HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-08-04 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
7 m *Vk"
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
6:00 P.M., AUGUST 4, 2009
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot
be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider
an item.
1. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Public
2. ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report.
a. Revenue Update. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Stan Zemler
3. ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda:
a. Approval of 07.07.09 and 07.21.09 Town Council Minutes. (5 min.)
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Dobson Ice Arena roof replacement bid award. (10 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Award the contract for the Dobson
Ice Arena roof replacement.
BACKGROUND: The Dobson Ice Arena has been in need of replacement.
This project was delayed from 2008 to 2009. The project was bid out, once
the council reviewed the third budget supplemental for 2009. The apparent
low bidder is Roofmasters Roofing. The town has performed reference
checks on the contractor. The replacement material will be metal and has
received Design Review Board approval. The town recieved five bids as
oulined below.
Roofmasters Roofing, Hays KS Base Bid -$555,000
B& M Roofing, Fredrick, CO Base Bid -$638,945
Turner Morris, Silverthorne, CO Base Bid -$678,143
Progressive Roofing, Denver, CO Base Bid -$709,245
Weathercraft, Colorado Springs, CO Base Bid -$881,108
The contract is within the budget for the project. Construciton is to begin
once the contract is signed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Instruct the Town Manger to enter into a
8/4/2009
contract with Roofmasters Roofing of Hays, KS for $555,000 in a form
approved by the Town Attorney.
5. ITEM/TOPIC: Lionshead Transit Center Conceptual Scenarios (90 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the Lionshead Transit
Station Phase I Feasibility Analysis Report provided, listen to the design
team's presentation, provide discussion, and ask questions with regard to
the presentation and the report. Provide staff and the design team with
direction to bring the recommended scenario(s) forward to Schematic
Design, and authorize the completion of Phase II-Schematic Design of the
study.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail and the Vail Reinvestment Authority, is
in the process of studying the feasibility of constructing a Lionshead Transit
Center in response to past planning efforts including the Lionshead Master
Plan. The VRA has contracted with the 4240 Architecture Team to complete
this design study. Since the project kick-off with the public and stakeholder
groups on May 20th, the design team has:
-Established the givens, goals and measurable criteria of the project (6/2/09)
-Outlined the current conditions, defined study areas, and tested "carrying
capacity" of various study areas to accommodate program components.
(6/16/09)
-Completed a transit analysis determining what transit elements need to be
accommodated now and in the future (7/7/09)
The design team will presentl0 conceptual scenarios that are based on the
established givens, goals, measurable criteria, transit operations, program
component needs, the Lionshead Masterplan and other past Lionshead
Transit Center related study efforts, and the public, stakeholder's and
Council's input. The 10 scenarios are categorized in incremental
improvement ranges that address the short, mid, and long range transit
needs.
An open house for the public to view the concepts will occur outside Council
chambers from 5pm-6pm on August 4th.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide staff and the design team with
direction to bring the recommended scenario(s) forward to Schematic
Design, and authorize the completion of Phase II-Schematic Design of the
study.
6.
ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009, an
Ordinance Submitting to the Registered Electors of The Town of Vail,
Colorado, at a Regular Municipal Election Held on November 3, 2009 a
Ballot Question to Amend Section 3.2 of the Town of Vail Charter Regarding
Town Councilmember Terms of Office. (20 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications,
or deny Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009, on first reading.
BACKGROUND: On July 21st the Town Council directed the Town Attorney
8/4/2009
to prepare a ballot question to submit to the registered electors of the Town
of Vail for the November 3, 2009 regular municipal election amending
Section 3.2 of the Town of Vail Home Rule Charter as it relates to terms of
councilmembers. The proposed amendment is meant to address ambiguities
and conflicts previously identified regarding the Town's terms and term limits
provisions for councilmembers as currently set forth in Section 3.2 of the
Charter. (See attached Memo)
The following language is proposed as a ballot question:
Shall Section 3.2 of the Home Ru/e Charter for the Town of Vail be repea/ed
and reenacted to read as follows, effective January 1, 2010:
Councilmembers shall be e/ected to serve four-year terms. No
councilmember shall serve more than two (2) consecutive four-year
terms. Partia/ terms of /ess than four (4) years in duration shall not count
toward this term limit. Terms shall be considered consecutive un/ess they
occur more than one regu/ar municipa/ e/ection cyc/e apart.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with modifications, or
deny Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009, on first reading.
7. ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009, A resolution approving the
purchase of Gore Range Condo II Unit #2-W, with a physical address of
2189 Chamonix Lane Unit #2-W, Vail, Colorado. (10 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire / Nina Timm
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, Approve with
Modifications, or Deny Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009.
BACKGROUND: The Vail Town Council approved the 2009 Town of Vail
Budget with $500,000 allocated to the Buy Down Program. The Buy Down
Program is designed to purchase existing dwelling units within Vail and
permanently establish them as employee housing units. The acquisistion of
Gore Range Condos # 2W is in keeping with the established goal and
actions identified in the Town of Vail Employee Housing Strategic Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009.
8. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment. (8:45 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT OT CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING SESSION WILL
BEGIN AT 6:00, TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
8/4/2009
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report.
a. Revenue Update.
PRESENTER(S): Stan Zemler
ATTAC H M E NTS :
Revenue Highlights
8/4/2009
TOWN OF VAIL
REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS
July 28, 2009
Sales Tax
When all sales tax returns are received for the month of June, collections for the month
are expected to be $711,149 down 22.5% from June, 2008. Year-to-date total sales tax
collections are down 15.4% from 2008 and flat with the budget. Inflation as measured by
the consumer price index was down (-1.4%) for the month of June compared to 2008.
Use Tax
Use tax collections as of July 28, 2009 total $242,567, a 39% decrease from this time last
year.
Construction Permit Fee Revenue
Construction permit revenue through July 28 totals $469,897 down 71% from 2008. The
2009 budget assumed a 66% drop. The decrease in activity from the prior year is due to
both maj or and non-maj or redevelopment proj ects underway in 2008. Maj or
redevelopment proj ects so far this year make up 62% of the total. Revenue from non-
maj or proj ects is down 49% from 2008.
Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT)
RETT collections through July 28, 2009, total $1.3 million. This amount is a 75%
decrease from last year due to both maj or and non-maj or redevelopment proj ects. Eagle
County as of May, 2009 is down 67% in sales dollars and down 54% in the number of
sales transactions.
At this time last year, the town had collected over $5.1 million in RETT from sales of
maj or redevelopment proj ects such as Arrabelle, Forest Place, One Willow and the Vail
Plaza. Year-to-date 2009 has seen limited sales from maj or redevelopment proj ects and
is down 84%. Collections not related to maj or proj ects year-to-date are 54% down from
this time last year.
PDFConvert.508.1.090804_Revenue_Highlights.doc - 1 -
8/4/2009
2-1-1
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda:
a. Approval of 07.07.09 and 07.21.09 Town Council Minutes.
ATTAC H M E NTS :
07.07.09 Minutes
07.21.09 Minutes
8/4/2009
Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
Members present: Dick Cleveland, Mayor
Mark Gordon
Kevin Foley
Margaret Rogers
Andy Daly
Farrow Hitt
Kim Newbury
Staff Members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation.
Dominic Mauriello asked Council to reconsider a previously read Ordinance that failed.
Council directed staff to put the item on the July 21 agenda.
Peter Woods stressed concern about a parking problem in East Vail.
The second item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
a. Revenue Update.
Budget & Financial Reporting Manager Kathleen Halloran reported that when all sales
tax returns are received for the month of May, collections for the month are expected to
be $508,320, down 18.3% from May, 2008. Year-to-date total sales tax collections are
down 15% from 2008 and down 9.4% from budget. Inflation as measured by the
consumer price index was down (-1.3%) for the month of May compared to 2008. Use
tax collections as of June 30, 2009, total $220,083, a 36% decrease from this time last
year. Construction permit revenue through June 30 totals $402,369, down 72% from
2008. The 2009 budget assumed a 66% drop. The decrease in activity from the prior
year is due to both major and non-major redevelopment projects underway in 2008.
Major redevelopment projects so far this year make up 60% of the total. Revenue from
non-major projects is down 45% from 2008. Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT)
collections through June 30, 2009, total $1.1 million. This amount is a 70% decrease
from last year due to both major and non-major redevelopment projects. Eagle County
as of May, 2009, is down 67% in sales dollars and down 54% in the number of sales
transactions. At this time last year, the town had collected over $2.3 million in RETT
from sales of major redevelopment projects such as Arrabelle, Forest Place, One Willow
and the Vail Plaza. Year-to-date 2009 has seen limited sales from major redevelopment
projects and is down 76%. Collections not related to major projects year-to-date are
61 % down from this time last year.
1
8/4/2009
3 -1-1
The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda.
a. Approval of 06.02.09 and 06.16.09 Town Council Minutes
Foley moved to approve the minutes with minor amendments with Daly seconding. The
motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
The fourth item on the agenda was the Vail Village Loading and Delivery Review of Pilot
Program (Meadow Drive, Courier Areas) and Update on Long-Term Recommendations.
Public Information Officer Suzanne Silverthorn explained loading and delivery policies
for the Village Core (Bridge Street, Gore Creek Drive, Hanson Ranch Road) and East
Meadow Drive have been evolving following the opening of the underground Mountain
Plaza facility and its 17 public bays during the 2008-09 ski season as well as
improvements at Vail Plaza Hotel which can now accommodate truck clearances of up
to 14 feet. Four additional public bays will be ready for use in July 2010 upon completion
of Solaris. Following is a summary of the current loading and delivery policies and
related actions following a review by the Vail Town Council on July 7, 2009:
Village Core Program
At this meeting the Vail Town Council voted 7-0 to retain a modified loading and delivery
system for the Village Core to be reviewed on September 1, 2009, as follows:
• Mountain Plaza loading docks available 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. daily.
• On-street delivery available from 4 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. on Bridge Street and from 4
a.m. to 10:30 a.m. (shortened from 11:30 a.m.) on Gore Creek Drive.
• Designated courier areas for Fed Ex, UPS, USPS, etc.:
o Determine optimal location on Gore Creek Drive (either north side, east end
of Gorsuch Building as currently in use) or move to south side of street.
Hours are 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.
o Two spaces at the south end of the Willow Bridge Road loading zone (next to
Checkpoint Charlie) for use by the couriers from 10:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.
o East Meadow Drive in front of Vail Boot and Shoe from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
• Removal of Mill Creek Court Building loading zone on Gore Creek Drive. (This zone
had been available for vehicles less than 20 feet in length by permit only between 6
a.m. and 6 p.m., while no parking was allowed from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.) Due to past
abuses, this zone is being removed and will be reviewed again on September 1,
2009. Violators will be ticketed.
• Improve Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking visibility (signage and paint) in
front of Mill Creek Court Building and expand spaces if possible.
• Explore restricting westbound traffic on Gore Creek Drive for better optimization of
Checkpoint Charlie.
• Hanson Ranch Road across from the Christiania Lodge available for 30 minutes of
unattended parking for vehicles less than 20 feet in length from 6 p.m. to 2 a.m. No
parking from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. Also available for 5-minute attended parking.
• All loading and delivery policies will be strictly enforced.
2
8/4/2009
3 -1-2
• Schedule a presentation to the Vail Town Council to discuss staff recommendations
for installation of surveillance cameras at key loading and delivery points for
improved enforcement.
While discussing the issue, Community Development Director George Ruther explained
loading and delivery improvements made at Vail Plaza Hotel took place as far as they
could without approval of the adjacent property owner. He said he believed the Vail
Plaza Club had no contractual financial obligation to make any further improvements.
"They have no legal or moral obligation to support this (add a service elevator)."
Cleveland again verified, "The Vail Plaza Hotel has done what they can do...You are
asking for permission to continue to work on gaining cooperation. Cleveland cautioned,
"I don't want to put a solution in that people don't use." Ruther emphasized, "There are
still many opportunities for Council to provide input...l believe we can have a final
agreement within 45 days." During a pause for public comment Joe Staufer said he had
nothing to do with delivery access being completed. Vail Village Inn homeowner Richard
Liebhaber spoke against his homeowner's association having any financial responsibility
for the proposed lift. Vail Homeowner's Association representative Jim Lamont said the
Vail Plaza Club owner was responsible for making the connection. Hitt said, "I need to
deal with the facts...l feel like I'm receiving mixed messages." Vail Village Inn Phase V
resident Marci Horton said loading and delivery was taking place illegally around the
property. "The noise is unbelievable at 4:00 a.m. and it goes all day." Silverthorn said
staff was pursuing the removal of delivery trucks on Meadow Drive. Hall said the
majority of the delivery was taking place in the Vail Plaza complex. Leibhaber said the
statistics may not tell the real story. "I like the idea of escalating fines... There should be
a disincentive for them to violate." Hitt remarked, "A lot of the problem seems to be
related to enforcement issues." Rogers expressed concern that delivery drivers
appeared to be a significant part of the problem. She then spoke in support of raising
fines for loading and delivery violations. Council agreed to end the education phase of
the pilot program and begin enforcement. Foley encouraged making flatbed hoists
available to delivery drivers so as to accommodate easier delivery. Daly moved to
approve the recommendations with Hitt seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 7-
0.
East Meadow Drive Pilot Program
At this meeting the Vail Town Council voted 7-0 to continue a pilot program for loading
and delivery on East Meadow Drive to be reviewed on September 1, 2009, as follows:
• On-street loading and delivery on the street's north side from Vail Boot and Shoe
west to Alpenrose from 5 a.m. to 8 a.m. Restrictions apply. Drivers enter from the
east from Village Center Chute or Checkpoint Charlie to access and must not
impede bus service which begins at 6 a.m.
• Police department will review and update regulatory signs as necessary to solicit
compliance.
• Policies will be strictly enforced.
• In pursuit of long-term solutions, staff will work to facilitate cooperative agreements
with affected parties and property in the Vail Village Inn Special Development District
(SDD #6) and the Town of Vail to explore alternatives such as a freight elevator or lift
that will accommodate the transport of deliveries from the loading dock at Vail Plaza
Hotel to businesses on East Meadow Drive. This exploration will include construction
3
8/4/2009
3 -1-3
cost estimates for an exterior solution as well as an interior solution. An update will
be presented to the Town Council on September 1, 2009. This update will include
the status of property owner consent, cost estimates, a plan for financial
responsibility and overall effectiveness of each of the solutions in accommodating
loading and delivery functions so trucks can ultimately be removed from East
Meadow Drive.
Gore Creek Drive property owners Debbie Wells and Dick Park spoke against adding
truck parking to the 303 Gore Creek Drive area. Park emphasized, "This issue truly
impacts daily life... We have enforcements issues... We have issues of compliance with
our delivery people." Vail Town home owner Chris Parks spoke against parking on
Gore Creek Drive. Jim Lamont spoke in support of more use of the Mountain Plaza
loading and delivery bays. He then asked Council to revisit the Vail Village master plan
and determine which areas should be protected. "We've got to start giving tickets to
people who park where they aren't supposed to park." Newbury commented, "I would
like my children to be able to walk to the Children's Fountain and not have to worry
about them being run over." Cleveland said, "I'm not sure the Front Door solves all the
problems it was supposed to solve." Daly moved to approve the recommendations with
Newbury seconding. Parks expressed concern about the abuse of handicapped
parking. United States Postal Service representative Jim Armstrong expressed concern
about the visibility of a store front on the east end of Gore Creek Drive. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was the North Frontage Rd. Recreational Path
Construction Contract Award.
Direct the Town Manager to enter into a contract with B&B Excavating to complete the
North Frontage Rd. Recreational Path Construction.
Town Engineer Tom Kassmel reported staff has recently publicly bid the North Frontage
Rd. Recreational Path Improvements, and received 7 bids, with B&B Excavating being
the lowest bidder. The path improvements include a raised concrete recreational path
along the north side of the North Frontage Rd. from Timber Ridge to the Roost Lodge's
east property line. The improvements are budgeted within the RETT projects budget
along with a$149,458 federal grant. The contractors provided bids as follows:
B&B Excavating $406,185.35
Colorado Constructors $451,882.14
Heyl Construction $459,747.70
Thoutt Brothers $494,380.94
Amercian Civil Constructors $494,990.00
Lawson Constructors $519,881.80
Jags Enterprises $523,867.88
All bids were within the total budget of $700,000.
Rogers then moved to direct the Town Manager to enter into a contract, in a form
approved by the Town attorney, with B&B Excavating, in the amount of $406,185.33, to
complete the North Frontage Road Recreational Path Improvements with Hitt seconding.
The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
4
8/4/2009
3-1-4
The sixth item on the agenda was the Second reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series of
2009, An Ordinance making supplemental appropriations and budget adjustments to the
Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund,
Dispatch Services Fund and Heavy Equipment Fund of the 2009 Budget for the Town of
Vail, Colorado.
Budget and Financial Reporting Manager Kathleen Halloran explained General Fund
expenditures were being reduced by $1.2 million. Cleveland clarified that due to the
General Fund/Capital Fund appropriation split, approval of the Ordinance would require
a super majority vote. Newbury moved to approve the ordinance with Gordon
seconding. Eagle Valley Schools representative Harry McQueeney explained the details
of the playground equipment included in the budget. Vail Valley Foundation
representative Ceil Folz explained how the town's contribution to the World
Championship bid could possibly pay dividends. The motion passed 6-1, with Cleveland
opposed.
The seventh item on the agenda was Resolution No. 20, Series of 2009, Authorizing the
Town Manager to sign the construction contract with JL Viele Construction to build the
Arosa Drive duplex.
Housing Coordinator Nina Timm said the contract terms include the following: A
Guaranteed Maximum Price; Fixed cost at $770,529 plus $10,778 in Builder's Risk
Insurance; The price includes the cost for LEED Certification; Start date no later than
October 1, 2009; Completion date no later than May 15, 2010; Line item cost savings
split 70% (TOV) - 30% (Viele); Owner Contingency and Winter Conditions savings 100%
to TOV; One-year warranty, from a Certificate of Occupancy being issued by the Town
of Vail, will benefit the individual owners; All plans are assigned to the Town of Vail;
Compliance with all Vail zoning and building code requirements is required; All required
Town fees are included in the GMP; and JL Viele Construction will maintain all required
insurance, including Builder's Risk. JL Viele representative David Viele explained the
meaning of builder's risk insurance. Zemler clarified sales of the units would take place
almost simultaneously with the project's ground breaking. Foley moved to approve the
resolution with Rogers seconding. Former Mayor Bob Armour clarified a statement
made in a previous meeting in regard to when the properties would be sold. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
The eighth item on the agenda was Adjournment.
Foley moved to adjourn with Hitt seconding at approximately 9:00 p.m. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
Dick Cleveland, Mayor
ATTEST:
5
8/4/2009
3 -1-5
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
6
8/4/2009
3-1-6
Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
Members present: Dick Cleveland, Mayor
Mark Gordon
Kevin Foley
Margaret Rogers
Andy Daly
Farrow Hitt
Kim Newbury
Staff Members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation.
There was none.
The second item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report.
In response to an earlier question from Council, Economic Development Manager Kelli
McDonald reported James Chung (Town of Vail hospitality industry consultant) was not
in the employment of a down valley developer.
0 LionsHead Parking Structure Agreement.
Town Manager Stan Zemler reported that Open Hillwood Partners had asked for an
extension on an agreement tied to the potential redevelopment of the LionsHead parking
structure.
0 Timber Ridge Update.
Zemler commented, "Progress is slow but sure and there are some unknowns we are
identifying."
• Village Camera Installation Update.
Cameras are currently being installed in Vail Village to assist with loading and delivery
enforcement. Cleveland asked if the system would be internet based.
The third item on the agenda was a presentation of lodging reservation activity during
ski season 2008/09 compared to 2007/08, as well lodging reservation activity for
summer 2009 and a preview of market forces affecting travel during the 2009 summer
season and beyond.
1
8/4/2009
3-2-1
Mountain Travel Research Program representative Ralf Garrison presented the following
observations relative to the 2008/09 winter ski season:
-Snow Trumps the Economy? Some, not so much.
-Short-Lead? Yes, but word of mouth still trumps travel decisions.
-Short-Haul? Drop in Long-Haul, Increase in short.
-Other-Impacts? Grey Market (individuals who rent their homes).
-Epic Pass? Good for Vail. Being continued.
-Shifting Demand Patterns? Look to school breaks.
-"All the Love" marketing program.
-Vail Performance? Less bad than others.
While discussing the 2009 summer season Garrison noted:
-Underlying Markets: Broken.
-Recent Recovery: Premature to be permanent.
-Consumers weary of bad news: ignorance is bliss.
-Summer Demand: Matches Winter Market (short lead, short haul, regional affordable).
-Travel Costs: Helpful.
-Weather: Early season heavy rains were not helpful.
-Road biking is on the rise.
-Vail Performance: Less bad than others.
Garrison then said preliminary data for the 2009/10 ski season was inconclusive.
The fourth item on the agenda was a request for the determination that an exclusive ski
concierge for guests is a similar use to a"Lodge Accessory Use" and "Personal
Service" pursuant to Section 12-3-4, Determination of Similar Use, Vail Town Code, to
allow for a"Lodge Accessory Use/Personal Service" on the second floor within the
Commercial Core I District, located at 227 Wall Street/Part of Lots B& C, Block 5C, Vail
Village First Filing.
Planner Warren Campbell explained the applicant requested Council make a
determination that the location of an exclusive ski concierge "Personal Service"
accessory to a"Lodge", be found to be a permitted use on the second floor of the "Hong
Kong Cafe" building. "The applicant believes their proposed use is accessory to a Lodge
and a Personal Service to their guests." The Community Development Department
recommended Council make the determination that the proposed exclusive ski
concierge use is similar to a listed permitted use on the second floor within the
Commercial Core I district (Lodge/Personal Service), pursuant to Section 12-3-4,
Determination of Similar Use, Vail Town Code. Developer representative TJ Brink
confirmed the Four Seasons Resort will be open for the 2009 Christmas holiday. He
then clarified the proposed change would be more of an "activities center" as opposed to
a ski concierge. "It will not be dormant." Foley asked if guests would be shuttled to the
area. Daly clarified the summer activities center would be open to the public. He then
commented, "You can use pricing to make exclusivity." Hitt expressed concern the
entire top of Vail Village was turning into a private club. While discussing food service at
the space, Brink stated, "There is a chance to give out muffins and coffee to the guests
in the space." During a pause for public comment, local Vail Village property owner Bob
Lazier clarified nothing would change in the Wall Street Building. "We aren't being able
2
8/4/2009
3-2-2
to attract the right type of people to the core...l am very, very concerned about our
tenants... We really need to service these people with a standard they are used to."
Rogers moved to approve the request with Gordon seconding. Rogers said it was
important to have Four Seasons guests in the Village. "It brings exactly the kind of
person we want to the Village." Brink then clarified, "Levels two and three will continue
as retail and the second level of the Eaton Plaza level will remain a club or concierge
level." Foley said he didn't see a Four Seasons guest walking a half-mile to the Vista
Bahn. Cleveland said he had concerns about use of the space in the summer and
exclusivity of the southern part of Vail Village. The motion passed 6-1 with Cleveland
opposed.
Cleveland finished the meeting by thanking departing Vail Daily reporter Melanie Wong
for her efforts covering town business.
The fifth item on the agenda was adjournment.
Foley moved to adjourn at approximately 7:32 p.m. with Newbury seconding. The motion
passed unanimously, 7-0.
Dick Cleveland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
3
8/4/2009
3-2-3
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Dobson Ice Arena roof replacement bid award.
PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Award the contract for the Dobson Ice Arena roof
replacement.
BACKGROUND: The Dobson Ice Arena has been in need of replacement. This project
was delayed from 2008 to 2009. The project was bid out, once the council reviewed the third
budget supplemental for 2009. The apparent low bidder is Roofmasters Roofing. The town has
performed reference checks on the contractor. The replacement material will be metal and has
received Design Review Board approval. The town recieved five bids as oulined below.
Roofmasters Roofing, Hays KS Base Bid -$555,000
B& M Roofing, Fredrick, CO Base Bid -$638,945
Turner Morris, Silverthorne, CO Base Bid -$678,143
Progressive Roofing, Denver, CO Base Bid -$709,245
Weathercraft, Colorado Springs, CO Base Bid -$881,108
The contract is within the budget for the project. Construciton is to begin once the contract is
signed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Instruct the Town Manger to enter into a contract
with Roofmasters Roofing of Hays, KS for $555,000 in a form approved by the Town Attorney.
8/4/2009
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Lionshead Transit Center Conceptual Scenarios
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the Lionshead Transit Station Phase I
Feasibility Analysis Report provided, listen to the design team's presentation, provide
discussion, and ask questions with regard to the presentation and the report. Provide staff and
the design team with direction to bring the recommended scenario(s) forward to Schematic
Design, and authorize the completion of Phase II-Schematic Design of the study.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail and the Vail Reinvestment Authority, is in the process of
studying the feasibility of constructing a Lionshead Transit Center in response to past planning
efforts including the Lionshead Master Plan. The VRA has contracted with the 4240
Architecture Team to complete this design study. Since the project kick-off with the public and
stakeholder groups on May 20th, the design team has:
-Established the givens, goals and measurable criteria of the project (6/2/09)
-Outlined the current conditions, defined study areas, and tested "carrying capacity" of various
study areas to accommodate program components. (6/16/09)
-Completed a transit analysis determining what transit elements need to be accommodated
now and in the future (7/7/09)
The design team will presentl0 conceptual scenarios that are based on the established
givens, goals, measurable criteria, transit operations, program component needs, the
Lionshead Masterplan and other past Lionshead Transit Center related study efforts, and
the public, stakeholder's and Council's input. The 10 scenarios are categorized in incremental
improvement ranges that address the short, mid, and long range transit needs.
An open house for the public to view the concepts will occur outside Council chambers from
5pm-6pm on August 4th.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide staff and the design team with direction to bring the
recommended scenario(s) forward to Schematic Design, and authorize the completion of
Phase II-Schematic Design of the study.
ATTAC H M E NTS :
Lioshead Transit Center Memo
Lionshead Transit Station Phase I Feasibility Analysis Report
8/4/2009
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Tom Kassmel, Public Works Department
DATE: August 4th, 2009
SUBJECT: A worksession to review the status of the Lionshead Transit Center
Feasibility Design Study
1. SUMMARY
The Town of Vail and the Vail Reinvestment Authority, is in the process of
studying the feasibility of constructing a Lionshead Transit Center in response to
past planning efforts including the Lionshead Master Plan (1998), A Report on
the Recommendation of a Preferred Site for the Town of Vail Transit Center
(2005), Vail 20/20 (2007), the Lionshead Transit Center White Paper (2008), and
the Vail Transportation Master Plan (2009). The VRA has contracted with the
4240 Architecture Team to complete this design study.
Since the kick-off with public and stakeholder group charettes on May 20th, the
design team has completed the following:
• Established the givens, goals and measurable criteria of the project
(6/2/09)
• Outlined the current conditions, defined study areas, and tested "carrying
capacity" of various study areas to accommodate program components.
(6/16/09)
• Transit analysis determining what transit elements need to fit now and in
the future (7/7/09)
Worksession
The purpose of this worksession is to review and discuss these efforts and
provide the baseline information that the design team used to narrow down the
project's focus to the 10 conceptual scenarios that will be presented at the
evening Council session.
Staff will also present an update of the federal funds currently available to the
town.
Eveninq Session
The purpose of the evening session is to present the 10 conceptual scenarios
that have been developed and evaluated by the design team to Council; and
have Council provide staff and the design team with direction to bring the
recommended scenario(s) forward to Schematic Design, and to authorize the
completion of Phase II-Schematic Design of the study.
8/4/2009
5 -1-1
A summary document, the Lionshead Transit Station Phase I Feasibility Analysis
Report has been provided to Council for use in both the afternoon and evening
Council sessions.
Progress of the project has been tracked on the Town of Vail website at
http://www.vailqov.com/subpaqe.asp?paqe id=916
II. BACKGROUND AND NEEDS REVIEW
The most recent past planning efforts specific to the Lionshead Transit Center as
mentioned above are available for review on-line on the Town of Vail website at
http://www.vailqov.com/subpaqe.asp?paqe id=893.
In general the reports discuss the future redevelopment of Lionshead and the
need for a Lionshead Transit Center to facilitate transit needs to the Lionshead
area that is continuously expanding with residential, commercial, and employee
uses. The need for this improvement is justified by the following:
• The need and desire to provide & promote a World Class level of transit
service & use for our residence and guests
• The need to provide a high level of transit service to a dense area of activity
within Vail, which is expected to grow in unit density by -230%
• The need to enhance the existing transit facilities which are inadequate with
respect to size, location, and amenities (i.e. shelter, restrooms, etc...)
• The need to better accommodate Regional Transit Needs in Lionshead
• The need for an enhanced Skier Drop-off (Vehicle&Shuttle)
• The need to relieve the VTRC of transit related demands (Bus capacity,
driver break areas)
• The need to promote Transit & Transit Oriented Dev. (TOD) as a key to the
success of Vail
• A Transit Center will provide the opportunity for Bus Route efficiencies
• A Transit Center will provide the opportunity to create World Class entrance
portal(s) to Lionshead
Project Timing
After more than a decade of planning and recognition of the need for a
Lionshead Transit Center, the time for the completion of this project has come.
Vail is internationally recognized as a leader amongst resort towns: in its level of
guest experience, in its use of free public transportation and in its walkability.
This high level of guest experience may be in jeopardy if current transit
conditions are not thoroughly assessed and addressed. The momentum created
from growing ridership may soon exceed the capacity of the current transit
system affecting the guest experience in a negative manner. This momentum is
created both internally, through multiple developments that will soon come on
line or are in various stages of design, and externally, through ECO transit, which
is trending higher ridership volumes. The full impact of the first phase of "Vail's
Billion Dollar Redevelopment" may be seen by the end of 2010 with 3 of the
largest developments coming back on line, not only re-instating existing uses but
also significantly increasing density (Four Seasons, Solaris, & the Ritz Carlton).
8/4/2009
5 -1-2
The proposed Lionshead Transit Center will alleviate some issues of capacity by
providing a better functioning and more efficient point of transition within
Lionshead, while also alleviating pressure on the over-capacity Vail
Transportation Center (VTRC).
Secondly, federal money is currently available that has been designated towards
enhancing the Lionshead transit facilities. The terms for this money are "use it or
lose it". Other areas have some potential for redevelopment but Lionshead offers
the most concentrated value available for the money being spent. Here, multiple
issues, already identified in the master plan, can be resolved at a well defined,
strategic area of influence.
Thirdly, smart growth initiatives and projects such as Ever Vail and recently
adopted town policies related to sustainable practice are refining Vail's
sustainable mantra which continues to grow in influence. This project will be a
milestone in the town's continued commitment to sustainable growth, by
facilitating Transit Oriented Development (TOD), a key element of Vail's overall
success, and will only enhance its portfolio of sustainable initiatives.
III. ESTABLISHED GIVENS, GOALS AND MEASURABLE CRITERIA
As the project moved forward and various concept solutions were evaluated, the
context of the process, commitment to address issues, and measures of success
of various alternatives, were performed using the set of established project
Givens, Goals, and Measurable Criteria.
Givens: Non-negotiable process and outcomes for the project
• Council acting as both the Vail Reinvestment Authority (Client) and the Town
Council (Property Owner/Review Agent) has final decision making authority.
• Lionshead Master Plan Amendments will be required based on current
conditions; however conformance to qualitative aspects and applicable
community goals will be required.
• Provide a safe environment for all users & maintain emergency access
• Use of Federal Transit dollars and the required local match will be used.
• Additional funds if needed will be allocated by the VRA from TIF sources.
• Transit use in Vail will increase.
• The project process will be transparent
o All comments will be documented
o All issues will be responded to
• All issues may not be resolved to everyone's satisfaction; there may have to
be compromises.
• The existing baseline conditions/operating standards of each problem, need,
and conflict will not worsen or be compromised.
• The final approved design will comply with ADA standards and comply with
Town Code.
• Public Art will be incorporated in to the design.
8/4/2009
5 -1-3
Goa/s: Project aims
• Create facilities necessary to provide world class comprehensive transit
operations within the Lionshead area that will improve transit efficiencies and
serve the current and future needs of the Town of Vail and Eagle County.
• Enhance transit facilities to encourage transit ridership and promote transit
oriented development.
• Improve East Lionshead Circle and Concert Hall Plaza bus stop areas to
create safer, more inviting, and more functional portals to the Lionshead
Area, that are flexible to adapt to current and future needs.
• Improve conditions of the East Lionshead Circle "chute" and East Lionshead
Circle/Frontage Rd. intersection to enhance traffic flow and safety
considerations, with the ability to accommodate future redevelopment.
• Implement applicable goals of the Lionshead Master Plan intended to
enhance the East Lionshead Circle and Concert Hall Plaza portals into
Lionshead by creating aesthetically pleasing, active and inviting public
spaces.
Measurable Criteria: Specific project evaluation criteria
• Comply with the Town Code and applicable Lionshead Master plan goals
• Provide a distinguishable World Class intermodal transit facility and entrance
portal to Lionshead
• Meet bus, shuttle, skier-drop off capacity needs (2008 needs, revised as
necessary if conditions have changed)
• Establish a transit station with restrooms, enclosed & outdoor waiting area,
information dissemination services, and other amenities
• Mitigate pedestrian access/egress conflict to/from Lionshead Parking
Structure from/to Lionshead mall
• Allow for potential future expansion and/or redevelopment of Lionshead
Parking structure, allowing for a successful portal with or without
development
• Provide adequate space for vehicular circulation and maneuvering
• Mitigate existing circulation issues on the Frontage Rd. as well as any new
traffic impacts.
• Provide convenient access from the Frontage Rd. for Town and ECO bus
routes
• Provide ease of rider transfer between Town, ECO, & In-Town buses
• Provide a maintainable and sustainable facility
• Accommodate Loading & Delivery for Lionshead (may or may not be within
facility)
• Enhance the entry of the LH parking structure
IV. TRANSIT ANALYSIS
A transit operations analysis was completed by the design team to determine
current and future transit needs. The following table summarizes the results of
the July 12th study, included in the Feasibility Report attached.
8/4/2009
5-1-4
TABLE,~~ ~~~l LionsheadPotentiai Transr'# Prtgram
-
%7&r of Vi hkles at tlne Twre
P~IMI Pun,caw)
E*O% Ex5':^ NO'Years 201'~aN,
12
! wdq Vans 8 8
5
41 Tra4M
Green We - -
Rei RoLto - -
SuMal: C*in and RX 2 2 2 4
Urt Haul Rode , - -
RD& ~ ~ ~
Selftnekv uxw~~e 4 1 1 ~
TA- Va.i TraV - Op;W 4 5 c a
T5Y14 Ya i 1o!h"NL "Ikow (11yfi 1) ? 5 7
CCC TranSt - OPW 4 d ~
E CO fiea* - k5*Lrrn (Note 2) 4 4 4 5
Toka i Pik Trard &ys
O*M $ 9 11
wniTm t 8 9
Ve i: Dm V aks 5arttvm wd'or lkrsr'dp bM r s •t b:awek
W.e k"afu ~ T: _re hl,'.~°,~"~~` F2.t? .i.t:x Kw", pq
V. CONCEPTUAL SCENERIOS
The design team has narrowed the project scope to 10 conceptual scenarios that
are based on the established givens, goals, measurable criteria, transit
operations, program component needs, the Lionshead Masterplan and other past
Lionshead Transit Center related study efforts, and public, stakeholders and
Council's input. The 10 scenarios are categorized in incremental improvement
ranges that address the short, mid, and long range transit needs. They include;
8/4/2009
5 -1-5
• Modest Improvements - Scenarios 1A and 1 B, providing minimal short
term transit improvements, focusing on aesthetic "streetscape"
improvements. These scenarios may not qualify for the Federal Transit
funding dollars.
• Increased Transit Capacity - Scenarios 2A and 213, providing short to
mid term increased transit capacity and qualitative "streetscape"
improvements
• Further Increased Transit Capacity - Scenario 3A and 313, providing
mid term transit improvements and qualitative "streetscape"
improvements
• Ultimate Transit Solution - Scenarios 4A, 4B and 5, providing a long
term transit solution and qualitative "streetscape" improvements
The complete analysis of each scenario is provided within the Feasibility Report
attached.
VI. RECOMMENDED SCENARIOS
The design team and staff have created recommendations revolving around the
short, mid, and long term solutions, along with probable costs, as follows;
• Short Term: Scenario 1 B $3.2 -$3.7 Million*
• Mid Term: Scenario 1 B+ Scenario 2B $12 -$14 Million
• Long Term: Scenario 1 B+ 4A $16 -$20 Million
*May not qualify for the Federal Transit funding dollars.
VII. NEXT STEPS
A big picture overview of the next steps for this project along with an anticipated
timeframe (assumes best-case), for the LHTC Design Study are as follows;
(these are subject to change based on Town approvals)
• Direction from Council to proceed with a recommended
conceptual scenario. (Aug 4tn)
• Vail Reinvestment Authority capital budget allocations and funding
options for improvements. (Aug. 18tn)
• Design Team proceeds with schematic design of up to three
alternatives of the preferred conceptual scenario. (Aug-Sept)
• A preferred schematic design alternative is recommended and
direction is given to proceed with the preferred alternative thru the
Design Development and Entitlement phase. (Oct. 6tn)
• Approval by the Town for Design Development & Entitlements.
(Oct-Nov)
• Construction Documents prepared. (Dec-April)
• Construction begins. (April-Nov)
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Review the Lionshead Transit Station Phase I Feasibility Analysis Report
provided, listen to the design team's presentation, provide discussion, and ask
8/4/2009
5-1-6
questions with regard to the presentation and the report. Provide staff and the
design team with direction to bring the recommended scenario(s) forward to
Schematic Design, and authorize the completion of Phase II-Schematic Design
of the study.
8/4/2009
5 -1-7
a w' , . ~ w~'.
. ' ~ ' k ir F'~ a~ x arXa~'Yr ~,r• '
, ~ .y..'~akti Tf`.'. ~ * r~u . M ~~{y'~~•~ ~ 5
,.~y'~ : ~xr: ~ y av`' / r , • -.~.+t ~ ' . ~"3~ . ~ ~
. + - ~ .'L ~ i J'" ~ • _ ~ ~ ~ ~
JI
h t
~ yyf-~J • ~
` • . i ~ <~"%`~y. ` ~ s ^ L . ~
,
, .
.
~ ~ ~~y x ~ ~'`f'!~t' a ~"J' 4 ~i M r ,ia~✓~ .~;~"'~°x-r~ el``s ~ ~J
~
.
.
r
, .
.
, ' ' . . .
.h . . . - '
.:i, ~ ~0. ,
. . - - . . . . . .i' . . . : ^ . . : . _ , ~ r , , ..r.
August 14 11•
Vail • Council ' - •
P . ' Feasibility Analysis R'••
R/4/2009 ~
5-2 - I ~lif;\l 1'1,~ 4240
S4/2009
2
Contents
Part 01: Why Are We Here Today / Project Goals and Givens / Existing Transit
Conditionswithin Lionshead
Part 02: Review of Phase I- Feasibility Analysis / Planning Process /
Update of Town Council Direction From 7/07/09 Work Session
Part 03: Update on Lionshead Transit Center Potential Transit Program Needs
(Revised LSC Transit Needs Report)
Part 04: Assembling the Various Analysis into "Functional Transit Scenarios"
(Review of Scenario Development Process)
Part 05: Scenario Overviews (10 total)
Part 06: Scenario Recommendations for Advancement
Part 07: Next Steps
s;4 2009
3 ~l~aee ~/'~ea¢i~iPltcd ~raaPcd2~2 ,Ge{zozt - ~//ar~,C~losx2lead 7aaaait Statiora
i-?-3
S4/2009
4
;-2-4
Part 01
Why Are We Here Today?
o Discuss Project Progress / Update
o Present Alternative Transit Scenarios
o Discuss Staff / Design Team Recommendations
o SeekTown Council Direction
s;a2oo9
.C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢i2 Statio.a
cj fP~aee i-? -5 9JeaaiZi2itrg ~caafcd¢ a ,Ge{zozt -l/ard
Part 01
Review of Project Goals
o Provide World Class Comprehensive Transit Operatians:
Create Facilities within Lionshead To Improve Transit Efficiencies To
Serve Current & Future Needs.
o Encourage Ridership & Promote Transit C7riented Development:
o Create Safer, More Inviting, Flexible & More Functional Portals to
Lionshead: Improve East Lionshead Circle & Concert Hall Plaza Bus Stop
Areas.
o Left Turn onto South Frontage Road From East Lionshead Circle "Chute":
Improve Conditions of the East Lionshead Circle "Chute" & East
Lionshead Circle / Frontage Road Intersection to Enhance Traffic Flow &
Safety Considerations & Accommodate Future Redevelopment.
o Implement Applicable Goals of the Lionshead Master Plan: Intended to
Enhance the East Lionshead Circle & Concert Hall Plaza Portals into
Lionshead by Creating Aesthetically Pleasing, Active & Inviting Public
Spaces.
s;a 2009
6 5_, 6
Part 01
Review of Project Givens
o Council shall act as both the Vail Reinvestment Authority (Client) and the
Town Council (Property Owner / Review Agent) has final decision
making authority.
o Lionshead Master Plan Amendments will be required based on current
conditions, however conformance to qualitative aspects and applicable
community goals will be required.
o The final approved Transit Center will meet the following criteria:
- Provide a safe environment
- Provide a World Class guest Lionshead Portal(s) and transit
experience
- Complywith ADA
- Provide a functionally efficient transit solution
- Comply with Town Code.
o Public Art will be incorporated into the Transit Center.
o Federal Grant money is available for 2010
s;4 2009
7 fP~aee 9`~eaaiZi2itrg ~caafcd¢~2 ,Ge{zozt -`l/ard .C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢i2 Statio.a
5-2-7
Part 01
Existing Transit Condition within Lionshead
o East Lionshead Circle: Currently Accommodates 4 buses
for In-town (Fully used at peak times)
o Concert Hall Plaza: Currently Accommodates 4 to 5 buses
for In-Town, Red & Green, & 5 ECO EB bus routes (fully used
at peak times)
o Red Sandstone School: Currently Accommodates 2 buses
for Red, Green, Lions Ridge, & Sandstone loops, and 5 ECO
WB bus routes. Functions as a transfer point to LH mall
using pedestrian overpass
o Summary of Existing Transit Uses: Between ELC and CHP
we have useable 8-9 bus bays, though not ideally spaced or
functioning.
o CHP Currently Operates Equivalently to the VTRC in
Lionshead as the Inter-modal Transit Hub. This is not an
Ideal Location.
s;4 2009
8 5_2 - 8
S4/2009
9 ~l~aee fea~iQitcf ~K<efcd2~¢ ,Ge{zozt - `l/ark.C4'aK¢lead 7za.wit Statio~a
5-2-9
S4/2009
10 s-z-1o
Part 02
Review of Phase I Planning Process
Methods of Analysis to Determine Site / Program / Transit Needs:
o Test What Fits By Sub-Area:
(See Town Council Packet presented on 6/18/09) - completed
o Investigate What Transit Functions Are Needed (Today / 7-10 yrs / 20 yrs):
(presented to Town Council on 7/7/09) See Chapter 3- LSC Revised Report
Lionshead Transit Center Potential Transit Needs - completed
o Arrange Alternatives Into Funetional "Scenarios" - Literally Hundreds of
Possible Combinations / Develop Complimentary Elements That Can Work
Together and Be Built Upon to Function as "Complete Systems"
o Investigate The Relative Costs:
(See Chapter 5 for Individual Scenario Range Estimates of Probable Costs)
o Develop Pras / Cons Criteria & Analysis for Seenarios;
(See Chapter 5 for Individual Scenario Pros & Cons)
o Provide Recommendations for 2-3 Scenarios to be Further Refined:
(See Chapter 6 for Scenario Recommendations)
s;4 2009
11 P4aee 9~eaaiNu'Pc'tcy ~caafcdQ~ ,~e;&azt -`l/aid .L~c'asx¢lead 7za.c¢i2 Sfatios
5-2-I]
Part 02
Recap of What We Heard on 7/07 Town Council Work Session
Town Council Comments:
o Investigate low cost solutions:
o Investigate solutions that may be implemented in the short term:
(2009-2010 calendar)
o Investigate solutions that satisfy transit needs for the next 7-10 years:
(2009-2019 calendar)
o Investigate long term, phased solutions up to the Ultimate Transit Station:
(2029 horizon)
s;4 2009
12
5-2-12
S4/2009
1 3 ~l~aee feaai~ii2itcs ~Kafcdd~¢ ~e~razt -`Ucue.L4bKdleead 7zaK¢it sratio~s
i-? - li
S4/2009
14
;-z-1-t
Part 03
Lionshead Transit Center Potential Transit Program Needs
LSC Memo Presented to Town Council on July 07, 2009
(Revised July 12, 2009)
s;4 2009
15 ~l~aee feaai~ii2itcs ~Kafcdd~¢ ~e~razt -`Ucue.L4bKdleead 7zaK¢it sratio~s
5-2-IS
LI4NSHEAD YRAMSIT CENTER POTEMTIAL TRANSIT Skier Drop-off
PROGRRM NEEDS The need for skier drop-off activity could potentially grow to any reasonable
LSC Transportation Consultants, Int. number that could be provided. The North Day Lot is expected to remain
July 12, 2009 available, but is also less convenient to some drivers who can be expected to
continue to attempt to drop off or pick up passengers on East Lionshead
This memo focuses on the program needs for transit vehides and other Cirde. Some level of management of drop-off adivity is therefore expected to
transportation functions in the Lionshead area, further focusing on the East remain to ensure that East Lionshead Circle is not overly impacted by skier
Lionshead area. Note that some of these uses may not ultimately be drop-off/ pick up activity. The remmmended strategy with regards to facility
accommodated in the East Lionshead area, depending on the overall study
fndings design, therefore, is to provide a facility that allows management Flexibility.
.
Rather than evaluate the number of spaces that could potentially be used, the
One of the goals of the Lionshead Transit Center is to help address the bus pertinent question is the number of spaces that provides Town staff with some
congestion at the Vail Transportation Center (VTRC) in the Vail Village. While it ability to accommodate the persistent skier drop-off driver, in a manner that
is widely seen as one of the most successful resort transit centers in the nation, minimizes confrontation and traffic congestion.
transit operations at the VTRC is impacted by use levels that exceed the
efficient capacity of the facility. The facility currently has a total of 6 double Our recommendation is that the North Day Lot remains the key skier drop-off
bus bays (each providing space for two buses nose-to-tail) for a total capacity
of 12 buses at one time on top of the facility, as well as the 3 bus bays for the location, which is the only Lionshead location advertised. For locals and
In-town route down below. However, at peak times there are currently 15 others "in the know" that insist on attempting to drop off or pick up at East
buses using or waiting to use this facility, which creates bus route delays that Lionshead, approximately 12 skier drop-off spaces should be provided in the
ripple through the Vail Transit and ECO Transit systems. In addition, shuttle,
taxi and Greyhound vehides also use this facility, adding to the congestion East Lionshead area as skier drop-off/short term spaces, to provide Town staff
.
with an ability to accommodate skier drop-off drivers without conflicting with
It should be noted that this memo defines the number of bays/spaces that other uses.
would be required for a single centralized transit center in Lionshead, not the
total number of bays/spaces that would be required in Lionshead as a whole. Another policy option would be to prohibit any access to East Lionshead Circle
The Lionshead area is 0.48 miles in length as the crow flies (measured from the for skier drop-off or any other unapproved use, such as through provision of a
east end of East Lionshead Circle to the west end of West Lionshead Circle).
While it is appropriate that Lionshead be served by only one ECO Transit stop card activated gate on West Lionshead Circlejust south of the Frontage Road.
,
a standard "rule of thumb" in planning transit services for busy urbanized Considering the many drivers with a need to access the various commercial,
areas is to provide transit stops for local services roughly every 1/6 to 1/8 of a lodging and residential uses along West Lionshead Cirde, however, this would
mile. Given the configuration of Lionshead and the density of development, at be difficult to implement and enforce, and could well create more congestion
a minimum at least two local stops is needed to avoid undue reduction in the than it solves.
attractiveness of transit service as an alternative to auto use, due to long walk
distances. (This is true even if the EverVail project is implemented, given that a
transit stop at EverVail will be at least 0.2 miles from Concert Hall Plaza). This
indicates that, even if a transit center is provided on one side of Lionshead that Lodging Shuttle Vans
serves all routes, bus bays will still be necessary on the other side of Lionshead
to serve the local routes such as In-Town, West Vail Red, and West Vail Green Town staff reports that three to four lodging shuttle vans are often on-site in
.
As a result, it is not appropriate to add the total number of bays provided in the East Lionshead Circle area at any one time during the peak periods of busy
both West and East Lionshead and compare this total against the ski days, and approximately 7 or 8 can be observed at absolute peak times.
recommendations presented below regarding the program for a single transit Given the number of new lodging properties currently planned or in
center. development, there is a significant potential for additional shuttle vans. Rather
than provide additional capacity for new shuttle vans, it is recommended that
the Town work with developers of new projects to provide ongoing operating
funding to enhancethe already-extensive public transit to serve new
developments. Over the long term, a better overall transportation system that
reduces traffic and parking needs can be provided by generating developer
support of the mmprehensive public transit program rather than to
splintering the potential funding resources into additional private shuttle
services.
S; 4/2009
16
5-2-16
Space for up to 8 shuttle vans at one time is recommended as a goal that The working assumption for the Lionshead Transit Center project is that the
could accommodate current demand without the need for any management existing charter bus parking near the east end of the parking structure will be
of this use. If final plans indicate that fewer spaces (on the order of 5 or 6) can maintained, so long as this space is not needed for other program elements. If
be provided, adequate conditions could still be provided if the Town were to so, the assumption will be that this use will be shifted to EverVail.
undertake adive management of the shuttle vans, such as through a permit
system that limits use or imposes a fee for use ofthe transit center, or by
stationing personnel to minimize the time necessary for each van to be at the Vail Transit
transit center. Before considering the individual routes, it is important to note that Vail Transit
as well as ECO Transit currently employ "shadow° buses on many routes in order
to provide adequate passenger capacity at peak load times. Also known as
tharter Buses "piggyback" or "tripper" buses, these additional buses are added as a second
At present, up to 5 charter buses are currently on-site in Lionshead at peak bus on a single scheduled run. The use of shadow buses is a common
times. There are several factors that can be expected to increase the demand occurrence in the peak winter season on the West Vail Red, West Vail Green and
for charter bus service to Vail over the coming years: East Vail Routes on the Vail Transit system as well as on the ECO Route 6 and
Gypsum/Eagle routes, provided largely inbound to Lionshead and the Village in
• Population growth, particularly along the Front Range, will increase the the AM peak period as well as outbound in the PM peak period. Drivers in the
number of persons within a convenient drive distance of Vail. Most AM peak period that notice their bus is reaching capacity will call the
recent State estimates indicate that the metro Denver area will grow by dispatcher, who will arrange for a shadow bus to be added at the next major
70 percent, or 1.6 million people, by 2035. stop and to serve the route into the VRTG In the outbound direction, shadow
buses are dispatched from the VRTC and serve the route until all passengers are
• While gasoline prices have abated somewhat from last year's highs, dropped off. While this is an appropriate way to provide a high quality of transit
future prices in general are expected to be substantially higher than service during periods of particularly high demand, it does increase the need for
over past decades, increasing the attractiveness of intercity bus bus bays at transit centers serving the key activity areas.
transportation as a cost-saving alternative to the private automobile.
Vail's in-town transit service provides the following routes that presently serve
• The "graying" of the population as the Baby Boom generation ages will Lionshead, or potentially could serve Lionshead:
substantially increase the proportion of the population (even the skiing
population) that may find quality intercity bus transportation to be • West Vail Green Route (Clockwise) and West Vail Red Route
preferable to driving. (Counterclockwise) - Currently 2 runs per hour are operated in each
direction, frequently with shadow buses. Substantial expansion is
• There is an increasing acceptance across the nation of use of high- expected in ridership on the West Vail route, which will increase demand
quality intercity bus service, expanding its potential "markeY" beyond to up to 4 runs per hour in each direction. At that level of service, either
the traditional rider groups. shadow buses will be provided, or the Green and Red route schedules can
Based upon these factors, a reasonable planning assumption would be to be expected to result in 2 buses onsite at any one time.
expect a doubling of charter bus use over coming years.
• In-Town Route - This service does not operate on a set schedule, but
Current plans are for the EverVail project to serve as the charter bus portal in rather buses are dispatched to provide consistent, short headways that
the Lionshead area. If the capacity of this projed to accommodate charter vary with passenger demand. At the busiest times, buses can "bunch" due
buses is reached, there are several strategies that can be employed to reduce to loading delays, resulting in two buses in the same direction at times. At
the number of charter buses on site at any one time. First, the provision of an present, this route continues westbound through the East Lionshead area
attractive charter bus passenger waiting lounge can provide passengers with to West Lionshead before returning back through East Lionshead
gathering point, reducing the time needed for an individual charter bus to be eastbound. This can result in two In-Town buses at East Lionshead at a
on-site during the afternoon loading period (when the peak charter bus time. If this route were instead to terminate at East Lionshead, one bus
demand occurs). Secondly, charter buses can be parked off-site during the bay could serve the route rather than two.
day, such as at parking for a summer recreational facility or school, and
scheduled to minimize overlapping times at the portaL ~~4~2009
17 fP~aee 9'~eaaiZi2itrg ~caafcdQr~ ,Ge;&azt -`l/ard.C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢i2 Statio.a
5-2-17
At present, there is reluctance among West Lionshead property owners Future Vnil Transit,'Veeds
to be cut off of the In-Town Route. One dedicated bus bay should be
provided for each direction. A second bus on-site in one direction can Demand for Vail Transit is expected to grow over the coming 20 years, though at a
share use of the second Green/Red bus bay. relatively low rate. While development will increase population and employment,
housing affordability issues will limit the impact on commuting by bus completely
• Sandstone - This route currently does not serve Lionshead, but rather within Vail. In addition, the development of expanded services at new mountain
provides service between the Sandstone area just north of Lionshead and portals appears to have reduced the demand for internal visitor transit use over
the VTRC To reduce over capacity problems at VTRC, this route could be recent years. Over the last several years, annual ridership has grown by a rough
realigned to instead serve a Lionshead Transit Center, particularly once average of 1.2 percent per year. The high forecast level of future development in
the Simba Run undercrossing is in place. As Lionshead grows in the Lionshead area (an 82 percent increase in the numberof lodging/residential
importance as a destination, the need to provide convenient service from units and a 57 percent increase in commercial Floor area) indicates that the
the Sandstone area to Lionshead can be expected to grow. demand for transit service to/from Lionshead will grow at a higher rate. A 2.5
annual rate of ridership growth, corresponding to roughly a 65 percent increase in
• Lionsridge - This route also does not currently serve Lionshead, but can ridership over a 20-year period, is assumed for this analysis.
be expected to do so in the future. As this route is "interlined" with the
Ford Park route, this would not reduce the number of buses serving With growth in demand, and after completion of the Simba Run undercrossing, the
VTRC, but laying over at Lionshead rather than at VTRC between runs service between the Village, Lionshead and West Vail could be reconfigured into a
could reduce overall capacity needs at VTRG "Line Haul" route that provides express transit service at key stops along the
corridor. This would effectively increase the required number of bus bays by one,
Table A presents a summary of peak period service times in Lionshead, for assuming that this bay is accessible by Line Haul buses operating in both
both existing routes as well as the routes that could potentially serve directions. Assuming that this Line Haul Route is implemented in the mid-term (7-
Lionshead. This table exdudes the In-Town Shuttle, as this route is served on 10 years), it would provide adequate increased capacity to accommodate ridership
an as-needed basis and specific service times at Lionshead vary. growth to this level.
At present, an optimal program for a single transit center in Lionshead would In total, an optimal level of bus bays to serve Vail Transit needs in 7 to 10 years
provide the following bus bays: would be six (including an additional bay for the Sandstone/Lionsridge and for the
Line Haul routes). In 20 years, thetotal number of bays in Lionshead would
• One bay dedicated for West Vail Green Route (which could also be used optimally be eight. Both of these figures could be reduced by one if
for shadow buses on the West Vail Red Route). Sandstone/Lionsridge stays at VTRC.
• One bay dedicated for West Vail Red (which similarly could also be used
for a shadow bus on the West Vail Green Route). ECO Transit
Lionshead is a key stop on the ECO Transit route system. At present, it is served by
• Two bays dedicated for In-town Shuttle Route. the following routes:
Optimally, two bays would also be provided to serve the Sandstone and • Highway 6 route up to 4 runs per hour
Lionsridge Routes. This would allowthe individual bays to be signed for • Vail/BeaverCreek route- up to 3 runs per hour
specific routes. However, considering that the service times in Lionshead do • Gypsum/Eagle route - up to 3 runs per hour
not coincide, given the site constraints it is recommended that a single bus • Minturn - up to 1 run per hour
bay be designated for both of these routes. Overall, 4 bays are recommended • Leadville - up to 1 run per hour
to accommodate current conditions, with 5 bays required if Sandstone and/or
Lionsridge routes were to be relocated to Lionshead. These figures could be
reduced by 1 bay if the In-town Route were terminated at East Lionshead.
S; 4/2009
18
5-2-18
As shown in Tables B and C, during the peak hour-long portion of the key AM As discussed above for the Vail Transit expansion, much of the resulting
commute period up to 10 individual service times are scheduled at Lionshead, increase in the need for bus bays will take the form of increased service
with up to 11 service times in the PM commute peak hour. At several times frequency that will not result in a corresponding increase in the number of
(such as around 7:37 AM, 8:42 AM, and 4:15 PM), three ECO Transit routes serve ECO Transit buses onsite in Lionshead at any one time. However, ECO Transit
Lionshead within only a few minutes. Given the variation in actual route times, ridership is more focused on employment trips, which are more
at these times it is not uncommon for buses from three routes to be at concentrated in the periods around employment start/stop times. Reviewing
Lionshead at the same time. Including a shadow bus on one of these routes, the existing schedule in light of this increased demand, a total of one
up to four ECO Transit buses are on-site in Lionshead at a peak time. additional bays would be optimal for ECO Transit in 7 to 10 years (a total of
five) and a second additional bay in 20 years (a total of six), though one less
Current ECO Transit routes follow the South Frontage Road in the eastbound would probably be adequate if space limits do not allow six.
direction through Lionshead to the VTRC, and then depart Vail westbound via
the North Frontage Road. From the operational perspective of ECO Transit, the
optimal plan would be for all routes to use I-70 to serve only one regional stop Roaring Fork Service
in Vail (such as at VTRC). Given the importance of the need to provide It can be expeded that public transit service connecting the Roaring Fork
convenient service to the various other employment centers in Vail beyond Valley (at Glenwood Springs) and the Eagle Valley will ultimately be
the Village, and the negative impacts of requiring transfers between ECO provided. Growth in Garfield County is expected to be the highest in the
Transit and the Vail Transit routes, serving Vail with only one stop is probably region, with a population increase of 234 percent between 2000 and 2035, to
not a feasible option. a 2035 population of roughly 146,000. It can be expected, however, that
conneding service will be incorporated into the ECO Transit schedule, so the
ECO Transit ridership patterns indicate that a majority of routes need to serve number of bus bays needed at Lionshead will not be impacted.
the VTRC. There are, however, two routes - Minturn and Vail/Beaver Creek -
that could potentially lay over at a Lionshead Transit Center, rather than the
VTRC. This would reduce overcrowding at the VTRC, and ridership on these Summit County Service
two routes is low enough that passenger needing to transfer to Vail buses (like Summit County's population is forecast to rise to an estimated 54,000 by
the In-Town Route) would not significantly impact load levels on these other 2035 (from a 2000 level of 23,548), and this 129 percent population growth
local routes. can be expected to warranttransit service connecting Vail with Summit
County. Summit County service can be expected to terminate at the VTRC, as
It may be possible- and beneficial for ECO Transit running time - to change serving this closer center will provide good access to the ski area as well as
ECO Transit service to Vail to only serve Lionshead and the VTRC. Prior to connections to the local transit service.
EverVail, all ECO Transit buses would probably exit at the Main Vail
interchange and serve both Lionshead and VTRC (with the order that they are
served dependent on where the specific route lays over). With EverVail, ECO Intercity Bus Service
Transit would probably exit at West Vail and serve stops in the eastbound Interciry service, such as Greyhound, can be expected to continue to serve
direction at EverVail, Lionshead and VTRC. the VTRC, rather than Lionshead. It is also prudent to assume that scheduled
Front Range interciry bus service will be provided along the I-70 corridor.
Growth of ECO Transit ridership in the future is expected to be extensive. The This could increase the need for bus bays at VTRC reserved for intercity
ECOTransitEmploymentLinkage5tudy prepared by LSC Transportation service, which in turn increases the need to shift other bus services (such as
Consultants in 2009 indicates a growth in peakwinter daily ridership of Sandstoneor Lionsridge) to Lionshead.
roughly 45 percent between 2008 and 2013 (only a five year period).
Projecting this further to a 20-year planning horizon is more difficult. One
consideration is growth in population in the service area. State forecasts
indicate that Eagle County will grow by 135 percent between 2000 and 2035,
adding an additional 55,000 potential riders. Lake County, also served by ECO
Transit, is forecast to grow by 166 percent (or 13,000 people). For purposes of
this study a 20-year doubling of transit demand is assumed.
S; 4 2009
19 f~~aee 9~eaaiNu'Pc'tcy ~caafcd¢~2 ,Ge{zozt -`l/ard .L~c'asx¢lead 7za.c¢i2 Sfatio~s
5-2-I)
Summary of Transit Facility Program Needs
Given the discussion above, Table D presents a summary of the number of
vehides that are recommended to be accommodated on site at peak times.
As shown, the total number of public transit bays (Vail Transit plus ECO Transit)
is calculated as follows:
• For current Lionshead services, 8 bus bays would be needed.
• If the Sandstone and/or Lionsridge Routes were relocated from VTRC to
Lionshead, this total would increase to 9 bus bays.
• To accommodate growth over the coming 7 to 10 years, the total
number of public transit bays would optimally be 11 (6 for Vail Transit
and 5 for ECO Transit). At a minimum, 9 bays would be required (5 for
Vail Transit excluding Sandstone and/or Lionsridge and 4 for ECO Transit)
• To accommodate growth over the coming 20 years, the total number of
public transit bays would optimally be 14 (8 for Vail Transit and 6 for ECO
Transit). At a minimum, 12 bays would be required to accommodate all
uses (7 for Vail Transit excluding Sandstone and/or Lionsridge and 5 for
ECO Transit).
This program is slightly higher than previous evaluations of bus bay needs in
Lionshead. For instance, a 2008 evaluation identified the need for up to 6 Vail
Transit buses plus 4 ECO buses, for a total of 10. These figures did not indude
shifting the Sandstone and Lionsridge buses from the VTRC to Lionshead, or
the full level of planned increase in the need for ECO Transit service. We
believe these program needs are realistic, particularly given the planned
growth in the Lionshead and the region as a whole, as well as recent trends in
gasoline costs and transit use across the nation.
It is important to note that site design constraints could increase the total
required number of bays. For instance, if some bays are only effectively
accessible by buses operating in the eastbound direction (such as on the north
side of the parking structure), the opportunity for shadow buses in both
directions to share bays is lost and additional bays may be needed elsewhere.
The specific physical space needs associated with these bays will also depend
on site design considerations. One potential option that could reduce space
needs would be to provide double bays (as is currently provided at VTRC). This
is particularly applicable for routes (such as West Vail Green and West Vail Red)
that need a second bus bay for shadow buses, as two buses operating in
tandem will not result in delays to the second bus in the double bay.
S; 4/2009
20
5-2-20
TABLE A. Vail Fransei Peak Period Service fo Lionshead
ExWUtlMg In-TOwn Shut1le TAI4LE 8: Existing Peak Nioming Wirrter ECfl Transit Service to
=snaaowe..ses com-ry used Lionshead
Sandstona (POteMial Lionsricge (POtenlial = Sfpap'pW B175Q5 COR7tl1011Iy illsed
4VestVail Green' West VaII Red` Fu3ure) FAWre)
5"46 AM to 515 607 AM 0 830 8:(JUAM 10.00 AM &
Peak Periotl PM P1A 3:00 PM to 500 PPA 6:15 AM to 8:15 PM Firi'18 Roufe 6" JypSURli`E34J[2" ANo€Iffi9aVef CFeek LeadVIllE Minhlffo
7:t] i AM
Mlwtes Pas7. tne Hour 702 AM i
0 m 7'.03 AM
1 7 U4 AM ■
2
9 7',U5 AM
4 7',(y6 AM
5 m 7.07 AM ■
s 7:06 AM
~
s m 7:25 AM
9 7:1Fi AM f
10 7:F7 AM ■
7 1
tz 726 AM
13 729 AM
7 30 AM
7:31 AM ■
IE
tr 732AM
ta 7:38 AM
19 737 AM ■ ■
2C ~ 7'38 AM
21 m
22 739 AM
23 7AOAM ■
z4 7',A1 AM
25
26 7,42 Ah7
27 7',43 AM
z~ 7'AA AM ■
29 7AS Ah7
30
31 A:09 AM
3z 6:02 AM7 ■ ■
ss 6:03 AM
34 6:04 ph9
as ~ 8~1 1 n"
;i8~12 AM ■
3A ~ 8:13 AM
aa 827 AhA
40 ■ 8:22 AM ~
41
a? $'23 AM
43 8"3fl AM 44 8:31 RNl ■ ■
45 ~
46 - a sz nM
a7 833 AM
48 8:34 AM
as
5n 83S AM
57 ~ 8 36 AM
52 837 AM ■
53 $:38 AM
sa
55 8:41 AM
56 8:42 AM ■ ■
57 8:49 AM
58 644 AM ~
59
BAG AM
ce:vea rransa zcoe-oa wi.ter sct,eduie Sourae: EC6 Transit 2009-09 Win[er Schedule
Si4/2009
21 PIiaee 9'~ea¢i~i2itrg 4.4¢w GeAozt - Zc'asx¢lead 7zaa2it Statiora
i-?-21
TABLE C: Existing Peak Akemvvn Winter ECO Transit Service TABLE D: East l.ronshead Potential Transit Pragrrarn
to Lionshead
= 5hadow Buses Commonly Ilsed Numkrer of Vehicles at One Time
Time Raute 6' GypsurnlEagle' AvonlBeaver Creek Leeciville Min[um Po[enlial Plan Ga acii
4:1 1 PM ExisCin ExEstin 7-19 Y€ars 26 Years
4:12PM SkierDrop -qfflPick-upSpaces 12 32 42 12
4.73PM Ladgin9vans 8 B 8 8
4:74 PM ■ ! CharterlFrant Rang.e Buses 6 5 5 5
4:15 PM Vail Transit
Green Rauta - -
4:16 PM ■ Fied Route " -
4 _17 PM SUbtnt3lGTeen and Red 2 2 2 4
4_77 PM ~ S Line Haul Rauce 1 '1
Intown Route 2 2 2 2
428 PM 5andslone &!or Liartsndge Routes - 7 3 1
4:32 PM To[al Vail Transit - Optimal 4 S 6 B
4:33 PM 1 Total Vahl Transit MinEmum (Note 1) 4 4 5 7
4:34 PM ■ ECOTransit-- Qptimal d C 5 6
4:35 PM ECO Transit Minimum (NOte 2) 4 4 4 5
4:45 PM 7otai PublicTransit Bays
4.46 PM ■ OPtimzl 6 9 11 14
4:47 PM Mfdfmum 8 0 9 12
4-46 PM No1e 1.- nae-s nut allow Sar,dsione andbr I.Ipn~rid4e qoules I.o shrf: ta LionsMead
4'44 PM Nme 2: wQu'd repUire addir=onBl a,.tl unCeslreable restrict:onson roule scheCUnng.
a:so- PM
a:s, aus r
4:5? PM
453 PM
3:54 PM ■
455 PM
51 1 2 PM ■
5:13 PM
5:1-0 PP.I ■
5'1S Plvl
&„i'1 4'141 ■
5 32 PM1A
5:33 PM
6 34 PM ■
5:35 PM
a:36 PM
5:37 PM ■
5:36 PM
5:39 PM
540 PM
541 PM
5 42 PM ■
5:33 PM
Suurce: ECO Transit 2008-09 Winter Schedule
Si4/2009
22
;_,_,2
S4/2009
23 ~l~aee ~/'fea~iQitcf ~rr<efid2~2 ,Ge{zozt - ~//ark.C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢it Statiora
i-?-23
S4/2009
24
;-z-z4
Pa rt 04
Assembling the Various Analysis into "Functional Transit Scenarios"
Scenario Development Process:
o Eliminate Ideas / Concepts From Further Consideration:
(Based on further analysis, eliminate preliminary ideas that don't work)
o Develop Working Assumptions:
(Based on further analysis, What "Ah-Ha" Moments Can Be Defined)
o Develop Incremental Ranges of Transit Related Improvements into
"SCenaPlos": (From Low Cost / Easily Implemented up to High Cost / Ultimate Transit Solution)
o Analyze Transit Operations of Each Scenario:
o Impact to Pedestrian WalkTimes to Gondola
o Impact on Pedestrian Walk Times to Other Transit Mode Transfers
o Impact to Transit Route Travel Times
o Impact on Bus Bay Delays
o Investigate Scope/ Cost of Improvements Required for Each Scenario:
s;4 2009
25 fP~aee 9 `~eaaiZi2itrg ~caafcd¢~2 ,Ge{zozt - `l/ard.C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢i2 i-? -25 Statio.
Pa rt 04
Ideas / Concepts Eliminated from Consideration
Preliminary Ideas / Concepts That Don't Work:
o Pizza Pan: / uncomfortable transit environment / eliminated uses do not
justify perceived value / eliminating conflicts by eliminating uses
o Pedestrian Tunnel: Similar / perceived safety / difficult to channel pedestrians
/ does not serve parking structure patrons well
o East Chute: Grades to steep 14% /significant impacts on LHPG entry / exit / SFR
o Overcrowding East Mall: Eliminate options with more than 8 buses at East
Mall due to spatial / qualitative limitations
o Overcrowding West Lionshead: eliminate options with more than 6 buses @
West Lionshead due to spatial / qualitative limitations
s;a 2009
26 s-z-z6
Part 04
Working Assumptions / "Ah-Ha" Moments
Working Assumptions:
o Local transit service SHOULD be served at both East Mall & West Lionshead (in-town / red / green/ line
haul) - As Lionshead is roughly 1/2 mile across, serving only one local stop requires many potential
passengers to walk long distances to access Red/Green, reducing the attractiveness of the local transit
program. Rule of thumb is to provide local transit stops on 1/8 to 1/6 mile spacing, indicating that
stops in both East Lionshead and West Lionshead (roughly 1/4 mile spacing) is a bare minimum to
serve this key activity center
o At some point ECO will outgrow West Lionshead and Need to Move! In the long tem, relying on West
Lionshead to serve ECO does not allow for projected transit needs.
o At some point in time, West Lionshead will not function as a inter-modal transit hub due to limited
area - will need to move to East Lionhead - think about VRTC transit hub relative to CHP
o ECO needs / prefers one base stop within Lionshead - ideally close to frontage road to minimize route
travel times
o ECO can be located independently from Red / Green - Transfers between Vail Transit and ECO can
occur @ VRTC
o In order to provide a true inter-modal transit center, at some point in the future, the Town will have to
spend real to consolidate what is currently a disjointed transit system.
o There is very little operational transit benefit that can be gained by minor striping or other cosmetic
improvements
o Due to its location, we question the viability of North Day Lot for Skier Drop-off. A strategy will be
needed to address drivers coming to the East Mall for this purpose.
s;4 2009
27 fP~aee 9'~eaaiZi2itrg ~caafcd¢~2 ,Ge{zozt - `l/ard,C4'asx¢lead 7zarz¢i2 Statio.a
i-?-27
Modest Improvements: Scenario 1 A Scenario 1 B
(No Transit Service Increase) Hardscape / Move Hotel Shuttles,
Landscape Move Skier Drop-off
Improvements to into LHPG / Add Left
East Mall & CHP Turn Lane @ West
Chute
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Increase Transit Capacity: Scenario 2A Scenario 2B
(Add up to 4 Buses)
Add 2 Bus Bays @ Add 4 ECO Bus Bays
II ~I West Lionshead to North Side of
20 IV 1 - 201 LHPG
Further Increase Transit Capacity: Scenario 3A Scenario 3B
(Add up to 8 Additional Buses)
ECO Moves to North ECO Stays @ CHP /
Side of LHPG / Add Add Red & Green
Red & Green Lines @ Lines @ East Mall
East Mall
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ultimate Transit Solution - Within LHPG: Scenario 4A.1 Scenario 4A.2 Scenario 4B
(Consolidate 8-12 Buses) Consolidate 10-12 Consolidate 10-12 Consolidate 8-10
Buses on Top Deck of Buses on Top Deck of Buses Within Lower
LHPG /(Surface LHPG /(Structured Deck of LHPG /(Lost
Parking @ Charter Parking @ Charter Parking @ Charter
Bus Lot) Bus Lot) Bus Lot)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ultimate Surface Transit Solution - Surface: scenario 5
(Consolidate 8 Buses Along South Side of Consolidate 12 Buses
LHPG and Additional 4 Buses at East Mall) Along South Side of
Incremental Ranges of Improvements
LHPG &East Mall /
Expand Bus
Turnaround @
4~200 Dobson
5 2 -
Impact on Pedestnan
b'dalk Time to Other
Impact on Petlestnan Lionshead Trip Impact on Transit Route Impact on Bus 6ay
4`ValkTime to Gondola Generators Travel Time Dela s i 1 Impact on
ECO ECQ ECO Village TRC Viability
Scenaria Vail Transit Transit Vail Transk ETransit G'ail Transit Transit Vail Transd Transit Overcioyvdina of Years)
1A Touch Lightly Q Q Q Q Q a Q Q Q Q
iB Modest Shuttle, Trafhc and Pedestrian 0 4 Q 0 + 0 + 0 0 Q
Im avements
Add Transft Capacfty at West Lfonshead 0 4 0 0 ♦ ♦ + + 0 2-3
zA Cirde 6ba stotal
2B Atld ECO Transit to Nadh Sitle of LHPG Q - Q Q ♦ ♦ Q 7-10
3A ECO Transft to North Sfde of LHPG; Add - t♦ -
Red antl Green Lfnes to East hAall ~ t t 0 t t t ~Q
3B ECO Transit Remains at CHP, Red and d 0 - a 0 0 + Q
Green Lfnes Mave to East Mall
4A Full Transit Cerrter on Top of LHPG Q _ t♦ 0 0 t♦ t t t 20
4B Full Transft Cerrter fn Bottam Level oF 0 4 0 - + + 20
LHPG
5 Consolitlate Transit at East tilall and Lonp 0 4 0 Q + + + 20
5outh Side of LHPG
Et; 1, Reflects ha pofential for buses to be deleyed n eiterin.c. or e:titinq fhe kus bays due la the pr=sence of buses in adlacent bays liat bloch; movem=nt,
♦ ♦ cUoig RElativeAdvanlagE
+ PJloderale ~elalive Advantage
4 Iw Relaiiv= Pdvaniage
~ PJloderale ~elalive Disadvantage
- - SUoig Relaiive Lieadvanlage
Comparison of Scenario Transit Operations
s;42009
29 ~l~aee fea~iQitcf 5-2 -29 4K<e~ ,Ge{zozt - `l/ark ,C4'oK2lead 7aaaait Stati"
Scenario
7A 76 2A 28 3A 38 4.A.7 4.0.2 48 5
TouchLighllyi ModestShuttle, AddTransit AddECOIONOHh AddRed&Green ECOStays~+i Consolidale10-12 Consolidalel0-12 Consolidale8-70 Consolidale
ProjectComponents imPieme't i n zaae Treffic& Capacity@ SidcofLHPG LinesroEaslMall CHPlRed&Grcen 8usesanTopof 8usesanTopoF 6useswithln Transit5crvixsa
12010 Petleslrian Marrioll Move lo East Mall LHPG (SUrfaee LHPG (Structur¢tl LHPG Low¢r Lev¢I East Mall antl
Improvements/ PYy [ Chartcr Pkg @ ChaAcr South Garagc Along Soulh Sldc
Implement in 2010 BusLat) BusLM) (loslpkgmovesto oFLHPG/Improve
i 2011 Charter Bus Loti ELC
Provide Modest Improvements to O O O O O O O O O O
East Mall & Conoert Hall Plaza
Relocate Day Skier Drop-offwithin O O O O O O O O O
Middle Deck of LHPG
Relocate Hotel Sliuttle Skier Drop-oR O O O O O ~
@ Tree Tops
6cpand West Chute for New Left ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
Tum Lane
Add Four Bus Bays (lwo each side) 0
to CHP
Add Bus Bays along Norih Side of
LHPG for ECO Transit 0 0
Add Pedestrian Overpass at East O O O O
Mall
Add Roundabout at West Chute O O O O
Replace Lost Parking at Charter Bus
Lot (surface or structured) 0 0 0
Provide 10-12 Buses @ LHPG Top 0 0
Oeck
Provide 8-10 Buses @ LHPG Lower 0
Lavel
Provide New Transit! Information
Siructure - 2500sf O O O O O O O
Curbside Bus DropoffAlong South
0
Side of LHPG
Expand Bus Tumaround at Dobson O
0 0 0
A~,.iN.t i
S'4/2009
30 "Kit of Parts7-A~pf OdCh - Scope of Improvements Required By Each Scenario
S4/2009
31 ~l~aee feaai~ii2itcs ~Kafcdd~¢ ~e~razt - `Ucue.L4bKdleead 7zaK¢it sratio~s
i-? - il
S4/2009
32
;-?-,z
Part 05
Scenario Overviews
Scenarios:
o Modest Improvements:
(Scenarios 1 A & 1 B)
o Increase Transit Capacity - Short Term (Add up to 4 Buses):
(Scenarios 2A & 2B)
o Further Increase Transit Capacity - Mid Term (Add 4 more Buses (8 new):
(Scenarios 3A & 3B)
o Provide for Ultimate Transit Solution - Long Term (Co-locate 12 Buses):
(Scenarios 4A.1 / 4A.2 / 4B / 5)
s;a 2009
33 P,' aee 9~eaaiNu'Pc'tcy ~caafcd¢~2 ,Ge{zozt -`l/ardZc'asx¢lead 7za.r¢it Statiora
5 -?-i3
S4/2009
34
;-?-,4
• Modest Hardscape / Landscape Improvements
to East Mall & CHP
• All Existing Uses & Transit Routes Remain / No
Increase to Transit Capacity
• Provide "Ambassadors" to Manage / Enforce
Congestion at East Mall
Scenario 1 A
35 - 35 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
i i.,rr r;r~lUi;-
Qay Skiei Grcu;:- o~t
/ 2WB
lb•- i, - n;si -,ai vQ, n;tir,,7
0- &sl.Vml: Rp.d :.irio / 4 EB
~
, - ~
-4P- 'N=st+lail GrPen tirne 2 EB DLANUP,1A4,'K
ir i~,. 1 12 E -
B C ShdY2
4 bays
a xN dir c.i ~ .;i ra. s~.i~FarP imprGvPmervts
Ired1'JC~IItUi3f~~ . .
•1~
~ aIT1b355ddk3I1
Frlf~}rc,PfRl$Irt, F.NZIf+f.l •
a,
~ ~ AftRPSEI_L- -
.1 .c:.,•~,~~ ~ O
~ . : rf,M1EftCiy .
' - ~ "IJ-THERflARF@CiTT
I.IOLSHEAD
. 5p{ F,^F VOP
1
~ West Lionshead
4,2009 Scenario 1 A
36 - 36 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
s~
- ~
-
_ - _ - ~
POINT LIONSHEAD PARKING GARAGE 'JG.II
4'APtTAGE LCCINTEIRNAT
OND
D
! ♦
8
,
+ ♦
_
:I-E,~IRENA
- II 2 ~g / -~l / ♦
2 EB ~
TRE=fGP
~
CON~OS
L"UQ~E Pi ~
LIONSNEAD
LIONSH_AD
~ CONOGS
East Mall
4,2009 Scenario 1 A
37 - 37 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
4~
z wa - - - - - = I F- 4 E6 ~
, Ee ,
' E
- .
~ -
<
zW$ i
~
2EB
West Lionshead East Mall
Impact on Transit Function:
None. Bus routes still impacted by congestion at both Mast2r Plan Implications:
CHP and ELC. Eastern Lionshead still served only by Vail Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan contemplates
In-Town, resulting in transfers or long walks to access potential for Town land to be used for private
other Town routes. Would not reduce current transit development at CHP and Lionshead Centre. This
overcrowding at VRTC. alternative could affect, but not preclude this from
happening.
How Long Scenario is Viable:
Current transit condition already results in reductions in Urban Desiyn Implicatior~s:
transit effectiveness. Growth in next few years is Provides minimal qualitative improvements to Lionshead
expected to result in additional shadow buses that can entry portals. Scope primarily includes an improved grade
substantially increase bus congestion in the CHP area. level separation of vehicles and pedestrians through
planters and raised pedestrian walkways. Extent of
improvements to provide a clearly defined and long-term
pedestrian plaza as all existing uses remain within East
Mall and CHP.
Scenario 1 A
38 - 38 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
Phasing Opportunities: Pras:
o Easily Allows for Next Increment of improvements. o Low Cost "Improvements" to existing areas
o Readily Leads to Scenario 1 B o Easily Implemented in Short Time
Impacts on Redevelopment: Cons:
o No Impact on Future Redevelopment of LHPG. o Requires 4-5 traffic enforcement officers
o Would not preclude the redevelopment of CHP o Does not improve transit capacity, connectivity
and Lionshead Centre between routes, or delays to bus movements
o Limited Lost If CHP Redevelops o Does not allow project to access Fed $
o Does not solve traffic delays for ELC traffic entering
SFR
o Does not "significantly" improve qualitative entry
into Lionshead
o Does not address original set goals or many of the
criteria of project - not significant enough to justify
recommendation.
Range Estimate of Probable Canstruetion Costs:
$1.4-$1.8m
4,2009 Scenario 1 A
39 s-? - 39 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
VAN-.SGE
PO NT LIJNSHEAI) FARKING GARAGE
Hotel shuttles
remain on north
SId2 Of ELC PaRKiN~
- - ~V
y <--existing aux, puilding-3~
In-town Routes
~
~
Only @ East Mall
~i
~ I
f I III~II
~ .
In-town Routes
a,~~~~5 ~ - , o x
Only @ East Mall 1
i
VnlL2l
Pedestrian Mall
Moves North
` ~T3EETOP
c?Nnns
Material - _ LIoNSHEA
Changes @ Ped. `°N°°'
~ i-r-i-
Crossing
SHELTERI -
i
TREETOP
~ . GONDOS y -
Detailed Sketch of East Mall improvements
I;~,,~~,~, Scenario 1 A
40 5-2-40 Modest Improvements to Hardscape / Landscape at East Mall & CHP
S4/2009
41
;-z-4t
S4/2009
42
;-z-4z
• Includes All Scenario 1A Improvements
• Elimination of Day Skier Drop-off within East
Mall: (replaced within middle deck of LHPG)
• Elimination of L&D within East Mall: (Small
vehicles redirected to middle deck of LHPG /
Large Vehicles into Arrabelle / Courier Vans
Remain)
• Hotel Shuttles relocated to Town Land
Adjacent to Treetops
• Provide Left Turn Lane at intersection of ELC
and SFR
Scenario 1 B
43 , I~~tel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
5---'-
I I:±tc 51 uttl-^s
Day Skior C]rop ort
~WB
~ L 1 r.=is,•,arve~,otics~ ~ 2
; ~ 4 EB
MP, VJNtiIVdil Ret1111to
01 4'de5tilail Gr?enLipe _i
~ -
-+Je~ In-°.r~t~lsi `S~`~ - -
\ / SIlaY2 LANDMARK
L Cf_ REThIL
~ ~1 ~ bays
Y. .
# nf ~uu5 l~ ryy
duti _+an or ~.ravei ~ ~ ~
su fare impravements
,
PLn_:~
. rped,wehicu'zrl ~
h:ardsc:~nFW ~v,c~f~sfhFaP; ~ E, i - -
~
al'115345dd0Y1 - -
~ Ff1fufi;Bfa1Ffli, I N!1F''` ~
/1ft3i1CiELLE
- "
,il:4NFRU5
Q
I tl
dHE N1p.F:RIOTT °
L.OKSHEAD ❑ n
:,'eWARF NC1
West Lionshead
S,4,,~09 Scenario 1 B
44 5 2 W, tel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
piavide:lNB Icft turn lanc
l'o pe rate NR Right anci NP, I Pftturn IanPs
4
I- ~
- I ~LJ
I
V - ~
VaNIFUt
f'OINT I L1UN'S1{LAUFAH'(INC.C~AHALL -I I- I r:
VA
INIERPI4
CO'JI
I
I.. Day Skfer Drop off 'r
Middle dcck of LHFG j
I t
~1 1 2 WB r, ~I°~~ IcOaa
g F in
~ ♦ ♦
2 EB '
~ 'I :
LIONSHEAC• LOGU[ +1T
~~--'i CCNI>CS LIUN}HE:1D
LJ
°
East Mall
4,2009 Scenario 1 B
45
5 ~-Ptel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
A 1- . 4..~ N&u9rtntlNPACftnlzmeL2 wo b
- 9 EB
share
A baYz ~
~ I
Mitltlle6ekNCHPL
! . . . . .
. , . . . s' .
2W6 g i
il 2E6
r ___I I
L I ~
~
~i West Lionshead 1 East Mall
Impact on Transit Function: Master Plan Implications:
Modest benefits. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan contemplates
from ELC and provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road potential for Town land to be used for private
travel lanes would reduce delays to Vail In-Town. development at CHP and Lionshead Centre. This
Allowing hotel shuttle passenger access to Lionshead alternative could affect, but not preclude this from
core without crossing ELC would also result in modest happening.
running time benefits. Other bus routes would still be
impacted by congestion at CHP. Eastern Lionshead still Urban Design Implications°
served only by Vail In-Town, resulting in transfers or long Further relieving pedestrian / vehicular congestion at the
walks to access otherTown routes. Would not reduce East Mall allows for more meaningful qualitative
current transit overcrowding at VRTC. improvements to Lionshead entry portals. Relocating
Hotel Shuttles to Treetops Area Allows for more direct
How Lony 5cenario is Viable: pathways to Ski Hill and further reduces congestion at East
Growth in next fewyears is expected to result in Mall. Relocating Skier Drop-off within LHPG provides a
additional shadow buses that can substantially increase clearly defined, long-term solution.
bus congestion in the CHP area.
5cenarlo 1 B
1~1 20°11Hotel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
46
;-z-46
Pras:
Phasing Opportunities: o Improves current conflicts between Hotel Shuttles
o Easily Allows for All Next Levels of Incremental Guests & Vehicles - Safer
improvements. o Eliminates Hotel Shuttle traffic along ELC = More
o Relocation of Skier Drop-off Is recommended to Pedestrian.
provide a permanent Long-term solution. o Reduces pedestrian/ vehicular conflicts
o Reduces traffic delays for NBR traffic at ELC/SFR
Impacts on Redevelopment: o Aids in managing day skier drop-off at ELC
o Minimal Impacts on Future Redevelopment of o Allows for future redevelopment of LHPG
LHPG - Relocated Skier Drop-off.
o Limited Lost If LHPG Redevelops Consc
o Greater investment than 1 A, but still would not o Eliminates green space in front of Treetops
preclude redevelopment of Lionshead Centre or o Does not improve conflicts between day skiers in
CHP. LHPG/vehicular conflicts
o Does not improve transit capacity- no additional
buses
o Does not trigger Fed $
Range Estimate of Probable Construction Casts:
$3.2 - 3.7m *
* Estimate includes all Scenario lA improvements
4,2009 Scenario 1 B
_I~qtel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
47 5 - 2
vn,niraGE -,t.6.m,
FOINT ~ LIONSHEAD PARKING GA3AUE
~ A-U ilY ~
Incorporate All PFRK~\K~
Scenario 1 A
Improvements
IL-L I <--existing aux. building --4
-
- _ ~
II II I
7~-- ~ I Hotel Shuttle Drop QfF
VAIL11 AJ 4
I.
Relocate Hotel
Shuttles to South
- ,
Side of East Mall TRCCTO? %A
CoNoos
I inNSHr-P
coNUo<
• + ~
r> ~ -
~ I BUS ~
I HEE Ii1N
~ CONDdS
Detailed Sketch of East Mall improvements
4,2009 Scenario 1 B
48 , tel Shuttle, Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements, Left Turn at ELC / SFR Intersection
5
S4/2009
49
5-2-49
S4/2009
50
5-2-50
• Includes All Scenario 1A + 1 B Improvements
• Add 2 More Bus Bays at West Lionshead and
Reconfigure & Assign Bus Bays at Concert Hall
Plaza - Total 6 Bays at West Lionshead
Scenario 2A
51 -,t Add Transit Capacity at West Lionshead
410io Shu[tl:~s
day Skicr Crrop uY
IP- L } 6 [Sirraf V-ehi[les}
WetitV.iil! Rwi Lino 4 EB
Ow- S'JestVlail; GreFn Lire L r '
ip- In-7.rwa, ~
? EB
Slldf2 LAP,GMARK
RETAIL
~f ;A,; ta.sy% 4 bays
s:x
e ~
clu,c:iry,i r ravaal ~ i
/
su face imnrcv=ments ~
o \
~rped,vehicu-ail
hartlsC~pe k 5 ~ilyedFrF:
~ aihr,a.ssaaor,~
f'flf(] ft C' fE1k f1t, R
\ \ fr - .
. 2 W'8
rAINEr;oS
HE PdAiFIOTT
I CD ~ o
LIONS-1-.4C:
j , St;'JAf,'F P.0
~
West Lionshead
Scenario 2A
52 5-2 -,z Add Transit Capacity at West Lionshead
provide. WR lett turn IanP
seperate NB Riqht and NB Left turn lanzs
~ ~
~ i
VNNTAGC - ~
F'OINI ~ - -
_ I - - LIONSHENd PABKING GARAGF r I
\4"vL
~ - ~ INTCR AL
NOOS
. ~ ~ Day5kicrDropoff
N1iddledeckofLliPG
D0350N
q*` i.e AaeNa
2 WB 8
d +
2 EB ~ ~
r;a
coni LI~~pliHGt:u~ LODGE.4T ~
COPJ~45 LIONSHfAD
East Mall
84,2009 Scenario 2A
53 5-2 -53 Add Transit Capacity at West Lionshead
,
4 EB
i 2 EB
share
` I
~ AbdyS i
. I i . , . .
. f . .
J ♦ - ilzy5k~eAOpoX
~ . ~ ++~iAdlcnccFal~MPG
~ 2W9
, . " - -
r
~ . . i . .
r s
! . F-L - . I ,
y ~ r
SNest Lionshead East Mall
(This drscussion assumes that a practical maximum of 6 bays is found to Master Plan Implications:
be feasible in CHP and/or Marriott area) Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan contem plates potential
for Town land to be used for private development at CHP. While
Impact on Transit Funetion the dollar investment is not huge, Scenario 2A contemplates
Modest benefits. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area from ELC and increased transit operation in this area, making it more critical to
provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road travel lanes would reduce the Town's overall transit operations and less likely that Town
delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle passenger access to land could be made available for private development at CHP.
gondola without crossing ELC would also result in modest running
time benefits. Two additional bus bays in West Lionshead would Urban Design Implications:
reduce bus delays today and in the near-term future. Eastern All Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design elements are incorporated at
Lionshead still served only by Vail In-Town, resulting in transfers or East Mall to allow for more meaningful qualitative
long walks to access other Town routes. Would not reduce transit improvements. Adding additional buses at West Lionshead only
needs at VRTC. further congests a small area and does not allow for
redevelopment of CHP into a West Portal. Moving additional
How Long Scenaria is Viable buses to north side of WLC minimizes congestion at CHP and
Within 2-3 years, the expected increase in the number of buses in allows for greater urban design / redevelopment possibilities.
West Lionshead would result in delays and congestion that equals or
exceeds today's levels. Also would not be viable if CHP is
redeveloped, or if the Line Haul Route is implemented.
Scenario 2A
54 ;-?-,-t Add Transit Capacity at West Lionshead
Phasing Opportunities: Pros:
o Easily allows for All Next Levels of Incremental o Increases Transit Capacity
improvements. o Keeps ECO and Vail Transit together
Impacts on Redevelopment: Cons:
o Adding buses to West Lionshead Potentially o Adds congestion to CHP and Marriott
inhibits the redevelopment of CHP. o Adds additional pedestrian conflict crossing along
o Limited Lost If CHP Redevelops W LH Circle
o Greater investment than 1 A, but still would not o Worsens pedestrian connection to Lionshead from
preclude redevelopment of Lionshead Centre or W LH and Ever Vail by adding bus traffic
CHP.
o No impact on potential redevelopment of LHPG
Range Estimate of Probable Construction Costs:
$3.5 - 4.Om *
* Estimate includes all Scenario 1 A& 1 B improvements
Scenario 2A
55 -;s Add Transit Capacity at West Lionshead
S4/2009
56
5-2-56
• Includes All Scenario 1 A, 1 B& 2A Improvements
• Move ECO from CHP to North Side of LHPG
• Provide New Pedestrian Circulation from North
Side of LHPG to East Mall
• Construct new Transit / Info. Center Structure @
ELC Bus Stop. (ie. restrooms, vending, warming
hut, offices, info. ctr.)
• Recommended to Add New Pedestrian Overpass
from Middle Deck of LHPG
• Provide Mechanical and Life Safety Upgrades to
Existing LHPG
4,2009 Scenario 26
57 -57 Add ECO to North Side of LHPG
I I::~tr• SI utr.6s•s
aay S k w r Drop odf
41-- L : D 5i*ial 'Jeha[lesl
10- 4NFtit've,il: €tP41 line - 2 WB
i
@P- VVestVriL Green Line
F-
I
tw- Ifl-nl"l1~1 S 4
2 EB , p. LCO / share LANr,MaRK
l / RE7AIL
~...~Y?:eus k.lYy~ 4 bays
= y. x
rlirec:ioi oF r.raves -
~ i
su•face improvzmznts \ ~ I
ijDrd:vehisusae.i ~ l
fi.~n.ly:..?f v h cc~f~SKd~?P~ ~ l _
arhb3ssadorr'
FnfK~rc.pl^ipr~t -
EIV(IA:'d
.AR?.46CLLF n
iUfdIAfVLHV
IJ- ~
T-IE MAGRIOT ' o
f\'~ 0 uoivs~=no ❑
~ sOLu.r,F n.or
West Lionshead
Scenario 26
58 -;a Add ECO to North Side of LHPG
pravide: WB I?ft turn lane
scpcrato NB Riqht and NB Left turn lancs
clemo existing landscape and replace
o inf~. Luilding
tL_d,,
new surface 9evel Improvements i
i ~
kti i
i -
~ new staiWelevators
i
4AVTAGE
POIPIT
liFIL
INTE~NAil01
mech./lifesafe#yu
~d?StoIHPGCOn~DOS
Day Skier Drop off,~ small L &Q
Middlc deek of LHPG
I
demn aux. buiEding
pedestrian bridge I
- - -
;vertieal ciroulation) ~i
nnasnN
T 2W8 icen~eNa
♦ ~
" 2 €6 . ~T_orvo
~ . in!ycr•p LOJGEA
CONDC•5 LIONSHEkD
L~
Transit Structure/ ~ J~~
TOV info. Cenler
East Mall
4,2009 Scenario 26
59 5-2 -59 Add ECO to North Side of LHPG
d fiCA i ..,i~.. u.n.,~
2W6 . .
/ ~
~ 2 EB
. ~ . - . .
I 2E6 _ -
~ t I
sham
q.bays- ? i~u~.,a.:.4ao„
~
i
. „ ~ S ~ - ~Y~urO.opeNYV*N160
~ . Etll drekmi4Hfti
J rj
. i -1 zwe
~ West Lionshead ~ East Mall
Impact on Transit Function How Long Scenario is Viable
Relocation of ECO buses from CHP to north side of LHPS would Would accommodate ECO Transit for the foreseeable
reduce ECO Transit running time as well as delays to ECO buses future. However, after 7-10 years, growth in number of
due to congestion at the CHP bus bays. Elimination of ECO buses Vail Transit buses in West Lionshead would exceed the
from CHP would also reduce congestion to Vail Transit buses in existing 4 bays. Also would not be viable if CHP is
CHP. Would increase passenger walk distance to/from West redeveloped, or if the Line Haul Route is implemented.
Lionshead, but reduce it to/from East Lionshead. Would increase
passenger walk distance between ECO stop and Lionshead Master Plan Implications:
Gondola by roughly 200 feet. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area There are no direct implications to the LHMP resulting
from ELC and provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road travel from Scenario 2B
lanes would reduce delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle
passenger access to gondola without crossing ELC would also
result in modest running time benefits. Eastern Lionshead still
served only by Vail In-Town, resulting in transfers or long walks to
access otherTown routes. Would not reduce transit needs at
VRTC.
Scenario 26
60 5-2-60 Add ECO to North Side of LHPG
Urban Design Implications: Pros•
All Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design elements are o Improves transit capacity
incorporated at East Mall to allow for more meaningful o Reduces ECO Transit running times / costs
qualitative improvements. Adding additional buses at o Improves pedestrian / vehicular conflicts @ CHP by
West Lionshead only further congests a small area and eliminating ECO uses
would hinder redevelopment of CHP into a West Portal. o Vertical transportation improves access to/ from
Moving additional buses to north side of WLC minimizes LHPG
congestion at CHP and allows for greater design o Ped. / Vehicle conflicts at East Mall reduced due to
possibilities. Ped. Bridge
Phasing Opportunities: Consc
o Easily allows for All Next Levels of Incremental o Decouples ECO from Red & Green Lines, (though
improvements. direct transfers still available at VTRC)
o Longer walking distances for ECO riders
Impacts on Redevelopment: o Vertical Circulation System & ECO bays - Lost
o Adding buses to West Lionshead Potentially if LHPG Redevelops
inhibits the redevelopment of CHP. o Removes mature vegetation North side of LHPG
o Limited Lost If CHP Redevelops o Requires code upgrades to LHPG
o May impact redevelopment of LHPG due to
significant spent for code upgrades to existing
LHPG & adding 4 bus bays along north side of Range Estimate of Probable Construetion Costs:
LHPG.
$12.0 - 14.Om ~
* Estimate includes all Scenario 1A, 1 B& 2A
improvements
(Note: Approximately $2.25m of total cost attributed to
code upgrades to existing LHPG)
Scenario 2B
61 5-2 -61 Add ECO to North Side of LHPG
- t-
S9UTNFRON7AGEROAD ~ - ~
~ N,
, : . _ _ .
. Bus Drop Off ° - - - - ~ Q
, IF f CC1•_SPridn en[r t0 f~
' y i u5 Shel[er5
~arage ~
LIUNSHEAUVnHK6NGGRkAGE ~
i ~ I
Detailed Sketch of ECO improvements North Side of LHPG
~ ~
g .
L ~ ^ry- R 17 'Z
r
L Gntl-
s~~-,~~,'~°-~t r+it *
~ -
one way Frontage Road Widening to Be Later Phase Improvements
saw tooth
public ECO bus bike 2 eastbound drive 16 2 westbound snow
LHPG sidewalk drop off green lanes median drive lanes storage I-70 ROW I-70 EB
Detailed Sketch of ECO improvements North Side of LHPG
I;~,,~~,~, Scenario 26
62 5-2 -62 Rdd ECO to North Side of LHPG
S4/2009
63
5-2-63
S4/2009
64
;-z-64
• Includes All Scenario 1 A, 1 B& 2A Improvements Except:
(a) Replace left turn lane at ELC/SFR intersection with Full Roundabout
• Add 4 Additional Bus Bays for Red & Green Lines at East Mall -(total 8 bays)
• Add Roundabout at ELC/SFR Intersection Due to Increased Transit Service at
East Mall
• Required to Add Pedestrian Overpass from Middle Deck of LHPG
• Demolish Auxiliary Building to Free Up Space for Additional Transit Uses
• Provide Additional Hardscape / Landscape Improvements at East Mall For
Expanded Transit Uses
• Provide Structural and Code Upgrades to Existing LHPG
• Assumes ECO Has moved to North Side of LHPG
Scenario 3A
65 5-2 -65 Move ECO to North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
Fl.,t., ~P,.,[tl':
Gjay Ski,, r C)Yu.c- b'.f
so L. • D ~SI°i:,I.U-g!I1eCIEiJ
*rt 5°uF%l'Uiil: iN:.1 Elfio ~WB
i
Ow 'NesllraiL Green Lirve ,,W- -
2 EB k
op i~,-~i)w~~~
- 2E6_
~ LLiI' ~ r^ LA~DMARK ~
Sfldl"2 HEfAIL
"':+f'stua ka7ys r~ 4 fJdyS tl i n=c :i o 7or :ra ~re,:
5u3Far.e imprauemer~is '
iped~uehicu~ae~
h ~ ~
PSr(9mC:srse !§5[~f~fSfdF'}@; e
~ ambassador;' Prtfnra.[merlt
f1ZJ4N
y+ 1 4RPABELLE
o
~ . ._.I _.1N14r1CR05
~ ' - - .
0
o
` THE NIA, RIpTT . °
f ~ o
uOtis-1 _Ar~
~ ~ ~0.111.r,F r.u
~
West Lionshead
4,2009 Scenario 3A
66 5-2 -66 Move ECO to North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
provide:Roundabout
r dcmo existing landscapc and replacc
I ♦ ~
_ _ m' 6 E B
demo irrfo. building
new surface ievel improvements ~
i
I _
i
~ nev✓stairs/elevators
i
VANTAC.,:
P01N1 ;
I I II
I i mech. r life safety upgrades [a LHPG INTERNi410NAL
~ f conDos
~r
i~
~
♦ ~ Day Skier Qrop o"ff/ small L&Q
a NiiddledeckofLHPG
demn aux.. building
2 EB +
` ICEAREMA
8
I ~
2 EB ~r"
..ONIJVS 11 ~
~ I.IGNSHtFU LOoGFF,T
/ CONLUti f IUNSHFhD
Transit5tructurF' pedestrian bridge
TOV info. center ;vertiral cir<ulatinn)
East Mall
4,2009 Scenario 3A
67 5-2 -67 Move ECO to North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
~
- i ws
- ~ ~ - - z Ea
~ ~ Ea • •
Snare
4 hays L.~ewra. s,e.r.aro«.
~ i
• ~ `
` _r p.y£k PM~•rmTIILN+J
5 M A'..~.ofLHPG
1
~ ~ f IY.nioa.buA~ing
' ~ IWB ✓
I,
~ 2WB . t. ~s' 8 ,..i..
West Lionshead East Mall
Impact on Transit Function How Long Scenario is Viable
Relocation of ECO buses from CHP to north side of LHPG would Would accommodate both Vail Transit and ECO Transit for
reduce ECO Transit running time as well as delays to ECO buses the foreseeable future - 20 yr. solution.
due to congestion at the bus bays. Elimination of ECO buses from
CHP would also reduce congestion to Vail Transit buses in CHP. Master Plan Implications:
Would increase passenger walk distance to/from West Lionshead, Extensive transit improvements at the East Mall would
but reduce it to/from East Lionshead. Would increase passenger preclude potential use ofTown land in the redevelopment
walk distance between ECO stop and Lionshead Gondola by of Lionshead Centre.
roughly 200 feet. Adding Red and Green Vail Transit stop in East
Lionshead Circle would significantly improve transit access to this
overall area, as well as reduce passenger walk distance between
the Red/Green stop and Lionshead Gondola by roughly 300 feet.
Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area from ELC and provision of
additional ELC/Frontage Road travel lanes would reduce delays to
Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle passenger access to gondola
without crossing ELC would also result in modest running time
benefits. Could reduce transit needs at VRTC by allowing
Sandstone and/or Lionsridge route to shift to Lionshead. Vail
Transit buses could be dispatched from East Lionshead to avoid
exceedingthe4-baycapacityofCHP(assumin~
,g,t~g afutureLine Scenario 3A
Haul Route serves ELC but not CHP). 5-2 -68 Move ECO to North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
Urban Design Implications: Pros:
o Many Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design elements are o ECO / Red & Green closer together improves overall transit
lost and given over to expanded transit uses at East system functionality
Mall to allow forfunctional vehicle movements. o Pedestrian Overpass improves pedestrian / vehicular conflicts
This equates to a very dense, urban, bus-stop o Allows for future redevelopment of LHPG
rather than a pedestrian focused walking village o Potentially reduces transit uses @ CHP:
character. o Roundabout significantly improves traffic congestion
o Even with providing a pedestrian bridge,
introducing additional buses at East Mall only Cons:
further congests a limited area and inhibits the o Adds 3 bus service lines to East Mall Pedestrian Environment
°entry experience" into East Lionshead. o Qualitative °Gateway" Environment Compromised
o Day Skiers parking at the lowest level of LHPG will o Keeps Hotel Shuttle traffic on ELC causing additional
exit at grade and conflict with additional buses. pedestrian traffic
o Existing Auxiliary Building uses to be relocated
Phasing Oppartunities:
o This Scenario is a long term solution that does not
warrant additional phases. Coupled with ECO
moving to North side of LHPG, this scenario Range Estimate of Probable Construction Casts:
satisfies the 20-yr. projected transit demands.
$15.6- 19.Om *
Impacts on Redevelopment:
o Allows for CHP to Redevelop * Estimate includes all Scenario 1 A/ 1 B/ 2A & 2B improvements
o Adding buses East Mall Likely precludes the except:
redevelopment of Lionshead Centre. • Replace left turn lane @ ELC/SFR with full roundabout
o Lost If LHPG Redevelops- (LHPG upgrades)
o Pedestrian Bridge and Roundabout would Need to
Interfacewith LHPG Redevelopment
4,2009 Scenario 3A
69 5-2 -69 Move ECO to North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
+raNTaGE
POINT LIONSHEAD PARKING :WFl~,E
id -1
,
~
New Vertical `'pRK'"G _ - -
L34 ~ ~
Circulation @
Both Sides of ' - ~
, ~ - . ~ :
, .
Ped. Bridge
i~~~_
New Full Size Bus
Turnaround t ~~i . . - ' I f II~ _ 44
<
~la vniL zi
Some Hotel
Shuttles Remain
~ f ~ • ; ~ ~ Hotel Shuttle Drop Uff
on ELC
~
TREETOP
COND05
Peclestrian Cli+erp~
New Information
LIVNSHEt
Center / Transit CONDC)
Station ~ -
4
~ -
~
W R IHttIUf'
. LUNIJUS
Detailed Sketch of Transit Improvements at East Mall
I;~,,~~,~, Scenario 3A
70 5-2-70 Mave ECO to Narth Side af LHPG / Add Red & Green Lines to East Mall
S4/2009
71
5-2-71
S4/2009
72
;-z-7z
• Includes all Scenario 1A, 1 B, 2A & 2B Improvements Except:
(a) Replace left turn lane at ELC/SFR intersection with Full Roundabout
(b) Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North Side of LHPG
• Add 4 Additional Bus Bays for Red & Green Lines at East Mall -(total 8 bays)
• Add Roundabout Due to Increased Transit Service at East Mall
• Required To Add Pedestrian Overpass from Middle Deck of LHPG
• Demolish Auxiliary Building to Free Up Space for Additional Transit Uses
• Provide Additional Hardscape / Landscape Improvements at East Mall For
Expanded Transit Uses
• Assumes ECO stays at CHP
Scenario 36
73 5-2 -73 ECO Stays at CHP / Red & Green Move to East Mall
Fl.,t~~P,.,[tlr:
Gjay Ski,, r C)Yu.c. b'.f
s.. i. D [Sr~:,i vg!i,,dk,:y 1 WB
r
5°uF%l'U~iil -iv:1 : iria /1 4 EQ
Ow '~4'e5 llrai1Lrreen _ire
Nr In-'_r1wu
~SIldY2 - -AV.pMARK RE'I`AIL
a y:~ f stua ka 7yt 4 bd'y5 ~ .
tlu :ico or.rave!: ~
-
~Y
SL!'FaCE If77pfvVEIT1ERIi ~ I
ipe&uelI
fIVLA ~
hP5rc9mC:srse!§5i~f~fS~dF'W;
ambassador,' -
en fn rs e ratv nt ~
r..n~'iarv
~
. o
~ -
. !ie i ANER45
~
TPICh1ARR,IGTT - ° .
~ION.,1 IFA-) a ~
. ,Quar-,r rvor
West Lionshead
4,2009 Scenario 36
74 ;-z - ECO Stays at CHP / Red & Green Move to East Mall
provide:Roundabout
~
~ ' * - - - - ~
~
vnNT.ac,. / - - - - - ' ~
POINii I I Liti\SHEAUP0.HKWL-(AHAGt
i' WTERNAiIONAL
CONYJOS
♦ I C]ay Skier Lrop offi small L&0
Middle deck uf LHPG ~
CS-j dcrnc aux, building
- -
2 EB
zwa , _ - _ DCBSON
~ q 2W6 $ icenaera,,
2 EB
TREP1
LIONSHEAD
L LOO'NSHEAD
CO~dDOi ~
Transit Stt~itturcl pcdcstrian bridgc
T04'inFacenter (verticalcirculation) ~
East Mall
Scenario 36
75 5-2 -75 ECO Stays at CHP / Red & Green Move to East Mall
4 EB ti
t ~
I
2 EB - --J
share
4 bays /
♦ 6y5Mer~mpoH! aIIL&O
\ _ M6tllebtt4M{H~ moaue.lwi~ l ~
~ 172M'
r
. . . . . 2WVB i . 0
2W 7B z€a ~
- -
J
J,
West Lionshead East Mall
Impact on Transit Function Master Plan Implications:
Adding Red and Green Vail Transit stop in East Lionshead Circle Extensive transit improvements at the East Mall would
would significantly improve transit access to this overall area, as preclude potential use ofTown land in the redevelopment
well as reduce passenger walk distance between the Red/Green of Lionshead Centre. Keeping ECO at CHP would then
stop and Lionshead Gondola by roughly 300 feet. Existing preclude the potential use of Town land in the
congestion in CHP would remain. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off redevelopment of CHP.
area from ELC and provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road
travel lanes would reduce delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel
shuttle passenger access to Lionshead Core without crossing ELC
would also result in modest running time benefits. Could reduce
transit needs at VRTC by allowing Sandstone and/or Lionsridge
route to shift to Lionshead.
How Long Scenario is Viable
Growth in next few years is expected to result in additional
shadow buses that can substantially increase bus congestion in
the CHP area. If CHP is redeveloped for additional transit uses,
then CHP private redevelopment is unlikely.
Scenario 36
76 5-2 -76 ECO Stays at CHP / Red & Green Move to East Mall
Urban Design Implications: Pros•
o Many Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design elements are lost and o Increases Transit Bus Bays
given over to expanded transit uses at East Mall to allow o Pedestrian Overpass improves pedestrian /
for functional vehicle movements. This equates to a very vehicular conflicts
dense, urban, bus-stop rather than a pedestrian focused o Allows for future redevelopment of LHPG
walking village character. o Roundabout significantly improves traffic
o Even with providing a pedestrian bridge, introducing congestion
additional buses at East Mall only further congests a o Eliminates need / cost for vertical circ. To SFR
limited area and inhibits the "entry experience" into East o Underutilized auxiliary building gone
Lionshead.
o Day Skiers parking at the lowest level of LHPG will exit at Consc
grade and conflict with additional buses. o Decouples ECO / Red & Green (although transfers
o Ultimate expansion of ECO will outgrow available area at can occur @ VRTC)
West Lionshead / CHP, inhibiting transit function and o Significant Transit Increases @ East Mall Inhibit
urban design quality. Qualitative Experience & Further Congest Area
o Transit uses must remain @ CHP / does not allow
Phasing Opportunities: for redevelopment
o This Scenario is a mid term solution that does not warrant
additional phases within the East Mall. If ECO moves to
North side of LHPG, coupled with red/green moving to Range Estimate of Probable Construction Casts:
East Mall, the combination satisfies the 20-yr. projected
transit demands. $12.9- 15.8m #
Impactx on Redevelopment: * Estimate includes all Scenario 1 A/ 1 B/ 2A & 2B
o Adding buses to West Lionshead and East Mall Likely improvements except:
precludes the redevelopment of CHP and Lionshead • Replace left turn lane @ ELC/SFR with full
Centre. roundabout
o Limited Lost If CHP Redevelops • Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along
North Side of LHPG @ $2.67m
4,2009 Scenario 3B
77 5-2 -77 ECO Stays at CHP / Red & Green Move to East Mall
S4/2009
78
5-2-78
• Includes all Scenario 1A, 1 B, 2A & 2B Improvements Except:
(a) Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North Side of LHPG
• Provide for 10-12 buses on Top Deck of North Parking Garage Structure
• 4 In-Town buses Stay at East Mall (similar to circulation @ VTC)
• Provide Improved Pedestrian Access (Vertical Transportation) From Top
Deck to Pedestrian Mall
• Provide Structural and Code Upgrades to Existing LHPG
• Provide Replacement Parking at Charter Bus Lot (surface - 4A.1 or
structured - 4A.2)
• Recommended to Add Pedestrian Overpass from Middle Deck of LHPG
• Move Hotel Shuttles to Top Deck of LHPG
4,2009 Scenario 4A
79 5-2 -79 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
I I:±tc 51 uttl-^s
Day Skior C]rop off
4P- L 1 D ;Smaf Vehi[les)
NP- VJNtiIVdil:Ret1111tO / 1 WB
r ~_iJ•
01 4'de5tilail,Crr?enLipe D~ANFAIARK
i~,-°C)t~1g, ~L'lf_ ShdYe t:r, # nF ~~~c l~ay5 4 bcy5 duti_ti~~n of:raveY su fare impravements i r,cdaehicu ar.~ L,
,Z.u
al'115345dd0Y?
~ ~7ikrrcpm2nt d# ~
F.13ZIAYJ ~
AHIiAF'LLLL ~
O
.i~11;'Ry7P,fdEftC:S
~ TFIE MARRIOTT a ~ .
_IONSHEACI ❑
~ . SUIPPIRE M f . .
West Lionshead
Scenario 4A
80 5-2 - 80 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
prcvide: N/6 Ieft twrn IJnc
seperate MB Right and VB Leftturn lanes
Z E13 ~
2 WB
~ r
' . X!:-a
Transit Structurei
TO\r info. center
8
P.;ir•~; -
j ~::7~
I I VAIL
iNitiRfdATIONAL
I I CCNO05
I Afed fOf diSpldt2d I
I parkinp
~
♦ Day Skier Drop off/ small L&D I
MidrlledxkoflHPG
2 WB -
2EB ~
~ ~ I]()HSON
ICE AHENA
♦
~ - Entrp/ Gateway
~5
LIUN51 {LNU LGDCE ,:tT ~
CONDOS LIONSHEAD
East Mall
Scenario 4A
81 5-2 - 81 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
~TO nF mt~iuo ,
+V
s..~.lJB Pv~lit an:i 4h I e~-1 .i .n_ y
iWB
4 p ~ d
'r1
j share :,rR ~
. h , `4 beys 8
~ ai ~oma ~
~ I
. , o,ysti~fEC .n; rn.ao ~
u•dtllede-knf-G
~
. - - -------J
~ i
: . - ~ .
2'N6
. ~ . .
0\`.`
Concert Hall Plau East Mall
Impact on Transit Function How Long Scenario is Viable
Relocation of ECO buses from CHP to LHPG would reduce ECO Would accommodate both Vail Transit and ECO Transit
Transit running time as well as delays to ECO buses due to for the foreseeable future (20 yrs.). If CHP is redeveloped,
congestion at the bus bays. Elimination of ECO buses from CHP two additional bays would be required elsewhere along
would also reduce congestion to Vail Transit buses in CHP. West Lionshead Circle.
Would increase passenger walk distance to/from West Lionshead,
but reduce it to/from East Lionshead. Would increase passenger Master Plan Implications:
walk distance between ECO stop and Lionshead Gondola by Scenario creates a direct conflict with "no net loss of
roughly 50 feet. Adding Red and Green Vail Transit stop in East parking" provision of LHMP. This scenario maintains the
Lionshead would significantly improve transit access to this potential for Town land to be used in redevelopment of
overall area. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area from ELC and Lionshead Centre and to a degree some potential for use
provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road travel lanes would ofTown land in redevelopment of CHP.
reduce delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle passenger
access to gondola without crossing ELC would also result in
modest running time benefits. Could reduce transit needs at
VRTC by allowing Sandstone and/or Lionsridge route to shift to
Lionshead. Vail Transit buses could be dispatched from East
Lionshead to avoid exceeding the 4-bay capacity of CHP
(assuming that a future Line Haul Route serves ELC but not CHP).
I;~,,~~,~, Scenario 4A
82 ;-z - 82 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
Urban Design Implications: Pros:
o The Majority of Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design o Functions as a True Transit Center- Consolidates Uses
improvements at East Mall and CHP are preserved. o Mimics the successful VTRC - Easy In / Easy Out
o Elimination of Hotel shuttles from East Mall reinforces o Frees up Space for Urban Design improvements @ East
pedestrian nature of space. Mall & CHP
o Day Skiers existing from LHPG will face very few o LHPG Entry Reconfiguration May Improve Skier Access
vehicular conflicts (will function similar to VRTC). in & Out
o East Mall has the ability to function as a'Town o Minimizes impacts of transit functions on nearby
Square" for special events. residential and lodging areas by focusing activity on
Frontage Road
Phasing Opportunities:
o This Scenario is a long term solution that does not Cons:
warrant additional phases. This scenario satisfies the o Triggers significant enhancements to LHPG to
20-yr. projected transit demands. accommodate transit uses (structural/ADANertical
Circulation/Life Safety)
Impacts on Redevelopment. o May preclude future redevelopment of LHPG
o This Scenario represents a long term transit solution o Eliminates parking stalls - Costs to Replace Lost Parking
with significant spent. Therefore, it seems unlikely o Bus Riders are Dropped off further from Ski hill
that LHPG would redevelop.
Range Estimate of Probable Construction Costsc
$16.0 - 20.Om
* Estimate includes all Scenario 1 A/ 1 B/ 2A & 2B
improvements except:
• Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North
Side of LHPG @ $2.67m
Estimate has wider low - high range due to extent of
required modifications for LHPG structural upgrades
costs include surface parking at charter lot only.
Structured parking @ Charter Lot is additional $4-5m.
Scenario 4A
83 ;-z - 83 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
8 Hotel Shuttles New Information 12 Full Size Bus Relocate Skier Entry/ Exit
Center/Transit Bays VehicularRamp Unchanged
Station
SC7U7HFkGNTAGENEiAQ W:- -aRvsi
~
~,?i`'
oc..~~i~.t~~
!W~ 7 ~ j
~
~ Hotcl
.
- , • ~LJ ~ ~ ~ f
f;~._.. . - _ Y . .1S
i ~
~ ` -
~ ' • •
I ` . . . . . . . . ~ . - . . ~ ' ~ ~s
~'~II a_..........~ ~ ~
LIONSHEk6PpRICING GRftAGE
. ~v
Detailed Sketch of Transit Improvements at top Deck of LHPG
4,2009 Seenario 4A
84 ;-z - 84 Consolidate 10-12 Buses on Top of LHPG
S4/2009
85
;-z - as
S4/2009
86 5-, 86
• Includes all Scenario 1 A, 1 B, 2A & 2B Improvements Except:
(a) Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North Side of LHPG
• Provide 8-10 Buses at Lowest Level of South Parking Garage Structure
• 4 In-Town buses Stay at East Mall (similar to circulation @ VTC)
• Add Roundabout
• Demolish Auxiliary Building to allow for increased transit program and movements
• Provide Structural and Code Upgrades to Existing LHPG
• Provide Replacement Parking at Charter Bus Lot (surface - 4A.1 or structured - 4A.2)
• Move Hotel Shuttles in Front of Treetops
• Does Not Trigger Pedestrian Overpass: (All new transit users to exit @ ELC grade)
4,2009 Scenario 4B
87 5-2 - 87 Consolidate 8-12 Buses Within South Garage
. Il~ic51•.ottlc;
Day Ski•^_i 6rjj~, od
-b- L : D (SiroiallVehicl,~s] 1 WB
4~4w4[ball Rt~ll.irv! F_ _
2 EB ,~r<h ~ DLANIIIIAIK
~ ~ ~w ~'dec[Vail 4rrPen rLir? - 2 ET ~Ina•1+i SrldCe~ EC~" 4 bays
suof=re impravemerugs iptd;vehifuEar,'
ft arfl;.cApe (45pf4tiCdF}e. ,
!
~~i~E7assador+ -tuiA r•i
/ Ffi ~0 fi,P f31pfYT,
AI;Fi:CELLE
o
i~vrnNEan~
p
~
0
, ~
I'
r~ [r~inR~iorT
l.ONSHEAp ~
}_iIIARIEN(l J
West Lionshead
Scenario 4B
88 5-2 - 88 Consolidate 8-12 Buses Within South Garage
i ~
% /
fi
~ m~ch r ~f;~ s;+'e[y iip;~iar:1s tc LH'f.-~
I ~
I
C)ay sl.rrr- tint<s I . ~r~i i I
hi55i.~tirn:> I~,w?c4leverr h ri~llvcl <krfLH%'u I fI
L I-IFL
LEB
2 EB
t
,i
f ntiy,+Gateway .
East Mall
4,2009 Scenario 4B
89 5-2 - 89 Consolidate 8-12 Buses Within South Garage
v - +
i~
2E6 . ~mech •o~Fes.vreirumrns• .cL~L
~ / 2 EB . tvft
t share 0 ,
~r
4 bays - .
_ - I ~
I
' I
i irr.., I
,
i i
i -------J
f -
~ zwg -
~ ~ 2 E6
- d:-'r E INN i .
I`
t
Concert Hall Plaza East Mall
ImPact on Transit Function How LonJ Scenario is Viable
Relocation of ECO buses from CHP to LHPG would reduce ECO Would accommodate both Vail Transit and ECO Transit
Transit running time as well as delays to ECO buses due to for the foreseeable future (20 yrs.). If CHP is
congestion at the bus bays. Elimination of ECO buses from CHP redeveloped, two additional bays would be required
would also reduce congestion to Vail Transit buses in CHP. elsewhere along West Lionshead Circle.
Would increase passenger walk distance to/from West Lionshead,
but reduce it to/from East Lionshead. Would result in no Master Plan Implications;
significant change in passenger walk distance between ECO/Red Scenario creates a direct conflict with "no net loss of
& Green stop and Lionshead Gondola. Adding Red and Green Vail parking" provision of LHMP. This scenario maintains the
Transit stop in East Lionshead would significantly improve transit potential for Town land to be used in redevelopment of
access to this overall area. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area Lionshead Centre and to a degree some potential for
from ELC and provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road travel use of Town land in redevelopment of CHP.
lanes would reduce delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle
passenger access to gondola without crossing ELC would also
result in modest running time benefits. Could reduce transit
needs at VRTC by allowing Sandstone and/or Lionsridge route to
shift to Lionshead. Vail Transit buses could be dispatched from
East Lionshead to avoid exceeding the 4-bay capacity of CHP
(assuming that a future Line Haul Route serves ELC but not CHP).
I;~,,~~,~, Scenario 4B
90 5-2-90 Consolidate 8-12 Buses Within South Garage
Pros:
Urban Design Implications: . Functions as a True Transit Center - Consolidates Uses
o The Majority of Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design . Frees up Space for Urban Design improvements at both
improvements at East Mall and CHP are preserved. East Mall & CHP
o Hotel shuttles would stay at East Mall (in front of • All Transit Functions closer to ski hill
Treetops) potentially impeding pedestrian nature • All Transit Functions Hidden - Out of Sight / Out of Mind
of space. • CHP complies with Lionshead Masterplan goals
o Day Skiers existing from LHPG will face very few
vehicular conflicts (will function similar to VRTC). Cons:
o East Mall has the limited ability to function as a • Triggers significant enhancements to LHPG to
"Town Square" for special events by restricting accommodate transit uses (structural/ADA/Vertical
Hotel Shuttles. Circulation/Life Safety)
o Would not require a Pedestrian Overpass due to • May preclude future redevelopment of LHPG
majority of bus riders exiting at lowest grade. • Eliminates parking stalls - Costs to Replace Lost Parking
Gateway / Landmark / Entry Portal elements to be • Costs to excavate lowest level of garage to allow for
created with surface level improvements - increased head room within structure
fountains / landscape / etc. . Coordination of existing structure with bus maneuvering
requirements = may result in inefficient space utilization
Phasing Opportunities: . Increases traffic on ELC Chute
o This Scenario is a long term solution that does not
warrant additional phases. This scenario satisfies
the 20-yr. projected transit demands. Range Estimate of Probable Construction Costs:
Impacts on Redevelopment: $19.0- 23.0 m
o This Scenario represents a long term transit
solution with significant spent. Therefore, it * Estimate includes all Scenario 1A / 1 B/ 2A & 2B
seems unlikely that LHPG would redevelop. improvements except:
• Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North Side
of LHPG @ $2.67m
Estimate has wider low - high range due to extent of
required modifications for LHPG structural upgrades
costs include surface parking at charter lot only.
Structured parking @ Charter Lot is additional $4-5m.
Scenario 4B
91 s-z -yi Consolidate 8-12 Buses Within South Garage
S4/2009
92
5-2-)2
• Includes all Scenario 1 A, 1 B, 2A & 2B Improvements Except:
(a) Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North Side of LHPG
(b) Replace left turn lane @ ELC/SFR with full roundabout
• Add 8 Buses Along South Face of LHPG
• Add 4 Additional Buses to East Mall
• Add Roundabout
• Add Pedestrian Overpass / Underpass
• Demolish Auxiliary Building
• Relocate Hotel Shuttles to Treetops
• Provide Full Size Bus Turnaround at Dobson
5cenario 5
93 5-2 -93 Consolidate Transit Services at East Mall and Along South Side of LHPG
~
ii:,,c sh,tirk'5
Day Skior C]rop off
4P- L 1 D ;Smaf Vehi[les)
1 WB
~
L Ytil dl Pe Ito
D~MVARK 01 4'destilail Crr?enLin~e
- 2 EB share ~ ~ L`f 4 bdy5 ti:r, # nf 115 ls ryy dIft :I~~'l Pfi~~3V21~ SLl'f2'C@ 1111~kf~1Y2R1~°M1SS i
- rpedlw•ehicu zrl
~ h.arcis:C~nFrw ~v,z~i~sC tFre. . ,
al'115345ad0Y?
~7ikrr<pment aN
~
~I
0
00
TFE iVARRIOTT °
uonis-Izar.= ~
rnuaF[ P.or
J
West Lionshead
4,2009 Scenario 5
94 5-2-94 Consolidate Transit Services at East Mall and Along South Side of LHPG
provide: Rouncabou4
~z
t
1 ~d - - - ~
VANTA( F
POlNli L10NSHEADPARKINGGARAGE
. . - - - _ - - - _ - . _ - _ ~ VT~
. ' IN7EANATLIOfdAL
CONGO_
PaeKWG Day Skier Drop offi smal I L&D -A,
Wliddle Jeck of LHPG
' , y.... . _ . _
' Z EB oossora
icEAhtrda
2 EB -
CONDt.. 1 ~JOIUSF'EAD
. ~
TranS~itStruCturC-/
TQV info. centFr ~
East Mall
84,2009 Scenario 5
95 5-2 -95 Consolidate Transit Services at East Mall and Along South Side of LHPG
1►--> `
1 WB ~
1
/ share
~ 4 6ays /
!
. i~ ~ . ..cAO„..,,..,,..,- .
ii..! 1 ' MIAEkdckoflHF':,
S`
f `
: . . ..~z~.,.~ .
~ 2 E6
I 2 W 8 4# 8 ~ W 6 u
6E8
Concert Hall Plaza East Mall
Impact on Transit Function How Long Scenario is Viable
Relocation of ECO buses from CHP to LHPG would reduce ECO Would accommodate both Vail Transit and ECO Transit for
Transit running time as well as delays to ECO buses due to the foreseeable future (20 yrs.). If CHP is redeveloped, two
congestion at the bus bays. Elimination of ECO buses from CHP additional bays would be required elsewhere along West
would also reduce congestion to Vail Transit buses in CHP. Lionshead Circle.
Would increase passenger walk distance to/from West Lionshead,
but reduce it to/from East Lionshead. Would result in roughly 100 Master Plan Implications:
feet increase in passenger walk distance between ECO/Red & Extensive transit improvements at the East Mall would
Green stop and Lionshead Gondola. Adding Red and Green Vail preclude potential use ofTown land in the redevelopment
Transit stop in East Lionshead would significantly improve transit of Lionshead Centre. Keeping ECO at CHP would then
access to this overall area. Eliminating Day Skier drop-off area preclude the potential use of Town land in the
from ELC and provision of additional ELC/Frontage Road travel redevelopment of CHP.
lanes would reduce delays to Vail In-Town. Allowing hotel shuttle
passenger access to gondola without crossing ELC would also
result in modest running time benefits. Could reduce transit
needs at VRTC by allowing Sandstone and/or Lionsridge route to
shift to Lionshead. Vail Transit buses could be dispatched from
East Lionshead to avoid exceeding the 4-bay capacity of CHP
(assuming that a future Line Haul Route serves ELC but not CHP).
I;~,,~~,~, 5cenario 5
96 5-2 -96 Consolidate Transit Services at East Mall and Along South Side of LHPG
Urban Design Implications: Pros:
o Many Scenario 1 A& 1 B urban design elements are o Provides pedestrians close to ski hill
lost and given over to expanded transit uses at o Consolidates all transit functions
East Mall to allow for functional vehicle o Does not impact / preclude LHPG future
movements. redevelopment, could be interim solution until
o Providing additional buses at East Mall only further LHPG does redevelop
congests a limited area and inhibits the "entry
experience" into East Lionshead.
o Adding significant bus volume along East Cons:
lionshead Circle will dramatically alterthe o Introduces sianificant additional traffic on ELC and
pedestrian nature of the area and transform the East Mall
environment into an urban, vehicular focused, o Eliminates Landscaping along South Face of LHPG
environment. o Visual/Noise/Air/Qualitativelmpactsto
o Day Skiers parking at the lowest level of LHPG will Neighbors
exit at grade and conflict with additional buses. o Requires pedestrians to cross (at grade) with buses
or triggers pedestrian over/underpass- conflicts
Phasing Opportunities: remain
o This Scenario is a long term solution that does not o Increases transit times due to additional travel
warrant additional phases. This scenario satisfies distances and pedestrian conflicts
the 20-yr. projected transit demands.
Range Estimate of Probable Construction tosts:
Impacts on Redevelopment:
o Adding buses to West Lionshead and East Mall $15.0 -18.Om
Likely precludes the redevelopment of CHP and
Lionshead Centre. * Estimate includes all Scenario 1 A/ 1 B/ 2A & 2B
o LHPG could redevelop and transit uses be improvements except:
relocated within redeveloped project. Could be
phased to maintain transit operations within • Replace left turn lane @ ELC/SFR with full
Lionshead. roundabout
• Eliminate all ECO Improvements Along North
Side of LHPG @ $2.67m
4,2009 Scenario 5
97 5-2 -97 Consolidate Transit Services at East Mall and Along South Side of LHPG
S4/2009
98 5-, 98
Part 06
Scenario Recommendations for Advancement
Scenarios Were Analyzed Based on IVumerous Criteria to
Develop Recommendations, Including:
o Resolution of Project Goals & Givens
o Improvement to Overall Transit Service
o Cost
o Abilityto be Implemented in ShortTerm
o Ability for LHPG, CHP and Lionshead Centre to Redevelop
o Ability to be Incrementally Phased
o Impact to Neighbors and Community
o Throw away Improvements Upon Next Increment of
Growth
o Masster Plan Implications
o Urban Design -Qualitative Improvements
Town Staff / Design Team Recommendations:
o Short term: Scenario 1 B
o Mid Term: Scenario 1 B+ Scenario 2B
o Long Term: Scenario 1 B+ Scenario 4A
s;a 2009
99 5-, 9y
scenario recommended rejected
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Scenario 1 A: Hardscape / Landscape No transit increase / Insufficient qualitative
Improvements to East Mall & CHP : improvements
Scenario 1 B: Move Hotel Viable Short-Term Improvements / Modest Cost /
Shuttles, Move Skier Drop-off Improves Qualitative Experience / Reduces
into LHPG / Add Left Turn Congestion @ East Mall / Improves Left Turn @
Lane @ West Chute ELC/SFR Intersection / Addresses Skier Drop-off
1••`.•••!;•••••`•.•+.~+•••r••••+.s••• . r
AddingTransitCapacitylncreasesCongestion/••••••••
Scenario 2A: Add 2 Bus Bays Cannot Grow Into a Long Term Solution Due To
@ West Lionshead Limited Area / Negatively impacts Pedestrian Gateway
into Lionshead
Scenario 2113: Add 4 ECO Viable Mid-Term improvements / Increases Transit Capacity / Improves
Bus Bays to North Side of ECO Operations / Relieves Pressure from CHP / Grows Transit Along
LHPG SFR / Triggers Necessary Improvements to LHPG //Reduces congestion
@ East Mall / Reduces ECO Transit route travel times
1•••• 1•••Scenario 3A: ! ECO Moves to 1• Adding Transit Capacity Increases Congestion
North Side of LHPG / Add Red & Inhibits Pedestrian Gateway into Lionshead /
Green Lines @ East Mall Significant Costs
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adding Transit Capacity @ East Mall Increases
Scenario 3113: ECO Stays @
CHP / Add Red & Green Congestion / Inhibits Pedestrian Gateway into
Lines ~a East Mall Lionshead / Significant Costs / ECO Needs Will
Outgrow CHP Area
'
Scenario 4A.1 / 4A.2: Full Viable Long-Term Inter-modal Transit Facility / Significantly Improves Transit
Transit Center at Top Deck of Operations / Relieves Pressure from CHP / Functions Similarly to VRTC -
LHPG /(Surface or Structured Provides all Transit Functions Along SFR / Adds Second Lionshead Stop on
Parking @ ChaYter Bus Lot) Red/Green for Increased Transit Accessibility / Good Arrival Experience for
Transit Passengers /(4A.1 - Min. Costs to Add Back Portion of Lost Stalls)
Scenario 4B: Full Tr'ansit CenteY at: More Expensive Solution within LHPG / More
Bottom Level of LHPG (Surface or : Congestion @ West Chute / Bus Bay Environment
Structd Parking @ Charter Bus Lot) ; Constrained Due Parking Above
~
Scenario 5: Consolidate 12 Creates Significant Congestion Along ELC & West
Buses Along South Side of Chute / Inhibits Pedestrian Environment of Sub-Area /
LHPG & East Mall / Expand Bus Presents Significant Neighborhood Impacts//
Turnaround Dobson Increases transit route running times
.
100 5-2- 100 Justification for Scenario Recommendations
Part 07
Next Steps
o Phase I- Feasibility Analysis: - Complete
o Phase II - Schematic Design:
Develop 3"Schematic Design Level" Concepts /
Select Preferred Design
o Phase III - Design Development:
Requires Town Approvals Under Separate Agreement /
Refine Selected Design Concept - Obtain Detailed Pricing /
Obtain Entitlements Approvals
s;a 2009
101
s-z-1oi
S4/2009
102
s-z-1o?
-001"4ri ewa
s;42009
103
s-z-1o3
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009, an Ordinance Submitting to
the Registered Electors of The Town of Vail, Colorado, at a Regular Municipal Election Held
on November 3, 2009 a Ballot Question to Amend Section 3.2 of the Town of Vail Charter
Regarding Town Councilmember Terms of Office.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny
Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009, on first reading.
BACKGROUND: On July 21st the Town Council directed the Town Attorney to prepare a
ballot question to submit to the registered electors of the Town of Vail for the November 3,
2009 regular municipal election amending Section 3.2 of the Town of Vail Home Rule Charter
as it relates to terms of councilmembers. The proposed amendment is meant to address
ambiguities and conflicts previously identified regarding the Town's terms and term limits
provisions for councilmembers as currently set forth in Section 3.2 of the Charter. (See
attached Memo)
The following language is proposed as a ballot question:
Shall Section 3.2 of the Home Ru/e Charter for the Town of Vail be repea/ed and reenacted to
read as follows, effective January 1, 2010: Councilmembers shall be e/ected to serve four-
year terms. No councilmember shall serve more than two (2) consecutive four-year
terms. Partia/ terms of /ess than four (4) years in duration shall not count toward this term
limit. Terms shall be considered consecutive un/ess they occur more than one regu/ar
municipa/ e/ection cyc/e apart.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No.
17, Series of 2009, on first reading.
ATTAC H M E NTS :
Memorandum 080409
Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2009
Other Municipal Charters
8/4/2009
~
Memorandum
To: Town Council
From: Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Date: 8/04/09
Re: Ordinance 17, Series 2009, Submitting a Ballot Question Amending Section
3.2 of the Town Charter Regarding Town Council Terms and Term Limits
1. Backqround
On July 21St the Town Council directed the Town Attorney to prepare a ballot
question to submit to the registered electors of the Town of Vail for November 3, 2009
regular municipal election amending Section 3.2 of the Town of Vail Home Rule Charter
as it relates to terms of councilmembers. The proposed amendment is meant to
address ambiguities and conflicts previously identified regarding the Town's terms and
term limits provisions for councilmembers as currently set forth in Section 3.2 of the
Charter.
According to the current Charter language, the terms of office for councilmembers
shall be four (4) years, provided that no councilmember may serve more than eight (8)
consecutive years. However, the Charter then states that the candidate receiving the
fourth highest number of votes shall only serve a two-year term. Not only do these
provisions create ambiguities concerning the number of terms a councilmember may
serve, the Charter appears to be internally inconsistent.
As currently drafted, a councilmember could feasibly serve a four-year term and a
two-year term without reaching the eight-year term limit. Under this scenario, the
councilmember would be eligible to serve another two-year term, but not a four-year
term. Unfortunately, there is no way to know whether the councilmember would actually
be elected for a two-year term until after the election is complete. If the councilmember
is elected for a four-year term, the Town is placed in the precarious position of having to
choose between a violation of the Charter's two-year term provision or the Charter's
eight-year term limit provision. Under either scenario, the Charter is violated.
1
8/4/2009
6-1-1
July 30, 2009
II. Proposed Amendment
The following language is proposed as a ballot question:
Shall Section 3.2 of the Home Rule Charter for the Town of Vail be
repealed and reenacted to read as follows, effective January 1, 2010:
Councilmembers shall be elected to serve four-year terms. No councilmember shall
serve more than two (2) consecutive four-year terms. Partial terms of /ess than four
(4) years in duration shall not count toward this term limit. Terms shall be considered
consecutive unless they occur more than one regular municipal election cycle apart.
III. Additional Questions
The Town Council inquired as to what amendments may be necessary to the
Town Charter to change the procedure by which the Mayor is selected.
Currently the Charter provides that "the mayor shall be elected from the duly
elected council by a majority vote at its first organizational meeting to be held
within seven (7) days from the election, and shall serve at the pleasure of the
council for a two-year term."
In order to change the way the Mayor is selected the Charter would need to
be amended, via a general election, with language setting forth the process by
which the Council would like to propose selecting a Mayor. The pertinent
language from home rule charters of some other jurisdictions is attached for your
consideration.
2
8/4/2009
6-1-2
ORDINANCE NO. 17
SERIES 2009
AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLORADO, AT A REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 3, 2009, A BALLOT QUESTION TO AMEND SECTION 3.2 OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL CHARTER REGARDING TOWN COUNCILMEMBER TERMS OF
OFFICE.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the "Town"),
is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under laws of the State of
Colorado and the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council") have been
duly elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the current language of Section 3.2 of the Charter creates potential conflicts
with regard to the length of terms and term limits of Councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to refer a measure amending Section 3.2 of the Charter
concerning Council Terms of Office to the Town's registered electors at the Town's 2009 regular
municipal election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO:
Section 1. The following ballot question is hereby submitted to the registered electors of the
Town at the Town's regular municipal election to be conducted on November 3, 2009:
Shall Section 3.2 of the Home Rule Charter for the Town of Vail be
repealed and reenacted to read as follows, effective January 1, 2010:
Councilmembers shall be elected to serve four-year terms. No
councilmember shall serve more than two (2) consecutive four-year
terms. Partial terms of less than four (4) years in duration shall not count
toward this term limit. Terms shall be considered consecutive unless they
occur more than one regular municipal election cycle apart.
Yes No
Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this
ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of
the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be
declared invalid.
Ordinance 17, Series 2009 1
8/4/2009
6-2-1
Section 3. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance
shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior
to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as
commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision
hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded
unless expressly stated herein.
Section 4. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of August, 2009, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 18th day of August, 2009, at 6:00 P.M.
in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Dick Cleveland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance 17, Series 2009 2
8/4/2009
6-2-2
ARTICLE III
COUNCIL
Section 3.1. The council.
The City shall be governed by a council of four (4) councilmen and a mayor. All councilmen and
mayor shall be nominated and elected at large from the entire City. (Ord. No. 46-1980, § 1)
Section 3.2. Terms of office.
At all municipal elections thereafter, the two (2) candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be
elected for a four year term, provided that the candidate receives fifty percent (50%) plus one vote or more of
the votes cast. (Ord. No. 46-1980, § 1; Ord. No. 39-2000, § 1(part); Ord. No. 38-2007))
Section 3.3. Mayor.
The mayor shall be elected at large from the entire city for a term of two (2) years. The candidate re-
ceiving a majority of the votes cast for the office shall be elected mayor. In the event that no candidate shall
have received a majority of the votes cast for the office, then a run-off election shall be held in accordance
with Section 2.7.
The mayor shall preside at meetings of the council and shall exercise such powers and perform such
other duties as are or may be conferred and imposed upon him by this Charter or the ordinances of the City.
He shall have all of the powers, rights, privileges and obligations of a council member. He shall be recog-
nized as the head of the city govemment for all ceremonial and legal purposes and he shall execute and
authenticate legal instruments requiring his signature as such official. (Ord. 39-2000, § 1(part))
Section 3.4. Powers of council.
The council shall be the legislative and governing body of the City and shall exercise, except as other-
wise provided in this Charter, all powers conferred upon or possessed by the City and shall adopt such laws,
ordinances and resolutions as it shall deem proper.
Section 3.5. Qualifications.
Each councilman and the mayor when nominated and elected shall be an elector of the City and a citi-
zen of the United States for at least one (1) year and shall have resided in the City of Aspen for at least one (1)
year. No councilman or the mayor shall be a salaried employee of the City during his term of office, perform
personal services for the City for which he is compensated other than as provided in Section 3.6. The council
shall be the judge of election and qualifications of its own members.
Section 3.6. Compensation.
The members of the council shall receive such compensation, and the mayor such additional compensa-
tion, as the council shall prescribe by ordinance; provided, however, that the compensation of any member
during his term of office shall not be increased or decreased. The mayor and councilmen may, upon order of
the council, be paid their actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties of office.
Section 3.7. Mayor pro-tem.
The mayor pro-tem shall be elected by council from its own membership. Said election shall take place
at the organizational meeting following each general municipal election. The mayor pro-tem shall serve until
the next organizational meeting unless sooner removed by a majority vote of the entire council. In the
8/4/2009
6-3-1
BRECKENRIDGE TOWN CHARTER
The terms of office for councilmen shall be four years as hereinafter
provided. The Council as constituted on the effective date of this Charter shall
continue as follows:
(a) The Councilmen previously elected shall continue throughout
their elected terms;
(b) In the regular municipal election to be held in 1980, the three
candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected for four year
terrns.
(c) In the regular municipal election to be held in 1982 and
thereafter the three candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be
elected for four-year terms.
Section 4.3 MAYOR:
The mayor shall be elected at large from the entire Town for a term of four
years. In the regular municipal election to be held in April, 1984, and every four (4)
years thereafter, the Mayoral candidate receiving the highest number of votes shall
be elected mayor. .
The mayor shall preside at meetings of the council and shall exercise such
powers and perform such other duties as are or may be conferred and imposed
upon him by this Charter or by ordinance or other applicable law. He shall have all
of the powers, rights and privileges of a council member including the right to vote.
He shall be recognized as the head of the town government for all ceremonial and
legal purposes and he shall execute and authenticate legal instruments requiring
his signature as such official.
Section 4.4 MAYOR PRO TEM:
The mayor pro tem shall be elected by a majority vote of the council at the
first organization meeting after the election and shall serve at the pleasure of the
council for a two-year term.
In the absence or disability of the mayor, the mayor pro tem shall perform
all duties and have all powers of the mayor. In the event of a vacancy in the office
of mayor pro tem, the council shall choose his successor.
Section 4.5 POWERS OF COUIVCIL:
"fhe council shall be the legislative and governing body of the Town and
shall exercise, except as otherwise provided in this Charter, all powers conferred
upon or possessed by the Town and shall adopt such laws, ordinances and
resolutions as it shall deem proper.
8/4/2009
6-3-2
`T~~w?i oF
CHAPTER III
ELECTIONS
Section 3.1 Laws Governing Elections.
Special and general municipal elections shall be governed by the Colorado Municipal Election Code of
1965 as now existing or hereafter amended or modified, except as otherwise provided in this Charter or as
Council may prescribe by ordinance. The Council may by ordinance establish the method for the
registration of electors; the number, qualifications and compensation for election judges and clerks; and the
boundaries of election precinct. The Council may by ordinance establish an election commission with such
powers, duties, terms and qualifications as provided by ordinance.
Section 3.2 Municipal Elections.
A general municipal election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of
1986, and of each even numbered year thereafter. Any special municipal election may be called by
resolution or ordinance of the Council at least sixty (60) days in advance of such election. The resolution
or ordinance calling a special municipal election shall set forth the purpose or purposes of such election.
Polling places for all municipal elections shall be open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on election day. (Ord.
84-8 §1)
Section 3.3 Precincts.
The election precincts of the Town shall remain as they existed on the effective date of this Charter until
altered by the Council as hereinafter provided. The council shall by resolution from time to time establish
convenient election precincts in accordance with this Charter and statutes.
Section 3.4 Non-Partisan Elections.
All municipal elections shall be non-partisan. No candidate for any municipal office shall run under a
party label of any kind.
Section 3.5 Recall.
Any elected official or elected officer of the Town may be recalled at any time after 90 days in office by
the electors entitled to vote for a successor of such incumbent through the procedure in the manner
provided for in Article XXI of the State Constitution. Consistent with the Constitution and this Charter, the
Council may provide by ordinance for furkher recall procedures.
CHAPTER IV
COUNCIL AND MAYOR
Section 4.1 Town Council.
The Town Council shall consist of seven (7) members, one of whom shall serve as Mayor and one of
whom shall serve as Mayor Pro-Tem. The Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem shall be elected from within and by
the Council as hereinafter provided.
8/4/2009 6-3 -3
.
Section 4.2 Terms of Office - Mayor and Councilmembers.
(a) The terms of office of the Councilmembers, hereinafter to be elected in accordance with the
provisions of this Charter, shall commence on their taking the oath of office at the ensuing organizational
meeting of the Town Council held after the election in the year elected and shall continue during the term
for which they shall have been elected until their successor shall have been elected and duly qualified;
provided, the terms of office of the Councilmembers elected at the regular municipal election held on May
4, 1982, shall extend to the regular municipal election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday
in the year 1986, and the terms of office of the councilmembers elected at the regular municipal election
held on May 8, 1984, shall extend to the regular municipal election to be held on the first Tuesday after the
first Monday in November in the year 1988.
(b) On the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in the year 1988, and thereafter on the
first Monday in November in the year 1992 and every four (4) years thereafter at the regular municipal
elections, three Councilmembers shall be elected for four (4) year terms.
(c) On the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in the year 1986, and thereafter on the
first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in the year 1990, and every four (4) years thereafter at the
regular municipal elections, four Councilmembers shall be elected for four (4) year terms.
(d) The terms of office for Councilmembers shall be four (4) years provided, however, that no member
shall serve for more than eight (8) consecutive years, that the terms of office for Councilmembers elected at
the regular municipal election held on May 4, 1982, shall be four (4) years, six (6) months and two (2)
days, and provided further a Councilmember who is appointed to fill a vacancy as well as any
Councilmember who was initially elected in the election which took place on August 8, 1978, may serve, in
addition to the initial term a total of no more than eight (8) additional years. Councilmembers who are
serving prior to the regular municipal election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in
November in the year 1986 shall have an additional six months added to their terms of office. (Ord. 84-8
§§2-5)
Section 4.3 Election of Mayor.
The Mayor shall be elected from amongst the duly elected Councilmembers by a majority vote of the
Council at its first organizational meeting which shall be held within seven (7) days after each regular
municipal election.
Section 4.4 Mayor - Powers and Duties.
The Mayor shall preside at meetings of Council and shall exercise such powers and perform such other
duties as are or may be conferred and imposed upon him by this Charter or the ordinances of the Town. He
shall have no power to vote except in cases of tie vote of the members of the Council present and voting.
The Mayor shall be recognized as the head of the Town government for all ceremonial, dignitary and legal
purposes and he shall execute and authenticate legal instruments requiring his signing as such official.
Section 4.5 Mayor Pro-Tem.
The Council shall, at its first meeting following each regular municipal election, and after the newly
elected members take office, elect one of its members to serve as Mayor Pro-Tem, for a term expiring at the
first Council meeting following each regular election except as hereinafter provided. The Mayor Pro-Tem
8/4/2009
6-3-4
1 ou~ ~ c~Y ~ F~o
ARTICLE II
TOWN COUNCIL
Section 2-1. Council Membership. The legislative affairs of the Town shall be vested in a Town
Council consisting of six (6) Councilmembers and the Mayor, all of whom shall be nominated
and elected at large from the Town.
Section 2-2. Powers of the Council. The Council shall be the governing body of the Town and
have all legislative powers and all other powers possessed by the Town and not conferred by
this Charter on others.
Section 2-3. Qualifications. [fhis section amended by a vote of the people held 4-2-96 and
11-4-08]
(a) Each member of the Council shall be a registered elector at the time of nomination
and election, or at the time of appointment to fill a vacancy, and shall have been a resident of
the Town or any territory annexed to the Town for at least twelve (12) consecutive months
immediately preceding such election or appointment.
(b) No person who has been convicted of embeulement, bribery, perjury, solicitation of
bribery, or subornation of perjury, shall serve as a member of the Council.
(c) No person may serve as Mayor or Councilmember, or any combination thereoft for
more than three (3) consecutive terms. Any person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy on the
Town Council and who serves one-half or more of the term of office shall be considered to have
served a term in that office for purposes of this subsection (c). Terms are considered
consecutive unless they are at least two years apart. This limitation on the number of terms
shall apply to terms of office beginning on or after April 1, 2010. With respect to terms of office
beginning prior to such date, the limitation on terms of office set forth in the Charter as it existed
prior to November 4, 2008 shall continue to apply.
(d) Subsection (c) of this section shall not prevent any person who is a member of the
Council on the effective date of this Charter from completing the term for which the person was
elected or appointed.
Section 2-4. Term. Members of the Council shall be elected for four (4) year overlapping terms,
with four (4) members elected at one (1) regular election, and three (3) members elected at the
subsequent regular election. The members shall take office at the first meeting, regular or
special, following their election and shall continue in office until their successors have been
elected and have complied with Section 2-8, or a vacancy is earlier established.
Section 2-5. Comqensation. The Councilmembers shall receive such compensation, and the
Mayor shall receive such additional compensation, as the Council may prescribe by ordinance.
The Council shall neither increase nor decrease such compensation during the member's term
of office. Members, upon order of the Council, may be paid their actual and necessary expenses
incurred in the performance of their duties of office.
2
8/4/2009.
6-3-5
(c) If three (3) or more vacancies occur during a regular meeting or between two (2)
consecutive regular meetings, the remaining members shall not fill the vacancies by
appointment, but, at the next regular meeting, shall order a special election, in the manner
provided in Section 4-3 of this Charter, to be held as soon as practicable to fill the vacancies for
the remainder of the terms.
(d) If, at the time the Council orders a special election pursuant to Subsections (b) or (c)
of this section, the Council is aware of any other election to be held in the Town by the Town or .
any other governmental entity within forly-five (45) days, the Council shall schedule the special
election to be held on the same day as such other election if practicable.
(e) If any vacancy in the Council occurs because of the election of a Councilmember to
the office of Mayor, the vacancy shall be filled for the remainder of the term by the
Councilmember candidate who, at that election, received the highest number of votes following
the Councilmember candidates who were elected to office.
Section 2-8. Oath of Office. Before assuming office, every member of the Council shall take and
file with the Town Clerk an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution of the United States,
the Constitution of the State of Colorado, and the Charter and ordinances of the Town, and to
faithfully perform the duties of the office.
Section 2-9. Mavor. The Mayor shall preside at meetings of the Council and shall exercise such
powers and perform such other duties as conferred by this Charter or by ordinances not
inconsistent with this Charter. The Mayor shall be considered a member of the Council and shall
have the same powers, rights, and duties as a Councilmember, including the right to vote. The
Mayor shall be recognized as the head of the Town government for all ceremonial and legal
purposes and shall execute and authenticate legal instruments requiring the Mayor's signature.
The Mayor, acting on behalf of the Council, shall oversee the efficient administration of Town
affairs by the Town IVlanager.
Section 2-10. Mavor Pro-Tem. At the first meeting, regular or special, following each regular
election, the Council, by a majority vote of the entire Council, shall appoint a Councilmember as
Mayor Pro-Tem for a two (2) year term. The Mayor Pro-Tem shall have the Mayor's powers and
perform the Mayor's duties whenever the Mayor is not available.
Section 2-11. Removal of Members of the Council. [This section added by a vote of the
people held 4-2-02] Remo.vals by the Council of inembers of the Council may be made for
either of the following reasons:
(a) For any lawful ground for removal of Town officers; or
(b) For any act declared by this Charter to constitute misconduct in office. Such
removals by the Council shall be made by a majority vote of all members of the Council after a
hearing, of which the member has been given notice in writing, which notice shall include the
charges against the member.
4
8/4/2009
6-3-6
. ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009, A resolution approving the purchase of Gore
Range Condo II Unit #2-W, with a physical address of 2189 Chamonix Lane Unit #2-W, Vail,
Colorado.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire / Nina Timm
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, Approve with Modifications, or Deny
Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009.
BACKGROUND: The Vail Town Council approved the 2009 Town of Vail Budget with
$500,000 allocated to the Buy Down Program. The Buy Down Program is designed to
purchase existing dwelling units within Vail and permanently establish them as employee
housing units. The acquisistion of Gore Range Condos # 2W is in keeping with the
established goal and actions identified in the Town of Vail Employee Housing Strategic Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009.
ATTAC H M E NTS :
Memorandum
Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009
8/4/2009
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: August 4, 2009
SUBJECT: Proposed Acquisition of a Housing Unit
1. Introduction
The Vail Town Council adopted the Town of Vail 2009 Budget with $500,000
allocated to the Buy Down Program. The Buy Down Program is designed to
purchase existing dwelling units within Vail and permanently establish them as
employee housing units. Additionally, the acquisition of Gore Range Condos
#2W is in keeping with the adopted goal and actions identified in the Town of Vail
Employee Housing Strategic Plan.
With the dollars budgeted for the Buy Down Program, the Community
Development Department is proposing the acquisition of Gore Range Condos II
unit #2W.
II. Proposed Unit
Unit #2W is a one bedroom, one bath unit. The unit is 521 square feet in size.
The unit is located on the middle floor of a three story building. Proposed
Purchase Price: $280,000
Staff has scheduled an appraisal and an inspection and per the terms of the
purchase contract will not purchase the unit if either of these is not satisfactory or
resolution of these items can be reached with the seller.
III. Proposed Use
Staff is proposing the Town retains ownership of the unit and utilize it as a rental
for Town employees. At this time of year the Town will benefit from additional
rental units for employees.
IV. Action Requested of Town Council
Authorize the purchase of Gore Range Condos II unit #2-W for a maximum
purchase price of $280,000 on September 5, 2009.
V. Attachment
Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009
8/4/2009
7-1-1
RESOLUTION NO. 21
Series of 2009
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY IN THE TOWN OF VAIL
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS GORE RANGE CONDO II UNIT #2-W, EAGLE COUNTY,
COLORADO WITH A PHYSICAL ADDRESS OF 2189 CHAMONIX LANE, VAIL COLORADO;
AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town"), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado is
a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Colorado and the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council") have been duly
elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town has budgeted $500,000 for the buy down of existing dwelling units in
the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the Town buys down existing dwelling units for the purpose of establishing
permanent employee housing units; and
WHEREAS, the Town will be using these funds to purchase the proposed unit; and
WHEREAS, the Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare
to purchase property legally described as Gore Range Condo II Unit #2-W, Eagle County,
Colorado with a physical address of 2189 Chamonix Lane, Vail Colorado (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Council's approval of this Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009, is required to
purchase the Property.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
1. The purchase of the Property is hereby approved by the Council at the maximum
purchase price of $280,000.00.
2. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Town, an
agreement to purchase the Property and to take whatever steps are necessary to
complete the purchase of the Property.
3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council
of the Town of Vail held this 4th day of August, 2009.
Dick Cleveland,
Mayor of the Town of Vail, Colorado
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson,
Town Clerk
Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009
8/4/2009
7-2-1
Resolution No. 21, Series of 2009
8/4/2009
7-2-2