Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2010-10-19 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA TM T VAM VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 12:30 P.M., OCTOBER 19, 2010 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: The Town Council will meet as the Vail Reinvestment Authority Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010, a resolution adopting an amended budget and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Vail Reinvestment Authority for its fiscal year January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010. (15 minutes) PRESENTER(S): Judy Camp ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council will meet as the Vail Reinvestment Authority to consider Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010. BACKGROUND: On October 5, 2010, the Commissioners of the Vail Reinvestment Authority authorized issuance of tax increment financing (TIF) bonds to fund $12.0 million of project costs for public improvements in LionsHead. The attached resolution amends the 2010 Vail Reinvestment Authority budget to reflect issuance of the bonds, which are expected to close on October 28, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010, as presented. 2. ITEM /TOPIC: Site visit to TOV owned streamtract, located at Tract B, Vail Lionshead Filing 2. (30 minutes) PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 3. ITEM /TOPIC: Gore Creek Plaza / Site Visit (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 4. ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update (15 min) PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell 5. ITEM /TOPIC: Five year outlook for all major funds. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran 10/19/2010 ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss budget assumptions in preparation for the first reading of the 2011 Budget scheduled for November 2nd. BACKGROUND: This is a preliminary look at the next 5 years for all of the town's major funds including the General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, RETT Fund, Dispatch Services Fund and the Heavy Equipment Fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback to staff on budget assumptions, especially on the 2011 proposed budget in preparation for first reading of the budget ordinance scheduled for November 2nd. 6. ITEM /TOPIC: Review of Draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative & Process Refinements (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Suzanne Silverthorn ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council is asked to review the draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for the Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND: On Oct. 5, the Town Council reviewed the concept of a Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative as a follow up to a Conference Center Fund Reallocation presentation on Sept. 7 in which five themes were presented for consideration as projects suitable for additional evaluation. As envisioned, the Guest Services Enhancement Initiative would determine the feasibility and economic benefits associated with implementation of a comprehensive "town wide signage /information /guest enhancement system" as recommended in the conference center fund review. As proposed, the initiative would integrate technology, signage, information center functions, guest relations activities, resort branding and other elements under a unified program. Staff has suggested selecting a team of experts to assist in the process via a Request for Qualifications /Proposals (RFQ /P). The proposed process has been refined to build upon Town Council's request to control costs and direct outcomes. This would be handled by evaluating and prioritizing a series of recommendations which would be used to develop an implementation plan that would coincide with available resources. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests Town Council approval and /or modification of the Request for Qualifications /Proposals for the Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative. 7. ITEM /TOPIC: A summarization of the Eagle River Watershed Council's grant funded activities, including recent water quality monitoring updates, I- 70 Vail Pass impacts and recommendations study, and inclusion in the revised 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan /Gore Creek Subwatershed section. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Melissa Macdonald, ERWC Executive Director ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: There is no action being requested at this time. The Council is encouraged to listen to the presentation, ask any question and provide feedback. 10/19/2010 BACKGROUND: At the October 11, 2010, Planning and Environmental Commission hearing the Eagle River Watershed Council gave this presentation to provide the Commission members insight into purpose, goals, and activities of the organization. 8. ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: Vail Economic Advisory Council (VEAC) Minutes - Kelli CSE Memo - Kelli Lodging Update Memo - Kelli Solaris Parking Signs - Warren Town of Vail Green Building Program - Kristen (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Kelli McDonald, Warren Campbell, Stan Zemler 9. ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council (15 min.) 10. ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C. R. S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: Status of Comcast Franchise Agreement negotiations. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire 11. ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment ( 4:20 P.M.) *Lunch will not be included* NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW (ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD), TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2010 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Building Permits and Registration processes - Nov 2 - WS - George - 30 min Commercial Ski Storage Update - Nov 2 - WS - Warren - 20 min. Winter Parking Incentives - Nov 2 - WS - Greg - 15 min Loading & Delivery East Meadow Drive Site Visit - Nov 2 - WS - George /Suzanne /Steve W - 20 min. Loading & Delivery East Meadow Drive Discussion - Nov 2 - WS - George /Suzanne /Steve W. - 30 min. Parking Policy Zoning Regulations - Nov 2 - WS - George /Bill - 30 min. Timber Ridge Rockfall Mitigation - Nov 2 - Evening - George - 30 min. Covered Bridge trees site visit - Nov 2 - WS - George - 20 min. PEIS CDOT letter - Nov 2 - WS - Greg - 20 min. Lightning Shelter Appeal - Nov 2 - Evening - George - 30 min. Permission to Proceed through Process for Community Garden - Nov 2 - 10/19/2010 WS - 30 min. VMLD 2011 Budget Resolution - Nov 2 - Evening - Kelli and Kathleen - 15 min. 1 st Reading Budget - Nov 2 - Evening - Judy - 30 min. Energy Audit Upgrades - Nov 2 - Evening - Greg /Kristin - 30 min. EPS Economic & Fiscal Impact Study /EverVail - Nov 2 - Evening - George - 60 min. Benefits Discussion - Nov 16 - WS - JP - 30 min. Bonus Pool - Information Update - Nov 16 - WS - JP 2nd Reading Budget - Nov 16 - Evening - Judy - 30 min. Local Purchasing Preferences - TBD - WS - Judy - 30 min. Resolution on Parking - TOV summer/VRI winter -TBD - Greg - 30 min Recognition of Howard and Cathy Stone/Vail Jazz Foundation - TBD - Dick Cleveland - Evening - 5 min. Conference Center Fund Update - Dec 7 - WS - Stan - 30 min. Ralf Garrison - Dec 7 - Evening - Kelli - 30 min. 10/19/2010 W ( V � VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: The Town Council will meet as the Vail Reinvestment Authority Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010, a resolution adopting an amended budget and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Vail Reinvestment Authority for its fiscal year January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010. PRESENTER(S): Judy Camp ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council will meet as the Vail Reinvestment Authority to consider Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010. BACKGROUND: On October 5, 2010, the Commissioners of the Vail Reinvestment Authority authorized issuance of tax increment financing (TIF) bonds to fund $12.0 million of project costs for public improvements in LionsHead. The attached resolution amends the 2010 Vail Reinvestment Authority budget to reflect issuance of the bonds, which are expected to close on October 28, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 4, Series of 2010, as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 101019 VRA Packet 10/19/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Reinvestment Authority Commissioners FROM: Judy Camp Kathleen Halloran DATE: October 13, 2010 RE: Vail Reinvestment Authority Budget In Tuesday's session, you will be asked to approve Resolution No. 4 making supplemental appropriations and adjustments to the 2010 budget. The following information is provided for your review: • Summary of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances — 2009 Actual and 2010 including the Third Supplemental Appropriation • Resolution No. 4, Series 2010 The purpose of this supplemental request is to appropriate funds for the issuance of Series 2010A and Series 2010B tax increment revenue bonds. During the October 5 th discussion of bond parameters, Council approved a maximum of $12.5 million of bond principal for $12.0 million in project costs to be financed with two series of bonds. Staff was also directed to pay cash for bond issuance costs and the required debt service reserve. The following projects were included in the bond offering documents at a maximum total project cost of $12.0 million: • LionsHead Transit and Welcome Center: $7.8 million • East LionsHead Portal: $2,075,000 (original estimate was $3.6 million) • West LionsHead Portal: $750,000 • Vail Public Library — Phase I: $475,000 • Surface parking at the charter bus lot: $900,000 Other than the LionsHead Transit and Welcome Center, the remaining projects have not been approved by Council and will go through the review process for design and construction costs. They are listed in the bond offering document to provide information to potential buyers regarding the types of projects that will be financed through the bond issuance. The supplemental appropriation includes the following items: • Bond proceeds of $12.0 million • Debt service reserve fund (cash- funded) of $1,030,000. This amount will be deposited with the bond trustee (US Bank) and reflected in the financial statements as "restricted" cash within the fund balance. • Cost of issuance of $250,000 (cash funded) • $50,000 of planning costs for newly -added projects such as the Library remodel Resolution No. 4, Series 2010 will appropriate a total of $300,000 including $250,000 to facilitate the issuance of tax - exempt increment revenue bonds, Series 2010A and taxable tax increment revenue bonds (direct pay Build America Bonds), Series 2010B and $50,000 to fund planning costs for newly -added projects. It will also authorize staff to deposit $1,030,000 with the bond trustee to fund the bond debt service reserve. 1 10/19/2010 1 -1 -1 VAIL REINVESTMENT AUTHORITY Summary of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance 2010 2010 2009 Original 2010 3rd Proposed Actual Budget Amended Supplemental Amended Revenue Property Tax - LionsHead TIF $ 1,709,772 $ 2,056,000 $ 2,056,000 $ 2,056,000 Property Tax -Vail Square Metro Districts 273,387 376,000 376,000 376,000 Earnings on Investments 26,705 10,000 Total Revenue 2,009,864 2,432,000 2,432,000 2,442,000 Operating Expenditures Professional Fees 9,830 25,000 25,000 25,000 Management Fee 34,195 41,120 41,120 41,120 Treasurer's Fee - LionsHead TIF 51,293 61,680 61,680 61,680 Treasurer's Fee -Vail Square Metro Districts 8,202 11,280 11,280 11,280 Vail Square Metro District Pass Through 265,186 364,720 364,720 364,720 Total Operating 368,706 503,800 503,800 - 503,800 Capital Outlay- Frontage Road Improvements 48,127 4,170 4,170 Debt Service - Bond Issuance Costs 250,000 250,000 Total Expenditures 416,833 503,800 507,970 250,000 757,970 Excess of Revenues over Expenditures 1,593,031 1,928,200 1,924,030 (250,000) 1,684,030 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfer Out to Capital Projects Fund Planning and Design (50,000) (50,000) LionsHead Transit/Welcome Center (289,409) (969,681) (969,681) LionsHead Parking Structure Addition (65,000) (65,000) LionsHead Portal Improvements Library Remodel LionsHead Parking Structure Capital Maintenance (160,000) (160,000) Total Transfers Out (289,409) - (1,194,681) (50,000) (1,244,681) Loan Proceeds 12,000,000 12,000,000 Transfer In from Capital Projects Fund - FTA Grant 2,479,515 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (289,409) 2,479,515 - 11,950,000 10,755,319 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 1,303,622 4,407,715 1,924,030 11,700,000 12,439,349 Beginning Fund Balance 1,333,551 2,519,601 2,637,173 2,637,173 Ending Fund Balance $ 2,637,173 $ 6,927,316 $ 4,561,203 $ 11,700,000 $ 15,076,522 Restricted Funds Included in Fund Balance - Debt Service Reserve $ 1.030.000 S 1.030.000 2 10/19/2010 1 -1 -2 RESOLUTION NO. 4, SERIES OF 2010 VAIL REINVESTMENT AUTHORITY A Resolution adopting an amended budget and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Vail Reinvestment Authority for its fiscal year January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010. WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 2010 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Vail Reinvestment Authority at the time it enacted Resolution No. 3, Series of 2009, adopting the 2010 Budget for the Vail Reinvestment Authority of Vail, Colorado; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CRS section 29 -1 -106 a notice of budget hearing has been published; and WHEREAS, notice of this public hearing to consider the adoption of the proposed Vail Reinvestment Authority budget was published in the VAIL DAILY on the 15th day of October, 2010; and NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED by the Vail Reinvestment Authority of Vail, Colorado, as follows: The Vail Reinvestment Authority adopts the amended budget and appropriates an additional $300,000 for expenditures beginning on the first day of January 2010 and ending on the 31 day of December 2010. The Vail Reinvestment Authority also authorizes staff to transfer $1,030,000 to US Bank, bond trustee, to be held in deposit as a debt reserve fund. Attested: Signed: Stan Zemler, Secretary Dick Cleveland, Chairman Resolution No. 4, Series 2010 10/19/2010 1 -1 -3 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Site visit to TOV owned streamtract, located at Tract B, Vail Lionshead Filing 2. PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 10/19/2010 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Gore Creek Plaza / Site Visit PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 10/19/2010 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell ATTACHMENTS: October 6, 2010 DRB Meeting Results Four Seasons Concierge Plans - DRB 10/6/10 October 11, 2010 PEC Meeting Results 10/19/2010 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING October 6, 2010 OV TIY Council Chambers X 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 PROJECT ORIENTATION 12:30pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Tom DuBois Pete Dunning Brian Gillette Rollie Kjesbo Libby Plante SITE VISITS 1. Wilhemsen Residence — 2910 Booth Creek Drive 2. TOV Banner Poles — 82 East Meadow Drive 3. Red Sands Corporation — 100 East Meadow Drive 4. Woo Restaurant — 100 East Meadow Drive 5. Blumberg Residence — 366 Forest Road 6. Lion Square Lodge — 660 Lionshead Place 7. Vail Spa — 710 West Lionshead Circle 8. McDonalds — 2171 North Frontage Road West 9. Ribiero — 1479 Aspen Grove Lane PUBLIC HEARING — TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00pm 1. Red Sands Corporation DRB100456 / 10 minutes Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 100 East Meadow Drive, Unit 26 (Village Inn) /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Red Sands Corporation, represented by Nedbo Construction ACTION: Denied (motion for approval failed by split vote) MOTION: Gillette SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 2 -2 -1 ( Kjesbo recused, Dunning and Plante opposed) 2. Blumberg Residence DRB100461 / 10 minutes Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 366 Forest Road /Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 3 Applicant: J. Seth Blumberg, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Gillette SECOND: Plante VOTE: 5 -0 -0 CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant shall install asphalt shingles to match the adjacent half of the duplex. Page 1 10/19/2010 4 -1 -1 3. Lion Square Lodge DRB100465 / 15 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re- paint, re -roof, balconies) 660 Lionshead Place /Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1 Addition 1 Applicant: Lion Square Lodge Phase 1 HOA, represented by Bill Anderson ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Plante VOTE: 4 -1 -0 (Gillette opposed) CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant shall match the yellow and brown paint colors to the colors used at the Arrabelle at Vail Square, to be confirmed by the Administrator prior to painting. 4. Powder Tools DRB100485 / 10 minutes Rachel Final review of a sign (projecting, business id) 278 Hanson Ranch Road (Bridge Street Lodge) /Lot A, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: RAD Three, LLC, represented by Ron Riley ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5. Four Seasons Concierge DRB100416 / 15 minutes Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stairs, ramp) 227 Wall Street / Lot C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: HB Development Co., represented by TJ Brink ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 3 -2 -0 (Dunning and Plante opposed) CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant shall install the wider wall design option (eight inch block and six inch veneer). 6. Woo Restaurant DRB100501 / 15 minutes Rachel Final review of changes to approved plans (chimneys) 100 East Meadow Drive /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Rick Woo, represented by John Martin ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Plante VOTE: 5 -0 -0 CONDITION(S): 1. This approval is contingent upon final approval of a minor amendment to the Special Development District. 2. The applicant shall paint both the mechanical equipment and the metal screen tan to match the existing chimneys. 3. The north side chimney and adjacent landing area walls shall be stucco to match existing building materials and colors (tan). 4. The applicant shall utilize a woven metal for screening where applicable. 7. Block 16 DRB100513 / 10 minutes Warren Final review of a sign (wall) 16 Vail Road (The Sebastian) /Lot M, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Ferruco Vail Ventures, represented by Mauriello Planning Group ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Page 2 10/19/2010 4 -1 -2 8. West Haven Condominiums DRB100493 / 10 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re- paint) 1325 Westhaven Drive /Cascade Village Applicant: West Haven LLC, represented by JL Viele ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 9. Ritz Carlton Sales Office DRB100499 / 10 minutes Rachel Final review of changes to approved plans (signs) 288 Bridge Street, Unit C -3 (Rucksack Building) /Lot D, Block 5A, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Ritz Carlton, represented by Kevin Roth ACTION: Tabled to the October 20, 2010 MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 10. McDonalds DRB100495 / 15 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 2171 North Frontage Road /Part of Lot 2, Vail das Schone Filing 3 Applicant: McDonalds, represented by Mark Helms ACTION: Denied MOTION: Gillette SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5 -0 -0 11. Vail Spa DRB100482 / 15 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (entry/parking) 710 West Lionshead Circle /Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Vail Spa Condominium Association, represented by KH Webb Architects ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Plante SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 4- 0- 1(Kjesbo recused) CONDITION: 1. This approval is contingent upon approval from utility companies and the Colorado Department of Transportation to be submitted in conjunction with the Building Permit. 12. Vail Recreation District DRB100524 / 5 minutes Bill Final review of a change to approved plans (lightning shelters) 1778 Vail Valley Drive /Unplatted and Lot E, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Vail Recreation District, represented by Scott O'Connell ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 13. Wilhelmsen Residence DRB100521 / 15 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (entry feature) 2910 Booth Creek Drive / Lot 2, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 11 Applicant: Axel Wilhelmsen ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 14. West Vail Fire Station DRB100511 / 5 minutes Bill Final review of changes to approved plans (window color) 2399 North Frontage Road /Parcel B, Resub of Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1 Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Mark Miller ACTION: Approved MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Page 3 10/19/2010 4 -1 -3 15. Town of Vail DRB100506 / 5 minutes Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (banner poles) 75 South Frontage Road /Unplatted Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Todd Oppenheimer ACTION: Tabled to the October 20, 2010 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0 16. Ribiero Residence DRB100252 / 10 minutes Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (trash enclosure) 1479 Aspen Grove Lane /Lot 2, Lions Ridge Filing 4 Applicant: Pedro Ribiero ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Gillette SECOND: Plante VOTE: 5 -0 -0 CONDITION: 1. The applicant shall replace any trees that are removed, damaged or dead within three years of construction with the same number of feet of trees that are removed, damaged or dead. STAFF APPROVALS Castro Residence DRB100341 Bill Final review of changes to approved plans (windows, roof) 965 Fairway Drive /Lot 1, Vail Village Filing 10 Applicant: Manuel Castro, represented by Berglund Architects Oliver Residence DRB100392 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping, deck) 754 Potato Patch Drive, Unit E /Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: Nancy Oliver, represented by Landscape Technology Group Cerisola Residence DRB100393 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping, address marker) 754 Potato Patch Drive, Unit W /Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: Pinetree Holdings, represented by Landscape Technology Group Tarr Residence DRB100422 Rachel Final review of an addition (loft, entry) 5020 Main Gore Place, Unit M2 (Gore Creek Meadows) /Unplatted Applicant: Jeff & Andrea Tarr, represented by Nedbo Construction Rodriguez Residence DRB100438 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 4071 Bighorn Road, Unit 13D (Pitkin Creek Park) /Unplatted Applicant: Judy Rodriguez Vail Racquet Club DRB100440 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 4695 Vail Racquet Club Drive /Unplatted Applicant: Racquet Club Owners Association Page 4 10/19/2010 4 -1 -4 Snowstorm LLC DRB100441 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof, skylights) 2009 Sunburst Drive /Lot 15, Vail Valley Filing 3 Applicant: Snowstorm LLC, represented by Chad Alcock Spaeth Residence DRB100447 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (window) 2773 Kinnickinnick Road, Unit D5 (Columbine North Condos)Lots A -C 3 &4, Block 4, Vail Intermountain Applicant: Edmond (Alex) Spaeth First Chair DRB100448 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (parking) 600 West Lionshead Circle (North Day Lot) /Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Kyle Griffith Cascades on Gore Creek DRB100449 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 1390 Westhaven Drive /Cascade Village Applicant: Cascades on Gore Creek, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects Smith Residence DRB100450 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 3931 Bighorn Road, Unit 5R (Pitkin Creek Park) /Unplatted Applicant: Sandra Smith Columbine West Condominiums DRB100451 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 2823 Kinnikinnick Road /Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Intermountain Applicant: Catherine Holonitch, represented by Paul Huntoon Gateway Land & Development DRB100452 Rachel Final review of a sign (business identification) 183 Gore Creek Drive, Suite 5 (Sitzmark) /Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Gateway Land & Development, represented by Michelle Horak Birch Residence DRB100453 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck) 1773 Shasta Place /Lot 13, Vail Village West Filing 1 Applicant: David & Kathryn Birch, represented by David Korbel Shay Residence DRB100454 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re- paint, stairs) 4545 Bighorn Road /Lot 3, Bighorn Subdivision 3 d Addition Applicant: Jenifer Shay Schutz Residence DRB100455 Warren Final review of an addition (5 Floor) 600 Vail Valley Drive, Unit F8 (Northwoods) /Unplatted Applicant: Stephen Shutz, represented by Nedbo Construction Page 5 10/19/2010 4 -] -5 Red Sands Corporation DRB100457 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stairs) 100 East Meadow Drive, Unit 26 (Village Inn) /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Red Sands Corporation, represented by Nedbo Construction Interlochen DRB100459 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (planter, retaining walls, stairs) 2958 South Frontage Road /Lot 4, Block 5, Vail Intermountain Applicant: Interlochen Condominium Association, represented by Darrell Cooter Strattan Residence DRB100460 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 4460 Timber Falls Court, Unit 1608 /Unplatted Applicant: Gaar Strattan, represented by Rob Hall's Kitchens Plus Dieterich Residence DRB100462 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (hot tub) 4459 Timber Falls Court, Unit 1801 (Timber Falls) /Unplatted Applicant: James Dieterich Bighorn 4792 LP Residence DRB100463 Warren Final review of an addition (bedroom, bathroom, laundry) 4792 Meadow Lane /Lot 5, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision 5 th Addition Applicant: Bighorn 4792 LP, represented by Nedbo Construction Ferdows Residence DRB100466 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows, doors) 4957 Juniper Lane /Lot 3, Block 4, Bighorn Subdivision 5 th Addition Applicant: SCIC, represented by Christine Ferdows Vail Property Holdings DRB100467 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 254 Beaver Dam Road /Lot 23, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Joe & Lucie Pal, represented by Moon Hsu Kelton Residence DRB100468 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck) 1034 Homestake /Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Art Kelton, represented by Duane Piper Weiss Residence DRB100469 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 62 East Meadow Drive, Unit 304, 305 (Talisman #380) /Track K -L, Block 5E, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Lawrence & Suzanne Weiss, represented by Tom Saalfeld Martin Residence DRB100472 Tom Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 5127 Main Gore Drive /Lot 6, Block 1, Bighorn Subdivision 5 th Addition Applicant: Landis Martin, represented by Charlie Sherman Page 6 10/19/2010 4 -1 -6 Diones Residence DRB100473 Tom Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 1626 Golf Terrace /Lot 2A, Warren Pulis Subdivision Appliant: Donald & Frances Diones, represented by A Cut Above Forestry First Chair DRB100476 Warren Final review of changes to approved plans (retaining wall) 600 West Lionshead Circle /Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Corporation, represented by Kyle Griffith Evergreen Hotel DRB100477 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re- paint) 250 South Frontage Road West/Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1 Applicant: HCT Development, represented by Chris Hanen Matterhorn Inn DRB100479 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck) 1552 Matterhorn Circle /Matterhorn Village Applicant: Matterhorn Inn Owners Association, represented by Matt Hansen Kirschner Residence DRB100480 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 1995 Chamonix Lane /Lot 27, Buffehr Creek Applicant: John Kirschner Safeway DRB100481 Rachel Final review of a sign (business identification) 2131 North Frontage Road /Lot 3, Vail das Schone Filing 3 Applicant: Safeway Store 0631, represented by Chuck Hand Timber Ridge Apartments DRB100483 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 1280 North Frontage Road, Buildings J, K, M, N, O & P /Lots A -P, Block C1, Lion's Ridge Filing 1 Applicant: Timber Ridge Affordable Housing, represented by Joe Costa Milmo Residence DRB100484 Bill Final review of changes to approved plans (chimney) 996 Ptarmigan Road /Lot 2, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Ptarmigan Vail, LLC, represented by Michael Suman Architect Lady Belle Partnership DRB100486 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 521 East Lionshead Circle (Vail 21) /Part of Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1 Applicant: Lady Belle Partnership, represented by Plath Construction Link Residence DRB100494 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 2692 Cortina Lane /Lot 10, Block B, Vail Ridge Applicant: Ted Link, represented by Wes Brown Roofing Page 7 10/19/2010 4 -1 -7 Ortegon Residence Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (door) 1459 North Green Hill Court/Lot 613, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: Vera Ortegon, represented by Ross Knittel The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Page 8 10/19/2010 4 -1 -8 ,� lavmtasss,w ..e. LLI 1 Ro rs o FDZ �n ALi. pR5 RAFIP FLAN PL?M - Ti w i i RCl1P CTP/ — _ 6� �EGTAJ �z�� `� i'�OR011ll IIFN MDR L'0g5 Y+ faKfiT SKl3 ' O MT911Y i'! nleyy, - 10/19/2010 4 -2 -1 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION October 11, 2010 1:OOpm 7C1WNOiff� TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT John Rediker Michael Kurz David Viele Tyler Schneidman Bill Pierce Henry Pratt Luke Cartin Eagle River Watershed Council Presentation - Melissa Macdonald 30 minutes Site Visits: 1. Boymer Residence — 1817 Meadow Ridge Road 2. Stephen's Park Stream Bank Restoration Project 20 minutes 1. A request for review of a variance from Section 12 -6F -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback, located at 1817 Meadow Ridge Road, Unit 6 /1-ot 21, Buffehr Creek Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100040) Applicant: Robert Boymer Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Viele SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6 -0 -0 CONDITION: 1. This approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this proposal. Rachel Friede made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. Bob Boymer stated that he had nothing further to add. There was no public comment. The Commissioners expressed their support to the variance request. 30 minutes 2. Report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to SDD No. 6, Village Inn Plaza, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the approved development plans to increase site coverage and reduce the side setback (east side) to facilitate expanded an expanded chimney for a new restaurant, located at 68 East Meadow Drive, Unit 602/ Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 100044) Applicant: Joe Staufer, represented by John G. Martin, Architect Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Upheld Staff's Approval Rachel Friede made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. Pa e 1 10/1 010 4 -3 -1 John Martin, representative of the applicant, made a brief presentation. Michael Suman, representing the Solaris Property Owners, outlined the concern of his client, specifically noting that more studies should be done to reduce potential negative effects of the cooking exhaust. He asked that the application be called -up and discussed at a later date to allow for further studies and discussions with the applicant. John Martin responded that the applicant has studied this restaurant and all of the options for exhausting the cooking appliances. The only three locations where chimneys and exhaust venting could occur is where they are being proposed today. He stated that a scrubber, as suggested by the applicant, would be the size of a small truck, and without taking up restaurant space, the scrubber would have to be located outside of the building. He further stated that there may not be any exterior location for the scrubber. He stated that a better filtration system could be utilized to eliminate smoke and ash from the cooking exhaust vents. Rick Woo, the owner of the proposed restaurant, stated that they are here today to expand the chimney chaise for expanded access for maintenance and fire department access. He said that the mixed use aspect of the neighborhood should allow for restaurants to be near residential. He said the north side exhaust fan is 120 feet from Solaris. The south side exhaust fan is 110 feet from Solaris. The only concern is the east exhaust, which is 40 feet from the Solaris building. There is a big line of trees between Solaris and the east exhaust fan that will create a barrier between the two properties. He said the wind primarily blows through the alley between Solaris and Village Inn Plaza and would blow the smoke towards Meadow Drive. He added that the Japanese kitchens are very clean, and most of the prep work and cooking will occur at the front of the house. There will be very limited deep frying and will decrease the amount of use of the venting on the east side of the building. Jonathan Staufer, owner of the commercial space and manager for the building, stated that Rick Woo wants to be a good neighbor. He said that they can get together with Solaris to create a good working relationship to problem solve any issues that arise. Michael Suman stated that the Solaris is in favor of additional site coverage for a scrubber to treat the exhaust venting if that were necessary.. Commissioner Rediker asked why the issue of negative exhaust impacts came up now and not with the previous minor amendment. Rachel Friede explained that the concern was raised by the Solaris development only in conjunction with this notification. Commissioner Pratt stated that from a zoning perspective, there is no issue. However, from a neighbor issue, there are some potential problems. The Commissioners confirmed staff's administrative approval confirming that the criteria had been met and did not call up the action for discussion. 75 minutes 3. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public building and grounds, to allow for the construction of a new structure to replace the Lionshead Parking Structure Auxiliary Building to provide guest related facilities, located at 395 South Frontage Road West/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Page 2 10/19 2010 4 -3 -2 Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100042) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Braun Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to October 25, 2010 MOTION: Viele SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 6 -0 -0 Warren Campbell gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, reiterated the process thus far. Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the Town's thinking on the life span of the Lionshead parking structure. Tom Kassmel explained that the most recent studies state that the parking structure is about half way through its life span with and additional 30 years remaining so long as maintenance and certain improvements are performed. Such as ADA improvements and the addition of fire sprinklers. Lou Bieker of 4240, consulting architect, made a presentation on the process thus far and the program and function of the proposed structure. Tom Braun, of Braun and Associates, planning consultant, gave a presentation on the provisions of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and the conditional use permit criteria that will be used to evaluate the proposal. Commissioner Viele inquired as to the construction duration. Tom Kassmel, stated that there was an aggressive schedule of seven months to be out of public spaces and working on the interior. Commissioner Cartin inquired as to whether or not this facility will be replace the information booth up on the Frontage Road. Tom Kassmel explained that there has been a great deal of discussion about that topic and the general consensus was that if the new design was done taking that into consideration that it was likely that the information both on the Frontage Road could be eliminated. Commissioner Cartin stated that he was concerned about the height of the tower and will be reviewing that closely in conjunction with a final action. Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the hours of operation of the waiting room as the ADA access went through that space and may be required to be open unless there are other options. He was not as concerned with the parking needs not being addressed per the Code with this proposal as there is a significant number of spaces adjacent to the structure. He agreed that housing would be better suited to the east of this structure. While the architecture is not in his realm he does feel it is out of character with the Master Plan. He highlight the roof snow shedding on to pedestrian areas. Suggested an outdoor fire pit as in the winter on a sunny day people like to wait outside. He suggested that maybe more bathrooms may be appropriate and that roofing of the entirety of the outdoor patio space on the top floor. He believes this is a great facility for an activities desk, but doesn't believe moving the information would be wise, as drawing first time visitors down to this corner is asking a lot. Page 3 10/19 2010 4 -3 -3 Commissioner Pierce agrees with Commissioner's Pratt comments about the information center. Visibility and ease of access is important. He further asked about the frequency of buses as with a seven minute peak time frequency was that much waiting room area necessary. He suggested the kids programs should maybe be located on the top floor to give greater use of the space. He felt there was too much south glass to display art in the space. He too expressed concern about the architecture with regard to views. Commissioner Schneidman raised concerns about guests in ski boots circulating through the building. Additionally he expressed concern over the tower height. Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the Town's thoughts on the use of escalators as they are a great guest amenity especially when in ski boots.. Tom Kassmel stated that escalators were contemplated early on, but were removed due to initial cost and ongoing maintenance. 4. Approval of September 27, 2010 minutes MOTION: Viele SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6 -0 -0 5. Information Update Warren Campbell informed the Commission that the Administrative Interpretation regarding Mery Lapin's request to combine his two lots into a single development site was called up by the Town Council at the request of the Town Attorney. Subsequent tot eh Town Attorney providing testimony at the Commission's hearing on the issue the Attorney discovered additional information potentially changing his original findings resulting in the need to proceed through the subdivision process. Warren Campbell concluded by stating that he would keep the Commission apprised of the outcome. 6. Adjournment MOTION: Viele SECOND: Cartin 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 October 8, 2010, in the Vail Daily. Pa e 4 10/1 010 4 -3 -4 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Five year outlook for all major funds. PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Discuss budget assumptions in preparation for the first reading of the 2011 Budget scheduled for November 2nd. BACKGROUND: This is a preliminary look at the next 5 years for all of the town's major funds including the General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, RETT Fund, Dispatch Services Fund and the Heavy Equipment Fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback to staff on budget assumptions, especially on the 2011 proposed budget in preparation for first reading of the budget ordinance scheduled for November 2nd. ATTACHMENTS: 5 -year budget 10/19/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Stan Zemler, Judy Camp, Kathleen Halloran DATE: October 14, 2010 SUBJECT: 5 -year Outlook for Major Funds The purpose of this discussion is to review staff's projections for the next five years within the major funds and receive feedback in preparation for the first reading of the budget ordinance scheduled for November 2 Attached for your consideration are the five -year plans for the following funds: - General Fund - Capital Projects Fund - Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund - Dispatch Services Fund - Heavy Equipment Fund In addition, staff has also included a historical timeline of sales tax collection policy and the "split" of revenues between the General Fund and the Capital Projects Fund on page 4 and a summary of all operating expenditures (across all funds) on page 7. General Fund The five -year outlook starts with the 2011 proposed budget, which was first reviewed by Council on October 5 Based on Council recommendations made during that meeting, the 2011 budget has been updated to reflect a 2% performance -based merit pool and a 1% bonus pool (total increase of $313,000 including benefits for 2011). It has also been updated to reflect the Fire Department's staffing model for the West Vail Fire Station starting in March of 2011. This model requires an increase of $35,000 (including benefits) to staff the station with a lieutenant, an engineer and a resident fire fighter for each shift. Previous budget estimates had included staffing costs for three fire fighters, but was not specific as to each position. While the 2011 General Fund budget projects a surplus of $447,193 at the end of the year, a shortfall of approximately $500,000 is anticipated for 2012. The shortfall grows each year through 2015 because total revenue is not growing at the same rate as expenditures. While sales tax collections are projected at the same growth rate as inflation for expenditures (2% per year), the drop in property tax revenues in 2012 causes an overall decrease in revenue. Major assumptions used in the development of this five -year plan: - 2011 Sales Tax is budgeted flat with 2009, with 2% per year growth beginning in 2012. - Property tax is relatively flat for 2011, but 2012 will be impacted by the re- assessment, with an estimated decrease of 25% in Vail's base (30% is predicted for a county -wide median) offset by further completion of major redevelopment projects such as the Four Seasons and Solaris. - Parking revenue for 2011 is $50,000 less than 2009 based on the net parking policy impacts, and increases by 3% in 2013 and 2015 (every two years). - Assume inflationary increase of 2% per year. - Salary expense includes merit pool increases of 2% per year (same percentage increase as operating expense). Employee benefits are projected at a 3% per year increase due to uncertainties in healthcare. However, the impact of healthcare reform in 2014 is not reflected because of the possibility for additional legislation changes and the difficulty in estimating the dollar impact. - New operational expenses were added for the Transit and Welcome Centers, as well as the new West Vail Fire Station. These projections also include increased costs from 1 10 /19/2010 5 -1 -1 newly -added streetscape and snowmelt such as Meadow Drive in front of Solaris. We do not have expenditures estimated for newly -added projects such as potential snowmelt for East and West LionsHead Portals, increased maintenance costs for surface parking at the charter bus lot or expanded use of the Welcome Center. These will be added pending additional analysis and design decisions. While departments have made significant cuts in both headcount and operating expenses to date, further reductions will be necessary to operate within the limits of annual revenues. Staff is currently developing a plan to remedy the shortfalls, which includes the following: • Analyze all operating expenditures and the town's organizational structure, including opportunities for contract services • Evaluate sustainable compensation and benefits options • Investigate the potential for new revenue sources such as summer parking and an increase in lodging tax to help pay for special events • Review the budget philosophy regarding the appropriate amount of fund balance, annual increases to the fund balance when both revenue and expenditures do better than expected, and the split of sales tax revenue between the General Fund and the Capital Projects Fund (see history of the "split" on page 4). On page 7, staff has summarized operational expenditures across all funds. The majority of operations are paid for by the General Fund ($28.6M for 2011, or 92 %). Remaining costs are paid for by the RETT Fund (7 %) and the Marketing Fund (business licenses - 1%). This exhibit demonstrates that there would be additional expense in the General Fund if these other revenue sources did not exist. Capital Projects Fund The Capital Projects Fund five -year plan was first presented to Council on September 7 The attached worksheet has not changed, with the exception of projects funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (changes are highlighted in gray in the worksheet). After the next five years of funding critical capital projects, this fund will have an estimated $3.8 million in remaining fund balance at the end of 2015. Significant projects funded over the next five years: - Annual maintenance averaging $3.6 million including streets, parking structures, town facilities and technology systems - LionsHead projects funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (up to $12.0 million over five years) - Neighborhood Road reconstruction (Mill Creek, Vail Valley Drive and East Vail roads) totaling $14.7 million over five years - Bridge reconstruction totaling $3.0 million over five years - Purchase of two hybrid buses ($1.2 million) - Variable message systems and signage on frontage road near Main Vail exits, Four Seasons, Ford Park and outside the Vail Village Parking Structure ($410,000) Some of the projects that are currently not funded: the Chamonix Housing site development, parking expansion at Ford Park or on the frontage roads, major reconstruction of the round - abouts, and reconstruction of several town facilities. See page 13 for a list of these projects, prioritized by Council, with suggested methods of funding. 2 10/19/2010 5 -] -2 Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) Fund This five -year plan was also presented to Council on September 7 The attached worksheet has been adjusted to reflect Council's decision to reduce funding for the Eagle River Watershed Council from $90,000 to $50,000 based on limited use of funds in prior years. After the next five years of funding annual maintenance and critical projects, this fund will have an estimated $3.2 million in remaining fund balance at the end of 2015. Significant projects funded over the next five years: - Annual maintenance of parks, recreation areas, forest health and environmental sustainability totaling $2.5 million on average per year. - Frontage Road bike lanes ($3.4 million) - Ford Park Master Plan ($2.1 million) - Improvements to Vail Recreation District - managed assets ($2.5 million) Dispatch Services Fund This is an enterprise fund, meaning that more than half of its revenue is from sources outside of the town, managing emergency communications for all of Eagle County. The 911 Board currently funds seven dispatcher positions, two supervisor positions and a systems engineer. Similar assumptions were used for this fund as with the General Fund, with projections of 2% per year increases in expenditures and the same increase in fee revenue collected from user agencies. There is a significant capital expenditure budgeted in 2011 for the replacement of the Dispatch Center's radio communication equipment. The current equipment in place is experiencing failures and is no longer compatible with statewide systems. This project will upgrade the Dispatch Services equipment by tying directly into the state system. A benefit is that all public safety agencies will be able to communicate across the state, which is a county -wide initiative. The Eagle County Radio System governance board (made up of the chiefs and directors of each user agency within Eagle County) has recommended moving forward with this project, which will be paid from the reserves in the Dispatch Services Fund. These reserves are the result of many years of contributions from all user agencies, including the Town of Vail. 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 actual use of the vehicles and equipment. Budget assumptions for this five -year plan include annual increases of 3% for both operating expenditures and the related charges back to the departments. Staffing cost increases are the same as the General Fund, with 2% merit pool increases per year. Due to annual savings from both fuel cost fluctuations and the delay of some vehicle replacements, the fund balance will grow to an estimated $2.1 million by the end of 2010. As such, annual charges to the departments have been decreased over the next five years, which will reduce General Fund charges and continue to provide the necessary funding for replacement as is the intent of the fund. At the end of 2015, this fund will have an estimated $1.1 million in remaining reserves. These five -year projections for all of the major funds will be published in the annual Budget Book once the 2011 budget is finalized. Staff is asking for feedback on these plans as we continue through the budget process. 3 10/19/2010 5 -1 -3 In response to Council questions from the October 5 discussion: First look at the 2011 Budget: Sales Tax Background (Abbreviated) July, 1967: 2% sales tax imposed February, 1971: Rate increased to 3% July, 1973: Rate increased to 4 %, and specified intent that 50% of sales tax revenue be earmarked for capital projects, real estate acquisition and related debt service November, 1985: Provision requiring 5 votes of Council to override the 50% split Sales Tax "Split" for the last 10 years • The "split" has been budgeted at an average of 61 % to General Fund and 39% to the Capital Projects Fund • The actual share of revenue has averaged 53/47 since 2000 and 50/50 since 2004. These averages include the impact of transfers of fund balance from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund • Since 2000, $9.2 million has been transferred into the Capital Projects Fund for both specific projects ($565,000 toward the Vail Gymnastics Center, $200K for the purchase of employee housing, $2.0 million for the purchase of the Wendy's property, $3.7 million for construction of the West Vail Fire Station) and to increase capital reserves ($1.15 million in 2004 due to better than expected sales tax revenue, $441,000 in 2008 due to unbudgeted property tax receipts and $1.0 million in 2009 due to better than expected sales tax revenue). History of Capital Resources Several revenue sources have been added to enhance the town's ability to fund capital projects over the years. 1980: Real Estate Transfer Tax. This 1 % of real estate transactions has funded $32.1 million of capital projects in the last 10 years. Annual revenues over the next five years averaging $3.2 million per year will cover $2.5 million of annual capital maintenance and operating expenses directly related to parks, recreation and environmental sustainability. 2005: Vail Reinvestment Authority. Creation of the LionsHead TIF District within the town's urban renewal authority has resulted in tax - increment financing revenue of $5.4 million since creation, with an expected annual $3.0 million on average for the next five years. Work has already begun on the LionsHead Transit and Welcome Center, with additional project work to be funded by bond proceeds of $12.0 million, as approved by Council on October 5 th 2008: Construction Use Tax. 4% use tax on construction and building materials have averaged $750,000 per year since implementation, with $500,000 per year from projects not related to major redevelopment. Employee Housing Fee -in -Lieu. The intent of this fee is to accumulate funds to use for the purchase or construction of employee housing within the town. To date, $700,000 has been collected. Federal Grants. While this source is not guaranteed and amounts vary by year, staff has been diligent in acquiring grants for the purchase of buses, bridge reconstruction and most recently $5.0 million for construction of the LionsHead Transit Center. A total of $12.6 million has been raised over the last 10 years, mainly to fund bus purchases. 4 10/19/2010 5 -] -4 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERALFUND 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Amended Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Comments Revenue Local Taxes: $ 16,600,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 17,238,000 $ 17,583,000 $ 17,935,000 $ 18,293,700 Budgeted flat with 2009 Actual Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 61/39 61/39 61/39 61/39 61139 61/39 Sales Tax $ 10,143,624 $ 10,310,000 $ 10,515,000 $ 10,725,630 $ 10,940,000 $ 11,160,000 Property and Ownership 5,013,647 5,055,000 4,333,000 4,333,000 4,549,000 4,549,000 2012: 25% decrease in base offset by completion of major projects; 5% increase 2014 Ski Lift Tax 3,115,000 3,193,000 3,272,800 3,354,600 3,438,500 3,524,400 2.5% increase per year Franchise Fees, Penalties, and Other Taxes 1,074,564 1,087,402 1,110,900 1,142,911 1,177,892 1,212,100 3.0% increase based on utilities sales Licenses & Permits 1,082,200 732,200 763,500 804,000 827,000 851,600 Not assuming any major redevelopment projects Intergovernmental Revenue 1,717,830 1,524,065 1,497,866 1,393,956 1,366,160 1,377,638 County sales tax, road & bridge, Hwy users tax (based on 5 -yr avg); COPS & SAFER grants Transportation Centers 4,932,744 4,911,500 4,911,500 5,094,800 5,094,800 5,247,644 Updated for net reduction of $50K from policy change (add'I free hour) Charges for Services 711,768 702,863 632,305 603,290 604,621 605,971 Based on average collections in a normal year Fines & Forfeitures 260,000 305,000 313,700 322,680 332,090 341,365 Based on average collections in a normal year Earnings on Investments 115,000 194,000 275,200 245,600 209,300 166,900 Based on 1% return on fund balances Rental Revenue 882,796 869,816 869,816 886,747 886,747 899,037 Based on average collections in a normal year Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 337,800 161,758 163,265 168,133 169,731 174,793 Based on average collections in a normal year Total Revenue 29,386,973 29,046,604 28,658,852 29,075,347 29,595,841 30,110,448 Expenditures Salaries 13,583,822 13,696,016 13,969,936 14,249,335 14,534,322 14,825,008 2% merit budgeted and 1% bonus pool Benefits 4,621,972 4,605,576 4,743,743 4,886,056 5,032,637 5,183,616 39.98% full -time benefits rate; overall rate 36.0% Subtotal Compensation and Benefits 18,205,794 18,301,592 18,713,679 19,135,391 19,566,959 20,008,624 Contributions and Special Events 1,285,025 1,273,750 1,299,200 1,325,200 1,351,700 1,378,700 Based on staff and Council recommendations All Other Operating Expenses 6,363,876 5,869,021 5,906,000 6,022,000 1 6,142,000 6,263,000 7.9% reduction from 2010 amended; $1.2M reduction or 17% from 2008 Heavy Equipment Operating Charges 2,067,124 2,071,117 2,133,251 2,197,248 2,263,165 2,331,060 Based on estimated usage and fuel costs Heavy Equipment Re lacement Charges 671,944 546,104 562,487 579,362 596,743 614,645 Based on scheduled replacement of fleetvehicles Dispatch Services 522,213 537,827 548,584 565,041 581,992 599,452 Represents 31% of total agency billings from the Dispatch Services Fund Total Expenditures 29,115,976 28,599,411 29,163,201 29,824,242 30,502,559 31,195,481 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 270,997 447,193 (504,349) (748,895) (906,718) (1,085,033) Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (3,749,000) - _ _ _ $3.66M Transfer of General Fund fund balance for W. Vail Fire Station construction; $90K transfer of Library donations for use toward new self check system Employee Home Ownership Program (240,000) - - - - - Total Expenditures 33,104,976 28,599,411 29,163,201 29,824,242 30,502,559 31,195,481 Surplus Net of Transfers & New Programs (3,718,003) 447,193 (504,349) (748,895) (906,718) (1,085,033) Beginning Fund Balance 23,423,417 19,705,414 20,152,607 19,648,258 18,899,363 17,992,645 Ending Fund Balance $ 19,705,414 $ 20,152,607 $ 19,648,258 $ 18,899,363 $ 17,992,645 $ 16,907,612 As %of Annual Revenue 1 67% 69% 69% 65% 61%1 56% 10/19/2010 -5- 5-1-5 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERALFUND 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Amended Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Revenue Local Taxes: $ 16,600,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 16,900,000 Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 61/39 61/39 61/39 61/39 61139 61/39 Sales Tax $ 10,143,624 $ 10,310,000 $ 10,515,000 $ 10,725,630 $ 10,940,000 $ 11,160,000 Property and Ownership 5,013,647 5,055,000 4,333,000 4,333,000 4,549,000 4,549,000 Ski Lift Tax 3,115,000 3,193,000 3,272,800 3,354,600 3,438,500 3,524,400 Franchise Fees, Penalties, and Other Taxes 1,074,564 1,087,402 1 1,142,911 1,177,892 1,212,100 Licenses & Permits 1,082,200 732,200 763,500 804,000 827,000 851,600 Intergovernmental Revenue 1,717,830 1,524,065 1,497,866 1,393,956 1,366,160 1,377,638 Transportation Centers 4,932,744 4,911,500 4,911,500 5,094,800 5,094,800 5,247,644 Charges for Services 711,768 702,863 632,305 603,290 604,621 605,971 Fines & Forfeitures 260,000 305,000 313,700 322,680 332,090 341,365 Earnings on Investments 115,000 194,000 275,200 245,600 209,300 166,900 Rental Revenue 882,796 869,816 869,816 886,747 886,747 899,037 Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 337,800 161,758 163,265 168,133 169,731 174,793 Total Revenue 29,386,973 29,046,604 28,658,852 29,075,347 29,595,841 30,110,448 Expenditures by Type: Municipal Services: Town Officials 1,279,126 1,295,861 1,321,389 1,351,253 1,381,926 1,413,158 Administrative Services & Risk Management 3,359,732 3,293,860 3,358,749 3,434,657 3,512,623 3,592,009 Community Development & Housing 1,947,525 1,715,097 1,748,884 1,788,409 1,829,006 1,870,342 Police 4,597,996 4,523,319 4,612,428 4,716,669 4,823,738 4,932,754 Police Communications 522,213 537,827 548,584 565,041 581,992 599,452 Fire 2,902,243 3,016,137 3,075,555 3,145,062 3,216,455 3,289,147 Public Works & Streets 3,652,561 3,563,430 3 3,715,750 3,800,097 3,885,979 Transportation & Parking 4,701,320 4,661,727 4,753,563 4,860,994 4,971,338 5,083,690 Facilities 3,872,255 3,733,318 3,806,864 3,892,899 3,981,268 4,071,245 Library 805,119 800,580 816,351 834,801 853,751 873,046 Economic Development 1,475,886 1,458,255 1,487,203 1,518,706 1,550,363 1,584,659 Total Expenditures 29,115,976 28,599,411 29,163,201 29,824,242 30,502,559 31,195,481 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 270,997 447,193 (504,349) (748,895) (906,718) (1,085,033) Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (3,749,000) Investment in Employee Home Ownership Prog (240,000) Total Expenditures 33,104,976 28,599,411 29,163,201 29,824,242 30,502,559 31,195,481 Surplus Net of Transfers & New Programs 3,718,003 447,193 504,349 748,895 906,718 1,085,033 Beginning Fund Balance 23,423,417 19,705,414 20,152,607 19,648,258 18,899,363 17,992,645 Ending Fund Balance $ 19,705,414 $ 20,152,607 $ 19,648,258 $ 18,899,363 $ 17,992,645 $ 16,907,612 a e of Fund Balance to Annual Revenue 67%1 69%1 69%1 65%1 61 1 56 10/19/2010 -6- 5-1-6 Town of Vail Summary of Operating Expenditures 2010 2010 2008 2009 Original Amended 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Expenditures by Type: Actual Actual Budget Budget Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Operating Expenses paid for by General Fund: Town Officials 1,224,007 1,161,906 1,234,126 1,285,713 1,295,861 1,321,389 1,351,253 1,381,926 1,413,158 Administrative Services & Risk Management 3,164,384 2,986,758 3,350,484 3,329,574 3,293,860 3,358,749 3,434,657 3,512,623 3,592,009 Community Development & Housing 3,327,400 1,888,707 1,847,525 1,951,861 1,715,097 1,748,884 1,788,409 1,829,006 1,870,342 Police 4,511,846 4,496,447 4,587,116 4,603,174 4,523,319 4,612,428 4,716,669 4,823,738 4,932,754 Police Communications 535,657 539,763 522,213 522,213 537,827 548,584 565,041 581,992 599,452 Fire 2,577,087 2,717,947 2,869,190 2,910,748 3,016,137 3,075,555 3,145,062 3,216,455 3,289,147 Public Works & Streets 3,717,159 3,357,816 3,649,854 3,657,039 3,563,430 3,633,630 3,715,750 3,800,097 3,885,979 Transportation & Parking 4,780,515 4,458,923 4,701,320 4,701,320 4,661,727 4,753,563 4,860,994 4,971,338 5,083,690 Facilities 3,442,983 3,308,598 3,872,255 3,872,255 3,733,318 3,806,864 3,892,899 3,981,268 4,071,245 Library 828,056 808,649 805,119 806,193 800,580 816,351 834,801 853,751 873,046 Economic Development 202,677 186,487 177,809 172,809 173,112 176,357 181,644 186,559 193,579 Information Center 200,722 200,336 209,990 209,990 202,990 207,050 211,191 215,415 219,723 Council Contributions 598,478 519,834 410,275 475,275 472,275 481,721 491,355 501,182 511,206 Commission on Special Events 539,620 608,968 617,812 617,812 609,878 622,076 634,517 647,207 660,152 Total paid by General Fund: 29,650,591 27,241,139 28,855,088 29,115,976 28,599,411 29,163,201 29,824,242 30,502,559 31,195,481 -1.8% 2.0% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% Operating Expenses paid for by Marketing Fund: Commission on Special Events 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 280,000 Operating Expenses paid for by RETT: Annual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1,143,289 1,145,481 1,323,478 1,333,114 1,300,942 1,339,970 1,380,169 1,421,574 1,464,222 Tree Maintenance 65,986 47,111 65,000 127,843 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 Rec. Path Capital Maint 325,114 123,406 150,000 261,196 104,094 115,399 126,782 88,804 80,443 Park / Playground Capital Maintenance 124,368 92,399 115,000 122,500 90,000 81,000 80,900 84,872 82,500 Street Furniture 14,178 18,113 22,500 22,500 22,500 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Public Art- operating expenses 78,455 81,861 85,157 85,157 89,371 92,052 94,814 97,658 98,720 Alpine Garden Support 90,000 55,620 55,620 65,620 55,620 57,289 59,007 60,777 62,601 Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation 93,431 38,937 90,000 90,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Forest Health 209,750 189,442 265,000 265,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Environmental Sustainability 166,036 205,379 250,000 378,160 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Total paid by RETT: 2,310,607 1,997,749 2,421,755 2,751,090 2,172,527 2,225,710 2,281,672 2,293,685 2,328,486 Total Operating Expenditures 32,241,198 29,518,888 31,556,843 32,147,066 31,051,938 31,668,911 32,385,914 33,076,244 33,803,967 -8.4% 8.9 % -3.4% 2.0% 2.3% 2.1% 2.2% 1 102010 - 1_, TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Project Information Total Sales Tax Revenue: $ 16,600,000 $ 16,900,000 $ 17,238,000 $ 17,583,000 $ 17,935,000 $ 18,293,700 2011 flat with 2009 actual; 2% per year thereafter Sales Tax Split between General Fund 61139 61139 61139 61/39 61139 61139 & Capital Fund Sales Tax - Capital Projects Fund $ 6,474,000 $ 6,590,000 $ 6,723,000 $ 6,857,370 $ 6,995,000 $ 7,133,700 Use Tax 600,000 500,000 515,000 530,400 546,000 562,400 No major projects assumed after 2009; 3% annual increase after 2011 Federal Grant Revenue 5,028,500 1,428,000 - - - 2010: $5.OM for transit center; $28SK for Police Live Scan Interface software; 2011: $828K for bridge reconstruction, $600K buses Lease Revenue 184,500 184,500 184,500 184,500 189,135 189,135 Per Vail Commons commercial and residential leases Employee Housing Fee -In -Lieu 100,000 Project Reimbursement 709,100 Resale of Arosa duplex 816,000 Resale of Arosa duplex constructed by the town Earnings on Investments and Other 18,000 2009: Based on earnings at .5 %; 2010 1 %; 2011 - 2014 at 2% Total Revenue 13,930,100 8,702,500 7,422,500 7,572,270 7,730,135 7,885,235 Maintain Town Assets Bus Shelters 27,000 27,900 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 2010 -2014 various repairs including deck topping replacement, expansion joint repairs, Parking Structures 486,000 504,000 690,000 860,000 920,000 915,000 ventilation, HVAC, plumbing and other structural repairs; Starting in 2010 there is an offset from VRA see transfer near bottom of sheet 2010 implement energy audit recommendations $600K plus various repairs; 2011 Facilities Capital Maintenance 1,073,000 450,000 890,000 705,000 650,000 810,000 various repairs; 2012: $135K repairs to PW Admin and $105K repairs to Municipal building, $80K Main Vail Fire Stn electrical and other repairs Building Remodels 67,000 74,000 On -going minor remodels ofvarious Town facilities; Removed $54K from 2011 Library Roof Replacement 400,000 - - _ _ Added 5/4/10 due to deteriorating condition and inability to continue to fix; removed $400K from 2014 facilities capital Main Vail Station Roof Replacement - 250,000 - - _ Added roof replacement 5/4/10; station remodel previously included in 5 -year plan removed Need to gut plumbing; electrical wiring; roofing, etc.; asbestos and mold remediation; 4 Creekside Housing Improvements 110,582 160,000 385,000 - - units were completed in 2010; plan to do 4 more in 2011; in 2012, complete remaining 4 units and replace exterior siding, stairs and decks 2012: $50K furniture replacement; 2015: $400K to change ventilation & improve noise Donovan Park Pavilion - - 50,000 - - 720,000 and $270K to replace heating /air system was pushed to 2015 during previous capital discussions; $50K furniture replacement Vail Village Inn Condo Roof (TOV Portion) 17,000 17,000 - - - - Capital assessment from owners' association for space owned by town Street Light Improvements 67,500 67,500 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 New street lights and to refurbish residential lighting On -going maintenance to roads and bridges including asphalt overlays, patching and repairs; 2012 - 2014 were previously updated for recent bid prices (savings of $925K); Capital Street Maintenance 733,440 1,153,500 1,000,000 1,170,000 915,000 1,220,000 Assumes that we do not see a dramatic increase from current prices and that reconstruction of neighborhood roads and bridges occurs (without reconstruction, maintenance costs will increase) Fire Truck Replacement 590,000 - 620,900 2012 replace pumpertruck from 1994; 2014 replace pumper truck from 1999 Audio Visual 33,879 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 2010: Council chamber streaming video and $8K for police car cameras; 2011 & beyond: $10K per year for replacement of cameras and recorders (assume 1 each per year) Document Imaging 130,592 116,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Annual maintenance, licensing and contract position thru 2011; later years annual software licensing Software Licensing 37,000 33,640 33,640 33,640 33,640 15,000 grade Microsoft products on all equipment in 2010; renew licenses in future Hardware Purchases 93,000 65,000 48,000 48,000 50,000 50,000 Sip cheduled rotation of PCs, printers and servers Data Center (Computer Rooms) 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Based on annual replacement schedule of security and power systems for 3 computer rooms 5 -1 -8 -8- TOWN OF VAR. 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Project Information Website and e- commerce 12,000 27,000 29,000 31,000 12,000 12,000 Internet security & application interfaces; website redevelopment Comm Dev ArcG IS System 25,700 Web access to town GIS information (similar to County's website GIS product Fiber Optics in Buildings 21 17,000 23,000 18,000 21,000 15,000 Cabling /Network Infrastructure; to repair, maintain & upgrade Network upgrades 30,000 21,000 35,000 60,000 40,000 30,000 Computer network systems - replacement cycle every 3 -5 years Phone System Replacement 35,000 Replace 15 -year old phone system Financial System Replacement - - - 350,000 - Replace 15 -year old financial system; continued support to current system questionable; better technology Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) / RMS 55 57000 59000 61000 50,000 50000 County -wide "Computer Aided Dispatch /Records Mgmt System" ; includes patrol car , , , , Project laptops and software used to push information to TOV and other agencies Intergraph software upgrade 80,000 TOV portion of upgrade to computer -aided dispatch system Live Scan Interface 28;500 Funded by .grant above; Links our Live Scan software to other agencies Total Maintenance 3,396,193 3,071,540 4,002,640 3,538,640 3,447,540 4,046,000 Enhancement of Town Assets Comm Dev Interactive Permit software 225,000 Replace ent of Permit Plus software; allows for web access by customers New Fire Truck 570,000 Newfire truck for additional station Library Self -Check System 90,000 Funded by library grants West Meadow Drive 83,189 Completion of projects under contract; $200K savings Future work may include newspaper boxes, Checkpoint Charlie, Covered Bridge, VVD Village Streetscape 767,389 - - - - - walk, etc. Per Council 7 /7/09, defer $300K to 2010 for covered bridge heat and VVD heated walk Neighborhood Road Reconstruction 429,469 1,800,000 4,325,000 4,300,000 4,250,000 - Overhaul residential streets '09 design; Construction 2010 Mill Creek; 2011 Vail Valley Drive reconstruction and 2012 -2015 East Vail roads Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction 150,000 1,050,000 - - - 1,950,000 Matterhorn Bridge reconstruction moved to 2011 due to CDOTfscal year and requirements; Partial funding from federal grant Parking Entry System / Equipment 13,000 - Metered lots; equipment obsolete and not servicable by vendor; Time sensitive for installation prior to next parking season Radio Equipment replacement (pub. - - 48,000 - 693,000 Replacement of 2008 radios for PW, Fire, PD works, pub. safety) Hybrid Bus Battery Replacement 55,000 385,000 Scheduled replacement: 1 in 2012; 7 in 2014; Estimated life of 6 years Replace Buses 2,283,214 1,203,400 2010: 6 regular buses; 2011 2 Hybrid buses Timber Ridge Legal /Zoning 60,080 - - - - - For redevlopment project Manor Vail Street Plan 83,800 - - _ - Expenditure related to impact fee paid by Manor Vail development; Keep funds in bugdet due to developer agreement Total Enhancements 4,755,141 4,053,400 4,428,000 4,300,000 4,635,000 2,643,000 New Assets LionsHead Transit Center (VRA) 5,500,000 $5.0 million from Federal grant; $288K transferred from VRA Welcome Center (VRA) 469,681 6,830,319 Funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (see Transfers below) Surface Parking Addition (VRA) 65,000 900,000 - Funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (see Transfers below) East LionsHead Portal (VRA) 2,075,000 Funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (see Transfers below) West LionsHead Portal (VRA) - 750,000 Library Remodel 475,000 Funded by the Vail Reinvestment Authority (see Transfers below) West Vail Fire Station 5,300 Construction of West Vail Fire Station Arosa Drive- Duplex for Employee 288,358 - - - - - Development project for deed - restricted housing Housing Increased to $500K per year as of 2009 per Housing Strategic Plan; use Housing Pay-in- Buy -down Program 552,118 - _ _ _ Lieu revenue to offsetthe annual $500K per Council 10/20/09; removed annual contribution 514/10; fund through fee -in -lieu and focus housing projects on Chamonix and others (see next item for fee -in -lieu budget) Buy -down Program Funded by Pay -in- 186,000 - - - - - Housing funded directly by Pay -in -Lieu fees collected from developers Lieu 10/19/2010 5- I -9 -9- TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Project Information 2010: Solaris $93.6K and Main Vail off ramps; '2011: $180K for Main Vail off ramps; Variable Message Signs / Way - Finding 193,653 180,000 100,000 130,000 - - 2012: Four Seasons /Middle Creek; 2013: EverVail; 2014: $65K each for Ford Park and Improvements Vail Parking structure 1 -70 Noise 383,180 - _ _ _ Construction of and East Vail berm would be phased; $751 K accumulated amount and annual $250K budget removed 514/10 Chamonix Area Planning 50,000 - - - - - Continued work on Chamonix area planning Traffic Impact Fee study 21,645 - _ _ _ Study to determine redevelopment impact on traffic / potential revenue; identified as a next step in transportation plan Total New Assets: 13,009,635 8,385,319 2,925,000 130,000 Total Capital before Financing 21,160,969 15,510,259 11,355,640 7,968,640 8,082,540 6,689,000 Debt Service on Outstanding Bonds 2,273,959 2,279,572 2,088,346 - _ Potential to defease in 2010 pending outcome of ballot initiatives 60/61; There would be no net change to the expenditure for this item, just a timing difference Timber Ridge Debt Service Guarantee 925,000 Annual debt service guarantee - requirement of TR debt 2010: Transit Center ($500K), W ecome Center design (469K) LH parking addition feasibility study ($65K) and LH Pkg mtc $160K; 2011: Welcome Center construction Transfer from Vail Reinvestment Authority (1,194,681) (8,520,319) (3,191 (310,000) (340,000) (350,000) ($5.5M), and LH Pkg mtc $315K; 2012: LH Portal improvements $1.1M, LH Pkg mtc $365K; 2013: $2.5M complete LH Portal and LH Pkg mtc $310K; 2014 mtc $340K; 2015: n $350K Transfer from General Fund 3,749,000 Transfer of GF fund balance for West Vail Fire station Total Debt Service and Financing: (1,744,722) (6,240,747) (1,101,654) (310,000) (340,000) (350,000) Total Expenditures 19,416,247 9,269,512 10,253,986 7,658,640 7,742,540 6,339,000 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (5,486,147) (567,012) (2,831,486) (86,370) (12,405) 1,546,235 Beginning Fund Balance 11,233,206 5,747,059 5.180.047 2.348.561 2.262.191 2.249.786 Ending Fund Balance 5,747,059 5,180,047 2,348,561 2,262,191 2,249,786 3,796,021 'Promissory note due from Childrens' Garden of Leaning included in ending fund balance - not spendable 15,000 10,000 5,000 10/19/2010 5 -1 -10 0 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Amended 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Comments Base sales flat with 2009 through 2015: Over 5-yr period, major redevelopment sales assume only Real Estate Transfer Tax $ 4,283,000 $ 4,670,000 $ 1233,000 $ 2,626,500 $ 2,626,500 $ 2,626,500 2/3 of units sell at 80% of list for Four Seasons. Ritz and Solaris; then only 2 resales per year thereafter for all major redevelopment projects Federal Grants 23324 - - - _ Federal grants for Stephen's Park restoration ($6K), $3Kfor NWCOG Regional Energy Efficiency grant; $8K for weed control; $6.3K ECO Trails to stripe rec path Golf Course Lease 122,000 124.400 126,888 129,426 132,014 134,655 Annual lease paymentfrom Vail Recreation District 2% annual increase- deposited to "Recreation Enhancement Account" (accompanying expenditure listed below) Interg oven menta I Revenue 26,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 2010: $20K Lottery proceeds; $6K reimbursement from County for solid waste survey; 2011 -2015 Lottery proceeds Recreation Amenity Fees 10,000 10,000 10.000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Earnings on Investments and Other 46,402 15,879 2011 based on 1 %:2012 -15 1.5% Total Revenue 4,510,726 4,840,279 3,389,888 2,785,926 2,788,514 2,791,155 Maintain Town Assets Annual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1,333,114 1,300,942 1,339,970 1,380,169 1,421,574 1,464,222 Ongoing path, park and open space maintenance, project mgmt Management Fee to General Fund (5 %) 214,150 233,500 161,650 131,325 131,325 131,325 5% of RETT Collections - fee remitted to the General Fund for administration Rec. Path Capital Maint 261,196 104,094 115,399 126,782 88,804 80,443 ICapital maintenance ofthe town's recreation path system Tree Maintenance 127;843 65,000 65.000 65,000 65,000 65,000 Regular maintenance fortree health within the town (spraying, removing, new trees); scale spraying on town -owned property at approx. $120 per tree Forest Health Management 265,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Pine beetle mitigation in conjunction w/ forest service; 2011 -2015; Reduced manager to part -time and reduced seasonal positions from 6 to 4 Street Furniture Replacement 22,500 22,500 25.000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Annual replacement or capital repairs, includes bike racks Park / Playground Capital Maintenance 122,500 90,000 81,000 80,900 84,872 82,500 Repair & maintenance of playgrounds, restrooms, etc. Reconstruction of retaining wall that supports bike path through the underpass; 2011 additional Bald Mountain Ftg Rd / Underpass Project 200,000 200,000 - - - - $200K to complete the frontage road widening for future bike path shoulders as part of underpass project. Project bid out one bid recd over current 2010 budget amount Glen Lyon Bridge - - - - - 150,000 Re- decking of recreation path bridge; too large a project to include in annual rec path captial maintenance Alpine Garden Support 65.620 55,620 57,289 59,007 60,777 62,601 Annual support at 3% increase per year (2011 flat with 2009 and 2010) 2010 includes an off -cycle grant of $1 OK if BFAG raises $90K in donations Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation 90,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Annual support of water protection programs; reduced based on lack of program implementation; Will re -look each year at grant application Public Art- Operating 85157 89,371 92,052 94,814 97,658 98,720 APP salary and operating expenses related to RETT Environmental Sustainability 378.160 250,000 250,000 250.000 250,000 250,000 Environmenal Sustainability salary and expenses Total Maintenance 3,165,240 2,606,027 2,387,360 2,412,997 2,425,011 2,609,810 Enhancement of Town Assets Timber Ridge - Buffehr Creek Rd separation 15,000 - - - - To finish path from TimberRidge to Roost; offset by Federal Grant of approx. $150K Stephen's Park Stream Repairs 66,000 Rebuilding of streamside area due to erosion; partially funded by federal grant Trailhead Development / Improvement - 24,000 50,000 - - - Improve trailheads; Continued need through 2012 (one trail per year); Eliminated 2010 as of 9/15/09 ADA Compliance w/ VRD 25,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Shared costs with VRD - ADA access at recreational facilities;new ADA regulations go into effect 2011 Greenhouse 5,000 12010 to finish greenhouse irrigation in spring 4 miles of bike lanes (6 foot shoulders) to be added prior to COOT overlay project; first priority is Frontage Road Bike Lanes/Trails 119,268 2,275,000 1,150,000 - - - Blue Cow Chute to East Vail; path from Vail Mtn School to E. Vail exit; 2009 for design ($50K) and survey work ($100K); construction was budgeted in 2010; now pushed to 2011 and 2012. Ford Park Master Plan 328,017 2,150,000 - - - - Implementing a portion of master plan, which may include Ford Park parking options Main Vail Roundabout pavement apron - - 130,000 _ _ - $130K concrete apron to protect the grass from cars /trucks on the edge of the roundabout - delayed from 2010 to 2012 as of 9115/09 10/19/2010 5 -1 -11 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Amended Ford Park Improvements - 200,000 - - - - Ford Park pathwork, restrooms and other improvements Seibert Circle 17,774 - - - - - To complete project Raw Water / Irrigation Control 366,493 - _ _ _ _ Water supply infrastructure; Ong plan to include in water bills, but interest rate now 5%, so paying up front instead of financing Kayak Take -out 10,000 - _ _ _ _ Kayak take-out area along stream (part of One Willow Bridge development agreement and must be accounted for separately) Stream Tract Encroachment Survey 14,081 Survey along Gore Creek Reconstruction of playground per safety plan; 20 years old; in -house design currently underway Red Sandstone Park - Per Safety plan 464,000 - - - - - and staff working on a plan to deal with parking and ADA requirements. Recent acquisition of parking parcel - staff will present park options at future meeting Ford Park Safety Improvements - - - - - 304.000 Ford Park playground completed in 2000; pushed improvements to 2015 Booth Creek Playground 15,000 385,250 Design in 2011; deferred construction until 2012 Booth Creek Park redevelopment 50,000 1,340.000 Design in 2011; deferred construction until 2012 Donovan Park 304,000 2015 safety improvements to playground / park Ford Park Soccer Field Parking Lot - - - - - 400,000 Porous pavement for reconstruction of this lot; Delayed from 2010 to 2015 b/c was able to overlay in 2009 Public Art - General To purchase sculptures, artwork, art programs and events; remainder is re- appropriated each year program /art 221;816 80,000 80,000 80,000 SU.000 85,000 to accumulate enough funds Public Art - Morales relocation 164,728 Transferred from Seibert project to cover cost of relocating the Morales artwork Public Art- Winterfest 63446 Annual Winterfest event: approximate cost of $25K per year; rely on donations Guest Enhancements 100.000 1 1 Plannin and desi n onl ; im lementation of $850K still on unfunded list Landscape Medians 190,311 - _ _ _ _ Frontage road medians alongside redevelopment projects; working on lighting plan forin front of Salons, Vail Plaza and Four Seasons Total Enhancements 2,070,934 4,904,000 3,145,250 90,000 90,000 1,103,000 VRD- Managed Facility Projects Recreation Enhancement Account 242,000 124,400 126,888 129,426 132.014 134,655 Reserve account for golf course improvements- funded by annual lease revenue Golf Course Irrigation 22,000 - - - - 2010: to complete irrigation project (50% share with VRD) Improvements to golf course (tees. bridges, etc) and main clubhouse; 2010 includes 7th tee no Golf Course and Clubhouse 996,550 753,187 11,862 14,799 8,553 9,451 retaining wall, 11th and 17th hole bridges; 2011 includes roofing, HVAC, boilers, stucco and. trim work, and parking lot asphalt for the clubhouse (currently no plans to move forward, but budget based on lease agreement) Golf Course- Maintenance Bldg 141,000 - 2,912 3,591 79,278 - 2010: improvements to maintenance building including stucco, wood trim and soffits; 2014 asphalt driving and parking area Dobson Ice Arena 240,000 128,159 58,796 2784 11,580 84,577 2011: Replace original hot water systems based on energy study (2 x 1200 gallons); Large quantity needed for ice maintenance Ford Park / Tennis Center Improvements 290,986 227,423 343,128 2,214 9,816 55,205 Retaining walls, repair of outbuilding structure, walkways, restroom roof and renovation of locker Athletic Fields 2,278 12,483 3,011 2014 asphalt overlay of parking lot Youth Services 25,000 2010: furnaces (may wait until 2011 due to potential Welcome Center project) G to astics Center 25,000 1,582 2010: cooling stem m wait until 2011 Nature Center 10.000 8,517 7,177 2012 wood open rail fencing; 2015 wood siding and trim Total VRD- Managed Facility Projects 1,992,536 1,233,169 553,685 155,092 253,724 294,076 New Assets Public Restrooms 670,000 Restrooms at W. Meadow Drive & Vail Road; Pushed from'09 to'11 Total New Assets: 670,000 Total Expenditures 7,228,710 9,413,196 6,086,295 2,658,089 2,768,735 4,006,886 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (2,717,984) (4,572,917) (2,696,407) 127,837 19,779 (1,215,731) Beginning Fund Balance 14,216,947 11,498,963 6,926.046 4,229,639 4,357,476 4,377,255 Ending Fund Balance' $ 11,498,963 $ 6,926,046 $ 4,229,639 $ 4,357,476 $ 4,377,255 $ 3,161,523 ' Promissory note due from Vail Recreation District of $1,028,000 is included in the fund balance and not spendable 10/19/2010 5 -1 -12 -12- Note: Costs are preliminary estimates Eligible for Funding From Capital VRA (TIF) RETT Projects Fund Priority I Guest Services Enhancements 850,000 Wayfinding; things to enhance "linger strategy "; fund from RETT as part of park /walking path system; $150K for design in 2010/2011 Library Remodel 400,000 Library is within the LionsHead TIE District; this remodel includes the main floor of the Library only Parking Expansion - LionsHead $18.1 M - $36.2M Projects and costs currently under review Parking Expansion - Charter Bus Lot 900,000 Parking Expansion - Ford Park : Structure $30.010 - $54.OM Projects and costs currently under review Parking Expansion - Ford Park : Surface $9.74M - $18.5M Projects and costs currently under review Parking Expansion - North Frontage Road 1,239,000 Various areas Parking Expansion - South Frontage Road 9,511,000 5,461,844 Includes parking from Cascade to PW Shops Simba Run Underpass Feasibility Study 400,000 Study to evaluate project; potential for federal funding if available in the future Energy Audit Enhancements $TBD $600K included in 2010 budget; High priority for items which save energy and money; could be funded from any of the three sources depending upon the assets location and /or use; projects and costs currently under review Chamonix Site Development - Housing $ TBD Funding for infrastructure; estimated costs to come from RFQ Main Vail Station - major remodel 975,000 Removed from funded list 5/4110 Priority II East Vail Fire Station Remodel 775,000 Roof and parking lot already done; this is the third worst building of the town's assets N. Frontage Rd -East Vail 2,100,000 Frontage Road - Ford Park 5,635,000 These three projects would include turn lanes, bike paths, etc. based on the town's Transportation Master Plan N. Frontage Rd -West Vail 7,513,000 Frontage Rd - LionsHead 7,484,000 From Evergreen to EverVail Main Vail Round -about Major Reconstruction 3,600,000 West Vail Round -about Major Reconstruction 1,000,000 Golf Course Clubhouse 7,000,000 Will likely require site work at additional cost; should be shared project with VRD LionsHead Park 800,000 Previous estimate; Still researching appropriate location LionsHead Information Center Renovation 550,000 Will be replaced with the Welcome Center if that project moves forward LionsHead Parking Structure Enhancements 3,500,000 Does not add spaces, but brings remainder of structure up to standards of new transit center and current codes; enhances guest experience; includes heated starways on east side Concert Hall Plaza 750,000 As presented Jan 2010 Muni Bldg HVAC replace & minor renovations 2,400,000 Replace air handling system and improve air flow; paint, replace carpet, replace ceilings, etc. which may be damaged in construction; move people temporarily Priority III Simba Run Underpass 19,500,000 VRA funding available outside TIE district as long as project reduces or prevents blight within the district East LionsHead Circle 1,200,000 Streetscape in front of structure from LionsHead entry to Dodson arena - final connections to Vail Village Town Shop Improvements 9,225,000 Municipal Building - complete remodel $ TBD Further study required; may be done in connection with other projects Financing Sources Capital VRA (TIF) RETT Projects Fund VRA bonding can be done any time without additional voter approval; current debt from Capital Projects Fund is paid off in 2012; Potential Bonding Capacity 26,000,000 20,000,000 additional sales tax revenue bonds require voter approval; current debt service could be reallocated to support $20M in project funding in 2013 Funding Available from Vail Resorts for 4,300,000 Additional Parking Federal Funding $ TBD 1 $ TBD ISomeprojects maybe eligible for federal funding; amounts are not known at this time 10/19/2010 -13- 5-1-13 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE DISPATCH SERVICES FUND 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Actual Budget Amended Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Comments Revenue E911 Board Revenue $ 753,913 $ 754,108 $ 754,108 743,656 765,966 788,945 812,613 836,991 Interagency Charges 1,150,659 1,162,231 1,162,231 1,214,925 1,239,224 1,276,400 1,314,692 1,354,133 Town of Vail Interagency Charge 539,763 522,213 522,213 537,827 548,584 565,041 581,992 599,452 Earnings on Investments 7,946 5,000 5,000 7,500 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Other 78,860 3,000 Total Revenue 2,531,141 2,443,552 2,446,552 2,503,908 2,563,773 2,640,386 2,719,297 2,800,576 Expenditures Salaries & Benefits 1,691,378 1,854,062 1,854,062 1,849,958 1,892,004 1,935,043 1,979,098 2,024,195 Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 441,695 511,633 514,633 519,006 529,386 539,974 550,773 601,789 Capital Outlay 69,731 50,000 123,000 800,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 1 50,000 2011: Radio Console proje ct Total Expenditures 2,202,804 2,415,695 2,491,695 3,168,964 2,471,390 2,525,017 2,579,872 2,675,984 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 328,337 27,857 (45,143) (665,056) 92,382 115,369 139,426 124,592 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund - - - - - - Beginning Fund Balance 962,344 1,048,694 1,290,681 1,245,538 580,482 672,864 788,233 927,659 Ending Fund Balance $ 1,290,681 $ 1,076,551 $ 1,245,538 $ 580,482 $ 672,864 $ 788,233 $ 927,659 $ 1,052,252 23% 26% 30% 34% 1 -14- 10 19/2010 -I -14 TOWN OF VAIL 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND 2010 Amended 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Comments Revenue Town of Vail Interagency Charge $ 2,836,464 $ 2,694,081 $ 2,774,903 $ 2,858,150 $ 2,943,895 $ 3,032,211 Insurance Reimbursements & Other - - Earnings on Investments 10,298 10,324 12,482 13,247 14,857 12,688 Equipment Sales and Trade -ins 168,240 203,550 81,705 164,150 148,880 163,720 Total Revenue 3,015,002 2,907,955 2,869,090 3,035,547 3,107,632 3,208,619 Expenditures Salaries & Benefits 965,912 971,528 993,696 1,016,390 1,039,622 1,063,405 2% merit pool increase per year Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 1,244,911 1,186,873 1,222,479 1,259,631 1,296,928 1,335,836 3% annual increase Capital Outlay 1,082,928 1,035,400 550,894 1,040,100 988,000 950,100 Total Expenditures 3,293,751 3,193,801 2,767,069 3,316,121 3,324,550 3,349,341 Use of fund balance over a period of years to Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (278,749) (285,846) 102,021 (280,573) (216,918) (140,722) offset annual increases Beginning Fund Balance 2,343,601 1,950,115 1,664,269 1,766,290 1,485,717 1,268,799 Ending Fund Balance $ 2,064,852 $ 1,664,269 $ 1,766,290 $ 1,485,717 $ 1,268,799 $ 1,128,077 10/19/2010 -15- 5-1-15 T VAIL VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Review of Draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative & Process Refinements PRESENTER(S): Suzanne Silverthorn ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council is asked to review the draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for the Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND: On Oct. 5, the Town Council reviewed the concept of a Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative as a follow up to a Conference Center Fund Reallocation presentation on Sept. 7 in which five themes were presented for consideration as projects suitable for additional evaluation. As envisioned, the Guest Services Enhancement Initiative would determine the feasibility and economic benefits associated with implementation of a comprehensive "town wide signage /information /guest enhancement system" as recommended in the conference center fund review. As proposed, the initiative would integrate technology, signage, information center functions, guest relations activities, resort branding and other elements under a unified program. Staff has suggested selecting a team of experts to assist in the process via a Request for Qualifications /Proposals (RFQ /P). The proposed process has been refined to build upon Town Council's request to control costs and direct outcomes. This would be handled by evaluating and prioritizing a series of recommendations which would be used to develop an implementation plan that would coincide with available resources. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests Town Council approval and /or modification of the Request for Qualifications /Proposals for the Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative. ATTACHMENTS: Council Memorandum 101910 Request for Qualifications Overview and Background Council Memorandum 100510 Council Memorandum 090710 10/19/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Suzanne Silverthorn, Kelli McDonald, Greg Hall, Stan Zemler DATE: October 19, 2010 SUBJECT: Review of Draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative & Process Refinements I. BACKGROUND On Oct. 5, the Town Council reviewed the concept of a Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative as a follow up to a Conference Center Fund Reallocation presentation on Sept. 7 in which five themes were presented for consideration as projects suitable for additional evaluation. As envisioned, the Guest Services Enhancement Initiative would determine the feasibility and economic benefits associated with implementation of a comprehensive "town wide signage /information /guest enhancement system" as recommended in the conference center fund review. As proposed, the initiative would integrate technology, signage, information center functions, guest relations activities, resort branding and other elements under a unified program. Staff has suggested selecting a team of experts to assist in the process via a Request for Qualifications /Proposal (RFQ /P). II. TOWN COUNCIL REFINEMENTS In its last review of the Guest Services Enhancement Initiative, the Town Council requested the following refinements: • Be clear about purpose. • Create a greater sense of satisfaction with our guests (from the time they research and book a trip, to arrival, to the experiences while they're here and departure). • Drive our economy. • Identify world class solutions to satisfy our needs for the next 10 to 20 years. • Add more detail to scope of work description. • Rely on staff expertise to the extent possible; don't outsource components that can be done in- house. • Demonstrate tangible outcomes and a solid return on investment; cost controls must be in place. • Develop a process that is incremental and phased to allow flexibility. III. PROPOSED RFQ /P PROCESS The proposed RFQ /P process has been divided into a series of steps that incorporate the refinements listed above. The process would result in the selection of a lead firm that would guide and assist the town in coming years, recognizing that our needs and specific actions will evolve over time. We anticipate a multiphase approach to the project that would involve an initial contract for a phase 1 guest services assessment followed by additional contracts (assuming Town Council's satisfaction) for phases 2 and 3 to further develop and implement identified projects 1 10/19/2010 6 -1 -1 or work elements. With this incremental approach, the town will have the ability to evaluate and prioritize a series of recommendations while developing an implementation plan that will coincide with available resources. The proposed steps are as follows: • Solicitation of RFQs, Oct. 25 — Nov. 15; • Selection of firms (4 to 6) to receive an invitation to submit a proposal, Dec. 1; • RFPs due, Dec. 17; • Identification of Finalists, Dec. 23; • Interviews with three selected firms, week of Jan. 10; • Announcement of Selection, Jan. 14; • Contracting and Commencement of Work, week of Jan. 17. IV. BUDGET Staff's budget estimate has been revised to reflect the refined process. During the RFQ process, respondents will be asked to indicate typical hourly billing rates for the personnel identified on the project team. However, the town would not be requesting a budget or costing as part of the RFQ. A more complete estimate of project costs would be required of firms invited to submit an RFP. As part of the selection process, staff will present a recommendation on available funding for the phase 1 assessment work. V. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL The Vail Town Council is asked to review the draft Request for Qualifications /Proposals for the Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative and provide direction to staff. VI. ATTACHMENTS Draft Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement RFQ /P & Background Vail Town Council Memo, 10 -5 -10 Vail Town Council Memo, 9 -7 -10 2 10/19/2010 6 -1 -2 Request for Qualifications The Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative Selection Process With this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) the Town of Vail is soliciting statements of interest and experience from qualified firms or teams. As described below, we are looking for the right group that can begin work in January and assist the Town on a number of different work elements. The RFQ is being wide lycirculated with the goal of obtaining a consulting partner that will bring experience and vision to address our needs. From the submitted RFQ's we intend to narrow the list of firms that are invited to propose through a second round Request for Proposal to four to six firms. Then, we expect that three to four firms will be selected as finalists in advance of the Christmas /New Year's holidays so that if they want to do any ground work it could begin in late December. These firms will then be invited to Vail to present and interview during the week of January 10 with selection to follow on or about January 14 and work to begin shortly thereafter. Our intent is to find the right team and to forge a relationship that may be ongoing for a long period of time. In the following sections we have provided a large amount of background information describing current conditions and our perceived opportunities and needs. We have tried to create a process that permits interested firms and teams to highlight their experience and qualifications with a modest level of initial effort. We look forward to your participation in this process. Selection Dates October 25 — November 15: Solicitation of RFQ's. Deadline for submission — 5:00 PM November 15. December 1:Selection of firms to receive an invitation to submit a Proposal. (Anticipated to be 4 to 6 firms) December 17: RFP's Due. December 23: Identification of Finalists Wk. of January 10: Interviews with three selected firms. Interviews will involve a presentation that will include some "audit" related questions, and a discussion of past work (case studies) and successful models from other resort communities, both domestic and international. January 14: Announcement of selection 1 10/19/2010 6 -2 -1 January 17 — 25: Contracting and commencement of work Selection Committee ( Discuss internally, not identified in RFQ) Project Overview The Origins of the Idea. Town of Vail (TOV) and Vail Resorts (VRI) have long recognized the importance of guest service. However, in recent months, the need and opportunity for a major initiative to address guest satisfaction and services has emerged. The Vail Town Council identified it as one of the important programs that it wanted to address this year. Further, input obtained from the Vail Community Survey in early 2010 showed strong support for improved guest service from both full time and seasonal residents. Guest service can provide a major area of differentiation for Vail in an increasingly competitive market place, both national and international. We believe it also provides the potential for improved market share and brand loyalty in both summer and winter. Why now ?As Vail's bed base and resort expansion is completed and new infrastructure comes on line there is an opportunity to tie the entire Vail experience, including the physical, environmental and guest service elements together, in a manner thatis unique among resort communities. This will provide competitive advantage over time and it will also allow Vail to capitalize on some upcoming opportunities. Vail has several major "milestone" events that will occur in future years. These include the 201250 th Anniversary of Vail, and the 2015 World Alpine Ski Championships. Together, these events will spotlight Vail to the world and will provide added challenges and opportunities to demonstrate the best in guest experience and service. Additionally, the TOV may have some additional funds to address these opportunities as a result of reallocating monies that were originally collected to build a conference center. The Conference Center Funds, described further at the tab below, presents an additional dimension to the opportunity that exists today. Based on recent discussions, these funds could be targeted toward creatingcapital assets that would improve the economic condition of the Town. Amenities and physical improvements that further an improved experience for visitors will further the sustainable economic goals of the Town. What is the Project and What is Requested by this RFQ ?The project involves a far - reaching and comprehensive effort to expand the quality and integration of services to enhance the guest experience in Vail, in all seasons. The idea is to offer a seamless,consistent and memorable Vailexperience that in turn results in enhanced performance and associated economic opportunities. Although this RFQ is for work that will be primarily managed by the Town of Vail, 2 10/19/2010 6 -2 -2 the project is endorsed by Vail Resorts Inc. (VRI) the owner of the ski mountain facilities, and there is an overarching goal to ensure that all aspects of guest experience are uniformly excellent. An initial goal for the Guest Service Enhancement Initiative has been stated as follows: Auniformly positive experience for all that come in contact with Vail, whether they visit, live or work in Vail. We aspire toprovide positive experiences and impressions for those that visit, intend to visit or simply have a perception of Vail based on information they read and hear. These positive experiences will result in greater guest satisfaction, greater involvement and participation in resort activities, loyalty, repeat visitation and a resulting benefit to our local visitor - based economy. Through this process we will be pursuing guest service enhancements that will satisfy our needs well into the future over the next 10 to 15 years. Recent efforts to solicit input from local leaders as part of the Conference Center Fund process suggest emerging opportunities to capitalize on Vail's renaissance. Examples include: • Welcome Center, Reception Center, Visitor Center, Information Center, Activity Center. Combination of a high -tech museum and activity center that would provide information about the vast array of activities and lodging options along with historical perspective that so many guests seek out. Having a high profile Welcome /Activity Center would help draw visitors off 1 -70 and counter balance our non - intuitive villages. Counteract the perception by some that Vail is snobbish and intimidating. Great models to be copied from Europe. • Vail's biggest shortcoming is really in software: e.g. general customer awareness of the wide array of activities already available, and the inability to easily access these some activities. We already provide not only unsurpassed winter sports activities, but also world -class hiking, cycling, rafting, fishing, etc. activities. What we lack is a central clearing house that is easily accessible for our guests to use. We have the activity assets — we need to leverage them. This is the Vail brand — the great outdoors, athletics, the safe wilderness — both summer and winter. • Family activities are the largest void. An activity center for kids and families would create a point of differentiation for Vail and could be done in collaboration with Vail Resorts. • Create a greater sense of satisfaction with our guests (from the time they research and book a trip, to arrival, to the experiences while they're here, and departure). This will help to drive our economy. Further, we need to look for world class solutions to satisfy our needs for the next 10 to 20 years. 3 10/19/2010 6 -2 -3 Vail does many things well and we are very proud of our accomplishments. However, we also recognize that there is room for improvement; we want to address the types of opportunities identified by our local leaders in the comments above, and we want to build on identified areas where we are falling short in guest services. Some of these areas include: • Issues and opportunities related to the 1 -70 travel experience and the decision process concerning time of travel, resort to visit (there are six other resorts in the immediate corridor) stops along the way, etc. While Vail does not control this experience and is at the mercy of many players, it is clearly one of the areas where the winter guest experience could be improved. • The challenges of providing adequate and easily accessible parking, especially during peak winter periods, and then moving guests from parking structures to the mountain. We believe that enhanced communications can improve the crowd management aspects of parking and the overall quality of this experience. Further, there are extensive and constantly evolving opportunities to participate in the social networking aspects of resort communications. • Visitor center management and programming. We operate multiple facilities serving a variety of needs. An evaluation of the purpose, locations, facilities, staffing, training, etc. could yield a better and more completely integrated guest experience. • The Town of Vail intends to pursue economic opportunities when they can be identified and measured and we believe there are opportunities to expand our capabilities in the area of measuring Return on Investment (ROI) associated with guest experience. This aspect of the Guest Service Initiative is identified to be very important — we want to understand and quantify potential improvements, and this measure will be an important component of future capital investment decisions. The need for outside professional assistance and the role of Town staff The Town's objective is to identify and contract with a team that can help the Town to envision and implement the far - reaching goal of enhancing the guest experience, recognizing that the effort will entail multiple yet to be determined tasks. Further, we want to build upon the efforts of Town and VRI staff and other entities and volunteers. While the Town has considerable experience in areas related to guest service, and a long track record in supporting tourism, it is recognized that we need outside assistance. What are we looking for through the RFQ process We are looking for a firm or firms with truly exceptional vision and experience in order to fully address the opportunities that exist. In light of this goal, the Town has developed this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and the associated process, in order to encourage interest and participation from a wide range of applicants representing diverse disciplines and perspectives. We are reaching out to identify companies or teams that represent exceptional experience and services that will further our ambitious efforts to enhance the guest experience. Our goal in the RFQ process is to identify a small set of potential firms that represent possible partner(s) for the Town; the selected teams will be invited to participate in the subsequent Request for Proposal (RFP) process. 4 10/19/2010 6 -2 -4 The RFP process will request some additional and more detailed information from selected teams. At the RFP stage we will request more information on budgets as well as more information on specific elements of the work program. For example, we anticipate using a multi -day "workshop" or "charrette" process, to be lead by the consultant team, to further the Guest Services assessment. Teams participating in the RFP will be requested to explain and demonstrate their capabilities in this area, as well as in the areas identified in this RFQ. Types of expertise we are looking for. The Town has identified a number of specific types of services that will be addressed through this Initiative. We believe that our needs are somewhat unusual in that we are looking for a variety of different services that are often not provided by a single organization. In other words, the RFQ anticipates that proposals may be submitted by teams representing multiple firms that have come together to propose on our project.As summarized below, we anticipate that the selected partner team will provide the Town with experience and guidance in a number of disciplines to include, at a minimum: • Technology and communications services to address guest needs in advance, during and after their visits; • Physical improvements to potentially include signage and other wayfinding systems, information centers, parking enhancements and dropoff improvements, etc. • Human resources management including best practices in guest service training, communications, and resource /manpower needs to support the identified systems and programs; and • An ability to provide guidance on the economic return on enhanced guest services including initial estimates of cost /benefit as well as measures of results over time. An expanded list of services is provided below. We expect the chosen firm(s) to have the ability to provide services to address the following identified needs and we request in the RFQ submittal, described further below, that your firm's resources and experience in these areas be described: Summary of anticipated consultant services: • Comprehensive competitive analysis and identification of best practices in other communities, resorts or other types of properties; • New technology solutions to enhance and support the guest experience; • Analysis of visitor patterns and volume at information centers,parking structures, buses, activities centers, etc.; • Infrastructure inventory of Vail visitor center locations and services andrecommendations relative to enhanced guest experience; • Solutions for information dissemination to guests before and atarrival, to include wayfinding; • Necessary resources and manpower to address the needs and opportunities; 5 10/19/2010 6 -2 -5 • Recommendations to eliminate duplication of services and to identify complimentary services; • Best practices for internal and external training programs; • Capital and operational costs; and • Consistent metrics for measurement of success and R.O.I. to be used on a continuous basis. The Anticipated Work Program and the Contractual Relationship As previously explained, we are looking for a partner firm that can guide and assist the Town in a variety of roles. Our goal is to select a single team to assist the Town in coming years, recognizing that our needs and the specific actions will evolve over time. We anticipate a multiphase approach to the project that would involve an initial contract followed by additional contracts to further develop and implement identified projects or work elements. The anticipated Phases are described below: Phase 1.Assessment /Defining High Impact Opportunities.Assistance in developing the specific elements of the Guest Enhancement Initiative and expanding the description of tasks to describe in detail the steps to create a truly integrated program that will guide local efforts in coming years. In order to complete this Phase of work we anticipate the selected Team will need to designate one or more individuals to work closely with a Town of Vail Working Group. This will require periodic visits to Vail, research and observations of Vail during the peak winter period, as well as a series of telephone conferences. Phase 1 will result in written documentation detailing the actions required to address the needs identified above. Further, it is expected that through the guidance and counsel of the selected team, the actions that the Town should consider will be expanded and also addressed. The result of this first Phase effort will be adefined series of specific actions or tasks with general costs, timelines, and responsibilities identified. Although it is anticipated that we will continue to later phases of work with the team that is selected, the Town Council will provide a review of direction and accomplishments before a second phase is authorized. Phase 2. Immediate Work Program. Based on the initial phase of work, a second set of tasks would be authorized for further development and definition. The budget for this phase has not been determined and will depend upon the results from the initial Phase. However, it is anticipated that this Phase will include the execution of some of the tasks identified above, as well as an expansion or further development of some of the work program. For example, the elements of the wayfinding /signage program might be authorized, while certain aspects of the technology platform might require further evaluation and refinement. Phase 2 anticipates these evolving needs. The budget for Phase 6 10/19/2010 6 -2 -6 2 has not been determined at this time and will depend upon the specific recommendations from Phase 1.Again, at the conclusion of this Phase additional input from Town Council will be solicited. Phase 3. Ongoing Initiatives. The final Phase(s) of this Initiative will involve ongoing execution and implementation of the work elements. This Phase is expected to take multiple years and the budget for this work has not yet been determined. Background Information on the Vail community and current guest service efforts We gathered a large amount of background information for use by interested teams. This information is presented in a series of tabs that are indexed below. The first tab provides an overview of many of the elements of the project. Then, more detailed information is presented describing in greater detail the specifics of some of the programs and initiatives that are currently underway. "'I'd D'Scussion or' the Context f Background Resort History Resort Characteristics Layout of Vail Access Guest Demographics Vail's Redevelopment Renaissance "Seamless" Guest Services Functions Town of Vail Resort Investment Conference Center Fund Reallocation Potential Partners for this Effort Public Parking Technology Blue text will link to Visitor Information Centers each attachment Vail Resorts Guest Services Wayfinding and Signage Guest Service Research Master Planning Tab 2. Town of Vail Economic Indicators Summary — July 2010 Update Tab 3. Vail Visitor Information Centers Fast Facts — 2009 Recap Tab 4. Town of Vail Public Parking Communications Plan — Winter 2010/11 Tab S. Guest Service Improvement Suggestions — 2010 Community Survey 7 10/19/2010 6 -2 -7 Tab 6. Lionshead Welcome Center Tab 7. Transit Center Tab 8. Wayfinding and Signage Work in Progress Tab 9. Vail Community Survey Tab 10. Town of Vail Art in Public Places Strategic Plan Tab11. Map of the Town of Vail Requests for Information and Specific Questions on the RFQ We request that there be no contacts with individual staff members in the Town of Vail regarding this RFQ. Written questions are invited and there will be a formal response to these questions on or before November 8. Questions may be emailed to: GuestServicesEnhancement @vailgov.com Reponses to the RFQ questions will be posted on the website at: Submittal Requirements for the RFQ The Respondent's Qualifications 1. Cover Letter introducing project team and summarizing capabilities, unique strengths and a brief statement outlining an understanding of the overall Initiative. The cover letter should not exceed three pages in length. 2. Written Submittal to include: a. Description of experience and background of all team members. Include an individual resume for each key team member. b. Demonstration of respondent team's capabilities to perform thetasks identified as summary of consultant services on page 5. In addition, provide background information on relevant past experience, address project team member relationships, past experience working together and a description of the roles and contributions of the various firms and team members. 8 10/19/2010 6 -2 -8 3. Provide a brief narrative outlining respondent's approach to integrating the objectives of the proposed project recognizing some of the unique constraints of Vail. Offer any preliminary ideas concerning how you and your team would address the goals of Phase 1. Provide suggestions on how you see Phases 2 and 3 being accomplished in order to successfully implement improvements that fall within the identified areas such as technology, training, way finding, financial tracking of results, etc. 4. Provide three examples of similar projects completed. Identify any awards or recognition received, problems solved, and the rough size of the project measured in either consulting fees and /or the costs of implementing the project. 5. Provide three references for the entire team, or for individual team members if the reference involves a project that was not conducted as a team. These references should identify: the location of the projects being referenced, the name and title of the individual to be contacted, phone number and an email for the contact. We request that the Written Submittal not Exceed 15 pages. Billing Rates and Typical Cost Structure As described above, the anticipated approach to a contract for this project will involve hourly billing toward a "not to exceed" agreed upon figure for Phase 1. We are not requesting a budget or costing as a part of this RFQ. A more complete estimate of project costs will be required of firms invited to submit an RFP. However, please indicate your typical hourly billing rates for the personnel identified on the project team. If you have particular suggestions concerning how the costing for the entire project might be addressed, based on your experience with similar projects, this input is invited at this time. Submittals Submit 10 bound copies of the RFQ response along with one electronic PDF copy on CD. Responses should be sealed, market "Guest Services Enhancement Initiative" and delivered November 15, 2010 on or before 5:00 PM (MTN) to: Attention Guest Enhancement Initiative Town of Vail, 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 (for Overnight Mail): Telephone number: 970 479 -2100 Statements received after the due date will not be considered. Respondents are advised the Town of Vail shall not be liable at any time for any costs associated with or related to the Project incurred by any submitter during any phase of this RFQ or any subsequent phase of the RFP process. 9 10/19/2010 6 -2 -9 Shortlist RFP Consideration The Town reserves the right to accept, to reject or to interview any or all qualified respondents and ignore any irregularities at its sole discretion. The Town expects to limit the number of respondents that are invited to submit for the RFP. At this time it is anticipated that the number will total between 4 and 6 firms. Following the RFP submittals it is expected that a limited number of teams will be invited to an interview in Vail in early January. Upon completion of the interview process, selection will occur and the Town reserves the right to immediately enter into contract finalization with the selected respondent. 10 10/19/2010 6 -2 -10 An Overview and Background Discussion for the Initiative Background Recognized as one of the world's top resort destinations, this alpine community hosts over 1.5 million skier visits annually and as many as 20,000 skiers a day. In addition, the resort's popularity as a summer destination has seen steady growth following implementation of a tax - supported marketing fund to promote visitation during the non - skiing months. The citizens of Vail rely on sales tax income from visitor spending to support municipal services and to fund amenities for guest and resident use. Its current strategic focus is to: Work with resort community partners to retain a leadership position in lodging and tourism activity in comparison with resort competitors. Resort History Known for big dreams and even bigger triumphs, Vail was once a sheep- raising and lettuce - growing area beneath the backdrop of the Gore Range mountains until its founders worked quietly and inconspicuously to develop one of the greatest ski resorts in the world. Their enthusiasm had been shaped years earlier at the nearby Camp Hale training facility where ski troopers from the 10 Mountain Division honed their outdoor talents to become renowned high - altitude soldiers in World War II. Their lives and their contributions to skiing are now celebrated at the Colorado Ski Museum and Hall of Fame in the heart of Vail. Today, nearly 50 years after Vail's founding, the dreams envisioned all those years ago are being perfected. Resort Characteristics & Community Amenities Surrounded by 350,000 acres of White River National Forest and framed by 5,000 acres of skiable terrain, Vail provides the perfect setting for alpine pleasures. Visitors are drawn to Vail's charming European -style pedestrian villages, which provide a variety of shopping and dining opportunities and a vibrant nightlife. Vail's community qualities are just as impressive with public and private schools, a full - service hospital, an award - winning library, free transit system, an abundance of neighborhood parks and trails, a Nature Center, Nordic center, gymnastics center, ice arena, championship public golf course, an outdoor performing arts venue and more open space than any other resort community in the U.S. Although winter continues to draw most of the area's visitors, an abundance of summer activities such as golf, mountain biking, fishing, rafting and cultural arts have produced a growing market for summer tourism. Layout of Vail As with any town, Vail has distinct neighborhoods and landmarks. In addition, the long and narrow layout (8 miles long by 1 -to -2 miles wide) makes orientation a bit challenging. Vail is divided into six main regions: East Vail, Golden Peak, Vail Village, LionsHead Village, Cascade Village and West Vail. The six regions are accessible from three exits along Interstate 70. North and South Frontage Roads run east and west through town, mostly parallel to the interstate, connecting residential and business areas. Located south of the interstate are the three major ski base areas offering access 1 10/19/2010 6 -3 -1 to Vail Mountain with ticket offices and skier services at each location. Chair 6, the Riva Bahn, is located at the far east end and serves Golden Peak; the Vista Bahn lift is found at Vail Village; LionsHead offers the Eagle Bahn Gondola and the Born Free Express. A smaller portal, Chair 21, serves Cascade Village and is known as the local's secret for quick access up the mountain. http: / /www.vailgov.com /docs /dl forms /vail maps.pdf http: / /www.vail.com /— /media /Vail /Files /Winter TrailMap 0910 /Winter TrailMap 0910.as hx http : / /www.vaiIgov.com /subpage.asp ?page id =910 http: / /www.vailgov.com /docs /dl forms /busmap72.PDF Access Vail is located approximately 30 minutes to the east of the Eagle County Regional Airport (the third busiest airport in the state) with 13 direct flights from across the U.S. during the winter and direct flights from Dallas, Miami and Denver during the summer. It is a two -hour drive from Denver International Airport along Interstate 70. Guest Demographics Winter Guests • Vail is a destination with more than 77 percent of its guests spending the night. Vail's guests can be described as affluent, educated and active. Mean household income is $230k, and the vast majority has at least a college education. Vail's guests are truly sophisticated travelers who are looking for the best; they not only come from all over the U.S., but from across the globe. They are adventure seekers who do not want to compromise on quality whether by themselves or with their families. The out -of -state guests account for approximately 60 percent of Vail's traffic, with over 30 percent coming from New York City, Chicago, Dallas and Washington, D.C. Nine percent of Vail's guests are international and an additional 8 percent are Colorado overnight guest. More than 50 percent of Vail's guests are families and during those key holidays this percentage grows as high as 80 percent. Spring /Summer /Fall Guests • In the non -ski months, 53 percent of guests spend the night. Similar to the winter guest, the summer visitor is affluent, educated and active. Mean household income is $208k. Summer guests tend to travel with family (40 percent) or spouse /significant other (25 percent) and tend to visit for rest and relaxation and to enjoy the natural beauty of the Rocky Mountains. Top activities include shopping and hiking. Top markets for Vail in the summer months include the Front Range of Colorado (25 percent), New York - Northern New Jersey (4 percent), Chicago (3.4 percent), Los Angeles (2.6 percent), Houston (2.6 percent) and Dallas (2.4 percent). Vail's Redevelopment Renaissance Since its founding in 1962, Vail has developed a reputation for innovation and excellence, which has resulted in exceptional experiences for guests and a high quality of life for residents. To ensure Vail's future success, a large -scale revitalization has 2 10/19/2010 6 -3 -2 been underway since 2004 totaling an estimated two billion dollars in public and private investment and well over half of all the land in Vail Village and LionsHead. The redevelopment has resulted in 154 net new lodging units and 54,000 sq. ft. of net new commercial space. As major redevelopment by the private sector begins to wind down, the town is shifting its focus from building new amenities to helping guests and residents enjoy them. There are some remaining public improvements planned, however, in LionsHead. LionsHead Public Improvements • Additional public improvements will be taking place within the next three years in LionsHead following the issuance of $12.5 million in tax increment financing (TIF) bonds by the Vail Reinvestment Authority. Funds from the bonds will be allocated as follows: • LionsHead Transit and Welcome Center, $7.8 million (with an additional $5 million funded from a Federal Transit Authority grant); • East LionsHead Portal Improvements (streetscape and bus stop), $2,075,000; • West LionsHead Portal /Concert Hall Plaza Improvements, $750,000; • Public Library Remodel, Phase I, $475,000; • Charter Bus Lot Surface Parking (60 spaces, retaining wall, entrance modifications), $900,000. "Seamless" Guest Services Functions As guest services partners, the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts aim to deliver a "seamless" guest experience. In other words, when successful, guests won't know the difference between a town - generated service versus a resort- generated service. The seamless effect is due to consistency in guest service standards between the two entities. The community also relies on lodges, retail businesses and restaurants to contribute to the seamless resort effect. A guest service recognition program called Premier Impressions has been in place for several years to reward members of the community who do extraordinary things to ensure guests have a memorable experience while in Vail. Town of Vail Resort Investment Because sales tax remains the single largest revenue source for the Town of Vail, economic development investments are focused on tourism, the primary economic driver. In 2009, town investments of approximately $6.5 million, or 11 percent of annual expenditures, were budgeted in sectors that bring guests to Vail and improve their experience once they're here. Specifically, the Town of Vail funds and maintains the following functions that are tied directly to tourism: • Public Parking • Free Transit • Special Events • Pedestrian Ambiance (streetscape embellishments, fountains, heated cobblestones, underground loading and delivery facilities, wayfinding signs) • Visitor Information Centers • Community Hosts 3 10/19/2010 6 -3 -3 • Summer Marketing • Art in Public Places • Flower plantings • Christmas decorations As a result of these resort investments, a sustained tourism base is essential for the continued financial health of the community. Conference Center Fund Reallocation In November 2005, Vail's electorate defeated an increase in the lodging tax to supplement taxes approved in 2002 to build and operate a conference center. The ballot question also contained a provision to rescind the 2002 taxes if the issue failed and for the Town Council to either: 1) refund any remaining revenues from the taxes pursuant to a refund methodology determined by the Council, or 2) submit a question to the voters on how such revenues shall be used. In December 2005, the Vail Town Council rescinded the 2002 taxes (a half -cent sales tax and a 1.5 percent lodging tax) effective January 1, 2006. In determining the disposition of $9.3 million in revenues collected prior to the taxes being rescinded (note: the fund continues to earn interest), the Town Council has determined it will not pursue a refund mechanism, but rather, will pursue submitting a question to the voters on reallocation of the funds. Reallocation Concepts • The most recent effort to explore concepts for the highest and best use of the funds has involved interviewing a cross section of stakeholders with the goal established by the Town Council of utilizing the funds "to increase overall economic vitality in the Town of Vail with the funds earmarked for capital assets, either new or existing facilities, providing a long -term benefit to the Town of Vail." The physical assets identified as having the most potential to achieve the goals of upgrading existing facilities, completing Vail's Renaissance and putting the "finishing touches" on the town are: • Remodel the Golf Clubhouse with the addition of an events pavilion, $3.5 million • Remodel and expand the Vail Village Welcome Center to include community space, $2 million • Enhance town wide signage /information /guest service systems, $1 million • Expand and renovate Dobson Ice Arena for more expanded uses, $2 million • Expand fields at Ford Park to create an additional field and extend the season, $1 million Next steps in this process have been identified as follows • October - November Work with prospective partners to: • Define clear purpose and programming for each of the five projects • Prepare any necessary feasibility studies to ensure viability of the projects • Prepare facilities project costs (hard and soft) and operating costs for each proposed asset enhancement Some of the work product deliverables require resources. The various projects are in different stages of development and study today. 4 10/19/2010 6 -3 -4 • Late December - February • Seek stakeholder and community input on proposed asset enhancements • Refine the projects as needed based on input and additional information received • Prepare any economic analysis as needed • Finalize projects and ballot question • March or April 2011 o Hold a special election for the $9.3 million reallocation http: / /agenda.vailgov.com /public /Bluesheet.aspx ?itemid= 1398 &meetingid =106 Potential Partners for this Effort Vail Resorts, Inc. (VRI) • Vail Resorts, Inc., through its subsidiaries is the leading mountain resort operator in the U.S. The company's subsidiaries operate the mountain resort properties of Vail, Beaver Creek, Breckenridge, Keystone mountain resorts in Colorado, the Heavenly Ski Resort in the Lake Tahoe area of California and Nevada, and the Grand Teton Lodge Company in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The company's subsidiary, RockResorts, a luxury resort hotel company, manages casually elegant properties across the U.S. and the Caribbean. Vail Resorts Development Company is the real estate planning, development and construction subsidiary of Vail Resorts, Inc. Vail Resorts is a publicly held company traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE:MTN). The Vail Resorts website is www.vaiIresorts.com and consumer website is www.snow.com Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) • The Colorado Department of Transportation is a critical partner as it relates to the management, maintenance and overall vision for Interstate 70 and the North and South Frontage Roads in Vail. CDOT's mission is to "provide the best multi - modal transportation system for Colorado that most effectively moves people, goods and information." CDOT's most recent effort involves a long -term plan to address future transportation requirements of I -70 between C -470 in Denver to Glenwood Springs. In addition, public safety agencies throughout the corridor are working with CDOT on proactive measures to keep I -70 over Vail Pass open between Vail and Cooper Mountain as well as the Eisenhower Tunnel approaches during the winter. This is being done through enforcement of chain possession laws for trucks, enforcement of the chain -up laws and other strategies to prevent accidents and spinouts that can close or block the interstate for hours. Winter and summer traffic on I -70 continues to grow and is beginning to have a negative impact on the guest experience due to traffic delays in getting to and from the mountains. Communication of traffic predictability is an essential component of the partnership. www. i70mtncorridor.com www.Gol70.com In addition, the Town of Vail is negotiating the possibility of taking control of portions of the frontage road from CDOT to help address its parking issues with increased predictability of available parking. U.S. Forest Service (USFS) 5 10/19/2010 6 -3 -5 • Vail is surrounded by 350,000 acres of White River National Forest. Vail Resorts has a permit from the USFS to operate 5,000 acres of skiable terrain on Vail Mountain. There are numerous recreational activities available within the forest to include hiking, biking, horseback riding and snowmobiling. The primary source for USFS information about those activities is currently disseminated from the Holy Cross Wilderness District offices on State Highway 24 near Minturn. Business Organizations • Vail is served by the following business organizations: Vail Chamber & Business Association, Meadow Drive Merchants Association, LionsHead Merchants Association and the Vail Valley Partnership. Vail Local Marketing District (VLMD) • The Town of Vail, through the Vail Local Marketing District, is responsible for marketing destination visitors during the spring /summer /fall. The marketing strategies are developed by a nine - member Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Council which meets monthly. This volunteer board is responsible for making recommendations to the Vail Town Council, which serves as the Vail Local Marketing District Board, for summer and shoulder season marketing programs funded by a 1.4 percent Vail lodging tax. Note: Vail Resorts assumes responsibility for destination marketing during the ski season. Over the past few years these two entities have worked closely to present Vail as a single brand and destination year- round. Vail Commission on Special Events • This is a seven - member board appointed by the Vail Town Council and is responsible for: creating and implementing a special event strategy for the Town of Vail; overseeing a director and staff, who will oversee permit applications and act as a single -point of contact for special events related issues; allocating funds budgeted by the Town of Vail for special events; evaluating event applications; overseeing event producers and promoters; evaluating and executing contracts for special events; other functions designated by the Vail Town Council. Vail Economic Advisory Council (VEAC) • The Vail Economic Advisory Council (VEAC) was established in 2006 as a citizens' advisory group for the purpose of advising the Vail Town Council, Town Manager and the community on economic issues that will sustain, enhance and diversify the town's economy. The major function of the VEAC is to focus on the overall economic future of Vail (West Vail to East Vail) and to develop an organized plan of action using specific information gained from past studies, existing studies and economic indicators. Public Parking Increasingly, parking has become the town's greatest challenge. For better or worse, the credibility of public parking in Vail is shaped by public opinion. Results from the 2010 Town of Vail community survey concluded that public parking demands attention by the town. Respondents want to see more options, better communicated information (signage and advisory systems) and a review of prices. While the Town Council works to create a long -term plan for additional parking inventory (up to 400 permanent spaces), implementation of a proactive communications plan for the 2010 -11 winter 6 10/19/2010 6 -3 -6 season provides opportunities to shape public opinion about parking options, ease of parking, pricing, simplicity of operations and immediate availability. http: / /agenda.vailgov.com/ public /Bluesheet.aspx ?itemid =1431 &meetingid =129 http: / /agenda.vailgov.com /public /Bluesheet.aspx ?itemid= 1432 &meetingid =129 http: / /agenda.vailgov.com /public /Bluesheet.aspx ?itemid= 1433 &meetingid =129 Technology Epic Mix • Epic Mix is being introduced by Vail Resorts for the 2010/2011 season and is being billed as a revolutionary technological advancement for the ski industry. It will be in use at Vail, Beaver Creek, Breckenridge, Keystone and Heavenly. Here's how Vail Resorts describes the product on its website: "With EpicMix, all your activity on the slopes is automatically captured and uploaded to your EpicMix dashboard. Now you can follow your days skied, track your vertical feet, see where you rode, earn EpicMix pins for your achievements, and collect points. You can also connect with your social networks like Facebook and Twitter and share your stats, pins and points. All this is possible because of Radio Frequency scanners at the base of every lift, and RF technology built into every Vail Resorts season pass, and PEAKS lift ticket." The Town of Vail and Vail Resorts envision a scenario where one day guests will be able to use their ski pass to access the public parking garages. http: / /www. snow. com /epicpass /home.aspx ?cmpid= PPC99363624 www.onthesnow.com Social Media • Vail Resorts relies heavily on social media to build its brand loyalty. The company currently has a presence on FaceBook (18,000 -plus fans), Twitter and YouTube. There are multiple Twitter accounts, including one for the CEO, Rob Katz. • The Town of Vail has limited experience with social media which currently includes Twitter accounts for VailGov, VailFire, VailLibrary and VailTownCouncil. The Vail Library uses Facebook. Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) Implementation Plan • The Town of Vail has completed a Dynamic Message Sign Implementation Plan for dissemination of real -time information, such as parking, events and incidents on the interstate. The master plan and design was prepared in 2009 by Kimley- Horn, Apex Design and VAg. The plan provides recommendations for 10 DMS locations, technology (Daktronics VL -3500 series, full matrix and full color) and aesthetics. Implementation is set to begin in 2010 following approval by the Colorado Department of Transportation. Funding has been budgeted for installation of 1 sign in 2010 and the remainder to be installed over the next several years. The plan envisions the integration of messages that can be shared and displayed by the Town of Vail and Colorado Department of Transportation to provide accuracy and consistency. Colorado Department of Transportation Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) 7 10/19/2010 6 -3 -7 • The Colorado Department of Transportation now is using its ITS plan coupled with the fiber optic backbone, that extends from Vail to Denver, to manage the I- 70 Mountain Corridor more effectively. Information from cameras, Variable Message Signs (VMS), Ramp Meters and Trip Times is transported in light - speed up and down the 1 -70 Mountain Corridor and available for stakeholders via the www.COTRIP.org website and 511 informational systems. Real -time information on the Highway and accessed on www.COTRIP.org and 511 will allow travelers to make informed decisions about utilizing the 1 -70 Mountain Corridor. Free 1 -Hour Wi -Fi • In 2006, the Town of Vail partnered with CenturyTel (now CenturyLink) for installation of a wireless network in Vail, which includes one -hour of free service. The program continues today, and has met with mixed reviews due to the lack of public assets to mount equipment on in order to service all areas. A plan is underway for a technology refresh of the wireless system, including the use of 5G cellular data services. http: / /www.vaiIgov.com /release.asp ?r id =2985 Real -time Parking Information • The Town of Vail will be testing a service that will transmit real -time parking information to mobile devices for greater reliability and predictability of available spaces. The service will be announced in November 2010. The system will transmit available parking spaces to us at regular intervals via a web based (XML) file. We will be converting this information into a useful format and pushing it out to our web server / mobile web server. Vail Resorts has agreed to push the information out via m.vail.com. Town of Vail Technology Strategic Plan • The Town of Vail has adopted an IT strategic plan which will be available upon request by qualified applicants during the question and answer phase. Visitor Information Centers Visitor services are an important component in Vail's continuing success. The Visitor Information Centers in Vail Village and LionsHead are owned by the Town of Vail and have been in place for more than 35 years while serving as the first point of contact for many arriving visitors. The facilities are staffed to provide a friendly welcome and to assist with information needs, resulting in a positive impression about Vail. The centers also serve to further Vail's reputation for resort excellence and contribute to the municipal goals of economic vitality and prosperity for businesses within the town. Approximately 80,000 visitors a year pass through the Vail Information Centers. Of those, approximately 60 percent visit the centers during the summer and 40 percent in winter. Existing Facilities • The Vail Village Visitor Information Center is a 950 sq. ft. space located on the top level of the Vail Village parking structure and accessed by 4 short -term parking spaces and 2 ADA spaces on the east side of the building, as well as 8 10/19/2010 6 -3 -8 approximately 1,500 additional parking spaces throughout the structure. Visitors also arrive via mass transit on the north and west sides of the building and by foot from the south. The main lobby and lounge area of the center, approximately 400 sq. ft., can accommodate up to 30 visitors at any one time. The center also houses a 100 sq. ft. vestibule area which is accessible 24/7; a 200 sq. ft. enclosed office; and a 100 sq. ft. storage area. Public restrooms are located nearby, beneath the transit terminal. • The LionsHead Information Center is a 475 sq. ft. stand -alone space located along South Frontage Road West near the entrance to the LionsHead parking structure, which contains approximately 1,100 spaces. A turnout from the Frontage Road provides easy vehicular access, especially for large recreational vehicles. The center contains an open lobby on the ground level and limited storage space in the basement below. It accommodates up to 30 visitors at any one time. The facility lacks water or sewer utilities. Therefore, public restrooms are located on the opposite side of the parking structure to the southwest. With the pending construction of the Lionshead Welcome /Transit Center, the town is contemplating removal of this facility so long as improvements can be made to the Vail Village Information Center to accommodate recreation vehicles. Other information services currently provided in this center would be handled at the new LionsHead Welcome /Transit Center. • The Vail Municipal Building, located at 75 S. Frontage Road, serves as an ad- hoc information center. With parking readily available, visitors oftentimes pull into this location to ask for directions and to use the restrooms. The building contains a front desk which is staffed on weekdays. Future Facilities • LionsHead Transit Center Phase 1 construction is underway on the South Frontage Road on the north side of the LionsHead parking structure. The project includes construction of a new 1,200 sq. ft. transit building and waiting area and restrooms; four Eagle County Regional Transit bus bays; frontage road improvements; and a 20 -space passenger drop -off area on the lowest level of the LionsHead parking structure, closest to the entrance to Lionshead. The schedule calls for road improvements to be completed by Nov. 15 and the transit building to be ready for occupancy during the 2010 -11 ski season. There are possible visitor services programming opportunities available in this building but will be somewhat limited due to space. • LionsHead Transit Welcome Center Phase 2 will break ground in April 2011 and will include a tear -down rebuild of the auxiliary building on the south side of the LionsHead parking structure. In its place will be a new 9,500 sq. ft. Transit Welcome Center, a three -story building that will feature a transit waiting area and welcome center, restrooms, ski lockers, Vail Recreation Youth District programming, elevators and space for exhibits and community functions. Visitor services programming opportunities are anticipated for this building as an enhancement and /or replacement to the services provided by the Visitor Information Center on the South Frontage Road. http: / /agenda.vailgov.com /public /Bluesheet.aspx ?itemid= 1429 &meetingid =129 9 10/19/2010 6 -3 -9 • Remodel and Expansion of the Vail Village Welcome Center has been proposed as one of the concepts for the Conference Center funds. Operations Since 2005, the town has contracted with an independent third party, Vail Info, Inc., to operate the centers and has renewed this operational contract annually for a period ending September 30, 2011. It is anticipated the town will issue a new Request for Proposals (RFP) in spring 2011 for operations. Before the RFP can be issued, the town will need to identify a comprehensive vision of the scope of services required of the operation, the facilities involved and whether a third party operator continues to be preferred. Volunteer Community Hosts In addition to the paid visitor information center staff, the Town of Vail manages a community host program in which as many as eight volunteers are stationed at key portals during peak days during the summer and winter to welcome guests and assist them with their questions. In exchange for a required 80 hours of service, the volunteers receive a free ski pass, parking pass or equivalent benefit. Vail Resorts Guest Services Vail Resorts operates the Mountain and Activities Information Center at the Arrabelle at Vail Square in LionsHead. The center is staffed daily and serves as a clearinghouse for information and bookings of activities provided by Vail Resorts, such as Adventure Ridge. Vail Resorts also manages a Mountain Guest Services Volunteer program which provides information and assistance while in the base areas and on Vail Mountain both summer and winter. This group also leads the tours of the mountain throughout the ski season. Wayfinding and Signage In 1999 the town issued a Request for Proposals for wayfinding services and selected Corbin Design of Traverse City, Mich., to overhaul the system which had been installed a decade earlier. The previous system had resulted in costly maintenance and replacement challenges given the use of enamel coated steel material for the pedestrian wayfinding signs. During the Corbin Design process, a new fiberglass embedded technology was selected to improve durability and reduce replacement costs. The program redefined the way visitors navigate Vail. Six villages were identified, each with assigned names (East Vail, Golden Peak, Vail Village, LionsHead Village, Cascade Village and West Vail) and unique colors to point them out. Also, mountain portal signage was developed to direct skiers who may take a lift up one slope only to ski down another slope into a different village later. The signage also supports the town's unique pedestrian focus, where visitors use a free public transit system to travel around town before walking to their destinations in the heart of each village. Components included the fabrication and location of 360 pedestrian signs placed at 90 locations throughout Ford Park, Golden Peak, Vail Village, LionsHead and Cascade Village; 100 -plus interior directional signs within the Vail Village and Lionshead paring structures; 30 skier drop -off regulatory signs placed throughout Golden Peak, Vail Village and Lionshead; new bus stop signs for the 17 in -town stops; 16 pedestrian maps placed in Vail Village and LionsHead; 2 corporate limit signs; new Frontage Road 10 10/19/2010 6 -3 -10 parking and information signs; Identification signs for all community parks; and over 100 trail signs along the Gore Valley Trail and U.S. Forest Service trailheads. Another phase of the wayfinding work was anticipated, but wasn't completed at the time due to lack of funding. This included gateway signs at each of Vail's three interchanges as well as a freeway monument along 1 -70. Since installation of the Corbin Design wayfinding system, many of the directional and informational signs have been removed to accommodate the most recent redevelopment which has been underway since 2004. The town has identified a need to evaluate the status of the current wayfinding system and make improvements where sign erosion has occurred. Link to Corbin Design one - sheeter Guest Service Research Both the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts, Inc. conduct a number of studies that provide information on the guest experience based on surveys. The most recent study by the Town was the 2010 Vail Community Survey, a periodic survey -based study of resident and part time resident (second homeowner) opinions. The results of this study are provided in the attached tabs along with a summary of responses on an open -ended question that asked, "What are the one or two things the Town of Vail could do to improve the guest experience in Vail ?" Additionally, the Town has done a number of intercept surveys of parking structure users and the results of these studies will be provided as needed once a team is selected. Historically, intercept studies have also been conducted on other aspects of the guest experience in summer. The Summer 2010 Intercept Survey results will be available Oct. 21. The Vail Local Marketing Board uses the Net Promoter method to measure guest satisfaction. The scores have continued to improve over the past three measurement periods as follows: 42 score in 2005 (reflects negative construction impacts); 62 in 2007 and 72 in 2010. Vail Resorts also conducts extensive research with skiers, including intercept studies that have spanned a number of years. This research includes questions on various aspects of the guest experience with particular emphasis on the mountain experience. As a part of the research Vail Resorts tracks a Net Promoter score for Vail visitors that permit the Vail experience to be tracked over time and to be compared with other resorts. The availability of this information will be limited but an overview of the research and general findings may be made available to the selected firm. Master Planning (Note: Community Development will add to this section later in the week) Art in Public Places Vail is a Town with a unique natural setting; internationally known for its natural beauty, alpine environment, and man -made structures that are compatible with the environment. 11 10/19/2010 6 -3 -11 These characteristics have caused a significant number of people to visit Vail with many of these visitors eventually becoming permanent residents participating in community life. The founders of Vail originally planned the Town with a vision to make it memorable and strict guidelines were developed to make Vail a unique community and vacation destination. Much of the success of Vail as a resort and as a community has been a direct result of this original concept. Over the years this vision has manifested itself in Town policies and regulations used to direct growth and development. After nearly 50 years, the Town has fully developed and is completing a period of revitalization. As buildings, streets, and public plazas are reborn, Vail has the opportunity to inject new life into the everyday experience of the resident and guest by using the resources offered by the Town's Art in Public Places program. The current AIPP program focuses largely on commissioning art pieces for specific locations within the community and providing for the placement throughout the Town of temporary art sculptures on loan from galleries. The AIPP program has relied upon the generosity of artists and galleries to provide temporary art and the Town Council to fund specific art projects. Today, the town's public art collection is valued at over $1.4 million and includes 37 works of art that range from memorials to playground components. AIPP also hosts numerous workshops, demonstrations and activities throughout the year. 12 10/19/2010 6 -3 -12 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Suzanne Silverthorn, Kelli McDonald, Greg Hall, Stan Zemler DATE: October 5, 2010 SUBJECT: Town of Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative I. BACKGROUND As a follow up to the Sept. 7 presentation on the themes and concepts for the highest and best use of the conference center funds, staff has begun to identify a process to advance the Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative as presented previously. This memo provides an overview of some initial thoughts generated during the information - gathering conducted earlier and additional input from staff. We will be seeking Town Council direction on this project over the course of the next few weeks as part of the conference center fund reallocation feasibility stage, which has identified "town wide signage /information /guest enhancement system" as one of five themes recommended for additional exploration. Considerations in support of the Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative identified previously are summarized as follows: Demonstrated Need The need and opportunity for a major initiative to address guest satisfaction is well- founded. The Vail Town Council identified it as one of the important programs that it wanted to address this year. Further, input obtained from the Vail Community Survey in early 2010 showed strong support from both full -time and seasonal residents for improved guest service. Guest service can provide a major area of differentiation for Vail in an increasingly competitive marketplace, both national and international. Why now? As Vail's bed base and community expansion are completed and new infrastructure comes online, there is an opportunity to tie the entire Vail experience together, including the built and natural environment, programs and activities, and guest service elements, in a manner that is unique among resort communities. This will provide competitive advantage over time and it will also allow Vail to capitalize on some upcoming opportunities. Upcoming Milestones Vail has several major "milestone" events that will occur in future years. These include the 2012 50` Anniversary of Vail and the 2015 World Alpine Ski Championships. Together, these events will spotlight Vail to the world and will provide added challenges and opportunities to demonstrate the best in guest experience and service. Leveraging Funds The recent discussions concerning the reallocation of the conference center funds presents an additional dimension to the opportunity that exists today. Based on recent discussions, these funds could be targeted toward creating capital assets that would improve the economic condition of the town. Amenities 1 10/19/2010 6 -4 -1 and physical improvements that provide an improved experience for guests and residents will further the sustainable economic goals of the town. In effect, the conference center funds present a unique opportunity to follow through on, and leverage, some of the ideas that have been developed but until now have lacked a focus and clear purpose as well as funding. II. WHAT IS PROPOSED The idea that is being pursued involves an ambitious and comprehensive effort to expand the quality and completeness of the guest experience in Vail, in summer and in winter. The idea is to offer a seamless, high quality experience to all who visit Vail. An initial goal for the Guest Service Enhancement Initiative could be stated to be: A uniformly positive experience for all who come in contact with Vail, whether they visit, live or work in Vail. Further, we aspire to provide positive experiences and impressions for those who intend to visit or simply have a perception of Vail based on information they read and hear. Need for Outside Professional Assistance There is a recognition that this effort will require outside assistance; we do not have the capacity to complete this project through staff resources. Further, we believe that it is appropriate to identify a firm or firms with truly exceptional vision and experience in order to fully address the opportunity that presents itself. In light of this goal, we propose to develop a Request for Qualifications and Proposal (RFQ /P) that will encourage interest and participation from a wide range of applicants, national and perhaps international. The nature of the project, including significant upside opportunity for Vail if we succeed in meeting our goals, suggests that we reach out with an ambitious effort to identify "best of breed" providers of services. We believe that an RFQ /P process will provide the best partner(s) for the town, similar to the success we had in selecting a partner for redevelopment of Timber Ridge. As proposed, we are suggesting that the process will require some proactive efforts by the town to define our objectives, needs, resources and prior efforts in advance of soliciting the RFQ /P. By spending some initial time on gathering this information, we believe that we will create the groundwork that will be both efficient and productive in meeting our objectives. What are we looking for through the RFQ /P process An initial effort to describe some of the aspects of the proposed effort has identified specific types of services that would be solicited. The list combines a mixture of technology, human resources management, physical improvements (signs and wayfinding) and costing, all integrated to provide the best possible guest experiences. We believe that the needs are somewhat unusual in that we are looking for a variety of different services that are not all typically provided by a single organization. In other words, our RFQ /P anticipates that we may be dealing with teams of consultants that have come together to propose on our project. Initial Areas of Focus • New technology solutions, • Necessary resources and manpower, 2 10/19/2010 6 -4 -2 • Elimination of duplication of services, • Addition of complementary services, • Best -of -breed internal and external training programs, • Solutions for information dissemination to guests before and at arrival, to include wayfinding, • Analysis of guest patterns and volume at information centers, parking structures, buses, activities centers, etc., • Infrastructure inventory of information center locations, etc., and recommendations relative to enhanced guest experience, • Capital and operational costs, • Comprehensive competitive analysis, and • Consistent metrics for measurement of success. III. BUDGET Our estimate for completing the scope of services identified above is $200,000 to $250,000. This estimate is based, in part, on costs associated with our previous wayfinding program which was developed in 1999. Those costs included $143,000 for program development and $415,000 for sign fabrication with in -house installation. The 2009 streetscape budget includes $50,000 that was to be used to fund phase - one of a stand -alone update to our wayfinding plan with a recommendation for $100,000 in the 2011 RETT budget that was to complete the planning for wayfinding. However, given the expanded scope of this project, staff requests consideration of an additional $100,000 in the 2011 capital budget to complete the integrated planning for a comprehensive approach and its multiple disciplines in the enhancement of Vail's guest services. While the proposed RFQ /P process will be used to further define the resources needed for implementation of the Guest Services Enhancement Initiative, the conference center reallocation working group's initial recommendation of $1 million appears to be a reasonable target given previous expenses associated with wayfinding. IV. TIME FRAMES With Council's direction, we propose to move toward initiating the RFQ /P process in the next several weeks. The goal would be to have a consultant team on board, conducting this initiative over the 2011 winter season. One of our goals would be to ensure that, to the extent needed, observations of guest services by the consultant team would occur during the peak winter periods. We are proposing that this effort will take approximately five to six months from initiation to completion. Our goal would be to have results available to Council to coincide with a special election for reallocation of the conference center funds in March or April, 2011. V. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL The Vail Town Council is asked to concur with the Vail Guest Services Enhancement Initiative as a preliminary step and to provide input on the areas of focus outlined in section 11 of this memo. The areas of focus will then be incorporated into a draft 3 10/19/2010 6 -4 -3 RFQ /P which will be presented to the Town Council for final review and approval at the Oct. 19 work session. VI. ATTACHMENT Vail Town Council Memo, 9 -7 -10 4 10/19/2010 6 -4 -4 f TOWN OF Ai VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO TO: Town Council FROM: Kent Logan DATE: September 7, 2010 SUBJECT: Update on Conference Center Funds Background The balance available for reallocation from the conference center funds is $9.3 million at the end of 2009. On April 6, 2010 Council approved the following: Goal Utilize the funds to increase overall economic vitality in the Town of Vail. Key Assumption The $9.3 million conference center funds should be used for capital assets, either new or enhanced existing facilities, providing a long -term benefit to the Town of Vail. Considerations The following considerations will be used for evaluation of concepts brought forward as potential uses for the conference center funds: • Drive increased lodging occupancy • Drive sales tax growth as a result of the investment • Enhance the experience for those who live, work and play in Vail • Project can be realistically accomplished, including financial feasibility and can meet such requirements as zoning, parking, sustainability, etc. • Understand impacts on neighborhoods • Ability to leverage funding sources available • Measurable return on investment • Plan for ongoing operational costs 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 j www. vailov.com 10/19/2019 Process Council directed the Town Manager to form a working group to solicit ideas and input and develop and evaluate concepts for the highest and best use of the conference center funds. Instead, Kent Logan, along with Susie Tjossem, Kerry Donovan, Stan Zemler and Kelli McDonald met with individuals and groups over the past 90 days. 2010 Community Survey Results The question was posed in the recent community survey of what was the best course of action determining the use of the conference center funds. Results were: • 50% - Move at a moderate pace, taking time to study and evaluate the choices • 18% - Move as quickly as possible — a ballot issue on this topic is overdue • 32% - Move at a slow pace — there is no hurry; having the money in hand preserves opportunities The follow up question was which is the best choice for expenditure of the funds. Results were: • 53% - Use the money to build something • 29% - Save the money for yet- undetermined needs • 14% - Other • 4% - Use the money for marketing or support programs to enhance our economy Who Did We Talk To? Harry Frampton Bill Jensen Rob Katz Ceil Folz Andy Norris Beth Slifer Doris Kirchner George Gillette Representatives from the Lodging Community Vail Economic Advisory Council What Did We Hear? Vail has a lot going for it, but every world -class resort must continue to reinvent itself. No big idea came forth for a new, dedicated purpose building that could make a significant impact. Rather, we heard that Vail should build on its strengths and take advantage of the opportunities and physical assets that seem to serve the most constituents and meet the original goal for the fund reallocation direction from Council of increasing the overall economic vitality in the Town of Vail within the parameters of the $9.3 million. Seek to leverage the $9.3 million 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 www. vailgov.com 10/19/20111 by working on joint projects with partners who bring additional capital investment and /or organizational /management capability to the table. Any stimulus to economic activity will result from a series of well thought out incremental steps that over time will have a positive impact. The concepts we heard most often included: • Upgrade existing facilities, finalize the Renaissance, strengthen our core • There does not appear to be any compelling need /purpose to construct a "new dedicated purpose building" and the land at the eastern end of the Lionshead parking structure is too valuable to be considered as a viable redevelopment project at this time with no joint development partner likely to step forward in this environment • A multi - purpose facility to serve recreational activities for groups, families, individuals and camps is needed • Flexible spaces for groups, banquets, weddings, entertainment, exhibits, art displays, small meetings, community meetings and lectures are needed • We have the "activity assets ", we need to leverage them. What we lack is a "central clearing house" that is easily accessible for our guests to use. Vail is lacking the software and programming. Recommendation for Highest and Best Use of $9.3 Million The physical assets identified as having the most potential to achieve the goals of upgrading existing facilities, completing the Renaissance and putting the "finishing touches" on the town are listed below: • Remodel Golf Clubhouse with the addition of an events pavilion - $3.5 million • Remodel and expansion of Vail Village Welcome Center to include community space - $2.0 million • Town wide signage /information /guest enhancement system - $1.0 million • Expansion and renovation of Dobson arena to allow for more expanded uses - $2.0 million • Ford Park expansion of fields to create an additional field and extend the season - $1.0 million The following page recommends filters through which to view the proposed concepts, as well pros and cons for these facilities /assets and others brought forward in the process. The proposed 5 projects should be further studied over the next 60 days to determine the viability of the projects moving forward. 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 3 www. vail OVXOm 10/19/20 111 Potential Facilities and Assets Pros and Cons Considerations How does the project serve the community? Who is served? Why is project viable? Will project support what exists or attract new uses? Does project fill a real gap? Uses Recreational Cultural Social Meetings Fitness /Wellness Events Evaluation Criteria Increase lodging occupancy Increase sales tax Cost to build /operate Location Infrastructure Enhances experience Catalyst Impacts Parking Disruption Compatibility of uses Quality of experience Golf Club House and Pavilion Pros Existing facility underutilized and upgraded Partnership opportunity Creates new functional spaces Already serves golf and Nordic community Potential use for weddings, social groups, senior activities, small meetings, non- profits and sports groups Enhances experience Venue /view Space to expand Opportunity to expand use from seasonal to more year -round 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 4 www. vailov.com 10/19/2019 Cons Clear purpose? Costs — who pays and what do you get Disruption of operation Parking Location — distance from town Could be seen as a repackage of golf club house remodel Possible competition with Donovan and other wedding venues Conclusion Statement: Working with the VRD, this facility could be remodeled and upgraded with the addition of an events pavilion. Do the homework on the software before launching a hardware project. Review the existing schemes from the 2008 renovation discussion. Then determine if further evaluation is necessary to identify what this concept actually includes and what physical plant is required. Cost Range $3.5 million Vail Village Information and Welcome Center Pros Location Visibly iconic and accessible for 1 70 traffic Institution of civic pride Parking Potential to increase sales tax New facility for community use Clear purpose Partnership opportunities with Colorado Ski Museum Enhances experience Unique differentiation from other resorts for family focus Cons Ongoing operational questions — who pays, programs, manages Cost May not increase occupancy Parking during peak times 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 $ www. vailov.com 10/19/2019 Conclusion Statement: This fills the gap of a central clearing house for activity and heritage assets that Vail has to offer in summer and winter to leverage and package. In addition, it offers a community gathering place. It will be essential to have sophisticated, effective interactive software applications and programs to deliver a world -class guest experience integrated with the Lionshead Welcome Center and the signage /information system upgrade in the Town of Vail. Cost Range $2.0 million Town Wide Signage /Information /Guest Enhancement System Pros Enhances guest experience Enhances ease of access /parking and reaffirms Vail as a pedestrian village Strengthens Vail's reputation as a world -class ski destination Integrates face -to -face guest relations with state -of -the art technology Eliminates duplication of effort and creates distribution efficiencies Leverages partnerships with Vail Resorts, Colorado Department of Transportation, U.S. Forest Service, Business Community, Re: compatibility of uses Establishes multi - language capabilities to build upon Vail's international brand /European character and improve quality of the experience Location neutral, provides equity in servicing entire resort Ability to measure impact, Re: guest satisfaction Minimal disruption Cons Indirect link to economic benefits (increased lodging occupancy, increased sales tax) Costs associated with continual technology advances Ongoing replacement and maintenance costs Conclusion Statement The Town of Vail is in need of a new wayfinding /information /guest enhancement system that will be used to integrate the numerous infrastructure and portal improvements that have occurred since Vail's renewal. The current wayfinding system was implemented more than a decade ago. Since then, many of the 300 directional and information signs have been removed to accommodate the most recent construction. With the advances of technology, the town is now poised to overhaul its current wayfinding /information system with a state of the art system that uses multiple platforms to convey road, weather, parking, Vail Mountain updates, special event information and other forms of information to our guests. 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 6 www. vailov.com 10/19/2019 This effort requires the development of a strategic plan to identify: new technology solutions; necessary resources and manpower; analysis of visitor patterns and volume at information centers, parking structures, buses, activities centers, etc.; consistent metrics for measurement of success; an infrastructure inventory of visitor center locations and recommendations relative to enhanced guest experience; capital and operational costs; and a comprehensive competitive analysis. Implementation of such a plan would take Vail's competitive position to new heights. Cost Range $1.0 million Dobson Arena Renovation and Expansion Pros Location — bus stop, retail, hospital adjacency Potential to increase lodging occupancy Potential to increase sales tax Partnership opportunities e.g. VRD, pro hockey, VVMC Additional community space Potential venue for additional special events TIF district financing Cons Ongoing operational questions — who pays, who programs, who manages Disruption of operation Parking Lacks clear purpose May be perceived as repackaging conference center Conclusion Statement: Evaluate an expansion /renovation of Dobson Arena as an improved venue for special events and gatherings, extending across the athletic, entertainment, medical and cultural spectrums. Before a commitment is made, however, evaluation needs to done with respect to current usage patterns and what additional programming can be expected. Cost Range $2.0 million 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 - 2100 7 www. vailov.com 10/19/2019 Ford Park Expansion of Fields Pros Existing facility improves Artificial surface expands season More events Additional field Clear purpose Enhances experience Existing demand May increase lodging occupancy May increase sales tax Investment in capital asset Managed and operated by VRD Partnership with VRD Cons Parking Location Impacts — noise? No indoor usage — cultural groups, meetings, etc. Seasonal Disruption to operations Conclusion Statement: Expansion of Ford Park fields would create an opportunity for additional uses with another field as well as lengthen the season for use. Partner with the VRD for programming and operations. Further review of existing schemes is recommended. Cost Range $1.0 million CIVIC Building at Cascade Hotel Pros Existing facility Small impacts Theatre Little disruption Currently unused Local business benefit Potential for private partnership Clear purpose 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 K www. vail OVXOm 10/19/2019 6 - 1 1-14 Cons Would need to purchase and renovate facility Parking currently inadequate and complicated to solve Location Unclear who project serves Who operates and maintains How are costs covered? May not be multi -use May not increase occupancy Not in TIF district for financing Zoning may be an issue Conclusion Statement: This option appears to be better served by private enterprise purchasing and programming the venue as a community and non - profit asset primarily serving the cultural community, but also with the opportunity to serve as a conference facility for VVMC and Steadman Clinic. Cost Range Unknown Charter Bus Lot Pros New year -round multi -use space Partnership with VR - $4.3 million parking TIF district financing Good location Fills a hole between Lionshead and Vail Village Supports events, cultural groups, meetings Potential to increase lodging occupancy Potential to increase sales tax Cons Parking requirement Unclear purpose Unknown cost Who operates and manages? Not existing facility — review process Could be perceived as repackaging of conference center Deed restriction How is it programmed? Who does it serve? 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 9 www. vail OVXOm 10/19/2019 Conclusion Statement This piece of land is too valuable to be considered a viable redevelopment project at this time in light of the fact that no compelling use is apparent and no joint development partner is likely to step forward in this environment. Cost Range Unknown VVMC /TOV Partnership Pros Steadman Clinic is a destination in itself Expand existing facilities VVMC is already an asset to the community and guests Improvements would benefit real estate prices VVMC would remain Vail centric TOV would gain new municipal facilities Have a wellness /fitness focus that aligns with TOV Could create state of the art meeting facilities and AV component TIF financing could be used Cons Long -term project Cost Parking requirements Housing requirements May not significantly increase occupancy Conclusion Statement This is an option that should be pursued but does not fit the evaluation criteria of the conference center fund reallocation. Cost Range Unknown Why Now? Think about the $9.3 million Conference Center Fund as the centerpiece of a coordinated economic stimulation plan for the 2010 — 2015 period, culminating in the 2012 50 Anniversary celebration and the 2015 World Championships, rather than an isolated spending decision. Momentum from the $2 billion renewal should be continued in an effort to improve our position in the ski resort rankings. The approach should be one of an integrated, thoughtful decision - making process that provides a mosaic to 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 10 www. vail OVXOm 10/19/20111 support the economic infrastructure of the town and fits within the context of the town's overall plans. With the current decrease in construction costs the Town of Vail would be able to further leverage the $9.3 million at this time. Election Scheduling A ballot question for reallocation of the conference center funds can be conducted either as a special election or as part of the regular municipal election as established by the Vail Town Council. The two options have been reviewed and verified by the town attorney. Since a November TABOR election is not required, a special election in early 2011 could be considered to allow sufficient time to meet with stakeholders, develop the project list and ballot question. Special Election • A special election is permissible because the election would not be governed by Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution, otherwise known as the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR). C.R. S. 31 -10 -108: Special elections shall be held on any Tuesday designated by ordinance or resolution of the governing body. No special election shall be held within the ninety days preceding a regular election. No special election shall be called within thirty days before the date thereof, nor shall any special election be held within the thirty -two days before or after the date of a primary, general, or congressional vacancy election. A special election may be held at the same time and place as a primary, congressional vacancy, or general election as a coordinated election pursuant to section 1 -7 -116 C.R.S., or may be conducted at the same time as a mail ballot election pursuant to article 5 of title , C. R. S. Special elections shall be conducted as nearly as practicable in the same manner as regular elections Under this scenario, the town clerk's office would request a three -month timetable to prepare for a special election (required notices, ballot preparations, etc.) Given the information - gathering process outlined above, a special election scenario for 2010 would be difficult to achieve. • The last special election conducted by the town was in July 2006 regarding the Crossroads /Solaris redevelopment. The election cost was $10,254. (Note: funding for the election and any information - gathering costs need to come from the General Fund operating budget; Conference Center Fund money may not be used for this or any purpose without an election.) • In 2011, the next special election could be scheduled on any Tuesday meeting the criteria listed above. 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 11 www. vail OVXOm 10/19/20 111 Action Requested of Council Mr. Logan is seeking direction from Council, including: • Feedback on recommended project list for utilization of the $9.3 million conference center funds • Direction to further refine uses and costs on proposed projects within next 60 days • Direction to move forward with stakeholder meetings to gather community input • Designated date to return to Council with feedback from stakeholders • Proposed date for a special election Attachments Sample facility schematics 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 p. (866) 650 -9020 (970) 479 -2100 j7 www. vail OVXOm 10/19/2019 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: A summarization of the Eagle River Watershed Council's grant funded activities, including recent water quality monitoring updates, I -70 Vail Pass impacts and recommendations study, and inclusion in the revised 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan /Gore Creek Subwatershed section. PRESENTER(S): Melissa Macdonald, ERWC Executive Director ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: There is no action being requested at this time. The Council is encouraged to listen to the presentation, ask any question and provide feedback. BACKGROUND: At the October 11, 2010, Planning and Environmental Commission hearing the Eagle River Watershed Council gave this presentation to provide the Commission members insight into purpose, goals, and activities of the organization. ATTACHMENTS: Town Council Memorandum 10/19/2010 MEMORANDUM To: Vail Town Council From: Community Development Department Date: October 19, 2010 Subject: A work session summarizing the Eagle River Watershed Council's grant funded activities including recent water quality monitoring updates, 1 -70 Vail Pass impacts and recommendations study, and inclusion in the revised 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan / Gore Creek Subwatershed Section. Staff: Bill Carlson, Environmental Health Officer Presenter: Melissa Macdonald, ERWC Executive Director I. SUMMARY This memorandum is being provided to the Vail Town Council to provide a framework for a presentation by the Eagle River Watershed Council (ERWC) regarding Water Quality Grant Funds from the Town of Vail. The activities are funded by a $90,000 grant a year in advance to be utilized primarily for collaborative action monitoring, technical /engineering analysis, watershed health - based projects, public education and community involvement in the watershed. Significant degradation and impairments have occurred and continue to occur along urbanized areas of Gore Creek. Ascertaining the sources of pollution affecting water quality and biological conditions in specific sites will enable us to structure scientifically based mitigation projects. Sharing the costs of field and laboratory investigations with our partners (CDOT, USFS, ERWSD, UERWA, USGS, Homestake Partners, VR Mgmt., Eagle County, Town of Eagle, Town of Gypsum, Denver Water) leverages our funds and enhances our ability to identify causal factors affecting both water quality and biological conditions at degraded sites on Gore Creek. Information generated from such integrative studies is imperative to ensure a robust future for Gore Creek, home to Vail's gold medal fishery, the TEVA games, the Vail Golf Course, the Betty Ford Gardens and many residents and businesses. II. RECENT GORE CREEK WATER QUALITY STUDY SUMMARIES • 2010 Black Gore Creek TMDL Load Allocation & Sediment Budget • 2000 -2007 USGS macroinvertebrate based assessment • 2008/2009 Eagle River Water & Sanitation District nutrient and macroinvertebrate study • 2006 -2010 USFS macroinvertebrate monitoring results • 2010 CDOW fish sampling (gold medal stream classification) • 2010 Gore Creek flood damage assessment from the River Restoration.org report • 2011 update to the 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan, Gore Creek watershed section III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS 1 10/19/2010 7 -1 -1 • Continue data collection and analyses efforts as needed to identify stressors within Gore Creek • Continue monitoring to track changes and evaluate the effectiveness of water quality improvement efforts • Work with other stakeholders to investigate control strategies and opportunities for reducing pollution input from point and nonpoint sources • Review Gore Creek and Black Gore Creek mitigation recommendations and prioritize efforts. • Develop project recommendations based on water quality assessments, biological studies and engineering reports. • Establish a robust, long -term water quality protection and education program, supported by the Town Council and community with adequate technical, educational and financial resources. • Continue supporting the county -wide monitoring partnership that has been developed by the Eagle River Watershed Council to track and understand water quality trends associated with storm and other water runoff and other diverse impacts to Gore Creek and the Eagle River. • Contribute to and consider adopting the revised 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan (currently being developed by ERWC). 2 10/19/2010 7 -1 -2 October 15, 2010 Eagle River Watershed Council State of the R Repo Overview of the Eagle t� Contents Introduction 1 Water Quantity and Management 4 Water Quality 6 Wildlife and Recreation 8 Emerging Issues 9 The Values of Preservation 10 Looking forward 1 1 Subwatershed Overviews 13-35 Glossary of Terms and Waterfacts 36 References Cited 40 Principal Authors: Tambi Katieb, Land Planning Collaborative, Inc. Kirby Wynn, Wynn Environmental, LLC Watershed Mapping: Scott Flemming, Eagle County GIS Department Special Acknowledgements: Ray Merry and Clifford Simonton, Eagle County / Scott Conklin, VISTA / Melissa Macdonald, ERWC / Kendall Backich and Barry Nehring, Colorado Division of Wildlife / Linn Brooks, Eagle River Water & Sanitation District / Bob Weaver, Leonard Rice Engineering / Eagle County Soil Conservation District / David Brown, U.S. Geological Survey / Scott Schlosser and Scott Jones, Colorado River Ranch Disclaimer: Maps created in this report by the Eagle County GIS Department are to be used for general purposes only. Eagle County does not warrant the accuracy of the data contained in this report. Selected land use and other uses depicted for land cover orientation purposes only, and are not inclusive of all similar land covers due to projection and scale of the maps. This report is also made possible through support of our Eagle River water monitoring and assessment program partners, including: Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Eagle County, Town of Vail, Vail Resorts, Homestake Partners (Colorado Springs and Aurora), Colorado River Water Conservation District, Town of Gypsum, Town of Eagle, Denver Water and the U.S. Geological Survey. A011 W Eagle Riv rr Eagle River Water & Sanitation [district EAGLE COUNTY Watershed Council, Inc. Introduction This report is designed to familiarize the reader with current water resource information on an easily understandable scale, highlighting issues and opportunities for our water resources that will form the basis of an update to the Eagle River Watershed Plan(ERWP), which was adopted by Eagle County in 1996. This important community master plan outlines a collaborative local philosophy for protecting and improving water quantity, water quality, wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities while promoting compatible land use practices in Eagle County. This report is based on a compilation of available records, reports, water quality analyses, and land use information of sometimes limited observation, yet this data provides a logical starting point for discussion among readers and master plan partners. While specific objectives of the 1996 ERWP have been implemented by various partners, changing demographics, land use patterns and transportation needs combined with new climate and water resource issues have created an opportunity to update the ERWP, incorporating new data and concepts relevant to the management of our watersheds. The Watershed Council(ERWC) and Eagle County, with support and participation from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District(ERWSD) and others, are providing the reader with this informational report on the present condition of our local watersheds as a first phase to the ERWP update process. There has been a focused effort by water users and government officials alike to keep our rivers and streams healthy since well before adoption of the ERWP. Sustaining this effort recognizes that healthy rivers, lakes and streams contribute to our quality of life and economy, and it requires regional cooperation and periodic introspection to truly be successful in our collective goal of preservation of the resource. Watersheds are a geographic area in which all water drains to a common point or outlet like a larger stream or river, a lake or underlying aquifer. Watersheds exist in a variety of shapes and sizes which result from the influence of geography, geology and climate (ERWP, 1996). While we all live within and tend to focus on political boundaries (towns, county) the watersheds that surround and support us are not defined by these settlement patterns. As a result of a recreation and tourism economy based on conserving natural resources while providing water for growth, our communities have adopted a watershed approach to managing the environment. A watershed approach is based on two simple principles: development within a watershed affects everybody (both upstream and downstream), and regional coordination of water management and water quality issues is paramount to preserving the natural environment and our quality of life in Eagle County. A sustainable water resource management approach is premised on a `triple bottom line' that seeks balance to economic, social and environmental costs and benefits. In the Eagle River watershed, the majority of lands suitable for settlement and transportation routes occuralong the valley floors inclose proximity tostreams. Forinstance, roughly ninety percent of the Interstate corridor in the Gore Creek watershed is within an eighth of a mile of the creek (Eagle County, 2009). As our communities mature, so do our needs for more space to grow. A 2006 study by the Urban Land Institute recommended that over the next 20 years, more than 14,000 new dwelling units would be required to meet the affordable housing needs of Eagle County residents alone. It is probable that new development will often be constructed in the same areas that also support valuable watershed functions, like wildlife habitat and groundwater recharge zones. We have an obvious need to understand the implications of a field of complex issues on limited water resources. On a local level, we can aniticipate the issues and opportunities in our watershed based on current and /or past water quality, water quantity, wildlife and land use impacts and trends. Introduction - Page 1 Eagle River watershed The Eagle River watershed is a network of clear mountain streams that cover a drainage area of approximately 960 square miles. It has an average annual water flow of roughly 414,000 acre feet. Elevations in the watershed range from 6,100 feet at Dotsero to 14,003 feet at Mount of the Holy Cross. Fed by numerous ephemeral, intermittent and perennial streams, springs and seeps, the Eagle River originates near the eastern border of Eagle County at Tennessee Pass and flows west for about 77 miles to its confluence with the Colorado River at Dotsero. Unique among Colorado watersheds, approximately 98% of the drainage is located in a single jurisdictional boundary - Eagle County. Nearly 75% of the watershed is on public land managed by two federal agencies - the United States Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (B LM). There are over 120 natural lakes and eight man -made reservoirs in the Eagle River watershed, the majority of these occurring on or adjacent to federal lands. Reservoirs are significant watershed elements as they serve to store and strategically release water into the local stream system. The physical location of these reservoirs presents both unique opportunities and constraints for water users and water suppliers. It should be noted the terms `water users' and `water suppliers' are thought of in broad terms and include the cities of Denver, Colorado Springs, Aurora and Pueblo, all of whom own and manage significant water rights in the Eagle River and Colorado River watersheds. Since community adoption of the 1996 ERWP we have learned much about our interactions with the stream corridors and how settlement patterns typical to our mountainous landscape affect the river system. Eagle Counter Watersheds 1 .SAS "1rs AO r fr = Y i Eagle, Colorado and Roaring Fork watersheds in Eagle County. Introduction - Page 2 Colorado River watershed Approximately 525 square miles of the 9,830 square mile Colorado River watershed lies within Eagle County. The Colorado originates in Grand County, flows through Gore Canyon into the and lower elevations of northern and western Eagle County before merging with the Eagle River at Dotsero and passing through Glenwood Canyon on its way to the canyon lands of western Colorado, Utah and Arizona. Prior to entering Eagle County, the river is already heavily managed at its headwaters in Grand County. The roughly 60 mile stretch of Colorado River through Eagle County is largely undeveloped. These are rural areas that maintain an agricultural and ranching heritage while at the same time hosting some of the most sought after recreational waters in the state and a considerable amount of habitat in White River National Forest for the largest elk herd in North America. On June 2, 2010, the Upper Colorado was listed as America's sixth most endangered river by American Rivers (American Rivers, 2010). Two stretches in Eagle County - Pumphouse to State Bridge, and State Bridge to Dotsero- are being considered by the Bureau of Land Management for designation as "Wild and Scenic" as the agency updates their Resource Management Plan for the area. Eagle County has submitted information to establish minimum instream flow rights to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the agency responsible for appropriation of such rights. There are proposals to expand transmountain diversions from headwaters of the Upper Colorado River basin that could further impact the timing and availability of instream flows to balance water supply, water quality, aquatic habitat and recreational needs. Importantly, the future of a historic water right at the "Shoshone" hydroelectric power plant in Glenwood Canyon that has long ensured water flows through Eagle County to the power plant during summer months is questionable and could significantly affect minimum instream flows in the Colorado if abandoned. Historic uses combined with the uncertainty of the Shoshone Hydroelectric water right and emerging issues like climate change and dust on snow are further obscuring future water management options within this basin. Competing needs will require compromise in light of the broad range of possible environmental outcomes. ,q K 1 __ 5 - -J "We need to be concerned with our water resources for future generations sake," says Scott Jones of the Colorado River Ranch -Eagle County's first certified organic ranch - standing near their new pivot irrigation system, which provides efficient watering and higher crop yields. Introduction - Page 3 Water Quantity and Water Management In 1996, the Eagle River Watershed Plan recognized a balance between human water demands (agriculture, recreation, urbanization) and the amount of water necessary to sustain natural resources. According to a report issued that same year by the American Water Works Research Foundation, Total Water Management is "the exercise of stewardship of water resources for the greatest good of society and the environment ". A basic principle of Total Water Management is that the water supply is renewable, but limited, and should be managed in a manner that is sustainable. Whatever the terminology, successful management of water resources is adaptive and forward thinking. Although the natural flow regime of the main stem of the Eagle River is more intact than other Colorado rivers of comparable size, human settlement has influenced and impacted the natural cycle of the river. Roughly seventy five percent of the average annual flow of the Eagle River occurs during the months of May, June and July, yet a minimum amount of water is necessary year round to support aquatic and other wildlife as well as community demands for affordable, clean and reliable water supplies during times of the year when natural water supply is the lowest(ERWP, 1996). Consumptive use in the Eagle River basin accounts for approximately 63,000 acre feet of the Eagle River's average annual yield of 414,000 acre feet measured at the Gypsum gage. The greatest consumptive use in the basin is transmountain diversion, which exports approximately 34,000 acre feet to the Front Range annually. This water is never returned to the Eagle River watershed and is therefore considered totally consumed. While these exports account for only 8% percent of the annual yield of the Eagle River, impacts on streamflows at the actual points of diversion in the headwaters are far greater. Transmountain diversions are taken in the headwaters during May -June peak flows, significantly reducing the annual peak and `flushing flows' important to maintain the ecological and geomorphic health of the Upper Eagle. These distinct changes in peak flow magnitudes are most notable in the Upper Eagle and Homestake Creek drainages. As our valleys have transformed from agriculture to urban settlements, streamflow patterns have also changed. Historic flood irrigation returned water to the river in late summer and fall months that urban settlements do not, however domestic use (development) is considered to return up to 90% of the water diverted year round, even during low flow periods. Highest in basin domestic use occurs in winter due to ski tourism - when the river flows are lowest. Averagery Year Year , w� =.z: u... F.&. Ri— A bly Ft e 1 WPM 1991 Conceptual flow diagram of the Eagle River in an average and dry year. Water Quantity - Page 4 In order to help protect aquatic life during low flow periods in the Eagle River and its tributaries, the Colorado legislature established the Instream Flow Program in 1973, which has since appropriated over8,500 miles of instream flowwaterrights to help preserve the natural environment. There are 76 segments of the Eagle River and tributary streams with these instream flow rights in place. In 2005, the Eagle River Inventory and Assessment (ERIA) observed that many of these rights offer limited protection of the river during low flow periods and are therefore not necessarily a good tool to evaluate ecological consequences of flow changes in the river (CSU, 2005). That said, Colorado passed the Healthy Rivers Act in 2008 which strengthens the ability of the instream flow program to utilize loaned or leased water that is not being used for environmental purposes- without the owner of those rights being penalized or having their water rights considered weakened, lost or abandoned under law. The Eagle River watershed might pursue a locally based water trust to benefit low stream flows. In 1994, the Eagle River Assembly estimated that to increase flows to minimum stream flow levels identified by the CWCB to protect the environment to a reasonable degree, up to 4,000 acre feet of water needs to be stored and released into the Eagle River during dry times of the year. The report estimated that up to 6,000 acre feet may be needed to ensure minimum instream flow as the County approached buildout of development approved as of 1994. At roughly the same time Eagle County estimated that there were approximately 11,000 existing approved unbuilt dwelling units in the watershed (ERWP, 1996). In 2009, Eagle County estimated that there were 18,009 existing approved unbuilt dwelling units in Eagle County, with a potential for another 5,134 units (Ivey, 2009). Of significant importance to long term water management is the possible addition of two water storage projects: the Wolcott reservoir and the Blodgett Reservoir or Camp Hale conjunctive use project. In 2004, the conceptual Wolcott reservoir was subject of a feasibility study by Denver Water, City of Aurora, Colorado River Water Conservation District, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority and Vail Associates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate operation and feasibility of a 55,000 to 105,000 acre foot reservoir. The reservoirwould be filled with waterfrom both Alkali Creek and the Eagle River during snowmelt runoff periods, and would be cooperatively managed to meet West Slope and Front Range needs. All releases would be made to the Eagle River, primarily during low flow periods to compensate for diversions to the East slope made upstream in the Colorado River basin (GRC, GEI, 2004). In 2007, Boards of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority settled a lawsuit with Denver Water wherein Denver agreed to abandon most of their water rights in Eagle County. While the settlement eliminated the possibility of a future transmountain diversion from Gore Creek, the Upper Eagle and the Piney River, it left open the possibility of a jointly developed reservoir north of Wolcott, water from which would serve West Slope purposes for recreation, beneficial uses in the Colorado River basin (including endangered fish protection), and as replacement or substitute water by West and East Slope water users for diversions elsewhere in the basin (UERWA, 2007). In 2010, after years of litigation, Eagle County and the cities of Aurora and Colorado Springs settled a 1995 Water Court case involving the cities proposal for development of a groundwater project at Camp Hale and a surface water reservoir in lower Homestake Creek, which would be used for future water diversions to the Front Range. As part of this settlement, the cities have agreed to abandon significant water rights within the existing Holy Cross Wilderness Area, moving points of diversion to locations outside the wilderness boundary. Additionally, the settlement greatly reduces the potential size of both the Camp Hale groundwater project and the proposed reservoir at the mouth of Homestake Creek. Water rights which the cities obtain through the settlement will be dedicated to cooperative development under the 1998 Eagle River Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), an agreement designed to cap the amount of transmountain diversions by the cities from the Eagle River basin. Climate change appears a near certainty, which affects timing, rate and intensity of precipitation. Water managers may look to increased water capacity as a solution to manage and balance growth and its impacts on the environment. This capacity can be accomplished through non - structural strategies that might include aggressive conservation measures or cooperative stream management plans as well as structural solutions like pump back systems or expanded water storage projects. Water Quantity - Page 5 Water Quality Water quality in the Eagle Riverwatershed is the result of a number of physical conditions, historical and current, natural and man made. Examples include extensive operations at the Eagle Mine in Gilman, agricultural impacts on sensitive soils, and transportation and land use development along the Eagle and major tributaries like Gore Creek. Two significant reports, the Eagle River Watershed Council's 2005 Eagle River Inventory and Assessment (ER IA) and the Assessment of Surface -Water Quantity and Quality, Eagle River Watershed 1947 -2007 (Williams and others, 2010 in press) were prepared to guide decision - making for projects that can benefit water quality. The ERIA determined that the greatest water - quality threats in the Eagle River watershed will be increased development and associated stormwater runoff, and cumulative recreational demands on resources. These activities may in turn alter streamflow regimes and increase nutrient and metals loading. Williams and others recently summarized water quality conditions and trends to help define important water quality issues. Another report that has been valuable for enhancing community understanding of how water - quality issues have changed since 1996 is the Northwest Colorado Council of Government's 2002 Eagle River Water Quality Management Plan. This plan is required by the Clean Water Act and has been helpful to outline critical water - quality issues and potential solutions for our region. These reports confirm the general consensus that waters of the Eagle River watershed are largely in good condition with some exceptions. Most streams originate in pristine alpine headwaters with crystalline bedrock geology and then merge with streams flowing through more erosive and saline sedimentary rock. That natural setting, combined with streams flowing through populated and developed lands tends to cause the streams to pick up increasing amounts of sediment and dissolved minerals and nutrients. Streams are generally more dilute during May -June peak flows and more concentrated during October -March base flow periods, in part because there is less snowmelt water available at base flow and also because winter base flow coincides with peak winter tourism activity and associated wastewater treatment discharges. Notable exceptions to these patterns have included increased metals and phosphorus in streams during the onset of snowmelt, when melt water reacts with and mobilizes phosphorus and metal -rich soils and geologic material. Current water quality issues include excessive sedimentation (Black Gore Creek, Gore Creek, Ute /Alkali /Milk Creeks), elevated nutrients (Gore Creek and main stem Eagle River below the Gore), elevated metals (tributaries and the main stem Eagle River in the vicinity of the Eagle Mine and Eagle reaches downstream of Minturn toward Edwards), dissolved solids (increasing chloride trend in Gore Creek likely related to application of deicers on roadways). Other general water - quality findings include pH (no major concerns but generally higher in Gore Creek and in the Eagle River below the Gore possibly related to enriched nutrient and algae levels, and generally lower pH in the Eagle River and tributaries associated with Eagle Mine drainage), dissolved oxygen (no major issues), and temperature (elevated at times during summer low flows in the lower Eagle and many reaches during drought conditions such as were present during 2002). «r i Colorado Division of Wildlife Spring fish sampling of the Upper Eagle below the Eagle Mine. Water Quality - Page 6 Recent studies have also expanded our knowledge of the direct and interdependent relationship of water quality to water quantity, streamflow alteration, and land use practices. Black Gore Creek, and to a degree Gore Creek, have been known to have persistent problems related to traction sand loading and hill -slope erosion into streams along Interstate 70 from Vail Pass to East Vail. In 2002, the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission added Black Gore Creek to the State's 303(d) list of impaired waters because of excessive sediment loading and related stream - habitat degradation. The Black Gore Steering Committee (BGSC) -a collaboration of stakeholder agencies- has implemented numerous sediment capture and mitigation programs that are stemming much of the flow of traction sand to Black Gore Creek and Black Lakes. The BGSC collaborated with the Forest Service to develop a draft plan to correct sediment impairment of the Creek. This plan is currently being considered for acceptance by the State of Colorado and the Environmental Protection Agency to establish the Total Maximum Daily Load(TMDL) for sediment. Adoption of the TMDL by early 2011 and continued emphasis by the BGSC for preventing traction sand from reaching area streams is expected to improve the condition of Black Gore and Gore Creeks over time. Since 1984, remediation of the Eagle Mine Superfund Site has made notable progress as evidenced by improvements in the population of brown trout and significant decreasing trends for zinc, cadmium, and manganese concentrations in the Eagle River from Belden to Minturn. Even though the remediation effort has improved conditions to date, metals contamination still persists and is limiting productivity of aquatic life, as evidenced by limitations in brown trout numbers and growth rates and a lack of more sensitive native sculpin in the mine - affected stream reaches. While many of the readily identifiable metals - loading sources have been remediated, the majority of the remaining zinc loads in the Eagle mine area are from more diffuse sources near Belden, which will require further characterization before cost - effective remediation strategies of these sources can be developed. Colorado River The Colorado River has been monitored forwater quality at two sites, at State Bridge and the Eagle River confluence at Dotsero, which bracket the entire 55 -mile reach in Eagle County. Limited data collected near State Bridge indicate relatively good water quality with low dissolved solids, nutrients, and metals concentrations, and no results indicating there are current water - quality issues to address (USEPA). However, the Colorado River mainstem begins to show impacts from sediment in the segment downstream from State Bridge where the Eagle County Soil Conservation district has designated a stream bank erosion management area. ( NWCCOG, 2002b; CWQCD, 1989). The NWCCOG report for the Upper Colorado River summarizes the major water quality issues for this reach of the Colorado as primarily resulting from impacts of transmountain water - diversions and sediment /dissolved solids loads from nonpoint sources. In a 1995 -98 data summary for a site near Dotsero, USGS reported generally good water quality with high dissolved oxygen, low dissolved solids and nitrate concentrations (Spahr and others, 2000). Total phosphorus concentrations were elevated but generally below 0.2 milligrams per liter. Suspended sediment concentrations were higher during the onset of annual snowmelt runoff, as expected, but were generally not excessive. Sample results for dissolved oxygen, nutrients, trace metals, and suspended sediment did not exceed applicable State standards in the Colorado River. However, most of these constituents are higher at the Dotsero site as compared to the upstream State Bridge site - likely due in part to the influence of inflows from the Eagle River (Spahr and others 2002, USGS). Water Quality - Page 7 Wildlife and Recreation The 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan outlined three main objectives to protect and enhance wildlife values in the watershed: to improve habitat of the fishery, to maintain and increase riparian habitat and to minimize disturbance to wildlife during critical times of year. There remain a number of management practices and specific projects that can further preservation and enhance aquatic and terrestrial wildlife in our basin. Three specific issues appear to limit the quality and productivity of the fishery: low flows, excessive sedimentation and heavy metals loading (CSU, 2005). Insufficient streamflows can cause a variety of problems for the health of the fishery and there are times of year that selected stream reaches fall below State - designated instream flows. The methods used to quantify instream flow needs do not address 'non fishery' issues. For instance, kayak parks may require different streamflow levels and apply for their own state - designated instream flows (Avon has secured a recreational in- channel water right or "RICD" for its kayak park). Sedimentation and turbidity, particularly during spring runoff or after a rain event is a significant deterrent to the fishery - particularly in the Lower Eagle. Excess sediment covers spawning areas, potentially burying fish eggs preventing spawning and macroinvertebrates thus limiting both fish reproduction and food supply (CSU, 2005). Sedimentation and turbidity also preclude productive fishing from Wolcott to the confluence of the Eagle and Colorado Rivers for considerable times of the year. This increases fishing pressure on the limited amount of publicly accessible waters in the Middle and Upper Eagle during spring and early summer months. Excessive sediment is continually introduced into the Eagle River as a result of natural erosion, land development and transportation system drainage. Heavy metals from the Eagle Mine Superfund Site continue to limit fish productivity in the Eagle River even though the total load has been greatly reduced through extensive remediation efforts. Current water quality standards in the vicinity of the Eagle Mine allow higher zinc concentrations than for other segments of the Eagle and were established based on estimates of potential maximum reductions that are deemed achievable through remediation. These standards are acknowledged to be only partially protective of Brown trout through Minturn and not protective of Rainbow or sculpin (ERWC- Eaglemine website). The Eagle and Colorado rivers, their tributaries, springs, streams and riparian zones provide important habitat to many forms of wildlife. Over half of the 1,000 species of wildlife in Colorado use or occupy riparian ecosystems (CDOW, 1992). Developing consistent riparian zone protection and promoting enhancement projects across the basin would therefore greatly benefit local wildlife. Recreation along the river corridors of the Eagle and Colorado has increased dramatically in the last twenty years. Kayak parks have proven to be community and economic benefits to Vail and Avon and are under consideration in other locations. Coordinated efforts to identify appropriate points of access, optimal access design and estimated carrying capacity of recreational activities could further protect both wildlife and the quality of recreational experiences. Wildlife and Recreation - Page 8 Emerging Issues Waterresources in the Upper Colorado basin, including the Eagle Riverwatershed, are threatened by emerging issues that are not as readily controllable as are typical impacts to the river system. While we cannot easily predict how these issues affect our water resources, we can anticipate and adapt our management of the resource based on the best science available to us today. The most significant of emerging issues is climate change, which affects temperature and precipitation as well as timing of streamflow patterns. A recent State - sponsored future Water Availability Study estimated there is anywhere from 0 to 900,000 acre feet of as- yet - undeveloped annual yield remaining that could be put to beneficial use in Colorado(CWCB, 2010) . For water planners, that is a broad and problematic range of uncertainty considering the entire State only uses about 2.5 million acre feet of water a year. Study authors said they knew the study would return a broad range of outcomes because it is the first such effort to incorporate multiple climate - change models to predict Colorado's water availability. According to the study, by 2040 the Upper Colorado and Eagle River basins are projected to have up to a 5 to 8 percent streamflow reduction due to climate affects as compared to historical annual average streamflow, and up to a 17 percent reduction in average annual streamflow by 2070 (CWCB, 2010). In general, the Colorado climate- change models predict warmer temperatures, wetter winters and drier summers, with more intense heat and dryness at lower elevations. The difference in estimated water yields is dramatic despite only a few degrees increase in mean annual air temperatures. There have been six major studies that have estimated streamflow levels in the Colorado River basin, including the Eagle River, will likely be reduced due to climate change (Udall, 2007). Significant streamflow reductions resulting from climate change will require water managers to rethink water allocation and use, and competition for water will dramatically increase to accommodate municipal, agricultural, recreational and environmental needs. Depositions of dust from the Colorado Plateau and other desert areas onto Colorado's mountain snowpacks have been recognized as a more frequently occurring phenomenon in the high country. Until recently, however, the implications of dust on snow events were poorly understood. Research conducted by the Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies Dust on Snow(CODOS) program found that depositions of desert dust onto Colorado's mountain snowpacks can dramatically reduce snowcover albedo(reflectivity), advance snowmelt timing, and increase snowmelt runoff intensity. These changes can have serious implications for irrigators and water - providers who will need to account for earlier peak flows and reduced late- summer flows. During the winter of 2008/2009, twelve dust -on -snow events led to a 40 to 50 day earlier snowmelt with record streamflow rates. CODOS's monitoring and forecasting services enable water managers to anticipate these events and still provide reliable water supplies if possible. At the time of writing this report, there were a recorded nine dust on snow events in the Colorado Rockies in the 2009/2010 season(CODOS website, accessed June 11, 2010). As with any forested environment, water resources in the Eagle River watershed are vulnerable to high intensity wildfire. According to the Forest Service, pine beetle has infected most of the lodgepole pine in headwaters of the Eagle River watershed and the epidemic is moving west. In several decades it is anticipated that those dead trees will fall and greatly exacerbate high intensity wildfires (Mausolf, 2010). Water supply and aquatic habitat will be at risk without continued interaction and strategic planning by both water providers, wildlife and land use managers. Emerging Issues - Page 9 The Values of Preservation The 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan estimated the economic impact of rafting in the community using the results of a 1991 survey done by the Colorado River Outfitters Association (CROA). The study estimates $168 was spent on average by each person per raft day. This number includes the secondary economic benefits of rafting such as lodging, transportation, clothing and dining costs. Applying the above figures to known Eagle River rafting activity, approximately $1,300,000 was spent by people rafting on the Eagle River in 1991 during the six week long rafting season. Rafting revenues statewide have been growing at an average of 12.7% per year and observed activity on the Eagle River, which is listed among the eight most popular commercial river runs in the state, is testimony to that growth. In 2009, the same study estimated over $800,000 in economic impact from use on the Eagle River(CROA, 2009). A 1989 study by the Colorado Division of Wildlife estimated direct fishing expenditures in Eagle County of $7,642,000. In 2008, the CDOW released a report titled the Economic Impacts of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Watching in Colorado, prepared by BBC Research & Consulting, which provided the most up to date economic impact projections on a county level. According to the research, the total impact of fishing (including direct expenditures and secondary spending by business and households) in Eagle County alone was $38,820,000 in 2007. Of the 64 counties in Colorado, Eagle County ranks as the 8th highest in total economic benefit from hunting and fishing activity combined - over $67,000,000 dollars of economic activity was generated in 2007, including the generation or support of over 900 jobs related to those expenditures (BBC, 2008). 4 - tl A recreation oriented economy relies on clean and plentiful water supplies. The population of Eagle County was forecast to almost double in the period from 1996 to 2010 (estimated from 30,608 to 57,300). The State Demography Office estimated a fulltime resident population of 54,721 in Eagle County in July 2009. Vail Resorts estimated a visitor population in the winter 2008/09 Vail ski season of over 1.6 million guest visits and 650,000 guest visits in winter and summer seasons, respectively. Special events draw tens of thousands of tourists to the area. For example, the Teva mountain games held each June attract over 40,000 attendees annually(MTRIP, 2009). The 1996 ERWP recommended that a carrying capacity be established that balances resource protection with recreational experiences. Continued effort to regularly monitor recreational use and the effect on water resource health protects infrastructure investments and the economic value generated by millions of annual visitors drawn to the area by the unique qualities of the Eagle and Colorado River watersheds. The Values of Preservation - Page 10 Looking forward- what we heard and next steps The Eagle River Watershed Council, Eagle County and the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District hosted six community open houses throughout the watershed to solicit public input on current priorities that amendments to the ERWP should consider. While attendance was often limited, a seven page list of priority issues among community members, elected officials, recreationa lists, environmentalists and ranchers was generated. Comments were categorized according to the five core topics of the 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan: water quantity, water quality, wildlife, recreation and land use. Most of the comments addressed water quality, land use or wildlife issues. Many land use and water quality concerns were related to perceived inadequate mitigation from urban development and its potential negative affect on stream water quality and fishery habitat. Additional comments focused on recreation, and issues related to multiple uses of the river (access, recreation needs, and dispersed impacts on the riparian zones). Finally, water quantity issues (low flows, water - storage project potential and the like) received the least attention during the open houses. While the comments received do not equate to an extensive survey by the Council, they do indicate the general focus areas the community would like to see addressed through amendments in the watershed plan. A direct goal of this report is to frame the extent of amendments to the existing watershed plan in a way that reflects today's concerns, opportunities and issues. The existing ERWP includes 60 action goals, roughly 42 of which have been implemented in whole or part by Eagle County and partners(Merry, 2010). Many of these action items require on -going attention (education, partnership water quality monitoring, and best management land use practices, etc.). For example, Colorado River area residents expressed concern that more water might be exported to the East Slope - a sentiment echoed through the NRCS Watershed Conservation Input Forum held on March 31, 2010 in Gypsum. Based on community input and the results presented in this report, the Eagle River Watershed Council and Eagle County, through a partnership advisory team, will propose specific amendments to the existing Watershed Plan that can serve to supplement and expand regional and municipal master plan policies regarding water resources. In the context of this report's findings, the following recommendations are offered for updating the ERWP: - Confirm the purpose, vision and goals of the existing Eagle River Watershed Plan with partnership advisory team of stakeholders. - Expand the geographic scope of the plan to include the Upper Colorado River in each topic area (water quality, quantity, recreation, land use, wildlife) to foster local investment and visibility of resource issues. - Incorporate a subwatershed approach that includes specific goals and policies supportive of sustainable practices in local community land use master plans. - Incorporate basin wide goals to minimize wildfire risk and protect management of resource values like aquatic habitat or water supply. - Incorporate a basin wide "Water Quality Report Card" approach to water quality monitoring that is easily understood by all stakeholders and monitoring partners in order to inform future priorities and projects related to water quality. - Update the Plan's Water Quality goals to recognize significant priorities regarding water quality in basin. These include State classification of impaired waters in the Gore and Upper Eagle basins and pending regulatory actions affecting dischargers. - Develop strategies to monitor issues that effect water quality based on the best available scientific information, desired future basin ecological conditions, and an integrated strategy for managing urban runoff consistent between incorporated and unincorporated areas. Looking Forward - Page 11 - Update the Plan's regional Water Quantity objectives to recognize climate change and water resource implications, significant changes regarding inbasin /transbasin water settlements and potential new water storage projects. - Update projections of growth and water use and revisit streamflow thresholds and action items considered in 1996. - Incorporate all major recommendations of the 2005 CSU Eagle River Inventory and Assessment, including the Multi- Criterion Decision Analysis approach as a flexible, rational and transparent means to restoration and preservation decision making, promoting improvement projects that maximize community investments that benefit the watershed. - Incorporate by reference any existing TMDL strategies (Black Gore Creek and Upper Eagle) and create a specific process to address any future load reduction management plans or strategies. - Support and invest in a resource inventory and assessment for the Upper Colorado river in Eagle County. - Update the implementation strategies of the Plan to identify the Eagle River Watershed Council as the entity for implementing watershed -wide objectives, including restoration and education projects. With the guidance of a Partnership Advisory Team, the ERWC and Eagle County will draft Watershed Plan updates and solicit public input as part of the plan amendment process. Ideally, the updated ERWP will be adopted as guidance and policy document by the Eagle County Planning Commission, municipalities and metropolitan districts in Eagle County, whose individual water resource goals and action items can be articulated in each subwatershed section of the plan. The next section of this report will identify the unique subwatersheds of the Eagle and Upper Colorado Rivers. m, om= Looking Forward - Page 12 Upper Eagle River The Upper Eagle River is defined as the headwaters of the river to Dowd Junction, at a point above the confluence of the Eagle River with Gore Creek. It drains an area of approximately 247 square miles, and includes the tributary streams of Resolution, Turkey, Rock, Two Elk and Game Creeks from the north and Homestake, Peterson, Fall, Cross, Martin and Grouse Creeks from the south. There are many healthy steams through wilderness areas in the drainage, for example Cross Creek was identified as a potential conservation area for the occurrence of genetically pure populations of Colorado River Cutthroat (Armstrong, 2000). There are four transmountain diversions that take water out of the Upper Eagle and transport it to the Front Range. These diversions include the Homestake Tunnel, Wurtz Ditch, Ewing Ditch and Columbine Ditch. Homestake Creek has had peak flows reduced to less than half of the historic values as a result of the transmountain diversion at its headwaters (CSU, 2005). The Eagle river begins as two streams- the East Fork and the South Fork- both originating near the continental divide in south - eastern Eagle County. The confluence of the East and South Forks is at the southern limit of Camp Hale. The River flows northwest for approximately 24 miles to Dowd Junction. The reach from the northern extent of Camp Hale to Maloit Park near Minturn is approximately 10 miles, and flows through Redcliff and the Eagle Mine Superfund site. The lower reach of the Upper Eagle flows 3.5 miles from Maloit Park to Dowd Junction through the Town of Minturn. The Upper Eagle has experienced extensive land use changes in close proximity to the river corridor. There are numerous, site - specific physical and chemical influences to the Upper Eagle River from the Climax Molybdenum Mine, Homestake Reservoirand transbasin diversions, the historic Camp Hale military training site, and the Eagle Mine Superfund site. The Towns of Minturn and Red Cliff have a combined permanent population of less than 2,000 residents, although annexation by Minturn of over 4,300 acres of Battle Mountain property in 2008 to accommodate a potential ski resort and new residential community could more than double the permanent population in this subwatershed. Persistent water quality degradation caused by drainage from the Eagle Mine area is the primary water quality concern in the Upper Eagle River watershed. Although remediation of Eagle Mine has reduced metals loading, zinc concentrations remain a limiting factor for aquatic organisms and depresses brown trout numbers and growth rates, also preculding an abundance of native sculpin in the mine - affected stream reaches. While many of the more obvious remediation opportunities have been addressed, the remaining metals sources in the Eagle mine area will be more difficult to handle. Over the last two years there were several operational failures at the Superfund site. As a result, both the EPA and State are reviewing new maintenance standards in addition to proposed new approaches to further reduce metals contamination coming from the mine. Sample results from 2009 indicate the standard was not exceeded for Cadmium or Copper; however, zinc concentrations regularly exceeded the standard in the Eagle River above Rock Creek and near Tigiwon Road from mid March through April. This is a period when elevated zinc concentrations have historically impacted the fishery. Aside from the adverse effects of the Eagle Mine Superfund Site, other areas and measures of water quality in the Upper Eagle River watershed indicate good water quality conditions. Upstream from the mine, streams sourced in alpine headwaters are generally clean and are not being significantly degraded by current land uses. However, the Red Cliff wastewater facility historically had problems meeting their discharge permit requirements during the winter months due to hydraulic overload. The facility is currently undergoing reconstruction which should bring the plant into compliance. Urban runoff and drainage impacts from the developed areas around Minturn and Red Cliff aren't currently implicated as causing persistent water quality issues. Nutrients and dissolved solids concentrations are generally low to very low and not increasing over time and general water quality indicators such as dissolved oxygen, pH, and stream temperature are within acceptable ranges throughout the area. However, the cumulative effects of projected growth and development combined with expanded transmountain diversions could impact water quality conditions, and are recommended to be addressed through enhanced water quality planning and protection efforts. Upper Eagle River - Page 13 ) O l CL V 70 O I 1 4) N -c Q It IL O N O I o f dS C_ p -- - - - - -- -- - - - -Y' 0 Q� 0 O ,O LU u Lu L _ E 'l CL uj � � o � C U > N =a ' •� m a l � 0 o�3�a9 Gore Creek Gore Creek originates above timberline in the Gore Range within the Eagle's Nest Wilderness. The creek flows west for about 19 miles to its confluence with the Eagle River at Dowd Junction, two miles north of the town of Minturn. The drainage area of the Gore Creek sub - watershed is approximately 102 square miles, and its tributaries include Deluge, Bighorn, Pitkin, Booth, Spraddle, Middle, Red Sandstone, and Buffehr Creeks from the north and Black Gore and Mill Creeks from the south. The lower reach of Gore Creek roughly parallels Interstate 70 through the developed municipal setting of the resort Town of Vail. The lower 4 miles of Gore Creek downstream from Red Sandstone Creek and upstream from Dowd Junction have been designated a Gold Medal fishery by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. The Gore Creek watershed has undergone rapid land -use changes since the 1960s as the Vail area shifted from traditional mountain ranchlands to a four - season resort community. While only eight percent of the watershed is developed urban, recreation, and transportation land cover (USGS, 2010), most development occurs close to the stream corridor which greatly magnifies water quality effects beyond what would normally be observed in a predominantly undeveloped watershed. Estimated total permanent population of Vail was 5,027 in 2009; however, the infrastructure of the Town is designed to accommodate a seasonal population of over 20,000 guests at one time (MTRIP, 2009). 1 . A. Streambank and channel restoration work completed by the Town of Vail at Stephens Park in lower Gore Creek's gold medal designated waters. With the exception of Black Gore Creek, water quality conditions are generally excellent in the upper reaches of Gore Creek and its tributaries as they flow from alpine headwaters to the main stem of Gore Creek in Vail. As the stream flows through the more urbanized areas it becomes increasingly enriched with nutrients, sediments, and dissolved solids derived from urban runoff and other nonpoint /point sources, including stormwater runoff from construction sites and impervious surfaces. Numerous data collection efforts have been conducted by local, State, and Federal agencies and individuals within the Gore Creek sub - basin. These data include surface and ground water quality and quantity parameters, macroinvertebrates, fish population estimates, and evaluating the overall ecological condition of the watershed. Seasonal variations show that for many nutrient species, concentrations tend to be lowest May - June and highest January - March. The gradual changes in concentrations between seasons may be related to dilution effects from increases and decreases in streamflow. In the Gore Creek area, nitrate and phosphorous concentrations are not increasing or decreasing over time (William and others, 2010 in press). Nutrients in Gore Creek are mostly derived from wastewater treatment discharges but a significant portion is also derived from other nonpoint sources. Gore Creek - Page 15 A nuisance algae, didymosphenia geminata - commonly known as `rock snot' - has been increasingly observed in Gore Creek(Grove, 2010). This algae commonly occurs in streams with low flows and low nutrient concentrations and can colonize new areas through accidental transplant between streams via wading shoes, fishing equipment, rafts, etc. Trace metals are generally near or below detectable levels and are not considered an issue. Total dissolved solids are not especially elevated but Williams and others (2010 in press) reported an upward trend that suggests it may be associated with increased use of chloride salts to control ice on roadways and other paved areas. That report also noted downward trends in dissolved oxygen coincide with upward water - temperature trends on Gore Creek near its confluence with the Eagle River, although it is not deemed a critical issue currently. One exception to the generally healthy condition in the watershed is Black Gore Creek, a tributary that originates at Black Lakes near the summit of Vail Pass. The entire length of Black Gore Creek is on the list of impaired waters because of excessive sediment loading and related stream - habitat degradation primarily caused by traction sand that was applied to Interstate 70 during winter months over a 30 year period and subsequently migrated to the creek. The sediment load to Black Gore Creek has also impacted the main stem of Gore Creek (Grove, 2010). In 2001, a sediment load reduction management plan was adopted by the Black Gore Steering Committee. Since that time, partners have invested millions of dollars in sediment control capital projects, remediation processes and management activities on Vail Pass and along Interstate 70. In 2010, the scope of work was expanded to repair several culverts that had failed, causing erosion of fill slopes below the highway and further adding to sediment loads in the creek. It will require years of focused effort to fully recover Black Gore Creek. Measures taken to reduce sediment impacts will need to meet regulated standards in 2011, when a final TMDL for sediment is expected to be adopted by the State Water Quality Control Commission - the TMDL a result of Black Gore Creek being listed as an impaired water body. Gore Creek - Page 16 CL 0 IL N O '� —■ • �f E I O Z O 0 V - - - - - -- - - - -- IL 0 V s ;^ t •l o p uQ o • 70 £ � o r �No m D- Middle Eagle River The Middle Eagle River is delineated as the segment from the confluence of Gore Creek to a point one mile downstream of Wolcott where the river is joined by Alkali Creek. The Middle Eagle River flows for approximately 15 miles in a northwesterly direction draining an area of approximately 118 square miles. When contributing areas of the Upper Eagle, Gore Creek and Lake Creek basins are added, the total drainage of the Middle Eagle is approximately 600 square miles. Tributaries from the north include Traer Creek, Nottingham Gulch, Swift Gulch, Buck Creek, Metcalf Creek, June Creek, Berry Creek, Beard Creek Tames Creek, Spring Creek, Red Canyon Creek, and Ute Creek. Tributaries from the south include Whiskey Creek, Stone Creek, Beaver Creek, Bachelor Gulch, McCoy Creek, Lake Creek, Squaw Creek, and Travis Creek. Although Lake Creek is included in the Middle Eagle River sub - watershed, it is separately delineated and described in the Watershed Plan because of its large contributing area and the nature of land uses it supports. ERWC, in partnership with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and Eagle County, is completing a 1.6 mile restoration project in the Eagle River near Edwards, including the confluence of Lake Creek, that reconnects segments of high quality upstream and downstream aquatic and riparian habitat. Growth in the Middle Eagle subwatershed has been dramatic over the last 40 years. Land uses include Interstate 70, extensive residential neighborhoods, and four regional commercial centers including the Town of Avon and Edwards and the resort community of Beaver Creek. According to the most recent State Demography data for 2009 and 2010, the population of the Middle Eagle includes approximately 2,821 full time residents in Eagle Vail, 7,108 full time residents in Avon, and 8,156 full time residents in the Edwards area. The majority of growth and development in this area has occurred in the last 40 years with moderate -to -dense urban and recreation land uses in close proximity to the stream channel throughout most of the reach. Significant recreational land uses include the ski areas of Beaver Creek, Bachelor Gulch and Arrowhead and eleven golf courses. Beaver Creek resort has over 18,000 beds and, in combination with Avon's buildout of expected tourist lodging, will accommodate as many if not more visitors at one time as Vail(Vail Resorts, 2010). As a result of these established land use patterns, the Middle Eagle may be subjected to greater and more complex water quality stressors than other areas of the Eagle River Watershed. Source waters for the Middle Eagle flow from areas draining similarly - developed Gore Creek, Beaver Creek, and upper Squaw Creek watersheds as well as the Eagle Mine superfund site in the Upper Eagle. Water quality of the Middle Eagle would also be directly affected by future operational changes in trans - mountain diversions that may occur in the Upper Eagle. Setbacks from rivers and streams in this area of the watershed vary widely, between Minturn, Avon, Beaver Creek Resort, and unincorporated areas in Eagle County(Eagle Vail and Edwards). Effective water quality management and planning for the Middle Eagle is complicated by the need to address upstream issues and will require partnerships among a diverse group of stakeholders. - `�� j - _� ' yIL+- , i• -} of k k F � - ,� � k. •' �� � �A �,.� a t`i,. n r_ "v, Restoration work on the Middle Eagle near Edwards. Middle Eagle - Page 18 Nutrient loading from point and nonpoint sources is a primary water quality issue for the Middle Eagle. Nutrient concentrations are relatively low upstream from Gore Creek and progressively increase to their highest levels near Wolcott as the Eagle flows through the developed areas of Eagle -Vail, Avon, and Edwards and receives tributary inflows from highly developed watersheds including Gore Creek, Beaver Creek, Buck Creek, and Squaw Creek (Williams and others, 2010 in press, NWCCOG, 2002). Most of this nutrient increase is derived from wastewater treatment discharges but a significant portion is also derived from other nonpoint sources such as runoff from roadways, individual septic systems, and other urban and recreational land -use areas (NWCCOG, 2002). Total phosphorus has been a nutrient of concern in the Middle Eagle. In the 1980s and early 1990s total phosphorus concentrations just downstream from Edwards were commonly observed by CDPHE to be above the USEPA- recommended (but not formally adopted by Colorado) level of 0.1 mg /L and ranging up to about 0.4 mg /L . For the more recent 1995 -2001 period (latest available data for the Edwards area), concentrations were much lowerwith few values above 0.1 mg /L occurring in the low -flow midwinter period when algal growth with associated phosphorus uptake /removal as well as diluting tributary inflows were at extreme lows. The USGS has been collecting nutrient samples in the Eagle River on a monthly to bi- monthly schedule for sites in Avon just below Beaver Creek and three miles downstream from Wolcott. Results for the January 2007 to January 2010 period (25 samples per site) indicate average total phosphorous concentrations of 0.05 and 0.14 mg /L and maximum concentrations of 0.21 and 0.31 at Avon and Wolcott, respectively. Thus the most elevated total phosphorus concentrations are occurring at the downstream extent of the Middle Eagle and sources primarily from point source discharges. The State of Colorado is currently developing numeric and biological- condition based standards for total nitrogen and phosphorus. These new standards are intended to define impairment thresholds and adopt protective biological and numeric criteria for the control and management of nutrients (total nitrogen and phosphorus) in streams, reservoirs, and lakes statewide(CDPHE, 2009). The State rulemaking schedule anticipates adoption of these standards by June 2011, although the process is contentious among many stakeholders who are concerned that the costs of compliance may come without reasonable assurance that the new standards will have the desired outcome of improving water quality and protecting aquatic life (Hall, 2010). Despite the many water quality stressors to the Middle Eagle, water quality is generally good during most of the year. Water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, hardness and suspended sediment values are generally within acceptable ranges. Comparisons of pH, water temperature, and dissolved oxygen to State stream standards show that sites have fewer than five observations outside these limits. Watershed -wide, less than one percent of the total number of oxygen measurements exceeded the State standard for chronic dissolved oxygen(Williams and others, 2010 in press) . Middle Eagle - Page 19 W °- } •) aW W "t ` m Co s o y p ��a • �°_ f �. O ' y �•c r c - o �• 3a v a a � o E a o _ o u 0 0 � � N O U L O Q T a O O O J �� N L C N ° ° -q -oo C N O Z N 0 a 3 m m Z U Li E I I•� f -1 ` i 1 Lake Creek Lake Creek is a major tributary of the Middle Eagle basin. It originates in the Holy Cross Wilderness as three tributary streams which meet to form the main stem of Lake Creek two miles above its confluence with the Eagle River. The drainage area covers approximately 49 square miles. Tributaries to East Lake Creek include Lime and Rock Creeks from the east and Middle Lake Creek from the west. Tributaries to West Lake Creek include Ohio Creek from the east and Casteel Creek from the west. Middle Lake Creek has no named tributaries. The lower reaches of the three forks and the main stem of Lake Creek flow through ranchlands and large and medium sized lot residential development. The lower segment has not undergone much channelization; however, it is not entirely free to migrate within the floodplain due to the proximity of residential development (Bledsoe et al, ERIA). The upper reaches of the East and West forks are typically healthy streams in wilderness areas, for example Upper East Lake Creek contains an identified population of Colorado River Cutthroat trout (Armstrong, 2000). The Lake Creek drainage and Holy Cross Wilderness Area. Surface -water quality in Lake Creek watershed has been monitored only a few times in recent years and thus a thorough determination of current conditions is not feasible. About 40 specific conductance measurements (analogous to `dissolved solids content') have been made in the downstream reach of Lake Creek since 1998 and indicate the water generally has low concentrations of dissolved solids with higher dissolved solids content during fall /winter and lower during spring when snowmelt, with almost no dissolved solids content, drains into the stream. No data were available to consider potential effects of stormwater runoff from developed areas of the watershed. A few late- summer, low -flow stream samples have been collected for dissolved solids, nutrients and trace metals, all of which indicate low to very low concentrations, although more extensive sampling would be needed to describe the water quality within the watershed and to understand how current land -uses may be affecting Lake Creek. The Lake Creek subwatershed is perhaps one of the most concerning relative to the potential for groundwater to be contaminated from human activities. This is largely due to the several hundred residential properties within Lake Creek that are not connected to a sanitary sewer system and utilize septic systems to dispose of household wastewater. Many of these systems were installed in the 1970s in areas known to have thin soils and shallow groundwater. A recent report by the USGS (Rupert and others, 2009) characterized portions of the Lake Creek watershed's alluvial aquifer system as highly susceptible to groundwater contamination from human activities. Continued subdivision of the few remaining large agricultural parcels in this basin, if unmitigated, could compound concern for ground water contamination. Other threats include point and nonpoint source loading from irrigated pastures and road systems; livestock grazing; and continued residential development within the stream corridor that can impact riparian vegetation and increase stream bank erosion and sedimentation. Lake Creek - Page 21 Lake Creek a Edwards '4 Avon W atershed u s 4 ,.• ' Eagle -Vail •�.` Middle Eagle Beaver Creek River Watershed •1 Ski Area (See Middle Eagle Map) �•`,`• 1 _ • rte Watershed Priorities _ Groundwater Vulnerability Lack of Water Quality '�•j a�f : • • Monitoring Future Growth Impacts Riparian Zone Protection Legend-- - - - - -- - - - -- ; A USGS Gaging Station Wilderness Boundary �• 1 � River, Stream, &Lake Recreational Land Use s ti Major Highway Incorporated Municipality 1 o azs r . 1 1 s � � Mllas I r za I•— Developed Unincorporated ;++ a ° p'�no °�dee�p�,��e o ° E -L ez ------- - - - - -- he he dl d •I Watershed Boundary Area P oaa�iaoorn p ao a sma,a w Lower Eagle The Lower Eagle River is the segment from the confluence of Alkali Creek with the Eagle below Wolcott to the confluence of the Eagle and Colorado Rivers at Dotsero. The Lower Eagle drainage is 26 miles long and covers approximately 148 square miles. This segment is influenced by the entire Eagle River drainage which covers 965 square miles, and includes all upstream subbasins of the watershed (Upper Eagle River, Gore Creek, Middle Eagle, Lake Creek, and Alkali Creek). Tributaries to the Lower Eagle from the north include Milk Creek, Castle Creek, Eby Creek and Cottonwood Creek. Tributaries from the south include Brush Creek, Abrams Creek, Alkali Creek (near Gypsum), Spring Creek and Gypsum Creek. Brush and Gypsum Creeks are the principal subwatersheds of the Lower Eagle, and support the established Towns of Eagle and Gypsum. Because of their large areas, significant future community development and contribution to the Lower Eagle, Alkali Creek, Brush Creek and Gypsum Creek subwatersheds are described separately in this report. The Lower Eagle has a diverse spectrum of land uses that include residential, commercial and industrial, resource extraction, ranching, recreation, airport and public lands access. Combined full time resident population of the Lower Eagle surpassed the combined full time resident populations of Vail and Avon in the late 1990s. The majority of growth in both Towns has occurred through annexation and conversion of agricultural lands to residential subdivisions along Brush Creek and Gypsum Creek unlike the Gore Creek watershed where extensive redevelopment has taken place. Both Towns operate municipal water and wastewater treatment facilities, and have made significant capital investments to meet the demands of the new resident population while preserving stream flow and ecological qualities of these major tributaries. While Brush Creek and Gypsum Creek currently provide municipal water supply, the Eagle River may serve an important water supply role in the future. y _ 1C Gypsum Ponds State Wildlife Area on the Lower Eagle. Water quality in the Lower Eagle is largely influenced by contributions from the Middle and Upper Eagle and their tributaries which drain some of the more developed recreational and urbanized areas. Brush Creek, the largest tributary to the Lower Eagle, contributes high - quality streamflows which can serve to significantly dilute constituents of concern such as nutrients, sediments, and trace metals. Point sources within the Lower Eagle include the wastewater treatment facilities for the Towns of Eagle and Gypsum. These same towns divert water from Brush Creek and Gypsum Creek, respectively, to provide drinking water for residents. The Town of Gypsum also provides some of its residents with non - potable water for irrigation and other uses. Lower Eagle - Page 23 Water quality conditions are generally good and well within State standards in the Lower Eagle River and tributary reaches during most of the year. Exceptions include Ute, Alkali and Milk Creeks which are natural sediment - loading sources to the Lower Eagle that cause an observed degradation of aquatic insect and fish habitat and associated reductions in fish production (Bledsoe and others, 2005). Trace metal concentrations are generally much lower in the Lower Eagle watershed as compared to the Middle and Upper Watersheds. Upward trends in nutrients between the Towns of Avon and Gypsum were detected for nitrate, orthophosphate and total phosphorous. There was a significant upward trend for total phosphorous at a site in the Lower Eagle for 1995 -2007. Neither the cause nor specific nutrient loading source for this trend was determined (Williams and others, 2010 in press). Streams in the Lower Eagle are generally well oxygenated with few exceedances of State standards During late summer, and especially during low streamflow years, afternoon stream temperatures can be elevated in the Lower Eagle causing severe stress to trout which can be exacerbated when recreational fishing is not curtailed (as it was in the drought conditions of 2002). Opportunities to improve water quality in the Lower Eagle include mitigation of excessive sedimentation from the Ute, Milk, and Alkali Creek drainages and major riparian zone planting /restoration work along the mainstem of the river(CSU, 2005). As expected, dissolved solids are elevated in the Lower Eagle as compared to other areas, primarily because of the erosive soils associated with sedimentary geology of the area that includes highly saline evaporite (gypsum) and marine shale formations. While mostly a natural phenomenon, the salinity - loading from these areas can be minimized through effective land and water management practices aimed at controlling erosion and limiting excessive irrigation. The major nonpoint source water quality issues for the Lower Eagle especially as the recipient of all contaminants that make it into the river upstream are urban and construction activities, historic mining activities, hydrologic modifications, recreation, and agricultural operations (NWCCOG, 2002). One of the key management issues to help protect water quality in the Lower Eagle as streams reach their capacity to assimilate contaminants will be the careful management of future regional growth. Urban and construction activities have been shown to impact water quality by increasing sediment, nutrients, metals, fecal bacteria, and organic pollutants. In particular, stream -side development, if not managed properly, denudes riparian vegetation which directly impacts water quality and the aquatic community (NWCCOG, 2002). Lower Eagle - Page 24 ! - - - - - -- L U Creek Rd r.. a C x rt I N .► 0.49,1'"& o i - 1 Y N - - ti Y ° ' S 'Gypsum Creek Rd o o o T arc m 0 N U ) o D- o •� O U Q o U o / m` L + •V U c . 'a c > DI N p - �-' W o s ° N `o o i p oa o o p p U U as o W o N o p U ` U 3 J��6, Z p 12w _vE ,�� • o 0 3 a Alkali Creek Alkali Creek originates on the north - facing slopes of Horse Mountain at approximately 9,000 above sea level draining in a southeasterly direction for about 11 miles to the confluence with the Eagle River near Wolcott. The drainage area of the Alkali Creek sub - watershed is roughly 45 square miles, and includes the tributary drainages of Muddy, Cache and Willow Creeks from the north and east. The watershed is generally characterized as high elevation sagebrush, pinion - juniper shrubland with areas of irrigated land along the valley floor (the pastures of 4 -Eagle Ranch for instance). A reconnaissance -level feasibility assessment for a new 55,000 to 105,000 acre foot in- channel reservoir (Wolcott Reservoir) in lower Alkali Creek determined that much of the sediment runoff from this drainage would be trapped by the reservoir and thus reducing a portion of the lower Eagle sedimentation problem (GRC /GEI, 2004). According to the feasibility study, operation of the potential Wolcott Reservoir would also release much colder- than - ambient waters, possibly easing water temperature issues in the Lower Eagle. The potential for residential or commercial growth and development in the Alkali basin is limited except for the potential of additional development if a reservoir is constructed. The underlying geology in the Ute, Alkali and Milk Creek drainages is dominated by highly erosive marine shales and shale- derived soils. Southerly aspects, sparse natural vegetation and historic grazing practices have contributed to the well documented sediment and salinity contributions from this area. Incision of the stream channel on the lower reach of Milk Creek is especially pervasive as compared to Alkali Creek, and according to NWCCOG extremely high sediment concentrations as high as 12,000 mg /L have been recorded during spring runoff. Suspended sediment and turbidity from Alkali and neighboring Milk and Ute Creeks severely limits the coldwater fishery of the Eagle River below Wolcott during runoff and storm events. While natural conditions in the watershed are responsible for much of the sediment and salt load, the effects of historical overgrazing and associated removal of riparian vegetation is considered to have increased sediment runoff (Bledsoe and others, 2005). Large quantities of sediment and salt drain from Alkali Creek into the Eagle River from the onset of snowmelt in March /April through the summer. However, the primary water quality and ecological impacts may be attributed to late summer thunderstorm events that transport high sediment loads to the lower Eagle River. These events create a seasonal degradation of aquatic insect and fish habitat and associated reductions in fish production as documented by CDOW (CSU, 2005; Eagle River Assembly, 1994). Water quality in Alkali Creek has been monitored only a few times in recent years, therefore a thorough determination of current conditions is not feasible. During low flow periods, historical dissolved solids concentrations of the Eagle River near Gypsum have typically ranged from about 500 to 1,000 mg /I(GRC /GEI, 2004). Shale sources, such as the Pierre shale that underlies the Alkali Creek watershed, are known sources of selenium, which in elevated concentrations can be harmful to fish and aquatic life. Streamflow gaging would be needed to describe the water resources within the watershed and to understand the magnitude of dissolved solids and selenium concentrations and loads to the Eagle River. Stream gaging would also be required to refine runoff and flow estimates ranging from 800 to 5,000 acre feet of annual yield (depending on precipitation patterns) (GRC /GEI, 2004). Alkali Creek - Page 26 i - z - . O o i N O o ° � O m o 0 0 IL f o o O J O w a o E 6 c w U i IL-- - - - - -- -- - - - -S a Q ro D U i a D- q je N N rr^^ CC V , I !•' , w m w IF l rF u E -61 ` u m of • • co W - CN EQ�ae° Brush Creek Brush Creek originates on two tributaries, East and West Brush Creek, in the Sawatch Range south of the Town of Eagle. West Brush Creek originates near Crooked Creek Pass and flows northwest to its confluence with East Brush Creek at approximately. Sylvan Lake on West Brush Creek is the center piece of Sylvan Lake State Park and provides recreation and water storage. East Brush Creek originates in the Holy Cross wilderness and includes the historic mining Town of Fulford. The majority of the West and East forks are relatively undisturbed public lands under the management of the U.S. Forest Service and Colorado Department of Natural Resources (State Parks Division). Below the confluence of East and West Brush Creeks the stream flows approximately 10 miles to its confluence with the Eagle River in the Town of Eagle. The drainage area of the entire sub - watershed is approximately 147 square miles. Major tributaries to lower Brush Creek include Bruce Creek, Salt Creek, Frost Creek, and Abrams Creek. Several of these lower tributaries originate on public lands and are considered healthy, for example Abrams Creek contains an identified population of genetically pure Colorado River Cutthroat trout (CSU, 2005). However, the Brush Creek basin is highly developed near its confluence with the Eagle River. In 2009, there were an estimated 6,054 full time residents in the Town of Eagle, the majority living in the Brush Creek drainage. A stream improvement project was initiated on 3.5 miles of stream to address eroded bank conditions and to improve trout habitat on the lower reach of Brush Creek. The project was completed in 2009. Most of the Town of Eagle's water supply comes from an intake on Brush Creek located seven miles upstream of the Confluence with the Eagle River, just above the Adams Mountain County Club golf course and residential subdivision. To accommodate future population growth, plans are in place for the construction of a second water treatment facility near the confluence of Brush Creek and the Eagle River. This facility will have intakes in Brush Creek and the Eagle River to provide greater options for water supply and treatment (Powell, 2010). Historically, the primary water quality stressors in Brush Creek have been sedimentation, irrigation return flows, runoff from livestock grazing in the upstream reaches and urban runoff in the developed lower reaches. More recently, as ranch lands have converted to residential development, the effects of irrigation return flows and sedimentation have been reduced. Livestock grazing within the riparian zone has also been curtailed in some areas, and other areas have undergone stream channel rehabilitation to improve riparian vegetation and streambank stability. Over time, these land use changes are expected to reduce sedimentation in Brush Creek (CSU, 2005). Recent monitoring by the Town of Eagle, Adam's Mountain Country Club (the Frost Creek Development), and the USGS generally indicate good water quality in Brush Creek. Nutrient and trace metals concentrations are low and dissolved solids concentrations are moderate and indicative of the sedimentary geology that underlies most of the area (USGS website, 2010). In the summer of 2008, excessive blooms of filamentous algae were noted in the lower reaches of Brush creek just upstream from the Town (Merry, 2010). This previously unobserved phenomenon may indicate episodic or otherwise poorly- understood water quality issues that should be monitored and addressed in the future. Previous algae monitoring by USGS in 2000 and 2001 did not find a similar occurrence. A novel and proactive water quality monitoring and mitigation program has been implemented in the watershed. Eagle County required the developers of Adams Rib Ranch (Frost Creek) to provide baseline monitoring prior to construction, during construction, and on an ongoing basis thereafter. This monitoring is designed to ensure that pre- existing water quality conditions are well understood before development and that potential development impacts are identified and addressed before they become severe (Wright Water Engineers, 2009; Merry, 2010). This collaborative program may serve as an excellent and economical model throughout the Eagle River watershed for incorporation into future development plans where appropriate. Brush Creek - Page 28 Lower Eagle '4 River Watershed Brush Creek Watershed (See Lower Eagle Map) F � jai Fulford Watershed Priorities • Brush Creek Restoration Project wt • Future Growth Impacts • Riparian Zone Protection ' 1 I l„ Legend � River, Stream, &Lake � i Wilderness Boundary � 0 QS 2 I •� Watershed Boundary 4 Recreational Land Use M, I \.�, ��;-.^� j Brush Creek ` edRe "P,eo� -_ L 82 1` t �w c a e Incorporated Municipality `du .dm�a "did ---------- - -_ — .� Restoration Project -,— �f A —1,r Gypsum Creek Gypsum Creek originates in numerous small streams that descend from the north - facing slope of Red Table Mountain within the White River National Forest. LEDE reservoir is at the headwaters of the Creek. The Creek flows in a northwesterly direction for about 20 miles to its confluence with the Eagle River within the Town of Gypsum. Tributaries to Gypsum Creek include Grundell Creek, Campbell Creek, Red Creek, Erickson Creek, Sundell Creek, and Sapdell Creeks among others. The drainage area of Gypsum Creek is approximately 103 square miles. Gypsum Creek is a drinking watersource for the Town of Gypsum. The upperwatershed is influenced by ranching and forest lands primarily vegetated with areas of mixed coniferous and deciduous aspen forest. The habitat quality has been observed as variable in these upstream reaches, with riparian areas in both good and degraded conditions (CSU, 2005). Downstream of the narrow upper valley the drainage widens considerably and the creek flows through the Brightwater golf course and residential subdivision. The Town of Gypsum has undergone tremendous growth over the past several decades resulting in new suburban neighborhoods constructed in the lower Gypsum Creek valley. In 2009, there were approximately 6,786 full time residents in Gypsum, many of them living in the Gypsum Creek drainage. The portion of Gypsum Creek through town center to the confluence with the Eagle River is highly channelized and constrained. Water quality in Gypsum Creek has been monitored only a few times in recent years, thus a thorough determination of current conditions is not feasible. Historically, the observed primary water quality stressors in Gypsum Creek have been livestock grazing, sedimentation and irrigation return flows in upstream reaches and urban stormwater runoff in the developed lower reaches (CSU, 2005). Limited data indicate dissolved solids are at moderate levels, and generally lower than in the Eagle River near Gypsum. Trace metal and nutrient concentrations are generally low prior to 2006 (USGS website accessed 06/10/2010). As ranch lands along the valley floor have converted to residential and other urban land uses, the Town has sought the purchase of public property along Gypsum Creek to preserve fishing access through conservation easements and potentially improve riparian habitat areas (Gallegos, 2010). However, irrigation return flows are being reduced and urban runoff will potentially increase as the Town develops. The Town recently acquired LEDE reservoir and has current plans to expand it to more than double its existing capacity. This acquisition and expansion will assist the Town in regulation and monitoring of minimum in- stream flows for Gypsum Creek, which will benefit wildlife, habitat and recreation. Unfortunately, little recent water quality data is available for evaluation to determine if noteworthy changes have occurred. To better evaluate water quality conditions and track potential effects from ongoing residential, commercial, recreation, and related infrastructure development, it is recommended that a consistent monitoring program be implemented for Gypsum Creek. Gypsum Creek - Page 30 Gypsum Creek Watershed/ m _ 4 �. Eagle county Airport % 1 Watershed Priorities Gypsum * LEDE Reservoir Capacity f� Eagle River Area Plan t * Gypsum Creek Habitat Conservation & Access / Lower Eagle * Lack of Water Quality Monitoring River Watershed * Future Growth Impacts Riparian Zone Protection (See Lower Eagle Map) soil J f j r r *r - -- - -- I � - Legend 6 USGS Gaging Station Recreational Land Use o o.s 1 z Mlles River, Stream, &Lake Incorporated Municipality Disclaimer This ap—s created bvth e Eagle ceuntyGIS en p genera wd de roe p,pose on v 9 Y Eag count does not J Depar — — — �.� wananeme aocuracy otme data cornamed herein. Se Ie Se Reoreational � \ Watershed Boundary and Use and Pduvel�gricditmdl Lands are depicted for land cover �L 82 - -1 �� ry recfi and orientation puryoses only and are not Inclusive of all similar land covers — due to projection and scale otthls map. Colorado River The Upper Colorado River headwaters originate in Grand County and encompass a large area of 1,869 square miles (NWCCOG, 208 Plan). The lower portion of the Upper Colorado watershed includes parts of Routt, Eagle and Garfield counties and technically ends at the confluence with the Roaring Fork River in Glenwood Springs. The Colorado River enters the northern part of Eagle County and flows generally southwest for approximately 55 miles through Gore Canyon to State Bridge, and then past the rural communities of Bond, McCoy and Burns to its confluence with the Eagle River at Dotsero. Several miles west of Dotsero the river leaves Eagle County and enters Glenwood Canyon. The drainage area of the Colorado River sub - watershed in Eagle County is approximately 525 square miles. The Upper Colorado as it passes through Eagle County has few urban influences, and is typified by public lands, large ranches and scattered recreational sites and trailheads. Tributaries include the Piney River which enters the river at State Bridge, Rock Creek which flows to its confluence at McCoy, and Sweetwater Creek which flows to its confluence about seven miles upstream of Dotsero (NWCCOG, 208). The Eagle River is the largest contributing flow to this reach of the Colorado River. There are major water storage facilities in the Upper Colorado before the river enters Eagle County, including Lake Granby, Shadow Mountain, Windy Gap, Willow Creek, Williams Fork, and Wolford Mountain Reservoirs. As such, flows in the river are highly managed. Constructed transmountain diversions on the headwaters of the Colorado transport as much as 600,000 acre feet per year to the Front Range - nearly one and half times the average annual yield of the Eagle River basin (CFWE, 2009). Water quality in the Eagle County reach of the Colorado River has been monitored at two sites, one near State Bridge and one downstream of Dotsero. The site at State Bridge was monitored as recently as 2008 and indicated fairly dilute water of good quality with low dissolved solids, nutrients, and metals concentrations, with no results that would indicate there are current water quality issues to address (USEPA website accessed June 12, 2010). However, the 1989 Addendum to the Colorado Nonpoint Source Assessment Report states that ''the Colorado River mainstem begins to show impacts from sediment in the segment downstream from State Bridge. The Eagle County Soil Conservation district has designated a stream bank erosion management area which may help explain the elevated sediment levels in this reach.'' (NWCCOG, 2002b; CWQCD, 1989) . 4 � . ti z, x .. a US Forest Service East Fork Red Dirt Creek streambank restoration. Colorado River- Page 32 The NWCCOG report for the Upper Colorado River summarizes the major water quality issues for this reach of the Colorado as primarily derived from impacts of transmountain water diversions, as well as sediment and dissolved solids loads from nonpoint sources. In early October of this year, the Forest Service completed a streambank reconstruction and riparian planting of East Red Dirt Creek to repair historic grazing impacts to the creek that potentially threatened a Colorado Cutthroat population. The USGS has monitored water quality in the Colorado River at a location downstream from Dotsero near the Eagle County line. In a data summary for the 1995 -1998 period, USGS results indicate generally good water quality with high dissolved oxygen, low dissolved solids and nitrate concentrations (Spahr and others, 2000). Total phosphorus concentrations were elevated at times and generally below 0.2 milligrams per liter with no apparent relation between streamflow magnitude and phosphorus concentration. Suspended sediment concentrations were higher during the onset of annual snowmelt runoff as expected but were generally not excessive. Total phosphorus and sediment concentrations were generally similar to but slightly lower than those observed in the Eagle River at Gypsum. Sample results for dissolved oxygen, nutrients, trace metals, and suspended sediment did not exceed applicable State standards in the Colorado River. However, nutrients, dissolved solids, trace metals and suspended sediment concentrations are higher at the Dotsero site as compared to the upstream State Bridge site. This is likely due, at least in part, to the influence of inflows from the Eagle River (Spahr and others 2002; USGS website accessed 06/10/2010). The reach through Eagle County is currently being considered for "Wild and Scenic" designation by the Bureau of Land Management. Risks to the water resource values of the Colorado are numerous, and include climate change, transmountain diversions, future growth and land use, oil and shale production, and potential loss of the Shoshone Call - the primary controlling senior water right on the Colorado River according to the Colorado River Water Conservation District (Sentinel, 2010). This historic 1902 water right ensures that water flows through Eagle County to the Shoshone Power Plant in Glenwood Canyon. Streamflow management objectives for the Colorado to protect and enhance watershed values like aquatic habitat and recreation may become an increasingly complex issue to manage on a local and regional level. Colorado River- Page 33 s O V/ s N -6 E • / i 1 o 0) N a 9 6 o I C ` Li e m �.- _.1� I • -� �,,., o l g ` • y � U I W r r r Q p N C t l o V) V) - 0 J C J� � IL CO < J L.L E CO CO . CO 1 O �} = I. - ',• I ��� � �� � � 11 W `. Derby -} g Junction Burns ',; •= - Alkali Creek Watershed (See Alkali Creek Map) Watershed Priorities Lack of River Inventory & Assessment Transmountain Diversions Preservation of the Shoshone Call f •� BLM Wild and Scenic Consideration Minimum Streamflow Rights Lack of Water Quality Monitoring L{ Future Growth Impacts r " Riparian Zone Protection •,. y Stream Bank Protection l E Lower age � e River Watershed % (See Lower Eagle Map) •�'` sero Eagle ot �, � f.�.. ��` rte•: {� ,�_ � ;�. �,,. ". •J Gypsum Eagle County Airport Legend •� Good �• �. ♦ USGS Gaging Station s _ Gypsum Creek - Gravel /Extraction /Mining r � � River, Stream, &Lake 4 Watershed Major Highway 1 F • ,b �;",; (See Gypsum Creek Map) •� Wild & Scenic River Consideration Red Dirt Restoration Project t �' I • I Watershed Boundary Wilderness Boundary r •� .> ,Colorado Riv&. 6 �- o 05 1 2 f I v 24 -1 1he 1he dl a Watershed -Wes X82 purpose y due lo prqd,don Glossary of Terms and Waterfacts Acre Foot (Feet): The volume of water required to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot. An acre foot is equal to approximately 325,825 gallons. For example, Nottingham Lake near Avon holds approximately 100 acre feet. Aquatic Habitat: Habitat available for use by fish and other aquatic species. The area of useable habitat in a stream typically increases as stream flow increases, except when stream flow is very high and water velocity is great than desirable. Augmentation: A means to allow diversion of water by a (junior water right when this (junior water right would otherwise be out of priority and unable to diverf water. An augmentation plan typically replaces (or augments) the amount of water consumed by a junior water right with water from a reservoir, or with water previously used for another purpose such as irrigation. By replacing the amount of water consumed, the amount of water available to senior downstream water rights is not diminished. In the Eagle River watershed, augmentation is most commonly filed from Green Mountain Reservoir in the Blue River watershed in Summit County or from Eagle Park reservoir in Eagle County. See C.R.S. 37 -92 -103 for definition of augmentation plan under state statute. Baseflow: the period of the year in which the stream flow in rivers and streams is the lowest typically from August through April. During this period, stream flow primarily results from ground water that is discharged to streams and rivers. Black Gore Creek Steering Committee(BGSQ: In the late 1990's, the BGSC was formed to allow concerned stakeholders to meet and discuss the issues of safe I -70 operation and sediment issues. A number of local, state, and federal entities are members of this Committee, including the Colorado Department of Transportation, Eagle County, Eagle River Water & Sanitation District, Eagle River Watershed Council, River Restora ion.org, Town of Vail, US Forest Service. Build out conditions: The population that is projected to occur with complete development assuming a development density comparable to existing conditions on all planned and platted sites. Actual build out could vary significantly, depending upon market conditions and land use approvals. Carrying Capacity: The amount and type of use an area can accommodate without altering either the environment or the user's experience beyond a degree of change deemed acceptable by the management objective. Conjunctive Use: A term used to describe the practice of storing surface water in a groundwater basin in wet years and withdrawing it from the basin in dry years. Cubic Foot per Second (cfs) : A rate of stream flow equal to one cubic foot of water (7.5 gallons) every second. One cfs flowing for one day results in a volume of water equal to approximately two acre feet. The Eagle River near Gypsum typically flows about 100 to 200 cfs during the low flow winter months. During peak snowmelt the flow of the river near Gypsum often exceeds 3,000 cfs. The flow of Gore Creek at Vail is usually about 10 to 15 cfs during the winter months. Peak snowmelt stream flow of Gore Creek is often 900 cfs or greater. Consumptive Water Use: That amount of water that is actually consumed by a given water use (a hay crop or golf course) and does not return to the stream. Camp Hale: The large glacial valley known as "Eagle Park ", located between Redcliff and Leadville in the Upper - Eagle basin, where in 1942 the valley was transformed into a training camp for 10th Mountain Division troops utilized in World War II. Construction of Camp Hale required massive land alteration to transform the area into one of the lamest cities in Colorado at the time. The Eagle River was relocated, enlarged and straightenedg as were associated riparian and wetland areas cleared and drained in order to make room for the housing, training facilities and relocated highway. Depletion: The use of water in a manner which makes it no loner available to other users in the same system. For example, immediately below a municipal dgversion headgate, the stream depletion is equal to the amount of water diverted. Downstream of return flow from a municipal wastewater treatment plant, the depletion is equal to the amount of water actually consumed by the municipal use that is not returned to the stream. Domestic Water Use: Water used for household purposes, and for lawn and garden irrigation in residential areas. Erosive Soils: Local soils prone to slow permeability, rapid surface runoff and minimal vegetative cover due to soil characteristics (soil type example: Pierre Shale, Niobrara formation and Benton Shale). The rate or intensity of erosion of these soils may be influenced by land use (for instance, historic grazing). Glossary- Page 36 Dust on Snow: A phenomenon where winter and spring depositions of desert dust from the Colorado Plateau onto Colorado's mountain snowpacks can dramatically reduce snowcover albedo, advance snowmelt timing, and enhance snowmelt runoff intensity when those dust layers are at or near the snowpack surface. Pristine, new snow reflects as much as 98% of sunlight, but dust - contaminated snow directly absorbs as much as 40 -50% of the incoming solar energy striking the snowpack, thereby becoming the dominant source of heat ener causing snowmelt, eclipsing even the energy contributed by very warm air temperatures. (COOS website, 2010) Flow Regime: A term used to describe the following characteristics of stream flow and their interactions: magnitude, timing, frequency, duration, and rate of change. Geomorphic: A term used to describe the scientific study of land forms and the processes that shape them. As it pertains to hydrology, the term describes the processes that affect the form or shape of the surface area of the drainage basin or watershed. Ground Water: Water sources found below the surface of the earth. Instream Flow (or minimum instream flow): The amount of stream flow in a stream or river that is recommended to maintain natural resource values such as fish habitat, recreation or water quality. An instream flow water standards is established by the Colorado Water Conservation Board in consultation with the Division of Wildlife, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, and/ or agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Interior that is intended to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree (See C.R.S. 37- 92- 102(3)). In -Basin Water Diversion: The diversion of water from the Eagle River Basin for use within the Eagle River watershed. Non -Point Source Pollution: A source of pollution that has a diffuse origin and entrance point to the stream. For example, sediment erosion from a construction site or oil and grease washing off roads in a thunderstorm. In contract, if water from diffuse sources is collected in a pipe ancf the pipe enters the river, it is a Point Source discharge. Non - Structural Strategy: A water supply strategy, such as conservation, that does not involve the construction of a dam, reservoir or diversion facility. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments ( NWCCOG): NWCCOG is a voluntary association of county and municipal governments that believes in the benefits of working together on a regional basis. NWCCOG serves 28 member jurisdictions in a 5- county region of northwest Colorado, including Eagle County. NWCCOG Regional Water Quality Management Plan (208 Plan): NWCCOG has been the designated regional water quality management agency for the region since 1976. In that capacitt�yy, NWCCOG's completes and imp lements a water quality management plan for the NWCCOG Region which includes the Eagle River and Upper Colorado watersheds, in compliance with Section 208 of the Clean Water Act. Optimum Instream Flow: A flow amount which protects an instream flow value such as fish habitat, recreation, aesthetics, or water quality. Point Source Pollution: Pollution that comes from a discreet or specified source such as industrial or municipal waste water discharge. Raw Water: Untreated surface or ground water. Return Flow: Water returned to the stream after beinci diverted and used for some "beneficial" use such as irrigation or domestic purposes. Usually return flows occur downstream of the point of diversion. Riparian Zone: The banks and adjacent vegetation influenced by the high water table. Plant types associated with riparian zone include but are not limited to cottonwoods, willows, alders, aspens and chokecherry. The presence or absence of these plants does not always indicate a riparian community. Past land use practices may have degraded the vegetation to the point where it does not appear to have riparian characteristics but because of the high water table in the area a change in the land use can quickly restore the riparian community. Conversely, a few characteristic plants may not indicate a true riparian community. For this reason, on site analysis is needed to help make this determination. This definition of riparian was comprehensively compiled from CDOW, NRCS (SCS), USFS, USACE, Colorado State University Range Science Department and Colorado Riparian Association definitions of riparian zone. Glossary- Page 37 Sensitive Areas or Lands: Land or water areas that are sensitive because they could be irretrievably damagged or lost if they are not protected. Wetlands, riparian areas and steep hillsides are examples of sensitive lands that typically do not respond or recover well from disturbance, whether it be a single occurrence or collective. Shoshone Call /Demand: The water demand associated with the Shoshone Hydroelectric Facility on the Colorado River in Glenwood Canyon. This is one of the most senior water rights on the Colorado that frequently limits upstream diversions in the Eagle River Basin and the Upper Colorado. Specific Conductance: is a measure of how well water can pass an electrical current. It is an indirect measure of the presence of inorganic dissolved solids, such as chloride, nitrate, sulfate, E sodium, magnesium, calcium, and iron. These substances conduct electricity because they are negatively or positive) charged when dissolved in water. The concentration of dissolved solids, or the conductivity, is affected - by the bedrock and soil in the watershed. It is also affected by human influences. For example, agricultural runoff can raise conductivity because of the presence of phosphate and nitrate. (See 5ttp: / /bcn. boulder .co.us /basin /natural /wgterms. html #nitrogen) Surface Water: Sources of water such as lakes, reservoirs, rivers and streams found on the earth's surface. Takings: Denial of all reasonable use of property, which is further defined by several U.S. and Colorado court cases. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): A Total Maximum Daily Load, or TMDL, is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still safely meet water quality standards. Under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, states, territories, and authorized tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters. These are waters that are too polluted or otherwise degraded to meet the water quality standards set by states, territories, or authorized tribes. The law requires that these jurisdictions establish priority rankings for waters on the lists and develop TMDLs for these waters Total Water Management: The exercise of stewardship of water resources for the greatest good of society and the environment (AWWA, 1996). Trans -Basin Diversion (or Out -of -Basin Diversion) : The diversion of water from the Eagle River Basin for use at locations outside of the Eagle River watershed. Trans -Basin diversions are considered 100% consumptive use because no water is returned to the source water basin. Watershed: A geographic area in which all water drains to a common point or outlet such as a larger stream or river, a lake, an underlying aquifer, an estuary, or an ocean. A watershed is also referred to as a drainage basin. Watersheds exist in a variety of shapes and sizes which result from the influence of climate, rock and soil types. Water Right: The legal rigc�ht to use a specified amount of water. Water rights in Colorado are administered according fo priority (first in time, first in right). An absolute waTer right is a right that has been historically applied to a beneficial use. A conditional water right is a right that - has not yet been developed or used, but that retains its historical priority. Conditional rights are usually associated with water projects that require years of planning nd construction (see also C.R.S. 37- 92- 103(6)). According to C.R.S. 37- 92- 103(12), a water righT means a right to use in accordance with its priority, a certain portion of the waters of the state by reason of the appropriation of the sa me. "Wet" Water: An informal expression that means someone may own authorized water rights . ( "paper water ") but because of the water supply is over - appropriated or the water source is inadequate, the actual water many not be available. Wetlands: Per 33 C.F.R. Part 328.3(b), C.F.R.5230.3(t) 1986, wetlands are "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas." This is the current definition used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wetlands Mitigation and Banking: Per federal wetlands regulations, if wetlands are disturbed or destroyed, and equal amount of wetland acres must be enhanced, restored or created, generally in the same watershed. Banking where permitted by policy, allows purchase of wetland credits that are used to fund target wetland restoration projects that may or may not be in the same watershed. As an example, bankin credits purchase for wetland losses in Eagle County are often compensated in Grand County (still in the Upper Colorado basin, not in the Eagle River watershed). Glossary- Page 38 Water Facts Water Conversion Table 1 acre foot of water equals 43,560 cubic feet or 325,581 gallons (Enough water, for example, for a family of four to take one ten minute shower using an average showerhead every day for 8.5 years) 1 cubic foot per second (cfs) equals 450 gallons per minute, or 646,320 gallons per day, or 1.983 acre feet per day, or 59.5 acre feet for 30 days, or 724 acre feet per year (An average showerhead flows at 2.6 gallons per minute) In -Basin Storage Capacities (selected examples) Black Lakes 300 acre feet storage Eagle Park Reservoir 5,300 acre feet storage Homestake 43,000 acre feet storage Nottingham Lake 100 acre feet storage Beaver Creek Snow Making Reservoir 127 acre feet storage Sylvan Lake 511 acre feet storage LEDE Reservoir 431 acre feet storage Watershed Improvement Projects (selected examples) Eagle Park Reservoir Black Gore Lakes (and enlargement) Black Gore Creek Restoration Project Eagle River Restoration Project (Edwards Reach) Eagle River Restoration Project (Minturn Reach) Eagle River Eagle Mine Superfund Site Mitigation (Gilman /Belden Reach) Brush Creek Habitat Restoration Project L.E.D.E acquisition and enlargement project Piney River Restoration Red Dirt Creek East Fork Restoration Stephens Park Restoration Project Water Facts- Page 39 References Cited American Rivers, Americas Most Endangered Rivers: 2010 Edition. Accessed June 20, 2010. http: / /www. a merica nrivers.org /assets /pdfs /mer- 2010 /a mericas- most -enda ngered- rivers- 2010.pdf American Water Works Association Research Foundation. 1996. Total Water Management Workshop Summary. Draft. Seattle, Wash., August 18 -20. Denver, Colo.: AwwaRF. Armstrong, J. (2000). Biological Survey of Eagle County, Colorado: Conservation Plan and Implementation Strategies. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. BBC Research & Consulting, September 26, 2008, The Economic Impacts of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Watching in Colorado, Prepared for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. 24 p. Colorado Dust on Snow (CODOS) Program, website information accessed June 11, 2010, http: / /www. snowstudies.org/codosl.html Colorado Foundation for Water Education (CFWE), Spring 2009, Colorado's Water Supply Future: Cooperation vs. Competition, 37 p. CDPHE, 2009, Annual Report to the Colorado Legislature and Water Quality Control Commission Fiscal Year 2008 -2009, 21 p. Colorado River Outfitters Association (2009). Commercial River Use in the State of COLORADO 1988 -2009. CROA, Buena Vista, CO. Colorado State Demography Office, Draft 2009 County and Municipal Estimates of Population and Households. Accessed May 25, 2010. http: / /dola. colorado. gov /dlg /demog /pop_cnty_estimates.html Colorado State University, Engineering Research Center (2005). Eagle River Inventory and Assessment. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 322 p. Colorado Water Conservation Board (2010). Draft Colorado Water Availability Study Final Report. Accessed June2, 2010. http: // cwcbweblink .state.co.us /weblink /0 /doc/ 140137/ Electronic .aspx ?searchid= 7554ad3c- 6d64- 44b9- 9bfa- 38aff0847d b7 Colorado Water Quality Control Division, 1989, Colorado nonpoint assessment report -1989 addendum: Denver, Colorado Department of Health, 189 p. Eagle County (1996), Eagle River Watershed Plan Eagle County (2005), Eagle County Comprehensive Plan Eagle County, GIS Department "Rivers and Roads" draft map, June 25, 2009. Eagle County Press Release (2010) accessed July 5, 2010. Viewable at http: / /www.eaglecounty.us/ Attorney/News/Water-Court-case-reaches-settlement/ Eagle River Watershed Council, 2010 State of the Rivers Open House Public input summary Flemming, Scott, personal communication, 2010 Gallegos, Lana, personal communication, 2010 Grand Junction Sentinel, (May 24, 2010), State's two halves try to reconcile competing interests in Shoshone, accessed May 30, 2010, http: / /www.gjsentinel.com/ news / articles /states_two_halves _ try_ to _ recon/ Grand River Consulting and GEI Consultants, 2004, Wolcott Reservoir Feasibility Assessment, Phase I Investigation, 102 p. Grove, Matt, USFS, personal communication, 2010. Hall, 2010, Federal Science Advisory Board Review of EPA's Simplified Nutrient Criteria Development Methods and Related Federal Initiatives: What Happens Next ?, Colorado Water Congress 2010 Annual Convention, January 27, 2010. Ivey, L., Terra Cognito GIS, (December 15, 2009), Eagle County Build Out and Visualization Report Residential Build -Out Results, Accessed on May 5, 2010, http: / /www.eaglecounty.us /Planning /Long_Range_Planning/ Build-Out-Analysis/ M TRIP LLC, Vail Lodging Inventory Study, December 2008 (Final Report Update July 16, 2009). Accessed July 5, 2010. http: / /www.vailgov.com /docs /d l_ forms / Vail_ Transient _Inventory_Study_Final_Report_ update071609.pdf Mausolf, Sarah, Steamboat Today, Eagle County man on front lines of beetle battle, accessed July 19, 2010, http: / /www.steamboatpilot.com/ news /2010 /jul /18 /eagle- county- man - front - lines- beetle - battle/ References- Page 40 Merriman, Dan, Janicki, Anne M., Colorado's Instream Flow Program- How It Works And Why It's Good For Colorado, 2005. Merry, Ray, personal communication, 2010. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Colorado River Watershed Office, (2010), Final Report on Watershed Input Forum, March 31, 2010 meeting in Gypsum. NWCCOG, 2002, 2002 Eagle River Water Quality Management Plan NWCCOG, 2002b, 2002 Upper Colorado River Water Quality Management Plan Office of Governor Bill Ritter, Press Release. Accessed May 25, 2010. http: / /www.colorado.gov /cs /Satellite/ GovRitter /GOVR/ 1208597677100 Ray, A., Barsugli, J., Averyt, K., Wolter, K., Hoerline, M., Doesken, N., Udall, B., Webb, R., 2008 Climate Change in Colorado: A Synthesis to Support Water Resources Management and Adaptation. Colorado Water conservation Board. Rocky Mountain Rail Authority "High Speed Rail Feasibility Study: Executive Summary", March 2010, Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc. Accessed June 12, 2010. http: / /www. rockymountainrail.org/ documents /RMRAExecutiveSummary- FINAL.pdf Rupert, M. Plummer, N., 2009, Ground water quality, age, and susceptibility to contamination, ERW valley fill aquifer, north - central Colorado, 2006 -2007: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009- 5082, 59 p. Spahr, N.E., Boulger, R.W., and Szmajter, R.J., 2000, Water Quality at Basic Fixed Sites in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Water - Quality Assessment Study Unit, October 1995- September 1998, U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 99 -4223, 63 p. Steltzer, H., C, Landry, T. H. Painter, J. Anderson, and E. Ayres. 2009.Biological consequences of earlier snowmelt from desert dust deposition in alpine landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106: 11629-11634, doi_10.1073_pnas.0900758106. Udall, Brad, April 9, 2010, Projected Climate Change Impacts on our Water Resources, University of Denver School of Law, Water Law Symposium proceedings. Upper Eagle River Regional Water Authority Press Release (November 29, 2007). http: / /cwcb.state.co.us/ NR/ rdonlyres/ C6B92D85- C621- 4DD5- B4BF- EBBDE34B 12B8 /0 /27d.pdf Urban Land Institute Advisory Services Panel (2006), Eagle County Colorado: A Regional Approach to Affordable Housing, accessed on May 12, 2010. http://www.economiccouncil.biz/doc/toc.asp?assn- id= I 2818&lin k id =78670 USEPA, STORET Data Warehouse accessed June 12, 2010, http:// www.epa.gov /storet /dw_home.html USGS Colorado -Water Quality Data Repository accessed June 10, 2010, http: / /rmgsc.cr.usgs.gov /cwgdr/ index.shtml Vail Resorts, 2010, Beaver Creek, accessed July 14, 2010, http: / /www.vailresorts.com /CORP /info /beaver- creek.aspx Weaver, Bob, personal communication, 2010. Williams, C.A, Moore, J.L., and Richards, R.J. 2010 (in press), Assessment of Surface -Water Quantity and Quality, Eagle River Watershed, 1947 -2007. Willy Powell, personal communication, 2010. Wright Water Engineers, 2009, 2009 Water Quality Monitoring for Frost Creek PUD and Salt Creek Equestrian Center Parcel: Prepared for Adam's Rib Recreation Area, Eagle Colorado, Report Number 721-002-1150 Wynn and others, 2001, Wynn, K.H., N.J. Bauch, and N.E. Driver, 2001, Gore Creek Watershed, Colorado - Assessment of Historical and Current Water Quantity, Water Quality, and Aquatic Ecology 1968- 98: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 99 -4270, 72 p. Zuellig, Robert, written communication, 2008. References- Page 41 Eagle River Water - shed CoundI, Inc. The Eagle River Watershed Council is a community non - profit 501(c) (3) corporation, established in 2004. "The vision of the Eagle River Watershed Council is to protect and enhance the high quality natural, scenic and economic values that our rivers and tributaries provide our citizens, visitors and wildlife population. In doing so, we seek to promote the interconnected conservation values the watershed represents to diverse interest groups that benefit from its continued health and well being and leave a natural resource legacy to future generations." November 1, 2010 Dear Watershed Partner: On behalf of both Eagle County and the Eagle River Watershed Council, we are pleased to provide you with a copy of the 2010 State of the Rivers Report. This is the first phase of the update to the 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan. The report includes input from a number of public open houses we conducted over the past year. Over the last few months, Watershed Council and County staff, along with several experts in the field, researched and prepared the enclosed overview report The report is comprised of two sections: the first section providing an overview by topic (water quality, water quantity, etc.) and the second providing an overview of water resource issues by subwatershed, including apparent watershed priorities for each subwatershed. As you read through this report, please keep in mind that the primary goal was to produce an overview that suggests update and focus areas or "watershed priorities" for the Eagle County Planning Commission, ERWC or our watershed partners which could positively influence local policy decisions and future study If you would like more copies of the report, please contact the Eagle River Watershed Council at 970.827.5406. You can also retrieve a PDF version of the report here: http:// www. erwc. org/ ProjectsPrograms /StateoftheRiver.aspx Wa est Regards, �z Cliff Simonton Kathy C ndler -Henry Senior Planner Board Chairman Eagle County Eagle River Watershed Council Eagle River Watershed Council, Inc. EAGLE COUNTY W6 l6.(g.(1) ►,fCw_it`1 Eagle River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Partnership As part of the knitting- together process of results from numerous studies and monitoring programs, the Eagle River Watershed Council is currently managing the Eagle River Monitoring and Assessment Program with support from Eagle County, ERWSD, UERWA, ERWC grant sources, Vail, Eagle, Gypsum, Denver Water, Vail Resorts, and Homestake Partners. This program, in addition to keeping the pulse of water quality conditions and issues, will ultimately educate the community and guide actions to curtail adversarial water quality trends. ERWC is also the leader for many other projects, including the Eagle River Watershed Plan update, Edwards Eagle River Restoration, Eagle Mine Superfund Site monitoring, Black Gore Creek traction sand mitigation, Piney River restoration, Eagle River Clean up, and Community Pride Highway Clean up. Kirby Wynn, a consultant to ERWC, is leading this Water Program that will be discussed today. Kirby brings to the position 15 years of Eagle River watershed water and ecological resource assessments and stakeholder engagement. Central to his ongoing role has been proactively engaging and collaborating with the many water stakeholders to understand and knit together the many different approaches to understanding and addressing water issues. With program partner support, ERWC is providing water resource leadership in as follows: • Coordinate and plan USGS activities for the water quality trends monitoring network. • Develop a 2010 State of the Rivers Report. • Amendments the 1996 Eagle River Watershed Plan through a stakeholder -based process. • Lead water quality /quantity education and awareness efforts on behalf of stakeholders • Become a central resource for local water stakeholders by developing and maintaining a collaborative presence through informal discussions, participation in workshops, public outreach sessions, council and board meetings, rule making hearings, and other venues • Lead the local water stakeholder communication and coordination for ongoing water monitoring, assessment, and mitigation partnerships • Facilitate timely discussions to refine monitoring approaches and ensure programs are adapted to meet changing stakeholder needs • Develop and present a water quality monitoring 'report card' that describes what we have learned about conditions in the previous year • Review and synthesize monitoring data and studies into summaries useful for water and land managers, planners, boards /councils, and the community • Put monitoring program results to work by engaging stakeholders about recommended actions and collaboration opportunities that could serve to protect or improve water quality Kirby Wynn, Water Program Director, Eagle River Watershed Council kirpy�wkiri)ywyrn.com (970) 250 -2200 Melissa MacDonald, Executive Director, Eagle River Watershed Council macdonald@erwc.org (970) 827 -5406 WS (a.(qi. 10 L 4f - 1 CDOT 2011 plans for West Vail Pass Improvements $1.2 million Project Area #1 — MP 170.8 Dowd Ditch Re -grade ditch with new 3% longitudinal slope, 3:1 side slopes, install French drain Proiect Area #2 — MP 185.9 Ditch & Curb Saw -cut shoulder of 1 -70 and bike path, excavate out existing ditch, repave ditch, install 4" Asphalt curb with two 3 ft openings, install rip -rap fans, remove sand near the bike path. Proiect Area #3 — MP 186.8 and MP 186.82 Pipes Clean out west pipe (186.8) and line it with CIPP, install manhole near bike path, remove pipe below manhole and plug pipe at bottom, fill in gulch. Install new pipe horizontally from manhole to the east pipe (slightly more than 90 degrees (approx. 100 degrees but verify with Stuart). At east pipe, install manhole below 1 -70 shoulder for west pipe to connect to. Install new pipe down slope to pond. Remove sand located near the bike path in both pipe locations. Install energy dissipater by pond. Project Area #4 — MP 187.1 Pipe and Contributing Pipe Clean out 1 -70 pipe and install CIPP. Install inlet at north edge of bike path. Remove and replace contributing pipe that runs parallel to bike path and connect it to the inlet. Remove and replace 1 -70 pipe between the new inlet and existing end downstream. Fill in gully and install energy dissipater. Remove traction sand located near the bike path. Proiect Area #5 — MP 187.75 Pipe Clean out 1 -70 pipe and install CIPP. Install manhole approximately 16' south of the 1 -70 edge of pavement. Remove pipe downstream of manhole. Install approximately 75 lineal feet of new pipe. Install channel between outlet of new pipe end and existing toe of slope and install 6" riprap in channel. Project Area #6 — MP 188.0 and MP 188.05 Pipes under bike path (Not in Contract) Remove separated section of pipe at MP 188.0. Remove and replace pipe at MP 188.05. Proiect Area #7 — MP 188.2 Pipe under bike path (Not in Contract) Remove and replace pipe. Install rip -rap at outlet. October 19, 2010 - draft Proiect Area #2 (MM 185.9) Scope: Sawcut shoulder of 1 -70 and bike path, excavate out existing ditch, repave ditch, install 4" asphalt curb with two 3 ft openings, install rip -rap fans, remove sand near bike path. L F" . Project Area 2- Looking West. Significant Rilling and Traction Sand deposit. Project Area 2- Looking West. Major Rilling and Traction Sand deposits. Two obvious Open pipe upstream of paved ditch in Project Area 2. collection /low points. Improve drainage between 1 -70 (which is super- elevated - - towards the path) and provide reinforced open channel rundowns for surface water. I II Project Area 2- Looking east. Section of poor drainage — runoff is directed off 1 -70 but the ditch is too shallow to hold runoff so it sheets across the path. Project Area 2- Looking West. Section of good drainage between 1 -70 and the path. Proiect Area #3 (MM 186.8) Scope: Clean out west pipe (186.8) located under 1 -70 and line it with CIPP, install manhole near bike path, remove pipe below manhole and plug pipe at bottom, fill in gulch. Install new pipe horizontally from manhole to the east pipe (at 100 degrees). At east pipe, install manhole below 1 -70 shoulder for west pipe to connect to. Install new pipe down slope to pond. Remove sand near the bike path in both locations. Install energy dissipater near pond. a; Is Project Area 3- looking west. Traction sand deposits adjacent to path. Include in scope to•'.%� t•.,.� remove 50' wide section (centered on pipe)— assume 1.5' deep. Project Area 3- Looking downhill. Pipe is rusted and displaced. Project Area 3- Proposed Energy dissipater location y, AI t�l Project Area 3 -E x. Pipe extends into hillside. The e. ,nng Project Area 3- looking downhill. Small pond close to site. outlet has not been found. Proiect Area #3 (MM 186.82) -cont 0 0 . - L r Project Area 4- Looking downhill. Traction sand deposit around pipe outlet. From the pipe outlet Project Area 4- looking east. Broken Project Area 44 -The pipe is exposed between 1 -70 eastbound and the bike path. there is a small eroded channel (approx. 2' wide x V deep with steep side slopes) down to the end section visible. Significant cracks are evident in the 1 -70 eastbound shoulder extending approximately 5' sedimentation pond. There is traction sand also built up in pond. from the edge of pavement. mum w' 4 _ Project Area A4- Looking downhill. Visible meandering channel with sand deposits Project Area 4- Another picture of exposed pipe between 1 -70 eastbound and bike path. Project Area #4 (MM 187.1) Scope: Clean out pipe under 1 -70 and install CIPP. Install inlet at north edge of bike path. Remove and replace contributing pipe that runs parallel to bike path and connect it to the inlet. Remove and replace 1 -70 pipe between the new inlet and existing end downstream. Fill in gully and install energy dissipater. Remove traction sand located close to the bike path. M• r ' Project Area #S-Large rock in gully. Project Area a5 -holes in bottom of Project Area 5- Looking downhill. Outlet far from Black Creek. contributing pipe. ProJekx Area llS- Laokittg dkrwNdlL WerWew. iM. Project Area a5 -There is a sediment pond with a Project Area Its- Looking west. The path has needed to be repaired 6jj6 Project Area e5 -Inlet of Pipe check dam just upstream of the inlet for Project repeatedly since the contributing pipe is leaking. Project Area e5- Contributing pipe just north of pat, Area a5. has holes in the flowline. MM 187.75 (Project Area #5) Scope: Clean out 1 -70 pipe and install CIPP. Install manhole approximately 16' south of the 1 -70 edge of pavement. Remove pipe downstream of manhole. Install approximately 75 lineal feet of new pipe. Install channel between outlet of new pipe end and existing toe of slope and install 6" riprap in channel. h i M F K.•. Ail r , -�' Looking west - Sediment pond downstream of outlet. Looking east - relationship of outlet and sediment pond to path. Looking uphill —(I -70 is at the top of the hill) Outlet visible with detached pipe downstream. Erosion and sediment deposits below. 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: Vail Economic Advisory Council (VEAC) Minutes - Kelli CSE Memo - Kelli Lodging Update Memo - Kelli Solaris Parking Signs - Warren Town of Vail Green Building Program - Kristen PRESENTER(S): Kelli McDonald, Warren Campbell, Stan Zemler ATTACHMENTS: 091410 Vail Economic Advisory Council CSE Memo to TC RE: Expansion of CSE Board VLMD Share Lodging Occupancy Report Solaris Parking Signs Green Building Memorandum 10/19/2010 VAIL ECONOMIC ADVISORY COUNCIL (VEAC) September 14, 2010 MEETING NOTES -VEAC Members Present: Michael Kurz; Rayla Kundolf; Matt Morgan; Brian Nolan; Laurie Mullen; Mia Vlaar; Rob LeVine; Greg Moffet; Mike Ortiz; Steve Kaufman; Alan Kosloff; Joe McHugh; Mark Gordon; Pam Stenmark; Kim Newbury - Others present: Matt Fitzgerald; Jim Lamont; Chris Romer; Lauren Glendenning; Michael Cacioppo -TOV Staff Present: Finance Director Judy Camp and Economic Development Manager Kelli McDonald - State of Vail Real Estate Vail Board of Realtors Chairman Matt Fitzgerald gave a report on the state of real estate in Vail. In 2010 there were more realtors in Vail than closed transactions. In all of Vail for the previous 12 months as of September 31, 2010, there were 445 listings, 211 sales and the absorption rate was 25 months. Matt indicated that properties in the $1 - $3 million dollar range were selling best. Vail is selling better than other mountain resorts. Judy Camp indicated the Town of Vail is estimating a 20% reduction in property taxes in 2011. 7 units have sold this year in Arrabelle. Solaris is impressive to clients and is positive for Vail, positioned as the "Rolls Royce" of finishes, layouts and views. 15 out of 79 have sold. Ritz Carlton has 48 out of 71 under contract with closings in September and October. The property is very different from Solaris in that it is mostly residential with very little commercial. There will be a rental pool managed by an outside company, as well as 45 fractional units owned by Marriott. The Four Seasons has 16 condos for sale and the managers are focused on getting the hotel opened by December 11 and just hired 75 people. There are Four Seasons "loyalists" who will be a new guest for Vail. "rhe fractional units will close before Christmas. Vail is performing better in real estate sales than other mountain communities because it is not lacking anything in buyer's eyes: has shopping, dining, healthcare. There is some price sensitivity and few highway noise complaints. As a comparison, Telluride had only 20 transactions in 2009. - Financial Reports Finance Director Judy Camp presented revenue highlights from July 2010. Sales tax collections for the month are expected to be $1,213,167 up 9.8 percent from budget and 8.1 percent from last year. Year -to -date sales tax collections are expected to be up 3.2 percent from budget and up 1.6 percent from last year. Use tax collections as of August 31, 2010 total $696,330 as compared with $565,514 at this time last year and $430,000 budgeted. Year -to -date use tax collections have already exceeded the full year budget of $600, 000. Construction permit fee revenue through August 31, 2010 totals $429,863. The 2010 budget for construction permit fees is $625,000 with year -to -date revenue about $77,000 higher than expected year -to -date. RETT collections through August 30, 2010 total $3,957,414 compared with $2,507,000 budgeted and $1,500,000 at this time last year. As of September 14, 2010 RETT collections totaled $5,100,000. Across all funds and revenue accounts through July 31, 2010, total revenue of $33.8 million is up 14.6 percent year -to -date from this time last year and up 7.7 percent from the budget. 10/19/2010 8 -1 -1 More details on financial reports can be found on the Sales Tax page of www.vailgov.com - Lodging Occupancy Economic Development Manager Kelli McDonald reported on lodging occupancy as of July 31, 2010. July occupancy was 52% vs. 47% last year, an 11% increase. August occupancy is pacing at 40% vs. 35% last year at the same time, a 13% increase; and September occupancy is pacing at 22% vs. 16% last year at the same time, a 34% increase. Vail continues to outperform the lodging industry in occupancy. More details on lodging occupancy can be found on the Economic Development page of www.vailgov.com -Other Business VEAC requested Town Staff talk to Vail Mountain about extending gondola hours in the spring and fall time periods. It was also requested that CSE consider funding activities in the Vista Bahn ski yard to create vitality to draw people up Bridge Street. Signage in the Village was also recommended. Group business is trending positively this year and into 2011 — especially corporate groups and weddings. VEAC was asked for input on winter parking plans. Moving from 1 '/z hours to 2 hours free in the entire structure was met with unanimous approval. There was no support for charging $3 after 3:00 p.m. — it was cautioned this would be a public relations nightmare. The group also felt that public information was key to the success of the parking plan so as to decrease confusion to both locals and guests. Disseminating real time parking information will be a huge plus. A suggestion was made to add levels to the Vail Village parking structure with funding from the $9.3 million conference center funds and the $4.3 million owed for parking from Vail Resorts. -Next Meeting Tuesday, October 12, 8:00 — 10:00 a.m. at The Antlers Topics will include: • Vail Mountain Winter Marketing Plan • Financial Reports • Lodging Occupancy Reports • Tour of Ritz Carlton 10/19/2010 8 -1 -2 *VA7OWN OF COV"SSON ON SPECIAL EVENTS MEMO: To: Vail Town Council From: Dave Chapin, Chairman, Commission on Special Events Date: October 13, 2010 RIE: Response from the CSE to the suggestion of expanding the Commission on Special Events from 7 to 9 Members CSE members were unanimous in their recommendation that the board not be increased to 9 members. While they acknowledged the Town Council's interest in taking advantage of the large number of qualified applicants to fill a single opening, they felt that: 1. The decision making process for determining the event funding allocations would become more cumbersome and lengthy, and it would be more difficult to come to consensus. 2. All of the interested applicants have an opportunity to re -apply in December. There are either 3 or 4 opportunities to apply each year in December. 3. Qualified applicants can be encouraged to apply to other town boards that deal with similar issues. 4, It is unusual to have such a large number of qualified applicants. In the future this may not be the case and it may be difficult to fill 9 positions with qualified and objective community members. In response to the question asked by the Council as to whether the CSE would welcome the designation of a member of the Town Council to act in an advisory capacity, the members agreed unanimously that it would be a benefit. Whether or not the Town Charter would allow for this type of participation was not discussed, and would be a question for the Town Attomey to address. 10/19/2010 8 -2 -1 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Council SUBJECT: Vail Market Share Lodging Occupancy Report DATE: October 19, 2010 The Town Council requested additional information regarding lodging occupancy market share for Vail in 2010 compared to 2009. The question was raised whether Vail was losing its competitive edge in this arena. For the last two years, Vail has been the leader (1 or 2) for each month of the winter seasons. However, this has not been the case in the summer when Vail has been number 3, 4 or 5. Attached are the destination comparison reports from 8131109 and $131/10 which indicate the following: VAIL'S MARKET SHARE IN OCCUPANCY VS, THE INDUSTRY, 2009 VS. 2010 Historic Data March 09: #1 at 62 %, beat the industry by 12 % March 10: #1 at 68 %0, beat the industry by 14% April 09: #1 at 44 %, beat the industry by 19 %❑ April 10: #2 at 40 %, beat the industry by 14 % May 09: #3 at 20 %, beat the industry by 7% May 10: #6 at 11 %, industry 1 % higher ,tune 09: #3 at 46 %, beat the industry by 6% June 10: #2 at 41 %, beat the industry by 13 % July 09: #3 at 46 %, beat the industry by 5 % July 10: #4 at 52 %©, beat the industry by 7 % August 09: #3 at 44 %g, beat the industry by 9 %© August 10: #4 at 46 %, beat the industry by 6 % Forecast Data September 09: #4 at 22 %, beat the industry by 2 % September 10: #5 at 28 %Q, beat the industry by 4 % October 09: #2 at 13 %, beat the industry by 4 % October 10: #4 at 12 %, beat the industry by 2% 1 10/19/2010 8 -3 -1 CONCLUSION Vail has remained relatively stable in market share and ranking against the industry based on occupancy from 2009 compared to 2010, beating the industry average in every month except May 2010. Note: MTRiPs occupancy report data includes the following destinations: Aspen, Beaver Creels, Breckenridge, Central Summit County, Copper Mountain, Keystone, North take Tahoe, Park City, 5nowmass, Telluride and Winter Park. ATTACHMENTS Vail Destination Comparative Report August 31, 2010 Vail Destination Comparative Report August 31, 2009 2 10/19/2010 8 -3 -2 o� xaz � C r � I �M l r - I �c Al c 4 CL C ` A s CL IVA 0 w �Z Mo `m 9 ° °m Ln v m Cp o a o % slaN KU 10/19/2010 8 -3 -3 ■ £_/ kkk ( . .< L i cIm < . ) � e c ca ® � k � © 7 \ « � § 2� U _ o _ S § � � ` � � CL. ■ § � � \ f LL 2 3 2 J k 'o CIq § e -;7- C 2 0 & '. 2 T-- � J 9f - - - � � $ 7 2 CL£ � tj C.3 - / \ %l � � o §& . w n k #GIVV edn*oo 10/19/2010 & -1 -4 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 19, 2010 SUBJECT: Solaris Public Parking Signs (Informational Only) I. DISCUSSION ITEMS This memorandum is being provided to the Town Council in response to questions raised regarding the public parking signs associated with Solaris. Why is Solaris permitted to have signs directing guests to their parking structure? In the spring of 2010 Solaris submitted applications to amend the Vail Sign Code proposing regulations to allow for Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property. The conclusion of this request was the adoption of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2010, which established regulations for this type of sign. Why are there two signs directing guests to the Solaris parking structure? Per Section 11- 7- 15A(1), Number, Vail Town Code, the administrator can make a determination that greater than one sign per public vehicular entrance is appropriate to promote the safe and expedient flow of traffic. The administrator determined that two signs were appropriate in order to direct guests from the South Frontage Road East to the entrance and prevent vehicles from entering the pedestrian core. Why are the signs located within the right -of -way for Village Center Road? Section 11- 7- 15A(4), Location, Vail Town Code, states that signs may be permitted in the Town's street right -of -way in conjunction with a revocable right -of -way permit. The Public Works Department and the DRB reviewed the sign locations and determined their locations were appropriate. What is a revocable right -of -way permit and what is the process to revoke? A revocable right -of -way permit is a document that the owner of private improvements in the right -of -way completes which states their agreement and understanding that should the Town require its right -of -way or need to perform work in the right -of -way which impacts the improvement the Town shall not be responsible for the replacement or repair of that improvement. Furthermore, the Town, with proper legal notice, can choose to cease the allowance of improvements within the right -of -way. What are the regulations regarding sign size? Per section 11- 7- 15A(2), Area, Vail Town Code the maximum allowable sign size is 10 square feet, unless the administrator determines a smaller or large area is necessary to promote the safe and expedient flow of traffic. The Solaris public parking signs measure 9.2 and 7.5 square feet. What is permitted to be on the sign face for a Public Parking Sign? Per Section 11- 7- 5A(8), Special Provision, Vail Town Code, the sign face is required to have a minimum of 50% of the total sign area dedicated to language or symbols identifying 1 10/19/2010 8 -4 -1 the parking available for use by the public. Furthermore the sign allows for the identification of the project name and logo and changeable copy identifying the availability of the parking. The Solaris public parking signs comply with this regulation. What was the review process for the Solaris parking Signs? The Solaris parking signs were submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board pursuant to Chapter 11 -4, Sign Application Procedures, Vail Town Code. The Design Review Board approved with a condition, the signs on June 16, 2010, which was reported to the Town Council on July 6, 2010. Why is the sign orange? Pursuant to Section 11 -5 -2D, Use Natural Colors, Vail Town Code, the Design Review Board reviewed the proposed sign color for its compliance with the regulations stating that signs should be earth tones, neutrals, and bright colors as accents. On July 21, 2010, the DRB approved the orange sign color by a vote of 3 -1 -0. II. BACKGROUND On April 12, 2010 the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously forwarded a recommendation of approval for amendments to the Town Sign Code to create Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property. The minutes from this hear are attached for reference (Attachment A). On May 4, 2010 the Town Council approved with modifications Ordinance No. 10 on first reading establishing regulations for Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property by a vote of 5 -1 -0 (Donovan opposed) On May 18, 2010 Town Council approved Ordinance No. 10 on second reading establishing regulations for Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property by a vote of 5 -2 -0 (Cleveland and Donovan opposed) On June 16, 2010 the Design Review Board unanimously approved the Solaris Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private property with a condition that the actual orange color sample be submitted for review as the print out on paper was not adequate. On July 21, 2010 the Design Review Board approved of Solaris parking sign orange color by a vote of 3 -1 -0 (Gillette opposed). Gillette's opposition was that he did not believe the particular color of orange being proposed complied with the Sign Code requirement for earth tones to be used. III. CONCLUSIONS This memorandum is provided for informational purposes. Does the Town Council desire to have additional information provided? Please provide direction to staff on any additional information required. Additional information or questions can be directed to George Ruther at 970 - 479 -2148 or gruther(a 2 10/19/2010 8 -4 -2 MEMORANDUM To: Vail Town Council From: Community Development Department Date: October 19, 2010 Subject: Status of the Town of Vail green building program efforts I. BACKGROUND /RATIONALE Since early 2010 the Town of Vail Community Development Department has pursued the following measures to improve the Town's environmental, building and development standards under the direction of the Vail Town Council. The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on the status of the fourth measure below (the incentive -based sustainable building program), and receive policy direction related to the approach of the program: 1. Adopt the 2009 International Code Council (ICC) Building Standards, including the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), with additional amendments to increase boiler and window efficiency. (Complete January, 2010). 2. Review Town of Vail Zoning and Development Standards to identify barriers to sustainable practices and propose amendments to the Code. (Amendments presented to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission March, 2010). 3. Eagle Valley Model Code Roundtable: The Community Development Department staff has been participating in a county wide model code roundtable, consisting of staff members from the various jurisdictions in Eagle County. The goal of this roundtable is to seek consensus on using one sustainable building program as a foundation for each community's building code. Currently this group is analyzing the International Code Council (ICC) 700 National Green Building Standard, which seems an eventual likely fit for Eagle Valley communities, as it is a nationally recognized code currently being adopted by several jurisdictions across the country. However, insuring all aspects of this model code are consistent with the Town of Vail's sustainable energy goals and objectives is yet to be seen. It is the intent of the Town staff to continue to work with the other jurisdictions over the next 1 -2 years to review this code for possible future use as a sustainable building code for the Town of Vail. 4. Establish a Town of Vail specific, incentive - based, "beyond- code" sustainable building program, which is realistic for implementation with current staff levels in 2010 -2011. The rationale for creating such a program stems from its environmental, economic and social benefits': Environmental: Emissions reductions are achieved in green buildings through the use of less environmentally harmful materials and decreased reliance on fossil fuel fired electricity. Renewable sources of energy and efficiency initiatives reduce contributions to global climate change, and diminish emissions that The Green Market, 7, Sept. 2010. Green Building Benefits. www.thegreenmarket.com 1 10/19/2010 8 -5 -1 compromise air quality and human health. Water conservation can yield significant water savings and maintain stream flows. Proper stormwater management reduces pollution, erosion and flooding. Waste reduction efforts can massively reduce the waste produced in demolition. A 1998 study, "Deconstruction: Building Disassembly and Material Salvage," from the National Association of Homebuilders, projected that 20 million tons of debris could be diverted from landfills if only one quarter of the buildings demolished every year were deconstructed. During periods of high construction the Eagle County Landfill reported over 50% of the volume to be construction and demolition material. Economic: From heating and cooling systems to home electronics and lighting, any items bearing the Energy Star seal will boast an average of a 20 -30% energy savings over standard products of the same type. Entire buildings can be Energy Star certified as well, with such construction using at least 15% less energy overall than a standard home. Often the cost of building green is equal to the cost of conventional design. However, some studies indicate that while they may cost an average of 2% more to build, a U.S. Green Building Council study indicates that energy and water savings allow an average green premium recovery period of 3 -5 years. The low operating costs and easy maintenance of green buildings make for lower vacancy rates and higher property values. Investment in energy efficiency at the USAA Realty Company's La Paz Office Plaza in Orange County, CA led to an $0.80 -per- square -foor- market value improvement, or a $1.5 million increase in value. Green buildings improve employee health and prevent absences. According to a U.S. Green Building Council report, Lockheed Martin's green facility in Sunnydale, CA, had a 15% drop in employee absenteeism, a savings which made up for the building's green premium in the first year. Employee productivity has been positively correlated with indoor environmental conditions. According to the report, "Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship to Building Energy Efficiency," improvements to indoor environmental conditions are estimated to have generated $20 to $160 billion nationally in workforce productivity gains. Social: According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, health and well being are supported by the indoor air quality inherent in green buildings. Poor indoor air resulting from insufficient air circulation, poor lighting, mold, temperature variances, carpeting, furniture materials, pesticides, toxic adhesives, paints, and other pollutants contribute to respiratory problems, allergies, nausea, headaches, and skin rashes. The Heschong Mahone Group, found that green building that emphasizes ventilation and non - toxic, low emitting materials create 2 10/19/2010 8 -5 -2 healthier and more comfortable living and working environments. According to a Paladino & Company study titled "Washington High Performance School Buildings: Report to Legislature," green schools result in a 15% reduction in student absenteeism and 3 -5% increase in test scores. II. INCENTIVE -BASED SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PROGRAM Goal: To create a user - friendly guide /checklist for Sustainable Building Initiative (SBI) elements in order to effectively achieve the Town's adopted goals of reducing community energy consumption by 20% by 2020, and decreasing landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years and 25% within 10 years. Purpose: The purpose of this initiative is to protect the Town of Vail public and environmental health, safety and welfare by regulating residential construction with the intent to conserve energy, water and other natural resources, preserve and protect the health of our environment through optional and mandatory requirements related to design, construction, operations, recycling, and deconstruction. Scope: The Town of Vail SBI aims to be "practically green" by including only practical, measurable, and enforceable actions to reduce the Town's environmental impact. Residential applicants would be required to achieve a minimum number of points in each of the following categories (based upon home size). Incentives will be provided for those applicants achieving beyond the minimum number of required points. Some sustainable building measures may considered a mandatory requirement, and the applicant would receive no points (e.g., recycling on site is required of all projects) • Energy Efficiency • Lighting (Indoor /Outdoor) • Snowmelt • Renewable Energy • Appliances • Heating and Cooling Systems • Water Conservation • Site Selection /Disturbance • Landscape and Irrigation • Building Materials • Construction Waste and Recycling • Indoor Air Quality. 3 10/19/2010 8 -5 -3 By way of example, a snapshot of the draft SBI checklist is provided below. C .e . r Measure Points Construction Submit and implement a construction waste management plan and recycle Required (0` Waste cardboard, wood, and commingled materials on site. Management Deconstruction Provide a deconstruction plan and divert over 40% of building materials 3 from the landfill by total volume of removed material in tons. Recycling Divert over 50% of on site - construction waste. Provide haul tickets as evidence of diverted material by ton. Energy Efficient Install efficient interior lighting for 70% of fixtures Lighting Heating and Install heat recovery and energy recovery units on continuous exhaust Cooling systems Implementation Strategy: Establish a meaningful, points -based incentive program to encourage green building and design practices within the Town of Vail while minimizing additional cost to home builders or the Town. The SBI aims to ensure that the checklist items are measureable, (i.e., some amount of paperwork will need to be submitted to ensure we achieve our waste diversion goals, for example.) Other measures, such as stormwater best management practices, energy efficient systems will be inspected on plans and on site. Incentive Options Staff is reviewing the following incentives for participation in the Sustainable Building program. Applicant to choose 1, 2, or all 3 based on the number of points. 1. Height bonus (i.e. 3 extra feet of height) Pros • Valuable incentive for encouraging green building applications, such as solar panels. A 1 foot height bonus has been effective in encouraging cold roof design. • Would allow architectural screens to better integrate solar energy into the character of the building. Cons • Height could be perceived as more bulk and mass 2. Construction Use Tax Refund Pros • Extremely powerful incentive Cons • Reduced and unpredictable level of tax income for Town of Vail • Cost/benefit has not been demonstrated 3. Order of Review— Applicants achieving "beyond code" green measures will move to the top of the plan review pile. Pros • No cost or impact to Town fee collection or operations • Valuable to applicant Cons • May be perceived as unfair • Depending on number of applicants, may set expectation of quick review by staff. 4 10/19/2010 8 -5 -4 4. Technical Assistance — Staff will provide technical assistance in working through the checklist and green building measures, similar to the Leadership for Environmental and Efficient Design (LEED) program, without the administrative cost. 5. Permit Fee Rebates — A certain percentage of building permit fees may be refunded if the applicant achieves above and beyond code and checklist minimum requirements. Pros • Direct monetary benefit on the up -front cost of the project, rather than longer payback times associated with some green building measures. • Demonstration that the Town of Vail is committed to encouraging sustainable building practices by directly absorbing costs. Cons • Reduction in Town fee collection required to cover cost of plan review and inspections. • Cost/benefit has not been demonstrated (i.e. level of incentive necessary to drive change in behavior will need to be tested) Outstanding Issues In order to develop a recommendation for an appropriate incentive program, staff is developing answers to the following questions: • Total Construction Use Tax collected and the possible impact of refunds over the long term based on percentage of current and projected green building practices. • What level of incentive is appropriate to encourage large beyond code efforts? • Would incentives apply to new construction only, remodels, etc.? • What is the cost impact to the builder to achieve each level of points? • How should points be weighted in order to best achieve the environmental goals of the community? III. NEXT STEPS • Establish a Sustainable Building Initiative Advisory Board comprising community representatives and property owners, Building Board of Appeals, builders, contractors, architects and other local experts to develop answers to the posed questions and finalize an appropriate program. November, 2010 • Host community open house /informational meetings. January, 2011 • Develop guidebook/worksheets to accompany the SBI. February, 2011 • Test the SBI to determine relative effectiveness on achieving the Town's goals; workload impacts; cost; and impacts on time. February, 2011 - March, 2011 • Present residential SBI to the Vail Town Council for adoption. April, 2011 • Once the residential SBI is complete and issues are resolved, staff will return to the Vail Town Council with the Commercial version of the SBI. IV. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL Staff requests that the Vail Town Council review the approach to the sustainable building initiative as well as the incentive options, and provide policy direction on the incentives to be used and categories of green building addressed. 5 10/19/2010 8 -5 -5 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council 10/19/2010 'OWN OF VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: Status of Comcast Franchise Agreement negotiations. PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire 10/19/2010