HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-01 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
11:00 A.M., SEPTEMBER 1, 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: PEC/DRB Update (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
2. ITEM/TOPIC: First draft of the 2010 Town Manager's Budget. (30 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss and provide feedback regarding
the proposed 2010 Budget.
BACKGROUND: Since June, Council has reviewed individual budget topics such
as revenue, long-term capital planning and operating expenditures. This
presentation is an all-inclusive review in preparation for the first reading of the
budget ordinance scheduled for September 15th.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction and feedback to staff in
preparation for the first reading of the 2010 Budget ordinance scheduled for
September 15th.
3. ITEM/TOPIC: Lunch. (20 min.)
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Follow-up presentation on Fire Department Impact Fees. (30
min.)
PRESENTER(S): Mark Miller / Tom Pippin (BBC)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen and provide direction relative to
imposing impact fees for the Fire Department.
BACKGROUND: On July 7, 2009, Tom Pippin (BBC) presented the study
conducted by BBC regarding fire department Impact Fees. Council discussed the
study and requested Tom Pippin and Mark Miller to bring back comparative
information on impact fees from other comparable resort communities in Colorado.
Council also directed BBC to include potential SFE's for the Timber Ridge
development in the analysis. BBC has provided a revised report and also included
information on non-utility impact fees for Colorado cities. In addition, information is
: C2()311:
provided on comparable fire department impact fees.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve and direct the Town Attorney to develop
an ordinance imposing fire department impact fees, to be set at the discretion of
the TOV Council.
5. ITEM/TOPIC: Traffic Impact Fee Discussion. (30 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and discuss draft Traffic Impact
Report and provide or confirm direction.
BACKGROUND: The town has recently hired Tischler Bise, a fiscal, economic
and planning consultant group to provide a nexus study for a codified Traffic
Impact Fee that is applied to all new development to provide the Town with funds
to mitigate new development impacts on the town's transportation infrastructure
and implement portions of the town's recently adopted Vail Transportation Master
Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and discuss draft Traffic Impact Report
and provide or confirm direction.
6. ITEM/TOPIC: Frontage Rd. Lighting Master Plan Update. (45 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the draft Lighting Master Plan and
the benefits of light emitting diode (LED) vs high pressure sodium (HPS)
techonology.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department
of Transportation, recently adopted the Vail Transportation Master Plan in
response to the on-going and projected increases in development activity, the
results of past master planning processes, and pending redevelopment plans. As a
separate element of this plan, the Town is also in the process of adopting a lighting
master plan for both the North and South Frontage Roads. While the need for
improved safety and way finding are the primary drivers for creating this lighting
master plan, the town is also addressing aesthetics and environmental
stewardship issues in this plan. The proposed lighting master plan is intended to
be implemented in stages as opportunities arise over time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Listen to presentation and confirm or provide
direction.
~ITEM/TOPIC: Transportation Master Plan Amendment for West Vail Fire
Station access. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the proposed amendment to the
Vail Transportation Master Plan Access Management Plan for the West Vail Fire
Station access.
BACKGROUND: In May of this year the town adopted the Vail Transportation
: C2()311:
Master Plan which included an Access Management Plan (AMP) that was
developed jointly between the town and Colorado Department of Transportation
(CDOT).
The AMP currently shows one access point for the future West Vail Fire Station.
The current preferred design shows two access points, one for the general public
and one for emergency vehicles. CDOT will permit this additional emergency
access as long as the town amends the AMP. In order to amend the AMP, an
amendment to the Master Plan must be approved by resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discuss amendment.
8. ITEM/TOPIC: Overview of the 2009 International Building Codes Project.
(15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Martin Haeberle
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Because this is a work session, staff does
not request that any formal action be taken at this time.
BACKGROUND: The Building and Fire Appeals Board has, through a process of
community consensus, reviewed the 2009 international building codes and is
recommending that the Vail Town Council adopts the 2009 international building
codes with several amendments. The proposed amendments specifically address
the uniqueness of the construction environment in Vail.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, staff does not
request that any formal action be taken at this time.
9. ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
10. ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Town Council
11. ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) 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: Timber
Ridge Redevelopment; 2) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b) - to receive legal advice
on specific legal questions; Re: update on pending litigation Town of Vail v.
WENK et al. Case number 08CV467; 3) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b) - to receive
legal advice on specific legal questions; Re: marijuana dispensaries; 4)
C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(f)- to receive legal advice on specific legal
questions, and to discuss personnel matters. (95 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
12. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment. (4:35 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
: C2()311:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT OT CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL
BEGIN AT TBD, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, IN THE VAIL TOWN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Public Notice:
THE NEXT VAIL LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT REGULAR SESSION WILL
BEGIN AT TBD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009, IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THE AGENDA WILL BE POSTED ON THE TOWN OF VAIL WEBSITE HOME
PAGE UNDER USEFUL LINKS.
: C2()311:
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: PEC/DRB Update
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
ATTAC H M ENTS :
August 24, 2009 PEC Meeting Results
August 19, 2009 Meeting Results
: C2()311:
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
August 24, 2009
y. 1:OOpm
~'Oi4N OF Y~ ~
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Michael Kurz David Viele
Sarah Paladino
Susie Tjossem
Bill Pierce
Scott Lindall
Rollie Kjesbo
No Site Visits
20 minutes
1. A request for a final review of a variance from 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow an addition, located at 4254 East Columbine
Way, Unit 10/1-ot 10, Bighorn Terrace, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090023)
Applicant: Cheryl Post, represented by Rodney Molitor Preferred Home Repair
Planner: Nicole Peterson
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6-0-0
CONDITIONS:
1. The variance approval is contingent on the Applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval
of a design review application for the proposed addition.
Nicole Peterson presented an overview of the Staff inemorandum.
The Applicant's representative, Rodney Molitor, was available for questions.
Commissioners voiced there general support for the application, and noted that other similar
variances have been granted to other properties in the same development.
45 minutes
2. A request for final review of an appeal of an administrative action, pursuant to Section 12-3-3,
Appeals, Vail Town Code, appealing a staff determination that the One Willow Bridge Market
Place is operating an exterior grill and business transactions in violation of the Vail Town Code,
located at 1 Willow Bridge Road/Lot 2, Sonnenalp Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PRJ05-0417)
Appellant: MOMD, LLC, represented by Robert McNichols
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Overturned
MOTION: Kjsebo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 3-1-2 (Pierce opposed, Kurz
and Paladino recused)
Commissioners Kurz and Paladino recused themselves from this item due to their working
relationship with the appellant.
Bill Gibson made a presentation per the Staff inemorandum.
Paqe 1
: CK3T1:
1-1-1
Commissioner Pierce asked why the PA District does not have the outdoor clause of business
activity location.
Bill Gibson responded that since the primary purpose for the district is to provide hotels, and not
other commercial uses, the issue may not have been considered when the district was adopted.
There is also the possibility that this requirement was unintentionally left out.
Commissioner Pierce asked what other properties would this apply to.
Bill Gibson responded with the list of other PA District properties.
Bob McNichols, the applicant, said he originally checked with Bill Carlson, the health inspector,
but did not realize that he needed to check to see if the grill was allowed by zoning. He stated
that this use is part of his allowed use of restaurants. McNichols said that while a conditional use
permit was obtained, this does not preclude having the permitted uses. He said this is similar to
outdoor dining spaces in other locations. He also noted that the grill is located on their private
property and not in the street right-of-way.
Dominic Mauriello, representative of the applicant, said that the conditional use permit allows an
outdoor dining deck in the PA District. He then passed out the a document that outlines the
permitted and conditional use. He said the 10-15% was added to allow more commercial uses in
the PA District. He said it is clear that outdoor dining decks are permitted. He then said outdoor
dining is a non-chalant as far as the approval process goes. He then said outdoor dining decks
could include outdoor grills, just as they include iced tea, utensils, etc. He said the outdoor
dining deck with grilling is not a nuisance and the only reason this is an issue is because another
business owner complained. The code allows Staff and the PEC to interpret the code and
decide what an accessory use or ancillary use.
Jim Lamont, president of the Vail Homeowners Association, said that he recalls this debate
occurring long ago with Donovan's Bar, which became a nuisance to the community when
grilling outdoors. He said Bob McNichols should respond about how he would deal with
complaints from the neighbors. He said with the correct attributes of outdoor grilling, it could be
ok. However, requiring Bob to cease operations would be tough. He said the underlying issue is
odor and smoke.
Bill Gibson clarified issues that were addressed by Bob and Dominic. He said the property was
developed as a conditional use lodge. He also said that some outdoor dining decks have been
treated as conditional use permits, and the most recent outdoor dining deck in Vail Village, the
Tap Room, was highly contentious. In addition, parking area is assessed to outdoor dining
areas. This is the reason that the Sandbar does not have outdoor dining, because they do not
have adequate parking.
Bob McNichols said that there are 22 condo owners in the building that have gas connections for
outdoor grilling on their own porches, and that this grill was not different than those grills. He
also stated that outdoor grilling occurs at their pool patio for parties. He said because of the
distance between his building and others the smoke and smell are not an issue.
Commissioner Lindall asked what occurs on the inside of the business. Bob McNichols
answered that there are six different venues that people can walk through the building to each.
He said there are five outdoor seating areas that are available during the summer months. He
said the debate is not about whether the grill is good or not, but whether the code allows this
type of use.
Paqe 2
: CK3T1:
1-1-2
Bill Gibson clarified that the restaurant is an accessory use to the lodge, which is a conditional
use since the commercial area is between 10-15% of the GRFA.
Commissioner Lindall asked if the marketplace could operate without the outdoor grill. Bob
McNichols said yes.
Commissioner Kjesbo asked if the neighbors had issue with this. Bill Gibson responded no.
Kjesbo said that he felt this was incidental to the outdoor dining area.
Commissioner Tjossem thanked Staff for bringing this to the PEC's attention. She said the smell
of the grill enhances the businesses all the way down the street. She said the grills are seasonal
and are accessories to a dining deck.
Commissioner Pierce said that if he lived upstairs he would not appreciate the smoke and smell.
He said this is an opportunity to see how this works and control the proliferation. He said this
could get out of hand based on the decision made today.
Commissioner Kjesbo made a motion to overturn Staff's interpretation, and determine that the
grill is accessory to the Market Place because of the following characteristics:
• The grill is portable.
• The grill is located on private property.
• The operation of the grill is seasonal.
• The Town of Vail has not received complaints about the grill from any adjacent property
owners.
Commissioner Tjossem seconded the motion.
As part of his motion, he noted the findings in the Staff inemorandum, but modified the language
in the affirmative instead of the negative.
Commissioner Pierce suggested the Commission clarify what is meant by no complaints.
Commissioner Kjesbo amended his motion to identify the following additional characteristics.
• There is only one portable grill.
• The subject property is located within the Public Accommodation District which does not
require that offices, businesses, and services be operated and conducted entirely within a
building through a"Location of Business Activities" regulation similar to other zone
districts.
Commissioner Tjossem amended her second.
Commissioner Kjesbo noted that other outdoor grills would need to meet these same
characteristics, and if they didn't they could appeal to the Commission as well.
The motion was approved 3-1-2, with Pierce opposed, and Kurz and Paladino recused.
Bill Gibson asked the Commission if they would like to discuss outdoor grills further as part of the
comprehensive zoning update project. The Commission directed Staff to add further discussion
of this topic to that project.
Paqe 3
: CK3T1:
1-1-3
Bob McNichols commented that by making this interpretation the Commission has simply
confirmed that uses in the PA District are different than those in Commercial Core 1 and other
districts.
60 minutes
3. 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 September 14, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lindall VOTE: 6-0-0
Rachel Friede presented an overview of the Staff inemorandum. She went through each
question posed, all related to employee housing regulations in Chapter 12-13, Employee
Housing, Vail Town Code.
The first topic of discussion was ownership scenarios of employee housing units. Staff asked
the Commissioners whether all employee housing units should be permitted to have any
ownership scenario. Commissioners Kjesbo and Pierce voiced their concern over adding
additional owners to a lot, and stated that in some cases, it was appropriate to tie ownership of
an EHU to a dwelling unit.
The next topic of discussion was whether to allow separation of EHUs and dwelling units on a
site. There was a great deal of discussion about the pros and cons associated with the incentive
of an EHU for a separated structure. Several members thought that an EHU separation would
be a good incentive so long as they still had to comply with site coverage and landscaping area
on the lot. Commissioner Pierce was not supportive of the incentive because it would
significantly effect bulk and mass on properties. He felt that all homes in Vail should be required
to have an EHU.
The next topic of discussion was standardization of incentives for EHUs, including GRFA bonus,
landscaping reduction and site coverage bonus. Rachel Friede gave several examples of
inequities in the incentives given to EHUs based on zoning and lot size. Commissioner Tjossem
asked about the ideal size of an EHU. She believed it was 700 square feet. Nina Timm stated
that the studio is a minimum of 438 sq ft for Commercial Linkage mitigation. Commissioner
Tjossem inquired as to increasing the GRFA incentive. Commissioner Kurz inquired as to
eliminating RETT and Construction Use Tax. Nina Timm explained that if a price appreciation
cap was imposed in the deed restriction, both RETT and Construction Use Tax would be
eliminated. Commissioner Pierce believed that to increase the livability of EHUS more
incentives should be considered. For example increasing the GRFA credit to at least 800 square
feet. He suggested reducing the parking requirement for EHUs. Warren Campbell noted that
parking increases livability. Commissioner Lindall stated that 800 square feet and one required
parking space would probably generate a great number of EHUs
The Commissioners were generally concerned about giving a site coverage bonus for having
any amount of EHUs in the LDMF and MDMF Districts, because it could potentially allow too
much square footage of site coverage for too few EHUs. The Commissioners suggested adding
LDMF and MDMF Districts to required districts for inclusionary zoning and commercial linkage.
Rachel Friede then presented the discussion item of elimination of the ten types of EHUs. Staff
suggested that the ten EHU types be eliminated and the requirements of each type of EHU be
put in each individual zone district chapter. Commissioner Kurz believes that the goal is noble,
Paqe 4
: CK3T1:
1 1 4
but was concerned about the loss of information. Commissioner Pierce stated that it would be
great to minimize the use of the table since it is confusing. Commissioner Paladino suggested a
reduction in categories, for instance from 10 to 6.
Commissioner Kjesbo had several question regarding what the current strategy and regulations
are for the unoccupied on Forrest Road and Beaver Dam Road. Nina Timm responded by
clarifying the current regulations. Commissioner Kjesbo added that walling of the garages for an
EHU is not appropriate. He also stated that caretaker units should be allowed a connection into
the main dwelling unit, since walking outside to get to the main unit is unacceptable.
5 minutes
4. 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: Table to September 14, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 6-0-0
5 minutes
5. 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 September 28, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 6-0-0
5 minutes
6. 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 September 14, 2009
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 6-0-0
5 minutes
7. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications; and requests for conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12-7H-
2, Permitted and Conditional Uses, Basement or Garden Level; Section 12-7H-3, Permitted and
Conditional Uses, First Floor or Street Level; 12-7H-4, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Second
Floor and Above, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Evergreen Lodge, with
dwelling units, accommodation units, and conference facilities and meeting rooms on the
basement or garden level, multi-family dwelling units, accommodation units and conference
facilities and meetings rooms on the first floor or street level, and a fractional fee club on the
second floor and above, located at 250 South Frontage Road West/Lot 2, Block 1, Vail
Lionshead Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080033, PEC080072)
Applicant: HCT Development, represented by TJ Brink
Planner: Rachel Friede
ACTION: Withdrawn
Paqe 5
: C203T1:
1-1-5
8. Approval of August 10, 2009 minutes
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lindall VOTE: 5-1-0 (Kurz recused)
9. Information Update
10. Adjournment
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6-0-0
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 21, 2009, in the Vail Daily.
Paqe 6
: C203T1:
1 1 6
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
. PUBLIC MEETING
August 19, 2009
Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
PROJECT ORIENTATION 2:00pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Pete Dunning Brian Gillette
Mike Dantas
Elizabeth Plante
Tom DuBois
SITE VISITS 2:30pm
1. Roost Lodge - 1783 North Frontage Road West
2. Blossom Himalayan Arts - 100 East Meadow Drive, Unit 20
3. Village Inn Plaza - 100 East Meadow Drive
PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00pm
1. Blossom Himalayan Arts DRB090285 / 10 minutes Nicole
Final review of a sign (business ID)
100 East Meadow Drive, Unit 20/1-ot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: William Hanlon
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: Dantas SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 4-0-0
CONDITION(S):
1) The applicant shall remove the sign bracket and wood mount from the east fagade located
above the store entrance and repair and paint the fagade to match the stucco color.
2. Roost Lodge DRB090316 / 15 minutes Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (repaint)
1783 North Frontage Road West/Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Subdivision
Applicant: Gregg Gastineau
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Dantas VOTE: 3-1-0 (Dunning Opposed)
CONDITION(S):
1) The applicant shall repaint the background color of all the existing signs from the current off-
white buff color to the proposed trim color (Sherman Williams Extra White SW7006).
3. Village Inn Plaza DRB090323 / 15 minutes Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (repaint)
100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Jonathan Staufer
ACTION: Table to September 2, 2009
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Dantas VOTE: 4-0-0
: C2()311: Page 1
1-2-1
STAFF APPROVALS
Buffehr Creek Partners Residence DRB090244 Nicole
Final review of changes to approved plans (windows)
1687 Buffehr Creek Road/Lot 2, Eleni Zneimer Subdivision
Applicant: Buffehr Creek Partners, represented by Scott S Turnipseed
Atefi Residence DRB090279 Rachel
Final review of changes to approved plans (windows)
1468 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 17, Block 3, Vail Valley
Applicant: Bahman Atefi, represented by KH Webb Architects
Vail Transportation Center DRB090294 Bill
Final review of changes to approved plans (flue re-paint)
241 East Meadow Drive/Tract B-C, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Town of Vail
Audiss/Fitzgerald Residence DRB090300 Nicole
Final review of changes to approved plans (extension of DRB080152)
4879 Meadow Drive/Lot 15, Block 5, Bighorn 5th Addition
Applicant: Michael Audiss
Prochnow Residence DRB090301 Nicole
Final review of changes to approved plans (extension of DRB080349)
483 Gore Creek Drive, Unit 7, Lot 7, Vail Village Filing 4
Applicant: Fritzlen-Pierce Architects
Glaser Living Trust Residence DRB090302 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (skylight)
62 East Meadow Drive, Unit 340/Block 5E, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Snowdon & Hopkins Architects
Brigham Residence DRB090303 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows)
2855 Aspen Lane, Unit 2/1-ot 1, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 11
Applicant: Martin Manley Architects
Sipf Residence DRB090305 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
3876 Lupine Drive/Lot 14A, Bighorn Subdivision 2nd Addition
Applicant: Shad Blakey
Goodwin Residence DRB090306 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior (fascia)
4410 Columbine Drive, Unit B/Lot 1, Bighorn 3rd Addition
Applicant: Stephen Jentzen
McAdam Residence DRB090307 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-rooo
744 Sandy Lane/Lot 2, Vail Potato Patch Filing 2
Applicant: Reid Phillips
: M()311: Page 2
1-2-2
Cook Residence DRB090309 Nicole
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
1128 Hornsilver Circle/Lot 9, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 8
Applicant: A Cut Above Forestry
Netzorg/Beswick Residence DRB090310 Rachel
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re-rooo
4256 Columbine Drive/Lot 20-4, Bighorn Amended
Applicant: Carole Beswick
Engleman Residence DRB090311 Rachel
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck and window trim)
655 Forest Road/Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 6
Applicant: Byron Hathorn
Ptarmigan Townhomes Tree Removal DRB090312 Warren
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
1975 Placid Drive/Lot 38, Vail Village West Filing 2
Applicant: Tom Saalfeld
Brody Family LLC/Dean Residence DRB090315 Bill
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (roof repairs)
4512 Streamside Circle/Lot 14, Bighorn 4th Addition
Applicant: Mel Brody
Commonwealth Ear Nose & Throat Profit Sharing DRB090317 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
2945 Booth Creek Drive/Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 11
Applicant: A Cut Above Forestry
Bryony Investment Holdings LTD Residence DRB090318 Rachel
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
950 Fairway Drive/Lot 6, Vail Village Filing 10
Applicant: A Cut Above Forestry
Suggs Residence DRB090326 Jen
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping)
1045 Homestake Circle/Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 8
Applicant: Steven & Susan Suggs
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.
: M()311: Page 3
1-2-3
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: First draft of the 2010 Town Manager's Budget.
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss and provide feedback regarding the proposed
2010 Budget.
BACKGROUND: Since June, Council has reviewed individual budget topics such as revenue,
long-term capital planning and operating expenditures. This presentation is an all-
inclusive review in preparation for the first reading of the budget ordinance scheduled for
September 15th.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction and feedback to staff in preparation for the
first reading of the 2010 Budget ordinance scheduled for September 15th.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
2010 Budget First Draft
: C2()311:
MEMORANDUM
To: Town Council
From: Stan Zemler, Judy Camp, Kathleen Halloran
Date: August 27, 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, the
capital plan and an overview of all operating expenditures.
This presentation includes 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. This draft has incorporated your direction from
prior meetings. The public hearing is scheduled for September 15.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL
Please review the attached 2010 budget proposal and provide comments and questions
to be addressed for the public hearing on September 15. Confirmation of funding for
Council Contributions is also requested.
While the 2008 General Fund surplus of $3.2 million was set aside to balance the 2009
and 2010 operating budgets, the current proposal only uses $1.3 million for those two
years. In addition, 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.
The attached proposal meets the Town Manager's guidelines 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.
During the August 18 work session review of operating expenditures, the following
questions were posed by Council:
• Q: Regarding Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) revenue projections for the Four
Seasons, Ritz Carlton Residences and Solaris, what is the status of pre-sales and
the anticipated percentage of actual closings?
A: While the sales offices were tentative to provide public information regarding
current sales, they supplied enough information to validate the appropriateness of
the RETT revenue projections for 2010. The 2010 revenue for the three major
redevelopment projects is estimated at a range of 50 - 75% of what is already sold.
This leaves a significant variance to account for closings that may fall through.
• Q: The town was awarded a three- year grant (4-year commitment) for an additional
police officer. Council asked if the additional position was needed.
A: Please refer to Attachment A for a response from Dwight Henninger, Chief of
Police.
• Q: New amenities in town such as heated streetscape, loading and delivery
facilities, fire pits, and fountains have added an estimated $940,000 annual expense
to the town's general operations. Council asked if there was any way to make cuts
: C2()311:
2-1-1
to these expenditures or if savings could be realized by using alternative energy
sources?
A: Please see Attachment B for a response from Greg Hall, Director of Public
Works.
• Q: Employee benefits are reported as a percentage of salary expense, with the town
manager's goal to remain less than 40% of full time salaries. 2010 benefits are
budgeted at 36.4%. Council requested a comparison to 2009 and 2008, and asked
to see the percentage of healthcare cost paid by employees.
A: A comparison of benefits to the past two years is included on page 12.
Employees that enroll in the medical insurance plan pay the following:
- monthly premiums from their paychecks
- co-pays for services (Rx, office visits, emergency room, etc)
- deductibles
- additional out-of-pocket co-insurance
From 2005 through 2008, these employee costs have averaged 25% of total
health plan expenses. The 2009 and 2010 budgets have been developed using
an estimation of the same cost share (25% employee, 75% Town of Vail).
• Q: How healthy are the town's health insurance fund reserves?
A: The town's health insurance fund balance is very strong. In 2008, the ending
fund balance was $1.3 million, an increase of almost $350,000 over 2007 due to
fewer medial claims than expected. These reserves are restricted for healthcare and
provide sufficient coverage to manage the town's risk during challenging times.
• Q: The West Vail fire station is not currently included in the 2010 operating or capital
budget. Staff is waiting for notification of a federal grant request ($5.6 million) prior
to posing the question to Council. Council has asked for a detailed cost breakout for
annual operating expenditures projected if the fire station project moves forward.
A: Staff will prepare a separate agenda item to respond to this request, as part of
the overall decision regarding the project. This item is currently scheduled for
discussion September 15.
• Q: Council reviewed proposed 2010 operating expenditures by department. A
request was made for a detailed explanation of expense increases in both the
Administration/Risk Management and Facilities departments (4% increase in each).
A: The Administration/Risk Management department consists of Finance, Sales Tax,
Information Technology, Public Relations, Town Clerk, Human Resources and Risk
Management. The overall 4% increase totaling $146,000 includes the following: an
additional $11,000 in estimated treasurer fees from the collection of property taxes;
$25,000 increase for general liability deductible expense (the town normally budgets
for two major incidents per year for a total of $50,000; in 2009, the budget was
reduced to $25,000); $15,000 increase in General Liability premium expense (5%
estimated); $18,000 for a town holiday party (cancelled for 2009); $45,000 budgeted
for vacation buy-back (employees participating in the high deductible health plan
may elect to apply unused vacation pay to their 457 or flexible spending accounts) -
this item was budgeted in the Admin department for 2010, compared to 2009, where
the expense is spread among all the departments (expense will be transferred to
individual departments as incurred); $25,000 contingency was added for small,
unforeseen items. This was increased because the proposed budget has very little
room for the unexpected.
The Facilities increase totaling $150,000 includes the following: $75,000 additional
for shared cost to operating the loading and delivery facilities at the Arrabelle and
Mountain Plaza. There were cost savings in 2009 due to a partial-year operation, as
well as limited staffing of those facilities. An increase of $65,000 in natural gas
(9.7%) was budgeted due to concern over rates. The amended 2009 budget
includes significant savings from what was originally budgeted.
: M()311:
2-1-2
Q: Council asked to see the impact of lower sales tax collections (specifically, if
sales tax came in 3% lower than currently budgeted for 2010; a total decrease of
18% from 2008).
A: The impact to the General Fund in 2010 would be a reduction in revenue of
$183,000. The Capital Projects Fund would also be impacted with a reduction to
revenue of $120,000.
The following questions were raised regarding Council Contribution requests:
• Q: Bravo!: Council asked for more detail on the $7,500 requested for the "Music
Matters" programming.
A: The program provides 21 various events within Vail, including performances by
the Young Artists' Ensemble, pre-concert talks at Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and Vail
Mountain School, story hour format programs at the Vail library for children ages 3-7
and Instrument Petting Zoos at the Vail Farmer's Markets.
• Q: Colorado Ski Museum: Can the museum provide competitive bids for the Vail
Pioneer video editing project?
A: Susie Tjossem asked Eef Productions for a revised bid, which has come in 25%
less than the original amount. This puts the video editing total cost at approximately
$53,000.
• Vail Valley Foundation: Council requested a report out on Street Beat (winter) and
the American Ski Classic.
A: The Foundation has provided a report that was given to the Commission on
Special Events (CSE) earlier this year (please refer to Attachment C).
• Q: Funding for the World Cup Climbing Wall competition by the CSE: Council
inquired as to the purpose of the original funding for this event.
A: At the time it was announced the USA Climbing Wall World Cup had been
awarded to Vail, and the initial Climbing Wall funding request was made by
Untraditional Marketing, Council contributed an additional $50,000 because the CSE
budget had already been allocated. Coincidentally, there were also Council
conversations regarding a permanent climbing wall location in order to secure the
long-term hosting of this event. The search for a permanent location for a climbing
wall has been stalled by the ongoing Ford Park and recreation master planning
processes. The cost of bringing the Climbing Wall World Cup to Vail is supported by
the additional $50,000 annual request, which was reduced by 10% to $45,000 in
2009. This is documented by Council minutes from November 6, 2007, and by
conversations with the current event promoter, the Vail Valley Foundation, and the
originator of the event.
• Q: Eagle River Watershed Council. Council requested an explanation of what
projects have been funded and more detail regarding the 2010 funding request.
A: Please see Attachment D for a detailed breakout of funding for 2009, 2010
requested funding ($99K) and 2010 staff-recommended funding ($90K, same as
2009).
Please note the contribution amounts budgeted have not been altered since the first
review on August 18. Any changes directed by Council will be included in the first
reading of the budget ordinance set for September 15.
: M()311:
2-1-3
~
~
TOWN x
OF V~ ~
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Memorandum
To: Towil Council
Stan Zemler, Town Manager
From: Dwight Henninger, Chief of Police
Date: September l, 2009
Subject: Police Deparnneilt Staffing
The Vail Police Depai-tnent was awarded a grant in the amount of $258,970 from the COPS Hiring
Recoveiy Program (CHRP). These grant funds will cover 100 percent of eiltiy-level salaty aild
benefits of a new swoi7l officer during the course of 36 inonths. At the end of the 36-month grant
period, the Town of Vail will be required to retain the officer position for an additional 12 months.
The CHRP was a competitive grant program launched by the Deparnnent of Justice with funds from
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The objective of this program is to hire
career law enforcement officers, improve community policulg capacity and expand crime
preveiltion efforts. To clarify what an accomplishment this has been for the Vail Police Department,
only 12 percent of funding requests were granted. Additionally, the Vail Police Departinent was
one of only 13 ageilcies in Colorado to receive a CHRP Award, chosen fiom 105 Colorado agencies
who had applied. This is a strong testament to the proven traclc record of Vail Police cominunity
policing strategies.
The CHRP grant will enable the department to fill a curreiltly vacant position and deliver an even
more efficient level of service. We take great pride in having been awarded the 2008 International
Association of Chiefs of Police Community Policing Finalist Award. The award was recognized by
the CHRP grant judging panel and is a clear aclcnowledgement of the Vail Police Department's
iinpressive coinininnent towards reducing the escalation of fear and level of crime aild disorder. A
new, grant-funded officer will allow Lis to build on and continLle the legacy of excellence within the
department and the coinmunity.
Attachment A
: C2()311:
2-1-4
Police Departnlent Statting Page 2
Memo, September 1, 2009
Cunently the Vail Police Depart7nent has the following authorized positions:
Origina12009 Filled Vacant 1998 Staffing
Bud et
2 33
Swon1 Perso11t1e1 30 28 (1) fi-ozc~i and (1) (2) positions frozcu
military lcavc 14 mo in 2002
CEOs 8 h 0 5
Records Tec11s, 5.5 5 (1) reduced staffiu ; 5
Mgr, Dept Secy as of 9/8/09
20
Dispatchers, 23 (11) 91113oard 3 19
Sups, Director ftmdcd
1 otc: Starting 9/8/2009, thc policc front dcslc will bc closcd on Sundays. This adjustmcnt to front
dcsk opcrations is thc result of managing a vacancy in a Rccords position and a low dcmand
for policc administrativc scrvices on Sundays.
While we have experienced a reduction in field staffing, we contiilue to address an increased level
of service. The following is a partial list of added taslcs undertalcen by the Police Deparnnent over
the last few years. Focus on the items in bold will be advanced by an additional officer resource.
Traffic Community Policing Problem Oriented Policing
I-70 Education and Police Dept tours/field trips Vacation security checks
Enforcement Special Olympics Torch Run TRC closure at 2 am
Directed enforcement 911 Safety Cainp (ECAD) Wildlife Protection
patrols Ordinance Education and
Vail Police Voltmteer Program
I-70 Pass/road closurc plan Enforcement
and implementation Citizen Police Acadeiny
Bilce patrol
Devo traffic control Iilcreased special eveilt
planning (including "World TIPS training
Parlcing emergency plan Status" events) In-kind scrvices for Stireet
Summcr paid parking patirol July 4"' and New Years Eve Beat, Hot Summer I ights, etc
Village loading and delivery events Late night bus follows with a
plan monitoring/enforcement School programs: Adopt a patrol car
Saturation patrols (DUI) Homc Room, Shop witih a Extended coverage at Check
Bilce and foot race traftic Cop, Project Graduatiion, Point Charlic
coiltrol skate park involvement Greater Liquor Board
Motorist assists Formalized COP/POP projects involvement
Crime prevention semunars
Attachment A
: C2()311:
2-1-5
Police Departnlent Statting Page 3
Memo, September 1, 2009
Criminal Investi ation Administrative Enhanced Outreach
Slci set ups Administration of grailt Critical Incident Mailageinent
Room set ups piograms (LEAF DUI 1610 am radio station
Eilforcement/Byrne Grant) collaboration
Crime informatioil sharing
with partner agencies through Career job fairs Mountain patrol
COPLINK Traveler's aid Outreach efforts with local
Skills-based progression civic entities
system (may limit ability to
send officers to training)
Jail status checlcs of prisoilers
5 Year Strategic Plan work
RESPONSE TIMES
(111 Aiiiltires)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2008
Priority 1 3:40 4:37 4:30 7:18 5:23 5:07
& 2 C alls
Priority 3 8:28 9.27 10:38 11:22 11:08 6:85
& 4 Calls
Officcrs 33 33 31 29 29 28
Priority 1 and 2 calls rcquirc lights, sii°cns aud immcdiatc rcsponsc. Priority 3 and 4 calls rcquirc
a standard responsc.
AVERAGE TIME ON CALLS
Currently, the average time spent on a call for service by an officer is 38.2 ininutes. An additional
officer resource will allow staff to inaintaiil proactive police service rather than a reactive posture.
WORKLOAD/PRODUCTIVITY
With increased staffing there is potential for greater self-initiated activity, which coLild result in
decreased crime rates and higher quality of life. (See page 5 for a comparison of activity in Vail to
other mountain resort police departments.)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2008
Crimcs pcr officer 30.81 32.03 31.19 37.12 34.82 37.57
Dispatched calls pcr 506 518 685 682 673 590
officer
Sclf-initiated calls pcr 1698 1745 1633 1291 1138 981 ~
officer
I umbcr of Ofticers 33 33 31 29 29 28
Sclf-initiatcd calls go down as an officcr's availablc tirnc dccrcascs.
Attachment A
: C2()311:
2-1-6
Police Departnlent Statting Page 4
Memo, September 1, 2009
Several of Vail's crime rates are higher or at least identical to the natioilal average in several
categories. As a national average per 5,000 population, 14.3 incidences of aggravated assault were
reported in 2007. Vail's aggravated assault rate is 14 cases per 5,000 populatioil. While 110.3 thefts
were reported nationally per 5,000 population, 391 incidences were reported in Vail for 5,000
poplilation. Burglaries rated higher than the national average - 42 ulcidences reported per 5,000
population in Vail compared to 36.5 reported nationally per 5,000 population.
OFFICER SAFETY AND ABILITY TO RESPOND TO SIMULTANEOUS
CALLS
Officers will be safer because of the ability to send inore officers to simultaileous einergency calls.
A study of the 2002 patrol schedule was coilducted calculating available officer worlc days. The
ilumber of days attributable to vacations, siclc time, traiiung, matenuty and bereaveinent were theil
calculated and sLibtracted from the available worlc days revealing a 15% reduction in available
worlcforce. At our February 2003 staffing level of 21 patrol officers and patrol sergeants, 3.15
officers were unavailable for duty, leaving a remainder of 17.85 officers distributed among four
patrol shifts. That translates to 4.5 officers per shift oi1 average but necessarily weighted for ilight
shift demands for service. At current staffing levels, in situations where response to multiple calls is
necessary, officer safety and response tiine is a significant concern. Calls routinely requiring the
respoilse of more than two officers include bar fights, domestic disturbances, serious injury traffic
accidents and pass closures. (See attachineiit, Vail Police Deparnneiit Organizational Chart.)
SPECIAL EVENTS AND "IN KIND" SERVICES
Further staffing increase will positively impact the police departmeilt's ability to provide exna-duty
and "in-lcind" services for special events. Statistics indicate overtime that equitably distributed will
result in less burnout.
POTENTIAL LIABILITY EXPOSURE
Increased staffing may result in lower liability exposure regarding jail operations. Currently,
prisoilers are physically checlced oilce per hour. Additional staffing will result in more reliant and
consistent prisoner time checlcs thereby lessening the Town's liability.
CONCLUSION
The staff recoininends Council accept the COPS Hiring aild Recovery Prograin Grant Award in the
amount of $258,970. A new hire made possible throLigh CHRP will help improve response times to
calls for service, ensure officer safety by assigning multiple officers to calls, play a vital role in the
planning and implementation of special events, and will preclude liability exposure regarding jail
operations. The funds will allow the men and womeil of the Vail Police Department to continue to
lead and serve our coininuiuty in extraordinary ways.
Attachment A
: C2()311:
2-1-7
Police Departnlent Statting Page 5
Memo, September 1, 2009
MOUI TAII RESORT POLICE AGEI CY ACTIVITY - 2008
BRECKENRI STEAMB MAMMOT
VAIL ASPEN DGE OATSPRI H
NGS LAKES
# of Sworn 28 26 24 26 20
Total Arrests 1,212 474 922 962 387
Sex Offenses 8 9 0 7 3
Robbery 0 0 2 0 5
Burglary 42 56 27 101 82
Larceny/Theft 391 357 382 366 208
Motor Vehicle 12 18 2 26 11
Assault 54 98 80 140 101
Arson 1 0 0 0 0
Fraud 164 55 73 84 100
Vandalism 158 92 147 239 150
DUI 90 101 90 209 150
Accidents 595 675 325 782 200
Case Nos. 2,525 1,935 2,074 2,916 922
CAD Calls 43,995 19,136 15,163 20,138 8,509
CAD Calls Per 1,569 736 631 774 425
Officer
Total Arrests 43 18 38 37 19
Per Officer
Incidents Per 90 74 86 112 46
Officer
Attachment A
: C2()311:
2-1-8
VAIL POLICE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
Chief of Police
Dwight Henninger
~
Special Events Operations Acting Administrative Systems Communications
Commander Commander Center Director
Planning Steve Wright Craig Bettis Engineer Joe Ribeiro
Day ShiftTeam Detective Atlministrative
(Sun, Mon, Tues) Sergeant Records 4 Dispatch
1 Sergeant Citizens' Academy Manager Supervisors
2 Officers Professional
3 CEOs Standards
3 Detectives
Swing ShiftTeam Hiring/Training 1 Executive
(Sun, Mon, Tues) Assistant
3 Officers Grants 18 Dispatchers
1 TRIDENT Planning & 3 Records
Night Shift Team drug task force Research Techs
(Sun, Mon, Tues) member (grant
1 Sergeant funded) Auditing ~
2 Officers
Animal Control
Day ShiftTeam
(Thurs, Fri, Sat) Court Liaison
1 Sergeant Accreditation
3 Officers
3 CEOs Demand Reduction
Swing Shift Team Reserve
(Thur, Fri, 5at)
1 Sergeant Planning
2 Officers Building
Maintenance
Night Shift Team
(Thurs, Fri, Sat) Budgeting
1 Sergeant
2 Officers
,
I D:1t.a S~~qlnntber ?(?(19 ~
: C2()311:
2-1-9
MEMORANDUM
To: Town Council
From: Greg Hall
Date: August 27, 2009
Subject: Alternative Energy for Snowmelt
In response to Council's question, staff began researching alternative energy
sources to fuel the heated streetscape snowmelt systems in the initial design of the
system. The town and its designers explored various alternative ways to provide
energy including wind or solar electricity, solar heating, and geothermal heat pumps.
The requirements for these alternatives to be able to provide a high amount of
energy to melt snow in a short amount of time and then be able to be technically shut
down for periods of time when it doesn't snow for two to three weeks (or the opposite
ability to provide energy for long periods of snow/cloudy weather) became
impractical. The size of the systems was also a major obstacle. An example was the
geothermal heat pumps that needed a well field the size of the fields at Ford Park.
The system that was installed includes the most efficient boilers available, a
sophisticated control and monitoring system, and included insulation, which has
since failed. The town will continue to pursue the any alternative energy source that
makes sense.
Regarding Council's concern with overall costs to operate the snowmelt system,
three variables add to costs. The total amount of area heated (as area is added it
adds operational costs). The atmospheric conditions regarding amount of snowfall,
temperatures and wind all effect energy use. A final factor is the cost of fuel. The
original estimates to run the snowmelt system were $1/sf based on natural gas
prices at the time of around $3 per decatherm. We have seen prices as high as $ 11
per decatherm, but have averaged in the $ 7.30-$9 for a season. The 2007-2008
operating cost was $2.28/sf verses 2008-2009 cost of $2.07/sf. We have over
250,000 sf of snowmelt. We will add another 30,000 sf with the completion of the
current developments. There are areas where additional snowmelt makes sense,
such as stairs and in heavy pedestrian areas. This will be a constant balancing act in
the future as far as the amount of snowmelt to add.
Regarding cutting back on operations of fire pits, fountains etc. Changes in these
operations would be service cuts. We have received requests for more use,
especially the Wall Street fire pit. We try to keep them off during the off season to
save fuels. We will continue this pattern. Removing is an option as well, but you will
hear from certain advocates.
Attachment B
: C2()311:
2-1-10
~T ~ ' an'.-~-~_r~,ag;z..~+ ~ ~-+vp••~i?r 'A'~,;, i
~
~1
AMERICAN SKI CLASSIC SUMMARY °
• Vail, Colorado March 18-22, 2009 •^;,~•~•~hy~~~;`~~~~~ ~
• On-site Audience Reach: 5,000 over 3 days
• HighlyAffluent -Avg. HHI of $200k, Material Percentage Make w
$1mm+. ASC event guests have proven year in and year out
that they spend incremental dollars throughout Vail in
restaurants, galleries, jewelry, real estate, clothing, hotels and
Ski ShopS. r " ~ ~ 4+~' r'~.F' ~ , ,
• 60-minute nationally syndicated TV show reaches no less than ~ s~
80 million US households. Over 75 percent of stations • ~ r!f~' ; A,
syndicating the event telecast are network affiliates; 25% are
cable providers (multiple re-airs). The telecast itself provides y~7
Vail with conservative impressions reach of 10,000,000 » ,¢y~~ ~Ny', • ~ "0 ~ ;r•
• Advertising for the event combines local print, radio and TV, `
email blasts and select International web based campaigns. ' rrY -
• 60/40 Male-Female Gender Split
• SVP, EVP and C Level Executives
• They Lead Active Lives - 74% Exercise Regularly
• Travel Frequently for Business and Pleasure
• 75% are age 34 to 65 and return each year to Vail a minimum
of 3 times both for the event and as destination guests of the
resort.
,
• Event attendees are 80% destination guests (outside of
Colorado) with 20% local and Front Range.
• An unparalleled uttra premium client entertainment & hospitality
experience . • ~ ' .
• American Ski Classic has historically done very well in securing - p~~
both participant (Ford Cup) support/investment along with
multiple corporate sponsor partners. 2009 was a challenge in '
both these areas for the obvious reasons but should recover well
for 2010 with an improved US and Intl. markets. ~(20 1:
1-1-1 1 Attachment C
Highlights and Improvements For The Future
• American Ski Classic is an event which draws Olympic and world cup
athletes who are hero's in their respective European countries. This
good will and support of these athletes on the world stage is a tangible
and invaluable asset to both Vail and the WF in our pursuit of another
World Alpine Ski Championships.
}i ~ • The American Ski Classic is the best, most recognized celebration of
both the sport of ski racing and Vail as a key player anywhere in the
I~ PR world. It's longevity (28 years) is a testament to both the desire to
support our heritage and to celebrate both the legends of our youth
and our youth of today who will be the next legends.
• Headliner concert Taj Mahal kicked off the event Thursday evening
bringing great crowds to Golden Peak.
• Younger Legends Daron Rawvles, Jonna Mendez, Casey Pucket and
Chad Fleisher joined the event in 09.
~ r,; „ p;~t ' • Vail Resident Cindy Nelson was recognized as the 2009 Legend of
; - kf - ~ Honor.
. g • Even in a tough economic climate, we were successful in securing
event title sponsor Korbel and Volvo as the Legends GS title.
• The venue set up for the Taj Mahal concert was not ideal creating a
4 a~a~~~~`~` bottle neck and a spectator flow issue. Concessions needed to be
= moved into main finish area and the venue set up created an odd line
of demarcation between concert goers and the elevated VIP platform.
• Although successful with Korbel and Volvo as large Corporate
sponsors, the event struggled in 09 to secure the critical mid level gold
and silver sponsorships due to economy and highly conservative brand
spending.
• Although part of the 09 plan, due to expense reductions we were not
able to execute ideas for greater community involvement. Our intent
to rectify this in 2010 is to invite the community to create teams of 4 to
~ race head to head in a qualifying day where one community team
:rncreceives a complimentary spot to race in the Ford Cup.
~ ~
? - 1 - 12 Attachment C
Revenues Cash & Trades 1,050,500
American Ski Classic 2009 Operating Budget
EXPENSES
Announcers 2,100.00
Auto Mileage 478.82
Credentials 2,612.40
Facilities-Operations 87,000.00
Gates, Bibs & Banners 3,821.00
Gifts 43,000.00
Insurance 6,734.00
Invitations 2,686.85
Labor 200,000.00
Lodging 40,708.30
Mail - Postage/Shipping 2,025.00
Marketing &Advertising 10,100.00
Media - TV & Talent 158,000.00
Non-Social Food 1,067.59
Permits 200.00
Prizes - Cash & Non Cash 4,042.00
Registration 1,510.25
Sales Commission & Expense 31,800.00
Social - F&B, Entertainment 112,567.00
Sound 7,000.00
Telephone 2,160.42
Transportation 7,931.32
Trades 474,012.00
Total Expenses 1,201,556.95
Net Profit - Loss ~_1 - 13 Attachment C -151,056.95
~
~BUD L ILrHT6 A,.
~ . ~ 1=~ ' ' l~ - - _
Bud Light Street Beat Summary
- • Vail, CO January 21 to April 15 2009
ijrl 4~ ~ • 10lh year for Street Beat
5~~; • Average of 3,000 + people attend each of 10 concerts; 8
concerts in Vail Village and 2 in Arrabelle/Lionshead
~ ' • A vibrant, youthful energy is generated by Street Beat and
sets the tone of Vail on 10 Wednesdays during the winter
s - • Whether the band is Funk, Bluegrass, Reggae, Hip Hop or
" Rock,
A gu e s t s a n d l o c a l s a li k e c e l e b r a t e t hi s u niqu e e xPe ri e n c e;
under the lights, under the bright winter stars with the majestic
- rocky mountains as the backdrop
• Avg. HHI of audience - $83K/year
~ ~ _ • Median Age - 35
_ • 40% LocaUColorado Residents, 50% Out of Sate from Top 25
_ ~ US DMA's 10% International Guests
• Drives retail (bar and restaurant traffic and revenue) Jan-Apr
on an evening tra ditiona l ly s low for bot h loca ls an d des tination
guests alike.
~ • Street Beat continues to do well each year raising corporate
sponsorship dollars. Anheuser Busch and their commitment to
the Street Beat concept is a critical factor in its ongoing
success.
• Street Beat has an aggressive marketing plan which spans 6
:(20 1: months of print, radio, local TV, posters, web, live TV and radA
interviews and email blasts. ~
? - 1 - l4 Attachment C
~'•.t` '
' a
~
~BUD L I Lr M T6
~ srRE-1 FAI'
.
f ~
Highlights and Improvements for The Future
• This year we went with 10 total concerts and it was just the
right We started with 1 show in Jan, 1 in Feb (the colder
• ~ months) and then ramped up to each Wednesday starting in
- • , : Y _ _ ~ March through April 15.
• By far the majority of inerchants in vail are supportive and
thrilled to have Street Beat each Wed. There were some
issues which we addressed hopefully to satisfaction of all.
~~t « 10_"~a~
~ • Concerts in Arrabelle/Lionshead are a huge hit, beloved by
` the merchants and a great venue for spectators.
a
_ ~ • Although 10 concerts Jan-Apr 10 is our current plan, we will
most likely be adding 1-2 concerts in Mid-late Dec 09 as the
collective agreement is we need tokcik off the season with
• \ - some music!
• The final Street Beat show was a great success with easily
3500-4000 ppl, amazing 80's costumes, Chadzilla & The
Monsters 80'2 cover band and a local winning the Volvo C30.
- I - 15 Attachment C AV
Revenues Cash & Trades 355,473
Bud Light Street Beat 2009 Operating Budget
EXPENSES
Auto Fuel 350.00
Entertainment 925.00
Facilities - Operations 37,700.00
Gifts 223.00
Insurance 5.000.00
Labor 99,000.00
Lodging 223.00
Mail - Shipping 21.00
Marketing & Advertising 13,000.00
Non Social Food 250.00
Permits 925.00
Prizes - Non-Cash 150.00
Sales Commission & Exp 12,000.00
Sound 34,266.00
Talent / Speakers 92,000.00
Transportation 150.00
Traded Gifts 28,000.00
Traded Goods 7,500.00
Traded Marketing 32,500.00
Total Expenses 364,183.00
Net Profit - Loss : (20 1: -8,710.00 ~
1- 1 - 16 Attachment C AV
Eagle River Watershed Council
Contribution Analysis
8/18/2009 Staff
Requested Recommended
2009 2010 2010 Comments
Annual expenditures:
Administration 18,000 20,000 18,000 Recommend same as 2009
Highway Clean-up 500 500 500
River Clean-up 500 500 500
Total Max Daily Load (TMDL) Monitoring 10,000 9,113 9,113 Provides data for EPA reporting
"Bug" analysis (effects of sedimentation compared to pure
Bio Monitoring 17,000 18,680 18,680 locations) - 5 sites in town. This was contracted with the US
Forest Service
Monitor physical (water quality/quantity) parameters of both
Source Monitoring 5,000 6,000 6,000 Black Gore Creek & Gore Creek; This is an annual
commitment with other communities who help fund as well.
State-wide volunteer water quality monitoring program co-
River Watch Program 5,000 sponsored by the CO Division of Wildlife and the CO
Watershed Assembly
Public outreach & information 5,000 5,000
Projects:
Culvert engineering;collaboration w/CDOT. USFS; Severe
culvert failure along 5 mile markers has resulted in large
Black Gore Creek Quality Protection 40,000 32,207 quantities of sediment and storm water to flow into the Black
Gore Creek; Reduced recommended funding to stay within
2009 funding levels; Project may not be fully completed in
2010
USGS Monitoring Station Relocation 12,000
Gore Creek Stormwater Quality 22,000 Mapping of stormwater drainage
90,000 99,793 90,000
Attachment D
: (P(811:
2-]-]7
~
~
TOWN ~
~
Proposed 2010 Budget
First Draft
September 1, 2009
2-1-18
Town of Vail
Proposed 2010 Budget
Table of Contents
2010 Budget Highlights 1
This is a verbal summary of the key assumptions, changes, and results
of the 2010 proposed Budget.
Major Revenue Analysis 8
Summary of Changes in Personnel 9
Ten-Year Summary of Budgeted Positions by Department 10
Employee Benefits Summary 12
This report shows the list of employee benefits by percentage and costs.
General Fund Revenue and Expenditures 13
This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category
In the General Fund
Contributions and Special Events 15
Proposed expenditures for the 2010 budget.
Capital Plan Summary 24
This summary provides project costs grouped by type of capital project (i.e. "Roads")
Capital Projects Fund Revenue and Expenditures 25
This schedule shows revenue by type and expenditures by project
in the Capital Projects Fund for 2008, 2009 and proposed 2010.
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund Revenue and Expenditures 28
This schedule shows revenue by type and expenditures by project in the RETT
Fund for 2008, 2009 and proposed 2010.
Marketing Fund Revenue and Expenditures 30
Debt Services Fund and Expenditures 30
Heavy Equipment Fund Revenue and Expenditures 31
Dispatch Services Fund Revenue and Expenditures 32
Conference Center Fund Revenue and Expenditures 33
Health Insurance Fund Revenue and Expenditures 33
: M()311:
2-1-19
TOWN OF VAIL
2010 BUDGET PROPOSAL
GENERAL AND RELATED FUNDS
The Town of Vail 2010 budget proposal presented in this document reflects the town's
vision to be the premier mountain resort community in a fiscally responsible manner.
During 2009, the budget was adjusted for reduced revenue projections as well as
significant reductions in expenditures. Specifically, the revenue budget has been
reduced by $3.0 million, and operating expenditures have been cut by $2.9 million.
Capital projects in both the Capital and RETT funds have been deferred to later years, or
in some cases will be completed early due to cost savings. In June, Council agreed to
use the $3.2 million of surplus from 2008 to support ongoing operations in 2009 and
2010. This will allow the town to maintain current service levels. During the budget
process for 2011, staff will propose additional changes to operations in order to function
within annual revenues.
REVENUE
The town's 2010 budget is funded by a projected $45.5 million net revenue budget.
Net revenues exclude inter-fund charges and transfers. 2010 projected revenues are a
2.1 % increase from the 2009 amended budget and a 22% reduction from 2008. (See
page 8 for a Major Revenue Analysis). The below chart identifies the various sources of
town revenue:
WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM
2010 Proposed Net Revenue $45.5 million
Rent, Fines &
Miscellaneous
7%
Earnings on Investments
Charges for Services
3%
Transportation Centers
12% Sales Tax
37%
Intergovernmental
Revenue
7%
Licenses and Permits/
2%
Real Estate Transfer Tax
10%
Ski Lift Tax and I Property and Ownership
Franchise FeesJ Use Tax Tax
9% 1% 11%
Sales Tax will produce approximately 37% of annual revenue for 2010. The $16.6
million of sales tax projected is flat with the 2009 budget, and a 15% decrease from 2008
collections.
1
: CKI311:
2- 1 -20
Real Estate Transfer Tax collections of $4.7 million represent 10% 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.
Property and Ownership Tax of $4.8 million will generate 11 % of total revenues for 2010.
The current base mil levy is 4.69 and constitutes 10% of the average taxpayer's property
tax bill. The assessor's office estimated a 13% increase for 2010, however we have only
built in a 10% increase to compensate for the possibility of successful appeals.
Ownership tax was budgeted flat with 2009.
Parking revenue from the transportation centers is projected at $5.4 million for 2010, or
12% of total revenues. This projection is flat with the 2009 budget.
Ski Lift Tax and Franchise Fees total $3.1 million and $1.1 million, respectively for 2010,
virtually flat with the 2009 budget. These revenues represent 9% of the total annual
revenue.
EXPENDITURES
The town's expenditure budget for 2010 is $52.4 million excluding inter-fund transfers
and charges. This is an 8.4% decrease from the 2009 amended budget.
Sixty-four percent of the expenditures are to provide municipal services and thirty-six
percent to fund capital improvements including debt service. Municipal services costs
have decreased 6% ($2.9 million) as a percentage of total expenditures since the
original budget for 2009, when municipal services represented 70%.
WHERE THE MONEY GOES
2010 Proposed Expenditures $52.4 million
Debt Service, 4%
EMM
Capital Improvements, Municipal erdi es Personnel, 42°/o
32% 64 /o
Materials & Services,
18.5%
Contributions,
Marketing & Special
Events, 3.5°/a
Within municipal services, 42% of spending is related to staffing costs. These costs
include salary expense, overtime, and benefits such as health insurance, disability
coverage, worker's compensation, pension, life insurance, unemployment and Medicare.
2
: M()311:
2- 1 -21
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. The town is proceeding with a federal "COPS" grant, which will fund
one police office for three years. This grant will fund a position that has been previously
budgeted, but is currently vacant. Please refer to page 9 for a detailed explanation of
FTE changes, and page 10 for a 10 year history of the town's FTE count.
Employee benefits are projected at $5.7 million, representing 36.4% of salary expense
for 2010 (please refer to page 12 for a breakout of employee benefits). 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, Disability, and
Unemployment
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 offset an 8% trend in expected claims experience. The reserve will
be maintained at a healthy level, and is adequate to cover 47% of annual claims
expense (guideline is normally 35%). See page 33 for a detailed fund statement for the
Health Insurance Fund.
While the above narrative summarized the overall proposed town financial outlook for
2010, the following provides an explanation of budgetary assumptions for each fund:
3
: M()311:
2-1 -22
GENERAL FUND
The General Fund supports the town's basic municipal operations. While the attached
General Fund proposed budget requires the use of $473,000 of the $3.2 million
surplus, the fund balance is projected to be $21.7 million at the end of 2010,
representing 75% of annual revenues. 35% was the Council directive in prior years as
the minimum fund balance during redevelopment.
REVENUE - $28,767,715
The General Fund's primary source of revenue is sales tax followed by parking, property
and ownership tax, and lift tax.
Sales Tax - $10,126,000
In this budget proposal, 61 % of the town's 4% general sales tax is allocated to the
General Fund. The remaining 39% is allocated to the Capital Projects Fund. This split
is the same percentage approved in the 2009 original budget. However, by Charter,
approval of this budget will require an affirmative vote by five out of seven Council
members (a super majority) because less than 50% of the sales tax revenue will be
dedicated to capital acquisition and improvements. 2010 sales tax revenue is
projected to be flat with the 2009 budget. 2009 is currently budgeted at a 15%
decrease from 2008.
Property Tax, Parking Revenue, Ski Lift Tax and Franchise Fees budgetary
assumptions were discussed above, in the Revenue section.
Licenses and Permit Fees - $732,200
The largest component of licenses and permits is construction permit fees, which
includes building, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical permits. The 2010 budget for
construction permits is projected at a 45% decrease from 2009 due to limited
construction activity.
EXPENDITURES - $29,240,739
During the budget process, the town manager directed the following goals:
• 0% increase to operations
• 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. Departmental expenditures came in at a
decrease of 6.4% compared to the original 2009 budget and a decrease of .3%
compared to the amended 2009 budget for operating expenditures. The departments
made additional reductions which resulted in a total decrease in spite of additional
charges for loading and delivery of $75,000 and a 6% increase in utilities ($65,000).
Charges to the departments for fleet maintenance and replacement increased 5%
($132,500) due to the uncertainty of fuel costs. 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
12). All of the above result in total expenditures for the General Fund at a decrease
of .3% from the 2009 amended budget.
Because expenditures exceed revenues for 2010, staff is proposing to use $473,000 of
the $3.2 million surplus from 2008 as agreed upon by Council in June.
4
: M()311:
2- 1 -23
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 (flat with 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 15-23 for detailed information regarding
Council contributions.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
REVENUE - $8,980,000
Sales tax is a primary revenue source for capital projects. For 2010, $6,474,000 or 39%
of the town's projected sales tax revenue is allocated to the Capital Projects Fund. This
is the same split used in the 2009 original budget.
Federal grant revenue of $1.OM is included, however that money is restricted to use
toward a transit center and is offset by the same amount of expenditure, currently shown
as a transfer to the Vail Reinvestment Authority. An additional $28,500 of grant money
has been awarded to the police department for the LiveScan Interface software, which
links the town's software data to other agencies.
The sale of the Arosa Drive duplex employee housing units is included in 2010, for a
total of $770,000. This will reimburse the town for construction costs incurred in 2009,
also budgeted at $770,000.
Use Tax collections are budgeted at $500,000, flat with the 2009 amended budget. No
major projects are assumed.
EXPENDITURES - $12,399,198
In addition to a debt service payment totaling $2.3 million, noteworthy projects for 2010
include:
• Annual capital maintenance of town facilities, parking structures and streets
totaling $1.7M.
• Neighborhood road reconstruction of $2.9M for Mill Creek Circle and Vail Valley
Drive. Planning and design for the reconstruction began in 2009 ($200K).
• Replacement of 6 town buses ($2.2 million).
• Continued work on an East Vail berm and drainage work to combat noise from I-
70 ($751 K).
The Capital Projects fund is projected to have a fund balance of $1.3M at the end of
2010, not including unfunded projects (West Vail Fire Station).
5
: M()311:
2- 1 -24
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX (RETT) FUND
REVENUE - $5,240,826
The primary revenue source for this fund is the 1% real estate transfer tax, accounting
for $4,705,000 in projected revenue for 2010. Base transactions are budgeted flat
compared to the 2009 amended budget ($3.4 million), however preliminary sales from
the Four Seasons, Ritz Carlton Residences and Solaris contribute to the overall
increase. Although all three projects are scheduled for completion by July, 2010,
budgeted revenue is based on only 25% of units selling, at 80% of current list price.
EXPENDITURES - $8,423,361
Use of the RETT Fund is restricted by ordinance to parks, recreation, open space, and
environmental sustainability. In addition to ongoing capital maintenance items and
park/path development of $2.4M, noteworthy projects for 2010 include:
• Widening shoulders along frontage roads to create bike / pedestrian paths
($2.3M)
• Continued master planning for Ford Park, including parking survey work ($1.OM).
• Widening shoulders along Vail Valley Drive during the road reconstruction project
($850,000)
• Improvements to VRD-managed assets totaling $690K. Significant projects
include improvements to the golf clubhouse, tennis court repairs, and ADA
access for both the clubhouse and youth services facility.
• Reconstruction of the Red Sandstone Park based on safety concerns ($439K).
• Continuation of Forest Health projects ($265K).
• Environmental Sustainability programs ($250K).
The RETT fund is projected to have a fund balance of $6.1 million by the end of 2010.
VAIL MARKETING FUND
Business license fees provide the revenue for this fund, which is restricted to marketing
Vail. Revenue is expected to be down less than one percent compared to 2009.
Expenditures for marketing through the Commission on Special Events (CSE) are flat at
$280,000.
DEBT SERVICE FUND
This fund is used to manage principal and interest on the town's outstanding debt.
Funds are transferred from the Capital Projects Fund to meet annual debt service
requirements and to cover the next upcoming principal and interest payments on the
2002B and 2008 bonds. All debt (principal balance of $6.3M at 12/31 /09) is scheduled
to be repaid by the end of 2012.
6
: M()311:
2- 1 -25
HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND
This is an internal services fund that manages the maintenance and repair of town
vehicles and equipment and the purchase of replacement vehicles other than buses and
fire trucks. Costs are charged back to departments based on their use of the vehicles
and equipment. The 5% increase in charges back to the departments is attributable to
the uncertainty of fuel costs in 2010 (during 2009, the fuel budget was reduced
significantly).
DISPATCH SERVICES FUND
This is an enterprise fund, e.g., more than half of its revenue is from sources outside of
the town, managing emergency communications for all of Eagle County. The county
and 911 Board currently funds seven dispatcher positions and a systems engineer. In
2010, this will increase to nine dispatchers and a system engineer.
CONFERENCE CENTER FUND
This fund was established in 2003 to account for a 1.5% public accommodations tax and
a.5% sales tax imposed by election for the purpose of building and operating a
conference center in the town. These taxes were rescinded by election in November of
2005. A TABOR election is required to release Conference Center funds for any
purpose. The fund balance is projected to be $9.4M by the end of 2010.
HEALTH INSURANCE FUND
This internal services fund manages the costs of providing health and short-term
disability insurance to employees. Net costs are charged to departments as employee
benefits. Since the town is self-insured on these items, a sufficient fund balance is
maintained to absorb extraordinary claims experience. Claims over $75,000 per person
are covered by an indemnity "stop loss" insurance product. Although increasing
healthcare costs are shared with employees, staff has recommended use of $150,000 of
fund balance to help offset the anticipated increase in medical claims for 2010. The
higher cost is partially attributed to the increase in employee participation in the health
plan (due to less turnover and increased membership if spouse's coverage was lost).
7
2- 1 -26
Major Revenue Analysis
2010 Budget
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 2011
Actual Actual Ac[ual Actual Budget Amended Proposed Projection Commen[s
vs.'08 actuel vs.'OS acwal 'm vs.'09 amanti a. vs. 2010
General Sales Taz 16,791,157 17,986,796 18,913,138 19,631,366 19,400.000 16,600,000 16,600,000 17,430.000 2009 collections reduced by 15%; Rat in 2010:5% increase in 2011
7.8% 7.1 % 5.2% 3B% -1.2'% -15 .r./ 0.0% 5.0%
RETT Tax 6,206p54 6,239,744 6,536,118 9,091,917 6,241,000 3,420,000 4,705,000 4,000,000 2010 indudes intial sales of Solaris, Ritz and Four Seasons estimated at 25%
28.0% 0.5% 1 .7% 39.1 % -31.4% -62.4%97.6% -15.0% oftotalunitSaVailable.at80%oftheGUffentlylistedplice.
Parking Revenue 3.651.537 4.007.334 4.514.392 4705.985 5.680744 5.432744 5.432744 5.622.900 2009 reduced /or pass sales, 2010 flat with'09; 2011 3.5% increase
11.1 1/1 9.7% 12.7% 1 .2 'k 20.7 'X 15.1% 0.0 1/1 3.5 a
Property Taz Revenue 2468,978 2750,693 2,819,823 4,092.056 4,110,000 4,110,000 4,630.647 4,630.647 Based on County assessor's projections of 10 % increase in 2010 - only
0.1/ 11.1 1, 25/ 15.1 / 01, af / 127 / o.o'/ increased off of Ihe base; did not indude potential abatement mils
Lik Tax Revenue 2,777.698 2.975.097 3.039,619 3277.703 3,190.000 3,115.000 3,115.000 3,193.000 2009 based on YTD actual and asswnes reinainder of year to be flat with
11 .31/1, 7.1 / 22% 78/ -27% S.o / 0 0% 2.5%, 2008 (net 5% decr): 2010 flat with 2009 and 2011 slight increase of 2.5 %
Construction Fees 2.466.054 3.481.989 4.992752 3799.444 1.681,250 1,261250 673250 673.250 Reduced based on slowdown of redevelopment activily: N. major
53.3% 11.2% 434% -23.9% -55.8% -66.8%i 16.6'/ 0.0% YedeVelopmenlpYOjeGtSaSSUmedfor 2010oY2011
Cons[ruc[ion Use Taz - - - 608,483 1.000.000 500,000 500.000 500,000 Reduced based on slowdown of redevelopment activiry: No major
N/A 61'.3 % -17.8 % 0.0 % 0.0 % IedeVelopment pYOjeGts assUmed for 2009I[iYU 2071
Other Tazes 1,251,928 1,367,139 1,399,739 1,644,975 1,298,719 1,333,719 1.315,200 1,341,760 Counry sales tax. Road & Bridge, Hwy users revenue, etc.
-0 .2% 9.2% 2.4% 17.5%, -21.0% -18.9% -1.4% 2.0%
Federal I County Grants 19.500 1.739D52 59,542 - 1,400.000 1,400.000 1,114500 1,515.000 S1.4M In'09 and $1.0M In'10 for transltcenter. 2010 COPs Grant $82K
NIA NIA NIA NIA NiA NIA -20]/ 3e.</. and 528.5K police LiveScan software: 2011: buses S600K.
bridge reconstructlon $828K and COPS Grant S87K
Earnings on Investments 1,112,872 2,133,315 2,585,412 1,478.466 985,111 298,719 240,200 354,906 2009 based on .5% return on fund balances: 2010 fiat but reduced fund
199.9% 91 .7'K 212% -12.8/ 39.1'1/1 -79.8% -19.6% I78'% balanGe5:2011 basedon 1% IE(uYn
Ren[al Income 780214 827,280 897,958 949,961 795.300 906,382 894,124 905,000 2009 increase due to additional employee units to rent; 2010 and 2011 flat
3.0% 6.0% 8.5% 5.8% -16.3% 1~.6% -1.r./ 1,2/ With2009
E911 and Interagency Dispatch 1,165,164 1,337,583 1,528,608 1,657,622 1,814,512 1,846,415 1,916,339 1,956,776 Incl. adding 1 FTE mid-year 2009 and 1 more FTE 2010 (funded by E911)
7.l% 14 .e % 1a.3 `1 8.1 % 9.5 % 11.n % 3.8 % 2W, Otherwise. 2010 intefagenGy GhaYges Flat With 2009; 1.5°o inCrease for 2011
All Other Revenue 10250.560 5.317.935 7.558.115 7.080720 3.348.558 4.314.815 4.323.839 3719245 2005 inGuded 54M Conference Center collections & 52N1 project reimb.
'n.o / 1:8.1 % c2 ,1 ~ -6 .9 % 527/ 39.1/ 0 2G: -91 .0/ 2007 induded S12M recreation ammenities and S1.3M project reimb.
2008 Induded over S1M of project relmburseinent and 6500K in Employee
Total Revenue 48,941,716 50,163,958 54,845,217 58,018,698 50.945,194 44,539.044 45A56,843 45.842,484 Housing Fee-in-Lieu
%comparetltoPriorYOar 11.1% 2.5% 9.3% 5.8"~~ -122% -23.2% 2.1% 0.8%
: (P(811: 8
? _ 1 _ ?7
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)
9
2- 1 -28
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 Q: 7.50 8.00 6.50 8.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 11.00 2.00
? _ 1 _?9 10
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)
Admin 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00
Patrol 28.00 28.98 30.48 31.00 3125 31.00 28.00 (3.00)
Investigation 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 0.00
Records 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.50 525 5.50 5.50 0.00
Dispatch 21.00 22.00 23.00 23.48 23.48 23.00 25.00 2.00
Police and Dispatch Total 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)
: (P(811:
2-]-30
Town of Vail
Employee Benefits
2008 2009 2010
Actual % Salary Budget % Salary Proposed % Salary
Full-Time Regular Employees
Fee Based
Health Insurance 2,300,000 17.6% 2,475,000 17.2% 2,500,000 18.1%
Group Term Life and Accidental Death Insurance 258,578 2.0% 85,000 0.6% 90,000 0.7%
Long-term Disability Insurance 60,000 0.4% 60,000 0.4%
Survivor's Life Insurance 76,000 0.5% 75,000 0.5%
Short-term Disability Insurance 40,000 0.3% 40,000 0.3% 35,000 0.3%
Wellness Benefit 98,672 0.8% 94,000 0.7% 96,000 0.7%
Sworn Officer Death and Disability Insurance 56,263 0.4% 62,000 0.4% 70,000 0.5%
Subtotal Fee Based 2,753,513 21.1 % 2,892,000 20.1 % 2,926,000 21.2%
Payroll Based
Pension Contribution 1,959,542 15.0% 2,271,720 15.8% 2,118,263 15.3%
Medicare 170,794 1.3% 208,114 1.5% 200,416 1.5%
Workers' Compensation Insurance 192,871 1.5% 194,100 1.4% 228,700 1.7%
Unemployment Compensation Insurance 27,846 0.2% 43,100 0.3% 48,400 0.4%
Subtotal Payroll Based 2,351,053 18.0% 2,717,034 18.9% 2,595,779 18.8%
Total Full-Time Benefits 5,104,566 39.1% 5,609,034 39.1% 5,521,779 39.9%
Part-Time and Seasonal Employees
Fee Based
Wellness 78,012 4.1 % 80,000 4.2% 75,000 4.0%
Wellness - Boards & Commissions 9,100 0.5%
Mini-Med Program 20,000 1.0% 16,000 0.8%
Payroll Based
Pension Contribution 28,546 1.5% 28,769 1.5% 28,381 1.5%
Medicare 27,594 1.5% 27,810 1.5% 27,435 1.5%
Workers' Compensation Insurance 28,122 1.5% 25,900 1.4% 31,300 1.7%
Unemployment Compensation Insurance 4,060 0.2% 5,754 0.3% 6,622 0.4%
Subtotal Payroll Based 88,322 4.7% 88,233 4.6% 93,738 5.0%
Total Part-Time and Seasonal Benefits 166,334 8.8% 188,233 9.8% 193,838 10.2%
Total Benefits -All Employees 5,270,900 35.2% 5,797,267 35.6% 5,715,616 36.4%
Salary expense: Full time employees 14,352,706 13,821,791
Salary expense: Part-time/seasonal employees 1,917,923 1,892,047
Total Salary expense (not incl OT): 16,270,629 15,713,838
Note: Total cost has decreased from 2009 by $81,651
The percentage increases because total salary expense has gone down
12
: C2()311:
2-1-31
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
GENERALFUND
2009 5% 2% 2% 2% Stax assump[ions
2008 Original 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Actual Budget Amended Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast
Revenue
Total Sales Tax Revenue: $ 19,631,366 $ 19,400,000 $ 16,600,000 $ 16,600,000 $ 17,430,000 $ 17780,000 $ 18,135,000 $ 18,500,000
Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 59/41 61139 59141 61139 61139 61139 61139 61139
SalesTax - GeneralFund $ 11,640,000 $ 11,860.000 $ 9,760.000 $ 10,126,000 $ 10,633,000 $ 10.846,000 $ 11.063,000 $ 11,285,000
Propedy and Ownershlp 4,309.622 4,293,500 4293,500 4,813,647 4,813,647 4,391,000 4,398,000 4,482.000 2012 retum m 20091evels; 2% incr2014
SkiLiftTax 3,277703 3,190,000 3,115,000 3,115,000 3,193,000 3,288,800 3,387,.500 3489,100 20112.5%;beyondat3%annual
Franchlse Fees, Penalties, and OtherTaxes 1,075,209 899,935 1,049,935 1,054,425 1,089,953 1,122,700 1,156,400 1,191,100 3% annual
Licenses & Permits 3,903,026 1,755,200 1,335,200 732,200 745,000 781 .250 804,000 827,000 No major redevelopment assumed
Intergovemmental Revenue 1,706,197 1,308,719 1,384,953 1,407,000 1,437,000 1,487.300 1,454,400 1,420,300 Includes PD grant ($82K start) through 2012
TransportationCenters 4,816,505 5,680,744 5,432,744 5,432,744 5,622,900 5,819,700 6,023,400 6234,200 3.5%annualstzrting2011
Charges for Services 1,000,733 798,838 716788 724775 691.100 666,340 694,730 724,743 Removed Volvo contract; RETT mgmt fee varies
Pines & Forfeltures 396J07 260,000 260,000 260.000 269.100 278,500 288200 298,300 3.5 % annual starting 2011
Eamingsonlnvestments 571 .073 495,000 115.000 115.000 215,000 423.100 612.100 585,400 20111%;20122%;beyond3%
Rental Revenue 949.961 795,300 906.382 894,124 905,000 936,700 969,500 1,003,400 2011 12%; beyond 3.5% annual
Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 163,025 59,000 118.440 92,800 91,000 94,200 97,500 100.900 3.5 % annual starting 2011
Total Revenue 33,809,761 31,396,236 28,487,942 28,767,715 29,705,700 30,135.590 30,948,730 31,641,443
1.0% 3.3% 1.4% 27% 22%
Expenditures
Salaries 13,319,994 14,119.592 13,673,687 13.633,859 13.868,233 14,284,280 14712,808 15,154,193 3% annual starting in 2011
Benefits 4,404,800 4,795,382 4,665,287 4,658,106 4,751,483 4,891,439 5,038,182 5,189,328 40%ofsalary expense (not incl. OT) starting in 2011
Subtotal Compensation and Benefits 17J24,794 18,914.974 18,338.974 18,291.965 18,619.716 19.175,719 19750,991 20.343,520
-0.3% 1.8% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
Contributions, Marketing and Special Events 1,366.668 1,.315,675 1,.322,125 1,227.925 1,289.321 1,328.000 1,367,800 1.408,800 3%/yearstarting2011
AIIOtherOperatingExpenses 7,038,794 7.383,434 6241.412 6,196286 6.471.000 6,610,400 6751,700 6.953.900 20113%incr.+Solaris&CheckptCharliesnowmclt
Heavy Equlpment Operating Charges 2,351,269 2,147,637 1,940,928 2,074,812 2,178,553 2,254,802 2,333,720 2,415,400 2011 5% incr, beyond 9.5% annual
Heavy Equipment Replacement Charges 635.903 678,881 678,881 677,538 980,100 865.944 966,700 777,000 Based on replacement schedule
Dispatch Services 533,164 543.072 543,072 522,213 544,220 571,087 593,715 615,667 eased on town's samc % age cost sharc of 31.54 %
Total Expenditures 29,650,592 30,983,673 29,065,392 28,990,739 30,082,910 30,805,952 31,764.626 32,514,287
0.3% 38%
Revenue Over(Under) Expenditures 4,159,169 412,563 (577,450) (223,024) (377,210) (670,362) (815,896) (872,844)
Employee Home Ownership Program (375,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000)
Total Expenditures 30,641,592 31,.358,673 29,315,392 29,240,739 30,332,910 31,055,952 32,014,626 32,764,287
Surplus Net of Transfers & New Programs 3,168,169 37,563 (827,450) (473,024) (627,210) (920,362) (1,065,896) (1,122,844)
Beginning Fund Balance 19,834,717 21,563,411 23,002,886 22,175,436 21,702,412 21,075,202 20,154,840 19,088,944
Ending Fund Balance $ 23,002,886 $ 21,600,974 $ 22.175,436 $ 21,702,412 $ 21,075,202 $ 20,154,840 $ 19,088,944 $ 17,966,100
Percent to Annual Revenue 68 % 69 % 78 % 75 % 71 % 67 % 62 % 57 %
Use ot Surplus:
2009 (827,450)
2010 (473,024)
(1,300,474)
~1z0108 Surpl us: 3,168,169
' ~('Rerhaindcr 1,867,695
13
2_]_j2
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
GENERALFUND
2009 2009
2008 Original Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Actual Budget Budget Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast
Revenue
Total Sales Tax Revenue: S 19.631.366 S 19.400.000 S 16.600.000 5 16.600.000 5 17.430.000 S 17380.000 S 18.135.000 S 18.500.000
Sales Tax Split blt Gen9 Fund & Capital Fund 59141 61139 59141 61139 61139 61139 61139 61139
Sales Tax S 11.640.000 S 11.860.000 S 9760.000 S 10.126.000 S 10.631000 S 10.846.000 S 11.063.000 5 11285.000
Property and Ownership 4.309.622 4291500 4293500 4.813.647 4.513.647 4.391.000 4.398.000 4.482.000
Ski Lift Tax 3277703 3.190.000 3.115.000 3.115.000 3.193.000 3288.800 3387.500 3.489.100
Franchise Fees, Penalties: and Other Taxes 1,075209 899.935 1,049,935 1:054:425 1:089.953 1,122700 1.156,400 1.191:100
Licenses & Permits 3.903.026 1755200 1.335200 732200 745.000 781,250 804.000 827.000
Intergovernmental Revenue 1706.197 1.305.719 1.384.953 1.407.000 1.437.000 1.457.300 1,454.400 1420.300
Transportation Centers 4.816.505 5.680.744 5.432.744 5.432744 5.622.900 5.S19700 6.023.400 6234200
Charges for Services 1.000.733 798.838 716.785 724775 691,100 666.340 694730 724743
Fines & Forfeitures 396707 260.000 260.000 260.000 269.100 275.500 288200 298300
Earnings on Investments 571.073 495.000 115.000 115.000 215.000 423.100 612.100 585.400
Rental Revenue 949.961 795300 906382 894.124 905.000 936700 969.500 1.001400
Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 163.025 59.000 118.440 92.800 91.000 94200 97.500 100.900
Total Revenue 33,809,761 31,396,236 28,487,942 28,767,715 29,705,700 30,135,590 30,948,730 31,641,443
1.0% 3.3% 1.4% 27% 22%
Expenditures by Type:
Municipal Services.
Town Officials 1224.007 1298703 1267297 1253232 1.300461 1.324774 1.364.517 1.393795
Administrative Services & Risk Management 3.164.384 1466.328 3228.825 3374.837 3.501.550 3.579.5S7 3.656.974 3768.987
Community Development & Housing 1327400 3252.081 2.379.978 1.991.616 2.066.804 2.116.407 2.179.899 2231.345
Police 4.511.846 4.871.111 4708.180 4728237 4.905.364 5.023.093 5.173785 5295.887
Police Communications 535.657 543.072 543.072 522213 544220 571.087 593715 615.667
Fire 2577.087 2769703 2735.009 2.673272 2773.851 2.840.424 2.925.637 2.994.682
Public Works & Sheets 3717.159 3726.449 1552.133 1649.853 3786.510 3.577.693 3.996.024 4.090.330
Transportation & Parking 4.7S0,515 4.723.939 4.5S2.449 4.701.320 4.577.444 4.994.503 5.144.338 5265.744
Facilities 3.442.983 3.945.951 3723.070 3.572255 4.015.661 4.115254 4262712 4.363.312
Library 828.056 854.593 820.745 805.118 835.109 855.151 880.806 901.593
Economic Development L541.495 t501713 1.524.634 1.418786 1.472.636 1.507.979 1.556215 1,592.945
Total Expenditures 29.650592 30.981673 29.065.392 28.990739 30.0S2.910 30.805.952 31764.626 32514287
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 4159169 412.563 (577A50) (223.024) (377210) (670.362) (815.896) (572.844)
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (441,.000)
Winter Economic Marketing Campaign (550.000)
Investment in Employee Home Ownership Progrem (375,000) (250,.000) (250,000) (250.000) (250.000) (250,.000) (250.000)
Total Expenditures 30,641.592 31,358,673 29.315.392 29240739 30332.910 31,055,952 32:014,626 32]64,287
Surplus Net of Transfers & New Programs 3,165,169 37,563 (827,450) (473,024) (627,210) (920,362) (1,065,896) (1,122,844)
Beginning Fund Balance 19.834.717 21.563.411 21002.886 22175436 21.702,412 21.075202 20.154.540 19.0S8.944
Ending Fund Balance $ 23,002,886 $ 21,600,974 $ 22,175,436 $ 21,702,412 $ 21,075,202 $ 20,154,840 $ 19,0S8,944 $ 17,966,100
: (P(811:
ia
2-]-33
2010 Contribution Request Spreadsheet
Last Year (incl. off-cycle) 2010 Requests Staff Recommendations
Variance to S[aff 20101n-
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 parking a e5 7.500
Q Vail Jun~ior Hocke Association - Nov 2010 Toumament 9 davs of ice + Donovan 1 da 15.391 9 davs of ice + Donovan 1 da + arkin 24.016 5 da ys ice+Donovan/noarkinq passe, 10.125 passe
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 arkin s- LH onl 1.050
7 Vail Valley Athlete Gommon (See item F) 6.000 10.000 4.000 6.000
U Foresicht5ki Guides 2-arkin in Vlllace 2200 2 blue asses/LH onl 2200
V Small Cham ~io s of Colorado 10000 10D00
ARRANGEMENTS and AGREEMENTS:
W Vail Valley Comm. TV/Gh5
Franchise Fee 70,000 70.000 70.000 30% of collected Franchise Fees
RealEstate TransferTax Fund:
X Bett Ford AI ine Garden Foundation
Oper~tlons 'i nated Ford Park saces 75.000 2 desi nated Ford Park s aces 19.380 55.620 2 desi nated Ford Park s aces
I-;1 15
2010 Contribution Request Spreadsheet
Last Year (incl. off-cycle) 2010 Requests Staff Recommendations
Variance to S[aff 20101n-
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
Y Eagle Rrver Watershed
Sediment Pollution Efforts 90.000 99.793 9.793 90D00
Z EacleValle Alllance for5ustainability 20.000 20D00
Information Booth Contract 209.990 209.990 209.990
GrandTotal 1,646,145 2,002,693 99,742 0 0% 1,602,695 72,950
m~f: fYB11:
_ - ~ - il 1 fi
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).
17
: C2()311:
2-1-36
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.
18
: M()311:
2-1-37
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 (WCF)
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
19
: C2()311:
2-1-38
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.
20
: M()311:
2-1-39
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.
21
: M()311:
2- 1 -40
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.
22
: C2()311:
2- 1 -41
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.
23
: M()311:
2- 1 -42
Town of Vail
Capital Plan Summary
` does not include unfunded projects
Actual Amended Forecast
2008 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Capital Projects Fund
Streetscape 1.197.015 1.668.162 1,668.162 365.000 130.000 135.000 - -
Roads 1.950.435 2.060587 2.060,587 4.449.139 1.221.000 6.875.000 8.770.000 1.215.000
Bridges - 150.000 150.000 - 1.050.000 1.650.000 - -
Facilities 781.302 765.684 765.684 473.000 504.900 1.740.000 992.000 605.000
Transit 3.714.402 200.400 200.400 2226.600 1231.300 70.000 30.000 324.000
Information Technology 1,709.399 684,510 684,510 488,000 272,000 247,000 710.500 644.500
Fleet Expansion 44.681 34.730 34.730 - - - - -
Fire 6.900 495.000 495.000 - 590.000 975.000 - 620.900
Police 104.324 51.650 51.650 83.500 57.000 59.000 61.000 50.000
Housing Improvements - 54,000 54,000 54,000 54,000 - - -
Housing Development (New) 784.195 1.270.000 1.270.000 500.000 500.000 500.000 500.000 500.000
Parking Structures 814.348 685.000 685.000 486.000 819.000 1.055.000 860.000 920.000
TimberRidge 44,520 1,025,000 1,025.000 - - - - -
Planning / Studies 265,416 164,000 164.000 - - - 40,000 -
Property Tax Increment- Restricted - 441,000 441.000 - - - - -
Debt Service 2.204,670 2,298,121 2,298.121 2.273.959 2.279,572 2,088.346 - -
Total Capital Expenditures for Capital Projects Fund 13,621,607 12,047,844 12,047,844 11,399,198 8,708,772 15,394,346 11,963,500 4,879,400
RETT Fund
Streetscape 668.892 737.771 737.771 352.500 22.500 25.000 25.000 25.000
Recreation Paths 252.183 1.148.614 1.148.614 3.149.000 1.174.000 50.000 - -
Parks/Playgounds 213.641 1,168.167 1.168,167 1.439,000 2.885,000 1.725.250 400.000 -
Fountains 85.534 212.696 212.696 - - - - -
Art in Public Places 131.537 425.156 425.156 80.000 80.000 80.000 80.000 80.000
Open Space - - - - - - - -
VRD-Managed Assets 82.049 5.676.200 4,453.403 700.000 1.299.440 529.981 165.133 263.768
Total Capital Expenditures for RETT 1,433,836 9,368,604 8,145,807 5,720,500 5,460,940 2,410,231 670,133 368,768
2-]-43 24
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE. EXPENDITURES. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
2009
Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Commen[s
Revenue
Total Sales 7ax Revenue'. $ 16.600.000 $ 16.600000 $ 17.430000 $ 17.778.600 $ 18,134,172 $ 18.496.855 2012 -2014 increase assumes a recoverv to 20071evels by 2014
Sales 7ax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 59141 61139 61139 61139 61139 61139
Sales Tax - Capltal Projects Fund $ 6.840000 $ 6.474.000 $ 6800.000 $ 6.934.000 $ 7.072000 $ 7214.000 Total reduction to revenue using same split as budgeted (39% to Capital)
Use Tax 500.000 500.000 500.000 500.000 500 000 500D00 2009. 50'% reduction. Flat through 2014
Federal Grant Revenue 1.400.000 1.028.500 1.428D00 _ _ _ $1.4M in'09 and $1.OM ln'10 fortranslt center $28.5K in'10 for Police Llve Scan Interface
software: 2011: $828K for bridge reconstruction. $600K buses
Eagle County Grant Revenue Requests for West Vail Fire Station. Slmba Run. Transit Genter. etc
Lease Revenue 188.550 184.500 184.500 184.500 184.500 189.135 Per Vail Commons commercial and residential leases
Employee Housing Fee-In-Lieu 72.000
Pmject Reimbursement 210.000 - - - Reimbursementfrom Vail Resorts forCDOT's study ofthe Frontage Rd relocation (EverVall):
Resale of Arosa duplex - 775A00 5,000 5.000 5.000 _ Ghildren's Garden of Leaning loan balance at 12131 /2008 is $25K with $SK per year due'.
$770K resale of Arosa duplex
Eamings on Investments and Other 18.750 18.000 2009: Based on eamings at .5°0'. 2010 1°02011 -2014 at 2%
To[al Revenue 9,229,300 8,980,000 8,917.500 7,623,500 7.761.500 7,903,135
Expendi[ures
Cdplldl Mdln[endnce EX2endl[ure5
Bus Shelters 27.000 27.000 27.900 30.000 30.000 30.000
Parking Structures 540A00 486D00 819D00 1,055.000 860.000 920000 2009. $120K Elevator replacement: 2010 -2014 vanous repairs including deck topping
replacement. expension joint repairs and otherstrucNral repairs
2009 repeir PW shop roof and various repairs to municipal facilities. 2010 and 2011 various
Facill4'es 679.500 473.000 450.000 1.290.000 705.000 605.000 repairs:2012$425KforreplacementofinFloorheatandwashequipmentforBusBarn.$165K
repairs to PW Admin and $100K repairs to Munlcipal bullding
Building Remodels 49.500 54.900 67.000 On-going minor remodels of various Town faclfities
Greekside Housing Improvements 54000 54000 54.000 Need to gutplumbing. electrical wiring. roofing. etc.
Donovan Park Pavilion - - - 450,000 220.000 _ 2012. $SOK fumiture replacement. $400K to change ventllation & Improve noise'.2013
replacement of heatinylair condltioning system
Street Light Improvements 67.500 67.500 67.500 50.000 50.000 50.000 Newsheet I-ights and refurbish residential Ilghting
On-going maintenance to roads and bridges Including asphalt overlays. patching and repairs:
Gepital Street Malntenance 1.337D87 730.000 1.153.500 1.000.000 1.170D00 915.000 2012- 2014 based on readjusted bld prices (savings of $925K). Assumes that we do not see '
dramatic increase from current prices and that reconstruction of Nelghborhood Roads is
ompleted. thus reducing maintenance in East Vail and Vail Valley Drive
Flammable storage / Mag Chlonde containment 16.560 - _ _ Secondary containment around Mag tank / remove glycol tank to meet containment
requlrements. This is a compfiance Issue.
Fire Truck Rebuild / Refurblsh - 590D00 - - 620.900 2011 replace pumper truck from 1994'. 2014 replace pumper truck from 1999
Fire infrastructure Improvemts (Main Vail station) 975.000 Remodel of Main Vail station after W Vail bullt. prevlously budgeted in 201(
Audio Visual (Council video.5ecurily. PD carvideo) 61.150 8.000 - 437.500 437.500 09 Council chemberstreaming video:'10 police car cameras'.'13.'14 Town-wide video securit
Document Imaging 106.699 110.000 110.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 Annual mamtenance. Ilcensing and conhact position thru 2011
Software Llcensing 68.200 37D00 15.000 15,000 65000 75.000 Upgrade Mlcrosoft products on all equipment. replacement PC's. server upgrades. A5400.
These upgrades occurevery 3-5 years on a rotation schedule
Hardware Purchases 84.380 45.000 65.000 48000 48000 50.000 Scheduled rotation of PCs. printers and servers
Data Center (Gomputer Rooms) 47.500 15.000 17.000 19.000 21 .000 - Fire suppression in computer rooms'. maintenance. security and powersystems for 3 rooms
Website and e-commerce 28.500 12.000 27.000 29.000 31 000 12.000 Intemet secunty & application interfaces'. website redevelopinent 2008/09
Gomm Dev ArcG15 System 52.000 10.000 Web access to town GIS information (simllar to Gounty's website GIS product)
FiberOptics In Buildings 15.000 21.000 17.000 23000 18.000 Cabling / Network Infrastructure. to repair. meintain & upgrade
Network upgrades 18.300 30.000 21.000 35.000 60.000 40.000 Computernetwork systems- replacementcycle every 3-5 years
Computer Aided Dispatch (GAD) / RMS Project 51.650 55.000 57.000 59000 61 000 50.000 CounN-wide "Computer Aided Dispatch/Records Mgmt System"
Gomm Dev Interactive Permit software 25.000 200.000 Replacement of Permit Plus software, allows for web access by customers
Llve Scan Interface 28.500 Funded by grant above'. Links our Llve Scan soRware to other agencies
Vehicle Expansion 34.730 2009 continued set up of Police Volvos $16K. ForkliR for PW $18K
Maintenance Paid for by Capital Fund 3,364.256 2,409.000 3,545,800 5,108,000 3,873.500 3,835,400
: (P(811:
2- 1 - 44 25
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE. EXPENDITURES. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
2009
Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Commen[s
Capi[al Replacemen[ Expenditures
West Meadow Drive 600.683 Gompletion of projects under con[ract: $200K savings
Village Streetscape 792.706 300D00 Future work may include newspaper boxes. Checkpoint Charlie. Covered Bridge. VVD walk.
etc. PerGounci1717109. defer $300K to 2010 for covered bridge heat and VVD heated walk
Neighborhood Road Reconstruction 200.000 2.900.000 - 5.575.000 7.300.000 _ Overhaul residential streets '09 design'. Gonstruction 2010 of $1 8M for Vail Valley Drive
reco
nstruction and $1.1 M for Mill Creek: 2011 & 2012 East Vail roads
Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction 150.000 - 1.050.000 1.650.000 _ _ Matterhom Bridge reconstruction moved to 2011 due to GDOT fscal year and requirements:
Partial funding from federal grant
Fire Breathing Apparatus 180D00 - - - Replaceinent of all (30) cylinders/compressors. Older model currently used not effective
Parking Entry System / Equipment 145.000 - - Metered lots. equipment obsolete and not servicable by vendor: Tlme sensitive for installation
prior to next perking season
Radlo Equipment replacement (pub. works. pub. safet 48.000 Replacementof 1998 radlos for PW, Fire. PD. delayed
Hybrid Bus Battery Replacement 40.000 294.000 Scheduled replacement
Offce Equipment> $5.000 9000 09 GIS Equip
Generator- Munlcipal Building / Dispatch 20.124 2009. work finished up in 20091 balance due on a contract
Replace Buses 173.400 2.199.600 1203.400 2009ciforspare parts on newhybnd buses - stocking parts reduces downtime when buses nee
ng'. 2010 6 regula r buses . 2011 2 Hybnd buses
Replacemen[ Paid for by Capi[al Fund 2,270.913 5,399,600 2,253,400 7,313,000 7,300,000 294,000 se
Property Tax Increment - Reserved 441.000 Reserve for unidentified projects
Other Improvements
Wes[ Vail Fire Station - Planning / Design 300000 Gontinue planning and design process:Design firm has been selected
AmsaDnve - DuplexforEmployeeHousing 770.000 Developmentprojec[fordeed-restrictedhousing
Buy-down Program 500.000 500D00 500 000 500,000 500.000 500D00 Increased to $SOOK per year as of 2009 per Housing Strategic Plan
Veriable Message Signs / Way-Finding Improvements 190.973 65.000 130.000 135.000 _ _ 09 Vall Vlllage wayfinding signs on order: $180K for Maln Vail round-about & Four Seasons.
10 Solaris'.'11 LionsHead and'12 East Vail
For'09. deslgn on EV berm is 60~io complete'. these dollars Include drainage work per
I-70 Noise 300.000 751.639 - 250.000 250D00 250.000 agreement with Bald Mfi townhomes (2010 deadline): Construction of berm would be phased
osts not known at this time: Pushed re-appropriation to 2010: Eliminated annual $250K
budgetfor2011
I-70 Fiber Optics 16g,781 _ _ _ 2009. project nearing completion. Town will have fiber optic connection to I-70 corridor for
improved public safety communications
Underground Utillty Impmvements 156.000 Transfer of utility Iines from above ground to underground. offset by $156K revenue above
from Holy Gross: work already completed and awaiting final bllling.
Manor Veil Street Plan 83.800 Expenditure related to impact fee peid by Manor Vail development'. Keep funds in bugdet due
to developer agreeinent
Chamonix Area Planning 30D00 Contlnued work on Chamonix area planning
Fire Impact Fee Nexus study 15.000 Nexus study to determine redevelopment impact on Fire Department: Potential revenue
7raffic Impact Fee study 30D00 Study to determine redevelopment Impact on traffic 1 potential revenue'. identifled as a next
step in transportation plan
Tlmber Ridge Legal2oning 100.000 Re-appropnation of $19K. plus an addltional $81 K to comlete Ihe second phase of negotiating
contract and to recognize incremental costs due to a higher number of respondants
Timber Ridge Debt Service Guarantee 925.000 Annual debt service guarantee -requirement of TR debt
This is offset by contnbutions from Vail Resorts and CDOT and covers completion of the
LlonsHead Improvements 34.000 - - - - - transportation study (currently underway) and consultant's review of EverVail frontage road
plan
Frontage Road Relocation 20.000 ' - Study oi the Frontage Rd relocah'on (EverVail) - se bursementfrom Vail Resorts abovF
Blo-Mass Study 50.000 For the research of Bio-mass options'. Staff is applying for a grant in May to fund a feasibility
study and being able to show a budget may be critical forgrant eligibillty
.
: (P(811:
z6
2-]-45
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE. EXPENDITURES. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
2009
Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Commen[s
To[al Other Improvements 3,673,554 1,316,639 630,000 885,000 790.000 750,000
To[al Capital before Financing 9.749.723 9,125,239 6,429,200 73,306,000 11,963,500 4.879,400
Debt Service and Financing
Debt Service on Outstanding Bonds 2298.121 2.273.959 2.279.572 2D88.346 Paid off by Jan 1. 2013. a ual payments updated for refunding of 1998 Bonds
Transfer to Vail Reinvestment Authonty 1.400000 1 A00.000 - Transfer federal grant money to VRA'. VRA covenng all expenditures for the transit center
project
To[al Deb[ Service and Financing: 3.698,121 3.273.959 2.279,572 2.088.346
Total Expenditures 13,447,844 12,399,198 8,708,772 15,394.346 11.963.500 4.879.400
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (4.218,544) (3,419.198) 208,728 (7,770,846) (4.202.000) 3,023,735
Beginning Fund Balance 8.981.869 4.761325 1.344.127 1.552855 (6.217.991) (10.419.991)
Ending Fund Balance 4.763,325I 7,344.727I 1,552.855 1 (6.277,991)1 (10,419,991)1 (7,396,256)I
Unfunded Capi[al Projects
Ghamonix Slte Development - Housing
West Vail Fire Station 2.760.000 2.760.000
Flre Truck - West Vall Flre Station 570.000
East Va-il Fire Station Remodel 775.000
Town Shop linprovements 9225.000
Creekside Housing Improvements 588000 262500 315.000
Mun-icipal Bldg - HVAC Renovation 2.400.000
Slmba Run Underpass 19.500.000
Frontage Rd - LionsHead 8.815.000
N. Frontaqe Rd -East Vail 2.100.000
Frontaqe Road - Ford Park 5.635.000
N. Frontage Rd - West Vail 7.513,000
Main Vail Round-about Major Reconstructlon 3.600000
West Vail Rou nd-about Major Reconstruction 1 00OA00
LH Auxilliary Bullding Renovation 1.015.000
LH Information Center Renovatlon 550.000
LionsHead Parking Structure Enhancements 5.000,000
To[al Unfunded Projects 2.760.000 3.330,000 9173.000 46.480.500 10,225.000 2.415.000
Ending Fund Balance Incl. Unfunded list 1.003.325 (4.745.873) (13.710145) (67.961.491) (82,388,491) (81,779.756)
: (P(811:
2-]-46 27
TOW N OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE. EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX
L 2009
Amended 2010 2017 2012 2073 2014 Comments
REVENUE
Real Estate Transfer Tax $ 3.420.000 $ 4.705.000 $ 4.000,000 $ 3.015000 $ 3.115.000 $ 3219D00 Ritz. Solans and Four Seasons. assume 25% sold 2010 at 80°/ list pnce'. Base transactions flat in 2010. up 5%
2011 -2014'. Limited amountof sales from majorredevelopment
Federal Grents 145.458 Federal grant forthe Tlmber Ridge/ BuffehrGreek path
Golf Course Lease 120.000 122.000 124.440 126.929 129.467 132.057 Annual lease paymenl from Vail Recreation District 2% annual lncrease - deposited to "REA"
VRD repayment for promissory note 341.098 343.424 337.568 331.712 325.856 Note based on $1 b M loan at 3.5 % over 5 years'. Adjusted 2009 for interest timing
Intergovenmental Revenue 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 Lottery proceeds
Project Reimbursements 2500 1 st Bank sponsorshlp of shopping bags
Recreation Amenity Fees 47.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 Based on actual collections in 2009
Eamings on Investments and Other 81.250 40A02 15.879 2009 & 2010: Based on .5 % reNm on pnor year's fund balance'. 2011 besed on 1%.2012-14 2%
Total Revenue 4,181.306 5,240,826 4.507.887 3.503.641 3.600523 3,381.057
Capi[al Maintenance Expenditures
Annual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1290.882 1.351.267 1.460.185 1.562.553 1.649.000 1.739.994 Ongoing path. park and open space maintenance. projectmgmt: $75K reduction In expenses 2009-11: $30K
vings 2012-14 (watersavings & backFlow repair & mtce
Manaqement Fee to General Fund (5%) 170.000 235.250 200.000 150.750 155.750 160.950 5% of RETT Collections - fee remitted to the General Fund foradminis[ration
Rec. Path Capital Maint 193.540 190.567 104.745 117.583 107.048 110.000 Capltal mamtenance of the town's recreation path system
Tree Malntenance 109.954 65.000 65,000 65.000 65.000 65.000 Regular malntenance for tree health within the town (spraying. remo g ewtrees)'.'09 to continue with scale
spraying on town-owned property at approx. $120 per tree
Forest Health Management 265.000 265.000 265,000 265.000 265.000 265.000 Pine beetle mltigation In conjunction wl forest servlce
Street Fumiture Replacement 25.983 22,500 22500 25.000 25.000 25.000 Additions and replacement of street fumiture:'09 re-appropriation to expand bike rack installatlons (at approx.
$1.000 perblke rack)
Park / Playyround Capital Maintenance 110.000 115.000 90.000 80.000 82.400 84.872 Repair & ma'mtenance of playgrounds. restrooms. ete.
Bald Mountaln Underpass Maintenance 200.000 Reconstruction of retaining wall that supports bike path through the underpess
AlpineGarden5upport 55.620 55.620 65.564 67.531 69.557 71.644 Annualsupportat3'%increaseperyear(2010Flatwith2009)
Black Gore Creek Sand M-itigation 180.569 90D00 100,000 100.000 100.000 100.000 Annual support of water protectlon programs:'09 to inove a waterline to make room for addltional sand retention
To[al Capi[al Main[enance 2,401.548 2,590,204 2.372.994 2,433.417 2,518,755 2.622,460
Other Improvemen[s
Meadow Drive Streetscape 411.788 09 for West Meadow Drive (Library to Vail Road). on9oing costs under contract
Katsos Ranch Bike Path 7.000 09 for wetland re-vegetation - Ihe last task in resurfacing rec path fmm Sunburst to E. Vail
Path (rom TimberRidge to Roost; of(set by Federal Grant of approx. $150K'. $46K addltional funds necessary to
T-imber Rldge-BuffehrGreek Rd separation 700A00 - - - - - _mply with federal funding requirements and original costestimates were from 2003. Gontract awarded atJune
2nd meeting.
Lionshead to Meadow Dr 202.500 Improvements to existing bike path along the stream
Treilhead Development / Improvement 23.200 24.000 24.000 50.000 Improve trailheads'. Gontinued need through 2012 (one trail per year)
ADA Compliance wl VRD 85.881 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 Shared costs with VRD -ADA access at recreetional facillties'.'09 re-appropriation to remodel restroom at golf
urse hole #13~. LH auxllliary bldg ADA improvements (lift) and a ramp/restroom upgrade at the Clubhouse.
Recreation Master Planning 6.415 Concept and design of recreation asset improvements. 2008/09 the Vail Golf Gourse Glubhouse
Streamwalk ADA & Safely improvements 1.033 To cover a remaining engineering bill
Greenhouse 250.000 $100K originally budgeted for just the greenhouse shucture. another $150K requested based on revised cost
estimates to include concrete base and other constructions costs
Frontage Road Bike Lanes/Trails 150.000 2.275.000 1.150.000 Gonstruct widened 6' shoulders along all frontage roads'. first prioriry is Blue Gow Ghute to Easl Vall'. path from
Vail Mtn School to E Vail exit 2009 for design ($SOK) end survey work ($100K)'. construction is budgeted in 2010
Vail Valley Drive - Blke Path 850.000 Addition of widened shoulders (for bike path) during reconstruction of Veil Velley Drive
Ford Park Master Plan 300.000 1.000.000 2150.000 Re-appropnation from 2008 for master planning and parking survey work (Phase I): Interviewed 5 candidates on
Apr. 27. Reduced 2010 from $3.3M to $1.0 M
Main Vail Roundabout pavement apron - 130.000 - - - Concrete apron to protect Ihe grass from cars/trucks on the edge of the roundabout
Ford Park Improvements 200.000 - - - - - Ford Park pathwork. restrooms and other improvements
Seibert Gircle 212.696 To complete project
Raw Water / Imgation Gontrol 371.752 Water supply Infrastructure: Orig plan to include in water bills. but interest rate now 5"', so paying up front Instead
offina
cing
Kayak Take-out 10D00 Kayak take-out area elong stream (part of One Willow Bridge development agreement and must be accounted for
separately)
Stream Tract Encroachment Survey 64.881 Survey along Gore Creek
28
2-1 -47
TOW N OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE. EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX
L 2009
Amended 2010 2017 2012 2073 2014 Comments
Reconstruction of playground per safety plan. 20 years old'. in-house design currently underway and staff, working
Red Sandstone Park- Per Sefety plan 25.000 439.000 - - - - a plan to deal with parking and ADA requirements: $25K to fnlsh design'.$439K for cons[ruction deferred
un[il 2010
Booth Creek Playground 15000 385250 Design in 2011 . deferred construction until 2012
Booth Creek Park redevelopment 50.000 1.340.000 Deslgn In 2011'. deferred construction unfi12012
Whlte Water Park 5.000 - - - - - 3rd hole / bladder system at Whitewater Park - last part of project is to program the waterfeature's system
Ford Park Soccer Field Parking Lot 400.000 Porous pavement for reconstruction of Ihls lot'. Delayed from 2010
Art in Public Places - Programs i ' Art 215.1 56 80.000 80.000 80.000 80.000 80.000 To purchase sculptures, artwork. art programs and events: remainder Is re-appropriated each year to accumulate
noi{qh funds
Public Art - Morales relocation 125.000 Transferred from Seibert prolect to cover cost of relocating the Morales artwork
Public Art - Meadow Drive Entry 85.000 Transferred In'08 from streetscape project to cover cost of new Meadow Dnve entry feature
Public Art- Operating 84.359 85.157 87.712 90.343 93.053 95.845 AIPP salary and opereting expenses related to RET7. 3% annual Increase
Landscape Medlans 300.000 - _ _ _ _ Frontage road medians alongside redevelopment projects: working on lighting plan forin front of Solaris. Vail
Plaza and Four Seasons
Public Reshooms - - 670.000 _ _ 09 Tear down and rebuild (and enlarge) Ford Park restroom'. Restrooms at W. Meadow Drive & Vail Road:
Pushed from'09 to'11
Environmental Sustainabillry 315,000 250D00 250.000 250.000 250.000 250.000 Envirommiietal projects such as energy efficiency studies of municipal buildings. recycling programs. etc.
Capital Paid for by RETT Funds: 4.151.661 5.743.757 4.486.712 2,205.593 833.053 435,845
VRD-Managed Facility Projec[s
RecreationEnhancementAccount 120.000 122.000 124.440 126.929 129.467 132.057 Reserveaccountforgolfcourseimprovements - fundedbyannualleaserevenue
Golf Course Irrigation - VRD's portion 1.607,522 Finance VRD's port ion of irrigation system replacement (5-year payback)
Golf Gourse Irngation 1.446.522 Based on estimates from Bome Englneenng'. spllt 50'/ with VRD (10 % reduction)
Golf Gourse Glubhouse. Starter5hack. etc. 542.175 33000 900.000 2912 18,390 79,936 Improvements to malntenance buildiny and main dubhouse
Golf Course -Other lmprovements 571.237 200.000 50.000 11.863 7.896 ADA access to clubhouse. bridge and retaining wall repairs
Dobson Ice Arena 975.993 100.000 15.000 58.796 2.784 11.580 09 Roof and cen[ral air repair: outer years lighting and locker rooms
Ford Park / Tennis Center Improvements 115.986 175.000 200.000 309.382 2.214 9,816 2009. Defer continued refurblshing of Ford Park tennis courts to 2010 ($62K). 2010. walkways & restroom roof pe
lease agieement delayed from 2008 due to park master planning
Athletic Fields 18.280 2.278 12.483 09 irrigation system. '12 asphalt overlay of parking lot
Youth Servlces 164.983 25.000 09 ADA access and fumaces
Gymnastics Genter 27.621 25000 1.582 09 retaining walls.'10 mechanical improvemenls
Nature Center 10.000 8.517 2012 wood open rail fencing
Total VRD-Managed Facility Projects 5.590.319 690,000 1,289,440 519,987 155.133 253,768
Total Expenditures 12.743,528 8,423,361 8,149,146 5.158.991 3,506,942 3,312,073
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (7,962222) (3182,535) (1641.259) (1,655.350) 93,382 68.984
Beglnning Fund Balance 17,288.266 9.326.044 6.141509 2.502251 846.900 940282
Ending Fund Balance $ 9326,044 $ 6.143,509 $ 2,502,251 $ 846,900 $ 940.282 $ 1.009266
: (P(811:
zs
2-]-48
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET PROPOSAL
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
VAIL MARKETING FUND
2009 2010
2008 Original Proposed
Actual Budget Budget
Revenue
Business Licenses $ 312,839 $ 314,500 $ 312,000
Earnings on Investments 3,819 - -
Total Revenue 316,658 314,500 312,000
Expenditures
Commission on Special Events 280,000 280,000 280,000
Collection Fee - General Fund 15,642 15,725 15,725
Total Expenditures 295,642 295,725 295,725
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 21,016 18,775 16,275
Beginning Fund Balance 62,619 81,394 102,410
Ending Fund Balance $ 83,635 $ 100,169 $ 118,685
DEBT SERVICE FUND
2009 2009 2010
2008 Original Amended Proposed
Actual Budget Budget Budget
Revenue
Transferfrom Capital Projects Fund $ 2,204,670 $ 2,266,775 $ 2,298,121 $ 2,273,959
Earnings on Investments and Other 50,830 - -
Total Revenue 2,255,500 2,266,775 2,298,121 2,273,959
Expenditures
Principal 1,890,000 2,000,000 1,980,000 2,035,000
Interest Expense 432,395 266,775 296,295 238,331
Fiscal Agent Fees 2,500 2,500 6,950 2,500
Refunding Bonds Issuance Costs - -
Total Expenditures 2,324,895 2,269,275 2,283,245 2,275,831
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (69,395) (2,500) 14,876 (1,872)
Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Debt proceeds, net (96,461)
Issuance costs premium 203,221
Issuance costs, net (115,741) - -
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (8,981) - - -
Beginning Fund Balance 252,710 249,639 174,334 189,210
Ending Fund Balance $ 174,334 $ 247,139 $ 189,210 $ 187,338
: (2(I311:30
2-1 -49
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET PROPOSAL
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND
2009 2009 2010
2008 Original Amended Proposed 2011 2012 2013 2014
Actual Budget Budget Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast
Revenue
Town of Vail Interagency Charge $ 3,067,497 $ 2,910,595 $ 2,703,886 $ 2,836,464 $ 3,243,653 $ 3,205,746 $ 3,385,420 $ 3,277,400
Insurance Reim burse ments & Other 111,337 38,800 38,800 - - - - -
Earningsonlnvestments 41,169 37,000 8,000 10,298 1Q027 11,212 11,929 12,796
Equipment Sales and Trade-ins 77,964 79,880 79,880 123,240 233,580 131,485 144,210 109,580
Total Revenue 3,297,967 3,066,275 2,830,566 2,970,002 3,487,260 3,348,443 3,541,559 3,399,776
Expenditures
Salaries & Benefits 899,228 1,010,532 942,623 965,872 986,368 1,016,976 1,039,772 1,064,819
Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 1,424,612 1,294,625 1,155,825 1,246,261 1,283,649 1,322,158 1,361,823 1,402,678
CapitalOutlay 640,907 74Q500 74Q500 812,150 98Q100 865,944 966,700 777,000
Total Expenditures 2,964,747 3,045,657 2,838,948 3,024,283 3,250,117 3,205,078 3,368,295 3,244,497
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 333,220 20,618 (8,382) (54,281) 237,143 143,365 173,264 155,279
Beginning Fund Balance 99Q117 1,617,232 2,068,007 2,059,625 2,005,344 2,242,487 2,385,852 2,559,116
Ending Fund Balance $ 1,323,337 $ 1,637,850 $ 2,059,625 $ 2,005,344 $ 2,242,487 $ 2,385,852 $ 2,559,116 $ 2,714,395
31
: (P(811:
2-]-50
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
DISPATCH SERVICES FUND
2008 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Actual Budget Amended Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast
Revenue
E911 Board Revenue $ 607,183 $ 657,015 $ 688,918 $ 754,108 775,506 797,500 82Q200 843,600
Interagency Charges 1,050,439 1,157,497 1,157,497 1,162,231 1,181,270 1,239,588 1,288,703 1,336,352
Town of Vail Interagency Charge 533,164 543,072 543,072 522,213 544,220 571,087 593,715 615,667
Earningsonlnvestments 18,763 12,142 5,000 5,000 10,000 1Q000 1Q000 1Q000
Other 7,500 - 69,750 - - - - -
Total Revenue 2,217,049 2,369,726 2,464,237 2,443,552 2,510,996 2,618,175 2,712,618 2,805,619
Expenditures
Salaries & Benefits 1,588,183 1,732,699 1,753,602 1,854,062 1,933,396 2,014,561 2,078,790 2,144,971
Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 459,767 499,535 499,535 512,233 527,600 543,428 559,731 576,523
CapitalOutlay 5Q121 135,000 124,750 5Q000 50,000 50,000 5Q000 5Q000
Total Expenditures 2,098,071 2,367,234 2,377,887 2,416,295 2,510,996 2,607,989 2,688,521 2,771,494
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 118,978 2,492 86,350 27,257 0 10,186 24,097 34,125
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (75,000) - - - - - - -
Beginning Fund Balance 918,366 821,458 962,344 1,048,694 1,075,951 1,075,951 1,086,137 1,110,234
Ending Fund Balance $ 962,344 $ 823,950 $ 1,048,694 $ 1,075,951 $ 1,075,951 $ 1,086,137 $ 1,110,234 $ 1,144,359
32
: (P(811:
2-]-51
TOWN OF VAIL 2010 BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
CONFERENCE CENTER FUND
2010
2008 2009 2009 Proposed
Actual Budget Amended Budget
Revenue
Taxes
Sales Tax - - - -
Public Accomodations Tax - - - -
Penalties and Interest on Delinquent Taxes
Subtotal Taxes - - - -
Other
Earnings on Investments 218,193 235,000 46,000 46,500
Total Revenue 218,193 235,000 46,000 46,500
Expenditures - General Government
Management Fee - - - -
General Supplies and meetings - - - -
CapitalOutlay - - - -
Total Expenditures - - - -
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 218,193 235,000 46,000 46,500
Beginning Fund Balance 9,046,283 9,271,283 9,264,476 9,310,476
Ending Fund Balance $ 9,264,476 $ 9,506,283 $ 9,310,476 $ 9,356,976
HEALTH INSURANCE FUND
2009 2010
2008 Original Proposed
Actual Budget Budget
Revenue
Town of Vail Interagency Charge - Prem $ 2,394,290 $ 2,515,000 $ 2,535,000
Employee Contributions 286,058 288,000 305,000
Insurer Proceeds 111,957 20,000 100,000
Earnings on Investments 35,866 24,719 5,000
Total Revenue 2,828,171 2,847,719 2,945,000
Expenditures
Health Inusrance Premiums 287,533 339,660 365,000
Claims Paid 2,163,853 2,448,059 2,675,000
Short-term Disability Pay 7,442 40,000 35,000
Professional Fees 20,000 20,000 20,000
Total Expenditures 2,478,828 2,847,719 3,095,000
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 349,343 - (150,000)
Beginning Fund Balance 990,117 1,089,099 1,414,762
Ending Fund Balance $ 1,339,460 $ 1,089,099 $ 1,264,762
: (2()311:
2 - 1 - S~'
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Lunch.
: C2()311:
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Follow-up presentation on Fire Department Impact Fees.
PRESENTER(S): Mark Miller / Tom Pippin (BBC)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen and provide direction relative to imposing
impact fees for the Fire Department.
BACKGROUND: On July 7, 2009, Tom Pippin (BBC) presented the study conducted by BBC
regarding fire department Impact Fees. Council discussed the study and requested Tom
Pippin and Mark Miller to bring back comparative information on impact fees from other
comparable resort communities in Colorado. Council also directed BBC to include potential
SFE's for the Timber Ridge development in the analysis. BBC has provided a revised report
and also included information on non-utility impact fees for Colorado cities. In addition,
information is provided on comparable fire department impact fees.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve and direct the Town Attorney to develop an
ordinance imposing fire department impact fees, to be set at the discretion of the TOV Council.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
REvised Impact fee report
Impact fee comparison
Colorado Community Impact fees
: C2()311:
m m I-M
RESEARCH &
CONSCJLTING
3773 Cherry Creek North Drive
Suite 850
Denver, Colorado 80209-3827
303.321.2547 fax 303.399.0448
www.bbcresearch.com
bbc@bbcresearch.com
JUIy 13, 2009
Mark Miller, Fire Chief
Vail Fire and Emergency Services
42 W. Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Vail Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Study - Revised Draft Report
Dear Chief Miller:
The Town of Vail hired BBC Research & Consulting (BBC) and Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc. (SBA) in
May 2009 to calculate impact fees for Vail Fire and Emergency Services (VFES). We will do so by answering
the following four questions:
1. What is the current level of service provided by VFES? Since the primary purpose of impact
fees is to help VFES maintain its current level of service in the future, it is necessary to know
the level of service VFES is currently providing to the communiry.
2. What future growth is expected within the Town of Vail? How many new residential
households and nonresidential buildings will be served by VFES over rhe next twenry years?
3. What new infrastructure is required to serve future growth while maintaining the current
level of service? Far example, how tnany new stations and fire trucks will be needed over the
lifespan of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to maintain the current level of service?
4. What impact fee is required to pay for the new infrastructure? Here we calculate an
apportionment of new infrastructure costs to future residential and nonresidential land-uses.
Then using this distribution the applicable impact fees are determined.
We believe that addressing these four questions, in order, provides the tnost effective and logical way
to calculate impact fees for VFES. This methodoloby is consistent with our past fire impact fee wark
over the last fifteen years, including over 20 fire impact fee studies in Colorado alone and mare than
100 such studies nationally.
: C2()311:
4 1 1
Revised Draft Report - Page 2
1) W hat is the current level of service provided by VFES?
The current level of service for a fire department is rypically described by several measures:
■ the average time it takes the departmenr to respond to a call;
■ the "ISO rating" for fire insurance purposes; and
■ any stated policy goals that have been adopted by elected officials.
In the case of VFES, it is possible to report the current level of service using all three measures:
■ the average response time is seven tninutes and farry-one seconds (7:41) per call;
■ the current ISO rating' is 5; and
■ the Town CounciPs recognized level of service goal for VFES is zero loss of life, to contain any
fires in their room of origin and to respond to 90 percent of all incidents with 5 minures or less.
VFES is anticipating additional residential and non-residential growth in the future. In arder to maintain the
current level of service to both existing and future residents, visitors and businesses, additional infrastructure
will be needed. Impact fees could help mitigate the financial burden on the Town created by these necessary
future investments.
2) What future growth isexpected in the Town of Vail?
In May and June of 2009, SBA prepared an analysis (see attachment) of expected residential and non-
residential growth that is likely to occur within the Town of Vail during the CIP period as measured by net
new Single Family Equivalent units (SFEs). The municipal limits of the Town are VFES's primary service
area.
Please note, however, that VFES's service area also extends beyond the Town boundaries to cover several
locations within unincorporated Eagle Counry. These locations include Interstate 70 from mile marker 182
to mile marker 190, certain partions of the I-70 frontage road in the Town care, the Highland Meadows
developtnent, Piney River Road development, and wild land fires on Vail Mountain. Because the Town of Uail
does not have the authority to i7npose impact fees on new development occurring outside its munzcipul limits, these
projects have not been includecl in the growth projeetions used in this stasdy.
Exhibit 1 on the following page summarizes the Town of VaiPs overall growth projections of SFEs during the
CIP period from January 2010 through December 2025. It does not include units that are already under
construction in 2009, ar are expected to break ground later this year. This is because impact fees are not
charged "after the fact" on projects that have already pulled building permits.
~
VFES was re-evaluated by an ISO rating tcam in June 2009. Whilc thc rating mam has not issucd its final report, it has identified
sevcral "prcliminarv deficicncies" that will necd to be addressed for Vail to maintain its current 1S0 rating - staffing, resources and thc
necd for a third cnginc.
: (M11:
4-1-2
Revised Draft Report - Page 3
Exhibit 1.
Town of Vail
Single Family Equivalent (SFE) Growth, 2010-2025
SFE Growth
Project Description 2010-2025
Unspecified new and remodeled units 247
West Vail Mall 531
Lionshead Future 177
Vail Village Miscellaneous 63
FourSeasons -
Solaris -
Ritz Carlton Residences -
Ever Vail 408
Vail Cascade - Cascade Condos 6
Cascade Cornerstone Building 26
Evergreen Lodge - New Fairmont Hotel 73
Glen Lyon Building 13
Timber Ridge 100
Lionshead Parking Structure 270
Strata 57
Tower Residences/Lionsquare Lodge North -
Chamonix - Net of West Vail Fire Station (7 SFE's)' 58
Timberline Lodge/Roost Lodge 44
Solar Vail 58
Lionshead North Day Lot 32
Landmark Condominiums -
Total New SFE's 2,163
Notes: (1) The 7 SFEs associated with the new West Vail Fire Station are deducted.
So urce: Stan Bernstein and As:ociates. Inc.
As shown above, the Town of Vail is expected to experience future growth of an estimated 2,163 net new
sinble-family equivalent units (SFEs) during rhe CIP period. The "net new" concept is important in that it
accounts for anticipated demolitions and redevelopment projects. Please note that Exhibit 1 includes an
estimated 100 net new SFEs at Tiinber Ridge per the direction of the Vail Town Council which has the most
recent knowledge of the site redevelopment plans.
: C2()311:
4-1-3
Revised Draft Report - Page 4
At the end of the CIP period in 2025, 19 percent of the existing SFEs will have been newly constructed
during the CIP period. As explained below, this percentage will become important in allocating project costs
in the CIP.
3) What new infrastructure is required to maintain the current level of service for future
growth?
VFES plans on constructing new buildings, rehabilitating existing structures, and purchasing new vehicles and
eyuipment during the CIP period. However, not all of these new infrastructure purchases are associated with
growth.
Some capital costs are for repair and replacement of facilities (e.g., standard periodic investment in existing
faciliries such as replacing an older fire engine). These costs are notimpact fee eligible. Some capiral costs are
for betterment of facilities, or implementation of new services (e.g., adding technical rescue capaciry). These
costs are generally not entirely impact fee eligible. Some costs are for expansion of facilities to accotntnodate
new development at the current level of service (e.g., purchase of new fire truck to accoinmodate expanding
population). These costs are impact fee eligible.
Because there are different reasons why VFES invests in capital projects, BBC conducted a"GRUM" Analysis
on all projects listed in the CIP:
■ Growt h. The "G" in GRUM stands for growth. To determine if a project is solely related ro
growth, we ask "Is this project designed to tnaintain the current level of service as growth
occurs?" and "Would the Fire Department still need this capital project if it weren't growing at
all?" "G" projects are only necessary to maintain the Department's current level of sernice as
growth occurs. It is thus appropriate to include 100 percent of their cost in the iinpact fee
calculations.
■ Repair & Replaeement. The "R" in GRUM stands for repair & replacement We ask, "Is this
project related only to fixing existing infrastructure?" and "Would the Fire Department still need
it if it weren't growing at all?" "R" projects have nothing to do with growth. It is thus not
appropriate to include any of their cost in the impact fee calculations.
■ Upgrade. The "U" in GRUM stands for upgrade. We ask, "Would this project improve the Fire
Department's current level of service?" and "Would the Department still do it even if it weren't
growing at all?" "U" projects have nothing to do with growrh. It is thus not appropriate to
include any of their cost in the impact fee calculations.
■ M ixed. The "M" in GRUM stands far mixed. It is reserved for capital projects that have sotne
combination of G, R and U. "M" projects by their very definition are partially necessitated by
growth, but also include an element of repair, replacement and/ar upgrade. In this instance, a
cost amount between 0 and 100 percent should be included in the fee calculations. Although the
need far these projects is triggered by new development, they will also benefit existing residents.
: M()311:
4 1 4
Revised Draft Report - Page 5
There are no projects in the following CIP that are 100 percent growth-related; none were determined by our
study to be necessitated solely by growth. Alternatively, some projects were derermined to be "mixed" in that
they had elements of growth, repair and replacement and/or upgrade. The new West Vail Fire Station and the
retnodel and potential relocation of the East Vail Fire Station are examples of such projects. In these
situations, only a portion of the total cosr of each project was included in the final impact fee calcularion!
The remainder of the cost of each "mixed" project should be paid by the Town from non-impact fee revenue
sources.
Exfiibit 2 below includes all new infrastructure projects (including replacements, repairs and upgrades) VFES
plans to buy and build between now and 2025.
Exhibit 2.
Vail Fre and Emergency ServicesCapital Improvement Plan, 2010-2025
Portion Allocated
Year Purchase to Include in Purchase
Type of Capital Infrastructure Purchased Value Impact Fees Value
Buildings
Construct New West Vail Fire Station 2010 $5,520,000 80 % $4,416,000
Remodel/Relocate East Vail Station 2012 $775,000 19 % $144,274
Remodel/Expand Vail Village Station 2011 $975,000 0% $0
Subtotal Buildings $7,270,000 $4,560,274
Vehicles and Equpment 2
Replace Existing Pierce pumper #411 2014 $620,000 0% $0
Replace Existing Pierce pumper #412 2022 $786,500 0% $0
Replace Existing Pierce pumper #414 2011 $568,200 0% $0
Replace Existing Pierce aerial #430 2022 $1,209,200 0% $0
Replace Existing Pierce platform #431 2021 $1,174,000 0% $0
Replace Existing Brush Truck 2' 2019 $109,000 0% $0
New Pumper for West Vail Fire Station 2010 $570,000 80 % $456,000
New Heavy Rescue Truck 2015 $300,000 19 % $55,848
New Type 6 Wildland Truck 2014 $150,000 19% $27,924
Technical Rescue Equipment Package' TBD $100,000 19 % $18,616
Subtotal Vehicles and Equipment $5,586,900 $558,388
Impact Fee Study $15,000 100 % $15,000
Grand Total: $5.133.663
Note: These new assets will allow VFESto continueto meet the current level of service throughout the CIP period.
(1) These itemswill be funded entirely from theTown of Vail "Capital Fojects Fund"-see below for adetailed explanation of what hasalready been budgeted.
(2) All vehicle Rirchase Values are calculated as"fully loaded" which includestools. communicationsand equipment.
(3) Technical Rescue Esquipment Package includesconfined space and trench rescue capabilities.
So urce : Vail Rre and Emergency Se rvicesand BBC Pesgarch & Consulting. Inc.
After accounting for completely non-growth related and "mixed-use" purchases, the rotal value of impact fee-
eligible capital construction and purchases is appro~tnately $5.1 million. This number represents growth's
"fair share" of VFES's future infrastructure needs.
2
'1'o calculate die `M" pcrcentagc for the East Vail Station, New Hcavy Rescue liuclc, New Wildland 'l'ruclc and 'l'echnical Rescuc
Equipmcnt Packagc, we divided the net new SFEs during the C1P period by the total number of SFEs at the end of the CIP period in
2025. 11ic numbers, detailed in Exhibit 1 above, arc 2,163 net new SFEs dividcd by total SFEs of 11,619 at the end of the C1P period
in 2025, which equals approximately 19 percent 'l'hc "M" percentage for the West Vail Fire Station and New Pumper Truclc to be
stationcd thcrcin wcrc choscn in consultation with VFES staff. The formcr linc itcros arc lcss closcly linkcd to growth than thc lattcr
items thus supportin- the lower "M" pcrcentagc.
: C2()311:
4-1-5
Revised Draft Report - Page 6
The Town of Vail maintains a"Capital Projects Fund" which collects revenue from sales tax, use taY, and
Federal, State and local grants. The purpose of the Capital Projects Fund is to pay for infrastructure
improvements in the Town either directly or through debt sernice on bonds that have been issued for
purposes of capital construction. During budbet deliberations each year, VFES is eligible to compete with
other Town departmenrs for a portion of the Capital Projects Fund.
Based on the Town's mosr current 2009 budget, VFES is already expected to receive near-term Capital
Projects Fund suppart for the following infrastructure improvements:
' $568,200 in 2011 to help fund vehicle replacement; and
' $975,000 in 2011 to remodel the main Vail Village Fire Station
Please note that while these capital projects are listed in the CIP above (Exhibit 2), they are not included in
the impact fee calculations. This is because under the "GRUM" concept discussed previously, these projects
are related ro repair, replacement and/or upgrade of existing infrastructure. The Town of Vail plans to invest
in these infrastructure improvements regardless of the pace of fizture growth. It would thus be inequitable to
ask new development to help pay for these projects.
By contrast, the construction and equipping of the new West Vail Fire Station and the East Vail Fire Station
remodel/relocation have not been budgeted from the Capital Projects Fund. This means two things: 1)
sufficient Capital Projects Fund revenue is not available to pay for the respective entire project, and 2)
portions of these projects are related to new growth in Vail and could thus be at least partially supparted by
impact fee revenue. These projects, and several vehicles identified in Exl-iibit 2, are therefore mixed ar"M"
projects under rhe "GRUM" concept discussed above.
For this reason, the CIP (see Exhibit 2) includes some of rhese costs in the impact fee calculations. If the
Town of Vail adopts impact fees, it will be responsible far funding the balance of these projects from non-
impact fee revenue sources. In other words, existing Vail residents and businesses will have to contribute their
fair share either through Capital Projects Fund revenue that has yet to be budgeted or other sources of
revenue.
4) What impact fee is required to pay for future infrastructure?
Here we calculate how much of the new fee-eligible infrastructure will be paid by developers. Usinb the
distribution of future land-use from Exhibit 1, we can assign future infrastructure costs from Exhibit 2 to the
appropriate development category and calculate the applicable fees. Our results are shown in Exhibit 3.
: M()311:
4 1 6
Revised Draft Report - Page 7
Exhibit 3.
Calculation of Fre Impact Impact Fee Calculation
Fees
Allocated Value for Future Fire Infrastructure' $5,133,663
N01e Net Growth in SFEs during CIP Period 2 2,163
(1) See C hibit 2.
(z) See Exh'b't'. Impact Fee per New SFE $2,373
SDurce:
Vail Fire and Emergency Services. San
Bernstein and Assoclates. Ina: and BBC
Remarch & Consulting.
As indicated above, we have calculated an impact fee of $2,373 per new SFE. A fee not to exceed this amount
is recommended for consideration by rhe Town of Vail. New sinble family homes would be charbed this fee
unless they were large enough to count as more than one SFE, as rypically determined from the utiliry meter
partion of each unit's building permit Similarly, multifamily and non-residential development projects would
be assessed impact fees according to the number of SFEs they represent.
Implementation Recommendations
We offer the following recommendations for your consideration:
■ The fees calculated in Exhibit 3 should be considered as the full-cost recovery amount. Town of
Vail elected officials could choose to adopt any fee amount between zero and the figures in
Exliibit 3. They cannot impose a greater amount.
■ The Town of Vail should prompdy create and maintain an"Impact Fee Fund" separate and
apart from the General Fund. All future impact fee revenue should be itnmediately deposited
into this account, and withdrawn only to pay far growth-related infrastructure. VaiPs General
Fund should be reserned solely for the receipt of taY revenues and associated interest earnings,
and ongoing operational expenses. Vail's Capital Projects Fund should be reserved for the repair,
replacement and upgrade of existing infrastructure not related to growth.
■ The fees calculated in this study should be updated periodically as VFES invests in additional fire
protection infrastructure beyond what is listed in Exhibit 2, and/or the SFE growth projections
change significandy.
■ The fees should be updated annually based on the EngineeringNews Record index ar other
infrastructure inflation indices.
■ For projects listed in the Capital Improvements Plan that are not 100 percent growth-related
(including "tnixed" projects), the Town of Vail should assutne the responsibiliry of paying their
share from non-impact fee revenue sources.
4 1 7
Revised Draft Report - Page 8
Please feel free to contact us with any questions you might have about our conclusions. We will
forward samples of fire impact fee enabling ordinances to your Town Atrorney when you indicate it
is appropriate.
Sincerely,
/ ~ •
Stan Bernstein
Thomas A. Pippin Stan Bernstein
Managing Director Stan Bernstein and Associares, Ine.
: C2()311:
4 1 8
Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc.
Financial Planners (ind Consultcant.s
For° Local Covet°nynents, Municil)al Bond Undet°writet°s, (ind Real Estate Develol)et°s
8400 East Prentice Ave., Penthouse
Greenwood Villa(ge, Colot°ado 80111
Phone: 303-409-7611 Fax: 303-409-7612 Emai1: Stanl)lara Earthlink.net
June 8, 2009
Mr. Marlc Miller, Fire Chief
Town of Vail Fire Department
RE: DRAFT #1 TOWI OF VAIL FIRE DEPARTMEI T("VFD") - FUTURE
SII GLE FAMILY EQUIVALEI T UI IT FORECAST
Dear Chief Miller:
Enclosed for your review is the most curreilt draft of the results of our 2009 forecast of
future Single Family Equivalent Units (SFE's) within the botmdaries of the Town of Vail
(which does not include all of the geographical area, or development, located within the
Town of Vail; although it includes the vast majority of it),Fire Department ("VFD"). For
the purposes of this forecast, one SFE contains 3,000 square feet, with the exception of
hotel rooms which are assumed to be 0.35 SFE's or 0.50 SFE's depending upon kitchen
facilities. The attached Schedule 1 summarizes the future SFE' S for VFD for the years
ending December 31, 2009 through 2025.
As of December 31, 2008 there were approximately 9,456 SFE's beiilg served by VFD.
The attached Schedule 1 indicates an additional 2,405 SFE's could be added during the
next 17-years which represeilts an increase of approxiinately 25.43% over the SFE base
as of December 31, 2008. There are several large projects currently Llnder constrLlction
that have already obtained building permits and are listed below;
Projecti Incremental SFE's
Four Seasoils Resort 90.0
Solaris 100.0
Ritz Carlton Residences 124.0
Lioils Square North 9.0
Landmark Condominiums 19.0
Total SFE's 342.0
Subtracting the 342.0 SFE's resulting froin projects that have already pulled building
permits results in approximately 2,063 potential future SFE's that be subject to paying
Fire Protection Impact Fees to VFD. These additional potential future SFE's represent
an increase of approximately 21.8% above the current number of SFE's in amouilt of
9,456.
: M()311:
4 1 9
Chief Marlc Miller
June 8, 2009
Page 2 of 5
Schedule 1 indicates that an additional 22 SFE'S subject ro impact fees could be added
during 2009 through 2011; 1,190 SFE's could be added during 2012 throLigh 2016; and a
total of 851 SFE's could be added from 2017 through 2025 (an average of approximately
95 annually). It is importailt that these SFE estimates are carefully monitored so that
adjusnnents can be made as future events regarding construction activity becomes
clearer.
A brief summary of the variolis projects expected to be constructed during the next 20-
years within the boundaries of VFD is described in the followiilg paragraphs.
Four Scasons (Formcrlv Holiday Inn/Chatcau) - The Four Seasons project is
expected ro be completed durlllg 2010 with net new SFE's of 44, for a total of 90 SFE's
(assuming 122 hotel rooms, 16 whole ownership condos, 19 fractional ownership
condominiums, 14 einployee housing units, a spa, and restaurant space). This project
will not generate aily Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Solaris (Formcrly Crossroads) - The Solaris development will contain 77 whole
owilership condos, a lO lane bowling alley, a movie theater, an ice rink aild coininercial
space, and is estimated to generate approximately 50 new SFE's for a total of 100 SFE's.
This project is expected to be complete in late 2010. This project will not generate any
Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Ritz Carlton Residences (Formcrly West Dav Lot) - The Ritz Carltoil Residences will
contain 116 whole ownership condos, 2 employee hoLlsing units, plus commercial space
and is expected to generate approximately 124 SFE's. Completion is expected in 2010.
This project will not generate any Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Landmark Condominiums - The Landmarlc will add 18 whole ownership condos and
one einployee housing unit, with expected completion in 2010. This will add 19
additional SFE's. This project will not generate any Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Tower Residences (Lionsquare Lodu I ortih) - The Tower Residences are being built
adjacent to the Lions Square Lodge and will include 9 whole ownership condos expected
to be coinplete in 2010. This will add 9 ilew SFE's. This project will not geilerate any
Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Ever Vail - Vail resorts is planning to develop the land that is curreiltly the VRI
Maintenance Building, Amoco/BP gas station, and Bloclcbuster retail center as Ever Vail.
Preliminary development plans include 53 employee housing units, 240 whole ownership
condominiums, a 127 room hotel, aild approximately 142,000 square feet of retail aild
office space. This project is expected be completed in phases in years 2012 through
2015. We estiinate a total of 408 new SFE's will be generated from this project, all of
which will be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
: M()311:
4 1 10
Chief Marlc Miller
June 8, 2009
Page 3 of 5
Cascadc Condos (old CMC sitic) - The old Colorado Mountain College site will be
redeveloped into 14 condoininiuin units with anticipated completion in 2012. This will
net approximately 6 new SFE's, all of which will be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Cascadc Cornerstonc Building - This project will consist of 22 whole ownership
condos and 4 employee housing units with a total of 26 new SFE's. Completion is
anticipated during 2012. All of these SFE's will be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Evergreen Lodge (I ew Fairmont Hotel) - Redevelopinent of the Evergreen Lodge is
anticipated to consist of 91 whole ownership condos, 129 hotel rooms, and 21,600
square feet of commercial space, adding a total of 73 net SFE's during 2013. All of
these SFE's will be subject to Fire Impact Fee reveilues.
Glen Lvon Buildint! - Adjacent to the proposed Ever Vail site, the Glen Lyon Building
is not currently owiled by Vail Resorts and is expected to be redeveloped as 15 whole
condos and 4 employee housing units with completion in 2014. A total of 13 net new
SFE's are expected as a result of this development, and will be subject to Fire Iinpact Fee
revenues.
Timber Ridgc - At this tiine the Timber Ridge redevelopment plans are very uncertain.
We have not included this in our SFE's at this time - it is possible that veiy few, or in
excess of 100 net additional SFE's could be generated from this project - we have talcen a
conservative positioil and assumed that ilo increineiltal SFE's will be generated.
(Editot°ial I ote: July 13"' Revised Dt°af't Iml)act Fee Rel)ot°t inclzrdes 100 net new SFEs
based on the direction of the Vcril Town Coirncil which has knowledge of7ate-bt°eaking
t°edevelopment plcrns.)
Lionshcad Parking Structure - This is a potential very large new development project
located at the existing Lionshead Parking Lot site. The project is very uncertain at this
time, bLlt will likely happen sometime in the next 17 years. We have included 270 new
SFE's during years 2015 and 2016 consisting of 240 hotel rooms, 130 whole ownership
condos, 25 fractional ownership condos, and restaurant, retail, and conference facilities.
This project will be subject to Fire Impact Fee reveilues.
Strata (old LH Inn, Vail Glo) - The Lionshead Inn and Vail Glo buildings will be
redeveloped as Strata. This development will include 63 whole ownership condos, 16
fractional owilership condos, 1 employee housing unit, and 12 hotel rooins. Expected
completion is 2013. This project will add 57 new SFE's which will be subject to Fire
Iinpact Fee revenues.
Chamonix/Firc Station - This site has been approved for 58 whole owilership condos
and a fire station. We estimate 65 SFEs with completion in 2012. Only 58 SFE's will be
subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
: M()311:
4 1 11
Chief Marlc Miller
June 8, 2009
Page 4 of 5
Timbcrlinc Lodgc (Formcrlv Roost Lodgc) - The Roost Lodge is expected to be
demolished and redeveloped to include 28 whole ownership condos, 3 employee housing
Lmits, and a 102 rooin Marriott Resideilce Inn hotel. Completion is scheduled for 2012
with an estimated 44 ilet SFE's. All of these net SFE's will be subject to Fire Impact Fee
revenues.
Solar Vail - The Solar Vail development will include 82 Employee Housing uiuts that
will replace the existing 24 Condo Units. Development is scheduled to be complete in
2012. This will add 58 net SFE's which will be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Lionshead I orth Dav Lot - Vail Resorts intends to develop this site into approximately
32 einployee housing uilits. Project completion is expected in 2012 and will add 32
SFE's which will all be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
West Vail Mall - While there is speculatioil about potential redevelopment of the West
Vail Mall area (including the West Vail Lodge), there is currently no master plan for this
area and there are no specific developments plails. We have included 50 SFE's annually
in years 2017 through 2021 (approxunately 70 SFE's aimually from 2022 through 2025)
for a total of 531 additional SFE's, all of which will be subject to Fire Impact Fee
revenues. Potential expansion projects s include Brandess Building, Garts, McDonalds,
Safeway, Vail das Schoile, and West Vail Lodge.
Lionshead Otiher - A total potential of 177 ilet SFE's could be geilerated from
Lionshead expansion project such as Vail International Residences and Concert Hall
Plaza commercial space. These SFE's would be subject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Vail Village Miscellaneous - A total of 63 potential net SFE's could be added during the
next 10 years froin expansion projects related to Gorsuch, Wren, All Seasoils, Chalet
road, Ramshonl, Texas Townhomes, and Vail Trails West. All of these SFE's would be
sLibject to Fire Impact Fee revenues.
Other -It is assumed that an average of 10 SFE's will be added each year fiom 2009
through 2011, with 15 SFE's added annually after 2011 as a result of uilidentified new
construction projects and remodels. All of these SFE's would be subject to Fire Impact
Fee revenues.
: C2()311:
4-1-12
Chief Marlc Miller
June 8, 2009
Page 5 of 5
LIMITATIOI S
Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc. has assembled the above infonnation, and the
infoi-inatioil presented on Schedule l, based on iilformatioil provided by others. Stan
Bernstein and Associates, Inc. has not independently evaluated or tested this information.
Coilsequently, Stan Bemstein aild Associates, Iilc. does ilot vouch for the achievability or
accuracy of this information, and disclaims any opinion with respect to tlus information.
Very truly yours,
Stan Bet°nstein
Stan Benlstein and Associates, Inc.
4 1 13
1 1 ,
EMERGENCY
-SERVICES
Meiiiio
To: Town of Vail, Town Council
From: Mark Miller, Fire Chief
CC: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Date: August 28, 2009
Re: Impact Fee Comparison
Fire Department Impact Fee Comparison
■ Proposed for TOV Fire Department -$2373 per Single Family Equivalent
(SFE) (Council can lower this fee at their discretion)
■ Steam Boat Springs - No Impact Fee
■ Breckenridge - In lieu of Impact Fee, they charge a"New Building Core and
Shell Fee" -$200. if under $50,000. If over $50,000 it is .004 of valuation
(Example - one million dollar home would be $4000)
■ Basalt - Same as Breckenridge
■ Aspen Fire - No fee but it has been discussed - no decision made yet.
■ Eagle River Fire Protection District (Avon, Edwards, Eagle/Vail, Minturn) -
$1671 (meter size 3/") $2841 (for meter size 1" ) Fees increase as meter size
increases.
■ Greater Eagle Fire Protection District (Eagle) -$1071 per dwelling unit
(residential); $535 per 1000 SF (commercial); $1339 per 1000 SF (extended
stay lodging facilities).
■ Winter Park, Fraser and Grand County -$454 per single family dwelling.
(Starting a review/update process)
1
: C2()311:
4-2-1
• Page 2
: C2()311:
4-2-2
July 13rh, 2009
Mr. Mark Miller
Fire Chief
Town of Vail
Via E-Mail
Re: Colorado Mountain Community Impact Fees
Dear Chief Miller:
It is my understanding that the Vail Town Council has asked you to provide information on the
amount of impact fees charged by other Colorado mountain communities.
The Colorado statewide average, non-utiliry impact fee for cities and counties was $6,568 according
to the 2008 National Impact Fee Survey.
The following mountain communiry data is based on the same survey and related links to local
ardinances, fee schedules and newspaper articles posted on the National Impact Fee Roundtable
website:
■ Unincarporated Pitkin Counry $7,158/residential unit
■ Unincorparated Summit Counry $6,000/residential unit
■ Ciry of Aspen $4,927/residential unit
■ Ciry of Steamboat Springs $4,001/residential unit
■ Unincorporated Eagle Counry
within Eagle River Fire Protection District $3,807/residential unit
■ Ciry of Telluride $3,608/residential unit
■ Ciry of Durango $2,169/residential unit
■ Unincorporated Eagle Counry
outside Eagle River Fire Protection District $2,137/residential unit
■ Ciry of Basalt $1,750/residential unit
■ Ciry of Gypsum $1,150/residential unit
■ Ciry of Winter Park $454/residential unit
: M()311:
4-3-1
Please note that the above fee atnounts do not include water, wastewater ar other utiliry fees. Rather,
they encompass fire, police, parks, transportation, affardable housing and other public faciliry impact
fees.
I hope this information is useful to you and the Town CounciL Please feel free to contact me with
any questions.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Pippin
303-726-5687
pippin.torri@gmail.com
4-3-2
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Traffic Impact Fee Discussion.
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and discuss draft Traffic Impact Report and
provide or confirm direction.
BACKGROUND: The town has recently hired Tischler Bise, a fiscal, economic and planning
consultant group to provide a nexus study for a codified Traffic Impact Fee that is applied to all
new development to provide the Town with funds to mitigate new development impacts on the
town's transportation infrastructure and implement portions of the town's recently adopted Vail
Transportation Master Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and discuss draft Traffic Impact Report and provide or
confirm direction.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Traffic Impact Fee Report
Presentation
Memo
: C2()311:
Transportation Impact Fee Study
r~,_
EM~~~ '
August 25, 2009
Prepared By
Tischle
~
FnwL ;ii, Ec:~:>~l~rr,7iC. il,i iiiiirig 'Corisult{vlh
: (P(7311:
5-1-1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................1
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE COLORADO IMPACT FEE ACT ................................................................................................1
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE TOWN OF VAIL ...................................................................................................2
Figure 1- Map of Town Boundary and Vail Core Area ......................................................................................3
LOWER FEES IN CORE AREA ....................................................................................................................................4
CURRENT AND PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION FEES ................................................................................................4
Figure 2- Road Impact Fee Comparison .............................................................................................................5
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES ....................................................................................................................6
Figure 3- Conceptual Impact Fee Formula .........................................................................................................6
TRIP GENERATION ....................................................................................................................................................7
Uehicle Trips to Development in the Town of Uail ..............................................................................................8
Figure 4- Summary of Projected Travel Demand ..............................................................................................8
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS .......................................................................................9
Figure 5- Summary of Transportation Improvements and Growth Share .......................................................10
CREDIT FOR OTHER REVENUES ..............................................................................................................................10
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FORMULA AND INPUT VARIABLES .....................................................................11
Figure 6- Transportation Impact Fee Input Uariables .....................................................................................12
MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES .................................................................................13
Figure 7- Transportation Impact Fee Schedule ................................................................................................13
FUNDING STRATEGY FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ...............................................................14
Figure 8- Impact Fee Revenue Projection ........................................................................................................14
IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................15
CREDITS AND REIMBURSEMENTS ...........................................................................................................................15
DEVELOPMENT CATEGORIES .................................................................................................................................15
APPENDIX A - DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ..........................................................................................................17
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY TYPE OF HOUSING ........................................................................................................17
Figure A1 - Persons per Household ..................................................................................................................17
TRIP GENERATION BY TYPE AND SIZE OF HOUSING .............................................................................................18
Figure A2 - Residential Trip Generation Rates by Type of Housing .................................................................18
Figure A3 - PM Peak Hour Uehicle Attraction Trips by Size of Detached House ............................................19
TRIP GENERATION BY FLOOR AREA OF DETACHED HOUSING .............................................................................20
Figure A4 - PM Peak Hour Inbound Trips by Square Feet ..............................................................................21
: C2()311:
5-1-2
■ 4701 SANGAMaRE ROAD I 5lJITE 5240 I SETHESDR, MD 20814
Tisc hierBise T. 800.424.431 S 1 F: 301.320.4860
F75Cdl,ECOrlornlC & PIanriiPlg COk15ul#aht5 4346{] RIDGE PARK ORIVE I SIJITE 200"W A TEMECllLA, CR 925413
T: 951.719.8478 f F: 301.324.4860
WVW W.TISCHLER6ESE.CdM
INTRODUCTION
For local governments, the first step in evaluating funding options for transportation
improvements is to determine the basic rules of the game established by state law.
Some states have more conservative legal parameters that basically restrict local
government to specifically authorized actions. In contrast, °home-rule" states grant
localities all powers that are not precluded or preempted by the state constitution or
statutes. Local governments in Colorado have home rule power and the State adopted
impact fee enabling legislation in 2001. Impact fees are one-time payments imposed on
new development that must be used solely to fund growth-related capital projects,
typically called "system improvements." In contrast to project-level improvements,
impact fees fund growth-related infrastructure that will benefit multiple development
projects, or even the entire service area, as long as there is a reasonable and direct
relationship between the new development and the need for the growth-related
infrastructure.
A second step in evaluating funding options for transportation improvements is to
consider the rational nexus and proportionality tests established by court cases. Project-
level improvements, typically specified in a development agreement, are usually
limited to roads adjacent to a proposed development and primarily address access
management. Because system improvements (funded with impact fees) are larger and
more costly, they may require bond financing and/or funding from other revenue
sources.
Highlights of the Colorado Impact Fee Act
The Town of Vail may impose development impact fees under the provisions of
Sections 29-20-102 through 204 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, which became
effective in 2001. In Colorado, the impact fee schedule must be legislatively adopted
and generally applicable to a broad class of property for the purpose of defraying
capital costs directly related to proposed development. Other states allow impact fee
schedules to include administrative costs related to impact fee studies and the
preparation of capital improvement plans, but this is not the case in Colorado.
1
- Fiscal Irnpa~ Analysis - Impac# Fees • LJtifity Ra . :14M*ijrturc Finanr.ing - lJSer Fees •Cnst Allncation PI3n5 - FiSr.af 5aftware -
5 -1-3
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
To be funded by impact fees, capital improvements must have a useful life of at least
five years. TischlerBise recommends that impact fee calculations should be in current
dollars (not inflated over time), with the costs periodically updated as part of the
regular budgetary process.
Development Pattern in the Town of Vail
Vail is a resort community of approximately 5,000 year-round residents that surges to
approximately 40,000-45,000 persons during peak tourism season when employees and
visitors are present. The occupied bed base of the community swells from 5,000 to
35,000 during these peak periods. Figure 1 delineates the core area of Vail. Actual
boundaries of the Town extend six miles to the east and four miles to the west of the
core area (see map inset). Given its location in a mountain valley, the Town has a
compact development pattern and a multi-modal transportation system that relies on
pedestrian, bicycle, transit and vehicular travel. Consistent with this setting, the
proposed impact fees will fund multi-modal transportation improvements necessary to
accommodate projected development within the Town of Vail.
2 Tischlefflise
: MO311:
5-1-4
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Figure 1- Map of Town Boundary and Vail Core Area
Va►1 Core Area
West ~
vait
East
Vail
i
~,s~ ~ I~,i i t
Ma~+~} • `Y~ ~
. ~
-
I-70 Exil # 176 ~ f
* A
y
. a _
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~4. xm~~''~'~
. ~ #
~
~
Fard Parh
L
~ ~ .+jt ~ A.~, ~h' ~ ~ -
W
~
~ µ x"... . '
~
1. . .
_ I
Lr`arrshead yiflage ' jif~-a ~
ua;r v;11age r, `ti ~ ,i . ~•c. ~ ,
'...,V .
1~ , 1
F.,..• ~
~ - . . : . ~
3 Tischlefflise
: MO311:
5 -1-5
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Lower Fees in Core Area
Development of attached housing units, hotels, and commercial buildings (e.g.
restaurants and retail shops) in the core area will facilitate pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit use, thus requiring less vehicular traveL In recognition of lower vehicular travel
demand in the core area, proposed transportation impact fees are lower in the core area.
Current and Proposed Transportation Fees
Figure 2 provides a comparison of current and proposed transportation fees for new
development in the Town of Vail. Current amounts are shown with dark shading and
white numbers. Current fees in Vail are based on the net increase in PM Peak Hour
vehicle trip ends generated by the entire development, with mitigation limited to
certain areas and reductions given for multi-modal travel. The Town currently assesses
transportation-related mitigation fees (see Vail code section in the footnotel). This
requirement is specific to certain zone districts and does not provide a codified fee
schedule. The current fees are determined and agreed upon by the Town and
developers during the development entitlement process.
Proposed fees are shown with light shading and black numbers in the table below. For
consistency with a national impact fee survey, the fee amount for a single family house
assumes construction of a three bedroom unit or approximately 2,000 square feet of
heated floor area. Fee amounts for nonresidential development are expressed per
thousand square feet of floor area.
112-7A,H,I,J: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS: Property owners/developers shall also be
responsible for mitigating direct impacts of their development on public infrastructure and in all cases
mitigation shall bear a reasonable relation to the development impacts. Impacts may be determined based
on reports prepared by qualified consultants. The extent of mitigation and public amenity improvements
shall be balanced with the goals of redevelopment and will be determined by the planning and
environmental commission in review of development projects and conditional use permits. Substantial
off site impacts may include, but are not limited to, the following: deed restricted employee housing,
roadway improvements, pedestrian walkway improvements, streetscape improvements, stream
tract/bank restoration, loading/delivery, public art improvements, and similar improvements. The intent
of this section is to only require mitigation for large scale redevelopment/development projects which
produce substantial off site impacts. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
4 Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5-1-6
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Figure 2- Road Impact Fee Comparison
Per Hrnisrncy Unrf Per. 1, 000 ,S1 FI
Srrgle FaIrulv Miltrfun~rly Relcarl O/Jrce
Natioiial Avcragc S3,077 52,096 55,327 53381
Incorporatcd Arcas in Colorado
Durango 52,169 51,298 53.810 52,823
Ft Collins S2,792 S1,804 S8,534 S3,067
Vail cLurcnt* ',1 1 ' '
Proposcd in Corc Arca of Vail 55,890 $4,038 59,420 S4,200
ProposcdOtasidcCorcArca 55,890 S5,048 520,360 S4,200
Countics in C olorado
AdainsCo. S1,599 S983 S2,131 S1,178
FaglcCo. S1,W0 51,109 S4,923 51,887
Jcffcrson Co. 52,591 S2,155 S5,630 S3,790
LxulicrCo. 52,913 52,044 55,870 52,408
McsaCo. 51,589 51,100 S2.448 S1,005
Pitkin current S5,664 53,505 S10,064 S31921
Pitkinproposcd S6.520 54,760 510,150 S3.770
Wcld Co. S1,987 S1,377 S1,024 S2,430
Soiure.• Dala for a// /oculroiis e.vcepf Var/ and Prl/zrn Coui7tv Jrom I crtroiia/ Inipact Fee
Sw-vei - Iv Duncan Assocratrons (2008). Srngle Fanuh' nssirnres 2, 000sqainwfeet or
thwe beclr-oonis. 1 onresrdefitral fees per-thouscind squade feet assunie a burldhig wrth
100, 0(X) sqiiar-e Jeet of floor-ar'ea.
* Czronnt fees rn Vail ar-e based orr the net nccrease rn PMPeak Hoza- vehrcle trrp ehd.s
genernted b,v the entrre developmeNt, wrth nutrgntroh lrnrited to cer•tarn areas and
r-eductron.s ginen forniultr-modul tr-anel. Tou7istuffproi,rded the uner-age mrtrgutron fees
czrr-rentlv collected.
5 Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5 -1-7
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Basic steps in a conceptual impact fee formula are illustrated below (see Figure 3). The
first step (see the left part of the equation) is to determine an appropriate demand
indicator, for a particular type of infrastructure. The demand indicator measures the
number of demand units for each unit of development. For example, an appropriate
indicator of the demand for roads is vehicle trips. The second step in the conceptual
impact fee formula is shown in the middle section of the equation. Infrastructure units
per demand unit are typically called Level-Of-Service (LOS) or infrastructure standards.
Road impact fee studies for suburban communities often establish a relationship
between lane miles and vehicle miles of travel (note: a lane mile is a rectangular area of
pavement one lane wide and one mile long). Because the Town of Vail has a more
compact, urban development pattern, multi-modal transportation improvements were
identified in a recently approved Transportation Master Plan. In essence, the Town of
Vail has combined the second and third step in the conceptual impact fee formula (see
the right side of the equation below). The cost of growth-related transportation
improvements was allocated to the expected increase in vehicle trips.
Figure 3- Conceptual Impact Fee Formula
Demand Infrastructure Dollars
Units Units
per per per
Development Demand Infrastructure
Unit Unit Unit
When applied to specific types of infrastructure, the conceptual impact-fee formula is
customized using three common impact fee methods that focus on different timeframes.
The first method is the cost recovery method. To the extent that new growth and
development is served by previously constructed improvements, local government may
seek reimbursement for the previously incurred public facility costs. This method is
used for facilities that have adequate capacity to accommodate new development, at
least for the next five years. The rationale for the cost recovery approach is that new
development is paying for its share of the useful life or remaining capacity of an
existing facility that was constructed in anticipation of additional development. The
6 Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5-1-8
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
second basic approach used to calculate impact fees is the incremental expansion cost
method. This method documents the current infrastructure standard for each type of
public facility in both quantitative and qualitative measures. The local government uses
impact fee revenue to incrementally expand infrastructure as needed to accommodate
new development. A third impact fee approach is the plan-based method. This method
is best suited for public facilities that have commonly accepted engineering/planning
standards or specific capital improvement plans. Proposed transportation impact fees
for the Town of Vail are derived using a plan-based method.
Trip Generation
Transportation models and traffic studies for individual development projects typically
use average weekday or afternoon, peak-hour trips, with estimated travel assigned to
specific routes. The need for transportation improvements in Vail was determined
through the Transportation Master Plan process using an extensive engineering
analysis. In contrast to the engineering analysis, the impact fee methodology is
essentially an accounting exercise whereby the cost of growth-related system
improvements is paid by new development within the Town of Vail. For the purpose of
impact fees, trip generation is based on attraction (inbound) trips to development
located in the Town of Vail. This approach eliminates the need for adjustments to
account for pass-through trips (i.e. external-external travel) and trips to destinations
outside Vail (i.e. internal-external travel).
One of the major trip destinations in Vail is the base of the ski mountain. In addition to
people working in Town and those staying over night, the ski mountain draws
thousands of 'day skiers' that typically leave their vehicles in a parking garage while in
Town. Because parking structures are ancillary uses, impact fees are typically not
imposed on the floor area of a garage, but the floor area of nearby development that
actually attracts people to the area. Given this practice, future growth of 'day skiers'
will not be directly accounted for in the development projections shown in Figure 4.
However, the Town and Vail Resorts have agreed the maximum skiers at one time that
can be handled by the Town's infrastructure is 19,900, as specified in the agreement
titled "Town of Vail & Vail Associates, Inc. Program to Manage Peak Periods."
Therefore, if the maximum skiers at one time agreement is increased, or if lift capacity is
increased without a significant increase in nonresidential buildings, a traffic impact fee
for additional day skiers should be contemplated.
7 Tischlefflise
: C2O311: , Pij,,
5-1-9
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Vehicle Trips to Development in the Town of Vail
The relationship between the amount of new development anticipated within Vail and
the projected increase in vehicle trips is shown in Figure 4. Expected development in
Vail is based on trends within the Town, Eagle County, and the state of Colorado. The
projected increase in development and afternoon, peak-hour trips are consistent with
Appendix E in Vail's Transportation Master Plan (FHU 2009) and the development stats
database, maintained by Town staff. Although the specific year is not important to the
analysis, the net increase in development is expected to occur by the year 2025. A faster
pace of development would accelerate the collection of impact fees and the construction
of planned improvements. Conversely, slower development would reduce fee revenue
and delay the construction of capital improvements.
Figure 4- Summary of Projected Travel Demand
De1"e1opn7ent Addrtronal Inbound Additronn/
Tvpe Developmenl Tr rpRatepeiIn[biind
Unrts (2) Development Trips
Unrt (3 Attachcd Housing
Units in Corc Arca 1,275 0.24 306
Attachcd Housing
Units Outsidc Corc 878 0.30 263
Dctachcd Housing
Units 247 0.64 158
Hotcl Rooms in Com
ArLa 598 0.24 144
Hotcl Rooms Outsidc
Coil~ 212 0.30 64
Connncrcial KSF in
Coi-e Arca (1) 389 0.56 218
C onnncrcial I{SF
Chats idc Corc (1) 83 1.21 100
(?fficc KSF (1) 54 0.25 14
Othcr Scrviccs
KSF (1) 160 0.40 64
TOTAL 1,331
(1) KSF= square feet of Jloor urea rn thozrsnnds.
(2) Appcndi.r E, Varl Tiunsportcrtron Mcn ter- Plari
(FHUZO09) and Town stc/J(08/09).
(3) Trrpgeneratronrules ureJi-orn Appendr.z E
Unrl Trurrspor fatron M61ster Plan, e.t-cept &tached
housrngandcoirmiercialozrtsidecor-earea. These
ai-e der-i i~ed fr-om ITE fornnilas and dcata.
g Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5 -1-10
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Transportation Impact Fee System Improvements
Transportation system improvements to be funded by impact fees are shown in Figure
5. Specific projects were identified in the Transportation Master Plan for the Town of
Vail (Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig 2009). Road sections listed below will be constructed as
"complete streets" with bus, bicycle, and pedestrians improvements. Town staff
prepared the planning-level cost estimates and identified the growth share of projects
that will be funded with impact fees.
The total cost of transportation improvements needed to accommodate new
development through 2025 is estimated to be approximately $134 million in current
dollars (not inflated over time). Approximately 48% of the total transportation
infrastructure cost is for structured parking, a transit center, and additional buses, but
impact fees will not fund these improvements. Funding from non-impact fee sources,
such as the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Real Estate Transfer Tax
(RETT), the Town of Vail General Fund, and development agreements, will cover
approximately $111.6 million of the total cost. The growth share of improvements to be
funded by impact fees is $22.4 million (-17% of the total).
9 Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5-1-11
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Figure 5- Summary of Transportation Improvements and Growth Share
Tofal Other Firndin- Grrnvfh Share
Ty/ae Descripfion Cosf (1) (Z) Funrled by
Inzprrcf Fees
Parldng and Transit Parlcing shuctures, natLsit ccntcr, 000,000 564,000,000 SO
and additional buscs
Roads iu Scc I N Frontagc - Arosa to WV S800,000 5800,(b0 SO
Roundabout
Roads in Scc II N Frontagc - WV Roundabout to S4,300,000 54,300,000 SO
Zcrmatt Ln
N Frontagc - Zcmatt Ii1 to S imba
Roads in Scc III 53,300,000 53300,000 SO
RLm
RoadS in Scc IV SimbaRiu7 Undcrpass 519,500,000 S4,500,000 S 15,000,000
S Frontagc - DJ Path to WV
Roads in Scc V S5,300,000 S5300,000 SO
Rouixlabout
Roads in Scc VI S Froiitagc - WV Rouixlabout to S2 800,000 S2,800000 SO
Simba
Roads in Scc VII S Frontagc - Simba to Strata S4,500,000 54,500,000 SO
N Frontagc - Simba nu1 to MV
Roads in Scc VIII S2,800,000 52,800,000 SO
Roiuidabout
Roads in Scc IX 1Vbin Vail Roimdabout S3,000,000 51,000,000 52,600,04)
S Frontagc - Shatato East LH
Roads in Scc X ~lc S2,`~0,000 5500,000 52,400,000
Li
Roads Scc XI S Frontagc - E LH Circlc to MV Sg 300,000 56,300,000 52,000,000
Roundabout
Roads Scc XII S Frontagc - MV Roundabout to 52 800,000 52,400,000 S400,0(l0
Vail Vall cy Dr
RoadS Scc XIII S Frontagc - Vail Vallcy Dr to Ford S2 qp0,000 52,900,000 SO
ParI<
Roads Scc XIV Frontagc Rd - FordParkto E Vail S6,200,000 S6,200,000 s0
TOTAL S134,(b0,000 5111,600.000 S22,400.000
Nct Incrcasc in PMPcakAttraction Trips (inboiuld) 1,331
Cost pcr Additional PM Pca1c Trip (inbouiicl) S 16,829
(1) Co.stand fiandh~g dntaftonr Vnrl Pub/rc Wodks. (2) Otherfimdhng hnclardes Toitn oJiI'crr! Capr[al
Bzidgel, RE77; TIFF, developnzent reqaiired rniprovennents, and CDOT.
Credit for Other Revenues
A general requirement that is common to impact fee methodologies is the evaluation of
credits. A revenue credit may be necessary to avoid potential double payment
situations arising from the one-time payment of an impact fee plus other revenue
payments that may also fund growth-related capital improvements. The determination
of credits is dependent upon the impact fee methodology used in the cost analysis.
Vail's transportation impact fees are derived using a plan-based method. This method
is based on future capital improvements needed to accommodate new development.
10 Tischlefflise
: MO311: , ,
5-1-12
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Given the plan-based approach, the credit evaluation focuses on the need for future
bonds and revenues that will fund planned capital improvements. If the Town bond
finances a major project, such as the Simba Run underpass, a revenue credit might be
necessary if future principal payments are paid from development-related revenue
sources. Payments from broad-based revenues, such as sales and resort taxes, would
not require a revenue credit.
Some impact fee studies include a credit for gas taxes and/or General Fund revenue. A
credit for future revenue generated by new development is only necessary if there is
potential double payment for system improvements. In the Town of Vail,
transportation impact fees are derived from the growth-related cost of system
improvements, not the total cost of capital improvements. Impact fee revenue will be
used exclusively for the growth share of improvements listed in Figure 5. Other, non-
impact fee funds, such as RETT and gas tax revenue, will be used for maintenance of
existing facilities, correcting existing deficiencies and for making improvements on
roads not listed in the transportation CIP. Based on expected development in Vail (see
Figure 8), future impact fee revenue matches the growth-related cost of planned system
improvements (approximately $22.4 million). If elected officials in Vail make a
legislative policy decision to fully fund the growth share of system improvements from
impact fees, a credit for other revenue sources is unnecessary.
Transportation Impact Fee Formula and Input Variables
Input variables for the transportation impact fee are shown in Figure 6. Inbound trips
by type of development are multiplied by the net capital cost per trip to yield the
transportation impact fees. For example, the transportation impact fee formula for an
attached residential unit in the core area is 0.24 x 16,829 =$4,038 (truncated) per housing
unit. Because the core area of Vail has a walkable, urban development pattern, impact
fees for attached housing, hotel rooms, and commercial buildings are lower in the core
area as supported by the engineering analysis in the adopted Transportation Master
Plan (FHU 2009). Trip generation rates are from the Transportation Master Plan, except
for two development types. Inbound trips, by heated floor area of detached housing, is
documented in Appendix A. The trip rate for commercial development outside the core
area is from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).2
z See Trip Generation (2008), for land use code 820. During the afternoon peak hour, the average
shopping center generates 3.73 trip ends, with 49% entering. Also, 34% of trips to the average shopping
center are pass-by trips that do not add travel to the adjacent road (see Trip Generation Handbook, ITE
11 TISGhieffli5e
: C2O311:
5 -1-13
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Figure 6- Transportation Impact Fee Input Variables
PMPeak Vehicle Trips ~ . Inba►nd
k-N rdentra! (per HrnirNg Unrt) Minunum MaYii~m Trips
Attachcd in Corc A~a a11 sizcs 0.24
Attachcd Outsidc C'orc all sizcs 0.30
Dctachcd 0 2,099 0.35
Dctachcd 2,100 2,299 0.39
Dctachcd 2.300 2,499 0.43
Dctachcd 2,500 2,699 0.47
Dctachcd 2.700 2.899 0.50
Dctachcd 2.900 3.099 0.53
Dctachcd 3,100 3,299 0S6
Dctachcd 3,300 3,499 0.59
Dctachcd 3,500 3,699 0.61
Dctachcd 3,700 3,899 0.64
Dctachcd 3,900 4,099 0.66
Dctachcd 4,100 4,299 0.68
Dctachcd 4,300 4,499 0.70
Dctachcd 4.500 4.699 0.72
Dctachcd 4,700 4,899 0.74
Dctachcd 4.900 5,099 0.76
Dctachcd 5,100 5,299 0.78
Dctachcd 5,300 5,499 0.79
Dctachcd 5,500 5,699 0.81
Dctachcd 5,700 5,899 0.82
Dctachcd 5,900 6,099 0.84
Dctachcd 6.100 6,299 0.85
Dctachcd 6,300 or norc 0.87
Hofe! (per room)
Hotcl in Core Arca 0.24
Hotcl Ounidc Corc 0.30
I onr-esrdentra! (per 1,000 Sq Ff oJ floor (ir-ea)
Comn-urcial in Core Arca 0.56
Comnurcial Outsidc Corc 1.21
C1Ffi cc 0.25
Othcr Scrviccs 0.40
Iqf'rastrucfureSfanrlarrls
Cost pcr Trip 516,829
Rcvcnuc Crcdit Pcr Trip SO
2004). The remaining 66% of the attraction trips are reasonably assigned to the average shopping center.
Multiplying these three factors (3.73 x 0.49 x 0.66) yields 1.21 inbound trips during the afternoon peak
hour.
12 TISChieI'iBiSe
. I2VJ1 1.
5 -1-14
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Maximum Supportable Transportation Impact Fees
The input variables discussed above yield the maximum supportable impact fees shown
in Figure 7. Fees for most types of nonresidential development are listed per square
foot of floor area. At the bottom of the table are some nonresidential development
types that have unique demand indicators. For example, the impact fee for lodging is
based on the number of rooms.
Figure 7- Transportation Impact Fee Schedule
Maximuni Trrrnsp(rfcdion Iirrprrcf Fee
ResrdeNtrnl (pci- hoarsrngirnit) Minimum Sq Ft MLLximtnnSqFt
Attachcdin Corc Aic-a all sizcs 54.038
Attachcd Outsidc Corc al1 sizcs S5,048
Dctachcd 0 2,099 55,890
DLtached 2,100 2299 S6,563
Dctachcd 2,300 2,499 S7,236
Dctachcd 2,500 2,699 S7,~X)9
Dctachcd 2,700 2,899 S8,414
Dctachcd 2,900 3,099 S8,919
DLtached 3,100 3?99 59,424
DLtached 3,300 3,499 S9,929
DLtached 3,500 3,699 S 10,265
DLtached 3,700 3,899 S10,770
Dctachcd 3,900 4,099 S 11,107
Dctachcd 4,100 4299 SI l,q43
Dctachcd 4,300 4,499 511,780
Dctachccl 4,500 4,699 S 12,116
Dctachccl 4,700 4,899 S 12,453
Dctachccl 4,900 5,099 512,790
DLtached 5,100 5,299 S 13,126
DLtached 5300 5,499 513,294
DLtached 5,500 5,699 S 13,631
Dctachcd 5,700 5,899 S13,799
Dctachcd 5,900 6,099 S 14,136
Dctachcd 6,100 6,299 S 14,304
Dctachcd 6,300 or imrc S 14,E41
HOI~~ (pL'i' 1'00171)
Hotcl in Cow Arca S4,038
Hotcl Outsidc Corc S5.(k48
I onresrdential (pei- sqiicn-eJoot oJJloor aren)
Comiwrcial in Core Arca 59.42
Comirercial (hitsidc Corc S20.36
C1ffi cc S4.20
Othcr S crviccs S6J3
13 Tischlefflise
: C2O311:
5-1-15
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Funding Strategy for Transportation System Improvements
Projected revenues essentially match the growth share of the capital improvements plan
for transportation (i.e. cumulative total of $22.4 million). Impact fee revenue can be
accumulated over several years to construct major projects, such as the Simba Run
underpass. The percentage of total impact fee revenue expected from each
development type is shown below in the right column. New housing units in Vail will
generate approximately 54.7% of the transportation impact fee revenue. New hotels
will generate approximately 15.6%, while other types of nonresidential development
will yield approximately 29.7% of projected revenue.
Revenue projections shown below assume implementation of the maximum
supportable transportation impact fee. To the extent the rate of development either
accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the impact fee
revenue.
Figure 8- Impact Fee Revenue Projection
DewloprieNt Addrtrona/ ProposedFee Projected Percmt oJType Developnent perDenelopnient Revehue Totul
Unrt.s (Z) UNrt br7111 c! Fees
Attachcd Housiiig
Uiuts in Corc Arca 1,275 54,038 55,148,000 23.0°/
Attachcd Housing
Units OutsidcCorc 878 S5.(}48 S4,432.0(x) 19.8°/
Connncrcial KSF in
Coi-c Arca (1) 389 S9,420 S3,664,000 16.4°/
Dctachcd Housuig
Units 247 510,770 S2,600,000 11.9%
Hotcl Rooms in Core
Aiea 598 S4,038 52,415,000 10.8%
Connncrcial KSF
ChitsidcCorc(1) 83 S20,360 S1,690,000 7.6°/
Othcr Scrviccs
KSF(1) 160 S6,730 S1,077,000 4.8°/
Hotc1 Rooms Chitsidc
Core 212 S5,048 51,070,000 4.8°/
Otticc KSF (1) 54 54,200 5227,000 1.00
TOTAL S22,383,000
(1) KSF= sguare feet of Jloor areu hn thousands.
(2) Appendix E, Varl Trcnv.sporlalroh Mu.ster Plah
(FKU 2009) and Trni °yr stafJ(08/09).
14 Tischlefflise
: MO311: , ,
5-1-16
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION
Although the Town of Vail only expects a few detached housing units to be constructed
each year, TischlerBise recommends a fee schedule whereby larger units pay higher
transportation impact fees. Benefits of the proposed methodology include: 1)
proportionate assessment of infrastructure demand using local demographic data; 2)
progressive fee structure (i.e. smaller units pay less and larger units pay more); and 3)
more affordable fees for workforce housing.
Credits and Reimbursements
Specific policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer
reimbursements will be addressed in the ordinance that establishes the transportation
impact fees. Project-level improvements, normally required as part of the development
approval process, are not eligible for credits against impact fees. If a developer
constructs a system improvement (see the impact fee funded improvements listed in
Figure 5), it will be necessary to either reimburse the developer or provide a credit
against the fees in the area benefiting from the system improvement. The latter option
is more difficult to administer because it creates unique fees for specific geographic
areas. Based on TischlerBise's experience, it is better for the Town to establish a
reimbursement agreement with the developer that constructs a system improvement.
The reimbursement agreement should be limited to a payback period of no more than
ten years and the Town should not pay interest on the outstanding balance. The
developer must provide sufficient documentation of the actual cost incurred for the
system improvement. The Town should only agree to pay the lesser of the actual
construction cost or the estimated cost used in the impact fee analysis. If the Town pays
more than the cost used in the fee analysis, there will be insufficient fee revenue.
Reimbursement agreements should only obligate the Town to reimburse developers
annually according to actual fee collections from the benefiting area. In the future, if the
Town adds other types of impact fees, site specific credits or developer reimbursements
for one type of system improvement does not negate payment of impact fees for other
types of infrastructure.
Development Categories
The development categories listed in the impact fee schedules will cover a majority of
the new construction anticipated within Vail. For unique developments, the Town may
allow or require documentation of reasonable demand indicators to facilitate an impact
fee determination, consistent with the methodologies and factors documented in this
report.
15 Tischlefflise
: C2O311: , ,
5-1-17
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Even though churches are a common type of development, they do not have a specific
impact fee category due to a lack of sufficient data. For churches and any other atypical
development, staff must establish a consistent administrative process to reasonably
treat similar developments in a similar way. When presented with a development type
that does not match one of the development categories in the published fee schedule,
the first option is to look in the ITE trip generation book to see if there is land use
category with valid trip rates that match the proposed development. The second option
is to determine the published category that is most like the proposed development.
Churches without daycare or schools are basically an office area (used throughout the
week) with a large auditorium and class space (used periodically during the week).
Some jurisdictions make a policy decision to impose impact fees on churches based on
the fee schedule for warehouses or mini-warehouses. The rationale for this policy is the
finding that churches are large buildings that generate little weekday traffic and only
have a few full time employees. A third option is to impose impact fees on churches by
breaking down the building floor area into its primary use. For example, a church with
25,000 square feet of floor area may have 2,000 square feet of office space used by
employees throughout the week. At a minimum, impact fees could be imposed on the
office floor area. An additional impact fee amount could be imposed for the remainder
of the building based on the rate for a warehouse or mini-warehouse.
The key consideration in administrative decisions is to be reasonable and consistent. If
an applicant thinks the administrative decision is not reasonable, it is appealed to the
elected officials for their consideration.
16 Tischlefflise
: MO311:
5-1-18
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
APPENDIX A - DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
In this Appendix, TischlerBise documents the demographic data used to derive trip
rates by size of detached housing. In the Town of Vail, the fiscal year begins on January
15t. Impact fees are calibrated using 2009 as the base year and 2010 as the first projection
year.
Demographic Data by Type of Housing
Figure A1 provides population and housing characteristics in Vail according to the 2000
census. Vail had 5,389 housing units at the time of the 2000 census. According to the
Census Bureau, a household is housing unit occupied by a year-round resident on April
1st (i.e. the census date). Approximately 40% of the housing units in Vail are occupied
by year-round residents, with roughly 60% of the housing stock considered to be
seasonal units. Detached units include both stick-built and manufactured housing
(shown with yellow shading below). Single family attached units, commonly known as
townhouses, are considered to be attached housing for the purpose of transportation
impact fees (shown with light grey shading below).
Figure A1- Persons per Household
Year-Round Population by Type of Housing
Town of Vail, Colorado
U«its in Rerrfer & Orvner lloizsiilg Vacanet°
Stivcnuc Pcrsons Houscholds PPH* Uynts Rate
1-Detached 843 361 234 648 44.3°/
Mobile Homes 17 4 4?5 4 0.0%
1-Attached(Tovnillousc) 959 401 239 973 58.8%
Two (DiIP1ex) 328 181 1.81 256 29.3%
3 or 4 678 334 2.03 664 49.7%
5 to 9 665 323 2.06 867 62J°/
10 to 19 399 229 1.74 797 71.3°/
20 to 49 502 276 1.82 811 66.0°/
50 or more 96 46 2.09 366 87.40/(
Total SF3 Sauiplc Data 4,487 2,155 2.08 5,386 60.0°/
~
Gerreral House T1pe Laenaographics lloir.sin~
Pcrsons Households PPW` Urirt.s Hsg Mix
Dctachcd 860 365 236 652 L°/
Attached 3,627 1,790 2.03 4,734 88°/
Group Quartcrs 13
Sanplc Diflerence 31 10 3
TOTn1. 4,531 2,165 5,389
.Source: U.S. Cejisiis I3iiicaii, 20)0 clata
x Perwr7spel •Iloieseliold
17 TisChlefflise
: C2O311:
5-1-19
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Trip Generation by Type and Size of Housing
As an alternative to simply using the average trip generation rate for residential
development, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes regression curve
formulas that may be used to derive custom trip generation rates using local
demographic data Key independent variables needed for the analysis (i.e. vehicles
available, housing units, households and persons) are available from the U.S. Census
Bureau's website. TischlerBise used Census 2000 data for Vail to derive custom trip
generation rates by type of housing, as shown in Figure A2. A vehicle trip end
represents a vehicle either entering or exiting a development, as if a traffic counter were
placed across a driveway. To calculate transportation impact fees, trip generation rates
are adjusted to avoid double counting each trip at both the origin and destination
points. Therefore, the basic trip adjustment factor is 50% unless traffic studies provide
specific data on inbound vs. outbound travel. According to ITE, the national average
for detached housing is 66% inbound trips during the afternoon peak hour. The
average size detached unit in Vail is expected to attract 0.64 inbound trips (0.97 trip
ends multiplied by 66%).
Figure A2 - Residential Trip Generation Rates by Type of Housing
Vail, COIOPadO Households (Z) llehrcle.sper
ilehrdes Detcuhed Attached Tolal Hoitsehold
Avarlable (1) Housrn- HoiisrnfZ lry Tenia-e
Owncr-occupi cd 2,114 316 820 1,136 1.86
Rcntcr-occupicd 1,752 49 970 1,019 1.72
TOTAL 3,866 365 1,790 2,155 1.79
17% 83%
Persons Ti-rl) Vehrcles li, Tr- rp Average Tr-ip Ehd.s per-
(3) Ends (4) Tv-pe of Hoiasrng Ends (S) Trrp Eiids Hoiisehold
Dctachcd HotLsii-ig 860 247 672 458 352 0.97
Attachcd Housing 3,627 652 3,194 708 680 0.38
TOTAL 4,487 898 3,806 1,166 1,032 0.48
(1) Vchiclcs availablc by tcnure from Tabl c H40, SF3, Cciisus 2000.
(2) Houscholds by tcrnuc and iniits in sh•ucttnc fromtablc H32, SF3, Ccnsus 2(100.
(3) Pcrsons by tmits in structurc frointablc FLi3. SF3, Ccnsus 2000.
(4) Vchiclc trips cnds bascd on pcrsons using formulas frrnn Trip Gcncration (ITE2008). For dctachcd housing (TTE
210), fittcd curvc cquation is EXI'(0.85*LN(pcrsons)-0.34). To fit withul thc data raugc of thc ITE studics, thc numbcr
of pcrsons was dividcd by 2 and thc cquation tCsult mLdtiplicd by 2. Por attachcd housing ( ITE 230), fittcd curvc
cquation is (0.17*pcncros)-35.30.
(5) Vchiclc trip cnds bascd on vchiclcs availabl c using fomiul as from Trip Gcncration ( ITE 2008). For dctachccl
housing(ITE 210), fittcd cLirvc cquation is EXI'(0.92*IN(vchiclcs)+0.05). To fit within thc data rangc of thc ITE
studics, fllcntanbcr ofvchiclcs availablc was dividcd by 3 aiici thc cquation resu1t multiplicdby 3. For attachcdhousing
(ITE 230), fittcd curvc cqttati(il is (0.21 *vchiclcs)+36.97.
18 Tischlefflise
: MO311:
5-1-20
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Custom tabulations of demographic data by bedroom range may be created from
individual survey responses provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, using files known as
Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS). Because PUMS data are only available for areas
of roughly 100,000 persons, Eagle County is grouped together with Grand, Summit,
Lake, Pitkin, Gunnison, Ouray, Hinsdale, and Mineral County (i.e. Public Use
Microdata Area 00700). As shown in Figure A3, TischlerBise derived trip generation
rates for detached housing, by bedroom range, based on the number of persons and
vehicles available. According to the County Assessor's parcel database, detached
housing in Vail is larger than the normal, with "small" units having three bedrooms,
°medium" units having four bedrooms, and "large" units having five or more
bedrooms, which is the upper limit for Census Bureau data. The far-right column
indicates inbound, afternoon peak hour vehicle trips by bedroom range, assuming 66%
of trip ends are inbound (national average for ITE 210).
Figure A3 - PM Peak Hour Vehicle Attraction Trips by Size of Detached House
V4 COIOTadO RecommeNrled
BedroonasIx,r- Persohs Tr-rp iIMrcles Trip AverUge House- TrrpEndsper InbouNd
Detached Uiirt (I) Ehd.s (Z) Avurluble (I) End.s (_3) Tr-r Ends hold.s (I) Household Trrps (4)
T'Ircc or Icss 1,323 320 1,222 769 545 589 0.93 0.46
Four 479 135 442 302 219 169 1.30 0.E4
Fivc or nwrc 150 50 145 108 79 47 1.68 0.83
Dctactlcd Subtotal 1,952 505 1,809 1,179 843 805 1.05
Attachcd Subtotal 817 630 397
GRAND TOTAL 2,769 2,439 1,202
(1) Amcncan Conuluuliry Stuvcy, Public Usc Microdata Samplc for Colorado PUMA 00700 (imwciL
Jitcd data far 2005-2007).
(2) Vchiclc trips cilds bascd on pcrsons using formulas frrnn Trip Gcncration (ITE 2008). For dctachcd housing (ITE 210), fittcd
cLu-vc cqLiation is EXI'(0.85*LN(pctsons)+0.34).
(3) Vchiclc hip cnds bascd on vchiclcs availablc usulg foi7l-tilas finin Trip Gcncration (ITE 2008). For dctachcdhousing (ITE 210),
fittcd curvc cquation is EXI'(0.92'kLN(vchiclcs)+0.05). To aplyoxunatc thc avcragc nianbcr of vchiclcs iu thc TTE studics, vchiclcs
wcrc dividcd by 2 and thc cquation result mulriplicd by 2.
(4) Rcconuncndcd ullound nips, by bcdroomrangc u•c rcduccd to irnkc inbound tnps for a mid-sizc dctachcd unit, dcrivcd finm ACS
PUMS data, match thc avcragc tiip gcncration ratc dcn vcd from CciLSus 2000 Siuluriiry Filc 3 data for thc Town of Vail. According to
ITE, 60% of trip cnds arc inbound.
19 Tischlefflise
: C2O311: , ,
5-1-21
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Trip Generation by Floor Area of Detached Housing
To derive afternoon peak hour inbound trips by square feet of detached housing,
TischlerBise combined demographic data from the Census Bureau (discussed above)
and detached house size data from the County Assessor's parcel database. The number
of bedrooms per housing unit is the common connection between the two databases. In
Vail, the average size detached housing unit with three or less bedrooms has 2,441
square feet of floor area. The average size of a four bedroom unit is 3,698 square feet of
floor area. Detached housing units with five or more bedrooms average 5,706 square
feet of floor area.
Average floor area and number of inbound trips by bedroom range are plotted in
Figure A4, with a logarithmic trend line derived from the three actual averages in the
Town of Vail. TischlerBise used the trend line formula to derive estimated average
afternoon, peak-hour, inbound trips by size of detached housing unit, in 200 square feet
intervals. Square feet measures heated floor area (excluding garages, etc).
Based on the size of detached housing units in Vail, TischlerBise recommends limiting
transportation impact fees for detached housing to the floor area range shown below.
In other words, a detached house with 2,099 or less square feet would pay a
transportation impact fee based on 0.35 inbound vehicle trips. Likewise, detached units
with 6,300 or more square feet of heated space would pay a maximum transportation
impact fee based on 0.87 inbound vehicle trips.
20 Tischlefflise
: MO311:
5-1-22
Transportation Impact Fee Vail, Colorado
Figure A4 - PM Peak Hour Inbound Trips by Square Feet
Vail, Colorado
Acti
uzl Averag~s
Sour~ce.• Ti~i~s !)v l~edroorrr rar~ge
/i-onnACSPLM rSdutu Floorurea Bedr-oonas Sc/uare Feel Inhozrnd Trrps Squure Ir7hozmd
Feet Ti~r zs
(heuted squcrs-eJeet) fr-ar~ County -nircc or lcss 2,441 0.4E 2,099 or Icss 0.35
Asse.ssor~/~ar~cel dntahuse..
Four 3,698 0.6 2,100 0.39
Fivc ormo~ 5,706 0.83 2,300 0.43
2,500 0.47
PMPeak Hour Inboimd VehicleTrips per Housin; Unit 2~7(X) 0•50
2,900 0.53
1.00 3,100 0.56
3,3(0 0.59
0.90 ~ 3,500 0.61
0.80 3,7(X) 0.64
OJO ~ 3,900 0.66
~ 0.60 4,1(x) 0.68
0.50 4,300 OJO
~ ~
H 0.40 4,500 0.72
4,700 0.74
0.30 y = 0.4358Ln(x) - 2.9394
4,900 0.76
020 R~ = 1 5,100 0.78
010 ~ 5,300 0.79
0.00 5,500 0.81
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 5~7(X) 0•82
Squarc Fcct 5,9(X) 0.84
6,100 0.85
6,300 or morc 0.87
21 TISChieffli5e
: MO311:
5-1-23
Transportation Impact Fee Study
Vail, Colorado
.
Tischle Fiscal, Economic & Plann_ise
~ng Consultants
_ - ~
09/01 /09
www.tischlerbise.com
800-424-4318
C2CB11:
?-'_-1
. r•
. . ~
TischierBise
. . . ~
• National practice
. . , . . . • Specialize in impact fees (over 600) . • Comprehensive fiscal ~
evaluations (over 500) '
• Infrastructure needs
• Revenue strategies
• Utility rate studies • Dwayne Pierce Guthrie, Ph.D., AICP
• Public and private - Doctorate in Planning, Governance,
sector experience and Globalization from Virginia Tech
(2007)
- Member, American Institute of
Certified Planners
- 30 years of planning experience
- Impact fee studies for approximately
120 jurisdictions in 25 states
: (2(811: TSChleI'Bi5f.'
5 L
Why Impact Fees?
• Minimizes externalities like traffic congestion
• Provides a market-oriented solution that
achieves a more efficient production level
- Creates a connection between private sector
development and the demand for public facilities
- Decreases infrastructure subsidies from broad-
based revenues
• Adequate infrastructure alleviates NIMBY
and BANANA concerns
Build Absolutely Nothing
: Anywhere Near Anybody TischlerBise
5 3
Impact Fee Ground Rules
• Comply with requirements of applicable court
decisions and State enabling legislation
• Not a revenue raising mechanism but a way to
help pay for growth-related infrastructure (need)
• Fee payers must receive a benefit
- Accounting and expenditure controls
- Timing of improvements
- Geographic service areas
• One-time fee covers new development's
proportionate share of capital costs for system
improvements
: (2(811: TSChleI'Bi5f.'
5 4
Colorado Impact Fee Act
• Fee schedules must be legislatively adopted
and generally applicable to a broad class of
property
• Local government shall quantify the
reasonable impacts of proposed development
on capital facilities
• A capital facility must have a useful life of five
years or longer
: (2(811: TSChleI'Bi5f.'
5-2-5
Vail's Current Mitigation Fee
• 12-7A,H,I,J: MITIGATION OF • CURRENT FEE
DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS:
STRUCTURE
Property owners/developers shall
also be responsible for mitigating
direct impacts of their development
on public infrastructure❑ $6500 per Net
Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) PM Peak Hour
§ 1) vehicular trip end
Substantial off site impacts may (entering and exiting)
include:
• Roadway improvements
• Pedestrian walkway improvements
• Streetscape improvements
• Loading/delivery❑
: (2(811: TSChieI'Bi5f.'
•
5-2-6
PerHozrsin~,, Unit Per 1,000 Sq Ft
Single Familv Mzrltifamilv Retail Office
ROad lmpaCt NationalAverage $3,077 $2,096 $5,327 $3,381
F~~ Incorporated Areas in Colorado
Durango $2,169 $1,298 $3,810 $2,823
Com~'la~'1S0n Ft. Collins $2,792 $1,804 $8,534 $3,067
Vail current` $1 $ $ 1 . •
Proposed ll1 Core Area of Vail $5,890 $4,038 $9,420 $4,200
Proposed Outside Core Area $5,890 $5,048 $20,360 $4,200
Counties in Colorado
Adams Co. $1,599 $983 $2,131 $1,178
Eagle Co. $1,600 $1,109 $4,923 $1,887
Jefferson Co. $2,591 $2,155 $5,630 $3,790
Laruner Co. $2,913 $2,044 $5,870 $2,408
Mesa Co. $1,589 $1,100 $2,448 $1,665
Pitlcin clirrent $5,664 $3,505 $10,064 $3,921
Pitlcin proposed $6,520 $4,760 $10,150 $3,770
Weld Co. $1,987 $1,377 $1,024 $2,430
Soiirce: Data f'or all loc°ations except Vail and Pitlcin Cozmtv f'rorn 1 ational
ImpactFee Szrrvev Uv Duncan Associations (2008). Sinole Farnilv assurrtes
2,000 sqzrare feet or three hedroorns. I onresidential fees per thozrsand sqzrare
f'eet assurne a buildinb with 100,000 syuare feet of'floor area.
* CurYent f'ees in llail are ba.sed on the net incf-ease in PMPeak Hozrr vehicle
trip ends gener°ated by the entire development, with rnitigation limited to
cer-tain at°eas and redirctions given formulti-niodal tt°avel. Town staff 'pf•ovided
522 FIgUr2 2 the avey°age rnitigation fees currentlv collected.
:(P(811: '
5-2-7
See Figure 1
rmap of Core Area
Va;! Core Area
West
Vail
East
Vaii JV f ~
.
I
,1.++
~ - ,
•ii`
J ~ ♦ j ~,~t~.r a _ . - l.7UExi1p778 ♦ .
eA~
~ ` '6'~ ~"1~,`.~ JL
10~
Ford Park
va% %
J
' I ,f ~!a'~ : ` ~ :'~~s "L`F~ ~I
trvnshead Village
VaiI Vrllage -
.
• ~ , " ~"i
•
5-2-8
Developmerrt Additiorral Irrboaind Additiorrcrl
Type Development Tril) Kate pe1- Inbourrd
Url its (1) Development Ti°ips
Projected Travel ~n~t
Attachcd Housing
Demand Units ul Corc Area 1,275 0.24 306
Attachcd Housing
Units Outsidc Core 878 030 263
Detachcd Housn7g
Units 247 0.64 158
Hotcl Rooms n7
Corc Arca 598 0.24 144
Hotcl Rooms
Outsidc Corc 212 0.30 64
Commercial KSF in
Corc Arca (3) 389 0.56 218
Comincrcial KSF
Outsidc Corc (3) 83 1.21 100
Office KSF (3) 54 0.25 14
Other Scivices
KSF (3) 160 0.40 64
TOTAL 1,331
(1) Appendix E, Vail Transpoy-tation Master Plan
(FHU2009) and Towrr stcrff'(08109).
(2) Ti-ip genercatiorr rates are fi-om Appendix E
Vail Tr-ansportcrtion Mastet-Plan, except detcrched
522 FIgUrG 4 hoatsing arrd commercial outside coy-e area. These
ay-e derived from ITE formirlas and duta.
~ (3) KSF = sqaiat-e feet offlool- cry-ecr in thousands. TISCh1B1$MSe
s-?-9
Growdi Share
Total Other
Tppe Descriptinn Fc~iaded bi'
Cost (1) Fzrfidii7g (2)
Impaet Fees
Parking aud Parldng shuctures, h-ansit S64,000,000 S64,000,000 SO
Growth- Transit ccntcr, and additional buscs
N Froutagc - Aros a to W V
Related Roads in Scc I S800,000 S800,000 SO
Roundabout
N Front3ge - W V Roimdabout
Roads in Scc II S4,300,000 S4,300,000 S0
CIP to Zcm~tt Ln
Roads in Sec III N Frontagc - Zcmatt Ln to S3,300,000 53,300,000 SO
Simba Run
Roads in Scc IV Sv1~ba Ruu Undcipass 519,500,000 54,500,000 S15,000,000
"'48% Of tOta l f01' Sha I'2C~ S Frontage - DJ Path to W V
Roads in Scc V S5,300,000 S5,300,000 S0
parking and transit xounaabo«r
Ca Ita l 1111 I"OV2111211tS Il0 S Frontagc - W V Rotmdabout
p p ~ Roads in Scc VI S2,500,000 S2,800,000 S0
funding from impact fees) ro suiiba
Roads in Scc VII S Frontagc - Sunba to Strata S4,500,000 S4,500,000 SO
Roads in Scc VIII N Frontagc - Sniiba run to MV S2 g00,000 S2,800,000 SO
Rouudabout
Roads in Scc 1X Maul Vail Rouudabout 53,600,000 S1,000,000 52,600,000
S Frontagc - Sh-ata to East LH
Roads in Sec X 52,900,000 S500,000 52,400,000
Road sections are Cll-`'`
Roads Scc XI S Frontagc - ELH Cu-clc to MV ~g 300,000 56,300,000 ~2,000,000
~~CoIYlplete StreetSRoundabout
S Froutagc - M V Roundabout ~2 g00,000 52,400,000 S400,000
W~t~ ~US, b~CyC~e, Roads Scc XII to Vail Vallcy Dr
a n d ped eStria n Roads Sec XIII S Frontagc - Vail Vallcy Dr to S2 g00,000 S2 900,000 '0
Ford Park
im p roVe m e nt5. Frontagc Rd - Ford Parl<to E
Roads Scc XIV S6,200,000 56,200,000 SO
Vail
TOTnL S134,000,000 S111,600,000 S22,400,000
Nct Ulcrcase v1 PM PcakAth-action Trips (inbouud) 1,331
See Figure 5 CostpcrAdditionalPMPeakTrip(inbound) 516,829
1
~(811('ost anc/ firnc/ing clatcr fi°om l'azl Piiblic Worlcs. (Z) Othei'fiindzng ificlticles Toi vn o/Uail
:
~ Capzla! Bzicfgel, RETT, TIFF, cleveloprnenl rec/ziired zmprovernews, cmc! CDOT.
5 -?-10
See Figure 6
Impact Fee Inputs
Vai~ Colorado
PM Peak Vehicle Trips Heated Sq 70.24
Residential (peY~Houih~ Unit) Minimum Maxitnum Attachcd in Corc Arca all sizes Attached Outside Core all sizes .Detachcd 0 2,099 0.35
Detachcd 2,100 2,299 0.39
Dctachcd 3,100 3,299 0.56
Dctachcd 4,100 4,299 0.68
Detachcd 5,100 5,299 0.78
Dctachcd 6,100 6,299 0.85
Dctachcd 6,300 or inore 0.87
Hotel (per rooin)
Hotcl in Corc Arca 0.24
Hotel Outside Core 0.30
1 onresidential (per 1,000 Scl Ft offloor area)
Coininercial in Core Arca 0.56
Coinincrcial Outsidc Corc 1.21
Offic c 0.25
Other Scrvices 0.40
Inf'rastvuctacre Standands
Cost per Trip $16,829
Rcv fP(811: TSChleI'glSe
cnuc Crc di rip $0
5 -2
See Figure 7
Transportation Impact Fee Schedule
Maximum Supportable Transportation Impact Fees
Residential (per lrousin,(,, unit) Mitlimum Sq Ft Maxirrium Sq Ft
Attached in Core Area all sizes $4,038
Attached Outside Core all sizes $5,048
Detached 0 2,099 $5,890
Detached 2,100 2,299 $6,563
Detached 3,100 3,299 $9,424
Detached 4,100 4,299 $11,443
Detached 5,100 5,299 $13,126
Detached 6,100 6,299 $14,304
Detached 6,300 or more $14,641
Hotel (per room)
Hotel k1 Core Area $4,038
Hotel Outs ide Core $5,048
I onresidential (per square foot of floor czrea)
Commercial in Core Area $9.42
ComtnercialOutside Core $20.36
Offic e $4.20
Other Services : (2CB1 1. $6.73
TischlerBise
5 -?-1z
Developrnent Additional Proposed Fee Projected Pel-cent of
Type Developrnent pet- Revenue Total
ICppaCt Fee Units (2) Developinent I111pact
Revenue Unit Fees
Projection Attaclled H°using
Units lll Core Area 1,275 $4,038 $5,148,000 23.0%
Attached Housing
Units Outside Core 878 $5,048 $4,432,000 19.8%
Conunercial KSF in
Core Area (1) 389 $9,420 $3,664,000 16.4%
Detached Housing
Units 247 $10,770 $2,660,000 11.9%
Hotel Rooms in
Core Area 598 $4,038 $2,415,000 10.8%
Conunercial KSF
Outside Core (1) 83 $20,360 $1,690,000 7.6%
Other Services
KSF (1) 160 $6,730 $1,077,000 4.8%
Hotel Rooins
Outside Core 212 $5,048 $1,070,000 4.8%
Office KSF (1) 54 $4,200 $227,000 1.0%
TOTAL $22,383,000
522 FIgUr2 8 (1) KSF = squar•e feet of floor area in thousands.
(2) Appendix E, Uail Transportation Master Plan
~5m) and Town staff (08109). Tischlerf3ise
5 -?-l3
`
See Figure A2
3rTrip Generation Rates by Type of Housing
Vail, COlOradO Households (2) Vehicles per
Vehicles Detached Atlached Total Hoarsehold
Availahle (1) Housing Housing by Tenure Natl011a1
Owner-occupied 2,114 316 820 1,136 1.86 average
Renter-occupied 1,752 49 970 1,019 1.72 SFD = 1.02
TOTnL 3,866 365 1,790 2,155 1.79 with 66%
17% 83% inbound
Persons Trip Vehicles hy Ti°ip Average Ti°ip En d.s per
(3) E 17 d,s (4) Ty~pe ofHousing End.s (S) Trip Ends Household
Detached Housulg 860 247 672 458 352 0.97
Attached Housulg 3,627 652 3,194 708 680 0.38
TOTAL 4,487 898 3,866 1,166 1,032 0.48
(1) Vehicles available by tenure fromTable H46, SF3, Census 2000.
(2) Households by tenure and units in structure fiomtable H32, SF3, Census 2000.
(3) Persons by units ul structure fromtable H33, SF3, Census 2000.
(4) Vehicle trips ends based on persons using fonnulas fromTrip Generation (1TE2008). For detached
housuig (1TE210), fitted curve equation is EXP(0.85*LN(persons)-034). To fit withul the datarange ofthe
1TE studies, the number ofpersons was divided by 2 and the equation result inultiplied by 2. For attached
housulg (1TE230), fitted curve equation is (0.17*persons)-35.30.
(5) Vehicle trip ends based on vehicles available Lisulg formulas fYOmTrip Generation (1TE 2008). For
detached housulg (1TE210), fitted curve equation is L;XP(0.92*LN(vehicles)+0.05). To fit within the data
range ofthe 1TL studies, the nuinber ofvehicles available was divided by 3 and the equation result
inultiplied by 3. For attached housuig (1TE 230), fitted curve equation is (0.21*vehicles)+36.97.
~ : (P(811: TSChlBI'glSe
5-2-14
Afternoon Peak Hour Attraction Trips by
Bedroom Range
V211, COIOTaClO Recommended
Beclroorns per PeYSOns Trip Vehicles Tri/) Average Hozrse- Ti^ip Ends pei- Inbozrnd
Detcrched Unit (I) Ends (2) Avcrilahle (1) Ends (3) TYip End.s holcls (I) Hozrsehold TYips (4)
Thrcc or lcs s 1,323 320 1,222 769 545 589 0.93 0.46
Four 479 135 442 302 219 169 1.30 0.64
Fivc or more 150 50 145 108 79 47 1.68 0.83
Detachcd Subtotal 1,952 505 1,809 1,179 843 805 1.05
Attachcd Subtotal 817 630 397
GRAND TOTAL 2,769 2,439 1,202
(1) Amcrican Comn7unity Sulvey, Public Usc Microdata Sample for Colorado PUMA 00700 (unweighied data for 2005-
2007).
(2) Vehicle trips cnds based on pcrsons usuig formulas fromTrip (iencration (ITE2008). For dctached housung (ITE
210), fitted curve equation is EXP(0.85*LN(pcrsons)+0.34).
(3) Vchiclc trip ends based on vehicles availablc usung formulas fromTrip Cicneration (ITE 2008). For dctached housing
(ITE 210), fittcd curvc cquation is EXP(0.92*LN(vchiclcs)+0.05). To approximatc ihc avcrage number of vchicles in the
ITE studics, vehicles wcrc dividcd by 2 and thc cquation result multiplied by 2.
(4) Rccommcnded inbound trips by bcdroomrange arc reduced to malce u7bouuld trips for a nud-size dctachcd unit,
derived fromACS PUMS data, match thc avcragc trip generation ratc derived fromCensus 2000 Sununary File 3 data for
thc Town of Vail. Accorduig to ITE, 66% of trip ends arc inbound.
See Figure A3
: (P(811: TSChlBI"giSe
5-2-15
See Figure A4 Inbound Trips by Size Of
Detached House
Vail, Colorado
Soiarce: Trij)s b~- hedt-oom ActuulAnevuges
P>edrooms Syziure Feet lnbotnnclTrips Sqztar,e Inboztnd
r-ange f-om ACS PUMS dala.
Feet Trij)s
Flooy- area (healed syuare feet)
Three or less 2,441 0.46 2,099 or less 0.35
fi^om CountyAssessorparcel
Fotu- 3,698 0.64 2,100 0.39
databa.re..
Five or more 5,706 0.83 2,300 0.43
2,500 0.47
PM Peak Hour Inbound Vehicle Trips per Housing Unit 2,700 0.50
2,900 0.53
1.00 3,100 0.56
3,300 0.59
0.90 3,500 0.61
0.80 3,700 0.64
OJO 3,900 0.66
0.60 4,100 0.68
~ 0.50 4,300 OJO
H 0.40 4,500 OJ2
4,700 OJ4
0.30 y= 0.4358Ln(x) - 2.9394 4,900 0JE>
0.20 ~ = 1 5,100 0J8
0.10 5,300 0J9
0.00 5,500 0.81
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 5,700 0.82
5,900 0.84
Sqliare Feet 6,100 0.85
: (F(811: TSChleI'g1s2
• 6,300 or more 0.87
5 -?-16
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Public Works Department
DATE: September 1St, 2009
SUBJECT: Traffic Impact Fee
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The Public Works Department is requesting a review and discussion of the proposed
Traffic Impact Fee and draft report dated August 25, 2009 as prepared by Tischler Bise.
The Town staff requests that the Council listens to presentations by Staff and
consultants, ask questions, and confirm or provide direction.
III. BACKGROUND
The Town has recently hired Tischler Bise, a fiscal, economic and planning consultant
group to provide a nexus study for a codified Traffic Impact Fee that is applied to all new
development to provide the Town with funds to mitigate new development impacts on
the Towns transportation infrastructure, and implement portions of the Town's recently
adopted Vail Transportation Master Plan.
The Transportation Master Plan projects anticipated development growth and future
transportation needs over the next 20 years (pending pace of development). The Master
Plan has projected the need for approximately $134 million of transportation, parking
and transit needs when Vail is "built-out/fully redeveloped", of which -$70 million is
attributed to transportation needs along the Frontage Roads. Of the $70 million,
approximately $24.6 million is expected to be absorbed by specific development
requirements and development agreements, about $23 will be expected to be funded by
public sources (General Fund, TIF, RETT, CDOT, Grants, etc...), and the remaining
$22.4 should be funded by a Traffic Impact Fee as identified in the nexus study.
The Town of Vail currently requests that developments mitigate their impacts on the
Town thru off site improvements and/or by providing a traffic mitigation fee of $6500 per
PM peak hour net new generated vehicular trips to and from the development. The
Town code permits this in certain zone districts, Lionshead Mixed Use I& II and Public
Accommodations I& II, thru Title 12-7 A,H,I,J. The fee is based on a traffic impact
report provided by the development and reviewed by Town staff. The total net trips is
then multiplied by the $6500 fee. If the trips are broken down by use the fee per use
would be estimated as follows:
: MO311: 1
5 -3-1
Vail Traffic M itiqation Fee
(As most recently calculated and used)
Multi-
Use
Peak PM Average Average Net Fee Average
Use ITE # Rate Unit Factor* Rate per Pm Peak Fee
Single Family 210 1.01 DU 1 1.01 $ - $ -
Multi Family 230 0.52 DU 0.7 0.364 $ 6,500.00 $ 2,366.00
Hotel 310 0.59 0.7 0.413 $ 6,500.00 $ 2,684.50
Retail 814 2.71 KSF 0.6 1.626 $ 6,500.00 $10,569.00
Restaurant 831 7.49 KSF 0.6 4.494 $ 6,500.00 $29,211.00
Office 710 1.49 KSF 1 1.49 $ 6,500.00 $ 9,685.00
* Multi-Use factors assume reductions in the Core, there are no reductions for Single Family or
Office.
The nexus study prepared by Tischler Bise has completed a nexus study that supports a
fee structure as shown in figure 7 of the attached Draft report.
III. ATTACHMENT
A. Traffic Impact Fee Draft Report, August 25, 2009
B. Presentation
2
5-3-2
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Frontage Rd. Lighting Master Plan Update.
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the draft Lighting Master Plan and the
benefits of light emitting diode (LED) vs high pressure sodium (HPS) techonology.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department of
Transportation, recently adopted the Vail Transportation Master Plan in response to the on-
going and projected increases in development activity, the results of past master planning
processes, and pending redevelopment plans. As a separate element of this plan, the Town is
also in the process of adopting a lighting master plan for both the North and South Frontage
Roads. While the need for improved safety and way finding are the primary drivers for creating
this lighting master plan, the town is also addressing aesthetics and environmental
stewardship issues in this plan. The proposed lighting master plan is intended to be
implemented in stages as opportunities arise over time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Listen to presentation and confirm or provide direction.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Memo
Presentation
: C2()311:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Public Works Department and Community Development Department
DATE: September 1, 2009
SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan,
an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in
regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel
Planner: Bill Gibson
1. SUMMARY
The applicant, Town of Vail, is requesting a work session to discuss the Frontage Road
Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting
forth details in regard thereto. The Public Works Department and Community
Development Department request that the Council listens to presentations by Staff and
consultant Nancy Johnson, ask questions, and confirm or provide direction.
At the work session, Staff will provide an update on the progress of the Frontage Rd.
Lighting Master Plan which was originally presented in March along with the Vail
Transportation Master Plan, and has since been presented and discussed at PEC. Also
since that time a test site had been set up at Ford Park parking lot to review the quantity
and quality of the two light sources that are currently being reviewed, LED and High
Pressure Sodium. A visit to this site prior to the worksession will be helpful for
discussion, a questionnaire is available on site to assist with an evaluation.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department of Transportation,
recently adopted the Vail Transportation Master Plan in response to the on-going and
projected increases in development activity, the results of past master planning
processes, and pending redevelopment plans. As a separate element of this plan, the
Town is also in the process of adopting a lighting master plan for both the North and
South Frontage Roads. While the need for improved safety and way finding are the
primary drivers for creating this lighting master plan; the Town is also addressing
aesthetics and environmental stewardship issues in this plan. The proposed lighting
master plan is intended to be implemented in stages as opportunities arise over time.
Both frontage roads are located within the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA)
right-of-way (ROM and are administered thru the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT). Pursuant to Section 43-2-135, Division of Authority of Streets,
Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) the Town of Vail is responsible for the illumination of
the frontage roads. The frontage roads currently have minimal roadway and pedestrian
lighting. The existing roadway lighting is limited to the roundabouts, and the existing
pedestrian lighting is limited to the commercial core areas and street intersections. With
1
: M()311:
6 1 1
this limited lighting, there are both safety concerns and way finding challenges for all
modes of transportation.
The overflow vehicle parking that occurs along the frontage roads at peak times is a
significant safety concern. Overflow parking occurs on the frontage roads 30 to 50 times
per year. This parking occurs at the busiest times during the year, in the busiest
locations along the frontage roads, during the shortest daylight hours of the year, during
times of inclement weather when road conditions are poor, and the parking occurs on
the opposite side of a visitor's primary destination thus requiring pedestrians to cross the
frontage roads. The combination of these factors presents a precarious situation for
vehicles entering and exiting parking spaces along the frontage roads, for pedestrians
entering and exiting their parked vehicles, and for pedestrian trying to cross the frontage
roads at various locations to access the commercial core areas. Other safety concerns
include the general inability of vehicle drivers to adequately see pedestrians, bicycles,
stopped buses, and other obstacles at night.
Nighttime way finding challenges currently exist at the roundabouts and at various local
road intersections along the frontage roads. The existing frontage road conditions limit
the ability of drivers to determine their necessary direction of travel without becoming
lost. Primary vehicle routes need to be illuminated at major intersections to lead drivers
who are unfamiliar with the area down the right path. Secondary road intersections also
need to be illuminated to allow the unfamiliar driver an opportunity to anticipate
upcoming intersections and to give the driver the ability to read relevant signage.
Notable destination points such as the Village parking structure, Lionshead parking
structure, and Ford Park also need to be property illuminated.
The Town anticipates that the proposed lighting master plan will be implemented over
time as roadway and private development construction projects occur. Staff believes it
is critical that each individual development project adjacent to the frontage roads be
coordinated with a comprehensive street lighting master plan. Unfortunately, there are
multiple private developments and roadway improvement projects already under
construction adjacent to the frontage roads. The roadway and pedestrian lighting
improvements associated with this construction is currently being implemented on a
project-by-project basis, rather than in a comprehensive and coordinated manner. The
proposed lighting master plan is intended to remedy this situation and provide direction
into the future.
The Town is currently assessing two different light sources to be used along the frontage
roads, LED and High Pressure Sodium (HPS). The LED source is a relatively new
technology for roadway lighting and the HPS is typical roadway lighting that can be seen
today along the Frontage Rd. and I-70. LED is a whiter, cooler light source with potential
life cycle cost and energy savings, as well as having better color rendering and shape
recognition qualities. HPS is a yellower, warmer light source that is relatively efficient
and cost effective and has been a proven technology.
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Public Works Department and Community Development Department request that
the Council listens to presentations by Staff and consultants, ask questions, and confirm
or provide direction. The plan will continue thru the PEC process and come back to
Council for approval in the near future.
2
6-1-2
.
, 0 A• ' • . • R • • . • • A• • • . • . g'
• • . • Master ghting P .
•
Review Objectives
•
Review Strateg
•
w, ance Criteria
Cost Analysis
Quantity o •
Quality • •
~ Results
fi.AesthetiG Characteristics
• .
~
~
~
~
6-z-i
.
.
~ ~
C:)
0 -
_ _
` .
~ ~ .F
• •
-
, motorists, bicyclists,
o • pedestrians o •
c ~i
. . roadways.
i~ • ~ ~ r,:
• ~ • ~ _
' • . • U • W~ -c
f
~ ~ • • • I!'~. -
ENVIRONMENTAL
~
. ~ ' M `
_
~ -
c~•
~
6-2-°
~ ~ •
•
~
.
~ . . ~ ! ~ A,...' A
` - • ~ • • T~~ _
<
- - ~ - ~
•
.
Li
-
_
~ ~ ► - ~t,
- ~ ~ • •r-
_ • ~ ~ ~
~
I
,a
16
~
6-z-3
' • • • •
~ • " • . ~ ~ • ~ . ~ ~
.
~
• ! ,~r_. .
A~~~
. i} #
• ~
~ - ~
KEY w ~ ✓v
-Traffie Volume & Density
high density
transition
- f• ~
r'
low density
_ - ~ - overflow parking
• .
• . • o . . • Master
r~
~ P . Improvements
~
~
~
6-2-4
. ~ ~ . •
•
, -
•
.
~ ~ t . . . ~ . . ~.4.. .
.~1. .
. ' . . . . ~ .
~ ~ ~ ' Y~ ` ~ _ iT•
~ Y .
.
` 4w
- gt
~
.
V~'7%
. + .
.
~ . 4, . . . . .
i?•
~
6-2-5
.
~ ~ ~ ~ _ Sf r ~~O s.4•~l
• ' . ~ - -
• 'TF~ ~ a"".~ p { : ~ ~ '4; ~3 ~
± t . .~fK
• } ' ,
~ v r' .
1 ~ ~ ~ ~ r
• ~ ~ . . ai - ~~-s • _ - _ _
~ J ~ ♦
Q ~ .T
~ # ~ '
41
I $
I - 2009 _
1 F F . . . .
V
i?•
~
gxwpmppw:
6-2-6
Lf) ~ M
C:
Ul C
.
~ QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
E
C
.
•
' ' A' DING OBJECTIVES
.
OR STRATEGY
_
~
~
~
6-z-7
• - - ~ GALAXY 400
• . .
.
, ~ -
~
• e ~u~ . _ _ I~ - -
~ , ;
~ . ~ . .
~
.
~ •
• . ~ ~ ~
. ' '
• • - r:eracarairga nl u - siH - Hi- iri
~
- . ! . . -
. r~ . . . . , ,
. ~ .
- r 7r r.l
- y . _ • , j^'-~
~ - . . " L-i
~
. - - - ~ i. , -ti
~ -
~
~
~
: fPf811:
6-2-5
. ■
• . . ~ ► LEDway" g
.
BetaCatalogBLD - STR - -HT- - LED-B - -SV-
~
• , .~._.u ..w~~e.~..
~
. a.....P.,,~•...+- Notes:
. - wR m un
GALAXY 400
LED LED HPS
_ - . . .o,
:
~
~
~
6-2-9
Performance . O
• GALaxY 400
C + . . _ . ~r
.
~
,
.
.
.
,
r i
~ . ~a.. CrtaCxalcy;:11_1 -SIR- -III- - LLI
xmvs-
_ #
~ RGY USA .
A . 23% better , P
= r , A . 1
-3 % • etter than HP
~ A 1 1 ♦ • , SYSTEM •
A . / % better tha •
ta
~
_ 350mA . 49% better tha •
~
~
~
6-Z-]0
Lf) ~ M
C:
Ul C
.
~ QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
' REGARDING ■ ' ORMANCE OBJECTIVES:
c
• , "
- i
_ . =
~
~
6-z- ii
■ ~ • s - ,
• _
. ~ • -
'
~
° • ' °
.
. ~ -
~
.
C ~
. ~ •
•
~ u~ ,.n un wo sso eoo eso 70 n iso noo - ~
WAVELENGiHINMI ~ m I~ •
- - ~
s
i
~
- -
~ •
.
6-2-]2
KEY
• ■ _ ~ ~ ~ -Traffic Volume & Density
.
' • ~ ~ •
~ - - high density
• ~ transition
.
low density
• ~ ~ . . ~ ~ .
~ ~ averflow parking
" Roadand Pedestrian Canflict pav$mentClasgi~jCStinn High Density
Ikrea Vrai#armity Veiling
Ratia ~urririancE
oad Pe~iestriar~ R1 R2 & Ft3 Rd Ratto
Ft Intersection
ConfRict Area E~y~Emm L ,~L~4a
luxlf~ I~ux~c EuxKc
i Freeway C3a55 A 6.0106 9.010.9 80)08 3.0 4.S 0•9 fC / 4.1
s
~ Freeway Glass B 4.010A 8.016.6 50)0S 3{} {}.3
Hi pn 10.011.0 74.Or7 a 13.017.3 3.0 u.s HI h Densit
~xpres~way g y
Medium 8.010_8 12.011.2 10.011.0 3_0 0.3 `
Low 6.0f0 fi 9,010.9 S.Q14 ~ 3_0 0.3 0•7 fC / 6:1
r, Fligh 12.0J1.2 17.t1f1.7 15.[z+7,5 3.0 0.3
- Majar
Medium 9.010.9 13 nrl a, 11.019.1 3 ❑ 03 Low Density
- Low 6. [71a 6 9.010.9 S{1fD. S 30 4.3
~ Hi h B.01C.8 ,z 011,2 10:011Q 4.0 0.4 0.4 fc / 6:1
Cnllecs~r
Med;.m s.o1o 5 9,9r0,9 8.41D.8 4.0 0.9
Lctw 4:Rlf] 4 7010.6 S.OID.S 4.Ll 0.4
~ liigh 6.[310.6 ~.610.9 8.OJD.8 6.0 0.4
Local
~ Medium 5,010 5 7.4l4.7 5.411).6 6.1} {].a
Lnw 3.C,103 4.0lO.4 4.0JD.4 6.0 04
:fP(811:
6-?-13
0
Ln Performance .
.
CU 0
Ln QUANTITY O
0
•
'Ee • . • measurements
~
• ~ • . ' • . •
, AY b' . • • better
¶ visual • ' • . .
c.
~
13
.
' ~
;
, .
-
~
6-2-14
High Density
~ ' ' • - • Intersection
.
' • ~ • 0.9fc/4:1
~
' High Density
~ 11 • ' - -
. 0.7 fc / 6:1
,
.
~ tliyh L'ensity-t:iqh F?es,uzn Soaium
~
Luminaixe Schedule
. Symbol Qty Lumens . Description Total Watts [M2!NLIFAC] . spacing
25 95~~0 GLXI^~-IV-10aHPS 130 U S ACtCHTTECTURAL LSGHTINIG 110ft
Calculation Summary
. Label Max Min Avg/Min
2.2 Q.3 3
.13
intersection ED
high densfty 2_3 1 0.0 N.A.
~ -
~
_ . ,
. J,~a.a 5: o
~~-~j---~~ :.s A. • J ~ ;,~g-_:.~~,
b.z e.x ~S'» + i.:
~ - - • ~L ~ \ I .
~
_ -
~
~
: fPf811:
6-2-IS
High Density
~ ' ' • - • Intersection
.
' • ~ • 0.9fc/4:1
~
' High Density
: 0.7 fc / 6:1
.
-
,
•
' Lvminaire Schedule ~
Symbol ~¢ty I,umens I Description ~ Total Watts ~[MANUEAC] ~ spacing '
21 e772.95 cer.u 35^,mA '2'9 3500K 1 13E'f'A L1`.;H'1'1NC, 1NC 13Cft
w
~ .Icula.~on Summary
1 it~h deC.C M.A.
~r7`1; x Mi~ A vy,f~,in 350mA LED - 5 BAR
0.D ~ 0 .3 3.91-
_ I
l
- ~ -
- ~ ' Luminaire Schedule
Symbol Qty II.umens Description ITotal Watts I[MANI7FAC] spacinq
- n 20 ~ 17.bJCi T4 43COK lOOLF ~ 218.bb ~P=TA LI;=FTING. INC 13 ~i_t I
- Calcul.--jticn Summar~
I,a bel Avq Nlix Mi.n AvgfMin
- °i~j'' a~-."i~i`y °.L1 3.3 N.P.
4'; :i. 8 0. 525mA LED - 5 BAR
...intcrsc_^cticn 1. -S 2.90
~
~
~
~
6-2-]6
Performance .
.
, P. g • . Betty • d . d-
CU 0
•
.
c -
. .
0
C ~
.
•
~
w
12
CONFIRMED
RID
THATLESS
SLUE
• ~~~j
NEEDED
. ~ - D SO -
~
s Luminaire Schedule
Symboi Qty _ Lumens I Descriptiort I Total Watts I[MANUFAC] _ spacing
_ ~ - i 79:i4k1^t? ~:~(71"'ii I 4 4~G'C3ri 1 I~l I A .-.I Gii I TIVG, TNC .
- i:l~ Cll~ 7W'I OT'I $UEfll.".7'f'~j'
- Label I tivg ux N._n Avcq/Misi
nic7%~ derrsi.-y ~ ,1.23 .~l ~J.O I+;.r?.
Tz. _ntersecrion I J.46 I J.;_' SJ
~
6-2-]7
. - • ~ ~ - • SPACING
.
.
4 KEx
Traffie Valume & IDensiry
. • 1 1
~ .
high density
~
9 transition
•
' • 11 1
law density
• :1 1
.
• ~ ~ ~ i overflow parking
- ~ 11 1
w
~ M .
- H.igh =~•ensity-High Pressure Sodiur:
= Luminaire Schedule
symbol Qty T.umens Description Total Watts [MANUFAC] spacing
] ;'5 95,00 GLXM-7V-=.QQHPS 13fi li S ARCHITEC_EIRAL ]LIGHTIPK~ 110ft
Calculation Summaru
Label Avy a>; Min Avy/Min
intersect.ioia 0.94 _ 0.3 3113
r~ high density U.56 .3 0 .0 N.A.
.is_.`_v-LE_. 3.5)5,'._A
s Luminaire Schedule
Symboi Qty Lumens I Description I Total Watts I[MANUFAC] spacing
7954k1~t:? ~:n(71"'ii I 4 4qG'C3ri 1 3,TA .-.I Gii I TIVG, TNC . ("O`..-
- ~ i:l] Clll7t'IOT'I $UElll.".7Yy
L:~}J~ t1VC] ~1 :t F,'_Il aT1Vqi~171
~ I hic7%] derrsiry D.29 i.1 0.0 N.A.
~ '_c~tersecr=~on I J.46 J F3 J.2 2.30
~
6-2-]8
~ ~ • . .
.
~ ~ ~ . ~ • . ~ ' • • . • '
~
~
•
.
~ . _ .
M Yj'f
- , ..m..~..n...b,~o~ , . ._...~.~.~..r m ~,.~b~.~...... . ;.....mm,..., ......4R.r_~.-
r
M. ~~...u......rn~.~w.,~.,w . ~ . ~.+.a. . v .w.~.w..~.e.wr .,a..
. w.-_ ~o - . ~..w✓M uo . wz-
tao'~~ 6auazr y +
rcndcnn~-
-
;.z, ax-su`vis~
~
: (P(811:
6-2-I)
0
Ln Performance .
.
CU 0
Ln TOWN OF OURAY INSTALLATIO
N
0
•
comment • the or [Mr.
CU
o i • • Risch] • • e • e•
• or, it loo
• oo • •
• • •
F t' Miguel
~
• • Power
~
_ . =
~ -
-
-
• .
,
_ after
~
6-z-zo
Lf) ~ M
C:
Ul C
.
~ QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
' REGARDING ■ ' ORMANCE OBJECTIVES:
c
• ANTITY O
~ UALITY •
- - -
"
_
~
~
~
6-z-z1
•
~
• . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~'rx~~ ~ i- .,ai i i ~,;w~~
~ • ~ •
~ • . • • • O, , , , t ~
• p~ ~
=~l , m. . .
- , ~
• . ~ to \
• . ' . ~ • • 7
~ w ~ ~ ~ . ,
• • • - " ++n~ttt v -
~ •~a,
y9'
~ - ~'~~g~ . ~
. c
_ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ . _ -
d+ ~ I
6 • • / , I 'R r
• ~ •
" AL.,~,~
-gu II ,~b~ 2f'?k p!i• ~ a. F~- -
= • . a ~r ~ - ~
40
~ ~ a1wv~S" 1 •,aI ~.'~Cw+....c.~
~
6-2-_2
~
* rr~
• 3r ~n:: '`4~ I~~j
Y'
~
• _ 1 ~4 - ~
~i
f4-
~
i. I ~ I I ~ • ~ I ~ I . ~ i ~ , . .
~ re
-___2 5'_.ROi4DWAY-POLE,_ ~
_ _ _
14' BANNERARM
POLE
• ~ ~ _ _
777
BIKE PATH ~~=-~~g4--
g - ' BOLLARD
rav svruHro
- `1
`TOW S AN pAF2D
ej
~
~ ~~(LLA E POLE~ -
,
~
- -
:C2 1. ; r ~ ' ~
6-z-z3
=£SW 7pr
• '
y'
. dW ~~N u p"; . i, ' ~ .
~
_
. r ~ I1 1
~
7 .
~ ■ 1 -T , I i ,
, _ ~
i„
. ~
- r -
. _ ,•o.a~.~r wi~~,~,,
~kVUbk- %vM
by`rAO :1rv^' ~')I
• i , _
~
El~
. ,
~
~
~ ~ ' • ~ ~ ~ • ~ '
~
6-z-z4
C
• • • a • • I.
,
~ Decorative ' ! i •
C
.
.
c . ~ ~
77
~
;
- ~••r ~ - ~
. .
- Cost: ' - Cost: ' - Cost:
~ . - $4 1 . 'o - $1461 '•.d . - $ ••1
g~• $911 $2775 -d, Po- $3475
• . $ 1 o . $4235 • . $5135
~
• ' 11
~ i i
6-z-zs
.
. ~ • ~ '
~
~y~rr'~•~ ~"-,1.~,°'~~ ar`'
• a . ~ ~ _ y~" ~ s
ALA
.
• ~
~ ` ~ - ~J~~~
4A
A
71,p
-
~
6-z-z6
Lf) ~ M
C:
Ul C
.
~ QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
E
C ' A' DING DECORA
.
- - .
- THE RECOMMENDATION TO
a DO' A MASTER ■ A
'ONTAGE ROAD LIGHTING
~
~
~
6-z-z7
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Transportation Master Plan Amendment for West Vail Fire Station access.
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss the proposed amendment to the Vail
Transportation Master Plan Access Management Plan for the West Vail Fire Station access.
BACKGROUND: In May of this year the town adopted the Vail Transportation Master Plan
which included an Access Management Plan (AMP) that was developed jointly between the
town and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT).
The AMP currently shows one access point for the future West Vail Fire Station. The current
preferred design shows two access points, one for the general public and one for emergency
vehicles. CDOT will permit this additional emergency access as long as the town amends the
AMP. In order to amend the AMP, an amendment to the Master Plan must be approved by
resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discuss amendment.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Memo and Resolution
Appendix I Table Amendment
Appendix I Graphic Amendment
: C2()311:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Public Works Department
DATE: September 1St, 2009
SUBJECT: Final review of Resolution No. 22, Series of 2009, a resolution adopting
amendments to the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in
regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant is requesting a final review of a resolution adopting amendments to the
Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
II. BACKGROUND
The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department of Transportation,
completed the Vail Transportation Master Plan (VTMP) this past Spring, adopted by the
Town Council on May 5th, 2009 by Resolution No. 12 series 2009.
The VTMP included an Access Management Plan (AMP) for the Frontage Rd. in
Appendix I. The AMP was created cooperatively with CDOT to identify current and
future access points along the Frontage Rd. becoming the guideline for all access points
along the Frontage Rd.
The West Vail Fire station site was allocated one full movement access point on the
AMP as indicated on the Chamonix Master plan at the time of the adoption of the VTMP.
Since that time a more specific site design has been developed for the West Vail Fire
station, suggesting a second access should be allowed onto the Frontage Rd. for
emergency vehicles only. This second access will allow the site to accommodate drive
thru bays and eliminate the on-site conflict of emergency vehicles and public vehicles.
CDOT has agreed conceptually to this additional emergency access but requested that
the AMP be updated to show this change. Since the AMP is a part of the VTMP, an
amendment to the VTMP is necessary.
III. ATTACHMENT
A. Resolution No.22, Series of 2009
B. Recommended changes to the VTMP (Additions are highlighted & clouded in yellow)
Resolution No. 22, Series of 2009 1
: M()311:
7 1 1
RESOLUTION NO. 22
Series of 2009
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENTS TO THE VAIL
TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD
THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town"), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado is a
home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado and
the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council") have been duly
elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail and Colorado Department of Transportation are in the process of
amending the Vail Transportation Master Plan in response to the on-going design of the Wet Vail Fire
Station; and
WHEREAS, the Town wishes amend the Vail Transportation Master Plan Access Management
Plan to allow an additional emergency access onto the North Frontage Rd for the proposed West Vail Fire
Station; and
WHEREAS, the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the
Town and conserves the Town's natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest quality.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL,
COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Council hereby approves and authorizes the amendments of the Vail
Transportation Master Plan.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Vail held this 1St day of September, 2009.
Richard Cleveland
Town Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson,
Town Clerk
Resolution No. 22, Series of 2009 2
: M()311:
7-1-2
North 1-70 Frontage Road
Access
Number Mile Post Side Description Location Current Use/Configuration Proposed Use/Configuration
1A 173.32 Left Former Wendy's Restaurant Access 300 feet west of West Full movement, Closed-down Full movement, Mixed Use
Vail Interchange Fast Food Restaurant Development
1B 173.30 Left Former Wendy's Restaurant Site 400 feet west of West None New Fire Station; Emergency
Vail Interchange Vehicles Only.
2 173.35 Left Former Service Station Access 160 feet west of West Full Movement Closed upon redevelopment and the
Vail Interchange ability to have cross access with
Access point #1
3 173.38 Both Chamonix Road West Vail Interchange Roundabout - Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
4 173.41 Left Commercial Use 90 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted
Vail Interchange Movement
5 173.44 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 260 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted
Vail Interchange Movement
6 173.48 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 560 feet east of West Full Movement 3/4 Movement
Vail Interchange
7 173.54 Left Commercial Use 810 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted
Vail Interchange Movement
8 173.60 Left Commercial Use 1,160 feet east of West Full Movement Closed
Vail Interchange
9 173.65 Left Commercial Use 1,430 feet east of West Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
Vail Interchange
10 173.70 Left Commercial Use 1,685 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted
Vail Interchange Movement
11 173.74 Left Commercial Use 1,900 feet east of West Full Movement Full Movement
Vail Interchange
12 173.81 Left Zermatt Lane Zermatt Lane Full Movement Full Movement, but Convert to 3/4
Movement If Safety Conditions
Warrant
13 173.83 Left Commercial Use 100 feet east of Full Movement Closed
Zermatt Lane
14 173.88 Left Playground/Park Access 310 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement
Zermatt Lane
15 173.96 Left Buffehr Creek Road Buffehr Creek Road Full Movement Full Movement
16 173.99 Left Commercial Use 170 feet east of Full Movement Closed - Provide Access to Meadow
Buffehr Creek Road Ridge Rd instead
17 174.04 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 400 feet east of Full Movement Convert to Full Movement Out Only
Buffehr Creek Road
18 174.06 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 540 feet east of Full Movement Convert to Full Movement In Only
Buffehr Creek Road
19 174.39 Left Commercial Use 0.43 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement
Buffehr Creek Road
20 174.52 Left Residential 0.58 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement
Buffehr Creek Road
21 174.54 Left Residential 0.60 miles east of Full Movement Closed -
Buffehr Creek Road
21A 174.59 Left Residential 0.65 miles east of N/A Full Movement - Transit Only
Buffehr Creek Road
22 174.63 Left Residential 0.70 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement
Buffehr Creek Road
23 174.73 Left Residential 0.25 miles west of Full Movement Full Movement - If Possible Connect
Lions Ridge Loop to Future Simba Run Underpass
Roundabout24, Otherwise Shift
West
24 174.78 Left Simba Run Resorts (Future Simba Ru 0.21 miles west of Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
Underpass) Lions Ridge Loop
: (2()311:
L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table Amended 081809.x1s
7 -2-1
24A 174.81 Left Residential 0.18 miles west of Full Movement Full Movement - If Possible Connect
Lions Ridge Loop to Future Simba Run Underpass
Roundabout24, Otherwise Shift East
25 174.92 Left Commercial - Vail Run 250 feet west of Lions Full Movement Closed - Provide Access to Lions
Ridge Loop Ridge Loop instead
26 174.97 Left Lions Ridge Loop Lions Ridge Loop Full Movement Full Movement
27 175.04 Left Residential 160 feet west of Red Full Movement Closed - Provide Access through
Sandstone Road adjoining property to Red Sandstone
Road
28 175.07 Left Red Sandstone Rd Red Sandstone Rd Full Movement Full Movement
29A 175.17 Left N/A 500 feet east of Read N/A Full Movement - New
Sandstone Road Playground/Park Access if 29 is
closed
29 175.20 Left Playground/Park Access 710 feet east of Red Full Movement Full Movement - Close Access if
Sandstone Road parcel integrates with neighboring
development to the east
30 175.24 Left Commercial Use 0.17 miles east of Red Full Movement 3/4 Movement
Sandstone Road
31 175.32 Left Commercial - Condos 0.23 miles east of Red Full Movement Full Movement
Sandstone Road
32 175.36 Left Red Sandstone Elementary School 0.31 miles east of Red Full Movement - Out Only Full Movement - Out Only
Sandstone Road
33 175.39 Left Red Sandstone Elementary School 0.33 miles east of Red Full Movement - In Only Full Movement - In Only
Sandstone Road
34 175.52 Left Commercial - Condos 0.46 miles east of Red Full Movement Full Movement
Sandstone Road
35 175.86 Left Middle Creek Village 0.20 miles west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement
Rd
36 175.89 Left Middle Creek Village 910 feet west of Vail Full Movement Inbound Bus Use Only
Rd
37 175.93 Left Middle Creek Village 510 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement
Rd
38 176.02 Both Vail Rd Vail Rd Roundabout - Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
: (2()311:
L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table Amended 081809.x1s
7-2-2
South 1-70 Frontage Road
Access
Number Mile Post Side Description Location Current Use/Configuration Proposed Use/Configuration
39 173.38 Both Chamonix Road West Vail Interchange Full Movement, Roundabout Roundabout - Full Movement
40 173.30 Right Service Station 550 feet east of West Full Movement/ Service Station Full Movement/Service Station
Vail Interchange
41 173.52 Right Service Station 680 feet east of West Full Movement/ Service Station Convert to 3/4 Movement Upon
Vail Interchange Redevelopment of Site (Close
When No Longer a Service Station)
42 173.63 Right W. Gore Creek Drive W. Gore Creek Drive Full Movement Full Movement
43 173.78 Right W. Haven Drive W. Haven Drive Full Movement Full Movement
44 173.85 Right W. Haven Drive W. Haven Drive Full Movement 3/4 Movement
45 174.01 Right Residential 260 feet west of Full Movement Full Movement
Matterhorn Circle
45A 173.92 Right Town Property 675 feet west of None Right-in/Right out movements
Matterhorn Circle
46 174.05 Right Matterhorn Circle Matterhorn Circle Full Movement Full Movement
47 174.15 Right Donovan Park Access 420 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement
Matterhorn Circle
48 174.57 Right Westhaven Drive Westhaven Drive Full Movement Full Movement
49 174.78 Both Future Simba Run Underpass 0.25 miles east of N/A Roundabout - Full Movement
Westhaven Drive
50 174.55 Left Commercial Use 0.25 miles west of Full Movement Closed
Forest Rd
51 174.91 Both Commercial Use 805 feet west of Full Movement Full Movement, Align Left and
Forest Rd Right Accesses
52 174.96 Right Commercial Use 475 feet west of Full Movement Full Movement
Forest Rd
53 175.01 Both Commercial Use 300 feet west of Full Movement Full Movement
Forest Rd
54 175.06 Both Forest Rd & Commercial Use on Left Forest Rd Full Movement Full Movement
55 175.13 Right W Lionshead Circle W Lionshead Circle Full Movement Full Movement
56 175.20 Right Commercial - Vail Spa Condos 490 feet east of W Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements
Lionshead Circle
57 175.28 Right Commercial - Lionshead Inn, Vail 200 feet west of W N/A Right In/Right Out Movements
Chophouse, Lionshead Circle
58 175.32 Right W Lionshead Circle W Lionshead Circle Full Movement Full Movement - Convert to 3/4
Movement when operations
transferto Los F.
59 175.38 Right Commercial - Condos 480 feet east of W Full Movement Full Movement - Convert to 3/4
Lionshead Circle Movement when Roundabout
installed at 60
60 175.52 Right E Lionshead Circle E Lionshead Circle Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
61 175.59 Right N/A 415 feet east of E N/A Full Movement
Lionshead Circle
62 175.68 Right Commercial - Parking Structure 805 feet east of E Full Movement Full Movement - Major
Lionshead Circle Intersection
63 175.80 Right N/A 0.22 miles west of Vail N/A Full Movement
Rd
64 175.83 Both Commercial Use 900 feet west of Vail Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements,
Rd Both Sides
65 175.88 Both Vail Valley Medical Center 740 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement - Atempt to align
Rd accesses from both sides upon
redevelopment
66 175.93 Right Vail Plaza Hotel 400 feet west of Vail N/A Add Access - Right In/Right Out
Rd Movements
67 175.95 Both Commercial Use 270 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement
Rd
68 176.02 Both Vail Rd Vail Rd Roundabout - Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement
: (2()311:
L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table Amended 081809.x1s
7-2-3
69 176.05 Right Commercial Use 120 feet east of Vail Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements
Rd
70 176.12 Right Commercial Use 450 feet east of Vail Full Movement Full Movement
Rd
71 176.13 Right N/A SOO feet east of Vail N/A Right In/Right Out Movements
Rd
72 176.15 Right N/A 600 feet east of Vail N/A Right In Only
Rd
73 176.18 Right N/A 725 feet east of Vail N/A Right Out Only
Rd
74 176.21 Right Village Center Dr Village Center Dr Full Movement Full Movement
75 176.23 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 130 feet east of Full Movement Transit Only, In Only
Village Center Dr
76 176.26 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 250 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement
Village Center Dr
77 176.29 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 550 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement
Village Center Dr
78 176.39 Right Commercial - Parking Structure 870 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement - Major
Village Center Dr Intersection
79 176.42 Right E Meadow Dr E Meadow Dr Full Movement 3/4 Movement - Subject to
Roundabout at 86
80 176.45 Right Utility Access? 103 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements -
Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86
81 176.11 Right Commercial - Condos 310 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements -
Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86
gZ 176.48 Right Commercial - Condos 400 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements -
Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86
83 176.53 Right Commercial Use 510 feet east of E Full Movement Closed
Meadow Dr
84 176.55 Right Commercial - Wren 660 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements -
Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86
85 176.57 Right Gerald Ford Park - Service Rd Access West end Gerald Ford Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements -
Park Subject to Roundabout at 86
86 176.62 Right N/A Gerald Ford Park N/A Roundabout - Full Movement
Location To Be Determined
87 176.50 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.40 miles east of E Full Movement In Only - Future Configuration To
Meadow Dr Be Determined
gg 176.54 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.44 miles east of E Full Movement Out Only - Future Configuration To
Meadow Dr Be Determined
89 176.59 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.49 miles east of E Full Movement Closed
Meadow Dr
: (2()311:
L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table Amended 081809.x1s
7 2 4
~ .s,,F' i ,
~ • ~~~~J ~-r • A x i t`,~ ~ . k~\
LoGrON
ocrcR eo ,''aJ1 r
i0µ~
VW~ "t6 f. 1
r.•FC~-r
~i
- - 3
I D
1 ~
~ ONLT IF NOi S
~ I • ACLESSIBIE Ai -r
\I/ irvteasECnorv tt Z
m
y~ ll
w i
r~
-er ro 3 ir
71 : ~ - ~ aJ sor~v CONDInnns o
ENeRCaacr " 421- _1
a}-~ N
Worvi~
4A /
CONY£RT i0 3 uPON - ~ ALL REOEYELOPNEIVi VALL BE ENCOURAGm
flmEVELOPMENi OF SIIE i0 ESiIHUSn CROSS-ACCE55 miN Iil~ENT `
• (C- xf~Erv rvU iOrvGER ~ . OEYELOPMENi i0 ME E%iENi iHAi
A SERNCE SfAPON) - CONOIIIONS N1LW.
1 . r' Y~._~'*~ ~~':'~i~'~f~~
ROUN..i ~ Ri(P.0
I 7 . ~ ~ ~ ~ / \ CLL}SE nCCf55 O
FELSBURCi 4 ~ ruu
HOLT
ULLEViG~!'
:0 wurni mreagc;r_rv O
- ' dfd~i67i~61: BB11: SCUE: 1'=20a'
I
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Overview of the 2009 International Building Codes Project.
PRESENTER(S): Martin Haeberle
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Because this is a work session, staff does not request
that any formal action be taken at this time.
BACKGROUND: The Building and Fire Appeals Board has, through a process of community
consensus, reviewed the 2009 international building codes and is recommending that the Vail
Town Council adopts the 2009 international building codes with several amendments. The
proposed amendments specifically address the uniqueness of the construction environment in
Vail.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, staff does not request that any
formal action be taken at this time.
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Staff inemorandum
power point presentation
: C2()311:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: September 1, 2009
SUBJECT: Overview of the 2009 International Building Codes Project
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this work session item is to
1. provide a brief background and summary of the 2009 International Building
Codes Project.
2. introduce the 2009 International Building Codes amendments as recommended
by the Town of Vail Building and Fire Appeals Board (BFAB).
3. discuss the next steps in the 2009 International Building Codes amendment
adoption process.
II. BACKGROUND
Building construction in the Town of Vail is governed by the 2003 International Building
Codes as amended and adopted by the Vail Town Council in 2005. The International
Code Council (ICC) updates the international building codes every three years so that
the most current technological advances in the construction industry are used in the
protection of the public health, safety, welfare, and property. Presently, the Town of Vail
Community Development Department receives numerous requests from our customers
to use the most current and up-to-date codes in order to take advantage of the latest
advancements in building science.
The Building and Fire Appeals Board, with the administrative support of the town staff,
created several technical advisory committees to assist in the process of adopting the
2009 International Building Codes. The technical advisory committees, made up of over
30 professionals working in the construction industry, reviewed proposed amendments
to the 2009 building codes made by the public and town staff. A member of the Building
and Fire Appeals Board chaired each of these committees.
The Building and Fire Appeals Board has, through a process of community consensus,
reviewed the 2009 international building codes and is recommending that the Vail Town
Council adopts the 2009 international building codes with several amendments. The
proposed amendments specifically address the uniqueness of the construction
environment in Vail.
1
: C2()311:
8 1 1
III. NEXT STEPS
1. September 8, 2009 - the Town of Vail Community development Department will host
a public open house to discuss the proposed amendments and the pending
ordinance with the community.
2. September 10, 2009 - the Town of Vail Building and Fire Appeals Board will meet to
review the public comments received from the public open house.
3. September 15, 2009 - first reading of Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2009, an
ordinance adopting the 2009 International Building Codes.
4. October 6, 2009 - second reading of Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2009, an
ordinance adopting the 2009 International Building Codes.
5. October 9, 2009 - the Town of Vail Community Development Department will host a
2009 International Building Codes Training Workshop to inform and educate
members of the construction community on the new regulations.
6. January 1, 2010 - the 2009 International Building Codes, as amended, become
effective.
IV. ACTION REQUESTED
Staff requests the Vail Town Council listens to the Staff presentation, asks any
pertinent questions, and provide feedback to Staff
Because this is a work session, Staff does not request that any formal action be taken at
this time.
VI. ATTACHMENTS
A. Technical Advisory Committee list
B. PowerPoint Presentation, dated September 1, 2009
2
: M()311:
8-1-2
Attachment A
International Building Code (Non Structural)
Chair: Kathy Langenwalter
Members
Bill Pierce, AIA Fritzlen Pierce Architects
Steve Rondinelli, AIA BCER Engineering
Mike Cuthbertson RA Nelson
Thomas Dubois, AIA TRD Architects
Heather Barrie KH Webb Architects
Beth Levine Beth Levine Architect Inc
International Residential Code (Non -Structural)
Chair: Kyle Webb
Members
Matt Lee, AIA 8150 Architects LLC
Michael Current KH Webb Architects
J.R. Whipple RMG Engineering
International Building/ Residential Code (Structural)
Chair: Mark Mueller
Members
Peter Monroe, PE Monroe Newell Engineering
Hannes Spaeh, PE Monroe Newell Engineering
Tim Hennum, PE KRM Engineering
Michael Strumph, PE KRM Engineering
Beth Levine, AIA Beth Levine Architect Inc
J.R. Whipple RMG Engineering
Plumbing/ Mechanical/ and Electrical Code
Chair: Steve Loftus
Members
Jerry Kiel, PE BCER Engineering
Keith Jones, PE BCER Engineering
Marlin Linder Encore Electric Co
Martin Zourek, PE AEC Engineering
Robert Cummings PE AEC Engineering
Stan Humphries, PE AEC Engineering
Mark Gunther, CBO Town of Gypsum
International Performance Code
Chair: Rollie Kjesbo
Members
Chip Melick, AIA Melick Associates Inc.
Carol Mulson, Deputy Fire Chief Eagle River Fire Department
International Energy Conservation Code
Chair: Lynn Fritzlen
Members
Jerry Kiel, PE BCER Engineering
Brian Sipes, AIA Zehren and Associates
Mike Culthbertson RA Nelson and Associates
3
: (2()311:
8-1-3
Taylor Critchlow, PE AEC Engineering
Ryan Darnell, AIA KH Webb and Architects
Michael Kaltwasser, AIA
International Fire Code
Chair: Rich Seth
Members
Brian Thompson, FPE Thompson Life Safety Consulting
Dave Leiker, FPE BCER Engineering
Deborah Shaner- Lueck, FPE Shaner Life Safety
Tim Ward Commercial Specialist
Anne Gunion, AIA VAG Architects
Carol Mulson, Deputy Fire Chief Eagle River Fire Department
4
: (2()311:
8 1 4
11• : • •
•
i
. . ,
, t
~ ~i 9►~~ ~ F y. ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ , _ , ~ _ -
_
6 T
I::'1
I ' ~.~b~.9 ~I{ k.'.. . 1
4k6 ' _ . . bt`
' 009 . • Council
A~. . - - .
IqC
s-z - i
Overview • Codes to be Adopte•
- . • . : • • . . • Fire
- . • . • . -
- . • . ' • • - . . . • -
- . • . - • • - . •
• ' - -
W, • • 2 - . a
8_z_,
Why the 2009 Codes?
• - • • • - current
• • • . • • • •
A • • - • • industry • . -
. • - • - - • • • science
Safety, efficiency, . - -
' - - • - Sustainable : • •
Initiative through - • • - 119
- • • - . •
r~~ < <
8_2
The 2009 Code Process
• • . consensus • • -
- . A• • •
• Why
• • ' - • - • •
•
Public • • • • • . -
4 . • • • Council
< <
8-2-4
Major Changes
• Snow loi d i ation
• Performance bi ed code
- Allows for flexibility in build • de •
i di d for ene • efficiency •
be increased by more tha %
• Fire • er requirements • • e
Family Re • ences
• A_n I._=ment cQde
r~~'~ ~ ` ► ~
8-2-5
Questions?
Martin Haeberle,
• 0 . • .
MHaeberle@vailgov.com
r~ ~ ~ ► ~C
16wo
bo-
s-z-6
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update.
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
ATTAC H M ENTS :
Town Manager's Residence
Ford Park Management Plan
: C2()311:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: September 1, 2009
SUBJECT: FOR INFORMATION ONLY
Redevelopment Potential of the Town Manager's Residence
2507 Arosa Drive/Lot 5, Block D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a preliminary analysis of the redevelopment
potential for the Town of Vail Town Manager's Residence property located at 2507 Arosa Drive.
The existing six-bedroom, single-family Town Manager's Residence was originally constructed
in 1979 under Eagle County jurisdiction and was later annexed into the Town of Vail in 1986.
The subject property is located within the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential District.
Since the lot size exceeds 14,000 sq. ft., the allowed density on the property is either one
single-family residence, one two-family residence, one single-family residence plus a Type II
Employee Housing Unit (EHU), or one two-family residence plus a Type II EHU. A Type II EHU
is a 300 to 1,200 sq. ft. unit that cannot be sold separately and must be occupied by a qualified
"employee".
The subject property is located within the High Hazard Debris Flow Zone. A site specific
geological hazard report will be required for any future redevelopment of the property. This
report will quantify the extent of the hazard and identify any necessary hazard mitigation.
SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 2507Arosa Drive
Legal Description: Lot 5, Block D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1
Zoning: Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential District
Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Current Land Use: Single-Family Residence
Lot Size: 0.334 acres / 14,549 sq. ft.
Environmental Hazards: High Hazard Debris Flow
Easements: 10 ft. drainage easement along south property line; and
5 ft. utility easements along west, north, and east property lines
SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Current Land Use Zoninq Land Use Desiqnation
North: Ellefson Park Outdoor Recreation Medium Density Residential
USDA National Forest Not Designated Not Designated
West: Residential Two-Family Primary/Secondary Low Density Residential
East: Residential Two-Family Primary/Secondary Low Density Residential
South: Residential Two-Family Primary/Secondary Low Density Residential
1
: C2()311:
9-1-1
The following development standard calculations are approximate and based upon the Eagle
County Assessor's property records and partial architectural plans from 1979 and 1987. Prior to
proceeding with redevelopment applications, a stamped topographic survey and as-built
architectural plans must be procured to accurately quantify these development standard
calculations.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARD REQUIRED/ALLOWED EXISTING
Lot Area (min): 15,000 sq. ft. 14,549 sq. ft. (non-conforming)
Density (max): one single-family residence one single-family residence
or one two-family residence
plus one Type II EHU
Setbacks (min):
Front (east): 20 ft. 22 ft.
Side (south): 15 ft. 46 ft.
Side (north): 15 ft. 12 ft. (non-conforming)
Rear (west): 15 ft. 66 ft.
Building Height (max): 33 ft. sloping/30 ft. flat roofs <33 ft.
GRFA (max): 6,329 sq. ft. 3,472 sq. ft.
(the allowed GRFA calculation does not include basement and garage area credits)
(if a two-family dwelling is built, the secondary unit GRFA max is 40% = 2,531 sq. ft.)
(if a Type II EHU is built, an additional 550 sq. ft. GRFA credit will be applied)
Site Coverage (max): 2,910 sq. ft. (20%) 1,483 sq. ft. (10%)
Landscape Area (min): 8,729 sq. ft. (60%) 11,108 sq. ft. (76%)
Parking (min): 2 to 5 spaces (varies by GRFA) 6 total spaces (2 enclosed)
REZONING ALTERNATIVE
An alternative redevelopment scenario for the Town property located at 2507 Arosa Drive would
involve rezoning the property from the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential District to the
Housing District. The purpose of the Housing District is to facilitate the construction of
Employee Housing Units, and a re-zoning of this property to the Housing District would allow for
a more intense redevelopment.
Although the rezoning would increase the required side and rear setbacks to 20 ft., these
development standards can be adjusted at the discretion of the Planning and Environmental
Commission. The re-zoning would allow for the construction of larger structures than the Two-
Family Primary/Secondary District by increasing the maximum site coverage limit to 55% and
reducing the minimum landscape area to 30%. Additionally, the Housing District has no
maximum building height limit or density limits (both units per acre and GRFA). These two
development standards are both prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission
during the review of a proposed development plan.
2
: M()311:
9-1-2
Memorandum
To: Vail Town Council
From: Greg Hall, Director of Public Works and Transportation
Date: September 1, 2009
Re: Update on Ford Park Management Plan project.
The design team led by EDAW has completed an initial site analysis of the Ford
Park site have interviewed the stakeholder groups including the Vail Valley
Foundation, Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, Bravo, and Vail Recreation District and
have evaluated the demand for parking spaces at Ford Park.
Prior to beginning the public process, the first task of the design team is to
develop several parking alternatives to a level of detail which will allow us to
present the following information to the Town Council.
• Where parking could be located (horizontally and vertically) on the site.
This may include some surface spaces in some scenarios.
• How many new parking spaces can be created with each alternative.
• The cost of each alternative.
• Initial alternative screening and pro/con opportunity/constraint analysis.
Currently the design team is working on multiple parking alternatives in 3
locations on Ford Park plus one additional scenario at the Soccer Field parking
lot. The 3 locations on Ford Park include the east surface parking lot, the Tennis
Courts, and the Softball Fields. The design team is using a range of parking
spaces or each of the various upper bench Ford Park locations. Some
alternatives will have more or less spaces, based on how they can actually be
configured. An overriding goal is no net loss of recreation space.
The on-site parking alternatives will be in plan, and will demonstrate the
opportunities and challenges associated with integrating additional parking into
the park through conceptual diagrams for revised circulation routes, deliveries,
and on-site uses. Sections through parking structures will be prepared as
needed to illustrate the choices and impacts. At this point in the process we will
not deal with issues unrelated to the parking alternatives (e.g. improving access
to nature center).
Staff with representatives from the design team will present the alternatives for
parking at the September 15, 2009 town council session.
: M()311:
9-2-1
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council.
PRESENTER(S): Town Council
: C2()311:
OOi)
MUT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2009
ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) 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: Timber Ridge Redevelopment; 2) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b) - to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions; Re: update on pending litigation Town of Vail v. WENK et
al. Case number 08CV467; 3) C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(b) - to receive legal advice on specific
legal questions; Re: marijuana dispensaries; 4) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(f)- to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions, and to discuss personnel matters.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
: C2()311: