HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-11-19 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Evening SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
6:00 P.M., NOVEMBER 19, 2013
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot
be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider
an item.
1. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation: (15 min.)
2.
ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda:
1) Resolution No. 15, Series of 2013 - Animal Control 2014 IGA
2) Proclamation No. 7, Series of 2013 - Declaring December 10, 2013 as
"Colorado Gives Day"
(5 min.)
3.
ITEM/TOPIC: Town Managers Report: (5 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Stan Zemler
4.
ITEM/TOPIC: Castle Peak Care Community Funding Request (30 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Lisa Pease, Augustana Care
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to presentation and ask
questions.
5.
ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013, An
Ordinance Amending Section 12-21-2, 12-21-11 and 12-21-14 of the Vail
Town Code Regarding Hazard Regulations and Setting Forth Details in
Regard Thereto (10 min)
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve changes to Ordinance 12-
21-2, 12-21-11, and 12-21-14 in order to maintain in good standing with the
National Flood Insurance Program.
BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado has adopted higher standards for
floodplain management. The major changes to previous requirements
include provisions to freeboard, critical facilities, and floodway surcharge
criteria. Communities have until January 14, 2014 to adopt local regulations
consistent with the new standards in order to remain in good standing in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and be eligible for grant funding
through the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the changes to
Ordinance 12-21-2, 12-21-11, and 12-21-14 in order to maintain compliance.
6. ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 20, Series 2013, an ordinance 11/19/2013
providing for the levy assessment and collection of town property taxes due
for the 2013 tax year and payable in the 2014 fiscal year. (10 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve or approve with
amendments
BACKGROUND: Please see attached memo
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve or approve with amendments
7.
ITEM/TOPIC: Presentation on the Timber Ridge Redevelopment Project
Program (30 min. )
PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Community Development Director, Jen
Wright, Wright and Company, Gary Gorman, Gorman & Company, Inc. and
Rick Pylman, Pylman & Associates.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Authorize the Town Manager to sign
the development application facilitating the redevelopment of Timber Ridge
as proposed.
BACKGROUND: On October 15, 2013, the Vail Town Council authorized
the Town Manager to enter into a pre-development agreement with Gorman
& Company, Inc. to facilitate the redevelopment of the easternmost 5.24
acres of the Timber Ridge Apartments. Pursuant to the terms of the
agreement, the developer was to return to the Town Council with a
presentation on the proposed redevelopment. The purpose of this agenda
item is to meet that required obligation and obtain the Town Council's
agreement on the proposed project program. Authorization from the Town
Council for the Town Manager to sign the development application shall
indicate the acceptance of the project program by the Town Council.
Please refer to the staff memorandum dated November 19, 2013 for a more
detailed description of the project program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department
recommends the Vail Town Council instructs the Town Manager to sign the
development application to facilitate the redevelopment of the
easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Apartments as proposed. Once
signed the applicants will be prepared to submit a complete development
application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for
review by no later than November 29, 2013, in accordance with the signed
Pre-development Agreement.
The development application is currently scheduled for final review by the
Planning & Environmental Commission on Monday, December 16, 2013.
8. ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013, a resolution adopting the
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (45 min. )
PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Community Development Director and
Tom Braun, Principal, Braun Associates, Inc.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, Approve with Modifications,
or Deny Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013 11/19/2013
BACKGROUND: On April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed town
staff to prepare a new master plan for Gerald R. Ford Park. In doing so, the
Town Council provided the following direction: The new plan shall be a
compilation of the 1974 Vail Plan, 1985 Ford Park Master Plan, 1997 Ford
Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update.
A series of goals, objectives, policies and actions steps were to be developed
to clarify the community's expectations for the Park and guide future
decisions about improvements with the Park. The concept of sub area
planning within the Park was supported. While the Park was to be planned in
its entirety, sub area plans and illustrative graphics were to be used to further
clarify opportunities within the respective areas of the Park. The new plan
was to incorporate both current improvements already underway within the
Park but also capture and articulate future improvement opportunities. The
Plan was to have an approximate ten year life span with periodic updates
and amendment considerations when needed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department
recommends the Vail Town Council approves the proposed 2013 Gerald R.
Ford Park Master Plan, as modifidied by the Planning & Environmental
Commission, based upon a review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this
memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public
hearings.
9.
ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013, An
Ordinance Amending Section 13-7-8 of the Vail Town Code Regarding
Recovery of Costs in Enforcement Actions and Setting Forth Details in
Regard Thereto. (5 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments
or deny Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
BACKGROUND: The Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code
to provide for an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful
court actions to enforce violations of Section 13-7-8.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
10. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:35 p.m.)
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation:
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda:
1) Resolution No. 15, Series of 2013 - Animal Control 2014 IGA
2) Proclamation No. 7, Series of 2013 - Declaring December 10, 2013 as "Colorado Gives
Day"
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution No 15 Series of 2013
Proclamation No. 7, Series of 2013
11/19/2013
Resolution No. 15, 2013
RESOLUTION NO. 15
Series of 2013
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
TOWN OF VAIL AND THE COUNTY OF EAGLE FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES; AND
SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the “Town”), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado
is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Colorado and the Town Charter (the “Charter”);
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have been
duly elected and qualified;
WHEREAS, the Town and the County of Eagle (the “County”) wish to enter into a 2014
Intergovernmental Agreement (the “IGA”) authorizing the County to provide animal control
services within the Town limits;
WHEREAS, the Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare
to provide animal control services; and
WHEREAS, The Council’s approval of Resolution No. 15, Series of 2013, is required to
enter into an IGA
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Council hereby approves and authorizes the Town Manager to enter
into the IGA with the County for animal control services on behalf of the Town in substantially the
same form attached hereto as Exhibit A and in a form approved by the Town Attorney.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of
the Town of Vail held this 19th day of November, 2013.
_________________________
Andrew P. Daly
Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Tammy Nagel,
Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
•
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
AND
THE TOWN OF VAIL
This Agreement made this day of , 2013, by and between the
County of Eagle, State of Colorado, a body corporate and politic (the "County") and the Town of Vail, a
municipal corporation (the "Town").
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the Town desires to contract with the County for the performance of the hereinafter
described Animal Services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such Animal Services on the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, this Intergovernmental Agreement is authorized pursuant to Sections 29-1-201 and
30-11-101, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, and Article XIV, Section 18, of the Colorado
Constitution.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions and promises
contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
SECTION 1. TERRITORY COVERED.
The territory covered by this Agreement is all of that certain property legally described as the Town of
Vail.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
Emergency On-Call Service is defined as any emergency call received by the County for which
Animal Service assistance is required and no Animal Service Officer is on duty to respond .
Shelter means The Eagle County Animal Shelter located at 1400 Fairgrounds Road, Eagle,
Colorado, and any other shelter facility operated or designated by County.
Unclaimed Day is defined as a calendar day or any part thereof during which an unclaimed
animal is confined in Shelter on behalf of the Town.
SECTION 3. SCOPE OF SERVICES.
11/19/2013
The County agrees to provide General Animal and Emergency On-Call Services within the Town of Vail as
follows :
A. General Animal Services shall include:
i. A minimum of 50 hours of patrol per month, consisting of inspection tours
looking for violations or responding to complaints.
ii. Administration and enforcement of the current Title 6, Animals of the Municipal
Code of the Town of Vail presently in effect, and as may be subsequently
amended.
iii. The County shall provide the Town with monthly reports and an annual report
of services provided pursuant to this Agreement . Such reports shall include, by
way of example only, the number of calls for service, number of animals
sheltered, number of Unclaimed Days, and number of citations issued, as they
apply to the Town of Vail.
iv. Animal .sheltering services for animals attributable to the Town, of the nature
and quality customarily provided at the Shelter. Animals attributable to the
town are animals impounded within the Town of Vail and animals owned by
persons dwelling, permanently or temporarily, in the Town of Vail.
B. Twenty-four (24) hours per day Emergency On-Call Service (via County answering
service when the Shelter not open).
i. Emergency On-Call Service will be provided during the period when an Eagle
County Animal Service Officer is not on duty . In the event that an Eagle County
Animal Service Officer is not immediately available to respond to an incident or
emergency, the Town of Vail will provide available personnel to secure the
scene and administer control of the situation until the Eagle County Animal
Service Officer arrives to resolve said incident.
SECTION 4 . OFFICIAL STATUS.
For the purpose of performing the Animal Services and functions set forth in this agreement, Eagle
County Animal Services shall enforce, as the Town's agent, the Municipal Ordinances relating to animals
now in effect and as amended from time to time.
SECTION 5. EQUIPMENT.
The County shall furnish and supply, at its sale expense, all necessary labor, supervision, equipment,
motor vehicles, office space, and operating and office supplies necessary to provide the services to be
rendered hereunder.
SECTION 6. COMPENSATION.
11/19/2013
The Town of Vail agrees to pay the County, monthly, the sum of $3,200.00 for General Animal Services .
On-Call Emergency Service shall be billed at: $50.00 per hour.
The Town of Vail agrees to pay the County, on or before the fifteenth day of each month, for General
Animal and On-Call Emergency Services rendered the previous month.
All fees and expenses recovered at or for the Shelter will remain with the County.
All court fines and costs will remain with the court of venue.
The County shall administer the County's Dog license Program for the Town. Monies collected from
residents of the Town shall belong to the County.
SECTION 7. PERSONNEL.
The Eagle County Animal Services Officer shall have full cooperation from the Town of Vail, its public
works, its police officers and/or their respective officers, agents, and employees, so as to facilitate the
performance of this Agreement.
The rendition of Animal Services provided for herein, the standards of performance, the diScipline of
officers, and other matters incident to the performance of such services and the control of personnel so
employed, shall remain in the County .
All persons employed in the performance of such Animal Services for the Town of Vail, pursuant to this
agreement, shall be County employees, except for Town personnel used to secure the scene as
described in Section 3.
SECTION 8. LIABILITY AND INSURANCE.
A. The County, its officers and employees, shall not be deemed to assume any liability for
intentional or negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the Town or of any officer or
employee thereof. Likewise, the Town, its officers and employees, shall not be deemed
to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts, errors or omissions of the
County or by any officer or employee thereof.
B. The County agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless to the extent allowed by
law, the Town, its respective agents, officers, servants and employees of and from any
and all loss, costs, damage, injury, liability, claims, liens, demands, action and causes of
action whatsoever, arising out of or related to the County's intentional or negligent acts,
errors or omissions or that of its agents, officers, servants, and employees, whether
contractual or otherwise. Likewise, the Town agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless to the extent allowed by law, the County, its respective agents, officers,
servants and employees of and from any and all loss, costs, damage, injury, liability,
claims, liens, demands, action and causes of action whatsoever arising out of or related
11/19/2013
to the Town's intentional or negligent acts errors or omissions or that of its agents
officers, servants and employees, whether contractual or otherwise.
C. The County and the Town shall respectively provide its own public liability, property
damage, and errors and omissions insurance coverage as each party may deem
adequate and necessary for any potential liability arising from this Agreement. Further,
the County and the Town, respectively, shall name, subject to the approval of each
respective party's insurance carriers, the other respective party as a co-insured under
such insurance policies to the extent of any potential liability arising under this
Agreement and, upon reasonable written request, shall furnish evidence of the same to
the other respective party.
SECTION 9 . TERM AND TERMINATION.
This Agreement is effective January 1, 2014 and shall end on the 31st day of December, 2014. Either
party shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause at any time by giving the
other party thirty (30) days' prior written notice of termination. Upon termination, the County shall be
entitled to compensation for services performed prior to such termination (calculated by prorating the
monthly rate for the number of days the County performed General Animal Services and adding all
charges for any additional services, including Emergency On Call Services, performed by the County
during that time), and both parties shall thereafter be relieved of any and all duties and obligations
under this Agreement.
Obligations of the Town of Vail and the County, respectively, after the current fiscal year, are contingent
upon funds for the purpose set forth in this Agreement being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise
made available.
SECTION 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
A. Notices. All notices, requests, consents, approvals, written instructions, reports or other
communication by the Town of Vail and the County, under this Agreement, shall be in
writing and shall be deemed to have given or served, if delivered or if mailed by certified
mail, postage prepaid or hand delivered to the parties as follows :
Town of Vail:
Town Attorney
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
County of Eagle:
Eagle County Attorney
P.O. Box 850
Eagle, CO 81631
11/19/2013
Either party may change the address to which notices, requests, consents, approvals,
written instructions, reports or other communications are to be given by a notice of
change of address given in the manner set forth in this paragraph A.
B. This agreement does not and shall not be deemed to confer upon or grant to any third
party any right to claim damages or to bring any lawsuit, action or other proceedings
against either the Town or the County because of any breach hereof or because of any
terms, covenants, agreements or conditions contained herein .
C. No modification or waiver of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or provision
herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be
charged therewith.
D. This written Agreement embodies the whole agreement between the parties hereto and
there are no inducements, promises, terms, conditions, or obligations made or entered
into either by the County or the Town other than those contained herein.
E. This Agreement shall be binding upon the respective parties hereto, their successors or
assigns and may not be assigned by anyone without the prior written consent of the
other respective party hereto .
F. All agreements and covenants herein are severable, and in the event that any of them
shall be held invalid by a court'of competent jurisdiction, this Agreement shall be
interpreted as if such invalid Agreement or covenant were not contained herein.
G. The Town has represented to the County and, likewise, the County has represented to
the Town, that it possesses the legal ability to enter into this Agreement. In the event
that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that either of the parties hereto did
not possess the legal ability to enter into this Agreement, this Agreement shall be
considered null and void as of the date of such Court determination.
11/19/2013
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and
year first above written.
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF
COLORADO, By and Through Its
ATIEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By:___________ By:______________
Clerk to the Board of Sara Fisher, Chairman
County Commissioners
ATIEST: TOWN OFVAIL
By:___________By:______________
Town Clerk Manager
11/19/2013
TOWN OF VAIL
PROCLAMATION NO. 7, SERIES OF 2013
A PROCLAMATION DECLARING DECEMBER 10, 2013 AS “COLORADO
GIVES DAY”
WHEREAS, charitable giving in the Town of Vail, Colorado is critical
to providing support that local nonprofit organizations need to make our
community a desirable place to live; and
WHEREAS, research shows an increase in online giving both locally
and nationally, and many believe it is the future of philanthropy; and
WHEREAS, Community First Foundation and FirstBank have
partnered in an effort to increase charitable giving in our community
through the online giving initiative Colorado Gives Day; and
WHEREAS, Colorado Gives Day in 2012 raised $15 million in a single
24-hour period via online donations at coloradogives.org, a website
allowing donors to direct their contributions to one or more of the thirty
(30) local, Eagle County, charities featured on the site, making it an ideal
resource for facilitating charitable giving to our locally-based nonprofit
organizations; and
WHEREAS, Colorado Gives Day is December 10 this year, and all
citizens are encouraged to participate because all donations, large or
small, can make a difference to nonprofits in need.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Vail Town Council
declares THAT: Tuesday, December 10, 2013, will be known as Colorado
Gives Day in our community.
SIGNED this 19th day of November, 2013.
________________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
Eagle County Gives Organizations -2013
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
Bravol Va i l
Bright Future Foundation for Eagle County
Can Do Multiple Sclerosis
Eagle River Watershed Council
Eagle River Youth Coalition
Eagle Valley Child Care Association
Eagle Valley Humane Society
Eagle Valley Land Trust
Early Childhood Partners
Education Foundation of Eagle County
Family Learn i ng Center
Habitat for Humanity of Eagle and Lake Counties
Mountain Valley Horse Rescue
Red Ribbon Project
Roundup River Ranch
Ski & Snowboard Club Vail !
Small Champions
SOS Outreach
Swi'ft Eagle Charitable Foundation
The Literacy Project
The Samaritan Center of the Rockies, Inc.
United Way of Eagle River Valley
Vail Community Television Corporation
Vail Mountain Rescue Group
Vail Symposium
Vail Valley Charitable Fund
Vail Valley Foundation
Vail Valley Salvation Army
Vail Veterans Program
Walking Mountains Sci ence Center
Local Chapters of Statewide/Regional Organizations, participating with Eagle County Gives in 2013:
American Red Cross Mile High Region
Colorado West Mental Hea lth/Mind Springs
Catholic Charities -Western Slope 11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Town Managers Report:
PRESENTER(S): Stan Zemler
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Castle Peak Care Community Funding Request
PRESENTER(S): Lisa Pease, Augustana Care
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to presentation and ask questions.
ATTACHMENTS:
CPSCC Brochure
CPSCC Budget
CPSCC Government Contributions
TOV Contribution Proposal
CPSCC Powerpoint
11/19/2013
Making our Community Whole
11/19/2013
I’m proud to join many of you in
supporting the Castle Peak Senior
Community, which will bring assisted
living, skilled nursing care, short-
term rehabilitation and memory care
to the Vail and Eagle County area.
I invite everyone in our community to
contribute so we can make this project
a reality. This is an investment in
something we will all need.
— Merv Lapin, Chair of Capital
Campaign Committee
Eagle County’s older adults tend to
leave home because they can’t find
extended care. Those left behind
lose the talent and wisdom of older
neighbors and the community suffers
economically. By joining Augustana
Care and Eagle County in supporting
this project, you can help those who
live here remain here.
— Timothy H. Tucker, President/CEO
of Augustana Care
11/19/2013
The experience, generosity and insights of older generations, combined with the
enthusiasm of other generations, make our community whole. Yet, most of us know
older people who need extra support to stay in our beautiful valley. One day, the
same may be said of each of us.
In the past, care was provided by family. But families today are smaller and women—
the vast majority of caregivers—often work, so many older adults live alone. The
reality is, we need to look beyond family for care and support.
In Eagle County, the number of older adults is increasing rapidly. Between 2010 and
2020, the number of adults aged 75 and older is projected to increase by 222 percent.
Currently, older adults in Eagle County must travel long distances to find assisted
living, skilled nursing, memory care or transitional rehabilitation services. They have
to leave our community at the time they most need its support.
In 2013, Eagle County purchased five acres in Eagle Ranch that, with your help,
will become the site of the Castle Peak Senior Care Community. The county
chose the respected nonprofit organization Augustana Care to develop and own
the care community.
Together with Eagle County, a capital campaign committee of dedicated volunteers
and other concerned individuals, Augustana Care has embarked on a $4.4 million
capital campaign to construct and equip the Castle Peak Senior Care Community.
The campus will include assisted living rental apartments, skilled nursing, memory
care suites and short-term rehabilitation.
Please join us by participating in this effort and providing financial support to this
initiative, which is so critical to maintaining the multi-generational fabric of Eagle County.
1
A Care Community for Eagle County
11/19/2013
2
As a life-long physician in Eagle County, I realize aging brings
a variety of challenges. We have an obligation to provide an option
for extended care to those who add so much to the fabric of our
community. Everyone benefits—those who love—and are loved.
—Jack Eck, MD
11/19/2013
• Eagle County’s population of adults 65 and
older is predicted to increase faster than any
other Colorado county’s 65-plus population
between 2010 and 2030.
• A recent study shows that nearly 70 percent
of people who turned 65 in 2007 will need
long-term care at some point; about 20
percent will spend five or more years in
long-term care.
• Many baby boomers and others in their 70s
and 80s will leave Eagle County if suitable
care is not available, resulting in an annual
$43 million loss to the local economy.
• The average 75-year-old suffers from
three chronic conditions and takes five
prescription medications. While most people
want to stay in their homes as they grow
older, fewer family members are available
to provide care.
• The Alzheimer’s Association projects that
by 2025, the number of people age 65 and
older with Alzheimer’s disease is estimated
to reach 7 million—a 40-percent increase
from those currently affected. Nearly
15 percent of caregivers live an hour or
more from loved ones with Alzheimer’s.
Out-of-pocket expenses for long-distance
caregivers are nearly twice as much as
local caregivers’ expenses.
3
Five critical reasons to invest in the Castle Peak Senior Care Community:
Responding to Change
Like Vi and Byron Brown, most people prefer to remain in
their communities as they grow older.
11/19/2013
There is a gap between the community’s
need for assisted living, skilled nursing,
memory care and short-term rehabilitation
and available services. Addressing this gap
will strengthen Eagle County’s ability to
attract and retain residents of all ages:
• The availability and quality of medical care
are among the top reasons people rank a
community as a desirable place to live.
• Older adults make our communities
better, both from a volunteer standpoint
and economically.
• Residents of Eagle County who must travel
long distances to find care for themselves
or loved ones experience greater stress
than those who live in an area where care
is readily available.
• The Castle Peak Senior Care Community is
projected to create 100 jobs during construction
and 65 permanent jobs when operating.
• The financial structure of the Castle Peak
Senior Care Community will allow it to be
self-sustaining.
As volunteers, neighbors
and grandparents, older
adults fill gaps in our
communities we would not
otherwise be able to address.
4
Closing a Gap to Strengthen our Community
The availability and quality of medical care are among
the top reasons people rank a community as desirable.
11/19/2013
5
Augustana Care brings more than
a century of proven experience to
our valley. Eagle County brings land
and other resources needed to get
Castle Peak Senior Care Community
built with manageable debt. Our
public-private partnership has all
the components for success. Together,
we can make this project happen.
— Sara Fisher,
Eagle County Commissioner
Since my sister in Minnesota moved
to Augustana Care’s Feeney Manor,
she is getting exactly the kind of
care she should be getting. I think
Augustana Care’s experience with
older generations and others will
serve us well in Eagle County. We’re
all getting older and it is good to
know Augustana Care will be here
if we need care.
— Mary Pownall
11/19/2013
With a history that spans 115 years,
Augustana Care is dedicated to helping
older adults live life to the fullest.
A non-profit organization responsible
for 23 care communities in Minnesota
and Colorado, Augustana Care is an
acknowledged leader in providing
responsive programs and services
to older generations.
• Augustana Care’s culture of person-
centered care is provided in settings that
offer the comforts of home. Castle Peak
Senior Care Community will have self-
contained “neighborhoods” that offer
private housing to every resident.
• Augustana Care values older generations’
talents and experience, and focuses on
providing the care residents need—when
and where they need it.
• Augustana Care connects residents
to the people and things that mean the
most to them.
• Augustana Care’s leaders strive for a
future where more people age in place
through community-based services such
as adult day programs, more people
return to independent lifestyles through
medical care and therapy, and residents
experience fewer re-hospitalizations.
Augustana Care helps
connect residents to the
people and things that
mean the most to them.
6
Augustana Care: Experience and Expertise
11/19/2013
7
The Castle Peak Senior Care Community is projected
to create 100 jobs during construction and 65 permanent
jobs when operating.
11/19/2013
• The care community will be designed to
serve people at all economic levels.
• When fully occupied, it is expected to
serve more than 110 people annually.
• Castle Peak Senior Care Community
will be located on a five-acre site at the
intersection of Capital Street and Sylvan
Lake Road in Eagle Ranch, selected for
its lower altitude, more moderate climate,
lower cost and easy walking distance to
local amenities. The care community will
have the capacity to expand if demand for
services increases.
• The 62,000-square-foot complex will
include the following:
- 20 assisted living rental apartments
- 22 skilled nursing private units
- 12 memory care private suites
- 10 transitional care private suites
• The campus will include the following
amenities:
- Common dining areas
- Multi-use activity spaces
- Gym
- Therapy rooms
- Lounge areas
• Construction costs are estimated at $240
per square foot.
• Outdoor areas surrounding the Castle
Peak Senior Care Community will include
the following:
- Large semi-circular terrace area
- Garden areas including a medicinal
healing garden
- Multiple partially shaded patios
and courtyards
- Rooftop terrace with planting areas
for memory care residents
- Courtyard areas and walkways
- Park area with a three-hole putting green
Castle Peak Senior Care Community At a Glance
8
11/19/2013
Your gift will help build the Castle Peak Senior Care Community. Gifts to the capital
campaign are tax deductible to the extent allowed by the Internal Revenue Service. Project
costs and funding sources are listed below.
Project Costs:
$15,100,000 Construction costs
2,600,000 Architecture, design and entitlement
1,645,000 Land*
1,500,000 Reserves and contingency
1,400,000 Furniture, fixtures and equipment
800,000 Financing and structure
400,000 Marketing and pre-opening
Total Cost: $23,445,000
Project Funding:
$12,000,000 Long-term conventional debt
4,400,000 Eagle County loan (subordinated debt)
1,645,000 Eagle County land purchase*
1,000,000 Augustana Loan (subordinated debt)
4,400,000 Capital Campaign goal
Total Funding: $23,445,000
Gift Range $# of Gifts
Required
$ Per Range Cumulative
% of Goal
Cumulative $
CAMPAIGN GIFT TABLE
Making our Community Whole: The Capital
Campaign for Castle Peak Senior Care Community
Lead Gifts
$1,000,000 1 $1,000,000 23% $1,000,000
500,000 1 500,000 34% 1,500,000
250,000 3 750,000 51% 2,250,000
100,000 7 700,000 67% 2,950,000
Major Gifts
$50,000 5 250,000 73% 3,200,000
25,000 14 350,000 81% 3,550,000
15,000 10 150,000 84% 3,700,000
10,000 25 250,000 90% 3,950,000
Community Gifts
$5,000 20 100,000 92% 4,050,000
2,500 30 75,000 94% 4,125,000
Under 2,500 Many 275,000 100% 4,400,000
*Land is owned by Eagle County and will be leased to Augustana Care for $1 per year.
11/19/2013
Naming Site # Available Naming Amount
Skilled nursing building 1 $1,000,000
Assisted living building 1 $500,000
Memory care household, transitional care household
and assisted living dining area 3 $250,000
Dining/activity terrace and two skilled nursing
kitchen/dining/living households 3 $100,000
Multi-use activity room, gym,
assisted living kitchen, club room 4 $100,000
Activities/craft room, lobby, roof terrace,
north courtyard, putting green 5 $50,000
Outdoor garden areas 2 $25,000
Lounge areas, conference room, staff lounges 6 $25,000
Patios 4 $25,000
Family dining room, library/business center 2 $25,000
Donors of $10,000 or more will be recognized on a donor recognition plaque at the
Castle Peak Senior Care Community.
Donor Recognition and Naming Opportunities
Donors of $25,000 or more to the
Castle Peak Senior Care Community
campaign may commemorate
their gifts through named gift
opportunities.
11/19/2013
Castle Peak Senior Care Community Capital Campaign
DONOR PlEDGE FORM
Please return to Augustana Care/Castle Peak Senior Care Community, PO Box 2127, Edwards, CO 81632
Thank you!
Donor Name(s)_______________________________________________________________________
Address____________________________________________________________________________
City___________________________________ State__________________ Zip___________________
Phone______________________________ E-mail________________________________________________
Signature_____________________________________________ Date__________________________
q I would like to make a one-time gift of $ _______________.
q My check is enclosed, made payable to Augustana Care.
q Please charge my credit card: ____Visa ____MC ___AmEx ____Diner’s Club
#_____________________________________________Expiration Date___________________________
Signed______________________________________________________________________________
q I pledge a gift of $_______________________, payable on or before__________________________
Payment Schedule____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
(Payment dates – pledge payments may extend over a three- to five-year period.)
q My employer participates in a matching gift program. Name of employer______________________
q I would like my donation to be anonymous.
(Optional) My donation is in memory/in honor (circle one) of__________________________________
Please send an acknowledgment to the following:
Name_______________________________________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________________________________
11/19/2013
Capital Campaign Committee
Merv Lapin, Chair
Susie Davis
Doris Dewton
Kaye Ferry
Louise Funk
Dan Godec
Deb Luginbuhl
Melissa MacDonald
Jerry Sibley
Pam Smith
Rick Smith
Jon Stavney
Augustana Care:
Timothy H. Tucker, President and CEO
Kay Gudmestad, Vice President, Fund Development
Lisa M. Pease, Director of Development, Colorado
Assisted by Eagle County:
Kathy Chandler-Henry, Commissioner
Sara Fisher, Commissioner
Jill Ryan, Commissioner
Jill Klosterman, Director of Housing
Tori Franks, Housing Specialist
11/19/2013
For more information, contact Lisa Pease
Director of Development, Colorado
Augustana Care/Castle Peak Senior Care Community
PO Box 2127
Edwards, CO 81632-2127
(970) 471-4864
lpease@augustanacare.org Castle Peak Senior Care Community is a project of
Augustana Care, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
There’s a sadness in watching people leave because there isn’t a
place to care for their needs or their spouses’ needs. We need to affirm
our seniors’ life experience and the many ongoing contributions
they offer. They’ve been very active in their community and devoted
volunteers. Their friends, and sometimes their families, are here.
We need to keep them in our community.
—Doris Dewton and her husband, Richard Gretz
11/19/2013
CastlePeakSeniorCareCommunity
SUBJECTTOCHANGE
DEVELOPMENTUSES Total
Construction
Gon~truroonContinfrnI'f
FeesandInsurance
FurnitureandFixtures
TotalConstructionCost
$13,253,335.00
I ~'~IJ~,OQ
$858,551.00
S 1,379,700.00
$16,416,908.00
ArchitectandEnginee.ting
LandPlanning
Estimating
FeesandPermits
TestsandStudies
TotalEntitlementCosts
s 1,235,000.00
$127,855.00
$33,500.00s1,066,567.00
$.125,484.00
$2,588,406.00
FundraisingConsultantandMaterials
D_1....Ioo_~.p__.,
Legal Fees
DeveloperFee
TotalFinancingandStructureCosts
$300,000.00
,!JCC,OOO.OOs255,000.00
$
$810,000.00
Salaries
MarketingMaterials
PreopeningEvents
TotalMarketingandPreopeningCosts
s 150,000.00
$150,000.00
$85,000.00
$385,000.00
Owner'sContingency
DebtServiceReserve
Lease-upReserve
OperatingReserve
TotalContingency
s 229,000.00
$600,000.00
$5001°00.00
$292,000.00
$1,621,000.00
TOTALPROJECTCOSTS $21,821,314.00
DEVELOPMENTSOURCES Total
LongTermConventionalDebt(USDARD)
FundraisingNeed(Gap)
EagleCountyContribution(notincludinglandcost)
A~tanaContribution
$12,024,000.00s4,397,314.00
$.4,400,000.00
$1,000,000.00
TOTAL~OURCH~OERUND~Sl1JilU1400
11/19/2013
c:..u.Peal SenIor c:_CommunltJ
111l"_Pro FonnII
YfIIIt y.,Y-y".Year Y...Yf1tII Year Year Yar
ReYenue 1 2 3 4 5 •7 8 9 10
NursingFacillll8s $2,125,341 $4,n4,247 P,527••$5,172.271P.121.7IO$5.9'78,31 sa.1315,_11,301,22518.471,884 ...,......
Conbibullonll 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 0
other Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 0
ToIIlRevenue B'25,34I $4,n4~7P,527....!!Jm:Il1 !!!.121,71O P,878,3-'11 18,1.,_1I,301~!!471,8104 51,048,514
Expense
NLnIng $101.470 $1,818,2111 $2,21O_1IO $2,U7.<tOO$2,SIIS,W$2,455.7.:1$2.517.124 $2,510,052 S2,844.WSl.710,887
MedicalRecords 32,118 33,-34..)41 35,03535.111 38,l1:li 38••38,814 41,101 43,_
SocIaJ Servk:ea 122,,017121,414 121_CZ3132,4111 135.7291H.1-tI '.....884 1110_157.254 181,117
Therapeutic Programs 118.557 10&,8711 1C111.,J1'111.1"113.1178117.M 121,SOI 121,SIII 132,_'''857DIetary2044,3114 Il00,_-~108,300 12.4.....I4S,~l1li2,&20 IIIZ,SII 7rI2,"72U53
Housekeeping 74.11"143.901 ,....172,7R178,2111?1.TI113.330 111,"190,7311114,151
Malntenanc:e 344,817 41',0lI0 ~)44 450.152 48"'87 .',se 484,128 &01,437522,41.538,718
Laundry 11._62,_-i.lIS••II.H2 ".-71,an 73,841 n,21181,131
Administration 1111.SIS 7306,762 71.)111 m,2I1 7U,0504 7112,-100.133 101,841 I,II,NO 825,0IIt
AncIllaries 115.711 248,483 SD,1C12 SOI,424311,131 SZ4,C1i8 332.138 340,443 348,154 357,878
DepnIcI.tIon 715.108 711,1181 71.,111717.1711717,788 711,se718,731 721.0111 722,721725,111
Amortfzation 7,1437,143 rl43 7,1437,1437,?137,1437,1437,143 7,143
Inl8Alst 420,"'8 0420,14'41.~412,Il0l407,229 401,_385,_388,Sl51 382.420 Sf5.857
Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ToI8lExpenae $3.720.124 $5,422.o:ze 11.03.'24 18,138,257 .,210.172 ••387,~1I11,411.48311.114,8711 ••741.834 ••au,312
Eacea of Reftnue,Gainsand
other~ueOVerElIpenle !!"594,978)($s..7.77!!J ~60<!ll~'5)($466.9881 ($4211,Q9})~390.B!OI ($352,421)($313,65~.($274,11-40)[$238,728)
Exceu of Raoven_,GaInsand
0dIer Rev8nueOVerExpenH (S"S9-4.978)($147778)($50-015)($468.9881 (M29 092)($390,aD)($352427)($313,655)($274,11-40)($238.728)
Add:
DeprecIation
AmoItImIIDn
IrdIIrest
715.508
7,143
420.845
715,_
7,143
420,1411
71ea1
-;1143
41l13li2
717.175
7,1043
412,,808
717,788
7,143
407,2211
718.811
7,'"113
401,:118
119,735
7,143
3a5,258
721,015
1.143
388,i51
722,7211
7.143
382.420
125.188
1,143
375,857
CahAvailableFor Debt Senlc:e
Debt Servlc:a
($451.4791 $496,201 $8311011870,340 f703,0411 173I,=t.1189?OIl $803,4$6 $837,352"1871,2511
$420,848 $420.8411 157:2578 '572,5711$Ii72,5711 $572,.411 »12.571 $572,578 $S72,57e $572.578
Page3C1f4
11/19/2013
c..tIe.......lor C....ComIlWIIity
10Va.ProForma
CoYange RMIo (107)'18 ,11 117 123 129 134 140 148 152
BaghII..c.h $1,SII2.028 P4f.<464 14115.101 1438._$480,58'$515.733 S581._".178 S350.111O ....168
C8ItI AYIIIaIIIaFe DellI 5e!vIca:(451.479)4118.201 1137.101 870,2AO703,049 738.21'789,7011 83.465 837.352 871,258
Add:I_In AaIunII.,.,..158.81.18.832 (7.800)3,.,$,4483,518 3._USO 3.713 3.l1li
~In"'"P.,.aI"""_113,233 a.•7A 11._11.43111.141 12,271 (a.87Vl 10.377 10.m
-'-In Aauad IIIIInII 55.071 0 (450)(488)(a2)(4l1li)(517)(53e)(1165)(674)
Less:DIbt &eM:.(4211.848)(420.841)(l72,S7I)(172,578)(672,678)(572.578)(572,678)(e'2.511)(572.578)(572,878)rna-In~""""(141.100)(88.SS7)(32,187)(8.5111)(t.71S)(t.m)(7.0115)(7.272)(7.484)(7,140)
I_In AIpIId InIInnca (3.5GO)(105)(108)(13)(15)(III)(100)(102)(105)(108)
1_111..............",.(12,BOG)(12,100)(12,100)(12,800)(12,I0Il)(25.800)(25,800)~OOO)("'000)(84.000)
......lnl:'lllt-..ve (57 ,2IiI)(57.218)(57 .211)(57,251)(57,251)(17,211)(17.211)P.2II)(57.218)(57.251)__In........(12,-,(12,100)(12.100)(12,II1II)(12,II1II)(12,100)(12,8110)'2,100)(2UCID)(32,000)
~tI~DIbt ~S11~"':!!!!l "211~"2US!!
TOCII c....IIIV_End '541.484 $4116.608 ~3I1503 i!!!15811 1615.733 1&9'1583 5448.178 1301'110 El168 138311111
TOCII AniiuaI'-ro--t III c.h tP45,~($50158}($57.105)S22_165184575,830 ($144,814)($M"J 511._125._
PIIgII4of4
11/19/2013
Castle Peak Senior Care Community
Schedule of Governmental Contributions Committed
As of November 13, 2013
Eagle County – approximately $1.1 million
$988,000 for the contribution of 3 acres of land for Phase 1 construction
$100,000 to $200,000 in unreimbursed staff time
Town of Eagle – Total of $600,000
$400,000 in fee recalculations from a 1.0 EQR to a .25 EQR
$45,000 in tap fee waivers
$155,000 to be paid over a 3 year period
Town of Gypsum – Total of $200,000
$200,000 to be paid over a 3 year period approved on 11/12/2013
Town of Avon – Total of $200,000
$50,000 approved for inclusion in the 2014 budget approved on 11/12/2013
$150,000 funding in future years – further discussion of the funding mechanism to be utilized
for this additional amount will be discussed at their meeting on November 26, 2013
11/19/2013
Castle Peak Senior Care Community
Capital Campaign Proposal
The Town of Vail, November 19, 2013
11/19/2013
Castle Peak Senior Care Community:
Castle Peak Senior Care Community (CPSCC) is a 64-unit skilled nursing and assisted living
facility that will be located in Eagle, Colorado. Castle Peak will be the first project of its kind in
Eagle County and will serve all income levels. The project will include: 20 assisted living
apartments, 22 private skilled nursing units, 10 private rehabilitation suites and 12 private
memory care suites. While the focus at CPSCC is on senior care, the skilled nursing,
rehabilitation care and memory care units may serve people of all ages.
History and Project Progress:
In 2009, the Eagle County Commissioners sat down to discuss the greatest opportunities and
challenges facing Eagle County. A topic that easily fit both categories was the lack of senior
care services. In 2010, with the full understanding that Eagle County Government did not have
the expertise to own or operate a senior living facility, it released an RFP for a senior living
developer/operator partner. Eagle County chose Augustana Care as a development partner
and owner/operator of CPSCC through a rigorous community interview process in August of
2010. Since then, Eagle County and Augustana Care have been working together to develop the
Castle Peak Senior Care Community. Much of the pre-development work (financial and market
analysis, site selection, initial building design) took place in 2010 through 2012. So far in 2013,
the Castle Peak project has made a lot of progress:
In February 2013 the project received unanimous approvals for the required zoning
changes from the Eagle Town Board.
In April 2013, Eagle County Housing and Development Authority closed on the purchase
of the land for the project. See the attached site plans.
In July 2013, the Capital Campaign officially launched.
In September 30, 2013, Augustana Care received approval of its loan application from
USDA Rural Development Community Facilities Loan program for the $12 million long-
term debt for the project.
In November 2013, the Eagle County Commissioners approved the donation of the 3-
acre parcel of land for Phase 1 valued at $988,000 for the development of CPSCC.
Augustana Care:
Augustana Care, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, will own and operate the Castle Peak Senior
Care Community. Augustana Care’s mission is to foster fullness of life for older adults and
others in need through housing, health care and community-based services. Augustana Care
has over 100 years of experience, owns and/or manages 23 properties in Minnesota and
Colorado, and provides care to an estimated 3,000 individuals daily. Augustana Care is
dedicated to helping those served to live the lives that most inspire them. Priorities are to value
older generations’ talents and experience; provide the care residents need, when and where
they need it; and to connect residents to the people and things that mean the most to them.
11/19/2013
Need and Benefits:
Older adults are the fastest growing segment of Eagle County’s population. Eagle County’s 65+
and 75+ populations are forecasted to grow by 158.6% and 221.7% respectively, in the current
decade, 2010-2020.
Eagle County Population Growth:
2000 2010 % Increase 2010 2020 % Increase
All ages 43,290 52,064 20.3% 52,064 68,350 31.3%
65+ 1,298 3,005 131.5% 3,005 7,772 158.6%
75+ 389 738 89.7% 738 2,374 221.7%
Currently, no skilled nursing or assisted living facilities exist in Eagle County. Many of our fellow
community members, are forced to move out of the county to obtain the care they require.
The effects of losing our older residents are felt deeply by the friends, family and communitie s
they leave behind. With Vail’s 65 and older population comprising 19% of this segment of the
population in Eagle County (2010 census), clearly these services will be utilized by Vail residents
in the coming years.
Recent research from the CSU Economics Department shows the estimated annual cost of
seniors leaving Eagle County due to a lack of housing and health care options at $43 million. It
is projected that Castle Peak will serve, on average, 110 people annually, create 100 jobs during
construction and 65 permanent jobs when operating.
While the need for a facility like Castle Peak is easy to see, in order to ensure a successful
project, Augustana Care will only be building to 53% of the total demand. Below is a chart
comparing the forecasted 2014 market demand for a skilled nursing and assisted living facility
to what is planned for phase one of the Castle Peak Project. The land, in Eagle Ranch, where
the project will be located, can accommodate a “Phase 2.” Phase 2 is not planned and will
depend on market demand, but the current design of the building will allow for an expansion of
both the assisted living and skilled nursing wings along with the potential addition of
independent living apartments.
2014 Demand Castle Peak Plan
Skilled Nursing Units 74 44
Assisted Living Units 46 20
Total 120 64
11/19/2013
Financial Structure and Analysis:
Below are the basic costs of construction of the Castle Peak Senior Care Community. Also see
the attached Castle Peak Senior Care Community Development Budget.
Total Cost of Project $21,824,000
USDA Rural Development Loan $12,024,000
Eagle County Loan
(subordinate to USDA loan) $4,400,000
Augustana Care Loan
(subordinate to USDA loan) $1,000,000
Funding Gap
(private philanthropy, grants, fee waivers,
etc.)
$4,400,000
USDA Loan:
The financing of CPSCC is structured to allow the project to be self-sustaining when 90%
occupied; no additional future operational subsidies are contemplated. The project’s
conventional debt is a $12,024,000 loan from the USDA RD Community Facilities Loan Program.
When the project received loan approval from USDA RD, it was able to lock in a 3.5% interest
rate over a 40-year term. The below market interest rate and favorable loan terms play a large
role in allowing the project to achieve sustainability.
Augustana Care received final loan approval September 30, 2013. The $12,024,000 loan
requires a 1.25 Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR). For every dollar borrowed the project
must have $1.25 to repay the debt. The project achieves 1.25 DSCR between years 5 and 6.
See the attached 10-Year Proforma. Additionally, one of the conditions of the loan approval is
that Augustana Care provides a 5-year operating guarantee to the project to cover any cash
flow shortages.
Augustana Care and Eagle County are contributing a combined $5.4 million in subordinate debt.
The subordinate loans will both have 55-year terms and will carry a 2% simple interest rate.
The loans will only begin to receive repayments after the project is open and operating
successfully and maintains a 1.25x debt service coverage ratio on the USDA loan. After this
minimum DSCR is achieved, 30% of the remaining cash flow will remain at the project in
reserves and other project funds, and the remaining 70% of the cash flow will be split between
Eagle County and Augustana Care. Currently, it is anticipated that Eagle County and Augustana
Care will receive their first debt payments in 2022 with a full repayment of the loan in 2070.
The chart below shows the required cash the project must generate to pay the USDA loan and
maintain the required DSCR for a loan of $12,024,000 and a loan of 16,424,000. With a loan of
11/19/2013
$12,024,000, the project just breaks even when it reaches revenue/lease up stabilization. With
a loan of $16,424,000 ($12,024,000 + $4,400,000) the project would need $251,326 in
additional cash on an annual basis to cover this loan payment and required DSCR. This would
translate into an increase in rents of $850 per month per resident in all of the market rate units,
which would potentially send rental rates beyond what the market will support. In the pre-
development phase, it became clear to the project team that increasing the conventional debt
to cover the funding gap was not a viable option.
Current Loan
Loan with
Fundraising
Gap
Loan Amount $12,024,000 $16,424,000
Interest Rate 3.50% 3.50%
Amortization Period (years) 40 40
Annual Loan Payment $558,959 $763,501
Minimum Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR) 1.25 1.25
Required Cash Available to meet DSCR $698,698 $954,376
Castle Peak Stabilized Cash Available $703,049 $703,049
Annual Excess (Shortfall) in Cash Available $4,351 $(251,326)
Project Affordability:
Augustana Care and Eagle County are committed to bringing a senior living project to the
county that will serve residents of all income levels. Castle Peak will provide both Medicaid and
Medicare units in the skilled nursing wing. The skilled nursing units comprise approximately
70% of the total units, with the assisted living units comprising the remaining 30%. The State of
Colorado sets the rate the project can charge a skilled nursing Medicaid resident and the
federal government determines the price the project can charge a skilled nursing Medicare
resident. Additionally, private insurance sets the rates it will pay for Medicaid and Medicare
residents. Castle Peak is budgeting for the highest allowable rates for these payer sources.
Market and focus group research has determined what the pricing should be for the private pay
assisted living units and the skilled nursing units. The research shows Eagle County residents
would pay up to 20% more in rent than comparable Front Range care communities to live in a
facility locally. If local rental rates were to climb beyond 20% above the Front Range
comparables, Eagle County residents would most likely choose to move rather than pay the
increased local rates. The project has budgeted for rental rates (both private pay and
Medicaid/Medicare) that are within our market’s acceptable range. Increasing the rents
beyond the acceptable range would price the lower income residents out, which would result in
an entirely private pay facility.
Augustana Care and Eagle County contributions:
11/19/2013
Augustana Care is investing $1,000,000 in cash to the project. Eagle County is investing
$4,400,000 in cash to the project; these cash contributions have been approved through the
USDA RD loan application and will be treated as subordinate debt. When the project is
operational, Eagle County’s only involvement will be as a subordinate lender. Having the loan
in place, will allow Eagle County recourse if the project encounters financial difficulty or
Augustana Care were to want to use the facility as anything other than a senior
living/healthcare facility. Eagle County Housing and Development Authority purchased 5 acres
of land for the project in April 2013 for $1,645,000. On November 12, 2013, Eagle County
donated approximately 3 acres of the land upon which “Phase 1” of the care community will be
constructed. The value of this donation is $988,000. This amount is not included in the
subordinate debt and will not be repaid by CPSCC to Eagle County. All of the funds Eagle
County is contributing to the project are a result of the refinance of the debt on Lake Creek
Village Apartments, a property owned by Eagle County.
Additionally, Augustana Care and Eagle County have been covering employee salaries for work
on this project since 2010. Each organization’s salary contributions are estimated at well in
excess of $200,000. Neither Augustana Care nor Eagle County will be collecting a developer
fee, an estimated savings to the project in excess of $1,000,000. As stated above, as a
condition of the USDA RD loan approval Augustana Care will be guaranteeing the project’s cash
flow for the first 5 years of operation.
The Capital Campaign:
As explained above, the costs of building the Castle Peak Senior Care Community are more than
Eagle County and Augustana Care can contribute. The project cannot support additional
conventional debt without severely affecting the affordability to the residents. In July 2013,
Augustana Care officially launched a, one-time, $4.4 million dollar capital campaign to raise the
remaining funds needed to make Castle Peak a reality. Augustana Care hired Lisa Pease, a
resident of Eagle County, to manage the capital campaign. Lisa is supported by a group of Eagle
County volunteers, who have made personal contributions to the capital campaign. Merv Lapin
and
Dr. Tom Steinberg, both long-time Vail residents, serve as the campaign’s chairman and
honorary chairman, respectively. As of November 13, 2013 the campaign has raised (in cash
and pledges) $1,767,587 40.17% of the total goal. This amount includes commitments from the
Towns of Eagle, Gypsum and Avon.
The Town of Vail:
Augustana Care respectfully requests that the Town of Vail contribute $200,000 towards the
capital campaign and help make our community whole by making the Castle Peak Senior Care
Community a reality. The capital campaign can accept pledges with payment terms over a
three-year period. The capital campaign must raise 75-85% ($3,300,000-$3,740,000) of the
campaign goal in order to break ground on the construction of the building. The goal for
ground breaking is late spring/early summer 2014.
11/19/2013
The Towns of Gypsum and Avon have also received capital campaign requests for donations of
$200,000 each. On November 12th, the Town of Gypsum approved a $200,000 donation to be
paid over a three year period, and the Town of Avon approved the addition of $50,000 to be
added to their 2014 budget with further discussion of the future donations to bring the total to
the $200,000 requested to occur on November 26 th. The Town of Eagle was the first town the
capital campaign approached. The Town of Eagle has pledged a total contribution package of
$600,000. Eagle will contribute $155,000 over 3 years and has agreed to waive building and
development fees up to $45,000 for a total cash contribution of $200,000. The remaining
$400,000 of Eagle’s contribution is in the form of water tap fee re-calculations. The capital
campaign committee is soliciting contributions from all the municipalities, unincorporated
metro districts (if allowable), local businesses, foundations and individuals.
The availability and quality of medical care are among the top reasons people rank a
community as a desirable place to live. While not yet assessed and quantified, it is believed
that having a complete spectrum of services will allow our older population to more freely
commit their time and financial resources to their community in Eagle County knowing they will
have a choice to stay here if they so desire. Additionally the development of Castle Peak will
provide Vail residents the option of relocating a loved one in need of care to Eagle County. This
will prevent current residents from having to make the difficult decision to leave the
community to care for a loved one elsewhere.
By filling the gap in housing and health care for seniors, the services at the Castle Peak Senior
Care Community will complement the medical industry in our county. Augustana Care has a
history of leadership by sharing best practices with a variety of community partners and service
providers. Potential collaborations include and are not limited to, inter-generational
programming with the schools, utilization of local hospice services and the potential
establishment of internships with students pursuing healthcare degrees at Colorado Mountain
College. All of these partnerships will potentially benefit the residents of Vail. Augustana Care
will continue to leverage new technologies and innovative practices to best serve the needs of
our aging population throughout Eagle County.
Medicaid, Medicare and USDA RD loan regulations all prohibit Castle Peak from providing
waitlist preference to Eagle County residents or reserving units in exchange for capital
campaign donations, at any level. In Augustana Care’s experience, a ll of the residents that
reside in skilled nursing or assisted living communities choose this type of living environment
because they need care and/or services. Augustana Care’s waiting lists are developed based on
people’s need for services and care. At Augustana Care’s assisted living community, Elk Run, in
Evergreen, Colorado, 80% of the residents come from the Evergreen community. The other
20% of the residents move to Elk Run to be closer to a family member that lives in Evergreen.
Elk Run experiences a 50% annual turnover rate. It is anticipated that Castle Peak will
experience similar lease-up and turnover patterns allowing Vail residents who need additional
care and services the option to move to Castle Peak and remain close to friends, family and
community.
Thank you for this opportunity and for your consideration of this proposal.
11/19/2013
Respectfully Submitted,
Castle Peak Senior Care Community Capital Campaign Committee and
Honorary Council
Capital Campaign Committee:
Merv Lapin - Chair
Susie Davis
Doris Dewton
Dan Godec
Peter Feistmann
Kaye Ferry
Louise Funk
Topper Hagerman
Deb Luginbuhl
Melissa MacDonald
Pam Smith
Rick Smith
Jon Stavney
Capital Campaign Committee Honorary Council:
Dr. Tom Steinberg - Chair
Dr. Bill and Martha Bevan
Dr. Kent and Martha Petrie
Martha Head and Dr. John Feagin
Dr. Jon Feeney
Dr. William Foutz
Dr. Phil Freedman
John and Linda Galvin
Renee and Dave Gorsuch
Paul Gotthelf
Sheika and Pepi Gramshammer
R.A. “Chupa” Nelson
Monica and Buz Reynolds
Staff Support:
Lisa Pease, Director of Development, Colorado
Kay Gudmestad, Vice President of Fund Development
Tori Franks, Eagle County Housing Department
11/19/2013
11/19/2013
11/19/2013
11/19/2013
Va
i
l
a
n
d
E
a
g
l
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
De
m
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
•
V
a
i
l
i
s
h
o
m
e
t
o
1
6
%
o
f
t
h
e
6
5
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
Ea
g
l
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
p
e
r
t
h
e
2
0
1
0
c
e
n
s
u
s
d
a
t
a
•
E
a
g
l
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
G
r
o
w
t
h
:
20
0
0
2
0
1
0
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
20
1
0
2
0
2
0
% Increase
Al
l
a
g
e
s
4
3
,
2
9
0
5
2
,
0
6
4
2
0
.
3
%
5
2
,
0
6
4
6
8
,
3
5
0
3
1
.
3
%
65
+
1
,
2
9
8
3
,
0
0
5
1
3
1
.
5
%
3
,
0
0
5
7
,
7
7
2
1
5
8
.
6
%
75
+
3
8
9
7
3
8
8
9
.
7
%
7
3
8
2
,
3
7
4
2
2
1
.
7
%
11/19/2013
Ma
r
k
e
t
D
e
m
a
n
d
20
1
4
D
e
m
a
n
d
C
a
s
t
l
e
P
e
a
k
P
l
a
n
Sk
i
l
l
e
d
N
u
r
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
7
4
4
4
As
s
i
s
t
e
d
L
i
v
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
4
6
2
0
To
t
a
l
1
2
0
6
4
Th
e
H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
G
r
o
u
p
:
C
a
s
t
l
e
P
e
a
k
Ma
r
k
e
t
S
t
u
d
y
:
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
6
,
2
0
1
3
11/19/2013
11/19/2013
•
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
s
t
o
f
o
s
t
e
r
f
u
l
l
n
e
s
s
o
f
l
i
f
e
f
o
r
o
l
d
e
r
a
d
u
l
t
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
i
n
n
e
e
d
th
r
o
u
g
h
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
,
h
e
a
l
t
h
c
a
r
e
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
•
N
o
n
p
r
o
f
i
t
5
0
1
(
c
)
(
3
)
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
•
H
i
s
t
o
r
y
o
f
t
h
e
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
p
a
n
s
1
1
5
y
e
a
r
s
•
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
c
a
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
3
,
0
0
0
p
e
o
p
l
e
d
a
i
l
y
•
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
C
a
r
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
o
w
n
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
m
a
n
a
g
e
s
2
3
c
a
r
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
(
1
i
n
Co
l
o
r
a
d
o
i
n
E
v
e
r
g
r
e
e
n
)
Au
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
C
a
r
e
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
F
a
c
t
s
11/19/2013
Ar
t
i
s
t
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
11/19/2013
Ca
s
t
l
e
P
e
a
k
w
i
l
l
b
e
6
4
u
n
i
t
s
,
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
1
1
0
p
e
o
p
l
e
an
n
u
a
l
l
y
,
a
l
l
i
n
c
o
m
e
l
e
v
e
l
s
,
a
n
d
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
:
22
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
N
u
r
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
fo
r
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
i
t
h
c
h
r
o
n
i
c
c
a
r
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
;
s
t
a
f
f
e
d
wi
t
h
2
4
-
h
o
u
r
l
i
c
e
n
s
e
d
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
20
A
s
s
i
s
t
e
d
L
i
v
i
n
g
A
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
co
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
s
t
u
d
i
o
,
1
b
e
d
r
o
o
m
an
d
2
b
e
d
r
o
o
m
a
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
w
i
t
h
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
b
e
d
r
o
o
m
,
b
a
t
h
r
o
o
m
,
k
i
t
c
h
e
n
a
n
d
li
v
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
w
i
t
h
2
4
-
h
o
u
r
n
o
n
-
l
i
c
e
n
s
e
d
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
.
12
M
e
m
o
r
y
C
a
r
e
S
u
i
t
e
s
in
a
s
e
c
u
r
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
i
t
h
d
e
m
e
n
t
i
a
re
l
a
t
e
d
d
i
s
e
a
s
e
s
10
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
C
a
r
e
S
u
i
t
e
s
fo
r
r
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
w
i
t
h
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
2
4
ho
u
r
n
u
r
s
i
n
g
c
a
r
e
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
n
s
i
v
e
t
h
e
r
a
p
y
,
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g
a
r
e
t
u
r
n
h
o
m
e
w
i
t
h
i
n
90
d
a
y
s
o
r
l
e
s
s
.
CO
M
P
O
S
I
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
C
A
R
E
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
11/19/2013
Si
t
e
P
l
a
n
11/19/2013
As
s
i
s
t
e
d
L
i
v
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
o
n
A
r
e
a
11/19/2013
Co
m
m
o
n
s
G
r
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
Fl
o
o
r
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
-
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
n
11/19/2013
As
s
i
s
t
e
d
L
i
v
i
n
g
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
Fl
o
o
r
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
-
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
n
11/19/2013
Wh
a
t
a
H
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
i
s
…
…
Fl
o
o
r
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
-
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
n
11/19/2013
Nu
r
s
i
n
g
-
F
i
r
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
Fl
o
o
r
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
-
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
n
11/19/2013
Nu
r
s
i
n
g
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
Fl
o
o
r
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
-
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
n
11/19/2013
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
$2
1
,
8
2
4
,
0
0
0
T
o
t
a
l
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
c
o
s
t
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
$1
2
,
0
2
4
,
0
0
0
U
S
D
A
r
u
r
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
l
o
a
n
4,
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
E
a
g
l
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
s
u
b
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
d
e
b
t
to
b
e
r
e
p
a
i
d
f
r
o
m
s
u
r
p
l
u
s
f
u
n
d
s
a
f
t
e
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
h
a
s
su
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
1,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
C
a
r
e
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
s
u
b
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
d
e
b
t
to
b
e
r
e
p
a
i
d
f
r
o
m
s
u
r
p
l
u
s
f
u
n
d
s
a
f
t
e
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
h
a
s
su
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
4,
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
C
a
r
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
c
a
m
p
a
i
g
n
t
o
r
a
i
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
to
c
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
g
a
p
$2
1
,
8
2
4
,
0
0
0
T
o
t
a
l
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
11/19/2013
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
o
f
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
•
U
S
D
A
R
u
r
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
L
o
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
re
c
e
i
v
e
d
w
i
t
h
4
0
y
e
a
r
t
e
r
m
a
t
3
.
5
%
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
•
S
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
b
y
E
a
g
l
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
an
d
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
n
a
C
a
r
e
i
n
t
h
e
f
o
r
m
o
f
s
u
b
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
de
b
t
r
e
p
a
y
a
b
l
e
o
n
l
y
f
r
o
m
s
u
r
p
l
u
s
c
a
s
h
•
D
e
b
t
l
e
v
e
l
s
a
l
l
o
w
t
h
e
c
a
r
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
t
o
b
e
s
e
l
f
-
su
s
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
t
9
0
%
o
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
•
O
n
e
t
i
m
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
c
a
m
p
a
i
g
n
t
o
b
u
i
l
d
P
h
a
s
e
I
11/19/2013
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
t
o
T
o
w
n
o
f
V
a
i
l
•
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
l
l
n
o
l
o
n
g
e
r
n
e
e
d
t
o
t
r
a
v
e
l
l
o
n
g
d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
o
r
re
l
o
c
a
t
e
o
u
t
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
t
o
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
t
h
e
c
a
r
e
t
h
e
y
n
e
e
d
•
A
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
a
n
d
r
e
t
a
i
n
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
o
f
a
l
l
a
g
e
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
st
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
e
d
•
C
o
u
n
t
y
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
l
o
s
s
e
s
o
f
~
$
4
3
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
d
u
e
t
o
la
c
k
o
f
s
e
n
i
o
r
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
a
n
d
h
e
a
l
t
h
c
a
r
e
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
re
d
u
c
e
d
•
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
j
o
b
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
:
10
0
d
u
r
i
n
g
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
6
5
pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
w
h
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
•
H
i
g
h
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
o
r
l
o
c
a
l
c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
re
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
11/19/2013
Th
e
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
C
a
m
p
a
i
g
n
Wh
e
r
e
w
e
a
r
e
t
o
d
a
y
•
A
m
o
u
n
t
R
a
i
s
e
d
T
o
D
a
t
e
-
$
1
,
7
6
7
,
5
8
7
–
4
0
.
1
7
%
of
g
o
a
l
•
M
u
s
t
r
e
a
c
h
7
5
t
o
8
5
%
o
f
$
4
.
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
g
o
a
l
t
o
br
e
a
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
(
$
3
.
3
t
o
$
3
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
)
•
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
fo
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
–
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
o
v
e
r
3
ye
a
r
s
a
c
c
e
p
t
e
d
•
R
e
s
p
e
c
t
f
u
l
l
y
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
a
$
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
11/19/2013
Pl
e
a
s
e
v
i
s
i
t
ww
w
.
c
a
s
t
l
e
p
e
a
k
.
o
r
g
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013, An Ordinance Amending
Section 12-21-2, 12-21-11 and 12-21-14 of the Vail Town Code Regarding Hazard
Regulations and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto
PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve changes to Ordinance 12-21-2, 12-21-11,
and 12-21-14 in order to maintain in good standing with the National Flood Insurance
Program.
BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado has adopted higher standards for floodplain
management. The major changes to previous requirements include provisions to freeboard,
critical facilities, and floodway surcharge criteria. Communities have until January 14, 2014 to
adopt local regulations consistent with the new standards in order to remain in good standing
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and be eligible for grant funding through the
Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the changes to Ordinance 12-
21-2, 12-21-11, and 12-21-14 in order to maintain compliance.
ATTACHMENTS:
Memo
Ordinance No 19, Series of 2013
11/19/2013
To: Town Council
From: Public Works
Date: 11-19-13
Subject: Ordinance 19 Series 2013
I. BACKGROUND
The State of Colorado has adopted higher standards for floodplain management. The
major changes to previous requirements include provisions to freeboard, critical
facilities, and floodway surcharge criteria. Communities have until January 14, 2014 to
adopt local regulations consistent with the new standards in order to remain in good
standing in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and be eligible for grant
funding through the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB).
Town staff previously sent the existing Town Ordinance, 12-21, to the CWCB NFIP
Coordinator for compliance review. In order to be in compliance the ordinance has
been modified as attached.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approving the changes to Ordinance 12-21-2, 12-21-11, and 12-21-
14 in order to maintain compliance.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
ORDINANCE NO. 19
SERIES 2013
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 12-21-2, 12-21-11 and 12-21-14 OF
THE VAIL TOWN CODE REGARDING HAZARD REGULATIONS AND
SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the "Town"),
is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Colorado and the Vail Town Charter;
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town have been duly elected and
qualified;
WHEREAS, the State of Colorado has adopted higher standards for floodplain
management; and
WHEREAS, communities have until January 14, 2014 to adopt local regulations
consistent with the new standards in order to remain in good standing in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) and be eligible for grant funding through the Colorado Water
Conservation Board (CWCB).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 12-21-2 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as follows:
12-21-2: DEFINITIONS:
For the purposes of this chapter, the words contained in this section are defined as follows:
ALLUVIAL FAN FLOODING: Flooding occurring on the surface of an alluvial fan or similar
landform, which originates at the apex and is characterized by high velocity flows; active
processes of erosion, sediment transport, and deposition; and unpredictable flow paths.
APEX: A point on an alluvial fan or similar landform below which the flow path of the major
stream that formed the fan becomes unpredictable and alluvial fan flooding can occur.
AREA OF SHALLOW FLOODING: A designated AO, AH, or VO zone on a community's flood
insurance rate map (FIRM) with a one percent (1%) chance or greater annual chance of
flooding to an average depth of one to three feet (3') where a clearly defined channel does not
exist, where the path of flooding is unpredictable and where velocity flow may be evident. Such
flooding is characterized by ponding or sheet flow.
BASE FLOOD: The flood having a one percent (1%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in
any given year.
BASE FLOOD ELEVATION: The elevation shown on a FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
for Zones AE, AH, A1-A30, AR, AR/A, AR/AE, AR/A1-A30, AR/AH, AR/AO, V1-V30, and VE
that indicates the water surface elevation resulting from a flood that has a one percent
chance of equaling or exceeding that level in any given year.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
BASEMENT: Any area of the building having its floor subgrade (below ground level) on all
sides.
BLUE HAZARD AVALANCHE AREA: An area impacted by a snow producing a total static and
dynamic pressure less than six hundred (600) pounds per square foot on a flat surface normal
to the flow and/or a return interval in excess of twenty five (25) years.
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION (CLOMR): FEMA’s comment on a proposed
project, which does not revise an effective floodplain map, that would, upon
construction, affect the hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source and
thus result in the modification of the existing regulatory floodplain.
CRITICAL FACILITY: A structure or related infrastructure, but not the land on which it is
situated, as specified in (critical facility section of ordinance), that if flooded may result
in significant hazards to public health and safety or interrupt essential services and
operations for the community at any time before, during and after a flood.
CRITICAL FEATURE: An integral and readily identifiable part of a flood protection system,
without which the flood protection provided by the entire system would be compromised.
DEVELOPMENT: Any manmade change in improved and unimproved real estate, including, but
not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation
or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials.
ELEVATED BUILDING: A nonbasement building: a) built, in the case of a building in zones A1-
30, AE, A, A99, AO, AH, B, C, X, and D, to have the top of the elevated floor, or in the case of a
building in zones V1-30, VE, or V, to have the bottom of the lowest horizontal structure member
of the elevated floor elevated above the ground level by means of pilings, columns (posts and
piers), or shear walls parallel to the floor of the water and b) adequately anchored so as not to
impair the structural integrity of the building during a flood of up to the magnitude of the base
flood. In the case of zones A1-30, AE, A, A99, AO, AH, B, C, X, and D, "elevated building" also
includes a building elevated by means of fill or solid foundation perimeter walls with openings
sufficient to facilitate the unimpeded movement of floodwaters. In the case of zones V1-30, VE,
or V, "elevated building" also includes a building otherwise meeting the definition of "elevated
building", even though the lower area is enclosed by means of breakaway walls if the
breakaway walls met the standards of section 60.3(e)(5) of the national flood insurance program
regulations.
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION: For the purposes of determining rates, structures for which the
"start of construction" commenced before the effective date of the FIRM. "Existing construction"
may also be referred to as "existing structures".
FLOOD HAZARD ZONE: The land in the floodplain subject to a one percent (1%) or greater
chance of flooding in any given year. The area is designated as zones A, AE, AH, AO, A1-99,
VO, V1-30, VE or V, on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). on the flood hazard boundary
map (FHBM). After detailed ratemaking has been completed in preparation for publication of the
FIRM, zone A usually is refined into zones A, AE, AH, AO, A1-99, VO, V1-30, VE or V.
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM): An official map on which the federal emergency
management agency has delineated both the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA)areas of
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applicable to the community.
FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY: The official report provided by the federal emergency
management agency that includes flood profiles and water surface elevation of the base flood
as well as the flood boundary-floodway map.
FLOOD OR FLOODING: A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of
normally dry land areas from:
A. The overflow of inland or tidal waters.
B. The unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source.
FLOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM: Those physical structural works for which funds have been
authorized, appropriated, and expended and which have been constructed specifically to modify
flooding in order to reduce the extent of the areas within a community subject to a "special flood
hazard" and the extent of the depths of associated flooding. Such a system typically includes
hurricane tidal barriers, dams, reservoirs, levees or dikes. These specialized flood modifying
works are those constructed in conformance with sound engineering standards.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT: The operation of an overall program of corrective and
preventive measures for reducing flood damage, including, but not limited to, emergency
preparedness plans, flood control works and floodplain management regulations.
FLOODPLAIN OR FLOOD PRONE AREA: Any land area susceptible to being inundated by
water from any source (see definition of Flooding).
FLOODPROOFING: Any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or
adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved
real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents.
FLOODWAY (REGULATORY FLOODWAY): The channel of a river or other watercourse and
the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without
cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height.
FUNCTIONALLY DEPENDENT USE: A use which cannot perform its intended purpose unless
it is located or carried out in close proximity to water. The term includes only docking facilities,
port facilities that are necessary for the loading and unloading of cargo or passengers, and
shipbuilding and ship repair facilities, but does not include long term storage or related
manufacturing facilities.
GEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA: An area within the town of Vail which may be subject to
rockfalls, mudflows, debris flows, debris avalanches, and unstable soil, slopes or rocks.
HIGHEST ADJACENT GRADE: The highest natural elevation of the ground surface prior to
construction next to the proposed walls of a structure.
HISTORIC STRUCTURE: Any structure that is:
A. Listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places (a listing maintained by the
department of interior) or preliminarily determined by the secretary of the interior as meeting the
requirements for individual listing on the national register;
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
B. Certified or preliminarily determined by the secretary of the interior as contributing to the
historical significance of a registered historic district or a district preliminarily determined by the
secretary to qualify as a registered historic district;
C. Individually listed on a state inventory of historic places in states with historic preservation
programs which have been approved by the secretary of interior; or
D. Classified as historically significant per title 10, chapter 2, "Special Historic And Architectural
Structures", of this code.
LEVEE: A manmade structure, usually an earthen embankment, designed and constructed in
accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control, or divert the flow of water so
as to provide protection from temporary flooding.
LEVEE SYSTEM: A flood protection system which consists of a levee, or levees, and
associated structures, such as closure and drainage devices, which are constructed and
operated in accordance with sound engineering practices.
LETTER OF MAP REVISION (LOMR): FEMA’s official revision of an effective Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), or Flood Boundary and Floodway Map (FBFM), or both.
LOMR’s are generally based on the implementation of physical measures that affect the
hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source and thus result in the
modification of the existing regulatory floodway, the effective Base Flood Elevations
(BFE’s), or Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).
LETTER OF MAP REVISION BASED ON FILL (LOMR-F): FEMA’s modification of the
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) based
on the placement of fill outside the existing regulatory floodway.
LOWEST FLOOR: The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An
unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or
storage in an area other than a basement area is not considered a building's lowest floor;
provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the
applicable nonelevation design requirement of section 60.3 of the national flood insurance
program regulations.
MEAN SEA LEVEL: For purposes of the national flood insurance program, the national geodetic
vertical datum (NGVD) of 1929 or other datum, to which base flood elevations shown on a
community's flood insurance rate map are referenced.
NEW CONSTRUCTION: For the purpose of determining insurance rates, structures for which
the "start of construction" commenced on or after the effective date of an initial FIRM, and
includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. For floodplain management
purposes, "new construction" means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced
on or after December 4, 2007, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures.
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN: See the definition of Flood Hazard Zone.
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicle which is:
A. Built on a single chassis;
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
B. Four hundred (400) square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projections;
C. Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and
D. Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for
recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.
RED HAZARD AVALANCHE AREA: Any area impacted by a snow avalanche producing a total
static and dynamic pressure in excess of six hundred (600) pounds per square foot on a flat
surface normal to the flow and/or a return interval of less than twenty five (25) years.
SLOPE: As defined in section 12-2-2 of this title.
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA: The land in the floodplain within a community subject
to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year, i.e., the 100-year
floodplain.
START OF CONSTRUCTION (For Other Than New Construction Or Substantial Improvements
Under The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (Pub. L. 97-348)): Includes substantial improvement
and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction,
repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, or other improvement was within one
hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The "actual start" means either the first placement
of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the
installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or
the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not
include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation
of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for basement, footings, piers or
foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the
property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not
part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the "actual start of construction"
means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether
or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building.
SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE: Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of
restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent
(50%) of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred.
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT: Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the
cost of which equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure. Market
value shall be determined by a qualified assessor designated by the administrator. The market
value of a structure is determined either:
A. Before the improvement or repair is started; or
B. If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For
the purposes of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first
alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences, whether
or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not,
however, include any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local
health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living
conditions.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
WATER SURFACE ELEVATION: The height, in relation to the national geodetic vertical datum
(NGVD) of 1929 (or other datum, where specified), of floods of various magnitudes and
frequencies in the floodplains of coastal or riverine areas.
VIOLATION: The failure of a structure or other development to be fully compliant with the
community’s floodplain management regulations. A structure or other development
without the elevation certificate, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance
required in Section 60.3(b)(5), (c)(10), (d)(3), (e)(2), (e)(4), or (e)(5) is presumed to be in
violation until such time as that documentation is provided.
ZONE OF INFLUENCE: Any area in a potential avalanche hazard zone where detailed
information is not currently available but which may be impacted by said hazard. These zones of
influence shall be designated on the appropriate maps of the administrator of the town.
Section 2. Section 12-21-11 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as follows:
12-21-11: FLOOD HAZARD ZONES:
A. Lands to which this ordinance applies: The ordinance shall apply to all Special Flood
Hazard Areas and areas removed form the floodplain by the issuance of a FEMA Letter of
Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR-F) within the jurisdiction of the Town of Vail,
Colorado.
Purpose: To promote public health, safety and general welfare and to minimize public and
private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to:
1. Protect human life and health;
2. Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
3. Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally
undertaken at the expense of the general public;
4. Minimize prolonged business interruptions;
5. Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric,
telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in floodplains;
6. Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of flood
prone areas in such a manner as to minimize future flood blight areas;
7. Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in a flood area;
8. Ensure that those who occupy the floodplain assume the responsibility for their actions;
9. Protect the natural areas required to convey flood flows and retain flow characteristics; and
10. Obtain and maintain the benefits to the community of participating in the national flood
insurance program.
B. Basis For Establishing S: The areas of special flood hazard Special Flood Hazard Areas
identified by the federal emergency management agency in a scientific and engineering report
entitled, "The Flood Insurance Study For Eagle County, Colorado, And Incorporated Areas"
dated December 4, 2007, with accompanying flood insurance rate maps and flood boundary-
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
floodway maps (FIRM and FBFM) and any revisions thereto are hereby adopted by reference
and declared to be a part of this chapter.
C. Designation Of The Floodplain Administrator: The town engineer or designee is hereby
appointed the floodplain administrator to administer and implement the provisions of this chapter
and other appropriate sections of 44 CFR (national flood insurance program regulations)
pertaining to floodplain management.
D. Duties And Responsibilities Of The Floodplain Administrator: Duties and responsibilities of
the floodplain administrator shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
1. Maintain and hold open for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of this
chapter.
2. Review all permit applications to ensure that the requirements of this chapter have been
satisfied and that the proposed improvement will be reasonably safe from flooding.
3. Review, approve or deny floodplain use and modification permits to determine whether
proposed improvements meet the provisions of this chapter.
4. Review evidence prior to the issuance of a floodplain use permit that all necessary permits
have been obtained from those federal, state, or local government agencies from which prior
approval is required. Conditional floodplain use permits may be issued contingent upon receipt
of the above mentioned agency permits.
5. Review and verify that no new habitable structure is constructed within the flood hazard
zoneSpecial Flood Hazard Area.
6. Review and verify that a licensed professional engineer or professional land surveyor certified
the location of the 100-year floodplain on all development applications that are adjacent to, or
partially located within the 100-year floodplain, that are proposing improvements that may affect
the floodplain.
7. Where interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the boundaries of Special Flood
Hazard Zone the areas of special flood hazards (for example, where there appears to be a
conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions) the floodplain administrator
shall make the necessary interpretation.
8. Notify, in riverine situations, adjacent communities and the Colorado division of emergency
management Colorado Water Conservation Board, prior to any alteration or relocation of a
watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the federal emergency management
agency.
9. Assure that the flood carrying capacity within any altered or relocated portion of any
watercourse is maintained.
10. When base flood elevation data have not been provided in accordance with subsection B of
this section, the floodplain administrator shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base
flood elevation data and floodway data available from federal, state or other source, in order to
administer the provisions of subsection F of this section.
11. When a regulatory floodway has not been designated, the floodplain administrator must
require that no new construction, substantial improvements, or other development (including fill)
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
shall be permitted within zones A1-30 and AE on the community's FIRM, unless it is
demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development, when combined with all
other existing and anticipated development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the
base flood more than one-half foot (1') (1/2’) at any point within the community.
12. Under the provisions of 44 CFR chapter 1, section 65.12, of the national flood insurance
program regulations, a community may approve certain development in zones A1-30, AE, AH,
on the community's FIRM which increases the water surface elevation of the base flood by more
than one-half foot (1') (1/2’), provided that the community first applies for a conditional FIRM
revision through FEMA (conditional letter of map revision).
E. Floodplain Permits:
1. Floodplain Use Permit:
a. Purpose: The floodplain use permit is a permit to allow temporary grading within the
floodplain and allow for necessary public infrastructure improvements within the floodplain. A
floodplain use permit may be issued under at least one of the following conditions:
(1) Temporary grading in the floodplain approved by the floodplain administrator, in which the
site is returned to its existing grade and conditions;
(2) Utility construction/maintenance within the floodplain approved by the floodplain
administrator which is deemed to have an insignificant impact to the 100-year floodplain;
(3) Stream bank stabilization within the floodplain approved by the floodplain administrator and
is deemed to have an insignificant impact to the floodplain;
(4) Public infrastructure construction/maintenance approved by the floodplain administrator
including, but not limited to, roads, bridges, recreation paths, walks, stream drop structures, and
stream erosion control measures which are deemed to have an insignificant impact to the
floodplain;
b. Floodplain Use Permit Application Submittal Requirements: Applicants shall provide the
following information prior to design review or any review by the planning and environmental
commission:
(1) Site plan at an engineering scale showing the location, dimensions, and elevations of the
proposed landscape/grade alterations, existing and proposed structures, relevant
landscape/topographic features, and the location of the foregoing in relation to the 100-year
floodplain. The floodplain line shall be provided on a plan certified by a licensed professional
engineer or land surveyor.
(2) Detailed topographic cross sections provided by a licensed professional surveyor of the area
proposed to be altered, showing existing and proposed conditions.
(3) Description of the extent to which any floodplain will be altered including why, when, how,
and when it will be replaced back to its original configuration, and addressing each relevant
criterion in subsection E3 of this section.
(4) Copy of all other necessary approved permits (i.e., building permit, public way permit, ACOE
permit, dewatering permit, DOW permit, CDHPE permit, etc.).
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
(5) If required by the floodplain administrator, an engineered floodplain analysis of the impacts
to the floodplain prepared by a qualified licensed professional engineer.
(6) Submitted application for a conditional FIRM and floodway revision through FEMA, if
applicable.
(7) Any additional information deemed necessary by the floodplain administrator.
2. Floodplain Modification Permit:
a. Purpose: A floodplain modification permit is a permit to allow construction of improvements
and/or modifications to the adopted floodplain for all other uses, improvements, or modifications
to or within the floodplain that do not fall within the guidelines of the floodplain use permit.
However, no habitable structures or improvements shall be allowed to be constructed within the
floodplain.
b. Floodplain Modification Application Submittal Requirements: Applicants shall provide the
following information prior to design review or any review by the planning and environmental
commission:
(1) Elevation of the lowest floor (including basement and crawl space) of all new and
substantially improved structures within or adjacent to the floodplain.
(2) Description of the extent to which any floodplain will be altered including why, when, how,
and when it will be replaced back to its original configuration, and addressing each relevant
factor in subsection E3 of this section.
(3) Signature of the owners of all property subject to an impact by the proposed improvement.
(4) A site plan drawn to an engineering scale showing the location, dimensions, and elevations
of the proposed landscape/grade alterations, existing and proposed structures, relevant
landscape/topographic features, and the location of the foregoing in relation to the 100-year
floodplain. The floodplain line shall be provided on a plan certified by a licensed professional
engineer or land surveyor.
(5) Detailed topographic cross sections provided by a licensed professional surveyor of the area
proposed to be altered, showing existing and proposed conditions.
(6) Copy of all other necessary approved permits (i.e., building permit, public way permit, ACOE
permit, dewatering permit, DOW permit, CDHPE permit).
(7) An engineered floodplain analysis of the impacts to the floodplain prepared by a qualified
licensed professional engineer.
(8) Copy of submitted application for a conditional FIRM and floodway revision through FEMA, if
applicable.
(9) Environmental impact report, per chapter 12 of this title.
(10) Any additional information deemed necessary by the floodplain administrator.
3. Review, Criteria And Findings: At the discretion of the floodplain administrator, floodplain use
permits may be reviewed by the floodplain administrator or the PEC. All floodplain modification
permits shall be reviewed and approved by the floodplain administrator and the PEC.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
a. Criteria: The following factors shall be used to make a determination in issuance of floodplain
permits:
(1) The effects upon the efficiency or capacity of the floodway;
(2) The effects upon persons and personal property upstream, downstream and in the
immediate vicinity;
(3) The effects upon the 100-year flood profile and channel stability;
(4) The effects upon any tributaries to the main stream, drainage ditches and any other drainage
facilities or systems;
(5) The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage;
(6) The susceptibility of the proposed improvement and its contents to flood damage and the
effect of such damage on the individual owner;
(7) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others;
(8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development;
(9) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles;
(10) The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions including
maintenance and repair of streets and bridges, and public utilities and facilities such as sewer,
gas, electrical and water systems;
(11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the
floodwaters and the effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the site;
(12) The effect the proposed changes will have any adverse environmental effect on the
watercourse including, without limitation, erosion of stream banks and stream side trees and
vegetation and wildlife habitat;
(13) The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable;
(14) The availability of alternative locations, not subject to flooding or erosion damage, for the
proposed use;
(15) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan for that area.
b. Findings: The following findings shall be made before granting of a floodplain permit:
(1) That the proposed use or modification adequately addresses the findings in subsection E3a
of this section, as determined by the floodplain administrator, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that one or more of the standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution
consistent with the public interest has been achieved;
(2) That the proposed use or modification is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives
of the town; and
(3) That the proposed use or modification is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
(4) That the proposed use or modification promotes the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a
manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a
resort and residential community of the highest quality.
4. Permit Fees: The town council shall set a floodplain permit schedule sufficient to cover the
cost of town staff time, consultant fees, and incidental expense.
5. Expiration Of Permit: A floodplain permit shall expire two (2) years after its date of issuance if
the permittee has not started construction under the permit.
F. Provisions For Flood Hazard Reduction:
1. General Standards: In all areas of special flood hazards Special Flood Hazard Areas, the
following provisions are required for all new construction and substantial improvements:
a. Habitable structures or improvements shall not be permitted to be constructed within the 100-
year floodplain. Improvements that may be approved for construction within the 100-year
floodplain include:
(1) Temporary grading in the floodplain approved by the floodplain administrator, in which the
site is returned to its existing grade and conditions;
(2) Utility construction/maintenance within the floodplain approved by the floodplain
administrator which is deemed to have an insignificant impact to the floodplain;
(3) Stream bank stabilization within the floodplain approved by the floodplain administrator and
is deemed to have an insignificant impact to the floodplain;
(4) Public infrastructure construction/maintenance approved by the floodplain administrator
including, but not limited to, roads, bridges, recreation paths, walks, stream drop structures, and
stream erosion control measures which are deemed to have an insignificant impact to the
floodplain;
b. An insignificant impact to the floodplain shall be defined as: An improvement in the floodplain
that is a public benefit that meets the criteria set out in subsection F1A of this section and
causes no negative impacts to adjacent properties and no permanent localized cumulative
increase in the adopted base flood elevations (BFE) greater than 0.25 vertical feet. The
applicant shall apply for a conditional FIRM and floodway revision through FEMA, if applicable;
c. All new structures or improvements, unless otherwise specifically provided for within this
chapter, shall not influence the 100-year floodplain and shall maintain a minimum clear distance
from the 100-year floodplain of one foot (1') in both the horizontal and vertical directions;
d. Floor plans and elevations illustrating that the lowest floor elevations including basement,
together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities,of the new or substantially improved
structure, shall be elevated to at least one foot (1') above the base flood elevation;
e. All approved new or modified improvements shall be designed (or modified) and adequately
anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the improvement resulting from
hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy;
f. All new approved construction or modified improvements shall be constructed by methods and
practices that minimize flood damage;
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
g. All new approved construction or modified improvements shall be constructed with materials
resistant to flood damage;
h. All existing nonconforming structures located within the 100-year floodplain that may require
maintenance shall not negatively impact the adopted BFEs or adjacent properties in any way,
unless as provided by subsection F1a of this section; and shall increase conformity and flood
protection as required by the floodplain administrator (i.e., floodproofing, flotation prevention,
flood resistant materials, etc.);
i. All existing nonconforming structures that may require maintenance to operational systems
that are within the floodplain shall be constructed with electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing,
and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities that are designed and/or located so
as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of
flooding;
j. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate
infiltration of floodwaters into the system;
k. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate
infiltration of floodwaters into the system and discharge from the systems into floodwaters; and
l. On site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination
from them during flooding.
2. Standards For Areas Of Shallow Flooding (AO/AH Zones): Located within the areas of
special flood hazard established in subsection B of this section, are areas designated as
shallow flooding. These areas have special flood hazards associated with base flood depths of
one to three feet (3') where a clearly defined channel does not exist and where the path of
flooding is unpredictable and where velocity flow may be evident. Such flooding is characterized
by ponding or sheet flow; therefore, the following provisions apply:
a. All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures have the lowest
floor (including basement, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities) elevated
one foot (1’) above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in
feet on the community's FIRM (at least 2 3 feet if no depth number is specified).
b. All new construction and substantial improvements of nonresidential structures have the
lowest floor (including basement, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities)
elevated one foot (1’) above above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth
number specified in feet on the community's FIRM (at least 2 3 feet if no depth number is
specified), or; together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities be designed so that one foot
(1’) above below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially
impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of
resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads of effects of buoyancy.
c. A registered professional engineer or architect shall submit a certification to the floodplain
administrator that the standards of this chapter are satisfied.
d. Require within zones AH or AO adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes, to
guide floodwaters around and away from proposed structures.
3. Floodways: Floodways located within areas of special flood hazard Special Flood Hazard
Area established in subsection B of this section, are areas designated as floodways. Since the
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of floodwaters which carry debris,
potential projectiles and erosion potential, the following provisions shall apply:
a. Encroachments are prohibited, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and
other development within the adopted regulatory floodway unless it has been demonstrated
through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering
practice that the proposed encroachment would not result in any increase in flood levels within
the community during the occurrence of the base flood discharge.
b. If this subsection F is satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements shall
comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of this subsection F.
c. Under the provisions of 44 CFR chapter 1, section 65.12, of the national flood insurance
regulations, a community may permit encroachments within the adopted regulatory floodway
that would result in an increase in base flood elevations, provided that the community first
applies for a conditional FIRM and floodway revision through FEMA. (Ord. 28(2007) § 5)
G. Properties Removed From Floodplain By Fill
1. A Floodplain Permit shall not be issued for the construction of a new structure or
addition to an existing structure on a property removed from the floodplain by the
issuance of a FEMA Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR-F), unless such new
structure or addition complies with the following:
a. Residential Construction: The lowest floor (including basement), electrical, heating,
ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities
(including ductwork), must be elevated to one foot above the Base Flood Elevation that
existed prior to the placement of fill.
b. Non Residential Construction: The lowest floor (including basement), electrical,
heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities
(including ductwork), must be elevated to one foot above the Base Flood Elevation that
existed prior to the placement of fill, or together with attendant utility and sanitary
facilities be designed so that the structure or addition is watertight to at least one foot
above the base flood level that existed prior to the placement of fill with walls
substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components
having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads of effects of
buoyancy.
H. Critical Facilities
1. Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possible, located outside
the limits of the Regulatory Floodplain.
2. Construction of new critical facilities in the Regulatory Floodplain shall be permissible
if no feasible alternative site is available, provided
a. Critical facilities shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet above the base flood
elevation or to the height of the 500-year flood, whichever is higher. If there is no
available data on the 500-year flood, the permit applicants shall develop the needed data
in accordance with FEMA mapping guidelines.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
b. Access to and from the critical facility shall be protected to the elevation of the 500-
year flood.
Section 3. Section 12-21-14 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as follows:
12-21-14: RIGHT OF APPEAL:
Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to deny any interested person his/her rights to appeal
the decision of the administrator in accordance with section 12-3-3 of this title. In addition,
nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to deny any interested person his/her rights to seek a
variance from the requirements of this chapter. Variances shall be governed by the provisions of
chapter 17 of this title.
Variances specific to Flood Hazard Zones, 12-21-11, shall be governed by chapter 17 of
this title and may be granted under the following conditions;
A. The Appeal Board may grant variances and place conditions upon them as it deems
necessary to further the purpose and objectives of this ordinance as stated in 12-21-
11(A).
B. Variances may be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation or restoration of
structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of
Historic Places, upon a determination that the proposed repair or rehabilitation will
not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure and the
variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of
the structure.
C. Variances shall not be issued within any designated floodway if any increase in flood
levels during the base flood discharge would result.
Section 4. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would have passed this
ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of
the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be
declared invalid.
Section 5. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 6. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this
ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that
occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or
proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of
any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or
superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 7. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall
not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2013
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 19th day of November, 2013 and a
public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 3rd day of December, 2013, in the
Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this
___ day of ______________, 2013.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 20, Series 2013, an ordinance providing for the
levy assessment and collection of town property taxes due for the 2013 tax year and payable
in the 2014 fiscal year.
PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve or approve with amendments
BACKGROUND: Please see attached memo
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve or approve with amendments
ATTACHMENTS:
Mil levy
11/19/2013
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: November 14, 2013
SUBJECT: Mil Levy Ordinance
I. SUMMARY
Authorization for the collection of property taxes in 2014
II. DISCUSSION
You will be asked to approve the attached mil levy ordinance upon first reading on Tuesday
evening. This ordinance authorizes the collection of property taxes in 2014 based upon 2013
assessed valuations of property within the town’s boundaries. Eagle County is responsible for
assessing values and for collecting property taxes on our behalf. The town is required by
Colorado state law to certify the mil levy by December 15 of each year. Since two readings of
an ordinance are required, we will bring the first reading on Tuesday and the second reading on
December 3rd to enable us to meet the December 15 date. The attached ordinance is based
on preliminary assessed valuations from the county (as of August, 2013).
The town’s base mil levy as shown in the ordinance is 4.69 mils and the abatement levy is .015
mils. Abatement results when a taxpayer protests an assessed valuation after the normal
protest period and is refunded a portion of the tax already due or paid. The abatement mil levy
allows the town to recoup the refunded amount. This abatement levy of .015 mils equates to an
additional $1.19 per year for a $1 million home and $4.35 per year for $1 million commercial
property.
The property tax authorized by the attached ordinance will generate $4.3 million in revenue in
2014, representing approximately 8% of the town’s total revenue. The estimated total net
assessed valuation for 2014 is an increase of 7.4% from the prior year’s assessed valuation for
property located in Vail.
11/19/2013
Ordinance 20, Series of 2013
ORDINANCE NO. 20
SERIES OF 2013
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION
OF TOWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 2013 TAX YEAR AND
PAYABLE IN THE 2014 FISCAL YEAR.
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to provide for the levy, assessment and
collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 2013 year and payable in the 2014
fiscal year.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail,
Colorado, that:
1. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses of the
Town of Vail, Colorado, during its 2014 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property
tax of 4.705 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $914,686,500 for the 2013
tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of
$4,303,842 calculated as follows:
Base mill levy 4.690 $4,289,880
Abatement levy .015 _ 13,962
Total mill levy 4.705 $4,303,842
Said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, as directed by the
Colorado Revised Statutes (1973 as amended), and as otherwise required by law.
2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance,
and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued,
11/19/2013
Ordinance 20, Series of 2013
any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 19th day of November, 2013. A public hearing shall be
held hereon at 6 P.M. on the 3rd day of December, 2013, at the regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
______________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Presentation on the Timber Ridge Redevelopment Project Program
PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Community Development Director, Jen Wright, Wright and
Company, Gary Gorman, Gorman & Company, Inc. and Rick Pylman, Pylman & Associates.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Authorize the Town Manager to sign the development
application facilitating the redevelopment of Timber Ridge as proposed.
BACKGROUND: On October 15, 2013, the Vail Town Council authorized the Town Manager
to enter into a pre-development agreement with Gorman & Company, Inc. to facilitate the
redevelopment of the easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Apartments. Pursuant to
the terms of the agreement, the developer was to return to the Town Council with a
presentation on the proposed redevelopment. The purpose of this agenda item is to meet that
required obligation and obtain the Town Council's agreement on the proposed project
program. Authorization from the Town Council for the Town Manager to sign the development
application shall indicate the acceptance of the project program by the Town Council.
Please refer to the staff memorandum dated November 19, 2013 for a more detailed
description of the project program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends the
Vail Town Council instructs the Town Manager to sign the development application to facilitate
the redevelopment of the easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Apartments as
proposed. Once signed the applicants will be prepared to submit a complete development
application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review by no later
than November 29, 2013, in accordance with the signed Pre-development Agreement.
The development application is currently scheduled for final review by the Planning &
Environmental Commission on Monday, December 16, 2013.
ATTACHMENTS:
Town Council Memorandum
Timber Ridge Market Study November 2013
Town Council Submission
Timber Ridge Redevelopment - Elevations
11/19/2013
To: Vail Town Council
From: George Ruther, Director of Community Development
Date: November 19, 2013
Subject: Redevelopment of the Eastern One-Half of Timber Ridge Village Apartments
I. Purpose
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Vail Town Council with a summary of the
proposed redevelopment of the eastern one-half of the Timber Ridge Village Apartments
located at 1280 North Frontage Road in Vail, Colorado. A summary presentation of the
redevelopment proposal is required pursuant to the terms outlined in the Pre-Development
Agreement, executed by and between the Town of Vail and Gorman and Company.
The summary presentation will address the following topics:
• Proposed Project Program
• Project Next Steps
In the end, the Vail Town Council is being asked to direct the Town Manager to sign the
development application, on behalf of the Town of Vail, to allow the project, as proposed,
to proceed through the Town’s development review process.
II. Proposed Project Program
1. Town Council instructed staff to enter into discussions with Jen Wright and Gary Gorman on
the redevelopment of Timber Ridge. All parties agreed that an RFP process was not needed as
that process has failed to achieve our objectives on three previous occasions.
2. Town staff entered into a 120-day exclusive negotiations process with Jen Wright and Gary
Gorman.
3. Assume no financial subsidies will be provided by the Town. ($8 million gap)
4. A “bottom up” approach based upon carrying capacity of the site has been used to determine
development potential. (ie parking requirement, type of construction, surface parking,
landscape areas, livability, etc.). This approach has resulted in a project which is financially
feasible and can be constructed unlike the previous three attempts.
5. Easternmost 5.24 acres of Timber Ridge. Lots1 -5, a resubdivision of Lion’s Ridge
Subdivision, Block C, Town of Vail.
6. Site designated Housing Zone District. Development shall be in full compliance with the
development regulations prescribed for the District.
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 2
7. Assemblage of four, three-story tall buildings containing at least 113 dwelling units. At least
70% shall be deed restricted pursuant to zoning requirements.
8. Based upon a recently completed market study, a mix of one and two bedroom units
(26%/74%)
9. Eighty-four (84) two bedroom units ranging in size from 870 square feet to 933 square feet
and twenty-nine (29) one bedroom units ranging in size from 597 square feet to 633 square feet.
10. Capable of housing at least 233 persons (1.5 persons/unit average x 29 one bedroom units
= 43.5 persons) (2.25 persons/unit average x 84 two bedroom units = 189 persons)
11. Each unit is provided with its own entrance off of a shared exterior stairwell.
12. Each unit is provided with a washer and dryer, gas furnace, energy star rated kitchen
appliances and a 360 cubic foot storage closet (5’x8’x9’).
13. 153 surface parking spaces total. 1 parking space per one bedroom unit and 1.47 parking
spaces per two bedroom unit.
14. >25 du/acre. Density calculation takes into account steep slopes and unbuildable areas of
the site.
15. 35-year ground lease with no upfront or annual payment. Improvements revert to the Town
at the end of the 35-year term.
16. Financial provisions ensure the improvements are in good repair at the end of the 35-year
term.
17. Town obligated to mitigate rockfall hazard. +/- $100,000 initial construction cost with
annual maintenance required. Developer obligated to pay for Frontage Road turn lane
improvements.
18. Deed restriction required consistent with the Housing Zone District 70%/30%
19. Initial pre-application meetings with Fire and PW. Project proposal is consistent with Town
requirements.
20. CDOT application and meetings pending. Town to apply for CDOT access permit on behalf
of the project.
21. Development application submitted by November 25, 2013. Final PEC meeting on
December 16, 2013. Schedule based upon construction start by late spring 2014.
II. Project Next Steps
A preliminary project schedule has been created to facilitate the successful outcome for this
project. The next steps for the project include:
• Deed restriction discussion with the Vail Town Council
• Final Lease Agreement negotiations with the Vail Town Council
• Rockfall mitigation approval
• Transit stop improvements discussion
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 3
• Development application submittal to the Town of Vail by November 29th
• Final development application review by the PEC on December 16th
• Conceptual design application review by the DRB on December 18th
• Final design application review by the DRB on January 8th or 22nd
• Submit building permit application by March 15th
• Issuance of building permit by May 1st
This schedule is subject to change as discussions regarding this project continue.
11/19/2013
Market Study
Apartment Property in Vail, Colorado
November 2013
Prepared by:
Rees Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 3845
Crested Butte, CO 81224
970.349.9845
melanie@reesconsultinginc.com
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc.
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................................. 1
Organization of the Report ...................................................................................................... 1
Consultant Qualifications ........................................................................................................ 1
1. Project and Site Description ................................................................................................ 3
Number, Type and Size of Units ............................................................................................. 3
Amenities ............................................................................................................................... 3
Unit Design ............................................................................................................................. 3
Rents ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Utilities .................................................................................................................................... 4
Access and Infrastructure ....................................................................................................... 5
Parking ................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Location Analysis ................................................................................................................ 6
Street Address/Street Boundaries .......................................................................................... 6
Surrounding Land Use ............................................................................................................ 6
Proximity to Services .............................................................................................................. 8
Shopping and Dining ........................................................................................................... 8
Public Transit ...................................................................................................................... 9
Bike and Pedestrian Access ............................................................................................... 9
Parks .................................................................................................................................. 9
Marketability ........................................................................................................................... 9
3. Identification of Market Area Boundaries ........................................................................11
4. Market Conditions ..............................................................................................................13
Rents .....................................................................................................................................13
Vacancies ..............................................................................................................................14
5. Competitive Analysis ......................................................................................................17
Selection of Comparables......................................................................................................17
General Description ...............................................................................................................19
Income, Rent and/or Employment Restrictions ......................................................................21
Resident Profiles ...................................................................................................................22
Lease Terms .........................................................................................................................23
Amenities ..............................................................................................................................23
Parking ..................................................................................................................................25
Utilities ...................................................................................................................................26
Unit Mix .................................................................................................................................26
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc.
Unit Size ................................................................................................................................28
Vacancies ..............................................................................................................................28
Rents .....................................................................................................................................30
Discounts/Incentives ..............................................................................................................31
Condominium Rentals ...........................................................................................................32
6. Demographic Trends and Economic Conditions .............................................................33
Market Area Demographics ...................................................................................................33
Demographic Trends .............................................................................................................35
The Economy ........................................................................................................................40
7. Demand Analysis ...........................................................................................................44
Demand from Market-Area Renters .......................................................................................44
Rental Demand from Job Growth ..........................................................................................46
Rental Demand from Down Valley .........................................................................................47
8. Conclusions and Recommendations ..............................................................................48
Design Considerations ..........................................................................................................48
Unit Mix ..............................................................................................................................48
Unit Size ............................................................................................................................48
Sound Abatement ..............................................................................................................49
Utilities ...............................................................................................................................49
Parking ..............................................................................................................................49
Marketability of Location ........................................................................................................50
Overall Market Conditions .....................................................................................................50
Responsiveness to Demographic and Economic Trends .......................................................50
Competition ...........................................................................................................................51
Demand for Rental Housing ..................................................................................................51
Rents .....................................................................................................................................52
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 1
Introduction
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to assess the marketability of the proposed redevelopment of
approximately half of the Timber Ridge apartment property in Vail, Colorado . Timber Ridge is
now owned by the Town of Vail. Gorman and Company in team with Wright and Company, a
long-time Vail Valley real estate development firm, proposes to demolish 102 units built in 1981
and now in very poor condition and to replace them with 112 one- and two-bedroom
apartments.
This report evaluates the design and site, analyzes the location, assesses the competition,
provides information on demographic trends and economic condition and determines if
demand exists for the proposed units. Conclusions and recommendations are made on design,
unit mix, rents and amenities.
Organization of the Report
This report consists of eight major sections:
1. Project and Site Analysis
2. Location Analysis
3. Identification of Market Boundaries
4. Market Conditions
5. Competitive Analysis
6. Demographic Trends and Economic Conditions
7. Demand Analysis
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
Consultant Qualifications
Over the past 20 years, Melanie Rees has become an industry leader in housing market analysis
with clients that include private and non-profit developers, public housing authorities, lenders
and local governments. Her focus is on areas throughout the mountain west where housing
costs are high, including the amenity-rich resort communities.
The firm’s services generally fall within three categories: housing needs assessments, project
specific market studies and strategic planning and program development . Rees Consulting is an
approved market analyst for programs administered by the Colorado Housing and Finance
Authority and the Colorado Division of Housing.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 2
Work in the Vail Valley has included:
The Vail Commons Master Plan, through which both ownership townhomes and
employee rental units were developed as part of a mixed -used property on a 6.4 acre
site acquired by the Town of Vail. The 52 townhomes are located on top of a grocery
store yet, with grade separations and other design elements, appear and function as a
residential property.
Housing needs assessments covering all of Eagle County completed in 1995, 2001 and
2007 in team with RRC Associates of Boulder.
Market studies for multiple apartment developments including Lake Creek Village, River
Edge, River Run and, as a subcontractor, Middle Creek.
Workforce housing impact study for the Eagle River Station, a large mixed use
development now in early development stages.
Consultation during the past year with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District on
modifications to their extensive, valley-wide employee housing program.
Rees Consulting has prepared market studies for numerous apartment properties in mountain
communities including:
Project Name Location
960 East Durango
Animas Village Durango
Breckenridge Terrace Breckenridge
Crested Butte Flats Crested Butte
Fox Run Fraser
Gold Hill Village Central City
Lake Creek Village Edwards
Melody Ranch Jackson, WY
Merced de las Animas Durango
Middle Creek Vail
Mountain Village Steamboat Springs
Pence Miller Avon
Pinewood Village Breckenridge
River Edge Avon
River Run Avon
Swan River Village Breckenridge
Tabernash Apts., Grand County
Valle de Merced Durango
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 3
1. Project and Site Description
Number, Type and Size of Units
A total of 113 one- and two-bedroom apartments and one leasing/management office are
planned. Of the total, 74% will have two bedrooms and two full bathrooms and 26% will be
one-bedroom units. All will be flats.
The proposed apartments will range in size from 597 to 633 square feet for one bedroom and
from 870 to 933 square feet for two bedrooms. The overall average size will be 889 square feet
in size. All units will have a deck measuring 95 or 115 square feet.
Proposed Unit Type and Size
Unit Type # of Units Unit Size Deck Sq.Ft.
1 BR 17 597 95
1 BR 12 633 115
2 BR/2 BA 42 870 95
2 BR/2 BA 36 911 115
2 BR/2 BA 6 933 115
Total/Average 113 820
Amenities
The units will have:
A large exterior storage closet off of the balconies that average around 33 square feet in
size for the one-bedroom units and 57.5 square feet for the two-bedroom units;
Coat closets by the entrance door;
Walk-in closets;
Large kitchens with ample counter space and cabinets;
Microwaves
Energy star appliances
The property will have an on-site leasing/management office located at the southwest corner
of Building B on the first floor. The 597 square foot office will have the same exterior
dimensions as a one-bedroom unit.
Unit Design
All of the units will have:
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 4
An “L” shaped kitchen with room for table;
A single entrance into the living room;
A stackable washer and dryer and mechanical room accessed from a door in the kitchen;
The one-bedroom units have a full bathroom with large vanity accessed through the bedroom.
The two-bedroom units will have a master bedroom suite with walk-in closet and full
bathroom. The second bedroom will be located directly across the hall from a full bathroom.
Units will be accessed via interior stairs that lead to the front doors. There are no corridors.
Given the cold, snowy weather in Vail, the interior stairs will not only be safer in winter but will
also shield against cold air entering the units every time the door is opened.
Rents
Rents have not yet been finalized. A range of $1,200 to $1,300 per month is being considered
for the one-bedroom units and the rent for the two -bedroom units will range between $1,600
and $1,700 per month.
Assuming the midpoint of the range, , rents on a per-square-foot basis will range from $1.77 for
the largest two-bedroom apartments to $2.09 for the smaller one-bedroom units, with an
average of $1.90.
Rents by Unit Type
Unit Type # of Units Unit Size Rent Rent/SF
1 BR 17 597 $1,200 - $1,300 $2.09
1 BR 12 633 $1,200 - $1,300 $1.98
2 BR/2 BA 42 870 $1,600 - $1,700 $1.90
2 BR/2 BA 36 911 $1,600 - $1,700 $1.81
2 BR/2 BA 6 933 $1,600 - $1,700 $1.77
Total/Average 113 820 $1,548 $1.90
Utilities
The cost of water, sewer and trash collection will be covered by base rent. Residents will be
responsible for their own electricity and gas. Heat will be forced air gas. While these systems
are far more efficient that the electric baseboard heat in the existing Timber Ridge units, they
are generally less efficient and most costly to operate than hot water heating systems.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 5
Access and Infrastructure
Road access and other infrastructure is in place to serve the 102 apartments that will be
demolished. The existing access off of the Frontage Road is proposed to be replaced with one
new vehicle entry point from the existing Frontage Road.
Parking
A total of 152 surface parking spaces are planned. This equates to a ratio of 1.34 spaces per
unit. One space will be provided free of charge for each unit. An additional space will be
provided for $75 per month on a first come/first served basis.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 6
2. Location Analysis
Street Address/Street Boundaries
The project is located in the town of Vail on the north side of I-70, a major east-west interstate
highway through Colorado, at 1280 North Frontage Road. It is about 1.5 miles west of Exit 176,
one of three exits in Vail off of I-70.
Project Location Map
Surrounding Land Use
The property is in a primarily residential area. More specifically:
Immediately to the east of the parcel are Simba Run Vail Condominiums, which include
about 70 one- and two-bedroom, amenity-rich condominiums that are primarily
marketed as short-term visitor rentals.
Only the east half of the existing Timber Ridge Apartments are to be redeveloped,
meaning that the existing apartments will border the west side of the redevelopment.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 7
These apartments will remain as workforce housing, with units master leased by Vail
Resorts for their employees, until it is redeveloped at a future date .
The US Post Office is located just beyond Timber Ridge to the west, at 1300 North
Frontage Road.
The mountainside, with some luxury single-
family homes at the top of the hill and a
road serving residential areas, Lions Ridge
Loop, borders the north end of the
property. The photo shows the hillside
looking north from the eastern access to
the property.
The south end of the site is bordered first by
a pedestrian/bike path, followed by the
Frontage Road, and then I-70, with each
path/road separated by a natural grass
median. The photo is looking southeast
from the west access to the property.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 8
Vicinity Map
Proximity to Services
Shopping and Dining
The nearest major grocery stores are City Market and Safeway, located less than one mile west
of the property along North Frontage Road. These are reachable via bus transit, personal
vehicle, or the bike and pedestrian trail, which has only a slight incline traveling west .
Several other amenities are located within the same development as the Safeway, including a
bank, barber, UPS store, dental office, child care center, liquor store, coffee shop, Sports
Authority, 7-Eleven and a Holiday Inn. Restaurants include a pizza place, sub shop, café, sushi
restaurant and quick serve options, including Subway, McDonalds and Qdoba.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 9
Public Transit
A covered bus stop is located at the existing western access to Timber Ridge apartments. This
bus stop will be redesigned and reconstructed as part of the construction of turn lanes into
Timber Ridge and the proposed apartments. A landscaped entrance will be provided to serve
as a transition between the two properties.
The stop is serviced by the West Vail Red and Green bus routes year round and provides service
every 40-minutes in the summer (May 27 through mid-December), once per hour in the spring
(April 15 through May 26), 30-minute intervals during peak hours in the winter (December 10
through April 14). In the winter, the site is also served by the Lionsridge route at varying
intervals. Buses run between 6 a.m. and 12 a.m. each day, with service offered until about 2
a.m. in the winter. Routes traverse the length of the North and South Frontage Roads, fr om
West Vail to Vail Village.
Bike and Pedestrian Access
The property is bordered by a bike and pedestrian path on the south, traveling along much of
the Frontage Road. It is located just over one half mile west of the pedestrian overpass bridge,
which ends in Vail near the Lionshead Ski School and Gondola.
A vehicle, bike and pedestrian underpass that would traverse under I-70, allowing more
convenient access to the heart of Vail and Lionshead is in the planning phase. The Town of Vail
has hired a firm to study the feasibility and environmental impacts of the underpass, and has
committed to provide 30% of the project’s funding. The north end of the underpass would
connect with North Frontage Road very near the east side of the Timber Ridge parcel in front of
the Simba Run condominium complex. The underpass has been discussed for years, but
appears to be moving forward although financing and construction could take several years .
This underpass would enhance Timber Ridge’s already very convenient location.
Parks
The redevelopment will include a modest park areas for residents. Otherwise, Town of Vail
parks and numerous mountain trails and federal open spaces are easily accessed from the
property via the bike and pedestrian trails, bus service, and personal vehicles.
Marketability
The site is very marketable. It is in a primarily residential area with easy access to groceries and
other necessary goods and services. With a bike/pedestrian path running along the property
and a bus stop serviced by two public transit routes, it is very convenient. A car is not required
to reach most job sites, shopping, skiing and Vail’s other resort amenities.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 10
Views of the mountains to the south, southwest and southeast are desirable, as well as the
southern sun exposure for units facing that direction . Noise from traffic is of concern for south
facing units, however, given the proximity to I-70 and bus/truck traffic along the Interstate and
the Frontage Road.
The apartments will be situated such that some will be facing toward the north and south and
others will be facing west and east, providing options based on views, sun exposure, highway
noise and other preferences.
Units on the north side of the buildings will provide views of the side of the mountain
and some will also view the parking lot, but will be more protected from I-70 noise than
other units;
Units facing south will have greater sun exposure in the winter and provide views of the
mountains, but will be most prone to highway noise;
Units facing west and east will have limited mountain views and varying degrees of sun
exposure during the day, and moderate exposure to noise from the Interstate .
The project will retain trees along the south border, helping to mitigate the sight and sounds of
traffic. Nonetheless, the use of advanced soundproofing in units to protect against such noise
should help the marketability of units.
The site is highly visible; it can be seen from I-70, both frontage roads and much of the town.
The redevelopment, which has already received coverage in the Vail Daily newspaper, will be
well known, particularly since Timber Ridge is adjacent to the Post Office, which most Vail
residents will at least occasionally visit. This exposure will benefit marketing efforts. It will not
be difficult to provide directions to potential residents when they make inquiries.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 11
3. Identification of Market Area Boundaries
The primary market area (PMA) for the proposed project includes the towns of Vail and Avon
and the unincorporated community of Eagle-Vail in between. It includes Census Tracts 5.02,
5.03, 7.01, 7.02 and 7.03. These boundaries were selected based on the following factors:
The communities are in close proximity with only minor physical separation; from the
Timber Ridge site to the heart of Avon is eight miles. Beyond Avon, communities are
distinct and separated by large areas of undeveloped land.
Vail and Avon are similar in terms of their economies and jobs offered; both are home
to destination ski areas, high-end accommodations, boutique shopping and fine dining.
Down valley communities are very different with big-box retailers and commercial
development that primarily serves the local population.
The rental inventory is similar throughout the market area with apartment properties
that primarily target low-wage year-round employees or seasonal workers.
Demographic characteristics are also similar within the PMA, yet very distinct from
those in down-valley communities, as described in the Demographic Trends and
Economic Conditions section of this report.
Primary Market Area Map
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 12
The PMA does not include the Beaver Creek resort, Arrowhead or other development to the
west. While it includes the residential units accessed by the Piney Lake Road, there are no
apartment projects in this remote area, and likely few units occupied as long -term rentals.
The PMA includes approximately 42% of the housing units in Eagle County, but only 33% of its
households and 29% of the county’s population. The up-valley communities of Vail and Avon
have proportionately more second/vacation homes than the down -valley communities of
Edwards, Wolcott, Eagle and Gypsum, which accounts for the higher percentage of hou sing
units within the PMA compared to population .
Approximately 35% of the population within the PMA resides in Vail. More reside in Eagle-Vail,
which is primarily a residential community where many local residents live. Through
annexations to the east, Avon now encompasses undeveloped areas, but also takes in several
apartment projects that are covered in the Competitive Analysis section of this report.
Population and Housing Units, 2010
Eagle
County
Vail PMA
Population 52,197 5,305 15,257
Housing units 31,312 7,230 13,064
Households 19,236 2,604 6,294
Housing Occupancy rate 61.4% 36.0% 48.2%
Source: 2010 Census
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 13
4. Market Conditions
This section of the report examines both current and historical occupancy levels/vacancy rates
and rents throughout Eagle County. It identifies trends and provides context for interpreting
the information presented on seven comparable properties in the Competitive Analysis section
of this report. Two sources of data were used:
The Multifamily Rent and Vacancy Survey published by the Colorado Division of Housing.
It is conducted twice yearly in the first and third quarters. The survey is flawed by an
inconsistent sample. It reported on around 1,200 units from 2008 through 2011 but, as
of the first quarter of 2013, covered only 831 units. The properties covered by the
survey are not disclosed. Nonetheless, it is useful for examining historical trends.
Reports compiled and published by Polar Star Properties, which manages three of the
seven properties examined in the Competitive Analysis section of this report. Their
report covers nine properties (plus two seasonal housing projects owned by Vail
Resorts, which were excluded from this analysis). The reports provide detailed project-
by-project information that allows comparison of up valley and down valley
performance and monthly occupancy levels that illustrate seasonality in the market .
Historical data, however, is no longer published.
Rents
Rents are generally higher in the market area than down valley.
Eagle Villas, a LIHTC project in Eagle, has an average per square foot rent of $1.04.
Lake Creek, a project in good condition in Edwards with employment restrictions only
(i.e., no income or rent limits) rents for $1.16 per square foot, on average.
Timber Ridge in Vail, which is in poor condition and managed by the same company as
Lake Creek, commands an average rent of $1.37.
Middle Creek, a LIHTC project in Vail with 44 market rate three-bedroom units, rents for
the most, at $1.97 per square foot.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 14
Rents by Property, July 2013
Location Avg. Rents Avg. Rents/SF
Buffalo Ridge Avon $1,341 $1.27
Buffalo Ridge II Avon $924 $1.69
EagleBend Avon $995 $1.36
Eagle Villas Eagle $1,036 $1.04
Kayak Crossing Avon $1,576 $1.31
Lake Creek Edwards $1,023 $1.16
Middle Creek Vail $1,262 $1.97
Timber Ridge Vail $1,026 $1.37
River Run Avon $1,275 $1.28
Overall $1,162 $1.35
Source: Polar Star Properties
Rents are starting to rise after several post-recession years when rates dropped and discounts
were widespread. The overall average rent increased 3% between July 2012 and 2013, and the
per-square-foot average grew by 15%.
Change in Average Rents
July 2012 – July 2013
2012 2013
Avg. Rent/Unit $1,159 $1,162
Avg, Rent/SF $1.17 $1.35
Source: Polar Star Properties
Vacancies
The following chart illustrates that apartment vacancy rates remained low through 2009, shot
upward in 2010, started to decline in 2011 and dropped to their lowest point in three years by
the first quarter of 2013. More specifically:
Vacancy rates remained low through 2009, long after the recession caused rental
markets to soften throughout much of the country. This was due to the strong influence
that construction has on jobs and the economy in the Vail Valley; construc tion projects
initiated while the development boom continued through 2007 were not completed
until 2009.
In 2010, vacancies shot upward from a combination of job losses and Vail Resorts
terminating their master leases on many units. Their need to import seasonal
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 15
employees dropped when high unemployment freed up many local workers to fill
seasonal ski resort positions. Vail Resorts had extremely high vacancies in the seasonal
worker properties they owned, as was the case at other Colorado ski resorts.
Vacancy rates also vary by season. Rates are consistently lower in the first quarter of
each year than in the third quarter. The high vacancy rate of 14.2% in the third quarter
of 2012 is an anomaly. It was likely due to turnover and reporting inconsisten cies rather
than a sudden short-term spike in the vacancy rate.
Multifamily Vacancies, 2008-2013
Source: Colorado Division of Housing
The following table shows that down-valley properties have similar occupancy levels as those
within the market area. This means that, as occupancies levels peak during the ski season and
as they continue to rise in general with the economy’s recovery, moving down valley will not be
a viable alternative to the decreasing availability and rising rents in the Vail area.
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
1st
Qtr 08
3rd
Qtr 08
1st
Qtr 09
3rd
Qtr 09
1st
Qtr 10
3rd
Qtr 10
1st
Qtr 11
3rd
Qtr 11
1st
Qtr 12
3rd
Qtr 12
1st
Qtr 13
2.7% 2.9%
2.1%
3.5%
6.0%
8.0%
5.7%
6.7%
7.9%
14.2%
4.5%
Va
c
a
n
c
y
R
a
t
e
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 16
Occupancy Levels by Property, July 2013
# Units Occupancy
Rate
Buffalo Ridge 68 93%
Buffalo Ridge II 176 90%
EagleBend 294 94%
Eagle Villas 120 90%
Kayak Crossing 50 98%
Lake Creek 270 96%
Middle Creek 142 98%
Timber Ridge 198 87%
River Run 117 93%
Total/Average 1435 93.2%
Source: Polar Star Properties
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 17
5. Competitive Analysis
This section of the report examines seven apartment properties within the primary market
area. It covers:
General description including location, age, number of units, condition and photos;
Income and/or rent restrictions;
Resident profiles;
Lease terms;
Amenities;
Parking;
Utilities;
Unit mix;
Unit size;
Vacancies;
Rents, per unit and per square foot; and
Discounts/incentives.
This section also provides information on the rents charged for condominium rentals located
within the PMA. The proposed units, being unlike existing apartment projects in the area, will
be the most comparable to condominium rentals in terms of design, location, amenities and
rents. This is because the proposed units will target a higher income population than projects
with income and/or rent restrictions and will be much newer and in a superior location than
other market rate apartment properties.
Selection of Comparables
The selection of properties was based primarily on location and target market served. All
apartment properties that are located within the primary market area and offer at least some
market rate units were included. The only apartment projects within the PMA that were not
examined as part of this analysis are:
Riverview Apartments, a 72-unit rent subsidized Section 8 complex in Eagle-Vail serving
very low income households;
Three seasonal employee projects owned by Vail Resorts: First Chair, Vail, a 124-bed
project completed in 2011; River Edge, Avon, a 103-unit project built in 1997; and The
Tarnes, Avon, a 136-unit project built in 2000;
18 rental units located at Vail Commons above retail space; and
36 units in two projects (Buzzard Park and Creekside) owned by the Town of Vail and
rented to Town employees.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 18
Combined, the six comparable properties have a total of 1,046 units. These units house
approximately 30% of the renter households residing in the market area.
Property Location Map
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 19
General Description
EagleBend is on the north bank of the Eagle
River on a long narrow site with buildings
running east/west. It is near the center of
Avon, yet is in a quiet location. Rents are
higher for units located directly on the river.
Even though it was built in 1990, the 294-unit
property appears to be well maintained and in
good condition and has attractive, mature
landscaping.
http://www.eaglebendapartments.com/
Buffalo Ridge is in Avon on the north side of I-
70 along a hillside yet in an isolated location.
The four-story buildings are aligned
east/west; all units face south with views. It
was developed as two separate projects for
financing purposes. In total, there are 244
units. One phase with 68 units is owned by a
non-profit housing corporation and managed
by Polar Star Properties. The remaining 176
units are owned/managed by Corum Real
Estate Group.
http://www.buffaloridgeapts.com/
http://buffaloridgeapartments.com/
Kayak Crossing is located on the river west of
Vail near Dowd Junction, the area in the
immediate vicinity of the I-70 Minturn exit.
The 50-unit property has access to fishing and
a kayak launch on site. The units are in three-
story buildings with interior stairs. The unit
mix is unusual; most units have five bedrooms
designed initially to function as housing for
seasonal Vail Resort employees. Polar Star
Properties now manages all units for year
round employees. The property appears to be
in excellent condition.
http://www.kayakcrossing.com/
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 20
River Run is a 117-unit condominium project
that functions as an apartment property. It
offers a mix of one-, two- and three-
bedroom units. It is nicely landscaped and
on the Eagle River next to Kayak Crossing in
a quiet location that is convenient to either
Vail or Avon.
http://www.riverrunvailvalley.com/index.as
px
Middle Creek is a LIHTC property completed
in 2004. It is owned and managed by
Coughlin and Company. The 142 units are
located on south sloping hillside just to the
north of I-70. Buildings range from three
stories served by stairs to eight stories with
an elevator. Most parking is in a central
garage. http://www.middlecreekvillage.com/
Timber Ridge has 199 units, all with two
bedrooms and one bath. Vail Resorts
master leases a portion of the units for its
employees. The current lease is for 98
units. At its pre-recession peak, VR master
leased 170 units. Timber Ridge does not
have a web site.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 21
General Description of Competing Properties
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
EagleBend Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River Run Timber
Ridge
Management Polar Star
Properties
Corum
Real
Estate Grp
Polar Star
Properties
Polar Star
Properties
Coughlin
and
Company
Texas Capital
Partners LLC
Corum Real
Estate Grp
Address 0930 Swift
Gulch Rd.
1020 Swift
Gulch Rd.
0010
Stonebridge
Dr.
0033
Kayak Ct.
145 N.
Frontage
Rd. W.
41929 Hwy 6 1208 N.
Frontage
Rd. W.
Location Avon Avon Avon Avon Vail Avon Vail
Property Type 4 stories
(garden
level w/3
floors
above)
4 stories
(garden
level w/3
floors
above)
3 stories 3 stories 3 – 8
stories
3 - 4 stories
Unit Type flats flats flats flats flats flats; lofts,
townhomes
flats
Year Built 2003 2003 1990 2000 2003-04 1985 1981
General excellent excellent good good excellent good poor
Total Units 68 176 294 50 142 117 199
Income/Rent
Restrictions
50% AMI 40 6
60% AMI 92 91
80% AMI 68
120% AMI 294 50
None 44 45 117 199
Income, Rent and/or Employment Restrictions
At Buffalo Ridge there are no income restrictions, but rents must not exceed rates that
are affordable for households with incomes at 80% AMI.
Buffalo Ridge II has a combination of LIHTC units at 50% and 60% AMI and market rate
units that have an Eagle County employment restriction. All but four of the 44 studios
and four of the 44 one-bedroom units are LIHTC restricted at 50% and 60%, respectively,
whereas 52 of the two-bedroom units have LIHTC restrictions and 36 are market.
Of the 142 units at Middle Creek, 97 are income restricted, 91 at 60% AMI and 6 at 50%
AMI. The three-bedroom units are the only ones without income restrictions . About
10% of the inquiries are from persons/households with incomes above the 60% AMI
restriction.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 22
At Timber Ridge at least one member of each household must be employed in Eagle
County; however, there are no income or rent restrictions imposed.
River Run has no employment, income or rent restrictions.
Kayak Crossing, which is owned by a non-profit corporation, has income restrictions of
120% AMI, but no rent restrictions.
Resident Profiles
The resident profiles vary by property. In general, they reflect the way in which demographic
trends vary within Eagle County. Residents living at apartment properties in Vail tend to be
single, living alone or with a roommate(s), or couples without children. The two properties in
the Dowd Junction area, located about mid-way between Vail and Avon, have some families
with children, but most households are adult-only. The properties farther down valley in Avon
are more family oriented with larger households and many children .
Buffalo Ridge has a wide mix of residents with single persons living alone in the studios
and about a 50/50 mix between singles living alone and couples in the one-bedroom
units. Approximately 40% to 50% of the LIHTC two-bedroom units have families with
children. The non-LIHTC two and three-bedroom units serve both roommate and family
households. About half of the residents move in from locations outside of Eagle County.
At Middle Creek, approximately 80% of residents move to the property from out of
state. The rest typically move from down-valley locations, with some occasionally
coming from elsewhere in the Vail area. About 60% of the property’s one-bedroom
units are occupied by two persons, whereas only about 10% of its two-bedroom units
are occupied by just one person.
Timber Ridge attracts residents who are new to the area, most coming from out of
state. Rarely does it draw residents from other properties in the Vail area. It is in such
poor condition that it is considered to be the last choice for persons who want to live in
Vail. About 40% to 50% of units are occupied by roommate households, with the rest
being evenly split between singles living alone and couples. Very few children live at
Timber Ridge.
While about half of the residents at River Run move there from out of state, the
property attracts about 40% of its residents from the Vail area and another 10% from
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 23
down valley. About 40% of its one-bedroom units are occupied by two persons,
whereas 10% of its two-bedroom units have one occupant.
EagleBend is a family-oriented project where the majority of residents are Hispanic.
Most have children. About 80% of the property’s one-bedroom units have two
occupants. Very few, if any, of the two-bedroom units are lived in by only one person.
Lease Terms
Most properties now offer only one-year leases. Timber Ridge has seven six-month leases for
which it charges $50 more per month. Buffalo Ridge II also offers six month leases but at no
additional cost. When occupancy levels were lower in 2010 and 2011, management was more
flexible and offered six month or month-to-month leases.
Property managers schedule most of their leases to expire in the late summer or fall so that
units can be leased quickly as the ski season approaches. During the summer of 2012, Polar
Star sought 18-month leases in order to carry tenants through until the ski season the following
year. Leases that expire in the spring typically take the longest to fill; however, property
managers reported little trouble filling vacancies that occurred in the spring and early summer
of this year.
Amenities
None of the apartment properties could be considered Class A yet most offer the amenities
most desired by renters in mountain resort communities, including balconies/patios, extra
storage space and on-site laundry.
None of the properties provide in-unit washers and dryers, yet River Run, the only one with
hookups, reports that many residents provide their own appliances. Other properties report
that residents bring in portable washers and dryers. Although two properties offer free WI-FI in
their community building/room, none have internet service throughout the property.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 24
Amenities by Project
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River Run Timber
Ridge
Community Room X X X
Playground X
BBQ X X X X X
On Site Office X X X X X
Covered Parking X X
Private Garages 60
$100/mo
85
$100/mo
Balconies/patios X X X X X
Walk-in Closets X X X
Storage Closets X X X X X
Free WI-FI X in
community
room
X in
clubhouse
Cable TV X X X X in VR
units
Washers/Dryers
W/D Hookups X
Central Laundry X X X X X - 2 X X - 2
Microwaves X X
Other: Air
conditioning
Air
conditioning
Basketball Hot tub
Sauna
Fitness Ctr
Pets Allowed $300 dep
$25/mo
$300 dep
$10/mo
Cats only
$300 dep
$25/mo
$300 dep
$25/mo
$300 dep
$200 2nd
$25/mo
$400 dep
$25/mo
$300 dep
All properties allow pets and all but EagleBend allow dogs. Most charge a $300 pet deposit,
half of which is non refundable. All except Timber Ridge charges rent for pets, typically $25 per
month.
River Run has the most amenities. Designed as condominiums, the property has a nicely
furnished clubhouse with billiards, copy/fax machines and free WI-FI. Units have fireplaces,
ceiling fans and, in some units, vaulted ceilings.
EagleBend has many amenities including a playground; the only property that provides one.
The leasing office for Polar Star’s three properties is located at EagleBend . Polar Star provides
bilingual staff at its three properties as well as basic cable TV that residents can upgrade if
desired.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 25
Timber Ridge offers the fewest amenities, but does have storage closets and an on-site leasing
office.
Parking
Parking has to be carefully managed at some properties, especially during the peak ski season .
While all have good proximity to a public transit stop with the exception of Buffalo Ridge, most
residents have cars. They often do not use their cars for transportation to their jobs since
parking is unavailable or very expensive in close proximity to where they work.
Most properties have parking policies and enforced regulations. Polar Star properties issues
two parking passes for the three-bedroom units at all of their properties and only one pass for
two-bedroom units in some cases. They report that parking continues to be problematic for
many of their residents and results in regular booting of unauthorized vehicles.
At Buffalo Ridge, there are 60 private garages for 68 units, which rent separately for
$100 per month. The property also has 95 surface parking spaces for a ratio of 2.28
spaces per unit, or roughly 0.9 spaces per bedroom. At this ratio, parking is tight.
Buffalo Ridge II has 85 garages that rent for $100 per month plus one surface space per
unit with a few additional spaces for visitors. Parking is a challenge. While the property
is served by a school bus, the nearest public transit stop is at the bottom of the hill.
Managers are attempting to restore transit service.
Kayak Crossing offers only surface parking free of charge. Although the number of
spaces is unknown, parking is ample for their resident’s needs.
Middle Creek has 22 surface parking spaces; the rest are in a central garage. Many
residents (typically 30% to 40%) do not have cars. One space is provided free of charge
for the LIHTC units; $75 is charged per space for all other spaces, whether surface or in
the garage. Management reports parking is adequate.
Property managers do not know the number of surface parking spaces at River Run but
parking is adequate and there are no fees for parking.
Timber Ridge has 220 surface parking spaces for its 199 units. One space is provided per
unit free of charge. A $75 monthly fee is charged for 15 additional parking spaces.
Because of its convenient location next to a transit stop, day skiers park illegally on site
to avoid $30 per day parking fees in the town’s public garages. Parking regulations are
enforced by towing with a $200 charge to retrieve cars. Even discounting the problems
caused by day skiers, spaces are inadequate for residents and their guests during the
peak ski season.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 26
Utilities
Most properties charge residents for some or all utilities in addition to rent . At Middle Creek,
hot water and heat are provided as part of rent for LIHTC units; $45 per month is charged for
gas heat and hot water in the three-bedroom units. Timber Ridge is the only property where
residents are responsible for all of their utilities with water/sewer and trash covered by rent .
Buffalo Ridge is the only property that has air conditioning necessita ted by its location on a
south-facing slope with south-facing windows.
Utility Charges by Property
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Type of Heat Hot
water
Hot
water
Hot
water
Gas Hot
water
Electric
baseboard
Electric
baseboard
Utility Provided
Heat X X X X X
Hot Water X X X X X
Water/Sewer/
Trash
X X X X X X
Electricity X X X
Gas X X X X
Utility Charges None
Studio $79
1 BR $170 $100 $150 $59
2 BR $185 $110 $170-
$175
$180 $95
3 BR $200 $190 $200 $45 $127
4 BR $220 -
$240
Unit Mix
Most of the comparable properties offer at least three types of units . Timber Ridge is the only
exception; all units have two bedrooms and one bathroom . Just over half of all comparable
units have two bedrooms. Only one property, River Run, provides two-bedroom/two-
bathroom units. The other properties offer only one bathroom in their two -bedroom units.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 27
Unit Mix by Property
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Total % of
Total
Studios 44 45 89 8.5%
1 BR 4 44 112 29 38 227 21.7%
2 BR/1 BA 24 88 138 2 24 199 475 45.4%
2 BR/2 BA 59 59 5.6%
3 BR 40 44 21 44 20 169 16.2%
4+ BR 27 27 2.6%
Total 68 176 294 50 142 117 199 1046 100.0%
Buffalo Ridge has a high proportion of large units, while Buffalo Ridge II has smaller units – most
are studios or have one bedroom. Buffalo Ridge has three different two-bedroom/one-
bathroom floor plans.
EagleBend has a unit mix which is commonly found in apartment properties in urban market
areas with more two-bedroom units than any other type. EagleBend has three different one-
bedroom floor plans and four designs for its two -bedroom units.
The unit mix at Kayak Crossing is atypical. It is the only property that offers units with four or
more bedrooms. It has no one-bedroom units and only two two-bedroom units. The property
was originally designed to primarily provide housing for seasonal workers; however, since Vail
Resorts discontinued their master leasing of units, they are now occupied on a one-year lease
basis.
Middle Creek offers studios through three-bedroom units; the two-bedroom units are the
easiest to lease and keep occupied. Units with mountain views are popular. Most bathrooms
at Middle Creek have showers only. Tubs are only in one of the bathrooms in the three-
bedroom units.
At River Run, the 19 two-bedroom loft units are most popular. One bedroom and bath are on
the lower floor with the other bedroom and bathroom in the loft, allowing greater privacy for
roommate households. The smaller two-bedroom units have 1¾ baths.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 28
Unit Size
Units vary from very small 325 square-foot studios to large four-bedroom units with dens
averaging 1,271 square feet. Average sizes are as follows:
360 square feet for studios;
603 square feet for one-bedroom units;
804 square feet for two-bedroom/one-bathroom units;
1,088 square feet for two-bedroom/two-bathroom units (one project only);
1,111 for three-bedroom units; and
1,271 for units with four+-bedrooms.
Unit Size by Property
Buffalo
Ridge I
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Avg.
Studios 325 395 360
1 BR 605 599 542 - 594
565 avg
495 750 603
2 BR/1 BA 846 - 953
886 avg
872 736 - 880
771 avg
828 685 -750
718 avg
750 804
2 BR/2 BA 975
1200
1088
3 BR 1199 1029 1085 940-945 1300 1111
4+ BR 1271 1271
Vacancies
Among the seven properties examined, the overall vacancy rate was 7.5% as of mid-August. It
was highest for studios (11.2%), followed by three-bedroom units (10.1%). It was lowest for
two-bedroom/two-bathroom units (none vacant) and for one-bedroom units (1.8%). This
variation by unit type appears to be typical. Property managers report that:
One- and two-bedroom units are the easiest to lease and keep occupied;
Studios typically have high vacancy rates and turnover. They are relatively easy to lease
as the ski season approaches; and
Three-bedroom units are typically the last to lease. Renters prefer not to live with
multiple roommates but for those who are willing to do so, the three-bedroom units are
the most economical choice.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 29
Vacancies by Property and Unit Type, Mid August 2013
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Total
Vacant
Vacancy
Rate
Studios 10 10 11.2%
1 BR 2 1 1 4 1.8%
2 BR/1 BA 8 1 37 46 9.7%
2 BR/2 BA 0 0.0%
3 BR 4 11 2 17 10.1%
4+ BR 1 1 3.7%
Total Vacant 4 20 13 1 2 1 37 78 7.5%
Total Units 68 176 294 50 142 117 199 1046
Vacancy
Rate
5.9%
11.4%
4.4%
2.0%
1.4%
0.9%
18.6%
7.5%
Vacancies are lowest during the ski season. All property managers report that they expect
100% occupancy by November 1st if not sooner. As of mid-August:
Buffalo Ridge had a vacancy rate of 5.9%; all vacant units had three bedrooms.
Buffalo Ridge II had 20 of 176 units vacant, for an overall vacancy rate of 11.4%. All of
the vacant units were under LIHTC income restrictions. Property management reported
that their market units fill the fastest because many applicants have incomes higher
than allowed for the LIHTC units. Half of the vacant units were studios, which typically
have the highest turnover. The vacancy rate for the 325 square foot studios was 23%.
EagleBend had an overall vacancy rate of 4.4% primarily due to 11 vacant three-
bedroom units; however, several of these units were leased for future occupancy.
Kayak Crossing had only one vacant four-bedroom unit, which equates to a very low
vacancy rate of 2%.
The vacancy rate at Middle Creek was 1.4%. Only two units were vacant, both of which
were three-bedroom units. Studio units have a high rate of turnover. Most turnover
when leases expire; however, most residents stay at Middle Creek moving into a one -
bedroom unit alone or into a two-bedroom apartment with a roommate. Usually all
three-bedroom units turnover. Overall turnover is 60% per year with most residents
leaving the area.
Timber Ridge had the highest vacancy rate by far of the comparable properties due
primarily to the condition of units. Of its 199 units, 37 were vacant yet most of those
were out of service; only eight units were vacant and available to rent. Adjusting for the
out-of-service units drops the effective vacancy rate from 18.4% to 4%. The 98 units
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 30
master leased by Vail Resorts are always counted as occupied whether or not they are
since rent is being paid on the units and they are not available for non -VR employees to
rent.
River Run had the lowest vacancy rate at 0.9%; only one of its one-bedroom units was
available to lease.
Rents
The overall weighted average rent as of August was $1,132 among the seven properties . The
average ranged from:
$704 for studios;
$901 for one-bedroom units;
$1,072 for two-bedroom/one-bathroom units;
$1,443 for two-bedroom/two-bathroom units; and
$1,725 for units with four+ bedrooms.
Rents by Unit Type and Property
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo Ridge II Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Average
Studios $655 50% AMI
$735 mkt
$744
50% AMI
$704
1 BR $930 $845 60% AMI
$925 mkt
$785-$830 $957 $1,200 $901
2 BR/1 BA $1,220 $1020 60%AMI
$1095 mkt
$995-$1,065
$1,130-1,195
$1,140 $1,145 $1,075 $1,072
2 BR/2 BA $1,375
$1,475
$1,443
3 BR $1,455 $1,275-
$1,345
$1,450 $1,900
$2,200
$1,650 $1,598
4+ BR $1,650
$1,800
$1,725
Average $1,341 $904 $995 $1,576 $1,260 $1,390 $1,075 $1,132
LIHTC units were priced at the maximums allowed, which were below market rates for
identical units.
The market units at Buffalo Ridge II rented for $5 less per month than the same type of
unit at Buffalo Ridge.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 31
EagleBend’s rates vary according to whether the unit is on or off the Eagle River . Off
river units are discounted $45 to $70.
Kayak Crossing’s rents are in the middle of the range, but $200 per month lower than
the same type of unit at neighboring River Run.
At Middle Creek, rents for the three-bedroom units vary by $300 per month depending
primarily by location within the property; premium rents are charged for the best views.
The maximum rents allowed are charged for the LIHTC and HOME units.
At Timber Ridge, $50 more per month is charged for six-month leases.
At River Run, units in the two buildings that are not on the river rent for $75 less per
month than the rate shown in the table.
The average rent per square foot was $1.47 in August . It ranged from $1.30 to $1.96. The rents
generally decrease as the unit size increases; however, the high rents per square foot for the
three-bedroom units at Middle Creek ($2.17/SF) altered this pattern, which is atypical. Rents
per square foot by property varied little, ranging from $1.27 to $1.42, with the exception of
Middle Creek at $1.93, again due to the unrestricted three-bedroom rents.
Rents per Square Foot
Buffalo
Ridge
Buffalo
Ridge II
Eagle
Bend
Kayak
Crossing
Middle
Creek
River
Run
Timber
Ridge
Weighted
Average
Studios $2.02
$2.26
$1.88 $1.96
1 BR $1.54 $1.41
$1.54
$1.42 $1.93 $1.60 $1.49
2 BR/1 BA $1.38 $1.17
$1.26
$1.36 $1.38 $1.59 $1.43 $1.36
2 BR/2 BA $1.41
$1.23
$1.29
3 BR $1.21 $1.29 $1.43 $2.17 $1.27 $1.52
4+ BR $1.30 $1.30
Average $1.27 $1.47 $1.36 $1.31 $1.93 $1.42 $1.43 $1.47
Discounts/Incentives
Discounts are disappearing. In 2010 through at least the first half of 2012, discounts were
common, like one to two months free rent. One property manager said, ”We were buying our
occupancies.”
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 32
At Polar Star’s three properties, the net effective rents are about 10% lower than stated
rents from discounts offered during the past year. One- and two-bedroom units are
now commanding stated rents but "one month off" is still being offered for the larger
units. Higher discounts are occasionally offered for three-bedroom units. Some older,
soon to expire leases at Kayak and Buffalo Ridge are still under the two month free
discounts offered in 2012.
Timber Ridge had a $500 move in incentive special in 2012 but is no longer offering any
discounts.
Buffalo Ridge II is offering $500 deposits, which are usually equal to one month’s rent.
Neither Middle Creek nor River Run are offering any discounts or incentives at this time.
Condominium Rentals
A total of 59 unduplicated listings for long-term rentals were found over four dates in July and
August in the Vail Daily and on Craig’s List. Of these, 28 were condominiums and eight were
listed as townhomes. Rents for these units ranged from $1,000 to $3,800, and averaged
$1,776. One-bedroom units averaged $1,104 per month; however, the sample only included six
units so may not well represent the market. The average rent for the 17 two-bedroom listings
was $1,762.
Condominium and Townhomes For-Rent Listings
Unit Type # of Listings Average Rent
1 Bdrm 6 $1,104
2 Bdrm 17 $1,762
3 Bdrm 13 $2,106
About one-third of the units were located in Avon, a few were in Eagle-Vail and the rest were in
Vail. The units in Avon tended to rent for less than the ones in Vail , although the sample is too
small to conclusively quantify the difference.
Only 16 of the 36 condo/townhome listings provided unit siz e. Per-square-foot rents ranged
from $1.15 for a large three-bedroom unit in Avon to $2.50 for a 500 square foot, one -bedroom
condominium in Vail. The average was $1.62 per square foot. All of the one-bedroom units for
which size was provided were small, from 500 to 540 square feet.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 33
6. Demographic Trends and Economic Conditions
This section of the market study consists of three parts:
Market Area Demographics, which provides information on population, housing units,
households and household composition and size of renter households.
Demographic Trends, which presents information from the 2000 and 2010 Censuses to
identify trends and gain insights as to how current demographic characteristics will likely
be changing in the future.
Economic Conditions, which covers jobs, wages and the distribution of jobs in Eagle
County.
Market Area Demographics
About one-third of Eagle County’s households (6,294 households) reside in the market area . Of
these, 2,604 reside within the town of Vail.
2010 Population and Housing Occupancy
Eagle
County
Vail Market
Area
Population 52,197 5,305 15,257
Housing units 31,312 7,230 13,064
Households 19,236 2,604 6,294
Housing occupancy rate 61.4% 36.0% 48.2%
Source: 2010 US Census
While most residential units in Eagle County are occupied as primary residences (61%), only
36% of units in Vail were occupied by residents in 2010; second homes/vacation
accommodations comprised the majority. In the entire market area, the housing occupancy
rate was only 48% in 2010. The homes that are not occupied by members of the workforce
typically create demand for workforce housing through cleaning, repair, snow removal,
landscaping and similar jobs involved in operation and maintenance of the units.
While one-third of Eagle County’s households reside in the market area, about 45% of Eagle
County’s renter households reside in the Market Area. Relatively fewer households can afford
to buy homes up valley; the only option other than commuting is to rent.
Over one-half of the households in Vail and nearly 50% of those in the entire market area rent .
Demographic characteristics vary by area. There are clear differences between up-valley and
down-valley communities. Vail has proportionately more renters than owners, more singles
and roommate households than families, and smaller renter households than down valley.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 34
Of the 3,336 renter households living in the market area in 2010:
Roommate households were the most common (37%).
Nearly 30% had only one member living alone.
Families were in the minority. About 19% were families with children and 15% were
families (both couples and singles) without children.
2010 Renter Households by Type: Market Area
Source: 2010 US Census
In Vail, proportionately fewer renter households have chi ldren (only 8%) and more consist of
singles living alone (36%) or with roommates (45%).
Renter Household Composition by Area, 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market
Area
# Renter Households 6,893 1,340 3,336
% Renter-Occupied 35.8% 51.5% 49.7%
Renter Households by Type
Family, no children 18% 11% 15%
Family, with children 29% 8% 19%
Living alone 26% 36% 29%
Non-family, roommates 27% 45% 37%
100% 100% 100%
Source: 2010 US Census
Family, no
children
15%
(479 total)
Family, with
children
19%
(800 total)
Living alone
29%
(899 total)
Roommates
37%
(1,152 total)
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 35
The average size of renter households within the market area is about 2.45 persons per unit. In
Vail is it considerably smaller at 2.04 persons per renter occupied unit. The largest segment of
the renter market is comprised on one- and two-person households, which combined total
61%.
2010 Renter Households by Size: Market Area
Source: 2010 US Census
Renter Household Size by Area, 2010
Persons per Unit Eagle
County
Vail Market
Area
1-person 26% 36% 29%
2-person 30% 37% 32%
3-person 18% 16% 18%
4-person 14% 8% 12%
5+ person 13% 2% 8%
Average size 2.68 2.04 2.45
Source: 2010 US Census
Demographic Trends
Between 2000 and 2010, most of the population growth in Eagle County occurred down valley .
While growth in Vail was slower, the rate of growth was particularly low elsewhere within the
market area. The population increased by 25% in the County (over 10,000 persons), but only
17% in Vail (774 persons) and just under 6% in the market area (908 persons). Growth in
households (occupied housing units) followed a similar pattern.
1-person
29%
(899 total)
2-person
32%
(1,014 total)
3-person
18%
(571 total)
4-person
12%
(382 total)
5+ person
9%
(264 total)
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 36
Total housing units, however, increased at about the same rate in the county and the market
area (41%) and at a slower pace in Vail (34%), where land availability is very limited . The
number of housing units grew faster than the resident population and households due to
construction of second/seasonal homes.
The housing occupancy rate declined by about 7 percentage points in the county, 4 points in
Vail and 9 points in the market area, indicating a significant rise in second homes . Even though
growth in the number of households did not keep pace with growth in second/seasonal homes,
the number of units occupied by local residents increased . The market area gained 680
households (owners and renters combined) between 2000 and 2010, for an average increase of
68 households per year.
Change in Population, Housing Units and Households: 2000 - 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market Area
Population
2000 41,659 4,531 15,326
2010 52,197 5,305 16,234
% change 25.3% 17.1% 5.9%
Total Housing Units
2000 22,111 5,389 11,527
2010 31,312 7,230 16,286
% change 41.6% 34.2% 41.3%
Households/Occupied Housing Units
2000 15,148 2,165 6,080
2010 19,236 2,604 6,760
# Change 4,088 439 680
% change 27.0% 20.3% 11.2%
Housing Occupancy Rate
2000 68.5% 40.2% 52.7%
2010 61.4% 36.0% 41.5%
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census
The increase in households within the market area was due primarily to growth in the number
of renter households. The market area gained 419 renter households between 2000 and 2010,
or an average of nearly 42 households per year. Renters now comprise the majority of
households living in Vail (51.5%). The number of renter households in Eagle County as a whole
increased by nearly 1,400 households, or an average gain of 140 households each year.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 37
Change in Renter Households: 2000 - 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market Area
2000 # renter-households 5,499 1,032 2,917
% renter-households 36.3% 47.7% 48.0%
2010 # renter-households 6,893 1,340 3,336
% renter-households 35.8% 51.5% 49.3%
% Change in renter households 25.4% 29.8% 14.4%
# Change in renter households 1,394 308 419
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census
There were some significant changes in the composition of renter households, which varied by
area:
Roommate households declined as a percentage of households in all areas, from 34% to
27% in Eagle County, from 44% to 38% within the market area and from 49% to 45% in
Vail.
Renters living alone increased, especially in Vail, from 33% to 36%. The change in points
between roommate households and persons living alone in Vail was very similar (4 and
3 points respectively), indicating that singles who lived together in 2000 found ways to
live alone by 2010 rather than forming couples and families.
The percentage of family households, with and without children, stayed about the same
in Vail but increased in the county as a whole; growth in families largely occurred down
valley.
Change in Composition of Renter Households: 2000 – 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market Area
2000 (total renter households) 5,499 1,032 2,917
Family, no children 17% 12% 11%
Family, with children 25% 7% 19%
Living alone 25% 33% 25%
Non-family, roommates 34% 49% 44%
100% 100% 100%
2010 (total renter households) 6,893 1,340 3,336
Family, no children 18% 11% 15%
Family, with children 29% 8% 18%
Living alone 26% 36% 29%
Non-family, roommates 27% 45% 38%
100% 100% 100%
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 38
Changes in renter household size also varied by region:
Renter households decreased in size in both the town of Vail and the market area while
size increased slightly in the county.
Renter households in all areas predominately have one or two -persons (56% to 73%),
followed by 3-person households (16% to 18%).
A much larger percentage of households have three or more members in both the
county (26%) and the market area (22%) than in Vail (10%).
Change in Size of Renter Households: 2000 – 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market Area
2000 (total renter households) 5,499 1,032 2,917
1-person 25% 33% 25%
2-person 32% 40% 33%
3-person 18% 17% 19%
4-person 14% 7% 14%
5+ person 12% 3% 8%
Average size 2.67 2.11 2.54
2010 (total renter households) 6,893 1,340 3,336
1-person 26% 36% 29%
2-person 30% 37% 33%
3-person 18% 16% 18%
4-person 14% 8% 12%
5+ person 13% 2% 8%
Average size 2.68 2.04 2.43
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census
The population and labor force in the Vail area is aging as is the trend in other Colorado
mountain resort communities. The age of renter households increased between 2000 and
2010.
The largest increase occurred in households 35 to 44 years of age.
The percentage of households under 35 declined in all areas; although these younger
households comprise a larger percentage of households in Vail and the market area
than in the county as a whole.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 39
Only households with a householder under 25 years of age decreased in number as well
as percentage in all areas (-21 in Vail, -150 in Eagle County and -153 in the market area).
Change in Age of Renter Households: 2000 – 2010
Eagle
County
Vail Market Area
2000 (total renter households) 5,499 1,032 2,917
15 to 24 years 17% 21% 22%
25 to 34 years 40% 46% 44%
35 to 44 years 22% 16% 18%
45 to 54 years 14% 10% 11%
55 to 64 years 4% 5% 4%
65 years and over 3% 2% 1%
2010 (total renter households) 6,893 1,340 3,336
15 to 24 years 11% 15% 14%
25 to 34 years 36% 42% 42%
35 to 44 years 24% 19% 21%
45 to 54 years 16% 12% 13%
55 to 64 years 9% 7% 7%
65 years and over 4% 4% 3%
100% 100% 100%
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 40
The Economy
The economy in Eagle County is recovering. Eagle County currently has about 37,820 jobs. This
is down from the peak of about 40,500 jobs in 2008, but up from a low of 35,660 in 2010. The
loss of 2,680 jobs reported by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs is much lower than a
local estimate of nearly 6,000 jobs, a difference likely attributed in part to construction jobs,
which are hard to track. Since 2010, total employment has increased by approximately 2,160
jobs, which equates to an average rate of growth of about 2% per year.
Change in Jobs: Eagle County, 2005 – 2013
Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), State Demography Section
The unemployment rate in Eagle County has been declining. Unemployment reached a high of
9.6% in 2010 and declined to 8.1% in 2012. This is still much higher than pre-recession rates,
which varied between about 2.9% and 3.9% between 2005 and 2008.
Average Yearly Labor Force and Employment: Eagle County 2000 - 2012
Year Labor Force Employment Unemployment Unemployment Rate
2012 29,793 27,388 2,405 8.1%
2011 29,293 26,689 2,604 8.9%
2010 29,674 26,836 2,838 9.6%
2009 30,624 28,235 2,389 7.8%
2008 31,837 30,705 1,132 3.6%
2007 31,161 30,267 894 2.9%
2006 30,206 29,191 1,015 3.4%
2005 28,670 27,555 1,115 3.9%
Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment
36,529
38,319
40,163 40,499
37,230
35,662 36,030 36,817
37,821
30,000
32,000
34,000
36,000
38,000
40,000
42,000
44,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
To
t
a
l
J
o
b
s
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 41
Unemployment rates in Eagle County vary by season. Unemployment is lowest during the
winter months (December through March) and highest during the shoulder seasons, in May and
November. For those who qualify, filing for unemployment is a common way to make it
through the shoulder seasons.
Employment and Unemployment by Month:
Eagle County July 2012 – June 2013
Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment
8.0% 7.7% 7.5% 7.9% 8.4%
6.6%
6.0% 6.0% 5.8% 6.4%
9.7%
7.8%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
Un
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
R
a
t
e
Em
p
l
o
y
e
d
L
a
b
o
r
F
o
r
c
e
Employment Unemployment Rate (%)
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 42
Eagle County jobs paid an average annual wage of about $39,187 in 2012. About 40% of jobs in
Eagle County are in the lowest wage sectors of accommodations and food, arts and retail trade,
averaging between about $28,700 and $34,000 per year.
Estimated Jobs by Sector: Eagle County 2012
# of
Jobs
% of
Jobs
Average
Annual Wage
(2012)
Estimated Total Jobs 36,817 100% $39,187
Accommodation and food 7,487 20.3% $28,727
Arts 3,756 10.2% $32,129
Retail Trade 3,554 9.7% $33,923
Construction 3,503 9.5% $47,157
Government 3,343 9.1% $51,356
Real estate 3,073 8.3% $41,214
Other services, except public administration 2,447 6.6% $37,912
Health Services 2,219 6.0% $59,141
Professional and business services 2,139 5.8% $59,849
Admin and waste 1,965 5.3% $30,882
Finance activities 763 2.1% $63,240
Transportation and warehousing 633 1.7% $41,827
Wholesale trade 495 1.3% $67,113
Information 404 1.1% $47,511
Education 335 0.9% $39,340
Manufacturing 304 0.8% $43,719
Agriculture 205 0.6% $39,111
Management of companies and enterprise 112 0.3% $78,358
Utilities 61 0.2% $62,790
Mining 19 0.1% $49,134
Sources: 2012 Total Jobs: DOLA, State Demography Section, Jobs Projections; Jobs by Sector: 2011 DOLA,
Colorado Economic and Demographic Information System (CEDIS); Wages by Occupation: 2012 Quarterly
Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW)
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 43
Approximately 15,300 employees work within the market area, which equates to al most 56% of
the employees within all of Eagle County. Wages in the market area average about 3% more
than those in the county as a whole.
Employees, Businesses and Average Annual Wage:
Average # of
Employees
Average #
Businesses
Average
Annual Wage
Avon 7,596 591 $44,243
Vail 7,564 546 $45,536
Eagle-Vail 140 31 $33,967
TOTAL Market Area 15,300 1,168 $44,789
COUNTYWIDE 27,481 3,213 $43,367
% Market Area 55.7% 36.4% 103.3%
Source: Economic Council of Eagle County based on Colorado Department of Labor and
Employment Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 44
7. Demand Analysis
Demand for the proposed rental units is primarily a function of:
Renter households that now reside within the market area who meet household size
and income targets;
Renters who will move into the area as the result of job growth; and
Renters who now reside down valley and commute to jobs within the market area.
The proposed project may attract other households. The Town of Vail is imposing a
requirement that 70% of the new units must be occupied by at least one person employed in
Eagle County through the zoning on the parcel. The other 30% could be leased to non-
employee households including:
Retirees who are cashing out of homes they own in Eagle County and want to remain in
the Vail area;
Retirees who want to move to the area for the lifestyle it offers; and
Second-home renters looking for an apartment convenient to the ski slopes and Vail’s
many other amenities.
The prime purpose of the proposed project is workforce housing, however. As such, this
analysis of demand provides only estimates generated by existing renter households and
employees who will move into the market area. Because of this, estimated demand and
capture rates should be considered conservative.
Demand from Market-Area Renters
An estimated 3,114 renter households now reside within the market area, down slightly from
3,336 households as of the 2010 Census. The out migration of renters was due to job losses in
2009 and 2010. The proposed 113 units would need to capture 3.6% of the renter households
now residing in the market area to be fully occupied.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 45
Market Area Renter Households by Income and Size, 2013
1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5+-Person Total
$0-10,000 211 69 6 16 0 302
$10,000-20,000 189 23 115 9 10 346
$20,000-30,000 32 157 68 99 13 369
$30,000-40,000 83 46 107 22 148 406
$40,000-50,000 123 174 43 32 2 374
$50,000-60,000 132 171 94 21 11 429
$60,000-75,000 97 126 37 54 67 381
$75,000-100,000 15 166 37 97 9 324
$100,000-125,000 16 30 36 9 7 98
$125,000-150,000 4 2 9 9 0 24
$150,000-200,000 11 32 10 0 0 53
$200,000+ 6 1 1 0 0 8
Total 919 997 563 368 267 3,114
Percent of Total 29.5% 32.0% 18.1% 11.8% 8.6% 100%
Source: Ribbon Demographics
With a mix of one- and two-bedroom units, the proposed property will mostly attract one- and
two-person households. There may be cases when three-person households lease units (a
couple with one roommate, a couple with a child or a single parent with two children), but,
based on demographic trends, these households should comprise an insignificant share of the
target market. There may also be an isolated case when three roommates rent a two-bedroom
unit, as has occurred at Timber Ridge in the past; however, given the positioning of the project
to target households with incomes higher than those served by the seasonal and LIHTC projects
that now exist in the area, it is unlikely that many units will be rented to roommates who must
share a bedroom.
Given the proposed rents, the project will serve households with incomes between $40,000 and
$100,000 per year. With rents starting at $1,250 per month (the midpoint of the range under
consideration for one-bedroom units), households with incomes of $40,000 per year would
need to spend 37.5% of their income on rent. This is well within the range that renters in high
cost mountain resort communities typically pay. Renters with annual household incomes
exceeding $100,000 should have many choices in terms of what they can afford to rent and will
likely opt for units with more amenities, although some may choose to rent at the proposed
property due to its convenient location.
Based on these assumptions, just over 1,000 renter households now reside in the market area
that are of the size and income that the proposed project will primarily target (see the table on
the following page). This equates to 32% of all renter households living within the market area.
A capture rate of 11% would be required to achieve 100% occupancy based solely on renters
already living within the market area.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 46
Targeted Renter Households within Market Area
Household Income 1-Person Households 2-Person Households Total
$40,000-50,000 123 174 297
$50,000-60,000 132 171 303
$60,000-75,000 97 126 223
$75,000-100,000 15 166 181
Total 367 637 1,004
Source: Ribbon Demographics
Rental Demand from Job Growth
Since 2010, jobs have been increasing at an average of about 2% per year. The rate of job
growth will likely increase in the future. The 2012 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment
estimated that the rate of job growth in 2013 through 2015 would be 2.5%. By 2016, when the
proposed units should be completed, there should be 2,908 additional jobs in Eagle County.
Of total new jobs, 1,620 should be located within the market area if new jobs are distributed at
the same ratio as existing jobs, with 55.7% located within the market area.
Job Growth and Housing Demand Estimates
Jobs
Eagle County Jobs in 2013 37,821
Eagle County Jobs in 2016 40,729
Increase in Jobs Countywide 2,908
Increase in Jobs in Market Area (55.7%) 1,620
Housing Demand from New Jobs in Market Area
(1.2 jobs per employee; 1.7 employees per household)
794
Rental Demand from New Jobs in Market Area (70% of total demand) 556
To calculate the housing demand generated by new jobs, the number of jobs is first divided by
1.2, the average number of jobs per employee, then by 1.7, the average number of employees
per housing unit. These standards are from the 2007 and 2012 Eagle County Housing Needs
Assessments.
Most of the employees that will be moving to the area to fill the new jobs will rent. According
to a housing survey conducted in neighboring Summit County in 2012, 70% of employees who
had lived in the county for five years or less rented. It is appropriate to assume that at least
that many will rent in the market area, and the percentage is likely higher given that housing
costs are higher. Assuming 70% of new worker households will rent, demand for 556 additional
rental units will be generated by job growth by 2016. The proposed 113 units would need to
capture 20% of this demand based solely on new job growth to achieve 100% occupancy.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 47
Rental Demand from Down Valley
Apartment property managers reported that only a small percentage of their residents moved
in from down-valley communities. Rough estimates were around 10%. Based on this history,
about 10 of the proposed units will be leased by households that alread y reside in Eagle
County, but outside of the market area.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 48
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the market, redevelopment of the eastern half of Timber Ridge in Vail to replace 102
aging two-bedroom units with 113 more upscale apartments targeted to serve the year round
population is warranted. This conclusion is based on a combination of factors:
The site is an excellent location for rental housing;
The rental market has recovered from the slump of 2010 and 2011;
Vacancies are low among competing properties and rents are starting to rise;
Competition is not likely to increase. No other new apartment properties are now
planned;
Demand from one- and two-person renter households already residing in the market
area with incomes in the targeted $40,000 to $100,000 range is sufficiently strong to
achieve 100% occupancy with a moderate capture rate of 11%;
The economy is recovering and the number of jobs is increasing. By 2016, job growth
within the market area should generate demand for over 550 additional rental units.
To maximize the proposed property’s marketability and long-term livability, specific conclusions
and recommendations are offered.
Design Considerations
Unit Mix
The mix of one- and two-bedroom units will be unique among apartment properties in the
market area, which is good. Most existing properties have three-bedroom units, yet property
managers report these units are the most difficult to lease and have very high turnover. Small
studios are also problematic with high turnover and higher than average vacancy rates.
Offering two bathrooms in all two-bedroom units should be very appealing. River Run is the
only apartment property in the market area that has two -bedroom units with two bathrooms;
they report that the units are popular and easy to lease, especially the units with two full
bathrooms.
Unit Size
The proposed one bedroom units will be about average in size compared to the units in
competing properties. The average among existing units is 603 square foot. The p roposed
units will range from 597 to 633 square feet. The two-bedroom units will be larger than most
of the two-bedroom units at competing properties. The proposed units will range from 870 to
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 49
933 square feet, which compares with an average of 804 square feet for existing two-
bedroom/one-bathroom units and 1,088 square feet for the only two bedroom/two-bathroom
units offered at one project.
The proposed units will have ample interior closets as well as exterior storage closets large
enough for bikes, skis and even most kayaks. The large balconies will also be very appealing to
potential residents.
Sound Abatement
Effective sound proofing to abate the noise from I-70 and the frontage road in the units that
face the Interstate should be provided.
Utilities
Hot water heating should be considered in order to lower heating bills and improve inside air
quality. Energy efficient heating systems and windows should be a priority as well as high value
insulation. Other green building items like non-toxic paints and building materials should be
used. In general, the targeted population will be environmentally conscious; green building
would be a highly marketable feature that distinguishes the proposed property from other
apartment and condominium rentals.
As planned, residents should be responsible for their own utilities rather than charged a flat
rate over which they have no control. While covering all utilities with a single fee as done at
Polar Star Properties’ three complexes is convenient for residents when moving in, the
proposed project will target households that are capable of providing deposits and placing
utilities in their name. Residents have no incentive to conserve when flat rates are charged.
Utility costs based on usage would especially appeal to retirees and second home renters who
might not occupy their units full time.
Parking
Parking will likely be tight at times, which is common in the Vail Valley. Since the property will
serve year round residents that are older and have higher incomes than the households now
living at Middle Creek and Timber Ridge, all of the households will likely have at least one car.
Also, unlike the other two properties in Vail, parking may be a year round issue rather than just
a problem during the ski season.
The proposed parking policy of one space per unit and an additional space, first come/first
served, for $75 per month should be workable but should be refined to give priority to two-
bedroom units for the additional space. One-bedroom units will be occupied by one person or
couples who could more easily share a car than the roommate households that will occupy
many of the two-bedroom units. Additional recommendations for parking:
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 50
Consider raising the fee for the additional space. Given the income levels targeted, a
higher fee could be affordable and would be an incentive to find off -site parking for
extra vehicles.
Prohibit parking by day skiers and limit visitor access to parking. Gated entrances or
other means should be used to ensure that parking spaces are available for residents. If
forced, visitors can take public transit to the property.
Attempt to locate off-site parking to which residents could be referred.
Consider rent reductions for residents who do not park on site. The space they would
have been provided could be rented to other households, thereby making up the
revenue from the discount. Attempt to make it financially worthwhile to live without a
car or to find a place to park off-site.
Marketability of Location
The location is excellent in terms of convenience, access to services and facilities, availability of
public transit, views and solar gain, visibility and compatibility with surrounding land uses. The
remaining western half of Timber Ridge will be unattractive, however. Privacy fencing,
landscaping or some combination of the two should be used to visually separate the new
property from the old Timber Ridge. In the future, the western half of Timber Ridge will also be
redeveloped, which will enhance the site’s already good marketability.
A new name for the proposed property is needed, which will help distinguish it from the old
Timber Ridge.
Overall Market Conditions
The rental market is strong and indicators are trending upward. Occupancy levels are
increasing after the market softened in 2010 due to job losses and termination of master leases
by Vail Resorts. The overall occupancy rate was about 93% in July, 2013, with levels expected
to increase during the peak ski season. Rents are starting to rebound. M ost discounts and
incentives have disappeared. By mid 2014, rates will probably have increased as much as 10%
over current levels.
Responsiveness to Demographic and Economic Trends
The proposed project will primarily target the largest segment of renter households –
61% of renter households within the market area are one- or two-person households.
The proposed project will increase the number of one-bedroom units (Timber Ridge
now has only two-bedroom units), which is appropriate given the prevailing trends of an
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 51
aging population, proportionately more renters living alone, fewer renters living with
roommates and relatively fewer families, with and without children, living in the market
area.
Growth in the market area population has been slow compared with the rest of Eagle
County, but this has been due to housing costs and the limited availability and high cost
of residential land. What growth has occurred has largely been in the renter population.
Homeownership up valley has been and will remain beyond the reach of most
workforce households. Families with children find housing that meets their needs down
valley, while renters without children are more likely to choose up valley as a place to
live.
Despite the gain of 680 renter households within the market area between 2000 and
2010, growth in second/vacation homes far outpaced it. This growth in non-primary
housing units generates demand for additional workforce housing through jobs created
in construction, maintenance and operations. This trend will likely continue with job-
generating second home growth exceeding growth in workforce housing.
Competition
There will be little direct competition with the proposed property. The two apartment projects
in Vail primarily target seasonal and/or low-income employees. The properties in Avon are
more family oriented and some are income restricted. River Run in the Dowd Junction area is
the most comparable of the seven properties examined. It has the lowest vacancy rate, the
largest units, the only two-bedroom units with two bathrooms, the most amenities and some of
the highest rents, but it is nearly 30 years old.
The availability of rental housing should be extremely low by the time the proposed property is
completed. As of mid-August, which is not when occupancies peak, only 32 units were vacant
among the six competing properties within the market area, not counting the 46 units vacant at
Timber Ridge. These properties cannot absorb the households that will be displaced from the
demolition of 102 units at Timber Ridge. Competition from other apartment properties should,
therefore, not be a concern.
The most direct competition will be from condominium units that are rented long -term. Most
of these units are relatively old, however, with inefficient heating systems and high utilities.
Some may be in locations that are equally convenient, but others are located in less desirable
areas. Most are in complexes with nightly or weekly vacation rentals, a situation that is not
desirable to many year round residents who dislike sharing walls with vacationing strangers.
Demand for Rental Housing
The demand for rental housing is more than adequate to warrant the construction of the
proposed 113 income producing units.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 52
Approximately 3,114 renter households now reside in the market area. The proposed
units would need to capture only 3.6% of these households to achieve 100% occupancy.
An estimated 1,004 one- and two-person renter households with incomes in the
targeted range of $40,000 to $100,000 per year now reside in the market area. These
are the households that the proposed project will primarily serve . To fill all units, the
property will need to attract 11% of these households, which is a moderate capture
rate.
Demand will likely be generated for 556 additional rental units within the market area
by 2016 due to job growth. The proposed units will need to capture 20% of this demand
to be fully leased.
Roughly 10% of the proposed units are likely to be leased by renters who now live down
valley but would rather live in Vail. There have been no new apartments built within
Vail in many years without income restrictions that moderate and middle income
renters could lease.
While the two apartment properties in Vail attract most of their residents fro m out of state, the
proposed property will likely draw more of its residents from the market area and down valley.
The estimates of demand for the proposed project are conservative because they do not take
into account leasing of units to anyone other than employees. Up to 30% of the proposed 111
units will not have employment restrictions. Retirees who want to remain living in Vail, retirees
who would like to move into the area and second home renters are all potential candidates for
these unrestricted units.
Rents
The proposed rents of $1,200 to $1,300 per month for one-bedroom units and $1,600 to $1,700
per month for two-bedroom apartments should be competitive and marketable. Although the
proposed rates for one-bedroom units are higher than the prevailing average, River Run, which
is older and in a less convenient location, already charges $1,200 for its one -bedroom units.
The two-bedroom rents will also be higher than the average of $1,443 yet rents are starting to
rise and should be at least equal to or possibly greater than the proposed rents when the
project is completed. The proposed rates will be lower than the average current rate of over
$1,700 for two-bedroom condominiums and townhomes.
On a per square foot basis, the proposed rents will average $1.90. This is considerably lower
than the average of $1.93 charged at Middle Creek, the only comparable property located
within Vail. Middle Creek does not have balconies or in -unit washers and dryers.
11/19/2013
November 2013
Rees Consulting, Inc. 53
Consider varying rents based on location within the property and views. Assuming that sound
proofing is adequate, the south facing units with views of the mountain and ample sun should
command the highest rents. The north facing units, particularly on the lower floors where
views are limited by the abutting hillside, should rent for less. At Middle Creek, rent for three-
bedroom units differs as much as $300 per month based on location and views.
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE NTS 11-14-13
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
LOTS 1-5, A RESUBDIVISION OF LIONSRIDGE SUBDIVISION BLOCK C, TOWN OF VAIL, CO
Town Council Submission
11-14-13
11/19/2013
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE: NTS 11-14-13
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT STREETSCAPE
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
BUILDING A -
GROUND LEVEL PLAN
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT BUILDING A PLAN
UP UP
UNIT A101 - TYPE A
1 BEDROOM [597.31 SF]
UNIT A102 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT A104 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT A103 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT A105 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT A106 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT A107 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT A108 - TYPE E
2 BEDROOM [933.20 SF]
open to
above
open to
above
alarm &
sprinkler
room
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
*Note: Building B is a mirrored version of Building A with a Site
Management Office occupying the 1 bedroom unit at ground level.
BUILDING B -
GROUND LEVEL PLAN
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT BUILDING B PLAN
UPUP
9' - 7 1/2"
7'
-
0
"
UNIT B101 - OFFICE
[597.31 SF]
UNIT B102 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT B104 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT B103 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT B105 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT B106 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT B107 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT B108 - TYPE E
2 BEDROOM [933.20 SF]
open to
above
open to
above
alarm &
sprinkler
room
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
BUILDING C -
GROUND LEVEL PLAN
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT BUILDING C PLAN
UPUP UP
UNIT C105 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT C106 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
alarm &
sprinkler
room
open to
above
open to
above
open to
above
UNIT C101 - TYPE A
1 BEDROOM [597.31 SF]
UNIT C102 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]
UNIT C104 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT C103 - TYPE C
2 BEDROOM [869.62 SF]UNIT C107 - TYPE A
1 BEDROOM [597.31 SF]
UNIT C110 - TYPE D
2 BEDROOM [911.11 SF]
UNIT C109 - TYPE A
1 BEDROOM [597.31 SF]
UNIT C108 - TYPE B
1 BEDROOM [632.55 SF]
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
BUILDING D -
GROUND LEVEL PLAN
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT BUILDING D PLAN
UPUP UP
alarm &
sprinkler
room
open to
above
open to
above
open to
above
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301 SCALE 1/4” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301
11' - 11 1/2"
11
'
-
0
"
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
BEDROOM
KITCHEN
BATH
EXTERIOR
STORAGE
8'
-
0
"
11' - 6"
5' - 0"
MECH/LDRY
7'
-
4
"
5' - 7 1/4"
LIVING
11' - 6"
TV
8'
-
5
1
/
2
"
3'
-
6
"
5' - 6 5/8"
24' - 9"
FRIDGE
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
DISH
WASHER
1'
-
0
"
9'
-
9
1
/
2
"
WH
WASHER /
DRYER FURNACE
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
21
'
-
1
"
11' - 11 1/2"
10
'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
21
'
-
1
"
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
FRIDGE30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
8'
-
0
1
/
2
"
BEDROOM 2
KITCHEN
BATH
EXTERIOR
STORAGE
8'
-
0
"
9'
-
1
0
"
TV
LIVING
5' - 0"
WH
MECH/LDRY
5' - 2 3/8"
WASHER /
DRYER
FURNACE DISH
WASHER
5' - 7 1/4"
12' - 2"
3' - 4"
11' - 3"
12' - 2 1/2"
8'
-
1
0
"
8'
-
1
"
24' - 9"
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
5'
-
8
"
8'
-
6
"
1'
-
0
"
13' - 11"
TYPE A - 1 BEDROOM (597.31 SF)TYPE B - 1 BEDROOM (632.55 SF)
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT 1 BEDROOM PLANS
Note: Unit areas indicated are calculated to face of exterior sheathing
and include exterior storage rooms, but do not include deck areas.
11/19/2013
BERGLUND ARCHITECTS, LLC
210 EDWARDS VILLAGE BLVD A103, EDWARDS, CO 81632 T: 970.926.4301
11' - 0"
9'
-
1
0
"
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
11
'
-
0
"
WASHER /
DRYER
22
'
-
0
"
BEDROOM 1
BEDROOM 2
KITCHEN
BATH
8'
-
0
"
5' - 0"
EXTERIOR
STORAGE
LIVING
FURNACEWH
3'
-
6
"
C
L
E
A
R
1' - 9"
10' - 0"
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
MECH/LDRY
1'
-
6
"
BATH
10' - 0"
3' - 6"
5'
-
7
1
/
4
"
12' - 3"
9'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
5' - 7 1/4"
5' - 8"
8'
-
1
1
/
4
"
11' - 8 1/4"
23
'
-
1
1
"
TV
5'
-
6
1
/
2
"
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
34' - 9"
10
'
-
4
"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
4'
-
0
"
FRIDGE
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
DISH
WASHER
22
'
-
0
"
11' - 6"
8'
-
1
"
3"
8'
-
5
1
/
2
"
10
'
-
0
"
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
11
'
-
0
"
FRIDGE
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
WASHER /
DRYER
34' - 9"
22
'
-
0
"
BEDROOM 1
KITCHEN
BATH
8'
-
0
"
5' - 0"
EXTERIOR
STORAGE
TV
LIVING
10' - 0"
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
MECH/LDRY
1'
-
6
"
BATH
9'
-
1
0
"
3' - 7"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
5'
-
7
1
/
4
"
5' - 7 1/4"
5' - 8"
7'
-
1
1
1
/
4
"
12' - 1"
21
'
-
1
"
11' - 8 1/4"
DISH
WASHER
FURNACEWH
8'
-
1
0
"
5'
-
8
1
/
2
"
3' - 8 1/2"
10' - 6"
3' - 6"
9'
-
8
3
/
4
"
1'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
6' - 2 1/2"
EQ EQ
3'
-
6
"
C
L
E
A
R
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
22
'
-
0
"
8'
-
1
"
7'
-
0
1
/
2
"
BEDROOM 2
13' - 9"
8'
-
6
"
1'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
10
'
-
0
"
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
11
'
-
0
"
FRIDGE
30
"
X
4
8
"
CL
E
A
R
F
L
O
O
R
SP
A
C
E
WASHER /
DRYER
35' - 9"
22
'
-
0
"
BEDROOM 1
KITCHEN
BATH
8'
-
0
"
5' - 0"
EXTERIOR
STORAGE
TV
LIVING
10' - 0"
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
MECH/LDRY
1'
-
6
"
BATH
9'
-
1
0
"
3' - 7"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
5'
-
7
1
/
4
"
5' - 7 1/4"
5' - 8"
7'
-
1
1
1
/
4
"
13' - 1"
21
'
-
1
"
12' - 8 1/4"
DISH
WASHER
FURNACEWH
8'
-
1
0
"
5'
-
8
1
/
2
"
3' - 8 1/2"
10' - 6"
3' - 6"
9'
-
8
3
/
4
"
1'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
6' - 2 1/2"
EQ EQ
3'
-
6
"
C
L
E
A
R
30" X 48"
CLEAR FLOOR
SPACE
8'
-
1
"
7'
-
0
1
/
2
"
BEDROOM 2
TYPE C - 2 BEDROOM (869.62 SF)
TYPE D - 2 BEDROOM (911.11 SF)TYPE E - 1 BEDROOM (933.20 SF)
SCALE 1/4” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
TIMBER RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT 2 BEDROOM PLANS
Note: Unit areas indicated are calculated to face of exterior sheathing
and include exterior storage rooms, but do not include deck areas.
11/19/2013
B
E
R
G
L
U
N
D
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
S
,
L
L
C
21
0
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
B
L
V
D
A
1
0
3
,
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
8
1
6
3
2
T
:
9
7
0
.
9
2
6
.
4
3
0
1
SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
T
Y
P
E
1
5
”
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
H
a
r
d
i
P
l
a
n
k
F
i
b
e
r
C
e
m
e
n
t
L
a
p
S
i
d
i
n
g
2
7
”
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
H
a
r
d
i
P
l
a
n
k
F
i
b
e
r
C
e
m
e
n
t
L
a
p
S
i
d
i
n
g
3
S
t
u
c
c
o
w
/
L
i
g
h
t
S
a
n
d
T
e
x
t
u
r
e
4
7
/
8
”
2
4
g
a
C
o
r
r
u
g
a
t
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
S
i
d
i
n
g
5
7
/
8
”
2
4
g
a
C
o
r
r
u
g
a
t
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
R
o
o
fi n
g
6
G
A
F
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
4
0
y
r
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
i
n
g
l
e
s
7
D
e
s
i
g
n
B
u
i
l
d
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
e
d
S
n
o
w
C
l
i
p
s
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
a
l
l
r
o
o
f
s
8
2
x
4
”
T
r
e
x
S
q
u
a
r
e
E
d
g
e
T
r
i
m
B
o
a
r
d
@
w
i
n
d
o
w
j
a
m
b
a
n
d
s
i
l
l
,
2
x
6
”
@
H
e
a
d
e
r
9
2
x
6
”
T
r
e
x
S
q
u
a
r
e
E
d
g
e
B
o
a
r
d
w
/
1
.
5
”
g
a
p
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
b
o
a
r
d
s
o
v
e
r
4
x
4
T
r
e
x
p
o
s
t
.
10
1
x
8
”
T
r
e
x
F
a
s
c
i
a
@
r
o
o
f
e
a
v
e
s
1
x
1
2
”
T
r
e
x
F
a
s
c
i
a
@
b
a
l
c
o
n
i
e
s
11
1
/
4
”
C
e
d
a
r
m
i
l
l
H
a
r
d
i
e
S
o
f
fi t
12
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
1
0
0
S
e
r
i
e
s
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
/
2
0
0
S
e
r
i
e
s
D
o
o
r
s
13
2
x
2
”
T
r
e
x
W
i
n
d
o
w
T
r
i
m
14
8
x
8
”
H
e
a
v
y
T
i
m
b
e
r
C
o
l
u
m
n
15
6
x
8
”
H
e
a
v
y
T
i
m
b
e
r
S
t
r
u
t
16
E
x
p
o
s
e
d
2
x
1
2
”
J
o
i
s
t
s
@
1
6
”
O
.
C
.
o
n
6
x
1
2
”
B
e
a
m
s
17
H
e
v
i
L
i
t
e
U
p
D
o
w
n
L
i
g
h
t
w
/
B
r
o
n
z
e
P
o
w
d
e
r
C
o
a
t
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
C
O
L
O
R
A
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
T
u
s
c
a
n
G
o
l
d
B
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
K
h
a
k
i
B
r
o
w
n
C
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
S
a
g
e
D
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
l
a
n
e
R
e
d
E
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
S
i
e
r
r
a
T
a
n
F
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
W
e
a
t
h
e
r
e
d
C
o
p
p
e
r
G
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
C
o
l
o
n
i
a
l
R
e
d
H
B
e
n
j
a
m
i
n
M
o
o
r
e
E
a
r
l
y
M
o
r
n
i
n
g
M
i
s
t
I
B
e
n
j
a
m
i
n
M
o
o
r
e
S
t
a
m
p
e
d
e
J
T
r
e
x
T
r
a
n
s
c
e
n
d
T
r
e
e
H
o
u
s
e
K
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
H
D
H
i
c
k
o
r
y
L
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
H
D
B
a
r
k
w
o
o
d
M
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
D
a
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
EJJ JM MKG
L
C
CA
C B IAAABBA H
H IEG
4610 1012 1265
6
2
21
2 1 311111111 3
3345
15 17 17
16
14 141477
1515
GA K C I HHJ JJ J J
J
I E5162 3 338 98 8 13
13
3 4 GAS METERS 2x4” STUCCO BUMP OUT W/ FLASHING CAP @ TOP CONCRETE FOUNDATION NOT TO EXCEED 6” TYP.
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
NO
T
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
6
”
T
Y
P
.
KN
O
X
B
O
X
,
H
O
R
N
&
S
T
R
O
B
E
AN
D
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
CO
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
2x
4
”
S
T
U
C
C
O
B
U
M
P
O
U
T
W/
F
L
A
S
H
I
N
G
C
A
P
@
T
O
P
2x
4
”
S
T
U
C
C
O
B
U
M
P
O
U
T
W/
F
L
A
S
H
I
N
G
C
A
P
@
T
O
P
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
T
I
M
B
E
R
R
I
D
G
E
R
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
11/19/2013
B
E
R
G
L
U
N
D
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
S
,
L
L
C
21
0
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
B
L
V
D
A
1
0
3
,
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
8
1
6
3
2
T
:
9
7
0
.
9
2
6
.
4
3
0
1
SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
21
0
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
B
L
V
D
A
1
0
3
,
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
8
1
6
3
2
T
:
9
7
0
.
9
2
6
.
4
3
0
1
SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
T
Y
P
E
1
5
”
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
H
a
r
d
i
P
l
a
n
k
F
i
b
e
r
C
e
m
e
n
t
L
a
p
S
i
d
i
n
g
2
7
”
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
H
a
r
d
i
P
l
a
n
k
F
i
b
e
r
C
e
m
e
n
t
L
a
p
S
i
d
i
n
g
3
S
t
u
c
c
o
w
/
L
i
g
h
t
S
a
n
d
T
e
x
t
u
r
e
4
7
/
8
”
2
4
g
a
C
o
r
r
u
g
a
t
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
S
i
d
i
n
g
5
7
/
8
”
2
4
g
a
C
o
r
r
u
g
a
t
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
R
o
o
fi n
g
6
G
A
F
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
4
0
y
r
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
i
n
g
l
e
s
7
D
e
s
i
g
n
B
u
i
l
d
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
e
d
S
n
o
w
C
l
i
p
s
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
a
l
l
r
o
o
f
s
8
2
x
4
”
T
r
e
x
S
q
u
a
r
e
E
d
g
e
T
r
i
m
B
o
a
r
d
@
w
i
n
d
o
w
j
a
m
b
a
n
d
s
i
l
l
,
2
x
6
”
@
H
e
a
d
e
r
9
2
x
6
”
T
r
e
x
S
q
u
a
r
e
E
d
g
e
B
o
a
r
d
w
/
1
.
5
”
g
a
p
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
b
o
a
r
d
s
o
v
e
r
4
x
4
T
r
e
x
p
o
s
t
.
10
1
x
8
”
T
r
e
x
F
a
s
c
i
a
@
r
o
o
f
e
a
v
e
s
1
x
1
2
”
T
r
e
x
F
a
s
c
i
a
@
b
a
l
c
o
n
i
e
s
11
1
/
4
”
C
e
d
a
r
m
i
l
l
H
a
r
d
i
e
S
o
f
fi t
12
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
1
0
0
S
e
r
i
e
s
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
/
2
0
0
S
e
r
i
e
s
D
o
o
r
s
13
2
x
2
”
T
r
e
x
W
i
n
d
o
w
T
r
i
m
14
8
x
8
”
H
e
a
v
y
T
i
m
b
e
r
C
o
l
u
m
n
15
6
x
8
”
H
e
a
v
y
T
i
m
b
e
r
S
t
r
u
t
16
E
x
p
o
s
e
d
2
x
1
2
”
J
o
i
s
t
s
@
1
6
”
O
.
C
.
o
n
6
x
1
2
”
B
e
a
m
s
17
H
e
v
i
L
i
t
e
U
p
D
o
w
n
L
i
g
h
t
w
/
B
r
o
n
z
e
P
o
w
d
e
r
C
o
a
t
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
C
O
L
O
R
A
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
T
u
s
c
a
n
G
o
l
d
B
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
K
h
a
k
i
B
r
o
w
n
C
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
S
a
g
e
D
H
a
r
d
i
e
C
o
l
o
r
p
l
u
s
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
l
a
n
e
R
e
d
E
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
S
i
e
r
r
a
T
a
n
F
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
W
e
a
t
h
e
r
e
d
C
o
p
p
e
r
G
D
u
r
a
t
e
c
h
C
o
o
l
C
o
l
o
n
i
a
l
R
e
d
H
B
e
n
j
a
m
i
n
M
o
o
r
e
E
a
r
l
y
M
o
r
n
i
n
g
M
i
s
t
I
B
e
n
j
a
m
i
n
M
o
o
r
e
S
t
a
m
p
e
d
e
J
T
r
e
x
T
r
a
n
s
c
e
n
d
T
r
e
e
H
o
u
s
e
K
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
H
D
H
i
c
k
o
r
y
L
T
i
m
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
U
l
t
r
a
H
D
B
a
r
k
w
o
o
d
M
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
D
a
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
FJJ
J
M
M
KF
L D
DADB
I
A
A A
B B
A H
H I
F G
4610
10
12
12
65
6 2
2121
3
1
11 11
1 1
1 3
33
4 5
15
15
17 17
16
14 141477
15
FA K D I HHJ JJ
J J
J I F5162 3 338 98
8 13
1334 GAS METERS 2x4” STUCCO BUMP OUT W/ FLASHING CAP @ TOP CONCRETE FOUNDATION NOT TO EXCEED 6” TYP.
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
NO
T
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
6
”
T
Y
P
.
KN
O
X
B
O
X
,
H
O
R
N
&
S
T
R
O
B
E
AN
D
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
CO
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
2x
4
”
S
T
U
C
C
O
B
U
M
P
O
U
T
W/
F
L
A
S
H
I
N
G
C
A
P
@
T
O
P
2x
4
”
S
T
U
C
C
O
B
U
M
P
O
U
T
W/
F
L
A
S
H
I
N
G
C
A
P
@
T
O
P
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
T
I
M
B
E
R
R
I
D
G
E
R
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
B
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
11/19/2013
B
E
R
G
L
U
N
D
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
S
,
L
L
C
21
0
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
B
L
V
D
A
1
0
3
,
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
8
1
6
3
2
T
:
9
7
0
.
9
2
6
.
4
3
0
1
SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
T
I
M
B
E
R
R
I
D
G
E
R
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
PROJECTED EXISTING GRADE
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
FINISH GRADE GAS METERSELECTRIC METERS 2x4” STUCCO BUMP OUT W/ FLASHING CAP @ TOP
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
NO
T
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
6
”
T
Y
P
.
11/19/2013
B
E
R
G
L
U
N
D
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
S
,
L
L
C
21
0
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
B
L
V
D
A
1
0
3
,
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
8
1
6
3
2
T
:
9
7
0
.
9
2
6
.
4
3
0
1
SCALE 1/8” = 1’-0” 11-14-13
T
I
M
B
E
R
R
I
D
G
E
R
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
PR
O
J
E
C
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
GAS METERS ELECTRIC METERS
2x
4
”
S
T
U
C
C
O
B
U
M
P
O
U
T
W/
F
L
A
S
H
I
N
G
C
A
P
@
T
O
P
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
NO
T
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
6
”
T
Y
P
.
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013, a resolution adopting the 2013 Gerald R.
Ford Park Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Community Development Director and Tom Braun,
Principal, Braun Associates, Inc.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, Approve with Modifications, or Deny
Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013
BACKGROUND: On April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed town staff to prepare a
new master plan for Gerald R. Ford Park. In doing so, the Town Council provided the following
direction: The new plan shall be a compilation of the 1974 Vail Plan, 1985 Ford Park Master
Plan, 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update.
A series of goals, objectives, policies and actions steps were to be developed to clarify the
community's expectations for the Park and guide future decisions about improvements with
the Park. The concept of sub area planning within the Park was supported. While the Park was
to be planned in its entirety, sub area plans and illustrative graphics were to be used to further
clarify opportunities within the respective areas of the Park. The new plan was to incorporate
both current improvements already underway within the Park but also capture and articulate
future improvement opportunities. The Plan was to have an approximate ten year life span
with periodic updates and amendment considerations when needed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends the
Vail Town Council approves the proposed 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, as
modifidied by the Planning & Environmental Commission, based upon a review of the criteria
outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented at
multiple public hearings.
ATTACHMENTS:
Town Council Memorandum
Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013, Ford Park Master Plan
PEC Memorandum
Ford Park Master Plan-Red Line
Ford Park Master Plan-Clean
11/19/2013
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission and Design Review Board
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: October 28, 2013
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption
of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, an assemblage of the 1985
Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the
2012 Ford Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and
580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC130012)
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Braun, Braun Associates,
Inc.
Planner: George Ruther
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a recommendation from the Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission (the “PEC”) to the Vail Town Council (the “TC”)
on the adoption of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master (the “Plan”), an assemblage of
the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012
Ford Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage
Road East/Unplatted.
Key elements of the new master plan include the following:
• Compilation of the previous planning documents
• Amended goals, objectives, policy statements and action steps
• Sub area plans with recommendations
• Expanded park boundary to the Covered Bridge
The goal of the master planning effort is to create a plan that maintains the essence of
what Gerald R. Ford Park (the “Park”) is today and what was envisioned for the Park in
1974 – a combination of natural open space along the Gore Creek corridor coupled with
recreational, social, and cultural uses and facilities that serve the needs of residents and
guests of Vail. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan will provide the town and
community with a “guiding document’ for the Park for the next ten years.
The primary purpose of the Plan is to define community expectations for the use of and
future improvements to the Park and as a resource to assist the Town in the decision-
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 2
making regarding capital improvements and/or any proposed changes to the Park. In
the end, the Plan is to be one of the many elements that comprise the Vail
Comprehensive Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
On April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed town staff to prepare a new master
plan for Gerald R. Ford Park. In doing so, the Town Council provided the following
direction:
The new plan shall be a compilation of the 1974 Vail Plan, 1985 Ford Park Master Plan,
1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update.
A series of goals, objectives, policies and actions steps were to be developed to clarify
the community’s expectations for the Park and guide future decisions about
improvements with the Park.
The concept of sub area planning within the Park was supported. While the Park was to
be planned in its entirety, sub area plans and illustrative graphics were to be used to
further clarify opportunities within the respective areas of the Park.
The new plan was to incorporate both current improvements already underway within
the Park but also capture and articulate future improvement opportunities.
The Plan was to have an approximate ten year life span with periodic updates and
amendment considerations when needed.
III. REVIEW CRITERIA
1. The extent to which the Master Plan furthers the general and specific purposes
of the zoning regulations; and
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the proposed Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan furthers the general purposes
of the zoning regulations. Staff believes the existing park, the proposed improvements
to Ford Park, and the associated updates to the Plan maintains the health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural
environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high
quality.
Staff further believes the proposed Master Plan furthers the specific purposes of the
zoning regulations. Staff finds the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford
Park, and the associated updates to the Plan continues to:
• To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities.
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 3
• To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow,
and other dangerous conditions.
• To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and
to lessen congestion in the streets.
• To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading
facilities.
• To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic
values.
• To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land
uses, consistent with municipal development objectives.
• To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with
structures.
• To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town.
• To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other
desirable natural features.
• To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other
amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters.
• To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community.
Staff also believes the proposed Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan furthers the purposes
of the General Use District. Staff believes the existing park, the proposed
improvements to Ford Park, and the associated updates to the Master Plan continues to
provide sites for public and quasi-public uses which, because of their special
characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards
prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially
prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve
the purposes prescribed in section 12-1-2 of this title and to provide for the public
welfare.
Staff believes the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford Park, and the
associated updates to the Master Plan continues to ensure that public buildings and
grounds and certain types of quasi-public uses permitted in the General Use District are
appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail,
are harmonized with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other
structures, ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to
the permitted types of uses.
2. The extent to which the master plan would better implement and better achieve
the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in
the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives
of the town; and
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford Park, and the associated
updates to the Master Plan are consistent with the following Land Use Plan goals:
Goal 1. General Growth/Development
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 4
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the
visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill areas).
1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as
its potential for public use.
Goal 2. Skier /Tourist Concerns
2.1The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while
accommodating day visitors.
2.4 The community should improve summer recreational options to improve year-
round tourism.
2.5 The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve
year-round tourism.
2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands
while continuing to purchase open space.
Goal 6. Community Services
6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing
growth with services.
6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods.
3. The extent to which the master plan demonstrates how conditions have
substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the
existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan is a compilation of several previous master
planning efforts for Ford Park. The most recent planning document created for Ford
Park was the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update. Prior to that, it was the 1997
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 5
Ford Park Management Plan. In the past 15 years, many of the plan recommendations
have been constructed and implemented. The existing planning documents are no
longer effective as each still remains in effect yet the documents sometimes provide
conflicting direction. Through the compilation of the planning documents, any conflicts
in direction are addressed and one, new singular planning document is created.
4. The extent to which the master plan provides a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal
development objectives; and
The applicant is proposing changes to the goals, objectives, and policy statements of
the Ford Park Management Plan as adopted in 2012 and 1997. The applicant is
proposing a new master plan to facilitate a variety of park improvements and provide
direction for future decision making regarding proposed improvements within the Park.
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the updated goals, objectives, and policy statements of the Ford Park
Management Plan as adopted in 2012 and 1997 are appropriate and will result in a
harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with the
Town’s development objectives.
IV. RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town
Council for the proposed 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan based upon a review of
the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony
presented at multiple public hearings.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval of this request to the Vail Town Council; the Community
Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval
on the adoption of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, an assemblage of the
1985 Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford
Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage
Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto”
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed master plan, the
Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the
following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section III of October 28, 2013
memorandum to the Planning & Environmental Commission, and the evidence and
testimony presented at multiple public hearings, the Planning and Environmental
Commission finds:
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 6
1. That the maser plan is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted
goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town; and
2. That the master plan furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning
regulations; and
3. That the master plan promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare
of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of
the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment
and its established character as a resort and residential community of the
highest quality.”
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Proposed 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
11/19/2013
1
Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013
RESOLUTION NO. 14
Series of 2013
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2013 GERALD R. FORD PARK MASTER PLAN,
AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, on April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed Town Staff to
prepare a new master plan for Gerald R. Ford Park;
WHEREAS, the new master plan was to be a compilation of previous planning
efforts for the Park and the articulation of recommendations for new improvements with
the Park;
WHEREAS, the new master plan is intended to be an element of the Vail
Comprehensive Plan;
WHEREAS, the new master plan is intended to have a ten year life span with
periodic updates and amendments when needed;
WHEREAS, the primary purposes of the new master plan are to protect the Park
from over development, to define expectations for the use of the Park, and to assist in
decision-making regarding capital improvements and other changes proposed in the
Park;
WHEREAS, the new master plan was prepared in collaboration with the Vail
Recreation District, Vail Valley Foundation, Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, Vail Economic
Advisory Council, Art in Public Places Board, Planning & Environmental Commission
and many other interested citizens from the Vail community;
WHEREAS, on July 22, August 12, and August 26, and September 9, 2013, the
Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held public hearings on an
application to adopt a new master plan for Ford Park;
WHEREAS, on October 28, 2013, the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental
Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with modifications, of the 2013
Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan amendments to the Vail Town Council;
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the new master
plan recommendations are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted
goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town; and,
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the new master
plan promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes
the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves
11/19/2013
2
Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013
and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest quality.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
SECTION 1. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan is hereby adopted as
depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Vail
Town Council of the Town of Vail held this 19th day of November, 2013
__________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission and Design Review Board
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: October 28, 2013
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption
of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, an assemblage of the 1985
Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the
2012 Ford Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and
580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC130012)
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Braun, Braun Associates,
Inc.
Planner: George Ruther
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a recommendation from the Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission (the “PEC”) to the Vail Town Council (the “TC”)
on the adoption of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master (the “Plan”), an assemblage of
the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012
Ford Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage
Road East/Unplatted.
Key elements of the new master plan include the following:
• Compilation of the previous planning documents
• Amended goals, objectives, policy statements and action steps
• Sub area plans with recommendations
• Expanded park boundary to the Covered Bridge
The goal of the master planning effort is to create a plan that maintains the essence of
what Gerald R. Ford Park (the “Park”) is today and what was envisioned for the Park in
1974 – a combination of natural open space along the Gore Creek corridor coupled with
recreational, social, and cultural uses and facilities that serve the needs of residents and
guests of Vail. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan will provide the town and
community with a “guiding document’ for the Park for the next ten years.
The primary purpose of the Plan is to define community expectations for the use of and
future improvements to the Park and as a resource to assist the Town in the decision-
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 2
making regarding capital improvements and/or any proposed changes to the Park. In
the end, the Plan is to be one of the many elements that comprise the Vail
Comprehensive Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
On April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed town staff to prepare a new master
plan for Gerald R. Ford Park. In doing so, the Town Council provided the following
direction:
The new plan shall be a compilation of the 1974 Vail Plan, 1985 Ford Park Master Plan,
1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update.
A series of goals, objectives, policies and actions steps were to be developed to clarify
the community’s expectations for the Park and guide future decisions about
improvements with the Park.
The concept of sub area planning within the Park was supported. While the Park was to
be planned in its entirety, sub area plans and illustrative graphics were to be used to
further clarify opportunities within the respective areas of the Park.
The new plan was to incorporate both current improvements already underway within
the Park but also capture and articulate future improvement opportunities.
The Plan was to have an approximate ten year life span with periodic updates and
amendment considerations when needed.
III. REVIEW CRITERIA
1. The extent to which the Master Plan furthers the general and specific purposes
of the zoning regulations; and
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the proposed Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan furthers the general purposes
of the zoning regulations. Staff believes the existing park, the proposed improvements
to Ford Park, and the associated updates to the Plan maintains the health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural
environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high
quality.
Staff further believes the proposed Master Plan furthers the specific purposes of the
zoning regulations. Staff finds the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford
Park, and the associated updates to the Plan continues to:
• To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities.
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 3
• To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow,
and other dangerous conditions.
• To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and
to lessen congestion in the streets.
• To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading
facilities.
• To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic
values.
• To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land
uses, consistent with municipal development objectives.
• To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with
structures.
• To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town.
• To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other
desirable natural features.
• To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other
amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters.
• To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community.
Staff also believes the proposed Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan furthers the purposes
of the General Use District. Staff believes the existing park, the proposed
improvements to Ford Park, and the associated updates to the Master Plan continues to
provide sites for public and quasi-public uses which, because of their special
characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards
prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially
prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve
the purposes prescribed in section 12-1-2 of this title and to provide for the public
welfare.
Staff believes the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford Park, and the
associated updates to the Master Plan continues to ensure that public buildings and
grounds and certain types of quasi-public uses permitted in the General Use District are
appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail,
are harmonized with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other
structures, ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to
the permitted types of uses.
2. The extent to which the master plan would better implement and better achieve
the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in
the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives
of the town; and
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the existing park, the proposed improvements to Ford Park, and the associated
updates to the Master Plan are consistent with the following Land Use Plan goals:
Goal 1. General Growth/Development
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 4
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the
visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill areas).
1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as
its potential for public use.
Goal 2. Skier /Tourist Concerns
2.1The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while
accommodating day visitors.
2.4 The community should improve summer recreational options to improve year-
round tourism.
2.5 The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve
year-round tourism.
2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands
while continuing to purchase open space.
Goal 6. Community Services
6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing
growth with services.
6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods.
3. The extent to which the master plan demonstrates how conditions have
substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the
existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan is a compilation of several previous master
planning efforts for Ford Park. The most recent planning document created for Ford
Park was the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update. Prior to that, it was the 1997
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 5
Ford Park Management Plan. In the past 15 years, many of the plan recommendations
have been constructed and implemented. The existing planning documents are no
longer effective as each still remains in effect yet the documents sometimes provide
conflicting direction. Through the compilation of the planning documents, any conflicts
in direction are addressed and one, new singular planning document is created.
4. The extent to which the master plan provides a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal
development objectives; and
The applicant is proposing changes to the goals, objectives, and policy statements of
the Ford Park Management Plan as adopted in 2012 and 1997. The applicant is
proposing a new master plan to facilitate a variety of park improvements and provide
direction for future decision making regarding proposed improvements within the Park.
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at multiple public hearings, Staff
believes the updated goals, objectives, and policy statements of the Ford Park
Management Plan as adopted in 2012 and 1997 are appropriate and will result in a
harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with the
Town’s development objectives.
IV. RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town
Council for the proposed 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan based upon a review of
the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony
presented at multiple public hearings.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval of this request to the Vail Town Council; the Community
Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval
on the adoption of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, an assemblage of the
1985 Ford Park Master Plan, the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan, and the 2012 Ford
Park Management Plan Amendment, located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage
Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto”
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed master plan, the
Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the
following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section III of October 28, 2013
memorandum to the Planning & Environmental Commission, and the evidence and
testimony presented at multiple public hearings, the Planning and Environmental
Commission finds:
11/19/2013
Town of Vail Page 6
1. That the maser plan is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted
goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town; and
2. That the master plan furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning
regulations; and
3. That the master plan promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare
of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of
the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment
and its established character as a resort and residential community of the
highest quality.”
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Proposed 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park
Master Plan
An Element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan
November, 2013
Resolution No. 14, Series 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
Prepared for:
The Town of Vail
Prepared by:
Town of Vail Department of Community Development
and
Braun Associates, Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
Vail Town Council Vail Planning and Environmental Commission
Andy Daly, Mayor Bill Pierce, Chair
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-tem Henry Pratt, Co-Chair
Jenn Bruno Susan Bird
Dale Bugby Luke Cartin
Dave Chapin Pam Hopkins
Greg Moffet Michael Kurz
Margaret Rogers John Rediker
Former Vail Town Council
Kerry Donovan
Kevin Foley
Susie Tjossem
Vail Recreation District
Vail Valley Foundation
Art in Public Places
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
11/19/2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1
2. Site Assessment/Existing Conditions 5
3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts 9
4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps 18
5. Ford Park Sub-Areas 37
6. Illustrative Plan 55
7. Park Management 62
8. Appendix 68
Due to the volume of material, the information listed below is provided in a
separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix.
• Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of the
property known as the Antholz Ranch.
• The Vail Plan, 1974
• Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the
Antholz Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
• The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report,
1985
• Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, designating the seven acres around the Nature
Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural
history.
• Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
• Ford Park Management Plan, 1997
• Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012
• BFAG Building – Site Evaluation Matrix, 2013
• Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, August 15, 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 1
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
November 2013
“Whereas, President Gerald R. Ford has brought to the Town of Vail his
interest and encouragement; has shown through his private life and public
life a commitment to recreation, the environment and places set aside
therefor; and believes that a statement of the community’s appreciation
and respect for Gerald R. Ford is appropriate and called for; that the
property commonly referred to as the Antholz Ranch is hereby named the
Gerald R. Ford Park.”
Resolution approved by Vail Town Council, January 18, 1977
Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION
The Town of Vail acquired the 38 acre Anholtz Ranch in 1973 for the stated purpose of
“improving the quality of life in the communitycreating a major recreation facility for the
total town.” (The Vail Plan, 1974). Since that time the property has increased in size to
more than 47 acres and has evolved into one of Vail’s most widely used and highly
cherished assets. The evolution of the Antholz Ranch to what has become Ford Park
was originally contemplated by one of Vail’s earliest planning efforts:
“The intended use program is a comprehensive one and eventually the
park will include an impressive number of facilities in addition to extensive
open turf space and the delight of the natural earth forms and mature tree
growth adjacent to Gore Creek.”
The Vail Plan, 1974
The goal of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan (the Plan) is to maintain the
essence of what Ford Park (the Park) is today and what was envisioned for the Park in
1974 – a combination of natural open space along the Gore Creek corridor coupled with
recreational, social and cultural uses and facilities to serve the needs of residents and
guests of Vail. The primary purposes of this Plan are to protect the Park from over
development, to define expectations for the use of the Park, and to assist the Town in
decision-making regarding capital improvements and other changes proposed to the
Park. Only those changes deemed to be in compliance with applicable elements of this
Plan will obtain approvals from the Town.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 2
The Town has completed four planning efforts for the Park. These plans have directly
influenced the development of Ford Park and each has contributed to the role the Park
plays in the community. These previous planning efforts were:
1974 Vail Plan – While the primary purpose of this plan was to address
Vail’s growth and development, it did include a chapter on recreation and
defined at a very broad level the role Ford Park could play in providing
recreational, cultural and community-oriented uses.
1985 Gerald R. Ford Park/Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report – At the time this plan was prepared; ballfields, tennis courts, and
parking had already been developed and construction of an amphitheater
had commenced. The purpose of this plan was to “guide the future
development of the park and establish guidelines for the implementation of
improvements” (1985 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan).
1997 Ford Park Management Plan – This plan was initiated in response to
several development proposals for the Park. The plan was a product of
extensive focus group and public input sessions and in essence served as
an amendment to the 1985 plan.
2012 Update to the Ford Park Management Plan – This plan was done to
acknowledge improvements proposed for the Park that were initiated
when Vail voters approved re-allocating a portion of the Convention
Center Funds to Ford Park.
Summaries of these previous plans are found in Chapter 3.
While the impetus for these planning efforts varied, each involved extensive community
input, debate, and at times, controversy. These planning processes revealed the
community’s intense passion for the Park as town staff, elected officials and the public
worked to find the appropriate levels of development and activity for the Park.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan presents a compilation of these previous
planning efforts along with new direction and ideas that have evolved from this latest
planning effort. The primary objectives of this Plan are to:
• Incorporate key elements of previously completed plans for Ford Park into one
document, specifically those guiding principles that have successfully shaped the
development of the Park from its inception,
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 3
• Establish clear expectations for the future use, development and management of
the Park,
• Protect the Park from over-use and over-development;
• Define effective tools for decision-making regarding the future of the Park, and
• Provide a single, comprehensive document to serve as the master plan for the
Park.
With the adoption of this Plan, previous plans for Ford Park will be archived and no
longer used as guides for future decision-making or planning for the Park. The 2013
Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan will serve as the Town’s sole planning document for
the Park.
The development of Ford Park has evolved over a number of decades. While the
majority of the Park is developed, and notwithstanding the most recent phase of
improvements to the Park, there is no reason to think that the Park will not continue to
evolve in the future.
This Plan was prepared with the expectation that it will provide the community with a
document to guide the use and development of the Park for the next ten years. That
said, it is likely that during this time new ideas or issues not addressed by this Plan will
arise, be they proposals for enhancements to existing facilities, the development of new
facilities, or new uses for the Park. This is to be expected as the needs of the
community will change over time and as they do changes to the Park may be
appropriate. As dialogue and debate occurs regarding any changes to the Park, it is
critical that decisions made by the Town maintain the essence of what Ford Park is, why
it was established, and how it provides environmental, recreational, educational, cultural
or social benefits to the community.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 14, Series
2013 by the Vail Town Council following recommendation from the Vail Planning and
Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this Plan may be initiated by the
Vail Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Commission, or members of the
community. Any such amendment proposal shall be reviewed by the Vail Town Council
following recommendation from the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission.
Elements of this Plan
This Plan includes the following chapters:
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 4
1. Introduction
The section provides an introduction to the plan, the purpose of this planning
effort and outlines the major elements of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master
Plan.
2. Site Assessment and Existing Conditions
This section explains how site and surrounding conditions influenced the initial
planning and design of the Park.
3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts
The 1997 Plan has provided the basis for this history and background of the Park
and the summaries of the four previous planning efforts that have taken place.
Site plans of the Park produced during these planning efforts are to provide a
history and context for how the Park has evolved over the years.
4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps
While the 1997 Plan provided a framework for this section, the goals, objectives,
policies and actions steps have been refined to better express the current vision
for the Park.
5. Ford Park Sub-Areas
Seven sub-areas are used to describe specific areas of the Park, their unique
features, the role they play in the Park, how they will be managed and provide
recommendations for improvements that could occur in the future.
6. Illustrative Plan
The 2013 Illustrative Plan is a refinement of the 2012 Illustrative Plan; it depicts
existing improvements and at a general level describes improvements that may
occur in the future.
7. Park Management
This chapter provides a brief summary of the various management and
operational aspects of the Park that are managed by the Town of Vail.
8. Appendix
Documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park planning efforts
are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 5
Chapter 2 - SITE ASSESSMENT/EXISTING CONDITIONS
Located immediately east of Vail Village, the proximity of Ford Park to Vail Village and
the convenient access it affords residents and guests is one of the Park’s most
significant attributes. This is no coincidence as the 1974 Vail Plan documented how the
location of Ford Park was a key factor in it being purchased for a community park and in
defining the initial vision for the Park to be a major center of cultural and recreational
activity for the community.
“all properties of significant size within the Town limits were researched
and the recommendation made that the Anholtz property, adjacent to
development at the east end of the Village, was the only site satisfying the
recreational uses anticipated. Selection criteria included such factors as
ease of walking distance from the Village, adequate space within a single
parcel for large, meadow-like turf areas, proximity to the Frontage Road
for simple and direct access by autos or buses, natural beauty such as the
Gore Creek provides, and directness of connection to major bicycle and
pedestrian trails.”
The Vail Plan, 1974
When purchased, the original Anholtz property was +/-38 acres. Today, Ford Park is
approximately 47.1 acres. The four areas of the Park and their acreages are depicted
below:
Ford Park, 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 6
In January of 1977, Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, was passed re-naming the
Anholtz Ranch to the Gerald R. Ford Park. A copy of this resolution is included in the
2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix.
Existing Conditions
In the past forty years many improvements have been made to Ford Park. Foremost
among these are athletic fields, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Betty Ford Alpine
GardenBetty Ford Alpine Gardens, a children’s playground, the Vail Nature Center, the
Vail Tennis Center and parking and transit facilities. Infrastructure necessary to serve
the Park is largely in place and vehicle and pedestrian access to and within the Park
has been established. With the exception of the Gore Creek Corridor, the majority of
the Park has been improved with buildings, facilities or other related site improvements.
Access and circulation is a key factor in how the Park functions. On-site parking is
provided, but in keeping with the original concept for the Park the amount of parking is
limited to +/-200 spaces along the Frontage Road and +/-65 spaces at the Soccer Field.
Parking for major Park events is provided in the Town’s parking structures. Access
from these structures to the Park is provided by pedestrian corridors and the Town’s
transit system. Pedestrian access is provided via the Gore Creek Trail, a sidewalk
along the South Frontage Road and by two bridges in the Golden Peak neighborhood.
The Park’s main transit stop is located on the South Frontage Road with additional
stops on Vail Valley Drive. These stops are served by the in-town shuttle and by
dedicated express bus service during special events.
Site Characteristics and Park Design
Physical characteristics of the land and the relationship of the Park to surrounding uses
and facilities influenced the earliest design concepts for the Park. Significant influences
in the early design of the Park include the South Frontage Road (that establishes the
north boundary of the Park), Gore Creek and adjoining wetland and riparian habitat (that
run the entire length of the Park), site topography, vegetation and views.
Topography of the main portion of the park between the Frontage Road and Gore Creek
includes a prominent and well-defined grade change that creates an “upper bench” and
“lower bench”. Over time this grade change, created in large part by grading from the
construction of Interstate 70, became a point of demarcation for the predominantly
active recreation uses on the Upper Bench and the cultural and passive recreation uses
on the Lower Bench.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 7
Much of Ford Park was initially developed without the benefit of a detailed design or
development plan. The 1974 Vail Plan did, however, set the stage for the future of the
Park by defining a number of basic design parameters for how the Park could be
developed. There are many examples of how these basic design parameters and
existing site characteristics directly influenced the design and development of the Park.
Parking and Transit
These facilities were located on flat terrain immediately adjacent to the South
Frontage Road and on the perimeter of the Park. This location minimizes the
impacts of vehicles on other areas of the Park.
Athletic Fields
Fields along the Frontage Road were located on what at that time was the Park’s
broadest expanse of relatively flat terrain. Not only did the fields “fit” on this
portion of the Park, the flat terrain minimized the need for site grading and
associated site disturbance. The fields also provide a buffer between highway
noise and other quieter areas of the Park.
The Amphitheater
The Amphitheater essentially straddles the grade transition between the Upper
and Lower Bench. This location allowed the Amphitheater to utilize sloping
terrain to create terraced seating areas within the Amphitheater. This location
also affords stunning views to the Gore Range.
Nature Center
The Nature Center is located within the relatively undeveloped Gore Creek
Corridor. The natural character of the creek corridor provides a fitting location for
the environmental education programs offered by the Nature Center.
The 1985 Ford Park Master Plan spoke eloquently about the philosophy of good park
design and the role site conditions and characteristics should play in the design
process.
“Compatibility of the park development within the environment is the most
significant aspect of the master plan. The existing landscape is an integral part of
each plan and not merely a backdrop against which the plans are staged. This is
essentially necessary with parklands, for there we expect the landscape to be
stable, pleasant and above all, functional. Accordingly, the planning and design
process was founded on a sound understanding of the features and dynamics of
the park site environment.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 8
Just as a tapestry is woven from many threads of different colors, textures and
strengths, so the landscape is composed of a variety of components such as
slopes, soils, plant communities and aquatic features. Each of these must be
identified and described, but more than that, the role of each must be understood
as a dynamic entity so that limitations and opportunities can be properly
understood. This involves the translation of forms, such as slopes and soil type,
into processes, such as runoff and soil leeching, and the definition of critical inter-
relationships among them.”
1985 Ford Park Master Plan
Integrating improvements with the landscape in order to create a pleasant and
functional park should be the goal of any park design. While developed without the
benefit of a comprehensive, detailed design plan, the major elements of the Park have
been located and designed in a manner that is very responsive to site conditions and
other influences. Ford Park today reflects many elements of the original vision for the
Park as outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan and as further defined by the 1985 Ford Park
Master Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 9
Chapter 3 - HISTORY OF FORD PARK and PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS
During the past forty years the Town of Vail has completed four major planning efforts
for Ford Park. This chapter summarizes the purpose, process and outcome for each of
these planning efforts and provides information on the history and development of Ford
Park.
Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973 (a copy of which is included in the 2013 Ford Park
Master Plan Supplemental Appendix), authorized the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch. At that time the 38-acre park site
represented the last remaining parcel of undeveloped land central to use by all
residents and visitors of the Vail community. The ordinance listed a variety of possible
uses for the property including the following:
• for park and greenbelt purposes,
• to preserve the natural and physical character of the area to be condemned,
• for bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails,
• for children’s playground,
• for performing arts and civic center,
• for a ski lift and related facilities,
• for picnic areas,
• for recreational facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools, gymnasium, ice
skating rink,
• for theater and assembly halls, convention center, public schools,
• for possible exchange or trade of condemned land, or a portion thereof, with
other property which may exactly meet the needs of the town, and
• to construct and maintain water works, transportation systems, and other public
utilities relating to public health, safety, and welfare.
The four major planning efforts for Ford Park include:
The Vail Plan, 1974
The Vail Plan was completed in August of 1973 and adopted in 1974 (a copy of this
plan is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix). In the early
‘70’s Vail pressures from growth and development were radically changing the
character of Vail and the primary purpose of the Vail Plan was to help the town respond
to growth pressures with the goal of “creating a recreationally-based community of
individuality, beauty and pleasure that can be unique in the United States.” (The Vail Plan,
1974). The plan included a chapter on the tTown’s recreation system. The Antholz
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 10
Ranch property was mentioned as “the only site capable of satisfying the anticipated
recreational needs of the community” (The Vail Plan, 1974).
The Vail Plan’s vision for the Antholz Ranch was to create a “major community park-
cultural center.” A wide range of potential uses for the park were identified:
• a place for showing and creating art, crafts, etc.,
• an indoor theater and an 800 seat outdoor amphitheater,
• meeting rooms and community workshops,
• wide outdoor terraces and natural landscapes
• indoor ice arena,
• tennis and handball courts
• children’s play facilities and space for family activities,
• headquarters for the Annual Vail Symposium and local television,
• a possible location for an ecologium (nature center), and
• a grammar school.
As a balance to this extensive program of uses and facilities for the Park, the Vail Plan
contemplated the preservation of the Gore Creek corridor as a passive, “quiet place” to
enjoy the natural beauty of the site.
The plan called for 200 surface parking spaces to meet the daily parking needs of the
park. Parking for major events was planned to be provided in the Vail Transportation
Center with town transit and various trails and bikeways providing alternative means to
access the Park. The Vail Plan also depicted a potential road connection at the east end
of the park that would link the Frontage Road with Vail Valley Drive.
While the Vail Plan did not include a detailed design plan for the Park, the conceptual
site plan below provided a vision for how the Park could be developed. A number of
existing park improvements reflect some of the basic concepts from the 1974 Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 11
Conceptual Plan for Ford Park, Vail Plan, 1974
Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan, 1985
In August of 1985 the Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan
Development Final Report was adopted by the Vail Town Council (a copy of this plan
and Resolution No. 19, Series of 1985 is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix).
When the 1985 planning process was initiated, improvements in the Park were limited
to athletic fields, tennis courts and parking. A foundation for an amphitheater was in
place but this project was not yet completed. At that time the very eastern end of the
Park along the Frontage Road was utilized as a snow-dump.
The purpose of the 1985 plan was to prepare a more detailed plan for the future
development of the park and to establish guidelines for the implementation of park
improvements. The master planning process included a Recreation Needs Analysis
Survey and extensive community input via workshops and community meetings. The
outcome of these efforts was an indication of the type and extent of improvements the
community wanted to see in the Park. Alternative site plans were considered and a
final, preferred plan was selected. This final plan included a swimming pool complex,
“neighborhood park improvements” (on the Lower Bench), a pond/skating rink (on the
Lower Bench), and the realignment of the eastern softball field. Development of the
neighborhood park improvements on the lower bench were completed in 1988 and
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 12
included restrooms, playground area, open turf area, picnic facilities, and the west
access road.
The first major structure to be constructed in the Park, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater,
was completed in July of 1987 and shortly thereafter a Parking and Transit Study for the
Amphitheater was completed. This study made five recommendations:
1. the Village Structure should be considered the major parking facility for Ford
Park (with improvements to the signs, sidewalks, and bus service being
necessary);
2. extend shuttle bus service to the soccer field;
3. disallow Frontage Road parking;
4. construct a vehicle turn-around and passenger unloading area at Ford Park;
and
5. do not schedule concurrent events in the Park.
These recommendations validated many of the recommendations for parking and transit
outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan.
Ford Park Master Plan, 1985
The 1985 Plan identified a location for an alpine garden and in 1989 the first phase of
the Betty Ford Alpine GardenBetty Ford Alpine Gardens was completed. Since that
time a number of expansions to the Ggardens have been completed, including the
Perennial Garden, the Meditation Garden, and the Alpine Rock Garden.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 13
Following approval of the 1985 Master Plan the following steps were taken regarding
the planning of Ford Park:
Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, was passed on November 3, 1987. This
resolution designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an area to be
preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural history. Vehicular traffic
was to be restricted and certain policies and procedures for preservation and
maintenance of the grounds and facilities were established by the resolution. (a
copy of resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, is included in the 2013 Ford Park
Master Plan Supplemental Appendix).
In December of 1988, the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District (Now the Vail
Recreation District) and the Town of Vail, requested an amendment to the 1985
Ford Park Master Plan. The two phase amendment was adopted by Council as
Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988. A copy of the resolution is included in the
2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. Phase one of the
amendment was to allow the construction of four additional tennis courts. Phase
two of the amendment changed the proposed location of an aquatic facility to the
eastern softball field. Funding of the aquatic facility was rejected by voters in a
special election on February 6, 1989. Vail Town Council was presented with a
petition to delete all reference to an aquatics center from the Ford Park Master
Plan in April of 1990. No record of Council action on the petition was found.
While the tennis center building is not mentioned in the Master plan amendment,
the VRD did receive a Conditional Use Permit for the project on May 8, 1990.
The Vail Village Master Plan, adopted in 1990, addresses Ford Park as a specific
study area. This plan acknowledged the use of the Park to accommodate
overflow skier and local parking needs. It recommended that the Park be studied
further as a site for additional skier parking to serve expansion of the eastern
side of Vail Mountain. Action Step #5 under Goal #5 states: Study the feasibility
of an underground (recreation fields would remain) parking structure in Ford
Park. The Parking and Circulation Plan (an element of the Vail Village Master
Plan), identified the western portion of the upper bench for potential parking
beneath the Park, and called for separated bike/pedestrian ways along the South
Frontage Road and Vail Valley Drive.
The Vail Transportation Master Plan, completed in 1993, states that the existing
Ford Park Parking area (at the east end of the Park) should be considered for a
possible 2-level parking facility with the second level below existing grade. Ford
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 14
Park and the athletic field parking area are also listed as two possible sites for
over-sized vehicles if the lot east of the Lionshead Structure becomes developed.
Ford Park Management Plan, 1997
The planning process that resulted in the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan process
was initiated in June of 1995 in response to several development proposals which had
been formally and informally discussed for the Park. These development proposals
included an Educational Center for the Betty Ford Alpine GardenBetty Ford Alpine
Gardens, a cultural/performing arts center, expansion of the tennis facility, athletic field
fencing, and a community parking structure. This planning process was also seen as a
means for addressing park management issues such as parking deficiencies, Frontage
Road access, pedestrian access and circulation, access for the elderly and mobility
impaired, utilization of the lower bench, conflicts between uses within the Park, conflicts
with adjacent property owners, and the delineation of financial responsibilities.
At the time the project was authorized the Vail Town Council expressed concern that a
new master plan for Ford Park could result in an excessive amount of new
development. In response, staff noted the intention of the project was to create a
management plan as a means to adequately and consistently evaluate development
proposals, with the goal of limiting development and protecting the character of the
Park.
Park leaseholders, two neighborhood representatives and town staff served as the
Stakeholder Group for the planning process and a third party facilitator was retained to
coordinate this effort. The Stakeholder Group developed alternative design solutions
addressing parking, vehicular access, Frontage Road improvements, additional sports
facilities and management policies. These plans were presented to the public in an
open house at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater in June of 1996.
The open house presentation was a turning point in the process of developing the
Management Plan. Several residents were alarmed by the alternatives included in the
presentation and initiated a grass-roots movement to place a referendum on any future
expansion/development within the Park. This strong public reaction, combined with a
lack of closure within the Stakeholders Group, prompted the Vail Town Council to revise
the process to include more community involvement. Three Focus Group meetings and
public input sessions were held throughout the fall of 1996.
The results of the focus groups and public input sessions and a preliminary master plan
framework were presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Vail
Town Council in late 1996. The PEC and Town CouncilFollowing these meetings staff
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 15
was directed staff to proceed with drafting the management plan as an amendment to
the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan based on the input received and presented. The
management plan was adopted in April of 1997. Major elements of the plan were six
goal statements along with objectives, policies and actions steps intended to define the
future direction for the Park. The 1997 Plan also included an Illustrative Plan that
identified a number of future improvements. Foremost among these was identifying a
site next to the Soccer Field parking lot for an Educational Center for the Betty Ford
Alpine GardenBetty Ford Alpine Gardens.
Following approval of the 1997 Management Plan the following related actions were
taken regarding the planning of Ford Park:
Goal #4 of the Vail Village Plan Master Plan (as amended in 1998) addressed
the preservation of “existing open space areas and expansion of green space
opportunities.” An action step associated with this goal is to “explore the
feasibility of expanding Ford Park to the west to Vail Valley Drive and/or Slifer
Plaza along the Gore Creek stream tract to provide improved pedestrian and
handicapped access to the Park.”
The 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan identified a wide range of roadway
improvements designed to accommodate traffic levels anticipated to meet 2025
demands. One of these improvements contemplates a roundabout at the west
end of Ford Park to “serve as a means of “u-turning” (eastbound to westbound)
and to potentially serve a future parking structure.”
2012 Management Plan Update
In 2012 the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan was updated to reflect numerous
improvements proposed for the Park. Plans to improve the Park were initiated when
Vail voters approved re-allocating a portion of the +/-$9,000,000 Convention Center
Funds to Ford Park. The other stakeholders in the Park also participated in the funding
of these improvements.
The 2012 Update maintained the general direction for the Park as established by the
1997 Management Plan. With only a few exceptions, the 2012 Update suggested no
significant changes to the uses, facilities and activities that currently take place in the
Park. One exception was the 2012 Update included the development of an Education
Center for the Betty Ford Alpine GardenBetty Ford Alpine Gardens along Gore Creek
adjacent to the main entry to the Gardens. All of the existing major uses in the Park –
athletic fields, passive recreation, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Alpine Gardens
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 16
and Tennis Center were to remain in place. The Update did not change any of the six
major goal statements (or related objectives, policy statements and action steps) in the
1997 Management Plan.
2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update
The most significant changes in the 2012 Update are found in the Illustrative Plan
chapter of the Plan. The Illustrative Plan provided conceptual site plan diagrams and
narrative explanations of improvements suggested for the Park. Many of these
improvements were first identified in the 1997 Plan, others evolved out of discussions
with the Vail Town Council, stakeholders and the community during the winter of 2012.
Many of these improvements were initiated in 2012 and 2013. Foremost among them
were the major re-modeling of the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, re-construction of East
Betty Ford Way, improvements to the parking and transit area, expansion and re-
configuration of the athletic fields and new concession and storage buildings associated
with the fields.
A copy of the 2012 Management Plan Update is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master
Plan Supplemental Appendix
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 17
Time Line of Ford Park Activities:
April 1973 Condemnation of Anholtz Ranch, Ordinance 6, 1973
August 1973 Completion of Vail Plan
January 1977 Anholtz Ranch named Gerald R. Ford Park, Resolution 1, 1977
August 1985 Completion of Ford/Donovan Park Master Plan,
July 1987 Amphitheater construction completed
August 1987 Alpine Demonstration Garden completed
November 1987 Preservation of Nature Center, Resolution 27, 1987
December 1987 Vail Valley Foundation lease signed
November 1988 Lower Bench improvements completed
December 1988 Ford Park Master Plan amendment by VRD, Resolution 44, 1988
December 1988 Service agreement with VRD, Resolution 46, 1988
May 1989 Tennis Center receives Conditional Use Permit
July 1989 Alpine Perennial Garden completed
January 1990 Completion of Vail Village Master Plan
February 1990 Aquatic Center rejected by voters in special election
April 1990 Council petitioned to delete Aquatic Center from Master Plan
May 1990 Tennis Center construction completed
June 1991 Alpine Meditation Garden completed
April 1993 Completion of Vail Transportation Master Plan
December 1993 Vail Recreation District agreement renewed
June 1994 Vail Alpine Garden Foundation license agreement signed.
June 1995 Town begins Ford Park Management Plan
October 1996 Council allows Betty Ford Vail Alpine Gardens Foundation to
proceed through process with Educational Center plans at Soccer
Field parking lot
April 1997 Ford Park Management Plan adopted
1999 Lease with Vail Valley Foundation renewed
2008 Lease with Vail Recreation District renewed
2009 Vail Transportation Plan Update completed
November 2011 Voters approve use of Conference Center Funding for Ford Park
Improvements
May 2012 Completion of 2012 Update to Ford Park Management Plan
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 18
Chapter 4 - GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTION STEPS
This plan includes six five statements that convey the community’s goals for Ford Park.
These goal statements provide broad direction on the preservation of the Park, how the
Park should be used, vehicles, pedestrian circulation, coordination between park users
and financial considerations relative to operations and capital improvements. Each goal
statement includes a series of objectives, policies and action steps. Collectively these
statements reflect input from the Vail Town Council, the community and leaseholders
during the 2013 master plan update process. These statements will be used to provide
guidance in decision-making on the management and use of the Park.
The goals, objectives and policies of this Plan will be considered during the review
process for any new development, changes or improvements proposed for the Park.
Only those proposals deemed to be in compliance with these statements (and other
applicable elements of this Plan) will gain approvals. Project proposals deemed to not
comply with these statements and other applicable elements of this Plan will be denied.
This chapter includes thirty-six action steps. In some cases action steps involve a
single, defined task intended to implement an objective or policy statement. An
example of this would be initiating refinements to the park design guidelines specific to
Ford Park. Other action steps involve on-going tasks. An example would be the
coordination and management of events in the Park. The Community Development
Department, with participation from the Public Works Department, will prioritize action
steps and present recommendations annually to the Planning and Environmental
Commission regarding that year’s work program for implementing action steps. The
Planning and Environmental Commission will provide a recommendation on the work
program that will be forwarded to the Vail Town Council who will make final decisions on
the work program along with any necessary budget expenditures.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 19
Goal #1:
Protect the natural environment along the Gore Creek corridor and ensure that
any new use or building within the Park does not adversely affect the character
and quality of the Park or the overall experience of park users.
Objective 1.1: Limit uses and future development to that which is consistent with these
goals, objectives and policies and is consistent with the Ford Park Sub-Areas and
Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain the variety of uses and facilities currently located
within the Park.
Policy Statement 2: Proposals for new (or changes to existing) facilities or uses
that would displace existing public uses will not be permitted unless there is
either a compelling public interest or adequate alternative facilities can be
provided.
Objective 1.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.1.1: Draft a new ordinance to exclude those uses listed in
Ordinance No.6, Series of 1973, now considered to be inappropriate, and
to redefine the allowable uses within Ford Park. The following uses that
are allowed and prohibited for Ford Park shall take precedence over
Section 12-9C-2 of the Vail Town Code concerning the General Use Zone
District:
Allowed Uses
Park and greenbelt
Bicycle and hiking trails
Children’s playground
Active recreation
Passive recreation
Outdoor amphitheater
Botanical gardens
Environmental, educationalEducational, and historical centers
Historical center
Picnic areas
Recreation and athletic facilities
Public utility easements
Parking (surface parking/structured parking)
Administrative offices for the operation of uses occurring within the Park
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 20
Public Art Display
Concerts and Special Events Venues
Prohibited uses
Ski lift and related facilities
Civic center, convention/conference center, public schools, gymnasium,
and assembly hall
Equestrian trails
Type III and IV employee housing
Action Step 1.1.2: Town of Vail will Rreview legal descriptions of existing
lease areas in consultation with for the Vail Recreation District, the Vail
Valley Foundation and the Betty Ford Alpine GardenBetty Ford Alpine
Gardens and modify, as deemed necessary, so legal descriptions
correspond with existing and proposed improvements and uses.
Objective 1.2: Maintain all facilities and uses in the Park at a high level of quality and
establish appropriate review procedures, review criteria and design standards for
evaluating any new development proposals or other proposed changes to the Park are
clearly established.
Policy Statement 1: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or
uses shall conform to the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan, including but not limited
to:
• Goals, Objectives and Policy Statements,
• Sub-Area Plans, and
• Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 2: Any new development or change to existing Park facilities
shall be reviewed for compliance with Section 12-11-6 Park Design Guidelines of
the Town of Vail Municipal Code, as well as other applicable Town regulations.
Policy Statement 3: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or
uses shall provide a needed environmental, recreational, educational, cultural or
social benefit to the community.
Policy Statement 4: Maintain and operate existing facilities, uses and functions
within the Park at a high standard of quality reflective of the Vail Brand.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 21
Objective 1.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.2.1: With participation of all Park stakeholders, Town staff to
prepare standards which outlines expectations regarding the appearance,
maintenance, and operation of facilities within the Park.
Action Step 1.2.2: Evaluate the park design guidelines in Section 11-12-6
of the Vail Town Code and modify as necessary to address design
considerations specific to Ford Park.
Objective 1.3: Preserve and protect the environmentally sensitive areas along the Gore
Creek Corridor.
Policy Statement 1: Uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor
shall be limited to only those prescribed in the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-
area.
Policy Statement 2: No new buildings should be permitted within the Gore
Creek Preservation Sub-area.
Policy Statement 3: Any new improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor
shall respect consider the 100-year floodplain and minimize impacts to wetland
or riparian habitats.
Objective 1.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.3.1: Evaluate the merits of strengthening preservation
controls within the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area via a conservation
easement or the Natural Area Preservation Zone District “Open Space”
designation.
Action Step 1.3.2: Inventory existing conditions of the creek bank and
vegetation within the Gore Creek corridor, initiate programs to stabilize or
restore these areas as may be necessary.
Objective 1.4: Utilize Ford Park as a showcase for environmental sensitivity and
sustainability.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 22
Policy Statement 1: Encourage all lease holders and events at the Park to
implement comprehensive recycling programs.
Policy Statement 2: Sustainable design and environmentally “friendly” materials
and construction methods should be utilized on all new development within the
Park.
Policy Statement 3: Maintain, protect and enhance the environmental character
of natural open space areas.
Policy Statement 4: New improvements within the Park and the ongoing
management of the Park should be done using sound environmentally sensitive
practices.
Objective 1.5: Limit the number and scale of buildings and structures within the Park to
no more than necessary to meet the needs of park operations and to provide
appropriate services and facilities to park users.
Policy Statement 1: As an alternative to new buildings, encourage shared or
joint-use buildings and/or facilities among Park lease-holders.
Policy Statement 2: The design of new buildings or structures shall be
integrated with the land with a subtle, understated, low-profile in appearance so
as to not dominate the Park’s landscape; “iconic” architecture or building designs
that may be visually distracting are not appropriate.
Policy Statement 3: Park stakeholders may have administrative office space
within the Park, provided that such space is limited in size to no more than what
is necessary only for the management and operation of facilities and uses
located within the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 23
Goal #2:
Provide open space, facilities, and programs within Ford Park to meet the passive
and active recreational, educational, social and cultural needs of residents and
guests of Vail.
Objective 2.1: Provide open space areas within the Park for the passive enjoyment of
nature and to reinforce the Park’s connection to the natural environment.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain Preserve the “delight of the natural earth forms
and mature tree growth adjacent to Gore Creek” (The Vail Plan, 1974) found within
Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area for the “quiet enjoyment of nature”, and limit
uses and activities within this area.
Policy Statement 2: The primary use of the open turf area within the Lower
Commons Sub-Area should be to provide a place for un-programed and informal
passive recreation. The use of this area for special events should be limited in
frequency and scope in order to minimize impacts on the primary use of this
area.
Objective 2.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.1.1: Establish management and operational policies for
special events within the open turf area of the Lower Commons Sub-area.
Action Step 2.1.2: Identify key viewsheds from strategic locations within
the Park and as may be necessary, establish designated view corridors to
ensure the protection of these viewsheds.
Objective 2.2: Utilize Ford Park to meet the community’s needs for active recreation
and formal team sport activities.
Policy Statement 1: The Active Recreation and Soccer Field Sub-Areas shall be
managed first and foremost to provide facilities for active recreation and team
sports.
Policy Statement 2: Landscape berms and buffers around active recreation
areas should be maintained and enhanced to mitigate potential impacts of noise
and activity on other sub-areas of the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 24
Objective 2.3: Maintain, and enhance where appropriate, the role of the Park in
providing facilities for the enjoyment and exploration of the arts, music, dance,
education and other cultural pursuits.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain the Ford Amphitheater as the primary a principle
summer-time performing arts facility in the Town of Vail.
Policy Statement 2: Support the Art in Public Places Board in their its efforts to
continue public art programs (i.e. interactive events, projects, art installations,
educational activities, etc.) within the Creekside area of the Lower Commons
Sub-area (and other areas of the Park as may be deemed appropriate).
Policy Statement 3: Support the educational programs provided at the Nature
Center and the programs provided by the Betty Ford Alpine GardenBetty Ford
Alpine Gardens.
Objective 2.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.3.1: Work with the Vail Valley Foundation on their efforts to
create a new “public plaza” at the entry to the Gerald R. Ford
Amphitheater.
Action Step 2.3.2: Work with the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Foundation
on their proposal to create an educational and visitor center within the
Park.
Action Step 2.3.3: Promote and support the use of the Nature Center and
surrounding area as a center for environmental education programs.
Action Step 2.3.4: In conjunction with the Vail Valley Foundation, evaluate
the feasibility of winterizing the Amphitheater to allow for use of the venue
during winter months.
Objective 2.4: Enhance the use of the Historic School House and preserve the historic
integrity character of the building.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 25
Policy Statement 1: Maintain public access to the School House and continue
the utilization of the building in accordance with the terms of the lease with the
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens.
Objective 2.4 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.4.1: Evaluate alternative uses for the School House that
will maintain public access and potentially involve the display of historic
photos and artifacts or other activities in keeping with the historic nature of
the building.
Action Step 2.4.2: Complete an architectural assessment of the School
House and establish a plan to protect and enhance the historic character
of the building.
Objective 2.5: Enhance and restore the Nature Center building and the landscape
surrounding the building.
Policy Statement 1: Limit vehicular access to only those vehicles necessary for
the operation of the building and educational programs.
Policy Statement 2: Uses proximate to the Nature Center should be limited and
shall be consistent with the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-Area.
Policy Statement 3: Restore the architectural and historical integrity character of
the Nature Center building.
Objective 2.5 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.5.1: Work with the Vail Recreation District to implement
measures for controlling vehicular access to the Nature Center building.
Action Step 2.5.2: Complete an architectural inventory of the Nature
Center building to define steps that could be taken to restore the historic
character of the building.
Action Step 2.5.3: Reduce Eliminate the parking areas around the Nature
Center building by and reclaiming these areas to a natural landscape
condition.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 26
Action Step 2.5.4: Prepare a master plan and an operations/management
plan for the Nature Center facility and surrounding area.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 27
Goal #3:
Reduce vehicular intrusions into the interior of the Park and minimize to the
greatest extent feasible the impact of vehicular activity on users of the Park,
particularly on the passive use areas of the Lower Bench and along pedestrian
walkways.
Objective 3.1: Reduce the presence and frequency of vehicular trips into the Lower
Bench (the Lower Commons, Gardens, Amphitheater and the Gore Creek Preservation
Sub-Areas) of the Park.
Policy Statement 1: Proposals for any new facility or use or the expansion of
any existing facility or use in the Lower Bench shall not generate an unnecessary
or appreciable increase in vehicular activity in the Lower Bench area of the Park.
Policy Statement 2: Uses in the Lower Bench shall operate in a manner that
limits vehicular traffic to the greatest extent possible. Vehicular access to the
Lower Bench of the Park should be limited to: maintenance; delivery of goods or
materials too large or too heavy to be carried by non-motorized means; use of
golf carts or similar means to provide access for people with limited mobility;
special transportation; and emergency services.
Policy Statement 3: Require all delivery vehicles to utilize East Betty Ford Way
to enter and exit the Lower Bench. Due to difficulties in maneuvering, large
trucks (semi’s) shall access the Lower Bench via East Betty Ford Way and may
exit via West Betty Ford Way.
Policy Statement 4: Passenger vehicle access to the Alpine Gardens, the
Amphitheater, AIPP programs or other uses in the Lower Bench shall not be
permitted other than vehicles used to provide access for people with limited
mobility or to deliver goods or materials too heavy to be carried by non-motorized
means.
Objective 3.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 3.1.1: Establish a system (i.e. signage, control gates,
electronic controls) for managing truck movements proximate to the
Amphitheater loading dock and for coordinating truck use of East Betty
Ford Way.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 28
Action Step 3.1.2: Coordinate delivery schedules to reduce the frequency
of delivery and service vehicles into the Lower Bench during peak use
time periods.
Action Step 3.1.3: Require stakeholders to utilize on-site storage facilities
to reduce and control the frequency of delivery and service vehicles into
the Park.
Action Step 3.1.4: Improve traffic gate operations and restrictions on both
the east and west ends of Betty Ford Way to eliminate unnecessary and
unauthorized vehicular intrusions into the Park. Consider closing the
western access point of Betty Ford Way to all vehicles except trucks too
large to utilize East Betty Ford Way (for exiting the Park).
Objective 3.2: Utilize the Parking/Transit Sub-area as the primary means for satisfying
the Park’s parking and transit needs.
Policy Statement 1: All stakeholders are required to adhere to the Parking and
Transit Management Plan.
Policy Statement 2: There shall be a “no-net loss” of the +/-200 parking spaces
within the Parking/Transit Sub-Area and the +/-65 spaces at the Soccer Field
Sub-area. Any net loss of parking spaces shall only be considered when off-set
by a demonstrated improvement or enhancement of public transit use or
alternate means of transportation to the Park.
Policy Statement 3: Provide parking for daily park-use within the Parking/Transit
Sub-Area and utilize the Vail Village Parking Structure to satisfy peak parking
demands of the Park.
Policy Statement 4: Maintain a central trash/dumpster/recycling facility within
the Parking/Transit Sub-area and mandate all Park leaseholders use the central
facility.
Objective 3.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 3.2.1: Town Staff, with coordination from Park stakeholders,
shall prepare a Parking and Transit Management Plan, to include, but not
be limited to the use and access of parking lots, fee structures, transit
operations, etc.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 29
Action Step 3.2.2: As demand warrants, continue operation of the In-Town
bus route beyond Golden Peak to provide service along Vail Valley Drive.
Action Step 3.2.3: Implement an improved wayfinding sign program
directing pedestrians from the Village Parking Structure and Slifer Square
in Vail Village.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 30
Goal #4:
Provide a safe, enjoyable and efficient pedestrian circulation system within Ford
Park and between Ford Park and Vail Village.
Objective 4.1: Provide clear and effective directional and informational signs to and
within Ford Park.
Objective 4.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.1.1: Develop a comprehensive sign plan to direct Ford Park
visitors from Vail Village and from each level of the Village Parking
Structure to destinations within Ford Park.
Objective 4.2: Encourage and promote park users to access the Park via pedestrian
routes from Vail Village and the Vail Transportation Center.
Policy Statement 1: The five existing pedestrian access points to the Park from
Vail Village and Golden Peak should be maintained and enhanced to maximize
their effectiveness in providing access to the Park.
Policy Statement 1: Encourage leaseholders in Ford Park to utilize their
marketing efforts to promote walking, biking and the use of Town buses as an
alternative to driving to the Park.
Objective 4.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.2.1: Implement enhancements to the Gore Creek Trail that
will improve safety, grading, surfacing, and lighting.
Action Step 4.2.2: Evaluate opportunities for additional seating areas,
public art and other features to enhance the walking experience along the
Vail Village Connector (within the Gore Creek Sub-area) and where
appropriate provide rest/sitting areas along all pedestrian routes to the
Park.
Action Step 4.2.3: Establish gateways or portals (signage, monuments,
landscape elements, etc.) at the main entries to the Park (Frontage Road,
Gore Creek Trail, Manor Vail, Slifer Plaza, Vail Valley Drive and the
Parking/Transit Sub-area).
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 31
Objective 4.3: Improve internal pedestrian circulation within Ford Park.
Policy Statement 1: New developments or other improvements in the Park shall
not diminish the quality of the pedestrian circulation system and when
appropriate shall include provisions to improve pedestrian circulation.
Policy Statement 2: Existing ADA routes should be enhanced and where
feasible new ADA access within the Park should be established.
Objective 4.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.3.1: Upgrade the portion of Betty Ford Way within the Lower
Commons Sub-area to create a high quality pedestrian corridor with
improved surface materials, lighting, seating and landscaping.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 32
Goal #5:
Maintain compatible relationships between all venues and all uses within Ford
Park.
Objective 5.1: Manage the carrying capacity of the Park by scheduling events to
prevent overlapping or simultaneous events that exceed the availability of community
parking or other park infrastructure.
Policy Statement 1: The Town of Vail through its designee shall coordinate with
leaseholders an annual schedule for events and uses at all Ford Park venues.
Policy Statement 2: No one event or type of use will be allowed to dominate the
usage of the Park.
Policy Statement 3: The Park is a Town of Vail community facility and in the
case of conflicting uses, functions that best serve the interests of the community
will have the highest priority. In all cases, final decisions regarding the use of the
Park shall rest with the Town of Vail.
Policy Statement 4: The day-to-day management and coordination of activities
in the Park will be assigned to the Town of Vail. The Town of Vail, through its
designee, will coordinate as necessary with representation from the Vail Valley
Foundation, the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and the Vail Recreation District.
Objective 5.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 5.1.1: Expand the master schedule kept by the Town Clerk to
include all venues within the Park.
Action Step 5.1.2: Hold preseason event/activity coordination meetings
with all affected stakeholders.
Action Step 5.1.3: Hold semiannual (or as deemed necessary)
coordination and input meetings with the Town of Vail, leaseholder
representatives, and neighborhood and adjacent property owner
representatives.
Objective 5.2: Provide sufficient separation, berms and landscape buffers between
facilities and uses.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 33
Policy Statement 1: The adequacy of berms and landscape buffers between
different facilities and uses shall be considered when evaluating proposed
changes to the Park. The type and extent of buffers to be provided shall be
determined based on the nature of the use, the site design of the proposed
facilities or uses, and the design parameters outlined in the Ford Park Sub-Areas
and the Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 2: Maintain and where necessary improve existing berms and
landscaping between facilities and uses.
Objective 5.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 5.2.1: Enhance existing landscape buffers between tennis
courts adjacent to the Active Recreation Sub-area and the Parking/Transit
Sub-area and evaluate the need to enhance landscape buffers between
other uses throughout the Park.
Objective 5.3: To fFoster a spirit of cooperation between all leaseholders within the
Park regarding their use of the Park and how to collectively use and manage the Park
for the benefit of all.
Policy Statement 1: Encourage the shared use of buildings and facilities.
Policy Statement 2: Decisions regarding proposals for new buildings or
improvements are to be made in the best interest of the Park and the Vail
community, not just in the interest of the leaseholder.
Objective 6.1 5.4: Establish a capital improvement plan for the Park and Eequitably
share the costs of park management and operations with Park lease-holders.
Policy Statement 1: All Ford Park leaseholders shall participate in cost sharing
with the Town of Vail for common operating costs at a level proportionate to the
leaseholders benefit from or relationship to said operation or management cost.
(or as may be outlined in current lease or license agreement). Management and
operations cost may include but are not limited to, electrical for pedestrian path
and parking lot lighting, trash removal, and parking lot and pedestrian path
maintenance costs.
Objective 6.1 5.4 Action Steps:
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 34
Action Step 6.15.4.1: Town staff to complete an inventory of existing park
operations and associated costs, and in conjunction with park
leaseholders, quantify the level of benefit realized by each leaseholder
from such operations.
Action Step 6.15.4.2: Research current lease, license and use agreements
to determine existing financial responsibilities of each lease holder.
Action Step 6.15.4.3: With input from the Vail Town Council, work with
leaseholders to modify existing leases to correct any inequities in utility
billing procedures and distribution systems, current utility use, and cost
sharing relationships.
Action Step 6.2.15.4.4: Create and maintain a five-year capital
improvements program for Ford Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 35
Goal #6:
Delineate financial responsibilities among Ford Park leaseholders and the Town
of Vail for both on-going maintenance/operation and capital improvements.
Objective 6.1: Equitably share the costs of park management and operations with Park
lease-holders.
Policy Statement 1: All Ford Park leaseholders shall participate in cost sharing
with the Town of Vail for common operating costs at a level proportionate to the
leaseholders benefit from or relationship to said operation or management cost.
(or as may be outlined in current lease or license agreement). Management and
operations cost may include but are not limited to, electrical for pedestrian path
and parking lot lighting, trash removal, and parking lot and pedestrian path
maintenance costs.
Objective 6.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 6.1.1: Town staff to complete an inventory of existing park
operations and associated costs, and in conjunction with park
leaseholders, quantify the level of benefit realized by each leaseholder
from such operations.
Action Step 6.1.2: Research current lease, license and use agreements to
determine existing financial responsibilities of each lease holder.
Action Step 6.1.3: With input from the Vail Town Council, work with
leaseholders to modify existing leases to correct any inequities in utility
billing procedures and distribution systems, current utility use, and cost
sharing relationships.
Objective 6.2: Establish equitable cost sharing agreements for Park capital
improvement costs.
Policy Statement 1: Ford Park leaseholders desiring to make capital
improvements within their respective lease areas shall be required to provide
funding for those improvements and for any modifications outside of the lease
area necessitated by such improvements.
Policy Statement 2: Services, functions, and programs provided by Ford Park
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 36
leaseholders bring visitors to the community who generate sales tax revenues
which in turn contribute to the General Fund. Residents of the community which
participate in those programs contribute to the Real Estate Transfer Tax through
real estate transactions. Both of these funding sources can be utilized by the
Town of Vail to pay for capital projects and improvements within Ford Park,
reducing the need for contributions from the leaseholders.
Objective 6.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 6.2.2: Establish the benefit/cost relationship for capital
projects to determine appropriate cost sharing agreements.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 37
Chapter 5 - FORD PARK SUB-AREAS
The topography of the old Anholtz Ranch is typical of a western Colorado riverfront
ranch – a broad expanse of flat land adjacent to the river corridor and an upper terrace
elevated above the river. In the early years of Ford Park these two distinct areas came
to be referred to as the Upper Bench and Lower Bench.
“The basic structure of Ford Park is comprised of two broad terraces, or benches as
locally referred to, which step down the north side of the Gore Creek and is typical of
mountain, valley and stream physiography.”
1985 Ford Park Master Plan
Ford Park topography/1985
Early plans for Ford Park (the Vail Plan) anticipated recreation-oriented uses (and a
number of buildings) on the Upper Bench with passive open space areas and an
amphitheater on the Lower Bench. Initial development of the Park included athletic
fields, tennis courts and parking facilities on the Upper Bench. Decisions on locating
these uses on the Upper Bench were made based on the terrain (availability of flat land)
and accessibility to the Frontage Road. Passive open space and the development of an
amphitheater were initiated on the Lower Bench. These plans and the early
development of the Park reinforced this Upper Bench/Lower Bench distinction. Over
time the Upper Bench came to be regarded as recreation-oriented while the Lower
Bench was regarded as being more oriented to cultural uses and passive open space.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 38
The characterization of athletic use on the Upper Bench and passive and cultural uses
on the Lower Bench remains valid today, and the terms Upper Bench and Lower Bench
provide a good, albeit generalized description of the Park. However, to discuss the
future of Ford Park in terms of just the Upper and Lower Bench does not acknowledge
the many subtleties and distinctions throughout the Park that need to be considered in
this master planning process. It is for this reason that sub-areas are used to more
clearly articulate the goals and objectives for specific areas of the Park. Sub-areas are
intended to provide a forum for defining the unique areas of the Park, where
improvements or changes may be acceptable and where improvements and changes
may not be acceptable.
The seven sub-areas described below were defined based primarily on the existing
uses and site characteristics within the Park. In some cases, sub-areas define one
single use. Examples of these include the Amphitheater and Alpine Gardens Sub-areas.
In other cases sub-areas include a number of related uses. Examples of these are the
Gore Creek Preservation and Lower the Commons Sub-areas. In many cases the
pedestrian corridors that link the sub-areas and facilitate the movement of people
throughout the Park are used as boundaries between sub-areas.
The sub-area boundaries were defined based on a variety of considerations. They
should not be considered hard, inflexible parcel lines. It is reasonable to anticipate that
when considering future improvements for the Park some latitude with the location of a
sub-area boundary may be appropriate. Any consideration to modify a sub-area
boundary shall be made in the context of the goals for the Park and for that particular
sub-area.
The use of sub-areas to better understand how the Park functions and to express how
the Park may change in the future is not an attempt to divide the Park into parts.
Rather, the sub-areas provide an effective means for discussing the unique areas of the
Park in the context of the goals and objectives for the entire Park. With Ford Park the
adage “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” clearly applies.
The diagram below depicts the seven sub-areas defined for the Park. The narrative that
follows addresses the following considerations for each sub-area:
• Existing uses and facilities,
• The role the sub-area plays in the overall context of the Park,
• The relationship of the sub-area to adjoining sub-areas,
• Improvements or changes that may be appropriate at some point in the future,
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 39
• Any parameters or other limitations relevant to the future uses and activities
within the sub-area, and
• Any other considerations.
Sub-area discussions address the Park at a fairly broad, master planning level. More
specific discussion of potential future improvements that may be appropriate for the
Park is found in the Illustrative Plan Chapter of this Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 40
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 41
Parking/Transit Sub-area
The Parking/Transit Sub-area provides on-site parking for the Park and includes a
transit stop, a passenger car drop-off area and a central trash/storage facility.
Strategically located along the South Frontage Road and on the periphery of other park
facilities and uses, this sub-area plays a vital role in how the Park functions by
separating parking and vehicles from other areas of the Park. The transit facility is a
key component of the Park by facilitating direct bus service to the Town’s parking
structures (which provide parking for peak demand days). This parking/transit concept
had its origins in the original planning of the Park.
“This major community park-cultural center will contain parking for more
than 200 cars and will also be served directly by the Town bus system.
Major parking will be accommodated in the transportation center.”
Vail Plan, 1974
Since the mid-70’s the parking plan for Ford Park has been to provide daily use parking
at the Park with parking for special events provided at the Town’s parking structures.
This parking plan was validated by a parking and transportation study for the
amphitheater completed in 1979. This parking plan remains valid today. Functional
transit facilities along with pleasant, safe pedestrian corridors between the Park and the
Village Parking Structure are key elements to ensure the on-going effectiveness of this
parking plan.
Prior to making improvements to the athletic fields in 2013 (to be completed in 2014) the
Park had approximately 200 on-site parking spaces. The athletic field expansion
displaced approximately 50 parking spaces at the west end of the parking lot. These 50
spaces were re-established by re-designing other portions of the parking lot,
maintaining the approximately 200 on-site parking spaces.
A “no net loss of parking” policy is in effect for the +/-200 on-site parking in this sub-
area. Any proposed reduction to existing on-site parking spaces will only be considered
in conjunction with concurrent improvements to alternative means of transportation to
the Park. An example of this would be reducing the number of parking spaces in order
to improve transit facilities.
The parking lot was designed such that it can continue to be used for concerts and
other special events. The parking lot also serves as a turn-around area used to
manage local traffic when eastbound I-70 is closed. It is anticipated that both of these
uses will continue.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 42
Future Improvements
With parking lot and transit improvements scheduled to be completed in the fall of 2013
and spring of 2014, it is anticipated that the Parking/Transit Sub-area will adequately
address the needs of the Park for the foreseeable future. Improvements that may be
considered in the future include:
• Design and installation of park entry features at the two pedestrian portals from
the parking lot into the Park.
• Installation of traffic control devices (gates or other means) at the east and west
ends of Betty Ford Way.
The potential improvements listed above are also described in the Illustrative Plan
section of this Plan.
The idea of constructing structured parking below the existing surface parking lot has
been discussed in the past. This could accomplish two objectives – increase the supply
of on-site parking (parking that could also address other town needs) and allow for
some alternative use on top of the structured parking. On a related note is the idea of
developing parking below the tennis center and re-constructing the tennis center on the
surface of the structure. While structured parking in either of these locations could
create opportunities for new uses on these areas of the Park, costs would be significant.
Based on studies completed in 2009-2010 the Town Council at that time determined
structured parking to not be feasible. If or when this idea is discussed in the future, an
initial step would be to evaluate implications on the goals for the Park and if necessary
initiate amendments to this Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 43
Active Recreation Sub-area
This sub-area is the focal point of active recreation, team sports, tournaments and other
special events. The location of these uses is consistent with some of the earliest design
direction established for the Park. It is expected that these uses will continue in order to
meet the community’s needs for active recreation facilities.
Significant plantings have created a landscape buffer between these active recreation
uses and other surrounding uses. These buffers should be maintained and continually
enhanced where necessary. Specific attention should be given to enhancing
landscaping between the Frontage Road and the athletic fields. This improvement
would provide a buffer between the Park and the road and also provide shade for
spectators. Noise and other compatibility issues with use of the athletic fields and
adjacent uses will need to continually be managed (refer to Goal 4 in Chapter 4 of this
Plan).
Future Improvements
Improvements to the Active Recreation Sub-area initiated in 2012 (expected to be
completed in 2014) were extensive and included expansion and re-organization of the
athletic fields and construction of a new restroom/storage building and a new
concession/restroom building. It is anticipated that these improvements will address the
active recreation needs of the community for the foreseeable future. Potential
improvements contemplated for this sub-area are:
• Design and installation of park entry features at the west end of the Park along the
Frontage Road and the two pedestrian portals from the parking lot.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 44
• Ongoing enhancement of the landscape buffer around the perimeter of the Sub-
area.
• The 2009 Town of Vail Transportation Plan contemplates a roundabout at the west
end of Ford Park to “serve as a means of “u-turning” (eastbound to westbound) and
to potentially provide access to a future below grade parking structure. No detailed
design work on this improvement has been done, but conceptually this roundabout
could be located just west of the athletic fields.
The existing Tennis Center is located between the Parking/Transit Sub-area and other
portions of the Park. East Betty Ford Way provides convenient and pleasant pedestrian
access to the Lower Bench of the Park along the southern end of the Tennis Center.
However, the tennis center presents constraints to establishing a convenient and
graceful pedestrian entry between the parking/transit area and the rest of the Park. If or
when the relocation of one or more tennis courts is considered, study should be given to
how improved pedestrian flow and new uses could be established in this area. By way
of example, the removal of the two courts adjacent to the Frontage Road and the
Athletic Field concession building would not only allow for a much improved “arrival
sequence” for pedestrians, but could also provide land for new facilities.
The Tennis Center building has been in existence for over 25 years and the design of
the building is inconsistent with the architectural character of buildings recently
constructed in the Park. If or when this building is to be re-developed, consideration
should be given to a design more consistent with the design objectives for the Park. In
addition to the design of the building, consideration should also be given to the use of
the building and the potential for shared use to accommodate other Park users.
The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within
Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub-area. The preferred location for this
building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently
determined to not be a viable location, the Tennis Center site is a suitable alternative.
The potential site for this building is proximate to or integrated with the Tennis Center
building. Coordination and cooperation from the VRD will be necessary if this site is to
be pursued.
As with the parking lot area, the idea of constructing structured parking below the
athletic fields has been discussed in the past. It is expected that if and when this idea is
pursued that an initial step would be to evaluate implications to the overall goals for the
Park and if necessary initiate amendments to the Ford Park Master Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 45
Lower Commons Sub-area
The Lower Commons Sub-area plays an important role in the Park by providing
structure, or organization to the overall design of the Park. The area provides a
transition zone between other uses in the Park and Betty Ford Way, which runs through
the sub-area, and provides a delightful arrival experience for pedestrians entering the
Park from the West. The Lower Commons Sub-area also provides some of the Park’s
most important and popular facilities that collectively address a number of goals and
objectives for the Park. Specifically, the Lower Commons Area provides places for
recreational use, public art, the passive use and the quiet enjoyment of the Park. The
sub-area also provides buffers between Park uses, a transition to the Gore Creek
corridor and creates an important sense of openness within the Lower Bench.
This sub-area should continue to be managed to provide the uses and park features
listed above. There are no major changes contemplated to the three distinct, yet related
uses that occur in this sub-area. These three uses are:
Children’s Playground
The playground is an immensely popular area of the Park. This use should continue.
While refinements and/or upgrading of play structures and facilities within the
playground may be made in the future, the basic size or “footprint” of the playground
should remain unchanged. The restrooms at the playground provide facilities for the
entire Lower Bench and there is a need to upgrade these facilities in the near future in
order to meet the demands of park users. No other buildings are contemplated in the
playground area.
Open Turf Area
Aside from natural open space areas along Gore Creek, the open turf area is the only
area of the Park that is not programmed with organized uses and activities. It is
important that this area remains open and available for informal use by patrons of the
Park in the future. The area provides space for picnics, rest, informal games and other
passive recreation use. The open turf area also provides an important buffer, or
transition from the more actively developed areas of the Park and the Gore Creek
Corridor. Given this areas adjacency to Betty Ford Way, it is critical to limit vehicles in
this area of the Park in order to prevent conflicts between park users and vehicles.
With the exception of very minor encroachments from landscape improvements,
lighting, seating and other similar features associated with improvements planned for
Betty Ford Way, tThe open turf area should not be reduced in size and no buildings or
structures should be permitted in this area. If Betty Ford Way is improved, all
streetscape improvements (lighting, landscaping, seating, etc.) should be located on the
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 46
south side of the walkway so as to not reduce the size of the open turf area. In the past
the southern end of the open turf area has been used for events (weddings, parties,
etc.) that have involved the placement of temporary tents and other features within the
open turf area. While these events may continue, the number and extent of such
events should be limited and events that would monopolize the open turf area and
prevent its use by other users of the Park should not be permitted. Any events in the
open turf area should be managed in accordance with Park procedures, specifically to
minimize the time temporary facilities are in place, minimize the number and extent of
vehicles necessary to service the event, etc.
Creekside Area
The Creekside area is a narrow strip of land south of Betty Ford Way and north of Gore
Creek. A few small structures (i.e. the “art shack, an open air picnic shelter) are located
in this area. Arts in Public Places (AIPP) may pursue remodeling or enhancing the art
shack at some point in the future. AIPP has placed permanent art installations in this
area and also runs summer art programs in this part of the Park. Art programs may
include activities such as interactive events, educational and participatory activities, and
temporary art installations. The passive use and the limited number of permanent
improvements within this area make it an excellent transition to the more natural,
undisturbed Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 47
The use and character of this area should remain unchanged. No new buildings should
be permitted. New art installations may be appropriate, but if pursued, they should be
done in a way that minimizes impacts to other surrounding uses and facilities and is
sensitive to the natural landscape.
Future Improvements
Improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Upgrading restroom facilities at the children’s playground.
• Further enhance the buffer between the athletic fields and the children’s playground.
• Additional art installations within the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Upgrade to Betty Ford Way to include a slight widening of the walkway, decorative
pavers, seating areas, lighting and other streetscape improvements.
The restroom and Betty Ford Way improvements are described in greater detail in the
Illustrative Plan chapter.
Amphitheater Sub-area
An outdoor amphitheater was contemplated in original plans for Ford Park dating back
to 1974. Completed in 1987, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater has evolved into Vail’s
most prominent venue for music, dance and other cultural events. The facility is
managed by the Vail Valley Foundation and is host to approximately 60 events each
summer. The amphitheater is considered one of the community’s most important
cultural assets.
In 2013 the Foundation completed an initial phase of improvements to the amphitheater.
Improvements included re-contouring the lawn seating, new restrooms, expansion of
concession areas, and other improvements. While not a project of the Foundation, the
Town of Vail recently made major improvements (decorative pavers, widening, and
reduction to grade of walkway) to East Betty Ford Way. The Foundation has plans for a
second phase of improvements to the Amphitheater that would create a new “public
plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 48
The relationship between the Amphitheater and the neighboring athletic fields will need
to be continually monitored to ensure compatibility between these (and all) park users is
maintained. It is important to protect and enhance areas of existing vegetation in and
around the Amphitheater and where appropriate improve the physical buffers between
these uses. The implementation of noise mitigation at the north end of the amphitheater
to minimizing noise impacts from the athletic fields and Interstate 70 has also been
discussed. The Foundation has completed acoustic studies of the amphitheater and
concluded that mitigating noise impacts from the fields and Interstate 70 would have the
unintended consequence of impacting sound quality within the amphitheater. As such,
noise mitigation is not being pursued.
The Amphitheater is a significant generator of people and also generates a significant
amount of vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench. Vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench
conflicts with a number of goals and objectives for the Park. It is important for the Town
and the Vail Valley Foundation to continue to work together to minimize vehicular traffic
to the Amphitheater. No new uses or expansion of existing uses at the Amphitheater
that would generate appreciably more vehicular traffic into this area of the Park should
be permitted. Managing and limiting vehicle traffic that may result from the proposed
public plaza will be an important consideration in establishing operational standards for
this new facility.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 49
Future Improvements
Potential improvements contemplated for the Amphitheater Sub-area include:
• Development of a “public plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
• Restoration of the stream bank adjacent to the Amphitheater south of Betty Ford
Way and east of the pedestrian bridge,
• Upgrading of the fence/screening of the utility installation along Gore Creek west of
the pedestrian bridge.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design and
development of the public plaza. These parameters are described in greater detail in
the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Alpine Gardens Sub-area
What began with completion of a demonstration garden in 1987 has evolved into a +/-
1.5 acre network of perennials, rock gardens and waterfalls hosting an array of high
alpine plants. The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens (BFAG) provides an important
educational and experiential element of the Park. The gardens and the mission of the
organization are in keeping with one of the original goals for Ford Park to provide
environmental and educational facilities for the community. The Alpine Gardens have
become one of Vail’s most popular summer attractions.
The Alpine Gardens has pursued the development of an “alpine education center” in the
Park for a number of years. The 1997 Ford Park Management Plan identified the
location for this facility to be within the Soccer Field Sub-area. During the 2012 Ford
Park Management Plan Update the BFAG proposed a location adjacent to Gore Creek
for the education building and the 2012 Plan recommended this site for a new building.
The Vail Town Council subsequently reconsidered this recommendation from the 2012
Update, and while expressing support for the BFAG to develop an educational building
within the Park, initiated a new evaluation of site alternatives for the building.
The Vail Town Council’s primary criterion for selecting a site for the educational center
building was that it not be located on the Lower Bench. Seven sites were evaluated,
three of which were determined to be viable sites for the building. The BFAG Building
Site Evaluation Matrix outlines the factors considered in this evaluation. A copy is found
in the Supplemental Appendix.
For a variety of reasons the preferred location for this building was determined to be
adjacent to West Betty Ford Way just west of the Children’s Playground. Located
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 50
directly on the grade transition between the upper and lower bench, the Vail Town
Council determined that this location conforms to their site selection criteria that the
building not be located on the lower bench. The other two sites that were considered
viable alternatives are at the Soccer Field and within the Tennis Center. These sites
could still be considered if following further study it is determined that the Betty Ford
Way site is not viable.
The primary purpose of the building is to provide educational programs for the
community and accordingly the uses within the building are expected to include rooms
for interpretive displays, meeting/class rooms, a greenhouse and a limited amount of
administrative space necessary to support on-site operations of the Ggardens.
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Alpine Gardens Sub-area include:
• Development of an alpine gardens educational center.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 51
• Extension of gardens along the northeast entry in order to create a buffer from
the adjoining athletic fields and improve pedestrian arrival to the Gardens.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design,
development and operation of the educational center. These parameters are described
in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area
The Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area includes the entire length of the Gore Creek
Corridor that passes through the Park. The sub-area is more than 21 acres in size and
is generally defined by the park boundary on the south and the 100-year flood plain, the
50-foot Gore Creek setback and/or topographic features on the north. Gore Creek,
associated wetland and riparian habitat and stands of specimen trees are the primary
features of the creek corridor. Existing improvements within this sub-area are limited to
bridges, trails, utility improvements and the Nature Center.
The Gore Creek corridor is the Park’s most significant natural feature and provides the
Park with delightful open space for the quiet enjoyment of nature. The corridor also
provides a critical pedestrian link to Vail Village. The designation of this corridor as a
preservation zone is in direct response to a number of goals and objectives from
previous park planning efforts. The preservation of and enhancement to this area is
also suggested by Goal #1 of this Plan. It is essential that adjacent uses respect the
natural environment of this sub-area and that effective buffers be maintained between
other more intensive uses within the Park.
It is intended that existing uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Preservation
Sub-Area be maintained and in keeping with the goals of preserving this area no new
buildings are to be constructed within the sub-area. Any other new uses or
improvements should be limited to those that will complement the natural character of
the creek corridor and will minimize impacts to this sensitive environment.
Resolution No. 27 of 1987 designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an
area “to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural history.” The
resolution stipulated that “vehicular traffic is to be restricted and certain policies and
procedures for preservation and maintenance of the grounds and facilities” should be
enacted. It is acknowledged that the Nature Center will bring a certain level of activity
to this sub-area. Nature Center activity should be concentrated on the “upland” portions
of the Nature Center in order to minimize impacts to the creek corridor.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 52
Improvements within the sub-area should be limited to low-impact improvements such
as soft surface walking paths, creek enhancements to improve fish habitat, fishing
access, re-vegetation and creek/stream bank restoration projects. In all cases such
improvements should be designed and constructed in a manner that minimizes
environmental impacts (i.e. avoid wetland habitat and wetland, maintain existing natural
vegetation, use of “best management practices”, etc.). The underlying goal of any new
trail development and/or bridge crossing should be to improve access in order to
enhance awareness of this important natural environment.
Utility improvements should not be located within this sub-area unless no other practical
alternative is available.
The Gore Creek corridor between the main portion of Ford Park and Slifer Square
provides important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail
Village Parking Structure). This corridor is heavily travelled and provides access to the
Park for many park users. Enhancing the walking experience along the corridor will
ensure its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park.
Fishing access to Gore Creek, while currently not an issue (i.e. excessive use from foot
traffic resulting in damage to riparian areas and vegetation), could become an issue in
the future. A creek access point was considered at the east end of the Nature Center
(using the bus turnaround on Vail Valley Drive as an unloading area) was discussed
during the 1997 Planning effort but was rejected as being contradictory to the intended
use of the Nature Center.
An Action Step suggested for this area (refer to Chapter 4 of this Plan) is to evaluate the
benefits of establishing a conservation easement for this area or to apply the “Open
Space” designation via the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The protection
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 53
afforded by either of these steps would define more permanent limitations on the use of
this area and in doing so establish a degree of permanence in preserving this creek
corridor.
The existing condition of the Nature Center Building and the surrounding area has been
a point of discussion. Potential improvements to the Nature Center are further
discussion in Chapter 6 – Ford Park Illustrative Plan.
Future Improvements
Future improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Enhancement and restoration of vegetation along the creek corridor, creek bank
stabilization and fishing habitat enhancements.
• Enhancements to the walkway between Vail Village and the Park to include
improvements such as seating, art installations, etc.
• Design and installation of park entry features at the three pedestrian portals to
the Park along the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Initiate steps to improve the physical condition of the Nature Center.
These improvements are discussed in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter.
Soccer Field Sub-area
The Soccer Field Sub-area, while often overlooked as an element of Ford Park,
provides a valuable community asset. The full-sized athletic field serves the soccer and
lacrosse communities, the sand volleyball courts are heavily used and the 65-space
parking lot is used year-around. A cul-de-sac at the east end of the sub-area allows in-
town buses to turn around when providing express service to Ford Park. These uses
should continue as they directly address the broad goals for the Park of “providing the
recreational needs of the community” (1985 Plan) and is consistent with the objective of
locating active recreation areas “away from the meadow and creek” (1985 Plan).
Separated from the rest of Ford Park by Vail Valley Drive and physically removed from
the more developed portions of the Park, the Soccer Field Sub-area does not have
compatibility or relationship issues with surrounding uses or facilities. No major
changes are contemplated to the existing recreational facilities in this sub-area.
While no major improvements are anticipated in the near future, the Soccer Field sub-
area is unique from the rest of the Park. For example, the uses and activities in this
sub-area do not impact other areas of the Park, the sub-area has direct vehicular
access that does not impact other park users, and the sub-area has no direct impact on
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 54
the Gore Creek Corridor. For these reasons this sub-area could be a suitable location
for new park uses or buildings to meet the future needs of the Park. If or when new
uses may be proposed for this sub-area, consideration should be given to applicable
elements of this Plan, how the proposed use could affect surrounding uses, private
covenants and other considerations.
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Soccer Field Sub-Area include:
• Expansion of the existing sand volleyball courts.
• Expansion of landscape buffers.
The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within
Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub-area. The preferred location for this
building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently
determined to not be a viable location, the Soccer Field site has been determined to be
a viable alternative. The potential location for this building is at the northwest corner of
the sub-area. Private covenant issues (with the neighboring Northwoods
Condominiums and with the Vail Village Seventh Filing) will need to be addressed prior
to constructing an education center on the soccer field site.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 55
Chapter 6 - FORD PARK ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
The Ford Park Illustrative Plan provides a general description of future improvements
contemplated for Ford Park. The Plan indicates the general location of the
improvements, a summary of the proposed improvements and parameters or criteria to
be considered in the design, development and operation of the improvement. The
design parameters and criteria are of particular importance as they establish specific
expectations for the proposed improvement. Conformance with these parameters and
criteria is a requisite to the Town approving any improvements in the Park.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan discusses a wide range of potential
improvements for the Park. The design and development of some improvements are in
progress. Other these improvements are only general ideas and will need further study
and design, an example being the installation of art along the Gore Creek Corridor
connection to Vail Village to enhance the walking experience. Other improvements are
not viable in the near-term but could be viable at some point in the future, examples
being structured parking under the athletic fields or a Frontage Road roundabout at the
west end of the Park.
It is not the intention of this Plan that only those improvements depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed for the Park. Improvements not depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed and will be reviewed relative to their conformance
with the goals, objectives and policies for the Park and the applicable Ford Park Sub-
areas. It should also be noted that the improvements being depicted on the Illustrative
Plan does not ensure if or when they will be implemented.
Any improvement proposed for the Park is subject to approval by the Vail Town Council
and further review by the Town’s review boards prior to being implemented. This review
may involve the Planning and Environmental Commission (Conditional Use Permit,
Development Plan review) and the Design Review Board prior to being implemented.
On the following page is the Ford Park Illustrative Plan and descriptions of future
improvements that may be made to the Park. This Plan includes numbers which
identify future improvements to the Park. Narrative descriptions of these improvements
follow.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 56
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 57
Improvement #1 – Gore Creek Corridor Restoration
There are a number of areas within the Gore Creek corridor where erosion, over-use or
other factors have disturbed or otherwise adversely impacted existing vegetation. A
restoration program should be implemented to improve vegetation along the creek
corridor. Restoration will improve the visual quality of this area and improve water
quality by preventing erosion. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary
in order to determine precisely where and to what extent restoration is needed.
Following completion of this assessment, a detailed landscape plan for the restoration
of the corridor should be prepared and implemented.
A parallel effort should be to evaluate the condition of the creek bank in order to identify
the potential need for stream bank stabilization to protect the bank from erosion.
Another opportunity to consider for Gore Creek is how pools or other features could be
created in the creek to improve the quality of fishing or potentially improve the creek for
other uses. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary in order to
determine precisely where and to what extent these improvements may be feasible.
Following completion of this assessment a detailed improvement plan for the creek
corridor could be prepared.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #1, Objective 1.3, Action Step 1.3.2.
Improvements #2 – Gore Creek Village Connector
The Gore Creek corridor between the west end of Ford Park and Slifer Square provides
important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail Village
Parking Structure). Enhancing the walking experience along this connection will
improve its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park. The
installation of seating areas, creek overlooks and public art are examples of
improvements that could be made to animate this walkway.
All Any future improvements shall be outside of wetland areas, the 100-year flood plain
or other environmentally sensitive areas. An inventory of the creek corridor to identify
such areas should be completed prior to initiating any improvements.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.2.
Improvement #3 – Entry Monuments at Park’s pedestrian entries
Pedestrians arrive to Ford Park from one of seven existing entries as identified on the
Illustrative Plan. Currently there is inadequate signage or other features identifying
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 58
these locations as entry points to the Park. The goal of this improvement is to formally
identify these portals and announce them as gateways, or arrival points to Ford Park.
Landscape features, signage, bollards, monuments, archways or other design features,
or some combination thereof, could be used to identify these locations. Landscape
enhancements to areas proximate to these entries may also be appropriate. A design
process is necessary to determine design solutions for these improvements. While
specific solutions for these park entry improvements could vary between locations, all
should share a common design vocabulary. It will also be important to locate these
improvements in a way that compliments the adjacent pedestrian corridor and does not
compromise pedestrian circulation.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.3.
Improvement #4 – Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center
The education center is envisioned to include multi-use space for year-around
educational programs and other activities, a greenhouse and limited administrative
space. Below are design, development and operational parameters and/or criteria to be
considered in the detailed design of this facility.
• Building and site improvements provide adequate clearances from
existing utility lines and drainage improvements and when necessary
such lines or improvements are relocated to provide adequate
clearances.
• A building of not more than approximately 3,5000 square feet of
useableof gross floor area.
• Building designed with a that is low-scale in appearance, that does not
visually dominate the surrounding area and does not visually loom over
West Betty Ford Way.
• Provide appropriate horizontal separation from West Betty Ford Way
and from the children’s playground in order to not diminish the quality
of this walkway these spaces.
• Ability to construct the project in a manner that does not adversely
impact other facilities or uses in the Park.
• A viable access management plan designed to minimize to the
greatest extent feasible the number and frequency of vehicles
accessing the education center. It is acknowledged that a service
vehicle or delivery vehicle may occasionally need to drive to the center.
However, daily or frequent vehicle access by staff or patrons of the
center will not be permitted
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 59
• Acceptable emergency vehicle access to the building and identification
of any site improvements necessary to accommodate such access.
• Identify the anticipated parking demand from the building and how it
will be addressed. No parking shall be provided at the building.
• Adequate storage space to meet the operational needs of the building
and to minimize the need for vehicle trips to the building.
• Coordination with the Vail Recreation District on the need to expand
fencing at the athletic fields to protect the building from errant balls.
• Evaluate the feasibility of providing public restrooms within the center (see
Improvement #7 in Illustrative Plan – Children’s Playground Restrooms)
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.2.
The site plan and cross-section are conceptual studies for how a building could be
designed on this site. While provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, these sketches
do not represent a development or design proposal. They are merely depictions of how
the building could be designed and there is no implied approval of the concepts
depicted below.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 60
Improvement #5 – Nature Center
Over the years a number of additions and modifications have been made to the nature
center building. Many of these changes have altered the historic character of this
building. An assessment of the building should be completed in order to understand
steps that could be taken to restore the architectural integrity of this building and the
surrounding area.
A current deficiency of the Nature Center is the lack of restroom facilities. If the building
is to be renovated consideration should be given to how restrooms could be
incorporated into the building. Other improvements to the Nature Center include, re-
claiming the informal parking areas proximate to the building and taking steps to limit
vehicular access to the site. These site improvements would most efficiently be
designed in conjunction with the evaluation of the building.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.5, Action Step 2.5.1-2.4.3.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 61
Improvement #6 – Ford Amphitheater Entry Upgrade/Public Plaza
The Vail Valley Foundation has proposed plans for transforming the existing
Amphitheater entry into a re-designed and re-purposed Public Plaza. The plaza is
intended to provide a more gracious and more functional entry to the amphitheater. The
design intent and objective of this improvement is to create a multi-use outdoor space
that serves as the primary arrival for the Amphitheater as well as a pre-convene and
post-function space during scheduled events. The Public Plaza would also provide a
venue for smaller gatherings hosted by other park leaseholders and also be open for
public use when not being used for scheduled events.
Other elements of the Public Plaza include a tensile roof covering, a tribute to the Ford
Family, a small stage within the courtyard, a new donor wall, enhancements to the
concession building and ticket windows, and new entry gates to the Amphitheater.
Parameters and criteria to be considered:
• Plaza design should be done to facilitate/not encumber truck turning movements
necessary to provide loading/delivery to the Amphitheater.
• Plaza design should be sensitive to and integrated with immediately adjacent
improvements at the Alpine Gardens.
• Trees removed to accommodate the Public Plaza should be re-located within the
Park and to the extent feasible be relocated proximate to the amphitheater.
• The space should be available for use by the public when not being used for
private functions.
• The space should be available for gatherings that support other Park
stakeholders (TOV, VRD, BFAG and AIPP).
• Any structures/roof elements associated with the public plaza should harmonize
with the Amphitheater, not dominate the surrounding area, and conform to the
Town’s park design guidelines.
• Any fencing that may be required to define the courtyard space or for liquor
license or other purposes should be subtle and visually unobtrusive. Landscape
materials should be used to soften the appearance of the fence.
• A viable management plan for minimizing vehicular access to the social
courtyard (employees, service vehicles, deliveries, etc.), and for servicing
the facility in a manner that minimizes impacts on pedestrian use of Betty
Ford Way.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.1.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 62
Improvement #7 – Children’s Playground Restrooms
The playground restrooms provide facilities for the entire Lower Bench. These facilities
are under-sized and in need of upgrade and expansion to meet current demand. When
designed, the new bathroom building should be one level and be sized no larger than
necessary to meet the needs of park users. The location currently considered for the
new restrooms is west of the existing facility where play apparatus are currently located.
New play apparatus will be provided with the removal of the existing restroom building.
The building should not encroach on the adjacent open turf area.
The adjoining Alpine Gardens Sub-area identifies a site along West Betty Ford Way and
next to the playground for the development of an alpine gardens education center. The
potential to incorporate restrooms for playground users within the alpine garden
education center should be evaluated. The goal of this approach is to minimize the
number of buildings in the Park. Coordination between the Town and the Alpine
Gardens will be necessary in order to evaluate the feasibility of this idea.
Improvement #8 – Betty Ford Way
The central portion of Betty Ford Way between the Covered Bridge and the
Amphitheater is envisioned to be a “feature pedestrian corridor”. This pedestrian way
will be treated with a higher level of design, surface materials, lighting, seating, etc.
Enhancements to Betty Ford Way will improve a park visitor’s experience to and
through the lower bench of the park.
It is anticipated that the existing path will be widened from approximately 10 feet to
between 11 and 13 feet to accommodate the multiple user types that visit the park at
peak use times and to reduce conflicts when Amphitheater/golf cart shuttles share the
path with pedestrians. The path surface will be replaced with finer textured, higher
quality pavements such as colored concrete, stone or concrete pavers. Seating areas
with benches at select locations along the path, landscape enhancements, lighting and
wayfinding may also be incorporated into this design.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #5, Objective 4.3, Action Step 4.3.1.
Improvement #98 – Betty Ford Way Traffic Control
While it is acknowledged that the Alpine Gardens, the Amphitheater and other uses in
the Lower Bench require vehicular access, an underlying goal for the Park is to
minimize vehicular traffic in this area. Betty Ford Way provides car and truck access to
this area. As a means for better regulating traffic into the Lower Bench, the installation
of gates, bollards or other improvements will be necessary at either end of Betty Ford
Way. In addition to improvements designed to limit car and truck access to the lower
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 63
bench, a system for managing large truck use on East Betty Ford Way should also be
explored. This section of Betty Ford Way is essentially a one-lane road. The purpose
of this effort is to prevent two trucks from utilizing East Betty Ford Way at the same
time.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #3, Objective 3.2, Action Step 3.2.3.
Improvement #10 – Frontage Road Round-about
The 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update recommends a “future access to Ford
Park” with a roundabout along the Frontage Road at the west end of the Park. This
roundabout would address two things – it could provide access to a future underground
parking garage and it could provide a means of “u-turning” (eastbound to westbound)
vehicles exiting from the Village Parking Structure. The Plan states that this roundabout
would be done “in association with parking additions” at the Park. The Town recently
studied the feasibility of developing a parking structure below the athletic fields and for a
variety of reasons this idea was determined to not be feasible. Development of the
roundabout will likely not be initiated until such time parking beneath the fields is
pursued.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 64
Chapter 7- PARK MANAGEMENT
Four organizations play a role in the management and operation of Gerald R. Ford
Park. The Town of Vail is the owner of the Park and manages the community park on
the Lower Bench, the stream tract, parking lot areas and pedestrian corridors. In
addition, the Town provides park management and coordination with the Park’s three
leaseholders. The leaseholders manage and operate their respective facilities:
The Vail Recreation District lease includes the Tennis Center, athletic fields and
land that includes the Nature Center. The Tennis Center Building is on land
owned by the Town but was developed and funded by the VRD. VRD offers
environmental education and research opportunities at the Nature Center.
The Vail Valley Foundation manages and maintains the Ford Amphitheater and
immediate surrounding grounds. The amphitheater seats up to 2,500 people and
is scheduled an average of 60 days during the summer months.
The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens manages the Gardens. The Gardens have
developed in four phases that began in 1987.
In its role as the overall park manager, the Town addresses a variety of management
and operational considerations. Often times this requires the involvement of different
town departments and town commissions and boards. Ultimately the Vail Town Council
is asked to review and approve management practices. The Town involves one or more
of the Park leaseholders when addressing these management topics and in some cases
the lease agreements with the Recreation District, the Vail Valley Foundation and the
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Foundation address these topics. Below is a list of park
management topics the Town is responsible for:
• Parking – Management of parking spaces, allocation of spaces to leaseholders,
rates at times pay-parking is implemented, etc.
• Special events on parking lot, athletic fields and open turf area – coordination
with promoters of events, scheduling, pre and post-event operations, etc.
• Park Calendar – While not responsible for scheduling events within leaseholder
facilities, the Town coordinates (with leaseholders) a comprehensive events
schedule for the Park.
• Transportation – management of transit operations between the Park and the
Vail Transportation Center, including periodic implementation of a Golden Peak
bus route.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 65
• AIPP projects – The review of art programs and installations in the Park.
• Proposals for new uses, new building or changes to the Park – The review of any
proposed change to the Park will involve the Vail Town Council and may also
involve the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board,
AIPP and the Commission on Special Events.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 66
Chapter 8 - APPENDIX
An extensive number of documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park
planning efforts have been assembled. Due to the volume of this material, these
documents are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix. Material found in the Supplemental Appendix includes:
1. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch.
2. The Vail Plan, 1974.
3. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the Antholz
Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
4. The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report, 1985.
5. Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, this resolution designated the seven acres
around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore
Valley’s natural history.
6. Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
7. Ford Park Management Plan, 1997.
8. Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012.
9. BFAG Building Site Evaluation Matrix.
10. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, Martin/Martin, August 15, 2013.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park
Master Plan
An Element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan
November, 2013
Resolution No. 14, Series 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
Prepared for:
The Town of Vail
Prepared by:
Town of Vail Department of Community Development
and
Braun Associates, Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
Vail Town Council Vail Planning and Environmental Commission
Andy Daly, Mayor Bill Pierce, Chair
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-tem Henry Pratt, Co-Chair
Jenn Bruno Susan Bird
Dale Bugby Luke Cartin
Dave Chapin Pam Hopkins
Greg Moffet Michael Kurz
Margaret Rogers John Rediker
Former Vail Town Council
Kerry Donovan
Kevin Foley
Susie Tjossem
Vail Recreation District
Vail Valley Foundation
Art in Public Places
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens
11/19/2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1
2. Site Assessment/Existing Conditions 5
3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts 9
4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps 18
5. Ford Park Sub-Areas 34
6. Illustrative Plan 52
7. Park Management 61
8. Appendix 63
Due to the volume of material, the information listed below is provided in a
separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix.
• Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of the
property known as the Antholz Ranch.
• The Vail Plan, 1974
• Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the
Antholz Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
• The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report,
1985
• Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, designating the seven acres around the Nature
Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural
history.
• Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
• Ford Park Management Plan, 1997
• Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012
• BFAG Building – Site Evaluation Matrix, 2013
• Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, August 15, 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 1
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan
November 2013
“Whereas, President Gerald R. Ford has brought to the Town of Vail his
interest and encouragement; has shown through his private life and public
life a commitment to recreation, the environment and places set aside
therefor; and believes that a statement of the community’s appreciation
and respect for Gerald R. Ford is appropriate and called for; that the
property commonly referred to as the Antholz Ranch is hereby named the
Gerald R. Ford Park.”
Resolution approved by Vail Town Council, January 18, 1977
Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION
The Town of Vail acquired the 38 acre Anholtz Ranch in 1973 for the stated purpose of
“creating a major recreation facility for the total town” (The Vail Plan, 1974). Since that time
the property has increased in size to more than 47 acres and has evolved into one of
Vail’s most widely used and highly cherished assets. The evolution of the Antholz
Ranch to what has become Ford Park was originally contemplated by one of Vail’s
earliest planning efforts:
“The intended use program is a comprehensive one and eventually the
park will include an impressive number of facilities in addition to extensive
open turf space and the delight of the natural earth forms and mature tree
growth adjacent to Gore Creek.”
The Vail Plan, 1974
The goal of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan (the Plan) is to maintain the
essence of what Ford Park (the Park) is today and what was envisioned for the Park in
1974 – a combination of natural open space along the Gore Creek corridor coupled with
recreational, social and cultural uses and facilities to serve the needs of residents and
guests of Vail. The primary purposes of this Plan are to protect the Park from over
development, to define expectations for the use of the Park, and to assist the Town in
decision-making regarding capital improvements and other changes proposed to the
Park. Only those changes deemed to be in compliance with applicable elements of this
Plan will obtain approvals from the Town.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 2
The Town has completed four planning efforts for the Park. These plans have directly
influenced the development of Ford Park and each has contributed to the role the Park
plays in the community. These previous planning efforts were:
1974 Vail Plan – While the primary purpose of this plan was to address
Vail’s growth and development, it did include a chapter on recreation and
defined at a very broad level the role Ford Park could play in providing
recreational, cultural and community-oriented uses.
1985 Gerald R. Ford Park/Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report – At the time this plan was prepared; ballfields, tennis courts, and
parking had already been developed and construction of an amphitheater
had commenced. The purpose of this plan was to “guide the future
development of the park and establish guidelines for the implementation of
improvements” (1985 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan).
1997 Ford Park Management Plan – This plan was initiated in response to
several development proposals for the Park. The plan was a product of
extensive focus group and public input sessions and in essence served as
an amendment to the 1985 plan.
2012 Update to the Ford Park Management Plan – This plan was done to
acknowledge improvements proposed for the Park that were initiated
when Vail voters approved re-allocating a portion of the Convention
Center Funds to Ford Park.
Summaries of these previous plans are found in Chapter 3.
While the impetus for these planning efforts varied, each involved extensive community
input, debate, and at times, controversy. These planning processes revealed the
community’s intense passion for the Park as town staff, elected officials and the public
worked to find the appropriate levels of development and activity for the Park.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan presents a compilation of these previous
planning efforts along with new direction and ideas that have evolved from this latest
planning effort. The primary objectives of this Plan are to:
• Incorporate key elements of previously completed plans for Ford Park into one
document, specifically those guiding principles that have successfully shaped the
development of the Park from its inception,
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 3
• Establish clear expectations for the future use, development and management of
the Park,
• Protect the Park from over-use and over-development;
• Define effective tools for decision-making regarding the future of the Park, and
• Provide a single, comprehensive document to serve as the master plan for the
Park.
With the adoption of this Plan, previous plans for Ford Park will be archived and no
longer used as guides for future decision-making or planning for the Park. The 2013
Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan will serve as the Town’s sole planning document for
the Park.
The development of Ford Park has evolved over a number of decades. While the
majority of the Park is developed, and notwithstanding the most recent phase of
improvements to the Park, there is no reason to think that the Park will not continue to
evolve in the future.
This Plan was prepared with the expectation that it will provide the community with a
document to guide the use and development of the Park for the next ten years. That
said, it is likely that during this time new ideas or issues not addressed by this Plan will
arise, be they proposals for enhancements to existing facilities, the development of new
facilities, or new uses for the Park. This is to be expected as the needs of the
community will change over time and as they do changes to the Park may be
appropriate. As dialogue and debate occur regarding any changes to the Park, it is
critical that decisions made by the Town maintain the essence of what Ford Park is, why
it was established, and how it provides environmental, recreational, educational, cultural
or social benefits to the community.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 14, Series
2013 by the Vail Town Council following recommendation from the Vail Planning and
Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this Plan may be initiated by the
Vail Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Commission, or members of the
community. Any such amendment proposal shall be reviewed by the Vail Town Council
following recommendation from the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission.
Elements of this Plan
This Plan includes the following chapters:
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 4
1. Introduction
The section provides an introduction to the plan, the purpose of this planning
effort and outlines the major elements of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master
Plan.
2. Site Assessment and Existing Conditions
This section explains how site and surrounding conditions influenced the initial
planning and design of the Park.
3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts
The 1997 Plan has provided the basis for this history and background of the Park
and the summaries of the four previous planning efforts that have taken place.
Site plans of the Park produced during these planning efforts are to provide a
history and context for how the Park has evolved over the years.
4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps
While the 1997 Plan provided a framework for this section, the goals, objectives,
policies and actions steps have been refined to better express the current vision
for the Park.
5. Ford Park Sub-Areas
Seven sub-areas are used to describe specific areas of the Park, their unique
features, the role they play in the Park, how they will be managed and provide
recommendations for improvements that could occur in the future.
6. Illustrative Plan
The 2013 Illustrative Plan is a refinement of the 2012 Illustrative Plan; it depicts
existing improvements and at a general level describes improvements that may
occur in the future.
7. Park Management
This chapter provides a brief summary of the various management and
operational aspects of the Park that are managed by the Town of Vail.
8. Appendix
Documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park planning efforts
are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 5
Chapter 2 - SITE ASSESSMENT/EXISTING CONDITIONS
Located immediately east of Vail Village, the proximity of Ford Park to Vail Village and
the convenient access it affords residents and guests is one of the Park’s most
significant attributes. This is no coincidence as the 1974 Vail Plan documented how the
location of Ford Park was a key factor in it being purchased for a community park and in
defining the initial vision for the Park to be a major center of cultural and recreational
activity for the community.
“all properties of significant size within the Town limits were researched
and the recommendation made that the Anholtz property, adjacent to
development at the east end of the Village, was the only site satisfying the
recreational uses anticipated. Selection criteria included such factors as
ease of walking distance from the Village, adequate space within a single
parcel for large, meadow-like turf areas, proximity to the Frontage Road
for simple and direct access by autos or buses, natural beauty such as the
Gore Creek provides, and directness of connection to major bicycle and
pedestrian trails.”
The Vail Plan, 1974
When purchased, the original Anholtz property was +/-38 acres. Today, Ford Park is
approximately 47.1 acres. The four areas of the Park and their acreages are depicted
below:
Ford Park, 2013
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 6
In January of 1977, Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, was passed re-naming the
Anholtz Ranch to the Gerald R. Ford Park. A copy of this resolution is included in the
2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix.
Existing Conditions
In the past forty years many improvements have been made to Ford Park. Foremost
among these are athletic fields, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Betty Ford Alpine
Gardens, a children’s playground, the Vail Nature Center, the Vail Tennis Center and
parking and transit facilities. Infrastructure necessary to serve the Park is largely in
place and vehicle and pedestrian access to and within the Park has been established.
With the exception of the Gore Creek Corridor, the majority of the Park has been
improved with buildings, facilities or other related site improvements.
Access and circulation is a key factor in how the Park functions. On-site parking is
provided, but in keeping with the original concept for the Park the amount of parking is
limited to +/-200 spaces along the Frontage Road and +/-65 spaces at the Soccer Field.
Parking for major Park events is provided in the Town’s parking structures. Access
from these structures to the Park is provided by pedestrian corridors and the Town’s
transit system. Pedestrian access is provided via the Gore Creek Trail, a sidewalk
along the South Frontage Road and by two bridges in the Golden Peak neighborhood.
The Park’s main transit stop is located on the South Frontage Road with additional
stops on Vail Valley Drive. These stops are served by the in-town shuttle and by
dedicated express bus service during special events.
Site Characteristics and Park Design
Physical characteristics of the land and the relationship of the Park to surrounding uses
and facilities influenced the earliest design concepts for the Park. Significant influences
in the early design of the Park include the South Frontage Road (that establishes the
north boundary of the Park), Gore Creek and adjoining wetland and riparian habitat (that
run the entire length of the Park), site topography, vegetation and views.
Topography of the main portion of the park between the Frontage Road and Gore Creek
includes a prominent and well-defined grade change that creates an “upper bench” and
“lower bench”. Over time this grade change, created in large part by grading from the
construction of Interstate 70, became a point of demarcation for the predominantly
active recreation uses on the Upper Bench and the cultural and passive recreation uses
on the Lower Bench.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 7
Much of Ford Park was initially developed without the benefit of a detailed design or
development plan. The 1974 Vail Plan did, however, set the stage for the future of the
Park by defining a number of basic design parameters for how the Park could be
developed. There are many examples of how these basic design parameters and
existing site characteristics directly influenced the design and development of the Park.
Parking and Transit
These facilities were located on flat terrain immediately adjacent to the South
Frontage Road and on the perimeter of the Park. This location minimizes the
impacts of vehicles on other areas of the Park.
Athletic Fields
Fields along the Frontage Road were located on what at that time was the Park’s
broadest expanse of relatively flat terrain. Not only did the fields “fit” on this
portion of the Park, the flat terrain minimized the need for site grading and
associated site disturbance. The fields also provide a buffer between highway
noise and other quieter areas of the Park.
The Amphitheater
The Amphitheater essentially straddles the grade transition between the Upper
and Lower Bench. This location allowed the Amphitheater to utilize sloping
terrain to create terraced seating areas within the Amphitheater. This location
also affords stunning views to the Gore Range.
Nature Center
The Nature Center is located within the relatively undeveloped Gore Creek
Corridor. The natural character of the creek corridor provides a fitting location for
the environmental education programs offered by the Nature Center.
The 1985 Ford Park Master Plan spoke eloquently about the philosophy of good park
design and the role site conditions and characteristics should play in the design
process.
“Compatibility of the park development within the environment is the most
significant aspect of the master plan. The existing landscape is an integral part of
each plan and not merely a backdrop against which the plans are staged. This is
essentially necessary with parklands, for there we expect the landscape to be
stable, pleasant and above all, functional. Accordingly, the planning and design
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 8
process was founded on a sound understanding of the features and dynamics of
the park site environment.
Just as a tapestry is woven from many threads of different colors, textures and
strengths, so the landscape is composed of a variety of components such as
slopes, soils, plant communities and aquatic features. Each of these must be
identified and described, but more than that, the role of each must be understood
as a dynamic entity so that limitations and opportunities can be properly
understood. This involves the translation of forms, such as slopes and soil type,
into processes, such as runoff and soil leeching, and the definition of critical inter-
relationships among them.”
1985 Ford Park Master Plan
Integrating improvements with the landscape in order to create a pleasant and
functional park should be the goal of any park design. While developed without the
benefit of a comprehensive, detailed design plan, the major elements of the Park have
been located and designed in a manner that is very responsive to site conditions and
other influences. Ford Park today reflects many elements of the original vision for the
Park as outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan and as further defined by the 1985 Ford Park
Master Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 9
Chapter 3 - HISTORY OF FORD PARK and PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS
During the past forty years the Town of Vail has completed four major planning efforts
for Ford Park. This chapter summarizes the purpose, process and outcome for each of
these planning efforts and provides information on the history and development of Ford
Park.
Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973 (a copy of which is included in the 2013 Ford Park
Master Plan Supplemental Appendix), authorized the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch. At that time the 38-acre park site
represented the last remaining parcel of undeveloped land central to use by all
residents and visitors of the Vail community. The ordinance listed a variety of possible
uses for the property including the following:
• for park and greenbelt purposes,
• to preserve the natural and physical character of the area to be condemned,
• for bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails,
• for children’s playground,
• for performing arts and civic center,
• for a ski lift and related facilities,
• for picnic areas,
• for recreational facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools, gymnasium, ice
skating rink,
• for theater and assembly halls, convention center, public schools,
• for possible exchange or trade of condemned land, or a portion thereof, with
other property which may exactly meet the needs of the town, and
• to construct and maintain water works, transportation systems, and other public
utilities relating to public health, safety, and welfare.
The four major planning efforts for Ford Park include:
The Vail Plan, 1974
The Vail Plan was completed in August of 1973 and adopted in 1974 (a copy of this
plan is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix). In the early
‘70’s Vail pressures from growth and development were radically changing the
character of Vail and the primary purpose of the Vail Plan was to help the town respond
to growth pressures with the goal of “creating a recreationally-based community of
individuality, beauty and pleasure that can be unique in the United States” (The Vail Plan,
1974). The plan included a chapter on the Town’s recreation system. The Antholz Ranch
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 10
property was mentioned as “the only site capable of satisfying the anticipated
recreational needs of the community” (The Vail Plan, 1974).
The Vail Plan’s vision for the Antholz Ranch was to create a “major community park-
cultural center.” A wide range of potential uses for the park were identified:
• a place for showing and creating art, crafts, etc.,
• an indoor theater and an 800 seat outdoor amphitheater,
• meeting rooms and community workshops,
• wide outdoor terraces and natural landscapes
• indoor ice arena,
• tennis and handball courts
• children’s play facilities and space for family activities,
• headquarters for the Annual Vail Symposium and local television,
• a possible location for an ecologium (nature center), and
• a grammar school.
As a balance to this extensive program of uses and facilities for the Park, the Vail Plan
contemplated the preservation of the Gore Creek corridor as a passive, quiet place to
enjoy the natural beauty of the site.
The plan called for 200 surface parking spaces to meet the daily parking needs of the
park. Parking for major events was planned to be provided in the Vail Transportation
Center with town transit and various trails and bikeways providing alternative means to
access the Park. The Vail Plan also depicted a potential road connection at the east end
of the park that would link the Frontage Road with Vail Valley Drive.
While the Vail Plan did not include a detailed design plan for the Park, the conceptual
site plan below provided a vision for how the Park could be developed. A number of
existing park improvements reflect some of the basic concepts from the 1974 Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 11
Conceptual Plan for Ford Park, Vail Plan, 1974
Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan, 1985
In August of 1985 the Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan
Development Final Report was adopted by the Vail Town Council (a copy of this plan
and Resolution No. 19, Series of 1985 is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix).
When the 1985 planning process was initiated, improvements in the Park were limited
to athletic fields, tennis courts and parking. A foundation for an amphitheater was in
place but this project was not yet completed. At that time the very eastern end of the
Park along the Frontage Road was utilized as a snow-dump.
The purpose of the 1985 plan was to prepare a more detailed plan for the future
development of the park and to establish guidelines for the implementation of park
improvements. The master planning process included a Recreation Needs Analysis
Survey and extensive community input via workshops and community meetings. The
outcome of these efforts was an indication of the type and extent of improvements the
community wanted to see in the Park. Alternative site plans were considered and a
final, preferred plan was selected. This final plan included a swimming pool complex,
“neighborhood park improvements” (on the Lower Bench), a pond/skating rink (on the
Lower Bench), and the realignment of the eastern softball field. Development of the
neighborhood park improvements on the lower bench were completed in 1988 and
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 12
included restrooms, playground area, open turf area, picnic facilities, and the west
access road.
The first major structure to be constructed in the Park, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater,
was completed in July of 1987 and shortly thereafter a Parking and Transit Study for the
Amphitheater was completed. This study made five recommendations:
1. the Village Structure should be considered the major parking facility for Ford
Park (with improvements to the signs, sidewalks, and bus service being
necessary);
2. extend shuttle bus service to the soccer field;
3. disallow Frontage Road parking;
4. construct a vehicle turn-around and passenger unloading area at Ford Park;
and
5. do not schedule concurrent events in the Park.
These recommendations validated many of the recommendations for parking and transit
outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan.
Ford Park Master Plan, 1985
The 1985 Plan identified a location for an alpine garden and in 1989 the first phase of
the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens was completed. Since that time a number of expansions
to the Gardens have been completed, including the Perennial Garden, the Meditation
Garden, and the Alpine Rock Garden.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 13
Following approval of the 1985 Master Plan the following steps were taken regarding
the planning of Ford Park:
Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, was passed on November 3, 1987. This
resolution designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an area to be
preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural history. Vehicular traffic
was to be restricted and certain policies and procedures for preservation and
maintenance of the grounds and facilities were established by the resolution. (a
copy of resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, is included in the 2013 Ford Park
Master Plan Supplemental Appendix).
In December of 1988, the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District (Now the Vail
Recreation District) and the Town of Vail, requested an amendment to the 1985
Ford Park Master Plan. The two phase amendment was adopted by Council as
Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988. A copy of the resolution is included in the
2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. Phase one of the
amendment was to allow the construction of four additional tennis courts. Phase
two of the amendment changed the proposed location of an aquatic facility to the
eastern softball field. Funding of the aquatic facility was rejected by voters in a
special election on February 6, 1989. Vail Town Council was presented with a
petition to delete all reference to an aquatics center from the Ford Park Master
Plan in April of 1990. No record of Council action on the petition was found.
While the tennis center building is not mentioned in the Master plan amendment,
the VRD did receive a Conditional Use Permit for the project on May 8, 1990.
The Vail Village Master Plan, adopted in 1990, addresses Ford Park as a specific
study area. This plan acknowledged the use of the Park to accommodate
overflow skier and local parking needs. It recommended that the Park be studied
further as a site for additional skier parking to serve expansion of the eastern
side of Vail Mountain. Action Step #5 under Goal #5 states: Study the feasibility
of an underground (recreation fields would remain) parking structure in Ford
Park. The Parking and Circulation Plan (an element of the Vail Village Master
Plan), identified the western portion of the upper bench for potential parking
beneath the Park, and called for separated bike/pedestrian ways along the South
Frontage Road and Vail Valley Drive.
The Vail Transportation Master Plan, completed in 1993, states that the existing
Ford Park Parking area (at the east end of the Park) should be considered for a
possible 2-level parking facility with the second level below existing grade. Ford
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 14
Park and the athletic field parking area are also listed as two possible sites for
over-sized vehicles if the lot east of the Lionshead Structure becomes developed.
Ford Park Management Plan, 1997
The planning process that resulted in the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan process
was initiated in June of 1995 in response to several development proposals which had
been formally and informally discussed for the Park. These development proposals
included an Educational Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, a cultural/performing
arts center, expansion of the tennis facility, athletic field fencing, and a community
parking structure. This planning process was also seen as a means for addressing park
management issues such as parking deficiencies, Frontage Road access, pedestrian
access and circulation, access for the elderly and mobility impaired, utilization of the
lower bench, conflicts between uses within the Park, conflicts with adjacent property
owners, and the delineation of financial responsibilities.
At the time the project was authorized the Vail Town Council expressed concern that a
new master plan for Ford Park could result in an excessive amount of new
development. In response, staff noted the intention of the project was to create a
management plan as a means to adequately and consistently evaluate development
proposals, with the goal of limiting development and protecting the character of the
Park.
Park leaseholders, two neighborhood representatives and town staff served as the
Stakeholder Group for the planning process and a third party facilitator was retained to
coordinate this effort. The Stakeholder Group developed alternative design solutions
addressing parking, vehicular access, Frontage Road improvements, additional sports
facilities and management policies. These plans were presented to the public in an
open house at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater in June of 1996.
The open house presentation was a turning point in the process of developing the
Management Plan. Several residents were alarmed by the alternatives included in the
presentation and initiated a grass-roots movement to place a referendum on any future
expansion/development within the Park. This strong public reaction, combined with a
lack of closure within the Stakeholders Group, prompted the Vail Town Council to revise
the process to include more community involvement. Three Focus Group meetings and
public input sessions were held throughout the fall of 1996.
The results of the focus groups and public input sessions and a preliminary master plan
framework were presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Vail
Town Council in late 1996. Following these meetings staff was directed to proceed with
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 15
drafting the management plan as an amendment to the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan
based on the input received and presented. The management plan was adopted in April
of 1997. Major elements of the plan were six goal statements along with objectives,
policies and actions steps intended to define the future direction for the Park. The 1997
Plan also included an Illustrative Plan that identified a number of future improvements.
Foremost among these was identifying a site next to the Soccer Field parking lot for an
Educational Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens.
Following approval of the 1997 Management Plan the following related actions were
taken regarding the planning of Ford Park:
Goal #4 of the Vail Village Plan Master Plan (as amended in 1998) addressed
the preservation of “existing open space areas and expansion of green space
opportunities.” An action step associated with this goal is to “explore the
feasibility of expanding Ford Park to the west to Vail Valley Drive and/or Slifer
Plaza along the Gore Creek stream tract to provide improved pedestrian and
handicapped access to the Park.”
The 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan identified a wide range of roadway
improvements designed to accommodate traffic levels anticipated to meet 2025
demands. One of these improvements contemplates a roundabout at the west
end of Ford Park to “serve as a means of “u-turning” (eastbound to westbound)
and to potentially serve a future parking structure.”
2012 Management Plan Update
In 2012 the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan was updated to reflect numerous
improvements proposed for the Park. Plans to improve the Park were initiated when
Vail voters approved re-allocating a portion of the +/-$9,000,000 Convention Center
Funds to Ford Park. The other stakeholders in the Park also participated in the funding
of these improvements.
The 2012 Update maintained the general direction for the Park as established by the
1997 Management Plan. With only a few exceptions, the 2012 Update suggested no
significant changes to the uses, facilities and activities that currently take place in the
Park. One exception was the 2012 Update included the development of an Education
Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens along Gore Creek adjacent to the main entry
to the Gardens. All of the existing major uses in the Park – athletic fields, passive
recreation, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Alpine Gardens and Tennis Center
were to remain in place. The Update did not change any of the six major goal
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 16
statements (or related objectives, policy statements and action steps) in the 1997
Management Plan.
2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update
The most significant changes in the 2012 Update are found in the Illustrative Plan
chapter of the Plan. The Illustrative Plan provided conceptual site plan diagrams and
narrative explanations of improvements suggested for the Park. Many of these
improvements were first identified in the 1997 Plan, others evolved out of discussions
with the Vail Town Council, stakeholders and the community during the winter of 2012.
Many of these improvements were initiated in 2012 and 2013. Foremost among them
were the major re-modeling of the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, re-construction of East
Betty Ford Way, improvements to the parking and transit area, expansion and re-
configuration of the athletic fields and new concession and storage buildings associated
with the fields.
A copy of the 2012 Management Plan Update is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master
Plan Supplemental Appendix.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 17
Time Line of Ford Park Activities:
April 1973 Condemnation of Anholtz Ranch, Ordinance 6, 1973
August 1973 Completion of Vail Plan
January 1977 Anholtz Ranch named Gerald R. Ford Park, Resolution 1, 1977
August 1985 Completion of Ford/Donovan Park Master Plan,
July 1987 Amphitheater construction completed
August 1987 Alpine Demonstration Garden completed
November 1987 Preservation of Nature Center, Resolution 27, 1987
December 1987 Vail Valley Foundation lease signed
November 1988 Lower Bench improvements completed
December 1988 Ford Park Master Plan amendment by VRD, Resolution 44, 1988
December 1988 Service agreement with VRD, Resolution 46, 1988
May 1989 Tennis Center receives Conditional Use Permit
July 1989 Alpine Perennial Garden completed
January 1990 Completion of Vail Village Master Plan
February 1990 Aquatic Center rejected by voters in special election
April 1990 Council petitioned to delete Aquatic Center from Master Plan
May 1990 Tennis Center construction completed
June 1991 Alpine Meditation Garden completed
April 1993 Completion of Vail Transportation Master Plan
December 1993 Vail Recreation District agreement renewed
June 1994 Vail Alpine Garden Foundation license agreement signed.
June 1995 Town begins Ford Park Management Plan
October 1996 Council allows Betty Ford Alpine Gardens to proceed through
process with Educational Center plans at Soccer Field parking lot
April 1997 Ford Park Management Plan adopted
1999 Lease with Vail Valley Foundation renewed
2008 Lease with Vail Recreation District renewed
2009 Vail Transportation Plan Update completed
November 2011 Voters approve use of Conference Center Funding for Ford Park
Improvements
May 2012 Completion of 2012 Update to Ford Park Management Plan
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 18
Chapter 4 - GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTION STEPS
This plan includes five statements that convey the community’s goals for Ford Park.
These goal statements provide broad direction on the preservation of the Park, how the
Park should be used, vehicles, pedestrian circulation, coordination between park users
and financial considerations relative to operations and capital improvements. Each goal
statement includes a series of objectives, policies and action steps. Collectively these
statements reflect input from the Vail Town Council, the community and leaseholders
during the 2013 master plan update process. These statements will be used to provide
guidance in decision-making on the management and use of the Park.
The goals, objectives and policies of this Plan will be considered during the review
process for any new development, changes or improvements proposed for the Park.
Only those proposals deemed to be in compliance with these statements (and other
applicable elements of this Plan) will gain approvals. Project proposals deemed to not
comply with these statements and other applicable elements of this Plan will be denied.
This chapter includes thirty-six action steps. In some cases action steps involve a
single, defined task intended to implement an objective or policy statement. An
example of this would be initiating refinements to the park design guidelines specific to
Ford Park. Other action steps involve on-going tasks. An example would be the
coordination and management of events in the Park. The Community Development
Department, with participation from the Public Works Department, will prioritize action
steps and present recommendations annually to the Planning and Environmental
Commission regarding that year’s work program for implementing action steps. The
Planning and Environmental Commission will provide a recommendation on the work
program that will be forwarded to the Vail Town Council who will make final decisions on
the work program along with any necessary budget expenditures.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 19
Goal #1:
Protect the natural environment along the Gore Creek corridor and ensure that
any new use or building within the Park does not adversely affect the character
and quality of the Park or the overall experience of park users.
Objective 1.1: Limit uses and future development to that which is consistent with these
goals, objectives and policies and is consistent with the Ford Park Sub-Areas and
Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain the variety of uses and facilities currently located
within the Park.
Policy Statement 2: Proposals for new (or changes to existing) facilities or uses
that would displace existing public uses will not be permitted unless there is
either a compelling public interest or adequate alternative facilities can be
provided.
Objective 1.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.1.1: Draft a new ordinance to exclude those uses listed in
Ordinance No.6, Series of 1973, now considered to be inappropriate, and
to redefine the allowable uses within Ford Park. The following uses that
are allowed and prohibited for Ford Park shall take precedence over
Section 12-9C-2 of the Vail Town Code concerning the General Use Zone
District:
Allowed Uses
Park and greenbelt
Bicycle and hiking trails
Children’s playground
Active recreation
Passive recreation
Outdoor amphitheater
Botanical gardens
Educational centers
Historical center
Picnic areas
Recreation and athletic facilities
Public utility easements
Parking (surface parking/structured parking)
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 20
Administrative offices for the operation of uses occurring within the Park
Public Art Display
Concerts and Special Events Venues
Prohibited uses
Ski lift and related facilities
Civic center, convention/conference center, public schools, gymnasium,
and assembly hall
Equestrian trails
Type III and IV employee housing
Action Step 1.1.2: Town of Vail will review legal descriptions of existing
lease areas in consultation with the Vail Recreation District, the Vail Valley
Foundation and the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and modify, as deemed
necessary, so legal descriptions correspond with existing and proposed
improvements and uses.
Objective 1.2: Maintain all facilities and uses in the Park at a high level of quality and
establish appropriate review procedures, review criteria and design standards for
evaluating any new development proposals or other proposed changes to the Park are
clearly established.
Policy Statement 1: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or
uses shall conform to the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan, including but not limited
to:
• Goals, Objectives and Policy Statements,
• Sub-Area Plans, and
• Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 2: Any new development or change to existing Park facilities
shall be reviewed for compliance with Section 12-11-6 Park Design Guidelines of
the Town of Vail Municipal Code, as well as other applicable Town regulations.
Policy Statement 3: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or
uses shall provide a needed environmental, recreational, educational, cultural or
social benefit to the community.
Policy Statement 4: Maintain and operate existing facilities, uses and functions
within the Park at a high standard of quality reflective of the Vail Brand.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 21
Objective 1.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.2.1: With participation of all Park stakeholders, Town staff to
prepare standards which outline expectations regarding the appearance,
maintenance, and operation of facilities within the Park.
Action Step 1.2.2: Evaluate the park design guidelines in Section 11-12-6
of the Vail Town Code and modify as necessary to address design
considerations specific to Ford Park.
Objective 1.3: Preserve and protect the environmentally sensitive areas along the Gore
Creek Corridor.
Policy Statement 1: Uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor
shall be limited to only those prescribed in the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-
area.
Policy Statement 2: No new buildings should be permitted within the Gore
Creek Preservation Sub-area.
Policy Statement 3: Any new improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor
shall consider the 100-year floodplain and minimize impacts to wetland or
riparian habitats.
Objective 1.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 1.3.1: Evaluate the merits of strengthening preservation
controls within the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area via a conservation
easement or the Natural Area Preservation Zone District “Open Space”
designation.
Action Step 1.3.2: Inventory existing conditions of the creek bank and
vegetation within the Gore Creek corridor, initiate programs to stabilize or
restore these areas as may be necessary.
Objective 1.4: Utilize Ford Park as a showcase for environmental sensitivity and
sustainability.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 22
Policy Statement 1: Encourage all lease holders and events at the Park to
implement comprehensive recycling programs.
Policy Statement 2: Sustainable design and environmentally “friendly” materials
and construction methods should be utilized on all new development within the
Park.
Policy Statement 3: Maintain, protect and enhance the environmental character
of natural open space areas.
Policy Statement 4: New improvements within the Park and the ongoing
management of the Park should be done using sound environmentally sensitive
practices.
Objective 1.5: Limit the number and scale of buildings and structures within the Park to
no more than necessary to meet the needs of park operations and to provide
appropriate services and facilities to park users.
Policy Statement 1: As an alternative to new buildings, encourage shared or
joint-use buildings and/or facilities among Park lease-holders.
Policy Statement 2: The design of new buildings or structures shall be
integrated with the land with a subtle, understated, low-profile in appearance so
as to not dominate the Park’s landscape.
Policy Statement 3: Park stakeholders may have administrative office space
within the Park, provided that such space is limited in size to no more than what
is necessary only for the management and operation of facilities and uses
located within the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 23
Goal #2:
Provide open space, facilities, and programs within Ford Park to meet the passive
and active recreational, educational, social and cultural needs of residents and
guests of Vail.
Objective 2.1: Provide open space areas within the Park for the passive enjoyment of
nature and to reinforce the Park’s connection to the natural environment.
Policy Statement 1: Preserve the “delight of the natural earth forms and mature
tree growth adjacent to Gore Creek” (The Vail Plan, 1974) found within Gore Creek
Preservation Sub-area and limit uses and activities within this area.
Policy Statement 2: The primary use of the open turf area within the Commons
Sub-Area should be to provide a place for un-programed and informal passive
recreation. The use of this area for special events should be limited in frequency
and scope in order to minimize impacts on the primary use of this area.
Objective 2.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.1.1: Establish management and operational policies for
special events within the open turf area of the Commons Sub-area.
Action Step 2.1.2: Identify key viewsheds from strategic locations within
the Park and as may be necessary, establish designated view corridors to
ensure the protection of these viewsheds.
Objective 2.2: Utilize Ford Park to meet the community’s needs for active recreation
and formal team sport activities.
Policy Statement 1: The Active Recreation and Soccer Field Sub-Areas shall be
managed first and foremost to provide facilities for active recreation and team
sports.
Policy Statement 2: Landscape berms and buffers around active recreation
areas should be maintained and enhanced to mitigate potential impacts of noise
and activity on other sub-areas of the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 24
Objective 2.3: Maintain, and enhance where appropriate, the role of the Park in
providing facilities for the enjoyment and exploration of the arts, music, dance,
education and other cultural pursuits.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain the Ford Amphitheater as a principle summer-time
performing arts facility in the Town of Vail.
Policy Statement 2: Support the Art in Public Places Board in its efforts to
continue public art programs (i.e. interactive events, projects, art installations,
educational activities, etc.) within the Creekside area of the Commons Sub-area
(and other areas of the Park as may be deemed appropriate).
Policy Statement 3: Support the educational programs provided at the Nature
Center and the programs provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens.
Objective 2.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.3.1: Work with the Vail Valley Foundation on their efforts to
create a new “public plaza” at the entry to the Gerald R. Ford
Amphitheater.
Action Step 2.3.2: Work with the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens on their
proposal to create an educational and visitor center within the Park.
Action Step 2.3.3: Promote and support the use of the Nature Center and
surrounding area as a center for environmental education programs.
Objective 2.4: Enhance the use of the Historic School House and preserve the historic
character of the building.
Policy Statement 1: Maintain public access to the School House and continue
the utilization of the building in accordance with the terms of the lease with the
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens.
Objective 2.4 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.4.1: Evaluate alternative uses for the School House that
will maintain public access and potentially involve the display of historic
photos and artifacts or other activities in keeping with the historic nature of
the building.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 25
Action Step 2.4.2: Complete an architectural assessment of the School
House and establish a plan to protect and enhance the historic character
of the building.
Objective 2.5: Enhance and restore the Nature Center building and the landscape
surrounding the building.
Policy Statement 1: Limit vehicular access to only those vehicles necessary for
the operation of the building and educational programs.
Policy Statement 2: Uses proximate to the Nature Center should be limited and
shall be consistent with the Gore Creek Preservation Sub-Area.
Policy Statement 3: Restore the architectural and historical character of the
Nature Center building.
Objective 2.5 Action Steps:
Action Step 2.5.1: Work with the Vail Recreation District to implement
measures for controlling vehicular access to the Nature Center building.
Action Step 2.5.2: Complete an architectural inventory of the Nature
Center building to define steps that could be taken to restore the historic
character of the building.
Action Step 2.5.3: Eliminate the parking areas around the Nature Center
building and reclaim these areas to a natural landscape condition.
Action Step 2.5.4: Prepare a master plan and an operations/management
plan for the Nature Center facility and surrounding area.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 26
Goal #3:
Reduce vehicular intrusions into the interior of the Park and minimize to the
greatest extent feasible the impact of vehicular activity on users of the Park,
particularly on the passive use areas of the Lower Bench and along pedestrian
walkways.
Objective 3.1: Reduce the presence and frequency of vehicular trips into the Lower
Bench (the Lower Commons, Gardens, Amphitheater and the Gore Creek Preservation
Sub-Areas) of the Park.
Policy Statement 1: Proposals for any new facility or use or the expansion of
any existing facility or use in the Lower Bench shall not generate an unnecessary
or appreciable increase in vehicular activity in the Lower Bench area of the Park.
Policy Statement 2: Uses in the Lower Bench shall operate in a manner that
limits vehicular traffic to the greatest extent possible. Vehicular access to the
Lower Bench of the Park should be limited to: maintenance; delivery of goods or
materials too large or too heavy to be carried by non-motorized means; use of
golf carts or similar means to provide access for people with limited mobility; and
emergency services.
Policy Statement 3: Require all delivery vehicles to utilize East Betty Ford Way
to enter and exit the Lower Bench. Due to difficulties in maneuvering, large
trucks (semi’s) shall access the Lower Bench via East Betty Ford Way and may
exit via West Betty Ford Way.
Policy Statement 4: Passenger vehicle access to the Alpine Gardens, the
Amphitheater, AIPP programs or other uses in the Lower Bench shall not be
permitted other than vehicles used to provide access for people with limited
mobility or to deliver goods or materials too heavy to be carried by non-motorized
means.
Objective 3.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 3.1.1: Establish a system (i.e. signage, control gates,
electronic controls) for managing truck movements proximate to the
Amphitheater loading dock and for coordinating truck use of East Betty
Ford Way.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 27
Action Step 3.1.2: Coordinate delivery schedules to reduce the frequency
of delivery and service vehicles into the Lower Bench during peak use
time periods.
Action Step 3.1.3: Require stakeholders to utilize on-site storage facilities
to reduce and control the frequency of delivery and service vehicles into
the Park.
Action Step 3.1.4: Improve traffic gate operations and restrictions on both
the east and west ends of Betty Ford Way to eliminate unnecessary and
unauthorized vehicular intrusions into the Park. Consider closing the
western access point of Betty Ford Way to all vehicles except trucks too
large to utilize East Betty Ford Way (for exiting the Park).
Objective 3.2: Utilize the Parking/Transit Sub-area as the primary means for satisfying
the Park’s parking and transit needs.
Policy Statement 1: All stakeholders are required to adhere to the Parking and
Transit Management Plan.
Policy Statement 2: There shall be a “no-net loss” of the +/-200 parking spaces
within the Parking/Transit Sub-Area and the +/-65 spaces at the Soccer Field
Sub-area. Any net loss of parking spaces shall only be considered when off-set
by a demonstrated improvement or enhancement of public transit use or
alternate means of transportation to the Park.
Policy Statement 3: Provide parking for daily park-use within the Parking/Transit
Sub-Area and utilize the Vail Village Parking Structure to satisfy peak parking
demands of the Park.
Policy Statement 4: Maintain a central trash/dumpster/recycling facility within
the Parking/Transit Sub-area and mandate all Park leaseholders use the central
facility.
Objective 3.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 3.2.1: Town Staff, with coordination from Park stakeholders,
shall prepare a Parking and Transit Management Plan, to include, but not
be limited to the use and access of parking lots, fee structures, transit
operations, etc.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 28
Action Step 3.2.2: As demand warrants, continue operation of the In-Town
bus route beyond Golden Peak to provide service along Vail Valley Drive.
Action Step 3.2.3: Implement an improved wayfinding sign program
directing pedestrians from the Village Parking Structure and Slifer Square
in Vail Village.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 29
Goal #4:
Provide a safe, enjoyable and efficient pedestrian circulation system within Ford
Park and between Ford Park and Vail Village.
Objective 4.1: Provide clear and effective directional and informational signs to and
within Ford Park.
Objective 4.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.1.1: Develop a comprehensive sign plan to direct Ford Park
visitors from Vail Village and from each level of the Village Parking
Structure to destinations within Ford Park.
Objective 4.2: Encourage and promote park users to access the Park via pedestrian
routes from Vail Village and the Vail Transportation Center.
Policy Statement 1: The five existing pedestrian access points to the Park from
Vail Village and Golden Peak should be maintained and enhanced to maximize
their effectiveness in providing access to the Park.
Policy Statement 1: Encourage leaseholders in Ford Park to utilize their
marketing efforts to promote walking, biking and the use of Town buses as an
alternative to driving to the Park.
Objective 4.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.2.1: Implement enhancements to the Gore Creek Trail that
will improve safety, grading, surfacing, and lighting.
Action Step 4.2.2: Evaluate opportunities for additional seating areas,
public art and other features to enhance the walking experience along the
Vail Village Connector (within the Gore Creek Sub-area) and where
appropriate provide rest/sitting areas along all pedestrian routes to the
Park.
Action Step 4.2.3: Establish gateways or portals (signage, monuments,
landscape elements, etc.) at the main entries to the Park (Frontage Road,
Gore Creek Trail, Manor Vail, Slifer Plaza, Vail Valley Drive and the
Parking/Transit Sub-area).
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 30
Objective 4.3: Improve internal pedestrian circulation within Ford Park.
Policy Statement 1: New developments or other improvements in the Park shall
not diminish the quality of the pedestrian circulation system and when
appropriate shall include provisions to improve pedestrian circulation.
Policy Statement 2: Existing ADA routes should be enhanced and where
feasible new ADA access within the Park should be established.
Objective 4.3 Action Steps:
Action Step 4.3.1: Upgrade the portion of Betty Ford Way within the
Commons Sub-area to create a high quality pedestrian corridor with
improved surface materials, lighting, seating and landscaping.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 31
Goal #5:
Maintain compatible relationships between all venues and all uses within Ford
Park.
Objective 5.1: Manage the carrying capacity of the Park by scheduling events to
prevent overlapping or simultaneous events that exceed the availability of community
parking or other park infrastructure.
Policy Statement 1: The Town of Vail through its designee shall coordinate with
leaseholders an annual schedule for events and uses at all Ford Park venues.
Policy Statement 2: No one event or type of use will be allowed to dominate the
usage of the Park.
Policy Statement 3: The Park is a Town of Vail community facility and in the
case of conflicting uses, functions that best serve the interests of the community
will have the highest priority. In all cases, final decisions regarding the use of the
Park shall rest with the Town of Vail.
Policy Statement 4: The day-to-day management and coordination of activities
in the Park will be assigned to the Town of Vail. The Town of Vail, through its
designee, will coordinate as necessary with representation from the Vail Valley
Foundation, the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and the Vail Recreation District.
Objective 5.1 Action Steps:
Action Step 5.1.1: Expand the master schedule kept by the Town Clerk to
include all venues within the Park.
Action Step 5.1.2: Hold preseason event/activity coordination meetings
with all affected stakeholders.
Action Step 5.1.3: Hold semiannual (or as deemed necessary)
coordination and input meetings with the Town of Vail, leaseholder
representatives, and neighborhood and adjacent property owner
representatives.
Objective 5.2: Provide sufficient separation, berms and landscape buffers between
facilities and uses.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 32
Policy Statement 1: The adequacy of berms and landscape buffers between
different facilities and uses shall be considered when evaluating proposed
changes to the Park. The type and extent of buffers to be provided shall be
determined based on the nature of the use, the site design of the proposed
facilities or uses, and the design parameters outlined in the Ford Park Sub-Areas
and the Illustrative Plan.
Policy Statement 2: Maintain and where necessary improve existing berms and
landscaping between facilities and uses.
Objective 5.2 Action Steps:
Action Step 5.2.1: Enhance existing landscape buffers between tennis
courts adjacent to the Active Recreation Sub-area and the Parking/Transit
Sub-area and evaluate the need to enhance landscape buffers between
other uses throughout the Park.
Objective 5.3: Foster a spirit of cooperation between all leaseholders within the Park
regarding their use of the Park and how to collectively use and manage the Park for the
benefit of all.
Policy Statement 1: Encourage the shared use of buildings and facilities.
Policy Statement 2: Decisions regarding proposals for new buildings or
improvements are to be made in the best interest of the Park and the Vail
community, not just in the interest of the leaseholder.
Objective 5.4: Establish a capital improvement plan for the Park and equitably share
the costs of park management and operations with Park lease-holders.
Policy Statement 1: All Ford Park leaseholders shall participate in cost sharing
with the Town of Vail for common operating costs at a level proportionate to the
leaseholders benefit from or relationship to said operation or management cost.
(or as may be outlined in current lease or license agreement). Management and
operations cost may include but are not limited to, electrical for pedestrian path
and parking lot lighting, trash removal, and parking lot and pedestrian path
maintenance costs.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 33
Objective 5.4 Action Steps:
Action Step 5.4.1: Town staff to complete an inventory of existing park
operations and associated costs, and in conjunction with park
leaseholders, quantify the level of benefit realized by each leaseholder
from such operations.
Action Step 5.4.2: Research current lease, license and use agreements to
determine existing financial responsibilities of each lease holder.
Action Step 5.4.3: With input from the Vail Town Council, work with
leaseholders to modify existing leases to correct any inequities in utility
billing procedures and distribution systems, current utility use, and cost
sharing relationships.
Action Step 5.4.4: Create and maintain a five-year capital improvements
program for Ford Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 34
Chapter 5 - FORD PARK SUB-AREAS
“The basic structure of Ford Park is comprised of two broad terraces, or benches as
locally referred to, which step down the north side of the Gore Creek and is typical of
mountain, valley and stream physiography.”
1985 Ford Park Master Plan
Ford Park topography/1985
Early plans for Ford Park (the Vail Plan) anticipated recreation-oriented uses (and a
number of buildings) on the Upper Bench with passive open space areas and an
amphitheater on the Lower Bench. Initial development of the Park included athletic
fields, tennis courts and parking facilities on the Upper Bench. Decisions on locating
these uses on the Upper Bench were made based on the terrain (availability of flat land)
and accessibility to the Frontage Road. Passive open space and the development of an
amphitheater were initiated on the Lower Bench. These plans and the early
development of the Park reinforced this Upper Bench/Lower Bench distinction. Over
time the Upper Bench came to be regarded as recreation-oriented while the Lower
Bench was regarded as being more oriented to cultural uses and passive open space.
The characterization of athletic use on the Upper Bench and passive and cultural uses
on the Lower Bench remains valid today, and the terms Upper Bench and Lower Bench
provide a good, albeit generalized description of the Park. However, to discuss the
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 35
future of Ford Park in terms of just the Upper and Lower Bench does not acknowledge
the many subtleties and distinctions throughout the Park that need to be considered in
this master planning process. It is for this reason that sub-areas are used to more
clearly articulate the goals and objectives for specific areas of the Park. Sub-areas are
intended to provide a forum for defining the unique areas of the Park, where
improvements or changes may be acceptable and where improvements and changes
may not be acceptable.
The seven sub-areas described below were defined based primarily on the existing
uses and site characteristics within the Park. In some cases, sub-areas define one
single use. Examples of these include the Amphitheater and Alpine Gardens Sub-areas.
In other cases sub-areas include a number of related uses. Examples of these are the
Gore Creek Preservation and the Commons Sub-areas. In many cases the pedestrian
corridors that link the sub-areas and facilitate the movement of people throughout the
Park are used as boundaries between sub-areas.
The sub-area boundaries were defined based on a variety of considerations. They
should not be considered hard, inflexible parcel lines. It is reasonable to anticipate that
when considering future improvements for the Park some latitude with the location of a
sub-area boundary may be appropriate. Any consideration to modify a sub-area
boundary shall be made in the context of the goals for the Park and for that particular
sub-area.
The use of sub-areas to better understand how the Park functions and to express how
the Park may change in the future is not an attempt to divide the Park into parts.
Rather, the sub-areas provide an effective means for discussing the unique areas of the
Park in the context of the goals and objectives for the entire Park. With Ford Park the
adage “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” clearly applies.
The diagram below depicts the seven sub-areas defined for the Park. The narrative that
follows addresses the following considerations for each sub-area:
• Existing uses and facilities,
• The role the sub-area plays in the overall context of the Park,
• The relationship of the sub-area to adjoining sub-areas,
• Improvements or changes that may be appropriate at some point in the future,
• Any parameters or other limitations relevant to the future uses and activities
within the sub-area, and
• Any other considerations.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 36
Sub-area discussions address the Park at a fairly broad, master planning level. More
specific discussion of potential future improvements that may be appropriate for the
Park is found in the Illustrative Plan Chapter of this Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 37
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 38
Parking/Transit Sub-area
The Parking/Transit Sub-area provides on-site parking for the Park and includes a
transit stop, a passenger car drop-off area and a central trash/storage facility.
Strategically located along the South Frontage Road and on the periphery of other park
facilities and uses, this sub-area plays a vital role in how the Park functions by
separating parking and vehicles from other areas of the Park. The transit facility is a
key component of the Park by facilitating direct bus service to the Town’s parking
structures (which provide parking for peak demand days). This parking/transit concept
had its origins in the original planning of the Park.
“This major community park-cultural center will contain parking for more
than 200 cars and will also be served directly by the Town bus system.
Major parking will be accommodated in the transportation center.”
Vail Plan, 1974
Since the mid-70’s the parking plan for Ford Park has been to provide daily use parking
at the Park with parking for special events provided at the Town’s parking structures.
This parking plan was validated by a parking and transportation study for the
amphitheater completed in 1979. This parking plan remains valid today. Functional
transit facilities along with pleasant, safe pedestrian corridors between the Park and the
Village Parking Structure are key elements to ensure the on-going effectiveness of this
parking plan.
Prior to making improvements to the athletic fields in 2013 (to be completed in 2014) the
Park had approximately 200 on-site parking spaces. The athletic field expansion
displaced approximately 50 parking spaces at the west end of the parking lot. These 50
spaces were re-established by re-designing other portions of the parking lot,
maintaining the approximately 200 on-site parking spaces.
A “no net loss of parking” policy is in effect for the +/-200 on-site parking in this sub-
area. Any proposed reduction to existing on-site parking spaces will only be considered
in conjunction with concurrent improvements to alternative means of transportation to
the Park. An example of this would be reducing the number of parking spaces in order
to improve transit facilities.
The parking lot was designed such that it can continue to be used for concerts and
other special events. The parking lot also serves as a turn-around area used to
manage local traffic when eastbound I-70 is closed. It is anticipated that both of these
uses will continue.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 39
Future Improvements
With parking lot and transit improvements scheduled to be completed in the fall of 2013
and spring of 2014, it is anticipated that the Parking/Transit Sub-area will adequately
address the needs of the Park for the foreseeable future. Improvements that may be
considered in the future include:
• Design and installation of park entry features at the two pedestrian portals from
the parking lot into the Park.
• Installation of traffic control devices (gates or other means) at the east and west
ends of Betty Ford Way.
The potential improvements listed above are also described in the Illustrative Plan
section of this Plan.
The idea of constructing structured parking below the existing surface parking lot has
been discussed in the past. This could accomplish two objectives – increase the supply
of on-site parking (parking that could also address other town needs) and allow for
some alternative use on top of the structured parking. On a related note is the idea of
developing parking below the tennis center and re-constructing the tennis center on the
surface of the structure. While structured parking in either of these locations could
create opportunities for new uses on these areas of the Park, costs would be significant.
Based on studies completed in 2009-2010 the Town Council at that time determined
structured parking to not be feasible. If or when this idea is discussed in the future, an
initial step would be to evaluate implications on the goals for the Park and if necessary
initiate amendments to this Plan.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 40
Active Recreation Sub-area
This sub-area is the focal point of active recreation, team sports, tournaments and other
special events. The location of these uses is consistent with some of the earliest design
direction established for the Park. It is expected that these uses will continue in order to
meet the community’s needs for active recreation facilities.
Significant plantings have created a landscape buffer between these active recreation
uses and other surrounding uses. These buffers should be maintained and continually
enhanced where necessary. Specific attention should be given to enhancing
landscaping between the Frontage Road and the athletic fields. This improvement
would provide a buffer between the Park and the road and also provide shade for
spectators. Noise and other compatibility issues with use of the athletic fields and
adjacent uses will need to continually be managed (refer to Goal 4 in Chapter 4 of this
Plan).
Future Improvements
Improvements to the Active Recreation Sub-area initiated in 2012 (expected to be
completed in 2014) were extensive and included expansion and re-organization of the
athletic fields and construction of a new restroom/storage building and a new
concession/restroom building. It is anticipated that these improvements will address the
active recreation needs of the community for the foreseeable future. Potential
improvements contemplated for this sub-area are:
• Design and installation of park entry features at the west end of the Park along the
Frontage Road and the two pedestrian portals from the parking lot.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 41
• Ongoing enhancement of the landscape buffer around the perimeter of the Sub-
area.
• The 2009 Town of Vail Transportation Plan contemplates a roundabout at the west
end of Ford Park to “serve as a means of “u-turning” (eastbound to westbound) and
to potentially provide access to a future below grade parking structure. No detailed
design work on this improvement has been done, but conceptually this roundabout
could be located just west of the athletic fields.
The existing Tennis Center is located between the Parking/Transit Sub-area and other
portions of the Park. East Betty Ford Way provides convenient and pleasant pedestrian
access to the Lower Bench of the Park along the southern end of the Tennis Center.
However, the tennis center presents constraints to establishing a convenient and
graceful pedestrian entry between the parking/transit area and the rest of the Park. If or
when the relocation of one or more tennis courts is considered, study should be given to
how improved pedestrian flow and new uses could be established in this area.
The Tennis Center building has been in existence for over 25 years and the design of
the building is inconsistent with the architectural character of buildings recently
constructed in the Park. If or when this building is to be re-developed, consideration
should be given to a design more consistent with the design objectives for the Park. In
addition to the design of the building, consideration should also be given to the use of
the building and the potential for shared use to accommodate other Park users.
The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within
Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub-area. The preferred location for this
building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently
determined to not be a viable location, the Tennis Center site is a suitable alternative.
The potential site for this building is proximate to or integrated with the Tennis Center
building. Coordination and cooperation from the VRD will be necessary if this site is to
be pursued.
Commons Sub-area
The Commons Sub-area plays an important role in the Park by providing structure, or
organization to the overall design of the Park. The area provides a transition zone
between other uses in the Park and Betty Ford Way, which runs through the sub-area,
and provides a delightful arrival experience for pedestrians entering the Park from the
West. The Commons Sub-area also provides some of the Park’s most important and
popular facilities that collectively address a number of goals and objectives for the Park.
Specifically, the Commons Area provides places for recreational use, public art, the
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 42
passive use and the quiet enjoyment of the Park. The sub-area also provides buffers
between Park uses, a transition to the Gore Creek corridor and creates an important
sense of openness within the Lower Bench.
This sub-area should continue to be managed to provide the uses and park features
listed above. There are no major changes contemplated to the three distinct, yet related
uses that occur in this sub-area. These three uses are:
Children’s Playground
The playground is an immensely popular area of the Park. This use should continue.
While refinements and/or upgrading of play structures and facilities within the
playground may be made in the future, the basic size or “footprint” of the playground
should remain unchanged. The restrooms at the playground provide facilities for the
entire Lower Bench and there is a need to upgrade these facilities in the near future in
order to meet the demands of park users. No other buildings are contemplated in the
playground area.
Open Turf Area
Aside from natural open space areas along Gore Creek, the open turf area is the only
area of the Park that is not programmed with organized uses and activities. It is
important that this area remains open and available for informal use by patrons of the
Park in the future. The area provides space for picnics, rest, informal games and other
passive recreation use. The open turf area also provides an important buffer, or
transition from the more actively developed areas of the Park and the Gore Creek
Corridor. Given this areas adjacency to Betty Ford Way, it is critical to limit vehicles in
this area of the Park in order to prevent conflicts between park users and vehicles.
, The open turf area should not be reduced in size and no buildings or structures should
be permitted in this area. If Betty Ford Way is improved, all streetscape improvements
(lighting, landscaping, seating, etc.) should be located on the south side of the walkway
so as to not reduce the size of the open turf area. In the past the southern end of the
open turf area has been used for events (weddings, parties, etc.) that have involved the
placement of temporary tents and other features within the open turf area. While these
events may continue, the number and extent of such events should be limited and
events that would monopolize the open turf area and prevent its use by other users of
the Park should not be permitted. Any events in the open turf area should be managed
in accordance with Park procedures, specifically to minimize the time temporary
facilities are in place, minimize the number and extent of vehicles necessary to service
the event, etc.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 43
Creekside Area
The Creekside area is a narrow strip of land south of Betty Ford Way and north of Gore
Creek. A few small structures (i.e. the “art shack, an open air picnic shelter) are located
in this area. Arts in Public Places (AIPP) may pursue remodeling or enhancing the art
shack at some point in the future. AIPP has placed permanent art installations in this
area and also runs summer art programs in this part of the Park. Art programs may
include activities such as interactive events, educational and participatory activities, and
temporary art installations. The passive use and the limited number of permanent
improvements within this area make it an excellent transition to the more natural,
undisturbed Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area.
The use and character of this area should remain unchanged. No new buildings should
be permitted. New art installations may be appropriate, but if pursued, they should be
done in a way that minimizes impacts to other surrounding uses and facilities and is
sensitive to the natural landscape.
Future Improvements
Improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Upgrading restroom facilities at the children’s playground.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 44
• Further enhance the buffer between the athletic fields and the children’s playground.
• Additional art installations within the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Upgrade to Betty Ford Way to include, decorative pavers, seating areas, lighting and
other streetscape improvements.
The restroom and Betty Ford Way improvements are described in greater detail in the
Illustrative Plan chapter.
Amphitheater Sub-area
An outdoor amphitheater was contemplated in original plans for Ford Park dating back
to 1974. Completed in 1987, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater has evolved into Vail’s
most prominent venue for music, dance and other cultural events. The facility is
managed by the Vail Valley Foundation and is host to approximately 60 events each
summer. The amphitheater is considered one of the community’s most important
cultural assets.
In 2013 the Foundation completed an initial phase of improvements to the amphitheater.
Improvements included re-contouring the lawn seating, new restrooms, expansion of
concession areas, and other improvements. While not a project of the Foundation, the
Town of Vail recently made major improvements (decorative pavers, widening, and
reduction to grade of walkway) to East Betty Ford Way. The Foundation has plans for a
second phase of improvements to the Amphitheater that would create a new “public
plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 45
The relationship between the Amphitheater and the neighboring athletic fields will need
to be continually monitored to ensure compatibility between these (and all) park users is
maintained. It is important to protect and enhance areas of existing vegetation in and
around the Amphitheater and where appropriate improve the physical buffers between
these uses. The implementation of noise mitigation at the north end of the amphitheater
to minimizing noise impacts from the athletic fields and Interstate 70 has also been
discussed. The Foundation has completed acoustic studies of the amphitheater and
concluded that mitigating noise impacts from the fields and Interstate 70 would have the
unintended consequence of impacting sound quality within the amphitheater. As such,
noise mitigation is not being pursued.
The Amphitheater is a significant generator of people and also generates a significant
amount of vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench. Vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench
conflicts with a number of goals and objectives for the Park. It is important for the Town
and the Vail Valley Foundation to continue to work together to minimize vehicular traffic
to the Amphitheater. No new uses or expansion of existing uses at the Amphitheater
that would generate appreciably more vehicular traffic into this area of the Park should
be permitted. Managing and limiting vehicle traffic that may result from the proposed
public plaza will be an important consideration in establishing operational standards for
this new facility.
Future Improvements
Potential improvements contemplated for the Amphitheater Sub-area include:
• Development of a “public plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
• Restoration of the stream bank adjacent to the Amphitheater south of Betty Ford
Way and east of the pedestrian bridge.
• Upgrading of the fence/screening of the utility installation along Gore Creek west of
the pedestrian bridge.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design and
development of the public plaza. These parameters are described in greater detail in
the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Alpine Gardens Sub-area
What began with completion of a demonstration garden in 1987 has evolved into a +/-
1.5 acre network of perennials, rock gardens and waterfalls hosting an array of high
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 46
alpine plants. The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens (BFAG) provides an important
educational and experiential element of the Park. The gardens and the mission of the
organization are in keeping with one of the original goals for Ford Park to provide
environmental and educational facilities for the community. The Alpine Gardens have
become one of Vail’s most popular summer attractions.
The Alpine Gardens has pursued the development of an “alpine education center” in the
Park for a number of years. The 1997 Ford Park Management Plan identified the
location for this facility to be within the Soccer Field Sub-area. During the 2012 Ford
Park Management Plan Update the BFAG proposed a location adjacent to Gore Creek
for the education building and the 2012 Plan recommended this site for a new building.
The Vail Town Council subsequently reconsidered this recommendation from the 2012
Update, and while expressing support for the BFAG to develop an educational building
within the Park, initiated a new evaluation of site alternatives for the building.
The Vail Town Council’s primary criterion for selecting a site for the educational center
building was that it not be located on the Lower Bench. Seven sites were evaluated,
three of which were determined to be viable sites for the building. The BFAG Building
Site Evaluation Matrix outlines the factors considered in this evaluation. A copy is found
in the Supplemental Appendix.
For a variety of reasons the preferred location for this building was determined to be
adjacent to West Betty Ford Way just west of the Children’s Playground. Located
directly on the grade transition between the upper and lower bench, the Vail Town
Council determined that this location conforms to their site selection criteria that the
building not be located on the lower bench. The other two sites that were considered
viable alternatives are at the Soccer Field and within the Tennis Center. These sites
could still be considered if following further study it is determined that the Betty Ford
Way site is not viable.
The primary purpose of the building is to provide educational programs for the
community and accordingly the uses within the building are expected to include rooms
for interpretive displays, meeting/class rooms, a greenhouse and a limited amount of
administrative space necessary to support on-site operations of the Gardens.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 47
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Alpine Gardens Sub-area include:
• Development of an alpine gardens educational center.
• Extension of gardens along the northeast entry in order to create a buffer from
the adjoining athletic fields and improve pedestrian arrival to the Gardens.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design,
development and operation of the educational center. These parameters are described
in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area
The Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area includes the entire length of the Gore Creek
Corridor that passes through the Park. The sub-area is more than 21 acres in size and
is generally defined by the park boundary on the south and the 100-year flood plain, the
50-foot Gore Creek setback and/or topographic features on the north. Gore Creek,
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 48
associated wetland and riparian habitat and stands of specimen trees are the primary
features of the creek corridor. Existing improvements within this sub-area are limited to
bridges, trails, utility improvements and the Nature Center.
The Gore Creek corridor is the Park’s most significant natural feature and provides the
Park with delightful open space for the quiet enjoyment of nature. The corridor also
provides a critical pedestrian link to Vail Village. The designation of this corridor as a
preservation zone is in direct response to a number of goals and objectives from
previous park planning efforts. The preservation of and enhancement to this area is
also suggested by Goal #1 of this Plan. It is essential that adjacent uses respect the
natural environment of this sub-area and that effective buffers be maintained between
other more intensive uses within the Park.
It is intended that existing uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Preservation
Sub-Area be maintained and in keeping with the goals of preserving this area no new
buildings are to be constructed within the sub-area. Any other new uses or
improvements should be limited to those that will complement the natural character of
the creek corridor and will minimize impacts to this sensitive environment.
Resolution No. 27 of 1987 designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an
area “to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural history.” The
resolution stipulated that “vehicular traffic is to be restricted and certain policies and
procedures for preservation and maintenance of the grounds and facilities” should be
enacted. It is acknowledged that the Nature Center will bring a certain level of activity
to this sub-area. Nature Center activity should be concentrated on the “upland” portions
of the Nature Center in order to minimize impacts to the creek corridor.
Improvements within the sub-area should be limited to low-impact improvements such
as soft surface walking paths, creek enhancements to improve fish habitat, fishing
access, re-vegetation and creek/stream bank restoration projects. In all cases such
improvements should be designed and constructed in a manner that minimizes
environmental impacts (i.e. avoid wetland habitat and wetland, maintain existing natural
vegetation, use of “best management practices”, etc.). The underlying goal of any new
trail development and/or bridge crossing should be to improve access in order to
enhance awareness of this important natural environment.
Utility improvements should not be located within this sub-area unless no other practical
alternative is available.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 49
The Gore Creek corridor between the main portion of Ford Park and Slifer Square
provides important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail
Village Parking Structure). This corridor is heavily travelled and provides access to the
Park for many park users. Enhancing the walking experience along the corridor will
ensure its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park.
Fishing access to Gore Creek, while currently not an issue (i.e. excessive use from foot
traffic resulting in damage to riparian areas and vegetation), could become an issue in
the future. A creek access point was considered at the east end of the Nature Center
(using the bus turnaround on Vail Valley Drive as an unloading area) was discussed
during the 1997 Planning effort but was rejected as being contradictory to the intended
use of the Nature Center.
An Action Step suggested for this area (refer to Chapter 4 of this Plan) is to evaluate the
benefits of establishing a conservation easement for this area or to apply the “Open
Space” designation via the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The protection
afforded by either of these steps would define more permanent limitations on the use of
this area and in doing so establish a degree of permanence in preserving this creek
corridor.
The existing condition of the Nature Center Building and the surrounding area has been
a point of discussion. Potential improvements to the Nature Center are further
discussion in Chapter 6 – Ford Park Illustrative Plan.
Future Improvements
Future improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Enhancement and restoration of vegetation along the creek corridor, creek bank
stabilization and fishing habitat enhancements.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 50
• Enhancements to the walkway between Vail Village and the Park to include
improvements such as seating, art installations, etc.
• Design and installation of park entry features at the three pedestrian portals to
the Park along the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Initiate steps to improve the physical condition of the Nature Center.
These improvements are discussed in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter.
Soccer Field Sub-area
The Soccer Field Sub-area, while often overlooked as an element of Ford Park,
provides a valuable community asset. The full-sized athletic field serves the soccer and
lacrosse communities, the sand volleyball courts are heavily used and the 65-space
parking lot is used year-around. A cul-de-sac at the east end of the sub-area allows in-
town buses to turn around when providing express service to Ford Park. These uses
should continue as they directly address the broad goals for the Park of “providing the
recreational needs of the community” (1985 Plan) and is consistent with the objective of
locating active recreation areas “away from the meadow and creek” (1985 Plan).
Separated from the rest of Ford Park by Vail Valley Drive and physically removed from
the more developed portions of the Park, the Soccer Field Sub-area does not have
compatibility or relationship issues with surrounding uses or facilities. No major
changes are contemplated to the existing recreational facilities in this sub-area.
While no major improvements are anticipated in the near future, the Soccer Field sub-
area is unique from the rest of the Park. For example, the uses and activities in this
sub-area do not impact other areas of the Park, the sub-area has direct vehicular
access that does not impact other park users, and the sub-area has no direct impact on
the Gore Creek Corridor. For these reasons this sub-area could be a suitable location
for new park uses or buildings to meet the future needs of the Park. If or when new
uses may be proposed for this sub-area, consideration should be given to applicable
elements of this Plan, how the proposed use could affect surrounding uses, private
covenants and other considerations.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 51
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Soccer Field Sub-Area include:
• Expansion of the existing sand volleyball courts.
• Expansion of landscape buffers.
The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within
Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub-area. The preferred location for this
building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently
determined to not be a viable location, the Soccer Field site has been determined to be
a viable alternative. The potential location for this building is at the northwest corner of
the sub-area. Private covenant issues (with the neighboring Northwoods
Condominiums and with the Vail Village Seventh Filing) will need to be addressed prior
to constructing an education center on the soccer field site.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 52
Chapter 6 - FORD PARK ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
The Ford Park Illustrative Plan provides a general description of future improvements
contemplated for Ford Park. The Plan indicates the general location of the
improvements, a summary of the proposed improvements and parameters or criteria to
be considered in the design, development and operation of the improvement. The
design parameters and criteria are of particular importance as they establish specific
expectations for the proposed improvement. Conformance with these parameters and
criteria is a requisite to the Town approving any improvements in the Park.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan discusses a wide range of potential
improvements for the Park. The design and development of some improvements are in
progress. Other these improvements are only general ideas and will need further study
and design, an example being the installation of art along the Gore Creek Corridor
connection to Vail Village to enhance the walking experience. Other improvements are
not viable in the near-term but could be viable at some point in the future, examples
being structured parking under the athletic fields or a Frontage Road roundabout at the
west end of the Park.
It is not the intention of this Plan that only those improvements depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed for the Park. Improvements not depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed and will be reviewed relative to their conformance
with the goals, objectives and policies for the Park and the applicable Ford Park Sub-
areas. It should also be noted that improvements being depicted on the Illustrative Plan
does not ensure if or when they will be implemented.
Any improvement proposed for the Park is subject to approval by the Vail Town Council
and further review by the Town’s review boards prior to being implemented. This review
may involve the Planning and Environmental Commission (Conditional Use Permit,
Development Plan review) and the Design Review Board prior to being implemented.
On the following page is the Ford Park Illustrative Plan and descriptions of future
improvements that may be made to the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 53
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 54
Improvement #1 – Gore Creek Corridor Restoration
There are a number of areas within the Gore Creek corridor where erosion, over-use or
other factors have disturbed or otherwise adversely impacted existing vegetation. A
restoration program should be implemented to improve vegetation along the creek
corridor. Restoration will improve the visual quality of this area and improve water
quality by preventing erosion. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary
in order to determine precisely where and to what extent restoration is needed.
Following completion of this assessment, a detailed landscape plan for the restoration
of the corridor should be prepared and implemented.
A parallel effort should be to evaluate the condition of the creek bank in order to identify
the potential need for stream bank stabilization to protect the bank from erosion.
Another opportunity to consider for Gore Creek is how pools or other features could be
created in the creek to improve the quality of fishing or potentially improve the creek for
other uses. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary in order to
determine precisely where and to what extent these improvements may be feasible.
Following completion of this assessment a detailed improvement plan for the creek
corridor could be prepared.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #1, Objective 1.3, Action Step 1.3.2.
Improvements #2 – Gore Creek Village Connector
The Gore Creek corridor between the west end of Ford Park and Slifer Square provides
important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail Village
Parking Structure). Enhancing the walking experience along this connection will
improve its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park. The
installation of seating areas, creek overlooks and public art are examples of
improvements that could be made to animate this walkway.
Any future improvements shall be outside of wetland areas, the 100-year flood plain or
other environmentally sensitive areas. An inventory of the creek corridor to identify
such areas should be completed prior to initiating any improvements.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.2.
Improvement #3 – Entry Monuments at Park’s pedestrian entries
Pedestrians arrive to Ford Park from one of seven existing entries as identified on the
Illustrative Plan. Currently there is inadequate signage or other features identifying
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 55
these locations as entry points to the Park. The goal of this improvement is to formally
identify these portals and announce them as gateways, or arrival points to Ford Park.
Landscape features, signage, bollards, monuments, archways or other design features,
or some combination thereof, could be used to identify these locations. Landscape
enhancements to areas proximate to these entries may also be appropriate. A design
process is necessary to determine design solutions for these improvements. While
specific solutions for these park entry improvements could vary between locations, all
should share a common design vocabulary. It will also be important to locate these
improvements in a way that compliments the adjacent pedestrian corridor and does not
compromise pedestrian circulation.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.3.
Improvement #4 – Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center
The education center is envisioned to include multi-use space for year-around
educational programs and other activities, a greenhouse and limited administrative
space. Below are design, development and operational parameters and/or criteria to be
considered in the detailed design of this facility.
• Building and site improvements provide adequate clearances from
existing utility lines and drainage improvements and when necessary
such lines or improvements are relocated to provide adequate
clearances.
• A building of approximately 3,500 square feet of gross floor area.
• Building designed with a low-scale appearance that does not visually
dominate the surrounding area and does not loom over West Betty
Ford Way.
• Provide appropriate horizontal separation from West Betty Ford Way
and from the children’s playground in order to not diminish the quality
of these spaces.
• Ability to construct the project in a manner that does not adversely
impact other facilities or uses in the Park.
• A viable access management plan designed to minimize to the
greatest extent feasible the number and frequency of vehicles
accessing the education center. It is acknowledged that a service
vehicle or delivery vehicle may occasionally need to drive to the center.
However, daily or frequent vehicle access by staff or patrons of the
center will not be permitted
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 56
• Acceptable emergency vehicle access to the building and identification
of any site improvements necessary to accommodate such access.
• Identify the anticipated parking demand from the building and how it
will be addressed. No parking shall be provided at the building.
• Adequate storage space to meet the operational needs of the building
and to minimize the need for vehicle trips to the building.
• Coordination with the Vail Recreation District on the need to expand
fencing at the athletic fields to protect the building from errant balls.
• Evaluate the feasibility of providing public restrooms within the center (see
Improvement #7 in Illustrative Plan – Children’s Playground Restrooms)
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.2.
The site plan and cross-section are conceptual studies for how a building could be
designed on this site. While provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, these sketches
do not represent a development or design proposal. They are merely depictions of how
the building could be designed and there is no implied approval of the concepts
depicted below.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 57
Improvement #5 – Nature Center
Over the years a number of additions and modifications have been made to the nature
center building. Many of these changes have altered the historic character of this
building. An assessment of the building should be completed in order to understand
steps that could be taken to restore the architectural integrity of this building and the
surrounding area.
A current deficiency of the Nature Center is the lack of restroom facilities. If the building
is to be renovated consideration should be given to how restrooms could be
incorporated into the building. Other improvements to the Nature Center include, re-
claiming the informal parking areas proximate to the building and taking steps to limit
vehicular access to the site. These site improvements would most efficiently be
designed in conjunction with the evaluation of the building.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.5, Action Step 2.5.1-2.4.3.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 58
Improvement #6 – Ford Amphitheater Entry Upgrade/Public Plaza
The Vail Valley Foundation has proposed plans for transforming the existing
Amphitheater entry into a re-designed and re-purposed Public Plaza. The plaza is
intended to provide a more gracious and more functional entry to the amphitheater. The
design intent and objective of this improvement is to create a multi-use outdoor space
that serves as the primary arrival for the Amphitheater as well as a pre-convene and
post-function space during scheduled events. The Public Plaza would also provide a
venue for smaller gatherings hosted by other park leaseholders and also be open for
public use when not being used for scheduled events.
Other elements of the Public Plaza include a tensile roof covering, a tribute to the Ford
Family, a small stage within the courtyard, a new donor wall, enhancements to the
concession building and ticket windows, and new entry gates to the Amphitheater.
Parameters and criteria to be considered:
• Plaza design should be done to facilitate/not encumber truck turning movements
necessary to provide loading/delivery to the Amphitheater.
• Plaza design should be sensitive to and integrated with immediately adjacent
improvements at the Alpine Gardens.
• Trees removed to accommodate the Public Plaza should be re-located within the
Park and to the extent feasible be relocated proximate to the amphitheater.
• The space should be available for use by the public when not being used for
private functions.
• The space should be available for gatherings that support other Park
stakeholders (TOV, VRD, BFAG and AIPP).
• Any structures/roof elements associated with the public plaza should harmonize
with the Amphitheater, not dominate the surrounding area, and conform to the
Town’s park design guidelines.
• Any fencing that may be required to define the courtyard space or for liquor
license or other purposes should be subtle and visually unobtrusive. Landscape
materials should be used to soften the appearance of the fence.
• A viable management plan for minimizing vehicular access to the social
courtyard (employees, service vehicles, deliveries, etc.), and for servicing
the facility in a manner that minimizes impacts on pedestrian use of Betty
Ford Way.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.1.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 59
Improvement #7 – Children’s Playground Restrooms
The playground restrooms provide facilities for the entire Lower Bench. These facilities
are under-sized and in need of upgrade and expansion to meet current demand. When
designed, the new bathroom building should be one level and be sized no larger than
necessary to meet the needs of park users. The location currently considered for the
new restrooms is west of the existing facility where play apparatus are currently located.
New play apparatus will be provided with the removal of the existing restroom building.
The building should not encroach on the adjacent open turf area.
The adjoining Alpine Gardens Sub-area identifies a site along West Betty Ford Way and
next to the playground for the development of an alpine gardens education center. The
potential to incorporate restrooms for playground users within the alpine garden
education center should be evaluated. The goal of this approach is to minimize the
number of buildings in the Park. Coordination between the Town and the Alpine
Gardens will be necessary in order to evaluate the feasibility of this idea
Improvement #8 – Betty Ford Way Traffic Control
While it is acknowledged that the Alpine Gardens, the Amphitheater and other uses in
the Lower Bench require vehicular access, an underlying goal for the Park is to
minimize vehicular traffic in this area. Betty Ford Way provides car and truck access to
this area. As a means for better regulating traffic into the Lower Bench, the installation
of gates, bollards or other improvements will be necessary at either end of Betty Ford
Way. In addition to improvements designed to limit car and truck access to the lower
bench, a system for managing large truck use on East Betty Ford Way should also be
explored. This section of Betty Ford Way is essentially a one-lane road. The purpose
of this effort is to prevent two trucks from utilizing East Betty Ford Way at the same
time.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #3, Objective 3.2, Action Step 3.2.3.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 60
Chapter 7- PARK MANAGEMENT
Four organizations play a role in the management and operation of Gerald R. Ford
Park. The Town of Vail is the owner of the Park and manages the community park on
the Lower Bench, the stream tract, parking lot areas and pedestrian corridors. In
addition, the Town provides park management and coordination with the Park’s three
leaseholders. The leaseholders manage and operate their respective facilities:
The Vail Recreation District lease includes the Tennis Center, athletic fields and
land that includes the Nature Center. The Tennis Center Building is on land
owned by the Town but was developed and funded by the VRD. VRD offers
environmental education and research opportunities at the Nature Center.
The Vail Valley Foundation manages and maintains the Ford Amphitheater and
immediate surrounding grounds. The amphitheater seats up to 2,500 people and
is scheduled an average of 60 days during the summer months.
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens manages the Gardens. The Gardens have developed
in four phases that began in 1987.
In its role as the overall park manager, the Town addresses a variety of management
and operational considerations. Often times this requires the involvement of different
town departments and town commissions and boards. Ultimately the Vail Town Council
is asked to review and approve management practices. The Town involves one or more
of the Park leaseholders when addressing these management topics and in some cases
the lease agreements with the Recreation District, the Vail Valley Foundation and the
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens address these topics. Below is a list of park management
topics the Town is responsible for:
• Parking – Management of parking spaces, allocation of spaces to leaseholders,
rates at times pay-parking is implemented, etc.
• Special events on parking lot, athletic fields and open turf area – coordination
with promoters of events, scheduling, pre and post-event operations, etc.
• Park Calendar – While not responsible for scheduling events within leaseholder
facilities, the Town coordinates (with leaseholders) a comprehensive events
schedule for the Park.
• Transportation – management of transit operations between the Park and the
Vail Transportation Center, including periodic implementation of a Golden Peak
bus route.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 61
• AIPP projects – The review of art programs and installations in the Park.
• Proposals for new uses, new building or changes to the Park – The review of any
proposed change to the Park will involve the Vail Town Council and may also
involve the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board,
AIPP and the Commission on Special Events.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 62
Chapter 8 - APPENDIX
An extensive number of documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park
planning efforts have been assembled. Due to the volume of this material, these
documents are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix. Material found in the Supplemental Appendix includes:
1. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch.
2. The Vail Plan, 1974.
3. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the Antholz
Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
4. The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report, 1985.
5. Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, this resolution designated the seven acres
around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore
Valley’s natural history.
6. Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
7. Ford Park Management Plan, 1997.
8. Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012.
9. BFAG Building Site Evaluation Matrix.
10. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, Martin/Martin, August 15, 2013.
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013, An Ordinance Amending
Section 13-7-8 of the Vail Town Code Regarding Recovery of Costs in Enforcement Actions
and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
BACKGROUND: The Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide for an
award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to enforce violations
of Section 13-7-8.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No.
16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance No. 16 Series of 2013
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
ORDINANCE NO. 16
SERIES 2013
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13-7-8 OF THE VAIL TOWN
CODE REGARDING RECOVERY OF COSTS IN ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
"Town"), is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Colorado and the Vail Town Charter;
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town have been duly
elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide
for an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to
enforce violations of Section 13-7-8.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 13-7-8.B.2 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as
follows:
2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall
subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium
association of three (3) times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily
rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when
paid shall be common elements of the condominiums. All sums assessed
against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and
unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium
association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written
notice placed of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of Eagle
County, and which may be collected by foreclosure on an owner's
condominium unit by the association in like manner as a mortgage or deed
of trust on real property. The condominium association's failure to enforce
the owner's personal use restriction shall give the town the right to enforce
the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If
the town enforces the restriction, the town shall receive the funds collected
as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the
enforcement of the restriction, and the town prevails in such litigation,
as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award the
townsuch party its court costs together with reasonable attorney fees
incurred.
Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity
of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or
phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town and
the inhabitants thereof.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in
this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced,
nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision
amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This
repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or
part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5th day of November, 2013 and
a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 19th day of November,
2013, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 15th day of November, 2013.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:35 p.m.)
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 61
• AIPP projects – The review of art programs and installations in the Park.
• Proposals for new uses, new building or changes to the Park – The review of any
proposed change to the Park will involve the Vail Town Council and may also
involve the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board,
AIPP and the Commission on Special Events.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 62
Chapter 8 - APPENDIX
An extensive number of documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park
planning efforts have been assembled. Due to the volume of this material, these
documents are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix. Material found in the Supplemental Appendix includes:
1. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch.
2. The Vail Plan, 1974.
3. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the Antholz
Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
4. The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report, 1985.
5. Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, this resolution designated the seven acres
around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore
Valley’s natural history.
6. Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
7. Ford Park Management Plan, 1997.
8. Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012.
9. BFAG Building Site Evaluation Matrix.
10. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, Martin/Martin, August 15, 2013.
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013, An Ordinance Amending
Section 13-7-8 of the Vail Town Code Regarding Recovery of Costs in Enforcement Actions
and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
BACKGROUND: The Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide for an
award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to enforce violations
of Section 13-7-8.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No.
16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance No. 16 Series of 2013
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
ORDINANCE NO. 16
SERIES 2013
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13-7-8 OF THE VAIL TOWN
CODE REGARDING RECOVERY OF COSTS IN ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
"Town"), is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Colorado and the Vail Town Charter;
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town have been duly
elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide
for an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to
enforce violations of Section 13-7-8.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 13-7-8.B.2 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as
follows:
2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall
subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium
association of three (3) times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily
rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when
paid shall be common elements of the condominiums. All sums assessed
against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and
unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium
association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written
notice placed of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of Eagle
County, and which may be collected by foreclosure on an owner's
condominium unit by the association in like manner as a mortgage or deed
of trust on real property. The condominium association's failure to enforce
the owner's personal use restriction shall give the town the right to enforce
the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If
the town enforces the restriction, the town shall receive the funds collected
as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the
enforcement of the restriction, and the town prevails in such litigation,
as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award the
townsuch party its court costs together with reasonable attorney fees
incurred.
Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity
of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or
phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town and
the inhabitants thereof.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in
this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced,
nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision
amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This
repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or
part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5th day of November, 2013 and
a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 19th day of November,
2013, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 15th day of November, 2013.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:35 p.m.)
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 42
passive use and the quiet enjoyment of the Park. The sub-area also provides buffers
between Park uses, a transition to the Gore Creek corridor and creates an important
sense of openness within the Lower Bench.
This sub-area should continue to be managed to provide the uses and park features
listed above. There are no major changes contemplated to the three distinct, yet related
uses that occur in this sub-area. These three uses are:
Children’s Playground
The playground is an immensely popular area of the Park. This use should continue.
While refinements and/or upgrading of play structures and facilities within the
playground may be made in the future, the basic size or “footprint” of the playground
should remain unchanged. The restrooms at the playground provide facilities for the
entire Lower Bench and there is a need to upgrade these facilities in the near future in
order to meet the demands of park users. No other buildings are contemplated in the
playground area.
Open Turf Area
Aside from natural open space areas along Gore Creek, the open turf area is the only
area of the Park that is not programmed with organized uses and activities. It is
important that this area remains open and available for informal use by patrons of the
Park in the future. The area provides space for picnics, rest, informal games and other
passive recreation use. The open turf area also provides an important buffer, or
transition from the more actively developed areas of the Park and the Gore Creek
Corridor. Given this areas adjacency to Betty Ford Way, it is critical to limit vehicles in
this area of the Park in order to prevent conflicts between park users and vehicles.
, The open turf area should not be reduced in size and no buildings or structures should
be permitted in this area. If Betty Ford Way is improved, all streetscape improvements
(lighting, landscaping, seating, etc.) should be located on the south side of the walkway
so as to not reduce the size of the open turf area. In the past the southern end of the
open turf area has been used for events (weddings, parties, etc.) that have involved the
placement of temporary tents and other features within the open turf area. While these
events may continue, the number and extent of such events should be limited and
events that would monopolize the open turf area and prevent its use by other users of
the Park should not be permitted. Any events in the open turf area should be managed
in accordance with Park procedures, specifically to minimize the time temporary
facilities are in place, minimize the number and extent of vehicles necessary to service
the event, etc.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 43
Creekside Area
The Creekside area is a narrow strip of land south of Betty Ford Way and north of Gore
Creek. A few small structures (i.e. the “art shack, an open air picnic shelter) are located
in this area. Arts in Public Places (AIPP) may pursue remodeling or enhancing the art
shack at some point in the future. AIPP has placed permanent art installations in this
area and also runs summer art programs in this part of the Park. Art programs may
include activities such as interactive events, educational and participatory activities, and
temporary art installations. The passive use and the limited number of permanent
improvements within this area make it an excellent transition to the more natural,
undisturbed Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area.
The use and character of this area should remain unchanged. No new buildings should
be permitted. New art installations may be appropriate, but if pursued, they should be
done in a way that minimizes impacts to other surrounding uses and facilities and is
sensitive to the natural landscape.
Future Improvements
Improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Upgrading restroom facilities at the children’s playground.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 44
• Further enhance the buffer between the athletic fields and the children’s playground.
• Additional art installations within the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Upgrade to Betty Ford Way to include, decorative pavers, seating areas, lighting and
other streetscape improvements.
The restroom and Betty Ford Way improvements are described in greater detail in the
Illustrative Plan chapter.
Amphitheater Sub-area
An outdoor amphitheater was contemplated in original plans for Ford Park dating back
to 1974. Completed in 1987, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater has evolved into Vail’s
most prominent venue for music, dance and other cultural events. The facility is
managed by the Vail Valley Foundation and is host to approximately 60 events each
summer. The amphitheater is considered one of the community’s most important
cultural assets.
In 2013 the Foundation completed an initial phase of improvements to the amphitheater.
Improvements included re-contouring the lawn seating, new restrooms, expansion of
concession areas, and other improvements. While not a project of the Foundation, the
Town of Vail recently made major improvements (decorative pavers, widening, and
reduction to grade of walkway) to East Betty Ford Way. The Foundation has plans for a
second phase of improvements to the Amphitheater that would create a new “public
plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 45
The relationship between the Amphitheater and the neighboring athletic fields will need
to be continually monitored to ensure compatibility between these (and all) park users is
maintained. It is important to protect and enhance areas of existing vegetation in and
around the Amphitheater and where appropriate improve the physical buffers between
these uses. The implementation of noise mitigation at the north end of the amphitheater
to minimizing noise impacts from the athletic fields and Interstate 70 has also been
discussed. The Foundation has completed acoustic studies of the amphitheater and
concluded that mitigating noise impacts from the fields and Interstate 70 would have the
unintended consequence of impacting sound quality within the amphitheater. As such,
noise mitigation is not being pursued.
The Amphitheater is a significant generator of people and also generates a significant
amount of vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench. Vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench
conflicts with a number of goals and objectives for the Park. It is important for the Town
and the Vail Valley Foundation to continue to work together to minimize vehicular traffic
to the Amphitheater. No new uses or expansion of existing uses at the Amphitheater
that would generate appreciably more vehicular traffic into this area of the Park should
be permitted. Managing and limiting vehicle traffic that may result from the proposed
public plaza will be an important consideration in establishing operational standards for
this new facility.
Future Improvements
Potential improvements contemplated for the Amphitheater Sub-area include:
• Development of a “public plaza” at the entry to the Amphitheater.
• Restoration of the stream bank adjacent to the Amphitheater south of Betty Ford
Way and east of the pedestrian bridge.
• Upgrading of the fence/screening of the utility installation along Gore Creek west of
the pedestrian bridge.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design and
development of the public plaza. These parameters are described in greater detail in
the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Alpine Gardens Sub-area
What began with completion of a demonstration garden in 1987 has evolved into a +/-
1.5 acre network of perennials, rock gardens and waterfalls hosting an array of high
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 46
alpine plants. The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens (BFAG) provides an important
educational and experiential element of the Park. The gardens and the mission of the
organization are in keeping with one of the original goals for Ford Park to provide
environmental and educational facilities for the community. The Alpine Gardens have
become one of Vail’s most popular summer attractions.
The Alpine Gardens has pursued the development of an “alpine education center” in the
Park for a number of years. The 1997 Ford Park Management Plan identified the
location for this facility to be within the Soccer Field Sub-area. During the 2012 Ford
Park Management Plan Update the BFAG proposed a location adjacent to Gore Creek
for the education building and the 2012 Plan recommended this site for a new building.
The Vail Town Council subsequently reconsidered this recommendation from the 2012
Update, and while expressing support for the BFAG to develop an educational building
within the Park, initiated a new evaluation of site alternatives for the building.
The Vail Town Council’s primary criterion for selecting a site for the educational center
building was that it not be located on the Lower Bench. Seven sites were evaluated,
three of which were determined to be viable sites for the building. The BFAG Building
Site Evaluation Matrix outlines the factors considered in this evaluation. A copy is found
in the Supplemental Appendix.
For a variety of reasons the preferred location for this building was determined to be
adjacent to West Betty Ford Way just west of the Children’s Playground. Located
directly on the grade transition between the upper and lower bench, the Vail Town
Council determined that this location conforms to their site selection criteria that the
building not be located on the lower bench. The other two sites that were considered
viable alternatives are at the Soccer Field and within the Tennis Center. These sites
could still be considered if following further study it is determined that the Betty Ford
Way site is not viable.
The primary purpose of the building is to provide educational programs for the
community and accordingly the uses within the building are expected to include rooms
for interpretive displays, meeting/class rooms, a greenhouse and a limited amount of
administrative space necessary to support on-site operations of the Gardens.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 47
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Alpine Gardens Sub-area include:
• Development of an alpine gardens educational center.
• Extension of gardens along the northeast entry in order to create a buffer from
the adjoining athletic fields and improve pedestrian arrival to the Gardens.
There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design,
development and operation of the educational center. These parameters are described
in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan.
Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area
The Gore Creek Preservation Sub-area includes the entire length of the Gore Creek
Corridor that passes through the Park. The sub-area is more than 21 acres in size and
is generally defined by the park boundary on the south and the 100-year flood plain, the
50-foot Gore Creek setback and/or topographic features on the north. Gore Creek,
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 48
associated wetland and riparian habitat and stands of specimen trees are the primary
features of the creek corridor. Existing improvements within this sub-area are limited to
bridges, trails, utility improvements and the Nature Center.
The Gore Creek corridor is the Park’s most significant natural feature and provides the
Park with delightful open space for the quiet enjoyment of nature. The corridor also
provides a critical pedestrian link to Vail Village. The designation of this corridor as a
preservation zone is in direct response to a number of goals and objectives from
previous park planning efforts. The preservation of and enhancement to this area is
also suggested by Goal #1 of this Plan. It is essential that adjacent uses respect the
natural environment of this sub-area and that effective buffers be maintained between
other more intensive uses within the Park.
It is intended that existing uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Preservation
Sub-Area be maintained and in keeping with the goals of preserving this area no new
buildings are to be constructed within the sub-area. Any other new uses or
improvements should be limited to those that will complement the natural character of
the creek corridor and will minimize impacts to this sensitive environment.
Resolution No. 27 of 1987 designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an
area “to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley’s natural history.” The
resolution stipulated that “vehicular traffic is to be restricted and certain policies and
procedures for preservation and maintenance of the grounds and facilities” should be
enacted. It is acknowledged that the Nature Center will bring a certain level of activity
to this sub-area. Nature Center activity should be concentrated on the “upland” portions
of the Nature Center in order to minimize impacts to the creek corridor.
Improvements within the sub-area should be limited to low-impact improvements such
as soft surface walking paths, creek enhancements to improve fish habitat, fishing
access, re-vegetation and creek/stream bank restoration projects. In all cases such
improvements should be designed and constructed in a manner that minimizes
environmental impacts (i.e. avoid wetland habitat and wetland, maintain existing natural
vegetation, use of “best management practices”, etc.). The underlying goal of any new
trail development and/or bridge crossing should be to improve access in order to
enhance awareness of this important natural environment.
Utility improvements should not be located within this sub-area unless no other practical
alternative is available.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 49
The Gore Creek corridor between the main portion of Ford Park and Slifer Square
provides important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail
Village Parking Structure). This corridor is heavily travelled and provides access to the
Park for many park users. Enhancing the walking experience along the corridor will
ensure its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park.
Fishing access to Gore Creek, while currently not an issue (i.e. excessive use from foot
traffic resulting in damage to riparian areas and vegetation), could become an issue in
the future. A creek access point was considered at the east end of the Nature Center
(using the bus turnaround on Vail Valley Drive as an unloading area) was discussed
during the 1997 Planning effort but was rejected as being contradictory to the intended
use of the Nature Center.
An Action Step suggested for this area (refer to Chapter 4 of this Plan) is to evaluate the
benefits of establishing a conservation easement for this area or to apply the “Open
Space” designation via the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The protection
afforded by either of these steps would define more permanent limitations on the use of
this area and in doing so establish a degree of permanence in preserving this creek
corridor.
The existing condition of the Nature Center Building and the surrounding area has been
a point of discussion. Potential improvements to the Nature Center are further
discussion in Chapter 6 – Ford Park Illustrative Plan.
Future Improvements
Future improvements contemplated for this Sub-area include:
• Enhancement and restoration of vegetation along the creek corridor, creek bank
stabilization and fishing habitat enhancements.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 50
• Enhancements to the walkway between Vail Village and the Park to include
improvements such as seating, art installations, etc.
• Design and installation of park entry features at the three pedestrian portals to
the Park along the Gore Creek Corridor.
• Initiate steps to improve the physical condition of the Nature Center.
These improvements are discussed in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter.
Soccer Field Sub-area
The Soccer Field Sub-area, while often overlooked as an element of Ford Park,
provides a valuable community asset. The full-sized athletic field serves the soccer and
lacrosse communities, the sand volleyball courts are heavily used and the 65-space
parking lot is used year-around. A cul-de-sac at the east end of the sub-area allows in-
town buses to turn around when providing express service to Ford Park. These uses
should continue as they directly address the broad goals for the Park of “providing the
recreational needs of the community” (1985 Plan) and is consistent with the objective of
locating active recreation areas “away from the meadow and creek” (1985 Plan).
Separated from the rest of Ford Park by Vail Valley Drive and physically removed from
the more developed portions of the Park, the Soccer Field Sub-area does not have
compatibility or relationship issues with surrounding uses or facilities. No major
changes are contemplated to the existing recreational facilities in this sub-area.
While no major improvements are anticipated in the near future, the Soccer Field sub-
area is unique from the rest of the Park. For example, the uses and activities in this
sub-area do not impact other areas of the Park, the sub-area has direct vehicular
access that does not impact other park users, and the sub-area has no direct impact on
the Gore Creek Corridor. For these reasons this sub-area could be a suitable location
for new park uses or buildings to meet the future needs of the Park. If or when new
uses may be proposed for this sub-area, consideration should be given to applicable
elements of this Plan, how the proposed use could affect surrounding uses, private
covenants and other considerations.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 51
Future Improvements
Potential future improvements within the Soccer Field Sub-Area include:
• Expansion of the existing sand volleyball courts.
• Expansion of landscape buffers.
The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within
Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub-area. The preferred location for this
building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently
determined to not be a viable location, the Soccer Field site has been determined to be
a viable alternative. The potential location for this building is at the northwest corner of
the sub-area. Private covenant issues (with the neighboring Northwoods
Condominiums and with the Vail Village Seventh Filing) will need to be addressed prior
to constructing an education center on the soccer field site.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 52
Chapter 6 - FORD PARK ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
The Ford Park Illustrative Plan provides a general description of future improvements
contemplated for Ford Park. The Plan indicates the general location of the
improvements, a summary of the proposed improvements and parameters or criteria to
be considered in the design, development and operation of the improvement. The
design parameters and criteria are of particular importance as they establish specific
expectations for the proposed improvement. Conformance with these parameters and
criteria is a requisite to the Town approving any improvements in the Park.
The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan discusses a wide range of potential
improvements for the Park. The design and development of some improvements are in
progress. Other these improvements are only general ideas and will need further study
and design, an example being the installation of art along the Gore Creek Corridor
connection to Vail Village to enhance the walking experience. Other improvements are
not viable in the near-term but could be viable at some point in the future, examples
being structured parking under the athletic fields or a Frontage Road roundabout at the
west end of the Park.
It is not the intention of this Plan that only those improvements depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed for the Park. Improvements not depicted on the
Illustrative Plan may be proposed and will be reviewed relative to their conformance
with the goals, objectives and policies for the Park and the applicable Ford Park Sub-
areas. It should also be noted that improvements being depicted on the Illustrative Plan
does not ensure if or when they will be implemented.
Any improvement proposed for the Park is subject to approval by the Vail Town Council
and further review by the Town’s review boards prior to being implemented. This review
may involve the Planning and Environmental Commission (Conditional Use Permit,
Development Plan review) and the Design Review Board prior to being implemented.
On the following page is the Ford Park Illustrative Plan and descriptions of future
improvements that may be made to the Park.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 53
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 54
Improvement #1 – Gore Creek Corridor Restoration
There are a number of areas within the Gore Creek corridor where erosion, over-use or
other factors have disturbed or otherwise adversely impacted existing vegetation. A
restoration program should be implemented to improve vegetation along the creek
corridor. Restoration will improve the visual quality of this area and improve water
quality by preventing erosion. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary
in order to determine precisely where and to what extent restoration is needed.
Following completion of this assessment, a detailed landscape plan for the restoration
of the corridor should be prepared and implemented.
A parallel effort should be to evaluate the condition of the creek bank in order to identify
the potential need for stream bank stabilization to protect the bank from erosion.
Another opportunity to consider for Gore Creek is how pools or other features could be
created in the creek to improve the quality of fishing or potentially improve the creek for
other uses. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary in order to
determine precisely where and to what extent these improvements may be feasible.
Following completion of this assessment a detailed improvement plan for the creek
corridor could be prepared.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #1, Objective 1.3, Action Step 1.3.2.
Improvements #2 – Gore Creek Village Connector
The Gore Creek corridor between the west end of Ford Park and Slifer Square provides
important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail Village
Parking Structure). Enhancing the walking experience along this connection will
improve its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park. The
installation of seating areas, creek overlooks and public art are examples of
improvements that could be made to animate this walkway.
Any future improvements shall be outside of wetland areas, the 100-year flood plain or
other environmentally sensitive areas. An inventory of the creek corridor to identify
such areas should be completed prior to initiating any improvements.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.2.
Improvement #3 – Entry Monuments at Park’s pedestrian entries
Pedestrians arrive to Ford Park from one of seven existing entries as identified on the
Illustrative Plan. Currently there is inadequate signage or other features identifying
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 55
these locations as entry points to the Park. The goal of this improvement is to formally
identify these portals and announce them as gateways, or arrival points to Ford Park.
Landscape features, signage, bollards, monuments, archways or other design features,
or some combination thereof, could be used to identify these locations. Landscape
enhancements to areas proximate to these entries may also be appropriate. A design
process is necessary to determine design solutions for these improvements. While
specific solutions for these park entry improvements could vary between locations, all
should share a common design vocabulary. It will also be important to locate these
improvements in a way that compliments the adjacent pedestrian corridor and does not
compromise pedestrian circulation.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.3.
Improvement #4 – Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center
The education center is envisioned to include multi-use space for year-around
educational programs and other activities, a greenhouse and limited administrative
space. Below are design, development and operational parameters and/or criteria to be
considered in the detailed design of this facility.
• Building and site improvements provide adequate clearances from
existing utility lines and drainage improvements and when necessary
such lines or improvements are relocated to provide adequate
clearances.
• A building of approximately 3,500 square feet of gross floor area.
• Building designed with a low-scale appearance that does not visually
dominate the surrounding area and does not loom over West Betty
Ford Way.
• Provide appropriate horizontal separation from West Betty Ford Way
and from the children’s playground in order to not diminish the quality
of these spaces.
• Ability to construct the project in a manner that does not adversely
impact other facilities or uses in the Park.
• A viable access management plan designed to minimize to the
greatest extent feasible the number and frequency of vehicles
accessing the education center. It is acknowledged that a service
vehicle or delivery vehicle may occasionally need to drive to the center.
However, daily or frequent vehicle access by staff or patrons of the
center will not be permitted
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 56
• Acceptable emergency vehicle access to the building and identification
of any site improvements necessary to accommodate such access.
• Identify the anticipated parking demand from the building and how it
will be addressed. No parking shall be provided at the building.
• Adequate storage space to meet the operational needs of the building
and to minimize the need for vehicle trips to the building.
• Coordination with the Vail Recreation District on the need to expand
fencing at the athletic fields to protect the building from errant balls.
• Evaluate the feasibility of providing public restrooms within the center (see
Improvement #7 in Illustrative Plan – Children’s Playground Restrooms)
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.2.
The site plan and cross-section are conceptual studies for how a building could be
designed on this site. While provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, these sketches
do not represent a development or design proposal. They are merely depictions of how
the building could be designed and there is no implied approval of the concepts
depicted below.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 57
Improvement #5 – Nature Center
Over the years a number of additions and modifications have been made to the nature
center building. Many of these changes have altered the historic character of this
building. An assessment of the building should be completed in order to understand
steps that could be taken to restore the architectural integrity of this building and the
surrounding area.
A current deficiency of the Nature Center is the lack of restroom facilities. If the building
is to be renovated consideration should be given to how restrooms could be
incorporated into the building. Other improvements to the Nature Center include, re-
claiming the informal parking areas proximate to the building and taking steps to limit
vehicular access to the site. These site improvements would most efficiently be
designed in conjunction with the evaluation of the building.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.5, Action Step 2.5.1-2.4.3.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 58
Improvement #6 – Ford Amphitheater Entry Upgrade/Public Plaza
The Vail Valley Foundation has proposed plans for transforming the existing
Amphitheater entry into a re-designed and re-purposed Public Plaza. The plaza is
intended to provide a more gracious and more functional entry to the amphitheater. The
design intent and objective of this improvement is to create a multi-use outdoor space
that serves as the primary arrival for the Amphitheater as well as a pre-convene and
post-function space during scheduled events. The Public Plaza would also provide a
venue for smaller gatherings hosted by other park leaseholders and also be open for
public use when not being used for scheduled events.
Other elements of the Public Plaza include a tensile roof covering, a tribute to the Ford
Family, a small stage within the courtyard, a new donor wall, enhancements to the
concession building and ticket windows, and new entry gates to the Amphitheater.
Parameters and criteria to be considered:
• Plaza design should be done to facilitate/not encumber truck turning movements
necessary to provide loading/delivery to the Amphitheater.
• Plaza design should be sensitive to and integrated with immediately adjacent
improvements at the Alpine Gardens.
• Trees removed to accommodate the Public Plaza should be re-located within the
Park and to the extent feasible be relocated proximate to the amphitheater.
• The space should be available for use by the public when not being used for
private functions.
• The space should be available for gatherings that support other Park
stakeholders (TOV, VRD, BFAG and AIPP).
• Any structures/roof elements associated with the public plaza should harmonize
with the Amphitheater, not dominate the surrounding area, and conform to the
Town’s park design guidelines.
• Any fencing that may be required to define the courtyard space or for liquor
license or other purposes should be subtle and visually unobtrusive. Landscape
materials should be used to soften the appearance of the fence.
• A viable management plan for minimizing vehicular access to the social
courtyard (employees, service vehicles, deliveries, etc.), and for servicing
the facility in a manner that minimizes impacts on pedestrian use of Betty
Ford Way.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.1.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 59
Improvement #7 – Children’s Playground Restrooms
The playground restrooms provide facilities for the entire Lower Bench. These facilities
are under-sized and in need of upgrade and expansion to meet current demand. When
designed, the new bathroom building should be one level and be sized no larger than
necessary to meet the needs of park users. The location currently considered for the
new restrooms is west of the existing facility where play apparatus are currently located.
New play apparatus will be provided with the removal of the existing restroom building.
The building should not encroach on the adjacent open turf area.
The adjoining Alpine Gardens Sub-area identifies a site along West Betty Ford Way and
next to the playground for the development of an alpine gardens education center. The
potential to incorporate restrooms for playground users within the alpine garden
education center should be evaluated. The goal of this approach is to minimize the
number of buildings in the Park. Coordination between the Town and the Alpine
Gardens will be necessary in order to evaluate the feasibility of this idea
Improvement #8 – Betty Ford Way Traffic Control
While it is acknowledged that the Alpine Gardens, the Amphitheater and other uses in
the Lower Bench require vehicular access, an underlying goal for the Park is to
minimize vehicular traffic in this area. Betty Ford Way provides car and truck access to
this area. As a means for better regulating traffic into the Lower Bench, the installation
of gates, bollards or other improvements will be necessary at either end of Betty Ford
Way. In addition to improvements designed to limit car and truck access to the lower
bench, a system for managing large truck use on East Betty Ford Way should also be
explored. This section of Betty Ford Way is essentially a one-lane road. The purpose
of this effort is to prevent two trucks from utilizing East Betty Ford Way at the same
time.
Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #3, Objective 3.2, Action Step 3.2.3.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 60
Chapter 7- PARK MANAGEMENT
Four organizations play a role in the management and operation of Gerald R. Ford
Park. The Town of Vail is the owner of the Park and manages the community park on
the Lower Bench, the stream tract, parking lot areas and pedestrian corridors. In
addition, the Town provides park management and coordination with the Park’s three
leaseholders. The leaseholders manage and operate their respective facilities:
The Vail Recreation District lease includes the Tennis Center, athletic fields and
land that includes the Nature Center. The Tennis Center Building is on land
owned by the Town but was developed and funded by the VRD. VRD offers
environmental education and research opportunities at the Nature Center.
The Vail Valley Foundation manages and maintains the Ford Amphitheater and
immediate surrounding grounds. The amphitheater seats up to 2,500 people and
is scheduled an average of 60 days during the summer months.
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens manages the Gardens. The Gardens have developed
in four phases that began in 1987.
In its role as the overall park manager, the Town addresses a variety of management
and operational considerations. Often times this requires the involvement of different
town departments and town commissions and boards. Ultimately the Vail Town Council
is asked to review and approve management practices. The Town involves one or more
of the Park leaseholders when addressing these management topics and in some cases
the lease agreements with the Recreation District, the Vail Valley Foundation and the
Betty Ford Alpine Gardens address these topics. Below is a list of park management
topics the Town is responsible for:
• Parking – Management of parking spaces, allocation of spaces to leaseholders,
rates at times pay-parking is implemented, etc.
• Special events on parking lot, athletic fields and open turf area – coordination
with promoters of events, scheduling, pre and post-event operations, etc.
• Park Calendar – While not responsible for scheduling events within leaseholder
facilities, the Town coordinates (with leaseholders) a comprehensive events
schedule for the Park.
• Transportation – management of transit operations between the Park and the
Vail Transportation Center, including periodic implementation of a Golden Peak
bus route.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 61
• AIPP projects – The review of art programs and installations in the Park.
• Proposals for new uses, new building or changes to the Park – The review of any
proposed change to the Park will involve the Vail Town Council and may also
involve the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board,
AIPP and the Commission on Special Events.
11/19/2013
2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 62
Chapter 8 - APPENDIX
An extensive number of documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park
planning efforts have been assembled. Due to the volume of this material, these
documents are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan
Supplemental Appendix. Material found in the Supplemental Appendix includes:
1. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of
the property known as the Antholz Ranch.
2. The Vail Plan, 1974.
3. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the Antholz
Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park.
4. The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final
Report, 1985.
5. Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, this resolution designated the seven acres
around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore
Valley’s natural history.
6. Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four
tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center.
7. Ford Park Management Plan, 1997.
8. Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012.
9. BFAG Building Site Evaluation Matrix.
10. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens – Site Evaluation, Martin/Martin, August 15, 2013.
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013, An Ordinance Amending
Section 13-7-8 of the Vail Town Code Regarding Recovery of Costs in Enforcement Actions
and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
BACKGROUND: The Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide for an
award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to enforce violations
of Section 13-7-8.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No.
16, Series of 2013 on second reading.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance No. 16 Series of 2013
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
ORDINANCE NO. 16
SERIES 2013
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13-7-8 OF THE VAIL TOWN
CODE REGARDING RECOVERY OF COSTS IN ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
"Town"), is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Colorado and the Vail Town Charter;
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town have been duly
elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to amend the Vail Town Code to provide
for an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in successful court actions to
enforce violations of Section 13-7-8.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 13-7-8.B.2 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended as
follows:
2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall
subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium
association of three (3) times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily
rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when
paid shall be common elements of the condominiums. All sums assessed
against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and
unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium
association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written
notice placed of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of Eagle
County, and which may be collected by foreclosure on an owner's
condominium unit by the association in like manner as a mortgage or deed
of trust on real property. The condominium association's failure to enforce
the owner's personal use restriction shall give the town the right to enforce
the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If
the town enforces the restriction, the town shall receive the funds collected
as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the
enforcement of the restriction, and the town prevails in such litigation,
as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award the
townsuch party its court costs together with reasonable attorney fees
incurred.
Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity
of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would
11/19/2013
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2013
have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or
phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town and
the inhabitants thereof.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in
this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced,
nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision
amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This
repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or
part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5th day of November, 2013 and
a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 19th day of November,
2013, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 15th day of November, 2013.
_____________________________
Andrew P. Daly, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk
11/19/2013
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: November 19, 2013
ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:35 p.m.)
11/19/2013