Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-11-02 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA TM Ova VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 11:30 A.M., NOVEMBER 2, 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: Lightning Shelter Appeal / Site Visit (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson 2. ITEM /TOPIC: Jesus Moroles' Ford Park Site Visit (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall, Molly Eppard 3. ITEM /TOPIC: Slifer Square Revised Landscape Plan / Site Visit (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 4. ITEM /TOPIC: Lunch Break (30 min.) 5. ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update (15 min) PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell 6. ITEM /TOPIC: The Community Development Department is requesting a worksession to present proposed changes to the building permit application process and gain the support of the Town Council to proceed forward with changes. (30 minutes) PRESENTER(S): George Ruther ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the staff presentation and actively engage in a dialogue regarding possible chnages to the buiilding permit application porcess BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department is charged with administering the building codes for all commercial and residential construction within the Town of Vail. The current process is costly and time consuming. There is room for improvements. Through changes in business practices, the Department can reduce cost and increase efficiencies of administering the building codes while maintaining an exceptional level of customer service. To that end, the Department is proposing to develop and implement a combination building permit 11/2/2010 process. 7. ITEM /TOPIC: A work session to discuss the Town's off street parking requirements and policies. (45 minutes) PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson, Planner and Greg Hall, Public Works Director ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The purpose of this work session is for the Vail Town Council to identify and discuss the current outcomes resulting from the Town's adopted parking policies. This work session is also an opportunity for the Vail Town Council to identify any current undesired outcomes, and to brainstorm alternative policy options that could be implemented to instead achieve desired outcomes. BACKGROUND: At its February 16, 2010 work session the Vail Town Council discussed a detailed Staff summary of the Town's current parking regulations prescribed by the Vail Town Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests the Vail Town Council either affirms the Town's existing parking policies or provides Staff with direction to re- evaluate specific parking regulations and policies at a future Town Council hearing. 8. ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion with Town Council regarding the relocation, installation, and funding of Jesus Moroles' Granite Amphitheater to the lower bench of Ford Park. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Molly Eppard, Todd Oppenheimer, Staff & Bill Rey, Kathy Langenwalter, Doe Browning AIPP Board Members ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the project, site location, and funding mechanism as presented and recommended by the AIPP Board for the relocation and installation of Jesus Moroles' Granite Amphitheater. Approve or approve with modifications proposed project. BACKGROUND: Jesus Moroles' commissioned work Granite Amphitheater, formally located in Seibert Circle in 1998, was removed and placed in outside storage at public works in 2005. The AIPP Board, with Moroles, reviewed alternate locations for Granite Amphitheater and selected the lower bench of Ford Park as the ideal setting for relocation. Various engineering methods were considered for the installation and the proposed helical pier method is the most economical means for the installation from our research. The natural setting of Ford Park with the Gore Creek will serve as the optimal location for Granite Amphitheater. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve or approve with modifications: - Relocation and installation of Granite Amphitheater in lower bench of Ford Park in fall 2011 - Proposed project budget of $260,100.00 - Proposed project funding to include use of existing project budget ($160,900.00) with the balance funded by a combination of private donations and AIPP public art project budget. 9. ITEM /TOPIC: Winter Parking Guest Incentive (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall 11 /2 /2010 ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and provide staff direction on the winter parking incentive program presented. BACKGROUND: The Town Council was interested in an incentive program presented at the September 21 meeting by Art Abplanalp. The program was suggested to provide an incentive for front range skiers to stay longer in Vail. There were multiple points of the program; one being, the drive back to the Front Range is not a great experience and waiting longer before proceeding east allows for a more enjoyable day. A significant incentive would be required to change the behavior of the traveling public. Getting a $10 discount significantly reduces the perception of the high cost of parking. 1 70 peak traffic is reduced. Vail businesses should benefit with more customers in town longer. Staff reviewed the impacts of the program proposed and has developed an alternative program with fewer financial impacts to the town's parking revenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide staff direction regarding the proposed parking incentive program. 10. ITEM /TOPIC: Town of Vail comments for the Revised Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Study(RDPEIS) (15 min) PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve /Approve with modifications the letter outlining our comments to be sent to the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) regarding the revised draft PEIS from the Town of Vail. BACKGROUND: The Colorado Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration have released the Revised Draft Programatic Enviornmental Impact Study for the 1 70 corridor. The sixty day comment period ends November 8, 2010. CDOT came to the September 21 meeting to provide an overview of the study. Stan Zemler for the Town of Vail was a member of the Collaborative Effort (CE) which developed a consensus preferred alternative. The RDPEIS recommends the CE's alternative as the preferred alternative. The town, as well, has reviewed the RDPEIS as part of the 1 70 coalition. The coalition has developed a set of comments that are for the corridor. The town is responsible for developing specific comments regarding our jurisdiction. The attached draft Iettercontains the town's comments on the study. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve /Approve with modifications the draft letter to be sent to CDOT by November 8 regarding the Town of Vail's comments regarding the Revised Draft Programatic Envioronmental Impact Statement for I- 70. 11. ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: *Appointment of two Council members re: Town of Vail Guest Service Enhancement RFQ Selection Process Winturn Cemetery District update (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Misc. 11 /2 /2010 12. ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council (15 min.) 13. ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment (3:55 p.m.) LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE TOWN COUNCIL NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW (ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) ------------------------------- THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD), TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Commercial Ski Storage Update - Nov 16 - WS - Warren - 20 min. Benefits Discussion - Nov 16 - WS - JP - 30 min. Bonus Pool - Information Update - Nov 16 - WS - JP - 30 min. Wildland Fire Mitigation Update - Nov 16 - WS - Mark Miller - 15 min. Red Sandstone Playground update - Nov 16 - WS - Greg - 15 min. Frontage Road Bike Lanes - Nov 16 - WS - Greg - 30 min. 2010 Intercept Study - Nov 16 - WS - KeIIi - 20 min. Timber Ridge Rockfall Mitigation - Nov 16 - Evening - George - 30 min. Energy Audit Upgrades - Nov 16 - Evening - Greg /Kristin - 30 min. 2nd Reading 2011 Budget - Nov 16 - Evening - Kathleen - 30 min. 1 st Reading of 2010 Supplemental No. 4 — Nov 16 — Evening — Kathleen — 30 min. VRA 2011 Budget Resolution — Nov 16 — Evening — Kathleen — 30 min. 1 st Reading of Mill Levy Certification — Nov 16 — Evening — Kathleen — 30 min. EPS Economic & Fiscal Impact Study /EverVail - Nov 16 - Evening - George -60 min. Loading & Delivery East Meadow Drive Site Visit - Dec 7 - WS - George /Suzanne /Steve W - 20 min. Loading & Delivery East Meadow Drive Discussion - Dec 7 - WS - George /Suzanne /Steve W. - 30 min. Conference Center Fund Update - Dec 7 - WS - Stan - 30 min. Gore Creek/Eagle River Water Quality Presentation - Dec 7 - Evening - Diane Johnson, ERWSD - 60 min. Village TH Zone District - Dec 7 - Evening - Bill Gibson - 60 min. Resolution No. 23 VV TH District - Dec 7 - Evening - Bill Gibson - 60 min. 2 nd Reading of 2010 Supplemental No. 4 — Dec 7 — Evening - Kathleen — 30 min. 2 nd Reading of Mill Levy Certification — Dec 7 — Evening - Kathleen — 30 min. Ralf Garrison - Dec 7 - Evening - KeIIi - 30 min. 11 /2 /2010 CSE and VLMDAC interviews — Dec 21 — Work Session - Kelli /Sybil) — 60 min. CSE and VLMDACappointments — Dec 21 — Evening — Kelli /Sybil) — 5 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. 11 /2 /2010 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Lightning Shelter Appeal / Site Visit PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson 11/2/2010 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Jesus Moroles' Ford Park Site Visit PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall, Molly Eppard 11/2/2010 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Slifer Square Revised Landscape Plan / Site Visit PRESENTER(S): George Ruther 11/2/2010 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Lunch Break 11/2/2010 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell ATTACHMENTS: October 20, 2010 DRB Meeting Results October 25, 2010 PEC Meeting Results 11/2/2010 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING oViAi� O ctober 20, 2010 ON (Vol Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 PROJECT ORIENTATION 1:00pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Tom DuBios Pete Dunning Brian Gillette Rollie Kjesbo Libby Plante SITE VISITS 1. Gorla Residence — 4822 Meadow Lane 2. Town of Vail Bridge — Adjacent to Aspen Court 3. International Millings Residence — 994 Ptarmigan Road 4. Town of Vail, Banner Poles — East Meadow Drive 5. Newspaper Boxes — Vail Village & Lionshead PUBLIC HEARING — TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00pm 1. Krogmann Residence DRB100577 / 5 minutes Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 2575 Davos Trail /Lot 1, Block F, Vail das Schone Filing 1 Applicant: Monika Krogmann ACTION: Tabled to November 3, 2010 MOTION: Gillette SECOND: Plante VOTE: 5 -0 -0 2. International Millings Ltd. Residence DRB100541 / 15 minutes Bill Conceptual review of a new construction (single - family residence) 994 Ptarmigan Road /Lot 3, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Salvador Guajardo, represented by Hans Berglund Architect ACTION: Conceptual, no vote 3. Gorla Residence DRB10 561 / 15 minutes Bill Conceptual review of new construction (duplex residence) 4822 Meadow Lane /Lot 9, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision 5 Addition Applicant: Vincent Gorla, represented by Andrew James Abraham ACTION: Conceptual, no vote 4. Town of Vail DRB1 00506 / 15 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: Approval (motion failed resulting in a denial) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 2 -3 -0 Page 1 11/2/2010 5 -1 -1 5. Town of Vail DRB100504 / 15 minutes Bill Final review of new construction (Aspen Court pedestrian /recreation bridge) 75 South Frontage Road /Unplatted Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Todd Oppenheimer ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 5 -0 -0 CONDITION(S): 1) The applicant shall texture the new bridge abutments with a "broom finish" to match the Vail Golf Course bridge abutments. 6. Town of Vail DRB1 00505 / 15 minutes Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (publication distribution boxes) 75 South Frontage Road /Unplatted Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Todd Oppenheimer ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: DuBois VOTE: 5 -0 -0 7. Lionshead Parking Structure Auxiliary Building DRB100563 / 5 minutes Warren Conceptual review of new construction (mixed -use building) 350 South Frontage Road/ Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel ACTION: Tabled to November 3, 2010 MOTION: Gillette SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5 -0 -0 STAFF APPROVALS Lionshead Inn Annex DRB100229 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 705 West Lionshead Circle /Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Lionshead Inn Lodge Tower DRB100399 / 5 minutes Bill Final review of a sign application (business identification) 200 Vail Road /Lots ABC, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Lodge South Association, represented by Mike Cavataio Gros Residence DRB100423 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stucco, windows, balconies) 1350 Sandstone Drive, Unit 6 (Eiger Chalets) /Lot G3, Lions Ridge Filing 2 Applicant: Joel & Jane Gros, represented by Richard Ste -Marie Perry Residence DRB100439 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (garden wall) 4193 Spruce Way /Lot 12, Block 9, Bighorn Subdivision 3 rd Addition Applicant: C. Lynn Perry Worldview LLC DRB100458 Warren Final review of changes to approved plans (hot tub) 1850 Lion's Ridge Loop /Lot 15, Dauphinais Moseley Filing 1 Applicant: Laura Deibel, represented by Matthew Newborn Page 2 11/2/2010 5 -1 -2 Noreli Residence DRB100474 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 2625 Bald Mountain Road /Lot 11A, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13 Applicant: Ron Noreli, represented by B & M Roofing Taplin Residence DRB100475 Bill Final review of changes to approved plans (GRFA, lighting, planter) 115 Forest Road /Lot 30, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: 115 Company, represented by KH Webb Architects Schwartz Residence DRB100478 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (electrical box) 1136 Hornsilver Circle /Lot 10, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Kathy Schwartz, represented by Lee Alleman Nelson /Gaylord Residence DRB100487 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (storage) 2932 Bellflower Drive /Lot 7, Block 8, Vail Intermountain Applicant: Rachel Nelson & Katie Gaylord Brod Residence DRB100488 Bill Final review of a minor exterior alteration (hot tub) 2550 Kinnickinnick Road, Unit J -1 /Lot J, Meadow Creek Subdivision Applicant: Daniel & Valerie Brod, represented by No Name Architects Angelovich Residence DRB100491 Rachel Final review of a changed to approved plans (living room, porch) 725 Forest Road, Unit A /Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 6 Applicant: Michael Angelovich, represented by Beth Levine Zimet Residence DRB100496 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 5136 Grouse Lane /Lot 9, Block 20, Vail Meadows Filing 1 Applicant: Carl Zimet, represented by Plath Construction Village Inn Plaza DRB100497 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 100 East Meadow Drive /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Village Inn Plaza Condo Association, represented by The Roofing Company Laumann Residence DRB100498 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck) 4484 Streamside Circle /Lot 12 -B, Bighorn Subdivision 4 th Addition Applicant: Edward Laumann, represented by TrimWorx Ritz Carlton Sales Office DRB100499 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 Page 3 11/2/2010 5 -1 -3 Village Inn Plaza DRB100500 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 100 East Meadow Drive /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Village Inn Plaza Condo Association, represented by Nedbo Ruth Residence DRB100503 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 800 Potato Patch Drive /Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Applicant Lloyd Ruth Wilhelm Residence DRB100508 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (vent) 4289 Nugget Lane /Lot 5, Bighorn Estates Applicant: Robert Wilhelm Lohrentz Residence DRB100510 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 1151 B Casolar del Norte Drive /Lots A & B, Block 8, Casolar II Applicant: William & Mary Lohrentz, represented by Julie Spinnato Marsh /Kuhlke Residence DRB100514 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 3011 Booth Falls Road /Lot 12, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 13 Applicant: Patricia Marsh Purchase Residence DRB100515 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 1310 Greenhill Court /Lot 17, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: John Purchase Franke Residence DRB100516 Rachel Final review of changes to approved plans (lighting) 2712 Kinnickinnick Court/Lot 10, Block 2, Vail Intermountain Applicant: Patti Franke, represented by Hans Oberlohr Ortegon Residence DRB100517 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (door) 1459 Greenhill Court /Lot 613, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: Anthony & Vera Ortegon Harvey Residence DRB100518 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (hot tub) 1418 Vail Valley Drive /Lot 19, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Applicant: 1418 Vail Valley Drive LLC, represented by Crossroads Realty Courtside Townhomes DRB100519 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 4552 Meadow Drive /Unplatted Applicant: Courtside Townhomes HOA, represented by Steve Ankerholz Page 4 11/2/2010 5 -1 -4 Iceliux LLC DRB100520 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (deck) 2430 Chamonix Lane /Lot 12, Block B, Vail das Schone Filing 1 Applicant: Iceliux LLC, represented by Nedbo Pockross Residence DRB100522 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (re -roof) 1460 Buffehr Creek Road, Unit C /Part of Lot 2, Ridge at Vail Applicant: Miriam Pockross, represented by Peter Berg Pine Tree Holding DRB100523 Rachel Final review of minor exterior alteration (lighting) 754 Potato Patch Drive /Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: Pine Tree Holding LLC, represented by Richard Leeman First Chair DRB100525 Warren Final review of a change to approved plans (snow retention) 600 West Lionshead Circle /Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Corporation, represented by Kyle Griffith Richey Residence DRB10527 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows) 5020 Main Gore Place Unit 12 (Gore Creek Meadows) /Unplatted Applicant: Tim Richey Teddington Residence DRB100528 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (windows, door) 1517 Vail Valley Drive, Unit 1 /Lot 12, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Applicant: Teddington Properties, represented by TrD Architects Vail Racquet Club Condominiums DRB100530 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 4695 Vail Racquet Club Drive /Unplatted Applicant: Vail Racquet Club Condominiums, represented by Steve Loftus Rams Horn Lodge DRB100531 Warren Final review of changes to approved plans (spa) 416 Vail Valley Drive /Lot A, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 5 Applicant: Rams Horn Lodge Condominium Association, represented by John Milligan Whiterock LLC DRB100533 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 4057 Lupine Drive /Lot 4, Bighorn Subdivision Applicant: Whiterock LLC, represented by Nedbo Caulkins Residence DRB100534 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 3010 Booth Creek Drive /Lot 4, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 11 Applicant: Caulkins Family Trust, represented by Shad Blakey Page 5 11/2/2010 5 -1 -5 FG Vail LTD DRB100535 Warren Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 332 Mill Creek Circle /Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Jane Bedford, represented by Shad Blakey Schwartz Residence DRB100537 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 1136 Hornsilver Circle /Lot 8 & 9, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: John Walsh Snyder Residence DRB100538 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stairs) 4420 Glen Falls Lane /Lot 10, Forest Glen Applicant: John Snyder Jones Residence DRB100542 Tom Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 1031 Eagles Nest Circle /Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 8 Applicant: Evan & Cindy Jones, represented by Shad Reed Beneducci Trust DRB100543 Tom Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 425 Forest Road /Lot 4 & 6, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 3 Applicant: Lisa Sivanich, represented by A Cut Above Forestry Roth Residence DRB100549 Rachel Final review of an addition (deck, garage, stair) 2865 A Aspen Lane /Lot 2, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 11 Applicant: Harry & Charlotte Roth, represented by Eric Johnson Architect Four Seasons Resort DRB100554 Warren Final review of a sign (wall sign) 1 Vail Road /Lots A -C, Vail Village Filing 2 Applicant: Four Seasons Resort, represented by TJ Brink Tretter Residence DRB100558 Warren Final review of a change to approved plans (window) 913 Red Sandstone Road (Sandstone 70) /Unplatted Applicant: Neil Tretter, represented by Julie Spinnato Windstream Condos DRB100559 Tom Final review of a minor exterior alteration (landscaping) 4295 Columbine Drive /Lot 7, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision 3 rd Addition Applicant: Windstream Condos, represented by Karl Edgerton STAFF DENIAL Rabin Residence DRB100489 Rachel Final review of a minor exterior alteration (stairway) 3094 Booth Falls Road, Unit 2 /Part of Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 12 Applicant: Robert & Patricia Rabin, represented by Eric Johnson Architect Page 6 11/2/2010 5 -1 -6 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 7 11/2/2010 5 -1 -7 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION October 25, 2010 1:OOpm 7C1WNOiff� TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Bill Pierce John Rediker Henry Pratt Luke Cartin Michael Kurz David Viele Tyler Schneidman arrived at 1:03pm 5 minutes 1. 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, 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: Table to November 8, 2010 MOTION: Viele SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 4 -0 -0 5 minutes 2. A request for review of a variance, pursuant to Chapter 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, from Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to allow for the installation of solar panels within two feet of a roof ridge and eave and extending higher than the ridgeline, located at 4918 Meadow Drive, Unit A /Lot 16, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100046) Applicant: Laurent Meillon Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Table to January 10, 2011 MOTION: Viele SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 4 -0 -0 3. Approval of October 11, 2010 minutes MOTION: Viele SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 4 -0 -0 4. Information Update Commissioner Schneidman arrived. Commissioner Pierce inquired into the outcome of the Vail Village Townhome District at Town Council. Bill Gibson explained that the Town Council had requested additional information related to the initial eave height concept and other tools to maintain the existing scale and character of the neighborhood. He clarified that it would return to Council in December. Commissioner Pierce inquired as to the status of the Ever Vail project. Pa 1 11 /2/2 5 -2 -1 Warren Campbell explained that the draft fiscal report had been completed and will be presented to the Town Council on November 16 It was anticipated that the Ever Vail project would reappear in January on the Commission's hearing agenda. 5. Adjournment MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 5 -0 -0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479 -2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24 -hour notification. Please call (970) 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published October 23, 2010, in the Vail Daily. Pa e 2 11/2 / 2� 10 5 -2 -2 TOWN (ffr VA M VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: The Community Development Department is requesting a worksession to present proposed changes to the building permit application process and gain the support of the Town Council to proceed forward with changes. PRESENTER(S): George Ruther ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the staff presentation and actively engage in a dialogue regarding possible chnages to the buiilding permit application porcess BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department is charged with administering the building codes for all commercial and residential construction within the Town of Vail. The current process is costly and time consuming. There is room for improvements. Through changes in business practices, the Department can reduce cost and increase efficiencies of administering the building codes while maintaining an exceptional level of customer service. To that end, the Department is proposing to develop and implement a combination building permit process. ATTACHMENTS: Power Point Presentation 11/2/2010 COMBINATION BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS Addressing problems and developing solutions Town of Vail Community Development Department November 2, 2010 IS THERE A PROBLEM ... ? "The Community Development Department is charged with administering the building codes for all commercial and residential construction within the Town of Vail. The Curren t process of administering the building codes is costly and time consuming. There is room for process improvements. Through changes in business practices, the Department can reduce cost and increase efficiencies of administering the building codes whil e still maintaining an excep Lion al I evel of custom er service. To that end, the Department is proposing to develop and implement a combination building permit process." TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE CHALLENGE...? "How do we create sustainable reductions in operating expenses in the building permit application and plan review process and still exceed the our customer's expectations ? TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE ANSWER...? Focus on the "big picture" Embrace change f Seek partnerships Focus on the customer Ask questions Go paperless f Invest in technology Evaluate our processes TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GOALS... Streamline the building permit process Eliminate redundancies Enhance customer service Reduce operating expenses Decrease plan review time Ensure predictability and consistency in the process TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUND RULES FOR CHANGE... "Customer-centric"... customer needs shall be a primary factor when evaluating alternatives. Demonstrated compliance and adherence to the town's adopted codes is mandatory. A process that is cost neutral to the town is essential. Investment in technology that adds value will be utilized. Education and training is integral to the success of the project. If there is not a demonstrated and compelling public purpose being achieved... then it is not necessary. TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFFING LEVELS... 2006 2010 for j pector TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HISTORICAL PERMIT DATA... 1600 Number of Issued Permits 1400 2000 - 2010 1200 1000 800 - # of Permits 600 - 400 200 0 O W N C'7 d' � cfl N 00 rn O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HIIIIIII itt I N N N N N N N N N N N TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MORE PERMIT DATA... 400 Number 35 0 of 300 Permits per Staff Member 250 2000 - 2010 ZOO 150 � # of Staff 100 50 0 N N N N TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY m n i I I I m I I DEVELOPMENT THE ISSUE IS NOT THE PERMITS.... ...It's the process! TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE PROCESS... BEFORE AFTER Demo Building Building vim; Mechanical Electrical Building Building Plumbing TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE PROCESS CONTINUED... Today Tomorrow Electrical Comb. Permit & Plan Review Permit Mechanical Building Permit & Permit & Plan Review Plan Review Project lumbing Demolition ermit & Project Permit & Plan Review Plan Review Plan Review TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GOALS... Streamline the building permit process Eliminate redundancies Enhance customer service Reduce operating expenses Decrease plan review time Ensure predictability and consistency in the process TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WHAT WE HEARD YOU SAY... "If it speeds up the process... absolutely! " "Don't forget the unintended consequences..." "Will this increase review .i time ?" "Fire needs to get onboard..." "The Town needs to do this..." ` r ' r 'r +n rn� "Seems simpler. Is it ?" "Maintain flexibility in the submittal process..." TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN...? 1600 1400 1200 1000 - 800 - After 600 Before 400 - 200 - 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SO WHAT, NOW WHAT...? Meet with our customers Outline the process Test the process Complete a Cost /Revenue Analysis Amend Title 10, Building Regulations 0 4 Provide education and it training lip Effective January 1, 2011 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'OWN ffVAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: A work session to discuss the Town's off street parking requirements and policies. PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson, Planner and Greg Hall, Public Works Director ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The purpose of this work session is for the Vail Town Council to identify and discuss the current outcomes resulting from the Town's adopted parking policies. This work session is also an opportunity for the Vail Town Council to identify any current undesired outcomes, and to brainstorm alternative policy options that could be implemented to instead achieve desired outcomes. BACKGROUND: At its February 16, 2010 work session the Vail Town Council discussed a detailed Staff summary of the Town's current parking regulations prescribed by the Vail Town Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests the Vail Town Council either affirms the Town's existing parking policies or provides Staff with direction to re- evaluate specific parking regulations and policies at a future Town Council hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Town Council memo 11/2/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department Public Works Department DATE: November 2, 2010 SUBJECT: Off Street Parking Requirements and Policies Discussion I. PURPOSE The purpose of this work session is for the Vail Town Council to identify and discuss the current outcomes resulting from the Town's adopted parking policies. This work session is also an opportunity for the Vail Town Council to identify any current undesired outcomes, and to brainstorm alternative policy options that could be implemented to instead achieve desired outcomes. II. BACKGROUND At its February 16, 2010 work session the Vail Town Council discussed a detailed Staff summary of the Town's current parking regulations prescribed by the Vail Town Code. III. DISCUSSION ITEMS Based upon the analysis of the Vail Town Code and the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Staff has made the following observations about some adopted parking policies: A. The Town of Vail has adopted objectives to "meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities" and to "encourage the use of public transportation to minimize the use of private automobiles throughout Vail." Unless carefully implemented, these policy objectives can be counter productive. Providing enough public and private parking to meet demand may increase the use of automobiles throughout Vail and may discourage the use of public transportation. B. Today the Town of Vail bares the responsibility for public parking. The Town of Vail provides public parking for guests, skiers, shoppers, special event attendees, etc. Many times per year demands for public parking exceed the capacities of the Town's existing parking structures. Contrary to the Town's policy of prohibiting on- street parking, overflow public parking is most often accommodated on the frontage roads. While frontage road parking may be viewed as a community problem, it is also viewed as the measure of a successful special event, a high volume skier /shopper day, an effectiveness tourism marketing campaign, etc. C. The stated purpose of the Town's parking regulations is to ensure the parking needs of a land use are addressed off street by that use with minimal impact to the neighbors. However, the cumulative effects of the Town's parking regulations have resulted in a significant transfer of private sector parking demands to the public sector. 1 11/2/2010 7 -1 -1 The Town's parking regulations include direct parking requirement credits and exemptions for certain properties. These direct reductions include core area parking reductions, commercial parking exemptions, multi -use parking reductions, employee housing parking reductions, no construction parking requirements, etc. The Town's regulations also include indirect parking requirement reductions. Examples include calculating restaurant parking based upon customer seating area and not assessing those portions of a restaurant utilized by employees such as the kitchen. Another example is the residential parking standards in the core areas assessed by unit count (1.4 spaces per unit), rather than by floor area as in other residential neighborhoods. The unit count assessment disregards the increased parking demands associated with large multiple bedroom condominiums. When these direct and indirect reductions result in the number of built parking spaces not meeting the actual parking demands of a use or development, the physical and financial burdens of these unmet transportation needs are ultimately shifted to the public parking structures, public streets, public trailhead lots, public park lots, neighboring private parking lots, public transit, and inappropriate locations such as the front lawns. D. The Town's parking regulations generally focus on parking supply, but do not address broader transportation demand issues. For example, when the Town's regulations allow a reduction in the number of required parking spaces that result in an unmet transportation need, the regulations do not require a development to off set those unmet demands with alternative transportation modes (example: van shuttles) or compensate public entities such as the Town or ECO for increases to public transportation service demands. E. The Town's parking regulations do not promote the maximized utilization of private parking spaces. The Town's parking regulations do not allow for the short -term leasing of private spaces for skier or special event parking. The Town's parking regulations do not address shared parking scenarios by land uses with non - competing parking needs. A recent example was a proposal by the Vail Mountain School to allow public parking on their property during non - school hours. The Town's regulations do allow "private clubs" and "private parking structures ". However, these private parking clubs are not addressed by the Town's parking regulations. By there very natures, private parking clubs do not function in the same manner as public parking facilities and are often under utilized. Should a private parking club be opened for public parking, it may compete with the Town's public parking structures for revenue during non -peak periods. While the Town's regulations prescribe the number of parking spaces to be constructed with a development, the Town's parking regulations do not address how parking spaces are operated once they're built. The Town's regulations do not designate which spaces in a building are for owners, visitors, customers, employees, deliveries, etc. It is assumed that the number of required spaces will accommodate all of these user groups. However, market demands often discourage parking spaces being allocated to employees or customers. There are numerous examples where required parking spaces have been inappropriately converted into lock -off style dwelling units, offices, storage areas, etc. 2 11/2/2010 7 -1 -2 IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff requests the Vail Town Council either affirms the Town's existing parking policies or provides Staff with direction to re- evaluate specific parking regulations and policies at a future Town Council hearing. 3 11/2 /2010 7 -1 -3 'OWN ffVAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion with Town Council regarding the relocation, installation, and funding of Jesus Moroles' Granite Amphitheater to the lower bench of Ford Park. PRESENTER(S): Molly Eppard, Todd Oppenheimer, Staff & Bill Rey, Kathy Langenwalter, Doe Browning AIPP Board Members ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the project, site location, and funding mechanism as presented and recommended by the AIPP Board for the relocation and installation of Jesus Moroles' Granite Amphitheater. Approve or approve with modifications proposed project. BACKGROUND: Jesus Moroles' commissioned work Granite Amphitheater, formally located in Seibert Circle in 1998, was removed and placed in outside storage at public works in 2005. The AIPP Board, with Moroles, reviewed alternate locations for Granite Amphitheater and selected the lower bench of Ford Park as the ideal setting for relocation. Various engineering methods were considered for the installation and the proposed helical pier method is the most economical means for the installation from our research. The natural setting of Ford Park with the Gore Creek will serve as the optimal location for Granite Amphitheater. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve or approve with modifications: - Relocation and installation of Granite Amphitheater in lower bench of Ford Park in fall 2011 - Proposed project budget of $260,100.00 - Proposed project funding to include use of existing project budget ($160,900.00) with the balance funded by a combination of private donations and AIPP public art project budget. ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum - Moroles relocation & installation Proposed Site Plan -Ford Park New Moroles design Photo - Seibert Circle 11/2/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council From: Art in Public Places Board /Coordinator DATE: November 2, 2010 SUBJECT: Jesus Moroles Granite Amphitheater relocation and installation on the lower bench of Ford Park 1) Background a) Original Granite Amphitheater installation by Jesus Moroles at Seibert Circle: Process: Art in Public Places Board issued a Call to Artists to submit concepts for an art competition for a prominent public art installation in Seibert Circle. Concept submittals were received from 79 artists and artist /landscape architect teams. Four artist's works were selected as finalists and each artist was paid a $2,500 stipend to further develop their concepts for presentation to the board. A collaborative design by Jesus Moroles and Design Workshop was selected by jury and they were contracted to develop construction documents and art components. The date for this project was 1996 through 1998, prior to the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships. The total fee paid for the art work was $199,482. In addition approximately $800,000 was spent at Seibert Circle for the installation of new utilities, demolition, site preparation, snow melt system, streetscape elements, etc. b) Removal of Moroles Granite Amphitheater with Streetscape: In 2005 the Vail Town Council voted to remove Moroles' Granite Amphitheater from Seibert Circle. At that time $125,000 was allocated as an estimated cost to reinstall the amphitheater's sculptural elements at a future date in an unspecified location. The work was then dismantled and moved to an outside storage area at public works where it has since been housed. 2) Reinstallation of Jesus Moroles' Granite Amphitheater to lower bench Ford Park a) Significance of artist and work: Jesus Moroles' 1998 Granite Amphitheater is the first such design in the artist's career. At that time, Moroles was a celebrated artist and his work has continued to be placed in major museum collections, corporate art collections, public art sites, exhibitions, universities, and private collections throughout the world. He is sought after for his public lectures, engagements, and presentations. He has garnered notable attention for his achievements, including being the youngest recipient of the National Medal of Arts Award the highest award given to artists and arts patrons by the United States Government. "The National Medal of Arts is awarded by the President of the United States to individuals or groups who '...are deserving of special recognition by reason of their outstanding contributions to the excellence, 11/2/2010 8 -1 -1 growth, support and availability of the arts in the United States. "' Previous visual artists who have received this honor include Georgia O'Keefe, Willem de Kooning, and Andrew Wyeth, among others. b) Current value of work: The original artist fee for Moroles in 1998 was $199,482. Over the past 12 years his work has increased significantly in value. The costs of the various elements in Granite Amphitheater if acquired from Moroles today would be: Tooth (large vertical sculpture) - $250,000; Strata (large vertical sculpture) - $250,000; Gore Creek (wedge bench) - $180,000; Granite benches (7 total) — range per bench $30,000 - $60,000. This total cost is estimated from $890,000 to $1,100,000 for these separate elements of the amphitheater. If installed in its entirety, Vail's Granite Amphitheater could be valued over $1,500,000 based upon estimated values of his work given the scale, number of large sculptural elements, and the important historical significance of this particular installation in the artists' career. c) Site selection of Ford Park for Granite Amphitheater: The AIPP Board together with Moroles have chosen the lower bench of Ford Park as the ideal location for Granite Amphitheater. With the natural setting of Gore Creek as a backdrop, the installation will nestle nicely within the existing landscape. This location at the lower bench has proven a good fit for AIPP's previous temporary sculptures with the abundance of summer cultural activity in Ford Park. The level of interaction with the current installation, Singing Trees, at this location is indicative of the potential usage of Granite Amphitheater for visitors to the park. It will serve as a welcoming place to gather within the park. d) Site design: The amphitheater has been modified for the space making it more open and smaller in scale than the previous layout. It will be supported by helical piers which were determined to be the best and most cost effective foundation for the project. Cobble and crushed stone walks will surround the amphitheater and lead to seating upon a low wall overlooking the creek. A lighting designer will be utilized to create interesting lighting effects that augment the sculptures and space. The installation is scheduled to begin after Labor Day 2011, as to not interrupt the summer activities of the park. Due to the artist's schedule, committing now to this project will ensure the work is ready for installation. 3) Funding of project a) Current cost for relocation and installation of Granite Amphitheater: Estimated total cost for installation of Granite Amphitheater is $260,100. The fee to Moroles is $133,000 which includes the artist fee for redesign, transportation of granite to and from artist's studio, the repair, re- cutting and carving of stone base, repair of the Gore Creek Sculpture which has been damaged, and on site installation. B & B Excavating has submitted a current proposal for the site work totaling $127,100. This includes excavation, site preparation, installation of helical piers, erosion control, irrigation, electrical, etc. 11/2/2010 8 -1 -2 b) Funds in present account for project: Approximately $160,900 is currently in an account specified for the relocation of Granite Amphitheater. This amount includes the $125,000 allocated by Town Council in 2005 as well as unused funds from the East Meadow Drive art entry feature. c) Funds needed to complete project: Approximately $99,200 is necessary to complete project. It is the intent of the AIPP Board to fundraise to offset this balance. $5,000 in a private donation has already been verbally agreed to begin this fundraising initiative by AIPP. The balance is in the current AIPP art project budget. 4) Requested approval for the relocation and installation of Granite Amphitheater from Town Council The Art in Public Places Board requests the approval of this project as presented: • Relocation and installation of Granite Amphitheater at the lower bench of Ford Park in the fall of 2011. • Proposed project budget of $260,100. • Proposed project funding to include use of existing project budget t of $160,900 with the balance funded by a combination of private donations and AIPP public art project budget RRT001. 11/2/2010 8 -1 -3 b / � § 79 . | k � - ■ - ©2�� � � sit 06 > El .� � \a^ � BUILDING v e, y 'FoLD PP•R10 — 5 OE •.'�ST T` , 1''1of�nt..re.S r4RT' pRoJ�c.T �� GA-ASS Gol561.IE FlWA•L S ITT- PLA1.1 SP ' 8192.1 p.P211r 28 2olc� I lk 2 A 4 1.. L GRILL ax t !. `lk TER P S 4 �4� FoQD )F ��- PARk ut"NTS vs yam 8192.3 ;] �jC� v iii¢ +� • � I Id r i °- IL 'OWN IT VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Winter Parking Guest Incentive PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and provide staff direction on the winter parking incentive program presented. BACKGROUND: The Town Council was interested in an incentive program presented at the September 21 meeting by Art Abplanalp. The program was suggested to provide an incentive for front range skiers to stay longer in Vail. There were multiple points of the program; one being, the drive back to the Front Range is not a great experience and waiting longer before proceeding east allows for a more enjoyable day. A significant incentive would be required to change the behavior of the traveling public. Getting a $10 discount significantly reduces the perception of the high cost of parking. 170 peak traffic is reduced. Vail businesses should benefit with more customers in town longer. Staff reviewed the impacts of the program proposed and has developed an alternative program with fewer financial impacts to the town's parking revenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide staff direction regarding the proposed parking incentive program. ATTACHMENTS: Parking incentive memo RRC page nine report july 2009 11/2/2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Greg Hall Stan Zemler SUBJECT: Winter Parking Incentive Program DATE: November 2, 2010 BACKGROUND The Vail Town Council expressed interest at the September 21 meeting in creating an incentive program to encourage guests to stay longer, avoid 1 -70 traffic back to Denver and increase business activity. EXISTING USE The Town of Vail had 133,615 -$25 transactions (stays of 4 or more hours). All the entries occurred before 12:30 pm. The town conducted an intercept survey by RRC in 2009, in which a majority of interviews were taken before 11:00 AM. Survey respondents were given the opportunity to take a web enhanced survey after their visit. 45% responded to the web survey indicating 12% of our visitors stayed beyond 6 pm. See attached page 9 of RRC report of July of 2009. The data is not able to be separated to determine the number of transactions entering before 11:00 am and those entering between 11 and 12:30 pm and stay beyond 6 pm. The pre- 11 am —post 6 pm was the customer base discussed for incentives. It may be easier to focus on customers paying the full daily rate $25 and leaving after 6 pm being eligible for the program. Currently at the 12% rate, this equals 16,400 cars. PROJECTED USE In examining the existing data and making some reasonable assumptions we derive at the following potential use: 20% of users returned between 2:30 and 3:30 PM, assume success in changing the behavior of 5 -10% of this group to stay another 3 hours. (1,336 -2,672 cars) 32% of users returned between 3:30 and 4:30 PM, assume success in changing the behavior of 15 -30% of this group stay another 2 hours. (6,414- 12,827 cars) 15% of users returned a between 4:30 and 5:30 PM, assume success in changing the behavior of 25 -50% of this group to stay another hour. (5,011- 10,021 cars) This would increase the 12% staying after 6 pm by another 9.6 -19.1% or a combined total of 21.6 -27.1 of all full day transactions. The incremental new guests staying beyond 6 pm equates to 12,760- 25,520 cars. The 11/2/2010 9 -1 -I total dollar estimate of $10 off equals the cost of $164,000 of the existing customers plus $127,600 - $255,200 of the new customers staying beyond 6 pm. The total cost of the program would be $291,600 - $419,200. The incremental new sales tax is only generated by the increase in new customers. It requires gross sales from each incremental car of $571 - $410 /car to offset the loss in parking revenue. The current trend of expenditures of users is $25 -$79 per car depending on the demographic of the user. Day visitors make up 55% of peak users and average 2.5 users per car. Total Average sales tax per car of $1.02 equals $25.50 gross sales /car. Locals make up 13% of peak users and average 2.5 users per car. Average sales tax per car is $1.17 or $29.25 gross sales /car. Destination guests make up 32% of users and average 3.1 users per car. Average sales tax per car of $3.16 equates $79 of gross sales /car. Average sales tax per all users is $1.72 or $43.10 gross sales per car. This requires a more than tenfold increase in expenditures for a $10 savings in parking costs. The increased sales are unlikely to offset the incentive program. It has been suggested to reduce the subsidy to only promote the savings on peak days. There is a real possibility that implementing $15 dollar parking on peak Saturdays would increase parking demand. This is counter productive to our attempts to limit peak parking to stay below 15 days on the frontage road. It also does not incentivize the destination skier during the week to spend more time in Vail. This destination guest spends over 3 times as much per car as compared to a Front Range day skier. Increased parking demand of 3 -6% on peak days can result in 100 -200 additional cars. INCENTIVE PROPOSAL EDUCATION AND PARTNERING An alternative is to promote the www /Gol- 70.com website and the message "leave by 6 arrive by 8" campaign. From the go I -70 website 1 -70 Traffic is Predictable The flow of peak hour traffic on I -70 is predictable. If the roads are clear and nobody runs into the median while texting his current position, then the highway begins to fill up around 2 pm and very soon each extra car causes highway speeds to drop. There are several key points where traffic slows first —the approach to the Eisenhower Tunnel, the bottom of Georgetown hill through Empire Junction and the narrow turns through Idaho Springs. Speeds on Vail Pass tend to depend as much on the current weather conditions as on the volume of cars. You can watch these spots in near real time on the Go170 Travel Planning tab or on the Go170 mobile app at http: / /gol70.com /mobile. 11/2/2010 9 -1 -2 Presidents Day Traffic Last Monday was Presidents Day, this is a good example of what to expect on that Sunday. The Y axis shows the additional time that it would take someone leaving Vail at the time found along the X axis. The delay is calculated as the traveler makes the 82 mile, 1 hour and 20 minute trips back to Denver's western gateway. Tatelll East Bourid Trip Delay ,W A Time Put another way the worst moment to leave Vail would have been at 4:15 when your travel time would have been an extra 66 minutes. That's time enough for dinner and by 6 the delay was only a few minutes. INCENTINVE DISCOUNTS The second part of the program would be to provide a redemption voucher for $10 off for visitors paying the full rate of $25 who leave after 6 pm on peak days as a thank you. The discount would be good on any M- Thurs return visit in which you leave after 6 pm as well. We can hand out a flyer to those who pay $25 and leave before 6 pm, delivering the message of the 1 -70 coalition and saying next time leave after 6 pm to receive the $10 dollar redemption voucher. Due to auditing controls, the redemption voucher would have an independent code to be used on the Town of Vail website to print a one time coupon. The coupon would be used during a qualifying return visit. Redemption vouchers could be redeemed at the Municipal Building parking sales office to receive a coupon as well. This would accomplish the following: • be a good educational message for 1 -70 traffic, • encourage leaving after 6 pm which increases incremental expenditures • encourage return business during the non -peak which in itself: • reduces 1 -70 peak traffic by encouraging travel on off peak days • increases business in non peak times • increases the destination guest to stay longer during their week here if they parked on the peak days as well as the day skier • may encourage additional visits from both day and destination guests(Summit County /down valley)during their time in Colorado to use their parking incentive coupon before they leave 11/2/2010 9 -1 -3 • run promotions with the business community to promote the leave after 6 pm campaign and maybe change the slogan for Vail Specific such as "its heaven after seven" • it significantly reduces the financial exposure to the town's parking revenue • allows the town to monitor the results and modify the program without significant negative cash flow consequences • should not increase demand significantly on peak days as the reward requires an additional step Staff Recommendation If there is interest on the council's part, provide staff direction to continue to refine the incentive program with our various partners to be implemented this year. The estimated net cost of the program assuming around a 20% redemption rate, would be in the $50,000- $75,000 dollar range. This is on top of the $ 115,000 in current parking revenue reduction due to the 2 hour free program. The program could be initiated by mid December for this ski season. 11/2/2010 9 -1 -4 TOWN OF VAIL PARKING SURVEYS 2009 Figure 6 At approximately what time did you return to your parked car on the day you were interviewed? 35% 0 30% 25% e 20% y 20% ° 5% e 15% 12% . 2 Q 10% &% 5% 5% 3% 4 1 %a 0% 0% Before 1100 AM 1200 AM 100 PM 2:00 PM 300 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM After 7:00 10:00 AM PM These results vary considerably by the type of visitor and whether they are staying overnight. For example, about 4 percent of Day Visitors from the Front Range reported that they returned to their cars at 1:00 PM and 23 percent at 2:00 PM. This is in contrast to only 1 percent and 12 percent respectively of Overnight Visitors from Out of State. These differences help to explain some of the differences in the likelihood of shopping and dining in the Town, and also the differing expenditure patterns by these segments of visitors. Figure 7 At approximately what time did you return to your parked car on the day you were interviewed? By Visitor Type 50% 45% Day visitor t Local resident 44 40% * Overnight visitor from Colorado a,35% �— Overnight visitor from Out ofState e 030% 31 H % � 25% 20% 22% 9% °' 17 a 15% 10% 10% 5% 0% Before 1100 AM 1200 AM 100 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM After 7:00 10:00 AM PM Activities after 3:00 PM . These results are further confirmed by the responses to a question concerning activities between 3:00 and 5:00 PM and between 5 and the time they left. Results show that the various segments of visitors reported distinctly different behavior patterns after 5:00. It is not that the Overnight Visitors from Colorado were RRC Associates 9 11/2/2010 9 -2 -1 TOWN (ffr VA M VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Town of Vail comments for the Revised Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Study(RDPEIS) PRESENTER(S): Greg Hall ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve /Approve with modifications the letter outlining our comments to be sent to the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) regarding the revised draft PEIS from the Town of Vail. BACKGROUND: The Colorado Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration have released the Revised Draft Programatic Enviornmental Impact Study for the 170 corridor. The sixty day comment period ends November 8, 2010. CDOT came to the September 21 meeting to provide an overview of the study. Stan Zemler for the Town of Vail was a member of the Collaborative Effort (CE) which developed a consensus preferred alternative. The RDPEIS recommends the CE's alternative as the preferred alternative. The town, as well, has reviewed the RDPEIS as part of the 1 70 coalition. The coalition has developed a set of comments that are for the corridor. The town is responsible for developing specific comments regarding our jurisdiction. The attached draft Iettercontains the town's comments on the study. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve /Approve with modifications the draft letter to be sent to CDOT by November 8 regarding the Town of Vail's comments regarding the Revised Draft Programatic Envioronmental Impact Statement for 1 -70. ATTACHMENTS: 170 Coalition Draft leter TOV draft letter 11/2/2010 1 COALITION setting the pace for the future October 20, 2010 I -70 Mountain Corridor Revised Draft PEIS c/o Wendy Wallach 18500 E. Colfax Avenue Aurora, CO 80011 The I -70 Corridor Coalition has reviewed the Revised Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement ( RDPEIS). The I -70 Corridor Coalition (Coalition) has been directly involved in this process through membership on the Collaborative Effort, the Project Leadership Team, the Context Sensitive Solutions team, and many other committees working on various aspects of the RDPEIS. As such, the Coalition is intimately aware of the details of the original draft as well as the revised draft. As an overall document, we highly support approval of the RDPEIS and urge the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) to move forward with the Final PEIS and, ultimately, the Record of Decision in a timely manner. The Coalition would like to provide the following comments relative to a few specific areas of concerns we have as a representative body for the entire corridor. We have asked our members not to duplicate these comments, but encouraged them to provide any local concerns individual jurisdictions may have directly in their own comment letter. Items of concern: 1) On page ES -26 in the Executive Summary the 2 nd "trigger' bullet point is written as: "The "specific" highway improvements are complete and Advanced Guideway System (AGS) studies that provide additional information on the ability to implement Advanced Guideway System within the Corridor are complete, OR" The specific language of the Consensus Recommendation (CR) is preferable: "The "Specific Highway Improvements" are complete, and AGS studies that answer questions regarding the feasibility, cost, ridership, governance, and land use are complete and indicate that AGS cannot be funded or implemented by 2025 or is otherwise deemed unfeasible to implement, or...." 2) Page 1 -12 Refers to AGS being BUILT by 2025, while CR language says "if AGS cannot be funded or implemented by 2025... " Not quite the same meaning. We have a general concern throughout the document in reference to AGS location within I -70 ROW. without a clear definition of what "corridor" means, the ambiguity of always indicating that the AGS is located within the median, north or south of the highway could be interpreted as meaning it must be within the existing ROW. If the Tier 2 feasibility study concludes that the AGS must go outside of the existing ROW, that could, by default, mean that the AGS in infeasible. Potential solution: Language should state that AGS may be located outside the ROW of existing I -70. 11/2/2010 10 -1 -1 3) The CR specifies AGS should be capable of being elevated for long stretches but not necessarily the entire length from C -470 to Eagle Airport. It is important the issue of AGS elevation not preclude a different conclusion in a Tier 2 study which may identify significant cost savings without any impact on operation of the AGS. 4) The RDPEIS uses parts of the RMRA study, but it should be noted that one of the objections to the RMRA study was that it failed to use the most current cost information available for guideway construction costs. Advances in production may result in significant, 30% or greater, reductions in cost of guideway. An issue which should be addressed in future Tier 2 studies. 5) While there is frequent reference to CSS throughout the entire document, the FHWA definition is never found in the Executive Summary or in the Introduction. CSS is both a "process" and a "solution" (Le. design and aesthetic elements of a project). While it is clear that CDOT is committed to the CSS "process ", it is less clear that there is an understanding that CSS is also a "product" in terms of design and implementation, even maintenance. While CDOT has committed to using the CSS Guidelines that have been developed, it means those elements should be incorporated at every level and in every aspect of anything that happens on the corridor, even something as mundane as a median barrier replacement. CSS is much more than just the "how ". It is important to include the formal definition of CSS in the Executive Summary and the introduction. 6) Page ES -23 section ES.21: We recommend striking all project descriptors such as "Improves mobility ", "Has strong public support", Enhances safety ", etc as these clear needs will be explored in project level studies. We would like to thank all the staff at CDOT and FHWA, along with the numerous other individuals and organizations which have worked so diligently to bring us to where we are today. We look forward to working together to bring this process to closure with the Record of Decision. On behalf of the I -70 Corridor Coalition, Michael Penny I -70 Corridor Coalition Chairman 11/2/2010 10 -1 -2 Ms. Wendy Wallach 1 -70 Revised Draft PEIS Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 1 18500 E. Colfax Ave Aurora CO 80011 RE 1 70 Revised Draft PEIS Comments Dear Ms. Wallach The Town of Vail endorses the 1 -70 Corridor Coalitions letters and comments. We also appreciate CDOT's cooperation and participation with the process. We want added to the record the following comments with regard to the Revised Draft PEIS. 1. The change from a 2025 timetable to a 2035 timetable requires the Main Vail Exit 176 to be added to the intersection improvements as part of the minimal action and the preferred alternative. The Town of Vail has conducted detailed traffic studies of the Vail Area with the cooperation of CDOT and the improvements are necessary. The recommendations are in the adopted Vail Master Transportation Plan dated March of 2009. 2. The town believes it is extremely important prior to constructing any new improvements, areas of the Interstate system currently exceeding environmental standards be mitigated. Our belief is that the proposed highway improvements on 1- 70 will directly require mitigation of current violations of Federal environmental standards in Vail. Specifically noise, sediment and erosion control, wildlife impacts, degradation of streams and wetlands and the use of 4(f) properties for parking. The highway alternatives as proposed will produce additional traffic and impacts over the do nothing alternative. We also recommend the reintroduction of a program like the Type 11 Noise mitigation program, in which Vail sites were next in line for funding. 3. The PEIS highway alternatives do not address the impact on local communities of providing parking at the destinations over the transit alternatives. This is a significant impact financially. 4. The Town specifically requests from MM 184 -169 the alignment of 1- 70 could be changed if the appropriate environmental clearances were obtained, local approval was obtained, right of way was cleared and there is no increase in maintenance cost to CDOT over the alternatives currently in the draft PEIS. The Town specifically wants to hold open the option of someday either cut and covering the interstate with private use of the air rights or providing for a series of tunnels which allows transfer of Right of Way. The cost of constructing and maintaining these projects would be borne by a joint public private partnership. 11/2/2010 10 -2- 1 5. The Town of Vail has had significant discussions with CDOT and FHWA with regard to the Frontage Roads in Vail. These frontage roads are part of the interstate system, owned by the Federal Highway Administration. The Vail Master Transportation Plan lays out necessary improvements to this system. The 170 PEIS does not address these frontage roads but does address the frontage roads in Clear Creek County, as well as improvements to US 6 in Eagle County. It would appear there is inconsistency in how FHWA /CDOT frontage roads are handled. We would suggest all frontage roads are addressed equally in the corridor and improvements to the Vail frontage roads are mentioned as needing attention in the revised draft PEIS as well. 6. There is mention of other studies related to the corridor. The two phases of the Intermountain Connection and the two phases of the Dowd Canyon feasibility study should be listed as well. 7. The Rocky Mountain Rail study listed two routes from Summit County to Eagle County. The Town of Vail only supports the route over Vail Pass as viable and has determined that lower gradients than shown in the study can be achieved if the route deviates from the highway alignment over the pass. Once again thank you for your time on this important project. Sincerely, Stan Zemler Town Manager 11/2/2010 10 -2 -2 'OWN IT VAM . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: *Appointment of two Council members re: Town of Vail Guest Service Enhancement RFQ Selection Process *Minturn Cemetery District update PRESENTER(S): Misc. ATTACHMENTS: Eagle County Cemetary District Correspondence 101810 11/2/2010 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY 970 - 328 -8685 FAX: 970-328-8699 www.eaglecounty.us EAGLE COUNTY October 18, 2010 Ms. Pam Brandmeyer Assistant Town Manager Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Re: Minturn Cemetery District and Vail Memorial Park Foundation Dear Ms. Brandmeyer: I am writing in response to your recent inquiry concerning the Minturn Cemetery District and the possibility of the Vail Memorial Park Foundation receiving funds from that District. The Minturn Cemetery District is governed by C.R.S. 30 -20 -801 et.seq. As you will see from a review of the statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is responsible for making appointments to the cemetery district board and is authorized to "levy a tax not to exceed four mills so certified to it by said cemetery district ". See C.R.S. 30 -20 -806. Pursuant to C.R.S. 30 -20 -805, the Minturn Cemetery District is a body corporate with the powers expressly granted to it under Colorado law. The board of the Minturn Cemetery District is responsible for managing its affairs and funds. Thus, the question of whether the Vail Memorial Park Foundation may receive funds from the Minturn Cemetery District is one that the District must consider. This office does not represent the Minturn Cemetery District and I expect the District's board may wish to consult with its own counsel on these important issues. The Board of County Commissioners hope that the Minturn Cemetery District Board and Vail Memorial Park Foundation Board can work together to address any issues or concerns in an amicable and thoughtful manner. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have additional questions. Yours very truly, Diane H. a iello Assistant County Attorney cc: Board of County Commissioners Minturn Cemetery District Board Vail Memorial Park Foundation Board Matt Mire, Town Attorney Eagle County Building, 500 Broadway P.O. Box 850, Eagle, Colorado 81631 -0850 11/2/2010 11 -1 -1 IL 'OWN ff VA, . VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November 2, 2010 ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council 11/2/2010