HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-01 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
6:00 P.M. TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2005
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
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 Input (10 min.)
2. ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda. Approval'of 02.01.05 and
02.15.05 Evening Session minutes. (5 min.)
3. Greg Hall ITEM/TOPIC: Award of Bus Bid. (Please see attachment) (5 min.}
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Town sent out nine RFP's
to bus manufacturers on November 30, 2004, and received only
one proposal on the due date of January 21, 2005, from Gillig
Corporation: The Gillig proposal is responsive to the bid
requirements. Staff negotiated with Gillig over their requests for
deviations from the technical specifications which has resulted in a
final price of $282,850.00 per bus.
4. Russ Forrest ITEM/TOPIC: Conference Center Update. (60 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The purpose of this update
is to:
• Review progress on the design of the Conference Center with
the Vail-Town Council. ----- -- - -- - - -- -- ~- - -
• Review the projected costs and budget for the construction of
the conference center.
Recommendation: On February 24~' at 2:00, the Vai{
Conference Advisory Committee met to review progress on the
conference center design. Any applicable recommendations from
the Committee will be forwarded to the Council on March 1, 2005.
5.Todd Oppenheimer ITEMROPIC: Vail Village Streetscape Phase 2 construction
contract. (15 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review request by staff to
negotiate the construction contract for the Phase 2, Vail Village
`ti.
Streetscape with B8~B Excavating as a change order to the current
Phase 1 construction contract.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: ThE: general contractor for Phase
1 of the Vail Village Streetscape Project, B&B Excavating, has
completed the first year of the two year construction contract.
Staff has been very pleased with the performance of B&B
Excavating and would like to accE;lerate a portion of the work
scheduled for 2006 into the 2005 construction seasons:
The Phase 2 improvements include ithe following areas:
• Children's Fountain.
• Gore Creek Drive, Children's Fountain to (but not
including) Checkpoint Charlie.
• Gore Creek Promenade.
Staff is requesting permission from the Council to forego
competitive bidding and to negotiates the construction price for the
Phase 2, Vail Village Streetscape improvements with B&B
Excavating and change order that work into the current Phase 1
construction contract.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the request to negotiate
the Phase 2, Vail Village Streetscape construction price with B&B
Excavation and direct staff to change order that work into the
current contract Phase 1 construction contract.
E•. Bill Carlson ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. #3, Series of
2005, an ordinance amending Sec'~tion 12-11-4, Material To Be
Submitted; Procedure, Vail Town Code, Chapter 14-2, Definitions,
Vail-Town Code, and Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town
Code, and setting for details in regard thereto. (5 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Table the second reading
of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005, too March 1, 2005.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Ori November 8, 2004, the
Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0 to forward a
recommendation of approval for the proposed text amendments.
On February 1, 2005, the Town Council approved the first reading
of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005, by a vote of 7-0.
7'. Bill Gibson ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. #6, Series of
2005, an ordinance adopting a revised approved development
plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn,
Phase I, to allow for modifications to Units 16, 17 AND 29, Vail
Village Plaza Condominiums, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10,
Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, located at 100 East
Meadow Drive (Vail Village Inn), Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail
Village 1St Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (15
min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with
modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, on first
reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On January 24, 2005, the
Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Town Council
for the proposed major amendment to Special Development
District No. 6, Vail Village Inn.
8. Russ Forrest ~ ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading, Ord. #7, Series of 2005. An
ordinance to designate 21 parcels of land (16 areas) in the town of
Vail as open space as per section 13.11 of the town of Vail
Charter. (5 min.)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Due to a publication error, staff
recommends Ord. #7, 2005 be tabled until 03.15.04.
9. Stan Zemler ITEMITOPIC: Town Manager's Report (10 min.)
10. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:10 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING ART TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BEGIN AT 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2005, IN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please
call 479-2106 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, February 1, 2005
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:05
P.M. by Mayor Rod Slifer.
Members present: Rod Slifer, Mayor
Dick Cleveland, Mayor Pro-Tem
Diana Donovan,
Farrow Hitt,
Kent Logan
Greg Moffet
Kim Ruotolo,
Staff Members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Input. Steve Lindstrom, member of the Vail
Local Housing Authority (VLHA), reported the Children's Garden of Learning, the early
childhood education center, had recently become operational in its new location with the
final construction costs hovering around $1.5 million. Lindstrom then thanked FirstBank,
Vail Resorts, Vail Valley Medical Center, the Dauphinais Family, Shaw Construction, the
VLHA and Slifer, Smith and Frampton for their support of the project. Lindstrom
continued Middle Creek was presently at 97 percent occupancy. Lindstrom then thanked
Housing Coordinator Nina Timm, Planner Matt Gennett, Fire Prevention Officer Mike
Vaughn and Fire Marshall Mike McGee for their immeasurable assistance in bringing the
project to fruition. Slifer then reported Council had made a site visit to the location and
thanked all involved for helping to create an invaluable community asset. Ruotolo
reiterated Lindstrom's comments.
The second item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda. Approval of Dec. 21, 2004,.
Jan. 4, 2005 and Jan. 18, 2005 Minutes. Council unanimously approved, 7-0, three sets
of minutes of record with minor amendments, later .provided by Donovan. Moffet moved
and Logan seconded the motion to approve.
The third item on the agenda was the Seibert Circle Modification Options. Council
voted 4-3 (Moffet, Ruotolo and Cleveland opposed) to continue with the Seibert Circle
redesign process. Slifer reported for the record there had been open house from 5:15 to
6:00 p.m. earlier in the evening for the public to view three possible options. Brent
Lloyd, representing Wenk Associates, lead streetscape designer, outlined three possible
strategies proposed for modifying Seibert Circle and provided estimated costs for each.
The first option (A) retained the existing Moroles sculptures and added minimal
landscaping with a small water feature. The second option (B) added cobble pavers to
the area, plus water and gas utilities for a fire pit. The third option (C) replaced and
relocated the existing sculptures to create a new design that would have visual appeal
throughout the year. Lloyd qualified, due to the unknowns of the actual feature,
estimates provided were educated guesses. Hall then po;>ed three questions to Council.
(1) Does the town move forward with Seibert Circle as a part of streetscape, and if so,
does the Council prefer Option A, B, or C?; (2) Does the Council desire an accelerated
or extended schedule?; or (3) No design, but establish a budget. During an opportunity
for citizen input, Pete Seibert Jr. stated he was happy to see the discussion regarding
the site named after his father was occurring and gave his support for alternative C.
Seibert also questioned why the relocation of the existing Moroles sculpture, if removed,
'was included in the refurbishment estimate. Seibert also mentioned the possibility of
:selling the Moroles pieces to help subsidize the cost of refurbishment. Nancy Rondeau
reported the current design of the circle is a disappointing expression of Vail. Ron Riley
:stated he beti~aved the Moroles sculpture was a lifeless piece of art, subsequently
supporting plan C. Sheika Gramshammer maintained the town should leave Seibert
Circle as a place to meet and greet. George Knox supported the replacement of
infrastructure in the circle. Barbara Deluca expressed the: Moroles sculpture needed to
be removed. F'aul Rondeau expressed concern that redevelopment estimates of the
circle were too expensive and Vail Resort's involvement in the project should be
questioned. Ri<;k Mueller stated the site needs to be redone. Dan Berry also expressed,
"something neE;ds to be done." Kay Cherry stated something more organic needed to
occur in the location. Jim Cotter questioned whether it would be legal for the town to
move a "site specific" art work. Kathy Langenwalter, a former chairperson of the AIPP
Board, said she; believed the project was too expensive to pursue, as the area had been
redeveloped only seven years ago and this action would be fiscally irresponsible. Logan
stated a decision made on a piece of art is not a mistake, as tastes and perceptions
continually change and evolve. Logan then expressed, "If we are going to spend a lot of
money on a project, this is the appropriate place to do i1.. The numbers are large, but
they are hardly precedent setting." Ruotolo questioned where the price of the art was
included in the budget. Moffet stated he would like the location to become known as a
destination. Moffet also asked for assistance from the private sector to refurbish the
area. Cleveland stated it is a misuse of government funds to rip out a feature only seven
years of age. Cleveland continued, "Why do you think this body will be any better than
the body who installed the circle in its current format?" Donovan reported her decision
vas not based on the art or the money, "It's about completing it (Village Streetscape)
and getting it done right. Has Seibert Circle art ever been used for a post card?" Stating
her involvement as Council representative to the AIPP Board, she also communicated
the AIPP board likes the- (Moroles) piece, although they believe it would be more
appropriate in <~ softer (more natural) setting. Slifer stated he believed prolonging the
Streetscape process was not helpful. Zemler concluded the discussion by_stating the
-- - -
projecf would continue as three simultaneous processes;: 1) some identification of a
design; 2) stree:tscape contractors would investigate costs; 3) public dialogue would be
continued. Zemler then reaffirmed Council was committinci to only the process, not the
actual feature. Logan moved and Donovan seconded the motion to endorse Option #C.
As part of the: motion, Council also stipulated planning for the refurbishment be
completed by April, 2005.
1"he fourth itern on the agenda was an informational presentation to the Vail Town
Council on the Proposed Lionshead Streetscape design. The purpose of the
presentation was to share the proposed design with Council and to gain information and
input from Council on the design as the applicant progresses forward with final design
development drawings for review and approval by the Design Review Board (DRB). On
September 27, 2004, the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission (PEC)
approved a major exterior alteration application allowing for the construction of the
2
Lionshead Core Site Hotel. In approving the, application, the Commission required the
applicant to construct certain off-site improvements. Included within the improvements is
the streetscape within the LionsHead Mall area. Chief Planner George Ruther reported
the ensuing streetscape design presentation clarified a possible formalized approved
design. Ruther also stated the design could be potentially approved by the DRB in mid-
February. Tom Braun and Jay Peterson then began a pictorial presentation of the
proposed Lionshead streetscape design. Peterson stated any reference to "Vail Square"
during the presentation, now known as LionsHead, was purely preliminary. Peterson
also stated the reference was only an attempt to tie Vail Village and Lionshead areas
together more. Continuing, he stated streetscape improvements to the area were a
separate project from the core site. Both Peterson and Braun communicated the
streetscape improvements intended not only to beautify, but to also make the area fun.
Braun discussed creating outdoor rooms and a sense of arrival with the use of pylons
and columns. Braun stated, "We are tying the new skier bridge together with
pylons/columns (approximately 36 ft. in height). The project is about discovery, not
dissimilar to those elements recently introduced in the Wall Street streetscape...The
entire area will be treated with pavers...And we have included the introduction of a news
stand." Peterson. also stated the whole of the project is American with Disabilities Act
(ADA) accessible. The applicant reported they had met on numerous occasions with
town staff, LionsHead merchants and property owners, neighbors, DRB and PEC. In
addition; the applicant held several open house meetings to hear concerns regarding the
streetscape plan and solicit input on the project. Ruotolo asked who would maintain any
streetscaping outside of the property boundaries. Peterson replied the town and
adjacent property owners would be expected to be responsible. Cleveland asked if the
town might examine a sampling of Vail Resort's design ideas as the town would like to
see some fresh ideas for Seibert Circle. Slifer stated he would like to see compatibility
with the square's and the town's wayfinding signs.
The fifth item on the agenda was a request for the Town Council to remand Special
Development District (SDD) #39 (Crossroads) Back to the PEC for review prior to
returning to Council for 1st Reading of an Ordinance. Council unanimously approved, 7-
0, to remand the Crossroads redevelopment SDD application back to the PEC. Moffet
continued comments expressed previously about the need to expand the town's
interpretation of public policy benefits to extend beyond traditional streetscape
improvements should acknowledge the project's retail components as a public benefit.
Several Council members expressed displeasure with a list of project modifications
interpreted by town staff following Council's initial review of the redevelopment. Staff had
_ ..
attempted to assimilate a comprehensive list of questions raised in a previous work
session. However, Council members indicated the list contained individual comments
but should not be used to reflect Council consensus. Peter Knoble, project applicant,
reported he had received good input from Council at the previous meeting. Cleveland
moved and Ruotolo seconded the motion to remand the application.
The sixth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. #3, Series of 2005,
an ordinance amending Section 12-11-4, Materials to be Submitted; Procedures, Section
12-11-6, Park Design Guidelines, and Section 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town
Code. On November 23, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0
to forward a recommendation of approval for the proposed text amendments to the Town
of Vail's erosion control and storm water quality standards. Town Environmental Ofi•icer
Bill Carlson stated the goal of the ordinance is the protection of Gore Creek's water
quality. Cleveland asked what precipitated the proposal. Carlson replied several recent
construction sii:es were having a detrimental effect (polluting) on Gore Creek. Carlson
also commented on the increasing stringency of federal water quality standards. Citing
potential bure<~ucratic complexities and expenses, Slifer suggested any changes
required by the ordinance be made part of the town building permit process. Hitt
encouraged larger penalties be placed on the back end of development, meaning
violators of the ordinance face more serious fines, as opposed to charging higher up-
i~ront/applicant 1`ees. Cleveland stated he believed anything the town did to protect water
quality would have to pay for itself, in regard to costs absorbed by the town enforcing the
ordinance. Donovan asked for a clearer definition of routine maintenance made by public
agencies as shoe believed in many instances, public projects resulted in pollution of the
creek. Zemler :>tated the town has had occasions where routine maintenance has led to
contaminated dlischarge. Donovan also expressed the neE;d for stringent enforcement of
i:he ordinance. Moffat asked what the penalty would be for' infractions made by the town.
Zemler replied the town would be held to the same standards as any other individual or
entity. Town Engineer Tom Kassmel clarified questions about future best practices being
utilized to meet storm water discharge obligations potentially impacting the town.
Council unanimously approved, 7-0, the ordinance on fiirst reading. Hitt moved and
I~uotolo seconcled the motion to approve.
The seventh item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. #4, Series of
2005, an ordin<~nce repealing and reenacting Chapter 10~-1, Building Codes, Vail Town
Code; adoptinga by reference the 2003 Editions of the International Building Code,
International Residential Code, International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code,
International Plumbing Code, International Fuel Gas Code, International Energy
Conservation Code; 2002 Edition of the National Electrical Code; and with regard to the
above-described codes, adopting certain appendices, setting forth certain amendments
thereto, and setting for details in regard thereto. On January 24, 2005, the Town of Vail
Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals forwarded a recommendation of approval to
the Town Couincil for the proposed text amendments. Charlie Davis, Chief Building
Official, explained since the 1990's, there has been a nationwide movement to create a
single model building code for the United States. Previously, there were three separate
<;odes regulating construction across the country. The Uniform Building Code (UBC),
published by 'the International Conference of Buildincl Officials (ICBO), generally
regulated the VVestern United States (including Colorado;-; the National Building Code,
published by the Building Officials and Code Administration International, Inc. (BOCA),
Generally regulated the Northeastern United States; and the Southern Building Code,
published by the Southern Building Code_Congress (SBCCI), generally_ regulated, the
Southeastern United States. These International Codes are being adopted, or have
already been adopted, in jurisdictions across the United States, throughout Colorado,
and throughout Eagle County. Davis explained, "Although the International Codes may
appear to be a one-size fits all approach to construction design and regulation, there are
allowances built into the code that take into account geographic locations throughout the
country. For example, seismic design and activity (earthquake resistant construction) is
addressed in the 2003 editions of the building code by re~;,ognizing certain areas of the
country are more prone to seismic activity. The West Coast has had catastrophic events
associated with earthquakes in the past. Colorado and specifically the Vail area have not
had the same I~istory as the West Coast. The building code recognizes differences in
geographic location and has provided the user with tables determining seismic design
k~ased on where; the code will be employed for design." Davis went on to explain these
tables are then used to determine how the design professional is required to design a
kuilding based on the seismic activity and location of thE; building. Council expressed
4
much interest in making sure the International Code had built into itself many other
elements of requirements based on geographic location, allowing the user to address
elements of design based on geographic location. The Town of Vail Building Safety and
Inspection Team, in association with the Town of Vail Fire Department, requested and
recommended Council adopt the most recent edition of this International Code. The
Town of Vail Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals also forwarded its
recommendation of approval to Council for the proposed adopting ordinance.
Additionally, the Colorado Chapter of the American Institute of Architects also gave its
support for Vail's proposed adoption of the International Codes. Council unanimously
approved the ordinance on first reading. Hitt moved and Ruotolo seconded the motion
to approve.
The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
- Vail Chamber & Business Association (VCBA) Update
Zemler announced a report had been included in Council packets provided by the
VCBA. Donovan stated "The Vail Guide" is better than the Vail Local Marketing District
Advisory Committee (VLMDAC)-produced marketing piece. Cleveland agreed the
promotional piece was "great". Kaye Ferry, VCBA Executive Director, requested the
Council require the VLMDAC include their "Vail Guide" as a part of the fulfillment piece
throughout the summer.
Zemler, reiterating comments made in the afternoon Work Session, commented on
proposed legislation, Senate Bill #62. Cleveland. asked if Eagle County Commissioner
Tom Stone had supported the legislation. Slifer then asked if Stone was the town and
county's representative on the State Water Board. Zemler replied Stone was the town's
representative. Cleveland suggested the town write a letter to the Eagle County
Commissioners expressing the town's displeasure with Stone's stance on the issue.
Zemler stated a response to the commissioners and Senator Jack Taylor would be
prepared and sent post haste. Slifer asked if the Colorado Association of Ski Towns
(CAST) needed to hire a lobbyist to oppose the measure. Zemler responded CAST had
allocated $2,500 towards funding for a lobbyist with other funds being potentially
forthcoming.
The ninth item on the agenda was adjournment. The meeting was unanimously
. adjourned, 7-0, at approximately 10:05 p.m. Moffet moved and Ruotolo seconded the
motion to adjourn.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
ATTEST:
5
(Lorelei Donald:~on, Town Clerk
Minutes provided by Corey Swisher.
6
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
The' regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:05
P.M. by Mayor Rod Slifer.
Members present: Rod Slifer, Mayor
Dick Cleveland, Mayor Pro-Tem
Diana Donovan,
Farrow Hitt,
Kent Logan
Greg Moffet
Kim Ruotolo,
Staff Members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Input. Carl Walker, Chairman of the Memorial
Park Board of Directors, introduced the Vail Memorial Park Board. Walker then thanked
former and present Council members Merv Lapin, Chuck Ogilby, Rod Slifer and Diana
Donovan for their help in bringing the park to fruition as well as attending board
members Robbie Robinson, Daphne Slevin and Joe Hanlon. The Memorial Park Board
then handed Zemler a $50,000 check repaying a loan provided as seed money for the
cemetery.
Rick Sackbauer, representing the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District (ERW&SD),
announced a meeting had recently been held consisting of water agencies from three
Western Slope counties (Grand, Eagle and Summit). The goal of the meeting was to
begin planning for the protection of ERW&SD water as well as its sister organizations.
Local resident Paul Rondeau volunteered to assist the town in the production of an
annual report providing performance measures for the town's general operating
departments. Rondeau also stated a belief local residents are intimidated by the
formality of .the. Evening. Session- public- comment- period. Rondeau- recommended the
use of a roving microphone to make potential speakers feel more comfortable. Rondeau
also expressed concern Council members do not always respond to phone messages
and emails made by local residents. Rondeau also announced he had recently met with
Zemler and realized the Town Manager may have a "full plate" of projects. He then
recommended the development of a volunteer task force of local retired professionals to
formulate a performance management reporting system.
The second item on the agenda was Resolution No. #3, Series of 2005, Opposition to
Senate Bill 62 (S662). A resolution expressing vigorous opposition to SB62 and urging
Senator Jack Taylor to immediately withdraw this discriminatory, dangerous and
completely unwarranted legislation. ERW&SD Board Chair Rick Sackbauer introduced
water rights attorney Fitz Holloman who provided technical details regarding the
proposed state legislation. Holloman began his presentation by stating Sen. Jack
'Taylor's legisla~.tion threatened Recreational In-Channel Diversion (RICD) water rights.
IHolloman encouraged Council to sign a letter of opposition and attend a Senate
Agricultural Coimmittee (SAC) meeting later in the week. I-lolloman noted the importance
of junior/senior water rights issues and emphasized RICD~s are a smart use of water as
none is wasted. Logan questioned why Taylor would champion such legislation. Fitz
responded agricultural water rights were the impetus behind Taylor's actions. Sackbauer
added recreatuonal water interests are outnumbered by agricultural interests. Ian
~4nderson, local kayaker and Vail Commission on Special Events (CSE) member, spoke
in support of oK>posing the legislation and stated he would attend the committee hearing.
Cleveland suggested sending Sen. Taylor a letter remindiing him of comments made to
Council while running for re-election. Taylor had appeared before Council stating his
resolve to protect Western Slope water rights. Donovan ;asked if the proposed Wolcott
Reservoir project might have acted as a catalyst to the proposed legislation. Holloman's
response was ono. Sackbauer finished the presentation by stating, ~We don't want any
~Nater coming out of Eagle County to go east." Moffet moved and Cleveland seconded
the motion to approve the Resolution. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The third item on the agenda was Resolution No. ~t4, Series of 2005. Rotary
International's 100' Anniversary. Council unanimously approved,7-0, the resolution
acknowledging 100 years of community and international) service. Moffet, local Rotary
member, thanked Council for the acknowledgement. Moffet moved and Ruotolo
;,econded the motion to approve.
The fourth itemm on the agenda was Vail Local Markel:ing District Advisory Council
(VLMDAC) Appointment. Douglas Brooks, General Manager of the Vail Cascade) was
appointed by Council to fill a vacant term expiring December, 2006. Cleveland moved
and Moffet seconded the motion to approve. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. #7, Seric;s of 2005, consideration of a
recommendation by the Open Space Board of Trustees toy Include 21 parcels of land in
16 areas as Designated Open Space. Introducing the itE;m, Community Development.
Director Russ Forrest noted on Jan. 25, 2005, the Vail Open Space Board of Trustees
rnet and unanimously voted to recommend 21 properties (16 areas) to Council for open
space designation. Current members of the Open Space Board of Trustees are Town
Manager Stan ~'_emler, Cleveland and David Viele from the: Planning and Environmental
Commission. Forrest asked for a Council recommendation to approve all or a portion of
the recommended parcels of land for designated open space. In addition, three parcels:_
_ -
the middle bench of Donovan Park, the "par three" parcel in the Booth Falls
neighborhood and a parcel near the East Vail water tower were suggested for
designation as a park so they could later be considered for open space designation. For
such parcels to be considered for open space designation, the following must occur:
-owned by the Town of Vail; and
-zoned either natural area preservation, outdoor recreation, or agriculture open
space; and
- be either:
1) Environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, riparian areas, critical habitat
identified by the Division of Wildlife, or the Natural Heritage Program);
2) High natural hazard areas including the 100-year flood plain, red avalanche
hazard area, high rock fall hazard area, and highs debris flow hazard area; or
3) Vail parks that provide passive outdoor recreation opportunities.
Forrest emphasized open space designation would result in the "freezing° of an asset
located within the Town of Vail. Also, a 3/ super majority vote from Council would be
required to designate a parcel as open space. Moffet moved and Hitt seconded a
motion to~ designate 21~ parcels of land, in 16 tracts in the town of Vait as Open Space
per section 13.11 of the town of Vail Charter. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
Council then considered three parcels to be designated as parks. Kim Ruotolo asked for
a definition of passive outdoor recreation. Forrest responded structured, organized
activity needs would be considered "active" recreation. Following an overview of the
recommended parcels, which include numerous stream tract areas, Farrow Hitt
emphasized the importance of protecting stream tracts. Donovan agreed. Kent Logan
inquired why the matter was before Council at this time. Hitt responded he was part of
the impetus prompting the action due to the need for some housekeeping. Donovan
applauded the effort. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, stated as the
community continues to mature, future generations will require parcels of land where
additional recreation can occur. Donovan requested a work session item providing
details of designation/zoning and potential use. With Council expressing support for the
20 qualifying properties, Council voted 4-3 to direct staff to prepare a process for
designating the three remaining recommended parcels as parks. Logan, Moffet and
Ruotolo were opposed. Hitt moved and Donovan seconded a motion directing an
exploratory process.
The sixth item on the agenda was the First Reading of Ordinance No. #6, Series of
2005, an ordinance adopting a revised approved development plan for Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase I, to allow for modifications to Units
16, 17 AND 29, Vail Village Plaza Condominiums, pursuant to Section ~ 12-9A-10,
Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, located at 100 East Meadow Drive (Vail
Village Inn), Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village 1~ Filing.On January 24, 2005, the
Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with
conditions, to the Town Council for the proposed major amendment to Special
Development District No. #6, Vail Village Inn. Council approved the ordinance, 6-1,
Donovan dissenting. Bill Pierce, architect, representing Liz and Luc Meyer, introduced
the item explaining the need for the ordinance. The ordinance allows for an additional
dwelling unit in a Special Development District (SDD). Cleveland inquired about
available parking for the entire SDD. Pierce responded Mr. Meyer had adequate parking
for the proposed dwelling unit. Donovan recommended the applicant contribute to a
higher proportion of streetscape improvements along Meadow Drive rather than the
current formula. Moffet_moved_and Hitt_seconded the_motion to approye._ _
The seventh item on the agenda was the Second Reading of Ordinance No. #3, Series
of 2005, an ordinance amending Section 12-11-4, Material To Be Submitted; Procedure,
Vail Town Code, Chapter 142, Definitions, Vail Town Code, and Chapter 14-6, Grading
Standards, Vail Town Code. Upon staff recommendation, Council unanimously
approved, 7-0, to table the second reading of this ordinance to March 1. Forrest clarified
a publication error led to the staff recommendation to table. Moffet moved and Ruotolo
seconded the motion to table the item.
The eighth item on the agenda was the Second Reading of Ordinance No. #4, Series of
2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 10-1, Building Codes, Vail Town
Code; adopting by reference the 2003 Editions of the International Building Code,
International Residential Code, International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code,
International Plumbing Code, International Fuel Gas Code, International Energy
Conservation Gode; 2002 Edition of the National Electrical Code; and with regard to the
above-described codes, adopting certain appendices. The ordinance passed 5-2, with
Donovan and Moffet opposed. Donovan and Moffet questioned the efficacy of exposing
the town to federal accessibility standards, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
requirements. Z'own Attorney Matt Mire cautioned against: approving an ordinance that
deviated from federal law. During the public comment period, Kaye. Ferry stated ADA
requirements leave no room .for rational thought, as many buildings in Vail are
impractical to be made accessible. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association,
asked by what means the town can alter the code so it meets localized conditions. Slifer
responded Council had clarified the issue in its previous meeting. Ruotolo moved. and
Fiitt seconded the motion to approve.
1"he ninth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's RE;port.
- Informat:ion Booth Updates
~'_emler reportedi staff had developed a proposed process and steps for selection of an
operator to manage the Vail information booths once the current contact expires at the
end of Septemk-er. The proposed timetable includes seven phases as follows:
--Phase 1-Information Gathering, February 15 -March 15, 2005
--Phase 2--Development of Request for Proposals Criteria, March 15 -April 19, 2005
--Phase 3--Issuance of Request for Proposals, April 20 -June 1, 2005
--Phase 4--Evaluation of Proposals, June 2 -June 5, 2005
--Phase 5--Selection of Operator, June 21 -July 5, 2005
--Phase 6--Approval of Operating Agreement, July 6 -August 2, 2005
-~-Phase 7--Preparation for New Contract Period, August 3 -October 1, 2005
Zemler then recommended reinstalling the Council Visitor. Center Subcommittee (Farrow
Mitt, Kim Ruotolo, Stan Zemler and Suzanne Silverthorn;) to manage the process and
bring its recommendations to the full Council for decisions on the RFP document and
>election of the operator. Zemler emphasized the town should thoroughly examine how
information is provided, mentioning geographic distribution and visitor characteristics.
Having recently returned from afact-finding visit to the European Alps, it was reported
Greg Hall and Jim Lamont will share how information is~ disseminated there. Ruotolo
requested a fifth member be added to the committee. Hitt received clarification from the
i:own attorney hits employment at a local lodge would not cause him to have a conflict of
interest. Donovan stated experience running an information center should not be a
criteria used to determine an operator. Council voted unanimously, 7-0, for approval of
the proposed schedule. Moffet moved and Cleveland seconded the motion to approve.
Simultaneous to the steps outlined above, staff also encouraged the development of a
- - - __ ._.
'Visitor Information Master Plan to be completed in the fiall of 2005. As propose , t e
master plan would include an audit of current visitor information systems as they relate
to guest arrival, the experience while here, and guest departure. In addition, the master
plan would contain a hierarchy for way finding systems and would address future
location(s) and related services for the Vail Visitor Centers.,
- Commission on Special Event (CSE) Logo Recommendation
Zemler reported at its January 25, 2005, meeting, the CSE voted to send the following
recommendation to the-Vail Town Council: Instead of the regular Town of Vail municipal
logo, the CSE is asking that all formal contracts with special events promoters require
'the use of the \lail Local Marketing District (VLMD) THINK SUMMER. THINK VAIL. logo
in all advertising and marketing material. Subsequently, staff recommended all special
events promoters (based on seasonality) through contract with the CSE incorporate both
4
a
the Town of Vail municipal logo, as well as the THINK SUMMER. THINK VAIL. logo on
all advertising and marketing promotions. Cleveland moved and Donovan seconded
approval of the staff recommendation. The motion passed unanimously.
- Formation of Seibert Circle Committee
Zemler informed Council staff had constructed an aggressive timetable to develop a
decision on the Seibert Circle renovation. Zemler recommended using the existing
streetscape committee, an AIPP member, Pete Seibert Jr., Dan Barry and a Vail Resorts
representative. Donovan recommended the committee meet weekly until an appropriate
proposal is produced.
The tenth item on the agenda was Adjournment. The meeting was unanimously
adjourned, 7-0, at approximately 8:40 p.m. Moffet moved and Ruotolo seconded the
motion to approve.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Minutes provided by Corey Swisher.
5
Memorandum
To: Stan Zemler
VailTownCounc~
From: Todd Scholl
Date: 2/24/2005
Re: Bus Bid
The Town sent out nine RFP's to bus manufacturers on November 30, 2004, and received
only one proposal on the due date of January 21, 2005, from Gillig Corporation. The
Gillig proposal is responsive to the bid requirements and we negotiated with Gillig over
their requests for deviations from the technical specifications which has resulted in a final
price of $282,850.00 per bus.
The reason that we only received one responsive bid is because the new emission
standards require an EGR diesel engine, the EGR engines generate more heat than the
older diesel engines, this requires a redesign of the cooling system and Gillig is one of the
only manufacturers that has redesigned their 96" wide bus for the EGR engine. We
require 96" wide buses so that we can mount ski racks on the sides of the buses. I have
asked for Gillig to provide us with a cost analysis for their proposal to include pricing of
recent bus orders similar to ours. Also, when compazed to the bids we received in 2002
for the same type of bus, this bid is $12,290.00 less per bus than their proposal in 2002.
The cost for these buses is shared with the FTA, the FTA will fund up to 80% of the
acquisition cost and a 20% local contribution is required. The following is a cost analysis
of this procurement:
Budget
2005 capital projects budget (6 Diesel & 1 Hybrid Buses) $2,401,200
Expenditures
Gillig Proposal (6 buses) $1,697,100
Advertising & Postage 1,500
Pre-production meeting &Pre-delivery inspections 30,000
Next bus & ski racks 30,000
Total Expenditures $1,758,600
Revenues
FTA G rant (2003 & 2004)
$1,438,832
Total
Net Cost to the Town (20% of Expenditures) $ 351 720
There is enough FTA funding to cover 80% of the cost of this procurement and the
remainder of this grant funding will be available for the hybrid bus that is budgeted this
year. In talking with Mike Rose, we should also be getting a 2005 FTA grant which we
will also be able to apply to the hybrid bus.
.At this time I recommend that we award the bid for six sta~idard high floor buses to Gillig
Corporation, this will complete the replacement of our older high floor buses that are non
.ADA compliant and our entire bus fleet will be ADA compliant. The next scheduled
replacement for• standard high floor buses will be in 2010.
,As for the hybrid low floor bus budgeted this year for the i~ltown shuttle, Mike and I
would like to wait until later this year to allow the manufacturers more time to refine the
hybrids, as the technology is still evolving and the price may come down as more of these
buses are put into service.
i
~ ~~
r - ~ ~ ~ _ ~ -
.~' - j
~ ~~ ~ ~ _
~ ~
3-K ~
~, ~~t;;
,_
~ * ~~
_-+
T
j ~ yq.~~~ ,+~~Yr-
~~
Y ~ ~ .v
- -
t ~ - - -,.
~ ~~ ~
__ F k -
i_
41I-r
~~.
~'
-,~~i,~,
f; ~~
i
~~
s
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Conference Center Advisory Committee
DATE: March 1, 2005
SUBJECT: Update on the Vail Conference Center
Planner: Russell Forrest
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this update is to:
• Review progress on the design of the Conference Center with the Vail Town
Council.
• Review the projected costs and budget for the construction of the Conference
Center.
On February 24`h at 2:00, the Vail Conference Advisory Committee met to review
progress on the conference center design. Any applicable recommendations from
the Committee will be forwarded to the Vail Town Council after the committee
meeting.
2. BACKGROUND
The Vail Town Council on April 20, 2004, authorized a series of next steps which
included interviewing owner's representative firms for the Conference Center. On
April 29, 2004, the Committee met to interview five owner's representative firms.
On May 18, 2004, the Vail Town Council authorized the Town Manager to execute
a contract with Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. to be the Town's owner's
representative and funding for the first phase of this contract or $8,510. The Vail
Town Council also authorized the Committee to negotiate with both Piper Jaffray
and Kirtpatrick Pettis to be the Town's investment banker on this project.
On June 1, 2004, the Vail Town Council voted to approve the following requests
from the Committee:
• Authorization to engage Piper Jaffray as the Town's investment banker for the
Conference Center.
• Authorization to issue an RFQ for design team assistance on the Conference
Center.
• Request to move forward with a negotiated guaranteed maximum price (GMP)
process for engaging a design team and a general contractor (as opposed to a
design build process). This essentially means that both the architect and
general contractor will work for the Town of Vail.
RequE;st for the Vail Town Council to approve the next phase of an owner's
representative contract. The preconstruction phase of the contract would cost
up to ;6155,774. However, the Committee is only requesting. $93,212 (includes
fees and reimbursables) to fund this function until a decision is made by the
Vail. Town Council to issue bonds which is anticipated in the
November/December 2004 time frame.
On June 15, 2004, the Vail Town Council reviewed and approved the following
next steps:
• Approval of the proposed process for engaging the public in the design team
selection process.
• Selection criteria for request for proposals.
• Consideration of proposed process givens.
• Review of updated project budget and interrelated parking costs, and
• Consideration and review of the major points of the proposed scope of service
reque:;t for proposals for design services (to be given to the top 3-4 teams
selectE~d in the qualification competition).
On July 6, 2004, the Vail Town Council reviewed and approved the following next
steps:
• Revievv the recommendation from i:he Committee on short-listing the design
team candidates and to issue the Request for Proposals (RFP) to the six
recommended design teams.
• Revievu and approve suggested changes to the dE;sign team selection process
from the Committee.
• Request permission to issue a RFP for a surveyor to survey the Lionshead
parking structure site and surrounding area:
On July 20, 2004, the Vail Town Council unanimously approved the following:
• A;contract for design services with Fentress Bradburn.
• Approval of next steps for master planning the Lionshead parking
structure/conference center site.
On September 21, 2004,, the Vail Town Council, Conference Center Advisory
CommitteE:, Design Review Board and Planning anti Environmental Commission
reviewed 'five alternatives site plans. In addition, the public reviewed the same
alternatives on September 22, 2004. The near unanimous opinion from the
various groups that reviewed the site plans was that alternative three is the
preferred ~~hoice. Staff is now adjusting what the Design Team will be working on
over the next two week to further refine alternative three and test this alternative
versus developing other alternatives further.
On October 19, 2004, the Vail Town Council met and reviewed an update on
architectural images for the conference center and authorized the Committee to
move forward with public discussions regarding the alternative styles.
The Committee met on October 21, 2004, and reviewed the qualification submitted
by six general contractors. After reviewing the qualifications, the Committee
recommended to the Vail Town Council that three general contractors receive
requests for proposals. Those general contractors include:
^ Hansel Phelps Construction
^ Hunt Construction Group/Hyder Construction
^ M.A Mortenson Company
On November 2, 2004, the Vail Town Council approved a motion to forward the
above mentioned contractors requests for proposals.
On December 7, 2004, the Vail Town Council voted 6-1 to direct the Conference
Center design team to move forward with a "natural/environmentally inspired"
design style. The design team of Fentress Bradburn developed three alternative
architectural approaches. These images were not the elevations of the proposed
Conference Center but rather provided alternative visions or inspirations-that could
be considered for the conference center. The three styles include:
1. Bavarian/Traditional Vail style
2. Contemporary
3. Natural/Environmentally inspired style
The Conference Center Advisory Committee reviewed the public input associated
with the three design alternatives on November 18, 2004. After reviewing the
public input and the associated costs with each design option, the Committee
forwarded a recommendatiori for the "Architectural Vision Inspired by Nature."
The Committee felt that this would create an outstanding architectural structure.
The materials as envisioned by the design team would utilize "mountain" materials
such as heavy stone and timbers. The roof element would be more iconic but is
intended to reflect the form of the surrounding mountains. It should also be noted
that one member of the Committee, although not present on November 18, 2004,
preferred the Traditional Vail Vernacular look.
The Conference Center Advisory Committee met on December 14, 2004, and
voted to recommend that. the Town of Vail purchase (using Conference Center
funds) the water and sewer taps. for the Charter Bus Lot site. On December 21,
2004' the Vail Town Council authorized that the Town purchase tap fees with the
condition that the Water District provide a letter confirming that a tap fee could be
used on the same site for a different use in the future and that the taps could be
moved to another Town of Vail owned land. The District did provide a letter
confirming this issue referencing the District's policies for doing tap transfers. The
final cost of the tap fee was $297,896.
On January 18th, 2005, the Vail Town Council voted to continue to move in the
direction of the "natural" design. The Vail Town Council did express concern about
the roof of the facility. They furthermore asked that the design team develop
alternative ideas for the roof of the facility.
3. DESCRIPTION OF .REQUESTS
A
B.
Design Update
On March 1, 2005, the design team will proviide an update on progress to
the Vail Town Council. Attachment A providE;s an illustration of where the
design of the facility is at this time. The Vail Town Council is requested to
provide their input on the design.
Capital Budget
Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. will provide an update on the
ca~~ital budget for the project on March 1st. The current construction
budget and cost estimate based on the design in Attachment A is:
Current Funds Available for Construction: $36,548,931
Cost Estimate Plus Design/Bidding Reserves: $36,493,000
Net Over or (Under): $ (55,931)
ThE: above mentioned budget is based on an annual debt service which
shall not exceed $2.7 million. As interest rates change the revenue
available for construction get will change. A.RC has included an interest
ratE; reserve of $750,000 to account for lost revenue due to interest rate
increases over the next two to three months. Piper Jaffray estimates a
move of 25 basis points will reduce the revenue available for construction
by approximately $1.2MM. ,
ThE: cost estimate is based on integrating construction estimates from five
cost estimators (two consultant and proposals from three general
contractors). When a design is accepted by the Vail Town Council, the
General contractors will be asked to resubmit cost proposals based on the
final approved design. A more detailed budget presentation will be provided
on March 1 S`, 2005 to the Vail Town Council..
Attachment A: Elevations of the Conference Center
F:\Users\cdev\COUNCIL\MEMOS\05\conference cenl:er030105final.doc
4
Attachment A:
Conference Center Elevations
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 1, 2005
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005, a request for text amendments to
Section 12-11-4, Material To Be Submitted; Procedure, Vail Town Code,
Chapter 14-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, and Chapter 14-6, Grading
Standards, Vail Town Code, and setting for details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Bi(( Carlson, Environmental Health Officer
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The Town of Vail is proposing text amendments to Section 12-11-4, Material To
Be Submitted; Procedure, Vail Town Code, Chapter 14-2, Definitions, Vail Town
Code, and Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to create
stormwater quality standards and a stormwater quality permit system.
II. BACKGROUND
On November 8, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0 to
forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council of the proposed
text amendments. The Commission's recommendation was based upon the
review of the criteria noted in the November 8, 2004, staff memorandum and the
evidence and testimony presented, with the findings noted in the November 8,
2004, staff memorandum. At the November 8, 2004, the Planning and
Environmental Commission public hearing, the proposed text amendments
modifying the Town of Vail stream setback requirements were withdrawn. This
issue will be addressed with the Planning and Environmental Commission at a
future date.
On February 1, 2005, the Town Council approved the first reading of Ordinance
No. 3, Series of 2005, with the following modifications by a vote of 7-0 (deletions
are shown in ~+r~'-^ +"r^~ ~^"/additions are shown bold):
Page 3; Construction Activity -Construction activity includes clearing,
grading and excavation activities. Construction does not include routine
maintenance performed by public agencies, or their agents. to maintain
original line and grade, historical hydraulic capacity, or original purpose
of the facility.
~, Page 5: Temporary Soil Erosion Control Measures -Interim control
measures which are installed or constructed and maintained whenever
grading or other earth disturbance is to occur for the purpose of sen-trel
soil erosion control until permanent soil erosion control is effected.
1
Since tf•ie February 1, 2005, Staff has also made the following modifications to
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 (deletions are shown in ~+r~~,-.,~"~t~#/additions
are shown bold):
~3. PERM( T REQ UI RED
it d• ~,.+ n n+;. ~;+.. .- ~ .I+;.,.-,
~ n.+n~1/ nr~
j. cua .~z-act
~^.
_ ~nn+ +h .-.{ mnr.+n
~.`~-6~E`ffr-}ftFEhi-'c~i "tms+rdr.-nE+c~irre~a,-'~4~1ictl'r°1" n+ ..h .,/~
f;
1't shall be unlawful for any person to conduct any activity resulting
i'n the disturbance of any land areas within the riparian zone, or
resulting in a total disturbed area of at least % acre, without first
obtaining a stormwater quality permit from the Town. Total
disturbed area includes any land. within a project that meets the
definition of "disturbed area," whethE~r or not such parcels are
contiguous.
+n.-.,.,,.,.,+,,.- , .,,-rr~n~~ .,f +r,~
j` .
f +m iu~Stcfr Tcrt--IL-'c^r-3~~~1-ai^-r"evi
/ '
l~egardless of total disturbed area, the Town may also require a
stormwater quality permit in conjunction with the approval of a final
ssubdivision plat, conditional use permit, or development plan.
The Town may a/so require a stormwater quality permit for a
disturbed area of less than % acre that is part of a larger common
plan of development.
It shall be unlawful for any such person to fail to obtain a stormwater
duality permit. Issuance of a permit by the Town of Vail does not exempt
the parties from obtaining any permits required by the State of Colorado
or the Federal Government.
IV. STAFF (RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recomimends that the Town Council
approvE:s the second reading of Ordinance No„ 3, Series of 2005, to amend
Section 12-11-4, Material To Be Submitted; Procedure, Vail Town Code, Chapter
14-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, and Chapter '14-6, Grading Standards, Vail
Town Code, and setting for details in regard thereto. Staff's recornmendation is
based upon the review of the criteria noted in the November 8, 2004, staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the evidence
and testimony presented.
2
t
Should the Town Council choose to approve the second reading of Ordinance
No. 3, Series of 2005, the Community Development Department recommends
the Town Council makes the following findings:
1. The amendments are consistent ,with the applicable elements. of the
adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
Comprehensive Plan and are compatible with the development
objectives of the Town; and
2. The amendments further the general and specific purposes of the
Zoning Regulations; and
3. The amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the Town and promote 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.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005
t
3
ORDINANCE NO.3
SERIES OF 2005
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 12-11-4, MATERIAL TO BE SUBMITTED; PROCEDURE,
VAIL TOWN CODE, CHAPTER 14-2, DEFINITIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE, AND CHAPTER 14-6,
GRADING STANDARDS, VAIL TOWN CODE, AND SETTING FOR DETAILS IN REGARD
THERETO.
WHEREAS, land development projects and associated increases in impervious cover alter
the hydrologic response of local watersheds and increase stormwater runoff rates and volumes,
flooding, stream channel erosion, and sediment transport and depostion; and
WHEREAS this stormwater runoff contributes to increased quantities of water-borne
pollutants, and stormwater runoff, soil erosion and non point source pollution can be controlled and
minimized through the regulation or erosion control and stormwater quality associated with
construction activities; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has promulgated regulations pursuantto
Phase II of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System as part of the Clean WaterAct, and
has required the implementation of a stormwater quality ordinance in order to meet requirements of
the stormwater discharge permit issued bythe State of Colorado; and
WHEREAS, soil erosion and stream channel erosion make necessary costly repairs to
gullies, washed out fills, roads and embankments, and the resulting sediment clogs storm sewers
and road ditches, leaves deposits of silt in streams, and is considered a significant water pollutant
associated with stormwater runoff; and
WHEREAS regulations limiting soil erosion and stream channel erosion are in the public
interest and will prevent threats to public health and safety; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held
public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code
of the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the proposed
~.
amendments further the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 ~
Y
WHEREAS;, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has
recommended approval of these amendments at its November 8, 2004, meeting, and has submitted
its recommendation to the Town Council; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the arriendments are 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
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments further the general and
specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and.
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments promote the health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the Town and promote 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 communityof the highest quality.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 12-11-4C, Preliminary and Finall Design Review, Vail Town Code,
shall hereby be amended as followings: (deletions are shown in s~il~e-~k~e~h/additions
are shown k~old)
i nI C)fIGQ Dormi~. ~n nnnrn~ur~l nn}innol nnlli ion n~ rlicnh~rrYO olimin~}inn c~c+om
JppXp~~ ~i~ fnr o}nrm rein ~nr rdicnhnrnoc~~a~24o rc rnci it}inn {rnm rlovo~n~~
YJ~~^.~`~~ ~~lMinn 4~ein /`)\~ nr mnro nnrnc c+holl hn nrocon}.,~ In lioi ~ ref ,,n^h ~nc,~~r~m~i~nG
UC"VC. Y mnro ']nron n~n~?nnrTT'Q--n t7"~~t'JVn~L~r~e,f c
wa~tE once iroc nr r•o}on+inn nnnr-1c hinh
6~f3
j. Stormwater Quality Permits: Refer to Chalpter 146, Grading Standarcls, of
the `/ail Town Code.
Section 2. Chapter 14-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, shall hereby be amended with
the following additions: (additions are shown in bold)
Ordinance No. 3, Series 012005 2
COLORADO DISCHARGE PERMIT SYSTEM (CDPS)
State of Colorado regulation (5 CCR 1002-61) and as amended which covers
discharges from specific types of industries including construction sites, and storm
sewer systems for municipalities as part of the Water Quality Control Division
(Division) underthe Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE).
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Construction activity includes clearing, grading and excavation activities.
Construction does not include routine maintenance performed by public agencies, or
their agents to maintain original line and grade, historical hydraulic capacity, or
original purpose of the facility.
CPESC
Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control
DEVELOPMENT
All activities involving earth disturbance and requiring a building or grading
permit, including but not limited to,commercial or industrial developments,
single or multi-family housing, construction of structures, road and driveways,
and installation of utilities.
DISTURBED AREA
That area of the land's surface disturbed by any work or activity upon the property by
means including but limited to grading; excavating; stockpiling soil, fill, or other
materials; clearing; vegetation removal; removal or deposit of any rock, soil, or other
materials; or other activities which expose soil. Disturbed area does not include the
tillage of land that is zoned for agricultural use. It also does not include performance
of emergency work necessary to prevent or ameliorate an immediate threat to life,
property, or the, environment. Any person performing such emergency work shall
immediately notify the Town Engineer of the situation and the actions taken. The
Town Engineer may, however, require such person to obtain a stormwater quality
permit to implement remedial measures to minimize erosion resulting from the
emergency.
DRAINAGEWAY.
Any natural or artificial stream, swale, creek, river, ditch, channel, canal or other open
intermittent watercourse.
EROSION
The process by which the ground surface is worn away by action of wind, water,
gravity, or a combination of thereof.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN
A plan to minimize erosion and on sitesedimentation resulting from construction
activities. The plan should include detailed information about the site; planned
construction activities and best management practices (BMPs) to implement that can
minimize on-site erosion and transport of sediment of~site during construction.
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 3
FINAL STABILIZATION
When all ~~oil disturbing activities at the site have been completed, and uniform
vegetative cover has been established with a density of at least 70 percent of pre-
disturbance levels, or equivalent permanent, physical erosion reduction methods
have been employed. For purposes of this section, establishment of a vegetative
cover capable of providing erosion control equivalent topre-existing conditions at the
site is considered final stabilization.
LAND-DISI-URBING ACTIVITIES
Any mechanical activity which alters the surface of t:he earth and exposes the same to
the elements of wind, water, or gravity. Land-disturbing activities include grading,
filling, excavating, and soil storage. Agricultural activities are exempt from this
definition.
MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (iMS4)
A system of conveyances owned arid operated by the Town of Vail used in the
collection, treatment or disposition of storm, flood or surface drainage waters,
including rnanmade structures and natural watercourses and/or floodplains for the
conveyance of runoff, such as detention or retention areas, berms, swales, improved
watercourses, channels, bridges, gulches, streams, rivers, gullies, flumes, culverts,
gutters, pumping stations, pipes, ditches, siphons, catch basins, inlets, pumping
plants and other equipment and appurtenances and all extensions, improvements,
remodeling, additions and alternations thereof; and any and all rights or interests in
such stormwater facilities, and which is not used foir collecting or conveying sewage.
OPERATOR
The individual who has day to day supervision and control of activities occurring at
the construction site: This can be the owner, the developer, the general contractor or
the agent of one of these parties, in some circumstances. It is anticipated that at
different phases of a construction project, different types, of parties will satisfy the
definition of an "operator" and the pertinent pori:ions of any applicable State of
Colorado. permit will be transferred as the roles change.
PROPERTI' OWNER
The record owner of the property or properties, who is the responsible party for the
Town of V2iil stormwater quality permits.
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK.
The line beitween upland and bottomland which persists through successive changes
in water levels, below which the presence and action of the water is so common or
recurrent that the character of the land is marked distinctly from the upland. and is
apparent in the soil itself, the configuration of the surface of the soil and the
vegetation. On an inland lake which has a level established by law, it means the high
established level. Where water returns to its naiEural levels as the result of the
permanent removal or abandonment of a dam, it rneans the natural ordinary high
water mark:.
PERMANENT SOIL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
Those control measures which are installed or constructed to control soil erosion and
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 4
which are maintained after completion of all grading and earth disturbance activities.
POINT SOURCE
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance from which pollutants are or may
be discharged. Point source discharges of stormwater result from structures, (e.g.,
roofs, roads, side walks, parking lots, etc.), which increase imperviousness of the
ground which acts to collect runoff, with runoff being conveyed along the resulting
drainage or grading pattern.
RECEIVING WATER
Any water of the State of Colorado into which stormwater related to construction
activities discharges.
RIPARIAN ZONE
The area located betweens the water's edge of aquatic ecosystems (rivers, streams,
lakes, ponds, springs and seeps) and upland areas, whose soils allow for or tolerate a
high water table, and provide sufficient moisture in excess of that otherwise available
locally so as to provide a more moist habitat than that of contiguous floodplains and
uplands. Riparian areas are composed of interacting assemblages of plants, animals
and aquatic communities whose presence is either directly or indirectlyattributed to
water-influenced or water-related factors. Riparian areas produce a diversity of
vegetative forms, sizes and species and a density of vegetation that makes them
among the most productive habitats for wildlife. Areas exempt from this definition are
manmade agricultural structures and devices such as irrigation ditches, sprinklers,
and artificial ponds, except when mitigation requires creation or replacement of
wetlands and/or riparian areas.
SPILL
An unintentional release of solid or liquid material which may cause pollution of the
MS4 or waters of the State.
STORMWATER
Any surface flow, runoff, and drainage consisting entirely of water from any form of
natural precipitation, and resulting from such precipitation.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP)
A written plan to minimize pollutants in stormwater discharged from
construction sites as required under the. Colorado Discharge Permit System v
(CDPS) General Permit for stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction
Activity. This plan includes a site description and map, identifies best
management practices for implementation at the site and identifies maintenance
and inspection requirements for these best management practices.
STORMWATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN
A plan to control pollutants transported in stormwater prior to pollutants entering
waterbodies. stormwater quality control plans in the context of these regulations
refer to post-development stormwater flows, rather than stormwater flows under
construction conditions: stormwater Quality Control Plans should be based on
best management practices (BMP's) such as avoiding direct discharge into
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 5
waterbodies, minimizing directlyconnected imperlrious area, use of detention
ponds, and other BMP's.
TEMPORARY SOIL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
Interim control measures which are installed c-r constructed and maintained
whenever grading or other earth disturbance is to occur for the purpose. of soil
erosion control until permanent soil erosion control is effected.
WETLAND
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient ito support and that under normal
circumstar-ces do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated scoil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas. For purposes of these regulations wetlands do not include areas that
are saturated so{ely by the application of agricultural irrigation water. Manmade lakes
and ponds built for the purpose of detaining runoff are not considered wetlands in the
context of 1lhese regulations.
Section 3. Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail -down Code, shall hereby be
amended with the following additions: (additions are shown in bold)
STORMWATER QUALITY PERMITS
A. PURPOSE, INTENT, AND LIABILITY
Purpose: The preservation of wetland and water areas, serves to prevent
waiver quality degradation of Gore Creek ar-d its tributaries the natural and
several manmade ponds in the Town of V'ail.. Protection of ecosystems,
aquatic habitats, and wildlife habitats, especially habitats for state orfederally
designated threatened or endangered species, to preserve ground water
recharge functions, and preserve natural flood plain control.
2. Intent: The intent of this chapter is to enhance the quality of water in the
Tovun's drainage ways and subsequent receiving waters by establishing
requirements for stormwater quality permits for construction and
development, to prevent soil erosion. and sedimentation from leaving
construction activities within the Town in order to protect the vital, beneficial
functions and values of wetlands, streams, riparian zones or areas and water
bodies within the Town.
3. Liability: Any person who undertakes or causes to be undertaken any activity
which involves disturbance of the- land's surface shall ensure that soil
erosion, sedimentation, increased pollutanit loads and changed water flow
characteristics resulting from the activity are controlled so as to minimize
pollution of receiving haters. The requirements of this section are minimum
standards and a person's compliance with the same shall not relieve such
person from the duty of enacting all measures necessary to minimize
pollution of receiving waters.
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005
B. PERMIT REQUIRED
It shall be unlawful for any person to conduct any activity resulting in the
disturbance of any land areas within the riparian zone, or resulting in a total
disturbed area of at least '/2 acre, without first obtaining a stormwater quality
permit from the Town, Total disturbed area includes any land within a project that
meets the definition of "disturbed area," whether or not such parcels are
contiguous.
Regardless of total disturbed area, the Town may also require a stormwater
quality permit in conjunction with the approval of a final subdivision plat,
conditional use permit, or development plan.
The Town may also require a stormwater quality permit for a disturbed area of less
than'/z acre that is part of a larger common plan of development.
It shall be unlawful for any such person to fail to obtain a stormwater quality
permit. Issuance of a permit by the Town of Vail does not exempt the parties from
obtaining any permits required by the State of Colorado or the Federal
Government.
C. PERMIT APPLICATION
Persons required to obtain a stormwater quality permit shall complete and file
with the Town an application on a form prescribed by the Town, in accordance
with the requirements of this section with the building permit application prior to
the' beginning of construction activities. In support of the application, the
applicant shall submit all- information required on the Town's form and any
additional information requested by the Town. A separate application shall be
required for each stormwater quality permit along with plans, specifications, and
.timing schedules for all earth disturbances. Vlhere the permittee fails to submit
any relevant facts in a permit application or report to the Town, the permittee shall
promptly submitthe relevant application informationwhich was not submitted or
any additional information which was not submitted or any additional information
needed to correct any erroneous information previously submitted.
D. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
Unless otherwise stated in this regulation, the submission of an application for,
determination of the completeness of, staff review of, and notice and scheduling
of public hearings on all applications for storm water quality permits shall comply
with the procedures this subsection.
1. Initiation. Applications for a stormwater quality permit shall be submitted
to the Community Development Director and Town Engineer by the owner,
or any other person having a recognized interest in the land for which the
development is proposed, or their authorized agent.
a. Applicant is Not the Owner. If the applicant is not the owner of the
land, or is a contract purchaser of the land, the applicant shall
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 7
submit a letter signed by the owner consenting to the submission of
the application.
b. Applicant if Not the Sole Owner. If the applicant is not the sole
owner of the land, the applicant shall submit a letter signed by the
other owners or an association representing the owners consenting
to or joining in the application foira stormwater quality permit.
2. IUlinimum Contents of Application. The aipplication shall be submitted in a
iform established by the Town of Vail and made available to the public
a. Determination of Completeness„ The Community Development
Director or Town Engineer shall determine if the application is
complete and includes data in sufficient detail to evaluate the
application to determine whether it complies with the appropriate
substantive requirements of tF~ese Water Quality Protection
Standards.
b. Applicants' Identify. The applicants name, mailing address,
telephone and fax number. If the ;applicant is to be represented by
an agent, a letter signed by the applicant granting power of attorney
to the agent shall be submitted, authorizing the agent to represent
the applicant and stating the representative's name, mailing
address, telephone and fax number.
c. Legal Description. The legal description and street address, if such
exists, of the parcel on which ;>tormwater quality controls are
proposed to occur.
d. Disclosure of Ownership. A disclosure of ownership of the property
upon which the stormwater qualiity permit is proposed to occur,
listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages,
judgments, liens, easement, contracts and agreements that run with
the land. The disclosure of ownership may be in the form of a
current certificatefrom a title insurance company, deed, ownership
and encumbrance report, attorney':s opinion or other documentation
acceptable to the Town Attorney.
e. Vicinity Map. An eight and one-half (8'/2) inch by eleven (11) inch
vicinity map, locating the subject parcel within the Town of Vail.
f. Streamside zone setback delineation. A property which is shown to
include a stream and/or wetland shall be required to provide a
survey or dimensional site plan, dlrawn at an engineering scale of
1:20, showing property lines, buildlings and any points of r'efererice
from the streamside zone setback to the Town of Vail.
g. Written Description. A written description of the .proposal and an
explanation in written, graphic or model form of how the proposed
development complies with the stormwater quality standards
regulation.
h. Environmental Impact Report, when applicable.
i. Adjacent Property Owners. A list of all property owners, compiled
by the applicant using the most recent Eagle County tax rolls, is
required for all applications and shall be submitted to the
Community Development Director as part of the application for
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 8
development. In addition to submitting a written list, the applicant
shall also submit the addresses on adhesive labels or in the form of
pre-addressed envelopes.
Determined Incomplete. If the Community Development Director or
Town Engineer determines the application is incomplete, a written
notice shall be mailed to the applicant specifying the application's
deficiencies. No further action shall betaken on the application until
the deficiencies are remedied. If the applicant fails to correct the
deficiencies within sixty (60) calendar days, the application shall be
considered withdrawn and returned to the applicant. The applicant
may appeal the Community Development Director's determination
to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) pursuant to
Section 3 (E) of these Water Quality Protection Standard
Regulations.
E: PERMIT ISSUANCE/DENIAL
The Town shall have up to ten (10) working days after receipt of the complete
application to request additional information and/or deny the permit. Upon receipt
of the corrective information, the Town shall have an additional ten working days
to issue or deny the permit.
If a permit is denied, the applicant shall be notified of such in writing. The .
notification shall set forth the grounds for denial and inform the applicant of what
corrective actions must be taken to obtain a permit. An applicant may appeal the
denial in writing to the PEC no later than thirty calendar days from the date of
issuance denial. The appeal must set forth the grounds for the appeal and include
any documents in support of the applicant's appeal. The PEC shall within thirty
(30) calendar days of receipt of an appeal rule on the matter based solely upon
review of the application, denial, appeal, and all documents related thereto. The
parties shall receive written notice of the PEC's decision.
F. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
A Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) is required to be submitted with the
application and shall be prepared in accordance with all of the requirements of the
most recent SWMP guidance document prepared by the CDPHE and good
engineering, hydrologic and pollution control practices. Priorto commencement
of construction activities, the SWMP shall be implemented for the construction
site covered by the permit.
1. Signatory Requirements. All plans shall be signed and certified for
accuracy by the operator.
2. SWMP Review/Changes. The operator shall amend the plan whenever
there is a significant change in design, construction, operation, or
maintenance, which has a significant effect on the potential for discharge
of pollutants to the MS4 or receiving waters, or if the SWMP provides to be
ineffective in achieving the general objectives of controlling pollutants in
stormwater discharges associated with construction activities.
G. RESPONSIBILITY OF PERMITTEE
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 9
During construction activities the permittee shall be responsible for:
1. The prevention of damage to any public utilities or service within the limits
or grading and along any routes of travel of the equipment;
2. The prevention of damage to adjacent property (No person shall grade on
land so close to the property line as to endanger any adjoining public
street, sidewalk, alley, or any public or private property without supporting
and protecting such property from settling, cracking, or other damage
which might result);
3. Carrying out the proposed work in accorrdance with the approved SWMP
;and incompliance with all the requiremeints of the permit and this section;
4. 'The prompt removal of all soil, miscellaneous debris, rnaterials applied;
dumped, or otherwise deposited on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or
other pubic thoroughfares or any other non-authorized offsite location,
during transit to and from the construction site, or otherwise, where such
.:spillage constitutes a prablic nuisance, trespass or hazard in the
determination of the Town Engineer or a Court of competent jurisdiction;
,end
5. Iln addition to the actual construction activities, the following types of
activities must be evaluated for the reasonable potential for contributing
I~ollutants to runoff: loading and unloading operations, outdoor storage
activities; vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling; significant dust
or particulate generating processes; and on-site waste disposal practices.
H. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Stormwater discharges from construction activities shall not cause or
i:hreaten to cause pollution, contamination or degradationof water of the
State;
2. E3ased on an assessment of the potential) of various sources at the site to
contribute pollutants to stormwater, the SWMP. shall include a description
of reasonable and appropriate control mc~asures that will be implemented
at the site;
3. All temporary erosion control facilities intended to control erosion and
:sediment of any earth disturbance operaition shall be installed before any
construction activities take place;
4. lfhe selection, design and installation of appropriate structural and.
nonstructural BMPs must be done in accordance with the latest version of
the Urban Drainage, and Flood Control District's Urban Storm Drainage
(:riteria Manuals (Vol. 3);
5. ~~ny earth disturbance shall be conducited in such a manner so as to
Effectively reduce accelerated soil erosion and resulting sedimentation.
6. All earth disturbances shall be designed, constructed and completed in
such a manner so that the exposed area of any disturbed land shall be
limited to the shortest possible period of time;
7. ;>ediment caused by accelerated soil erosion .shall be minimized from
runoff water before it leaves the site of tFre disturbed area;
8. Any temporary or permanent facility designed and constructed for the
conveyance of water around, through, or from the earth disturbance area
shall be designed to limit the v~ater flow 1:o anon-erosive velocity;
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 ~ 0
9. Construction site operators shall control waste such as but not limited to
discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals, litter, and
sanitary waste at the construction site that may cause adverse impacts to
water quality. .
10. All discharges authorized by the Town shall be composed entirely of.
stormwater and discharges of material other than stormwater must be
addressed in a separate permit issued by the State of Colorado for that
discharge:
11. Discharges exempt from discharge prohibitions [this area refers to an Illicit
- Discharge Ordinance] that are combined with stormwater discharges
associated with construction activity are authorized;
a. Landscaping irrigation
b. Lawn watering
c. Diverted stream flows
d. Irrigation return flow
e. Rising ground waters
f. Uncontaminated ground water infiltration {as defined in 40 CFR
35.2005(20)}
g. Uncontaminated pumped ground water
h. Natural Springs
i. Flow from riparian habitats and wetlands
j. Water line flushing
k. Discharges from potable water sources
I. Foundation drains
m. Air conditioning condensation
n. Water from crawl space pumps
o. Footing drains
p. Individual residential car washing'
q. De-chlorinated swimming pool discharges
r. Street wash water
12. Concrete wash water shall not be discharged to the MS4 or waters of the
State;
13. Off-site, vehicle tracking of sediments shall be minimized. Vehicle tracking
on Town streets shall not be allowed to enter the MS4 or waters of the
State; all streets shall be scrapped and cleaned by the end of each day;
14. The bypass of treatment facilities is generallyprohibited;
15. Bulk,storage structures for petroleum products and other chemicals shall
have protection so as to contain all spills and prevent any spilled material
from entering the MS4 or waters of the State;
16. No chemicals are to be added to the discharge unless the State of
Colorado grants permissions for the use of a specific chemical and
documentation of which is presented to the Town;
17. Solids, sludge or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or
control of wastewaters shall be properly disposed of in a manner such as
to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the
States;
~ 18. All wastes composed of building materials must be removed from the site
,~ for disposal in licensed disposal facilities. No building material wastes or
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 11
unused building materials shall be buried, dumped, or discharged at the
:site;
19. ,All discharges must comply with the la~rrful requirements of the Town of
'Vail, and other agencies regarding any discharges of stormwater to the
IMS4 or waters of the State under their jurisdiction, including applicable
irequirements;
20. 'Temporary soil erosion control facilities shall be removed upon completion
•of all construction activities final stabilization, and earth disturbance areas
.graded and stabilized with permanent soil erosion control measures
(pursuant to the standards and specifications prescribed in the latest
irevision of the stormwater management plan guidance document prepared
Iby the CDPHE and in accordance with the permanent erosion control
iFeatures shown on the SWMP approved by the Town.
I. SITE INSPECTIONS
Inspections shall be completed on a form prescribed by the Town. [e.g., CDOT's
inspection form as a template].
1. ~4ctive Sites -For sites where construction has not been completed, the
permittee and/or operator shall make a thorough inspection of their SWMP
~~t least every 14 days and after any precipitation or snowmelt event that
causes surface erosion.
a. The construction site perimeter, disturbed areas and areas used for
material storage that are exposed t:o precipitation shall be inspected
for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage
system. Erosion and sediment control measures identified in the
SWMP shall be observed to ensurE~ that they are operating correctly.
b. Based on the results of the inspection, the description of potential
pollutant sources, and the polllution prevention and control
measures that are identified in the site's SWMP shall be revised and
modified as apprapriate as soon as practicable after such
inspection. Maintenance and/or rr~odificationsto control measures
shall be completed in timely manner, but in no case more than 7
calendar days after the inspection.
c. The permittee and/or operator shall keep a record of inspections on
the project site at all times. Any incidence of non-compliance, such
as uncontrolled releases of mud or muddy water or measurable
quantities of sediment found off the site, shall be recorded with a
brief explanation as to the measures taken to prevent future
violations, as well as any measures taken to clean up the sediment
that has left the site. After adequate measures have been taken to
correct any problems, or where a report does not identify any
incidents of non-compliance, the report shall contain a signed
certification indicating the site is incompliance. This record shall
be made available to the Town oi` Vail or State of Colorado upon
request.
2. (:ompleted Sites- For sites where all construction activities are completed
but final stabilization has not been achieved due to a vegetative cover that
leas been planted but has not become established, the permittee and/or
operator shall make a thorough inspectioin of the SWMP at least once every
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 ~ 2
month. When site conditions make this schedule impractical, the permittee
and/or operator may petition the Town to grant an alternate inspection
schedule. These inspections must be conducted in accordance with
subparagraphs a, b, and c of subparagraph (1) above.
3. Winter Conditions -Inspections, as described above in subparagraphs a.
and b., are not required at sites where snow. cover exists over the entire
site for an extended period, and melting conditions do not exist. The
exemption is applicable only during the period where melting conditions
do not exist. Regular inspections, as described above, are required at all
other times.
J. REPORTING
No regular reporting requirements are included in this section; however, the Town
reserves the right to request that a copyof the inspection reports be submitted.
K. FINAL STABILIZATION
1. Firial stabilization is reached when all soil disturbing activities at the site
have been completed, and uniform vegetation cover has been established
with a density of at least 70 percent of pre-disturbance levels, or equivalent
permanent, physical erosion reduction methods have been employed. For
purposes of this requirement, establishment of a vegetative cover capable
of providing erosion control equivalent to pre-existing conditions at the
site can be considered final stabilization. The Town may, after consultation
with the permittee and/or operator and upon good cause, amend the final
stabilization criteria for specific operations.
2, Permanent soil erosion control measures for all slopes, channels, ditches,
or any disturbed land area shall be completed within fourteen (14) calendar
days afterfinal grading or the final earth disturbance has been completed.
When it is not possible to permanently stabilize a disturbed area after an
earth disturbance has been completed or where significant earth
disturbance activity~ceases, temporarysoil erosion control measures shall
be implemented within fourteen (14) calendar days. All temporary soil
erosion control measures shall be maintained until permanent soil erosion
measures are implemented.
L. RETENTION OF RECORDS
1. The permittee shall retain copies of the SWMP and all reports required by
this permit and records of all data used to complete the application tube
covered by this permit, for a period of at least three years from the date
that the site is finallystabilized;
2. The permittee shall retain a copy of the SWMP required by this permit at
the construction site from the date of project initiation to the dateof final
stabilization, unless the Town approves another location, specified by the
permittee.
M. CHANGE IN DISCHARGE
• The permittee shall inform the Town Engineer within two weeks in writing of any
intent to significantly change the activities from those indicated in the permit
application (this does not include changes to the SWMP). Upon request, the
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 ~ 3
permittee shall furnish the Town with such plains and specification, which the
Town deems reasonable necessary to evaluate the effect on the discharge and
receiving water. The SWMP shall be updated within 30 days of the changes. Any
discharge to the waters of the State from a poiint source other than specifically
authorized in this section is prohibited.
N. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMEPJTS
The owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all permanent quality
measures enacted pursuant to this chapter. A,II temporary stormwater quality
control measures shall be removed after work on the site has been completed and
the measures are longer needed. Should any property owner fail. to adequately
maintain the permanent stormwater quality measures or remove the temporary
measures, the Town may, after notifying the owner of the required maintenance
and/or removal and the owner failing to perlForm such maintenance and/or
removal, enter the affected property and perform or cause to be performed the
required work and assess the charge for such work against the property owner, in
accordance with the procedure set forth in Section Q., 1., 2., 3., and 4., remedies
for noncompliance.
O. TRANSIFER OF PERMiT
When the responsibilityfor stormwater discharges at a construction site changes
from orre owner to another, the permittee shall/ submit a completed Notice of
Transfer and Acceptance of Terms of a stormwater Quality Permit Certification on
a form prescribed by the Town that is signed in .accordance with subsection (D),
(1) of this section. If the new responsible partywill not complete the transferform
the peririt may be inactivated and the new owner shall obtain permit coverage
separately.
P. INSPECTIONS AND RIGHT OF ENTRY
The permittee shall allow the Town Engineer and//or an authorized representative:
1. lfo enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or
~rctivity is located or in which any records are required to be kept underthe
terms and conditions of the permit;
2. At reasonable times to have access to anti copy any records required to be
kept under the terms and conditions of this permit and to inspect any
ronitoring equipment or monitoring method required in the permit;and
3. To enter upon the permittee's premises to investigate, within reason, any
actual suspected, or potential source of grater pollution, or any violation of
the Colorado Water Quality Control Act. The investigation may include, but
is not limited to the following: sampling of any discharge and/or process
waters, the taking of photographs, interviewing permittee staff on alleged
violations, and access to any and all facilities or ar=eas within the
K~ermittee's premises that may have any effect on the discharge, permit or
~rlleged violation.
Q. REMEDIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE
1. Compliance orders. Whenever the TovKn determines that any activity is
occurring which is not in compliance with astormwater quality permit
~rnd/or the requirements of this ordinance, the Town may issue a written
Ordinance No. 3, Series oi'2005 ~ 4
noncompliance order to such person or permittee. The person or
permittee shall submit a written compliance schedule to the Town
Engineer with in five (5) days. The schedule shall contain specific actions
the permittee/operatormust complete, including dates forthe completion
of the actions. It shall be unlawful for any person to fail to comply with any
compliance order requirement.
2. Suspension and revocation of permit. The Town may suspend or revoke a
stormwater quality permit for violation of any provision of this section,
violation of the permit, and/or misrepresentations bythe permittee orthe
permittee's agents, employees, or independent contractors. .
3. Stop work orders. Whenever the Town determines that any activity is
occurring which is not incompliance with an approved permit and/or the
requirements of this ordinance, the Town may order such activity stopped
upon service of written notice upon the permittee and/or operator
responsible for or conducting such activity. Such permittee and/or
operatorshall immediatelystop all activity until authorized in writing by the
Town to proceed. If the appropriate permittee and/or operator cannot be
located, the notice to stop shall be posted in a conspicuous place upon the
area where the activity is occurring. The notice shall state the nature of the
violation. The notice shall not be removed until the violation has been
cured or authorization to remove the notice has been issued by the Town.
It shall be unlawful for any permittee and/or operator to fail to comply with
a stop work order.
4. Civil proceedings. In case of any violation of any provision of this
ordinance, or any amendment thereof, the Town of Vail may, at its
discretion, initiate civil proceedings, including injunction, mandamus,
abatement, declaratory judgment or other appropriate actions or
proceedings, to prevent, enjoin, abate, remove, or otherwise correct any
such unlawful condition. Civil remedies provided for underthis section are
not exclusive and shall not preclude prosecution for criminal violations
under the provisions of this section.
R. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
As a condition for the issuance of a stormwater quality permit, applicants shall be
required to provide security in the form of cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of
credit. The amount of the security shall be based upon the estimated cost of the
work required to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit
and requirements of this section. In determining the cost of work, an
administrative fee of 15% of the escrow amount shall be included.
S. RELEASE OF SECURITY
The security shall be released when the permit has been inactivated upon the
Town's determination that the permittee has successfully completed all required
work and met all other requirements of this section.
T. ASSESSMENT
~ If the permittee does not successfully complete all required work or violates any
requirement of the permit or this section, the Town may take corrective measures
and charge the cost of such to the permittee. Such costs shall include the actual
Ordinance No. 3, Series of2005 15
cost of any work deemed necessary by the Town. If the total of such costs
exceeds the security, the permittee shall be responsible for payment of the
remainiing balance within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of an accounting of
such from the Town.
U. ESTABL{SHMENT OF FEES
The Town Council shall, by resolution, establish all fees and charges deemed
necessary by the Town to implement the requirements of this section.
V. VARIANCES AND EXCEPTIONS
No permits shall be required for the following:
1. ~4gricultural use of land zoned rural residential.
2. ~~rading or an excavation below finished grade for basements, footings,
retaining walls, or other structures on plots of less than half (1/2) acre in
:size unless required otherwise under Section 3 (B) above. If groundwater
is encountered, the owner must contact the Town engineer and obtain a
groundwater discharge permit.
3. Sites smallerthan one half (1 /2) acre which are not part of a larger common
flan of development or sale and which constitute an infill of an established
older development within the Town.
4. INhere the applicant's engineer or CPESC professional certifies in writing
that the planned work and the final strucaures or topographical changes
will not result in or contribute to soil erosion or sedimentation and will not
interfere with any existing drainage course in sucha manner as to cause
damage to any adjacent property or result in the deposition of debris or
:>ediment on any public way, will not present any hazard to any persons or
property and will have no detrimental influence upon the public welfare or
upon the total development of the water,;hed.
5. Even though permits are not required under subsections V.1., 2., 3., and 4.,
of this section, those operations and construction activities which are
faxempted from obtaining permits must comply with the rules and
regulations concerning grading and erosion_specified inthis section, and
:;hall provide appropriate controls to retain soil erosion on the construction
:site.
Section 4. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for an~~ 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 5. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 16
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the
inhabitants thereof.
Section 6. 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 anyother action or
proceeding as commenced under or byvirtue 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 7. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereo#
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 thereo# theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 15t day of February, 2005, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 15t day of March, 2005, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 1St day of
March, 2005.
ATTEST:
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
~.
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2005 ~ 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 1, 2005
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, an ordinance adopting a revised
approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail
Village Inn, Phase I, to allow for modifications to Units 16, 17, and 29, Vail
Village Plaza Condominiums, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, located at 100 East Meadow Drive (Vail
Village Inn), Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village 1St Filing, and setting
forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Luc Meyer, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects
Planner: Bill Gibson
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant's proposal is to convert portions of the existing Units 17 and 29 of
the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums, Phase I, (generally located at the former
Phoenix Rising location) from retail uses to a residential dwelling unit. The
fascade of Unit 16 will also be upgraded as part of this proposal. This proposal
will add 2,104 sq.ft. of gross residential floor area (GRFA) to SDD No. 6, Vail
Village Inn. SDD No. 6 is comprised of 3.45 acres and consists of five phases of
development in the form of the Vail Village Inn. Staff is recommending approval,
with conditions, of the applicant's proposal, based on the criteria established in
Section IX of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental
Commission dated January 24, 2005.
BACKGROUND
At its January 24, 2005, .public hearing, the Planning and Environmental
Commission voted 7-0 to forward a recommendation of approval, with
conditions, to the Town Council of the proposed major amendment to SDD No.
6. The Commission's recommendation was based upon the review of the criteria
noted in Section IX of the January 24, 2005, staff memorandum and the evidence
and testimony presented, with the findings noted in Section X of the January 24,
2005, staff memorandum.
On January 19, 2005, the Town of Vail Design Review Board conceptually
reviewed this proposal and noted its support of the proposed design. This
proposal is scheduled for final review by the Design Review Board at its March 2,
2005, public hearing.
On February 15, 2005, the Town Council approved the first reading of Ordinance
No. 6, Series of 2005, by a vote of 6-1 (Donovan opposed).
1
011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Community Development recommends that the Town Council
approves the second reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, with
conditions. Should the Towri Council choose to approve the second reading of
Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, with conditions, the Department of Community
Development recommends the Council pass the following motion:
"The Town Council approves the secona' reading of Ordinance No. 6,
Series of 2005, an ordinance adopting a revised approved development
plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, to
allow for modifications to Units 16, 17, and 29, Vail Village Plaza
Condominiums, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures,
Vail Town Code, located at 100 East Meadow Drive (Vail Village Inn),
Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village 1St Filing, and setting forth details in
regard thereto, subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of this major amendment to Special Development District
(SDD) No. 6, Vail Village Plaza, shall bE~ contingent upon the applicant
receiving Town of Vail approval of the related design review
application.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for this major amendment to
Special Development District (SDD) No. 6, Vail Village Plaza, the
applicant shall submit a construction staging plan to the Town of Vail
Public Works Department for review and approval.
3. Prior to the issuance of a temporary or .Final Certificate of Occupancy
for this major amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No.
6, Vail Village Plaza, the applicant shall amend the Condominium Map
for the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums, pursuant to Chapter 13-6,
Condominium and Townhouse Plats, Vail Town Code. ,A note shall
be placed on the plat identifying the parking spaces dedicated to Units
16, 17, and 29, Vail Village Plaza Condominiums. Additionally, the
applicant shall construct and/or fund that portion of the East Meadow
Drive Streetscape improvements to be constructed in accordance with
the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan (see Attachment E of the
January 24, 2005, Staff memorandum to the Planning and
Environmental Commission)."
Should the Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, on
second reading, the Community Development Department recommends the
Council makes the following finding:
"Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated
,January 24, 2005, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Town
Council finds:
2
That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No.
6, Village Inn Plaza complies with the nine design criteria outlined in
Section 72-9A-8, Vail Town Code.
Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
Council, based upon the testimony and evidence presented; that any
adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development
standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits
provided.
Lastly, the Council finds that the request is consistent with the
development goals and objectives of the Town. "
IV. ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005
3
ORDINANCE NO.6
Series of 2005
AN ORDINANCE ,ADOPTING A REVISED APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6, VAIL VILLAGE INIV, PHASE I, TO ALLOW FOR
MODIFICATIONS TO UNITS 16, 17, AND 29, VAIL VILLAGE PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS, AND
SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, amendments to a Special Development District are permitted pursuant to
parameters set forth for such in Section 12-9A-10 of the Towri Code of the Town of Vail; and
WHEREA~~, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail field a
public hearing on January 24, 2005, to consider the proposed amendment in accordance v~ith
the provisions of the Town Code of the Town of Vail and forwarded a unanimous
recommendation of approval to the Town Council of the Town of Vail based on the. criteria and
findings presented in the staff memorandum; and
WHEREA`~, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed amendment to Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, complies with the review criteria outlined in
Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code and that the applicant has demonstrated that any
adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying
zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided; and
' WHEREA~;, the approval of the major amendment to Special De~,elopmerit District No. 6,
Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, and the development standards in regard thereto shall not establish
precedence or entitlements elsewhere within the Town of Vail;; and
WHEREAS, all notices as required by the Vail Town Code have been sent to the
appropriate parties; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the best interest ofthe public health,
safety, and welfare to adopt the proposed amendments to SpE~cial Development District No. 6,
Vail Village Inn, Phase 1. ~
Ordinance No. 6, Series x:005
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Purpose of the Ordinance
The purpose of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2005, is to amend the Approved Development Plan for
Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, in accordance with the provisions of
Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Town Code. The "underlying" zone district for Special Development
District No. 6 shall remain as the Public Accommodation (PA) zone district.
Section 2. Establishment Procedures Fulfilled, Planning Commission Report
The procedural requirements described in Article 12-9A of the Vail Town Code have been
fulfilled and the Vail Town Council has received the recommendation of approval from the
Planning & Environmental Commission for the major amendment to Special Development
District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1. Requests for the amendment of a special development
district follow the procedures outlined in Article 12-9A of the Vail Town Code.
Section 3. ~ecial Development District No. 6
Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, is hereby amended to assure
comprehensive development and use of the area in a manner that v~ould be harmonious with the
general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and
promote the goals, objecti~s and policies of the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan. Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1, is regarded as being complementaryto the
Town of Vail by the Vail Town Council and the Planning & Environmental Commission, and has
c
,~ been amended because there are significant aspects of the Special Development District that
Ordinance No. 6, Series 2005 2
cannot be satisfiec'I through the imposition of the standard Public Accommodation zone district
requirements.
Section 4. Development Standards, Special Development No. 6, Vail Village Inn
The amended Development Plan for Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 1,
shall include the following plans and materials prepared by FritzlE;n Pierce Architects, dated December
13, 2004, and stamped approved by the Town of Vail, dated March 1, 2005:
a. A200. Level One Floor Plan
b. A201. Level Two Floor Plan
c. A202. Level Three Floor Plan
d. A301. North & South Elevations
e. A302. East & West Elevations
Density-Number of Units Per Acre -
The number of dwelling units permitted in Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn shall
not exceed the following:
Dwelling Units Per Acre - 13.25
Density -Gross Residential Floor Area -
The gross residential floor area (GRFA) units permitted in Special Development District No. 6, Vail
Village Inn, Phase 1, which accounts for residential square footage only, shall not exceed the
following:
GRFA - 186,561 Square Feet
Ordinance No. 6, Series 2005 3
Other Development Standards
No other development standards are amended bythis ordinance
Section 5. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis 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 6. 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 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.
c
Ordinance No. 6, Series 2005 4
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST REAC-ING this 15`h day of February, 2005, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 1S` day of March, 2005, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Rodney E:. Slifer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this1st day of
March, 2005.
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 6, Series 2005 5
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
VAIL PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT
d/b/a VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
5:00 P.M.
Tuesday, February 8, 2005
Town of Vail Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT Nino Licciardi, Julie Hansen, Peter Cook, Scott Proper, Michelle
Hall
STAFF PRESENT Dennis Stein, Jody Blackburn, Amy Ludke
TOV MEMBERS Diana Donovan, Pam Brandmeyer
PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT None
CALL TO ORDER Nino called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m
APPROVAL OF 2/8/05
MEETING MINUTES Peter moved to approve the January 11`h minutes as written. Scott
seconded. Approved Unanimously.
PUBLIC INPUT OF ITEMS
NOT ON AGENDA
None
GOLF PLAN INTRODUCTION
Nino stated that he had been working on different ideas and
concepts of design for the Vail Golf Course. He presented his
drawings to the Board and stated that he would like Board
Members to be open minded regarding the following drawings and
to look over the ideas that he had presented. If any Board member
had comments or questions about the golf course drawings that
they should be discussed at the next Board Meeting Tuesday,
February 22, 2005.
Scott inquired if there really needed to be changes made to the golf
course. Peter said that the majority of courses across the country do
invest in updating their courses throughout the years. He went onto
state that the Vail Course is long overdue. Peter stated it had been
20+ years since any improvements were made to the course.
Nino stated that he just wanted the Board to be open minded
regarding the new concepts presented.
2004 FINANCIAL RE-CAP
Jody updated the Board on the 2004 Financials. She stated that the
District came in ahead overall by an estimated $28,000.00, but still
below budget.
She went onto state that Sports was favorable by $24,204 due to
the additional programming and increased participation which
helped the District tremendously. She stated that Dobson and Golf
Operations both came in unfavorable. Dobson's loss was due to
negotiations with the Town of Vail over the capacity issue during
2004/2005 winter special events season. Golf Operation's loss was
due to low group bookings and the District's responsibility in the
Pro Shop Inventory Buy Out. Jody stated that it was these two
departments that hurt the District as a whole.
JANUARY 2005 FINANCIAL UPDATE
Jody went onto describe the January 2005 figures and stated that
Sports and Dobson were ahead in revenue. The one week booking
of the National Brotherhood of Skiers really benefited Dobson.
Scott stated that,he noticed the $30,000 still budgeted for capital
improvements on the tennis courts. He inquired if improvement
costs would still be split between the District and the Town of
Vail. Dennis stated that we still need to get together with the Town
regarding the tennis court repair to see who will be responsible for
the cost of that repair.
Peter stated that he would like to see Jim Myers present at the next
Board Meeting to go over his final 2005 Golf Maintenance Budget.
He would like to get an answer from Jim if his 2005 budget is
indeed a workable, realistic budget. He wants to know if golf
conditions will remain the same under his new budget cut.
CURRENT CASH POSITION
Vail Recreation District Cash Balance as of 2/8/05
t
ColoTrust $ 57,856
ls` Bank $114,308
2
Upcoming Tax Revenue Payments:
February 10, 2005 - $118,000
March 10, 2005 - $324,000
Jody stated that our current 2005 cash position is better than it was
in 2004 at this time.
Michelle stated that she had spoken with Diane from Youth
Services, Vail Resorts and the Town of Vail and stated that there
would be no Y06 Teen New Year's Eve Event. Vail Resorts
mainly wanted to emphasize their amenities on New Years, such as
Adventure Ridge and wanted to go in a different direction.
Michelle stated that Dobson Arena would be open on New Year's
Eve and stated that we should get something booked in the Arena
sooner than later. Jody stated that Mike and Irv are working on
getting an event in on New Year's Eve.
REVISED/UPDATED GOALS
- Julie and Peter both agreed there be no more changes to the 2005
• Goals as of February 4, 2005 when the new revised goals were
presented. Julie stated that the Board must now evaluate the 2005
Goals_that Dennis has put together and evaluate Dennis's
performance based on the Goals he has submitted. Julie stated that
she would like to see Dennis tracking a monthly spreadsheet on his
progress and accomplishments from his 2005 Goals. She would
like to see him updating the Board monthly with this information.
The Board agreed.
Peter made a motion to accept the 2005 Goals from Dennis revised
as of February 4, 2005. Julie Seconded. Approved Unanimously.
REVISED DISTRICT PERSONNEL POLICIES
Jody stated that changes had been made to the Personnel Policy
Manual from discussion last time it was reviewed. Jody stated that
requests from Board Members were addressed and the Policy
Manual was sent to our Lawyers for review. Jody stated that Julie's
requests were met regarding; e-mail and Internet regulations and
other policies that were recommended by the lawyer were included
as well.
Scott questioned if our Manual was now legally protected because
of the legal review. He questioned if we were able to distribute
3
them to our employees. Dennis stated that was correct and yes we
were able to distribute them to our employees.
Dennis stated that many policies and procedures from the past also
still remain in the Manual.
Julie made a motion to accept the new District Personnel Policies
Manual. Scott Seconded. Approved Unanimously.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INPUT
Dennis stated that he would like to make a correction of incorrect
information shared regarding Vail Junior Hockey at the last
meeting. Dennis had previously stated that Vail Junior Hockey was
not paying monthly ice time invoices on time. Dennis investigated
and confirmed that Vail Junior was paying monthly invoices in a
timely fashion. He apologized for the incorrect information that
was given.
BOARD MEMBER INPUT
Michelle commended Youth Services; Diane and Chad for
reevaluating programs with low numbers and focusing on the
programming that had increased participation. Diane and Chad cut
the programs they felt were not needed, with low numbers in order
to save their Department and the District money. She stated we
must meet with the Town on possible solutions and a relocation for
the Youth Services building located in the Lionshead Parking
Structure when the new conference center is developed. We also
need not to forget the New Years Eve Event, although we do not
have it scheduled this year we need to consider possibly hosting
the event in the future, let us not forget about it.
Peter inquired about what types of hockey programs Dobson Staff
had in mind for next year. Dennis stated that Dobson would be
programming more recreational hockey programs and Vail Junior
Hockey would still have more. competitive programming for
hockey players wanting that opportunity to compete at a more
competitive level. Dennis went onto state that Vail Junior Hockey
is in agreement with this split.
Julie thanked staff for installing a light onto the outdoor sheet of
ice. Many people have commented on how much they like skating
on the outdoor sheet of ice and feel it has been a success.
4
Scott is impressed with Dennis's final 2005 goals and looks
forward to using these as a guide for a very successful 2005 year.
Peter and Scott agreed that the Board must meet with the Town in
terms of what they have planned for our Youth Services building
in the Lionshead Parking Structure when construction takes place
for the new Conference Center. We cannot let that decision slide;
we must relocate our Youth Services Department if the new
conference center will eradicate our building.
Scott stated at this time he feels that the impact of the conference
center has no impact on the Youth Services building.
ADJOURNMENT
Julie motioned to adjourn at 6:00 p.m. Peter seconded. Approved
unanimously.
Peter W. Cook, Secretary
a/OS BOD/2-8 minu[es.doc
~~~~~i
~`~~ ~ ~ ~5'~-~~~~
Amy Ludke, Assistant Finance Manager
5
Vail Town Council
75 South Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
February 23, 2005
Dear Mayor Slifer and Council members:
The Commission on Special Events strongly advocates any changes to, or variances
from, the sign code which may be deemed necessary to accommodate the back lighting of
the Vail Happenings signs. These signs have proven to be an excellent means of
communicating the current and upcoming events to the community and our guests. The
evening hours are frequently a time when guests and residents who are strolling to and
from dinner or shopping have the time to pause and read the lists. Without back lighting,
the signs are virtually useless after dark. Thank you for taking the time to consider this
issue.
Sincerely yours,
Dave Chapin, Chairman
Commission on Special Events
Cc: Russell Forrest
CSE Recon~n~endatinn to Council: Sign Code Cl~anges to !~l'i:07131t10d<ltt Vail Happc~~ings 2?4~2Q05
` lodge at LionsHead
Vail Town Council Members
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
February 25, 2005
Dear Town of Vail Council Members,
This letter is to raise directly with you our most recent concerns
regarding the proposed Vail Conference Center. Let us first say that we
are greatly appreciative of the job that Russ Forrest and the design
team has done in keeping us informed as the planning for this project
has evolved. The Town is to be congratulated on the openness of this
process. We have been given ample opportunities to address our
concerns with the planners and up until now have been supportive of
the project in concept.
The most recent plans presented to representatives of our Board of
Managers by Russ Forrest on February 7 and February 23, 2005 have
raised issues and concerns that if not resolved will jeopardize our
ongoing support of the center. We have reviewed the following list
with Russ but felt it important to also put them directly to the Town
Council and Architects.
- The mass and density of the building is too large for the site.
Specifically, we are concerned about how the building envelope
has grown to the south. The new design extends the
development approximately 75 feet to the south and therefore
75 feet closer to our buildings and property. Obviously, this
creates all sorts of problems for us relating to the right of
peaceful use and enjoyment of our property. We would highly
encourage the design team to consider shrinking the
building envelope on the south side so as not to disturb
the existing setback and street alignment.
- The proposed patio/deck structure has been presented to us as a
most important feature of the center. We can understand the
designers desire to have this deck but cannot understand why it
is being placed with a view directly to the south. The deck as it is
now designed will be approximately 40 feet above the ground,
Professionally Managed by Peak Resort Service, Inc.
380 East Lionshead Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-2700
40 feet from our property line and faces directly south into our
building creating a claustrophobic environment for Phase II & III
residences and for conference attendees. The current capacity as
designed is for approximately 300 people. These 300 people will
have a birds eye view directly down and into the 22 bedrooms
situated on the north side of our Phase III building and
numerous Phase II condominium and studio units. We can
envision some potentially embarrassing situations for our guests
and owners being caught unawares to this situation, especially at
night. This smoker's party porch/deck will also generate
substantial new noise for those trying to sleep/relax in those
particular bedroom units. We would highly encourage the
design team to consider sliding the deck towards the
southeast end of the conference center and orienting the
deck views more towards the southeast to take advantage
of the unobstructed views of Vail Mountain present above
the Library, including the open expanse between the
Library and Dobson Ice Arena area, as well redesigning
this deck/patio to shrink it in size so as to limit the
number of people who are able to congregate, thereby
reducing the noise disruptions. This would provide a BETTER,
LESS CLAUSTROPHOBIC and UNOBSTRUCTED view experience
over the Vail Library toward Vail Mountain vs. looking into and at
a fairly unattractive Phase III building as it exists today, and in
the future, a potentially taller structure with even more
bedrooms a mere 50 feet away from 300 onlookers.
- The current proposed plan, due to the expansion to the south,
would require a new road alignment for East Lionshead Cr. and
the elimination of the existing roundabout at the east end. This
new alignment will shift the street to the south onto what has
historically been used by the Lodge at Lionshead for its
landscaped buffer from the street and parking structure. It will
also encroach upon our existing driveways, two of which are
heated. The plan calls for moving the existing roundabout to the
west and placing it directly at the top of the main driveways to
our underground parking structures and surface lot. This
roundabout is heavily used by the outlying hotel shuttles that
move at a fairly rapid clip. We believe this new street and
roundabout alignment will create a hazardous situation for both
pedestrians and our guests/owners attempting to pull out of the
property onto E. Lionshead Cr. We would highly encourage
the design team to leave the existing street alignment and
roundabout in place. We would also encourage the Town
of Vail to consider the creation of a new shuttle stop on
the upper west side deck of the parking structure. This
would greatly reduce the chaotic, vehicular/pedestrian
conflict and congestion that currently exists on the
corner.
Thank you for taking these issues into consideration. We are optimistic
that the talented and creative design team will be able to come up
with solutions that will work for all parties, keep the center on track
and allow for us to continue to be proponents of the project.
Sincerely,
Board of Managers
Vail/Lionshead Condominium Association
Lionshead Phase II Condominium Association
Lionshead III Condominium Association
Cc: Russell Forrest
Fentress, Bradburn Architects