Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-16 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session..,, AGENDA EVENING MEETING 6 P.M. TUESDAY, SEPT. 16, 2003 NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation (5 min.) 2. ITEM/TOPIC: Approval of the Aug. 5 and Aug. 19 Evening Minutes (5 min.) 3. George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: Appointment to Fill Vacancy on the Design Review Board (5 min.) 4. John Gulick ITEM/TOPIC: Update on U.S. Forest Service Fuel Mitigation Efforts Phil Bowden (10 min.) BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Phil Bowden, Fire Management Officer for the U.S. Forest Service, is requesting the Vail Town Council provide permission to burn piles of logs (this fall) on Town of Vail owned property known as unit #6 of the Booth Creek Proposed controlled burn area. Unit #6 is located behind the Falls Condominiums in East Vail. There are approximately 36 acres of town- owned property within the USFS boundary designated as part of the unit #6. Multiple agencies have worked throughout the summer cutting and stacking logs to be burned when weather conditions become favorable in this area. Over the past three years, Bowden has updated Council on details of the project, however, the windows of opportunity to utilize live fire were delayed during last summer's drought. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide written permission for the USFS to burn piles of logs on town- owned land in the unit #6 area of the Booth Creek controlled burn area. 5. Kelli McDonald ITEM/TOPIC: Approval of Off-Season Hours for Vail Visitor Centers and Funding Request for Off-Season Signs and Information Signs for Visitor Centers (5 min.) 6. Greg Hall ITEMlTOPIC: I-70 Noise Discussion (1 hr.) Steve Wright 7. Pam Brandmeyer ITEM/TOPIC: Request for Funding for Set-Up and Take-Down of the Vail Kirk Hansen Ice Dome for the 2003-04 Winter Season and Discussion of Interest by Vail Junior Hockey Association and Western Eagle County Metropolitan Recreation District and/or Eagle County to Purchase Bubble and Relocate to a Temporary Site at Miller Ranch (20 min.) 8. Matt Mire ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 10, Series 2003, a Resolution to Roll- ~. . Judy Camp Forward to 2004 Unspent Funds from 2003 Relating to I-70 Noise Mitigation and Indoor Recreation/Gymnastics Facility (5 min.) 9. Judy Camp ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2003, 2004 Budget (20 min.) 10. Judy Camp ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2003, Supplemental Appropriation for the 2003 Budget (20 min.) 11. Russell Forrest ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2003, Vail Memorial Park rezoning re: amending the official zoning map of the Town of Vail for Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian from natural area preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review, Approve or Deny First Reading of Ordinance 22, Series of 2003. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Vail Town Council reviewed the proposed design for the Vail Memorial Park June 3 and voted to allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on town-owned land. On August 20 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to "staff" approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission approvals have occurred. On September 8 the Planning and Environmental Commission voted to approve the minor subdivision and conditional use permit for the memorial park. They also voted to recommend to the Town Council that they approve the proposed rezoning of the Park to Outdoor Recreation District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the Town Council approve Ordinance 22, Series of 2003, subject to the criteria and findings in section IX of the attached staff memorandum. 12. Matt Gennett ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2003, an ordinance amending Sections 12-61-96., Housing (H) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-76-18B., Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7C- 14B., Commercial Core 2 (CC2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7D-11 B., Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7E-13B., Commercial Service Center (CSC) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7H-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-71-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; and 12-8E-5B, Ski Base Recreation-2 (SBR-2), Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays Vail Town Code to regulate the outdoor display of merchandise, within all zone districts listed above except Core 3 (CC3) and Commercial Service Center (CSC), to an eight month period of April .. 1 to December 1, annually, and setting forth details for all aforementioned zone districts in regard thereto. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with conditions, or deny Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2003, on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Community Development Department has conducted numerous meetings with the merchant community, and received supportive input. The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) held a public meeting on this request August 11, 2003, at which the PEC forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Town Council as they decided outdoor displays are not a visual issue. A first reading of this ordinance went before Council September 2, 2003, where it was tabled in order for staff to provide more clarity regarding the distinction in language between the separate groups of zone districts potentially affected by this zone district. A copy of staff's memo (8/11/03) to the PEC has been attached for reference. 13. Russell Forrest ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. An ordinance repealing and re-enacting Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2001, providing for the major amendment of Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort, and amending the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 36 in accordance with Chapter 12- 9A, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (40 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, on second reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, amends Special Development District No. 36 to allow for the redevelopment of the existing Chateau at Vail and Vail Amoco site. The proposal includes 118 accommodation units, 22 fractional fee club units, 34 Type III Employee Housing Units, 18 condominiums, retail and restaurant uses, conference and meeting rooms, and a spa and health club. On May 6, 2003, the Town Council voted to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, on first reading. Second reading has been table numerous times to allow the applicant and staff to meet the required conditions of first reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. The modifications to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, are outlined in the staff memorandum. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, on second reading. 14. Russell Forrest ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003. An ordinance amending the official zoning map for the Town of Vail in accordance with Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 5, Zoning Map; Rezoning Lot 9A, Vail village 2nd filing, from the Heavy Service zone district to the Public Accommodation zone district. (5 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, on second reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On May 6 the Town Council approved on first reading Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, an ordinance rezoning Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing from Heavy Service zone district to Public Accommodation zone district, in accordance with Section 12-3-7, Vail Town Code. The rezoning is in association with the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort, as outlined in Ordinance No, 9, Series of 2003.Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, has been tabled numerous times to allow the applicant and staff to meet the conditions of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. The modifications to Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, are outlined in the staff memorandum. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, on second reading. 15. George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2003, an ordinance amending the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map to rezone Lots 1 & 2, Mill Creek Subdivision from Natural Area Preservation (NAP) District to Ski Base Recreation 2 (SBR-2) District and Lots P3 & J, Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing from Public Accommodation (PA) District to Parking (P) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2003. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On Aug. 11 the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the request to rezone Lots 1 & 2 Mill Creek Subdivision and Lots P3 & J, Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing to Ski Base Recreation District and Parking District, respectively. Upon review of the requests, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0 to forward a recommendation of approval of the rezoning requests to the Vaii Town Council. A copy. of the staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated August 11, 2003, has been attached for reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2003, on second reading. 16. Kirk Hansen ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report (10 min.) • Approval to purchase seven Ford Explorers to replace Saab leased patrol cars for $167,000. 17. Adjournment (10:25 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 BEGIN AT 2 P.M. ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2003 IN THE TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 6 P.M. ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2003 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. VAIL TOWN COUNCIL Evening Meeting Tuesday, August 5, 2003 6:00 P.M. The regularly scheduled Vail Town Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday August 5, 2003 by Mayor Ludwig Kurz. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ludwig Kurz, Rod Slifer, Mayor Pro-Tem Dick Cleveland Diana Donovan Bill Jewitt Greg Moffet ABSENT: Chuck Ogilby STAFF PRESENT: Pam Brandmeyer, Interim Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Caroline Bradford of the Eagle River Watershed Counncil provided a brief update on sand mitigation efforts along Black Gore Creek, noting that progress is being made as a result of newly installed sediment basins. Bradford also invited a representative from the Town Council to participate in a meeting with Congressman Brad Udall and his staff at 10:30 a.m. on Aug. 13. Councilmember Diana Donovan volunteered to attend as a back up to Councilman Chuck Ogilby. Richard Kent, president of the Scorpio Condominium Association, located along West Meadow Drive, asked if the Town Council was investigating formation of an Urban Renewal Authority that would include properties along Meadow Drive, In addition, Kent inquired if a companion blight study had been approved. He also expressed the association's interest in adding additional protections that would prevent condemnation of property for development by a third parry. In response to Kent's questions, Mayor Ludwig Kurz said the short answer to the first two questions is "no" and "no". Gwen Scapello described a recent outdoor dining experience along East Meadow Drive in which noise from a town bus interrupted her ability to have a conversation with the other dining guests. Noting the town's award of a federal grant for new buses, Scalpello urged the town to make plans to purchase quieter buses. 'The second item on the agenda was presentation of the 2003 Vail Great Commercial Gardens contest. The award for best flower displays was given to two winners: the Hotel Gasthof Gramshammer and Vail Cascade Resort and Spa In addition, the Town of Vail was presented with the Cindy Brennan Award for Garden Excellence. The contest also recognized 18 other businesses for their distinctive flower displays. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda, July Meeting Minutes. Greg Moffet moved to approve the meeting minutes for the July 1 and July 15 meetings with one correction. Diana Donovan seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The fourth item on the agenda was a Fire Services Update. Mayor Ludwig Kurz provided an update on the Council's decision-making path as it relates to fire services in Vail. With decisions spanning from March 18 to July 21, Council has voted to pursue design of a fire station on the Hud Wirth site in West Vail; pursue an election in November to fund the station as well as a remodel of the Main Vail station; and to pursue consolidated fire services with the Eagle River Fire Protection District, among other decisions. After receiving a proposal from the Eagle River Fire Protection District to fund Vail's fire operations and its capital improvements fora 3.8 mill levy transfer, he said the Council directed staff to prepare an additional ballot question for the November election. However, during an executive session on July 21, Kurz said the Council learned that a consolidation ballot question and mill levy transfer would be better suited for a May election sponsored by the Eagle River Fire Protection District. In the interim, the Council has directed staff to explore contracting with the district for fire services. with a target date of January 1. Other steps to take place include the drafting of a letter of understanding, apre-inclusion agreement and a financial analysis to determine if a consolidation is favorable to Vail, he said. Councilman Bill Jewitt noted that if an election were held in May to consolidate fire services via the transfer of 3.8 mills, there would be no additional taxes for Vail property owners, He noted the Council had previously contemplated asking voters for a property tax increase to fund the fire station improvements. Councilman Dick Cleveland noted the possibility of additional efficiencies in the form of a reduction in the overall mill levy for fire services should the Beaver Creek Metro District join in the consolidation effort. The fifth item on the agenda was a Request to Participate in a Joint Study to Explore Consolidated Fire and Emergency Medical Service. Several Councilmembers expressed concern. Dick Cleveland, for example, said he preferred to focus on moving ahead with fire service consolidation discussions with the Eagle River Fire Protection District, noting that a $30,000 study on emergency medical services could negatively impact that momentum. Additionally, Cleveland shared feedback from a board member of the Eagle County Ambulance District who suggested the issues have been studied previously and that a new study would be a waste of money. Also expressing concern was Bill Jewitt, who said he preferred to know the levels of participation from other cost-share partners before committing Town of Vail funds. Jewitt also questioned whether the study would 2 be impartial, given the extensive fire services background of the recommended consultant. Diana Donovan expressed concerns about the scope of services outlined in the proposal, which she described as too generic. During the public comment period, retired physician Tom Steinberg said introduction of the ambulance discussion would confuse the public and possibly cause the town to lose a vote to consolidate fire services. Steinberg further criticized the town, saying the staff influenced the outcome of an earlier study by directing the consultant to mention the ambulance district and a possible consolidation. Steinberg said the town also failed to involve the ambulance district director in previous discussions. Next to speak was Fred Morrison of the Eagle County Ambulance District. Morrison invited the Town Council and staff to attend an Aug 21 board meeting of the Ambulance District to discuss results of the earlier study. The remaining speakers, Dr. Chip Woodland and Dr. Larry Gall of Vail Valley Medical Center, expressed concerns about diminished patient care if firefighter duties were merged with paramedics.. After a lengthy discussion, Greg Moffet moved to table the staff's request to fund up to $10,000 to participate in a joint study to explore consolidated fire and emergency medical service for further discussion at the August 19"' Council meeting. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The sixth item on the agenda was an update from Tayor Hawes, a staff member representing Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Water Quality and Quantity Committee (NWCCOG-QQ). The Council received an update on three water-related issues. First, Hawes described provisions of Referendum A, which will appear on the November election ballot. The measure, supported by Gov. Bill Owens, would authorize $2 billion in bonding authority for water infrastructure and improvements. According to Hawes, most Western Slope organizations have expressed opposition to the measure including the board of the NWCCOG-QQ among the objections is how the ballot measure has pitted Western slope interests against the Eastern slope, she said, due to the absence of mitigation provisions. Taylor said her organization will prepare a white paper to include pros and cons, which will be distributed at a later date. Mayor Ludwig Kurz noted receipt of correspondence from Eagle County Commissioner Arn Menconi who has asked the Vail Town Council to consider a resolution in opposition of Referendum A. Councilmembers expressed interest in taking a position on the ballot measure after reviewing the white paper from NWCCOG. In addition to Referendum A, Hawes provided an update on a statewide water supply initiative, which will include roundtable discussions on water supply and demand analysis within Colorado's eight water basins. Councilmembers forwarded Chuck Ogilby's name to be nominated for participation. Lastly, Hawes distributed an information sheet on the Colorado River Return Reconnaissance Study, also known as The Big Straw. The Study, which will be completed by November, will evaluate three different paths for bringing water from the Utah State line to the Front Range. The seventh item on the agenda was the Eagle County Master Plan Update. Rebecca Leonard, senior planner for Eagle County, provided an overview of the county's master plan update, which will include a series of community meetings in September and 3 January. She distributed a list of Planning Commission members and Technical Advisory Committee members and encouraged the town and its citizens to contact the members to provide feedback. The plan was written and adopted in 1996. Since then, numerous technological improvements have been implemented that will enable the update to be more user friendly, she said. A draft of the master plan update will be circulated in early spring. During discussion, Councilman Greg Moffet asked Leonard to distribute a copy of the policies that were established in 1996. The eighth item on the agenda was a presentation of the 2002 Audit Report. Mike Jenkins, a partner with McMahan and Associates, presented the 2002 audit report to the Town Council. The town had $20.5 million in available resources in 2002. General fund expenditures were $918,000 lower than projected for the year due to the combined impact of conservative budgeting and unfilled staffing vacancies, according to the audit report. Overall, Jenkins said the town had a "clean" audit, meaning that the town's finances are presented fairly and that the Council can rely upon them for decision- making. Of particular note, said Jenkins, is the town's solid base of available resources in its general fund, which was represented by fund balances of 40 percent of 2002 general fund expenditures. Due to reporting changes required by the Government Accounting Standard Board (GASB), Jenkins said the financial statements contained in next year's audit will be presented in a format that more closely mirrors private sector financials. The ninth item on the agenda was a review of Council policy direction to the Vail Parking Task Force, regarding 2003-04 Ski Season Objectives. At the suggestion of Councilman Greg Moffet, the Council adopted five parking policies to be used by the Vail Parking Task Force in developing recommendations for the 2003-04 ski season. The policies are as follows: --serve our core markets (skiers, shoppers, employees) --manage the yield --simplify the product --design the product so it is revenue neutral --increase safety During discussion, Councilmembers Greg Moffet and Bill Jewitt expressed a desire to simplify the system. Councilmember Diana Donvan agreed, suggesting the town consider directing vehicles into specific parking spots for added efficiency. Donovan also noted an interest in evaluating parking programs from other communities. She said decisions must be made based on fact and not on emotion. Councilman Rod Slifer suggested the need to understand and accommodate Vail's customers and their needs, such as returning to the park free after 3 program. After learning from Public Works Director Greg Hall that returning to the free after 3 could result in a revenue loss of over $300,000, Councilman Bill Jewitt inquired about the possibility of providing a tiered pricing system which would enable free parking to those who amve after 3, while vehicles already in the structures would continue to be charged. Jewitt also urged the town to continue to move forward with a temporary parking solution on the Ford Park softball fields for this coming ski season. Councilman Dick Cleveland suggested consideration of a single parking rate, such as $8, in addition to other parking products. 4 Mayor Ludwig Kurz, who chairs the Parking task Force, said the group has adequately evaluated customer wants and needs. He said the Task Force meets at 2 p.m. on August 6 to continue its discussions. He also noted a recent announcement by the North Cherry Creek neighborhood in Denver that will require paid parking in areas surrounding the Cherry Creek Mall. He also said the Vail Parking Task Force will serve as the applicant for a conditional use permit for temporary parking on the Ford Park softball fields. The tenth item on the agenda was an approval request for the Two Year Construction Phase and Budget for Vail Village Streetscape Plan. Diana Donovan made athree-part motion to continue moving forward with the Vail village Streetscape project. Greg Moffet seconded the motion. The motion included approval of snowmelt in limited areas, directing staff to enter into a contract to complete the final design for phasing in 2004 and 2005 and directing the design team to carry out a process to coordinate the design and construction sequence with impacted parties. A vote was taken on the motion and the motion passed 5-1, Bill Jewitt opposing. The Council declined a staff request to finalize a budget for the project, which is estimated at $3.6 million in 2004 and $3.5 million in 2005. Instead, the Council Streetscape Committee will be asked to forward a budget recommendation to the full group. During discussion, Councilman Greg Moffet said he would find it hard to support the plan unless adjacent property owners contribute financially, while Councilman Bill Jewitt, who has been steadfast in his opposition to snowmelt, said the project has taken on a life of its own at a time when dollars are tight. Noting the difficulty in funding the project through a Local Improvement District, Councilman Rod Slifer expressed interest in reviewing other cost-share solutions. Slifer also suggested a modification to the construction sequencing for Gore Creek Drive. During the public comment period, Kaye Ferry of the Vail Chamber and Business Association, said the Council should have established a budget at the outset of the project and should have done more to include the business community in the funding discussions. Also, Sybill Navas, administrator of the Vail Commission on Special Events, urged the Council to make a decision early enough so the project can get underway in April to minimize impacts to businesses and special events. The eleventh item on the agenda was a Market Analysis and Business Plan Consultant Team Selection for the Vail Conference Center. During discussion, Councilmember Diana Donovan inquired about how the contract would address a potential outcome if the firm recommended not to build a conference center. Councilman Rod Slifer, who chairs the Advisory Committee, said the recommended firm, HVS, has used its analysis to recommend "no" to some projects. The company has conducted studies in Colorado Springs, Denver and Santa Fe, among other cities. The recommendation to hire HVS was presented by Scott Proper, a member of the advisory committee, who said the group initially reviewed eight proposals, they interviewed three firms before recommending HVS. Following the presentation, Greg Moffet motioned to accept the recommendation from the Conference Center Advisory Committee to direct the interim town manager to enter into negotiations for a contract not to exceed $100,000 with HVS International to prepare a marketing analysis and business plan for the Vail conference center. Rod Slifer seconded the motion. A vote was taken on the motion and the motion passes, 6-0. 5 The twelfth item on the agenda was the Dobson Ice Arena Smoke Management Discussion. Dick Cleveland moved to direct the town staff to move forward in entering into a contract with Beaudin Ganze Consulting Engineers to engineer a smoke management system for Dobson Ice Arena. Greg Moffet seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion was approved 6-0. Fire Chief John Gulick stated the $15,573 contract will be used to design a system that will keep smoke eight feet above the floor, thus allowing for the safe and orderly evacuation of the arena. The modifications will ultimately increase the occupancy load for the arena from 1,000 persons up to 3,000. The funding will come from the town's capital projects budget. The thirteenth item on the agenda was a Property Conveyance to Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. Ordinance #17, Series of 2003, was presented to the Council on first reading, authorizing the conveyance of fee title to two parcels of real property in the town of Vail adjacent to the property commonly known as the Old Town Shops and legally described as Part of Tract D, Vail Village Second Filing. Greg Moffet moved to pass ordinance #17 on first reading. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. Town Attorney Matt Mire explained that the parcels were not conveyed with the Old Town Shop parcel and are contiguous to that land. The additional parcels are required for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District to expand their operation. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0. The fourteenth item on the agenda was Resolution #7, Series of 2003, a resolution approving bylaws and an intergovernmental agreement with Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency. In presenting the resolution, Human Resources Director John Power said the agreement will save the town considerably in its liability insurance costs. Greg Moffet moved to approve Resolution #7. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the. motion was approved, 6-0. The fifteenth item on the agenda was Resolution #8, Series of 2003, a resolution clarifying height calculations in the Lionshead Mixed Use Zone District. George Ruher, Chief planner in the Community Development Department, said the clarification preserves the previous policies for building height in Lionshead which is 71 ft. for the average maximum height of any building and 82.5 feet as the absolute maximum height of any building. Ruher further stated the resolution would clarify the methodology used to calculate height in the Lionshead Mixed Use Zone Districts. Ruher stated the change resolved several methodology questions that have been raised since adoption of the 1998 Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Greg Moffet and seconded by Rod Slifer. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0. The sixteenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Interim Town Manager Brandmeyer stated she had nothing to add to the submitted report. 6 As there was no further business, Greg Moffet motion to adjourn. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 7 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL Evening Meeting Tuesday, August 19, 2003 6:00 P.M. The regularly scheduled Vail Town Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 by Mayor Ludwig Kurz. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ludwig Kurz Rod Slifer, Mayor Pro-Tem Dick Cleveland Diana Donovan Bill Jewitt Greg Moffet Chuck Ogilby STAFF PRESENT: Pam Brandmeyer, Interim Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Lou Meskimen shared his observations about I-70 noise issues, which was a common complaint during the recent town-sponsored picnic at Bighorn Park, he said. Noting that signs have been installed at the Genesee Hill and Georgetown areas reminding truckers that engine brake mufflers are required, Meskimen suggested installation of similar signs in Vail. Councilmembers informed Meskimen that a sign has been recently installed at mile marker 180 in East Vail. Two additional suggestions were offered by Meskimen. One is to circulate a petition to request the speed limit on I-70 be lowered through Vail. The second is to increase noise enforcement along I-70 in Vail either by the Sheriffs Office, the Vail Police Department or the Colorado State Patrol. Lastly, Meskimen suggested use of the Golf Course Clubhouse parking lot for ski season parking. Al Martens, owner of a unit in the Scorpio Condominiums at 131 West Meadow Dr., distributed pictures to the Town Council illustrating the impact to his property that will result from construction of the Four Seasons resort. Martens said the project would block his views. The second item on the agenda was the Introduction of New Town of Vail Manager. Mayor Ludwig Kurz introduced Stan Zemler as Vail's new Town Manager. Zemler will begin full-time employment with the town on Oct. 6. Kurz said the hiring of Zemler represents one of the more far-reaching decisions of the Town Council. He thanked Human Resources Director John Power for his assistance as well as the entire town staff for their hard work during the seazch process. In particulaz, Kurz thanked Interim Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer for "holding it all together." He then read a passage from an editorial in the Boulder Daily Camera as follows: "We can't deny that Zemler and Vail are a good match. The community offers an outlet for his knowledge of environmental and economic issues, a great setting for his love of the outdoors, and a new management challenge. Whether Stan Zemler spends the rest of his working life in Vail, moves on to another assignment or finds his way back to this area, the community will be better off for his service. Boulder certainly is." In welcoming Zemler to Vail, Kurz also thanked members of a citizens committee who assisted in the interview process. Zemler said he was grateful for the opportunity to be in Vail and he looked forward to the challenges ahead. The third item on the agenda was Vail Valley Foundation Funding Request for the 2009 World Alpine Ski Championships. Councilmembers offered support to a request by Ceil Folz of the Vail Valley Foundation to provide a contribution of $800,000 over a 4-to 5-year payment period as well as in-kind services associated with hosting three World Championships simultaneously in 2009 (Alpine, Freestyle and Snowboazd). Venue decisions by the International Ski Federation will be made next June 5. Throughout the summer and fall, Folz said she has been contacting key government and community groups and has received support and encouragement to bid on the events, which aze projected to have an economic impact of over $30 million locally. Folz provided a handout that summazizes results from the 1999 World Alpine Ski Champions as well as other advantages in pursuing the championships in 2009. Following Council's informal approval of the request, Mayor Ludwig Kurz distributed a draft letter addressed to the International Ski Federation offering the town's endorsement of the Vail Valley Foundation's bid for the 2009 championships. The fourth item on the agenda was Review of Contribution Requests. Greg Moffet moved to table the item to the September 2, 2003 meeting. Dick Cleveland seconded the motion. The Council voted 7-0 to table this item to the Sept. 2 meeting. The fifth item on the agenda was Housing Enforcement Discussion. After reviewing current policies and additional options that would strengthen town enforcement measures to ensure occupancy of employee housing units (EHU) within the town, the Council directed staff to pursue three initiatives as follows: 1) establish a process to verify annual tenant information which is provided by the property owner during an annual affidavit process required by the town; 2) require properties to update older deed restrictions to the most current one when a significant building permit is applied for; and 3) encourage and publicize aggressive enforcement efforts. A fourth option, to revise the current deed restriction to provide more stringent enforcement efforts, was deemed to be unnecessary by the Council due, in part, to the small number of dispersed employee housing units that have been created since the last enforcement update to the EHU ordinance in 2000. Since then, only 7 units have been created, which prompted Steve Lindstrom of the Vail Local Housing Authority, to suggest the need for increased incentives by the town, such as allowing an owner to "buy-out" their deed restriction at fair market value. Councilman Bill Jewitt suggested exploration of ahousing-in-lieu fee in exchange for additional square footage in a home. However, with the town's acquisition of the Timber Ridge apartments and construction now underway for rental units at Middle Creek, several Councilmembers, led by Greg Moffet, said the town has done much in the last six months to address the need for smaller units. Instead, Moffet said he'd prefer to look for ways to create incentives to provide larger housing units for families. The enforcement discussion was requested by Councilmember Diana Donovan who has often said there are "flagrant abuses" throughout town by owners who leave the units empty or use the space for purposes other than employee housing. Anyone found to be in violation of the EHU ordinance faces a penalty of up to $999 per day of violation and up to 180 days in jail. Earlier during the discussion, Vail Housing Coordinator Nina Timm explained the town has varying degrees of enforcement ability, due to updates of the EHU ordinance in 1992, 1994 and 2000. While there are 441 approved EHUs within the town, 254 of those do not require the units to be occupied, according to the town's interpretation of the ordinance in place at the time of approval. During the public comment period, Kaye Ferry said she explored putting an EHU in her home and found it to be a cumbersome process with no additional benefit to the property owner. She said she agreed with Greg Moffet's observations and encouraged the town to explore affordable housing opportunities for families. The sixth item on the agenda was the Second Reading, Four Seasons Special Development District. Greg Moffet moved to table second reading of an ordinance to allow for the redevelopment of the Chateau at Vail and the Vail Amoco site. Rod Slifer seconded the motion. At the applicant's request, the Council voted 7-0 to table the item. The ordinance was tabled to Sept. 16 to address conditions of approval as they relate to off-site improvements and a memorandum of understanding with the Town of Vail regarding public improvements. The applicant, Nicolet Island Development, Inc., proposes to build a Four Seasons Resort to include 118 accommodation units, 22 condominiums, 34 employee housing units, retail and restaurant uses, conference and meeting rooms and a spa and health club. The ordinance was approved on first reading May 6. Prior to the vote to table the matter for the third time, Councilman Dick Cleveland expressed frustration in the inability to resolve the issues. In response;, T.J. Brink of the development company, said he's continuing to work with a representatives from Nine Vail Road to find solutions to accommodate a request for additional parking spaces for the condominium property to satisfy an arrangement that occurred when the two properties were built. Councilman Greg Moffet encouraged the two parties to work out a comprornise. The seventh item on the agenda was the Second Reading, Rezoning of Alpine Standard's Property. Greg Moffet moved to table second reading of an ordinance to rezone the Vail Amoco site from the Heavy Service zone district to the Public Accommodations zone district. Dick Cleveland seconded the motion. Also at the applicant's request, the Council voted 7-0 to table The ordinance was tabled to Sept. 16 to accompany other approvals necessary for construction of the Four Seasons Resorts which will replace the Vail Amoco station and the Chateau at Vail near the Main Vail roundabout. For more information, contact ,Allison Ochs in the Community Development Department at 479-2369. The eighth item on the agenda was the Second Reading, Conveyance of Property to Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. Greg Moffet moved to approve second reading of an ordinance conveying two parcels of land to the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. The Council voted 7-0 to approve second reading. Town Attorney Matt Mire explained the additional parcels are required to enable the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District to expand its plant. For details, contact Mire at 479-2107. The ninth item on the agenda was the Second Reading, Amendment of Town Code to Define Terms used in Determination of Building Height. Dick Cleveland moved to approve a second reading of an ordinance amending the town code as it addresses height calculations for primary roof ridgeline, primary roof, dormer and interpolated glade. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. The Council voted unanimously, 7-0 to approve the motion. The changes clarify building height calculations and address questions that have surfaced regarding properties in the Lionshead Mixed Use Zone Districts. The amendment preserves previous policies for building height in Lionshead which is 71 ft, for the average maximum height of any building and 82.5 feet as the absolute maximum height of any building. The tenth item on the agenda was the Discussion to Participate in Joint Study to Explore Consolidated Fire and Emergency Medical Service. Greg Moffet moved to direct the interim town manager to decline participation in a joint study to explore consolidated fire and Emergency Medical Service. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. The Council voted 7-0 to approve the motion.. In making the motion to decline, Councilman Greg Moffet noted the town is already actively discussing consolidation with the Eagle River Fire Protection District. He suggested that an additional study on yet another consolidation would muddy the issue. The eleventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. During a review of the Town Manager's report, Councilmembers asked for additional background information as it relates to the town's application for a Treasurer's Deed to acquire 6.36 acres of land north of Cortina Lane. Community Development Director Russell Forrest said the property was designated as a high priority acquisition in the 1994 Open Lands Plan. Also, after reviewing an update on enforcement provisions of the town's false alarm ordinance, Councilmembers directed Fire Chief John Gulick and his department to issue a summons to repeat offenders when education fails to achieve the desired results. For additional information, contact Town Attorney Matt Mire at 479-2107. As there was no further business, Greg Moffet motioned to adjourn. Bill Jewitt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk K JACK TAYLOR State Senator P.O. Box 775656 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 Home: (970) 879-1880 Capitol: (303) 866-5292 Business: (970) 879-3600 Senate Chamber State of Colorado Denver REFERENDUM A OPPOSITION August 7, 2003 (From a Denver fires : Canference Denver attended by 12 Legislators - 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans. 9 from::the West Slope and 3 from the. East Slope):. REFERENDUM A/SENATE BILL 236 COMMITTEES Chairman of: Finance Vice-Chairman of: Agriculture, Natural Resources & Energy Member of: Water Resources Review Legislative Audit Tourism Board • State Senator Jack Taylor -- Northwest Colorado -- Vice Chair, Senate Agriculture Committee • Each of us here today firmly believes we: • Need more storage capacity -- in all of Colorado • And we have worked hard to that end • However, we are gathered here • In opposition to Referendum A • Because of some serious flaws • Let me enumerate some those flaws: • Others will give you more details 1) No Basin of Origin or mitigation protection. If water is not protected, beautiful valleys will not stay green. 2) Blank check -- because we don't know what projects this money will be used on. 3) If Referendum Apasses -- it will create law that cannot be complied with. a) A project under construction by 2005 • Can't get permits that fast -- many are federal requirements recycled paper 2 4) Financing is NOT, and has NOT been, the problem. • Revenue streams to pay debt is the problem • Referendum A will NOT solve that problem • Water and Power Authority has UNLIMITED bonding capability ~ ~° +,~ r! • Referendum A is NOT NEEDED ~ ~: ~~ i ~ %~~"'"~ ~~= ~` ~~`~~'~~~'~~) 5) Proponents claim public/private partnerships can be formed under Referendum A: • AGAI N • Water and Power Authority CAN DO, • AND HAS DONE, public/private partnerships 6) Referendum A will NOT help agriculture. • Because agriculture generally CANNOT provide the necessary revenue stream to pay the DEBT 7) No legislative oversight. • For a check and balance system 8) Politicizes water issues. • And these water decisions should NOT be made in a political atmosphere ~, ~ 1 v , _ __._-_ ... Finaf Draft Table 2. Projected State Revenue from the Video Lottery Program ($ in millions) t` 9tat ea- r • 200¢=20fl5~ 2005-2006. 40Cr' 2407 • Revenue from VIL`T' Program VLT Revenue after Prizes 591.2 8150.5 5165.6 Less: Comtnissic-n to Racetrack Operators '35.6 -58'7 -64'6 Equals State Share of Revenue 55.6 91.8 101.0 Less: Administrative Costs -9.4 -13.6 -14.8 Plus: VLT' License Fees 1.3 0.0 0.0 State Revenue Available for Distribution ~ 547.5 $78.2 $86'2 Distribufiian o~ Stott R.eveaue' Local Parks attd Recreation 818,5 831.3 534.1 • State Parks 4,6 7.8 8.6 LOCO 3,8 6.1 8.l TourismPromation ?0.6 25.0 25.0 Public School Construction 0 8'0 10'0 'T'otal Distributions $4'7.5 578,2 S$6.2 -- - *The video Zortery program. x~ould begin November 1, 2004. Revenue projections unr~ r to - budgetyear dre based on eight months of operation. PROJECTIONS OF REVENUE FROM CURREIJT Ld1"I'1rRY GAMES SUGGEST T~pTLOTTERY RBVE1ti'[JE WILL NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO REACH TIC GQCO CAP DURING EACH OI'Tl-fir NEXT THRE~'YEf.RS. Under the proposal, LOCO reveriuc is prof ected to increase each year and reach its cap.. U to X25 million r year will, be set aside for Colorado tourism promotion. Assuming that a. total 0 2, ) VLTs are licensed at racetrae sn o 04-OS u get year, an additional $1.25 million will be available for tourism promotion from the one-tame license fee of ~50U per VLT. Funding for public school construction occurs only afrcr the tourism promotion fund reaches its $25 million annua] cap. Expenditures. The Colorado Lottery Commission will be responsible for regulating the video lottery program, including issuing licenses, approving g~Ies, and cvntrall,ing the number anal type of VLT machines. T)aese responsibilities are expected to require 16 new state employaes and cast about $1.5 million per year for salaries and Qther expenses. An additional fee of approximately $12 nvllion per year will be paid to private VLT EQU ~~MExT AIVD technology providers to place the VLTs at the racetracks and to connect each VLT to a central computer system. The sales cornlni.ssion paid to the racetracks where the VLTs are placed is estinsated to be nearly .-0ugssll5,20033r:4D3 ~:INRPORT8L1[M~4NAG~ll~~TZ'ANBERRY'.i!!9•a89_/•AC7CC~+RgBR _ - Svc ~ d•os ~~,~ a~ GC.IL.ORADO TOURISM 11'~ ITIATI'~tE VOTE YES ON AMENDMENT 33 NOVEMBER j,~,rH VYWW.TOURlSMMEANSJ~B.GOM COLORADO TOURISM INITIATIVE VOTE YES ON AMENDMENT 33 LYNEA ~~ 190 E. 9TH AVE, Su17'E 350 COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR DENVER, CO $0203 OFFICE (303) 831-0151 CELL (303) 5798794 F,vC (303) 831-0875 LYNEA@~-YPIEAHANSEN. COM 1~YW W.TOURISMMEANS,IOBS.COM Colorado Tourism Initiative The Colorado Tourism industry is facing a critical challenge. Tourism is vital to Colorado. Consistently ranked as the 2nd or 3rd leading sector of our economy, the industry employs more than 212,000 workers and contributes billions of dollars to the Colorado economy every year. Moreover, the industry has broad impacts Colorado cities and towns depend upon a strong tourism industry to help fuel the sales tax revenue upon which their budgets so heavily depend. Today, however, many segments of our tourism industry are facing significant challenges that must be addressed if we are to maintain our economic vitality. A sagging national economy, drought, forest fires, chronic wasting disease and other factors have kept visitors away from Colorado. Based upon tourism's impact to the Colorado economy, even a 10% decline in Colorado tourism would mean $700 million less in tourism spending, and up to X55 million less in tax revenues to local governments already facing large budget deficits. Unfortunately, Colorado had experienced blows to our tourism industry even before last summer's drought and fires. In 1993, Colorado voters rejected the continuation of the tax-funded State Tourism Board. The consequences of this funding loss were measured in a study conducted by Longwoods International: "In just 2 years following the loss of a state tourism office, the number of overnight pleasure trips declined by 2.7 million, a 30% decrease in market share. Adjusted for inflation, pleasure travel in Colorado dropped by 15%, a decline of $847 million." • "In 1997 alone, the loss in market share cost Colorado residents approximately $2.4 billion in foregone tourism .revenue, and over $134 million in lost tax revenue." To address this significant drop in revenue, in 2000 the state reestablished a tourism promotion office with limited funding for marketing Colorado. Correspondingly, tourism began to increase slightly in 2001. Today, however, a tight state budget means there is less money available to continue tourism promotion at a level sufficient to attract new visitors to Colorado. This financial constraint, coupled with the challenges currently facing state tourism, has exacerbated an already tenuous situation. Meeting this challenge requires a creative approach. The Longwoods International study of the Colorado tourism industry clearly illustrates the need to increase funding for tourism promotion: "The weak business outlook and consumer reticence about taking longer distance trips argue strongly for continued state support and funding for tourism marketing efforts ... Colorado needs to consider reestablishing a national marketing presence, in large part to broaden the visitor base and ensure growth for the future." - Longwoods International, May 2002 The need for increased promotion is clear. However, tightening state budgets mean that there is less state money available for tourism promotion, and every tax dollar spent on tourism marketing is one dollar less that could be spent on other priority funding needs -like education and transportation. Moreover, in 1993 Colorado voters clearly rejected a special tax specifically earmarked for tourism promotion, making the passage of new tax revenue highly unlikely. In response to this challenge, a grass roots coalition of tourism industry leaders are sponsoring a unique initiative that will create millions of dollars in new revenue for tourism promotion -without raising taxes. The Plan. • This initiative would authorize the Colorado Lottery Commission to implement electronic lottery games at current gaming locations in Colorado. Video Lottery Terminals (VLTs) simply allow a user to play an electronic version of the same scratch ticket games currently available at retail Stores. "Winners" do not receive cash; rather they "win" a paper receipt that can be redeemed for cash at a retail outlet... just like normal, paper Lottery scratch tickets. • Under this plan, VLTs would be limited to locations where gaming is currently allowed: licensed casinos, class B horse racetracks and greyhound racetracks. • The Colorado Lottery Commission would have the authority to approve application for 500 video terminals, issue and revoke licenses, approve games, control the number and type of VLT machines that maybe used and monitor play from the machines through a central computer system. • The funding plan would sunset in 15 years, giving the voters the opportunity to continue or discontinue the program, or redirect a portion of funds, if necessary, to address emerging issues. • A Fiscal Note prepared by the Colorado Legislative Council projects that in the first full year of operation this program would generate $128 million in revenue after prizes paid. Under this plan 39% of revenues would be retained by sales agents to cover administration, maintenance and commissions. 61 % of revenues would go to the State of Colorado and would be disbursed according to the provisions of the Constitution that established the state lottery. Once the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund reaches its constitutionally mandated cap, spillover funds of $25 million annually would be directed to the Colorado Tourism Promotion Fund. This distribution is outlined below. Pro'ected Revenues millions of dollars ~ Full Year 1 (OS-06) Distributable Proceeds: Conservation Trust Fund $31.3 State Parks $7.8 Great Outdoors Colorado * $6.1 Colorado Tourism Promotion Fund $25 Public School Construction $8 Total Distribution $78.2 * The GOCO statutory cap redirects funds to the Colorado Tourism Promotion Fund This Plan will create $25 million dollars in new revenue to promote Colorado tourism at a critical time -without raising taxes. At the same time providing additional security for Great Outdoors Colorado and the current Lottery beneficiaries. For more information contact Support Colorado's Economy & Environment at 303-831-0151 or SupportColorado@Earthlink.net Facts About The Tourism Initiative MYTH-I FAC T There are 8 locations in Colorado where legal gambling ~ exists today. The three limited stakes gambling towns and This initiative creates a "gambling the 5 horse and dog tracks. If this initiative passes ... those explosion" along the front range. eight locations are the only places these machines could be located. Additionally, the lottery commission is only required to place 500 Video Lottery Terminals at each location- hardly an explosion. The Colorado Lottery Commission appointed by the This will allow 18 year olds to Governor will be responsible for all rule making. This gamble; there will be no bet limit. commission will set the age limit, bet limit, what types of ~ games will be played, as well as being responsible for issuing and revoking licenses. J The petition process does not allow local residents to vote on whether to This initiative only allows VLTs in locations where put a gambling facility in their gaming already occurs. backyard. The whole point of this initiative is to get Colorado's economy going again ... and that helps every community. Most cities and towns in Colorado rely heavily on sales tax Th re will be i t f f th revenues for their budgets ... increasing tourism means ~ l th th t t t i it di i t t e no mpac or ee e rans a es ors spen ng money n e s a e ... a more v s local communities. into more sales tax revenue for the state and local communities. Helping the economy is a rising tide that lifts all boats. Because this initiative amends the Lottery provisions in the Colorado Constitution, specific impact fees could not be implemented without impacting other lottery games, like Lotto and Powerball. ~ Ironically, the same Casino lawyers and lobbyists that oppose this initiative sponsored and lobbied in favor of a bill at the legislature this year that would have taken away Historic Preservation grants would historic preservation funds for -what else? Tourism be reduced. promotion. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. The fact is increased tourism and increased revenue to the I~ state will support historic preservation. And the casinos cannot quantify what - if any -reduction in historic preservation funding will be. j MYTH FACT ~, The tax a ers would not have to a a cent for the Video PY PY Lottery Terminals. The program is self-funding and more The new Video Lottery Terminals than covers any associated costs. The fiscal analysis would cost taxpayers at least $60 produced by the Colorado Legislative Council shows no million initially and then the negative impact to the general fund and no expenditure of ~ machines would have to be replaced tax revenue. The Lottery Commission has full authority to every three years. charge the vendors for the machines. As proof just look at j existing lottery programs ... no tax money is used for the ~ I i technology. That's what opponents of casino gambling said a decade ago. The truth is that there has never been a study that accurately quantified the increase in crime, alcoholism or divorce from gambling (on either side of the debate). Crime rates will skv rocket around the Video Lottery Terminal locations. Horse and dog tracks have been in existence for nearly 50 years, they provide enough parking and have ample rooms at their facilities to accommodate increased visitors. If the casinos are really worried that gambling increases social problems ... then maybe we should explore doing away with the casino gambling that we already have. The racetracks operate 7 days a week approximately, 12 ;This initiative will turn apart-time hours a day and this would not drastically change by racetrack into afull-time casino. adding Video Lottery Terminals. In actuality, adding video lottery terminals to racetracks will also increase local jobs and the city's tax base. i While they may physically resemble one another, there are differences between slots and Video Lottery Machines. Video Lottery Terminals are really With slot machines you put in coins and when you win out just slot machines. comes money. With Video Lottery Terminals, you put in currency and when you win you receive a payout slip that can be redeemed for cash. Video Lottery Terminals much more closely resemble lottery tickets in this manner. Get the facts. Support Colorado's Economy & Environment www.TourismMeansJobs.com (303)831-0151 or (888)TOURISM • SupportColorado@Earthlink.net TOURISM INITIATIVE OFFICIAL BALLOT LANGUAGE The title as designated and fixed by the Board is as follows: AN Al~1ENDMENT TO THE COLOR-ADO CONSTITUTION CONCER'VING THE GENERATION OF ADDITIONAL STATE REVENUES THROUGH THE AUTHORIZATION OF VIDEO LOTTERY TERYIINALS, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, DIRECTING THE LOTTERY COIVI~IISSION TO ALLOW VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS AT DESIGNATED RACETRACK LOCATIONS AND LIMITED GAMING ESTABLISHMENTS; AFTER THE ALLOCATION OF NET PROCEEDS FROM VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLOR4D0 PROGRAM, ALLOCATING UP TO $2~ MILLION OF SUCH NET PROCEEDS IN A FISCAL YEAR TO .~N EXISTING FUND TO PROMOTE TOURISiV1 IN COLORADO: IMPOSING A ONE-TIiVIE $500 LICENSE FEE ON EACH VIDEO LOTTERY TERti1INAL AND ALLOCATING SUCH LICENSE FEES TO THE TOURISM PROMOTION FL1v'D; EXEMPTING NET PROCEEDS AND LICENSE FEES FROM VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS FROM ALL RESTRICTIONS ON SPENDING, REVENUES, AND APPROPRIATIONS; AMID REPEALING THIS MEASURE ON JULY 1, 2019. The ballot title and submission clause as designated and fixed by the Board is as follows: SHALL THERE BE AN AwIENDMENT TO THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION CONCER'VING THE GENERATION OF ADDITIONAL STATE REVENUES THROUGH THE AUTHORIZATION OF VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, DIRECTING THE LOTTERY COMMISSION TO ALLOW VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS AT DESIGNATED RACETRACK LOCATIONS AND LIMITED GAMING ESTABLISHMENTS: AFTER THE ALLOCATION OF NET PROCEEDS FROM VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO PROGRAM, ALLOCATING UP TO $25 MILLION OF SUCH NET PROCEEDS IN A FISCAL YEAR TO AN EXISTING FUND TO PROMOTE TOURISiv1 IN COLORADO; IMPOSING A ONE-TIME $500 LICENSE FEE ON EACH VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINAL AND ALLOCATING SUCH LICENSE FEES TO THE TOURISM PROMOTION FUND; EXEMPTING NET PROCEEDS A1VD LICENSE FEES FRONT VIDEO LOTTERY TER'~IINALS FROM ALL RESTRICTIONS ON SPENDING, REVENUES, AND APPROPRIATIONS; AND REPEALING THIS MEASURE ON JULY 1, 2019? L, Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, A~'~IENDING ARTICLE XVIII, ADDING A NEW SECTION TO READ: SECTION 15. COLORADO TOURIS~I~PRONIOTION PROGRaiVi. (1) IN ORDER TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL FLNDS FOR THE PROMOTION OF COLORADO TOURISM, THE COLORADO LOTTERY COMMISSION [S DIRECTED TO [MPLEiv1ENT THE USE OF VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS AT EXCLUSIVE LOCATIONS. AND THERE IS IMPOSED A LICENSE FEE FOR EACH VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINAL APPROVED FOR USE AT SUCH EXCLUSIVE LOCATIONS, ALL AS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION. (2) AS L'SED IN THIS SECTION, LNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: (a) "COLORADO PROIviOTION REVENUES" MEANS UP TO THE FIRST TWENTY-FIVE MILLION DOLLARS OF NET `LT PROCEEDS IN ANY STATE FISCAL YEAR, AFTER THE ALLOCATION OF PROCEEDS TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE XXVII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND THIS SECTION. (b) "COMMISSION" MEANS THE COLORADO LOTTERY COMMISSION AS ESTABLISHED IN SECTION 24- 3J-207, C.R.S., OR SUCCESSOR STATL`TE. (C) "EXCLUSIVE LOCATIONS" tiiEANS THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: (I) PROPERTIES LICENSED AS RACETRACKS AS OF JANUARY 1, 2003, AND DOING BUSINESS AS ARAPAHOS PARK, CLOVERLEAF GREYHOUND TRACK, MILE HIGH GREYHOLND RACING, POST TIIAIE GREYHOUND RACING, AND PUEBLO GREYHOUND PARK: AND (II) THE LICENSED LIMITED GAMING ESTABLISHhIENTS INTHE CITY OF BLACKHAWK, CENTRAL CITY, AND THE CITY OF CRIPPLE CREEK QUALIFIED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THIS ARTICLE. (CI) "NET VLT PROCEEDS" MEANS ALL PROCEEDS FROM THE OPERATION OF VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS UNDER THE VIDEO LOTTERY PROGRAM, NET OF PRIZES AND EXPENSES OF THE STATE LOTTERY DIVISION, INCLUDING SALES AGENT COMbIISSIONS. REVENUES GENERATED BY THE LICENSE FEE ESTABLISHED BY SUBPARAGRAPH S OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE NET VLT PROCEEDS. (e) "PROMOTION FUND" MEANS THE COLORADO TRAVEL AND TOURISM ADDITIONAL SOURCE FUND AS ESTABLISHED IN SECTION 24-49.7-106, C.R.S., OR SUCCESSOR STATUTE. (~ "SALES AGENT COMMISSION" MEANS THE LESSER OF (I) SIX PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AMOLNT OF CURRENCY AND CREDITS WAGERED, OR (2) THIRTY-NINE PERCENT OF ALL CURRENCY WAGERED LESS THE VALUE OF ALL PAY VOUCHERS ISSUED. {g) "VIDEO LOTTERY PROGRAM" MEANS THE STATE-SUPERVISED LOTTERY PROGRAM MANDATED BY THIS SECTION. (h) "VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINAL" OR "TERMINAL" b1EANS A COMPUTERIZED VIDEO DEVICE THAT, WHEN ACTIVATED BY INSERTION OF CURRENCY IN THE FORti1 OF BILLS, PLAYS A LOTTERY GA:bIE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION AND AWARDS CREDITS, EVIDENCED BY A PRINTED PAY VOUCHER OR AN ELECTRONIC CREDIT REDEEMABLE FOR CASH, ON THE BASIS OF CHANCE. "VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINAL" OR "TERMINAL" DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY MACHINE OR DEVICE REFERRED TO AS A SLOT MIACHINE IN SECTION 9 OF THIS ARTICLE OR A MACHINE THAT DIRECTLY DISPENSES CONS, CURRENCY IN THE FORM OF BILLS, TOKENS, OR ANY ITEM OF VALUE OTHER THAN A PRINTED VOUCHER. (~) THE COMMISSION SHALL IMPLEMENT THE VIDEO LOTTERY PROGRAM NO LATER THAN NOVEMBER I, 2004. THE COMMISSION SHALL PROMIULGATE ALL NECESSARY RULES TO REGULATE THE VIDEO LOTTERY PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE W[TH THIS SECTION. THE RULES OF THE COMMISSION SHALL MAXIMIZE THE NET VLT PROCEEDS AVAILABLE FOR DISTRIBLTION UNDER THIS SECTION. (4) UPON THE SLBMISSION OF A SALES AGENT APPLICATION BY THE OPERATOR OF AN EXCLUSIVE LOCATION LISTED IN SUBPARAGRAPH 2(C)(I) OF THIS SECTION, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMISSION, THE COMM[ISS[ON SHALL APPROVE THE USE OF FIVE HUNDRED VIDEO LOTTERY TERtitINALS AT THE EXCLUSIVE LOCATION REFERENCED IN THE APPLICATION. UPON THE SUBb1ISSION OF AN ACCEPTABLE APPLICATION BY THE OPERATOR OF A LICENSED GAbIING ESTABLISHMENT LISTED IN SUBPARAGRAPH 2(C)(II) OF THIS SECTION, THE COMMISSION SHALL APPROVE THE USE OF TERMINALS AT THE EXCLUSIVE LOCATION REFERENCED IN THE APPLICATION IN A NUMBER THAT THE COMMISSION DEEMiS TO BE ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THE COMMISSION'S PL`RPOSES. NO ADDITIONAL TERMINALS SHALL BE PERb1ITTED AT ANY EXCLUSIVE LOCATION WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION AFTER ITS CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL TERMINALS. (S) THE COMMIISSION SHALL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF VIDEO LUTTERY TER'VIINALS EXCEPT AT EXCLUSIVE LOCATIONS. (6) $EGINti"ING WITH THE FIRST STATE FISCAL YEAR IN WHICH THE VIDEO IATTERY PROGRAM GENERATES NET VLT PROCEEDS, SUCH NET VLT PROCEEDS SHALL BE SET ASIDE, ALLOCATED, ALLOTTED, AND CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED FOR DISTRIBUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION, NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22-54-117, C.R.S., OR SUCCESSOR STATUTE. NET VLT PROCEEDS SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE ~L'ITH SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE XXVII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION AFTER ALL NET PROCEEDS FROM ALL OTHER STATE-SUPERVISED LOTTERY PROGRAMIS FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO PROGRAMS. BEGINNING WITH THE FIRST STATE FISCAL YEAR IN WHICH THE VIDEO LOTTERY PROGRAM[ GENERATES COLORADO PROMOTION REVENUES, SUCH COLORADO PROMOTION REVENUES SHALL BE SET ASIDE, ALLOCATED, ALLOTTED, AND CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED, AND SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED ANNUALLY TO THE PROMOTION FUND. ALL NET VLT PROCEEDS SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM ANY RESTRICTIONS ON SPENDING, REVENUES, OR APPROPRIATIONS, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE RESTRICTIONS OF SECTION 20 OF ARTICLE X OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION. (7) ALL NET VLT PROCEEDS SHALL BE ACCOUNTED FOR SEPARATELY FROM PROCEEDS FROM ALL OTHER STATE-SUPERVISED LOTTERY PROGRAMS AND SHALL BE SEPARATELY ALLOCATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION. NET VLT PROCEEDS SHALL NOT AFFECT THE ALLOCATION OF NET PROCEEDS FROM OTHER STATE-SUPERVISED LOTTERY PROGRAMS TO THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO PROGRAM OR OTHER PROGRAMS FUNDED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY STATE-SUPERVISED LOTTERY PROCEEDS. (R) UPON THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION MADE PURSUANT TO SUBPARAGRAPH 4 OF THIS SECTION. THE STATE OF COLORADO, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SHALL COLLECT FROh[ THE APPLICANT A ONE-TIME LICENSE FEE OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS MULTIPLIED BY THE NLI~IBER OF VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS APPROVED FOR L'SE PURSUANT TO THAT APPLICATION. ALL REVENUES GENER4TED BY THIS LICENSE FEE SHALL BE ALLOCATED AND DISTRIBUTED TO THE PROMOTION FUND WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF COLLECTION. SUCH REVENUES SHALL BE EXEMPT FRObI ANY RESTRICTIONS ON SPENDING, REVENUES, OR APPROPRIATIONS, INCLUDIivG WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE RESTRICTIONS OF SECTION 20 OF ARTICLE X OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION. SUCH REVENUES SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE PROCEEDS FRObI LOTTERY PROGR4:~IS AS DEFINED [N SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE XXVII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ALLOCATION AS SET FORTH THEREIN. (9) THIS SECTION IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2019. i a~~, i vi c Denver Post al knight Look who's whining By AI Knight Denver Post Columnist Wednesday, August 06, 2003 -Colorado has seen some absurd political alliances in the past, but few could rival the alliance now forming to oppose a proposed expansion of gambling at the state's horse and dog tracks. The casino interests (there are 42 in Colorado) and the anti-gambling crowd want Colorado voters to reject a proposed ballot initiative that would allow dog and horse tracks to install and operate video lottery terminals. Casino interests are arguing that the lottery terminals will amount to (hold your breath) an expansion of gambling. They want Coloradans to be shocked -yes, shocked - at the idea that gambling would be encouraged at dog and horse tracks. Anti-gambling organizations, which obviously don't have the financial resources of casinos, have joined with them to oppose the ballot initiative (which has yet to be formally certified for inclusion on the November ballot). Radio ads have been running for weeks raising the alarm about the gathering of petition signatures. The ads suggest something very sinister about the fact that Wembley USA, operator of Colorado's dog and horse tracks, is backing the measure. The ads also hint darkly that these developments may somehow constitute a misuse of the initiative process and that the public should take an early stand both against the substance of the measure and against the techniques employed by its sponsors. But neither argument can withstand even casual examination. Colorado, as with other initiative states, has rules that apply equally to well-off corporations or impoverished individuals. They are being followed in this case. The state has 42 casinos only because a ballot measure was sold to voters by the very people who stood to benefit from gambling. There was nothing wrong with that then, and there is nothing wrong with that now. There is something vaguely inappropriate, however, in these same folks now claiming that the motives of Wembley USA are in any way less worthy than their own, or that gambling in one of their casinos constitutes ahigh-minded activity while gambling in one of Wembley's properties does not. With a couple of notable exceptions, Coioradans have shown themselves quite able to sort through the merits and demerits of ballot initiatives, and it can be expected that they will be able to do so again this fall. It's noteworthy that a number of groups that promote and depend upon tourism are supporting the ballot initiative so at least part of the campaign will be focused on issues of tourism and tax revenues instead of the advantages or disadvantages of gambling. http:/,'~~•~-~~~.denverpost.com/cda'article~print/0,1674,36%7E73%7E 1553563,OO.html 8'21/03 1 cl, ~C:.r V 1 .. Dog and horse tracks have had to put up with competition from casinos and state-sponsored gambling programs for years; it is only natural that these tracks would like to stay on sound financial footing. The fact is that tracks with video machines have fared better than those without them. Casino owners like to claim casinos are job-creation centers, but they are no different in that regard than a horse or dog track. There are many small players in the horse-race industry: owners, breeders, trainers, jockeys, grooms, hay growers, horse-trailer and truck dealers, and so on. When motives are compared, the anti-gambling organizations and the casino interests don't really come off any better than the race-track organization or its supporters in the tourism trade. Wembley and its allies are simply asking that additional gambling opportunities be provided at their facilities. If they produce additional revenue, the state will share in those revenues. Given the realities of the racing industry, this is a logical development. Contrast that position with that of the anti-gambling organizations. They are arguing that the state should not have any more gambling, but in making that claim they implicitly endorse or accept the large number of gambling opportunities already provided. Casino interests actually have an even harder case to make. They must arg~;e that the gambling they provide is good but the gambling that others might provide is bad. If there is either a good moral or even economic basis for that claim, it has so far not shown up in the campaign ads. It's a safe bet it never will. AI Knight of Fairplay alknight@mindspring_com)) is a former member of The Denver Post editorial-page staff. His columns appear on Wednesday. http:/iwww.denverpost.com/cda/article/printr'0,1674,36%7E73%7E 1553 ~63,OO.htm1 8/21 /03 Aurora Sentinel August 13, 2003 EDITORIAL ~ Taking a gamble on track slots There's no good reason why the state shouldn't take a gamble on putting slot machines out at the Arapahoe Park race track in east Aurora. Voters may decide a proposal to allow 500 instant lottery terminals, which are just slot machines, at the Aurora track and a few others across the state. Colorado needs to face the reality that gambling is already here, and it's here to stay. The door opened.years ago when lotto tickets came to Colorado. It's a little late to be lamenting the downsides of legalized gambling after the barn door was blown off by voter-sanctioned casinos in Cripple Creek and Central City. People love it. The slot machines sing Hearty 24 hours a day up in them thar hills, netting millions each year for the state and casino owners. The only people with legitimate complaints are the mountain casino owners, who are, rightfully, scared to death that they'll be missing the millions of nickels plugged in Front Range slot machines instead of their own. Too bad. So why not bring a little cash down here, and let other gambling companies share the wealth? While we believe that local endorsements of job creation are a little rosy, it sure wouldn't hurt to have more cars and cash circulating out at the track before it goes belly up and becomes a problem to the area instead of an asset. And the changes, if approved by voters in November, would benefit that industry, too. Arapahoe Park owners have said they will be increase purse funds for both horses and greyhounds at Wembley tracks. The Colorado secretary of state will decide soon whether the question will go before voters in November. Officials in Colorado Springs and Loveland oppose the plan because it doesn't send any money to the cities, and the state's handful of casinos are also lining up to fight the proposal. Aurora hasn't spoken out yet. We don't think they should. If gamblers start rushing to the track, Aurora should instead focus on helping other new businesses get started out there. Maybe the city can parlay the change into a resort community offering gamblers places to eat and things to do at the Aurora Reservoir. How about, Aurora: Slots and Yachts? ©Aurora Sentinel 2003 1 / 4. ,. ~<: C'. 'r ~~f ]r~, ea ~d' ++rf'w4.; . 7~ .'r +~~ 1 t Paid for by: Video Lottery, the game Colorado wins, ~a>~ .. ~.~,':.. ~~y ~r 7~ e~ .i ~~ rr d) ~ ~ ~; yy~~p ~ J ~ V ~~~4dy 3 ~ ~ ~ "4 R . aY 6 ~ S ' '~ f ~ ~ W~ ~ . Mt~ '~ gl~ .'. ~p ~„"~ sk- A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I '' ~ ~ I ~ ~,~~~ ~v~~ ~ ~, ~ S P4 ~~' d~ *~ - ~ e" ,. d ~ ~ Jd ~ .~k , ~ ~ ~ d .~ ~ ~~ ..~3n ^ ~~r ~ !'~ R. ~ -. - ~ ~ , _Y J ~ ~ .k`drtw.aWM"""' r ~ w ~ d ~ .. ~ \ 1 ~ ~ ., A"~.4e __ u ~" i ~ hF 4 , .e ~ ~~~ ~~ ~A ~x game Colorado wins. Facts on how the program will worN: • This initiative would authorize the Colorado Lottery Commission to implement Video lottery at restricted locations in Colorado. "Video Lottery Terminals" are electronic games that allow a user to play an electronic version of lottery games. • The Colorado Lottery Commission would have complete control over the program, and would have the authority to issue and revoke licenses, approve games, control the number and type of VLT's that maybe used and set age limits and bet limits for the machines. • Under this plan, VLT's would be strictly limited to only those locations where legal gaming is currently allowed; licensed casinos, and horse racetracks and greyhound race- tracks. Because this is a constitutional amendment, the games could never be expanded to other locations. • The funding plan would expire or "sunset" in 15 years, giving voters the opportunity to continue or discontinue the program. • Under this plan 61% of revenues would go to the State of Colorado and would be dis- bursed according to the curl•ent provisions of the Constitution that established the state lottery. Where the money goes: The money would flow through the current lottery beneficiaries ... meaning millions more for open space ... schools ... and up to $25 million per year for tourism promotion. State Budget Year Use of Money 2004-05* 2005-06 2006-0~ Local Parks & Recreation $18.5 $31.3 $34.5 State Parks 4.6 ~.8 8.6 GOCO 3.8 6.1 8.1 Tourism Promotion 20.6 25.0 25.0 Public School Construction o.0 8.0 lo.o Total State Revenue $47.5 $~8.2 $86.2 Table 2. Projected State Revenue from the Video Lottery Program ($ in millions). (Prepared by Colorado Legislative Council.) * The video lottery program would begin November i, 2004. Reuem~e projections during the 2004-05 stnte budget year nre bused ort eight months of operation. ** includes the one-time machine license fee of $50o per VLT in the 2004-05 budget year. ~" ~ ~ ~~~ '~ ~~~~ e ~w ~ , -~~ 'dvE jb t:~ `j Nor ±. ~ ,~ t ~U ,.. ~1 ~~ I~+f ~" t R'i J`• ~~ .dk Y. ~F: <.w s,,. ^~ }~ R~, 4 ~~~ ~ l 4 a~ Ism U~' y'r+~+~ ~ 1#0~ ` Qi ~ :,. I ~.r6~ ~' oS FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. OZ-PA-1102 9111103 PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT between USDA, FOREST SERVICE, WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST and TOWN OF VAIL This PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT is hereby entered into by and between the USDA Forest Service, White River National Forest ,hereinafter referred to as the Forest Service and the Town of Vail, hereinafter referred to as the Town of Vail, under the authority of the Cooperative Funds and Deposits Act of December 12, 1975, Pub. L. 94-148, 16 U.S.C. 565a1 - a3 and/orWyden Amendment, Section 323(a) of the Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 as included in P.L. 105-277, Div. A., Section 101 (e) as amended by P.L. 107-63, Sec. 330. A. PURPOSE: Treat hazardous fuel accumulations in and adjacent to the wildland urban interface on all or a portion of the project area known as Booth Creek Unit #6. B. STATEMENT OF MUTUAL BENEFIT AND INTERESTS: Reduce hazardous filels accumulations to reduce wildland fire intensity within the project area known as Booth Creek Unit #6 through prescribed treatments on lands administered by the Town of Vail and the U.S. Forest Service. C. THE FOREST SERVICE SHALL: 1. Provide hazardous fuels treatment fiinding for the Juniper Valley Crew (Colorado Department of Corrections, Rifle, CO) through the Town of Vail to complete labor intensive treatments within the project area. 2. Provide material to cover piles of material resulting from prescribed treatments. 3. Provide personnel to ensure work activities accomplished under this agreement are in compliance with specifications provided to the contractor. D. THE TOWN OF VAIL SHALL: 1. Contract with the Juniper Valley Crew (Colorado Department of Corrections) to complete labor intensive treatments in accordance with specifications agreed to between the Town of Vail and U.S. Forest Service. E. IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT: FS A~eement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator A~eement No. 02-PA-1102 9/11/03 1. FOREST SERVICE ACKNOWLEDGED IN PUBLICATION AND AUDIOVISUALS. Forest Service support shall be acknowledged in any publications and audiovisuals developed as a result of this instrument. 2. FEDERAL COST PRINCIPLES. This agreement will be governed by and audit requirements tinder OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-profit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-122, Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations with exclusions- listed in Attachment C of OMB Circular No. A-122, OMB Circular No. A-21, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions, OMB Circular No. A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments This agreement will be governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures. 3. COLLECTION OF AMOUNTS DUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.. Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3716 and 7 CFR, Part 3, Subpart B, any funds paid to a cooperator in excess of the amount to which the cooperator is finally determined to be entitled under the terms and conditions of the award constitute a debt to the Federal Government. If not paid within a reasonable period after the demand for payment, the Federal awarding may reduce the debt by: a. Making an administrative offset against other requests for reimbursements. b. .Withholding advance payments otherwise due to the cooperator. c. Taking other action permitted by statue. Except as otherwise provided by law, the Federal awarding agency shall charge interest on an overdue debt in accordance with 4 CFR, Chapter II "Federal Clanns Collection Standards" and 31 U.S.C., Chapter 37. 4. TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. The cooperator shall fiirnish their tax identification number upon execution of this instrument. 5. FUNDING EpUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES. Federal fiinding under this instrument is not available for reunbursement of recipient/cooperator purchase of equipment (and supplies). 6. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA). Any information fiirnished to the Forest Service under this instrument is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 9/1 7. RETENTION AND ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR RECORDS. The Forest Service, Inspector General, or Comptroller General, through any authorized representative, shall have access to and the right to examine all records related to this instrument. As used in this provision, "records" includes books, documents, accounting procedures and practices, and other data regardless of type and regardless of whether such items are in written form, in the form of computer data, or in any other form. All records pertinent to this agreement shall be retained for a period of 3 years. 8. MODIFICATION. Modifications within the scope of the instrument shall be made by mutual consent of the parties; by the issuance of a written modification, signed and dated by all parties, prior to any changes being performed. The Forest Service is not obligated to fund any changes not properly approved in advance. 9. NONDISCRIMINATION. The recipient/cooperator shall comply with all Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination and all applicable requirements of all other Federal laws, Executive orders, regulations, and policies. These include but are not limited to: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d, 2000e-16), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, disability, or national origin; (b) Title IX of the Education amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683, and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended (29 USC 794) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disabilities. The nondiscrimination statement which follows shall be posted in primary and secondary recipient/cooperator offices, at the public service delivery contact point and included, in frill, on all materials regarding such recipients'/cooperators' programs that are produced by the recipients/cooperators for public information, public education, or public distribution: "In accordance with Federal law and U S. Department of Agriculture policy, this institution is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA- , is an equal opportunity provider and employer." If the material is too small to permit the full statement to be included, the material will at minimum include the statement, in print size no smaller than the text; that "This institution is an equal opportunity provider. " 10. PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS. Improvements placed on National Forest System land at the direction of either of the parties, shall thereupon become property of the United States, and shall be subject to the same regulations and administration of the Forest Service as other National Forest improvements of a similar nature. No part of FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 4111/03 this instrument shall entitle the cooperator to any share or interest in the project other than the right to use and enjoy the same under the existing regulations of the Forest Service. 11. LEGAL AUTHORITY. The cooperator has the legal authority to enter into this instrument, and the institutional, managerial and financial capability (including funds sufficient to pay nonfederal share of project costs) to ensure proper planning, management, and completion of the project. 12. PARTICIPATION IN SIMILAR ACTIVITIES. This instrument in no way restricts the Forest Service or the Cooperator(s) from participating in similar activities with other public or private agencies, organizations, and individuals. 13. EXTENSION OF PERFORMANCE PERIOD. The Forest Service, by written modification may extend the performance period of this instrument for a total duration not to exceed 5 years from its original date of execution. 14. TERMINATION. Any of the parties, in writing, may terminate the instrument ui whole, or in part, at any time before the date of expiration. No parties shall incur any new obligations for the terminated portion of the instrument after the effective date and shall cancel as many obligations as possible. Full credit shall be allowed for each Party's expenses and all non-cancelable obligations properly incurred up to the effective date of termination. Excess fiends shall be refimded within 60 days after the effective period. 15. PRINCIPAL CONTACTS. The principal contacts for this instrument are: Forest Service Project Contact Phil Bowden 125 W. 5`~ Street PO Box 720 Cooperator Project Contact Town of Vail Eagle, CO 81631 Phone: (970) 328-6388 FAX: (970) 945-6448 E-Mail: pbowden@fs.fed.iis Phone: FAX: E-Mail Forest Service Administrative Contact Cooperator Administrative Contact FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 9/11/03 Phone: Phone: FAX: FAX: E-Mail: E-Mail 16. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. Funds in the amount of $20,000 are currently available for performance of this instrument through September30, 2004. The Forest Service's obligation for performance of this instrument beyond this date is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Forest Service for any payment may arise for performance tinder this instrument beyond September 30, 2004, until funds are made available to the Forest Service for performance and until the recipient/cooperator receives notice of availability to be confirmed in a written modification by the Forest Service. 17. DAMS-BACON OR SERVICE CONTRACT ACT. Federal wage provisions (Davis-Bacon or Service Contract Act) are applicable to any contract developed and awarded under this instrument where all or part of the funding is provided with Federal funds. Davis-Bacon wage rates apply on all public works contracts in excess of $2,000 and Service Contract Act wage provisions apply to service contracts in excess of $2,500. The Forest Service will award contracts in all. situations where their contribution exceeds 50 percent of the costs of the contract. If a cooperator is approved to issue a contract it shall be awarded on a competitive basis. 18. COPYRIGHTING. The cooperator is granted sole and exclusive right to copyright including the right to publish and vend throughout the world in any language and in all media and forms, in whole or in part, for the full term of copyright and all renewals thereof in accordance with this instniment. However, the cooperator shall not sell, or grant copyrights to a third-party designee who intends to sell, the document as aprofit-making venture. No original text or graphics produced and submitted by the Forest Service shall be copyrighted. The Forest Service reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, the work for Federal government purposes. This right shall be transferred to any sub-agreements or subcontracts. This provision includes: a. The copyright in any work developed by under this instrument. b. Any rights of copyright to which purchases ownership with any Federal contributions. 19. PUBLICATION SALE. The cooperator may sell any publication resulting from the project. The publication may initially be sold at fair market value which is defined in this instrument to cover costs of development, production, marketing, and distribution. After the costs of development and production have been recovered, fair market value is defined in this instrument to cover the costs of marketing, printing, FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 9/11/03 and distribution only. Fair market value must exclude any in-kind or Federal government contributions to the total costs of the project. 20. ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFER. The recipient/cooperatorshali designate a financial institution or an authorized payment agent through which a Federal payment may be made in accordance with U.S. Treasury Regulations, Money and Finance at 31 CFR 208, which requires that Federal payments are to be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT) to the maximum extent possible. A waiver may be requested alid payment received by check by certifying in writing that one of the following situations apply: a. The payment recipient/cooperator does not have an account at a financial institution. b. EFT creates a financial hardship because direct deposit will cost the payment recipient more than receiving a check. c. The payment recipient/cooperator has a physical or mental disability, or a geographic, language, or literacy barrier. To initiate receiving your payment(s) by electronic transfer, contact the National Finance Center (NFC) on the worldwide web at www.nfc.usda.gov, or call the NFC at 1-800-421-0323., or (504) 255-4647. Upon enrollment in the program you inay begin to receive payment by electronic funds transfer directly into your account. 21. PAYMENT/REIMBURSEMENT. Reunburse the cooperator for the Forest Service's proportionate share, percent of actual expenses incurred, not to exceed $ reduced by program income, and other Federal and nonfederal cash contributions, as shown ul the incorporated Financial Plan. If program income generated from the project exceeds the cooperator's actual expenses, the Forest Service share is zero. The cooperator is approved to submit billing(s). The Forest Service will make payment for its share of project costs upon receipt of an invoice. Each ilivoice shall display the cooperator's actual expenditures to date of the invoice (not just the Forest Service share of actual expenditures), displayed by separate cost elements as documented in the Financial Plan, less program income and other Federal and nonfederal cash contributions and previous Forest Service payments. The invoice should be forwarded as follows: Send original to: Send copy to: USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service National Forest National Forest (address) (address) (City, State, Zip) (City, State, Zip) Phone: Phone: E-Mail: E-Mail: FS A~m~eement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 9/11/03 22. ADVANCE PAYMENT. The cooperator is approved to submit requests for advance payments on a basis, for the Forest Service's proportionate share percent of anticipated actual expenses, not to exceed $ ,reduced by program income, and other Federal and nonfederal cash contributions, as shown in the incorporated Financial Plan. If program income generated from the project exceeds the cooperator's actual expenses, the Forest Service share is zero. The Forest Service will snake advance payment upon receipt of the invoice. The first invoice may request an advance based upon estunated cost no to exceed 30 days expenditures. Each subsequent invoice shall display the cooperator's (1) additional advance funding, if needed, and (2) the actual expenses incurred to date of the invoice (not just the Forest Service share of actual expenditures), displayed by separate cost elements as documented iri the Financial Plan, less program income and other Federal and nonfederal cash contributions and previous Forest Service payments. Any funds advanced, but not spent, upon expiration of this instrument shall be returned to the Forest Service. The invoice should be forwarded as follows: a. Send an original to: b. Send a copy to: 23. ENDORSEMENT. Any cooperator contributions made under this instrument do not by direct reference or implication convey Forest Service endorsement of the cooperator's product or activities. 24. ANNUAL OPERATING/FINANCIAL PLAN. The attached AOP/financial plan is hereby incorporated and becomes a part of this agreement. 25. COMMENCEMENT/EXPIRATION DATE. This instrument is executed as of the date of last signature and is effective through at which time it will expire unless extended. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the last written date below. USDA FOREST SERVICE DATE DATE FS Agreement No Cooperator Tax ID No. Cooperator Agreement No. 02-PA-1102 )/11/03 The authority and format of this instrument has been reviewed and approved for signature. DATE FS Agreements Coordinator Job Code - WFHF25 - $20,000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOR FOREST SERVICE USE ONLY Agreement #.: tit-PA-11.()~ Spending I:imit for FY04: n>?i_l,il0i1 Buxden (overlaeadrate): Job Code: Billing Frequency (advance lump sum, monthly, quarterly, senu-annual, annual): Vendor ID (triultiple partners?): If Federal, Agency Location Code: Pragraui Manager and phone #: Terminalion Date: ~u V ~1 • ((o • G 3 ~P~C-u(.~t ~ DECISION NOTICE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BOOTH CREEK PRESCRIBED BURN U.S.D.A.- Forest Service Region 2 -Rocky Mountain Region White River National Forest Holy Cross Ranger District Eagle County, Colorado Decision and Reasons for the Decision Baek~round This Decision Notice for the Booth Creek Prescribed Burn replaces a June 29, 199$ Decision made by the Holy Cross District Ranger.' The original .decision was to implement Alternative 2, broadcast burning, on units 1, 2, 3, and. 6; and a portion of Alternative 3, cutting a corridor, piling brush, and burning the piles, in units 4 and 5. ,Units 2 and 3 were scheduled to be pring burned first, and. conditions were monitored in:I999 through 2001, for the right conditions. Wind speed ` and direction and curing of the fuels did not coincide to allow burning of the units in any of the 3 years, and given. the prevailing wind direction and orientation of the Vail Valley, it is unlikely that favorable broadcast burn conditions will occur. In addition to unfavorable weather and fuel conditions,- continued public concern about the effects of broadcast burning on unstable soils, risk of escaped fire, and smoke dissipation in the steep and narrow Vail Valley has led to this modification of the decision. New Decision Based on the original analysis and evaluation described in the Booth Creek Burn Environmental Assessment, further consideration of public concerns, and-new information, it is my decision to implement Alternative 3; mechanical treatment, in units. 2 3, and 6. Units 4 and 5 will be mechanically treated also, as specified in the previous decision. Following are the reasons for my decision,`as documented in the Environmental Assessment- and subsequent Supplemental Information Reports: , • This alternative will improve the habitat capability for bighorn sheep and other :.species, and :improve the health and vigor of shrub and tree species. Aspen, an important vegetationcomponent in the project area will be treated.-and. 4/10/2002. 3:31 PM booth_dn.doc Page 1 of 6 i 1 regenerated by cutting. Cutting will also alter the age classes of browse species, resulting in a more natural habitat. • It addresses new concerns regarding soil and slope stability in the project area. • Burning fuel in piles eliminates the need for fireline construction. • Smoke dispersion will be more effective and easier to control. • The risk of escaped prescribed fire will be significantly reduced. • Timing and duration of the project should not pose unreasonable impacts on local residents or forest users. • These alternatives, as mitigated, will have no significant or long-term adverse effects on any of the resources in the area. Burning activity will be limited to piled fuels only. Application of broadcast burning to rejuvenate browse-species will be addressed in the upcoming Vail Valley Forest Health Project. This will allow-amore comprehensive analysis of wildlife needs, soil and slope stability issues, and potential aquatic habitat impacts in the project area. Alternatives Considered Three alternatives were considered in detail, including the No Action alternative. ALTERNATIVE 1 No Action Alternative 1 is the no action alternative that must be considered and analyzed in detail: This alternative would result in no implementation of management activities necessary to sustain and enhance the critical habitat for bighorn sheep. The vegetation (aspen acid shrubs) would continue to age,'die and be replaced with species less desirable to bighorn sheep. The aspen stands would decay and eventually be replaced by shrubs. Grasses and forbs would eventually, replace shrub species. Big game (deer. and elk) would lose valuable young aspen for forage during the winter. The sheep would have difficulty accessing habitat to the west, .increasing their risk of over using their existing habitat. Excess vegetation (grass, shrubs and .dead/ down aspen) would continue to accumulate and result in greater risk of uncontrolled wildfire. ALTERNATIVE 2 Proposed Action This alternative consists of broadcast burning management -units 1, 2, 3, and 6. Burning would be done with ground personnel using hand ignition. Some of the aspen and most of the shrub component would be regenerated. The dead and down aspen would be reduced, and the'shrubs grasses and forbs would be stimulated to produce more and. better forage. The area would be improved for a number of wildlife species. The bighorn sheep would be able to access habitat to the west. Units 1, 2, and 3 have stands of aspen that are 30-80% dead. Surface fuels are grass,. serviceberry, sagebrush`and down logs. Unit 6 is mostly shrubs and grass with decaying: 4/10/2002 3:31 PM booth dn.doc Page 2 of 6 stands of aspen. Approximately 800 acres .would be prescribed burned in a mosaic pattern during atwo-year period, weather permitting. The burns would occur during the spring and/or fall when weather and burn conditions are optimal for attaining objectives and controlling the fire. Artificial reforestation of aspen will not be needed, as the intensity of the fire is expected to regenerate from 300 to 3,000 stems per acre. Units 2 and 3 are proposed for spring burning in the first year. Unit l is proposed for a fall bum, aS its north aspect makes it too wet in a normal spring. Unit 6 would be burned the next year. ALTERNATIVE 3 Mechanical Treatment This alternative would use Forest Service and Town of Vail Fire Department personnel, as well as volunteers to manually cut and pile dead and. down ;aspen. Piles would be burned when they have dried and weather conditions are optimal for smoke dispersion and control of the burning. The shrub component (sagebrush and serviceberry) would be manually cut to stimulate regeneration. Management units 1, 2, 3, and 6 would be treated in their entirety, and units 4 and 5 would have a corridor 125 yards wide by 400 yards long cut through the middle. The corridor would be on the contour of the slope. It may take several years to implement this 'alternative: depending on personnel availability, expertise and funding. Mitigation Measures Required mitigation measures are listed in the Environmental Assessment on page II-6 and II-7 and are incorporated by reference. All mitigation measures which apply to Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 will be adopted. Based on Supplemental Information Reports developed for this revised decision, the following mitigations are also adopted: • 'For each unit where aspen is treated, some of the larger aspen snags, decadent snag replacement trees, and larger downed logs or felled trees will be left unburned to meet Forest Plan standards for snags and downed woody logs. • No mechanical treatments or pile burning -will occur in aspen`stands from May 15-June 20 unless a Forest Service biologist identifies that elk are not using specinc stands during the calving season. • Aspen forests in units will be searched for raptor nests and raptor nesting cavities prior to treatment. If raptor nests are found, the nest tree will be protected. A wildlife biologist will identify a buffer around any nest found: The area inside the buffer will either be avoided entirely or mechanically treated and burned outside 4/10/2002 -3:31 PM booth_dn.doc - Page 3 of 6 i the active nesting period, depending on the protection recommended by the biologist. .. • The western boundary of unit 1 to will be moved upslope to avoid the steep slopes and riparian zone along Spraddle Creek. Most of these slopes are located within 350 ft. of the creek. The attached map displays the new western boundary. • To prevent severely burned soils, burning will be conducted when soil, humus,. and large fuels are moist. • Burn piles will be located at least 100 feet from any stream course, or from areas with surface runoff that connects to a stream course. This includes intermittent channels, gullies, and road ditches. • To prevent the loss of nutrients and protect long-term soil productivity, fuels less than 2 inches in diameter will be lopped and scattered. Tree boles and large limbs will be burned -only. Public Involvement Several important environmental issues were considered in determining how best to implement the proposed project if at all, within the Booth Creek Burn project area. Forest Service resource specialists identified some of the issues, and members of the public identified others or helped to better define these issues. Public comment on the proposed project was solicited by mailing. scoping letters to members of the public who could be affected by the proposed project, or those who might have an interest in the decision. Chapter V of the Environmental Assessment lists those individuals, organizations, and agencies notified. Letters were,sent during February.5-9, 1997. Written comments were requested by April 1, 1997. ~'he comment period was extended to May 1, 1997 due to public request, Approximately 23 written responses were received. In addition, 150 brochures were hand delivered to residents during the second week of March. The brochures were hand delivered to homes and residents: adjacent to the proposed burn units. Seven people attended the open house in Vail on February 10, 1997. There-were also three meetings with the Vail Town Council The public was invited to attend several field trips. in February and March of 199'7 to look at the proposed burn units and to the results of a 1994 burn near Dowd Junction. 4/10/2002 3:31 PM booth_dn.doc Page 4 of 6 Finding of No Signif cant Impact (FONSI) The Environmental Assessment indicates that: • The proposed action will not have significant effects on the quality of the human environment, either as an individual action, or as part of the cumulative effect of other past, present and planned actions within this area. • The proposed action does not affect public health and safety., • There are no unique characteristics ofths area that would set it apart from similar areas where there is experience with this type of project. The selected alternatives are not in proximity to historic or cultural sites or resources; park lands, or prime farm lands. It does not impact wetlands, or contain wild and scenic rivers or ecologically critical areas. • The effects of the proposed action are not highly controversial: • The effects of the proposed action on the human environment are not highly uncertain, nor do they involve unique or unknown risks. • The proposed action is not precedent setting. It does not establish a precedent for future actions that may have a significant effect on the environment. It does not represent a decision in principle about a future consideration. • The proposed action will not adversely affect districts; sites, highways, structures or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed action will not cause loss or destruction of significant cultural or historical resources. • The proposed action will not adversely affect endangered or threatened species or their habitat. ~ This action complies with -other federal, state or local laws and requirements imposed for the protection of the environment: • Alternative 3 as mitigated is consistent with management direction tiered to the `. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS} of the Wliite River National Forest Land and Resource. Management Plan, approved September 20,1984, as amended and aS required by 36 CFR 219.10(e). Specifically, the project conforms with Forest management direction to accomplish vegetation management to meet the goals identified in Section III, pages 24-38, of the Forest Plan.` The general direction provides for managing of the habitat specifically for bighorn sheep, management of the browse species into varied seral stages (age classes) and assist with the management of habitat in cooperation with the State of Colorado's big game population goals. Management Emphasis 2A allows for a level of wildfire protection and management of aspen utilizing fire as a ool (Section l l l-1 O1). ~ I accept the findings of fact pur uant to the National Forest Management Act's timber (aspen) treatment requirements as prepared by David Van Norman, certified silviculturist on Apri123, 1997 for the stands to be treated in this project under Alternative 3. • Alternative 3 complies with other laws and regulations including the National Historic Preservation Act, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. 4/1.0/2002 3:31 PM booth_dn.doc Page 5 of 6 Based on the findings in the Environmental Assessment, I find that this project will not have a significant effect on the human environment and is excluded from documentation in an Environmental Impact Statement. This decision is subject to appeal pursuant to 36 CFR 215.7. A written Notice of Appeal must be submitted within 45 days after the date the notice of this decision is published in the Glenwood Post. Notice must be sent to: USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, ATTN: Appeals Deciding Officer (RFO}, PO box 25127, Denver, Colorado 80225. Appeals must meet content requirements of 36 CFR 215.14. Detailed records of the environmental analysis are available for public review at the Holy Cross Ranger District, P.O. Box 190, Minturn, Colorado 81645. For further information on this decision, contact District Ranger Cal Wettstein, P.O. Box 190, Minturn, CO 81645; telephone (970) 827-5715.` If no appeal is received, implementation of this decision may occur on, but not before, 5 business days from the close of the appeal filing period. If an appeal is received, implementation may not occur. for 15 days following the date of appeal disposition. ~_._:. CAL WETTSTEIN Date District Ranger Holy Cross Ranger District White River National Forest 4/10/2002 3:31 PM booth dn.doc Page 6 of 6 2 ---- ~-. UPPER COLORADO RIVER -~'-: :::::w~>-~:.: - -~`"'"~~`-~~'~ '`~"'' INTERAGENCY FIRE MANAGEMENT -- ~ OOt ree ~::<:.- - 4:.r-: USFS -WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST BLM -GRAND JUNCTION DISTRICT ~ ,-1.----- • • USFS -GRAND MESA NATIONAL FOREST Pre S crl e Fir e • Project Area Unit 1: 110 acre s Unit 2: 140 acres Units 3: TOV: 17 acres WRF: 90 acres Unit 6 : Pile TOV : ~ 3 0 acre s WRF: ~ 1 S acres Broadcast: TOV: 15 acres WRF: 10 acres `~~ ~~` C~~~~>~ ~C~= ~°~~r~t~`~~c:~t~ ~~ it~~ .C~I~~tC~~~r ~~'~~11~~~. ~~~'~~~~~~ ~~~i~~~.T ~ a 1 ~~fY [ ~~~~ C~, ~'~'tl ~ (~~' ~~)C)I~t1~,'~~ t)~1 ~°{)~~~`C.'C~l C~c.'Ct~~`~ tllt~l'ItI~J ~)~ 1~~~~4~I~:: ~~~~~~~t~ 1:~~~ i~~c~~1~~~~it~~l -~~~~~lt~~ ~~~ 1~~~~tt~~C ~~ t~~ C~~N~~~~~t_r F_ C~~~~t C l / C `~* ~~r~ utY ~`~~ ~..A~ Noise Mitigation Options for I-70 Action Control Status Request Response Lower the speed limit CDOT/FHWA -11/01 No 2/02 Lower the speed limit trucks only CDOT/FHWA 11/01 No 2/02 Restrict the use of engine brakes CDOT/TOV 11/01 No 2/02 yes 9/02 Use Jersey Barriers for Tire mitigation CDOT/FHWA 11/01 No 2/02 Eliminate Rumble Strips CDOT/TOV Adopt a more restrictive noise ordinance and heavily enforce TOV Build berms CDOT/TOV on going on going Build Walls or other barriers. Either public/ private/ both, allow flexibility in designs and DRB approvals. CDOT/TOV Sites identified Allow use of CDOT Right-of-ways by non-CDOT projects Build semi-enclosing barriers overlapping cantilever enclosure CDOT/TOV Bury portions of I-70 FHWA/CDOT/TOV Regulations reviewed Investigate quieter surface treatments CDOT/TOV 12/02 No 1/03 Change land use regulations require noise mitigation Mitigate noise with built in barriers, set backs, landscaping and orientation TOV Insulate and install air conditioning in all buildings affected TOV/PRIVATE Lobby CDOT for reinstatement of Type II mitigation program TOV/others affected Meeting with Mayor and CDOT 2001 Woshington lrnhsstruclur~ Services, N~c. TRAMSPORTATI~N MASTER PLAN UPDATE Noise ~~ ~~ K t ~I ~ ~. ,~~ Ir i,I i ~ _, ,.:~ ,~,1, r '„' .l; ~ ' i~~:t:~ "~~F.~ ,) ~~Y 64E '~ #, ~~ .: ~ _ Noise Excerpted from VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE Prepared for: Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Prepared by: Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc. 402 7T" Street, Atrium Suite 111 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 WGI Project Number 2284.02 July 2002 ~~-; Executive Summary Chapter 1: Vail Village Deliveries Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 1-4 Operations .................................................................................................................................1-10 Chapter 2: In-Town Shuttle Bus System Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Town Bus System Overview ......................................................................................................... 2-2 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 2-3 Options for the Vail In-Town Shuttle System ................................................................................. 2-3 Analysis of Remaining Technologies ............................................................................................ 2-4 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 2-9 Chapter 3: Outlying Bus System West Vail Bus Route Overview ..................................................................................................... 3-1 Downvalley Bus System ............................................................................................................... 3-7 Chapter 4: Trail System Interface Recreation Trails Constructed since 1990 ..................................................................................... 4-1 Pedestrian I-70 Undercrossings Constructed Since 1990 ............................................................. 4-2 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 4-3 Chapter 5: Level of Service Analysis Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5-1 Intersection Level of Service ......................................................................................................... 5-1 Possible Solutions ......................................................................................................................... 5-4 Parking Structure Level of Service ................................................................................................ 5-5 Chapter 6: Connecting Fixed Guideways Draft Report Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 6-1 -70 Mountain Corridor Major Investment Study ............................................................................ 6-2 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 6-4 f ~ Table of Contents 1 Town of Vail t Chapter 7: Noise Noise Terminology ........................................................................................................................ 7-2 CDOT's Noise Policy ..................................................................... ............................. 7-4 ................... Noise Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 7-5 Modeling Resuits .......................................................................................................................... 7-7 Sensitivity Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 7-11 Noise Abatement ........................................................................................................................ 7-15 Summary .................................................................................................................................... 7-32 Chapter 8: I-70 Capping Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 8-1 Opportunities ................................................................................................................................ 8-2 General I-70 Capping Issues ........................................................................................................ 8-4 Environmental Impact Considerations ........................................................................................... 8-6 General Capping Considerations .................................................................................................. 8-7 Capping Construction Issues ........................................................................................................ 8-8 Comparative Capping Projects .................................................................................................... 8-11 Chapter 9: Traffic Model Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 9-1 Model Development ...................................................................................................................... 9-1 Existing Network ........................................................................................................................... 9-6 Future Network .............................................................................................................................. 9-7 Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 9-10 Chapter 10: PETS Issues Issues ........................................................................................................................................ 10-1 Other lssues ............................................................................................................................... 10-6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 10-9 Appendices A1: Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, March 2000 and July 2000 A2: FHU Vail Village Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, September 2000 B1: Project Objectives and Criteria 62: Technology Screening Process C1: Portions of the Eagle County Trails Master Plan C2: Trail Maps from Original Transportation Master Plan D1: Intersection Level of Service D2: Roundabout Level of Service E: I-70 Capping and Fixed Guideway Mapping F1: CDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidelines F2: Noise Contour Mapping G: FHWA Joint Development Study H1: Population and Employment Data Table of Contents 2 Town of Vail H2: Traffic Volume Data H3: Model Calibration H4: Growth Model H5: Trip Reassignment Work Table List of Figures 1-1: Potential Delivery Quadrants for the Commercial Core ...................................................... 1-8 2-1: Comparative Screening Matrix ......................................................................................... .. 2-7 4-1: New Trails Completed Since 1990 ................................................................................... .. 4-4 7-1: Receiver Locations .......................................................................................................... .. 7-8 7-2: Approximate Noise Wall Locations .................................................................................. 7-25 8-1: Total Costs for Each Tunnel ...............................................:............................................ 8-18 9-1: Schematic Representation of the Vail Transportation Model Network .............................. .. 9-2 9-2: Schematic Representation of the Vail Transportation Model Network .............................. ...9-4 List of Tables 3-1: Low-Floor Vehicle Specifications ....................................................................................... 3-5 5-1: Level of Service for a Two Way Stop-Controlled Intersection ............................................ 5-2 5-2: Town of Vail Existing LOS Analysis ................................................................................... 5-3 5-3: Town of Vail Existing Parking Structure LOS Analysis ...................................................... . 5-5 7-1: Typical Noise Levels :........................................................................................................ . 7-3 7-2: CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria ........................................................................................ 7-4 7-3: I-70 Segment Characteristics ............................................................................................. 7-7 7-4: .Noise Model Results .......................................................................................................... 7-9 7-5: Noise Level Ranges Based on Distance from I-70 ........................................................... 7-11 7-6: Relative Noise Level Increases Based on Traffic Volumes .............................................. 7-13 7-7: Decibel Increases Based on "Jake" Brake Noise ............................................................. 7-14 7-8: Decibel Increases Based on Rumble Strip Noise ............................................................. 7-14 7-9: Noise Wall Descriptions ................................................................................................... 7-23 7-10: Noise Model Results with Mitigation Measures in Place .................................................. 7-26 7-11: Masonry (Concrete Block) Noise Wall Cost ..................................................................... 7-28 7-12: Concrete Pre-Cast Panel Noise Wall Cost ....................................................................... 7-28 7-13: Concrete Cast in Place Noise Wall Cost .......................................................................... 7-28 7-14: Noise Model Results with Mitigation Measures in Place .................................................. 7-29 7-15: Relative Noise Level Increases Based on Traffic Volumes .............................................. 7-34 9-1: Nodes in the Vail Transportation Model ............................................................................. 9-2 9-2: Links in the Vail Transportation Model ............................................................................... 9-4 9-3: Origins and Destinations Matrix (Existing) ......................................................................... 9-5 9-4: Estimated Growth for Nodes in the Vail Model ................................................................. .. 9-7 9-5: 2020 Adjusted Volumes for the Vail Model ...................................................................... .. 9-9 10-1: PETS Issues for the Town of Vail and Possible Solutions ................................................1 0-11 Table of Contents 3 Town of Vail Vail, Colorado attracts a large number of visitors each year because of its world-class ski area, wide array of recreational opportunities, and thriving economy with numerous restaurants, retail businesses, and services to choose from. With a high volume of visitors comes a need for an efficient transportation system to get visitors to and from Vail and to transport them within the Town as well. In 1990, the Town of Vail undertook a Transportation Master Plan to address all transportation systems and future needs for the area (see Vail Transportation Master Plan, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, 1993). That document addressed the current transportation system within Vail and also provided recommendations for improvements to the system. Purpose of the Update to the Transportation Master Plan The Town of Vail makes great efforts to keep its transportation system as efficient and updated as possible. This is evidenced by the many improvements and additions to the system over the years to accommodate the high volumes of visitors and traffic each year. Because ten years have passed since the production of the original Transportation Master Plan, the Town has deemed it necessary to provide an update for the continued efficiency of the transportation system. The purpose of this Transportation Master Plan Update is to review the existing conditions of the transportation system and to address and/or resolve transportation issues that have arisen since 1990. The following issues were included in the original Transportation Master Plan and will be addressed and updated in this document: • Vail Village Deliveries • Town Bus System (specifically, the In-Town Shuttle) Executive Summary i Town of Vail • Outlying Bus System • Trail System Interface • Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis • Implementation Process • Plan Monitoring and Updating One issue addressed in the original document has been resolved since 1990 and is no longer applicable to this update, and that is the Interstate 70 (I-70) Access. In the original document, parking issues for the Town of Vai{ were also addressed. The parking issues are also being addressed at the time of publication of this update; however, the study is still underway and will be published as a separate document at a later date. In addition to the updates in this document, new issues for the Town of Vail transportation system have come to light. These will be addressed in this document and include the following: • Connecting fixed guideway transit systems • Noise contour map for I-70 traffic • I-70 capping review • Traffic forecasting • Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PETS) issues resolution Each of these issues will represent a different chapter in this document. In general, these issues were studied and completed individually but are brought together in this document so that all affected parties and agencies may view them as a whole system. This ensures better coordination by all agencies in making the transportation system efficient for the present as well as for the future. Summary of Updates, Additions, and Resolved Issues To provide ease of reference, each update and addition is summarized below with recommendations, if applicable. The issues from the original Transportation Master Plan that are either resolved or no longer applicable are also summarized below. Updates: Vail Village Deliveries The Vail Village Loading and Delivery Study was researched and prepared for the purpose of analyzing and understanding all the factors surrounding people and goods movement in and out of the Vail Village Commercial Core One. The study and this summary provide options and supporting background to help minimize or eliminate .motorized vehicles (primarily Executive Summary i i Town of Vail delivery trucks) from the Commercial Core for the purpose of enhancing visitor enjoyment and safety. Based on analysis of the present loading and delivery system and the available options for the Commercial Core, short-term and long-term recommendations include the following: • Short-term 1. Use of Variable Message Signs (VMS) at key locations could direct skiers to the parking structures and inform them of appropriate skier drop-off locations. The VMS could also be used to direct loading and delivery traffic to available access routes, loading bays, and dispersed terminals. 2. Consideration should be given to a ticketing structure that penalizes the repeat offender of the loading zones in Vail while not affecting Village guests. First-time offenders pay the maximum hourly rate, and the rate for each subsequent offense is increased significantly. 3. There are several access points into the Village at the present time, only one of which (Checkpoint Charlie) is able to control the entry of delivery traffic. Most delivery vehicles enter .the Commercial Core through Checkpoint Charlie, and many other vehicles enter from the other three access points to the Village, frequently against traffic. In reviewing traffic patterns, traffic flow, and entry access points to the Village, it was discovered there might be some opportunity to further limit access to the Village for all types of vehicles. By guiding vehicle entry to enforceable access points throughout the Commercial Core, the overall traffic volume is dispersed over several access routes. Further, the use of on-street loading bays can be better regulated. 4. The following planning and design function should be accomplished. • An operational and technology plan should be drawn up to implement a traffic management system based upon an electronic communication system that integrates real time VMS, GPS tracking, smart card, Internet computer camera, and dispatch technology with operational and enforcement services. • Along-range plan should be developed that when implemented in phases will interconnect buildings with terminal facilities via back-of-house access routes accommodating hand or motorized carts. The plan should be implemented in conjunction with redevelopment of private property and streetscape improvements. • Amend loading standard in the .zoning code to require enclosed (terminal) loading and delivery bays for a variety of truck types and sizes as part of large development and redevelopment projects. The excess capacity of each terminal should be integrated through developer agreements into the dispersed terminal system. 5. One issue that is a significant contributor to the problem of truck numbers and dwell time in the Commercial Core is the time. some deliveries are made. Earlier delivery of goods could remove the majority of larger delivery vehicles from the Commercial Core before "guest hours." This approach would be most effective if instituted in conjunction with improved signage and some changes in access and traffic flow in the Executive Summary iii Town of Vail Village. Stricter limitations could be put on Viiiage access if delivery personnel could complete deliveries to all establishments before 7:00 a.m. • Long-term 1. Addition of several delivery bays as part of a dispersed terminal on the Land Exchange site (the Vail Front Door project at the base of Vista Bahn/the Lodge at Vail). To effectively service at least one-third to one-half of the Commercial Core, six to ten bays for large trucks would be required. 2. Include enclosed dispersed delivery terminals in large development and redevelopment projects. The Town should also seek opportunities to require or acquire additional delivery bays in these facilities. 3. Provide strategically located, heated pedestrian walkways in the Village and adjacent commercial areas, so that push hand carts, pallet jack size pull carts, and small motorized carts can better function in the winter. 4. Where practical, construction or provision for future construction of underground delivery tunnels with street level freight elevators to facilitate loading and deliveries between .buildings and dispersed delivery terminals should be done in conjunction with large development and redevelopment projects. 5. Construction of a dispersed delivery terminal with one bay for large trucks or four to eight bays for small cargo vans within an automobile parking structure on the P3&J site on Hanson Ranch Road. 6. Change current zoning code requiring additional on or off-site storage requirements per retail square foot for businesses in the Village. 7. Change current zoning code concerning required delivery space. The current zoning code requires delivery space to be ten feet by 25 feet, which is not adequate. Bars, restaurants, and hotels which require delivery of food and beverages should have one to two or more spaces, twelve feet wide and 35 to 50 feet long. This would accommodate most delivery vehicles. The code should allow for required loading bays to be located in a nearby dispersed delivery tunnel. 8. Design dispersed delivery terminals in appropriate locations so that cargo from a large truck can be transferred to a small cargo van. These would access a dispersed cargo van delivery terminal or bay located closer to the delivery destination. 9. Increase the availability of close-in restricted parking spaces within controlled access private parking structures. These would accommodate the delivery needs of residents, maintenance and construction personnel, business owners, and parcel carriers using small cargo vans and pick-ups. This will contribute to the reduced use of on-street loading. bays. Restricted parking spaces could be located in existing and future parking structures built for automobiles. Parking (summary to be provided by FHU) To be completed as a separate document at a later date. { Executive Summary iv Town of Vail In-Town Shuttle Bus System As a response to space limitations, driver shortages, and higher costs, the Town of Vail is evaluating replacing the In-Town Shuttle buses with an alternative transit system. Such a system would have to be capable of carrying 5,000 people per hour (the current peak demand is approximately 4,000 people per hour) and effectively serve a route approximately 1.5 miles in length. The route would have to be similar to the current bus system route while effectively maximizing both ridership and system operations. This update is to determine the best options, from a range of opportunities, for providing mass transit for the Town of Vail In- Town Shuttle bus route. These options are being presented to address the increased demand and other issues discussed below on the In-Town Shuttle. The bus route is roughly a three-mile loop from Vail Village to Lionshead. The analysis of all potential options for the In-Town Shuttle system resulted in the following technologies for final consideration: • Power Unit/Trailer Combination Units • Low-floor Buses • Articulated Transit Buses • Low-floor, Articulated Buses • Guided Busway • Automated Guideway Transit (AGT): • SK • Cableliner DCC • Aeromovel Based on analysis of the remaining technologies and input from two focus group meetings attended by residents and businesses within the Town of Vail, a set of short-term and long- term recommendations for the In-Town Shuttle bus route have been developed and include the following; • Short-term 1. Develop an Express Bus Route from Vail Village to Lionshead -Vail Transit should consider an In-Town Express Bus route between Vail Village and Lionshead. This route would run along the Frontage Road to provide for a quicker, more direct route between the two areas. The express route could also make use of a low-floor, articulated bus. In keeping with the character and space available in the Village Core area, the In-Town Shuttle is better suited for the use of 40-foot buses. However, an express route on the Frontage Road could utilize aloes-floor, articulated bus to increase the capacity. 2. Purchase Low-Emissions Vehicles - To address the problem related to smell/air quality, Vail Transit should consider selecting buses that run on compressed natural gas (CNG) and produce lower emissions. Executive Summary v Town of Vail 3. Improved Information Technology and Information Displays -Electronic message boards which provide real time information should be placed at the Transportation Center, as well as other key stops along the route. Real time information along the route is extremely valuable to transit riders. Such information requires the deployment of an automatic vehicle location system (AVL) to track buses (Vail Transit already has such a system through NEXTbus). The AVL data can be converted into bus arrival times, which can be transmitted to bus stops. 4. Extend In-Town Shuttle Route to Cascade Village - If demand warrants, the In-Town Shuttle route should be extended west to serve Cascade Village. While discussion at the two focus groups held on September 21St, 2001 indicated that the existing In- Town Shuttle route should be extended to serve Cascade Village, Vail Transit should conduct an on/off survey on its West Vail Green and Red routes to determine the number of riders who currently board and/or deboard at the Cascade Village stop and where they are coming from and going to, to better determine the level of demand for a service extension. Extending the In-Town Shuttle route to Cascade Village will add approximately one- half of a mile to each run. This additional mileage would allow vehicles to complete their loops in 50 minutes as opposed to the current 40 minutes, and would not add any substantial cost to the service. • Long-term Develop Guided Busway - If the Town of Vail continues to grow as expected, and capacity on the shuttle needs to be increased to 5,000 pph, Vail Transit should consider the development of a guided Busway to run between Lionshead and Main VaiUCascade Viiiage. The use of a guided Busway would allow vehicles to run on shorter headways and therefore carry additional passengers during peak hours. 2. Install Transit-Activated Signal at High Volume lntersections along Frontage Road - At intersections such as East Lionshead Circle and Frontage Road, buses have difficulty making left-hand turns from the minor street (East Lionshead) onto the major street (Frontage). The Town of Vail could look to install atransit-activated signal system that involves detecting the presence of a bus and, depending on the system logic and the traffic situation, then give the transit vehicle special treatment. The system could give a green signal during peak periods for buses waiting to enter onto the Frontage Road. In addition, real time control technologies can consider not only the presence of a bus, but the bus adherence to schedule and the volume of other traffic. Outlying Bus System This update includes a West Vail route structure review based on the West Vail Red Loop and the West Vail Green Loop. Ridership, schedules, and route information are provided as Executive Summary vi Town of Vail well as short-term and long-term recommendations to streamline the existing route. Also included in this analysis is discussion of a potential undercrossing of I-70 to be constructed in the Simba Run area. In particular, the effects to the West Vail bus route from this undercrossing are determined. Recommendations for the West Vail bus route include the following: • Short-term 1. Streamline Current West Vail Schedules -Vail Transit should change the current schedules, so that buses operating on the West Vail Green and West Vail Red routes depart at the same time. This would provide more balanced east-west service along the North and South Frontage roads and alleviate safety issues generated by transit users having to cross I-70 at-grade to access bus stops along the opposite frontage road. In the winter, this would mean that buses on each route make their first departure from the Transportation Center at 5:45 a.m. Streamlining these schedules would also make the system easier to understand and utilize, which could generate additional ridership. 2. Improved Route Identification -While each of Vail Transit's routes have names and are color-coded, a number, letter, or number and letter designation should also be used to help lead passengers through a trip. The number, letter, or number and letter designation, along with the route name should be displayed on each bus and any printed maps. In addition, vehicles should have some indication of the direction they are going (e.g. West Vail Green Red -North Frontage) so that the new riders can better understand the system. 3. Elimination of Red Sandstone School Stop on West Vail Green and Lionsridge Loop Routes - To make the routes in the West Vail area run more efficiently, two of the routes, West Vail Green and Lionsridge Loop, should eliminate stopping at Red Sandstone School. This route would continue to be served by the West Vail Red and Sandstone routes. The elimination of this stop would reduce the running time of the West Vail Green route and allow vehicles serving the Lionsridge Loop to reach their primary service area faster. 4. Installation of Trailblazer Signs -Trailblazer signs that direct riders to the nearest stop or stops should be installed on major streets and other key strategic stops throughout West and East Vail. These signs would satisfy the need for approach information, and thus should be compatible with route guidance information with regard to location labels, directions, and route designations. Metal trailblazer signs with the appropriate route guidance information can cost anywhere between $500 and $1,000. Executive Summary vii Town of Vail • Long-term 1. Purchase of Additional Low-floor, Articulated Buses - If West Vail continues to grow over the next few years as expected, Vail Transit should consider purchasing two additional low floor, articulated buses to handle the expected increase in demand. These vehicles should be used on the West Vail Green and Red routes.- Low-floor, articulated buses have a 33 percent greater capacity than regular low-floor vehicles. 2. Incorporation of Bus Stops at Simba Run Underpass -While the use of the Simba Run underpass to restructure the West Vail Red and/or West Vail Green routes will not provide any service enhancement or increase in ridership, additional bus stops should be located at each end of the proposed Simba Run underpass along North and South Frontage Roads to improve passenger access to the system and increase safety. These additional stops would serve the West Vail Red and West Vail Green routes, as well as the Lionsridge Loop in the winter. 3. Incorporation of Stops at Lionshead Intermodal Facility -Following completion of the Lionshead Intermodal Facility, Vail Transit should add this location as a stop on the West Vail Green, West Vail Red, and In-Town Shuttle routes. The facility will include significant parking and should become a key transfer point for transit service, which will increase system ridership. In addition to the West Vail bus route, a discussion of the Downvalley bus system (the ECO system) is included. A bus service review is provided and includes information on routing, schedules, and ridership as well as short-term and long-term recommendations to provide more efficient routes. Recommendations for the Downvalley bus system include the following: • Short-term Variable Lane System and GPS at Transportation Center -The transit plaza could be changed to a variable lane system rather than the current assigned lanes for each route. This would include a variable message system to direct buses into certain decks when they arrive. This would allow for staggered bus arrivals, and therefore add more capacity. The variable message system could be incorporated with a Global Positioning System (GPS), a system that allows a central control system to track the location of ali buses at all times. This type of system would allow for greater capacities of buses from downvalley routes rather than the current single lane that is assigned for ECO routes. Executive Summary viii ~ own of van 2. Express Service on Vail to Edwards Route - To reduce the travel time for commuters and other passengers traveling from downvalley locations to Vail and generate additional ridership, express service should be provided on the Vail to Edwards route. This can be done by making some of the existing runs into an express run with limited stops, or by adding an express run, which may require additional vehicles. • Long-term 1. Impact of the IMC on the Eagle Valley Transportation System - If the IMC rail line is constructed between Vail and the Eagle County Airport, two of the existing Eagle Valley Transportation routes -the Vail to Edwards and Vail to Dotsero routes -would essentially be providing redundant service. To eliminate this service redundancy and make the system function better, these routes should be converted into a feeder service, which would serve new rail stations irr Edwards and Dotsero. Feeder routes would be designed to serve residential areas in each town, with runs scheduled to meet arriving and departing trains. Trail System Interface In the original Transportation Master Plan, the 1990 trail system is described and mapped. Recommendations are also included for new trails to be constructed that would tie in with the existing trail system and create abetter-rounded system. This update provides information on trails that have been built in the Town of Vail since 1990 (from the recommendations made). Each new trail is described in terms of location and physical characteristics, and a map is included to illustrate the locations of the new trails. In addition, the recommendations made in 1990 have been re-prioritized to make a high priority of trail improvements that have not yet been implemented. In addition to the re-prioritization of the 1990 trail recommendations, the Town has also identified additional trail links that it considers to be of high priority. These include the following: 1. Lionshead Bypass -from the skier bridge in Lionshead, bypassing Lionshead, and connecting to the existing trail system behind Tree Tops Condominiums 2. Vail Village Bypass -from Vail Road near Checkpoint Charlie, to Vista Bahn 3. Sunburst Road Bypass -from the golf course clubhouse to the west end of Katsos Ranch Path Appendix C1 is a portion of the Eagle County Trails Master Plan. This appendix is included to illustrate how the trail system in the Town of Vail ties in with the Eagle County Trails Master Plan. Execufive Summary ix Town of Vail For reference, Appendix C2 includes the trail maps from the original Transportation Master Plan. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes In 1990, peak hour traffic volumes were collected at 26 intersections along the Frontage Roads in Vail. These counts were taken in March and July during peak weekends. This update includes counts in 2000 at the same intersections in March and July during peak weekends. The counts in 2000 differ because eight of the intersections from the 1990 counts have been reconstructed as four roundabouts; two in West Vail and two in Vail Village, all providing access to and from I-70. The results of the traffic counts are provided as Appendix A1. Appendix A2 also provides peak hour traffic counts completed by Felzburg Holt ~ Ullevig in September 2000 for the Vail Village area. These counts were not conducted for the 1990 Transportation Plan but are included here for reference. Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis The LOS Analysis update provides LOS for the intersections studied in the original Transportation. Master Plan. This update also includes LOS for the newly constructed roundabouts in West Vail and Vail Village. All intersections along the Frontage Road were found to maintain a LOS of C or better, a standard for the Town of Vail, with the exceptions of Vail Valley Drive West (LOS D), Matterhorn Circle (LOS E), and Westhaven Drive (LOS F). Recommendations for these intersections include the following: 1. Traffic signals. Although the Town of Vail has not used traffic signals in the past to maintain the character of the Town, they are still a feasible solution and could be considered. 2. Traffic directors during peak periods of travel. 3. Roundabouts at these intersections. Although the space requirements at the intersections with poor LOS would indicate that roundabouts are not a feasible solution, this possibility should be further examined, as roundabouts are effective tools in creating adequate flow conditions at an intersection. 4. An all-way stop installed at the intersection (this would bring the LOS to C). Implementation Process The implementation process includes a scheduled plan of action for certain elements within the Transportation Master Plan Update. Transportation system elements within the Update should be prioritized as short-term (one to five years), mid-term (six to ten years), and long- term (eleven to 20 years). Recommendations have not been made concerning priorities for Execufive Summary x - own or van the Town as priorities usually change, depending on what is most appropriate at that time. The Town of Vail should develop a flexible plan for prioritizing the recommendations included in this Update. This prioritization plan should remain open and flexible as any changes in priorities may affect other plan elements. An individual chapter is not included to address this element. Plan Monitoring and Updating The original Plan included continuous monitoring and periodic updates of the Transportation Plan to include actions such as periodic traffic counts and a formal plan update every five years. This update to the Transportation Master Plan serves the purpose of updating changes that have taken place in the transportation system for the Town of Vail since 1990. An individual chapter is not included to address this element. Issue that is resolved and no longer applicable: I-70 Access In the original Transportation Master Plan, I-70 access was addressed because of the poor traffic flow at two of the three interchanges (West Vail and Main Vail interchanges). The report outlines the physical and operational characteristics of the interchanges, goals regarding access to I-70, additional crossing capacity of I-70 at these locations, and alternatives to solve the congestion problems at these interchanges. The issue has since been resolved with the construction of roundabouts at these interchanges -two roundabouts to replace the four intersections at West Vail, and two roundabouts to replace the four intersections at Main Vail Additions: Connecting Fixed Guideway Transit Systems Two rail systems that have been proposed are the Inter-Mountain Connection (IMC) and the Colorado Intermountain Fixed Guideway Authority (CIFGA). The IMC is a commuter rail that would primarily use existing tracks and run from Vail to the Eagle County Airport. The CIFGA system is a fixed guideway system that would run from Denver International Airport (DIA) to Vail and eventually the Eagle County Airport. This addition to the Transportation Master Plan addresses these two systems and how they would affect the transportation system in Vail This chapter also includes recommendations for alignments and station locations in the Vail area based on topography and proximity to activity centers. Mapping is provided in Appendix E to show potential alignments for the fixed guideway system. Potential alignments for the CIFGA system include the following: Executive Summary xi Town of Vail • Dowd Junction The CIFGA alignment could enter Vail by way of Dowd Canyon on the existing Union Pacific (U.P.) Railroad tracks. Just before the crossing of I-70 over Highway 6 (Dowd Junction), the alignment would curve to the east, paralleling the existing bike path. At the point where the bike path crosses under I-70, the alignment could follow one of two options. Option 1 would be a tunnel cut through the slope of the mountain north of I-70. This option would parallel I- 70 until the entrance to West Vail, at which point the median opens up and the alignment would cross over to the median. This option would be most beneficial if 1-70 was not capped. Option 2 would bring the alignment into the median under the proposed capping of I-70 through Dowd Canyon, in between the eastbound and westbound lanes. Two other options exist for the alignment in the Dowd Canyon area. Option 3 through this area involves the diversion of the alignment before Dowd Canyon. As I-70 curves to the east and back before Dowd Canyon, the alignment could continue south (instead of curving back west and into Dowd Canyon) and tunnel through into Dowd Canyon just west of West Vail. At this point the alignment could cross into the median and continue into West Vail. Option 4 for the Dowd Junction area includes following the existing rail line into Minturn and then tunneling north back to I-70. This option would be considered because of potential grade problems at Dowd Junction. Options 1 and 2 might face difficulties in creating a rail line that could negotiate the steep grade at the intersection of I-70 and Highway 6. • West Vail For either option discussed above, the alignment would be in the median as CIFGA enters West Vail. The CIFGA alignment would remain in the median, whether or not the capping was to be constructed. A station location could also be constructed in the median for West Vail access at a location determined to be the most practical. This station would include pedestrian crossings to access areas north and/or south of I-70 and the Frontage Roads in West Vail • Main Vail The CIFGA alignment would remain in the median through Main Vail as well, with potential station locations at the proposed North Day Lot Transportation Center in Lionshead and the Vail Transportation Center for pick-up and drop-off of riders. These stations could be constructed in the median of I-70 with pedestrian crossings to access areas north and/or south of I-70 and the Frontage Roads. • East Vail The CIFGA alignment could also remain in the median through East Vail and continue east outside of the Vail city limits. As the IMC is proposed as an interim solution until completion of the CIFGA project, all alignment recommendations might be temporary. These sections could be removed as Executive Summary xii r own or va,- sections of the CIFGA project are completed. However, the IMC could also remain useful as a local service, providing more frequent stops in Vail for downvalley commuters. Any decisions regarding the temporary or permanent use of the IMC would be decided by the Town of Vail upon further studies and public involvement. Recommendations for potential IMC alignments include the following: • Dowd Junction and West Vail The IMC alignment would parallel the CIFGA alignment entering Dowd Canyon and traveling through West Vail (using Option 1 or 2). Shortly after passing by the West Vail Roundabouts and the potential station location in West Vail, the IMC alignment would leave the median, crossing over to the area between I-70 eastbound and South Frontage Road. The alignment would continue to parallel the CIFGA alignment. • Main Vail The alignment would continue to use the space between I-70 eastbound and South Frontage Road, while sharing the potential station locations at Lionshead and the Vail Transportation Center with the CIFGA for pick-up and drop-off. The IMC is proposed to end at the Vail Transportation Center, at which point the line would go back downvalley along the same route. Noise Contour Map This addition includes the creation of a noise contour map based on existing and future traffic volumes in the I-70 corridor. Noise measurements were taken at 50 locations throughout the Town of Vail to determine current noise levels produced primarily by I-70. These existing measurements were used for the development of a noise model. The noise model accounts for terrain features and traffic conditions. A future noise model was then developed based on known development plans and traffic forecasts. The noise model includes planning level noise abatement options. A map of the noise contours with explanatory text will be included as a part of this section in Appendix F2. I-70 Capping Review The Town of Vail has expressed the desire to explore other options to reduce noise levels and bring a greater sense of community cohesion to the Town of Vail. Under consideration is the "capping" of I-70. This would involve the tunneling of I-70 under the existing alignment, using the land above for development or open space purposes. This addition to the Transportation Master Plan provides an analysis of other capping projects completed throughout the. country, critical issues that the Town of Vail would face in considering such a project, and recommendations for locations and land use in constructing a cap. Appendix E provides mapping for potential capping areas along I-70 through Vail. Executive Summary xiii Town of Vail Traffic Model From existing traffic counts, peak hour link volumes were documented and compared with previous 1990 link volumes. Using this information as a base, a spreadsheet-based travel demand model has been prepared for the Frontage Roads and major intersections in the Town of Vail. The model forecasts future traffic based on socio-economic data (housing, population, and employment). Eight traffic analysis zones have been used for the model and these include the following: I-70 East, I-70 West, East Vail, Vail Village, Lionshead, West Vail south of I-70, West Vail north of I-70, and Other Vail north of I-70. The model has been set up for multiple forecast years, and ten and twenty-year forecasts have been conducted. Appendices H1-H5 document the model structure and assumptions made. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PETS) Issues Resolution A PEIS was recently initiated by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for I-70 between Denver and Glenwood Springs (see I-70 Mountain Corridor PEIS, Summary of Issues, J.F. Sato & Associates, June 2000). To prepare for this PEIS planning effort, issues that could potentially affect transportation in Vail were identified and discussed during a focus group attended by residents representing a wide array of interests and backgrounds. This addition to the Transportation Master Plan identifies these issues and potential solutions to the issues that have been recommended by the Town of Vail. The issues and solutions are also presented in the form of a matrix to indicate how different solutions can potentially address more than one issue. Recent or Ongoing Studies In addition to the studies described in this update, other recent or ongoing studies are taking place in the Town of Vail. Some of these are summarized below. Transportation Center Work in Lionshead The North Day Lot Transportation Center is proposed in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (Design Workshop, Inc., December 15, 1998). The Transportation Center would serve to create a major new point of entry into the pedestrian and retail core of Lionshead. It would also play a role in providing for a central transit stop in Lionshead. The Transportation Center would consist of: • Local/regional shuttles • Local/regional transit and charter buses • Short-term skier drop-off area • Pedestrian portal • Combination of large central service and delivery facility • Construction under a structured parking deck • Access to central Lionshead by freight elevators and a service tunnel • Accommodation for a peak volume of 15-20 delivery vehicles and storage space Executive Summary xiv i own or van The Redevelopment Master Plan views the Transportation Center as a priority project as it is a prerequisite for other critical projects discussed in the Plan. Roadway Functional Planning along South Frontage Road for Simba Run Crossing The scope of work for this project involved conceptual design development for three elements: 1. Improvements to the South Frontage Road between Ford Park and just west of Cascade Village 2. A two-lane I-70 underpass at Simba Run 3. Related North Frontage Road improvements at the intersection of the new Simba Run Underpass Other elements of this project: 1. Feasibility of the improvements identified in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan 2. Improvements to drainage at Town Hall and access control 3. Feasibility of the South Frontage Road realignment near the VA shops 4. Space and height constraints at the pedestrian overpass Executive Summary xv Town of Vail ~". As a measure of the Town of Vail Critical Strategies, a noise study was conducted to identify noise impacts created by the traffic on Interstate Highway 70 (1-70) in the Town of Vail. The study included the following tasks: • Analyzing existing noise levels • Determining noise impacts • Determining future noise levels based on projected future traffic volumes • Performing sensitivity analysis to differences in speed, variations of receiver locations, increases in truck traffic, and increases in overall traffic volume • Determining the affect of noise barriers in various locations The noise impacts were analyzed in accordance with the Colorado Department of Transportation's (CDOT) noise policy (CDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidelines, February 1, 1995, See Appendix F1). Traffic noise level predictions were made for two conditions: existing 2000 and year 2020. Site conditions, including horizontal and vertical layout as well as topographical and traffic information, were used as input to the STAMINA 2.0 model. This is the approved noise model used by CDOT. General results of the traffic noise modeling effort are reported below. The results of the noise study indicate that receivers will experience traffic noise levels in excess of CDOT's noise abatement criteria under both the existing 2000 and year 2020 traffic levels. Currently, approximately 25 percent of all the tax assessor's parcels in the Town of Vail exceed a 66-decibel noise level. This percentage represents only residential parcels that exceed the 66-decibel noise level out of the total number of parcels in the Town Noise 7-1 Town of Vail of Vail. Other types of land use including schools, hospitals, parks and hotels are not included in the 25 percent (these other uses represent a small percent of the total number of parcels in the Town of Vail). A description of common noise terminology, a summary of CDOT's noise policy, a description of the noise modeling process, results of the sensitivity analysis, and noise mitigation analysis are discussed below. Noise Terminology Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale, which is often the source of much confusion. What humans hear are pressure fluctuations in the air that are created when something vibrates, such as an engine or the cone of a loudspeaker. The range of pressure fluctuations the human ear can detect is extremely large (20 to 20,000,000 Pascals, the metric unit of pressure). This range is unwieldy to discuss, so the decibel (dB) scale is used to compress the numbers to a more manageable form. On this scale the range of human hearing is approximately 0 d6 (threshold of hearing) to 140 dB (threshold of pain). Some typical noise levels are shown in Table 7-1. Note that these levels are in dB(A), not d6. The "A" denotes that the noise levels have been adjusted according to the A-weighting network. The A- weighting network adjusts noise levels to reflect the fact that the human ear is more sensitive to high frequencies than to low frequencies. A-weighted decibels are most often discussed in reference to outdoor noise situations and are used exclusively in this analysis. Noise 7-2 Town of Vail Table 7-1: Typical Noise Levels Noise Source Noise Level (d6(A)) Amplified rock band 120 Commercial jet takeoff at 61 meters (200 ft) 110 Community warning siren at 31 meters (100 ft) 100 Busy urban street 90 Construction equipment at 15 meters (50 ft) 80 Freeway traffic at 15 meters (50 ft) 70 Normal conversation at 2 meters (6 ft) 60 Typical office interior 50 Soft radio music 40 Typical residential interior 30 Typical whisper at 2 meters (6 ft) 20 Human breathing 10 Threshold of hearing 0 Outdoor noise levels are almost constantly fluctuating, particularly near a highway. The unit called the equivalent average sound level (Leq) is used to quantify the fluctuating noise level into a single number. The Leq has the same sound energy as the time-varying noise level over a stated time period (essentially the average noise level). The time period used in highway noise analysis is one hour. All noise levels discussed in this report are A-weighted, hourly Legs representing the loudest hour of traffic. The loudest hour of traffic is usually represented when traffic volumes on the roadway reach Level of Service C. Levels of Service C traffic volumes are defined as traffic running at stable operations, however, the ability to maneuver and change lanes in mid-block locations may be restricted. Longer queues, adverse signal coordination or both, may contribute to lower travel speeds. Noise 7-3 Town of Vail CDOT's Noise Policy The CDOT has adopted the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) policy and guidance for highway traffic noise analysis and abatement (see Appendix F1). This guidance sets a standard to determine when federal and/or state funds can be used for noise mitigation related to highway traffic noise. The guidance establishes standards for noise abatement on both new construction projects (Type I projects) and for noise abatement on an existing highway (Type II projects). This noise analysis uses the noise abatement guidance for a Type II project. The standards used by FHWA and CDOT are used as representative criteria so the Town of Vail has a recognized basis for considering noise impacts. The FHWA policy on noise mitigation states that noise mitigation must be considered for any receptor (e.g. a residence) or group of receptors (e.g. a neighborhood) where predicted traffic noise levels, using traffic volumes and roadway conditions projected 20 years into the future, approach or exceed the noise abatement criteria (NAC). The NAC establish the criteria to determine noise impacts on receivers. Relevant NAC are shown in Table 7-2. The CDOT NAC assume traffic noise is considered to "approach" a criterion at a level 1 d6(A} less than the criterion (e.g. 66 dB(A) for Category B). Table 7-2: CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category Ley* (d6(A)) Description of Activity Category B 67 (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. C 72 (Exterior) Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in the category above (this includes retail businesses). " Hourly A-weighted equivalent level for the noisiest hour of the day in the design year In 1996, the FHWA released an interim final rule that revised the FHWA regulation that allows federal participation for Type II projects. The interim final rule states that for Type II projects, noise abatement measures will only be approved for projects that were approved by the state Department of Transportation (DOT) before November 28, 1995, or are proposed along lands where land development or substantial construction predated the existence of any highway. The FHWA stated that the implementation of Type II projects is a strictly voluntary decision made by a DOT and there are no special or separate federal funds to provide highway traffic noise abatement. Noise 7-4 Town of Vail Currently in Colorado, the use of state transportation funds for noise abatement is only considered for highway construction on a new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway, Type I projects. However, until 1999, CDOT had a Type II project program in place. Appendix F1 shows the priority listing of projects falling under the previous Type II program. The Town of Vail had four projects on the list. One of those projects was second on the list for funding, before the Type II program was cancelled. During the previous Type II program in Colorado, Type II projects were funded by both federal dollars as well as state transportation dollars. The amount of federal and state dollars a project was eligible for was based on the roadway classification. While FHWA dollars are no longer available for Type II noise abatement projects, the FHWA currently states that some state highway associations allow a third party to pay the difference between the actual cost of a traffic noise barrier and the cost that is deemed to be reasonable. The FHWA recognizes that this is a method that may provide abatement for traffic noise problems that might otherwise go unmitigated. Noise Analysis A traffic noise analysis along I-70 through the Town of Vail was conducted using the FHWA's computerized noise prediction model, STAMINA 2.0 (using Colorado emission data). This program evaluates the noise energy produced by traffic in a segment of roadway based on the traffic volume, speed, and types of vehicles using the roadway. Site-specific horizontal and vertical conditions are also input to STAMINA in addition to traffic volume and speed data. Using existing mapping of the I-70 corridor through Vail, an XYZ-coordinate system was created. The alignment of the roadway (I-70) was translated into the XYZ-coordinate system.. By inputting the alignment as XYZ-coordinates to the STAMINA noise model, the model recreates the alignment of the roadway. Noise readings were also taken along the 1-70 corridor though Vail. A total of 50 readings were selected to serve as a representative receiver sample. Each reading location (representative receiver site) was translated to the XYZ-coordinate system based on the existing mapping. The representative receiver site coordinates were also input to the STAMINA model. The STAMINA model created an electronic schematic of the I-70 con-idor through Vail, including the representative receiver site locations. By inputting the traffic volume, speed, and types of vehicles using the I-70 corridor, the model predicts the noise levels at each representative receiver site based on the receiver position from the roadway. Since the model does not take into account any obstacles between the receiver and the roadway which may prevent sound energy from reaching the receivers (e.g., buildings, vegetation, and partial barriers), the representative receiver readings served as validation Noise 7-5 Town of Vail measurements to determine the amount of sound energy blocked at each representative receiver location. The amount of sound energy that is blocked by obstacles is called the shielding factor. This shielding factor was used to calibrate the noise model. The model also does not take into account sound energy that may be reflected off surrounding terrain or structures that may increase the amount of sound energy experienced at a receiver location. The validation measurements account for this reflection. Two noise models were created. One model produces the existing year 2000 noise levels and the other model predicts the future year 2020 noise levels, based on predicted traffic growth. Both of the models use average annual daily traffic (AADT) volumes. Analysis of the model's sensitivity to differences in speed, variations of receiver locations, and increases in truck traffic were also pertormed. Noise Receptors Studied The study area defined for the noise analysis is shown in Figure 7-1. A total of 50 representative receiver sites were selected to serve as a representative sample within the project area. The receivers are identified as receiver 1 (R1) though receiver 50 (R50). The receivers were modeled at five feet above ground elevation (representing a standing adult) and were measured at an area of outdoor activity associated with each location. Figure 7-1 shows the approximate location of the noise receivers analyzed in the study. Based ort the modeling, a noise contour map was prepared and then the total number of affected receptors was determined using the Town of Vail Geographic Information System (GIS). The noise contour map for the existing condition is shown in Appendix F2. Traffic Characteristics In order to determine the traffic noise impacts associated with I-70, existing and predicted noise levels were modeled for both the 2000 existing condition and the year 2020 predicted condition. Existing 2000 traffic volumes were determined by assuming astraight-line growth pattern between 1997 AADT counts (collected by CDOT) and 2020 predicted AADT counts (for 2020 traffic predictions, see Chapter 9; Traffic Model). Using hourly traffic counts collected by CDOT a peak hour factor of eight percent was determined. The hourly traffic counts collected by CDOT also provided an average of four percent medium trucks and seven percent heavy trucks on the roadway. The average speed used in the model was 70 miles per hour (mph), as validated with a speed study. Noise 7-6 Town of Vail The I-70 corridor through Vail is divided into four separate segments. The segment divisions are determined by different traffic characteristics. Table 7-3 illustrates the traffic volumes, type of traffic, and average speeds that each of the four segments carries. The categories of traffic volume, type of traffic, and average speed were used as input to the STAMINA model in order to predict noise levels along the I-70 corridor through Vail. Table 7-3: I-70 Segment Characteristics Segment I-70 Segment 2000 2020 °~° % % Average Location Number AADT AADT Medium Heavy Passenger Speed in Vail (Milepost) {2-Way {2-Way Trucks Trucks Cars (mph) Traffic) Traffic) W. Vaii 1 (171.43-173.32) 44178 68700 4.6 4.1 91.3 70 Central Vail 2 (173.32-176.03) 31048 49700 4.2 6.0 89.9 70 Central 3 (176.03-179.87) 24474 38300 4.2 7.6 88.1 70 E. Vail 4 (179.87-181.98) 20209 31600 4.0 9.0 87.0 70 Modeling Results A total of 50 representative receiver sites were analyzed to determine the level of noise impacts associated with the different locations along the 1-70 corridor. The approximate location of each receiver is illustrated schematically in Figure 7-1. Existing noise levels were computed to be in a range from 47.2 dB(A) at a representative receiver site 1,125 feet from I-70 to 75.4 dB(A) at a representative receiver site 150 feet from I-70. Future conditions were computed to be in a range from 49.1 dB(A) at a representative receiver site 1,125 feet to 77.5 dB(A) at a representative receiver site 150 feet from I-70. Table 7-4 shows the predicted noise level reading and the difference between the existing noise level and the 2020 predicted noise level. Noise 7-7 Town of vau 0 ti' cD VI 00 ~`~'est ~al1 R19 X238 R2 1~~~ ~23U ;R37„R36 ..:1216 ~,.,.~.-:~._ ~~ 4 ~.,._~~`~73' ,'',.,.-._..~.~~_._,..R3~...._- ,~}~ r-~z3~ Asa ~~ z1~32 -R13 °R26 "C231 X77:, R12'~f .~?q ~,/ R ~ 5 ~~~Its ~~: ~4 X25 u ' ~1 <~~ ~1 ,~ Receiver locations with noise levels currently in excess of 66 d6(A) are bolded Figure 7-1: Receiver Locations 0 ~, Last V ai! ~.s1`~`ti ~ ~=t5 R44 ~4. R42 > R>v ~ ,' 1244 4f Rd: Rd8 ~. v o•I Table 7-4: Noise Model Results Receiver Distance Existing 2000 Difference in 2020 Noise Energy Receiver from Roadway Noise Energy d6(A) Levels (dB(A)) (feet) Levels (dB(A)) (2020-existing) R1 150 70.0 72.0 2.0 R2 530 60.1 62.0 1.9 R3 1275 59.1 61.0 1.9 R4 1150 54.5 56.4 1.9 R5 540 57.1 59.0 1.9 R6 275 61.4 63.3 1.9 R7 320 61.0 63.0 2.0 R8 625 63.3 65.4 2.1 R9 1000 61.5 63.6 2.1 R10 2100 58.9 61.0 2.1 R11 925 60.1 62.1 2.0 R12 300 61.3 63.3 2.0 R13 310 57.8 59.8 2.0 R14 670 61.1 63.1 2.0 R15 1475 60.3 62.4 2.1 R16 1430 59.3 61.3 2.0 R17 925 65.4 67.4 2.0 R18 150 75.4 77.5 2.1 R19 1900 56.0 58.0 2.0 R20 1550 52.5 54.5 2.0 R21 300 69.2 71.2 2.0 R22 1930 58.1 60.2 2.1 R23 170 61.9 63.9 2.0 R24 750 58.3 60.3 2.0 R25 1200 54.5 56.6 2.1 R26 1450 52.4 54.4 2.0 R27 650 62.9 64.9 2.0 RZ$ 120 68.8 70.7 1.9 R29 680 55.4 57.3 1.9 R30 1080 54.7 56.6 1.9 Noise 7-9 Town of Vail Receiver Distance Existing 2000 Difference in Receiver from Roadway Noise Energy 2020 Noise Energy dB(A) feet Levels d6 A Levels (dB(A)) ( ) ( ()) (2020-existing) R31 1470 53.5. 55.4 1,9 R32 1000 66.3 68.2 1.9 R33 750 53.2 55.2 2.0 R34 860 55.9 57.8 1.9 R35 250 57.6 59.5 1.9 R36 550 61.0 62.9 1.9 R37 900 61.5 63.5 2.0 R38 1100 59.7 61.6 1.9 R39 730 53.7 55.6 1.9 R40 770 56.3 58.3 2.0 R41 175 55.2 57.1 1.9 R42 1125 47.2 49.1 1.9 R43 580 56.1 58.0 1.9 R44 180 54.8 56.8 2.0 R45 540 54.6 56.6 2.0 R46 1050 58.3 60.3 2.0 R47 1650 51.0 52.7 1.7 R48 628 55.3 57.3 . 2.0 R49 600 52.7 54.7 2.0 R50 450 61.3 63.2 1.9 *Shaded rows represent receivers that exceed the 66-dB(A) approach threshold in the year 2020. Five of the representative receiver sites are found to have noise levels in excess of the noise impact criteria. These receivers, R1, R18, R21, R28, and R32 are currently above the 66- dB(A) noise level, noise abatement criteria for activity category B. Figure 7-1 shows these affected receivers in bold-faced type. For the year 2020, six of the representative receiver sites were predicted to have noise levels in excess of the noise impact criteria. These receivers, R1, R17, R18, R21, R28, and R32 are predicted to have noise levels above 66 dB(A) in the year 2020, based on projected traffic increases. The largest noise levels will occur for receivers located closest to I-70 or with the best line of sight of I-70. However, an increase in the distance from I-70 does not always reflect a decrease in noise level. Each receiver may have a different shielding effect based on obstacles between the receiver and the roadway, which may prevent sound energy from Noise 7-10 .Town of Vail reaching a receiver site (e.g., buildings, vegetation, and partial barriers). Table 7-5 defines a range of noise levels for the distance from I-70 through the Vail area for both the existing and the predicted 2020 conditions. In all cases the difference between the existing noise levels and the predicted 2020 noise levels should not be detectable to the human ear (i.e., less than 3 dB(A), studies have shown a 3-dB(A) increase is barely detectable by the human ear). Table 7-5: Noise Level Ranges Based on Distance from I-70 Distance Existing 2020 From I-70 (ft) Noise Level Range (d6(A)) Noise Level Range (dB(A)) 200 53-76 57-78 400 57-70 59-72 600 53-62 55-64 800 53-64 55-66 1000 56-67 58-69 1200 47-60 49-62 1400 59* 61'` 1600 52-60 54-62 1800 51* 53* 2000 56-60 58-61 "only one representative receiver located within this distance from I-70 Appendix F2 shows noise contour maps developed to estimate noise levels at any location in the Vail area. Contour maps of the existing 2000 condition as well as the predicted 2020 condition have been produced. These should be used as a guide only, due to the variability of noise levels in the Vail area caused by shielding and reflection. The maps help to identify the actual number of receiver sites in the Vail area that are affected by noise levels: Actual noise measurements should be taken in order to determine the exact noise levels at any specific location. Receiver sites may vary from single-unit structures to structures housing multiple units. The actual number of affected receivers is based on the number of units per structure. Sensitivity Analysis A sensitivity analysis was performed based on differences in speed, variations of receiver locations, increases in truck traffic, and increases in overall traffic volume. For the categories Noise 7-11 Town of Vail of speed, receiver locations, and truck traffic, two sensitivity runs were performed. Overall traffic volume sensitivity is displayed as a table. While noise levels are predicted to increase based on the sensitivity analyses, the average increases represent levels that are not normally perceptible to the human ear. Studies have shown a 3-d6(A) increase in noise level is barely detectable by the human ear. Speed The existing year 2000 noise model was altered to model the existing traffic volumes at 60 mph and 55 mph. The analysis showed that on average, an increase of 0.7 dB(A) occurs with every five mph increase in speed. Noise level increases would be barely detectable over a 20 mph range (<3 d6(A)). Receiver Locations The existing year 2000 noise model was altered to model differing heights at the representative receiver sites. This shows how noise energy changes by level within multi- level structures. All receivers were modeled at ten feet higher than initial elevation and 20 feet higher than the initial elevation. The analysis showed that on average, an increase of 0.04 dB(A) occurred for the first ten-foot increase in elevation and an increase of 0.002 d6(A) occurred for the second ten-foot increase in elevation. This analysis assumed that each level of a multi-level structure has the same shielding factor. In other words, each level of a multi-level structure has the same amount of sound energy blocked by obstacles (e.g., buildings, vegetation, and partial barriers). This assumption may not hold true in all cases. As the height increases for the receiver, the shielding effects realized at a lower level may have no effect on a receiver at a higher level. to areas of heavier vegetation, noise levels are often Lower at ground level due to these shielding effects. Truck Traffic Increases The predicted year 2020 noise model was altered to model different percentages of truck traffic increase. The model analyzed an overall increase of two percent and an overall increase of four percent of trucks in the traffic mix. The analysis showed that on average, an increase of 0.3 d6(A) occurred for a two percent increase in truck traffic and an increase of 0.6 dB(A) occurred for a four percenf increase in truck traffic. Noise level increases would be barely detectable up to 3 dB(A). Noise 7-12 Town of Vail Traffic Volume Increases The predicted year 2020 noise model uses an AADT volume of between 31,600 vehicles and 68,700 vehicles, depending on the segment of I-70. This AADT is an estimated increase from existing AADT. A sensitivity analysis of the relative noise level increase based on increased traffic volumes was performed. Table 7-6 demonstrates the relative noise level increase based on traffic volumes. Table 7-6: Relative Noise Level Increases Based on Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes Relative Noise Level Noise Level Increase (Average Daily Traffic) (dB(A)) (per 5000 Vehicles per day) 40000 46.0 N/A 45000 46.5 0.5 50000 46.9 0.4 55000 47.4 0.4 60000 47.7 0.3 65000 48.1 0.3 70000 48.5 0.3 75000 48.8 0.3 80000 49.0 0.2 Future traffic volumes will also have an additive effect on the existing noise contour lines. The 2020 traffic predictions show the average traffic on I-70 is to increase by 57 percent of the existing traffic on I-70. This increased traffic produces an average increase of 2 dB(A) to the existing contour lines for the 2020 condition. Again, noise level increases would be barely detectable up to 3 dB(A). Short Duration Point Source Noise The noise produced from engine °jake" brakes and rumble strips were measured and analyzed to determine the effect of short duration point source noise on the overall noise levels produced by the general 1-70 traffic. The average increase in noise based on short duration point source noise generated from "jake" brakes and rumble strips is shown in the tables below. The tables reflect the average dB(A) increase to be added to each of the existing contour lines to reflect the presence of short duration point sources. In general, "jake" brakes add 6 d8(A) at the source and rumble strips add 9 dB(A) at the source. This incremental increase in noise becomes smaller as the distance from I-70 increases. Table 7-7 shows the effect of jake brake noise and Table 7-8 shaves the effect of rumble strip noise. Noise 7-13 i own or van Table 7-7: Decibel Increases Based on "Jake" Brake Noise Existing Noise Contour (dB(A)) Relative Decibel Increase (dB(A)) 70 2.0 66 1.0 60 0.5 Table 7-8: Decibel Increases Based on Rumble Strip Noise Existing Noise Contour (dB(A)) Relative Decibet Increase (dB(Aj) 70 4.0 66 3.0 60 1.0 Noise 7-14 Town of Vail Noise Abatement Identifying Noise Mitigation Currently, representative receiver locations R1, R18, R21, R28, and R32 (representing approximately 540 receivers) were recognized as having noise levels above 66 d6(A). This is the level at which noise abatement is considered. In the year 2020, representative receiver locations R1, R17, R18, R21, R28, and R32 (representing approximately 600 receivers) were recognized as having noise levels above 66 dB(A). While these numbers reflect the number of receivers accounted for by the representative receiver locations, the numbers do not reflect the total number of affected receivers (those receivers that experience noise levels exceeding the 66-dB(A) approach criteria) located in the Town of Vail. In order to determine the total number of affected receivers, refer to the noise contour maps presented in Appendix F1. Mitigation Strategies There are many possible ways to reduce the noise levels produced by the traffic on I-70. Below is a list of possible mitigation strategies. Long Term Strategies (require construction) Barriers Berms Concrete walls (with and without form liners) Wood wails Glass walls Metal walls Absorptive walls Masonry walls Jersey Barriers Bury or cap I-70 White noise Noise Cancellation Pavement type Insulation Short Term Strategies (no construction) Enforcement Lower speed limits No passing for trucks Noise 7-15 -own or van Reduce volumes Noise Ordinances Noise Ordinances by time of day Engine Brake ordinances Variable message speed sign (VMS) Static truck warning sign In order to better understand the strategies listed above, pictures and descriptions are listed below. long Tenn Strategies (requires construction) Barriers Noise abatement barriers are the most common type of highway rioise mitigation. The CDOT currently considers barriers only for new construction, widening, or major realignment of highways. CDOT considers noise abatement of less than 5 dB(A) unreasonable due to the negligible human perception. Barrier effectiveness is usually limited to 10 to 12 dB(A), although some special techniques can improve barrier performance by 3 to 5 d6(A). In the Vail area, barriers are expected to be more effective on the south side of I-70 as most land use is lower than the roadway and the line of sight is easier to block. Noise barriers on the north side may not be effective for land uses located significantly above the roadway. Barrier cost varies depending upon type, style, and height. Berms may be constructed for as little as $0.5 million per mile, while structural barriers may average around $2.0 million per mile for the Vail area. There are several different types of barriers as presented below: • Berms. Noise attenuation berms have the advantage of being less expensive to construct and have the potential for landscaping. A disadvantage is that they require more space to construct. Atypical noise berm in Vail is estimated to be approximately 60 feet wide. Bean in Vail Noise 7-16 Town of Vail Concrete Wall Form liners can be used on concrete walls to create various types of designs. Form Liners Concrete walls. Concrete noise abatement walls are becoming more common because of their longer life and ease of maintenance. Concrete walls can be simple walls or can be constructed with form liners that allow various designs (shown below). Noise 7-17 Town of Vail • Wood walls. Previously a common type of construction in Colorado and other states, this type of noise abatement wall has fallen out of favor due to the shorter life span and higher maintenance cost. ~ ' '~' ~' c.~." ` A~' r ~. - s' ~ i ., , . i :. ~, `'t u _, i ~- s' ~" . ~ . ' + r ~ 9 ~ 3 •:~ r s~i ~; ~ ~' s; t ; '3; e r ' ~~ ^ ~ is `,w Y;., f. a Y_ 3 k= M~~ ~,.,. ..~,.: ~,r _ ~ ~ ~' ~~ ~ ~;~ : ~ ~ .~. ~ ~~y <_, . ~. Glass Noise Wall, France Plywood Noise Wail • Glass walls. Most of the research for glass walls has been done in Canada and Europe. Glass walls are currently not approved for use by CDOT due to concerns of highway glare, scratching, and cleaning maintenance. Noise 7-18 Town of Vail Glass Noise Wall, France • Metal walls. Several manufacturers produce metal walls. These are typically metal panels that are supported by posts. • Absorptive walls. Absorptive noise abatement walls provide voids within the wall to "trap" noise. Absorptive walls have higher capital and maintenance costs, but can provide additional noise attenuation particularly when parallel barriers are constructed. ~~ . ~~; ~.a~ ~w~ - -, ~ ~ ~-~ ~n ~ e~.:n+ xw Masonry Form Liner Wall • Masonry walls. CDOT's current focus appears to be masonry walls. These can be built on site or pre- manufactured and installed as panels. Recent variations create a masonry feel with a concrete form liner. __ ___ Noise 7-19 Town of Vail Masonry Form Liner Wall 1-25, Colorado Springs, (neighborhood side) Absorptive Noise Wall (post and panel) • Jersey Barriers. Also known as a Type 4 guardrail, these 32-inch high concrete guardrails are common along state highways. In recent noise measurements conducted along State Highway 82, these barriers were found to reduce noise levels by approximately 2.5 dB(A) for receivers located at the same elevation as the roadway. These barriers would appear to provide similar noise abatement for many receivers located on the south side of I-70 within Vail and some receivers located on the north side of I-70 within Vail. Bury or cap I-70 Totally enclosing f-70 would prevent any highway noise from leaving the highway. However, both ends of the enclosure (tunnel entrances if acut-and-cover tunnel was constructed) will produce higher levels of noise. These higher levels of noise would need to be mitigated. White noise This type of noise abatement is not used for highway noise. It is typically an indoor background noise generated to mask other noise. Noise Cancellation This is accomplished by creating an opposite and equal sound pressure wave to a known noise generator. It can be effective on very specific pieces of machinery or also equipment that is enclosed. This cannot be used for pavement noise and could only be used for engine and stack noise if each individual vehicle has a noise cancellation device installed. These devices are very specific and are not currently available for vehicles. Pavement type Open graded asphalt is generally considered to reduce tire noise by 2 to 4 d6 (A) over dense graded asphalt. Noise reduction is due to the voids in the pavements caused by open (or uniform) grading. However, since there is no hard data or research on the subject, the FHWA's official position is that they will not allow any adjustments in noise analysis or noise abatement (or allow states to do so) until additional research is done. It is thought that the noise abatement benefits are lost as the voids get filled up with dust, sand, and other material. Other benefits of open-graded asphalt are that it provides better drainage and therefore better traction in wet conditions. Europeans have been known to wash and vacuum their open-graded asphalt for these reasons. Asphalt is generally considered quieter than concrete pavement although studies by the State of Washington indicate that after seven years, concrete pavement becomes quieter due to wear. Noise 7-20 Town of Vail Insulation A form of noise mitigation that is very uncommon for highway traffic noise and is somewhat common for airport noise abatement is insulation. This technique only works for enclosed buildings and its effectiveness depends greatly on the insulating materials used. This is generally considered the most expensive form of mitigation. Since Vail is in a cold climate, most buildings are typically already we11 insulated. Short Term Strategies (no construction) Enforcement Recent speed data by the Vail Police Department indicated that average speeds on I-70 are approximately 70 mph.- It is unknown if the presence of the radar trailer caused drivers to slow down. If better enforcement of speeds along I-70 resulted in a five mph reduction of average speeds, the expected noise reduction would be 0.7 dB(A). This noise level decrease is not normally perceptible to the human ear. Studies have shown a 3-dB(A) difference in noise level is barely detectable by the human ear. Lower Speed Limits Traffic speeds directly affect highway noise. This is primarily due to tire noise and is affected more by cars. In general, a ten mph reduction in average highway speed will reduce noise by 1.5 dB(A). If the average speed for trucks only was reduced by ten mph, the average noise would drop by about 0.7 dB(A). This noise level decrease is not normally perceptible to the human ear. Studies have shown a 3-d6(A) difference in noise level is barely detectable by the human ear. No passing for trucks This mitigation was suggested by a focus group of Vail property owners and residents. If restrictions on passing reduced overall speeds for trucks, noise could be reduced. This is not expected to result in any significant noise reduction. Reduce volumes This mitigation option was also raised by the focus group. The discussion considered that restrictions be placed on trucks such that a greater majority would take alternative east - west routes such as I-80 through Wyoming. A ten percent reduction in truck traffic is estimated to reduce noise by approximately 1.5 dB(A). This noise level decrease is not normally perceptible to the human ear. Studies have shown a 3-dB(A) difference in noise level is barely detectable by the human ear. Noise 7-21 Town of Vail Noise Ordinances Although the Town of Vail already has noise ordinances in place, additional ordinances or better enforcement could provide additional noise abatement. The current noise ordinance is 90 dB(A) at 25 feet for gross vehicle weight over 10,000 pounds. A truck conforming to the State Muffler Law traveling at 65 mph produces 86 dB(A) which conforms to the current noise ordinance. For I-70 truck traffic, noise ordinances could include reduced speeds, restrictions on engine "jake" brakes, and time restrictions. These would have to be coordinated and potentially approved by CDOT and FHWA. Noise Ordinances by time of day In general, most people are affected more by noise during nighttime hours than daytime hours. Federal agencies that recognize this typically penalize nighttime noise by 10 d6(A) when analyzing noise impacts. This could be recognized by incorporating restrictions on nighttime traffic. Engine Brake Ordinances Commonly called "jake" brakes, these compression brakes on trucks generate higher levels of noise. In general, "jake" brakes add 6 dB(A) at their source. However, since this is a point source, it dissipates more rapidly than a continuous line of traffic. At most receivers close to I-70 (at the 70 dB(A) contour), a jake brake adds about 2 dB(A) of noise. This noise generated from a jake brake has a distinctly different sound than typical traffic noise and is therefore more noticeable. At receivers farther away, the relative increase is less, 1.0 dB(A), at the 66-dB(A) contour, and 0.5 dB(A) at the 60-dB(A) contour. If engine brakes were prohibited in Vail, these point source noises could be eliminated. Variable Message Speed Sign (VMS) The VMS would provide a speed measurement for passing traffic, similar to the VMS in Glenwood Canyon. Static Truck Warning Sign A static truck warning sign would provide a warning for truckers that grades continue ahead and to maintain low speeds to prevent the necessity for using engine brakes, similar to truck warning signs at Mt. Vernon Canyon. Modeling Mitigation A third noise model was developed based on the results of the existing and future conditions modeled. The third model incorporates future conditions (worst case) with noise mitigation measures in place. Noise walls were modeled as abatement in various locations along the I- 70 corridor through Vail. The walls were modeled per CDOT maintenance standards. The walls were positioned 20 feet from the outside lane line along I-70. This distance from the lane line provides a full twelve-foot shoulder, as well as eight feet for snow storage. The Noise 7-22 Town of Vail distance also prevents the wall casting shadows in the travel lanes of I-70. Typical sections for noise walls on the north and south side of I-70 are shown in Appendix F1. The optimized height used to model the noise walls was determined by using the predicted attenuation provided by barrier Homographs. Based on variations in the height of the wall and the location of receivers through the I-70 corridor, attenuation was maximized. An Excel spreadsheet and figures representing the varying heights of noise walls and the amount of attenuation produced based on the barrier Homographs are included in Appendix F1. Table 7-9 describes the noise walls modeled. Table 7-9: Noise Wall Descriptions Wall Representative Receiver Sites Protected Approximate Length (feet) Barrier Height (feet) A R1, R2, R3 4700 12 B N/A* 1200 12 C R4, R5, R6 2500 16 D R7, R8, R9 3650 12 E R10, R11, R12 3650 16 F R13, R14, R15 2450 12 G R16, R17, R18, R19, R20, R21 6700 16 H N/A* 900 16 I R23, R24 4050 12 J R22, R25, R26, R27, R28 2750 12 K R31,R32,R33 7000 12 L N/A* 950 16 N R35 2300 12 M R36, R37, R38 550 16 O N/A* 1400 16 *Receiver sites were not modeled at these locations. Noise walls were modeled here based on the actual land use at these locations. See Appendix F1 for more detail. The top elevation of the walls located on the north side of I-70 was modeled at sixteen feet above the edge of pavement. The top elevation of the walls located on the south side of I-70 was modeled at twelve feet above the edge of pavement. In some instances the walls located on the south side of I-70 may actually be taller than twelve feet if the noise wall must be built on a retaining wall. The bottom elevation of the wall may be below the elevation of the edge of pavement. The difference in the height of the barriers is due to the difference in the topography of the I-70 corridor and the maximization of attenuation. The north side of I- Noise 7-23 Town of Vail 70 is a steep upward slope, while the south side of I-70 is a valley. Barriers were not modeled on any bridge structure. This caused for some gaps in the walls, which reduces the effectiveness of the barrier attenuation. Figure 7-2 shows the approximate locations of the noise walls modeled. While a particular wall may not show protection of a representative receiver site, actual receivers exist behind the wall. Walls have been modeled in locations that protect impacted receivers based on the predicted contour lines for the 2020 condition. Noise contour maps reflecting the affect of the modeled noise walls is included in Appendix F2. The year 2020 noise levels, at the modeled representative receiver sites with and without mitigation, are presented in Table 7-10. The noise levels shown in Table 7-10 do not reflect the affect of having parallel barriers in place. The STAMINA model does not produce results reflecting this condition. By having parallel barriers, especially when the heights of the parallel walls vary, the potential of noise reflecting off of the walls and back to the receivers is very likely. This parallel barrier effect could potentially increase the noise levels of certain receivers above levels currently experienced. If a more detailed analysis of the proposed noise abatement shows potential for reflection, absorptive materials should be used on the top of the wall face to reduce the parallel barrier effect. Noise 7-24 Town of Vail 0 m ~, ':~i=~. L 7 ~ + (~:~ ~~~; v N 0 ~., ~.' fi ~ .. ..~ -~~.u~ t '~~r~~t ~'titil ~ ~` ~~ '+~:~~~...L.'~ ~,~~~. .~ W f:~~ : ~ Receiver locations with noise levels currently in excess of 66 dB(A) are bolded Figure 7-2: Approximate Noise Wall Locations 0 v Table 7-10: Noise Model Results with Mitigation Measures in Place Receiver Receiver Distance from Roadway (FT) 2020 Noise Energy Levels (dB(A)) 2020 Noise Energy Levels (d6(A)) Attenuation from noise barriers modeled (dB(A)) R1 150 72.0 59.1 12.9 R2 530 62.0 51.9 10.1 R3 1275 61.0 55.4 5.6 R4 1150 56.4 52.4 4.0 R5 540 59.0 52.6 6.4 R6 275 63.3 53.0 10.3 R7 320 63.0 50.5 12.5 R8 625 65.4 56.8 8.6 R9 1000 63.6 59.4 4.2 R10 2100 61.0 55.4 5.6 R11 925 62.1 55.5 6.6 R12 300 63.3 51.9 11.4 R13 310 59.8 48.1 11.7 R14 670 63.1 55.4 7.7 R15 1475 62.4 56.2 6.2 R16 1430 61.3 57.4 3.9 R17 925 67.4 64.2 3.2 R18 150 77.5 61.0 16.5 R19 1900 58.0 50.4 7.6 R20 1550 54.5 50.8 3.7 R21 300 71.2 49.8 21.4 R22 1930 60.2 56.2 4.0 R23 170 63.9 62.0 1.9 R24 750 60.3 55.6 4.7 R25 1200 56.6 51.9 4.7 R26 1450 54.4 48.5 5.9 R27 650 64.9 56.9 8.0 R28 120 70.7 55.3 15.4 R29 680 57.3 56.0 1.3 R30 1080 56.6 55.2 1.4 Noise 7-26 Town of Vaii Receiver Distance 2020 Noise 2020 Noise Attenuation from Receiver from Roadway Energy Levels Energy Levels noise barriers (FT) (dB(A)) (dB(A)) . modeled (d6(A)) R31 1470 55.4 49.6 5.8 R32 1000 68.2 61.3 6.9 R33 750 55.2 47.6 7.6 R34 860 57.8 56.7 1.1 R35 250 59.5 58.0 1.5 R36 550 62.9 55.4 7.5 R37 900 63.5 58.5 5.0 R38 1100 61.6 56.5 5.1 R39 730 55.6 54.2 1.4 R40 770 58.3 56.8 1.5 R41 175 57.1 55.7 1.4 R42 1125 49.1 47.6 1.5 R43 580 58.0 56.5 1.5 R44 180 56.8 55.3 1.5 R45 540 56.6 55.1 1.5 R46 1050 60.3 58.8 1.5 R47 1650 52.7 51.3 1.4 R48 628 57.3 55.8 1.5 R49 600 54.7 53.2 1.5 R50 450 63.2 61.7 1.5 Cost of Mitigation Each of the walls modeled affect different numbers of receivers. The CDOT Noise Abatement Guidelines provide a cost allowance reflecting the effectiveness of the barrier. The NAC lists a cost ceiling of $3000/decibel reduction/receiver as being a reasonable cost. The CDOT NAC realizes attenuation only for those receivers experiencing at least a 3-dB(A) reduction in noise levels. The receivers included in the cost/benefit ratio are usually limited to the first row of buildings. In built-up residential or commercial areas, the first row of buildings along a highway may provide some reduction of highway noise to areas beyond that row of buildings. In turn, additional rows of buildings may provide additional noise reduction to areas still farther beyond. The row of buildings closest to the roadway present a worst case scenario for noise levels in the area because shielding effects due to buildings are not Noise 7-27 Town of Vail provided for the first row of homes. However, in the area through Vail, the topography of the area allows for direct lines of sight of I-70 to not only the first row of buildings, but also to buildings further away that may be located at a higher elevation. The walls modeled as mitigation can be constructed in various ways. Table 7-11 through Table 7-13 present the cost associated with different wall materials as well as the cost for the wall foundation based on the height of the wall Table 7-11: Masonry (Concrete Block) Noise Wall Cost Noise Wall Height (FT) Cost of Wall Cost of Foundation Total Cost ($/SF) ($/LF) ($/LF) 12 24-35 190 478 16 24-35 190 574 Table 7-12: Concrete Pre-Cast Panel Noise Wall Cost Noise Wall Height (FT) Cost of Wall Cost of Foundation Total Cost ($/SF) ($/LF) ($/LF) 12 20-50 190 430-690 16 20-50 190 510-990 Table 7-13: Concrete Cast in Place Noise Wall Cost Noise Wall Height (FT) Cost of Wall Cost of Foundation Total Cost ($ISF) ($ILF) ($ILF) 12 30-40 190 550-670 16 30-40 190 670-830 Additional costs may include removing/replacing traffic signs, drainage design work, absorptive noise wall paneling, retaining walls, and the potential cost for de-icing. The cost of each of the walls modeled has been determined. The cost of the walls assumes $30 per square foot for the wall plus $190 per linear foot for the foundation. Based on the number of receivers that realize at least a 3-dB(A) decibel reduction behind each of the walls, the cost per decibel reduction was approximated. An average decibel reduction of 7 dB(A) Noise 7-28 Town of Vail for first row receivers (within 300 feet of I-70) was used to determine the cost per decibel reduction. The 7-dB(A) reduction is based on the average dB(A) reduction experienced by representative receiver sites modeled within 300 feet of I-70, with mitigation measures in place. The density information to determine the number of receivers realizing attenuation was provided by the Town of Vail Geographical Information System (GIS). The cost details for each wall modeled are listed in Table 7-14 below. Table 7-14: Noise Model Results with Mitigation Measures in Place Wall Representative Receiver Sites Protected Approxi- mate Length (feet) Barrier Height (feet) .Unit Cost ($/LF) Segment Cost ($/LF) Cost per Decibel Reduction ($id6(A)) A R1, R2, R3 4700 12 550 2,585,000 3929 B N/A 900 12 550 660,000 7857 C R4, R5, R6 1800 16 670 1,675,000 12,594 D R7, R8, R9 27E10 12 550 2,007,500 2987 E R10, R11, R12 3700 16 670 2,445,500 12,047 F R13, R14, R15 1800 12 550 1,347,500 5833 G R16, R17, R18, R19, R20, R21 6700 16 670 4,489,000 2096 H N/A 900 16 670 603,000 86,143 R23, R24 4100 12 550 1,417,500 862 J R22, R25, R26, R27, R28 2800 12 550 962,500 893 K R31,R32,R33 7000 12 550 3,850,000 13,095 L N/A 1000 16 670 636,500 5683 M R36, R37, R38 2300 16 .670 1,541,000 22,014 N R35 600 12 550 82,500 2357 O N/A 1400 16 670 210,000 1034 "Shaded rows represent walls that are reasonable under the cost/benefit ratio determined in the NAC. Based on the cost benefit of the walls, six walls are economically reasonable according to the NAC. The NAC realizes a reasonable cost of $3,000/decibel reduction/receiver. A more detailed model of the proposed walls, analyzing the cost/benefit ratio for each wall including all receivers in the Town of Vail that receive a minimum 3-dB(A) reduction in noise level due to noise abatement measures, may result in more of the proposed walls being economically reasonable under the NAC. Also, where space allows, walls may be built as berms to reduce costs. Noise 7-29 Town of Vail Feasibility and Reasonableness of Mitigation As part of the noise analysis and abatement guidelines set by the FHWA as well as the CDOT, the feasibility and reasonableness of mitigation must be determined. FHWA has established vague standards to perform this determination. The CDOT has used these standards and created a more concise procedure to determine the feasibility and reasonableness of proposed mitigation measures. The following questions have been answered in order to perform the feasibility and reasonableness analysis as described in the instructions for completion of the noise abatement worksheet in the CDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidelines (see Appendix F1). Feasibility • Can a continuous noise barrier or berm be constructed? Noise barriers or berms are most effective when they are continuous and do not have any breaks for driveways, sidewalks, streets, roads, utilities, drainage facilities, irrigation ditches, etc. In the Town of Vail, continuous noise barriers can be built to achieve desired noise reduction. • Cana 5-dB(A) noise reduction be achieved by constructing a noise barrier or berm? The noise model shows that the majority of first row receivers will realize a noise reduction of at least 5 dB(A) with the proposed mitigation measures in place. • Cana 5-dB(A) noise reduction be achieved by insulation of the receiver? (Normally limited to public and non-profit buildings.) This question is not considered since a 5-dB(A) reduction of noise can be achieved by constructing a continuous barrier. Are there any "fatal flaw" safety or maintenance issues involving the proposed noise barrier or berm? Under the current proposed mitigation, no fatal flaws are apparent. However, a more detailed analysis of each of the proposed walls, should analyze details such as excessive restriction of sight distance, continuous shadows causing icing of driving lanes during the winter months, excessive glare or reflection of headlights or sunlight off the noise barrier, directing large volumes of water across the driving lanes or other severe drainage situations, to ensure no fatal flaws exist. Noise 7-30 Town of Vail Reasonableness Cost per impacted receiver per decibel. In consideration of each potential bamer or berm segment, the cost should be less than $3,000 per receiver per decibel reduction for a reasonable project, and less than $3,500 per receiver for a marginally reasonable project. This noise analysis only took into account the front row receivers to determine the cost per decibel reduction per receiver. Amore detailed analysis may prove a minimum 3-dB(A) noise reduction for more receivers and therefore warrant more noise abatemenf reasonable based on cost. Of the fifteen proposed noise walls, six are considered reasonable or marginally reasonable based on cost. Impacted persons' desires. At least 60 percent of impacted people, both property owners and renters, should want the proposed noise mitigation measure for the project to be considered reasonable. An in-depth public involvement program would be necessary to determine the majority of public opinion. This public involvement would be performed during a more detailed study. Development type. The mixture of development types plays a major part in determining the reasonableness of noise mitigation. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 45 percent of the development should consist of Category B receivers (see Table 7-2). The Town of Vail has approximately 93 percent of the development consisting of Category B receivers. Under the CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria that makes noise mitigation within the Town of Vail very reasonable. Development vs. Highway timing. This item compares the date of the residential or commercial development of the impacted receivers to the date of construction of the roadway improvement that contributes transportation generated noise levels. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 50 percent of the impacted receivers should have development dates that predate the initial highway construction or last through lane addition project. The Town of Vail has approximately twelve percent of the development predating the initial interstate construction of 1969, and 53 percent predating the last phase of interstate construction in 1976 from Booth Creek east over Vail Pass. Under the CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria that makes noise mitigation within the Town of Vail reasonable. Development existence. This item addresses the length of time impacted receivers have been exposed to transportation related noise impacts. For a project to be considered reasonable, at least 50 percent of the impacted commercial and residential receivers in a development should have been in existence for more than fifteen years. Approximately 89 percent of the residential receivers have been in existence for more than fifteen years in the Town of Vail. Under the CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria that makes noise mitigation within the Town of Vail very reasonable. Noise 7-31 Town of Vail Land use controls. This item addresses the degree of land use planning which occurs in an area that attempts to minimize transportation related noise impacts on new development. For a project to be considered reasonable, local officials must either routinely coordinate new subdivision proposals with CDOT or have local land use restrictions in place that control incompatible land use adjacent to highway corridors. The Town of Vail has the following issues: • Very stringent zoning controls. • Very stringent design review guidelines. • A town-wide noise ordinance. This includes the use of engine " jake" brakes. • The use of berms for most residential areas abutting the interstate. Commercial zoning (as a buffer) on most portions of West Vail adjacent to I-70. • Most of the land away from I-70 is constrained by geologic hazards (snow avalanche, rock fall, debris flow, 100-year floodplain). Approximately 40 percent of Vail's land area lies within a rock fall hazard zone, while no portion of the I-70 corridor through Vail lies within a rock fall zone. Therefore, there is minimal choice but to locate development adjacent to the interstate. • The Town of Vail is constrained by the national forest. With very tight topographical and political boundaries, Vail averages % mile wide with I- 70 splitting this difference. This leaves minimal space for development. Many parts of the residential development that lies adjacent to I-70 (Matterhorn and West Vail) that has no buffer, was developed in Eagle County and then annexed from Eagle County. Therefore, the Town of Vail did not have the benefit of reviewing development of these areas. Under the CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria these issues make noise mitigation measures within the Town of Vail reasonable. Summary The following are the results of the traffic noise impacts analysis conducted for the I-70 corridor through the Town of Vail: FHWA/CDOT criteria were used as a guide for considering noise impacts. Noise 7-32 Town of Vail Currently, five representative receiver sites, representing a total of approximately 540 receivers, are found to have noise levels in excess of the noise impact criteria. These representative receivers, R1, R18, R21, R28, and R32 are currently above the 66- dB(A) noise level. While these numbers reflect the number of receivers accounted for by the representative receiver locations, the numbers do not reflect the total number of affected receivers (those receivers that experience noise levels exceeding the 66- dB(A) approach criteria) located in the Town of Vail. In order to determine the total number of affected receivers refer to the noise contour maps presented in Appendix F2. For the year 2020, six representative receiver sites, representing a total of 600 receivers, were predicted to have noise levels in excess of the noise impact criteria. These receivers, R1, R17, R18, R21, R28, and R32 are predicted to have noise levels above 66 dB(A) in the year 2020 based on projected traffic increases. While these numbers reflect the number of receivers accounted for by the representative receiver locations, the numbers do not reflect the total number of affected receivers (those receivers that experience noise levels exceeding the 66-d6(A) approach criteria) located in the Town of Vail. In order to determine the total number of .affected receivers refer to the noise contour maps presented in Appendix F2. The largest noise levels will occur for receivers located closest to I-70 or with the best line of sight of I-70. However, an increase in the distance from I-70 does not always reflect a decrease in noise level. Each receiver may have a different shielding effect based on obstacles (e.g., buildings, vegetation, and partial barriers) between the receiver and the roadway, which may prevent sound energy from reaching the receivers. • An average increase of 0.7 dB(A) in noise level occurs with every five mph increase in speed along I-70. • An average increase of 0.04 dB(A) in noise level occurred for aten-foot increase in elevation for each receiver and an increase of 0.002 dB(A) in noise level occurred for a 20-foot increase in elevation for each receiver. • An average increase of 0.3 d6(A) in noise level occurred for an overall increase of two percent trucks in the traffic mix along I-70 and an increase of 0.6 dB(A) in noise level occurred for an overall increase of four percent trucks in the traffic mix along I- 70. • Table 7-15 below represents the average dB(A) increase based on increasing traffic volumes. Noise 7-33 Town of Vail Table 7-15: Relative Noise Level Increases Based on Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes (Average Daily Traffic) Relative Noise Level (dB(A)) Noise Level Increase (per 5000 Vehicles per day) 40000 46.0 N/A 45000 46.5 0.5 50000 46.9 0.4 55000 47.4 0.4 60000 47.7 0.3 65000 48.1 0.3 70000 48.5 0.3 75000 48.8 0.3 80000 49.0 0.2 Noise produced by short duration point sources including jake brakes and rumble strips add to the overall existing noise levels. An average additive increase to the noise levels represented by the contour lines can be expected. The additive increase to the existing 60-dB(A), 66-dB(A), and 70-dB(A) contour lines due to jake brakes is 0.5 dB(A), 1.0 dB(A), and 2.0 dB(A), respectively. The additive increase to 60-dB(A), 66-dB(A), and 70-dB(A) contour lines due to rumble strips is 1.0 d6(A), 3.0 dB(A), and 4.0 dB(A), respectively. • Noise contour maps were developed (based on noise readings taken at various representative receiver sites) to estimate noise levels at any location in the Vail area. These should be used as a guide only, due to the variability of noise levels in the Vail area caused by shielding and reflection. Receiver sites may vary from single-unit structures to structures housing multiple units. The actual number of affected receivers is based on the number of units per structure. Actual noise measurements should be taken in order to determine the exact noise levels at any specific location. Since this noise analysis does not include highway construction on a new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway, federal funds are not eligible for noise mitigation, under the Type I project considerations. Federal funds are eligible for this project under Type II project considerations, but .the noise mitigation would have to compete against other highway projects on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). The location and size of the proposed noise wall are analyzed strictly on a planning level analysis. The proposed walls should be optimized prior to the design stage. The implementation of Type II projects is a strictly voluntary decision made by a DOT Noise 7-34 Town of Vail and there are no special or separate federal funds to provide highway traffic noise abatement based on Type II projects. Based on the previous Type II priority list, if funds should become available through the reinstitution of a Type II program in Colorado, the Town of Vail should have high priority for those funds. • The Town of Vail may compete with other transportation projects on the STIP for funds based on the traffic noise impacts due to I-70 traffic. • Due to the outcome of the Noise Abatement Determination Worksheet, the overall noise abatement proposed for the Town of Vail is feasible and reasonable. A more detailed analysis of each individual wall should be performed before any design of the proposed mitigation is done. Noise 7-35 Town of Vail Typical Noise Wa!! Section North of 1-7C3 =11'1~~ ~. `~ ~ 1 1 ,~ 12" 7 T ~ 8' TNR~JUGI~ SHOULfJLR SNOW LANE STORAi,£ s b. I NOISE WALL i 1 j 7ypica! Noise Wall Section Without Retaining Wall 7 2' Na~s£w~aLL ~" 'r~rY ~~ r I ~^^-~ , i J 8' ~ ~~ 12" ~,1 12' SNOW ~ SHOULDER THROUGH STORAGE LANE Typical Noise ltVall SectionWith Retaining Wall 7 7' NOlS£ WALL RkTAiNtNG YVALI (YAR'!]i3G HEtGFf;) l SNOW ~ SHOULO£R STORAGE r L t ~ ~' ~' -~~ THROUGH LANE f ~h~~tl<~~~~~ (-;~st ~C)~~ I-i~f) D~~~ T~ I~'r~~~a~~t~ t'~i~~sc 1'~'~~Itti I '.' h~~i5c t~'~f1 Sc-E~11i ti~l` I-7i~; ! *wb~::. v~ -~ ~~ ..~ ~=t.ti, ,~ ,~~. ~_ a~~ ,~ ~~ r.~ ~ ! ~ 1 '}A 1 ~l~Ct14 ~~I{7~1~{jE;'1' _ T}ll (lU~}1 Nomograph estimate of noise attenuation based on barrier height, receiver Location X&Y For Town of Vail Noise Evaluation, 2284.Q2 8B Truck Source gy 1000' barrier ~.~~~.. reciever Subtended Angle Auto Source feet= 35.0 99.0 meters= 10.7 30.2 Distance (CJ1 EV Reciever Vol E uiv. Trucks $0 1600 Cars 1600 1600 NEAR LANES BH Distance Ground Elecvation EV AUTO LS BB Subtended An le Barrier Attenuation Truck LS Barrier BB attenuation Total Atten aH lanes Feet Feet to Road Feet m m degrees m m 3 3 3 3 75 75 75 75 -2S -15 -5 -16 -20 -10 0 -10 23.i 23.1. 22.9 23.1 3.$ 2.3 0.9 2.8 i 71 771 777 171 14 11.5 7.5 11.5 24.4 23.5 23.0 23.5 7 ,3 - - fi 0 0 0 ($.4} {3.4} {2.2} 2.7 3 3 3 3 3 7 00 1 Dp 100 700 700 -45 -30 -15 -5 5 -40 -25 -70 0 10 32.8 31.4 30.6 30.5 30.6 5.2 3.fi 2.0 0.9 - 7 85 t 65 165 165 7 65 12.5 71.5 9.8 7 0 33.8 32.1 31,0 30:6 30.5 2.7 i . 9 - - - 9 4 4 0 0 {'11.3} (S.9 j (2.6) {?_.2j _ 3 200 -24 -iS 61.i 1,7 143 6.5 81.4 - 4 2.2 3 200 -S 0 81.0 0.9 143 5.7 67.0 - 0 {24 3 200 15 2D 67.3 - i43 0 61.7 - 0 _ 3 300 -25 -24 97.8 1.6 124 4.7 91.8 - p 7.8 ~ 3 300 -15 -10 97,5 1.3 924 4.4 91.6 - 0 '~- 7.7 3 300 -5 0 91.4 0.9 124 4 97.5 - 0 ~ 1,5 3 300 10 15 91,6. 0.4 724 3.6 91.5 - 0 t.fl 3 300 25 34 91.9 - 9 24 0 91.7 - 0 _ 3 400 -30 -25 .122.2 1.6 708 3.3 122.3 - p .: 1,4 3 400 -15 -10 122.0 1.2 108 3.7 122.0 - 0 1:3 3 400 -5 0 727.9 0.9 708 3 127.8 - 0 7.2 3 400 15 20 722.1 4.4 108 2.8 122.0 - 4 0:8 3 400 35 40 122.5 - 108 0 122.3 - 0 _ 3 500 -35 -30 152.7 7,6 94 2.7 152.$ - 0 i.2 3 500 -25 -20 752.5 1.3 94 2.6 152.6 - p 7,2 3 500 -75 -10 152.4 1.7 94 2.5 752.5. - 0 1.1 3 500 -5 4 152.4 4.9 94 2.3 7 52.4 - 0 : 1.0 3 500 7 5 20 152.5 0.5 94 2.7 152.4 - 0 0:7 3 500 35 40 152.9 0.7 94 2 152.7 - 0 0. 3 500 45 54 753.2 - 94 0 :. .152.9 - p 74 700 -15 -10 30.6 4.1 165 12.3 31.0 1:7 9 70.2 10 100 -5 0 3Q5 3.4 1s5 11 30.6 0.6 6.2 .7 7 0 7 00 5 f 0 30.6 2A :165 10 30.5 - 0 2.5 70 20Q -20 -15 ..61.7 3.$ 743 7.8~ 67.4 1,4 6.5 {6.9} 518141, 17:50 AM noise: atten typicat.xls '8i-1 Feet i 0 10 i0 i0 10 10 10 10 10 7 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 0 10 10 Distance Feet 200 200 3011 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 500 S00 500 500 500 500 500 Ground Elecvafion to Road -5 15 -2S -15 -5 10 25 -30 -15 -5 1 S 35 -35 -25 -i5 -5 15 35 4S EV Feet 0 20 -20 -10 0 15 30 -25 -70 0 20 40 -30 -20 -70 0 20 40 50 AUTO LS ~ 61.0 .61.3 91.6 91.5 91.4 97.6 97.9 122.2 122A 121.9 122.1 .122.5 152:7 752.5 152.4 152.a 152.5 152.9 153.2 BB m 3.0 2.0 3.8 3.4 3.0 2.a 2.0 37 3.3 3.0 2.5 2A 3.7 3.5 3.3 3.0 2.6 2.2 2.0 Subtended An le de tees 143 143 124 124 724 124 i24 108 108 i 08 108 108 94 94 94 9a 94 94 94 Barrier Attenuation 7.2 6.8 5.5 5.3 5.7 4.8 4.6 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.1 3 29 2.8 Truck t_S m 61.0 67.1 91.8 9i.6 91.5 91.5 91.7 122.3 122.0 121.8 122.0 122.3 152.6 152.5 152.4 7 52.4 152.7 152.9 Harrier Total Atten BB 4ttenuation al! Panes m 0.6 6 6.3 7.3 4,2 2.2 7.0 3.9 4.6) 0.8 3.7 4.1 0.1 7 2.1 1,3 3 1.6 0.9 2.8 3y 0.6 2.6 2.9 0.1 7 i .7 0 1.3 i.0 2.4 _ 2.g 0.8 2.3 2.7 0.6 2.2 25 0.2 1 1.5 ~ " 1_i f 1 : 16 100 -15 -10 3 : 7 S 100 -S 0 0.6 30 5 5.9 165 73.1 31A 3.5 i0.5 11.8 16 100 5 1 D . 30 6 4.9 165 ? 1.7 30.6 2.4 9.5 10.4 16 16 100 2~ 2S -20 30 -15 . 31.8 3.8 7.7 i 65 165 7 0.5 9 30.5 3i.2 1.4 8.4 $9 16 200 -5 0 61.1 61 0 5.7 143 8.4 61.4 3.2 7.4 8.0 7 6 ifi 200 200 15 35 20 40 . 61.3 62 2 4,9 3.8 143 143 8 7.fi 61 A 61.1 2.4 1.4 7 6.5 7.3 6.2 i 6 300 -25 -20 . 2.7 743 8.4 61.7 0.3 3 4.2 i6 300 -15 -i0 91.6 91 5 5.6 7 24 5.9 91.8 3.1 5.4 5.8 ~~- 16 300 -5 0 . 97 4 5.2 124 5.8 91.6 2.8 5.3 5.6 16 16 300 300 10 25 15 30 . 97.6 91 9 4.9 4.3 124 i 24 5.7 5.6 91.5 91.5 2.4 1.9 5.2 5 5.1 16 4b0 -30 25 . 3.8 124 5.5 91.7 7.4 4.9 4.8 16 400 -15 - -10 1222 122A 5.5 108 4.4 722.3 3.1 3.9 4.3 16 400 -5 0 121 5.1 108 4,3 122,0 2.7 3.8 4.1 16 400 75 20 .9 122 4.9 10$ 4.2 121.9 2.4 3.7 3.8 7 6 400 35 40 .1 i 4.3 10$ 4.1 122.0 1.9 3.6 3,6 16 500 ~5 -30 22.5 1 3.8 108 4 122.3 1.4 3.5 3.3 16 500 -25 -20 52.7 1 S.5 94 3.3 752.8 3.1 3 3,g 16 500 -15 -i 0 52.5 5.3 94 3.3 152.6 2.9 3 3,2 16 500 -5 0 152.4 15 5.1 94 3.2 152.5 2.7 3 3,1 16 500 15 20 2.4 1 4.9 94 3.2 152.4 2.4 2.9 ' ' 3;0 16 500 35 40 52.5 1 4.5 94 3.7 152.4 2.0 2.9 2.9 is S00 45 50 52.9 4.0 94 3.1 152.7 1.6 2.8 ~ 2.7 153.2 3.8 94 3.1 162.9 7,4 2.8 2.6 5/9101, 11:50 AM noi::c_at#~n type~al.xls Appendix F2 Noise Contour 11~apping ^ w....~.:_.~_.. ". '~`` y t ~~ ' ~ ~ ~.51 _ ~ti~ .~ ~~ i '' ~ v ~....~ ~"~..~"^ti, ~-,. ~`~ ~'° ~ ~. ..- ;y ,~, ``~~ ,~ ~~ --- _.w....~_ ~. ~--~. ```` ~_. ~~ °'~ __ ~_ '- ____ ==~, ---~- ~~.~ -...__ cam. --~,~-~,.._.,~. ' _ _ r _ ~ ,_`~--y = ~,- "b.. __ ~~ _1- ti __ ~. ~- __ ~ _ ~ ~~` ~-'~'~ 'a s~~ ''~~:~__° a .« ~,.~. -,. r.. ~ .. ,~............. ,~~ .F. , -. ,... ,.. ,,. ,~.. ,. ,. -~,, ~~ ~J -- ~ ~-~-~,.., l' ,, R`, ', ,,` ............... ~- --' ~ '! `1 ~~~~ r'r-~ ~ rf ref f ~,~' O_~' ~-~, _ ~ r. ,. -__ -~ ,~ .~„°a. ~'~ .rte ~"•. ~f~ ,r r~ ~~ .. ~.. ~. .,, h ~ ~` mow--. ~ J ,, _. ,a - .~.... vr++ 1 - ~ -::::d-, - _ _ ~,~ ~ rr~+r t e ,; ..~ „~, =~-- f.~` ~, ~ -~. ~ ~ ~~ ~. _ ~ .~ ~.. r„ .. ..r _: .~, .a. ~, t~ ,.,... ~. ~.~.. ~ ~c F~ m ~;~ "~z~ o>!c:-.+. stern i^:sect,;,.., G A~,~~~~~ ~ ~ t~ +t ~ s. fy _ "~`~~ _ ,~ `" ~- }t `~` ,~ '' ~^ ~~ ....~- _. ____. r ,,,.r" .,.~ w------~~- ~__.._.,.,_..___._......_ 1,..~..W.. ~` ,~ .~- _ _ ~ r --.:~T _, ~. .,~ --.,;ate - - - .~ ~~.. __ __ .__. - s ~ _~ ~ a ..,.,_ ~.w- _ _ _ ..._._ .._ ....,..~..._ . _ ~-! ~'~'w.. r "*a_iw-~~ J~ ////~~~ __ ,.. f -- ._~- '~ .. ~ ~M '..rte --~... ,~yC , J~ ///~ . 1 ~ »,~ ...._._. ter- ..... ---- .__ - _,...~._-.~ _w~~. ~~ ._ __,._..~...~..._.._-~.,,.._....m.~ ~---...~.--.~-~...~ --~-- ..._. ,~.,~ __ ~ --------_._ _ ~ _. -""'-0 wrirr...~~""-~... ,p. ._. ,. ~..,, _~ ...~ ~-'' ~ :-.'-~~.- gq 1~I~ -~.~,__,_,,,~•m'.'_`,'T=r„r.,a~"'.,, ~~~`'"~`'s#IIWIMN"'^-'_..,..,_,.._...--~°'. ~.. ~ K ~ § !~ ~_ .. .. ~r~"~ y, ,' `~w ~_ f .~! ' ` - _.___ _ ~--f,, ~~ ~~ ~. ,,. _ ~ ~y ~~ ~: ~. s ;~~~ ~ 1~ ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"~ ~' -^,- I ~,-~ I ~~ 1.__.~:._._..... 1EOE~1 .,v,_ _x_.__ FM tid~st~rxba~c•. ~ f 3 ~" wrw iD d6r~ £ "` w. 6P ~. w sm n+ .~ I~~kp € w-~ tan xaa Si 1 r:~.... 4 ~ ~.~ ~~ -~ ~`~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~°__ ` ~~`~'~ ~s z ~ `~~r L ~, ,Si r i - s~r~ A /yam ,,,~~J ~- y~ .~ -._.. _.__ --~_... ~~~~,, ~ ~"'~ ~' ~r ~ r -_...,,..,. _,~.. ~ +sr. rn.rrrr ~ " --....,,t +.~.,, ~/A~ 110 ~~, :~ ,: ~~ t°~ r +, j'~~ ,~~~ fi -~• ^. ~ ~,. ,. .ter ``-~ ~» "~s•:.m~' ~'"'°N` ,r~i~. ~~. '%• ~ -•.,~_ _._ ~''~^~..,.,, `' `0~*a~.fi r+; ;,~ _. maw t ? k~, a.. ~-~~--. {~,~ y J{ ._ 1 _ -- _~ __- ~-- ~~ ~, . ~_ ~, ~~~~ ~..--._ , ...-',~ ti ---. •A •~ ~~.. ~;C ,. ~.~, LB6E7~ ~i I~ _...,-...._......,.«.,.~,..~,.,.~»..,, 179 ~ C+*~ wow ~~ pa ~1 ~., ~w .:,w 8668{N1 ~ r w~ w •w gu ~) ' i ~r V~r{alnnYe i ~ ~ mas~4d, I~+S r e..... .._ ....,,.._...~..._.. ~ ~iMM1~tlMrMutiM~~ - _ __ _____r_..._.,_.,~ -=~.', ~~~~~ ~ '~. r_ ~.= ~~ .. ,,~ , 4 ~ ~` 4~~ --.~ ~~~ ~^"~' ,i .~'~..,~..+, w ~ fig``--',~""`~ ~"~ ~+~,.~ 1~ ~"",ti. ~ „~` ~4R ~; ~~ i s-~ _ ti -~.°~---.` I -'~;:~ ~~ I ,, ; \ _._, ~.~ w,,, ~ ~~ ~~ . ~ ' r._ '. p.. ,.. ~~ __ _ .~ (`jI i „~ az. ti_ ~.---N ~. __.. _ .~- ~.- ....,ta ~,~,..-..,...,,--any` ,~..._..,_.,,.---.,..w._._~......~ _._~ ~ ~,+...+~"""'...-,-^' .....-•-" ~ ~t _ ~_ _. ~, ~ ~. ,:.. ----~. ,yarn, wr++ 4 r "! ' 'y ! " °`""..~++~..... ~.+~' ~ .~,, ~~~~~~ ~ ,~, play "~~. ''~i ~ ~,~,,. ~ ~. .~_- _ ~ f.~-t'~i< ~ '`' `rid r1 ,,,, ,,,,_ ~.+ «t*'" p ,-'. ~ .~ r ...W......--- ~ --... ,.~ S ~ „~ i ~ ,-~ -_ ~,..., f ,,. ~- ~; r,~ _ ~.,1,.~. r_. ~-~; ~ ~ .~ '~ p ~ ~ j1 J/f+`'~-' ,t• mom.. ..--•~ ~ ,, ~"` ~ ~ ~. .r _ ._,~_ .w...,,~.,.,~~.,,,m~ri~,,...d~.:.,,,.. .....,.:., NefA~G~tenan• w +. w . eaaex) a •r.~dYa.7Erdae (~ app ~_ .-........__..Y.~ _.u__._~..._..~: ^K +rr ,~ "".. ,., ,~ _~ ___._ ~~ .__~ ...,,~.... .r-..,; .~.......--~.-.~....~,~,,, - ___ _ - - _ _ ~. _,._ " ~ ~. .. swr..rw . ,"~.: ~, ~~~~.~. ,, ~ ...+. ~ ~.er 4! ~ ~~: fir. ~ ~ ~..., ~~ F -, .tip ~'> w A ~,, ^ ~-- 4e~ro ~,aE.h~a .A.d.. ._~~w...._...~. - ~..._. ~,, .~ rr~ ~ '' e.s l8d1(A; - •. ••... w eaaaN; f •,~rl.i'Zf Ili lf}~~fy v ire . ~ j A~MfY'J1l0.MIRkc. f . ~_ ..LL,~~.. ~._~ ~,. mrom ,_~~ .~..._ __~~ ~' „~ ,_~ a. ~ "\ L.: ,rem Jr~ . „b y~ ~ ~f ~ .~ a'. ~ '~~~_ ,irk i"`, -~~..)~..~ 1 r` ,. ~ .~1 ~~~ ~ (`i ., .,t ~ ~~ '' '--.. '~ i ~, ~ t L,---~ ~~° '~~'~ 1~ _ 1MMM _ ~~. ~.~ . _~ -- -- ~. J~~ ~ /~,,_ .~.,_.«...~ „"'"'. / +~ ' ~ 'rte./ ~! °' ,y. r ~...-..+~"` .._wW'-,...,mss ...:- ~\.,~.~..~' }~''i a «~, ~ u _~_ _. _ _ ---.,~,,.,.., W, „~ ' t. : ~ r r ~.rr :9~1~~ -{a r 'udyLTC wHN ~ ~, uMibY+i. 7A1L _ ~ ~ ~IMYA INc { -i~, f ~, fS _ .~..,,, ,W t 1~ t -__~w ~. ~ a. {. ~' ~a ra ~ .~;~ < ~~„ ~+ r^ ...e++~.+^""•+~ .r"'. err.. ~r (rr. rnrwr - J`~'~ a :_• _- u,_,.~w.-.•. -- _ ~.... ~.r-_ .~ ...__._. ~. .- _, """", r, 1 ~..~ __ t =_..~.._„~ ~ W._.. .- ,~ _ _ 1 r. .. -.~e--~-~...W_ ~„~_. ~~ ~„,~~,Cd~~ _.,,W, _ _. ., ~~ ~.'~~ wY '~Ai~'~e`'`..,m,wrr,'~N~~a.. ;` fir, e'.. _'~ ~ -.-~ _„__'`:.~ ('"~ ~~ Jf}ti~~ { r~1~~3,,, ~. ~ {~ •t. =-.~.~6.w..~J''~`; uxe~~. ~.~,_a. g~~ :~ '„ ~ . s""" E r'' °(~'~4..__4~'' `-.-~?- ,; ~ y1„~ ~'"`"'", ~- `` ~ ~.~, ~ ~ .N.~,,.r-~.~'I" ~""'".._,,~ i~.~ ~ her . ~ ~`"_" .- w ~ - ~r `~ x .- ~" ~` ~ ~ ' !fit ~ Lat - r"`' i ~e:.,,__~~,~~ ^~~~~~ ~w* ~~d~ ~.""'tip., S~ ~~~ ..~+' ._ _. ,,., _,,._,...-r" -~ ~. ~r """. „....._ ~ _ ~... ___---° .~..~~..-- ~ ~ i ,- _ r--~- --- .. ~ _ ~~~ C t ~-.. , r I ~ ~ '~~~~, .~ ~ ~, ,, , `--- ... ~.~ 1 ~'-` ~`~~, - ~~ ~ , `yam ~-_ ;~ ti , f`~`~.=.....::~_~,lL ._ ~ ~ ,,. ~ ! l ' ., , . --~'~ `: i iPr~ ~.~, 1~9 ~y ... _>~ ~.,.~ M8F#CbfHglflr' 1,,, +UR YYIY19 `~ ? WY ~ W ~r k~ ~, ~~ .,_ ~ - ~ ~~ ``,: ~` ti ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~'~.. ~_ __ _ __. „~ ~ys~ `s~~4ae, ,. ~T. ~'~ a, k ~t~ ~ Iy ~,h ~~ ~~ ~,.~„ -~...,. __ __ ~_ --~ ~-- --- _~ ~wi- as wi ~s . air ~~ ~`i. „~_ _,..~',~-~„`' ~"``!'~...,,-w~ ~ `. "°+ ,. .---. ~.::~,,~ -. ~%`'`,.,,' aye ;''-,.; ~.___ ~.~~ '`"'^~.,~.....~ "".",~.: __ <:_-~ ___ ~~; }~ ~" ~"rt ~~ "' ~ f ~~~,~ `.;,~^~ /may - ... -~ .., ~ '~= a ~,. ~ -ti ~, ~ ~ .. ~ :~ •~ y -^°~ " is .+. :~ /~ w *" -.+a.,r ~.,e,.,w ,,. ,~. `, \ti `~ \`i ~ ~ ~\`' ,~ 4 \\\` ~-~ ___~_~ 1, . -- 4. _ . _ _. _~_ __ _.__ . . ~~ ._:,. -- n~+ n_ _ _.._ _ _.~.~ __- __ ~ _ .a~ _ ..... f r i ~ _: ---~ t~/~'.~ as • «~ erx ~// ~1,~/ i~FGft~h lzfPit• t•.b'i4 '$ l ~ 'fit ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ,~~' ~~^`~...~_:~.:+~, ~ ~ ~ ...rte....-._.__..~ ,..~ ~r-~ \~'+.. ~ ~• •-1 ~' ,. ~':Y"~ _ j~.! 7~ `mil l_ /1 ~ ~ /F_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~~~111 '~ ~ ~ ~ '~:, ~%.""'~="~J''~~ Sri"~ ~ # ~ j n {'r ~~~~~~.r' _: ._ ~~~ ~,, '~,! ~Y ~ ~., 4M~„ ,,.y '+. r }a~A~ra~• ~~ w„rs ~..+... ...r.Y ari... aw~~: rr+. ~ _... t ~..~-...~.+ _ ~,,/~/ ~- J~`/"~~~..,W„_~.....~.~" -"'~,.ree„ ..I~YY~. ~~y~ _ ~YY YI11IU1r~Y11M `~~ ~'~~~Yl!~1~ ww~'Wi ~~ ti _. ~ ~r~~ ~ ~ -w ~.,~ ~~.~ ~ .~-~_--. `~ ~-~-~~ g __..- . ~,f xk y' -- ___ _~ _- r -;-- .» ~ , ~-~. „~.~ ~~ ._.. ti.- = . . ~`- ~ ~~ ~--, - r._~~, - ,: ~- .. Vi 111! ~,iPly. M' Y. ~~ is rtwdsMe~, ~1iA ', ~ ho ~. 1~~1 ~ S~ ~ :, _ :._ .'J ~ ... __ . _ ..,~~~. r... s _. ,.~,,,, ...r ..s+i• ,~ ......-, _,,,~..__.. i ~ _. ~.w--- ~,. .._...~. _.__~__~...._._ .~.._ _...W...--~ .._ ~..~re 1. ~ . ~ f ~ ~~ ~ ~ rN eV ~ .~.r r+ lTi1 w' +~+ w .,, ,~, ~~ •f ~_ ~, it .., ~` ~.'~`..''`~ ~ ~v :_ t1B9EN01 __~ ~._~ ~ ~ e.-- 67L EaMeed P , .. .. 1~.c.n+auti• ~~ ~ 7t4171N .. ~ ~ .. : f1 f6yf; ~~rat •a~t»mM ~ +rauetar.:P~ .~, ~. ~~~: ~~ y ~ / s' i~ ~~ ~~ ~r ~ ~ ~ *, +-~ .....,....-.~......__,.~- ~..-- J~,r ~... ~~ 11111,1 ,~ r "~ ~,t \R w l ~. ~~~ ~! ~" ==~ `~~ ~ ~ ~ si ~' rj r ~- ~, +~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ .r i ~ ~ ~~~ Fes"'"^~:"~ -. ~ ~~ _.,,,,~„ ~ ~.... ,,~" '" ~ ~' ~ .. ~, ~.ns. ~ . ~. ---..ti ~--..-- ,-~' ,j t \. ,/ ... ` ~... ~ ~R -`.\ ,1 ...- r --- -- ~_...-._ e_._ ...___.e.__. (' -..=-may _ ,, r ~ + f _' 4 ` ~ ~`~ ~~,~ ' ~~. ,. ,. ,,,~ `~~ ~ ~ ,,~ „ ~, ~ 4 ~ ~ ~'~' •w ~ A ~~\ ` y,. ~ ~~ "' ~ 4 ~ , . ' .. ~ . 1 ... ,~ F Sf _ .~ ii ~,~,,,.' ... _ . ~r°' rr~ a~ ~ ` 'AMU ~~~~~ ~ . _ _ . _,~ ~ " "~ ../i .~ ,~ _~ , ~ y ~ ._~ ~ ,....~ ~ ~ ~~. ~ -~ ./~ `~ ._~ - I -'--..~ .. "`,. '`--_ _. ~~--^" ~ _~ ``:~ ~~ a 1ST ~ _ tom,,`-- "% 1 B. ~..._ ~ ~' r ~ ~., , r _. ~- .f ter, ;: ~,,, ~'~i -: `~ ~, ~ .r .' -~ ~, ,- f_.. _ .... ._...,_. „ _ h}Q ~MakM! `!x'1 Ndk~t4aiors' r r A i~&~Aj w. rr tw w ¢2dY~l} F '4sY~f70eoYt y~y~Awia d4G0 ~'. ~...... ~.~~~ +r._.. _ .W.mv ..war... ~~,"^~Y~ "'^~r,-.i ..~. ~ ~ ~: ,_.W,,,_ ,-.-.~ ""51YIiWrYr~- ^~wwrrr~...-,.~sr i~ - ~ ~ C`.~ .~ .w ,~ ;' ~ t^^ ,,,, w ~~ y,,,,r ,,....y~~^., .. ~r"'''"`^. ~ ~ ~' a.?~ /_~ ~~,~.~~ m~,•.~Y .6'`'~.~-...~.~r rw rw er w,.,,,.,_..... °~~~.ce~r..s^c~n ,~j+ _ r ~~,,rr ~ r •` ~ ~ ~ ~?t \)_,.. /~._ ~ w-~ r~ .~4"F ~~ ..... ~~~ !. -~ s `yc f~ ~ it 4 Y ~~, ~~ ~=~ .~~ 1 ~ [31 ~,. ~V ~! ~ ,: {~; ,'~ •~"~ 1/~ = amt f t ~:!wea ~ I, ~ '^'~~ L ~~ =!~ .-..~ -~ _, .~ ~ +M~ ~~ f ,~ ~ !,~.~ ~k ~"r-~~ ~' ~ ...~--, r~ t``~.-ter ~ ~ "~„_..- : ~ -. ; ~M.. +i. ~ «~ «~, «~ r ' ~ti ~. ~„ ~, W« ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ,~ ~" '` .,, ~ ~ t `~ r e ~~ x ,~"'~*~ ,.~ ,.vr" ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~._-~ _,..r.- ~„ .~ ,,, «~ ~„ ,, I i _~ w-- ~ ~i t~, ~ ~ i ~.,~_ _~ „ 1 r c-~=`~r ~;~- ~~'"if 4` :~ i is ~-.' .~.._..,.~...~ti~===_; ~...~-..- r: ~`---•.`.,?` 3"""''"x^7' r d" ': ~< ~~ .. .~ ~- ,~ ~ g .'` ~ _ r -__ ,_, ~-- _,.~ ~, ~-~ ~. ~ _~,_~,.- ~~ ~r,;..~-,_.r.. ~. .. .~ ~..- ` ~ ~ .,,, ~„ r ~. ~- :..--" _~ ~_ _._-.. s ~--".-,- ~.~^ ~-- y. ~ //" S" ..'_"`..--'_"~~L'. r"". ~~-J'l,r••..7 rJ ~"`~~1--~~ •+ i •~ ~i '~/` ~~y ijj ., ` ~d~~,.a,,.+'r ~~~ ,,` ~ k...~ ~ d ~ ,^ ~ \ ~~SS 1 ~ '~ ,, ~^'~!.' 1. z ~ , 1 _"""`" n ~„ R ~. ~ ~ ~ ,r~ ~~. ~ E s ~ ^. .~. ~~~• is f 'I'~'' ....; • y _~...,.~.......~Y. _ .w.~.~_-_~_____.. _.___ .~., ., 1 I f --..., ~"`- '^~- -,~ ' `-.. ~~~~~, ~` `'~-.. ..,,, , ;- .. (~... f w~~ k ~~ to tj 1~~.`{ sq ~~ ~_~ ~„y ~`~..,`` ;rte.., ~+.a. ~.,,, ~,,, ~r r..., ~. 1 _ ~\ ~^+,'`-~.. 1~'\ '~'a., ,yam ~ ~~ ~~~ ^•~^~ ~.~ ~ ~~ 1 51 . ~~_.~ ~~ J ~, ~,~; 1~ .{ ~~: ,~ --°-~-. ,, ., ~ ~_~. ~ ~. ~._. _ .. , -- _, _ _ .~.f-,,. , __ ~« ~eruMe _... . r...r. x~vwc _ _...__ ... ~ _ ..~.. ..... aa,~;ay F~ +~ .~ sin ...~., ~ ~ __ _...._.. _ .. __ H~ t ~ / r `! _ ' ~/ '~"~" P ~` "'all ~ .~ -~ ~_ , T __ _ ~~. e -- W_-----.~.. ~w r- __ ..~ __.-°--~-'° _._.Y--. ~- ~~.e _.~ .V._.--~ ~' ,.._. », ~__ ... ,. _ ~.- .... .» ~. _ _ ,K..~ t ~ --..-.~-~.~, ,-°'~_ ,~ ~ , yr_-'"„"~ `_._~..-,~~r ~~~ _.._....V=.-- ~. ~ ~"" "_ ~ ~~ _ ,r, ~ - _ S ~- ~, .~_ ~ ~ ~_ ..._ ~. . ~:'.~-, .'~ (1 i ~ '~`~ ,~ ,.~ .__ .. ~",,~ .~,1 `=~~ ~;,~ _~ ~~ ~_ ~1, ~¢• a~ ~anrrs ' ~~~ ~~ bC3:Aj ~ ai w ~ $t6;J.~ ~ ~. +.r~tkmt;.~sr ~~ tLYJ t ... __.-.~ __ _ ~,~ _, __ _ _. _._ o ,~_,__ ~ `~-~ -~. --5~ r I ^M,,. I' +~ 1~ "".r .~ .~ ~`~ ~y ~ ~~ ~~ ,;~-~ ti I ~_ _- ~:,.~ . _ __- E ~~ J E r t l I f r ~ -- ~. ,,,;,;,, ~~~~,~~; __ ~~;$ ~. -~4 ~~~ _. • ~,.~ ~ ~ ~+ ~~ .d~ "~ 4 ~'`~ .~ l ~`'¢~... ~ ~ ~" '/~~~ 1 .~ '~ j ,Y .'~ J ~~~. +a ~ Y N t ~ ~'~~ w/ f ~ ~~ r 4~~~ , s """ -.~ .~. ......... ,.. ,., ~ ,.. ~t'~ _- w ~:r ~~, ~°^, .,,, ».u,.....s E ~ , { y~~,p ` W z ~~ W~ ~, _ .~ =-.._; .......~a.,~ ~ ~ ~ ~, .... __ _. ____ ____ ~.~.. .,. ...~....W..,, --~...__r.. _ r. ~..Y.. ~., .~---„.. ~ w_ s ~~ „~ ~ r rte` ~;~ v~ -~' ~, ~ ~~ V " p . ~.ww L~ irrrrrrr.Me&eiWii ~_,......,..~.~°. ~~ t .` u ~ ~ r, ~„~..,~ ~~~~~ ~~ o---, - `~--.: ~~~e ... „~ ~, ,~ ~.y* .... ~ .... _._.~ _ ~ _ ~-~.d __ ._ ~._.____ ~~ _. _ . _ _ ___.v._ ~.~` ~~ ~-~ ~ ;.ti ~ a .r ~,, * , _~~ , ~,. ~~~ ~~~~~ ~. _.~ ~..° -, -~.. .~~, ^~~~ ~_ ~~ ~~r---w- ~~~~e~ -;.. `-kr ~a t .~..~~... .._._... ...._~..~.~..~_. . ~-r7 ~a~.a '. r ~..,.....9x+~Fy , ~dgb~'r.. '~.... i ar:adi(aR A9lR ... .._..,...m.........~.....__ .............._..._.U._., ...........,,.,,,...,.,.........,._I _---` ~"- _~ 3 N .....,.~.~ ,~'" ""tt pa ..- """" ~.y ~...wR_.. ~.: .y~~.,..~ _..:."°r../~ ,7`~/~/""Ce`-~ ~'lr'~J' ~y~ 5 s f ^.~""" kk ~~ ~ ~ ~ r,- ,..~''~., ..!?~ ~ F~ ,f'~ ts- , ~"' ~. # ~i~' _. ., .... 1 r. ~`. / k ~y. "f J ~ `" ~ lip ~l ."'.; ~ ~~``~,. i'i ~ `, ,., Y~.~ ~~ ~ ...~~,a.y~a~~ ' ~y ~7 ~ ~5 ~::. ~. ti ~ ..~ ti. ti rt ' ~. F~V lilt '~ l~ ~ , i ''4. ti M ~ ~ Y Ci^- i `~. --,-. ~-...,+.... ~ __ ti~ , . m ~ . _ ~,. ,~ i ~ex~ .,__.. ,M.F rrr~ u~SNds __.... ,.~, - -. ..... .........._..,.m-~ ~ spa eic+n~e~a ,~,, •..w ~~~~ ~~~E ' tiur~r~~7Grd~ .... ._.. _....~_a... _.._ +aa. `~ rttJOW. ORDINANCE NO. 20 Series of 2003 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 12-61-9B., HOUSING (H) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS; 12-7B-18B., COMMERICAL CORE 1 (CC1) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY; 12-7C-14B., COMMERCIAL CORE 2 (CC2) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY; 12-7D-11 B., COMMERCIAL CORE 3 (CC3) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS; 12-7E-13B., COMMERCIAL SERVICE CENTER (CSC) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS; 12-7H-17B., LIONSHEAD MIXED USE 1 (LMU-1) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY AND; 12-71-17B., LIONSHEAD MIXED USE 2 (LMU-2) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY, 12-8E-56., SKI BASE RECREATION-2 (SBR-2) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS, VAIL TOWN CODE TO ALLOW FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO REGULATE THE OUTDOOR DISPLAY OF MERCHANDISE IN CERTAIN ZONE DISTRICTS IN THE TOWN OF VAIL TO AN EIGHT MONTH PERIOD OF APRIL 1 TO DECEMBER 1, ANNUALLY, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, text amendments are permitted pursuant to parameters set forth for such in Section 12-3-7 of the Town Code of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on August 11, 2003, to consider the proposed amendment in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of the Town of Vail and forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Town Council of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proposed text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; implements and achieves the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate; and provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds it in the interest of the public health, safety, and Ordinance No. 20, Series 2003 welfare to adopt this amendment to the Town Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED. BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Sections 12-61-96., HOUSING (H) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS; 12-7B-18B., COMMERICAL CORE 1 (CC1) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY; 12-7C-14B., COMMERCIAL CORE 2 (CC2) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY; 12- 7D-11 B., 12-7H-17B., LIONSHEAD MIXED USE 1 (LMU-1) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY AND; 12-71-17B., LIONSHEAD MIXED USE 2 (LMU-2) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAY of the Vail Town Code shall hereby be amended as follows: (deletions are shown in c4riLo +h~,,,,,,~ additions are shown in bold) Outdoor Display of Goods: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own private property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. The outdoor display of goods in front of establishments may occur from April 1St through December 1St, annually, and is subject to the requirements of sale signage set forth in Title 11, Sign Regulations. The outdoor display of goods in the public right-of-way is prohibited unless specifically permitted by the Town of Vail. Section 2. Sections 12-7D-11 B., COMMERCIAL CORE 3 (CC3) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS AND; 12-7E-13B., COMMERCIAL SERVICE CENTER (CSC) DISTRICT, LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, OUTDOOR DISPLAYS of the Vail Town Code shall hereby be amended as follows: (deletions are shown in cfriLe +h,-.,~ ~..h additions are shown in bold) Outdoor Display of Goods: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own private property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. The outdoor display of goods in front of establishments is subject to the requirements of sale signage set forth in Title 11, Sign Regulations. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the Ordinance No. 20, Series 2003 2 remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 23`d day of September, 2003 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 7th day of October, 2003, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordinance No. 20, Series 2003 3 ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ludwig Kurz, Mayor READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 23rd day of September, 2003. ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Ordinance No. 20, Series 2003 4, MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: August 11, 2003 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to allow for a text amendment to Sections 12-61-9B, 12-7B-18B, 12-7C-14B, 12-7D- 11 B, 12-7E-13B, 12-7H-17B, 12-71-17B, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: The Town of Vail Planner: Matt Gennett I. SUMMARY The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, to allow for a text amendment to Sections 12-61-9B., Housing (H) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-76-18B., Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7C-14B., Commercial Core 2 (CC2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7D-11 B., Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7E-136., Commercial Service Center (CSC) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7H-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays and; 12-71-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays, Vail Town Code, to allow for the outdoor display of goods in certain zone districts during a specified period of time, and forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council of the requested text ameridments, subject to the findings noted in Section IX of this memorandum. The impetus behind this request stems from a collective, public observation that the overabundant use of outdoor display racks has become an aesthetic issue in town and must be curtailed and further restricted to a limited timeframe on an annual basis. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting to amend Title 12 of the Vail Town Code. Amendments to the Vail Town Code are permitted pursuant to parameters set forth for such in Section 12-3-7 of the Vail Town Code. The proposed amendment is a text amendment to Sections 12-61-9B., Housing (H) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7B-18B., Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7C-14B., Commercial Core 2 (CC2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7D-11 B., Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7E-13B., Commercial Service Center (CSC) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays; 12-7H-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays and; 12-71-17B., Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) District, Location of Business Activity, Outdoor Displays, Vail Town Code, to add language as follows: (Additions shown in bold; all the aforementioned sections are identical) For All Zone Districts Except Commercial Core 3 (CC3) and Commercial Service Center (CSC): Outdoor Display of Goods: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own private property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. The outdoor display of goods in front of establishments may occur from April 1St through December 1St, annually, and is subject to the requirements of sale signage set forth in Title 11, Sign Regulations. The outdoor display of goods in the public right-of-way is prohibited unless specifically permitted by the Town of Vail. For Commercial Core 3 (CC3) and Commercial Service Center (CSC): Outdoor Display of Goods: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own private property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. The outdoor display of goods in front of establishments is subject to the requirements of sale signage set forth in Title 11, Sign Regulations. III. BACKGROUND In November, 1994, the Vail Town Council suggested the creation of an ordinance limiting the outdoor display of goods to a specified number of holiday weekends and special events. The suggestion was made after Council members expressed concern about continued use of cardboard boxes, handmade signs and other unsightly display techniques. On December 19, 1994, the Council's suggestion for display limitation was considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC). By a vote of 5 to 1, the PEC opposed the suggestion for limited display days and instead recommended adoption of display guidelines to be used year-round. On January 17, 1995, the Town Council requested that a community meeting be held to discuss the issue. 2 On February 14, 1995, a community meeting was held at which merchants and residents determined that limitations on outdoor displays, as proposed, were not necessary. On June 13, 1995, council determined that outdoor displays should be administered by the merchants in a "self-regulating" matter. The Town Council has recently requested that the Community Development Department look into a plausible method of regulating outdoor displays on an appropriate timeframe basis. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BODIES Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for forwarding a recommendation of approval/approval with conditions/denial to the Town Council of a text amendment. The Planning & Environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested text amendment: 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and; 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission deems applicable to the proposed text amendment. Design Review Board: Action: The Design Review Board has NO review authority of a text amendment. Town Council Actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental Commission may be appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental Commission erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. The Town Council is responsible for final approval/approval with conditions/denial of a text amendment. -, The Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested text amendment: 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive. Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Town of Vail Zonina Reaulations (Title 12. Vail Town Code Town of Vail Streetscaoe Master Plan The plan discusses the existing conditions of pedestrian walkways in the Village and Lionshead in regard to elements such as circulation efficiency and site amenities, like landscaping and the placement of wooden benches. The measures called for in this document speak to enhancing the pedestrian experience in terms of both visual appeal and ease of movement through the streets, especially during ski season when people are generally moving to and from the parking structures and ski lifts. The proposed text amendment will work toward furthering these objectives. Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan The Lionshead plan recommends actions concerning the pedestrian environment and ways to enhance its efficiency as an activity generator, without impeding the flow of pedestrian traffic and movement. Recommendations for improving the 4 pedestrian environment include incorporating sidewalks into the redevelopment so that people are brought closer to the retail entities and window fronts. The outdoor display of goods during peak ski season would serve as an impediment to the aesthetic and functional objectives of this document. Vail Village Master Plan Goal # 3 of the Vail Village Master Plan recognizes, as a top priority, the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. The proposed text amendment furthers the achievement of this goal. VI. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The review criteria and factors for consideration fora request of a text amendment are established in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12-3, Vail Town Code (Ordinance No. 4, Series 2002). A. Consideration of Factors Regarding the Text Amendment: 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and 12-1-2A, Purpose/General, states the following: General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and genera! welfare of the Town, and to promote the coordinated and .harmonious development of the Town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. Staff has determined that the proposed text amendment will further "promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality." 12-1-2B.8, Purpose/Specific, states the following: To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the Town. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed text amendment will work toward further safeguarding and enhancing the appearance of the Town of Vail. Staff believes that a text amendment limiting the use of outdoor display racks to an off-peak period of the year will be beneficial to the residents and merchants of the Town of Vail alike. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 5 Section 4.3, Chapter II of the Town of Vail Land Use Plan states: The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) Staff believes that by limiting the use of outdoor displays to the off-peak part of the calendar year, the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan will be better achieved. 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and Since the inception of the subject regulation, retail business activities have intensified in the Village core and Lionshead to an extent that now requires further, more specific regulation. The existing regulation is still appropriate, applicable and relevant however, the degree to which conditions have changed warrant a restriction on the time of year outdoor displays may be used. It has been widely observed and commented upon, by the public and town officials alike, that the character of Vail has suffered in recent years due to the preponderance of outdoor display racks creating a negative image for tourists and residents. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. The proposed text amendment is intended to work in harmony with the new draft Sign Regulations. Part of the proposed text amendments to the Sign Regulations will restrict the frequency and duration of outdoor sales events to twice yearly, only during the allowable period for outdoor displays, and not to exceed thirty days for each sales event. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before forwarding a recommendation of approval for a text amendment: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and 6 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council for the proposed text amendment to Sections 12-61-9B, 12-7B- 18B, 12-7C-14B, 12-7D-11 B, 12-7E-13B, 12-7H-17B, and 12-71-17B, Vail Town Code. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town, and 1. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and 2. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances. its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: September 16, 2003 SUBJECT: A request for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Vail Town Code, to allow for amixed-use hotel; and a request for a proposed rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing from Heavy Service (HS) district to Public Accommodation (PA) district, located at 28 S. Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing. Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc. Planner: Allison Ochs I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM FIRST READINGS Ordinances No. 9 and No.10, Series of 2003, were approved on first reading by the Town Council on May 6, 2003. Second readings of the ordinances were tabled numerous times to a11ow for the applicant and staff to resolve some of the conditions of first reading. The following summarizes the changes that have been made to Ordinances No. 9 and No. 10, Series of 2003, since first reading: Ordinance No. 9. Series of 2003: ^ Condition 2 has been amended to reflect the completion of the Memorandum of Understanding, dated September 16, 2003, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required off-site improvements. The Memorandum of Understanding has been attached to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. ^ Condition 6 has been stricken, which required revisions to the architectural plans of the building at the corner adjacent to the Alphorn. The applicant has made these revisions. ^ Condition 7 has been stricken to reflect the approval of the variance to allow for the relocation of four parking spaces for 9 Vail Road. ^ Condition 26 has been added to reflect the Council's condition of approval on first reading, which states "that the developer shall commit no act or omission in any way to cause the current operation of the Chateau to cease until such time as a demolition permit is issued by the Department of Community Development." ^ Condition 27 has been added which states "that Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, shall not take effect until January 1, 2004." This condition was requested by the developer to ensure that the existing approvals for the site would not expire until the developer has taken ownership of the property. Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 The condition of approval for when the rezoning was to take effect was modified from, "such date that a demolition and/or building permit is issued forthe demolition of the existing structure on the site of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing, for preparation for the construction of Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort," to "That the rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village Znd Filing shall take effect on January 1, 2004. " II. SUMMARY OF REQUESTS The Four Seasons Resort is a mixed-use development proposal, located at 28 South Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road /Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing. The proposal is for the redevelopment of the existing Chateau of Vail and the Vail Amoco sites. Uses within the development include residential, hotel, commercial and recreation. The key components of the Four Seasons Resort development proposal are provided below: ^ 47,592 sq. ft.-fractional fee club units (22 units) ^ 53,421 sq. ft. -condominiums (18 units) ^ 76,978 sq. ft. -accommodation units (118 keys) ^ 10,202 sq. ft. -employee housing units (34 units) ^ 7,695 sq. ft. - restaurant/retail ^ 11,726 sq. ft. -conference/meeting rooms ^ 14,416 sq. ft. - spa/health club Major Amendment to Special Development District No. 36 The Four Seasons Resort is requesting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 36. Pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, a Special Development District allows for deviations from the development standards as regulated by the underlying zoning, provided it is determined that such deviations provide benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations. It does not allow for deviations from the permitted or conditional uses of the underlying zoning. The Four Seasons Resort proposal contains the following deviations from the underlying Public Accommodation zone district: Height - as recommended, the maximum height of the building is 89 feet, which is 41 ft. higher than the 48 ft. allowed under the Public Accommodation zone district regulations. The primary roof ridge (which runs parallel to South Frontage Road) is proposed to have a maximum height of 77.5 ft. Site Coverage (below grade) - as recommended, the site coverage below grade exceeds the maximum allowable by the Public Accommodation zone district. The Public Accommodation zone district allows 65% site coverage (77,199 sq. ft.) As recommended, the applicant is proposing below grade site coverage of 71 % (84,402 sq. ft.) and above-grade site coverage of 58% (69,346 sq. ft.). Staff has attached the Four Seasons Resort Zoning Analysis, dated April 28, 2003, for reference. The analysis compares the development standards outlined by the underlying zoning of Public Accommodation to the Vail Plaza Hotel West proposal from 2001, to the proposal for the Four Seasons Resort. Rezoning Request 2 Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, regulates the process for zone district boundary amendments. The proposal for the Four Seasons Resort includes a rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2~d Filing from Heavy Service zone district to Public Accommodation zone district and inclusion in Special Development District No. 36, as recommended by the Planning and Environmental Commission. The zoning map amendment is included in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003. II1. BACKGROUND OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS On April 28, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0-1 (Hartman recused) to recommend approval of the major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort, and the rezoning request of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2~d Filing to Public Accommodation zone district to Heavy Service zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission also voted 4-0-1 (Hartman recused) to approve the conditional use permits to allow fora 22 unit fractional fee club and 34 Type III Employee Housing Units. The conditional use permit approval is conditioned upon approval of second reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. The Planning and Environmental Commission's recommendation of approval included the conditions as outlined in Section 5 of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. Each of the conditions istime-sensitive and, in addition, to the conditions of approval, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommended approval of the following off-site improvements, as indicated on Sheet A-12.0.1 Off-site Improvements Plan, and as referenced in Section 4 of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003: • Widening of the south side of the South Frontage Road and installation of a left turn lane to the Four Seasons Resort and the Vail Police Station, with final design to be .approved by the Town of Vail and Colorado Department of Transportation. • Installation of landscaped medians on South Frontage Road from the roundabout to the western lot line of the Scorpio. • Installation of a detached 6 ft. wide heated paver sidewalk adjacent to South Frontage Road and the Four Seasons Resort frontage. • Installation of an attached 6 ft. wide heated sidewalk and all related necessary improvements (i.e. retaining wall, railing, curb and gutter) adjacent to South Frontage Road, along the Scorpio frontage. • Relocation of the fire hydrant adjacent to South Frontage Road. • Relocation of Spraddle Creek piping and installation of new box culverts. • Installation of heated paver sidewalk on Vail Road along Four Seasons Resort frontage. • Installation of heated paver sidewalk from the west side of Mayors Park to the west property line of the Four Seasons Resort frontage on West Meadow Drive, in accordance with the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. • Installation of decorative lighting adjacent to public walkways along Four Seasons Resort frontage, with final design and location to be approved by the Town of Vail staff and Design Review Board. • Overlay of South Frontage Road from the western end of the Scorpio to the roundabout. • Road improvements to the north half of West Meadow Drive adjacent to the Four Seasons Resort frontage, including curb, gutter, asphalt reconstruction, and drainage improvements. Final design to be approved by the Town of Vail. • Road improvements to Vail Road from the roundabout to the driveway of 9 Vail Road, including curb, gutter, asphalt, and drainage improvements. The Staff Memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission, dated April 28, 2003, is available at the Community Development Department upon request. The Design Review Board has reviewed the Four Seasons Resort development proposal on three previous occasions. The Design Review Board has stated their conceptual support of the design of the Four Seasons Resort and will continue to review the architectural details of the project as outlined in the conditions of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. IV. MAJOR AMENDMENT TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.36 Article 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code provides for the amendment of existing Special Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a Special Development District is as follows: To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the Special Development District. An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses, and activities of the Special Development District. The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters with which the Special Development District shall adhere. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to: the approved site plan; floor plans, building sections, and elevations: vicinity plan; parking plan; preliminary open space/landscape plan; densities; and permitted, conditional, and accessory uses. The determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the proposed Special Development District, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in the property's underlying zone district. The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed Special Development District. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. Reductions of the plans have been attached for reference. On April 28,.2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission found the Four Seasons Resort development proposal to be in compliance with the following criteria: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. V. REZONING REQUEST Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, provides the process for a zone district boundary amendment. The proposed project includes a request for a rezoning of 28 South Frontage Road /Lot 9A, Vail Village 2~d Filing. The lot is currently zoned Heavy Service zone district, the purpose of which is provided in Section 12-7G-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, and is as follows: The Heavy Service District is intended to provide sites for automotive-oriented uses and for commercial service uses which are not appropriate in other commercial districts. Because of the nature of the uses permitted and their operating characteristics, appearance and potential forgenerating automotive and truck traffic, all uses in the Heavy Service District are subject to the conditional use permit procedure. In granting a conditional use permit, the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Town Council may prescribe more restrictive development standards than the standards prescribed for the District in order to protect adjoining uses from adverse influences. As noted in the purpose statement, the Heavy Service zone district is intended for automotive-oriented uses, including gas and service stations. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from Heavy Service to Public Accommodation. The purpose of the Public Accommodation zone district, as provided in Section i 2-7A-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, is as follows: The public accommodation district is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semipublic facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, commercial/retail and related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located within the same district and compatible with adjacent land uses. The public accommodation district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a vacation community, and where permitted uses are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the district. The applicant is proposing to include Lot 9A as part of the development site of the Four Seasons Resort. In addition to the rezoning, Lot 9A will be included in the Special Development District designation. Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, provides the review criteria for a zone district boundary amendment. It provides the following criteria for review of a zone district boundary amendment: A. Factors, Enumerated: Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment: 1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning documents; and 3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and 4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and 5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and 6. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose 6 statement of the proposed zone district. 7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate. 8. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. B. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone district boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, and Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, on second reading, for the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, to allow for a mixed-use hotel, located at 28 South Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road /Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing; and a rezoning from Heavy Service zone district to Public Accommodation zone district located at 13 Vail Road /Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing. Four Seasons Resort Zoning Analysis April 28, 2003 Development Standard Allowed/Req by PA zone district 2001 SDD#36 Approval* Proposed Lot Area: _ 10,000 sq. ft. 101,140 sq. ft. 118,768 sq. ft. GRFA: 178,152 sq. ft. (up to 150%) 151,710 sq. ft. 177,991 sq. ft. AU/FFU 124,706 sq. ft. (70%) 106,215 sq. ft. (70%) 124,570 sq. ft. (70%) DU 53,445 sq. ft. (30°l°) 45,381 sq. ft. (30%) 53,421 sq. ft. (30%) Retail/Rest. 17,815 sq. ft. (10%) 2,835 sq. ft. (2%) 14,557 sq. ft.(8%) Density (du/acre): 25 du/acre 6.47 du/acre 7.3 du/acre AU unlimited 116 118 FFU unlimited 40 22 DU 68 15 18 EHU unlimited 14 34 Site Coverage: Below Grade Setbacks (above grade): Frontage Rd. Vail Rd. West side East side Meadow Dr. Setbacks (below grade): Frontage Rd. Vail Rd. West side East side Meadow Dr. Building Height: Landscaping: Parking: Loading: 77,199 sq. ft. (65%) 76,821 sq. ft. (76%) 84,402 sq. ft. (71%) 20 ft. 5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 7.5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 22.5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 7.5 ft. 18 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 48 ft. 35,630 sq. ft. (30%) 198 spaces + spa 3 berths 5 ft. 7.5 ft. 21.25 ft. 2.5 ft. 20 ft. 53 ft. 31,151 sq. ft. (30.8%) 228 spaces 3 berths 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 20 ft. 89 ft. 39,687 sq. ft. (33%) 215 3 berths *The 2001 Special Development District No. 36 did not include the Vail Amoco site. MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: September 16, 2003 SUBJECT: A request for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Vail Town Code, to allow for amixed-use hotel; and a request for a proposed rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing from Heavy Service (HS) district to Public Accommodation (PA) district, located at 28 S. Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing. Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc. Planner: Allison Ochs I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM FIRST READINGS Ordinances No. 9 and No.10, Series of 2003, were approved on first reading by the Town Council on May 6, 2003. Second readings of the ordinances were tabled numerous times to allow for the applicant and staff to resolve some of the conditions of first reading. The following summarizes the changes that have been made to Ordinances No. 9 and No. 10, Series of 2003, since first reading: Ordinance No. 9. Series of 2003: ^ Condition 2 has been amended to reflect the completion of the Memorandum of Understanding, dated September 16, 2003, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required off-site improvements. The Memorandum of Understanding has been attached to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. ^ Condition 6 has been stricken, which required revisions to the architectural plans of the building at the corner adjacent to the Alphorn. The applicant has made these revisions. ^ Condition 7 has been stricken to reflect the approval of the variance to allow for the relocation of four parking spaces for 9 Vail Road. ^ Condition 26 has been added to reflect the Council's condition of approval on first reading, which states "that the developer shall commit no act or omission in any way to cause the current operation of the Chateau to cease until such time as a demolition permit is issued by the Department of Community Development." ^ Condition 27 has been added which states "that Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, shall not take effect until January 1, 2004." This condition was requested by the developer to ensure that the existing approvals for the site would not expire until the developer has taken ownership of the property. Ordinance No. 10. Series of 2003 The condition of approval for when the rezoning was to take effect was modified from, "such date that a demolition and/or building .permit is issued for the demolition of the existing structure on the site of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing, for preparation for the construction of Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort," to "That the rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing shall take effect on January 1, 2004. " II. SUMMARY OF REQUESTS The Four Seasons Resort is a mixed-use development proposal, located at 28 South Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road /Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing. The proposal is for the redevelopment of the existing Chateau of Vail and the Vail Amoco sites. Uses within the development include residential, hotel, commercial and recreation. The key components of the Four Seasons Resort development proposal are provided below: ^ 47,592 sq. fit. -fractional fee club units (22 units) ^ 53,421 sq. ft. -condominiums (18 units) ^ 76,978 sq. ft. -accommodation units (118 keys) ^ 10,202 sq. ft. -employee housing units (34 units) ^ 7,695 sq. ft. - restaurant/retail ^ 11,726 sq. ft. -conference/meeting rooms ^ 14,416 sq. ft. - spa health club Major Amendment to Special Development District No. 36 The Four Seasons Resort is requesting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 36. Pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, a Special Development District allows for deviations from the development standards as regulated by the underlying zoning, provided it is determined that such deviations provide benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations. It does not allow for deviations from the permitted or conditional uses of the underlying zoning. The Four Seasons Resort proposal contains the following deviations from the underlying Public Accommodation zone district: Height - as recommended, the maximum height of the building is 89 feet, which is 41 ft. higher than the 48 ft. allowed under the Public Accommodation zone district regulations. The primary roof ridge (which runs parallel to South Frontage Road) is proposed to have a maximum height of 77.5 ft. Site Coverage (below grade) - as recommended, the site coverage below grade exceeds the maximum allowable by the Public Accommodation zone district. The Public Accommodation zone district allows 65% site coverage (77,199 sq. ft.) As recommended, the applicant is proposing below grade site coverage of 71 % (84,402 sq. ft.) and above-grade site coverage of 58% (69,346 sq. ft.). Staff has attached the Four Seasons Resort Zoning Analysis, dated April 28, 2003, for reference. The analysis compares the development standards outlined by the underlying zoning of Public Accommodation to the Vail Plaza Hotel West proposal from 2001, to the proposal for the Four Seasons Resort. Rezonino Request 2 Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, regulates the process for zone district boundary amendments. The proposal for the Four Seasons Resort includes a rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing from Heavy Service zone district to Public Accommodation zone district and inclusion in Special Development District No. 36, as recommended by the Planning and Environmental Commission. The zoning map amendment is included in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003. III. BACKGROUND OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS On April 28, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0-1 (Hartman recused) to recommend approval of the major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort, and the rezoning request of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing to Public Accommodation zone district to Heavy Service zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission also voted 4-0-1 (Hartman recused) to approve the conditional use permits to allow fora 22 unit fractional fee club and 34 Type III Employee Housing Units. The conditional use permit approval is conditioned upon approval of second reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. The Planning and Environmental Commission's recommendation of approval included the conditions as outlined in Section 5 of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. Each of the conditions istime-sensitive and, in addition, to the conditions of approval, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommended approval of the following off-site improvements, as indicated on Sheet A-12.0.1 Off-site Improvements Plan, and as referenced in Section 4 of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003: • Widening of the south side of the South Frontage Road and installation of a left turn lane to the Four Seasons Resort and the Vail Police Station, with final design to be approved by the Town of Vail and Colorado Department of Transportation. • Installation of landscaped medians on South Frontage Road from the roundabout to the western lot line of the Scorpio. • Installation of a detached 6 ft. wide heated paver sidewalk adjacent to South Frontage Road and the Four Seasons Resort frontage. • Installation of an attached 6 ft. wide heated sidewalk and all related necessary improvements (i.e. retaining wall, railing, curb and gutter) adjacent to South Frontage Road, along the Scorpio frontage. • Relocation of the fire hydrant adjacent to South Frontage Road. • Relocation of Spraddle Creek piping and installation of new box culverts. • Installation of heated paver sidewalk on Vail Road along Four Seasons Resort frontage. • Installation of heated paver sidewalk from the west side of Mayors Park to the west property line of the Four Seasons Resort frontage on West Meadow Drive, in accordance with the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. • Installation of decorative lighting adjacent to public walkways along Four Seasons Resort frontage, with final design and location to be approved by the Town of Vail staff and Design Review Board. • Overlay of South Frontage Road from the western end of the Scorpio to the roundabout. • Road improvements to the north half of West Meadow Drive adjacent to the Four Seasons Resort frontage, including curb, gutter, asphalt reconstruction, and drainage improvements. Final design to be approved by the Town of Vail. • Road improvements to Vail Road from the roundabout to the driveway of 9 Vail Road, including curb, gutter, asphalt, and drainage improvements. The Staff Memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission, dated April 28, 2003, is available at the Community Development Department upon request. The Design Review Board has reviewed the Four Seasons Resort development proposal on three previous occasions. The Design Review Board has stated their conceptual support of the design of the Four Seasons Resort and will continue to review the architectural details of the project as outlined in the conditions of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003. IV. MAJOR AMENDMENT TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.36 Article 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code provides for the amendment of existing Special Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a Special Development District is as follows: To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the Special Development District. An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses, and activities of the Special Development District. The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters with which the Special Development District shall adhere. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to: the approved site plan; floor plans, building sections, and elevations: vicinity plan; parking plan; preliminary open space/landscape plan; densities; and permitted, conditional, and accessory uses. The determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the proposed Special Development District, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in the property's underlying zone district. The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed Special Development District. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. Reductions of the plans have been attached for reference. On April 28,.2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission found the Four Seasons Resort development proposal to be in compliance with the following criteria: 4 A. Design compatibility and sensitivityto the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. V. REZONING REQUEST Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, provides the process for a zone district boundary amendment. The proposed project includes a request for a rezoning of 28 South Frontage Road /Lot 9A, Vail Village 2~d Filing. The lot is currently zoned Heavy Service zone district, the purpose of which is provided in Section 12-7G-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, and is as follows: The Heavy Service District is intended to provide sites for automotive-oriented uses and for commercial service uses which are not appropriate in other commercial districts. Because of the nature of the uses permitted and their operating characteristics, appearance and potential forgenerating automotive and truck traffic, all uses in the Heavy Service District are subject to the conditional use permit procedure. In granting a conditional use permit, the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Town Council may prescribe more restrictive development standards than the standards prescribed for the District in order to protect adjoining uses from adverse influences. As noted in the purpose statement, the Heavy Service zone district is intended for automotive-oriented uses, including gas and service stations. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from Heavy Service to Public Accommodation. The purpose of the Public 5 Accommodation zone district, as provided in Section 12-7A-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, is as follows: The public accommodation district is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semipublic facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, commercial/retail and related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located within the same district and compatible with adjacent land uses. The public accommodation district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a vacation community, and where permitted uses are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the district. The applicant is proposing to include Lot 9A as part of the development site of the Four Seasons Resort. In addition to the rezoning, Lot 9A will be included in the Special Development District designation. Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, provides the review criteria for a zone district boundary amendment. It provides the following criteria for review of a zone district boundary amendment: A. Factors, Enumerated: Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment: 1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning documents; and 3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and 4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and 5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and 6. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district. 7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate. 8. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. B. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone district boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, and Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003, on second reading, for the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, to allow for a mixed-use hotel, located at 28 South Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road /Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing; and a rezoning from Heavy Service zone district to Public Accommodation zone district located at 13 Vail Road /Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing. Four Seasons Resort Zoning Analysis April 28, 2003 Develo ment Standard Allowed/Re b PA zone district 2001 SDD#36 A roval* Pro osed Lot Area: 10,000 sq. ft. 101,140 sq. ft. 118,768 sq. ft. GRFA: 178,152 sq. ft. (up to 150%) 151,710 sq. ft. 177,991 sq. ft. AU/FFU 124,706 sq. ft. (70%) 106,215 sq. ft. (70%) 124,570 sq. ft. (70%) DU 53,445 sq. ft. (30%) 45,381 sq. ft. (30%) 53,421 sq. ft. (30%) Retail/Rest. 17,$15 sq. ft. (10%) 2,835 sq. ft. (2%) 14,557 sq. ft.(8%) Density (du/acre): 25 du/acre 6.47 du/acre 7.3 du/acre AU unlimited 116 118 FFU unlimited 40 22 DU 68 15 18 EHU unlimited 14 34 Site Coverage: Below Grade Setbacks (above grade): Frontage Rd. Vail Rd. West side East side Meadow Dr. Setbacks (below grade): Frontage Rd. Vail Rd. West side East side Meadow Dr. Building Height: Landscaping: Parking: Loading: 77,199 sq. ft. (65%) 20 ft. 5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 7.5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 22.5 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 7.5 ft. 18 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 48 ft. 35,630 sq. ft. (30%) 198 spaces + spa 3 berths 5 ft. 7.5 ft. 21.25 ft. 2.5 ft. 20 ft. 53 ft. 31,151 sq. ft. (30.8%) 228 spaces 3 berths 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 20 ft. 89 ft. 39,687 sq. ft. (33%) 215 3 berths 76,821 sq. ft. (76%) 84,402 sq. ft. (71 %) *The 2001 Special Development District No. 36 did not include the Vail Amoco site. ORDINANCE N0.23 SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND, DISPATCH SERVICE FUND, AND CONFERENCE CENTER FUND OF THE 2003 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 2003 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No.30, Series of 2002, adopting the 2003 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 2003 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure or (reduction) of said appropriations as follows: General Fund $ 494,524 Capital Projects Fund 1,537,000 Dispatch Service Fund (25,000) Heavy Equipment Fund 9,200 Conference Center Fund 261,500 Total $ 2,277,224 ~. 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 16th day of September, 2003, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 7th day of October, 2003, at 6:00 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 7th day of October, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE N0.23 SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND, DISPATCH SERVICE FUND, AND CONFERENCE CENTER FUND OF THE 2003 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 2003 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No.30, Series of 2002, adopting the 2003 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certifed 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 2003 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure or (reduction) of said appropriations as follows: General Fund $ 494,524 Capital Projects Fund 1,537,000 Dispatch Service Fund (25,000) Heavy Equipment Fund 9,200 Conference Center Fund 261,500 Total $ 2,277,224 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 16th day of September, 2003, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 7th day of October, 2003, at 6:00 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 7th day of October, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ~' ORDINANCE N0.23 SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND, DISPATCH SERVICE FUND, AND CONFERENCE CENTER FUND OF THE 2003 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 2003 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No.30, Series of 2002, adopting the 2003 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 2003 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure or (reduction) of said appropriations as follows: General Fund $ 494,524 Capital Projects Fund 1,537,000 Dispatch Service Fund (25,000) Heavy Equipment Fund 9,200 Conference Center Fund 261,500 Total $ 2,277,224 ~, V 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 16th day of September, 2003, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 7th day of October, 2003, at 6:00 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 7th day of October, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk r Department of Police TOWN Memorandum To: Town Council am Brandmeyer, Interim Town Manager From: "~~wight Henninger, Chief of Police Date: September 10, 2003 Subject: I-70 Noise Enforcement Recent Actions: Since Council's last discussion in May 2002 regarding noise on I-70, truck safety inspections were carried out on two separate occasions in conjunction with the Colorado State Patrol Motor Carrier Safety Program. No engine muffler violations were observed during inspections done on November 11 and 12, 2002, yet sixteen equipment violations were found. During the second period of inspections conducted on August 4 and 5, 2003, no engine muffler violations were observed in the 29 trucks inspected. In August 2003, signs were posted on westbound I-70 at mile marker 176 and 180, stating, "Truckers Engine Brake Mufflers Required." Potential Enforcement Options: Engine brake mufflers (Jake Brakes) Colorado Revised Statutes Section 42-4-225 (1.5) currently requires any commercial vehicle equipped with an engine compression brake device to have a muffler. This section normally applies to inspections at Ports of Entry and Weigh Stations. Violators of this statute are fined $500. Vail Municipal Code Town of Vail Municipal Code Section 5-1-7 (G) prohibits commercial vehicles from emitting 90 decibels or more at a distance of twenty-five feet. This code is difficult to enforce due to the high ambient noise on the Interstate. Adoption of a new local ordinance The Town could adopt a local ordinance prohibiting the use of engine brakes along given sections of the Interstate. This type of ordinance will be particularly difficult for the Motor Carriers Association to accept. They view the use of engine brakes as a safety issue for the younger and less experience truckers. Removal of Rumble Strips CDOT and the Police Department do not recommend this option given that the rumble strips are proven to reduce accidents, particularly for sleepy or inattentive drivers. It is our opinion that the strips save lives. Enforcement of Existing Speed Limits or Reduction of the Post Speed Limits The posted speed limit on I-70 through the Town of Vail is 65 mph. Speed studies conducted by the town indicate that speeds ranked in the 85~' percentile equate to approximately 70 mph. At best, strict enforcement and reduced speed limits could lower the overall 85~' percentile to 55 mph, resulting in a 2.1 dB (A) sound decrease. Noise level changes are barely detectable at less than 3 dB (A) according to the Town Noise Study. Enforcement Issues: For the Police Department to begin enforcement of truck noise, or engine brake violations a change in philosophy within the organization would be required. The current direction is to concentrate enforcement efforts on in-town violations and not to work traffic violations on the highway. To begin enforcement activities on commercial vehicles would require a minimum of eight hours of additional training for each officer on safe traffic stops of trucks, understanding of truck brake and muffler systems, chain laws and other related commercial violations. Currently four hours have been scheduled for the Off-Season Training during the first two weeks of November. If the Vail Police Department is to have a presence on the highway it is important to recognize that it would require the officers to take action on other serious violations such as passenger vehicle traveling at a very high rates of speed. To do otherwise, could result in a perceived lack of respect for law enforcement authority, which has a demoralizing effect on the officers and reduces their effectiveness. Depending on the desired level of enforcement for truck noise violations, the additional enforcement staff on the highway could range from three new full-time officer positions seven night a week enforcement to only placing officer in an overtime status working only certain nights and times. An additional alternative would be to unfreeze the two frozen peace officer position from the Apri12003 budget cuts, which would provide for coverage on five to six evenings a week. Whichever course of action is preferred, it is clear that during the early stages of this project, additional staff time would be required to conduct education with the motor carriers. Additionally, early enforcement activities would have to be at a level of adequacy to assure it will have a clear and observable presence on the highway. This perceived presence is necessary to secure the understanding of the Town's resolution to solve this problem with the trucking industry. I would estimate as a minimum that it would take twenty-one hours a week for at least four months. Due to the large number of special events in Vail it is sometimes difficult to fill overtime with Vail Police Officers and requires us to seek assistance from Avon Police Department, Colorado State Patrol and Eagle County Sheriff's Office. The potential for additional truck related overtime may exasperate this problem, to date this year Vail officers have worked over 2000 hours of overtime and extra duty special event overtime. The Colorado State Patrol has quoted a rate of $42 an hour plus mileage for additional I-70 enforcement. Use of outside agencies for enforcement of Town of Vail Municipal Codes may be problematic, as an example the State Patrol would require the approval of the State Attorney General before they could take action on Town codes such as the existing noise ordinance or a new Engine Brake prohibition. Enforcement of the muffler laws is difficult as it requires a reason for the truck traffic stop in order to inspect the muffler system, which may not always be easily identified. Commercial vehicle enforcement may result in some additional custodial arrests of truck drivers for non-vehicle related crimes and warrants. Recommendation: 1. Enact an ordinance prohibiting the use of engine compressed brakes (Jake brakes) between mile marker 173 and 181.5 in the Town of Vail. Prohibiting use of these brakes outside of these mile markers may increase the hazards to all drivers on the highway due to the steep grades and the need for use of these brakes in an emergency. 2. Authorized an additional $46,000 in the Police Department FY 2004 budget to pay for one additional Vail peace officer, or to pay for Colorado State Patrol Troopers overtime to enforce commercial vehicles laws on I-70, in the Town of Vail. It is anticipated that a commercial vehicle enforcement program would start as early as April of 2004 after an education program for the truckers and the officers. ORDINANCE NO. 24 SERIES OF 2003 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE: ADOPTING A BUDGET AND FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE COSTS, EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, FOR ITS FISCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 2004 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2004 WHEREAS, in accordance with Article 1X of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long-range capital program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities for the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the proposed Town budget and capital program was published on the 19t" of September, 2003, more than seven (7) days prior to the hearing held on the 7t" of October, 2003, pursuant to Section 9.5 of the Charter; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for the 2004 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget; and NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for the enactment hereof have been fulfilled. 2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year beginning on the first day of January, 2004, and ending on the 31St day of December, 2004: Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2002 FUND AMOUNT General Fund 21,269,616 ...Capital Projects. Fund_ 9,751,897 Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 4,256,804 Conference Center Fund 368,300 Vail Marketing Fund 315,800 Debt Se-vice Fund 2,296,599 Heavy Equipment Fund 2,085,013 Health Insurance Fund 1,811,000 Dis atch Services Fund 1,510,631 Total Before Interfund Transfers 43,665.660 Less Interfund Charges & Transfers 6,668,642 NET EXPENDITURE BUDGET 36,997,018 3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan for the 2004 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by reference herein and made part hereof, and copies of said public records shall be made available to the public in the Municipal Building of the Town. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after publication following the fina passage hereof. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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 Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2002 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. 7. 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 16th day of September, 2003, A public hearing shall be held hereon on the 7th day of October, 2003, 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 BY TITLE ONLY this 7th day of October, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 16, 2003 SUBJECT: Ordinance 22, Series of 2003: A request to amend the official zoning map of the. Town of Vail for Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision, a part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian from Natural Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District. Applicant: Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Dorward Planner: Russell Forrest 1. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted four applications to create a memorial park on Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision which is an 11.08 acre parcel within the 156 acre Katsos Ranch Park. Katsos Ranch Park was purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just south of the East Vail exit from Interstate 70 and extends west to the Vail golf course. The applicant has submitted four applications to the Town of Vail that include: 1. A minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre Katsos Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 11.08 acre property for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. It would also create Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision which would total 145 acres, 2. A request to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision (the 11.08 acre Vail Memorial Park) from Natural Area Preservation to the Outdoor Recreation zone district, 3. A conditional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation zone district, and 4. A Design Review Board Application for Phase 1 of the memorial park. 2. BACKGROUND The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park on June 3rd of 2003 and voted to allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on Town land. On August 20, 2003 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to "staff' approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission approvals have occurred. On September 8th the Planning and Environmental Commission voted to: • Approve a minor subdivision for Katsos Ranch that creates Lot 1 and Tract A of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. • Recommend approval of an amendment to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapter 3, Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to rezone Lot 1 of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision from the Natural Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District. • Approve a conditional use permit for the Vail Memorial Park subject to the conditions identified in the staff memorandum in Section X. 3. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL AND STAFF RECOMENDATION The council is being requested to approve of Ordinance 22, Series of 2003 to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision on first reading. Staff is recommending that the Town Council approve Ordinance 22, Series of 2003 subject to the criteria and findings in section IX of the attached staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission. Attachments: A. Ordinance 22 B. PEC Memorandum and Attachments ORDINANCE NO 22 Series of 2003 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, ZONING MAP; REZONING LOT 1 KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIVISON, A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH RANGE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN FROM THE NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION (NAP) DISTRICT TO THE OUTDOOR RECREATION (OR) DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and WHERAS, the Town Council finds that the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2003., the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail recommended approval of this zoning map amendment as stated in the title of this ordinance in accordance with the approved criteria and findings for a rezoning as per Section 12-3-7 of the Vail Town Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF Ordinance No. 22 ,Series of 2003 VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as follows: That Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision, a part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian from Natural Area Preservation (NAP) District to the Outdoor Recreation (OR) District; as shown in attached map Attachment A. Section 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. Section 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. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, Ordinance No. 22 ,Series of 2003 inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 16th day of September, 2003 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 7th day of October, 2003, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 7th day of October, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 22 ,Series of 2003 Attachment A Location of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision, A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian lh 1F RS1ATt `~\ . I- I6.. ~9ltAGE' * gp y t f~ENTN F tNC ter y / 'I~--_,.. / ((~~ ~ ~t ~ see ~9 Rio V i Y ~. __ t11-t- i tl ~ ~. 1~Y ~ --LIO ~ :~~~t ~•~\~ < ~l ` iFAC[ A'. C t ~+ ' S Y ~. a ~ l0i .w: ~ ~_ t \ 6P~ ii. ~_ s. ~.r _~___.~ 92 ~Y ~ h3'~~. `. ~ \ .a ,_ . , -, t t 221 6 dt>'(S 0.V.y{/p/XC d.LN. 5]5.96 i i a ~w,~ '\.._ :a ,~~ r. v, a: ~ L. W u ~- ~. .__ t _y -- ~) 1C,RN _~ta)11dSt+d1 ~ L~~ JJ -- Ordinance No. 22 ,Series of 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 8, 2003 SUBJECT: A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property (unplatted), pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-8B-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted parcel of land located on in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian (proposed as Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Subdivision), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete metes and bounds description is on file at the Community Development Department). Applicant: Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Dorward Planner: Russell Forrest SUMMARY The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted three applications to create a memorial park on an 11.08 acre portion of the Katsos Ranch Park identified in the proposed minor subdivision as Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. This 156 acre parcel was purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just south of the East Vail exit from Interstate 70. The applicant is requesting approval on a minor subdivision, rezoning to Outdoor Recreation, and a conditional use permit for a cemetery. The purpose statement of the Vail Memorial Park is: "The Vail Memorial Park will serve to celebrate, remember and honor the lives of the many people who have helped to define Vail through their experiences and contributions. By paying tribute to these diverse individuals, we will strengthen our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who share a spiritual passion and love for Vail." This park involves the creation of a crusher fine walking path, rock memorial walls, arched entry gate, memorial rocks, and stone benches. No structures or lighting are proposed as part of this application. Staff is recommending approval of these three applications in that this application is consistent with the criteria and findings identified in section IX of this memorandum. The applicant has provided responses to the Planning and Environmental Commission's issues identified at the August 25th meeting (Attachment F). II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is requesting the following: 1. Approval of a minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre Katsos Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 11.08 acre property for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. It would also create Tract A, Katsos Ranch Subdivision which would total 145 acres 2. Recommendation of approval to the Town Council for a rezoning of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision (the 11.08 acre Vail Memorial Park) from Natural Area Preservation to the Outdoor Recreation zone district 3. Approval of a conditional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation zone district. The specific components of the proposal include: • A double track access gravel path (approximately 400 feet long in phase 1) that connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the memorial park. This path would also provide access for the park and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles. • A 3 foot wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths are a crusher fine trail). • Six memorial boulder walls .benched into the natural topography at the toe of the slopes on the south side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall. • Natural stones for memorial engravings. • Memorial trees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if irrigation can be provided to the site with the cooperation of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. • Arched entrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch Trail south of the pedestrian bridge. • Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not be allowed on this site. 2 The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the attached site plan (Attachment E). Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years depending on demand. III. BACKGROUND In 1993, an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery in the Town of Vail. Over 10 alternative sites were evaluated for land use, ownership, and environmental considerations. After a detailed study of the alternatives, the upper bench of Donovan Park was chosen as a preferred alternative. A design was developed and approved by the Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to the Vail voters in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001, a renewed effort in memorializing deceased Vail locals again became an interest. A committee was established to identify a preferred location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee established three major criteria for site selection: • Minimum 5 acres in size Pedestrian and vehicular access • Not located directly adjacent to residential areas. After screening for those criteria, the following alternative sites were further reviewed. 1. Katsos Ranch 2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head 3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park Given the criteria mentioned above the preferred alternative was Katsos Ranch in that it was the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had good access. It also was the quietest reflective space of the three alternatives. The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park and has voted to allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on Town land. On August 20, 2003 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to "staff' approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission approvals have occurred. IV. Planning and Environmental Commission DISCUSION ITEMS FROM THE AUGUST 25, 2003 MEETING The following are discussion items for this topic: A. Intensity of Use: The Planning and Environmental Commission was concerned about the intensity of use on the site. The primary concerns related to this issue were conflicts on the recreational trail and parking. The Planning and Environmental Commission was also concerned about the conflicts in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on phasing capacity and comments made by 3 the applicant on capacity. The EIR has been updated with the latest information on phasing, wetlands, and floodplain information. The applicant has provided responses to these issues in the attached letter (Attachment F). B. Parking: Parking for memorial services can be accommodated to a limited extent at the trail-head parking area for the Katsos Ranch Trail. Eighteen parking spaces are provided at this location. However, staff believes that there is inadequate parking for groups larger than 30 people. Staff believes that the applicant should require larger services to park at remote locations and to provide a shuttle service to the site. The applicant is proposing to require a shuttle service for groups over 25 people. Furthermore, additional no parking signs may be needed along the Frontage Road. C. Recreation Path: Staff believes there could be some limited conflicts on the recreation path when a large memorial service is occurring. To avoid conflicts with bicycles on the path, staff would suggest that a temporary sign on the existing recreation trail be placed to the west of the memorial park and at the bridge to indicate when memorial service is occurring and for bicyclist to dismount during memorial services. The sign would be placed on the trail during memorial events. D. Wetlands: The Vail Memorial Foundation has been working with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) to enhance the existing wetlands on the site. Wetlands have been mapped and are identified in the wetlands study in the Environmental Impact Report (Attachment D). As part of its approved 1993 plan to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWSD identified the Katsos Ranch .property as a wetland mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which 3.5 acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although ERWSD has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction and Vail Memorial Park is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as well (or apply fora 404 permit). Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWSD consultants have flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to Vail Memorial Park's first phase. The only potential conflict is the swale directly north of the primary development areas in phases 1-4, which is included in the mitigation area. The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial Park Foundation, and ERWSD that spanning this swale with bridges or boardwalks would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit. (Attachment F) Development of paths in phases 2-4 may require wetland permits, depending upon the tong-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion of the Vail Memorial Park site. E. Floodplain: Staff acknowledged the need to verify the floodplain location at the last Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. Since the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the floodplain delineation on the site survey, Town staff has investigated further and has found that the 100-year floodplain covers a greater area than was previously identified (Attachment E). Section 12- 21-10 of the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines: A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two- Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "structure" as used in this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including residential use. E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) § 1: Ord. 12(1978) § 4) After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above mentioned regulations, an Engineer with Peak Land Surveying has concluded that the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations (see letter in attachment F). No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the "quantity or velocity of flood waters." V. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS A. Minor Subdivision As per section 13-4-2 C of the Town Code the Planning and Environmental Commission is the final decision making body on a Minor Subdivision. Any final decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission can be appealed to the Town Council. B. Rezoning Town Council: The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a rezoning or a text amendment. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. The Town council must utilize the criteria and findings identified in section VI of this memorandum. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for applying the criteria in section VI of this memorandum and making a recommendation to the Town Council on a rezoning. C. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval/denial of CUP. The Planning and Environmental Commission will make recommendations to the Town Council on rezoning land, text amendments, and modification of hazard designations. The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal for: Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. 5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed use. 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority on a CUP, but must review any accompanying Design Review Board application. The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review Board proposal for: • Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings • Fitting buildings into landscape • Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography • Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation • Adequate provision for snow storage on-site • Acceptability of building materials and colors • Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms • Provision of landscape and drainage • Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures • Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances • Location and design of satellite dishes • Provision of outdoor lighting • The design of parks VI. APPPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS A. Town of Vail Zoning Regulations Section 12-8C Natural Preservation (NAP) District The current zoning of the proposed Memorial Park site is Natural Area Preservation. The purpose statement for the Natural Area Preservation District is: Section 12-8C-1: The Natural Area Preservation District is designed to provide areas which, because of their environmentally sensitive nature or natural beauty, shall be protected from encroachment by any building or other improvement, other than those listed in Section 12-8C-2 of this Article. The Natural Area Preservation District is intended to ensure that designated lands remain in their natural state, including reclaimed areas, by protecting such areas from development and preserving open space. The Natural Area Preservation District includes lands having valuable wildlife habitat, exceptional aesthetic or flood control value, wetlands, riparian areas and areas with significant environmental constraints. Protecting sensitive natural areas is important for maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat, preserving wildlife habitat, flood control, protecting view corridors, minimizing the risk from hazard areas, and protecting the natural character of Vail which is so vital to the Town's tourist economy. The intent shall not preclude improvement of the natural environment by the removal of noxious weeds, deadfall where necessary to protect public safety or similar compatible improvements. (Ord. 21(1994) § 10) Section 12-8B Outdoor Recreation (OR) District The applicant is proposing to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision to Outdoor Recreation. The purpose Statement for the Outdoor Recreation Zone District is: Section 12-86-1: "The outdoor recreation district is intended to preserve undeveloped or open space lands from intensive development while permitting outdoor recreational activities that provide opportunities for active and passive recreation areas, facilities and uses. (Ord. 21(1994) § 9)" B. Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designation for Katsos Ranch Park is Open Space. This land use category is defined as: "Passive recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream corridors and drainage ways are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were classified as undevelopab/e due to high hazards and slopes over 40% are also included within this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted by existing zoning such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning. Also, permitted in this area would be institutional/public uses." Specific goals in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan that relate to this use include: 1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space. 6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth. C. The plan also specifically discusses Katsos Ranch and states the following: "This parcel of land has been the subject of much community -wide discussions since its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 146 acres (current survey shows area at 156 acres) and lies immediately east of the Vail Golf Course and south of Gore Creek. A Study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of alternative development scenarios for the property. The alternatives ranged from a "do nothing" or "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style golf course. The study concluded that a moderate level of development is the most desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running trail, cross country skiing trails, and picnic areas. Many o these improvements have been constructed and are used by area residents and tourists alike. Based on this expression it is assumed that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate use for the parcel. " Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan does identify Katsos Ranch Park as a sensitive natural area as defined by the Natural Heritage Program. No specific actions or management recommendations are made for this specific parcel other than the creation of a south trail to the south of this parcel and on US Forest Service Land. After a US Forest Service review of a specific trait alignment, the Forest Service concluded that there would be significant challenges to approving this trail with Lynx habit in close proximity to this proposed trail. VII. ZONING ANALYSIS Legal Description: Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision Zoning: (current) Natural Area Preservation District Zoning: (proposed) Outdoor Recreation District (OR) Land Use Designation: Open Space Lot Size: 11.08 acres Development Standard (OR) Allowed Proposed Parking: As per Chapter 10 18 Available Lot Area: Not applicable Setbacks: 20' from all property lines 400' from nearest property line Height: 21' flat/24' sloped No buildings Density Site Coverage Not applicable 5% VIII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING 0% (no buildings) Land Use Zoning North: I-70 ROW & Residential Right of Way & Primary Secondary South: US Forest Service No Zoning East: Residential Primary Secondary West: Golf Course Outdoor Recreation IX. REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. Minor Subdivision A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code. 1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is: Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation District. The proposed lot size is 11.08 acres. Frontage: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation District. Dimension: There are no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation 'District. The proposed lot size for the Memorial Park is 11.08 acres. The remaining area identified as Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision is 145 acres. 2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-3-4, and is as follows: "The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable.... The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental infegrify and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. " The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to insure that the subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision purpose statements from 13-1-2 (C) are as follows: 1. "To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposals will be evaluated and to provide information as to the type and extent of improvements required." Staff believes that this proposal meets the standards and criteria for a minor subdisvision in the Town of Vail and that the plans provide clear information on the extent of the development. Furthermore no new commercial or residential development will result from this subdivision and the proposed used is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos Ranch. 2. "To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without conflict with development on adjacent land." No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed site design is intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park and is over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastern portion of the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands. 3. "To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land." This proposal preserves the natural integrity of the land. No buildings are proposed for this project. No significant environmental impacts are anticipated. The applicant is working with the Eagle River and Water District to enhance the wetlands area on the site. The first phase of the Vail Memorial Park has no impacts on either existing wetlands or the proposed creation of wetlands by the ERWSD (See Attachment A for letter from ERWSD in applicant response to Planning and Environmental Commission issues). Future phases may require Corps of Engineers approval based on whether new wetlands are created on the site as planned. In evaluating the design of the Vail Memorial Park, no negative impacts are anticipated in terms of the value of adjacent properties. 4. "To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town development objectives." Staff believes that this project is designed in harmony with the natural setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental impacts or impediments to the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch. The applicant 10 will need to provide notice on the recreational trail to trail users during memorial events to avoid conflicts. However, staff believes that trail conflicts can be mitigated with signage considering the anticipated number of memorial events per year. 5. "To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision." The creation of the Vail Memorial Park will be a critical community asset. It will not have any significant impact on public infrastructure. 6. "To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and procedures." A proposed plat has been provided with the application that is consistent with the requirements identified in Title 13, Chapter 4 of the Vail Town Code. 7. "To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the community and the value of the land." An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project. No significant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 25 people. Working cooperatively with the ERWSD it is possible to expand wetlands on the site beyond what currently exists. Phase 1 of the project will not conflict with any proposed wetland creation on the site. Also future phases should be reviewed by the Corps of Engineers to avoid conflicts once the precise boundaries of new wetlands are delineated as the result of this partnership. B. Rezoning 1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space. The Open Lands Plan also identifies Katsos Ranch as sensitive natural area. The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Vail Memorial Park Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and 11 development objectives. The proposed plan protects the natural integrity of the Katsos Ranch Park. 2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning documents. The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. The closest home is over 1000 feet away from the Vail Memorial Park and is screened by vegetation. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park compliments the natural landscape and avoids impacts to existing wetlands. In fact, there is now the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland area on Katsos Ranch through a partnership with the ERWSD. 3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives. The proposed design is intended to blend into to the natural landscape. There should be no significant interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos Ranch given the number of times memorial events are anticipated within a calendar year. Staff has provided recommended conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit in section X of this memorandum to reduce conflicts on the recreational path. Furthermore, staff would recommend that the conditional use permit for the Vail Memorial Park be reviewed within 1 year of approval to evaluate any unanticipated impacts. 4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole. A memorial park, as proposed, is an important component to the life cycle of a community. The park is intended to celebrate and memorialize individuals that have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Districts. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies this site as Open Space and states that Katsos Ranch is "appropriate for passive outdoor recreation." The uses in the OR zone District are controlled through a conditional use permit. 5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features. 12 No building or structures are proposed as part of the Vail Memorial Park. No significant site disturbance is anticipated other than the creation of paths to the proposed memorial areas. The proposed park avoids impacting existing wetlands. Infact, there is the opportunity to expand wetland area on the eastern portion of the site through a partnership with the ERWSD. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and no other significant impacts are anticipated. 6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district. Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the purpose statement within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The presence of a memorial park on the site will help ensure the site remains as open space in perpetuity. 7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate. The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well documented since the last effort in 1993. Conditions on Katsos Ranch have not changed. It is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south and Gore Creek on the North. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site. 8) Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. C. Conditional Use Permit 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos Ranch. It will maintain the environmental integrity of the site and potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Katsos Ranch. The Town Council has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objective of the Town of Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments the natural character of Katsos Ranch Park. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. 13 No buildings are proposed as part of this project which will impact light and air. A memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is potentially parking for large memorial services. Staff believes this impact can be mitigated by requiring all memorial groups over 25 to utilize buses or shuttles to the park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking structure (in the summer and shoulder seasons). Staff recommends reviewing the conditional use permit after 1 year to ensure that circulation on Bighorn Road and the Katsos Ranch recreational trail are not adversely impacted. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. Staff has analyzed the project intensity of use of the Vail Memorial Park. The 1993 Donovan Park cemetery study anticipated 24 memorial services (which included casket burials) within a year. Staff contacted the County Coroner and Eagle County on average has 60-70 deaths per year. Nationally approximately 50% of all deaths result in cremation. With the proposed conditions of approval to prevent Frontage Road parking and the Foundations interest in limiting large memorial services on the site, staff does not believe there will be any significant circulation impacts. However, it is difficult to anticipate the nature of impacts with this type of use and staff would recommend that the conditional use permit be reviewed in 1 year's time. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. No buildings are proposed as part of this application. X. STAFF RECOMMENDATION A. Minor Subdivision The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves a minor subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 4, Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivison, A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian into Tract A (Area of Katsos Ranch Park excluding the Vail Memorial Park) and Lot 1 (Vail Memorial Park Site) Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. Staff's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following findings: "The Planning and Environmental Commission approves of the proposed minor subdivision and finds that the minor subdivision application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. Specifically, the Commission finds that the minor subdivision resolves allows the proper 14 identification and platting of the Town of Vails largest property and the ability to delineate the Vail Memorial Park. B. Amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval of an amendment to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapter 3, Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to rezone Lot 1 of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision from the Natural Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District. Staff's recommendations are based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following findings: "Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone district boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. " C. Conditional Use Permit (Conditions Revised by PEC in Bold from the September Stn PEC Meeting) The Community Development Department recommends approval for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9B-3, Conditional Uses; Vail Town Code, to allow for a Cemetery and memorial park on Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Subdivision. Staffs recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following findings: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the Parking (P) District. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. 15 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve or forward a recommendation of approval of the applicant's to the Vail Town Council, staff recommends that the Commission makes the following conditions a part of the approval: 1. All future phases (2-4) of the Vail Memorial Park must be reviewed by the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to construction as appropriate. 2. The Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has taken responsibility for the review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide swale into phase 1. The proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review application shall be submitted by Eagle Vail Memorial Park Foundation for review and approval of the Design Review Board prior to construction. 3. The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval by the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases (phases 2-4) prior to the construction of any future phases. 4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any remote parking used for inurnment services. 5. The applicant shall provide signage approved by Town staff during memorial events to clearly indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists should use caution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to Katsos Ranch and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the Katsos Ranch recreational trail. 6. The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Frontage Road at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public Works Department. 7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail prior to construction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Park. 8. The applicant shall return to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one years time from the date of approval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be reviewed to evaluate the impacts on circulation along the Frontage Road and to the use of the recreational trail. 9. The applicant shall submit future phases to the Planning and Environmental Commission for review by the Commission to ensure that environmental impacts are adequately addressed in future phases. 10. There shall be no maintenance, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1St and May 1St 16 11. The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the public use of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion for currently existing passive recreational uses. XI. Attachments: A. Public Notice B. Vicinity Map C. Application Letter D. EIR E. Design Plans F. Letter from Applicant responding to comments from the August 25th meeting 77 Attachment A. Public Notice THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Vail Town Code on August 25, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: A request fora final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property (unplatted), pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-8B-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted parcel o~ land located in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6 Principal Meridian, and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete metes and bounds description is on file at the Community Development Department). Applicant: Vail Memorial Park, represented by Merv Lapin Planner: Russell Forrest A request for a variance from Section 12-7B-15, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, to allow for awnings over existing second floor deck, located at the Vista Bahn Building, 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Remonov & Company, represented by Knight Planning Services Planner: Matt Gennett A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments to Title 14, Section 10, Development Standards Handbook, Chapter 8, Architectural Design Guidelines, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, and Vail Village Design Considerations, Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, to allow for the use of temporary enclosures of outdoor dining decks, and setting for details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Matt Gennett The applications and information about these proposals are available for public inspection during regular business hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department office, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation held in the Town of Vail Community Development Department office and the site visits that precede the public hearing. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for additional information. This notice published in the Vail Daily on August 8, 2003. O 1 ;; TOi9NOFYAIL ~ BAz~TZ FAMILY PARTNERS II LLC 11091 BRONCO DR ' ZKER, CO 80138 CAULKINS FAMILY PTNSHP 1600 BROADWAY 1400 DENVER, CO 80202 HINTZ, BERND JURGEN ~1OVAR HOUSE 24 QUEENS RD WEYBRIDGE SURREY UNITED KINGDOM KT139UX HUZELLA, LISA WHEELER ~/O TMW ENTERPRISES 2120 AUSTIN AVE STE 100 f~OCHESTER HILLS, MI 48309 LEPRINO, NANCY 16365 W BAYAUD DR JOLDEN, CO 80401 REIMERS, ARTHUR J. I45 ROUND HILL RD 1RENNWICH, CT 06831 VANHOOPS HOLDINGS LP X022 JASON CT 3OULDER, CO 80303 .BANNER, M. R., III & ELAINE T. MATTHEW R. BANNER, III REVOCABLE TRUST 1540 ROCKMONT CIR BOULDER, CO 80303 ERICKSON, MABEL T. IRREVOCABLE TRUST BUTTS, RICHARD TRUSTEE 1115 SOUTHPORT LOOP APT 4 BISMARCK, ND 58504-7085 HOVERSTEN, PHILIP E. & LOUISE B. -JT 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR VAIL, CO 81657 JOSE ANTONIO O FARRILL QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST CRATER 428 MEXICO 01900 DF MEXICO CITY MEXICO MORAN, CHLOE HELD 1480 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA, MN 55391 SNOWFLAKE TRUST C/O MANTUCKET CAPITAL LLC 5251 DTC PARKWAY STE 995 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 VOLLBRACHT, WILLIAM B. & LESLIE PO BOX 5440 DENVER, CO 80217 - ~~ ~~S cr~is ~~ rz,~vut) ~ (as) J3 BARTLETT, JAMES R. & SUSAN B. 7700 N 71ST ST PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253 GINSBERG, STANLEY A. & MARTHA -JT 17950 LAKE ESTATES DR BOCA RATON, FL 33496 HUGHES, DIANE K. TRUSTEE - BURNEY, KENDALL K. - HUGHES, KING B. 4405 HIGHLAND DR DALLAS, TX 75205 KAPLAN, GILDA L. 3030 BOOTH CREEK DR VAIL, CO 81657 PITTO J. RUSSELL 655 MONTGOMERY ST 1190 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111- 2630 TOWN OF VAIL C/O FINANCE DEPT 75 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL, CO 81657 WILHELMSEN, AXEL & JANIE 2910 BOOTH CREEK DR VAIL, CO 81657 Attachment B. Vicinity Map ~, x F E4 ~ { ~'~ 3 ~ d f r_ r ~ 1 _ ., _~` t F[~': ~ . { " '3t : :' o-c . , . ' ~ _ .. ` ~T~ " L ~ ~+ ~ ~ r ~t r ~ ` f ~ £ ~ x. l; s ~ ~ ~ t .,R,~ s-,. ,~ ~. ~ - i .~. r, .«:~ ,. _ w r ~ ,,,- - .n f ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ i ., 1 ~ t a ~d ~ Ar w„ } ~ $~ 1 :. H .~ ~ 1z . fi 4 _. , `r ~ ~ M1 -. r- rF t - c tE r r ,, ,,. ~~_:. - ~. ~~ , ~ . ~Sl,; 5 1 ~~ .. K l4 i. ~F ~y t'h " 1~ ~. ,~+. ,. , _ Caen Attachment C. Application Letter r r ~~ VAIL MEMORIAL PARK APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BY PEC AND DRB July 28, 2003 1. Description and Location of the Property: The Vail Memorial Park site is an 11.13-acre portion of the Katsos Ranch purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just south of the East Vail exit from Interstate 70. There are no improvements on the site except for a sanitary sewer line running across it from east to west. Portions of the site are included in a wetland mitigation plan for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. Across-country ski trail uses the upland meadows on the site in winter, and asingle-track hike/bike trail traverses the site along the toe of the slopes. 2. Description of the Request for Review: 1. Approval of a Minor Subdivision 2. Approval of an application to rezone the memorial park to outdoor recreation. The Outdoor Recreation District allows cemeteries as a conditional use. Also the designated open space charter provision allows sites to be rezoned to one of the three open space zone districts (i.e. Natural Area Preservation, Outdoor Recreation, and Agriculture and Open Space). 3. Approval of a conditional use permit for the park and cemetery. 4. Approval of a design review permit for the park design and sign. 3. Description of the Development Proposal: Although it has been forty years since the town's founding as a ski resort and although the resort has since evolved into ayear-round community of some 5,000 people (and another 10,000 in the larger Eagle Valley), Vail still lacks -and desires - a place where its citizens and those who love the valley can be memorialized. After years of study, consideration of numerous sites, and an earlier cemetery master plan proposed for Donovan Park but narrowly defeated in a bond issue election (1993), this site has been selected by a citizen task force and is being proposed for use as a memorial park. Any current or past resident of the Vail Valley or Eagle County and anyone who feels an emotional connection with the region will be able to purchase a memorial inscription and/or bury or scatter ashes in the memorial park. (No casket burial is anticipated.) The areas to be developed for memorials will be concentrated in clearings at the toe of the slopes along the southern boundary of the site, where they will not be visible from off-site. The design motif is intended to adhere as much as possible to natural forms and materials: low walls of dry-stacked native stone, flagstone and crushed stone paths, and native boulders not exceeding 24" in height, sensitively placed in clusters. There will be no headstones and no formal carved monuments. The types of memorials proposed are intended to be non-intrusive and entirely compatible with the character of the natural landscape: • Engraved inscriptions on boulders in dry-stacked walls at the toe of the slopes; • Engraved inscriptions on individual boulders and flush-set stone slabs placed in clusters along the pathways; • Donated benches fashioned of natural boulders; • Memorial groves of trees dedicated to the memory of loved ones (proposed later in phase one depending on availability of water). • Ashes can be scattered in designated areas or buried in biodegradable urns behind the memorial walls or under memorial stones. An accessible crushed stone pathway system will connect the memorial areas to the existing Town of Vail recreation path and an existing parking area on Bighorn Road. No vehicular access to the site (other than for small maintenance vehicles) or other improvements are proposed. It is proposed that the memorial park be opened in phases as needed. The initial phase would consist of two or three dry-stacked walls totaling about 100 linear feet (four feet high), several hundred pre-set stone slabs and boulders for memorials, a space where small memorial services could be held, and a short looping pathway connection. The estimated capacity of this first phase would be approximately 500 memorials, which could be sufficient fora 10-20 year timeframe. 3. Operation of the Vail Memorial Park Seven members of the existing task force will become the board of directors and will be responsible for setting policies for the operation of the Memorial Park, setting the pricing structure and residency requirements for price tiers, hiring staff, and approving the annual budgets for maintenance and capital improvements. It is anticipated that an "executive director" will be hired who will report directly to the board and be responsible for the following: • Accounting and annual budgeting • Scheduling of committal and memorial services • Coordination of logistical, parking and transportation arrangements, including golf carts as appropriate, for services to be held in the Memorial Park, particularly when larger groups are anticipated • Attendance at larger services and services where there may not be a minister or funeral director in charge • Hiring of maintenance staff or outsourcing of landscape maintenance services • Sales, donations and fund raising • Arranging for memorial engravings and stone selections on site • Arranging for biodegradable urn burials and the scattering of ashes • Correspondence • Compile documentation on residency and make recommendation to Board regarding pricing tier eligibility of deceased. Board decisions are final. • Maintenance of permanent records including individual histories and GPS location of memorials Basic maintenance will be the responsibility of the executive director but it is anticipated that it will be contracted out. The park is designed for minimal maintenance. Only natural materials will be used and they will be used in a natural way. Only native species will be planted to restore the site and to create memorial groves which will also act as a buffer and enclosure. Assurance of adequate water will be necessary before tree plantings are done. No plantings by the public will be allowed. Artificial flowers, etc will be removed. No grass will be mowed. It will look like the rest of Katsos Park. An endowment will be established for perpetual care of the Memorial Park. Planning alternate arrangements for parking for groups over 30 will be the responsibility of the executive director, in concert with the deceased's family or their funeral director. The Director will make arrangements for the use of various parking facilities, with MOU's where possible, and have transportation available at an additional cost to the user. The parking structures will be used when there is no conflict which would be reviewed in each instance with the Town of Vail Parking Director. 1t is anticipated that most cars will usually remain at the chapel. 4. Review Criteria Minor Subdivision A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code. A. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is: Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation or Natural Area Preservation District. The proposed lot size is 11. 13 acres. Frontage: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation or Natural Area Preservation District. Dimension: There is no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation or Natural Area Preservation District. The proposed lot size is 11. 13 acres. B. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-3-4, and is as follows: "The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regufations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. " The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to insure that the subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision purpose statements from 13-1-2 (C) are as follows: 1. "To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposals will be evaluated and to provide information as to the type and extent of improvements required. " Response: The Foundations believes that the proposal is consistent with the intent and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. "To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without conflict with development on adjacent land. " Response: No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed site design is intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park-and is over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastern portion of the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands. 3. "To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. " Response: No buildings are proposed for this project. No environmental impacts are anticipated. Infact, the Foundation is working with the Eagle River and Water District to enhance the wetland area on the site. 4. "To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town development objectives. " Response: The Foundation believes that this project is design in harmony with the natural setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental impact or impedes the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch. 5. "To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision. " Response: The creation of a Memorial Park will be a critical community asset. It will not have any significant impact on public infrastructure. 6. "To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and procedures. " Response: A proposed plat has been provided with the application 7. "To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the community and the value of the land. " Response: An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project. No significant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 30 in size. Rezoning 1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space. The Open Lands Plan also identifies Katsos Ranch as sensitive natural area. The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Memorial Park Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and development objectives. 2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning documents. The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. The closes home is over 1000 feet away and screened by vegetation. The proposed design of the Memorial Park compliments the natural landscape and avoids impacts to wetlands. In fact, there is now the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland area on Katsos Ranch through a partnership with the Eagle River Water District. 3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives. The proposed design is intended to blend into to the natural landscape. There should be no interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos Ranch. 4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole. A memorial park, as proposed, is an important component to the life cycle of a community. The park is intended to celebrate and memorialize individuals that have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Districts. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies this site as Open Space and states that Katsos Ranch is "appropriate for passive outdoor recreation." The uses in the OR zone District are controlled through a conditional use permit. 5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features. The proposed park avoids impacting wetlands. Infact, there is the opportunity to expand wetland area on the eastern portion of the site through a partnership with the Eagle River and Water District. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and no other significant impacts are anticipated. 6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district. Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the purpose statement within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. 7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate. The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well documented since the last effort in 1993. Conditions on Katsos Ranch have not changed. It is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south and Gore Creek on the North. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site. 8) Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. Conditional Use Permit Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos Ranch. It will maintain the environmental integrity of the site and potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Katsos Ranch. The Town Council has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objective of the Town of Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments fhe natural character of Katsos Ranch Park. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. A memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is potentially parking for large memorial services. The Foundation believes this impact can be mitigated by requiring all memorial groups over 30 to utilize buses or shuttles to the park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking structure. (in the summer and shoulder seasons). 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. The Foundation does not believe there will by any impact to circulation or traffic flow for 90% of the groups using the Memorial Park which are anticipated to be under 30 participants. However, a shuttle system will be required for groups over 30 in size. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. No buildings are proposed as part of this application. Submitted Materials 1. Signed application 2. Written Project Description 3. Environmental Impact Report (Final Wetland Report will be submitted on August Stn) 4. Site Plan with wetland delineation 5. Phase 1 plan with limits of site disturbance 6. Stamped Topographic Survey 7. Draft Plan with Title Commitment 8. Photos & Drawings of the memorial walls and rocks 9. Elevation of wall to scale (will be forwarded to Town on August 1, 2003} 10. Operational Plan (will be submitted on August 1, 2003) 11. Examples of Materials to be proposed (Will be submitted on August 9th) Attachment D. EIR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE VAIL MEMORIAL PARl~G July 23, 2003 Revised on September 2, 2003 Prepared by: Sherry Dorward, Anna Higgins„ and Russ Forrest i Table of Contents 1. Purpose 3 2. Proposed Project 4 4. Affected Environment 6 5. Background and Alternatives Evaluated 7 5. Potential Impacts and Mitigation 9 6. Summary of Impacts 12 2 Environmental Impact Report for the Vail Memorial Park 1. PURPOSE: The purpose of the Environmental Impact Report for either a public or private project is to identify and evaluate environmental impacts associated with a proposed project so that environmental considerations can be integrated into the decision making process. The requirements for an Environmental Impact Report are specfified in Title 12, Chapter 12 of the Vail Town Code. The submission and review of an environmental impact report is required to achieve the following objectives: 1. Availability Of Information: To ensure that complete information on the environmental effects of the proposed project is available to the Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the general public. 2. Environmental Protection A Criterion: To ensure that long-term protection of the environment is a guiding criterion in project planning, and that land use and development decisions, both public and private, take into account the relative merits of possible alternative actions. 3. Review And Evaluation Procedure: To provide procedures for local review and evaluation of the environmental effects of proposed projects prior to granting of permits or other authorizations for commencement of development. 4. Review And Evaluation Procedure: To provide procedures for local review and evaluation of the environmental effects of proposed projects prior to granting of permits or other authorizations for commencement of development. 5. Avoid Geologic Hazard Areas: To ensure that buildings are not constructed in geologic hazard areas, by way of illustration, flood plains, avalanche paths, rockfall areas, where such hazard cannot practically be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council 6. Protect Water Quality: To ensure that the quality of surface water and ground water within the Town will be protected from adverse impacts and/or degradation due to construction activities. (Ord. 37(1980) § 10: Ord. 19(1976) § 14: Ord. 8(1973) § 16.100) 2. PROPOSED ACTION 2.1 Description of Action The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is proposing to create a memorial park on the eastern 11.13 acres of Katsos Ranch Park. The total land area of Katsos Ranch park is 156 acres and it is owned by the Town of Vail. The property is currently zoned Natural Area Preservation and is designated open space. The property is located at approximately 8,400 feet elevation within the Gore Creek basin in East Vail. The ranch is separated from Interstate 70 by Gore Creek. It is also separated from the residential development in East Vail by a dense community of willow shrubs. The Vail Memorial Garden Foundation is proposing to lease Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion from the Town of Vail (See attachment A). The Foundation would be responsible for the construction and maintenance of the Park. Three phases are proposed for the Vail Memorial Park. The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has identified the following purpose statement for the park: `The Vail Memorial Park will serve to celebrate, remember and honor the lives of the many people who have helped to define Vail through their experiences and contributions. By paying tribute to these diverse individuals, we will strengthen our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who share a spiritual passion and love for Vail." 2.2 Project Components The specific components of the proposal include: • A double track access path (approximately 400 feet long in phase I) that connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the memorial park. This path would also provide access for park and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles. • A 3 wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths are a crusher fine trail). • Six memorial boulder walls benched into the natural topography at the toe of the slopes on the south side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall. • Natural stones for memorial engravings. • Memorial trees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if irrigation can be provided to the site with the cooperation of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. • Entrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch Trail south of the pedestrian bridge. 4 • Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not be allowed on this site. The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the attached site plan. Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years depending on demand. No structures are proposed as part of this application. In addition, no lighting is proposed with this application. 2.3 Intensity of Use There are currently 41,600 people in Eagle County and there has been a 3% increase in retirement aged individuals in the County between 1990 and 2000. There are on average approximately 60-70 deaths per year in Eagle County (Eagle County Coroner). Based on a market study that was developed for a proposed cemetery at the Upper Bench of Donovan Park in 1993 it was estimated that approximately 24 memorial events would occur per year. The Interfaith Chapel currently conducts approximately 3-12 memorials per year. Approximately 120 people may come to the memorial service and then on average 15-20 people may come to a burial or inurnment of ashes. Memorial services occur primarily in the week. Paster Walker of the Vail Interfaith Chapel, who was interviewed on July 23, 2003, stated that with the Vail Memorial Park and an aging population it is possible to see the number of memorials increase to 50 per year over the next 10 years. Also it would be possible to have more people choose to combine a memorial and inurnment service at the Vail Memorial Park Site. Therefore, a reasonable design target for an average inurnment service could be 20 people with a maximum number of people at approximately 120 people (5-10 time/year). There could be a total of 50 memorial events per year during the non winter months primarily during week days. The average length of time for an inurnment service is approximately 20-30 minutes. If the Inurnment Service was combined with a memorial service, then the time could be increased to 1 hour per service. It should be noted that the Vail Memorial Park Foundation will actively discourage large memorial events from occurring on the site to preserve the natural integrity of the site. 2.4. Phasing Proposed on Site The applicant is proposing four phases. The first phase is intended to last for 15 years. The last phase could be implemented in 30-40 years. The applicant is asking that phases 1 - 4 be approved through a conditional use permit. The applicant is only pursuing Design Review Board approval for phase 1 at this time. The capacity of each phase summarized below: LATER EST'D MEMORIALIZATION OPTION PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASES TOTAL INSCRIBED STONES IN DRY-STACKED BOULDER WALLS 200-250 200-250 350-400 0 750-900 (Assumes 2 to 2.5 memorial inscriptions per linear foot of wall -see note 1) (note 4) ABOVE-GRADE BOULDER MARKERS WITH INSCRIPTIONS 50-60 75-100 75-100 150-300 400-560 (Embedded boulders clustered near internal walking paths) (note 2) (note 4) FLUSH-SET STONE SLABS WITH INSCRIPTIONS 100-125 75 50-75 150+ 375-425 (Set alongside pathways, along the base of memorial walls, and in the phase 1 memorial gathering space) (note 4) MEMORIAL TREES 25 20 20 20 85+ (Memorial groves are dependent on availability of irrigation water) MEMORIAL BENCHES note 3 5 5 5 5 20 TOTALS note 4 380-475 345-450 500-600 325-475 1550-2000 General notes: Maximum capacity of the Memorial Park is variable and difficult to estimate, as is future demand. Phases would be built out as needed. It is anticipated that the Memorial Park will serve Vail's needs for at least a century, and possibly much longer. Deaths in Eagle County currently average 6D-70 per year, but fewer choose burial in a local county cemetery. Cremation represents less than half of burials nationwide. This suggests that "normal" annual demand for memorials could be in the range of 15-30, with each phase serving 10-20 years or more. This number could increase greatly with strong sales to non-residents and families of deceased who are buried elsewhere but want to be remembered in Vail. (By comparison, the 1993 Vail Cemetery Master Plan estimated 100-year demand at 900 burial spaces, including in-ground and crypt casket burial.) Notes: 1. The onty walls planned are in phases 1, 2 and 3 at the toe of the slopes. Walls in phases 1 and 2 total about 100 LF each and about 200 LF in phase 3. Exact length will be determined by staking in the field; number of inscribable boulders will depend on type and average size of stone selected. 2. The maximum number of memorial boulders will depend on how many are placed along paths in the central upland meadow areas in later phases, as well as the constraint of avoiding wetland mitigation areas in the eastern portion of the site. Phases 2 and 3 are larger in area than phase 1. 3. Benches will be installed in predetermined locations (approx. 5 each phase) when donated in someone's memory. 4. Capacity of phases after initial construction could be increased (or decreased), 'rf demand warrants and the Foundation Board desires, by adjusting the length/number of boulder walls and the number of boulder markers and flush-set slabs. 2.4 Actions Requested of the Town of Vail The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is making the following requests: 1. Approval of a Minor Subdivision 2. Approval of an application to rezone the memorial park to outdoor recreation. The Outdoor Recreation District allows cemeteries as a conditional use. Also the designated open space charter provision allows sites to be rezoned to one of the three open space zone districts (i.e. Natural Area Preservation, Outdoor Recreation, and Agriculture and Open Space). 3. Approval of a conditional use permit for the park and cemetery. 4. Approval of a design review permit for the park design and sign. 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The Vail Memorial Park site is part of the former Katsos Ranch property in East Vail purchased as open space by the Town of Vail. It is a relatively flat alluvial plain bounded on the north by Gore Creek and the Interstate 70 right-of-way, on the south by US Forest Service land, on the east by wetlands and asingle-family subdivision beyond them, and on the west by Town open space. Five vegetation types generally characterize the site: • A wetland/riparian strip along Gore Creek, consisting primarily of willows, Englemann Spruce, and a few cottonwoods; • Wetland shrubs and forbs at the eastern end of the site and along portions of natural swales within the property; • Rows of mature Lodgepole Pine and Cottonwood clustered in the same swales and depressions but generally not classified as wetlands; • Upland meadows of sage and wildflowers over granular soils extending through the central east-west axis of the site; • Forest of Lodgepole Pine and Aspen on the slopes to the south. Although the site was likely cultivated and flood-irrigated in the past, the natural topography has not been altered in any major way. Relatively minor disturbances have been caused by earthwork associated with the construction of the sanitary sewer line across the site and the digging of small diversion ditches as part of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District's 1995 wetland mitigation plan. The disturbances are evident where gravelly subsoils excavated from these activities have been disposed of and have been slow to revegetate naturally. In some of these areas, invasive plant species, such as Linnaria (Butter and Eggs), have taken root. There is currently a recreational trail that runs from the Katsos Ranch Trailhead through the park and connects to Sunburst Drive to the west. This is a heavily used recreational trail. Approximately 18 parking spaces are available at the east end the Katsos Ranch Trail which would be the proposed parking for the Vail Memorial Park. 4. BACKGROUND AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED In 1993 an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery. Over 10 alternatives sites were evaluated for land use, ownership, and environmental considerations. After a detailed study of the alternatives, the upper bench of Donovan Park was chosen as a preferred alternative. A design was developed and approved by the Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to the Vail voters in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001, a renewed effort in commemorating deceased Vail locals again became an interest. A committee was established to identify a preferred location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee established three major criteria for site selection: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Access 7 • Not directly adjacent to residential areas. After screening for those criteria the following alternatives were further reviewed. 1. Katsos Ranch 2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head 3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park Given the criteria mentioned above the preferred alternatives was Katsos Ranch in that it was the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had good access. . It also was the most quiet reflective space of the three alternatives. Other environmental considerations are reviewed below: Site Water Air Flora/Fauna Visual Circulation Resources Quality Conditions Katsos ~ . Wetlands No impact Some Not visible from 18 parking places exist on vegetation adjancent are located at the site-no loss loss would homes east of Katsos of wetlands occur on the Ranch. No impact anticipated. trail is anticipated to Opportunity residential areas. to expand No wetland significant area with impact is the Water anticipated District Spraddle Spraddle No impact Some Site is visible 17 parking places Creek creek runs vegetation from mountain. available at through site, loss would However, it is trailhead. erosion occur on the heavily wooded control trail in the summer would be (Aspens) required No significant impact is anticipated Streamwalk Use of No impact No impact is Site would be Parking would (east of pavers with anticipated visible from occur at the covered names may adjacent Village Parking bridge) increase properties Structure or at velocity of Ford Park, There run-off could be pedestrian conflicts with memorialsenrices. Other considerations evaluated by the Vail Memorial Committee included noise from I- 70, zoning, impact to adjacent owners, grade, and cost. After reviewing all the environmental, economic, land use factors the Town Council and the Vail Memorial Committee choose Katsos Ranch as the preferred location. 5. POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 5.1 Water Resources Gore Creek runs through the site for approximately 1000 feet. Phase 1 is approximately 230 feet from Gore Creek. Wetlands are located on the site. However, they will not be impacted by the proposed trails or memorials. Montane Environmental Solutions, Ltd. (Montane) was retained by Sherry Dorward ASLA, (Client) to identify jurisdictional wetlands that may occur on a portion of the Katsos Ranch Open Space parcel located in East Vail, Colorado. It is located in the NE of NW '/ of Section 11, Township 5 South, Range 80 West, North 39° 38' 38" West 1060 18' 37" The delineation was conducted on June 19 and 23, 2003 in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. The jurisdictional wetlands on the property are primarily associated with the alluvial aquifer of Gore Creek. It is located within the 100-year floodplain and is subject to overbank flows in its eastern most section, as witnessed in 2003. In addition, seeps along the south steep slope support mesic wetland vegetation (Salix monticola, Mertensia ciliata, and Smilacina stellata). In some instances the plant community does not meet the dominance criteria for a jurisdictional wetland, although it is a somewhat moist habitat. A low lying drainage runs along the base of the steep slopes. This drainage is the recipient to both some of the seep hydrology and overbank flows of Gore Creek. As such, it has sections of it that meet the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland. It is hypothesized that it is a former side channel to Gore Creek with a substrate of unconsolidated alluvium and colluvium, which allows periodic draining of surface water flow and hence the broken jurisdictional wetland boundary. The remainders of the wetlands are along the bank of Gore Creek and in low lying polygons within the study area. These wetlands are dominated by willow shrubs (S. monticola and S. drummondiana) with an understory of dominant Canada reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis). As part of its approved 1993 plan to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWS identified the Katsos Ranch property as a wetland mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which 3'/z acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although ERWS has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction, and VMP is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as well (or apply fora 404 permit). 9 Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWS's consultant has flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to VMP's first phase. The only potential conflict is the swale directly north of the primary development areas in phases 1-3, which is included in the mitigation area. The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial Park Foundation, and ERWS that spanning this Swale with bridges or boardwalks would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit. (See Attachment B.) Development of paths in phases 2-4 may require wetland permits, depending upon the long-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion of the VMP site. ERWS and the VMP Foundation are actively cooperating to ensure that wetland mitigation and the Memorial Park are mutually compatible on the site. ERWS may apply for an amendment to its water augmentation plan to increase seasonal water flows to the site, which will be beneficial for VMP's desire to plant memorial groves of trees in future years. 5.2 Environmental Contamination Toxic materials are a concern from traditional cemeteries with casket burials. However, cremated remains have similar characteristics as organic fertilizers. The following is a list of the chemical components and their concentrations of a cremated remain. The chemical composition of cremated remains is summarized below. Chemical Components of Cremated Remains Phosphate 47.5% Calcium 25.3% Sulfate 11.00% Potassium 3.69% Sodium 1.12% Chloride 1.00% Silica 0.9% Aluminum Oxide 0.72% Magnesium 0.418% Iron Oxide 0.118% Zinc 0.0342% Titanium Oxide 0.0260% Barium 0.0066% Antimony 0.0035% Chromium 0.0018% Copper 0.0017% Manganese 0.0013% Lead 0.0008% Tin 0.0005% Vanadium 0.0002% Beryllium <0.0001 Mercury <0.00001 10 There is some concern in the literature about cancer treatment and the impact on cremated remains. However, there does -not appear to be any human or environmental risks that can be found with the burial of cremated remains. The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is also proposing biodegradable urn which would be buried either behind the memorial walls or underground beside memorial rock. No water quality impacts or human health concerns are anticipated from this proposed action. 5.3. Air Quality No grading is proposed for the project. Therefore there should be no significant dust generated from the project. Some dust may be generated as paths are created on the site. There should be no air quality impacts as the result of the operation of the Vail Memorial Park. 5.4 Biotic Conditions The natural ecosystem of East Vail in this area is a montane environment with aspen forests dominating the steep valley slopes, which have scattered seeps along their length creating species rich habitats. In the drier valley slopes, lodgepole pines and spruce-fir trees dominate. The undeveloped floodplain of Gore Creek of which the Katsos Ranch is part, is a mosaic of four dominant vegetative communities: 1) sagebrush (Artemisia tridentatum) and rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) 2) lodgepole (Pinus contorts) 3) Valerian (Valerians edulis) and 4) Mountain willow (Salix monticola). On July 23, 2003, Town staff contacted the Colorado Division of Wildlife to determine if any threatened or endangered species occupied this area of Katsos Ranch. The response from the Division was that if wetlands where not disturbed not threatened or endangered species should be impacted. No threatened plant species have been found on the site. The design of the proposed Memorial Park is intended to take advantage of the innate beauty of the site's natural landscape and to minimize further disturbances. The wetland areas and forested slopes will be maintained in perpetuity as natural preserves, and all mature trees will be retained. Most of the development of memorial spaces will be concentrated in the small clearings at the toe of the forested slopes, where they will be screened from view. The openness of the upland meadows will be maintained, and over the long-term, land management strategies will be undertaken to return the vegetation of the site to a more completely native, self-sustaining composition. 5.4 Natural Hazard The Katsos Ranch area includes all of the Town hazard areas, i.e., snow avalanche, debris flow, rock fall, and 100 year flood plain. Attachment C shows the various hazards in the project area. No buildings are proposed in these hazard areas. No grading will ll occur that will increase the flood hazard in the project site. Memorial services will not occur once snow has covered the site. Therefore, there should be no increase in hazard to individuals as the result of the memorial site. It is possible that a falling rock could damage the path and the memorial walls. This risk will be mitigated by the creation of a capital replacement fund. The proposed memorial walls will follow the grade of the slope and should not be considered a structure as defined in section 12-2-2. The 100 year flood plain does cover a significant portion of the site. Section 12-21-10 of the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines: A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "structure" as used in this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including residential use. E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) § 1: Ord. 12(1978) § 4) After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above mentioned regulations, the Foundation believes that the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations. No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the "quantity or velocity of flood waters." 5.5 Land Use Conditions Adjacent uses include primary/secondary two family residential properties east of the park and on the north side of the interstate. The closest residential property from the site is over 1000 feet away. The Katsos ranch property is zoned Natural Area Preservation and provide a natural park setting for Vail residents and guests. The only major recreational use on Katsos Ranch is the recreational trail that runs east west on the property. Access on this recreational trail can be gained from Sunburst Drive to the west and from the south side of the East Vail Interchange. No adverse land use impacts are anticipated as the result of this project. 5.5 Visuallmpact One of the major design goals of this project is to blend the design of the park into the natural environment so that there is little or no visual impact as the result of the Memorial Park. Adjacent property owners will not see the improvements on the site. Recreational trail users would see a new 5-8 foot path coming from the Katsos Ranch Trail along with an entry feature. The rocks being proposed for the Park will not be cut and smooth. Rather they will appear as natural rocks that may have fallen from the hillside. The Foundation is also proposing that all flowers and religious icons be banned 12 from the site to further ensure that the site appears as a natural meadow. The Foundation would be responsible for informing memorial groups that flowers or other objects shall not be left on the site. The Foundation would also be responsible for maintaining the site to ensure landscaping and trails are maintained. 5.6 Circulation and transportation conditions Eighteen parking spaces are currently available at the Trail Head for Katz's Ranch. An averaged sized memorial service of 15-20 people would generate 8-10 vehicle trips which could be accommodated at the trailhead parking. However, a larger memorial service, over 30 people, i.e. generating 15 or more vehicles, could not be accommodated on the site. Mitigation for larger groups to prevent parallel parking on Bighorn Rd would be required. The Interfaith Chapel and the Vail Memorial Park Foundations proposes to require the use of buses from the Chapel parking or Vail parking structure for events over 25 people the Interfaith Chapel has agreed to provide parking with the 37 parking spaces at the chapel. In addition, the parking structures in the summer could provide parking for large memorial services in the non winter months. The Vail Mountain School has also stated that would review requests to use their parking lot in the summer. The family or friends organizing a memorial service would be required for groups over 30 individuals to provide a shuttle service for memorial service participants. 5.7 Population Characteristics This project will not contribute to an increase in population or should generate new development around the project site. 6. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS No significant impacts are anticipated as the result of this project. Wetlands may infact be improved as the result of additional wetland creation through a partnership between the Eagle River Water District and the Vail Memorial Park Foundation. The design of the Memorial Park is intended to blend into the natural environment. The only impact associated with the memorial park is potentially parking along Bighorn Road. It is recommended that a limit be placed on 30 memorial participants at once utilizing the park. If more participants are anticipated then the Foundation should then require the use of shuttle buses from the Vail Chapel. Attachments: A. Site Plan B. Wetland Study C. Hazard Study and Floodplain 13 __,_.µ.____,.~.._ , _._ _ _ ~.,,.. { ~ ,~-Dt.~ , .. ~ P4 i 4 fi S FC-GT 3F Tf-2 :[E?. c. !' 7i;N _d~* ' ~ E{ F ~ .> r~ ~' .'~ ' i ~ 7 , _ ~, ,, . ' _ _ „~_ ~' _ i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~tf - ~ r y y d ~ _ -~ _ t ' i ~~ ~ r4 i . 4 y ._.- r _ r ' cr fir 1'~ C ~:. d wyk ~ ... . A, ,.;w..+1` „ . . ~~. 7 .rry ~, i ,_ - - S ., ~r 4?ge:rt' ~?5 ~~y I... ~ ~ [i n ~.f ~ y ~ 1 :7 ~ t ~. r "~ ~~~HS' ~ ., ~ 1 , , ~ _ r ~• ~f r '' 1 r r - ~{ } R Y f 1 C' t7c ~r 0 dT r i ~ a 'ter ~ M ~ Y~ (~:"~ `~ t r 7 '• ` .w ' l 4 S 1F . ~ J frz'': j41 P 4 , f ~ ~ r .. !~ P ~ _ - s i r 5 ' ., l . . s . , ,. _ Jpr ~ _ s t, r- ..t EAGLE RIVER ~~ MATER 8c SANITATION DISTRICT 846 Forest Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-7460 • FAX (970) 476-4089 September 5, 2003 Russell W. Forrest Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Vail Memorial Park Master Plan Dear Russ: The Eagle River Water & Sanitation District has reviewed the most recent version. of the site plan for the proposed Vail Memorial Park to be located at the Katsos Ranch Open Space. The District has established a wetland mitigation site at Katsos Ranch, which was authorized by the Vail Town Council in January 1992 (Resolution No. 24, Series of 1991). We appreciate the efforts of Russ Forrest, Sherry Dorward and the Memorial Park Task Force to coordinate plaiming and design of the park with the District so that impacts to the wetland mitigation areas can be avoided. The site plan dated July 28, 2003 addresses our conceals related to the configuration of Phase I of the Vail Memorial Park Master Plan. The access pathway from the bike path to the Phase I area will not impact the wetland mitigation site, if bridges or elevated boardwalks are installed to span the drainage Swale located to the north of the Phase I loop. For the main entrance path to Phase I, a bridge span of at least 20 feet will be needed to avoid impacts to the wetland mitigation area, and for the secondary entrance path, a span of at least 25 feet will be needed. Bridge support pilings can be located within the drainage swale without adverse impacts to the mitigation site and without applying for a permit from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.. We believe that the use of bridges or boardwalks to span the drainage swale will eliminate any potential conflict between Phase 1 of the Memorial Park and the District's mitigation areas. The District will take full responsibility for coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding potential. impacts to the wetland mitigation site. With regard to Phases II through N of the Vail Memorial Park, additional work is needed. to more precisely define the extent of wetland mitigation areas, based upon water distribution, topographic conditions and regulatory requirements of the Corps of Engineers. In addition, the District is investigating possible improvements to the water distribution system including the installation of diversion structures and a pond.. This WATER, WASTEWATER, OPERATIONS B~ MANAGEMENT SERVICES Russell W. Forest September O5, 2003 Page 2 effort will be coordinated with the Vail Memorial Park Foundation with the purpose of maintaining a successful wetlands mitigation site that is fully compatible with the Memorial Park. We would appreciate the opportunity to review the design plans for the Phase I bridges or boardwalks. If you have any questions or need any additional details, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Eagle River Water & Sanitation District r Dennis Gelvin, General Manager cc: Mark Gilfillan, U.S. Anny Coips of Engineers Robert M. Weaver, Hydrosphere Resource Consultants, Inc. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT VAIL MEMORIAL GARDEN AT KATSOS RANCH TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE NUMBER I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... l lI. VICINITY AND GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................1 111. WETLAND DESCRIPTION A. VEGETATION ..................:..............................................:............................. 2 B. •SOILS ...................................................................................................................... 3 C. HYDROLOGY ..............................................................................................3 IV. METHODS USED ............:...........................................................................................................4 V. RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................................4 APPENDICES FIGURES FIGURE 1-SITE VICINITY, VAIL EAST, COLORADO 7.5 MINUTE QUAD FIGURE 2-WETLAND BOUNDARY SURVEYED BY PEAK LAND SURVEYORS, FRISCO, COLORADO PHOTOGRAPHS DATA FORMS WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT VAIL MEMORIAL GARDEN AT KATSOS RANCH I. INTRODUCTION Montane Environmental Solutions, Ltd. (Montane) was retained by Sherry Dorward ASLA, (Client) to identify jurisdictional wetlands that may occur on a portion of the Katsos Ranch Open Space parcel located in East Vail, Colorado. It is located in the NE 1/a of NW 1/a of Section 11, Township 5 South, Range 80 West, North 39° 38' 38" West 106° 18' 37" (FIGURE 1). The property is accessed from Interstate 70 to Exit 180, to Bighorn Road, which is south of the highway. The ranch is on the south side of Gore Creek. The study area was a proposed parcel of the Katsos Ranch created by the Vail Memorial Garden Committee (FIGURE 2). The property is approximately 13 1/z acres comprised of open dry meadow, riparian, and aspen/cottonwood and lodgepole forests. The delineation was conducted on June 19 and 23, 2003 in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. II. VICINITY AND GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION The property is located at approximately 8,400 feet elevation within the Gore Creek basin in East Vail. The ranch is separated from Interstate 70 by Gore Creek. A dense community of willow shrubs also separates it from the residential development in East Vail, which is east of the parcel. The natural ecosystem of East Vail in this area is . a montane environment with aspen forests dominating the steep valley slopes, which have occasional seeps within them creating species rich habitats. On the drier valley slopes, lodgepole pines and spruce-fir trees dominate. The undeveloped floodplain of Gore Creek of which the Katsos Ranch is part, is a mosaic of four dominant vegetative communities: 1) sagebrush (Seriphidium vaseyanum) and rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) 2) lodgepole (Pines contorta) 3) Valerian (Valeriana edulis) and 4) Mountain willow (Salix monticola). Precipitation in June 2003 was 148% of average. According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the SNOTEL station at Vail Mountain registered 2.2 inches of rain. The average precipitation for June is 1.8 inches. Snowpack was 28% of average at the time of the delineation and while Gore Creek saw higher than normal flows during May and June, they have beeri attributed to a quicker than normal snowmelt'. III. WETLAND DESCRIPTION The jurisdictional wetlands on the property are primarily associated with the alluvial aquifer of Gore Creek. The majority of the site, primarily the open meadow is within the 100-year ~ http://www.wcc.nres.usda.gov/cgihin/precip.pl?state=Colorado Wetland Delineation Vail Memorial Garden p. 1 floodplainZ. The boundary begins at the southeast corner of the proposed property and continues in an equidistant corridor along Gore Creek. There is a slight topographical change from the floodplain to an elevation at the toe of the steep slopes that demarcates the boundary. The wetlands located on the property other than the riverine wetland along Gore Creek are low- lying, within depressions or drainages and typically dominated by willow shrubs. The transition from wetland to upland is obvious in these areas because the topography is abrupt and the vegetation immediately changes from willows and a wetland understory to a sagebrush/rabbitbrush dryland. Wetland C is a slope wetland that originates near the base of the steep slope in the southeast region of the parcel. It, too, is dominated by willow but its transition is gradual into the species- - rich aspen forest higher on the slope. The wetlands along the banks of Gore Creek are less distinct in that the transition from riverine wetland to upland is gradual and includes mesic species such as Canada reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), geranium (Geranium richardsonii), and bedstraw (Galium septentrionale). The parcel is also the location of a mitigation site for the Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District Permit Number 9560 - Katsos Ranch. The mitigation plan required "construction of a drop structure or series of drop structures in Gore Creek to raise the level of the stream and the water table and to allow a portion of the flow in Gore Creek to return to the abandoned oxbow." The "oxbow" is referring to the drainage located ~at the base of the steep slope on the south side of the parcel within the lodgepole gallery. While the ditches have water periodically within them, they do not support a predominance of wetland vegetation: The wetland consultant for the EVWSD believes the ditches may be maintaining some of the wetlands in the low-lying areas particularly Wetland I. The wetland boundary along the banks of Gore Creek is les distinct like that of Wetland C, in that the transition from riverine wetland to upland is gradual and includes mesic species such as Canada reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), geranium (Geranium richardsonii), and bedstraw (Gallium septentrionale). A. VEGETATION Wetlands on the property are predominantly a mosaic of shrub wetlands dominated by Salix drummondii and Salix monticola, both common willows of the montane zone and dominant in Eagle County. Along Gore Creek trees such as alder (Alms tenuifolia) and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) with occasional Colorado spruce (Picea pungens) occur within the mosaic. In the dry open areas sagebrush (Seriphidium tridentatum spp. vaseyanum) dominates, transitioning into sloping meadows of valerian (Valeriana edulis) on the south perimeter. z http://www.hazardmaps.gov/atlas.php Wetland Delinearion Vail Memorial Garden p. 2 Transition from wetland to upland is abrupt with stony upland areas dominated by pussytoes (Antennaria sp), buckwheat (Eriogonum umbellatum), fleabane (Erigeron sp), and disturbed areas invaded by toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) with houndstongue (Cynoglossum o f f icinale). The table below lists native species characteristic of wetlands on the property. WETLAND VEGETATION COMMON NAME Aconitum columbianum FACW Monkshood Alnus incana tenui olia OBL Thin leaf alder Betula lctndulosa OBL Bog birch Calama ostis Canadensis OBL Canada reedgrass Cardamine cordifolia OBL Bittercress Disti ea involucrataFAC Twinberry honeysuckle E uisetum arvense FAC+ Field horsetail Galium s etentrionale FACU Northern bedstraw Geranium richardsonii FAC Geranium Heracleum lanatum FAC Cow-parsnip Maianthemum stellatum FAC False Solomons seal Salix drummondii OBL Bluestem willow Salix monticola OBL Mountain willow B. HYDROLOGY The majority of the wetlands on the property are supported by the alluvial aquifer of Gore Creek. Its influence is captured where the topography is low and the plants can reach the water table. It appears that groundwater also nears the surface near Wetland C from the steep slopes of East Vail. The wetland boundary extends up the slope, which is likely. due to the groundwater nearing the surface where the steep slope begins to decrease. At the time of the delineation, Gore Creek was receding from its flood stage. Some of the mitigation ditches had water in their initial reaches. Montane made an assumption that at that time, the water level may have been at ordinary high water and therefore the boundary of standing water became the boundary of the wetland. A vegetation indicator could not be used in these reaches because there were no plants growing in the ditches, and soil pits could not be dug due to the large cobbles. C. SOILS There is no soil survey coverage for the East Vail area by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. However it is possible that the soil identified is a transition of two soil series because of its location at the valley bottom and within the floodplain of Gore Creek. The soil found near the toe of the steep slope may be the Almy series. This is based on its description in the soil survey which states that is it a reddish brown loam, dark reddish brown when moist and formed in alluvium derived dominantly from calcareous Wetland Delineation Vail Memorial Garden p. 3 redbed sandstone and shale. The soil in Sample Point 1Wet most resembled this soil type. The other soil type found in Sample Point 2Wet resembled that of a Mollisol in its soft textured loam. However, its dark chroma and aquic moisture regime met the hydric indicator. IV. METHODS USED The wetland delineation. methods used were in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, January 1987. A routine on-site inspection for 'Areas Equal to or Less than 5 Acres in Size' was performed. The data for the sampling points included vegetation and hydrology indicators. Two soil pits were dug to a depth of 16-inches and were used to identify the presence of reduced soil .conditions; depth to saturated soil, and depth to free water. Wetland boundaries were determined by the percentage cover of hydrophytic plant species (obligate, facultative wet, and facultative), indicators of wetland hydrology, the presence of hydric soils, and topography. v. RESOURCES 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1987), Wetland Delineation Manual. 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1988), National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands Re ion 8 . 3. U.S. Natural Resource Conservation Service (1980), Soil Survey of Summit County Area Colorado. 4. Weber, W.A. (1996), Colorado Flora:(Western Slope), Colorado Associated University Press. Wetland Delineation Vail Memorial Garden p. 4 USGS 7.5 MIN. QUAD VAII, EAST, COLORADO ~~UNTAN~, OL w ~~ ~~r 4763 /i~ SE SCALE 1:24000 i 0 _ 1 MILE 1000 ~ 0` 1000 2000 3000 a000 5000 6000 7000 FEET ~~ \ \ 73'~ \\ 553 '05"E - 16.35' /N GRAPHIC SCALE T~ w 3 m + RS ~q TIC (Prasr) /~) 3 Daeh - eo n ~'~ ~( S00'11'1 t"W-5 3' 0 ~ ~" '~ i`\ 535'25'07'E - 120.00' ~\ ,I ~ INi----{\~ ~ rr w IEAN 1 claw eaurowr 's" ~y.~~° __~--~ A PART ~OF SEC 2, ~ ~ n TSS; ~ R80W e /r -M "~'`" ~• w N~rl\ I r , - ^+'-ix \ aAa anA3a znat aA+Mae ~' Ar new . [awe / N89'41'31"W-1324.18' SOU1N L#IE SEC. 2, T 5 5, R 80 W (TOWN OF PAPA fF~FlfRIPT1aM' A VAMB s L.a,a M M Sw11Ewi wwTU 6 SECTW i Wwaxs a 5d1+µ W WxWIWC Ai M MIM'AClf WIrE1 6' M Q M ]wMAaT 1/{ V M adq SND S<l:IN+ 3 1aN31CE M Saud 1/{ D3MIa1 ~ aND bEanW 3 xAn3 x arVl'3I A +wAl[ iEEf: TWIQ M M{i'A' W A [OTANS V )aaN ff[E): 111a,S xNM91' V A datANEC I Mx[L x ad3Ya• E A natAN[E a ms F¢r; x >omnr E A agrAx¢ s n[ N )a6T+r [ A dSTAMd: 6 Oaw IQ.T; N aSN'3a' E A gSfANS 031x1 iQT n F A d5)ANQ 6 M.r RET; MN[E N YfM'3Y E A gliwft 0 e21] IFFY W A lalM NW,r-O-aNT O M4JgtA+[ W nOKS A[WO !An ladrt-6-MY M [!LL NMRY 1. 6 ana'Dr E A dsrAxa s tam fECn 2 ! 001+5+' +/ A WTw4 v mw r¢r, 1 S 3!]0'w' E A dSEAMt 0 claw iCETt ~ ! moor [ A narAN¢ s +aaw rm: a ! wM'af [ A dSTAM4 K IN.ra /QT; a S x'aYY C A 0lMxn: > +>ArS /[CL ). f Mffi'aJ' C A niTANR 0 13aW [LLll a s aene'a• E A nsTA«a s :{a+a rEE3; r. [ +oa{tr n A dsrAxw a aiw rvsrl m. a )xxoY E A narANa s 3mw qFT ro A Mart Aida M aw+xllESr uM swMASr IN s M lWMAST +/~ aF sAn >¢+IDN 1 n+ola AIwD sxo ulE dsrAxx ialw W M nnlE sorb s a[anNma fAa PAAm mxrAxMW n.+3o { [~ t~e1..n9>~ +. DAU s TsawAM+r . u) Saw 2 ealOlxMaa hA~M wxnWl raMF 3RUldt ntwAndl" vn.w (w.w vel > rAO+wdw AaAI +vaaw++T nlox tow s wa AmAI aArnla • nm.ecr +Mn - - {. rtAx [Aro nr+NFnNa Mc dD xw saannl A not aEAxw s M axl[Dr rnsanr ro FsrAUSx oA,croxv, FAaawlrs ax wlrs-or-wA) s lemw. i0' 'S8"E-145.60' - x[axo DoDAxca ulu3[D M nvs waowvwlr lewnox adnNUTC vac nWtWm sr (twt mISAW7 owa xa Ka>ra3a DAnn w/m 3DOa Ar dw rr a [wxDAllr onaunal xAa ddnw M+w cdlmrvAi wAaxxq rxanom n aaxr. ` ~ ~ a Iw TM IAaDD MFAWAnax pTAMw IxOx ralA aW a0. ~ -~ •." . .\\',` nMaEY011Y GPIN+MW ` ,'\ `\ ndpol S r NlWrmdlAE Lno suNtEYw NEmn9+m dloal M N+q s Ific lTAW s tm°M:DO, w xacnr mm mAr na rmodl)ANF uv NA! ,I.cF [r IIE AxD uraw An xn~oa3NED~[L AxD n,a M Ilw a AannArz Aro wwccr ro M em s nr \ \~S3fi'35'07"E-175.00' ^.~ `\ car a~ md~ ° ~ s =~ \ ~ s~"Ax u,o sM{cnrw r+a ~~ / j 1` ` 1 1\ +\ +-~; / / \ ++ IumrnEV Vt) waAnox [sr,rcAa .,.._ \ `\ / w,. - I Ila®Y 590tH nlAr lraa UPnoMlllf wearax wNmaas ws MpAxw T1Ai IT q xnT • lAxO SdKT MT dt rlrNd,9Wir dINKT Mi, A,O MAi a R t4D" M M [atAr1191xpT 0 iD14 rIIILIWa A anlF3+ NM ` ~. ,, ' I/IWYO/pT {NICa ,., .. \ ,M aEWAdt + ~ \ M NIInIET WMR nMi M IIIPxO'A4)gL Dx M ABOIf DCSDAFD rMw. dl /l+q DATf ar/1[/a3. ES®r Y14nY WMFCwNS wE W1MnY MnIM M rwxaAMp 0 M rANCn LN~T AS llaA)I. nMi Mc AM: Ip aIDIDAOxc3+ra urax M a[adasm rle ll3¢ sr wnrol9,dlrs a wr AdKMMC rmarses ~ M MT- '-y ` ~` ,` ol®r w MdeATm, AxD +xAT ncx[ Is xD AnAxpr n9En0 cr axM s AxY FA431FlIT nN88N0 dl AAanMO wY NMT 6 Sx0 /Nlm. [I@i tl Nww. \ ~ \ ` ~ M2 ` .. ~xr ` . • ~\ - 24810', ~~ - ~N55'08'41"W ~\ b3Wd1 a IAaE wLn1A00 ras xr. 3[DN ,. . N70'S4'S3'E - 52.00' ~ \\~\ oar.- ~+x~ ~ ~~ w ~Q\~ nN. OAR» ~~ N89' '31"W - 902-48' "`-,e .. _. oec+MC xAxxae J . .. M aLV. - a]W )p -. -~ PHOTOGRAPH 1. AT BIKE PATH BRIDGE LOOKING WEST. PHOTOGRAPH 2 AT SOUTHERN FOOTPATH LOOKING EAST. • \ 57299'30"W-82.73' ~ 55: N49'4- '-fi9.21' ~+. y.r 3.02' ~ n ~r, . ~ \,~ ,\ Ga lIl \ O smtm ` ~I t. \ ~ ( n ~ ` ~ \PT~ APART IOF SE ~~ ~~ TSS,IR80V `~ *\ ri1~ .oo ~~ I ``~~ +~ I ~• I ~.+..-. I I I . rm...a wvl I ~ ea.. uws %/; ~\ \,\ .. ~~ sir `•\ \ ~ . ~= ~ _~N55'OB'41'W, - 249. 0', ~\ ++ "! "\ Sa w R 4[ _ 1N[ •TM M iVa[Vi I/~ ~ M xVl YLTaI 1 MaQ M( vIM 1/~ MIP w• SVO BC~Im i eani A RII'L V ~.i1i01¢n M 1011 119i¢ Nu~w' ~ X aasYW' E i onIM6 R ]un ran X ]!'fl'it' C A ou'xv2 6 1a[ Tom 'm' [ ~ wJrtr¢ J fu1 P¢i~ f i~wn~ sy~~:~~m~ctmnwaa an rtlm. mn:w m no1¢ xalu fue .a*-w-ur a« ra m~i~n fn ar ~ . wsw.a a iw 1an mle ar c . m~.1¢ n 1mm ran nvwr e . mrr.a s im.m ran m?SiY [ ~ wnria v bran r¢n mwr [ . wf..+a v vim tan a•. c • wnwc a ~.am r¢n na u . ~ wnr.¢ or aim 1mi i irxnr e ~ onrc w fmm tar m ~ rmrt 1ao1o rte fm 1.~a w ~wi'~s 'sim m M """~~ 1/r v s.n menm z ~ 1 nas rm,r v nmw.c s.n r1.m m i°gw.o naa . i o.n v m.omrll. , .ur mm > mam..u v (wa ml noieriw .o.r moo,w,n nw m.1 v^vr .o~r~..wwo ew~c~c we m w~o1~_a~ ~x~a ar,cw~. ~,o u1i'iaaml mlmurt rorc p0O1191f~ ~~ ~~ m~ ~~m4~~r as rr aim 2m nmo wtw0ml mnwm Am rW fur o. raw ua .f1.am Mm+oun uwa rR un m Y1t s°°p1i.rz'oi 1Oma+:oa ro ~.un. mn..+o u` r'"'ii ow1O~0°'~"`.m.:rt iw ~c~i re art sot s ui uawm 'na1c~' iia aou an w~afo.M uar mun m+[enma rxc awar .ax ae m°mrlw aw a~1n ar.w~.m:o 1~aa ~n`a'~ w a.r aas a n .wtwlr amc m fv1 ~ r mmarw m ~.coao wtr river a s.a rwRa aurr n x u: m~mtmi iu x. aom \ ` ~ fa70'S4'S3'E - 52.00' m \ \\ \ \ \` `^\~'~ ~ w xauz~ ~ ,~ ~ .~~~~ r aM iw ~ ~" _ T ' N89' '31"W - 902.48'` ^~/ /. .. .. ~ *m+~J . PHOTOGRAPH 3. FROM EAST END OF WETLAND H LOOKING EAST IN LODGEPOLE GALLERY. i z ,' ,~ . PHOTOGRAPH 4. WETLAND C. LOOKING SOUTHEAST. PHOTOGRAPH 6. UPLANDS IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF GORE CREEK RIVERINE WETLAND. PHOTOGRAPH 5. FROM EAST END OF WETLAND I LOOKING NORTH INTO UPLANDS. __.~ i3., G'~ j _ 4~. 4t y y~.~~ 2 ,. ~ ~,` .j PHOTOGRAPH 8. UPLANDS OF PROPOSED PARCEL LOOKING NORTHEAST. SMOOTH BROME PHOTOGRAPH 7. MAN-MADE DITCH AS PART OF MIT[GATION FOR EVWSD.. DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site ~. , d 5 - ,~9,~5 r:f~~ J~ . ~~~1? a~" ~, Date ( ~ ~~ / Applicant !Owner V County ~~~ ~~~, Investigator State Do Normal Circums~aii~~es exist on the site? ES O Community ID Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? NO Transect ID ~,7 Is the area a potential Problem Area? Itr needed, explain on reverse) YES NO Plot ID ~ ~~- ~ ~ ~~ VEGETATION ` J Dominant Plant Species Stratum .Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1 c~a:~ ~ :~ ~vto ro (a ~ S L_ 9 3 SV11 ~ ~c~_cr,~i;.~_.~.~_.~~ L 11 4 v{'ZC~ i v ~ S ~-( ~ 12 6 14 7 15 8 16 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks {-lYT1Rnl (~GY ^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ W ater Marks ^ Drift Lines ^ No Recorded Data Available ^ Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth. of Surface Water (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches ^Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water in Pit (in) ^ Local Soil Survey Data ^ FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil I ~ (in) ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) '~ DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETEP,MINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site /~' :~ ,` Date (p ~ ~ Applicant /Owner County Investigator ~~,~ ~ State Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site.. YES NO Community ID Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES NO Transect ID Is the area a potential Problem Area? (it needed, explain on reverse) YES NO Plot ID 2 ~t ~tC~9v q VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1 ~ I ~ C,44 ~ ~. S ~ &'L 9 3 0.~ Y l r.~ t K C~-. 11 /' 4 l.~(-Z11 l V Vvl f . L4~1,1 12 5 13 6 14 7 15 8 16 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks HYDROLOGY ^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ I undated ^ Aerial Photographs ~aturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks. ^ Drift Lines ^ No Recorded Data Available ~ ^ Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches ^ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water in Pit (in) ^ Local Soil Survey Data ^ FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil (in) ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND .DETERMINATION .(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) ProjecUSite ~ Date ~ ( Applicant I Owner VGA--~--Q County l.~~.~~".K. • Investigator ~ ,~s~ r; State Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ~~ YES NO Community ID Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situa~n)? >ru? YES NO Transect ID Is the area a potential Problem Area? (if needed, explain on reverse). YES 1 Plot ID ~`~'t--J (~•~.;~, ~ ~,~•;~~ ~-1 VCVL1/-11~vn - Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum .Indicator 2 r Y I D ~ 1~ '~ -~ ~ 1 g 3 ' ~ ~ r'! I 11 5 13 6 14 7 15 8 16 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks ~~ c• HYDROLOGY ^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge ^ Aerial Photographs ' ^ Other ^ No Recorded Data Available FIELD OBSERVATIONS Depth of Surface Water Depth to Free W ater in Pit Depth to Saturated Soil WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Inundated ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches ^ Water-Stained Leaves (in) ^ Local Soil Survey Data ^ FAC-Neutral Test (~n) ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) } Z ?. 1ti,~ ~ y~$'= ~en+v .TH{>,;-.1 T- -,.. .:: ~ y' S L r ~ ~'H ' T .v't.: y' _ ~ ' ~ ~} I ~ ~' r) ~ y4 ~ l L '~' a. :ry j 'F T'^ L 1." ' _ ~ ~ , ~ c- - ~ y.* ! 'F 3 ~! y~ l ~ J _ "'S.' .+, '~ . ±~ _ 1 ~ ~ ~' 4 k ~A 11 luvr . ` y 1 Y ~ ' 1 v ~ ~ . , ~u ~v` w~ ~ ~"~ ; i r Y ? ,c n a i ~t ', ~ v ~ n „~,: ~;. r ~ : "fin. i " ~~ ,. L'T . - •,.. i.~ y ~.~., .. ~ ~ ~ ~ " . _ .., ;~ t ~ j e : sti ~ ,~ w ~ ~T d s-: R k -i. ~~ ~~ ~, a S ~ „ ~ ~ ~ :. ~ Vail Town Boundary oc fall _ ,a s' S _. ~ ~ r ~.„' 1 '~ ~a ~ .. ~ ~ 1 ,, t. w ~ Approximate Garden Boundary ~y.-~~. High Severity Rockfa8 ,~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~, ~,- ,~ ~ y ~- ,, r'S y. ; ~ _ ,fi -~~ ~ i - - (Mosn thMhazy d re~ ion xists yt:-^ s r ~ •TZ ~ c.` ~ ,~ ~ ~ Approximate Parcel Linework 9 ) '- ~ . ~ f k „ "' : ~ -~° ~ ~` Debris Flow ~,i c' a ~ i c ~. '~ { ~ ;:a ~ ~. ` - Avalanche Hazards j ' ~ ~ ` ~ ~ '' r .+'- "` ' f . ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~.~ - t~~--tt~ High Hazard Debris Flow "y~-a ~ c ~ ~`] ~ .~ C- ~ t i ,~ ty !~ +f~~.. \~ ~ - ~ High-Red "y ~ . t > #~,~~` ~ y ~ y- ~} I '~ ~%i`-~ f ~ {; p #. - "" ~ ~ Moderate ~~ Moderate Hazard Debris Flow '° e. :~ ~ `' c ~.. ~ ~ _ ~ I I ~; Nigh Hazard Debds Avalanche . i~ ~ _ - ,yta ~ ire ~j*,.^ ~ r _- ~ . ~ ~ ~ ^r C~ Possibte lnFluence _ i ~ i Js ~., y'~~~ 1- i ~tl~ ~ :.~ V - a ~ y u~' ~~ ~, ~ Fey i ~ '^ti_. ' ^G T i I 1 rc "S ~~ ~~ - ~j~ ~y~. q ~ ~~ Ia f ~ .~ vSq~i~:t~*~t~~~ t F ~yy ~ ~ ..~ ~ .~ '*~~` .:. ,'fit `i` ~.'.. ~,t ~ . ~ /+ cis ~'~ - ,-P '~1 ~ . ;- r 3 F~ t ~ ?yam i ` j ~ v i'._.i J F ,~ y!`'~ 5 },+r "'rs~~~ r u~ ~° c ' ~• s.+y ~° t' i~fct , a rYl ~? !. , ~-• ~.~ 1,: * ',.. A ~ t _ ~ ~_ ~~~ x ., ':r - e ~ >t .a .4 .~. ,~ ~ .r:,. ~ t ~.,. ~~ F 'y ~, .Y ~~`F'i: ~ ~k 'L ~ r° YL "V~~4 I~ n ~' ~. -+S ~t+:r "'Lr9 .~"~.a~r ( 'iy t~ v 1 `~.1~ '.. 1~ .~. ~ 1'~, w~i~4~{gam {;~~ ~ ':- .-~ ~~a } y ~"~ '"c3 Wr>'..~ .~ J+ ~' ?~i 1 ~~y ~i,~~r ) ,+t't~.:. t, r i. e1 Potential Natural Hazards for the P M _- ~~ ~ jj - .~ \. ' tiq ~ ~lf _ dl-. ~. r ~ ~M.. ,i ~~ ~~ ,~ r~ +. q V 200 0 200 400 F t 1 " = 300' ___ _ ee Vail Memarial Park - ------ I I \ Pet1pN~ 1 \ I >„~~ em vm°fx,~'"v u° u[maw50ecwe~uoni°o~n ~ nr ~oescniam"ns rmiows m' ""xce eo ~sr n ~ c°m.~aw c Ar ,HC~ aas~r" n a me a nn soumus >«c s°u,"us I ~m sce~tf .wn m m i/. ea+,+en a sw seerw" v~n.~v w~mxe'a ~'ai, c j ~ ~ ~ ee ""en'.nr w A onnxcE m ~,vn rtcr; v,e a x,eroe'°r A asrAxc I yo,srnxcc a"~x"i rtcr°mEVc \\\\\ ~ 72'19'30" 2.73' \\ 7 GRAPHIC SCALE ii~asas~e ..w«e~~ rce,mssro a~ssaa'0 ,cwm s.m mar-a-m.v nc rau°m"° ,° I R ~1 I ~~ N49'4T51'E 6 .21' `.` ST'9 t a ren 1,O ~ ttm°n"mn s'i~sii `.A°aii:.a arieeom r~ccr., N63' 6'20'E-32.57' 7 \~t7 1 \ ~ a n,nr~s~%. ao rK ~ vs°rsn a ecou ai` m vµMe ~~ I r\ N75'03'19" -63.02' \ ~\ ~ ~ , ° .xua co"r.m,,,° n,w .acs .w~c °n I ~l I '51.24"E-90.59' - \ __ _-_- -~ I \ 35' '07 ~.~. \ ~\ t7:m ~~\ r ~ \ ~\ e,ee ..a \ ~~ \, ,. °Are a mnce.A.n.. u,. z°m ~ ~ S J~ es t"•w eel I \~ \ nme a I \ Cyr E, t5p• 0- ~ m,u m>°aAO"r mw mx" a ..n nem.c "...m° I ~~ \ I ~ ~Ff/t- ~-~ _ t 45.6 ' ° a "i ~ a».Na"ao~ "~,."°~: ~ o:,"~°"o>`ira."`.~,."A"%~ ..".. ' ~ ` ~ .. „~,r a„a.ma «.. am,~° e.w. ~~a.mA~ a.a,°s a°mn~ ~~~~ nl ~~ ----~~ .nB~ma~,an,sm~°,w„".nume,~A~,.~e~ e.,° `~ ~ ~\ o ~~ \ z .\~~ A P T ~OF SEC Z. O ~ \ asanoan. ° E~'ma,a ,wsaE~°a ~'mn"w.a mw~r_ b_E :B`~,'::°': \ \ ~x,aE ro ~°m. ~.\~ z _\ ~,,, I ,\ ~ ~ ~° h'~~Bw~ ~'~°' o~" ~" TM':: ~ u:a u"tt a.h`. oa a m ,~ ~~ i~ ~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~. w,A:s \ a ~ . nA,n ..el ~ ~ ~ a.m°~new, ~ocAn I °m.C / ~ \\ 1\ \~\ \ d cERnmua '~ V •~ , MArt Wn6 PnwA"Cp ~\ ~ / \ maKr rt~r mro nui Ir is / ~\ " eon nn [sr.eUS,ucxr a' tt"eE euN-me °n onrtx coma 4i x I / / \ ~'\ \ ,olo`1n/°], EMCFVi UMIP"dIY Ca,¢CnwlSX eaaaml4v"weM1nN'I"E a is ~~ P ~ \ ~ \ E~SFUexi a055MO a Btmoeruxo wv r~x, a 9.w sucFl ert[vr ~5 x° PP \ ." 0~2 \\ ,\,\ \ raon"o° r.u a. .e ~_ J e\ ( (` 5'08' 1 •. ll'~C \ \~\ aka `~/ ~ \ ~ `\ \ \ \ 1 ~° \ ~ ~ ~~ - a mm ae.. ~~ ~ ~ ~\ "' "a "a."~ ~ "~ oop• ''may ~vAi -~, NB9'4i'31"W - 902.46'_ - _ - - '°-/ '-\ - - ~, ~ ~ IMPROVEb ENTP OCA~ONCCERTIFICATE > o \ ~ ~ ~ \ \ O PART OF SECTION 2, T5S, R80W, 8th P.M. ~ ^ TOWN OF VAIL ^ (\ ~ EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO \ OPAWN: GP FENEN£O: tP w.:.~~••vw"•+• oAIE oa/t15/off PLC .wBp: tt29 SHEET 1229IT Attachment E. Design Plans I '~ ,, I •' \_ ~ -_ ~ \ , t _ KEY >-- ~ \~w, ~~ ~' MEMORIAL WALLS W/ INSCRIBED BOULDERS KATSOS RANCH ~"~ '~S ~ .. ~~f,.~ i OPEN SPACE ~\! ~ '` _ j ~ INSCRIBED FLUSH-SET STONE MARKERS '~ ~I Ex'g Pedestrian Bridge l ~ ~, /,~ f ~~ CRUSHED STONE PATH 4' WIDE "I (Rated for l0,000.1b. loads) ~" _1 s' TF~Sl a ' ~ ~~ ~ ~ MEMORIAL BOULDERS TOV Recreatloj, Pa[h ~~ I ~~y aTF /~~ ~ ~1 ," Wetland Mitlgatloh Area - ~ ~ - ~. "• ~ I , _=. ASH SCATTERING GARDEN Entry Feature ahd Slgn-I w~ 11 _ - a k / _ - - _ -_ !'` ~ ^_ -~ \ ~'~. ~ - ~ • \. ~/ MEMORIAL GROVES ' ~ ~ ~ ~ Ex6TING MATURE TREES R I 111 c. ,' ,~, (-,fit' ~~ ~ Pote~t~lai No Bndge I f',:j ,,{jafer dhasc~ , .i iriaii .,.. ~,CC' __ XISTING WETLANDS Existing Dirt Track ~ "• ~ ~~ .,, d' f To ee Revegetated r~ - '~I'4 I ~~' r lF ~ f I ', y r E .. ) ° \ ~a - 3 ~ yam, ~ `~y+ :P~ ` K ~C 2t ~ F I Ex'O Mature trees w ~~_. ~ ~~ ! +~,., r "' `<: ~ ao6na~ • a a Scattering Garden ~~ ~~ I elq~nQAn2p I ~E~ M Agab r, ~ .~` ~ i~ ,\~~ Ramp - l ,Committal Service Spac I~` ~1 , ~ ~ a ~ ~.;;. '~ r ud n of , ~ .. ~~ ~, 1 ~ titian ~ b k l~'~. ~ADACrushedStone Path a ~, ~ Itl gtIP9 Areps v.+-_,h ~, j Existing Dirt Trail eR„-yPwti u4 + ~' j~.. I ~~ ~ } % Moadow ~ ~ ~~ ~'-_ I Aerouted throughMemorlal Areas - , ~ "~~ \ _ ~ -. , .i " 7;~a .r~ f ~ "n - _- "fir 4~ 'fit 'r ~= ~~ v( Po ,nr- - R° 1 + Y\ NOTES ~~ 'i.~ ,,. ~ ;, .. , '~ ~., `~~ t a l~ I. V IM i IP kl i t dd-( - t ph nd burial or Stan f 9c1 `~ dat~Ct°~ ~•^ ~ ~- ~" ~t Q R~ a h IY k to I P d riot of mcmatlo n f' ` Wetland ~ !{t/rv ~ ~~~ D. will he allowed under .near Ine<rined boulders and paving stones ~~~ ~ ~ } ~ ,lt*tgal Est AIEd v 2. Tho MemoAal Park will be constructed In phases corresponding to • I~ ~ tee, mmlpatea <o mpnRy need Ao woos ana memorial stoma ww ee ~ 5 ~ ~ ~~' \ pr! .et ana m: fined on kite ak needed. Pnakg I <an a«ommoemc gp ~ ' ~t.§~~ .x~~ »~ - k ~\ R9yor ~ ~18s n9 w soo mamoriala, .mien snowe ne enopen rot to eo ao years. o; 3. eo sne Ilpndng, pauuies, or kt.p<wres are proposee. '~ ~~ \ t ~ ~~~ n aono' \ pace ~ ~y9 . . a. oener man rot <gnstrpe,on of howaer kya m or mo proposed pons, t 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ • G [Here wm be na mmrm,oo or eaalna gradek or nawrnr drmnagewavs. - Z t;?' ~ ~ " s. ue mature [rook ww be remgvea. ug lanaklaping Is intandea purer ~ ~ ~ ... '~ v '. ~ - than native grasses and wldflewers In areas tlislurbea by Construction. I :- ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ "/y^' ~ _•" v i ~~' ~ _ r ~~~~~~~. ., 6. Memgriai groves of trees mey be plonfed oiler initial Javelepment a - - •" ~ '~-'-~~ ~ - ~~,y\~ water availability can 6e assured Ho piped Irrlga[lon is anliclpated. ~ ~ "t" '`- --~' -~: ~". y Y ^a>` _ -- ry I. >. No wenana areas will bC alsturbetl. All areas prppocad in Eagle River -~ - - ~ - - - - ~' ~~ V -- "~'~ .•r fT.L1a~x ''•'^°'7~r°~"'""'u= CC "1`~'~tffi`i- __' _ _\r~^'?_ _.. __ Water and ganltatlan pictrlc['s wetland mltlpaHon plan can be ' -' m<orporatea mm the ete/lanas<ave plan rot me nemor,al Pa.k. USFS S"ERR'y°°p"°"p° VAIL MEMORIAL PARK 8. There wilt be no parking or paved roans on the site; aoA-ace«cmle ~ANOSG>PE .ARCHITECT pathways well he cruchetl stone on a stab,llxed base. Small malntenence vehitlea will need inrrequent access ana wW be able to MASTER P LA N arms pn tn! central Pam. "'I'jso I 'r ,.. g. a new Peaakvlan brmge may ba regpesma In me mwre to Prgmae _ KATSOS RANCH OPEN SPACE e direct pedestrian access If the need Is aemonstrateal It is not - ~ SONESMAC +m~i„aeelnmlk<gnauipnawkeaPPUtaugn. ~ ~ ,I VAIL, COLORADO _ _ , .~ _ . I'.,.~" I.,,,.,_. July 28, 2003 SHERRY DORWARO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT INC. SONfSMAC L F~~itiw SFr ecaG ~ ceb ~+~~t'E~ ' ~R E ~.. ~ ill ~~ -_I i~ v) Y ~ .~ ~ !?. ~~ ~ I ,~ ~) f s~ ~~' ~i~ ~:~ ~- < i c,7 i F_ <,1 -' ~~ .. ' ~~ E OBE r~~~iC~--1 ~ ~~N 1~1'iO~l ~Oi~ ±~~~ ~~~~ .N:~ ~TT~t2- HI a ~. - -t ;,:,.. -_ _.,~ ~I~,~ I~C~L~~~.~J~' u~ ~L~ ~~v~a~ ~d~~l R ,, C~'~N-VI LA~'~ ~~~~t ~~ ~~~ M~~~ ~ ~Ui2t ~~ i ~'~~~ WALL D~ J (~'(~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~-}~ ~ i"~ I T MEMORIAL BOULDER WALL ,• I . ,.~° ~ .'- t . ~ ^ }~ Q ~' ~ ~ CP a ~ ~(,, ,~ . ~ ^ w~ /~//. ~~~TD~ ~'[~f ~ -~ I~~ ~ t~l2l'tl'1 _ ~J~~1`E 1 '(C' 1~ I~I~f ~ I~ ~~i(~~ ~~ w .: f~vUl~~~ ~ 2'/2 - ~ ~ I~ 171~,M~~C~, ~~ ~~~I ~ I•~i f~T~p . ~'D 'PSI ~-1 °~E~- ~ . -~ ; I ~~i ~~, ~~~ ~ ~H~~n ~~ ~~Tr} . MEMORIAL BOULDERS aim ~~~~ -~'r~lr 'U .-~ s 1 ~ vU c, UU~~ U uv ~ . -_ ~~ a ~ ~ . 0 ~ ~. , D __0 . _._ o ~, <lt..~~...JJJ ~/ ~~~ ~~~G~ - ~~o~ . ;. ,~, ~a~~ ~T~ ;~ ; a . ., ~ QC Nv MDf~ A ~~~ '' ~ T ~,~r~ ~~ ~~ { MEMORIAL GATHERING SPACE (PLAN) ~+-I dpi ~~~ ©~ ~~~ I~l.~-~N ~/~ ~I~I SEATWALL @ MEMORIAL GATHERING SPACE I' n .n ~• .r. i ~, ~~T~~ -~~ W I LDFI.Ui~I E~ ~ ! ~ ~ G C~MP,~~~ ~' 1?~~~,'PF~ ~_: ~~ ~~ ~~.fi~ 2'' 1~~=~MPG~~1~ C~t-I I'~ w r1'~-{ ~i r-~p~ ~G~'IP~~"1~ ~L~ ~T ~ p, h~i"~ r--~~ r-~pc~ ~dt~ ~~ ~(r~S1~2~=fig ~l~t-I ~~~~. ED ST~NE_PEDESTRI „ ~ ~ ,_ ~„ ~, ©~, ~J o/I h ca~ n• _.. ~~~~~ ~~~ MEMORIAL STONES ALUNC PATH ~ „ _ ~ ,_ o„ ~~~ dd~~ , i„ pis ~.~, -f tc 4'. Yif+r ~ S 'y J~A, ~ ~ti ^~ ~ ~~~ ~ ` ~`_, ~~ ~~ ~~ . .s .~ ~ ECTI®N MEMORIAL STONES ALONG PATH. (PLAN) ~„=~~-p„ _ Q ., ~ruxfiv~~~~~~0 W~-4F~~Ti~~b ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ATE l~ ~ i'i+~~%--~ ~I~ Gz~~ ~~~ PEDESTRIAN/ MAINTENANCE PATH G~~--I ~1~ ~"Ot-l~ l-~I~I~N ~'p ~~-I~ 0 ATTAHCMENT F RESPONSES TO THE PEC MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 2003 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Vail Memorial Park Foundation DATE: September 3, 2003 SUBJECT: Response to Issues Raised at the August 25, 2003 PEC Meeting Thank you for your input and the issues you raised at the August 25th PEC meeting. In this memo, the Foundation wishes to respond to each of your issues. We are confident that all of them can be adequately addressed through the conditional use process. Furthermore, we are proposing to carefully track and review the progress of the Vail Memorial Park (VMP) during the first year of operation to ensure that any unforeseen conflicts or problems are identified and additional measures devised to mitigate them. A. Intensity of Use: The PEC was concerned about the intensity of use of the Memorial Park and the potential conflicts it might create on the frontage road and the existing recreation path. The studies prepared in 1993 for the cemetery proposed at Donovan Park estimated that 24 memorial events would occur in a year, but this number included casket burials. Based on information from the Vail Interfaith Chapel, services typically last 1 hour or less and are most often scheduled during weekdays. On average, 15-20 people -usually the immediate family - attend a graveside interment .(casket burial) or inurnment (urn burial) service, with the memorial service, typically larger, occurring beforehand at the Chapel. Anticipating the possibility that some families may wish to hold the entire memorial service at the site, the Foundation will take the following actions to mitigate potential conflicts and protect the natural environment of the site: 1. Highly visible cautionary signage at each end of the Katsos Ranch recreational trail will be erected where people going to the memorial park will join the recreation path. These signs will state that that cyclists need to dismount during memorial services. 2. Friends of the family, congregation members or funeral home staff will be stationed on the recreational path to inform cyclists that a memorial service is occurring and ask them to be careful, slow down or dismount when that memorial services consists of more than 25 people. 3. Information handouts about access, parking, and safety on the recreation path will be distributed at the time of sale of memorial stones and at the time of a service, through funeral homes, pastors, and the VMP director. 4. Stringent management of construction use will occur to prevent conflicts on the trail. This will include the use of signs and flagman. 5. Memorial services expected to be larger than 25 people will be strongly discouraged. In VMP's marketing materials, the site wi!! be described as most appropriate for intimate family inurnment services. 6. After the first year, the Vail Memorial Park Foundation will review usage to identify any operational issues. If necessary, the Foundation will consider additional physical improvements to reduce the potential for conflicts, such as widening the gravel shoulders on the recreation path between the parking lot and the VMP (where topography allows) and using temporary means to cordon off a pedestrian lane. In addition, VMP will take the following actions to reduce parking conflicts on the frontage road: 1. The VMP Director will require all memorial services likely to be attended by more than 25 people to utilize ride-share or shuttle vans from the Chapel (or other memorial service venue), to be organized by funeral home, pastor, or family in conjunction with VMP director. 2. If after one year there are complaints to the Town about parking on the frontage road, the Foundation will pursue the creation of additional parking and/or more stringent requirements on the maximum size of memorial groups. 3. The Vail Memorial Park Foundation will discourage large memorial services (same as #6 above). 4. The Vail Memorial Park Foundation will pay for the placement of additional no parking signs along Bighorn Road at the Katsos Ranch trailhead. B. Capacity: PEC also had questions about the capacity of the project. The EIR has been revised to reflect the Foundation's current estimate of the number of memorials in each phase. It should be noted that the long- term capacity and the intensity of use of the site are two different things. The increased number of memorial opportunities will simply increase the life span of each phase. Regardless of how many memorial inscriptions are available on the site, the County will still only experience on average 60-70 deaths per year. Nationally, fewer than 50% of deaths result in cremation. C. Wetland Issues: PEC ex pressed some concerns about potential conflicts with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District's (ERWS) wetland mitigation plan on the site. Jurisdictional wetlands have been mapped and are identified in the EIR. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has done a site inspection with Anna Higgins, the Foundation's wetland consultant, and Bob Weaver, ERWS's wetland consultant. Conclusions from this work include: Proposed improvements in the Memorial Park do not impact existing jurisdictional wetlands. As part of its approved 1993 plan to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWS identified the Katsos Ranch property as a wetland mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which 3'/2 acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although ERWS has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction, and VMP is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as well (or apply for a 404 permit). Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWS's consultant has flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to VMP's first phase. The only potential conflict is the swale directly north of the primary development areas in phases l-3, which is included in the mitigation area. The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial Park Foundation, and ERWS that spanning this swale with bridges or boardwalks would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit. (See Attachment A.) Development of paths in phases 2-4 may require wetland permits, depending upon the long-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion of the VMP site. ERWS and the VMP Foundation are actively cooperating to ensure that wetland mitigation and the Memorial Park are mutually compatible on the site. ERWS may apply for an amendment to its water augmentation plan to increase seasonal water flows to the site, which will be beneficial for VMP's desire to plant memorial groves of trees in future years. D. Limits of Disturbance: The PEC indicated that the limits of disturbance need to be identified on the approved plans. Limits of disturbance are identified for phase I, but can only be approximated for future phases. The Foundation has pursued DRB approval only for phase I; future phases wi{I require DRB approval and at that time the Foundation will identify the limits of disturbance precisely. In all phases, disturbances will be limited to the margins along pathways, where walls and memorial boulders will be concentrated in a strip approximately 10-20 feet wide. Beyond that margin, disturbances to natural vegetation will be minimal. E. Floodplain: Since the PEC reviewed the floodplain delineation on the site survey, Town staff has investigated further and now indicates that the 100- year floodplain covers a greater area than was previously identified. Section 12-21-10 of the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines: A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40~J or greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "structure" as used in this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including residential use. E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) § 1: Ord. 12 (1978) § 4 J After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above mentioned regulations, the Foundation believes that the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations. No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the "quantity or velocity of flood waters." F. Final Plat: Peak Land Surveying has completed a minor subdivision plat for the Katsos Ranch property that subdivides it into two parcels: Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Subdivision, the 11.13 acre Memorial Park site;ke~ is the remainder of Katsos Ranch Park. rr«c ~ {~ The Foundation is ready to move forward with the Memorial Park and believes this project meets the criteria outlined in the staff memo for a minor subdivision, rezoning, and conditional use permit. We look forward to meeting with you on September 8th and coming to closure on the above mentioned issues. Thank you for your time and consideration. EAGLE RIVER VI/ATER 8c SANITATION DISTRICT ~~ 846 Forest Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-7480 • FAX (970) 476-4089 September S, 2003 Russell W. Forrest Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Vail Memorial Park Master Plan Dear Russ: The Eagle River Water & Sanitation District has reviewed the most recent version of the site plan for the proposed Vail Memorial Park to be located at the Katsos Ranch Open Space. The District has established a wetland mitigation site at Katsos Ranch, which was authorized by the Vail Town Council in January 1992 (Resolution No. 24, Series of 1991). We appreciate the efforts of Russ Forrest, Sherry Dorward and the Memorial Park Task Force to coordinate planning and design of the park with the District so that impacts to the wetland mitigation areas can be avoided. The site plan dated July 28, 2003 addresses our concerns related to the configuration of Phase I of the Vail Memorial Park Master Plan. The access pathway from the bike path to the Phase I area will not impact the wetland mitigation site, if bridges or elevated boardwalks are installed to span the drainage swale located to the north of the Phase I loop. For the main entrance path to Phase I, a bridge span of at least 20 feet will be needed to avoid impacts to the wetland mitigation area, and for the secondary entrance path, a span of at least 25 feet will be needed. Bridge support pilings can be located within the drainage Swale without adverse impacts to the mitigation site and without applying for a permit from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.. We believe that the use of bridges or boardwalks to span the drainage Swale will eliminate any potential conflict between Phase 1 of the Memorial Park and the District's mitigation areas. The District will take full responsibility for coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding potential impacts to the wetland mitigation site. With regard to Phases II through IV of the Vail Memorial Park, additional work is needed to more precisely define the extent of wetland mitigation areas, based upon water distribution, topographic conditions and regulatory requirements of the Corps of Engineers. In addition, the District is investigating possible improvements to the water distribution system including the installation of diversion structures and a pond. This WATER, WASTEWATER, OPERATIONS & MANAGEMENT SERVVCES Russell W. Forest September O5, 2003 Page 2 effort will be coordinated with the Vail Memorial Park Foundation with the purpose of maintaining a successful wetlands mitigation site that is fully compatible with the Memorial Park. We would appreciate the opportunity to review the design plans for the Phase I bridges or boardwalks. If you have any questions or need any additional details, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Eagle River Water & Sanitation District By. `/~' Dennis Gelvin, General Manager cc: Mark Gilfillan, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Robert M. Weaver, Hydrosphere Resource Consultants, Inc. PEAK LAND CONSULTANTS, INC. PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC. PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. 970-476-8644 ^ FAX 970-476-861 G ^ 1000 LION'S RIDGE LOOP ^ VAIL, CO 81657 970-726-3232 ^ FAX 970-726-4343 ^ 78436 US HWY 40, P.O. BOX 1680 ^ WINTER PARK, CO 80482 September 4, 2003 Town of Vail Department of Community Development Attn: Mr. Russell W. Forrest, AICP 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Vail Memorial Park Dear Mr. Forrest: I have reviewed the Master Plan and Phase I site plan for the Vail Memorial Park, concerning the 100-year floodplain. Based on presently accepted Town of Vail floodplain information published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed improvements on the site should not adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of the 100-year flood waters generated on Gore Creek per the requirements of the Town of Vail Hazard Code. Respectfully Yours, ~ ,~. Eric G. Williams, PE Peak Civil Engineering, Inc. P:\ 1200-1299\ 1229\Docs\letter-floodplain-09-04-03.doc ~ ~ \ e ~~ro ,u, ,. IEEE. TME so~,. ;;. ~w~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ E;A"R :a;, ~ :•: o~;~ I ~ ~ ,E« ~ ~ ~ 7279'30' 2.73' ~ 3 / GRAPHIC SCALE N o~,,.~E ~ ~..,, EEC,: I N49'4T51"E B .21' lF~sTq o ~ s mss-son ~ N63' 6'20"E-32.57 7 ~>O ui i . asi ~a a i' ~ "`~'s:~ , , ww ,~mw nK sou~..u, Q N75'03'19" -63.02' \ \•\ ~ ~`si oi`.oHS~~"`v°o'.~~/~ecu„~uc sw P'.«~"~i°NG i"10.~i~,~us umc~ I \ ~ a::. u auw I '51'24"E-90,59' 1 --~~-~•-• ~1 -- -_-- I'\ 35 '07 ~.~. _ v v \ \ '-~ i. o,a uE ro.ocswnv . unr mm ~ `~ \ !l S 1 ~_ x eD,au,u.. ".uu su„,na .a.. sPn. ucv„w- u.>... cu,w .n I ~~ ~~ ~~E ~ s ~ ~ C7~ f~150 Op wccr,s PuL roPauxAPn. ERaP msR ~ v,s ,En~u u,PPwc I v . n,x,so ~ I ~ _ CRE• ~ "" ~ ~ ''~FFir ~~-~_ uS.BO• MP.~:.°i ~ ~`~,°.,'"~o~'~"° ~„>;;°°o:~oo,~~."~~p"::~~P~ I ~\` ' \ ~ _ .r as» maunou w,s orn~vm Exec ~uu~sPnA, ox,uwcs oPOURCu ' `~ ~~ "s I \ ~ - ~ \ \ s ~w ,s m wrnu.naR oewum mw sEU, \ \ \ .E~w~EP ~EPn.~a ~,. ,>ao ~. aa~ ,» ., P.~ e~~ ~,~ .~ _ ~ \`~ ~ P T ~Of SEC 2, O \ '~ , ~- ~"' "" `~ wsum~N2. mucu:o~D TM~EE~E wE ,~ ~RAa~ o .. _, ... ~ • J ~ \ \ ~ I ~.-_~ ` w vE nwu ~~ „~ \ ~~ ~ ' ,a °ti~ ~ \` \ I ~ M~ FCO8.vM4~sn[~x[BVLCCgt,~ilY~iNAi~ ~ ~o aON,~PAh i Ovrs rc \. \`~ G~¢ Rho IliaE ES~R uY SuKP~ivoN B I Of ui xxowFOGE. \ 6 5.00' I ~ I ~ ~~~~ ,ss) I umaEwC ur,ss / / \\ ,\ \ \ \ \ \ wPROVENEx1 tOCATM 6nMCAlE ~p ~ ` ~~ ~~ ~ feR ME 69,eDSrupf o! EErvcE wilOM6 oP onrtP NNPf / \ u• M / \~ •\ tWES.~~ rW uPxorEUExls ou nK ERGH uscn eEO PMfFi M ,~~ I / / \ ..~ \ o;~~b,~E' ~~E~i'E;~ ; ~: sxo~,°";~~';RE E :.~ H~~ a,un,ER~ '~ fD ~ \ ,, '~,.\ E,SE.D,E wosv„c ~R ~~EW~~~ v,. PAR, of :.., .MBE.. E.P. ,. ,~,~ 0 ~a \ \ , `u A ~ ~O \ \ ~ ' \ ~~ \ ~ \ -~ _ val `~,,N89'41'31"W - 902.48' "~- ~\ ~ ,\ ~ ~ d / IM ROVEMENT LOCA~PION CENIIFIC~TE Ems, ~• PART OF SECTION 2, T55, HBO}{~, 6th P.M. L~..~.'L~ . 1 TOWN OF VAIL n ~\ .\\ ~ ~ EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO ~ ~\ ` DRAINJ: GP RENEWED: GP ~ SHEET 12291T e uaaxm¢,~..~wn~a~ DALE: 09/OS/OJ PLC JOEY: 1119 FINAL PLAT KASTOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIVISON A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3> TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 11'EST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL ~1IERIDIAN, TORN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EACLE, STATE OF COLORADO CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION AND OWIJERSHIP xrvE~xlsl w r¢ vw¢ v si~tm [ xm nox [ a: mx¢ x~os,'m sx~ ~fEk mx[[ x~!!V!'3sse' Klaa& o r¢i; amCN' S sx.ula~rtfl artx le~vi'w'x~, a wurf~[L m 'x'sY x~eipa~ iFFt axfx¢ x[anc mf [IESrexEV lauxowx o[ vw luixcf EIEKxix rxwt !µ!]a'N' x, lx.n r¢l: m IW [loam x[]W.ox r[EirxEHG !!'!Y E 1!~ ¢[y a' 4 10.5l.1a s¢! o m zoutxK51 ooxn[a a !wo Yao' E, taarM ¢[t la m xaxr s [[nwxx4 sxn xwm [oxaxxrs 15[.ou ixi5 [wu ¢xr uxo[x m~Nnuf aun !M[ ~ sueavnFO m swn wao •olf Iwo Ko[x! x! Snow ox xxsros R.W[x xwm w[uwvax, ~5; awD xFA¢~ IXgGrt xra Yt ~! xLL 6 M~ oxwnor¢,NS, u~"ix aiaonvws or u~n'o<x'rnxmx~n wui'is~5wn~c siMix! niwwxr xxx rox wmxcr In-E(>)tu ~ ~~ ~~ cmmwo o[ec s woo :~i~; a c~:r°n"~'µo[`xE"~~OKa,a,x x.,[> ono` aow.., l.oo r.x~ LAND USE SUMMARA us[ .ooM:ss I lnocw s-cl TITLE CERTIFICATE xa ,l~ax~x[, - TOKN COUNCIL CERTIFICATE SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE usrz mxC twx[cl~irm cwv¢it¢ s Euo w~ ¢ f5ux ~i m PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CERTIFICATE CERTFICATE OF TAKES PAID CLERR ANO RECORDER CERTIFICATE FINAL PLAT KASTOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIVISON A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF TtIE SIXTH PRINCIPAL IYiERIDIAN, TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO INTERSTATE _ I-70 \ _ -_ i VAIN ` ~ ~ _, _. ,.h T 682.57 ~ ~... ,~, - ` - ._' VILLAG ~Y-" ;ELEVENTH ' ,w - 575.80 Y - y, .. 2 LYl , "' Lf'. ._ j ~ / :_ ~ "L17 ~ _. L!S 50' STREAM/ 5G' STREAM SETBACK SETBACK ~ . / j L'6 S2S q. ., B0 2 y~ LPO L1Y ~'~,LU sn sREnu~ SEiNACK 10 ` J~ ~~ w L ~ `~T ~ ~S g ~~ t~ O T ~rF pp ~. o. ~ ~ ~~ R N Tum .a.®"",../ a'~« tea, ~ ~ N a~ ,~lEC .~' ~ 4 SOUin EAST a SECl10N ] i., '4 of 88' 0' ~ s[cnoNRZER [oRNER V LP 2669.13' 69'1 '1 S6 ' • '4 '1 2621.86 575.98 74.9' L` BASIS OF BEARING SWTH 1/tfi B.LM. rs sfcnaN z LINE TABLE LMF NGtH NEARWC BIGHORN SUBDIVISION o~. o cwvnr.~n. ANC. s .`~"om1 n Y1J BY: GP B Na. !OB No. FINAL PLAT KASTOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIVISON A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANCE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EACLE, STATE OF COLORADO i~,e.oo,E GOLF COURSE - swill I/. SBH'S1'Oe'E Qi SECMM 1069.27' ~ VAIL'- _. ~ t-- ~. I .- VILLAG GOLF /~-- . _~ ELEVENTH ~ -'y+b . COURSE LYY iz! ,'+., '., t ,.-~ .; 1 .__ FILING it Lle '0•s 4. L , 18 L 9 L% ' Ss ~ / / ~ ~ 300. LE4 ~ g ~Z, ..-~ ,9 V sE enck LPO 50' SIpEA4 SETBACK SO' SipEAM/ SFIBACK TRACT A TRACT ~ ~. .a W ~ M..s.e ArnEs ~K O' 9pp0 1 T SW1H EAST or sccnoH ~ w B.L.M. 58972'10'E 2621.86' BASIS OF BSARINC B.L.M. INTERSTATE I-70 O~ ~_l to Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #Z of 2003 Revenue Eapenditare Increase Increase Vel'SiOn ~ Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Capital Projects Fund Project Budgets Amended 2003 Berry Creek Employee Housing Units 1,000,000 Timber Ridge Loan 1,000,000 Dobson Ice Arena 15,575 Smoke evacuation system design Children's Garden of Learning 50,000 Loan for relocation; to be repaid over 10 years Town Mgr Residence Town Manager's Office Remodel Buy-Down Program Middle Creek Plan Review Fees CDOT Funding -Bighorn Cr. Remediatio: Capital Street Maintenance Spruce Way & Columbine Dr Reconstruct Other Bighorn Flood Remediation Donovan Pavilion 50,000 Renovations 10,125 estimate per Slifer Design (27,000) Transfer funding to Middle Creek 27,000 Transfer funding from Buy Down Program (50,000) Transfer funding to Bighorn Creek Remediation 253,050 Spruce Way & Columbine Drive -net cost $61,300 158,250 To be reimbursed by CDOT 10,000 construction extras 300,000 Capital Outlay-improvements 15,000 Cost of one new parking machine Capital Outlay 25,000 Electricity to Repeater Site -funded by Dispatch Service Subtotal Capital Projects Fund 1,300,000 1,537,000 General Fund I-70 Sink Hole Incident CDOT Reimbursement 145,543 Workers' Comp Deductible Com Dev Professional Fees Streets -Contract Labor Police -Overtime Fire -Overtime 1,000 Two injuries at the site 1,000 Neighborhood site inspections - TMC 17,360 ERW&S and Ewing Trucking 3,379 1,568 Supp 2 of 2003 030902 1 9/11/03 12:52 PM Version 1 , Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #2 of 2003 Revenue Eapenditnre Increase increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Fire -contract Service 1,782 Fire -Radio Repair & Maintenance 2,800 Streets -HEF Operating Charges 9,200 Streets -HEF Replacement Charges 5,620 Traffic Control 3,215 Portable Lighting Gravel 6,140 Other Expenses 7,086 Subtotal I-70 Sink Hole Incident 145,543 60,149 General Fund Donovan Pavilion Rental Revenue Hightway /Streets Adv Professional Fees Contract Services Water/sewer Electric Gas Trash Removal Building R & M Other R & M Advertising Equipment<5000 Misc Subtotal Donovan Pavilion Other Budgets Adjustments 39,000 4,900 55,420 40,000 670 1,000 3,350 500 3,090 1,675 2,255 5,000 4,325 39,000 122,185 per Donovan Pavilion Mgmt adv in Wedding Facilities by Greg H for Donovan Pavilon Donovan Pavilion Mgmt Fees Donovan Pavilion Mgmt operating budget TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses TOV direct expenses Furniture, fixtures, flags, start up costs TOV direct expenses Supp 2 of 2003 030902 2 9/11/03 12:52 PM Version 1 Proposed Supplemental Approprial3ons and Budget Adjustments #Z of 2003 Revenue Expenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Town Clerk contract labor Confrerence Ctr Mgmt Fees Constuction Permits Com Dev Admin Seasonal Salary Com Dev Benefits Seasonal Sal Com Dev professional fees Out of District Fires Resp Fire Personal Service Salaries Fire Personal Service Benefits Fire Personal Seasonal Salaries Fire Personal Service Benefits Com Dev Salaries Com Dev Benefits Bus Drivers Salaries Bus Drivers Benefits Bus Drivers Seasonal Salaries Bus Drivers Benefits Facility Maintenance Contributions Contributions Subtotal Other Adjustments Parlaing Bank Charges Bank Charges Parking Revenue 2,240 Help for election and special events 161,500 Management fees - 5% of collections 32,820 Increase in Construction Permits 29,120 Seasonal Salary Budget for administrative support 3,700 Seasonal Benefits for administrative support 4,892 Energy Service Associates for energy conservation program (12,000) Not as many Wildfires this summer (19,000) F.F. six month leave of absence (7,900) F.F. six month leave of absence 8,000 Students used to cover leave of absence 1,020 Students used to cover leave of absence 12,854 Transfer funding to Com Dev for GIS position 5,026 Transfer funding to Com Dev for GIS position (14,235) FTE moved to Parking-Ford Park (5,570) FTE moved to Parking-Ford Park 5,040 To cover FTE with seasonal bus drivers 640 To cover FTE with seasonal bus drivers 26,164 Repairs & maintenance for Town Manager's residence 50,000 Pro Cycling Tour sponsorship 5,000 Vail Farmers Mkt Traffic Control 378,863 289,325 6,500 Additional credit card fees associated with increased parking revenue 10,000 Additional credit card fees associated with increased parking revenue 50,000 Parking revenue Ford Park Summer'03 Supp 2 of 2003 030902 3 9/11/03 12:52 PM Version 1 Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #2 of 2003 Revenue Expenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Parking Salaries 19,000 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Seasonal Salaries 3,000 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Overtime 4,500 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Benefits 8,200 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Revenue 350,000 Add'1 parking revenue due to parking plan changes Street/HWY Seasonal Salaries 7,985 Add'1 plowing outlying paid lots Street/HWY Benefits 1,015 Add'1 plowing outlying paid lots Parking Seasonal Salaries 17,745 Add'1 hosts for outlying paid lots Parking Benefits 2,254 Add'1 hosts for outlying paid lots Contract Labor 15,000 Move existing parking machines to new locations Printing & Publishing 5,000 Add'1 marketing expenses to implement new parking procedures Sign & Sign Materials 5,000 Increase sign program Contract Labor 100,000 Strip sod & install base gravel on field of Ford Park Subtotal Parking 400,000 205,199 Subtotal General lend 621,320 494,524 Dispatch Service lbnd Radio R&M Advertising Computer Software Subtotal Dispatch Service lend Heavy Equipment lend I-70 Sink Hole Incident Interfund Charges -Operating Expense Interfund Charges -Replacement (12,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site (9,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site (4,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site (25,000) 9,200 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole 5,620. Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Supp 2 of 2003 030902 4 9/11/03 12:52 PM Version 1 Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #2 of 2003 Revenue Expenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Motor Fuel 8,280 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Lubricants 920 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Subtotal Heavy Equipment )H~nd 14,820 9,200 Conference Center )H~nd Professional fees 100,000 Marketing & analysis consultants Management Fees 161,500 5% of collections Subtotal Conference Center Find 0 261,500 Total All lends 2,081,683 2,277,224 Supp 2 of 2003 030902 5 9/11/03 12:52 PM MEMORANDUM To: Town Council From: Judy Camp Date: September 19, 2003 Subject: Supplemental Appropriation I am attaching a revised spreadsheet detailing proposed supplemental appropriations and budget adjustments for 2003. This spreadsheet and the ordinance you will receive this evening for first reading have been changed to reflect the following: Dispatch Services Capital Proiects Three Dispatch Services projects should have been included in the spreadsheet that you received last week -Computer Aided Dispatch and County Wide Police Records Management System;° 911 Phone System Upgrade, and Console Furniture Upgrade. These projects will all be fully funded in 2003 with grant revenue and funds from the Dispatch Services Fund so there is no net impact on the Town's budget. Additional information on these projects and timelines was e- mailed to you on Friday by Pam Brandmeyer. Donovan Pavilion The contract services line has been reduced by $2,255 for an advertising expenditure that was shown in two places on the original spreadsheet. This item was included in the Donovan Pavilion Management Company's budget; however the bill was paid directly by the Town. because the agreement with the management company had not been finalized at the time the expense was incurred. -1- Version 2 Changes Highlighted Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjuatmen~ #2 of 2003 Revenue Ezpenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Capital Projects Fund Project Budgets Amended 2003 Berry Creek Employee Housing Units 1,000,000 Timber Ridge Loan 1,000,000 'Transfer from Dispatch Services Fund Federal Grant Revenue CAD/RMS system Dobson lce Arena Children's Garden of Learning Town Mgr Residence Town Manager's Office Remodel Buy-Down Program Middle Creek Plan Review Fees CDOT Funding -Bighorn Cr. Remediatic Capital Street Maintenance Spruce Way & Columbine Dr Reconstruct Other Bighorn Flood Remediation Donovan Pavilion Capital Outlay-improvements Capital Outlay Subtotal Capital Projects Fund 90,000 CADiRMS system -portion nccded in 2003 165,000 CAD~RMS system grant -already approved 255,Ot10 CAD!RA~1S system 15,575 Smoke evacuation system design 50,000 Loan for relocation; to be repaid over 10 years 50,000 Renovations 10,125 estimate per Slifer Design (27,000) Transfer funding to Middle Creek 27,000 Transfer funding from Buy Down Program 300,000 (50,000) Transfer funding to Bighorn Creek Remediation 253,050 Spruce Way & Columbine Drive -net cost $61,300 158,250 To be reimbursed by CDOT 10,000 construction extras 15,000 Cost of one new parking machine 25,000 Electricity to Repeater Site -funded by Dispatch Service 1,555,000 1,79?,000 General Fund I-70 Sink Hole Incident CDOT Reimbursement Workers' Comp Deductible Com Dev Professional Fees 145,543 1,000 Two injuries at the site 1,000 Neighborhood site inspections - TMC Supp 2 of 2003 030902 Revised 1 9/16/03 9:26 AM Version 2 Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #2 of 2003 Changes Highlighted Revenue Ezpenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Streets -Contract Labor Police -Overtime Fire -Overtime Fire -contract Service Fire -Radio Repair & Maintenance Streets -HEF Operating Charges Streets -HEF Replacement Charges Traffic Control Gravel Other Expenses Subtotal I-70 Sink Hole Incident Donovan Pavilion Rental Revenue Hightway /Streets Adv Professional Fees Contract Services Water/sewer Electric Gas Trash. Removal Building R & M Other R & M Advertising Equipment<5000 Misc Subtotal Donovan Pavilion 17,360 ERW&S and Ewing Trucking 3,379 1,568 1,782 2,800 9,200 5,620 3,215 Portable Lighting 6,140 7,086 145,543 60,149 39,000 per Donovan Pavilion Mgmt 4,900 adv in Wedding Facilities by Greg H for Donovan Pavilon 55,420 Donovan Pavilion Mgmt Fees 37,745 Donovan Pavilion Mg~nt operating budget - adjusted for Hil] c&Co paid directly 670 TOV direct expenses 1,000 TOV direct expenses 3,350 TOV direct expenses 500 TOV direct expenses 3,090 TOV direct expenses 1,675 TOV direct expenses 2,255 Nill &z Co. bill paid byTOV befr~re contract ~.vi m;magement co. was complete 5,000 Furniture, fixtures, flags, start up costs 4,325 TOV direct expenses 39,000 11~~,~~30 Supp 2 of 2003 030902 Revised 2 9/16/03 9:26 AM Version 2 k'roposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #Z of 2003 Changes Highlighted Revenue Ezpenditure Increase Increase Description (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Other Budgets Adjustments Town Clerk contract labor 2,240 Help for election and special events Confrerence Ctr Mgmt Fees 161,500 Management fees - 5% of collections Constuction Permits 32,820 Increase in Construction Permits Com Dev Admin Seasonal Salary 29,120 Seasonal Salary Budget for administrative support Com Dev Benefits Seasonal Sal 3,700 Seasonal Benefits for administrative support Com Dev professional fees 4,892 Energy Service Associates for energy conservation program Out of District Fires Resp (12,000) Not as many Wildfires this summer Fire Personal Service Salaries (19,000) F.F. six month leave of absence Fire Personal Service Benefits (7,900) F.F. six month leave of absence Fire Personal Seasonal Salaries 8,000 Students used to cover leave of absence Fire Personal Service Benefits 1,020 Students used to cover leave of absence. Com Dev Salaries 12,854 Transfer funding to Com Dev for GIS position Com Dev Benefits 5,026 Transfer funding to Com Dev for GIS position Bus Drivers Salaries (14,235) FTE moved to Parking-Ford Park Bus Drivers Benefits (5,570) FTE moved to Parking-Ford Park Bus Drivers Seasonal Salaries 5,040 To cover FTE with seasonal bus drivers. Bus Drivers Benefits 640 To cover FTE with seasonal bus drivers Facility Maintenance 26,164 Repairs & maintenance for Town Manager's residence Contributions 50,000 Pro Cycling Tour sponsorship Contributions 5,000 Vail Farmers Mkt Traffic Control Subtotal Other Adjustments 378,863 287,070 Parking Bank Charges Bank Charges 6,500 Additional credit card fees associated with increased parking revenue 10,000 Additional credit card fees associated with increased parking revenue Supp 2 of 2003 030902 Revised 3 9/16/03 9:26 AM 1 Version 2 Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #Z of 2003 Changes Highlighted , Revenue Ezpenditure Increase Increase Descrlption (Decrease) (Decrease) Reason Parking Revenue 50,000 Parking revenue Ford Park Summer'03 Parking Salaries 19,000 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Seasonal Salaries 3,000 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Overtime 4,500 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Benefits 8,200 Summer Parking Collections-Ford Park Parking Revenue 350,000 Add'1 parking revenue due to parking plan changes Street/HWY Seasonal Salaries 7,985 Add'1 plowing outlying paid lots Street/HWY Benefits 1,015 Add'1 plowing outlying paid lots Parking Seasonal Salaries 17,745 Add'1 hosts for outlying paid lots Parking Benefits 2,254 Add'1 hosts for outlying paid lots Contract Labor 15,000 Move existing parking machines to new locations Printing & Publishing 5,000 Add'1 marketing expenses to implement new parking procedures Sign & Sign Materials 5,000 Increase sign program Contract Labor 100,000 Strip sod & install base gravel on field of Ford Park Subtotal Parking 400,000 205,199 Subtotal General Fund 621,320 492,269 Dispatch Servkce Fund 'Transfer to Capital Projects Fund 90,000 CADIRMS -funds needed in 2003 E-9 f 1 Board -Phone Project 279,517 911 Phone System Upgrade funded by E91 I Authority 91 ] Phone System Upgr~ide 279,517 9l 2 Phone System Upgrade funded by E~)11 Authority Capital Outlay 69,500 Console and Fu~~niture upgrades Contract Se~wices (69,500) To fiend console upgrades Radio R&M (12,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site Advertising (9,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site Computer Software (4,000) to cover electricity charges for repeater site Supp 2 of 2003 030902 Revised 4 9/16/03 9:26 AM Proposed Supplemental Appropriations and Budget Adjustments #Z of 2003 Description Revenue Increase (Decrease) Ezpenditure Increase (Decrease) Reason Version 2 Changes Highlighted , Subtotal Dispatch Servfice Fund ? 79,517 34,517 Heavy Equipment Fund I-70 Sink Hole Incident Interfund Charges -Operating Expense 9,200 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Interfund Charges -Replacement 5,620 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Motor Fuel. 8,280 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Lubricants 920 Streets and Roads vehicle usage during response to I-70 Sink Hole Subtotal Heavy Equipment Fund 14, 820 9,200 Conference Center Fund Professional fees 100,000 Marketing & analysis consultants Management Fees 161,500 5% of collections Subtotal Conference Center Fond 0 261,500 Total All Funds 2,b16,200 2,899,486 Supp 2 of 2003 030902 Revised 5 9/16/03 9:26 AM ORDINANCE N0.10 Series of 2003 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, ZONING MAP; REZONING LOT 9A, VAIL VILLAGE 2ND FILING, FROM THE HEAVY SERVICE ZONE DISTRICT TO THE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the Town Council finds the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and WHERAS, the Town Council finds the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the rezoning is necessary to facilitate the approval of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, amending Special Development District No. 36, Four Seasons Resort; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed this zoning map amendment in accordance with the approved criteria and findings for a rezoning as established by Section 12-3-7, Vail Town Code, and has forwarded a recommendation of approval at the April 28, 2003, Planning and Environmental Commission hearing; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 Section 1. Amendment: The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as follows: That Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing shall be rezoned to Public Accommodation zone district from Heavy Service zone district; as shown in attached map, Exhibit A. Section 2. Conditions: That the rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing shall take effect on January 1, 2004. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the .validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 6"'day of May, 2003 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 17"' day of June, 2003, 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 16`h day of September, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 .~ Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2003 ORDINANCE N0.21 Series of 2003 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE TOWN OF VAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, ZONING MAP; REZONING LOTS 1 AND 2, MILL CREEK SUBDIVISION, FROM NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION (NAP) DISTRICT TO SKI BASE RECREATION-2 (SBR-2) DISTRICT AND REZONING LOTS P3 AND J, BLOCK 5A, VAIL VILLAGE 5T" FILING, FROM PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION (PA) DISTRICT TO PARKING (P) DISTRICT, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARDS THERETO. WHEREAS, Chapter 5, Zoning Map, of the Vail Town Code establishes the procedures for evaluating changes to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail ("Zoning Map"); and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the "Zoning Map" has been reviewed in accordance with the prescribed requirements outlined .r. erections 12-3-1 through 12-3-? of the Zoning Regulations of the Vail Town Code; and WHEREAS, on August 11, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail reviewed and forwarded a unanimous recommendation of approval of the proposed amendment to the "Zoning Map" to the Vail Town Council in accordance with the criteria and findings outlined in Section 12-3-7 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds the proposed amendment to the "Zoning Map" is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan, the Vail Village Master Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and WHERAS, the Vail Town Council finds the amendment to the "Zoning Map" is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds the amendment to the "Zoning Map" promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Zoning Map Amendment: The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Mill Creek Subdivision shall be rezoned from Natural Area Preservation (NAP) to Ski Base Recreation-2 (SBR-2) District; and Lots P3 and J, Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing shall be rezoned from Public Accommodation (PA) District to Parking District, as illustrated on Exhibit A (attached) Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence; cla~_ise or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 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. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 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 ON FIRST READING this 2"d day of September, 2003 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 16th d:~y of September; 2003, 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 16Th day of September, 2003. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 21, Series 2003 EXHIBIT A Er1STMIA.DOWD~ a ~+ ~~~~ t .t ti~_ i~ -£a ~~ ~ `i N -~ ~ j'~,~ r ~r~ ~ i-A °rT"'?~5'~z'~s~m..,. . ~ ~. a ~'.r ~ Et .1ft-"` r i '. ~c.~, ,j CTS.` , - ~ i ~.`t` - - ..;-e ~ 'f_ ~} .. k r t J, - _ ~' ___ _..._i I _ ~ ~ N ° ' < i l, i i I I I . ~ ,,,.~~ t G ~ ~ ~.. ~ ~ i i ' - ~ ~ ~ _~. !` 4 .. ~ f J~~• I{lt ~ ~~~~ ~` -~-- _~_- Lots 1 ~ 2, l~lill Creek ~ubdivisiQn~ sail I~~~E R~c~~A~'~4~r~ - 2 ~s~~-~~ ®I~~r1~fcT N N' E s MAP NOT TO SCALE Aug. 28, 2003 Lots P3 & J, Vait Village 5th Filing PA~tIC11~G (P) t)IgTRICT Zone Districts .~ Primary Secondary Residential "~`~ Outdoor Recreation High Density Multiple Family E~ ~ Agricultural & Open Space ~~ Public Accommodation r',"A Natural Area Preservation Q:' Commercial Core t ) ` Ski Base Recreation Commercal Core 2 J ~ Ski Base Recreation 2 ~~_ ~ Commercial Service Center ~~ ~ Parkin 9 General Use d~ ';'~ .- -~ , MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Pam Brandmeyer, Interim Town Manager RE: Town Manager's Report DATE: September 16, 2003 Children's Garden of Learnina The Children's Garden of Learning is working on a capital campaign. The idea involves selling "monogrammed bricks" that would be placed at the entrance to the new building. In order to .use the bricks for the capital campaign, the Children's Garden needs a lease forthe new building as well as Town Council's permission to place the bricks at the entrance to the building. With the necessary approvals, the Children's Garden will then move through the Town's development review process. The goal is to have the bricks in place when the new building is complete. They are working with the Vail Local Housing Authority and the developer of Middle Creek to facilitate this effort. Additionally, a draft lease for the Children's Garden will be presented for your consideration at the Oct. 7 Town Council meeting. The salient points in the draft are as follows: - . Five year term with five year renewal options - Rental rate of $10 per year - .Admission priority given to residents of the Town of Vail, employees within the Town of Vail, employees within Eagle County, and then all others - Annual verification of compliance with enrollment priority - Hours of operation from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Friday (except holidays) - The Town of Vail will insure the building - The tenant will not pay property taxes on the building - Town of Vail must be named as additionally insured on all insurance policies - All utilities (including snow and trash removal) are the responsibility of the tenant - The Town is not responsible for repairs or maintenance - The building and site improvements must be returned to the Town in the condition that they were received While we'll discuss this in more detail on Oct. 7, please let me know if any of these terms are of concern to you. Saab Reulacement Vehicles I have attached a memo from Chief Henninger with a recommendation to replace the Saab police vehicles with Ford Explorers. This will require authorization from Council at the evening meeting. Parkins Ticket Amnesty The Police Department and Municipal Court are working together to reduce the backlog of unpaid parking tickets. There are approximately 60 vehicles that have received three or more unpaid tickets over the past year. There are many other cars with three tickets for more unpaid tickets from past years. Just last week, the court mailed over 1,100 letters in an attempt to notify individuals of their outstanding tickets. Judge Buck has agreed to an Amnesty period this fall where, for two weeks, he will allow individuals to pay off all their tickets and he will dismiss every third ticket. Judge Buck will decide which of the three tickets he will dismiss. It is hoped that this will help reduce the backlog of tickets in the system as we enter the busy winter season. In general, Vail courts collect a higher than average percentage of parking tickets than other jurisdictions. After the Amnesty period, the Police Department will increase efforts to locate and tow vehicles with three or more unpaid parking tickets. If you have additional questions about this Amnesty period, please let me know. Police Department Annual Report Attached you will find a copy of the 2002 Police Department Annual Report. This is the first time in over ten years that this document has been published. If you have any comments, or recommendations for future reports please forward them to Chief Henninger. Vail Vallev Exchange and Youth Recos~nition Award At the last Council meeting, you had asked to see a break down of costs associated with the. two youth awards to help determine funding levels for 2004. The Youth Recognition Award is a fixed cost of $1,000 per person for college scholarships. We have traditionally. presented this award to outstanding juniors in each of the two schools, Battle Mountain High and Vail Mountain. Similarly, the Youth Ambassador Award is also presented to juniors in each of the two schools. Recipients receive $500 each, plus roundtrip airfare to Australia. Expenses for 2003 are as follows: Youth Recognition Award $2,000 (2 checks for $1,000 each) Youth Ambassador Award $1,000 (2 checks for $500 each) Total $3,788.50 (plane tickets) $6, 788.50 Given the total spent in 2003, a budget of $7,000 is recommended for 2004. Town Mananer Welcome Reception Please mark your calendars for a community welcoming reception for Stan Zemler and his family from 5 to 7 p.m. Friday, Oct. 24 at the Donovan Pavilion. Stan will be here Sept. 22-26, then on a full-time basis beginning Oct. 6. Feel free to stop by and welcome him. Pro Cvclina Tour Contract Follow Up At your request, Frank Johnson has provided a statement that clarifies the relationship between the Vail Valley Chamber and Tourism Bureau and Legacy Sports Group, LLC as it relates to the PCT Rocky Mountain Classic. Legacy Sports Group is under contract from the WCTB to manage its interests in the event. One-hundred percent of all funds received by the WCTB from the Town of Vail for the event are remitted directly to Threshold Sports, Inc., owners of the PCT and are placed against the event budget. If you have additional questions about this relationship, please let me know. UPCOMING ITEMS Oct. 7 Work Session Agenda Executive Session, re: Children's Garden of Learning Lease Lionshead Submittal Review Discussion of Donovan Park Use Facilities Apollo Park DRB Call-up Site Visit Site Visit and Discussion re: Design Review Board Decision at Vail Village Inn Black Gore Creek Update DRB/PEC Update Oct. 7 Evenins~ Session As~enda Urban Renewal Authority Public Hearing Children's Garden of Learning Lease Discussion of Ford Park User Fee Apollo Park DRB Call-up DRB Appeal, re: Vail Village lnn Completion of Contribution Requests for 2004, re: Free Days at Donovan Pavilion First Reading, Parking Fine Ordinance First Reading, Sign Code Ordinance First Reading, Text Amendment to allow for Temporary Enclosures for Outdoor Dining Decks First Reading, GRFA Amendments Request to Improve Small Portion of Town-owned Land Second Reading, 2004 Budget Second Reading, 2004 Supplemental Appropriate Second Reading, Outdoor Display of Merchandise Second Reading, Type II Employee Housing Units Second Reading, Vail Memorial Park Department of Police ro~voFV~c Memorandum To: Town Council Pam Brandmeyer, Interim Town Manager From: ~~~ Dwight Henninger, Chief of Police Date: September 11, 2003 Subject: Saab Replacement Vehicles Subsidized lease agreements between the Town of Vail and Saab since the early '70s has been an excellent cost saver for the Town of Vail and an effective promotional tool for Saab. However, earlier in the summer Saab indicated they were no longer interested in continuing to provide seven police patrol cars and six administrative cars to the Town of Vail. Subsequently, the Police Department began contacting other vehicle manufactures in an effort to develop a new partnership and lease patrol cars at an attractive, lower-than-fair market cost. Efforts were made with VW, BMW and Land Rover. Unfortunately, the vehicles available either did not meet patrol officer requirements or were too costly. During this process Saab, at the urging of Mike Shaw in Denver, made a new proposal to provide Saab patrol cars at a lease cost of $350 per month, up from our current lease payment of $319 per month. Mike Shaw then offered to provide six administrative cars for a higher monthly cost than the current price with an additional payment stipulation for per vehicle mileage usage. The current Saab lease agreement expires January 31, 2004. Extensive testing of a wide range of viable patrol vehicles was conducted. Other police agencies were surveyed to ascertain their experiences using the vehicles under consideration. Based on all of the selection criteria and with significant input from the Vail Police Officers, the two most highly rated vehicles were the Ford Explorer and the Saab 9.5. In side-by-side cost analyses done by Vail Fleet Manager Todd Scholl, the total annualized cost for seven vehicles per year using two-year lease agreement terms with Saab and the purchase of Ford Explorers with an expected five-year replacement cycle are as follows: Saab 9.5 $36,156 Ford Explorer $30,650 Based on these analyses, staff is recommending the purchase of seven 2004 Ford Explorers at a cost of $23,800 plus $2,300 of equipment each, for a total of $183,400. To replace the six leased Saabs for Administrative use, staff is recommending that $132,000 be allocated to the purchase the most economical vehicles for our uses that are on the State of Colorado bid list, or the General Services Administration (GSA) AutoChoice program. Both of these programs bid prices come out October 1. The monies to fund these purchase will come from the Heavy Equipment Replacement Fund. The sixth Saab is being replaced with an automobile allowance for the new Town Manager. ~nw~o~vnai7 September 10 20U3 JULY 2003 VAIL BUSINESS REVIEW Overall July sales tax increased .9% with Retail increasing 2.0%, Lodging increased 2.7%, Food and Beverage increased .4% and Utilities/Other (which is mainly utilities but also includes taxable services and rentals) decreased 5.6%. Town of Vail sales tax forms and the Vail Business Review are available on the Internet at www.vailgov.com. Please remember when reading the Vail Business Review that it is produced from sales tax collections, as opposed to actual gross sales. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to call me at (970) 479-2125. Sincerely, Sally Lorton Sales Tax Administrator July 2003 SALES TAX VAlL VILLAGE July July July 2002 2003 Collections Collections Chan e ~ Retail _ ~ ~" ~ s .~ ~. ry, . m . , p a Lod in 9 9 ~ ~ Y , ~XYy ~ j.. y i ~ ;y , y~ ~` ~ ~ ~ _ ~, ~ , Food S Beverage ~`~ ~ b n 3 iC'}" ~"i3q 3t ~ , ~ ~ 4 '~"~i ~~ ~ £ ~ Other ~~ , ~,~ s,~ : t . ~ ~- = ~:~ fry . . ~ ~. ~ .~ Total ~ x ~ ~ ~~`~ J ~ LIONSHEAD Duly Zoo3 sa~ES r,4x CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST VAIUSANDSTONE/WEST VAIL July July July 2002 2003 °lo Collections Collections Chan e ~.: Retail fE. ~ ~- , R t Lodging ~ 4 '.: _ sY a x ~~ az Y ' ~Ss Food & Beverage :r+4 ~ u ~ ' ~~ ~r w ,~~ , " x Other s .= ~, ti s2' i v y~.a i ;{ . , i ~ ° ~ E a 3 Total v4 S a, ~~ i{ i i •, 4 ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ' ~ ~ w b ' * x= . '"~ t { °^r fi - - 1 ~ OUT OF TOWN July July July 2002 2003 °/@ Collections Collections Chan e kY , ~ XC Retail ~ ~, x ~~ ~ -~~ ~ '~ ~ Y f 'w s • .~.. ~~ r Lodging ~`; '~ ~~ ~'' ~' pp a~ `s * w= yak ~.3,». ,, ,~ ~~~..~`r Food Ol ~ `4-:u ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~. 'k^ ~~.. e` a~~~ #r Beverage ~~~ ~~ ~> ~~ ~ 'Q~`~ ~~ s 3 sp. &~ z a ~' xzs.~- ~{~i~' ~ t ~ s >s t-,-y ~,~ bA ~`}a*'4 S w 6B` Y~ r ,S~° qr ,+ ~ 4'r '°,,z"i . m 3 0v q .,zY --~'` ` ~: % m ~ ~-d ( i*~z `8 z ~ zy y5 ~ttl@f b1~~~x~, ~Mz~x`~t~" *^,?'L w~'iri s~~iz-~~~~g~.i..~. v ~ Total ~~ ~ ~~~, ~~'~:~""~ "~ ~~- x'~ >~, . ~~ '~~~ July 2003 SALES TAX TOTAL July July July 2002 2003 Collections Collectio ns Chan e _~ Retail ~~ <~, Lodging ~ ~ Y "'~,`p~' S F Y X 'Ha! ~` 'S ~` ~~Y, d 8 F k~~ oo ~ ~ ~ ' Beverage ,; ~~ ~ F ,~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~ q~~4~~,~ 1 T. ~+ ~ ~ ~ :. ." T~ ~~ ; y ~ ,~y~ f~=~: N X+~Y Y\+^~~.g }~ ~. ~ ~ y. y ~v t dL Up y .1 3 Utilities 8~ '~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Oth ~ ~ ~ x~ " # ~~ , ~. ~U x~s~' ~ ~ '' er ~• r __*~ ~.. - ,._ ~ ~ :. ~F'~. ~~t; r f _ ~ ~~ ~_ Total ~ , ~ S~ J ~ 1 RETAIL SUMMARY July 2002 Collections July 2003 Collections July Chan e FOOD 135,709 134,709 -.7% LIQUOR 22,528 22,706 .8% APPAREL 57,014 62,973 10.5% SPORT 88,864 86,466 -2.7% JEWELRY 30,901 28,422 -8.0% GIFT 17,898 14,173 -20.8% GALLERY 8,922 7,289 -18.3% OTHER 66,517 79,531 19.6% HOME 318 836 162.9% OCCUPATION TOTAL 428,671 437,105 2.0% ~n~: ~ Vail Chamber & Business Association Membership Benefits Level I and Level II Level IBenefits - 51 L~r I:IZ (Free): • Ability to network with other members • Free Internet listing • Free VCBA web page listing (www.vailchamber.org) • Lodges have a direct line thereby facilitating reservations • Free Vail Guide listing • Monthly meetings • Use of Community Bulletin Board • Workmen's' Compensation • Listing in Shopping and Dining Directory Level II Benefits - (Dues Paving): • All Level I benefits • Discounted ski pass • Voting rights • Health insurance We are requesting that Vail businesses make a contribution of $250.00 for the first location or business license, $100.00 for the second location or business license, and $50.00 for each additional location or business license. In addition, we are requesting that home businesses join our organization at $100.00 and Associate Members at $250.00. Associate Members do not have a Business License in the Town of Vail. They belong to the Vail Chamber & Business Association for a variety of reasons. Associate Members are welcome to attend Monthly Membership Meetings and Turn It Up! They receive a signature for a discounted ski pass but no other benefits. Membership dues can be paid by check or credit card. Thanks! Today's Date: 9/11/03 2003 Project Matrix A=The buck R= For moving C= Have info 1= Who else stops here forward responsible needs to people need know? to move forward No. of remaining VTC meeting days: 1st Reading for Ballot Question, 0; November Election, 3 PROJECT! TARGETED CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTED INFORME COMPLETION DATE REVIEW 2003 BALLOT Review of community survey findings Done Suzanne Suzanne Pam Community Review of 5-Year Capital Projects lists, Done VTC Greg, Judy Pam, dheads Community i.e election needs Election ballot go/no-go Review of 2 ballot options (mill levy Done; No-Go VTC Pam, Greg, Judy, Matt Community decision by 6/1 /03 transfer & GO bond) decided Suzanne, Matt Fire Service Consolidation Negotiate service contract with Eagle Sept. 8~ Oct. TC Matt, Pam, Judy JP, John Community River Fire effective 1/1/04; plan for meetings consolidation election in 5/04 004 BUDGET Council direction needed on Done VTC Pam Judy Community CBANVCTB future funding Preparation of budget timetable Done Judy Judy Pam dheads BUSINESS Executive session discussion with town Done Matt Matt Pam, Judy VCBA IMPROVEMENT attorney DISTRICT Council direction on $15,000 funding Done C Matt Business business request community community Council direction on business license. fee Done VTC Pam, Judy business community Council direction on Commission on Done C Pam, Judy, CSE Community Special Events PROJECT/ TARGETED CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTE INFORME COMPLETION DATE REVIEW CONFERENCE CENTER Need Council site selection Done C Pam, Russ, Greg Judy, Matt Community decision/direction; report-out on parking charette ppointment of Oversight Committee Done VTC C Pam Community Need Council decision/direction on Recommend a VTC Oversight Russ, Greg, Community project manager the end of Committee, Pam Matt, Judy phase 1 Review RFP for business plan and Done C Russ Forrest Oversight update of market analysis (program Committee erification) Council review of recommended Done VTC Russ Forrest Oversight candidate to award a contract to for the Committee business plan Design-build RFP November, C Oversight Judy, Matt Community 2003 Committee, Pam, Russ, Greg DONOVAN PARK pprove contract for pavilion operation; Done VTC Greg Pam, Matt Community set rates Discussion of soccer field C-VRD scheduling/lawn care/ irrigation subcommittee TBD 9/1/03 Complete construction Dedication, Greg Greg VTC Community 8/30 EAGLE COUNTY Facilitate independent audit of county VTC Ludwig, Pam partner community CONSOLIDATION 8 and towns to identify areas of duplication agencies COST-SHARE and revenue sharing FIRE SERVICES Independent analysis of existing studies Done Pam Pam C Community 6/3/03 6/2/03 RFQ for architectural services Done Pam Pam John, Greg, Russ, Matt Council decision on fire service levels Done VTC Pam ohn, Greg Community and related facilities PROJECT/ TARGETED CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTE INFORME COMPLETION DATE REVIEW 6/17/03 RFP for architectural services C Staff John, Greg Community FIREWISE CODE Determine how to integrate Firewise October, 2003 C Russ Bill Carlson CHANGES principles into DRB regulations GRFA Proposal on reforms to GRFA September, C Russ, PEC Bilt Gibson Community regulations 2003 -70 NOISE MITIGATION Completion of East Vail berms, 5-year Greg Greg CDOT Community project Jersey barriers Greg Greg CDOT Community Noise wall demonstration Greg Greg CDOT Community Speed/ noise enforcement State Patrol C Dwight Greg, CDOT Community truck inspections, August 4/5- Done New Signs on -~ -70-Done LIONSHEAD Community parking agreements To be VTC Pam, Greg, Russ Dwight Community REDEVELOPMENT negotiated Final recommendation from Task Force October, 2003 C Pam, Russ Judy, Greg, Community on a petition and creation of the Matt uthority Review of public projects to include Done C Greg, Russ Judy, Pam Community transit center Formation of URA/Implementation of TIF October, 2003 C Russ Pam, Matt, Community Greg, Judy CDOT cost-share agreement Greg Greg Pam, Russ, C Judy VRI/Com Dev Staffing agreements Prior to 1st Russ Russ, Greg, John Pam, Matt, C meeting with Judy, JP PEC PROJECT/ TARGETED CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTED INFORME COMPLETION DATE REVIEW MIDDLE CREEK Construction anticipated to begin 7/01/0 Construction Russ Nina C, DEVELOPMENT undervvay Community PROJECT PARKING Review of 02-03 season; mod cations 8/27/03 C Greg, Parking Community Community or 03-04 Parking Task Task Force Force MTG 9/2/03 Evening Explore seasonal parking on Ford Park PEC Hearing C Greg, Parking Community Community ball fields 9/8 Task Force, Vail Resorts Expansion of community parking Done C Greg, Russ, Community Community capacity; parking charette report-out Parking Task Force RED SANDSTONE Cost-share request to Eagle County VTC Pam VRD Community INDOOR MULTI- School District to augment $150K + in- PURPOSE REC FACILITY kind from TOV, $400K from Water District, $250K from Vail Resorts, $600K om RE50J Identify interim location options for C Pam, Greg, Russ VRD Community gymnastics post 8-04 lease Determine if parking improvements at Greg Greg, Russ, Pam C, RES, Community Red Sandstone School are needed VRD ROLE OF TOWN Recreation philosophy discussion, re: TOV-VRD VTC Pam dheads, VRD Community GOVERNMENT Ice Dome, Skate Park, Indoor subcommittee Recreation ork (Recreation, Culture, What businesses are we in? VTC Pam dheads Community Education, Economic Development - as part of overall roles discussion for RD) PROJECT/ TARGETED CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTED INFORME COMPLETION DATE REVIEW STEPHENS PARK PILOT Schedule review of pilot program and VTC, 2/17/04 PROGRAM (Dog Park) determine if off leash policy is to be News release 2/18/04 allowed permanently 5/12/03 SIGN CODE REVISION Develop a revised sign code that is September, C Russ DRB, Business easier to understand and enforce 2003 Business community Community IMBER RIDGE Friendly condemnation action in District Done Pam, Russ Nina, Judy, Matt Steve Jeffers C, Court for acquisition Community TOWN MANAGER pplications due May 23 Done; 164 VTC Search firm JP Community SEARCH applicants Fall 2003 Candidate screening June 17 Done; 5 VTC Search firm JP Community finalists Interviews July 10-11 Done C C JP Community VAIL ICE DOME Cost-share request to Eagle County Letter sent C Pam Vail Jr. user groups Commissioners for set-up/tear-down 5/9/03 Hockey, VRD Vail Jr. Hockey fund-raising campaign C, 9/16/03 Vail Jr. Hockey ail Jr. Hockey VTC, VRD user groups Recreation philosophy discussion Done C Pam RD Community VAIL MEMORIAL PARK DRB Application 8/28/03 PEC 2004 Opening Mtg Development review process, DRB Task Force Russ dheads Community Creation of 501 c-3 8/28/03 C Task Force Matt Community Rezoning C, Task Force Russ Community 9/16/2003 AIL VILLAGE Need Council direction on snowmelt Done C Greg Pam Community STREETSCAPE PEC review of Master Plan 918/03PEC PROJECT/ TARGETED COMPLETION DATE CURRENT STATUS/ DIRECTION NEXT REVIEW ACCOUNTABL RESPONSIBLE CONSULTE INFORME Preparation of phased construction schedule with input from Water District, adjacent property owners, business community First meeting 9/10/03 Greg Greg adjacent property owners, ater District, CBA Community Exploration of Downtown Development uthority/TIF No followup scheduled C Russ Pam, Russ, Matt, Judy Community VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Loading and delivery Greg Greg Pam, Russ, Dwight, Matt. affected properties, Community R integrating off-site streetscape into their plans Greg and George Greg and George Pam, Russ, Judy, Matt VAIL POLICE DEPARTMENT AL REPORT 2002 Police Activities and Crime Statistics ~. ~: .~.~~ ~_ ~, ~~.~ -~~ ~ ~+? ~ ~-~ Wit` f.~h~w~ r` -`t-r~ _..~ ~ '3R ~4 -yr r. ~'~ s+'±,, L ~ 3 k ,'fir ~ ~ i ~ ,' ~'c; DWIGHT HENNINGER CHIEF OF POLICE INDEX Message from Chief Dwight Henninger ......................................................................................3 Organization Chart and Goals.......... ...........................................................................4 . g ............. ........ raimn ......................................................... .............................................5 Vision, Mission, Values ........................................................................................................6 Community Policing ................ ............................................................6-8 .............................. Accomplishments in 2002 ......................................................................................................9 Administrative Services Summary ...........................................................................................10 Records Services Summary ....................................................................................................11 Patrol Services Summary... ..................................................................11 ................................ Investigative Services Summary .............................................................................................11 Code Enforcement Services ..................................................................................................1 l Communications Center Services ...........................................................................................12 Characteristics of Vail and Eagle County Communities ................................................................13 Law Enforcement Actions & Crime Statistics ......... .......14-18 ........................................................ 2002 Professional Standards Review............ ......................................................................19 Current Technology Environment ..........................................................................................20 The Future .....................................................................................................................20 2 n~essac~e f rows Cl~~e f H-ewwi,w~e~ On behalf of the members of the Vail Police Department, I am proud to present the Vail Police Deparmtent 2002 Annual Report. This report provides a summary of our services, initiatives, actions, professional development and a look at our future goals. As Chief of the Town of Vail Police Department, I find it an honor to lead a law enforcement agency composed of 61 highly trained and dedicated men and women. The mission of the Vail Police Department is to provide a sense of safety and security through high quality police service. It is the foundation of who we are and what we do. We make it a practice to evaluate our day-to-day operations and our mission objectives based on our values of Integrity, Teamwork, Ownership and Excellence. ~ ~ ~-' ~ As expressed in our Vision, Mission and Values, we work hard to promote a unified ~~F ~E t~ _-; partnership with the community and with our neighboring agencies. Working as a unified team, we pledge to deliver a safe and secure community. We believe that if the Vail Police Department can achieve its goals and successfully address formidable challenges to law enforcement in the current climate of defense of the homeland and heightened local risks, it can lead and serve by example. The Vail Police Department has played a dominant role in supporting Vail community interests by initiating and implementing both time-honored and visionary safety measures. While this strategy is proceeding fundamentally on track, it is important to continue our focus on solidarity - an integral part of the citizen-police partnership. Solidarity encompasses the best practices of communication, teamwork, support and change; all of which are essential to fighting crime and public disorder, breaking cycles of victimization and boosting community confidence. In support of our community policing principles, we are committed to the following goals for 2003: • seeking ideas, comments and concerns from citizens and guests • identifying the procurement and implementation pathway for a multijurisidictional regional data sharing solution • implementing the technology plan to allow wireless data transfer between the station and field patrol cars • upgrading our 911 phone equipment and installing a new radio repeater site • sharing resources with other agencies to achieve greater efficiencies • developing leaders within the organization to better serve the community and the department. In keeping with our tradition of duty and responsibility, the Vail Police Department remains dedicated to providing you with the highest attainable level of professional police service within our budgetary limitations. We are grateful for the support and trust we receive from the community and our town officials. s s . Dwight E. Henninger Chief of Police Chief Henninger, Detective Bettis, Sgt. Allen at the National Memorial Service, Washington, D.C. 3 ~~Q~ ta~,G,li`IZAT~~~ :~~ State Funded Chief of Police Police Corps Dwight Henninger Training Supervisor Special Events Operations Administrative Systems Communications Planning Commander Commander Engineer Center Manager Sergeant Sergeant Sergeant Sergeant Detective Administrative Records Manager Day Shift Team Night Shift Team Day Shift Team Night Shift Team Sergeant Citizens Academy 3 Dis patch (Sun, Mon, Tues) (Sun, Mon, Tues) (Thurs, Fri, Sat) (Thurs, Fri, Sat) Volunteer Program Supervisors Professional Standards Hidng/Training Grants Planning & Research Officers/CEOs Officers OficerslCEOs Officers Detectives Auditing 1 Executive Assistant 1 Officer 1 Oficer 10fficer 1 Officer 1 Detective Animal Control 2 Officer 2 Officer 2 Officer 2 Officer 2 Detective Court Liaison 4 Records Techs 3 Officer 3 Officer 3 Officer 3 Officer 3 Detective Administrative Duties 17 Dispatchers 1 CEO 4 Officer 4 Officer 4 Officer Accreditation 2 CEO 1 CEO 5 Officer Demand Reduction 2 CEO Reserve Program 3 CEO Recruiting Building Maintenance Vehicle Maintenance Budget Grant Funded Drug Task Force Member GOALS 2002 & Beyond Become the best resort police department in the country. Use our relationship with the community to reduce the fear of crime. Enhance partnerships with both internal and external customers, and identify future partnerships. Our proactive policing methods are reliant upon the department's commitment to partner with citizens in the resolution of quality of life issues, including the reduction of crime and disorder. Continue ongoing education and training of the community and the department to promote community oriented policing and problem solving. The department must continually offer information and training to citizens and agency personnel in community oriented policing, problem solving strategies and crime prevention. Further facilitate and improve the way police services are delivered and increase the amount of time supervisors spend with their employees. Improve communication within the department. 4 Analyze organizational effectiveness to determine whether resources are being used effectively and in what manner the department can improve. The department looks for nontraditional means of identifying, gathering and analyzing the effectiveness of its efforts. Focus on the recruitment and retention of police personnel. Recruiting quality personnel and retaining veteran officers is vital to the success of the department. Ensure that strategies, systems and technologies are in place to accommodate any and all changes. Revisit the mission, vision and values of the department. TRAINING The Vail Police Department has a reputation in the public safety industry for the excellence of training we provide to our employees, which in turn creates a higher level of service to the community and helps reduce employee turnover. To support the professional growth of all police department employees, extra projects and ancillary assignments are highly encouraged. DIVISION HOURS OF TRAINING Administration 533.70 Investi ations 905.25 Patrol 1,842.74 Code Enforcement 233.50 Records 188.00 Communications Center 415.00 TOTAL 4,118.20 Training for sworn personnel includes community policing, leadership, organizational effectiveness, range training, Pressure Point Control Techniques, CPR, accident response, traffic stops, winter driving, interview techniques, risk and liability, drugs, terrorism and technology. Training for code enforcement officers includes community policing, leadership, radar, accident response, winter driving, CPR, technology and more. Training for records technicians includes community policing, leadership, uniform crime reporting, Colorado Open Records Law, property and evidence, statistical reporting and technology. Training for communication officers includes community policing, leadership, law enforcement dispatching, emergency medical dispatching, 911, conflict management, power phones and suicide intervention. 4~-- `~rF~-- ~' ~~ ~°~ ;1-~;~~ _ _~ -- VAIL POLICE DEPARTMENT VISION To be the best resort police department in the country. MISSION The mission of the Vail Police Department is to provide a sense of safety and security through high quality police service. VALUES Integrity I will never betray my office, character or the public trust. Teamwork I will actively collaborate with others to accomplish the task. Ownership I will take responsibility for what needs to be done and hold myself and others accountable. Excellence I will strive to do the best job possible. COMMUNITY POLICING Community policing is a cornerstone of the Vail Police Department's organizational philosophy. It is a fundamental principle that promotes community, government and police partnerships, proactive problem solving and community engagement to address the causes of crime, fear of crime and other quality of life community issues. Community Policing is a process wherein the police and the community work together to identify the function and purpose for sharing responsibility in fighting crime, disorder and solving problems of concern to the community. Our team structure, patrol schedule, in-service training and evaluation process keep all employees up to speed on how to make effective and timely operational decisions. The seven Vail PD work teams are empowered to make these decisions enabling everyone to accomplish a shared community vision and purpose. SOME OF OUR BEST COMMUNITY POLICING PROGRAMS • COPS FOR KIDS -Promotes interactions between officers and youth in recreational and educational settings. • ADOPT-A-HOMEROOM -Officers visit school classes to talk about public safety. • DECISION MAKING GUIDE -Assists employees in deciding the best course of action • SKUSNOWBOARD/BIKE REGISTRATIONS - Over 200 skis and snowboards were entered into a local database and into CCIC in 2002. • WEBSITE - A critical source of information between the department and community (vailgov.com). • BIKE PATROL -Increases visibility of patrol and code enforcement. • SHOP WITH ACOP -Toys and clothes are purchased for families in need. • LIDS FOR KIDS -Bicycle and skateboard helmets are donated to ensure youth safety. • CEILING ART PROJECT -Elementary students paint acoustic ceiling tiles for display in our main lobby. Their diverse themes about police officers and police work are revealing. • SKATEBOARD PARK -Every summer the top level of our parking structure is converted into a skateboard park as an outlet for a safe alternative. 6 • STAY OUT OF JAIL CARDS- The department encourages personal responsibility and making more informed decisions after drinking alcohol. Test strips measure BACs. • S.O.S. -The Snowboard Outreach Society works closely with the department to register recreational property and educate residents and visitors on crime prevention tips. • BOOTH-IN-A-BOX -Mobile platforms used as recreational property registration booths, deter many opportunistic crimes and educate the public about theft prevention. • TIP ACOP -Uniformed personnel serve as waiters and waitresses at local restaurants to generate over $1,000 for the Colorado Special Olympics. VAIL POLICE DEPARTMENT AND COMMUNITY PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES & PROGRAMS • CITIZENS ACADEMY - In 2002, 35 members of the community graduated from the Vail Citizens Academy. Graduates of this program routinely communicate valuable information to patrol officers and the command staff about potential hot spots of activity. They also act as a public relations arm of the department. • VOLUNTEERS PROGRAM - In 2002, 35 volunteers performed ~+C~`~"' '*t ~ ~" - 2,340 hours of non-enforcement functions, thus freeing up - ~ _ jt f_' department staff to engage in critical problem solving and } ,~~L:~ s ~ ~ _ community policing activities. Volunteer hours worked in 2002 ,-,~„~,r:Q~x "' "- add up to $37,440 in savings to the Town of Vail. Projects ~ ~~~~`~~ ~" b~ ~ - __,~„ •, accomplished and tasks performed include translation services, ~ ---~ - administrative support, special events assignments, development of ~ `t' ~ , a volunteer youth program and a volunteer emergency response ;~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~' team, ski/board/bike registrations, police auction support and ~ ~~° 3 development of a volunteer recruitment brochure. • CRIME PREVENTION WORKSHOPS -Community members learn valuable business and residential crime prevention topics. _ _ =--~ • RIDE ALONGS -Contact between officers and community members increases intimate knowledge of the community and of the role of the police in crime prevention and intervention. • TIPS - 83 liquor license establishments, trained on responsible liquor service, proactively address issues related to over service. • COMMUNITY SURVEYS -Results are used to determine the level of understanding of crime prevention and the level of fear in the community towards crime and social disorder. This information helps the department identify and prioritize crime problems and develop solutions. • SCHOOL MEETINGS -Seminars are conducted on topics such as school bullying and crisis management planning. 7 • AT&T LANGUAGE LINE -Staff from AT&T offer immediate land-line translation service between officers and the public 24 hrs a day, seven days a week. • VOLUNTEER INTERPRETER - A volunteer provides Spanish translation services at the front counter of the department five days a week. • SOCIAL NORMING CAMPAIGN -Newly launched, the department has partnered with the Eagle County Youth Coalition and local schools to educate the youth about the adverse effects of overdrinking. • NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS -Outreach efforts with tenant and property manager associations yield significant information for our problem solving strategies. • WOMEN' S RESOURCE CENTER -One of the department's code enforcement officers serves on the board of the center. Their service mutually benefits the department and the center. • INTRADO-911 PROGRAM -The primary purpose of the reverse 911 system is to simultaneously call up to 1,000 phone numbers per minute notifying them of an emergent message from the local authorities. This information could include evacuation information or public safety announcements. RECENT EXAMPLE OF PROBLEM SOLVING WITH THE COMMUNITY The theft of skis and snowboards during the winter season, and bike thefts, during the summer season has become a significant problem in the Town of Vail over the past five years. The vast majority of these thefts appear to be crimes of opportunity. During the ski season, there is a constant flow of pedestrian traffic through Vail Mountain's three base areas, all within the jurisdiction of the municipality. In the morning, legions of snow-riders flock to the lifts, along the way stopping to purchase lift tickets, sending their children off to ski school, and a multitude of other tasks in preparation for their day. Before, during and after the lifts close down and after the final run is made, they head for the bars, restaurants and retail stores for our internationally acclaimed apres-ski experience. Most, if not all of these stops, require people to leave their rental or personal equipment outside and attended. Unless the owner sees the thief taking their gear, the crime can be perpetrated in plain sight. No one else on the street has any idea who owns those skis, or that snowboard. A quick walk to the car or the bus, and the thief is gone. Complicating matters, most victims know nothing more than the basic information about their equipment. They rarely know serial numbers, model numbers or identifying characteristics. And each of these thefts can cost the victim literally thousands of dollars worth of winter apparatus. The Vail Police Department continues to work diligently towards decreasing the number of thefts every year. Officers conduct "set-ups", placing expensive equipment in plain sight and arresting anyone who walks off with the staged equipment, usually resulting in felony charges. The department also has made aggressive strides in conveying to the public the importance of registering skis, snowboards and bikes. We then enter serial numbers and other identifiers into a local database and place clearly visible decals on the gear to dissuade would-be thieves. This process can be labor intensive and difficult to schedule, based on the already heavy call load and responsibilities of our department's resources. These are deterrence actions at the core, but a determined thief will still find the product they are looking for. The amateur, opportunistic criminal will ideally be dissuaded by the thought of some high profile arrests from the set-up, or the knowledge that the equipment is traceable and registered to the police department. Success from the latter method is the easier to replicate, as it does not necessarily require law enforcement skills. The Vail Police Department has partnered with the local community to recruit volunteers to staff ski and bike registration booths. Volunteers work in conjunction with the police records personnel and compile data on ski, snowboard and bike thefts looking for trends and "hot spots". Registration efforts are concentrated in the areas identified as current trouble spots. The mere presence of the registration booths, displayed with police graphics, deter many of the opportunistic crimes that would have occurred in its absence. In addition, volunteers educate the public about ski, snowboard and bike thefts, decreasing the likelihood of future crimes. 8 ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN 2002 • Colorado Police Corps Vail Police Department has been a participant of the Colorado Police Corps since June 2001. We are therefore eligible to hire graduates of police corps academies. Three police corps graduates joined the department in 2002 and one veteran officer started cone-year instructor fellowship. • Policy and Procedures Manual The department completed several steps in its lengthy process towards accreditation with the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police. One of the steps was a department wide effort to draft a policy and procedures manual. A final version of the manual will be completed in the Fall 2003. • Special events success In June 2001, the Vail Police Department drafted and the Town Council passed two resolutions to reverse an alarming trend of criminal activity and threats to human life and property during peak holiday periods. One resolution was a juvenile curfew ordinance; the second was a special district ordinance. By 2002, the delivery of the message of zero tolerance was successful. Violent crimes and reports of personal injuries were greatly reduced, during the New Years Eve and 4th of July holidays. • Citizens Academy Several graduates from the two academies held in 2002 went on to become crime analysts and volunteer critical incident responders. • Social Norming Campaign The department, in a joint effort with the Eagle River Youth Coalition, was awarded a $36,000 grant from CDOT to conduct research to resolve underage substance abuse problems in Eagle County and to develop consistent countywide strategies. Social norming has been around on a national level for the past five years. We will be the first to deliver this program on a local IeveI. • Grant awards In addition to the grant from CDOT, described above, the department was awarded a 2002 COPS MORE grant that will fund the purchase of new mobile technology. • Reduction in crimes Significant reductions in incidents involving larceny, assault, disorderly conducts and DUI were accomplished through strong community policing, innovative safety measures and aggressive investigations. • Olympic Torch Run The Olympic Torch Run Committee rated the Olympic Torch Run through Vail in February 2002 as one of the two most successful in the country. • Conferences/Training hosted 250 Chiefs and Sheriffs attended the 2002 Law Enforcement Coordinating Committee Conference on Terrorism Prevention in Vail. • Implementation of Skilled Based Progression An evaluation structure is in place that rewards participation in collaborative problem-solving efforts and time spent on community policing activities, as well as the effort and initiative to learn new skills. 9 The Vail Police Department Team _ - _- ~~ - ~.._~„~ 4 3, ' '~ f ~ f'~;-. `~ ' .- --_-~ z :- ~. , E e~ f ~-- ~ - ~'r ~~ -. r ~ ~, s .~ 7 ~ t ~ M-: ~~- `. _ - i4 -yam ors ~- ~ ~ ` ,~ ` ~ „ r~ Fl ~ `~ ~, ~~ ~ ~' ~ . t~ _. - e-~, st, - Chief Dwight Henninger leads the Vail Police Department consisting of 61 members: the Chief, two Commanders, five Sergeants, three Detectives, one Administrative Officer, 17 Police Officers, five Code Enforcement Officers, one Records Manager, four Records Technicians, one Executive Assistant, one Communications Manager, three Communications Supervisors and 17 Dispatchers. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF As leader of the Vail Police Department, Chief Dwight Henninger has the ultimate authority and responsibility for the performance and direction of the department. He is responsible for creating the vision for the department, setting goals and objectives and to see they are accomplished. He also coordinates community relations, problem solving approaches, fiscal management, strategic planning, technological developments and organizational initiatives. ADMINISTRATIVES SERVICES DIVISION SUMMARY The Administrative Services Division of the Vail Police Department includes the Chief of Police, one Administrative Commander, one Administrative Officer and one Colorado Police Corps Training Supervisor. The Administrative Commander is responsible for Professional Standards, Planning & Research, Auditing, Training and Hiring, Records Unit, Animal Control, Court Liaison, Citizen's Academy, Volunteer Program and Administrative Duties. The Administrative 10 Officer position, frozen since fa112002 to reduce overall salary cost to TOV operating budget, assists the Chief and the Commanders with administrative functions and training. RECORDS SERVICES OPERATIONS DIVISION SUMMARY The Administrative Commander oversees the Records Division which is comprised of one Records Manager, one Executive Assistant and four Records Technicians. Three Technicians work 30 hours per week, while one works 40 hours per week. The Executive Assistant performs administrative, budgetary and secretarial functions to maintain the operations of the police department. Responsibilities include assisting in preparation of the department's annual operating budget, personnel functions, fiscal duties, and running project reports. She coordinates training registrations, orders uniforms and equipment for sworn and non-sworn personnel, and audits payroll sheets. The Records Technicians perform law enforcement records management functions which include classifying crime reports for NIBRS (National Incident-Based Reporting System) and coding and updating statistical information into Colorado Crime Information Center (CCIC). They prepare statistical reports for submission to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Bureau of Investigation under very strict federal and state crime reporting mandates. They research and retrieve information for individuals and criminal justice agencies while applying and administering specific statutory dissemination requirements. They receive citizen and guest complaints and make referrals to appropriate staff members. All Records Technicians must maintain NIBRS certification. PATROL SERVICES OPERATIONS DIVISION SUMMARY The Operations Commander is responsible for Patrol, Investigations, Code Enforcement and Special Events Planning. The Patrol Division consists of four patrol sergeants, 17 police officers (with one frozen position) and five code enforcement officers. The Patrol Teams are dedicated to providing the highest level of professional police service possible. Patrol officers and code enforcement officers perform a variety of duties including calls for service, routine reports, arrests, criminal investigations, traffic accidents, traffic enforcement, proactive and preventative patrol and general community activities. They get about the town in Saab patrol cars, on foot and on K2 mountain bikes. As with all other divisions in the department, they are trained and empowered to make decisions and participate in activities that support the principles of community policing. INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES OPERATIONS DIVISION SUMMARY The Investigations Division consists of one detective sergeant and four detectives. The detective sergeant and three detectives are responsible for in-depth investigations of crimes against persons and property. The fourth detective was assigned in July 2002, to the Eagle County Crimes Task Force, an organization responsible for multijurisdictional investigations throughout Eagle County. The task force is a joint effort with the Vail Police Department, the Avon Police Department and the Eagle County Sheriff's Office and is funded by a Byrne grant from the State of Colorado and the U.S. Department of Justice. Cases handled by detectives are typically the result of calls initially investigated by patrol officers. Depending upon the complexity or nature of the call, a detective may be called to a crime scene to assist patrol officers. In some instances, the detectives will work with the patrol officer rather than assume the case directly. The Investigations and Patrol Divisions work closely together, sharing information as it is learned and solving cases with great diligence. Detectives also serve as patrol officers when necessary for staffing needs. CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES OPERATIONS DIVISION SUMMARY The Operations Commander oversees five code enforcement officers who comprise this civilian branch of the Vail Police field personnel. All five serve on two day-shift teams and are supervised by a patrol sergeant. They are responsible for the education and enforcement ofnon-criminal municipal codes. They assist with Vail Pass closures in instances of 11 inclement weather or bad traffic accidents. They perform many services that can be accomplished by non-sworn personnel. They also participate and initiate a broad range of community relations programs and participate in special events. Code Enforcement Officers are specially trained and certified by the State of Colorado. One code enforcement position was cut during the 2003 budget process to reduce overall department operating costs. COMMUNICATIONS CENTER SERVICES SUMMARY The Town of Vail's commitment to public safety starts with its state-of--the-art consolidated 911 Center. The Vail Communications Center is located at the Vail Police Department and supports twenty-four hour a day operations for thirteen public safety agencies including: law enforcement, emergency medical services and fire departments across the county. Twenty full-time communications professionals staff the Vail Communications Center which handles on average 600 phone calls and dispatches over 400 responses a day. These professionals hold national and state certifications in Emergency Medical Dispatch and 9-1-1 call management. The Center is managed by a full time Communications Center Manager who maintains the vision and mission of the department and is responsible for identifying and meeting the needs of all the user agencies, and the performance of the Center. The Center is strengthened through astate-of--the-art computer aided dispatch system, and a county wide 800 megahertz radio system. Additionally, new 9-1-1 phone equipment, funded by the 911 Board, will be installed in the fall of 2003. This new technology will allow the Vail Communications Center to pinpoint the location of cellular callers on a computer based map. This enhancement will improve the response time to callers who are unaware of their physical location. Operational cost for the Center is distributed to all thirteen agencies with the Town of Vail's contribution equaling approximately forty percent of the operating budget. . ".~= ._.. f ~~, ;; =- -~ _- 12 CHARACTERISTICS OF VAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY COMMUNITIES • High profile events proliferate Vail's population throughout the year. These events include the World Alpine Championships, the American Ski Classic, Ride the Rockies, White River Rafting, the Olympic Torch Run, bicycle championships, as well as several holiday celebrations. ~~ : ~" ""'"~"1 ,.l ~. _: ~'~. ~~ __ ~= .~~'., t, ~. • Eagle County has an extensive Spanish- speaking community and European community which lead to diverse communication and cultural enrichment. • In 2002, U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis rated Eagle County as the sixth fastest growing in 13 Western states. Eagle County is also the fourth fastest growing county in Colorado and the tenth fastest in the United States since 1990. • Child and adult protective services are available at Eagle County Social Services on a 24 hour, 7 day a week basis. Vail Police Department plays a vital role in outreach, focusing on individuals, groups and neighborhoods, having numerous issues and concerns. Our aim is to persist in taking a coordinated and comprehensive approach to juvenile crime, domestic violence and public order crimes, by working with Eagle County Social Services, neighboring law enforcement agencies, local and front-range schools and other community oriented organizations. • Vail is host to a large transient population, arriving with each new season. Vail also accommodates the migration of individuals and groups who live outside of Vail. • There is a vast disparity of wealth in the community. A 1990 U.S. Census shows that 8% of Eagle County children live below the federal poverty level. Yet, Eagle County is also second home to numerous wealthy millionaires and billionaires. • The Colorado Department of Labor and Employment listed the Median Family Income for Eagle County at $41,183 for 1999, while a study conducted by Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute in 1999 found that the total annual expenses for a two parent family in Eagle County works is a whopping $46,984. The Eagle County Housing Division listed the average sales price for a single-family unit in 2002 as $711,521. 13 Calls for Service & Incident Numbers Assigned 1998 - 2002 Incident report numbers are assigned to calls for service when an officer generates paperwork, does follow- up investigation on a case or when certain types of calls require an incident report number by department policy. The Vail Police Department responded to 52,527 calls for service in 2002. 14 The Vail Police Department has seen a marginal reduction in calls for service and incident numbers due largely to a decrease in recreational visitors associated with the public's perception of travel risks after September 2001 and a drought in 2001 and 2002. Adult & Juvenile Arrests by Month Year 2002 120 104 100 96 - 91 85 79 80 71 67 67 60 55 Adult Arrest 49 Juvenile Arrest 44 40 -- ~3- 20 - 10 $ 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 1 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 15 LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS & ACTIVITIES (1998 - 2002) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total Arrests 929 942 1102 1078 877 Offenses Reported: Burglary 91 56 61 86 98 Larceny/Theft 737 722 669 775 648 Ski/Board Thefts + - 145 119 128 102 Motor Vehicle Theft 37 23 28 24 35 Assault 106 107 89 132 119 Fraud +++ 124 101 87 73 103 DUI 131 209 186 184 108 Drugs 119 90 159 122 120 Vandalism 263 252 265 252 269 Sexual Offenses 10 8 12 8 14 Trespassing 152 147 129 163 186 Trespassing (vehicular) ++ - - - 56 113 Disorderly Conduct 86 69 76 115 88 Obstructing/Resisting 32 32 36 43 32 Protective Custody 192 91 146 163 167 + Ski and board thefts are included in Larceny/Theft ++ Vehicular Trespassings are included in Trespassing +++ Prior to October 2002, Deceptive Use of Ski Facilities were classified as Larcerry/Theft; Deceptive Use of Ski Facilities are currently classi fied as Fraud. AGENCY COMPARISONS 2002 _ N ~~ AIL 1'I)~ - -= ASPEN PD j BRECK PD _~TG~~~1t3U~T - N1:~1~iNl()T)Fi LAIi>t:5 _ 11 # of Sworn 29 27 21 24 17 Total Arrests 877 428 231 682 387 Forcible Rae 3 unavailable 2 10 5 Robbery 1 unavailable 3 2 4 Burglary 98 57 55 58 109 Larceny/Theft 648 350 96 335 413 Vehicle Theft 35 unavailable 6 37 18 Assault 119 unavailable 61 95 135 Arson 4 unavailable 0 2 1 Fraud 103 unavailable 18 86 153 Vandalism 269 94 98 177 154 DUI 108 105 148 183 66 Accidents 638 552 324 645 140 Total Incidents ++ 3,586 1,833 1,588 2,541 1,906 Incident/Officer 124 68 76 106 112 Computer Aided Dispatch Calls 52,527 19,411 10,978 18,084 unavailable wore: vau rte reports lleceptroe Use of Ski Facilities as Larceny/Theft; Mammoth PD reports Deceptve Use oY Ski Facurties as FYauQ. (In 2002, Vail had 75 Deceptive Use of Ski Facilities; Mammoth had 141.) + + Total Incidents reflect all incidents which are assigned case numbers. Crimes shown on this comparison chart are a partial listing of Total Incidents. 16 VAIL POLICE CRIME STATISTICS RAPE: • One rape case was reported in 2001. Two rape cases were reported in 2002 and were determined to be unfounded. A third case, brought forth to our department by a probation officer, had actually originated and occurred in Avon. SEXUAL OFFENSES: In 2001, seven cases of sexual offenses other than rape were reported, three of these incidents were indecent exposure, three were unlawful sexual contacts and one involved an employer ordering an employee to unclothe herself. In 2002, 12 sexual offenses were reported in addition to the rape cases. Three of these cases involved peeping toms, one involved indecent exposure and eight involved unlawful sexual contact. Unlawful sexual contact is committed when a person knowingly subjects a victim to any sexual contact without consent, not including intrusion or penetration. ROBBERY: • Robberies decreased from three cases in 2001 to one case in 2002. The strong-arm robbery that occurred in 2002 involved three unknown, male suspects and one male victim who sustained minor injuries. ASSAULT: • Total assaults dropped from 132 cases reported in 2001 to 119 cases reported in 2002, which is a 9.8% decrease. • Total number of assaults includes both aggravated and simple assaults. In 2002, there were 19 aggravated assaults and 100 simple assaults. Aggravated assaults are those involving a weapon or inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. • In 2002, there were 24 cases of domestic battery resulting in 27 arrests. • In 1999, there were 29 cases of domestic battery resulting in 35 arrests; in 2000, there were 28 cases of domestic battery resulting in 31 arrests. In 2001, there were 24 cases of domestic battery resulting in 26 arrests. • According to victim advocates, only a small percentage of domestic violence is reported. Victims often endure multiple events of battery before making the first call to law enforcement. BURGLARY: In 2002, 98 residential and commercial burglaries were reported. Incidents of burglary have steadily increased over the past four years to 19981evels. There were 56 burglary cases reported in 1999; 61 in 2000; and, 86 in 2001. 17 The department offers vacation security checks, where a patrol officer will check residential properties in an owner's absence. It is just one measure used by our patrol to combat the increase in burglaries. THEFT/LARCENY: Larcenies have decreased steadily over the past five years. There were 648 cases of larceny reported in 2002. That figure represents 15 % of the department's tota12002 case reports. Of the 6481arcenies reported, 102 involved theft of skis or snowboards. • The most commonly stolen skis by make are Salomon, Rossignol and K2. The most commonly stolen snowboards by make are Burton, Salomon and Rossignol. MOTOR VEHICLE THEFTS: 35 motor vehicle thefts were reported to the Vail Police Department in 2002, which represents a 25.7% increase from 2001, when 24 motor vehicles thefts were reported. The most commonly stolen vehicle in Vail by make was Toyota. • According to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, the most commonly stolen vehicle in 2000 was the Toyota Camry, followed by the Honda Accord, Oldsmobile Cutlass, and the Honda Civic. ARSON: • Four arsons were reported in 2002, compared to one arson in 2001. Three out of four cases reported in 2002 led to arrests. The fourth case remains under investigation. VAIL POLICE TRAFFIC, PARKING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT Year # of Warnings Jssucd # of Citations ~ Issued Total # of ~' tiYarnin«s & Citations 1998 2011 983 2994 1999 3044 1601 4645 2000 2287 1106 3393 2001 1065 941 2106 2002 958 793 1751 In 2002, warnings and citations were issued for Rl3 tra ffic violations. 619 narking violati ons. 80 motor vehicle accident violations, 35 noise violations and 204 other code violations. ACCIDENTS REPORTED 1998 - 2002 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total Accidents 702 631 658 650 638 Accidents involving alcohol and/or drugs 10 34 22 15 22 of Total Accidents 1.4 5.4 3.4 2.3 3.5 Three top causes of accidents in 2002 were careless driving, special hazards conditions and improper backing. 18 2002 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS REVIEW There were 26 professional standard cases assigned in 2002, more commonly known as Internal Affairs or IA Investigations, regarding Vail PD personnel. The following topics were investigated or reviewed. ~rofe~sresna~ ~ ~. 'l~'_ 4 ~~tto nq, _ .t$pvst _ _~ Standards I = Gene : G~nerat~d ~- 'Category - _ Policy 3 2 _ _ 1 - - 1 Unfounded Violation 1 Exonerated 1 Written Reprimand Use of Force 8 7 1 8 Exonerated * 4 were from wildlife calls when an animal had to be ut down Traffic Complaint 1 1 1 Unfounded Lost Property 1 1 1 Unfounded Missing Evidence 1 1 1 Organizational training issue Slow Investigation 1 1 1 Unfounded Sexually 1 1 1 Verbal Counseling Harassing Comments Sub Total: 16 11 5 4 Unfounded 9 Exonerated 1 Verbal Counseling 1 Written Reprimand 1 Or anizational Trainin Issue Damaged 1 1 1 Verbal Reprimand Equipment Inquiry 1 1 1 No Policy Violation Motor Vehicle 8 8 1 Not preventable Accident 5 Verbal counseling 1 Verbal reprimand 1 Written reprimand Sub Total: 10 10 1 No Policy Violation 1 Not Preventable 5 Verbal Counseling 2 Verbal Reprimand 1 Written Re rimand Grand Total: 26 21 5 9 Exonerated 4 Unfounded 6 Verbal Counseling 2 Verbal Reprimand 2 Written Reprimand 1 No Policy Violation 1 Organizational Training Issue 1 Not Preventable 19 CURRENT TECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENT The Vail Police Department embraces technology and utilizes computer systems to aid in public safety and the safety/efficiency of the staff. The department has 28 networked PCs with multiple servers running on Windows 98 Second Edition and Novell Netware 6 respectively. Microsoft Office XP is the primary desktop application. Our computer aided dispatch software and our records management software is Harwood Technical Enterprises (H.T.E.), a specialized law enforcement system, based in Orlando, Florida. THE FUTURE The Vail Police Department and neighboring law enforcement agencies are ready to launch a visionary endeavor. We have developed a successful process and framework to marshal and share resources in order to implement an integrated technical solution that will allow information to be shared by multiple jurisdictions in Eagle County. The impact of this new technology is the ability to make good decisions quickly, keep the public and law enforcement informed in a timely manner and solve cases more easily. It is just one of many public safety measures we are pursuing in order to keep our towns safe. Our agency seeks to improve police response to victims. Our success will be measured by levels of victim satisfaction and outcomes from aggressive investigations. We will also tackle youth offenses by diverting youth away from crime using multi-agency initiatives. Tactics and strategies on how to stop rising crime, how to create better safety measures and how to use statistics to help monitor the successes of community policing initiatives will continue to be analyzed. The time and effort put forward to develop new initiatives are pivotal in helping us shape a more efficient way to build safer communities. Significant challenges lie ahead, but we are making excellent progress. We will continue to provide the highest standard of service the community deserves and will further enhance the reputation of the Vail Police Department. .................... _~.~ ~~,~,_ .. ~ .Y ~~ ---~ --_ s. ~ -=~ - ~ - ,~ "~" rY = - ~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ a _ _ - _ r ``~ . ~C~:~ i'- - - i _ _~_-__ ._. ~ ~ _= ys ib_ ~ ~ 8~7 - - _ ~ s ~~ ~ ~ ~ .._ . ;.~ _; Vail PD working with Vail Resorts to monitor speeding skiers and snowboarders. (Vail Radar Trailer on Vail Mountain Ski Slope) 20 G Ut Q 9~ d~ 6 3 ~+!~u~t.~ 3 ~-uen s ri W~~k~rt I C' ~.~ti ~~ J ~L 0 C~` ~~~,~ MOUNTAIN C~ C` sf PRO CYCLING TOUR VAIL COLORADO 2 0 0 4 ~t = c.r~-~-~ u~ , UGC; l~ ,. ~i ~v~~~rspurts~~si~essjo~r~~~~,~~~~ Street6smith's VCJLUME 6 • ISSUE 11 JOURNA lm Pro Cycling Tour will make a stop in Vail next season BY LANCipON BROCKINTpN STttfE WRBER Vail, Cola., becomes a new stop on the Pro Cycling Tour next year. The PCT, the professional bicycleroad- racing circuit that launched in 2000, is teaming with the Vail Valley Chamber & Tourism Bureau to create the annual PCT Rocky Mountain Classic at Vail. The inaugural event, expected to be an- nouncedtoday willtakeplaoeSept.3S, 20p~. Under terms of the partnership, Vail also will be the official resort of the 200 Pro Cycling Tour, said David Chauner, chief executive officer of Norristown, Pa.-based Threshold Sports, the sports marketing and eventmanagement com- pany that owns and operates the toux Hooking up with Vail is part of Threshold's continuing efforts to expand the Pro Cycling Tour, which is sanc• tinned by USA Cycling, the sport's gov- erning bady.This yeaxthe circuitfeatures seven races in three markets: Philadelphia, New York and San Francisco, Target markels include Chicago, Los Angeles and Boston, Chauner said. The 2003 Pro Cy- clingTour started last month and wraps up in September. Aspartof thePCT Vail deal, the iwopar- tiesagreed to team up to offer sponsor- shipsthat include markeiingtie-ins tothe Rocky Mountain Classic at Vail and to the tour's other events. . According to Chauner, the asking price for title sponsorship of the Vail event will be $l.5 million. Currently, two of the three stops on the Pro Cycling Tour have title sponsors. An addifiionalsix sponsorshippackages, each including an association with the Rocky Mountain Classic and the tour's other stops, will be priced at $500,000- $700,000 apiece. Among the elements of the sponsorship packages would be onsite signs, corporate hospitality and cornmereial time on tele• vision coverage of the events on local af- flliatesandthe Outdoor Life Network. Tying in with the Pro Cycling Tour enables Vail to gain additional exposure in key markets and "gives us a platform to reach our target demographic," said Rick Chastain, director of event mar- keting for the Vail Valley Chamber & Tourism Bureau. Bicycle road racing at- tracts an upscale audience, which the resort region covets. Fbr the inaugural event, Vait's goal is to attract 20,000 visitors to the resort area. JULY ?-13, 2003 • $5.95 ~_~ `D >~ .~ (b X J~ __ 3 (~ `"'C/ G The circuit Hdes In three cures this year. 1VI Vi VJ 11. VL 1'110 - [aa YLL +~-)vv.ai vvs ~~ uc~ 5 ~~ SGn~~,~ INTERNATIONAL CYCLING UNION I .-e ~~ Professional Gyding Count~i By mad and fax (+1)908-832.6$_39 Threshold Sports LLC Mrs Robin Morton Pinebrook Business Center 1 2650 Eisentwwer Av~rue PA 194031~rristawn USA Aigle, 16 July 2003 ref: Profe&sinnal ~n9 ppVMPfiS Vaff Circun Race 2QU4 Dear Mrs Marton, The inscr~tion of the new race "Vail Circui# Race" on the UCl 2004 Calendar was discussed by the working group ~ the Professional Cyclir~ Gounal "r:alendar and dassif~ication" on June 18~', 2003. The warkir~ group s delighted E' creation of this r~ew event and decided to recommend its Insc 4 UCl oa~r~ar in loss t.3 to the UC! Professions! Gyding Council under the fobwirrg condition -~ The calendar fee shall be paid before Wert 20 August (see attached irnoice}. Durktg the meeting, it was decided that this procedure shall tie applied to all new races on the 2004 calendar, to make sure organisers had the necessary financial resources to enter a race on tha UGI ca~ndar, Should you request further information, please kkrdlp contact your National Federation who is receiving a copy of this letter. 9est regards, ud P Assistant to the Professional Cycling Wager End.: invoice Cii 186b At~te / 3wittedand m+4t 24 468 58 1 1 feX i-41 24 468 58 t2 wvrrr.ua,t~1 IN CELEBRATION OF THI? 2OU3 SAN FRANCISCO l`-MOBILE. fNTFRNATIONAL, YOU ARE CORDIALLY INVITED TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN CLASSIC AT VAIL ANNOUNCEMENT AND WELCOME RECEPTION ~~~ ~OUN7Al~r ~. ~~r' PRO CYCLING TOUR VAfL C'.C)LORAI>O 2 0 U 4 tiYATT EMBARCADERO ATRIUM LOBBY SAN FRANCISCO, CA FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2003 5:30 - 6;30P.M. APPETIZERS ANb COCK"TAILS SERVED ~J ~., ~ G ~~ G ~~nc~+v~~~ 1~ ~~ wF° ~~_-~ Cal~cy~PSa~ The Vail Valley is proud to welcome the Pro Cycling Tour to the Colorado Rocky Mountains in 2004! Catch the mountain excitement as mens' and women's teams such as U. S. Postal Service, Saturn, Subaru, T-Mobile and more battle it out cresting some of America's highest peaks. Travel packages start at $599 per person, including 4 nights lodging, air fare, and 4-day mid-size car rental. Based on double occupanry Subject to availability Price will vary depending an departure nty. Rate was based aui of sties such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago ww. vailprocycling. com www.procyclingtour.com PCT RMC logo ~~% G ro ~ L L lr ~-~.- ~j ~. s ~ ~ P Af a.. F '•~ ~ ~ 4 I ~~ Y.~P u ,~ i ~ y~ ~ ~~. f~-a ~ s ~ ~.~ .::. :~ -~..--- r ~ ,~~-'~ ;~ .. ~, 7 ~ _~~. .G .: ~ ~~,~. .~{ 4.,~`, ~y, r,+ _i ~,,~ f. '~ '~ ,~~ ~ ~ ~ •r k~. ~ i 1i '1 1 ~t } i ~ i t •, ~,, ~, ,:~~~- ~: ~,- -,. ~' -~ /b~ t~1 , r ' V V ~ r V I C --~^Js J f __ + r~r ~~'" ~` 94 (( " K III ~ ~ a r-'~-- ~ ~. ~ ~;.,.~' .: