HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-08-18 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA - -
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
11:30 A.M., AUGUST 18, 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.
Public comments on work session item may be solicited by the Town
Council.
1. ITEM/TOPIC: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District is hosting a
luncheon for the Town of Vail Council from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm at the
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District building located at 846 Forest Rd.
(90 min.)
2. ITEM/TOPIC: PEC/DRB Update. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
3.
ITEM/TOPIC: A discussion of Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) implementation
strategies, and answers to questions posed by the Vail Town Council at the
August 4, 2009 work session on the PAYT program introduction. (60 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests the Vail Town Council
participates in the presentation and discussion by providing policy direction by
answering the following question: 1) Which of the Pay-As-You-Throw program
options presented an appropriate approach to achieving the Town's adopted goal
of diverting 10% of its waste to the landfill within five years (2015) and 25%
within ten years (2020)?
BACKGROUND: Background / Vail's Status Quo: Colorado has very low
recycling rate (about 12-17%, bottom 1/4 of the US or worse, depending on
source). Recycling in Vail is lower than the state average. Only about 30% of
households participate in a recycling program, and the total residential diversion
(i.e. recycling) rate for the Town of Vail is only about 9%. In the Town of Vail, trash
pickup in residential units not on dumpster service is serviced by two primary
waste haulers: Vail Honeywagon and Waste Management. Both haulers offer
curbside recycling service, of which the cost is already imbedded in their trash
pickup fees. Recycling is not currently mandated under Town code. Neither
company offers curbside compost service in Vail. Both waste haulers offer
recycling to commercial and multi-family unit residential properties for a range of
fees averaging $65/month, depending on size and pickup frequency.
Goals and Household Interest: The Town Council adopted a resolution
Hii8izoo9
establishing a goal of reducing landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years, and
25% within 10 years. The Town-wide survey conducted as part of this project
found strong interest in recycling, and a willingness to pay additional fees ($4-
$7/household per month) for additional recycling and other waste diversion
opportunities. The Town can not achieve these goals without additional
efforts. The study's recommendations - which provide increased opportunities to
recycle for both the residential and commercial sector - follow. Pay-As-You-
Throw (PAYT) is a source-reduction program that treats trash like any other
existing utility such as electricity; the less you use, the less you pay. PAYT focuses
on education and financial incentives, rather than mandatory participation. PAYT
rewards consumers for conservation, resource efficiency, and recycling, rather
than the current system, in which everyone pays the same regardless of the
amount of waste they produce. PAYT is fair, and used by innovative, sustainable
communities all across the country and is the single best way to move a
community toward producing "zero waste". By attaching a price to volume, PAYT
encourages less waste production that goes beyond simply recycling, but through
more sustainable buying habits and reuse (e.g., it's not about whether or not a
plastic water bottle gets recycled, but that plastic is not used in the first place;
stainless steel water bottle instead of plastic, cloth towels instead of paper towels,
buying in bulk instead of individually wrapped items with excess packaging,
composting food waste instead of throwing it in the trash).
Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT): is a source-reduction program that treats trash like
any other existing utility such as electricity; the less you use, the less you pay.
PAYT focuses on education and financial incentives, rather than mandatory
participation. PAYT rewards consumers for conservation, resource efficiency, and
recycling, rather than the current system, in which everyone pays the same
regardless of the amount of waste they produce. PAYT is fair, and used by
innovative, sustainable communities all across the country and is the single best
way to move a community toward producing "zero waste". By attaching a price to
volume, PAYT encourages less waste production that goes beyond simply
recycling, but through more sustainable buying habits and reuse (e.g., it's not
about whether or not a plastic water bottle gets recycled, but that plastic is not
used in the first place; stainless steel water bottle instead of plastic, cloth towels
instead of paper towels, buying in bulk instead of individually wrapped items with
excess packaging, composting food waste instead of throwing it in the trash).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that given the statistical information
available and the data gathered during the feasibility process in the Town of Vail
that a PAYT program is the most effective way to achieve the Town's waste
diversion goals. Staff recommends the Vail Town Council consider the
implementation options provided, and provide direction as to whether or not the
options provided are appropriate, and if there is a preference toward any of them.
If so, staff would like to present the PAYT program options to the community in a
public workshop in the near future.
4' ITEM/TOPIC: Presentation/discussion on progress of the West Vail Fire
Station (Schematic Design - Phase 1). (30 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Mark Miller/ Don Watkins (Belford-Watkins Architects)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen, provide feedback, and approve
proceeding on to Phase 2(Design Development)
BACKGROUND: Belford-Watkins Group Architects were hired to provide design
Hii8izoo9
and engineering services for the new West Vail Fire Station. The RFP was
separated into four phases, in an effort to consider each phase and the associated
costs before moving on to the next phase. The four phases include: Schematic
design; Design Development; Final Architectural/Engineering Design and
Specifications; and Contract Administration.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the design concepts as submitted by the
West Vail Fire Station design committee, and approve proceeding on to Phase 2
(Design Development). The committee will continue to refine overall square
footage and site design to further reduce costs.
5. ITEM/TOPIC: 2010 Operating Budget. (30 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the proposed 2010 operating
expenditures.
BACKGROUND: The budget process began in June with a review of budget
philosophies, major revenue items and continued in July with a review of the
town's long term capital plan. This next step is a review of overall operating
expenditures of the town in preparation for a full review of all components of the
budget on September 1 st.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback to staff regarding overall
operating expenditures, in preparation for a full review of the 2010 Town
Manager's Budget on September 1 st. First reading of the budget ordinance is
scheduled for September 15.
6. ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
7. ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Town Council
8. ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b)(e)
- to receive legal advice on specific legal questions and to determine
positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators; Re: pending litigation
Civil Action No. 08-CV-00464-LTB-MJW, Diana Johnson v. Town of Vail, et
al.; and other pending and/or threatened litigation.; 2) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)
(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of
property interests; to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to
determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re:
proposed Timber Ridge redevelopment. (35 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
g• ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment. (4:20 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT OT CHANGE)
Hii8izoo9
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL
BEGIN AT TBD, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, IN THE VAIL TOWN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Hii8izoo9
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District is hosting a luncheon for the Town of
Vail Council from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm at the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
building located at 846 Forest Rd.
Hiiaizoo9
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: PEC/DRB Update.
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
ATTAC H M ENTS :
August 5, 2009 DRB Meeting Results
August 10, 2009 PEC Meeting Results
Hiiaizoo9
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
ov~kL PUBLIC MEETING
August 5, 2009
~~iCouncil Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
PROJECT ORIENTATION 2:00pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Tom DuBois Mike Dantas
Pete Dunning Brian Gillette
Libby Plante
SITE VISITS 2:30pm
Bloom Residence - 5197 Gore Circle
Illig Residence - 796 West Forest Road
PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00pm
1. Illig Residence DRB090261 / 5 minutes Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
796 West Forest Road/Lot 13, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 5
Applicant: Beth Levine
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Plante VOTE: 3-0-0
CONDITION(S):
1. The applicant shall plant the two replacement evergreen trees, 12 and 14 feet in height
respectively, on the street side of the residence.
2. Bloom Residence DRB090259 / 5 minutes Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stone veneer)
5197 Gore Circle/Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn 5th Addition
Applicant: Martin Bloom
ACTION: Table to August 19, 2009
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Plante VOTE: 3-0-0
3. Arosa Duplex DRB090213 / 20 minutes Nicole
Final review of new construction (two-family dwelling)
2657 Arosa Drive/Lot 8, Block C, Vail Ridge
Applicant: Vail Local Housing Authority, represented by VAg Inc.
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Plante VOTE: 3-0-0
CONDITION(S):
1. The applicant shall provide a mock-up of the proposed exterior materials and colors for
further review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of a building
permit.
2. The applicant shall submit a final site grading and drainage plan that shall be reviewed
and approved by the Public Works and Community Development Departments, prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
Page 1
Hi18i2oo9
a- i - i
STAFF APPROVALS
Children's Garden of Learning DRB090171 Nicole
Final review of a sign (business)
129 North Frontage Road West/Middle Creek Subdivision
Applicant: Children's Garden of Learning, represented by DeeDee Hense
Skaal Haus DRB090182 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stucco)
141 West Meadow Drive/Lot D-2, Vail Village Filing 2
Applicant: Charlie Sherman
Ritz-Carlton Club DRB090216 Rachel
Final review of a change to approved plans (sign lighting)
288 Bridge Street, Unit C3/Lots E, F, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Kevin Roth
Ritz-Carlton Club DRB090219 Rachel
Final review of a sign (display box)
288 Bridge Street, Unit C3/Lots E, F, Block 5A, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Kevin Roth
Homestake Condos DRB090238 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows)
1081 Vail View Drive/Block A6, Lions Ridge Filing 1
Applicant: Dave Peel
Ferguson Residence DRB090242 Warren
Final review of changes to approved plans (paint color)
1250 Westhaven Circle/Lot 30, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Dan Walcher
Dockstader Residence DRB090243 Tom T.
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
3987 Lupine Drive/Lot 8, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Rodgers Dockstader
Jost Residence DRB090245 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck)
5013 Snowshoe Lane/Lot 24, Block 19, Vail Meadows Filing 1
Applicant: Piper Architecture
Lighthall Residence DRB090246 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
483 Gore Creek Drive/Lot 8, Vail Village Filing 4
Applicant: Diane Lighthall, represented by Happy Trees, LLC
Gordon Residence DRB090247 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (sidewalk)
4997 Main Gore Drive/Lot 1, Block 4, Bighorn Subdivision 5th Addition
Applicant: Shane Maullin
Page 2
Hi18i2oo9
a- i -a
Pattison Residence DRB090248 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
5177 Gore Circle/Lot 11, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision 5th Addition
Applicant: Peter Fletcher Pattison Living Trust
Senkow Residence DRB090249 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
931 Red Sandstone Road/Unplatted
Applicant: Daniel Senkow
Spring Hill Lane LLC DRB090250 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
1498 Spring Hill Lane/Lot 16, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1
Applicant: A Cut Above Forestry
Courtside Townhomes DRB090251 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-paint, doors, lights)
4552 Meadow Drive/Unplatted
Applicant: Steve Ankerholz
Hadley Residence DRB090252 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck)
1127 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 11, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant: Doug Kopel
Beck Residence DRB090255 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
2923 Bellflower/Lit 2, Block 6, Vail Intermountain
Applicant: Stephen Beck
Wheatley Residence DRB090256 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-paint and deck)
1762 Alpine Drive/Lot 5, Vail Village West Filing 1
Applicant: Mella Clare Wheatley
Holiday Inn DRB090257 Bill
Final review of changes to approved plans (sign)
2211 North Frontage Road West/Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3
Applicant: Vanquish Vail
Ritz-Carlton Hotel DRB090260 Warren
Final review of changes to approved plans (stucco and paint color)
728 West Lionshead Circle/West Day Subdivision
Applicant: Graham Frank
Marriott Hotel DRB090262 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (mechanical venting)
714 Lionshead Place/Marriott
Applicant: Slaugh Construction
Page 3
Hi18i2oo9
2-1-3
354 Beaver Dam Road Partners Residence DRB090263 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck)
354 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 9, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 3
Applicant: Sarah Charles
Goldstein Residence DRB090265 Nicole
Final review of an addition (fireplace and storage)
3145 Booth Falls Court, Unit A/Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 12
Applicant: Erickson Architects
Vail Golf Course DRB090266 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (access ramp)
2450 South Frontage Road East
Applicant: Vail Recreation District
Simon Residence DRB090267 Warren
Final review of an addition (addition, entry porch, fence)
4800 Meadow Drive, Unit 4/Unplatted
Applicant: Peel/Langenwalter Architects
Lodge Tower DRB090268 Bill
Final review of an addition (vestibule)
164 Gore Creek Drive/Lots A, B, C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Stanley Cope
Shimon Residence DRB090270 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-paint)
1828 Alta Circle/Lot 42, Vail Village West Filing 1
Applicant: Dennis Shimon
Upton Residence DRB090271 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows)
4192 Columbine Way/Lot 25 & 26, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Anne Upton, represented by Arthur Cowperthwaite
Riva Ridge South Condos DRB090272 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-paint, balcony)
114 Willow Road/Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Riva Ridge South Condos, represented by Tim Hargreaves
Morris Residence DRB090273 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
2945 Booth Creek Drive/Lot 3-1, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 11
Applicant: John Morris
Gerstenberger/Horn Residence DRB090274 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (driveway)
1320 Greenhill Court, Units A& B/Lot 16, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Allen Gerstenberger and Sally Horn
Page 4
Hi18i2oo9
2-1-4
Silberberg Residence DRB090275 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
4367 Streamside Circle/Lot 8, Bighorn Subdivision 4th Addition
Applicant: Paul Silberberg, represented by Slifer Management
Becker Appointment Trust Residence DRB090277 Warren
Final review of changes to approved plans (windows)
4026 Lupine Drive/Lot 13, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Brown-Wolin Construction
Tyrolean DRB090278 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
400 East Meadow Drive/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Tom Saalfeld
Balloun/Maurer Residence DRB090281 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-rooo
1480 Aspen Grove Lane, Units A& B/Lot 2, Ridge at Vail
Applicant: Anne Fitz
Fitz/Feistmann Residence DRB090282 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-rooo
1480 Aspen Grove Lane, Units A& B/Lot 4, Ridge at Vail
Applicant: Anne Fitz
Walker Residence DRB090283 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
5089 Gore Circle/Lot 9, Block 2, Bighorn Subdivision 5th Addition
Applicant: Lori Walker
Frampton Residence DRB090284 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
14 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 34, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Susan Frampton, represented by Just Us Gardens
Baltz Family Partners II LLC Residence DRB090286 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
5147 Gore Circle/Lot 14, Block 1, Bighorn 5th Addition
Applicant: Kathy Olson
Plzak Residence DRB090287 Rachel
Final review of changes to approved plans (windows)
740 Sandy Lane/Lot 4, Vail Potato Patch Filing 2
Applicant: Maximilian Plzak
Riva Ridge 45/05 LLC Residence DRB090288 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck)
244 Wall Street, Unit R-2/Parcel 2, A Resubdivision of Part of Lot C, Block 5C, Vail Village 1st Filing
Applicant: Nedbo Construction
Page 5
Hi18i2oo9
2-1-5
Morken/Wilson Residence DRB090292 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck)
4595 Bighorn Road, Units 1& 2/Bighorn Addition 3
Applicant: Marc Finer Construction
Spring Hill Lane LLC DRB090293 Warren
Final review of changes to approved plans (windows)
1498 Spring Hill Lane, Unit A/Lot 16, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1
Applicant: Tim Zarlengo
Bryony Investment Holdings DRB090296 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-rooo
950 Fairway Drive/Lot 6, Vail Village Filing 10
Applicant: Bryony Investment Holdings
O'Malley Residence DRB090297 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
354 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 9, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 3
Applicant: 354 Beaver Dam Road Partners, represented by Heid Remodeling
Judd/Stockmar Residence DRB090298 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
4096 Columbine Drive/Lot 14, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Eleanore Judd
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office
hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75
South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356,
Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Page 6
Hi18i2oo9
2-1-6
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
i~. August 10, 2009
1:OOpm
j..
!U1'!11UI Yl1J1a , .
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Rollie Kjesbo Michael Kurz
Scott Lindall David Viele
Sarah Paladino
Bill Pierce
Susie Tjossem
Site Visits:
No site visits
A moment of silence was observed in remembrance of former Commissioner Jim Viele.
5 minutes
1. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of a new
special development district, pursuant to Article 12-9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail
Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through14 (Vail Rowhouses)/Lots 7
through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090022)
Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Tabled to August 24, 2009
MOTION: Lindall SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
60 minutes
2. A request for a work session to discuss prescribed regulations amendments, pursuant to Section
12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090017)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Friede
ACTION: Tabled to August 24, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5-0-0
Rachel Friede presented an overview of the Staff inemorandum covering each topic one at a
time.
Regarding the topic of orientation of buildings for passive solar gain, Commissioners Tjossem
and Pierce expressed concern with regard to regulating building orientation and the fact that
much of a lot's value is derived from the views that can be obtained. Furthermore, the
orientation of our valley, the steep slopes and natural features (rocks and trees) will provide
barriers to compliance with building orientation requirements. The Commissioners generally
agreed to recommend additional language to strengthen the guideline to utilize passive solar
heating and cooling through design.
Regarding the topic of regulating site disturbance on all low-density residential lots, the
Commissioners expressed that regulating site disturbance held some positive benefits.
Commissioner Kjsebo brought up the concern that utility connections sometimes require
increased site disturbance than may be planned. Commissioner Pierce expressed concern over
tying into grades of neighboring properties. He suggested a distance by which to tie in to catch
Pa e 1
ailai2~o9
a-a-i
grade. Commissioner Lindall expressed concerns about limiting site disturbance as some lots
need further disturbance, such as smaller lots and lots without natural topography due to
previous development. Commissioner Tjossem suggested a sliding scale of ratios, with smaller
lots allowed greater disturbance. Rachel Friede suggested an alternative to site disturbance as
a percentage, citing the LEED program that limits site disturbance with certain prescribed
distances from buildings, walkways, and other site improvements. Commissioners Tjossem and
Lindall agreed with that concept. Commissioner Kjesbo suggested that a site disturbance bonus
be provided for sites with EHUs that are allowed greater site coverage.
Regarding the topic of water course setbacks, Rachel Friede elaborated on the lack of clarity of
what is allowed in the water course (stream) setback. Commissioner Pierce believed that the
current regulations were appropriate so long as it was on private property. He stated that an
individual should be able to landscape within the setback to whatever degree they desired. The
Commissioners generally agreed with keeping the existing regulations allowing for at grade
patios and decks to encroach into the stream setbacks. It was agreed that areas within the
floodplain remain natural.
Regarding the topic of wetland regulations, Rachel Friede described the current regulations with
regard to wetlands, which are limited in scope. Commissioner Kjesbo stated that a wetlands
delineation of the entire Town needs to occur prior to any new regulations. He said this type of
study would be helpful like the other hazard maps. The Commissioners generally agreed that
prior to determining the appropriate setback from wetlands, a Town-wide study should be
conducted to understand the extent of the wetlands in the Town.
Regarding the topic of roof forms and heat tape, Rachel Friede described the impacts of heat
tape and potential ways to reduce the impact through the design of a roof form. Commissioner
Paladino felt that the exact regulations should be reviewed when discussing this topic as it
deserved greater scrutiny. Commissioner Pierce stated that heat tape was an integral part of
roof system design in Vail. He added concerns about safety in pedestrian ways. Warren
Campbell reminded the commission that we were focusing on residential at this point and not the
commercial/pedestrian villages. Several of the Commissioners agreed that heat tape in excess
is not good for anyone. They agreed that individual circuits and sensors should be required.
Furthermore as roof systems improve to R-60, less and less heat tape will be needed. It was
mentioned that it takes a couple of seasons to determine were ice damning occurs. It was
suggested that the way to regulate this topic was through technology.
Regarding the topic of roofing materials, Rachel Friede reviewed the current regulations. She
noted that the changes in roofing material technology has created a need to amend the
regulations. The Commissioners expressed that it wasn't warranty or weight that was the
concern but the relief of the shingle with regard to thickness and shadow lines created. It was
suggested that bi- and tri-laminate should be explored.
Regarding the topic of plant species selection, Rachel Friede went through the current
regulations and the concerns of non-native/evasive species being introduced. Commissioner
Pierce stated his concerned about limiting to only native species as there has been hybrid
evolution of plants that may be appropriate for this area. Commissioner Tjossem inquired into
the ease of listing prohibited species. Commissioner Pierce stated that there is a need for
screening between neighboring properties. Furthermore, the trees may serve as a wind break or
shade for cooling in the summer.
Regarding the topic of landscaping irrigation, the Commissioners generally agreed that requiring
review of irrigation would be cumbersome and costly. Commissioner Kjesbo noted that a
limitation on turf grass areas would be preferable to limitation on permanent irrigation.
Pa e 2
ailai2~o9
a-a-a
Commissioner Pierce noted that even native grasses need watering in order to stay healthy.
Commissioner Paladino expressed concern that creating a maximum amount of turf grass could
potentially encourage applicants to utilize turf grass when they wouldn't have without limitations.
Commissioners Lindall and Kjesbo agreed that applicants typically know if they want turf or not,
and would not be encouraged to add more with such regulations. The commissioners generally
agreed for a need to require rain sensors.
Regarding the topic of tree removal, Rachel Friede reviewed the guidelines and recommended
that more concrete requirements for replacement be implemented. Commissioner Kjesbo
suggested that the Town could be a repository for tree replacement that cannot be located on a
subject property. The Commissioners agreed that tree replacement should be required, with off-
site mitigation permitted, for removal of healthy trees. They also agreed that replacement of
dead trees be recommended, but not required.
Regarding the topic of limitation of driveway size and thus, limiting snow melt, Rachel Friede
made a presentation on the impacts and growth of snow melt over the past seven to ten years.
The Commissioners agreed that limitations on driveway size could affect design. Commissioner
Lindall noted that he would rather see snowmelted driveways if other structure design issues
could be better addressed. Commissioner Pierce noted that required parking spaces may have
contributed to large driveways. Pierce further commented that smallest driveway may not be the
best for design. Commissioner Lindall noted that snowmelted areas should have a specific
purpose, such as a path to an outdoor hottub or a specific feature.
5 minutes
3. A request for a work session to discuss a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3,
Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of public buildings and grounds
(fire station), located at 2399 North Frontage Road/Parcel A, Resub of Tract D, Vail Das Schone
Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090019)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Table to August 24, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
4. A request for a work session to discuss the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan,
an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC090014)
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Table to August 24, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
5. A request for a work session to discuss the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan,
an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC090014)
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Table to August 24, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
6. A request for final review of conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12-71-5, Conditional
Uses: Generally (On All Levels Of A Building Or Outside Of A Building), Vail Town Code, to allow
for the development of a public or private parking lot (parking structure); a vehicle maintenance,
service, repair, storage, and fueling facility; a ski lift and tow (gondola), within "Ever Vail" (West
Pa e 3
ailai2~o9
2-2-3
Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South
Frontage Road West rig ht-of-way/U n platted (a complete legal description is available for
inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC080063)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to October 26, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
7. A request for a final review of major exterior alterations, pursuant to Section 12-71-7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the area known
as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), with multiple mixed-use structures including but not limited to,
multiple-family dwelling units, fractional fee units, accommodation units, employee housing units,
office, and commercial/retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage
Road West, and the South Frontage Road West rig ht-of-way/U nplatted (a complete legal
description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department),
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080064)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to October 26, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
8. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation
amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12-
10-19, Core Areas Identified, Vail Town Code, to amend the core area parking maps to include
"Ever Vail" (West Lionshead) within the "Commercial Core" designation, and setting forth details
in regard thereto. (PEC080065)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to October 26, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
5 minutes
9. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary
amendment, pursuant to 12-3-7, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning of
properties from Arterial Business District and unzoned South Frontage Road West right-of-way
which is not zoned to Lionshead Mixed Use-2, properties known as "Ever Vail" (West
Lionshead), located at 953 and 1031 South Frontage Road West and South Frontage Road
West right-of-way, (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail
Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080061)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to October 26, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5-0-0
10. Approval of July 27, 2009 minutes
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lindall VOTE: 5-0-0
11. Information Update
The PEC requested to have a copy of the memorandum to Council regarding PAYT to be
provided to them.
Pa e 4
ailai2~o9
2-2-4
The PEC requested to know the height of the poles the example light fixtures were attached to at
Ford Park for the Lighting Master Plan.
12. Adjournment
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lindall VOTE: 5-0-0
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The
public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the
Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional
information.
Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970)
479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published August 7, 2009, in the Vail Daily.
Pa e 5
ailai2~o9
2-2-5
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: A discussion of Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) implementation strategies, and
answers to questions posed by the Vail Town Council at the August 4, 2009 work session on
the PAYT program introduction.
PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests the Vail Town Council participates in
the presentation and discussion by providing policy direction by answering the following
question: 1) Which of the Pay-As-You-Throw program options presented an appropriate
approach to achieving the Town's adopted goal of diverting 10% of its waste to the landfill
within five years (2015) and 25% within ten years (2020)?
BACKGROUND: Background / Vail's Status Quo: Colorado has very low recycling rate
(about 12-17%, bottom '/a of the US or worse, depending on source). Recycling in Vail is lower
than the state average. Only about 30% of households participate in a recycling program, and
the total residential diversion (i.e. recycling) rate for the Town of Vail is only about 9%. In the
Town of Vail, trash pickup in residential units not on dumpster service is serviced by two
primary waste haulers: Vail Honeywagon and Waste Management. Both haulers offer curbside
recycling service, of which the cost is already imbedded in their trash pickup fees. Recycling is
not currently mandated under Town code. Neither company offers curbside compost service in
Vail. Both waste haulers offer recycling to commercial and multi-family unit residential
properties for a range of fees averaging $65/month, depending on size and pickup
frequency.
Goals and Household Interest: The Town Council adopted a resolution establishing a goal of
reducing landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years, and 25% within 10 years. The Town-wide
survey conducted as part of this project found strong interest in recycling, and a willingness to
pay additional fees ($4-$7/household per month) for additional recycling and other waste
diversion opportunities. The Town can not achieve these goals without additional efforts. The
study's recommendations - which provide increased opportunities to recycle for both the
residential and commercial sector - follow. Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) is a source-reduction
program that treats trash like any other existing utility such as electricity; the less you use, the
less you pay. PAYT focuses on education and financial incentives, rather than mandatory
participation. PAYT rewards consumers for conservation, resource efficiency, and recycling,
rather than the current system, in which everyone pays the same regardless of the amount of
waste they produce. PAYT is fair, and used by innovative, sustainable communities all across
the country and is the single best way to move a community toward producing "zero waste".
By attaching a price to volume, PAYT encourages less waste production that goes beyond
simply recycling, but through more sustainable buying habits and reuse (e.g., it's not about
whether or not a plastic water bottle gets recycled, but that plastic is not used in the first place;
stainless steel water bottle instead of plastic, cloth towels instead of paper towels, buying in
bulk instead of individually wrapped items with excess packaging, composting food waste
instead of throwing it in the trash).
Hiiaizoo9
Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT): is a source-reduction program that treats trash like any other
existing utility such as electricity; the less you use, the less you pay. PAYT focuses on
education and financial incentives, rather than mandatory participation. PAYT rewards
consumers for conservation, resource efficiency, and recycling, rather than the current system,
in which everyone pays the same regardless of the amount of waste they produce. PAYT is
fair, and used by innovative, sustainable communities all across the country and is the single
best way to move a community toward producing "zero waste". By attaching a price to volume,
PAYT encourages less waste production that goes beyond simply recycling, but through more
sustainable buying habits and reuse (e.g., it's not about whether or not a plastic water bottle
gets recycled, but that plastic is not used in the first place; stainless steel water bottle instead
of plastic, cloth towels instead of paper towels, buying in bulk instead of individually wrapped
items with excess packaging, composting food waste instead of throwing it in the trash).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that given the statistical information available
and the data gathered during the feasibility process in the Town of Vail that a PAYT program is
the most effective way to achieve the Town's waste diversion goals. Staff recommends the
Vail Town Council consider the implementation options provided, and provide direction as to
whether or not the options provided are appropriate, and if there is a preference toward any of
them. If so, staff would like to present the PAYT program options to the community in a public
workshop in the near future.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Pay-As-You-Throw Program Memo
Aspen PAYT Program Summary
PAYT Powerpoint Presentation
PAYT - Setting Bag and Fixed Fee Ratio Example
Hiiai2oo9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: August 18, 2009
SUBJECT: Pay-As-You-Throw Program Implementation Strategies
1. SUMMARY
Through a feasibility study funded in part by the Northwest Colorado Council of
Governments (NWCCOG), findings of the study concluded that a Pay-As-You-Throw
(PAYT) program is feasible and the most effective way to achieve the Town's adopted
goal of reducing landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years and 25% within 10 years. In
response to questions and comments raised at a Town Council work session held on
August 4, 2009 introduction to the PAYT program, Staff has prepared answers to those
questions, and will present program implementation options for PAYT in residential units
not on dumpster service, and a program implementation plan for commercial and multi-
family units.
The purpose of this session is to:
• Provide answers to Town Council questions posed during the August 4,
2009 work session related to PAYT program implementation.
• Provide implementation strategies and options for residential a PAYT
program in the Town of Vail
• Provide options for increased multi-family and commercial recycling in the
Town of Vail
II. DISCUSSION ITEMS
Background / Vail's Status Quo: Colorado has very low recycling rate (about 12-17%,
bottom '/4 of the US or worse, depending on source). Recycling in Vail is lower than the
state average. Only about 30% of households participate in a recycling program, and
the total residential diversion (i.e. recycling) rate for the Town of Vail is only about 9%.
In the Town of Vail, trash pickup in residential units not on dumpster service is serviced
by two primary waste haulers: Vail Honeywagon and Waste Management. Both haulers
offer curbside recycling service, of which the cost is already imbedded in their trash
pickup fees. Recycling is not currently mandated under Town code. Neither company
offers curbside compost service in Vail.
Both waste haulers offer recycling to commercial and multi-family unit residential
properties for a range of fees averaging $65/month, depending on size and pickup
frequency.
Goals and Household Interest: The Town Council adopted a resolution establishing a
goal of reducing landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years, and 25% within 10 years.
The Town-wide survey conducted as part of this project found strong interest in
recycling, and a willingness to pay additional fees ($4-$7/household per month) for
1
Hii8i2oo9
3 - i - i
additional recycling and other waste diversion opportunities. The Town can not achieve
these goals without additional efforts. The study's recommendations - which provide
increased opportunities to recycle for both the residential and commercial sector - follow.
Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) is a source-reduction program that treats trash like any
other existing utility such as electricity; the less you use, the less you pay. PAYT focuses
on education and financial incentives, rather than mandatory participation. PAYT
rewards consumers for conservation, resource efficiency, and recycling, rather than the
current system, in which everyone pays the same regardless of the amount of waste
they produce. PAYT is fair, and used by innovative, sustainable communities all across
the country and is the single best way to move a community toward producing "zero
waste". By attaching a price to volume, PAYT encourages less waste production that
goes beyond simply recycling, but through more sustainable buying habits and reuse
(e.g., it's not about whether or not a plastic water bottle gets recycled, but that plastic is
not used in the first place; stainless steel water bottle instead of plastic, cloth towels
instead of paper towels, buying in bulk instead of individually wrapped items with excess
packaging, composting food waste instead of throwing it in the trash).
Answers to questions posed at the August 4 Town Council work session are provided
below:
1. One waste hauler in the Town of Vail offers different sized containers, isn't this already a
variable rate/PAYT program?
A: No, one hauler offers customers the option to purchase a smaller trash container (64
gal.) for a slightly cheaper one time fee, than the larger 96 gal. container, however the
actual cost of service, or pickup of the trash is the same amount each month regardless
of the size of the can.
2. What opportunities exist for larger recycling containers?
A: Several companies offer larger recycling containers (including bear-resistant options).
Larger recycling containers are a recommended part of a PAYT program.
3. What is the County MRF set up? Is there no single stream option?
A: The Eagle County MRF is currently designed for a dual-stream option, meaning
newspaper and commingled materials would need to be separated. This is still in
discussion.
4. What can be done to encourage people to recycle more?
A: PAYT programs are the best way to increase diversion rates. Recycling is one way to
increase recycling. Education, signage, and outreach are also great ways to increase
recycling.
5. How would haulers track colored bags and what additional costs are associated? What is the
cost of additional software, record keeping, etc.?
A: Haulers would not need to track each colored bag purchased, since they would be pre-
paid by the customer. The hauler may, however, have a role in compliance, as they load
trash containers onto their truck, they can note as bags fly into the hopper if a non-
compliant bag exists. There would be no need for additional software under the proposed
system. The hauler may need to note the address of a non-compliant household to follow
up with them later and remind them of the program.
2
Hii8i2oo9
3 - i -a
6. What can be done now to encourage greater recycling participation for dumpster service
users?
A: An ordinance requiring imbedded recycling fees, regular pickup and additional space
requirements would encourage increased recycling, tied with outreach and education. A
PAYT similar to a single-family bag program would be an appropriate way of testing
effectiveness.
7. Does the Town have a baseline, what is the diversion goal based upon?
A: The Town's baseline data applies to households not on dumpster service, and was
measured through the set-out survey.
The average computed weight for surveyed residential trash was 100 Ibs/household, the
average computed weight for the fiber recycling was 9 Ibs/household, the average
computed weight for the commingled recyclables was 7 Ibs/household, and the average
combined weight for recycling was 10 Ibs/household. The average computed diversion
rate for all surveyed households was 9%. This statistic was computed under a 90
confidence level, and a 7% margin of error. We can also infer that the Town of Vail
household units not on dumpster service generate at least 254,100 Ibs of trash per week,
and 24,510 Ibs of recycling per week. To determine both commercial and single-family
residential combined trash rates, we may look to Jackson, WY who has recently
determined an average of 12 Ibs of trash per person per week. The Colorado state
average is 11.6 Ibs. per person per week.
8. What percentage of the Vail population would be impacted with a residential PAYT program for
phase 1?
A: At an initial estimate, at least 47% of the households in Vail, or at least 2541 units
would be eligible to participate in a residential PAYT program (see chart below).
Total Housing Units in Vail 5382 2000 U.S. Census data
Housing Type Number Percentage of total
1 unit detached sin le famil 648 12%
1 unit attached townhome 973 18.10%
47% of total units in Vail are not on
dumpster service and would be
eligible to participate in the PAYT
2 units du lex 256 4.80% program Phase 1
3 or 4 units 664 12.30%
10-19 units 797 14.80% Assumed dumpster service
20 or more units 1177 21.90%
9. When would the multi-family (i.e dumpster service be included)?
A: The program would begin with increased recycling opportunities, and Town staff would
immediately begin a pilot PAYT for residents on dumpster service when a single family
PAYT begins.
10. Have the waste haulers and the public been involved in the PAYT feasibility and planning
process?
A: Yes, both Honeywagon and Waste Management have been involved in the PAYT
planning process since January, 2009. There have been 3 joint stakeholder meetings
along with several conference calls held along with SERA, in which representatives from
Vail Honeywagon, Waste Management, the Eagle Valley Alliance for Sustainability, the
Eagle County Landfill, and a Vail resident were in attendance. The Town of Vail has also
3
Hiiai2oo9
3-1-3
hosted a PAYT informational webinar for the above stakeholders. So far, public input has
been obtained through the community online survey, and the resident represented at the
stakeholder meetings.
11. Won't people just dump their trash in public trash containers and the Town will incur that
cost?
A: Study results indicate that this is more of a perceived concern than an actuality. There
are very few incidences of illegal dumping. Education and availability of bags is key to
eliminating this concern.
There are several options for implementing PAYT programs:
1. Contracting- Local governments to contract for residential service for all units up to
and including 7 units per building. Multi-family buildings with over 7 units are
considered commercial and local government may not contract for commercial
accounts.
2. Ordinance- Local governments may pass an ordinance requiring all haulers to follow
certain guidelines including setting PAYT rate structures.
3. Municipal collection- The Town can choose to take over trash collection
themselves, purchasing a collection fleet, hiring FTEs, and all of the associated
administration and O&M.
4. No Action - If the Town Council chooses not to move forward with a PAYT program,
Staff suggests amending waste diversion goals and Environmental Strategic Plan
action items relative to PAYT implementation.
Mandatory Commercial and Multi-Family Sector
The commercial sector makes up between 35-45% of the total waste stream in the US'.
In general, recycling programs are implemented and refined in the residential sector and
then expanded to cover the commercial waste stream23. There is significant potential to
increase diversion in the commercial sector in Vail. However, there are a number of
barriers that must be considered when discussing the commercial sector. These include:
• Waste stream- unlike the residential waste stream, commercial waste is not
homogenous, each business type, size, and location may generate vastly different
types of waste.
• Space- space for recycling is often cited as a major concern in commercial
programs.
• Lack of control over bills- many commercial entities do not have control over their
bills. The trash and recycling is often contracted through a property management
company.
• Cost- Larger businesses may be able to reduce their trash service levels (and costs)
through recycling. However, smaller businesses may already be on the lowest level
of trash service and are not able to reduce their trash subscription level to save
money through recycling.
• One program does not fit all- In the residential sector it is feasible to use a blanket
program that covers all households. Each business in the commercial sector faces
~ Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures. US EPA Office of Solid Waste, EPA530R-08-010,
November 2008.
2 Skumatz, Lisa and Freeman, Juri. Increasing Recycling in the Commercial Sector. Assessment of Mandatory Commercial
Recycling Programs and Exclusive HaulerArrangements. 2009, Prepared for Alameda $topwaste.org
3 Skumatz Lisa and Freeman, Juri. Recycling Study Targeting Small Businesses in Mecklenburg County, NC. 2008. Prepared for
Mecklenburg County Solid Waste Department
4
Hii8i2oo9
3-1-4
its own barriers (space, materials, customer type, janitorial staff, property managers,
etc.) and a battery of program types might be necessary to address the entire sector.
~ Lack of infrastructure- It is necessary that the proper infrastructure is in place
before any mandatory commercial program is implemented.
Strengths of Mandatory Commercial Recycling Programs
Program Element Description of Strengths
Increased All of the programs reported that the commercial diversion has increased due to mandatory
diversion- recycling
Increased Programs increase access and the opportunity for all business to participate, divert
accesslopportunity- materials, and in some cases realize monetary savings in trash costs
Increased Haulers and recyclers reported that the program can increase revenues available to
revenues- support diversion initiatives
Increased Potential to increase customer accounts for haulers and recyclers
customers-
Market May help bring processors, or end-users into the area
development
Market May increase opportunities for haulers and bring in new h au lers/co m petition
development
Efficient Design- Some target specific sectors with large amounts of waste, or exempt small generators to
reduce administrative hassle with minimal impact on waste diversion
Addresses all Instead of placing the burden of diversion only on the residential sector, the entire
sectors- community is responsible, no sector is exempt
Flexibility- The program can offer flexible options for diversion for each business type
Goals- Programs can be designed with community goals in mind and can be crafted to address
certain materials or diversion aims
Reporting- Programs can require reporting and tracking of diversion and disposal in the sector which
might not have been done previously
Economies of Increased efficiencies in collector routing and processing by requiring all businesses to
scale- participate
Weaknesses of Mandatory Commercial Recycling Programs
Program Element Description of Weaknesses
Increased costs- May increase the costs for haulers and generators
Need for Without proper infrastructure to handle the additional recycling stream the program may not
infrastructure- be successful
Politics- May require market intervention by City/County, possible negative political reaction by
some actors
May drive out small Depending on the hauler's ability to adapt, some haulers report that the programs may
haulers- push them out of the market and favor larger haulers
Reporting- Added burden to City staff, haulers, and generators to complete necessary reporting
Incentives- Depending on program design there may not be incentives for the generator or haulers to
increase participation above minimum requirements
Enforcement Can build resentment and resistance to the program among generators
(generators)-
Enforcement May add time and cost to enforce the program to City staff and/or haulers
(haulers, City)-
May not increase Although the opportunity is offered for all businesses to divert materials, without proper
participation- planning the program may not increase participation
Not the best way to If the goal is increased diversion tonnage, forcing 100% participation may not be the most
meet goals- effective or equitable way to achieve it. Focusing on the largest generators and those that
can reduce trash bills through recycling may work better and may be less expensive from a
social point of view.
Multi-Family
5
Hii8i2oo9
3 -1-5
There is a significant opportunity to address the MFU sector but it may take more time
than the single-family (SF) units. Overall the MF sector remains a slightly more difficult
sector to address than the SF sector. SF units already have service available, do not
face space barriers, see direct economic signals from the proposed PAYT programs,
and have individual trash carts. Before additional steps can be taken to address the
multi-family sector it is important to address the following barriers:
Barrier 1: Lack of Proqrams: Many of the MFUs in Vail do not have recycling programs.
Solution: Require that haulers imbed the cost of recycling in their trash service.
By imbedding the costs of recycling in trash service, all MFUs will be required to
pay for recycling service whether or not they recycle. The requirement should
ensure that recycling service is at least equal to the level of trash service to give
residents an opportunity to recycle materials.
Barrier 2: Lack of space: The lack of space for recycling bins next to trash carts is a
common barrier. Older units may not have been designed to include space for recycling
and there may not be adequate space next to the trash bins. If either the trash or
recycling bins are significantly more convenient than the other, contamination may be a
serious issue to contend with.
Solution: Require that all new and significant remodels include equal and
convenient access to both trash and recycling containers. The Town planning
department could be required to check all MF building plans to ensure that this
requirement is met before granting permits. For existing MFUs, it may be
necessary for town staff to work with property managers to develop plans and
identify areas in which recycle carts may be conveniently located.
Once there is an opportunity for all MFU to recycle, other measures may be taken to
increase the level of diversion in the sector, including a pilot PAYT bag program.
III. ACTION REQUESTED
Staff requests the Vail Town Council participates in the presentation and discussion by
providing policy direction by answering the following question:
1) Which of the Pay-As-You-Throw program and improved recycling program options
presented an appropriate approach to achieving the Town's adopted goal of diverting
10% of its waste to the landfill within 5 years (2015) and 25% within 10 years (2020)?
OPTIONS WORKSHEET
RESIDENTIAL PAYT PROGRAM OPTIONS
Yes No Recommendations
❑ ❑ Option 1. Residential PAYT with Imbedded Recycling - Ordinance Version-
Introduce a Pay as you Throw (PAYT) system; households that put out less trash
pay lower rates, and those who put out more trash pay higher bills. Trash bills
vary with service usage - like electricity and other utilities - and households willing
to recycle have the ability to reduce their bills. All households would have access
to curbside recycling and the cost would be included in the trash bill. PAYT is
expected to allow Vail to reach its diversion goals quickly.
How it would work. Households pay for Town approved trash bags
(special color & logo), and the bags are put in the household's existing
bear-resistant containers. Haulers continue to collect using semi-
automated collection. Non-compliant households (trash not in bags in the
6
8/18/2009
3-1-6
cans) would not have their trash collected (or a"warning" might be offered
for a short time). Haulers receive more money the more trash is collected,
so they have an interest in monitoring bag usage. They stand by the cans
as they are emptied into the truck, so they can visually inspect compliance.
Potential concerns and solutions: Recycling collections costs may increase, but
per-household rates would fall because fixed costs are spread over more
households. Recycling would be paid through the trash bill, and it represents a
new business opportunity to haulers. New bins for recycling are an up-front cost
that can be repaid over time through trash bills. There are no new bins needed for
trash. All haulers are affected equally (level playing field).
Actions required: Town Council passes an ordinance for PAYT and
imbedded recycling. The ordinance would include a recycling service
definition (every other week, major materials, containerization), reporting
requirements / inspection authority; and pricing "structure" allowing
"monthly base fee or customer charge" not to exceed the price of 4 bags,
or similar. Bags must hold 32 gallons of trash.
❑ ❑ OR Option 2. Residential PAYT with Imbedded Recycling via RFP - Introduce
a Pay as you Throw system as described in A1, however, a competitive RFP
process would be used to select a hauler to provide town-wide service in
compliance with the PAYT service requirements.
How it would work: Town issues an RFP, widely advertised. Town
administers the resulting contract. Costs to residents may be lower
because of the economies of scale achieved with one hauler rather than
multiple haulers providing service, and Town has greater authority over
service and rates, incentives, and design of the program. The Town would
achieve the exact recycling/diversion programs it designs and work with
the contractor on education and future programs such as composting.
Potential concerns and solutions: Only one hauler "wins" the contract (unless
the Town is divided into two geographic regions). Requires (limited) Town staff
time to manage contract. Customers may not initially like a change in service
provider.
Actions required: Direct town staff to prepare RFP, establish evaluation
committee, and review results and provide recommendation selected as
contractor by Town Council in the future.
If there is interest in expanding waste diversion programs, multi-family unit and
commercial improved recycling and PAYT program options follow.
MULTI-FAMILY UNIT IMPROVED RECYCLING PROGRAM OPTIONS WORKSHEET
❑ ❑ Option 1. Multi-family (MF) Trash Service Revised to include recycling
(applies to MF buildings with 7 or less units): Require trash service fees to be
revised to cover trash plus recycling service no less than'/ the trash service level
(e.g. buildings with 2 cubic yards per week of trash service must also receive at
least 1 cubic yard of recycling space).
How it would work: All MF residents would be provided an opportunity to
recycle. The cost would be recovered through increased trash rates,
providing a business opportunity for haulers. For space-constrained
properties, use of multiple 96-gallon wheelies could suffice.
Potential concerns and solutions: Household behaviors will only be indirectly
affected (trash costs are imbedded in rent). Access to recycling is provided, but
education and signage will be needed (decision needed whether hauler or building
responsibility). Haulers will need many more bins / dumpsters, and that will be an
7
8/18/2009
3-1-7
investment recovered through rates. Policy decisions will be needed to address
buildings with significant contamination in the recyclables. Multifamily trash rates
are likely to increase to cover the increase in services (two collections), but the
service adds progress to Town of Vail diversion goals. This assures that MF are
allowed opportunities similar to SF.
Actions required: Pass an ordinance requiring that trash service for
multifamily buildings must include provision of'/ the volume in recycling,
placed in a similarly convenient location, and that education must be
provided once a year.
❑ ❑ AND Option 2. Multi-family household PAYT pilot program: Town staff is
directed to implement a pilot program of a PAYT program suitable and practical for
Town of Vail multi-family buildings. The program should be designed to provide a
practical recycling incentive for MF building tenants. The MF imbedded recycling
program is consistent with this recommendation, and would allow for a bag
program similar to SF units. Staff should return to the Town Council with a
recommended option within 2 months.
IMPROVED COMMERCIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM OPTIONS
❑ ❑ Option 1. Commercial Recycling - Option 1(Aggressive): Require haulers to
offer recycling equal to at least'/ the monthly trash volume4 per month as part of
trash service. There is to be no separate fee for recycling, and the cost is
recovered through new/ revised trash rates.
Potential concerns and solutions: This option would most likely require
auditing, and some exceptions granted for space limitations. Town staff
would work with the existing Vail Village pilot recycling program (in which
several business take recyclables to the Vail Resorts loading dock
recycling containers for pickup) and Vail Resorts to help find a workable
solution.
❑ ❑ AND/OR Option 2. Commercial Recycling - Option 2(Targeted): This is a
three-part recommendation. 1) Implement an "ABC" or "All bottles & cans, or all
beverage containers" law. This requires all businesses that serve beverages to
recycle beverage containers or their liquor license is not renewed. This is in place
statewide in North Carolina, and in communities elsewhere around the nation. 2)
Pass two ordinances. One would require all businesses to fill out recycling plans,
The plan makes businesses think about recycling, and encourages some
businesses to implement programs. The second ordinance would require all
businesses to incorporate clauses into commercial (and potentially multi-family)
leases saying tenants were expected to recycle. 3) The Town may consider acting
as an intermediary to help design/organize some high paper or high cardboard
routes with the haulers and businesses.
❑ ❑ OR Option 3. Commercial Recycling - Option 3(Least Aggressive): Pass an
ordinance implementing the recycling plans and recycling lease option described
above.
OPTION FOR SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR RECYCLING
❑ ❑ Option 1. Space For Recycling Ordinance: Town could pass ordinance requiring
designated space on planning documents for recycling in all new and remodeled
commercial and multi-family buildings - inside and outside - to avoid recycling
space constraint problems into the future.
How it would work: Code would be revised to double space for trash to
cover trash and recycling. The Town building department would inspect
plans for compliance. This has been suggested as part of the Sustainable
Building Initiative as well.
Potential problems and solutions: Costs will be slightly higher, but it will likely
be a small part of any major remodel, and barriers to recycling are removed
4 Recycling may be collected less frequently, so container size and frequency may differ from trash.
8
Hiiai2oo9
3 - i -s
forever.
Actions Required: Pass an ordinance requiring equal space for recycling
and codify requirements and include in inspection procedures.
ADDITIONAL LONG TERM PROGRAM OPTION
❑ ❑ Additional Option: Staff direction for longer term: To achieve the longer-term
goals, direct Town Staff to focus on the two main waste streams remaining -
compostable materials and construction/demolition. Although beyond the scope of
the feasibility study, the following two elements would represent priority activities
toward reaching higher diversion:
• Work with the County Materials Recovery Facility as it develops composting
options, and test options for seasonal every-other-week yard waste5
collection and/or a system of yard-waste drop-off options. This is a
significant waste stream. The Town might also consider a targeted food
waste program for grocery stores and other large commercial food
generators.
• Examine a variant of the construction and demolition (C&D) deposit
programs6 in place in San Jose and other communities. C&D is a significant
waste stream, especially in Vail.
• Consider other elements that may be identified in a zero waste plan.
• Require reporting back in 1-2 years.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff believes that given the statistical information available and the data gathered during
the feasibility process in the Town of Vail that a PAYT program is the most effective way
to achieve the Town's waste diversion goals. Staff recommends the Vail Town Council
consider the implementation options provided, and provide direction as to whether or not
the options provided are appropriate, and if there is a preference toward any of them. If
so, staff would like to present the PAYT program options to the community in a public
workshop in the near future.
V. NEXT STEPS
If the Town Council believes the options presented are appropriate, Staff will present the
PAYT program concept and implementation options at a public workshop. Staff will then
return to the Town Council with public input results and drafts of appropriate ordinance
or RFP documents.
5 Or yard waste / food waste collection. Although food waste can be more complicated in areas with bears, a number of
communities have moved successfully in this direction. However, until the larger waste streams have been addressed, it may
not be worth the extra hassle for the smaller food waste stream in Vail.
6 The deposit system may not be as effective in an affluent building community like Vail; however, speed of approval and other
incentives may be developed and be more effective in Vail.
9
8/18/2009
3-1-9
Skumatz Economic Research Associates, lnc.
Boulder Office: 762 Eldorado Drive, Superior, CO 80027
Phone: 3031494-1178 FAX: 3031494-1177
email: skumatz @serainc.com; web: serainc.com; payt.org
DATE: August 7, 2009
TO: Kristen Bertuglia, Town of Vail
FROM: Lisa Skumatz, Juri Freeman, SERA
SUBJECT: City of Aspen PAYT Program
Population: 5,914
Summary:
In 2005 the Aspen City Council decided to implement the Waste Reduction and
Recycling Ordinance with two goals in mind:
• To increase the lifespan of the Pitkin County Landfill which was quickly
approaching capacity.
• To reduce energy consumption, global warming, and air pollution through
increased recycling.
The city researched various options to achieve their goals and determined that
implementing variable rates would be most effective means of doing so. The city based
their PAYT ordinance on those in other cities throughout Colorado including Fort Collins
and Boulder. In Aspen, multiple private haulers collect both trash and recycling and the
majority of the materials are brought to a single county owned landfill. The city does not
set the rates for PAYT but does set a rate structure that the haulers in town must adhere
to in order to receive their license. The town decreed that the rates for a 64-gallon
container must be double those set for a 32-gallon container and the rates for the 96-
gallon level of service must be three times higher than the 32-gallon container.
PAYT Ordinance:
The Waste Reduction and Recycling ordinance in Aspen is similar to those in other cities
but unique in that it applies to all sectors: single-family residences, multi family
residences, and all commercial properties. Below is a summary of the ordinance:
• Mandatory collection- recycling collection is automatically included (embedded)
as part of the trash service for all residential, multi family and commercial
properties.
• Rates- rates must be volume based with the unit of volume being 32-gallons.
• Same day pick up-Trash and recycling must be collected on the same day to
make it easier for customers to remember.
• Bans- yard waste is banned from disposal in the trash, the city also set up a free yard
waste drop-off in town to offer alternatives for disposal.
• Required reporting- all haulers must report collected tonnages to the city.
• Sunset provision- the city will look at the ordinance in three years and decide if
they want to renew it
• Contract exemption- commercial properties with existing contract with haulers
Hii8izoo9
3 -a - i
can wait until the contract expires before subscribing to the new variable rates.
• Cardboard exemption- an exemption for self haul commercial properties to keep
costs down for small businesses generating large volumes of cardboard.
Results:
The ordinance was implemented in the fall of 2005 and by early 2006 all of the
residential accounts had been switched over to the new rate structure. The commercial
accounts have taken a little bit longer to fully implement for a few reasons. One being
the contract exemption and the other reason is that many of the individuals operating the
businesses are not the same ones holding the contracts for trash service in the building.
The city has dedicated one FTE to ease the implementation. AS of 2009 the City reports
that they all the businesses in town are complying with the ordinance.
Multi-family recycling is slowly improving as well. Enforcement is an on-call basis. The
City does not actively monitor the MFUs but instead relies on complaints from residents
about not receiving service. If a MFU resident calls the City and reports that they do not
have recycling bins at their unit, the City will follow up with the property manager to get
recycling bins on-site. The ordinance requires that all haulers embed recycling fees in
the overall trash rates. Properties may often receive a reduced trash bill through
participation in the recycling program. By recycling the MFUs have the opportunity to
lower their trash service levels and thus reduce their overall bills.
The city has seen its recycling rate reach 14% in the first year of implementation. It is
difficult to measure growth from pre-implementation because there was no reporting
before the ordinance. Overall, the City estimates that they have reduced over 11,100
tons of C02e. The two tables below show the tonnage and percent recycled:
Tons Recycled (MFUs are considered commercial)'
2006 2007 2008
Residential 3,639 4,332 2,165
Commercial 20,553 22,539 19,496
Total 24,192 26,871 21,661
Diversion Rate2
2006 2007 2008
Residential 8% 6% 8%
Commercial 9% 11% 12%
Total 14% 16% 18%
1 Source: City of Aspen 2008 Recycling Report
2 Source: City of Aspen 2008 Recycling Report
8/18/2009
3-2-2
• • ~]1J
' • •
p - - . • . -g
Y~
F
~ T I ~ II
~
OAL; R / I I AIL LANDFILL
o , O , I ' ' / A, AND 25%
WITHIN ' AI
August 8 • Council o •
.
PAYT?
• • , •
• • • utility, P/ • / customers
/ e ed on the volume o e o
s •
An opportunity to p• • •
An opportunity to ed • e the public • bout
recycling • d other • e diversion
method
s
PA •
A R- g P .
divert waste • . d
,SilHizoo9 1
3 -3-1
! Di° fential P• ftrk?
e -r o . • ~ ~
~ d. • lil~l~~l ir1 r`~ N11
• . - -d?
ty 1.
.y 1.
- A - . 4 • . • . •
• . .
• . p
• • R` / e . • / . • I
Ordinance versus Contracting Pros and Cons
Ordinance Contract
Pros Cons Pros Cons
• Maintains • Less control over • Town has greater control • Limits competition in the
competition in services over rates and service market
the market • Political support is options • May be politically
place needed • Allows for routing unattractive
• Allows • May not be the most efficiencies for selected • Limits customer choice
customers to efficient (more trucks on hauler • Requires lengthier
choose their the roads, more GHG • Simplified reporting of implementation process
service emissions, etc.) tonnages collected (RFPs, Bids, selection,
provider • Potentially lower rates for etc)
• Easierto customers • Higher resistance from
implement • Reduced wear and tear haulers
• Retains a on streets
"level playing • Can set facility
field" for all designation for materials
haulers
operating
underthe
same rules
• Less
resistance
from haulers
• Less
administrative
demand for
Vail
8/ 18/2009 2
3 _3_2
rDrr1Pari SOrj ~r"
rr • - . ~ior~
aty cost uetore Parr cDsts noW
Louisville, CO $17 for 64 gallon. Additional for Competitive bid to a single contracted hauler: Costs are now $7.95 t
rarycling plus fuel surcharges. $20.65 for 32-96 gallon carts. Recyding free, added a new
compostable collection service. Pnce of compostable cart ranges
from $2.75 for a 32 to $825 for a 96 g.
Lafayette 2008 $10.50 with fuel surcharge Competitive bid to a single contracted hauler. 32g $6.36, 64g
and Non-HOA residents paid 1.5 to $12.79, 96g $19.09 includes free recycling. For the 20% still using
2 times those rates. 96g, rates increased, for the other 80% rates went cl~own or stayed
the same.
Superior, CO Various haulers, on averages rates Switched to a single contracted hauler it is now up to 96g $8.95,
were $24 indudes recycling
Salt Lake Cdy, Uf Only option, 90g for $1125 40g $825, 60g $925, 90g $1125. Also, yard waste option added,
90g for $3.50
PoR Angeles, WA Only option was 90ga1 for $27.70 Couldn't change size of container due to haulers. Now offer vveekly
and every other week (EOVN trash collection with 90g containers
$27.70 weekly, $19.75 every other with free 96g rarycling. Over half
of the population is on EOW and is paying less now than before.
Multi-FOmily and Commercial, Optio
Q*rdinanres
• d• • g • • • d
• •
g imb'di', . ~il,ls
~ rr-~~~'`• ~;~rJ~11C~?~~ rJr reC%Allg ~ll ll?\Jv
J!11,`~ ~ ~ ~lll~
rjGb • g p• p
• - d . - p • ;n
p•g.
MFU p p .
8iiHizoo9 3
3 -3 -3
Questio
mp
• 'd ~rcl;'~11J~~~~r rJllllll~JllJrclrl~ll
D . • d a ll~•~/l~r~
P • p • i GgTo
8/ 18/2009 4
3-3-4
LXA1~IFLL FRO v ~t)L~ ILL u~ I KA Y iOiv
PURPOSES ONLY
SETTING BAG AND FIXED FEE RATIO - RATE STRUCTURE - Town of Vail
ASSUME CURRENT BILLS ARE $30 ON AVERAGE $30.00
IF fxed fee cannot exceed price of X Bags==> 4 6 8 10
Then fixed fee is priced at==> $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00
and Each bag costs $3.75 $2.50 $1.88 $1.50
Here bags are too inexpensive for strong incentives
Customer monthly bills IF they use X bags per MONTH - Here are the resulting bills.
0 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00
1 $18.75 $17.50 $16.88 $16.50
2 $22.50 $20.00 $18.75 $18.00
3 $2625 $22.50 $20.63 $19.50
(1 can or 32 gallons per week 4 $30.00 $25.00 $22.50 $21.00
Common set outs AFTER b $33.75 $27.50 $24.38 $22.50
Recycling are about 1.5 bags / week 6 $37.50 $30.00 $2625 $24.00
Equals about 6 bags per week. 7 $4125 $32.50 $28.13 $25.50
(2 cans or 64 gallons per week 8 $45.00 $35.00 $30.00 $27.00
9 $48.75 $37.50 $31.88 $28.50
10 $52.50 $40.00 $33.75 $30.00
11 $5625 $42.50 $35.63 $31.50
(3 cans or 96 gallons per week==>) 12 $60.00 $45.00 $37.50 $33.00
13 $63.75 $47.50 $39.38 $34.50
14 $67.50 $50.00 $4125 $36.00
15 $7125 $52.50 $43.13 $37.50
(4 cans or 128 gallons per week 16 $75.00 $55.00 $45.00 $39.00
17 $78.75 $57.50 $46.88 $40.50
Constructed bySkumatz Economic Research Assoaates, lnc. (SERA)
,S/18/200)
3-4-1
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Presentation/discussion on progress of the West Vail Fire Station (Schematic
Design - Phase 1).
PRESENTER(S): Mark Miller/ Don Watkins (Belford-Watkins Architects)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen, provide feedback, and approve proceeding on
to Phase 2 (Design Development)
BACKGROUND: Belford-Watkins Group Architects were hired to provide design and
engineering services for the new West Vail Fire Station. The RFP was separated into four
phases, in an effort to consider each phase and the associated costs before moving on to the
next phase. The four phases include: Schematic design; Design Development; Final
Architectural/Engineering Design and Specifications; and Contract Administration.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the design concepts as submitted by the West Vail
Fire Station design committee, and approve proceeding on to Phase 2(Design Development).
The committee will continue to refine overall square footage and site design to further reduce
costs.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
West Vail Fire Station agenda
West Vail Fire Station power-point
Hiiaizoo9
V
J
J
~
i-=
C21
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
~
Q
° a Date: August 18, 2009
ar ~
m ~7
Subject: Schematic Design Review
:Irrhirrrurr
Vail Fire Station #3
Project #09083
Plunnin~
Design Goals
• Provide drive-through bays if possible (eliminate back-in maneuver)
• Make efficient use of site to provide maximum parking (more than
masterplan)
• Maintain masterplan vehicular connection to housing development
• Make public spaces available at grade level
• Place non-public spaces at upper level (separation from public
activities)
• Separate public and firefighter entries
• Building to be a marker for the West Vail neighborhood (set
precedence)
• Provide strong statement to community
• Consider LEED Certification
• Consider space for ambulance substation
Design Progress Options
Option C
Good grade approach to housing development
Too close to Shell property
Dual access to frontage road
Modern building character and forms
Option B
Direct access to housing development
Dual access to frontage road
Possible revised access for Shell property
Built into hillside
Traditional building character and massing
Option A
Direct access to housing development
Single access to frontage road
Built into hillside, impinges more into hillside
Parking transgresses onto housing property
Less opportunity for ambulance substation
Modern, mountain character
Hii8i2oo9
ai1
Square Foot and Construction Cost Comparison
Option A Option B Option C
Square Feet 19,433 s.f. 17,266 17,377
Building Cost $4.4 mil $3.8 mil $3.7 mil
Site Cost $1.3 mil $1.2 mil $1.2 mil
Option A was selected for further development but with the understanding
that square footage and cost would need to be reduced.
Approaches to Cost Reduction
Site
• Reuse existing retaining walls (move building further south)
• Two point access onto Frontage Road (less excavation/export)
• Defer construction of sidewalk serving housing project
• Reduced length of water service entries and use existing F.H.
• Reduced plug number for storm water detention
Apparatus Bays
• Move exercise room to shift quarters (upper level)
Admi nistration
• One fire prevention office removed
Shift Quarters
• Gang toilets together and add lavs at bunk rooms
Resident Firefighters
• Elimination of two resident firefighter toilets
Building Envelope
• Reduction of glazing or conversion of storefront to window
units
• Reduction in cost of stone veneer
• Reduction in cost and number of canopy's & solar shades
Building Systems
• No cooling at shift quarters and resident firefighters dorm
Current Design
Construction Costs
Square Footage 16,700
Building Cost $3.5 mil ($210/s.f.)
Site Cost 1.1 mil
$4.6 mil ($275/s.f.)
Comparison to Original Program
Master Plan Current Design Delta
Program Space 13,354 13,145 ( 209)
Non-Program Space 2,003 3,555 1,552
15,357 16,700 1,343
Project Budget (see attached)
Hiiai2oo9
4-1-2
2 Town of Vail Station #3
~
Proj ect Budget
m ~ Schematic Design Phase
~
v Q
o ~ M,>>,,;,?.",
m °
Ctl CD Inrerhu:v
8/18/2009
CONSTRUCTION COSTS SOFT COSTS
Sitc 51,071,604 Basc AE Fccs S274,624
Conditioual Usc Pcrmit S 10,500
Apparatus Bays $1,092,028 Civil Enginccring 533,000
Shift Quartcrs 5571,048 Landscaping Dcsign S6,500
Administration 5921,499 Irrigation Dcsign 54,500
Rcsidcnt Fircfightcrs Dorm S920,885 Survcy S600
Subtotal 54,577,064 Soils Invcstigation 52,000
Plat
3% Changc Ordcr Contingcncy S 137,312 Rcimbursablcs (cstimatcd) 549,369
LEED Coordination S35,000
Total 54,714,376
FURNISHINGS, FIXTURES & EQUIPMENT Dcvclopmcnt Fccs (cxcmpt)
Apparatus Bays $25,894 Couditioual Usc Fcc (cxcmpt)
Shift Quartcrs 559,503 Building Pcrmit (cxcmpt)
Administration S54,024
Rcsidcnt Fircfightcrs Donn S38,406 Propcrty Insurancc
Excrcisc Room S 15,630 Quality Tcsting S20,000
IT EquipmcnY S45,555
Traffic Signal Communications Scrvicc 55,000
Rcsidcntial Watcr Tap S25,821
Commcrcial Watcr Tap (1 1/2") 544,994
Rcsidcntial Scwcr Tap S20,543
Commcrcial Scwcr Tap S38,169
Watcr Mctcr S 1,474
Elcctrical Scrvicc S7,000
Gas Scrvicc 550,000
5% Contingcncy S 11,951 5% Contingcncy S31,455
Total S250,961 Total S660,549
ToTaL cosTS $5,625,885
nwnbcrs to bc confirmcd by utility company whcn construction documcnts complctc
8/18/2009
4-1-3
' 2008 Amerz~an Fii°~ ~~~~on Campa~~~ons
(Sonrce: FiJ°e Chief-A~In;azine, November 2008 edition)
,
,
City Size (sq.ft.) Cost Cost/Sq. Ft.
Bentonvillef AR 33,100 5.3 million $163
' Tuesan, AZ 15,600 3.9 million $250
Oceanside, CA 18,300 6.9 million $375
Batavia, iL 26,000 4.7 million $183
Carlsbaci, CA 6,100 4.0 million $405
Cherryville, NC 141700 1.8 million $127
Cfovis, CA 9,400 5.1 million $541
Downers Grove, iL 331000 7.0 million $211
~ Escondida, CA 9,129 4.5 million $493
Fairfax, VA 24,195 6.0 million $248
Fayetteville, AR 6,700 1.4 million $199
{:lin, MA 221200 6.4 million $290
Fran
.
Highnoint, NC 121100 1.9 million $158
Jeffersanville, IN 17,900 3.7 million $205
Long Beach, CA 6,600 3.0 million $479
Marana, AZ 14,000 3.3 million $23$
Newport Beach, CA 9,000 7.0 million $617
~ Orange, Ca 7,400 2.8 million $350
! Orlando, FL 10,100 2.8 million $284
~ Roanoke, VA 30,000 5.1 million $190
; San Luis, AZ 141500 2.3 million $171
San Niarcos, CA 14,000 4.3 million $310
; Shawnee, KS 18,100 3.0 million $166
'St Clouud, MN 11,300 2.2 million $200
Surprise, AZ 161400 4.1 million $250
Venice, FL 16,500 3.2 million $197
i Virginia 6each, VA 17,100 4.7 million $277
i Yuma, AZ 7,900 2.6 million $325
~
~ AVERAGES 15P757 4003 million $282.25
Square Feet Dollars per° square foot
~
~
~
~
i
~
I
Hii8i2oo9
4i4
~
0
~
`m
~ ~F_L_ -
X • WEST VAIL FIRESTATION
AFFORDA6LEHOl35iNG
i
U • ' ~ - - - - _
A 1 - i - - -
- ; ~ - - ~
- - - -
.
~J~ - - - ~
~ --i~ - ~
~ -
.
-
~
~ -
r -
. r . _
_ - -
- ;
- u NEIGNBORNOOD
- - - - - ' r-. - BLOCK
16 dwelling unfh per atre
~
tleP 5..- b iSFi
u~;llrpe unlh rtllype
Poh 9 Po e~ ~PUCSe g. '.r33
,po
I'•~~ . - an S ]GVT -=.t??
' ' ~ ~ ,MplkafunAf 'SB - -
J~~~•~h~~ lolrstad~poces~IC55 .1cr4alsAk ~ 91a4b
ti.' 1`1009
4-Z-1
~
~
2
i
-
.
3
F
11, " L . . , . . . . . u'l.
tl;
4
b
-
~
~
4_2_2
,
`-i
✓
i
-
L
~ ~J I( I~~.
~ . ~ ~
Steep Possible
Grade Ambulance
Site T `
Conf BunkerJ
I.Off ~ r,~
Off
It' ~
~ 2 4 7 Bio ~~'r Y-
. 3 6 Exercise-, Ir: ~ ' I
5 - , I
Slide
Stair u
Trafn'g Tool 2 3
y r~ _ IOut
E
~to~
~
. , . ~ . • Hose
Tower I
t
. Steep ~ _ ~
i-
Grade
l I~ 1
i
i
,
1
35 Parking ~ ' } ..V,
Spaces
~
Lower Level Plan Option
x.~ib~zooe
4-2-3
8 g
Bay Roof
7 10
6 F
WS
O
P tio 2
5 Laun 1 2
-L
a K 3 dLI
H ~ K Laun -,i
w pr '
9 3
5 4
- Y
z Liv I
Hose
Tower
1
8/lb!2009
4-2-4
~
I ~
i
L3
~ I
1_" ;
~
_wY
-
_
South Elevation
x.~ib%zooe
a-?_;
. 7~ . ~
Housing
Access !a
Steep I ~ I
Grade
. Poss ible
Ambulance '
Site I '
- ~J-- _
~
6 4 3
r-2 1 1 Off - - - •I I.
Bunker 7 +y
Conf I I F
Exercise !
, E ~ Bio Work N ~ Community
~ Use Entry
~ I -
w Train'g
'
151idei-, .
-"T -K I I Lu j `
v10~ Stair
IStorco
2
3 ~
~ Steep
Grade F- ~ ~ ~ • ~
Public '
Entry
}
Tower l
~ r
~
,
'
- - . ; Community
'
32Parking - ' Access Spaces ~ Fire Truck Access
Lower Level Plan Option
3i1S/2009
4-2-6
° 4 5
s
3~ -
F ~
~ G.
` Bay Roof 2~ LS-tor 7~
3 ~ O
4 3.ti f ~ Laun 8
~
1
rt' ~ Trainmg
~ Mezz.
K
~
~ ~ . K . au
~ N ~ Slide . ~ .
Stair
~ l
pav 72
'
I 2
I F'= ~
~ o
4 Hose
j I
Tower
Upper Level Plan Option
3i1S/2009
4-2-7
Ty-
_
T
r r ff] ff ~ - ✓
--'W
South Elevation
i; _ . .
iiizi~',.
.
~ -
• ~ ~ ~}+J - , , J
~
-40 r G 7L r
-Li
L.~-
East Elevation
x.~ib%zooe
4-2-5
I} '
~s
~ .r
f ~ _m:~~ , r-`~ ~ - • j •j~ ~
rAi -
~ North Elevation
x.~ib%zooe
4-2-9
-
~ "
' . - - - - - . ~ ~ ' - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - " -
~ i~ - ~ ~ ~
lb~
~
` _
~
1 L ~
~ -F-- --r- ~ /
•f - `
~ ~ ~r~
11 ~ ~
>
Lower Level Plan Option
H~ib~zooe
4-2- 10
1 2
3 4
5 _ 6
8
EXERCISE 7 I 10
ROOM 0 9 I
7 7- -
11
uiunM E
e
TOOL/ U K
SCBA TRAW o
AREA
BUNKER CON ~R CE ~
GEAR R_ OfJ~
SLIDE MfCH REC WZ;u ~ i
- - -
17- i
- = S ~
10/J/ . i
~
ASH APPARATU - 0 p I
- AYS e 6 i
M ~ TRAINING
ROOM i
S- ~
- ~ ~
.I 2 3
U P - --r,
_ i
i
STAI '
~
ENTRY i
.
. ~
Q i
, _
,
- - - - `
, . _~i---- - - - - - - - - - - -
- -
- -
rHOSE`"
~ W
~
Lower Level Plan Option
3i1S/2009
4-2-II
~ 1 2
0
3 4
5 6
I
❑
S ~ o
~ ol
7 8
OPEN
2 TO ~ i
3 BELOW 9
~ OPEN _
DN, ` TO BUILD STU u
i APPARATUS SUP ROQ
SLID gqy AN
o BELOW 10
4 STOR J ' -
11
KITCHEN I~II III~
DN LI1LfNG ~
SHIFT QUARTERS I
c~INIhJC~u ~~J~_I 12
L AY o
STAIR iT ~ QINI~G ~~~M
, ~
I N a s
, Hos
w
Upper Level Plan Option
8i1S/2009
4-2- ]2
` . ~ . . . .
_ . . , ~ _ . . _ .
' . . 1 I.~ .
T_ .
~
_
-
South Elevation 1
~
.
_ r-
~ r
_
~
-
South Elevation 2
x.~ib%zooe
4-2- 13
- -
, -
= _ - ~ - -
- J I ~ - -
=
-
II ,
-
:U
L-
~ r~
' ,
East Elevation 1
~
- '14
- - -
I~~
T 1145-
East Elevation 2
x.~ib%zooe
4-2- ]4
~
INest ''rl'ail Fire Station #3 i~
Vail, Colorado
~
Town Council Work Session Submittal
August 12, 2009
4-2- 15
PLAN LEGEND ~
h~.
A. NORTH FRONTpGE ROAd
B. SiDEWALK FROM BUS STOP ! RQLINDABDUT
C. ENTRYMONUMENTlACCENFLANDSCAPE ~
~r D. SHAR€D DRIVEWAY
E. STORMWATER DETENTION BASIN
rP _T~%~' F. PEDESTRIANCRfl55WALK5
G. PARKIyG AREA
H. DRWEWAY ACCESS TO RESIDENTIAL ABOVE
~ . I 1. MAIN BUI1DiNG ENTR,4NCE
~ II 1 I. FFRE TRUCK BAYS ACCE55 LANE
- K. FIRE TRUCK BAY ENTRANCE
K' L. F6RE TRUCK BAY ERIT 'a
~ - Q• M. OUTDOOR PATiD ' SREAR-OUF -
I~ N. FFAGPOiE i ER & EMS 3PECIAL A1ONUMENF
I /I; S~ I O. E7(TERIOR MECHANICAL EQLIIPMEN.T; TRASH
VRCINUSEU P. EVERGREEN LANDSCAPF BUFFER
f/ ~~~ie€ s~.ti.rinN Q. DECIAV4U5 TREE5/ GRASSES BVFFER
BUII FAWC R. %ENIC BUILDING COLIAR (CD88LE r SHRiJBS}
. ` I S. %ERIC NATIV€ PERENNIAL ACCENT BEDS
T, SFT€ RETAINI'VG WALLS
U. CONCRETE 51DEWALKS ~ •'m
V. DEDICATE6 EGRESS PNLY FOR FIRE TRUCKS
% i •
W. TO ADJACENT Gk5 SFATItSN
s~
G.
D. E.
v. A. ~
~~'y _yF ~ asaa~s s-
~ CONCEPTUAL 5lTE & LANDSCAPE PLAN
4-2- 16
~
~a
~a
~M
~
.
o c' 77~
_ # I LAJ
- ~ ~ ~ wae vrl F.e
1 ^ ~
ti1.41N I[ VP I. PI.4N ~
SG\LE: PIB"_1.-U,.
4-Z- 17
~
La
~
~
DIN~
1._IV'NLR LLVLL PLAN y-~
SL'ALL:1/0"=1'-0'
4-Z- ]h
~
~
~a
w
~ - -
~
i ' - - - -
_ ~i F - -
~ . WastvailF.
~ . 1' seal~~s
ti ~ ~•.eerew• ~ _ ~
NC)fJf I'I.-\1 ~ ~vwa8~ae~
st~\I.L~ 113t"= t -ii
4-Z-19
~
w
pnn
~ - :
. . . . ...n m
. . .
~
. . . . . _
~ .
.T_
~
~T
Tl
SOUTH ELEV,,TfUN ~
S(:AIF~ II€i'-1'-f1'
,
y ` W V441 ~
-f sanimnn
i I . .
kA"L57 F!1f21'IALLLLVi111(_5N yyLtil LLLVA1I0,1
Sf:41€~ IiF3" I'-ll" AIF1!H"..7'-U"
4-Z-20
~
~I
v
✓ . ~ ~~I _ _ _ - _ . ~ i . ~w..vm
} F ~ I
f
NL7[2111LLLVAIIUN
S(AI F'. I~N"_ ! ~-0•
~ 1 t M1 t~, ~ M~e~[ vail Fic
Z i~•1' 1 1~ ' S1MionI3
FAST Fl FVATIC IN
4l:ALL lin" 1 ~-il"
4-Z-21
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: 2010 Operating Budget.
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the proposed 2010 operating expenditures.
BACKGROUND: The budget process began in June with a review of budget philosophies,
major revenue items and continued in July with a review of the town's long term capital plan.
This next step is a review of overall operating expenditures of the town in preparation for a full
review of all components of the budget on September 1 st.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback to staff regarding overall operating
expenditures, in preparation for a full review of the 2010 Town Manager's Budget on
September 1st. First reading of the budget ordinance is scheduled for September 15.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
2010 Operating Expenditures
Hiiai2oo9
MEMORANDUM
To: Town Council
From: Stan Zemler, Judy Camp, Kathleen Halloran
Date: August 13, 2009
Subject: 2010 Draft Operating Budget
2010 BUDGET PROCESS
The attached information is provided for your consideration in Tuesday's work session
discussion of the 2010 budget. To date, you have reviewed revenue forecasts and the
capital plan. Tuesday's discussion will focus on operating expenditures, which are
included in the General Fund, the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, and the Marketing
Fund (business license fee revenue directed to special events.) We are presenting this
information in a different format than you have seen before to answer the question "How
much does it cost to operate the Town of Vail"?
On September 1, you will see a consolidated draft of the 2010 budget proposal in a more
traditional format including both capital and operating expenditures by fund along with
five-year projections for major funds. The September 1 draft will incorporate your
direction from Tuesday's meeting as well as prior meetings on capital expenditures. The
September 1 work session will be the final opportunity for discussion before the public
hearing on September 15. The 2010 budget timetable is attached for your information.
While the 2009 and 2010 operating budgets will be balanced by using some of the $3.2
million General Fund surplus generated in 2008, we plan to reach a sustainable budget
balanced by annual revenues for 2011. Although that budget will not be proposed and
approved for another year, we are already working on an Organizational Health plan to
determine how to best use our reduced resources to achieve our mission to be the
premier resort community.
BACKGROUND
The Economy
The US economy has been in recession since December 2007 with more recent
economic data giving some hope of a recovery in the near future. During 2008, US
median home prices dropped 13%. Many US consumers remain over-extended with
mortgages and credit card debt. Consumer confidence is at an all-time low and the
consumer is no longer fueling the US economy.
Europe is also in recession and the worldwide economy is lagging. The US stock
market, as measured by the Dow Jones Industrial Average, was down 34% at the end of
2008 compared with prior year, but has shown an upturn in the second quarter of 2009.
Vail's Economy
Vail's economy has faired better than the rest of the nation, and other ski resort areas,
due to its recent redevelopment activity, strong marketing, high-end clientele, summer
events, and the strength of Vail Mountain including the Epic pass introduced in 2008.
Current trends in tourism include: "staycations" i.e., staying closer to home to vacation;
shorter trips; looking for more value; booking later; and more active vacations.
Hii8i2oo9
5 -1-1
Conspicuous consumption, which once drove the economy, is giving way to avoidance
of luxury in tough economic times.
Lodging occupancy rates for "same properties" (a sample of lodges that have been in
business for at least one year) for the 2008/2009 ski season are estimated at 52.4%,
down from 58.6% the year before. Average daily rates, ADR's, at those same lodges
are off approximately 11 % from the year before and essentially the same as 2005/2006
at $364 per day. Advance bookings for the next six months continue to be down from
prior year; however, the impact of later booking patterns recently has mitigated some of
the initial shortfalls in advance bookings.
Sales tax collections in Vail began trending downward in October, 2008, almost a full
year after the U.S. economy entered recession. The town may have been less impacted
than the rest of the country in the early days of the recession because commitments had
already been made for vacation stays. The upscale nature of the town's guests may
also have protected Vail in the early stages when the biggest impact was on middle
class workers and homeowners. For 2009, sales tax revenues through June are down
15% compared with 2008. The 15% reduction has been fully reflected in the 2009
amended budget and we are on target to meet the $16.6 million projection for full-year
sales tax revenue.
Redevelopment activity has slowed considerably with just two major projects, Solaris
and Ritz Carlton Residences, moving forward as planned and a third major project, Four
Seasons, slowed down as a result of foreclosure and change in general contractor.
Real Estate Transfer Taxes (RETT) peaked in 2008 at $9.1 million, a level that is not
expected to be achieved again during our planning horizon. Sixty-two percent of the
2008 RETT was collected from major redevelopment projects. We are now on track to
meet the much lower 2009 amended budget of $3.4 million.
The Future
The US and world economies are showing early signs of improvement with some
forecasters predicting an end to recession is close. Most agree, however, there will be a
"new normal" when the economy turns. The "new normal" is likely to include a
continuation of many of the trends we are seeing today - staying closer to home; shorter
vacations; guests looking for more value; less "conspicuous consumption" and perhaps
less luxury. Tourism will continue to be the economic driver of the Town of Vail.
However, redevelopment will no longer provide the economic boost it did over the past
five years.
In the future, the Town of Vail will be challenged to provide the high level of guest
services and attractions our residents and guests expect while maintaining public safety
and other municipal services with fewer financial resources.
Transition from the Redevelopment Era to the "New Normal"
During Vail's Billion Dollar Renewal, both the town and private developers added
important amenities including streetscape, loading and delivery facilities, water features,
fire pits and more. The town also increased programs and service levels in several
areas and increased spending on contributions and special events. Several positions
were added specifically for redevelopment and all but two of those positions have been
removed for 2010. The net impact of these new amenities, programs, services, and
Hii8i2oo9
5-1-2
contributions/special events is an increase of $2.3 million over 2005 spending as
detailed in the attached document.
Expected increases in revenue resulting from redevelopment have now been offset by
the impact of the national recession and the slow down in spending on tourism. To
address reduced revenue in 2009, the budget has been amended three times with
operating expenditures reduced by more than $2.9 million. General Fund operating
expenditures for 2010 have also been reduced since Council first saw preliminary
numbers with the 2009 amended budget on July 7. The attached proposal meets the
Town Manager's objectives of: no increases in operating expenditures; no merit
increases for town employees; and benefit costs not to exceed 40% of full-time base
salaries. It incorporates the revenue projections agreed by Council on June 16 and is
balanced by use of a portion of the $3.2 million General Fund surplus generated in 2008.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL
Please review the attached 2010 budget proposal for operating expenditures and
provide comments and questions to be addressed for the consolidated budget
presentation on September 1. Specific direction is requested concerning Council
Contributions.
Hiiai2oo9
5 -1-3
~
~
TOWN ~
~
2010 Operating Expenditure Review
August 18, 2009
8,18,z0o9
5-1-4
Town of Vail
2010 Operating Expenditure Revicw
Tablc of Contcnts
2010 Opcrating Highlights 1
2010 Budget Timetable 4
Opcrating Analysis 5
This warksheet compiles a11 operating expenditures across all fLinds
Summary of Changes in Pcrsonncl 6
Ten-Ycar Summary of Budgetcd Positions by Department 7
Employec Bcnctits Summary
This report shows the list of employee benefits by percentage and costs. 9
Contributions and Special Events 10
Proposed expenditures for the 2010 budget.
Signiticant Impacts sincc 2005 19
This analysis identifies major impacts to operational budgets since 2005
8/18/2009
5 -1-5
TOWN OF VAIL
2010 OPERATING ANALYSIS
Based on Council's request, staff has compiled an analysis encompassing all operations
of the town, without consideration of the fund those operations are paid from. The
analysis will give an overview of "what it takes to operate the town" prior to the review of
the entire Town Manager's budget on September 1St
REVENUE
The town's 2010 budget includes revenue projections presented to Council June 16.
Currently, the $16.6 million of sales tax projected is flat with the 2009 budget, and a 15%
decrease from 2008 collections. Sales Tax represents approximately 38% of annual
revenue for 2010. As of June 30, sales tax collections for 2009 are tracking with the
budget, and 15% down from 2008.
Real Estate Transfer Tax projections of $4.7 million for 2010 represent 11 % of total
annual revenues. Since 2004, we have separated RETT revenue into two categories:
collections from major redevelopment projects (such as Arrabelle, Four Seasons, Ritz
Carlton Residences, etc.) and "base" collections, which represent all other real estate
transactions. This separation allows for more accurate trending. "Base" collections are
projected flat for 2010, and collections from major redevelopment are budgeted at an
increase with the assumption that the Four Seasons, Ritz Carlton Residences and
Solaris will begin sales during 2010. The estimated revenue is based on 25% of total
units sold, at 80% of the currently listed price.
Proposed budgeted revenues for 2010 will be included in the full budget review
scheduled for September 1 St
EXPENDITURES
During the 2009 budget process, over $2.9 million in operating expenditures were
eliminated. In addition, ten percent reductions were taken to operating-type
expenditures within the capital funds ($525,000). Examples include annual park and
landscape maintenance, facility maintenance, parking structure maintenance, etc.
For the 2010 budget, the town manager directed the following goals:
• 0% increase to operating expenditures
• 0% performance-based merit pool for salaries & wages
• Maintain benefits cost at 40% or less of full-time employee total wages
All three goals were met or exceeded. Total operating expenditures across all funds
($31.8 million) are down .7% from the amended 2009 budget, and down 1.9% from
2008. This was accomplished in spite of anticipated increases beyond our control such
as loading and delivery, snowmelt, utilities and fuel prices. Please see page 5 for a
detailed summary of all operating expenditures.
Total personnel costs are proposed at a.3% decrease, and the cost of benefits for full-
time employees came in under the goal in spite of an overall increase of .8 percentage
points for a total of 36.4% of wages (page 9).
1
Hiiai2oo9
5-1-6
The town's operations are supported by 288 full time equivalent (FTE) positions in 2010,
down from 300 at the beginning of 2009. Of these, 221 are full-time regular employees.
During 2009, the town reduced a net of 11.6 FTEs. The only additions to the 2010
proposed budget are two dispatch services positions which will be externally funded by
the E911 Board. Please refer to page 6 for a detailed explanation of FTE changes, and
page 7 for a 10 year history of the town's FTE count.
The town has pursued two grants relating to staffing: the "COPS" grant, which will fund
one police officer for three years (out of a four-year commitment from the town), and the
"SAFER" grant, which will fund a portion of three firefighters for 4 years. The COPS
grant will fund a position that has been previously budgeted, but is currently vacant. The
SAFER grant will require the hiring of three new firefighters for a minimum period of five
years, with the first four years partially reimbursed. Year one the town receives 90%
reimbursement (of estimated total expense of $220,000), year two reimbursement at
80%, year three at 50% and year four at 30%. Town staff only recommends accepting
this grant if the town moves forward with the construction of a West Vail Fire Station.
The town has applied for $5.1 million of federal funding for the new station, and we
expect to receive notification by September 30th. The additional three fire fighter
positions would allow for 2 paid fire fighters and 1 fire resident in each of the three fire
stations per shift. The 2010 proposed budget does not include the SAFER grant at this
time.
Employee benefits are projected at $5.7 million, representing 36.4% of base salary
expense for 2010 (please refer to page 9). The chart below identifies a breakout of
individual benefits within the total $5.7 million. The largest single component of benefit
cost is health insurance at 43%, followed by pension contributions at 38%.
BENEFIT COSTS
By Category
Wellness Benefit
Medicare 3%
4%
Health Insurance
43%
Pension
38%
)Life, abil ity, and
ployment
Workers' Insurance
Compensation 7%
Insurance
5%
The town is self-insured and has managed rising benefit costs by increasing healthcare
contributions paid by both the town and the employee, utilizing forfeited pension benefits
to offset pension contributions, and using $150,000 of reserves in the 2010 Health
Insurance Fund to help offset an 8% trend in expected claims experience. The reserve
2
Hiiai2oo9
5 -1-7
will be maintained at a healthy level, and is adequate to cover 47% of annual claims
expense.
Council contribution requests are included in this proposal so that Council can review
them as a part of the entire budget and evaluate financial impact to the town. Of the
$2.0 million in funding requests, $1.6 million is recommended by staff (down $43,450
from 2009). Currently, funding for Council contributions is included in the proposed
budget at this level. As final decisions are made regarding the contributions, the budget
will need to be adjusted accordingly. Please refer to pages 10-18 for detailed
information regarding Council contributions.
Historical Analysis
Part of this operating analysis included a look back to 2005, to identify significant
impacts to the operating budget since that time (see page 19 for the detailed analysis).
Four different categories were identified:
• Additional employees based on redevelopment or an increase in services. For
2010, the town will have 2.0 full time equivalent employees (FTE) relating to
redevelopment at a cost of $125,000. 1.5 of these FTEs are construction
inspectors to service the three large construction projects still underway. .5 FTE
is administrative support for the Community Development department.
• Increased service levels such as bus service, summer parking, new fire fighters,
economic development and environmental sustainability result in annual expense
of $651,522.
• Contributions and special events funding has been increased nearly 50% since
2005, adding annual expense estimated at $317,239.
• Increased operating expense from new infrastructure such as streetscape heat,
loading and delivery, fire pits and water features have added approximately
$937,750 annually.
• New programs such as the Employee Home Ownership Program (EHOP) are
currently budgeted at $250,000 for 2010.
These four categories in total contribute an estimated $2.3 million to the 2010 budget.
3
Hii8i2oo9
5 -1-8
Town of Vail
Proposed 2010 Budget Timetable
Budget Guidelines
Presentation of 2008 audit report to Council 06/02/09 ~
Council discussion of budget timetable & philosophies 06/16/09 ~
Council discussion of major revenue items 06/16/09 ~
Guidelines distributed to department heads 06/08/09 ~
Staff prepares departmental budgets 06/08/09 to 06/26/09
Town Manager reviews departmental budgets 07/06/09 to 07/24/09
2009/2010 parking task force meeting TBD
Capital budget request for county funds submitted 08/28/09
Council discussion of 15 & 5-year Capital plan 07/21/09 ~
Council discussion of 15 & 5-year RETT plan 07/21/09 ~
Council review of Operating Expenditures 08/18/09
Council review of Town Manager's budget - draft 09/01/09
VLMD Board review of 2010 Operating Plan 09/15/09
Budget Documentation and Reporting
First reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Two 04/21/09 ~
Second reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Two 05/05/09 ~
First reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Three 06/16/09 ~
Second reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Three 07/07/09 ~
First reading of 2010 budget ordinance 09/15/09
Second reading of 2010 budget ordinance 10/06/09
Vail Reinvestment Authority Budget Resolution 10/06/09
Vail Local Marketing District Budget Resolution 10/06/09
First reading of mil levy certification ordinance 11/17/09
First reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Four 12/01/09
Second reading of mil levy certification ordinance 12/01/09
Second reading of 2009 Supplemental Number Four 12/15/09
Mil levy certification deadline to Eagle County 12/15/09
Budget book submission (to State) 01/31/10
8/18/200q
5-1-9
Town of Vail
2010 Budget
Operating Analysis
2009 2009 Over/(Under)
2008 Original Amended 2010 vs 2009 %age
Expenditures by Type: Actual Budget Budget Budget Amended Variance
Operating Expenses paid for by General Fund:
Town Officials 1,224,007 1,298,703 1,267,297 1,253,232 (14,065) -1.1%
Administrative Services & Risk Management 3,164,384 3,466,328 3,228,825 3,365,837 137,012 4.2%
Community Development & Housing 3,327,400 3,282,081 2,379,978 2,000,616 (379,362) -15.9%
Police 4,511,846 4,871,111 4,708,180 4,728,237 20,057 0.4%
Police Communications 535,657 543,072 543,072 522,213 (20,859) -3.8%
Fire 2,577,087 2,769,703 2,735,009 2,673,272 (61,737) -2.3%
Public Works & Streets 3,717,159 3,726,449 3,552,133 3,649,853 97,720 2.8%
Transportation & Parking 4,780,515 4,723,939 4,582,449 4,701,320 118,871 2.6%
Facilities 3,442,983 3,945,981 3,723,070 3,872,255 149,185 4.0%
Library 828,056 854,593 820,745 805,118 (15,627) -1.9%
Economic Development 202,677 222,852 195,772 177,809 (17,963) -9.2%
Information Center 200,722 209,990 209,990 209,990 - 0.0%
Council Contributions 598,478 448,725 498,725 413,175 (85,550) -17.2%
Commission on Special Events 539,620 620,147 620,147 617,812 (2,335) -0.4%
Total paid by General Fund: 29,650,591 30,983,674 29,065,392 28,990,739 (74,653) -0.3%
Operating Expenses paid for by Marketing Fund:
Commission on Special Events 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 - 0.0%
Operating Expenses paid for by Capital Projects Fund:
Document Imaging (contract employee) 78,154 83,931 83,931 80,226 (3,705) -4.4%
Operating Expenses paid for by RETT:
Annual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1,143,289 1,365,882 1,290,882 1,326,267 35,385 2.7%
Tree Maintenance 65,986 60,000 109,954 65,000 (44,954) -40.9%
Rec. Path Capital Maint 325,114 153,540 193,540 190,567 (2,973) -1.5%
Park / Playground Capital Maintenance 124,368 110,000 110,000 115,000 5,000 4.5%
Public Art - operating expenses 78,457 84,359 84,359 85,698 1,339 1.6%
Alpine Garden Support 90,000 55,620 55,620 55,620 - 0.0%
Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation 93,431 90,000 180,569 90,000 (90,569) -50.2%
Forest Health 259,607 265,000 265,000 265,000 - 0.0%
Environmental Sustainability 221,542 255,000 315,000 250,000 (65,000) -20.6%
Total paid by RETT: 2,401,794 2,439,401 2,604,924 2,443,152 (161,772) -6.2%
Total Operating Expenditures 32,410,539 33,787,006 32,034,247 31,794,117 (240,130) -0.7%
F:\FINANCE\BUDGET\BUDGET 10\Op Exp Analysis 5
8/18/2009
5 -1-10
Town of Vail 2008 Budget
Summary of Changes in Personnel
From 2009 Original Budget to 2010 Budget
2009
Changes Comments
Full-time Regular Positions
Transit - Buses (2.00) Reversed the conversion of 2 seasonals to full-time employees
Fleet Maintenance (1.00) Converted full-time journey mechanic to summer seasonal
(3.00)
Fixed Term / Externally Funded
Community Development (3.50) Building inspector, plans examiner, Sr. Planner and Admin support
Fire (2.00) Fire inspectors
Police (3.00) CEO
Capital projects (1.50) Engineer and .5 streetscape inspector
Dispatch 2.00 E911 funding two additional dispatch positions
(8.00)
Seasonal Positions
Public Works Street Mtce (0.96) Remove 2 seasonals
Parks - Landscaping (1.44) Remove 3 seasonals
Transit - Buses 1.76 Reversed the conversion of 2 seasonals to full-time employees
Fleet Maintenance 0.25 Converted full-time journey mechanic to summer seasonal
Community Development (0.25) Removed Planning Intern
(0.64)
Total Changes to FTE Count: (11.64)
6
8/18/2009
5 -1-11
TOWI OF VA[L 20U9 6GDGGT
TEN-YEAR SUMMARY OF BUDGETED POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT
2010
Positions
Department 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Change
Full-Time Regular Positions - Funded by TOV
Town Officials 6.50 7.10 7.10 6.50 6.90 6.90 7.06 6.23 6.23 6.23 0.00
Administrative Services 18.45 18.00 18.00 18.00 19.15 18.15 19.68 21.02 20.35 20.35 0.00
Community Development 14.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 13.85 13.85 15.18 15.18 17.85 17.85 0.00
Fire 16.00 18.20 18.20 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 22.00 2125 21.25 0.00
Police and Communications 6125 60.25 61.75 5425 56.25 54.25 54.50 54.50 54.50 54.50 0.00
Library 8.75 8.75 8.75 6.38 6.38 6.38 6.63 6.63 6.55 6.55 0.00
Public Works, Streets & Roads, L 30.00 29.00 29.75 29.75 3125 31.75 31.75 31.75 30.80 30.80 0.00
Transportation & Parking 28.50 28.50 28.50 27.50 30.50 31.00 31.00 31.00 33.00 31.00 (2.00)
Fleet Maintenance 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 12.00 (1.00)
Facility Maintenance 21.50 21.50 20.50 20.50 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 0.00
Capital Projects 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total FTE's - Full-Time Regular 278.95 220.30 227.55 208.88 216.28 213.28 216.80 221.37 223.53 220.53 (3.00)
Fixed Term Employees
Administrative Services 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 - - - - 0.00
Community Development 2.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 0.50 (3.50)
Fire 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 - (2.00)
Police and Communications - - - - 1.48 3.48 3.48 3.48 3.00 - (3.00)
Public Works, Streets & Roads, Landscaping 1.75 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.50 1.50 0.00
Capital Projects 1.25 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.50 - (1.50)
Document Imaging 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Total Fixed-Term 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.75 1223 16.49 14.49 13.74 13.00 3.00 (10.00)
Externally Funded Employees
Police and Communications 4.00 4.00 7.50 8.00 6.50 8.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 11.00 2.00
Total Externally Funded 4.00 ~4,Q4)Q 7.50 8.00 6.50 8.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 11.00 2.00
5 _I _12 7
TOWI OF VA[L 20U9 6GDGGT
TEN-YEAR SUMMARY OF BUDGETED POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT
2010
Positions
Department 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Change
Seasonal Positions - Funded by TOV
Town Officials 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Administrative Services 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.98 1.04 0.59 1.19 1.94 1.94 0.00
Community Development 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 125 0.25 0.00 (0.25)
Fire 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.51 1.68 720 7.20 10.20 10.20 0.00
Police and Communications 0.93 0.93 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Library 0.93 0.93 1.09 2.48 2.48 2.48 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 0.00
Public Works/ Streets & Roads/L~ 10.18 10.18 9.55 7.57 8.69 8.94 11.42 11.90 12.86 10.46 (2.40)
Transportation & Parking 25.75 28.00 26.89 25.84 23.24 22.78 25.31 26.70 25.70 27.46 1.76
Fleet Maintenance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 025
Facility Maintenance 0.83 0.83 0.83 1.33 1.33 1.36 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 0.00
Total Seasonal / Part-Time 40.00 43.65 41.62 39.52 3823 3828 47.60 51.32 54.03 53.39 (0.64)
All FTE's (Full-Time Equivalents)
Town Officials 6.50 7.10 7.10 6.50 6.90 6.90 7.06 6.23 6.23 6.23 0.00
Administrative Services 18.87 19.42 19.42 19.42 20.13 20.19 2027 22.21 22.29 2229 0.00
Community Development 14.96 15.96 15.96 16.48 19.85 19.85 20.18 20.43 22.10 18.35 (3.75)
Fire 16.00 19.60 19.60 19.40 20.51 21.68 27.20 31.20 33.45 31.45 (2.00)
Police and Dispatch 62.18 61.18 62.23 6225 64.23 65.73 66.98 66.98 66.50 65.50 (1.00)
Library 9.68 9.68 9.84 8.86 8.86 8.86 8.33 8.33 8.25 825 0.00
Public Works, Streets & Roads 40.18 39.18 39.30 37.32 41.69 42.32 44.80 45.28 45.16 42.76 (2.40)
Transportation & Parking 5425 56.50 55.39 53.34 53.74 53.78 56.31 57.70 58.70 58.46 (0.24)
Fleet Maintenance 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 1225 (0.75)
Facility Maintenance 22.33 22.33 21.33 21.83 21.33 21.36 21.38 21.38 21.38 21.38 0.00
Ca ital Pro ects 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 3.00 2.38 2.38 2.63 2.50 1.00 1.50
Total FTE's 258.95 264.95 264.17 260.15 273.24 276.05 287.88 295.37 299.56 287.92 (11.64)
tii1R/7009
5 -]-]3 8
Town of Vail
Employee Benefits
2010 Budget Proposal
$ % Salary
Full-Time Regular Employees
Fee Based
Health Insurance 2,500,000 18.1%
Group Term Life and Accidental Death Insurance 90,000 0.7%
Long-term Disability Insurance 60,000 0.4%
Survivor's Life Insurance 75,000 0.5%
Short-term Disability Insurance 35,000 0.3%
Wellness Benefit 96,000 0.7%
Sworn Officer Death and Disability Insurance 70,000 0.5%
Subtotal Fee Based 2,926,000 21.2%
Payroll Based
Pension Contribution 2,118,263 15.3%
Medicare 200,416 1.5%
Workers' Compensation Insurance 228,700 1.7%
Unemployment Compensation Insurance 48,400 0.4%
Subtotal Payroll Based 2,595,779 18.8%
Total Full-Time Benefits 5,521,779 39.9%
Part-Time and Seasonal Employees
Fee Based
Wellness 75,000 4.0%
Wellness - Boards & Commissions 9,100 0.5%
Mini-Med Program 16,000 0.8%
Payroll Based
Pension Contribution 28,381 1.5%
Medicare 27,435 1.5%
Workers' Compensation Insurance 31,300 1.7%
Unemployment Compensation Insurance 6,622 0.4%
Subtotal Payroll Based 93,738 5.0%
Total Part-Time and Seasonal Benefits 193,838 10.2%
Total Benefits - All Employees 5,715,616 36.4%
9
Hiiai2oo9
5 -1-14
2010 Contribution Request Spreadsheet
Last Year (incl. off-cycle) 2010 Requests Staff Recommendations
Variance to S[aff 20091n-
2009 Cash 20091n-Kind Funded 20091n- 2010 Cash 20101n-Kind Reques[ 20701n- Z009 ~a9e Staff Recom'd In-Kind Kind
TOWN OF VAIL FUNDING REQUEST Funded Kind Value Request Kind Value Var Recom'd
GENERAL FUND Con[ribu[ions: Funding Cash Value
ECONOMIC:
A Bravo! Colorado / New York Phllharmonlc 67.500 75.000 7.500 75.000
A Bravo! Colorado / Philadel phia Orchestra 67.500 75D00 7.500 75D00
A Bravo! Colorado/Music Matters Education & Outreach 7.500 7.500 7.500
A Bravo! Golorado - General o eratlons 22.500 15 Ford Park Parkin 15 Ford Park Parkinc7 V2.50015 Ford Park Parkln
B Nationai Re ertoN orcr,estra 1 000 1 000 1 o00
C Vail Farmers' Market 5B50 Traffic. buses. si n 4.500 6.500 Traffc. buses. sicns 4.500 650 Treffic. buses. ,,Ins 4.500
D Vail Jazz Festlval (JuneSe t'09) 30.600 45.000 14.400 30.600
E Colorado Ski Museum 95350 95.850
F Vail Vallev Foundation
Birds of Prey (Dec 1-4. OS) ADA & ubllc transit 10.000 TOV buses 15D00 TOV buses 10.000
The Session - cancellation announced Nov 52008 Parkin 3.000
American Ski Classic 5.000 Parkinc 3.500 18.000 arkln vouchers 3.000 13000 5.000 )arkin vouchers 3.000
Street Beat! Winter Concert Senes 25.650 PD & PN/ su ort 7.500 28.500 PD & PW su ort 7.500 2.850 25.650 PD & PW su ort 7.500
Vail Intemational Dance Festival 45.000 55.000 10.000 45.000
GeraldRFordAmph-itheater(HotSummerNights) 24.525 presence 2800 27.250 PDpresence 2800 2.725 24.525 PD presence 2800
International Gycle Classic / Colorado Stage 150.000 PD. Fire & PW 15.000 150.000 ve funds 15.000
G Vail Ghamber & Business Association VCBA
Premier linpressions 13.500 30.000 16.500
Vail Guide 10.000 10D00
H Radio Free Mintum 2.500 2.500
I Commisslon on 5 ecial Events 791.810 836.810 45.000 791.810
Fund Climbin Wall World Gu 50.000 50.00045.000 kee s arate from CSE
TOTALECONOMIC 7,760,235 7,463,910 47,800 303,675 22% 7,726,085 42,800
EDl1CATIONAL
J Eacle Valle vGhildcare -annual contribution 45.000 53.000 8.000 45.000 donete TOV coin uters & set u
K Vail Valle Chantable Fund 2.500 2.500
L Pro~ectGraduation 2.500 2.500
M CASA of the Continental Divide 1.000 1.000
N First Descents 5.000 5.000
Vall Valle Exchance / Youth Recocnition Award 6,300 6.300
TOTALEDUCATIONAL 51,300 64,000 12,700 22% 45,000
RECREATION
O Ski & Snowboard Club Vail (Oct 28 - 31. 2010) 4 davs of ice 5285 4 da s of Ice 5285 2 da s evlsit if an left over 2b50
P VVMCS ri~c Fashion5how& Wncheon Mar24.2010 3001-dav erkinq a 7.500 3001-da arkin 7.500 3001-0a parkinc a e5 7.500
Q Vail Jun~ior Hocke Association - Nov 2010 Toumament 9 davs of ice + Donovan 1 da 15391 9 davs of ice + Donovan 1 da + arkin 24.016 5 da s ice+Donovan/noarkinq passe, 10.125
R Skatine Glub of Vail (Jul 1418'10 & late Dec.'10 9 da s of ice 11.891 9 da s of ice 11.891 5 da s Ice;revlslt if an left over 6.625
5 5 ecial OI m cs (Sunda s Jan . Feb. Mar'10 6 arkln es for7 Sunda s 1.050 9 sunda s of arkin s 42 villa e 1.050 42 arklnq a s- LH onl 1.050
7 Vail Valley Athlete Gommission (See item F) 6.000 10.000 4.000 6.000
U Foresicht5ki Guides 2-arkin passes in Vlllace 2200 2 blue passes/LH onl 2200
V Small Champ io s of Cobrado 10.000 10D00
TOTALRECREATION 9,000 20,000 51,942 14,000 140% 6,000 30,150
SUBTOTAL - CONTRIBUTIONS 1,220,535 1,547,970 99,742 330,375 23% 1,177,085 72,950
ARRANGEMENTSandAGREEMENTS:
W Vail Vallev Comm. TV/Ch5
Franchise Fee 70.000 70D00 70.000 30% ofcollected Franchise Fees
SUBTOTAL - ARRANGEMENTSandAGREEMEN70,000 70,000 70,000
GRANDTOTALGeneralFund 1,290,53 1,617,910 99,742 330,375 22% 1,247,085 72,950
z.- I- Iz. io
2010 Contribution Request Spreadsheet
Last Year (incl. off-cycle) 2010 Requests Staff Recommendations
Variance to S[aff 20091n-
2009 Cash 20091n-Kind Funded 20091n- 2010 Cash 20101n-Kind Re [ 20701n- 2009 %a9e Staff Recom'd In-Kind Kind
TOWN OF VAIL FUNDING REQUEST Funded Kind Value Request ques Kind Value Var Recom'd
GENERAL FUND Con[ribu[ions: Funding Cash Value
RealEstate TransferTax Fund:
X Bett Ford AI ine Garden Foundation
Bndge Replacement (out of cycle 08)
Operetions SSb20 2 desi nated Ford Park spaces 75,000 2 desicnated Ford Park spaces 19.380 55,620 2 desi nated Ford Park s ac
Meditation Garden Renovation
Y Eagle Rlver Watershed
Sediment Pollution Efforts 90.000 99.793 9.793 90.000
River & Communit Pride Hw Clean U
Z EaleValle AllianceforSustalnabillt 20D00 20.000
TOTALRETT 145.620 774,793 0 29,773 15% 145,620
Information Booth Contract 209.590 209.990 209.990
GrandTotal 1,646,145 2,002,693 99,742 0 0% 1.602,695 72,950
xIti.'U[1)
5- I- 16
2010 Contributions
Please see the attached spreadsheet to coincide with the following background and
recommendations.
ECONOMIC
A. Bravo! Colorado
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bravo! Vail Valley Music Festival is requesting a total of
$157,500 to help fund the 2010 Philadelphia Orchestra and the New York Philharmonic - Vail
Residency programs. Bravo! is requesting $75,000 for each program, and $7,500 for the Music
Matters Education and Outreach Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding at $157,500 (flat with 2009). Historically,
the Town of Vail has contributed funding to the New York Philharmonic and the Philadelphia
Orchestra Tier 1 programs as well as another $25,000 towards Bravo! operating expenses. This
year Bravo! is not requesting funds for operations. The cultural benefit to the Town of Vail and the
tourist attraction of this event are major factors in staff's recommendation for funding.
B. Bravo! Family Concert (National Repertory Orchestra)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Orchestra is requesting $1,000 to offset travel expenses
associated with their annual concert in Vail. Each season, they perform a free family concert at the
Ford Amphitheatre in conjunction with Bravo!.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding at $1,000 based on the cultural benefit
to the town and the potential increase in drive traffic from the Summit area.
C. Vail Farmer's Market
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Vail Farmer's Market is requesting $4,500 of in-kind value to
cover the cost of services provided by the Town of Vail during the events, and $6,500 cash to cover
the cost of traffic control. The Commission on Special Events (CSE) funded $56,000 toward the
Farmer's Market in 2009.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding the in-kind request of $4,500 which will
be included in the town's 2010 operating budget. Staff recommends consolidating the cash request
with the funding provided by the CSE.
D. Vail Jazz Foundation
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Vail Jazz Foundation is requesting $45,000 to help fund the
free Jazz at Vail Square concert series in August/September, the Vail Jazz Party during Labor Day
weekend, summer concerts at the Vail Farmers' Market and ICEF Jazz & Marching Band
performances at the Vail America Days celebration.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding a total of $30,600 (flat with 2009).
12
8/18/2009
5 -1-17
E. Colorado Ski Museum
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The museum is requesting total funding of $95,850. The funding
will be used as follows: $25,000 to match a grant given by Martha Head and the Howard Head
Foundation to design, fabricate and install two interactive video viewing stations and develop video
content for those stations. $70,850 will be used for the final editing of 13 Vail Pioneers videos that
have been filmed by Eef Productions over the last 6 years for use at the viewing stations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: While the town agrees with the importance of the Vail Pioneer
project (having invested $23,000 over the past several years), staff is concerned with the pricing of
the final editing. Staff does not recommend funding at this time, but would reconsider based on a
competitive bid process, or potential partnering opportunities with the schools or local community
TV Channel 5 to accomplish the video editing. Staff does not recommend funding the $25,000
matching grant.
F. Vail Valley Foundation (VVF)
BACKGROUND INFORMAT►ON: The Foundation is requesting $128,750 of cash funding and
$28,300 of in-kind for entertainment programs and winter events. (Street Beat; Vail International
Dance Festival and Hot Summer Nights, Birds of Prey, and the American Ski Classic).
The Vail Valley Foundation (VVF) presented a proposed cycling event for 2008 that ultimately
was withdrawn because major sponsorship was not secured. Although the 2010 International
Pro Cycling Classic is still tentative, the Foundation is requesting a cash contribution of
$150,000 and in-kind of $15,000 contingent upon the event coming to fruition.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding the in-kind requests for the special
events, although limits the Birds of Prey in-kind to $10,000, and those costs are built into the
town's 2010 operating budget. Staff also recommends the following levels of cash funding:
$25,650 toward Street Beat; $45,000 to the Vail International Dance Festival; and $24,525
toward Hot Summer Nights, and $5,000 for the American Ski Classic for a total of $100,175.
The level of funding recommended is flat with the 2009 contribution awarded. While staff
supports the International Pro Cycling Classic, the budget cannot support the increase in
funding. Reserve funds are available pending Council's direction.
G. Vail Chamber & Business Association (VCBA)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The VCBA is requesting a total of $40,000 of funding for the
following programs: $10,000 to expand the Vail Guide to include all business license holders and
$30,000 to be used for both a winter and summer Premier Impressions Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Due to current economic conditions, staff recommends suspending
funding the Premier Impressions Program for one year. Staff does not recommend funding for the
Vail Guide as advertisers normally cover the cost of publication. The town has budgeted for a half-
page advertisement in the 2010 Vail Guide through the Economic Development department at an
estimated cost of $2,495.
13
8/18/2009
5 -1-18
H. Radio Free Minturn
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Radio Free Minturn is requesting $2,500 to continue the
station's educational programs, such as out of pocket expenses for school programs and the
station's tower and studio leases.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although the town awarded $2,000 in operations from the 2007 off-
cycle contributions as a part of start-up funding, staff does not recommend funding operations in
future years.
1. Commission on Special Events (CSE)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The CSE is requesting funding for various events, totaling
$836,810. This amount is flat with 2009, including funding allocated in 2009 for the World Cup
Climbing event.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding at $791,810 (same as last year), with the
additional $45,000 eligible for consideration for the Teva Mountain Games. An additional $61,556
of staffing & related expense is currently included in the town's 2010 operating budget. The entire
CSE budget is part of the Economic Development Department of the town.
EDUCATIONAL
J. Eagle Valley Childcare (EVC)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The EVC has requested $53,000 of funding for 2010. This
includes $50,000 subsidy for childcare, and $3,000 for the purchase and installation of new
administrative computers.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because the town is a founding partner, staff recommends funding
the same amount as 2009 ($45,000) to be used for the Vail Childcare facility. This is the only
childcare facility in Vail that provides infant care. In addition, staff recommends that the town
donate our used computers and IT staff time for installation.
K. Vail Valley Charitable Fund (VVCF)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: VVCF is requesting $2,500 in cash toward the 2010 Big Beers,
Belgians, and Barleywines Festival. This event raises money for individuals who work or live full
time in Vail and who are facing a medical crisis.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although this request supports the production of an event in Vail,
staff cannot recommend funding a charitable contribution from taxpayer dollars.
L. Project Graduation - Battle Mountain High School
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Project Graduation is requesting $2,500 of funding to be used
14
8/18/2009
5 -1-19
toward the annual event providing a safe and sober place to celebrate graduation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although this event is important and has a positive impact to the
town, staff does not view this as appropriate for town funding. The town does make other donations
to Battle Mountain H.S. through free use of Donovan Pavilion for prom, banquets and other school
events.
M. CASA of the Continental Divide
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: CASA is requesting $1,000 of funding to be used toward the
recruiting, training and supervising of volunteers to serve as Court Appointed Special Advocates
(CASA's) for children involved in juvenile dependency proceedings in the courts of the Fifth Judicial
District of Colorado.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not view this program as appropriate for town funding.
N. First Descents
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: First Descents is requesting $5,000 of funding to be used toward
week-long outdoor adventure programs which aim to improve the quality of life for young adult
cancer survivors.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not view this program as appropriate for town funding.
RECREATIONAL
0. Ski & Snowboard Club of Vail
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Ski & Snowboard Club of Vail has requested in-kind funding
of $5,285 for 4 days of ice for their annual Ski & Snowboard Swap event to be held Oct 28 - 31,
2010.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding this in-kind request for two days (out of
four requested) with appropriate approval and coordination with the Vail Recreation District. The
Ski & Snowboard Club will be responsible for hard costs for use of the Dobson Arena such as set-
up, tear-down, cleaning, and utilities. Two days are recommended at this time because the town is
currently recruiting participatory sporting events and may need to use some of our allocated free
days to offset costs for those groups. However, if there are enough available days remaining prior
to this event, staff recommends providing the full amount of days.
P. Vail Valley Medical Center Volunteer Corps (WMC)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The VVMC is requesting in-kind funding for 300 parking vouchers
for the Spring Fashion Show & Luncheon event held at the Vail Marriott on Wednesday, March 24,
2010.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding this in-kind request as in prior years. It
is included in the town's 2010 operating budget.
15
8/18/2009
5-1-20
Q. Vail Junior Hockey Association
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Vail Junior HockeyAssn. is requesting a total of$15,391 in-
kind funding including $11,891 for 9 days of ice (3 weekends during November, 2010) and $3,500
for use of the Donovan Pavilion in the spring of 2010 for an End of Hockey Season gathering for
volunteers, sponsors, parents, and players. In addition, they are requesting free or reduced parking
in the LionsHead Parking Structure for the 3rd weekend of the tournament (scheduled for November
19 - 21) at an estimated cost of $8,625.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends providing 5 days of ice time (out of 9 requested),
subject to approval and coordination with the Vail Recreation District for the ice time. Staff
recommends waiving the fee for ponovan Pavilion, contingent upon approval and coordination with
the Donovan Management Company regarding availability. However, the Hockey Assn. will be
responsible for hard costs for use of the Dobson Arena and Donovan Pavilion such as set-up, tear-
down, cleaning, and utilities. The reduced days relate to the town's need for ice time as mentioned
in item "O". However, if there are enough available days remaining prior to this event, staff
recommends providing the full amount of days. The parking request is estimated at a cost of
$8,625. Staff does not recommend funding this request as the budget cannot support an increase
from the prior year's contribution.
R. Skating Club of Vail
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Skating Club of Vail has requested in-kind funding of
$11,891 for 9 days of ice for two separate competitions (29th Annual Vail Invitational Championships
July 14-18, 2010 and the Holiday Ice Shows in late December, 2010).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends providing 5 days of ice time (out of 9 requested)
subject to approval and coordination with the Vail Recreation District. The Skating Club will be
responsible for hard costs for use of the Dobson Arena such as set-up, tear-down, cleaning, and
utilities. The reduced days relate to the town's need for ice time as mentioned in item "O".
However, if there are enough available days remaining prior to this event, staff recommends
providing the full amount of days.
S. Special Olympics
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Special Olympics is requesting in-kind funding of $1,050 for
6 parking vouchers for five Sundays in January, 3 Sundays in February and 1 Sunday in March.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding this in-kind request, for the LionsHead
parking structure only, with one-time entry/exit coupons (total of 42).
T. Vail Valley Athlete Commission (see backup for item F)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Athlete Commission is requesting a$10,000 cash
contribution to support local athletes. The athletes are also funded by the Vail Valley Foundation,
Vail Resorts and the Beaver Creek Resort Company.
16
8/18/2009
5-1-21
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding this request at $6,000 (flat with 2009) in
support of our athletes and for the international exposure for the Town of Vail.
U. Foresight Ski Guides
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Foresight Ski Guides is requesting two parking passes for the
Vail Village parking structure for January - April 2010 and November/December 2010. Foresight
provides parking to volunteer guides, half of which drive from Denver. Local guides usually take
public transportation and/or carpool. Foresight provides challenge recreation opportunities to
visually impaired participants and guides, including the Colorado School for the Blind and soldiers
blinded in Iraq and Afghanistan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends providing two blue passes, restricted to the
LionsHead parking structure.
V. Small Champions of Colorado
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Small Champions of Colorado is requesting $10,000 of funding
to help support children's programming. The programs provide children with special disabilities
one-on-one coaching in sports such as swimming, golf, rock climbing, skiing/snowboarding, etc.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend funding as this is more appropriate for
funding from the county health and human services department.
ARRANGEMENTS & AGREEMENTS
W. Vail Valley Community TV / Channel 5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Channel 5 is requesting a portion of the franchise fee the Town
of Vail receives annually from Comcast. In 2009 this amount was budgeted at $70,000.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding the franchise fee at 30%, approximately
$70,000 based on 2010 budgeted franchise fee revenue. The percentage has been reduced from
40% based on increased franchise revenue collected by the town. Staff recommends retaining the
funding at the $70,000 level (same amount normally appropriated annually by Council).
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND
X. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Alpine Garden Foundation is requesting funding of $75,000
for operating expenses. The Garden hosts thousands of visitors per year and has achieved World-
premier status as a high altitude garden.
17
8/18/2009
5-1-22
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding operating expenses at $55,620, flat with
2009 funding. 2009 had been reduced by 10% from 2008.
Y. Eagle River Watershed
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Eagle River Watershed is requesting $99,793 of funding.
Of this request, $67,793 relates to the maintenance and monitoring of the Black Gore Creek,
$20,000 for general operating support, $5,000 of public outreach/information and $6,000 for
collaborative action monitoring with other local municipalities.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding of $90,000 based on prior year's
contribution, pending a review of 2009 results. Staff also recommends that not more than 20% go
toward general operations, with the remainder for specific projects as they are completed.
Z. Eagle Valley Alliance for Sustainability
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Alliance is requesting $20,000 of funding to partnerwith the
Town on environmental programs to provide a neutral forum for stakeholder participation and create
education and outreach programs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend funding out of Council contributions.
However, if the environmental sustainability staff would like to contract for services, Eagle Valley
Alliance would be considered as a potential bidder for those services.
18
8/18/2009
5-1-23
Significant Impacts to Operations since 2005
1. FTEs 4.5 FTEs =
2 fire insp
a. Fixed-Term Employees /"RedevelopmenY' 1 CEO
1 Constr insp
Since 2005, we've added 12 fixed term employees at an annual cost of $850,000 incl. benefits (2009 dollars) .5 Admin Comm Dev
During 2009, we reduced the fixed term employees by 7.5, the remaining 4.5 represented an annual cost of $340,000 incl. benefits
2010 is currently budgeted to futher reduce this number to 2.0 at an annual cost of $125,000 incl. benefits 2.0 FTEs =
.5 Admin Comm Dev
1.5 Constr insp
Of the $1.3M total we need to reconcile, the amount relating to the "redevelopmenY" employees: $ 125,000
b. Increase in Services 2009 Cost
2006 Added for Economic Development, Communications, Special projects - 1 FTE $ - Removed
2007 Expanded bus service (seas); 2.54 FTEs $ 98,616
Dispatch position - 1 FTE $ - Externally funded
CSE coordinator converted to full-time from contract employee .75 FTE (Benefits exp) $ 15,000
Landscaping and maintenance (seas) .96 FTE $ - Removed
2008 Extended (seas) street cleaning (events, streetscape) -.48 FTE $ - Removed
Summer parking (seas) - 1.39 $ 47,618
New fire fighters - 3 FTEs $ 218,330
Economic Development - 1 FTE $ 1307880
2009 2 seasonal bus drivers for Frontage Rd pickup -.75 FTEs $ 297119
Dispatch position (funded by E911 Board) - 1 FTE $ - Externally funded
Environmental Planner - 1 FTE $ 837700
Recruiting Coordinator (seas) - .5 FTE $ 257259
2010 Dispatch position (funded by E911 Board) - 1 FTE $ - Externally funded
Total Increase in Services: $ 651,522
II. Contributions / Special Events
General Fund Bus License Total In-Kind
Events %age incr Events Events Labor Contributions
2005 284,013 280,000 564,013 39,940 462,293
2006 3187389 12.10% 2807000 5987389 397950 4327291
2007 4647016 45.74% 2807000 744,016 Teva $90K; Farmers' $40K; Snowdz $20K 457450 455;147
2008 488,703 5.32% 2807000 768,703 42,450 598,478
2009 5617810 14.96% 280,000 841,810 Climbing wall event $50K 427950 498,725
Cumulative since 2005: 97.8% 49.3% 7.5% 7.9%
Total increase since 2005: $ 317,239
III. Increased Operations from new amenities 2010 Cost
Loading and Delivery - shared operating costs with VRI 150,000
Streetscape snowmelt & electric 665,750
Streetscape - annual maintenance 30,000
Seibert Circle and Fire Pits - annual maintenance & additional utilities 45,000
RETT Skate Park - annual set-up & take-down 20,000
RETT Landscaping - additional flowers in Lionshead; Ftg Rd medians, etc 277000
Total increase: 937,750
IV. New Programs
Employee Home Ownership Program (EHOP) 250,000
Operating Additions: $ 2,281,511
8/18/2009
F:\FINANCE\BUDGET\BUDGET 10\Stats 19
5-1-24
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update.
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Stream Tract Survey
Hiiai2oo9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Public Works Department & Community Development Department
DATE: August 18, 2009
SUBJECT: Information Update - Gore Creek Stream Tract Survey Update
On May 19, 2009, Town Council authorized Staff to proceed with the issuance of a
contract to Peak Land Consultants (PLC), Inc. for the surveying of public stream tracts
along Gore Creek and the primary tributaries in the Town of Vail. This memo is intended
to update Council regarding the status of the survey work.
At the time this memo was drafted, Staff was informed by representatives of PLC that all
of the primary survey field work would be completed by Monday, August 10, 2009. PLC
needs to perform additional fieldwork at some of the sites in order to look for more
monuments as boundary discrepancies were found while compiling the data in the office.
Meanwhile, they have indicated that they expect to have the stream tract survey initial
drawings completed and available for Town review by Tuesday, August 18th. They will
solidify and coordinate the review date by the end of the week of August 10tn
Following the review and delivery of the stream tract survey final drawings, Staff will be
in a better position to identify the magnitude of encroachments into public stream tracts
along Gore Creek and the primary tributaries in the Town of Vail and, subsequently,
develop a compliance strategy. Staff will be back to Town Council on September 15tn
with a proposed compliance strategy.
Hii8izoo9
ci1
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council.
PRESENTER(S): Town Council
Hiiaizoo9
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct
negotiators; Re: pending litigation Civil Action No. 08-CV-00464-LTB-MJW, Diana Johnson v.
Town of Vail, et al.; and other pending and/or threatened litigation.; 2) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(a)
(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; to
receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy
and instruct negotiators, Re: proposed Timber Ridge redevelopment.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
Hiiaizoo9