerged from the ongoing discussions between VLHA, the Town of Vail Planning Staff, and the Town Council and Planning and Environmental Commission over the last several weeks. The purpose of this section is to list the members of our Development Team, provide a brief narrative overview of the planned program for the development, ownership, and operation of the project, and introduce the three major components of the Project Program which are discussed in more detail in this submission package. Overview of Program for Development Coughlin & Company, as Developer, will undertake, oversee, finance, and operate the development of the rental multifamily community to be located on the Mountain Bell site within the Town of Vail. The goal of the development, as set forth in detail in this submission and in the Development Agreement, is to provide housing for local employees at affordable rental rates. In this endeavor, Coughlin & Company will seek an environmentally sensitive design for the project that is aesthetically appropriate for its high profile location at the main entrance to the Town of Vail. This design must, of course, reflect a level of quality that allows for the long- term maintenance of the project, while providing reasonable and economical First Costs that are consistent with the goal of providing affordable housing. Coughlin & Company will serve as the Managing Member of the for profit entity that will own and operate the project, and will raise the equity funds that are described in this submission and will be required to complete the initial capitalization of the Project. Coughlin & Company will also pursue a financing program for the project that is intended primarily to address the needs pf the Vail market, and secondarily, to make the best use of state and federal financing vehicles and programs that result in the lowest possible rental rates for tenants. The project will be operated and managed according to the highest industry standards for affordable rental housing, as outlined and described in the Development Agreement. Coughlin • Property Management will employee full time staff, some of whom will live at the project. This on-site management approach allows continuous monitoring of the upkeep of the project, • awareness of tenant activities and issues, and responsiveness to urgent situations. Third party vendors will provide selected services to the project including landscape maintenance, snow removal, janitorial services, and trash removal. We believe that the program of the Development Team, as presented in this submission, successfully addresses the goal for a first rate, affordable rental housing development. Development Team As you know, our development team consists of the same group of professionals and consultants whose resumes were presented to you during the RFP process. For purposes of clarity, the Development Team members and their primary responsibilities are as follows: Coughlin & Company, Inc. Managing Member of Ownership Entity Underwriter and Syndicator of Debt and Equity Financing required to complete the Project Property Manager, through its affiliate, Coughlin Property Management Odell Architects Project Architect • Shaw Construction General Contractor EDAW, Inc. Landscape Architects KL&A of Colorado Structural Engineer Architectural Energy Corp. Sustainable Design Consultant Peak Land Consultants Civil Engineer Additional consultants and professionals will be added to the team, as necessary, as the development process progresses. An organization chart that has been prepared by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. is attached for reference at the end of this Section. Proiect Components The main components of the Project Program are: 1) Project Schedule Architectural Resource Consultants, a consultant for the Town of Vail, has offered • to prepare a project schedule which is to be inserted in this submission. Architectural Resources Consultants has put this schedule together based on input . from the Development Team, VLHA, and the Town of Vail. This development and construction schedule is predicated on achieving the public approvals and entitlements, etc. that are required prior to securing financing and commencing construction. Based on the progress that we have achieved to date and the apparent community support for the project, we believe that this schedule is a reasonable anticipation of the likely time required to complete the project and its component activities. 2) Project Plans There are three main components of the Project Plans, including: a) Site Plan - The current site plan has been developed by Odell Architects and Peak Land Consultants, Inc. and has been developed in response to comments and suggestions made by the Town of Vail planning staff, VLHA, and other Town of Vail entities. While it is expected to continue to evolve and change based on future input from numerous entities, it represents the current conceptual approach to the development of the site. b) Exterior Elevations - These have been previously submitted to the VLHA through our RFP responses, and continue to represent the intended architectural character for the project. Reduced color copies were provided in the previous Initial Project Program Submission of September 4`h in Section 5; • duplicate black and white copies are included herein. The next phase of design, over the course of the next 2 or so months, will begin to reflect adjustments and modifications to the exterior elevations as we "fine tune" the site, further develop the design, complete our engineering, and begin our submission materials for the Vail Design Review Board. c) Floor Plans - Enclosed herein in Section 2 are the current conceptual floor plans that correspond with the unit types and unit sizes that were submitted to the Housing Collaborative in conjunction with the completion of the Market Assessment. These unit floor plans will, of course, continue to evolve and adjust over time as we focus on stacking, constructability, construction cost, the exact configuration of each building, etc. The Development team anticipates that alternate designs for some or all of the unit types may be required or desirable prior to the completion of the final plans, although the overall size, amenity package, and feeling of each unit is anticipated to be largely in keeping with these submitted unit floor plans. Section 2 also contains a stacking diagram, which reflects a schematic vertical layout of the units, building by building. 3) Project Budget • Attached in Section 4 are the preliminary Project Budget and the preliminary 20- . Year Pro Forma. This budget reflects the unit mix and rental rates that have been discussed by VLHA and Coughlin & Company and which have been validated in the Market Assessment. The First Costs represent our estimate of the costs associated with implementing this program, which is subject to refinement and adjustment as more details on soil conditions, required parking, Town of Vail requirements, CDOT requirements, etc., are identified and quantified. Shaw Construction prepared its estimate in light of the Conceptual site plan, Conceptual Grading Plan, unit floor plans, unit mix, and unit stacking diagram which are included in this submission. Per the Development Agreement, the construction budget will be updated periodically as refinements to the design occur, detailed soil condition information is available, parking requirements and parking area designs are finalized, and we receive comments and other input, including comments from the Town of Vail's PEC and DRB. Changes in construction costs will result in changes to the unit rental rates. The letter prepared by Shaw Construction that accompanies the current budget estimate details the assumptions that are imbedded in this budget and lists other qualifications to the estimate. A specific discussion of Project Financing Options and Project Financing recommendations is attached hereto. • • iviiaaie ureeK HrroroaDie mousing rroject Organizational Chart 13SEP01 I Town of Vail Land Owner Vail Local Housing Authority Board of Directors Special Fiduciary Agent for the TOV 1 Mr. Mark Ristow Vail Local Housing Authority Chairman of the Board IM Nina Timm Town of Vail & Vail Local Housing Authority Executive Director r r ~ Coughlin 8 Company Technical Analysis Team Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Fairfield and Woods,PC Developer I Project Controls Legal Team Developer's Architect Markel/Needs Study Consultant Program Manager I Mr. Jim Mulligan, Esq. Odell Architects Housing Collaborative, Inc. Lead Counsel Financial Analyst cost control LEEDS Consultant Colorado Housing & Finance Authority Support Staff I AEC, Inc. . . Civil Engineering Schedule Monitoring Structural Engineer Peak Land Consultants, Inc. KL&A Structural Engineer, Inc. Geotechnlcal Engineering Development Agreement Administrator Landscape Architect Koechlein Enginering, Inc. Edaw, Inc. 1 Hazardous Materials Engineering Project Websltellnfofmatlon Hub Developer's Contractor Stewart Environmental Shaw Construction Hydrology Child Education Center Peak Land Conuitsnis, Inc. I New Facility Mechanical Dasig n18ullder TBD Wetlands Consultant Montane Evironmental Learning Tree Electrical DeslgOBuilder TBD Traffic Engineering TDA, Inc. ABC Center Developer's Property Manager Coughlin Properly Management, Inc .1 1 picurrent projectsUddle CreeMOrganizalional Chart.doc Page 1 of 1 ® 2001 All rights reserved by • Year Pro Forma. This budget reflects the unit mix and rental rates that have been discussed by VLHA and Coughlin & Company and which have been validated in the Market Assessment. The First Costs represent our estimate of the costs associated with implementing this program, which is subject to refinement and adjustment as more details on soil conditions, required parking, Town of Vail requirements, CDOT requirements, etc., are identified and quantified. Shaw Construction prepared its estimate in light of the Conceptual site plan, Conceptual Grading Plan, unit floor plans, unit mix, and unit stacking diagram which are included in this submission. Per the Development Agreement, the construction budget will be updated periodically as refinements to the design occur, detailed soil condition information is available, parking requirements and parking area designs are finalized, and we receive comments and other input, including comments from the Town of Vail's PEC and DRB. Changes in construction costs will result in changes to the unit rental rates. The letter prepared by Shaw Construction that accompanies the current budget estimate details the assumptions that are imbedded in this budget and lists other qualifications to the estimate. A specific discussion of Project Financing Options and Project Financing recommendations is attached hereto. Middle Creek Village Unit Description This section contains the following information regarding the proposed unit mix and unit configuration for Middle Creek Village: 1) A summary of the compatibility of the proposed unit mix with the Market Assessment completed by the Housing Collaborative on October 30, 2001. 2) Conceptual Floor Plans, prepared by Odell Architects, including a discussion of the financial restrictions that would apply to certain of the units relating to the occupant's household income. 3) A diagram prepared by Odell Architects, which reflects a vertical stacking program to accommodate the proposed unit mix. 4) An overview of certain key amenities and assumptions that relate to the unit design. 5) A copy of the Middle Creek Village Market Assessment prepared by the Housing Collaborative in October 2001. • Middle Creek Village Discussion of Unit Mix and Housing Collaborative Market Assessment OVERVIEW Members of the Vail Local Housing Authority, Coughlin & Company, the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority and The Housing Collaborative have engaged in ongoing meetings and discussions since August, 2001 regarding the appropriate unit mix and rental rates for Middle Creek Village. The Housing Collaborative has been engaged by the Town of Vail to assess the appropriateness and level of acceptable in the market of the proposed unit mix. In this effort, several scenarios have been analyzed, and a rework of an initial program occurred to respond to some feedback received from the Housing Collaborative in September 2001. A revised unit mix and program, which was mutually developed by Coughlin & Company and VLHA, was submitted to the Housing Collaborative on October 23, 2001; that submission is the basis for the final report that is attached herein. The overall conclusion of the Housing Collaborative is a strong statement of support for the proposed unit mix and rental rates. • UNIT MIX The proposed unit mix in this submission differs slightly from the unit mix submitted to The Housing Collaborate in that this submission reflects 8 fewer units. This submission reflects 148 units, versus 156 in the Market Assessment of the Housing Collaborative. The reduction in units responds to the stacking plan included herein and certain site considerations, including parking requirements. As this program reflects fewer units, the conclusions of the Market Assessment are not compromised in any way, and may be strengthened. Four unit types have been included in the proposed unit mix. The percentage of each unit type has been selected to respond to comments in the initial Market Assessment, the opinions of Coughlin & Company, VLHA, and certain members of the broader Vail Community that have been consulted. In addition, half of the total units (exclusively in the alcove studio or I bedroom format) are intended to participate in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program and will be subject to the restrictions and requirements thereof. The remaining 50% of the units (including some alcove studios and 1 bedroom units, and all of the 2 and 3 bedroom units) will only be subject to the Master Deed restrictions applicable to Middle Creek Village and will not participate in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. • The specific unit breakdown is proposed to be as follows: 1) Alcove Studio Units - 61 in Total The market study indicates a dramatic shortage of studio and 1-bedroom units in the Vail market, and in addition, several local business leaders and employers indicated that, if affordable, this unit type would be extremely attractive due primarily to the privacy that it affords the occupants. In addition, we believe that people who are currently living in roommate situations may be candidates for this unit type. It is proposed that 57 alcove studio units be restricted to occupants whose annual income is at or below 60% of Eagle County's area median income, with an initial rental rate of $693.00 per month. For a single person living in this unit, the maximum household income for 2002 is projected to be approximately $30,000; for 2 people living in this unit, the maximum household income would be approximately $35,000. These income restrictions allow the project to utilize the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, which is a significant source of subsidy for the cost of constructing the entire project. The number of households that qualify at this income cap was discussed in great detail in the Market Assessment, which indicates strong market demand for this restricted unit. In addition to the 57 alcove studios in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program, the proposed mix • includes 4 additional identical units that would be rented for $850.00 per month. Tenants in these 4 units would not be subject to the income restrictions of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. The Market Assessment also indicates sufficient demand for this unit type at the suggested rent levels. The alcove studio unit has been designed to provide a separate and screened sleeping area, a walk-in closet, and full size kitchen. It is intended to provide many of the same benefits of a 1 bedroom, and comfortably accommodate an individual tenant or couple. 2) 1 Bedroom Units -18 in Total Of this unit type, 14 units would participate in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program and would rent for $733.00 per month. These units would be subject to the same general income restrictions described above for the Alcove Studio units that participate in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. The remaining 4 units would rent for $975.00 per month. 3) 2 Bedroom Units - 24 in Total The market assessment indicates significant demand for this unit type, and CHFA representatives found the flexible nature of a two bedroom unit (in terms of the variety of occupant configurations that it can accommodate) to be appealing over the long term. As a result, there are 24 2-bedroom units, which represents 16% of • the total units in the project. These units are designed with 1 larger bedroom, which includes a walk-in closet, and 1 smaller bedroom. The larger room is . intended to accommodate 2 people, if so desired, while the smaller bedroom is intended to accommodate 1 person. Due to compliance and income qualification difficulties in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program for units that are inhabited by multiple wage earners, no 2 or 3 bedroom units will participate in the tax credit program. 4) 3 Bedroom Units - 45 in Total In order to address the demand for units that are shared in a typical roommate configuration, 3 bedroom units have been incorporated to provide an affordable rental rate per occupant, and increased density on the site. RENTAL RATES The rental rates in the proposed mix are below the current market, as indicated in the data provided by the Housing Collaborative. When compared to the market for similarly situated units, Coughlin & Company believes that in some cases, the proposed unit rents are up to $400.00 per month below the market rate rents for units of similar configuration. UNIT SIZE AND DESIGN The units, as designed by Odell Architects, are larger than reflected in previous formal submissions to VLHA. This increase in unit size has been in direct response to comments and . suggestions from the Housing Collaborative, the Vail Town Council, and other government bodies in Vail. The result of this increase in unit size has been a decrease in the rent per square foot associated with each unit type. While the units are still somewhat smaller than what would be typically found in the Denver suburban market, for example, the unit size (with an emphasis on storage) appears to be appropriate and responsive to the Vail market. CONCLUSIONS: The unit mix has been carefully analyzed and thoroughly discussed by Coughlin & Company and VLHA. The primary objective of the proposed unit mix is to provide units that respond to the demands of the market and that can be delivered with the lowest possible rents. The conclusions of the Housing Collaborative support this unit mix, rental rates, and rent restrictions. The development team is very enthusiastic about the quality of the design and the livability of each floor plan. Furthermore, this unit mix appears to be compatible with attractive financing programs, which will result in the lowest possible rent rates given the design and requirements of the program. • Middle Creek Village Overview of Unit Amenities The current unit plan and stacking diagram assumes certain amenities and unit features, some components of which are discussed below. As design progresses and as construction budgets are further developed, some amenities may be added and some may be altered or removed. The following represents the Development Team's current assumptions: • Annliances - Each unit will feature a full kitchen, complete with refrigerator, full size oven and range top, disposal, dishwasher, and microwave oven. • Common Areas - Adjacent to the leasing and management office will be a tenant lounge that will include a common area for tenant use. This common area is currently planned to include tenant mailboxes, a cyber cafe, television lounge, and party room with appropriate kitchen facilities (minimal - exclusively for refrigeration and warm up). In the current site plan, this common area is located at the main entrance to the project, and directly in front of the bus stop. It is anticipated that tenants waiting for the bus will be able to wait inside this building during the hours that this building is • open. • Outside Area - Exterior amenities, including a central barbecue/picnic area and some form of recreation will be provided at Middle Creek Village. • Laundrv - Laundry facilities will be provided on site at two or more central laundry locations. These facilities will feature coin operated equipment. Individual washer/dryer hookups may be evaluated as a design upgrade in certain or all units, although this would represent a substantial increase in the budget (approximately $401,000 per SHAW construction) and is not a feature that is typically found in affordable housing communities. • Ceiline Heieght - Ceilings are planned at 8 feet, the common ceiling dimension for multifamily properties. As most units are south facing, the Development Team intends to create a sense of space and light throughout the units through a southern solar orientation and generously sized windows. Increasing ceiling heights above 8 feet is very costly primarily because most dimensional building materials (2x4s, sheets of drywall, etc.) come in 8-foot lengths. In additional, most public bodies involved in affordable housing financing discourage upgrades of this kind. In top floor locations, the Development Team will investigate the possibility of increasing ceiling heights and/or adding lofts. If this proves to be feasible, it would make sense • to charge an additional premium for these units to offset the additional costs of constructing the lofts. • Balconies - As building plans are further developed, the inclusion of a limited number of balconies will be explored. There are both positives and negatives associated with balconies from a management perspective. On the positive side, a balcony is a nice amenity and assists in the renting of the unit. It can also justify a premium rent, and it can improve the architectural variety of the outside of the building. On the negative side, balconies often become additional tenant storage area and can fill up with unsightly tenant items. For this reason, neighbors of affordable housing projects typically object to the inclusion of balconies in the project, as was the case at Buzzard Park. Balconies are often relatively quick to show signs of deterioration and wear and tear and can become costly to maintain over time. • Rental Furniture - Coughlin & Company intends to offer furniture rental for tenants at Middle Creek. The exact furniture available and rental rates will be developed prior to the marketing of the project to prospective tenants. The rental of furniture may be provided by third party vendors or by the project itself. Such rental would require additional deposits from tenants and monthly rental fees. Based on the furniture provided, monthly rental rates would probably range from $35.00 per month to $100.00 + per month. • • Middle Creek Village Alcove Studio I A r. ! , I ' 1 IJ s s ~ j! I t~ ! O g , st 11 i r Number of Units: Approximate Unit Size: 364 square feet Rental Rate: $693.00 per month Bathrooms: 1 bathroom Tenant Income Restrictions: Eligibility for this unit would be restricted to households that earn 60% or less of Eagle County's Area Median Income. For 2002, the maximum qualifying income is estimated to be $30,000 for a 1-person household or $35,000 for a 2-person household. • Based on October 25, 2001 Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. Middle Creek Village Alcove Studio iIT i I ~~15 i n I t I~11 i 5 ~ • Number of Units: 4 Approximate Unit Size: 364 square feet Rental Rate: $850.00 per month Bathrooms: 1 bathroom Tenant Income Restrictions:. No income restrictions would apply to tenants. Rental rates and increases in rental rates would be subject to Deed Restrictions. Based on October 25, 2001 Initial Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. Middle Creek Village 1 Bedroom Unit i i 11s 0 F;::EI o I I t r , r-~ • Number of Units: 14 Approximate Unit Size: 480 square feet Rental Rate: $733.00 per month Bathrooms 1 full bath Tenant Income Restrictions: Eligibility for this unit would be restricted to households that earn 60% or less of Eagle County's Area Median Income. For 2002, the maximum qualifying income is estimated to be $30,000 for a 1-person household or $35,000 for a 2-person household. • Based on October 25, 2001 Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. Middle Creek Village 1 Bedroom Unit I-o' rr i I. o O~ O • Number of Units: 4 Approximate Unit Size: 480 square feet Rental Rate: $975.00 per month Bathrooms 1 full bath Tenant Income Restrictions: No income restrictions would apply to tenants. Rental rates and increases in rental rates would be subject to Deed Restrictions. • Based on October 25, 2001 Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. Middle Creek Village 2 Bedroom Unit I I ~ V 00 00 000 t I i as Y Number of Units: 26 Approximate Unit Size: 728 square feet Rental Rate: $1,350.00 per month Bathrooms: 1 bathroom Tenant Income Restrictions: No income restrictions would apply to tenants. Rental rates and increases in rental rates would be subject to Deed Restrictions. • t Based on October 25, 2001 Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. Middle Creek Village 3 Bedroom Unit AV4 r-r - O I O O X fr-v O l 4 f I t i Number of Units: 44 Approximate Unit Size: 900 square feet Rental Rate: $1,765.00 per month Bathrooms: 2 bathrooms Tenant Income Restrictions: No income restrictions would apply to tenants. Rental rates and increases in rental rates would be subject to Deed Restrictions. Based on October 25, 2001 Initial Project Program Budget. In addition to rental rate, tenant pays for utilities. 38 3a Sa $a 4 44, 13~ $a Sa 3a 3a 3a a ~ Xd gd .04 38 U 3b 3b Sa 3a 3a S 3b 4 e s 3b 3, 38 3b 3b td t 5 yd g 38 gad a 2 1 11S3 y7 q$ ,A4 2 $a ~ AS, Sa 3b 3, 33 aid 34 b p v 38 gd s 1 3h 3b ud 3a '4 g-d 5d . a 2 Z Z d ed $ S S S S S S CID S $ $ $ qtd a.tl 2 3a 38 ud Kfi g 2 2 Sa Sa a gad I y> R 1 1 1 9 S. fia 3a 2 2 3b 3b $ S$ S $ $ 3b I 3 2 ad. u 38 $ a $ S $ s 3b qd 2 'td $ $ $ lld .4 ~ ~ 96d --L- S S S S S 9ps g~YggH 4 $ 3a ~,,yyp 1 i564 q 10Y°°." b'.d 2 } $-d- { S$ S g S S t % R S ~deialgG 30 woos di 1 xd ~ I ~d 8a~'gF asd 'k E 7r'°8 Ba~q A Stac~n9fliagrams • Middle Creek Village Initial Project Program Submission Housing Collaborate Market Assessment • VAIL LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORi i 1f Middle Creek Village Market Assessment October 2001 i • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 1 of 75 • TABLE of CONTENTS • .p • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 2 of 75 M IDDLE CREEK VILLAGE - MARKET ASSESSMENT Overview The Vail Local Housing Authority is proposing to develop the Middle Creek Village site for rental housing. According to the Request for Proposal, which sought a candidate to be the developer for this site, the goal was "to design a project that establishes a new benchmark foremployee housing design." Multiple goals were identified for the project, including: A 'primary focus to provide affordable fental housing for seasonal renters maintained in perpetuity; • A secondary goal was to provide housing suited to long-term renters within the Town of Vail; • To provide an early childhood learning center meeting the needs for 65 full-time students with a five-day-a-week operation from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm on site. Purpose of Market Assessment The primary purpose of the market assessment is to assess the demand for rental housing within the Town of Vail, including: • • An estimate of the number of renter households in Eagle County; • An estimate of the number of renters, by household size, household type and income distribution; • An estimate of the number of renters with incomes that meet tax credit guidelines; and, • An estimate of the number of renters employed in the Town of Vail. j In addition, the market assessment focuses on comparable properties located throughout Eagle County. This includes an assessment of the number, bedroom configuration s, square footage, amenities and rents of below market-rate units that are available in 'he area. Because Middle Creek Village proposes to house both seasonal and long-term workers, projects that provide housing to either or both populations were reviewed. Also, there are peculiarities in the performance.of seasonal worker housing and longer-term employee housing that are specific to resort communities. These include the length of leases, number of roommates allowed for different bedroom configurations, parking requirements, unit sizes and potential conflicts between seasonal and longer-term employees. Because of this, projects located in resort communities outside of Eagle County were also contacted. These included: • Big Billie's in Telluride; • Marolt Ranch in Aspen; • Maroon Creek in Aspen; • Breck Terrace in Breckenridge; and, • Tenderfoot in Keystone. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 3 of 75 Consultant Qualifications This market study was undertaken by RRC Associates, Inc. on behalf of The Housing Collaborative, LLC. The Housing Collaborative consists of three firms that specialize in market studies, housing needs assessments and housing policy analysis, and program design and implementation.. All members of The Housing Collaborative were involved in the preparation of this study and include: Kathy. McCormick, principal of McCormick and Associates, Inc..•has been. concentrating on housing market analysis studies during the past three years. She was responsible for the primary analysis completed for the Middle Creek Village Market Study. The firm has also conducted and participated in seven comprehensive. housing needs assessments, through which primary research was used to evaluate the needs of various. population segments. Ms. McCormick has completed several market studies for affordable housing projects, including Aspen, Brighton and a project proposed for the Stapleton redevelopment site. Prior to forming. her own firm, she worked with the City of Boulder and the Housing Authority of the City of Boulder for over 13 years. During her tenure, she oversaw the acquisition and development of affordable housing for the special populations as well as mixed income rental housing. Rees Consulting, Inc. is an established market analysis firm that specializes in rental housing. Over the past 10 years, the firm's principal, Melanie Rees, has completed numerous rrsbrket studies in Colorado for both free-market and income-restricted projects. Clients have included private developers, municipal and county governments, • housing authorities and non-profit development groups. She has completed several market studies in resort communities and provided insights about potential market performance for Middle Creek Village. Ms. Rees was the primary author of the 1999 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment. Chris Cares of RRC Associates, Inc. is highly experienced in creating housing projects and policies Shat respond to the special opportunities found in resort communities. The firm of RRC Associates, Inc., of which Mr. Cares is a staff member, conducted the Housing Needs Assessment survey for Eagle County and provided the information from that study f& the Middle Creek Village Market Study. Mr. Cares conducted focus groups for the Mountain Bell site (a precursor to the Middle Creek Village development). His firm was the primary contractor for this project. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 4 of 75 • Information Sources • The primary source of information for preparing this report is the Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment that was completed in July 1999. This information is based on a distribution of 3,600 household surveys to Eagle County residents. Of this number, 794 were returned for a 22% response rate, with information received on 1,046 adults. ' In addition, information about seasonal employees was obtained through an employer survey that was conducted as part of this Housing Needs Assessment; • Information from the 2000 Census has been used to supplement the information obtained through the household and employer surveys obtained for the Eagle County Needs Assessment; • Information obtained from the Colorado State Department of Labor; and, • Interviews conducted by McCormick and Associates, Inc. and RRC Associates, Inc. Sources of information are noted on all tables or applicable sections. Tables' references to "household survey" refer to the information that was obtained through the survey of households that was completed as part of the 1999 Eagle County Housing Needs • Assessment. It is important to note that the under-representation among renters and seasonal workers is likely for both the Census and Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment. The Census was conducted in the spring, which is traditionally a time when seasonal workers leave the area. In our experience, seasonal workers, renters and low income households are less likely to respond to household surveys. i) s . The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 5 of 75 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) will develop Middle Creek Village. The VLHA was recently named by the Town of. Vail Council to further local efforts to produce housing that would be affordable to employees in the Town of Vail. Middle Creek Village will be the.first development that,will. be undertaken by this group. Coughlin and Company was selected as.the developer forithis project.. - As proposed, this project will consist of 156 units that will offer studios, one-, two- and three-bedroom ;units..-This project will be built at the "Mountain Bell" site, located north of Interstate 70. -The site currently.houses a day care center and is steeply sloped. There is one primary access to the site at this time. As proposed, 64 of the "alcove studio" units and 14 one-bedroom units will be developed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), with rents that are affordable to households earning 60% of the AMI. The balance of the units will be deed-restricted per Vail requirements. The following chart indicates the proposed bedroom configurations, square footage and rents for this project. These rents do not include utilities. Proposed Program Number of Bedroom Finance Program Square Proposed • Units Configuration Footage Rent 64 Studio LIHTC - 60% of AMI 364 $693 4 364 Market 364 $850 14 1 BR/1 BA LIHTC - 60% of AMI 480 $733 4 1 BR/1 BA Market 480 $975 26 2BR/1 BA Market 728 $1,350 44 3BR/2BA Market 900 $1,765 As proposed, this project would offer 270 bedrooms. Studios and one-bedroom units would be targeted to employees who remain in the area year round, whereas the two- and three-bedroom units may be targeted to workers who come to the area to work a season. This project is targeted to unrelated roommates, single persons and couples. It is not expected that the families with children would be drawn to this site. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 6 of 75 • Number of Bedrooms Bedroom Total Configuration Number of Number of Units Bedrooms Studios 68 68 1 BR 18 18 2 BR 26 52 3 BR 44 132 Total 156 270 It is anticipated that surface parking will be offered. As part of this market study, efforts to determine the value of assigned parking and/or covered parking were assessed. In addition, the need for storage, laundry services, unit size and site amenities were reviewed. This was done in anticipation of further refinements to amenities and overall site design. Project Location and Services Middle Creek Village will be located on the west side of Interstate 70 in Vail, Colorado. • This site is commonly referred to as the "Mountain Bell site", because of a 70-foot, monolithic structure that provides some form of telecommunications for the Vail Valley. It is quite noticeable from the highway and serves as a landmark for the area. The tower would remain after the development of this site. Currently, a day care center exists at the site. As planned, the day care center would be re-built adjacent to Middle Creek Village. A road currently leads up to the site, and it is anticipated that improvements would be made to accommodate a heavier volume of traffic due to the development. Other improvements and requirements are still under negotiation with the Town of Vail. There do not appear to be many other uses surrounding the site, with the exception of some larger residential homes. The parcel is wooded and steeply sloped and has a tranquil feeling. The parcel faces south toward the Vail Ski Resort, offering good views, and the northern exposures look up a mountain that is also wooded. There are not any primary services, such as shopping, located immediately adjacent to the site. It is well located relative to employment, as the primary resort area, which includes skiing, retail shops, restaurants, the Ski Museum and other services, is north of the site, across Interstate-70 and less than two miles away. A drawback is that there is not any pedestrian access to this area, although the public transportation system provides good service to all areas of Vail and would be extended to include this project. This means that residents will be able to use public transit and as parking is at a premium in Vail, it is likely that their cars will remain parked at the site most of the time. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 7 of 75 • Primary grocery shopping is located north of Interstate-70, less than five miles west of the site. This includes both City Market and Safeway. There are numerous small convenience stores located in Vail Village. The hospital is less than three miles from the site, as are other primary medical services. Several banks are located in Vail as well. Recreation abounds in the Vail Valley and includes skiing, both downhill and cross- country, golf, tennis and.numerous hiking trails. There is an ice skating arena and athletic club that could be used by residents. in Vail 4 r. MIddIs Ctask_Mllag ` Aed.6Anaatonei_kmrrNetyScriotl: " _ r s ~F~t Cnm angnce °tore. rls Market° bank' ry^.~ " N"r" Cralg5Market o uo~ ,a VallA:11 ciP°' ? C ru'x• r1~? -r Citymarket - SaIBNd9 r ;'~Ve1lvalley klwlcalcenler w-11 -i , 14 S~i ~i Amenities All of the units will have dishwashers, microwave ovens and exterior storage that is located adjacent to the front door of each unit. Walk-in closets will be provided in the studios, one-bedroom units and at least one bedroom in each of the two- and three- bedroom units. Covered parking will be provided for an additional -fee. Site amenities will include a Town of Vail bus stop, outdoor open space and recreation areas, a central barbeque area and a common area within the building that features a cyber cafe and room for residents to use for parties, meetings and related functions. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 8 of 75 Market Area Definition The primary market area for the proposed project is Eagle County, with the Town of Vail providing a more narrowly defined market area. For this study, it was decided to consider all of Eagle County rather than focus solely on employees in the Town of Vail. This is because Eagle County is a "regional market" as far as those seeking housing are concerned. Information is presented on renters within the entire County, with a subset offered for those who are employed in the Town of Vail at the end of the report. In this way, the VLHA can make decisions regarding preferences for renters who currently live and/or work in the Town of Vail. There is also a secondary market for the proposed development consisting of workers currently commuting to work in the Vail Valley from the Lake County/Leadville and Garfield County areas. It should be noted that this market study focuses exclusively on the primary market area in analyzing demand for housing. Because it does not quantify demand from the secondary area, it is a conservative analysis of likely demand for Middle Creek Village. Additional demand is likely to be generated from households currently living in Lake and Garfield Counties who commute to the Vail area for employment. Market Area § 3 t'" ou ?~t+nd ~ lrap~a"'fl+at ~`Ro.~crion y y: r ~ TC~r~e ; ~ K! ~ `~Y i x pS € ~s1 St30 1 1 ToQR4D+xrtam 1264 i•'~a'~Ftsk70A=UgfdemtLS ~ y ra.'we r. J1F4t ~RIaU _ ,:=l3~t3h!~1N3L1D1!3'.~t7p 1 k :acFZrattiFarps[ Farv§t - ; ~ ~ . -;'~d 1 "fi7` q• - ~ LeMS s ...dam i~ w X. ,'~ut gPtOWflr~ } , r MaNet kea cil" crrr ~ . 4~i J Everqr' 000, CZ. reGktlititi~e I h `4 pos. 1ILt7G ~4 ~#~QGG 5F fr~ 4 .r 1 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 9 of 75 • GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MARKETAREA The following sections provide a review of the population in Eagle County and the demographic profile of renters. This includes: • Number of persons in renter households; • Household type; • Age and gender,'. • Household income; • Amount paid for housing; • Type of unit and number of bedrooms in units occupied by renters; and, • Employment. The primary sources of information for the following sections were the 1999 Household Survey conducted as part of the Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment and the 2000 Census. When available, 2000 Census data was used. Total Population According to the 2000 Census, there were 41,306 persons living in 15,148 households in Eagle Count, as well as 353 living in group quarters, for a total population of 41, 659. Of this number, 4,518 people were located in 2,165 households in the Town of Vail, with an additional 13 in group quarters, for a total population of 4,531. Given the fact that the . Census was conducted in April 2000, it is likely that these figures do not include a number of seasonal employees who are typically found in these areas of Colorado. Unrelated roommates accounted for 21.1 % of all households; however, this number is probably low due to the under-representation of renters and seasonal employees overall in the 1999 household survey. Population - 2000 Census Eagle County Town of Vail Population 41,659 4,531 Households 15,148 2,165 The average household size was 2.73 persons in 2000. Owners and Renters The 2000 Census found that 36% of Eagle County households were renters. In the Town of Vail, 48% of households were renters. The average household size of renters was 2.67 persons, and 2.76 persons among those who owned their home. i The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 10 of 75 • Renters and Owners - 2000 Census Eagle County % of HH Vail % of HH Total: 15,148 100% 2,165 100% Owner occupied 9,649 64% 1,133 52% Renter occupied 5,499 36% 1,032 48% Number of Persons - Renters Approximately 43% of renters in Eagle'County consist of two-person households, with another 18% made up of one-person households. About 38%a consist of three or more persons. The average size of renter households was 2.54, with a median of two persons reported. Household Size of Renters - Eagle County # of Persons Percent 2000 Census 1 18.4% 1,010 2 42.9% 2,357 3 15.6% 860 • 4 16.3% 897 5 4.1% 224 6 2.0% 112 7+ 0.7% 37 Total 100.0% 5,499 Source: Household Survey Household'Type According tq the household survey, 48% of renter households in Eagle County consist of couples (230%) and couples with children (24.5°/x). Household Type- Renters Household Type % of HH # of HH Adult living alone 17.7%' 972 Single parent with children 6.8% 374 Couple 23.8% 1,309 Couple with children 24.5% 1,346 Unrelated roommates 21.1% 1,159 Family members and unrelated roommates 4.8% 262 Other 1.4% 75 Total 100.0% 5,499 Source: Household Survey The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 11 of 75 Age According to the 2000 Census, over half of renter householders in Eagle County are under the age of 34 (57%). In Vail, 66% of renter households are under the age of 34. It is important to note that renters in the area tend to be younger, particularly in the Vail area. Age of Renter Householders Eagle County Vail - #ofHH %ofHH #ofHH %ofHH Renter occupied: 5,499 100% 1,032 100% 15 to 24 years 918 17% 216 21% 25 to 34 years 2,221 40% 473 46% 35 to 44 years 1,220 22% 170 16% 45 to 54 years 763 14% 101 10% 55 to 64 years 233 4% 51 5% 65 and older 144 3% 21 1 % Source: 2000 Census Gender i Over half (59%) of renters in Eagle County are females and 41 % are males. . Gender of Renters R Male 4. 41% Male toD Female Female 59% Source: Household Survey Household Income The average household income of renters in Eagle County was $51,538 in 1999, with a median of $50,000. In Eagle County, the average household income for all households was $85,889 and the median was $65,000. In 1999, the median household income for Eagle County was very close to the 1999 median family income estimate of $64,300 provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Housing Collaborative, LLC, Page 12 of 75 The distribution of household income among renter households shows clustering between $20,000 to $60,000, with about 9% below $20,000 and 16% above $80,000. Household Income Distribution - Renters 18% NIP 116%- 111 WIN t 6, _ Less than $10,000 $20,000 $30.000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 S100,000 5150,000 $10,000 to 19,999 to 29,999 to 39,999 to 49,999 to 59,999 to 69,999 to 79,999 to 89,999 to 99,999 to 149,000 and above Source: Household Survey Household Incomes by Percent and Number of Households: Renters l Annual Income % of HH # of HH Less than $10,000 5% 267 $10,000 - 19,999 4% 229 $20,000 - 29,999 12% 649 $30,000 - 39,999 14% 764 $40,000 - 49,999 13% 725 $50,000 - 59,999 17% 955 $60,000 - 69,999 12% 649 $70,000 - 79,999 7% 382 $80,000 - 89,999 5% 267 $90,000 - 99,999 5% 267 $100,000 - 149,000 4% 229 $150,000 and above 2% 114 Total 100% 5,499 Source: Household Survey The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 13 of 75 Area Median Income In 1999, approximately 17% of renter households in Eagle County earned less than 50% of the Area Median Income. Assuming that there were not substantial changes in household income, it is estimated that 17% of the 5,499 renter households (943 households) earn less than 50% of the AML. Another 550 renter households earn 50% to 60% of the Area Median Income. This suggests that there are approximately 1,493 renter households in Eagle County with incomes that would qualify them for some form of housing assistance, including recital units produced using Low Income Housing Tax Credits:. 1999 Area Median Income - Eagle County 1PHH 2PHH 3PHH 4PHH 5PHH <30% AMI $ 13,500 $ 15;450 $ 17,350 $ 19,300 $ 20,850 30% TO 50% AMI $ 22,500 $ 25,700 - 28,950 $ 32,150 $ 34,700 51% TO 60% $ 27,000 $ 30,840 $ 34,740 $ 38,580 $ 41,640 61% to 80% $ 33,450 $ 38,250 $ 43,000 $ 47,800 $ 51,600 80% to 100% AMI $ 45,000 $ 51,400 $ 57,900 $ 64,300 $ 69,400 100%+ $ 54,000 $ 61,680 $ 69,480 $ 77,160 $ 83,280 Source: HUD % of Renter Households 1999 Area Median Income % of Estimated Renter HH Number of HH Under 30% AMI 8.6% 471 30 - 50% AMI 8.6% 471 l 50 - 60% AMI 10.0% 550 60 - 80% AMI 10.0% 550 80 - 100% AMI 22.1% 1,217 100%+ AMI 40.7% 2,238 Total 100.0% 5,499 Source: Household Survey i The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 14 of 75 • The following chart provides a more refined estimate of the number of renter households whose incomes fall within various Area Median Income Categories, adjusted by household size. Using these estimates suggests that roughly 1,494 renter households earning 0% to 60% of the Area Median Income in Eagle County. Renter Households by Area Median Income and Household Size 9PHH 2PHH '3PHH -4PHH 5PHH Total <30% AMI Eligible for Tax 30% TO 50% AMIC redits 51 % TO 60% ~`L12~- 1;111'01x6559 X548 61% to 80% 142 181 154 63 .37 577 81% to 100% AMI 369 215. 169 314 150 1,217 TOTAL 924 825 575 518 446 3,288 Source: Household Survey Unrelated Roommates and Family Members with- Roommates It was acknowledged that there could be persons who are currently living in roommate situations who would prefer to live alone, if affordable and suitable housing were available. To better understand the potential number of single persons, the information for household types was further refined to consider the number of persons living as unrelated roommates or with family members and unrelated roommates. The number of households in this section is slightly different from previous household estimates due to further stratification. It is within 2% of previously reported numbers and is considered to be statistically valid. There are ao estimated 2,418 households that consist of adults living alone, unrelated roommates, family members and unrelated roommates, and other households. The remaining 3,004 renter households consist of couples with and without children and single-parer households. Number of Households by Marital Status/Adults in Household Family members Adult living Unrelated and unrelated # of Adults alone roommates roommates Other Sub-total 1 897 39 39 975 2 39 663 39 741 3 234 156 390 4 234 39 273 5 39 39 Total HH's 936 1,209 195 78 2,418 Source: 1999 Household Survey and 2000 Census • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 15 of 75 • There are an estimated 4,914 adults living in these renter households, of which 3,198 are adults who live in unrelated roommate households. Of these, 41 % are found in two- person households, with 29% found in four-person households. Among family members and unrelated roommates, 468 live in three-person households. This tends to support the perception that couples and one unrelated person are sharing a home in Eagle County. Number of Persons by Marital Status and Adults in Households . Family'members Adult living . Unrelated and unrelated # of Adults -alone roommates roommates Other Sub-total 1 897 39 39 975 2 78 1326 78 1482 3 702 468 1170 4 936 156 1092 5 195 195 Total HH's 975 3198 624 117 4914 Income of Single Persons i The income of individuals was also examined to make a determination of the number of persons who may have incomes that would qualify for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. It appears that there are 2,729 persons living who earn less than 60% of the Area Median Income (shaded area). Another 1,482 persons earn 60% to 100% of the AMI. Number of Individual Adults by 1999 AM[ Category and Marital Status Family members Adult Unrelated & 1999 AEI living alone roommates roommates Other Sub-total Under 30% AMI 81 291 489 30 - 50% AMI 41 s?;' 678 89 808 50 - 60% AMI' - '283;x; h 969 ]-d8 , 1,432 60 - 80% AMI 122 388 89 599 80 - 100% AMI 406 388 89 883 100%+ AMI 41 485 178 703 Total 3,198 624 117 4,914 It is not surprising that most of the individuals who earn less than 60% of the AMI are unrelated roommates. Another 325 are adults who currently live alone and 267 are found with family members and unrelated roommates. No single persons live in the "other" category who also earn incomes in this bracket. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 16 of 75 • Approximately 58% (1,301) persons live or work in Vail. Close to 52% (1,162) work in Vail and only 32% lived in Vail at the time of the survey. Around 26% both live and work in Vail. This suggests that most of the potential single-person renters will be those who work in Vail and live elsewhere. Summary of Individual Adults by AMI Category and Marital Status Adult ` Unrelated Family members and 'living alone roommates unrelated roommates Other Sub-total 0 - 60% AMI 325 1,647 267 0 2,24 % of 30 - 60% AMI who live OR work in Vail: 58.1% 1,301 L % of 30 - 60% AMI who work in Vail: 51.9% 1,16 °o of 30 - 60% AM] who live in Vail: 32.1% 71 of 30 - 60% AMI who live AND work in Vail: 25.9% 58 i The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 17 of 75 • UNIT TYPE AND AFFORDABILITY This section examines the types of units currently occupied by residents, what they pay for rent and what they also believe they could afford. The percent of adults living alone who occupy apartments.is consistent with the number of one-person households who also occupy apartments. Among couples, 26% occupy apartments and: another 26% indicated-they live in condominiums. Among couples with children, 34% are in apartments and another 20% livein single-family homes. Unrelated roommates are fairly evenly distributed among apartments, condominiums and town homes/duplexes..-- Household Type by Unit Type Adult Couple Family members living Single parent with Unrelated and unrelated alone with children Couple children roommates roommates Apartment 69% 20% 26% 34% 30% 29% Condominium 12% 20% 26% 11% 30% 14% Townhouse 30% 14% 9% 20% 14% Duplex 4% 6% 9% 10% 14% Mobile home 4% 30% 11% 11% 3% 14% Single-family house 17% 20% 3% 14% Accessory/caretaker unit 3% Other 12% 3% 3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Household Survey it Consideration was also given to the number of persons in a household by the number of bedrooms in the unit in which they lived. A majority of two-person households (58%) live in two-bedreom units. About half of four-person households lived in three-bedroom units, with 68% of five-person households living in three-bedroom units. This information documents the sharing of bedrooms among larger sized households. Bedroom Configuration by Number of Persons in.Household One Two. Three Four Five Person Persons Persons Persons Persons One Bedroom 80% 19% 5% Two Bedrooms 20% 59% 52% 33% 17% Three Bedrooms 21% 38% 50% 67% Four Bedrooms 2% 5% 17% 17% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Household Survey The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 18 of 75 • Unrelated roommates are most likely to live in two-bedroom units (59%). About 56% of couples with children live in three-bedroom units. Couples without children are more likely to be living in two-bedroom units (44%), although about 29% are living in three- bedroom units. Number of Bedrooms by Household Type Adult Single.._ Couple Family members living -parent with with Unrelated and unrelated alone children Couple children roommates roommates One Bedroom 80% 24% 3% 7% Two Bedrooms 20% 75% 44% 38% 59% 50% Three Bedrooms 25% 29% 56% 21% 33% Four Bedrooms 3% 3% 14% 17% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Household Survey The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 19 of 75 EMPLOYMENT The 1999 Housing Needs Assessment for Eagle County examined employment patterns through a household survey and employer survey. The following sections examine information gleaned from these studies that may be useful in defining populations for whom the Middle Creek Village development could be targeted. Number of Jobs In 1999, there were an estimated 34,936 jobs in Eagle County according to the Colorado State Demographer. This included approximately 5,893 jobs attributed to sole proprietors, with the remaining 29,043 attributed to wage and salaried positions. As might be expected, there is seasonal fluctuation of jobs in Eagle County. Based on 2000 ES202 data, the lowest number of E8202 jobs was reported for May 2000 (24,565), compared to the prior winter peak of 29,951 jobs in March 2000, with the highest number of jobs found in December (30,753). This is a difference of 5,386 jobs, which are attributed to seasonal employment. Job Holding Both the household survey and information from the State Demographer's Office indicate that the residents in Eagle County hold an average of 1.2 jobs. Applying this estimate to the number of jobs in the area provides some indication of the number of jobs that are filled by seasonal workers. Seasonal Employees Several steps were taken to determine an estimate of the number of employees in Eagle County who'may only be in the area seasonally. First, it was assumed that many year round residents are employed in seasonal jobs, as well as positions that are held year round. Forecast information provided through the Colorado Demographer's Office Jobs and Labor Force estimated 36,623 jobs in Eagle County for 2000. According to the forecast, approximately 7,085 persons commute into the county for employment and 2,000 residents work outside of County boundaries. We estimate that approximately 2,245 to 2,830 seasonal workers are employed in the Vail Valley each winter. The derivation of these estimates is shown in the table below. In brief, the steps in the estimate are as follows: • Monthly ES202 data shows that there was a difference of 5,387 ES202 jobs between the winter peak of 29,951 ES202 jobs in March 2000 and the shoulder- season trough of 24,564 ES202 jobs in May 2000. This provides a measure of the number of winter seasonal jobs in the County (under the assumption that May employment represents a base line of year-round employment in the County). The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 20 of 75 • • We assume that roughly 50 percent of these seasonal jobs are filled by year- round local residents, while the remaining 50 percent are filled by seasonal residents. This implies that approximately 2,694 seasonal ES202 jobs are filled by seasonal residents. This estimate is based on conversations with a prominent local employer which has indicated that approximately half of its seasonal hires are local residents. Additionally, this finding is supported by the 1999 Eagle County Housing Survey, which showed higher levels. of employment and multiple jobholding in winter (average of 1.2 jobs / person) than at other times of year (average of 1.1 jobs:/ person). ' ' • Taking into account the winter multiple jobholding rate of 1.2 jobs per worker leads to the conclusion that there are 2,245 seasonal residents who fill the 2,694 seasonal jobs described above. This provides a lower-bound estimate of the winter seasonal workforce in the County. • It should be noted that ES202 jobs only account for approximately 79.3 percent of all jobs in Eagle County, according to estimates by the Colorado State Demographer. Sole proprietors account for most of the remaining jobs. The seasonality of proprietor jobs, and the degree to which they are filled by seasonal residents, are unknown. However, if it is assumed that a pro-rata share of proprietor jobs are filled by seasonal residents, an upper-bound estimate of 2,830 seasonal resident workers is estimated. r • The average of the two seasonal worker estimates is 2,538 seasonal workers. This provides a "middle-ground" estimate of the number of seasonal workers employed in the County. • Further analysis of the ES202 database (as of fourth quarter 1996) shows that over 90 percent of the County's employment is in the Vail Valley, while the remainder is in the Roaring Fork Valley or is undetermined. Moreover, essentially all of the winter seasonal variation in employment in the County is concentrated in the Vail Valley portion of the County. Thus, the estimates of seasonal employment and seasonal workers contained in this discussion are sped,fically applicable to the Vail Valley portion of the County, and are thus applicable to the estimation of seasonal housing demand in the Vail Valley. • As of fourth quarter 1996, roughly two thirds to 70 percent of seasonal employment in the Vail Valley was estimated to be concentrated in the Town of Vail area. Given the increasing level of winter tourism activity downvalley over the past four years, this percentage may have since dropped. Nonetheless, the Vail area is likely to still account for the substantial majority of seasonal employment in the Valley. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 21 of 75 Estimation of Winter Seasonal Workforce Employed in Eagle County, 2000 • Measure Data Source March 2000 ES202 jobs 29,951 Colo Dept Labor & Empl - Labor Mkt Info May 2000 ES202 jobs 24.564 Colo Dept Labor & Empl - Labor Mkt Info Seasonal difference in ES202 jobs 5,387 Conversation with several local employers; Assume 50% of winter seasonal jobs are filled by 5000 1999 Eagle Co Housing Survey results seasonal residents showing greater multiple jobholding in winter than other times of year ES202 jobs filled by seasonal residents 2,694 Average jobs per worker 1.22 RRC 1999 Eagle County Housing Survey Number of seasonal workers, 2000 (assume nQ proprietor jobs are filled by seasonals) 2,245 ES202 jobs as a % of total jobs 79.3% Colo State Demographer, 1999 data Number of seasonal workers, 2000 (assume pro-rata share of proprietor jobs are filled by seasonals) 2,830 t Average of abov6 two seasonal worker estimates estimates 2Commuting According to employers responding to the employer survey completed as part of the housing needs assessment in 1999, about 14% of employees commute from outside of Eagle County. Applying an estimate of 14% to the 29,951 jobs available in the Vail Valley at peak season suggests that 4,193 people commute into the area for employment. Almost half live in Leadville/Lake County and just over one-fifth live in Glenwood Wirings/Garfield County. Another 12% live in Summit County. 10 Most commuters (64%) worked in Vail and about one-fifth were employed in the Avon/Beaver Creek/Arrowhead areas. Almost half of all commuters live in households composed of couples with children. Slightly under one-fifth of commuters live in households composed of couples and about the same percentage live in households composed of family members and unrelated roommates. About half of the commuters would prefer to live in Eagle County. These results were impacted be Leadville residents; approximately 60% of the commuters who live in the Leadville area would prefer to live in Eagle County. When asked about their housing preference type, the majority indicated they would prefer a single family home or mobile home; however, of those interested in living in apartments, close to 40% were from the The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 22 of 75 Leadviile area. Commuters tended to be employed in construction (27%) and maintenance/housekeeping and service jobs (37%). Another 10% work in restaurants. The following table provides an estimate of "commuter households" who would be interested in moving into the Vail area. Of the 4,193 commuters,, about half (2,097) indicated they wanted to live in Eagle County. Assuming that the household pattern of these individuals was consistent with all commuters, approximately 40% (839 persons) would be living as couples, family members living with roommates and roommate households. These are the.household types that are most likely to be attracted to a rental housing development. Applying the average household size of 2.76 persons to the estimate of those living as couples and with roommates yields an estimate of 304 households that could be included.as part of the market for. Middle Creek Village. Estimate of Commuter Households Interested in Living in Eagle County Commuters 4,193 Prefer Eagle County 2,097 50% Couples and Roommates 839 40% 2.76 Ave HH Households 304 Size i Length of Residence or Employment Among renters, almost half have been in the area from one to six years. Approximately 9% had been in the area for less than six months and about 8% had been in the area for six months to one year. Length of Employment/Residence l Among Renters in Eagle County Less than 6 months 9.0% 6 months - 1 year 7.9% More than 1 up to 3 years 24.3% More than 3 up to 6 years 25.4% More than 6 up to 10 years 13.0% More than 10 years 20.3% Total 99.9% Source: Household Survey According to the household survey, approximately 95% of renters live in the area year round, with 5% reporting they were in the area for the ski season only. It is expected that these estimates are low, due to under-representation of renters in general and seasonal workers specifically. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 23 of 75 Job and Population Growth According to forecasts provided by the Colorado Department of Labor, approximately 10,000 new jobs are projected for Eagle County from 2000 to 2005 or an annual average change of 4.9%. The population is expected to grow from 41,888 (assumed an undercount in population) to 48,667 for this same period, for an average annual increase of 3%. Projected Growth in Jobs and Population, Eagle County _ Average 2000 2005 Annual Growth Jobs 36,623 46,604 4.9% Population 41,888 48,667 3.0% Source: Colorado Department of Labor • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 24 of 75 VAIL RENTERS AND WORKERS Consideration was also given to renters who are employed in the Town of Vail, as it is likely that these households will be given a preference for living at the Middle Creek Village development. An estimated 1,032 renter households live in Vail based upon the 2000 Census. Tenure - Renters Eagle County % of HH Vail % of HH Total: 15,148 100% 2,165 100% Owner occupied 9,649 64% 1,133 52% Renter occupied 5,499 36% 1,032 48% Source: 2000 Census Vail Employees This section, focuses on the 29% of renters who work in Vail. According to the household survey, approximately 29% of eastern county (Vail to Gypsum) renters work in Vail. Over one-third of renters work in Avon/Beaver Creek/Arrowhead. Location % of Renters Vail 29% Edwards/Homestead/Singletree 10% Avon/Beaver Creek/Arrowhead 36% Eagle 12% Eagle-Vail 3% Gypsum 3% Minturn/Red Cliff 4% Other 2% Total 100% Source: Household Survey Of renter households living in Vail, approximately 41 % consist of two persons. Fewer single persons are in the area than other household sizes (17%). Overall, the household sizes found in Vail closely follow those noted for all of Eagle County with one exception; no households of more than four persons were reported through the household survey. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 25 of 75 • Percent of Renters By Household Size HH Size Percent 1 17.0% 2 41.4% 3 22.0% 4 19.5% Total 99.9% Source: Household Survey, 2000 Census Income of Vail Renters The mean incomes of renter households. working in Vail ($48,610) are slightly below that of renters throughout Eagle County ($51,538), although the median income is equivalent. Household Income of Renters Working in Vail Mean Median $ 48,610 $ 50,000 Source: Household Survey The income distribution among renter households in Vail is uneven. Close to 20% of renters earn $75,000 to $100,000. Slightly over 12% earn $25,000 to $29,999. Income Distribution -Vail Renters $75,000 - 99,999 I " > $0,000 - 74,999 I # $65,000 - 69,999 $60,000 - 64,999 I 1' r r . 35,000 - 59,999 I I 19 $50,000- 54,999 9 ' $45,000 - 49,999 $40,000 - 44,999 $35,000 - 39,999 I t r ti $30,000 - 34,999 $25,000 - 29,999 $20,000 - 24,999 $15,000 - 19,999 j 7f 9a s Fr $0 - 14,999 - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Percent of Renter Households Source: Household Survey The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 26 of 75 • Length of Time in Area The percentage of renters who work in Vail and have resided or been employed in the area for six or fewer months is less than found in all of Eagle County. This percentage increases for those in the area for six months to one year. In other words, the data suggest newcomers to the area are especially likely to find housing down valley. Length of Time in Area 4'- 30- 13 EaglE ® Vail 20-"~ 10 i p a °;w :a a i 5- 'Id Les': than 6 6 months - 1 More than 1, up More than 3 up More than 6, up More than 10 months year to 3 years to 6 years to 10 years years i The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 27 of 75 HOUSING CONDITIONS This section of the report provides a review of comparable properties that are located in Eagle County. This includes an in-depth review of selected properties that includes location, target population(s), rents, unit sizes and bedroom configurations, amenities and absorption rates. This section also includes a description of comparable properties located in other resort communities that were contacted for this assessment. Although an in-depth review of properties located in other resort communities is - included, the rents were not analyzed as they are from a different market area. Overview Within Eagle County there are a variety of rental housing options that appear to be targeted to different populations. For example, Vail Resorts owns, manages and master-leases a significant amount of rental property in the area that is primarily targeted toward housing seasonal workers. Generally, there are workers that come into the area to work one season, and then leave. Many of these workers return each year to work another season. In addition to Vail Resorts, several other employers also master lease and/or own properties that they make available to employees. These include hotels, local governments, transportation services and area restaurants. Some of these units are designated specifically for seasonal workers, whereas others are provided for year- round employees. Other affordable housing is also available and being developed in Eagle County. These include several .tax credit projects, the majority of which are targeted to housing families and unrelated roommates who live in the area year round. The further south one moves along the 4-70 corridor, the greater emphasis there is on offering housing to couples and households with children. Several for-sale projects have been developed and are proposed that are targeted to households earning 80% of the Area Median Income. Employer Housing Employers rk~3sponding to the Employer Survey for the Eagle County Housing Needs assessment provided an indication of the number of employees for whom they provided housing. Of the 42 employers responding to the survey, half indicated that they currently provide housing or rent/mortgage subsidies to an average of 68 employees per employer. This percentage may be overstated since larger employers tended to respond to the survey more than smaller employers. Based on the responses, these employers provided housing for 1,364 employees in 1,172 housing units in Eagle County. Seasonal Workers In conducting the interviews among different property management entities, a pattern began to emerge that influences the programming considerations for the different developments. This information may be useful in further refining the program for Middle Creek Village. Some of the primary observations include: • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 28 of 75 • • There are different types of "seasonal workers". Some are younger who come into the area to work one season and play. This worker fits the profile that most people associate with a "seasonal worker" as they are primarily in the area to ski/hike/bike and party.. This type of resident prefers to live with roommates and is willing to share a bedroom; • The second type of "seasonal worker" is one. who returns to the area year after year to work.- Ski patrol, ski school employees, medical staff-including nurses and lab technicians-were cited as examples. These workers would prefer to have their own unit,'although they will share 'a unit if they have their own bedroom. They do not want to live in the same building as the above-described seasonal worker who intend to be in the valley for a single season; and, • Single persons and couples who remain in the area year-round and want to live in their own place, without additional roommates. These households also do not want to live with the more transient seasonal workers.. Number of Occupants Per Bedroom There is an emerging trend to limit occupancy of seasonal worker housing to one person per bedroom. This reflects the desire of most people living in rental housing to at least have their own bedroom. It also avoids additional conflicts among roommates who may have shared a room in the past. Returning seasonal workers and those who live in the area year-round may have people with whom they are comfortable sharing an apartment if they can have their own bedroom within that apartment. Managers of housing for seasonal employees reported that about 75% of the bedrooms are shared. Returning seasonal workers are given a priority to have their own bedroom, whereas seasonal workers who are new to the area often have to share with another person. First timeseasonal workers prefer to live in a unit with others, as that is a way to meet people. Although they do share a bedroom, there are conflicts that occur with the forced sharing of a sleeping area with someone of the same sex. First time and returning seasonal workers would also prefer to have a separate bedroom and not be forced to share a room. Couples, on the other hand, would share a bedroom and are an appropriate group to target for the one- bedroom units proposed a Middle Creek Village. It appears that these people seek studios in seasonal housing developments first, and if not available, will live in a shared housing arrangement where they can have their own bedroom. Management Trends Most of these developments provide on-site management. It was noted that on-site management is important to minimize conflicts among residents and to resolve enforcement of infringements on the lease before they become major problems. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 29 of 75 • Comparable Projects The projects that would be the most comparable to Middle Creek Village are located along the 1-70 Corridor. The following map indicates the location of the comparables as well as other projects financed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Comparable and Tax Projects in the Market Area : Hyteyryc ` _ TOM" h radut Ka~atCrocsti0 Af.vrRUn wa, Project Descriptions Lake Creek Apartments is located in Edwards and offers 270 units that are arranged in 34 eight-plefz buildings. This is an attractive project that was built in 1994 and offers a mix of one, two and three-bedroom units. About half of the two-bedroom units are master-leased to area employers. The project offers one-car garages for each unit, for an addition4l $50 per month and includes one additional surface parking space per unit. In the past, parking was a problem at this project because of the number of visitors and because residents were using the garages for storage and not the parking of cars. Stricter enforcement of a requirement to use the garages for cars has minimized parking problems on the site. This project provides housing for seasonal and long-term workers; however the emphasis is on attracting the long-term worker to the site. One- and two-bedroom units were the first to lease up, with three-bedroom units taking longer. A mix of couples, couples with children and unrelated roommates have chosen this location. Most of the unrelated roommates are people who have known each other previously and are choosing to live as roommates rather than be assigned to an apartment. Rents vary according to the location of the apartment. Units that are in close proximity to the highway are the least expensive, those in the common area are in the mid-range and those close to the river are more expensive. There is about a $100 per month The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 30 of 75 difference ih rent between units located close to the highway and those that are next to the river. In addition to the base rent, the cost of utilities, cable and garages are added on. These fees range from $160 for a one-bedroom unit to $120 per month for a two- bedroom unit and $130 per month for a three-bedroom unit. A 12-month lease is required. Vail Associates owns and manages or contracts for units at a number of properties in Eagle County that are focused on providing housing for seasonal employees. These include the Sunbird, The Tames'and Rivers Edge. Vail Resorts has recently taken over the management of Rivers Edge and The Tarnes from Corum Real Estate. The pricing structure varies somewhat from property to property; although the guidelines established by Vail Resorts generally apply to all of the units. These rentals are devoted to employees of Vail Resorts during the winter season. In the summer and shoulder season, other employees may rent these units, but are required to leave by October 15h. Vail Resorts requires a $200 deposit from its employees to lease a unit and $400 if a person is a not a Vail Resorts employee. Leases are for six months; however, a daily rate is computed and a person may get out of the lease at any time without a penalty. For the most part, employees are expected to share a unit with a roommate. This may include sharing a bedroom, although some units allow employees to have their own bedroom. Employees who return to work each season usually want their own bedroom, whereas employees who are new are more willing to share a bedroom. Generally, Vail Resorts charges $410 per person to share a one-bedroom unit or $350 to share a bedroom in a two-bedroom unit. In all of the properties that it owns and manages, at least 75% of the one or more bedroom units have at least one shared bedroom. Studios house single persons and/or couples, with returning seasonal workers given a priority to have a studio. A private bedroom in a two to four bedroom unit costs about $425 per bedroom. During the winter months, occupancy hovers between 96%o to 99%. In the summer months, occupancy drops to 60% to 70%. In the recent past, ?extensive efforts were made to attract others to lease these units. The focus was on construction, landscaping and golf course employees. It was noted that it appears that many families may move into these units for the summer. These are families that may live in Eagle County in crowded conditions during the winter months, as well as families who commute from other areas during the winter to work. It is not known if Vail Resorts will continue to market to these groups to lease vacant units in the summer months. For the purposes of this assessment, three of the properties operated by Vail Resorts were selected. These include The Tarnes and Rivers Edge, which have been combined in the project comparisons as the unit size, rents and bedroom configurations are the same. Timber Ridge Village Apartments are also included, as Vail Resorts master leases the majority of these units. The Tames is a 76-unit complex with 202 beds that was developed by Vail Resorts in partnership with the Vail Valley Medical Center. These include two new buildings and a recent renovation of two existing buildings. This development is devoted to seasonal workers for both Vail Resorts and the Medical Center. This complex offers a mix of The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 31 of 75 studios, two-bedroom and four-bedroom units. There are interior lockers that are set aside in a separate area for resident use, laundry rooms and a communal room. An office is also located on site. Extra storage that is easily accessible by residents and designed to enhance security were noted as important features. The lockers are located on the first floor and are dry-walled and have deadbolts. A convenient location that is secure was noted as being important if residents would use the lockers. It was also noted that there have been conflicts between the seasonal workers employed by the Medical Center and Vail Resorts. Although Medical Center employees are also seasonal, they tend to be-older and do not desire to live with younger seasonal workers. Because of this, management has segregated the buildings so that more mature seasonal workers are living in separate buildings. Rivers Edge is dedicated to seasonal workers. It offers 137 apartments in a mix of two-, three- and four-bedroom units. Each bedroom is quite small (approximately 80 square feet) and has built-in cabinets and beds to maximize space. Originally, Rivers Edge was going to be developed as a series of small studios and one-bedroom units. During the development process a focus group was held in which it was learned that potential residents would prefer to have a small bedroom, with a door that would lock, and a larger communal space. This included a shared kitchen, bathroom and living/dining area. This development has been successful in providing livable space for seasonal workers and was replicated at The Tames and other projects in the area. Parking for this development was done based on 8/10ths of a space per bedroom. To date, there have not been any problems with parking and it was felt that half a space per bedroom would have been adequate. In addition, Rivers Edge has a communal space in each building where residents could gather to watch TV, host an event or "get away" from roommates. It was noted that this concept did not work well, as there were problems monitoring the use of these rooms. From a property management perspective, it would be better to offer one large communal room that is located adjacent to the office. Residents could reserve this space for events and pay a refundable deposit for its use. Eagle Benc! was constructed in two phases with 294 units provided altogether. The older phase'is contemporary in design and has tuck-under and surface parking. There is a tot lot, community room and one edge of the site borders the river. The last phase of 54 units was constructed in 1994 and these are located directly on Highway 24 fronting the Eagle River. Of the 294 units, 70 are master-leased by Vail Resorts for seasonal employees in the older portion of the project. The balance of the units are leased by older persons who are either in the area year-round or are returning seasonal workers. Timber Ridge Village Apartments is a 198-unit complex located in Vail. This project was built in 1980 and is well located within the Town of Vail on the north frontage road across from Interstate 70 and west of Lion's Head. The site has a 20-year employee- housing covenant that is set to expire in January 2002. At this time, the Town of Vail is pursuing efforts to retain this project for employee housing. The project consists entirely of two-bedroom units. Most of the complex is master- leased by area employers for housing employees. The units are 750 square feet in size 10 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 32 of 75 • and the lease allows up to four persons per unit. Surface parking is provided and can pose a problem at times, since most of the residents own a car. Although parking can be problematic, most residents use local transit to go to work, for shopping and other activities. Vail Resorts does offer satellite parking for its employees. The project includes a clubhouse, sauna, hot tub, fitness center and on-site laundry. It consistently maintains occupancy between 98% to 100%. River Run is a 117-unit complex that was built in 1986 and is located in Eagle-Vail, one- half mile'west of the Mintum exit"off Interstate 70. `It is privately owned and operated without'any employment or income restrictions. It offers a mix of one- to three-bedroom units all with balconies:' Residents tend to be younger workers living together as roommates. Most of them work in the Vail and Avon area. They have recently instituted a 12-month lease to reduce turnover. = The site includes a fitness center with locker rooms and showers; separate sauna, clubhouse, outdoor Jacuzzi, sun decks, community laundry facility, lounge and video library. A hook-up for a stackable washer/dryer is included in each of the units and many residents purchase these appliances and have them installed. Surface parking is provided and has not been a problem for this complex. Eagle Villas is a 120-unit tax credit project that is located in Eagle and was built in 1995. It provides two- and three-bedroom units and consistently maintains occupancy at 95% to 100%. The units are located in six buildings that are two and three stories. A community building, laundry room and playground are some of the amenities that are offered. The project uses a one-year lease and tends to attract. families and couples who work throughout the Eagle Valley. Kayak Crossing is a 50-unit apartment community located between Eagle-Vail and Dowd Junction. This project was developed under a 6320 non-profit corporation. It consists of four buildings that have a mix of two-, three-, four- and five-bedroom units. Colorado Mountain Express owns half of the bedrooms in the project. These tend to be the five-bedroom units. Only one person per bedroom is allowed at this project, which attracts a mix of seasonal and longer-term residents. Among the seasonal workers, there are some who are in the area for a season, whereas others return year after year. Surface parking is provided at this site. This project was fully leased within 30 days of opening. Out of the eight developments that were surveyed for this market study, six were selected for more in-depth review. The following sections review apartment size, rent rates, rents per square foot and amenities offered in each of these complexes. Apartment Size The size of units in Eagle County varies depending upon the target population for the project. For example, units at Rivers Edge/Tarnes are smaller than other apartment projects in the area and are focused primarily on providing housing for seasonal The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 33 of 75 • workers. Other developments market primarily to year-round residents, although seasonal workers are also found in these properties. These factors are important to consider when comparing the unit size proposed for Middle Creek Village. In this project, the studios and one-bedroom units are targeted for year round residents, whereas it is anticipated that the two and three-bedroom units will house seasonal workers. The proposed unit types for Middle Creek Village include: • Studios designed to be 364 square feet. include an alcove that provides for some. separation between living and sleeping areas. These are significantly larger than the studios found at Tames and Rivers Edge. The size and layout of the studio is likely to be-a desired feature among potential residents; • One-bedroom units will be 480 square feet. This is about 120 square feet larger than the one-bedroom units offered at River Edge/Tames and between 62 to 247 square feet smaller than other projects. Although smaller, the layout of the unit will accommodate a variety of furniture arrangements. • Two-bedroom units are planned at 728 square feet. Among comparable units, the sizes range from 551 (Rivers Edge/Tames) to 1,200 square feet at River Run. Although small, the size and layout of this unit at Middle Creek Village can accommodate a couple and roommate or several roommates. Because of this, it is likely that this unit will attract both long term and seasonal workers. • Three-bedroom units are intended to be 900 square feet. This includes one large bedroom, with a walk-in closet and two smaller bedrooms. Two bathrooms are proposed. The layout allows for separation of the living and sleeping areas, which should enhance its appeal to seasonal workers who are living as roommates. These units are larger than the seasonal housing offered at Rivers Edge/Tarnes (690 square feet) and are slightly smaller than three bedroom units offered at Kayak Crossing and Lake Creek. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 34 of 75 Unit Size Rivers Middle Lake Edge/ Eagle Kayak. Timber River Eagle Creek Creek Tarnes Bend Crossing Ridge Run Villas Village Total Units 270 237 294 50 198 117 120 156 Studio 41 68 Square Feet 240-272 364 One Bedroom 30 - 30 100 39 18 Square Feet 550 325-365 542-594 747 480 Two Bedroom 152 66 2 198 60 48 26 975- Square Feet 860 551-629 740-880 828 750 1,200 874 728 Three Bedroo 88 22 20 21 19 68 44 Square Feet 1000 690 1030 978-1325 1,300 1065 900 Four Bedroom 7 171 41 Square Feet 802-949' 1271 I 1,150 Rents This section examines the rents by bedroom configuration and on a per square foot basis. • Of the studios proposed for Middle Creek Village, 64 will be financed using LIHTC and would be leased for $693, exclusive of utilities. This equates to a per~square foot cost of $1.90. At Rivers Edge/Tarnes, rents include utilities and are leasing for $2.08 per square foot to $2.39. Of greater consideration are the studios that will be developed at the Village at Avon (see pending projects). The studios in this development will be smaller at 310 square feet and have rents proposed at $525 to $550 or $1.69 to $1.77 per square foot. The tax credit units will be priced below those proposed for The Village at Avon on a per square foot basis, but have a higher rent and will also offer a slightly larger unit. • The rent of $733 proposed for the one-bedroom units that would be dedicated to tax credits fall on the low end of the rental range when compared to other developments. In comparable projects, rents for one-bedrooms range from $650 (Lake Creek) to $855 (River Run). On a per square foot basis, the rents proposed at Middle Creek Village are higher than comparable properties, with the exception of Rivers Edge/Tarnes. At Middle Creek Village. the rents on a per square foot will run from $1.53 for the 14 tax credit units to $2.03 for the four The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 35 of 75 • market rate rentals. The Village at Avon is proposing rents of $745 to $920 for a 580 square foot, one-bedroom apartment or $1.28 to $1.58 per square foot. • The two-bedroom units proposed for Middle Creek Village would rent for $1,350 or $1.85 per square foot. These are the highest rents of all comparable properties; the next highest rent found in other projects was $1,295 (River Run). The Village at Avon is proposing rents of $860 to $1,200 per month for an 835 square foot unit. This equates to rents of $1.03 to $1.44 per square foot. • Middle Creek Village is proposing rents of $1,765 or $1.96 per square foot for a 900 square foot, three-bedroom unit. This product is proposed for seasonal workers and would be most comparable to the units proposed at Rivers - Edge/Tarnes. The proposed rent at Middle Creek Village is significantly higher than Rivers Edge/Tames, which includes utilities in the rent. The Village at Avon is proposing the development of 40, three-bedroom units that would be 1,145 square feet and lease for $1,390 per month or $1.21 per square foot. i The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 36 of 75 • Rents and Rent Per Square Foot Middle Lake Rivers Eagle Kayak Timber River Eagle Creek Creek Edge/Tarns* Bend* Crossing Ridge Run Villas Village Total Units 270 237 241 50 198 117 120 156 Studios 41 68 N;...: $693- Rent $500-$650 - $850 $1.90 - Rent/Sq. Ft. $2.08-$2.39 $2.33 One Bedroom 30 30 100 39 18 $650- $725- $700- Rent $750 $820 $790 $855 1$733-$975 $1.18 - $2.24- $1.33- $0.94- $1.53 - Rent/Sq.Ft. $1.36 $2.52 $1.34 $1.14 I 1 $2.03 Two Bedroom 152 66 2 198 ' 60 48 26 $8855- $350- $905- Rent 5990 $700 $1,015 900 $1,050 1 $11295 1 $795 1 $1,350 $1.03 - $1.15- $1.08 - • ~Rent/Sq.Ft. $1.15 $1.12 -$1.27 $1.22 $1.09 $1.40 1 $1.17 1 $0.91 1 $1.85 Three Bedroo 88 22 20 21 i 19 68 44 Rent $10150 $1,275 1$11 80 $1,325 1 $ $14495 1 $$8 5 i $1,765 kent/Sq.Ft. $105 $1.85 1 $$1 5 $1. 6 $1.115 i $0784 $1.96 1 Two Four Bedroom S 78 17 4 Rent 1 0 $1,700 $1,590 i 1 $800 Rent/Sq.Ft. $1.79 -$2.111 $1.25 1 $0 9 1 Unit Mix Among all the comparable properties, two-bedrooms are the most prevalent (47%), followed by three-bedroom units (22%). In comparison, 44% of the units at Middle Creek Village will be studios, with 12% found in one-bedroom units. Two-bedrooms will account for 17% of the product type, with three-bedrooms at Middle Creek Village constituting 28% of the unit mix. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 37 of 75 • Bedroom Configuration of Comparable Properties Four Bedroom - = Studio g% 4% One Bedroom 18% Three Bedroom r 22% p~ a Two Bedroom 47% Middle Creek is heavily weighted toward studios and one-bedroom units, which is in keeping with the desire to house year round residents who are single adults and couples. Although there are a significant number of three-bedroom units in comparison to other projects, there will not be any four-bedroom units. Middle Creek Village - Proposed Bedroom Mix Bedroom Number of • Configuration Units % of Units Studio 68 44% One Bedroom 18 12% Two Bedroom 26 17% Three Bedroom 44 28% 156 100% Amenities This section compares amenities proposed at Middle Creek Village to comparable projects. Amenities vary among projects. Most offer a community room, with Rivers Edge/Tarnes having several community areas within each building. These are being altered, as it was found to be difficult to provide oversight to these areas and often resulted in unwanted guests sleeping on the premises, property damage and other misuse of the facilities. It was recommended that a community room be located close to the office and that residents make, arrangements and pay a deposit to use the room for parties or other functions. Amenities such as hot tubs were also sources of management headaches and, with the exception of River Run had either not been built or were removed. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 38 of 75 • Balconies and patios were found in all projects except for Timber Ridge and offered an additional "room" for residents to use in the summer months. Playgrounds were located on most projects. All developments provided additional storage, although Lake Creek includes a garage where residents store items such as skis, kayaks and boxes. All projects offered on-site management. Utilities are included in the rent at Rivers Edge/Tai-nes. At Lake Creek and Kayak Crossing residents pay an additional amount for utilities that varies based on the size of the unit. Other developments include water, sewer and trash in the rent, but not electricity or gas. Most developments provide surface parking. It was noted that not as much parking is needed for seasonal employee housing. One project was built using .8 spaces per bedroom and felt that it was "over-parked" and that .5 space per bedroom would have been adequate. In contrast, parking for year round employees should probably be based on 1.1 to 1.2 spaces per bedroom, depending upon the number of roommates allowed in a space. Each person will have a car. For example, at Timber Ridge, one space per unit is provided, although each resident usually arrives with a car. Residents must decide who uses the parking space and Vail Resorts provides satellite parking outside of town. At Timber Ridge, most residents use public transit to go to work, shopping and other errands, leaving the car parked in the lot most of the time. At Lake Creek, one-car garages are provided for each resident for an additional $50 per month. Residents must pay for the garage. At one point in time, residents used the garage for • storage and did not park their cars in them; however, management has required use of the garage for its intended purpose. Garages will be rented for an additional $75 per month at the Village at Avon. Generally, the amenities proposed at Middle Creek Village are in keeping with comparable projects, with the exception of patios and balconies. i • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 39 of 75 Amenities Middle Lake Rivers Eagle Kayak Timber Eagle Creek Creek Edge' Bend' Crossing Ridge River Run Villas Village Clubhouse/Community Room x x x x x x Hot Tub X Exercise Equipment x _ Balcony/Patios x x x x x Playground X x x x Garages x $50/month Covered Parking x x -extra Storage x x x x Laundry Room X x x x x x x x Washer/Dryer Hook-ups x Microwaves x Fireplaces x Dishwashers/Disposals X x x x x x Central Air Conditioning X Picnic/Barbeque Areas x x On-Site Management x x x x x Water, 1 Sewer, Water, Utilities Included No Yes Yes No Trash Sewer Water, Trash Furnished Apartments No Yes Some Some Some Source of he-`.t Gas Gas Gas Gas Electric Electric Gas Gas Tenants pay electric Security Deposits/Lease Terms Security deposits for The Tarnes/Rivers Edge are $200 per employee. For other projects, fees ranged from one-months rent, to a flat $1,000 (Mountain Glen) to a variation depending upon the bedroom configuration. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 40 of 75 • Deposits Lake Kayak Mountain Eagle Creek Crossing Eagle Bend Glen' Villas 16R $ 925 $1,200 $1,000 1 month's rent .2BR $1,250 $1,090 $1,400 3BR $1,480 $1,500 $1,700 4BR - $1,750 Lease terms are generally for one year, although seasonal employee housing uses a six-month lease. Employee housing leases include a daily rate and there are no penalties for breaking the lease. No lease-up incentives were noted among the property managers interviewed. Utilities Most projects include water, sewer and trash pick-up as part of the rent. The following projects charge a fee for utilities that includes water, sewer, trash, expanded cable, gas and electric. Among projects that focus on seasonal workers, all of these utilities are included in the basic rent. Utility Fees i . Lake Kayak Eagle Creek Crossing Bend 1 BR $110 $100 2BR $120 $110 $110 3BR $130 $120 $120 4BR $130 it 5BR $140 Other Communities This section includes project descriptions from developments located outside of Eagle County. These include developments that are located in other resort communities as well as in Leadville. Breck Terrace is located in Breckenridge and consists of a total of 17 two- and three- story open-ended apartment buildings located within one block of the Breckenridge Recreation Center, four blocks of shopping and other amenities, and within two miles of the ski area. This project has 302 units and was fully leased within 30 days of opening. It is also convenient to resort, town, and county bus systems. The units range from one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, where exactly one bedroom in each unit is a "shared" room containing bunk beds. The complex offers a community clubhouse, containing a full kitchen, games, book exchange/library, big screen television, and other amenities. Additional storage is available for each unit on the top floor of each building. One parking space is available for each bedroom on a first come, first-serve basis and is The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 41 of 75 • generally plentiful. Private rooms are in the highest demand, along with 3-bedroom units. Breck Terrace only serves full-time employees of the Breckenridge Resort (30 hours per week). Because housing in the complex is offered as part of an incentive to attract resort workers for generally hard-to-fill positions, rent rates are set at lower-than-market rates to make them affordable and attractive to potential employees. As a result, there is very little turnover during the peak employment seasons (winter and summer). Leases are on a day-to-day basis, which makes it convenient for seasonal employees. Employees that do stay year-round and can commit to year-round leases are encouraged to find housing elsewhere in the community to free up the needed seasonal units. 1 BR/1 BA 2 BR/1 BA 2 BR12 BA 3 BR/2 BA Square foot 554 713 798 937 Rent Shared bedroom: $3501person Private bedroom: $425/person Tenant Paid Utilities Phone (cable and other utilities included in rent) Security Deposit Req: $150 plus $50 non-refundable administration fee Tabor Grard consists of 37 units in the 1991 renovated historic Tabor Grand Hotel in the center of downtown Leadville. The units are a mix of relatively spacious one- and two-bedroom units, including one studio apartment, with one permit parking space . available per unit. Free transportation is available for residents that work in the neighboring resort communities (Vail, Frisco, etc.); however, only year-round leases are offered, generally discouraging strictly seasonal workers. Applicants must meet income- qualification requirements, as all units are rent restricted based on HUD standards for incomes at or below 60%, 50%, and 40% AMI. One-bedroom units tend to be in highest demand, though other units are usually available provided the applicant meets the income-qualification requirements. Studio 1 BR/1 BA 2 BR/1 BA 2 BR12 BA Rent $348 $285 to $449 $533 $533 Tenant Paid Utilities All except water (units are gas heated) Security Deposit Req: Rent plus $50 utility deposit Marolt Ranch consists of 100 dormitory-style apartments with a front living-area, shared bedroom (two twin beds), a private bath, two large closets, and a small kitchen (counter, sink, microwave, small refrigerator). Each unit is designed to hold two tenants and may house up to four people. The complex is owned and operated by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and offers seasonal housing for full-time Pitkin County employees (35 hours/week) from September 1s` through April 30"and student housing for the music school in the summer. Five units are available for year-round occupancy, which contain a slightly larger kitchen (mini stove, larger fridge). Winter seasonal units • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 42 of 75 • tend to fill up by mid-September, at which time a waiting list is available, although units are rarely vacated before the end of the season in April. Marolt Ranch is an auto-disincentive property, with only 50 parking spaces available for over 200 occupants. On-site parking spaces are issued through a lottery system and cost an extra $75 per month. Overflow parking is available at no charge, but is located some distance from the complex. However, the town of Aspen is about a ten-minute walk from Marolt Ranch and, the local bus system serves the property at no cost to the rider. 1 BR/1 BA Square foot 450+ Rent $720 Tenant Paid Utilities Cable, phone Security Deposit Req: First, last, deposit: $2,120 Pinewood Village consists of eight two- and three-story apartment buildings and contains 74 units. This project is located in Breckenridge and offers a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom units. One-fourth of the ono- and two-bedroom units were developed using Low Income Housing Tax Credits. This portion of the development is set aside foutenants working within Summit County who have incomes at or below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The complex is located across the street from the Justice Center and library and a half-block from City Market. Bus transportation is available at the complex both to town and the ski area. Units typically fill up by the end of August with winter residents and May or June with summer residents. Winter turnover is basically non-existent and a 6 to 8 percent turnover rate is generally expected from May through August. The longest waiting lists are for one-bedroom units. Year-round leases are required. This project leased up with 60-days of opening. Permit parking is available at a rate of one space per unit. A total of 55 single-car garages are also available at a rate of $40 per month, which are in high demand and consistentlyffiave a waiting list. Additional amenities that make the units particularly attractive include a washer/dryer in each unit and very large walk-in closets that provide abundant storage. 1 BR/1 BA 2 BR/1 BA 2 BR/2 BA 3 BR/2 BA Bedroom mix 28 38 8 Square foot 660 800 860 1,000 Rent (market-rate $561($765) $679($955) $789($995) $1,235 units in parenthesis) Tenant Paid Utilities Flat fee covers all but phone: $50 1-BR, $55 2-BR, $60 3-BR Security Deposit Req: '/Z of rent The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 43 of 75 Big Billie's is an apartment complex that was completed in 1995 in Telluride and contains 149 studio units. These are small ski in/ski out units located at the base of lifts 1 and 10 on the Telluride ski mountain in Mountain Village. Storage is limited and kitchens consist of a microwave, a two-bumer cook-top, and a small "dorm" refrigerator. Cars are not imperative as the units are convenient to the transportation "Chondula" that operates to and from the town of Telluride. Further, parking is limited, with only 30 spaces available for the.149 units. Approximately 50% of the units are occupied year-round, with the remaining units occupied by seasonal workers. Employees of Telluride Ski and Golf receive priority for available units, though the only requirements that-must be met for occupancy are that individual yearly incomes may not exceed $27,000 and no more than one person may occupy any one unit. Six-month leases are required through the winter months and month-to-month leases are available in the summer months. Units tend to fill up by November for each winter season, whereas the complex rarely (if ever) reaches 100% occupancy in the summer. Studio (efficiency) Square foot 242 Rent $440 Tenant Paid Utilities Phone Security Deposit Req: Application fee, first, deposit: $835 Pending Developments Village at Avon Corum is proposing the development of a 244-unit apartment complex that offers a mix of one-, Mot, and three-bedroom units. This project will be located south of Interstate-70 at the Avon exit. The development is proposed in two "phases;" however, the phases correspond to the financing mechanisms that are proposed..rather than the timing of constructio5 Construction is expected to begin in the Spring,2002, with completion of units 18 to 24 months later. This project expects to attract long-term employees, including couples, couples with children and unrelated roommates who meet the income guidelines. Phase One will consist of 176 units that are financed with a combination of Private Activity Bonds and LIHTC. These will include: • 44 studios with 310 square feet and a proposed rent of $608; • 44 one-bedroom units with 580 square feet and a proposed rent of $725; and, • 88 two-bedroom units with a proposed rent of $860. Phase Two will be financed using a 6320 approach and will be targeted to households earning 80% of the Area Median Income. These will include: • 4 one-bedroom units for $675 per month with 580 square feet; • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 44 of 75 • 24 two-bedroom units with 845 square feet and rents of $1,200; and 40 three-bedroom units with 1,145 square feet that would rent for $1,390 per month. The following chart summarizes the rent mix and cost per square foot for the Village at Avon: Village at Avon - Tax Credit Units Studios 1BR 2BR 3BR Number 44 48 . ~ 112 40 Size 310 580 835 1,145 $525- $745- $890- Rent $550 $920 $1,200 $1,390 $1.69- $1.28= $1.07- Rent Per Square Foot $1.77 $1.59 $1.44 $1.21 Garages will be provided for an additional $75 per month. The total number of garages has not been finalized. The project will include laundry facilities on-site, a clubhouse and additional storage. i • Mountain Glen This is a 72-unit apartment complex that is being developed by Eagle County and is located in Gypsum. The site is currently under construction; however, of the one building that has been completed five units are occupied. Another seven units are pre- leased. The project is expected to be complete in November of this year. The unit mix and rents include: Mountain Glen 2BR 3BR Number 54 18 Size 895 - 991 1062 $1,160- $1,300- Rent $1,235 $1,370 $1.25- $1.22- Rent Per Square Foot $1.31 $1.29 A playground will be included on the site and the units will have individual washers and dryers. There are no income requirements for this project; however, residents must be full-time employees of Eagle County. Up to two persons per bedroom are allowed in this development. Two covered parking spaces are provided for each unit. A 12-month • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 45 of 75 lease is preferred; rents increase by $50 per month for a six-month lease and $25 per month for a nine-month lease. In addition to the rental units proposed to the Village at Avon, the Town of Avon has several affordable housing developments that are in the planning process or currently under construction. Most are targeted to households earning 80% or less of the AMI. The typical size is a two-bedroom _unit and they are all condominiums or townhome style units. The unit size, mix and whether or not they will be rented or sold has not been determined in all cases. For example; the balance of the units proposed at the Village at Avon (256) may be for-sale or for-rent. •According to the planner, the build out for the Village is planned over a 20- to 25-year timeframe, with some early employee housing being required. - - Planned Projects -Avon For-Sale Rental Project Number of Project Number of Name Units Name units Brookside 3 Lakeside 3 Lodqe Terrace Chapel 3 L'Auberge 6 Square Wildwood 17 Confluence 45 Sheraton 17 Lot B 9 Mountain Vista Village at 256 Village at 244 Avon undetermined Avon if they will be for-sale i Lot 61 9 Total 296 316 In addition LU the development proposed for the Town of Avon, several are pending in other parts of Eagle County. The projects identified are primarily for-sale housing and include: • Two Rivers - 400 units of mixed type affordable housing to be developed in the Dotsero area. Of these, 100 would be condominiums, 280 manufactured homes and 20 apartments above commercial space have been tentatively planned; • Eagle Valley Health Center - 36 employee rental housing units to be developed in Edwards; and, • Berry Creek 5`h - is a parcel of land that that may be jointly developed by Eagle County, Town of Vail and the Eagle County School District. It would offer a mix of single-family homes, duplexes, town homes and condominiums. This project The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 46 of 75 • is in the planning discussion phase, with approximately 300 units being considered for this site. Ground breaking is planned for summer 2002. Tax Credit Projects There are two-tax credit projects in Eagle County: • . Eagle Vi71as is a 120-unit tax credit project that is located in Eagle and was built inA995. It provides twoo- and tfiree-bedroom units and consistently maintains occupancy at 95% to_100%. The"units are located in six buildings that are two and three stories'. A community building, laundry room and playground are some of the- amenities that are offered (see competitive projects for details). • Holy Cross Village Apartments has 60 rental units and is located in Gypsum. Rental housing for households eaming up-to 60% of the AMI is offered. One-bedrooms Two-bedrooms Three-bedrooms 10 26 24 Square Footaqe 700 890 1,033 Rent $642 $764 $880 i • 1 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 47 of 75 • VACANCY RATES AND AVERAGE RENTS Vacancy Rates The vacancy rate for Eagle County has varied from a low of 0.1 % to a high of 1.8% since 1996. For the last five years, the vacancy rate has continued to be one of the lowest in the state for each survey reporting time period. Vacancy rates do vary significantly when one takes into consideration the target market.: -Rental housing directed toward seasonal workers tends to have very low-vacancy rates during the winter season (less than 5%) and may reach, as high as 30%` during the summer months. The lower vacancy rates are attributed to rental developments that focus on year-round workers and/or those developments that execute master leases with area employers. Generally, when there is a vacancy rate below 5%, there is concern about the adequacy of supply of apartment units. It is apparent that there is a serious shortage of multi- family rental units in Eagle County. With the exception of the summer months, when seasonal worker housing is abundant and available for households who are not affiliated with specific employers, locating year-round rental housing or an apartment during the winter months may be impossible. Average Multi-Family Vacancy Rates for Eagle County 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr • 96 97 97 98 98 99 99 00 00 01 Averaqe Vacancy 1.7% 0.8% 1.8% 1.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.4% 0.9% 0.4% 0.1% Source: Colorado Multi-family Rent and Vacancy Survey, February 2001 Average Rents Over the last three years, both average rents and rents by-apartment type have steadily increased. Since the third quarter of 1996, average rents have increased by 25.5%. There are %)me variations by quarter that are due to the sample size fluctuating. For the first quarter of 1999, the sample included a slightly different makeup than the first quarter of 2001 (for example, one group with 198 one-bedroom units did not report). As a result, average rent decreased somewhat for the first quarter 1999. Average Multi-Family Rents for Eagle County 3rd Qtr 1st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1st Qtr 96 97 97 98 98 99 99 00 00 01 Rent $ 798 $ 886 $ 900 $ 901 $ 992 $ 948 $ 958 $ 989 $ 997 $1,000 Source: Colorado Multi-Family Vacancy Survey, February 2001 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 48 of 75 i Average Rent by Bedroom Configuration for Eagle County 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 3rd Qtr 1 st Qtr 96 97 97 98 98 99 99 00 00 01 Studio $ 430 $ 488 $ 505 $ 516 $ 400 $ 563 $ 530 $ 540 $ 529 16R $ 663 $ 645 $ 717 $ 667 $ 859 $ 714 $ 759 $ 780 $ 813 $ 866 28R/1 BA $ 853 $ 937 $ 917 ~ $ 918 881 $ 927 $ 932 $ 954 $ 948 $ 972 2SR12BA 920 $ -871 ...$1,024 --$1',402; $1,204 $1,054 $1,065 $1,098 $1,015 $1,129 3BR $ 991 '•$1,004"$1,081_ $1,082 $1,238 $1,172 $1,066 $1,200 $1,124 $ 920 Ave. Rent $ 798 $ 886 $ 900 $ 901 $ 992 $ 948 $ 958 $ 989 $ 997 $1,000 Source: Colorado Multi-Family Rent and Vacancy Survey, February 2001 J • 4 • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 49 of 75 • DEMAND ANALYSIS The demand analysis for this project has been completed in several steps. This includes an analysis of the overall demand for rental housing, followed by the demand for the tax credit units and market rate units. Within the demand analysis for tax credit units, an analysis was completed. for- both households and individuals who are currently living in a roommate situation.:_This.was done. to_ascertain,the potential market among roommates, as most individuals and couples would prefer to live in their own apartment and not share a unit.with anyone else. The tax credit analysis focuses on year round residents and does not include seasonal employees. The demand analysis for market rate units considers the potential market among residents whose incomes exceed the tax credit threshold and includes seasonal workers as a subset of this group. This analysis is based on the demand of current households and forecasted growth. The growth projections are based upon projections provided by the state; however, it is likely that growth will not occur at the projected rates given the slowdown in the economy. Traditionally, resort communities are the most volatile when there are changing economic conditions. i Overall Market • Household Type There are an estimated 5,499 renter households in Eagle County (36 % of total households). About 48% of renter households consist of couples (23.8%) and couples with, children (24.5%). Unrelated roommates accounted for 21.1 % of all households;lhowever, this number is probably low due to the under-representation of renters overall and seasonal employees in the 1999 household survey. Household Type- Renters Household Type % of HH # of HH Adult living alone 17.7% 972 Single parent with children 6.8%. 374 Couple 23.8% 1,309 Couple with children 24.5% 1,346 Unrelated roommates 21.1% 1,159 Family members and unrelated roommates 4.8% 262 Other 1.4% 75 Total 100.0% 5,499 Source: Household Survey Results applied to 2000 Census Estimates of Renter Households The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 50 of 75 • Age Renters in Eagle County tend to be young. Over half are under the age of 34 (57%). Age of Renter Householders Eagle County Vail #ofHH %ofHH #ofHH %ofHH Renter occupied: . 5,499 100% 1,032 100% 15 to 24 years 918 17% 216 21% 25 to 34 years 2,221 40% 473 46% 35 to 44 years 1,220 22% 170 16% 45 to 54 years 763 14% 101 10% 55 to 64 years 233 4% 51 5% 65 and older 144 3% 21 1% Source: 2000 Census Income Renters have a significantly lower income that other households. The average household income of renters in Eagle County was $51,538 in 1999, with a median of $50,000. In"comparison, the average household income for all households was $85,889 and the median was $65,000. In 1999, the median household income from the household survey for Eagle County was very close to the 1999 median family income estimate of $64,300 provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In 1999, approximately 27% of renter households in Eagle County earned less than 60% of the Area Median Income. Assuming that there were not substantial changes in household it come, it is estimated that 27% of the 5,499 renter households (1,492 households) earn less than 60% of the AM[ and would qualify them for some form of housing assistance, including rental units produced using Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Estimates of the Number of Renter Households by Area Median Income % of Estimated Renter HH Number of HH Under 30% AMI 8.6% 471 30 - 50% AMI 8.6% 471 50 - 60% AMI 10.0% 550 60 - 80% AMI 10.0% 550 80 - 100% AMI 22.1% 1,217 100%+ AMI 40.7% 2,238 Total 100.0% 5,499 • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 51 of 75 Population Growth Assuming a 3% annual increase in population from 2000 to 2006 (42,547 to 49,324 people) and an average household size of 2.76, with renters accounting for 36% of all households, the number of renters in the area would grow to 6,528 by 2006. If income ranges were to stay constant, approximately 27% of these households would earn less than 60% of the Area Median .Income and would be eligible for units developed with tax credits (1,775 households). -Approximately 4,753 rentetswould eam above this level and may seek out market rate housing. Growth in Renter Households % of Percent AMI Renter HH Estimated 2000 Estimated 2006 Under 30% AMI 8.60% 471 561 30 - 50% AMI 8.60% 471 561 50 - 60% AMI 10.00% 550 653 60 - 80% AMI 10.00% 550 653 80 - 100% AMI 22.10% 1,217 1,443 100%+ AMI 40.70% 2,238 2,657 Total 100.00% 5,499 6,528 Commuters i About 14% of employees (4,193 people) commute from outside of Eagle County to work. Of these, an estimated 55% are renters. Approximately 40% of all commuters live in households composed of couples and about the same percentage live in households composed of family members and unrelated roommates. The Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment found that around half of the commuters would prefer to live in Eagle County and that commuters tended to be employed in construction (27%) and maintenance/housekeeping and service jobs (37%). Approximately 40% of commuters are couples, family members living with roommates and roommate households. These are the household types that are most likely to be attracted to a rental housing development. Assuming that 2,306 commuters are renters (55% of commuters) and applying the overall average household size of 2.76 persons yields 836 households. If half of these households would prefer to live in Eagle County, then an additional 418 renter households could be included as part of the market for Middle Creek Village. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 52 of 75 Estimate of Commuter Households Interested in Living in Eagle County Commuters 4,193 Renters 2,306 (55%a rent) Prefer Eagle County 1,153 2.76 Ave HH Households .418 Size Turnover Rate Turnover rates were estimated at 40% and are based on information obtained from property managers which indicate that an average of four to five units per month become vacant per project. In housing for seasonal employees, turnover rates are much higher as six-month leases are used and at least half the units become vacant at the end of the winter season. Turnover rates are used as the basis for calculating demand from current residents; however, in a low vacancy rate, high cost environment it does not adequately capture all the potential market. In a high cost environment, households do not have the choice they might under other markets, making turnover rates unusually low. This, in turn, may not adequately capture the demand for the proposed housing and in a high vacancy rate environment, turnover rates may be higher and would suggest greater demand exists than is actually the case simply because renters have more choices. Factors Used to Calculate Turnover Rates Number of Projects 7 Total Units in Projects 1,062 Average Turnover 4 per month, per project Turnover - 15 Months 420 Turnover Rate 40% The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 53 of 75 Low INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT - DEMAND ANALYSIS Of the 156 units proposed for Middle Creek Village, 78 would be financed using Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). Of the 78 tax credit units, 64 would be studios and 14 would be one-bedroom units. This analysis is provided in accordance with CHFA guidelines as published for the 2001 allocation plan, as the 2002 guidelines have not been adopted. These findings are probably conservative, as unrelated roommates and seasonal workers are likely to be under-represented in the household survey. For example, the household survey data indicates that 1,472 three-person households are families with children. Another 493 three-person households are unrelated roommates.. Given the. number of seasonal workers who migrate to the area, there are probably more three-person households made up of unrelated roommates than reflected in the survey data or demand calculations. This is important as the information indicates sufficient demand for two- and three-bedroom units, however, the site design and interior unit design would be different for families with children than seasonal workers. Demand From Existing Households Of the 5,495 renter households in Eagle County, an estimated 1,494 earn less than 60% of the Area Median Income and thus would be eligible for units produced using Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Of these households, 842 (56%) consist of one- and two- person households. These are the household sizes most likely to live in studio and one- bedroom apartments. It is acknowledged that the LIHTC guidelines estimate one person for a studio and 1.5 persons for a one-bedroom unit; however, in resort communities and areas where vacancy rates have been consistently low, it is reasonable to expect that a two-person household will select a one-bedroom unit and possibly a studio. For this reason, two-person households were included, in the demand for studios and one- bedroom units. Shaded area denotes households eligible for tax credits. Renter Households by Income 1PHH 2PHH 3PHH 4PHH 5PHH Total <30% AMI 132` 138 80 37, 83' 470' 30% TO 50% AMI 69.,- 180 :71. 39 117 476 51% TO 60% x-212" '111 101 -~65 59 548 'r 61 % to 80% 142 181 154 63 37 577 81% to 100% AMI 369 215 169 314 150 1,217 TOTAL 924 825 575 518 446 3,288 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 54 of 75 • Employment It is estimated that there are 418 commuter households living as couples and with roommates who may be interested in moving to Middle Creek Village. Approximately 47% of commuters are employed in housekeeping/maintenance/restaurant and service jobs, which typically pay lower wages. It. is estimated that about half of the commuter households have income equal to or less than 60% of the Area.Median Income, or that 209 commuter households who are interested in living in Eagle County and are comprised of couples acid those living with roommates would be eligible for units produced using Low Income Housing-Tax Credits. - Future Demand - - According to the Colorado State Department of Local Affairs, State Demographers Office, the population in Eagle County is expected to grow 3% per year from 2000 to 2006. This will increase the number of households to 18,134 in 1996. Assuming that 36% of these households rent, results in an estimate of 6,528 total renters in 2006. Currently, 27% of renters meet the LIHTC income guidelines. Applying this to new renter households results in a total of 1,762 income-qualified renters in 2006. The difference between the current households (1,494) and projected income-qualified renters over the five-year period is 267 households or 53 new households annually. Assuming 56% of these households consist of one and two persons results in 30 new income and"household size qualified persons annually. • Existing and Proposed Tax Credit Projects For this analysis, only existing and proposed studio and one-bedroom units were selected, as these are the unit types that would compete with Middle Creek Village for market share. Currently, Holy Cross offers 10 one-bedroom units. The Village at Avon is proposing.44 studios and 48 one-bedroom units that would be priced as affordable under the tax credit program. This is a total of 102 tax credit units that are, or will be, made available in Eagle County. Capture Rafe and Market Penetration Rate Analysis - Tax Credit Units Using the information described in the previous sections, the capture rate for the studio and one-bedroom units is projected to be 16.8% and market penetration would be 10.5%. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 55 of 75 • Tax Credit Units Capture and Market Penetration Analysis Renters 5,499 Income Qualified 1,494 Household Size 842 Turnover Rate 320 Demand From Existing HH 320 Commuters' 209 New HH 36 Total annual demand from new, existing and commuters 565 Existing Studio, 1 & 2 BR Tax Credit Units 10 Proposed Tax Credit Units 92 Net Demand 463 Capture Rate and Market Penetration Calculations Annual Demand .565 Existing and Proposed Units 102 Proposed for Middle Creek Village 78 Capture Rate 16.8%0 j Market Penetration 10.5% Individuals and Tax Credit Units . Because of the high cost of housing in Eagle County, many two or more person households consist of unrelated roommates. Alternatively, estimated demand was also considered among individuals. This information was obtained by further stratifying the results fromOe 1999 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment. In 1999, there were 2,240 individuals who were renters living alone, with family members and roommates and in roommate households who had incomes that met the LIHTC thresholds. 'This equates to roughly 5% of the population. Of these persons, 1,647 live with roommates. Adding these persons (1,647) to adults living alone (325) equates to the need for 1,972 beds. Another 267 individuals live with family members and roommates. The latter are most likely to be couples living with one or two roommates. Assuming two beds for each of these households equates to the need for 133 additional beds. Adding this to the 1,972 individuals living as roommates and adults currently living alone equates to 2,106 potential households/individuals who may seek to live in studio and one-bedroom units. These adults also constitute a potential market for two or more bedroom units, especially those who are couples and currently living with roommates. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 56 of 75 • Individuals in Households by Income Adult Unrelated Family members and livinq alone roommates unrelated roommates Other Sub-total 30 - 60% AMI 325 1,647 267 0 2,240 Capture Rates and Market Penetration Analysis The capture rates and market penetration computations for individuals were done using the same information and methodology as performed on households. It was assumed that family members living with unrelated roommates equated to a need to provide two units to house these households; in other words, one unit might house a couple and one an individual. Assuming a 3% increase in population yields an estimate of 24 new income qualified individuals moving into the market area on an annual basis. Using this approach, Middle Creek Village would capture 10.8% of the market and a market penetration of 10.7% would have to be achieved to fully occupy the units. Capture Rates and Market Penetration for Individuals Unrelated Roommates 1,647 • Adults Living Alone 325 Family Members and Unrelated Roommates 134 Total Demand 2,106 Turnover Rate 800 Demand From Existinq Individuals/Couples 801 New Persons 24 Total annual demand from new, existing and commuters 825 } Existing Studio, 1 & 2 BR Tax Credit Units 10 Proposed Tax Credit Units 92 I~ Net Demand 723 5 Capture Rate Annual Demand 825 Existing and Proposed Units 102 Proposed for Middle Creek Villaqe 78 Capture Rate 10.8% Market Penetration 10.7% Estimate of Households Paying 30% to 40% of Income for Rent The following table indicates the rents, including utilities that are allowed under the LIHTC program for 2001 in comparison to the rents proposed for Middle Creek Village. Rents indicated for Middle Creek Village do not include the utility allowance. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 57 of 75 2001 Allowable Rents - LIHTC • LIHTC Proqram Middle Creek Villaqe AMI Studio 1 BR Studio 1 BR 30% $ 370 $ 396 50% $ 617 $ 661 60% $ 741 $ 793 $ 693 $ 733 Source: CHFA There are about 842 on and two-person households who earn 60%, or less of the Area Median Income and would be eligible for units provided with Low Income Housing Tax Credits. The next chart compares rents that are affordable to households earning 30%, 50% and 60% of the Area Median Income. Households earning 30% of the AMI would pay 50% or more of their income for this product and would likely need other forms of housing assistance. This equates to 270 households. 1;7?HH .r.:Stuiiio'', 1 BR' 2`PHH _ Studio 1 BR Proposed Rents $ -.693 $ 733 - $ 693 $ :733 ncome;at 30WAM, $14;800':; of Monfhlv'Incomefor.RR6 t, .:$16900 W "of MonthIv Income for: Rent ax`Credit Rent` „$370 59.4% ,x $423 „49,2%_, 0% Number-'6rHH .132 130 rN c at 50", AM1 $24,700$ 8,100 axdit Rent618 31.%umber of HH 69 180 come 'at'60% AMi $29.640m $33840 Fax. Credit Rent $741,;. 28.10/0 29.7% $,846 24.6% 26..0% Number of HFi 212 111 • One-person households earning 50% of the AMI would pay 34% to 35% of their incc:.)me for a studio or one-bedroom unit in this project (69 households). Of the two-person households (180) earning 50% of the AMI, roughly 30% of gross monthly income would be devoted to this product. • One-person households earning 60% of the AMI would pay 28% to 30% of their gross monthly income for the units, (212 households) and two-person households would pay 25% to 26% for this product (111 households). The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 58 of 75 • MARKET RATE UNITS - DEMAND ANALYSIS Of the 156 units proposed for Middle Creek Village, 78 will fall under tax credit requirements and 78 will be market-rate units. The two- and three-bedroom market-rate units are expected to draw from both seasonal workers and year round residents. Unit Targets - Middle Creek Village Number - Bedroom . Finance Market Tax of Units Configuration Program Credit 64 Studio LIHTC - 60% of AM I 64 4 364 Market 4 14 1 BR/1 BA LIHTC - 60% of AMI 14 4 1 BR/1 BA Market 4 26 2BR/1 BA Market 26 • 44 3BR/213A Market 44 Total 156 78 78 In 2000 there were 5,499 renters households. Assuming a 3% annual increase in population from 2000 to 2006 (42,547 to 49,324 people) and an average household size of 2.76, with renters accounting for 36% of all households, the number of renters in the area would grow to 6,528 by 2006. Excluding the current estimate of 1,494 low income tax credit qualified renters from the current estimated total renter households of 5,499, results in a current estimate of 4,005 renter households who might seek out the market rate units. Ireaddition, it was estimated that 209 of the 418 commuter households who rent and would prefer to live in Eagle County also have incomes that would allow them to qualify for the market rate portion of this project. This equates to 4,157 households with incomes above the tax credit threshold. Generally, the estimate of demand for the market rate units is likely to be conservative as it does not take into consideration seasonal employees who come into the area for part of the year and who would also seek rental housing in Vail. Seasonal employees are considered as a separate sub- market for this development (see Demand Estimates - Seasonal Employees). In performing the capture rate and market penetration analysis, units that have been developed or are proposed for employees in the market area were used. These include the comparable projects (exclusive of Eagle Villas and the tax credit units proposed for the Village at Avon) as well as the 72 units proposed for the Village at Avon to be financed using the 6320 program, 72 units at Mountain Glen, 72 additional rental units planned in Avon and 20 rentals proposed for a project in Dotsero. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 59 of 75 Comparable Existing and Planned Projects Project Units Comparable Proiects 942 Various in Avon 72 Mountain Glen 72 Village at Avon 68 Dotsero 20 Eagle Valley Health Clinic - 36 Total Units 1,210 Market Rate Units Capture and Market Penetration Rates Using the factors mentioned in the previous sections, the capture rate for the market rate units is estimated to be 13.8% and a market penetration rate of 24.2 would need to be achieved to fully occupy the units. Market Rate Units Capture and Penetration Rate Renters 5,499 LIHTC- Income Qualified (1,494) Over Income 4,005 Turnover Rate 1,522 • Demand From Existing HH 1,522 Commuters with incomes above LIHTC threshold 209 New Households 46 Total annual demand from new, existing and commuters 1,777 Capture Rate Annual Demand 1,777 Existing and Proposed Units 942 Proposed units 268 Total Existing and Proposed 1,210 Proposed for Middle Creek Village 78 Capture Rate 13.8% Market Penetration 24.2% Seasonal Employees Seasonal employees are considered a sub-market for Middle Creek Village. This project is expected to draw heavily from seasonal employees to occupy two- and three-bedroom units. The proposed rents reflect this, as pricing assumes an amount paid per bedroom as opposed to an overall unit cost that a family would have to consider paying to live in the area. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 60 of 75 • It is estimated 2,245 to 2,830 individuals, the majority of which are currently not housed in the Town of Vail, come into the valley each year for work. Using the average household size for renters of 2.54 and applying it the mid-point of individuals coming to the area to work (2,538) yields an equivalent 999 renter households or the need for 2,538 beds, assuming all seasonal workers would have their own bedroom. A majority of these renters, and their need for housing, are likely to be in addition to the 5,499 renter households identified in the 2000 Census. Anecdotal information from Vail employers confirms this number, as they generally describe a need for an additional 2000 beds to house seasonal workers each year. All rental projects in Eagle Valley offer housing to both seasonal and year-round workers, although some developments target seasonal workers. Of the comparable projects, Rivers Edge/Tames, Kayak Crossing, Eagle Bend and Timber Ridge house a majority of seasonal workers. Information from the employer survey conducted as part of the 1999 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment was used to estimate demand for seasonal employee housing. Employers reported providing housing for 1,372 employees. Not all employer assisted housing is devoted to housing seasonal workers and it is likely that there are a greater number of employees who receive assistance than was reflected in the survey. Although there are probably more beds available to house seasonal workers, the 1,372 employees who receive housing assistance is likely to be a close estimate of seasonal worker beds that are available in the area. Demand Estimate The demand for seasonal worker housing was computed differently than for tax credit units or market-rate housing. By its nature, 100% of seasonal worker housing is subject to turnover during a 15-month period. CHFA guidelines require using the turnover rate to form the basis for computing a capture rate and market penetration, which would not adequately capture the net demand estimate. Instead, demand was computed using the estimated number of seasonal workers coming into the Vail Valley and subtracting an estimate for~housing that is available for seasonal workers. The estimate for the number of employees who receive housing assistance through employers is likely to be high, as it is unlikely that all 1,372 employees who receive housing assistance are seasonal workers. On the other hand, there may be more housing provided for seasonal workers than was captured through this study. If it were assumed that employers provided housing for 1,372 seasonal workers, and that the number of seasonal workers in the area were 2,538, then there would be a net demand for seasonal worker housing of 1,166 beds or 459 units, (assuming 2.54 persons per rental unit). Using this methodology, Middle Creek Village would have to capture 15.8% of the net demand to fill the two- and three-bedroom units with seasonal workers (equivalent to 184 beds and assumes one occupant per bedroom). Market penetration for all seasonal housing would be at 53.2%. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 61 of 75 • Capture and Penetration Rates - Seasonal Worker Housing Seasonal Workers Seasonal Workers - Annual Estimate 2,538 Existinq Beds -1,372 Net Demand 1,166 Middle Creek Villaqe 184 Capture Rate 15.8% Penetration Rate 53.2% 1 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 62 of 75 • CONCLUSIONS Overview The proposal for Middle Creek Village includes units to be developed under the Low Income Housing Tax. Credit guidelines as well as providing market rate housing primarily targeted to seasonal employees. Middle Creek Village is proposing to house year-round residents, who meet the LIHTC guidelines in the studio and one-bedroom units, with a small portion made; avaiiable'at market. - Seasonal workers would be the-primary target for the two- and three-bedroom units,'although it is anticipated that year-round. residents may also seek out these units. For the purposes of this review, "seasonal workers" are those who come to the area to work one or two seasons and then leave. They may return to the area to work each season, but are not in the community year-round. Longer-term residents are those who live in the area year round. These residents may hold jobs that are seasonal in nature; however, they live in the area year round. Anecdotal information provided by area employers indicates that many of their "seasonal employees" are, in fact, year-round residents of Eagle County. One large employer indicated that year-round residents meet about half of their seasonal employment needs. It appears that there is sufficient demand for studio and one-bedroom units when current unrelated roommates are broken into individuals and combined with adults living alone. All property managers indicated a high demand for studio and one-bedroom units; at a • minimum, unrelated roommates and families with unrelated roommates wanted a separate bedroom if they had to share an apartment. On a per bedroom basis, two-bedroom units would rent for $675 per room, which is slightly below the rent proposed for the studios to be offered as tax credit units ($693) and about $60 below the rate proposed for the one-bedroom units. The small difference in price may make studio and one-bedrooms more attractive to income-eligible households,vho desire their own apartment. For the market-rate units, the price difference would be higher ($175 when a studio is compared to a single bedroom in a two-bedroom unit); however, the demand appears to be sufficient to fill this product, particularly ~Jnce eight (8) studios and one-bedrooms are offered at a "market rate" rent. Consideration was also given to the number of persons in a household by the number of bedrooms in the unit in which they lived. A majority of two-person households (58%) live in two-bedroom units. About half of four-person households lived in three-bedroom units, with 68% of five-person households living in three-bedroom units. This information documents the sharing of bedrooms among larger sized households and indicates that the proposed unit mix is appropriate for the market. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 63 of 75 • Bedroom Configuration by Number of Persons in Household One Two Three Four Five Person Persons Persons Persons Persons One Bedroom 80% 19% 5% Two Bedrooms 20% 59% 52% 33% 17% Three Bedrooms 21% 38% 50% 67% Four Bedrooms 2% 5% 17% 17% '100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Household Survey 0 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 64 of 75 RECOMMENDATIONS This section of the report combines the requirements described in the CHFA Market Study Guidelines for Recommendations and Conclusions. It includes an evaluation of the developer's proposal as-well as the opinions of the market analyst about the rent structure. 1. Product Mix The product mix proposed for Middle Creek Village is appropriate given the target markets to be served. As proposed, this project would consist of stacked flats in several different buildings (final arrangement has yet to be determined). Stacked flats are suitable for this product type and location. Special consideration needs to be given to separating the studios and one-bedroom units that are designated for year round residents from seasonal workers (two- and three-bedroom units). Ideally, these would be in separate buildings, although it may be accommodated on different floors within a building. One property manager noted that they let people know that one building is "quiet" and has a low tolerance for noise, whereas another building may be more tolerant of noise. A similar management tactic is recommended for this project. Middle Greek Village will have 44% of its units devoted to studios, with 12% found in • one-bedroom units and 17% consisting of two-bedrooms. Three-bedroom units will make up 28% of the unit mix. Comparable projects devote more toward two- bedrooms (47%) and very little to one-bedrooms and studios (22% combined). This generally reflects a market where a large number of individuals live as roommates to attain housing that is more affordable. Given that there are 1,347 persons living as unrelated roommates and another 267 who live as family members and unrelated roommates, it appears that the introduction of studios and one-bedroom units will meet a pent-up demand for small, affordable units that could accommodate an individual or couple. Property managers interviewed for this study confirmed that the greatestidemand was for studios and one-bedroom units. q Although studio and one-bedroom units are desirable, two-bedroom units offer the greatest flexibility in attracting couples desiring to live alone or with a roommate and two unrelated roommates. Given that there is a fair number of two-bedroom units in the area (47% of comparable projects), it is appropriate that Middle Creek Village would only devote 17% of its product to this unit type. The three-bedroom units are clearly targeted toward seasonal workers and make up 28% of the bedroom configuration. Given that there are approximately 2,500 seasonal employees who move into the area to work during the high season and only 31 % of existing product consists of three and four-bedroom units, it seems appropriate to include seasonal worker housing in this development. • As proposed, the unit design will accommodate couples and roommates. In each of the two- and three-bedroom units, one bedroom is larger and • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 65 of 75 • includes a walk-in closet, making it suitable for a couple or two persons to share. The remaining bedrooms are smaller, making them appropriate for one person. In addition, the unit design is flexible enough to accommodate families with children, which should enhance marketability in the summer and shoulder seasons. As noted for other seasonal renter housing, families often moved into these units during these times. 2. Optimum Rents, Security Deposits and Lease Terms It is not known at this time what the security deposit requirements would be for Middle Creek Village. Among the comparable properties, security deposits ranged from $200 per employee (Tarnes/Rivers Edge) to about 1.5 times the base rent (Lake Creek Village Apartments). Projects that allowed pets required a pet deposit and increased the rent for the pet. No pets will be allowed at Middle Creek Village. • Although the proposed rents for Middle Creek Village are higher than found among comparable and proposed projects, they are within the allowable levels for households earning 60% of the AMI for the tax credit product. Most comparable product is located down valley, which has lower overall housing prices and may not offer a fair comparison to rents in Vail. As there has not been any affordable rental housing introduced into Vail that has not been affiliated with an employer, the rents proposed for this development are considered to be optimal for the area. Vail is the primary employment center and is attractive to many because of a . reduction in commuting time and distance. In addition, Vail is often noted as a place where more renters would prefer to live. Consideration should be given to providing some variation in rents, depending upon the location of the unit. For example, top floor units would have better views and no one living "over them" and could command a slightly higher rent. Ground floor units may have patio space or easy access to the outdoors, which would also allow for a variance in rent. It is recommended that, while prices may vary, the overall average should not exceed that proposed for this development. • Middle Creek Village is proposing to use a six-month lease. This lease term will make it attractive and competitive with other seasonal housing product; however, it may increase turnover and vacancy rates as a result. Consideration should be given to using a 12-month lease for those units designed for longer-term residents. A six-month lease would be appropriate for seasonal workers. • A security deposit equivalent to $200 per resident would be in keeping with other seasonal worker housing projects. Property managers also report offering a payment plan to cover the security deposit, which could include a weekly or bi-weekly fee that is paid until the full deposit is made. A security deposit equivalent to 1.5 times the monthly rent for longer-term residents would be consistent with other practices in the area. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 66 of 75 • • With the exception of seasonal worker housing developments, no move-in specials were required to lease-up units. For seasonal workers, incentives included offering units solely to those employed by the companies that owned and/or master-leased the property, allowing for a six-month lease that included a daily rate and no penalties for breaking the lease and a modest security deposit. It may be necessary to offer similar incentives to these workers. 3. The demand fog studio and' one=bedroom" hits ' Eagle Countyrelies on the number of individuals/couples currently living with roommates who may be willing to pay more to live-in their own apartment. The choice people make to live with roommates is influenced by several factors: Age and length of time in the area. Younger residents are more willing to share a bedroom, particularly if they are new to the area. Returning seasonal workers and year round employees who have been in the area would prefer their own apartment and are willing to share a unit if they can have their own bedroom; • Cost. Sharing a space is usually less expensive than renting an apartment alone. In the Eagle Valley the average rent for a studio was $529 (first quarter 2001) and a one bedroom was $866. In comparison, a two-bedroom, two-bath unit had an average rent of $1,129 or $564. When comparing the costs, a studio would be appealing, as the rent is not significantly different from sharing a room, but a one-bedroom unit is likely to appeal to higher income, more mature households. • Location. Proximity to work and not having to drive is a consideration, particularly for those who commute into Vail to work. Parking is at a ;I premium in Vail and employees often have to pay for parking if they drive into town. Having a unit in the community, that includes parking for instances when a vehicle is needed for shopping or to leave the area, is likely to be a consideration when selecting a unit. The fact that there will be a transit stop at Middle Creek Vi Ilage will enhance the location further. It is estimated that Middle Creek Village will have to capture 19% of existing households, commuters and new households. In comparison, this project would only have to capture 10.8% of income-qualified households. Clearly, the project will attain more success if it is able to attract individuals currently living as roommates to this development. Marketing efforts need to be directed primarily to these individuals. The tax credit units are priced so that households at 60% of the AN could afford them and not exceed 30% of monthly income for rent. One-person households earning 50% of the AMI would have to pay 34% of their income for a studio and 36% of the monthly income for a one-bedroom. Households below 50% of the AMI would exceed 40% of their income for a housing payment and would likely need other forms of assistance. To be competitive and attract income qualified renters, pricing needs to be held to a maximum of that which is currently proposed. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 67 of 75 • 4. Estimated Absorption Most of the developments in Eagle Valley were built several years ago and absorption rates would not be applicable. In Breckenridge, Pinewood Village provides 74 units that include a mix of year-round and seasonal housing. This project was fully leased within 60 days.of opening in 1997.. Breck Terrace, also in Breckenridge, was opening in November 2000 with 302 units; it was fully leased within 30 days of opening.: Kayak Crossing was completed in September 1999 and was fully leased upon completion. Breck Terrace and Kayak Crossing are both employee assisted housing developments, where it was likely that employees had been notified and pre-selected for occupying the units (50 units). Regardless, this indicates that there was a very high demand for this project. Currently, Mountain Glen (located in Gypsum) is under construction and has five units occupied in the one building that is complete with an additional seven units pre-leased. The project is expected to be complete in November 2001. Delays in construction have affected occupancy rates. It is important to note that one factor that could affect the lease-up of Middle Creek Village is whether or not it is available at the same time, or close to, the opening of The Village at Avon. Taking all of these factors into consideration, it is reasonable to assume that Middle Creek Village could lease an average of 15 units per month and achieve full occupancy within a ten-month period. 5. Amenities i Following are suggested amenities and considerations the overall project based on the target market(s): Seasonal Emolovee Housinq • The more successful seasonal worker housing provides for private bedrooms, with shared living areas or common space. While the bedrooms may be fairly small, they need to be large enough to accommodate a bed and other furnishings and have a lockable door. Many of these types of units have furniture that has been "built-in." The common areas generally include a living room, dining area and kitchen. These rooms need to be large enough to accommodate the number of people sharing the unit. These employees do not make a large sum of money and cook at home more frequently than others. They also tend to entertain others within the unit, but do not need a dining area. As proposed, the unit layouts of the two- and three-bedroom units address these needs. In addition, one of the bedrooms in larger units includes a walk-in closet and is larger, which may accommodate couples sharing a unit with one other person. Furthermore, the inclusion of two bathrooms in a three-bedroom unit make this unit type more desirable The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 68 of 75 • than other three- and four-bedroom units.provided for seasonal employees where one bathroom is offered. • Anecdotal information about "seasonal employees" indicates that they would prefer to live in a unit with a separate bedroom and shared common area over a "dormitory-style" environment or even a very small studio apartment. Units of two to three bedrooms are the most appropriate for these groups. While the size may be fairly small, the organization of the interior space needs to be done in a way that maximizes art "open feeling. This includes using flexible common space and designing kitchen areas so that they are open to the rest of the unit, but still have a defined kitchen space. Again, the proposed unit plans accommodate this desire. • Many seasonal workers do.not bring cars; therefore a reduction in parking is appropriate and desirable. Although this is the case, care must be given to parking demands generated by uses during "off-season." For example, a sports camp where kids/teens use the seasonal units may create similar parking demand to winter workers; construction workers, on the other hand, would likely create higher demand for parking. Sufficient interior and exterior storage that will hold clothing, skis, bikes, • kayaks and other goods will be needed. The inclusion of the outdoor storage locker that is adjacent to the entryway of the unit addresses this need. • Access to public transportation and pedestrian links to services will also be important. Including a bus stop for the Town of Vail service will be imperative. • Hot water heaters should be adequate to provide heated water for bathing, washing dishes and clothing. Laundry rooms on site have been planned and are appropriate. Year-Round Residents • Based on the results of the focus groups, many of the year round residents living in rental housing are likely to be unrelated roommates or couples without children. These households would prefer to live in Val. • Year-round residents would like units that are "well designed with an emphasis on sound insulation." They would also prefer to have seasonal employee housing located within an enclave, rather than distributed throughout housing that they might lease. This suggests that if both groups are to be housed at Middle Creek Village, the buildings should be separated and may have different design features. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 69 of 75 • • Balconies or patio areas will be important for longer-term renters, but not as important for seasonal employees. This amenity is offered in other developments, with the exception of Timber Ridge. • There will need to be sufficient parking for year-round residents. It is more likely that there will be one car per resident for year-round residents, and this segment would be especially concerned if seasonal worker parking is not adequate. Covered parking that is offered for an additional fee would be acceptable..-,The preference would be for garages; other projects charge $50 to $75 for a garage. • This group is willing to live with roommates. The focus group found that no more than two roommates (a total of three people) are desired. This suggests that the two-bedroom units may accommodate year round residents who consist of a couple and one roommate, or three roommates. One-bedroom units are also desired by this segment. Regardless of the bedroom mix, it will be important to have a unit that is of sufficient size to accommodate a variety of furniture placements and types of furniture. Smaller units are likely to be more acceptable in Vail than down-valley locations. This group is more likely to want in-unit washers and dryers, or at least a washer/dryer hook-up. Both Grouos • Regardless of the target populations to be housed at Middle Creek Village, the following need to be considered: Sufficient interior and exterior storage that will hold clothing, skis, bikes, kayaks and other goods will be needed. Good sound insulation. • Information gleaned from the focus groups indicates that residents would prefer to have some services on site. These include things such as on- site laundry, computer rooms for Internet access, gym/work out area and a community room that could be used for larger parties. Ideally, the community room would include a "heat-up" kitchen with a microwave, water service and coffee/tea service. Property managers indicate that while these amenities are desirable and would enhance the livability of the unit, access to common facilities, such as a community room, gym/work-out area and computers must be closely monitored. It was suggested that community rooms be placed adjacent to the management office and that a deposit be required of residents for use of the facility to assure that it is returned clean and free of damage. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 70 of 75 • 6. Utilities - There is a variation in how utilities are handled among comparable projects. They are generally included in the rent for seasonal employees to avoid conflicts among roommates about how much to pay. This includes water, sewer, electric, gas and cable services. Other developments charge a flat fee, in addition to the base rent, for comparable utilities, also to avoid potential conflicts. The fee adjusts based on the number of bedrooms. Other developments only include water, sewer and trash in the rent. It is recommended that a utility fee be added to the base rent to avoid conflicts among roommates and minimize the amount of deposits a renter may have to pay at the time a lease is signed. 7. Gas is the recommended source of fuel, as it is more economical. 8. Timing - it is important to recognize that The Village at Avon is proposing to construct 244 rental units in Avon during the same time period that is proposed for Middle Creek Village. Although the location of Middle Creek Village is more desirable than that proposed for the Village at Avon, this project is proposing larger units, of a comparable unit mix, for a lesser rent. Although the market appears to be strong at this time, the recent slowing of the economy may have an adverse affect on both projects if they are introduced into the market at the same time. i • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 71 of 75 ATTACHMENTS Summary of, Focus Groups On April 2, 2001 Chris, Cares of RRC Associates, Inc. moderated two focus groups for the Town of Vail. These groups were designed to address issues related to affordable housing in the Town, particularly as experienced.by current renters.. Participants in the groups were recruited by the Town of Vail (TOV) staff; sessions were held at the Library and at the Inn at West ,Vail., Prior to the start of each group participants were asked to complete a brief Background Survey designed to provide some additional information to augment that obtained through the focus groups. A summary of the results of this survey is provided in the attachment to this report. This short report provides a brief overview of findings from the groups, along with a summary of notes taken at the session by Nina Timm, a member of the Community Development Department staff. Participants were told that their comments would be summarized in a format that did not directly attribute comments to an individual. Further, the participants were identified by first name only. Therefore, the notes list comments but they do not contain references to the names of speakers. • The focus groups were designed to build on focus groups conducted over the past • several years that have been held with seasonal residents. The makeup of participants in each of the April groups was similar. Surprisingly, the groups were not well attended by true "seasonal" workers although this segment was targeted in the recruiting. The problem was that, with the exception of one participant, seasonal workers-,Chose not to attend the sessions. The group that attended these sessions, which included primarily residents that have been in Vail between one and three years, represent another extremely important segment of the Vail community in need of housing assistance. • Based on the short survey conducted in advance of the sessions, all participants feel that affordable housing is a problem. In fact, interestingly, the groups felt strongly that they along with seasonal residents should be. receiving attention from the Town in efforts to create affordable housing. As several pointed out, "We represent an important segment of the community both in terms of our interest in the community and the types of service we provide, year-round." • In general participants were young (between the ages of 25 and 35) renters. Most lived with unmarried roomates although a few participants were married. A majority of participants live in the Town and all worked at least one job in the Town. Many of the participants work more than one job and most have worked multiple jobs in the past. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 72 of 75 • While describing their household, participants were asked about pets. Several participants have pets and most want pets but indicate that they are "not allowed." There is an interplay between having pets and finding affordable housing that is frequently a part of the housing decision process for residents, especially those that have been in Vail between one and five years. While it is obviously difficult to create affordable housing that allows pets, it is important to understand that many residents want pets - it is an important part of quality of life as perceived by this segment of the work force. It is also one of he perceived benefits of moving down Valley to less expensive but also less restricted housing. • Many members of these groups would like to own in the future but in the near term they are looking for rental housing that has some of the attributes of owned housing. Some participants find it acceptable to live down-Valley (although not beyond Edwards), but most really want to live in Vail. "Vail has the night life and the fun. Vail is why I am here." • The groups felt that access to transportation is an important part of the housing location decision process. The Vail bus system is good and it makes it possible to live and work without a car, or without daily use of a car. The groups felt strongly that housing should be located on the transportation system. They felt that the Mountain Bell site is a good site in relation to the bus system, but that it would take some work to be pedestrian friendly. They felt that it is important to pay careful • attention to pedestrian planning, especially if the site is to serve seasonal workers. • The groups felt that they are paying excessive amounts of their income for housing - in some cases as much as 50 percent. They frequently compare the costs to what they experience in other metropolitan areas and are keenly aware of the sacrifice that they believe they are making to be in Vail. They balance the quality of their life in Vail against opportunities to move to other locations (often urban) where salaries would b~ higher and/or housing less expensive. • The groups were generally not very aware of efforts by the Town and others to create affordable housing. Some were aware of Vail Commons and were very positive about the design and function of these units. The current program of deed restrictions applied to TOV affordable housing was discussed. In general, the group felt that deed restrictions are important and necessary although several said deed restrictions would enter into their housing purchase decision. Their concern was to have enough value accumulating in their home to allow them to move to another property in the Vail area as they outgrow their initial home. This lead to the suggestion that affordable housing in Vail should include a variety of housing types that are appropriate to households' changing needs over time. • Participants felt that "seasonal housing" does not work in the long term for residents. They wanted to see some transitional" rental units created that are designed for the special needs of the segment that are in Vail from one to five years, or some of the international staff that return each year, but are also gone for a part of the year. Ideally these units would be "Well designed with emphasis on sound insulation. The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 73 of 75 • They would anticipate the desire to not party all the time, and be located so that the seasonal work force is concentrated in enclaves." • Focus group participants felt that seasonal and longer-term rental units should contain a mixture of floor plans, not all one type of plan. An example of these differing opinions-,about unit layouts was evident around the discussion of both kitchens in units, and roommates. Some felt that kitchens are very important because this is where interaction takes place =others felt that they could be minimized because many workers have access to food services, on-mountain or at restaurants. Similarly, some wanted roommates and were willing to share a bedroom but most preferred a unit design that minimized this occurrence. • In general, the groups felt that there are different types of needs by different types of workers... They pointed out that a segment of seasonal workers arrive with little more than a suitcase and skis, but others arrive for a single season with a car fully loaded. For many of these workers, cost is the most important issue and the focus group participants supported units designed for low cost housing by seasonal residents. But they felt that good design and sound insulation are extremely important in designing for any segment. Based on the opinions expressed at the focus groups, each of these segments represent an important part of the work force and both should be designed for. Several felt that the dormitory-type approach for seasonal workers should be a part of the program, but there was some feeling that this type housing"would be better located closer to the mountain than the Mountain Bell site (Sunbird redeveloped was suggested). • • Most participants felt that longer term rental housing could be effectively integrated with seasonal worker oriented housing and that this type of "integrated community design" should be pursued. They envisioned a "neighborhood" with a mixture of people. As a part of the design for seasonally and longer term residents they mentioned recreation facilities (such as a minimal work out facility, pool tables, internet access, basketball and volleyball). They also mentioned outdoor gathering places where barbeques could occur. They described a need for indoor and outdoor "social s aces." They felt that a well designed laundry is an opportunity. One mentioned a combination laundry/bar that is available in some other communities. "A place to hang out in conjunction with the laundry would be nice." One mentioned that Vail's recreation facilities that are being discussed would provide excellent amenities to support worker housing - she said "Perhaps the recreation center should also be talked about for the Mountain Bell site. Interestingly, as the groups talked about the Mountain Bell site they were excited about-the opportunities that it represents and they began to envision far more uses for the site than it could ever hold. • Balconies were discussed. Many felt that if adequate and well-designed indoor and outdoor gathering spaces were created, balconies are a low priority for seasonal residents. However, they are important for longer-term residents, as is storage space. • The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 74 of 75. • Parking was seen as an opportunity to be handled differently. Several suggested that parking be allocated to individuals rather than to units. Pay for parking in addition to the unit rent, encourage workers without cars and discourage the use of cars. Several felt that cars could be stored somewhat remote from their unit although security of the automobile was a concern. All of the participants had cars (sometimes one per married couple) but several pointed out that many seasonal workers come to Vail without cars. This represents a "design opportunity." i • 9 The Housing Collaborative, LLC. Page 75 of 75 • Middle Creek Village Project Financing Options Coughlin & Company analyzed many financing structures that might be employed to implement the unit mix reflected in this submission. Three of these are discussed below. Coughlin & Comnanv. in its efforts to provide a financing program that maximizes unit affordabilitv to tenants, recommends Financing Ootion #1. This financing plan will be developed and testing with the applicable entities whose support is required, including the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority, the State of Colorado, and various sources of governmental and private credit enhancement. Furthermore, the selected unit mix and rental rates have been submitted to the Housing Collaborative, and have been validated by the Housing Collaborative as supportable by and responsive to the market for such units in Vail. Financing Plans may require modification based on future feedback from the applicable public entities. • FINANCING OPTION 91 The unit mix and rental rates reflect that 50% of the total units in the project will be designated and restricted for occupants whose household income is at 60% or less of Eagle County's area median household income. These units will be entirely studio units and 1-bedroom units. The remaining units that are not subject to the AMI restrictions will include studio, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, and 3 bedroom units: all of these will be unrestricted as to the maximum income of the occupants. This unit mix is intended to qualify the project to utilize the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and tax-exempt bonds (which would be made available to the project through an allocation of Private Activity Bonds). In addition, it anticipated that Taxable Bonds would be required to provided the remaining required Debt Financing. Coughlin & Company would arrange private equity investment to fill the remaining financing gap, which is currently estimated to be approximately $1,300,000 - $1,400,000. The estimated breakdown of the proportions of each of the financing sources, and the estimated interest rate for each component of the debt financing, is reflected in attached Project Budget and Project Pro Forma. Changes to the Program that result from input from the Town of Vail or changes to the budget due to scope changes or uncertainties related to the cost and quantity of parking, the requirement for acceleration/deceleration lane(s), soils conditions at the site, etc., shall be reflected and explained in future Project Budgets, as required. FINANCING OPTION #2 Utilizing the same unit mix, a second alternative was analyzed in which the Low Income Housing Tax Credit was eliminated, although tax-exempt bonds were still utilized as the major source of permanent financing. This option essentially reflects the economics of a "63-20 Corporation" format of ownership. This option necessitated a dramatic increase in private equity to replace the LIHTC equity. Private equity in this scenario is approximately $3,400,000. Unlike equity provided through the LIHTC program, which requires little or no annual cash distributions, private equity requires a minimum of 12 - 15% cash-on-cash return PLUS additional funds to repay principal or, in this case, to generate the potential for a 22% - 25% Internal Rate of Return. To generate this additional level of annual cash flow and make this financing alternative feasible, the unit rents would need to be increased annroximately $200 per unit ner month across all 148 units in the DroDosed unit mix versus the rental rates in Financing Option #1. Financing Option #2 represents a dramatic reduction in unit affordability for tenants. FINANCING OPTION #3 This option is the same as Option #2 above, except the use of tax exempt bonds has also been eliminated and has been replaced by traditional, taxable debt. This has the impact of both increasing the interest rate associated with the long-term debt, and reducing the amortization period from 40 years to 30 years. This option reflects "market rate" financing, without any of the • benefits or programs that are available for affordable housing development. Total private equity required in this scenario (to preserve a maximum Loan-to-Value ration on the I" Mortgage Debt) would be approximately $4,500,000 - $4,700,000. This option requires substantial additional cash flow versus Financing Option #2 to cover the increased debt service that this the result of higher interest costs and a shorter amortization period. To generate this additional level of annual cash flow and make this financing alternative feasible, the unit rents would need to be increased annroximately $380 ner unit ner month across all 148 units in the nronosed unit mix versus the rental rates in Financing Option 91. Financing Option #3 represents a dramatic reduction in unit affordability for tenants. A more detailed pro forma associated with Option 42 and Option 43 is being submitted, under separate cover, to the Executive Director of the Vail Local Housing Authority. • Middle Creek Village Project Pro Forma This section contains the following items: 1) Unit Mix and Revenue Breakdown 2) Sources and Uses of Funds 3) 20 Year Operating Pro-Forma 4) Projected Operating Expense Breakdown (initial year) 5) Detailed Construction Cost Support from Shaw Construction First Costs The Sources and Uses reflects the Development Team's current best assessment and estimate of the costs of completing the project through its initial lease-up. As we are currently in a very early stage of planning, these items are preliminary in nature and are subject to a number of assumptions. As we progress through our reviews with PEC, ORB, and as we develop more detailed plans, we will be able to more accurately reflect the First Costs associated with the project. In addition to a 5% Development Contingency, the project budget reflects a separate Town of Vail Items Contingency Fund in the amount of $200,000, which will be used, if required, to cover added costs associated with currently unforeseen requirements imposed on the • project by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town Council, or Planning Department staff, and the full expenditure of this $200,000 has already been factored in to the unit rents. If these funds are not required, this budget line item will be eliminated from the Final Project Budget, and rents will be adjusted accordingly. If unforeseen requirements exceed $200,000, budget and rental increases may be required. In previous versions of the budget, this contingency was at $550,000; it is at a reduced amount in this submission to reflect the fact that substantial funds have now been set aside for the inclusion of covered parking within the project. The current Project Budget reflects the inclusion of a Debt Service Reserve Fund, equal to 3 month's debt service on the tax-exempt and taxable bond financing, and construction period interest estimates that relate to the current financing mix and projected construction completion date. The components of our Proposed Financing are discussed in narrative form in Section 3 herein. Otherwise, estimates of the principal amounts of each source of funds, interest rates, and amortization periods are all included herein. 20 Year Pro Forma The exact breakdown of the projected sources of revenues is derived from the unit mix and rental rate schedule. The projected operating expenses are detailed in a separate schedule within this • section, and the debt service requirements are calculated in the Income Statement. Each item in the Pro Forma is preliminary in nature and is subject to change as more details of the design are provided and more feedback is received from the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority, the State of Colorado, and other private sources of credit enhancement. • Monthly Detail The current submission presents all First Costs in terms of the totals for the project's development. A monthly breakdown of construction expenditures would be neither accurate nor useful at this juncture, but will be available in conjunction with the Final Project, or perhaps earlier, once we have a more accurate projection of our start date and more detailed construction plans operating cost and project revenue information in annual totals. The 20-year Pro Forma also shows annual totals for project revenues and expenses, which is how this information will be consistently shown to VLHA and project lenders. A projected monthly breakdown of on-going rental income and on-going operating expenses is not typically done in the real estate industry because detailed monthly budgets are typically only completed for the immediately succeeding year. Coughlin & Company will provide VLHA with annual operating budgets, presented in a monthly breakdown, as the are prepared in the future. • • • • Middle CreekPillage Rental Housing Development - Unit Mix Rental Rate, Rental Rates Rental Rate, PER VS. At Number Percent Square Footage utility #of Total Shared Square 60% 100% 3.00% Unit Description of Units of Total Per Unit Total Percent Rate Allow. Total Beds Beds Bedroom Bed Bedroom Foot AMI AMI Increase " Affordable, at 60% of AMI Alcove Studio 57 38.51% 364 20,748 23.36% $693 $48 $741 1.00 57.00 $693 $693 $347 $1 90 $0 $714 1 Bedroom 14 9.46% 480 6,720 7.57% $733 $60 $793 1.50 21.00 $733 $489 $367 $1.53 $0 $755 Total 71 47.97% 30.93% AVERAGE $701 $751 1.10 $701 $653 $350 $1.83 Market Rate Alcove Studio 4 2.70% 364 1,456 1.64% $850 $48 $898 1.00 4.00 $850 $850 $425 $2.34 ($337) $876 1 Bedroom 4 2.70% 480 1,920 2.16% $975 $60 $1,035 1.50 6.00 $975 $650 $488 $2.03 ($287) $1,004 2 Bedroom 24 16.22% 728 17,472 19.67% $1,350 $80 $1,430 2.50 60.00 $675 $540 $338 $1.85 ($157) $1,391 3 Bedroom 45 30.41% 900 40,500 45.60% $1,765 $90 $1,855 3.50 157.50 $588 $504 $294 $1.96 $23 $1,818 Total 148 52.03% 69.07% AVERAGE 600 $1,547 $1,630 2.95 305.50 $649 $541 $325 $1.95 TOTAL 100.00% 88,816 100.00% Common Area Factor = 2.81% Common Area Square Footage = 2,500 Total Square Footage (Approx.) 91,316 -Actual LIHTC rents will be the CHFA rents in effect at the time of the initial lease-up; actual initial market rate rents will be the rents reflected in this schedule, increased at the same % increase in the LIHTC rents from the 2001 schedule to the schedule in place at the time of initial lease-up. Middle Creek Village Rental Housing Development Sources and Uses of Funds % of Sources of Funds Total Total Land Contribution 0 0.00% Sale of Tax Credits 1,993,052 8.13% Private Equity 1,351,016 5.51% Bond Financing Tax-Exempt Bonds 77.01% 15,000,000 61.22% Taxable Bonds 22.99% 4,478,336 18.28% 100.00% 19,478,336 19,478.336 79.50% Deferred Developer Fee, @ 66.67% 1,678,647 6.85% Gap/(Surplus) 0 0.00% Debt, per unit 24,501,052 100.00% LIHTC Uses of Funds Total Per SF Basis Land Acquisition 0 $0.00 0 Day Care Center Costs $6,757 1,000,000 $10.95 0 Hard Costs - Construction $85,788 12,696,694 $139.04 12,696,694 (includes tuck under parking) Per Unit, Total $92,545 Site Work and Surface Parking 2,770,334 $30.34 2,770,334 Additional Construction Items Allowance for Accel/Decel Lanes 240,748 $2.64 240,748 TOV Items Contigency (PEC,DRB, CDOT, etc.) (1) 200,000 $2.19 200,000 • Value Engineering Target, @ 3.76% (581,289) ($6.37) (581,289) Architect and Engineering, @ 5.75% 960,697 $10.52 960,697 Marketing, Leasing, Administration 70,190 $0.77 0 Financing Fees and Interest Origination Fees 1,169,022 Approximate Breakdown 1st Mortgage Financing (Tax Exempt) 300,000 Taxable Bonds 134,350 Equity Syndication 100,322 Bond Issuer Fees 194,783 Credit Enhancement 389,567 Legal and Other 50,000 Total Origination 1,169,022 1,169,022 $12.80 292,256 Construction Period Interest- Net 1,283,894 1,283.894 $14.06 1,283,894 Debt Service Reserve Fund Deposit (Equal to 3 months Debt Service) 340,979 $0.00 0 Legal, Accounting, etc. 150,000 $1.64 75,000 Reimbursement to TOV 250,000 $2.74 250,000 Tap Fees 385,000 $4.22 385,000 Total Developer Project Contigency, 5.00% 1,046,813 $11.46 1,046,813 Allocation - Hard Costs 2.50% 523,407 Allocation - Soft Costs, Financing 2.50% 523,407 Developer Fee, @ 12.00% 2,517,970 $27.57 2,517,970 24,501,052 $268.71 1 22,138,1171 Calculation of Tax Credits Total Eligible Basis i 22,138,117 x Percentage of all Units (or so that is "Affordable" 30.93% Actual Project Basis 6,846,624 x Tax Credit Factor ("4% Credits") 3.55% Total Tax Credits 2,430,552 Price Per Credit = $0 $0.8.82 Proceeds from Sale of Credits 1,993,052 (1) TOV Items Contigency is exclusively for project scope increases that are directed by TOV agencies or VLHA. Any unused portion of this contingency category will be removed from the project budget prior to closing on the Project's Financing and rental rates will be adjusted accordingly. Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 2,087,456 2,129,205 2,171,789 2,215,225 2,259,529 2,304,720 2,350,814 2,397,830 2,445,787 2,494,703 PUPA Other Income $125.00 18,500 18,870 19,247 19,632 20,025 20,425 20,834 21,251 21,676 22,109 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 3.50% 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 Laundry Income 40,000 40,800 41,616 42,448 43,297 44,163 45,046 45,947 46,866 47,804 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single $75.00 48,600 49,572 50,563 51,575 52,606 53,658 54,731 55,826 56,943 58,081 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem $125.00 22,500 22,950 23,409 23,877 24,355 24,842 25,339 25,845 26,362 26,890 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units $25.00 7,200 7,344 7,491 7,641 7,794 7,949 8,108 8,271 8,436 8,605 11 Additional Surface Spaces $40.00 5,280 5,386 5,493 5,603 5,715 5,830 5,946 6,065 6,186 6,310 0 Additional Storage Spaces $50.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss 7.00% ($156,903) ($160,024) ($163,208) ($166,455) ($169,768) ($173,147) ($176,593) ($180,108) ($183,693) ($187,351) Net Revenue 2,084,567 2,126,036 2,168,335 2,211,480 2,255,487 2,300,375 2,346,161 2,392,862 2,440,497 2,489,085 Expenses Expense Inflation 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% PUPA Operating Expenses $3,250.00 481,000 500,240 520,250 541,060 562,702 585,210 614,471 645,194 677,454 711,326 Reserve for Replacement $250.00 37,000 38,480 40,019 41,620 43,285 45,016 47,267 49,630 52,112 54,717 Net Operating Income 1,566,567 1,587,316 1,608,066 1,628,800 1,649,501 1,670,149 1,684,423 1,698,038 1,710,932 1,723,041 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1.49 1.51 1.53 1.55 1.57 - 1.59 1.60 1.62 1.63 1.64 Available for Subordinate Debt 516,136 536,885 557,635 578,369 599,070 619,718 633,992 647,607 660,501 672,610 Subordinate Debt Payment 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 Total Debt Service 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.15 1.16 1.18 1.19 1.21 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 Available for Distribution 202,652 223,402 244,152 264,886 285,586 306,234 320,509 334,123 347,017 359,127 Interest Rate and Dent Service Assumptions Amount Rate Amort Payment Tax-Exempt Bonds 15,000,000 5.75% 30 1,050,431 Taxable Bonds 4,478,336 7.00% Int. Only 313,484 Interest only for 30 years, than amortizing through 40 years Total/Average 19,478,336 6.04% 1,363,915 Amortized Payment = 623,967 Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 2,544,597 2,595,489 2,647,399 2,700,347 2,754,353 2,809,441 2,865,629 2,922,942 2,981,401 3,041,029 Other Income 22,551 23,002 23,462 23,932 24,410 24,899 25,397 25,904 26,423 26,951 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 11,934 Laundry Income 48,760 49,735 50,730 51,744 52,779 53,835 54,911 56,010 57,130 58,272 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single 59,243 60,428 61,637 62,869 64,127 65,409 66,717 68,052 69,413 70,801 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem 27,427 27,976 28,535 29,106 29,688 30,282 30,888 31,505 32,136 32,778 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units 8,777 8,952 9,131 9,314 9,500 9,690 9,884 10,082 10,283 10,489 11 Additional Surface Spaces 6,436 6,565 6,696 6,830 6,967 7,106 7,248 7,393 7,541 7,692 0 Additional Storage Spaces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss ($191,081) ($194,886) ($198,767) ($202,725) ($206,763) ($210,882) ($215,083) ($219,368) ($223,738) ($228,196) Net Revenue 2,538,645 2,589,196 2,640,758 2,693,351 2,746,996 2,801,714 2,857,526 2,914,455 2,972,522 3,031,750 Expenses Expense Inflation 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Operating Expenses 746,893 784,237 823,449 864,622 907,853 944,167 981,934 1,021,211 1,062,059 1,104,542 Reserve for Replacement 57,453 60,326 63,342 66,509 69,835 72,628 75,533 78,555 81,697 84,965 Net Operating Income 1,734,299 1,744,633 1,753,966 1,762,220 1,769,308 1,784,919 1,800,059 1,814,689 1,828,766 1,842,244 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1.65 1.66 1.67 1.68 1.68 1.70 1.71 1.73 1.74 1.75 Available for Subordinate Debt 683,868 694,201 703,535 711,789 718,877 734,488 749,628 764,258 778,335 791,813 Subordinate Debt Payment 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 313,484 Total Debt Service 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 1,363,915 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.27 1.28 1.29 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35 Available for Distribution 370,384 380,718 390,052 398,305 405,394 421,004 436,145 450,775 464,851 478,329 Town of Vail • Affordable Housing Development Detail Of Project Operating Expenses Administrative/Leasing Total Payroll Salaries and Taxes 56,250 Management Fee 114,620 Professional Fees 16,950 General Office Expenses 4,800 Leasing Expenses 8,400 Total Administrative Expenses 201,020 Operating Expense Janitor Contract Services 10,320 Window Cleaning 6,906 Cleaning Supplies 3,182 Carpet Cleaning 13,416 Apartment Make Ready 11,484 Light Fixtures Bulbs 3,293 Trash removal 7,082 Insurance 54,816 • Fire and Life Safety 3,916 Utilities 32,112 Total Operating Expense 146,526 Maintenance Expense Staff Payroll 40,702 Snow Removal Materials and Assistance 7,900 Grounds 4,585 Common Area Painting 4,545 Plumbing 2,212 Other Building Maintenance Supply 4,350 Total Maintenance Expense 64,294 Taxes 69,160 Total Expenses 481,000 Per Unit, Per Year $3,250 November 5, 2001 • Middle Creek Village SHAW Construction Scope Letter and.Estimate Detail SHAW • IMIMMBHMEIN~ November 5, 2001 Mr. Mike Coughlin Coughlin & Company Inc 140 East 19`h Avenue, Suite 700 Denver, CO 80203-1035 Re: Middle Creek Village Concept Design Estimate; Revised II Dear Mike, Thank you for the opportunity to present you with revised Conceptual pricing for the Middle Creek Village Housing project. Please bear in mind that the documents which outline the work are preliminary. We are providing this budget based on preliminary unit plans, but without the benefit of building floor plans, sections, elevations, and details, etc.. We have discussed the scope with Odell Architects and design consultants to provide a comprehensive budget based on the best information available. At this point in time, the design documents are still very much a work in progress. When in doubt, we have used our experience to draw reasonable • inferences from the plans and have assumed specifications that are in keeping with the concept of affordable housing. The assumptions that form the basis for the estimate are the same as in our previous letter to you except as outlined below. The design and budgeting process is a dynamic one, and ultimately, decisions made by you and the Design Team, as well as confirmation of the soils report and other variables will determine the final project costs. Our role is to analyze assemblies and offer suggestions which will enable you to build the desired project within the budget. The project consists of a total of (148) units, with a gross floor area measured outside wall to outside wall totaling (88,816) sf of housing plus (19,905) sf of tuck-under parking plus (2,500) sf of Commons/Leasing Office for a gross floor area of (111,221) sf, comprised of the following Unit Mix: Type A& B Studio 1-bath 364 sf (61) Units Type B 1BR 1-bath 480 sf (18) Units Type C 2 BR 1-bath 720 sf (24) Units Type D 3 BR 2 bath 900 sf (45) Units • 760 Horizon Drive • Grand Junction, CO 81506 Phone (970) 242-9236 • Fax (970) 241-5618 • www.shawconst.com Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 The Estimate assumes the following: ? Unit Kitchens and Bathrooms are repetitive in design ? Window types are repetitive'with (3) - (4) unit types from standard sizes. ? Bathrooms and Kitchens stack so that waste and vent lines and all domestic water and electric lines are efficiently stacked. Floor loads are efficiently stacked so that no structural transfer conditions exist. ? Rated walls shall be built using the NER 149 assembly. SCHEDULE We have assumed that construction of your project will begin in the 2Q02. Depending on the extent of sitework and the scope of the parking structure, we estimate the project will require approximately 3 months of pre-requisite sitework and preparation and approximately 12 months to complete the buildings for a total schedule of approximately 15 months. DESIGN DOCUMENTS Our price is in accordance with the following documents: Unit Floor Plans dated 10/26/01 Concept Site Plan, prepared by Peak Land Consultants faxed to us 11/1 and earthwork quantities per Peak verbal direction. THE BASIS OF PRICING The price is based on the plans and our reasonable interpretations thereof, and takes into account assumptions necessary for a complete building as intended. Where an allowance is noted, it includes both labor and materials unless specifically stated otherwise. THE FOLLOWING IS INCLUDED Division 2000 SITE WORK • Clear and grub of existing vegetation • Topsoil depth removal is assumed as average of 12" strip depth. This will be confirmed when a soils report is completed with representative borings across the site. • Demolition and removal of existing building. Where feasible, asphalt and concrete • will be crushed and recycled. • Earthwork and utility quantities as detailed on the attached estimate dated 10/19. Page 2 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 • • Paving is assumed as 3" HBP on 5" Class 6. All asphalt and concrete paving quantities are assumed as detailed. • Paving is not included in this budget for the Early Child Center; the subgrade at this area will be left 0.5'. The A/D Lane earthwork, paving, striping and signage is not included in this budget. • Site assumed a total export as shown on the attached detail cost estimate.. Some material is assumed to be embanked on the CDOT ROW adjacent to the site. Vegetation of this berm is in the Landscape Allowance noted below. • The road to the existing Mountain Bell tower site will remain except for the entrance which shall be blocked off. • A temporary site fence using orange "snowfence" is included (chain link fence is not included.) • Allowance of $15,000 is included for Site furniture. • Allowance of $15,000 is included for Bus Shelter • Allowance of $200,000 is included for landscape irrigation, plantings, seeding, and all related work (Early Learning Center is not included in this allowance). • Retaining walls shown are assumed as MSE split face block from manufacturer standard colors or boulder walls at Contractor's option. • Walks are assumed as 4" thick grey standard 4ksi concrete with broom finish on grade. (no gravel or class 6 prep except to level subgrade) • Screened rock 4" thick under slabs on grade. • Installation of 4" foundation drainage at CIP walls only (No foundation drain is included where isolated spread footings are below frost line). All foundation drains are daylighted (no pumps, drywells or vaults are included) • Total Allowance of $20,000 for Trash/Recycle bin enclosures Division 3000 CONCRETE • Concrete cast-in-place Footings totaling (373) cy and Walls totaling (627) cy using 3ksi concrete. CIP Concrete columns at tuck-under parking are 12"x12" CIP for a total quantity of (540) If. • Total of (742) if of thickened edge approximately 12" x 12" for load bearing interior walls. • Concrete slab-on-grade 4' thick using 4ksi concrete assuming a total of (29,605) sf of building on grade reinforced with fibermesh or WWF10/10 • A total of (900) sf of structural slab doweled into CIP walls at entry pads and stair landings which are located over deep fill areas (top prevent settlement of pads). • Gypcrete 1 ''/z" thick at all elevated floor assemblies. • Concrete entry pads, walkways with quantities as detailed in estimate • Division 4000 MASONRY Page 3 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 • Total Allowance of $150,000 for stone and supporting steel ledgers, flashing, and all related components. Stone is featured at many arch locations which will cost more than flat "block" areas. (Synthetic stone may be a good alternative here to get more coverage for less money, and to simplify the supporting structure.) DIVISION 5000 STEEL • The project estimate assumes that no structural steel is required (all wood frame) • A total allowance of $40,000 for snowfence is included Division 6000 WOODS & PLASTICS • Wood framing assumes use of pre-engineered standard TJI floor joist and roof joist package, bearing on nominal 6" exterior wall studs and interior 4" nominal wall studs. All wall heights are nominal 8' tall. Floor sheathing will be 1/4" T&G APA rated OSB nailed and glued to TJI's. Wall sheathing of exterior walls will be predominantly exterior Y2" gypsum sheathing with OSB only as required at exterior corners. • Rough framing of roofs shall be pre-fabricated trusses with an energy heel, 4:12 roof pitches, with 19/32" OSB nailed (no glue) including blocking. Roof overhangs shall be limited to 24" maximum. • • Floor framing over tuck under parking will be pre-engineered I joists with (2) layers of 5/8' Type X GWB for separation. • Party Wall construction shall consist of the 1 hour rated wall using NER 149 assembly. • Soffits shall be hardiboard or equivalent textured material nailed to roof joists/outriggers. • Siding (except for stone locations) shall be 4'x8' hardiboard stucco textured panels with 4/4 x nominal 6" hardiboard or battens to simulate "Bavarian timber/stone wall" theme. • Window and door casing shall be 4/4 x nominal 4" hardiboard • Roof soffit fascia shall be nominal lx6" hardiboard fascia • A total of (54) floors of stairs are included and shall be nominal 3"x 10" timber stringers and treads with STK Western Red cedar picket rails. • Finish carpentry including prefinished Legacy base trim, paint grade closet single shelf & rod, paint grade window sills and apron. • Employee Housing grade kitchen cabinets and bathroom vanities and countertops with an Allwoance of $1,850/Unit. • Total Allowance of $25,000 for window shutters including special stencil or decorative painting. • Allowance of $15,000 for decorative exterior timber • Division 7000 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION. Page 4 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 • • Tuff-n-Dri vertical waterproofing on foundation walls adjacent to occupied CIP walls. ( No dampproofing or waterproofing is included on walls below grade). • Insulation above tuck under parking shall be R30 unfaced fiberglass batt. • Unfaced batt insulation: R19 at exterior walls, R-11 for all interior bathroom walls, R38 blown-in insulation in ceilings with baffles. Polyethylene vapor barriers at all exterior walls and ceilings. (No interior wall or floor insulation is included except noted above.) • Bituthene waterproofing vertically 30" at all vertical to horizontal roof junctures. Bituthene at all soffits and valleys. • Roof assembly shall be 30 year asphalt shingles on felt paper and galvanized flashings at valley, step locations. (Drip flashing is not included.) • Flashing at door and window heads, at roof areas using galvanized flashing. • Total of (1,200) if of gutters, downspouts with heat tape Division 8000 DOORS & WINDOWS • Pre-finished, insulated, raised panel doors at all Unit Entries • Flush panel hollow core metal doors at exterior closets with pull and locking hasp in lieu of passage hardware. • • Insulated unit Entry Doors have door viewer, lever locking handset and deadbolt. • Legacy, pre-finished flush panel doors with Timely knock down metal frames for all interior doors. • A total of (825) Vinyl windows from manufacturer standard sizes each approximately x5' in single-hung configurations with a maximum of (4) window sizes. Tempered units are included as required by code adjacent to openings. • Standard unframed, wall-mounted mirrors in all bathrooms. Division 9000 • Allowance of $100,000 for exterior stucco • GWB wall assemblies consisting of 5/8" exterior walls, ''/z" interior walls with RC channel on ceilings, water resistant in bathrooms. All GWB will receive spray applied wall and ceiling texture. • A total of (3,978) sf of interior soffits to conceal bathroom exhaust ducts to outside walls. • Total of (19,000) sf of sheet vinyl flooring in entry, bathrooms and kitchens • Recycled carpet with allowance of $17.5/sy installed including pad at all non-vinyl floor areas. • Paint or seal all interior GWB with one color for walls and ceilings, using semigloss in Kitchens and Bathrooms. Painting of exterior with maximum of (4) colors for body • and trim. Page 5 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 Division 10000 SPECIAL CONDITIONS • Economy-grade bath accessories, including towel bars, toilet paper holders, shower rods and robe hooks. • Total of (16) Fire extinguishers. • Interior grade Mailbox postal specialty Allowance of $5,000 Division 11000 EOUIPMENT • Appliances in all units including builder's grade economy 19.1 cf refrigerators, electric 4 top oven and range, ductless exhaust hoods, garbage disposal. (Dishwashers and Microwaves are not included) Division 12000 FURNISHINGS • Allowance of $20,000 for vinyl window blinds in all units. Division 15000 PLUMBING & HEATING • All plumbing, including PVC drain, waste & vent piping at three story units, cast iron in 4 story units. All underground waste piping shal be pvc or abs. • Hydronic heating with (1) zone per unit for all units. Polyethylene distribution tubing and baseboards. • Boiler plant shall be located in each building with exterior door access and side wall power vent. • Bath exhaust fans and ducting through side wall. • Wet Fire sprinkler protection as required by code per NFPAI3R including sprinkler protection of tuck-under parking. • Economy-grade plumbing fixtures (white w/ chrome trim), Delta or equivalent faucets, tank-type round toilets, oval china lavatory sinks with single lever faucets, 5' hub and shower enclosures w/ single lever faucets, stainless steel kitchen sinks w/ single lever faucets and spray. Division 16000 ELECTRICAL • Electrical distribution and wiring. Economy-grade fixtures. • Local fire alarm shall separate Units from false alarm condition . • Code required lighting of tuck-under parking. Page 6 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 • ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCES • Total Allowance of $5,000 for signage • Total Allowance of $5,000 for finishes in Leasing and Commons above what is included in base estimate. • Total Allowance of $17,500 for Material Testing & Inspections • Total Allowance of $40,000 for Builders Risk Insurance GENERAL CONDITIONS • Project Supervision including Project Management, Superintendent, Assistant Superintendents and Labor Foreman. • Temporary Utilities for telephone, electricity, heating and water. • Temporary Office facilities and supplies • Fire protection and safety supplies for the project duration. • General weather protection and snow removal. • Job vehicles, tools and equipment. • General construction clean-up and trash hauling. • General material handling. ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS 1. Tap fees, development fees, fees owed to Holy Cross, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, CATV or telephone companies and Water/Sanitation Department. 2. Furnishings, shelving or equipment not specifically mentioned above 3. Telephone systems 4. Data communication system, cables or cable trays. 5. De-watering, excavation, removal or replacement of unsuitable material, rock removal or blasting in excess of 2cy in size 6. Laundry equipment, microwave ovens, dishwashers 7. Sales & Use Taxes 8. Document printing and mailing/distribution costs 9. Acceleration/Deceleration lane 10. Pavement, landscaping or building construction of the Early Child Learning Center 11. Lofts in units 12. Balconies or French Balcony Rails • 13. Soil nailing (grading is assumed to allow all earth cuts to be passive without temporary mechanical stabilization) Page 7 of 8 Middle Creek Village November 5, 2001 • 14. Provisions outlined in Planning letter regarding curb on both sides of Frontage Road, Bus turnoff on south side of Frontage Road, offsite water main improvements, bike path beyond property limits, expansion of Frontage Road, on-site storm detention or sand oil interceptors, Frontage Road lighting, etc. 15. Garage Doors and Garage storage units are excluded (garage spaces will be open and passively ventilated) The cost of the work noted above is broken down as follows: Site Development and on-grade parking $2,770,334 Buildings and tuck under parking $12,395,304 General Contractor Performance Bond Buildings $ 131,390 Subcontractor Bonds Allowance $ 90.000 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $15,387,028 ALTERNATES Add Allowance for Accel Decel Lane (excluding overlay of existing road) $240,750 • Add Allowance of adding stackable laundry Washer/dryer in every unit $401,000 Add Allowance for Microwave ovens each Unit $ 21,500 Add Allowance for Dishwashers each Unit $ 58,500 We sincerely look forward to working with you, the Town of Vail, Odell Architects and the other members of your project team in bringing this project to fruition. Sincerely, SHAW CONSTRUCTION Clark Atkinson cc. Otis Odell, Lee Mason Rich Keller, Dave Hall • Page 8 of 8 • Middle Creek Village Developer Notes on Exclusions in Shaw Construction Estimate The following is a verbatim excerpt from the letter from Shaw Construction, dated November 5"', which excerpt describes certain exclusions from the construction cost estimate. Responses in blue are additional notes and explanations provided by Coughlin & Company. ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS 1. Tap fees, development fees, fees owed to Holy Cross, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, CATV or telephone companies and Water/Sanitation Department. An allowance in the amount of $385,000 is included in the Developer's budget for these items. 2. Furnishings, shelving or equipment not specifically mentioned above Model unit furniture, management office fi?rniture, and common area furnishing and equipment are included in marketing/leasing allowance. 3. Telephone systems Budret assumes that this is provided directly to tenants by local phone . company. 4. Data communication system, cables or cable trays. Assumed to be provided by local cable access provider, at no cost to project. 5. De-watering, excavation, removal or replacement of unsuitable material, rock removal or blasting in excess of 2cy in size. Since there is not a firll soils report yet, this is a base line assumption. 6. Laundry equipment, microwave ovens, dishwashers Developer has added the contractor indicated add price for dishwashers and microwaves to the budgets so these items ARE included in the construction budget. Laundry equipment is typically provided to the project by the third party vendor at no cost to the project, or if purchased directly by the project, this will be accommodated in the existing budget. 7. Sales & Use Taxes ['OV will secure a waiver of these costs, pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement. 8. Document printing and mailing/distribution costs Included in Architectural and Engineering line item in Developer's Budget. 9. Acceleration/Deceleration lane Allowance has been identified by Shaw in scope letter, and has been included in Developer's Budget tinder a separate line item. 10. Pavement, landscaping or building construction of the Early Child Learning Center These costs are to be included in CEC prqject allowance of $1,000,000. 11. Lofts in units 12. Balconies or French Balcony Rails Neither is included in current budget. Will be evaluated as design progresses. Additional costs related to these upgrades would need to be paid for through increased tenant rents for' units that have these features. 13. Soil nailing (grading is assumed to allow all earth cuts to be passive without temporary mechanical stabilization) 14. Provisions outlined in Planning letter regarding curb on both sides of Frontage Road, Bus turnoff on south side of Frontage Road, offsite water main improvements, bike path beyond property limits, expansion of Frontage Road, on-site storm detention or sand oil interceptors, • Frontage Road lighting, etc. 15. Garage Doors and Garage storage units are excluded (garage spaces will be .,,,i_ and passively ventilated) • Middle Creek Village • Shaw Construction - Site Construction Cost Estimate • ran* Val Sao co lo- Nd~ta PC CW o VZ,cc p~kt ~ 6n91pO~ 978 d7$ RK M" } co a C`-t It - - Q S. r~ NOON- i Middle Creek Village Afford" Housing ~ Town of Vafi hou hV Augwt(y Cor2cv*w silo Budget Affdd/e Creek WOW* Rev 4 S/d&pes - Labor wateriai Maurw 1 ! Lncaldon phase On "'N i Takeoff Owtlty Labor Ca"n?t Bub Costftlrit Sub Amount Total CostNnit ToW Amount Amount CosWnR Mount Childcare -4 2810 Aa PaMng Ii 2625 Pavaenelrt Um" ..r -i-.¢~w .°Y ..a Fri ~~i i.';i' _ C . _ - . , ti 1 'e~S!S¦!WR, -7i. _ ~~vM~y7~yy,':'.. ':I'.~r6., S f~S,,'~;f,g, _ _ - •~u~~~:, - ;t' ;"PAT u• i 2630 Crrb a Gutter Pam aCuwbGUMw- ir 460.00 It 0.30 72 1311 18.00 A 8.100 14,30 K 8235 Curb 6 Gutw 199 8,100 91235 j CD J Z 2900 Re alrang WaOa LAW U* bd*v % ft 2,520.011 "ft - 25,.00 haft 93,000 25.00 lead WN i Ratainlits W4ft 63.000 6300 I Childcare 135 71,100 71435 Ofvska 216ti Creal9ng cwwiq MW G n bbkv 6,900.00 4¢1 0.05 krctft 943 0.0 1 teal! as 0.15 1eaft 1.096 0.71 draft 1,446 Foepiwe Top%S 220.00 =)d - - - 12110 hayd 2640 1200 kuyd 2640 cNerf"s s4a 69 3,675 4089 I -Z 2110 Denw2dan J AsphA SBYgp $625..00 W 0.15 AA 394 $A5 Art 131 IDO ,Off 7.875 320 MR 5400 p11 394 131 7,a75 SACO 2210 Grading X Mad" Rash &adM 20,00 to I $am Aw 1700 135.00 hm 2700 i i 6ran4fa$ 2,740 $T(W , i 2220 Ex- _;:•.n nbew 4,088.99 Cy 500 lq 2"" SAO ky 4444 Dap--SuOA 3,214.00 cy - - - 12.00 ky 38.569 12.00 ky 38569 Ex vattlam 56,812 SU12 O + 2240 9ar9d16ing She Fd 875.00 cy - - - 7.50 ky 6.569 760 toy 8563 - i_ 8addNrtg 6,363 6563 1 O 2618 Asphalt Paving . AephaheaftaAccuOa*0lanes 83333 sgyd - 2070 herd 19,120 20.70 tagW M320 1 18 ,133 16.80 ?scRd tdf3s Eno f 3].33 Petlt O'tdda _ _ _ 1 ~ . r.,..,....-u. - tp ,'fix t"ie'~~s,y.~i 2' ? ~ r ^ -•n T, vx. -ice y,~~,~,•.cS_-s 1~ .:.•i:.., rT ,.c. ~FR~S ~'s'~'"r __y o r f,lzt.. 1 •v .a _ _ .c .;~.~fn i- Yo?:. S!~7~f'!::•Cdinar i A>tplail P-ft Lail rim l.erle 1,268,97 evN - - - W.70 hgyd 26,228 ~ .20.7V 19l 2Q220 Asphdl'PW&QQ60@MShaddx 787.00 e0d 20.70 had 15,877 29.70 *010 '_ita977 ?,SAW 79.350 ~ I AaphaftPaytng' . 2630 Cuib'6t3oit5Bi Pen 8 (lab Griller -30- 1.050 00 M 0.90 M 315 15.69 Af 1s`590 f 890 Af 1449 CLrp Ciwae - 211.00 tf.' 130 a 30 45.00 Af 800 4550 Al 930 . i f % illaddle Creek Village Af actable Housing 3 Town of VaA ftous ft Authority fVMl va PH i Concv&mf Site Buwt$et Ukk& Crook VAkW Rev 4 St 4w* I i - - i in of j L.ocatlon phwe Dsscdpt6on Takeoff 02"ty labor Co"um Labor watww Material Sub Coattilah Sub Amount Total CesblJ t Total Amount Amount Coa urdt Amount I Carb 4c GuW 344 2BA30 211,778 t~1 2760 Sds FOmishwos 61st Sh*hw - Albwance 1.00 hum - 15,000AO Awes 15.000 15,004.00 lkuro 16p6o 58a1 F11m1kili tgs 15,000 15.005 Of ne 1,0" Z~ 1gq,g115 196,0$9 r~ Site 2005 Ttctp Sibs Fen" r N T.V S" Fq.A 800600 0 215 ar 1.350 - 12.16 7.290 14.40 K &640 Temp 9M Fenca 1.350 1'290 8,540 i ~ - O IZ _ 2010 Lxwut ay+mY 270AOOA0 60ft 091 dgft 2708 0101 W 1366 0.10 h+1rt 27De0 0.12 APO 91.154 i S~Ea ~7~ 1 27,060 71,154 Me Clearisa 204,000.90 "R OA3 lsgfi 13,200 0.01 hgft 2,&10 0.16 A qft 38600 011 7Qyt 6!1,440 t9e lam, 2,300.00 Ancm 2.300 756.00 Awm Tan x,960.06 Auua6 3,066 , Strip sod abc1<y2e TOP" 4,89090 cto - - - 8.00 A" 20.3.10 6.00 logo Wo co 921)1-Topepi 8,s1B.D0 r0y4 12.80 Arryd 42122 12.00 AvW 42.192 1-4 ck-ing 15,500 3990 111,132 t 18,822 l.0 Ln ~ zllo o. .--1 _ - *N 26,960 d- BuecBW Dertsal~rbump idea 3,T7U.00 s* 1.00 haft 7.00 Awa MOO 390 8,370 N Acphetlt-QVAot/ 12090 6tH 0.15 Anfl 18 0.05 MH 6 9.00 AsA 360 3.20 Mft 984 O Deltscfit/ot1 3588 6 23,950 27,U4 f- 2210 Grading X tbta Friah Qa 12am en: - 135.00 A" 10,200 135.00 Ada 14200 dsig t ~ H F11~d ~M OrYdhp 360.00 hrz 10.00 mro 4480 16.00 hn 44N ' V 14addm 6radkq G, 38.1116•.110 90ft - - OA6 Arpt 14,867 OA6 44 14,867 HandGr&dM Srbdtb 33.M&00 Go 0.15 !qn 4966 0.16 hl* 4164 t ~ W~•a~d'ing 11.446 31,097 42,543 + C 2220 E=avatlan O Nad*40exanall 4,0B0.OO wy0 1100 kuo 40,800 1090 Ica 4000 1~ 2&6 cut 54,434.00 cy 600 Jq 172,170 6D0 icy 172,170 L) Drowse6+rrD1a1 22371.00 cy 12.00 kV 2UA52 12.00 ky 288,462 n 6~cotralbr+ 481422 481,422 . 22Aa saaMsag + D 5119 fia 12062.50 W - 7.50 Ay 20,469 7.50 ky 90,460 Ur 14 slid l conpudcn 1.00 tsum - - - 14,760,00 Ram 14,750 14.750.00 Mum 14,750 15,00 Av7d 66A46 12.x6 kuyd eaAM 1 ~ ~ $~ackfM9 4`~ - - 171W14 171,714 C! 2.288 304110e n}p~T.~Ygi~t~y~ __-Y...,... ...z.__ .:•r:3y-•+~ a. k•,_c'~.<~• ita _:c Y^. L Y t s7r~ i~. p g.c~r < 1-~ + - i',CiP71SrIr', .rl,~-'' n.-.:': lit;::~u.•••.:i~5 ir_. ° h~3 s;-..`. _ . e.. _ ~::r . - . x-'1..7 .i.....-.! _ + 2281 Soft 8tflb8ke i• i j WddieCrftkvl9AHord" Housing • pages re" a Vail HoasiaQ AU#Kw8y tI/M 1:53 pm Cotmep aH SAO Budget AOlP W Cmok UlAagre Rev 4 Site free t - O~ Location Afiet®e TakeoR$tariHty Lab" C.~ Labs- Material Ma"Jim Amount Coamnit Amount Sub CoatdUne SuhMlourlt Total CosUtlnit Total Atno+trrt 25100 SBm pratrfegs (N G4hfhe4gkri 9.00 a046 - 2AW.0 KIMM 1,000 2.800.00 leach (800 L%W to bA t • 30' WOO Irm - 6540 M 33,000 55M .art 3000 1,00 esch _ U06-DO leant 6m a,sao.oo A" asoa nteinaaaPlw 77aP 80.00 h ft 7640 AIR 2,250 75.00 Anti 8250 Dnlne" Pkm - 24' AM 1X7080 hrlt - - 0600 1n 095150 9500 A11ti 80.590 4'Diereaa+r&bnhole 200 0045 - - - 3,SOIL" leach 71900 5.600.00 kaCh 7400 h j O Qnb triaN 640 each 2400." roach 20.000 2,500.0 kodt zUw - pip RAP 250,00 my - 7600 hl 19,790 7$40 by 19,781 1. -.,lee 2.00 e" 15,000.00 Alear 10.000 WMIDO kadt 80400 rCti vlac,: . ae 1ed850 181660 p ` 1:010 EAVaimt coatrot l= Waft POO" 2,60040 h* 1.16 Anti 2,876 250 kR 9.250 3.% AreR 4,123 NeyOwes ~ wcfi 1540 A=rk 750 16,00 faadr 7w VTC 240 **oh 3,000.00 hedt 8,000 3•900AO. iwttl "99 1katccrw S" hn 19,00 fits 12800 1240 #is 9800 2940 4n 72400 f6'00f;1s1 C.OnUOt SS,876 22,844 3r1,2T5 259(1 • S~`Utl119rs Wa4r OA&L M - ffm m Smite 1,300.00 37 - - - - 9640 A 74600 64M .0' 72,000 We*DieUWxn-6'FLaSerrte 16.00 It - - - S7D0 A 2,140 Sam a 2340 Maier MA6 jdm- fee Hydrani 310O each - - - 2.500-00 Mtah 7,600 2.900-00 kxfi 7500 - waim Disbt kdw- 4' the sane 35040 M BODO A 17,60,0 50,00 A 17500 water D a.c - r Dca*dk 350.00 MAA - - 35.00 440h 12,160 90.00 feade 1$250 ,--I W41W Dbb*RAM -Y Meter Pit /1.00 each - - - 1150-00 latch 19,750 1,250,00 Ahedt 13,7b0 N Wata111114= ion -Cwnect a EdOM 2.00 eadi 7 SOOAO ks<h 6.000 2,500,04 Atadr 6014 9x+9ary'semet-e•Nawi 775.00 it - - - 45.00 lr 14,100 44AO X 3411.00 O aer ety seww -F' wung srvwes 956.00 if - - - - 10.,00 A 26,000 4DA0 AT 26M ; y9e+sar-C>muro,rts 11,00 &atrA _ 150,00 isw4 2.760 25000 Axxh 2.750 SariaySexer-3lenrwka .00 each 0 W X 34Awy Sewer - Cwwa W F.m3,g 1X0 each - 6,000,00 1"kuh (6 90,000 5,05040 ~ 91w 1,280,00 !0044 t,250 1,25040 learb 1,290 >3 - Ohm Sep, co - F Bed BAfl oriy j{ y 174040 e- 875 Af 15,225 8.75 td t5?23 _ f q 3~•#Ypr4t: a acl.'!1~;- J _ ; ~ , ^ a i,13Pt: i~ 3~~{~<..;3.vr,~~~ Jli~•i• ~S;a. aocuk4'+haeeSenirs • Ewca. Bad. Bkwonly 1,28040 if - - - 9.T6 3Y 14908 0.75 M SI1A39 9~*x Seavim - Tana VeLAPe.dn 0X0 each - - - !,9(30.00 h" 8,,000 1,oao,00 AWC* 9,pm Elwin ~e Saute - (yon, Bed, BA only 550,00 if - - - - 9.75 R 4.376 0.75 M 4175 D \ - AO.,WMwb*mN%u" 140 i mw - - - 3.1W.W Awrn &100 8,100.0 Arrnt 7.100 O SUatlti~aa x66,878 266878 U 2L10 AzOaAhviog L AasYrOA Pellrtg 7,208.00 4Qyd 19,98 h0'4 1)6231 18.90 hcgrr3 13641 i .a..,, AIVW P`fiz~*g 3x1040 eaes 3:200 3,200.00 Alum 3200 Aaplak'Pravfttg 138,431 139AM r C O U 26P0 Concrot6 PV/Mo y 3 Cooa+04 P"v a Tmal 6+dameac 5xv 64h 116 Ae>f! 9e 4m ho 2,304 4.16 h.$1 2,1Y0 D ro Cb vwm Pff*q- Enarsnce lcradq Pam 1200Ao Wrt 0.15 hofi 180 6.25 W 7300 6.40 NgfI 7E4t0 D.S-- Comoro* Paving 286 OA04 1 Oi070 .,w F• 202S Pavwwm flung k I Pub" Lkm Y16A0 "on - - - 12A0 J"ch 2,40 u.00 kart 2,040 fl - MC Siiab* 10+00 0001 - 110:00. leach 1-100 110.00 leach 000 r, , , ~ Ma kirlg S,r41a 3J10 i i Mkkfle Creek VI AXordaW Housing 0 PaQq . Town of VibU MQUmWV Audmdty t1'Jzm Im PAI CaTtteplud S1te 8orc~et JWW&e Crwk VWVv Rev4 SiA ift maim- &Iq LI: 2 I Locatlal Phase Oasclipflon Takaoff Cauantlty Labor Coevurklt Labor MatvW hta*fld Bub CoWUntt Sub Anbouot Taal C "Vnlt Total! Amawlf Amount Coewnit Anmrd r 2630 Gnb & Gaokr Pm 4t Qa'4 GA 0 -18' 3,128.00 H 0.90 m 838 ~1840 N 58304 18.30 AM 57242 Cub & GUtbar 038 d8 3@! 37242 J7 " 2700 att. 111tJi7U'19mwt Wood Troah EpAwms 240 ead: 10.000.00 hegh 20000 1GA,OAO A sale 2uw .--i TraffbcBteru 4.00 each - - 175.M larh 700 175.00 leach Tco ~ Bf1a inptvwmert Z0,79q Z9J00 2760 BibsFurnlsF,Y,~ BfbaFumiehi,ge 1-~ ldunt - - 1SA00.0 harn 15.000 15AMim Agm t5,000 >O ttas Fitmkhinga 15 f 00 15700 ZB00 l~ndecepilq 1,a,eRaCnPe d bfigagm Alacmca 188,707.11 ei - - 1.79 fd 200„001? 1.18 ht MAW blfge9on61e- 1.00 rAft 1,25M paean 1250 90040 Raven 900 Larldsaaf~g 1,I30 9Q0 215040 ha.m t16D 200,800 20Q,i5S ~ -AlialiAQ, No 24'. fesEr........n0 8Aa5400 eft _ 2580.E 16f,360 20.00 laglt 151,*0 ' MSEkt AoddNWata 85900 salt - 25.0 !p0 1-9925 25.0 twa 17,625 S Rbtmnftag Wass 165,f 75 168,774 3170 Foatimp M20 9118705 R3 3120 Coa cTeSe wadka L . wet Gone 4000 ps1 14.963.78 SO all (Sq* 2,215 sA0 hqY 5806 4.15 rse11 O Z100 Wak Qnc • HC PAn" 1040 each COnarerte®WelYx YlAS 58540 had, 65 ~ 585.00 Teem 67.85"SU 9 3330 04*04tV 19 8ta7r G SWW6b* 0oac 1:31040 n - 45.00 M 58a5D 4&00 M 54850 Co.... •y Q &a!r 58 530 59.950 u J s 3520 Ugh! Pow Baaas u9m Pao 114o aece 100.00 lead 1100 125,80 leach 1.378 i25.00 ked, 1375 380.00 had, 3.897 C i.7gtat P04 ear" 1,108 1,375 1X5 31M I Handrails & Rlgs J . waaa~ 91.90 xm - - 3547 n•7 3,185 as_oo A„ft ales 1 Ptpa Haponds 181.90 b* - - - 7540 m 13.575 7540 tart ia5T5 l HanArz ib & Rigs 16,760 16J60 i 9608 Palnlfilg faeic,7Slb 1.AD tgan - - - 3A0o.0 Awm Iwo' .3A00.00 lb"m UK . l i+efrlisp 3:000 3000 - 16980 Ustmng j i fW A CAVSX VOW H~s1n8 1(iiddie T~ n -(arty ~`"i°'~ -'~,so „u tst5~ 00 4~ yntt pmo V660 uta coati K pr"°u`ct ~s~0° Isb 105,E The try was pn SAC a; 7 r Q c`a 'a t - o. u a - L rn J I(o gc4VA ~ ~ tOUS'Cg pjWxdaW* image Auegxlv e T,wo van t} 1 ~'io~a1s ~,C6R 7 G ao =dtib SAO* 'b G ~G boi 16 QAlG C .C.0- 6 1664 ~Z1 1 Asti 1? yUAAW ~S`A~O~ l.odo %6 caorww WM!"m~cRa~good _ y815? 600 1-4 Tow r n n. -7 .o 01 c 3. r P Shaw Construct ionirJ---' ax:u7~-141-5618 = c=` 'O1 15~Uy U Nov Middle Creek;tlage Affordable H6using Peak.Land Consultants Concept Site Review Executive' Summary. TOTAL PR - T Qeaariptll+on 10195 Budget . 1112,Sudvt PWS C :sofa 3ite.Fence 8,640 8,60 - Site Layout 30,572 31,154, 582 Inorsese Is due to addlitlon of turn lane and south shoulder Clearing-. 120,138 134,111 13,973 lnw*"Od topsoil rep'. t DmInolItlon 32,384 35,744 3,380 Additional sswcutting required at frontage road Grading 73,818 45,243 (28,:78) Deleted hand grading Q paving vatlon 357,999 540,454 182,495 Included WX of struouff* sxcevatlon, additional 10k cy of tits out and export .13ackfIlling 148,388 178,276 29,891 Included SW of structural backfin, reduced aka fill by 5,8004y A $43k Site Drainage 40,133 188,850 148,517 added 21011 CMP, i J"f at RCP, 2 " atormcaptors, 2 n%k 8 curb talsis and 140cy rip-rap Erosion Control 1 38,275 38,275 - $ft Utilities 244,418 266,818 22,480 Added 4° fire serOve to each bung, 200ff 4' sanitary main, 2 mh, Asphalt Paving 208,308 218,981 10,673 Added left turn ions and 5' paved shoulder at frontage road Concrete.Paving 28.026 111,070 (17,988) sus tum around to asphan paving Pavement Marking 1,556 3,740 2,184 Powment striping at tuck-under parking Curb. 8x Gutter 83,219 86,252 3,033 slightly nigher quanUW% ~ She IntorovememB 700 ( 20.7-00 20,000 added 2 trash enclosures • Site Furnishtnas 30.0001 30,000 Umiscaoino 202,150 202,150 - . R micaining Watts 247.500 228,175 20,875 added approx. 330af Mae wail 5 ft Concr'9ts Footings 2,55$ - (21608)' Deleted retaining waits in parkcx,g to Site Concrete Walls 42U - (4,238) 1 Deleted retaining wells in parkleV tat 1:6 Walks 103,881 67,950 (35,931) 1 Rnducad total of of concrete wank, ,waked to okaring item Site Stair's 42.525 58,9:50 16,425 tnofvosed If of alto stairs IV typ width LI ht pole Basses 3,850 3,850 fiandisits & Raitlnsis 24,750 16,760 (7,990) kedaced If of 7 line and 2 line raging Painting 3.000 3.000 - Site Lichtinst 18.150 18,150 - QC'8 931,788 166,813 24.124 Insurance, Contingency, Warranty 205,975 223,318 17,341 Relatod to ineraesed cost of work Roserve, Bonds IF" 1 166,634 195,720 29,086 1 - Totals 1 2,863,608, 3,011,082 447,4"74 A,4b~ z~?o, 33 . 1 vtio-t I or 1 Middle Creek Village Shaw Construction - Building Construction Cost Estimate u> E Project name Middle Creak Village i G Vail D Eagle County CO Client Coughlin Development - 0 Vail 0 CO Architect Odell Architects {303)670-59N V w Engineer kla O I Estimator CRA rv p ji 0 Job size 111221 sgft I ~e Job cost job number 0 Audit Dimenslonal Report format Sorted by'Group phaselPhase' 'Detail' summary 0 ' un O 00 O - - a Fill 4 Shaw Constrl Company Standard Estdt : Report page 2 Middle Cres lane 1 1105/20*t 8 AM Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount !dame Amount L E 0 0 1000 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1001 ??7? Tap Fees (By Owner) 1.000 is o" Permit by Owner 1.000 Is 0 0 1100 Supervision 1110 Project Manager 1,510.000 hr 87,580 - 87,580 1120 Superintendent 12.000 mo 84,540 24,240 - 108,780 General Superintendent 100.000 hr 6,400 6,400 x Labor Foreman 2,464.000 hrs 54,208 54,208 Field Suptd #€1 9.000 ma 52,200 18,180 70,360 Field Suptd Suptd #12 5.000 mo 29,000 10,100 39,100 1 Supervision 313,928 52,520 366,448 1,610.000 Labor hours cn O~ 12.00 Temp Utilities =a co 1215 Temp. Phone 12000 mnth 9,000 9,000 s 1220 Temp. Electricity 12000 mnth 8,400 8,400 1240 Temp. Gas 5.000 mnth 29,000 29,000 Potabte Water 12.000 mont 1,620 1,620 Temp Phone/Data Hookup 1.000 Is 1,100 1,100 Temp Utilities 46,020 1,100 49,120 Z 2,946.610 labor hours 0 1300 Temp Office cn n 1301 Temp Offioe 12,000 ninth 3,900 6,180 10,080 1303 Move-in 1.000 each 654 650 0 1303 Move-out 1.000 each 654 650 - Jobsile Olerk 2,100.000 hr 36,435 36,435 Field Radios 40.000 mo 6,004 6,000 _1J - Accounting Data Processing 12.000 mo 25,320 25,320 Copier 12.000 mo 1,920 1,920 Fax 12.000 mo 1,320 1,320 ComputerlHardware 24,000 mo 6,672 6,672 Temp Office 61,755 9,900 17,392 89,047 2,100.000 Laborhours 0 1320 Temp Facilities 1325 Temp Toilet (Rent) 61.000 ninth 7,320 7,320 Ternp Facilities 7,320 7,320 1330 Fine Protection 1330 Fire Protection 9.000 mnih goo 900 I Shaw Cvnstru 1 Company Standard Estir Report Page 3 Middle Cr"Oage 91/06/2061818 AM 07 Item Description Takeoff0ty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount sv E Flre Protection 900 900 i trJ 1,559.970 Labor hours v) 1340 Safety 1341 First Aid Equipment 12.000 ninth - 1,380 1,380 ` Hardhats 1.000 Is 400 400 - Safety Equipment 1-000 Is 1,750 1,750 Safety 3,530 3,530 1370 Weather Protect -rr 1371 Weather Protection 235.000 hrs 3,760 3,525 7,285 X 1372 Snow Removal 85.000 hrs 1,360 - 12,750 14,110 Weather Protect 5,120 3,525 12,750 21,395 -Ij O I 1800 Tools & Equipmnt p 1610 Job vehicle 26.000 ninth - 17,550 17,550 j 1620 Tools & Equipment (Rent) 12.000 ninth 4,500 - 4,500 ~1630 Tools & Equipment Consumables 1.000 Isum - 3,650 3,650 00 Tools& Equlpmnt 25,700 25,70,0 2,079.960 labor hours 1700 layout 1701 layout (Own Forces) 280.000 hrs 4,480 3,080 7,560 Layout 4,480 3,460 7,560 Z • CO 1705 Cleanup n 1707 Trash Haul 19.000 each - - 20,900 20,900 (n 1708 Finish clean 91,316.000 s[ 34,700 8,218 42,919 n Rough Clean 1,375.000 hrs 22,000 22.000 ? p Segregate Waste 1.000 Is 7,250 7,250 Cleanup 56,700 8,218 28,150 93,069 1720 Mat. Handling r" 1721 Material Handling excl 6100 290.000 hrs 4,640 4,640 1722 Freight 1-000 [sum 1,100 1,100 Mat. Handling 4,640 1,100 5,740 ` 1725 Punchlist o 1725 Punchlist 148.000 unit 6,512 5,180 11,692 Punchlist 6,512 5,180 11,692 1735 Blue Prints 1737 As Built Plans 1.000 Isum 1,850 1,850 n Shop Drawing Blue Prints 1.000 Is 1,700 1,700 Shaw Constri.~i Company Standard Esth 3 Report Page 4 Middle Crer3 aae 1110&20018 AM Vern Doscripllon TakeoH Qty Arnount Amount ~~FS Amount Name Amount ¢ E Blue Prints 3,550 3,550 0 • U) 1745 Job Photographs 1745 Job Photographs 1.000 Isurn - 1,250 1,250 Job Photographs 1,250 1,250 o 1750 Job Signs 1750 Job Signs 1.000 each 41 200 241 - Safety Signs 8.OOD each 110 80 190 Job Signs 152 280 432 -T ti GENERAL CONDITIONS 453,287 161,553 71,512 686,752 0 10,296.540 labor hours N 2000 SITEWORK 2100 Clearing Mobilization 1,000 is 10,000 10,000 Clearing 10,000 10,000 2200 Earthwork n Mass Ex 3,576.000 cy 23,244 23.244 n - Excavate Footings 1,759.800 Cy 14,078 14,078 n Backfill footingstwalls 1,494.000 cy 20,916 20,916 0 Stabilized Constr Entrance 2.000 Is 7,000 7,000 p < Dust ControilWaler 1.000 is 6,760 6,750 15,050 Crean Roads 1.000 is , 8.300 Surveying 190.000 hrs 23,750 23,750 0 Misc Excavation Equipment 5-000 mo 12,500 12,500 Erosion Control Mainlenanoe 8.000 ma 8,050 4.000 12,060 Crane Pads 1.000 Is 6,600 6,800 Earthwork 14,350 12,500 415,286 142,139 2210 Grading Fine Grade 260.000 hrs 4,160 780 4,940 Grading 4,160 780 4,940 D 0 c.n 2250 Gravel Hardscape Gravel 1,020.000 st y 1,377 1,377 n - SOG gravel prep 29.605,000 st 7,401 39,967 47,388 Gravel 7,401 41,344 48,745 y - 2270 Layout 2272 Hand Compaction 160.000 hrs 2,560 2,560 Shaw Construt. Company Standard Estin Report 'age 5 Middle Creek4age _ 11105!200 8 AM - miff"= (J) Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount [L E Layout - - 2,560 2,560 0 2500 Slte Drainage _ fl - Fndn Drain 1,455.000 Incl 20,370 _ 20,370 Site Drainage 20,370 20,370 0 SlTEWORK 28,472 13,280 187,002 228,754 3000 CONCRETE ' nom, x 3110 Footings n - Continuous Footings 330.600 cy 104,139 104,139 n Footings at Stairs 22.600 cy 6,930 6,930 i Fine Grade at Footings 7,492.(100 st 3,296 3,296 N I~ Footings at Tuckunder columns 21.60 cy 6,804 6,804 ' Footings 3,296 117,873 121,16.9 H 3120 Walls n 1M1lalls 608.200 cy 209,139 209,139 n Thickened Edge 742.000 if 14,1110 14,840 n Pilasters 21.000 cy 8,085 8.085 n Miac Canctete 1,000 loci 7,500 7,6M Layout / Quality Control 736.100 hrs 21,384 21,384 Cleanup 1 Dumpsters 5.000 each 5,810 3,725 9,535 Z Columns at Tuck Under Parking 540-000 is 9,720 9,720 ° Walls 27,194 9,720 243,289 280,203 cn 3310 S.O,G. Concrete o n SOG 4" 29.605.000 sf 124,341 124,341 - Mach Pads 1.000 is 4,400 4,400 n Structural Stab 900.000 st 5,985 5,985 - Fine Grade @ Slab on Grade 29,605.000 sf 7,401 7,401 S.O.G. Concrete 7,401 134,726 142,127 o 3320 Concrete @ Walks n Entry Pacts 1,632.000 sf 6,854 6,854 D n Stair Landings 1,632.000 sf 10,853 10,853 0 n Structural Waik 800.000 $f 5,320 5,320 Concrete @ Walks 23,027 23,027 3340 Topping n Gypcrete 81,616.000 sf 253,010 253,010 Temp Neat 1.000 Is 4,950 6,750 11.700 Shaw Constru,~Company Standard EsUr, Report cage 6 Middle Creea$e 111051200&8 AM gm- KM l Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount IL E Topping - --4,950 259,760 264,710 0' 0 - Ul c+ 3601 Grout Use Grout 35.000 cf 3,325 1,330 4,655 Grout 3,325 1,330 4,655 o CONCRETE 41,216 96,000 778,675 835,891 4000 MASONRY a x 4490 Wall Flashing u 4192 Wall Flashing - 20 mil Vinyl 1.000 Is - o N 4400 Stone 4400 Stone Allowance ARCHES! 1.000 Is - 150,000 150,000 cn water & Temp Power 1.000 Is 3,200 3,200 00 Sleet ledges 1.000 Is Stone 153,200 153,200 4840 Protection 4840 Protection 115.000 hrs 1,840 828 2,668 Masomy Dumpsters 1.000 each 745 745 Protectlon 1,840 828 745 3,413 o 4 < MASONRY 1,840 828 953,945 156,613 cn 5000 STEEL ° 5850 Mlsc Metals 5B96 Bolts and Shims 1.000 Isum - 6,700 - 6,700 n Snawfenoe Allowance 1,000 Is 40,000 40,000 w° Mtsc Metals 6,700 40,000 46,700 i STEEL 0 6,700 40,000 46,700 -Ij .6000 WOOD & PLASTICS 6100 Rough Framing - Exterior Siding Fascia & Trim 58,800.000 sf 167,580 155,820 323,400 - Rough Framing RooffSoffit 37,250.000 sf 74,500 245,850 320,350 Rough Htockj4Sheathin9 91,316.000 sl 63,921 98,621 162,542 Roof Trusses 752.000 Is 97,760 97,760 Shaw Constru~ Company Standard Estir. Report page 7 Mtddre Creekroape 111051200918 AM - =D7 Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount aj 6100 Rough Framing o Rough Frame Walls & Floors 91,316.000 It 853,805 716,831 1,570,635 - LayouVQualitiy Control 960.000 hrs 21,120 960 22.080 Rough Clean 960.000 hrs 15,360 215.360 1,605 Dumpsters 29.000 each 21,605 Graft Stop Party Walls 1.000 Is 1,935 12,100 14,035 0 Timber Stairs 54.000 floo 72,630 86,400 159,030 w Window ShutlerAllowance 1.000 Is 25,000 25,000 Timber Allowance 1.0400 Is 15,000 15,000 - Floor Framing above Tuck Under 22,405.000 sf 51,532 39,209 90,740 ParkinglCommons a Rough Framing 36,480 1,384,622 1,416,436, 2,837,538 = X. -1 O 6165 Stair Framing l 6167 Temporary Railings 480.000 fnft 4,637 2,880 7,517 N Stair Framing 4,637 2,880 7,517 W rn 6187 Weather Protect CO 6187 Temp. Cover Siding & Trim 1.000 Isum 2,022 275 2,297 - Snow Removal 1.000 Is 6,000 6,000 f Weather Protect 2,022 275 6,000 8,297 61 BB Equipment Rental 6188 Fork Lift Rental 12.000 mrrth 40,200 4.800 45,000 Equlpment Rental 44,200 4,800 45,000 0 2,079.960 Laborhours 6190 Mat Handling ° 6190 Material Handling 1,360.000 hrs 21,760 21,760 s o 21,760 21,760 ~ Mat Handling 6192 Framing Hardware 6192 FramiNHardwane 91,316.000 sf 13,697 13,697 c,d Framing Hardware 13,697 13,697 0 6200 Finish Carpentry 6245 6"a Trim 35,982-200 If 23,388 3900 62,969 CD Closet Shetvir?glRod 2,958000 IF 10,530 51,765 62,295 0 Window Sill 2,958.000 If 11,093 11,093 22,185 Finish Carpentry 45,011 102,438 147,449 6400 Arch Woodwork Cabinet & Countertop Allowance 148.000 Unit 273,800 273,800 Accessitie Unit Casework 6.000 each 3,000 3,000 CommoosA-easing Casework 1.000 Is 2,000 2,000 Shaw Constru,~Company Standard Estirr Report 'age 8 Middle creek tie 11105120&.98 AM Item Descriplion Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount Cu Arch Woodwork 278,800 276,800 o WOOD & PLASTICS 64,899 1,486,686 1,808,474 3,360,058 2,079.960 Labor hours 0 7000 THERM AL-MOIST PR Q-4 7100 Waterproofing - Wall Waterproofing 17,800.000 sf 52,510 52,510 x Grind & Patch 265.000 hrs 4,240 4,240 Extra Trip Charges 3.000 each 1,200 1,200 - " Waterproofing 4,240 53,710 57,959 O I P 7200 insulation 7200 insulation 91,316.000 sf - - 155,237 155,237 fr%sulate FLoor above Tuck Under 22,40.5.000 sf 15,235 15,235 Parkinglcommons Insulation 170,473 170,473 _ 7210 Batt Insulation Fine Stop 91,316.000 sf 3,653 2,739 6,392 Batt Insulation 3,653 2,739 6,392 7300 Shingles & Tile o 7311 Asphalt Shingle 372.500 sq 149,000 149,000 Snow Removal 158.000 hrs 7,584 7,584 Division 7 Dumpsters 5.000 each 3,725 3.725 Shingles & Tile 160,309 160,309 0 7402 Flashing - Fire Caulking 91,316.000 Is 4,566 3,653 8,218 -Ij - Rashings 1.000 Is 14,000 14,000 Flashing 4,566 17,653 22,218 7600 Sheet Met/Flash 7630 Gutter 8 Downspout Allowance 1,200.000 Ifl - 12,600 12,600 Sheet Met/Ffash 12,600 12,600 CD 7900 Sealants 7910 Exterior Caulking 91,316.000 sf - - 35,613 35,613 Acoustical caulking 1.000 Is 1,700 600 2,300 Sealants 1,700 600 35,613 37,913 Shaw Conslrutompany Standard Estirr ~teport 'age 9 SC Middle Creek Wge ? 1/05>•20Q7 8 AM Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount . Q E 0 THERMAL-MOIST PR 14,158 20,992 432,705 467,855 8000 DOORS & WINDOWS o. 8110 Hollow Metal 8112 Metal Doors & Frames 15.000 leaf 186 4,125 1,575 5,886 - Insulated Metal Entry Door (Type 148.000 leaf 1,838 40,700 15,540 58,078 5) Exterior Closet Doors 148.000 each 1,838 22,200 11,100 35,138 s1 Hollow Metal 3,863 67,025 28,215 99,103 X 8200 wood Doors O - Damage Replacement 1.000 Is 2,500 2,500 N n Bifold doors 201.000 leaf 2,496 12,060 15,075 29,631 A Passage Doors 394.000 leaf 4,693 49,644 31,520 86,057 in Misc Doors Leasing Etc 1.000 Is 1,500 1,500 6i Wood Doors 7,390 64,204 48,095 119,689 8500 Metal Windows n 8500 Vinyl Windows 825.000 Unit - 115,500 17,325 132,825 - Protection 153000 hrs 2,448 459 - 2,907 - Misr-Windows 1.000 Is 3,500 750 4,250 Metal Windows 2,448 119,459 18,075 139,982 Z C 6700 Finish Hardware n 8700 Entry Hardware 148,00 each 8,140 8,140 n 8700 Hollow Metal Door Hardware 15.000 each 825 825 n Privacy & Passage Hardware 394.000 each 13,790 13,790 ei-Pass & Bi•Fold Hardware 201.000 each 804 7 50 804 iAisc Hardware 1.000 Is 1,750 1,750 Storage Unit doors 148.000 cacti 592 592 Finish Hardware 25,901 25,801 w 8800 Glass & Glazing 8030 Mirrors 3,672.000 sgft - 25,704 25,704 - Protection 1.000 Is 300 300 Glass & Glazing 26,004 26,004 0 DOORS 8 WINDOWS 13,701 276,589 120,389 410,679 9000 FINISHES 1 ;haw Construct Oomparty Standard Estim,AWeport 1010 Middle Creek IWjVe ? 4/05/2001. AM Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount a i~ O 1100 Plantar & Stucco U, 9120 Stucco Alowance 1.000 Is 100,000 100,000 Plaster & Stucco 100,000 100,000 z fi )250 Gypsum Wallboard i GW8 ceiling assmbly 91,316.000 sf 187,198 187,198 G) i Dropped Soffits 3,978.000 sf 20,666 20,686 C-4 Prerock units 1.000 Is 8,200 8,200 2 Hour Separation vralls 8' 4,565.600 sf 18,964 18,964 Party Wall 8' tall 36,556.800 sf 102,359 102,359 X Interior Walls (2 sides 244,692.300 sl 685,138 685,138 - GWB Patch & Touchup 1.000 Is 7,210 7,210 -.j - Leas ing,Commons Walls 1.000 is 1,000 1,000 j Fire Rated Lid at Tuck Under 27,375.000 sl 58,856 58,856 rv p Parking n 151 Heating for Finishes 91,316.000 sgft 13,697 45,658 13,697 73,053 151 Oumpstars 18.400 each 13,410 13,410 151 Layout/QualityControl 736.000 hrs 11,776 736 12,512 151 FinishesCteanup 885.000 hrs 14,160 14,160 Gypsum Wallboard 39,693 46,394 9,116,718 1,202,748 9650 Resilient Firng Vinyl Kitchens & Bathrooms 19,000.000 sf _ 62,931 62,931 Resilient Flrng 62,93.1 62,931 E z 0 C 9680 carpeting - Carpet protect C&R 148.000 unit 9,176 9,176 U' Carpet Apartments 8,100.000 sy 141,750 141,750 0 Cleanup /Dumpsters 7.000 each 5,215 5.215 r-' Floor Prep 1.000 Is 3,600 3,600 Carpeting 159,741 159,741 -Ij 9900 Painting ~J Paint Sub 91,316.000 sf 342,435 342,435 Paint Touch-up 91,316.000 Sf 14,611 14,611 Painting 357,046 357,046 D FINISHES 39,633 46,394 1,796,436 1,882,464 10000 SPECIA t TIES 10400 Identifying Dev 420 Unit Numbers 14x3-000 each 888 1,776 2,664 Shaw Constn Company Standard. Esth Report 'age 11 Middle Creah*ag e 4 i/05/2060 18 A M liem Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount E identifying Dev - ----888 1,776 2,664 0' L7 10520 Fire Ext 526 Fire Ext. Cabinets (Recessed) 16.600 each 2,400 480 2,880 Fire Ext 2,400 480 2,880 ~o 10550 Postal Specialty G-) 552 Mail Box Allowance 1.000 each 640 5000 500 6,000 Postal Specialty 500 5,000 500 6,000 10800 Bath Accessories X - Towel Bars 193.000 each 1,930 2,316 4,246 (-D TP Holders 193.000 each 96,5 2,316 3,281 CD Shower Rods 193.000 each 2,8!15 2.316 5,211 N - Robe Hooks 386.000 each 3,088 4,632 7,720 - Grab bars 20.000 each 1,500 520 2,020 ~ Bath Accessories 10,378 92,100 22,478 k-1 00 SPECIALT/,FS 500 18,666 24,856 34,02? 11000 EQUIPMENT 11900 Appliances Refrigerators 148.000 each 4,902 55,500 4,625 65,027 0 ElecRange/Oven 148.000 each 3,676 46,620 4,625 54,921 < - Garbage Disposal 148,000 each 7,400 7,400 cn Ductless Exhaust hood 148.000 each 2,451 4,440 5,550 12,441 Forklift 1.500 mo 5,025 5,025 0 Dumpsters 4.500 each 3,353 3,353 ~ Appliances 11,029 113,960 23,178 148,166 EQUIPMENT 11,029 113,960 23,178 148,166 12000 FURNISHINGS .12500 Window Treatment 510 Bilnds Allowance 1.000 is 20,000 20,000 Window Treatment 20,000 20,000 FURNISHINGS 0 0 20,000 20,000 .Shaw Consfru Company Standard Esth. Report age 12 Middle Creeklillrage - 11/05I200~8 AM Item Description Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount Name Amount CU :o 15000 MECHANICAL 15001 Mechanical Sub 000 Heat)HVAGPIumbing 91,316.000 Isum 1,538,675 1,538,675 0 000 Dumpsters 5.000 each 3,725 3,725 0 Baseboard Protection 1.000 Is 6,830 6,830 c, Extended Bauer Warranty 1.000 Is 19.000 11,000 Heat Tape Tuck Under pipes 1.000 is 8,000 8,000 Mechanical Sub 1,568,230 1,568,230 X U0 15400 Plumbing -It CutflPatch 1.000 Is 4,200 4.200 Fire Caulk 1.000 Is 3,200 3,200 rJ Plumbing 875.000 ilxt Plumbing 7A00 7.400 Co 15950 Fire Protection 950 Fire Prolection Intl Commons 91,316.000 sf 173,500 173,560 - Fire Protection Tuck Under Parking 19,905.000 sf 37,820 37.820 Fire Prote-clion 211,320 211,320 MECHANICAL 0 0 1,786,950 1,786,950 _ z 0 C 16000 ELECTRICAL 16001 Electrical Sub 001 Electrical Sub 91.316.000 sub - 794,449 794,449 001 Dumpsters 2.000 each - 1,490 1,480 Electrical Excavation 1.000 Is 10,000 10,000 Pourer to laigatrr 1.000 Is 900 90(1 Neat TapelDedicated Circ 1.000 Is 12,500 12,800 ' N Aitowanoe Ughling Tuck Under Parking 19,905.000 sf 54,739 54,739 Electrical Sub 874,078 874,078 ELECTRICAL 0 0 874,078 874,078 18000 ALLOWANCES 18461 Allowances 1 Sege 1.000 Isum 5,000 5,000 LeasingfCommons Finishes 1.000 Is 5,000 6.000 Shaw Constra Company Standard Estin Report tga 13 Middle Creesa 9Z105/70o&8AM Item Oescriptlon Takeoff Qty Amount Amount Amount !Jame Amount a) E i BOU Allowances 0 Material Testing & Inspections 1.000 Is 17,500 17,500 ui Builders Risk Insurance 1.000 Is 40,000 40,000 Allowances 67,500 67,500 z ALLOWANCES o 0 67,500 67,500 .I N I 00 p ' C (,n C) . -J VJ l~ i~ Shaw Constru* Company Standard Estirr. Report -tge 14 Middle CreekWage 1 110 512 00 8 AM Partial Totals a labor 668,735 12,376.500 hrs G Material 2,162,049 Subconiract 8.175.699 11,006,483 il,006,483 n Taxes 8 ins. on Labor 294,243 44,000 % C Liability Insurance 61,636 0.560% T ° Contractor Contingency 227.247 2.000% T 583,126 11, 589, 609 CWGC Fee 805.695 6.500 % T Tl 805,695 12,395,304 w Partial Total 12,395,304 111.448 /sgff o _ I N CO . z G C C11 s O ; N Ul Middle Creek Village Overview of Site Design In comparison to previous site plans that have been submitted by the Development Team to VLHA, the current site plan reflected in this submission has many features that we believe represent substantial improvements. 1) Grading - The existing plan reuses much of Mountain Bell Road, and generally features a more gradual climb on the new interior road. With the exception of the initial turn along Mountain Bell Road, the new road has a grade of 5% or less. 2) Retaining Walls - The philosophy of the Development Team has been to attempt to use the buildings themselves for as much retainage as possible. Some of the upper buildings are buried at the back of the building by as much as 20 feet. While this adds cost to the construction of the buildings, it eliminates the need for many of the retaining walls and results in a superior appearance for the project. Most of the actual retaining walls reflected in the conceptual site plan are at a height of 6 feet of less. . 3) Bus Stop - The Town of Vail bus stop has been completely integrated into the site and will allow for both eastbound and westbound buses. The drop off will be at the entrance to the leasing and management office, which will be a convenient location for our tenants. The new location of the bus stop reduces the total number of curb cuts along Frontage Road and reduces the amount of retaining that would otherwise be required along the south boundary of the property. Its location at the main entrance to the leasing office will also be a marketing advantage for Middle Creek. 4) Accel/Decel Lane - Greg Hall, of the TOV Public Works Department, attended a design session with the Development Team. The accel/decel lane design reflects his comments and suggestions, and has been priced by SHAW as a component of the budget of this submission. The accel/decel lane includes provisions for left turning off of Frontage Road into Middle Creek. 5) Parking - This site plan reflects dramatically more parking that previous submissions and includes 80 + covered spaces. Each of the 5 buildings that have a general east/west orientation feature tuck under parking at the lowest level. The overall parking ratio of this plan is approximately 1.6 per unit (See Section 5 for more detail). The substantial increase in cost to achieve this parking ratio and to incorporate covered parking is included in the Project Budget. • Middle Creek Village Project Plans This section contains the following items: 1) Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by Odell Architects 2) Conceptual Grading Plan, prepared by Peak Land Consulting In addition, all of the items in Section 5 of the Initial Project Program Submission of September 4 can be inserted herein, as many of the items have not changed based on the current version of the site plan. Those items that are no longer applicable are indicated in Italics below. The items in the September 4`h submission include: 1) Project Elevations and Renderings, prepared by Odell Architects 2) Site Plan `Character 'prepared by Odell Architects (no longer applicable) 3) ALTA Land Survey, prepared by Peak Land Consultants 4) Preliminary Plat, prepared by Peak Land Consultants 5) Existing Conditions Survey, prepared by Peak Land Consultants 6) Topographic Map, prepared by Peak Land Consultants 7) Concept Site Plan and Concept Grading Plan, prepared by Peak Land • Consultants (no longer applicable) 8) Slope Analysis, prepared by Peak Land Consultants 9) Concept Utility Plan, prepared by Peak Land Consultants (no longer applicable) Items 41 and #2 of the September 4`h submission indicate the general architectural character of the project, and the character of the proposed site. These remain our current general expectation for the project, although the massing and location of the buildings has been adjusted (as reflected in the new conceptual site plan). The design of the project and the design of the site are subject to review and comment from the Town of Vail. These plans are preliminary in nature and will be modified to respond to comments from the Town of Vail and to respond to further design input from the Development Team. Preliminary Drainage Report For Middle Creek Village Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado • August 27, 2001 Prepared For: Odell Architects Prepared By: Peak Civil Engineering, Inc. 1000 Lions Ridge Loop Vail, Colorado 81657 . Introduction The Middle Creek Village site is a parcel of land in the Town of Vail, located in the Southeast '/a of Section 6, Township 5 South, Range 80 West. The site is north of the north frontage road of I-70 approximately '/a mile west of the main Vail interchange. The attached vicinity map shows the project location. The existing site proposed for development is approximately 8.1 acres and includes the existing Mountain Bell Road and the Qwest (old Mountain Bell) microwave tower building. The proposed development plan consists of 8 multi-unit buildings with related parking and appurtenant structures. Mountain Bell Road would be extended through the site to create a loop to and from the north frontage road. Existine Hvdrologv Middle Creek passes through the property from north to south approximately 250 feet west of the existing Mountain Bell Tower building. The Middle Creek drainage basin is approximately 6 square miles and is included in the Flood Insurance Study of the Town of Vail dated November 2, 1982. The hydrology of the drainage basin will remain largely unchanged as a result of the proposed development. The 100 year floodplain based on stream depth, as shown on flood profile panels 07P thru 09P, has been delineated and is included in the appendix. • The westerly 1/3 of the proposed development site (2.8 acres) is within the Middle Creek drainage basin. The existing Mountain Bell Tower building, parking lot and driveway to the north frontage road occupies 0.9 acres of the proposed development site. The easterly 2/3 of the site (5.3 acres) flows south to the roadside ditch along the north frontage road which flows east toward Spraddle Creek. All hydrology calculations in this study utilized the Rational Method. This method has been shown to be appropriate for calculating the hydrology of small drainage basins of fewer than 100 acres. Runoff coefficients were taken from the Urban Drainage Manual, Denver Regional Council of Governments, Table 3-1, and rainfall intensities were taken from the Town of Vail "Intensity - Duration - Frequency Curves The table and curves are presented in the Appendix. Proaosed Hvdrologv The development of the existing site will utilize the existing drainage basins with 1/3 of the site draining to Middle Creek and 2/3 of the site draining to the north I-70 frontage road ditch. Approximately 9.4 acres of offsite drainage flowing through the site are included in the rational method calculations. Proposed drainage patterns through the site will approximate the existing conditions. No detention is proposed for the site. The summary table presents the results of the study with hydrology calculations shown in the appendix. Hydrology Summarv Table West Exist. West Pron. East Exist. I East Pron. 2.8 ac. 14.7ac. O 10-Year 2.5 cfs 3.3 cfs 7.0 cfs I 11.3 cfs Q100 - Year 1 6.7 cfs 7.6 cfs 27.2 cfs + 32.8 cfs Water Oualitv Issues Proposed inlet design will include additional depth in accordance with Town of Vail standards to facilitate sedimentation. Proposed sedimentation pond at the southeast corner of the project site will also act to promote sedimentation and infiltration of runoff from the site. All swales will be grass lined or lined with rip-rap when water velocities and slope mandate. Additionally, silt fence and straw bale dikes will be used throughout the site during the construction process. Proposed Drainaee Improvements Proposed drainage improvements include extension of the existing Middle Creek culvert to the north, catch basins in Mountain Bell road at both the southwest entrance and the southeast entrance to the site, and culverts under the Mountain Bell road entrances to accommodate the north frontage road drainage. Hydraulic calculations for the drainage improvements are included in the appendix. ; Conclusions Runoff from the proposed development will follow existing drainage patterns. The proposed sedimentation basin will serve as a water quality feature to promote sedimentation and infiltration. Catch basins will have additional depth to further facilitate sedimentation. Inlets, catch basins and culverts will be designed to safely pass the 10-year event. Surface drainage improvements will be designed to safely pass the 100-year event without damage to property. As the site plan is refined, this drainage study will need to be updated. • Appendix ' I a i PROJECT LOCATION a I i J- .0 ~ U W La INTERSTATE 70 ! W l.7 ` U Z W > 'A, TE R Ua sMEAU R S T A T LL E 70 0 r ) f O SEC 6 T. 5 i Z C . 8 TONNSHIP 5 r SEC SOUTH a 5 ~,W ,n f- ! i ! ~ r f coo U-L c"i iR7aFA~ , • ' :3: 111 LD 0 Z 0 H Q U O J 3 a rn c*~ 0 i a~ U7 ORAre er ow NTS 76'0 a, OAM 08/m/m m SHEET 0 a RAINAGE CP.ITER IA MANUAL RUNOFF TABLE 3-1 (42) RECOI•;iiENDED-RUNOFF COEFFICIEINTS AND PERCENT IMPERVIOUS LAND USE OR PERCENT FREQUEi;CY SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS IMPERVIOUS 2 5 10 100 Business: Commercial Areas 95 .87 .87' .88 .89 Neighborhood Areas 70 .60 .65 .70 .80 Residential: Single-Family * .40 .45 .50 .60 - Multi-Unit (detached) 50 .45 .50 .60_ .,7o.- Mu 1 t i -Un i t (attached) 70 .60 .65 .70 .80 1/2 Acre Lot or Larger * .30 .35 .40 .60 - Apartments 70 .65 .70 .70 .80 r Industrial Light Areas; 80 .71 .12.. .76 .82 .90- Heavy Acres 90 ----•-.80 - --.:.80 .85 jY Parks ,.Cemetaries: 7 :10 .18 .25 ""45 - Playgrounds: 13 .15+. .20 30-- .50 F t i Schools 50 .45 1,60" . /u~ - 50 . P.a i 1 road Yard Areas 20 .20 .25` . 35 - :.45y' Undeveloped Areas: - Historic Flow Analysis- 2 = (See "Lawns") _ Greenbelts, Agricultural Offsite Flow Analysis 45 .43 .47 .55 .65 ' when land use not defined Streets: Paved 100 .87 .88 .90 .93 '_L ter. Gravel (Packed.) 40 .40 .45 .50 .60 .r' ~_Drive and Walks: 96 .87 .87 .88 .89 .90 ; s .90 Roofs: 90 .80 .85 Lawns, Sandy Soil 0 .00 .01 .05 .20 Lawns, Clayey Soil 0 .05 .15 .25 .SG I - NOTE: These Rational Formula coefficients nay not be valid for large basins. *See Figure 2-1 for percent impervious. FROM: DRCO(3 URBAN STORM DRAINAC~E_ C RI i t_tdA MANUAL 11-1-90 1100V' non T>.:Ir.c AW) ci non rnnirnn I*. rn7 INTENSITY --DURATION Fr^ FREQUENCY CURVES i-' ' 11 17 1 - - - a, - Ld t--,j 7- Z4- ill I 1+ 11 1 i f 1{ Ir 1 . i i b 10 20 30 40 50 60 (TIME MINUTES) VAIL F C DO Hvdroloev Calculations. .I~\! i,Y,y,.e..a"•,1',- _I/~~ _ bw `ll f S° I~~ ,~/I i'III1~~i,: Iltl l ,PJF"""a t I ~ ~ ti ~ ~j~~N. /1I s~;rr (--o;~~~~l,l/(l~~l(~,r f 1;~, ~ f,~~ ~ :ou•ta(k. nl ~ vso<v it; 6 _ ` u k/ ~ oa ':I' ~:r~.~ ~~~1 tr~. =_I ~1 ~ Il\ ~~ih~-. • ~ l 11 It 6{ , Il•ll ,_~i//% 1\, _ - _ 1'11 i i % / g 1+ ` \y/ov/.. ~,al~ l~- `~r8 i -f• P`,, ( Z O f ff r 1 / Il l l ~ I~~ l ( / _ ,,,,1~, _ : ~ II,~ir 1111,1 >t : j(`,' 1:!!_ ~ o IF x E3 l } l\ ~ ~(l 1 ( is //Ij r~ 'I~' 1 ~ I(t \ \ ~r ~ w Q 1= 1\ ~ ~i ~ III ~1`\ ~ _ / - " ~ \ 811 • \ t\~ 1 1 `\\'1 1 - / / \ t \ f I - O ~ 1 ~ ~ i \ • 1 ~ / _ ,1`~ III I(•`;'~ fir`. t ~ 3 v = '1 y ( '1~ .i"~ /r ll~' J,~,• ='U.illil ~ 1 \ \ `>9, j O 11 VI /osos,/ Z ~ -~J S; ~~q-i /i,!~N1;1(i ~i~~,; (,~1•%' 1 l '~,nooa~ ~ - ~ o' a ~ 1 \ ~ ~ ! ~,\~t. ``R'te '4, \ ' , r 9~~^ e m0 ~°-=a.~b • `:1 'S ill` ' ' t /x ,j~e;% e•!Crcf-k - . `~N~® ' Q ` 4 - l - W - c! ° CORPO E 1,`L 1 Vary L r = : .t`G o Y (d Lr) 0' DRAwt am or cm r-+ ~ ifs: tti-°tt~ s ran rz :A-;, _ '~y • , / . '~f / _ _ t ~C r/ 1 . RE%W acaR taw _~,L+-„~ ~aru~ .Vail •if-'-=-.; ~r ~'/O / DA Ali ~ ~ ~ • ~ r dP ~ ~ ~ ~ _ SHEET SCALE: 1' = 3000' 1 c i - - - o I 0.8 AC. % . 1300, S 0.40 I _on i i r A I Q 0 /l U u TOPOGRAPHY FROM i 7.5 MIN. SERIES WEST Q VAIL AND EAST VAIL / F- I OUADRANGLES , m z I E7U Y W Z J 8.7 AC. / W L7 1 950 S=0.66 ~I Q W ya I z~ p a D tL o ~ z D { o I I , r i r AST BASIN ' 14.7 AC. / J ! , U I / i 5.2 AC. ` i . 1500• _ / 1-EST BASIN - ~2.8 AC. 5 _ 009 300 I I S 0.40 1 550' T BE[L S = 0.401 SITE _ - ~ ~ r - ~ ~ - NOFt?H f- r y onAr?k as O U .---'.L-- RC Jam low DAIS 08/2ZA" = SCALE: 1' = 200, - - - _ _ _ - - - - - _ - - - . __r SHEET ~ ~ 1 MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE 8/21/01 . WEST DRAINAGE AREA - EXISTING CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD TOTAL AREA = 2.8 AC Job No. 1039 By: GKM C1 - PVMT & BLDG 0.7 AC C10= 0.88 C100 = 0.89 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage C2-FOREST 2.1 AC C10 = 0.25 C100 = 0.50 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage C10= (0.88 x 0.7) + (0.25 x 2.1) / 2.8 0.41 C100= (0.89 x 0.7) + (0.50 x 2.1) / 2.8 0.60 TIME OF CONCENTRATION T1 = SHEET FLOW, 300 FT @ 40%. T1 (10 yr) = (1.1 - 0.41) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 16.23 min. T1 (100 yr) = (1.1 - 0.60) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 11.78 min. • T2 = SHALLOW FLOW, 550'@ 40% n = 0.025 A/p = 6/13 - 12'Wx0.5'd V10 = 1.49 / N x (A/P)^ 2/3 x S^ 1/2 11.78 fps s = 0.11 V100 = V10 11.78 fps T2 (10 yr) = 550' / 11.78fps x 60 0.78 min. T2 (100 yr) = 550' / 11.78fps x 60 0.78 min. TOTAL Tc10 = 21.4 +.8 = 17.0 min. TOTAL Tc100 = 11.8+.8= 12.6 min. INTENSITY (I) = Intensity (1) from Town of Vail IDF curves 110= 2.2 in./hr. 1100 = 4.0 in./hr. PEAK FLOW RATE (Q) Q = CIA Q10= (0.41) x(2.2) x(2.8)= 2.51 cfs Q 100 = (0.60) x (4.0) x (2.8) = 6.69 cfs MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE 8/22/01 EAST DRAINAGE AREA - EXISTING CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD . TOTAL AREA = 14.7 AC Job No. 1039 By: GKM C1 - FOREST 14.7 AC C10 = 0.25 C100 = 0.50 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage TIME OF CONCENTRATION T1 = SHEET FLOW, 300 FT @ 40%. T1 (10 yr) _ (1.1 - 0.25) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 19.92 min. T1 (100 yr) _ (1.1 - 0.50) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 14.06 min. T2 = SHALLOW FLOW, 950 FT @ 66%. 10' WIDE, 0.5' DEEP V10 & V100 = 1.49/n x (A/P)^.67 x S^.5 n = 0.05 V10 & V100= 1.49/n x (5/11)^.67 x .66^.5 14.27 fps A/p = 5/11 - 10'Wx0.5'd s = 0.66 T2 (10yr) = 950 / 14.3 x 60 1.1 min. T2 (100yr) = 950 / 14.3 x 60 1.1 min. . T3 = CHANNEL FLOW, 500 FT @ 9%. n = 0.05 ROADSIDE DITCH - 2' DEEP 3:1 SIDES, n = 0.05 A/p = 12/12.6 s = 0.09 V10 & V100 = 1.49/n x (A/P)^.67 X S^.5 V10 & v100 = 1.49/n x (12/12.6)^.67 x .09^.5 8.65 fps T3 ( 10yr) = 500 / 8.7 x 60 1.0 min. T3 ( 100yr) = 500 / 8.7 x 60 1.0 min. TOTAL Tc10 = 19.9 + 1.1 + 1.0 = 22.0 min. TOTAL Tc100 = 14.6 + 1.1 + 1.0 = 16.1 min. INTENSITY (I) (Vail IDF Curves) _ 110= 1.9 in./hr. Intensity (1) from Town of Vail IDF curves 1100 = 3.7 in./hr. PEAK FLOW RATE (Q) Q = CIA Q 10 = (0.25) x (1.9) x (14.7) = 6.98 cfs • Q 100 = (0.50) x (3.7) x (14.7) = 27.20 cfs 11 / 7''-~ ' - .o py r. r + r! ,i a ( J! coc~ I I I. ND Ili MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASINS TOWN OF VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE 8/21/01 WEST DRAINAGE AREA - DEVELOPED CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD TOTAL AREA = 2.8 AC Job No. 1039 By: GKM C1 - PVMT & BLDG 1.3 AC C10 = 0.88 C100 = 0.89 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage C2-FOREST 1.5 AC C10 = 0.25 C100 = 0.50 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage C10 = (0.88 x 1.3) + (0.25 x 1.5) / 2.8 0.54 C100 = (0.89 x 1.3) + (0.50 x 1.5) / 2.8 0.68 TIME OF CONCENTRATION T1 = SHEET FLOW, 300 FT @ 40%. T1 (10 yr) _ (1.1 - 0.88) x Length ^1/2 /S ^1/3 13.07 min. T1 (100 yr) _ (1.1 - 0.89) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 9.82 min. T2 - SHALLOW FLOW, 550'@ 40% n = 0.025 V10 = 1.49 / N x (A/P)^ 2/3 x S^ 1/2 11.78 fps A/p = 6/13 - 12'Wx0.5'd s=0.11 V100 = V10 11.78 fps T2 (10 yr) = 550' / 11.78fps x 60 0.78 min. T2 (100 yr) = 550' / 11.78fps x 60 0.78 min. TOTAL Tc10 = 13.0 +.8 = 13.8 min. TOTAL Tc100 = 9.8 +.8 = 10.6 min. INTENSITY (1) = Intensity (1) from Town of Vail IDF curves 110= 2.2 in./hr. 1 100 = 4.0 in./hr. PEAK FLOW RATE (Q) Q = CIA Q10= (0.54) x (2.2) x (2.8) = 3.34 cfs 0 Q 100 = (0.68) x (4.0) x (2.8) = 7.63 cfs MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE 8/22/01 EAST DRAINAGE AREA - DEVELOPED CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD TOTAL AREA = 14.7 AC Job No. 1039 By: GKM C1 - FOREST 12.0 AC C10 = 0.25 C100 = 0.50 Runoff Coefficient - C from Table 3-1, Urban Drainage C2 - PVMT & BLDGS 2.7 AC C10 = 0.88 C100 = 0.89 C10= (0.25 x 12.0) + (0.88 x 2.7) / 14.7 = 0.37 C100 = (0.50 x 12.0) + (0.89 x 2.7) / 14.7 = 0.57 TIME OF CONCENTRATION T1 = SHEET FLOW, 300 FT @ 40%. T1 (10 yr) = (1.1 - 0.37) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 17.21 min. T1 (100 yr) = (1.1 - 0.57) x Length ^1/2 / S ^1/3 12.38 min. T2 = SHALLOW FLOW, 950 FT c@ 66%. n = 0.05 10' WIDE, 0.5' DEEP A/p = 5/11 - 10'Wx0.5'd s = 0.66 • V10 & V100 = 1.49/n x (A/P)^.67 X S^.5 V10 & V100= 1.49/n x (5/11)^.67 x .66^.5 14.27 fps T2 (10 yr) = 950 / 14.3 x 60 1.1 min. T2 (100 yr) = 950 / 14.3 x 60 1.1 min. T3 = CHANNEL FLOW, 500 FT @ 9%. n = 0.013 CURB & GUTTER - 6" DEEP, n = 0.013 A/p = 3.5/14.5 - 14'Wx0.5'd s = 0.09 V10 & V100 = 1.49/n x (A/P)^.67 x S^.5 V10 & v100 = 1.49/0.013 x (3.5/14.5)^.67 x .09^.5 13.27 fps T3 ( 10 yr) = 500 / 13.3 x 60 0.6 min. T3 ( 100 yr) = 500 / 13.3 x 60 0.6 min. TOTAL Tc10 = 17.2 + 1.1 + 0.6 = 18.9 min. TOTAL Tc100 = 12.4 + 1.1 + 0.6 = 14.1 min. INTENSITY (1) = Intensity (1) from Town of Vail IDF curves 110= 2.1 in./hr. 1 100 = 3.9 in./hr. • PEAK FLOW RATE (Q) Q = CIA Q10= (0.37) x (2.1) x (14.7) = 11.29 cfs Q 100 = (0.57) x (3.9) x (14.7) = 32.77 cfs 0 0 • P. \Mountain Bell Site\1039\dwg\DRAIN--FP.DWG Fri Aug 24 07:41:21 2001 GKM i .9-i' 1 I I ~ r i r T.I I'"i: j ' '1 l II~1 I III! t1 iI I.I`' + ' I II :I°..I;i, II III t'I! (Ili' I li{I i !iiI, ! '1ltl: 1 i iIl IIII `III l ~ I r71'~I I I li' li I '!li %ii' {'i1 +il illf i~; Ali :I; fill jii I`I~ ill .Iii it ;:1.. II . I1I I I I i Itl ! ! ! ! I J ~11 !III :I II'I.. !;;1 i I. ! I';. !i~ ill I,I Illi I.I. !I 'III , I { i ! jl• I; I i t II I , i tl ' J !iI`' Ij ° ' i'. ai •I. 111 I ' i1I! j iI I; Ijl. :il !I; nil ill; IF ;r,, V I ! it II{ ! , 1 11;' I'{ Ills i I ! I I I 1 III t 11 'I1' IIi II,1 I;.I i11 i r' i , 1 .;I i It li 1• i i'Ii 1lii 'i 'I: I ' I nil , I j'I! '11' t11! 1'II ;11: ` ' it I 111!. i';I Iii! IIII 1 t,+!. i I: lil. !1' ~1~ jljl ;li' li~ I~ Eii il; h + it IliJ l il.l l! ! Ili ' ! 1 iI; i 1',i l I I li 1 ' . 11 11 11 ; I I iII ii+!! !li: -!1r it ! ,`I; It 1111 (i 11 !1 ! I ! , i'i I i t! t:!; 'I t ',1I •IIi ,11 ! I, l,l i .1 Ili ' i !4 ' 1 i, 1 111\ II 11 t I (i ~i i ( i';' Ili t ! 1'` t iii II ;I Ij ;1 111 i 1 ii I ; i I iI is II !i it //)^`J1 1 II I I I I Ilil 1 II!i I I 11 it ! 1 'I •'I, 4J i;y1 ttl ,l 1 1 111lI I I 1f I i!I{ ~1I I I,!i IF :if li! ; ill i I!II i I I .I ti~ 1: •i, '1 11 t ! I I i I ! t t I i) I I il'il I i; 1111 i 'Ili; IIII i '1 l.I) tll ~ll, r j(i i + i, !i,l`•i,~}:!,! 1 I II! 4j 11.1' •'11.1 ili'ili I! '!'I ;ii' ~ li i Ji"J' '`;1 .l; ~ili i I t it I jl t I i; 1 I I,I: ~i ! ~1•!I!, ,111, 't1 ti~i ill ! 11111jI, ! !!11 :1111 I' 1 lii! ,,11;11' 1' y ! rI 1'r ~ I, ~ li (11 II / i 111 11 i' /I. it i . } { .1'.. , •'1 1,11 li ' I I t I I 1 t' I II„ 1:tI !}Ii '1, ''11 :II 'i1i'' x':11:! , I} '1'y;! Il;i I ,I, ! ;i I, 1 ii,{ 1!f, :ll; ' i 1 1 I• li •1~`,, ;ti` 11 III I I il!I I i I) I :j!1 Iil`I li Ill: !!!1 !jii I!Ij its. ,~4 I, y},4 {l,l•} 11• 111 'fl`. !11! ",I I :1,1:,1!1,' { \I' / y...', } 1I it ,:'II IIi I! III I11i I t {(l1 '111 1'11: 11!' ~I~' IIII IIi''11 will 11 '1, 'i Ili I Ili 1111111 'll }lIl i1 'i •ili i1•' I l!Il lit, 1' t^-11I(,,'1 't 1 `i. il.1l .l t 1 I! :1 j1l IIIl~ 1' 'tlil ';Ii j! ~Vi 'i if I i~;l 1{ ,fI 111'! Ijl `il j1i1; !Itl ;~jl 1}111 '.j1; i I 'N, i• 1} I V: ! I ! I I I r l' `I I I i{;1 1 -ll ,II 1} y i I , .{I i I'..._. ,t t\,~1\1, 1111t''t I II 11 II ' "`I !,i'~ tl`1 I, ~I~!! I II .111 I,It I I~ I ' ,!1 II' iI I ' { 141 i, ' I r ~ ,~`.~``~1\+ \ 1}`!111 `II, ~11I ;11! I{~I i`.~t IiI i`I! ! 11 'll !;ii II' II', 4,!iI !!I i~' I iyil If I ,{II IS: i~lt 111 i I, : r ` 1 1 i!~ 1 : / _ it `4 , 11,\ +1 1 !li 1': i.' i~' 11'1! I IiI!, ! i ~ , !I 1111 t' ',t II !1 1 I: ;!iit {1 Ali IiI: II {ji .I ii:' J i' ' Ili IISS l 1,1 11`1 ~11: iitl !il II' ~ 1 I ; 11 ,;II io ~i: , !i'11'i!' 11'1 1 I Ii;I Illi I I.: 1,;1 ,I'! I r. t 1' II j~' I'} ! i I: 1 ,,I. !IIi , 1 I ~ r-.. ~,+'tI ~,1\ ,1, l,`i\ I`~`'•` l.,l} ,lit: ;!11 14 i ~ ~i (I I II I I. 4 II,{1 ;,1;}l :,~!1 i, I 'l~l Iill it , I 1.' i ' ` + ! 1 111 i ,I 1 l 'I I I )i~1, is 1,11 ' IL 11 if?, 1 I!, iI I ` I ' ( J I 1 1\t'` 1.\., i,l,. \+:1 '1'•, \t', '1 \t 11',1, .ll.s li iTM: 11 ~1 -+11 I ~!I I ll 11 j ,Ii x ~ \~t',i~ 11 1! iZl '1 I 1,11 i~ ~i1i it 'II' ' I I;j' it I!I till j1 III 1 ' Ili1 r ! s' 1 ` \t;j~p ,t:1 111 11 I I' ~i ~ i• it ! i 1 iII ~ i I I:I 1 i 1 +ir i' 1, }1 •tG!`;\'„+.•1.\'`,''.\',~L, III i'I I ;Ilt r, I i ' !IIi III +•I~ i'1 11 i 1; I i ! Ir _ ,1 1 ;11 I '1 t I I! i :i ,I I';• ti~l ~1'!'i; !I'I i •II I il,i I:~'I IIII 'Ii i! I 1 1 11 ;I: }iii iiI' I! li; I it 1111 li; v; } j 1 x!1,4 Ilh,'!1!. i!i } ''.i a :t i!, t11111~1 :!i iit I I IIII t !11111! fill I!ii 1 1! . `ii!i;; /...'r 1 'r lyl lll'II 11 ti1~!11,1.1, ; ilj, 1111 j !1 !;,I 111 IIII IIII IIII tl!! i1jl'III '11" ill fitl IJ;; 11. rl/ r Itl ~ + \ "5' 'i r'--`-_--•. I !/~r% ' i! t`11' 1.11 j'. 11` ~ !,l'1 it if I !1~I i ~'llt 11 i, Ii. ;iI~I~ i ,I 1.!i ll ' ~ i i' ~ r;rl I l ~'-s1 r ~ =L•,' :\'1 ,:,?}pQ { 1+! i 11' 'li IIi! 'i ! Iii , II I~ 11,1 IIII I'! ~il I I rll Ii i' r'; - ti 9r i 1 •.„,'1`p`i' ,1l1 t. I ! I! :li,+ ~ ;I ;i: i 1 0i1 I!Ul•- ~1 + ii• ~ ' !i 1\•. .`\~.;\'a 1 it,,i!C~, ''1 ill 'I .i~Jl{li III !t'il~l II, tIl ;i 'I ',(i1. iI ' i :ll 1 .11 ~~_7]y'' I I I ;;ys '•i,1\tt\\+'!'{; 'I; I I'I Ij II 1 ~1 1111 I , 1;11 I 11'1 I •V, i~ ( `a ti ~ t 1 I'li li'Q i; I' i'II Iii )!•+l'I; IIII ii~l ij I.II Ilf! Ii11 ;)If II t II,I I 11~ :,ii iI,' !ij ii(I li'! I 'f n. kT;1 i r/ / ~ ! I t 1111 !'ll li; i!II I'll III I I ='1 II 1`:! II{{ iljl i~ 11:1 IIII !I ;Ili 1 ; ,t ! i, :1!11 i 1 ! ';'i'i 1 r ,ct / ! /,il ,n•, '~li 1 ` i I~ II .11 1{; ; 11 III L!I 11 , I III! { 1 !V 1.. till 11 -mu { I' I 1 1 i iif 1 t 11 ` i ;f11I !,1' j4 I '1 1 IIi' I!jj 1111 Ij;l {;'I iII 1 ' ,r'. ji%„•. ;'-nfn_,r - !iiI I I ,1 :ll r;l , i' ri,} i}; ,I i Itl' iI l;~{ G~7 t ,I,! !1 ,11! i I I', 1'' i :i ! ;I.I' Ii;; 1'!It Ifij a>:, j J t,! :I :I I,II •t;! , Ii 1! ! i,ili ,li ';'1 Jill i 17.; i ii !i ! i ii ''•f y-1~`' - is li ill il` I' II li I i .1:11 1}., .I. 11 ;I, !1 11 ,I.i 11 I. !iti. t 1' i( i,lfi / i 1 I ~i,I IIII I~I' tilt ! ill :1: ii I.I+ ~1 li 1!11 !'Ii !i 1111,1'1 1111 i Iii !j S III iiI 1' I II r i• ! II 1 II' !11 i I II UI II'' x m' l(11 'I 1; !Iilii ' ` ' '1.11 ' I' ; r t.h ~.krll•~n.~! r ?y ((#iI y I ;'i IIII (I (II jlfi i! i II' I ~'1 i ! i ill, li , ;;i, I .1 I I i ' i / ' V j r i• V i,(i. vita; r i :~i R' % 'i I.I! is i•i Il! t 1 1LII :111 !111 1 ! 1+','1', I 7111 ill it Jl i II 1 , '!'-i !iI! III! 1'11 '.1 i!!1'. ' it O I iSl ' y~tth„„r(y~yu.',!, '1, r!((C~ ri~``l1. x,,\`1',`1,1 `\.it ~i ~l! 1. 1 I I ;I li rii' ;,?.,S t'fi " irr I~,S!4b, 141,61ir- lil•Iy lil!iii lil~!!' ' j/ ;tll I'I {f' 'I{ ~ 11'1 iia 1;, '!JI"; I / t ~~IrS1~G ! R\,i ,''i !li! i , I 'I (Ili (I Ii I!I •~II • I, I' i ' •1 I! +1i 1'' Ij z ';i"• it t?, ~ ~ t :4?l ~T i 1. r ' I ,t J}V III; i li i li.l i IJ 1! "m' III ;1~. `t1' '•1 ! i -i ~ , r', ii, s^t"~47~r5~. - \ t;`: htl, ,111 Ito ,t~i Il;s 'III { :I. I •It f,l!, !!!JI "i1+I \ \I,: 1` lZ iiI ~ 1. r '.~d,~vk1 !tit ~n: r^ / ` 1 i! i } !rl ii 1' Ilt ! :Ii 11111 ;1!, +I ! 111 l iIt~j i I i Ill} '1`1!! !1'l I\',. j• tl (1 1 f• t , \+1 1, ti 11'! 1 1 tl'illt I I '1 G' `.t•`'t' i O + t l+ z 'i iia, / / e / kr,',~~h / r t, 1: \ 1U\ s.l 1 it}il IIII IIi' 11!1 I~ ! IIII \111 a':' I 1.i G7 y I,t 1 1 1 ,t11 1111 11 + 1! / .l ;li 1t1 I,I ii ' i, I!1i i'I li 41 ~ 1 , ! /T7 tall ( ~ I i ` % 1 1 i. ~ %`}I, 111 !i I! .lit ,t11 ~1I! 1< `~N I ,r !1 .ll l I 1 / ' ' I ~I / 1 li! I 111 1 f , 11,111 ~ u ~ - ' \ ~ 1 ~11 t` 1, 1 +t Il fi'~ I iF %J 'r !di t'; / _ -:~tI IIII I~It t1i tt ._ti1 1 -"1~ I 1 ~ tl r ill II i 1. ~ `1 ! I -''/-4 "-•x ~ 1 1 w - , r/ ~ l 77 ;i .I I f'i j ! i r I~J/'r(r`;i!~/I;!!i :1!' ~!/ii,/ !'%r: ~'~i is//~ I 1i t ,i j , ! I I I / r ' 1 1 - l~ 1 I % I i "'It ! \ J l I/, :i~ !(c'/ %!'r yll ! ! - r/' r ii ' /l;i'/ ~ lit ' ~ t 1 l ~ r % !l!/ / ; .%~~-^r _ i '.,1 /t~7:i';'. • r % '/i r I%f lr. i.: r "i:i`/t/ i' .r ~ ' ,1 rr(!! yr r f!!/ / /ii 'i`I ; r r, ~ ; /i 11 ' / % % / . J• i • j _ i~• i ri, ' ' \ ~~i l;'iG+!!~Jr !r/ r!; /rr! l;!( li,+', i - ~ .l, !/jrliiiir(i%ij r('%i( 'i//!(l~, IIIIII i!/~~ (tj,~ !`r•;/r', ~•',1 tJ J'I j ! !I, ~r! I r `jI \ i'\ 2 '%il(~/ %jit,/~illlil~j~ijjj'; Ili ,~I! 1 i il(iJ'l!/I !fit' jj ~ / t I i' i.i;~~: I i i ! i # r //1( lLll~lillti(,'4 lj Iii r~i; i(jJ lrll ;l!! ! ! t i J1+ r/,. , y I , ! II it Ili .t• t'CG~I~})<%/.'„'+(,r,1 Jl i r I/ i ' I , ' 1, 1 I /,r /r// 1/?1+~~!?'l~+ti II~IIJ'Ia,_~€!/./'.r%i~,"i ' ~~r~ i % •!Il', , :'.,!IIII 'I', I,I 11, ~!i1' li 1' u:i 1~ Q;. '%'.u, , , ; I i1 ~7'l1Jj' i!:6'r i'1I~''i I! y( l!!i' l i •i i %"!!~ri l.' b ! I ( hI r / 1(l~' il; i,•'rt j/ I II i't1 ! ( ~'I. r' ,(I' - { / I%: ~I !'i I' 11'1 1 L l j, l l r' / `I' I I I :'%j,%I;,/i i/'%/.r~ :i• ~%/'/,yl,+;l,! ; 1 'rl ;1,~ 1711 ! j 111 k7 I •1 ~ lr lr. r ~'.~/,•I( IIi I 1 ' '1 , / ' .t ' 1 /7 r l i / ;i/•!:' ./ii",i/:,rl;/•' / i! ! .I ~ I ; i I.i' 1 i /~l; 1 , I ~f 1 !r I !`,//!i~!/! ~ :~i',,i •I Ii I Ili J`~~'I r ~'il ! .l 1 S I t, 1+1 /rl, r '%if ~•'/!!l ill ii i iII 1` ~ fill VJ ' (i i l ' ' - i t ` ~ j j! I 1'~' , rl; j!/'I•j;%/'/!,;!' i ,r ~ / /i„ i l ( 1 ~l4 ;!:I , l , ' j , ; I !'i~ ~ y ; 1 l~ rill !;t ~~('i%i%;l1 ~~!'l~ /,~/'1'/; - ,,;ll!'~1'1,;~ / / 11`, li\I ii`I''i ' ! ;!~/i' % i ,i I 1 a. ` i 1 •1 1`'~~ !i , 'i/ f' 1 /.'/i / i/ I I i ,li~ ~i j !;I Ii 1 i hji x.. )jf :r, rhr l 11,'1 n%,/~ ,Ir,, IJitf% I t! II ! 1 ! + i 1 ;1 'J' (II /:~,,/(!`;n 1(/rl,rll l 1111 J /;I f il. Itl Ill' lit; 1!;l j, '1 i• /I ii' I ! 1 I I 1' 1 IW j, !il 11 ,/%(%(i'il 1(11 'tit i%J "i' / 111'7 )r ! /i; "IiI 'l ll f jib, l t 1( IIII '1%iil/1%+'lJ 'lifh!! ((rJ~11jJ%jl'/; i / ! 1 1 ('r! 1:,,l1 lrll lJi ,i ji j~(( l/l( /~i. : : ! ( + 1% i Il: , 1 11 (iI / 1 1 ( t i ! ( f t / . / ! i I , 1'i. ~!j 1 , ~ ) % l 'j: l~ i•il t (`tl ii fr 1 ' 111 I r t!(i %!•r %l/i r1 i 'll. i + ' '(i ~,i; 1:/( t f f! rt,%I r, (l t! ' / (rl ! i ! r' tji '%/'111 it ( !Irr %/1 ''~1;1• I'' r///Ji%'l+jl 1//'•11/'t lrr lr i{~ I' t(+f fil~1 iii l'!!!11 '//`Il j:/( I i i II j/%~1/%('Ir ( (r111~ '(ltl':),i ~tl'Ilt, it % ii%~ I l ~i{' II I I iI 1' 1 j' II 1 I'/' r ill; \i +/(r (/!t/ 1!1%i~l~~!/i rl" a l /I ' Itt I•• 1! It! ! i ~ I I Itt ll lil I t' , ( 1l !ii) rl %/(f /i/~ riir /1 r' 11%! /11' I// /1/';J~r(l'?'f! 1 ii ll lf)r! /%i I i i' 11 ; !I t' i III IIII Ill, i ill: ( /l /tl%j%'il(!',//; i: I !111' ~ 'lll' '1% 1(,1/,'lrlj l~jjrrl,;;l'4/; rr,,. 'i/ 1 IiI, il?I ltl !.(l ~r! ;;l I/f Ii,!`' r , I rl ~~1 /1 ,7/1 .l 1 ,rl, i' / 11 i! I 'i I I ' I t; 'f 1: (~11 Jl1 / i 'fr 1+/ 1/'(!// % { I I 'i; IIi ; l `1,i r ,f ' IIi ,r l! 1, l'!• ! l1'1':. r+; _ i, ' l !r%' rl(I f%'! 1 li ~irt• /1/, i/;/ /r,! tl ((,''!/'%(i, i/~'j / ~ ' 1 ii , fII II Iii.! ~`i ~I I Ii, 1j1 '1(1 ;i r i,' I;I-iI; l C (O/i~ l (I t%~i ! i1111,t,1 l f .!'i / r ! r r i l (7 ! ~ i,j ~Ijl ~)I , ~i I l ~ i 1 II, I i 'Ill „ (l ,'I'i r I ~ ( Fi: i/1 /1/rI%((r/ r,l I r 1 / 'I !1 Il i I Iftl i!, G • !l )It jl! iII' Ir i I(// 1,('~i.//.,%.:,,• l J tli i /f (!i1 I%:iirl,l Ir/i, ! il,;j'1(t 1 I I ?It % i. j;j .l ! I, ' ~ iJt r t il~ f 1' (Jr1 Itfi ~l iii"! fl: 1~ ,`iIi I!t 111'O/ i III I (T~ % i, 1 Il / i Ill 1(1 '1!i I~{I ! J~ 1 I I: fJ!~ ~tli '1 lr: ri(; i! I ir I1I ! i i ( 1i Il~ f1 ! i~ /II:I I! fl 11 1 'w ;1 '7: .l I I r~ a ,t 1, 11 i lti Old 1 1 'I !l1 I::' r i rl!( tll rj 1 / i, rri Ii 1 ii I i! t 11'1 t ' 1! (i I'+11 1 ) i;l: /i!i 7 1 ! l ( 1 f h 1. I Ij, i t i t ( r l i ii li! r;1 / 1+ i F-_a ! ' ! r 1 % ' ,(1 I/: 1 it if ll I,il t fi IIi IiI! !{ii l l II I i. I i, ltl i'f J, ill; !if 11 I i 1 1 1 11 !i(( %J//1, lljii~ I llli IiJll~i414{ 1`l'1 1;11 ,!Il f !1 , _ //.y/~i'~•'.''!r i i!''~lllj'tit/ 1;)1 l1i i I r jl rl ! i I 't ~'1 !1 j•. i 1• i /i(• r'~; tJ l l I , r l I!( !rl rr 7: + 1 T j. ! il' ! I ' ( 1 t 1 I I I l 1 % r'' i i,! ; %f!( ~l'i Il+i 1 l 11 t ! ' I ' j1• i it i,F,• 'ir'!, •'b, r!// jl'i` r~tt IiI l l '~I' i11t ii ~;'l l' t ji it/, 'y'' - /j:~' i;l, tl ,,Ir i1 ~ ~iI: it t 1 1+11 f--~ ~i' 1(, f'"'/r ~ /I,• ;ill , I i.11 ( % i i, / 'lif 1 1 j I'i l O li j: /Ir; ij; II II; II Ammwz MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE PRELIMINARY-SITE LAYOUT -MIDDLE CREEK STREAM BED AND FLOODPLAIN a,< m TOWN OF, VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO A mcreek-culv2 (1600020WO jpeg) .u w~ a vocal! i•. Y~xs. zs i szT~~;a ice: w ors & is § y T xf~r ~~kP S ty) IR • szv~ a~ _ t 9 ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ F~'Y.~ ~•t ~ ~a ~.~yt,3 VPS~-reams e- GA OJ 8-23-0 Hvdraulic Calculations, 1 3"Tir , 800 - - - - 1 ~S~' iPt` a 8.300 I :i _ Z (C oooo. std ! 1 _ y\\ _ W g' Gy.. ;t. \ Z v _ 1 t r-n 2 00 8 CD DRAW i n OESG ED 9Y: 1 - - nc Joe* t m c SFEET SCALE: V = 100 0 MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE 8/22/01 HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS INLETS: SUMP CONDITION Use D&L I-3386 Grate Open area = 2.5 sf Ponding Depth = 0.5 ft K = 0.7 (30% clogged) C = 0.6 entrance loss coef. ORIFICE EQUATION - V = C x (2gh)^9/2 and Q = KVA V = 3.4 fps Q = 6.0 cfs West Draina9a Area - Q10 = 3.4 cfs, Q100 = 7.6 cfs 2 - Inlets (one on each side of Mt. Bell Road - 6 cfs X 2 = 12 cfs Q~ o o ~ ? East Drainage Area - Q10 = 11.3 cfs, Q100 = 32.8 cfs 1 2 - Inlets (one on each side of Mt. Bell Road - 6 cfs X 2 = 12_cfs Q ~o - o k °324 Side Inlet Catch Basin Frame ' and Cover F3/4' rv o o e r Appx. Wt. 91 lbs. s=ue` I- c1 3/4' F2• I _F3/4' 8 1/4' AppxWt 590 Ibs Concave Gutter Inlet Frame . 0®3306 and Grate , ` . Available with: 'A' Grate 13 1/4 • Vane Grate II II F77 M s• I I _ 4.. I I zo 1/z I I n~} 24' J1 i/2' nrnjn(n r--lnr-nn ~ I--Irnnrn - 39 3/4' ^ 37 1/4 I u~~ c I 39 114 I VARE GRATE 'A' Grate l8 1/4" ,,~~1=3440 thru 1-3450 7~~v~tt~ , . x4 , sx Curb '.Inlet Frames and Grates 3 Yr. x: 27 ~ 25 I/.• 32 /4' 35 3/<' 19 1/2' sr' Ent F 19 7/.• L rFi. K0 ?5 1/2' i- lam'/ G 3, DR 4-SIDED FRAME =8 I/2• Catalog No. _ Tyae of Grate Total Weiaht I Catalog No. Tvae of Grate Total Weight 1-3440 2 Sided Concave 340 1-3446 3 Sided Flat 360 1-3442_ _ 2 Sided Flat 340 _ 1-3448 4 Sided Concave 380 1-3444 3 Sided Concave 360 1-3450 4 Sided Flat 380 95 MSUPPLY Table Rating Table for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\ e.fm2 Worksheet 18" CULVERT Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Constant Data Mannings Coefficient 0.010 Depth 1.30 ft Diameter 18.00 in Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment Channel Slope 0.005000 0.050000 0.005000 ft/ft Rating Table Channel Slope Discharge Velocity (ft/ft) (cfs) (fus) 0.005000 10.09 6.20 0.010000 14.26 8.77 » = 3c ~S (~lL ? 0.015000 17.47 10.74 0.020000 20.17 12.40 0.025000 22.55 13.86 0.030000 24.70 15.18 0.035000 26.68 16.40 0.040000 28.53 17.53 0.045000 30.26 18.59 0.050000 31.89 19.60 i 08/22/01 FlowMaster v5.15 04:43:52 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Table Rating Table for Circular Channel Project Description Project File pe.fm2 Worksheet 24" CULVERT Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Constant Data Mannings Coefficient 0.010 Depth 1.75 ft Diameter 24.00 in Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment Channel Slope 0.005000 0.050000 0.005000 ft/ft Rating Table Channel Slope Discharge Velocity (ft/ft) (cfs) ON 0.005000 21.85 7.50 0.010000 30.90 10.60 0.015000 37.84 12.98 fa r7 = l13 C-4 1,5 r-e, 11J, 0.020000 43.70 14.99 US (,,5 0/10 v E 2~ ~ 0.025000 48.86 16.76 0.030000 53.52 18.36 0.035000 57.81 19.83 0.040000 61.80 21.20 0.045000 65.55 22.49 0.050000 69.09 23.70 • 08/22/01 FlowMaster v5.15 04:42:53 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 AUG 20 2001 13:18 FR EAGLE VAIL SC 970 949 3289 TO 4768616 P.01i01 Xcel Ener9'Y$hr PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY P. 0. Box 430 Minturn, Colorado 81645 August 20, 2001 Peak Land Consultants, Inc. Attn: George Mossnw 1000 Lionsridge Loop Vail, Colorado 81657 Subject: Service Availability Year Mr. Mossman: In accordance witb our tariffs filed with and approved by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, gas facilities can be made available to serve your project at Middle Creek Village (the Mountain Bell Site). Currently our lead time for design is 4 weeks and lead time for construction is 8 weeks. Due to workload, material availability and design complexity, design and construction lead times are approximate and subject to change. Please submit your plans at the earliest opportunity to better assure meeting your proposed schedule for receiving service. ® Gas costs will be calculated in conformance with our filed SERVICE LAi r,<AL CONNECTION AND DISTRIBUTION MAIN EXTENSION POLICY. ? Electric Costs for the project will be calculated in conformance with our filed SERVICE CONNECTION AND DISTRIBUTION LINE EX i zASION POLICY. If you have any questions or comments, or if I can be of further assistance, please call me at the number listed below. My normal work hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sine ely, Ka n Bo rt Technician 970-262-4070 TOTAL PAGE.01 AUG.23.2001 11:46AM HOLY CROSS VAIL N0.45B P.2 CROSSM O G, Z 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • PC DRAWER 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 O (970) 945-5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081 b~ SSO~O August 22, 2001 Mr. George Mossman Peak Lane! Consuftants, fnc. 1000 Lions Ridge Loop Vail, CO 81657 RE: Middle Creek Village -"Mountain Bell Site" Dear Mr. Mossman: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of Holy Cross Energy. Holy Cross Energy has existing power facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. These existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide electric power to the development, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations cn file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system for this protect. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERGY Ted Huskey, Engineering Service Supervisor TH:vw Service Location *52-65 EAGLE RIVER WATER 8c SANITATION DISTRICT W 846 Forest Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-7480 • FAX (970) 476-4089 August 21, 2001 Mr. Jim Ellerbroek Peak Land Consultants, Inc. 1000 Lionsridge Loop Vail, CO 81657 Subject: Middle Creek Village Development Ability to Serve Letter for Water and Sewer Dear Jim: As of August 14, 2001,the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District will provide domestic water and sewer service to the above-referenced development. The District has excess capacity to process domestic water and sewer to its constituents at the present time. The Vail Wastewater Treatment Plant (VWTP) is currently serving approximately 5607 Single-Family Equivalent (SFE) units. The current design capacity of the VWTP is 7500 SFE units. • Accordingly, upon compliance with the rules and regulations, and the payment of appropriate tap fees, the District will provide domestic water and sewer service. Construction for all main line extensions is the responsibility of the developer; however, all construction drawings must be pre-approved by the District. If you have any questions or concerns please contact the District at 476-7480. Sincerely, 14 3~04 11 - Fred S. Haslee Regulations Administrator c Customer Account File FSH/mem AVF:\ISWSD\8REGS\ABILTSRV\FORWXJtS.~M(Q§f9 .RATIONS & MANAGEMENT SERVICES 8-23-01; 2:lOPM;QWEST ENG. ;970 384 0257 # I/ i 8-23-07; 2:OePM 9704768616;tF 2 August 23, 2001 To whom it may concern; Qwest confirms our ability to serve the proposed site (Middle Creek Village) as shown on the "Location Plan" dated August 20, 2001 prepared by Peak Land Consultants, Inc. We understand that the plants transmitted are conceptual only. Jason anaipe, Qwest Field Engineer Jason Sharpe f, Manager CPReid Ea9Lmar t, eg Lout NeMOrk Operatos 921 Grand Avenue C kxada 81601 Glenwood Spring 970 384 0238 970 618 7513 cef t 970 978 031 7 pager r. 970 384 0237 tax N5ha2@9wee.COM } ~ o 8401 t] -`rte`/y ~r _ . 1 ? \ ^~ti 3St?-^--- ~a~. 1.- s -`°-4300------------------ •.y - - _ •.I Ill _ 82.90-_ _ _ ~'/r/ ^~`__-'r'te"'~ ~ 1 ii ..8 .`A ~ ....a.. _ ` + 1 1 ^ .ti- ck OrjJ~~\ 1A - r.rr _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _!9iiRf'-_= k _ • .:.jji ' - v~NW~ - - icy --~~`a~.- _ ow ---,a- - 8205- 1 tf a« - - - - - - - - - or 010 p%,c joef DAB 0 p P SK F"a Yg" PR-lo s"o t i 1 A t W i i l ~ I?~ 1+++ 1 U ; 7 +1+++ 111,1+ 1 r , ~ 1 1 1 1 ENE „--_-1 1 t 111111 r1 ~ t _.~__•w..~•rrr~_-~~_~ 11111 K~-- ~im~ t 1 WT I wo. _ `,i°_ .tfYN~~:~~•_ %:fyl:1'`''ruc~uuf`~3fi'~S'~~~~f",-yO/~'~-~- Won Cat t"ypRD sr. q 1,.6G v,.e J" It DAB NT S i 3 O 41 r~l~4tllliit/y!'~'~~.:, i4ht~\AS~~,lj,4~\\~?Y~~\\\\~",.,~,-~•:•.4~:--'-'~ ,,y .r"a~2!!^::. _ - _ . - 1. ,yi14'A,f I Itt)?--'!.-` '1~.~\•t*~;Vt~~~;\\,:.\•~. y~` - - - - ` =r%"_ : - OG , .1Y . Y ti a NI" r._ a AA' " 01-0111"l y 5t4 \ t \ ' - k i - - r fri - - \'1 t _ Y 1 t ' - sr \ \ _ 1 wss A 50 4 _ =J~ - F - owe. - - _ - s \ - ~ i r 4 - 1. :i 11Z -7n /t - - - V i\1 "'r•~"-~'l J~i - \ '1/% 917.1 ',p gi10p„!•_ 43r'''-w`1Y <`R«.:.,....w....: TAM _ t i• - i - - - :i~ia G..:- t 1. 1-1 it \ i r, ` ' \ `l ~ ~ - - - r \ _ - - - - /1 i ~ lp1R1N ~i ~"t r.. 1 _ _ ~~4fw~~?:+ t _ , iii"..-.+ _ _ OAIF. o ~7•Jalssa e~l>•~~~~n 1 o. r .S.F.3 TRA 1 VAIL POT / rm1.1~a+Nnq i ae•Iw~w .eN ama• LO VAIL POT 4 =alto - 02•a ar aav amo , _~1 _ y 7 V e- 30MOo 101-W tawaq awe-202~6<r a~i..a~emo ` oQ z o w- aeazras w aaNnn tong - T"'t'RONr C.) A O Y*IVSIt-.wr wYO . wA INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (NDRDi FRO'ItADE ROAD) 70 O NYttwW a ~,.•.11.•~ NgVlT. atom. Q• (NL OV101 NSA OCI.1m 1110Y OIGfK i1Wl NMIOm1Ai1H fLL0 M~ !Y 1K iD11 p ,01~. . YM Mlm 1NL 1Mr. I LINE TABLE tp~ ~~,Y , oR v aa•e Nast sw • r.m a•n•ss• moo wwi m11a Nn tiasar. euv - Nato tow 4 ® tNrt YumlAmt • •im•>Qni s n~a•' iw var n Ns• a•o rwra wv a• ~Nypppyypp. • n a,s•~u 1•tws+r. w toev No n ~Ila• . leo s Ma.emuu 1„i.•o d {myy@~ aaass asu d aarre w W ene aem A, r•• ~•r M ns mr.~al I~~YYt{ • M.•CWVNa1LN..W WOaMm NSI.OIOl 101.v,.I. 0v011aI pOfs~llL AlOli WpaOmnapy •ga10111f pyd w•r.ssomt a.ar•n•a .N • ~os •a.~wn. a°ool~aa~~Nl. Nrap 1.~.14ea~ I~i laa ua m'N roaila• a•nx Yam o_a1 rlpNq wao DRAW jr . •m•a s SV N q1 olNaa s,Y a01t, r NUPCDL R[MEt1ED+ !!0 RC x" Ion DAM 06/23,01 SHEET 1 of 2 0 r WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST (U.&F.S.) 1 TRACT C qy VAIL POTATO PATCH 9a R SP LOT OB VML POTATO PAT. 0 al V4m OWEST^i ~ ~9J aetst'seMt~7 y ea......w QT I G7 r~~` W . - .i 1v.nwlsrtvwq sW' ,G~,r O In ~O se0ae'42'Tl - 311.x7 o.Ht - oxst'rr a.M ®e ~ F czn R- 3N10A0 T- 101.x' V. HTtO.rBar r., tAim 830 ° 0 nCGA 013- 302x7 Om.r amD ..30[x301 e~i.a~llwaw Ou~+n ,,,,,,,exp i+ ~ U CH- 3o26S' .'W q nel F N71'MWW- IO&W INTERSTATE A HIGHWAY No. 70 ai°" "7'010 \ U O (NORTH FRONTAGE RCMO) \ Kam) V1 Q+ rn a NOMATES 9,wE op tmE ell muTER LOT 1 sm TOTAL Se R - NeetO se. R TOTAL Sy, R . IetfOtt sy R ' AREA ONR taa - eTtn ~0. R ANA IA~EIi W.i - JxxexO sp. ?L .4F AREA OVER 100< - 61Htt8 s4 ER AIEA lNOER C- . 7, R WYMADC OH071 00x8 R DEBRIS -Bm A - 1T1 DRARrt r TOTAL BUROABLL AREA - 1=0 ea R REVVED, 00 Plc imp 7030 DAM 08/}3/01 MOM THE 100 YEAR ROOORAN DDES HOT LX WMN LOT 1. SHEET I 2of2 i D TITLE T~RV EY pRISCIPAL JVERIDIAN ALTA PLA 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH fACSM SURVEY j ND 5 SOUTH, RANGE Op COLORADO S'fflp F THE SE 4 SEC OF SAIL OWN Ty OF EAGLE. STATE OF THE yg' 0 TOWN PART a so^' 0. SE14 wot 6u, PA A Pmt RANG 8o uw m / r+a ~w s 2MR WAN ~ g 13 ~ ! i _rtaK wao `tro t $ • E 70 +x N5740SWN - ijw 003nn - s amp ..d+ - - - - FROVrA6f ROAD INTERSTATE HIGHWAY No. 70 (NORTH (f MTAGE ROAD) UND 9V.J O s US WEST pARGEI K u , M ~ w+ - SHEET S of 3 ~ r. pan Kl m ABM v .qM r'I aem"m ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY LAND SURVEY PLAT PART OF THE SA, OF THE SEX SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANCE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EACLE, STATE OF COLORADO 1. ova erg,rKtalr~l rev l~lg~~w~r¦~~~w trai .m stir ml poa~eel°°s &Tiin~i6ii' rTiLat~a° r r ~ , ~ ltr r tlrr ¦Irra tlta t ral O 1 DI¦f! tttwal A/O ¦wi x lY1 w r x tautw alto O t011i t ~ 1A¦C (4 rllttt rD t~rrglMxrell~Kr 10yO0tODrlyi~~p e~I ¦iLr~rrtl~N~O~IytWY01sM~I~NrN t °m1a ~L ~pOptl¦¦ Y'V tiMElOt~yM¦F. S ?d ~]itW, D~fMgYW ~tr> a ~ ! • ~ _Y wIPr.I1f. r 00~1ir nOl N e,tM all Y ~l tOOr~u wtw ai is '~'I f'. r rtr~i0 M¦ Or llf~2~i~ i ~ 6 s K It~¦ ~u¦ IYLa ,w mno nta •1[D~I1pOa how o w tat 11an lDY MOr YD IYIM tM'TMY Yt r raYr ~IrM A K IWCrII ttM ° ~ W Vi IM Ol1r OCIOO 0.11m rD¦I II R1 IlttlYtl iSaO ~r~ t N w xt. rt erwr wwN 00•tlMl l SM LOW" p/pN)}y LID x~¦ wY,r r s.D a0 - ~ ~ au r.al ~wrw~it~ r.:' ~irsr~ ¦°Ow¦ r~o't °ww ra Iwaaaa rorl ¦ ws • saw Kn _ rolr ¦ tnrr• r ttss ton • urvt ¦w~~Ipml a I.a I°.a n N. omwc_~pµ1/GY~I1~~ ~pI 70a ! Ml1r• ¦ rLN /Hn ~ 141OItl Y~Ift IDl OY11°IOG1Nd{ ¦~°t ~ aD irk IIK A 1IOIr l rrr• r Itn w. ran I • at110 •en~mLa isr ~yDy¦tfx~'r~elps~rploppw~sy. ~,p. .t~¦ta~°~t .~rt~su~v asr . ~~pp1~~0lyIpIA~...~ll M 1[ ~ I~t([~Oy1y[11Y¦/D~ ~tllrMll~I, r ¦ [y~1al1~KMI , - t tgrtllbD110(tY /r tr0a/mprgN~ yb~IDM6 ~i1}~11~ ~Ot1pp rrrl l]tr1~ wx¦ IID I~{Itr O yOp 1a/~¦YIr¦¦i~Yll MV. +1! Y}lltlrl'R`M~ M.yyty • x W ~We 1°,~¦~DIOrMi 1MV b MI CAM M IR~r1C4. fMtl arwt Its w g00rOmtR aI N 1¦t~ilK,~Y¦Wtt t ~ Hwlf° lrjl/ M6• ItD Yt0 tlCi~p K IfI1~u0 r lY~ 10 ~¦wrrR YalrN .r rNtllryflNww,yy,rtplK~I~f~a0~t1I1~¦pA~/tI~K/slp¦p~~al ///~I`~l YIIK ITT 1¦K 1't W'~ ~L=11;4+. r\I~AMQ r Ortl 1I r ®M ObYf/ { J P MN SAD q nln ¦01 ~ryr • 1l[ ~~1p1 s x wl?¦Ilt w IO1011t1M~~g1¦~ ~~~y~r,y Y~~~yfsa~aYl)WOl{Yi1pI!s ~¦planl irOtlliCYIMIY. •r n~r<4~ry~ixCITO¦DaWII to ¦4r,It10Yr1iK 0s0~M¦ItrlO~w t Mllr tl 410 M gly1~~ KtOI~ ~rpmmt~~lpl¦wtYgQ/1~1~11ipW~tyb~MlR ~r. ipp~0. .1 ¦01 /Y. ~~o ¦ Ip DOgl~ppt trttss.t o I- meat '0 ¦ tta7r r VIII K r¦rtts mle P /ltlrl ? w WMl MYI I I?- tsQ ¦ Orm1 pspprpOr l® YOIS tl¦I wl ttrrr ! ltur M I r rr r K /rl tea ¦ tar [ Ww 16n rtlQ zt F' ,t,y lqy WI sry a ra v¦1(Y ¦Dwa prp~sylyr la¦Ip+gaa l~sn/r~agsptaan~~l Iwadr ¦¦rt M<>OArp IMEOIt ¦~~wr/xy~r wn >.I n16 OIIOrII~tgll¦rpalrlr~lrr}tyrM1rYTrt/y{rl pM,Q1rM'ptpK / ¦yp~~ ~,K, • 1,~1tl ¦11YI. ,10r1 .DIIr11OaAplp¦i,w.Owf~p~P i `l~ lK[,O 4TOKfN/'/~I~~ Y¦~wYlOS W11olMLS1'ia®lM . rs,r. tttlt¦It R.11111f tr Pwr IaT ¦ wr'r'r t¦t¦ K tpraf ewn r tar¦ ~ I°IOr •Iilplli~C ¦a r ttr r N p Wy 1ra t 0tW •¦s 1m tllptDfgqlr FOR II MI'!I~ ~°iIa°~Iaf MDIt M IOIM IMI> MY wt rY Yi tOYIaR 1rr YI w1.Y Wt t¦r¦G n¦YI1tG\OQ t OIfJV l aRtl Itr w K MII O NWy110r IN>tl 1l{ tlrrY IM DI IUl MD DI[ypY~ I[DY DI R ¦ 1 ~ Mwi00dOirr rIN 1®I,~~ ~~R~~IM~~>/••~yy~l pl.~;p1y Ipl l W~yIp111N I/~~Im DOILY .OrMR tullt;ri N M~ L M WTr°1[~tY~IIY~ Q x4101 N iOEpOIiR ~Y K lrrr lsOrt', r I f(Y[ p rRwr trutoan rta orltw I.¦e~alr . w I;ie nil'altrtn• ae ' moI?°iu r >r O O O O®O tow m mr ¦sto¦. wrr. rm 000 «a lmltprws rtr x(r o Row t¦l ~•rwa¦ta P HMO ~l to tawlar OtlDttw ~ttD,e vtrl ¦r¦ ¦rrla ra rr wart ~urr~Id ~rettrlrl4 ¦r.rr¦tttmrrrtttar tsr¦rs•ttw r¦¦.ar rta -7 rNY ® a•ees trot alt¦a tut ¦awsatrarrrat.w saw • v ~tll~Y ~Y~ rla twOw -M~K~tr- trrww ~tr•~tr~~- tlrsw -tr-to-ri- ,I¦r www r sxs8r i of 3 I O r, URVEY H pRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ND TITLE T OF THE SIXT ALTAIA~ ND SURVEY P WGF $o COLO O LA SOUTIL STATE OF fl SgCTIO14 6, TOE 5 OF EAGLE, t\ .m- ~n E S OF THE SE'/TO10 OF SAIL, CO FOREST ' as pO"` PART OF Wµ1tE RIYER`v, T) ~l OWEST wdo'"w=+ rt a*'"°` d".~°~` p„•~^' gow tit ECI 601 Pmt w • ro,• fsm w TRACT C Tt2{ Z _ • 8 VAIL POSASO PA p N8a'W5" 424.10 W."N - u,+v ars» No *'M eZti. a®f {/'4n/-,..91 VAM-PaT~PATCN Y _ .~w..,.~., r.r•.+., r. 0.. may. L.- ogtYE ~ pa ~ N7t o~~,re+' INTERSTATE HIGHWAY No. 70 ~ ,m•r•w'„n ` r,.. _ ,,w a++~0" (NGRTH fRONTA,E Row) o2b+ 1, io A 1iaz~+ 34 C. si aK 0 ayu, "°y, W a7i, T181-E ~w w* "'mi sa b' VV. f i_;-•' J Jam."-.'~ .,.n-- %~3€ VAI7l Me 7.1 C> L) - --~-~-.-''Vi'i - e ~ a _ ~ ~ N011Z fRetvr~ ' o } _ tNTERSTATE HIGHWAY No. 70 t (NORTH M NTAGE RO-) , t ae s PLO Jw, rte'°• ~ ~ ~~,,,,,,.•ra ems" ,,e..~a anA SIES,T , 1039T war ry,~s.wew'"'sa.°"~w~~~« • amma~~~~~m~~.~.ars'•y p°'Wiwi" "w• ~ t -;1 'n"" w aoioe a+~• • 1T~ r~~. M~~ ~ sM> o°'ie oM~. ss 'Il" - y.m .au a-- ~ ~nauuS PEAK LAS CONSUL Q02 tea/ cu/ «uut utl: J ~ i^A3. (1704768616 • Segtes=lber 18. 2001 M. s. A3lisoa Ocbs ?awn of Vail 75 Sauth Froze Road VaiL CO 81657 Dear Ms. Ochs: L as a duty =hosized to metualve of VS West Co sinns of Qwest Sgm to hnv the subject pig of ground de=ibed on F-xluVtt A platted as Lot 2 ofM "e Creek VlUage Phi Eiy: Naine, Dat= . .:O 0 1 1S1110-wOJd wdZS'10 100Z-SZ-da$ 9LL-d Z00/ZOO d 088-1 SLOZ SSG Z09 1 iii/l ~j I A 11 , I t Jt J{ I ,(/FiJ'j( ~ f/rl t, t ~ t l , 11 } f ~ I ` 1 W lJ fT1 ii'il j-rl 1 t ! ' ~j,{~ 1 I` 1 1 I V 2 i It(rrj,;,t ~i~ r( r'i11 ! (f t ! 1 ' '1 t ' _ tittle' ! Q ~'t~tll'Ii' T f b J ~!lil' ) l) ' i I I ! W ti;, ~i~ll,l elil•1 it Ill1) e j+1 1 , ! i t g l'lltl,i~1 1 ;;I IIII t' Illilt(i t j ,j ;r ? r If Pilo 1ji1,11"1'I(jl~ltljjliltil~ {Ilj, 111,t ((r/1 ti I(1(f( :,(11 t 1 r ~ / L `t ~ ` ~ ~ ~ 3l Illj'I+,~Ir~la; (rtt't+l,:+{'Ijy1(,, ii !1 ~ t 1; I 1 rr j;'' 'i + '~(i, ~ ( ( (1+j t t 1 1 1,1'illt~,~ti;' tllll(I''111`(~11t +r(1'jilitjtljl; r+ J` II - ' ~ j ~ t li! tr , ~I lli iel;li~!Illil~llll Ii ''f t 1j't;,Il Ii1 ; iJ ile + 1e1; i rr ll' i (1 ;,i It I ~ ' , fill Itl'l itl~i illtl;i j`11j1 j Ij t+i 'L, I , 1r-• ~ 1 ; ~Ili~ t'I i'11YII~1111 ''i(ftr'('?NII''' I• ~ , v ~ t ,filll t~ill(,tl )'jrl ilr (i/rir (1((1,?t1 i)jj,l~! iii(I ill f"' i1/ ,'f 1~1' V I / /~'~~J/1'tyrljJ,°+y' , 1 % I ; iaJ~ 1 r%-1a t (i ,r t/ 1 1 1it 47%/V(1/r~11 l,llj:, 11 11;'IIe~'1 l 111~('~~ r r tr, p~y'lt/rt,re r rE; I ~4 ~ i f I' I t l i 4 t \ if I + t,~tt'I~lll1'It•~i ('1('/% I r, r ~ ' , ti l II, Ill t e t 'i%(Ij'c`~If:l „~I,IIi~ II.IIr' Ij~~,'?~r r t t \ ~ I ~ ; j'i 49 'Iltl ti'+ I t~(111}t'i;'/11lltrf'r~~r]'r~ll'lle,i(1 C 1 no \ rj, , , ; 1 I l (rt?OY;; tf { ti~' ; i I r r 7e t r '177, r itll I l I ~ I ~ f. l i 1 (j%r+ ?j ;1 t ~tr'''tr+ J? ,r of ?ti 1 ~ ~ { e ~I { ' I , f `!t(, r(i`(t t (,jr! I .(,ty '+Illjltii rl \ \ \ \ \ ~ i f i I' t' 1 ' { t 1 ; it "/://'!t1• pI t1~ji(rj~1'(Ilt(./f(j,'i'i~lll' 'i ? 1 l \ , .3 ,I~f i ~I, + , ~ g r -'71 / l +t l+Jnrjtrt ? it+lrti ! , A A jj' n_1 , ~V 'i) ~ I' ~i-'l /,~n'rL~ ~ A v 1 ' III ~f ~ ! li 1 i ~II ' I I Iii 1,VAA•r~ \ i,~`\. i /r 1 V \ mill -MAW '1~ ittt~ i;,1' ;II",air' , ' I I!'1 1~~ ' / r{ 1 1 if i 'lit ` li,11 ti 1~ 1t V IWi lfIiI1wee t!1 111~1r+~~ / t`~ j fjt I t+ 11 1 ,~,ti~4~\t~''111~,,\:~`~`~v,~~ ~ It•--'~1_' 1 - ~ ~ { . 'i!i,l 1f 111 ~11 r I ( , - 1 M oh 1A - l'lilf 1 j 1 i lit it x;V~vA`;~~~~~~~~~. ~ Ill ~s_ . , _ , I ( V'.1 t 1 t' 11 it 1 \ r 1.1 t ( + ! ,1i 1 ! i I' t ( + i 1 1'11 11\` \ t\'•}1i ``\1\ ( it 't , ~'111 t A ! , ' ~ t'y, ,,~lt~ ,l,i~;t t11'• t~~`~•'`\~J; f t 1 t! I i 1 , 1' 1 1~ r. I I i' \It i vivo ~ ~ h 1 toy VIVO "I T 11..; Il U n li i C X , LI] N J O ~ O 4y Q C6 I O (tf C O I Q o L - O - +r I i O U r Q~ Q~ U ~ U - U R O cv - C C c~ t` L +r O O O L U U Q I- Q 'I N OPMAK U 0 1 ~ U m 1 now f ! Q a FITAININT VAN too 1 ,r t1 1 y, l1 1 ~ V t ; 71, 1 '1 } 1 t too %"a too! ! t p t t 1 n 1 } I' s F t• ) Own Aw"Tw 4,. v~ { i Ova I ' ~ 4 ..,F _ RI ATI N F _ Q N U.S.F.S. D PEAK LAID ()ONAI~TAMB, NC. C3 4s FOUND 3° BRASS CA PEAK LAID ~iMEY1~K~i NC, > » ON 2~" STEEL POS7 goo9oo-17e~~ FA~I 89 - _ 3 23 0 23 6 4 3 N '7 .9 892 ( 21 W 2633.76 DEED • f00D UON'dlD~ I.OOr YAK x491867 0 WN F VAI • L (BOOK 246, PAGE 960) ~~3.899 ACR BOOK 216, PAGE 419 • RIM ELEV. = 8243.4 6 CR INN OUT ELEV• = 8228.6 G N NV IN (N) ELEV. = 8236.3 ~s• 00 NV IN (E) ELEV. = 8228.7 ~ ~ 01 • • ~ w R L IM ELEV• = 8223.6' DG 0 NV DUT ELEV. = 8214.6' PAN NV IN (S) ELEV = 8214.9' NV IN (E) ELEV = 8214.9' a o y A SEWER OLE CENTERLINE 0 iF 0~ RIM ELEV. = 8214.7' HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ~ ~ INV OUT ELEV. = 8203.5 ~ SSOCIATION EASEMEN w p~ ~ - F / ~ / -3 BOOK 642 PA 44 INV IN (N) ELEV. - 8203.9' ~2 / GE 3 ) NV IN (E) STUB ELEV, = 8203.8 i ~ exlsnNc o ~ BUILDING ~ 100 1AOUNTAIN ~ ~ BELL RD LECTRIC L • o~ ~w~a 0 ~ TRANSFOR E ~ w o • • S R MANHOLE MHOt ~ o ~ RIM ELEV. = 8206.5 ~~o ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ w INV OUT ELEV• = 8195.7 ~ " ~ • I \ ~ ww~ INV E = 8196,5' , 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 . I r ~ - ~ _ PLAY GROU 4 '"K • S9 w:--.::.. ~ AREA 4 ~ ACCESS ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ o ror waT +~r ~ AND UTILITY • • ~ . v z=o,,: W ~z ' ~ EASEM - a ~ o ~ ~ N ,sgwk,,..,~ ENT 800 ti e• ~ • o ~ ~ Z 3o N ~ wx'r. MOUNT - K 218, PAGE 4 + 3 LE _ AIN BELL RO dfs"._ 19 • o v D ~ A~~ . ~ ELE .z~ ~ AD~" < (S69. i al ~ ELE AJ.-..,._ ChS GAS ~ - \ r ~ ~ ~f . - ~ 303 ~ 1 .9' ?Q' f ter- ° ~o~ m a ~ 0 IC, Q£~Q w ~ • . ~ ~ A w 8209.8' / G w~ gr~ G ~ 40.03 • t, . , 4 ~ a ~119~Nt w ~ 0.1' _ r (40.00' DEE, ~ • 9 V'~ ~ • • I III • • ~ .I . • - ~ ~ • _ • . • 0 ~,,~N p ~ • , , , ~ t • ' a w • • • • • A DONDED IRRIG~TC ' ~ ~ • • o f(+' • N T ~ a • 24 C.M.P. _ , ` , • • • PLAY GR6UA ~ . ~ • r,,. 880>~~4 AREA 23 Mu ~ ~r 81 w,~~ \ * • • • ~,w~~ ~ • N • . ~ E(p _ 826 30' r (83'36'29" 72" C.M.P. ~M,N E DEED DEED ~ 2 ~ B DO E'D R WIRE FENCE r • 1~ ELE 822 ' • ~ • FOUND 3 BRASS CAP 820- ' 1 \ ON 6" CONCRETE POST _ ,D,O,T, R.O.W, MARKER .yn~ . ` ~ 11.0' B ~>>'3 \ 71'38'09"W - 1.00' FROM LINE TABLE N74'25 59 W 204.70 :~x.~ - _ >~a ~ ; _ , 1aRp-- • . _ _ ~ ~S,~ 3 8 Og W \ AL LAT LOCH, ILON w LINE LENGTH BEARING (S74'21'35"E - 204.70' DEED) `'w`° "'~lOB.t 8207 ^ 206.6~? - ~ F ~ ' 0 65.24' S36'23 30 W ~ - _ _ ago • _ 7 L2 120.00' S88'30'00"W ~ _ 4, 9 _ _ ~ 1 s, g8 0 L3 32.25' S26'1 700"W ~.-~w~ - ~ . • , , L4 107.00' S60'09'00"W L5 143.67 N88'34'00"W I T L6 r 220.00 N00 00 00 W A T HI H L7 W ~ ~ 05.9 ~ ~ 'r... , ' ~ _ ` f~~ ~1' ~ 1 411.93 S83 36 30 E A Y , . NoR o. 7 l8 125.63' N15'49 00 E TH F ' \ ~ ` ~ .,,;x19 ' 1 RON Tac ER L9 91.54' S15'49'00"W OAp L10 382.48' N83'36'30"W R, 0, W, 200 _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~.~1~.5' 193.4' P L11 40.25' 500'00'00"W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 193,1' r \ ~ 193.4 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.jB19~i5' ~ \ LEGEND PROP TY DESCRIPTION: A PART OF THE S~~ OF THE SEk, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST AREA OF TOPOGRAPHY BY PEAK LAND S Y PEAK LAND SURVEYING AUGUST, 2001, \ ~ / ~ O$ ® E . Op SEWER, WATER, STORM, ELECTRICAL, PHONE, AND DATA MANHOLES OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 246 AT PAGE 960, EXCEPT (ALL OTHER AREAS DERIVED FROM DIGITAL AEF 30M DIGITAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY FILES \ " « ti ` ~ ~ ~ A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 218 AT PAGE 419. PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF NAIL, TOPOGRAPHIC I TOPOGRAPHIC MAP DATED "FALL 1994". . r \ Z "rte p } . r, 1Ai,s' ©Q ® GAS, ELECTRIC, AND PHONE METERS SIGN 0 o O 'N cu FIRE HYDRANT ~ ~ UTILITY POLE I~ J GV WV GENERAL NOTES: \ I°'D ~ GAS AND WATER VALVES ~X LIGHTPOST 1 DATE OF SURVEY: FIELDWORK, 2001. \ ~ WATER SHUT OFF VALVE (CURB STOP) ~ INLET/CATCH BASIN ti~6 I ~ N 2 THIS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. REFER TO THE ALTA/AGSM LAND SURVEY o,, rn o rn m ®m ELECTRICAL, PHONE, CABLE TV PEDESTALS LARGE BOULDER/ROCK PLAT FILED WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING OFFICE, FOR BOUNDARY ~ ~ SURVEY INFORMATION, ~S a cnm Z ~ " 3 PROJECT BENCHMARK: COLORADO HARN CONTROL POINT "SPRADDLE". cn fNDICATES AN EVERGREEN TREE WITH A TRUNK DIAMETER OF 3 OR GREATER. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ELEVATION = 8287.82 (NAND 88)• I~~ o >>0 I~z ~n ~ INDICATES A DECIDUOUS TREE WITH A TRUNK DIAMETER OF 3' OR GREATER. I, BRENT BIGGS, A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF 4 FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON BASED UPON THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WAS a _ _ THE TOWN OF NAIL DATED NOVEMBER 2 1982 REFER TO FIRM COMMUNITY PANEL No. 080054 MADE BY ME AND UNDER MY SUPERVISION, AND THAT THE MAP IS ACCURATE AND iAP w s F ~0• ~ ~ > ~ ~~i W 4TE AND \r~ rn ~ 0002C AND PROFILE PANELS 07P THRU 09P. CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. a ASPHALT v FJ o ' S ALL U11LIT1ES SHOWN HEREON WERE FIELD LOCATED BY THEIR RESPECTIVE COMPANIES, PEAK LAND No r~ Y~ CONCRETE WALL 'OR CONCRETE SLAB ~ SURVEYING, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE LOCATIONS SHOWN FOR DATE: o DRAWN: JF o ADDITIONAL UTILITES NOT SHOWN. ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO BRENT BIGGS COLORADO P.L.S. 27598 • Iv REVIEWED: BB ao - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDGE OF ASPHALT/CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. FOR & ON BEHALF OF GRAPHIC SCALE \ i PLC JOB#: i x39 ~ - - FLOWLINE OF CREEK, CURB AND GUTTER, PAN PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. O1 6 PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. DID NOT PERFORM A TITLE SEARCH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO x so o zs 50 Sao zoo \ I ~ A TF• (1R ~ /(11 ~ _ _ ti__ ~ FCTARI ICH CIWNFRCHIP FACFUFNTC (IR RI~NTC-CIF-WAY ~F RFCfIR~ RF('~Rf1 <1CICI1IAFNTC I ITII 17Ff1 rr- iwc unc rn IN THIS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WERE PROVIDED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, o TREELINE ORDER No. VC272436, DATED APRIL 26, 2001, AT 5:00 P.M.. - ELE ELE ELE - BURIED ELECTRICAL LINE 7 NOTICE: ( IN FEET) SHEET - GAS GAS ' GAS - BURIED GAS LINE ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT cn IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, 1 inch = 50 ft. SEW SEW SEW - BURIED SEWER LINE MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN WAT wAT WAT- BURIED WATER LINE YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. c c 1039T FOUND 3" BRASS CAP 6 5 0 ON 21h" STEEL POST 7 8 a PEAK IJUD CONBULTANT'8, NC. PEAK lJ1aD BURVEI'W0. NC. aao-oa~ r,~ic aoaoe~ae aoouaraHOa~t,aor vK,ooaea r GRAPHIC SCALE I (IN FEET ) 1 inch = 100 ft, F R T RI R ATI NA HlT V N L W U.S.F.S, I S89'32'30"E - 2634.93' (N89'2T21"W - 2633.76' DEED) . + C 6.. r~ V POTATO PATCH ~ . . : Nom, """"`+W;r"`"", ~ ~ ...r-....' w ~ ~ 1 I is IF ~ ~ n~~' ;F ~!m'o w~,~, r"'..w.^"""'.^-~ ~ ~ rn ".W~"~ .r.-'", r ~ ~ ' ~ ~ P A PENS CE=~:.._..,....-~- Wes,,. Y:,~- - fTl cn ~ y' 17.226 ACRES ~ w a ~ L - _ T P_ , VAIL POTATO PATCH o ~ ~W o . ~ Q ES ~ w ° A w ~ ~ +,~r.",~ ---1~- a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p 319.70 w _ 4 512 N80 a . (BOOK 218, PAGE 419) ~ ~ ~ W r-. W n. S8 'DEED) OO 5 ..•,...r "E _ 319.70 2 w ~ _ 1,096 ACRES t N ~ Z !~"1 (N84'55 50 (S7g•56'28" 42 ~ s E _ 4.40 424,gD~ ~ (NOT A PART OF THIS SURVEY) I ~ ~ , „ ~ a+ r (,D ~ O DEED) - i ..'o 'o 6,673 ACRES ~ .,r ` r ~ ~ _ Ns , z ~ o a waa m w O (s . 9 4 ss s , S s2j" W N~ ~ F ~ ~ ,3 3D3 03 , / ~2D~ D 0 fED~ ~~o p ~ D I ~ 'ice . _ D 1'`8zzo ~ S80 08 42 W 211.80 e " ~ z20"~ (N80'13 O6 E - 211,80' DEED) ( = 02'54'37" 02'56'18" DEED i Qe to ( ) R= 3990.00' N74'25'S9"W - 204.70' W 30 ~ A ~ T= 101.36' (102,33' DEED) (S74'21'35"E - 204.70' DEED) 826. (s83`~2s~~E _ ~ AREA OF MANMADE SLO MANMADE SLOPE WITH 826.30' DEED) ~ M""~ O OR GREATER (TYPICAL) ~ O 202.67 (203,62' DEED) A SLOPE Of 40~ OR GREATER (1 H ' ` CH= 202,65' 204.60' DEED) ( p E~ CB= S85'27'36"W (N85'31'10"E DEED) ~N T N71'38'09"W - 198.00' ~ A W ERS rA rE H~~H W (S71'33'45"E - 196.10' DEED) O W (NORTH FROM AY No 70 U ~ ~ TAKE ROAD) O ~i (R. 0. W.) ~ a W ' zo i Na i w INDICATES SLOPE OF 40% OR GREATER 0 o , c 0 SOT 1 SITE TOTAL Sq. Ft. = 290649 Sq. Ft. TOTAL Sq. Ft. = 1041014 Sq. Ft. N rn AREA OVER 40% = 87427 Sq. Ft. AREA UNDER 40% = 399086 Sq. Ft. a AREA UNDER 40% = 200399 Sq. Ft. AREA OVER 40% = 641928 Sq. Ft. c MANMADE OVER 40% _ 6968 Sq. Ft. N DEBRIS FLOW AREA = 8171 Sq. Ft. DRAWN: JF m a w TOTAL BUILDABLE AREA = 199196 Sq. Ft. REVIEWED: BB a 0 J PLC JOB#: 1039 (!J DATE: 08/23/01 s m 0 NOTE: THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN DOES NOT LIE WITHIN LOT 1. SHEET CU L/) QI m 2 of 2 c aJ c 0 Z a i ~ ' - PEAK LAND CONBI~.TANTB, NC. PFJUC LAPD BURVEYN4 NC. ( I 1 ~ \ LIONl~00 ~ LOOrFAX ~i70~47611I6 _ ~ t_~~ l' _ - -"i - - - ~ _ _ - 1NH I T R1 R A Tl N F ` - - N E V aC 0 _ F ND 3~ " A UMINUM CA ~ - U.S.F.S. _ - ON 21~" STEEL POST _ _ ~ i . ~ ~ H 1 OUND 3~" ALUMINUM CAP ^-_____--=_i~- _ II ~ ON 2'~" STEEL POST 1 ~ - 5~9 32 30 E - 2634,93 N89'2T21°w - 2633.7x' D - _ - ~ ~ _ i•--- 111 ~ i~!r~-- _ 11 y. NAIL POT TO PATC „ o - - - - i-.._-= litN~KAL usE z~; - - - N f VA~L - SEE GENERAL NOTE 6 wo o - ~ - - _ - yam/ I ~ ` ~ l ~ ~ ~ICATES AREA OF ~ - ~-i'r`s_----- (BOOK 246, PAGE 960) - _ f%` ~ I (BOOK 218, PAGE 419) ROCK FALL HAZARD (TYPICAL) ~ ` ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ 1.096 ACRES (SEE GENERAL NOTE 4) - ~ N 41 -_„1~ • ~ - ~ ~f _ -100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN_ m O ~ ~ ___r--" - _ 2>~.899 ACRES i _ _ NOT A \ \OF\HIS S` Y~~ 1~~~~_ ~ - VA I L POTATO A T/, ; - - - _ _ - J ti. O N\ \ _ r_ _ - 319 \ ~ ~ - - ~ COM~IUNICATIO ~ N ~ ` -I ' ~ ~ ~ ~ eui~niNC GENERAL USE ZONE _ 51 X26 W ==7V • ~ - ~ ~ - ~ _ ~ - X84 D 80 0 / - - 319 • _ - 2 _ / - 10' HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ O (SEE GENERAL NOTE 6) = - ~ ~ ; \ - - ~1=- 84'55 50 E _ - - =~~S7g• " w ~ - i - (N ~ _ -~-5628 E ~ 424, ~ - _ - ~ (`I , ASSOCIATION EASEMENT ~ "~W C O ^ v v ~ ~ . ~ o c 1"x"1 / BOOK 642, PAGE 344 ~ a ~ ~ 424 40~ --r- ~ - - ' 40' DEED - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ 9 AND -f1C'CESS ~ \ _ J ~n AND UTI r " ` _y - - - _ - - - S9 - _ Bo - - ~ - OK LITY'~S _ cHOO ~ O BOOK_218, ERT~ ` = I ~ \ y ~ ~ 'T~~ ~ - _ - .apt - 1 f ~ J- _ ~ o ~ . i a - ~ - ~ . 2p• Q - N 80 08 42 E 211.80 ~ - , DEE 24 C.M.P. (N80'13 O6 E - 211.80 DEED) . ~ ~ 82 8220 2~ ---Ae~NO W ~ ~ r' ~ ~ I+i \ - ~~ABAND N AR ~ \ Delta = 02'54'37 (02'56'18" DEED) ~ ~ R= 3990.00 - - azpo'--, . _ , 53 ^ 826 30' ~ W ~ T= 101.36 102.33' DEED ~ _ ( ) SHADED AREA INDICATES , ~ _ - 202.67 (203.62' DEED) - DEBRIS FLOW AREA ~ ~ Q (SEE GENERAL NOTE 5).,, Q ~ ~ ~ ` _y-~~ .30' DEED) ~ O A ~J _ ` N \ ~ IFS--1i CH= 202.65 204.60' DEED ~ _ ~R TH FRONT ~ _ ~ U A CB= S85'27'36"W 885'31'10"W DEED ~ ~ \ _ ~ o AGE ROAD _ 0 ~ n i N74 25 59 W - 204.70 \ 574'21'35"E - 204.70' DEED ( ) _ _ j 1 r r AT _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~RS tq tE HI c~, \ ~ ~ (NORTH GHWAY No ~O I ~ O NORT HF FRONTAGE N71'38'09"W - 198,00 ~ ROgp) W ~ W (R, Q, W l (571'33'45"E - 196.10' DEED) FOUND 3" BRASS CAP ON 6" CONCRETE POST C•D•O.T. R.O.W MARKER N71'38'09"W - 1.00' FROM AREA OF TOPOGRAPHY TOPOGRAPHY BY PEAK LAND SURVEYING AUGUST, 2001. Lor CORNER (ALL OTHER AREAS DERIVED .AS DERIVED FROM DIGITAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY FILES PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF VP TOWN OF VAIL, TOPOGRAPHIC MAP DATED "FALL 1994", SINE TABLE ~ LINE LENGTH ~ BEARING ~ L1 65.24' ~ S36'23'30"W ~ ~ L2 120.00' S88'30'00"W L3 32.25' S26'17'00"W ~L4 107.00' S60'09'00"W ~L5 143.67' N88'34'00"W ~L6 180.11' N00'00'00"W ~ GENERAL NOTF,~; 0 cu ~ 1 DATE OF SURVEY; AUGUST, 2001. 0 O1 ~ 2 PROJECT BENCHMARK: COLORADO HARN CONTROL POINT "SPRADDLE". ELEVATION = 8287.82' (NAND 88). ~ 3 FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON BASED UPON THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY FOR cu LARGE BOULDER/ROCK THE TOWN OF NAIL, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1982. o, a 4 THE ROCKFALL HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF NAIL ROCKFALL HAZARD vi z O ~ CONCRETE WALL OR CONCRETE SLAB MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000. SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION. cn _ _ Q, 5 THE DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF NAIL DEBRIS FLOW a HAZARD MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000. SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION. a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDGE OF ASPHALT/CONCRETE w rY v~ ~ 6 THE ZONE LINE SHOWN FOR THE GENERAL USE (GU) AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL ~ - ~ FLOWLINE OF CREEK, CURB AND GUTTER, PAN TOWN OF NAIL ZONING MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000. ALL OTHER AREAS ON THE SITE ARE DRAWN: JF ~ - X 1E FENCE LINE ZONED AS NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION DISTRICT (NAPD). SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION, c . ° IN 7 CURRENT USE OF THE ZONE "GU"IS FOR TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS, DAY CARE, AND PRESCHOOL x TREEL E IN A LEASE WITH THE TOWN OF NAIL. REVIEWED: BB n~ PLC JOB#: 1039 m 8 NOTICE; o So ~ DATE: 08/23/01 ~ ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT m IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. a~ r., ( IN FEET) SHEET 1 inch = 100 ft. a) co c loft ro C O S a 1 PILLAGE 1 1 2, 4 > > RANGE 8 D WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDAIN ~ ~ STATE OF COL ORAD 0 . 11. f f (IN FEET ) I ( 1 inch = 100 ft, WHIT RI R TI VE A ER NATIONAL FOREST U.S.F.' (U.S.F.S.) I 1978 USD INT FOUND 3~" ALUMINUM CAP ON 2~r" STEEL POST C FOUND 3" BRASS CAP BLM ON 2~" STEEL POST ~ 6 5 S'- s S89'32'30"E - 2634.93' (Nas'2 1s 34.93 (N89'27'21"W - 2633.76' DEED) S 1/16t coo C +sra~~ (NORTH LINE S',~, SE LINE S',~, SE'/a SEC. 6) / TRA T C ' 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN VAIL POTATO PATCH Z N o N45'00'00"E ~ ~ z S° . ~ TRA T A C o QWEST , IOO,oo~ I INDICATES AREA OF Q o APPROXIMATE ROCK FALL N ni ' N w OPEN SPACE (BOOK 218, PAGE 419) / ^ \ 20'0 HAZARD (TYPICAL) ~ =o 20.0' SEE GENERAL NOTE 5 ~ ~ 1.096 ACRES ~ \ ( ) ~ ~ I ~ 17.226 ACRES (NOT A PART OF THIS PLAT) ~ ~ \ ~rj ~ T W L 01 BUILDING SETBACK • ~ • W VAIL POTATO PATCH ~ w SHADED ARE. W SHADED AREA INDICATES 63, ~ APPROXIMAT DEBRIS ~ ~ (SEE GENER ~OXIMAT DEBRIS FLOW AREA ~ ` ~ , i~ / ~ , ' 2 ' ~ (SEE GENERAL NOTE 6) ; " , , ; ~ 20,0' \ B 1~,, _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' W ° ~ w ~ Oo , . ~ " - 319.70 ~ ' / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CENTERLINE OF 10' LOT ~ \ 5126 W N LINE TABLE S84 p 800 " " - 319.70 DEE) 0 52 LS LS (122,20' DEED) ~ ~ ~ , ~ L12 ~ HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC \ ~ o ~ C~C N64'55 50 E (S7g~ w - ~ LINE LENGTH BEARING ( ss 28" 424 , E 424 ' 40 i , ~ ~ ASSOCIATION EASEMENT 6.673 ACRES \ D o C .40' pEEp UTILITY EASEMENT L1 65.24' S36'23'30"W ~ LITY EASEMENT , , ~.0" , 48 (BOOK 642, PAGE 344) \ ~ ~ r Z L2 120.00' S88'30'00"W N6 . 9S , q~C SS AND U ~ . ' , . 113 ~ C1 ~ \ ~ ~ ~ I L3 32.25' S26'17'00°W i lss . 9 ¢ „ 40.0' TIUTY EASEMENT 8.0 - \ L16 C~ L4 , ~ , _ 52~., W I 107.00 S60 09 00 W ~ ~ , F , ~ . 3 30 L15I - - m L5 14.7 ' 4 ~ ' 03 I 3 6 N88 3 00 W ~ .2 , ~ Op 0 °3 3~ ~ ? LzS / 9 (88.18' DEED) L1p ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ 2 9, IL'6 220.00' N00'00'00"W ~ " _ ~ ~ , £ ° °f 83 f 40.00' DEED) L23 C9 L22 C~ p3 CENTERLINE OF 20' m ~ D 80 08 42 W 211.80 INDICATES AREA OF L7 411.93 S83 36 30 E Z APPROXIMATE ROCK FALL r ~ i ~ 40.03' \ \ 8 UTILITY EASEMENT (N80'13'O6"E - 211.80' DEED) I L8 125.63' N15'49'00"E o " HAZaRD (TYPICAL) 40.0' ~ 8 BUILDING SETBACK ACCESS, UTILITY, AND ~ \ ~ I- 42~ ~ ~ ~ DRAINAGE EASEMENT C~ ~ ~.I Lg ~ ~ ~ ° Delta = 02'54 37 (02'56'16" DEED) (SEE GENERAL NOTE 5) I I 91.54 S15 49 00 W UTILITY qNp ` (?p\ \ I N n DRAINAGE EASEMENT 1 L10 R= 3990.00' ~ " I 382.48 N83 36 30 W w _ . o N74 25 59 W 2! I L11 40.25 S00 00 00 W ~ T= ~ 01.36 (102.33' DEED) . ~ ~ (S74'21'35"E - 204.70' 'S9"W - 204.70' 20.0' N83'40'S3"W _ c5~ L. ~ 10.0' N 35"E - 204.70' DEED) 826'30 (S83'36' ~ ~ I ~ TRUE POINT OF L12 I 20.48 I S88 34 02 W a = 3.62' DE L 202.67 (2o ED) 29 E - 826.30' 0 L13 45.33' 07'18' ~ I ' I S 24 W DEED) ~ 20.0' ~ BEGINNING ~ ~ CH= 202.65 (204.60' DEED) I L14 I 26.40' S83'36'23"E D w " r rn C6= S85 27 36 W (N85'31'10"E DEED) IL15 I 11.52' IN83'36'19"W .r.° ~N TERS Tq 1'E HI ~ . GH ` I~'~~ 10.0' ~ 0 IL16 291.75' N90'00'00"E w ~NORrH FRON AY No, 7p IL17 77.20' S57'18'S7"E TAGE Rpa~) ~ N71'38'09"W 198.0'' ~ S0~°o IL18 73.59' S68'36'21"E ~ ~R, Q, l ~ (S71'33'45"E - 196.10' DEED) ~ , \ V ` L19 95.77' S84'06'30"E ~ v ' L20 73.59' S68'36'21 "E FOUND 3" BRASS CAP L21 77.20' S57'18'57"E ~ ON 6" CONCRETE POST 1 1 L22 291,75' N90'00'00"E S SE C.D.O. T. R.O.W. MARKER 4 I L23 7.04' N83'36'19"W ^ SE1~ ~ N71'38'09"W - 1.00' FROM » SEC. 6 4 LZ 37.84 N20'0015 E v, 6 CALCULATED LOCATION to L25 I 110.00' S74'25'59"E ~ ~ ~ FOUND 3" BRASS CAP ON 6" CONCRETE POST, C.D.O. T. R.O,W. MARKER ~2~ ~If D IL26 27.18' S14'55'22"E m • 0 SET No. 5 REBAR WITH ALUMINUM CAP L.S. No. 27598 s. cn N gyp,. ~ I to I L27 133.28' S54'36'57"E ~ , a, ~ FOUND No. 5 REBAR WITH ALUMINUM CAP L.S. No. 27598 ~s, m ~ \ o, ~ ~ ma.W 7~p o~ v ~1 m ~~p, ooD m Z rn r v m D N FOUND 3" BRASS CAP ON 2~" STEEL POST FOUND 3~" ALUMINUM CAP ~ FOUND 3~" ALUMINUM CAP S72'15'07"E - 22.2' CALC LOCATION (FALLS IN BUILDING) N85'33'21 "E - 3.8' REFERENCE MONUMENT (B.L.M.) (WITNESS CORNER MISSING) REFERENCE MONUMENT (B. L.M.) , M ~ SEC. 6 ~ „ , S89 35 47 W - 2174.94 (CALC) /a sEC. ~ S89 35 47 W - 668.42 (CALC) AP _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - N89'28'26"E - 1970.82' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ 1 s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FOUND 3" BRASS CAP 6 5 t2 7 d ~ n ~ FOUND 3'~" ALUMINUM CAP N89 35 47 E - 2843.37 (MEAS.) 0 541'53 02 E - 4.3' ON 2'f~" STEEL POST 7 g ~°v FOUND 3'~" ALUMINUM CAP REFERENCE MONUMENT (B.LM.) ~ S29'18'47"W - 33.9' REFERENCE MONUMENT (B.L.M.) v io CURVE TABLE N CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD BEARING DELTA I a C1 79.98' 8.93' 4.47' 8.92' S86'48'12"E 06'23'41" ~ C2 60.00' 34.23' 17.59' 33.76' N73'39'29"W 32'41'03" ~ ~C3 20.00' 3.94' 1.98' 3.93' S62'57'39"E 11'17'24" I D I C4 60.00' I 153.14' 197.72' I 114.83' N04'30'48"E I 146'14'18" a C5 60.00' 69,25' 39.06' 65.47' S62'49'43"W 66'07'35" I J IC6 20.00' 57.42' 146.94' 39.63' N13'38'35"E 164'29'52" I 9 C7 60.00' 11.82' 5.93' 11.80' S62'57'39"E 11'17' 4" I 2 ~ ~ C8 20.00' 11,41' 5.86' 11.25' N73'39'28"W 32'41'03" I o Q C9 119.98' 13.39' 6.70' 13.38' S86'48'12"E 06'23'41" ~ ti N N SHEE T 2 of 2 m PEAK LAND CONStLTANM NO. PEAK LAND afiWEYNM NO. ~ N44 RAX 67O.4M-M cm LIONS PC= LOOP VAL. 00 am DRAWN BY: JOHN I JOB No. 1039 0 z i a ~LLA GE 2, 4 > > 'ANGE 8 0 WEST OF TIIL' SIX TIC PRINCIPAL MERIDAIN > > STATE OF COL ORAD O TITLE CERTIFICATE ~c»~ ~ CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION AND OWNERSHIP 'SECS SEC 6 SEC 5 SEC 6 SEC 5 DOES HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE TITLE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT THE TOWN OF VAIL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BEING ~ ; ~ ' TO ALL LANDS SHOWN UPON THIS PLAT AND THAT TITLE TO SUCH LANDS IS VESTED IN SOLE OWNER IN FEE SIMPLE, OF ALL THAT REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE TOWN OF VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL LIENS, TAXES AND ENCUMBRANCES, EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, LYING NORTH OF - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70 RIGHT-OF-WAY, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH o SE1~ SEC 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, ORIGINALLY DESCRIBED IN N A QUIT CLAIM DEED, BOOK 246 AT PAGE 960, FILED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK AND ~ RECORDER OF COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS " " ` ~ SITE LOCATION FOLLOWS; m Z VIC. BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 6, WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER, OF THE ~ VICINITY MAP ~ DATE Tests ______•DAY OF A.D., 20______. SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, BEARS N 00'28'16" W 1316.47 FEET ~ SCALE: 1 "=500' BEING THE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SAID Sl SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, N 00'28'16" W 685.54 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE - SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70 AND BEING THE TRUE PDINT OF @~GINNINC~; AGENT THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70, THE FOLLOWING EIGHT (6) COURSES; ' t N 71'38'09" W 198.00 FEET• - I 2) THENCE N 83'40'53" W 826.30 FEET; ~ N i f p S i A i 3) THENCE N 74'25'59" W 204.70 FEET; e ~ o 4) THENCE N 69'59'45" W 303.20 FEET; 5) THENCE N 80'00'52" W 424.40 FEET; 6) THENCE S 84'51'26" W 319.70 FEET; ' PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CERTIFICATE 7) THENCE S 80'08'42" W 211.80 FEET TO A POINT OF ANON-TANGENT CURVE; 8) THENCE 202.67 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3990.00 _ . FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02'54'37" AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S 85'2736" W 202.65 FEET TO A EtSi a~ ; , H r e R s r~'t , o THIS FINAL DAY OF S APPROVED BY THE TOWNAODF ~OAIL-PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISION POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST UNE OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; o ~ THENCE ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, N 00'16'30" W ~ ' 347.38 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; J THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER S 89'32'30 E , , sec. . , SEC. 6 SEC. s SEC.6 SEC. 5 ATTEST: 2634.93 FEET TO THE SAID NORTHEAST CORNER, OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; , . sEC. ~ - ' x - sE . e THENCE ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTERS 00'28'16" E ~ ~ ~ ' - SE . 6 630.93 FEET TO THE Q T B N SAID TRACT CONTAINS 24.995 GROSS ACRES OF LAND - ' "~T "`'1001' LRS.E P .lK 4E ESIN INS, - • MORE OR LESS. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A WARRANTY DEED, RECEPTION N0. 114010, BOOK 218 AT PAGE 419, FILED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK AND RECORDER OF COUNTY • - , TOWN CLERK CHAIRMAN V OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ~ ~ , . ' TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO TOWN OF VAIL PLANNING AND ~~5, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, ~ ~ ~ ~ ' RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 1170.20 FEET N 36'01'25" W FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.; THENCE N 00'00' E 180.11 FEET; THENCE N 88'34' W 143.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60'09' W 107.00 FEET; THENCE 5 26'17' W 32.25 FEET; THENCE ' S 88'30' W 120.00 FEET; THENCE S 36'23'30" W 65.24 FEET; THENCE S 83'36'30" E 411.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.096 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS; AND TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO AND EGRESS FROM THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED TRACT GENERAL N07~S: ' BY PEDESTRIAN, VEHICULAR AND MOTOR TRAFFIC, FOR AERIAL AND BURIED TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC SURVEYORS CE POWER LINES AND FOR BURIED WATER, SEWER, GAS AND OTHER UTILITIES TO SAID TRACT OVER AND 1 DATE OF SURVEY: AUGUST, 2001. JEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ACROSS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO WIT: ADMINISTRATOR CERTIFICATE 2 BASIS OF BEARINGS: MONUMENTS FOUND MARKING THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF I, BRENT BIGGS, DO HE A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SOUTH QUARTER, SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, LAWS OF THE STATE C VT BIGGS, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A REGISTERED LAND SURUEYOR LICENSED UNDER THE RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS SECTION 6, BEING S00'28'16"E - 1319.92' (SEE DRAWING) OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, THAT THIS PLAT IS A TRUE, CORRECT AND COMPLETE PLAT OF THIS FINAL PLAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL ADMINISTRATOR THIS DAY OF E CREEK VILLAGE", AS LAID, OUT, PLATTED, DEDICATED AND SHOWN HEREON, THAT SUCH PLAT A.D. 20____. • FOLLOWS: "MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGI 3 MONUMENTATION AS INDICATED HEREON• WAS MADE FROM AN ? ADE FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF SAID PROPERTY BY ME AND UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND BEGINNING AT A POINT BEING 1170.20 FEET N 36'01'25" W FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 6, ~ CORRECTLY SHOWS THI CTLY SHOWS THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF THE LOTS, EASEMENTS, AND STREETS OF SAID ATTEST: TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P,M•; THENCE S 00'00' 40.25 FEET; 4 FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON BASED UPON THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY FOR SUBDIVISION AS THE S THE TOWN OF VAIL, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1982, REFER TO FIRM COMMUNITY PANEL No. 080054 REGULATIONS GOVERNII VISION AS THE SAME ARE STAKED UPON THE GROUND IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE 4TIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND. THENCE N 83'36'30" W 382.48 FEET; THENCE S 15'49' W 91.54 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE 0002C AND PROFILE PANELS 07P THRU 09P. OF INTERSTATE 70; THENCE N 74'21'35" W 40.03 FEET ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF IN WITNESS WHEREOF, INTERSTATE 70; THENCE N t5' 49' E 122.20 FEET; THENCE S 83'36'30" E 411.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF 5 THE ROCKFALL HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL ROCKFALL HAZARD 20-___-- NESS WHEREOF, I HAVE SET MY HAND AND SEAL THIS DAY OF A.D., TOWN CLERK ADMINISTRATOR BEGINNING, CONTAINING 23.899 NET ACRES, MORE OR LESS: HAVE BY THESE PRESENTS LAID OUT, MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000. TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO PLATTED AND SUBDIVIDED THE SAME INTO LOTS AND BLOCKS AS SHOWN ON THIS FINAL PLAT UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF: 6 THE DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD MAP DATED OCTOBER i7, 2000. MIDDLE CREEK VILLAGE BRENT BIGGS 7 PEAK LAND SURJEYING, INC. REPLIED UPON THE ALTA/AGSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PLAT A SUBDIVISION IN THE TOWN OF VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO; AND DOES HEREBY ACCEPT THE DATED AUGUST, 2001, BY PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. FOR THE BOUNDARY INFRRMATION SHOWN COLORADO P.L.S. No. 27598 RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE AND HEREON. SAID SURVEY IS FILED WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING OFFICE, SET APART ALL OF THE PUBLIC ROADS AND OTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND PLACES AS SHOWN ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLAT TO THE USE DF THE PUBLIC FOREVER; AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE THOSE 8 THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THIS FINAL PLAT IS TO CREATE A DEVELOPMENT LOT FOR THE TOWN OF PORTIONS OF SAID REAL PROPERTY WHICH ARE INDICATED AS EASEMENT ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLAT VAIL ZONE "H" FOR HOUSING APARTMENTS. AS EASEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN HEREON; AND DOES HEREBY GRANT THE RIGHT TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN NECESSARY STRUCTURES TO THE ENTITY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING SERVICES FOR 9 PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. DID NOT PERFORM A TITLE SEARCH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO WHICH THE EASEMENTS ARE ESTABLISHED. ESTABLISH OWNERSHIP, EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD. RECORD DOCUMENTS UTILIZED IN THIS FINAL PLAT WERE PROVIDED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, ORDER No. VC272436, CERTIFICATE OF TAXES PAID EXECUTED THIS DAY OF DATED APRIL 26, 2001, AT 5:00 P,M.. - A.D., 20---- 10 NOTICE: I, THE UNDERSIGNED, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT, IN NO EVENT, DUE AND PAYABLE AS OF UPON ALL PARCELS OF REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED ON THIS PLAT ARE PAID 1N FULL. OWNER: TOWN OF VAIL, A MUNICIPAL ADDRESS: 75 S FRONTAGE RD WEST MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN CORPORATION VAIL, CO 81657 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. DATED THIS DAY OF A.D., 20_____. TREASURER OF EAGLE COUNTY BY: ATTEST:-- - TITLE: - - TITLE: STATE OF SS COUNTY OF - _ ) LAND USE SUMMARY THE FOREGOING DEDICATION WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF A.D., 20~---~ BY CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE N AS OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. PARCEL AREA USE ADDRESS LOT 1 6.673 ACRES HOUSING DISTRICT "H' MY COMMISION EXPIRES Oi 0 THIS PLAT WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER AT O'CLOCK ON THtS DAY OF 20_____ AND IS DULY m WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL TRACT A 17.226 ACRES OPEN SPACE AND UTILITIES "NAPD" N/A RECORDED AT RECEPTION N0. CU o, NOTARY PUBLIC CLERK AND RECORDER a c BY: LAND USE SUMMARY DEPUTY 3 D a PARCEL AREA J ~ LOT 1 4.573 ACRES m s o , rn m 0 L~ i. a~ N CL) m PEAK LAND CONSLLTANTB, INC. SHEET I of 2 .~c PEAK LAND &AVEYNQ NC. t WO-476-48" PAX 970-478,,M 1000 LJON$ f4W LOOP VAL, OO SIW 0 I DRAWN BY: JOHN I JOB No. 1039 a SCRVEY 'LA T ' 2, 4 , , RANGE 8 0 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN , , STATE OF COL ORAD 0 QWEST ~ (BOOK 218, PAGE 419) 1.096 ACRES (NOT A PART OF THIS SURVEY) / UNPLATTED APART OF S~,~, SE'/a SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, o ~ zoa ~o • RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. 23.899 ACRES (IN FEET ) L5 1 inch = 100 it. ' EDCE OF ' MIDDLE CREEK / ~ PAN r CENTERLINE OF 10' A~ HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC v V ASSOCIATION EASEMENT -T~-~ ~ (BOOK 642, PAGE 344) • L2 (SEE DETAIL) ~ ~ EXISTING v BUILDING ~ / I ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER ~l , I PLAY GROUND L AREA © ~ _ _ _ (51.7' e ^ 343, ~ 1u - 1 N Q wA T ~ " ups ~ N EASE • • I 1-STORY WOOD 9S N ` WA SRS 9 - L ~ E~as~! B00 vi EXISTING `'`~.W k 21~ GE 419 ~ ~ BUILDING FRAME BUILDING lss9, S ~ t.~_ - _ ss W ~ _ ..~I S t .~AT AS ' '~AS ~ 'a WITH WALKOUT 21'F ~ ~ 3 30 PRE-SCHOOL a3 3 ~ ( ) •20 2Q Q_,„, ~ L9 (88.18' DEED p c, EEO ~ ~~r. W l J ~ b ~ ~I A~ Sr ~ ~s, " 2.5' OVERHANG (40.00' DEED) AROUND ENTIRE ® ~~i ~ ~ 40.03' EXISTING \ BUILDING - ~ BUILDING • _ } \ 81.42, a \ - . ~i _ . , , - 0 _ _ ~ ~I - ' v R T ~ ,r X y \ \ F \ ~ R 0 N \ (343, 4') ,.o' r ~ ~ qG E ~ .a, ~ ~ R ~ ~ rn 0 o qp ~ (28.0') (40.0') x----• ~ v ~i N83'40'S3"W _ 82 36 p v m \ _ _ a ~ 'L.F , ~ ~ 1 STORY WOOD Y ~ L.F ~ (583'36'29"E - 826.30' DEED) a ~ FRAME BUILDING \ \ ~ ~ r. A' o ~ \ (PRE-SCHOOL) W v t.l r ~ - - E ~ \ (LEARNING TREE) a~"'.',' M U \ DECK~~ • ? n _ ~ A ~ 1 _ N74 25 59 W 204.70 1~ 74'21'3 " - 2 4.70' D S 5 E 0 EED ( ) ~ GV ~N TERS rA rE H? _ - - - _ ' - _ -II- t PLAY GROUND AREA NORTH F HWAY No _ RONTAGE ~ ~ - BUILDING DETAILS ROgp~ R. p, W,) SCALE: 1 "=20' EDGE OF • PAN 61. N n' 0 0 N ~p,~ US W ST PAR L C a_ ~ ~.o o.~..b:-~..____ h CEL ~ v v v e v v N \v v o v o v a 10,p~ ~t a v v v v,v CENTERLINE OF 10' HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC o ~ MULTI-LEVEL N ASSOCIATION EASEMENT CONCR ~ TE BUILDING uz N L12\ (BOOK 642, PAGE 344) QWEST COMMUNICATIONS) 1 0 m ~ 5.0' 5.0' 9 h°i L13 13 N v 48.42' Oi ~ 5.0' a 0' C i v ~ ~ ~ 4??, ,v v,v v. v v v v v X68 v v v v v v ~ \ ! ~ ~ v a v v v a v ' i I ' ° • ~ ' • ~ ° • ° ° • ° S83'36'23"E - 26.40' ~ I I!•~ i i~ ~ a, a ' ~ i `~a v v v v v v v i.40' G ~ ~ v v v v v ~ I v v,v v J J a OVERHANG \ ~ , - EASEMENT D1 'EMENT DETAIL ~ SCALE: 1 "=5d SCALE: 1 "=50' o +-J " " BUILDING DETAIL SHEE T 3 of 3 m PEAK LAND OON8ILTAN M NO. SCALE: ! "=30' -cc PEAK LAND aM*-YF, NC. ro . WO-470-05" PAX WO-476-M WO UOn FOW LOOP VAL, CO OW DRAWN BY: JOHN I JOB No. 1039 0 f a S~TRV~'Y ~'LA T 2, 4 > > RANGE 8 0 WL'S T OF THL' SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ~ ~ STATE OF COLORADO 1~ wHiT Ri R ATI NAI V N 0 E E IATIONAL FOREST U . S. F. S, FOUND 3~{~" ALUMINUM CAP S.F.S.) 1978 I USD INT ON 2~" STEEL POST BLM C GENERAL USE ZONE FOUND~3" BRASS CAP S? s ~ S89'32'30"E - 2634.93' (N89.27'21°w - 1 s (N89'27'21"W - 2633.76' DEED) / ~ (SEE GENERAL NOTE 6) ~ ON 2~" STEEL POST ~ S 6/16t C,~ C ~nR~~ (NORTH LINE Sh, SEA/a SEC. SEA/a SEC. 6) • / z TRA T 100 YEAR FLOODP~ IN ~ ~ QWE S T' O O VAIL POTATO PATCH Z o 0 o UNPLATTE D o~ GENERAL USE ZONE ~ I ' ~ ~ A R F 1 1 TI T PAT 0 S,~ SE a SEC ON 6 TOWNSHIP 5 SOU H (SEE GENERAL NOTE 6) / / J (BOOK 218, PAGE 419) I INDICATES AREA OF N J TH, ' / 1.096 ACRES APPROXIMATE ROCK FALL ~ ~ , ~ .N W / (NOT A PART OF THIS PLAT) HAZARD (TYPICAL) ~ " m o RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. / , (SEE GENERAL NOTE 4) ~ ~ w 23.899 ACRES m ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER T L N MIDD VAIL POTATO PATCH ~ W MIDDLE CREEK NTE F ~ w y ~ CE RUNE 0 10 I , r o ~ SHADED AREA INDICATES ~r HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC , rr i ~ A INDICATES I EDGE F ASSOCIATION EASEMENT ~ r , r. ~ r ' O m J APPROXIMAT DEBRIS FLOW AREA W ~ (SEE GENERAL NOTE 5) FLOW AREA ~ ~ ~ ~'AN t0 (BOOK 642, PAGE 344) Q SAL NOTE 5) ~ ~ % v • J (SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 3) ~ 0 ~ .70' nW _ 319 84 5126 N8 ~ m S 'DEED) ~ OO n "E - 319.70 52 N84'55 50 (S7g. w v ~ 15 L1s W ~ ~ r~ ( 56 28"E _ 424. , , 424 40 E © .40 DEED I ~~j ~ ) L7'~' ~ ` '''ii I ~ ~ ~ Z ~~I~' m ~ Ns . 9S , _ d, ruY aaMO ~ I r .1 O ~ A~ ~ ~ (s 94 ~ .~.r. i , - _ figs , S _ 4 r ~ _ _ _ ..,~,..1 - _ s 2j„ W ~""r ~ r".~~..- - F, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ABANDONED to m ~ - - _ _ 3 30 5 24" C.M.P. 3'~0' De ce ~ r~~ ~ ~c \ IRRIGATION DITCH T o _ E N80'08'42"E - 211.80' INDICATES AREA OF ~ y ' ~ T , i ~ m " WAD p (N80'13'06"E - 211,80' DEED) APPROXIMATE ROCK FALL ~ ~ . ~ ` ~ ~ ~ L_ ~ ~ r= ~ ~ RAY diQNO ~ p ~ ~ n HAZARD (TYPICAL) ~ / ~ 6 AAA au' ~ TRUE POINT OF m Delta = 02 54 37 (02'56'18" DEED) (SEE GENERAL NOTE 4) ~ ~ rn ` ~ ~ ~ , N ABANDONED BARBED ~ BEGINNING n FOUND 3° BRASS CAP w R= 3990.00' 24° C.M,P, ~ ~ O ~ a ~ rn ON 2ft" STEEL POST ~ T= 101.36 (102.33' DEED) N83•40'S3 W - 826 WIRE FENCE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .30~ ' ~ ~ N6T2T36"W - 22.71' ~ 202.67' 203.62' DEED .2 ~ nW - 04,]0 I ( ) N74 5 59 2 (S83.3B~29~E ` FROM LOT CORNER ~ . ~ ` \ ` ` \ \ ` _ 826.30' DEED) (APPARENT BLUNDER) ~ , ~ ~ CH= 202,65 (204.60' DEED) (574'21'35"E - 204,70' DEED) ® ~ . r ~ ~ n 72" C.M.P. J r o C6= S85 27 36 W (585'31'10"W DEED) 72" C.M.P. ELECTRICAL ` ~ ` ~ ~ NOR TH FRpN T- - - - _ ' ~ . W TRANSFORMER - _ - _ _ ~ AGE Rpgp _ _ W n D r IN TE - _ _ RStgTE ~ n HIGH yyq Y No, 7 N71'38'09"W - 198.00' ` - ` ~ ~ ~ ~ NpRTH O FRpNTAGE c~: ~ ~ . Rpgp) (S71'33'45"E - 196.10' DEED) ~ 1 1 S SE `R• W.) FLOWLINE OF ~ 1 / ~ 4 CURB AND GUTTER SEC. 6 ~~si. FOUND 3" BRASS CAP ^ r z ON 6" CONCRETE POST ° z m ti\ F C,D,O.T. R.O.W. MARKER ° N `~s~\ ~ ~ N71'38'09"W - 1.00' FROM 00 ~ vA LOT CORNER m N ~ r~ ~ I N m i .~o \ rn a (p r~ n ~r mom F ooh rn m~Z oI~ ~ r FOUND 3" BRASS CAP ~ ' m ON 2'fi" STEEL POST D to v FOUND 3~" ALUMINUM CAP FOUND 3~i~" ALUMINUM CAP S72'15'07"E - 22,2' CALC LOCATION N85'33'21"E - 3.8' \ ~a REFERENCE MONUMENT B.L,M. (FALLS IN BUILDING) REF R NC M N M NT M. ( ) (WITNESS CORNER MISSING) E E E 0 U E (B. L. ) SEC. 6 • ~ sEC. ~ S89'35'47°W - 668,42' (CALC) - AP - - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - - - ~ s S893547W - - - - N89'28'26"E-1970.82' - ~ ,z 7 0 2174,94' (CALC) FOUND 3~{~" ALUMINUM CAP FOUND 3" BRASS CAP 6 5 ON 2~" STEEL POST 7 g N89 35 47 E - 2843.37 (MEAS.) S41'S3'02"E - 4.3' FOUND 3'~" ALUMINUM CAP REFERENCE MONUMENT (B.L.M.) S29'18'47"W - 33,9' REFERENCE MONUMENT (B.L,M.) SET 132,00' W.C. 2 ALUMINUM CAP ON 3/4" ~ STEEL ROD 132.00 o w.c, 1 ss_ LINE TABLE 4 S7 o PLS 27598 LINE LENGTH BEARING L14 114.00' N00'00'00"W m 2°01 L1 65,24' S36'23'30"W L15 77.00' N90'00'00"E IL2 120,00' IS88'30'00"W L16 I 76,00' S84'01'23"E ~ I L3 32.25' S26'17'DO"W L17 ~ 36.60' S49'27'25"E ~ L4 107.00' 560'0 ' 0"W L18 47.76' S07' 6'03"E m I 9 0 I 2 ~ FOUND 3 BRASS CAP ON 6 CONCRETE POST, C.D.O. T. R.O.W. I C.D.O. T. R.O.W. MARKER IL5 143,67' IN88'34'00"W ~L19 I 72.28' ~S50'09'43"W 00 T No. R AR WITH A MINUM AP L.S. No. 27 a SE 5 EB LU C 598 27598 IL6 180.11' N00'00'00"W L20 73.04' S77'04'43"E IL7 411.93' S83'36'30"E L21 25.86' N67'23'11"E m IL5 ' 125,63' N15'49'00"E IL22 36.36' IN82'07'S3"W 100 0 50 100 200 40D a I L9 91.54' S15'49'00"W L23 110.62' S23'44'30"E I I I I I J a L10 382.48' N83'36'30"W L24 87.43' N83'36'29"W (IN FEET ) ~ L11 40.25' 500'00'00"W L25 51.29' N04'33'08"W I 1 inch = 100 ft. ~L12 20.48' S88'34'02"W L26 61,52' S87'31'26"W o ~ IL13 45.33' S07'18'24"W L27 51.07' N14'32'07"E V1 SHEE T 2 of 3 m PEAK LAD CONSLLTANM INC. PEAK LAD SURVEYN4 INC. ro 170.57l~IIM FAIL 070!!1! 1000 LIOM! IDOE LOOP VAL 00 MV 0 i I DRAWN BY; JOHN I JOB No. 1039 d: LE SURVEY r PLA T 1 1 2, 4 , , RANGE 8 0 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ~ , STATE OF COL ORAD O 1 A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, LYING NORTH OF GENERAL NOTE; INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70 RIGHT-OF-WAY, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, ORIGINALLY DESCRIBED IN , c~/A i A QUIT CLAIM DEED, BOOK 246 AT PAGE 960, FILED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK AND sec s 1 DATE OF SURVEY: AUGUST, 2001. SEC 6 SEC 5 RECORDER OF COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS secs sec s FOLLOWS: 2 BASIS OF BEARINGS: MONUMENTS FOUND MARKING THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, BEING 500'28'16"E - 1319.92' (SEE DRAWING) BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNEA OF SAID SECTION 6, WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER, OF THE 3 MONUMENTATION AS INDICATED HERON, SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, BEARS N 00'28'16" W 1316.47 FEET BEING THE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS DESCRIP110N; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SAID - - ~ 4 THE ROCKFALL HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL ROCKFALL HAZARD a SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, N 00'28'16" W 685.54 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE S 1 MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000, SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION. SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70 AND BEING THE Ig~E POINT OF @F,~INNIN~; ~ SE/a SEC 6 r , THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 70, THE FOLLOWING EIGHT (8) ~ 5 THE DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000, SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION. COURSES: 1) N 71'38'09" W 198.00 FEET; W SATE ~~CAT~~N 2) THENCE N 83'40'53" W 826.30 FEET; Z VICINITY MAP 6 THE ZONE LINE SHOWN FOR THE GENERAL USE (GU) AREA WAS DERIVED FROM THE OFFICIAL TOWN OF VAIL ZONING MAP DATED OCTOBER 17, 2000, ALL OTHER AREAS ON THE SITE ARE a 3 THENCE N 74'25 59 W 204.70 FEET; SCALE; 1"=500' ZONED AS NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION DISTRICT (NAPD). SHOWN IN IT'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION. 4) THENCE N 69'59'45" W 303.20 FEET; 5) THENCE N 80'00'52" W 424.40 FEET; ' 6) THENCE S 84'51'26" W 319.70 FEET; 7 ALL UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON WERE FIELD LOCATED BY THEIR RESPECTIVE COMPANIES, PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE LOCATIONS SHOWN FOR 7) THENCE S 80'08'42" W 211.80 FEET TO A POINT OF ANON-TANGENT CURVE; ~ ADDITIONAL UTILITIES NOT SHOWN. ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO 8) THENCE 202.67 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3990.00 ~ , CONSTRUCTION. FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02'54'37" AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S 85'27'36" W 202.65 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; 8 BUILDING TIES ARE INDICATED IN PARENTHESIS. THENCE ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, N 00'16'30" W , 9 CURRENT ZONING IS "GU" (GENERAL USE) AND "NAPD" (NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION DISTRICT). 347.38 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; NTERS'"TC ~o THE "GU" CURRENT US IS FOR TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS, DAY CARE, AND PRE-SCHOOL. THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, S 89'32'30 E ~ , 2634.93 FEET TO THE SAID NORTHEAST CORNER, OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, OF THE SOUTH HALF, OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTERS 00'28'16" E 10 THE TOWN OF VAIL PROVIDED PEAK LAND SURVEYING WITH A COPY OF A LEASE IT HAS GRANTED TO "THE LEARNING TREE, INC." AND "ABC SCHOOL, INC." THE LEASE LINES ARE ON SHEET 2 OF THIS 630.93 FEET TO THE ~ PAINT QF BEGINNING, SAID TRACT CONTAINS 24.995 GROSS ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A WARRANTY DEED, RECEPTION N0. SURVEY. 114010, BOOK 218 AT PAGE 419, FILED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK AND RECORDER OF COUNTY 11 PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. DID NOT PERFORM A TITLE SEARCH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: e~si uas~ ~ a~aF 0 H rEe s rE ~ NS THBS SALTOA/AGSM ILA DA TITLE SURVE YIWERE P OVIDED OBYRLANOD DTITLEEGOUARANOTEEM OMPANYILZED A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, - RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: SEC. 6 ~ SEC, 6 SEC. 5 ° ORDER No. VC272436, DATED APRIL 26, 2001, AT 5:00 P.M.. SEC, 6 SEC. 5 BEGINNING AT A POINT 1170,20 FEET N 36'01'25" W FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 6, sec. ~ ~ sE , e SE , 6 12 NQTDE: TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.; THENCE N 00'00' E 180.11 FEET; THENCE _ ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT, IN NO EVENT, N 88'34' W 143,67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60'09' W 107.00 FEET; THENCE S 26'17' W 32.25 FEET; THENCE ~csr ~D0" MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN S 88'30' W 120,00 FEET; THENCE S 36'23'30" •W 65,24 FEET; THENCE S 83'36'30" E 411.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.096 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS; SAID TRACT OF LAND , YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. CONTAINING 23.899 NET ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. us AND TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO AND EGRESS FROM THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED TRACT BY PEDESTRIAN, VEHICULAR AND MOTOR TRAFFIC, FOR AERIAL AND BURIED TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC POWER LINES AND FOR BURIED WATER, SEWER, GAS AND OTHER UTILITIES TO SAID TRACT OVER AND ACROSS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO WIT: A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SOUTH QUARTER, SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT BEING 1170,20 FEET N 36'01'25" W FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 6, T04VNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.; THENCE S 00'00' 40.25 FEET; THENCE N 83'36'30" W 382.48 FEET; THENCE S 15'49' W 91.54 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT DF WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE 70; THENCE N 74'21'35" W 40.03 FEET ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE 70; THENCE N 15' 49' E 122.20 FEET; THENCE S 83'36'30" E 411.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, TOWN OF VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO. ALTA/AGSM LAND TITLE SURVEY: TO THE TOWN OF VAIL AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH "MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/AGSM LAND TITLE SURVEYS," JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA, NSPS, AND AGSM IN 1999, AND INCLUDES ITEM 1, 2, 4, 6, 7.b1, 8, 9, 10, 11.a, 12, 13, AND 15 OF TABLE A THEREOF, PURSUANT TO THE ACCURACY STANDARDS AS ADOPTED BY ALTA, NSPS AND AGSM IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF THIS CERTIFICATION, UNDERSIGNED FURTHER CERTIFIES THAT THE SURVEY MEASUREMENTS WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "MINIMUM ANGLE, DISTANCE, AND CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR SURVEY MEASUREMENTS WHICH CONTROL LAND BOUNDARIES FOR ALTA/AGSM LAND TITLE SURVEYS," DATE: BRENT BIGGS COLORADO P.L.S. No, 27598 LEGEND O$ E © O SEWER, WATER, STORM, ELECTRICAL, PHONE, AND DATA MANHOLES © OE © GAS, ELECTRIC, AND PHONE METERS SIGN FIRE HYDRANT ~ UTILITY POLE Y GV WV GAS AND WATER VALVES ~ LIGHTPOST ~(J WATER SHUT OFF VALVE (CURB STOP) ~ INLET/CATCH BASIN ~ ®m ELECTRICAL, PHONE, CABLE TV PEDESTALS LARGE BOULDER/ROCK ~ - INDICATES AN EVERGREEN TREE WITH A TRUNK DIAMETER OF 3" OR GREATER. ,r INDICATES A DECIDUOUS TREE WITH A TRUNK DIAMETER OF 3° OR GREATER. 0 0 N - o C - - ~ ASPHALT 0 p~.i+.~i.+~ CONCRETE WALL OR CONCRETE SLAB v 4 - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDGE OF ASPHALT/CONCRETE N ~ ~ - ~ - FLOWLINE OF CREEK, CURB AND GUTTER, PAN , ~ ' a # X FENCE LINE c ~ TREELINE ~ ELE ELE •ELE BURIED ELECTRICAL LINE a ~ GAS GAS - • GAS BURIED GAS LINE a t- SEW SEW • -SEW BURIED SEWER LINE J i WAT WAT • •WAT BURIED WATER LINE m a a i rn m o Q i 1 aJ SHEE T 1 of 3 m PEAT( LAND CONBULTANM NC. c ~ PEAK LAND BURVEYM M 1000 LKNO IDOE LOOP VAL, CO OW DRAWN BY: JOHN I JOB No. 1039 0 1 a _ . ~ AN1~+ CONaI~-T r~~~ , ~wca~'~° ~ - ~ ~p YAL. CO ~ ~ ~~fD~ , , q t ! r ~ / ~ - , - ~ i~ i~ r t ~ , . r . • p r , .w ..r r , ~ , _ w ~ ~ ~ . ~ _ ~ w , . ~ w_ , - "5 . ~ . ; . , ~ . - ~ , w. - _ .f _ r...- , . , • , _ - r s ` 1 .r ~ or• . . - r i. . - ~ (~Q w ' . ~ QJ ..r ~ a . ~ J J ~ . - . ~ i . - ~ ~ W~ r^ . _ . . . ~ - ~ ~ - - ~ 111 . I+w ~ 4. , _ w t 1 . a h ~ . a , _ ...r ..w.. _ . . . ~ - Q ...u ~ - r ~ n " r _ ~ ~ y ° . `q ; i .r ~ to _ _ . - .r. . ' ~ 1 1 . . ~ ~ r ~ v, ' ..n .r~ 1~ ; i ~ _ i t i ~ ,r Ni ~ - `ti ~ ~ r , . T t~ _ .r - ~ ~ r., f y - . ER MA~OL SEWER MAC! ',p,.~ _ EX SEW ~ EJ(. ~ ~ ~ ~ , • . . . . r - - 822.6 RIM= ~--82~ • l.. . . , RIJ~. ~ 14.6, ~ - 8228.6 _ ~ a ~ ~ / ~ a2 . _ ~1N~ER7 4NVERT - ~ , , , ' - , ~E ! 1 . - . . - - - - ''ten' ~ .r- ! --'1 ''T`''a ~Q _ _ , fir, ~ T ~ , . - ~ ~ t , $ ~ - ,~F~_ ~tS.';,-... u~;~.. -~-Z~+s«_- r.A'+F__ - • ih 41k-.--t'e'as Gas :6 Gas uAa ; ,r f . _ _ - - WER _ - LV- i ~,Y . _ - - G ~ ~ i' E;:.t ~ ~E ~ - C.E - C;.F ELF ~ - ' p 2pY• / LLL ~ R1M = U ~.E 195.7 ~{AN ~ T _ r. l IN1lER~ - 8 r ~ ~X. SEWER A ~ ~ 1M 8214.7 ~ ~ - 820 _ ~ , ~t~~ERT . 1~ ~ ~ _W _ J w', - Ek t ~ , ~t ~ i _ ~ 4 ~ .r r i ~ ~ ~w - v i-- E / / _ 'i ~ OLE - - NH ` - _ ~ 5EWER M A _ _ p1E - , a. ~`1 ~ ~ ~~QRO. _ _ - ~ 1 , 8216.0 ~ - ~ _ R^fM p4,5 - ,ems _ SEWER F w - PRO. ~ . _ . 6 ~ - ANNOt~ ~r..,i -.y. ESE CLf'.`- iLE - ~ z~ 5EWER - PRO• _ . , ~ ~ n ri.. , _ _ ~ X22 ~ Rik T .8210.0 x - - , ` PRO. SEWER MANHOLE PRO. SEWER MANHOLE ~ . _ w _ 8223.0 EX, Q" Q ,..r., , i~ ' RAM = 8228.5 RIM WATER MAIN o _ 8275.0 ads INV~Rfi ~ ..$214,0. _....IpIUER~. ' r,- ~ . . . ~ r - ..i PROPOSED GAS SERVICE - DRAWN TRANSFORMER, PEDE5TALS, DESIGNED BY. T PROPOSED _ ~ ELECTRIC AND PHONE SERVICE RE'~IEWED: Pt.c cos ~ o FIRE HYDRANT, AND SERVICE o8/2~~ ' WATER MAIN, DATE: PROPOSED 8, zoo SHEET w : ~ GRAPk~1C SCA~I~ o ' z5 5o i 0 N SERVICE a ~ f~ „SEWER MAIN AND 50 O ~r PROPOSED 8 _ V O _M. (1N FFFT ) '7 n l inch 50 it. t0 N Q C --0 PROPOSED SE'NER FORCE MAIN 3 D N N n N U Moog 3 D (n T _ ~ 1 M . _ t ~ w ~ r ~ ~ I ! 1. J J vr.. " 1 ' i l `ti \ • ~ ~ ' • ° . .n. _ M. _ _ f _ , , h i ~ ` • ~ ~ , ; 1\ ' . r r ~ 1 , ` ~ ~ , _ ~ • _ ~.~y . i70"06i614 FAX970~476~1616 . _ _ 1000 LIOf18 • ~ ~ ~ lAOP YAL C70 !1067 ~ , ~ ' , . ; 1 ' y r. ~u s.a ~ sf i ' ti,, ri. w_. m~_ r. wr• , ^ _ 1 ~ ~ 1 i • ~ , ~ ; ~ 1 . .r _ i i . , . , ,w. ..e.. ~ . .r . , _ , w., ~ - , . , , _ I . , 100 YEAR F14ODPLAIN . , \ . r f . . _ , " . ~ ~ ~ ~ r" r ~ ,a; ~ ,,,,r. r . I . 1 ' w „ • ~ . _ CT A ~ ~ _ _ w. . • W M c _ , _ . . _ . ti v ~ Q . • _ ~ . , . ' ~ " ` ~ TRACT A . • ~ ~ . , . Y,. , . T ' ~ ~~i - • / , , . ~ , ~ . . . _ ~ ~ . . _ , ~ 'J q \ ~ ~ .r ; v I y , .r . • { S A , . _ y , . • . _ ~ , . , ~i it ~ . ~ J W - ~ ~ ,:MOUNTAIN BELL ~2s " . M~ ~ ~ . - ; • ~ US WEST PARCEL \ ~ , ~ ?BUILDING ~ _ s ~ 6ry ~ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •i ' ' _ PARKING ST ~ • r..... ~ . Y ~ ) r . ~ , W. ZKING STRU,ETURE ` ~ ~ . ~ . u _ I ~ , r.. ~ ~ _ ~ - O0 ~ 6a _ . ~ i ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ , tOT 1 `'w , _ _ . - .w ""1Q0 YEAr~+ FLOODPLAIN ~ i - _ _ ~ _ ,e3 _ , _ - _ ' ~ , w „y 'oaa BASED ON~1982 FEMA w ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ , ' FLOOD INSl~RAN E STUDY / - .bti' _ ~ _ 'OSS dry.. , ~f PROPDSEB~ RETAINING WALLS ~ ~ \ k x,.15 pi,"+ \ ~ ~ ~ TERRACED PER.., ~ . «yr / . QEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. ~ , ~ . , ~ ~ ~ 8240. ~ 1. pp~ ~ ~ ~ 37 R i.. 63 8250 . 6 r - , _ EXTEND EXISTING 72" CA~1P ti; ' .w¢} ~ ~ 82~~ I T A i ' - ~ =~.Ai~ID-it~STALL iJEW HEADWALL . ~ ~ ~ e 1 e5'o~a ..1 ' r i , r~ ry ~ 8242117 .f 6' ~ ~ ~ , 82J2¢1 4 ~ K. i ~ 1 _ 9 8242 Bap ~ t. ~ . f ~ ~ ~ pJ . w~.. 230` 8242 _ , ? ~ _ , ~ ~ 4 9226 . ~ • \ ~ ~ T ~ _ X220• 4~°. . ~~C' ~ _ . , ~Q ~ P S SHE ~ . _ ~E_ ~ - R ~T+o - - LT I~ p S f A fl.... P +j° ~ 4.24 ~ y , Q~~,,px ~ t _w ' r ~»v ?q a . - k 07.1 ~ J ~ ~ z e.. ~ T o _ _ __PROPflSED..GULVERTS - • _ AND INLETS " 1 - - _ r ~ _ _ J ~f ~ ~ _ _ ~n w - - 3J ~ Q _ ROS• - p F~ T ~ _ _ _ - ~ _ _ _ _ - ~ NORtH E R ~ ~ w ~ FRONTAL OAD ~ c o o z w 0 0 N N ~l Q1 N • Q .-i (D INDICATES AREA OF +6' CUT +6' CUT m EXCLUDING BUILDING FOOTP I FOOTPRINTS a DRAWN: JE • , , INDICATES AREA OF +6' FILL Fltt DESIGNED BY. JE ' ~ EXCLUDING BUILDING FOOTPRINTS OOTPRINTS REVIEWED: N PLC JOB#: 1039 DATE: 08/27/01 U GkAPH1C SCAI,~ m a SJ 0 5 50 100 200 a rn m 0 SHEET n~ IN F'EES' } cn 1 inch = 50 ft. 2 v co ~o C 7 O i a ~ / 1 - ' I ' 1 ' ' I . ~ i . 1~ - I ' ,n I J + ~ ~ p, I I 7 I ~ I /-r ~G ~ + A ~ TRACT ~ I ~ I ~ V 1r.~~ 1 V R AST A T ~o o~ 111 1t1 , ~ 111 it ~,i ~ 1 ~ i ~ , ~ I I ~ 111 . 1 11 111 1I1 III ~I,II 111 ti,I~ I I 1 t ' RE y 1 1 ~ , RuCTu CTCRE 1 1 1 1 1 1 I' 1~ I, SOT 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ K~~O S ~ ~ ~ k~ ~ Ali S~ ~ ~ ~ Q AR ~ I ~ ~ I I11,1`~~~,I MdUNT ~ i, i I I I ~N~ I 11I ~~~~I ~ ...:.~....+_..i 1 1 I ~P ASE ` ~ . 1 1 1 ~...#.....I,~' 11 ~,RkIN~ III I y 4 I I I I PARKING ARSE 1 1 1 i, i ESQ P 1 1 1 `I y I I I DRIWE AISLE 1 gPAGES (TYP) ~ I 2~~,. ~ USW 111 I I ~ Z§~ DR1VE r..¦,,,,,,,r,.. f - , - 1 1 1 I, i IpA~K~G~P~C1~ l 1 ''I 1 I I I 40' RADI AISLE (SYP) Itii ~ 1 1 11 I ~ ~ / ~ ~r ~ _ EARLY LEA ECG O m . _ - -n~.~... _ _ f.. . / EN 1'ER _ _ , _ ~ _ y r f~j~ ~ ,.r Qq' RA US ~ + + + + ,r t i Z °I i I ~ 'III ~ EDGE DF u1 - - EXISTING (TYP) ~ w ~ ASPH AL I ~ ~ 1 I ' ' ~ i ~ I - " 40' RADIUS . ~l l _ - 1 J - R "",,,,ti. r i 'i - S SHELT - . ~ I - . . r'~'~ ~ ~ X11 ~i - _ . ~ J r ` l ~ r~n~ _ ~ _ _ , . ; , - -e. - PROP SED PAT ~ __...a -.......3 - - - NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD „ , _ ~ - - - _...-r ~J - ~ _ +r.~ ..r - id~~T~{ . . ~ .r.- EXISTING FRaN GYP) ROAD LANES) OF FRpN 1S7~NG EDGE YP) EX ASPHA~Z ~T pRI ZG(tYP) PRpppSEDANES )TYP) RpAD DR p,WN'. DE~~~N~~ E REV,~W~p: SOB#~ pATE; SH zI~AP~~IC ;~~~;'~1~1'' C w... ~V mil'` ~ 1 l ~ .-.-..---'ice... NTS ~TION p SE ~ ROA ~ 1N 50 tt, 1YP~~p 2~ 2' 2 ~E VAR~E`' W CRO55 Sii N TE CURB-/ CpNCRE R illillillillillllllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilillllllllllllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiilIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIillillilllllllllllllll11111100~~- N4 GUT~E A 0 a L N rn a c Ln cr x v OL) 0 ON Pedestrian Spine 4 story residential 2 story building residential 3 story residential building building Leasing/ y community l~ Jff ~1 11~l:lYh ~l~~~m •~lCa'IC1~l i.® ate, Imp Wff a . building 0" W 1.75 19 on3 ~2 story residential Conceptual massing/character sketch/south elevation building I.I-III ,Il ;z e i I } X10] 111110111 IF Conceptual typical 3 story housing unit Pedestrian Street ang . r 2 story residential 1 I building I~lgg~ i IAS , Conceptual end elevation/site section Middle Creek Village Vail Colorado Odell Architects, P.C. 303.670.5880 Open Space Above - i. t Play area (2 tiers) - Approx. 4500 SF A is South Elevation el 1=;. 2 level 4,500 SF Er' A. Early Learning 20 parkin Center / spacesO North eva ion Conceptual Early Learning Center Il~i.•I.JIn (`.on4 1/illnnn Middle Creek Village Project Schedule To be submitted by Architectural Resource Consultants, under separate cover. • • Project Schedule to be provided by ARC after agreement on date revisions - Middle Creek Village Rental Housing Development - Unit Mix Rental Rate, Rental Rates Rental Rate, PER VS. At Number Percent Square Footage Utility # of Total Shared Square 60% 100% 3.00% Unit Description of Units of Total Per Unit Total Percent Rate Allow. Total Beds Beds Bedroom Bed Bedroom Foot AMI AMI Increase Affordable, at 60% of AM[ Alcove Studio 57 38.51% 364 20,748 23.36% $1,074 $48 $1,122 1.00 57.00 $1,074 $1,074 $537 $2.95 $381 $1,107 1 Bedroom 14 9.46% 480 6,720 7.57% $1,114 $60 $1,174 1.50 21.00 $1,114 $743 $557 $2.32 $381 $1,148 Total 71 47.97% 30.93% AVERAGE $1,082 $1,133 1.10 $1,082 $1,009 $541 $2.83 Market Rate Alcove Studio 4 2.70% 364 1,456 1.64% $1,231 $48 $1,279 1.00 4.00 $1,231 $1,231 $616 $3.38 $44 $1,268 1 Bedroom 4 2.70% 480 1,920 2.16% $1,356 $60 $1,416 1.50 6.00 $1,356 $904 $678 $2.83 $94 $1,397 2 Bedroom 24 16.22% 728 17,472 19.67% $1,731 $80 $1,811 2.50 60.00 $866 $693 $433 $2.38 $224 $1,783 3 Bedroom 45 30.41% 900 40,500 45.60% $2,146 $90 $2,236 3.50 157.50 $715 $613 $358 $2.38 $404 $2,211 Total 148 52.03% 69.07% AVERAGE 600 $1,928 $2,012 2.95 305.50 $822 $685 $411 $2.46 TOTAL 100.00% 88,816 100.00% $381 Common Area Factor = 2.81% Common Area Square Footage = 2,500 Total Square Footage (Approx.) 91,316 -Actual LIHTC rents will be the CHFA rents in effect at the time of the initial lease-up; actual initial market rate rents will be the rents reflected in this schedule, increased at the same % increase in the LIHTC rents from the 2001 schedule to the schedule in place at the time of initial lease-up. C'1 UQ n CD r. O N o ?o n xo y O o N m m CD o3i D M a SOr C O O m -o ID (n N v ° O •JD ° m m m c m N < D m v ' t° Q d c a CD 01 3 B OR OR N o CY T 3 m J a~ ° ro m a CD O m m x C) m m a m c o 0 o pm c= Wtn ~_°..m o L~ 0 N (n o c c< a X, J a m m m m c D co J m m o c m m -n m C) 3 2 J a o n c a ° C) J m x co o m' d m m < n 5 a m J N c m =r C) n co a- o o m m o ° -t m d N N m c 5. C J C X T N ° fP (D m p J J O 3 c J m m r 0. J H. -n ' m m m m =0 c oJi au 3 n a y 1 ro o,m 7 m m J C) ~r0o7m-1~n u m m 1 a n C)m m C)a O J o o m u'^ m ° m H O o c2i' m Om o o_m ~ 0.0 m e y ~^.J DC m x•o m 7 o m m`O a o -w 0 0 (n ,d ~ O J O J c x J (O p c J X x . J T a^ m H Cy xap -i m N m N c 0 CS, ° a y o C)io' On ~nm 2 m y Nm a m d 3Dm m m o C ? m•C y T x 7 mw o J C) 2' in x < m T ao a J c ~p f° o a J. ~p N 0 J m in m m m N a? G C) O N N O J J y 0 w a 7 N m T N t0 O O m N p N 0 co a m N N m T = va J- "~i m Td m =nP nP ° 3 am 2 CD CD y 0 a Fr a = n? a 0. J M A w 7 d O N ^1 b w t0 a y a ry O O j I N N m m m m O m =Q m z x ° (D sv e~ C/) d t0 V N N N Vl ID ED N O co E9 y° O N(nO V V N N~ O O O c J O 000 (7 1 N 0) A m N OOO su O+ 0 CD m m N m O 0 N C J N r 3 Q AA A fT~O W OWO A m (00 t00 0. J ~"1 m W W t0 W O O Oo W O< d W W O] O O oWo fD CT OD O 0 O C cc CC La CD a y J J O N O A N O A N °m 0 o (p O N < o x 3 .d-. N N _ O O C p~ N j u pNp N N N N V1 (O A 'n O r-. m'm W W W V NN 0W m (NTiN A V m j O A v 0O A V O 0 c d fR N W A 0 0 u 0 V N O p O p y 0 0 O O O p 4 m p 0~ Q. 0 N 00) U)f0 O V (OT V fOJpp +W -W+0 0 n fmi OO O 0 W p0oA (WW,t m0 ° + Cb O N 7 O OtD O ~O N O W O00 W O N O V vD 00 A A00 SI N O V tD co 0d Qa - c v 0 ~ O a 4A ~ °o o m o ~ m o 0 VN OND A N O N N O O Obi N N O tW0 O O co w 00 O O m V CD c0 N ~I Of O V 0 ~I 0 W WW 0100(4 00 0 co A ° p J A ID N A A O 0 0 0 N V N .V. O A A N O o I? j O N O < O j = O > D u N N N N O 0 O W N O N ID 00 :SAC. p N o go o rn r ~ O 0 0 0 C. -l 01 N O V W CD m S A W 000 O N co co O A W CD 0 0 '1 000 0 O W 0 V v0 0 co A 4 0 0 m C) Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 1 2- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 2,785,013 2,840,713 2,897,528 2,955,478 3,014,588 3,074,880 3,136,377 3,199,105 3,263,087 3,328,349 PUPA Other Income $125.00 18,500 18,870 19,247 19,632 20,025 20,425 20,834 21,251 21,676 22,109 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 3.50% 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 Laundry Income 40,000 40,800 41,616 42,448 43,297 44,163 45,046 45,947 46,866 47,804 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single $75.00 48,600 49,572 50,563 51,575 52,606 53,658 54,731 55,826 56,943 58,081 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem $125.00 22,500 22,950 23,409 23,877 24,355 24,842 25,339 25,845 26,362 26,890 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units $25.00 7,200 7,344 7,491 7,641 7,794 7,949 8,108 8,271 8,436 8,605 11 Additional Surface Spaces $40.00 5,280 5,386 5,493 5,603 5,715 5,830 5,946 6,065 6,186 6,310 0 Additional Storage Spaces $50.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss 7.00% ($205,830).($209,928) ($214,108) ($218,371) ($222,720) ($227,156) ($231,680) ($236,295) ($241,002) ($245,804) Net Revenue 2,734,599 2,789,043 2,844,576 2,901,219 2,958,996 3,017,927 3,078,038 3,139,351 3,201,890 3,265,679 Expenses Expense Inflation 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% PUPA Operating Expenses $3,250.00 481,000 500,240 520,250 541,060 562,702 585,210 614,471 645,194 677,454 711,326 Reserve for Replacement $250.00 37,000 38,480 40,019 41,620 43,285 45,016 47,267 49,630 52,112 54,717 Net Operating Income 2,216,599 2,250,323 2,284,307 2,318,540 2,353,009 2,387,701 2,416,300 2,444,526 2,472,324 2,499,635 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1.45 1.48 1.50 1.52 1.54 1.57 1.59 1.60 1.62 1.64 Available for Subordinate Debt 692,507 726,231 760,215 794,448 828,917 863,610 892,209 920,435 948,232 975,544 Subordinate Debt Payment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Debt Service 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.45 1.48 1.50 1.52 1.54 1.57 . 1.59 1.60 1.62 1.64 Available for Distribution 692,507 726,231 760,215 794,448 828,917 863,610 892,209 920,435 948,232 975,544 Interest Rate and Dent Service Assumptions Amount Rate Amort Payment Tax-Exempt Bonds 19,090,209 7.00% 30 1,524,092 Taxable Bonds 0 7.00% Int. Only 0 Interest only for 30 years, than amortizing through 40 years Total/Average 19,090,209 7.00% 1,524,092 Amortized Payment = 0 Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 3,394,916 3,462,814 3,532,070 3,602,712 3,674,766 3,748,261 3,823,226 3,899,691 3,977,685 4,057,238 Other Income 22,551 23,002 23,462 23,932 24,410 24,899 25,397 25,904 26,423 26,951 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 13,336 Laundry Income 48,760 49,735 50,730 51,744 52,779 53,835 54,911 56,010 57,130 58,272 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single 59,243 60,428 61,637 62,869 64,127 65,409 66,717 68,052 69,413 70,801 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem 27,427 27,976 28,535 29,106 29,688 30,282 30,888 31,505 32,136 32,778 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units 8,777 8,952 9,131 9,314 9,500 9,690 9,884 10,082 10,283 10,489 11 Additional Surface Spaces 6,436 6,565 6,696 6,830 6,967 7,106 7,248 7,393 7,541 7,692 0 Additional Storage Spaces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss ($250,701) ($255,697) ($260,792) ($265,989) ($271,290) ($276,697) ($282,213) ($287,838) ($293,576) ($299,429) Net Revenue 3,330,745 3,397,112 3,464,806 3,533,854 3,604,283 3,676,121 3,749,395 3,824,135 3,900,369 3,978,129 Expenses Expense Inflation 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Operating Expenses 746,893 784,237 823,449 864,622 907,853 944,167 981,934 1,021,211 1,062,059 1,104,542 Reserve for Replacement 57,453 60,326 63,342 66,509 69,835 72,628 75,533 78,555 81,697 84,965 Net Operating Income 2,526,399 2,552,548 2,578,014 2,602,723 2,626,595 2,659,325 2,691,928 2,724,369 2,756,613 2,788,622 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1.66 1.67 1.69 1.71 1.72 1.74 1.77 1.79 1.81 1.83 Available for Subordinate Debt 1,002,307 1,028,457 1,053,923 1,078,631 1,102,504 1,135,234 1,167,836 1,200,278 1,232,522 1,264,531 Subordinate Debt Payment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Debt Service 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 1,524,092 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.66 1.67 1.69 1.71 1.72 1.74 1.77 1.79 1.81 1.83 Available for Distribution 1,002,307 1,028,457 1,053,923 1,078,631 1,102,504 1,135,234 1,167,836 1,200,278 1,232,522 1,264,531 Middle Creek Village Rental Housing Development - Unit Mix Rental Rate, Rental Rates Rental Rate, PER VS. At Number Percent Square Footage Utility # of Total Shared Square 60% 100% 3.00% Unit Description of Units of Total Per Unit Total Percent Rate Allow. Total Beds Beds Bedroom Bed Bedroom Foot AMI AMI Increase " Affordable, at 60% of AM] Alcove Studio 57 38.51% 364 20,748 23.36% $891 $48 $939 1.00 57.00 $891 $891 $446 $2.45 $198 $918 1 Bedroom 14 9.46%, 480 6,720 7.57% $931 $60 $991 1.50 21.00 $931 $621 $466 $1.94 $198 $959 Total 71 47.97% 30.93% AVERAGE $899 $949 1.10 $899 $838 $449 $2.35 Market Rate Alcove Studio 4 2.70% 364 1,456 1.64% $1,048 $48 $1,096 1.00 4.00 $1,048 $1,048 $524 $2.88 ($139) $1,080 1 Bedroom 4 2.70% 480 1,920 2.16% $1,173 $60 $1,233 1.50 6.00 $1,173 $782 $587 $2.44 ($89) $1,208 2 Bedroom 24 16.22% 728 17,472 19.67% $1,548 $80 $1,628 2.50 60.00 $774 $619 $367 $2.13 $41 $1,595 3 Bedroom 45 30.41% 900 40,500 45.60% $1,963 $90 $2,053 3.50 157.50 $654 $561 $327 $2.18 $221 $2,022 Total 148 52.03% 69.07% AVERAGE 600 $1,745 $1,828 2.95 305.50 $739 $616 $370 $2.21 TOTAL 100.00% 88,816 100.00% $198 Common Area Factor = 2.81% Common Area Square Footage = 2,500 Total Square Footage (Approx.) 91,316 `"Actual LIHTC rents will be the CHFA rents in effect at the time of the initial lease-up; actual initial market rate rents will be the rents reflected in this schedule, increased at the same % increase in the LIHTC rents from the 2001 schedule to the schedule in place at the time of initial lease-up. A ~Q CD O W ^ -D m 1 x D x "1 O -1 a D v ° m m m m < D_ d a M tO Q y d CJ' c °a m °1 N c M O a d O in CD Jo. d m a ig, 0 rn a -1 x d o f1 0 0 0 T B N J m- c n a N m A m m L O c m w 4. o 0-,o D CO c< N A V J a m y D M J J M J o -n c d m . m A J- x m y m m < N 3 J d c o ° c a c m A A d d 7 _ m m o Z. an d rp ~ m •a m a m p J (D m y o m m 0 3° J TC J J A d y u A J c x 5 N av3 3 na - ^o m7 c°o m m co m m° o a E M H -i v < ' 0a Co m 3 v, A A ~rAm.m-1+y o y d m m J 0 O J a A Co N O d d N 2 J m p O N O m d a J d H J O D N V1 )c O m j 7 -1 -110 N -•1. =_oc~.^ u S li m M. -Ow 0 A av co m y m m QaS.d 3a m J010 Io <0 2`' c m Q a x k a~ T C -0. -1m Q~ .^-Qw K ga f d CJ A N A d rn C ° A J y o Am On ~m 2 z.D m<, Nm ^.3Dcmo 3.m 2 . T a x 7 J 0~ A N x N N < m C .O. Q a CD J Co _ d m J m 3 7 y N ~m O = m (D (D CL N m Co 3 N a 7,G p A O n N OA ?.J J 0= a0 O'11q ~O A o d p d J O a a co m m 3 o ff n A D vii O o m m a J (D m to' O J N y C p ° d? c m N 2 0 o• J = A Imo Q c W 0 y 0 7 J a N m m N V O m m m m o f o OI C N d m m c o o m x A y - o d fD a N + ° N x ;o fJD fR N + (/1 ~y (D cy, 0. O O' N N N N FG.i ICj1 O <T f.11 O 3 Vl W m y N (011 m 0 O A OI C 0 CD M _ O 000 a N A A m n V O°i N J1 n ¢ :E -o . o m Co v 2~ A° A = Q. am U) O m m + + y 0 J 3 N A A O (Olf ppS J 00 D N .pAI QO (011 O 000 p00 O O. 7• `mil U3 0 ay Nm V W 0mAw O W v O41 -N C) mO N CD O ~ 3 d C N N N + 0 ? y N 0 N N N + + + N N+ N + O W T 0 w~.... M m A cD O (T O W N+ W w (11 N N Co (D W O V 00 mm A C. O 00 m 00 v tODO O 0 r m a fA W W A O p 0 p V N 0 0 O) O Ul _ (`p0' [m1 G m N (Vp W O N + 0 0 0 m V 10 (OD Co N0 A (((~J~ ~Op> O 0 Co ~I A 0 0 ^ O ON 0a?10 uCO 0000 (T V W O'V vD OOO A A0O E c.+0 W (OD NOO E N Q 0 C CT O ~ 1 O (A (A a O a < w N fR M fn ER VI fR M w O 0 (D W O O O S U 0 + A N O C9 W O O Of j N O WD 0 1± 0 O p 0 . . (D ~p 0 0 0 m 00 -1N ~I O G V V1 !.1 m W o W 0 00 m Nm .P 00 0 p J N V O N A O W V N .V. O A A A N O T a? a: 0 0 d n Q. y 0 N O ~ o r O D m N _ N N N N j (n O W N w N V N NO(11 O m cc) 0 0 0O0 o A 01 0 rn 0 m r j+ X 0 0 0 V ~ I = N OOO 0 O O Co 0A W ID N o ID W O O O O O V W O V 0 0 A A 0 0 N A Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 2,449,829 2,498,825 2,548,802 2,599,778 2,651,773 2,704,809 2,758,905 2,814,083 2,870,365 2,927,772 PUPA Other Income $125.00 18,500 18,870 19,247 19,632 20,025 20,425 20,834 21,251 21,676 22,109 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 3.50% 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 Laundry Income 40,000 40,800 41,616 42,448 43,297 44,163 45,046 45,947 46,866 47,804 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single $75.00 48,600 49,572 50,563 51,575 52,606 53,658, 54,731 55,826 56,943 58,081 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem $125.00 22,500 22,950 23,409 23,877 24,355 24,842 25,339 25,845 26,362 26,890 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units $25.00 7,200 7,344 7,491 7,641 7,794 7,949 8,108 8,271 8,436 8,605 11 Additional Surface Spaces $40.00 5,280 5,386 5,493 5,603 5,715 5,830 5,946 6,065 6,186 6,310 0 Additional Storage Spaces $50.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss 7.00% ($182,286) ($185,915) ($189,616) ($193,391) ($197,242) ($201,170) ($205,176) ($209,263) ($213,431) ($217,683) Net Revenue 2,421,803 2,470,013 2,519,186 2,569,343 2,620,504 2,672,687 2,725,914 2,780,206 2,835,584 2,892,069 Expenses Expense Inflation 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% PUPA Operating Expenses $3,250.00 481,000 500,240 520,250 541,060 562,702 585,210 614,471 645,194 677,454 711,326 Reserve for Replacement $250.00 37,000 38,480 40,019 41,620 43,285 45,016 47,267 49,630 52,112 54,717 Net Operating Income 1,903,803 1,931,293 1,958,917 1,986,664 2,014,517 2,042,461 2,064,177 2,085,382 2,106,018 2,126,025 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1.81 1.84 1.86 1.89 1.92 1.94 1.97 1.99 2.00 2.02 Available for Subordinate Debt 853,372 880,861 908,486 936,233 964,086 992,030 1,013,746 1,034,951 1,055,587 1,075,594 Subordinate Debt Payment 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 Total Debt Service 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.37 1.39 1.41 1.43 1.45 1.47 1.48 1.50 1.51 1.53 Available for Distribution 511,743 539,233 566,858 594,604 622,457 650,401 672,117 693,322 713,958 733,965 Interest Rate and Dent Service Assumptions Amount Rate Amort Payment Tax-Exempt Bonds 15,000,000 5.75% 30 1,050,431 Taxable Bonds 4,880,409 7.00% Int. Only 341,629 Interest only for 30 years, than amortizing through 40 years Total/Average 19,880,409 6.06% 1,392,060 Amortized Payment = 679,988 Middle Creek Village Projected Income Statement Revenue 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Revenue Inflation 2.00% 2,00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Rental Income 2,986,328 3,046,054 3,106,975 3,169,115 3,232,497 3,297,147 3,363,090 3,430,352 3,498,959 3,568,938 Other Income 22,551 23,002 23,462 23,932 24,410 24,899 25,397 25,904 26,423 26,951 Interest Income, Debt Service Reserve, @ 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 12,181 Laundry Income 48,760 49,735 50,730 51,744 52,779 53,835 54,911 56,010 57,130 58,272 54 Covered Parking Spaces - Single 59,243 60,428 61,637 62,869 64,127 65,409 66,717 68,052 69,413 70,801 30 Covered Spaces - Tandem 27,427 27,976 28,535 29,106 29,688 30,282 30,888 31,505 32,136 32,778 24 Covered Spaces - 2 Bedroom Units 8,777 8,952 9,131 9,314 9,500 9,690 9,884 10,082 10,283 10,489 11 Additional Surface Spaces 6,436 6,565 6,696 6,830 6,967 7,106 7,248 7,393 7,541 7,692 0 Additional Storage Spaces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vacancy Loss ($222,019) ($226,443) ($230,954) ($235,556) ($240,250) ($245,038) ($249,922) ($254,904) ($259,985) ($265,167) Net Revenue 2,949,684 3,008,451 3,068,393 3,129,535 3,191,899 3,255,510 3,320,394 3,386,575 3,454,080 3,522,935 Expenses Expense Inflation 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Operating Expenses 746,893 784,237 823,449 864,622 907,853 944,167 981,934 1,021,211 1,062,059 1,104,542 Reserve for Replacement 57,453 60,326 63,342 66,509 69,835 72,628 75,533 78,555 81,697 84,965 Net Operating Income 2,145,338 2,163,887 2,181,602 2,198,403 2,214,211 2,238,715 2,262,927 2,286,809 2,310,324 2,333,429 Tax Exempt Bond Payment 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 1,050,431 DSC on Tax Exempt Bond Payment 2.04 2.06 2.08 2.09 2.11 2.13 2.15 2.18 2.20 2.22 Available for Subordinate Debt 1,094,906 1,113,456 1,131,171 1,147,972 1,163,780 1,188,284 1,212,496 1,236,378 1,259,893 1,282,997 Subordinate Debt Payment 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 341,629 Total Debt Service 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 1,392,060 Total Debt Service Coverage 1.54 1.55 1.57 1.58 1.59 1.61 1.63 1.64 1.66 1.68 Available for Distribution 753,278 771,828 789,542 806,344 822,151 846,655 870,867 894,750 918,264 941,369