HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-02-04 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
1:30 P.M., FEBRUARY 4, 2014
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied
upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item.
Public comments on work session item may be solicited by the Town
Council.
1.
ITEM/TOPIC: DRB/PEC Update (10 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
BACKGROUND: There are not any DRB Meeting results to present to Town
Council. The next regular DRB Meeting is scheduled for February 5, 2014.
2.
ITEM/TOPIC: CIRSA Council Training (60 MIN. )
PRESENTER(S): Tami Tanoue, CIRSA
3.
ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of 2014 Community Survey. (20 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Suzanne Silverthorn and Chris Cares
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council is asked to provide
direction regarding next steps.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail community survey has been used to probe
public policy issues and solicit feedback on additional topics of community interest.
It has also been used to measure the town's operational performance as
compared with previous years. The most recent surveys were conducted in 2003,
2005, 2010 and 2012. A 2014 survey has been budgeted to coincide with the new
Town Council term and to benchmark municipal service levels. The purpose of this
discussion is to receive direction from the Town Council related to the status of the
survey, including a schedule, methodology and topics.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None.
4.
ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion on Registration of Pesticide Applicators. The
purpose of this presentation is to discuss the merits of requiring registration
of some pesticide applicators operating within the Town of Vail, similar to
current ordinances requiring registration of general contractors and private
snowplow operators. (20 min)
PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting the Town Council
consider whether this is an ordinance that should be implemented, and to provide 2/4/2014
feedback to staff. If Council determines it is, staff will return with a draft ordinance
for review in March.
BACKGROUND: On January 7, 2014, town staff presented a framework for
developing a Gore Creek Water Quality Strategic Action Plan to address Gore
Creek’s listing on the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 303
(d) List of Impaired Waters. The presentation outlined the three categories of
causes for the impairment and discussed five strategies for addressing them. In
addition, a list of specific actions was provided for implementation or further
discussion. Gore Creek was placed on the 303(d) list due to low counts of aquatic
macro-invertebrates (aka bugs) based on what is termed the Multi-metric Index.
Failing bug scores are indicative of stressors affecting the long-term health of Gore
Creek. One cause of the impairment includes pollutants associated with land use
activities. These pollutants include pesticides. And one of the strategies for
addressing the causes is Regulatory Measures, which includes ordinances. See
the attached Memorandum for additional information.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends this ordinance is worth
implementing as a way to better manage and understand the possible impacts
associated with insecticide applications. The ordinance could have immediate
impacts to the health of Gore Creek if implemented prior to the 2014 spraying
season.
5.
ITEM/TOPIC: Appoint Members of Council to the Guest Enhancements
Committee: Pedestrian Ways, Bus Stops, directories (10 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
6.
ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update:
1) December Revenue Highlights;
2) December Sales Tax;
3) 2014 Parking Equipment Replacement Memorandum; (5 min. )
7.
ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports (15
min.)
8.
ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(e)
- to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine
positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: update on
pending litigation. (10 min. )
PRESENTER(S): Kendra Carberry
9. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (4:00 p.m.)
NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW (ALL ARE
APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
--------------------
THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK
SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD),
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2014 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Ongoing agenda items TBD: DRB/PEC updates - Warren - WS - 15 min.;
Information Updates Attachments: WS - 15 min.; Executive Session items:
30 min.; Consent Agenda: 5 min.; Town Manager Report: 5 min. 2/4/2014
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Resolution No. 2 CDOT Simba Run Underpass IGA - ES - 2/18- Tom
Amended FHU Contract - ES - 2/18 - Tom
Lionshead Medians Design Update - 2/18 - Tom
I-70 Underpass Design Update - 60 min. - WS - 2/18 - Tom
Village Information Center Design Update 30 min. - WS - 2/18 - Greg
2015 VVF Council Update - ES - 2/18
Timeline for Council Goals Discussion - WS - 2/18
RRC Attendance Survey - WS - 30 min. - 2/18
Eagle County Open Space Coordinator Toby Sprunk 30 min - ES - 2/18
Wall Street Call-Up - WS & ES - 2/18
Commercial Ski Storage Ordinance 1st reading - ES - 3/4
Commercial Ski Storage Ordinance 2nd reading - ES - 3/18
AIPP Board Member Interviews and Appointments - WS & ES - 3/18
2nd Budget Supplemental - ES - 3/18
Clean Up Title 12 Ordinance - TBD
NEPA and Uniformed Relocation Act - 30 min. - ES - Mike Vanderhoff -
TBD
Plastic bags - TBD
Village Information Center - Greg - TBD
Fee Schedule changes - George - TBD
Neighborhood Speed Control - TBD - Greg/Dwight
Housing Strategic Plan - George - TBD
Beaver policy update - Kristen - WS - TBD
Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan Update - 60 min - ES - George -
TBD
2015 WAC construction restrictions discussion - 30 min - WS- George -
TBD
Sister City discussion - TBD
Discussion of future of RSES - TBD
Streaming PEC & DRB - TBD
2015 Expectations/Legacy Piece - TBD
2015 Town-wide fulfillment - TBD
VLMD Term limits - TBD
Marijuana policy discussion - WS - Matt - TBD
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: DRB/PEC Update
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
BACKGROUND: There are not any DRB Meeting results to present to Town Council. The
next regular DRB Meeting is scheduled for February 5, 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
January 27, 2014 PEC Meeting Results
2/4/2014
Page 1
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
January 27, 2014 at 1:00pm
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Bill Pierce Pam Hopkins
Henry Pratt Michael Kurz
Luke Cartin
Susan Bird
John Rediker
Site Visit:
None
15 minutes
1. A request for the review of a final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the combination of two lots into a single lot , located at
701 and 705 West Lionshead Circle/A portion of Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC130044)
Applicant: Lionshead Inn, LLC, represented by The Wells Partnership
Planner: Joe Batcheller
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Bird VOTE: 5-0-0
Joe Batcheller gave a presentation per the staff memorandum.
Commissioner Pierce inquired as to the application of setbacks.
Joe Batcheller explained that setbacks will be taken from the perimeter of the new larger
(combined) lot.
Commissioner Pratt inquired as to access off of the South Frontage Road.
Warren Campbell explained the approved development plan included an access point off the
South Frontage Road for fire staging, trash, and any loading and delivery. He further explained
that the design included the ability for larger vehicles to turn-around on-site.
There was no public comment.
30 minutes
2. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to a Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in gross residential floor area to facilitate
additions to existing dwelling units, located at 100 East Meadow Units 501 and 502 (Vail Village
Inn Phase 3) /Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC130046)
Applicant: Deltec Bank and Trust, represented by Eggers Architect
Planner: Jonathan Spence
ACTION: Tabled to February 10, 2014
MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5-0-0
2/4/2014
Page 2
3. A request for the review of a final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-4, Minor Subdivision, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the relocation of the platted building lots and access easement, located at
1624, 1626, 1628, 1630, and 1632 Buffehr Creek Road/ Lots 1-5, Elk Meadows Subdivision, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC130028)
Applicant: Elk Meadows Development, LLC, represented by Sharon Cohn
Planner: Joe Batcheller
ACTION: Table to February 24, 2014
MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5-0-0
4. Approval of January 13, 2014 minutes
MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Bird VOTE: 5-0-0
5. Information Update
Commissioner Bird inquired as to the location of the I-70 underpass. Was the Town Council
considering any other locations other than the location between Simba Run and Savoy Villas.
Warren Campbell explained that the Vail Town Council heard a presentation on January 21,
2014, where direction was given to move forward with the location between Simba Run and
Savoy Villas.
Commissioner Pierce confirmed this and provide additional comment as he attended the meeting
to vocalize his concerns.
6. Adjournment
MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Bird VOTE: 5-0-0
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage
Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public
hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Times and order of items are
approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Planning
and Environmental Commission will consider an item. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional
information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please
call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published January 24, 2014 in the Vail Daily.
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: CIRSA Council Training
PRESENTER(S): Tami Tanoue, CIRSA
ATTACHMENTS:
CIRSA PowerPoint
2/4/2014
800.228.7136 www.cirsa.org
Tami A. Tanoue
General Counsel/Claims Manager
The Oath of Office:
Ethics, Liability, and
Best Practices
for Elected Officials
and Board and Commission
Members
2/4/2014
Speaker Bio
Tami A. Tanoue
In-house General Counsel/Claims Manager for
CIRSA since July, 2002.
Previously in private practice with the firm of Griffiths,
Tanoue, Light, Harrington & Dawes, serving CIRSA
as its contract General Counsel for 12 years, and
serving as City or Town Attorney for several Colorado
municipalities.
Previously Staff Attorney for the Colorado Municipal
League, representing the collective interests of
Colorado municipalities.
Regular speaker on local government liability topics;
author of several publications on liability issues.
2/4/2014
Speaker Bio
Suggestions today are based on my years as a
municipal attorney and observing the ways in which
governing bodies can get into or stay out of trouble
from a liability standpoint
Suggestions are those of the author, who takes full
responsibility for them…any resemblance strictly
coincidental, etc.
Here as a training resource; in the event of any
conflict between my training tips and the advice of
your municipal attorney, the advice of your municipal
attorney prevails!
2/4/2014
Introduction
A typical oath of office:
“I solemnly swear or affirm that I will
support the Constitution and laws of the
United States of America and the State
of Colorado, [this Charter,] and the
ordinances and other laws of the Town,
and that I will faithfully perform the
duties of the office upon which I am
about to enter.”
2/4/2014
Introduction
The oath is a commitment you make to
yourself and the that you will keep faith
with:
The federal and state constitutions and
laws
Your home rule charter
The ordinances of the Town
And your commitment to faithfully
perform the duties of the office to which
you were elected (or appointed) 2/4/2014
Introduction
The oath of office is an ethical responsibility
of the highest order: it is the first and most
important promise you make
Throughout your term, the oath can:
Shine a light on best practices for elected
and appointed officials
Provide pathways for maximizing
effectiveness and minimizing liability
2/4/2014
Introduction
In this presentation, we’ll examine these
issues:
Respecting the allocations of responsibility
in Town government
Meeting practices - transparency
Conduct in quasi-judicial matters
Personal conduct towards one another,
staff, and the community
In the context of the oath, best practices, and
liability reduction
2/4/2014
Allocation of Responsibilities
There is a municipal version of “separation of
powers” concept:
Governing body: All legislative matters, significant
quasi-judicial matters
Judge: Judicial matters (e.g. ordinance violations)
Boards and commissions: Primarily advisory, with
some exceptions; some focus on quasi-judicial
matters
Manager: Administrative matters
2/4/2014
Honoring the Allocation
Is it part of your oath of office to honor the
concept of municipal “separation of powers”?
Is it a “best practice?
Is it a way to reduce liability?
2/4/2014
Honoring the Allocation
Part of your oath? Insofar as your home rule structure sets out a
specific allocation of responsibilities, yes!
In home rule municipalities (there are about 100), the
allocation of responsibilities is likely to be set out explicitly in
your home rule charter
Most charters establish a council-manager allocation of
responsibilities
Many charters contain explicit “no interference with
administration” language that specifically restricts council
involvement in administrative matters
Some charters are less than clear on allocation of
responsibility
For CIRSA members, free home rule charter review is
part of your property/casualty risk management services
2/4/2014
Honoring the Allocation
Best practice? Yes!
Honoring the allocation or separation of powers
means that:
Each functional unit can shoulder a portion of
the total responsibility of running a government
– you can’t possibly do everything yourselves
Each functional unit has a particular area of
expertise, and the selection of persons
performing those functions is calculated to find
“the best person for the job”
“Check and balance” function
2/4/2014
Honoring the Allocation
Best practice, cont’d
Most importantly, honoring the allocation of
powers frees the governing body to perform the
functions that CANNOT be delegated:
–Legislation, significant quasi-judicial matters
–Minding the “big picture” issues
If you’re spending your time getting into other
spheres, then you may not be “minding the
store” in the functions that no one else can do!
Who else is in charge of the big picture, other
than you?
2/4/2014
Honoring the Allocation
Reduces liability? Yes!
Public officials have protection from liability when they are
within the “scope of employment” – term used in Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act
“Scope of employment” means everyone must respect the
parameters of your job description
So to the extent your charter or state law sets out
parameters that include an allocation of responsibility, those
parameters are part of your job description; honoring those
parameters will help keep you within the “scope of
employment”
Liability coverages also hinge on your being within the scope
of your authorized duties
If you are going outside the parameters, you could be
outside the scope of your job description…and outside the
scope of your liability protections! 2/4/2014
Transparency - Meetings
Transparency is a basic expectation of the
citizens for meetings of the governing body
Citizens take great interest in the goings-on
of their community, how/when those goings-
on are discussed, and opportunities to listen
in on/participate in the discussion
“Watchdogs” often are present to ensure
transparency is maintained
A lack of transparency can cause massive
trust and credibility issues
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
Is it part of your oath to abide by the
letter and spirit of the Open Meetings
Law?
Is it a best practice?
Is it a way to reduce your personal
liability?
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
Meeting transparency: Part of the oath? Yes!
Open Meetings Law (OML) applies to all meetings
of the governing body, boards, commissions,
committees, etc.
Applies to 3 or more or a quorum, whichever is
less
Requires discussion/action on all public business
to take place only at a meeting open to the public
and of which timely notice has been given
Permits executive sessions only for limited and
specified purposes and following specified
procedures
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
How can you break faith with the OML? Let’s count
some of the ways….
You establish a “committee” of your governing
body. Its meetings aren’t posted and aren’t open
to the public.
Three or more of you hold “meetings before the
meetings” to sort things out.
You have email discussions in which all of you
discuss public business by hitting the “reply all”
button.
Other ways?
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
Let’s count some more of the ways….
You hold executive sessions for purposes that
aren’t enumerated in the OML, or your executive
sessions veer “off topic”
You all have iPads for viewing agenda materials.
You discover that using the “chat” function to talk
to each other during your meetings is fun and
makes the meeting time go a lot faster
There is a vacancy on the body. You decide to
hold an executive session to discuss those who
are seeking appointment to the position.
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
Best practice? Yes! It’s the law, citizens
expect it, and it’s the right thing to do.
Playing fast and loose with transparency is
a sure way to lose citizen trust
If you’re home rule, you may end up with
draconian meeting/executive session
requirements in your charter
Violations may become Exhibit A in
legislation to establish more stringent OML
requirements
2/4/2014
Honoring Transparency
Is it a way to reduce liability? Yes!
We tend to see the same firms over and over in
litigation against municipalities for alleged OML
violations
CIRSA has “executive session defense cost coverage”
for its member governing bodies…do you have such
coverage?
Efforts are made, through litigation, to “push the
envelope” on OML interpretations that are not
favorable to municipalities…don’t be the one to
“make bad law”!
You may suffer the embarrassment of having your
executive session discussions being made public 2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial Rules of
Engagement
Governing body activities can be pigeonholed into
two broad areas, legislative and quasi-judicial
Some boards and commissions specialize in quasi-
judicial functions
Planning Commission, Licensing Authority
Rules of engagement differ depending upon where a
particular matter is pigeonholed
If quasi-judicial, certain rules of engagement are
CONSTITUTIONAL requirements, and not
following those rules is a CONSTITUTIONAL
violation for which a remedy exists under 42 USC
Section 1983
2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial Rules of
Engagement
Legislation:
Reflects public policy relating to matters of a permanent or general character
Not normally restricted to particular individual or entity
Affects the legal rights of specific individuals only in the abstract
Prospective in nature
Not subject to appeal under C.R.C.P. Rule 106(a)(4)
Think: “State Legislator -- State Capitol”!
2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial Rules of
Engagement
A quasi-judicial decision:
Determines rights, duties or obligations of a
specific individual or entity
Based on facts developed at a hearing to resolve
the particular interests in question
Applies presently existing legal standards (like
ordinances) to the facts
Usually subject to appeal under C.R.C.P.
106(a)(4)
Think: “Judge -- Courtroom”!
2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial Rules of
Engagement
Allowing “anything goes” legislative rules of
engagement to apply in a quasi-judicial matter is a
sure way to end up with a civil rights claim, if a party
is dissatisfied with the outcome
In quasi-judicial matters, you must follow the
procedural due process formula required by the
constitution:
Provide notice and a fair hearing before an
unbiased, neutral set of decision-makers
Connect up the applicable law to the evidence that
is entered into the record of the hearing (via
witnesses, documents, etc.) to arrive at the correct
and legally defensible decision 2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
A local elected or appointed body member doesn’t wear a
robe, is easily recognized on the street, and is expected by
citizens and others to be “accessible” at all times, but . . .
A judge reviewing your quasi-judicial decision in an appeal
proceeding will judge your conduct against the way he/she
would behave as a judge in his own courtroom – so keep
the “judge – courtroom” scenario in mind when deciding on
your own conduct in quasi-judicial matters
So the quasi-judicial rules of engagement call for you to
“think like a judge” in your personal conduct . . .
2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Would a judge seek out citizens and invite or ask them to come and testify as witnesses in a pending case before him/her?
Would a judge allow himself/herself to be “lobbied” on a pending matter at home or at the local supermarket?
Would a judge compromise the appearance (and possibly reality) of fairness by singling out one side or another to be overly friendly with?
Would a judge make a decision in a matter in which he/she had a financial interest, or in which he/she had already made his mind up?
Would a judge ignore the law and/or the facts in rendering a decision, and make his/her decision on the basis of factors that he/she knows are not relevant?
2/4/2014
Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Would a judge make a public statement that could come back to haunt him/her later on in terms of displaying a possible bias?
If you make a speech, write a column, talk on the radio, send out a newsletter, write a letter to the editor, blog, text, tweet, Facebook, etc., etc…are you saying anything that could reflect poorly on your impartiality?
Or reflect poorly on the Town?
2/4/2014
Honoring the Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Is it part of your oath?
Is it a best practice?
Is it a way to reduce your personal
liability?
2/4/2014
Honoring the Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Is it part of your oath? YES!
You committed to follow constitutional
requirements, including procedural due process
You committed to follow the applicable laws in
arriving at your decisions
Sometimes this makes for necessarily awkward
interactions with the public, and restrictions on
voters’ or the business community’s access to you
Sometimes this means that “popular will” does not
play an appropriate role in your decision-making
2/4/2014
Honoring the Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Is it part of “best practices”? Yes!
Procedural fairness in rendering quasi-judicial decisions is a
basic expectation of the citizens, the business community,
and a judge reviewing your decision on appeal
If you follow the rules of engagement, the chances of having
your decision challenged successfully on appeal go way
down
Following the rules of engagement is the one aspect of
quasi-judicial decision-making you have full control over!
You may not have control over the evidence presented,
or the law you must apply, but you DO have control over
the procedures you follow.
2/4/2014
Honoring the Quasi-Judicial
Rules of Engagement
Is it a means of reducing liability? Yes!
Disregarding the rules of engagement means you are
handing an dissatisfied party a constitutional/civil rights claim
as well as the possibility that your decision will be overturned
on appeal
In a civil rights claim, potential liability is unlimited…and
prevailing claimants can receive an award of attorneys’ fees
as well as damages
Land use litigation is costly, lengthy, and very risky,
especially in the current financial climate
CIRSA members have access to the Land Use Liability
Hotline
2/4/2014
Personal Conduct
The way you conduct yourself in relation
to other members of the body, staff, and
the community greatly impacts your
effectiveness as an elected official
The incivility and divisiveness that
characterize partisan politics need not
be imported into nonpartisan municipal
government!
2/4/2014
Personal Conduct
With respect to one another:
Is someone maintaining the “outsider” perspective even after
becoming the ultimate “insider”?
Is someone afflicted with the Outlier Syndrome (see Spring
2012 CIRSA Coverage Line, “Governing Bodies and the
Outlier Syndrome)
Is someone not recognizing that an elected or appointed
official’s power can be exercised only through the body as
a whole? Acting as “I’ rather than “we”?
Is there an “imbalance of information” on the council/board?
Is there a sense of distrust among one another? Is there
constantly the same split vote on every issue with the same
people lining up on the same side every time?
2/4/2014
Personal Conduct
With respect to staff:
Is staff viewed as “the enemy”?
Is there frequent second-guessing of staff,
or a desire to do independent “research”
on staff recommendations?
Is staff frequently blindsided by issues that
are raised for the first time only in the
middle of a council/board meeting?
Are you letting non-direct reports contact
you directly with their personnel issues, or
delving into such issues yourself? 2/4/2014
Personal Conduct
With respect to the community:
Are “public comment” periods turning into
“public inquisition” periods or “public
argument” periods?
Is “staff bashing” or “elected official
bashing” happening at council/board
meetings?
Are you being unduly influenced by what
you believe is the prevailing community
sentiment?
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Is it part of your oath?
Is it a best practice?
Is it a way to reduce your personal
liability?
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Personal conduct guidelines: Part of your oath? What are your
thoughts?
For lawyers, courtesy towards one another and the judicial
system are ethical requirements.
Is it a stretch to say that civility and courtesy are also part
of the big picture of ethics for elected officials?
Acting as “I” rather than “we” : No individual member of the
body (except the Mayor, who may have charter-defined
responsibilities) is legally empowered to do anything on
his/her own!
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Is it part of best practices? YES!
Conduct towards one another:
“Outsider” perspective no longer fits. It can skew your perspective and
work against sound-decision-making
“Outliers” can cause great turmoil on the body. And being an outlier
means you are not going to be effective!
Disagreements are to be expected. You were not elected to think with one
mind. But the manner in which disagreements are expressed and explored
can either be constructive…or highly destructive
Balance of information: How about a pact among the members of the body,
spoken or unspoken, that to the extent possible, all members will receive
the same information at the same time?
Trust /division issues: Wouldn’t it enhance productivity if you can overcome
trust issues and divisions that seem to occur for reasons other than
principled stances on issues?
Retreat to discuss “soft” issues and reach a consensus about conduct
guidelines?
Formulation of Council/Board Rules of Conduct?
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Best practices, cont’d: With respect to staff:
Your Manager and staff are there to be a resource to you
Commit to a “no surprises” approach – advance consultation is
good, “deer in the headlights” look in the middle of the meeting
is bad!
If you are an incoming elected or appointed official and have
suspicions about staff…keep in mind that the staff was only
carrying out the prior governing body’s agenda. Don’t hold that
against the staff!
If you feel you are not getting the right information, or not enough
information, with which to make a decision…the remedy is not for
you to go seek out your own information, or to do the research for
the staff. The remedy is to ask for more or different information from
the staff.
Do not involve yourself in personnel matters below the level of your
direct reports! Every organization must have some type of chain of
command, and your involvement in such matters will disempower
supervisors and create chaos.
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Best practices, cont’d: With respect to community:
Public comment periods are just that. If the questions start flying, don’t try to
answer them on the spot. If staff is present, respond to the question by
letting the citizen know that “the staff is taking note of your question, and will
look into it and get back to you.”
Don’t argue with an inflammatory public comment. You’re the decider and
will always have the last word!
If staff-bashing starts, letting it happen is a sure way to crush morale
Redirect the focus away from people and personalities, and back
towards plans, projects, priorities, etc/
Are you always bound to vote the way you believe the prevailing public
sentiment dictates?
Municipalities are representative democracies. You were elected to use
your own mind, heart, and conscience, not to count heads and vote
accordingly!
In quasi-judicial matters, “prevailing public sentiment” is probably not
one of the applicable legal criteria!
2/4/2014
Honoring Personal Conduct
Guidelines
Is it a way to reduce liability? Yes!
CIRSA’s observation: How a council/board interacts with one
another and with staff is a great predictor of liability. A
dysfunctional council or board inevitably attracts claims.
A council or board that mistreats staff or citizens is modeling
bad behavior organization-wide. “You know what” rolls
downhill!
A council or board that creates or allows chaos in the chain
of command is asking for employment claims!
A council or board that is over-involved in administrative
matters is straying away from its best areas of immunity.
2/4/2014
Conclusion
Ethical behavior is not just about instances where a
financial or other conflict of interest may exist
In a larger sense, ethical issues are present in all of
your dealings with one another, staff, and the
community
The ethical choices you make in those dealings will
either enhance or reduce your effectiveness, and
enhance or reduce your liability
You started your term with the oath of office. Keep
faith with the oath throughout your term, and it will
keep shining the light on the path of best practices
that elevate you and keep you out of trouble!
2/4/2014
About CIRSA
Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency
Public entity self-insurance pool for property, liability, and
workers’ compensation coverages
Formed by in 1982 by 18 municipalities pursuant to CML
study committee recommendations
Not an insurance company, but an entity created by
intergovernmental agreement of our members
Total membership today stands at 245 member municipalities
and affiliated legal entities
Out of 271 incorporated municipalities in Colorado:
74% are members of our PC pool
45% are members of our WC pool
2/4/2014
About CIRSA
Member-owned, member-governed organization
No profit motive – sole motive is to serve our members
effectively and responsibly
Have returned over $30,000,000 in contributions to our
membership
CIRSA Board made up entirely of municipal officials
Seek to be continually responsive to the liability-related needs of
our membership – coverages and associated risk management
services, sample publications, training, and consultation
services, as well as specialty services such as home rule
charter review
We have the largest concentration of liability-related experience
and knowledge directly applicable to Colorado municipalities
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of 2014 Community Survey.
PRESENTER(S): Suzanne Silverthorn and Chris Cares
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council is asked to provide direction
regarding next steps.
BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail community survey has been used to probe public policy
issues and solicit feedback on additional topics of community interest. It has also been used to
measure the town's operational performance as compared with previous years. The most
recent surveys were conducted in 2003, 2005, 2010 and 2012. A 2014 survey has been
budgeted to coincide with the new Town Council term and to benchmark municipal service
levels. The purpose of this discussion is to receive direction from the Town Council related to
the status of the survey, including a schedule, methodology and topics.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Discussion of 2014 Community Survey Memorandum
2014 DRAFT Survey
2012 Survey Results
Invitation Postcard sent in 2012
2/4/2014
To: Vail Town Council
From: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Suzanne Silverthorn, Community Information
Date: February 4, 2014
Subject: Discussion of 2014 Community Survey
I. BACKGROUND
The Town of Vail community survey has been used to probe public policy issues and solicit
feedback on additional topics of community interest. It has also been used to measure the
town's operational performance as compared with previous years. The most recent surveys
were conducted in 2003, 2005, 2010 and 2012. A 2014 survey has been budgeted to coincide
with the new Town Council term and to benchmark municipal service levels. The purpose of
this work session is to receive direction from the Town Council related to the status of the
survey, including a schedule, methodology and topics. Chris Cares of RRC Associates, the
town’s research contractor, will facilitate the discussion.
II. SURVEY OBJECTIVES
In the past, the Town of Vail community survey has been used to:
• Measure how the Town is performing, by types of services and departments.
• Identify current needs and priorities with emphasis on policy questions identified by
Town Council.
• Identify future needs and goals of the community.
• Solicit open-ended comments that provide an opportunity to hear verbatim suggestions
and input.
• Provide some background on Town initiatives that might be of interest to citizens (i.e.
two-way communications on topics such as Council’s Long Term Goals).
• Maintain some consistent questions and formats over time so that results may be
tracked over time.
• Provide an opportunity for citizens to sign up to receive additional Town information
through e-services.
III. 2014 SURVEY DEVELOPMENT
Results from the 2012 community survey and a postcard invitation sample are included as an
attachment for reference. Also included is a working draft of the 2014 survey. The questions
shaded in blue are topics that have previously been forwarded by the Town Council. While
some of these questions are no longer pertinent, the Town Council may wish to retain selected
questions to measure changes in community sentiment. In addition, there may be benefit in
asking for feedback regarding the three goal areas reaffirmed by Town Council: 1) Enhance
Economic Vitality; 2) Grow a Balanced Community; and 3) Elevate the Quality of the
Experience. Questions related to departmental service levels have been carried over from
previous years and are included in the working draft.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 2
The Town Council may also want to consider development of some additional questions for
employees who work in Vail but live elsewhere. In the past, this demographic has participated
in the “open” version of the survey but there was no particular outreach to these groups. In
light of some of Town Council’s broader objectives, it might be appropriate to include a few
questions that are designed particularly for this segment. Examples might include: methods of
commuting and ratings of transit and parking, importance of events and nightlife, frequency and
use of Vail services, housing, longer-term expectations with respect to location of residence,
etc.
IV. METHODOLOGY
The proposed methodology for the 2014 survey would use two techniques: 1) an initial
postcard mailing to households, business owners and part-time residents inviting recipients to
enter a password to complete the survey online; and 2) promotion of an open invitation to
complete the survey online without a password restriction. The two formats would be used to
enhance participation, especially among subgroups of residents (such as the youth segment).
The initial postcard invitation mailing would be based on a list of Vail households to be
purchased from a third-party provider. In addition, paper copies of the survey would be
available for distribution in Town of Vail buildings as a mail-back option. These methods were
used in 2012 and resulted in 677 completed responses with a margin of error of about 4.6
percent measured for the surveys that were distributed randomly. The proposed method would
ensure comparability to past research and would represent an inclusive outreach to citizens
with several different invitations to participate. The results provide an effective tool for
understanding community sentiment.
V. FOCUS GROUPS
At the most recent Town Council goal-setting session, interest was expressed in probing ways
the Town can improve the quality/convenience of parking and transportation. Focus groups
were identified as a potential research tool. The Town has previously used focus groups in
various ways, including for refinement and testing of survey questions and topics before they
were fielded via the community survey. The proposed 2014 work program would include two
focus groups that would be used to refine this year’s survey, and would gather some additional
information on quality and convenience of transportation. Additionally, the input from the focus
groups would be used to identify topics within the survey that could receive special attention in
the statistical analysis and write-up of results. Our initial suggestion is to conduct one group
with permanent residents and a second group with seasonal residents.
We are also suggesting that if the Council wants to use focus groups as part of a broader effort
to understand some of the longer-term issues identified in the retreat, we would develop an
overall program for this work, using the first two focus groups and findings from the community
survey to inform the process. Examples of the types of topics that might be investigated could
include: Areas where Vail is vulnerable competitively or economically? How do we develop a
broader regional consensus on topics of regional concern, etc.? Focus groups could be
conducted with residents having different characteristics (workers, retirees, seasonal residents,
citizens from different parts of town and potentially down valley, etc.). We estimate that adding
these focus groups would add about 10% ($2,500 to $2,800) to the overall budget for the
community survey, depending upon the types of incentives that are required to induce
residents to participate.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 3
VI. TIMELINE
A proposed schedule for the 2014 survey project is as follows:
Feb. 4 Work Session Review of draft survey and discussion of community issues/topics
by Town Council
Week of Feb. 17 Focus groups to refine selected survey questions and gather
ideas
Week of March 10 Finalization of survey
Week of March 24 Mailing to Vail households to invite participation (includes a
sampling of second homeowners and business representatives)
April 7-14 Promotion of survey to enlist participation by all interested parties
April 7-14 Distribution of paper copies in municipal facilities for mail-back
April 28 Last day for survey participation
June Presentation of report
VII. ACTION REQUESTED OF TOWN COUNCIL
Staff is seeking direction from the Town Council on next steps related to the status of the
community survey, including schedule, topics, methodology and use of focus groups.
VIII. ATTACHMENTS
2014 Draft Survey
2012 Survey Results
Invitation Postcard sent in 2012
2/4/2014
1
2014 DRAFT #1 – FOR DISCUSSION
Note – Sections Highlighted in Blue are Council Policy Questions developed
in 2012
First, a few questions about the general state of Vail…
1. Would you say that things in the town of Vail are going in the right direction, or have they pretty seriously gotten off on
the wrong track?
[ ] Right direction
[ ] Wrong track
[ ] Don’t know
In a few words, why do you feel that way?_____________________________________________________________________
(Please attach an additional sheet of paper with your comments if needed on any survey question.)
2. Over the past two years has the sense of community within the town improved, gotten worse or stayed the same?
[ ] Improved
[ ] Gotten worse
[ ] Stayed the same
[ ] Don’t know/no opinion
Do you have any comments or suggestions on your response?_____________________________________________________
COMMUNITY ISSUES (FOR COUNCIL POLICY DISCUSSION)
3. The Vail Town Council and staff value community input to help understand your priorities. For each area listed below,
indicate the level of priority you believe is appropriate. (Use a 1 to 5 scale where 1=Not a Priority, 3=Somewhat, 5=High
Priority.)
NOT A HIGH DON’T
PRIORITY NEUTRAL PRIORITY KNOW
1. Actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded
community (a great place to live, work and play) 1 2 3 4 5 x
2. Budget and capital management 1 2 3 4 5 x
3. Economic vitality 1 2 3 4 5 x
4. Environmental sustainability (waste and energy
conservation programs, environmental education, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
5. Focus on housing for middle income workers in vital
support roles (e.g., future development of Chamonix
property in West Vail) 1 2 3 4 5 x
6. Focus on housing for service workers (e.g., redevelopment
of Timber Ridge) 1 2 3 4 5 x
7. Guest relations and customer service 1 2 3 4 5 x
8. Parking 1 2 3 4 5 x
9. Transportation needs (bus service – local and regional) 1 2 3 4 5 x
What one area is your highest priority? (Insert number from list: #_______________)
2/4/2014
2
The Vail Town Council’s Long-Term Goals and Initiatives for 2012 through 2022 focus on four primary areas:
• Improve economic vitality
• Grow a balanced community (address the current and desired demographics for the town)
• Improve the quality of the experience
• Develop future leadership
Do you have any specific comments or suggestions for the Council regarding these goals?
______________________________________________________________________________________________
EVENTS
Vail has developed a wide variety of events in all seasons that have become part of our community culture. Our events now
include concerts, festivals, athletic events and other activities.
4. In general, how would you describe the experience that events in Vail create for you and your guests?
VERY VERY DON’T
NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVE KNOW
1 2 3 4 5 x
Do you have any comments on your response concerning events?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
5. What are your three favorite events in Vail?
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
6. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of town-wide events.
Quantity of events – are there:
[ ] Too few events [ ] About the right number [ ] Too many events
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
The overall quality of events in Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Ease of access to event venues (Ford Park Fields,
Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, Vail Village,
Lionshead, Dobson Arena) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking availability during special events 1 2 3 4 5 x
Frontage Road express bus to transport event-goers
between Lionshead, Vail Village and
Ford Park in the summer 1 2 3 4 5 x
How do you typically access events in Vail?
[ ] Public transportation [ ] Walking or cycling [ ] Driving
Do you have any further comments on events in Vail?_____________________________________________________
7. What do you believe is the town-wide economic impact of events in Vail?
VERY VERY DON’T
NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVE KNOW
1 2 3 4 5 x
2/4/2014
3
FEES AND TAXES
8. Which statement below best describes your opinion about the relationship between taxes/fees and the services that are
provided by the Town of Vail?
[ ] I am satisfied with the current level of taxes and services
[ ] I am willing to pay more taxes to get more services
[ ] I feel that I pay too much for the services I receive
[ ] I am willing to accept service reductions if it means lower taxes
[ ] I have no opinion
THE ENVIRONMENT
9. Please rate the amount of emphasis that is being placed on the following in Vail. (Use a scale from 1 to 5 where 1
means “Much Too Little Emphasis” and 5 means “Far Too Much Emphasis.”)
MUCH TOO ABOUT FAR TOO DON’T
LITTLE RIGHT MUCH KNOW
Overall attention to the threat of wildfire from beetle-killed trees
through forest management such as cutting and
removing trees, and forest regeneration 1 2 3 4 5 x
Enforcement of the dead tree removal ordinance to address
the beetle infestation 1 2 3 4 5 x
Addressing energy consumption 1 2 3 4 5 x
Gore Creek water quality 1 2 3 4 5 x
10. Please indicate the level of priority you would like to see placed on the following:
NOT A HIGH DON’T
PRIORITY NEUTRAL PRIORITY KNOW
Emphasis on “zero waste” (composting/recycling, etc.)
at community events 1 2 3 4 5 x
A plastic bag initiative to ban the bags in grocery stores
(restrictions would apply at 2 grocery stores and shoppers
could bring their own bags and/or would have an option
to purchase a paper bag for 20 cents) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your responses to Questions 9 and 10?______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
TOWN SERVICES
The Community Development Department provides planning, design review, environmental programs, and building and
restaurant inspection services.
11. Have you used the services of the Community Development Department within the past 12 months?
[ ] Yes [ ] No (GO TO Q. 14)
12. (IF YES) How did you access their services? (Check all that apply)
[ ] Website
[ ] Telephone
[ ] Walk in to office
[ ] Attend a meeting
[ ] Other:______________________________________
(If satisfied or willing to pay more)
Are there specific types of services, programs or
amenities you would like to see expanded or
improved?____________________________
____________________________________
2/4/2014
4
13. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department.
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Availability of information (e.g., public records) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall service and efficiency 1 2 3 4 5 x
Timeliness of response (to telephone calls, inspections,
questions/inquiries, plan review, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Building permit review and inspections 1 2 3 4 5 x
Courtesy and attitude/helpfulness 1 2 3 4 5 x
Knowledge/ability to answer questions 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?_____________________________________________________________________
The Public Works Department provides maintenance of public areas including parks, buildings, roads and village areas.
14. Rate your satisfaction with Public Works services in the Town of Vail:
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Snow removal on roads 1 2 3 4 5 x
Road and street maintenance by the Town of Vail
(potholes, sweeping, drainage, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall park maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 x
Appearance and condition of town-owned buildings 1 2 3 4 5 x
Friendliness and courteous attitude of
Public Works employees 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of pedestrian villages 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of public restrooms 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?____________________________________________________________________
Public Safety
15. Have you utilized Vail Fire for any service, inspection or emergency within the past 12 months?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No (GO TO Q. 17)
16. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Fire Services in the town of Vail.
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Response times to basic medical emergencies and fires 1 2 3 4 5 x
Courtesy and helpfulness of firefighters and fire prevention staff 1 2 3 4 5 x
Timely plan-check and fire inspection systems
on remodeled or new construction 1 2 3 4 5 x
Fire safety, awareness and education programs provided 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?_____________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
5
17. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Services in the town of Vail.
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Overall feeling of safety and security 1 2 3 4 5 x
Appropriate presence of police on foot/vehicle patrol 1 2 3 4 5 x
Friendliness and approachability of
Vail police department employees 1 2 3 4 5 x
Overall quality of service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Crime prevention 1 2 3 4 5 x
Managing parking and traffic control issues 1 2 3 4 5 x
Visibility of police foot/vehicle patrol 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?______________________________________________________________________
Parking and Bus Service
18. When you visit Vail Village/Lionshead, what is your first choice for parking for the following purposes? (Check one
only for each, as applicable)
FOR SHOPPING FOR WORK FOR SKIING
I PREFER I PREFER I PREFER
Lionshead Parking Structure [ ] [ ] [ ]
Vail Village Parking Structure [ ] [ ] [ ]
Cascade Area [ ] [ ] [ ]
North Frontage Road in West Vail (Safeway area) [ ] [ ] [ ]
Donovan Park [ ] [ ] [ ]
Other: ______________________ [ ] [ ] [ ]
19. Why do you prefer that location to enter the mountain for skiing?
[ ] Variety of shops and restaurants
[ ] Overall experience
[ ] Ski lockers
[ ] Shorter walking distance
[ ] Gets to parts of the mountain I prefer to ski
[ ] Other: _________________________
20. Do you own a parking pass or value card this season? [ ] No (GO TO Q. 22)
[ ] Yes: [ ] Gold pass
[ ] Blue pass
[ ] Green pass
[ ] Pink pass
[ ] Value card
21. How satisfied are you with the benefits of your pass this year? NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?______________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
6
22. Please rate your satisfaction with public parking services in Vail. NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Overall parking fees/pricing structure 1 2 3 4 5 x
Booth attendant courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking structure cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking availability during winter periods 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking availability during summer periods 1 2 3 4 5 x
Parking availability during Ford Park events 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?_______________________________________________________________________
23. How many times per month do you use TOV bus service? times per month in winter________ in summer_______
Are there any specific concerns or considerations that reduce your use of bus services?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
24. Please rate your satisfaction with bus service.
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Frequency of in-town shuttle 1 2 3 4 5 x
Frequency of outlying service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Bus driver courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 x
Dependability of bus service 1 2 3 4 5 x
Cleanliness of buses 1 2 3 4 5 x
Level of crowding on buses 1 2 3 4 5 x
Late night bus service—Town of Vail 1 2 3 4 5 x
Late night bus service—ECO Regional Transit 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?________________________________________________________________
Library Services
The Vail Public Library offers access to information resources of many types to serve the needs of Vail's guests, residents,
businesses and schools.
25. Do you hold a library card in the Town of Vail?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
26. What typically brings you to the library? (Check the two most important categories)
[ ] Materials (books, magazines, audio CDs, DVDs)
[ ] Computers
[ ] Wireless access
[ ] Children’s story hours/programs
[ ] Programs for adults/families
27. How frequently do you use the library? _______ times per month
28. What do you like best about your experiences at the library?___________________________________________________
2/4/2014
7
29. Please rate your satisfaction with the following:
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
Library collection (including magazines, books,
audio and visual media) 1 2 3 4 5 x
Library Story Hour 1 2 3 4 5 x
Summer Reading Program 1 2 3 4 5 x
Databases 1 2 3 4 5 x
Friendliness/courtesy of library staff 1 2 3 4 5 x
Library news releases 1 2 3 4 5 x
Library website 1 2 3 4 5 x
Library mobile app 1 2 3 4 5 x
Any comments on your response?___________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES OF LOCAL INFORMATION
30. How do you receive information about the Town of Vail that may be of interest to you? (Check all that apply)
PLEASE LIST SPECIFIC SOURCES FOR EACH
[ ] Online
[ ] Newspaper
[ ] Radio
[ ] Television
[ ] Other
31. Do you subscribe to e-services provided by the Town of Vail?
[ ] No (GO TO Q. 33)
[ ] Yes (which ones?)
[ ] Special event info
[ ] News releases
[ ] Sales tax info
[ ] Library updates
[ ] Art in Public Places
[ ] Community Development Department updates
[ ] Meeting agendas
[ ] Twitter
[ ] Other__________________________________________
32. How satisfied are you with the e-services provided by the Town of Vail?
NOT AT ALL VERY DON’T
SATISFIED SATISFIED KNOW
1 2 3 4 5 x
2/4/2014
8
33. As you may be aware, a “big idea” has been periodically suggested that would attempt to address the impacts of I-70
as it passes through Vail. Recognizing that this idea has received no serious study to date and that any efforts to deal
with the impacts will take many years, and would likely involve major costs (including the potential for a property tax
increase), please provide some initial input to local decision makers.
To eliminate or reduce traffic noise from I-70, which of the following long-term solutions do you support for exploratory
consideration? (Check all that apply)
[ ] Extensive sound walls to contain Interstate noise
[ ] Covering portions of I-70 (also known as “cut and cover” solution)
[ ] A combination of sound walls and covering I-70
[ ] Relocating I-70 in a tunnel, removing it altogether from the community
[ ] Live with the condition, increasing enforcement of speed limits
[ ] No opinion
Do you have any additional comments on this topic? __________________________________________________________
Please provide the following demographic information. Remember that all responses remain strictly confidential
and are reported only in group format.
34. What is the ZIP code of your primary residence? _________________________________
35. Which of the following best describes you?
[ ] Year-round resident (11+ months/year)
[ ] Part-time resident (what is the ZIP Code of your primary residence? ___________________)
[ ] Employed in the town of Vail but don’t live there
[ ] Get mail in the town but don’t live or work there
[ ] Non-resident owner of business/commercial property
36. Which of the following best describes your employment status?
[ ] Work 8 months or more a year in the local area (Vail Valley)
[ ] Work 7 or fewer months a year in the local area (Vail Valley)
[ ] Currently employed outside of the local area (work on Front Range, out of state, etc.)
[ ] Not employed: retired
[ ] Not employed: unemployed and/or looking for work
[ ] Not employed: homemaker
[ ] Other:____________________________________________________
37. Is your residence (either year-round or seasonal) within the town of Vail?
[ ] Yes [ ] No
If yes, where?
[ ] East Vail
[ ] Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas
[ ] Booth Creek/Aspen Lane
[ ] Golf Course
[ ] Vail Village
[ ] Lionshead
[ ] Potato Patch, Sandstone
[ ] Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, the Valley
[ ] Vail Commons/Safeway area
[ ] West Vail (north of I-70)
[ ] Matterhorn, Glen Lyon
[ ] Intermountain
[ ] Not a resident of the town of Vail
[ ] Other______________________________
38. Do you own or rent your residence?
[ ] Own
[ ] Rent
[ ] Other (specify)_________________________________________
2/4/2014
9
39. How would you rate cell phone service at your residence or business in town?
POOR AVERAGE EXCELLENT DON’T KNOW
1 2 3 4 5 x
OR [ ] Service not available
[ ] Don’t have a cell phone
Any comments on your response?__________________________________________________________________________
40. How long have you lived within the town of Vail (or
owned property if a non-resident)?
[ ] Less than 1 year
[ ] 1-5 years
[ ] 6-15 years
[ ] More than 15 years
[ ] Not applicable
41. (IF RESIDENT) Do you own or operate a business
within the town of Vail? [ ] Yes [ ] No
42. Are you a registered voter in Vail? [ ] Yes [ ] No
43. Which of these categories best describes your
household status?
[ ] Single, no children
[ ] Couple, no children
[ ] Household with children living at home
[ ] Empty-nester, children no longer at home
44. Are you:
[ ] Male [ ] Female
45. In what year were you born?___________________
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR CONTINUING EVALUATION PROGRAM.
If you would like to receive updates and information from the Town of Vail, please include your email address:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
Prepared for:
Town of Vail
Prepared by:
RRC Associates, Inc.
4940 Pearl East Circle, Ste 103
Boulder, CO 80301
303/449-6558
www.rrcassoc.com
Town of Vail
Community Survey 2012
Final Report
May 2012
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates CONTENTS
Contents
AN OVERVIEW OF RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 1
A Demographic Profile of Respondents ..................................................................................................... 2
Evaluations of Topics of Policy and Broad Community Interest ................................................................. 4
An Evaluation of Town of Vail Departments and Services ......................................................................... 7
Selected Takeaways from the 2012 Community Survey ........................................................................... 8
A REPORT OF SURVEY FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... 10
Community Priorities ................................................................................................................................ 13
Environmental Issues .............................................................................................................................. 17
Events Ratings ........................................................................................................................................ 19
Taxes and Fees ....................................................................................................................................... 22
Parking Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 23
RATINGS OF SATISFACTION—DEPARTMENTS ..................................................................................... 27
Community Development ........................................................................................................................ 27
Public Works ............................................................................................................................................ 30
Bus Service ............................................................................................................................................. 32
Fire Services ............................................................................................................................................ 36
Police Services ........................................................................................................................................ 37
Library ...................................................................................................................................................... 40
SOURCES OF LOCAL INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 44
THE IMPACTS OF I-70 ............................................................................................................................... 47
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 1
AN OVERVIEW OF RESULTS
This summary provides an overview of selected survey results as well as an identification of some of the
major themes and findings that emerged from the 2012 Community Survey. The 2012 Town of Vail
Community Survey used methods virtually identical to those used in 2010, the last time a survey was
fielded by the Town of Vail. Once again, the survey resulted in extensive open-ended comments as well
as statistical measures of many topics that are of interest to the community. The comments are
excerpted in the body of the report, and are also presented verbatim in the attachments with no editing,
punctuation or spelling correction.
In 2012 the surveys were fielded using three techniques. The primary method of distribution was
through a postcard mailed to all identified postal addresses, including both boxes and home delivery, as
well as to all identified part-time residents that own property in the Town. The postcard contained an
invitation to complete the survey on-line using one of two unique passwords provided on the cards.
Also, residents that had a password but requested (by telephone) to complete the survey using a paper
form were provided a survey. Together these two response methods resulted in 412 completed
surveys. These surveys are referred to in the report as the “Random Link” surveys. They represent
responses that were randomly obtained from residents, both year-round and part-time, through the
controlled version of the survey.
Survey invitation postcards arrived in Vail mailboxes during the early part of the week of March 26,
2012. The survey was closed at midnight on April 24. In addition, an “Open Link Survey” was advertised
as available for completion on April 16. This was timed to be about two weeks after the initial postcard
mailing. Through various ads, the public was invited to complete the survey on-line but without a
password. This effort resulted in 265 responses. Responses from this group are generally similar to
those obtained from the Random Link group, i.e., the group that answered the survey invitation using a
password, but throughout much of this report the discussion focuses on the Random Link (or Invitation
Web/Paper) version of the survey responses because this group represents the “random” sample, most
comparable to the phone surveys conducted in the past. Together, the three survey methods resulted
in 677 completed; this represents a broad community-wide response and provides an effective tool for
understanding current local sentiment. The overall response was up from the 528 surveys completed in
2010.
The 2012 Community Survey is one of a number of public outreach efforts conducted by the Town. The
survey results are considered a tool for gathering input rather than a vote or a referendum on the many
civic issues that are explored. The survey results have been dissected in various ways to identify
dominant themes and messages and these findings are explored in the full report that follows. The
presentation in the final report is organized into two major areas of discussion. First, survey
demographics are presented and issues and topics of community importance are explored. Then,
ratings of Town departments and services are presented.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 2
A Demographic Profile of Respondents
The survey contained a number of demographic questions that are used to understand input from
residents. For example, much of the survey analysis presented in this report is based on overall
responses to the Random Link version of the survey. However, as noted above, in some instances
results from all respondents are presented in merged tables. Where graphs are based on the merged
results, a notation of the sample source is provided.
Where is your residence within the Town of Vail located? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
East Vail 25% 24% 25%
West Vail (north of I 70) 17% 13% 16%
Potato Patch, Sandstone 14% 15% 14%
Intermountain 8% 9% 8%
Vail Village 8% 8% 8%
Other 5% 8% 6%
Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, the Valley 6% 5% 5%
Lionshead 6% 2% 5%
Matterhorn, Glen Lyon 4% 4% 4%
Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas 2% 6% 3%
Vail Commons/Safeway area 2% 4% 3%
Golf Course 3% 2%
Booth Creek/Aspen Lane 1% 0%
Not a resident of the town of Vail 1% 0%
n= 286 124 413
Do you own or rent your residence? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Own 87% 74% 82%
Rent 12% 25% 17%
Other 1% 2% 1%
n= 346 215 560
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 3
How long have you lived within the town of Vail (or owned property if a
non resident)?
Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Less than 1 year 3% 5% 4%
1-5 years 13% 14% 13%
6-15 years 25% 22% 24%
More than 15 years 52% 35% 46%
Not applicable 8% 24% 14%
n= 354 209 563
Which of the following best describes you? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Year-round resident (11+ months/year) 53% 71% 60%
Part-time resident 37% 11% 28%
Employed in the town of Vail but don’t live there 6% 16% 10%
Get mail in the town but don’t live or work there 2% 1% 2%
Non-resident owner of business/commercial property 1%
1%
n= 354 211 565
(IF RESIDENT) Do you own or operate a business within the town of
Vail?
Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
No 84% 85% 85%
Yes 16% 15% 15%
n= 280 171 451
Are you a registered voter in Vail? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Yes 51% 50% 51%
No 49% 50% 49%
n= 338 205 543
Which of these categories best describes your household status? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Empty-nester, children no longer at home 32% 25% 30%
Couple, no children 24% 28% 26%
Household with children living at home 24% 20% 23%
Single, no children 19% 27% 22%
n= 352 209 561
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 4
Gender Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Female 48% 57% 51%
Male 52% 43% 49%
n= 347 210 558
Which of the following best describes your employment status? Random
Link
Open
Link Overall
Work 8 months or more a year in the local area (Vail Valley) 41% 62% 49%
Not employed: retired 21% 12% 18%
Currently employed outside of the local area (work on Front Range, out
of state, etc.) 22% 10% 17%
Other 6% 7% 7%
Work 7 or fewer months a year in the local area (Vail Valley) 6% 4% 5%
Not employed: homemaker 3% 2% 3%
Not employed: unemployed and/or looking for work 1% 3% 2%
n= 355 214 568
Evaluations of Topics of Policy and Broad Community Interest
The survey contained a number of questions that were designed to provide input on policy-related
topics that are of interest to the community. The following sections of this report summarize the topics
that were probed.
Community Priorities. Respondents were asked to evaluate nine priority topics based on a scale of 1 to
5 with 1 being “not a priority” and 5 a “high priority.” This question was similar but not identical to a
2010 question on town priorities. The averaged results are summarized below.
Table 1
Priorities for Town Focus
2012 2010 Budget & capital management 4.4 4.4 Economic vitality 4.3 4.4 Actions to improve Vail as a well-rounded community 4.2 4.0 Transportation needs 4.2 4.1 Guest relations and customer service 4.1 4.3 Parking 4.0 4.5 Environmental sustainability 3.8 3.5 Focus on housing for service workers 3.5 Not Asked Focus on housing for middle income workers 3.5 Not Asked
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 5
Based on a comparison of the ratings this year to 2010, a first conclusion is that all of the topics
evaluated are considered priorities by a large segment of residents, with the relatively lower rated
housing categories still receiving over 55% rating as a priority, a 4 or 5 on the five-point scale. Budget
and capital management and economic vitality were rated a priority by over 80 % of respondents.
Another main conclusion is that parking has fallen off the top; it was the dominant issue in the last study
with an average priority rating of 4.5. This year the comparable rating is 4.0. Another strong shift is that
the topic of environmental sustainability is rated a significantly higher priority than in 2010, although it
is still rated relatively lower than most of the other categories.
In a follow-up question, respondents were asked about the “one area from the list that is your highest
priority.” The most identified priorities were:
“Actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded community (a great place to live, work and
play),” identified by 33% of respondents.
Next most identified were two economic issues, “Economic vitality” (15%) and “Budget and
capital management” (13%).
It is interesting that while a majority rated the economic issues slightly higher when averaged on the
five-point scale, the idea of improving Vail’s overall appeal as a well-rounded community is resonating
with many at this time. But, economic management and fiscal considerations are also widely supported,
and if responses on these two categories are summed they are close to the figure obtained by “well-
rounded community” (28% compared to 32%).
Right Direction/Wrong Track? A question that has been tracked for over a decade asked, “Would you
say that things in the Town of Vail are going in the right direction, or have they pretty seriously gotten
off on the wrong track?” About 70% of respondents said the TOV is going in the “right direction”
compared to 18% “gotten off on the wrong track.” Those saying “right direction” are up significantly
from the findings in 2010 (58% “right direction” and 28% “wrong track”), and are identical to the level
achieved in 2005. The responses on this question were probed in various ways. Open-ended comments
were sorted by “right direction” and “on the wrong track” and these results are presented in the main
body of the report. When residents were asked to explain their responses concerning this question
several themes emerged.
Among those that expressed the town is headed in the “right direction,” multiple respondents identified
the following:
Supportive of the upgrades that have occurred in the Village and Lionshead. They mentioned
the facelifts and new buildings, and renewal of dated structures. One said, “All the construction
cranes are gone and the town feels vibrant.”
A number believe Vail has successfully weathered economic challenges and they credit Council
and staff for some of the success. Comments included, “The recession was well managed, the
‘rebirth of Vail’ is essentially complete, and overall we are positioned extremely well for the
future.” Another said, “Town officials and staff continue to operate a fiscally sensitive local
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 6
government.” A year-round resident noted, “TOV has done a very nice job with capital projects,
communications and general community leadership.”
Decision-making was also cited. “There is a lot of thought put into the decisions of the Town of
Vail.”
The use of conference center funds to “get things done” was also mentioned multiple times.
Comments differ among those that said the town is on the “wrong track:”
Concerns were expressed about the proposal to develop the Vail Municipal site with a partner.
These residents identified considerations such as the structuring of the deal, and that there
might be better locations for a new Town Hall.
Some residents cite parking as an issue, saying there is not enough parking and that this
shortage negatively impacts the experience of guests and locals alike. Further, the cost of
parking was identified by some.
A change in character was identified in various ways. Comments included “Vail has lost a sense
of community. It is now truly a resort town.”
The size, scale and character of the new buildings were criticized by some. In contrast to those
that feel the town is on the right track because of new buildings and progress, others said the
town is headed in the wrong direction and identify the results of redevelopment as the problem.
“Way overbuilding” and “We have sold our souls for cash” are examples of comments from this
smaller group who say the town is on the wrong track.
Sense of Community. About half the respondents indicated Vail’s “sense of community” stayed the
same, with 18% saying it “improved” (up from 9% in 2010). About 16% said it had “gotten worse” (down
from 26% in 2010). Like the ratings of “right direction” and “wrong track” this question suggests that
there is substantial support for the general direction of Vail at this time.
In a related question, the relationship between taxes and town services found a majority of respondents
(61%, up from 56% in 2010) indicating satisfaction with the current level of taxes and the services
provided by the town. About 15% percent said they pay too much for the services. One in ten
respondents said they would be willing to pay more taxes to get more services, while 6% said they
would be willing to accept service reductions if it means lower taxes, down from 10% in 2010. Clearly,
economic concerns have eased somewhat but there is a call for careful management and there is a
segment of residents that still believe they pay too much.
Environmental Issues. There is general satisfaction (about 50 to 55%) with the amount of emphasis
placed on environmental issues. Questions addressed the overall attention to forest health,
enforcement of the dead tree removal ordinance, addressing energy consumption and Gore Creek water
quality. More people said there’s “too little emphasis” (30-38%), than “too much” (4-16%).
In new questions, residents were asked about a plastic bag initiative, and emphasis on zero waste. A
ban on plastic bags in grocery stores received divided support with about 37% calling it a “priority” (4 or
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 7
5 on the five-point scale) but 37% rating it a “1” or “not a priority” on the Random Link version of the
survey. Results suggest that this topic is a higher priority with year-round than with part-time residents.
Events. The survey contained a series of questions concerning events in Vail. Overall, most
respondents, both year-round and part-time, believe events have a positive town-wide economic impact
(about 90% rate events a 4 or 5 on the five-point scale). Most also believe there are the right number of
events (81%), with about 8% saying there are “too many.” The overall “quality of events” was also rated
high (about 85% rating them 4 or 5). The lowest rated aspect of events, in terms of satisfaction, was
parking. About 11% said they were “not at all satisfied” (“1” on the five-point scale), but 32% rated
parking satisfaction a 4 or 5 during events.
Cell Phone Service. Another new question this year addressed cell phone service in town. While 44%
rated their service “Excellent/very good” (4-5 on the five-point scale) about 13% called it “poor” (a 1)
and 12% rated it a 2 on the five-point scale. Clearly, this is an issue for a segment of the community.
Results were probed by parts of town and the areas most likely to rate “poor” (all with over 20% calling
service a 1) included Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas; Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge and the
Valley; and Vail Village.
The Impacts of I-70. The survey contained a question concerning potential “big ideas” for addressing
the impacts of I-70 as it passes through Vail. Based on a list of alternative actions, most residents
indicated they had an opinion (92%), but ideas varied widely. The most identified action was, “Live with
the condition, increasing enforcement and speed limits” (38%). Beyond this finding, there was little
consensus, with all of the choices receiving between 20 and 30% of responses on the multiple choice
question. The diversity of opinions was further supported by the broad ranging open-ended comments
that were received on this question.
An Evaluation of Town of Vail Departments and Services
The survey contained a number of questions designed to evaluate services provided by the Town. In
most cases the wording of these questions is identical to past surveys, permitting comparisons over
time. Taken together, these ratings serve as a form of community report card. In general, the ratings of
the Town services were positive this year. They were unchanged or up slightly in a number of
categories.
As in past years, ratings were examined by year-round and part-time resident responses. Overall, the
groups are similar in their ratings, but part-time residents rate most categories slightly higher.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 8
Consistent with the themes that are described above, most categories of ratings were up or unchanged.
In rating their satisfaction with a variety of municipal services with 5 being “very satisfied,” the highest
scores were given to the following categories:
Table 2
Highest-Rated Town Services
2012 2010
Courtesy and helpfulness of firefighters and fire prevention staff 4.5 4.5
Snow removal on roads 4.5 4.3
Response times to basic medical emergencies 4.4 4.4
Cleanliness of the pedestrian villages 4.4 4.4
Friendliness/courtesy of library staff 4.4 4.4
Overall feeling of safety and security 4.4 4.3
Dependability of bus service 4.4 4.3
Frequency of town shuttle 4.4 4.2
Overall park maintenance 4.3 4.3
Bus driver courtesy 4.3 4.1
Cleanliness of buses 4.3 4.1
Friendliness and courteous of Public Works employees 4.2 4.1
Library story hour 4.1 4.3
Road and street maintenance 4.1 4.0
Cleanliness of public restrooms 4.1 4.0
Library website 4.0 4.1
Fire safety, awareness and education programs provided 3.7 4.0
Relatively lower rated services included: parking fees/pricing structure (average 2.7), parking availability
during Ford Park events (3.1), late night bus service-ECO Regional Transit (3.1), and building permit
inspections (3.1).
The ratings of town departments and services also resulted in a large number of open-ended comments.
These results are provided in the Attachments and have been provided to Town departments for further
evaluation.
Selected Takeaways from the 2012 Community Survey
Key observations from the 2012 results include the following as summarized by the RRC team.
The overall “mood” of the town is very favorable, measured across a number of questions. The
“right direction” measure is up sharply, to a level that matched the previous high recorded in
2005.
The sense of community also showed improvement and the open-ended comments provide
indications of the sources of the improvement. Residents like the fiscal responsibility they feel
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 9
the Town has shown, and they also point to special events as a positive. Events like Farmers
Market have reinforced the feeling of community and provided a place to gather and enjoy
summer weekends. Additionally, the end of construction is also applauded (note: this is as of
the survey timeframe). Again, the positive statistical results, coupled with many positives
expressed in the open-ended comments, suggest a feeling of community support and a positive
direction for Vail.
Parking continues to be a source of complaint by some but public tolerance for parking seems to
have improved based on both the statistical measures and the open-ended comments. It is
unclear how much of the difference is attributable to few peak days with Frontage Road parking
during the 2011/12 season. Parking is especially identified by those unsatisfied with the general
direction of the town.
The Council-identified priorities are generally the right priorities according to a number of
respondents. The survey listed the four primary focus areas that Council will be addressing in
the future:
Improve economic vitality
Grow a balanced community (address the current and desired demographics for the
town)
Improve the quality of the experience
Develop future leadership
Open-ended comments on these Goals and Initiatives were generally very positive and
supportive. There was particular support by some for the emphasis on “leadership.”
Additionally, the survey measured priority areas and the single dominant statement was in
support of “Actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded community.” Economic
planning, budgeting and fiscal caution are also applauded in the comments and supported in the
statistical evaluation. However, the overriding message is that all of the priorities identified by
the Council, and tested in the survey, are of relatively high importance to a majority in the
community – all received over 55% calling them a 4 or 5 on the five-point scale.
While housing has diminished as the dominant issue that it was five or so years ago, it is still an
important consideration. The survey asked about housing for both “middle income workers”
and “service workers.” Both were identified as important, receiving an identical average rating
of 3.5. However, housing for middle income workers was identified as the “most important”
priority for 8% of respondents, compared to 4% identifying service worker housing. Clearly, the
results suggest support for broadening housing efforts to include a larger segment of workers in
the Town.
The survey questions that evaluate the ratings of Town services (the overall “report card”)
represent generally positive evaluations. Further, the overall community disposition towards
services and individual departments as reflected in the comments is mostly positive and
constructive. Where changes in ratings from past surveys are evident, for the most part they
show improvement.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 10
A REPORT OF SURVEY FINDINGS
Vail’s “Sense of Direction.” Respondents were asked whether they felt the Town of Vail is going in the
“right direction” or heading on the “wrong track.” This question has been used as one of the first
questions in the community survey for a period dating back to 2003. This year the results are among the
most positive ever recorded and they show a sharp reversal from 2010. As shown below, these results
are consistently favorable across both versions of the survey, the Random Link and the Open Link
responses. Further, while year-round resident and part-time resident responses are not identical (part-
time are generally a little higher), both segments were very positive as measured by the 2012 version of
the survey.
Table 3
Would you say that things in the town of Vail are going in the right direction,
or have they pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?
A Note on How to Read These Tables: Tables like the one below are used throughout this report. They present a summary of su rvey results
from two groups of respondents: By version of the survey that was used, and by whether they are year-round, part-time, residents, etc. For
this question, results are broken out by those that feel things are going in the “right direction,” on “the wrong track” or t hey “don’t know.” The
first column summarizes responses from all participants summed together. Then, each subsequent column represents responses from a
particular segment or subgroup of participants. Each column sums to 100 percent.
Throughout much of this report the discussion focuses on the Random Link (or Invitation Web/Paper) version of the survey responses because
this group represents the “random” sample, most comparable to the phone surveys conducted in the past. The columns under “Which of the
following best describes you?” include all respondents to the survey not just the Random Link responses. However, these columns do not sum
to 677 (the overall “n”) because a number of respondents did not answer the question concerning “Which best describes you?” a question
placed near the end of the survey.
Would you say that
things in the town of
Vail are going in the
right direction, or
have they pretty
seriously gotten off
on the wrong track?
Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-
time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get
mail in
the
town
but
don't
live or
work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Right direction 70% 70% 71% 67% 74% 73% 75% 75%
Wrong track 17% 18% 15% 20% 16% 16%
Don’t know 13% 13% 14% 13% 11% 11% 25% 25%
n = 677 412 265 338 154 55 10 5
The open-ended comments provide additional input concerning the improved ratings of the direction of
Vail as measured this year. Generally, comments were quite favorable in a number of categories with
particular mention of the conclusion of construction (note: this was as of the survey timeframe). “All
the construction cranes are gone and the town feels vibrant” said one year-round resident. There were
also a number of favorable comments concerning town management with words like “progressive” and
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 11
“fiscally sensitive” used in the comments. Further, the use of conference center funds to “get things
done” was also mentioned multiple times.
While parking has diminished as the single most important issue (see later sections of this report), likely
in part the result of lower peak skier visits and less powder days that tend to exacerbate parking issues,
this problem was still noted by a number of the respondents that feel Vail is headed in the “wrong
direction.” Also mentioned were concerns with the Vail Valley Medical Center’s involvement in
redevelopment of the Vail Municipal site, as well as with “high end development.” For a complete list of
comments click here: (VIEW COMMENTS). Some of the favorable and negative comments this year are
presented below:
Why do you feel the Town of Vail is going in the right direction, or has gotten off on the wrong track?
Survey: Email / Resident Type: Year-round / Direction: Right Track
All the construction cranes are gone and the town feels vibrant.
All the improvements in Lionshead and around town really give Vail a much needed facelift and people feel good about
coming to a place they see continually improving.
Business is good, people are here, the highway is crowded.
Continued Capital Upgrades
Council is spending $$ to upgrade facilities at Ford Park and the golf course
Curbed development and well maintained
Despite the economic situation, the TOV has thrived.
Development seems to be picking up.
Essential services continue to be handled with priority to other goals. (capital improvements etc.)
Events, maintenance, etc.
Finances are in good order, good long term planning
Financially secure, taking advantage of opportunities with the medical center.
Generally cognizant of the national economy and the effects on our local economy but still aware that we need to plan
sensitively for the future.
Good job
Good leadership from Town Council
Growth has continued in the correct direction; however, there is still many improvements we need to look at as a
community.
I am very pleased with Prop 1 funds being spent to upgrade current facilities: the VNC/golf course, Ford Amphitheatre, and
the Dobson Ice arena. I am also pleased to see upgrades at the library.
I believe the town is well managed fiscally, and I feel the leaders have paid attention to the changes in the resort economy
and responded appropriately by bringing the right events.
I enjoy the activities that the TOV has helped plan. Also, I believe the upkeep of the town, such as the roads, has been
done in a satisfactory manner.
I feel very lucky to live in Vail.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 12
Why do you feel the Town of Vail is going in the right direction, or has gotten off on the wrong track?
Survey: Email / Resident Type: Year-Round / Direction: Wrong Track
Instead of focusing on making the experience better, both the Town and Vail Resorts are focusing on 'more' and 'bigger'. It
is dangerous to ski Vail mountain and buildings like Solaris and Vail Plaza are too large, out of character and offer no
charm.
Lost its charm. Big buildings, big bucks, big business, no style.
Marketing district is a waste of money
Need to keep the town SMALL. That is what is attractive about it. Upgrading buildings is one thing, but don't need the
sprawling Denver effect.
Over incentivizing projects, selling town land rather than leasing it, not paying enough attention to big environmental issues
including carrying capacity (sustainability is more than education and recycling)
Parking
Parking is just a mess, the whole Ever Vail proposal, seems like moving lot of different directions at one time.
Sale of town land without voter approval
Selling land to the hospital, land which is not easy to come by.
Spending public funds for the wrong things
The 'community' is no longer its residents, but those of us who live in Vail fulltime, regularly conscripted to remind the
managers, council and mayor of their fiduciary responsibility to protect our assets, which wrongly seem to be identified as
developers, paying guests and corporations. These are not assets, but paying dividends if we ALWAYS invest in
community.
The focus has been and is on luring the rich tourist - there is nothing for locals. We need a rec center like Avon or at
minimum Singletree Rec Center.
The present economic philosophy and end results of said philosophy are out of touch.
Sense of Community. Respondents were asked whether they feel the sense of community in the Town
of Vail has improved, gotten worse or stayed the same over the past two years. This question has been
asked over many years and, as shown below, there is a sharp improvement in the percentage saying Vail
has gotten better, up to 18% this year, from a low of 9% in 2010 and similar to the 17% obtained in
2005. The percentage of responses saying Vail has “gotten worse” was at 16%, down substantially from
the 2010 figure of 26%. This finding is consistent with the results from the “right direction” question
described above. There is considerable support for the overall efforts of the Town and the open-ended
comments further reinforce the positives. Residents are saying things like:
Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding the sense of community within the town?
Survey: Email / Resident Type: Year-Round / Direction: Worse
The response from the town around the support of Red Sandstone was wonderful in regards to the Town Council . . .
I believe that schools bring community. They bring children to a community so people leave their houses, hang out in the
street and meet their neighbors. Without children, people drive into their garage and never enter their neighborhood.
When this question is examined by year-round residents, part-time or those employed in the town,
there are some differences. Not surprisingly, part-time residents are especially likely to report they have
“no opinion” (22 percent); this indicates that a significant segment of the part-time residents are not
involved in “sense of community.”
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 13
Interestingly, the responses from the group that is included in “other,” which is made up of Town
employees, non-resident business owners and those that are employed in the town but live elsewhere,
the responses were relatively positive with an overall average of 30% of Open Link respondents saying
the sense of community had “improved” and just 12% saying it had “gotten worse.”
Table 4
Sense of Community
Over the past two years has
the sense of community
within the town improved,
gotten worse or stayed the
same?
Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-
round
resident
(11+
months/
year)
Part-
time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't
live or
work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commer-
cial
property
Improved 20% 18% 23% 19% 16% 30% 25%
Gotten worse 16% 16% 16% 19% 15% 12%
Stayed the same 50% 50% 49% 55% 46% 49% 38% 50%
Don’t know/no opinion 15% 16% 13% 7% 22% 9% 38% 50%
A follow-up question further probed the responses on “sense of community” by allowing respondents to
elaborate. Again, these responses may be obtained by clicking here: (VIEW COMMENTS).
Community Priorities
The survey included a set of questions designed to probe community issues and priorities. These were
based on topics that the Vail Council has identified as important. The wording of the question was as
follows:
“The Vail Town Council and staff value community input to understand your priorities.
For each area listed below, indicate the level of priority you believe is appropriate.
(Use a 1 to 5 scale where 1=Not a Priority and 5=High Priority).”
As summarized below, all of the topics are considered to have some priority with very few responses in
the 1 or 2 category (“not a priority”) on the five-point scale. Overall, at least 54% of respondents
considered all categories to be priorities. The four categories that were most identified based upon the
percentage of respondents giving them a 4 or 5 (“high priority”) included:
Budget and capital management – 86%
Economic vitality – 85%
Transportation needs – 80%
Actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded community (a great place to live, work and
play) – 80%
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 14
Figure 1.
Community Issues : Indicate the level of priority you believe is appropriate (Random Link)
Highest Priority. When respondents were asked to select one area from the list that would be their
“highest priority,” the topic “Actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded community (a great
place to live, work and play)” was selected twice as often as any other category (33%), compare to
“Economic vitality” (15%), selected next most often. The notion of “a well-rounded community” seems
to resonate with a large segment of citizens, both year-round and part-time residents.
The topic of housing was addressed in two separate categories:
Focus on housing for middle income workers in vital support roles (e.g. future development of
Chamonix property in West Vail) - 8%
Focus on housing for service workers (e.g. redevelopment of Timber Ridge) - 4%
The results suggest somewhat greater support for emphasis on middle income workers than service
workers at this time. Taken together, these two categories represent 12% placing housing in the upper
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 15
tier of priorities. However, these results are very different from those obtained in 2008 when housing
issues were identified in a number of ways as the highest priority of many in Vail.
Comparing the results from this question to a similar but not identical question in 2010, there are
pronounced differences. Parking was most frequently identified as the top priority at that time with
25% of respondents identifying it, compared to 11% calling it top priority this year. “Economic vitality”
received similar ratings at 15% this year, 17% in 2010. While parking remains a concern, economic
issues and the idea of Vail pursuing actions to improve Vail’s appeal as a well-rounded community have
taken on greater priority at this time.
Figure 2.
Community Issues : Indicate the level of priority you believe is appropriate (Random Link)
Percent responding “High Priority” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 16
A follow-up question identified the Vail Town Council’s Long Term Goals and Initiatives for 2012 through
2022:
Improve economic vitality
Grow a balanced community (address the current and desired demographics for the town)
Improve the quality of the experience
Develop future leadership
The survey then asked for “comments or suggestions” concerning these priorities in an open-ended
format. A few respondents expressed the opinion that “these are all important.” These and other
comments suggest that the identified Council priorities are relevant in the minds of residents. Based on
the comments, both year-round and part-time, residents seem to understand and generally support
these priorities. There were a number of very specific comments and suggestions on priorities that were
identified in this question. For a summary of comments click here: (VIEW COMMENTS).
Do you have any specific comments or suggestions for the Council regarding the
Long-term Goals and Initiatives for 2012 through 2022?
Survey: Email / Resident Type: Year-Round
People who retire naturally want to come here. To sustain a community there must be a way to bring people in for services
off season. The Steadman Clinic has done a good job of that which creates jobs. Other than that it is a tourist based town.
Priority should be a more balanced community
Promoting summer & summer events
Put in more parking solves 99% of the above
Reduce the noise of I-70
The more housing for the 'middle income' workers like myself is a big goal. We are trying to buy a house but even in the
current market finding something affordable is tough.
The quality of the experience for whom. . .local resident, part-time local resident, or visitor?
The Town should not engage in ownership of 'affordable housing'. That is the responsibility of the private sector, save for
the Town utilizing incentives, tax breaks, etc., to encourage the private sector to provide employee housing..
These are all great. Develop Future Leadership should be first!
Do you have any specific comments or suggestions for the Council regarding the
Long-term Goals and Initiatives for 2012 through 2022?
Survey: Open Link / Resident Type: Year-Round
The council needs to address environmental programs. For such a nice community, we are living in the stone age of
environmental programs and it is obvious to the average citizen that the town council does not value the environment.
The future of Vail falls in the summer for everyone. To build Vail is to build its summers and make it a year round sort of
multi set of resorts that profit the city as well as the resort. Bringing people to the city for events from all over. Once built, it
would promote growth through every business across Eagle County.
The Key word is BALANCED. We have enough hotels and beds in town! Let’s focus on creating a great community ----
The VVF has cut funds on free music (and quality free music) and other 'LOCAL' based events.....The town should step in
and create more free cultural events for locals- this creates a balanced demographic.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 17
Environmental Issues
The survey contained several questions that relate to Vail’s environmental policies. As summarized
below, while about half of respondents think the Town’s efforts addressing environmental issues are
“about right,” more respondents believe efforts are much too little or too little (1 and 2 on the five-point
scale) than believe the efforts are “too much” (4 or 5 on the scale).
Comparing responses in 2012 to 2010, year-round residents are significantly more likely to support
giving more attention to the threat of wildfire from beetle-killed trees and the enforcement of the dead
tree removal ordinance this year than two years ago. However, again, most respondents feel current
efforts are “about right.” For example, 14 percent of year-round residents said the threat of wildfire
gets too little attention, compared to 7% in 2010. Similarly, 14% said enforcement of tree removal
deserves more attention, compared to 8% in 2010.
Figure 3.
Rate the amount of emphasis that is being placed on the following environmental concerns
(All Respondents)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 18
The results also provide indications that the opinions of year-round and part-time residents are similar
but not identical. In general, year-round residents are particularly likely to believe the town should
place more emphasis on dealing with the beetle kill issue. Responses are similar on Gore Creek water
quality and addressing energy consumption. The survey results permit the constituencies that place
greatest priority on these types of actions to be identified and measured.
Emphasis on zero waste and a plastic bag initiative were evaluated for the first time in 2012. The survey
responses indicate that zero waste is a higher priority as measured by both the Random Link and the
Open Link survey respondents. For example, on the Random Link, 60% of all respondents rated zero
waste a “high priority” (4 or 5 on the five-point scale). This compares to 44% rating the plastic bag
initiative as “high priority.” It is notable that there were about 37% of total Random Link respondents
that said the plastic bag initiative was “not a priority” (1 on the five-point scale). In other words, on this
issue the community is already divided with relatively few in the middle.
As summarized below, responses from both the year-round and part-time respondents were somewhat
similar on these questions although year-round residents are especially likely to consider both efforts to
be a “high priority” (5 on the five-point scale).
Figure 4.
Level of priority you would like to see placed on the following
(All Respondents)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 19
Events Ratings
The strong majority of respondents say events create a positive experience in Vail. On the question, “In
general, how would you describe the experience that events create for you and your guests?” about
85% of both permanent and part-time residents rate the experience positively, a 4 or 5 on a five-point
scale.
The survey asked a follow-up open-ended question on events and the comments were numerous.
Generally, they offered support for events but there are a number of specific suggestions that can be
taken into account as events are evaluated. As with many of the topics addressed in the survey, there
are conflicting opinions with some saying the events are out of balance and others saying they represent
“the right mix.” (VIEW COMMENTS)
Do you have any comments on your response concerning events?
Survey: Email / Resident Type:Part-Time / Response: 5-Positive
I would like to see events kept family oriented and minimal expense for participants.
I'm tired of smelling pot at EVERY event that I bring my family to. I don't have a problem with people using marijuana, but I
don't think that the police should look the other way when 1/6 to 1/4 of the attendees at an event are smoking pot AT THE
EVENT.
Keep up the efforts!
Let them continue if economically viable.
Love the summer concerts
Love them. The town and Vail Resorts do a fantastic job.
More evening concerts on the weekend at the Ford Amphitheater for people in their mid 30s+
These are KEY differentiators for Vail and personally one of the reasons I chose Vail as a place to purchase a residence.
There is so much to do and such diversity of activities.
They are fun and world class at the same time. Wonderful!
To achieve the goal is to make Vail attractive to a wide range of people.
Vail events are great, really give a reason to come up to the mountains.
Vibrant, energetic, quality.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 20
Similarly, about 80% of respondents believe the “economic impact” of town-wide events is positive (50%
“very positive” and 38% a 4 on the five-point scale). As shown, about 3% of year-round and no part-
time residents rate the economic impacts of events negatively.
Figure 5.
What do you believe is the town -wide economic impact of events in Vail?
(All Respondents)
A series of additional questions examined other aspects of events. While most respondents feel that
Vail has “about the right number of events” (81%), 12% feel there are “too few” and 8% (8% year-round
and 4% part-time) say there are too many. Clearly, there is broad support for the overall approach to
events in Vail at this time.
More specific questions considered event quality, access, parking availability and Frontage Road express
bus access during summer events. In general, residents are satisfied, particularly with “event quality”
where 83% rated their satisfaction a 4 or 5 (“very satisfied”). As shown below, there is room for
improvement in access to events, particularly parking.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 21
Figure 6.
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of town -wide events
(All Respondents)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 22
The survey also asked respondents to identify their three favorite events in Vail. Not surprisingly, the
large events dominate in the totals. Overall, the most identified events included in rank order: Bravo,
Fourth of July, Teva Games, Farmers Market and Taste of Vail. Many of the smaller events have strong
support as “top three favorites” and even if they are not as prominent as the most identified events,
they are still important to segments of the part-time and year-round residents. However, there is
support for a wide variety of different events, a strong indication of the appeal of having a number of
different events over the year.
Table 5
What is your favorite event in Vail? Responses
Bravo! Vail Valley Music Festival 15.0%
Teva Games 14.1%
Fourth of July 7.6%
Concerts at Ford Amphitheater 6.5%
Vail Farmers Market 6.5%
Taste of Vail 6.3%
Ski Season 4.0%
Vail International Dance Festival 3.6%
Street Beat Concerts 3.2%
Concert Series 2.9%
Spring Back to Vail 2.9%
Free Concert Series 2.3%
Birds of Prey World Cup Race 2.1%
Holidaze 2.1%
Oktoberfest 1.9%
Hot Summer Nights 1.5%
Vail Film Festival 1.5%
Jazz Festival 1.3%
Pro Challenge Bike Race 1.3%
Other Events Mentioned 13.5%
There were a large number of comments regarding events. While most are positive, there are some
suggestions for specific areas of improvement in events that should be noted. (VIEW COMMENTS)
Taxes and Fees
The survey asked about satisfaction with taxes and fees as they relate to services that are provided by
the Town. Most respondents (61% Random Link and 54% Open Link) are satisfied with the current level
of taxes and services. This compares to 56% on the Random Link survey in 2010. Additionally, 10% of
respondents in 2012 indicated “I am willing to pay more taxes to get more services” compared to 6% in
2010. And 6% said they are willing to accept service reductions for lower taxes, down from 10% in 2010.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 23
Taken together, these responses provide additional documentation that the overall support and
confidence in Town of Vail programs is positive at this time.
The survey asked specifically about services people would be willing to pay more to obtain. There were a
large number of suggestions but no single program or service stood out as lacking. (VIEW COMMENTS)
Comparing responses on this question between year-round residents and part-time residents, year-
round residents are about equally likely to say they pay too much (16% compared to 17% of part-time
residents). However, it is notable that the percentage of part-time residents that say they are paying
“too much” has gone down from 24% in 2010 to 17% in 2012. This is indicative of the more positive
sentiment of this segment of respondents identified in this year’s survey. The part-time residents are
particularly likely to mention the completion of construction and the overall favorable economic
direction of Vail in their comments; results suggest that these feelings have translated into fewer part-
time respondents saying they are paying too much.
Figure 7.
Which statement describes your op inion about the relationship between taxes/fees
and the services that are provided by the town ?
(All Respondents)
Parking Issues
Parking Pass/Value Card Ratings. About 24% of respondents this year indicated that they own a Parking
Pass or Value Card, down slightly from the reported 26% in 2010. Of those that have passes the most
identified is the Value Card, held by 68%, and the Blue Pass ( 20%). These results are very similar to
those measured in 2010 and 2007.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 24
Respondents were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with their Parking Pass or Value Card on a
scale of “1-Not at all Satisfied” to “5-Very Satisfied.” The mean rating this year was 3.7, up from 3.4 in
2010 and from 3.3 in 2007 and 3.0 in 2005. However, as in the past, the responses varied significantly
by type of pass owned. Results indicate the following average ratings for the different passes in rank
order of satisfaction:
Table 6
Please rate your satisfaction with your parking pass
2012 2010
Gold Pass 5.0 4.7
Blue Pass 4.3 4.1
Green Pass 3.7 3.7
Pink Pass 4.5 3.6
Value Pass 3.5 2.9
Preferred Parking Locations. The survey asked respondents where they prefer to park for shopping,
work and skiing, and why. About half of all respondents favor the Village Structure for shopping (69%),
followed by Lionshead (14%). For work most people cite “other” (52%) and it is usually private parking
that they report using. For skiing, the Village is preferred by 35%, compared to 23% favoring Lionshead
and about 3% mentioning Cascade. Together, the North Frontage Road, Donovan Park accounted for
only 3%. “Other” areas were mentioned by 37% of respondents; these usually were private spaces.
Various aspects of parking ratings were evaluated. The format of these questions was unchanged from
2010 and the results may be compared. As shown below, parking fees are the most negatively rated
aspect of parking services by year-round and part-time residents alike. Also, it should be noted that
parking during summer events was identified as a relative problem. While summer parking availability is
the most positively rated item, these ratings have been trending downward in recent surveys.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 25
Table 7
Please rate your satisfaction with parking services
Satisfaction with Public Parking Services Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-
round
resident
(11+
months/
year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Overall parking
fees/pricing
structure
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 21% 20% 22% 21% 19% 20% 14% 25%
2 26% 27% 24% 25% 26% 30% 29% 25%
3 26% 26% 27% 25% 24% 32% 43% 25%
4 17% 17% 17% 18% 22% 7% 14%
5 VERY SATISFIED 10% 10% 11% 11% 9% 11% 25%
Average 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.8
Booth attendant
courtesy
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 2% 2% 2%
2 6% 7% 6% 6% 3% 7% 14% 25%
3 23% 22% 25% 23% 21% 28% 29% 25%
4 35% 39% 27% 34% 39% 28% 57%
5 VERY SATISFIED 35% 31% 40% 35% 35% 37% 50%
Average 3.9 3.9 4 3.9 4 4 3.4 3.8
Parking
structure
cleanliness
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 4%
2 12% 12% 14% 13% 12% 7% 13%
3 27% 30% 22% 28% 23% 29% 38%
4 36% 34% 39% 33% 40% 40% 25% 75%
5 VERY SATISFIED 22% 21% 23% 22% 23% 20% 25% 25%
Average 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 4.3
Parking
availability
during winter
periods
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 12% 11% 13% 15% 8% 7%
2 19% 22% 13% 16% 24% 9% 40% 25%
3 26% 25% 29% 25% 31% 28%
4 28% 27% 29% 27% 28% 33% 60% 25%
5 VERY SATISFIED 15% 14% 16% 16% 9% 23% 50%
Average 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.2 4
Parking
availability
during summer
periods
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1% 2% 1%
2 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 10%
3 15% 17% 12% 16% 13% 12%
4 30% 30% 29% 25% 37% 34% 63% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 49% 47% 52% 52% 44% 44% 38% 50%
Average 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.5
Parking
availability
during Ford
Park events
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 10% 10% 9% 11% 6% 8% 14%
2 18% 20% 14% 15% 19% 27% 14%
3 32% 30% 36% 32% 38% 22% 50%
4 24% 24% 24% 23% 25% 24% 57%
5 VERY SATISFIED 16% 16% 17% 18% 12% 19% 14% 50%
Average 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4 4
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 26
Figure 8.
Please rate your satisfaction with public parking services in Vail (Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 27
Any comments on your satisfaction with public parking services in Vail?
Survey: Email / Resident Type: Year-Round
Build some more parking!
Charge year round
Clean and wash and paint the parking structures more frequently.
Concern: 1. High parking fees discourage skier-visits and decrease overall TOV revenue. 2. High parking fees actually
decrease the Town's revenue. Politicians: 'Don't be so selfish, Town-centered, and greedy!'
Costs too high for all day events
I refuse to pay for parking!
I usually use the structures off season and off hours. I know everyone complains about parking fees, but they should see
the fees people pay in metro areas. They should also understand that some of our high-end guests now pay for parking in
the glitzy hotels in which they stay
If Ford park parking is full, notify drivers before they reach entrance to Vail Village parking structure.
If we have more parking, we have less open space. The pricing is high - but it does drive people to use alternative transport.
If you are a Vail resident you should get a discount on parking when you exit by showing your ID because sometimes you
have to park in the structure and $25 is really steep.
To view all comments click here: (VIEW COMMENTS)
RATINGS OF SATISFACTION—DEPARTMENTS
Community Development
The Community Development Department was used by 21% of respondents, down slightly from the 23%
reported in 2010 and 26% in 2007. As summarized in the graphs below, the ratings of Community
Development are based on that segment of the community that has used the services of the
department. Ratings have shown some declines from 2010 but gains over years prior to 2010. In
general, about half the respondents rate the department a 4 or 5 (“Satisfied” or “Very Satisfied”). As in
past surveys, the building permit review process remains a relative source of weakness. In a new
question, the “Timeliness of response (to telephone calls, inspections, question/inquiries, plan review,
etc.” was asked. Results show about 49% rate service a 4 or 5 and 24% call it a 1 or 2.
Similar to past years, the part-time residents that used the services of Community Development tended
to be slightly to significantly more negative toward the services. This finding may merit some attention
in that only a small proportion of part-time residents typically use the services but this is an area of
relative negativity toward the Town. The open-ended comments provide additional insights on the
ratings. (VIEW COMMENTS)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 28
Figure 9.
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department
(Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 29
Table 8
Please rate your satisfaction with Community Development Department
Community Development Department Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Availability of
information (e g ,
public records)
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 5% 5% 5% 4% 13%
2 5% 8% 4% 4%
3 34% 36% 32% 40% 26% 17% 50%
4 29% 28% 31% 24% 35% 50% 100%
5 VERY SATISFIED 26% 23% 31% 28% 22% 33% 50%
Average 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.5 4.2 4 4
Overall service and
efficiency
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 8% 8% 8% 7% 19%
2 15% 15% 14% 15% 19%
3 20% 26% 10% 24% 7% 14%
4 30% 28% 34% 25% 37% 43% 100% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 27% 23% 34% 29% 19% 43% 50%
Average 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.5 3.2 4.3 4 4.5
Timeliness of
response (to
telephone calls,
inspections,
questions/inquiries,
plan review, etc )
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 7% 9% 5% 8% 4%
2 16% 15% 17% 18% 8% 14%
3 22% 26% 16% 21% 36% 50%
4 24% 24% 23% 21% 20% 43% 100% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 31% 26% 38% 33% 32% 43%
Average 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.5 3.7 4.1 4 3.5
Building permit
review and
inspections
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 12% 15% 5% 7% 33%
2 19% 14% 28% 24% 14%
3 21% 32% 3% 22% 19% 25%
4 23% 23% 23% 18% 24% 50% 100% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 25% 16% 40% 29% 10% 25% 50%
Average 3.3 3.1 3.6 3.4 2.6 4 4 4.5
Courtesy and
attitude/helpfulness
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 7% 10% 2% 5% 16%
2 4% 10% 4% 14%
3 26% 32% 16% 26% 28% 100% 50%
4 25% 26% 22% 22% 28% 43%
5 VERY SATISFIED 38% 31% 49% 42% 28% 43% 50%
Average 3.8 3.7 4.1 3.9 3.5 4.1 3 4
Knowledge/ ability to
answer questions
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 2% 2% 1% 8%
2 7% 5% 10% 7% 8%
3 26% 31% 17% 26% 32% 17%
4 34% 35% 33% 33% 24% 50% 100% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 31% 26% 38% 33% 28% 33% 50%
Average 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.6 4.2 4 4.5
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 30
Public Works
Ratings for Public Works remained high this year, ranging from an average of 4.5 for “snow removal”
and 4.4 for “cleanliness of the pedestrian villages,” to 4.0 for “appearance and condition of Town-owned
buildings.” At least 73% of respondents rated each Public Works service a 4 or 5 - “Very Satisfied,” up
from 71% in 2010 and 63% in 2007. The average rating for snow removal was up 0.1 point with the
percent of Random Link respondents rating snow removal very satisfactory (a 4 or 5) at 90% - up slightly
from 2010 (86%). Again this year the lowest-rated aspect of Public Works was “appearance of Town-
owned buildings;” the lowest rated category in 2007, as well. The high ratings of all aspects of public
works delivery remain notable, with little evidence of dissatisfaction in any aspect of these operations.
Figure 10.
Rate your satisfaction with Public Works services in the Town of Vail (Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 31
Table 9
Please rate your satisfaction with Public Works
Public Works Services Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Snow removal
on roads
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 0% 1% 0% 0%
2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
3 8% 9% 8% 9% 7% 7% 25%
4 31% 29% 34% 32% 26% 31% 71% 25%
5 VERY SATISFIED 59% 60% 58% 58% 65% 62% 29% 50%
Average 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.3 4.3
Road and street
maintenance by
the Town of
Vail (potholes,
sweeping,
drainage, etc )
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 2% 2% 3% 0% 2%
2 4% 4% 3% 6% 1%
3 16% 15% 16% 17% 15% 5% 13%
4 42% 43% 40% 39% 44% 55% 75% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 37% 36% 38% 36% 40% 39% 13% 50%
Average 4.1 4.1 4.1 4 4.2 4.3 4 4.5
Overall park
maintenance
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%
2 2% 1% 2% 3%
3 11% 12% 8% 12% 10% 7% 25%
4 38% 40% 35% 36% 41% 42% 71%
5 VERY SATISFIED 49% 46% 53% 49% 49% 51% 29% 75%
Average 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5
Appearance
and condition
of Town-owned
buildings
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1% 1% 0%
2 5% 4% 6% 6% 3% 2%
3 22% 22% 21% 26% 16% 18% 13%
4 41% 44% 36% 38% 45% 48% 50% 75%
5 VERY SATISFIED 31% 29% 35% 29% 35% 32% 38% 25%
Average 4 4 4 3.9 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.3
Friendliness
and courteous
attitude of
Public Works
employees
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 0% 2% 1% 1%
2 2% 2% 1% 2% 2%
3 18% 19% 16% 17% 20% 17% 20% 25%
4 32% 36% 27% 31% 37% 26% 60% 25%
5 VERY SATISFIED 47% 43% 54% 49% 40% 57% 20% 50%
Average 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.4 4 4.3
Cleanliness of
pedestrian
villages
2 2% 0% 4% 3% 2%
3 9% 10% 6% 10% 6% 7%
4 35% 37% 32% 33% 35% 38% 63% 25%
5 VERY SATISFIED 55% 52% 58% 54% 59% 53% 38% 75%
Average 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.8
Cleanliness of
public
restrooms
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1% 1% 2%
2 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 5%
3 16% 18% 12% 19% 14% 10%
4 40% 41% 39% 39% 40% 33% 63% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 40% 37% 45% 38% 42% 50% 38% 33%
Average 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.3
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 32
Bus Service
Respondents remain largely satisfied with Town of Vail bus service, with over 84% of respondents rating
dependability of bus service, frequency of in-town shuttle, driver courtesy and cleanliness of buses a 4
or 5 – “Very Satisfied.” Crowding on buses is a relative area of weakness with only 52% saying they are
“very/somewhat satisfied,” up slightly from 47% in 2010. The late night bus service of the town is rated
better than the ECO Regional Transit (55% satisfied compared to 32%), but these both remain areas of
relative weakness.
Figure 11.
Please rate your satisfaction with bus service (Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 33
As illustrated in the past, the neighborhood location of the survey respondent within Vail is closely
associated with the ratings of local buses. Shown below, there is a wide spread in average ratings by
neighborhood (that is, the distance between the highest and lowest points on the vertical axis). For
example, crowding on the buses is not identified as a problem from respondents that live in the Booth
Creek area, where the ratings of satisfaction are high; the ratings are lowest, or least satisfactory, from
Intermountain residents, and there are significant differences of opinion indicated by the wide range of
responses. In contrast, the frequency of in-town shuttles is rated high by all respondents and there is
relative agreement (a narrow spread) on this question.
Figure 12.
Please rate your satisfaction with bus service
By Neighborhood (All Respondents)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 34
Table 10
Please rate your satisfaction with bus service
Satisfaction with Bus Service Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Frequency of
in-town shuttle
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 2% 2% 0%
2 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2%
3 11% 12% 9% 12% 9% 14% 13%
4 31% 30% 32% 32% 29% 33% 38% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 55% 55% 55% 53% 60% 50% 50% 50%
Average 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.5
Frequency of
outlying service
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 2% 4% 3% 4% 4%
2 9% 10% 7% 9% 7% 8%
3 21% 23% 19% 19% 23% 32% 33%
4 31% 32% 30% 32% 30% 28% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 35% 32% 40% 37% 35% 28% 100%
Average 3.9 3.8 4 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.7 5
Bus driver
courtesy
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 2%
2 3% 3% 2% 4% 1%
3 11% 12% 8% 13% 9% 5%
4 33% 32% 34% 34% 29% 37% 50% 33%
5 VERY SATISFIED 53% 52% 54% 48% 60% 56% 50% 67%
Average 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.7
Dependability
of bus service
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 0% 0% 1% 1%
2 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2%
3 11% 12% 9% 12% 8% 12% 25%
4 29% 29% 29% 30% 29% 20% 25% 33%
5 VERY SATISFIED 57% 57% 59% 55% 60% 66% 50% 67%
Average 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.7
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 35
Table 10 (cont.)
Please rate your satisfaction with bus service
Satisfaction with Bus Service Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Cleanliness of
buses
2 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2%
3 11% 11% 12% 14% 6% 12% 13%
4 35% 38% 29% 33% 40% 33% 25% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 51% 48% 56% 50% 52% 53% 63% 50%
Average 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5
Level of
crowding on
buses
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 5% 5% 6% 6% 6%
2 12% 14% 9% 11% 17% 10%
3 29% 29% 28% 30% 29% 27% 25%
4 36% 37% 36% 36% 32% 46% 38% 100%
5 VERY SATISFIED 18% 15% 22% 18% 16% 17% 38%
Average 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.7 4.1 4
Late night bus
service - Town
of Vail
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 4% 5% 3% 5% 3%
2 11% 12% 10% 15% 6% 6%
3 28% 28% 28% 27% 29% 44%
4 28% 30% 25% 29% 27% 25% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 28% 25% 34% 24% 35% 25% 33% 100%
Average 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.8 3.7 4.3 5
Late night bus
service - ECO
Regional
Transit
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 16% 14% 19% 22% 3% 17%
2 15% 21% 7% 15% 16% 17%
3 34% 33% 35% 32% 40% 39%
4 15% 12% 19% 16% 10% 17% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 21% 21% 20% 16% 31% 11% 50% 100%
Average 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.9 3.5 2.9 4.5 5
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 36
Fire Services
About 15 percent of respondents indicated that they had used fire services within the past 12 months,
identical to 2010 and down from the 22 percent reported in 2007. As in the past, ratings of fire services
are based on the relatively small part of the community that used services. Fire services continue to be
rated relatively high compared to most other departments and services provided by the Town. Courtesy
and helpfulness and response times are rated especially favorably (about 90% 4 or 5). As shown below,
plan check times and fire safety awareness receive relatively lower ratings but overall responses are
favorable. The fire safety, awareness and education ratings are pulled down slightly by a large segment
that rates these services a 3 (38%) and not by a large number calling these services a 1 or 2. There were
no 1 ratings and 8% of responses were a 2. The open-ended comments concerning the Fire Department
are found by clicking here. (VIEW COMMENTS)
Figure 13.
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Fire Services in the Town of Vail
(Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 37
Table 11
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Fire Services in the Town of Vail
Public Safety Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-
round
resident
(11+
months/
year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commerci
al property
Response times to
basic medical
emergencies and
fires
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 3% 3%
3 7% 9% 9%
4 31% 31% 35% 31% 11% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 59% 58% 65% 56% 89% 50%
Average 4.5 4.4 4.7 4.4 4.9 4.5 .
Courtesy and
helpfulness of
firefighters and fire
prevention staff
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 2% 2%
2 1% 1% 6%
3 5% 7% 7%
4 22% 21% 25% 24% 6% 33%
5 VERY SATISFIED 70% 68% 75% 67% 88% 67% 100%
Average 4.6 4.5 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.7 5
Timely plan-check
and fire inspection
systems on
remodeled or new
construction
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 4% 7% 4% 10%
2 4% 2% 7% 4% 10%
3 15% 19% 7% 16% 10% 100%
4 28% 31% 22% 36% 10% 17%
5 VERY SATISFIED 49% 41% 63% 40% 60% 83%
Average 4.1 4 4.4 4 4 4.8 3
Fire safety,
awareness and
education programs
provided
2 5% 8% 4% 25%
3 25% 38% 27% 40%
4 31% 27% 41% 38% 10% 100%
5 VERY SATISFIED 38% 27% 59% 31% 50% 75%
Average 4 3.7 4.6 4 4.1 4.3 4
Police Services
Police service ratings were similar to 2010 and mostly up from 2007 and 2005. In the categories of
feeling of safety and security (with 85% “very/somewhat satisfied”) and quality of service (78%), the
strong majority of Vail residents are satisfied with the police services they are receiving. Ratings remain
similar in 2012 for the three new questions that were added in 2010 to explore new aspects of policing
services. As illustrated on the graph below, managing parking and traffic control issues is a source of
relative dissatisfaction with 64% satisfied, but this is up from 58% in 2010. Appropriate presence of
police on foot/vehicle patrol and crime prevention also received relatively lower marks, but this
category was also up with 72% satisfaction ratings. Open-ended comments provide some additional
insight into the police ratings. (VIEW COMMENTS)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 38
Figure 14.
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Services in the Town of Vail
(Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 39
Table 12
Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Services in the Town of Vail
Police Services Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-
round
resident
(11+
months/
year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail in
the town
but don't
live or
work there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Overall feeling
of safety and
security
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 0% 0% 1% 1%
2 2% 1% 4% 3% 0% 5%
3 12% 13% 9% 14% 9% 9% 33%
4 32% 33% 30% 31% 35% 27% 71% 33%
5 VERY SATISFIED 54% 53% 56% 51% 55% 59% 29% 33%
Average 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.3 4
Appropriate
presence of
police on
foot/vehicle
patrol
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 3% 4% 4% 2% 5%
2 5% 6% 4% 6% 4% 5%
3 20% 20% 20% 23% 16% 19% 13%
4 33% 33% 34% 32% 38% 33% 50% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 39% 39% 38% 36% 41% 38% 38% 33%
Average 4 4 4 3.9 4.1 4 4.3 4.3
Friendliness and
approachability
of Vail police
department
employees
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 2% 4% 3% 1% 5%
2 7% 7% 8% 10% 3% 7%
3 15% 16% 14% 14% 17% 17% 25% 33%
4 28% 28% 30% 27% 32% 32% 25% 33%
5 VERY SATISFIED 46% 47% 45% 46% 48% 39% 50% 33%
Average 4.1 4.1 4 4 4.2 3.9 4.3 4
Overall quality
of service
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 3% 3% 3% 1% 7%
2 3% 2% 4% 4% 1% 2%
3 16% 17% 15% 18% 18% 10%
4 36% 34% 40% 36% 33% 40% 50% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 42% 44% 39% 39% 47% 40% 50% 33%
Average 4.1 4.1 4.1 4 4.3 4 4.5 4.3
Crime
prevention
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 3% 3% 2% 4% 3%
2 6% 5% 9% 8% 3% 3%
3 20% 22% 15% 20% 22% 15% 17% 100%
4 34% 32% 38% 31% 36% 48% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 37% 38% 36% 37% 39% 33% 17%
Average 4 4 4 3.9 4.1 4.1 4 3
Managing
parking and
traffic control
issues
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 7% 6% 7% 9% 3% 5%
2 9% 9% 10% 11% 8% 7%
3 21% 21% 22% 22% 22% 17% 29%
4 34% 35% 32% 30% 41% 32% 43% 67%
5 VERY SATISFIED 29% 29% 29% 27% 27% 39% 29% 33%
Average 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.9 4 4.3
Visibility of
police
foot/vehicle
patrol
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 4% 4% 5% 5% 3% 5%
2 8% 7% 10% 9% 7% 5%
3 22% 25% 18% 22% 24% 19% 13% 50%
4 32% 31% 33% 31% 31% 36% 50% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 33% 33% 34% 32% 35% 36% 38%
Average 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.9 4.3 3.5
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 40
Library
Library ratings were generally positive and comparable to past years. About 63% of respondents report
holding a library card. Differences are evident in card-holding among year-round residents (71%) and
part-time residents (52%). While most respondents report that it is the “materials (including books,
magazines, audio CD’s and DVD’s)” that bring them to the library (90%), the technology including
computers (15%) and wireless access (10%) are also important. Children’s hour (11%) and programs for
adults/families (9%) are also rated as important by about one in 10 respondents.
The friendliness of staff is rated particularly well this year, at an all-time high of 87%. The Library
Collection, a primary reason for using the Vail Library, was rated favorably at 80%, unchanged from
2010. Databases (a new question in 2010) showed significant decline (to 68% satisfied down from 80%
in 2010), and several other areas of evaluation also deserve attention because of apparent declines in
ratings (summer reading program, the website and the story hour).
The open-ended comments provide additional insight on the library, with specific praise, criticism and
suggestions for improvements. A first question asked, “What do you like best about your experiences at
the library?” This question yielded many favorable comments. The staff can use this input to identify
the attributes and services that are most valued by constituents, both year-round and part-time. (VIEW
COMMENTS) Additionally, the survey asked about other comments. This question yielded some
specific insights, including the lack of knowledge of some aspects of the library such as the new “app.”
(VIEW COMMENTS)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 41
Figure 15.
Please rate your satisfaction with the following at the library (Random Link)
Percent responding “Very Satisfied” (4 or 5)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 42
Table 13
Please rate your satisfaction with the following at the library
Satisfaction with Library Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't live
or work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Library
collection
(including
magazines,
books, audio
and visual
media)
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 0% 1% 1% 2%
2 1% 2% 1% 2%
3 16% 18% 12% 15% 17% 17% 100%
4 39% 41% 36% 43% 32% 25% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 43% 39% 50% 41% 46% 58% 50%
Average 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.5 3
Library Story
Hour
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1%
2 2% 1% 4% 2% 11%
3 23% 26% 19% 28% 22%
4 30% 33% 25% 29% 29% 22% 33% 100%
5 VERY SATISFIED 44% 38% 52% 39% 49% 67% 67%
Average 4.1 4.1 4.3 4 4.3 4.4 4.7 4
Summer
Reading
Program
2 2% 2% 3% 3%
3 31% 31% 31% 32% 31% 33%
4 35% 37% 32% 37% 31% 33% 100%
5 VERY SATISFIED 32% 30% 35% 28% 38% 33% 100%
Average 4 3.9 4 3.9 4.1 4 4 5
Databases
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1%
2 1% 1% 1%
3 28% 30% 25% 30% 25% 15% 100%
4 36% 35% 37% 36% 37% 38% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 35% 32% 38% 32% 38% 46% 50%
Average 4 4 4.1 4 4.1 4.3 4.5 3
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 43
Table 13 (cont.)
Satisfaction with Library Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-round
resident (11+
months/year)
Part-time
resident
Employed
in the
town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't
live or
work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Friendliness/
courtesy of library
staff
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 1% 4% 3% 4%
2 3% 2% 4% 3% 1% 11%
3 9% 10% 8% 10% 11%
4 25% 27% 23% 27% 22% 19% 33% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 60% 60% 61% 56% 66% 67% 67% 50%
Average 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.7 4.5
Library news
releases
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 2% 1% 2% 2%
2 2% 3% 1% 3%
3 26% 28% 24% 27% 26% 25% 50%
4 36% 38% 34% 35% 38% 60% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 34% 31% 39% 33% 36% 40% 25% 50%
Average 4 3.9 4 3.9 4.1 4.4 4 4
Library website
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
2 1% 1% 1%
3 31% 33% 27% 34% 26% 23% 17%
4 33% 33% 33% 31% 31% 54% 50% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 35% 34% 37% 34% 41% 23% 33% 50%
Average 4 4 4 4 4.1 4 4.2 4.5
Library mobile app
1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 1% 2% 2%
2 5% 4% 7% 4% 25% 100%
3 51% 53% 48% 54% 61% 25%
4 20% 18% 25% 20% 9% 50% 50%
5 VERY SATISFIED 22% 23% 20% 20% 30% 50%
Average 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.3 4.5 2
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 44
SOURCES OF LOCAL INFORMATION
Respondents were once again asked about how they receive information about the Town. Newspapers
were highest rated with 84% citing this source. Online sources were also important (54%), followed by
television (23%) and radio (9%).
As summarized below, the differences in sources of information between year-round and part-time
residents are evident. While both groups are generally similar, year-round residents are especially likely
to cite the newspaper, while part-time residents are especially apt to identify online sources and
television. Clearly, these results have implications for Vail’s media strategies.
Table 14
How do you typically receive information about the Town of Vail that may be of interest to you?
(Random Link Respondents)
2012
Newspaper 84%
Online 54
Television 23
Other 11
Radio 9
When the information sources used are viewed by resident type, the findings are as follows:
Table 15
How do you typically receive information about the Town of Vail that may be of interest to you?
(Overall Sample – Year-Round vs. Part-Time Residents)
Year-Round Part-Time
Newspaper 87% 79%
Online 56 65
Television 20 29
Other 11 13
Radio 10 7
The data show that there are differences in use of media sources by age group. Newspaper and
television use increase with age and social media use decreases with age.
Table 16
How do you typically receive information about the Town of Vail that may be of interest to you?
(Overall Sample – By Age Group)
18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 or older
Newspaper 77% 82% 81% 84% 92%
Online 72 59 63 59 50
Television 11 18 20 25 27
Other 10 7 14 9 5
Radio 10 7 14 9 5
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 45
About one in five respondents say they subscribe to “e-services” provided by the Town. This figure is
higher among year-round residents (28%) than part-time (20%). Notably, about 250 survey respondents
indicated they wanted to be added to the Town’s email list, a side benefit of the survey process.
Satisfaction levels with the e-services are high – 82% are satisfied, 4 or 5 on the five-point scale. The
survey suggests that citizens, and especially part-time residents, are especially likely to be subscribing to
news releases and special event information (60% or more). These e-services are an especially good
way to reach the entire community, both year-round and part-time.
Another question concerning communications evaluated cell phone service in the Town. About one in
four (25%) of Random Link respondents report poor service (1 or 2 on the five-point scale). About half
are in the positive category (4 or 5) with 24% rating service a 5. The reported ratings of phone access
are generally similar between year-round and part-time residents. Virtually all respondents (99%)
indicated they have a cell phone.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 46
The ratings of cell phone service vary significantly by part of Town as shown by the graph below.
Relative problems are most evident in the three areas shown on the left side of the graph: Booth Falls
and Bald Mountain Road areas; Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, and the Valley; and Vail Village.
Figure 16.
How would you rate cell phone service at your residence or business in town?
(All Respondents)
There were a number of comments on cell phone service issues. In general, they reflect considerable
frustration among residents, both year-round and part-time alike. The service from AT&T was called out
specifically in a number of the comments and there were numerous requests to attend to this problem.
The comments may be found by clicking here. (VIEW COMMENTS)
22%
18%
27%
0%
13%11%12%13%
10%9%
0%
5%
2%
17%
26%
13%
0%
16%
11%
12%
5%9%
7%
35%
7%
7%
2.82
2.90
2.98 3.00
3.16 3.22
3.38
3.41 3.44 3.46 3.55
3.86 3.92
2
3
4
5
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Bu
f
f
e
h
r
C
r
e
e
k
,
L
i
o
n
s
r
i
d
g
e
,
t
h
e
V
a
l
l
e
y
Bo
o
t
h
F
a
l
l
s
a
n
d
B
a
l
d
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
R
o
a
d
a
r
e
a
s
Va
i
l
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
Bo
o
t
h
C
r
e
e
k
/
A
s
p
e
n
L
a
n
e
Ea
s
t
V
a
i
l
Va
i
l
C
o
m
m
o
n
s
/
S
a
f
e
w
a
y
a
r
e
a
Ot
h
e
r
Ma
t
t
e
r
h
o
r
n
,
G
l
e
n
L
y
o
n
We
s
t
V
a
i
l
(
n
o
r
t
h
o
f
I
7
0
)
Li
o
n
s
h
e
a
d
Go
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
Po
t
a
t
o
P
a
t
c
h
,
S
a
n
d
s
t
o
n
e
In
t
e
r
m
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Percent Responding "2"
Percent Responding "1"
Average
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 47
THE IMPACTS OF I-70
The survey contained a new question designed to gather some feedback on the impacts of I-70 and
some preferences in terms of alternative actions. The question included some background information,
followed by a specific set of actions. The wording was as follows:
As you may be aware, a “big idea” has been periodically suggested that would attempt to address the
impacts of I-70 as it passes through Vail. Recognizing that this idea has received no serious study to
date and that any efforts to deal with the impacts will take many years, and would likely involve major
costs (including the potential for a property tax increase), please provide some initial input to local
decision makers.
To eliminate or reduce traffic noise from I-70, which of the following long-term solutions do you
support for exploratory consideration? (Check all that apply)
Extensive sound walls to contain Interstate noise
Covering portions of I-70 (also known as “cut and cover” solution)
A combination of sound walls and covering I-70
Relocating I-70 in a tunnel, removing it altogether from the community
Live with the condition, increasing enforcement of speed limits
No opinion
The survey found that most respondents had an opinion (92%) about the choices for dealing with I-70.
Interestingly, the responses from year-round and part-time residents and on the Random Link and Open
Link versions of the survey were similar. The most identified action was “Live with the condition,
increasing enforcement of speed limits” (38%). There is little consensus on which other specific
solutions should be pursued, with all of the choices receiving support of between 20 and 30% on the
multiple choice question. The diversity of opinions on this topic suggests that for any particular action
to emerge as a priority with broad support, considerable additional study will be needed. This
conclusion is further borne out by the open-ended comments. (VIEW COMMENTS)
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Community Survey 2012
RRC Associates 48
Figure 17.
To eliminate or reduce traffic noi se from I -70, which of the following long -term solutions do you
support for exploratory consideration? (All Respondents)
Table 17
I-70 Solutions
To eliminate or reduce traffic noise
from I-70, which of the following
longer-term solutions do you support
for exploratory consideration?
Total All
Sources
Survey Version Which of the following best describes you?
Random
Link
Open
Link
Year-
round
resident
(11+
months/
year)
Part-
time
resident
Employed
in the
Town of
Vail but
don't live
there
Get mail
in the
town but
don't
live or
work
there
Non-
resident
owner of
business/
commercial
property
Live with the condition, increasing
enforcement of speed limits 37% 38% 37% 36% 40% 40% 25% 50%
A combination of sound walls and
covering I-70 29% 30% 29% 30% 32% 21% 38% 25%
Covering portions of I-70 (also known
as cut and cover solution) 28% 28% 27% 29% 25% 30% 38%
Extensive sound walls to contain
Interstate noise 23% 21% 27% 24% 27% 19%
Relocating I-70 in a tunnel, removing it
altogether from the community 23% 27% 18% 25% 25% 12% 13%
No opinion 8% 8% 10% 8% 7% 12% 13% 25%
2/4/2014
1
Community Survey 2012
SUMMARY OF RESULTS: RANDOM LINK
First, a few questions about the general state of Vail…
1. Would you say that things in the town of Vail are going in the right direction, or have they pretty seriously gotten off on
the wrong track?
2012
(n=412)
2010
(n=521)
2007
(n=397)
2005
(n=404)
70% 58% 58% 70% Right direction
18 28 30 19 Wrong track
13 14 12 10 Don’t know
In a few words, why do you feel that way?_____________________________________________________________________
(Please attach an additional sheet of paper with your comments if needed on any survey question.)
2. Over the past two years has the sense of community within the town improved, gotten worse or stayed the same?
2012
(n=411)
2010
(n=369)
2007
(n=400)
2005
(n=404)
18% 9% 14% 17% Improved
16 26 36 21 Gotten worse
50 54 45 53 Stayed the same
16 11 5 8 Don’t know/no opinion
Do you have any comments or suggestions on your response?_____________________________________________________
2/4/2014
2
COMMUNITY ISSUES
3. The Vail Town Council and staff value community input to help understand your priorities. For each area listed below,
indicate the level of priority you believe is appropriate. (Use a 1 to 5 scale where 1=Not a Priority, 3=Somewhat, 5=High
Priority.)
The Vail Town Council’s Long-Term Goals and Initiatives for 2012 through 2022 focus on four primary areas:
• Improve economic vitality
• Grow a balanced community (address the current and desired demographics for the town)
• Improve the quality of the experience
• Develop future leadership
Do you have any specific comments or suggestions for the Council regarding these goals?
______________________________________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
3
EVENTS
Vail has developed a wide variety of events in all seasons that have become part of our community culture. Our events now
include concerts, festivals, athletic events and other activities.
4. In general, how would you describe the experience that events in Vail create for you and your guests?
VERY VERY
NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVE mean n
2 2 12 27 57 4.4 379
Do you have any comments on your response concerning events?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
5. What are your three favorite events in Vail?
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
6. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of town-wide events.
Quantity of events – are there:
12% Too few events 81 About the right number 8 Too many events n=353
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED mean n
The overall quality of events in Vail 1% 3 13 46 36 4.1 355
Ease of access to event venues (Ford Park Fields,
Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, Vail Village,
Lionshead, Dobson Arena) 4 11 25 34 26 3.7 364
Parking availability during special events 12 24 33 21 11 3.0 349
Frontage Road express bus to transport event-goers
between Lionshead, Vail Village and
Ford Park in the summer 6 7 26 29 32 3.7 283
How do you typically access events in Vail?
30% Public transportation 26 Walking or cycling 44 Driving n=366
Do you have any further comments on events in Vail?_____________________________________________________
7. What do you believe is the town-wide economic impact of events in Vail?
VERY VERY
NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVE mean n
0% 2 9 38 50 4.4 352
FEES AND TAXES
8. Which statement below best describes your opinion about the relationship between taxes/fees and the services that are
provided by the Town of Vail?
61% I am satisfied with the current level of taxes and services
10 I am willing to pay more taxes to get more services
15 I feel that I pay too much for the services I receive
6 I am willing to accept service reductions if it means lower taxes
8 I have no opinion
n=371
(If satisfied or willing to pay more)
Are there specific types of services, programs or
amenities you would like to see expanded or
improved?____________________________
____________________________________
2/4/2014
4
THE ENVIRONMENT
9. Please rate the amount of emphasis that is being placed on the following in Vail. (Use a scale from 1 to 5 where 1
means “Much Too Little Emphasis” and 5 means “Far Too Much Emphasis.”)
MUCH TOO ABOUT FAR TOO
LITTLE RIGHT MUCH mean n
Overall attention to the threat of wildfire from beetle-killed trees
through forest management such as cutting and
removing trees, and forest regeneration 15% 27 54 3 1 2.5 330
Enforcement of the dead tree removal ordinance to address
the beetle infestation 17 26 51 4 1 2.4 304
Addressing energy consumption 5 25 53 8 8 2.9 300
Gore Creek water quality 11 27 55 6 1 2.6 286
10. Please indicate the level of priority you would like to see placed on the following:
NOT A HIGH
PRIORITY NEUTRAL PRIORITY mean n
Emphasis on “zero waste” (composting/recycling, etc.)
at community events 12% 10 21 29 29 3.5 357
A plastic bag initiative to ban the bags in grocery stores
(restrictions would apply at 2 grocery stores and shoppers
could bring their own bags and/or would have an option
to purchase a paper bag for 20 cents) 37 9 17 16 21 2.8 362
Any comments on your responses to Questions 9 and 10?______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
TOWN SERVICES
The Community Development Department provides planning, design review, environmental programs, and building and
restaurant inspection services.
11. Have you used the services of the Community Development Department within the past 12 months?
21% Yes 79 No (GO TO Q. 14) n=360
12. (IF YES) How did you access their services? (Check all that apply) n=76
23% Website
43 Telephone
62 Walk in to office
19 Attend a meeting
12 Other:______________________________________
2/4/2014
5
13. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department.
Any comments on your response?_____________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
6
The Public Works Department provides maintenance of public areas including parks, buildings, roads and village areas.
14. Rate your satisfaction with Public Works services in the Town of Vail:
Any comments on your response?____________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
7
Public Safety
15. Have you utilized Vail Fire for any service, inspection or emergency within the past 12 months? n=354
15% Yes
85 No (GO TO Q. 17)
16. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Fire Services in the town of Vail.
Any comments on your response?_____________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
8
17. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Services in the town of Vail.
Any comments on your response?______________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
9
Parking and Bus Service
18. When you visit Vail Village/Lionshead, what is your first choice for parking for the following purposes? (Check one only
for each, as applicable)
FOR SHOPPING FOR WORK FOR SKIING
I PREFER I PREFER I PREFER
Lionshead Parking Structure 14% 18% 23%
Vail Village Parking Structure 69 28 35
Cascade Area 1 3
North Frontage Road in West Vail (Safeway area) 4 2 2
Donovan Park 1 1
Other: ______________________ 12 52 37
n=341 258 320
19. Why do you prefer that location to enter the mountain for skiing? n=325
3% Variety of shops and restaurants
9 Overall experience
13 Ski lockers
20 Shorter walking distance
28 Gets to parts of the mountain I prefer to ski
28 Other: _________________________
20. Do you own a parking pass or value card this season? 76% No (GO TO Q. 22)
24 Yes: 4% Gold pass
20 Blue pass
4 Green pass
4 Pink pass
68 Value card
21. How satisfied are you with the benefits of your pass this year?
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED mean n=
5% 8 29 25 33 3.7 80
Any comments on your response?______________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
10
22. Please rate your satisfaction with public parking services in Vail.
Any comments on your response?_______________________________________________________________________
23. How many times per month do you use TOV bus service?
15.3 times per month in winter, n=330
7.7 times in summer, n=309
Are there any specific concerns or considerations that reduce your use of bus services?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
11
24. Please rate your satisfaction with bus service.
Any comments on your response?________________________________________________________________
Library Services
The Vail Public Library offers access to information resources of many types to serve the needs of Vail's guests, residents,
businesses and schools.
25. Do you hold a library card in the Town of Vail? n=356
63% Yes
37 No
26. What typically brings you to the library? (Check the two most important categories) n=257
90% Materials (books, magazines, audio CDs, DVDs)
15 Computers
10 Wireless access
11 Children’s story hours/programs
9 Programs for adults/families
27. How frequently do you use the library? 2.5 times per month, n=304
2/4/2014
12
28. What do you like best about your experiences at the library?___________________________________________________
29. Please rate your satisfaction with the following:
Any comments on your response?___________________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
13
SOURCES OF LOCAL INFORMATION
30. How do you receive information about the Town of Vail that may be of interest to you? (Check all that apply) n=348
54% Online
84 Newspaper
9 Radio
23 Television
11 Other
31. Do you subscribe to e-services provided by the Town of Vail? n=61
81% No (GO TO Q. 33)
19 Yes (which ones?)
62% Special event info
63 News releases
23 Sales tax info
26 Library updates
17 Art in Public Places
29 Community Development Department updates
33 Meeting agendas
10 Twitter
5 Other__________________________________________
32. How satisfied are you with the e-services provided by the Town of Vail?
NOT AT ALL VERY
SATISFIED SATISFIED mean n
2% 2 14 40 42 4.2 61
33. As you may be aware, a “big idea” has been periodically suggested that would attempt to address the impacts of I-70
as it passes through Vail. Recognizing that this idea has received no serious study to date and that any efforts to deal
with the impacts will take many years, and would likely involve major costs (including the potential for a property tax
increase), please provide some initial input to local decision makers.
To eliminate or reduce traffic noise from I-70, which of the following long-term solutions do you support for exploratory
consideration? (Check all that apply) n=349
21% Extensive sound walls to contain Interstate noise
28 Covering portions of I-70 (also known as “cut and cover” solution)
30 A combination of sound walls and covering I-70
27 Relocating I-70 in a tunnel, removing it altogether from the community
38 Live with the condition, increasing enforcement of speed limits
8 No opinion
Do you have any additional comments on this topic? __________________________________________________________
Please provide the following demographic information. Remember that all responses remain strictly confidential
and are reported only in group format.
34. What is the ZIP code of your primary residence? _________________________________
35. Which of the following best describes you? n=354
53% Year-round resident (11+ months/year)
37 Part-time resident (what is the ZIP Code of your primary residence? ___________________)
6 Employed in the town of Vail but don’t live there
2 Get mail in the town but don’t live or work there
1 Non-resident owner of business/commercial property
2/4/2014
14
36. Which of the following best describes your employment status? n=355
41% Work 8 months or more a year in the local area (Vail Valley)
6 Work 7 or fewer months a year in the local area (Vail Valley)
22 Currently employed outside of the local area (work on Front Range, out of state, etc.)
21 Not employed: retired
1 Not employed: unemployed and/or looking for work
3 Not employed: homemaker
6 Other:____________________________________________________
37. Is your residence (either year-round or seasonal) within the town of Vail? n=354
82% Yes 18 No
If yes, where? n=289
25% East Vail
2 Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas
Booth Creek/Aspen Lane
3 Golf Course
8 Vail Village
6 Lionshead
14 Potato Patch, Sandstone
6 Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, the Valley
2 Vail Commons/Safeway area
17 West Vail (north of I-70)
4 Matterhorn, Glen Lyon
8 Intermountain
Not a resident of the town of Vail
5 Other______________________________
38. Do you own or rent your residence? n=346
87% Own
12 Rent
1 Other (specify)_________________________________________
39. How would you rate cell phone service at your residence or business in town?
POOR AVERAGE EXCELLENT mean n
13% 12 29 21 23 3.3 343
OR 1% Service not available
Don’t have a cell phone
Any comments on your response?__________________________________________________________________________
40. How long have you lived within the town of Vail (or
owned property if a non-resident)? n=280
3% Less than 1 year
13 1-5 years
25 6-15 years
52 More than 15 years
8 Not applicable
41. (IF RESIDENT) Do you own or operate a business
within the town of Vail? 16% Yes 84 No n=280
42. Are you a registered voter in Vail? 51% Yes 49 No
n=338
43. Which of these categories best describes your
household status? n=352
19% Single, no children
24 Couple, no children
24 Household with children living at home
32 Empty-nester, children no longer at home
44. Are you: n=347
52% Male 48 Female
45. In what year were you born? Average age=55.6, n=330
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR CONTINUING EVALUATION PROGRAM.
If you would like to receive updates and information from the Town of Vail, please include your email address:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
2/4/2014
•
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
,
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
,
s
n
o
w
p
l
o
w
i
n
g
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
t
o
w
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
•
S
h
a
r
e
y
o
u
r
t
h
o
u
g
h
t
s
a
n
d
i
d
e
a
s
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
m
o
s
t
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
i
s
s
u
e
s
f
a
c
i
n
g
V
a
i
l
.
By
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Su
r
v
e
y
,
y
o
u
’
l
l
b
e
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
pr
i
z
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
w
o
r
t
h
$
5
0
0
toward your choice
of
a
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
s
e
a
s
o
n
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
p
a
s
s
,
a
n
E
P
I
C
s
k
i
p
a
s
s
o
r
a
g
i
f
t
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
t
o
a
V
a
i
l
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
.
He
r
e
’
s
H
o
w
t
o
P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
:
G
o
t
o
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
t
o
v
s
u
r
v
e
y
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
2
OR
Re
q
u
e
s
t
a
p
a
p
e
r
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
q
u
e
s
t
io
n
n
a
i
r
e
b
y
c
a
l
l
i
n
g
9
7
0
-
4
7
9
-
2
1
1
5
.
Pl
e
a
s
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
1
0
d
a
y
s
t
o
b
e
s
u
r
e
y
o
u
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
a
r
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
.
We
i
n
v
i
t
e
y
o
u
t
o
ma
k
e
y
o
u
r
v
o
i
c
e
he
a
r
d
!
Ta
k
e
P
a
r
t
i
n
t
h
e
T
o
w
n
o
f
V
a
i
l
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
u
r
v
e
y
i
n
a
Co
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
t
O
n
-
L
i
n
e
F
o
r
m
a
t
2/4/2014
c/
o
R
R
C
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
P.
O
.
B
o
x
1
7
8
8
0
Bo
u
l
d
e
r
,
C
O
8
0
3
0
8
Ev
e
r
y
o
n
e
’
s
i
n
v
i
t
e
d
t
o
t
a
k
e
p
a
r
t
i
n
th
e
T
o
w
n
o
f
V
a
i
l
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
u
r
v
e
y
!
• F
u
l
l
-
t
i
m
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
• P
a
r
t
-
t
i
m
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
• E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
•
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
o
w
n
e
r
s
• G
u
e
s
t
s
,
t
o
o
He
r
e
’
s
H
o
w
t
o
P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
:
Go
t
o
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
t
o
v
s
u
r
v
e
y
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
2
O
R
re
q
u
e
s
t
a
p
a
p
e
r
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
n
a
i
r
e
(s
e
e
o
t
h
e
r
s
i
d
e
)
.
Pl
e
a
s
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
1
0
d
a
y
s
.
Pa
s
s
c
o
d
e
:
xxxxx
Pa
s
s
c
o
d
e
:
xxxxx
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion on Registration of Pesticide Applicators. The purpose of
this presentation is to discuss the merits of requiring registration of some pesticide applicators
operating within the Town of Vail, similar to current ordinances requiring registration of general
contractors and private snowplow operators.
PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting the Town Council consider
whether this is an ordinance that should be implemented, and to provide feedback to staff. If
Council determines it is, staff will return with a draft ordinance for review in March.
BACKGROUND: On January 7, 2014, town staff presented a framework for developing a
Gore Creek Water Quality Strategic Action Plan to address Gore Creek’s listing on the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 303(d) List of Impaired Waters. The
presentation outlined the three categories of causes for the impairment and discussed five
strategies for addressing them. In addition, a list of specific actions was provided for
implementation or further discussion. Gore Creek was placed on the 303(d) list due to low
counts of aquatic macro-invertebrates (aka bugs) based on what is termed the Multi-metric
Index. Failing bug scores are indicative of stressors affecting the long-term health of Gore
Creek. One cause of the impairment includes pollutants associated with land use
activities. These pollutants include pesticides. And one of the strategies for addressing the
causes is Regulatory Measures, which includes ordinances. See the attached Memorandum
for additional information.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends this ordinance is worth implementing as a
way to better manage and understand the possible impacts associated with insecticide
applications. The ordinance could have immediate impacts to the health of Gore Creek if
implemented prior to the 2014 spraying season.
ATTACHMENTS:
Memorandum
2/4/2014
To: Vail Town Council
From: Departments of Community Development and Public Works
Date: February 4, 2013
Subject: Discussion on Registration of Insecticide Applicators
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this memorandum and Council presentation is to discuss the merits of
requiring registration of some pesticide applicators operating within the Town of Vail,
similar to current ordinances requiring registration of general contractors and private
snowplow operators. This item is an action of the draft Strategic Action Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
On January 7, 2014, town staff presented a framework for developing a Gore Creek Water
Quality Strategic Action Plan to address Gore Creek’s listing on the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment 303(d) List of Impaired Waters. The presentation
outlined the three categories of Causes for the impairment and discussed five Strategies
for addressing them. (Please see Appendix A for a review of Causes and Strategies.) In
addition, a list of specific Actions was provided for implementation or further discussion.
Gore Creek was placed on the 303(d) list due to low counts of aquatic macro-invertebrates
(aka bugs) based on what is termed the Multi-metric Index (MMI). Failing MMI scores are
indicative of stressors affecting the long-term health of Gore Creek. As indicated in
Appendix A, one of the three causes of the impairment includes pollutants associated with
land use activities. These pollutants include pesticides. And one of the strategies for
addressing the causes is Regulatory Measures, which includes ordinances.
III. PESTICIDES 101
The term pesticide is a general term for a product used to control a pest. Pesticides
encompass insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc. where insecticides are used to control
bugs, herbicides are used to control plants, and so on, generally for the benefit of humans.
Pesticides are regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and each approved
pesticide includes a label that describes its intended use, allowed applications rates,
methods and specific warnings. In Colorado, commercial pesticide applicators are
required to be licensed by the Colorado Department of Agriculture, and there are various
levels, endorsements and specialties depending on the circumstances of the applicator.
Use of a pesticide other than intended by the label is illegal, and a licensed applicator
could lose his/her license for not following the label. As they say in the industry, “The
Label is the Law.”
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 2
In general, the use of pesticides is with good intent. For instance, the use of herbicides to
manage noxious weeds protects native plants and habitats, including riparian areas along
stream banks. Likewise, a failure to treat spruce trees for a pine needle scale infestation
will ultimately result in the loss of the tree. And, many of the trees along Gore Creek are
century-old spruce trees, many currently infested with scale. Loss of those trees results in
bank erosion and reduced shade on the creek – both of which affect water quality and
habitat. However, it is important to balance the use of pesticides and to explore other
management methods for protecting resources.
In Vail, there are numerous types of pesticide applications occurring. Examples include:
Homeowner’s applying or hiring commercial applicators to apply “weed and feed”
type herbicides to eliminate dandelions and other lawn pests
Public and private noxious weed management
Turf maintenance in public facilities such as parks, playing fields and the golf course
Public and private insecticide applications on lodgepole pines, spruce, aspens and
cottonwoods to control mountain pine beetle, pine needle scale, aspen and oyster
scales, aphids and other pests
IV. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
When reviewing the labels of common pesticides used in Vail, some products specifically
indicate that they can be harmful to aquatic insects, which makes sense considering that
insecticides are intended to eliminate insects. When coupled with the fact that significant
spraying has occurred over the past fifteen years to battle infestations of mountain pine
beetle and pine needle scale, it is possible that spraying has affected aquatic life.
With that in mind, the town has implemented changes in its application of insecticides over
the past two years in response to water quality concerns. Changes include:
Elimination of spraying for mountain pine beetle. The town now uses verbenone
packs attached to the trees. This pheromone signals potential invaders that a tree
is already full of other beetles and to move on.
Elimination of foliar spraying on most trees in town, especially near Gore Creek and
tributaries, and substituting a low impact insecticide applied to tree trunks instead
Elimination of soil injection for insecticides near waterways or in wet areas
Application of fertilizers to recovering trees to reduce stress and boost immunity so
they can fend off the next infestation without insecticides
Simple removal of highly infested trees with the idea of replanting with a variety of
species in the near future to provide biodiversity
These practices will be evaluated over time and other practices implemented as needed to
continue tree recovery while reducing environmental impacts.
V. REGISTRATION OF COMMERCIAL SPRAYERS
While any pesticide is potentially harmful, it is the application of insecticides that has the
highest potential for impacting aquatic insects in Gore Creek. This is due to the fact that
many trees being treated are in close proximity to waterways, with the intent of controlling
insects. Incorrect application methods, application during windy conditions and disregard
for product warning labels have all been observed in Vail.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 3
Staff is proposing that the Town Council consider that all commercial insecticide
applicators (those who are licensed by the state and hired to apply insecticides) be
required to register with the Town in order to operate within town limits. There are two
main reasons for this proposal:
1) To educate spraying contractors regarding the impairment of Gore Creek and the
town’s best management practices
2) To understand the extent of spraying that is occurring in town
Similar to the town’s ordinance requiring snow plow operators to register (Ordinance 33,
Series 1980, attached), an applicator would provide the following:
1) Applicator license from Colorado Department of Agriculture
2) Certificate of Insurance
3) A list of clients
Advantages
1) Easy distribution of educational information
2) Ability to respond to complaint calls
3) Provides additional motivation to operate according to the label
4) Provides further public knowledge of products being applied in Vail
Staff Impacts
5) Requires someone to process applications
a. Minimal, as there are approximately a dozen applicators at this time
b. Can be rolled into plowing registration but performed in spring instead of fall
6) Potential enforcement efforts from code enforcement or the police department
Does not…
7) Require the town to “license” applicators as that is handled by the state
8) Require testing or other oversight
VI. ACTION REQUESTED BY COUNCIL
Staff is requesting that the Town Council consider whether this is an ordinance that should
be implemented, and to provide feedback to staff. If Council determines it is, staff will
return with a draft ordinance for review in March.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that this ordinance is worth implementing as a way to better manage
and understand the possible impacts associated with insecticide applications. The
ordinance could have immediate impacts to the health of Gore Creek if implemented prior
to the 2014 spraying season.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 4
Appendix A
Staff has defined the following terms to be used in the Strategic Action Plan, based on the
Key Findings and Recommendations of the Gore Creek Water Quality Improvement Plan
(WQIP):
Cause – one of the three main reasons for water quality decline in Gore Creek as
defined in the WQIP
Strategy – one of five general approaches to be used for addressing the Causes
Action – specific measures under each Strategy to be considered for implementation
Listed below are the Causes of the decline in water quality in Gore Creek as defined by the
WQIP, as well as the Strategies defined to address the Causes.
Causes
1) Riparian Buffer/Habitat Degradation
2) Impacts of Impervious Cover and Urban Runoff
3) Pollutants Associated with Land Use Activities and Urban Runoff
Strategies
1) Regulatory Measures
2) Education
3) Site Specific Projects
4) Best Management Practices
5) Monitoring/Study
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Appoint Members of Council to the Guest Enhancements Committee:
Pedestrian Ways, Bus Stops, directories
PRESENTER(S): Pam Brandmeyer
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update:
1) December Revenue Highlights;
2) December Sales Tax;
3) 2014 Parking Equipment Replacement Memorandum;
ATTACHMENTS:
Decemeber Revenue Highlights
December 2013 Sales Tax
2014 Parking Equipment Memorandum
2/4/2014
- 1 -
TOWN OF VAIL
REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS
January 30, 2014
Sales Tax
Upon receipt of all sales tax returns, December collections are estimated to be
$3,417,353 up 14.9% from last year and up 11.8% compared to amended
budget. Year to date collections of $21,958,197 are up 9.5% from last year and
up 5.0% from amended budget. Inflation as measured by the consumer price
index was up 1.5% for the year.
Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT)
RETT collections through December total $4,633,055 down 15.0% from this time
last year, but exceeding the annual budget of $3,871,000. Of current collections,
12.8% is from major redevelopment projects including Manor Vail, Four Seasons,
Ritz Carlton Residences, Solaris, and Lions Square Lodge North. Collections not
related to major redevelopment projects currently total $4,037,754 down 4.3%
from prior year.
Construction Use Tax
Use Tax collections total $1,360,585 year-to-date compared to the amended
budget of $1.35 million. Construction use Tax is up 11.3% from prior year.
Parking Revenue
Season to date:
Pass sales from November through January 28 total $612,840, up 9.9% from
prior winter season.
Daily sales from the parking structures total approximately $1.5 million, up 12.9%
from the prior winter season.
Summary
Across all funds, year-to-date total revenue of $49.9 million is up 4.3% compared
to budget and up 1.9% from prior year, with increased sales tax collections
helping to offset decreases in RETT. Construction Use Tax was previously down
from prior year, but has now surpassed 2012 collections due to several new
residential homes underway. **Total revenues not final for 2013**
2/4/2014
MEMORANDUM
January 30, 2014
To: Vail Town Council
Stan Zemler
Pam Brandmeyer
Judy Camp
From: Sally Lorton
Re: December Sales Tax
I estimate Vail will collect another $23,000 in December sales tax to bring
December collections to $3,417,353. If so, we will be up 11.8% or $360,208 from
the amended budget and up 14.9% or $443,527 from December 2012. Year to
date would be up 9.7% or $1,934,743 from 2012. The year to date and full year
budgets have been amended by $822,000 to reflect additional collections earlier
in the year. Year to date revenue would be up 9.4% or $1,881,197 from the
original budget and 5.1% or $1,059,197 from the amended budget. This is a
record for the month of December and year to date. The previous record for
December was in 2011 and year to date was in 2012. Year to date increased
from the record in 2012 by 9.7%.
2/4/2014
% Change % Change
2013 Budget from from
Month 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Budget Collections Variance 2012 Budget
January 1,997,091 2,225,841 2,275,967 2,597,985 2,783,306 2,976,655 2,619,673 2,564,383 2,795,688 2,855,524 3,143,593 3,145,618 2,025 10.16%0.06%
February 2,111,163 2,362,825 2,429,377 2,527,130 2,718,643 3,071,615 2,588,889 2,577,360 2,803,136 2,994,580 3,265,186 3,267,349 2,163 9.11%0.07%
March 2,372,942 2,344,178 2,785,101 2,852,954 2,986,446 3,327,304 2,504,567 2,685,004 3,143,418 3,185,859 3,647,404 3,650,154 2,750 14.57%0.08%
April 871,468 992,157 915,554 1,280,324 1,330,740 1,098,918 1,235,941 1,156,934 1,191,690 1,183,087 1,068,077 1,069,959 1,882 -9.56%0.18%
May 428,919 411,595 458,770 449,283 545,874 622,103 516,150 421,925 473,292 487,739 560,955 563,530 2,575 15.54%0.46%
June 742,755 732,113 834,913 805,362 953,017 918,061 717,233 873,765 895,951 963,143 1,014,352 1,021,716 7,364 6.08%0.73%
July 1,075,532 1,128,514 1,166,183 1,255,243 1,265,781 1,397,842 1,121,860 1,228,767 1,481,329 1,573,499 1,462,209 1,652,616 190,407 5.03%13.02%
August 1,029,446 994,445 993,985 1,055,614 1,162,746 1,349,795 1,068,391 1,147,352 1,310,471 1,380,710 1,322,533 1,506,955 184,422 9.14%13.94%
September 679,208 757,033 795,807 832,549 908,318 834,569 753,754 761,425 889,945 978,037 913,727 989,220 75,493 1.14%8.26%
October 508,092 532,537 566,173 614,396 688,519 662,767 581,033 594,362 623,420 644,577 676,408 750,800 74,392 16.48%11.00%
November 591,269 623,646 713,117 799,582 747,877 719,109 651,873 701,075 788,430 825,873 790,411 945,927 155,516 14.54%19.68%
December 2,171,098 2,362,095 2,549,032 2,771,258 2,821,871 2,652,628 2,553,974 2,963,763 3,184,645 2,973,826 3,057,145 3,394,353 337,208 14.14%11.03%
Total 14,578,983 15,466,979 16,483,979 17,841,680 18,913,138 19,631,366 16,913,338 17,676,115 19,581,415 20,046,454 20,922,000 21,958,197 1,036,197 9.54%4.95%
Town of Vail
Sales Tax Worksheet
1/30/2014
2/4/2014
To: Town Council
From: Public Works
Date: February 4, 2014
Subject: 2014 Parking Equipment Replacement Project
I. SUMMARY & PURPOSE
The purpose of this memo is to outline the process the Town of Vail will pursue in
replacement of the town’s parking equipment. The town has budgeted $650,000 in the 2014
budget for this project.
At the April 2, 2013, Council work session, staff and the town’s parking operations
consultant presented a detailed analysis of Transaction Rates & Equipment, concluding that
the current methodology, equipment configuration modifications, along with some Pay-On-
Foot machines, is the appropriate methodology of transactions for Vail.
II. BACKGROUND
Staff has worked with Carl Walker Parking Consultants to review the most current parking
technology and equipment that may be applicable to the Vail parking structures. The
purpose was to review the town’s existing parking operations and review the technology and
equipment options available. The discussion revolved around current operation
methodologies, parking lot control and revenue collection options.
The Vail parking structures’ equipment currently varies from 7-12 years old and will be
replaced. Advancements in parking equipment, and more importantly guest expectations
when using public paid parking, have changed, allowing the town to review more efficient
guest experience with regard to entering and exiting the parking garages.
The town’s parking garages experience extremely high transaction rates, especially at peak
entry and exit periods. A typical holiday period or weekend will see an average of 1800
transactions per day at the Lionshead structure and 3300 per day at the Vail Village
structure, with up to 30% of those transactions occurring within the peak afternoon exit
period. Peak times around Christmas and New Years can bring in over 2200 transactions
per day at the Lionshead structure and over 3800 transactions per day at the Vail Village
structure. Over the course of the five month winter season, both structures combine to see
an average of 580,000 transactions equaling, a total revenue of $3.5 - $4.0 million. Over the
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 2
seven summer months, the combined see an equally impressive 600,000 transactions but
with no revenue.
Both parking structures have conventional equipment that use tickets and or passes to track
and verify the parked time of each of our guests. Upon exiting, a guest may choose to
either pay by cash or credit, or exit by use of a pass or verified free ticket (2 Hour Free or
Free after Three). They also may choose to exit via a manned booth or automated pay
lane. Each structure has 4 exit lanes. Each has the capability to have up to three (3)
manned booths, with all lanes having the ability to be used as automated pay lanes. Both
the manned booths and pay lanes accept cash, credit, passes and verified free tickets.
The town has an intricate parking policy that includes multiple pay rates, multiple pass types
and available free periods. In order to successfully operate the two parking structures, it
requires a coordinated effort between the town’s parking, finance and IT Departments.
Many of the challenges the parking staff sees on a day-to-day basis include:
Lost tickets and false claims by guests
Wet or destroyed tickets
2 Hour Free parking abuse by ‘Looping’
Congestion at exit lanes due to high volume, as well as previously stated issues
Congestion at Frontage Road intersections
Guest mindset – absent minded, distracted, “vacation” mindset
Lionshead structures circuitous exiting flow
Climatic factors – cold and snow
24 hour staffing demands with major fluctuations of volumes at peak times
Equipment issues due to high use and climatic factors
After initial review, staff recommends the town move forward with a hybrid option that moves
toward automation. It was recommend providing the following at each structure;
One to two (1-2) manned booths at exit:
Provides the ability for our guests to have a personal interaction with a cashier upon
exit: maintains status quo for many: and provides the ability to provide immediate
assistance at the exit for anyone with issues upon exiting.
Multiple (3-4) unmanned exit lanes with ticket verifiers & proximity pass readers:
Provides faster exiting for those using passes and verified tickets (free or pre-paid at
a Pay on Foot station) and may provide secondary exiting from Lionshead.
Two (2) Pay on Foot (POF) stations at each structure:
Provides guest with the ability to use Pay on Foot station and exit more quickly
Increase Value Pass usage (Pre-paid Debit Cards):
Provides frequent users with the fastest entering and exiting. Based on the 2012
citizen survey 76% of respondents did not have a parking pass, yet almost all
respondents would qualify for some type of pass.
This option is recommended to provide the town with flexibility as we move toward
automation. Based on past experience, we do not believe that our guest is totally prepared
to make the move to a fully automated Pay on Foot system. Having the option to pay at a
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 3
manned booth is an expectation of some of our guest and it provides immediate assistance
to those guests that may have issues similar to the challenge issues presented above in
section 2. The flexibility of having two booths allows us to staff or not staff as needed
depending on how fast we can educate our guests on the use of Pay on Foot, the purchase
of value/debit passes, etc. Currently, we have four booths at Lionshead; this can be
reduced to two. This option would utilize all of the current exit lane methodologies (1-5 as
listed in section 4) and add Pay on Foot.
III. PARKING EQUIPMENT VENDOR SELECTION PROCESS
The purpose of today’s work session is to update the Council to provide a better
understanding of the parking equipment replacement project in 2014.
The parking division of Public Works will solicit proposals for the replacement of parking
equipment at the Village and Lionshead structures, Ford Park and the soccer field. In
addition, vendors will provide pricing for the following additional upgrades.
Pay on foot equipment for both structures
Automation of the summer special event parking to improve revenue control
Programs to enable customers to add value to cards via the internet
License plate recognition (LPR)
Parking stall location designator system
IV. PROPOSAL REVIEW
A review team, with representatives from parking, IT, and finance, as well as support from
the town’s parking consultant, will review the proposals and interview vendors.
Selection criteria
Reliability of equipment to function with the Town of Vail high use and environment
Accounting reconciliation/banking support
Technical support
Training and startup
Successful project implementation
Warranty
Expandability and flexibility for the future
User friendliness
Report and statistics ease
Ability to interface with other parking management systems such as space availability
Completeness and understanding of the Town of Vail parking operations and needs
Project costs
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 4
Upon completion of interviews, a proposal will be selected and a contract will be brought to
the Town Council for award.
IV. NEXT STEPS
The next steps for the Parking Equipment Replacement Project are as follows:
Complete RFP February 5 -10
Advertise RFP February 7,14,21
Vendor Mandatory Pre-Proposal Site visit Feb 24
Bids submitted March 14
Vendor interview April 1 - 11
Award contract May 6
Equipment installation: Village Structure, Ford Park and the soccer lots September
Begin equipment installation Lionshead Structure October
Installation, staff training and testing complete November 1
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends moving forward with the parking equipment replacement project vendor
selection process based on the recommendations of the town staff and direction of the
Town Council at the April 2, 2013, meeting.
VI. ATTACHMENTS
A. April 2, 2013 Staff Memo
B. Carl Walker Parking Operational Methodologies Report
2/4/2014
5136 Lovers Lane, Suite 200, Kalamazoo, MI 49002
Tel: 269.381.2222 Fax: 269.349.4656 | carlwalker.com
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the Lionshead Parking Structure (03/22/13)
NOTE: According to information provided by the city, the facility processes approximately 375
exiting vehicles per hour during peak conditions (based on actual hourly exit lane counts).
However, since exiting traffic is not spread out evenly over the peak hour, actual exit lane
capacity needs are likely higher than 375 vehicles per hour. For example, if a large portion of
vehicles leave at the same time (perhaps after the ski lifts shut down) more exit lanes would be
required to minimize vehicle queues and provide a high level of service. Assuming vehicles
leaving during the peak hour do so within the same 30-minute period, exit lane capacity needs
would be roughly double those where exits are more evenly disbursed throughout the hour.
Option #1 – Current Operational Methodology with Improvements
The basic operational methodology currently used at the parking structure could be
maintained. However, improvements would be needed to increase exit lane capacities,
improve customer service, address concerns about abuse of the two hour time limit, and
improve revenue control.
The current operational methodology is common of many parking structures across the country.
Transient (hourly) parkers pull a ticket at entry and pay the appropriate parking fee at exit (to
either a cashier, a Pay-in-Lane machine, or an exit verifier). Customers can also pay for parking
using the credit-in/credit-out feature of the parking access and revenue control system. Parking
discounts or validations are available for certain customers to help reduce parking fees. Facility
customers with monthly or seasonal privileges use access cards to enter and exit the facility.
However, a couple of improvements would be necessary to address the challenges identified by
the city and the project team. Potential improvements could include (but would not be limited
to):
Increasing the Exiting Capacity of the Structure – This would involve two primary
improvements:
o First, two exit lanes would be added to the facility. These new exit lanes could be
added to the existing entry/exit plaza or they could be separate and flow to a
different street. One new lane would be cashiered and the second could be a
credit card only lane.
o Second, the existing Pay-in-Lane machine in Lane S-X would be removed in favor
of an exit verifier that would process credit cards only.
The addition of two new exit lanes would increase peak hour exiting capacity to
approximately 660 vehicles per hour (to handle peak exiting load within the peak hour),
and removing the Pay-in-Lane machine would increase exiting capacity in Lane S-X.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
2
Advantages to maintaining the current operational methodology, with necessary
improvements, would include:
As this methodology is already in use, it is familiar to most parkers.
There is a human response to problems and equipment malfunctions in the exit lanes.
There is a person to answer questions and provide directions in most exit lanes.
There is a cashier to process parking tickets that have become unreadable.
Parking customers would not be required to take their tickets with them after they park
(unlike a Pay-on-Foot or Central Cashier approach). Therefore, less signage would be
needed.
Provides customers with the option to pay using the cashier or an exit verifier (device that
can process the parking ticket and collect payment using a credit/debit card).
This methodology can provide a perceived higher level of customer service.
The equipment costs for this option are typically lower than those of a fully automated
system.
There is usually a higher level of flexibility in dealing with special parking needs or other
situations that may arise (e.g., special day only discounts or parking passes).
Using cashiers allows for the use of non-machine readable passes, discount cards, or
validations (although passes/discounts/validations not processed through the revenue
control system can create auditing and reconciliation concerns). Automated options,
such as Pay-on-Foot (POF) will require the use of machine readable passes, discount
cards, and validations.
Customers would be able to park as long as they like without having to make another
payment to a multi-space meter (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Existing discount and/or validation programs can be continued. These programs can be
difficult or impossible to offer if multi-space meters are used (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-
Display).
Less parking enforcement would be required for this option than for a gateless solution
(Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Disadvantages to utilizing an improved version of the current methodology could include:
As this methodology requires more staff than automated solutions, labor costs can be
higher.
Increased supervision of parking staff is required.
Cashiered operations typically have higher management and administrative costs.
Cashiers require more auditing than automated solutions to ensure sufficient revenue
control is provided.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
3
Even with increased exit lane capacity, exiting traffic conditions may not be improved if
all of the traffic is directed to the frontage road.
Accepting payment of parking fees in exit lanes is inherently slower than verifying pre-
paid tickets. The service rate of a cashiered exit lane is approximately 95 to 135 vehicles
per hour (26.7 to 38.0 seconds per vehicle). The service rate of an exit lane that validates
parking tickets paid to a central cashier or Pay-on-Foot (POF) machine is approximately
360 vehicles per hour (10.0 seconds per vehicle).
More exit lanes would be required to sufficiently handle peak exiting conditions than a
central cashier or POF solution.
Option #2 – Pay-On-Foot Methodology
Pay-on-Foot (POF) machines can provide the quickest parker exit
times, as payment is taken away from the exit lanes. This equipment
allows patrons to pay for parking before they get to their vehicles
and enter an exit lane. Patrons would take a parking ticket from a
ticket dispenser as they enter the facility. Then, they would take the
ticket with them, instead of leaving it in their vehicle. When they are
ready to leave, they must first insert their parking ticket into a POF
machine. The machine(s) would be located in or very near the
facility, adjacent to pedestrian entrances (e.g. southwest corner of
the structure). The machine would compute the parking fee,
collect payment (cash or credit/debit), and then return the ticket to
the parker. The parker will then have a set amount of time to exit
the parking facility before additional parking fees are assessed. At
exit, the parker simply inserts their parking ticket into an exit verifier
and they leave the facility. The exit verifiers would be configured to
accept credit cards if the patron fails to pay at the POF machine.
Parkers leaving within the two hour free parking period could exit
the facility directly.
This equipment costs approximately $50,000 to $80,000 per machine, depending on the
equipment options selected (not including the cost for a centralized system management, exit
verifiers, other equipment, or installation). Each POF machine can process approximately 75 to
100 customers per hour (approximately 36.0 to 48.0 seconds per customer). As credit card
transactions can be processed more quickly than cash, and approximately 58% of all payment
transactions are credit/debit, some of the POF machines could only process credit/debit cards.
This would help reduce equipment costs as credit/debit card only machines are much less
expensive ($20,000 to $30,000).
It would be recommended to purchase and install at least six POF machines; three would
process both cash and credit/debit and three would process only credit/debit cards. A
roaming parking attendant would be available to help customers use the equipment, answer
questions, and provide directions. The POF machines should be located in a climate controlled
location. In addition, notification signage is required to alert parkers to take their tickets with
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
4
them. This signage would be installed throughout the structure (e.g., on columns, walls, near
stairs and elevators, and at each entry lane).
Advantages to utilizing POF machines include:
Labor costs are reduced as less staff is needed.
POF machines provide a 24-hour automated cashiering capability.
A POF methodology can provide greater exit lane service levels. As most payments are
processed away from the exit lanes, exit lane throughput can be approximately three
times greater. The construction of additional exit lanes may not be necessary.
As fee collection would be controlled by the automated system, cashier mistakes/thefts
are less likely. Revenue control and reconciliation can be better using an automated
solution.
Provides customers with the option to pay using a POF machine or an exit verifier.
Customers would be able to park as long as they like without having to make another
payment to a multi-space meter (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Existing discount and/or validation programs can be continued. These programs can be
difficult or impossible to offer if multi-space meters are used (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-
Display).
Less parking enforcement would be required for this option than for a gateless solution
(Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Disadvantages of pay-on-foot could include:
POF can be more difficult for some customers to use. The implementation of a POF
solution would require a significant customer education effort and additional
staffing/hosts at the onset for a period of time
POF may not be guest friendly to those who have just come off the mountain and are
walking in ski boots, handling skis, poles, wearing gloves, and corralling a family. It may
be perceived as an inconvenience to a weary end of day skier.
POF equipment can be more expensive than either a tradition exit cashier methodology
or a multi-space meter solution (depending on the size of the operation). However,
reduced on-going staffing expenses can offset initial equipment costs in a relatively short
amount of time (again, depending on the size of the operation).
Customers would be required to take their parking tickets with them after they park.
Some customers may forget to take their parking tickets with them after they park. This
would mean that customers must go to their vehicle to retrieve their ticket and then walk
back to the POF machine or they will have to pay in the exit lane using a credit card.
The automated equipment may not be able to process tickets that have become wet or
damaged.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
5
There may be a lack of direct human response to customer questions or concerns. This
disadvantage could be reduced through the use of roaming parking attendants;
however, labor expense savings would be reduced.
There is no attendant presence in exit lanes. This could mean an increased response
time to exit lane equipment malfunctions. However, intercoms in the exit lanes would
help reduce response times.
There may be less flexibility to address special needs than a cashiered option, such as
special parking needs or other situations that may arise (e.g., special day only discounts
or parking passes).
All parking passes, discount cards, and validations must be machine readable (although
this would provide improved revenue control).
Incorporating LPR with an automated solution would be more challenging. There would
not be a cashier in the exit lane to verify the license plate of the vehicle leaving.
Additional signage is required to remind customers to take their tickets with them after
they park (increasing implementation costs).
Option #3 – Central Cashier Methodology
The same type of equipment used for exit cashiering
could be configured in a central cashier format. In
this situation, instead of paying a cashier at exit,
customers would pay at a central cashier point before
walking to their vehicles. For this to work, parkers must
keep their parking tickets with them so they can pay
at the central cashier station. This setup works similarly
to the POF machine option, except the customer
would pay a cashier instead of a machine. At exit,
the customer would insert their paid ticket into an exit
verifier machine that would confirm the fee has been
properly paid. If the fee has not been paid, the customer would either be asked to pay at the
central cashier station or could be asked to insert a credit card for payment.
The cost of implementing this method of operation would be similar to the traditional exit
cashiering option, although additional equipment would be necessary. The cost of providing
exit verifiers in each lane would be approximately $15,000 to $20,000 per exit verifier (plus
shipping, handling and installation).
It would be recommended to purchase and install equipment for at least six central cashiers. A
roaming parking attendant would be available to deal with exit lane equipment issues. The
central cashier methodology would require the construction of a small building in which the
cashiers will work. A covered or climate controlled area could also be constructed for
customers. In addition, notification signage is required to alert parkers to take their tickets with
them. This signage would be installed throughout the structure (e.g., on columns, walls, near
stairs and elevators, and at each entry lane).
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
6
Central cashiering advantages can include:
There is a human response to problems and equipment malfunctions.
There is a person to answer questions and provide directions.
There is a cashier to process parking tickets that have become unreadable.
Central cashiering can provide a higher level of perceived customer service compared
to automated equipment (POF or multi-space meters).
The central cashiering approach typically has lower initial equipment costs than a POF
methodology.
Provides customers with the option to pay using a centralized cashier or an exit verifier.
A central cashier methodology can provide greater exit lane service levels. As most
payments are processed away from the exit lanes, exit lane throughput can be
approximately three times greater. The construction of additional exit lanes may not be
necessary.
There is usually a higher level of flexibility in dealing with special parking needs or other
situations that may arise (e.g., special day only discounts or parking passes).
Using cashiers allows for the use of non-machine readable passes, discount cards, or
validations (although passes/discounts/validations not processed through the revenue
control system can create auditing and reconciliation concerns). Automated options,
such as Pay-on-Foot (POF) will require the use of machine readable passes, discount
cards, and validations.
Customers would be able to park as long as they like without having to make another
payment to a multi-space meter (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Existing discount and/or validation programs can be continued. These programs can be
difficult or impossible to offer if multi-space meters are used (Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-
Display).
Less parking enforcement would be required for this option than for a gateless solution
(Pay-by-Space or Pay-and-Display).
Disadvantages to central cashiering could include:
As this methodology requires more staff than automated solutions, labor costs can be
higher.
Increased supervision of parking staff is required.
Cashiered operations typically have higher management and administrative costs.
The central cashiering approach typically has higher initial equipment costs than a
traditional exit cashier methodology.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
7
There is no attendant presence in exit lanes. This could mean an increased response
time to exit lane equipment malfunctions. However, intercoms in the exit lanes would
help reduce response times.
Customers would be required to take their parking tickets with them after they park.
Some customers may forget to take their parking tickets with them after they park. This
would mean that customers must go to their vehicle to retrieve their ticket and then walk
back to the central cashier station or they will have to pay in the exit lane using a credit
card.
Incorporating LPR with a central cashier solution would be more challenging. There
would not be a cashier in the exit lane to verify the license plate of the vehicle leaving.
Additional signage is required to remind customers to take their tickets with them after
they park (increasing implementation costs).
Option #4 – Hybrid Approaches: Central Cashier with POF, Exit Cashiering with POF, or Central
Cashiering with Exit Cashiering
Instead of relying on a single approach, a hybrid approach could be employed. This could
include central cashier with POF or exit cashiering with POF. Either approach could provide a
flexible alternative while addressing the various advantages and disadvantages of each option.
However, there are some downsides to mixing cashier and automated solutions:
Equipment costs and/or staffing costs could negate any potential savings. For example,
savings in staffing costs related to POF would be reduced if more staff is included
(increasing equipment payback timeframes). Equipment costs for POF would offset any
cashiered equipment savings.
Customers may gravitate toward one option more than another. For example, the
majority of customers may decide to bypass central cashiers and pay in the exit lane
instead. This would reduce exit lane service levels and could necessitate constructing
additional exit lane capacity. Conversely, more customers could decide to pay at the
central cashier station instead of paying in the lane. This would result in longer lines at
the central cashier station and underutilized exit lane cashiers. It would be difficult to
predict which option the majority of customers will use.
Customers could become confused as to which option to use. Signage in the facility
may remind them to take their ticket with the when it isn’t necessary if they use an exit
cashier.
Customers are not able to predict which option is best. For example, a customer may
see a small line at the POF machines or central cashier station and decide to pay at exit
– only to find much longer lines at the exit cashier booths.
For these reasons, hybrid approaches are sometimes not recommended. Of the potential
hybrid alternatives, the option with the least challenges would be the combination of central
cashiering and POF. The combination of these alternatives would address some of the potential
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
8
drawbacks of each while improving exit lane capacities. This hybrid approach would also be
easier for customers to use, provide more predictability, and be more flexible.
Option #5 – Multi-Space Meter Methodology (Pay-by-Space, Pay-and-Display, or Traditional
Pay-by-License Plate)
Multi-space parking meters are often used in situations
where the visitor parking area consists of on-street spaces or
a set number of parking spaces in a lot (although they can
be used in any type of parking facility). These machines
are placed with a convenient walking distance of all
parking spaces, and customers pay their fees to the
machine after parking their vehicles. For example, after a
customer has parked his/her vehicle, they walk up to a pay
machine. They pay for the amount of parking they think
they will need by inserting the payment into the machine.
Payment could be accepted using coins, debit, credit, or
some other prepaid card.
The difference between the three machine configurations
is simple. Pay-and-Display machines require parkers to take
a receipt from the machine after making payment and put
it on the dashboard of their vehicle to prove they paid.
Pay-by-Space machines require parkers to note which space number they parked in before
walking to the pay machine. They then enter the space number into the machine and pay their
fee. Parkers using a Pay-by-Space machine are not required to display a receipt in their vehicle.
Pay-by-License Plate is similar to Pay-by-Space. However, customers using Pay-by-License Plate
will enter their license plate number into the multi-space meter instead of a space number.
Additional parking meter technologies could include cell phone payment options and warning
notices before overtime parking occurs.
Multi-space meter advantages include:
Simple setup and management (although consistent parking enforcement is needed).
They can accept multiple forms of payment.
They can provide flexibility in setting parking rates.
Can be less expensive than other parking equipment options (depending on the number
of spaces covered and machines needed). Systems range from $12,000 to $15,000 per
unit.
They don’t require parking control gates. Therefore, entry and exit lane capacity is
maximized.
They can incorporate other features, such as pay-by-cell phone.
Multi-space meter disadvantages include:
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
9
Requires sufficient parking enforcement to ensure customers pay for parking. Can result
in more parking citations, citation appeals, and customer complaints than gated
options.
Mentally limits customer stays, as they have to either leave when their time has expired or
pay at the machine again. This can be very inconvenient for some longer term parkers.
Pay-and-Display machines require patrons to go back to their vehicles to display
receipts.
Pay-by-Space machine could result in patrons having to go back to their vehicles if they
did not note their space number.
Pay-by-License Plate machines require customers to remember their license plate
numbers. If they forget, or don’t check their plate number before walking to a machine,
they will have to return to their vehicle.
Additional signage would be required to help patrons park properly.
Providing parking discounts or validations can be more difficult or impossible.
Providing a limited amount of free parking (e.g., first two hours free) can be more
challenging. More enforcement would be required. Also, customers would have to go
back to the structure to pay for parking if they are going to overstay the two-hour time
limit.
As the control gates would be removed, access for monthly/season pass parkers would
be uncontrolled. This would require the use of parking permits and sufficient
enforcement.
The use of these technologies may prove cumbersome for large parking facilities.
If a machine malfunctions, customers must walk a greater distance to find a machine.
This methodology cannot incorporate lane-based LPR. Mobile LPR could be used to
enforce time limits and long-term parking restrictions.
There is a lack of direct human responses to questions or concerns. This disadvantage
could be reduced through the use of roaming parking attendants; however, labor
expense savings would be reduced.
While this option could help improve entry and exit lane capacities, there are a significant
number of challenges to overcome. This option is not recommended for additional
consideration.
Option #6 – Advanced LPR (License Plate Recognition).
This option would use LPR to track vehicles at entry and exit. Transient parkers would pull into an
entrance lane where the LPR camera(s) would read and record the license plate. The transient
parker would not be required to pull a ticket from a ticket dispenser. To pay for parking, the
transient parker would pay at the conclusion of their stay at the exit lane. At the exit, the LPR
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
10
system would verify each vehicle license plate, determine length of stay, and payment would
need to occur (cashier or automated transaction) prior to opening the exit gate.
Pass holders would also pull into an entrance lane where their plates would be read by the LPR
system. At entry, the LPR system would read the pass holder’s plate, verify parking privileges,
and then open the control gate. If the pass holder does not have valid parking privileges, the
system could prompt them to pay for parking as a transient guest would. License plate
verification would also occur in the exit lanes. Pass holder license plates would be entered into
the system when they purchase their parking passes. Pass holders could use AVI tags or
proximity cards to enter and exit the facility instead of using the LPR system (if desired).
Option #6 advantages include:
Labor costs are reduced as less staff is needed.
As fee collection would be controlled by the automated system, cashier mistakes/thefts
are less likely. Revenue control and reconciliation can be better using an automated
solution.
Provides the option to incorporate a POF machine, Central Cashier or an exit verifier.
Customers would be able to park as long as they like without having to make another
payment to a multi-space meter.
Existing discount and/or validation programs can be continued. These programs can be
difficult or impossible to offer if multi-space meters are used.
Less parking enforcement would be required for this option than for a gateless solution.
Parking tickets would not be needed, so there is no concern about tickets becoming
damaged or lost. Also, customers would not have to keep their parking tickets with
them.
Parking passholders would not need a credential (card or tag) to enter or exit the facility.
The LPR system would help monitor vehicle durations to help curb abuse of the two-hour
free parking time limit and eliminate opportunities to switch parking tickets (in order to
avoid long-duration stays).
Option #6 disadvantages include:
LPR system may have difficulty reading license plates during periods of inclement
weather (e.g., license plates are covered with snow, salt, or dirt/mud).
Incorporating LPR with an automated solution would be more challenging. There would
not be a cashier in the exit lane to verify the license plate of the vehicle leaving.
If the system misreads a license plate, customers could be stuck in entry or exit lanes.
Entry and exit lane service rates (number of vehicles processed per hour) may be slower
than some of the other options. Entry lane service rates may be slower than taking a
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
11
ticket or presenting a credential. Exit lane service rates may be similar to exit cashiering
(or slower if payment is made in the lane). Service rates will depend on the LPR
technology selected.
Current LPR systems are not perfect. There will be a percentage of plate misreads each
day (could be between 2% and 15% depending on a number of variables and the
equipment used).
This operating methodology would be relatively new. Therefore, there will likely be a
number of issues that arise during installation, testing, and day-to-day operations.
Option #7 – Pay on Entry
Instead of processing payments at exit (e.g., using exit cashiers, central cashiers, POF, or Pay-in-
Lane), parking fees could be collected when vehicles enter the facility. This operating
methodology is common in facilities that experience a high volume of vehicles entering or
exiting at the same time (e.g., event and sports venues).
Cashiers would be stationed in the entry lanes and a flat fee would be collected at
entry. Payment could be made using cash or credit/debit. Parking control gates could be used
to force vehicles to stop and pay fees. At exit, vehicles would be able to freely exit the facility
(no need to stop and pay a fee or present a prepaid or validated ticket). Parking passholders
would use a credential (e.g., a proximity card or AVI tag) to enter/exit the facility.
The advantages of a pay on entry methodology would include:
Since there is no payment of any kind required at exit, this methodology can provide
greater exit lane capacities than exit cashiering, central cashier, POF, and Pay-in-Lane.
As less parking access and revenue control equipment is needed, this option can be the
least expensive to implement.
As less equipment is used, equipment malfunctions are less of a concern. Also, there is
no worry about lost or unreadable tickets.
This option can be simple to set up and implement.
Cashiers are in the entry lanes to welcome visitors, collect fees, answer questions, provide
directions, and close the facility when it is full.
Customers would pay for parking before they are carrying ski gear or shopping
bags. Customers would not have to stop at a POF machine or central cashier on their
way back to the facility.
Disadvantages of a pay on entry methodology would include:
Entry lane capacities would be reduced. Paying parking fees would take longer than
pulling a ticket from a ticket dispenser. Additional entry lanes could be needed. Instead
of the current condition of delays at exit, there could be delays at entry.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
12
Charging a flat fee would not allow for reduced parking rates for short-term stays. All
customers would pay the same rate.
Higher parking fees for short-term stays could discourage some visitors from using the
facility or visiting the area.
Providing a limited amount of free parking (e.g., two hours) or offering a parking
validation would not be practical.
Charging a flat fee could encourage longer duration stays (reducing space turnover).
Collecting parking fees at entry would require a more manual operation. This would
require more supervision, reconciliation, and auditing. A system of revenue control can
be provided to help reconcile activities (e.g., vehicle counts); however, auditing would
be more difficult than the other options.
This operating methodology requires more staff than an automated solution (e.g., POF).
As the parking fee is paid at entry, it would be more challenging to stop people from
parking for multiple days. Parking enforcement would be needed to stop people from
parking overnight or to charge them for overnight parking.
Other Alternatives to Consider
In order to further improve facility operations and management, the following additional
technologies should be considered:
Automatic Vehicle Identification (AVI) for Monthly/Season Pass Access – AVI uses radio
frequency identification tags and readers to provide access to monthly/season parkers.
As the monthly/season parker approaches the entry/exit lane, the AVI reader sends a
signal that detects the tag (typically placed on the lower driver-side portion of the
vehicle windshield), with the tag responding with the necessary identifying information.
The system then determines the validity of the tag and performs the necessary functions
(e.g., open entry/exit gates). The main advantages of AVI technology are increased
entry/exit throughput and better customer service (e.g. customers don’t have to roll
down their windows and present a card, faster entry/exit, etc.). However, the installation
of an AVI system can be more costly than the other access card technologies and the
cost of access tags can be significantly higher than proximity cards.
Incorporating a Counting System and Signage – For some
people, searching for parking in parking structures can be
challenging. In order to make finding parking easier, many
parking facility operators and owners are installing count
systems, parking guidance systems, and Variable Message Signs
(VMS) to help people drive directly to areas with available
parking spaces. For example, VMS signs could be installed at
each parking structure entrance that display the number of
parking spaces available by level (or a simple open/full message
could be displayed). This information would help visitors and
cardholders drive directly to the level with available parking.
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
13
The following count and guidance alternatives are available:
o Utilize the Count Features of the Centralized Parking Access and Revenue Control
Software:
A facility count system utilizing the
centralized control software would
generally consist of magnetic loops
installed in each facility entrance and
exit lane (as well as on each ramp for
level-by-level counts), vehicle
detectors, ramp controllers (for level-
by-level counts) and VMS signs.
The same software package that controls the lane equipment can
provide vehicle counts. Also, the same magnetic loops and detectors
installed with the equipment would be used for counts.
Counts can be provided for the overall facility and/or by level.
The centralized control software can activate/deactivate lot full or VMS
signs. Lot full signs would be located in facility entrance lanes and VMS
signs can be located inside and/or outside of the parking structure.
This option provides a substantially lower cost count/control option than
single-space sensor systems.
Parking count systems that rely on magnetic loops are less accurate than
systems that use single-space sensors (e.g., ultrasonic sensors or vehicle
recognition cameras). Parking staff will need to verify system counts on a
daily or weekly basis by conducting occupancy counts during off-peak
hours (e.g., late evenings).
o Advanced Parking Guidance Systems:
More advanced systems use
individual space sensors and can
accurately direct parkers to an
exact space. Vehicle counts and
guidance can be provided for
the overall facility, by level, by
row/aisle, and/or by space.
Vehicle sensors would be installed above individual spaces (typically
ultrasonic sensors), or space sensors could be installed over drive aisles to
2/4/2014
Preliminary Operational Methodologies for the
Lionshead Parking Structure (UPDATED DRAFT)
March 26, 2013
14
cover multiple spaces (could be ultrasonic sensors or vehicle identification
cameras).
Advanced parking guidance systems
typically include guidance lights that are
installed over each space. Red lights
would show that the space is occupied
and green lights would identify available
spaces.
The cost of a count system will vary
depending on the system selected, options
purchased, equipment needed, power
and electrical conduit needed, and VMS
sign quantities. Systems using space sensors are far more expensive than
magnetic loop systems. Space sensor systems can cost between $400
and $600 per space for equipment and installation.
o Single-space sensors are far more accurate than magnetic loop systems.
o Since these systems can direct parkers to individual spaces, they can provide
faster parking search times and result in less vehicle emissions.
2/4/2014
To: Town Council
From: Public Works
Date: April 2, 2013
Subject: Lionshead Parking Structure Entry Improvements-Parking Equipment Options
1. Summary & Purpose
This past December the Town awarded the design contract for the Lionshead Parking
Structure (LHPS) Entry Improvements project to Zehren and Associates. The purpose
of the LHPS Entry project is to improve the operational efficiency, safety and aesthetics
of the Lionshead Parking Structure Entry.
As identified in the previous Council discussion the Lionshead Parking Structure has
three primary issues;
1. Transaction Rates & Equipment: With peak exit volumes of 375-450
vehicles per hour, efficiency is critical at the exit booths.
2. Circuitous Route to Exit and Layout: Multiple levels of parking exiting from
the bottom up via a spiraling exit ramp that has up to 5 merge points
before one gets to the exit lanes.
3. Frontage Road Traffic Flow: At peak exiting and entering periods the
Frontage Roads are also at their peak, making entering and exiting difficult
and slow, backing up into the exit lanes and parking structure.
Council directed staff to come back with a discussion on options for parking equipment
and technology to better understand whether the majority of the problems could be
solved with parking equipment. Therefore the focus of this worksession will be on
parking equipment and transaction rates. Subsequent discussions will address routing,
layout and Frontage Road traffic flow.
Staff has worked with the design team, including Carl Walker Parking Consultants, to
review the most current parking technology and equipment that may be applicable to
the Vail parking structures. The purpose of today’s worksession is to review the Town’s
existing parking operations and review the technology and equipment options available.
The purpose today is not to select specific manufacturer of parking equipment, but to
discuss operation methodologies, parking lot control, and revenue collection options.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 2
Our focus will be on the Lionshead parking structure; however since the Lionshead
Entry improvements have been integrated with the 2014 budgeted Vail parking
equipment replacement program, staff has also reviewed the Vail Village parking
structure equipment as well. All options reviewed are applicable to both parking
structures. The parking equipment replacement project is intended to replace the aging
parking structure ticketing and gate equipment within both Lionshead and Vail Village
Parking Structures. This equipment replacement includes; entry and exit gates, entry
ticket spitters, exit ticket verifiers, exit automatic and manned pay stations, software and
additional hardware.
2. Background
The Vail parking structures’ equipment currently varies from 7-12 years old and are up
for replacement. Advancements in parking equipment and more importantly guest
expectations when using public paid parking have changed, allowing the town to review
more efficient guest experience with regards to entering and exiting the parking
garages.
The town’s parking garages experience extremely high transaction rates, especially at
peak entry and exit periods. A typical holiday period or weekend will see an average of
1800 transactions per day at the Lionshead structure and 3300 per day at the Vail
Village structure, with up to 30% of those transactions occurring within the peak
afternoon exit period. Peak times around Christmas and New Years can bring in over
2200 transactions per day at the Lionshead structure and over 3800 transactions per
day at the Vail Village structure. Over the course of the five month winter season both
structures combine to see an average of 580,000 transactions equaling a total revenue
of $3.5 - $4.0 million; over the seven summer months they combined see an equally
impressive 600,000 transactions but with no revenue.
Both parking structures have conventional equipment that use tickets and or passes to
track and verify the parked time of each of our guests. Upon exiting a guest may
choose to either pay by cash or credit, or exit by use of a pass or verified free ticket (2
Hour Free or Free after Three). They also may choose to exit via a manned booth or
automated pay in lane. Each structure has 4 exit lanes. Each has the capability to
have up to three (3) manned booths, with all lanes having the ability to be used as
automated pay in lanes. Both the manned booths and pay in lanes accept cash, credit,
passes, and verified free tickets. The Town has an intricate parking policy that includes
multiple pay rates, multiple pass types, and available free periods. In order to
successfully operate the two parking structures it requires a coordinated effort between
the town’s parking, finance and IT Departments.
Many of the challenges the parking staff sees on a day to day basis include;
Lost tickets and false claims by guests
Wet or destroyed tickets
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 3
2 Hour Free parking abuse by ‘Looping’
Congestion at exit lanes, due to high volume as well as previously stated issues
Congestion at Frontage Road intersections
Guest mindset – absent minded, distracted, “vacation” mindset
Lionshead structures circuitous exiting flow
Climatic factors – cold and snow
24 Hour staffing demands with major fluctuations of volumes at peak times.
Equipment issues due to high use and climatic factors.
3. Existing Parking Structure Data Collection
In order to better understand the needs of the Vail parking structures, town staff
and the design team, reviewed the past three years of ski season parking data. We
were able to extract and evaluate every transaction that occurred each day and
determine; daily and hourly transaction counts, times and frequency of peak
transactions, how each transactions is made, whether it’s a free transaction, pass
transaction, or what increment of cash/credit was paid. This data analysis provides us
with average and peak daily lot counts, the type of transactions that are occurring at
peak times, and what type of transaction our average user uses.
In general the average holiday and weekend day during the winter ski season will see
the following transactions; ( A more detailed breakdown is attached)
Winter Average Average Average Average Average Average
Season Hldy/Wknd Peak Free Pass $10 $15 $25
Total Transactions Transactions Transactions Transactions Transactions Transactions Transactions
Transactions Per Day Per Day Per Day Per Day Per Day Per Day Per Day
Lionshead 205,000 1800 2200 43% 17% 5% 3% 32%
Vail Village 370,000 3300 3800 58% 11% 5% 3% 23%
Of the two different types of transactions, Free/Pass and Payment transactions, the
Free/Pass transaction are the most efficient, as there is no exchange of payment at the
entry or exit gate, the parking ticket or pass is simply verified. Based on the above data
the majority of the average transactions are free or pass, providing the potential to have
an extremely efficient transaction rate. However this data is misleading as this trend is
different during the peak exit period between 3:30 and 5:30 pm. During the peak exit
period 60%-75% pay upon exit and only 25%-40% use passes or a free verified ticket.
This trend of high payment transactions at peak times causes less efficient transaction
rates at the exit gates. This information can provide insight into how best to
accommodate our guests. Some assumptions that can be made based on this data;
The afternoon exiting is our design constraint due to the high amount of exit
payment transactions; with peak exiting at greater than 450 vehicles per hour,
and the 15th busiest hour at ~375 vehicles per hour. The majority of our exit
transactions occur within these two peak afternoon hours and most are paying by
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 4
cash or credit at the exit gates, slowing transaction rates. So providing alternate
pay locations, other than at the exit gates (i.e. pre-paid debit card passes, pay on
foot, or pay and display) may be beneficial; however, this would require
significant re-education of our guests.
Pass usage, specifically Value Pass usage, can be incentivized much more to
provide our guests with a faster entering and exiting experience. An average of
only 14% of our guests use passes, it is in the best interest of the guest and the
town if that number was significantly higher.
The free periods are used heavily. It may be to the town’s best interest to
investigate a more balanced free period schedule. The average fee per
transaction collected during the 2012/13 season to date is $3.39 in Lionshead
and $3.68 at Vail Village.
4. Parking Equipment and Technology
Parking equipment and technology has evolved significantly over the past 20 years.
The current state of parking equipment includes;
Entry ticket spitters for verification of entry time
Manned exit booths to receive tickets and process transaction with Cash or
credit
Automated Pay in Lane that verify tickets and process cash and/or only credit
Credit In/Credit Out reads a credit card upon entry for verification of entry time
and reads the same credit card at the exit for verification of exit time and takes
payment simultaneously eliminating the need for a ticket.
Pass Proximity Reader allows the guest to enter using a pass; i.e. debit pre-paid
pass like Vail’s Value Pass, or pre-paid passes like Vail’s Gold, Silver, Blue,
Green, or Pink passes. This eliminates the need for a ticket or exit payment
since each pass would be pre-paid.
Pay on Foot (POF) which allows the guest to take a ticket at entry, hold onto that
ticket, and then pay on their own, using cash or credit prior to leaving, at
convenient automated locations other than the exit lanes.
Central Cashiering, which is similar to POF except the guest pays at one central
location that is manned.
Pay by Space/ Pay and Display/Pay by License Plate Number allows a guest to
enter without taking a ticket and exit without going thru a pay lane or a gate.
The guest pre pays on location at a convenient automated location for an
estimated amount of time. The guest either enters a dedicated space number
where there vehicle is parked (Pay by Space); or receives a receipt for payment
and displays this receipt in their vehicle (Pay and Display); or enters their license
plate number (Pay by License Plate Number). The operator (the town) then
enforces payment with parking enforcement personnel. If a guest extends their
stay beyond the initial estimated amount of time, they must return and add more
time; or, there are know technologies that will allow a guest to add more time by
phone/credit card.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 5
License Plate Recognition (LPR) allows the guest to enter without taking a ticket
and pay upon exit based on their license plate number which is read at entry and
exit, eliminating the need for a ticket. Exit payment can be made by some of the
options above.
Pay on Entry requires the guest to pay a set flat fee upon entry regardless of the
time they will spend within the parking structure. This eliminates the need for a
ticket and any exit payment or enforcement.
Hybrids- A combination of any of the above to create a preferred system.
Currently the town uses the first five methodologies of the above list.
As parking equipment has evolved over the past 20 years the town has been at times at
the cutting edge, sometimes too cutting edge. In early 1990’s the town installed Pay on
Foot machines; and more recently the town installed a Pay and Display system in both
parking structures for “shopper” parking serving over 100 spaces in each structure.
Both of these types of equipment met with much criticism regarding use, user
friendliness and enforcement. They were subsequently uninstalled. Though these
types of parking equipment have been in use since then at other public parking
structures, and have become more readily available and familiar to guests, it is still
critical that any parking equipment and/or technology used is familiar to all or most of
our guests and can be easily used in our resort ski environment. This includes its user
friendliness in the cold and snow, potentially with gloves on, holding skis and poles (or
set aside close by), in ski boots, and friendly to the weary skier and family at the end of
the day.
Other available technologies that can or may be incorporated into a parking system
include;
Automated Vehicle Identification(AVI) allows the guest to enter using a RFid Tag
within the car (i.e. C-470). This eliminates the need for a ticket or exit payment
since each AVI would be pre-paid or automatically billed.
Automated counting systems that provide information to the arriving guest of how
many spaces are available. The system could be detailed enough to tell guests
where in the structure, by level, that the most available spaces are.
Advanced parking guidance systems provide a similar technology but are
detailed down to the exact space location and can direct vehicles to an exact
space instead of an area or level.
Combination RFid passes. It is possible to combine a parking pass with any
other type of pass a guest may be holding, i.e. an Epic Pass. However this type
of combination would require coordination and cooperation of both pass
operators; tracking the payments and having the rights to pre-paid accounts
and/or credit card information can get very complicated.
Each of these options are discussed more thoroughly with pros and cons in the
attached memo provided by Carl Walker Parking Consultants and then summarized in
the attached reference matrix. A cost estimate will be provided once parking equipment
has been narrowed down or selected and the installations, quantities, and locations are
known.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 6
5. Staffing
Each of the above described options requires similar type staffing, with some having
more emphasis on various staffing needs. Each will require parking attendants/hosts,
equipment technicians, parking supervisors, enforcement, finance and IT staff.
Our existing operations requires 141 parking staff man hours per day, not including
overtime as needed on peak days, along with another 25 hours per day behind the
scene man hours from Finance and IT. For relative comparison purposes we estimate
the options presented above may require the following approximate staffing levels;
Vail Parking Structure Staffing Man Hours
Parking System
Total MH
Per Day
Cashiers
Equipment
Technician Supervisor
Traffic
Control
Host Enforcement Finance/IT VTC LH
Existing 166 36 36 10 21 28 10 25
Pay on Foot 124‐174 12‐24 12‐24 16 21 28‐54 10 25
Central Cashier 164‐176 35 35 10 21 28‐40 10 25
Pay and Display 155‐175 0 0 16 24 42‐62 48 25
Pay on Entry 133 32 32 10 12 10 10 25
LPR 172 36 36 16 21 28 10 25
AVI 112 24 24 10 19 12 10 25
The estimates above are based on the assumption that a significant amount of host
assistance would be needed at peak times with any type of guest controlled payment,
i.e. Pay on Foot or Pay and Display; and that a Pay and Display type system would
require a significant amount of enforcement and “meter readers”. Over time these types
of guest controlled pay options may require less assistance as guests become more
accustomed to the new system hence the given staffing ranges.
The personnel estimates did not go beyond this level to include possible increase in
court time, ticket revenue recovery, or warrant issuance, etc…
Any Hybrid of these systems would change the staffing levels and would most likely be
similar to the staffing levels we have today or potentially exceed today’s level. Based
on these assumptions the only two options that provide a potential significant savings in
staffing are going to either a full Pay on Entry or full Pass/AVI system. However it would
be impossible to implement a full Pass/AVI system as that would require all guests to
have a pass of some form.
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 7
7. Recommendations
After initial review staff recommends the town move forward with a Hybrid option that
moves toward automation. We recommend providing the following at each structure;
One to Two (1-2) manned booths at exit:
Provides the ability for our guests to have a personal interaction with a cashier
upon exit, maintains status quo for many, and provides the ability to provide
immediate assistance at the exit for anyone with issues upon exiting.
Multiple (3-4) unmanned exit lanes with ticket verifiers & proximity pass readers:
Provides faster exiting for those using passes and verified tickets (Free or pre-
paid at a Pay on Foot station), and may provide secondary exiting from
Lionshead.
Two (2) Pay on Foot (POF) stations at each structure:
Provides guest with the ability to use Pay on Foot station and exit more quickly
Increase Value Pass usage (Pre-paid Debit Cards):
Provides frequent users with the fastest entering and exiting. Based on the 2012
citizen survey 76% of respondents did not have a parking pass yet almost all
respondents would qualify for some type of pass.
This option is recommended to provide the town with flexibility as we move toward
automation. Based on past experience we do not believe that our guest is fully
prepared to make the move to a fully automated Pay on Foot system. Having the option
to pay at a manned booth is an expectation of some of our guest and it provides
immediate assistance to those guests that may have issues similar to the challenge
issues presented above in section 2. The flexibility of having two booths allows us to
staff or not staff as needed depending on how fast we can educate our guests on the
use of Pay on Foot, the purchase of value/debit passes, etc… Currently we have four
booths at Lionshead, this can be reduced to two. This option would utilize all of the
current exit lane methodologies (1-5 as listed in section 4) and add Pay on Foot.
Once the type of equipment is selected an RFP will be distributed to manufacturers for
proposals, and then evaluation as to which specific manufacturer meets the Town’s
requirements.
This hybrid option may exceed the current parking equipment replacement budget as a
result of the purchase of POF machines. However once layout concepts are fully vetted
we will have a better understanding of whether or not the combined project will be on or
over budget and by how much. We will provide that information at that time.
The other options were discarded for the following primary reasons;
Pay-on-Foot Only; this system may be difficult for our end of day skier guests,
ski gear (gloves, boots, skis, poles) complications, the guest having to keep ticket
on them and not losing or damaging it, exit gates would be unmanned so we
would be unable to provide immediate resolution to issues, the number of POF
stations to install for high volume hours, the re-Education of guest
2/4/2014
Town of Vail Page 8
Central Cashiering; this is very similar to POF, however it is more restricted on
location of a central cashier which requires a heated office space to function.
Pay by Space/ Pay and Display/Pay by License Plate Number; this system is
less flexible with pay rates and passes, it is onerous on the guest to return to
their vehicle potentially multiple times, requires the guest to guesstimate how
much time they will spend parked, leads to many times more disputed charges,
and from past experience was not well received. It also may encourage less
turnover by meter feeding.
License Plate Recognition; this technology is limited to a clean license plate. In
our climate there would be far too many misreads or non-recognition of plates
due to snow, icepack, dirt, grime, and debris on license plates. The accuracy
under normal conditions is 85%, that means at least 15% of misreads (300-500
on our typical holiday/weekend day), meaning potential lost revenue, poor guest
experience, and disputes on charges.
Pay By Entry; Although this option is the most widely used for ski resorts since it
is simple and has reduced staffing implications; this system would require the
town to change our rate structure to a flat rate, and provide separate areas for 2
hour free parking. It allows the guest to stay as long as they like for the one flat
rate, minimizing space turnover and limiting the capacity of each structure over
the course of a day. If the flat rate is set too low we may fill every day and be on
the Frontage Road too often, too high of a rate and we would not be catering to
the many uses and needs of our guests. This system however has been
suggested as the preferred method for any type of paid summer parking.
7. Next Steps
Based on the discussion and direction by Council, staff and the design team will
develop more detailed concept solutions that include the recommended equipment
program with improved locations and geometric layouts.
Lionshead Entry Improvement Project Schedule
Concept Design: April-May 2013
Schematic Design: June-July 2013
Design Development and Entitlements: August-September 2013
Final Design and Construction Documents: September 2013-January 2014
Construction & Equipment Installation: April-June; Sept-Nov 2014
2/4/2014
Da
t
e
E
n
t
r
y
E
x
i
t
E
n
t
r
y
E
x
i
t
E
n
t
r
y
E
x
i
t
P
a
s
s
*
‐
$
15
.
0
0
$
20
.
0
0
$
25
.
0
0
$
OtherPass‐$ 15.00$ 20.00$ 25.00$ OtherLHVV
12
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
2
1
7
8
5
1
7
7
5
3
1
9
5
3
1
4
0
3
9
3
3
6
9
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
2
6
6
%
6
%
3
%
2
4
%
0
%
7
5
%
5
%
3
%
1
7
%
0
%
7
.
5
8
$ 5.67$
12
/
2
8
/
2
0
1
2
2
2
4
5
2
2
0
3
3
2
9
2
3
2
2
1
5
2
4
5
2
5
1
2
/
2
8
/
2
0
1
2
5
9
%
7
%
5
%
2
8
%
0
%
7
0
%
6
%
3
%
2
1
%
0
%
9
.
2
2
$ 6.73$
12
/
2
9
/
2
0
1
2
2
2
0
9
2
2
1
9
3
0
1
7
2
9
9
8
5
7
3
5
6
7
1
2
/
2
9
/
2
0
1
2
6
2
%
9
%
4
%
2
6
%
0
%
6
9
%
5
%
3
%
2
3
%
0
%
8
.
4
0
$ 7.03$
12
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
2
1
8
8
8
1
8
9
9
2
9
0
3
2
9
6
8
4
9
2
5
0
3
1
2
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
2
6
0
%
9
%
4
%
2
7
%
0
%
7
0
%
6
%
3
%
2
1
%
0
%
8
.
8
9
$ 6.70$
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
2
2
0
4
2
1
7
8
5
3
2
0
8
2
9
7
4
5
5
3
5
4
3
1
2
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
2
6
4
%
7
%
4
%
2
5
%
0
%
7
2
%
7
%
3
%
1
7
%
0
%
8
.
0
6
$ 5.97$
01
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
1
6
6
7
1
9
0
5
2
7
3
4
3
0
7
4
4
7
1
4
7
9
0
1
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
6
2
%
7
%
4
%
2
7
%
0
%
6
8
%
8
%
3
%
2
0
%
1
%
8
.
5
4
$ 6.83$
01
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
6
9
8
1
6
9
5
2
7
2
4
2
7
0
2
3
8
4
3
8
3
0
1
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
6
1
%
6
%
5
%
2
7
%
0
%
7
0
%
6
%
3
%
2
0
%
0
%
8
.
6
6
$ 6.59$
01
/
0
3
/
2
0
1
3
1
7
2
3
1
7
2
3
2
7
2
8
2
7
4
0
4
0
7
4
0
6
0
1
/
0
3
/
2
0
1
3
6
3
%
5
%
4
%
2
8
%
0
%
7
1
%
6
%
3
%
2
0
%
0
%
8
.
5
0
$ 6.43$
01
/
0
4
/
2
0
1
3
1
7
9
1
1
7
6
6
2
9
4
1
2
8
4
2
4
6
3
4
5
3
0
1
/
0
4
/
2
0
1
3
6
3
%
5
%
4
%
2
7
%
0
%
7
0
%
6
%
3
%
2
1
%
0
%
8
.
3
8
$ 6.76$
01
/
0
5
/
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
2
2
8
3
7
2
8
6
3
6
7
6
6
7
4
0
1
/
0
5
/
2
0
1
3
5
7
%
6
%
5
%
3
2
%
0
%
6
5
%
4
%
4
%
2
8
%
0
%
9
.
7
7
$ 8.37$
01
/
1
8
/
2
0
1
3
1
5
9
9
1
5
7
3
2
5
6
4
2
3
7
9
3
1
8
3
1
8
0
1
/
1
8
/
2
0
1
3
6
7
%
3
%
3
%
2
6
%
0
%
7
7
%
4
%
2
%
1
6
%
0
%
7
.
6
8
$ 5.11$
01
/
1
9
/
2
0
1
3
1
6
3
0
1
6
4
0
3
0
6
7
3
0
2
0
5
7
4
5
8
3
0
1
/
1
9
/
2
0
1
3
6
9
%
5
%
3
%
2
4
%
0
%
7
6
%
4
%
2
%
1
8
%
0
%
7
.
2
0
$ 5.40$
01
/
2
0
/
2
0
1
3
1
6
6
9
1
6
8
5
2
4
0
9
2
5
9
9
4
2
6
4
2
3
0
1
/
2
0
/
2
0
1
3
5
2
%
7
%
4
%
3
6
%
1
%
6
4
%
5
%
3
%
2
6
%
1
%
1
0
.
8
3
$ 7.99$
02
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
1
7
4
6
1
7
1
0
2
5
2
2
2
4
0
9
4
7
7
4
7
4
0
2
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
4
5
%
2
%
3
%
5
0
%
0
%
6
1
%
3
%
4
%
3
2
%
0
%
1
3
.
3
7
$ 9.30$
02
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
8
0
6
1
8
1
8
2
7
0
2
2
6
7
0
6
5
1
6
5
0
0
2
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
4
3
%
3
%
2
%
5
2
%
0
%
6
1
%
3
%
2
%
3
3
%
1
%
1
3
.
7
9
$ 9.24$
02
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3
1
8
7
7
1
8
2
9
3
2
4
9
3
1
0
3
5
6
9
5
4
2
0
2
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3
7
0
%
4
%
2
%
2
5
%
0
%
7
5
%
3
%
2
%
1
9
%
0
%
7
.
0
8
$ 5.67$
02
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
3
1
9
2
2
1
9
3
0
3
0
2
4
3
0
4
2
9
0
1
9
3
7
0
2
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
3
5
0
%
4
%
3
%
4
3
%
0
%
6
8
%
3
%
2
%
2
6
%
0
%
1
1
.
9
5
$ 7.45$
02
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
1
7
6
4
1
7
4
8
2
8
9
3
2
8
1
0
4
8
8
4
8
2
0
2
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
5
8
%
7
%
2
%
3
3
%
0
%
6
5
%
4
%
2
%
2
8
%
0
%
9
.
6
9
$ 8.06$
02
/
1
7
/
2
0
1
3
1
4
8
6
1
5
2
7
2
5
1
5
2
6
8
0
3
9
4
4
2
5
0
2
/
1
7
/
2
0
1
3
5
7
%
5
%
3
%
3
5
%
1
%
6
8
%
4
%
3
%
2
5
%
0
%
1
0
.
0
7
$ 7.36$
02
/
1
8
/
2
0
1
3
1
3
8
3
1
3
9
1
2
3
5
1
2
4
2
5
2
8
3
2
8
0
0
2
/
1
8
/
2
0
1
3
5
9
%
5
%
3
%
3
3
%
0
%
6
7
%
5
%
3
%
2
5
%
1
%
9
.
5
4
$ 7.38$
03
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
2
1
9
3
2
1
0
4
2
7
9
4
2
6
8
3
6
6
8
6
4
1
0
3
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
3
6
6
%
2
%
2
%
3
0
%
0
%
6
8
%
3
%
2
%
2
7
%
0
%
8
.
2
1
$ 7.60$
03
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
8
8
8
1
8
7
2
2
8
4
7
2
7
8
4
8
3
7
8
3
8
0
3
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
4
5
%
3
%
3
%
4
8
%
0
%
6
4
%
3
%
2
%
3
0
%
1
%
1
3
.
1
0
$ 8.45$
03
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
3
1
8
9
8
1
9
1
3
2
5
9
2
2
5
4
9
5
6
5
5
5
9
0
3
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
3
6
1
%
3
%
3
%
3
2
%
1
%
6
5
%
3
%
3
%
2
9
%
0
%
9
.
2
4
$ 8.36$
03
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
3
1
6
8
2
1
7
3
5
2
4
2
6
2
5
9
8
4
7
6
4
8
5
0
3
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
3
5
6
%
6
%
4
%
3
3
%
1
%
6
2
%
4
%
3
%
3
0
%
1
%
9
.
9
7
$ 8.70$
Av
e
r
a
g
e
1
8
1
7
1
8
1
1
2
8
1
4
2
8
0
3
5
2
3
5
2
2
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
1
7
%
4
3
%
5
%
3
%
3
2
%
0
%
1
1
%
5
8
%
5
%
3
%
2
3
%
0
%
9.49$ 7.21$
Av
g
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
s
2
9
9
7
7
0
9
7
6
1
5
8
0
4
3
0
8
1
6
2
1
1
3
2
7
9
6
5
3
1
1
Av
g
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
d
*I
n
Ta
b
l
e
Pa
s
s
& Fr
e
e
ar
e
co
m
b
i
n
e
d
as
$0
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
;
In
Av
e
r
a
g
e
s
th
e
Pa
s
s
av
e
r
a
g
e
is subtracted from Pass & Free percentage
Pe
a
k
Ho
u
r
on
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
y
4p
m
‐5p
m
4
p
m
‐5pm on 12/30/12
12
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
2
9
2
4
0
1
2
1
9
3
0
1
4
6
2
9
1
8
2
2
5
0
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
e
d
Pe
a
k
10
t
h
Hr
Ba
s
e
d
on
la
s
t
3 ye
a
r
s
is
~3
7
5
~
4
0
0
on 12/27/12
02
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
3
7
4
9
2
2
8
9
0
19734191841
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
e
d
Average Fee Per Transaction
Lo
t
Co
u
n
t
s
272 238
30
0
Fe
e
Fr
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
Da
t
e
Li
o
n
s
h
e
a
d
V
a
i
l
Village (Includes Upper Deck)
74
2
24
5
875
Va
i
l
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
Up
p
e
r
Va
i
l
Vi
l
l
l
a
g
e
Li
o
n
s
h
e
a
d
2/4/2014
St
a
f
f
e
d
Bo
o
t
h
P
a
y
in
La
n
e
P
a
y
in
La
n
e
P
a
y
‐On
‐Fo
o
t
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
Mu
l
t
i
Pa
y
P
a
y
‐On‐EntryProximity VerifyerAVIEntry Ticket Spitter
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
/
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
Me
t
h
o
d
Ca
s
h
/
C
C
/
P
a
s
s
at
Ex
i
t
C
a
s
h
/
C
C
/
P
a
s
s
at
Ex
i
t
C
C
/
P
a
s
s
at
Ex
i
t
V
e
r
i
f
i
e
r
at
Ex
i
t
V
e
r
i
f
i
e
r
at
Ex
i
t
V
e
r
i
f
i
e
r
at
Ex
i
t
C
a
s
h
/
C
C
/
P
a
s
s
at EntryPass Verifier at ExitRfid Reader at ExitEntry Ticket
De
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
St
a
f
f
e
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
bo
o
t
h
th
a
t
is
ab
l
e
to
ta
k
e
al
l
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
& ha
s
Ve
r
i
f
i
e
r
& Pr
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
Ve
r
i
f
i
e
r
Au
t
o
pa
y
st
a
t
i
o
n
th
a
t
ca
n
ta
k
e
al
l
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
& ha
s
ve
r
i
f
i
e
r
& Pr
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
Ve
r
i
f
i
e
r
Au
t
o
pa
y
st
a
t
i
o
n
th
a
t
ca
n
on
l
y
ta
k
e
CC
or
pa
s
s
e
s
or
fr
e
e
ti
c
k
e
t
s
& ha
s
Pa
s
s
Pr
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
Ve
r
i
f
i
e
r
Pa
y
st
a
t
i
o
n
lo
c
a
t
e
d
at
co
n
v
i
e
n
e
n
t
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
se
l
f
pa
y
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
30
mi
n
u
t
e
s
gr
a
c
e
pe
r
i
o
d
to
ge
t
to
ca
r
an
d
ge
t
ou
t
.
Pa
y
st
a
t
i
o
n
lo
c
a
t
e
d
at
co
n
v
i
e
n
e
n
t
si
n
g
l
e
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
to
pa
y
on
fo
o
t
at
ca
s
h
i
e
r
.
Pa
y
st
a
t
i
o
n
lo
c
a
t
e
d
at
co
n
v
i
e
n
i
e
n
t
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
that
re
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
s
to
pre pay
fo
r
pa
r
k
i
n
g
an
d
di
s
p
l
a
y
a
ti
c
k
e
t
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
i
r
vehicle. Pay upon entry of parking structure at a pay station. No exit gate required.Verifier that allows a guest to waive a pass within a few inches of the verifier.Overhead Rfid reader that reads a pass as a vehicle drives byAuto ticket spitter for entry time documentation
95
‐13
5
VP
H
8
0
‐10
0
VP
H
8
0
‐11
0
VP
H
3
0
0
‐36
0
VP
H
3
0
0
‐36
0
VP
H
F
r
e
e
Fl
o
w
1
3
5
‐200 VPH at Entry600 VPH800 VPH400 VPH
75
‐10
0
PP
H
at
St
a
t
i
o
n
11
5
‐17
5
PP
H
at
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
75
‐10
0
PP
H
at
St
a
t
i
o
nFree Flow at Exit
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
LH
1‐3
1
3
0
0
0
0
4
0
3
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
VV
1‐3
2
1
0
0
0
0
4
0
5
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
LH
1‐20
3
‐42
0
0
0
4
‐603
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
VV
1‐20
3
‐42
0
0
0
4
0
5
Pr
o
s
Hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
at
ex
i
t
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
al
l
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
wi
t
h
o
u
t
ma
n
n
e
d
bo
o
t
h
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
al
m
o
s
t
al
l
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
wi
t
h
o
u
t
ma
n
n
e
d
bo
o
t
h
Fa
s
t
ex
i
t
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
ti
m
e
,
si
n
c
e
gu
e
s
t
ha
s
al
r
e
a
d
y
pa
i
d
an
d
ne
e
d
s
on
l
y
to
ve
r
i
f
y
ex
i
t
i
n
g
Fa
s
t
ex
i
t
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
ti
m
e
,
si
n
c
e
gu
e
s
t
ha
s
al
r
e
a
d
y
pa
i
d
an
d
ne
e
d
s
on
l
y
to
ve
r
i
f
y
ex
i
t
i
n
g
Fa
s
t
e
s
t
en
t
r
y
ex
i
t
ti
m
e
si
n
c
e
gu
e
s
t
pa
y
s
af
t
e
r
pa
r
k
i
n
g
Fastest exit time since guest pays upon entryFaster entry and exit transaction, since pass is prepaidFaster entry and exit transaction, since pass is prepaid
Ab
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
is
s
u
e
s
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
(l
o
s
t
ti
c
k
e
t
s
,
we
t
ti
c
k
e
t
s
,
DU
I
'
s
,
et
c
…
)
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
‐
No
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
Fa
s
t
e
r
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
th
a
n
Pa
y
in
La
n
e
wi
t
h
Ca
s
h
,
si
n
c
e
no
ca
s
h
is
fe
d
in
t
o
ma
c
h
i
n
e
s
Hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
at
Ca
s
h
e
i
r
Human interaction at entryLimited issues to occurLimited issues to occur
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
‐
No
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
‐
No
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
Reduce staff in afternoonsReduce StaffingReduce Staffing Current Standard‐ No learning curveNo need for customers to stop and present access
Co
n
s
Sl
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ti
m
e
S
l
o
w
e
s
t
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ti
m
e
S
l
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ti
m
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
pa
y
pr
i
o
r
to
ex
i
t
i
n
g
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
pa
y
pr
i
o
r
to
ex
i
t
i
n
g
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
gu
e
s
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
pe
r
i
o
d
ne
e
d
e
d
fo
r
pa
r
k
i
n
g
or
re
t
u
r
n
/
c
a
l
l
to
ex
t
e
n
d
Requires all periods to be paid at consistent rate. Requires all guest to purchase a pass ahead of timeRequires all guest to purchase a pass ahead of time
Co
s
t
of
ma
n
n
i
n
g
bo
o
t
h
s
N
o
Hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
N
o
Hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
N
o
hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
N
o
hu
m
a
n
in
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
R
a
t
e
s
must change to flat rate.No human interactionNo human interaction
Un
a
b
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
is
s
u
e
s
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
at
th
e
ga
t
e
No
Ca
s
h
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
ei
t
h
e
r
go
ba
c
k
to
ca
r
to
ge
t
ti
c
k
e
t
or
ha
v
e
it
on
th
e
m
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
ei
t
h
e
r
go
ba
c
k
to
ca
r
to
ge
t
ti
c
k
e
t
or
ha
v
e
it
on
th
e
m
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
gu
e
s
t
to
ei
t
h
e
r
go
ba
c
k
to
ca
r
to
di
s
p
l
a
y
ti
c
k
e
t
or
me
m
o
r
i
z
e
space
nu
m
b
e
r
be
f
o
r
e
le
a
v
i
n
g
ca
r
2 Hour Free would have to be provided in separate lot
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
cl
e
a
n
dr
y
ti
c
k
e
t
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
cl
e
a
n
dr
y
ti
c
k
e
t
M
a
y
be
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
au
t
o
m
a
t
e
d
st
a
t
i
o
n
wh
e
n
ar
m
s
ar
e
fi
l
l
e
d
wi
t
h
sk
i
ge
a
r
/
f
a
m
i
l
y
Ca
s
h
i
e
r
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
ma
y
no
t
be
in
co
n
v
i
e
n
e
n
t
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
al
l
gu
e
s
t
s
Ma
y
be
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
to
deal
wi
t
h
au
t
o
m
a
t
e
d
st
a
t
i
o
n
wh
e
n
ar
m
s
ar
e
fi
l
l
e
d
with
sk
i
ge
a
r
/
f
a
m
i
l
y
Reduces turnover and potentially capacity
Un
a
b
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
is
s
u
e
s
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
at
th
e
ga
t
e
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
cl
e
a
n
dr
y
ti
c
k
e
t
U
n
a
b
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
is
s
u
e
s
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
at
ga
t
e
Al
l
sp
a
c
e
s
ne
e
d
to
clearly
la
b
e
l
e
d
.
Th
i
s
wi
l
l
be
an
is
s
u
e
on
to
p
de
c
k
s
for
nu
m
b
e
r
i
n
g
an
d
cl
e
a
r
st
r
i
p
i
n
g
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
le
a
r
n
i
n
g
cu
r
v
e
Un
a
b
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
is
s
u
e
s
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
at
ga
t
e
Un
a
b
l
e
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
issues
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
l
y
at
th
e
gate
Di
ff
ic
u
lt to
pr
o
v
i
de
cu
r
r
e
n
t
ra
t
e
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
wi
t
h
Fr
e
e
pe
r
i
o
d
s
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
Co
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
Ma
t
r
i
x
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct
negotiators, Regarding: update on pending litigation.
PRESENTER(S): Kendra Carberry
2/4/2014
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014
ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (4:00 p.m.)
NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW (ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES
AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
--------------------
THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT
APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD), TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2014 IN THE VAIL
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Ongoing agenda items TBD: DRB/PEC updates - Warren - WS - 15 min.; Information Updates
Attachments: WS - 15 min.; Executive Session items: 30 min.; Consent Agenda: 5 min.; Town
Manager Report: 5 min.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Resolution No. 2 CDOT Simba Run Underpass IGA - ES - 2/18- Tom
Amended FHU Contract - ES - 2/18 - Tom
Lionshead Medians Design Update - 2/18 - Tom
I-70 Underpass Design Update - 60 min. - WS - 2/18 - Tom
Village Information Center Design Update 30 min. - WS - 2/18 - Greg
2015 VVF Council Update - ES - 2/18
Timeline for Council Goals Discussion - WS - 2/18
RRC Attendance Survey - WS - 30 min. - 2/18
Eagle County Open Space Coordinator Toby Sprunk 30 min - ES - 2/18
Wall Street Call-Up - WS & ES - 2/18
Commercial Ski Storage Ordinance 1st reading - ES - 3/4
Commercial Ski Storage Ordinance 2nd reading - ES - 3/18
AIPP Board Member Interviews and Appointments - WS & ES - 3/18
2nd Budget Supplemental - ES - 3/18
Clean Up Title 12 Ordinance - TBD
NEPA and Uniformed Relocation Act - 30 min. - ES - Mike Vanderhoff - TBD
Plastic bags - TBD
Village Information Center - Greg - TBD
Fee Schedule changes - George - TBD
Neighborhood Speed Control - TBD - Greg/Dwight
Housing Strategic Plan - George - TBD
Beaver policy update - Kristen - WS - TBD
Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan Update - 60 min - ES - George - TBD
2015 WAC construction restrictions discussion - 30 min - WS- George - TBD
Sister City discussion - TBD
Discussion of future of RSES - TBD
Streaming PEC & DRB - TBD
2015 Expectations/Legacy Piece - TBD
2015 Town-wide fulfillment - TBD
VLMD Term limits - TBD
Marijuana policy discussion - WS - Matt - TBD
2/4/2014