HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-07-01 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
R
J
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
6:00 P.M., TUESDAY, JULY 1, 2008
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and
cannot be relisd upon to determine at what time Council
will consider an item.
1. ITEMITOPIC: Citizen Input. (10 min.)
2. ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report. (50 min.)
? Summer Parking Update. ? Response to audit report.
? Revenue Update.
? CDOT Incident Management Plan.
3. ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda. (5 min.)
a. Approval of 06.03.07 and 06.17.08 minutes.
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Out-of-Cycle
Contribution Request. (10 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Consider additional
information regarding Betty Ford Alpine Gardens' request for
supp4emental funding for 2008.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: At the June 17`" meeting, Council
requested additional information from Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
concerning their request for funding to replace three bridges in the
garden. This agenda item and the attached memo are in
response the request for information.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As discussed in more detail in the
attached memo, staff recommends funding up to $20,000 from the
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund to replace the two smaller bridges
in 2008.
\
5. ITEMITOPIC: Emergency Generator Bid. (10 min.)
Staff is asking for approval to award the bid for the Emergency
Generator Project to JL Veile Construction. The Town received four bids and Veile Construction was the low bid at $179,660. .
The project is budgeted at $175,000 in capital projects, we will
need additional funding from the 911 Authority Board which
authorized $25,000, and the Fire Chiefs which endorsed the use
of $50,000 from the Dispatch Fund Balance, for a total project
budget of $250,000. The budget line items are:
? Viele Bid $179,660
? Arch/Engineer $17,500 (so far)
? Generator $33,500
? Contingency $19,340
? Grand Total $250,000
Bringing the municipal/Police Department building emergency
lighting up to code was an unforeseen cost when the budget was
originally put together. Staff also needs contingency money as
there may be unforeseen items come up as the project gets
underway.
6. ITEM/TOPIC: 2008/09 Parking Task Force Recommendations.
' (30 min.)
Please see attached memorandum.
7. Scot Hunn ITEMITOPIC: A request for first reading of Ordinance No. 5,
Series of 2008, an ordinance approving a major amendment to
Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to
Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to
allow for the development of the Cornerstone Site. (PEC070055)
(40 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
First Reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2008:
Staff recommends the Council approves, on first reading,
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2008, an ordinance approving a major
amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade
Village, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of the Cornerstone
Site.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On January 28, 2008, the Town of
Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted unanimousfy
to forward a recommendation for approval, with conditions, of an
application for a major amendment to Special Development
.
District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10,
Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
development of the Cornerstone Site. (PEC070055)
On February 19, 2008, the Vail Town Council held a public
hearing to consider Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2008, an ordinance
approving a major amendment to Special Development District
No. 4, Cascade Village, on first reading. At that meeting, the
Council voted unanimously to table the public hearing to their
regularly scheduled meeting of March 18, 2008, citing concerns
over the proposed amendments to the SDD, building height,
public benefits, parking and employee housing mitigation. The
applicant has submitted subsequent requests to table the hearing
to the Council's regularly scheduled meeting dates of April 1, May
20, and July 1, 2008, to praperly respond to the Council's
previously stated concerns and to work with Staff to fully analyze
previous amending ordinances for SDD No. 4 prior to returning to
the Town Council for further consideration of the development
. plans and first reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2008.
8. Bill Gibson ITEM/TOPIC: Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2008, an ordinance
amending Chapter 12-16, Conditional Use Permits, to allow for the
administrative review and approval of specific conditional uses,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080103). (30 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approved, approve with
modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2008, on first
reading.
BACKGROUND RATDONALE: On June 23, 2008, the Planning
and Environmental Commission voted 6-0-0 to forward a
recommendation of approval for the prescribed text amendments
. of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2008. The purpose of the
proposed amendments is to streamline the Town development
review process, while achieving the same development outcomes.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Town
Council approves Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2008, on first
reading.
9. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment. (8:35 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BEG1N AT TBD, TUESDAY, JULY 15, 2008 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL .
CHAMBERS.
To: Town Council
From: Stan Zemler, Judy Camp, Greg Hall
Date: June 26, 2008
Subject: Response to Audit Management Letter
At your June 3, 2008, meeting, Michael Jenkins of McMahan and Associates presented
the 2007 audited financial statements. During the audit, McMahan and Associates
identified the parking system implementation as an issue that warranted discussion in a
management letter. Staff agrees with the comments made by the auditors and offers the
following update and action plan. Auditor comments are repeated here in italics.
Parking system Implementation
The parking software system implemented by the Town in late 2007 batched credit card
charges on a daily basis, rather than by booth and terminal, leaving the Town unable to
verify completeness of parking revenues. In addition, Town staff discovered that the
new parking soffware's process for pre-authorization of credit card charges resulted in
erroneous duplication of customer parking charges in several instances. Although Town
staff was able to resolve many disputed charges from parking customers, the volume of
such duplications prevented Town staff from fully identifying valid parking charges during
this period. Moreover, the Town was forced to utilize other parking software so that
credit sales could be timely processed and reconciled to daily bank deposits and booth
activity reports.
It is therefore imperative that Town staff eifher work with the parking system contractor
to resolve these software deficiencies so as to allow Town parking staff more effective
batching and tracking capabilities, or determine an alternative course of action with
respect to the management and reporting of the Town's parking structures.
Staff acknowledges the problems discussed above. The immediate action taken to
reso(ve the duplicate credit card charges was to discontinue use of the new system for
credit card processing. A temporary system was established to provide credit card
processing through credit card machines cnnnected directly to the bank. Meanwhile, a
new version of the "data cap" hardware that was in place prior to the installation of the
new system was installed. The new data caps are faster than the old ones with the
same reliability. Once the data caps were installed, all transactions were reconciled
from the exit booth activity to bank records. Staff plans to continue using data caps for
the 2008/2009 ski season.
Staff will continue working with the parking system vendor to find a solution to the
hardware and software issues that caused the credit card processing portion of the
system to fail. It is important to note most of the parking structure equipment, including
the gate operations, cash register processing, gate access information, and user
inventory by type of pass, was similar to the system it replaced and has operated
satisfactorily from installation. Only the reporting and credit card transmission module,
which was a newly written component provided as part of the package, is an issue.
With the initial installation, time was short to get the system up and running before paid
parking began. Among the factors contributing to the system problems are the following
processes which we will control in the future:
F:\PINANCE\BUDGET\BUDGET 08\Town Council Memos & Analysis\080701 Mangaement Letter.doc
• the credit card processing portion of the system was not adequately tested prior
to use • audit reports were not written and tested
• standard operating procedures for booth attendants and supervisors were not
determined and documented
• booth attendants and supervisors were not adequately trained on new
procedures
Each of these items will be addressed before going live again with the new software.
We also noted no formal contractual arrangement with the parking system contractor
outlining the rights and responsibilities of each party, leaving the Town without traditional
means of pursuing resolution of discrepancies or dispufes with vendors. All significant
arrangements with external parties (based on either dollar amount or "sensitivity') should
be formalized to clearly outline the rights and responsibilities of each party, establish
performance and payment parameters, provide a method of resolving discrepancies and
disputes, and should be signed by the parties to indicate acceptance of terms. All major
contracts would then be subject to the Town's customary review by the Town Attorney
before execution.
Staff acknowledges there was no written contract and there shouid have been. There
was a multi-departmental selection process and Council approval to award the contract
to the bidder recommended by staff. However, no formal contract was drafted and
submitted to the Town Attorney and Town Manager for review and signature,
respectively.
All directors have been reminded of the need for contracts for the town's protection.
Staff who gave the vendor the "go ahead" for this project also commit to obtaining
contracts in the future.
Meanwhile, staff has identified the need to update, clarify, and re-distribute the town's
purchasing guidelines. This effort is in process.
An additional internal control for capital projects will be implemented shortly through the
Town's H T E accounting system. Currently, a project code is set up to track each
capital project at the time the project is budgeted. Once the project code is established,
. payments can be processed against that code. There is no checkpoint to assure a
contract exists. In the future, project codes will be established in the system as "budget
only" until a contract is executed. With the "budget only" classification, the project will
appear on budget reports, but no payments may be made against it. When a contract is
executed, the Town Attorney's office will notify Finance and the "budget only" flag will be
changed to "active" allowing payments to be processed.
Finally, a tracking mechanism will be set up for those projects which require Town
Council approval prior to awarding the contract. In the future, when Council approves an
~ award, notification will be send to the Town Attorney's office and accounts payable to
' expect a contract is in process. The Town Attorney's office will follow up with the
appropriate department if a draft contract is not sent for review.
F:\FINANCE\BUDGET\BUDGET 08\Town Council Memos & Analysis\080701 Mangaement Letter.doc
TOWN OF VAIL
REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS
July 1, 2008
Sales Tax
When all sales tax returns are received for the month of May, collections for the month
are expected to be $617,735, up 13% from May, 2007. Year-to-date sales tax collections
of $11 M are up 6.8% from 2007. For comparison, inflation as measured by the consumer
price index was up 4.2% compared with the prior year.
Use Tax
Use tax collections began as of January 1, 2008. As of June 24, collections total
$303,384 of unbudgeted revenue.
Construction Permit Fee Revenue
Construction permit revenue currently totals $1.4M, up 1.3% from this time last year.
The increase is due to major redevelopment projects, which make up 80% of the total.
Construction permit fee revenue from non-major projects is down 30% from this time last
year.
Real estate Transfer Tax (RETT)
RETT collections throubh 7une 24, 2008, total $3.5 million. This amount is a 16%
increase from this time last year primarily due to recent sales of major redevelopment
projects. The overall real estate market in Eagle County is down 25% in sales dollars and
down 43% in sales transactions as of April, 2008.
Major redevelopment projects such as Arrabelle, Forest Place, One Willow Bridge and
Vail Plaza account for 54% of year-to-date 2008 collections. This is significantly higher
than the 26% from June 2007, and is the reason Vail's RETT revenue is performing much
better than the rest of the county.
RETT collections from property transfers not related to major redevelopment projects
dropped by 28% year-to-date as of June, 2008 compared with 2007. This is more in line
with the sales decrease across the county.
080701 Revenue Highlights - 1 -
ti
.
TOWN OF VAIL MEMORANDUM
TO: Stan Zemler
Council Members
FROM: Kathleen Halloran
DATE: 1 st Qtr 2008
RE: Investment Report
Enclosed is the investment report with balances as of March 31, 2008.
The estimated average yield for the pooled cash fund was 2.9%. As of
3/31/08, the yield curve for 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year are 1.28%, 1.51%,
and 1.54% respectively. TOV investments performed above all of these yields.
Our investment mix follows the policy objectives of safety, liquidity, and yield in that order.
2008 Investment Mix
$5.8M
Gov't
$5.2M Securities, 9%
Cash, 8% $1.81VI
CD's, 3%
$49.8M
Colorado
Investment
Pool, 80%
Other than transfer of funds for operating uses, the Town did not change banking institutions
or investment products during the 1st quarter of 2008.
Please call me if you have any questions.
v
. ~ •
Town of Vail, Colorado
Investment Report
Summary of Accounts and Investments
As of 3/31 /08
2008
Balances Percentage
Cash 03/31 /08 of Total
Commercial Banks $4,435,722 7.09%
Money Market Funds $723,314 1.16%
Total Cash $5,159,036 8.25%
U.S. Government Securities (see page 5)
Government Agency Seurities -Piper Jaffray $3,864,014 6.17%
FNMA'S, GNMA'S, FHLMC'S & SBA'S - Dana $1,976,748 3.16%
Total Government Securities $5,840,762 9.33%
Certificates of Deposit $1,807,728 2.89%
Colorado Investment Pools $49,798,617 79.54%
Total Portfolio $62,606,143 100.0%
Maturing Within 12 Months $58,741,884 93.83%
Maturing Within 24 Months $1,639,444 2.62%
Maturing After 24 Months $2,224,815 3.55%
$62,606,143 100.0%
Investments 03312008 2
rPerformance Summary
as of 3/31/08
Institution Average Balances
Type of Accounts ' Return 03l31/08
"CASH"ACCOUNTS
Commercial Bank Accounts:
First Bank of Vail - Operating
Interest 1.530% $4,435,722
Money Market Accounts:
Schwab Institutional Money Market Fund - Dana Investments
Interest and Balance 2.640% $35,557
Vail Super Now Public Funds Account - Piper Jaffray
Interest and Balance 2.590% $687,757
Total Money Market Funds $723,314
Total "Cash" Accounts $5,159,036
GOVERNMENT SECURITIES (see pg 5)
Government Agency Seurities -Piper Jaffray 4.36°/a $ 3,864,014
FNMA'S, GNMA'S, FHLMC'S & SBA'S - Dana 4.86% $ 1,976,748
$ 5,840,762
Total Government Securities $ 5,840,762
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
U.S. Bank, Vail Colorado Matures May 31, 2008 5.250% 598,738
Alpine Bank, Vail Colorado (#19750) Matures Sept 7, 2008 3.639% 569,533
Alpine Bank, Vail Colorado (#19751) Matures Sept 7, 2008 5.250% 639,456
1,807,728
Total Certificates of Deposit $ 1,807,728 LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOLS
Colotrust General Fund
Interest 2.790% $49,798,617
Total Local Government Investment Pools Accounts $49,798,617
Total All Accounts $62,606,143
Investments 03312008 3
` a Government Securities
as of 3l31 /08
Days/Years
Int Rate Purchase Maturity to Maturity Market
Agency Broker Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value
"*"Federal Agency Discount Notes & Bonds*"*
FHI.MC 3128X1HH-3 PiperJaffray 3.000% 2.990% 26-Mar-08 10-Dec-08 0.7 $140,188
FHLB 31339Y5-DO Piper Jaffray 3.280% 3.270% 16-Jul-03 16-Jan-09 5.5 $200,062
FHLB 31339YJ-W3 Piper Jaffray 3.500% 3.490% 28-Ju1-03 28-Jan-09 5.5 $200,188
FNMA 31398AHS4 Piper Jaffray 4.875% 4.800% 25-Mar-08 15-Oct-09 1.6 $344,889
FHLB 3133XH-FA-5 Piper Jaffray 5.000% 4.930% 26-Dec-06 16-Oct-09 2.8 $253,438
FHLMC 3128X27E9 Piper Jaffray 4.250% 4.240% 18-Mar-08 30-Oct-09 1.6 $500,435
FFC6 31S-TD-5 Piper Jaffray 4.650% 4.440% 22-Ju1-05 5-Apr-10 4.7 $261,640
FNMA 3136F3-RDO Piper Jaffray 4.250% 4.230% 28-Feb-08 20-May-10 2.2 $501,405
FHLB 3133XK-6X-6 Piper Jaffray 5.375% 5.330% 27-Jun-07 18-Jun-10 3.0 $251,640
FHLB 31339YHD7 Piper Jaffray 4.000% 3.990% 25-Mar-08 23-Ju1-10 2.3 $100,094
FFCB 31331 YGD6 Piper Jaffray 4.375% 4.320°r6 10-Dec-07 10-Dec-10 3.0 $202,312
FHLB 3133XK-Z9-9 Piper Jaffray 5.300% 5.190% 27-Jun-07 15-Dec-10 3.5 $254,923
FHLMC 3133FiCV7 Piper Jaffray 4.000% 3.990~'0 25-Mar-08 15-Mar-11 3.0 $200,034
FHLB 3133XK-4R-1 Piper Jaffray 5.500% 5.460% 27-Jun-07 20-Jun-11 4.0 $302,064
FHLB 3133XP3N2 Piper Jaffray 3.875% 3.850°h 25-Mar-08 22-Ju1-1 1 3.3 $150,704
Average Yield 4.36% $3,864,014
Days/Years
Interest Rate Purchase Maturity to Maturity Market
Agency Broker Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value
* * * FNMA'S, ARM'S & SBA'S"* *
FNMA Dana 5.000% 4.9% 23-Jan-06 23-Jan-09 3.0 122,644
SBA 500463V-Q Pooled - Dana 7.625% 7.1 % 1-Aug-88 25-Jan-13 24.5 $3,118
SBA 502647V-Q Pooled - Dana 8.475% 7.9% 1-Ju1-94 25-Jun-19 25.0 $10,414
SBA 504417V-Q Pooled - Dana 8.000% 7.2% 1-Feb-99 25-Feb-24 25.1 $12,101
SBA 505536V-M Pooled - Dana 7.875% 5.6% 1-Aug-01 25-Jun-26 24.9 $35,804
GNMA 8417 Pooled - Dana 5.125% 5.1 % 1-Oct-88 20-Oct-18 30.1 $4,367
GNMA 8703 Pooled - Dana 4.750% 5.6% 1-Sep-95 20-Sep-25 30.1 $1,445
GNMA 8720 Pooled - Dana 5.125% 5.1 % 30-Sep-95 20-Oct-25 30.1 $1,389
GNMA 8788 Pooled - Dana 5.375% 6.3% 1-Jan-96 20-Jan-26 30.1 $1,258
GNMA 80426 Pooled - Dana 4.500% 5.6% 21-Ju1-00 20-Ju1-30 30.0 $13,930
GNMA 80593 Pooled - Dana 4.375% 6.3% 1-Apr-02 20-Apr-32 30.1 $8,543
GNMA 80710 Pooled - Dana 4.500% 5.6% 1-Ju1-03 20-Ju1-33 30.1 $14,773
FNMA 555921 Pooled - Dana 5.456% 5.7% 1-Oct-03 1-Sep-35 31.9 $59,465
FNMA 422251 Pooled - Dana 6.124% 6.5% 1-Dec-95 1-Jan-21 25.1 $75,287
FNMA 334439 Pooled - Dana 5.630% 6.2% 1-Dec-95 1-Apr-24 28.4 $6,211
FNMA 520790 Pooled - Dana 5.805% 6.5% 1-Jun-00 1-Apr-28 27.9 $9,345
FNMA 546468 Pooled - Dana 6.389% 6.6% 24-May-00 1-Jun-28 28.0 $5,850
FNMA 535326 Pooled - Dana 6.472% 6.2% 26-Jun-00 1-Jun-28 28.0 $8,154
FNMA 323798 Pooled - Dana 6.427% 6.6% 1-Dec-99 1-May-29 29.4 $3,172
FNMA 576517 Pooled - Dana 6.069°h 7.0% 1-Mar-01 1-Feb-30 28.9 $2,123
FNMA 567875 Pooled - Dana 5.735% 6.5% 1-Dec-00 1-Sep-30 29.8 $7,405
FNMA 593941 Pooled - Dana 5.328% 6.79'0 1-Dec-01 1-Dec-30 29.0 $26,765
FNMA 545057 Pooled - Dana 6.394% 6.5% 1-May-01 1-May-31 30.0 $1,842
FNMA 650970 Pooled - Dana 6.969% 7.1 % 1-Aug-01 1-Ju1-32 30.9 $8,479
FNMA 709092 Pooled - Dana 6.913% 7.0% 1-Jun-03 1-Jun-33 30.0 $13,820
FNMA 723661 Pooled - Dana 5.068% 7.0% 1-Ju1-03 1-Ju1-33 30.0 $5,086
FNMA 761737 Pooled - Dana 3.720% 6.5% 16-May-05 1-Dec-33 28.6 $22,725
FNMA 725462 Pooled , Dana 5.217% 6.0% 1-Apr-04 1-Jan-34 29.8 $15,684
FNMA 745 i 60 Pooled - Dana 5.592 % 6.4 % 1-Dec-05 1-Mar-34 28.3 $49,097
FNMA 791573 Pooled - Dana 4.968% 7.0% 1-Ju1-04 1-Aug-34 30.7 $11,375
FNMA 888321 Pooled - Dana 6.000% 5.8% 1-Mar-07 1-Aug-34 27.3 $84,465
FNMA 849207 Pooled - Dana 4.686% 6.3% 1-Jan-06 1-Jan-36 30.0 $68,192
FNMA 888710 Pooled - Dana 5.675% 5.8% 1-Sep-07 1 -Jul-36 28.9 $93,518
Investments 03312008 4
1
Y
Government Securities
as of 3/31 /08
Days/Years
Int Rate Purchase Maturity to Maturity Market
Agency Broker Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value
FNMA 893933 Pooled - Dana 7.370% 6.5% 1-Sep-06 1-Oct-36 30.1 $80,528
FNMA 555624 Pooled - Dana 5.465% 6.8% 1-Jun-03 1-Mar-38 34.8 $12,511
FNMA 735967 Pooled = Dana 3.987% 6.4% 1-Sep-05 1-Mar-38 32.5 $22,330
FNMA 888386 Pooled - Dana 5.601% 6.0% 1-Apr-07 1-Mar-38 30.9 $155,527
FNMA 888618 Pooled - Dana 5.861% 6.2% 1-Ju1-07 1-Mar-38 30.7 $56,118
FNMA 557073 Pooled - Dana 5.543% 5.7% 1-Sep-00 1-Jun-40 39.8 $9,974
FNMA 110540 Pooled - Dana 5'.282% 5.4% 1-Nov-90 1-May-20 29.5 $10,124
FNMA 327446 Pooled - Dana 6.143% 6.5% 1-Oct-95 1-Aug-22 26.9 $5,520
FNMA 868877 Pooled - Dana 7.370% 6.6% 1-Apr-06 1-Apr-36 30.0 $63,855
FNMA 701045 Pooled - Dana 5.292% 6.5% 1-Apr-03 1-Apr-33 30.0 $134,202
FHLMC 775572 Pooled - Dana 4.907% 6.0% 1-Sep-94 1-Jun-24 29.8 $32,397
FHLMC 885469 Pooled - Dana 5.86596 6.4% 1 -Dec-95 1-Aug-25 29.7 $2,052
FHLMC 610416 Pooled - Dana 6.615% 7.2% 1-Mar-96 1-Mar-26 30.0 $451
FHLMC 755344 Pooled - Dana 6.086% 7.1 % 1-May-00 1-Mar-28 27.9 $4,137
FHLMC 645235 Pooled - Dana 5.340% 6.2% 1-Ju1-00 1-Mar-29 28.7 $2,796
FHLMC 846784 Pooled - Dana 6.187% 6.7% 1-Ju1-00 1-May-29 28.9 $4,329
FHLMC 786867 Pooled - Dana 5.892% 6.0% 1-Nov-99 1-Aug-29 29.8 $3,628
FHLMC 846956 Pooled - Dana 6.315% 6.8% 1-Nov-01 1-Nov-31 30.0 $3,414
FHLMC 847166 Pooled - Dana 4.137% 6.6% 1-Ju1-03 1-Aug-33 30.1 $11,228
FHLMC 847359 Pooled - Dana 5.202% 6.2% 1-Dec-04 1-Dec-34 30.0 $12,212
FHLMC 782526 Pooled - Dana 4.207% 4.2% 1-Apr-05 1-Apr-35 30.0 $145,838
FHLMC 847629 Pooled - Dana 5.535% 6.1% 1-Oct-06 1-Sep-36 29.9 $44,919
FHLMC 865006 Pooled - Dana 6.935% 6.8% 1-Feb-89 1-Aug-18 29.5 $1,622
FHLMC 865127 Pooled - Dana 6.183% 6.1 % 1-Aug-89 1-Mar-19 29.6 $2,629
FHLMC 865476 Pooled - Dana 5.353% 6.0% 1-Apr-96 1-Feb-36 39.9 $1,875
FHLMC 865663 Pooled - Dana 5.540% 5.9% 1-Nov-00 1-Feb-30 29.3 $3,505
FHLMC 765114 Pooled - Dana 6.295% 6.8% 1-Mar-99 1-Jan-18 18.9 $4,948
FHLMC 847427 Pooied - Dana 5.782% 7.1 R'o 1-Ju1-05 1-Sep-34 29.2 $9,991
FHLMC 1G1840 Pooled - Dana 5.245% 5.3% 1-Feb-06 1-Nov-35 29.8 $106,815
FHLMC 1133063 Pooled - Dana 5.552% 5.5% 1-Aug-06 1-Aug-36 30.0 $146,230
FHLMC 847058 Pooled - Dana 5.552% 7.1 % 1-Aug-02 1-Aug-32 30.0 $48,716
FHLMC 611384 Pooled - Dana 5.941 % 6.9% 11-Feb-05 1-Dec-32 27.8 $11,570
Accrued interest 4,860% $10,324
Income Receivable $2,586
Average Yield 4.86% 1,976,748
Total $5,840,762
Investments 03312008 5
?
Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was calted to order at
approximately 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Dick Cleveland.
Members present: Dick Cleveland, Mayor
Mark Gordon
Farrow Hitt
Kevin Foley
Kim Newbury
Margaret Rogers
Andy Daly
Staff Members: Stan zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Input.
Colorado Department of Transportation representative Michelle Halstead introduced
herself to Council. Halstead serves in CDQT's office of government relations and is a
point of contact for the community as it relates to CDOT issues and concerns.
The second item on the agenda was the Prssentation of the 2007 Audit Report.
Michael Jenkins, C.A., C.P.A., and a principal of McMahan and Associates, LLC,
presented the results of the 2007 audi# to the Council and the public. "This was an
independent examination of the town's financials." In accordance with section 9.11 of
the Vail Town Charter, an independent audit shall be made of all town accounts at least
annually. The audit shall be conducted by certified public accountants and copies made
available for public inspection at the municipal building. Jenkins reported the town's
finances are healthy and thanked Finance Director Judy Camp and Budget & Financial
Reporting Manager Kathieen Hailoran for their diligent efforts and accounting accuracy.
Jenkins commented on an "except for" clause in the auditor's opinion concerning Timber
Ridge's ability to continue as a going concern. Regarding Timber Ridge, Daly
responded, "The net results are not a significant component to the overall financial
health of the town...This is not a significant issue compared to the town's ability to meet
its financial obligation...lt does not reflect the solid financial position of our community..."
Jenkins and Zemler clarified the recent credit card issues in the Vaif parking structures
had been addressed and the system was improving.
The third item on the agenda was Betty Ford Alpine Gardens (BFAG) Update.
I
BFAG Executive Director Ann Kurronen thanked Council for its continued financial
support. "Your supporting us has heiped us become what we are today...We are
nationally recognized in the botanic garden community...We see 100,000 visitors come
through the gardens and we do not charge...The gardens host numerous programs for
children and we do not charge for that either...We will be celebrating our 20'n
anniversary this summer.. Several programs are scheduled to celebrate the event...
Garden Smart, the longest running television garden show in the country, will be
producing a segment on what Vail does to beautify the city." Kurronen also mentioned
the gardens had been nominated as a finalist for the best botanic garden in the country
by Horticufture Magazine. Daly clarified the garden's budget was approximately
$400,000. Kurronen explained "We are pretty well planted as this point...We don't have
to spend a whole lot on plants anymore."
The fourth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
? Revenue Update.
Budget and Financial Reporting Manager Kathleen Halloran reported as part of revenue
monitoring and budget planning, staff will continue to follow current information on
available financial and economic trends such as housing sales, consumer confidence
and inflation. That information, along with year-to-date revenue collection, will factor into
the town's analysis of budgeted revenues. Two major revenue categories described
below include a brief summary of market or economic assumptions. Sales tax collections
continued at a healthy pace overall with January through April estimated collections of
$10.5 million, up 6.6% from last year. Meanwhile, the consumer price index is 3.9%
higher than April 2007, which identifies the portion of increase potentially caused by
inflation. Year-to-date sales tax revenue is 3.8% higher than budgeted for the same time
period. The month of April is estimated at $1.1 miltion, down 18.21 % from last year due
to the timing of Easter (March '08 versus April '07). The 2007/2008 ski season is
expected to be up 4.8% from the prior ski season, reflecting good snow. Year to date
property tax collections of $2.7 million are $802,000, or 42% higher than prior year. A
28% increase was budgeted for 2008. An additional 12-18% of incremental property tax
revenue ($450,000 -$650,000) was estimated when the county's final assessor's report
was published. Tax collections are tracking as projected. Use tax collections began as of
January 1, 2008. As of May 29, coflections total $156,458. Although larger collections
throughaut the summer construction period are anticipated, the town current{y does not
have any revenue budgeted for this item in 2008. Ski lift tax revenue of $2.6 million
through April is up 7.5% from last year and November - April ski season revenue of $3.2
million is .up 3.3% from the prior ski season. Year-to-date parking revenue of $2.9 million
through April, 2008 is up 6.0% from the same point in time last year. For the ski season
(November 2007 through April 2008), parking revenue of $4.5 million is up 11.2% from
the 200612007 season, mainly due to increased pass sales and pricing. Construction ,
permit volume is 34% higher than last year with construction permit fee revenue of $1.1
million through May 30, 2008, compared with $817,000 for 2007. The total annual
budget far this line item is $1.3 miilion. This year's revenue includes $902,000
(83% of the total) from five large redevelopment projects: Lionsquare Lodge North,
Mountain View, Ritz-Carlton, Safeway and. Solaris. Major redevelopment projects
accounted for $519,000 (64% of total) at this time fast year. Construction permit fees
from non-major projects have decreased by 36% from last year. Construction permit ,
fees include building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and sprinkler permits. RETT
collections of $2.9 million through May 26, 2007 are 30°1o higher than this time last year.
2
2008 collections include the following major projects to-date: Arrabelle at Vail Square,
Forest Place, One Willow and Vail Plaza. Last year's collections included tax on a
portion of three large projects: Forest Place, Gore Creek Place and IUlanor Vail. Major
projects account for 46% of year-to-date collections in 2008, compared to 11 % of the
total in 2007. RETT collections from property transfers not related to major
redevelopment projects dropped by 22% year-to-date as of May, 2008, compared with
2007.
? Vail Child Care Center Re-Allocation.
The matter was addressed during the information update earlier in the day.
The fifth item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda.
? Approval of 05.06.08 and 05.20.08 Town Council Minutes.
Hitt moved to approve the consent agenda with Rogers seconding. The motion passed
unanimously, 7-0.
The sixth item on the agenda was an appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail
Town Code, of the Town of Vaif DRB's denial of a Design Review application, submitted
according to Chapter 11, Design Review, Vail Town Code, to allow for installation of an
information kiosk, located on Tract B-C, Vail Village Filing 1(On Bridge Street, north of
the Covered Bridge, across East Meadow Drive from the Vail Transportation Center,
near the skier statue).
Chief of Planning Warren Campbell explained that on May 7, 2008 the DRB denied the
design review application to allow for installation of an information kiosk. The DRB
denied the request with the finding that the design of the kiosk did not meet the intent of
Section 14-10-5A, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code. In particular, the
synthetic roof material proposed did not comply with Section 14-10-5.A, criteria numbers
9-3, Vail Town Code. DRB Chairman Pete Dunning sa+d the matter comes down to one
issue. "The town wants to use a material that has not been approved to be used in the
Town of VaiI...Architectural appearance is key to the continued success of the town."
Rogers commented, "I'm a little embarrassed the town is asking for an exception ta the
code that everyone else has to adhere to." Project Manager Todd Oppenheimer
responded, "This is a prototype installation and we are only asking for ane af these at
this time." Oppenheimer explained that life expectancy is why staff recommended the
proposal. "For what things cost this is a pretty good deal". Newbury moved to uphold
the DRB opinion with Rogers seconding. During a pause for public comment, Kaye
Ferry spoke in support of the kiosks. "I'd say conservatively we've worked on this for ten
years maybe fifteen...This is a little kiosk that is going to sit in the middle of the street
and protect all sorts of computer equipment; there are a lot special little things that need
to be built into this... We still have no mechanism to tell our guests where they are
standing and where they are going to go." Rogers stated for the record that design
standards do not only apply to residences. Daly encouraged having the kiosk
manufacturer work directly with the DRB. Foley asked for future discussion about the
cost and value of placing kiosks around town. The motion to uphold passed
unanimously, 7-0.
The seventh item on the agenda was the 2009 Triumph Winterfest Artist Selection.
3
Council was informed AIPP held an ice sculpture event in January, 2008.Seventeen ice
sculptures, lit internally with LED's were placed on Gore Creek Promenade where .they
delighted all who saw them. AIPP has selected artist Lawrence Argent to once again
design ice sculptures for a 2009 event. The artist requested a design fee of $5,000
which includes taking responsibility for the artistic concept, site visits to determine
placement and being on site to assist with placement and iristallation. The AIPP Board
determined the total budget for the 2009 Triumph Winterfest, including artwork,
installation, lighting and publicity will not exceed $40,000. Funding for the project comes
from Triumph Development. AIPP Board members believe Triumph Winterfest makes a
significant contribution to the Town of Vail, provides entertainment and stimulates
cultural and economic vitality. Lawrence Argent, a nationally known artist will create ice
sculptures that will contribute significantly to Vail's reputation as a world class resort.
Council agreed the event was acceptable.
The eighth item on the agenda was a, LionsHead Inn LLC, represented by the Mauriello
Planning Group, request to proceed through the development review process with a
proposal to make improvements on town-owned right-of-way in conjunction with a
proposed redevelopment of the LionsHead Inn and LionsHead Inn Annex (Fabulous Vail
Glo).
Chief of Planning Warren Campbell reported to Council it was the desire of the applicant
to apply for an amended major exterior alteration application and design review
application to make improvements on town-owned West LionsHead Circle right-of-way,
in conjunction with the approved LionsHead Inn and LionsHead Inn Annex
redevelopment known as Strata. The proposed impravement was a vehicle puN-off area
that could accommodate finro vehicles. The applicant was required to obtain Council (i.e.
property owner) approval before proceeding through the town's development review
process. The Community Development Department recommended Council deny the
applicant's request to proceed through. the development review process. Applicant
representative and architect Will Hentschel provided Council with a brief description of
the project. Project applicant Rocky Cortina said the purpose of the request was to make
the entrance to the proposed development more inviting. Gordon moved to grant the
applicant permission to move through the development review process with Hitt
seconding. Newbury asked if the proposal was an adequate location for loading and
delivery. "I think you would expect to see there would be a lot more than just for Strata."
Allison Kent from the Mauriello Planning group said onsite drop-offs had been
investigated. Rogers said we don't want to encourage hotel drop offs on the public right- of-way. "The request is we give up public right-of-way so they can have more property."
Cleveland commented, "There is insufficient room for existing uses today and (if
approved) we take the ability away from the town to address the issues that exist today
let alone to address issues in the future." The motion failed 3-4 with Hitt, Gordon and
Foley voting in favor.
The ninth item on the agenda was the First reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2008,
an ordinance amending SDD No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10,
Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Osaki Sushi
Restaurant, located at 100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1.
The applicants requested Council table the first reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of
2008, to its July 1, 2008, public hearing to allow the applicants additional time to resolve
issues related to the condominium association's approval of this request. On April 28,
4
2008, the PEC voted 4-0-2 (Kjesbo and Viele recused) to forward a recammendation of
approval, with conditions, for a major amendment to SDD No. 6, Vail Village Inn, to aliaw
for an addition to the Osaki Sushi Restaurant, located at 100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O,
Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. On May 20, 2008, Council tabled this item to June 3,
2008, hearing at the applicants' request. Gordon moved to table the item until July.1
with Daly seconding. Hitt expressed concern the town was placing onerous demands on
the applicant. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The tenth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2008,
an Ordinance Amending Title 1, Chapter 3, Section 2 of the Vail Town Code by the
Addition of the Definition of the Word "Publication."
Town Attorney Matt Mire said Section 4.10 of the Town Charter requires pub{ication of
ordinances upon their introduction and adoption. The Charter does not define what is
required by "publication". In 2007, the town spent $19,693 for publication of its
ordinances in the Vail Daily, requiring the Town Clerk to increase the office advertising
budget during the third supplemental appropriation by an additional $12,000. In 2008,
the town has spent $8,106 to date to meet its legal requirement for publication of these
notices. Nationwide, studies have shown that 73% of households have a computer in
their home or have access to a computer at work or at their local libraries. This
percentage increases in locations such as Vail where citizens have a higher education
rate than the national average. An estimated 70 percent of properties in Vail are owned
by part-time residents. By publishing the town's ordinances on its Web site (vailgov.com)
not only will all property owners have direct access to the ordinances it is also more
fiscally and environmentally responsible. Cleveland and Mire c{arified the ordinance
would give town staff compfete control over the process (as opposed to relying on
adequate and timely publication by the Vail Daily). General Manager of Colorado
Mountain News Media (publisher of the Vail Daily), Steve Pope stated the real issue at
hand, "is that raw communication supports the democratic process...These channefs
only work for people who already have an interest in a town happening...The Vail Daily
reaches 92% of your constituents Open government is the significant issue here."
Realvaif.com co-owner David Williams said by posting legislation on the internet Council
was not hiding information from their constituents. "We (realvail.com) are an alternative
that exists to help you drive traffic...We coufd help drive traffic to your site by cross-
Iinking...lYs an archaic notion to print page after page of nine-point font ordinances in the
Vail Daily." Kaye Ferry and Michael Cacioppo spoke in support of maintaining print
publications. Realvail.com co-owner Tom Boyd encouraged Counci(to give it the option
to change. Rogers moved to approve the ordinance with Newbury seconding. Hitt said
he believed the town should not entirely pull out of the newspaper. Daly commented,
"I'm in favor of communicating with our constituents in as many ways as possible."
Cleveiand said the change would serve as an additional tool for the future and "gives us
more options." The motion passed 5-2, with Foley and Gordon opposed. Mire apologized
to Council for not providing more detail as he believed the item was more explanatory.
The eleventh item on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 13, Series
of 2008, an Ordinance amending Chapter 12-2, Definitions, Article 12-7G, Heavy
Service District, Ghapter 12-14, Supplemental Regufations, and Chapter 12-16,
Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to al4ow for sexually oriented businesses as a
conditional use in the Heavy Service District.
5
~
On May 12, 2008, the PEC voted unanimous{y to recommend approval of the proposed text amendments to the Vail Town Council. On May 20, 2008, the Vail Town Council
unanimously approved Ordinance No. 13, Series of 2008, upon first reading.
Newbury moved to approve the ordinance as subject to the findings on page 2 in the
staff memorandum dated June 3 with Gordon seconding. The motion passed
unanimously, 7-0.
The twelfth item on the agenda was Adjournment.
Newbury moved to adjourn with Hitt seconding at approximately 8:30 p.m. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
Dick Cleveland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Minutes provided by Corey Swisher.
6
r .
Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
The regular meeting of the Yail Town Council was called to order at
approximately 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Dick Cleveland.
Members present: Dick Cleveland, Mayor
Mark Gordon
Farrow Hitt
Kevin Fo1ey
Kim Newbury
Margaret Rogers
Andy Daly
Staff Members: Stan Zemier, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Input.
Former Vail Mayor Bob Armour thanked the town, Eagle County and the U.S. Forest
Service for their efforts to improve the safety of the West Vail neighborhood via the
Forest Health project, which includes the cutting of dead and diseased trees to help
protect the neighborhood from wildfire.
Brooke Franke said her dog had been viciously attacked by another dog over the
weekend. She spoke in support of banning pit bulls within the Town of Vail.
Dick Cleveiand announced ECO Trails would hold its annuaf ciean up on Saturday,
June 21.
The second item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
? Update on the Chamonix Site Master Plan process. Senior Planner Scot Hunn provided Council with an update on the Chamonix master
planning process. "We are continuing with developing the plans for the site based on
feedback and direction given by the Council on May 20, 2008...A preferred site and
' layout for the fire station has been identified. Staff has met with representatives from the
Ambulance District regarding participation in the project and staff is of the understanding
that the District may desire to purchase a small portion of the site for future
development. Staff has also met with the owners of the West Vail Shel{ gas station and
will be working with that ownership in the coming weeks to integrate ideas that may be
mutually beneficial to both the Chamonix project and the Shell station site. Next steps
1
z
~
wiN include work on preliminary cost estimates, as weii as three-dimensional massing
models...Will provide three different options." Hunn then said he has directed the design
team to start evaluating the three site options against standards for LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design). He will provide information at the next meeting with
the Advisory Cammittee and the Town Council as to what LEED is, how the project may
achieve a certain rating under LEED and what time and cost considerations should be
evaluated by the Council in making a determination to seek LEED certification on any
portion of the project. He stated further, "We are at a time we need to make that choice
very soon...As more people are working toward LEED certification we are getting a
better idea of what the real costs are." Daly asked who the target market for the project
would be. Hunn reminded the Council of determinations made at the May 20th Council
meeting; that the Council had agreed that the project was to target those individuals
making between 60% and 140°l0 of AMI (Area Median Income). He continued by stating
the pro}ect was originally geared toward housing "young professionals" and "young
families," based on information gathered early in the master plan process from
interviews with major employers and employees within the Town. Daly then encouraged
attempting to meet the needs of a broad range of people. He expressed concern that
young professionals were being pushed down valley. "We have to think about different
price points for different people in the community." Rogers said Council generalty
agreed a recycling center should be placed on the site. Gordon, Hitt and Newbury
questioned the placement of an ambulance substation on the property.
The third item on the agenda was the Decision of Council Out of Cycle Contribution
Requests for 2008.
Kathleen Halloran, Manager of Budgets and Financial Reporting, explained the purpose
of this mid-year review is to provide an opportunity for organizations that have newly
identified projects or unforeseen changes to their budgets to come forward at one time.
Council evaluates the various proposals based on their direct benefit to the entire
community of Vail, fulfillment of the town's mission, and how this contribution will affect
our resort community's future health. The Town Council's mission statement reads: In
order to be the premier mountain resort community, we're committed to providing
citizens and guests with a superior level of environmentally-sensitive services and an
abundance of recreational, educational, and cultural opportunities.
A. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
The Alpine Gardens requested up to $50,000 to help fund the replacement of a
collapsed bridge and two smaller bridges. The collapsed bridge was built in the late
1990s, without consultation of a structural engineer. The Alpine Gardens would like to
rebuild all three bridges with structural integrity and a similar aesthe#ic design. An
insurance claim has been filed, and if successful, the proceeds will reduce this request.
The Gardens host up to 100,000 visitors per summer and has achieved wor{d-premier
status as a high altitude garden. Staff recommended funding from the RETT fund up to
$50,000 (net of insurance proceeds). The bridges serve as the only access for disabled ,
individuals for the gardens, which operate on town-owned land. Hitt moved to approve
the request with Daly seconding. Daly recommended deferring the replacement of the
two small bridges. Hitt amended his motion to reflect Daly's comments with Newbury
doing the same. Zemler encouraged that the Public Works Department be involved and
sign-off on the new bridges during construction. Hitt then withdrew his motion for further
information. Hitt then moved to direct staff to gain additional pricing options to determine
2
the price of rebuilding just one bridge, or if there are cost savings to rebuilding ail three
at the same time. Council agreed.
B. Bravo! Vail Valley Music Festival
Bravo! Vail Valley Music Festival requested $75,000 to help fund travel, administration,
marketing, advertising and promotional expenses that will occur in 2008 for the 2010
London Symphony Orchestra - Vail Residency program. The program had not received
Board approval until after the town`s 2008 budget process. Historically, the town has
contributed funding toward the Tier One New York Philharmonic and Philadelphia
Orchestra programs. Because this program was not finalized until after 2008
contribution requests, it falls within the criteria for "a newly identified project or
unforeseen changes. Staff recommended funding $60,000 of this request to cover the
cost of travel, marketing and promotional expenses. Staff did not recommend funding
the $15,000 requested for administration because the town contributed $25,000 in
general administration to the 2008 Bravo! program. The recommendation to fund this
request was based on the caliber of this group and the fact that this group also resides in
this Tier One category. The cultural benefit to the town and the. tourist attraction of this
event are also factors in staff's recommendation for funding. Director of Development
Bravo! Vail Valley Music Festival Jeanne Reid explained the funding request would
provide travel to London, Paris and Berlin in an attempt to recruit those orchestras. The
London Symphony will also be hosted in Vail. Daly moved to support the staff
recommendation with Rogers seconding. Rogers and Gordon spoke in support of fully
funding the request. Hitt suggested funding the event once it is confirmed that they will
come to Vail. The motion failed, 3-4 with Cleveland, Newbury, Foley and Hitt opposed.
C. Colorado Ski Museum
The ski museum requested from $50,000 to $75,000 to help fund the 2008 Tannenbaum
Festival (Nov. 21 - Dec. 13). The Festival's goal is to draw people into Vail during the
early ski season by creating a magical holiday setting with hundreds of decorated
Christmas trees. The Festival will include participation from lodging, retail and dining
establishments (decorations and discounts); a Saturday holiday market/Christmas Fair;
Santa visits and holiday music. Staff did not recommend funding at this time, however,
staff proposed that this request go before the Commission on Special Events (CSE) for
2009 funding. It is considered an enhancement of existing events during that time period
such as Holidays in Vail ($35K of funding through the CSE for 2008) and Snow Daze
($64K of funding through the CSE for 2008). Colorado Ski Museum Executive Director
Susie Tjossem explained the event would be collaborative and inclusionary within the
business community and Vail Resorts. Rogers asked what local businesses were
contributing. Tjossem responded that the businesses will pay a fee to participate, as well
as purchase a live tree. Cleveland asked why the request had not gone to Commission
on Special Events (CSE). Tjossem said the Vail Chamber and Business Association was
a partner with the request. Newbury said she didn't believe $75,000 was seed money.
Funding was not approved.
D. The Valley Home Source (TVHS)
TVHS requested $29,200 of funding toward the start-up of a multi-jurisdictronal housing
management and economic research organization. TVHS offers deed-restriction
management services, pol`icy advisement, rssearch data and an opportunity to address
housing issues collaboratively with neighboring towns and Eagle County. Staff did not
recommend funding this program because of the potential for an on-going commitment
3
of town funding for services outside of the Town of Vail. Staff expressed concern the
programs offered by the TVHS are a duplication of services provided by the town's
housing division, and were not comfortable with dedicating future funding in light of the
upcoming 2009 budget. Valley Home Source Executive Director pon Cohen explained
the request would serve as seed money for the start up organization. "We have faith this
project will carry its own weight...lt will feel very much like a private entity...lt will serve
as an outsource extension that heightens your housing department's ability to provide
resources." Rogers said the town can no longer think of itself as an isolated pod. Rogers
moved to approve the modified request with Gordon seconding. Daly said the group's
support from other municipalities spoke to the need for a county-wide resource. During a
pause for public comment, Colorado News Media General Manager Steve Pope spoke
in support of county-wide cooperation. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
E. Vail Chamber & Business Association (VCBA)
The VCBA requested funding in the amount of $39,000 to he4p off-set instructional costs
of the Disney Institute Guest Service Training Program scheduled for September, 2008.
The VCBA would like to host a two-day program to provide managers and employees
with the tools they need to maintain and improve upon the quality of guest service
throughout Vail. The $39,000 would cover the fee for the licensed Disney speaker. The
program will have other costs such as food and beverage for the event, advertising and
promotion, etc. Attendees will be charged a fee to participate (amount yet to be
finalized, but the suggested rate is $5,000 per ten person corporate table or
$399/person). Any revenue raised beyond the $39,000 speaker cost would be shared
equally with Disney based on the contract for services. Although staff agreed the
program would be valuable, staff did not recommend a contribution because they did not
believe the item was appropriate for town funding. Staff belisved the program should be
covered by sponsorships and charging appropriate fees to participants. VCBA baard
member Susie Tjossem explained the Disney Institute had not offered this program to
any other ski area in North America. VCBA board member Lourdes Ferzacca spoke in
support of the program. Gordon moved to approve the request with Hitt seconding.
Rogers said she would be willing to have the town serve as a"safety net" if event
expenses were not covered. "I really think this project is going to help the businesses of
this town." Cleveland did not feel that the town should use taxpayer dollars toward fund
raising efforts. Gordon said the town funds lots of events where event sponsors intend to
profit. The motion failed, 3-4 with Daiy, Gordon, Hitt voting in favor. Hitt moved to
approve the request with the town receiving two tabfes at the event. The motion passed
5-2, with Rogers and Cleveland opposed.
F. Vail Chamber & Business Association (VCBA)
The VCBA requested $4,000 of funding be used toward participation in the 2008
Colorado Ski & Snowsports Expo to be held in November. Staff did not recommend
funding this project because it did not fit the criteria of "newly identified projects or
unforeseen changes to budget." A request for this event was normally included in the
annual budget process, but was not requested by the VCBA during the 2008 budget
cycle. Hitt moved to approve the request with Foley seconding. The motion passed 6-1,
with Cleveland opposed.
The fourth item on the agenda was the Second reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series of
2008, an Ordinance Amending Title 1, Chapter 3, Section 2 of the Vail Town Code by
the Addition of the Definition of the Word "Publication."
4
Town Attorney Matt Mire explained Section 4.10 of the Town Charter requires
publication of ordinances upon their introduction and adoption. The Charter does not
define what is required by "publication". In 2007, the town spent $19,693 for publication
of its ordinances in the Vail Daily, requiring the Town Clerk to increase the office
advertising budget during the third supplemental appropriation by an additional $12,000.
In 2008, the Town has spent $6,205 to date to meet its legal requirement for publication
of these notices. Nationwide, studies have shown that 73% of households have a
computer in their home or have access to a computer at work or at their local libraries.
This percentage increases in locations such as Vail where citizens have a higher
education rate than the national average. An estimated 70 percent of properties in Vai1
are owned by part-time residents. By publishing the town's ordinances on its Web site
(vailgov.com) not only will all property owners have direct access to the ordinances it is
also more fiscally and environmentally responsible. Mire recommended Council table
the item until a later date so a more in-depth discussion could take place. Rogers said
Mire's memo was very well drafted. She then clarified the ordinance had nothing to do
with legai notices. "It only addresses ordinances." Hitt said he thought it was premature
to abandon the newspaper entirely. Hitt moved to approve the ordinance with Rogers
seconding. Generaf Manager of Colorado Mountain News Media Steve Pope said
publication rates have not increased. Hitt said Pope's recent newspaper editorial was
misleading. "To suggest we would do this because it is easy is doing everyone in this
town a disservice." Newbury told Pope, "You are doing a tremendous injustice to our
Town Attorney by stating he was attempting to do something moraify unjust." Kaye
Ferry said, "In the spirit of open government everything that takes place in these Council
Chambers should be published." The motion failed 1-6, with Rogers in favor. The
Council then administratively directed town staff to use the town's Web site as an
additional posting outlet.
The fifth item on the agenda was Adjournment.
Foley moved to adjourn with Hitt seconding at approximately 8:15 p.m. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
Dick Cleveland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
5
t
l
!
Minutes provided by Corey Swisher. ~
i
~
6
MEMORANDUM
To: Town Council
From: Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp and Kathleen Halioran
Subject: Betty Ford Alpine Garden Off-Cycle Funding Request
Date: June 26, 2008
At the June 17 meeting, the Betty Ford Alpine Garden (the Garden) requested up to
$50,000 to help fund the replacement of a collapsed bridge and two smaller bridges.
During the meeting, staff was asked to come back with more information regarding the
cost to replace the larger bridge only, and the cost to repface the two smaller bridges at
a later date.
Since the meeting, the Garden has been notified that their insurance carrier will cover
the cost to replace the larger bridge. The Garden would like to amend their funding
request to not more than $20,000 in order to replace the two smaller bridges.
The two small bridges also have issues with rotted wood, but after consultation with a
structural engineer have been braced and are expected to remain in tact for the season.
The material cost of these bridges total $9,400. The Garden was unable to obtain
detailed labor and installation costs from the contractor at the time of this memo;
however, there should be cost savings if the same equipment can be used to install all of
the bridges at the same time. The Garden would also prefer to disrupt the gardens only
once for this project, as opposed to on two separate occasions.
In speaking with our Public Works department, equipment is needed to install the
bridges due to the weight of the girder beams (2 per bridge). Each beam weighs from
660 Ibs (small bridge) to 1800 Ibs (large bridge). The equipment may not be necessarily
a crane, but rather a reach forklift, boom truck, etc. They also commented that access to
the site will be a problem because of the configuration of the garden and other park
improvements.
The Garden is willing to submit this funding request as a part of the 2009 Council
Contributions but believe that it is more effective to complete the two bridges at the
same time as the larger bridge. Staff recommends funding up to $20,000 from the Real
Estate Transfer Tax fund to replace the finro smaller bridges in 2008.
f
"r?
?
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Vail Parking Task Force
SUBJECT: Parking Recommendations Ski Season 2008-2009
DATE: July 1, 2008
At the direction of the Town Council, the Vail Parking Task Force has reviewed the
parking outlook for the 2008-09 season. This review included an evaluation of the
estimated number of workers in town, the number of available parking spaces and
anticipated peak guest days. Based on this review, the Task Force has developed a
series of parking and transportation management recommendations for Town Council
consideration. Additional recommendations regarding hourly parking rates and parking
pass pricing will be forwarded to the Town Council in August.
Last year from November to January 1, there were approximately 2,100 construction
workers on projects in both Vail ViNage and Lionshead. For the remainder of the season,
there were close to 1,200 construction workers. The town experienced 44 days of
overflow parking from January through Apri6. This coming season there will be
approximately 1,500 construction workers in both villages for the entire season. The
town saw record sates of all parking pass products last season.
Based on these considerations, in addition to any impacts of the new Epic Pass, the
Task Force evaluated both our ability to reduce demand and/or increase supply. It is
afways the goal to reduce demand; however, considering the magnitude of the problem
at hand and the totai number of days we experienced on the frontage road last season,
an increase in supply is also recommended. The Task Force set a goal of securing an
additional 400 net new spaces over last year. The majority of the overflow days occur
during the peak periods.
The Vail Parking Task Force recommendations are as follows:
Increase Parking Supply
The parking supply will be increased with the addition of the Vail Front
DoorNail Village Club parking by approximately ...................................100 spaces
Use of Forest Service office parking IoUweekends (Dowd Junction)........ 50-75 spaces
Construct temporary parking lot on Chamonix property if Planning
Cammission approval is obtained 180 spaces .
Request permanent parking approvaf from CDOT from
Wendy's to Chamonix on the North Frontage Road 35=60 spaces
Use Donovan Park parking on non-event days (39 last year) 70-90 spaces
Rent additional spaces in Avon .........................................................100 spaces
Arrabelfe Club parking run as valet ....................................................100 spaces
There is also some loss of parking spaces from last season:
North Day Lot creation of skier drop off 30 spaces
Wendy's Lot for Chamonix lot access . . . . . . . . . ....10 spaces
1
i
Originally we had thought the entire Holy Cross Lot would be lost next season as a Vail
Resorts employee lot, but now we understand there will be no loss of employee parking
at this lot. Arrabelle spaces will be used by the Marriott hotel this coming winter.
Estimated net gain in spaces will be in the range of ...........................350-550 spaces
Related Costs
00
Chamonix Lot 200,0
CDOT parking (North Frontage Road) $ 50,000-150,000
Securing parking in Avon is $10/day/space 50,000-150,000
Providing transportation from outlying areas will vary depending
on the number of days provided ........................................$500-$1,000/day per site
Service Enhancement
The addition of 6 designated bus stops along South Frontage Road and increased bus
service is recommended for better overflow road management during overflow days.
.$50,000 bus stops
$50,000 operations
Policy Changes
Review the current zoning regulations to determine if there is an easier process to allow
private properties with unused parking to offer to the public either daily or via monthly
rental.
Require future major construction projects to provide a parking mitigation plan for
approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
Diminish Parking Demand
The parking structures average close to three people per car. This is a very high
occupancy number. To offer incentives for carpooling, it was thought a higher occupancy
vehicle may be a better target. The Task Force investigated the introduction of a van
pool service into the valley. The Town of Breckenridge recently hired the company VPSI
(brochure attached) to provide van pool service for their employees. The Task Force
encourages the town, Vail Resorts, major employers and construction projects and
chamber associations to look into the use of van pools to transport employees to Vail.
Not only is this an environmentally sound solution, but it will also reduce the demand for
parking. Van pooling fills a void wi;h ECO during peak times when it is at capacity or
schedules do not work. Also discussed were discounts or other incentives on the parking
side. We have not at this time made any final recommendation. The use of incentives to
registered van pools, not only from Eagle County if this materializes, but from other
areas or private van pools from the Front Range is a possibility.
Further Recommendations:
• Restrict Green Passes to the Lionshead Parking Structure
• A significant increase in peak day all day parking rates
• Related increases in parking passes based on final day rates
Communications
2
~
Finally, it is the goal of the Task Force fo finalize the entire parking program no later than
early September to allow for a comprehensive communications package and to leverage
the message with communications implemented by TOV, VRI, VCBA, the contracting
community and other partners.
Actions Requested of Council
Endorse the Task Force recommendations. Additionalty, staff requests discussion and a
decision for the following:
1. Allow a PEC application to be submitted for the Chamonix property to
move the project through the approval process.
2. Use Donovan Park parking during non-event days. tt is anticipated these
spaces will be allocated and managed with a group that we can readily
communicate to on days parking will not be allowed.
.
3. Pursue with CDOT a permanent parking solution from Wendy's to
Chamonix on the North Frontage Road.
4. Construct 6 new overflow parking bus stops along the South Frontage
Road.
3
45
Everything
What you need to know
is a vanpoQl? about a vanpool
A vanpool is a better way to travel co and
from wor1<. A vanpoaf is a group of SEo
15 pcoplc who commute togethci• on a
f-egular Lasis in a roomy, com{ortab10 van. -
One pa-sari voh:nceers to be [he d+-iverl -
COOI"L!ti13t01' Of C}1C vanpool and Ilo!'fiiaily
ndes free_ The riders share che cnst of +,r
aperaring clie v~inE,oc1. The vanpooS groUp
~ii f . ,
deti'i illffl,:S thc•ir daily schedu{e and
rousc includinb oiie or more designaced
- -
,:.,.._x~
picl.-up lacacions, such as Park aitid
Ride lots or sliopping centei•s. • - _ . - - ~ ~
Ask yoitir empioyer if they offer VPS! Moves The World
a qualified cransparc.icion or Contact us for more informatiun. ,
1-800-VAN-RiDE ~ - ` . . .
vanpool benefi?. www.vanridc.com
VPS! Moves The Wurtd
Princed on reryded paswr.
~04008VPSI.Inc.Ap Righ;s Rc;crw:d.
,j • .r.' :
~
b
f
F. t.~I _
.R . _ .i~ How to StdP'E
a vanpool in
10 easy steps:
= ) Cai1 us at I-800-VAN-RIDE.
- 2 Deteriiiine rasic rouce, schediile and
CSC11o1tC';j p1;5(.tlgE'1' cOSCS.
3 qdvertise thc rour.c 1nd si~n on ridcrs.
4 Ho{d gi-oup mee(ing wiLh potential ridei s.
5 Identify candid.zces for voluncc:er driver•s!
coordinators and altcrnttc dr+vcrs.
. _ _ . . . . 6 Sc:t policics arid payment ot cacli ridcr•'s
shar-e of r.hm cost.
Who vanpools? Why vanpooi? 7 5-Llcct you.- vi;,pofl, ve;,;t,`.
• Thousands of smart commuters ride Save money - In most cases, vanpoolers can 8 Set start date znJ colicct
in VP51 vanpuols everyday. slve $ I,000 :t yenr or more compired co thc cosi first manth's payment.
• of driving a{une. Piu~. they spend less for gas, pa;-i~;r;g,
People who Fs1ve ~t }c:is- i i0 minute 9 Estabfish the Qi•ound rules aiid, if
di ive or u-avcl rnore th.in 15 miles repairs and maintenar:ce on their vehirles, available, rcgiscer all participants in a
c2ne-way co work. People who main4lin Save time - A vanpool can use clle (HOV) High Guarcnteed Ride 1-lome profir-am,
a reLuively consistenc work schedule. Occupancv Vehicle Lanes, significaszdy re {ucing tt}e
time spPnt com;~iutii}g cQ attd fs ani wai-k each d3y, ~O Get in tlZC van and go.
• Anyone wlla livcs t+~d works alonp an
existmR i-uute and is Save your sanity -You don't haVe Cu fig}l; tr-ziffic
willing to sharc congcstion. ir: a varipooi you can sleep, YE:1d 311d
t4;e ndc w+th 4 to retax on youi- corr,iiIuce to and From worl<_.
14 ochet• people Satve our air - One vanpool remove, 1~; maily as
in z vanpool. 14 vehides and cheir emissions irom the road ezch -
day. Thac's good for you and for the enti,ironrnent.
VPS? Inc.'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Community Development
DATE: July 1, 2008
SUBJECT: Town of Vail Strategic Housing Plan Update
1. Introduction
The Town of Vail recognizes employee housing as basic infrastructure. This
housing allows employees to live in the town thereby promoting community,
supporting the local economy, and reducing regional transportation needs. The
Strategic Housing Plan seeks to provide enough deed-restricted housing for at
least 30 percent of Vail's workforce to live in the Town through policies,
regulations and publicly initiated development. This Plan will be used as a
decision-making guide for the implementation of the Town's employee occupied
housing programs.
The Plan will:
? Provide background information on Town housing definitions, policies and
initiatives.
? Document the current approaches to providing employee housing.
? Address the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats to
employee housing.
? Recognize and affirm the importance of Vail serving as a regional partner
in the provision of employee housing.
? Identify goals and methods the Town will pursue to accomplish the
identified housing objectives.
II. Status
Based on Town Council's direction related to the goals for the Town's housing
program, Staff and the Housing Authority have been working to identify a
number of action steps to ensure the goals can be achieved. Currently, the
focus is on both gaining a more complete understanding of the jobs being
generated by completed development projects and firming up future job growth
projections by updating anticipated development and redevelopment projects
information.
Most significantly, the Town has a better understanding of the Ever Vail
development project. This information is critical to ensuring the action steps
identified in the Town's Strategic Housing Plan are in alignment with the types
of housing that will be needed by future employees.
The Town Council, the Vail Economic Advisory Council and the Housing
Authority have all identified providing a broad range of housing options as
1
critical to the long-term community of Vail. The objective of understanding •
future job development is to ensure the housing options that are developed
meet the goals of the community as well as the needs of local employees.
III. Identified Action Steps
The Housing Authority has identified a number of possible action steps for the
Strategic Housing Plan. Town Council will need to be an active partner to
ensure the successful implementation of the Plan. The following action steps
have been identified in the first time frame (1 to 3 years) of the plan:
A. Develop an exchange program for certain deed restricted employee housing
units that provides a greater employee housing benefit to the community
than currently exists.
B. Revisit inclusionary zoning and commercial linkage requirements to ensure
they are meeting their intended goals.
i. The Housing Authority does not anticipate recommending a change
at this time, but believes annual review is important.
ii. The Housing Authority also recommends auditing actual employee
generation when new developments are complete to ensure the
goals are being met by the requirements.
C. Ensure the Town positively influences the development of employee
housing in Ever Vail and the redevelopment of West Vail.
D. In addition to opportunities within the Town of Vail, take advantage of all
regional employee housing opportunities.
IV. Next Steps
Based on the newly updated development data, Staff will present a draft
Strategic Housing Plan to Town Council at the July 15, 2008, public hearing.
Due to the magnitude of the employee housing issue, Staff believes significant
time will need to be dedicated to a work session with the Town Council on this
topic and a special work session may be warranted.
2
' .
r'
Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan: Executive Summary
As a tourism destination for outdoor activities, the Town of Vail relies heavily on the
environment to provide natural beauty and recreational opportunities and thus, the state
of the environment greatly affects the Town's economy. It is essential to maintain and
even improve the state of the environment to ensure that the environment as a resource is
available to future generations. Vail's reputation as a resort industry leader lends itself
to setting exceptional standards for environmental stewardship. While environmental
protection is essential to the town's vitality, an environmental program must also
accommodate economic and social needs.
In 1998, the Town of Vail held the Vail Environmental Odyssey Search Conference,
which served as the basis for the 1998 Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan. The
Town of Vail Department of Community Development led a planning effort in 2006 and
2007 called Vail 20/20: Focus on the Future. The resulting document was the Vail 20/20
Strategic Action Plan, which included goals, strategies and actions for eight topical areas,
including the environment. The Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan, adopted in November
2007, and the Environmental Strategic Plan adopted by the Town of Vail in 1998, serve
as the foundation for A Green Legacy, the Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan.
The purpose of A Green Legacy, the Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan, is to
provide a framework for the municipality, partners, business, full and part time residents,
and guests to take action to achieve the environmental vision of the community. The Plan
sets measurable goals, and provides actions to achieve those goals. A two-phase
implementation plan is found in Appendix A in order to provide details on partners, costs,
benefits, and timeline. The environmental vision statement is as follows:
In the Town of Vail, we recognize that our qualiry of life rests on the
quality of our environment and we respect our natural and cultural
heritage. We strive to be a model community by taking individual and
collective action to protect and enhance our ecological environment, while
maintaining a vibrant socia[ and economic base.
The plan is broken into the following five goal areas that will help achieve the
environmental vision of the Town of Vail:
Goal #1: Effectively manage the environmental sustainability program outlined in this
plan with cooperation among stakeholders and sustain the path to implementation,
resulting in success.
Goal #2: Improve efficiency in water, energy, and waste management in business,
residences and in government in order to address global warming caused by greenhouse
gas emissions.
Goal #3: Ensure that the ecosystem, specifically the forest and water systems, maintain
current levels of health, if not improved levels, through cooperation with stakeholders.
Goal #4: Ensure Town of Vail development regulations and policies are congruent with
the carrying capacity of the area's natural and built environment and encourage
sustainable economic development.
1
,
{
Goal #5: Ensure that the public is educated and aware of environmental issues, initiatives
and implementation measures.
Using the guiding principles of the plan, each goal is broken down into actions and steps
to achieve such goals. There are environmental indicators noted that, once analyzed, can
help track success in implementation of the plan. The implementation plan identifies
necessary resources, how to obtain those resources, and a timeline for completing actions.
The plan provides detailed actions for the next two years, with a more general concept of
actions for the next five years.
OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN
l. Develop a long-range environmental work plan to protect and improve Vail's
environmental quality.
2. Improve community cooperation and collaboration with our year round residences in
addressing Vail's environmental challenges.
3. Encourage a culture of environmental stewardship through outreach and education.
4. Ensure that Vail is environmentally proactive.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE PLAN
The Guiding principles for the Environmental Strategic Plan are overarching statements
that reflect the fundamental values which are the foundation of the plan. ,
1. Creating Partnerships and Fostering Cooperation: Involving all
stakeholders will ensure coordination of program actions and
implementation.
2. Building Awareness and Encouraging Communitv Participation: The
community is also an essential stakeholder and with community
participation and shazing information comes buy-in from the public and a
sense of place.
3. Planning Proactively: It is imperative to look ahead and plan for the
known and the unknown factors in the future.
4. Achieving Balance: Finding a common ground between economy, society
and the environment is critical to successful planning and actions.
5. Promoting Openness and Accessibilitv: Sharing information and
providing access to Town resources is fundamental to an open society.
6. Behaving Responsibly and Accountablx: Being accountable for one's
actions and taking responsibility will ensure that all parties are acting in
the best interest of the environment.
7. Advocating Actions Beneficial to the Environment: Convincing
stakeholders to take action that will benefit the environment will allow for
successful implementation of the plan. 8. Thinking Globallv, Acting Loca11X: We can make an impact on global
climate change by doing our share in the local community.
2
5
~
Please write your yuestions or comments below:
Bill Carlson Environmental Health Officer
Town of Vail Environmental Heaith Department
970-479-2333
BCarlson@vailgov.com
3
y fi . - ' }T~, .
~ ' x ~`e r~f ~^~1~~ '"F~~n - ~ . 1 I j K d M i~t ' yL I ~ ~ k ~i
, ~.~n v,,,,, i,r o~~.~~~£
~ . . t . ~b. y t ' x• ~j t . TA. yX' . ~r" z~T11
' f . ~ k"~• ~ -~,i ~ 'A~NF sK 11'J~.,
t-
`
P a pr
~ ~
~i ~
1+-,.rfi~'' T: ~ y
r
Lhu ~F -
a~
~41",
• _ ~ ~aw ~ ,
' I • - . °i ~ , ~'#y • ,g & r. Y y~,l4h~t,
r
~ y ~ "`•'f~ ~
p
rLi A~+
N. , ~ n a.~ + ~.aic ,it r ~ { ~ . , k r
»
, _ , ' k i,~ r+"~ k..;;~ s;`i ,c • e~ p . f
~t _ 1 - R ~~t n ~kj~ . ~~P' ~ ;"a ~ z~
' . _ • ~ ~e II~ ' u ` , ~ ~ . ~
~:,A • t e f' .y
f
f . ~ r~.• .1, ~ ~ . . r . ~ j., Lb+~ - . ~
M t~ c
' E t'- ' F q q ! , r•
e
~
_ - . .
~ ? ~ ~/4j~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , t~ ~ +x ~c.
r501.1..'~ax R ~ .
~~~q
_ '~r ~u `-:a ~ _~x~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - , a~.,. ; - ~ y~ •
~-m
.T.,
F, ~ ~
- • .yg~
t ~ . 0
F'
s
F.k 9 i,~`.~ys, u+w aa
I ~
~ . • d n ~ ~ ~ ~
~,as~~ 3 .rd'~~ ' .s~.' . ~ _ ~ . ~ ~•-k', ~-r' ` _ _ ` 'y, 1 ,
. - _ _ _ 3 A f ~ . j~- ' _
. u
` ; • ,
t
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As a tourism destination for outdoor activities, the Town of Vail relies heavily on the
environment to provide natural beauty and recreational opportunities and thus, the state of the
environment greatly affects the Town's economy. It is essential to maintain and even improve
the state of the environment to ensure that the environment as a resource is available to future
generations. Vail's reputation as a resort industry leader lends itself to setting exceptional
standards for environmental stewardship. While environmental protection is essential to the
town's vitality, an environmental program must also accommodate economic and social needs.
In 1998, the Town of Vail held the Vail Environmental Odyssey Search Conference, which
served as the basis for the 1998 Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan. The Town of Vail
Department of Community Development led a planning effort in 2006 and 2007 called Vail
20/20: Focus on the Future. The resulting document was the Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan,
which included goals, strategies and actions for eight topical areas, including the environment.
The Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan, adopted in November 2007, and the Environmental
Strategic Plan adopted by the Town of Vail in 1998, serve as the foundation for A Green Legacy,
the Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan. The purpose of A Green Legacy, the Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan, is to provide a
framework for the municipality, partners, business, full and part time residents, and guests to
take action to achieve the environmental vision of the community. The Plan sets measurable
goals, and provides actions to achieve those goals. A two-phase implementation plan is found in
Appendix A in order to provide details on partners, costs, benefits, and timeline. The
environmental vision statement is as follows:
The Town of Vail is an environmental leader and a sustainable community. The
Vail community collaborates to restore and protect the natural and built
environment in balance with its economic and social needs.
The plan is broken into the following five goal areas that will help achieve the environmental
vision of the Town of Vail:
Goal #1: Effectively manage the environmental sustainability program outlined in this plan with
cooperation among stakeholders and sustain the path to implementation, resulting in success.
Goal #2: Improve efficiency in water, energy, and waste management in business, residences
and in government in order to address global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
Goal 43: Ensure that the ecosystem, specifically the forest and water systems, maintain current
levels of health, if not improved levels, through cooperation with stakeholders.
Goal #4: Ensure Town of Vail development regulations and policies are congruent with the
carrying capacity of the area's natural and built environment and encourage sustainable
economic development.
Goal #5: Ensure that the public is educated and aware of environmental issues, initiatives and
implementation measures.
Using the guiding principles of the plan, each goal is broken down into actions and steps to
achieve such goals. There are environmental indicators noted that, once analyzed, can help track
success in implementation of the plan. The implementation plan identifies necessary resources,
how to obtain those resources, and a timeline for completing actions. The plan provides detailed
actions for the next two years, with a more general concept of actions for the next five years.
t
CONTRIBUTORS •
Vail Town Council
Richard D. Cleveland, Mayor
Andy Daly, Mayor Pro-tem
Mark Gordon
Kim Newberry
Farrow Hitt
Margaret Rogers
Kevin Foley
Planning and Environmental Commission
Rollie Kjesbo
David Viele
Sarah Paladino
Scott Proper
Susie Tjossem
Bill Pierce
Michael Kurz
Administration Department
Stan Zemler, Vail Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Judy Camp, Director of Finance
Kathleen Halloran, Budget Analyst
Department of Community Development
George Ruther, Director
Bill Carlson, Environmental Health and Planning
Warren Campbell, Chief of Planning
Nina Timm, Housing Coordinator
Sean Koenig, GIS Specialist
Stan Hahn, Electrical Inspector
Scot Hunn, Senior Planner
Bill Gibson, Town Planner
Nicole Peterson, Town Planner
Rachel Friede, Town Planner
Department of Public Works
Greg Hall, Director
Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN 1
OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN 1
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE PLAN 1
BACKGROUND 2
EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS 3
SCHEDULE FOR PLAN ADOPTION 3
STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN 3
TOWN OF VAIL VALUES 4
VISION, GUIDING PRINCIPLES, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 5
THE STRATEGY 7
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT 7
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION 10
ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION 14
EDUCATION/AWARENESS 17
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 18
INTRODiJCTION
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
The purpose of this plan is to outline an environmental work program that consists of goals, strategies,
actions, and an implementation plan that will help the town coordinate efforts to achieve the
environmental vision of the community. A coordinated effort to achieve this vision will allow Vail to
maintain and improve environmental quality in Vail and throughout the region. It is essential to
protect the environment in Vail because of the major role the environment plays in the economy,
serving as the source of recreation and tourism. As a local government, it is essential for the Town of
Vail to take action that will play a part in the larger effort to reduce carbon emissions and improve the
state of the environment overall.
Vail and other ski resort communities are dependent on a healthy environment for recreational
amenities that influence development, tourism, and econorriic viability. The complexity of Vail's
ecosystem affects the sustainability of the natural environrnent and the community at large (Vail 20/20,
2007). Sustainability is generally defined as the ability of the present generation to meet its own needs
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Report of the World
Commission, 1987). According to Bill Carlson, Environmental Health Officer, through a newly
created comprehensive environmental management system focused on sustainability and reducing the
town's impact on the environment, the town has committed to continuous improvement of our
environmental practices by promoting renewable energy, resource efficiency, ecosystem protection and
a campaign for community environmental awareness and education.
OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN
1. Develop a long-range environmental workplan to protect and improve Vail's environmental
quality.
2. Improve community cooperation and collaboration with our year round residences in addressing
Vail's environmental challenges.
3. Encourage a culture of environmental stewardship through outreach and education.
4. Ensure that Vail is environmentally proactive.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE PLAN
The Guiding principles for the Environmental Strategic Plan are overarching statements that reflect the
fundamental values which are the foundation of the plan.
1. Creating Partnerships and Fostering Coo,peration: Involving all stakeholders will ensure
coordination of program actions and implementation.
2. Building Awareness and Encouraging Community Participation: The community is
also an essential stakeholder and with community participation and sharing information
comes buy-in from the public and a sense of place.
3. Planning Proactivelx: It is imperative to look ahead and plan for the known and the
unknown factors in the future.
4. Achieving Balance: Finding a common ground between economy, society and the
environment is critical to successful planning and actions.
5. Promoting Openness and Accessibility: Sharing information and providing access to
Town resources is fundamental to an open society.
6. Behaving_ Responsibly and Accountably: Being accountable for one's actions and
taking responsibility will ensure that all parties are acting in the best interest of the
environment.
7. Advocating Actions Beneficial to the Environment: Convincing stakeholders to take
1
J
action that will benefit the environment will allow for successful implementation of the'
plan. 8. Thinking Globally, Actin Lg ocally: We can make an impact on global climate change
by doing our share in the local community.
BACKGROUND
In 2006, the Town of Vail made a commitment to develop a Community Plan called Vail 20/20 Focus
on the Future as a way to build upon Vail's successes, keep the resort community competitive and to
seek opportunities to improve the community through a strategic plan. The adopted goals for the Vail
20/20 process were to create a plan that identified commonly shared values in the community, create a
clear vision for Vail, integrate a plan to coordinate Vail's strategies for the future, and create a plan
that transcends the administrations of town staff, Vail Town Council and appointed boards and
commissions (Memo to Vail Town Council, 2006).
The public input process for Vail 20/20 included two public workshops, a meeting with Vail's
stakeholders, a workshop with Vail Mountain School students, and an open house to respond to a first
draft of the Strategic Action Plan. Environmental sustainability, workforce housing, I-70 mitigation,
wildfire preparedness and management of growth and redevelopment were identified during these
meetings as top priorities for the town. More than 300 voices were heard to assist in setting a direction
for the future. At the same time, the 2007 community survey results were published, and both
initiatives showed tremendous support for environmental initiatives.
Through the 20/20 process, the community identified environmental issues as one of its top concerns
and expressed the need for a more sustainable community. Participants commented that an ongoing
dialogue about the surrounding forest health between the Forest Service and the town is an
environmental strength. Participants expressed interest in developing more recycling opportunities,
reducing the reliance on chemicals fo handle maintenance issues such as snowrnelt, ongoing work to
address the mountain pine beetle outbreak and related fire hazard and protection of Gore Creek. Other
recommendations included adopting a green building code (Vai120/20, 2007). In the 2007 community survey, environmental resources are identified by 82 percent of respondents as
very important with only 6 percent calling this issue unimportant. Respondents were asked to evaluate
a list of 10 topics important to Vail's future. In this case, "environmental protection" received the
highest score with a rating of 4.3 on a 5 scale (5 being "extremely important"), followed by
"addressing the pine beetle infestation" which received a 4.1 score. 71 percent of respondents
suggested the town place a high priority on "enforcement of requirements for private property owners
to remove dead beetle-infested trees." Satisfaction of environmental quality, which links both the
natural and built environment within the town, was ranked 3.8 of 5, which is just above average
satisfaction (Town of Vail Community Survey, 2007).
After approving the final Vail 20/20 Plan, the Town Council directed staff to develop an
Environmental Strategic Plan that includes environmental goals and actions which will be supported
by the municipality, and also by individuals, families, institutions, and businesses. The council
encouraged Staff to promote actively contributing to sustaining a healthy environment in Vail and
beyond. The majority of the environmental recommendations and goals are directed to the Town
because it is here where the broad range of environmental actions at the local level can be focused,
promoted and coordinated best.
2
r
EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS
The following documents were created to guide environmental policy and actions:
Comprehensive Open Lands Plan: Adopted in 1994, the Comprehensive Open Lands Plan identifies
and develops strategies for acquiring or protecting remaining open lands in Vail that would be valuable
for recreation, protecting sensitive environmental resources, extending or connecting trails, providing
adequate neighborhood open space and creating a small amount of contingency land for unseen needs.
This plan expired in 2000.
Environmental Strategic Plan: Adopted in 1994, the Environmental Strategic Plan established a
long-term environmental protection work plan. The plan expired in 1998.
Eap-le River Water Quality Management Plan: Adopted in 1996, this document is still relevant and
is used by stewards of the watershed to understand the current situation, the initiatives taken and future
actions needed to protect the region's aquatic health.
Communitv Wildfire Protection Plan: The purpose of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan
(CWPP) is to implement a seamless, coordinated effort in determining an appropriate fire management
work plan within the town, complementing local agreements for wildfire protection. Adopted in 2007,
the CWPP is still being utilized to guide forest health projects.
Vail EnerEy Audit: The Energy Audit identified the baseline energy usage by the municipality, and
categorized sources of energy use. The audit made recommendations to improve energy efficiency and
conservation, many of which are in this document.
SCHEDULE FOR PLAN ADOPTION
May 16, 2008: Vai120/20 Local Environmental Work Group Session
June 10, 2008: VEAC Presentation and feed back
June 23, 2008: Planning and Environmental Commission review
July 1, 2008: Vail Town Council ESP Draft hand out for comment
July 15, 2008: Vail Town Council Evening Session
August 19, 2008: Vail Town Council Resolution Adoption
STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN
The plan is organized into the following sections:
• Town of Vail Values
• Summary of Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals • Detailed Action Plan
• Appendix A: Implementation Plan
• Supporting documentation
3
,
TOWN OF VAIL VALUES
The Town of Vail Values were adopted by the Vail Town Council as part of the Vai120/20 Strategic
Action Plan (2007) and represent what is important to the community and our partners.
1. Premier Resort Community: Vail values its role as a premier resort community, which
recognized the interdependent relationship between the resort, community and municipality. Vail's
success as a resort depends largely on it success as a community which fosters relationships
between locals and visitors. We make plans and take actions that are investments in the experience
and lives of many different generations, today and into the future. It takes work and reinvention to
stay No. 1, and Vail is committed to innovation and creativity to achieve our goals.
2. Diversity: Vail values maintaining a diverse population of residents, workers and visitors, with a
broad representation of age, family composition, ethnic background and economic means.
3. Activities Benefit Individuals and the Community: Vail values a vibrant community life
supportive of spiritual and physical well-being and encouraging of intellectual and cultural growth.
This value includes providing a wide variety of educational, recreational, entertainment, art and
cultural opportunities. These offerings are accessible to all and appeal to residents and guests of all
ages, incomes and interests. These activities promote the development of relationships that
strengthen the community.
4. Natural Environment: Vail values the environment as a source of health, beauty, recreation and
economic strength that makes Vail a special place to live, work and play. As stewards of the
environment, Vail is committed to promoting sustainable environmental practices in every aspect
of the community.
5. Participation and Cooperation: Vail values building partnerships by working towards solutions
to environmental challenges through open communication and cooperation between community
members, businesses, interest groups and local and regional governments. Cooperation is essential
to addressing issues that extend beyond town boundaries.
6. Leadership: Vail will be open and transparent in our planning, decision-making and
implementation of the ESP.
7. Health Economy: Vail values world-class service and a vibrant, diverse, year-round economy that
caters to full and part-time residents, visitors and business owners and operators. A growing
employment and revenue base supports the economy, which thrives on environmental
sustainability, amenities and events, transportation and other infrastructure.
8. Sense of Place and Character: Vail values the strong history of the town and its unique character
and legacy while acknowledging the importance of reinvention. This is reflected in the high quality
of the built environment with design and features that endure over time.
9. Safety and Health: Vail values a sense of personal security for its citizens and their children, as
well as for property. Quality healthcare and physical activities support the health of the
community.
10. Transportation and Transit Network: Vail values a sustainable, multi-modal transportation
system that effectively provides ease of access to residents, visitors and the workforce in an
environmentally and technologically forward manner.
4
1
VISION, GUIDING PRINCIPLES, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Yail's Vision:
In the Town of Vail, we recognize that our quality of life rests on the quality of our environment and we
respect our natural and culticral heritage. We strive to be a model community by taking individual and
collective action to protect and enhance our ecological environment, while maintaining a vibrant social
and economic base.
y
GUIDING PRICIPLES
Lead by Example
Creating Partnerships anci Fostering Cooperation
Building Awareness and Encouraging Community Participation
Planning Proactively
Achieving Balance
Promoting Openness and Accessibility
Behaving Responsibly and Accountably
Advocating Sustainability
Thinking globally, acting locally
Monitor, measure and re ort annually
y
Goal #1: Effectively manage the environmental sustainabiliTy program outlined in this plan with
cooperation among stakeholders and sustain the path to implementation, resulting in success.
01.1 Gain a clear understanding of our current baseline scenario of environmental health and impacts.
01.2 Environmental Management will be used to implement this plan and reach all objectives and
goals.
Goal #2: Improve efficiency in water, energy, and waste management in business, residences
and in government in order to address global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
02-1: Ensure that current and projected water use remains below current capacity of water rights.
02-2: Reduce both the public and the town's annual baseline municipal green house gas emissions by
10% by 2010 and 30% by 2020.
02-3: Reduce the rate of residential, commercial and construction waste through programs centering
on reducing, reusing and recycling waste. Reduce the volume of landfill waste by 10% by 2010 and
20% by 2020 and increase the volume of recycled materials by 50% by 2010 and 75% by 2020.
Goal #3: Ensure that the ecosystem, specifically the forest and water systems, maintain current
levels of health, if not improved levels, through cooperation with stakeholders.
03.1: Maintain Gore Creek watershed as a Gold Medal Fishery, while working to maintain tributaries
that meet and/or exceed aquatic life standards set by the state of Colorado.
03.2: Implement the CWPP in order to ensure an adequate fire break between the Town of Vail and
the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI).
03.3: Ensure that water quality continues to surpass levels required by federal standards.
5
~
Goal #4: Ensure Town of Vail development regulations and policies are consistent with the
carrying capacity of the area's natural and built environment and encourage sustainable
economic development.
01.1: Ensure all long-range planning documents and development regulations plan for a build-out that
does not exceed carrying capacity for both human and natural resources.
01.2: Develop a transportation system that minimizes impacts to natural and man-made resources.
013: Educate residents and businesses on strategies to foster environmental stewardship.
Goal 95: Ensure that the public is educated and aware of environmental issues, initiatives and
implementation measures.
04.1 Initiate a public education campaign through local and regional media outlets that addresses
public actions in the implementation plan.
04.2 Market Vail as an ecotourism destination and promote awareness of environmental initiatives.
6
.
THE STRATEGY
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Key Issues/Background:
The Town of Vail contains 3,360 acres of land in a land mass approximately 10 miles long and at most
1 mile wide surrounded by the White River National Forest. The Town itself is at 8,150 feet in
elevation, while the peak of Vail Mountain is 11,450 feet. Of the 3,360 acres of land, almost 500 acres
are occupied by I-70 and the Frontage Roads. Almost 1000 acres are designated open space, with the
remaining approximately 1860 acres for residential and commercial uses. Gore Creek is the only
major water body within the town boundary, and it runs through the entire length of the town and runs
into the Eagle River just west of Vail in Dowd Junction. There are almost 1200 acres of vacant land
within the Town, but about 1000 acres of that vacant land is owned by the Town of Vail and has some
preservation zoning designation. There are 6,412 dwelling units in the entire Town. 9 percent or 624
units are deed-restricted employee housing units. A total of 1,520 households in Vail are occupied
with residents working in Vail (Development Statistics, 2007).
Population directly affects the amount of resources used in order to sustain the Town's needs. One
important issue to recognize is the rapidly changing demographic profile of residents within the Town
of Vail. This trend was made clear in 2000 by the U.S. Census results, and has accelerated since then.
Vail's current year-round population is approximately 4,800 residents. The Town has about 6,400 total
housing units. The Town's permanent population occupies about 2,300 housing units (37 percent of all
units) with the remaining units vacant part of the year (about 63 percent); these are typically occupied
by part-time (seasonal) residents. Vail is a Town with relatively small households (2.09 persons
compared to the Eagle County average of 2.73), which are unlikely to contain children. Only 13
percent of Vail households have one or more persons under 18, compared to 35 percent for the County
as a whole, and 46 percent in Eagle. The data suggest that many of Vail's former resident families as
well as large segments of the local work force are now living west of Vail and commuting to work in
Vail. Vail is considerably older than most of the rest of Eagle County, with only 11 percent of the
population in Vail under the age of 19 (compared to 26 percent in the County and 32 percent in the
Town of Eagle). About 21 percent of Vail's population was over the age of 50 in 2000 compared to 15
percent for Eagle County. Recent estimates of population growth provided by the State of Colorado
anticipate growth in Eagle County from about 50,000 residents in 2005 to almost 90,000 residents in
2030. Growth in the three-County region that includes Eagle, Pitkin and Garfield counties is projected
to grow from 115,000 in 2005 to 246,000 in 2030. Vail is relatively well educated (61 percent have
Bachelor's or higher degrees compared to the County average of 43 percent). Perhaps surprisingly,
Vail has lower median household incomes than the County ($56,680 in 2000 compared to $62,682 for
the County) (Vai120/Z0, 2007).
The Town is currently undergoing major redevelopment with Vail's Billion Dollar Renewal that
includes both public and private projects throughout Vail Village and Lionshead. Land use within the
Town is largely guided by the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan, which comprises a number of
adopted documents, some of which were adopted as long ago as 1979, and all of which designate
legislated and preferred land use within the Town. The Vail Land Use Plan, which is part of the
Comprehensive Plan, was adopted in 1986 and is intended to serve as a basis from which future land
use decisions may be made within the Town of Vail. Within the plan, general types of land uses are
defined which are then used to develop the Vail Land Use Map. The Land Use Plan was not intended
7
to be regulatory in nature, but was intended to provide a general framework to guide decision-making.
Land use is legally controlled by the Zoning Regulations, or Title 12 of the Vail Town Code.
It is essential to connect land use decisions with carrying capacity of utilities and municipal services.
Carrying capacity is the maximum number of people who can use a site without an unacceptable
alteration in the physical environment, an unacceptable decline in the quality of experience gained by
visitors, and an unacceptable adverse impact on the society, economy, and culture of the tourism area
(Mathieson, Alister, and Geoffrey and Wall, 1982). In 1998, the Town of Vail conducted a Carrying
Capacity Study that identifies ecological, physical, facility and social carrying capacity. While the
study may lend itself to addressing current carrying capacity, the 10-year-old document needs to be
revisited to fully understand the current situation as compared to the carrying capacity.
The changing demographics and increases in development have led to increased traffic in Vail. The
current level of service that has been deemed acceptable is a LOS C. However, projections in the
Transportation Master Plan, most recently updated in 2007, shows that future development will trigger
lower levels of service. In order to meet service standards, and control traffic issues within the Town,
it is essential to provide road improvements while also providing additional alternative transportation
options. The Town of Vail has provided alternative transit in the form of a free municipal bus system,
an extensive paved pathway system, and hiking and biking trails for recreational movement. These
alternatives, along with paid parking in the winter season, have curbed automobile usage and have
extended the ability of the current road system to provide adequate service.
As the number of vehicles traveling along I-70 through Vail increases, interstate noise pollution
continues to increase. To address the issue, the town has built sand storage berms in East Vail that act
as noise barriers. The town continues to monitor noise levels and according to the Colorado
Department of Transportation, they will be resurfacing I-70 from East Vail to West Vail with noise-
reducing pavement in 2008.
According to the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District in 2006, water rights are also of concern
when it comes to increasing density and population. The District says they have enough water rights to
carry the demand of projected build-out sceriarios. The primary source of domestic water in Vail is
wells, supplemented by surface water sources on Gore Creek and the Eagle River. Water diversion
infrastructure and treatment facilities currently have excess capacity to serve demands in Vail.
Additional capacity to divert and treat water is planned and will be implemented as demand for water
increases. Vail's wastewater effluent is treated at the Vail and Avon Wastewater Treatment Plants.
Excess capacity for treatment is currently available at both of these facilities. Additional capacity is
planned and will be implemented as demand for treatment increases. Water and sewer main capacity
in Vail has been studied and in general is adequate for current use and project build-out of current
zoning within the Vail service area. A replacement and upgrade program is in place to address
capacity issues and improve system efficiency. Replacement and upgrade programs target sources of
groundwater that limit existing sewer collection system capacity. Water main replacement targets
areas where inferior construction inhibits the reliability of water delivery. Upgrades required to meet
increased demand from development is planned as specific development projects are approved.
8
Goal #1: Ensure Town of Vail development regulations and policies are congruent with the
carrying capacity of the area's natural and built environment and encourage sustainable
economic development.
Objectives:
01.1: Ensure all long-range planning documents and development regulations plan for a build-out that
does not exceed carrying capacity for both human and natural resources.
01.2; Develop a transportation system that minimizes impacts to natural and man-made resources.
01.3: Educate residents and businesses on strategies to foster environmental stewardship.
Current Initiatives:
• The Town has developed an alternative transportation system to service as much of the Town as
possible, with most residences in close proximity to trails and parks.
• ERWSD adopted a policy (by Resolution dated July 22, 2004) which requires that the developer of
1) increased density within the District's service area, or 2) new lands annexed into the District,
dedicate sufficient water rights to serve the increased density or newly annexed lands.
• According to the ERWSD (2008), as a responsible water resources steward, the District encourages
the efficient and beneficial use of water through: 1) implementation and continued development of
a water conservation program; 2) structuring water rates schedules to provide customer incentives
to use water wisely; and 3) utilization of District water supply resources for the benefit of the
environment and stream flows.
• The Town has passed employee housing requirements that will ensure some employees will be able
to live and work in Vail.
Phase I Actions and Steps:
Action 1.1: Conduct an updated carrying capacity study that includes transportation issues and how
bed base v secondary/primary residents fits into the equation.
A.1.1.1 Through an environmental assessment of the community, determine key resources that
need defined carrying capacities. •
A.1.1.2 Identify those carrying capacities and develop strategies for staying within those limits.
A.1.1.3 Identify mitigation strategies if carrying capacity has been exceeded for critical
manmade or natural resources.
A.1.1.4Utilize carrying capacity thresholds when reviewing development applications.
Action 1.2: Update land use planning documents to ensure that all long-range planning addresses
carrying capacity and sustainability.
A.1.2.1 Evaluate the need for additional studies and research related to sustainability and
carrying capacity.
A.1.2.2Conduct a complete overhaul of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, including the Vail Land
Use Plan, Vail Village Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan,
Transportation Master Plan.
A.1.2.3Assure Planning and Environmental Commission is involved with the Environmental
Stragetic Plan.
Action 1.3: Update the Vail Town Code to reflect ideals of sustainable land use development.
9
A.1.3.1Research necessary updates of Title 12, Zoning Regulations and Title 14, Development
Standards, Vail Town Code.
A.1.3.2Update Hazard Regulations.
A.1.3.3Update open space districts to ensure that development is excluded as a land use.
A.1.3.4Update the employee housing requirements to increase on-site employee housing,
which will in turn promote an environmentally friendly live/work scenario.
Action 1.4: Review local and regional land use planning documents and determine how the Town of
Vail should assist in the implementation of such plans.
Performance Measures/Environmental Indicators:
Build-out scenario/Relationship to current situation
Water quantity Carrying capacity of various utilities, services, etc
Land Uses
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
Background/Key Issues:
According to the Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project (2007), the earth's surface has undergone
unprecedented warming over the last century, particularly over the last two decades. The future
climate of the Rockies will likely be dominated by human-induced warming under "business as usual"
carbon emissions, so accurately characterizing the regional response is vital to the Rockies' future
sustainability. According to Vail Resorts (2007), the snow season on Vail Mountain is approximately.
15 days shorter than what it was 25 years ago. In 2008, the town will complete a streetscape project
that includes heated pavers in Vail Village and Lionshead in the pedestrian core areas. These pavers
make it safer for pedestrians to walk in the winter and remove the need for snow removal trucks and
plows in the village cores. However, according to the Streetscape Master Plan (2005), an additional
1,357 tons of greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere each winter season from melting snow.
To offset this energy use, the town has offset 100% of its electrical use with wind energy credits. Also,
funds from the town's Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) have been designated for use on renewable
energy projects. In 2008, the Town hired a consultant to conduct the Town of Vail Municipal Energy
Audit. The audit suggested how to reduce municipal energy use over the next few years. However,
there is little effort to coordinate the energy use of the general public. Energy use is directly related to
emissions of greenhouse gases, from the harvesting, production, and end use of the energy source.
Waste management is a major issue within the Town and throughout the region. According to Eagle
County (2008), the Eagle County Landfill is a Colorado State-approved Subtitle D solid waste disposal
facility. Of the 61 acres approved for development, 31 are in use. This site will reach capacity in 14 to
17 years, depending on waste levels. However, future expansion could push the capacity of the
landfill. Recycling is free in Vail and is managed by the town through a contract with a local trash
hauler. Vail residents may drop off their recyclables behind the Community Development Department
building. The town also is supporting Eagle County as it builds a recycling transfer station and
hazardous waste facility at the Wolcott landfill. While the Town searches for locations for recycling
drop-off in East and West Vail, there is a need to require curbside pay-as-you-throw programs for
10
recycling in both residential and commercial settings in order to increase the amount of waste
diversion that occurs.
As stated in the previous goal section, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District projects that with
current build-out, there is adequate water in the water well system to support a growing population.
However, this does not preclude the community frorn conserving water in order to protect this precious
natural resource. This is essential considering that the City of Denver owns water rights that preclude
the rights of the local water district.
Goal #2: Improve efficiency in water, energy, and waste management in business, residences
and in government in order to address global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
Objectives:
02-1: Ensure that current and projected water use remains below current capacity of water rights.
02-2: Reduce both the public and the town's annual baseline municipal green house gas emissions by
10% by 2012 and 30°/a by 2020.
02-3: Reduce the rate of residential, commercial and construction waste through programs centering
on reducing, reusing and recycling waste. Reduce the volume of landfill waste by 10% by 2012 and
20% by 2020 and increase the volume of recycled materials by 50% by 2010 and 75% by 2020.
Current Initiatives:
• In 2007, the town installed 4.53 KW photovoltaic solar panels on the Vail Village Information
Center as a pilot project for solar on municipal buildings.
• The town purchased wind power credits for 100 percent of municipal power to offset carbon
emissions from electricity use. This contract is renewable in 2009.
• The town hired a consultant in 2007 to create a municipal energy plan, which created a baseline of
2006 data to quantify energy use, provide recommendations for aggressively reducing energy use
from all sources and track potential financial savings through efficiencies that can be reinvested
into the local community. This consultant has also conducted a Green Building Code Feasibility
Study for creation of green building policy/standards in Vail.
• The town continues to manage the free recycling program in Vail.
• A cardboard recycling system will be.installed and operational in summer 2008.
~ The town's Environmental Health Office is working with Eagle County on a county-wide
comprehensive recycling program which will include a$2.3 million recycling transfer facility at
the Wolcott landfill, increasing the Valley's recycling capacity by 2-4 times.
• Research is underway to locate sites for three-site mobile trailer recycling collection system that
will increase recycling opportunities for residents in East and West Vail.
~ The town sponsored its first-ever electronic recycling event in 2007 collecting over 8000 lbs of
electronic waste.
~ The town requires special events to incorporate recycling in their event planning.
• The town purchased seven hybrid buses in 2008, for a total of eight in the fleet, costing over $3.5
million.
• ToV public transportation saves xxxxx miles in travel per year.
• The Department of Community Development is retrofitting their office with energy efficient
lighting including timers, motion sensors and educational materials and a kiosk to promote
environmental stewardship.
lY
~
Phase I Actions and Steps:
Action 2.1: Require new construction and major renovations to obtain green building certifications that
promote resource and energy efficiency.
2.1.1 Decide on the Staff recommendation for which green building program works best for the
Town of Vail.
2.1.2Town Council will pass an ordinance requiring recommended green building program be
mandatory for new construction within the Town.
2.1.3lncrease the number of builders, developers and planners that voluntarily adopt
environmentally friendly methods during development and construction.
2.1.4Educate the public on the adopted green building program and provide services at the
Department of Community Development to provide information.
2.1.5 Provide economic incentives to developers and builders who build green.
Action 2.2: Implement energy efficiency and conservation measures for municipal facilities.
2.2.1 Work with TOV Facilities Team to instill a culture of conservation in order to gain an
effective ally that can really make difference.
2.2.2Set the TOV energy baseline from 2006 Energy Action Plan so that progress in reducing
energy use can be accurately tracked.
2.2.3Conduct TOV facilities lighting audit & reduce energy costs and GHG emission by
retrofitting existing equipment with new technologies; compact florescent lamps.
2.2.4Research energy services contractor for performance contracting
2.2.5Utilize savings from energy performance efficiencies to infrastructure improvements.
2.2.6Educate Town staff and the community on global warming impacts.
2.2.7Provide education in a variety of venues, and data needed by the community to understand
the need for action to reduce global warming.
2.2.8Encourage car pooling among town commuting staff.
2.2.9 Work to develop an alternative work hours program to allow for employees to work from
home or work fewer days per week.
2.2.10 Conduct feasibility study of a biomass heat and power plant in TOV using beetle killed
trees, waste wood and landfill waste.
2.2.11 Increase number of alternative fuel vehicles in town fleet to 50% by 2015.
2.2.12 All town non emergency diesel powered vehicles will use bio-diesel (135B20) by 2020.
2.2.13 Research additional alternative energy options, such as solar, geothermal, and wind
power generated on municipal facilities.
2.2.14 Require life cycle cost analysis for all major equipment purchases and replacement.
Action 2.3: Increase recycling participation and reduce per capita landfill waste through an ordinance
requiring residential and commercial curbside recycling.
2.3.1 Track solid waste, recycling and hazardous waster/material levels in TOV.
23.2 Research other community pay as you throw waste/recycling hauling programs.
2.3.3 Present curbside recycling concept to Town Council and obtain support for pay as your
throw / variable rate waste/recycling program.
2.3.4 Create recycling committee from town departments, community and other stakeholders.
2.3.5 Obtain feed back and buy in from valley waste haulers for system configuration, planning
and rate structure. Hold recycling and waste hauling community open houses.
2.3.6 Conduct outreach and education for on going political support. Develop a waste hauling
12
and recycling information brochure.
2.3.7 Determine implementation steps and enforcement mechanism.
2.3.8 Conduct pilot test and phase in with customer education, understanding and attitudinal
analyses.
2.3.9 Monitor and refine program 6 months after implementation.
2.3.1 OHold electronics recycling event in the TOV every June with support from EVAS.
Action 2.4: Increase the number and quality of recycling drop off locations within the town,
specifically in East and West Vail
2.4.1 Propose old Wendy's site as West Vail community recycling center.
2.4.2 Seek public input for East Vail community recycling center location.
Action 2.5: Promote and require recycling of construction waste and building material.
2.5.1 All building permits will be required to submit a waste management plan that identifies
sources of waste and methods to reduce, reuse and recycle.
2.5.2 Partner with RECON and Habitat for Humanity for TOV deconstruction materials delivery.
2.5.3 Promote construction and building contractor recycling education in the TOV.
2.5.4 Develop commercial waste education programs in TOV.
Action 2.6: Promote reduction in water consumption in businesses, community and municipality.
2.6.1 Conduct public awareness campaign along with ERWSD to promote reduction in water use.
2.6.2 Ban water features on private property that waste water resources.
2.6.3 Implement regulations that control the amount of water allowed to be used for lawns,
landscaping features, etc.
2.6.4 Promote xeriscaping and native plant use that can reduce water used for irrigation.
Phase II Actions:
Action 2.7: Research alternative fuel options for town transit/fleet operations.
Action 2.8: Build awareness of the climate change problem through public education and awareness
programs.
Action 2.9: Partner with energy industry to promote and educate consumers about energy efficiency
and ma.king smart energy decisions.
Action 2.10: Encourage adoption of green building strategies and practices, such as integrated design
for all construction projects.
Action 2.11: Partner with the I-70 Coalition and Eco Transit to promote and leverage mass transit
proj ects.
Action 2.12: Develop a commercial cardboard recycling collection program for Vail businesses.
Action 2.13: Create a culture of waste reduction and resource efficiency by delivering a clear and
consistent message of resource efficiency through recycling sites, community messages and guest
experiences.
Action 2.14: Promote and support Vail grocery tote bag program to reduce plastic bag disposal.
Action 2.15: Work with Eagle and Summit County Transportation Authorities to create and Summit-
Eagle bus service.
13
Performance Measures/Environmental Indicators:
Solid Waste Landfill Volumes
Recycled Materials Volumes
Water consumption, TOV, per ERWSD
GHG Emissions studies
TOV energy bills
ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION
Background/Key Issues:
Drought, warmer temperatures and the infestation of the mountain pine beetle have led to increased
wildfire danger in and surrounding Vail. According to the US Forest Service, as of 2007, the beetle has
infested over 70% of the trees from Lionshead to Dowd Junction and during the next five years, the
area surrounding Vail will lose hundreds of thousands of pine trees from this infestation. The dying
and dead trees are more susceptible to catch fire and thus, increase the danger of spreading wildfires.
According to the Town of Vail, through 2010 the town will spend over $1.5 million on addressing the
beetle outbreak and wildfre preparedness.
Gore Creek is the only major tributary that runs through the Town, and supports both recreational and
sanitation needs. The reach of Gore Creek flowing through Vail has been subjected to numerous
disturbances over the past 30 years including increased sediment from sanding of I-70 during the
winter. Monitoring the effects of sand sedimentation and other pollutant sources on the Gore Creek is
underway and the town works with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District on watershed
management programs to improve and protect the future stream health conditions of Gore Creek,
which is a Gold Medal Trout fishery.
The Gore Creek Macroinvertebrate and Stream Health Monitoring Report: 2004-2006 Monitoring
prepared for the Eagle River Watershed Council, stated that they compared "aquatic insect numbers in
Gore Creek to other healthy streams in the area and found that Gore Creek flowing through Vail is in
poor condition compared to healthy reference sites... Data summarized from various reports (Eagle
River Inventory and Assessment 2005, Hydrosphere 2005, Wynn et al. 2001) indicate that in the past
decade a downward trend in stream health is occurring in Gore Creek, typical of increasing
urbanization."
Goal #3: Ensure that the ecosystem, specifically the forest and water systems, maintain current
levels of health, if not improved levels, through cooperation with stakeholders.
Objectives:
03.1: Maintain Gore Creek watershed as a Gold Medal Fishery, while working to maintain tributaries
meet and/or exceed aquatic life standards set by the state of Colorado.
03.2: Complete the CWPP in order to ensure an adequate defensible space for the Town of Vail.
033: Ensure that water quality continues to surpass levels required by federal standards.
14
Current Initiatives:
• The Town is partnering with U.S. and Colorado State Forest Service and Eagle County on the Vail
Valley Forest Health Project, which seeks to reduce wildfire hazard by creating a fire break around
the town by removing beetle infested trees and working on re-vegetation programs. In 2007, the
town hired a six person wildfire mitigation hand crew and a crew boss for fire prevention education
and cutting/thinning projects on town-land adjacent to U.S. Forest Service lands.
• The town finalized its Community Wildfire Protection Plan in 2007, which outlines how Vail can
protect itself from the threat of wildfire.
• New regulations in 2007 require Class A roof assemblies or roof covering materials on all new
roofs and re-roofs in Vail, as well as banning wood shake and wood shingles for all structures
within the Town.
• Since 2000, the town has been an active member of the Black Gore Creek Steering Committee a
project funding partner for source control and monitoring.
• Supports the planning and construction of 63 sedimentation basins on I-70 Vail Pass over the past
five years.
• In 2007, the town assisted in funding the Colorado Deparhnent of Transportation's Sedimentation
Basin of Last Resort project located at mile marker 183 on Vail Pass.
• Supports Gore Creek water quality monitoring efforts by the Forest Service.
• Supports the implementation of Black Gore Creek Total Maximum Daily Loads (threshold for
pollution rates that still meet water quality standards) to identify sediment load reduction projects
and implementation plans.
Phase I Actions and Steps
Action 3.1: Reduce extreme wildfire hazard areas in the WUI as outlined by 2010 through the Vail
Valley Forest Health Project and the Town's Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
3.1.1 Fund CWPP fuel reduction and forest enhancement projects as well as the use of the ToV
Wildfire Mitigation Crew.
3.1.2 Complete yearly forest health projects in the CWPP.
3.1.3 Work with USFS and Colorado State Forest Service to educate public on forest health
proj ects.
3.1.4 Enforce the TOV Hazard Tree Ordinance with property assessments, urban forestry
contractors, and develop enforcement mechanism.
Action 3.2: Initiate Trees for Vail program as a forest restoration and Town of Vail beautification
proj ect.
3.2.1 Establish tree planting committee and develop project resources needed, purpose, mission,
vision & scope of work. Assign tasks and responsibilities to committee members.
3.2.2 Determine project budget and explore grant opportunities and other funding sources.
3.2.3 Detertnine time line and present project summary to Town Council.
3.2.4 Complete tree plantings and submit project report to council.
Action 3.3: Create a Gore Creek Water Quality Protection Plan and implement pollution prevention,
stream and stormwater monitoring and public education actions and strategies.
15
3.3.1 Obtain proposal for a Town of Vail stormwater management plan (SWMP) and Gore
Creek Water Quality Protection program through a collaborative partnership with the Eagle
River Watershed Council.
3.3.2 Review SWMP with TOV administration for input and approval.
3.3.3 Determine resources and support needed to implement SWIVIP. 3.3.4 Partner with community volunteers, USFS for stream monitoring to determine the stream
health status of Gore Creek.
3.3.5 Implement pollution prevention stormwater BMPs for municipal operations.
3.3.6 Establish and sustain a community-based mechanism to administer and implement the
Gore Creek Water Quality Protection Plan (WQPP).
Action 3.4: Annually review funding to support the Eagle River Watershed Council and other partners
and continue participation in the Black Gore Creek steering committee.
3.4.1 Attend Black Gore Creek Steering Committee meetings and periodically report findings
and actions to TOV.
3.4.2 Monitor Black Gore Creek sand mitigation projects and efforts by CDOT and ERWC.
3.4.3 Partner with the USFS, USGS and CDOT on water quality mitigation and Gore Creek
stream health efforts.
Action 3.5: Protect and restore the Gore Creek's water quality, stream channels, riparian corridors,
natural areas, wetlands, and unique ecosystems.
3.5.1 Determine the stream health trends of Gore Creek.
3.5.2 Support permanent on-stream solutions that protects Gore Creek from past operation and
maintenance of the I-70 roadway (i.e., Basin of Last Resort), including annual review of funding
opportunities, and public support of the program.
3.5.3 Determine the trends and conditions of wetlands in TOV.
3.5.4 Reduce sediment deposition into stream channels and wetlands
3.5.5 Reduce storm water and other point and non-point source pollution impacts and stabilize
stream flow.
3.5.6 Reduce nutrient loading contributing to excessive aquatic plant growth.
3.5.7 Reduce sources of bacteria contributing to beneficial use impairments.
3.5.8 Identify, prioritize and establish mechanisms for preserving, restoring andlor enhancing
stream channels, riparian corridors, natural areas, wetlands, and unique ecosystems.
3.5.9 Promote and participate in local and water stewardship efforts such as Water Wise
Wednesdays with the Eagle River Water Sanitation District (ERWSD).
3.5.10 Participate in local and regional efforts to promote natural corridors and greenways.
3.5.11 Reduce inputs of hazardous materials, organic compounds and heavy metals and restore
affected areas.
3.5.12 Develop and implement a fisheries restoration and enhancement plan.
3.5.13 Develop and implement a recreation enhancement plan to improve recreational access
and opportunities.
3.5.14 Reduce soil erosion and sedimentation.
3.5.15 Develop or revise ordinances to prevent, minimize and reduce soil erosion and
sedimentation, especially for construction sites and I-70 road sand problems.
3.5.16 Implement BMPs for effective soil erosion and sedimentation prevention and mitigation,
addressing both upland sources as well as sources from stream bank erosion.
16
3.5.17 Improve soil erosion and sedimentation control inspections and enforcement, as well as
education, for parties responsible.
Action 3.6: Protect open space and reduce golf course impacts on water quality.
3.6.1 Support open space pxeservation efforts.
3.6.2 Encourage golf course and open space practices that protect water quality.
Phase II Actions:
Action 3.7: Encourage updating andlor enforcement of the Hazard Tree Ordinance of the towri's
regulation making pine beetle infested trees a nuisance, through property assessments and owner
education, as well as the use of our wildfire mitigation crew.
Action 3.8: Research state and federal grant opportunities for wildfire fuel reduction projects, public
education and fire prevention programs.
Action 3.9: Research potential code amendments to further protect homes from wildland fires.
Action 3.10: Develop and implement best management practices for sedimentation and erosion control
in the Eagle River Watershed.
Action 3.11: Work with the Colorado Department of Transportation in the development of actions that
reduce past and future I-70 operations and maintenance impacts to Black Gore Creek, Gore Creek,
Miller Creek and Polk Creek, via public participatiori process and comment period.
Action 3.12: Integrate Town of Vail storm water protection and compliance program with the U.S.
Forest Service and Vail Resorts to prevent the discharge of sediment into Gore Creek ,
Action 3.13: Partner with the U.S. Forest Service and Colorado State Forest Service, BLM, Eagle
County, on future wild land fire mitigation and fire prevention projects.
EDUCATION/AWARENESS
Goal #4: Ensure that the public is educated and aware of environmental issues, initiatives and
implementation measures.
Objectives:
04.1 Initiate a public education campaign through local and regional media outlets that addresses
public actions in the implementation plan.
04.2 Market Vail as an ecotourism destination and promote awareness of ongoing environmental
initiatives.
Phase I Actions and Steps
Action 4.1: Create Ecotourism council to promote environmental education & ecotourism in Vail.
Link with ToV chamber and Vail Economic Council.
4.1.1 Develop a program that is supported through a variety of funding sources that serves to
promote environmental education and ecotourism in Vail.
4.1.2 Work will local marketing initiatives to brand Vail as an ecotourism destination.
4.1.3 Work with guide services to promote environmental education and raise funds for
17
conservation initiatives.
Action 4.2: Build awareness of the Vail ecosystem by coordinating the promotion of outdoor
recreation amenities with VRD and other local stewards of the environment.
4.2.1 Build awareness of Vail's ecosystem and sustainability efforts through public education.
4.2.2 Coordinate the promotion of outdoor recreation amenities with VRD and other stewards of
the environment.
4.2,3 Work with Vail Nature Center to create information clearinghouse on natural resources
and amenities.
4.2.4 Work with non-profits, local chambers and rotary club to promote and design
programming that will support Vail as an ecotourism destination.
4.2.5 Develop and/or promote existing and future public education and outreach programs.
4.2.6 Identify, promote, and encourage participation in educational opportunities for land use
decision-makers, (e.g., planning commission, local boards, developers, chamber of commerce)
Action 4.3: "Sense of Place", identifying and maintaining the community qualities dear to residents
and visitors.
4.3.1 Meet with community members and stakeholders to determine local qualities important to
residents and visitors
Phase II Actions:
Action 4.4: Work with non-profits to promote environmental programming in Vail and regionally.
Action 4.5: Research the need to create an Ecotourism Council supported by a variety of funding
sources to develop a program that promotes environmental education and ecotourism in Vail.
Action 4.6: Encourage the business community conduct an educational campaign to promote and
design programs that support Vail as an ecotourism destination.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY MANAGEMENT
Goal #5: Effectively manage the environmental sustainability program outlined in this plan with
cooperation among stakeholders and sustain the path to implementation, resulting iu success.
Objectives
05.1 Gain a clear understanding of our current baseline scenario of environmental health and impacts.
05.2 The Environmental COORDINATOR will implement this plan and reach all objectives and
goals.
Phase I Actions and Steps
Action 5.1: Establish measurable, attainable goals for improving the baseline scenario.
5.1.1 What are the trends and condition of the Vail ecological system?
5.1.2 What are the trends in the diversity and biological balance of the ecosystem?
18
5.1.3 What are the chemical, physical and biological pollutant trends of the Vail ecosystem?
5.1.4 What are the trends and conditions of Vail wetland areas?
5.1.5 What are the trends and conditions of Gore Creek and it's tributaries?
5.1.6 Report resource consumption and C02 emissions for town operations.
Action 5.2: Create a template to report progress on environmental goals/actions with town
departments and community partners.
5.2.1 Work with town departments and community partners to develop a report format.
Action 5.3: Collect data covering intervening pernod and determine goal bench
marks.
5.3.1 Collect data that covers intervening period form the previous two years and determine
bench marks for all ESP goals.
Action 5.4: Create mechanism for implementation of environmental sustainability plan.
5.4.1 Establish an Implementation Advisory Committee to manage implementation of the plan.
5.4.2 Work with stakeholders and active participants to promote action and implementation.
Action 5.5: Produce annual report that communicates results to departments and community.
6.4.1 Publish annual report card, post on TOV website and present to town council and other
community organizations.
ESSENTIAL loTEXT STEPS
Following the Vail Town Council's approval of the Environmental Strategic Plan in the summer of
2008 the ESP Task Force recommends the following essential next steps:
• The creation of an ESP Implementation Advisory Committee
• Hiring a sustainability coordinator to assist the Task Force
• Developing a communications plan
• Developing a set of environmental indicators by which to measure the state of Vail's environment
• Focusing Vail's response to the Recycling Challenge
19
r
WORKS CITED
Carlson, Bill. (2006) Memo to Vail Town Council dated 01/17/06. Town of Vail.
Colorado Department of Transportation.(2008) www.cotrip.org Information on I-70 Resurfacing
Projects. Accessed 4/3/08
Eagle County. (2006) Eagle County Landfill Fact Sheet
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. (2006) Memo to Town of Vail, dated 11/1/2006.
Eagle River Watershed Council. (2007) The Gore Creek Macroinvertebrate and Stream
Health Monitoring Report: 2004-2006.
Felsburg Holt and Ulevig. (2007) Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan. Town of Vail.
Gore Creek Watershed Management Plan (2006)
Mathieson, Alister, and Geoffrey and Wall. (1982) Tourism: Economic, Physical and Sociallmpacts,
New York: Longman. p. 21
RRC Associates. (2007) Town of Vail Community Survey Results.
Schmueser, Gordon and Meyer (2007). Town of Vail Energy Action Plan. Town of Vail
Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project. (2007) State of the Southern Rockies Ecoregion.
http://www.restoretherockies.org/rport.html Accessed 4/5/08
State of Vail Report. (2007). Town of Vail.
Town of Vail Department of Community Development. (2007) Development Statistics 2007.
Town of Vail Public Works Department (2005). Streetscape Master Plan Background Information.
Town of Vail.
United Nations. (1987) "Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development."
General Assembly Resolution 42/187. Accessed 4/01/08.
Vail 2020 Strategic Action Plan (2007). Town of Vail.
MEMORANDUM
June 25, 2008
To: Vail Town Council
Stan Zemler
- Pam Brandmeyer
Judy Camp
From: Sally Lorton
Re: May Sales Tax
On the reverse side please find the latest sales tax worksheet. I estimate I'll collect
another $47,000.40 in May sales tax to bring May collections to $617,735.00. If so, we
will be up 13.16% or $71,861.00 from 1'vlay 2007 and up 10.25% or $57,418.00 from
budget.
Town of Vail
Sales Tax Worksheet
6/25/2008
% CMrp* % CMrry.
7008 Budy~t from hom
MOI1Lh 7997 1998 1999 3000 2001 2002 2003 2006 2005 2006 2007 Budger C0/%CtionJ V•dsnc• 2007 &,egsr
'
a-.;
. s ~-e?. ~ri~, x, . .
2.:~. Y. N ,.vR i.~~. .c %
. .
. ? 1~~:.~.~-. ,~',t„~~.&+ ~>a3`a,'~R,~ ~'t"v °,u
. . ' _ . • ,4. . u T`g "we^ :a-.:'a . .
January 2,052,569 2,115,359 2,066,459 2,034,529 2,210,547 2,073,481 1',997,091 2,225,841 2,275,967 2.597,985 2,783,306 2,857,079 2,977,110 720,031 6.96% 4.20%
February 2,089,673 2,153,121 2,021,486 2,223,670 2,366,327 2,281,833 2,111,163 2.362.825 2,429,377 2,527,130 2,718,643 2,790,702 3,071,465 280.763 12.98% 10.06%
March 2,580,992 2,368,077 2,415,202 2,545,573 2,568,871 2,699,664 2,372,942 2,344,178 2,785,101 2,852,954 2,986,446 3,165,608 3,330,906 165,298 11.53% 5.22%
April 874,427 1,107,334 952,843 926,771 1,043,431 870,875 871,468 992,157 915,554 1,280,324 7,330,740 1,266,005 1,071,706 (794,299) -19.47%_ ,_75.35.%
May 329,783 382,718 370,864 368,121 448,234 414,248 428,979 111.595 458,770 449,283 545,874 560.317 570,735 10,418 4.55% 7.86%
~:?a~„~~ ~ . ~ • ~ ~ ~ . ~ ti ~ ~.~.a ~
.
`:3 ~ w. . _
W.:.~.~„~ .~.s '2a ~^+"~k`^i ~ a
arm°
Toiai 7.927,444 8,126:609 7,526,854 8,118,664 8,637,404 8,340,101 7,781,583 8,336,596 8,864,769 9,707,676 10,365,009 70.639,711 11,027,922 382,211 6.34°l0 3.59%
•
ri~,
. y' . ,Y~'~`~ > w~'. .;~x Y,~ ~ ~ : .x,. . ~:•,s '-6*~Sk,~.x.'.; ~i. .:;2'
.a,..5
~fi~~
Jvne 630,366 633,400 692,811 721,774 751,439 657,707 742,755 732,113 834,913 805,362 953,017 978,261
July 1,043,637 1,107,882 1,130,883 1,235,470 1,157,867 1,044,966 1,075,532 1,128,513 1,166,783 1,255,243 1,265,781 7,299,143
Aupust 1,073,430 1,183,926 1,050,004 1,038.516 1,124,275 1,084,318 1,029,446 994,445 993,985 1,055,614 1,162,746 1,193,373
September 637,831 735,608 606,600 817,313 747,766 713,574 679,208 757.,033 795,807 832,549 908,318 932,237
October 472,836 515,531 536,204 547,201 486,570 484,425 508,092 53<".537 566,173 614,396 688,519 704,751
Novembar 707,166 656,596 582,260 691,445 571,783 642,293 591,269 623,646 713,117 799,582 747,877 790,267
December 2,254,709 2,070,834 7,883,805 2,062,205 7,933,940 2,139,417 2,171,098 2,362,095 2,549,032 2,771,258 2,821,871 2,862,263
~~~~~"°"..f°, ,
W,';~A AX mg».:,;€ i
~ "'~a..~ ~ r~,~
t~... s_: • .
_ : .;~':~d~
~v 5r~ ~ y
Total 14, 747, 419 15,030, 386 14, 509.421 15, 232, 538 15,4 71, 044 15,106, 801 14,578,983 15, 466, 979 16,483,979 17,841,680 18,913,138 19,400,000
~
r~
APRIL 2008
~
~ VAIL BUSINESS REVIEW
TOM OF VE A
June 19, 2008
The April Vail Business Review breaks down the four percent sales tax collected for April and the ski
season.
Overall April sales tax decreased 19.5% with Retail decreasing 32.6°Io, Lodging decreased 26.3%, Food and
Beverage decreased 5.3% and Utilities/Other (which is mainly utilities but also includes taxable services and
rentals) decreased 2.0°l0. The ski season resulted in a 4.8% increase overall with Retail increasing 2.7%,
Lodging increased 6.6°Io, Food and Beverage increased 4.0% and Utilities increased 6.3°Io.
Town of Vail sales tax forms, the Vail Business Review and the sales tax worksheet are available on the
internet at www.vailgov.com. You can subscribe to have the Vail Business Review and the sales tax
worksheet e-mailed to you automatically from www.vailgov.com.
Please remember when reading the Vail Business Review that it is produced from sales tax collections, as
opposed to actual gross sales.
If you have any questions or comments please feel free to call me at (970) 479-2125 or Judy Camp at (970)
479-2119.
Sincerely,
Sally Lorton
Sales Tax Administrator
r,
April 2008 Sales Tax
VA/L VILLAGE
April April April
2007 2008 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 2109718- -118,799 -43.6%
Lodging 1389246 999655 -27.9%
Food & Beverage 1795592 1329128 -26.4%
Other 49571 29253 -50.7%
Total 533,127 3529,835 -33.8%
LIONSHEAD
April April April
2007 2008 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 79,945 53,313 -33:3%
Lodging 111,101 79,545 -28.4%
Food &
Beverage 39,038 559175 41.3%
Other 99683 59762 -40.5%
~
Total 239,767 193,795 -19.2°10
I
t
A pril 2008 Sales Tax
CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST VAIUSANDSTONE/WEST VAIL
Aprii April April
2007 2008 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 127;925 1115980 -12.5%
Lodging 615011 -13.0%
Food &
Beverage 427743 60,468 41.5°/Q
Other 59591 69211 11.1 %Q
Total . 246,406 239,670 -2.7°l0
OUT OF TOWN
April April April
2007 2008 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 47,278 299815 -36.9%
Lodging 19,841 9,871 -50.2%
Food & `
Beverage 460 - - 305 -33.7%
. Utilities & 2449410 ` 244;761- - 0.1 %
Other -
Total 311,989 2849752 -8.7%
,
A pril 2008 Sales Tax
TOTAL
April April April
2007 2008 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 4659866 3139907 -32.6%
Lodging 3399335 2f50,082 -26.3%
Food &
Beverage 261,833 248,076 -5.3%
Utilities & 2649255 258,987 -2.0%
Other "
Total 113319289 110719052 •19.5%
'RETAIL SUMMARY
April April April
2007 2008 °Io
Collections Collections Change
FOOD 100,542 85,344 -15.1.%
LIQUOR 22,178 21,867 -1.4%
APPAREL 65,252 37,023 -43.3%
SPORT 171,899 106,051 -38.3%
JEWELRY 10,832 9,205 -1.5.0%
GIFT 8,623 4,060 -52.9%
GALLERY 2,682 1,882 -29.8%
OTHER 83,571 47,696 -42.9%
HOME 287 779 171.4%
OCCUPATION
TOTAL 465,866 313,907 -32.6%
07108 Ski Season Sales Tax +
VAIL VILLAGE
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Reta i I 292359665 291029116 -6.0°!0
Lodging 2,090,189 291473236 2.7%
Food & Beverage 1,865,670 198479564 -1.0%
Other 51,117 629679 22.6%
Total 61242,641 611599,595 -1.3%
LIONSHEAD
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 704,91 1: 856,906 21.6%
Lodging 19448,205 1,5909517 9,8%
Food &
Beverage 3989375 552,068 38.6%
Other 575152 60,179 5.3%
Total f 2,608,643" 3,0591670 17.3%
. 07108 Ski Season Sales Tax
CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST Vi41USANDSTONE/WEST VAIL
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 191449388 19192,703 4.2%
Lodging 19062,423` 1,0919579 2.7%
Food & -
Beverage 445,549 419,824 -5.8%
Other 33,262 325144 -3.4%
Total 29685,622 297369246 1.9%
OUT OF TOWN
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
Retail 304,424 . 3569261 17.0%
Lodgi ng 2009118 289,932 44.9%
Food &
Beverage 109744 109082 s6.2%
Utilities & 133409078 154199387 5.9°fo
Other Total 1,855,364 2,075,662' 1 t:9°!0
07108 Ski Season Sales Tax . TOTAL
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
.k
r. _
mN
s
Retail 4;389,388 ' 4,507,986 . ` 2:70lo,
. s .
~
Lodging 4980499,35 5911%264 6.6%
~
Food & - -
Beverage 2;3r720,,338 2,829,538~ 4.0%
. : ~ ~ . .
.
Utilities & ` 4,481,669 ~ 1r,,574,385 } 6,.3%
Other
,
.
~
Total .M 135392127 0 ' 145031J7.1 41.8°fa
.
:
I
r•
RETAIL SUMMARY
Ski Season Ski Season Ski Season
06/07 07/08 %
Collections Collections Chan e
FOOD 821,445 842,480 2.6%
LIQUOR 210,403 245,284 16.6%
APPAREL 535,535 556,861 4.0%
SPORT 1,937,725 2,032,938 4.9%
JEWELRY 169,817 159,790 -5.9%
GIFT 85,293 59,957 -29.7%
GALLERY 45,373 34,294 -24.4%
OTHER 580,672 573,288 -1.3%
HOME 3,125 3,094 -1.0%
OCCUPATION
TOTAL 4,389,388 4,507,986 2.7°Io
1
~ . ,
~
j_
. ~
,
,
.
,
.
~N
,
,
,
g4 . ~ 'f.:.
4t•,v
i
. :
.
. ' . ~ , .
~ . -.'~1. . . . . : ~
. _ . . . . . . . . . . , . . ' ~
~
~
. ~
,I, I
f i ~1 ; t ~ I
44~~~
i' - + . _ ~ . _ ° ;."S~~ "a~f° ~ i' - • , ' I
i
f . . ' - , . ~u . .
~ : . , ~ . . . - . . . . ' • , ' ~ ~~"D` ,'`.,."'..pe a" '`a~' ~ = ri, ~
~ • . • . . ' - ' ' ~ _ . ' .
~ . . , . ,
. , . ' . .t -
..s:.,.' .
_ . _ . . : .
: _ . . . . . . .
~
~ . . . ~ • ~ ~ ~
. _ ' . ~ , . , . : . , ~ I
, _ ~c~,~ ~*+a•,.~~ ~a~ ~ ~ „ . . , .
. . . . . _ . . . ~ - - : ~
. . - . , . . { . , , 1
. , ~ . • • ' ' ' ' ~
:
' ~ a . _ . . . . ' ~
~ , r , ' I
. . . , ' ~ ~ . . ~ , ' ~
DEPAHTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION ' - - -
~ ' ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . , ~
_ , ~ . _
I . ,
. . _I
( . - . . ~
,
. ;
.
.
~ WPW, U* lIM llt°J.r;~..~'.~c°~~er 1~..~~ , • , ~ i
I
• . ' : ~m . : ~o e ° , c(~' a , e - ~ . , ~ I
, .
4 ' ooe
~~l
f ~ " ' • ~ ~ ~r~' ~ wi? $14
• ` ,.~.!'VlZU~i~~~~ ~VV ~~f~ o ,0 s ~i~~
. .r . . : ~ ~.y., ..f? , . , - . r . . ~ ..I ~ , 2ss:;. '~:a~
. ~ . . . . . , ~
. ....n..a...,-_z, , :.._...>,y_,._. . . : . . . . . . , .
~ f
~ • ._~Mau+ -
~ 5 . ..._r-- .....qy a~,.; .H. -r..,».~. _ .
. . , , , . . . r . e, . . (
.
• . ~
~
~
~
~
~
• 2008 Elected Officials' Guide
~ to the
•
• Colorado Department of Transportation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• OT
•
• DEP NT OppOR
-
•
• '
•
~
~
~
~ STAT]E O F C
• OLORADO
~ EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS oF\co~
P 90
~ 136 State Ca itol
• Denver, CO 80203 - 1792
• Phone (303) 866-2471
• , ' fa,s;Bill Ritter, Jr.
• Governor
k
•
w
•
•
•
•
~ Greetings:
~
~ The Colorado Department of Transportation is pleased to present "The Elected Officials'
• Guide to CDOT." Our hope is that this guidebook will provide you with the necessary
information to make sound transportation decisions on behalf of the citizens of this state.
~
~ As Colorado's elected officials we are entrusted with the responsibility of stewardship
• and with the privilege of serving the public. Local, state, and federal office-holders work
• each day to improve the lives of their constituents. Without your hard work and
dedication, Colorado would not be able to provide this state's citizens and businesses
~ with the services needed to sustain our high quality of life.
~
• One of the most vital obligations charged to government is transportation. We know that
this issue is timely and needs discussion. From cul-de-sacs to interstate highways,
~ Coloradans depend heavily on transportation infrastructure that is designed,
~ implemented, and maintained for the 21St Century through the work of elected officials.
• This book should help provide you with answers to constituent questions regarding issues
• such as planning, changing, and funding our transportation system here in Colorado. I
_ hope you'll find "The Elected Officials' Guide to CDOT" an invaluable tool to use
~ toward that end.
• Please accept my sincere appreciation for your service to our state.
~
~ Sincerely,
• Bill Ritter, Jr.
~ Governor
~
~
~
~
i
~
~
•
i
•
, ~
•
•
•
•
~
~
•
~
•
•
~
~
•
•
~
~
~
i
1
iv
~
~
•
~
Transportation Commission of Colorado
• ~ ~
4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Room 270, Denver, Colorado 80222-3406
~ (303) 757-9025 FAX (303) 757-9717; www.dot.state.co.us/commission
• ` S~NE N ~
•
.
. DOUGLAS E. ADEN
Chair, Grand Junction
~ WILLIAM G. KAUFMAN
Vice Chair, Loveland Dear Friends
• HENRY SOBANET
• Denver We understand that as elected officials serving the needs of your district
• JEANNE ERICKSON transportation is often of the highest importance to you and your constituents.
Evergreen Transportation is a common thread throughout every community. Not only does
• GREGORY B. McKNIGHT transportation provide for the mobility of goods and people, but it can also impact
Greenwood Village
~ growth patterns and economic activity. Many times, the performance of a
HEATHER BARRY
! Westminster transportation system impacts public policy decisions.
• GEORGE KRAW20FF
Steamboat Springs Because we value our working relationship with you, "The Elected Officials' Guide
• STEVE PARKER to CDOT" was created as a resource for you. Not only does it cover topics such as
Durango
~ planning, funding, and environmental stewardship, it also includes a comprehensive
. LES GRUEN acronym guide, a glossary of transportation terms, and a section for frequently asked
Colorado Springs
. GEORGE H. TEMPEL questions. We hope "The Elected Officials' Guide to CDOT" proves to be a valuable
~ wiiey tool as you strive to make Colorado a better place to live, work and raise a family.
KIMBRA L. KILLIN
• Holyoke Questions about any of the topics outlined in this document should be directed to the
~ STACEY STEGMAN CDOT Government Relations Office at 303-757-9772.
Secretary
- Thank you for your service to Colorado.
~
~ Sincerely,
~
~
~
~ Douglas E. Aden, Chairman
~ Transportation Commission of Colorado
~
~
~
• Russell George, Executive Director
~ Colorado Department of Transportation
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
•
i
•
~
•
•
•
•
~
~
~
•
•
•
~
i
~
i
•
•
•
~
~
1
~
ui
~
~
• TABLE OF CONTENTS
•
~ Welcome to the Elected Officials' Guide to CDOT 1
~ CDOT Organization Chart
~
~ Chapter 1: Commissions, Boards, Management and Outreach
•
~ Colorado 1ransportation Commission 3
. Transportation Commissioners and Map
~ Colorado Tolling Enterprise 5
~
~ Colorado Division/Board of Aeronautics 7
~
~ Executive Director 9
•
~ Office of Government Relations ..........................................................................................................................11
~
. Office of Public Relations ....................................................................................................................................13
~
• Chapter 2: Funding and Resource Allocation 15
• Federal Funding Sources ......................................................................................................................................17
~ HTF: Highway Trust Fund
~ Surface Transportation Authorization
~ Annual Appropriations
Earmarks
~
• State Funding Sources ...........................................................................................................................................19
~ HUTF: Highway Users Tax Fund
Senate Bill 1
~ House Bill 1310
• Capital Construction
. Limited Gaming
TRANS Bonds: Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes
~
• Alturnative Funding Options 22
• Public and Private Partnerships
Tolling
~ Regional Transportation Authorities
• Resource Allocation by Investment Categories . 23
~
~
~
~
~
• vii
~
~
~
TABLE OF CONTENTS ~
•
•
Chapter 3: Transportation Planning 25 ~
20-year Statewide Transportation Plan •
TPR: Transportation Planning Regions
STAC: Statewide Advisory Committee ~
TPR/STAC Representatives and Map •
Urban Planning 29 •
MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organizations
TIP: Transportation Improvement Program ~
Rural Planning 30 •
STIP: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program •
10 Steps to Plan and Build a Project
Statewide and Regional Planning Managers 33 40
Planning Managers and Map 34 •
Chapter 4: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 35 ~
Regional Planning and Environmental Managers and Map 37 ~
~
Chapter 5: Engineering and Maintenance 39 ~
Engineering Regions •
Regional Transportation Directors and Map 40
~
Maintenance 41 •
Maintenance Superintendents and Map 42 •
Safety and Traffic Engineering 43 ~
Traffic Engineers and Map 44 -
Chapter 6: Doing Business with CDOT 45 ~
Procurement 45 ~
Equal Employment Opportunity 47 •
Disadvantaged Business •
Agreements 50
~
~
Appendix ~
FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions 51 ~
Glossary of Terms 55 ~
Transportation Acronym Guide 63 -
. ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
viii •
~
• Welc6me
~ to the
~ Elected Officals' Guide to CDOT
•
•
• By the
• CDOT Office of Government Relations
•
~ We are pleased to offer you this guide to our department. You can find information on the various functions of our
~ agency and answers to your questions regarding transportation issues in Colorado.
~ Our staff welcomes your questions and are ready to assist you with any issue or inquiry.
~
~ Thanks for your interest in transportation.
~
• Herman Stockinger Melissa Nelson Mickey Ferrell
Director Legislative Liaison Federal Liaison
~ Phone: (303) 757-9077 Phone: (303) 757-9703 Phone: (303) 757-9755
fe
~ Michelle Halsted Tom Lorz Elaine Seeley Pyle
~ Local Liaison Research and Communications Office Manager
~ Phone: (303) 757-9441 Phone: (303) 757-9084 Phone: (303) 757-9065
~
~ Angie Drumm
~ Loca1 Liaison
~ Phone: (303) 757-9105
~
~
• How to use this guide
~ Answers to Frequently
~ Asked Questions
Page 51
~ Sections on CDOT and `
~
~ our functions Chapters 1 - 6 `
~
~
~
~ J~ranSportation Terms
ge 55
. 1
~
~
~
Colorado Department of Transportation Organization Chart ~
•
Governor - - Legislature ~
z
•
~ ~ ~m . •
Executive Director •
Deputy Executive Director ~ •
Office of Gov't Relations Transportation Tolling Enterprise ~
} Commission Board Aeronautics Board ~
i ~
Office of Public Relations .
~
` - Division ofAudit Attorney General ~
Information Technology 5 •
Office
~
_ ~ _ . _ . Tolling Director •
Attorney General
~
Tolling Enterprise •
Division
~
~
Division of Division of Division of Human Division of •
Division ofAccounting Transportation Engineering & Resources & Aeronautics ~
and Finance Development Maintenance Administration ~
Intermoda! Region 4 Administrative •
Accounting Region 1 Central •
Planning Northeast Services Center
~
Financial Mgmt. Research Region 2 Region 5 Center for •
and Budget Southeast Southwest/Central Procurement •
Services
Information L Region 3 Region 6 Metro ~
Management Northwest Area Center for Equal •
Opportunity
Environmental Staff Branches •
Program Center for Human •
Business 8 Tech Support Resource Mgmt.
Projed Development .
Intelligent Transportation
SyStems Center for ~
Materials&Geotechnical Facilities Mgmt.
Transportafion Safery & Traflic •
Engineedng
Conhacls & MarketAnalysis ~
Bndge Design 8 Mgmt. •
Maintenance & Operations Direct
Reporting •
Communications •
~
~
2 -
~
~ ,
~
• Colorado Transportation Commftion
•
• Colorado's transportation system is managed by the Colorado Department of
~ Transportation under the direction of the Transportation Commission. The Commission
is a non-partisan, statutorily authorized body comprised of eleven volunteer citizen
r members who represent and reside in specific districts (see map on page 4). Each
i Commissioner is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the state senate to serve
• a four yeaz term. In order to provide continuity on the commission, the expiration dates
of comrnissioners' terms are staggered every two years.
~
. Under state law, the powers and duties of the Transportation Commission include:
~ • Formulating general policy with respect to the planning, management, The CommiSsion iS a-non-.
~ construction, and maintenance of public highways and other transportation Patli,san, stututorily
• . systems in the state; authot'iZed body comprised
Advising and making recommendations to the Governor and the General
~ Assembly relative to transportation policy; = of eleven volunteer citizen
• Promulgating and adoP~ tmg the transPortation dePartment budget and Programs, ` members who represent
~
• including construction priorities on the state highway system; and reside in specifiC
• Assuring that the preservation and enhancement of Colorado's environment, districts. Each
~ safety, mobility, and economics be considered in the planning, selection, commissianer is appointed
~ construction and operation of all transportation projects; by the Governor and
• • Reducing state transportation costs through cooperative agreements confitmed.by the state
(intergovernmental and Public/Private Partnerships); and senate. .
~ • Maximizing state transportation funds with a strategic, integrated, statewide '
• planning process.
~ By statute, the commission or individual commissioners may give direction to or make
~ requests of the executive director. Direction to or requests of the CDOT staff are provided
• by formal resolution adopted by the commission.
~ For meeting information visit our Web site at: www.dot.state.co.us/commission
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ 3
~
~
~
Transportation Commissioners •
i
. ~
:;t::,-,;: C Y •
i~G~f._ j ..I~idi...;
~
PS
r 5
~
i 6
; ; ~ i
~ .R:,r.c
r:r .~co ~ ~ ~ ;reu ?'!.rt= •
~ 4.
n
,x... .
` . -1
~ 3 ~ i~ ~ . ~
I--
Pi:ft;C I .
7 ,
, 9 L
. . , •
. I
J
CUR.:! •,t;I'.GI.D I .P:/i:','i.'r:'I .
I I I
,
. ,
`I
, -7---- F -
, 8 i ~ ' L---1--~ ~ •
,
; , f , ~
~
• : r- i .,i i .
, ~
. I ~ ...f...... i
.
' I 1 ~ ::cs~.__
Data Swrce: CDOT 2005 Publishetl: May 2006 .
DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 6 DISTRICT 10 ~
Henry Sobanet George Krawzoff George Tempel ~
Represents Denver County Represents Clear Creek, Gilpin, Represents Baca, Bent, Crowley, .
Grand, Jackson, Moffat, Routt, and Custer, Huerfano, Kiowa, Las .
DISTRICT 2 Rio Blanco Counties Animas, Otero, Prowers, and Pueblo
Jeanne Erickson Counties ~
Represents Broomfield* and DISTICT 7 •
Jefferson County Doug Aden, Chair DISTRICT 11 i
Represents Chaffee, Delta, Eagle, Kimbra Killin
DISTRICT 3 Garfield, Gunnison, Lake, Mesa, Represents Cheyenne, Elbert, Kit ~
Gregory McKnight Montrose, Ouray, Pitkin, and Summit Carson, Lincoln, Logan, Phillips, •
Represents Arapahoe and Douglas Counties Sedgwick, Washington, and Yuma
Counties Counties ~
DISTRICT 8 •
DISTRICT 4 - Steve Parker SECRETARY ~
Heather Barry Represents Alamosa, Archuleta, Stacey Stegman
Represents Adams, Boulder and Conejos, Costilla, Dolores, Hinsdale, Director of Public Relations ~
Broomfield* Counties La Plata, Mineral, Montezuma, Rio CDOT ~
Grande, Saguache, San Juan, and San 4201 East Arkansas Avenue •
DISTRICT 5 Miguel Counties Room 277
Bill Kaufman Denver, CO 80222 ~
Represents Broomfield*, Larimer, DISTRICT 9 Phone: (303) 757-9362 ~
Morgan, and Weld Counties Les Gruen stacey.stegman@dot.state.co.us •
Represents El Paso, Fremont, Park,
and Teller Counties ~
~
* Indicates a portion of a county i
4 •
~
~
`
r Colorado Tolling Enterprise
•
~ T'he Colorado Tolling Enterprise (CTE) is a not-for-profit business within CDOT
! created by the Colorado Legislature under constitutional provision (TABOR) to
finance, design, build, operate, and maintain tollways. An enterprise, as defined by
~ TABOR, can receive no more than 10% of its annual revenues from state and local
~ taxes.
~ The CT'E was made possible by state legislation in 2002 (Senate Bill 02-179 and
~ House Bi1102-1310) that enables CDOT and the Transportation Commission to issue -.The CTE provid'es a new
~ non-recourse bonds far additional capacity toll projects to be implemented on new, ;mechanism,for .not only
not existing, highway lanes throughout Colorado. These bonds are repaid by collecting 1
~ funding much-needed
tolls from those choosing to use the lanes. As non-recourse bonds, they will not be a ~ burden on the taxpayers; the risk rests with the bondholders. `'capactly improvements,
• but operating,and .
• Under provisions of the legislation, the Transportarion Commission serves as the maifttcti~iing them oyer the
Board of Directors to the Enterprise. The Commission is required to adjust toll rates, life of the roadway,.
~ upon payment of certain costs and debt, so that the amount of toll revenues generated
• is as close as possible to the amount required for the ongoing operation, maintenance,
. renewal, and replacement of the tollways.
~ The CTE implemented its first project by opening up the underutilized Bus/HOV
• lanes on I-25 from Downtown Denver to US 36 for solo drivers who choose to pay a
~ toll. The project opened in June 2006 and provides congestion relief to thousands of
commuters daily. Revenues collected from tolls are more than sufficient to cover
~ operating and maintenance costs on these lanes.
• The CTE provides a new mechanism for not only funding much-needed capacity
~ improvements to alleviate congestion, but operating and maintaining them over the
~ life of the roadway.
~ Peggy Catlin, Deputy Executive Director of the Colorado Department of
~ Transportation, currently serves as the Acting Colorado Tolling Enterprise Director
~ and can be reached at (303) 757-9208 or neggy.catlin@dot.state.co.us.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 5
~
~ .
r
• Colorado Aeronautical Board
~
~ The seven-member Colorado Aeronautical Board was created by statute in 1988 and
• is responsible for aviation development in Colorado. Members of the Board represent
specific aviation interests across the state. Each member is appointed by the Governor
~ to serve three-year terms and to represent both government and aviation-interest The ,seven-membet'
~ constituencies. Colorado Aeronautical '
Boar~d is r.esponsible, for' "
~ EASTERN SLOPE GOVERNMENTS av:iation development in
Harold Patton, Chair Golorado,
Greenwood Village, CO
~
~ Harold Felderman, Vice Chair
• Greeley, CO
~ WESTERN SLOPE GOVERNMENTS
• Dale Hancock
• Glenwood Springs, CO
~ Dave Ubell
• Montrose, CO
~ PILOT ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE
~ Vacant
to
~ AVIATION INTERESTS-AT-LARGE
• Larry Romrell - Secretary
. Castle Rock, CO
~ AIRPORT MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIVE
~ Dennis Heap
• Watkins, CO
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
r
~ 7
~
~
~
Colorado Division of Aeronautics •
•
In support of CDOT's development of a forward-looking, multi-modal transportation ~
system, the Colorado Division of Aeronautics promotes public and private partnerships •
to enhance aviation safety, aviation education, and the development of an efficient .
administration of the State Aviation Fund.
The Divasaon of
AerottautiCS t'eceives no : The Division of Aeronautics receives no General Fund revenues to support its aviation .
General F"und revenues to = activities. Financial support for aeronautical activities is provided through the State ~
Aviation Fund, which is comprised of funds generated from a 2.9% sales tax on all
support its avtation jet fuel, a.04 cendgallon excise tax on non airline jet fuel and a.06 cent/gallon ~
acttvtttes. `excise tax on aviation gasoline (AVGAS) which is used in most single and light twin i
engine aircraft. Of this revenue 65% of the Sales Tax, all of the Jet Fuel Excise Tax ,
and .04 cents of the AVGAS Excise Tax is returned to the airport on which the fuel
was purchased. This money is earmarked for airport development. The remaining ~
35°Io of the Sales tax and.02 cents of the AVGAS Excise tax is placed in the Aviation •
Fund to be disbursed as "grants-in-aid" to the aviation community and as
administrative expenses for the Division of Aeronautics. These grants are awarded ~
to help fund a variety of airport needs such as runway construction, pavement ~
maintenance, airport related equipment and safety related projects. •
Please contact Travis Vallin, Colorado Division of Aeronautics Director, with any ~
additional questions at (303) 261-4418 or travis.vallin@dot.state.co.us ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
8 ~
`
~
~
~ Executive Director ~
~ Russell George was appointed by Governor Bill Ritter to serve as Executive Director
• of the Colorado Department of Transportation in Feburary of 2007. Mr. George is
responsible for the overall direction and management of CDOT, with a staff of more
~ than 3,000 employees and an annual budget of approximately $1 billion.
~
• In 2004, Russell George was appointed Executive Director of the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR). He previously served as Director of the Colorado Division The Executive Director is '
~ of Wildlife since September, 2000. During his tenure he led efforts to address a responstble for tlae_overull -
. number of issues critical to the future of the state's wildlife resources. direCtion and" managemen.t
~ Prior to his cabinet positions, Russ was Speaker of the Colorado House of `of CDUT. '
~ Representatives. He was named Legislator of the Year in 1994 and 1996 by the
• Associated Press' capitol reporter. A graduate of Harvard University Law School, he
. served as a volunteer at the Crow tribe reservation in Montana, a municipal judge in
Rifle, general counsel for the Rio Blanco and West Divide Water Conservancy Districts
~ and as director for the Silt Water Conservancy District. Russ is married to Neal Ellen
* George. They have four sons and reside in Rifle, Colorado.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
s
~
~
•
i
•
~
~ 9
~
~
~
~
i
•
•
~
•
•
i
~
r
•
•
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
•
~
~
1
~
10
~ .
~
• Office Government Relations
•
• All elected official liaison activities are coordinated through CDOT's Office of
• Government Relations. The Office of Government Relations is responsible for
outreach efforts on behalf of the Transportation Commission and CDOT with elected
~ officials at the fecteral, state, and local government levels.
~
. Specifically, the Office of Government Relations provides strategic and analytical
support to the Transportation Commission and CDOT's Executive Management Team
~ in both transportation policy development and government relations. The Office of
` Government Relations also serves as a resource to elected officials and other external
• partners of CDOT to assist in explaining and understanding complex transportation
financing, planning, and engineering practices.
~
~ Federal Government Liaison The Of, fice °of Government
~ CDOT's Office of Government Relations provides Federal Government Liaison 'ReZations is responsibile
support to both internal and external stakeholders. Specifically, the Federal Liaison for outreuCh e,fforts on
~ is responsible for outreach efforts with Colorado's Congressional Delegation and behalf of the,,_ .
~ their staff as well as representatives of federal government agencies on behalf of Transportation
• CDOT. Because federal transportation authorization bills delineate how state Commission and' CDOT
Departments' of Transportation must allocate their share of federal transportation yyith elected officials at the
~ funds, the primary focus of the Federal Liaison is to work with our elected ' federal, state, and local
~ representatives and senators in Congress to ensure Colorado's transportation programs govem,ment levels.
• are considered in the most optimum light.
~ For specific questions, please contact Mickey Ferrell, Federa.l Liaison, at (303) 757-
. 9077 or mickey.fenell@dot.state.co.us.
~ State Legislative Liaison
~ The State Legislative Liaison within CDOT's Government Relations Office is
~ responsible for outreach efforts with members of Colorado's General Assembly.
• Primarily, the State Legislative Liaison develops and advances CDOT's annual
• legislative agenda while serving as CDOT's representative in the Colorado State
Capitol during each legislative session. The legislative agenda is developed with the
~ input of CDOT's Executive Management Team and approval of the Transportation
• Commission in close coordination with the Governor's Office. The Legislative Liaison
advises the Commission and Executive Management Team on pending issues before
~ the state legislature and provides strategic and analytical support to identify potential
~ impacts to the Department.
~ For specific questions, please contact:
~
~ Melissa Nelson, State Legislative Liaison, at (303) 757-9703 or
• melissa.nelson@dot.state.co.us
~ Thomas Lorz, Research and Communications Coordinator, at (303)757-9084 or
• thomas.lorz@dot.state.co.us
~
i
•
•
• 11
~
~
~
Local Government Liaison ~
The Local Government Liaison function of CDOT's Policy and Government Relations ~
Office was created in 2001 in an effort to enhance and improve the Transportation ~
Commission and CDOT's existing relationship with local gavernments. Local •
governments are one of CDOT's more active and vocal constituencies because the
transportation planning process is a locally driven, grass-roots effort. The impacts of ~
transportation issues and projects are often felt the greatest at the local level. The -
Local Government Liaison provides strategic and analytical support from a policy •
perspective to the Commission and the Executive Management Tean on transportation
issues of concern to local governments. The position also helps to communicate to ~
local governments the issues being considered by the Transpoxtation Commission ~
and how those may impact individual local communities. •
For specific questions, please contact: ~
Michelle Halstead, Local Government Liaison, at (303) 757-9441 or -
~
michelle halstead@dot state.co.us.
~
If you have other questions regarding Government Relations, please contact: !
~
Herman Stockinger, Director of the Government Relations Office, at (303) 757-9077 ~
or Heman Stockinger@dot.state.co.us. !
. ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
•
•
12 ~
~
• Office of Public Relations
•
~ The Office of Public Relations is the link between CDOT and the news media
• statewide, as all media communications are coordinated through it. The Office is
responsible for news releases, construction and maintenance advisories and
~ publications, advertising development and placement and both internal and external
• communications, especially during emergencies or crises. Over 300 media contacts
• are fielded and responded to every week, including news releases and advisories,
reporter inquiries and guest editorials.
~
• In addition to working with members of the media, the office provides internal support The Offce of Public
~ to the Transportation Commission by writing news releases concerning policy Reldtiorts' is'the link
decisions and Commission activities along with formulating responses to media bettiveen CDOT and the °
~ inquiries on behalf of each transportation commissioner. neivs, media stdtewide as
• The office is also charged with running statewide safety information campaigns to all media communications `
~ educate drivers and promote safety. "Click It or Ticket" is just one example of many `are coordinated through it..:
~ to promote the use of safety belts.
~ In order to help the public resolve disputes with CDOT and respond to complaints
~ and compliments, the Office of Public Relations also works closely with the
~ Governor's Advocacy Corps. to help citizens resolve issues.
~ Please direct all media calls to Stacey Stegman, Director of Public Relations, at
~ (303) 757-9362 or stacey.stegman@dot.state.co.us.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 13
~
!
i
~
~
•
~
i
~
•
~
i
~
~
•
~
•
•
~
~
~
•
~
•
~
~
1
~
14
~
• Funding and Resource Allocation
•
~ The Colorado Department of Transportation's revenue is derived from the Highway
. Users Tax Fund (state gas tax), Gaming Funds, Sales and Use Taxes known as Senate
• Bill 1, Capital Construction Funds, House Bill 1310, and the Highway Trust Fund
(federal gas tax). majority of CDQT's
• The annual budget is developed by the Transportation Commission and submitted to budget ts directed and
the Governor for approval. The budget includes both legislatively appropriated items alloca'ted"by the Il-
~ and "non-appropriated" items (those areas appropriated by the Transportation member.,Transportation
~ Commission rather than the state legislature). Cotrimission. ~ The majority of CDOT's budget is directed and allocated by the 11-member
~ Transportation Commission. The Joint Budget Committee allocates approximately
~ 3% of CDOT's budget. In order to make budgeting decisions, the Transportation
• Commission uses a performance based resource allocation process that provides
guidance how to allocate funding among four major investment categories: Safety,
~ System Quality, Mobility and Program Delivery.
i
• Every year the Transportation Commission reviews their performance objectives in
each of these investment categories in order to make policy decisions regarding the
~ allocation of these resources.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ 15
~
~
~
Estimated FY 2007-2008 Financing System - Distribution by Investment Categories ~
(In Millions) ~
~
Revenue Non-CDOT CDOT CDOT ~
Sources Distribution Revenue Budget" ~
$1,817.8 ($468.1) $1,349.8 $1,349.8 ~
. . ~
IiUTFOF the= •
7HHUT :Top Lec~islativeAppropriated Pr~ogram DeliverylSafetyl
~7~ ~ Mobility •
:
$38.2
0%0 HU7`F" " . 2.8% •
~ Restricted -
Ssurces a€ HUTF. 'I .0°Io Safety • TC ~
$178,7
Motar FuE1 Tax _ 13.2°l0 ~
Pr0 ects & Education
68.1°l0 : HUTF to Cliries Maintenance (signing & sfriping), -
$101,6 Regional Priorifies •
Qther Taa, FeES 13.0% ~r249.6 HUTF t0 }~ciCltS •
31.9% $0,$
•n..~• ~
E1UTF tcs . . . 4,~1~/~ - ~ .
Gounties
$9 57.t3 a ~ . Zp.i°1o ~ e - a •
Ht1'!'F to CDOT ' • •
$415.2 ,
°
~
' ~ ' • ~ Mobility - TC
Obligation . ~ , 9 •
Restriction $287 ~ 21 3% ~
Enhancement, Metro, CMAQ •
Maintenance'(snow & ice),
ITS (investments), ~
* - : : RegionalPriorifies
MISC~11~11RCtUS , , , : : : • ° -
"$276.$ M~st~aCl~ite~s: •
.
o Misc. includes: Safety Education: Transit; Aeronautics; ; a':: ~~~7,g ° • •
~~:7l0
~ Gaming Funds; Local Funds, Interest earned on Bonds; k°
Other Misc., SIB, Tolling Collections, Rail Bank, _
HB02-1310 ro'f~
Senafe Bili
~
97•001 . Senate Bill °,~~~q ' ~ ,
$242.9 97-001
~ ° •
13.4% $242.9
~ ~
* ` . - ~
~
m ~ . . •
°/1 This Revenue & Allocation chart does not include ~
Bond proceeds. -
Totais may vary due to rounding. TC=Transportation Commission
As of January 2008 Appropviated •
~
~
16 ~
~
~
• Federal Funding Sources ~
•
• Highway nust Fund (HTF) • The national Highway Trust Fund (HTF) was created by the Highway Revenue Act
~ of 1956 to ensure a dependable source of revenue for the National System of Interstate
and Defense Highways. It is also the source of funding for the remainder of the
~ Federal-aid Highway Program.
~
• Similar to other federal trust funds, the HTF is a financing mechanism established by
law to account for tax receipts that are collected by the federal government far specific C"oitgress must give
~ purposes. Originally the HTF was dedicated solely for highways, but later Congress petsion for federal -
• determined that a portion of the highway tax revenues collected should be used for funds to be expended froriz
transit needs. To that end, the Mass TransitAccount was created and became effective
~ in 1983. the Highway Trust F und;
~ transportatian
• The HT'F is funded primarily by a federal fuel tax, which is currently 18.4 cents per authoriZation is, the means.
gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel fuel. Of the motor fuel taxes, by wltich this permission is~ the Mass Transit Account usually receives 2.86 cents per gallon. ;gt'unted.
i :
•
~ Surface Transportation Authorization
Congress must give permission for federal funds to be expended from the HTF;
~ transportation authorization is the means by which this permission is granted. Each
~ transportation authorization bill establishes transportation policy, defines programs,
• outlines areas of emphasis for spending, and authorizes funding to the states.
Transportation authorization legislation covers multiple years because transportation
~ projects take a great deal of time from planning through construction. ISTEA, TEA-
• 21, and SAFETEA-LU are the most recent examples of Transportation Reauthorization
• Bills enacted by Congress. '
~ SAFETEA-LU Funding Problems
~ Fiscal Year 2009 (FY 09) is the last year of the SAFETEA-LU authorization bill.
• Two economic issues are coming together to put pressure on the Highway Trust
• Fund (HTF). When SAFETEA-LU was passed in 2005, Congress decided to spend
down the trust fund which had a large positive cash balance. That balance was to be
~ spent over the life of the SAFETEA-LU authorization bill, however due to several
• economic factors, the HTF is facing a negative balance in the $6 billion to $8 billion
• range in FY 09. By statue, the HTF is not permitted to carry a negative balance, nor
is it allowed to borrow money. If a funding solution is not found, Congress will be
~ forced to reduce the amount of money given to the States in FY 09 by 20% or more
• (approximately $100 million for Colorado).
~ Annual Appropriations
~ The annual appropriations legislation places yearly limits on the amount of funds
~ that can be spent within the multiple-year transportation authorization legislation. In
• addition to funding authorized programs on a year-by-year basis, appropriation
legislation utilizing the HTF fuel tax usually provides the opportunity for a certain
~ number of specific projects, or "earmarks," to be selected by Congress.
~
~
~
~ 17
~ "
~
~
Earmarks ~
An earmark is a specific project identified by Congress as a high priority with a ~
specific dollar amount attached for funding. The goal with earmarks is to ensure that ~
the funding for them comes from "discretionary" money-a portion of the Highway •
Trust Fund (HTF) that is set aside off-the-top for this specific purpose prior to the
remaining HTF being distributed by "formula" back to the states. C'DOT works closely ~
with Colorado's congressional delegation to ensure that projects which are earmarked •
are also identified as a transportation priority to Colorado's transportation planning -
partners and can be found in the short-term, 6-year Strate;ic Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) for the fiscal year in which the money is sought. ~
Unlike previous authorization bills, SAFETEA-LU departed frorn the past in that the -
Congressional Authorization committees (House Transportation Committee and ~
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee) made a canscience choice to ~
remove most, if not all, the discretionary funds from the bill. The Authorizer's chose -
to direct funds through authorization earmarks (SAFETEA-LU earmarks) which had •
the effect of removing the discretionary money from the Appropriations Committees
The ?'ransportation (both House and Senate). In other words, the Authorizers removed the Appropriators ~
C"ommissionhas-taken < flexibility in earmarks annually so that if the appropriators choose to include earmarks -
a policy p.osition that in the annual spending bills the money for those earmarks would almost wholly
earmar.king should be come from the formula funds allocated to each state. ~
coordinated...,
' Because of this, both CDOT and the Colorado congressional delegation sought to •
make an earmarking process that was more clearly understood for everyone. The
Transportation Commission has taken a policy position that earmarking should be ~
coordinated to the extent possible with Colorado's congressional cielegation members •
and the Transportation Planning Regions (TPR) and Metropolitan Planning •
Organizations (MPO's) representatives to ensure earmarks reflect the current
Transportation Plan. ~
CDOT submits annually, an appropriations notebook which conitains projects from •
that fiscal years STIP. This notebook is developed in cooperation with all the MPO's ~
and TPR's across the state. Because congressional office's get a limited number of ~
requests, CDOT's appropriations notebook contains four highway projects and one •
aviation project where applicable. Federal funding for these earmarked projects flows •
through CDOT and, as such, the Department administers the projects to meet all
federal requirements for federal funding (match, environmental requirements, ~
completion of the logical phase of the project requested, etc). -
Earmark requests outside of the CDOT Appropriations Notebook will be considered ~
a request by the local jurisdiction. That jurisdiction will then be responsible to meet ~
all federal requirements for federal funding (match, environmental requirements, •
completion of the logical phase of the project requested, etc.)
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
18 -
~
•
~ State Funding Sources
•
• Highway Users Tax Fund (HUTF)
• The major source of revenue for CDOT is the Colorado Highway Users Tax Fund (HU'TF).
~ Almost three-fourths of the HLTTF is funded through Colorado's motor fuel tax, which is
22 cents per gallon of gasoline and 20.5 cents per gallon of diesel fuel. The remaining
~ funding is comprised of motor vehicle registrations and other fees.
• Priar to distribution to CDOT, the General Assembly appropriates "off-the-top" money =The mujor source of~
~ from the HUTF to the Department of Revenue (for Ports-of-Entry and Division of Motor ~reyenue for CDOT is the°
~ Vehicles) and the Department of Public Safety (Colorado State Patrol). "Off-the-top" Colorarlo Highway Users
. appropriations cannot increase more than 6% annually. Ta.x Fund (HUTF): AlmOSt '
• three fourths of the HUTF
Following the allocation of "off-the-top" money from the HUTF, the remaining dollars *fund'ed through "
~ are distributed by statutory formula to CDOT, counties, and municipalities. Col'orudo's motor fuel tpx.
~ .
~
~ FY 2008 Distribution: $782.8 Million
• Off-the-Top
• CDOT $100.7 M
$415.5 M 12.9%
• 53% otr-the-TOp
Departuien[ of Revenue
~ CO State Patrol
HuTF
• ~ , ~ t~t~ restricted
$8.0 M
1%
~ ~
~
Counties
~ Cities $157.0 M
• $101.6 M 20.1%
13%
~
. As of January 2008
~ Sales and Use Tax (Senate Bill 97-001)
~ In 1997, the Colorado General Assembly passed Senate Bi1197-001. Senate Bill 1 is a
~ measure to provide additional funding from sales and use tax revenues associated with
• automobiles and automobile-related accessories. In Colorado, the general fund can only
grow by 6% annually. Any additional revenue is directed towards other state
~ priorities, including a portion for strategic transportation projects through the
~ Senate Bill l transfer. The strategic projects are also known as "7I'' Pot Projects."
~ In addition, a minimum of 10°Io of the Senate Bill l transfers are used to fund
• strategic transit projects. See "Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS)"
and "7th Pot Project Progress" on page 21.
~
~
~
~
. 19
~
~
~
House Bill 02-1310 ~
In 2002, Colorado House Bill 02-1310 was enacted by the General Assembly to ~
provide that any unallocated General Fund surplus within the TA.BOR constitutional ~
revenue limit be allocated two-thirds to the State Highway Fund and one-third to the •
state's Capital Construction Fund. The HiJTF allocation from the General Fund surplus
under House Bill 02-1310 is to be used for reconstruction, repair, maintenance, and capital ~
expansion projects. •
Capital Construction Funds (House Bill 95-1174) ~
Settate Bill7 provtdes In 1995, the Colorado General Assembly enacted House Bill 95-11'14 requiring the •
funding, from sales and use Transportation Commission to annually submit to the Capital Deve:lopment Committee ~
tax revenues assocutted w~h (CDC) a prioritized list of state highway reconstruction, repair, and rnaintenance projects ~
automobtles and for possible funding with Capital ConstrucUon Funds. Prior to 1995, CDOT was not •
autorriobale-related eligible to receive Capital Construction Funds in as much as these funds were reserved for .
non-transportation-related capital improvements like state buildings.
accessones to; ficnd high ~
priority state wute -
Under the legislation, the Capital Development Committee (CDC) reviews the
transportation projects. Transportation Commission-approved list of projects and either approves or rejects the ~
list in its entirety. The CDC-approved list of projects is forwarded to the Joint Budget ~
Committee far possible funding up to the available amount of Capital Construction Funds. .
These funds are appropriated in a lump sum, not by individual proji:cts. •
Gaming Funds •
Limited gaming began in Colorado on October 1,1991. The most inunediate and visible ~
impact was to the roads surrounding the gaming communities of Etlack Hawk, Central •
City, Cripple Creek, and near the casinos in Southwest Colorado. Traffic increases on •
some stretches of state highways in the vicinity of the gaming co:mmunities has been
great and most of these roads were not built to handle the large amount of traffic that has
~
since been generated. •
Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute, CDOT may request an appropriation from the ~
state's Limited Gaming Fund to address the construction and maintenance needs associated ~
with the increased traffic on state highways in the vicinity of gamin,g communities. -
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
20 -
~
• ' ' i.i ,.q
~
• Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes (TIdANS Bonds)
bond proceeds must be : In 1999, the General Assembly passed TRANS and referred it to the voters, who in turn
~ used on 28 strategic
. approved it. TRANS provided a financing mechanism allowing CDOT to issue bonds to nsportahon projects
accelerate strategic transportation projects. The legislation required that bond proceeds <<
-across the state commonl
~ must be used on 28 strategic transportation projects across the state commonly referred to y
as 71 Pot Projects. ~refe,~'ed tocis 7w''Pot ' PI'OJGC~S.
.
~ 71 Pot Project Progress >
~ ~A
Corridors Completed or Fully Funded
~ I-251LTS 50/SH 47 Interchange
• I-25, Owl Canyon Road to Wyoming
. C-470 Extension k =
US 34, I-25 to US 85
~ Santa Fe Corridor
• I-76 at 120th Avenue
US 285, Goddard Ranch Court to Foxton Rd.
~ I-225 at Parker Road (SH 83)
~ I-70 East, Tower Road to Kansas State Line
• I-70/I-25, "The Mousetrap"
SH 82, Basalt to Buttermilk
~ US 50, Grand Junction to Delta
• I-25, SH 7 to SH 66
• US 287, Broomfield to Loveland
T-REX (I-25 and I-225) .
~ US 40 Berthoud Pass and in Winter Park
~ I-25 through Colorado Springs
• I-25/US 36lI-76lI-270
US 160 Wolf Creek Pass
~
. Remaining Corridors
Powers Boulevard in Colorado Springs
~ US 287, Campo to Hugo
~ US 160, SH 3 to the Florida River
• US 550, New Mexico State Line to Durango
I-25, SH 66 to Fort Collins - Environmental Impact Statement
~ (EIS) underway
~ I-70 West, Denver to Eagle County - Programmatic EIS draft
• complete I-25 Denver to Colorado Springs - EIS completed from Lincoln
~ Avenue to Castle Rock; Environmental Assessment (EA)
• completed from Monument through Colorado Springs
• East Corridor Major Investment Study - undergoing necessary
environmental clearance to identify future projects
~ West Corridor Major Investment Study - undergoing necessary
. environmental clearance to identify future projects
i
•
• , `
:
.
•
• 21
~
~
~
Alternative Funding Options •
•
Public and Private Initiatives (PPIs) •
The Colorado General Assembly gave CDOT the authority to become involved in ~
Public and Private Initiatives (PPIs). PPIs are joint partnerships that can be formed •
between a private entity and CDOT to implement transportation projects. If a private •
entity is awarded a project, some or all of the financing and design/construction are
the responsibility of that entity. Before the initiation of construction, CDOT must ~
complete the appropriate environmental studies and clearance.s, as well as meet •
applicable state and federal requirements. •
Tolling ~
The Colorado Tolling Enterprise (CTE) is a not-for-profit business that finances, •
designs, builds, operates, and maintains toll highways. .
A Regconal Transportadon
Authonty alloivs two orv The CTE opened its first project, the North 1-25 HOV/Express I,anes, to the public ~
more junsdictions to fornt a. in June of 2006. The HOVltolled Express Lanes maximize the efficiency of HOV .
tuxing district in order to lanes, allow those who drive alone (also known as single occupant vehicles) to use •
fund local'lransportakon_ . the HOV/Express Lanes if they pay a toll. As the HOV lanes cuirrently have excess
projects. space, there is room for additional vehicles without any travel time impacts to ~
carpoolers who use these lanes without paying a toll. The proj~ect includes seven -
miles of the I-25 HOV lanes, between Downtown Denver and US 36. Revenues from •
this first project now fully fund its operations and have begun to repay the transfer of
funds authorized by the Transportation Commission. •
Regional Transportation Authorities (RTAs) ~
Formerly known as Rural Transportation Authorities, the state legislature broadened ~
the rural authority to regional or a statewide authority in 2005. Prior to the passage ~
of this legislation, every area of the state except the Denver Metro area was allowed ~
to form RTAs. Currently, an RTA allows two or more jurisdictions to form a taxing ~
authority in order to fund local transportation projects. An Imter-Governmental
Agreement between the RTA and CDOT is required prior to taking it to a vote of the ~
people of said region in order to form and fund a transportation project on the state •
highway system. •
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
22 -
~
• , .t
•
• Resource Allocation by Investment ~ Categories
~ Resource Allocation is the process by which revenue estimates are used by the
• Commission to distribute expected funding by CDOT investment categories: Safety,
• System Quality, Mobility, and Program Delivery. Resource allocations are then
geographically distributed based on performance measures of the state highway system
~ to the six CDOT engineering regions and are referred to as control totals.
~
~ Investment Categories
~ Resource Altocation is the
• Safety ~ process by which revenue
. The Safety category includes services, programs, and projects that reduce fatalities, "Eestimates are used to. F
injuries, and property damage for all users of the system. The goals of the safety disttibute expected
~ program are to (1) create, promote, and maintain a safe and secure transportation funding geogt'aphically to
. system and work environment. (2) Increase investment in safety and strategic projects. ; investment categories.
The investment category includes the following two areas of focus: (1) Drive Behaviar
"
~ Program, which promotes safety through education and enforcement programs, and
~ (2) Roadway Safety Program with an emphasis on highway or signage improvements
• to better the safety of the motoring public.
~ System Quality
~ System Quality includes all programs that maintain the physical functionality and
. aesthetics of the existing transportation infrastructure at Transportation Commission-
• defined service levels. This investment category primarily includes CDOT's
maintenance acUvities on the highway system, right-of-way, and bridge program. In
~ addition to highway maintenance, the investment.category includes maintenance
. activities for airports and the preservation of railroad rights-of-way for transportation
i users. There are six program areas within the System Quality Investment Category:
(1) Pavement, (2) Bridge, (3) Roadside Maintenance, (4) Rest Area, (5) Traffic
~ Operations, and (6) Tunnel.
~ Mobility
~ The activities within this category address issues that impact whether it be level or
~ quality of movement, accessibility to transportation, reliability of the system,
• connectivity of one system to another system, and environmental stewardship. The
• programs used to address these issues include highway performance program, alternate
modes, intelligent transportation systems, travel demand management programs,
~ weather-related incident management teams and traveler information.
~
~ Program Delivery
. Program Delivery supports functions that enable the deliveiy of CDOT's programs
and services with the following goals: (1) deliver high quality products and services
~ in a timely fashion; (2) attract and retain an effective and qualified workforce; and
. (3) foster an environment that respects workforce diversity. The programs and services
with this investment category are the foundation for delivery of all of the other
~ investment categories.
~
~
~
• 23
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
i
i
•
•
~
•
•
•
i
~
i
•
~
~
~
i
~
1
24
~
~
r Transportation Planning
•
~ In 1991, two laws dramatically changed transportation planning in Colorado. The
• first changed the Colorado Department of Highways to the Colorado Department of
Transportation. Within this law, a grassroots process was established for defining
~ transportation needs. It required the development of a comprehensive, long-range
~ twenty-year Statewide Transportation Plan, incorporating the priorities and needs of
~ the 15 transportation planning regions.
~ The law was the enactment by Congress of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
• Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) that similarly required the states to produce a
• Statewide Transportation Plan and a Statewide Transportation Improvement Program _A g~assroots process for `
(STIP). In 1998, the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21) was defning transportution
~ enacted to replace ISTEA. In 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, needs and priorities Was f
• Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was signed into law establtshed in 1991 by
• to replace TEA-21. ,
integrating all 15 regional
~ In accordance with SAFETEA-LU, CDOT carries out a continuing, cooperative, and transportation plans into a'
. comprehensive statewide multi-modal transportation planning process with its 15 Comprehensive multi-
• transportation planning regions. The process includes the development of a long- modal Statewide
range Statewide Transportation Plan that sets the vision and a Statewide Transportation Transportation Plan:
~ Improvement Program (STIP) that identifies short-term project needs and priorities. °
~ CDOT has chosen to use a six-year STIP, to be updated every four years.
Transportation projects in the STIP are consistent with corridor visions identified in
~ the long range Statewide Transportation Plan.
~
~ Long Range 1~-ansportation Plan
• The Long Range statewide transportation plan represents a comprehensive, multi-
modal transportation vision. It provides a statewide perspective that reflects the
~ Transportation Commission policies and integrates the needs, revenues and costs
• identified in a1115 Regional Transportation Plans. It contains a constrained component
• based on Transportation Commission resource allocation, the cost to sustain the system
at current performance levels, and a vision of how the system could perform by
~ reducing congestion, improving safety and maintaining the existing transportation
. system.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 25
~
~
~
1~-ansportation Planning Regions (TPR) ~
Development of a twenty year statewide transportation plan begiins at the local level ~
with business persons, residents and local officials in the Transportation Planning .
Regions (TPRs). Of the 15 TPRs, five located in urban areas are known as •
Eacli Transportat~on ' Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)and the remainin;g 10 are non-urban
TPRs. Each TPR is comprised of municipalities and counties within given boundaries. ~
Planning Regton ts " State law enables elected off'icials from the counties and municnpalities in the non- •
comp~ZS~edofeleoted , urban TPRs to form Regional Planning Commissions (:RPC) through an
officials from Colot'udo's intergovernmental agreement. The RPCs develop and adopt reg:ional transportation ~
Countks and.tnuntctpaltttes:, plans. Regional transportation plans are integrated into the statewide transportation ~
who tdenlify and~ptzoizttZe ~ plan which is approved by the Transportation Commission. ~
corridor strategies andlor ~
proJects for thear speciftc Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC)
plannangi;regton for The Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC)-made up of i
`integration„ into the representatives of each of the 15 TPRs-advises the Department on planning-related !
E„
Statewide„Transportation. issues and reviews the regional and statewide transportation plans. The STAC meets .
Plans regularly (usually monthly) prior to each Transportation Commission meeting. The
Chair of the STAC provides regular updates on STAC activitie:s and issues to the ~
Transportation Commission. For members of the Statewide Adlvisory Committee, ~
please visit page 27. -
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
26 . •
~
~
~
• Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC)
~ Representatives
•
• T'RANSI'ORTATION P'LAN NINGREGtONS
:
• ~
~
. .
.
,
• . ~1
. . . ~r~,y~+r~ ~ryxTy i6id~e 1t,r 3.
•T Y ,,.~~i, a 7 ~idR e~tl: F.
q:~
uq'l~ ,~~~3.~~,r~~W~• x.~,
• rv ~ ~ ~ , ' , ~ <
.
~ ~
.
~ ~ • •=~z
• ~ . . . .
,
'
. <
.
' . w
• • ~ . , , -a.:. .
: . ~
. • • , . ; e , , . " ,
al°~ . {
• ~ . ~ Y ~ x.:•.: ~e.: z''A~"'~ ~ ~ ' . ;
~ ' ,~r~'~_~ t~c z '3 ~~~a • .a"\ ....r :3.:' ~ , ~ ~ ~
4^ . ...a : ~ '3q r~
i ~y~` ~ • e ~ ~ V~~ „ ?
& '~.x~.< . ~ o\~ d`
: ~•i, • ,
•
4G- ~ ::~i a~' < : ~
.
.
.
,
~
~
,
r_...
• r . . ~ ,
• r~-. ~ ~u ' ,a
_ • ~
• ~ ~~l ~ ~ r r > ~ 4 ' A
''.~~t~ . , 5 ~r;~ a~witi ~~,~~*~~i.~'~~` .
• < i~ k„~ ~ . ~ .
.
,
»
. ~
.a~ '
~
,
~
.
~
• .
,
,
. ,
.
.
• ~.;;fsa;.. ,F~,~'~' k;.;,~ ~i*e, ~ -
. .
y' i, r _~i~~,~?; :
• ~R'~~~a~s~'~"-~ : , g
.
:m' S. . ~ ~
~ ~
. . .
.
~ . ~ '
.>,~i ` ~ . • :to~*, ~
„ A
i
, : . . .
. .
• 'N ~ ~ ~ .
• ~a~. ~ ~ ~"p=
, ~ . , : ..aa:~;'~, ':s>, t ' '
• Uit Adwusl~x R ~ „~~s'~~ `'s., .
• 1~xi91~1~~it~i+~r1 ~
trsct~ Rsaavffi~n
•
~ CENTRAL FRONT RANGE GRAND VALLEY/MESA NORTH FRONT RANGE
• Larry Lasha COUNTY Ed Starck
Fremont County Commissioner Todd Hollenbeck Mayor of Windsor
~ Phone: (719) 276-7300 Mesa County Regional Phone: (970) 686-5191
~ Transportation Director
. GREATER DENVER AREA Phone: (970) 244-1788 NORTHWEST
~ Lorraine Anderson John Rich
Council Member, City of Arvada GUNNISON VALLEY Jackson County Commissioner
~ Phone: (303) 424-5664 Vince Rogalski, STAC Chair Phone: (970) 723-4328
~ Phone: (970) 641-0808
• EASTERN PIKES PEAK AREA
• Trent Bushner INTERMOUNTAIN Wayne Williams
Yuma County Commissioner Mick Ireland El Paso County Commissioner
~ Phone: (970) 332-5796 Mayor, City of Aspen Phone: (719) 439-1870
~ Phone: (970) 920-2858
~
~
~
• 27 Continued on page 28
~
~
~
~
Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC) •
Representatives continued ~
•
PUEBLO AREA SOUTHEAST SOUTHWEST ~
John Cordova Dan Tate DeWayne Findley ~
Pueblo County Commissioner Southeast Colorado Enterprise Montezuma County •
Phone: (719) 583-6538 Development Commissioner -
Phone: (719) 336-3850 Phone: (970) 882-7366 •
SAN LUIS VALLEY
George Wilkinson SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN UPPER FRONT' RANGE ~
Alamosa County Commissioner TRIBE Robert Masden ~
Phone: (719) 580-4627 Bob Piccoli Weld County Commissioner i
Director, Construction & Project Phone: (970) 356-4000 ext. •
SOUTH CENTRAL Management 4200
Priscilla "Pete" Fraser Phone: (970) 563-0138 ~
South Central Council of UTE MOUNTA][N UTE ~
Governments INDIAN TRIBE •
Phone: (719) 845-1133 ext. 216 Michael Elkriver .
Tribal Council
Phone: (970) 564-5601 ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
2s ~
•
~
~
• Urban Planning
•
~ Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO)
~ Five of the 15 Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs), are known as Metropolitan
• Planning Organizations (MPOs), located in urban areas with a population of 50,000
• or more. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG); Grand Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organization (Mesa County); North Front Range
~ Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council (Fort Collins/Loveland area); Pikes
• Peak Area Council of Governments (Colorado Springs area); aiid Pueblo Area Council
• of Governments (Pueblo area). The five MPOs have mare complex planning
requirements than the ten TPRs with predominantly rural characteristics.
~
• An MPO is a federally designated entity established by agreement between the
. Governor and units of local government responsible for carrying out a continuing,
cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process that results in plans
~ and programs for the urbanized area.
Fiveof Ehe IS MPOs with populations of 200,000 or greater are designated as Transportation Transporfation Planning
~ Management Areas (TMAs) and have additional federal requirements and Regions are known as
~ responsibilities regarding air quality conformity, long-range planning and short term Metropolitan Plunning
• project selection. Colorado has three TMAs: Denver Regional Council of OrganiZations because
Governments, North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council, they are in urban areas
~ and Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments. with a population of
~ 50, 000 or more. ;
1ransportation Improvement Program (TIP)
~
• MPOs prepare Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs), which include constrained
and vision components and identify the needs and corridor strategies and/or projects
~ anticipated to be constructed over the next twenty-plus years. The MPOs also prepare
• Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) to identify projects to be constructed
• in the next six years. The Transportation Commission and the Department actively
participate in the MPO transportation process. The TIPs adopted by the MPOs and
~ approved by the Governor are incorporated without modification into the six-year
• Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
~ Under federal law, all five Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) in cooperation
~ with CDOT are required to develop a short-term capital improvement program
• consistent with the long range transportation plan for their metropolitan planning
area. Similar to the STIP, the TIP is updated every four years and in Colorado,
~ includes a six year planning horizon. MPO TIPs are approved by the MPO and the
• Governor and included in the Statewide STIP without modification.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
. 29
~
~
~
Rural Planning •
~
Ten Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs) are primarily rural in nature. In these ~
rural areas, Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) are responsible for developing •
Ten Regional Planning r Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) in cooperation with CDOT and establishing •
the regional priorities and needs in the multi-modal Regional Tr•ansportation Plans.
Comrrti55ioiis are Like their MPO counterparts, the RPCs develop long-range (twenty plus year), multi- •
responsible for developing modal plans that have both fiscally-constrained and vision components. •
Regional Transportation
~Plans and establi5hang the In non-MPO planning regions, regional priorities are established by the RPCs through ~
regional ptZOritieS und their regional transportation planning process. Projects are se:lected through the ~
needs. through the CDOT Region Project Priority Programming Process (4P) which generally -
occurs once every two years. The 4P utilizes the "fiscally-consitrained," regionally
prioritized corridar strategies to as the basis for projects and prioxities to be included ~
in the six-year Statewide Transportation Improvement Program {STIP). i
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
30 •
~
~
r
• Statewide 1ransportation Improvement Program (STIP)
• The Statewide Transportation Plan is implemented by programming priority projects
~ into the short-term, six-year Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP).
~ The STIP projects are consistent with statewide transportation plan to assure - -
• development of corridor visions. All federally funded and regionally significant ~Y The,SMtewtde
projects are identified in the STIP. Projects are selected in cooperation with local ~ Transportatton P.lan ts -
~ officials in TPRs based on a set of criteria developed to solve or improve a particular ` implemented by
~ congestion, safety, or system quality need on the transportation system. ; ptogramming priority
ority proje ctsinto the short- `
Under SAFET'EA-LU, the STIP is updated every four years through the Project Pri
'i territ;, stx year $tdte?vide
~ Planning Process (4P). This 4P effort incorporates the state statutory requirement Transportatton
~ that CDOT formally hear the transportation needs of Coloradu's 64 counties through jmprovement Plan (STXP):
meetings with the Regional Transportation Planning regions. The 4P process also '
~ meets the federal requirement that CDOT work cooperatively with the MPOs to
~ develop TIPs prior to incorporating the TIP into the STIP.
~ .
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
!
•
• 31
~
~
~
10 Steps to Plan and Build a Project ~
•
Every CDOT project is identified in the six-year Statewide Transpo:rtadon Improvement ~
Program (STTP) based on its ability to meet or improve a particular congestion, safety, or •
system quality need. Projects programmed in the six-year STII', must be consistent with •
the long-range Statewide Transportation Plan.
~
Long-Range Planning Process: 20 Year Statewide 1Yansportati0n Plan •
1. Deternvne your appropriate Transportation Planning Region ('IPR) and Regional -
Planning Commission (RPC). See pages 27 through 28.
Eyery CDOT Pro,e,ct must° ~
be conststent with the 20 2• P~'opose a corridor strategy or project to the Regional Planning Comm
ission (RPC) ~
yea "r Statewtde or the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO). -
Transportahon,Plan and
ro rammed:into the six- 3. Participate in the planning activities held by the RPC, MPO and CDOT. Through ~
p$ ~ planning meetings, the development of corridor visions, goals, and strategies are
year STIP.before it can be established to address the needs for each plammng region. Proje:cts built by CDOT -
advertised for contYCtctorvy:` or using federal funds must be consistent with the corridor visions, goals and ~
and, construction can strategies identified in the Regional and Statewide Transportation Plans. -
begin.
4. Regional transportaUon plans are adopted by the respective RPC or MPO and
integrated into the 20 year multi-modal Statewide Transportatian Plan, which is ~
adopted by the Colorado Transportation Commission. Public involvement is .
encouraged at both the regional and statewide level. -
Short-Range Planning Process: Siar-Year Statewide 1ransportation Improvement ~
Program (STIP) !
5. The Statewide Transportation Improvement Program or STIP process begins with !
the CDOT Regions conducting the county hearing or 4P Proces-s to identify local
funding priorities over the next few years. The projects selected must be ~
consistent with the corridor visions identified in the adopted Regional and -
Statewide Transportation Plans. •
6. CDOT prepares a draft STIP (a fiscally constrained, six-year plan) that proposes ~
how to expend funds over the next six years. Joint meetings are then held with all
•
the Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs) to prioritize projects submitted
through the county hearing process. The projects selected must be consistent with ~
CDOT's regional budgets. !
7. The final STIP is reviewed to ensure state and federal regulatioiis are met. ~
~
8. The STIP is approved by the Colarado Transportation Commission, the Federal -
Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration. ,
9. STIP projects are programmed and budgeted. Once design and environmental
clearances are completed and all construction funds are included in the STIP, and •
budget, the project can go to ad. -
10. STIP projects are advertised for contractors, contractor is selected, and project ~
construction begins. •
For additional questions you may have about CDOT's planning process, please contact Sandi ~
Kohrs, Multimodal Pluming Branch Manager, at (303) 757-9795 or sandi.kohrs@dotstate.co.us.
~
32 -
~
~
~
~ Statewide and Regional Planning Managers
•
~ The regional planning managers direct all planning activities for their engineering PZann,irig 1Vlaiiaget's `
region while facilitating communications between CDOT and Colorado's -
~ transportation planning regions. The statewide Division of Transportation ~trect all planning
• Development coordinates the development of regional and statewide planning and aclivities betWeen CDOT .
outreach. Each planning manager is in close communication with CDOT's Division and Colorado's `
~ of Accounting and Finance and the TPRs, because they all work together to develop Transpor,tdtion Plartning, .
~ and adopt the 20-year regional transportation plans, which guide transportation ' Regions,.
• decisions made by CDOT in the short-term (6-year STIP) planning process.
~
r
~ .
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 33
~
~
~
Planning Managers •
•
CDOT Engineering Regions ~
s
>JL'r:.~:0.T ~ J I e 'LFi:°d f
J k , i;:4I
r~ ' ~ I t tl*1 . ~
A4
a '
d t i 4
r«a ~
~'i",~" ; O
3
~ w _
k ~ ts I
z'
~
a„. L..
i
~~...«...~_...~~.-x~[ . i
( y ! 1
~ ~ , ~
.
. ~ . «x1
{ Y?4P ~
~ t~~ 0
3 l~ . s. T ~ m i I~ . .a ; tl I
, , ~k'.. ~ ~f~ `1... - .A. ~ , I 3 O
r t---4 ,s i) , . . ~t' ,.........».....l..e.....~.~.......__--..-.........n- A
~ ~ .
' f +
t ~ F ~ I
i.:' . 6 I. ~ " I
r'; ~ n.. ~t ~ .v~. P ~
~
Fl:r,13~~d W~20U O
•
STATEWIDE REGION 2 REGION 5 ~
Vacant Wendy Pettit Laurie Blanz ~
Phone: (303) 757-9763 Phone: (719) 546-5748 Phone: (970) 385-1435 ~
@dot.state.co.us wendy.12ettit@dot.state.co.us laurie.blanz@dot.state.co.us -
REGION 1 REGION 3 REGION 6 ~
Darin Stavish Mark Rogers Lizzie Kemp -
Phone: (303) 365-7047 Phone: (970) 248-7075 Phone: (303) 757-9929 •
darin.stavish@dot.state.co.us mark.rogers@dot.state.co.us elizabeth.kemp@dot.state.co.us
~
REGION 4 -
Karen Schneiders
Phone: (970) 350-2172 ~
karen.schneiders@dot.state.co.us -
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
34 -
~
~
~ National Environmental PolicyAct
•
~ In the 1960's, the public became increasingly cognizant and concerned about human
. impacts on the environment. As a result, Congress passed the National Environmental
. Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, which was signed into law on January 1, 1970. Although
many CDOT transportation decisions are subject to more than 40 state and federal
~ environmental laws, NEPA is the principal federal environmental law governing
~ federal decision-making, planning, and development activities. NEPA requires all NEPA is the principle
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposed federal actions with the federal environmental law
~ potential to affect the quality of the "human environment." governing federal decision-
~
NEPA set a new standard for federal decision-making based on thorough making, planning, and
~
environmental analysis; consideration of alternatives of proposed federal actions; development activities.
CDOT has committed to
~ and public disclosure and review before action is taken. Its regulations mandate that
• transportation decisions involving federal funds and approvals consider complying with the intent
• environmental-in addition to technical and economic-factors in the assessment and t'equirements of NEPA
and decision-making process. It also requires that the federal agency consider all for all tt'anspottalion
~ reasonable alternatives to their proposed action and its environmental impacts. To activities, regardless of
• ensure that environmental impacts are corisidered before final decisions are made, whether they are federally
• NEPA requires a"detailed statement" for every proposed action that affects the quality funded..
of the human environment. Detailed statements may be in one of the following three
~ forms:
• (1) An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary for
~ actions that will have a significant impact on the environment;
~ (2) An Environmental Assessment (EA) is required if the
• significance of the environmental impact of the action is not
• clearly established; or
(3) Categorical Exclusion (CE or Cat Ex) for actions that do not
~ individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental
• impact.
~
• Finally, NEPA mandates that the public have an opportunity to participate in the
• process through public hearings. The full decision-making process is outlined in the
chart on page 36.
~
• Accordingly, CDOT has committed to complying with the intent and requirements
• of NEPA for all transportation activities, regardless of whether or not they are federally
funded. Although non-federal projects do not require the federal agency approval,
~ the NEPA process is an established framework for ensuring environmental factors
. are considered and consistent with CDOT's environmental ethic. Thus, the guiding
• principles of NEPA have been incorporated into the CDOT transportation planning
and project development process, as well as maintenance and operations of the state
~ transportation system. It is the responsibility of all CDOT employees to recognize
• and consider these essential principles and to appropriately include them in the
. transportation decision-making process.
~ If you have additional questions concerning the National Environmental Policy Act,
• please contact Brad Beckham, Environmental Programs Branch Manager, at (303)
• 757-9630 or Brad.Beckham@dot.state.co.us.
~
• 35
~
~
~
NEPA Categories •
•
Environmental Impact' ' Eriviro'nmental Categorical Exclusions ~
~
Statements (EIS) ~ Assessments (EA) (Cat EidCE)
. ' :.f . .
,i.. _ . . , . .
n, .
. . . .
, , _ . . .
r
. . . . . . r... ' . .
y
Actions that are likely;to; have: a The si„gnifi icance of the enuiron , i Actioris'that do not iridividually •
' significant affect on the enyi- menfal.impact of the action is : or cumulatively have a signifi-
~
ronment,; not. clearly established. cant environmental impact: -
.
~
,
Examples include Examples'iriclude; Examples:include: , •
A new'controlled access _ . Actions that are not clearly • Pedestrian facilities; •
freewaY; , Cat Exs, •,LandscaPm
:
g!. .
•`A highway'project of four Actioris that do not clearly ` Routine maintenance ~
or more lanes on a new require an EIS; including resurfacing, •
location; •An EA would assist in bridge replacement and
New construction or exten= determining the need for, an-rehabilitation, and minar -
sion of fixed rail transit EIS. - widening. ~
facilities. ` " , •
CDOT or FHWA adopts a ° CDOT or FHWA approval is
CDOT, or FHWA for federal Finding of No Significant required on all Cat Ex projects. ~
,
projects, signs a Record of Impact (FONSI) if the study :In Colorado, FHWA has ~
Decision that presents the basis findings show that no significant programmatically approyed .
for'the decision, summarizes impacts are created by the; some Cat Exs.
any mitigation measures to be action. ~
.
incorporated in the project, and , ' .
documents any 4(fl approval,* 23 C.F.R., § 771115,et seq : •
. < : .
* In some cases, if during the course of the project it is deternuned the project will not have a significant impact, the •
project can be re-categorized to an EA and result in a FONSI. FHWA retains final categorization deternunination for ~
federal projects. •
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
36 •
~
• ' . t~',-'r:+ .5'Y "G.! ~+i4~:.na,;~}!' 4;'
.
• Regional Planning and Envirmental Managers (RPEMs)
•
~ CDOT EngineeringALmgions
• _ ~
• .,...:=:'?T ~ I ~
• f~ r ~ Rt I.Ly~~a.
< ~
7,...~
71
. ~
• -nr, ~A.qe; ~...w~ ~ ~U6W s.e. ~ w-..r~w.i-,.......-..~--
~ ~ -
~ { ~ .
3
• -.....~~..«~~..,...r:l ......,--.,<„~-d 1 4 ~..u .u 1 ~ ~ ~ ~^',':..V
~dj 4L~~'E~ ~ m F I Czt~#=~' ! ~
• ~ P° ,;e,.. a
> ~0
• ~ a:~ _ T_ ~ L
.
~ ~
,
• !
.
. .
• _ ~ ' 1
5aa a t ~ . . ~ " ~ ~
i ~
,
• ` a."~} ~ . R .
.
a
~ r
• r.-_,--_~..~_ ~ e,„ a: ~ z ! ~ E~:.,. ^a~ ~r~ ~..~.,..,_,._L...
.
• ~...r~. °.r~ ~r. :;i"fl. _a._...w ' ~ . i
• . n ~ . _ . ..i; _ , ~
• i3Y.3''J.'3U'.2. a".c0': ioES . . . . . . F:(w7E7Etd: l.iiw 2t"7t`]
•
~ REGION 1 REGION 3 REGION 5
~ Michelle Li Tammie Smith Kerrie Neet
. Phone: (303) 757-9112 Phone: (970) 248-7226 Phone: (970) 385-1430
michelle.li@dot.state.co.us tammie.smith@dot.state.co.us kerrie.neet@dot.state.co.us
~
~ REGION 2 REGION 4 REGION 6
• Dick Annand Myron Hora Jim Paulmeno
Phone: (719) 546-5410 Phone: (970) 350-2263 Phone: (303) 757-9385
~ richard.annand@dot.state.co.us myron.hora@dot.state.co.us jim.paulmeno@dot.state.co.us
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
. 37
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
~
~
~
•
•
•
~
~
~
•
~
~
i
i
3$
~ .
~
• Engineering Regions
~
• CDOT has established six engineering regions across the state in order to decentralize _
. many of its design, construction and maintenance project functions and maximize contact CDOT has established six
with local governments, industry, and the public. Each CDOT engineering region is a engineering regions across
~ semi-autonomous operating entity covering all aspects of CDOT operations for that region. the state irt order to
• Therefore, each region covers engineering, maintenance, planning and environmental decentraliZe many of its
• management, traffic, right-of-way and surveying, utilities, and human resource functions and maximize
management for its area. Each of the Regional Transportation Directors (RTDs) wark contact with the public.
~ under the supervision of the Chief Engineer and serve as a member of the Statewide
• Executive Management Team responsible for internal CDOT policy development.
a
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 39
~
~
~
Regional Transportation Directors (RTDs) •
•
CDC)T Engineering Regions ~
~ •
PR.~=?C:' ~ t ~
,e.,v , T !E K~:.n ...~.:;2F:?c'72, ~ '~:,Rlb r •
~ 4 ~ `
'Y.i: ~?34~i:..;3 ~ ~ i ~N~~YIY ~F::^.'~ Mvt.fl:!~ ~ '~l. :?.~12 •
r ,~;,r
r--j ~..wa~ r''°7 ~a~s ~ •
t
fl: ~
3
~\~,d i ` ` ` ' ~ ..,m F.r t •
L..~~.,_._-. ~
~ . - v.~,:: •
~ ,.,r__,.~ x~rr~ ~ r 's ^:a ~
,
.~anr,ss~ f ~a~=ra,:::r; ~---____....w..._. •
_'.e..._ __.,.M_.v
2 . ~ ~
~a. ^~w ' ~ rf.'. I ~~tii ~ ..<.S...xc •
~.'Y 3."'a ' ~
. ~ ~ F~ '•&.m ~:).:ti~'Dtf3...` Y~ ...~».~_-...~«....-.~,_.___t...~...-.._>:...__
y .~+CRA4~: :.7 ~ ~ •
_ J~ . . ..>:7h ` ~ ~f ~ ~ •
. r i
.
D3a SaUfO?: CFTJi i~3{L •
FUR35REtl.: >.1ap'.Z3Cv
.
REGION 1 REGION 3 REGION 5 ~
Jeff Kullman Weldon Allen Richard Reynolds ~
18500 East Colfax Avenue 222 South 61 Street 3803 North Main Avenue •
Aurora, CO 80011 Room 317 Room 306 -
Phone: (303) 365-7001 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Durango, CO 81301
jeff.kullman@dot.state.co.us Phone: (970) 683-6203 Phone: (970) 385-1402 . ~
weldon.allen@dot.state.co.us richard.revnolds@dot.state.co.us •
REGION 2
Tim Harris REGION 4 REGION 6 ~
905 Erie Avenue Bob Garcia Randy Jensen ~
Pueblo, CO 81002 1420 2°d Street 2000 South Holly Street •
Phone: (719) 546-5452 Greeley, CO 80632 Denver, CO 80222
timothy.harris@dot.state.co.us Phone: (970) 350-2162 Phone: (303) 757-9459 ~
robert.garcia@dot.state.co.us randy.jensen@dot.state.co.us ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
40 •
~
~
~
~ . .
• Maintenance
•
• The Colorado Department of Transportation's (CDOT) maintenance program protects
• the significant investment in our current highway infrastructure. The program is designed
to keep the 9,200 centerline-mile staxe highway system open and safe for the traveling
~ public. This involves all activities from the centerline of the highway to the right-of-way
A fence on both sides of the highway.
~ Examples of highway maintenance activities include: patching, sealing of pavement crack
~ and joints, mowing unpaved surfaces and shoulders, cleaning drainage structures,
• maintaining stream beds, sweeping the road surface, picking up litter, maintaining roadway
~ signs and lighting, painting bridges, snow plowing and ice control, and removing snow The Colorado Department
and sand. This preservation effort is not only vital to the integrity of the infrastructure; it
of Trartsportation,s
~ is an imperative component of highway safety for the traveling public. Maintettance Program
• While maintenance work by nature is somewhat reacUve, CDOT's maintenance personnel Protects the significant
~ strive to provide statewide consistency in the level of service to the traveling public. To investment in our Current
~ that end, CDOT has continued a performance budgeting system far the maintenance highway infrastructure.
• program. The Maintenance Levels of Service (NII.,OS) system includes an annual physical This preservation effort is
. rating to observe conditions for approximately fifty activity or system items. The measured not only vital to the integrity
items are then categorized into nine Maintenance Program Areas (MPAs), which are of the infi'astructure; it is
~ listed in the chart below: an imperalive component of
~ highway safety for the
There are five service levels established for each MPA, with calculations translated to a traveling public.
~ grade scale of A through F, with A being the verybest Level of Service (LOS) and F being
i the worst. The ratings for each MPA are then applied as the base level to a modeling
. system to identify budget requirements to achieve changes to the target MLOS. This
provides the Transportation Commission with the necessary cost/benefit analysis to
~ allow prioritization of a level effort and related funding in all major MPAs. The
• MPAs are also identifiable in CDOT's overall investment categories to allow a link
. with investment strategy allocations.
~
~ Level of Service FY 2007
• MPAs Grade
~ 1. Planning, Scheduling, Inspection, and Training; B
! 2. Roadway Surface; B+
, 3. Roadway Facilities; B
4. Roadside Appearance; C+
~ 5. Traffic Services; C+
~ 6. Bridge; C
! 7. Snow and Ice; B-
8. Buildings, Grounds, Rest Areas, and Equipment; C+
~ 9. Major Tunnels. : B-
~ _
. ource:CDOT Staff Maintenance
~
~
~
• 41
~
,
~
~
Maintenance Superintendents •
•
•
I :1'os"~~:i'd . ~ .eSKit.'rf •
r tAF;La;«s?.
76
~ ~~`i'~ ~ ~F~:4:.i~ ~
~ S'Li1'.St ~!tlLwL'x3. I I I •
R E.:G~3::"v~ _':+::tdii!':E<•.:.L:#:.x,
r .rt&:~"sG •
a
r-i- . }V16Pri'
. A`=L[i~ gP,•M, •
~ ' I r
1. .I I nr:P l ::t:sa
I •
P' 51
I % €ltm p3,r,;a I
I ~ ~ ~ I w~~~?ui:fi I. •
e':'.~y_ ~ :.x~.°i J ' •
I _ S_: ^:c§:Sr.7¢:ti ltirP#s
` 33i . ~T-~--
_:€a r`~"t7%s`? fi Ix,:i;:>;~.~ C"3W:f._... ~ I " -r, ~ # •
10d7
,1'_WI-:~:~ _..t„- I •
wmt~~~€:4.t; i,~ 'M:.. ,x ~~s.~ •
t ;
•
•
SECTION 1 SECTION 4 SECTION 7 ~
Dennis Allen Keith Flowerdew Mike DeLong ~
1420 21 Street 905 Erie Avenue 1205 West Ave, Box A .
Greeley, CO 80631 Pueblo, CO 81001 Alamosa, CO 81101
Phone: (970) 350-2122 Phone: (719) 546-5419 Phone: (719) 589-3616 ~
dennis.allen@dot.state.co.us keith.flowerdew@dot.state.co.us michael.delong@dot.state.co.us ~
SECTION 2 SECTION 5 SECTION 8 ~
Delmon French Fred Schulz Rob Haines ~
606 S. 9"' Street 18500 E. Colfax Ave. 5640 E. Atlantic Place ~
Grand Junction, CO 81501 Aurora, CO 80211 Denver, CO 80224 •
Phone: (970) 248-7362 Phone: (303) 757-9649 Phone: (303) 757-9514
delmon.french@dot.state.co.us fred.schulz@dot.state.co.us robert.haines@dot.state.co.us ~
SECTION 3 SECTION 6 SECTION 9 •
Paul DeJulio Kandace Lukow Mike Salamon ~
20581 W. Hwy 160 260 Ranney Street P. O. Box 397 ~
Durango, CO 81301 Craig, CO 81625 Idaho Springs, CO 80452 •
Phone: (970) 385-1652 Phone: (970) 824-5104 Phone: (303) 512-5730 .
naul.dejulio@dot.state.co.us kandace.lukow@dot.state.co.us michael.salamonCdot.state.co.us
~
~
42 •
~
~
~ .
~
• Safety and Traffic Engineering
•
• The mission of the statewide Safety and Traffic Engineering Office at CDOT is to
. reduce the incidence and severity of motor vehicle crashes and the associated human
and economic loss. To accomplish this, CDOT has set four major specific goals and
~ objectives:
~
• (1) Reduce the fatal crash rate;
(2) Reduce the injury crash rate;
~ (3) Increase seat belt usage;
• (4) Reduce alcohol related fatal crashes.
~ In arder to meet these goals, there are several statewide programs in place to identify
~ locations with potential for accident reduction such as, "Hot Spot" Projects; Traffic The mission of the
. Signal Projects; Highway Safety Improvement Projects; and a Safety Assessment statewide Safely and Traffic
Program at the project and corridor levels. Engineering Of,~`ice at
~ CDOT is to reduce the
~ In addition to a statewide Off'ice of Safety and Traffic Engineering, each transportation incidence and severzty of
• region also has an in-house traffic engineer to handle the specific project needs region- motor vehicle crashes and
by-region. The duties of a regional traffic engineer include planning, organizing, the associated human and
~ directing and overseeing activities related to safety, planning traffic flow management, economic loss.
~ and the design, installation, and management of all traffic control devices, among
• other related responsibilities.
~ For additional questions about statewide safety and traffic engineering programs,
~ please contact Gabriela Vidal, CDOT Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch Manager,
• at (303) 757-9879 or Gabriela.Vidal@dot.state.co.us.
~ For questions concerning specific regional safety or traffic projects, please contact
• your appropriate regional Traff'ic Engineer referenced on page 44.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 43
~
~
~
~
Traffic Engineers •
•
CDOT Engineering Regions ~
rr 42fA'T.'`
~ 4 t .
4 . .
h
~
v'T,"R
~f .
I~y
.+S s F Ik P.:y •
r ~ i r
t i
~ r .
L....-._-
JfY~~ i ~ Y R~ F r~:y' j t .
~~,f
M ~ •
PhT: ~ ti..?r°,+E%~f;~: l_~__.__...~,....... •
° •
M j ~krV -~w... 1 . ~....r ~ .~.......t,
~..,.a.•~:t..d .61;: ::i,',' ' r ~ ~ ~ •
1 I
, i i~ ~ ~ .....~.1~ t
t; . . ~r ~ d ~ 9 ~ ! ~ •
' - r y I
r.3.::ii'AYD -.v__
~ t ~ , ~ ~ ~ 4 t__ ~.r.~E ~.L •
4-.r.'€R. «r i rr"~ f •
3A a~.:...... F
Ua4i.e;UFE::. Lu°JT Z?9L5 F.~:'3G6?~', A1&Y 20:i •
.
REGION 1 REGION 3 REGION 5 ~
Bernie Guevara Jim Nall Mike McVaugh ~
Phone: (303) 757-9122 Phone: (970) 248-7035 Phone: (970) 385-8360 •
bernardo.,guevara@dot.state.co.us jim.nall@dot.state.co.us mike.mcvaugh@dot.state.co.us •
REGION 2 REGION 4 REGION 6 ~
Sasan Delshad Ina Zisman Steve Hersey (acting) ~
Phone: (719) 546-5411 Phone: (970) 350-2121 Phone: (303) 757-9942 •
sasan.delshad@dot.state.co.us ina.zisman@dot.state.co.us steven.hersev@dot.state.co.us
. ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
44 !
~
~
~
• Procurement ` The Center for Procurement and Contract Services is a part of the Division of Human
~ Resources and Administration and provides the infrastructure for the acquisition of
, goods and services in support of the overall mission and values.
• CDOT has three major buying and contracting units:
,
Center for Procurement Property <
~ and Contract Services Agreements Management
S day-to-day operations hi hwa construction
g y building construction
= and maintenance goods and design and design ~ and services
r Center for Procurement and Contract Services
~ Vendors who want to sell goods and services to CDOT should•register on the Bid
~ Information and Distribution System (BIDS) Web site. All competitive purchases
• conducted by CDOT and other state agencies, institutions, and colleges are completed
thru this system. There is an annual registration fee of $40, payable to the State of
~ Colorado.
• The web address is www.gssa.state.co.us
~ CDOT utilizes the State of Colorado's Purchasing Department's price agreements
• whenever possible. When goods and services are needed and they are not on state
! price agreements, CDOT will issue its own Invitation for Bids, Documented Quotes
• and Request for Proposals - thru the BIDS system - Below are examples of goods
and services that the Center for Procurement and Contract Services might purchase
~ directly:
i • Aircrafdaerospace supplies & equipment
` • Art/graphics/drafting/engineering supplies/equipuipment
~ • Asphalt
• • Building maintenance services
• Clothing and uniforms ~ • Computer programming & consulting services
~ • Concrete
~ • Consulting - organization, management, research
• Grounds maintenance & landscaping equipment
~ • Ice and snow removal materials and supplies
• • Laboratory & scientific services/analysis/testing
~ • Road/bridge materials & equipment
• Tools
~ • Training Services
~
~ Cheryl Wright is CDOT's Procurement Manager and can be reached
at (303) 757-9660.
w
E
•
~
•
, 45
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
`
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
,
~
~
~
~
a
. ~
. ~
46
~
~
• Center for Equal Opportunity
~
• In accordance with state and federal civil rights law, the Center for Equal Opportunity
• (EO) mission is to:
• Promote and maintain a qualified, diverse and respectful CDOT and contractor
• workforce.
Promote equal access to transportation improvements, maintenance and systems
for Colorado residents
Promote and maintain equal opportunity for small and underutilized highway
• construction contractors and consultants.
~ The Center for EO implements and administers statewide initiatives to help ensure
4f its overall mission is achieved.
0 ~ The DBE Program
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has a policy of helping small
~ businesses owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, including
~ minorities and women, to participate in contracting opportunities through
w Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) programs.
In order for small disadvantaged firms to participate in the CDOT's DBE Program,
~ they must apply for and receive certification as a DBE. The groups that are presumed
, to be socially disadvantaged are African American, Asian American, Native American,
• Hispanic and women. People not falling into one of those groups may establish
individual proof of their personal social and economic disadvantage.
~
~ The ESB Program
• The Emerging Small Business Program (ESB) is a race-neutral program designed to
• aid small companies in procuring work on CDOT's highway construction and design
projects. Many of the small firms participating in the ESB program are also certified
~ DBEs. The program is intended to assist ESBs to gain the knowledge, experience
~ and resources needed to successfully compete for highway construction, design and
• research contracts.
• Construction Development Center (CDC)
• The CDOT CDC consultants assist DBEs with bidding and estimating. CDC offers
• classes and training sessions to provide firms (DBE and non-DBE) with business
development skills and networking opportunities.
,
~ Business Opportunity and Workforce Development Program
~ (BOWD)
• CDOT received a two-year grant from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
• in 2007 making Colorado one of a select few states to offer a pilot program aimed at
improving the capacity and capability of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs)
~ to compete for highway contracts. Through this program, participating firms receive ,
• a tailored program of technical and business assistance.
~
~
~
~
~
• 47
40
~
~
On-the-Job Training (OJT) ~
The objective of CDOT's On-the-Job Training Program (OJT) is to provide training ~
and upgrading of minorities and women in meaningful jobs in the highway •
construction industry and developing full journey workers in the trades. .
Equal Access ~
The Center for Equal Opportunity administers initiatives to ensure sidewalk and ~
building access for persons with disabilities, and equitable access to transportation -
services; and programs.
~
Employment Initiatives ~
The Center for Equal Opportunity provides assistance to CDOT employees and job ~
applicants to assure non-discrimination and equal opportunity. -
Debra Gallegos is the EEO Center Manager and may be reached ~
at (303) 757-9303 or toll free at 1-800-925-3427, by e-mail at -
debra.gallegos@dot.state.co.us and on the Web at www.dot.state.co.us/EEO -
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
48 •
~
~
i
CIVIL RIGHTS MANAGERS
•
• GDOT Engineering RegiQns
• ~ ~''N
t
~ M g-:ST ~
- tt~ I ;Rl~
1
~-?:~Ctb
_Je's
F
l ~ 4 j
~ - - .
• ~ ~ ~~wrr ,~--I YiA,`:t{::x::i:)?: ~ 1'iFk&A
r re'
[ g r Aa ~i§
i
3 1
40 W_...._._ _ 1
• • Pf:.;€::# E` ~ I ~t.7 ~ i
/j~~ t
. i ~ s. :r.: . ~.,.,..m~.....
~ "~I __,.'.:5 ~ N ~ ` .a - r; ~ c;~, ::v~:~,a•s:
• L__-_~...__~.~ ,:.~T - i"~...,;.'r;l ~
• F :'d:9c: ~ ~~Jts;€; =„Si. t-_-......_...m.,...... ..ns.
F --,+s.... t ,
J t !
• ' . :.E:4 1 ;~.~a 1
~ 2
r
• L ~..,.~--s~ i~`_°"""~ ~~„~~-~~aa `i~' +~...~._,.,._.J_.w.,.....
• P.u ..m 23.~:~~ - j e• ~
ZA
• .e.:h ~::fi J` 4 '_-e. I.-.^ ` i;;_<F;'{ h,.... I u#Wti
i P ~ t s
• I ~,:~L~;,. ~ ,_,,,z.__ !
~ G3t3 Saurca: C;E?7 ZO[5 F`wlshe6. h1ak2G[5
~
~ REGION 1 REGION 3 REGION 5
~ Micki Perez Christa Taylor Alice Baker
. 18500 E. Colfax Avenue, Room 108 222 S. 6THStreet 3803 N. Main Avenue, Suite 306
Aurora, Colorado 80011 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Durango, Colorado 81301
~ (303) 365-7031 (970) 683-6210 (970) 385-1403
~
. REGION 2 REGION 4 REGION 6
Mary Dugan Wendy Miller Mickey Vialpando
~ 905 Erie Avenue 1420 2NDStreet 2000 S. Holly Street
~ Pueblo, Colorado 81001 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Denver, Colorado 80222
~ (719) 546-5432 (970) 350-2107 (303) 757-9386
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 49
~
~
~
Agreements •
~
CDOT's Agreements unit ensures that state and federal-aid highway program (FAHP) ~
funds are effectively and efficiently managed and delivered in accordance with -
applicable laws, regulations, policies, and consistent with good business practices. -
The unit achieves this goal by executing contracts and inter-governmental agreements
(IGAs). ~
Contracting ~
The construction contracting unit conducts the hazd-bid contracting process for all -
CDOT projects. ~
~
The agreements unit conducts the contracting process for professional services, such -
as engineers, architects, surveyors and industrial hygienists. This process includes
consultant prequalification, issuance of Requests for Proposal, facilitation of the ~
selection process, contract negotiations and contract execution. ~
Inter-governmental agreements (IGAs) ~
IGAs are required at any time CDOT or a local agency (public/private) are spending ~
funds ar providing goods/services for either party. This legal agreement defines the ~
project scope, identifies roles and responsibilities, details funding amounts, •
encumbered project funds and payment obligations. The agreements unit creates and -
processes IGAs for the department, with support from each region. The state controller
and attorney general allows CDOT to use boilerplate IGA language to expedite the ~
agreements process between local agencies and the department. While CDOT can -
alter the scope, funding and project description, deviations from either party from -
these pre-approved contracts requires approval from other state agencies. Once an
IGA is executed, a notice to proceed is issued and the project can begin. ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
50 -
~
~
~
• FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions
•
~ Q. Where can I find road and weather conditions?
• A. The Colorado Road and Weather Conditions telephone lines are as follows:
• 511 is available via landline and where cellular service is available in Colorado.
511 is an addition to CDOT's, (303) 639-1111 or (877) 315-ROAD traveler
~ information lines or visit www.cotrip.org.
~
• . How can I get a Colorado State Highway Map?
A. To request a map, please either e-mail your request to CDOT's Office of
~ Pub ic Relations at chri stopher.robbins@dot.state.co.us or send your request to the
~ Colorado Department of Transportation, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Room 277,
• Denver, CO 80222. The maps are free of charge.
~ . How do I get a pothole fixed on the state highway system?
• A. CDOT has an internal policy that once a pothole is reported it must be
• patc ed within 24 business hours. Please mark the exact location of a pothole if you
notice one that needs to be patched and contact the appropriate CDOT Maintenance
~ Superintendent located on page 44.
~
• How do I add a sign along the interstate system to
advertise a local business or to promote a site of national, lustoric, or
~ regional significance?
• A. All advertising is prohibited on interstate rights-of-way (ROW) pursuant to the
. federal Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (HBA). However specific services
(LOGO) signs are permitted at certain locations. This federally sanctioned sign
~ program is construed as traveler information signage, not advertising, as it provides
• business identification and directional information signs for services gas, food,
• lodging, camping and for eligible tourist attractions. Colorado Logos, Inc. runs the
LOGO Sign Program for CDOT and can be reached at (303) 462-2320 to answer
~ specific questions or deternune if a business or attraction is eligible. Signs identifying
• the location of museums and National Historic Districts may also be erected in the
ROW. These signs are approved by Region Traffic Engineers on a case-by-case
~ basis.
~
• Off-premise outdoor advertising is governed by federal, state and local requirements
designed to protect our natural and economic resources. This short answer is designed
~ to outline some of these requirements and help all to understand the process of erecting
• outdoor advertising to increase business while preserving our state'.s natural beauty.
• It is not intended to contain all the rules and regulations governing all signs in all
areas. To erect outdoor advertising, the first step is to contact the CDOT Region
~ Outdoor Advertising Coordinator. He or she can provide a complete list of state and
• federal regulations and can advise about where to find out more about local regulations.
• He or she can also deternune whether a permit is even required for your sign. Always
check for local regulations, as this short answer applies only to state and federal
~ regulations.
~
~
~
~
~
• 51
~
~
~
With one look at the statutory definition of a sign, it becomes apparent that the best ~
approach is to contact the Region Outdoor Advertising Coordinator early on. Their ~
job is to help balance advertising needs against their mandate to regulate while •
preserving the beauty of our State. By definition, "Advertising device" (sign) means .
any outdoor sign, display, device, figure, painting, drawing, message, placard, poster,
billboard, structure, or any other contrivance designed, intended, or used to advertise ~
or to give information in the nature of advertising and having the capacity of being •
visible from the travel way of any State highway, except any advertising device on a
vehicle using the highway or a person or animal carrying a sign. ~
Complete rules and regulations are available online at www.dot.state.co.us/rules/. •
Please contact CDOT Outdoor Advertising Program Manager, Jerry Miller, with ~
additional specific questions in Headquarter's Safety and Traffic Engineering Section ~
at (303) 757-9273 or jerrv.miller@dot.state.co.us. •
.
Q How do I add a sign along the primary or secondary highway system to ~
advertise a local business or to promote a site of national, historic, or ~
regional significance? •
A. All advertising is prohibited on state highway rights-of-way (ROW) pursuant to •
the federal HBA, however Tourist Oriented Directional Signs (TODS) are permitted
along some primary and secondary highways, but not at all locations. This federally ~
sanctioned sign program is construed as traveler information signage, not advertising, •
as it provides business identification and directional information signs for business, •
service and activity facilities. A facility is eligible for a TODS sign only if it derives
a major portion of income or visitors during the normal business season from road ~
users not residing in the area of the facility. Colorado Logos, Inc. runs the TODS .
Sign Program for CDOT and can be reached at (303) 462-2320 in order to answer •
specific questions or determine if a business or attraction is eligible. Signs identifying
the location of museums and National Historic Districts may also be erected in the ~
ROW. These signs are approved by Region Traffic Engineers on a case-by-case •
basis.
~
Off-premise outdoar advertising on private (off premise) property adjacent to existing ~
CDOT ROW and visible from the highway traveled way has a multitude of rules and •
regulations, and CDOT permits are handled on a case-by-case basis. All are subject
to local jurisdiction approval as well as very specific size, lighting, spacing and ~
industrial or commercial zoning restrictions. •
With one look at the statutory definition of a sign, it becomes apparent that the best ~
approach is to contact the Region Outdoor Advertising Coordinator early on. Their ~
job is to help balance advertising needs against their mandate to regulate while ~
preserving the beauty of our state. By definition, "Advertising device" (sign) means •
any outdoor sign, display, device, figure, painting, drawing, message, placard, poster,
billboard, structure, or any other contrivance designed, intended, or used to advertise r
or to give information in the nature of advertising and having the capacity of being -
visible from the travel way of any State highway, except any advertising device on a •
vehicle using the highway or a person or animal carrying a sign.
~
~
~
~
~
52 -
~
~
~ Complete rules and regulations are available online at www.dot.state.co.us/rules/.
• Please contact CDOT Outdoor Advertising Program Manager, Jerry Miller, with
• additional specific questions in Headquarter's Safety and Traffic Engineering Section
at (303) 757-9273 or jerrY.miller@DOT.State.CO.US.
~
• How do I get a project in the planning pipeline (STIP)?
A. All projects must first be included in the 20-yeaz Statewide Transportation
~ Plan. If your project is not included, you must request a plan amendment from your
~ Transportation Planning Region (TPR) or Metropolitan Planning Region (MPO).
• Projects are then prioritized and included in the six-year Statewide Planning
Improvement Program (STIP) for programm.ing and construction through coordination
~ with your TPR/MPO and CDOT. The project prioritization takes place every two
~ years. See "10 Steps to Plan and Build a Project" on page 32 and 33.
~ . How do I amend a project in the planning pipeline (STIP)?
~ Q A. In order to amend a project in the six-year Statewide Transportation
• Improvement Program (STIP), you must request an amendment. An amendment is
• made when priorities for the (TPR) or (MPO) have changed or project details
necessitate moving a specific transportation forward or backward in the priorities.
~ Your TPR/MPO will then process the amendment through CDOT. Contact your
. Transportation Planning Commission representative listed on page 27 and 28.
~ . How do I get appointed to serve on a Regional Planning
~ Q Commission (RPC)?
• A. Each Regional Planning Commission (RPC) has its own set of by-laws. In order
• to learn how to become a member, contact your local (TRR) chairman listed on page
27 and 28. Often each board of county commissioners or city/town councils dictate
~ which elected officials from their body will serve as a member of the RPC.
• . What process do local governments need to follow to get
~ new interchange or improve an existing interchange on the state system?
~ A. DOT has implemented the 1601 Policy and Procedural Directive for the approval
• of new interchanges and major modifications to existing interchanges on the state
highway and interstate system. These procedures provide significant approval
~ flexibility depending on the complexity of the type of interchange improvement and
~ increase the range of project issues discussed prior to any formal application made
• for a specific interchange project. For further information or a copy of the 1601
Procedural Directive, please contact Aaron Willis at (303) 512-4019 or
~ aaron.willis@dot.state.co.us.
~
• How do I raise or lower the speed limit?
Q A. State law requires that all road authorities, before altering speed limits,
~ conduct a traffic engineering study. This study must be done in accordance with the
• provisions of the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) "Manual on Uniform
. Traffic Control Devices" (MLITCD). Furthermore, the MUTCD states that all speed
limits should be established through an engineering investigation which examines
~ the 85' percentile speed and roadway factors such as road shoulder conditions, grade,
• alignment, and sight distance. Once a traffic engineering study is completed, CDOT's
• Traffic Engineers analyze the traffic investigation figures to determine a realistic
speed limit. For further information, you may contact Bryan Allery in CDOT's Safety
~ and Traffic Engineering Office at (303) 757-9967 or brvan.allerv@dot.state.co.us.
~
~
~ 53
~
~
~
. What is the process to change the timing of a stoplight ~
located on the state system? ~
A. ignals on state highways are under the control of the CDOT regional traffic -
offices. When a Traffic Engineer receives a call with a request to change the timing
of a stoplight they do the following: (1) vary signal programming remotely via ~
computer; and (2) perform field visits to verify field conditions have not changed (a ~
new shopping center opened, etc). If nothing has changed and the Traffic Engineer •
observes inegular flows, minor modifications to the timing might be made; or in
more complicated situations, CDOT would re-evaluate corridor timing patterns. ~
However, the ability to make modifications is limited. Often minor changes for one •
movement adversely affect other movements and negate possible benefits. For more •
detailed inquiries, please contact your regional Traffic Engineer located on page 44.
~
How do I make a state highway that crosses through my •
jurisdiction safer for pedestrians? •
A. Pedestrian safety on state highways is of major importance because of the obvious
differences in travel patterns and potential for serious injury when conflicts occur. ~
As a result, CDOT attempts to balance the needs of all users of the facility and make •
the best accommodation possible. Options available to enhance pedestrian safety .
include appropriate signing and pavement markings, pedestrian signals, lighting,
behavioral education projects and establishing "safe walking routes" and school zones. ~
For further detail on pedestrian safety on the state highway system, please contact -
your regional Traffic Engineer located on page 44. .
. How do I get oversized/overweight truck permits? ~
A. CDOT's Permit Section can be reached at (303) 757-9539 or 1-800-350- •
37 5 toll-free from within Colorado.
~
Q Where do I get a DOT number for my commercial truck? •
A. If your business will operate within Colorado only, you can visit the •
Colorado State Patrol website (www.csp.state.co.us) or call them at (303) 273-1875
for an application. If your business will operate interstate, you will need to contact ~
the Federal Highway Administration Motor Carrier Office located in Colorado at •
(720) 963-3130.
~
Where can I find information on commercial vehicles or ~
trucking regulations?
•
•
ge Colorado Department of Revenue Motor Carrier Services has important •
information on vehicle inspections and driver paperwork. You may contact them by
phone at (303) 205-5746 or through their website at www.revenue.state.co.us. ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
54 •
~
~
~
• Glossary of Terms
~ 4P Process (Project Priority Planning Process)
• A hearing process held with the boazds of county commissioners in a1164 counties in
• Colorado generally once every two years to discuss regional transportation pnorities.
~ 7" Pot
• A program of 28 statewide strategic priority transportation projects identified by the
Transportation Commission and financed through Senate Bill 1 funds and TRANS
~ Bonds.
~
• 1601 Procedural Directive
Established by the Transportation Commission for the approval of new interchanges
~ and major modifications to existing interchanges on the state highway and interstate
. system.
~ Agency Coordination
t~
~ The process followed to involve other federal, state, and local agencies in the decision-
. making process for plans, programs, and projects.
~ Alignment ` =a._..
~ The horizontal and vertical location of the centerline of a proposed or existing highway.
• Alternatives
~ Potential solutions to a transportation problem. Alternatives may consist of different
~ alignments, lane configurations, types of access control, or transportation modes and
. strategies.
~ Appropriations
~ An annual process to fund authorized projects within the federal transportation
• authorization bill by Congress.
~ Arterial Street
• A class of street serving major traffic movements for travel between major points.
~ Attainment Area
~ An area considered to have air quality that meets or exceeds the U.S. Environmental
• Protection Agency (EPA) health standards used in the Clean Air Act. Non-attainment
• areas are areas considered not to have met EPA standards for designated pollutants.
~ Authorization
. Congress must give permission for federal funds to be expended from the Highway
• Trust Fund; transportation authorization is the means by which this permission is
granted. Each transportation authorization bill establishes transportation policy,
~ defines programs, outlines areas of emphasis for spending, and authorizes funding to
. the states.
~ Bonus Area
~ Any area within 660 feet of the nearest edge of the interstate right-of-way (ROW)
the entire width of which was acquired for ROW after July 1, 1956.
~
~ . .
~
. 55
~
~
~
Capacity ~
A transportation facility's ability to accommodate a moving flow of vehicles in a •
~ given time period.
Categorical Exclusion (Cat Eu/CE) ~
A classification under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of actions that •
do not have a significant effect on the environment, either individually or cumulatively. .
Conformity ~
The requirement for transportation plans, programs, and projects to be consistent •
with the local and state air quality plans. .
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) ~
A categorical federal-aid program created by federal law, which directs funding to .
projects that contribute to meeting national air quality standards. •
Control Totals •
Resource allocations geographically distributed to the six CDOT Engineering Regions •
are referred to as control totals.
~
Corridor .
A linear route or geographic area that accommodates travel or potential travel. -
Design ~
The process by which engineering plans, estimates, and specifications for a •
transportation project are developed. •
~
Design-Build ~
Design-Build is an alternative delivery strategy where design and construction services •
are included in a single contract. The design-build method requires construction firms •
to team with consultant design firms to work together to design and construct
improvements shifting responsibility to parties who can best manage the processes ~
and outcomes. .
Design-Bid-Build ~
Design-Bid-Build is the traditional project delivery approach, which segregates design ~
. and construction responsibilities by awarding them to an independent private engineer •
and a separate private contractor. .
Design Phase •
The project development phase from the time a project has been cleared and authorized •
by an environmental document to the start of construction.
~
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) -
The process of developing detailed environmental document required by the National •
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when an agency proposes an action that is likely
to significantly affect the environment. The DEIS includes a discussion of purpose ~
and need, alternatives, environmental conditions and effects, and public involvement •
activities. The document is completed and presented to the public before a final •
preferred alternative is deternuned.
~
~
. ~
56 •
~
~
~
~ Earmarks
• An earmark is most commonly referred to as a specific high priority project identified
by Congress with a specific dollar amount attached for funding.
~ Environmental Assessment (EA) -
• A concise document which includes a brief discussion of the need for a proposed
• action, potential alternatives, and the environmental impacts of the proposed action.
! Environmental Justice (EJ)
• The Environmental Protection Agency describes Environmental Justice as "the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national
~ origin or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement
~ of environmental laws, regulations and policies."
~ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
~ The federal agency responsible for regulating and enforcing federal environmental
• laws including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species
. Act among others.
~ Express Toll Lanes (ETL)
. See Managed Toll Lanes.
~ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ,...._,._......v...y
~ A division of the U.S. Department of Transportation that administers the Federal-aid - • Program, which provides funding to states to construct and improve highways, bridges, J
. and urban and rural roads. %i I'J
~ Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
. A branch of the U.S. Department of Transportation that assists communities in
• developing and improving mass transportation.
~ Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
• A detailed statement on the significant impacts on the environment required by the
National Environmental Policy Act. It contains the same supporting information
~ required by the Draft EIS with appropriate revisions to reflect comments received
• from circulation of the Draft EIS and the public hearing process.
~ Financial Planning
~ The process of defining and evaluating funding sources and determining how to
• allocate the funds.
~ Financial Programming
~ A short-term commitment of funds to specific projects identified in the regional
• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
~ Finding of No Significant Impacts (FONSI)
~ A document reviewed by FHWA resulting from the Environmental Assessment (EA)
• that presents the reasons why the action will not have a significant impact on the
• human environment, and for which an Environmental Impact Statement will not be
prepared. The FONSI authorizes a project for design.
~
~
~
• 57
~
~
~
Fiscally-Constrained ~
A program or plan that is budgeted within the amount that CDOT can reasonably .
expect to receive in funding allocation. •
Gaming Funds ~
~
~ Funds allocated by the Colorado General Assembly to address the construction and •
~K~ maintenance needs associated with the increased traffic on state highways in the
vicinity of gaming communities. ~
•
Geographic Information System (GIS) •
Computerized data management system designed to capture, store, retrieve, analyze, •
and display geographically referenced information.
~
High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes •
~ High Occupancy Vehicles with 2 or more people are allowed to travel for free or
~ reduced cost in these lanes. Single-occupancy vehicles are allowed to travel in HOT ~
Lanes by paying a variable toll based on the amount of congestion on the general ~
purpose lanes. Usually as congestion on the general purpose lanes increase, more •
single-occupancy vehicles use the HOT Lanes causing the tolls to go up in order to
keep the HOT Lanes congestion free. ~
~
High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes •
Lanes specifically designated for vehicles carrying two or more people and
motorcycles. ~
~
Highway Trust Fund (HTF) •
The federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is a financing mechanism established by law
to account for tax receipts that are collected by the federal government for ~
transportation needs and is funded primarily by a federal fuel tax. .
Highway Users Tax Fund (HLJTF) ~
The major source of revenue for CDOT is the Colorado Highway Users Tax Fund ~
(HUTF), which is funded through Colorado's motor fuel tax, motor vehicle •
registrations and other fees. .
Intelligent ltansportation System (ITS) ~
~ The application of advanced technologies to improve the efficiency and safety of
transportation systems. •
~
Intermodal •
Connections and the ability to connect between modes of transportation. •
Investment Category ~
The Transportation Commission utilizes a resource allocation system following four •
major investment categories: Safety, System Quality, Mobility, and Program Delivery. •
ISTEA ~
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Eff'iciency Act (ISTEA) is the 6-year federal .
transportation authorization bill enacted by Congress in 1991. This law was -
reauthorized in 1998 with the passage of the Transportation Equity Act for the 215t
Century (T'EA-21) and subsequently in 2005 with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, ~
Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). •
~
58 .
~
~ .
~
~ Long-Range 1ransportation Plan (LRTP) ~
. A document resulting from regional and statewide collaboration prioritizing
Colorado's transportation needs over the next 20 years. Also known as the 20-year
~ Statewide Transportation Plan or "The Plan."
. Managed Toll Lanes (MTLs)
A lane or lanes along a freeway that have a variable toll based on the amount of
~ congestion on the general purpose lanes. Usually as congestion on the general purpose
~
~ lanes increase more people use the MTLs, causing the tolls to go up in order to keep
~ the MTLs congestion free.
~ Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
• A regional policy body required in urbanized areas with populations over 50,000
• responsible in partnership with the state to carry out metropolitan transportation
planning requirements including developing a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP).
~
• Mitigation
• Action taken to avoid or to minimize adverse environmental impacts.
~ Mobility
• Mobility Investment Category goals focus on improving mobility and increasing
• travel reliability. The activities within this category address issues that impact
movement whether it be level or quality of movement, accessibility to transportation,
~ reliability of the system, connectivity from one system to another, or environmental
. stewardship.
~ Mode
~ A specific form of transportation, such as automobile, subway, bus, rail, or air, etc.
• Multi-Modal
~ Incorporating more than one mode of transportation. i.e.: light rail in conjunction
• with highway.
~ National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
~ A national policy requiring any project using federal funding or requiring federal
~ approval, including transportation projects, to weigh the impacts to the environment ~ S
on proposed and alternative choices before a decision is made.
~ Non-attainment
• A geographic region that the EPA has designated as not meeting national air quality
• standards.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• 59
~
~
~
Performance Measures ~
Indicators used as feedback in decision-making to determine how well the .
transportation system is performing.
Program Delivery ~
The Program Delivery Investment Category supports administrative functions that •
enable the delivery of CDOT's programs and services. .
Public and Private Partnerships ~
The Colorado General Assembly has given CDOT the authority to become involved ~
in Public Private Initiatives (PPIs). PPIs are joint partnerships that can be formed •
between a private entity and CDOT to implement transportation projects funded
mostly by private dollars. ~
Public Hearing ~
A public meeting to formally present and gather comments on project alternatives ~
within an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. ~
Public Information Meeting ~
A meeting to provide information to the public and/or receive input from the public ~
with regard to a proposed action. ~
Public Involvement ~
The process by which the public is informed, made aware, and involved in the ~
transportation project development process. .
Regional Priority Program (RPP) ~
Funds allocated to each CDOT region to be used by that region for capital improvement ~
projects generated from the Transportation Planning Regions. The funds are from .
~ the Highway User Tax Fund (HUTF) and the Federal Highway Administration .
- (FHWA), as well as other sources.
~
Right-of-Way (ROW) •
Real property or interests therein, acquired, dedicated or reserved for the •
construction, operation, and maintenance of a transportation mode.
~
SAFETEA-LU .
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users is a 6-year federal transportation authorization bill signed into law on August i
,
10, 2005. It replaces TEA-21. ~
Safety ~
An Investment Category with the primary goal to reduce transportation-related crashes, ~
injuries, and fatalities. •
Senate Bill 1 ~
Senate Bill 1 or SB97-001 is a law enacted by the Colorado General Assembly in ~
1997 to provide additional funding from sales and use tax revenues associated with .
automobiles and automobile related accessories to fund high priority state •
transportation projects.
~
~
~
60 •
~
~
~
~ Significant Impact
• An action in which the cumulative primary and secondary effects significantly alter
~ the quality of the human environment. Significance considers the context and intensity
of a proposed action.
~
. Stakeholders
Individuals and organizations involved in or affected by the transportation planning
~ process.
~
40 State Infrastructure Bank (SIB)
The General Assembly authorized CDOT to establish a State Infrastructure Bank, a
~ low interest revolving loan fund that issues loans and credit assistance to local
~ governments or private entities for capital transportation improvements for highway,
• transit (bus and/or rail), and aviation projects.
~ Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
• A 6-year, statewide, "fiscally constrained" program of transportation projects
. incorporating the Regional Transportation Plans and the Metropolitan Planning
Organization's (MPO) Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP).
~
. Statewide 1ransportation Plan
• See Long-Range Transportation Plan
~ Strategic Projects
• This investment category is comprised of 28 high priority Strategic Projects also
~ known as 711 Pot Projects. These 28 projects have been selected to address corridors
of statewide and regional significance.
~
. System Quality
The System Quality Investment Category includes all programs that maintain the
~ functionality and aesthetics of the existing transportation infrastructure at
• Transportation Commission-defined service levels.
~ Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)
~ The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) is a Colorado constitutional amendment
• mandating that any excess tax revenues collected by the General Assembly above
the 1% plus inflation and population formula must be returned to the taxpayer's in
~ the form of a TABOR rebate.
~
• TABOR also requires that any proposed tax increases be forwarded to the Colorado
• voters for their consideration.
~ TEA-21
. The Transportation Equity Act for the 2151 Century (TEA-21) is the 6-year federal
w transportation bill authorized in 1998 replacing ISTEA. TEA-21 was reauthorized in
August 2005 by SAFETEA-LU.
~
. Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS Bonds)
• In 1999, Colorado voters approved a ballot measure referred to them by the General
Assembly to provide a financing mechanism, or Transportation Revenue Anticipation
40 Notes (TRANS), allowing CDOT to issue bonds to accelerate strategic transportation
• projects.
~
. 61
~
~
~
1Yansportation Demand Management (TDM) ~
Programs designed to reduce demand for transportation such as the use of transit and •
of alternative work hours. ~
Transportation Investment Program (TIP) ~
A document prepared by Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) that lists .
priority transportation projects in the represented metro area to be incorporated into .
the Statewide Transportation Investment Program (STIP).
~
Transportation Management Area (TMA) ~
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) with a population over 200,000 with •
more stringent federal requirements.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
62 ~
~
~
~
~
• Transportation Acronym Guide
•
~ 3C Continuing, Comprehensive, and Cooperative Transportation Planning Process ~Y q
• 3R Resurfacing, Restoration, Rehabilitation
4P Project Priority Planning Process
~ 4R Resurfacing, Restoration, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation r. ~
, AA Alternative Analysis
AAP Affirmative Action Plan
~ AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ACEC American Council of Engineering Consulting
• ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
~ ACM Agreements and Consultations Management (System)
~ ACP Access Management Plan
• ACPA American Concrete and Paving Association
, ACT Agency Coordination Team (DRCOG)
ACT Association for Commuter Transportation
~ ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
• ADT Average Daily Traffic (7 days)
• AE Annual Element of a multi-year budget plan (TIP or FYPP)
AG Attorney General
~ AGNC Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado
. AHS Automated Highway System
ALTS Automatic Location and Tracking System
~ AMP Access Management Plan
~ AMPO Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations
• ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making
APA American Planning Association
~ APCC Air Pollution Control Commission
. APCD Air Pollution Control Division
~ APOE Aerial Ports of Embarkation/Sea Ports of Embarkation
APTA American Public Transportation Association
~ APTS Advanced Public Transportation Systems
. AQCC American Quality Control Commission
• AQCM Air Quality Congestion Mitigation
ARC Audit Review Committee
~ ARCOM Army Reserve Command
• ARTBA American Road and Transportation Builder Association
• ATIS Advanced Traveler Information Systems
ATMS Advanced Traffic Management Systems
~ ATR Automated Traffic Recorder (count station)
. ATSSA American Traffic Safety Services Association
• ATU Amalgamated Transit Union
AVC Automatic Vehicle Classification
~ AVCS Advanced Vehicle Control Systems
• AVI Automatic Vehicle Identification
AVL Automatic Vehicle Location
w AVR Automatic Vehicle Recorder
~ AWDT Average Week Day Traffic (5 days)
• AWOS Automated Weather Observation System
~
~
. 63
~
~
~
BAC Better Air Campaign ~
~ BAC Blood Alcohol Level •
` BACCHUS Boosting Alcohol Consciousness Concerning Health of University
~ Students ~
BAMS Bid Analysis Management System ~
BMP Best Management Practice .
BMS Bridge Management System •
BOCC Board of County Commissioners
BPR Bureau of Public Roads (in 1967 it became the Federal Highway !
Administration) .
BPR Business Process Reegineering ~
BRF Bridge Replacement Funds
BRRC Bidder Responsibility ~
BRT Bus Rapid Transit .
BTS Bureau of Transportation Statistics •
BUI Boating Under the Influence
CAA Clean Air Act of 1990 !
~F •
CAC Construction Advisory Committee
Y CAD Computer Aided Design ~
off
CAD ComputerAided Dispatch •
CAMREAL Canadian, American, Mexican Transportation Trade Center
CASTA Colorado Association of State Transit Agencies ~
CBAC Colorado Bicycle Advisory Board ~
CBD Central Business District •
CCA Colorado Contractors Association .
CCD City and County of Denver
CCI Colorado Counties Incorporated ~
CCTV Closed Circuit Television •
CDC Construction Development Center .
CDFD Central Direct Federal Division
CDL Commercial Drivers License ~
CDOT Colorado Department of Transportation •
CDOW Colorado Division of Wildlife
CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment ~
CE Categorical Exclusions (or Cat Ex) ~
CECC Consulting Engineers Council of Colorado i
CENCOM Central Command
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality ~
CEST Colorado Engineering Software Transition .
CEUMS Commercial Electronic Variable Passage Signs •
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CFR TPR Central Front Range Transportation Planning Region ~
CHUC Colorado Highway Users Conference ,
CIFGA Colorado Intermountain Fixed Guideway Authority (sunset) •
CIMC Colorado Incident Management Coalition
CINC Commander in Chief ~
CIP Capital Improvement Program .
CIRS Colorado Intergovernmental Review Systems •
CIS Corridor Investment Study
CMAQ Coalition for Mobility and Air Quality ~
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program ~
CMCA Colorado Motor Carriers Association •
64 .
. ~
~
~
~ CMHCCA Colorado Minority Heavy Construction Contractors Association
• CML Colorado Municipal League
CMO Contract Modification Order
~ CMS Congestion Management System
~ CNMTA Colorado Nuclear Materials Transportation Act CO Carbon Monoxide
COE Corps of Engineers (also see USACE)
~ COFRS Colorado Financial Reporting System
• COG Council of Governments
• COP Certificate of Participation
COPEEN Colorado People's Environmental & Economic Network
~ COPIRG Colorado Public Interest Research Group
. CORIS Colorado Roadway Information System
• COSH Calorado Occupational Safety and Health
COSMIX Colorado Springs Metro Interstate Expansion
~ CO-TRIP Colorado Transpartation Resource and Information Partnership
. COVE Commercial Vehicle Operations (electrical data sharing)
• CPG Consolidated Planning Grant
CPR Cracking, Patching, and Rutting on a roadway
~ CQI Continuous Quality Improvement
i CRHRS Colorado Rockfall Hazard Rating System
CRS Colorado Revised Statute
~ CSP Colorado State Patrol
~ CTAA Community Transportation Association of America
• CTE Colorado Tolling Enterprise
CTI Colorado Transportation Institute
~ CTIP Colorado Transportation Information Program
~ CTMC Colorado Transportation Management Committee/Center
w CTMS Colorado Transportation Management System
CTOC Colorado Traffic Operation Center (name changed to CTMC)
~ CVO Commercial Vehicle Operations
• DAB Digital Audio Broadcasting
~ DBE Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
~ DD Developmentally Disabled/Developmental Disability
i DDD Division far Developmental Disabilities ~
. DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DIA Denver International Airport
~ DIR Direct to Projects
. DJRPP Denver Joint Regional Planning Program
. DMS Dynamic Message Signs
DMU Diesel Multiple Unit
~ DODES Division of Disaster and Emergency Services
! DOLA Department of Local Affairs
i DORA Department of Regulatory Affairs
DOT Department of Transportation
~ DOTEO Department of Transportation Emergency Organization
. DRCOG Denver Regional Council of Governments
DSS Decent Safe Sanitary (housing)
~ DTD Division of Transportation Development within CDOT (Planning)
~ DUI Driving Under Che Influence
~ DUT Denver Union Terminal
DWAI Driving While Ability Impaired
~ 65
~
~
~
~
EA Environmental Assessment !
EA TPR Eastern Transportation Planning Region •
ECO Eagle County Transit
EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ~
EHS Emergency Highway System ~
EHTR Emergency Highway Traffic Regulation ~
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment •
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EJ Environmental Justice ~
EJT Eisenhower Johnson Tunnel ~
EMS Equipment Management System
EMT Executive Management Team (CDOT) 41
EO Executive Order •
EOC Emergency Operations Center •
EOS Emergency Operations Simulation
EOS Environmental Overview Study ~
EOSS Electronic One Stop Shopping .
EPA Environmental Protection Agency •
ER Emergency Relief
ERP Enterprise Resource Planning ~
. ESB Emerging Small Business ~
ETL Express Toll Lanes !
ETPR Eastern Transportation Planning Region
~
FA Financial Advisor •
FAA Federal Aviation Administration •
FAI Federal Aid Interstate
FAP Federal Aid Primary (old-prior to 1991 National Highway System) ~
E J~
FAR Final Acceptance Report
•
FAS Federal Aid Secondary (prior to 1991 Surface Transportation Program) .
FAST Financial Assessment of System Targets
Fasl'racks 2004 RTD Ballot Initiative w
FAU Federal Aid Urban .
FAUS Federal Aid Urban Systems
FCP Federally Coordinated Program (of highway research and development) ~
FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement ~
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency .
FHP Forest Highway Program
FHPM Federal Highway Program Manual 40
FHWA Federal HigHway Administration •
FIMS Financial Information Management Systems •
FIPS Federal Information Processing Service
FMCS Fleet Management and Control Systems ~
FMFIA Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act ,
FMS Financial Management System .
FMTS Freeway Metering
FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact ~
FRA Federal Railroad Administration .
FTA Federal Transit Administration .
FTE Full Time Employee
FUNCLASS Functional Classification ~
r
66 ~
40
0
~ . , .
~
~ FURSCOM United States Forces Command
• FY Fiscal Year ;
• FYP Five-year Plan ~ Z
FYPP Five-year Program of Projects , r
~
• GDL Graduated Driver Licensing Law of 1999
GFE Good Faith Effort
~ GIS Geographic Information Systems
~ GJ TPR Grand Junction Transportation Planning Region
. GOCO Great Outdoors Colorado (funded through Colorado Lottery money)
GPS Global Positioning Systems
~ GUI Graphical User Interface
~ GVT Grand Valley Transit
. GV TPR Gunnison Valley Transportation Planning Region
~ HABS Historical American Buildings Survey ~
~ HAR Highway Advisory Radio HARE Historic American Engineering Record
. f
HAZMAT Hazardous Materials
~ HEEP Highway Engineering Exchange Program
• HELP Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate (incorporated)
• Herald Colorado Operational Test- AM Radio Subcarrier
HF High Frequency
~ HI Hazard Index
• HIAP Highway Investment Analysis Package
. HLRC Highway Legislative Review Committee
HLT Hanging Lake Tunnel
~ HOT High-Occupancy Toll
• HOV High-Occupancy Vehicle
• HPBC High Priority Bicycle Corridor
HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System
~ HPR Highway Planning and Research (federal funding)
• HSR High Speed Rail
• HTF Highway Trust Fund (federal)
HiJTF Highway Users Tax Fund (state)
~
~ I4R Interstate Resurfacing, Restoration, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation
IAC Interagency Advisory Committee
~ IBTTE International Bridge Tunnel and Turnpike Association
~ ICB Inter-City Bus
• ICC Interstate Commerce Commission
ICE Independent Cost Estimate
~ IG Inspector General (federal)
, IGA Intergovernmental Agreement
. IGS Interactive Graphics System
IHS Interstate Highway System
~ ILEV Inherently Low-Emission Vehicle
• I/M Inspection and Maintenance
• IM Interstate Maintenance
IMS Intermodal Management System
~ IM TPR Intermountain Transportation Planning Region
• IND Indirect to Project
~
~ 67
~
~
~
IRI International Roughness Index ~
' IRIS Integrated Roadway Information System •
~ IRS Internal Revenue System •
ISCE Interstate Substitute Cost Estimate
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ~
IT Information Technology .
ITI Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure i
IT ITS Information Technology-Intelligent Transportation System Committee
ITMT Intelligent Transportation Management Team ~
ITOC Interim Traffic Operations Center •
ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems .
IVHS Intelligent Vehicle Highway System
IVRS Interactive Voice Response System ~
IX Interstate Transfer Funding/Projects •
JBC Joint Budget Committee (Colorado General Assembly) ~
JEC Jefferson Economic Council ~
JEFFTAAG Jefferson County Transportation Advisory and Advocacy Group •
JPO Joint Program Office (US DOT)
• JSPIA Joint Southeast Public Improvement Association ~
JTPA Job Training Partnership Act ~
LCAT Larimer County Area Transit ~
LEAF Law Enforcement Assistance Fund ~
LEDPA Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative ~
LEDS Law Enforcement Data System .
LEV Low Emissions Vehicle
LOS Level of Service ~
LRP Long-Range Plan •
LRT Light Rail Transit •
LRV Light Rail Vehicle
LTTP Long Term Pavement Performance ~
LULAC League of United Latin American Contractors •
MAC Materials Advisory Committee ~
MAC Metro-Area Connection (Denver's light rail line) ~
MACC Making A Connection Consortium .
~ MACC Metro Area County Commissioners •
MAI Member of Appraisal Institute
MAP Maintenance Allocation Process ~
MAYDAY Colorado Operational Test-Personal/In-Vehicle Emergency Location .
Device
MBE Minority Business Enterprise ~
MBO Management By Objectives .
MHTA Multi-State Highway Transportation Agreement .
MIS Major Investment Study .
MLOS Maintenance Level of Service
MMC Metro Mayors' Caucus •
MMS Maintenance Management System •
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOBCON Mobilization Convoy Control ~
MOST Motorcycle Operator's Safety Training Fund •
MOU Memorandum of Understanding •
68 •
~
~
~
~ MPA Maintenance Program Area m-- ,----7
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
• MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area
~ MTL Managed Toll Lane
~ MTMC Military Traffic Management Command MTMCWA Military Traffic Management Command Western Area
MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan
~ MVIC Metro Vision Issues Committee (DRCOG)
~
• NAA Non-attainment Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
~ NACO National Association of Counties
~ NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement (U.S., Mexico, and Canada)
• NAGHSR National Association of Governor's Highway Safety Representatives
NAHSC National Automated Highway Systems Consortium
~ NARC National Association of Regional Councils
• NASHTO Northeastern Association of State Transportation Officials
• NBIS National Bridge Inspection Standards
NCHRP National Cooperating Highway Research Program
~ NCP Nationally Coordinated Program
• NCPD National Corridor Planning and Development
. NCS Network Computing System (CDOT)
NEMA National Electric Manufacturer's Association
~ NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
• NFA Non-federal Aid
• NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NFR AP&CD North Front Range Air Pollution & Control District
~ NFRMPO North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization
• NFRTA North Front Range Transportation Authority
NFRT & AQPC North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning
~ Council
~ NHI National Highway Institute
• NHS National Highway System
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
~ NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
~ NOS National Ocean Survey
• NPDES National Pollution Discharge Eliminations System
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rule Making
~ NPS Non-project Specific
• NSIDH National System of Interstate and Defense Highways
• NTCIP National Transportation Communication for ITS Protocol
NTS National Transportation System
~ NWCCOG Northwest Colorado Council of Governments
. NW TPR Northwest Transportation Planning Region
~ O&D Origin and Destination (survey)
~ O&M Operations and Maintenance
i OES Office of Environmental Services ~
• OFMB Office of Finance, Management and Budget (CDOT)
OHW Ordinary High Water
~ OHWL Ordinary High Water Line
• OIG Office of the Inspector General
• OJT On-the-Job Training
. 69
~
~
~
OMS Office of Management Systems .
OPLAN Operation Plan •
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Assocation
OSPB Office of State Planning and Budgeting (Governor's Office) ~
OTS Office of Transportation Safety •
P&A Planning and Administrative Costs ~
~
PAC Planning Advisory Committee ~
~
. PACOG Pueblo Area Council of Governments •
PCCP Portland Cement Concrete Pavement •
PCEMS Pre-construction Engineering Management Systems
PCP Priority Corridor Program ~
PDP Project Development Project •
PE Preliminary Engineering
PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement ~
PL Public Law or Planning Funds •
PLH Public Land Highways •
P&M Planning and Management Region
PM10 Particulate Matter Less than 10 Micron Size ~
PMCGs Pavement Management Coordinating Groups •
PMOC Program Management Oversight Committee .
PMP Pavement Management Program
PMS Pavement Management System ~
PNP Private Non-Profit •
POE Port-of-Entry .
PPACG Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments
PPI Public/Private Initiative Program ~
PPPP Project Priority Programming Process (4P) .
PPTN Public Private Transportation Network •
ProBE Project Budget & Expenditure Subsystem
ProMIS Program Management Information System ~
PRJPE Process Review/Product Evaluation •
PRT Personal Rapid Transit •
PSB Policy Steering Board (Model Deployment)
PS&E Plans, Specifics, and Estimate ~
PSI Pavement Serviceability Index •
PSTS Project Scheduling Tracking System •
PTMS Public Transportation Management System
PUC Public Utilities Commission •
RABA Revenue-Aligned Budget Authority ~
RABBIT Research Activities Bulletin Board ~
RACES Radio Amateur Communications Emergency System .
RAPP Resource Allocation Prioritization Program •
RAQC Regional Air Quality Council (Denver)
RC Reserve Components ~
RDS Radio Data System •
REDDI Report Every Drunk Driver Immediately -
RFP Request for Proposal
RFTA Roaring Fork Transit Authority ~
ROD Record of Decision •
ROW Right-of-Way
70 ~
~
~
~
~
~ RPC Regional Planning Commission ~
• RR Railroad
RRR Rural Resort Region
~ RSL Remaining Surface Life (of road)
t~
~ RTA Regional Transportation Authority
• RTAP Rural Transit Assistance Program
RTD Regional Transportation District (Denver's mass transit operator)
~ RTD Regional Transportation Director (CDOT Engineering Region Director)
~ RTMS Radar Traffic Management System
• RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWIS Road Weather Information System
~
~ SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act:
• A Legacy for Users `
SAP Manufacturer of CDOT's enterprise resource planning software that manages
~ operational and financial activities of the department.
• SCATS Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System
• SCOOT Split, Cycle, and Offset Optimization Technique
SC TPR South Central Transportation Planning Region
~ SEBP Southeast Business Partnership
• SEE Social Economic Environment
• SE TPR Southeast Transportation Planning Region
SH State Highway
~ SHA State Highway Agency
• SHPO State Historical Preservation Officer
. SHRP Strategic Highway Research Program
SIB State Infrastructure Bank
~ SIP State Implementation Plan (plan for attaining air quality compliance)
• SLV TPR San Luis Valley Transportation Planning Region
• SMEE Staff Maintenance Equipment Exemption
SMP State Management Plan
~ SPIP Strategic Project Investment Program
~ SOF Safe Off-System
SOV Single-Occupancy Vehicle
~ SPIP Strategic Project Investment Program
• SPR State Planning and Research Funds
. SRA Safety Rest Area
SREC Sufficient Reasonable Effort Committee
~ SSC State Significant Corridors
w STAC Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee
• STE Surface Transportation Program- Enhancements
STF Surface Transportation Program- Flexible
~ STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
• STM Surface Transportation Program- Metro
• STP Surface Transportation Program
STPP Surface Transportation Policy Project
~ STS Surface Transportation Program- Safety
• STU Surface Transportation Program- Urban
• STURRA Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act
SWAA Southeast Alternatives Analysis
~ SWIFT Statewide Improvements for Transportation
. SWP Statewide Plan
~
• 71
~
~
~
TABOR Taxpayer's Bill of Rights ~
TAC Technical Advisory Committee •
~ TAFS Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study •
TAG TransitAdvisory Group
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone ~
TC Transportation Commission (CDOT) •
TCD Traffic Control Device •
TCM Transportation Control Measure
TDM Transportation Demand Management ~
TDP Transit Development Program •
T&E Threatened and Endangered (Species)
TE Transporter Erector ~
TE Transportation Enhancement ~
TE Temporary Easement (Right-of-Way) •
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 2111 Century
TIFIA Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 - ~
TIMS Transportation Information Management System ~
TIP Transportation Improvement Program •
TIU Traveler Information Unit
TLRC Transportation Legislative Review Committee ~
TMA Transportation Management Area •
TMC Traffic Message Channel •
TMG Traffic Monitor Guide
TMIP Travel Model Improvement Program ~
TMO Transportation Management Organization .
TMS Transportation Management Systems •
TOC Traffic Operations Center (CDOT)
TOD Transit-Oriented Development ~
TODS Tourist Oriented Directional Signs •
TOPICS Traffic Operations To Increase Capacity & Safety •
TPL Total Project Leadership
TPR Transportation Planning Region ~
TQF Transitional Quarter Funds i
TQM Total Quality Management
TRAB Trip Reduction Advisory Board ~
TRAC Transportation Research Act Center (AASHTO sponsored) -
TRAC Transportation and Civil Engineering Program •
TRANS Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes
TRB Transportation Research Board `
T-REX Transportation Expansion Project in Southeast Denver ~
TRIP Transportation Resource Information Partnership -
TSM Transportation System Management
T-VAT Threat-Violence Assessment Team ~
UAPC Urban Area Policy Committee ~
UFR TPR Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Region ~
~ po UGB Urban Growth Boundary
~
UMC Unit Movement Coordinator •
UMTA Urban Mass Transit Administration •
UPWP Unified Planning Work Program
USACE United States Army Corp of Engineers (also see COE) ~
USC United States Code •
72 •
r
r
~
~
~ USDOT United States Department of Transportation • USFS United States Forest Service
• UZA Urbanized Area
~ VAT Vehicle Attenuating Ternunal
• V/C Volume Capacity Ratio
VMS Variable Message Sign
~ VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
• VO Vehicle Occupancy
• VOC Volatile Organic Compound
VPD Vehicles Per Day
~
~ WASHTO Western Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
WBE Women-owned Business Enterprise
WIM Weigh In Motion 'J&P WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Project ~
• WTS Women in Transportation Seminar
• WTTN Western Transportation Trade Network
WWMEES Worldwide Military Command and Control System
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ 73
~
~
'i
- , ~
:
~!W~~ 40~
~ .
„
;
a °
I-
; .
. . ~ : .
, . . . . . _ . . . , . ~ _ , . , ,
- , , ,-i- . _ ~ , .r.. . , ~
l
,
, ' , • .c- NEW dEAF PAPER~ ~
j ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS STAI'EMENT
. of using post-consumer waste fiber vs. virgin fibcr i
' Colorado Department of Trensportation saved the following resources by using New Lea( Reincarnation . ~
Matte, made with a minimum o( go% recyded fiber and a minimum of 30% posbconsumer waste.
~ processed or elemental chlorine free, and manufactured with electricity that is offsetwith Green-eO certifed ~ I
' f renewable energy c rtificates. ~
I
~ trees water energy solid waste gr gasesuse ~
j
' i 2 456 1 109 173 . s . < : _ . ~
Fully grown gallons million Btu poi.uids pounds ~ j
~ Calwlabnns based on recearch by Envummnental Defensr and othei mr.mbr.is of the Paper Taslc Porc=. ~ t
~ cQ2oo8 New Leaf Paper www.newleafpapeccom
. I M+CiEN1 OREST ~ , N~nLEAF YAVE0. . ,
~ FRIENFDLY'"
, I
i
i.
~
~
€
~
r
• , , . v.
F j ~
) uo IT,
• r~mL`ud.'.: ~ 4 ~^""';'e`^,G.",^ ~ .
DEF/ARTMi ENT QF TF;ANSPORTATiClN
~
~
f
~
~ .
:
k
f
~
i. . , ~ ,
Financing ou r transportation
syste m
Thursday, June 19, 2008
8:30 -10:00 a.m.
Grand Priest Creek il and III
Speakers -
Joe Kiely, Limon Town Administrator
Michael Penny, Frisco Town Manager,
CML Executive Board Secretary-Treasurer
Melissa Nelson, CDOT Government
Relations
Moderator - Don Feldhaus, Greeley
Councilmerr?ber, CML Conference
Committee Member
~
q
CML
1 4. 311_ • AD•
4 ~ Colorado Municipal League
86th Annual Conference
' ' June 17-20, 2008
' Steamboat Springs
~
Coiorado Municipal I.eague
8611 Annual Meeting
Steamboat Springs
lune19,2008
Financing Our Transportation System
]ce Kiely, Town Administrator, Town of Limon
Michael Penny, 7'own Manager, Town of Frisco
Melissa Nelson, Govemmrnt Relarions, CDOT
Sources of ransportation
F ding
~ b CDOT BudgN <~:::3 ~
t 3~
tzNa~. ~
~
tyqd.
CobnAe dp~rtmem of Truqnrtatloo
a..ra vr ua. aow vr...~ q.e. - a.oe..w b~.•~se~ c.eae.w
e~
~ f1.6fi~.0 fi656.91 fDi)D ~p0].6
~ ~ •
I ~ M
.~...n ~.i
ta,n ^ ~ ~ ~.,F .
' 1.ih Ylkt~)~
.
Federal Funding Program
(33%)
w
Federel Funds Federal Trust Fund Insolvency in 2009
{6211.7 Million
e Issue #1: SAFE7'EA-LU authorized more federal
o~inai rc funds than was expected to be available (resuldng in
BudBat mandatory rescission in 2009)
ta27.e Mnnon o Colmado impact- S40-E I20 million
ndoPi.d re °Issue #2: Federal gas tax dollats coming in lower
Budget than anticipated
i737 Milllon ? COIOigd0lm
pact- saaloo m;nsoo
e Issue #3: What will the obGgation limitaeon be set
at?
? Coloredo impact- S50 millioo
. LZ
Federal Funding Program
45
/0 X3
W ~ f..
35
30 ?SAFETEM
ou w
m2D
» 13 ' 0 HO-y
a ~ a^a"m -
RMucrion
5
~ . .
2005 2006 20117 2008 2Ip9
,a<:,
State Funding Program (63%)
e HUTF
e Gas Tax FY 2009 gud9eted Revenues
a Fees °tl'°r
3.3X
y,1fF; yyaG
Fadenl
S` S.B. 97"001 32.8% ;?-94.7%
Gartiip
0.8%
SB G7-01
a H.B. 02-1310 re0T'110 +o<%
7.e%
~ . _ , . .
Colorado Motor Fuel Tax Revenues
F
>
0 1e.>Y ~ ~ y ~ ~ _
3l.n. j ~4 s z
D, , NEZ -
.~`3~ ~
.,W
. . ...e:
The Cost of Inflation
e CCI has increased an avenge of 6.4% per year
since 1992
e$1 in 1992 is now worth <40¢ after adjusting for the
CCI
Si.oo
$0.80
$0.60
w.w
$oso
$0.00
?O 0444444b ?i i, OG Y ~ ti O O O
~ ? ? ~G M1C hb`M1C 'L 'l~ 'L 'L ~
x, r~n.:...~..,.. ...i
Excess General Funds: SB-1 & HB 1310
. Highly dependent on economic growth
and actions by Colorado's General
Assembly.
Not,a reliable sowce funds for planning.
Can be reduced by:
Capital ~ ConStruRion III;- ~
Lawsuits
Revenue
Forecast Other
vs. Actual funding dxislons
77
Senate Bill 97-001 Funds
d ..,,.~."~d 3 3 t ~ ~
t k ~
, ~
Economic Forecast for Transportation
'OSPB FOrecaSt:, March, 2008
Funarobb $gpp '
2008-2008 ~O
Billlon
$400
ceneml E300
Fund totela $200
2000.2071
t537 Mlllion $700
i0
2006 2007 2008• 2009' 2010• 2077•
Ac4ml Ae6ia1
M S.B. 87-1 0 H.B. 02-1310
Dollero In Mllions
Panel Mission
? To bring together a broad range of stakeholders to
identify long term sustainable transportation
programs and funding options for a 2111 Century
multimodal transportation system to support a
vibrant economy and quality of life
Panel Recommendations
~
~
/ vi5ian
~Peliry 5fatements'
lrnre5ts~~h ~ Gaieg~ri~~~
A Vision or Colorado's
Transportation Future
o Finance and [nvestment
e Choice and Mobility ,
a Economic Sustainabitity
P S8fCly
e Quality of Life
a Change and Growth in
Colorado
ffi~ . "-r''= v
Policy Statements
Programmatic
o Maintainexisting
roads and bridges
t• Mobility
Improvements
d Transivcail options
o Congestion relief
a 7w Pot projects
o Shoulders
~i... 77, 7
roiic~y a en s
Programmatic
t Enhance urbarv'nval
transit service
o Bikelpedestrian safety
investment
t Environmental
Stewardship
s Local Share
o Climate Change & VMT
.74 . .
n:
Policy Statements
o Leveiaging
a Public Private PazmershiPs
o Bonding to acceleratt
Pfolects
o Tolling as congestion
managementtool
a
" a Freight
o Economic development i
IIP • Departmental efficiencies
o Pmject selecdon through
planning process
~
Poor Roads and Brid es ~
A
K ~~~8m` ~ 'S"~ n,• ~ c
ENO
Y
.a`J
1
~ a
a
.w wl ry W.~~ ~ ~ ~
Poor Roads and Bridges
• ~ , ~,~~ai~• F r,,~ h~E~~ ~ ~,~~s:
+G~r ~ <!?~w.
s . F_: .
Investment Categories
ttd &Obn Aenud FLM6q ThndwM-PnlvndARrwuw
erwmt014 ei ..:f4Tmu Uwi iMwUVM6tllto~s~..
euhw Tnenrrt ib3 mYm R!u Eoa G b B
BMy~ NLEmltim YWibfimB
uuYr~oLwMqBw~ 562 mim RuM6anCb8
lMkY~ tl! - R~tran F b D
YolWy.7!!2 ei9Yenbt/
• BbtlpkRqr.ls i60mdm ''m~°°Mmo~p Wa~ R.e Ynn .
. YWYOAYYOhft Wlmilm ~ ~ d~MbM
bF
. BtrOpcT'rW iIBDmOm ReMpwDbG
T~rai-UiMn t~lmYm RW~hmeCbB T~roll-(Wal ppmilm Hw4mCb8
EmYm+nsW i26m@on EYWWa1B
BlqaYtPWwEin C10mlim EY~Yentl6
luatvwpwlmm fmmC~m v~ao~pu'yewom
Surface Treatment - Raise from C to B
• Cutrendy about 60% of Coloradds roads rate Good/Fair; 40%
Poor
• If no additional funding becomes available, this level will slip to
50% Good/Fair and 50% Poor in 20 years.
• It would require an additional $57m annually to stay at the same
level as today.
• The panel believed that having 40% of Coloiado's roads in Poor
condition was not acceptable economically to Colorado and thus
the recommendation was for an addition $222m which would
improve the cuaent conditions to 90% Good/Fair.
.
- ,
Bridge - Maintain at B
• Colotado cucrendy has 122 bridges (already increased from 116)
on the state system that are
structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
• Despite this number, 95% of bridges rate Good-/Fair.
• If no funding is added, in the next 20 yeazs tlus rating will drop
to 81 % Good/Fair with a proportional increase in shvcnually
deficient bridges.
• The Panel recommended at m;nimum of mainiaining the status
quo here by investing an addirional $156m annually to keep the
rating of 95°/a Good/Fair.
7.4
Maintenance Level of Service - Raise from C to B
• This category funds very basic maintenence including potholes,
snow removal, barriers, mckfalls, etc.
• The investnent of $82m annually for the next 20 yeazs prevenu
a slide in the ability to address these safety items.
.
_ .
~
Shoulders - Raise from F to D
• Colorado currendy has 2,526 miles of roadways with deScient
shoulders meaning the shoulders are nazrower than four feet.
• There is cuTrently no progam to address this deficiency.
• T6e recommendation of $78m would address 250N. of the
deficiency over a twenty year period.
Strategic Projects - Accelerate 5 years
• These projects are the 28 Suategic, often called 7th Pot projects
cwrendy receiving funding through Senate Bill 1 tunding.
• Currendy it will take 20 years to complete all 28 projecu under
the existing funding.
• The Panel recommended that $56m be added annually in order
to accelerate these projects from 20 years to 15 years.
"
'WM Multi-Modal Mobility - Limit Deciine
• This category addresses the growing congestion issues aroimd
the stau.
• In 2007, the average travel delsy in congested corridors during
peak homs wes 22 minutes, and by 2035, it was projected, with
increased population and trucks, to increase to 70 minutes.
• Investing an additional $337m a year will limit the averege
delay to less than 54 minutes.
::777^ 7."': 77777
Strategic Traasit - Raise from D to C-
• 7'his category addresses the need to develop transit that connecu
communities m Colorado.
• This recommeuded $169m could be used to develop iail transit
along I-70 or I-25.
Urban Transit - Raise from C to B
• This funding would speed the progess of existing local, urban
transit system like RTD.
• In polling done by several sources this is the strongest polling
category. The irony is that people polled want trsnsit developed
so they can continue to drive without increased congestion.
• The recommendation for $36m annually would meet complete
FasTracks and other urban visions for transit over the next 20
years.
~
Rural Traasit - Raise from C to B
• This fimding would address shortfalls in funding identified in
Regional Tiansportation Plans. This includes the hansit
systems in many of the mountain communities.
• The recommendation is for $36m.
Environmental - Establish at B
• This would be a new program designed to mitigate
env'vonmental impacts of transportabon projects.
• The recommendation was for $25m annually.
• Some of this fimding might be used to accelecate Environmental
Studies already required on federally funded projects
Bicycle/Pedestrian - Establish at B
• This would create a new program to enhance bicycle and
pedestrian routes that encouiage a reduction in vehicle usage.
• The recommendation is for $ l Om annually.
7
Local Transportation - Varies by Local
Jurisdictions
• It would require $883m annually to maintain the current levels
of service provided by local govemments.
• The recommendation is for $293 million.
• V1'hile the effect of this fimding will vary from community to
community, overall the cumnt "C" performance level will still
decrease to a"D=' level. This level of funding would result in
about a "D+" level.
Funding Recommendations
$1.5 billion annual investment
c Maintenance Fee
fe Gas Tax
~ Visitor Fees
V Sales and Use Tax
fi Severance Tax
2008 Legislative Session
a No Transportation Funding Bills
Passed
~ Other Legislation resulted in a
reduction in transportation funding of
$121.4 millioa
Q Construction Inflation (6.4%) added
another $96 million to the $1.5 b
recommendation.
s Currently behind the recommendation
by $1.717 b.
. -
2009 CDOT Budget
5% decrease in Safety Funding
~ 20% decrease in System Quality including a
12% decrease in Surface Treatment
? 21 % decrease in Mobility including
Congestion Relief
+ 90% decrease in Strategic Highway Funding
? 47% decrease in Stcategic Transit
; , . . ~ .
Without Additional Revenue . . ,
20 Years Later
As you can see, with even $1.5 billion in new revenue, the
system will not be at the level it is today in some azeas; but
without additional revenue, it looks like this in 20 years:
o The Good/Fair roads in Colorado slip fmm 60% to 50°/a.
t The number of Good-Fair bridges in Colorado decrease
fmm 95% to 81%.
t• Maintenance L.evel of Service is maintained
a No additional shoulders added to the state highway
system
b~',;,'v 'w, y ~,,:ist:a••
Without Additional Revenue
20 Years Later
As you can see, with even $1.5 billion in new revenue, the
system will not be at the level it is today in some areas; but
without additional revenue, it looks like this in 20 yeazs:
~ 1990's Strategic Pm,}ecu fmally campleted.
t Congestion increased to an average tnvel delay during
peak hours of 70 minutes per day.
a No development of passenger rail on either 170 west or
125 corridors.
r Transit unable to expand except through local funding
H No additional funding for local govemment roadways.
The Crisis Is Not So Quiet
1993
? Cost of a gallon of Gas
$1.16
? Movie Ticket $4.14
~ Average cost of new car
$12,750.00 Loaf of Bread $1.57
First Class Postage Stamp ~,?M
$0.29
Big Mac $2.24
The Crisis Is Not So Quiet
•a The current price of a Big
Mac is $3.41
~ That's an increase of
52.23% since 1993 . .
If the same standard was
allowed for fuel tax, the ,
current fuel tax would be
$0.61.
? With no increase since 1993 would the
McDonalds still sell Big Macs or anything?
~'w;
The Crisis Is Not So Quiet
•s The current price of a First
Class Postage Stamp is
$0.43.
~ s
? That's an increase of
48.24% since 1993.
~ If the same standard was allowed for fuel
tax, the current fuel tax would be $0.60.
? With no increase since 1993 would the US
Postal Service still deliver letters?
The Crisis Is Not So Quiet
s The current price of a gallon ~
of Gasoline is $3.74.
~
R That's an increase of 222%
since 1993.
If the same standard was allowed for fuel
tax, the current fuel tax would be $1.29.
? With no increase since 1993 would the
we have fuel stations available today? ~
The Crisis Cannot Remain Quiet
• The local needs are in the same crisis as the state needs.
• More discussion about how to divide the current
transportation funding more fairly will not address
the crisis.
• Waiting for someone else to pay for the transportation
system will not happen -
i.e. THERE IS NO ROAD FAIRY!
• Without a statewide solution, the statewide system of
moving people and goods will continue to
deteriorate.
The Issues
• Who Pays?
• Fees vs. Taxes
• Federal Trust Fund Shortfalls
• Maintenance Shoulders Congestion
Transit Environmental Local Statewide
Bicycles
l
Moving Forward
• Working Groups
• Statewide Strategic Transit
• Coalition Building
• Proposal Options
• Public Education
What Can I Do?
• Individually Get Involved in the Process
• Involve your Municipality in the Process
• Contact your Legislators - State & Federal
• Ask Candidates about Increasing Transportation
Funding
Questions?
GAS TAX REMAINS FLAT COLORADO VISION FOR THE FUTURE
• Gas tax is a fixed amount per gallon ~ In planning for Colorado's transportation future, residents and business people
Gas tax hasn't been increased since 1991 say that want to live and work in a state where they can: MOVING COLORADO: VISION FOR THE FUTURE
• Gas tax revenues decrease as fuel 2035 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAPI
efficiencies increase Statewide Vision
CORRIDOR VISIONS • Travel on safe roads
Approximately 350 corritlor visions have been updated to identify current • Depend on an efficient transportation system
trends and contlitions. Together the corridor visions comprise an integrated - Purchase goods delivered efficiently antl cost-effectively
transportation network reflecting long range local, regional and statewide • Find aiternative options for those who cannot or choose not to drive
travel needs in response to community values, economic development
and environmental considerations. Corridor visions - Access recreation and tourist destinations without sitting in traffic MOVING COLORADO
increase the efficiency and accountability of the • Rely on a transportation system that supports local communities,
~ ~transportation system by aligning vision strategies and economic growth and protects the environment
project selection. Taken together, the corritlor visions ~~u.~9.;~
. . . . . . . . . . . ~ ~ ` i ~
establish an integrated, system-wide, multi-modal
vision that balances local and statewide transportation TOP TEN STRATEGIES
goals and strategies. "
Top strategies from about 350 multi-modal transportation corridors were identifietl
REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY CORRIDORS to help improve safety, retluce congestion and maintain the transportation
system.
CDOT antl the Regional Transportation Planning Regions developed
Top Ten Strategies - All Corridors
a cooperative approach to focus available funding on critical corridors
and programs. Key strategies on specific corridors were identifietl for 70% ~ PassIrG ;ruRNLANes
implementation over the next decade basetl on available funding levels. iHrERSECTioN/ INrERCHnr,cE
¦ IMPROVEMENTS
IMPROVESHOULDERS
50No
- _ - - ~ ~ -
o ;4-g SURFACE TREATMENT
~ort cmi ,s s s:° ~`°9 p z ~ iRANSIT BUS AND RAIL
WA otcemboet5pnngs~. . W
~Greale F
Y
w/T ~ m 30% - 1," m IMPROVE GEOMETRICS
~
cWi c BICYCLE 1 PEDESTRIAN
~ a ~ 20% " Al;; IMPROYEMENTS
~a ~
ueve~~ u ~ m CAPACITY 1 NEW LANES
r~< ^f ----F W% ¦ ACCESS CONTROL
„
; ,sF- 0% ' - ; , IMPROVE HQT SPOTS
cra d ~ n~i~a~
o adf cnng=.
f ~ . t, !
CONTACTS
~ ~ ~
~Pue~For a copy of the plan or if you have any questions, please let us know.
`a'°°'a CDOT Statewide Planning Unit: 303.512.4019
Email: StatewitlePlaninfo@dot.state.co.us
r~~ W ~ COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
r n dAd WBb: http:llwww.dot.state.co.uslStateWidePlanninglPlansStudies12035P1an.asp
1 S ~z 1 ~
- - Para una copia en espanol del Plan, Ilame al 303.512.4019 March 20, 2008
~ RE610MAL NQ15P0T SGiE XIfiIFWNYS
En espanol:
~ TRARM MWTERMIMPLEMENTFTiMf
CORRUXWS http:llwww.dot.state.co.uslStateWidePlanning/PlansStudies/2035P1an_Spanish.asp
THE 2035 PLAN TOTAL PLAN COSTS 2008 - 2035 SYSTEM PERFORMANCE RELATED TO INVESTMENT
Moving Colorado: Vision for the Future, updates the long-range transportation Sustain Three potential investment scenarios:
, . , , , ,
plan for Colorado. Required by Federal and State law, the Plan captures SCENARIO '4"
. , . . , . . _ ,
the public's vision and the Colorado Transportation Commission's policies ToraL
INVESTMENT $1236 $176B >$249B . . .
and priorities. Together, it provides the vision for a 21st century multi-modal (2008DollarslnBfllions)
comprehensive transportation system. aNNuAL ~ ' ° • ° ' ` ° ` °
INVESTMENT ~ ~ ~ .s :A °"~s} ~ e a a ra : e i • - •
(2006 Dollars In Billions)
The multi-modal corridor visions integrate local land use decisions, community
values, environmental antl economic considerations with local and statewide
transportation needs.
The Midterm implementation strategies begin formalizing CDOT's need to make
tough choices on program and project priorities to make the wisest investments Estimated 2085 5tate Highway System Performance Outcomes
~
INVESTMENT ostto Costto
with limited resources. Regional priorities focus funding on critical corridor
, . ~t
neetls for the short term. ~ ~ Current ~ ~ ~ ~ -
TOTAL $1076
Anticipated revenues represent only about one-half of the funds needed to INVESTMENT
(zoue uoiiam m eimons) $64B achieve the transportation vision. While gas prices continue to rise at the pump, $28g `
the gas tax remains flat and is worth only one-third of its 1991 value. cDoTHi9nWaYFunaSonlY ~ x~-~~; Congestian* 70 ComdorVision
~
This brochure highlights k@y fIC1dIC1gS ~mprovements~Moda~cnoices
pW11lABLF ~ (Average minutes of
from the 2035 Statewide Plan with FuN°5 daily delay per traveler 22 <22
in congested corridors)
its supporting technical reports and Mafntenance
interactive corridor vision CD-ROM, " Grade F B B__
m~xsroer~nox ,
Pavement ~ zs% ~ so% 75°I
the Regional Transportation Plans
„
COIIdItI011 Good/Fair Good/Fair Good/Fair
and Local Transit and Human Service
Plans.
~ Bddge ~ so/ ~ 95/ 100k
• COndklOn Good/Fair Good/Fair Good/Fair
~ Safety
~ (fatality Rate per 100M 1.26 1.10 1.00"* ,
vehiclemdestraveled)
ry
KEY ISSIlES *Congest'ion is ona comportent of the mo6i0ty investmenf cafego ` . ~
"Fafalrty Rats may decrease with fhe passage of a primary seat belf law
• Colorado's population is projected to grow 56 percent by 2035 placing j, ~
~r
added congestion and maintenance demands on the sYstem. ~N"„~ ~
Estimated 2035 Local Roadway, Transit/ Rail and
• The energy boom stimulates the economy and also stresses the trans- Aviatian System Performance Outcomes
portation infrastructure.
I
INVESTMENT 1 i Sustain
1 '
Current • Freight transportation by truck and rail wiil increase 250 percent. SCENARIO
TOTAL TOUGH CHOICES
• Highways which provide the lifeline to recreation and tourism are INVESTMENT* $95B g112B >$1426
Doliars in Blllio~)
(2008
challenged by over-crowding, high mountain passes and snow storms. Without increased revenue, CDOT will have ;
41 Aviation ~ to make some tough choices about prioritizing
• The need to protect Colorado's naturai environment includes reducing GeneralState ~ ~ -
otihe System critical programs and corridors. CDOT's primary
transportation's contribution to global warming. ROA~-!
Tobjective is to provide the traveling public a
• Public transportation plays a key role in our future for both urban and T~nsa r Rail Percento, safe transportation system. Rapidly rising costs C LOSED! ~EWARE
Oemand lAet NOf eNaucN nors
rural , pOSNOtES .
areas. and decreasing revenues coultl mean closing
Local RoadwaY il lanes, roads or brid ges, fewer snowplows on '
GeneralStete ~ ~oftheSystem iffia the roads and retluctions in capacity projects
just to maintain the existing system.
`Dotar amounts may not add due fo roun~irg.
Ethical Leadership: Earning
and keeping the public trust
Wed nesday, J u ne 18, 2008
1:15 - 2:30 p.m.
Sheraton Sunshine Peak
Speaker - David Rabiner, CSP,
Rabiner Resources
Moderator -Diana Allen, City of
Lakewood Councilmember
~
CML
's>'•'Fa,i~..~, r
Colorado Municipal League
86"' Annual Conference
June 17-20, 2008
Steamboat Springs
il
~
~ CML
The Voice of Co/orado's CiNes and Towns
Ethical Leadership
June 18, 2008
~,ABINER
R E S O U R C E S
~
ETHICS IN LEADERSHIP
What is ethics?
Ethics is "...the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with mora/ duty and obligafion."
(Merriam-Webster)
Ethical leadership is more than knowing and enforcing what's right and wrong.
For most leaders, ethical decision-making is easy when they are faced with decisions that are
clearly either right or wrong. The challenge involves the choices that are not so clear.
Those are the times when leaders must choose between "righY" and "right" or between the
"lesser of two evils." Those are the smaller, yet equally important decisions leaders make every
day that define who they are.
When leaders pay attention to ethics, they learn to use these daily choices to clarify their
values and define their character. Flexing their ethical muscles on these everyday decisions
helps build the courage and conviction they need to make the best ethical decision when there
is pressure to do otherwise.
Ethical leaders believe one (or both) of the following:
• They define themselves as leaders not by whether they get what they want, but by whether
they do the right thing.
• If leaders do the right thing on a consistent basis, in the long run, they will, in fact, get what
they want.
What causes people to make unethical choices?
"!t is often easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them."
- Adlai Stevenson
O 2008 Rabiner Resources 1
vYEmTH...EE2OF P,EuRSONAL VALUES..~~.:.~
Validation ,
• We also have a basic need to like and respect ourselves: • Self-validation helps minimize your fusion to others. • .
• Validating others is effective because of their fusion to you. ,
LIKE IN.OTHERS ' DON'T LIKE•IN OTHERS
. ,
, , . .
Whenever we do something for validation and we do NOT get validated, we see it as
invalidation. -
Whenever we feel we have b'een invalidated, the easiest way we cope with it is simply to
invalidate the invalidator.
We justify our own "right-side" behaviors by making.them someone else's fault. Deep inside,
though, our own stock in ourselves drops. Whenever we invalidate ourselves by demonstrating "right-side° behaviors, we will turn to
someone else to get validated. . . .
2 . O 2008 Rabiner Resources
The Power of Fusion
Our cultural experiences (TV, movies, advertising, etc) teach us to rely on others to get our
validation needs met - to be fused to what others think about us, say to us, and do to us. We
give away our personal power when we are overly fused to others. Conversely, we find
strength, confidence, and a sense of control when we learn how to self-validate.
"Self-validation" is an internal process of self-approval. It happens when we internally
acknowledge ourselves for being the kinds of people we want to be. The more self-validating
we are the less fused we are.
Our fusion to others often keeps us from doing what we know we should do. The way to
defend against the powerful influence of fusion is to get very clear about what you value and
then strive to live up to your values, no matter what.
"Leadership is a combination of strategy and character.
lf you must be without one, be without the strategy."
- Norman Schwarzkopf, retired US Army General
O 2008 Rabiner Resources 3
SELF AWARENESS AND VALUES WORKOUT m. :
If you went through a drive-thru, gave the server $5, and, as you were driving away, saw that
you received change from a$20, would you return the money? If no, what personal value
might you be violating?
Do you criticize colleagues they aren't present? If yes, what personal value might you
be violating?
Do you own up to your mistakes in front of others? If no, what personal value might you
be violating?
Have you even fudged on an expense report? If yes, what personal value might you
. be violating? ,
~ . - - ~
"Se/f awareness extends to a person's unalerstandl ng, of his or her"
va/ues and goa/s A person~who /acks se/f awareness is
Y apf to make ~
decisions- that,bring on inner turmo~l by treading on buried values
.
~ - a " .i .
~
. . .Y` . 4. .E
D'r Daniel Goleman,.Emotional lntelligence
,
F
.
, : , .
. ;
~ x.: - . . I
4. O 2008 Rabiner Resources
:
RELY ON THESE PRINCIPLES. ..AND THE REST WILL FOLLOW
The following are principles that apply to building an ethical workplace. Rely on these
principles. ..and the rest will follow.
You are more likely to make the right decisions if you:
Consider how you will define yourself by your decision. What values are relevant in this
situation? In priority order, what values should you uphold in this situation? What values come
into conflict in this situation? Which of the values that are in conflict are more deeply rooted in
you, your profession, your organization, and the communities you care about?
Consider who gains and loses by your decision. Who are the people who have an interest
in the decision you make? Do you know what they value or what decision they would make?
What are the reputation consequence for you? How would you feel and be regarded by others
if the details of the decision and action plan were to become public?
Consider the regulatory consequences. What possible social or political backlash might
occur as a result of your decision? What laws or rules might arise as a result of your decision?
Gather as many facts as possible. Do you have all the facts so you can make an informed
decision? How would you define the problem if you stood on the other side of the fence?
Consider all possible decisions. What are all the alternative decisions and action plans?
How would you rank each decision based on its ability to uphold your most important values
and minimize harm to stakeholders? How would the stakeholders view your decision?
Make course corrections when necessary. What are the underlying causes of the situation?
What can you do to prevent it from happening again? What did you learn from the decisions
you made?
The quality and frequency of the conversations surrounding
ethical decisions are as important as the decisions themselves.
Practice on the smaller choices until the principles of
ethical decision-making become values.
O 2008 Rabiner Resources 5
_ -
_
HOW DO YOU DEVELOP ETHICAL LEADERSHIP? !
Summary:
1. Know that you define yourself by the choices you make.
2. Pay close attention to the ethical issues present in everyday decision-making. Practice
identifying and talking about those issues with the people you lead.
3. Rely on principles and the rest will follow.
• Consider how you will define yourself by your decision.
• Consider who gains and loses by your decision.
• Consider the regulatory consequences.
• Gather as many facts as possible.
• Consider all possible decisions.
• Make course corrections when necessary.
' • A/most two thirds of loca/ government emp/oyees (63%) said they
observed at /east one type of misconduct in the previous year.
; i
, • In the public sector, /oca/ government had the highest leve/ of workers ~
who witnessed misconduct but did not report it - 34%. ;
~
• The most common/y observed types of misconduct at the /ocal ~
, government /evel were: '
abusive behavior (26%) '
putting own interests ahead of the organization (26%) and
; lnternet abuse (239to). i,
;
~ - Ethics Resources Center, 2007 National Government Ethics Survev ~
,
i
6 O 2008 Rabiner Resources
M The following resources are some of those we used to assemble the material contained in today's
program. These are wonderful resources that we recommend you consider as you continue your self-
development.
Badaracco, Joseph, Jr., Defining Moments: When Managers Must Choose Between Right
and Right, Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
Ethics Resource Center, 2007 National Government Ethics Survey
Stark, Andrew, What's the Matter With Business Ethics?, Harvard Business Review, 1998.
Best wishes for your continued success,
David Rabiner, CSP, speaker, trainer, and facilitator, is a graduate of the Edward R.
a~,y Murrow School of Communications at Washington State University. Before
becoming a trainer in 1993, David enjoyed a successful, 15-year career in radio news
broadcasting, as an entrepreneur, and in executive-level public service. David has
presented to more than 1,600 groups in 12 countries and 44 states. In 2003, David
passed rigorous standards to earn the coveted Certified Speaking Professional
(CSP) designation, the worldwide benchmark for speaking excellence. Email David
at david@rabiner.com.
~
Susy Wagner, program consultant and leadership coach, earned her undergraduate degree ~
from the University of Oregon and her MBA from Marylhurst University. Before joining
Rabiner Resources, Susy served as Risk Manager for the Cities of Eugene, Oregon and
Portland, Oregon and as Vice President at Liberty Northwest, a subsidiary of Liberty Mutual.
A business and community leader, Susy is a board member emeritus of the Oregon
Foundation for Medical Excellence and recipient of an Outstanding Public Service Award
from the City of Portland. Email Susy at susy@rabiner.com.
rv~ " David Elliott, business development manager, eamed his bachelor's degree in
literature from UCLA. Prior to joining Rabiner Resources in 2003, he spent 20
years in New York City working in public relations representing such clients as
Universal Studios Florida, Alpo Petfoods, The Bahamas Ministry of Tourism, and
Polaroid Corporation. More recently he managed a large communications
department for Brooklyn, New York-based KeySpan Energy, one of the largest
energy companies in the northeast. Email David at elliott@rabiner.com.
536 SW Westwood Drive • Portland, Oregon 97239
503-245-8878 • www.rabiner.com
O 2008 Rabiner Resources 7
COLORADO'S HIGHWAY
CONDITION DILEMMA
As a result of increased use and a lack of road improvement funding,
~ Colorado's system of roads and bridges is in poor condition. Without a major
investment of new dollars, Colorado will fall further behind and be unable to
maintain the highway system that has taken over 100 years to build.
.
R O
.
UGH
.
RO
_ AD
. .
~ 4
. ;S.y. .
. _ . A,.. ,
A LOOK AT THE FACTS
Through its pavement management system, the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) has determined that 35% of the state's highway
system is in poor condition. In addition, approximately 18% of the system
is in need of reconstruction or major rehabiltation and has zero Remaining
Service Life (RSL).
Driving on roads in need of repair costs Colorado's motorists $955 million -
$321 per driver - annually in extra vehicle operating costs, including acceler-
ated vehicle depreciation, additional repair costs and increased fuel consump-
tion and tire wear. Additional annual vehicle operating costs are estimated to
be $344 in the Denver metro area and $284 in the Colorado Springs area.
A desirable goal for state and local organizations is to keep 75% of its road-
way system in good or better condition. Due to a lack of funding, it is dif-
ficult for the Colorado highway system to meet the 60°/a good or better goal
established by the Colorado Transportation Commission.
AS P HA LT
A THE OOTH QUIET RID
10d% REC°VCLABLE
THE COST OF COLORADO'S Steady UOpulation growth has resulted in
INADEOUATE ROADS increased vehicle travel on Colorado's
highwavs, resulting in accelerated
The Colarado Department of Transportation (CDOT) pavement deterioration.
currently invests approximately $150 million annually in the * Colorado's population increased by 38 percent from
Surface Treatment Program. It is estimated that a two fold 1990 to 2004, from 3.3 million residents to 4.6
increase in funding to $300 million is needed annually just million residents.
to maintain the current condition of Colorado highways.
* Vehicle travel in Colorado increased by 25 percent
Excellent between 1990 and 2003, from 20 billion vehicle
Good ao% oroa in ouamy miles of travel (VMT) to 26 billion VMT. Vehicle
I
~ $1.OOforRerwvalbnHere travel in Colorado is projected to increase at this rate
Fair ~ 75% rn ure ---J into the future.
Poor ao% omo,n Quaft~ WiIlCosti4.00-S.OOMere * Currently 35% of Colorado's roadways are in poor
Very Poor ,Z%o,Lffe condition. At existing funding levels. CDOT
Failed estimates that approximately 60% of the roadways
Time will be in poor condition by 2016.
PAVEMENT LIFE CYCLE
* The amount of transportation funding in Colorado
Without adequate funding, a"keep the good roads good" has declined as a percentage of state funding from
approach cannot be taken and roads will deteriorate to the approximately 12% in 1985 to 5% in 2006.
point of needing total reconstruction. It is estimated that
it costs four to five times higher to reconstruct (rebuild) a Statistics provided by TRIP, a national transportation
poor road as compared with maintaining and resurfacing a research group. 202-466-6706, www.tripnet.org and
road kept in good condition. (Reference: Heartburn Highways, the Colorado DOT.
TRIP October 2005)
"It is estimated that a two fold increase in funding is necessary
just to maintain the current condition"
CDOT Pavement Management Program - 2005 Long Range Condition Projections by Funding Allocation
20-year Analysis
1000/0
.
E
E
90% i CDOT Surface
. ~ Treatment Budget
. . . `
800/0
~$400 Mill
70%
c _ _.R,.~•"».°»"
0
i'5 600/o _5300 Mill
c
0
V
' . _ . . . . . . .
$00/0
~
-$151 Mill
~ 40% (Gurrent
~ funding levels)
~
30%
~Colorado
Transportation
20% . . . ~
10/0 o _ _ ~ -Objective
!
j
O%
O~~ O~~ O~~ O~~ O~b O~~ O~'~ O~'~ Oti O`~'~ ti`Z'b
ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti 16, ti ti ti ti
161
Years
Assumes 4.0% inFlation in costs and 3.5% increase in budget per year & k factor = 0.2
1% bridge enhancement, 4.6% for P.E., 17.0% for C.E., & 11.0% for essentials
95% of the budget is utilized for resurfacing and reconstruction projects.
5% of the total budget is utilized for preventive maintenance
12/29/OS
June 2006 Volume 1 Number 2
~
MAJOR HIGHWAY INVESTMENTS TOP PRIORITY David A. Pampu
Colorado's transportation system is the backbone of.the state's economy. The state's
transportation system moves goods and services, supports tourism and recreation, moves
commuters to jobs and provides the means for transporting our agricultural products to
/ market.
In recent years voters in various regions of Colorado have committed to visionary
0 orado investments in air transportation, rapid transit and local roads. While these investments
significantly contribute to enhancing our transportation infrastructure and, consequently,
the economy, investment in our state highway system has not kept pace. In fact there has
' Perspectives examine critical been a 38% decline in funding for highways in recent years. This despite the fact that
, issues in transportation finance. 87% of the $77 billion worth of commodities delivered annually to and from sites in
Editor David Pampu can be Colorado is transported on the state's highways and that commercial trucking is projected
reached through the Website.
to increase 52% in Colorado by 2020. Regarding the impact of investment on the
economy, the Federal Highway Administration has estimated that every $1.00 spent on
MoveColorado also publishes in- street and highway improvements results in $5.40 in economic benefits.
, depth white papers that examine
these issues in greater detail.
Colorado's highway system exists, but continued investment in the maintenance and
upgrade of the system to meet the needs of the 21" century is critical. In 2004 The Road
MoveCo?orado is a private lnformation Program (TRIP), a national research organization on highway transportation
industry organization that provides issues, graded various aspects of Colorado's highway system:
information, sponsors education
programs, and supports the efforts
of Colorado community, business ReportCard
and political leaders to solve Colorado Highway System
transportation funding issues. Ruad Information Pro ram, Washin ton, DC 2004
Road Condition C-
Brid es B
Con estion D+
Sate C-
Contact us: Economic Develo ment and Trans ortation Fundin C-
wevw.movecolorado.ora
The passage of Referendum C& D would have helped the state address some of these deficiencies. lf approved by the voters of
Colorado, these proposals would have provided $1.2 billion in guaranteed funding to improve the state highway system
accelerating the construction of the projects through bonding. Even though the bonding provisions did not pass. Referendum C
will still help transportation funding by reducing the budget crisis. Approximately $1 billion in transportation funding through
SB 1 and HB 02-1310 will be generated through 2010-1 l.
While the overall impact on uansportation will be to return Colorado to 2001 funding levels, that wouldn't happen until 2010-1 l
and it will depend on economic recovery. We now face higher construction costs. The amount of money generated, $1 billion, is
approximately 1% of total needs of $100 billion through year 2030. Cunently, thirty percent of Colorado's urban highways are
congested. CDOT currently invests $162 million annually for capacity improvements. By 2030, with population projected to
double and congestion increasing by 161%, it will require $1 billion annually to maintain the 30% congestion level.
Perspective: While the underlying foundation of highway revenue is the user fee assessed on motor fuel sales, in recent years
Colorado has increasingly relied on state General Fund revenues to supplement user dollars to meet state highway needs. One
significant effect of the TABOR amendment has been to eliminate the ability of CDOT to avail itself of these state Genera) Fund
dollars. That will change because of the passage of Referendum C. The problem is that without a major investment of new
dollars, Colorado will fall further behind, unable to make progress on the widening gap in transportation funding critical to our
highway system. As we consider future transportation revenues, we need to think of our highway system as a top priority.
SETTING THE PACE FOR TRANSPORTATION FUNDING IN COLORADO
~
THE CHALLENGE
• The economic downturn reduced dollars available for high- i ffomm .
way improvements ~
• Current funding levels will not catch up editOL'ial
• We are falling further behind, fixing 'yesterdays problem Bicyclists discover state's rough roads
• Construction costs have increased significantly in recent As the state continues to grow, more than one-third
times
• The transportation system needs more than small scale of Colorado's roads are in poor condition, and
investments funding continues to fall behind growth. ~
A FiJTURE AT RISK One reason Ride the Rockies, the just-completed annual
• Transportation revenues fail to keep pace with growth and Colorado bic cle tour, is so o ular is that the stai~and
inflation y ~ p p
• Colorado risks falling farther behind in transportation infra- volunteers take pains to make the event safe. Among other
structure things, crews travel the route before the ride begins, using
orange spray paint to mark such problem spots as potholes
CONCLUSION and broken pavement. In some places, they have to high-
Inadequate roads and bridges cost Colorado motorists billions of dol- light so many damaged areas that the road resembles a big
lars every year in wasted time and fuel, injuries and fatalities caused jigsaw puzzle.
by traffic accidents, and wear and tear on their vehicles. Increasing
funding and making needed improvements to Colorado's roads and Sadly, that situation would exist no matter where the tour
highways is key to providing a safer, more efficient system. A system (sponsored by The Denver Post) went in our state. While
that will save motorists money and time, while improving the eco- poor road conditions are especially noticeable from the seat
nomic livelihood of the entire state and its residents. of a bicycle, Colorado's deteriorating highways are a con-
Colorado's highway system is critical for the state's economy cern no matter what you drive or ride. Common problems
and quality of life. Without a major investment of new dollars, include asphalt wrecked by freezes, shoulders that don't
Colorado will fall further behind and be unable to maintain the meet modern standards and roads that have been patched
highway system that has taken over 100 years to build. A portion so often the lanes have been unacceptably narrowed.
of future funding for transportation improvements should be
dedicated for highway system quality and highway maintenance. __Excerpt taken from the Derrver Post dated 6127106--
` A
tic!olorado Asphalt
Pavement AssoclaNon
6880 S Yosemite Ct #110
Centennial, CO 80112
COIItACt IIS TOdAyI
303-741-6150
www.co-asphalt.com
COLORADO'S HIGHWAY
CONDITION DILEMMA
; r -
~
fl -
~ -
; ~ ~ I III
. ,
u~
07.01.0g ES
From: . "S08948 Vail Village" <S08948@starbucks.net>
To: <towncouncii@vailgov.com>
Date: 7/1/2008 3:35:07 PM
Subject: Vail Structure Parking
Dear Town Council,
I do agree that there is a ongoing issue with the parking in Vail. But I do not agree that charging the guests
is the answer.
The issue has come about because of the construction workers filling the garage before 10:00 am. This
was not a problem last summer but because of the new construction they have taken over.
What needs.to happen is that the construction workers need carpool or ride that bus like most of us do. 1
know of several construction companies that, out of respect for the town, have their workers park down
valley and they bus them in.
The second option is that the construction workers can park in the Lionshead Structure, which is a bigger,
faciliry, and ride the bus or walk to the village.
If we charge for parking we effect the customers that come from down valley as well as the front range.
We will once again become the Big Bad Resort Out For Money. Also, what will be accomplished is noone
will park in the garages and we will end up with empry garages with a small scattering of guests that feel
that they are once again being "nickle & dimed" by Vail.
We the town need to take a proactive approach that will not hurt our image by punishing the guest forour
incompentence and keep all involved content.
I can tell you that I will NEVER visit a town that charges me to park just because I want to walk around,
stretch my legs, and possibly spend a little money. I'd drive to the next town with free parking.
Thank you for your time and concideration.
Michelte Moehring
ASM Vail Starbucks #8948
,
• ' Page 1 of 3
Pam Brandmeyer - Re: huh?
From: Tommy Neyens <skivalet@vail.net>
To: Brian Nolan <brian@vailchophouse.com>
Date: 7/1/2008 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: huh?
Brian,
This is a problem with more than enough blame to go arourid.
Vail Resort who, in the 11 years they have owned the mountain, have yet to build any public parking
for their day skiers.
The Town of Vail for their part has not stepping to requiring the ski resort to provided an appropriate
parking solution for the 10,000 to 20,000 people that use their slopes daily.
We as a community aze at fault for electing councils who did not have the will or foresight to address
and solve tough issues.
That said we need to come up with a solution.
I would suggest we DO eliminate street parking for a year and create a park and ride program.
Vail Resorts could start by turning their Holy Cross Parking and North Day into a payed lot, the guest is
number one let's give them up front parking.
To satisfy displaced employees, VR could use it's bone yard in Minturn as a park and ride.
As for the town we could charge to park at Donovan Park, the Wendy's site and the Town Hall parking
lot on weekends. ,
In addition Town of Vail could try to rent any appropriate valiey wide spaces which could be used as
pazk and ride lots.
This said we would have to add more busses/frequency to the TOV schedule and work w/ ECO.
I guess my point is there are other solutions but like $5.00 a gallon gas, it could hurt,
than again, at $5.00 a gallon for gas this may become a mute point.
Another concern which is lost in this discussion is public safety and the cost to the community to
maintain the frontage road.
TOV payed a lot of overtime for both road maintenance & code enforcement. Also not accounted is
the liability cost to the town if god forbid someone is injured or killed on the frontage road.
Bottom line is we need another parking structure but in the meantime we need solutions and the' status
quo is not an option in my opinion.
I will be at tonight's meet and I look forward to any suggestion to move us forward.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 7/1/2008
, Page 2 of 3
Thanks, .
Tom Neyens
Ski/Bike Valet
970-476-7770
On Jun 30, 2008, at 7:56 PM, Brian Nolan wrote:
All right now - we are the new kids on this block - not the neighborhood - just this block.
And any of you who know me, know I am well.. Not one to well.. Hold my thoughts. So
here goes. . Apparently there might be conversation tomorrow at the fine town council meeting in Vail
to speak to the "Parking problem" I have always found it an interesting name - I consider
a parking problem one where our parking lots are empty and no one comes here
anymore - but that is for another day.
It seems - and this is my take and opinion - not fact - that there are people upset about
the situation and they believe the action of having NO PARKING ON ANY OF THE
STREETS NEXT WINTER is a solution.
1 St this will sit great with the past "rif raf' comments made here locally to our guests and
regular customers who park on the road. 1St a left, to the head, then the right to the jaw.
2nd _ I am unsure where any of you are on this but it scares me. { mean I wiN take all the
potential guest I can from anywhere they want to come from. And telling them they cannot
park will only send them somewhere else. Just speaking about it will cause some pain - in
my opinion.
I guess that this has something to do with applying pressure to the ski company? But
disturbing our - all of our guests - seems like a horrible tactic. I will not try and figure out
today the years of leadership - or lack thereof in one corner or the other. Or what deals or
offers have not been enough or are too much. AI1 1 know is 1 am going to the council
meeting tomorrow night to:
1- Listen and get more informed.
2- Be sure there is a process; I mean really, the council will not be voting tomorrow on
anything are they? They of course are going to give all people - on a(I sides, a
chance to speak to the direction they are going, right? - Especially since they are
talking about all of our guests.
3- To take notes for those of you who cannot make it and need them - let me know by
responding here please.
Again - please realize I know there may be more to this then I know - but as a new set of
eyes in Vail his seems to fly in the face of guest service, or experience - in any sort of
way. I liope all or any of you can make it - and if any of you have any words of wisdom to
help me understand this - email - quick:
Brian Nolan` file://C:\Documents and Settings\A.dministrator\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00403.HTM 7/112008
. . •
From: <mary@thebalancewheel.com>
To: <Towncouncil@vailgov.comy
Date: 7/1/20081:44:55 PM
Subjeat: parking (part 2)
Dear Councit,
Thank you so much for your responses to my last emaii regarding parking. It is gratifying to know you are
taking this situation seriously and have some good ideas.
I just wanted to chime in once again with my best idea.
I think it would be good to give construction workers passes to park on the street. It won't cost them any
money, they are still close to their sites, it leaves the structure open for guests.
I know thece is a meeting for merchants tomorrow. I must say that I do not think it is merchants in the
village that have caused the big crunch this summer. I have been working in the.village since 1995, and
have never seen this. It is doubtedly the construction projects. I think giving them another alternative is
the best way to keep everyone happy.
Thanks, again, for your time and attention.
Mary Cannell (Kevin, too)
The Balance Wheel
286 Bridge Street
Vail, Colorado 81657
store 970-479-1047
• ' ' Page 1 of 1
Pam Brandmeyer - Parking
From: "John G. Cogswell" <tsblossom@qwestoffice.net> .
To: <towncouncil@vaiTgov.com>
Date: 7!1/2008 11:57 AM
Subject: Parking
Sorry, I will not be able to attend tonight's meeting. ff the contractor would help park outside to
sculpture. That,would help. The idea of have a$50.00 merchandise pass for the summer would be O.K.
with some of the retailer and real estate office. Please review if the worlcer at the front door can park in
that space. John Cogswell
1
file://CADocuments and Settings\Administrator\I,ocal Settings\Temp\GW}00004,HTM 7/1/2008 ~