Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-04 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Evening SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING SESSION AGENDA VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 6:00 P.M., MARCH 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. 1. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation (15 min.) 2. ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda: 1) Approval of February 4 and February 18 meeting minutes 2) Proclamation No. 1, Series of 2014, Official Proclamation for One Book One Valley, 2014 - Lori Ann Barnes 3) Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014 - Bighorn Area GSA Amendment - Jonathan Spence 4) License Agreement for easement encroachment at 2801 Snowberry Drive - Tom Kassmel (15 min. ) 3. ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report: 1) Community Meeting (5 min. ) 4. ITEM/TOPIC: Update on 2015 Alpine World Ski Championships (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Ceil Folz, Vail Valley Foundation ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the presentation and have an opportunity to ask questions of the Vail Valley Foundation. BACKGROUND: The Vail Valley Foundation will make quarterly updates to the Council and the community on the 2015 Alpine World Ski Championships as a result of the Town of Vail sponsoship of the event. 5. ITEM/TOPIC: Vail I-70 Underpass Project Update (75 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel, Michael Vanderhoof and Kathy Freeman ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Endorse a preferred location of the I- 70 Vail Underpass based on the previous Council meeting presentations, and to also listen to and solicit any questions regarding the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and Federal Uniform Act presentations, presented by CDOT. BACKGROUND: The I-70 Vail Underpass is a proposed new multimodal pedestrian and vehicular connection that is midway between Main Vail and West Vail exits, passing under I-70. This underpass has been identified in the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the CDOT I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) as a critical link between the North 3/4/2014 and South Frontage Road. The Town and CDOT have recently entered into a Letter of Commitment to jointly fund the design and construction of this project with an expected completion date of December of 2017. CDOT, the Town of Vail, and the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU), will request the Town Council endorse a preferred location for the underpass based the presentations to Town Council on 1/21/14 and 2/18/14. CDOT will also provide Council and the public with a cursory overview of the NEPA process and Federal Uniform Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Endorse the preferred location of the I-70 Vail Underpass based on the previous Council meeting presentations, and listen to and solicit any questions regarding the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and Federal Uniform Act presentations, presented by CDOT. 6. ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 2, Series of 2014, A Resolution Approving an Amended Intergovernmental Agreement Between the Town of Vail and the Colorado Department of Transportation Regarding the Design of the I-70 Vail Underpass; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. (10 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve Resolution 2 Series 2014 an amended IGA with CDOT BACKGROUND: The conceptual design work completed to date for the I-70 Vail Underpass has been jointly funded by CDOT and the Town of Vail thru an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) approved last year. The current approved IGA provides joint funding up to a maximum of $325,000 to the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). As the project comes to a close on conceptual design this funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, both the IGA with CDOT and the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 2 Series 2014 an amended IGA with CDOT 7. ITEM/TOPIC: I-70 Vail Underpass Design Contract Amendment (5 minutes) PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve design contract amendment with FHU BACKGROUND: The conceptual design work completed to date for the I-70 Vail Underpass has been completed by the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). As the project comes to a close on conceptual design this funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve design contract amendment with FHU 8. ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014, an ordinance enacting Title 5, Chapter 12, Vail Town Code, “Recycling 3/4/2014 Requirements”, establishing regulations regarding recycling of discarded materials by solid waste generators, and solid waste services provided by waste services companies operating in the town of Vail and setting forth details in regards thereto. (45 min) PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2014, upon second reading BACKGROUND: At the conclusion of the evening session held February 18, 2014, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 upon First Reading, but recommended modifications to the ordinance language to accommodate community hardship, and directed staff to address language and definition clarity. Ordinance No. 6 has been revised accordingly. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Vail Town Council approve Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 upon second reading. 9. ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, an ordinance for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12-2-2: Definitions of Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and to amend Sections 12-7B, 12- 7H, 12-7I and 12-8E replacing the term “Commercial Ski Storage” with “Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (15 minutes) PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, upon first reading. BACKGROUND: At the Town Council Public Hearing on February 18, 2014 staff provided an update on this item with information from the February 10 th Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. After careful deliberation and after taking public comment, the Town Council determined that the existing regulatory mechanism, discounting the determination of similar use that occurred in 2006 related to the 3 rd floor of the Vista Bahn Building, is sound and appropriate pertaining to allowable locations for ski storage/ski club type uses. The Council directed staff to perform the necessary analysis and code work to make certain, with no ambiguity or room for misunderstanding, that ski storage/ski club uses, in all their variations, are appropriately located only in the basement or garden level of a structure in the Commercial Core 1 (CC-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) and Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR-2). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission at their February 24, 2014 meeting unanimously recommended approval of the proposed code amendments. 10. ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek 3/4/2014 Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140002 ) (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council review the Planning and Environmental Commission recommendation and approve, approve with modifications or deny the first reading of the rezoning ordinance. BACKGROUND: On August 21, 2012 the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2012 establishing the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District. The Vail Village Townhouse (VVT) District was adopted following numerous public hearings before the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council first, as a private property owner initiated application and later, as a Community Development staff led effort. On December 17, 2013 the Vail Town Council instructed staff to submit a rezoning application for the properties known as The Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes, omitting from the application the Vail Rowhouses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalet and Vail Trails East. On February 10, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Vail Town Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” 11. ITEM/TOPIC: A request to proceed through the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (15 min) PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell and Kyle Webb ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: On behalf of the property owner, the Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the applicant’s request for property owner authorization to proceed through the Town’s development review process. BACKGROUND: On October 16, 2012, the Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Donovan opposed), directed staff to enter into a license agreement for “landscaping, patio, drainage, and water feature improvements" on town owned stream tract. On August 21, 2013, the Design Review Board by a vote of 3-1-0 (Kjesbo opposed) approved with a condition, a design review application for a new duplex on the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Should the Vail Town Council choose to 3/4/2014 approve the applicant’s request, Staff recommends the Council pass the following motion: "The Vail Town Council, on behalf of the property owner, approves the applicant's request to proceed throught the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto." 12. ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S.§ 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession of Marijuana. (5 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. BACKGROUND: In 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana. Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older. In light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession and open and public display or consumption of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013. Ordinance No. 5 reconciles the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18- 406 and to clarifies the Town's penalty provisions concerning the possession and open and public display and consumption of marijuana. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. 13. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (10:00 p.m.) 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda: 1) Approval of February 4 and February 18 meeting minutes 2) Proclamation No. 1, Series of 2014, Official Proclamation for One Book One Valley, 2014 - Lori Ann Barnes 3) Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014 - Bighorn Area GSA Amendment - Jonathan Spence 4) License Agreement for easement encroachment at 2801 Snowberry Drive - Tom Kassmel ATTACHMENTS: February 4 meeting minutes February 18 meeting minutes Proclamation No. 1, Series of 2014 Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014 Encroachment License Agreement 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 4, 2014 Page 1 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 4, 2014 6:00 P.M. Vail Town Council Chambers The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Andy Daly. Members present: Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro Tem Margaret Rogers Jenn Bruno Dave Chapin Dale Bugby Absent: Andy Daly Greg Moffet Staff members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk _________________________________________________________________ The first item on the agenda was recognition of Buck Allen’s 35 year anniversary with the town on February 13, 2014. Kurz presented Judge Allen with a plaque thanking him for his 35 years of service as the town’s municipal judge. Allen was 29 years old when he was appointed as the town judge. Allen thanked the 1979 town council members for having faith in making him the judge. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was no citizen participation. Ludwig welcomed Vail Cub Scout Troop 231 who was in the audience working on their Citizenship merit badge. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: 1) Approval of January 7 and January 21 meeting minutes. Bugby made a motion to approve the January 7 meeting minutes with a second from Rogers. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. Bugby made a motion to approve January 21 meeting minutes with a second from Chapin. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. The fourth item on the agenda was the Town Manager’s Report. Town Manager Stan Zemler asked council to confirm proposed dates to visit Park City on April 3 and 4 and October 9 and 10 to visit Aspen. Council agreed to confirm dates with Zemler before the February 21 town council meeting. The fifth item on the agenda was the Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation requesting permission to proceed through the town’s development review process with an application to construct an education center in Gerald R. Ford Park. Community Development Director George Ruther explained the Ford Park Master Plan identified the site of the proposed facility 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 4, 2014 Page 2 along west Betty Ford Way, just northwest of the playground. The education center design, size and program will be consistent with the approved 2013 Ford Park Master Plan. Rogers made a motion to allow Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation to proceed through the process with a second from Chapin. Ludwig reminded Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation that this was an approval to proceed through the process, but not approval of the project. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. The sixth item on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Creating the Timber Ridge Enterprise Fund of the Town of Vail, Colorado; Making Budget Adjustments to the Timber Ridge Enterprise Fund of the 2014 Budget for the Town of Vail, Colorado; Authorizing the said Adjustment as Set Forth Herein; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. Director of Financing Judy Camp stated there were no changes made to the ordinance since the first reading. Rogers made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 4 on second reading with a second from Bruno. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. The seventh item on the agenda was the Road to 2015 Incentive Program. George Ruther stated the purpose of the 2015 incentive program was to provide financial incentive to commercial building owners and their tenants to complete certain functional and aesthetic exterior and interior building improvements within and around Vail Village, Lionshead and the East and West Vail retail areas. These eligible projects include painting, sign repair/replacement, awning repair/replacement, landscape improvements, deck improvements, etc. The goal of the incentive program was to maintain and enhance the pedestrian experience; provide comfortable and attractive places to shop and eat; and to make a first and lasting positive impression of Vail during the 2015 World Alpine Ski Championships. The incentives would include a refund on planning application fees, building permit application and plan review fees and would expedite the application and plan review for permits submitted after March 1, 2014. Rogers hoped businesses would take advantage of this program. Chapin asked if there was a limit on how many permits could be pulled by a business to take advantage of the incentive program. Ruther responded there was no limit. Council instructed Ruther to go forward with the Road to 2015 Incentive Program. The eighth item on the agenda was the Vail construction update. Public Works Director Greg Hall stated the town would be impacted by a significant number of large construction projects in 2014. Many of the most impactful projects are along the North and South Frontage Roads. Starting in April, on the North Frontage Road from City Market to Main Vail and on the South Frontage Road from the Donovan Pavilion to Cascade, the road shoulders will be widened by 6 feet for bike lanes. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) provided the town with $100,000 for water quality vaults that will be scheduled to be constructed in April – June on the South Frontage Road from West Vail to the Donovan Pavilion. Staff is preparing to update council at the February 18 Town Council meeting concerning the South Frontage Road medians, which will be located from the Lionshead Parking structure to Vail Spa. The median project will begin in April and will be financed with Tax Increment Financing (TIF) dollars. Staff is planning on having these projects completed by June so CDOT can begin 11 miles of asphalt overlay on all Frontage Roads from July to October. Chief Engineer Tom Kassmel told council the WiFi/4G Das project that started last fall would be completed in June. Kassmel stated 7 of the 23 nodes have currently been installed. Rogers asked if the internet service would be town wide in time for the 2015 World Championships. Kassmel responded that was the plan. Town Manager Stan Zemler said he would arrange for Ron Braden, Information Technology Director, to update council on February 18 concerning internet and 4G services. Kurz asked how 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 4, 2014 Page 3 important were the Lionshead medians on the Frontage. Kassmel responded the project was more of an aesthetic improvement. Rogers asked if the Frontage Road projects could be scheduled to complement each other to allow use of the other Frontage Road while one is under construction. Kassmel said it would depend on the contractor. Chapin requested confirmation that the construction would not interfere with the GoPro Games. Kassmel informed council that staff planned to communicate possible construction delays to guests and homeowners through the town’s construction news and by hosting construction kick off meetings and weekly neighborhood meetings starting in spring. There was no public input. The ninth item on the agenda was Vail 21 Encroachment, permission to precede, DRB130567. The Vail 21 Property located at 610 West Lionshead Circle proposed building improvements that included minor airspace encroachments into Town of Vail property. The applicant requested permission to proceed through the Design Review Process and if acceptable to Council, enter into revocable permit agreement with the Town of Vail for said encroachments. Community Development Planner Jonathan Spence said the Vail 21 property was originally constructed in 1972 as a mixed-use property which consists currently of 21 residential condominiums with commercial spaces on the basement and first floor levels. The Vail 21 Homeowners Association proposed an exterior remodel and updating of the structure with new windows, doors, railings, etc. Will Hentschel, with 359 Design, addressed council requesting permission for three levels of air space encroachments: 1. a 5’x3’ portion of a larger retail entry trellis at the eastern entry of Vail Sports; 2. a 0-2’ and 2’-6”x12’ retail sunshade element at the south eastern storefront of Vail Sports Performance Rentals; and 3. resurface of the stair and retail entry trellis, which is currently located at the top step of the retail stairs at Birkshire Hathaway. Rogers requested substantial landscaping and art work to be added to the property for public benefit. Town Attorney Matt Mire reminded council the action requested was for approval to go through the process and not approval of the project. Rogers made a motion to allow the applicant to proceed through the development review process with the proposed encroachments with a second from Chapin. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. The tenth item on the agenda was commercial ski storage/private ski clubs. Community Development Planner Jonathan Spence returned to council with responses to their questions they had during the January 7 work session commercial ski storage/private clubs presentation. At that meeting council requested additional information concerning sales tax generation; a better understanding of the varieties of ski storage/private ski clubs in operation; and recognized seasonality and its impacts on the guest experience, commercial vibrancy, village vitality and sales tax collections as a concern. Spence said the Community Development Department with the assistance of the Finance Department has put together average sales tax generations per square foot based on an analysis of 7 restaurants located in either Vail Village or Lionshead. The average sales tax generation per square foot on a yearly basis was $17.00. For a restaurant of 2300 square feet the yearly generated sales tax was $39,100. Staff also analyzed the sales tax generation numbers for 3 ski storage/ski clubs establishments also located in Vail Village or Lionshead. The average sales tax generated per square foot on a yearly basis is $2.29. For an operation of 2300 square feet; the yearly generated sales tax would be $5,267. Spence stated for potential displacement of office uses there have been comprehensive studies or tracking of office space in Vail Village or in Lionshead in recent years. Spence spoke with Mike Pearson, President and Managing Broker of NAI Mountain Commercial, who believed there was neither an unmet need nor a situation of excess in relation to office space and he did not anticipate a displacement related to more locational user’s who needed a close proximity to the ski edge for their operations. In response to council’s questions concerning a variety of 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 4, 2014 Page 4 uses and use seasonality, Spence referred to a classification of commercial ski storage/private ski clubs graph that was provided to council in their packets. Spence said he met with 9 ski storage operators and what he found was there were 5 different types of ski storage/private ski clubs: traditional ski storage, private ski club, concierge hotel service, overnight slopeside ski storage and a remote community ski club. Each classification had its own attributes and impacts such as customer base, level of staffing, storage location, affiliations, valet, seasonality, demand, additional amenities and fee structure. Dominick Mauriello, representing property owner Rick Mueller, agreed with the staff analysis. Maureillo said location was an issue and guests want locker facilities close to the base of the mountain. The older generation and young families with kids do not want to lug their equipment from the parking structures through the village. Mauriello suggested that rather than reserving the second floor units located at the base of the mountain for office/retail uses; use those spaces for more of what the demands are. Mauriello went onto suggest that his client’s Vista Bahn building was in a prime location for that type of service rather than being a prime location for a restaurant, for example. Chapin said the locker rooms that were being discussed sound to be more like a private club and will not improve guest experience for all. Additionally, Chapin disagreed with Mauriello that a second floor restaurant could not be successful in that building. Rogers asked if a private club was being proposed to go into that space. Mauriello stated it was a public locker facility with showers. Some lockers might be leased by hotels for their guests to use. Mauriello said there would be a loyalty created where guests will stay in the village longer to shop and dine because they had a locker to keep their ski gear in rather than lugging it to their cars. Rogers stated she was leaning towards making the change to the core use because the demands have changed. Kurz agreed the demand and needs are changing, but he did not agree with making changes based on one application. Bruno confirmed with Spence that there still were lockers available in Vail Village and in Liuonshead with the current demand. Bruno cautioned there could be an easy way out for a second floor building and the town might end up with a lot of ski storage if council is not careful. Rogers said this is why she is in favor of a conditional use and not just permitting it outright. Rogers explained the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) would develop guidelines for that type of use. Town Manager Stan Zemler confirmed that council was interested in allowing this type of use on second floors with guidelines in a managed format. Spence will draft guidelines to present to the PEC and will return to council in two weeks. Community Director George Ruther stated he believed he understood council and that there was a desire to make changes to the policy concerning the ski storage business, but council wanted staff to keep in mind the impacts on the town’s direct and indirect sales tax collection, the seasonality uses and for staff to look into the policies of the other uses that are currently being allowed so to not displace those current uses. Ruther said staff would go to the PEC with options for their consideration and return to council with the PEC’s recommendation on March 4. Kurz asked for public comment. Tom Neyens, Ski Valet, said second floor owners will think this will be easy money and there would be a flood of lockers. Neyens said below ground level space works for a locker facility, not second floor units. Gwen Scalpello agreed with Neyens. Scalpello was additionally concerned that ski lockers could not produce year round use. Rogers asked for staff to provide an update to council on February18. The eleventh item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C06 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S § 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession and Open and Public Display or Consumption of Marijuana. Town Attorney Matt Mire requested council not to take any action on this ordinance at this time so that he may talk to both the town police department and the municipal courts concerning these penalties. 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 4, 2014 Page 5 The twelfth item on the agenda was the Wall Street Appeal of Design Review Board (DRB) Decision. An appeal pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the final decision of the DRB on December 18, 2013, approving, with conditions, a commercial addition and exterior alterations to the façade to the Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street/Lot B&C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto (DRB130552). Rogers made a motion to continue the appeal to the February 18, 2014, Town Council meeting with a second from Bruno. The motion passed 4-0-1 (Chapin recused himself). The thirteenth item on the agenda was the Adjournment. There being no further business, Bugby made a motion to adjourn with a second from Chapin. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. Council adjourned at 8:09 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Attest: __________________________________ Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro Tem ___________________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 1 Vail Town Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:00 P.M. Vail Town Council Chambers The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Andy Daly. Members present: Andy Daly, Mayor Ludwig Kurz Margaret Rogers Greg Moffet Jenn Bruno Dave Chapin Dale Bugby Staff members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Kendra Carberry, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk _________________________________________________________________ The first item on the agenda was recognition of Town of Vail Fire Department emergency respondents. Daly thanked the Vail Fire Department for their hard work, dedication and expertise. Mark Miller, Fire Chief, stated it had been a busy winter with several accidents on Vail Pass. Miller thanked the Eagle River Fire District and the Vail Mountain Rescue, as well as Vail Dispatch for their assistance with the an accident that occurred over the past weekend. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was none. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda. 1) Award of contract to Old Castle SW Group dba United Companies of Mesa County for the Frontage Roads Shoulder. Moffet made a motion to direct the Town Manager to enter into an agreement with Old Castle SW Group with a second by Rogers. The motion passed unanimously 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was the Town Manager’s Report. There was none. The fifth item on the agenda was the I-70 Vail Underpass Project Update. Chief Engineer Tom Kassmel reminded council that staff presented a review of the I-70 Underpass Project and its progress along with ten possible locations for the underpass at the January 21, 2014 Council meeting. Staff indicated the preferred location was location 5b, a skewed alignment which located the north roundabout between the Simba Run Condominiums and the Savoy Villas along the North Frontage Road, and located the south roundabout west of the Glen Lyon Office building along the South Frontage Road, similar to the location that previous transportation master plans had identified. Based on public input and discussion with the Town Council, the design team had now refined location 5b and included two additional locations for review; one just east and one just west of the preferred location. The refined location 5b had evolved into 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 2 location 5c. The two additional locations have been identified as locations 4b and 5d respectively. Based on the design team’s review of the three refined locations, Kassmel stated the preferred location was 5c. Rick Erjavec, design consultant for Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig, explained to council that each location included roundabouts on both the north and south sides of the interstate in order to accommodate the traffic at the proposed new intersections. Roundabouts have been identified as the recommended traffic solution for each intersection because both a typical and modified ‘T’ intersection failed operationally during existing and future expected traffic conditions. Erjavec stated it gave those intersection a service level F. Daly said the council would not like anything below a level C as a resort community and with snow operations a level D. Kassmel reviewed all possible I-70 underpass locations with council. Kassmel said location 5c, Simba West Skewed Alignment, was recommended as the preferred location for the following reasons: 1. even though this was the recommended location, this location would have similar aesthetic, visual, noise, air quality and lighting impacts as locations 4b & 5d that would have to be analyzed and potentially mitigated; 2. this location minimized the need for retaining walls on the south side and had the potential for the least height of retaining walls on the north side; 3. minimal to no private property impacts on the south side; 4. no impacts to any existing or planned buildings or parking; however it did require acquisition of Simba Run property on north side of I-70 in an area that is currently green space; and 5. the North Frontage Road would have to be lowered 14 feet and the South Frontage Road would have to be lowered 11 feet. Kassmel went onto say as the project progressed public input would be taken continuously through the project website at www.vailgov.com/underpass and through specific stakeholders meetings and correspondence. Daly asked for public comment. Bob Llewellyn, representing Savoy Villas Homeowners Association, suggested minimizing the impact to Savoy Villas and Simba Run the town builds berms and plant large trees, sound walls made with stone siding to assist with the impacts Kassmel had listed. William Pierce, property owner at Simba Run felt the best location was still location 4b, East Cascade Village. Pierce said the goals should be to minimize the impact over structures that currently are there. Charlie Calcaterra, representative of the Simba Run Homeowner’s Association, said the roundabout would be 50 feet from Simba Run units and the impacts would be big to those units. Calcaterra requested clarification as to why stop signs wouldn’t work. Rogers asked Kassmel if the roundabout would be significantly below the grade so those units would not get the car lights, sounds and smell. Kassmel responded there would be trees to block the view of the roundabout; berms would be built to bring the grade up so the units on the lower level would not have those issues. The upper level units in Simba Run would look onto the underpass. Bob Llewellyn requested council schedule site visits prior to making a choice on location. Llewellyn and Calcaterra offered council access to units that would be impacted. There was no further public or council comment. Rogers asked if the proposed footprint of the roundabout was as small as it could be. Kassmel stated there were criteria that needed to be met but staff would shrink that foot print as much as possible once a site had been chosen. Daly asked for Kassmel to share traffic numbers at the March 4 council meeting. Kurz thanked the public for their thoughtful input and thanked them for a productive meeting. Town Manager Stan Zemler asked Kassmel to present the projected traffic volume in 10 year increments and a phased plan for roundabouts The sixth item on the agenda was an appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the final decision of the Town of Vail Design Review Board on December 18, 2013, approving, with conditions, a commercial addition and exterior alterations to the façade of the Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street/Lots B&C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto (DRB130552). Chapin recused himself from this agenda 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 3 item because he had a property interest concerning this discussion. Chief Planner Warren Campbell provided council the background for this project. On May 13, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) unanimously approved, with conditions, a request to allow for the construction of additions in excess of the prescribed site coverage. By a vote of 3-2 (Pierce and Bird opposed) the PEC approved with conditions the major exterior alteration or modification to allow for the construction of additions at the Wall Street Building. This approval was unanimously upheld by the council on July 2, 2013. On December 18, 2013, the Design Review Board (DRB) approved, with conditions, a commercial addition and exterior alterations to the façade to the Wall Street Building. The conditions applied to the approval were as follows: 1. In conjunction with the building permit submittal, the applicant shall include plans depicting the flower boxes on the third floor balcony railings as presented at the public hearing. 2. In conjunction with the building permit submittal, the applicant shall include plans depicting the incorporation of muntins in the transom windows installed above the balcony doors on the third floor. The muntins shall be designed as to create four equal dimensions panes of glass. 3. In conjunction with the building permit submittal, the applicant shall include plans which incorporate the transom window and knee wall design on the first floor commercial space located on the northeast corner. On January 7, 2014, the council appealed the DRB’s approval because of a concern with the height of the knee wall at the base of the folding door system; a concern with the absence of an exterior deck on the third floor condominium unit on the southeast corner; and a concern that the existing second floor office windows on the southeast corner should match the new office windows on the east façade. Campbell said the plans approved by the DRB for the storefront of the American Ski Exchange included a door system which will fold up allowing for the entirety of the façade becoming open to the pedestrian street. This design approach was taken in response to the PEC requirement that no outdoor display of goods would be permitted outside of the in-filled commercial arcade due to the negative impacts it would have on pedestrian flows on Wall Street. The knee wall of this accordion door system was to be 10 inches in height. The Vail Village Design considerations state that ground floor display windows are typically raised creating a knee wall of 18 inches. In reviewing this element the DRB took into consideration that the store front was a folding door system which would allow the interior retail space to become fully open to the pedestrian street. There currently is no deck on the east façade of the third floor condominium unit. All existing decks on the structure are being replaced and would have a consistent wrought iron and planter box design. The DRB, Jeff Winston, design consultant, and staff did not find the elevation above the Jewels of the West commercial space to be in need of an additional design element to contribute to the overall architectural character and design of the structure. The second floor windows above the Jewels of the West commercial space currently existed and were not proposed to be replaced. The second floor office windows above the commercial arcade infill had been approved for replacement per the plan. The DRB, Jeff Winston and staff did not find that the office windows above the Jewels of the West commercial space needed to match the new office windows being proposed above the commercial arcade. This decision was made as there was an architectural approach taken with regard to this structure which was to create a design that appears to have been additive over time resulting in appropriate facades appearing different, but architecturally compatible. This architectural approach resulted in a structure which would appear to have been in place longer than its actual age. Moffet moved to uphold the DRB’s approval with the following modifications: the flower boxes have irrigation systems; 18 inch knee wall will be installed; and a color change to the east side with a second by Kurz. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Chapin recused). 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 4 The seventh item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Enacting Title 5, Chapter 12, Vail Town Code, “Recycling Requirements.” Environmental Sustainability Coordinator Kristen Bertuglia reviewed a powerpoint presentation with council that was provided in their packets. Bertuglia explained that this ordinance would enact a new chapter in the Vail Town Code requiring recycling in the town and the associated measures to ensure policy, infrastructure, economic incentives and education to ensure maximum waste diversion rate. Daly asked for public comment. Michael Staughton, manager of the restaurants Los Amigos and Russell’s expressed concern there are some areas in the Village and in Lionshead that do not have the ability to accommodate and store the recycling containers that are required. Chapin agreed with Staughton and thought the town would need to assist business owners in figuring out the logistics. Chapin suggested the implementation date of Ordinance No. 6 be moved from June 1 to July 1. Scott Hutchins, Waste Management representative, said his company was in full support of this ordinance and thanked the council for being involved. Resident Marshall Turley said his neighborhood works together to recycle and expressed the current recycling containers being used are too small. Chris Cutchins, resident, was excited about the recycling ordinance and thought the town would be a leader in the valley. Meghan Lovelace thanked the haulers for their support and explained the resort guests expect to recycle. Gwen Scalpello said the biggest problem is educating people on what can and cannot be recycled. Scalpello suggested signs with this information be placed on the recycle bins. Matt Donovan, owner of Vail Honeywagon, expressed concern there would be an increase in illegal dumping and suggested reconsideration of the wildlife resistant containers. Public comment closed. Moffet was not comfortable with the ordinance as is currently read and felt the ordinance would work with the current county recycling facility. Moffet requested two “whereas” clauses are removed from the ordinance for second reading. Rogers supported the ordinance and suggested a hardship exemption of three months be added to allow residents and business owner’s time to address any storage problems they might have. Rogers also said single stream was awesome and the county’s dual stream should not hold Vail back from passing this ordinance. Bugby requested the penalties be removed from the ordinance and the town should provide a self-haul option. Kurz agreed with Rogers’s suggestion for the hardship clause. Though Chapin was uncomfortable with parts of the ordinance, he too agreed with the hardship clause and would like construction materials be added to the ordinance. Roger moved to approve Ordinance No. 6 on first reading with the recommended changes to add a three month hardship exemption, implementation of the ordinance to be July 1, a delay in fines until January 1 and the removal of the two “Whereas” clauses that were requested by Moffet. Kurz second the motion. The motion passed 6-1 (Bugby opposed). The eighth item on the agenda was a request for nullification and vacation of a declaration of covenant encumbering 100 Vail Road, Lot 35, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Community Developer Director George Ruther reviewed a memorandum which was provided to council in their packets concerning the zoning history of the property. Ruther stated on April 21, 1978, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) voted unanimously to deny a variance for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for an additional 2,944 square feet of GRFA and approved a setback variance to allow the structure to encroach in the required setbacks based on the shape and topographical constraints of the lot. On May 2, 1978, the Webster’s appealed the denial of the GRFA variance to the council. The council found that the PEC misinterpreted what areas of the house should and should not be counted towards GRFA, such as the indoor swimming pool. The council concluded the GRFA variance was approximately 2,000 square feet less than what the Community Development Department and the PEC had determined the GRFA to be. The council overturned the PEC’s 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 5 denial of a GRFA variance by a vote of 4-1. A condition of the council’s decision to overturn the PEC’s earlier denial was that a declaration of covenant be made and executed against the lot requiring that any structure built on said lot would be used only as a single family residence with caretaker facilities. The reason for this declaration of covenant was to control population by being more prohibitive towards multiple dwelling units on a site. After hearing this interpretation, Mr. Webster offered the option to deed restrict the property as means of preventing his property from contributing to a potential overpopulation problem. As a result, on May 31, 1978, Mrs. Elisabeth A. Webster signed a Declaration of Covenant which restricted any structure on the property at 100 Vail Road to a single family residence. In 1982, construction on the single family dwelling unit was completed. According to property records maintained by the Community Development Department, the single family residence is approximately 8,142 square feet in size. Under current zoning regulations, the property would be allowed approximately 7,653 square feet of GRFA. Further analysis is needed to determine if the structure complies with the current GRFA allowance, given the uncertainty of deductible GRFA on site (i.e., below grade). Ruther said council was being asked to remove and vacate the Declaration of Covenant recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder’s Office at Reception No. 172727. The staff’s recommendations were based upon the following considerations: 1. according to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail, the lot is zoned Two-Family Primary Secondary Residential District; 2. the size of the lot conforms to the minimum lot size requirements established for the District; 3. the Gross Residential Floor Area regulations have been amended since the single family residence was completed on the lot in 1982; 4. chapter 18 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Vail provides policy direction for addressing non-conforming structures. The policy of the town is to permit nonconforming structures to be maintained but encourages non- conformities to be discontinued, or minimized, when possible; 5. a remodel of the existing structure into a two family dwelling unit further reduces any existing non-conformities with regard to density controls; 6. the fears of creating “crash pads” in Vail and over population are no longer warranted; and 7. a remodel of the existing structure on the lot further facilitates the town’s use of its right of way for the continuation of a pedestrian sidewalk along Vail Road. Jim Wear, representing the applicant Mr. Alejandro Rojas, said the town needed to rezone that lot per the zoning map procedure and that his client was asking to be in compliance with neighborhood zoning. Moffet made a motion to approve the applicant’s request to remove and vacate the Declaration of Covenant, recorded at Reception No. 12772, at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder’s Office, on Lot 35, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing, based upon the considerations outlined in the staff memorandum, dated February 18, 2014, and instructs the Town Manager to take the legal actions necessary to vacate the Declaration of Covenant on behalf of the Town of Vail with a second by Kurz. There was no public comment. The motion passed 7-0. The ninth item on the agenda was commercial ski storage and private ski clubs. Community Planner Jonathan Spence reviewed the Planning and Environmental Commission’s (PEC) February 10 meeting minutes, which were provided in council’s packets. Spence explained staff had provided the PEC with a memorandum which outlined the purpose, background and considerations concerning this subject. Spence said it was staff’s intent to explore the ideas and alternatives presented by the PEC and return on February 24, 2014, with draft regulations that attempt to address both the opportunities available through the change in policy and the unintended consequences resulting from the expansion of allowable use locations. Daly asked for public comment. Tom Neyens, owner operator of Ski Valet, asked council what the need was to have ski storage on the second floor when there is plenty of space available on garden or lower level units. Neyens said a ski storage facility would not generate the sales tax a 3/4/2014 Town Council Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2014 Page 6 restaurant would. Sebastian Vail Manager Lance Thompson reminded council to consider guest experience. Dominic Mauriello, representative of the applicant reminded council this request was only being applied to Commercial Core 1 zone district. Jeff Babb Vail Resorts, told council their four clubs are open 365 days and are robust in the summer. The clubs run programs and activities for their members. The applicant and owner of the Vista Bahn Building, Rick Mueller, said he would rather a restaurant be on the first floor of his building and not on the second. Mueller said he has had no requests for office space on the second floor of his building and was willing to incorporate any conditions council may want to add. Daly said he could not support a change to the zoning to allow second floor ski storage. Daly went onto say there is a responsibility to maintain the village vitality. Daly did not believe adding lockers to the second floor would do that nor would it generate sales tax. Moffet felt there was plenty of garden level space available if there was a demand for the lockers. Moffet did not see a need to permit ski storage/ski clubs on the second floor. Kurz, Chapin and Bruno agreed with Daly and Moffet’s statements. The Tenth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 4, Series of 2014, A Resolution Approving the Ground Lease and Deed Restriction for the Timber Ridge Property. George Ruther explained this resolution was to accommodate the redevelopment of Timber Ridge. The Town would be entering into a long-term ground lease with the developer of the property, Lion's Ridge Apartment Homes, LLC. Ruther said the ground lease would be subject to a Deed Restriction governing the use of the property. Daly said a requirement needed to be added stating that the insurance would to be adjusted per CPI for liability purposes. Moffet made a motion to pass Resolution No. 2 with a second by Kurz. There was no public comment. The motion passed 7-0. The eleventh item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S. 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession of Marijuana. Town Attorney Matt Mire explained that this ordinance only addresses penalties for the possession of marijuana. Moffet made a motion to pass Ordinance No. 5 on first reading with a second by Rogers. There was no public comment. Motion passed unanimously 7-0. The twelfth item on the agenda was the Adjournment. There being no further business, Moffet made a motion to adjourn with a second from Bugby. The motion passed unanimously 7-0 and council adjourned at 10:02 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Attest: __________________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ___________________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 Proclamation No. 1, Series of 2014 ONE BOOK, ONE VALLEY, 2014 A Valley-wide reading program sponsored by the Towns of Avon, Eagle, Minturn, and Vail WHEREAS, community-read programs have united and uplifted hundreds of cities and principalities throughout the United States of America; and, WHEREAS, the book “Finders Keepers: a tale of archaeological plunder and obsession” by Craig Childs, renowned naturalist and Colorado author, is a ghost story—an intense, impassioned investigation into the nature of the past and the things we leave behind; and, WHEREAS, this Eagle Valley community read will feature book talks & discussions, film showings, special related programs hosted by Walking Mountains Science Center and a special guest appearance by the author; and, WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Public Library, in collaboration with the Eagle Valley Library District, Colorado Mountain College, the Bookworm of Edwards and Walking Mountains Science Center have resolved to bring this valley-wide reading program to the citizens of Eagle County; and, WHEREAS, the One Book, One Valley initiative will encourage literacy and shared enjoyment of reading throughout Eagle County, NOW, THEREFORE, this 4th day of March, 2014, the Vail Town Council proclaims and hereby promotes the One Book, One Valley initiative and officially announce and promote the novel “Finders Keepers” to all Eagle County residents for their enjoyment and the enjoyment of all. _______________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor Attest: _________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2014 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014, a resolution modifying the Official Avalanche Hazard Map to revise the red and blue hazard zone designations in the vicinity of 4730 Meadow Drive, accurately reflecting the best data and modeling available; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Bighorn Townhouse Association, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY The applicant, Bighorn Townhouse Association, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting a modification to the Official Avalanche Hazard Map to revise the red and blue hazard zone designations in the vicinity of 4730 Meadow Drive, accurately reflecting the best data and modeling available. The revisions to the hazard map will result in the Bighorn Townhouse properties and the adjacent town owned parcels being removed from both the red and blue avalanche designations. II. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE TOWN COUNCIL The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014. III. BACKGROUND The King Arthur’s Court Avalanche Path is located in East Vail directly south of the Town of Vail owned Bighorn Park. This avalanche area was originally studied by Ron Halley, P.E. of Hydro-Triad Engineering in 1975. This avalanche path was named the King Arthur’s Court (K.A.C.) Avalanche Path as the analysis was done in the context of a planned development in the area by that name. This 1975 mapping was used as a basis for the report on snow avalanches produced in 1977 which was ultimately adopted by the Town of Vail. This mapping was revised in 1984 by Mr. Arthur I. Mears P.E. to more accurately reflect the conditions and modeling of the K.A.C. path. The Town of Vail aims protects the inhabitants of the town from dangers related to floodplains, avalanche paths, steep slopes and geological sensitive areas. Within the 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 Avalanche Hazard Map are two designations, blue and red, corresponding to different levels of static and dynamic pressure produced by a snow avalanche. Properties within the red designation are not permitted any building activity or construction of any structures. Structures may be built in the blue hazard designation following a site specific geological report and proper mitigation, if required. The Town of Vail is committed to maintaining the most accurate hazard maps based on the best available information. New information specific to this area has been submitted by the applicant necessitating an amendment to the adopted map. Please see the applicant's provided materials included as Attachment B for a complete background on this item. IV. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW/PROCUDURE Pursuant to Section 12-21-13: RESTRICTIONS IN GEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREAS, the following procedures shall be followed: G. Disputes; Procedure: In any case where a person wishes to dispute the designation of any property as a geologically sensitive area by one of the maps and studies adopted by this section, the following procedures shall be followed: 1. A written application shall be filed with the department of community development requesting such a hearing and providing a supporting site specific geologic investigation. 2. A hearing shall be set on a date a minimum of thirty (30) days after the application has been filed to allow for a staff review. 3. At the hearing before the town council, the applicant shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present his/her case and submit technical and geologic evidence to support his/her claim. If the site specific geologic investigation establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the property should not be designated as a geologically sensitive area, the town council shall direct the department of community development to amend the map appropriately. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014, the Community Development Department recommends the Council pass the following motion: “The Vail Town Council approves Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014, an ordinance amending the Official Avalanche Hazard Map to revise the red and blue hazard zone designations in the vicinity of 4730 Meadow Drive, accurately reflecting the best data and modeling available, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 Should the Town Council choose to approve the proposed revision to the Official Avalanche Hazard Map, the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council makes the following finding: “The site specific geologic investigation dated January 19, 2014 performed Mr. Arthur I. Mears P.E. establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the property should not be designated as a geologically sensitive area and that the map should be amended as proposed.” VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Resolution No. 5, Series of 2014. B. Request to amend the Official Avalanche Hazard Map with reports, January 30, 2014 3/4/2014 RESOLUTION NO. 5, SERIES OF 2014 A RESOLUTION TO MODIFY THE OFFICIAL AVALANCHE HAZARD MAP TO SHOW REVISIONS TO THE MODERATE (BLUE) AND SEVERE (RED) HAZARD AREAS RELATED TO THE KING ARTHUR’S COURT (K.A.C.) AVALANCHE PATH IN THE VICINITY OF 4730 MEADOW DRIVE WHEREAS, the King Arthur’s Court (K.A.C.) Avalanche Path is located in the Town of Vail in the vicinity of 4730 Meadow Drive; and WHEREAS, the K.A.C. Avalanche Path has been studied extensively since 1975; and WHEREAS, Mr. Arthur I. Mears, P.E. is a recognized avalanche consultant with over 30 years of experience; and WHEREAS, the investigation by Mr. Mears has determined that the existing hazard delineations are not accurate; and WHEREAS, the proposed new delineation of the moderate and severe hazard areas is the result of the best available data and modeling techniques; and WHEREAS, this modification is in accordance with 12-21-13: Restrictions in Geologically Sensitive Areas NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1) That the Official Avalanche Hazard Map shall be modified per Attachment A. in accordance with the direction provided by Mr. Arthur I. Mears, P.E. in the January 19, 2014 report bearing his name and stamp. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March 2014. __________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 January  30,  2014   Vail  Town  Council   C/O  Jonathan  Spence   75  S.  Frontage  Road   Vail,  Colorado  81657   Re:  Avalanche  Hazard  Map  Amendment  Application   Dear  Vail  Town  Council:   Mauriello  Planning  Group  has  been  retained  by  the  Bighorn  Townhouse  Association  to  assist   with  an  amendment    to  the  Town  of  Vail  Avalanche  Hazard  Map.  Pursuant  to  the  Town  Code,   this  letter  shall  serve  as  the  formal  request  for  this  map  amendment.       Introduction:   The  Association  is  requesting  the  amendment  for  the  properties  located  at  4708  and  4718   Meadow  Drive,  known  as  the  Bighorn  Townhouses,  located  in  East  Vail  across  from  Bighorn   Park.    The  Bighorn  Townhouses  are  identified  by  the  Avalanche  Hazard  Map  as  located   within  both  the  Blue  (Moderate)  and  Red  (High)  Avalanche  Hazard  Area.    Included  with  this   application  is  a  detailed  report  prepared  by  Arthur  I.  Mears,  P.E.  Inc.,  one  for  the  foremost   experts  in  the  world  with  regard  to  snow  avalanches,  which  concludes  that  the  Town’s   hazard  maps  should  be  updated  to  reflect  the  conclusions  of  his  report.    The  conclusions  are   based  upon  decades  of  new  studies  and  modeling  techniques/technology  that  were   previously  not  available  when  the  Town’s  hazard  maps  were  originally  studied  and  adopted   in  1975  and  1977.       The  revised  mapping  would  place  the  Bighorn  Townhouse  properties  outside  of  any  hazard   area.    The  amendment  would  also  benefit  other  neighboring  properties  and  Town  owned   lands.   Background  and  Regulations:   The  Bighorn  Townhouse  properties  are  located  within  the  Blue  Hazard  Avalanche  Area  and   the  Red  Hazard  Avalanche  Area  as  mapped  by  the  Town.   These  areas  are  defined  by  Chapter  21:  Hazard  Regulations  as  follows:   BLUE  HAZARD  AVALANCHE  AREA:  An  area  impacted  by  a  snow  producing  a  total  static  and   dynamic  pressure  less  than  six  hundred  (600)  pounds  per  square  foot  on  a  flat  surface   normal  to  the  flow  and/or  a  return  interval  in  excess  of  twenty  five  (25)  years.   PO Box 4777 Eagle, Colorado 81631 970.376.3318 www.mpgvail.com By Shelley Bellm at 11:10 am, Feb 06, 2014 PRJ14-0031 3/4/2014 RED  HAZARD  AVALANCHE  AREA:  Any  area  impacted  by  a  snow  avalanche  producing  a  total   static  and  dynamic  pressure  in  excess  of  six  hundred  (600)  pounds  per  square  foot  on  a  flat   surface  normal  to  the  flow  and/or  a  return  interval  of  less  than  twenty  five  (25)  years.   Section  12-­‐21-­‐10:  Development  Restricted,  of  the  Town  Code  prohibits  the  construction  of   any  structure  within  a  Red  Avalanche  Hazard  Area.    Structures  may  be  built  in  Blue   Avalanche  Hazard  Areas  with  proper  mitigation  measures.    Furthermore,  for  existing   structures  within  Hazard  Areas,  no  building  permit  shall  be  issued  for  the  exterior   expansion,  alteration  or  addition  to  existing  structures  except  for  windows,  skylights,  and   minor  alterations.       The  following  map  is  the  Town  of  Vail’s  GIS  map  of  the  Avalanche  Hazard  Map  for  the   Bighorn  Townhouse  area.    The  map  clearly  shows  how  the  current  hazard  mapping  impacts   the  Bighorn  properties.    As  currently  mapped,  these  properties  are  severely  restricted  from   redevelopment  and  remodel  activities,  are  subject  to  extraordinary  insurance  costs,  and  are   impacted  in  their  ability  to  be  marketed  and  sold  due  to  this  outdated  and  now  inaccurate   40  year-­‐old  mapping.   Chapter  21:  Hazard  Regulations  allows  for  amendments  to  the  Geologic  Hazard  Maps  when   more  detailed  site  specific  information  is  available.    A  request  is  to  be  submitted  to  the   Community  Development  Department    followed  by  a  hearing  before  the  Town  Council  (no   Planning  and  Environmental  Commission  Review  is  required).    The  Town  Council  then  makes   the  following  finding:   Town  of  Vail    Existing  Snow  Avalanche  Hazard  Mapping Bighorn  Townhouses 3/4/2014 If  the  site  specific  geologic  investigation  establishes  by  clear  and  convincing  evidence  that   the  property  should  not  be  designated  as  a  geologically  sensitive  area,  the  town  council  shall   direct  the  department  of  community  development  to  amend  the  map  appropriately.   This  avalanche  area  was  originally  studied  by  Ron  Halley,  P.E.  of  Hydro-­‐Triad  engineering  in   1975.    This  avalanche  path  was  named  the  KAC  Avalanche  Path.    This  1975  mapping  was  used   as  a  basis  for  the  report  on  snow  avalanches  produced  in  1977  which  was  ultimately  adopted   by  the  Town  of  Vail.    The  image  below  is  the  Hydro-­‐Triad  mapping  that  was  interpreted  onto   the  Town’s  snow  avalanche  hazard  map.    In  1990,  Arthur  I.  Mears,  P.E.,  Inc.  completed  an   analysis  and  re-­‐mapping  of  the  KAC  avalanche  which  reduced  the  blue  avalanche  hazard  to   the  Bighorn  Townhouses.  The  last  KAC  avalanche  probably  occurred  between  1950  and  1962.   Avalanche  Hazard  Expert:   The  applicant  has  engaged  the  services  of  Arthur  I.  Mears,  P.E.,  Inc.,  Natural  Hazards   Consultants,  to  review  the  previously  map  snow  avalanche  hazard  and  its  relationship  to    the   Bighorn  Townhouses.    Mr.  Mears  also  performed  all  of  the  analysis  and  mapping  for  the   debris  flow  and  debris  avalanche  for  the  Town  of  Vail,  which  mapping  is  still  used  today  as   the  basis  of  the  Town’s  hazard  maps.   Mr.  Mears  has  a  B.S.  in  Civil  Engineering  and  an  M.S.  in  Geology  from  the  University  of   Colorado,  Boulder.  Based  in  Gunnison,  he  formed  Arthur  I.  Mears,  P.E.,  Inc.  in  1981.  Mr.   Mears  has  been  an  avalanche  consultant  on  over  1000  projects  in  9  states  and  8  countries.   He  has  published  over  35  technical  and  research  papers  and  works  with  international   colleagues  from  Canada,  Switzerland,  Norway  and  Austria.    Mr.  Mears  provides  hazard   K.A.C.  Avalanche  Study  from  Sept.  1975 3/4/2014 mapping,  risk  analysis,  mitigation  strategies  and  design  parameters  to  protect  people  and   infrastructure  from  avalanches,  debris  flows,  and  rockfall.  His  clients  include  utilities,   transportation,  mining,  municipalities,  engineers,  planners,  land  developers  and   homeowners.    More  information  about  Mr.  Mears  credentials  and  experience  can  be  found   at  his  website  www.mearsandwilbur.com.   Conclusions  of  Mears  Study:   Based  on  the  investigation  (included  with  this  submittal),  Mr.  Mears  has  concluded  that  the   property  is  beyond  the  range  of  design  avalanches  (100-­‐year  avalanche)  and  that  a  map   amendment  should  revise  the  Town’s  Avalanche  Hazard  Map  to  reflect  this  analysis.       The  following  map  is  a  revised  Avalanche  Map,  using  the  Town’s  current  GIS  mapping  (solid   blue  and  red  colors)  of  the  Avalanche  Hazard  for  the  KAC  Avalanche  Path,  with  the  proposed   revision  to  the  map  based  on  the  current  analysis  of  the  Avalanche  Hazard  of  the  KAC   Avalanche  Path  (red  and  blue  outline).    Analytical  methods  for  estimating  the  magnitude,   extend,  and  destructive  energy  of  design  avalanches  have  changed  since  the  1975  and  1977   studies.    These  methods,  advanced  mostly  in  Europe  through  research,  direct  observation,   and  computer  modeling  have  allowed  for  more  accurate  estimations  in  recent  decades.    In   addition,  substantial  regrowth  of  the  forest  in  the  area  has  diminished  the  probability  of   large  avalanches.    A  significant  forest  fire  affected  the  upper  reaches  of  the  avalanche  area   prior  to  the  1970s.       Town’s  Current  Avalanche   Hazard  Mapping Proposed  Avalanche   Hazard  Mapping  based  on   Mears’  Investigation 3/4/2014 The  conclusion  from  the  analysis  indicates  the  following:   1.Design-­‐avalanche  extent  and  the  high  (red)  and  moderate  (blue)  hazard  zones  should  be   modified  as  shown  on  Figure  3.    The  outer  limit  of  the  design  avalanche  will  stop   approximately  200  ft.  south  of  the  condo  units.    The  Town  of  Vail  avalanche-­‐zone  map   should  be  updated  to  reflect  this  change.   2.Destructive  powder  avalanches  will  not  affect  the  condo  units.    A  very  low-­‐density  dust   cloud  may  reach  the  units  and  extend  to  the  south  of  Meadow  Drive  but  it  will  not   produce  damaging  pressures  or  endanger  people.   3.Because  the  design  avalanche  will  not  reach  the  condo  units,  mitigation  to  protect  from   avalanches  will  not  be  needed  and  is  not  recommended.   4.Debris  flow  will  not  affect  the  units.    Muddy  floods  may  reach  the  condos  however,   structural  damage  will  not  occur  and  danger  or  injury  to  residents  will  not  be  a  problem.     Mitigation  from  debris  flow  is  not  recommended.       We  have  included  the  following  attachments  in  support  of  this  application  to  amend  the   Town’s  Avalanche  Hazard  Map:   1.Investigation  of  Arthur  I.  Mears,  P.E.,  Inc.  of  the  Avalanche  Hazard  for  Bighorn   Townhouses  (January  29,  2014)  ,  located  at  4708  and  4718  Meadow  Drive,  in  accordance   with  the  requirements  of  Chapter  21:  Hazard  Regulations,  of  the  Vail  Town  Code.       2.K.A.C.  Avalanche  Study,  Vail  Colorado  (1975)  by  Ronald  Halley,  Avalanche  Consultant.   3.Evaluation  of  the  Snow  Avalanche  Hazard  in  the  Valley  of  Gore  Creek,  Eagle  County,   Colorado  (1977)  by  the  Institute  of  Arctiv  and  Alpine  Research,  University  of  Colorado.   4.Shape  Files  of  the  proposed  revisions  for  use  by  the  Town  of  Vail  for  the  amendment  to   the  GIS  Map  for  the  Avalanche  Hazard  for  the  Bighorn  Townhouses.
 Thank  you  for  your  time  and  consideration  on  this  matter.    Should  you  have  any  questions,   please  do  not  hesitate  to  contact  me  at  970.376.3318  or  dominic@mpgvail.com.   Sincerely,     Dominic  Mauriello,  AICP   Principal 3/4/2014 1 Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc. Natural Hazards Consultants 555 County Road 16 Gunnison, CO 81230 Tel/Fax: (970) 641-3236 January 29, 2014 Bighorn Townhomes c/o Dominic Mauriello Via email RE: Avalanche hazard at condo buildings Dear Ms. Bernardo: I completed a site visit on January 27, 2011 and analysis on January 28 and February 4, 2011. This report was reviewed and updated slightly on January 28, 2014. As a result of this work I conclude the following: The residential units are beyond the range of design avalanches and will not require mitigation. Details of my methodology and support for my conclusions are contained in this report, as follows. Important limitations to my conclusions are discussed under the “Limitations” section of this report. Location, previous work and avalanche exposure The area studied is located at 4708 & 4718 East Meadow Drive in Vail, Colorado (e.g. “Condos”) below and to the west of the “KAC Avalanche Path1.” This was first studied and named by Ron Halley. P.E. of Hydro-Triad engineering in 1975, the first site-specific study of this path. His mapping has been used as the basis for the Town of Vail avalanche-zone maps. According to the 1975 study, unit 4718 is in the high-hazard or “Red” zone and unit 4708 is located at the boundary of the intermediate-hazard or “Blue” zone. In December, 1990, A.I. Mears, P.E., Inc. completed an analysis and re-mapping of the KAC avalanche. This study modified the avalanche boundaries reducing the blue zone and provided avalanche loads on the Bernardo residence. Both the 1975 and 1990 studies have been modified in this current analysis. Modifications are justified because of the current availability of updated avalanche-dynamics analytical techniques that have become available in the last decade. The KAC avalanche starts on steep, open north-east facing slopes between 10,500 and 9,500 feet elevations, approximately. Roughly 20-25 acres of 1 The KAC Avalanche was named by Ronald L. Halley, P.E., the president of Hydro-Triad, Ltd. In a study commissioned by Mr. Donald J. Tomas and completed in September. 1975. 3/4/2014 2 avalanche starting zones2 exist within this steep, open forest. Inspections of old U.S. Forest Service aerial photos indicate that the last major avalanche in this path occurred between 1950 and 1962. It widened the avalanche track below 9,000 feet elevation and destroyed portions of the forest (Figure 1). This avalanche probably reached the meadow immediately below the steep terrain but it is unclear from physical evidence if it reached the current locations of the Condos or Meadow Drive. Compare Figure 1 with Figure 3. Figure 1. 1962 aerial photo showing damage from the KAC avalanche in Vail that probably occurred between 1950 and 1962. Forest fire damage is also visible on adjacent slopes. The magnitude, extent and destructive energy of design avalanches3 can be estimated through analytical methods widely applied mostly in central Europe, especially in Switzerland. Older versions of such methods were applied in the 1975 study by Hydro- Triad and were used as the basis for the avalanche map of the KAC avalanche used in Vail zoning. However substantial research, direct observations of avalanches worldwide, and computer modeling have taken place in Europe in the subsequent decades. Furthermore, re-growth of the forest throughout upper and intermediate parts of the avalanche path4 has diminished the probability of large avalanches. Figure 2 is a photo of the lower part of the path taken on January 27, 2011 near the site labeled “Tree Damage” in Figure 1. Avalanche-Dynamics Analysis We applied an updated Swiss avalanche-dynamics modeling technique (the program AVAL-1D) to compute avalanche speeds and runout distances (stopping positions) of dense flowing avalanches. Avalanche speeds computed were less than 30m/s (65mph) in the avalanche above 10,000 feet elevation. Speed decreased quickly to less than 15m/s (33 mph) at the point where avalanches discharge from the main gully above the meadow. Avalanche runout 2 Starting zones are areas generally steeper than 30 degrees and are areas where avalanches begin, accelerate and increase in mass. 3 In Vail, the design avalanche is the largest or most destructive event expected in a 100-year period, a “100-year avalanche.” This event has a constant annual probability of 1%. 4 Avalanche path: the entire area where an avalanche moves, including the starting zone, the track (where greatest speed is reached) and the runout zone where the avalanche stops (the open meadow in the KAC path). 3/4/2014 3 in the meadow south of the condo units was computed; design avalanches will stop south of the condo units as shown in Figure 3 where avalanche red and blue zones have been delineated. Figure 2. Lower part of KAC avalanche path (labeled “Tree Damage” in Figure 1). Re- growth of forest is apparent. Powder avalanches can also occur during periods of widespread dry-slab releases from the primary starting zones between 9,500 and 10,500 feet elevation. However these will be confined to the steeper terrain above 9,000 feet within and adjacent to the central gully of the KAC path. Powder avalanches will not produce destructive forces at the base of the KAC avalanche path or at the condo units. Conclusions and recommendations The following conclusions and recommendations are based on 1) the site inspection conducted on January 27, 2011, 2) our previous studies of avalanche potential in the Vail area and elsewhere in North America and Europe, 3) previous work in the KAC avalanche path by Hydro-Triad and myself, 4) analysis of aerial photographs dated 1939, 1950, 1962, 1974, 1984 and current imagery available on the internet, and 5) the avalanche-dynamics analysis referenced. 3/4/2014 4 1. Design-avalanche extent and the high (red) and moderate (blue) hazard zones should be modified as shown on Figure 3. The outer limit of the design avalanche will stop approximately 200 feet south of the condo units. The Town of Vail avalanche-zone map should be updated to reflect this change. 2. Destructive powder avalanches will not affect the condo units. A very low- density dust cloud may reach the units and extend to the south of Meadow Drive but it will not produce damaging pressures or endanger people. 3. Because the design avalanche will not reach the condo units, mitigation to protect from avalanches will not be needed and is not recommended. 4. Debris flows will not affect the units or proposed new structures. Muddy floods may reach the condos however structural damage will not occur and danger or injury to residents will not be a problem. Mitigation from debris flows is not recommended. Limitations to this work General 1) You as my client should know that while our company can and does attempt to uphold high professional standards, the state of scientific and engineering knowledge is incomplete, and does not always permit certainty. The complex phenomena involved in avalanches cannot be perfectly evaluated and predicted, and methods used to predict avalanche behavior change as new research becomes available. While we can and will offer our best professional judgment, we cannot and do not offer any warranty or guarantee of results. Site-Specific 1) Avalanches larger than the Town of Vail 100-year design avalanche are possible. Such events may travel farther than the blue-zone limit mapped on Figure 3. 2) Furthermore, the design avalanche mapped assumes the current forest cover and vegetation. Widespread destruction of the forest in the starting zone by fire or other causes could increase the areas of avalanche release and the size of avalanches. Report prepared by, Arthur I. Mears, P.E. Avalanche-control engineer 3/4/2014 5 Figure 3. Updated mapping of the KAC avalanche path, East Vail, Colorado. Red and Blue zones were defined in accordance with Vail regulations. 3/4/2014 Bl u e Z o n e Re d Z o n e Red & Blue Aval a n c h e Z o n e s f o r K A C P a t h m a p p e d b y A r t h u r I . M e a r s , P E , I n c . February 6, 2011 S e e c o m p l e t e r e p o r t f o r d e f i n i t i o n s a n d l i m i t a t i o n s . 3/4/2014 1 K. A. C.AVALANCHE STUDY VA I L, COLORADO Prepared For Donald J. Thomas King Arthur's Court Development ay Ronald L.Halley Avalanche Consultant 1 Sept., 1975 I f 3/4/2014 HYi`~R0°TWA0 ti''t; September 19, 1975 1 Mr. Donald J. Thomas 13555 Coliseum Drive Chesterfield, Missouri 63107 Dear Mr. Thomas: Enclosed is our report on the Avalanche Study for the so-called KAC Avalanche Path. The study was performed in accordance with our proposal letter of February 28, 1975. The proba6le avalanche runout zones have been defined, and a discussion of the impact of the avalanche on potential development within the King Arthur's Court has been included in the report. If there are any questions, please contact us. Sincerely, HYDRO-TRIAD, LTD. Ronald L. Halley, P.E. President RLH/mh Encl: Report 1 bN, MISSiv;ilPri .AVE. - SUITE 10 LAKEWOOD, CCILORADO 80226 PHONE 303•934-2477 3/4/2014 K A C AVALANCHE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa9e Introduction . 1 Location 1 Terrain . . 2 Geology . . . . . . . 2 Vegetation 3 Land Use Zoning 4 Historical Avalanche Occurrences . 5 General Gore Valley : 5 KAC Avalanche 6 Aval anche Zoni ng . . 8 KAC Avalanche Analysis . 12 Character of the Avalanche Path 12 Snow Depth vs. Recurrence Interval 13 Runout Zone Analysis 16 Conclusions and Recommendations 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure I General Location Map Figure II Avalanche Path Figure III Avalanche Path Profile Figure IV Zoning Map 3/4/2014 1 K A C AVALANCHE STUDY INTRODUCTION 1 This study of the avalanche path located in the Bighorn area of the Gore Valley was authorized by Mr. Donald Thomas, one of the owners of property sited in the valley floor below the avalanche path. This particular avalanche path has generated a considerable amount of furor within the county and the town of Vail over the past two to three years. The various public discussions concerning the KAC avalanche path will not be reviewed herein, as most are a matter of record. This study is based upon the physical facts of the slide path, the mountain meteorology producing the snowpack conditions found in and adjacent to the Gore Creek Valley and an avalanche analysis including definition of modes of the avalanche and dynamic consider- ations. The runout area is defined by a red zone (relatively high prob- able occurrence with high impact pressures) and a blue zone (r^elatively remote occurrence probability and lower probable impact pressures). t These zones are generally in accordance with the Swiss Avalanche Zoning Planl, although modified somewhat to fit the Gore Valley. Location The KAC avalanche path is located on the south valley wall near the Bighorn area in the eastern end of the Gore Valley. The Town of Vail has recently annexed the valley section including the Bighorn area and the runout zone is within the Vail Town limits. The location of the KAC avalanche is shown on the general location map, Figure I. 3/4/2014 i 2 1 Terrain The general terrain of the Gore Creek Valley is highly conducive to major climax type avalanches, especially along thesouth valley wall. The ridge line extending from Vail Pass, between Black Gore and Main Gore Creek on the north and Turkey Creek, Two Elk Creek and Mill Creek on the south, ranges in elevation from 10,800 feet (3300 meters) at Vail Pass to 11,800 feet (3600 meters) at the point between the headwaters of Two Elk and Mill Creeks. The valley floor at the Bighorn area is approximately 8500 feet (2600 meters). The valley show5 the U-shaped characteristics of the glacier action during the Pleistocene epoch and the upper portions of many of the major avalanche paths have nivation or small "hanging" glacier hollows. The terrain forms steep slopes down into the valley with slopes often exceeding 38 degrees (78 percent) and frequent cliff bands of the more resistant rock members (limestone and sandstone) of the Minturn Formation. Geology The Gore Range is one of the major massive uplift sections of Precambrian crystalline rock typical of the mountainous regions of Colorado. The uplift fault block forming the main element of the range is flanked by metamorphic gneisses and by the sedimentary for- mations extending westward. The two major faults flanking the range are the Gore Fault which bears roughly north-northwest and the Frontal Fault which trends approximately parallel. 3/4/2014 3 1 The Gore Fault can be easily identified in the field, as it is highly visible traversing through the area east of the top of Vail Pass then northwestward cutting through the Main Gore Creek just upstream of the confluence with Black Gore immediately upstream of the Bighorn area. Westward of the fault, the sedimentary rocks of the Minturn and Maroon Formations are very evident. The Maroon Formation conformably overlies the Minturn Formation. t The Maroon Formation consists of red mudstone or shale, siltstone and fine-grained sandstone. The Minturn Formation can be identified by the distinctive beds of coarse grained gray to reddish sandstones, conglomeritic sandstone, sandy and silty shales as well as the pinkish gray to gray limestone beds. The cliff bands that are evident along both sides of the Main Gare Valley between Bighorn and the Vail Village center are the more resistant sandstone and limestone members of the Minturn Formation. The cliff and diagonally cut arroyo within the lower end of the KAC avalanche path are exposed portions of a limestone member of the formation. Vegetation The KAC avalanche path extends from the valley floor, 8500 feet elevation (2600 meters) to near timberline at 11,100 feet (3400 meters) and traverses basically three ecosystems. The valley floor can be described as a meadow vegetal type system that up until the early 1960's was intermittently used for meadow hay production with some irrigation and livstock grazing. The ditches are still evident in the field. 3/4/2014 4 1 Above the valley floor to an approximate elevatian of 9000 feet 2750 meters) extends a mixed stand of open aspen graves, small meadow pockets (derived primarily from geological factors) and lodgepole pine or pouglas Fir. There are a few scattered Ponderosa Pine in this zone. From 9000 foot upward, the primary vegetal types consist of relatively dense forest of Engelmann Spruce, subalpine fir and lodgepole pine. The grassy or shrub-covered meadow area along the bottom of the ephemeral KAC stream and on the northeast aspect sloping into the stream is the relatively frequent avalanche release zone. Land Use Zoning The valley walls and adjacent mountains throughout the 6ore Valley area are part of the White River National Forest and therefore are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service. The current zoning of the valley floor within the privately owned land is shown on Figure IV. This indicates the bulk of the valley floor immediately adjacent to the runout area of the avalanche is currently zoned "Low Density Multiple Family". The Bighorn Subdivision, Fifth Addition, is apparently two-family residential as is Tract C and D of the Bighorn Townhome Subdivision. 1 3/4/2014 1 NISTORICAL AVALANCHE OCCURRENCES General Gore Valley The Gore Valley has seven major climax type avalanche paths along the south valley wall that have been identified between the village area and the confluence of Black Gore and Main Gore. These avalanche paths have been named primarily by Forest Service personnel and from west to east are as follows: Clubhouse Frontage Road Waterfall Old Muddy Timberfalls King Arthur (KAC) Vail Meadows Another large avalanche path is located east of the Black Gore - Gore Creek confluence on Black Gore that has been designated as the Siberia Slide. This avalanche path may impact the new Interstate I-70 alignment. In between these major avalanche paths are numerous small slides and wet spring type slide paths that wi11 require close examination in case of any potential development in or near the runout areas. During a heavy wet spring snowfall of May 6-7, 1973, many of the wet, spring-type slides along the valley wall slid. Fortunately, these wet spring type avalanches have minimal runout distances and no existing structures were jeopardized. 3/4/2014 6 1 Discussions with old-time Gore Valley or Minturn residents, as related by Jim 6regg, U.S.F.S. and Whit Borland, indicate the last major climax avalanche cycle in the valley was during the 1940's, although some comments would indicate major avalanches may have occurred in the early 1950's. Examination of snow course records would indicate 1943, 1947 and 1952 as being the most likely years for major avalanche occurrences. Exact determination of these reported occurrences would require detailed interviews with older local residents and examination of the meager climatic data available for that period. While detailed newspaper research and personal interviews have produced good information on the history of various major avalanche paths in the San ,luans Silverton area2, it is doubtful that local newspapers in Eagle County would have included the same detail, since the Vail Pass Highway, U.S. 6, is relatively new (1930's) and few of the local ranchers "wintered" in the 6ore Valley. K A C Avalanche Detailed examination of the tree growth in and adjacent to the KAC slide path indicates major avalanche activity within the past 30-35 years. Other major avalanches have occurred within the past 100 years. The old burn area that is clearly visible, see Figure II, at the head of Mill Creek has been a factor in avalanche activity in the 1930's and 1940's. The forest fire apparently burned just to the upper edge of the KAC gulley drainage. The resultant open area with the prevailing west wind up Mill Creek would aggravate snow deposition loading on the steep upper slopes of the KAC avalanche path. The exact date of the Mill Creek fire is not known, but due to the rather cormnon practice of 3/4/2014 7 setting forest fires to obtain jobs fighting the same fire during the depression years, the early 1930's is a likely period. Whatever the source, natural or man-caused, the burn area has definitely been a factor in avalanche activity on the KAC avalanche. The burn area is slowly revegetating, slowly, mainly due to the elevation and is holding more snow at this time (personal observation, winters 1974, 1975). 1 t 1 t 3/4/2014 AVALANCHE ZONING Avalanche zoning is a facet of mapping of natural hazard zones such as geological hazards, floodplain mapping and snow and ice avalanches. The Swiss have progressed further in physical and legal definition of avalanche zoning 1'4, but various mountainous areas within the United States have either passed or are contemplating avalanche zoning (vis, Resolution of the San Juan County Regional Planning CorrQnission, adopted November 5, 1975; Avalanche Zoning for the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska and Avalanche Zoning Ordinance for the City of Ketchum, Idaho). An interesting aspect of the Avalanche Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ketchum (Sun Valley), Idaho is allowing owner-occupied single-family homes within a so-called "Extreme Avalanche Hazard Sub-Zone" with the stipulation that the owner may reside in the dwelling year-round, but the dwelling may not be rented between November 1 and April 30. The Swiss avalanche zoning standards may be generalized by the following three categories: White Zone:Terrain is free of avalanche hazard. It might be affected by the air blastof dust avalanches the pressure of which does not exceed 100 kilograms (kg) per square meter (20.5 pounds per square foot). Red Zone:Terrain which is exposed to frequent and powerful avalanches. This means avalanches with: a pressure of l to 3 metric tons per square meter (200 to 600 pounds per square foot) and a return period of 30 years or less; a pressure of more than 3 tons per square meter and a return period of 90 years or less. Blue Zone:The blue zone is a transition zone between white and red. This area is affected only seldom or slightly by avalanche5. This means avalanches have: a pressure of more than 3 tons per square meter over 600 pounds per square foot) and a return period of more than 90 years; 3/4/2014 1 a pressure of 1 to 3 tons per square meter and a return period of more than 30 years; a pressure of 0.1 to 1.0 tons per square meter (20 to 200 pounds per square foot). These zone definitions set forth the relative avalanche activity and probable impact loads, the zones do not set forth what development activities are allowed within these zones. Allowed or disallowed activities within the zones must be established by the local or regional public agencies. The following excerpts from "The Avalanche Zoning Plan" by Hans Frutiger are pertinent: Now it will be possible to determine building specifi- cations for the different zones. These will prohibit construction in zones unfit for development. Definitions, however, are necessary. For example: building restrictions could not be applied to the construction of underground structures such as water reservoirs, or to temporary buildings used only in sumner. It might also be permissible to allow farm buildings such as haylofts and sumxner stables, which are protected by avalanche control structures. On the other hand, buildings connected with big traffic or gathering of people such as hotels and schools might be excluded from the blue zone. The zone of transition, especially if it is broad, can be divided into smaller sections. This can be done by distinguishing between more and less endangered areas. It would be illogical to require building reinforcements to have the same load capacity on the edge of the "red zone" as on the edge of the "white zone". Therefore, avalanche pressure bands with ranges from 3.0 to 2.0 t/mz, 2.0 to 1.0 t/mz and 1.0 to 0.0 t/m z can be provided. Eventually, a plan for evacuation must be drawn for the transition zone. The right to effect evacuation must also be contained in the regulations of the avalanche zoning plan. In practice the community authorities can only achieve an evacuation with the help of an Avalanche Warning Service. It has to give the technica7 advices. Therefore, such a communal service has to be provided necessarily for every settlement having "blue zones". As can be seen, the transition zone'(blue zone) occupies a special position. A correnent must be made now, which could have already been mentioned in the chapter dealing with legal aspects. Because 1 3/4/2014 10 property rights should be protected as much as possible, the federal judicial practice requires an unquestionable legal foundation in arder to effect general building restrictions or building limi'tations which must be evoked as a result of avalanche danger. It is the transition zone that leads to problems and which makes it idfficult to arrive at decisions that satisfy public and private interests. It is inherent in the peculiarities of avalanches, especially the ones that occur at greater time intervals, that their extent and there- fore their potential to do damage, can only be estimated. Therefore, small errors can be introduced even by qualified plan researchers, since no one is in the position to state objectively what exactly will happen. Such a possibility should not be a reason to decide in case of doubt in favor of the landowners since this could result in a decision which is neglecting the appropriate safety requirement. We should be aware that a wrong decision can have catastrophic conse- quences." The definition of the Extreme Hazard or Red Zone, as used in this analysis, is basically the same as recomnended by the Swiss and can be stated as follows: Red Zone:Terrain which is exposed to frequent and powerful avalanches. This means avalanches with: 1) a pressure of 200 to 600 pounds per square foot i to 3 metric tons per square meter) and a return period of 50 years or less; 2) a pressure of more than 600 pounds per square foot (3 metric tons per square meter) and a return period of 100 years or less. Blue Zone:Terrain that is a transition between the red and white zones. This area is affected relatively infrequently 100 years or slightly by avalanches. This means avalanches have: 1) a pressure of more than 600 pounds per square foot (3 metric tons per square meter) and a return period of more than 100 years; 2) a pressure of 200 to 600 pounds per square foot (1 to 3 metric tons per square meter) and a return period of more than 30 years; 3) a pressure of 20 to 200 pounds per square foot (0.1 to 1.0 metric tons per square meter) and a return period of less than 50 years. 3/4/2014 11 The 30 year recurrence interval used in the Swiss Avalanche Zoning Plan is probably due to climatic cycles that have been established in the Alps. The modification to 30 year, 50 year and 100 year utilized herein is to place the avalanche zoning on a more comparable basis to the existing U.S. Federal Flood Insurance Act which uses the 50 and 100 year recurrence intervals as benchmark hazard levels. 1 1 1 t 3/4/2014 1 K A C AVALANCHE ANALYSIS t Character of the Avalanche Path The KAC avalanche path has a northeast aspect and a maximum vertical drop of approximately 2350 feet (720 meters). The length of the avalanche path is approximately 5400 feet (1650 meters) from the start of the runout zone or edge of valley floor to the upper end of the path. The release zone consists of two areas; the lower area relatively free of significant tree growth due to geological conditions, slope and frequency of avalanches and the upper area with a significant stand of timber but showing evidence of avalanche activity both as string" slides and more general releases.. These two areas are delineated on Figure III and are of almost equal areal extent, 26.6 acres and 26.8 acres (10.15 and 10.85 hectares). The lower area has an almost due east aspect and has local steep sections of 40-42 degrees (84-89 percent), although the nominal slope for the majority of the area is 36 degrees (73 percent). The bedrock in this area is exposed in many locations as narrow cliff bands and dipping rock surfaces. Soil cover is shallow and shows evidence of relatively rapid soil creep due to the steep slope and relatively weak rock-soil interface. With the predominate grass- shrub ground cover, the winter snow cover has very limited frictional strength at the ground surface. t 3/4/2014 13 The upper release area is not as steep as the lower area and possesses a deeper soil mantle and a significant stand of timber. Average slopes in this upper release area range from 32 to 36 degrees (62 to 73 percent) although the upper endhas local slopes of 38 degrees (77 percent). The snow deposition from the Upper Mill Creek basin has been significant in the past due to the burn area, but with the re-vegetation continuing, this factor is becoming less of a problem for the upper release area. Snow Depth vs. Recurrence Interval The west side of the Gore Range has a strong orographic uplift condition that generates the relative abundance of snow that makes the Vail ski area known internationally for good dependable powder snow. Snow measurement courses for this area consist of the Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service stations at Shrine Pass and Vail Pass plus the snow courses maintained by Vail Associates near the Patrol Building at the top of the ski area and near Mid-Vail. The S.C.S. Shrine Pass snow course measurements were initiated in 1942; the Vail Pass course in 1952. The Vail ski area measurements were initiated in 1963, although some miscellaneous measurements were conducted as early as 1960. The S.C.S. Snow Depth Frequency Analysis published in 1974 data through 1971) indicates a one percent probability (100 year recurrence interval) snow depth of 77 inches (1.95 meters) for the Shrine Pass course and 86 inches (2.3 meters) for the Vail Pass course for April 1. The ten percent probability (10 year recurrence 1 3/4/2014 14 interval) snow depth is 76 inches (1.78 meters) far the Shrine Pass course and 73 inches (1.85 meters) for the Vail Pass course. In an analysis performed by Whit Borland5 in 1972 on the Clubhouse Gulch Avalanche and using the nine years of record from the Vail Associates station, the 100 year recurrence interval snow depth was indicated to be approximately 140 inches (3.6 meters). This record is extremely short for a reliable frequency analysis, and the course character such as wind deposition and aspect are not fully defined at this time. These snow depth frequency relationships cannot be used directly in avalanche analysis for a variety of reasons, but primarily due to the fact that the maximum snow depth usually occurs in April which is after the peak period of slab avalanche activity in the Central Rockies, whieh is normally late December to mid March, and that the avalanche activity is the resultof cumulative factors within the snowpack, such as snow genesis, resulting largely from temperature history of the snowpack. As an example, the following is a list and date of occurrence of the avalanche accidents or incidences within Colorado as listed in "The Snowy Torrents", both the January 1967 and the March 1975 editions. These two editions cover the period 1910 through 1971. Black 6ear Mine April 2, 1926 Arapahoe Basin November 18, 1951 Arapahoe Basin January 18, 1957 St. Mary's Lake February 24, 1957 Dam Slide (Berthoud)April 8, 1957 Loveland Basin February 12, 1958 Berthoud Pass April 29, 1958 La Plata Peak March 19, 1960 3/4/2014 15 Aspen February 23, 1961 Arapahoe Basin November 24, 1961 Loveland Pass January 7, 1962 Twin Lakes January 21, 1962 Dotsero March 4, 1962 Red Mouritain Pass March 3, 1963 Homestake Lake January 31, 1965 Geneva Basin December 20, 1965 Loveland Pass January 7, 1967 Arapahoe Basin November 26, 1967 Aspen Highlands February 15, 1968 Leadville February 24, 1968 Niwot Ridge January 26, 1969 Loveland Basin January 27, 1969 Redcliff January 29, 1969 Breckenridge December 25, 1969 Red Mountain Pass March 2, 1970 Breckenridge January 10, 1971 Snowmass February 27, 1971 Aspen Mountain March 6, 1971 Aspen March 16, 1971 Pole Creek, San Juans October 17, 1971 Vail November 28, 1971 This list does not represent a full assessment of the critical ava- lanche periods during the various winters but only when people or property were involved in snow avalanches. It does give an indication of when during the winter season the majority of avalanche incidences occurred. By month, this would be: MONTH NUMBER OF INCIDENCES October 1 November 4 December 2 January 9 February 6 March 6 April 3 The October incident involved elk hunters crossing a snow filled gulley. The Black Bear Mine incidences on April 2 occurred as the re- sult of a 14-day storm cycle starting on March 22, 1975. The Dam Slide on April 8, 1957 was released by artillery fire after a very intense spring storm. It was, however, a hard slab, size 5(very large) thet evolved into a mixed powder avalanche during passage down the avalanche slide path. 3/4/2014 16 The point of this discussion is to indicate the probable higher risk during the late December to mid March period and that not just total snowpack depth but snow genesis, temperature and storm history are major factors in developing high hazard and recurrence interval data for avalanche activity. For this analysis of the KAC avalanche, two different snowpack depths were examined as to maximum velocity and runout considerations. These snowpack depths were 59 inches (1.5 meters) and 78.5 inches 2.0 meters) and these depths have been taken as equivalent to the average release area snow depth for the two recurrence intervals used in the Red and Blue runout zone definitions. Runout Zone Analysis The detailed analysis of the avalanche dynamics and runout zone definition involved: 1) assessment of the types of avalanches that can occur at this location, i.e. loose snow, slab, powder, wet snow avalanches or mixed type avalanches; 2) definition of the release zone, slide path dynamics and runout distance and impact pressures for the more critical types of avalanches. A detailed discussion of snowpack genesis, avalanche types and dynamics will not be included herein, as this information is discussed at depth in the various refer- ence books. The loose snow avalanche can occur on this avalanche path, but would involve only the top layers of the snowpack resulting from a particular storm cycle and would be 9imited in areal extent and runout distance. In all probability, the loose snow avalanches would be 3/4/2014 17 associated with the local cliff bands in the steeper sections of the release zone(s) and the cliff area near the bottom of the slide path. The wet-spring type avalanches have occurred relatively frequent on this slide path, but those originating in the release zone(s) do not carry through the relatively flat section, Sections B-B and C-C on Figure III. midway down the slide path. Debris from wet spring avalanches in this section were observed by the author in the spring of 1973and 1975. An extremely large wet snow avalanche could theoretically carry through this section, but the bulk of the snow would lodge in the ravine or arroyo cutting diagonally across the slide path below the lower cliff band. The critical type of avalanche for this major slide path in determining runout distance and impact pressures in the valley floor are the slab avalanche and powder avalanche or a mixed slab-powder avalanche. Typically in the Central Rockies, the powder avalanches originate as soft slab avalanches and through slide path geometry or velocity considerations evolve rapidly into powder or mixed state avalanches. For the KAC avalanche path with the gully section near Section A-A and the lower cliff band, the mixed state or the powder avalanche will be the condition of the snow mass as it enters the valley floor. A full-blown powder avalanche as would be defined by the equations and criteria of Voellmy would tend'to be confined due to the restrictions 1 within the mid avalanche track and due to the approximately 30 degree velocity vector change.from the release zone into the slide path. 3/4/2014 18 This analysis is based upon the method utilized by Frutiger on the Juneau, Alaska.and Twin Lakes, Colorado avalanches which utilizes the equations of Voellmy and Salm. The primary equations are: V 0 2 = to R (sin 0 - le cos YY'0) Gulley F1ow 40 Aoyo Powder Avalanche V2 2gho U o fL Runout Distance 2 V1 S ~2 2g cos ~U - Tan ~U) + ~1 21~ hl~ Froude Number 2 F 9h Where if F4.1 streaming flow if F 7 1 shooting flow P 9 V2(1+ P P1_P2 1 Where: V velocity (avg.) of the snowmass at the point indicated by the subscript ts = coefficient of ground friction (m/s2) 400 to 600 m/s2) 4( friction coefficient (0.1 to 0.3) angle of ground surface from horizontal density of snow, subscripts indicate whether state is snowpack, flowing snow or deposited h depth of snow 3/4/2014 19 g= acceleration of gravity, 9.82 m/sec2 A= cross sectional area of flowing snow S = runout distance, meters P= pressure on perpendicular obstruction The analysis indicates the initial slope velocities within the release zone are in the lower part of the range that could, under proper conditions, evolve into a powder avalanche. An analysis of flow regime indicates for flowing snow mass, the Froude Number is greater than 1 and thusly "shooting flow" would exist. Calculations were made for bath a flowing mass and a mixed condition flowing and powder avalanche. The fiield evidence was utilized to establish the cross sectional area at the various points and to establish the historic range of velocities at the cliff and rock nose area. The trajectory for the snow mass coming off the cliff was ca1= culated for various potential velocities and it was found that all velocities below approximately 42 meters per second (95 miles per hour) would allow the snow mass to impact uphill of the rock nose in the arroyo) and this area would have to fill before the remainder of the sliding mass would carry on through to the valley floor. Sections across the ciiff-rock nose area were measured in the field and the volume of snow to fill this area is approximately 38,000 cubic meters. With an initial density of 0.20 gm/cm3, a deposited density of 0.35 gm/cm3 and an average release area depth of 1.5 meters, this arroyo would absorb snow from eTeven acres (4.4 hectares) of the release area. This volume and the attendant turbulence and energy loss for the remaining snow crossing the arroyo are definite factors in any evaluation of this avalanche path. 3/4/2014 20 Consideration was given to the possibility of a powder avalanche with velocities in,excess of 42 meters per second at the cliff. Velocities in excess of 42 meters per second under conditions of a large powder avalanche on a relatively open slope is very possible as velocities as high as 90-100 meters per second have been reported . Due to the geometry of this slide path and the evidence from the trees below the rock nose, it is the opinion of the author that the probability of a full-blown powder avalanche with velocities in excess of 42 meters per second is sufficiently remote as not to be a design case for this particular avalanche path, given the adopted runout zone definitions. The calculations for the runout distance and impact pressures were made based upon equations of Voellmy and Salm and the evidence obtained in the field from the avalanche path. A velocity vector change of the sliding snow due to the geometry of the cliff, arroyo and rock nose is evident from the debris on the rock nose. This was considered in the runout zone definition. 1 3/4/2014 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions derived from this study are shown on Figure II, i.e. a High Hazard or Red Zone of avalanche runout that has a maximum length of approximateiy 600 feet and an Intermediate Nazard or Blue Zone width of 60 feet. The definition of the zones is given under the chapter "Avalanche Zoning" of this report. A case might be made to define the limits of the runout zone on the basis of conditions that would occur on a more infrequent, i.e. considerably greater than 100 year recurrence interval, since the potential for loss of life exists. A parallel could be drawn between the conceptualdesign philosophy currently utilized in the design of dams and spillways in which the design floods are based upon Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) and PM Flood type events and definition of avalanche runout zones. The Swiss have considered this problem in the evolution of their avalanche zoning criteria and the co?ranents of 6audenz Bavier of Chur contained in Chapter XU, page 157, of "Avalanche Protection in Switzer- land", General Technical Report RM-9, March 1972, are pertinent. De Quervain has expressed himself with regard to the avalanche catastrophe of 1968 in Davos as follows relative t to this problem: If one wishes to exclude all possible risk by taking as a basis of zoning not only the regular avalanche activity but also all isolated historical events, then various well-known localities wou7d have to place entire regions under the ban.' And again he writes: Thus, probably in the future there will remain a residual risk, whether because in the space of centuries one must accept one enormous catastrophe or because more frequently one must reckon with less intense damage.'" 3/4/2014 22 1 The Swiss, while living with avalanche problems of far greater magnitude than we experience, to date, in the United States, have adopted a rational, practical approach to the risks involved and the zoning limitations. Since two of the Bighorn Townhouse and some of the uncompleted KAC buildings lie partially in the Red Zone and partially in the Blue Zone, some consideration by the Town of Vail will be necessary to establish a policy for these buildings and the potential inhabitants. Various alternatives are available which range from allowing continued construction and occupancy to restrictive zoning and not allowing habitation within the avalanche runout zones. Another possibility is avalanche defense structures, either retarding structures in the release zone or protective structures in the runout zone. Retarding structures in the release zone would be on National Forest land and would require considerable cooperation and coordination with the U.S. Forest Service. The cost of these structures would be relatively high and environmental impact considerations will be significant. Defense structures in the runout zone would have to be massive t to afford protection to the buildings and would require careful design to insure a reasonable degree of protection. It would be premature at this time to define, in detail, the structure that would be required, but the construction costs for full protection would be at least 200,000. 3/4/2014 23 If there were no buildings within either the red or blue zones, the most propitious action would be to exclude any construction within either zone. The KAC development, however, has several buildings under construction; and the Bighorn Townhomes have been completed and occupied for several years. The buildings on the KAC development that lie within the red zone should not be completed for habitation during the winter months. Any building that is completed within the red or blue zone should be assessed for potential damage to adjacent structures in case of a major avalanche. If additional buildings are constructed on the KAC property, the new buildings should be sited out of both the red and blue zones. The Bighorn Townhomes present a somewhat different problem in that these buildings have been completed and occupied for several years. There is definitely a hazard involved for these buildings and any winter inhabitants. Based upon "Encounter Probabilities for Avalanche Damage" by Ed LaChapelle, Alta Avalanche Study Center, March 1966, and considering a fifty year life for the building and a fifty year recurrence interval for a major avalanche, the chances for avalanche damage to these.buildings is approximately six out of ten during the expected life period. 3/4/2014 REFERENCES 1. The Avalanche Zoning Plan", by Hans Frutiger, USDA Forest Service, Translation No. 11, July 1970. 2. Development of Methodology for Evaluation and Prediction of Avalanche Hazard in the San Juan Mountain Area of South- western Colorado, INSTAAR, December 1974. 3. Cold Region Science and Engineering, Part III, Section A-3 Avalanches", by Malcolm Mellon, May 1968. 4. Avalanche Protection in Switzerland", 6eneral Technical Report RM-9, March 1975. 5. Evaluation of the Snow Avalanche Hazard in the Valley of Gore Creek, Eagle County, Colorado", INSTAAR. 6. Clubhouse Avalanche, Vail, Colorado", Whit Borland, July 1972. 7. Racquet Club Avalanche", Whit Borland, December 1972. 8. Avalanche Forces and the Protection of Objects", by Sommerhalder, translation by E. LaChapelle, Alta Avalanche Study Center, November 1967. 9. The Snowy Torrents, Avalanche Accidents in the United States 1910-1966", Dale Gallagher, Ed., January 1967. 10. The Snowy Torrents, Avalanche Accidents in the United States 1967-1971", Knox Williams, March 1975. 11. On the Destructive Forces of Avalanches", Voellmy, Trans. No. 2, Alta Avalanche Study Center, March 1964. 12. Snow Frequency Analysis for Colorado and New Mexico Snow Courses, 1974", April 1974. 13. An Example of Damage From a Powder Avalanche", M. Martinelli, Jr. and K.D. Davidson, 1966. 14. Guidelines and Criteria for ldentification and Land Use Controls of 6eologic Hazard and Mineral Resource Areas", Colorado Geological Survey 1974. 15. The Weather and Climate of a High Mountain Pass in the Colorado Rockies", Art Judson, November 1965. 1 3/4/2014 16. Avalanche Zoning for the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska", Hang Frutiger, January 1972. 17- San Juan County, Colorado Avalanche Zoning Resoiutions" 18. Avalanche Zoning Ordinance for-the City of Ketchum, Idaho" 19. Encounter Probabilities for Avalanche Damage", Ed LaChapelle, March 1966. 20. Snow Avalanches, A Handbook of Forecasting and Control Measures", U.S.D.A. Forest Service No. 194, Rev. October 1968. 3/4/2014 r f / r~ , j,M~ r tl l~'1•~~a."~,, y ~Q i"1 r ti~~`~~'i~ ~ ` =f• ti._..._ f / ~ f~,Ff wY~ l_ Q1- i U- --~~9~' i\ti"~~ fz--~/- i-- t OOD'~~ L A .1. i Ye_CF 1 t N~\~ W A` Y~~BW t i'A A'~m 1i~n' li 4 N4~R ~ ~l ~ hu~I(/ ~ty 1 ~t 1 4X~ ~~i fl~ i' !1 r VA i~ 1 i j ~ -•V ~1~:~,~i i 1 t f k 1 ~414 A.C. A~q~A~„GQL0R A•VAIL# RGE'NAL TRIAC 500 WeSr M;sS,y: 010 Bulldin9 wood Colo. 81 Loke Sep75 3/4/2014 F lk ;J iL 3 4l S~I/{-`+~Try I t ^YXU~I r I h a.. v V r. F I L'(^Il! / IL L~t T ~ VQIL RAQUET CLU'B CQNDM/NlUll~f r~ t i-j e. a J • li I 1•'I I r'I n r 1 i i.Lr i I f •I•• l ~1 l'I IFI, I14I il~ ~~5.,~ i ~TtiI i; 1 I~I l 1 F .si-ir.'UNPLATTEO~'.~~~~1 I UNPLATTED~:~: O j I••.'•F~ o~t; A.C. OF VA/Lr'.~K. r,• i':::. iF j:''::::::....:::.j' r 1'~,;t• I:,. T~ 1 ..,...........,....,f1u ......................r I..:i;~~:'••~~A. UNPLATTEQ f; Nate. Zomng lines I~ s~,obtoined from maPs RAC by the Town of Vail. . . . . . . TRACT :TRACT BIGHORN SUBCIVISION B. . . .c f'IFTH ADOITION Ir S ~Legend: L o w Density . . . . . . . . . . . ft~\\p Multiple Family i.:i"Med. Density ZONING MAPuItipleFamily1SCale ; I1° =100 M J BIGHORN AREATwoFamily Residential VAIL' COLORADOWN/TE R/VER LID.NATIONAL fOREST lIP/AD, 8S~ 7500 Wesl Mississippr AvE. Surie 0l0 Buildrng A Lakewoo4, Co%. 80226 Sepi., 1975 3/4/2014 1 I i I. - I II I i ~ I i I I FIGURE III l V f ~1 t~ ti ~ a ti p ~tihy ti r H A 1 n ~t ~ h A VN ~h rs~j~,Less dense powder n t~ ~ y i Less densepowder ~ ti nn ah ~compo e t bove - ~y~e ~ component above r ti7ll~ th~s level . ~ h ~ h ~ this level . N G.~h 1 h IC ~ 1 1 h~ h t nh ~r ao ~ii _ r.N EI _ M I`_ J~~N d' Ill liil-lI11= 1111=1f11lir'= 1I~1-=Ih III 111= _1 Ilil-11U=-l~li~~~ =_ rt~1~ ~1111-rlil J111=1f11= u"=~=,~~ii (111 ~ IN~ ~IUI r~-iih J~,ta~1=_~l11r,llli=ir;~ rii; _lli+ ~ 1 _ 1 !a~ ~A rox, level of freuentlopp Q y X-SECTIONB- B running avalanches. v~ 7 SECTION C- C Scale : I"= 20'l~ ~ ~II ~ ll~l _ s~Qie: i"= 2o'17~i~ j Top ofSlide Path ~ 1, i' I P sECTia N A A 125'14 °Scale : I ° = 20' J~~~ ~ L~ i»=' ~ i I I 8~~6jf~ii_Ilu~ ii~,~+ iuit~~,. ~ a'~ _li1 =1iN=nu I~ n= I N7i ~=, ii~ y;0 1. a~ I~ / 600 t ~ o1I~ i~ ~ ~IU! ~ iUi._n 1U1= 111~~=i i W 400 j SECTION D- D THRU CLIFFa R~ CK NOSE ~ ~1°~° 200 Scale: I'~= 40' a2~2006 50+00 52 54 56 58 ~ 6Qt00 62 64 i I ~ ~ I10, 000 i i o~o/i 1~~~ / I800 j I~ ,600 ow o~ o 53~ 3°~°i /in i ~ i 5~ ~ I 600 j i i 400 i i_- I !Io i i I 3i ~i I/ i a~r I°/ ~ _20066 ~O/400i r ~i r I,o N I c I o~o / o I O Q h/ ,t~ Q Agj o v r a~v c i G1 N I 2~~ Iw o WI 000 a m i ~ I O m a 1/i i ~ o 0%I ~ d 6 i iUO C I m 9, 000 cn cn L 8000 M Q IV N ~ O ii~ a O~ i~r U o~o f 1~~~6~0/I 235~o N~800 a a sao35 ~a~ Cliff C25~~~~~o I ~ 38 40+00 42 44 46 48 50+00 52 I O Rock Nose., ~ I 5eesectionD- D for ao ~ l -~~~t r~ Q aemiior ciirr area.600Sta. 0+00 Edge of streamK. A. C. 4 6.6%_ _ AVALANCHE PATHPROF/LE 500VAlLCOLORADOHYDR~- TR/QD, L lD.7500 41'esl Mls:>i:;~r~,pi Ave.4 6 8 IO+00 1214 16 18 20t00 22 2426 28 30+00 32 343638 40t00 40t00 42 44 Suite 010Buildir+gA Lokewood, Colo, 3/4/2014 I ~FIGURE II ~T u i' a ~ p r M~~Jr x r a 1 r , a i , j',r f J ~ r t Y r j,1~' ld+~r,p i x pi L~ ~a, 6 Fr •~A: o R I f . ' 3µ.~.. ~I ~e ~ I h+ f `N.,`~i y ~y t1~~.w ~r A.-~1~~' sr y"d~~3~''s s,;p f r 1 ;,,r r~f I~.r~r~`r r~ lry'4~.:~: 'q1~~I~i1~;j14Y~: y ~ t,. I~ ~f I ,p^t 1? Ar' iytk' ~a r,:. ~ Y'r ~r F~ 4.~.~ i ri.f.~.d r. d iril[ A~ 1~' r.d I/r ,f c n t ql'M; ~Y 4-~~.i~~ r.~''l~ i,,1!~" u4x~ ~r ar~la~.f~d ± MR;,~ y,~%r .i 1 I i F M y f. yy.'~ul"~~1 ~~ff..c4)..F j,~y~~~°.~y~rl~ j :y*~l~'T a,'W ,F'M1 l v r t ,y4 Sr„2i i 1. , r,~~a7 ' r" , b~" J,p1s 1~~y,c~a~ F 0.,~j"r.r~M~~1r",w~F 1- 3~s~~~i i ~ ~w~, r~,s,i d t 'r l:'~ ,o wk err R,1 r 1~tYd. r~y ~ fdsM f?'~~~t a~,~'.r'r 4.i.~ f ci J r l e i k a r r y.a p~ f r rl~1(r 1 ~r ~,;;1''~' w;a i'+i , .t 1 ;il~ y r •f~`f~~r r r f`I r yw~F 0 p, F p ~t Y i k'>..Mb~rI~ e.~i r 'A~" 4, - L I~*kF~.;.4 ,i „r+ . rYl'~?'~"a , ~ 0 r , v - ty i~ r r,#e a yr h.x q ,r „ f~ o . f ~irM~.t y~~1~i,~1" .i.~ J~1~ t °fi!'y. ,qr. y/r 1 ~.,-n:.' f i • 1ry~t~~w p. rjei~ k M..l N i ' ; ]Y i~Y a`A t t a~i`•a `Ah.;Cf P.~!Q 1 ' f i a' i~,-'A e. N Fj. ~a F s c<r',r~ t ,s f ~f z ~Nt i s L''~~~n f f:; ~ y~,f 'r":'_t X py'1 _w n~~~"o r r I e:,f a 1M v;~r ,j'~ ~ x f tq~af,,. .j~. r S Na Ve:.a I~ , . :r is l N 4 tr~f1+~r V a~4 I Y'rr .p~ F~y~s. s, : ~ Y :l C i~t f f i r s r r'` i~'A A ~^p, ~ Q~r Y ri r^ r~r, .r i t c~ ~R x p+~, ' ~ f._F ~ w'~y g}1' ~ 1`Y! '~1 i r j~ ' ~6 ~I~F ~f'a.a ~ Al~ 0~~y r~y y ~ k4 r~,r..4 i r' ~lri ~ ` J , jr ~ ; r Y r B~ ~Y a- ~r°'. Q. Y l,•~- P'~-' d r'I 0, r i~ . i .fi • ~ Q4~t i ~l/s.~f r~~~.tY # ' ~.r~`r I 6 h,._ ? i 'l~, ~ r ~ r P ~ ~ E~t~ . r f i n~ 7 - .1 t r G p z ;C t, ry'. ,r.~l'v l . / y r n t ~1ir7M~. t`-y~y~~ -w+M~w z 0 ~t~'~~r r ~r~i~r. ~rqr r ~f[. f~0 t f ~ e . r'~ ~rQ,a~ r r ,1 J ' j a~ 1,f a f 1~' ~r ~ .i ~ J r`Y~ 1 . „p'y r,tpii:f.,:5,r~'r 1 t ~t Q~ j R p ~ 'yy ; Y i ,I.S!'~1 ~f S •l fl r~,.. .r fd n~f~'.~,~.7,.. ~~~ Y~{~~~~.T.~f~r, py~v~ry p 0 r~ p F:t f. i a 4'r i Ti+,~Q M' Y'.iY~ 1 I ~a'M'~fi r r :i r~'•'.~ ,r~i a.cr~f. y'r g pr r t~J~A iy~'f b'j Y A 1a~t, y.,I~~ ,1 11G;:; - r N, ,aqd!, l'l ,L t~~ v~Mi,~~ Q1 1 r ir k1. I'~.w~a^_ s f ag~ ~~~"y~s ,r, ;j:v x' 1 1 R.,. ynr l Y1" .9.~.f ~ydr~~F. y.. ~~hI d-. .yt.t ~r . Jr~ y~~s y~;.r 1~ ,a y~~ a z i r ` ~ s+r' .y~f f , y,,r i P f, J,~"' ' f i~'.r i li ~k.il , ce ~ . r , 1 , ' T tg~ ~ ~ 1 ~4 4 ~ lI'r p l I P 6.' i~7 r j q~ J Y~-~`'1.:y ~:fY Lyj~i J~,~~ ~Y~SS.q4FT^' yaY r~.J ~I , f f a~ 4,~'~y~~'.~ ° ~i~ ` a t i-p ,r v R Ar h~,rE Jf .~d~ t t,Y r.W... d".r..~~_ Y...~a.... ~ u yI~ir..f~'d :i.";s}' :i~e?~`?~s d ~~e'~ pr1:f'•. ~f ~fi ~ f ylY!•r.a.y. y;7~i w~,d~.N~ j rp S u M ai` i+''` fd ~r ,s y , j r .P' ~ r° 'e~ w y~'~ r a s 'F WY - y I, n. .krrt~e~'~',~~~ 3' y .v r~y. ~lr:.R„'.. t.ry'~'-.+io.t ~r a' f, ~pi~ .f ~rI r~s-4' fi^ J , t r S :Nyxr1.n,. .e r 1~. t ak~I. t Y.::'.Y:r . .r F`~ti.r."~k~ 4,~ .t. ,x°~ r.y 1 a: ~ 1 t,~-~~r;^~ti: ~ -r r fit r r~nr~r D'~e .~r X 3 y y P 1, I j ~ts.7 T M~P ~I', i g,i r t .r f ~y r 1. t' J1wr ' , ~ . .I ,x r,4 9y~, x .r, 4 7~ fD.i~r d f~~...~ ~ ~ y i r ~r~ , J s ^ r 1 r ~ 4~ I "j r,,.f 4;l"r' Pj'i''kVf, (f?~s s ~ R t S~r. .v ~a ~s rf~''.~f q.1.r oa:o f 1~' i ,r..M y , , JAJ n ~d' F , .J, , d/r r'r lF e res' . r 'l!t f ~R .t.d f~/, r r r' ~ f y /r S' _ c ao; r y~~i r . ~y G ,y po y r~ti~t.,a~'.1 r I y~r ~ ~Il.f j cl~ j'~ ytww iM~.t t~,. Yy p. .I I.~ .c i / 4tAf7j1 Y.r" i J:.J~ 1,j a '1~ .i r s r i't.r~1irr1~.t}'k'r,"~r a . ~r, oi y y~ F - i- 1 4 e,~^f"9 S,r ~,x -l~''~: •c~"`1 y K y ,t:r E r .t ' ~ ~ y+y~1 i ~y r q y tppy,:r r;s ~r;W~i~,Sl~~S'i...y t r"`A ~ , ~i'r~`. i, ~ r ps I ~t I ,v,~ o~rG y~~~~'r•f t~7ri.'.,k~ i :::~~b~x `r'"1 i.. °I d y. I l r r , d t~ c.i ,f.r- ~7:a k~.M ~ ,W Y. f rJiF l~a w r~t0 ~ r r r r F ~1P z•A tIr ~tOJ A2P ~r~ o C r ,I r` .3efl~i ,f'~ y zw.r 26,8 4 q 1 rS(~ 0 p t t 4.~W r'F~ ' p~s#L~_gfr y;- 8 L ti~ a ~ I rr ~f r 1r r f _ b r 85r" 1 i r . ! r Nrt'1~. I w k Y ~ ~I~~ ~Ni. I 1 y~ft~ ~r n r ~ A,e~j f Fj s t r~'~ tiz.~r t i 7q p~ .r 1 r.. r ~ ~.~~.'Il ~arjl~ R s iIry li ~l 3 ti.r~M~~ ,~t j, y;...:?~~.S w"~1;. , ~ . 7F r~A i 4. I J wai;i, : r MY . re.=,, r a~- ~r~~a,i . Q ~ LN t,.M~re .r~# fl Ir'•F~. a1,K.;. : r + x~',r i 0~a:"F F "r.,,2 6 F FI. A .1 s- ~ k f,~ f r i 1 . _ r r r- k .y y~1.'!,(r j 1' r A. w. I J I~' w~ I! iIt5,.. w Y J -4 I rt y •r', a j v~l ~fi t d. r.' .r a ~ J ` i a ~ Y 4.~ 1 f'I"5~cy. i~;. w i.N" i,'a' q ~r ~1'I" ~r xrfrxlY ~f J j r~:~ i~,y.A.; I I R A r~ .: y' r r . ~ .yf. ~Vy M Y I II 1~7.k. y':~1 w'~kti4~A~.q s:~"r',"~ ~ F"'N; rr.u~,#"~. yl5yr ~C R f r, Y 96 f ~y~ k1 ~M. J bt~ i- r~x~~~t T ~ y!i*i '.Y ,i~ n r~' A x f,j j• s' y 4 r~rr' , l,'r ~ ~ t YIfftr , ~ r y rfirf. m~e 4i~9 r' . .e~ . fi s l y,~ y k j i ~fi'y1w, ~e~rw.I ~ f =. r: r7~.~7. 1`r'R 1„~.''~'f'"'H pT ~ i S o lq4. , ~ ~r F r'Y "u ai'~y.__ ~s ,4 AJeV -M r"': ~y , _tra E.. y j t 9 , r.•y~r,~.i ~ : J!1 ti~ 9 , ,rr; t 4 i ,ti ~ ~ r h l rr jj'~ Il'y n~/ Z 1~.1 de i~ ,iI~' r F~ la!' r b! i a y N r rf+ l r, ~ r rty y/y 1 a R r 11'i ~st F s „ S ir ~y,e r+raem .l`f F r/ ~f f.~ ~r~ ~I rr I I f ~I r fi~ h~*4 i Y 1 et ~4'Je ~ ~ ~R..114F ~ 7` ~ s~t~~ n'~ .h..•'~3^r,-s"q . ~I f~r fKl. 5 r .;~3' s'~p.v'.r , TU'~.,~-Jst r in -Y~y y g~ ti% -s : 1~`:~a t j "t ~r S.r. .ti~; r ,r~ p't l, d'.r~,~, d 6 f v r~ ~a~~1. ~l ~s? r,~' . i~ x dF',y~ y[,„~ff:.f, SI'~h"vy I k~.`^~,~rd`C n~Ty. k f~~j'7 f ~ w L k~"`~9 Yi ai~r~, -g v,1r ~ 1 xF'~ ,-n;,~'s~n , ~ i.,1'.c ..s 1~.y, ifi r Ir ttr r i~~F:.r ~x h~"~~~`~!?~'``r~i~ z;~ ~Y4~1 r r'r r~y ,ti+~.s k t~~`.~. " ~Y~.,~*,"~,e~,~-~ f `,~k,,s'..~j.rs.r" '1~ , Fs.~W yi zy~ z~~h~ su'3 ii~"4~ ~4 jr ,r N, l~~V~ i{. i' fR#~s,d`l r QtiIi :t-~ry,,o o ir~t,Ws ,Y;,r~'~~t~n ?,'tk- 3~~v'"~ W~1 Mr, y~? h y ~iistY,.v,~ i ~ e d~ z?~'3 y r k'S~tM,r # r I ' , r1 Ci r V rrw.r.d~ ~r , _I,r J y} fI~k,, s{ s,. s r e e' ~ r~~i v r~"i"' S.„SC T+r r~~,„ ~ iyY. r'':L?W~~ 1 y`t i(~. ~ ` ; ~,Y w . v~ S U n ~k~:. i ~t i"~ ti' ' P rfr r = C . rf,ri -4A;r y j ' I , f /rr~ 'a~ i t~y a.0. 1r~` ~f 5:yii . . S' t t~f .nn~1~ ~c~ ~~L~..L 1.}`C~~'df }~lA} r gky iY y~, ~i' r ~ff~ A`:.t ~f 1.j I I , ~ ~ F a. ~ u~fy. r f. ~ i r y r,.~a ~ rr14SF~~ U~..r'~. f aT~ +i[sh~K'~";~i,s•rt'zr'i~, SI CI O ~ O 1 i„y,`~~!`C' f.,i~ ~y~a.i'l'~.tlrif ~ "'f.R. f 3 r i DCC , r' ll 1 l..~ v 4b ~W' r~ l 1,i' .b,f~d r~d r 7 c ~ r,.r -~r r ~~r .i IYII ~ QI7GLIl ~y r 3'.i sw r „ 1 f v 1'K S ~ ar i. rk f?-y- ~ T ' /H~r.'r~ .w.. f r~ a -l~ , f x~~x ~ ,r. N ~ A`RE~ , r ~ r ~r~r k~ q'~ a~,j~_~ y r'f1 j a t~¢,'. , y.-r I ~ "y... f~rN~l f rc„ - c`4'~al w r r,w ~ 1 er~r : ~t I ~o rf,~,~,. ~ ,l j f n R `wr~t.~.r ~7 1 n a"v iv' y,W!r ,at, ~ n M I N r rP~K~~.,~i`f`. ~3~ \c 1 a ~ l ~ rr-~:a C;~~~ir,w:iIrl .a r .r rrj ,r t~. r.a~ f f r r . zZ, . r f~' , i' p, , , fY` , r ; ~ r j.r;n x r 1 1 r v s ~ " r,~"tf jY"' ~ j~'1 x E~vr',Tr fe.r tI y t.r.a t1~: ~r o f w, y,r r-ka i- O 1. N vx ~°x ~r t f ,r J~<~f .r 3,.f- j i~r e y~.,5'y ~ ~f ~r ~f r' ~ ~y~/t o r iIrr" a~ r~. ~f 1 w 1~1d ..y~ J y w'~ti.~A i'f. 4^' . . . , r a`aa~~^J r h~ fr D t1 , d'f.- ~.ie• e. ~,7"~~ a ~37~ i•r 6~ s~,.~.w.l Cy ~ ~?''r ~r I r ~ ~r J~I r.~ o p I p r r yy y K ~j~}.Y~ e,'r_ k G `y~'R1~~,Y/~'~F FI 'tb:i .1 a t~ s ~ i 1 .s.y~ lJ 7. t e.~~ 1r',fy" d ~ , .f , py:`R-r f t~ r~~~ r 1~ . ~rr r.1~• ,l I,F M. ,I 1 r: r.rrr ~'Y t r p 1v~M~ a . l~.S r t (l.X lr l i 4~9. 4 tr~~~~ P~Y~ f yi . d , r- r {1. W.? f t 1.y c,y~ ~ a • ~W' iM} 4 r~ ,r y' ikl 'i~ P~yi y I'~ ir~F yT M rrr t I f~' rl/r / 'f,r e+r r K'":xa;~~~~ iF:Yr~.. ysT.hr rlr~v~v rj~~ 1 ~ i r~f t;. c i~r r~Q r` y w ~ Yf rry~f t I%~r rr"~ ~1 r I r-ti.y W ~ ~ tiik in .P N J „M? r . a~1w, H:O ht~-'~ r r~t. a ze~s .k w~/'tl ~ 4 s~~f r f ~ r,t F r~r ~ i t7Crr y F,~1,~y'~:5.J; .y 4~i. . r~~.4 a i ~c I;.xfAfWVaii. w e ~r r s K yy;~ a J y r .A r d~ rl ~ ';r p r ite ~r + y,i r a Mat s~•F ,y.x~ a 1~. . ~ 4:; 4.J.f r ~ l~ j y~4' ~ lf~~ N .ri r 1~ ~irj./ ~ ,Ap , o 1 ~if~A~ ~ .r .j. ~ : iofr~. ~r y . .y .a i w~Ty' .r y~.~ N f t 6 y Y~ Y..L~, f r i I~ r . . r , I y i I i P s y S 'y t~7, t..J% t1arY + 's r 1aap .w~rA~l r~` s ! r 1' ~ ~f r i ir.n 9i'y ~yr y 4 I , y y y~,~i ' 4 b .ly1C y I il. ~t' ...: A~; iiA/J d. f~rr d1~f .t I ~Arrt . ,rr._ ~i~,~~r` f r~~~ M S~ ~ L r ~e+.:< r s`r s . y i y A - 2 UpperReleaseZaneA- C Chute Intermediate ar .BlueRunout Zone 26, 8 ac.QreaIn Acres 8~4.86aa.Area In Acres & -y 14_ 85 h Hectores 1.95h Hectores .V T .LH Contoursbased u on field surve sV,4/L COLORA~O ~x P Y , U. S.G. S. I: 24,000 ma s Q Town _ Ja-I Frequent or LowerRelease Zone~HighHazardorpui7500 WestMisslssi i Ave. AP of Vail I 100 maps 26.6ac.Area In Acres 8~Red Runout Zcne Suile 0/ DBuilding A 10 _75 ha Hectores ~Lakewood Colo, 80226S~epf. 1975 ,lab. ew.r_ N da;..# _I if.tt,~~ 3/4/2014 i EVALUATZCN OP THF, SNOW AVAI.A:YC:Ir, iaZARD IN TfiE VALLiY 0F GOriE CREEK, EAGLE CQTlPZTY~ COLOKADO Final Report Prepared for thE tot,m of Vail, Go:oraclo by In3titute of Arctic and A2pine Recearc: Univers3ty of Colorado culdc;r, Colorado Research Team: Richard F. Madole, Project Director Paul Carrara Mike Glenn Art Mears Paula Krebs Funded by hational Aeronautica and Space Administration NASA-PY Project Grant Number NGL-06-003-200 I~IIIIIIII!IIUIII~IIi~IIIflIIIIIIIIIIIIINII~IIII~IIII~IIIIC 3/4/2014 ACKIQOWLEDGLCIENTS INSTt'1A.R personnel on this project gratefullytacknowledge the asEtistar.ce of the towm of Vail in providir.g living quarters and office support for the duration of the field season. w'e wish to thank especially Terry Aiinger for his cooperation and active support of this research effort, and to thank Kent Rose and Jim Lamont for their aid. We also thank Ed Browning, and Jim Gregg of the U.S. Forest Service, and ArC ,7udson, and Fete Martinelli of the Rocky i4cuntain Porest and Range lxperiment Station (U.S.F.S.) for helpful advice and assistance. Sincere appreciation ie expressed to the field assistants, Marks Anders, i•.ichael Eurnham, Dave Groeneveld, and Sandy Zicus, for their valuable help. 3/4/2014 TABLE OF COIdTE:VTS SECTION PAGE I.INTRODUCTION I II.CONDITIONS IN SNO[d PACK LEADING TO AVALANCtIE RELEASE 2 Paul Carrara) Avalanche Types 2 Genesis in the 5now Pack 2 Equitemperature Metamorphism 4 Temperature Gradient Metamorphism 4 Physical Characteristics of Avalanche Hazard Areas 4 Some Factors Conducive to Avalanche Formation 6 Meteorological Topographical 7 III.METHODOLOGY The Problem Art tiears) 7wo Types cf Avalanchea: Wet and Dry 8 Art Mears) Calculation of the Velocity and Impact of "Climax" Powder Avalanches 9 Art Mears) Caleulation of Starting Zone Volumes 12 Art Mears) Vegetative Analysis of Maximum Avalanche Width 13 Paula Krebs and Mike Glenn) Sizes of the Avalanche Runout Areas 15 Art Piears) Impact Pressures Within the Runout Area 16 Art Mears) The Avalanche "Windblast"16 Art Mears) 3/4/2014 1 SECTION PAGE IV.WET SD',OW AVALA2dC?;ES pir' UNC0:7F7.Nr.D 5'L0Pi;S 17 Paul Carrara) Velocity, Impacts and Runout Distances of the Unconfined Wet Avalanche 17 V.SiJDi~77ARY 19 Large Major Avalanches 14 Small Slope-Avalanchee 20 Clubhouse 21 Waterfall 22 Timberfalls 23 Ol:d Muddy (Racquet Club)24 King Arthur 25 Vail Meadows 26 SELECTED REi ERI;iiCES 27 GLO5SARY 29 3/4/2014 iv LIST OF FZGURES FIGURE PAGE lA.Slab avalanche 3 1B.Loose snow avalanche 3 2A.Gully avalanche S 2B.Unconfined slope avalanche 5 3.Aftereffecta of powder avaldnche impact 10 GA,Wet enow avalanche confined in an avalanche track 11 GB.Powder enow avalAnche in the acme avalancha track as 4A. 3/4/2014 SEcrTON i IN1'RODUC'LION 4 R The snow avalanche, a mass fiow cf snow and/or ice down a slope, is one of the most widespread and serious natvral hazards in montane Colorado. The high, steep, and unbro}:en slopes that extend ircn above timberline down to habitable altitudes, such as 8,200 feet (2,500 m), represent the greatest danger. Velocities attained by some 1a:ger 2valanches on sucn slopes may exceed 224 mph (100 m/s) and impact forces may be on the order of several hundred lb/ft2 (t/n2) Ie11or, 1968). Ever since man has gone into the mountains he has been plagued by avalanches. The recsrrence of winters of excep*ior.ally heavy snows result- ing in avalanches and disasters are well docuaeated in Switzerland where villages have been located in the hign mountzin valleys for more than a thousand years (Fraser, 1967). The largest avalar.che disaster recorded in the United States claimed 96 lives at Wellington, tYashington in 1910 Gallagher, 1967). _ The probleiv of avalanches is not new to Colorado. During the height of mining in the late 1800's and early 1900's virtually hundreds of niners were killed by avalanches (U.S. Dept. Agric., 1968). Since 1950 avalanches have claimed a total of 41 lives in Colorado, and during this 23 year peri- od Colorado leads all other states in avalanche fatalities (A. Judson, per. comm.) 1473). The number of avalanche fatalities will only increase w:.th increasing recreational use of the mountains and development of mountain properGy. The widespread occurrence of natural hazards and the rapid expansion of population centers in mountainous Colozado pose a major problen for government, planners, developers, ar.d the public in general. 11,1ountainous terrain forces population cer.ters and the nighways linxing Chem to locate along valley floors that are prone to multiple hazards including floods, debris flows, and landslides as well as avalanches. The Vail area, partic- ularly Vail East, exemplifies the problem. Of ccnsiderable concern is the fact that much of the public is unaware of the kinds and 2bundance of these natural hazards. The town of Vail has been aware of the natural hazard problem ar.d in late 1972 appealed to the INSTAAR NASA-PY project team for support tnrough the then relatively new program funded by the NASA (.dational Aeronautics and Space Adminlstration) Office of University Affairs. This program whieh is devoted to applying space technolo~y and the latest remote sensing technology to real world problems requires, ameng other things, that user groups requesting support be willing to act upcn the study results. The need to delinit natural hazards in the Vail area ar.d the willir.gness of municipal officiale to act upon study results clear2y complied with the NASA-PY program guidelinea. Because of this and the suiCabi'_iCy of NASA high altitude aircraft imagery for delimiting natural hazards in th:s area, the work described in the following pages became possible, I V 9 i E 3/4/2014 SECTION II CONDITIONS IN SNOW PACK LEADING TO AVALANCHE RELEASE The defin±tion of an avalanche, as used in this report, refers to a mass of snow and/or ice falling, flowing, or sliding rapidly down a slope under the force of graviCy. Wherever snow occurs on steep slopes the possibility of an avalanche is present. Avalanches occur by the thousands every winter in mountainous Colorado, and the probability af loss of life and property is certain to increase with inereased winter recreational use of the taountains. Avalanche Types There are two basic avalanche types, the loose snow avalanche and the slab avalanche, which are recognized by differences in the mechanical properties of sr.ow in the starting zones. The distinction is based on the amount of internal cohesion existing between the individual snow particles LaChapelle, 1970). Lcose snow has litCle internal cohesion and slides as a formless mass. In contrast, a slab avalanche has more internal cohesion and can transmit static stresses over a great distance at high speeds. This results in a large volume of snow releasing from the starting zone. Slab avalanches (Figure 1.A) involve a much larger area than the loose snow avalanche, and the starting zone of a slab avalanche contains a fracture line which may be several hundred or thousand feet long. Slab avalanches are classified as soft or hard, depending on the condition of the snow coming to rest in the runout zone. Ttie difference is meteorologically induced. The hard slab is thought to be the result of cold temperatures and strong winds (LaChapelle, 1966). Loose snow avalanches (Figure 1B) tend to occur when a fluffy snow accumulates on steep slopes during times of little or no wind. Changes in the snow pack, ei=her induced by temperature or meltwater, reduced what littZe internal cohesion may be present and the snow gives way to acquire atubility at a lnwer angle oT repose. Wet, loose snow avalanches, although not as large as slab avalanches, are very common in the spring nnd early summer and are a hazard to mountaineers in the high country. Slab avalanches constitute a major hazard because in many instances they flo;a over great distances and can inflict extensive damage because of high velocity and large size. Wind-blown snow commonly develops slab con- ditions, and wind is interpreted to be one of the dominant factors 3n slab formation (LnChapelle, 1970). Slcib avalanches begin sliding ae a single large slab, uaually on an incompetent layer such aa depth hoar or a buried sun crust. Genesis in the 5now Pack Basically, avalanches occvr in an unstable snow pack when the strength of the snow can no longer support its oG-n weight. Instability i.s produced by changes vrithin the snow pack usually associated with temperature. f d f 3/4/2014 r s yI NN t U 1 w---- 3/4/2014 4 Equitemperature rietamorphism If the temperatures are the same or at -Zeas''t Fsicailar throughouz 'the depth of the snow pack, a process known as equiteraperature metamorphism can occur (LaChapelle, 1967). This process is most ragid at 32°F (0°C) but slows with decreasing temperature. At temperatures below -40°F (-40°C) the metamorphism takes place very slowly. The snow crystals char.ge shape sa that the ratio of surtace area to volume approaches a rinimum. Total surface area is reduced by the transfer of water vapor Co tne paints of contact between particles. The it2dividual ice particles tend to weld together in a process called siatering (P,amsier and Kisler, 1966), The snow nack is strengthened and stability is increased. However, there are other proceases whichdecrease snow strength and etability. Temperature Gradient P,etanorphism Cold a3r temperatures can create a situation whereby snow at the top ot the pack is colder than near the bottom. When the temperature oradient is large enough and the snow pack has a high permeability to air, a process referred to as temperature gradienC metamorphism occurs (LaCtiapelle, 1964). The equilibriun o£ k,ater vapor pressure in the interstitial spaces is temperature dependent. The equiliUrium point varies with the temperature gradient and water vapor flows £rom regions of higher pressure (warmer snow) to areas with lower pressure'(cold.er snow). This causes a grain to grain transfer of waCer vapor. Vapor is condensed a-- ice on the coldsurface of an adjacent grain. Opposite this deposition ooint, vapor is removed to be deposited as ice on the cold surface of the nexC grair.. Tenperature ;radi- ent metamorphism results in the upper part of the snow pack Saining raterial at the,expense of the lower part of the pack. In addition, this process tends to produce cup shaped crystals wfiich possess little cohesion and which undergo almost no sintering. This usually produces larger crystals with fecrer ice bonds whose tensile strength, resistance to shearing, and lodd bearing capacity are greatly reduced. If the process is compieted, the snow involved develops into a mass of crystaZs with little or no interztal eohesion. This is callea depth hoar. Tlie occurrenee of depth hoar in a snow pack on steep slopes can lead to dangerous avalanche conditions, ana ia responsible for some of the Zarge "climax" avalar.ches which have cccurred in Colorado. Physical Characteristics of Avalanche Hazard Areas There are two main types of avalanche hazard areas: the well-defined avalanche chute or gully, and the steep planar barren slope which may "rur_" over a considerab]_e area. A well-channeled avalanche track usually leads from a bowl-shaped catchment basin at its head, the starting zone. When snow in the catchrsent basin is released, it is funnelled into the gully where it is generally confined until reaching tfie valley floor below. Forces fzom these avalanches ulay be very high. These avalanches are capable of cuuaing extensive damaee Co buildinEs und loss o£ life. Fiuure 2A illuatratea the component parta of thie type oC avnlanche. The other tyne of av3lanche hazard area occurs on asteep hillside with little or no vegetation (Figure 2Il). In theae areas, it is difficult to 3/4/2014 r~ y {t\\~ 4,.4 41 1~1 slk-~J 1r rK~~Y} A lit~t4 Y:1 y 1 r l< lc~ `c~/~-,y r ` i f ` t~ . ~ j~j 1 w i. l r 4,,,-„4 AVALANCHEUPJCONFINEDSLOPE GULI.Y AVALANCHE Fisure 2B. Figure. 2A. 3/4/2014 delimit the cat'chnent basin Uecause the entire hillside may release if slab conditions develop. Avalanches can occur on essentially any slope of 15° to 60°, but ure most corcmon slopes of.30°% 40 45°. SZopes less~ than 25° are not steep enough to be hazardous except under rare and pecul- iar conditions, and tnose sreater than 60° are so steep that snow tends not to accumulate on them (LaChapelle, 1970). Wet slides are an excention to this. There are reports of wet slides starting from a slope as gentZe as 12° (CotCman, 1966). Areas prone to avalanches may be associated with indicator plant eomzr,unities and/or structure of vegetation. Tracks that avalanche annu- ally will be nearly devoid of trees. Those thaL- run relatively frequently are outlined by aspen wEiile the hillsides around them may be covered by a coniferous forest. Trimlines separating small trees fren larger ones are oiten evident on hillsides. In some areas avalanc}iing is restricted to small "stringer" slides wiiose locations are revealed by narrow lanes devoid of trees. Also some smaZl nvalanches can take place on forested slopes and flow through the forest without destroying it. Two inportant points to remember are (1) any steep slop.2 can "run" under proper conditions,and 2) even a smaZl slide of anly a hundred feet or so is enouoh to trap und kill a human. The high frequency avalanche paths are only a part of the avalanchz hazard problem, ar.d perhaps the least worrisome part at that. Of r.:ore concern are the not so obvious areas ot infrequent avalanching. These avalanches are analogous to the 50- or 100-year flood. They do not occur often, but when they do, the damage tends to be severe. As point2d out bJ Gallabher (1967), the climax avalanche may "run" only ence per one or two centuries, and iC is these that hold the records for deaths and property damage. The inirequency of these large, deadly avalanches is such that Lhere tend to be few clues to the outer limits. The areas involved are generally covered with forests w•hich, to the uninfo:med observer, appear to be safe. However, clues to detect the boundaries do exist in the liviag, damaged, and dead vegetation. Somo Fnctore Conducive to Avalanche Formntion Meteorological Wind will redeposit snow on the lee side of ridges, thus loading r these slopes with more snow than if there had been no wind. Winds greater than 15 mph will usually move suow. Wind can also compact snow to form a slab, which when fractured begins sliding as a unit. Rapid accumulatian wi.ll not allow the snow to settle. Generally snow- fall rates of 1 inch per hour produce hazardous conditions. Wnter contrnt mny build tap to nuch a point thnt the intcrnal cohcelon of the tmuw puck iH reQuced. Thie ie tho enuea of wot enow nvnluncheet in the spring. Cold temperatures may lead to fornation of dep[h hoar. If a tempera- ture gradient exists ir, the snow pack, the sintering process and its stabil- izing influence will be greatly sloked. 3/4/2014 7 Snow cr'ysEal structure is important because small needles and pellets result in more dangerous conditions than dendritic or star-shaped cryytals LaChagelle, 1969).t 3 Storms iniluence potential avalanches. A large number of avalanches, usually loose snow avalanches, occur during or shortly after atorma. Tapogranhical Slope asnect is considered important because snow on north-facing slopes is nore susceptible Co depth hoar conditions and, therefore, is nore liicely to slide in mid-winter. SouCh-facing slopes are dangerous in the spring season. Slope anvle, as mentior.ed before, 3s important in that most avalanches occur on slopes of 30° to 45°. However, avalanches can occur on slopes ranging from 15° to 60°. Slope Drofile is to be considered because slab avalanches are more likely to occur on conve.t slopes where tensional forces are present. Snow depth is an important factor. If the snow depth exceeds the average height of ihe ground surface roughness the avalanche hazard is inCreased. For those interested in furthe'r reading canceraing aval2nches refer to the selected bibliography in the back of this report. t- 3/4/2014 1 srcTioH zzi 2IETHODOLOGY t The Problem Several moderately large avalanche pachs exist on the north and north- east facing walls of the valley of Gore Creek (Plates 1 and 2), lhe ava- lanches c:hich run in these paths pose destructive potentials which'are difficult to evaluate because they rarcly run to their full capacity. Be- cause oi their hig}i velocitins and "flutd" properties, thesc avalanches do ttot stop on the mountainsides, but travel unknown distances out onto the valley floor. Several of these "ruuout" areas are pr?vata].y owned, and a.re presently being developed. The probability that these avalanches will reach buildings wnich are occupied during the ski seasor. is dangerously high in several cases. The iollowing questiona must be answered to evaluate the degree of thie hazurd: 1. Wliat area will Che runouC of the largest expecCecl avalanches cover? r 2. Whatrwill be the impacL• forces upon cbstacles within these areas? 3. What is the probAbility that the large or "cilmax" avalanche will occur? The methodology used to answer these questiona ia preeented in this chapter. Two Types of Avalanches: Wet and Dry Wet snow avalanches and dry snow or "powder" avalanches both occur in the major avalanche paths along the valley of Gore Creek. It is necessary to distinguish between them because they differ greatly in density, velocity, runout area covered, and the nature of impact with obstacles. Powder avalanches typically consist of a fluidized, 2ow density mixture of snow and air. They often reach velocities 4-n excess of lOG mph but dc not travel faster than 200 mph except on rare occasions (:fellor, 1968). The flow of these low density powder avalanches is probably turbulen., and upon impact toith obstacles behaves like a true fluid. Consequently, the results of the powder avalanche impacts observed in the field havebeen analyzed using the relationships of aerodynamics. Wet snow avalanches usually travel at much lower velocities, flow closer to the ground, and follow irregularitiea ir. the topography nore closely than powder avaZaaches. The density of the moving nnow may ba as high as the density of the snow deposit before it released. Wet snow 3/4/2014 9 avalanches, because of the±r hioh density, nay behave as a compressible solid upon impact with a rig3d body (:fellor, 146,8~, causing very higN inpact pressures in spite ot their low velocities. Tne high kater cor.tent of these avalanches has a iuoricating eftect, ar.d they may trsvel ZOIIg distances in the runout area, especially when they are confined to a gu11y A. Judson, per. comm,, 1973). Of these two avalanche types, the powder avalanche has the potential of covering the largest area in the ruaout z.ene. Therefore, the possible runout areas of these powcier avalanches should be determir:ed bec2use they are capable of covering larger areas than wet snow avalaaches. Calculation of the Velocity and Impact af "Climax" PaWCIer Avalanehes Tite impact pressure of a poc.der avalanche is a funetion of flow densiCy and velocity. Although density is unknown, reasonab2e upper and lower limits may be esticaated. A very lightly loaded powder avalanche has a bulk density of ice particles in turbulent suspension as low as 10-4- grs/cm3.(1) Since the density of air at 10,000 feet elevation is about I0-3 gm/cm3 Chis is also the approxj.mate lower limiC for avalanche density (i•lellor, 1968). Mellor (1968) suggests an upper linit for powder avalanche density of i0-2 gm/cm3, which is the approximate minimum density for snow in which all the particles are in mutual contact. ilowever, powder avalanches may be some- what denser close to ttle ground, so for purposes of analyzing ivipacta a higher value of 2 X 10-2 gn/cm3 has been used in calculatier:s. Observations in the field showed that powZer atalaach° impac*_.s near the lateral bour.daries of the track generally caused breaking of the trunks of Englemann Spruce (Picea en~el:,iannii), Lodgepole Pine (Pir.us contorta) , and Aspen {populus tr.cmu].oide,) at heights of 5 to 15 feet above L'ne ground, and there was often widespread damage to limbs or nearby trees up to 35 feet above the ground (rigure 3). The Vail Meadows avalanche reached flcw heights of 120 feet above the central gul-ley about halfway down the Crack. I[ was not uncommon to £1nd the broken stu:nps of Spruce trees three feet in diameter which had failed through the beading stress applied to L-hem by an avalanche. Where wet snow avalanche damage was observed, it was much more extensive. Large trees were u;ually uprooted as ttight be e:cpected frcm a dense slurry of snow movir.g close to the ground. Consequently, it was not difficult to distinguish between wet and powder snow avalanche damage. Tne central gullies of the large avalanche paths showed wet snow avalanche danage. Figure 4 depicts the relative sizes of powder and wet snow avalanches flowing in the same track. Fie1d data collected to determine avalanche impact pressures included measurement of the cross sections of tree trur.ks where bendin,; failure had taken plnce. In Vail Mcadowa, King Arthur's and Timberfalls gullies, trees broken or damnged by pok-dez avalanche impnct wera observed along the entize l)lgm/cm3 Q 62.4 lbs/'r"T~. 3/4/2014 J/~~1f/~y' r tt~` 4*^ t 3/4/2014 I{ 1.~II! IJ~} . f; 1 a l y~X_~~~~i~~~~~y~., ~'I~,.F s t ui. r l ~O. ,f•s'','~1,•r,i~r',~'%';` Y%'i t~i;:_.'y'{, 1t,~Y 1 f f I f} t ~ I~/ j'4i ~vr i~VA~'l~. y~,~,~l' j(ftJ~ ~ y~ y r / i s rY~ rk'',i~~~5r~.» t 1 G ~i j -h t,:1 t. ti;~ ti u 1, ~?~~ti j ~~fi ~~~~~r.1~1'lf~v" 1 f y il fir~ r J,r 5 r~,~r c c 1 yL?'r _ n t l„t;~. f ~ ' v s ~ ~ l. ~ ivr S c'",i ?5r' i~`/~Irf~~ _ i~+"-r~` r,Sl j~€1~'~ r{ i i Ik:..t ~ 1~..~w F~ f I-V w f 1~ L 1 f j/.~ t 1 t ) l 1 t S , r.. •.y jroti1ti\a,E•r"~ 1 ol( ti! t ~ 1-J~1..t J t~ t ~ ~..~ill1l~Yir.~.~7 t l~, 1.~ . i q j 1.' y l y ~ - 7 t `E!i45y~p t f Zti;!.~/~1 t~ :1.~,~',f`I~r G rn„ / i~~ ~ K(4 Y~ui{~ K 1~ Y• 1~~~~f `i~ ii • ~y Z~YY4 fJ~l~r~~l#~''I`.r~l S',h. f~~~ j' i 1"1 i e~'' :yll, ~ 1~J ~ r.~.:/ /fi M `7~Y'r 1" y"r.'~~'~ w+`.~u//~i/! +1?..V•'~.: 1 I~~~~i~~~~A~1S ~ ~e Y 1t ~ i i~~TJ Y+. fi SamL v,.~v,v t , • he e 1atc aYo~.?~ I•-~ 1i.1 7"'•:.I' : f p~z,,deX e Fisure 4a• track asr4A' B~ 1 feat xes r_ .~s-.-G'•1 e~1 b~r~p~i f fecte~. 3/4/2014 13 purpose because they are almost scale consistent from point to point. Tne portio;i of thepiioto cove°ing t.ze Gore Creek avalanche area was enlarged to a scale of approxir:ately 1:12,000 (1" = i.,G00'). Resolution at this scale was about 5 feer.. The starting areas•wer@ outlined, as ahoun on Plates 1 and 2, assuming the following: 1. All of the open, unforested areas could release eimultaneously, and, 2. In forested areas adjacent to the open areas where destruction in the timUcr was observed, 1/2 of thia surface area was used to calculate avalanche relcase volumes. During the summer of 1973 the starting areas of Clubhouse, Frontage Road, Waterfall, Old I~fuddp, Timberfalle, N.ing Arthur's, and Vail Meadows avalnnche areay were visited, The following observations are genera2, and apply to all these areas: , Z, Extensive areas existed wh3ch were almost coapletely devoid of trees. 2. Gradients on the upper north and northeast facing slopea typically measured 60% to 80%. 3. The slopes were smooth and grass covered. 4. In some cases dowmdipping rcck strata leud to downslope move- ment of rocks and soil and appeared to linit extensive tree growtih. 5. At some locations extensive destruction from powder avalanching was evident wi,*_hin the mature forest, especially adjacent to the open starting areas. This inc3icated thaC some of the snow within the Porestcould contribute to a maximum volume avalanche release. 6. Avalanche Taovement down the central gullies can cause a szmul- taneous release of sr.ow from areas lower on the mountain, adding to the avalanche volume. 7. Localized avalanche activity probably takes place more fzequentlp in the starting areas, and tracks limiting revegetation of these areas. Vegetati.ve Analysis of Maximua Avalanche k'idth The mhinum width of the clir.!ax snow avalanche is a requzred parameter in the analysis of impact forces and runout distances. With changes in the terra3n the avalanche track is altered. The extent of these alterations are dependent on the nature of the terrain characteristics, and indicate the volume and the velocity of the snow. An analysis or the vegetation 3/4/2014 14 across the track and into the undisturbed forest on either side is a way to quantify the volume and velocity of the snow involved in the inzreouent ard seldoM observed cllmax avalanche. An assunFftion of the developed, methodology is that the ma}:in:um width of the clinaa avalanche ccincidea with the u;aximura lateral exter.t oL disturbed vegetation along the track. The undisturbed vegetation i5 characteristic of the sature forest and departures fron th7s are detectable as "disturbed vegetation" in the ava- lanche track. The samplir.fi technique does not require description and analysis of the vesetation Lor the entire avalanche area. Ir.stead, detailed informa- tion is collected f.or smaller areas whicil are theoretically represeneative of the total area. Vegetation is sampled along lines, called transects, and yield a cross-sectional description of the vegetation from within the forest on one side of the avalanche track into the forest on the other side. The transects, or lines for sampiing, are laid out perpendicular to the avalaache traclc at selected points where the channel characterist=cs change. Examples of transect placement are at the top of the track markir.g the loiver edge of the starting zone, at'some intermediate "normal" points along the traclc, at points where the slope gradienC signiLicantly changes, at point.9 wlicra Lli(i dirrctlo<i or ch:irnctcrlvticn of the channcl chnnp,c, attci aC t:hc boCCum uf. tho nv:llnncho Crticic miirlclnE; ne Lop of the runouC •r,ana, n topop,rnphic or Ineal re7.1eL crosh-accti.on way surveyed tor ench trunrleci. The correct placement of the transects and the cross-sectioas of each were ttecessary to determine the variations of the margins of the avalanche as a response to changes in topography. Lach transect consisted of two =egmients, one going to the right of the Crack and one going to the left. Beth seg- ments began at the draiii•age channel in the avalanche track and ended in the mature forest on opposite sides of the gully. A transect is an elongated sample plot in which the vegetational data are recorded as a list-count of plants as they are encountered. This method is useful to indieate transitions in vegeCation, as in this instance betweett the mature forest ar.d the avalancP:e track. Within contiguous sample units along the transect a list of species, i.e. the kind of plants, and the number of indivi.duals of each species were recorded. Two sizes of samnle units wcre employed, one for woocly vegetation and oae for herbaceous (non- woody) vegetation. For the tzees and snrubs the sarple units were five oy five meter quadrats sucessively placed along the transects. Besides recording the species and number of indi•aiduals within each sample uni*_, the diameters of the trees were noted as we11 as aay scars or branch trimming. Within these larger quadrats for woody vegetation one meter by one-half meter quadrats were selected as the sample units for herbaceous vegetation. The detailed information frota field data collected in this nanr.er poztrays the distribution,and the apparent changes in density of speciesalong the transects. The data fron each segment were analyzed separately because differing environmental factore, such aa slope aspect, influenced each segnent. The procedure used was a coaputer program of factor aaalysis described by Bray and Curtie (1957). This analysis groups the data into clustera of saiapie 3/4/2014 15 units having similar vegetative characteristics. Where there is a change in the composition of the vegetation a diffwrer.C Fluster ;ts designated. For exa7ple, data from one segmienC extending from Che drainage into the mature forest mignt be grouped into a creei: co:nmunity, a n:2adow-like grase area, shrubs ar.d tree seedlir.gs, and mature forest. 1'he break between the cluster of sample uniCS representing shrubs and tree seedlings and the cluster of sample units representing the mature forest indicates the max- imum lateral extent of disturbed vegetation. This is interpreted to be the maxinum width oL the avalanche. Ay plotting the sample units of the two segments along the cross-section of any particular transect tne lateral boundary of the avalanche can be located, 5ome indication of the volune af snow filling the channel during the climax avalanctie can be calculated from this in£orLZatian. Branch trinning and scars on the lower portions of tree trunks near this lateral boundary give additional evidence of the flow depth and max- imum width of the avalanche track. Frequently found were the snapped off trunks of trees nea: these lateral Uoundaries. t3y measuring the size of these stumps and by noting what species of tree they were, the force required to cause f<:ilure can be calculated. Data from various U.S. Forest Service research laborato.ties are available which evaluates the internal stren;th of different *.aoods. Combining this informaCion with the known location of the stumps miniaum values of the forces generated within the snow avalanche can be derived. In summary, the maximum la.teral extent of the climax snow avalanche is depicted by thc point where the characteristics of the maturn forest 3isap- pear. Within the mature fcrest there is random deadfall, little ground vegetation, and few young trees. Within the avalanche track near the lateral boundary is found unifornly oriented downed timber, meadow-like vegetation, and shrubs with seedling conifers. In some instances the maximum width of the avalanche caunot be detected as precisely as described above. Here, field notes, personal observation and e:zperience, and computer analysis are combined *_o determine the naximum lateral extent of the climax snow ava- lanche. Sizes of the Avalanche Runout Areas The measured and derived data used to calculate the size of the climax avalanche runout areas were the following: 1. Probable range of avalanche velocities. 2. Probable range of avalanche flow densities. 3. The width of the avalanche at the top of Che runout. 4. The heighK of the avalanche at the top of the runout. 5. The topography of the runout area. i 3/4/2014 16 Voellmy"(2955) developed a method for calculating avalanche runout distance. For this study, Voellmy's equations have been modified to include the effects associa*ed witn lateral sp:eading oe the avalanche in the runuut area. The results obtained througn this modification seem reasonable when compare3 u-ith observed runout areas in other parCs of Colorado. The runout areas for the six large avalanche gullys in the valley of Gore Creek are shown on Plates 3 and 5. Impact Pressures Within the Runout Area As the avalanche decelerates in the runout area, its density increasea probably causing impact pressures to increase also. Obstacles near the outer limits of the rur.out area nay actually be exposed to greaCer impact pressures than those near the bottom of the avalanche track. For example, at Timberfalls, im;act pressures at the boCtom of the track would be ubout 1,000 pounds per square foot, but could increase to more than 2,OC0 pounds per square foot after the avalanche has traveled severai hundred feet into the runout area. From a planning standpoint to try to compromise the ava- lanche hazazd by building withiri the'outer limits of the runout area is not logically sound. The Avalanche "Windblast" Powder avalanches sometipes have a high velocity gust of air associated with their descent. The maxinum velocity of this gust is probably limited by the terminal velocity of the avalar.che during its descent, bnt possibly the parcel of air comprising this gust naintains a high velocit}• for a longer period nf time than the avalar.che itself-. If both the avalanche and the wind gust reach the runout 2rea at the same time, the gust will depart fron the avalanche front as the snow mass decelerates. The air blast may traveZ unexpectedly long distances across the valley as long as it is unim- peded by majo: obstacles, thereby extending the destructive zone of the avalanche. As discussed previously the ma:cir„um avalanche velocities possible along the valley of Gore Creek are about 170 npn. The inpact pressure associated with a 170 rsph gust of clear air at this altitude is 65 pounds per square foot. However, after the air parcel has traveled 1,500 feet tha velocity could still be 140 mph, producing impact pressures af 45 pounds per square foot. This is still a potentially destructive pressure to buildinSs. Although the boundaries oi the "windblast" effect could not be mapped in this report it should be considered when pl.anning structures in the line of avalanctie descent, even when they are beyond the rur.out liraits. This is particularly important wnen buildings are dcsigned to have large areas of glass facing the mountainaide. 3/4/2014 SECTION IV FIET SnOW AVALANCHES Oh UNCONFINED~AOPES Aerial photo inspection along with later f3eld observations clearly indicated that the large gullys descending the southern wall of the valley of Gore Creek are not the only avalanche hazard present in the valley. The steep hillside in areas between the gullys where the slope ranges from 25° to 40° also "runs" with small wet snow avalanches. These wet snow ava]anches, similar to the wet slides in the gullys, usually travel at los;er velocities and flcw closer to the ground than corresponding powder avalanches. The flow densities of these wet ava- lanches may be as great as the density before release. Destructive poten- tial by these wet snoG? avalanches may be higti because of this high density. One small avalanche last spring broke an aspen tree which was 40 cm in diameter, and carried it almost to Gore Creek. Velocity, Impacts and,Runout Distances of the Unconfined Wet Avalanches Although not possessing the tremendous runout potential of avalanches occurring in the major gullys, the wet avalanches on the steep valley side- walls are a definite hazard. Impact forces associated with these avalanches may be high due to the high density of snow. To delimit the runout distances of these avalanches on the avalanche hazard Maps was considered important. Field observaL•ions turned up evidence of runout distances and destruc- tive forces. Furthermore, fi.eld data delimited those areas subject to wet-spring avalanches. The equations of Voellpy (1955) and Sommerhalder 1964) were used to delimit the extent of the wet'slides in areas where nvalanche debris Iias been removed. Assumptions in the calculations included 3epth of released snow, the ground friction coefficients, and coe£ficient of internal friction. How- ever, the values whi.ch were used in the equations must approxiMate the actual ones because field observa*_ions tend to support the ealculated results. For avalanches ariginating below the linestone outcrops the depth oi released snow was considered to be approximately one rceter, a value thought to be a realist:ic depth. Values for the coefficient of ground friction used were 400La /52 for grassy areas (5orr,merhalder, 1964). Internal friction may approach zero in the case of extremely wet avalanches but for the majority the coefficient value will be around 0.15 (Sommerhalder, 1964). Runout distances ior these wet avalanches are much less tnan those of the large gu11y avaianches but due to the high densities, impact forces from these wet avalanches are surprisingZy high. Runout distances for wet avalanches in various areas of the valley of Gore Creek range from 15 to 150 meters. These distances are dependent on the starting slope angle, the nature of the vegetation on the starting slope and in the runout zone, the 3/4/2014 ie depth of the"released snow, the slope of the runout zone and the water cantent of the moving snow. 4 y VelociLies of wet snow avalanches may approar_h 68,4 nph (30 m/s) for a large release. This is still much slower than those velocities obtained by the large climax poiader avalanches. The following table gives an indication of veloci*_ies, impacts and runout distances on various slope angles assuming a grassy surface in the release zone, 1 m of released snow with a density of 300 kt,/n3 and a grassy runout surface sloping at 10°. These conditions are common in the valley of Gore Creek. Starting Impact Runout Slope Anp,le Velocity mph (m/s)pounds/ft2 (+/m2)Distances feet(m 25°29.4 (13.1)1,904 (9.5)245 (75) . 30°33.4 (14.9)29660 (13)233 (71) 35°36.8 (16.4)3,070 (15)266 (69) 40°40 17.8)3,480 (17)220 (67) 3/4/2014 SECTIOY V SUhAfARY Gore Creek flows in a westernly directionfor approxinately 12 miles before it joins the Eagle River at Dowds Junction. Gore Creek is joined from the south by one of its major tributaries, 31ack Gore Creek a few miles from its headward margin. At this point the valTey becomes broader and the valley gradient lessens. fiowever, larse gullys can be seen descend- ing the southcrn vZlley wall which are bare of vcgr_taCion in many places. The uvalanche tiazard in the valley of Gore Creek is associated with theae gullys nnd Cne valley sidewall. The vaSley oi Gore Creek ia cuC into the Aiinturn Formation which consists oY 5,800 zt. 1,800 m) oi shales, sand- stones, and conglomerates of Pennsylvanian age (320 to 280 ruillicn years ago) interbedded with several beds of limestone and dolomite in its upper twa-thirds. For a detailed anaiysis of tiie locaZ bedrock the reader may refer to several sources on this sub,ject (hreto, 1949; Hanshaw, 1958; Berger, 1961; and Poelchau, 1963). Large Major Avalanches The major gullys which constitute the avalanchc hazard in this valley are located from the Junction of the Gore and Black Gure creeks, and extend down to the vicinity of the Clubhouse Slide. All of these avalanches, with the exception of the Vail Meadows Slide, run unobstructed to the valley floor, wilich lies at elevations.of 8,200 ft. 2,500 m) to 8,400 ft. 2,550 m), and which is endangered by avalanches. The vertical drop from the hea3 of these gullys to the valley floor is 1,970 to 2,800 ft. 600 to 850 m). 1ne bowl-shaped depressions high up on the h311side are the caCChment basins for the associated avalanche tracks. These bowls probably were nivation hollows during the Pleistoeene when the climate was considerably cooler. Evidence that these slides have "run big"'in the past comes from the obvious trimlines, bzolcen tree stumps, and in sone cases by the alzgned debris on the runout fans at the bottom of the tracks. However, lack of this evidence does not imply the avalanche track never ran. Z:uch of the debris brought down by these avalanches were removed Uy ranchers using tne fans as hay neadows (Jim Gregg, pers. cocm., 1973). Present day construc- tion crews have also reraoved debris as the area o;as bulldozed to 1ay foundations for condominiums and homes. Wet slides in the spring are a com.mon occurrence in these gullys. The sides of these gullys aze ratner steep (30°-40°) ar.d with the warm weather in April and 24ay snow in these gullys rnay slide. Although these caet slides do not usually flow for great distances out onto the runout ian, the poten- tial avalanche hazard still re,..ains high. The wet sl4des keep the track c2ear of obstructiona and vegetation so that A r~3jor powder avalanc:~e Ylow- ing down the track in winter will encounter only a mminiBUm of surface friction. In short, the wet spring slides occurring in the gullps prepare the avalanche track for the climax powder avalanche. 3/4/2014 zo SmaZ1 SZope-Avalanches In other areas wtiere r.o large avalanche gul2ys are present slope avalanches are very ccm.mon. Unlike the large gully type of avalanchee, these avalanches do not posses crell-defined catcnment basins, tracks, and runout fans. Tne slcpe avalanctles occur on the steep valley sidewall 25° to 40°) and usually originate immediately below the proncnnced lime- stone outcrop along the valley wa11, alttiough some large wet avalanche trac3cs originate above tnis unit: The slope avalanches are Co the west of Timberfalls gu11y, where the slopes are covered by as,nen. In sosce areaQ, the existence of slope avalanches is marlced by a doiN-ns7_ope absence of treea. However, soze wet avalanches can eviden*_ly run out c?f forested areas as well without destroying much of the vegetation cover. These bankslides appear to be more common zn the aspen forested areas as opposed to the coniferous forested areas. One reason for this may be that the non-foliated aspen trees aiford little protection to the underlping snow pack during the spring warm-up allowir.g lubricution of the snow pack by meltwater. This contrasts sharply to snow pack in areas of conifer forest that are in shade (C. Whelin, per. comm,, 1973). While not possessing the extensive runout potentia2 of large gully avalanches, unconfined wet ava2anches certainly are capable of inflicting daaage to buildings and causing loss of human ?ife. Many lives lost to avalanches have been from smail.ova2anchee that run less than se-.eral hundred feeE (Fraser, 1967). r q. 3/4/2014 ClURHOUSE E T. Description of Terrain A. Startins Zone 1. Area: 30 acres 2. Average inclirLation: 50% 3. Maximu.-n inclination: 80`/< 4. Elevation: 10,200 to 9,400 £eet 5. Orientation: N to NtJ B. Avalanche Track l. Average width: 145 feet 2. Maximum width: 150 feet 3. Maximum flow height:' 70 feet 4. Elevation aC bottom: 8,400 feet C. Runout Zone 1. Average inclination: 14% 2. Type of surface: mixed grass, shrub, and sspen forest II, Ayalaache Destructive Potential A., Zn the Track 1. Maximum velocity: 100 to 130 mph 2. Maximum impact pressure: 1,000 to 1,300 lbs. per sq. ft. B. In the Runout Zone 1. Maximwn runout distance: 650 to 800 feet 2. Maximam impact pressure: 1,000 to 2,000 lbs. per sq. ft. 3. Maximum distaTice of observed debris: 750 feet 3/4/2014 22 WATERF6LL R {h 1. Deacription of Terrain A. Starting Zone 1. Area: 20 acres 2. Average inclination: 53% 3. rfaximum inclination: 70% 4. Elevation: 10,700 Co 10,100 feet 5. Orientation: NE S. levalanche Track 1. Average width: 170 feet 2. Maximum width: 180 £eet 3. Maximum flow height: 80 feet 4. Elevation at bottom: 8,500 feet C. Funout Zone 1. Average inclination: 20% 2, Type of surface: grassy meadow 11. Avalanchc Destructive Potential A.. In the Track 1. Maximum velocity: 100 to 130 mph 2, Maximum impact pressure: 1,000 to 1,300 lbs. per sq. ft. S. In the Zunout Zone 1. Maximum runout distance: 750 to 910 feet 2. Maximum impact pressure: 1,000 to 2,000 lbs. pe~ sq. ft. 3, 2•'.aximum distance of observed debris: 820 feet 3/4/2014 23 TI218ERFALLS 1. Description af Terrain S A. Starting Zone 1. Area: 47 acres 2: Average inclination: 57% 3. Maximum inclination: 80% 4. Elevation: 10,900 to 9,600 feet 5. Orientation: NE B. Avalanche Track 1. Average width: 300 feet 2. Maximum width: 340 feet 3. Maximum flow height: approximately 100 feet 4. Elevation at bottoa: 8,650 £eet C. Runout Zone la Average inclination: 1.0'0 2. Type of surface: grassy meadow II. Avalanche Destructive Potential A. In the Track l. Maximum velocity: 120 to 150 mph 2. Maximum impact pressure: 1,000 to 1,500 lbs. per sq. ft. B. In the R.unout Zone 1. Maximum runout distance: 1,040 to 1,260 feet 2. Maximum inpacL pressure: 1,500 to 3,000 lbs. ger sq. ft. 3. faximum distance of observed cebris: 780 feet 3/4/2014 24 OLD MG'DDY (RACQUET CLUB) I. Description of Terrain A. Starting Zone l. Area: 30 acres 2. Average inclination: 54% 3. Mar.imum inclination: 80% 4. Elevation: 10,600 to 9,400 feet 5. Orientation: NE B. Avalanche Track 1, Average width: 150 feet 2. Maximum width: 250 feet 3. Maximum fiow helght: 70 feet 4. Elevution at bottom; 8,600 feet C. Runout Zor.e 1, Average inclination: 5% 2. Type of surface: grassy meadow with some mudflow debria II. Avalanche Destructive Potential A. In the Track 1. Maximum velocity: lOQ to 130 mph 2. Maxinium impact preaeure: 800 to 1,100 lbe. per aq. fC. B. In tlic Runout Zone 1. Maximum runout diatAnce: 770 to 950 feet 2. Ma.ximum impact pressure: 1,000 to 2,000 lbs. per sq. ft, 3. Maximum distance of observed debris: none could be found 3/4/2014 V . 2J K11YG l'illyj]VR x {3 I, Description of Terrain A. Starting Zone 1, Area: 45 acres 2. Average inclination: 57% 3. Maximum incli.nation: 85% 4. Elevation: 11,000 ta 9,600 feet 5. Qrientation: NE B. Avalanche Track 1. Average width; 300 feet 2. Maximum width: 380 feet 3. Maximum flow height: 110 feet 4. Elevation at bottom: 8,700 feet C. Runout Zone 1, Average inclination: 7% 2. Type of surface: grassy meadow II. Avalancne Destructive Potential A. In the Track 1. Maximum velocity: 120 to 150 mph s~~avS 2. Maxinum 3mpact pressure: 1,000 to 1,500 lbs, per sq. ft. B. In the Runout Zone L 1. Maximum runout distance: 1,080 to 1,320 feet 2. Maximum impact pressure: 2,000 to 4,000 lba. per aq. ft, 3. Maximum distance of observed debris: 730 feet 3/4/2014 t.s~- 3/4/2014 26 VAIL MEt1DOWS a 4 I. Description of Terrain A. Starting Zone 1. Area: 55 acres 2. Average inclination: 50% 3, Maximum inclination: 80% 4. Elevation: 11,300 to 10,000 feet 5. Orientation: NE B. Avalanche Track 1. Average width: 210 feet 2. Max3mum width: 280 feet 3. Maximum flow height.: 120 feet 4. Elevation at bottom: 9,000 feet C. Runout Zone 1, Avalanche hits a 100-foot high hill directly at bottom of runout zone II. Avalanche Destructive Potential A. In the TracK 1. Maximum velocity: 150 to 170 mph 2. Maximum impact pressure: 1,300 to 1,700 lbs. per sq. ft. B. In the Runout Zone The avalanche hits a 100-foot high hill at the bottom of the track where much of the energy is lost. Part of the avalanche overtopa the hill, and part is deflected to eiChez si3e. 3/4/2014 27 w SELECTED REFERE:tiCES Bray, J.R. and J.T. Curtis. 1957. An ordination lof the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr., V. 22, p. 217-234. Berger, W.H. 1961. Areal geology of the central part of the Minturn Quadrangle, Colo. Unpubliehed M.Sc. thesis, i7niv. of Colo., 105 pp. Betts, Ii.S. 1919. Timber, its etrength, seasoning and grading. McGruw- Hill, N.Y., 234 pp. Daugherty, R,, and J. Franzini. 1965. Fluid mechanica with engineering applications. McGraw-Hi11, N.Y., 574 pp. Fraser, C. 1966. The avalanche enigma. John Murray, London, 301 pp. Gallagher, D. ed.), 1967. The snowy torrents--avalanche accidents in the United States, 3910-1966. U.S. Forest 5ervice, Alta Avalanche Study Canter, 144 pp. Hoerner, S.T. 1965. Fluid-dynamic drag. S.F. Hoerner, Midland Park, New Jersey, 452 pp. Hanshaw, B.B. 1958. Struc*_ural geology of tne tvest side of Y.he Gore Range, Eagle County, Colorado. Unpublished :i.Sc. thesis, Univ. of Colorado, 138 pp. LaChapelle, E.R. 1966. Avalanche forecasting - a modern syntnesis. In: International symposium on scientific aspects of snow and ice avalanches, Int. Assc. Sci. Hydrol., pub. 69, p 350-356. LaChapelle, E.R. 1969. Field guide Co snow crystals. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle and London, 101 pp. LaChapelle, E.R. 1970. The ASC of avalanche safeCy. Colorado Outdoor Sports Co., Denver, Colorado. Mellor, M. 1968. Avalanches. Cold Regions Science and Engineering, Part III; Engineering, 5ection A3, Snow Technology, 215 pp. Poelchau, H.S. 1963. Geology of the Gore Creek area, Eagle County, Colorado. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Colorado, 76 pp. Shoda, M. 1965. An experinental study on dynamics oi avalanchirg snow. In: Symposi-um of Davos, International Association of Scientific Hydrology, Publication no. 69. Somnerhalder, E. 1964. Avalanche Forces and the Protection of D'ojects. Translation no. 6, Alta Avalanche 5tudy Center, U.S. Fc-est 5ervice. Tweto, 0. 1949. Stratigraphy of the Pando area, Eagle County, Colorado. Colorado Sci. Soc ProceedinSs, v. 15, no. 4, p 149-235. 3/4/2014 zs U.S. Dept. of Agric. 1968. Snow avalanches--a har.dbook of forecasting and control measures, U.S. Forest Service, Agric. Handbook 194. k Voellmy, A. 1964. On the destructive force o£ avalanches. Translatioa no. 2, Alta Avalanche Study Center, U.S. Forest Service, 64 pp. l 3/4/2014 30 an?le of renose: The maximum angle of slope at which loose, cohesionless material will come to rest.* avalanche. A large nass of snow and/or ice falling, sliding, or flowing very rapidly under the force of gravity.* avalanche track. That part of the hillside leading from the catchment basin to the runout zone. In many cases it is a gully and can be distinguished by its lack of vegetation. branch triri. Loss of branches on the lower portion of a tree trunk. Caused by material moving past tree snow, air). catchnent basin. The main collection region for the snow at T.he head of the avalanche track (syn. starting zone). centigrade. Unit of temperature in metric system, water freezes at 0°C and boils at 100°C. To convert to °F = 9/5°C + 32.) clastic. Pertaining to or being a rock or sediment composed principally of broken frasments that are derived from preexisting rocks or minerals and that have been transported individually for some disCance from their places of origin.* climax avalanche. A large or major avalanche which is a result oL cumulative factors working over a longer interval of time than those avalancl:es associated with a single sCorn.t cohesion. Shnar strength in a snow pack not related to interparticle friction.* conglomerate. A coarse-grained, clastic sedimentary rock composed of rounded fragments larger than 2 nm in diameter (granules, pebbles, cobbles, boulders) set in a fine-grained matrix o° sand, silt, or any natural cementing agent.* conifer. An evergreen; e•g. pine, spruce, fir. dead-fall. Downed, dead trees. density, vepetative. Number of individuals in relation to the space in which they occur. Denotes definitiops taken from Glossary of Geology, Araerican Geol.ogical Institute, 1972. t Denotes definitions taken from Gallagher, D. ed.). 1967. The snowy torrents--avalanche accidents in the UniCed States, 1910 1966. U.S. Forest Service, Alta Avalanche Study Center, 144 pp. I mDenotes definition taken from Ramsier, R.O. and C.M. Keeler. 1966. The sintering procesa in anow. Journal of Glaciology, V. 6, No. 45, 421- 424. 3/4/2014 31 deDth hoar. New centers of crystallizatfon caused by vertical diffusion of water vapor. These crystals are of a di€ferent character tha~ the original snow, and often are cup shaped and layered. Cohesion is very poor between the crystals. A steep tercperatnre gradient within the snow cover usually will induce such fornations.t dolomite. A carbonate sedimentary rock consisting chiefly of the mineral dolomite in composition, or a variety of linestone or aarble rich in magnesium carbonate.* equitemperature r.:etas:orPhisr.i. A process of modification of ice crystals in a snow pacic, characterized by vapor transfer fron regions of high surface energy to regions of low surface energy in a relatively constant-temperature, below-freezing environment and leading to the formation of uniform, well-rounded grains.* factor analysis. A statistical method of evaluating data for homogeneous or similar characteristics.• fluid. A substance that is permanently deformed with the slightest stresa. formation. The basic or fundamental rock-stratigraphic unit in the local classification of rocks, consisting of a body of rock generally characterized by some degree of internal lithologic honogeneity or distinctive lithologic features.* fracture line. The well defined line across the top oi the avalanche path where the s1aU breaks away fromthe stable snow. The fnce of the fracture ia perpendicular Co the slope t gradient. A degree of inclination, or a rate of ascent or descent of an inclined part of the Earth's surface wirh respect to the horizontal. IC ia expressed as a ratio, a fraction, a percentage or an ar.gle.* I kilometer. A measurement of length in the metric system, equal to 1,000 meters (1 kilometer - 0.6214 miles). lee. The part or side of a hill or ridge sheltered or turned away from the wind.* limestone. A sedicaentary rock consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate, primarily in the forn of the mineral calcite. Limestones are formed by either organic or inorganic processes, and may be detrital, chemical, oolitic, earthy crystalline or recrystallized.* list-count. A method of vegetation data collection in which species are listed and the number of individuals of each species is recorded. loose snow avalanche. A snow avalanche that starts at a poi,:t and widens downhill, in snow lacking cohesion.* meter. The basic unit of length in the metric system, equal to 3.281 feet. 3/4/2014 32 metric ton. A thousand kilugrams, equal to 2,205 pounds. * nivation. Erosion o£ rock or soil beneatli a•sno*bhnk or snow patch afld around its fluctuar.ing margin, caused mainly by frost action but also involvin; c,iemical weuthering, soliflucCion, and meltwater transport oi wcathcring products.* nivation hollow. A small, shallow recess, depression or clrque-like basin iorred 'oy a snow patch or snowbank. Pennsylvanian. A period. of the Paleozoic era thought to have covered the span of time between 320 and 280 million years ago.* permeabilitv. The property or capacity or a porous rock, sedimenC or soil for transmitting a fluid without impairment oi the structure of the nedium; it is a neasure of the relative ease of fluid flow under unequal pressure.* Pleistocene. An epoch of the Quaternary period, after the Pliocene of the Tertiary and betore the Holocene (syn. Ice Age; Great Zce Age; glacial epoch).* powder avalanche. An avalanche conposed of dry, loose snow. As used in this report, a high velocity cloud of ice particles maintained in suspension by turbulence, with an effective density between 10'3 gm/cm3 and 2 x 10'2 gmjcs,3• quadrat. A unit for vegetation sampling. Depending on the Cype of vegetation, a quadrat may be the entire sample area or a subunit within a larger sample plot. The size varies with the type of vegetation being sampled (syn, sample unit). remote sensi.ng. The measurement or acquisition of information of some ti property of an object or phenomenon, Uy a recording device that is not in physical or irtimate contact with the object or phenomenon under study.* runout zona. That area in the avalanche path where the debris comes to rest t sample plot. An area delineated for vegetation sampling. sample unit. An organizational subdivision of a sample plot used in vegetation analysis (syn. quadrat). sandstone. A medium-grained, clastic sedir.ientary rock conposed of abundant and rounded or angular fragments of sand size set in a fine-grained matrix and more or less firmly.united by a cementing material.* sedimentarv rock. A rock resulting from the cor.solidation of loose sediment. that has accumulated in layers consisting of inechanically formed fragments of older rock transported from its source and deposited in water or from air or icc, or a chemical rock forned by precipitation from solution, or an organic rock consisting of the renains or secretions of plants and anlmals.* 3/4/2014 33 ahale. A fine-grained, detrital sedir„entary rock formed by the consolida- tion of clay, silt or mud, and c2iaracterized by finely stratified structure and/or fissility that is approximqtely parallel to the, bedding.* sintering. The process by which ice and snow particles bond together at temperatures 'Delow the melting point. Evaporation-condensation is Lhe cajor mechanism by which sintering proceeds under normal atmos- pheric conditions.p slab. A layer in, or the whole thickness of, a snow pack whose internal cohesion is larde compared to its external adhe-,ion to other snow layers or the ground. The characteristic identifying property of a snow slab is Che ability to sustain clastic deformation under streas and hence the propagation of fractures.* slab zvalanche. A snoW avalanche that starts from a fzacture line, in snow possessing a certain amount of cohesion.* slope aspect. The direction toward which a slope faces with respect to the compass or to the rays of the sun.* species. A kind of organism. As used in this report, a kind cf plant. The plural of soecies is also species. sun crust. A type of snow surface forned by refreezj.ng of sur£ace snow that had been selted by the sun.* emperature rradient. The rate of change in temperature with vertjcal height in a snow pack,expressed as °C/cm. temperaturc r,radient metamorphism. A nrocess of modification of ice crystals in deposited snow, characterized by vaper transfer under strong vapor pressure and temperature gradients, and reeulting in the growth of complex shaped crystals usually with stepped or layered surfaces.* tensile strength. The maximum applied tensile stress that a body can withstand before failure occurs.* tension. A state of stress in which tensile stresses predominate; stress that tends to pull a body apart.* topography. The general configuration of a land surfare or any part cf the Earth's surface, including its relief and the position o: its natural and man-made features.* transect. A line along which vegetation is sampled or data collecte3 syn. eample plot). tree sapling. A young tree with a height between sig and fifteen feet. 3/4/2014 34 tree seedlina. A young tree with a height less than six feet. trimline. A sharp break or boundary in vege'tation. Specifically in the case oi avalanches, a downslope absence of trees in the active ava- lanche zone in contrast ro nearby bordering mature forest in these areas not afiected by avalanches. trunk scar. An area on a tree trunk where the bark has been removed by the abrasive action of material noving past the tree. turbulent flow. Flow in which the flow lines are confused and hetero- geneously mixed, as opposed to laminar flow.* water vapor. Water in the gaseous state. wet avalanche. An avalanche composed of damp snow (high water content) usually caused by a eudden thaw. Common in the apring season. windblast. A hfgh velocity gust of sir sometimes aasociated with large avalanches. J j. 3/4/2014 Clubhouse i Gore f~~~----- Frontaye I. II I~ryr"'^i- . Sa Y I J I,~ I~~~ 1~~i 1 ~ i,~,i'J ~t~ i'j~~ f`_~. t il~ i Gore Creek S?g~ '0 v ? _i ~ i Golf Course Ci 1 f'~i;~ C~ 8 280 Interstate 70 PLATE 5 CLIMAX AVALANCHE RUNOUT Golf course area O 500 1000 1500 FEET i rI r 0 100 200 300 400 METERS N Contour Interval = 40 feet 3/4/2014 5idewindar 1 Terroy j' I 1~--•-.,-•- J\ e.aoo:_:--- s Gore Crcek 1. I,1~: pLATpELANCI~E RuNOUTS GI.IMAX T East of galf course FE looo t~oo 0 50-~Q 400 MEYERS o 1~9 200 Intervoi = 40 feet Contour 3/4/2014 vc:il Mladows wa~o~ran ranU niuiur Timbarfa!!s r- - O'd Muddy 7~r 1: y i i i i I / 1 i 1 l._ I t f f j00OIO.00d w,ooo ro,ooo-t"` r_ a+'SOD f 9,000 l g,000--1---~f~ t y. f. r..,,,i••~Ca~re;r~',CrE~K,./~k PLAv E S GCRc CREEK AVALAP.CHE AREfi Upper Go:e Volley 0 IO:iO 2000 r'EcT 1 0 300 6~00 METEF6 Contow In'erve! = 200 feet See PLATE''3 ior Rur.out Detai;s t n 3/4/2014 w~sa:'r~»,d.Paat¢:..s~su4a.uv.u......._. a,1 Clubhause r- frontcge 10,000 i 9,000 00~~l ~ OfO/C.(80K rc--~"in?erstote 70 ATE 2 GORE CREEK AVALANCHE A;eo: wesf part 0 IG00 2000 FEET N 0 200 400 600 A7ETERS Conlcur Intervai - 200 feet Saa PLATE 5 for Runou: Detoile 3/4/2014 u..~~ g ClnGhouse S Fron!age 10,000 y i\oOO 4 2 f ~ l i~ J~^~~~~~~~.~9,000 re Creek f lntarstate 70 ATE 3 GORE CREEK AVALANCHE Araa: west parf a4 0 1000 2000 FEET f------r==`r' y IV 0200 406 ECO ML7ERS Ccntour Interva7 = 200 feet See PLA7E 5 tor Runout Dataiis fi i 3/4/2014 Me r King P.-thur 8,800 .I O:d Muddy L. 8.6~0--~' ti\t F Y y r J f c A `os ~ 151z- F \ r"`~ 11 a f q r~•.';:<iii=~_/Gor Creeke o U.S.6 a c• l r_..~....~..,_m,~.~,,.....~..-r~~r.m~..,..r..... _ _ .u._ 3/4/2014 ware rfaii Timberfa3s 7 r, f M' J52O r'~-~~ tt fl.r--_~~~- .!8 W,_i- ti i~:~ ry,~ i-• .13..~,Gora i~ J- i•4Y,~~~• ~y;~Ela.,;• `s P~Caa 'J` f, IL.A7E 3 CLIMAX, AVALANCNE RUtr'OUTS Upoer Gcre Creek Uclley a SCO 1000 I500 FEE` Q 10 200 3pp 4'p0 ME'ERS Contour intcrval = 40 feet Area ef we! snow ovalanches l Runout o` Icrge powCcr avcla.nchos V..r....~........e~.s+..+w.~. .A_n.. r . v.... . . .v 1 3/4/2014 f• c l Wotertalt TimberTalls r CCC" "1:~.1-'\_. i V:~`.~V;1 F'./y` . i j~P----8,400- Gore C---w..;e S I%------' U.S. g e I •i PLATE 3 CLIMAX AVALANCHE RUNOUTS Upper Gore Creek Velley 0~--~- 5~00 1000 1500 FEET 0 160 266 300 400 METERS Contaur Interval = 40 feet Area of wef snow avalanches y Runout of lorge powder avalonches 3/4/2014 l e 1 s r-.-----f iaio7 \w•. :-f"~-- "-%'`-.,'--'"r 4' aa»r`f. r l J `r / 98--.r' i FI V j/ . J hi'~IV T~~ r l „l i1~ r'^ 1~"y;r ~009`8'- 5~~oy~a4a!1 tPPnW Plp nyUV burN s*opoaµi II ~ 3/4/2014 LOCAL GUYERtiN1EtiT MA";ACE^.5ENT COtiSULTANTS PRESS R'cLETSI 1740 W i:liama 54z¢t ( Lcr.uec Coiurado 80216 / T1:one (30J 399-7059 June 23, 1979 A recent study has verified t}~at the lacation of t},c j Core Valle}'IVate; Dist.ict water storage tank in the Va:2 . A1 E ht 0 R A N DU Af Mea3ows avalanche path has ne notential detrimental efEect ott re,sidences below :t. This is the conc;usion of a Avalanche Scudy cocipleted T0: IIoard of Directors, Gore V~lley iYater Uistrict at tlie request o£ the Gore tialley l'+ater Dist.rict Ly 1{}•drn- fi'iad Ltd. This scudy was commissioned in respoi»e to tUe i~RCAL' JII[U65 1'. Coilins - fears a.;id cwicarns raiscd last year as tv the eiEect> a£ [iie. RP.; AvalancFe Stud ~Present~tion to Vail Toian Council SOO,1100 gallon water storage tank loc~ited ii~ the a~raLanche Y path. Ron Ha11ey is schedulcd to make a verUal presentation of T}~e most recent analysis uses thc generally ?eceptcd the Avalauiche Study Co the Vail Town Counci7. ut their study 100-year avalanche und dssesses iCS impoct on thc tauk. 2 session SnJ thcir formal meeting, "iuesday, July 5.founJ that when the wate; stcragc turk is Ri)% ful;, it o-~ill It is expected [hnt the presentation to the Town Council coinpletely resist the avalanche. If the tauk is iess C~ui.l, it is suhject to sliding ofi i.ts hase and rupturing. Hti~.ever, Study Session will occur at ahcut h:60 p.m. (the study sessi_n oven iE a.X shuuld rupture, the water rcleused would consti- s'tarts at 2:09 an:l ends at S:OG and iae'vz renuested to 6e late tute le5s than 1$ uf thc volwne of siww already ;uavipg down on the agendxl; anL it is expected tnat presentaYion bcfore Lhe Ltie avalanche path, T'be tank itsclf xoitiid movu veTy little, Town Council i.ill t•e early in the inezting, wIlic}; starxs at 7:30 I believe it would be helpful to haye as many lloai'd mentbeis pra-Tl+c Gore Valley N'ater [listrict indicates that the tank senC at ihese meeti.ngs as possibl4 to re-emphasize the tact that hns scldom 6een Icss than BOa ful] and the cl;ar.ces of tnis Gere Galley Water District has fulfil:ed its co~.mltmenL ta assess occui'iing at the sase cime an.avalunche would occur are ex- the xvalanche hazard. I do not L4lieva that iX 1s pecesSai'y foT ti'emely snall. Regardicss, the 14ater Pistrict i3oard has ra- Tom GrimshatiJ or myse;f to be present.solved to maintain at least 80% oI the volunie in the t2nk, Enc.osed is a copy of a news release which w:ll be sent to excepT in a cssz of extreTe eiiergency. The cost oi buildi>>g The Vail ?iail and to the Vail Villager next blunday. Please let a diveTSion stiuctt:re to prqtect the t»nk ir the eF'ent an aca- me know if you have any objections or suggesfed chan8es to it. lanche st:ould occur u'nen it i.as less x'..sq 30'~ full xou11 be pve; $25,000, as coiapare3 wich a replacemcnt ccst on the tank JPC:ajh of aUout $100,000, Enc, cc; I'honas T. Grimshaw Mos2 imrtortant, the study reyeals Ghere is no adde.i dangar Stunle± Bernstein ~To d~nhill structures, bux does recommerd that the Town o: Vail Craig Rooillard allou na structuTes to be built in the ii:g}t-Haza7d Zcn9 As al- Rop Flaliey Yeady defined in p;evious 5tudies, q preser,tat,alt oF the Tepart wili be madF be:qre the L'ai: Town Council on Tuesdwy eyening, July 5 bY Ronkld I., Hailey, p,E „ of Hydro-Triad Ltd. A copy of thc report is pn fzle iR the Vail Planning office. JPG;ajh a a 3/4/2014 To: Town Council From: Public Works Department Date: 3-4-14 Subject: Easement Encroachment License Agreement 2801 Snowberry I. BACKGROUND A duplex located at 2801 Snowberry has recently been constructed on a previously empty lot. As a part of this construction a portion of the garage was unknowingly constructed within an existing plated Roadway/Utility Easement. The plated 15’ easement runs parallel and adjacent to the existing 50’ road Right of Way (ROW). The duplex went thru the Town Development Review process and was approved without acknowledgment of the easement. The survey provided at the time did not clearly identify this easement, and the design plans did not show the easement at all. Therefore town staffs, the reviewing utilities, the architect and the contractor were unaware of its existence. Town staff discovered the issue after the required ILC (Improvement Location Certificate) was performed on the home this past fall. In order to provide final approval this issue must be resolved. After further review town staff does not see an immediate or future need for this portion of the roadway easement, as there are no plans to widen the roadway outside the existing 50’ road ROW. Town staff suggested that a license agreement be drafted and proposed to the parties whom have rights to the existing easement, being the Town and all of the utilities. Since that time a License Agreement has been drafted, reviewed and signed by each utility, and reviewed by the Town attorney. II. RECOMMENDED ACTION Direct the Town Manager to execute the License Agreement, allowing the encroachment to remain within the easement until such time the garage encroachment is removed. III. ATTACHMENTS License Agreement 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report: 1) Community Meeting 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Update on 2015 Alpine World Ski Championships PRESENTER(S): Ceil Folz, Vail Valley Foundation ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the presentation and have an opportunity to ask questions of the Vail Valley Foundation. BACKGROUND: The Vail Valley Foundation will make quarterly updates to the Council and the community on the 2015 Alpine World Ski Championships as a result of the Town of Vail sponsoship of the event. ATTACHMENTS: 2015 Update 3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL March 4, 2014 3/4/2014 Updates from last Update 3/4/2014 INSERT VIDEO 3/4/2014 TE S T E V E N T S S U C C E S S •New Raptor Course Fantastic •Television 26 cameras/ Dream Team working together •Transportation system •Volunteers on course and off 3/4/2014 •Connectivity Resolved •90% Revenue in the door •Wolfgang Puck to be Chef 3/4/2014 NBC to be domestic partner 20-26 hours TV in USA 3/4/2014 1 YEAR COUNTDOWN BEGUN! 3/4/2014 Official Artist Carrie Fell OFFICIAL ARTIST CARRIE FELL 3/4/2014 Bi g g e s t S t a r s a r e A m e r i c a n s 3/4/2014 WHAT’S HAPPENING IN VAIL? 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Elements of the Championships 3/4/2014 2015 Elements in Vail •Opening Ceremonies •February 2 Golden Peak. Expected audience 4,000 •Awards Presentations •10 Awards Presentations to be held at Solaris Plaza 6:30 pm on race days •Public concerts •Following each Awards Presentation, a free public concert will be held in Solaris Plaza featuring top musical acts •Nations Hospitality Houses •Currently, Casa Italia, Austria Haus, Swiss House, French House and German House have all committed to locations in Vail •Screen Stadium •Each race day, Solaris Plaza will come alive with live race feed from the events •Festival Functions •Committee is working to complete plan •Nations Team Event •Confirmed for Tuesday, February 10 the at 2:15 •Qualifying Races •Men’s GS on Thursday, Feb 12 and Men’s SL on Saturday Feb 14 •Closing Community Celebration •Sunday February 15 at 7:00 pm 3/4/2014 EX C I T E M E N T Snow to Show Music Festival 3/4/2014 Sk i R a c i n g + •Nations Team Event •Men’s Qualifying Events •Legends Race •Charity Race •Big Air Festival •Opening Ceremonies •Public Picks •Craft Beer and Night Club •Awards 3/4/2014 Casa Italia/Austria Haus/Swiss/German/Casa Mexico 3/4/2014 Champion Chefs Celebrities Ceremonies 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Media Impressions 3/4/2014 2015 Vail Media Inclusion •Vail in official title and logo of the event •Official logo used on all media, social, print and electronic •Vail “dedicated” television bumper each day of event broadcast •World feed live and delayed broadcast from Vail each day of events in Vail •Features to be shot on Vail highlights for world feed broadcast inclusion •Opening segment of each day to include video of Vail Mountain 3/4/2014 MARKETING IMPACT EXPECTATIONS Product Impressions Description Value Detail Total Value Website 12,160,000 With the launch of the first website this coming spring, utilizing numbers the 2011 WASC are achieving. Each website viewing utilizing the standard media multiplier of .12 $1,459,200 Social Media 1,530,692,000 At this time, we look at the impact of Twitter, Facebook, blogging, Youtube, and apps. The projected impressions are based solely upon those media opportunities, though we know this is the area of greatest growth and messaging. This number represents and EXTREMELY low estimate of what will likely occur We utilized a combination of numbers from the 2009 Championships as well as what we see on a daily basis from our World Cup to arrive at a conservative guestimate. In addition, the valuing of social media is moving at a higher per impression value than what we are using her. We are using the social media multiplier of .01 $1,530,692 Print Advertising 6,750,000 Reflects all ads taken out in traditional media based on a marketing plan of over 150 ad placements in the coming 4 years 150 ad placements with an average impression of 45,000 and a media multiplier of .20 $1,350,000 Email blasts 15,000,000 Utilizing partner email databases (VRI, USSA, sponsors, etc) its expected that our email database for frequent email blasts will be no less than 1 million addresses With an expectation of no less than 15 email blasts in the final year of the Championships, and a media multiplier of .20 $3,000,000 Television shows 1,000,000,000 viewers With more than 30 hours of broadcast time over the 2 weeks going out to more than 90 countries, there will be a total of approximately 2,700 hours of television around the world Based on an average time buy/ hour of $230,000/hr of television in the US in a major market and utilizing viewer numbers based upon current World Championships viewers $621,000,000 3/4/2014 Television shows 1,000,000,000 viewers With more than 30 hours of broadcast time over the 2 weeks going out to more than 90 countries, there will be a total of approximately 2,700 hours of television around the world Based on an average time buy/ hour of $230,000/hr of television in the US in a major market and utilizing viewer numbers based upon current World Championships viewers $621,000,000 PR 1,648,000 Relates to number of times Vail/Beaver are identified within articles and printed no paid pieces around the world Based on same number as PR articles from the ’99 Championships with a multiplier of .20 $329,600 TOTALS 2,566,250,000 $628,669,492 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Economic Impact 3/4/2014 ATTENDEE IMPACT EXPECTATIONS Participation Breakdown Numbers Description Detail Total Value Athletes 550 Men and women racers from over 70 countries. The OC is responsible for providing accommodation and meals for these athletes Additional spending expected by this category is based at the lowest level: $25/ day x 10 days x 550= $137,500 Team Support 550 Coaches, trainers, physicians that travel with the team Responsible for their lodging costs and most meals. Spending is based on the second lowest level:$135/day x 16 days x $550= $1,188,000 Media 1800 Responsible for all of their own expenses, lodging and meals. Spending based upon the average per day cost of a mid winter guest: $290/day x 15 days x 1800 people= $7,830,000 Sponsors 1200 International sponsors representing the top 7 sponsor categories of the Championships. These individuals are based on a higher per day cost due to the nature and inclination of who they are and their spending patterns. $385/day x 7 days x 1200= $3,234,000 Supporters 7,500 Industry and team supporters who travel to major events in support of their Federation and sport. These individuals receive official accreditation, but pay for all of their own expenses. Based upon the average per day cost of a mid winter guest:. $290/day x 10 days x 7,500= $21,750,000 Fans 30,000 Number of fans based upon 1999 race attendance surveys and studies. Based per day cost from the average mid winter guest: $290/day x 7 days x 30,000= $60,900,000 TOTALS 41600 $95,039,500 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL UPDATE March 4, 2014 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Vail I-70 Underpass Project Update PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel, Michael Vanderhoof and Kathy Freeman ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Endorse a preferred location of the I-70 Vail Underpass based on the previous Council meeting presentations, and to also listen to and solicit any questions regarding the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and Federal Uniform Act presentations, presented by CDOT. BACKGROUND: The I-70 Vail Underpass is a proposed new multimodal pedestrian and vehicular connection that is midway between Main Vail and West Vail exits, passing under I- 70. This underpass has been identified in the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the CDOT I- 70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) as a critical link between the North and South Frontage Road. The Town and CDOT have recently entered into a Letter of Commitment to jointly fund the design and construction of this project with an expected completion date of December of 2017. CDOT, the Town of Vail, and the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU), will request the Town Council endorse a preferred location for the underpass based the presentations to Town Council on 1/21/14 and 2/18/14. CDOT will also provide Council and the public with a cursory overview of the NEPA process and Federal Uniform Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Endorse the preferred location of the I-70 Vail Underpass based on the previous Council meeting presentations, and listen to and solicit any questions regarding the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and Federal Uniform Act presentations, presented by CDOT. ATTACHMENTS: Uniform Act Presentation NEPA Presentation Memo Presentation 3/4/2014 Pr e s e n t e d b y : RI G H T O F W A Y S E R V I C E S Pu t t i n g i t a l l t o g e t h e r 3/4/2014 OU T L I N E  In t r o d u c t i o n  Pu r p o s e  Fe d e r a l & S t a t e L a w s  Pr o j e c t P r o c e s s a n d T i m e l i n e  NE P A R e q u i r e m e n t s  Ri g h t o f W a y P l a n s  Ti t l e 3/4/2014 OU T L I N E CO N T I N U E D  Su r v e y  Ap p r a i s a l  Ac q u i s i t i o n / N e g o t i a t i o n s  Re l o c a t i o n CD O T a n d L o c a l P u b l i c A g e n c y 3/4/2014 IN T R O D U C T I O N Th i s p r e s e n t a t i o n i s a n o v e r v i e w o f t h e C D O T R i g h t of W a y p r o c e s s . I t p r o v i d e s g e n e r a l g u i d a n c e i n ph a s e s o f a c q u i r i n g r i g h t o f w a y f r o m t h e be g i n n i n g o f t h e p r o c e s s t h r o u g h p r o j e c t ce r t i f i c a t i o n . 3/4/2014 PU R P O S E Th e C D O T R i g h t o f W a y ( R O W ) p r o g r a m i s re s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o v i d i n g o v e r s i g h t o n a l l f e d e r a l pa r t i c i p a t i n g ( F H W A ) p r o j e c t s i n c o m p l i a n c e wi t h t h e U n i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n A c t . 3/4/2014 PU T T I N G I T A L L T O G E T H E R PU R P O S E   OF  UR A FE D E R A L  &  ST A T E   LA W S NE P A   RE Q U I R E M E N T S RI G H T ‐OF ‐ WA Y   PL A N S TI T L E  &  SU R V E Y AP P R A I S A L NE G O T I A T I O N S LOCAL PUBLIC AGENCIES RE L O C A T I O N 3/4/2014 PU R P O S E O F T H E U N I F O R M R E L O C A T I O N A C T ( U R A ) Th e p u r p o s e o f t h e U R A i s t o : • Pr o v i d e f a i r , e q u i t a b l e a n d c o n s i s t e n t t r e a t m e n t o f in d i v i d u a l s , f a m i l i e s , b u s i n e s s e s , f a r m s a n d n o n - pr o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s • En c o u r a g e a c q u i s i t i o n b y a g r e e m e n t • Be e f f i c i e n t i n a c q u i r i n g r e a l e s t a t e a n d r e l o c a t i o n of d i s p l a c e e s PU R P O S E   OF  UR A 3/4/2014 FE D E R A L & S T A T E L A W S FE D E R A L • Un i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n As s i s t a n c e a n d R e a l Pr o p e r t y P o l i c i e s A c t o f 19 7 0 , a s a m e n d e d • 42 U n i t e d S t a t e s C o d e §4 6 0 1 e t s e q . • Re g u l a t i o n s P r o m u l g a t e d t o th e U n i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n As s i s t a n c e a n d R e a l Pr o p e r t y • Ac q u i s i t i o n P o l i c i e s A c t o f 19 7 0 , a s a m e n d e d • 49 C o d e o f F e d e r a l Re g u l a t i o n s , P a r t 2 4 ST A T E • Se c t i o n 1 5 o f t h e Co n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e S t a t e o f Co l o r a d o • Th e C o l o r a d o R e l o c a t i o n As s i s t a n c e a n d L a n d Ac q u i s i t i o n P o l i c i e s A c t § 2 4 - 56 - 1 0 1 , e t s e q . , C o l o r a d o Re v i s e d S t a t u e s FE D E R A L  &  ST A T E   LA W S 3/4/2014 AD D I T I O N A L P O L I C I E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S MU S T  BE  FO L L O W E D • Co l o r a d o D e p a r t m e n t of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R i g h t of W a y M a n u a l • Co l o r a d o D e p a r t m e n t of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Su r v e y M a n u a l RE F E R E N C E  MA T E R I A L • FH W A P r o j e c t De v e l o p m e n t G u i d e 3/4/2014 PR O J E C T P R O C E S S A N D T I M E L I N E • Na t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l i c y A c t ( N E P A ) R e q u i r e m e n t s • Su r v e y • Ri g h t o f W a y ( R O W ) P l a n s • Ap p r a i s a l R e q u i r e m e n t s • Ne g o t i a t i o n • Re l o c a t i o n • Ev e r y D a y C o u n t s ( E D C ) I n i t i a t i v e • Pr o j e c t C e r t i f i c a t i o n 0 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 months36months 3/4/2014 NE P A R E Q U I R E M E N T S Th e N a t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l i c y A c t ( N E P A ) r e q u i r e s al l F e d e r a l a g e n c i e s t o : • As s e s s t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s • Co n s i d e r t h e i m p a c t s i n m a k i n g p r o j e c t d e c i s i o n s • Di s c l o s e i m p a c t s t o t h e p u b l i c NE P A   RE Q U I R E M E N T S 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 54 mo n t h s 60 months 3/4/2014 NE P A C L E A R A N C E I S R E Q U I R E D P R I O R T O : • Ap p r o v a l o f R i g h t o f W a y s P l a n s • Is s u a n c e o f F a i r M a r k e t V a l u e • Be g i n n i n g A c q u i s i t i o n / N e g o t i a t i o n s o r a R e l o c a t i o n 3/4/2014 RI G H T O F W A Y P L A N S RO W P l a n s a r e a p r e r e q u i s i t e t o F e d e r a l pa r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f r e a l p r o p e r t y . RI G H T ‐OF ‐ WA Y   PL A N S RO W P l a n s a r e p r e p a r e d b y b o t h i n t e r n a l CD O T p e r s o n n e l a n d e x t e r n a l c o n s u l t a n t s . 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months 54 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 Th e p u r p o s e o f t h e R i g h t o f W a y P l a n s a r e t o : • Pr e s e n t P h y s i c a l S u r v e y I n f o r m a t i o n • Il l u s t r a t e B o u n d a r y o f A f f e c t e d O w n e r s h i p s a n d pr o p e r t y t o b e a c q u i r e d • De f i n e N e w R i g h t o f W a y L i n e RI G H T O F W A Y P L A N S CO N T I N U E D 3/4/2014 LO C A L P U B L I C A G E N C Y ( L P A ) / RI G H T O F W A Y P L A N S • Ri g h t o f W a y P l a n a p p r o v a l m u s t b e g i v e n b y t h e CD O T P r o j e c t D e v e l o p m e n t B r a n c h M a n a g e r (F e d e r a l F u n d s ) • Ri g h t o f W a y P l a n a p p r o v a l s h a l l b e b y C D O T Re g i o n o f f i c e ( 1 0 0 % ) S t a t e f u n d i n g • Pr o j e c t s o n l o c a l r o a d s w i t h 1 0 0 % l o c a l f u n d i n g d o no t r e q u i r e C D O T o v e r s i g h t . 3/4/2014 • Pr o p e r t y p u r c h a s e d b y C D O T o r L o c a l P u b l i c Ag e n c i e s m u s t b e f r e e a n d c l e a r o f a l l en c u m b r a n c e s . • Ti t l e C o m m i t m e n t s o r M e m o r a n d u m o f O w n e r s h i p ar e u s e d t o i d e n t i f y o w n e r s h i p a n d e n c u m b r a n c e s . TI T L E TI T L E  &  SU R V E Y 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months 54 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 SU R V E Y Su r v e y o r s a r e u s u a l l y t h e f i r s t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s t o h a v e co n t a c t w i t h a f f e c t e d p r o p e r t y o w n e r s . T h e im p r e s s i o n s t h e y l e a v e r e f l e c t o n t h e r i g h t o f w a y ac t i v i t i e s t h a t f o l l o w . • Su r v e y s s h a l l b e p r e p a r e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e su r v e y p r o c e d u r e s o u t l i n e d i n C D O T ’ s S u r v e y Ma n u a l a n d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e l a w s o f t h e St a t e o f C o l o r a d o • Su r v e y s a r e p r e p a r e d b e f o r e d e s i g n 3/4/2014 Th e S u r v e y m u s t : • De f i n e d E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n • De t e r m i n e B o u n d a r y o f A f f e c t e d O w n e r s h i p s • Es t a b l i s h M o n u m e n t a t i o n t o A s s i s t C o n s t r u c t i o n Su r v e y SU R V E Y CO N T I N U E D 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months 54 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 SU R V E Y CO N T I N U E D Tw o s u r v e y s a r e r e q u i r e d o n p r o p e r t i e s b e i n g im p a c t e d b y a p r o j e c t : 1. P r e l i m i n a r y S u r v e y t o i d e n t i f y a l l p r o p e r t i e s w i t h i n th e p r o j e c t a l i g n m e n t 2. C o n s t r u c t i o n S u r v e y t o i d e n t i f y a n d d e f i n e t h e ac t u a l i m p a c t t o e a c h p r o p e r t y . 3/4/2014 RI G H T O F W A Y T E A M Ap p r a i s e r s , r e v i e w a p p r a i s e r s , n e g o t i a t o r s a n d re l o c a t i o n a g e n t s a l l f o r m a t e a m w i t h w h i c h t h e pr o p e r t y o w n e r w i l l i n t e r a c t . Ap p r a i s e r s a n d r e v i e w a p p r a i s e r s a r e a n i n t e g r a l pa r t o f t h e l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n t e a m . AP P R A I S A L 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months 54 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 AP P R A I S A L R E Q U I R E M E N T S Th e U n i f o r m A c t r e q u i r e s t h e f o l l o w i n g : • Be f o r e a n o f f e r c a n b e m a d e t o p u r c h a s e a pr o p e r t y , t h e A g e n c y m u s t d e t e r m i n e f a i r m a r k e t va l u e a n d e s t a b l i s h j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n . • Ap p r a i s a l s a r e r e q u i r e d f o r a c q u i s i t i o n s w i t h es t i m a t e d v a l u e o f $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 o r m o r e . • Wa i v e r v a l u a t i o n s / V a l u e f i n d i n g s c a n b e p r e p a r e d fo r a c q u i s i t i o n s u p t o $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 w i t h t h e a p p r o v a l o f th e C D O T R e g i o n R i g h t o f W a y M a n a g e r . 3/4/2014 AP P R A I S A L R E Q U I R E M E N T S CO N T I N U E D • Al l a p p r a i s a l s m u s t b e r e v i e w e d a n d a p p r o v e d b y a se c o n d q u a l i f i e d , r e v i e w a p p r a i s e r • Re v i e w a p p r a i s e r r e c o m m e n d s f a i r m a r k e t v a l u e co m p e n s a t i o n b a s e d o n a p p r a i s a l o f t h e s u b j e c t s pr o p e r t y a n d p a r t b e i n g a c q u i r e d • Th e R e g i o n R i g h t o f W a y M a n a g e r a p p r o v e s j u s t co m p e n s a t i o n No t e : C D O T r e v i e w a p p r a i s e r m u s t b e C D O T s t a f f o r on t h e C D O T p r e - q u a l i f i e d l i s t 3/4/2014 LO C A L  PU B L I C  AG E N C Y  (LPA) /  AP P R A I S E R  RE Q U I R E M E N T S • Ap p r a i s e r m u s t b e l i c e n s e d b y t h e S t a t e B o a r d o f Re a l E s t a t e a s a g e n e r a l a p p r a i s e r a n d o n C D O T ’ s pr e - q u a l i f i e d l i s t • LP A ’ s m a y r e c o m m e n d a n a p p r a i s e r t o b e o n t h e CD O T p r e - q u a l i f i e d l i s t • Ap p r a i s e r s c a n a p p l y t o g e t o n t h e C D O T p r e - qu a l i f i e d l i s t i n d i v i d u a l l y 3/4/2014 AC Q U I S I T I O N / N E G O T I A T I O N S NE G O T I A T I O N S Th e  ag e n t  ne g o t i a t o r s  ar e  ke y  to  th e   ag e n c y ’ s  re p u t a t i o n  wi t h  th e  pr o p e r t y   ow n e r s .    Th e y  re p r e s e n t  th e  fa c e  an d   im a g e  of  CD O T . 3/4/2014 AC Q U I S I T I O N / N E G O T I A T I O N S R E Q U I R E M E N T S • Pe r s o n a l c o n t a c t w i t h p r o p e r t y o w n e r s • Of f e r p r e s e n t e d i n p e r s o n w h e n p o s s i b l e • Of f e r m u s t b e i n w r i t i n g • Pr o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t y t o c o n s i d e r o f f e r ( m i n 3 0 d a y s ) • No c o e r c i o n • 90 d a y w r i t t e n n o t i c e t o v a c a t e • Pa y m e n t b e f o r e p o s s e s s i o n 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months54months 3/4/2014 NE G O T I A T I O N O P T I O N S In c l u d e s : • Ag r e e m e n t a t a p p r o v e d f a i r m a r k e t v a l u e • Ad m i n i s t r a t i v e S e t t l e m e n t s • Co n d e m n a t i o n • Le g a l S e t t l e m e n t 3/4/2014 LO C A L P U B L I C A G E N C Y ( L P A ) CO N D E M N A T I O N • LP A ’ s m u s t b e w i l l i n g t o c o n d e m n • Ob t a i n a u t h o r i t y t o c o n d e m n a s e a r l y i n t h e p r o c e s s as p o s s i b l e • Co n d e m n a t i o n i s u s e d a s a l a s t r e s o r t t o a c q u i r e t h e ne e d e d r i g h t o f w a y 3/4/2014 AL T E R N A T I V E M E A N S O F P R O P E R T Y A C Q U I S I T I O N • Do n a t i o n • Do n a t i o n i n E x c h a n g e f o r C o n s t r u c t i o n F e a t u r e s • De d i c a t i o n • Fu n c t i o n a l R e p l a c e m e n t 3/4/2014 LO C A L P U B L I C A G E N C Y ( L P A ) A C Q U I S I T I O N / NE G O T I A T O R • Mu s t u s e r e a l e s t a t e s p e c i a l i s t s o n C D O T ’ s p r e - qu a l i f i e d a g e n t l i s t • LP A ’ s c a n a p p l y f o r c o n s u l t a n t o r s t a f f r e a l e s t a t e sp e c i a l i s t s t o b e o n t h e p r e - q u a l i f i e d a g e n t l i s t • Ex p e r i e n c e n e c e s s a r y i n c l u d e : – Wo r k o n e m i n e n t d o m a i n p r o j e c t s – Ac q u i s i t i o n o f r e a l p r o p e r t y o n E m i n e n t d o m a i n pr o j e c t s – Re l o c a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l s , f a m i l i e s , b u s i n e s s e s , fa r m s a n d n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s o n e m i n e n t pr o j e c t s . 3/4/2014 NE G O T I A T I O N A N D R E L O C A T I O N C O N T A C T R E C O R D S • On e o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n s o f n e g o t i a t o r s an d r e l o c a t i o n s a g e n t s i s t o k e e p a n a c c u r a t e a n d up t o d a t e a c c o u n t o f c o n t a c t s w i t h t h e o w n e r an d / o r d i s p l a c e e s • Ea c h c o n t a c t s h o u l d b e t y p e d o r w r i t t e n i n a pe r m a n e n t f o r m s u c h a s i n k 3/4/2014 NE G O T I A T I O N A N D R E L O C A T I O N C O N T A C T RE C O R D S CO N T I N U E D • Ea c h e n t r y s h o u l d i n c l u d e : – Da t e o f c o n t a c t – Ti m e o f c o n t a c t – Ty p e o f c o n t a c t – Pe r s o n s p a r t i c i p a t i n g – Is s u e s d i s c u s s e d – An y r e s o l u t i o n s m a d e 3/4/2014 RE L O C A T I O N 49 C F R P a r t 2 4 . 2 ( 9 ) D i s p l a c e d p e r s o n . ( i ) G e n e r a l . “A n y p e r s o n w h o m o v e s f r o m r e a l p r o p e r t y o r mo v e s h i s o r h e r p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y f r o m t h e r e a l pr o p e r t y ” . RE L O C A T I O N 0 mo n t h s 6 mo n t h s 12 mo n t h s 18 mo n t h s 24 mo n t h s 30 mo n t h s 36 mo n t h s 42 mo n t h s 48 mo n t h s 60 months 54 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 DI S P L A C E D P E R S O N S I N C L U D E : 3/4/2014 RE L O C A T I O N CO N T I N U E D Re l o c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s c a n b e a l e n g t h y p r o c e s s . Ea c h r e l o c a t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t a n d s o m e m a y b e co m p l i c a t e d . Re l o c a t i o n a g e n t s h a v e a d i f f i c u l t j o b w o r k i n g w i t h di s p l a c e e s w h o w i s h t o r e m a i n w h e r e t h e y a r e . I t ta k e s s p e c i a l s k i l l s t o b e s u c c e s s f u l a s a r e l o c a t i o n ag e n t . 3/4/2014 RE L O C A T I O N A S S I S T A N C E • Re l o c a t i o n P l a n n i n g • No t i c e s – 9 0 D a y • Ad v i s o r y S e r v i c e s • Re l o c a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e P a y m e n t s • Re s i d e n t i a l D i s p l a c e m e n t s • Re p l a c e m e n t H o u s i n g S t a n d a r d s • Mo b i l e H o m e s • Bu s i n e s s D i s p l a c e m e n t s 3/4/2014 TY P I C A L R E L O C A T I O N P R O C E S S U N D E R TH E U N I F O R M A C T * 1 –P l a n Pr o j e c t 2 –P r o j e c t Ap p r o v e d 3 –I n f o r m  Pe r s o n s To  Be  Di s p l a c e d 4 –I n t e r v i e w Pe r s o n  to  be Di s p l a c e d 5 –W o r k  wi t h Pe r s o n  to  be Di s p l a c e d 6 –P e r s o n  ch o o s e s Re p l a c e m e n t  pr o p e r t y An d  mo v e s   7‐ Pr o c e s s  Cl a i m s An d  Ma k e  Pa y m e n t 8 – F o l l o w ‐up * UR A  Rules 4/2/89 3/4/2014 RE S I D E N T I A L R E L O C A T I O N P A Y M E N T C O M P U T A T I O N Re p l a c e m e n t H o u s i n g P a y m e n t s (o w n e r s 1 8 0 d a y s o r m o r e ) • Pr i c e D i f f e r e n t i a l P a y m e n t • Mo r t g a g e I n t e r e s t D i f f e r e n t i a l P a y m e n t • In c i d e n t a l e x p e n s e s To t a l n o t t o e x c e e d : $ 2 2 , 5 0 0 3/4/2014 RE N T A L S U P P L E M E N T - T E N A N T Te n a n t s 9 0 d a y s o r m o r e Re n t a l s u p p l e m e n t o r , D o w n p a y m e n t an d I n c i d e n t a l e x p e n s e s To t a l n o t t o e x c e e d : $ 5 , 2 5 0 f o r 4 2 m o n t h s o r do w n p a y m e n t u p t o t h e r e n t a l a m o u n t o r $5 , 2 5 0 3/4/2014 RE Q U I R E M E N T S F O R P A Y M E N T S 1. M u s t h a v e o w n e d / r e n t e d a c q u i r e d u n i t 1 8 0 d a y s (o w n e r ) o r 9 0 d a y s ( t e n a n t ) p r i o r t o t h e “ i n i t i a t i o n of n e g o t i a t i o n s ” 2. M u s t p u r c h a s e / r e n t a D e c e n t S a f e a n d S a n i t a r y re p l a c e m e n t w i t h i n 1 2 m o n t h s 3. M u s t c o m p l e t e f o r m s a n d f i l e c l a i m s w i t h i n 1 8 mo n t h s 3/4/2014 HO U S I N G O F L A S T R E S O R T Wh e n a p r o g r a m o r p r o j e c t c a n n o t p r o c e e d o n a ti m e l y b a s i s b e c a u s e c o m p a r a b l e r e p l a c e m e n t dw e l l i n g s a r e n o t a v a i l a b l e w i t h i n t h e m o n e t a r y l i m i t s fo r o w n e r s o r t e n a n t s , o n a c a s e b y c a s e b a s i s h o u s i n g of l a s t r e s o r t c a n b e u s e d a s s p e c i f i e d i n 4 9 C F R 2 4 . 4 0 1 or 2 4 . 4 0 2 . 3/4/2014 RE S I D E N T I A L M O V I N G P A Y M E N T S Ex p e n s e s m u s t b e R e a s o n a b l e a n d N e c e s s a r y . Re s i d e n t i a l m o v e o p t i o n s i n c l u d e : • Ac t u a l C o s t ( b a s e d o n t h e l o w e r o f t w o e s t i m a t e s ) or • Fi x e d M o v e ( b a s e d o n t h e U n i f o r m R e l o c a t i o n A c t Re s i d e n t i a l M o v i n g C o s t S c h e d u l e ) 3/4/2014 NO N - R E S I D E N T I A L M O V I N G P A Y M E N T S • Ac t u a l C o s t • Si t e s e a r c h • Re e s t a b l i s h m e n t ( w h e n a p p l i c a b l e ) o r • In L i e u - o f P a y m e n t 3/4/2014 AP P E A L An y a f f e c t e d p e r s o n m a y f i l e a w r i t t e n a p p e a l w i t h th e a c q u i r i n g a g e n c y i n a n y c a s e i n w h i c h h e / s h e be l i e v e s t h e a g e n c y h a s f a i l e d t o p r o p e r l y de t e r m i n e e l i g i b i l i t y f o r o r t h e a m o u n t o f a re l o c a t i o n p a y m e n t . 3/4/2014 EV E R Y D A Y C O U N T S Ev e r y D a y C o u n t s ( E D C ) i s a 2 0 1 0 F e d e r a l H i g h w a y Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n ( F H W A ) e f f o r t d e s i g n e d t o i d e n t i f y an d d e p l o y i n n o v a t i o n a i m e d a t s h o r t e n i n g p r o j e c t de l i v e r y . 3/4/2014 TH E 2 0 1 0 E D C P R O G R A M I N C L U D E S S I X R I G H T OF W A Y F L E X I B I L I T I E S : 1. F u n c t i o n a l R e p l a c e m e n t 2. I n c e n t i v e P a y m e n t s 3. A p p r a i s e r - N e g o t i a t o r / C o n f l i c t o f I n t e r e s t 4. W a i v e r V a l u a t i o n s 5. C o n d i t i o n a l C l e a r a n c e s 6. R i g h t o f E n t r y o n t o F e d e r a l L a n d s 3/4/2014 QU A L I F Y I N G L O C A L P U B L I C AG E N C Y S T A F F • LP A s t a f f c a n p e r f o r m a p p r a i s a l / w a i v e r v a l u a t i o n s , ac q u i s i t i o n / n e g o t i a t i o n s a n d r e l o c a t i o n i f t h e y sa t i s f y t h e c r i t e r i a f o r C D O T ’ s p r e - q u a l i f i e d l i s t f o r t h e di s c i p l i n e • Co n t a c t t h e R e g i o n R O W M a n a g e r t o s t a r t t h e qu a l i f i c a t i o n p r o c e s s • Ap p r o p r i a t e a p p l i c a t i o n m u s t b e c o m p l e t e f o r t h e st a f f s e e k i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n LO C A L   PU B L I C   AG E N C I E S 3/4/2014 • CD O T w i l l e v a l u a t e a l l a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r q u a l i f i c a t i o n • At l e a s t o n e p e r m a n e n t , f u l l t i m e L P A s t a f f m e m b e r mu s t b e d e e m e d q u a l i f i e d t o p e r f o r m a c q u i s i t i o n ag e n t t a s k s f o r a n L P A t o b e c o m e q u a l i f i e d t o pe r f o r m i t s o w n R O W a c q u i s i t i o n w o r k . • An a d d i t i o n a l L P A s t a f f m e m b e r m u s t b e q u a l i f i e d to p e r f o r m r e l o c a t i o n a g e n t w o r k i f t h e L P A p r o j e c t re q u i r e s r e l o c a t i o n . • An L P A m a y h a v e t h e i r o w n q u a l i f i e d s t a f f m e m b e r pe r f o r m t h e a c q u i s i t i o n t a s k s , a n d h i r e a f e e a g e n t or c o o r d i n a t e w i t h C D O T R O W s t a f f ( i f a v a i l a b l e ) t o pe r f o r m r e l o c a t i o n w o r k QU A L I F Y I N G L O C A L P U B L I C A G E N C Y ST A F F CONTINUED 3/4/2014 PU R P O S E   OF  UR A FE D E R A L  &  ST A T E   LA W S NE P A   RE Q U I R E M E N T S RI G H T ‐OF ‐ WA Y   PL A N S TI T L E  &  SU R V E Y AP P R A I S A L NE G O T I A T I O N S RE L O C A T I O N LO C A L   PU B L I C   AG E N C I E S BR I N G I N G I T A L L T O G E T H E R 3/4/2014 TH E C D O T R I G H T O F W A Y P R O C E S S PU R P O S E  OF   UR A FE D E R A L  &  ST A T E  LA W S NE P A RE Q U I R E M E N T S RI G H T ‐OF ‐WA Y   PL A N S TI T L E  & SU R V E Y AP P R A I S A L NE G O T I A T I O N S RE L O C A T I O N LO C A L  PU B L I C   AG E N C I E S 3/4/2014 I 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s En v i r o n m e n t a l C o m p l i a n c e D i s c u s s i o n Mi c h a e l E V a n d e r h o o f Co l o r a d o D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Re g i o n 3 P l a n n i n g a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a n a g e r 3/4/2014 Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t De v e l o p m e n t P r o c e s s Po s t N E P A Pr o j e c t De v e l o p m e n t Ac t i v i t i e s Ri g h t - o f - W a y Co n s t r u c t i o n Fu n d i n g a v a i l a b l e , P r e l i m . E n g i n e e r i n g , Al t e r n a t i v e s , I m p a c t A n a l y s i s , p u b l i c / a g e n c y co o r d i n a t i o n , d o c u m e n t a t i o n Fi n a l D e s i g n NE P A A p p r o v a l : L o c a t i o n , d e s i g n c o n c e p t a c c e p t a n c e NE P A Va i l M a s t e r P l a n , I 7 0 P E I S , I n t e r m o u n t a i n Tr a n s P l a n n i n g , S h o r t a n d l o n g t e r m Pl a n n i n g 3/4/2014 Wh a t i s t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o c e s s ? - N a t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l i c y A c t - P r i m a r y Fe d e r a l L a w - Ot h e r F e d e r a l L a w s – C l e a n W a t e r A c t , En d a n g e r e d S p e c i e s A c t , N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Pr e s e r v a t i o n A c t , e t c . - Ad d i t i o n a l S t a t e R e q u i r e m e n t s – S B 4 0 3/4/2014 NE P A - F e d e r a l A c t i o n NE P A i s t r i g g e r e d b y a f e d e r a l a c t i o n – t y p i c a l l y f u n d i n g , pe r m i t o r a p p r o v a l Fe d e r a l A c t i o n ( s ) : - A c h a n g e i n I n t e r s t a t e A c c e s s C o n t r o l w i l l r e q u i r e Fe d e r a l H i g h w a y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( F H W A ) a p p r o v a l . - RA M P f u n d s a r e a s s u m e d t o i n c l u d e f e d e r a l - a i d tr a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d s ( F H W A ) - 40 4 p e r m i t f o r p l a c e m e n t o f f i l l i n t o w a t e r s o f t h e U S 3/4/2014 NE P A D e c i s i o n M a k i n g - F H W A i s l e a d f e d e r a l a g e n c y . - C D O T - r e g u l a t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t t o p r e p a r e s t u d i e s a n d en s u r e c o m p l i a n c e o n b e h a l f o f t h e F H W A . R e s p o n s i b l e fo r b u i l d i n g a n d m a i n t a i n i n g H i g h w a y S y s t e m . - V a i l – S p o n s o r o r A p p l i c a n t - O t h e r f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s m a y h a v e N E P A a c t i o n s d u e t o pe r m i t s o r o t h e r a p p r o v a l s . 3/4/2014 NE P A D o c u m e n t s Cl a s s o f F e d e r a l A c t i o n : - En v i r o n m e n t a l I m p a c t S t a t e m e n t (E I S ) – m a j o r f e d e r a l a c t i o n s t h a t r e s u l t i n si g n i f i c a n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s – e . g . n e w c o n t r o l l e d a c c e s s f r e e w a y - Ca t e g o r i c a l E x c l u s i o n (C E ) - d o n o t i n d i v i d u a l l y o r c u m u l a t i v e l y h a v e a si g n i f i c a n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l e f f e c t - En v i r o n m e n t a l A s s e s s m e n t - A c t i o n s i n w h i c h t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e en v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t i s n o t c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d . e . g . N e w I n t e r c h a n g e a t Ea s t E a g l e , C 4 7 0 M a n a g e d L a n e s • De p e n d s o n s c o p e , l o c a t i o n / s e t t i n g , a n d p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t s 23 CFR 117 3/4/2014 I 7 0 U n d e r p a s s a t V a i l Sc o p e i s r e l a t i v e l y m i n o r – G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n w i t h ro u n d a b o u t s Ex p e c t e d e f f e c t s : - N o k n o w n i s s u e s w i t h a r c h a e o l o g y , h i s t o r i c r e s o u r c e s , pa l e o n t o l o g y o r s t a t e s e n s i t iv e p l a n t a n d a n i m a l s p e c i e s - F r o n t a g e R o a d G r a d e c h a n g e - R O W A c q u i s i t i o n 3/4/2014 I 7 0 U n d e r p a s s a t V a i l - N o r e s i d e n t i a l / c o m m e r c i a l d i s p l a c e m e n t s - M i n i m a l n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e i m p a c t s – p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t s t o we t l a n d s a n d w a t e r s o f t h e U S - T r a f f i c e f f e c t s – n e w c i r c u l a t i o n p a t t e r n s w i t h l i m i t e d in d u c e d g r o w t h – t e c h r e p o r t t o b e p r e p a r e d - N o i s e e f f e c t s – R e q u i r e s n o i s e m o d e l i n g a n d p o t e n t i a l ab a t e m e n t a n a l y s i s – t e c h r e p o r t t o b e p r e p a r e d 3/4/2014 I 7 0 U n d e r p a s s A t V a i l - P r o p o s e d a s a C a t e g o r i c a l E x c l u s i o n o r “ C E ” - C E d o e s n ’ t m e a n n o i m p a c t o r n o a n a l y s i s - I 7 0 P r o j e c t w i l l i n c l u d e r o b u s t p u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t p r o c e s s - N E P A d o c u m e n t a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e m i n i m a l - T e c h n i c a l m e m o s , r e p o r t s , s t u d i e s w i l l b e p r e p a r e d , a s ne c e s s a r y 3/4/2014 Ot h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l R e q u i r e m e n t s CD O T p r o c e s s w i l l a d d r e s s : - E n d a n g e r e d S p e c i e s A c t , p l u s s t a t e s e n s i t i v e s p e c i e s - M i g r a t o r y B i r d T r e a t y A c t - N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n A c t - C l e a n W a t e r A c t – W e t l a n d s a n d o t h e r w a t e r s o f t h e U S - F e d e r a l N o i s e R e g u l a t i o n s - P a l e o n t o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s - H a z a r d o u s w a s t e s / m a t e r i a l s - O t h e r c o m p l i a n c e a c t i v i t i e s w h e n r e c o g n i z e d 3/4/2014 Ot h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l Re q u i r e m e n t s - E a c h a r e p o t e n t i a l m u l t i - s t e p p r o c e s s e s w i t h r e q u i r e m e n t s dr i v e n b y r e g u l a t i o n s , p o l i c i e s , e t c . Pr o b a b l e P a r t i c i p a t i n g A g e n c i e s i n c o m p l i a n c e a c t i v i t i e s : - U S A r m y C o r p s o f E n g i n e e r s - U S F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e - C o l o r a d o P a r k s a n d W i l d l i f e - C o l o r a d o S t a t e H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n O f f i c e r - C o l o r a d o D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c H e a l t h a n d E n v i r o n m e n t 3/4/2014 Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t De v e l o p m e n t P r o c e s s Po s t N E P A Pr o j e c t De v e l o p m e n t Ac t i v i t i e s Ri g h t - o f - W a y Co n s t r u c t i o n Ne e d , a l t e r n a t i v e s a n d i m p a c t a n a l y s i s , pu b l i c / a g e n c y c o o r d i n a t i o n , d o c u m e n t a t i o n (C E , E A / F O N S I , E I S / R O D ) Fi n a l D e s i g n NE P A A p p r o v a l : L o c a t i o n , d e s i g n c o n c e p t a c c e p t a n c e NE P A Sy s t e m c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , c o o r d i n a t i o n , co n f o r m i t y , p r o j e c t n e e d Pl a n n i n g 3/4/2014 To: Town Council From: Public Works Department Date: 3- 4-14 Subject: I-70 Vail Underpass Project Update I. SUMMARY & BACKGROUND The I-70 Vail Underpass is a proposed new multimodal pedestrian and vehicular connection that is midway between Main Vail and West Vail exits, passing under I-70. This underpass has been identified in the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the CDOT I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) as a critical link between the North and South Frontage Road. The Town and CDOT have recently entered into a Letter of Commitment to jointly fund the design and construction of this project with an expected completion date of December of 2017. CDOT, the Town of Vail, and the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU), have recently begun the design process and will provide an update to Town Council based on the comments received at and since the Town Council meeting on 1/21/14 and 2/18/14. Both of these past Council presentations and Council meeting video links are available at the project website at www.vailgov.com/underpass Staff presented a review of the I-70 Underpass Project and its progress along with ten possible locations for the underpass at the 1/21/14 Council meeting. Based on public input and discussion with the Town Council, the design team then refined the preferred location as well as two additional locations for review at the 2/18/14 Council meeting. The refined locations included location 4b, 5c, and 5d. Based on the design team’s review of the three refined locations, the design team’s preferred location is 5c. In order to better understand some of the potential impacts of the preferred location, Council requested at the 2/18/14 meeting to have a site visit. A site visit has been arranged to occur prior to the worksession for this Council meeting; Council will visit the preferred location site and view the visual impacts from adjacent residential units. The purpose of this Council meeting is to endorse a preferred location based on the previous Council meeting presentations, provide any specific input on any additional critical preliminary design elements, and to also listen to and solicit any questions regarding the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and Federal Uniform Act presentations, presented by CDOT. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 II. LOCATION ANALYSIS The three locations which have been refined and added to the initial Location Verification Report include 4b, 5c, & 5d. Each conceptual location includes roundabouts on both the north and south sides of the interstate in order to accommodate the traffic at the proposed new intersections. Roundabouts have been identified as the recommended traffic solution for each intersection because based on the conceptual level traffic analysis the typical and modified ‘T’ intersections fail operationally. The traffic analysis will be further vetted in the preliminary design process over the next month to confirm the recommended intersection configuration. Each of these locations were refined and shown at the 2/18/14 Council meeting with the most updated proposed lane configurations of the roundabouts along with conceptual sidewalks/bike paths and retaining walls. Location 4b is located between the previous locations 4 and 5, at the eastern end of the Timber Ridge affordable housing project on the north side, and approximately 100’ east of the Liftside Condominiums on the south side. Location 5c is a skewed alignment which located the north roundabout between the Simba Run Condominiums and the Savoy Villas along the North Frontage Road, and located the south roundabout west of the Glen Lyon Office building along the South Frontage Road; similar to the location that previous transportation master plans had identified. Location 5d is located east of location 5c, straddling the eastern end of the Simba Run Condominiums property and the adjacent Vail Run Condominiums property along the north side and just west of the Glen Lyon Office Building property on the south side. The following summarizes the pros and cons of each alternative in relation to the preferred location 5c. General Benefits of each of these Locations • Locations provide an area where both the north and south frontage roads are below I-70. • Locations are roughly halfway between Main Vail and West Vail interchanges. • Locations provide good connectivity to both the North and South sides of I-70. • Locations provide good multi-modal service to transit activity centers. Location 4b: East Cascade Village This is not recommended to advance for the following reasons: • Similar aesthetic, visual, noise, air quality, lighting impacts as in locations 5c & 5d effecting adjacent residents; however in this location the impact occurs on both the South and the North sides of I-70 at Timber Ridge and the Liftside Condominiums. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 • Requires lowering the north frontage road by 17 feet and the south frontage road by 15 feet. • Requires a substantial 25’-35’ retaining walls on the south side of the crossing impacting the Gore Valley regional/ski trail, the existing trail’s bridge over Gore Creek, and Gore Creek • Significant impacts to the approved redevelopment of the Timber Ridge affordable housing apartments set to start construction this spring; requiring acquisition of Timber Ridge property, redesign of the approved redevelopment, and a potential loss of 12-24 units and therefore not compatible with the Town of Vail's 20/20 Strategic Plan’s goal of increasing affordable/workforce housing within Vail. • Impacts to the Timber Ridge apartments as an affordable housing complex may require a Federal Environmental Justice (EJ) Analysis. This Federal order sets forth steps to prevent disproportionately high and adverse effects to minority or low-income populations through Title VI analyses and environmental justice analysis conducted as part of the Federal transportation planning and NEPA provisions. Location 5c: Simba West Skewed Alignment This location is recommended to advance for the following reasons: • Even though this is the recommended location, this location will have similar aesthetic, visual, noise, air quality, lighting impacts as in location 4b & 5d that will have to be analyzed and potentially mitigated. These potentially impact the adjacent properties at the Savoy Villas and the Simba Run Condominiums. • This location minimizes the need for retaining walls (if any) on the south side, and has the potential for the least height of retaining walls on the north side. • Minimal to no private property impacts on the south side. • No impacts to any existing or planned buildings or parking; however it does require acquisition of Simba Run property on north side of I-70 in an area that is currently green space. • North frontage road must be lowered 14 feet and south frontage road must be lowered 11 feet, the least of the remaining locations. Location 5d: Simba East Skewed Alignment This is not recommended to advance for the following reasons: • Similar aesthetic, visual, noise, air quality, lighting impacts as in location 5c effecting the adjacent residents along the North Frontage road, however the impact is moved further east; and it will also have similar impacts to existing commercial properties on the south side now and residential properties in the future if the Ever Vail redevelopment occurs. • This location requires the acquisition Simba Run property and Vail Run property on the north side, and the Vail Professional Building property on the south side. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 4 • North frontage road must be lowered 20 feet and south frontage road must be lowered 8-9 feet • Requires substantial 30’ retaining walls on the north side of the North Frontage Road. • This location requires lowering the frontage road on the north side. The new profile of the north frontage road requires unacceptable steep grades to match the access to the Vail Run condominiums and Lions Ridge Loop. • The reverse skew orientation is in the opposite direction of the major traffic movement from the West Vail Commercial area to Lions Head and back. • Truck turning movements are tight for the major movement. • The roundabout on the south side is incompatible with the future Ever Vail plans and the future south frontage road relocation to be parallel to I-70. • Moves pedestrian crossing ~500’ further east, further from the I-70 at grade worn pedestrian crossing path. III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Once a preferred location is endorsed the design team will move forward into preliminary design and environmental analysis with the preferred location. During preliminary design and environmental analysis the design team will more thoroughly vet a design solution, including but not limited to; • Determining the best horizontal and vertical design location; finding the ‘best fit’ geometric design within the constraints of the endorsed preferred location. • Fully vetting and solidifying the recommended traffic design solution, i.e. Roundabout vs ‘T’ intersection design, taking into account traffic operations, capacity, safety, impacts, etc... • Structural selection for bridges and retaining walls. Taking into account structural needs, impacts, and aesthetics. • Project mitigation measures for adjacent properties in close proximity to the proposed project related to environmental impacts, including Visibility, Noise, Aesthetics, Lighting, Air and Water Quality. • 3D interactive rendering will be prepared and presented to the public at a future Town Council meeting. This model will allow the public to visualize the underpass and how impacts may be mitigated. IV. NEPA (National Environmental Protections Act) PROCESS Michael Vanderhoof, CDOT Region 3 Planning and Environmental Manager, will review the NEPA process that will be simultaneously occurring while the project is in preliminary design. See attached presentation. V. FEDERAL UNIFORM ACT Kathy Freeman, CDOT Region 3 Right of Way Manager, will review the Federal Uniform Act, a process that will be followed for any necessary property acquisitions. See attached presentation. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 5 VI. NEXT STEPS As the project progresses public input will be taken continuously thru the project website at www.vailgov.com/underpass and thru specific stakeholders meetings and correspondence. The following is a list of key design milestones and more formal public input opportunities anticipated to occur during the design process. As this process is dynamic these dates will fluctuate as the project develops; March 4, 2014 Final Conceptual Location to Town Council, along with; NEPA Process & Uniform Act (Property acquisition process) March – October 2014 Preliminary Design & Preliminary Environmental Clearance March 11, 2014 Open House at Town of Vail Community Meeting April 2014 Town Council Update July 2014 Town Council Update (Preliminary Design Complete) October 2014 Town Council Update (Environmental Clearance Update) January 2015 Town Council Update (Final Design Complete) January 2015 Open House (Final Design) January-December 2015 Right of Way plans and property acquisition process January 2016 Final Environmental Clearance (FHWA) January-April 2016 Construction Documents, Bid & Award, Open House Spring 2016-Fall 2016 Construction VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council endorse location 5c as the preferred location and allow staff and the design team to begin preliminary design and environmental analysis of the underpass in this location which will specifically address; • Determining the best horizontal and vertical design location; finding the ‘best fit’ geometric design within the constraints of the endorsed preferred location. • Fully vetting and solidifying the recommended traffic design solution, i.e. Roundabout vs ‘T’ intersection design, taking into account traffic operations, capacity, safety, impacts, etc... • Structural selection for bridges and retaining walls. Taking into account structural needs, impacts, and aesthetics. • Project mitigation measures for adjacent properties in close proximity to the proposed project related to environmental impacts, including Visibility, Noise, Aesthetics, Lighting, Air and Water Quality. • 3D interactive rendering will be prepared and presented to the public at a future Town Council meeting. This model will allow the public to visualize the underpass and how impacts may be mitigated. VIII. ATTACHMENTS Location Presentation NEPA Presentation Uniform Act Presentation 3/4/2014 I- 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s Pu b l i c W o r k s Ma r c h 4 , 2 0 1 4 Photo by Jack Affleck 3/4/2014 I- 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s Su m m a r y o f T o w n C o u n c i l o n 2 / 1 8 / 1 4 2 To w n  of  Va i l    |   Pu b l i c  Wo r k s    |   3/ 4 / 1 4 • Re v i e w  of  Pr e s e n t a t i o n  on  2/ 1 8 / 1 4 • Re v i e w  of  Lo c a t i o n s  4b ,  5c ,  5d • Re v i e w  of  Pr o s  an d  Co n s  of  ea c h • St a f f  & de s i g n  te a m  re c o m m e n d e d  Lo c a t i o n  5c • Re v i e w  of  Co u n c i l  & Pu b l i c  In p u t  & Di s c u s s i o n • Di s c u s s e d  th e  be n e f i t s  an d  im p a c t s  of  th e  lo c a t i o n s ,   pa r t i c u l a r l y  of  5c • Co n c e r n s  we r e  he a r d  re g a r d i n g  th e  im p a c t  of  5c  on  the north  si d e  & th e  cl o s e  (5 0 ’ )  pr o x i m i t y  to  re s i d e n t i a l  un i t s . • Th e  de s i r e  fo r  a si t e  vi s i t  to  be t t e r  un d e r s t a n d  th e  pr o x i m i t y  to  th e  re s i d e n t i a l  un i t s • Di s c u s s i o n s  re g a r d i n g  th e  ne e d  fo r  ro u n d a b o u t s  ve r s u s             ‘T ’  in t e r s e c t i o n s 3/4/2014 I- 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s Pr o j e c t U p d a t e 3 To w n  of  Va i l    |   Pu b l i c  Wo r k s    |   3/ 4 / 1 4 Pr e s e n t a t i o n  To d a y • Id e n t i f y  pr e f e r r e d  lo c a t i o n  ba s e d  on  pr e v i o u s  Co u n c i l   me e t i n g s • Re v i e w  Ne x t  St e p s  fo r  Pr e l i m i n a r y  De s i g n  & En v i r o n m e n t a l   An a l y s i s • Re v i e w  Pr o j e c t  Sc h e d u l e • En d o r s e  pr e f e r r e d  lo c a t i o n • NE P A  Pr o c e s s  Pr e s e n t a t i o n • Fe d e r a l  Un i f o r m  Ac t  Pr e s e n t a t i o n 3/4/2014 Underpass Location OptionsLocation 4BLocation 5CLocation 5D 3/4/2014 Buildings Impacted (Directly ) Buildings < 120' Away (Most Aesthetic, Noise, Light, Air… Impact) Property Acquisition (Major) N. Frontage Rd. (Lowering) S. Frontage Rd. (Lowering) N. & S. Frontage Rd. Steepest Grade (%)** N. Retaining Wall (Approx. maximum*) S. Retaining Wall (Approx. maximum*) Gore Creek Impact 4b 1 Ti m b e r R i d g e , Li f s i d e C o n d o s Ti m b e r R i d g e 17 ' 15 ' 5 % 1 3 ' 2 5 ' - 3 5 ' Ye s YE S . I m p a c t t o a p p r o v e d r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f T i m b e r Ri d g e Af f o r d a b l e H o u s i n g e f f e c t i n g b o t h bu i l d i n g s / u n i t s & p a r k i n g , I m p a c t t o s o u t h s t e e p sl o p e ( 2 5 ' - 3 5 ' w a l l s ) & G o r e C r e e k 5c 0 Sa v o y V i l l a s , Si m b a R u n Si m b a R u n 14 ' 11 ' 5% 1 0 ' 4' No NO ( N o t a t t h i s t i m e ) 5d Ev e r V a i l Si m b a R u n , Va i l P r o f . B l d g . , Gl e n L y o n B l d g . Si m b a R u n , V a i l Ru n , V a i l Pr o f . B l d g . 20 ' 8' >7 . 5 % 3 0 ' 4' No YE S . I n a b i l i t y t o m a t c h g r a d e a l o n g N o r t h F r o n t a g e Ro a d , 3 0 ' w a l l s o n N o r t h s i d e , C a u s e s r e d e s i g n o f fu t u r e E v e r V a i l p l a n s , d i f f i c u l t t u r n m o v e m e n t s f o r bu s e s a n d t r u c k s . X Wo r s t X Av e r a g e X Be s t * R e t a i n i n g w a l l h e i g h t s a r e a p p r o x i m i a t e a n d a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e r e t a i n i n g w a l l s a l o n g t h e N o r t h s i d e o f t h e n o r t h r o u n d a bo u t a n d t h e S o u t h s i d e o f t h e s o u t h r o u n d a b o u t , N O T t h e r e t a i n i n g w a l l s a g a i n s t I - 7 0 w h i c h w i l l b e s i m i l a r i n e a c h o p t i o n . ** F o r c o m p a r i s o n t h e e x i s t i n g s t e e p e s t s e c t i o n a l o n g t h e N o r t h F r o n t a g e R o a d j u s t w e s t o f t h e P o s t O f f i c e i s ~ 5 . 5 % Th e e x i s t i n g s t e e p e s t s e c t i o n a l o n g t h e S o u t h F r o n t a g e R o a d i s j u s t e a s t o f D o n o v a n P a r k a n d i t i s a t 6 % MA J O R D I R E C T I M P A C T S Location Ma j o r D e s i g n F l a w s I- 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s L o c a t i o n R e f i n e m e n t S u m m a r y 3/4/2014 I- 7 0 V a i l U n d e r p a s s Pr o j e c t U p d a t e 4 To w n  of  Va i l    |   Pu b l i c  Wo r k s    |   3/ 4 / 1 4 Pr e l i m i n a r y  De s i g n  & En v i r o n m e n t a l  An a l y s i s • Be s t  ho r i z o n t a l  an d  ve r t i c a l  de s i g n  lo c a t i o n • Fu l l y  ve t t i n g  tr a f f i c  de s i g n  so l u t i o n  fo r  op e r a t i o n s ,  capacity,  sa f e t y ,  im p a c t s ,  et c . . . ; • Ro u n d a b o u t   • ‘T ’  in t e r s e c t i o n   • St r u c t u r a l  se l e c t i o n  fo r  br i d g e s  an d  re t a i n i n g  wa l l s • En v i r o n m e n t a l  cl e a r a n c e s  an d  de s i g n ; • No i s e ,  Ae s t h e t i c s ,  Li g h t i n g ,  Ai r  an d  Wa t e r  Qu a l i t y ,  etc… • 3D  mo d e l i n g   3/4/2014 Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e S c h e d u l e Pr o j e c t S c o p i n g Pr e l i m i n a r y D e s i g n Pr e l i m i n a r y En v i r o n m e n t a l C l e a r a n c e Fi n a l D e s i g n Ri g h t o f W a y P l a n s an d A c q u i s i t i o n Fi n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l Cl e a r a n c e Pr o j e c t A d v e r t i s e m e n t Co n s t r u c t i o n Q1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 20 1 4 20 1 5 2016 Pu b l i c O p e n H o u s e To w n C o u n c i l U p d a t e Spring 2016 - Fall 2017 DO T DE P A R T M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N CO L O R A D O FELSBURG HOLT&ULLEVIG 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. 2, Series of 2014, A Resolution Approving an Amended Intergovernmental Agreement Between the Town of Vail and the Colorado Department of Transportation Regarding the Design of the I-70 Vail Underpass; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve Resolution 2 Series 2014 an amended IGA with CDOT BACKGROUND: The conceptual design work completed to date for the I-70 Vail Underpass has been jointly funded by CDOT and the Town of Vail thru an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) approved last year. The current approved IGA provides joint funding up to a maximum of $325,000 to the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). As the project comes to a close on conceptual design this funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, both the IGA with CDOT and the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 2 Series 2014 an amended IGA with CDOT ATTACHMENTS: IGA FHU Scope & Fee Resolution Memo 3/4/2014 Page 1 of 3 CONTRACT AMENDMENT Amendment #1 Original Contract CMS # 13 HA3 50661 Project # STA 0702-327 (19094) Amendment CMS # TBD TBD 1) PARTIES This Amendment to the above-referenced Original Contract (hereinafter called the Contract) is entered into by and between Town of Vail (hereinafter called “Local Agency”), and the STATE OF COLORADO (hereinafter called the “State”) acting by and through the Department of Transportation, (hereinafter called “CDOT”). 2) EFFECTIVE DATE AND ENFORCEABILITY This Amendment shall not be effective or enforceable until it is approved and signed by the Colorado State Controller or designee (hereinafter called the “Effective Date”). The State shall not be liable to pay or reimburse Contractor for any performance hereunder including, but not limited to, costs or expenses incurred, or be bound by any provision hereof prior to the Effective Date. 3) FACTUAL RECITALS The Parties entered into the Contract to design an underpass to connect north and south frontage roads located along I-70A (MP 175) where CDOT will review and provide input on the I-70 Underpass Improvements Project in the Town of Vail. The Parties now agree to increase design funds by $475,000.00 and to update the Scope of Work and Form 463 (Exhibit A); the Funding Provisions (Exhibit C); and the Local Agency Contract Administration Checklist (Exhibit E). The Parties also agree to update The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) (Exhibit K), as amended as of March 20, 2013. 4) CONSIDERATION-COLORADO SPECIAL PROVISIONS The Parties acknowledge that the mutual promises and covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration are sufficient and adequate to support this Amendment. The Parties agree to replacing the Colorado Special Provisions with the most recent version (if such have been updated since the Contract and any modification thereto were effective) as part consideration for this Amendment. If applicable, such Special Provisions are attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Section 26. 5) LIMITS OF EFFECT This Amendment is incorporated by reference into the Contract, and the Contract and all prior amendments thereto, if any, remain in full force and effect except as specifically modified herein. 6) MODIFICATIONS The Amendment and all prior amendments thereto, if any, are modified as follows: a. Exhibit A-1 Exhibit A to the Basic Contract shall be removed and replaced in its entirety by Exhibit A-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All references in the Basic Contract to Exhibit A shall be removed and replaced by Exhibit A-1. b. Exhibit C-1 Exhibit C to the Basic Contract shall be removed and replaced in its entirety by Exhibit C-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All references in the Basic Contract to Exhibit C shall be removed and replaced by Exhibit C-1. c. Exhibit E-1, Local Agency Contract Administration Checklist 3/4/2014 Page 2 of 3 Exhibit E to the Basic Contract shall be removed and replaced in its entirety by Exhibit E-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All references in the Basic Contract to Exhibit E shall be removed and replaced by Exhibit E-1. d. Exhibit K-1, The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 Exhibit K to the Basic Contract shall be removed and replaced in its entirety by Exhibit K-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All references in the Basic Contract to Exhibit K shall be removed and replaced by Exhibit K-1. 7) START DATE This Amendment shall take effect upon the date of the State Controller’s Signature. 8) ORDER OF PRECEDENCE Except for the Special Provisions, in the event of any conflict, inconsistency, variance, or contradiction between the provisions of this Amendment and any of the provisions of the Contract, the provisions of this Amendment shall in all respects supersede, govern, and control. The most recent version of the Special Provisions incorporated into the Contract or any amendment shall always control other provisions in the Contract or any amendments. 9) AV AILABLE FUNDS Financial obligations of the state payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted, or otherwise made available. THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 3/4/2014 Page 3 of 3 THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE EXECUTED THIS AGREEMENT * Persons signing for The Local Agency hereby swear and affirm that they are authorized to act on The Local Agency’s behalf a nd acknowledge that the State is relying on their representations to that effect. THE LOCAL AGENCY Town of Vail By: _______________________________________ Title: ______________________________________ __________________________________________ *Signature Date: __________________________ STATE OF COLORADO John W. Hickenlooper, GOVERNOR Colorado Department of Transportation Donald E. Hunt, Executive Director ________________________________________ By: Scott McDaniel, PE, Acting Chief Engineer Date: _________________________ 2nd Local Agency Signature if needed By: ________________________________________ Title: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________ *Signature Date: _________________________ LEGAL REVIEW John W. Suthers, Attorney General By:_______________________________________________ Signature - Assistant Attorney General Date: _________________________ ALL AGREEMENTS REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE STATE CONTROLLER CRS §24-30-202 requires the State Controller to approve all State Agreements. This Agreement is not valid until signed and dated below by the State Controller or delegate. The Local Agency is not authorized to begin performance until such time. If The Lo cal Agency begins performing prior thereto, the State of Colorado is not obligated to pay The Local Agency for such per formance or for any goods and/or services provided hereunder. STATE CONTROLLER Robert Jaros, CPA, MBA, JD By:___________________________________________ Colorado Department of Transportation Date:_____________________ 3/4/2014 Exhibit A-1 - Page 1 of 4 28. EXHIBIT A-1 – SCOPE OF WORK I-70 Vail Simba Run Project to I-70 Underpass Scope of Work The I-70 Vail Simba Run project is a partnership between the Town of Vail and Colorado Department of Transportation. The purpose of the project is to connect the north and south Frontage Roads at approximate I-70 mile marker 175. The Town of Vail will manage the design phase of the project through this Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). The original Scope of Work is modified by Amendment #1 to include:  evaluation of the crossing location;  traffic and safety analysis along the I-70 and Frontage Road corridor and at the adjacent interchanges such as West and Main Vail;  assistance with the NEPA clearances such as a Noise Study;  preliminary and final design of the underpass including gathering the topographic data, construction phasing to accommodate I-70 and Frontage Road traffic, structural selection report and preparation of FIR & FOR plans, specifications and cost estimates  development of Ownership maps including ‘toes’  85% construction plans and specifications 3/4/2014 Exhibit A-1 - Page 2 of 4 3/4/2014 Exhibit A-1 - Page 3 of 4 3/4/2014 Exhibit A-1 - Page 4 of 4 3/4/2014 Exhibit C-1 - Page 1 of 2 30. EXHIBIT C-1 – FUNDING PROVISIONS A. Cost of Work Estimate The Local Agency has estimated the total cost the Work to be $600,000.00 which is to be funded as follows: 1 BUDGETED FUNDS a. Federal Funds $600,000.00 (100% of Participating Costs) b. Local Agency Matching Funds $0.00 TOTAL BUDGETED FUNDS $600,000.00 2 ESTIMATED CDOT-INCURRED COSTS a. Federal Share $0.00 (__ of Participating Costs) b. Local Agency Local Agency Share of Participating Costs $0.00 Non-Participating Costs (Including Non- Participating Indirects) $0.00 Estimated to be Billed to Local Agency $0.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CDOT-INCURRED COSTS $0.00 3 ESTIMATED PAYMENT TO LOCAL AGENCY a. Federal Funds Budgeted (1a) $600,000.00 b. Less ROW Acquisition 3111 and/or ROW Relocation 3109 (80% of $4,900) ($0.00) TOTAL ESTIMATED PAYMENT TO LOCAL AGENCY $600,000.00 4 FOR CDOT ENCUMBRANCE PURPOSES Total Budgeted Funds $600,000.00 Less ROW Acquisition 3111 and/or ROW Relocation 3109 $0.00 TOTAL ENCUMBRANCE $600,000.00 Net encumbrance is as follows: WBS Element 19094.10.30 Design 3020 $600,000.00 WBS Element _____.__.__ Const 3301 $0.00 3/4/2014 Exhibit C-1 - Page 2 of 2 B. Matching Funds The matching ratio for the federal participating funds for this Work is 100% federal-aid funds (CFDA #20.205) to 0% Local Agency funds, it being understood that such ratio applies only to the $600,000.00 that is eligible for federal participation, it being further understood that all non-participating costs are borne by the Local Agency at 100%. If the total participating cost of performance of the Work exceeds $600,000.00, and additional federal funds are made available for the Work, the Local Agency shall pay 0% of all such costs eligible for federal participation and 100% of all non-participating costs. If additional federal funds are not made available, the Local Agency shall pay all such excess costs. If the total participating cost of performance of the Work is less than $600,000.00, then the amounts of Local Agency and federal-aid funds will be decreased in accordance with the funding ratio described herein. The performance of the Work shall be at no cost to the State. C. Maximum Amount Payable The maximum amount payable to the Local Agency under this Agreement shall be $600,000.00 (For CDOT accounting purposes, the federal funds of $600,000.00 and the Local Agency Matching funds of $0.00 will be encumbered for a total encumbrance of $600,000.00), unless such amount is increased by an appropriate written modification to this Agreement executed before any increased cost is incurred. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the total cost of the Work stated hereinbefore is the best estimate available, based on the design data as approved at the time of execution of this Agreement, and that such cost is subject to revisions (in accord with the procedure in the previous sentence) agreeable to the parties prior to bid and award. D. Single Audit Act Amendment All state and local government and non-profit organizations receiving more than $500,000 from all funding sources defined as federal financial assistance for Single Audit Act Amendment purposes shall comply with the audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133 (Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations) see also, 49 C.F.R. 18.20 through 18.26. The Single Audit Act Amendment requirements applicable to the Local Agency receiving federal funds are as follows: i. Expenditure less than $500,000 The Local Agency expends less than $500,000 in Federal funds (all federal sources, not just Highway funds) in its fiscal year then this requirement does not apply. ii. Expenditure exceeding than $500,000-Highway Funds Only The Local Agency expends more than $500,000 in Federal funds, but only received federal Highway funds (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, CFDA 20.205) then a program specific audit shall be performed. This audit will examine the “financial” procedures and processes for this program area. iii. Expenditure exceeding than $500,000-Multiple Funding Sources The Local Agency expends more than $500,000 in Federal funds, and the Federal funds are from multiple sources (FTA, HUD, NPS, etc.) then the Single Audit Act applies, which is an audit on the entire organization/entity. iv. Independent CPA Single Audit shall only be conducted by an independent CPA, not by an auditor on staff. An audit is an allowable direct or indirect cost. 3/4/2014 Exhibit E-1 – Page 1 of 5 32. EXHIBIT E-1 – LOCAL AGENCY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CHECKLIST 3/4/2014 Exhibit E-1 – Page 2 of 5 3/4/2014 Exhibit E-1 – Page 3 of 5 3/4/2014 Exhibit E-1 – Page 4 of 5 3/4/2014 Exhibit E-1 – Page 5 of 5 3/4/2014 38. EXHIBIT K-1 – SUPPLEMENTAL FEDERAL PROVISIONS Exhibit K-1 – Page 1 of 4 State of Colorado Supplemental Provisions for Federally Funded Contracts, Grants, and Purchase Orders Subject to The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), As Amended Revised as of 3-20-13 The contract, grant, or purchase order to which these Supplemental Provisions are attached has been funded, in whole or in part, with an Award of Federal funds. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of these Supplemental Provisions, the Special Provisions, the contract or any attachments or exhibits incorporated into and made a part of the contract, the provisions of these Supplemental Provisions shall control. 1. Definitions. For the purposes of these Supplemental Provisions, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them below. 1.1. “Award” means an award of Federal financial assistance that a non -Federal Entity receives or administers in the form of: 1.1.1. Grants; 1.1.2. Contracts; 1.1.3. Cooperative agreements, which do not include cooperative research and development agreements (CRDA) pursuant to the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, as amended (15 U.S.C. 3710); 1.1.4. Loans; 1.1.5. Loan Guarantees; 1.1.6. Subsidies; 1.1.7. Insurance; 1.1.8. Food commodities; 1.1.9. Direct appropriations; 1.1.10. Assessed and voluntary contributions; and 1.1.11. Other financial assistance transactions that authorize the expenditure of Federal funds by non- Federal Entities. Award does not include: 1.1.12. Technical assistance, which provides services in lieu of money; 1.1.13. A transfer of title to Federally-owned property provided in lieu of money; even if the award is called a grant; 1.1.14. Any award classified for security purposes; or 1.1.15. Any award funded in whole or in part with Recovery funds, as defined in section 1512 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (Public Law 111 -5). 1.2. “Contract” means the contract to which these Supplemental Provisions are attached and includes all Award types in §1.1.1 through 1.1.11 above. 1.3. “Contractor” means the party or parties to a Contract funded, in whole or in part, with Federal financial assistance, other than the Prime Recipient, and includes grantees, subgrantees, Subrecipients, and borrowers. For purposes of Transparency Act reporting, Contractor does not include Vendors. 1.4. “Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number” means the nine-digit number established and assigned by Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. to uniquely identify a business entity. Dun and Bradstreet ’s website may be found at: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. 1.5. “Entity” means all of the following as defined at 2 CFR part 25, subpart C; 1.5.1. A governmental organization, which is a State, local government, or Indian Tribe; 1.5.2. A foreign public entity; 1.5.3. A domestic or foreign non-profit organization; 1.5.4. A domestic or foreign for-profit organization; and 1.5.5. A Federal agency, but only a Subrecipient under an Award or Subaward to a non-Federal entity. 1.6. “Executive” means an officer, managing partner or any other employee in a management position. 3/4/2014 Exhibit K-1 – Page 2 of 4 1.7. “Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN)” means an Award number assigned by a Federal agency to a Prime Recipient. 1.8. “FFATA” means the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282), as amended by §6202 of Public Law 110-252. FFATA, as amended, also is referred to as the “Transparency Act.” 1.9. “Prime Recipient” means a Colorado State agency or institution of higher education that receives an Award. 1.10. “Subaward” means a legal instrument pursuant to which a Prime Recipient of Award funds awards all or a portion of such funds to a Subrecipient, in exchange for the Subrecipient’s support in the performance of all or any portion of the substantive project or program for which the Award was granted. 1.11. “Subrecipient” means a non-Federal Entity (or a Federal agency under an Award or Subaward to a non-Federal Entity) receiving Federal funds through a Prime Recipient to support the performance of the Federal project or program for which the Federal funds were awarded. A Subrecipient is subject to the terms and conditions of the Federal Award to the Prime Recipient, including program compliance requirements. The term “Subrecipient” includes and may be referred to as Subgrantee. 1.12. “Subrecipient Parent DUNS Number” means the subrecipient parent organization’s 9-digit Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number that appears in the subrecipient’s System for Award Management (SAM) profile, if applicable. 1.13. “Supplemental Provisions” means these Supplemental Provisions for Federally Funded Contracts, Grants, and Purchase Orders subject to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 , As Amended, as may be revised pursuant to ongoing guidance from the relevant Federal or State of Colorado agency or institution of higher education. 1.14. “System for Award Management (SAM)” means the Federal repository into which an Entity must enter the information required under the Transparency Act, which may be found at http://www.sam.gov. 1.15. “Total Compensation” means the cash and noncash dollar value earned by an Executive during the Prime Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s preceding fiscal year and includes the following: 1.15.1. Salary and bonus; 1.15.2. Awards of stock, stock options, and stock appreciation rights, using the dollar amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to the fiscal year in accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised 2005) (FAS 123R), Shared Based Payments; 1.15.3. Earnings for services under non-equity incentive plans, not including group life, health, hospitalization or medical reimbursement plans that do not discriminate in favor of Executives and are available generally to all salaried employees; 1.15.4. Change in present value of defined benefit and actuarial pension plans; 1.15.5. Above-market earnings on deferred compensation which is not tax-qualified; 1.15.6. Other compensation, if the aggregate value of all such other compensation (e.g. severance, termination payments, value of life insurance paid on behalf of the employee, perquisites or property) for the Executive exceeds $10,000. 1.16. “Transparency Act” means the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282), as amended by §6202 of Public Law 110 -252. The Transparency Act also is referred to as FFATA. 1.17 “Vendor” means a dealer, distributor, merchant or other seller providing property or services required for a project or program funded by an Award. A Vendor is not a Prime Recipient or a Subrecipient and is not subject to the terms and conditions of the Federal award . Program compliance requirements do not pass through to a Vendor. 2. Compliance. Contractor shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Transparency Act and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, including but not limited to these Supplemental Provisions. Any revisions to such provisions or regulations shall automatically become a part of these Supplemental Provisions, without the necessity of either party executing any further instrument. The State of Colorado 3/4/2014 Exhibit K-1 – Page 3 of 4 may provide written notification to Contractor of such revisions, but such notice shall not be a condition precedent to the effectiveness of such revisions. 3. System for Award Management (SAM) and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Requirements. 3.1. SAM. Contractor shall maintain the currency of its information in SAM until the Contractor submits the final financial report required under the Award or receives final payment, whichever is later. Contractor shall review and update SAM information at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if required by changes in its information. 3.2. DUNS. Contractor shall provide its DUNS number to its Prime Recipient, and shall update Contractor’s information in Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if required by changes in Contractor’s information. 4. Total Compensation. Contractor shall include Total Compensation in SAM for each of its five most highly compensated Executives for the preceding fiscal year if: 4.1. The total Federal funding authorized to date under the Award is $25,000 or more; and 4.2. In the preceding fiscal year, Contractor received: 4.2.1. 80% or more of its annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts and subcontr acts and/or Federal financial assistance Awards or Subawards subject to the Transparency Act; and 4.2.2. $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts and subcontracts and/or Federal financial assistance Awards or Subawards subject to the Transparency Act; and 4.3. The public does not have access to information about the compensation of such Executives through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d) or § 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 5. Reporting. Contractor shall report data elements to SAM and to the Prime Recipient as required in §7 below if Contractor is a Subrecipient for the Award pursuant to the Transparency Act. No direct payment shall be made to Contractor for providing any reports required under these Supplemental Provisions and the cost of producing such reports shall be included in the Contract price. The reporting requirements in §7 below are based on guidance from the US Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and as such are subject to change at any time by OMB. Any such changes shall be automatically incorporated into this Contract and shall become part of Contractor’s obligations under this Contract, as provided in §2 above. The Colorado Office of the State Controller will provide summaries of revised OMB reporting requirements at http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/FFATA.htm. 6. Effective Date and Dollar Threshold for Reporting. The effective date of these Supplemental Provisions apply to new Awards as of October 1, 2010. Reporting requirements in §7 below apply to new Awards as of October 1, 2010, if the initial award is $25,000 or more. If the initial Award is below $25,000 but subsequent Award modifications result in a total Award of $25,000 or more, the Award is subject to the reporting requirements as of the date the Award exceeds $25,000. If the initial Award is $25,000 or more, but funding is subsequently de -obligated such that the total award amount falls below $25,000, the Award shall continue to be subject to the reporting requirements. 7. Subrecipient Reporting Requirements. If Contractor is a Subrecipient, Contractor shall report as set forth below. 7.1 ToSAM. A Subrecipient shall register in SAM and report the following data elements in SAM for each Federal Award Identification Number no later than the end of the month following the month in which the Subaward was made: 7.1.1 Subrecipient DUNS Number; 7.1.2 Subrecipient DUNS Number + 4 if more than one electronic funds transfer (EFT) account; 7.1.3 Subrecipient Parent DUNS Number; 3/4/2014 Exhibit K-1 – Page 4 of 4 7.1.4 Subrecipient’s address, including: Street Address, City, State, Country, Zip + 4, and Congressional District; 7.1.5 Subrecipient’s top 5 most highly compensated Executives if the criteria in §4 above are met; and 7.1.6 Subrecipient’s Total Compensation of top 5 most highly compensated Executives if criteria in §4 above met. 7.2 To Prime Recipient. A Subrecipient shall report to its Prime Recipient, upon the effective date of the Contract, the following data elements: 7.2.1 Subrecipient’s DUNS Number as registered in SAM. 7.2.2 Primary Place of Performance Information, including: Street Address, City, State, Country, Zip code + 4, and Congressional District. 8. Exemptions. 8.1. These Supplemental Provisions do not apply to an individual who receives an Award as a natural person, unrelated to any business or non-profit organization he or she may own or operate in his or her name. 8.2 A Contractor with gross income from all sources of less than $300,000 in the previous tax year is exempt from the requirements to report Subawards and the Total Compensation of its most highly compensated Executives. 8.3 Effective October 1, 2010, “Award” currently means a grant, cooperative agreement, or other arrangement as defined in Section 1.1 of these Special Provisions. On future dates “Award” may include other items to be specified by OMB in policy memoranda available at the OMB Web site; Award also will include other types of Awards subject to the Transparency Act. 8.4 There are no Transparency Act reporting requirements for Vendors. Event of Default. Failure to comply with these Supplemental Provisions shall constitute an event of default under the Contract and the State of Colorado may terminate the Contract upon 30 days prior written notice if the default remains uncured five calendar days following the termination of the 30 day notice period. This remedy will be in addition to any other remedy available to the State of Colorado under the Contract, at law or in equity. 3/4/2014     March 4, 2014    Mr. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer  Town of Vail  1309 Elkhorn Drive  Vail, CO 81657    Re: Proposal to Amend FHU’s Vail Interchanges PEL Study Contract   NEPA Support, Preliminary and Final Design Services for the Proposed Interstate 70 /Vail  Underpass     Dear Mr. Kassmel:  Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) is pleased to continue to assist the Town of Vail and CDOT Region 3  in the development of the proposed I‐70 Vail underpass and associated roundabout intersections  located in the Town of Vail. The purpose of this scope of work is to provide environmental NEPA  support (CATEX assumed) and provide preliminary/final design services to develop contract  documents for the advertisement and construction of the project.  Based on information that you provided, it is FHU’s understanding that CDOT will perform  environmental evaluation for all resources except noise and wetlands, and will provide the  appropriate NEPA forms.  Attached please find our proposal, which includes a scope of work and milestone schedule. Also  included is a summary of proposed fees, for FHU and our subconsultants, in a project worksheet  format supported by our estimated labor hours, and other direct costs.   If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please feel free to call.      Sincerely,    FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG    Chris Fasching, PE     Rick Erjavec, PE  3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   2 | Page    Principal      Sr. Transportation Engineer  Attachments 3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   3 | Page    PROJECT BACKGROUND  The Town of Vail (TOV) recently underwent a period of unprecedented development and  redevelopment which is anticipated to continue to some extent into the future. The development  trend prompted the reevaluation and update of the Town’s Transportation Masterplan. The Vail  Transportation Master Plan (VTMP) focused on Vail’s existing transportation system and how  anticipated future growth will impact Vail’s transportation infrastructure. The plan’s traffic model  anticipates Vail will see approximately 2400 new vehicular PM peak hour trips once all anticipated  redevelopment and build out occurs.   The impact of the projected new growth will strain the Town’s existing transportation  infrastructure specifically the Main Vail (176) and West Vail (173) interchanges. Both of these  roundabout interchanges are vital to the TOV’s connectivity, as they are the only means of  crossing Interstate 70 within a 3 mile stretch along the commercial and resort core areas of Vail,  and they are the only points of access to Interstate 70. Straining these locations to operational  failure paralyzes  TOV’s transportation network. This failure currently occurs during peak visitor  times as well as when the Town is overwhelmed with additional traffic from Vail Pass closures,  causing all traffic, transit, emergency services and general town services, to go to gridlock within  this 3 mile stretch. Future growth of the TOV will require additional relief to these two key  locations.  Analysis of the existing interchanges and the  TOV’s roadway infrastructure connectivity has been  on‐going since the original Transportation Master Plan was developed in 1991, and since that time  numerous improvements have been made to these locations; most notably, the construction of  the roundabouts. Design alternatives discussed since then have been included in some of the  Town’s relevant transportation documents.  Each document suggests improvements to increase and/or relieve capacity at both the Main Vail  and West Vail roundabouts, with the most notable improvement suggested being the addition of  the “Simba Run Underpass”. The proposed underpass is a grade separated crossing of the  interstate located approximately halfway between the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges near  the namesake Simba Run Condominiums. The underpass is currently the third listed improvement  project on the Intermountain Statewide Transportation Improvement Project’s list. This project  would add connectivity between the north and south side of the interstate and relieve the  interchanges at Main and West Vail of repetitive thru traffic by providing a direct connection  between the core resort village areas and the West Vail commercial area.  This project began as a Planning and Environmental Linkage study in the summer of 2013 with a  vision of moving into design and construction once funding was obtained. In early 2013 the TOV  3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   4 | Page    submitted a CDOT RAMP application for construction funding for the I‐70 / Vail Underpass; they  were successful in securing RAMP funds to move the project forward. In a joint effort, the TOV and  CDOT selected the consultant team of Felsburg Hold and Ullevig (FHU) and its subconsultants for  the project.  The attached Scope of Work is for services to be provided by the Consultant associated with  Project Initiation and Continuing Requirements, Project Development, Preliminary Design and  Final Design for the new underpass of I‐70 in the Town of Vail in Eagle County, Colorado.   This Scope of Work is an amendment and revision to Section 7 of CDOT standard project scope of  services made part of the current PEL Contract and incorporated herein by reference. Where  noted, Consultant (FHU) refers to Felsburg Holt & Ullevig. All work to be completed by  subconsultants is identified herein with specific reference to the subconsultant that will perform  all or part of the work task.   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2013  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   5 | Page    SECTION 7 – PRECONSTRUCTION WORK  The proposed project includes an I‐70 underpass and associated roundabout intersections with  frontage roads, near the Simba Run Condominium complex in the Town of Vail, CO. The project  goal is to provide an additional crossing of I‐70 roughly halfway between the West Vail and Vail  interchanges to relieve traffic congestion at the existing interchanges. The proposed underpass  does not include ramps connecting to mainline I‐70.  Through initial work, the Consultant (FHU) will establish a concept plan for the I‐70 / Vail grade  separated underpass compatible with previous planning efforts. This will be used as a starting  point for preliminary and final design for the underpass.  The following Key Tasks have been identified for this project:   Provide NEPA support to TOV and CDOT for selected resources (wetlands and noise). The level  of environmental clearance is expected at this stage to be a Categorical Exclusion (CATEX)  based on minimal anticipated impacts to affected resources. This will be confirmed as project  details and impacts are established.   Initiate project data collection including: a topographic survey; obtaining existing utility  mapping and utility locates; geotechnical subsurface investigation; traffic data review; and  review of conceptual design from past studies.    Review and incorporate recommended safety improvements along the I‐70 corridor based on  appropriate safety assessment reports provided by CDOT.    Identify environmental mitigation, utility relocates, and right‐of‐way acquisition project  requirements.    Complete preliminary and final design of the underpass including the development of Field  Inspection Review (FIR) and Final Office Review (FOR) plans for review by the TOV and CDOT.   Assist the TOV and CDOT in establishing a public information approach that can be sustained  through the design and the construction phase.   Assist the TOV and CDOT with the Project Leadership Team process for this project.  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   6 | Page    1 PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS 1A PROJECT MANAGEMENT  The Consultant (FHU) Project Manager will be responsible for contract, task order and invoicing  paperwork for the project, as well as other project design related tasks. The Consultant (FHU)  Project Manager will provide day‐to‐day design and agency coordination related to project tasks  undertaken by the Consultant team.  Deliverable(s):   Invoices (FHU)   Monthly Progress Reports (FHU)  1B PROJECT SCHEDULE (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a detailed schedule that identifies project milestones as well as  work tasks as listed below. The schedule will be updated on a monthly basis and submitted with  the monthly progress report.  Based on an initial assessment by the Consultant (FHU), the project can be completed in  approximately 24 months.  1C INITIAL PROJECT KICK‐OFF MEETING (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will attend a project initiation meeting with the TOV and  CDOT to discuss preliminary and final design project scope, deliverables, schedule, as well as level  of coordination within the Team and with outside entities.  In preparation for the meeting, the  Consultant (FHU) will prepare the meeting agenda, handouts and exhibits; they will also prepare  meeting minutes and submit them for review within 5 working days of the meeting.   1D PROJECT MEETINGS  1Da Project Management Coordination   Regularly scheduled Project Management Coordination (PMC) meetings will be held with the TOV  Project Manager, CDOT’s Project Manager and the Consultant (FHU’s) Project Manager. (18  monthly meetings are anticipated including 1 each from February 2014 to January 2015; and 6  post‐FOR)  1Db Project Team Coordination   Regularly scheduled overall Project Team meetings will be held with the TOV, CDOT and the  Consultant Team. (18 monthly meetings are anticipated including 1 each month from February  2014 to January 2015; and 6 post‐FOR)  1Dc Discipline Specific   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   7 | Page    Discipline‐specific meetings will be held to discuss and coordinate discipline specific project items.  (6 meetings are anticipated.)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   8 | Page    1Dd Structure Review  Structure coordination meetings will be held with the TOV and CDOT Staff Bridge to discuss  structure type selection (bridge and walls), aesthetic elements, lighting etc. (6 meetings are  anticipated.)   1De Communication Aids  The Consultant (FHU) will provide communication aids for the meetings listed above.  Deliverable(s):   Meeting Agendas (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   Meeting Communication Aids (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within 10  working days of the meeting.  1E IDENTIFY DESIGN CRITERIA (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will develop design criteria based on the TOV and CDOT standards for final  design. Design Criteria will be submitted to the TOV and CDOT for review and concurrence.   Design criteria will be revised as necessary and referenced throughout the course of the project.  1F INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will review and summarize previous concepts for the crossing of I‐70.   1G REVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will review existing environmental documentation pertinent to the corridor  and note mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that need to be addressed by the  project.   The project will be implemented in a manner consistent with the I‐70 Programmatic  Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)/Record of Decision (ROD), and with collaborative and  programmatic processes established through the PEIS/ROD including the I‐70 Corridor Context  Sensitive Solution (CSS) process, A Landscape Level Inventory of Valued Ecosystem Components  (ALIVE) and Stream and Wetland Ecological Enhancement Program (SWEEP).  1H PERMITS  1Ha Permission to Enter Private Property (CDOT Form 730)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   9 | Page    Preparation of “Permission to Enter Property” forms, for the purpose of surveying on private  parcels, will be completed by The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership). (See The Lund  Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   10 | Page    1Hb Special Use Permit  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will obtain a special use permit to survey within CDOT’s  ROW. (See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)  Deliverable(s):   CDOT Form 730 (for 3 properties) (The Lund Partnership)   Special Use Permit Application (The Lund Partnership)  1I TRAFFIC CONTROL  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) traffic control vendor will be responsible for traffic  control for ground survey activities that occur within the existing roadway.    The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) traffic control vendor will be responsible for traffic control  for subsurface the geotechnical investigation within the existing roadway.  Deliverable(s):   Traffic Control Plans (The Lund Partnership and Yeh & Associates)  2 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2A COMMUNICATION AND CONSENSUS BUILDING  2Aa Project Contact List  The Consultant (FHU) will develop and maintain a project contact list of project stakeholders  including the TOV, CDOT, the Consultant Team, Coordinating Agencies, Property Owners and  Business Owners.   2Ab Public Meetings  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will conduct three more public meetings for the project.  The first meeting is expected early around the time of the Field Inspection Review meeting, the  second near the time of the Final Office Review meeting and the third prior to the beginning of  construction.   2Ac Project Leadership Team Process  The Subconsultant (Pat Noyes & Associates) will assist the TOV with implementation and carrying  out the Project Leadership Team Process for the project. See the attached Pat Noyes & Associates  scope of work for additional information. (9 meetings are anticipated.)  2Ad Agency Specific   Agency specific meetings will be held to discuss project progress and gain input from coordinating  agencies.  (6 meetings are anticipated.)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   11 | Page    2Ae Communication Aids  The Consultant (FHU) and the Subconsultant (Pat Noyes & Associates) will provide communication  aids for the meetings and processes listed above.  Deliverable(s):   Project Contact List (FHU)   Meeting Minutes (FHU)   Meeting Communication Aids (FHU, Pat Noyes & Associates)  2B SURVEY  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will complete a base topographic survey for the project  including both aerial and ground surveys; as required they will also provide supplemental survey  to provide additional topographic features needed to complete design. (See The Lund  Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)  Deliverable(s):   Pre‐Survey Conference Meeting Summary (The Lund Partnership)   Survey Control Diagram (The Lund Partnership)   Topographic CAD Reference File (The Lund Partnership)   Pothole and Geotechnical Bore Hole Locations (The Lund Partnership)  2C DATA GATHERING, ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION DEVELOPMENT  2Ca Traffic Analysis   The Consultant (FHU) will complete a traffic analysis that was started prior to February 1, 2014 as  follows:   Summarize traffic analysis results comparing roundabouts to T-intersections with frontage roads for the underpass. Deliverable(s):   Roundabout vs. T‐Intersection Matrix (FHU)  Exclusion(s):   Traffic Simulations   Traffic Counts (Traffic counts have previously been collected and an analysis  completed for the impacts resulting from the proposed improvements.)    Safety Assessment (A Safety Assessment Report for I‐70 mainline and the frontage  roads has been completed by CDOT.)    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   12 | Page    2Cb Noise Study  The Consultant (FHU) will perform a traffic noise analysis for the NEPA process in accordance with  CDOT’s latest guidelines. The analysis will include review of relevant prior environmental  documents and noise analyses, including the I‐70 PEIS and TOV noise studies.   The analysis will include up to 10 short‐term (15 minute) noise measurements in the study area to  evaluate existing conditions and support verification of the project noise modeling. Both ground‐ level and upper floor balcony locations will be targeted for measurement with the condition that  access from owners is granted to the Consultant.  Noise modeling will be conducted using TNM Version 2.5 and will include current conditions and  two future traffic conditions (no‐build and build) in the project study area. If noise impacts are  identified in the study area, models will be developed to evaluate potential noise abatement  measures for impacted properties. Abatement will consider both I‐70 and frontage road traffic  noise to comply with CDOT’s guidelines.  Construction noise will also be considered. FHU will review the TOV noise ordinance limits and  assess for potential construction noise issues and develop recommendations to include in the  construction documents to address construction noise abatement. Deliverable(s):   Noise Study Documentation (FHU)   Noise Technical Memo for the CATEX (FHU)   Noise Mitigation Requirements (FHU)  2Cc Air Quality (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Air Quality. 2Cd Archaeology (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Archaeology. 2Ce Paleontology (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Paleontology. 2Cf Geology (CDOT)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   13 | Page    CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Geology.    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   14 | Page    2Cg Water Quality (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Water Quality.  2Ch Noxious Weeds (CDOT)  CDOT will prepare an Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan for the project, which  documents the type, quantity, density and management of noxious weeds in the Build Alternative  alignment and impact. This will include techniques to manage weeds during and post construction.  2Ci Historic (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Historic resources. 2Cj Floodplain & Drainage Assessment  The Consultant (FHU) will review Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance  Rate Maps to assess if flood boundaries within the primary impact area have changed. Information  will also be obtained from the Master Floodplain Drainage Plan. The Consultant (FHU) will prepare  appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Floodplain & Drainage.  For the purposes of this task it  is assumed that the location analyzed is not in the flood plain.    Deliverable(s):   Summary of Flood Plain Research  (FHU)   NEPA Floodplain & Drainage Report (FHU)   Conceptual Drainage Report (FHU)  2Ck Right‐of‐Way   The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will create an existing ROW CAD Reference File and an  ownership map from existing ROW survey from the TOV. See the attached The Lund Partnership  scope of work for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   ROW CAD Reference File  (The Lund Partnership)   ROW Ownership Map (The Lund Partnership)  2Cl 4(f)/6(f) Activity (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to 4(f)/6(f) resources.    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   15 | Page    2Cm Threatened & Endangered Species (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. An  environmental plan sheet for mitigation measures and design will be required for such items as  prairie dog mitigation and is included in this project. CDOT will prepare appropriate NEPA  documents pertaining to Threatened & Endangered Species. 2Cn Wetlands  The Consultant (FHU) will review the previously conducted delineation to determine any wetland  impacts and note any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project to be addressed. The  need for a wetland mitigation plan has not been identified for this project. This task includes the  preparation of a wetland finding report.   Deliverable(s):   Determination of Wetland Impacts  (FHU)   Wetland Finding Report (FHU)  Exclusion(s):   FacWet Functional Assessment  (Wetland impacts are not anticipated to warrant a  wetland functional assessment.)  2Co Hazardous Materials (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. As required,  CDOT will conduct a Phase II Environmental Subsurface Investigation. CDOT will prepare  appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Hazardous Materials. 2Cp Existing Roadway and Major Structures  The Consultant (FHU) will evaluate existing conditions for the roadway physical condition, roadway  geometry, and roadway drainage. The Subconsultant (Clanton & Associates) will evaluate existing  conditions for existing roadway lighting.   Deliverable(s):   Existing Condition Report  (FHU)  2Cq Construction Requirements  The Consultant (FHU) will investigate general construction impacts.   The TOV, CDOT and the Consultant (FHU) will analyze construction noise impacts and develop  Contractor requirements to mitigate noise during construction.  Deliverable(s):   Construction Noise Mitigation Requirements  (FHU)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   16 | Page       3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   17 | Page    2Cr Aesthetic Considerations  The Subconsultant (PKM) will prepare aesthetic concept plans based upon the aesthetic goals of  the TOV and CDOT. They will match the existing aesthetics within the surrounding area. Concept  plans will be submitted to the TOV and CDOT for approval.   The Consultant (FHU) and  subconsultant (PKM) will conduct two meetings with the TOV Design Review Board (DRB).  Deliverable(s):   Aesthetic Concept Plans (PKM)  2Cs Existing Utility Mapping   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will conduct a review of utility information previously  collected by the TOV and CDOT; obtain existing utility mapping from utility companies within the  project limits; conduct utility locates (with their utility location subconsultant); and conduct  potholing (with their potholing subconsultant).   Requests and receipt of utility maps from utility companies will be coordinated with the TOV and  the CDOT Region Utility Engineer via copies of request and transmittal letters.   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will coordinate the survey of utility locates and pothole  locations with the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership).   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will reconcile gathered utility data and conduct field  reviews with the Region Utility Engineer and Utility companies, as required, to verify to the best  extent possible horizontal and vertical utility data.   It is anticipated that there will be a total of (4) meetings in the field to meet with the Region Utility  Engineer, meet with utility companies, coordinate utility locates and monitor potholing efforts. The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will compile existing utility information into an existing  utility CAD reference file.  Deliverable(s):   Existing Utility CAD Reference File (Goodbee & Associates)   Pothole Log (Goodbee & Associates)  2Ct Conceptual Underpass Location Investigation (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a list of potential underpass crossing locations based upon the  existing geometric constraints. At these locations, an examination of the horizontal alignment and  vertical elevations of eastbound and westbound I‐70 will be compared to the north and south  frontage roads to determine which locations are most suitable for an underpass crossing and the  roundabout intersections. The Consultant (FHU) will develop layouts for the chosen intersections,  and evaluate the crossing locations with respect to geometric design feasibility/practicality;  environmental impacts; operations and safety; and cost. This work will be completed in  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   18 | Page    coordination with the Project Leadership Team Process. The preferred alternative will be chosen in  coordination with the NEPA process.   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   19 | Page    2Cu Land Use & Environmental Justice (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Land Use and Environmental Justice. 2Cv Cumulative Effects (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Cumulative Effects.  2D NEPA CLEARANCE   CDOT will compile NEPA Clearance Documents and gain the necessary NEPA clearance for the  project.   The Consultant (FHU) will provide the NEPA technical memos listed in Section 2C, as well as  provide CDOT periodic assistance, as needed, in compilation of the NEPA Clearance Documents;  and gaining the necessary NEPA clearance for the project.  3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN  3A GEOTECHNCIAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION   3Aa Structure Foundations  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will conduct a geotechnical subsurface investigation for the  purposes of determining structure foundation recommendations. Locations of bore holes will be  coordinated with the Consultant (FHU’s) Structural Engineer. See the attached scope of work from  Yeh & Associates for additional information.  3Ab Pavement Design  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will conduct a geotechnical subsurface investigation for the  purposes of determining pavement design recommendations. They will provide pavement  recommendations based on traffic counts, ESALS and existing pavement type and condition. See  the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Geotechnical Subsurface Investigation Report (With Preliminary  Foundation Recommendations and Pavement Design) (Yeh & Associates)   Preliminary Geotechnical Plan Sheets (Bore Hole Location Map + Boring Logs) (Yeh  & Associates)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   20 | Page    3B STRUCTURE DESIGN  3Ba Preliminary Bridge Design   The Consultant (FHU) will develop multiple bridge type and layout alternatives for I‐70 over the  new underpass. Bridge alternatives will be analyzed for cost, ease of construction, aesthetics, and  durability.  The alternatives analysis will be documented in a structure selection report. The  preferred bridges will be designed to a 30% level. Design will be per the latest AASHTO and CDOT  design criteria and standards. This work will be done in coordination with the TOV as well as CDOT  Staff Bridge. Deliverable(s):   Bridge Structure Selection Report (FHU)   Bridge General Layouts (FHU)  3Bb Preliminary Retaining Wall Design   The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with roadway design on required retaining wall locations. For  the identified retaining wall locations the Consultant (FHU) will analyze alternative wall types for  cost, ease of construction, aesthetics, and durability.  The alternatives analysis will be documented  in a structure selection report. The preferred walls will be designed to a 30% level. Design will be  per the latest AASHTO and CDOT design criteria.  Deliverable(s):   Retaining Wall Structure Selection Report (FHU)   Retaining Wall General Layouts (FHU)  3C HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING  3Ca Roadway Drainage   The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for a stormwater conveyance system within  the project limits. This will include location of storm sewer pipes, inlets and manholes. Design will  be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT standards.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a preliminary drainage report.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a Pipe Material Selection Letter for the TOV and CDOT review  and acceptance.  Deliverable(s):   Pipe Material Selection Letter (FHU)   Preliminary Drainage Report (FHU)   Preliminary Storm Conveyance Plans (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   21 | Page    3Cb Structure Drainage   The Consultant (FHU) will determine if bridge drains will be required for the proposed I‐70 bridges;  and a drainage system for the proposed retaining walls.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Bridge Drain Location & Sizing (FHU)   Preliminary Retaining Wall Drainage System (FHU)  3D PERMANENT WATER QUALITY  The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for permanent water quality facilities within  the limits of project impact. Alternative water quality facilities will be considered to minimize ROW  impacts.  For the purposes of this task it is assumed that water quality will be provided by  subsurface water quality inlets or vaults and water quality ponds will not be analyzed.    Design will comply with state and local water quality requirements including those issued by the  Colorado Department of Health and Environment’s Water Quality Control Division as is required  by the Clean Water Act.   Deliverable(s):   Water Quality Tech Memo (FHU)   Water Quality Section for above mentioned Preliminary Drainage Report (FHU)   Preliminary Water Quality Plans (FHU)  3E EROSION CONTROL & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION  The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for erosion control and storm water  management during construction. Design will be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT current  standards.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Storm Water Management Plans (FHU)  3F UTILITY COORDINATION  Based on preliminary design from all the design specialties, the Subconsultant (Goodbee &  Associates) will identify existing utilities (both wet and dry) that will be impacted by design.  The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will create a utility contact list to be included in the  existing utility plans.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   22 | Page    The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will submit necessary information for the relocation or  adjustments of affected utilities to FHU, the TOV and CDOT Region Utility Engineer.   Deliverable(s):   Existing Utility Plans (Goodbee & Associates)  3G UTILITY DESIGN  The Consultant (FHU) will complete preliminary design on required water and sanitary sewer  relocations. Preliminary design will be completed in coordination with CDOT’s Utility Engineer, the  TOV, and the utility companies.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Wet Utility Plans (FHU)  Assumption:   Dry utility relocation will be designed and detailed by the respective utility owner.  3H ROADWAY DESIGN AND ROADSIDE DEVELOPMENT  3Ha Roadway Design  The Consultant (FHU) will conduct the preliminary roadway design for the preferred underpass  location. Preliminary design will include horizontal and vertical layout, grading and determination  of wall locations.  Roadway design (including roundabout design) will be in accordance with AASHTO, FHWA, the  TOV and CDOT’s latest design standards and guidelines. Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Roadway (Including Roundabout) Plans (FHU)  3Hb Roadside Development  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will provide preliminary design for lighting, pedestrian/  bike paths, landscaping/ irrigation and urban design elements. The Consultant (FHU), will  coordinate with the TOV and the PLT to understand and implement their goals and objectives  regarding these elements.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Landscape and Urban Design Plans (PKM)   Preliminary Lighting Plans (Clanton & Associates)   Preliminary Trail Plans (FHU)  3Hc Roundabout Geometry Review  The Subconsultant (GHD) will review the preliminary layout of the proposed roundabouts. See the  attached scope of work from GHD for additional information. 3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   23 | Page    Deliverable(s):   Suggested Roundabout Horizontal Alignment Changes (GHD)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   24 | Page    3I TRAFFIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will conduct the preliminary signing and striping design for the preferred  underpass location in coordination with the preliminary design.  Signing and striping design will be  completed in accordance with current TOV, CDOT, and MUTCD standards.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Signing & Striping  Plans (FHU)  3J RIGHT-OF-WAY Based on preliminary design for all design specialties, the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership)  will make a preliminary determination of area of right‐of‐way acquisition; and develop preliminary  ROW plans. See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary ROW Plans  (The Lund Partnership)  3K CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN The Consultant (FHU) will analyze and develop the general construction phasing and traffic control  plan to establish a feasible sequence of construction. The Consultant (FU) will also develop  preliminary detour plans including horizontal alignment, vertical alignment and temporary wall or  shoring locations.The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with the TOV and CDOT Region 3 staff to  establish phasing and traffic control work zone design criteria based on the project area lane  closure policy, allowable construction zone design and posted speed limits, salient construction  elements, and pavement material type.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Construction Phasing Plans  (FHU)  3L PREPARATION FOR THE FIR  The Consultant (FHU) will be primarily responsible for preparation, assembly and distribution of  the FIR documents. Subconsultants will be responsible for providing the Consultant (FHU) with the  necessary preliminary drawings for review prior to the FIR.   An Opinion of Probable Costs will be developed and submitted with the FIR package.  Deliverable(s):   FIR Plan Set  (FHU)   Preliminary Opinion of Probable Cost (FHU)   Preliminary Reports (as noted in tasks listed above) (FHU and subconsultants)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   25 | Page    3M FIELD INSPECTION REVIEW  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants along with the TOV and CDOT will participate in the FIR.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an agenda with time allotments for discussion of specialists and  write meeting minutes.    Deliverable(s):   Agenda  (FHU)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of the meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within  10 working days of the meeting.  3N POST FIR REVISIONS  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will complete their respective post FIR document  revisions.   The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a comment /response matrix which documents FIR comments  and the Team’s responses to comments.   Deliverable(s):   Revised Preliminary Plans (FHU)   Revised Preliminary Reports (FHU and subconsultants)   Comment / Response Matrix (FHU)  4 FINAL DESIGN  4A FINALIZE DESIGN DECISIONS AND VARIANCES  The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with the TOV and CDOT to finalize and gain acceptance to  design decisions and variances.   Deliverable(s):   Design Variance Documentation (FHU)  4B GEOTECHNCIAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION   4Ba Structure Foundations  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will finalize structure foundation recommendations for use  in final bridge and retaining wall design. See the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for  additional information.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   26 | Page    4Bb Pavement Design  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will finalize pavement design recommendations for use in  final roadway design. See the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for additional  information.  Deliverable(s):   Final Geotechnical Subsurface Investigation Report (Yeh & Associates)   Bridge and Retaining Wall Geotechnical Plan Sheet(s) (Yeh & Associates)  4C STRUCTURE DESIGN  4Ca Bridge Design   The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the bridge design including superstructure, substructure and  foundation design. Design will be per the latest AASHTO and CDOT design criteria; and in  coordination with the TOV and CDOT Staff Bridge. The Consultant (FHU) will conduct an independent design check of the bridge, complete a Bridge  Rating in accordance with CDOT requirements; calculate bridge pay item quantities and produce a  summary of quantities to be included in the FOR plans; and provide an independent check of the  quantities. Deliverable(s):   FOR Bridge Plans (FHU)   Bridge Design Calculations (FHU)   Bridge Independent Design Check Calculations (FHU)   Bridge Rating (FHU)   Bridge Quantity & Independent Quantity Check Calculations (FHU)  4Cb Retaining Wall Design   The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the retaining wall design in accordance with the latest AASHTO  and CDOT design criteria. The Consultant (FHU) will conduct an independent design check of the retaining walls, calculate  retaining wall pay item quantities and produce a summary of quantities to be included in the FOR  plans; and provide an independent check of the quantities. Deliverable(s):   FOR Retaining Wall Plans (FHU)   Retaining Wall Design Calculations (FHU)   Retaining Wall Independent Design Check Calculations (FHU)   Retaining Wall Quantity & Independent Quantity Check Calculations (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   27 | Page    4D HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the stormwater conveyance system plans, calculate quantities  and a produce a tabulation of storm conveyance pay items. Design will be in accordance with  current TOV and CDOT standards.  The Consultant (FHU) will complete the drainage report.  Deliverable(s):   Final Drainage Report (FHU)   FOR Storm Conveyance Plans (FHU)  4E PERMANENT WATER QUALITY  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize design for permanent water quality facilities within the limits of  project impact; calculate quantities and produce a tabulation of permanent water quality pay  items.  Design will comply with state and local water quality requirements including those issued by the  Colorado Department of Health and Environment’s Water Quality Control Division as is required  by the Clean Water Act.   Deliverable(s):   FOR Water Quality Plans (FHU)  4F EROSION CONTROL & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DURING CONSTRUCITON  The Consultant (FHU) will provide final design for erosion control and storm water management  during construction; calculate quantities and a produce a tabulation of erosion control and  stormwater management pay items. Design will be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT current  standards.   It is anticipated that the erosion control plans will involve three phases, an initial, interim and a  final. Deliverable(s):   FOR Storm Water Management Plans (FHU)  4G UTILITY COORDINATION  The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will finalize the identification of existing utilities (both  wet and dry) that will be impacted by design and finalize the existing utility plans with call‐outs  indicating which existing utilities are impacted by the project. They will also update the utility  contact list to be included in the existing utility plans.  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   28 | Page    The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will assist the TOV and CDOT Region Utility Engineer as  necessary to obtain the necessary utility agreements.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   29 | Page    Deliverable(s):   Pothole Log Plan Sheet (Goodbee & Associates)   Existing Utility Plans (Goodbee & Associates)  4H UTILITY DESIGN  The Consultant (FHU) will complete final design for required water and sanitary sewer relocations.  Final design will be done in coordination with the TOV and CDOT’s Utility Engineer, the TOV, and  the affected utility companies.   The Consultant (FHU) will calculate quantities and produce a tabulation of utility pay items to be  included in the utility plan set.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Wet Utility Plans (FHU)  Assumption   Dry utility relocates are designed and detailed by the respective utility owner.  4I ROADWAY DESIGN AND ROADSIDE DEVELOPMENT  4Ia Roadway Design  The Consultant (FHU) will complete final roadway design; calculate roadway quantities and  produce a tabulation of roadway pay items to be included in the roadway plans. Roadway plans  will include typical sections, roadway plans, roadway profiles, roadway geometry, removals, and  cross‐sections. Deliverable(s):   FOR Roadway Plans (FHU)  4Ib Roadside Development  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will complete final design for lighting, pedestrian/ bike  path, landscaping/ irrigation plans and urban design elements.  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants (PKM, Clanton & Associates) will calculate quantities and  produce tabulations or summaries of the roadside development pay items to be included in the  plans.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Landscape and Urban Design Plans (PKM)   FOR Lighting Plans (Clanton & Associates)   FOR Trail Plans (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   30 | Page    4Ic Roundabout Geometry Review  The Subconsultant (GHD) will review the final layout of the proposed roundabouts. See the  attached scope of work from GHD for additional information. Deliverable(s):   Suggested Roundabout Horizontal Alignment Changes (GHD)  4J TRAFFIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize signing and striping design and plans. They will calculate signing  and striping quantities and produce traffic pay item tabulations and a summary of traffic pay items  to be included in the FOR plans.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Signing & Striping Plans (FHU)  4K RIGHT OF WAY PLANS & ACQUISITION 4Ka ROW Plans  Based on final design of all design specialties, the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will  finalize ROW plans. Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will attend a ROWPR with the TOV and  CDOT. See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.   Deliverable(s):   Final ROW Plans  (The Lund Partnership)  4Kb ROW Acquisition (CDOT)  The CDOT will complete all tasks associated with ROW acquisition.  4L CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN The Consultant (FHU) will finalize construction phasing, detour and traffic control plan; calculate  quantities and produce tabulations for detour and traffic control pay items.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Construction Phasing Plans  (FHU)  4M ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS The Consultant (FHU) will develop appropriate environmental plans and tabulate quantities for  items such as SB40 trees, prairie dog relocation, materials handling, and hazardous materials  handling. (Actual items will be determined with the CatEx, and final design.)  Deliverable(s):   Environmental Plans  (FHU)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   31 | Page    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   32 | Page    4N PROJECT SPECIFICATION With input from Subconsultants, the Consultant (FHU) will prepare a project specification package  including pertinent project special provisions and standard special provisions.   Deliverable(s):   Draft Project Specifications  (FHU)  4O OBTAIN PERMITS 4Oa 401 Permit  The 401 Permit is not anticipated with this project.   4O b 402 Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft permit application for a 402 permit for the TOV and  CDOT review and submittal.  4Oc 404 Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft 404 permit application for the TOV and CDOT review  and submittal to USACE, if wetlands are impacted by the project. If a permit is needed, it is  assumed that a Nationwide Permit will be appropriate.  4Od Wildlife Certification  A programmatic SB40 wildlife certification is anticipated with this project.   4Oe NPDES/CDPS Storm Water Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft permit application for the NPDES/CDPS storm water  permit to the TOV and CDOT for review and submittal.   Deliverable(s):   Draft Permit Applications (FHU)  4P FINAL OFFICE REVIEW PREPARATION  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants in coordination with the TOV and CDOT will prepare final  design plan package including plans, specifications and estimates for the FOR review. This package  will be submitted to the TOV, CDOT, utility companies and key agencies for review two weeks prior  to the FOR meeting.   Deliverable(s):   FOR Plans and Project Specifications (FHU)   Opinion of Probable Cost (FHU)   Final Reports (as noted in tasks listed above) (FHU and subconsultants)    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   33 | Page       3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   34 | Page    4Q FINAL OFFICE REVIEW  The Consultant (FHU), Subconsultants, the TOV and CDOT will participate in the FOR. The  Consultant (FHU) will prepare the meeting agenda and meeting minutes.  Deliverable(s):   Agenda  (FHU)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of the meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within  10 working days of the meeting.  4R POST‐FOR REVISIONS  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will be responsible for their respective post‐FOR  document revisions.   The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a comment /response matrix which documents FOR comments  and the Team’s responses to comments.   Deliverable(s):   Revised Plans & Specifications & Reports (FHU and subconsultants)   Comment / Response Matrix (FHU)  4S CONSTRUCTION PLAN PACKAGE  Electronic and hard copies of the roadway and structural design information will be provided to  the TOV and CDOT by the Consultant (FHU). A final engineering package will be prepared by the  Consultant (FHU) and subconsultants. A bridge construction field packet will be included. Three  record plans sets will be prepared by the Consultant (FHU) and subconsultants. One record plan  set will be retained by the Consultant (FHU) for 3 years and the others submitted to the TOV and  CDOT.  Deliverable(s):   Final Plans & Specifications (FHU)   Record Sets of Plans & Specifications (FHU)   Structures Field Packet (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   35 | Page    4T ACCESSES & CDOT FORM 137 – STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION  The Consultant (FHU) will design all accesses that connect into the state right of way in accordance  with the State of Colorado, State Highway Access Code. If the access is a public street or an access  with a curb return entrance the design will also be in accordance with Chapter 9 of the Colorado  Department of Transportation Roadway Design Guide 2005.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an exhibit for each access. An exhibit may consist of more than  one sheet if needed to clearly display all of the information. The exhibit will include:  - plan, profile and cross‐section of the proposed access to be constructed or modified,  - highway and street right‐of‐way lines,   - property lines,   - all proposed and existing easements,   - all removal items in proximity of the access,  - existing accesses that will be closed,  - details of any structure to be constructed as part of the new or modified access,  - entering and exiting turning templates for the design vehicle,  - if the access is a public right of way, the name of the road or street and the name of the  jurisdiction,  - if the access is to a single parcel, the property address and the parcel number, and   - if the access is a private access that serves more than one property the addresses and  parcel numbers of all properties served by the access.  The Consultant (FHU) and/or the Project Manager (CDOT) will contact the owners of the accesses,  or the owners’ representatives, during the design process to advise them of the anticipated  changes to their access, to listen to the owners’ concerns and desires regarding the access and to  ascertain if an owner will be cooperative or contentious. To the extent practical the desires of the  owners will be incorporated into design of the accesses, subject to review and approval by the  CDOT Region 3 Traffic Division.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   36 | Page    The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an informational summary for each access in a spreadsheet that  can be copied into Form 138. The informational summary will contain the following:  Access A Access B Highway: (if frontage road; e.g., I-70, N Frontage Road) MP: Side of Highway: (left or right in ascending MP direction) If there is an Access Control Plan, access no.: Road or street name, if public access: Jurisdiction, if public access: Parcel address, if private access: Assessor’s parcel number: Owner name: Contact information of owner or owner’s representative: (name, mailing address, phone number) If a shared private access, include the address, parcel number, owner name and contact information for each parcel served by the access. Comments:   The Consultant (FHU) will submit the access exhibits and the access informational summary to the  CDOT Region 3 Permits Manager at least 90 days prior to the advertisement date for accesses with  cooperative owners and at least 120 days prior to the advertisement date for accesses with  contentious owners.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   37 | Page    As requested, the Consultant (FHU) will provide additional necessary information to the TOV and  CDOT to issue Form 137.  Deliverable(s):   Access Exhibits (FHU)   Access Informational Summaries (FHU)   Additional Pertinent Information for CDOT Form 137 (as requested)  (FHU)   SECTION 8 SERVICES AFTER DESIGN  All work associated with Services after PS&E, Bid Documents and Advertisement are not included  in this task order. These services will be covered in a future task order.  3/4/2014 PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) 2013 MASTER PRICING AGREEMENT eff. 07/01/2013 PROJECT NAME:(303) 721-1440 LOCATION:Vail, CO FIRM NAME: NAME OF PREPARER: SCOPE OF WORK DATE TYPE OF PROPOSAL : 1A LABOR RATES EmployeeDirect SalaryOverheadIndirectLabor Rate Employee NameClassificationCost / hourRate (%)Cost$/Hour (a)(b)(c) Meghan Adams Graphic Design II25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Matthew P Adams Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Gerald G. Albin Associate70.00$ 173.58%2.7358191.51$ Anna Marie Amoroso Marketing Specialist31.00$ 173.58%2.735884.81$ Kyle A. Anderson Principal II69.71$ 173.58%2.7358190.72$ Thomas W. Anzia Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Kate A. Baird Engineer III34.13$ 173.58%2.735893.39$ Daniel Barth Engineer I22.60$ 173.58%2.735861.82$ Anthony Baumert Env Scientist/Planner IV40.87$ 173.58%2.7358111.80$ Julienne BautistaEnv Scientist/Planner I26.44$ 173.58%2.735872.33$ George W. Beams, Jr Principal II67.31$ 173.58%2.7358184.14$ Adam T. Behmer Env Scientist/Planner II24.52$ 173.58%2.735867.08$ Ty BereskieEngineer I22.12$ 173.58%2.735860.52$ Wesley B Boggs Engineer I24.52$ 173.58%2.735867.08$ Dean P. Bradley Principal III74.52$ 173.58%2.7358203.87$ Charles M. Buck Engineer V45.19$ 173.58%2.7358123.64$ D Holly Miller Buck Principal I60.10$ 173.58%2.7358164.41$ Janet L. Campbell Graphic Design Manager34.50$ 173.58%2.735894.39$ Janis S. Christopher Engineer IV38.46$ 173.58%2.7358105.22$ Zachary CoppersmithEngineer I 14.00$ 173.58%2.735838.30$ Jeffery W. Dankenbring Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Shawn C. Dankenbring Engineer IV43.27$ 173.58%2.7358118.38$ Scott E. Dankenbring Sr Designer40.75$ 173.58%2.7358111.48$ Cady Dawson Transportation Planner III37.26$ 173.58%2.7358101.93$ Adam J. Denney Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Lyle E. DeVries Principal I60.10$ 173.58%2.7358164.41$ John Dibble Engineer I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Richard A. Dillon Sr Bridge Designer45.25$ 173.58%2.7358123.79$ Jonathan B Dixon Env Scientist/Planner II28.85$ 173.58%2.735878.92$ Katharine M. Duitsman Engineer III36.78$ 173.58%2.7358100.62$ Matthew John Eberly Engineer I27.88$ 173.58%2.735876.29$ Rick ErjavecSr Engineer56.25$ 173.58%2.7358153.89$ Christopher J. Fasching Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Robert W. Felsburg Principal III76.92$ 173.58%2.7358210.45$ Richard R. Follmer Associate52.88$ 173.58%2.7358144.68$ Stacey Roth Freitag Accounting Clerk II24.50$ 173.58%2.735867.03$ Todd S. Frisbie Engineer IV41.35$ 173.58%2.7358113.11$ Kendra M. Gabbert Engineer II31.01$ 173.58%2.735884.84$ Linda L. Gann Environmental Tech II26.25$ 173.58%2.735871.81$ Thor W. Gjelsteen Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Stephen P. Grasmick Engineer IV48.08$ 173.58%2.7358131.54$ Colleen Renee Guillotte Engineer III31.73$ 173.58%2.735886.81$ Laura A. Haas Env Scientist/Planner III31.73$ 173.58%2.735886.81$ Richard J. Haden Associate55.29$ 173.58%2.7358151.26$ Jeremy Ryan Hahn Engineer IV39.42$ 173.58%2.7358107.85$ Benjamin J. Harms Designer I20.50$ 173.58%2.735856.08$ David E. Hattan Associate62.50$ 173.58%2.7358170.99$ S. Keith Hidalgo GIS Specialist III31.01$ 173.58%2.735884.84$ Dustin Hoffner Designer II21.00$ 173.58%2.735857.45$ Catherine Ann Jopes-Garver Sr Admin Assistant31.00$ 173.58%2.735884.81$ Stacey Joy Engineer I22.60$ 173.58%2.735861.82$ Jessica JurzenskiEnv Scientist/Planner III31.25$ 173.58%2.735885.49$ Kurt R. Kellogg Associate52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Evan Kirby GIS Manager52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Kurt A. Kolleth Sr Designer46.50$ 173.58%2.7358127.21$ Alan Kreisa Engineer III37.50$ 173.58%2.7358102.59$ Terrence L Lage Env Scientist/Planner II22.12$ 173.58%2.735860.50$ I-70 Vail UnderpassPHONE NUMBER: CONTRACT #: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig TASK ORDER #: Jeanne SharpsCONTRACT TIME: 02/21/14 Cost Plus Fixed Fee 3/4/2014 Larry W. Lagsding Sr Designer35.00$ 173.58%2.735895.75$ David G. Lampe Engineer V44.23$ 173.58%2.7358121.01$ Lawrence C. Lang Engineer V45.91$ 173.58%2.7358125.61$ Todd LebovGIS Specialist I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Edward L. Lind Associate54.09$ 173.58%2.7358147.97$ Jacob E. Lloyd Env Scientist/Planner I23.56$ 173.58%2.735864.45$ Matthew Love Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Kevin R. Maddoux Env Scientist/Planner V46.15$ 173.58%2.7358126.27$ William J. Marcato Sr Engineer48.08$ 173.58%2.7358131.53$ Steven C. Marfitano Transportation Planner II31.25$ 173.58%2.735885.49$ Matthew Bryant McFadden Associate56.01$ 173.58%2.7358153.23$ Colleen G. Means Accountant36.54$ 173.58%2.735899.96$ Mark D. Meisinger Engineer III36.30$ 173.58%2.735899.30$ Vicente Miranda Designer III29.00$ 173.58%2.735879.34$ Brian L. Moffatt Sr Designer38.00$ 173.58%2.7358103.96$ Steven Robert Murray Sr Engineer51.92$ 173.58%2.7358142.05$ Jessica S. Myklebust Env Scientist/Planner V42.31$ 173.58%2.7358115.75$ Thomas G. Nead, Jr. PEAssociate53.85$ 173.58%2.7358147.31$ Megan Ornelas GIS Specialist II28.37$ 173.58%2.735877.60$ Cynthia A. Otegui Engineer IV41.59$ 173.58%2.7358113.77$ Joshua S. Palik Engineer II30.77$ 173.58%2.735884.18$ Jesse W. Poore Env Scientist/Planner III37.50$ 173.58%2.7358102.59$ Alex Keith Pulley Env Scientist/Planner V44.23$ 173.58%2.7358121.01$ Jeffrey M. Ream Sr Engineer51.20$ 173.58%2.7358140.08$ Robert G. Refvem Principal II67.31$ 173.58%2.7358184.14$ Gabrielle C. Renner Engineer II28.37$ 173.58%2.735877.60$ Carin RichardsonEnv Scientist/Planner IV40.87$ 173.58%2.7358111.81$ Sylvia Romo Marketing Manager37.02$ 173.58%2.7358101.28$ Stephanie J. Sangaline Anzia Sr Engineer51.92$ 173.58%2.7358142.05$ Michael Schott Construction Technician I16.00$ 173.58%2.735843.77$ Dustin C. Shaklee Designer V35.75$ 173.58%2.735897.80$ Jeanne M. Sharps Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Stan Y. Shibao Designer IV35.00$ 173.58%2.735895.75$ Amy Sobol Env Scientist/Planner I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.77$ Ken J. Soellner Sr Designer45.00$ 173.58%2.7358123.11$ Amy N. Stecyk Engineer IV42.07$ 173.58%2.7358115.09$ Patrick R. Stein Engineer IV45.67$ 173.58%2.7358124.95$ Michelle Kasak Stevens Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Elizabeth Stover Engineer I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Mary Kristin Strub Administrative19.50$ 173.58%2.735853.35$ Linda S. Stuchlik Sr Admin Assistant28.00$ 173.58%2.735876.60$ Elliot M. Sulsky Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Shea M. Suski Transportation Planner I26.44$ 173.58%2.735872.34$ Jennifer SuttonAdministrative17.00$ 173.58%2.735846.51$ Tim R. Tetherow Associate49.04$ 173.58%2.7358134.16$ Marie Elizabeth Thoming Engineer II30.53$ 173.58%2.735883.52$ Dale J. Tischmak Sr Environmental Scientist47.12$ 173.58%2.7358128.90$ Zachary Topoleski Graphic Design IV32.25$ 173.58%2.735888.23$ Kelly Turner Designer III29.50$ 173.58%2.735880.71$ Chad D. Twiss Engineer IV38.46$ 173.58%2.7358105.22$ Shawn M. Twiss Systems Administrator37.00$ 173.58%2.7358101.22$ Kody UnstadEnv Scientist/Planner II23.08$ 173.58%2.735863.14$ Beverly Vasquez-Frisbie Administrative25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Rachel J. Ward Environmental Tech I14.50$ 173.58%2.735839.67$ Brady D. Weingardt Designer II21.50$ 173.58%2.735858.82$ Jeni A. Wells Administrative19.75$ 173.58%2.735854.03$ Preston WierzbaEngineer I (Intern)15.00$ 173.58%2.735841.04$ Jennica MH Wilcox Engineer II28.85$ 173.58%2.735878.92$ Jenny A. Young Transportation Planner V46.15$ 173.58%2.7358126.27$ Amy Zlotsky Associate50.96$ 173.58%2.7358139.42$ 3/4/2014 1B LABOR COSTS EmployeeLabor RateEstimated Cost Employee NameClassification$/Hourper Employee ((d) from 1A) Meghan Adams Graphic Design II 68.40$ 1,094.32$ Matthew P Adams Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Gerald G. Albin Associate 191.51$ -$ Anna Marie Amoroso Marketing Specialist 84.81$ -$ Kyle A. Anderson Principal II 190.72$ -$ Thomas W. Anzia Principal II 177.56$ -$ Kate A. Baird Engineer III 93.39$ 6,274.04$ Daniel Barth Engineer I 61.82$ -$ Anthony Baumert Env Scientist/Planner IV 111.80$ -$ Julienne BautistaEnv Scientist/Planner I 72.33$ 7,493.86$ George W. Beams, Jr Principal II 184.14$ 3,572.33$ Adam T. Behmer Env Scientist/Planner II 67.08$ -$ Ty BereskieEngineer I 60.52$ -$ Wesley B Boggs Engineer I 67.08$ -$ Dean P. Bradley Principal III 203.87$ -$ Charles M. Buck Engineer V 123.64$ -$ D Holly Miller Buck Principal I 164.41$ -$ Janet L. Campbell Graphic Design Manager 94.39$ -$ Janis S. Christopher Engineer IV 105.22$ 39,505.12$ Zachary CoppersmithEngineer I 38.30$ -$ Jeffery W. Dankenbring Sr Engineer 143.37$ -$ Shawn C. Dankenbring Engineer IV 118.38$ 39,764.82$ Scott E. Dankenbring Sr Designer 111.48$ -$ Cady Dawson Transportation Planner III 101.93$ -$ Adam J. Denney Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Lyle E. DeVries Principal I 164.41$ -$ John Dibble Engineer I 68.40$ -$ Richard A. Dillon Sr Bridge Designer 123.79$ 64,952.73$ Jonathan B Dixon Env Scientist/Planner II 78.92$ -$ Katharine M. Duitsman Engineer III 100.62$ -$ Matthew John Eberly Engineer I 76.29$ 20,548.73$ Rick ErjavecSr Engineer 153.89$ 160,136.63$ Christopher J. Fasching Principal II 177.56$ 13,778.99$ Robert W. Felsburg Principal III 210.45$ -$ Richard R. Follmer Associate 144.68$ -$ Stacey Roth Freitag Accounting Clerk II 67.03$ -$ Todd S. Frisbie Engineer IV 113.11$ -$ Kendra M. Gabbert Engineer II 84.84$ 11,734.60$ Linda L. Gann Environmental Tech II 71.81$ -$ Thor W. Gjelsteen Principal II 177.56$ 17,223.74$ Stephen P. Grasmick Engineer IV 131.54$ -$ Colleen Renee Guillotte Engineer III 86.81$ -$ Laura A. Haas Env Scientist/Planner III 86.81$ -$ Richard J. Haden Associate 151.26$ -$ Jeremy Ryan Hahn Engineer IV 107.85$ 5,754.23$ Benjamin J. Harms Designer I 56.08$ -$ David E. Hattan Associate 170.99$ -$ S. Keith Hidalgo GIS Specialist III 84.84$ 5,699.66$ Dustin Hoffner Designer II 57.45$ -$ Catherine Ann Jopes-Garver Sr Admin Assistant 84.81$ 5,953.65$ Stacey Joy Engineer I 61.82$ -$ Jessica JurzenskiEnv Scientist/Planner III 85.49$ -$ Kurt R. Kellogg Associate 143.37$ -$ Evan Kirby GIS Manager 143.37$ 6,924.62$ Kurt A. Kolleth Sr Designer 127.21$ -$ Alan Kreisa Engineer III 102.59$ -$ Terrence L Lage Env Scientist/Planner II 60.50$ -$ Larry W. Lagsding Sr Designer 95.75$ -$ David G. Lampe Engineer V 121.01$ -$ Lawrence C. Lang Engineer V 125.61$ 11,169.25$ Todd LebovGIS Specialist I 68.40$ -$ Edward L. Lind Associate 147.97$ 13,272.90$ Jacob E. Lloyd Env Scientist/Planner I 64.45$ -$ Matthew Love Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Kevin R. Maddoux Env Scientist/Planner V 126.27$ 9,555.97$ William J. Marcato Sr Engineer 131.53$ -$ Steven C. Marfitano Transportation Planner II 85.49$ -$ 90 76 89 70 48 53 67 138 97 1,041 78 525 269 336 Estimated Number of Work Hours 16 67 375 104 19 3/4/2014 Matthew Bryant McFadden Associate 153.23$ -$ Colleen G. Means Accountant 99.96$ -$ Mark D. Meisinger Engineer III 99.30$ 5,886.78$ Vicente Miranda Designer III 79.34$ 51,887.18$ Brian L. Moffatt Sr Designer 103.96$ -$ Steven Robert Murray Sr Engineer 142.05$ -$ Jessica S. Myklebust Env Scientist/Planner V 115.75$ -$ Thomas G. Nead, Jr. PEAssociate 147.31$ -$ Megan Ornelas GIS Specialist II 77.60$ -$ Cynthia A. Otegui Engineer IV 113.77$ 42,715.00$ Joshua S. Palik Engineer II 84.18$ -$ Jesse W. Poore Env Scientist/Planner III 102.59$ -$ Alex Keith Pulley Env Scientist/Planner V 121.01$ 4,782.18$ Jeffrey M. Ream Sr Engineer 140.08$ -$ Robert G. Refvem Principal II 184.14$ 35,723.29$ Gabrielle C. Renner Engineer II 77.60$ -$ Carin RichardsonEnv Scientist/Planner IV 111.81$ -$ Sylvia Romo Marketing Manager 101.28$ -$ Stephanie J. Sangaline Anzia Sr Engineer 142.05$ -$ Michael Schott Construction Technician I 43.77$ -$ Dustin C. Shaklee Designer V 97.80$ 69,079.57$ Jeanne M. Sharps Sr Engineer 143.37$ 89,512.53$ Stan Y. Shibao Designer IV 95.75$ 67,630.34$ Amy Sobol Env Scientist/Planner I 65.77$ -$ Ken J. Soellner Sr Designer 123.11$ -$ Amy N. Stecyk Engineer IV 115.09$ -$ Patrick R. Stein Engineer IV 124.95$ 46,912.26$ Michelle Kasak Stevens Sr Engineer 143.37$ -$ Elizabeth Stover Engineer I 68.40$ 38,971.47$ Mary Kristin Strub Administrative 53.35$ -$ Linda S. Stuchlik Sr Admin Assistant 76.60$ 6,572.49$ Elliot M. Sulsky Principal II 177.56$ -$ Shea M. Suski Transportation Planner I 72.34$ -$ Jennifer SuttonAdministrative 46.51$ -$ Tim R. Tetherow Associate 134.16$ -$ Marie Elizabeth Thoming Engineer II 83.52$ -$ Dale J. Tischmak Sr Environmental Scientist 128.90$ 19,510.09$ Zachary Topoleski Graphic Design IV 88.23$ 7,121.89$ Kelly Turner Designer III 80.71$ 52,781.79$ Chad D. Twiss Engineer IV 105.22$ -$ Shawn M. Twiss Systems Administrator 101.22$ -$ Kody UnstadEnv Scientist/Planner II 63.14$ -$ Beverly Vasquez-Frisbie Administrative 68.40$ -$ Rachel J. Ward Environmental Tech I 39.67$ -$ Brady D. Weingardt Designer II 58.82$ -$ Jeni A. Wells Administrative 54.03$ -$ Preston WierzbaEngineer I (Intern)41.04$ -$ Jennica MH Wilcox Engineer II 78.92$ 7,358.26$ Jenny A. Young Transportation Planner V 126.27$ -$ Amy Zlotsky Associate 139.42$ -$ 1B $990,855.33 2 10%FIXED FEE$99,085.53 93 151 81 654 86 375 570 706 624 706 40 194 375 59 654 FEE (xx% X Section 1B.) (Enter fee percent in Cell E207) TOTAL LABOR COSTS 3/4/2014 3A OTHER DIRECT COST (IN-HOUSE) RateUnitQuantityCost $0.24SF2000$480.00 $0.71SFTBDTBD $0.55SFTBDTBD $0.39SFTBDTBD $0.08Each10,000$800.00 $0.19Each5000$950.00 $1.22SF360$439.20 $1.69SFTBDTBD $0.510Mile12,000$6,120.00 (1) 3B OTHER DIRECT COST (OUTSIDE) RateUnitQuantityCost (2)EachTBD$200.00 (2)EachTBDTBD (2)EachTBD$1,000.00 (2)EachTBDTBD At Cost (3)EachTBDTBD At Cost (4)EachTBD$3,000.00 At Cost (4)EachTBD$1,300.00 (4)EachTBDTBD At Cost (5)EachTBDTBD At Cost (6)EachTBD$600.00 At Cost (6)EachTBD$200.00 At Cost (7)EachTBD$200.00 (2)EachTBDTBD At Cost (8)EachTBD$1,000.00 3 TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $16,289.20 $1,106,230.06 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)At actual reasonable cost and always requires prior item-by-item approval by CDOT before any specific expenditure. At cost, but not to exceed applicable rates in current Colorado Fiscal Rules. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written approval of CDOT of the actual dollar amount of rental, unless rental is for subcompact or compact automobile with unlimited mileage. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written prior approval of CDOT. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written prior approval of CDOT. CDOT will neither approve nor reimburse for any alcoholic beverages associated with any meal or other activity. Film Development Miscellaneous SUBTOTAL (SUM 1B+2+3) At actual reasonable cost. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written approval of CDOT of the actual dollar amount of ticket, unless ticket is for economy class airfare booked at least 2 weeks in advance. OTHER Traffic Counts Auto Rental Meeting Facility Rental Rental Equipment Catering Postage (Major Mailings) TRAVEL/LODGING/MEALS Parking & Tolls Air Fare Lodging Meals TRAVEL Mileage (1) At current allowable State Government rate. DELIVERIES Overnight Deliveries Local Courier COPIES & PRINTS Black & White (6) Color (6) PRESENTATION BOARDS Bond - Foam Core Mounted (6) Glossy - Foam Core Mounted (6) PLOTTING Bond (6) Glossy (6) Mylar (6) Vellum (6) 3/4/2014 4A OUTSIDE SERVICE RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS) Cost $40,270.40 $13,520.00 $47,799.00 $110,424.34 The Lund Partnership (spent by February 1 2014)-$35,298.51 $41,295.16 Pat Noyes & Associates (spent by February 1, 2014)-$9,891.48 $33,914.00 $85,779.46 4B OUTSIDE SERVICE RATES (VENDORS) Cost MIG (formerly Winston Associates)$9,960.00 4 TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES $337,772.37 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST (SUM OF 1B+2+3+4)$1,444,002.43 (Typed Name)(Signature) (Date) Lump Sum I am a representative of Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, duly authorized to contractually bind the firm. My signature below constitutes formal agreement (without further signature) to a Task Order, which is issued by the State pursuant to the terms of this Task Order Proposal, without substantive change. I also declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. Firm Method of Compensation Firm Method of Compensation Yeh & Associates CPFF Goodbee & Associates CPFF The Lund Partnership CPFF PKM CPFF GHD CPFF Clanton & Associates CPFF Pat Noyes & Associates CPFF 3/4/2014 Revised 01/21/13 1PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS 1A Project Management 80500 16 596 1B Project Schedule (completed prior to 02/01/14)0 1C Initial Project Kick-Off Meeting (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1DProject Meetings Meetings 1DaProject Management 92216 8 316 1DbProject Team 2440180404040168 388 1DcDiscipline Specific 16824168 72 1DdStructure Review 888 24 1DeCommunication Aides 824408 80 1E Identify Design Criteria (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1F Independent Design Review (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1G Review Environmental Documents (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1HObtain Right-of-Way Entry Permits 0 1ITraffic Control 0 TASK 1 PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIEMENT TOTALS 22848944645680168321476 2PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2A Communication and Consensus Building 2AaContact List 2 2 4 2AbPublic Meetings 247240404024 240 2AcProject Leadership Team Process 4080 120 2AdAgency Specific Meetings 2448 72 2AeCommunication Aids 488408 68 2BSurvey 44 8 2CGathering Data, Analysis and Mitigation Development 2CaTraffic Analysis 832 40 2CbNoise Study 81604020 228 2CcAir Quality (CDOT)0 0 2CCArchaeology (CDOT)0 2CePaleontology (CDOT)0 2Cf Geology (CDOT)0 2Cg Water Quality (CDOT)0 2ChNoxious Weeds (CDOT)0 2CiHistoric (CDOT)0 2Cj Floodplain and Drainage Assessment 48214 2CkRight-of-Way 0 2Cl4(f)/6(f) Activity (CDOT)0 2CmThreatened and Endangered Species (CDOT)0 2CnWetlands 2048 68 2CoHazardous Materials (CDOT)0 2Cp Existing Roadway and Major Structures 0 2Cq Construction Requirements 4444 16 2Cr Aesthetic Considerations 22 4 2CsExisting Utility Mapping 44 8 2CtConceptual UP Location Invest. (completed prior to 02/01/14)0000000 0 2CuLand Use and Environmental Justice (CDOT)0 2CvCumulative Effects (CDOT)22 4 2DNEPA Clearance 82020856 TASK 2 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT TOTALS 1188406941804040856950 3PRELIMARY DESIGN 3A Getoechnical Subsurface Investigation 3AaStructure Foundations 88 16 3AbPavement Design 88 16 3BStructural Design 0 3BaPreliminary Bridge Design 16815585708 315 3BBPreliminary Retaining Wall Design 8674575608 263 3CHydrology/Hydraulics Engineering 3CaRoadway Drainage 460808152 3CbStructure Drainage 8210 3DPermanent Water Quality 42450 78 3EErosion Control & SWMP 44040 84 3FUtility Coordination 88 16 3GUtility Design 810060 168 3HRoadway Design & Roadside Development 3HaRoadway Design 12080 240804 524 3HbRoadside Development 8 60 68 3HcRoundabout Geometry Review 844 16 3ITraffic Engineering 2040 60 3JRight-of-Way 888 24 3KConstruction Phasing Plan 806080 220 3LPreparation for the FIR 21616241882 86 3MField Inspection Review 816168 48 3NPost FIR Revisions 416201616164 92 TASK 3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN TOTALS 24342166402286144640362256 4 FINAL DESIGN 4A Finalize Design Decisions and Variances 228 12 4BGeotechnical Subsurface Investigation 4BaStructrure Foundations 44 8 4BbPavement Design 44 8 4CStructure Design 4CaBridge Design 4 36840116396 924 4CbRetaining Wall Design 4 7022840072 774 4DHydrology/Hydraulic Engineering 4100808 192 4EPermanent Water Quality 44040 84 4FErosion Control & SWMP 48080 164 4GUtility Coordination 88 16 4HUtility Design 810080 188 4IRoadway Design and Roadside Development 4IaRoadway Design 14012060440 760 4IbRoadside Design 8 4080 128 4IcRoundabout Geometry Review 444 12 4JTraffic Engineering 248020 124 4KRight-of-Way 4KaROW Plans 16 16 4KbROW Acquisition 4 4 4LConstruction Phasing Plan 84060180 288 4MEnvironmental Plans 2480 86 4NProject Specifications 450448 70 4OObtain Permits 4Oa401 Permit 0 4Ob402 Permit 0 4Oc404 Permit (CDOT) 0 4OdWildlife Certification 241212 30 4OeNPDES/CDPS Storm Water Permit (CDOT) 0 4PFinal Office Review Preparation 2888888 50 4QFinal Office Review 816888 48 4RPost-FOR Revisions 416161616164 88 4SConstruction Plan Package 2416161616164 90 4TAccesses & CDOT Form 137 280 82 TASK 4 FINAL DESIGN TOTALS 1848326117857212847880324246 PROJECT TOTALS 38813818921976103620181308161568928 I-70 Vail Underpass AS S O C I A T E & G I S MA N A G E R CONSULTANT HOURS PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION CO N S U L T A N T HO U R T O T A L PR I N C I P A L EN V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R OR E N G I N E E R I I I , I V O R V EN V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R O R EN G I N E E R I & I I DE S I G N E R I I I DE S I G N E R I O R I I A D M I N I S T R A T I V E SE N I O R D E S I G N E R O R DE S I G N E R I V O R V SE N I O R E N V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R O R EN G I N E E R Hours FHU Hour Estimate 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 1 GHD Inc. 5325 Wall Street Suite 2305 Madison WI 53718 USA T 1 608 249 4545 F 1 608 249 4402 E madison@ghd.com W www.ghd.com November 7, 2013 Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 Attention: Jeanne Sharps, P.E. Senior Project Manager Dear Jeanne: Re: Roundabout Design Support Services I-70 Simba Run Underpass Vail, CO Our Proposal No. 13229 Thank you for your invitation to submit a proposal to provide design support for the proposed roundabouts and approaches at the proposed I-70 Simba Run underpass. The intersections include multi-lane roundabouts at each of the Simba Run intersections with the Frontage Roads. We understand that Felsburg Hold & Ullevig (FHU) will be completing the roadway geometry with GHD providing design assistance for the roundabout intersections. Detailed Tasks A work program that has proven successful with our involvement in a project like this is outlined below: Operational Analysis  Review of peak hour traffic volumes  Confirm operational analyses  Confirm traffic lane configurations Horizontal Geometry GHD will review the design for the following elements:  Curb locations, crosswalks, splitter islands, sidewalk or multi-use path, bike ramps, truck apron etc.  Fast paths with speed calculations for R1 through R5  Critical design parameters  Design vehicle movement checks  Preliminary stopping sight distance for: approach, circulatory roadway, crosswalk and exit, and intersection sight distance. Project Deliverables Deliverables for the roundabouts and approaches will include:  Horizontal geometry suggestions in CAD format  Telephone and web meetings as necessary 3/4/2014 2 Professional Fees Based on the proposed scope of work outlined above, we are prepared to proceed with this assignment on an hourly basis up to a maximum amount of $13,520.00. We will invoice monthly based on hourly billings. If this meets your approval please sign and return the attached consultant agreement. We look forward to working with you on this project. Yours truly, GHD Inc. (The Home of Ourston Roundabout Engineering) Troy Pankratz, P.E. Project Director TP/kk 3/4/2014 3 3/4/2014 GoodbeeandAssociates,Inc. SimbaRunUnderpassScope/FeeEstimate 1/23/14 Task Subtask DescriptionofActivities/Assumptions LeadProject Engineer StaffEngr Administrative Assistant TotalHrs TotalCost 2014ratesusedforestimating $140/hr $111/hr $96/hr ProgressmeetingswithTownofVail,CDOTandFHU(assume5meetingsinDenver)15 15 $2,100 Monthlyinvoicesandprogressreport(assume12months)12 12 24 $2,832 RunUNCCsearchtoidentifyutilityowners.ObtainkeymapsandutilityplansforEverVailandTimberRidgedevelopmentsfrom TOV.Identifydatagapsandrequestmappingasneeded.ObtainutilitycontactinformationfromTOV.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithTOV,CDOT,FHUandYehregardinglocatesneargeotechborings.CoordinatewithLundtohavelocatessurveyed andincorporatedintoexistingutilitysurveyfile.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithCDOT,TOVandFHUregardingpre-FIRpotholing.Preparepotholingplan.Hirepotholingcontractortopothole8-10 locationsover2-3days.Markpreliminarypotholelocations.FieldoversightbyTOV.CoordinatewithLundtohavepotholes surveyed.CompilepotholedataintopotholelogforFIRplans. 24 4 28 $3,804 Coordinatewithdryutililtyownersregardingpotentialconflicts,relocationstrategies,andiftheywanttoupsize,etc.aspartofthe relocation.4 4 $560 PrepareexistingutilityCADfilebasedonutilitysurveyfile.PrepareutilityplansforFIRsubmittalshowingexistingutilities,potential utilityconflicts,relocationstrategiesandpotholes(assume6sheets-planviewonly).Prepareutilitycontactlist.Reviewdraftplans (i.e.,roadwayanddrainage)tomakesureutilitiesareshowncorrectlyandareconsistentwithutilityplans. 16 32 48 $5,792 Distributeutilityplanstoutilityowners.AttendFIRmeeting.Coordinatewithutilityownersregardingcommentsonplans.Assume FIRmeetingisinVail.8 8 $1,120 Re-evaluateutilityconflictsbasedonFIRdesigncomments.CoordinatewithFHUdesignteamtomitigateutilityimpactswhere possible.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithCDOT,TOVandFHUregardingpre-FORpotholing.Preparepotholingplan.Hirepotholingcontractortopothole5-7 locationsover1-2days.Markpreliminarypotholelocations.FieldoversightduringpotholingbyTOV.CoordinatewithLundtohave potholessurveyed.UpdatepotholelogwithnewpotholedataforFORplans, 24 4 28 $3,804 Meetoneononewithutilityownerstodiscussutilityconflictsandrelocations.Preparemeetingminutes.(Assume5utilityowners=5 meetingsover11/2days),20 20 $2,800 Updateexistingutilityfileperpotholedata.PrepareproposedutilityCADfilebasedoncoordinationwithutilityownersanddesign team.PrepareutilityplansforFORsubmittalshowingexistingutilities,proposedrelocated/newutilities,potholesandpotholedata. WetutilitydesignplansandproposedwetutilityCADlayerbyothers.Assume6plansheets. 12 32 44 $5,232 Preparedraftutilityspec.TextforwetutilityworkandlightingbyotherstobeinsertedbyGoodbee.8 8 $1,120 Preparedraftquantitiesandcostestimatefordryutilityrelocationworktobedoneatprojectcost.Wetutilityquantitiesandcost estimatebyothers.Quantitiesandcostestimateforlightingbyothers.8 8 $1,120 Distributeutilityplanstoutilityowners.AttendFORmeeting.Coordinatewithutilityownersregardingcommentsonplans.Assume FORmeetingisinVail.8 8 $1,120 FinalRevisions CoordinatewithTOV,CDOTandFHUdesignteamre:revisionsrequiredbydesignmtg.Revisionsshowninfinalplansubmittal.4 4 8 $1,004 Utility Coordination Preparedraftutilityclearancelettersbasedonutilityspecforreview.Obtainutilityownersignaturesonclearanceletters.Compile utilityclearancepackageforTOVtosubmittoCDOT.AssumeCDOT/TOVwillcoordinatewithutilityownersregardingwhowillpay forrelocatingutilities. 16 4 20 $2,684 ConstructionPlan Package Preparefinalutilityplansandutilityspec.12 12 24 $3,012 TOTALLABOR 209 92 12 313 $40,624 Item Units #ofUnits UnitPrice Subtotal miles 1300 $0.565 $735 day 1 $40 $40 Lodging night 1 $150 $150 days 3 $1,500 $4,500 days 3 $500 $1,500 LS $0 $0 Reproduction LS --$250 $250 TOTALODCs $7,175 TOTAL $40,624 +$7,175 =$47,799 Mileage(assume3progressmeetingsinDenver,5meetingsinVail(pre-FIRandpre-FORpotholecoordinationmeetings,one-on-onemeetings,FIR,FOR) TrafficControl Permitting(assumefeeswaivedbyTownandCDOT) Utility Coordination FIR Potholing(assume3days) PerDiem FORRevisions andFinal PS&EPackage Project Initiationand ContReqts Project Management Preliminary Design Utility Coordination FOR FinalDesign C:\usr\G&A\SimbaRun\GASimbaRunscope-fee012314 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 January 28, 2014 Rick Erjavec Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way Suite. 600 Centennial, CO 8011 RE: Simba Run Underpass Visualization The Boulder MIG office (formerly Winston Associates) has provided on-call 3D visualization services to the Town of Vail for over ten years and we are enthusiastic about continuing our relationship with both Vail and FHU. The following is intended to attach to a more formal FHU vendor or sub- consultant agreement and serve as only a scope and fee estimate. Overview The goal of this project is to provide the Town of Vail with a tool that will help improve the understanding of the preferred alternative design and visual impacts. We will create an interactive 3D visualization that will enable its users to navigate through the model and study the design from the surrounding context. To accomplish this goal, the following proposal details the method that MIG will use to build a virtual 3D model of the project area and proposed underpass. The model will become a part of a custom software package that users can “unzip” and run from their computers. THE SOFTWARE (Vizhen) The use of 3D graphics is not new; software tools have been able to create stills and animations for many years. What is new and key to this process is real-time rendering - which will allow for free movement around the scene. It does not allow only the “good side” of a project to be shown, but rather from every angle and perspective. Our approach uses a combination of commercial software (ArcGIS, AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, SketchUp) along with MIG’s custom software to achieve the real-time visualization. 3/4/2014 ASSUMPTIONS We will utilize the existing conditions terrain model that was created for Vail as our starting point for this project to save both money and time. Additional detail or newer aerial photography can be incorporated if necessary. This project is still in the schematic design phase and will require Vail/FHU to make decisions about design that will perhaps outpace the regular design process, for the 3D model. For example, decisions on materials for the underpass or support structure that usually would not be finalized until late in the process may need to be made earlier for this effort. The style, detail, and final deliverables will be very similar to those of the Vail Fire Station pictured below. Task 0 – Ongoing Coordination and Communication $ 805 As needed coordination via email, net-meeting, and phone conversation to keep the project on the right track. Task 1 - Project Initiation $230 Collect, organize, and integrate data for both existing conditions and proposed underpass design.  Data to be provided by Vail or FHU: o Supplementary existing conditions information  Aerial Photo  Existing survey  Contours or Elevation GRID  Relevant survey information and property boundary o Proposed underpass design  Site plan / Landscape design  Grading  Bridge/Structure design 3/4/2014 Task 2 – Existing Conditions $ 920 Modify the existing conditions as necessary and align proposed improvements with the existing 3D model data set. Task 3 – Proposed Improvements $ 5,060 Create an illustrative siteplan overlay that will convey locations for road realignment, access, and landscape improvements. Model the proposed roundabouts, bridge/support structure, necessary retaining walls, and splice proposed grading into the existing conditions terrain model. Task 4 – Review and Revise $ 2,070 Prepare draft materials (images, video, or interactive software) as necessary for FHU and Town of Vail staff for review and commenting. Respond to redlines and comments and prepare the final deliverables. Task 5 – Town Council Meeting $ 875 Attend one public hearing to help run the 3D model. Deliverables  Interactive 3D Vizhen model of the project.  Stills can easily be generated via the Vizhen software but we will be happy to provide a few dozen if necessary.  Attendance at one public meeting. BUDGET Labor $ 9,660 Reimbursables $ 300 TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $9,960 3/4/2014 November 11, 2013 Rick Erjavec, PE Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 Dear Rick, Pat Noyes & Associates is pleased to be part of the FHU team for the Simba Run Underpass Project in Vail. I look forward to working with the Town of Vail, CDOT Region 3, and FHU to deliver a project that is endorsed by all the stakeholders and is consistent with unique context of the Vail Valley and the I-70 Mountain Corridor. The following outlines my commitment to support the project during project development and design through the planning and facilitation of the Project Leadership Team and public outreach. My involvement and activities below reflect the proposed scope of work currently being developed by FHU for the Town of Vail (TOV). Public Meetings Pat Noyes & Associate will support FHU in the planning and conduct of two public meetings for the project. The first meeting is expected early in the project to present to the community the project background and objectives, the process for developing and evaluating alternatives, and underpass alternatives, and to gather public input. The second meeting will present the preferred alternative and update the public on project progress. Pat Noyes & Associates will support FHU in creating and providing meeting materials for these meetings. Estimated hours: 60 Project Leadership Team Process Pat Noyes & Associates will assist the TOV with implementation and carrying out the Project Leadership Team (PLT) Process for the project. Pat Noyes & Associates will work with TOV and FHU to ensure that the PLT is consistent with the CSS on the I-70 Mountain Corridor Guidance and that project development and design reflects the context and community values of the Vail Valley (12 meetings are anticipated.) Estimated hours: 100 3/4/2014 Page 2 Agency Specific Agency specific meetings will be held to discuss project progress and gain input from coordinating agencies. It is anticipated that Pat Noyes & Associates will attend a number of these meetings in support of the project team and CSS process. Estimated hours: 20 Communication Aids Pat Noyes & Associate will support FHU in the development of communication aids for the meetings and support TOV in providing information on its website and other local media. Estimated hours: 40 Thank you for the opportunity to be part of this project. I look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Pat Noyes Principal 3/4/2014 PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) (Firms with No Established Indirect Cost %) Project Name : Simba Run Underpass Location : Vail, CO Firm name Pat Noyes & Associates Name of Preparer Pat Noyes Phone no. 303-440-8171 Scope of Work Date 11/2013-11/2015 Type of Proposal : COST PLUS FIXED FEE Contract # TBD Task Order # TBD 1A. LABOR RATES (a) (b) (c) (d) EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE BILLING RATE ADJUSTED MULTIPLIER LABOR RATE NAME CLASSIFICATION COST/HOUR RATE $/HOUR (b =d) Pat Noyes Principal $180.00 $163.64 1.0 $163.64 (b) Adjusted Rate $.00 / hr divided by Fee (.10) Adjusted Rate = Labor Rate (b) = (d) 1B. LABOR COSTS: EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE LABOR RATE ESTIMATED NUMBER ESTIMATED COST NAME CLASSIFICATION $ / HOUR OF WORK HOURS PER EMPLOYEE Pat Noyes Principal $163.64 220 36,000.80 TOTAL LABOR $36,000.80 2. FEE (10% X Section 1 B.) FIXED FEE $3,600.08 3A. OTHER DIRECT COST RATES (IN-HOUSE):* ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED UNITS RATES COST Per diem . . . . . $_____ $___________ Mileage . . . . . 3000 $.565 $_1,695.00___ Other . . . . . . . $_____ $___________ SUBTOTAL $_1,695.00___ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 3B. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (OUTSIDE) :* ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED UNITS RATES COST Per diem . . . . . $_____ $___________ Mileage . . . . . $_____ $___________ Other . . . . . . . $_____ $___________ SUBTOTAL $____(*)_____ SUBTOTAL (SUM OF 1B+2+3A+3B) $1,695.00 *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 3/4/2014 4A. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS): FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST $0 Please have each sub-consultant fill out this form listing their employee's name, classifications, indirect rate, fee, multiplier, other direct cost (ODC), etc... 4B. OUTSIDE SERVICES (VENDORS):* FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST $0 List all vendors to be used and attach their standard price list(s). *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $41,295.16 I declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. ____Pat Noyes_____________________________ _________________ (TYPED NAME AND TITLE) (SIGNATURE) 11/11/2013 (DATE SIGNED) 3/4/2014 PKM Scope of Work Simba Run Aesthetics and Landscape October 30, 2013 1. Data Collection and Background Research PKM will research other Town of Vail design guidelines and review other past reports related to aesthetics of this area. In addition, PKM will inventory existing roundabouts in the town to complement the existing theme in proposed designs. A meeting will be held with TOV staff to confirm the direction of visual character desired for this project and to discuss parameters for design. 2. Concept Design PKM will develop three conceptual alternatives for retaining walls and underpass architectural enhancements for review with TOV staff and stakeholders. Cost estimate comparisons will also be provided in conjunction with FHU staff. In addition, general landscape designs consistent with TOV theme for the roundabouts will be included. 3. Presentation Meetings a. PKM will present alternatives to Town Council for their review and to gain direction on the preferred alternative. b. A final alternative will be refined from stakeholder input and presented to Town Council/Design Review Committee for approval. 4. Preliminary Design PKM will prepare preliminary design documents for the retaining walls, underpass faces and interior walls, roundabout hardscape and landscape. Information on water taps for irrigation will be documented and mainline locations identified. A preliminary cost estimate and specifications will be prepared. 5. FIR Meeting PKM will attend the FIR meeting and gather reviewer comments. 6. Final Design PKM will incorporate FIR comments and prepare final landscape, irrigation and structure aesthetic details for the underpass and retaining walls. Plans, details, technical specifications and cost estimates will be prepared. 7. FOR Meeting PKM will attend the FOR meeting and gather reviewer comments. 8. Bid Documents PKM will prepare final bid documents for landscape, irrigation, structure enhancements and retaining walls. Tabulations, specifications, plans, details and cost estimate will be included. 3/4/2014 Simba Run PKM Fee for Aesthetics and Landscape Design 30-Oct-13 LABOR Task Description Resource Hourly Rate Hours Subtotal 1. Data Collection and Background Research Principal LA 130.00$ 4 520.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 8 400.00$ 2. Concept Design (3 alternatives)Principal LA 130.00$ 24 3,120.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ 3. Presentation/Stakeholder Meetings Principal LA 130.00$ 40 5,200.00$ 4. Preliminary Design Principal LA 130.00$ 20 2,600.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 12 1,197.00$ Engineering Technician 50.00$ 12 600.00$ 5. FIR Meeting Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ 6. Final Design Principal LA 130.00$ 24 3,120.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 40 3,990.00$ Engineering Technician 50.00$ 12 600.00$ 7. FOR Meeting Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ 8. Bid Documents Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 24 1,200.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 12 1,197.00$ SUBTOTAL LABOR 32,864.00$ OTHER DIRECT COSTS Unit Price Units Subtotal Mileage (mile)(7 round trips)0.555$ 1120 621.60$ Large format color copies (SF)1.25$ 72 90.00$ Foam core mounting (SF)4.70$ 72 338.40$ SUBTOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 1,050.00$ TOTAL PKM FEE 33,914.00$ 3/4/2014 Yeh and Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers & Scientists 5700 East Evans Avenue, Denver, CO 80222, (303) 781-9590, Fax (303) 781-9583 1525 Blake Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, (970) 384-1500, Fax (970) 384-1501 570 Turner Drive, Suite D, Durango, CO 81303, (970) 382-9590, Fax (970) 382-9583 November 5, 2013 Mr. Rick Erjavec, PE Senior Engineer Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO. 80111 Re: Scope of Work and Estimated Fee Geotechnical and Pavement Investigation Simba Run Underpass Project Vail, Colorado Dear Mr. Erjavec: This letter presents Yeh and Associates’ scope of work and estimated fee for performing a geotechnical and pavement investigation for the I-25 at Simba Run Underpass project. The scope of work is based on information you provided to Yeh in scoping meeting on October 24, 2013. The scope of work includes the following items. 1. Four borings will be drilled in the project area near the proposed bridge structures on I- 70. 6 borings will be drilled for the proposed retaining structures. In addition, 6 borings will be drilled to verify the existing pavement structure and subgrade. 2. The bridge borings will extend to a depth that is approximately 70 feet below the existing grade, the retaining wall borings will be drilled to a depth of approximately 50 feet and the pavement borings will be drilled to a depth of 5 feet. 3. The bridge and retaining wall borings will be drilled with truck mounted drill rig using an odex rotary system and the pavement boring s will be drilled using an auger system. 4. Permits will be obtained from CDOT and Town of Vail and utility locates will be completed. Right of entry to private residences and businesses will be provided by others. 5. It is assumed that traffic control with a lane closure will be required for all 16 proposed boring locations. 6. The boring locations and elevations will be surveyed by others. 7. Representative soil samples will be obtained from each boring at about a 5 foot interval using a California sampler and a standard split-spoon sampler. 8. Geotechnical laboratory tests consisting of classification will be performed on samples obtained from the borings. Chemical analyses (pH, soluble sulfate, soluble chloride and resistivity) will also be performed. The R-value will be determined from tests performed on two of the samples obtained from the pavement borings. 3/4/2014 Scope of Work and Estimated Fee Geotechnical and Pavement Investigation Simba Run Underpass Project Vail, Colorado 2 | Page 9. Prepare DRAFT Geotechnical and Pavement Report summarizing findings from the subsurface investigation containing all photos, findings, boring logs, field and laboratory data, and analysis results that can be used for designing the pavements, bridge foundation, retaining walls and embankments. 10. Update, revise and issue the FINAL Geotechnical and Pavement Report, incorporating the latest geotechnical and pavement findings and recommendations, as well as review comments. Submit 2 hard copies and electronic files (data files, program files, and pdf of final) of the final report. Our services will be provided on a time and expense basis as a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract. The estimated cost for our geotechnical services, including all fieldwork, laboratory testing, evaluation of the requirements for sulfate resistant concrete, and preparation of a geotechnical engineering and pavement report is estimated to be $ $85,800. A copy of the CDOT CPFF Project Cost Worksheet is attached. We can begin the field investigation within two weeks after receipt of notice to proceed and obtaining a CDOT and Town of Vail access permit. It is anticipated that the field investigation can be completed in 10 to 14 days and the geotechnical engineering analyses can be completed within 4 weeks after the field work is complete. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully submitted, Yeh and Associates, Inc. Richard D. Andrew, PG Vice President Attachment: CDOT CPFF Project Cost Worksheet 3/4/2014 Project Number:Vail Simba Run Underpass Project Location:Vail, CO Firm Name:Yeh and Associates, Inc. Name of Preparer:Rick Andrew Firm phone No:(303) 781-9590 Scope of Work Date:November 5, 2013 Type of Proposal:Cost Plus Fixed FeeContract #Task order #1 1A. LABOR RATES EMPLOYEEEMPLOYEEDIRECT SALARYINDIRECTOVERHEADLABOR RATE NAMECLASSIFICATIONCOST/HOURCOST (%)1+(b)$/HOUR (a)(b)( c )(d) Aichiouene, MustaphaField Technician23.50$ 142.65%2.426557.02$ Andrew, RichardPrincipal Scientist63.00$ 142.65%2.4265152.87$ Arndt, BenjaminProject Manager51.50$ 142.65%2.4265124.96$ Assay, KeithProject Engineer34.00$ 142.65%2.426582.50$ Hernandez, IvanLab Technician15.50$ 142.65%2.426537.61$ Johnson, RichardProject Manger45.00$ 142.65%2.4265109.19$ LaForce, RobertSr. Materials Manager50.25$ 142.65%2.4265121.93$ Walz, MikeSr. Technician30.00$ 142.65%2.426572.80$ White, SylviaStaff Scientist II26.50$ 142.65%2.426564.30$ 1B. LABOR COSTS LABOR RATEEST. NO.ESTIMATED COST EMPLOYEEEMPLOYEE$/HourOF WORKPER EMPLOYEE NAMECLASSIFICATION((d) from 1A)HOURS Aichiouene, MustaphaField Technician 57.02$ 402,280.91$ Andrew, RichardPrincipal Scientist 152.87$ 162,445.91$ Arndt, BenjaminProject Manager 124.96$ 101,249.65$ Assay, KeithProject Engineer 82.50$ 16013,200.16$ Hernandez, IvanLab Technician 37.61$ 501,880.54$ Johnson, RichardProject Manger 109.19$ 404,367.70$ LaForce, RobertSr. Materials Manager 121.93$ 161,950.91$ Walz, MikeSr. Technician 72.80$ 201,455.90$ White, SylviaStaff Scientist II 64.30$ 503,215.11$ TOTAL LABOR 32,046.79$ 2. FEE (10% x Section 1 B.)FIXED FEE3,204.68$ 3A. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (In-house)*: ITEM ESTIMATED UNITUNITSESTIMATED UNITSRATECOST 2wd Vehicle Mileage[1]0 $0.51mile- 4wd Vehicle Mileage[1]900 $0.54mile486.00 [1]At current actual state government allowed rate *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required SUBTOTAL486.00 3B. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (Outside)*: ITEM ESTIMATED UNITUNITSESTIMATED UNITSRATECOST Lodging[2]8114.00 Per Day 912.00 Per Diem Meals[3]Allowable Cost (see footnote)1071.00 Per Day 710.00 Miscellaneous[4]0- Each- Express mail/courier services0- Each- Postage for major mailings1200.00 Each200.00 Major ReproductionAt actual reasonable cost 0- Each- Parking/TollsAt actual reasonable cost 0- Each- SUBTOTAL1,822.00 *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager requiredOTHER DIRECT COST TOTAL2,308.00$ PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) Actual Cost (see footnote) Actual Cost (see footnote) At actual reasonable cost At actual reasonable cost [2] At actual cost, not to exceed the allowable conus rates by county, per State Fiscal Rules. [3] In accordance with current Colorado State Fiscal Rules applying the allowable Conus rate for meals and incidentals applicable county. (No receipt necessary) [4] At actual reasonable cost subject to approval of the CDOT Project Manager 1 of 2 3/4/2014 4A. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS)*: FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST -$ -$ -$ SUBTOTAL-$ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 4B. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (VENDORS)*: FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST Drilling 35,120.00$ Traffic Control 12,400.00$ Outside Lab 700.00$ -$ SUBTOTAL48,220.00$ OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL48,220.00$ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required TOTAL ESTIMATED COST85,779.46$ (SIGNATURE) (DATE SIGNED) Vice President November 5, 2013 I am a representative of Yeh and Associates, Inc, duly authorized to contractually bind the firm. My signature below constitutes formal agreement (without further signature) to a Task Order, which is issued by the State pursuant to the terms of this Task Order Proposal, without substantive change. I also declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. Richard D. Andrew 2 of 2 3/4/2014 Resolution No. 2, Series 2014 RESOLUTION NO. 2 Series of 2014 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGARDING THE DESIGN OF THE I-70 VAIL UNDERPASS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the “Town”), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado and the Town Charter (the “Charter”); WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have been duly elected and qualified; WHEREAS, the Town and the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement on February 5, 2013, routing #13 HA3 50661; and WHEREAS, the Town and CDOT now wish to amend the existing Intergovernmental Agreement with increased funding in order to begin the preliminary and final design of the I-70 Vail Underpass; and WHEREAS, the Town and CDOT now wish to enter into this amended Intergovernmental Agreement for the design of the I-70 Vail Underpass. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. The Council hereby approves and authorizes the Town Manager to enter into the amended Intergovernmental Agreement with CDOT, in substantially the same form as attached hereto as Exhibit A and in a form approved by the Town Attorney. Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail held this 4th day of March, 2014. _________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Town Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 To: Town Council From: Public Works Department Date: 3-4-14 Subject: Resolution 2 Series 2014: I-70 Vail Underpass Project IGA I. SUMMARY & BACKGROUND The I-70 Vail Underpass is a proposed new multimodal pedestrian and vehicular connection that is midway between Main Vail and West Vail exits, passing under I-70. This underpass has been identified in the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the CDOT I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) as a critical link between the North and South Frontage Road. The Town and CDOT have recently entered into a Letter of Commitment to jointly fund the design and construction of this project with an expected completion date of December of 2017. The conceptual design work completed to date has been jointly (50/50) funded by CDOT and the Town of Vail thru an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) approved last year. The current approved IGA provides joint funding up to a maximum of $325,000 to the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). The funding is more specifically dispersed as, $200,000 from the Town of Vail and $125,000 from CDOT for design fees, with an additional $75,000 from CDOT for in-house CDOT services. As the project comes to a close on conceptual design the funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, both the IGA with CDOT and the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. After thorough review of the additional FHU scope and fee by Town staff and CDOT, the appropriate additional scope and fee for preliminary and final design by FHU is $1.445 million (7%-8% of anticipated construction costs). This scope and fee will carry this project thru all design phases over the next two years thru the spring of 2016. This fee will also be split between the Town and CDOT thru an amended IGA. II. RECOMMENDED ACTION In order to correspond with the Town and CDOT’s current budgets and processes, CDOT and Town staff recommends that the Town amends the existing 50/50 split IGA by resolution to total of $1.2 million dollars: • $600,000 total from the Town of Vail, within the appropriated 2014 Vail Budget • $600,000 from CDOT 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 A future IGA amendment will occur by the end of this year to cover the balance of the design contract for use in years 2015 & 2016. It should be recognized that the project as a whole ($21.8 million) will ultimately be a 70/30 split, with CDOT carrying the 70%, per the RAMP funding award. This funding split will be rectified during the ROW acquisition and construction phase of the project. By maintaining the 50/50 split for design we are able to keep this project moving seamlessly by amending the existing 50/50 split IGA, and not entering into a new IGA at this time, which may cause a significant delay to the design of this project. In order to comply with the terms of the amendment to the CDOT IGA above, the Town will also then need to amend its current contract with FHU with an additional $1.445 million for the design of this project. This additional fee will be carried over the course of the next two years of design and is a fee for service based contract. By entering into the contract this year the town will have to supplement the 2014 budget by approximately $800,000. This will cover the entire cost in 2014, allowing the balances to be rolled into future years. The contract fees will also be reimbursed by CDOT per the IGA, so this additional supplemental will be offset by revenue from the CDOT reimbursements. Staff will provide the detail regarding this supplemental at the first budget supplemental. The additional $1.445 million scope and fee for design is provided in an attachment. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving Resolution 2 Series 2014 and directing the Town Manager to enter into an amended IGA with CDOT for a total reimbursement amount from CDOT of $600,000. IV. ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2 Series 2014 CDOT Amended IGA 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: I-70 Vail Underpass Design Contract Amendment PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve design contract amendment with FHU BACKGROUND: The conceptual design work completed to date for the I-70 Vail Underpass has been completed by the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). As the project comes to a close on conceptual design this funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve design contract amendment with FHU ATTACHMENTS: Memo FHU Scope & Fee 3/4/2014 To: Town Council From: Public Works Department Date: 3-4-14 Subject: I-70 Vail Underpass Project Design Contract Amendment I. SUMMARY & BACKGROUND The I-70 Vail Underpass is a proposed new multimodal pedestrian and vehicular connection that is midway between Main Vail and West Vail exits, passing under I-70. This underpass has been identified in the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the CDOT I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) as a critical link between the North and South Frontage Road. The Town and CDOT have recently entered into a Letter of Commitment to jointly fund the design and construction of this project with an expected completion date of December of 2017. The conceptual design work completed to date has been jointly (50/50) funded by CDOT and the Town of Vail thru an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) approved last year. The current approved IGA provides joint funding up to a maximum of $325,000 to the selected design consultant, Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig (FHU). The funding is more specifically dispersed as, $200,000 from the Town of Vail and $125,000 from CDOT for design fees, with an additional $75,000 from CDOT for in-house CDOT services. As the project comes to a close on conceptual design the funding is nearly exhausted. Therefore, both the IGA with CDOT and the existing Town contract with FHU will need to be amended to include preliminary and final design. After thorough review of the additional FHU scope and fee by Town staff and CDOT, the appropriate additional scope and fee for preliminary and final design by FHU is $1.445 million (7%-8% of anticipated construction costs). This scope and fee will carry this project thru all design phases over the next two years thru the spring of 2016. This fee will also be split between the Town and CDOT thru an amended IGA. II. RECOMMENDED ACTION In order to comply with the terms of the amendment to the CDOT IGA, the Town will also then need to amend its current contract with FHU with an additional $1.445 million for the design of this project. This additional fee will be carried over the course of the next two years of design and is a fee for service based contract. By entering into the contract this year the town will have to supplement the 2014 budget by approximately 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 $800,000. This will cover the entire cost in 2014, allowing the balances to be rolled into future years. The contract fees will also be reimbursed by CDOT per the IGA, so this additional supplemental will be offset by revenue from the CDOT reimbursements. Staff will provide the detail regarding this supplemental at the first budget supplemental. The additional $1.445 million scope and fee for design is provided in an attachment. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff also recommends directing the Town Manager to enter into an amended contract with FHU in the amount of $1.445 million for preliminary and final design services for the I-70 Vail Underpass in a form approved by the Town Attorney. IV. ATTACHMENTS FHU Additional Scope and Fee 3/4/2014     March 4, 2014    Mr. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer  Town of Vail  1309 Elkhorn Drive  Vail, CO 81657    Re: Proposal to Amend FHU’s Vail Interchanges PEL Study Contract   NEPA Support, Preliminary and Final Design Services for the Proposed Interstate 70 /Vail  Underpass     Dear Mr. Kassmel:  Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) is pleased to continue to assist the Town of Vail and CDOT Region 3  in the development of the proposed I‐70 Vail underpass and associated roundabout intersections  located in the Town of Vail. The purpose of this scope of work is to provide environmental NEPA  support (CATEX assumed) and provide preliminary/final design services to develop contract  documents for the advertisement and construction of the project.  Based on information that you provided, it is FHU’s understanding that CDOT will perform  environmental evaluation for all resources except noise and wetlands, and will provide the  appropriate NEPA forms.  Attached please find our proposal, which includes a scope of work and milestone schedule. Also  included is a summary of proposed fees, for FHU and our subconsultants, in a project worksheet  format supported by our estimated labor hours, and other direct costs.   If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please feel free to call.      Sincerely,    FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG    Chris Fasching, PE     Rick Erjavec, PE  3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   2 | Page    Principal      Sr. Transportation Engineer  Attachments 3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   3 | Page    PROJECT BACKGROUND  The Town of Vail (TOV) recently underwent a period of unprecedented development and  redevelopment which is anticipated to continue to some extent into the future. The development  trend prompted the reevaluation and update of the Town’s Transportation Masterplan. The Vail  Transportation Master Plan (VTMP) focused on Vail’s existing transportation system and how  anticipated future growth will impact Vail’s transportation infrastructure. The plan’s traffic model  anticipates Vail will see approximately 2400 new vehicular PM peak hour trips once all anticipated  redevelopment and build out occurs.   The impact of the projected new growth will strain the Town’s existing transportation  infrastructure specifically the Main Vail (176) and West Vail (173) interchanges. Both of these  roundabout interchanges are vital to the TOV’s connectivity, as they are the only means of  crossing Interstate 70 within a 3 mile stretch along the commercial and resort core areas of Vail,  and they are the only points of access to Interstate 70. Straining these locations to operational  failure paralyzes  TOV’s transportation network. This failure currently occurs during peak visitor  times as well as when the Town is overwhelmed with additional traffic from Vail Pass closures,  causing all traffic, transit, emergency services and general town services, to go to gridlock within  this 3 mile stretch. Future growth of the TOV will require additional relief to these two key  locations.  Analysis of the existing interchanges and the  TOV’s roadway infrastructure connectivity has been  on‐going since the original Transportation Master Plan was developed in 1991, and since that time  numerous improvements have been made to these locations; most notably, the construction of  the roundabouts. Design alternatives discussed since then have been included in some of the  Town’s relevant transportation documents.  Each document suggests improvements to increase and/or relieve capacity at both the Main Vail  and West Vail roundabouts, with the most notable improvement suggested being the addition of  the “Simba Run Underpass”. The proposed underpass is a grade separated crossing of the  interstate located approximately halfway between the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges near  the namesake Simba Run Condominiums. The underpass is currently the third listed improvement  project on the Intermountain Statewide Transportation Improvement Project’s list. This project  would add connectivity between the north and south side of the interstate and relieve the  interchanges at Main and West Vail of repetitive thru traffic by providing a direct connection  between the core resort village areas and the West Vail commercial area.  This project began as a Planning and Environmental Linkage study in the summer of 2013 with a  vision of moving into design and construction once funding was obtained. In early 2013 the TOV  3/4/2014  TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH  4, 2014  BACKGROUND – INTERSTATE 70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   4 | Page    submitted a CDOT RAMP application for construction funding for the I‐70 / Vail Underpass; they  were successful in securing RAMP funds to move the project forward. In a joint effort, the TOV and  CDOT selected the consultant team of Felsburg Hold and Ullevig (FHU) and its subconsultants for  the project.  The attached Scope of Work is for services to be provided by the Consultant associated with  Project Initiation and Continuing Requirements, Project Development, Preliminary Design and  Final Design for the new underpass of I‐70 in the Town of Vail in Eagle County, Colorado.   This Scope of Work is an amendment and revision to Section 7 of CDOT standard project scope of  services made part of the current PEL Contract and incorporated herein by reference. Where  noted, Consultant (FHU) refers to Felsburg Holt & Ullevig. All work to be completed by  subconsultants is identified herein with specific reference to the subconsultant that will perform  all or part of the work task.   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2013  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   5 | Page    SECTION 7 – PRECONSTRUCTION WORK  The proposed project includes an I‐70 underpass and associated roundabout intersections with  frontage roads, near the Simba Run Condominium complex in the Town of Vail, CO. The project  goal is to provide an additional crossing of I‐70 roughly halfway between the West Vail and Vail  interchanges to relieve traffic congestion at the existing interchanges. The proposed underpass  does not include ramps connecting to mainline I‐70.  Through initial work, the Consultant (FHU) will establish a concept plan for the I‐70 / Vail grade  separated underpass compatible with previous planning efforts. This will be used as a starting  point for preliminary and final design for the underpass.  The following Key Tasks have been identified for this project:   Provide NEPA support to TOV and CDOT for selected resources (wetlands and noise). The level  of environmental clearance is expected at this stage to be a Categorical Exclusion (CATEX)  based on minimal anticipated impacts to affected resources. This will be confirmed as project  details and impacts are established.   Initiate project data collection including: a topographic survey; obtaining existing utility  mapping and utility locates; geotechnical subsurface investigation; traffic data review; and  review of conceptual design from past studies.    Review and incorporate recommended safety improvements along the I‐70 corridor based on  appropriate safety assessment reports provided by CDOT.    Identify environmental mitigation, utility relocates, and right‐of‐way acquisition project  requirements.    Complete preliminary and final design of the underpass including the development of Field  Inspection Review (FIR) and Final Office Review (FOR) plans for review by the TOV and CDOT.   Assist the TOV and CDOT in establishing a public information approach that can be sustained  through the design and the construction phase.   Assist the TOV and CDOT with the Project Leadership Team process for this project.  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   6 | Page    1 PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS 1A PROJECT MANAGEMENT  The Consultant (FHU) Project Manager will be responsible for contract, task order and invoicing  paperwork for the project, as well as other project design related tasks. The Consultant (FHU)  Project Manager will provide day‐to‐day design and agency coordination related to project tasks  undertaken by the Consultant team.  Deliverable(s):   Invoices (FHU)   Monthly Progress Reports (FHU)  1B PROJECT SCHEDULE (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a detailed schedule that identifies project milestones as well as  work tasks as listed below. The schedule will be updated on a monthly basis and submitted with  the monthly progress report.  Based on an initial assessment by the Consultant (FHU), the project can be completed in  approximately 24 months.  1C INITIAL PROJECT KICK‐OFF MEETING (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will attend a project initiation meeting with the TOV and  CDOT to discuss preliminary and final design project scope, deliverables, schedule, as well as level  of coordination within the Team and with outside entities.  In preparation for the meeting, the  Consultant (FHU) will prepare the meeting agenda, handouts and exhibits; they will also prepare  meeting minutes and submit them for review within 5 working days of the meeting.   1D PROJECT MEETINGS  1Da Project Management Coordination   Regularly scheduled Project Management Coordination (PMC) meetings will be held with the TOV  Project Manager, CDOT’s Project Manager and the Consultant (FHU’s) Project Manager. (18  monthly meetings are anticipated including 1 each from February 2014 to January 2015; and 6  post‐FOR)  1Db Project Team Coordination   Regularly scheduled overall Project Team meetings will be held with the TOV, CDOT and the  Consultant Team. (18 monthly meetings are anticipated including 1 each month from February  2014 to January 2015; and 6 post‐FOR)  1Dc Discipline Specific   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   7 | Page    Discipline‐specific meetings will be held to discuss and coordinate discipline specific project items.  (6 meetings are anticipated.)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   8 | Page    1Dd Structure Review  Structure coordination meetings will be held with the TOV and CDOT Staff Bridge to discuss  structure type selection (bridge and walls), aesthetic elements, lighting etc. (6 meetings are  anticipated.)   1De Communication Aids  The Consultant (FHU) will provide communication aids for the meetings listed above.  Deliverable(s):   Meeting Agendas (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   Meeting Communication Aids (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU, Subconsultants as appropriate)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within 10  working days of the meeting.  1E IDENTIFY DESIGN CRITERIA (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will develop design criteria based on the TOV and CDOT standards for final  design. Design Criteria will be submitted to the TOV and CDOT for review and concurrence.   Design criteria will be revised as necessary and referenced throughout the course of the project.  1F INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will review and summarize previous concepts for the crossing of I‐70.   1G REVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will review existing environmental documentation pertinent to the corridor  and note mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that need to be addressed by the  project.   The project will be implemented in a manner consistent with the I‐70 Programmatic  Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)/Record of Decision (ROD), and with collaborative and  programmatic processes established through the PEIS/ROD including the I‐70 Corridor Context  Sensitive Solution (CSS) process, A Landscape Level Inventory of Valued Ecosystem Components  (ALIVE) and Stream and Wetland Ecological Enhancement Program (SWEEP).  1H PERMITS  1Ha Permission to Enter Private Property (CDOT Form 730)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   9 | Page    Preparation of “Permission to Enter Property” forms, for the purpose of surveying on private  parcels, will be completed by The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership). (See The Lund  Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   10 | Page    1Hb Special Use Permit  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will obtain a special use permit to survey within CDOT’s  ROW. (See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)  Deliverable(s):   CDOT Form 730 (for 3 properties) (The Lund Partnership)   Special Use Permit Application (The Lund Partnership)  1I TRAFFIC CONTROL  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) traffic control vendor will be responsible for traffic  control for ground survey activities that occur within the existing roadway.    The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) traffic control vendor will be responsible for traffic control  for subsurface the geotechnical investigation within the existing roadway.  Deliverable(s):   Traffic Control Plans (The Lund Partnership and Yeh & Associates)  2 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2A COMMUNICATION AND CONSENSUS BUILDING  2Aa Project Contact List  The Consultant (FHU) will develop and maintain a project contact list of project stakeholders  including the TOV, CDOT, the Consultant Team, Coordinating Agencies, Property Owners and  Business Owners.   2Ab Public Meetings  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will conduct three more public meetings for the project.  The first meeting is expected early around the time of the Field Inspection Review meeting, the  second near the time of the Final Office Review meeting and the third prior to the beginning of  construction.   2Ac Project Leadership Team Process  The Subconsultant (Pat Noyes & Associates) will assist the TOV with implementation and carrying  out the Project Leadership Team Process for the project. See the attached Pat Noyes & Associates  scope of work for additional information. (9 meetings are anticipated.)  2Ad Agency Specific   Agency specific meetings will be held to discuss project progress and gain input from coordinating  agencies.  (6 meetings are anticipated.)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   11 | Page    2Ae Communication Aids  The Consultant (FHU) and the Subconsultant (Pat Noyes & Associates) will provide communication  aids for the meetings and processes listed above.  Deliverable(s):   Project Contact List (FHU)   Meeting Minutes (FHU)   Meeting Communication Aids (FHU, Pat Noyes & Associates)  2B SURVEY  The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will complete a base topographic survey for the project  including both aerial and ground surveys; as required they will also provide supplemental survey  to provide additional topographic features needed to complete design. (See The Lund  Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.)  Deliverable(s):   Pre‐Survey Conference Meeting Summary (The Lund Partnership)   Survey Control Diagram (The Lund Partnership)   Topographic CAD Reference File (The Lund Partnership)   Pothole and Geotechnical Bore Hole Locations (The Lund Partnership)  2C DATA GATHERING, ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION DEVELOPMENT  2Ca Traffic Analysis   The Consultant (FHU) will complete a traffic analysis that was started prior to February 1, 2014 as  follows:   Summarize traffic analysis results comparing roundabouts to T-intersections with frontage roads for the underpass. Deliverable(s):   Roundabout vs. T‐Intersection Matrix (FHU)  Exclusion(s):   Traffic Simulations   Traffic Counts (Traffic counts have previously been collected and an analysis  completed for the impacts resulting from the proposed improvements.)    Safety Assessment (A Safety Assessment Report for I‐70 mainline and the frontage  roads has been completed by CDOT.)    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   12 | Page    2Cb Noise Study  The Consultant (FHU) will perform a traffic noise analysis for the NEPA process in accordance with  CDOT’s latest guidelines. The analysis will include review of relevant prior environmental  documents and noise analyses, including the I‐70 PEIS and TOV noise studies.   The analysis will include up to 10 short‐term (15 minute) noise measurements in the study area to  evaluate existing conditions and support verification of the project noise modeling. Both ground‐ level and upper floor balcony locations will be targeted for measurement with the condition that  access from owners is granted to the Consultant.  Noise modeling will be conducted using TNM Version 2.5 and will include current conditions and  two future traffic conditions (no‐build and build) in the project study area. If noise impacts are  identified in the study area, models will be developed to evaluate potential noise abatement  measures for impacted properties. Abatement will consider both I‐70 and frontage road traffic  noise to comply with CDOT’s guidelines.  Construction noise will also be considered. FHU will review the TOV noise ordinance limits and  assess for potential construction noise issues and develop recommendations to include in the  construction documents to address construction noise abatement. Deliverable(s):   Noise Study Documentation (FHU)   Noise Technical Memo for the CATEX (FHU)   Noise Mitigation Requirements (FHU)  2Cc Air Quality (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Air Quality. 2Cd Archaeology (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Archaeology. 2Ce Paleontology (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Paleontology. 2Cf Geology (CDOT)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   13 | Page    CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Geology.    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   14 | Page    2Cg Water Quality (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Water Quality.  2Ch Noxious Weeds (CDOT)  CDOT will prepare an Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan for the project, which  documents the type, quantity, density and management of noxious weeds in the Build Alternative  alignment and impact. This will include techniques to manage weeds during and post construction.  2Ci Historic (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Historic resources. 2Cj Floodplain & Drainage Assessment  The Consultant (FHU) will review Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance  Rate Maps to assess if flood boundaries within the primary impact area have changed. Information  will also be obtained from the Master Floodplain Drainage Plan. The Consultant (FHU) will prepare  appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Floodplain & Drainage.  For the purposes of this task it  is assumed that the location analyzed is not in the flood plain.    Deliverable(s):   Summary of Flood Plain Research  (FHU)   NEPA Floodplain & Drainage Report (FHU)   Conceptual Drainage Report (FHU)  2Ck Right‐of‐Way   The Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will create an existing ROW CAD Reference File and an  ownership map from existing ROW survey from the TOV. See the attached The Lund Partnership  scope of work for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   ROW CAD Reference File  (The Lund Partnership)   ROW Ownership Map (The Lund Partnership)  2Cl 4(f)/6(f) Activity (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to 4(f)/6(f) resources.    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   15 | Page    2Cm Threatened & Endangered Species (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. An  environmental plan sheet for mitigation measures and design will be required for such items as  prairie dog mitigation and is included in this project. CDOT will prepare appropriate NEPA  documents pertaining to Threatened & Endangered Species. 2Cn Wetlands  The Consultant (FHU) will review the previously conducted delineation to determine any wetland  impacts and note any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project to be addressed. The  need for a wetland mitigation plan has not been identified for this project. This task includes the  preparation of a wetland finding report.   Deliverable(s):   Determination of Wetland Impacts  (FHU)   Wetland Finding Report (FHU)  Exclusion(s):   FacWet Functional Assessment  (Wetland impacts are not anticipated to warrant a  wetland functional assessment.)  2Co Hazardous Materials (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. As required,  CDOT will conduct a Phase II Environmental Subsurface Investigation. CDOT will prepare  appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Hazardous Materials. 2Cp Existing Roadway and Major Structures  The Consultant (FHU) will evaluate existing conditions for the roadway physical condition, roadway  geometry, and roadway drainage. The Subconsultant (Clanton & Associates) will evaluate existing  conditions for existing roadway lighting.   Deliverable(s):   Existing Condition Report  (FHU)  2Cq Construction Requirements  The Consultant (FHU) will investigate general construction impacts.   The TOV, CDOT and the Consultant (FHU) will analyze construction noise impacts and develop  Contractor requirements to mitigate noise during construction.  Deliverable(s):   Construction Noise Mitigation Requirements  (FHU)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   16 | Page       3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   17 | Page    2Cr Aesthetic Considerations  The Subconsultant (PKM) will prepare aesthetic concept plans based upon the aesthetic goals of  the TOV and CDOT. They will match the existing aesthetics within the surrounding area. Concept  plans will be submitted to the TOV and CDOT for approval.   The Consultant (FHU) and  subconsultant (PKM) will conduct two meetings with the TOV Design Review Board (DRB).  Deliverable(s):   Aesthetic Concept Plans (PKM)  2Cs Existing Utility Mapping   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will conduct a review of utility information previously  collected by the TOV and CDOT; obtain existing utility mapping from utility companies within the  project limits; conduct utility locates (with their utility location subconsultant); and conduct  potholing (with their potholing subconsultant).   Requests and receipt of utility maps from utility companies will be coordinated with the TOV and  the CDOT Region Utility Engineer via copies of request and transmittal letters.   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will coordinate the survey of utility locates and pothole  locations with the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership).   The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will reconcile gathered utility data and conduct field  reviews with the Region Utility Engineer and Utility companies, as required, to verify to the best  extent possible horizontal and vertical utility data.   It is anticipated that there will be a total of (4) meetings in the field to meet with the Region Utility  Engineer, meet with utility companies, coordinate utility locates and monitor potholing efforts. The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will compile existing utility information into an existing  utility CAD reference file.  Deliverable(s):   Existing Utility CAD Reference File (Goodbee & Associates)   Pothole Log (Goodbee & Associates)  2Ct Conceptual Underpass Location Investigation (completed prior to February 1, 2014)  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a list of potential underpass crossing locations based upon the  existing geometric constraints. At these locations, an examination of the horizontal alignment and  vertical elevations of eastbound and westbound I‐70 will be compared to the north and south  frontage roads to determine which locations are most suitable for an underpass crossing and the  roundabout intersections. The Consultant (FHU) will develop layouts for the chosen intersections,  and evaluate the crossing locations with respect to geometric design feasibility/practicality;  environmental impacts; operations and safety; and cost. This work will be completed in  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   18 | Page    coordination with the Project Leadership Team Process. The preferred alternative will be chosen in  coordination with the NEPA process.   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   19 | Page    2Cu Land Use & Environmental Justice (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Land Use and Environmental Justice. 2Cv Cumulative Effects (CDOT)  CDOT will review the appropriate environmental documents pertinent to the corridor and note  any mitigation or commitments pertaining to this project that are to be addressed. CDOT will  prepare appropriate NEPA documents pertaining to Cumulative Effects.  2D NEPA CLEARANCE   CDOT will compile NEPA Clearance Documents and gain the necessary NEPA clearance for the  project.   The Consultant (FHU) will provide the NEPA technical memos listed in Section 2C, as well as  provide CDOT periodic assistance, as needed, in compilation of the NEPA Clearance Documents;  and gaining the necessary NEPA clearance for the project.  3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN  3A GEOTECHNCIAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION   3Aa Structure Foundations  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will conduct a geotechnical subsurface investigation for the  purposes of determining structure foundation recommendations. Locations of bore holes will be  coordinated with the Consultant (FHU’s) Structural Engineer. See the attached scope of work from  Yeh & Associates for additional information.  3Ab Pavement Design  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will conduct a geotechnical subsurface investigation for the  purposes of determining pavement design recommendations. They will provide pavement  recommendations based on traffic counts, ESALS and existing pavement type and condition. See  the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Geotechnical Subsurface Investigation Report (With Preliminary  Foundation Recommendations and Pavement Design) (Yeh & Associates)   Preliminary Geotechnical Plan Sheets (Bore Hole Location Map + Boring Logs) (Yeh  & Associates)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   20 | Page    3B STRUCTURE DESIGN  3Ba Preliminary Bridge Design   The Consultant (FHU) will develop multiple bridge type and layout alternatives for I‐70 over the  new underpass. Bridge alternatives will be analyzed for cost, ease of construction, aesthetics, and  durability.  The alternatives analysis will be documented in a structure selection report. The  preferred bridges will be designed to a 30% level. Design will be per the latest AASHTO and CDOT  design criteria and standards. This work will be done in coordination with the TOV as well as CDOT  Staff Bridge. Deliverable(s):   Bridge Structure Selection Report (FHU)   Bridge General Layouts (FHU)  3Bb Preliminary Retaining Wall Design   The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with roadway design on required retaining wall locations. For  the identified retaining wall locations the Consultant (FHU) will analyze alternative wall types for  cost, ease of construction, aesthetics, and durability.  The alternatives analysis will be documented  in a structure selection report. The preferred walls will be designed to a 30% level. Design will be  per the latest AASHTO and CDOT design criteria.  Deliverable(s):   Retaining Wall Structure Selection Report (FHU)   Retaining Wall General Layouts (FHU)  3C HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING  3Ca Roadway Drainage   The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for a stormwater conveyance system within  the project limits. This will include location of storm sewer pipes, inlets and manholes. Design will  be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT standards.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a preliminary drainage report.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a Pipe Material Selection Letter for the TOV and CDOT review  and acceptance.  Deliverable(s):   Pipe Material Selection Letter (FHU)   Preliminary Drainage Report (FHU)   Preliminary Storm Conveyance Plans (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   21 | Page    3Cb Structure Drainage   The Consultant (FHU) will determine if bridge drains will be required for the proposed I‐70 bridges;  and a drainage system for the proposed retaining walls.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Bridge Drain Location & Sizing (FHU)   Preliminary Retaining Wall Drainage System (FHU)  3D PERMANENT WATER QUALITY  The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for permanent water quality facilities within  the limits of project impact. Alternative water quality facilities will be considered to minimize ROW  impacts.  For the purposes of this task it is assumed that water quality will be provided by  subsurface water quality inlets or vaults and water quality ponds will not be analyzed.    Design will comply with state and local water quality requirements including those issued by the  Colorado Department of Health and Environment’s Water Quality Control Division as is required  by the Clean Water Act.   Deliverable(s):   Water Quality Tech Memo (FHU)   Water Quality Section for above mentioned Preliminary Drainage Report (FHU)   Preliminary Water Quality Plans (FHU)  3E EROSION CONTROL & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION  The Consultant (FHU) will provide preliminary design for erosion control and storm water  management during construction. Design will be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT current  standards.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Storm Water Management Plans (FHU)  3F UTILITY COORDINATION  Based on preliminary design from all the design specialties, the Subconsultant (Goodbee &  Associates) will identify existing utilities (both wet and dry) that will be impacted by design.  The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will create a utility contact list to be included in the  existing utility plans.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   22 | Page    The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will submit necessary information for the relocation or  adjustments of affected utilities to FHU, the TOV and CDOT Region Utility Engineer.   Deliverable(s):   Existing Utility Plans (Goodbee & Associates)  3G UTILITY DESIGN  The Consultant (FHU) will complete preliminary design on required water and sanitary sewer  relocations. Preliminary design will be completed in coordination with CDOT’s Utility Engineer, the  TOV, and the utility companies.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Wet Utility Plans (FHU)  Assumption:   Dry utility relocation will be designed and detailed by the respective utility owner.  3H ROADWAY DESIGN AND ROADSIDE DEVELOPMENT  3Ha Roadway Design  The Consultant (FHU) will conduct the preliminary roadway design for the preferred underpass  location. Preliminary design will include horizontal and vertical layout, grading and determination  of wall locations.  Roadway design (including roundabout design) will be in accordance with AASHTO, FHWA, the  TOV and CDOT’s latest design standards and guidelines. Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Roadway (Including Roundabout) Plans (FHU)  3Hb Roadside Development  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will provide preliminary design for lighting, pedestrian/  bike paths, landscaping/ irrigation and urban design elements. The Consultant (FHU), will  coordinate with the TOV and the PLT to understand and implement their goals and objectives  regarding these elements.   Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Landscape and Urban Design Plans (PKM)   Preliminary Lighting Plans (Clanton & Associates)   Preliminary Trail Plans (FHU)  3Hc Roundabout Geometry Review  The Subconsultant (GHD) will review the preliminary layout of the proposed roundabouts. See the  attached scope of work from GHD for additional information. 3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   23 | Page    Deliverable(s):   Suggested Roundabout Horizontal Alignment Changes (GHD)   3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   24 | Page    3I TRAFFIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will conduct the preliminary signing and striping design for the preferred  underpass location in coordination with the preliminary design.  Signing and striping design will be  completed in accordance with current TOV, CDOT, and MUTCD standards.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Signing & Striping  Plans (FHU)  3J RIGHT-OF-WAY Based on preliminary design for all design specialties, the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership)  will make a preliminary determination of area of right‐of‐way acquisition; and develop preliminary  ROW plans. See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary ROW Plans  (The Lund Partnership)  3K CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN The Consultant (FHU) will analyze and develop the general construction phasing and traffic control  plan to establish a feasible sequence of construction. The Consultant (FU) will also develop  preliminary detour plans including horizontal alignment, vertical alignment and temporary wall or  shoring locations.The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with the TOV and CDOT Region 3 staff to  establish phasing and traffic control work zone design criteria based on the project area lane  closure policy, allowable construction zone design and posted speed limits, salient construction  elements, and pavement material type.  Deliverable(s):   Preliminary Construction Phasing Plans  (FHU)  3L PREPARATION FOR THE FIR  The Consultant (FHU) will be primarily responsible for preparation, assembly and distribution of  the FIR documents. Subconsultants will be responsible for providing the Consultant (FHU) with the  necessary preliminary drawings for review prior to the FIR.   An Opinion of Probable Costs will be developed and submitted with the FIR package.  Deliverable(s):   FIR Plan Set  (FHU)   Preliminary Opinion of Probable Cost (FHU)   Preliminary Reports (as noted in tasks listed above) (FHU and subconsultants)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   25 | Page    3M FIELD INSPECTION REVIEW  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants along with the TOV and CDOT will participate in the FIR.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an agenda with time allotments for discussion of specialists and  write meeting minutes.    Deliverable(s):   Agenda  (FHU)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of the meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within  10 working days of the meeting.  3N POST FIR REVISIONS  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will complete their respective post FIR document  revisions.   The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a comment /response matrix which documents FIR comments  and the Team’s responses to comments.   Deliverable(s):   Revised Preliminary Plans (FHU)   Revised Preliminary Reports (FHU and subconsultants)   Comment / Response Matrix (FHU)  4 FINAL DESIGN  4A FINALIZE DESIGN DECISIONS AND VARIANCES  The Consultant (FHU) will coordinate with the TOV and CDOT to finalize and gain acceptance to  design decisions and variances.   Deliverable(s):   Design Variance Documentation (FHU)  4B GEOTECHNCIAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION   4Ba Structure Foundations  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will finalize structure foundation recommendations for use  in final bridge and retaining wall design. See the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for  additional information.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   26 | Page    4Bb Pavement Design  The Subconsultant (Yeh & Associates) will finalize pavement design recommendations for use in  final roadway design. See the attached scope of work from Yeh & Associates for additional  information.  Deliverable(s):   Final Geotechnical Subsurface Investigation Report (Yeh & Associates)   Bridge and Retaining Wall Geotechnical Plan Sheet(s) (Yeh & Associates)  4C STRUCTURE DESIGN  4Ca Bridge Design   The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the bridge design including superstructure, substructure and  foundation design. Design will be per the latest AASHTO and CDOT design criteria; and in  coordination with the TOV and CDOT Staff Bridge. The Consultant (FHU) will conduct an independent design check of the bridge, complete a Bridge  Rating in accordance with CDOT requirements; calculate bridge pay item quantities and produce a  summary of quantities to be included in the FOR plans; and provide an independent check of the  quantities. Deliverable(s):   FOR Bridge Plans (FHU)   Bridge Design Calculations (FHU)   Bridge Independent Design Check Calculations (FHU)   Bridge Rating (FHU)   Bridge Quantity & Independent Quantity Check Calculations (FHU)  4Cb Retaining Wall Design   The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the retaining wall design in accordance with the latest AASHTO  and CDOT design criteria. The Consultant (FHU) will conduct an independent design check of the retaining walls, calculate  retaining wall pay item quantities and produce a summary of quantities to be included in the FOR  plans; and provide an independent check of the quantities. Deliverable(s):   FOR Retaining Wall Plans (FHU)   Retaining Wall Design Calculations (FHU)   Retaining Wall Independent Design Check Calculations (FHU)   Retaining Wall Quantity & Independent Quantity Check Calculations (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   27 | Page    4D HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize the stormwater conveyance system plans, calculate quantities  and a produce a tabulation of storm conveyance pay items. Design will be in accordance with  current TOV and CDOT standards.  The Consultant (FHU) will complete the drainage report.  Deliverable(s):   Final Drainage Report (FHU)   FOR Storm Conveyance Plans (FHU)  4E PERMANENT WATER QUALITY  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize design for permanent water quality facilities within the limits of  project impact; calculate quantities and produce a tabulation of permanent water quality pay  items.  Design will comply with state and local water quality requirements including those issued by the  Colorado Department of Health and Environment’s Water Quality Control Division as is required  by the Clean Water Act.   Deliverable(s):   FOR Water Quality Plans (FHU)  4F EROSION CONTROL & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DURING CONSTRUCITON  The Consultant (FHU) will provide final design for erosion control and storm water management  during construction; calculate quantities and a produce a tabulation of erosion control and  stormwater management pay items. Design will be in accordance with the TOV and CDOT current  standards.   It is anticipated that the erosion control plans will involve three phases, an initial, interim and a  final. Deliverable(s):   FOR Storm Water Management Plans (FHU)  4G UTILITY COORDINATION  The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will finalize the identification of existing utilities (both  wet and dry) that will be impacted by design and finalize the existing utility plans with call‐outs  indicating which existing utilities are impacted by the project. They will also update the utility  contact list to be included in the existing utility plans.  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   28 | Page    The Subconsultant (Goodbee & Associates) will assist the TOV and CDOT Region Utility Engineer as  necessary to obtain the necessary utility agreements.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   29 | Page    Deliverable(s):   Pothole Log Plan Sheet (Goodbee & Associates)   Existing Utility Plans (Goodbee & Associates)  4H UTILITY DESIGN  The Consultant (FHU) will complete final design for required water and sanitary sewer relocations.  Final design will be done in coordination with the TOV and CDOT’s Utility Engineer, the TOV, and  the affected utility companies.   The Consultant (FHU) will calculate quantities and produce a tabulation of utility pay items to be  included in the utility plan set.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Wet Utility Plans (FHU)  Assumption   Dry utility relocates are designed and detailed by the respective utility owner.  4I ROADWAY DESIGN AND ROADSIDE DEVELOPMENT  4Ia Roadway Design  The Consultant (FHU) will complete final roadway design; calculate roadway quantities and  produce a tabulation of roadway pay items to be included in the roadway plans. Roadway plans  will include typical sections, roadway plans, roadway profiles, roadway geometry, removals, and  cross‐sections. Deliverable(s):   FOR Roadway Plans (FHU)  4Ib Roadside Development  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will complete final design for lighting, pedestrian/ bike  path, landscaping/ irrigation plans and urban design elements.  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants (PKM, Clanton & Associates) will calculate quantities and  produce tabulations or summaries of the roadside development pay items to be included in the  plans.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Landscape and Urban Design Plans (PKM)   FOR Lighting Plans (Clanton & Associates)   FOR Trail Plans (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   30 | Page    4Ic Roundabout Geometry Review  The Subconsultant (GHD) will review the final layout of the proposed roundabouts. See the  attached scope of work from GHD for additional information. Deliverable(s):   Suggested Roundabout Horizontal Alignment Changes (GHD)  4J TRAFFIC ENGINEERING  The Consultant (FHU) will finalize signing and striping design and plans. They will calculate signing  and striping quantities and produce traffic pay item tabulations and a summary of traffic pay items  to be included in the FOR plans.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Signing & Striping Plans (FHU)  4K RIGHT OF WAY PLANS & ACQUISITION 4Ka ROW Plans  Based on final design of all design specialties, the Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will  finalize ROW plans. Subconsultant (The Lund Partnership) will attend a ROWPR with the TOV and  CDOT. See The Lund Partnership’s attached scope of work for additional information.   Deliverable(s):   Final ROW Plans  (The Lund Partnership)  4Kb ROW Acquisition (CDOT)  The CDOT will complete all tasks associated with ROW acquisition.  4L CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN The Consultant (FHU) will finalize construction phasing, detour and traffic control plan; calculate  quantities and produce tabulations for detour and traffic control pay items.  Deliverable(s):   FOR Construction Phasing Plans  (FHU)  4M ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS The Consultant (FHU) will develop appropriate environmental plans and tabulate quantities for  items such as SB40 trees, prairie dog relocation, materials handling, and hazardous materials  handling. (Actual items will be determined with the CatEx, and final design.)  Deliverable(s):   Environmental Plans  (FHU)  3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   31 | Page    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   32 | Page    4N PROJECT SPECIFICATION With input from Subconsultants, the Consultant (FHU) will prepare a project specification package  including pertinent project special provisions and standard special provisions.   Deliverable(s):   Draft Project Specifications  (FHU)  4O OBTAIN PERMITS 4Oa 401 Permit  The 401 Permit is not anticipated with this project.   4O b 402 Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft permit application for a 402 permit for the TOV and  CDOT review and submittal.  4Oc 404 Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft 404 permit application for the TOV and CDOT review  and submittal to USACE, if wetlands are impacted by the project. If a permit is needed, it is  assumed that a Nationwide Permit will be appropriate.  4Od Wildlife Certification  A programmatic SB40 wildlife certification is anticipated with this project.   4Oe NPDES/CDPS Storm Water Permit  The Consultant (FHU) will complete a draft permit application for the NPDES/CDPS storm water  permit to the TOV and CDOT for review and submittal.   Deliverable(s):   Draft Permit Applications (FHU)  4P FINAL OFFICE REVIEW PREPARATION  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants in coordination with the TOV and CDOT will prepare final  design plan package including plans, specifications and estimates for the FOR review. This package  will be submitted to the TOV, CDOT, utility companies and key agencies for review two weeks prior  to the FOR meeting.   Deliverable(s):   FOR Plans and Project Specifications (FHU)   Opinion of Probable Cost (FHU)   Final Reports (as noted in tasks listed above) (FHU and subconsultants)    3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   33 | Page       3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   34 | Page    4Q FINAL OFFICE REVIEW  The Consultant (FHU), Subconsultants, the TOV and CDOT will participate in the FOR. The  Consultant (FHU) will prepare the meeting agenda and meeting minutes.  Deliverable(s):   Agenda  (FHU)   *Meeting Minutes (FHU)   *First draft of the meeting minutes will be completed and submitted to the TOV and CDOT within 5  working days of the meeting; final meeting minutes will be distributed to meeting attendees within  10 working days of the meeting.  4R POST‐FOR REVISIONS  The Consultant (FHU) and Subconsultants will be responsible for their respective post‐FOR  document revisions.   The Consultant (FHU) will prepare a comment /response matrix which documents FOR comments  and the Team’s responses to comments.   Deliverable(s):   Revised Plans & Specifications & Reports (FHU and subconsultants)   Comment / Response Matrix (FHU)  4S CONSTRUCTION PLAN PACKAGE  Electronic and hard copies of the roadway and structural design information will be provided to  the TOV and CDOT by the Consultant (FHU). A final engineering package will be prepared by the  Consultant (FHU) and subconsultants. A bridge construction field packet will be included. Three  record plans sets will be prepared by the Consultant (FHU) and subconsultants. One record plan  set will be retained by the Consultant (FHU) for 3 years and the others submitted to the TOV and  CDOT.  Deliverable(s):   Final Plans & Specifications (FHU)   Record Sets of Plans & Specifications (FHU)   Structures Field Packet (FHU)     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   35 | Page    4T ACCESSES & CDOT FORM 137 – STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION  The Consultant (FHU) will design all accesses that connect into the state right of way in accordance  with the State of Colorado, State Highway Access Code. If the access is a public street or an access  with a curb return entrance the design will also be in accordance with Chapter 9 of the Colorado  Department of Transportation Roadway Design Guide 2005.  The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an exhibit for each access. An exhibit may consist of more than  one sheet if needed to clearly display all of the information. The exhibit will include:  - plan, profile and cross‐section of the proposed access to be constructed or modified,  - highway and street right‐of‐way lines,   - property lines,   - all proposed and existing easements,   - all removal items in proximity of the access,  - existing accesses that will be closed,  - details of any structure to be constructed as part of the new or modified access,  - entering and exiting turning templates for the design vehicle,  - if the access is a public right of way, the name of the road or street and the name of the  jurisdiction,  - if the access is to a single parcel, the property address and the parcel number, and   - if the access is a private access that serves more than one property the addresses and  parcel numbers of all properties served by the access.  The Consultant (FHU) and/or the Project Manager (CDOT) will contact the owners of the accesses,  or the owners’ representatives, during the design process to advise them of the anticipated  changes to their access, to listen to the owners’ concerns and desires regarding the access and to  ascertain if an owner will be cooperative or contentious. To the extent practical the desires of the  owners will be incorporated into design of the accesses, subject to review and approval by the  CDOT Region 3 Traffic Division.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   36 | Page    The Consultant (FHU) will prepare an informational summary for each access in a spreadsheet that  can be copied into Form 138. The informational summary will contain the following:  Access A Access B Highway: (if frontage road; e.g., I-70, N Frontage Road) MP: Side of Highway: (left or right in ascending MP direction) If there is an Access Control Plan, access no.: Road or street name, if public access: Jurisdiction, if public access: Parcel address, if private access: Assessor’s parcel number: Owner name: Contact information of owner or owner’s representative: (name, mailing address, phone number) If a shared private access, include the address, parcel number, owner name and contact information for each parcel served by the access. Comments:   The Consultant (FHU) will submit the access exhibits and the access informational summary to the  CDOT Region 3 Permits Manager at least 90 days prior to the advertisement date for accesses with  cooperative owners and at least 120 days prior to the advertisement date for accesses with  contentious owners.     3/4/2014 TOWN OF VAIL  MARCH 4, 2014  SCOPE OF WORK – INTERSTATE70  / VAIL UNDERPASS   37 | Page    As requested, the Consultant (FHU) will provide additional necessary information to the TOV and  CDOT to issue Form 137.  Deliverable(s):   Access Exhibits (FHU)   Access Informational Summaries (FHU)   Additional Pertinent Information for CDOT Form 137 (as requested)  (FHU)   SECTION 8 SERVICES AFTER DESIGN  All work associated with Services after PS&E, Bid Documents and Advertisement are not included  in this task order. These services will be covered in a future task order.  3/4/2014 PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) 2013 MASTER PRICING AGREEMENT eff. 07/01/2013 PROJECT NAME:(303) 721-1440 LOCATION:Vail, CO FIRM NAME: NAME OF PREPARER: SCOPE OF WORK DATE TYPE OF PROPOSAL : 1A LABOR RATES EmployeeDirect SalaryOverheadIndirectLabor Rate Employee NameClassificationCost / hourRate (%)Cost$/Hour (a)(b)(c) Meghan Adams Graphic Design II25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Matthew P Adams Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Gerald G. Albin Associate70.00$ 173.58%2.7358191.51$ Anna Marie Amoroso Marketing Specialist31.00$ 173.58%2.735884.81$ Kyle A. Anderson Principal II69.71$ 173.58%2.7358190.72$ Thomas W. Anzia Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Kate A. Baird Engineer III34.13$ 173.58%2.735893.39$ Daniel Barth Engineer I22.60$ 173.58%2.735861.82$ Anthony Baumert Env Scientist/Planner IV40.87$ 173.58%2.7358111.80$ Julienne BautistaEnv Scientist/Planner I26.44$ 173.58%2.735872.33$ George W. Beams, Jr Principal II67.31$ 173.58%2.7358184.14$ Adam T. Behmer Env Scientist/Planner II24.52$ 173.58%2.735867.08$ Ty BereskieEngineer I22.12$ 173.58%2.735860.52$ Wesley B Boggs Engineer I24.52$ 173.58%2.735867.08$ Dean P. Bradley Principal III74.52$ 173.58%2.7358203.87$ Charles M. Buck Engineer V45.19$ 173.58%2.7358123.64$ D Holly Miller Buck Principal I60.10$ 173.58%2.7358164.41$ Janet L. Campbell Graphic Design Manager34.50$ 173.58%2.735894.39$ Janis S. Christopher Engineer IV38.46$ 173.58%2.7358105.22$ Zachary CoppersmithEngineer I 14.00$ 173.58%2.735838.30$ Jeffery W. Dankenbring Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Shawn C. Dankenbring Engineer IV43.27$ 173.58%2.7358118.38$ Scott E. Dankenbring Sr Designer40.75$ 173.58%2.7358111.48$ Cady Dawson Transportation Planner III37.26$ 173.58%2.7358101.93$ Adam J. Denney Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Lyle E. DeVries Principal I60.10$ 173.58%2.7358164.41$ John Dibble Engineer I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Richard A. Dillon Sr Bridge Designer45.25$ 173.58%2.7358123.79$ Jonathan B Dixon Env Scientist/Planner II28.85$ 173.58%2.735878.92$ Katharine M. Duitsman Engineer III36.78$ 173.58%2.7358100.62$ Matthew John Eberly Engineer I27.88$ 173.58%2.735876.29$ Rick ErjavecSr Engineer56.25$ 173.58%2.7358153.89$ Christopher J. Fasching Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Robert W. Felsburg Principal III76.92$ 173.58%2.7358210.45$ Richard R. Follmer Associate52.88$ 173.58%2.7358144.68$ Stacey Roth Freitag Accounting Clerk II24.50$ 173.58%2.735867.03$ Todd S. Frisbie Engineer IV41.35$ 173.58%2.7358113.11$ Kendra M. Gabbert Engineer II31.01$ 173.58%2.735884.84$ Linda L. Gann Environmental Tech II26.25$ 173.58%2.735871.81$ Thor W. Gjelsteen Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Stephen P. Grasmick Engineer IV48.08$ 173.58%2.7358131.54$ Colleen Renee Guillotte Engineer III31.73$ 173.58%2.735886.81$ Laura A. Haas Env Scientist/Planner III31.73$ 173.58%2.735886.81$ Richard J. Haden Associate55.29$ 173.58%2.7358151.26$ Jeremy Ryan Hahn Engineer IV39.42$ 173.58%2.7358107.85$ Benjamin J. Harms Designer I20.50$ 173.58%2.735856.08$ David E. Hattan Associate62.50$ 173.58%2.7358170.99$ S. Keith Hidalgo GIS Specialist III31.01$ 173.58%2.735884.84$ Dustin Hoffner Designer II21.00$ 173.58%2.735857.45$ Catherine Ann Jopes-Garver Sr Admin Assistant31.00$ 173.58%2.735884.81$ Stacey Joy Engineer I22.60$ 173.58%2.735861.82$ Jessica JurzenskiEnv Scientist/Planner III31.25$ 173.58%2.735885.49$ Kurt R. Kellogg Associate52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Evan Kirby GIS Manager52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Kurt A. Kolleth Sr Designer46.50$ 173.58%2.7358127.21$ Alan Kreisa Engineer III37.50$ 173.58%2.7358102.59$ Terrence L Lage Env Scientist/Planner II22.12$ 173.58%2.735860.50$ I-70 Vail UnderpassPHONE NUMBER: CONTRACT #: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig TASK ORDER #: Jeanne SharpsCONTRACT TIME: 02/21/14 Cost Plus Fixed Fee 3/4/2014 Larry W. Lagsding Sr Designer35.00$ 173.58%2.735895.75$ David G. Lampe Engineer V44.23$ 173.58%2.7358121.01$ Lawrence C. Lang Engineer V45.91$ 173.58%2.7358125.61$ Todd LebovGIS Specialist I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Edward L. Lind Associate54.09$ 173.58%2.7358147.97$ Jacob E. Lloyd Env Scientist/Planner I23.56$ 173.58%2.735864.45$ Matthew Love Engineer I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.76$ Kevin R. Maddoux Env Scientist/Planner V46.15$ 173.58%2.7358126.27$ William J. Marcato Sr Engineer48.08$ 173.58%2.7358131.53$ Steven C. Marfitano Transportation Planner II31.25$ 173.58%2.735885.49$ Matthew Bryant McFadden Associate56.01$ 173.58%2.7358153.23$ Colleen G. Means Accountant36.54$ 173.58%2.735899.96$ Mark D. Meisinger Engineer III36.30$ 173.58%2.735899.30$ Vicente Miranda Designer III29.00$ 173.58%2.735879.34$ Brian L. Moffatt Sr Designer38.00$ 173.58%2.7358103.96$ Steven Robert Murray Sr Engineer51.92$ 173.58%2.7358142.05$ Jessica S. Myklebust Env Scientist/Planner V42.31$ 173.58%2.7358115.75$ Thomas G. Nead, Jr. PEAssociate53.85$ 173.58%2.7358147.31$ Megan Ornelas GIS Specialist II28.37$ 173.58%2.735877.60$ Cynthia A. Otegui Engineer IV41.59$ 173.58%2.7358113.77$ Joshua S. Palik Engineer II30.77$ 173.58%2.735884.18$ Jesse W. Poore Env Scientist/Planner III37.50$ 173.58%2.7358102.59$ Alex Keith Pulley Env Scientist/Planner V44.23$ 173.58%2.7358121.01$ Jeffrey M. Ream Sr Engineer51.20$ 173.58%2.7358140.08$ Robert G. Refvem Principal II67.31$ 173.58%2.7358184.14$ Gabrielle C. Renner Engineer II28.37$ 173.58%2.735877.60$ Carin RichardsonEnv Scientist/Planner IV40.87$ 173.58%2.7358111.81$ Sylvia Romo Marketing Manager37.02$ 173.58%2.7358101.28$ Stephanie J. Sangaline Anzia Sr Engineer51.92$ 173.58%2.7358142.05$ Michael Schott Construction Technician I16.00$ 173.58%2.735843.77$ Dustin C. Shaklee Designer V35.75$ 173.58%2.735897.80$ Jeanne M. Sharps Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Stan Y. Shibao Designer IV35.00$ 173.58%2.735895.75$ Amy Sobol Env Scientist/Planner I24.04$ 173.58%2.735865.77$ Ken J. Soellner Sr Designer45.00$ 173.58%2.7358123.11$ Amy N. Stecyk Engineer IV42.07$ 173.58%2.7358115.09$ Patrick R. Stein Engineer IV45.67$ 173.58%2.7358124.95$ Michelle Kasak Stevens Sr Engineer52.40$ 173.58%2.7358143.37$ Elizabeth Stover Engineer I25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Mary Kristin Strub Administrative19.50$ 173.58%2.735853.35$ Linda S. Stuchlik Sr Admin Assistant28.00$ 173.58%2.735876.60$ Elliot M. Sulsky Principal II64.90$ 173.58%2.7358177.56$ Shea M. Suski Transportation Planner I26.44$ 173.58%2.735872.34$ Jennifer SuttonAdministrative17.00$ 173.58%2.735846.51$ Tim R. Tetherow Associate49.04$ 173.58%2.7358134.16$ Marie Elizabeth Thoming Engineer II30.53$ 173.58%2.735883.52$ Dale J. Tischmak Sr Environmental Scientist47.12$ 173.58%2.7358128.90$ Zachary Topoleski Graphic Design IV32.25$ 173.58%2.735888.23$ Kelly Turner Designer III29.50$ 173.58%2.735880.71$ Chad D. Twiss Engineer IV38.46$ 173.58%2.7358105.22$ Shawn M. Twiss Systems Administrator37.00$ 173.58%2.7358101.22$ Kody UnstadEnv Scientist/Planner II23.08$ 173.58%2.735863.14$ Beverly Vasquez-Frisbie Administrative25.00$ 173.58%2.735868.40$ Rachel J. Ward Environmental Tech I14.50$ 173.58%2.735839.67$ Brady D. Weingardt Designer II21.50$ 173.58%2.735858.82$ Jeni A. Wells Administrative19.75$ 173.58%2.735854.03$ Preston WierzbaEngineer I (Intern)15.00$ 173.58%2.735841.04$ Jennica MH Wilcox Engineer II28.85$ 173.58%2.735878.92$ Jenny A. Young Transportation Planner V46.15$ 173.58%2.7358126.27$ Amy Zlotsky Associate50.96$ 173.58%2.7358139.42$ 3/4/2014 1B LABOR COSTS EmployeeLabor RateEstimated Cost Employee NameClassification$/Hourper Employee ((d) from 1A) Meghan Adams Graphic Design II 68.40$ 1,094.32$ Matthew P Adams Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Gerald G. Albin Associate 191.51$ -$ Anna Marie Amoroso Marketing Specialist 84.81$ -$ Kyle A. Anderson Principal II 190.72$ -$ Thomas W. Anzia Principal II 177.56$ -$ Kate A. Baird Engineer III 93.39$ 6,274.04$ Daniel Barth Engineer I 61.82$ -$ Anthony Baumert Env Scientist/Planner IV 111.80$ -$ Julienne BautistaEnv Scientist/Planner I 72.33$ 7,493.86$ George W. Beams, Jr Principal II 184.14$ 3,572.33$ Adam T. Behmer Env Scientist/Planner II 67.08$ -$ Ty BereskieEngineer I 60.52$ -$ Wesley B Boggs Engineer I 67.08$ -$ Dean P. Bradley Principal III 203.87$ -$ Charles M. Buck Engineer V 123.64$ -$ D Holly Miller Buck Principal I 164.41$ -$ Janet L. Campbell Graphic Design Manager 94.39$ -$ Janis S. Christopher Engineer IV 105.22$ 39,505.12$ Zachary CoppersmithEngineer I 38.30$ -$ Jeffery W. Dankenbring Sr Engineer 143.37$ -$ Shawn C. Dankenbring Engineer IV 118.38$ 39,764.82$ Scott E. Dankenbring Sr Designer 111.48$ -$ Cady Dawson Transportation Planner III 101.93$ -$ Adam J. Denney Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Lyle E. DeVries Principal I 164.41$ -$ John Dibble Engineer I 68.40$ -$ Richard A. Dillon Sr Bridge Designer 123.79$ 64,952.73$ Jonathan B Dixon Env Scientist/Planner II 78.92$ -$ Katharine M. Duitsman Engineer III 100.62$ -$ Matthew John Eberly Engineer I 76.29$ 20,548.73$ Rick ErjavecSr Engineer 153.89$ 160,136.63$ Christopher J. Fasching Principal II 177.56$ 13,778.99$ Robert W. Felsburg Principal III 210.45$ -$ Richard R. Follmer Associate 144.68$ -$ Stacey Roth Freitag Accounting Clerk II 67.03$ -$ Todd S. Frisbie Engineer IV 113.11$ -$ Kendra M. Gabbert Engineer II 84.84$ 11,734.60$ Linda L. Gann Environmental Tech II 71.81$ -$ Thor W. Gjelsteen Principal II 177.56$ 17,223.74$ Stephen P. Grasmick Engineer IV 131.54$ -$ Colleen Renee Guillotte Engineer III 86.81$ -$ Laura A. Haas Env Scientist/Planner III 86.81$ -$ Richard J. Haden Associate 151.26$ -$ Jeremy Ryan Hahn Engineer IV 107.85$ 5,754.23$ Benjamin J. Harms Designer I 56.08$ -$ David E. Hattan Associate 170.99$ -$ S. Keith Hidalgo GIS Specialist III 84.84$ 5,699.66$ Dustin Hoffner Designer II 57.45$ -$ Catherine Ann Jopes-Garver Sr Admin Assistant 84.81$ 5,953.65$ Stacey Joy Engineer I 61.82$ -$ Jessica JurzenskiEnv Scientist/Planner III 85.49$ -$ Kurt R. Kellogg Associate 143.37$ -$ Evan Kirby GIS Manager 143.37$ 6,924.62$ Kurt A. Kolleth Sr Designer 127.21$ -$ Alan Kreisa Engineer III 102.59$ -$ Terrence L Lage Env Scientist/Planner II 60.50$ -$ Larry W. Lagsding Sr Designer 95.75$ -$ David G. Lampe Engineer V 121.01$ -$ Lawrence C. Lang Engineer V 125.61$ 11,169.25$ Todd LebovGIS Specialist I 68.40$ -$ Edward L. Lind Associate 147.97$ 13,272.90$ Jacob E. Lloyd Env Scientist/Planner I 64.45$ -$ Matthew Love Engineer I 65.76$ -$ Kevin R. Maddoux Env Scientist/Planner V 126.27$ 9,555.97$ William J. Marcato Sr Engineer 131.53$ -$ Steven C. Marfitano Transportation Planner II 85.49$ -$ 90 76 89 70 48 53 67 138 97 1,041 78 525 269 336 Estimated Number of Work Hours 16 67 375 104 19 3/4/2014 Matthew Bryant McFadden Associate 153.23$ -$ Colleen G. Means Accountant 99.96$ -$ Mark D. Meisinger Engineer III 99.30$ 5,886.78$ Vicente Miranda Designer III 79.34$ 51,887.18$ Brian L. Moffatt Sr Designer 103.96$ -$ Steven Robert Murray Sr Engineer 142.05$ -$ Jessica S. Myklebust Env Scientist/Planner V 115.75$ -$ Thomas G. Nead, Jr. PEAssociate 147.31$ -$ Megan Ornelas GIS Specialist II 77.60$ -$ Cynthia A. Otegui Engineer IV 113.77$ 42,715.00$ Joshua S. Palik Engineer II 84.18$ -$ Jesse W. Poore Env Scientist/Planner III 102.59$ -$ Alex Keith Pulley Env Scientist/Planner V 121.01$ 4,782.18$ Jeffrey M. Ream Sr Engineer 140.08$ -$ Robert G. Refvem Principal II 184.14$ 35,723.29$ Gabrielle C. Renner Engineer II 77.60$ -$ Carin RichardsonEnv Scientist/Planner IV 111.81$ -$ Sylvia Romo Marketing Manager 101.28$ -$ Stephanie J. Sangaline Anzia Sr Engineer 142.05$ -$ Michael Schott Construction Technician I 43.77$ -$ Dustin C. Shaklee Designer V 97.80$ 69,079.57$ Jeanne M. Sharps Sr Engineer 143.37$ 89,512.53$ Stan Y. Shibao Designer IV 95.75$ 67,630.34$ Amy Sobol Env Scientist/Planner I 65.77$ -$ Ken J. Soellner Sr Designer 123.11$ -$ Amy N. Stecyk Engineer IV 115.09$ -$ Patrick R. Stein Engineer IV 124.95$ 46,912.26$ Michelle Kasak Stevens Sr Engineer 143.37$ -$ Elizabeth Stover Engineer I 68.40$ 38,971.47$ Mary Kristin Strub Administrative 53.35$ -$ Linda S. Stuchlik Sr Admin Assistant 76.60$ 6,572.49$ Elliot M. Sulsky Principal II 177.56$ -$ Shea M. Suski Transportation Planner I 72.34$ -$ Jennifer SuttonAdministrative 46.51$ -$ Tim R. Tetherow Associate 134.16$ -$ Marie Elizabeth Thoming Engineer II 83.52$ -$ Dale J. Tischmak Sr Environmental Scientist 128.90$ 19,510.09$ Zachary Topoleski Graphic Design IV 88.23$ 7,121.89$ Kelly Turner Designer III 80.71$ 52,781.79$ Chad D. Twiss Engineer IV 105.22$ -$ Shawn M. Twiss Systems Administrator 101.22$ -$ Kody UnstadEnv Scientist/Planner II 63.14$ -$ Beverly Vasquez-Frisbie Administrative 68.40$ -$ Rachel J. Ward Environmental Tech I 39.67$ -$ Brady D. Weingardt Designer II 58.82$ -$ Jeni A. Wells Administrative 54.03$ -$ Preston WierzbaEngineer I (Intern)41.04$ -$ Jennica MH Wilcox Engineer II 78.92$ 7,358.26$ Jenny A. Young Transportation Planner V 126.27$ -$ Amy Zlotsky Associate 139.42$ -$ 1B $990,855.33 2 10%FIXED FEE$99,085.53 93 151 81 654 86 375 570 706 624 706 40 194 375 59 654 FEE (xx% X Section 1B.) (Enter fee percent in Cell E207) TOTAL LABOR COSTS 3/4/2014 3A OTHER DIRECT COST (IN-HOUSE) RateUnitQuantityCost $0.24SF2000$480.00 $0.71SFTBDTBD $0.55SFTBDTBD $0.39SFTBDTBD $0.08Each10,000$800.00 $0.19Each5000$950.00 $1.22SF360$439.20 $1.69SFTBDTBD $0.510Mile12,000$6,120.00 (1) 3B OTHER DIRECT COST (OUTSIDE) RateUnitQuantityCost (2)EachTBD$200.00 (2)EachTBDTBD (2)EachTBD$1,000.00 (2)EachTBDTBD At Cost (3)EachTBDTBD At Cost (4)EachTBD$3,000.00 At Cost (4)EachTBD$1,300.00 (4)EachTBDTBD At Cost (5)EachTBDTBD At Cost (6)EachTBD$600.00 At Cost (6)EachTBD$200.00 At Cost (7)EachTBD$200.00 (2)EachTBDTBD At Cost (8)EachTBD$1,000.00 3 TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $16,289.20 $1,106,230.06 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)At actual reasonable cost and always requires prior item-by-item approval by CDOT before any specific expenditure. At cost, but not to exceed applicable rates in current Colorado Fiscal Rules. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written approval of CDOT of the actual dollar amount of rental, unless rental is for subcompact or compact automobile with unlimited mileage. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written prior approval of CDOT. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written prior approval of CDOT. CDOT will neither approve nor reimburse for any alcoholic beverages associated with any meal or other activity. Film Development Miscellaneous SUBTOTAL (SUM 1B+2+3) At actual reasonable cost. At actual reasonable cost, but always requires a specific prior request of CDOT and the written approval of CDOT of the actual dollar amount of ticket, unless ticket is for economy class airfare booked at least 2 weeks in advance. OTHER Traffic Counts Auto Rental Meeting Facility Rental Rental Equipment Catering Postage (Major Mailings) TRAVEL/LODGING/MEALS Parking & Tolls Air Fare Lodging Meals TRAVEL Mileage (1) At current allowable State Government rate. DELIVERIES Overnight Deliveries Local Courier COPIES & PRINTS Black & White (6) Color (6) PRESENTATION BOARDS Bond - Foam Core Mounted (6) Glossy - Foam Core Mounted (6) PLOTTING Bond (6) Glossy (6) Mylar (6) Vellum (6) 3/4/2014 4A OUTSIDE SERVICE RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS) Cost $40,270.40 $13,520.00 $47,799.00 $110,424.34 The Lund Partnership (spent by February 1 2014)-$35,298.51 $41,295.16 Pat Noyes & Associates (spent by February 1, 2014)-$9,891.48 $33,914.00 $85,779.46 4B OUTSIDE SERVICE RATES (VENDORS) Cost MIG (formerly Winston Associates)$9,960.00 4 TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES $337,772.37 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST (SUM OF 1B+2+3+4)$1,444,002.43 (Typed Name)(Signature) (Date) Lump Sum I am a representative of Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, duly authorized to contractually bind the firm. My signature below constitutes formal agreement (without further signature) to a Task Order, which is issued by the State pursuant to the terms of this Task Order Proposal, without substantive change. I also declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. Firm Method of Compensation Firm Method of Compensation Yeh & Associates CPFF Goodbee & Associates CPFF The Lund Partnership CPFF PKM CPFF GHD CPFF Clanton & Associates CPFF Pat Noyes & Associates CPFF 3/4/2014 Revised 01/21/13 1PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS 1A Project Management 80500 16 596 1B Project Schedule (completed prior to 02/01/14)0 1C Initial Project Kick-Off Meeting (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1DProject Meetings Meetings 1DaProject Management 92216 8 316 1DbProject Team 2440180404040168 388 1DcDiscipline Specific 16824168 72 1DdStructure Review 888 24 1DeCommunication Aides 824408 80 1E Identify Design Criteria (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1F Independent Design Review (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1G Review Environmental Documents (completed prior to 02/01/14) 0 1HObtain Right-of-Way Entry Permits 0 1ITraffic Control 0 TASK 1 PROJECT INITIATION AND CONTINUING REQUIEMENT TOTALS 22848944645680168321476 2PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2A Communication and Consensus Building 2AaContact List 2 2 4 2AbPublic Meetings 247240404024 240 2AcProject Leadership Team Process 4080 120 2AdAgency Specific Meetings 2448 72 2AeCommunication Aids 488408 68 2BSurvey 44 8 2CGathering Data, Analysis and Mitigation Development 2CaTraffic Analysis 832 40 2CbNoise Study 81604020 228 2CcAir Quality (CDOT)0 0 2CCArchaeology (CDOT)0 2CePaleontology (CDOT)0 2Cf Geology (CDOT)0 2Cg Water Quality (CDOT)0 2ChNoxious Weeds (CDOT)0 2CiHistoric (CDOT)0 2Cj Floodplain and Drainage Assessment 48214 2CkRight-of-Way 0 2Cl4(f)/6(f) Activity (CDOT)0 2CmThreatened and Endangered Species (CDOT)0 2CnWetlands 2048 68 2CoHazardous Materials (CDOT)0 2Cp Existing Roadway and Major Structures 0 2Cq Construction Requirements 4444 16 2Cr Aesthetic Considerations 22 4 2CsExisting Utility Mapping 44 8 2CtConceptual UP Location Invest. (completed prior to 02/01/14)0000000 0 2CuLand Use and Environmental Justice (CDOT)0 2CvCumulative Effects (CDOT)22 4 2DNEPA Clearance 82020856 TASK 2 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT TOTALS 1188406941804040856950 3PRELIMARY DESIGN 3A Getoechnical Subsurface Investigation 3AaStructure Foundations 88 16 3AbPavement Design 88 16 3BStructural Design 0 3BaPreliminary Bridge Design 16815585708 315 3BBPreliminary Retaining Wall Design 8674575608 263 3CHydrology/Hydraulics Engineering 3CaRoadway Drainage 460808152 3CbStructure Drainage 8210 3DPermanent Water Quality 42450 78 3EErosion Control & SWMP 44040 84 3FUtility Coordination 88 16 3GUtility Design 810060 168 3HRoadway Design & Roadside Development 3HaRoadway Design 12080 240804 524 3HbRoadside Development 8 60 68 3HcRoundabout Geometry Review 844 16 3ITraffic Engineering 2040 60 3JRight-of-Way 888 24 3KConstruction Phasing Plan 806080 220 3LPreparation for the FIR 21616241882 86 3MField Inspection Review 816168 48 3NPost FIR Revisions 416201616164 92 TASK 3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN TOTALS 24342166402286144640362256 4 FINAL DESIGN 4A Finalize Design Decisions and Variances 228 12 4BGeotechnical Subsurface Investigation 4BaStructrure Foundations 44 8 4BbPavement Design 44 8 4CStructure Design 4CaBridge Design 4 36840116396 924 4CbRetaining Wall Design 4 7022840072 774 4DHydrology/Hydraulic Engineering 4100808 192 4EPermanent Water Quality 44040 84 4FErosion Control & SWMP 48080 164 4GUtility Coordination 88 16 4HUtility Design 810080 188 4IRoadway Design and Roadside Development 4IaRoadway Design 14012060440 760 4IbRoadside Design 8 4080 128 4IcRoundabout Geometry Review 444 12 4JTraffic Engineering 248020 124 4KRight-of-Way 4KaROW Plans 16 16 4KbROW Acquisition 4 4 4LConstruction Phasing Plan 84060180 288 4MEnvironmental Plans 2480 86 4NProject Specifications 450448 70 4OObtain Permits 4Oa401 Permit 0 4Ob402 Permit 0 4Oc404 Permit (CDOT) 0 4OdWildlife Certification 241212 30 4OeNPDES/CDPS Storm Water Permit (CDOT) 0 4PFinal Office Review Preparation 2888888 50 4QFinal Office Review 816888 48 4RPost-FOR Revisions 416161616164 88 4SConstruction Plan Package 2416161616164 90 4TAccesses & CDOT Form 137 280 82 TASK 4 FINAL DESIGN TOTALS 1848326117857212847880324246 PROJECT TOTALS 38813818921976103620181308161568928 I-70 Vail Underpass AS S O C I A T E & G I S MA N A G E R CONSULTANT HOURS PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION CO N S U L T A N T HO U R T O T A L PR I N C I P A L EN V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R OR E N G I N E E R I I I , I V O R V EN V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R O R EN G I N E E R I & I I DE S I G N E R I I I DE S I G N E R I O R I I A D M I N I S T R A T I V E SE N I O R D E S I G N E R O R DE S I G N E R I V O R V SE N I O R E N V I R O N M E N T A L SC I E N T I S T , P L A N N E R O R EN G I N E E R Hours FHU Hour Estimate 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 1 GHD Inc. 5325 Wall Street Suite 2305 Madison WI 53718 USA T 1 608 249 4545 F 1 608 249 4402 E madison@ghd.com W www.ghd.com November 7, 2013 Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 Attention: Jeanne Sharps, P.E. Senior Project Manager Dear Jeanne: Re: Roundabout Design Support Services I-70 Simba Run Underpass Vail, CO Our Proposal No. 13229 Thank you for your invitation to submit a proposal to provide design support for the proposed roundabouts and approaches at the proposed I-70 Simba Run underpass. The intersections include multi-lane roundabouts at each of the Simba Run intersections with the Frontage Roads. We understand that Felsburg Hold & Ullevig (FHU) will be completing the roadway geometry with GHD providing design assistance for the roundabout intersections. Detailed Tasks A work program that has proven successful with our involvement in a project like this is outlined below: Operational Analysis  Review of peak hour traffic volumes  Confirm operational analyses  Confirm traffic lane configurations Horizontal Geometry GHD will review the design for the following elements:  Curb locations, crosswalks, splitter islands, sidewalk or multi-use path, bike ramps, truck apron etc.  Fast paths with speed calculations for R1 through R5  Critical design parameters  Design vehicle movement checks  Preliminary stopping sight distance for: approach, circulatory roadway, crosswalk and exit, and intersection sight distance. Project Deliverables Deliverables for the roundabouts and approaches will include:  Horizontal geometry suggestions in CAD format  Telephone and web meetings as necessary 3/4/2014 2 Professional Fees Based on the proposed scope of work outlined above, we are prepared to proceed with this assignment on an hourly basis up to a maximum amount of $13,520.00. We will invoice monthly based on hourly billings. If this meets your approval please sign and return the attached consultant agreement. We look forward to working with you on this project. Yours truly, GHD Inc. (The Home of Ourston Roundabout Engineering) Troy Pankratz, P.E. Project Director TP/kk 3/4/2014 3 3/4/2014 GoodbeeandAssociates,Inc. SimbaRunUnderpassScope/FeeEstimate 1/23/14 Task Subtask DescriptionofActivities/Assumptions LeadProject Engineer StaffEngr Administrative Assistant TotalHrs TotalCost 2014ratesusedforestimating $140/hr $111/hr $96/hr ProgressmeetingswithTownofVail,CDOTandFHU(assume5meetingsinDenver)15 15 $2,100 Monthlyinvoicesandprogressreport(assume12months)12 12 24 $2,832 RunUNCCsearchtoidentifyutilityowners.ObtainkeymapsandutilityplansforEverVailandTimberRidgedevelopmentsfrom TOV.Identifydatagapsandrequestmappingasneeded.ObtainutilitycontactinformationfromTOV.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithTOV,CDOT,FHUandYehregardinglocatesneargeotechborings.CoordinatewithLundtohavelocatessurveyed andincorporatedintoexistingutilitysurveyfile.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithCDOT,TOVandFHUregardingpre-FIRpotholing.Preparepotholingplan.Hirepotholingcontractortopothole8-10 locationsover2-3days.Markpreliminarypotholelocations.FieldoversightbyTOV.CoordinatewithLundtohavepotholes surveyed.CompilepotholedataintopotholelogforFIRplans. 24 4 28 $3,804 Coordinatewithdryutililtyownersregardingpotentialconflicts,relocationstrategies,andiftheywanttoupsize,etc.aspartofthe relocation.4 4 $560 PrepareexistingutilityCADfilebasedonutilitysurveyfile.PrepareutilityplansforFIRsubmittalshowingexistingutilities,potential utilityconflicts,relocationstrategiesandpotholes(assume6sheets-planviewonly).Prepareutilitycontactlist.Reviewdraftplans (i.e.,roadwayanddrainage)tomakesureutilitiesareshowncorrectlyandareconsistentwithutilityplans. 16 32 48 $5,792 Distributeutilityplanstoutilityowners.AttendFIRmeeting.Coordinatewithutilityownersregardingcommentsonplans.Assume FIRmeetingisinVail.8 8 $1,120 Re-evaluateutilityconflictsbasedonFIRdesigncomments.CoordinatewithFHUdesignteamtomitigateutilityimpactswhere possible.6 6 $840 CoordinatewithCDOT,TOVandFHUregardingpre-FORpotholing.Preparepotholingplan.Hirepotholingcontractortopothole5-7 locationsover1-2days.Markpreliminarypotholelocations.FieldoversightduringpotholingbyTOV.CoordinatewithLundtohave potholessurveyed.UpdatepotholelogwithnewpotholedataforFORplans, 24 4 28 $3,804 Meetoneononewithutilityownerstodiscussutilityconflictsandrelocations.Preparemeetingminutes.(Assume5utilityowners=5 meetingsover11/2days),20 20 $2,800 Updateexistingutilityfileperpotholedata.PrepareproposedutilityCADfilebasedoncoordinationwithutilityownersanddesign team.PrepareutilityplansforFORsubmittalshowingexistingutilities,proposedrelocated/newutilities,potholesandpotholedata. WetutilitydesignplansandproposedwetutilityCADlayerbyothers.Assume6plansheets. 12 32 44 $5,232 Preparedraftutilityspec.TextforwetutilityworkandlightingbyotherstobeinsertedbyGoodbee.8 8 $1,120 Preparedraftquantitiesandcostestimatefordryutilityrelocationworktobedoneatprojectcost.Wetutilityquantitiesandcost estimatebyothers.Quantitiesandcostestimateforlightingbyothers.8 8 $1,120 Distributeutilityplanstoutilityowners.AttendFORmeeting.Coordinatewithutilityownersregardingcommentsonplans.Assume FORmeetingisinVail.8 8 $1,120 FinalRevisions CoordinatewithTOV,CDOTandFHUdesignteamre:revisionsrequiredbydesignmtg.Revisionsshowninfinalplansubmittal.4 4 8 $1,004 Utility Coordination Preparedraftutilityclearancelettersbasedonutilityspecforreview.Obtainutilityownersignaturesonclearanceletters.Compile utilityclearancepackageforTOVtosubmittoCDOT.AssumeCDOT/TOVwillcoordinatewithutilityownersregardingwhowillpay forrelocatingutilities. 16 4 20 $2,684 ConstructionPlan Package Preparefinalutilityplansandutilityspec.12 12 24 $3,012 TOTALLABOR 209 92 12 313 $40,624 Item Units #ofUnits UnitPrice Subtotal miles 1300 $0.565 $735 day 1 $40 $40 Lodging night 1 $150 $150 days 3 $1,500 $4,500 days 3 $500 $1,500 LS $0 $0 Reproduction LS --$250 $250 TOTALODCs $7,175 TOTAL $40,624 +$7,175 =$47,799 Mileage(assume3progressmeetingsinDenver,5meetingsinVail(pre-FIRandpre-FORpotholecoordinationmeetings,one-on-onemeetings,FIR,FOR) TrafficControl Permitting(assumefeeswaivedbyTownandCDOT) Utility Coordination FIR Potholing(assume3days) PerDiem FORRevisions andFinal PS&EPackage Project Initiationand ContReqts Project Management Preliminary Design Utility Coordination FOR FinalDesign C:\usr\G&A\SimbaRun\GASimbaRunscope-fee012314 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 January 28, 2014 Rick Erjavec Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way Suite. 600 Centennial, CO 8011 RE: Simba Run Underpass Visualization The Boulder MIG office (formerly Winston Associates) has provided on-call 3D visualization services to the Town of Vail for over ten years and we are enthusiastic about continuing our relationship with both Vail and FHU. The following is intended to attach to a more formal FHU vendor or sub- consultant agreement and serve as only a scope and fee estimate. Overview The goal of this project is to provide the Town of Vail with a tool that will help improve the understanding of the preferred alternative design and visual impacts. We will create an interactive 3D visualization that will enable its users to navigate through the model and study the design from the surrounding context. To accomplish this goal, the following proposal details the method that MIG will use to build a virtual 3D model of the project area and proposed underpass. The model will become a part of a custom software package that users can “unzip” and run from their computers. THE SOFTWARE (Vizhen) The use of 3D graphics is not new; software tools have been able to create stills and animations for many years. What is new and key to this process is real-time rendering - which will allow for free movement around the scene. It does not allow only the “good side” of a project to be shown, but rather from every angle and perspective. Our approach uses a combination of commercial software (ArcGIS, AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, SketchUp) along with MIG’s custom software to achieve the real-time visualization. 3/4/2014 ASSUMPTIONS We will utilize the existing conditions terrain model that was created for Vail as our starting point for this project to save both money and time. Additional detail or newer aerial photography can be incorporated if necessary. This project is still in the schematic design phase and will require Vail/FHU to make decisions about design that will perhaps outpace the regular design process, for the 3D model. For example, decisions on materials for the underpass or support structure that usually would not be finalized until late in the process may need to be made earlier for this effort. The style, detail, and final deliverables will be very similar to those of the Vail Fire Station pictured below. Task 0 – Ongoing Coordination and Communication $ 805 As needed coordination via email, net-meeting, and phone conversation to keep the project on the right track. Task 1 - Project Initiation $230 Collect, organize, and integrate data for both existing conditions and proposed underpass design.  Data to be provided by Vail or FHU: o Supplementary existing conditions information  Aerial Photo  Existing survey  Contours or Elevation GRID  Relevant survey information and property boundary o Proposed underpass design  Site plan / Landscape design  Grading  Bridge/Structure design 3/4/2014 Task 2 – Existing Conditions $ 920 Modify the existing conditions as necessary and align proposed improvements with the existing 3D model data set. Task 3 – Proposed Improvements $ 5,060 Create an illustrative siteplan overlay that will convey locations for road realignment, access, and landscape improvements. Model the proposed roundabouts, bridge/support structure, necessary retaining walls, and splice proposed grading into the existing conditions terrain model. Task 4 – Review and Revise $ 2,070 Prepare draft materials (images, video, or interactive software) as necessary for FHU and Town of Vail staff for review and commenting. Respond to redlines and comments and prepare the final deliverables. Task 5 – Town Council Meeting $ 875 Attend one public hearing to help run the 3D model. Deliverables  Interactive 3D Vizhen model of the project.  Stills can easily be generated via the Vizhen software but we will be happy to provide a few dozen if necessary.  Attendance at one public meeting. BUDGET Labor $ 9,660 Reimbursables $ 300 TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $9,960 3/4/2014 November 11, 2013 Rick Erjavec, PE Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 Dear Rick, Pat Noyes & Associates is pleased to be part of the FHU team for the Simba Run Underpass Project in Vail. I look forward to working with the Town of Vail, CDOT Region 3, and FHU to deliver a project that is endorsed by all the stakeholders and is consistent with unique context of the Vail Valley and the I-70 Mountain Corridor. The following outlines my commitment to support the project during project development and design through the planning and facilitation of the Project Leadership Team and public outreach. My involvement and activities below reflect the proposed scope of work currently being developed by FHU for the Town of Vail (TOV). Public Meetings Pat Noyes & Associate will support FHU in the planning and conduct of two public meetings for the project. The first meeting is expected early in the project to present to the community the project background and objectives, the process for developing and evaluating alternatives, and underpass alternatives, and to gather public input. The second meeting will present the preferred alternative and update the public on project progress. Pat Noyes & Associates will support FHU in creating and providing meeting materials for these meetings. Estimated hours: 60 Project Leadership Team Process Pat Noyes & Associates will assist the TOV with implementation and carrying out the Project Leadership Team (PLT) Process for the project. Pat Noyes & Associates will work with TOV and FHU to ensure that the PLT is consistent with the CSS on the I-70 Mountain Corridor Guidance and that project development and design reflects the context and community values of the Vail Valley (12 meetings are anticipated.) Estimated hours: 100 3/4/2014 Page 2 Agency Specific Agency specific meetings will be held to discuss project progress and gain input from coordinating agencies. It is anticipated that Pat Noyes & Associates will attend a number of these meetings in support of the project team and CSS process. Estimated hours: 20 Communication Aids Pat Noyes & Associate will support FHU in the development of communication aids for the meetings and support TOV in providing information on its website and other local media. Estimated hours: 40 Thank you for the opportunity to be part of this project. I look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Pat Noyes Principal 3/4/2014 PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) (Firms with No Established Indirect Cost %) Project Name : Simba Run Underpass Location : Vail, CO Firm name Pat Noyes & Associates Name of Preparer Pat Noyes Phone no. 303-440-8171 Scope of Work Date 11/2013-11/2015 Type of Proposal : COST PLUS FIXED FEE Contract # TBD Task Order # TBD 1A. LABOR RATES (a) (b) (c) (d) EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE BILLING RATE ADJUSTED MULTIPLIER LABOR RATE NAME CLASSIFICATION COST/HOUR RATE $/HOUR (b =d) Pat Noyes Principal $180.00 $163.64 1.0 $163.64 (b) Adjusted Rate $.00 / hr divided by Fee (.10) Adjusted Rate = Labor Rate (b) = (d) 1B. LABOR COSTS: EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE LABOR RATE ESTIMATED NUMBER ESTIMATED COST NAME CLASSIFICATION $ / HOUR OF WORK HOURS PER EMPLOYEE Pat Noyes Principal $163.64 220 36,000.80 TOTAL LABOR $36,000.80 2. FEE (10% X Section 1 B.) FIXED FEE $3,600.08 3A. OTHER DIRECT COST RATES (IN-HOUSE):* ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED UNITS RATES COST Per diem . . . . . $_____ $___________ Mileage . . . . . 3000 $.565 $_1,695.00___ Other . . . . . . . $_____ $___________ SUBTOTAL $_1,695.00___ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 3B. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (OUTSIDE) :* ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED UNITS RATES COST Per diem . . . . . $_____ $___________ Mileage . . . . . $_____ $___________ Other . . . . . . . $_____ $___________ SUBTOTAL $____(*)_____ SUBTOTAL (SUM OF 1B+2+3A+3B) $1,695.00 *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 3/4/2014 4A. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS): FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST $0 Please have each sub-consultant fill out this form listing their employee's name, classifications, indirect rate, fee, multiplier, other direct cost (ODC), etc... 4B. OUTSIDE SERVICES (VENDORS):* FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST $0 List all vendors to be used and attach their standard price list(s). *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $41,295.16 I declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. ____Pat Noyes_____________________________ _________________ (TYPED NAME AND TITLE) (SIGNATURE) 11/11/2013 (DATE SIGNED) 3/4/2014 PKM Scope of Work Simba Run Aesthetics and Landscape October 30, 2013 1. Data Collection and Background Research PKM will research other Town of Vail design guidelines and review other past reports related to aesthetics of this area. In addition, PKM will inventory existing roundabouts in the town to complement the existing theme in proposed designs. A meeting will be held with TOV staff to confirm the direction of visual character desired for this project and to discuss parameters for design. 2. Concept Design PKM will develop three conceptual alternatives for retaining walls and underpass architectural enhancements for review with TOV staff and stakeholders. Cost estimate comparisons will also be provided in conjunction with FHU staff. In addition, general landscape designs consistent with TOV theme for the roundabouts will be included. 3. Presentation Meetings a. PKM will present alternatives to Town Council for their review and to gain direction on the preferred alternative. b. A final alternative will be refined from stakeholder input and presented to Town Council/Design Review Committee for approval. 4. Preliminary Design PKM will prepare preliminary design documents for the retaining walls, underpass faces and interior walls, roundabout hardscape and landscape. Information on water taps for irrigation will be documented and mainline locations identified. A preliminary cost estimate and specifications will be prepared. 5. FIR Meeting PKM will attend the FIR meeting and gather reviewer comments. 6. Final Design PKM will incorporate FIR comments and prepare final landscape, irrigation and structure aesthetic details for the underpass and retaining walls. Plans, details, technical specifications and cost estimates will be prepared. 7. FOR Meeting PKM will attend the FOR meeting and gather reviewer comments. 8. Bid Documents PKM will prepare final bid documents for landscape, irrigation, structure enhancements and retaining walls. Tabulations, specifications, plans, details and cost estimate will be included. 3/4/2014 Simba Run PKM Fee for Aesthetics and Landscape Design 30-Oct-13 LABOR Task Description Resource Hourly Rate Hours Subtotal 1. Data Collection and Background Research Principal LA 130.00$ 4 520.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 8 400.00$ 2. Concept Design (3 alternatives)Principal LA 130.00$ 24 3,120.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ 3. Presentation/Stakeholder Meetings Principal LA 130.00$ 40 5,200.00$ 4. Preliminary Design Principal LA 130.00$ 20 2,600.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 12 1,197.00$ Engineering Technician 50.00$ 12 600.00$ 5. FIR Meeting Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ 6. Final Design Principal LA 130.00$ 24 3,120.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 40 2,000.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 40 3,990.00$ Engineering Technician 50.00$ 12 600.00$ 7. FOR Meeting Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ 8. Bid Documents Principal LA 130.00$ 8 1,040.00$ Landscape Architect 50.00$ 24 1,200.00$ Irrigation Designer 99.75$ 12 1,197.00$ SUBTOTAL LABOR 32,864.00$ OTHER DIRECT COSTS Unit Price Units Subtotal Mileage (mile)(7 round trips)0.555$ 1120 621.60$ Large format color copies (SF)1.25$ 72 90.00$ Foam core mounting (SF)4.70$ 72 338.40$ SUBTOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 1,050.00$ TOTAL PKM FEE 33,914.00$ 3/4/2014 Yeh and Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers & Scientists 5700 East Evans Avenue, Denver, CO 80222, (303) 781-9590, Fax (303) 781-9583 1525 Blake Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, (970) 384-1500, Fax (970) 384-1501 570 Turner Drive, Suite D, Durango, CO 81303, (970) 382-9590, Fax (970) 382-9583 November 5, 2013 Mr. Rick Erjavec, PE Senior Engineer Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO. 80111 Re: Scope of Work and Estimated Fee Geotechnical and Pavement Investigation Simba Run Underpass Project Vail, Colorado Dear Mr. Erjavec: This letter presents Yeh and Associates’ scope of work and estimated fee for performing a geotechnical and pavement investigation for the I-25 at Simba Run Underpass project. The scope of work is based on information you provided to Yeh in scoping meeting on October 24, 2013. The scope of work includes the following items. 1. Four borings will be drilled in the project area near the proposed bridge structures on I- 70. 6 borings will be drilled for the proposed retaining structures. In addition, 6 borings will be drilled to verify the existing pavement structure and subgrade. 2. The bridge borings will extend to a depth that is approximately 70 feet below the existing grade, the retaining wall borings will be drilled to a depth of approximately 50 feet and the pavement borings will be drilled to a depth of 5 feet. 3. The bridge and retaining wall borings will be drilled with truck mounted drill rig using an odex rotary system and the pavement boring s will be drilled using an auger system. 4. Permits will be obtained from CDOT and Town of Vail and utility locates will be completed. Right of entry to private residences and businesses will be provided by others. 5. It is assumed that traffic control with a lane closure will be required for all 16 proposed boring locations. 6. The boring locations and elevations will be surveyed by others. 7. Representative soil samples will be obtained from each boring at about a 5 foot interval using a California sampler and a standard split-spoon sampler. 8. Geotechnical laboratory tests consisting of classification will be performed on samples obtained from the borings. Chemical analyses (pH, soluble sulfate, soluble chloride and resistivity) will also be performed. The R-value will be determined from tests performed on two of the samples obtained from the pavement borings. 3/4/2014 Scope of Work and Estimated Fee Geotechnical and Pavement Investigation Simba Run Underpass Project Vail, Colorado 2 | Page 9. Prepare DRAFT Geotechnical and Pavement Report summarizing findings from the subsurface investigation containing all photos, findings, boring logs, field and laboratory data, and analysis results that can be used for designing the pavements, bridge foundation, retaining walls and embankments. 10. Update, revise and issue the FINAL Geotechnical and Pavement Report, incorporating the latest geotechnical and pavement findings and recommendations, as well as review comments. Submit 2 hard copies and electronic files (data files, program files, and pdf of final) of the final report. Our services will be provided on a time and expense basis as a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract. The estimated cost for our geotechnical services, including all fieldwork, laboratory testing, evaluation of the requirements for sulfate resistant concrete, and preparation of a geotechnical engineering and pavement report is estimated to be $ $85,800. A copy of the CDOT CPFF Project Cost Worksheet is attached. We can begin the field investigation within two weeks after receipt of notice to proceed and obtaining a CDOT and Town of Vail access permit. It is anticipated that the field investigation can be completed in 10 to 14 days and the geotechnical engineering analyses can be completed within 4 weeks after the field work is complete. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully submitted, Yeh and Associates, Inc. Richard D. Andrew, PG Vice President Attachment: CDOT CPFF Project Cost Worksheet 3/4/2014 Project Number:Vail Simba Run Underpass Project Location:Vail, CO Firm Name:Yeh and Associates, Inc. Name of Preparer:Rick Andrew Firm phone No:(303) 781-9590 Scope of Work Date:November 5, 2013 Type of Proposal:Cost Plus Fixed FeeContract #Task order #1 1A. LABOR RATES EMPLOYEEEMPLOYEEDIRECT SALARYINDIRECTOVERHEADLABOR RATE NAMECLASSIFICATIONCOST/HOURCOST (%)1+(b)$/HOUR (a)(b)( c )(d) Aichiouene, MustaphaField Technician23.50$ 142.65%2.426557.02$ Andrew, RichardPrincipal Scientist63.00$ 142.65%2.4265152.87$ Arndt, BenjaminProject Manager51.50$ 142.65%2.4265124.96$ Assay, KeithProject Engineer34.00$ 142.65%2.426582.50$ Hernandez, IvanLab Technician15.50$ 142.65%2.426537.61$ Johnson, RichardProject Manger45.00$ 142.65%2.4265109.19$ LaForce, RobertSr. Materials Manager50.25$ 142.65%2.4265121.93$ Walz, MikeSr. Technician30.00$ 142.65%2.426572.80$ White, SylviaStaff Scientist II26.50$ 142.65%2.426564.30$ 1B. LABOR COSTS LABOR RATEEST. NO.ESTIMATED COST EMPLOYEEEMPLOYEE$/HourOF WORKPER EMPLOYEE NAMECLASSIFICATION((d) from 1A)HOURS Aichiouene, MustaphaField Technician 57.02$ 402,280.91$ Andrew, RichardPrincipal Scientist 152.87$ 162,445.91$ Arndt, BenjaminProject Manager 124.96$ 101,249.65$ Assay, KeithProject Engineer 82.50$ 16013,200.16$ Hernandez, IvanLab Technician 37.61$ 501,880.54$ Johnson, RichardProject Manger 109.19$ 404,367.70$ LaForce, RobertSr. Materials Manager 121.93$ 161,950.91$ Walz, MikeSr. Technician 72.80$ 201,455.90$ White, SylviaStaff Scientist II 64.30$ 503,215.11$ TOTAL LABOR 32,046.79$ 2. FEE (10% x Section 1 B.)FIXED FEE3,204.68$ 3A. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (In-house)*: ITEM ESTIMATED UNITUNITSESTIMATED UNITSRATECOST 2wd Vehicle Mileage[1]0 $0.51mile- 4wd Vehicle Mileage[1]900 $0.54mile486.00 [1]At current actual state government allowed rate *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required SUBTOTAL486.00 3B. OTHER DIRECT COSTS (Outside)*: ITEM ESTIMATED UNITUNITSESTIMATED UNITSRATECOST Lodging[2]8114.00 Per Day 912.00 Per Diem Meals[3]Allowable Cost (see footnote)1071.00 Per Day 710.00 Miscellaneous[4]0- Each- Express mail/courier services0- Each- Postage for major mailings1200.00 Each200.00 Major ReproductionAt actual reasonable cost 0- Each- Parking/TollsAt actual reasonable cost 0- Each- SUBTOTAL1,822.00 *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager requiredOTHER DIRECT COST TOTAL2,308.00$ PROJECT COST WORKSHEET (COST PLUS FIXED FEE) Actual Cost (see footnote) Actual Cost (see footnote) At actual reasonable cost At actual reasonable cost [2] At actual cost, not to exceed the allowable conus rates by county, per State Fiscal Rules. [3] In accordance with current Colorado State Fiscal Rules applying the allowable Conus rate for meals and incidentals applicable county. (No receipt necessary) [4] At actual reasonable cost subject to approval of the CDOT Project Manager 1 of 2 3/4/2014 4A. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (SUBCONSULTANTS)*: FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST -$ -$ -$ SUBTOTAL-$ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required 4B. OUTSIDE SERVICES RATES (VENDORS)*: FIRM NAME ESTIMATED COST Drilling 35,120.00$ Traffic Control 12,400.00$ Outside Lab 700.00$ -$ SUBTOTAL48,220.00$ OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL48,220.00$ *Prior Approval from CDOT Project Manager required TOTAL ESTIMATED COST85,779.46$ (SIGNATURE) (DATE SIGNED) Vice President November 5, 2013 I am a representative of Yeh and Associates, Inc, duly authorized to contractually bind the firm. My signature below constitutes formal agreement (without further signature) to a Task Order, which is issued by the State pursuant to the terms of this Task Order Proposal, without substantive change. I also declare that to the best of my knowledge the wage rates and other factual unit rates supporting the compensation to be paid by the Department for the professional services on this document are accurate, complete, and current at the time of contracting, and include no unallowable or duplicate costs. Richard D. Andrew 2 of 2 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014, an ordinance enacting Title 5, Chapter 12, Vail Town Code, “Recycling Requirements”, establishing regulations regarding recycling of discarded materials by solid waste generators, and solid waste services provided by waste services companies operating in the town of Vail and setting forth details in regards thereto. PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2014, upon second reading BACKGROUND: At the conclusion of the evening session held February 18, 2014, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 upon First Reading, but recommended modifications to the ordinance language to accommodate community hardship, and directed staff to address language and definition clarity. Ordinance No. 6 has been revised accordingly. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Vail Town Council approve Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 upon second reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 - Memo Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 3/4/2014 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2014 SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014, an ordinance enacting Title 5, Chapter 12, Vail Town Code, “Recycling Requirements”, establishing regulations regarding recycling of discarded materials by solid waste generators , and solid waste services provided by waste services companies operating in the town of Vail and setting forth details in regards thereto. I. SUMMARY Ordinance No 6, Series 2014 enacts a new chapter in the Vail Town Code requiring recycling in the Town of Vail, and associated measures to ensure policy, infrastructure, economic incentives, and education to ensure the maximum waste diversion rate. II. BACKGROUND Vail Town Council Waste Diversion Goal Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan Waste Diversion Goal (adopted January, 2009): Reduce the amount of Town of Vail landfill contributions by 10% within 5 years (2013) and 25% within 10 years (2019). At the conclusion of the evening session held February 18, 2014, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014 upon First Reading, but recommended modifications to the ordinance language to accommodate community hardship, and directed staff to address language and definition clarity. III. VAIL COMMUNITY WIDE RECYCLING ORDINANCE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK Definitions The definition of the following have been modified for clarity (inclusions in red): Non-Attractant - Any substance which does not attract wildlife. Substances that are considered to attract wildlife include food products, pet food, feed, compost, grain or salt or materials which formerly contained such items. Office Paper or cardboard that did not previously contain food or other attractants are considered non-attractants. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 Community Hardship Council expressed the desire to extend the effective date of Ordinance No. 6 until July 1st, 2014, and insert a 30-day hardship clause in order to accommodate concerns from the business community that more time may be needed in special cases to modify operations and or infrastructure. Staff agrees that certain property owners may have more difficulty in complying with Ordinance No 6. than others, and special consideration must be given. A 3-month extension will be granted to those demonstrating a hardship, as determined by the town manager. E. Hardship: Upon application to the town manager, and showing of hardship by a property owner or contractor of waste services, and good faith effort of intent to comply, the town manager may grant an extension, for a three month period of time, with which to comply with the provision of this Chapter. At the request of the Vail Chamber and Business Association, language has been added to include the Town’s intent to grant technical assistance where requested and appropriate. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is committed to assisting the community businesses, residents and guests in achieving adopted waste diversion goals, the Town will provide technical assistance in recycling planning Council expressed the desire to delay fines until January 1, 2015 Staff recognizes that the intent of this request is to ensure that the Town is not unnecessarily ticketing unaware, noncompliant property owners, residents or guests. However, staff does not recommend including this dated language in the ordinance. But rather, staff will use a warning system and good judgment following the effective date of July 1st, in order to achieve the goal of compliance, rather than a number of issued fines. Hardships may be granted in difficult cases which will postpone any penalty. Published “Rates” vs. “Rate Range” Several waste haulers expressed the concern that Ordinance No. 6 requires that customers be notified once per year of the recycling and trash service availability, frequency of pickup, and different service level prices for Save as You Recycle residential customers. The ordinance originally stated that “rates” must be published. For various reasons, haulers frequently quote different prices for similar services and do not support publishing their rates. Staff recognizes that through the nature of a n open subscription market, there are elements of competitive pricing and rates are not fixed. However, the intent of the rate publication language was intended to ensure that customers are aware , that should they choose to take advantage of Save as You Recycle, that they have pricing options at different trash levels. Therefore, the ordinance language has been updated to include language to require the “rate ranges” for each level of service be published, rather than the exact price. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Council expressed the concern that additional recycling trucks on the road, as well as the need for some recyclables to be transported to Denver may actually result in increased greenhouse gas emissions and therefore the Town should not include a “Whereas” statement that claims a reduction in the ordinance introduction. Staff recognizes that increasing frequency of pickup and requiring recycling may increase truck traffic and GHGs. However, staff holds that recycling of virgin materials still outweighs the transportation increase in terms of GHG emissions based on feedback from Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. who submits the following: “It is a long-term policy decision... If we wish to support the ski industry and its goals of sustainability to keep snow on mountains, we have found recycling is by far one of the cheapest and most effective. Work in the state of Oregon has shown that the recycling saves so much embedded energy in aluminum that it would be worth shipping aluminum to a market that is 2.2 times the distance to the moon away based on the saved energy vs. making a can out of virgin material. Paper and other materials also have fairly significant numbers….” Construction Waste Recycling Council inquired as to why construction waste was not included as part of Ordinance No. 6. Because construction waste is not a regularly contracted service, a different set of rules and right-of-way issues apply to on-site construction waste recycling. Currently, contractors may order on-site recycling bins for commingled items, steel, clean wood, cardboard, or any other recyclable material. The International Green Construction Code (under review by the Building Department) requires on-site recycling of designated materials should they be adopted by the Vail Town Council in the future. IV. ACTION REQUESTED The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2014, upon second reading. V. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014, Community Wide Recycling Ordinance, revised 3/4/2014 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 SERIES 2014 AN ORDINANCE ENACTING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 12, VAIL TOWN CODE, “RECYCLING REQUIREMENTS”, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS REGARDING RECYCLING OF DISCARDED MATERIALS BY SOLID WASTE GENERATORS, AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY SOLID WASTE SERVICES COMPANIES OPERATING IN THE TOWN OF VAIL AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARDS THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the “Town”) is a home rule Town duly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado and its home rule charter (the “Charter”); WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have been duly elected and qualified; WHEREAS, Article 5 of the Charter sets forth the procedures for amending the Vail Town Code; WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is committed to environmental protection and stewardship; WHEREAS, through the adoption of the Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan, the Town of Vail has established a goal of reducing the waste going to the landfill by 25 percent by 2019. Increased participation in recycling programs and maximizing capture rate of recyclables through existing and future programs are necessary to meet and exceed the recycling goal; WHEREAS, the current waste diversion rate in Eagle County is between 17 and 19 percent, and the diversion rate in the Town of Vail is approximately 10 percent in the residential sector and 19 percent in the business sector, below the national average waste diversion rate of 34.5 percent; W HEREAS, The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment estimates that each person generates approximately 3,150 pounds of waste per year and a large portion of the disposed materials could be reused, recycled or put to other beneficial use, resulting in significant resource, energy, and economic savings ; WHEREAS, as the Eagle County landfill reaches permitted capacity, it is becoming more difficult and expensive to site, p ermit and develop new landfill capacity; WHEREAS, through the adoption of the Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan, the Town of Vail has also established a goal of reducing community greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020, and diverting waste from the landfill is one of the most cost effective and efficient ways of reducing greenhouse gas emissions resulting from landfills and new resource processing; 3/4/2014 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is committed to assisting the community businesses, residents and guests in achieving adopted waste diversion goals, the Town will provide technical assistance in recycling planning; and WHEREAS, municipalities are empowered by C.R.S section 30-15-401(1)(a)(II) to inspect vehicles proposed to operate in the conduct of business of transporting ashes, trash, waste, rubbish, garbage, or industrial waste products or any other discarded materials; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 6, Series 2014, shall be known as “The Community- Wide Recycling Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE T OWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. TITLE 5, CHAPTER 12, is hereby enacted as follows: 5-12-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of this Chapter is to establish policy and infrastructure to support recycling in the Town of Vail in order to reduce the town’s impact on the environment and ensure ongoing waste diversion education to residents and guests. 5-12-2: DEFINITIONS: For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply: Base Unit of Refuse: The smallest increment of volume of refuse or solid waste collection which is no larger than 32 gallons of capacity. Commercial Customer: Any premises where a commercial, industrial, or institutional business or enterprise is undertaken, including, without limitation, reta il shops and establishments, eating or drinking establishment , healthcare facilities, child daycare centers, public and private schools, professional and business offices, religious institutions, and public buildings and facilities. Discarded Materials: All putrescible and non–putrescible solid waste discarded from any residential, multi-family or commercial source including recyclable material. The term discarded materials shall exclude discarded or abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, sewage sludge, hazardous waste, materials used for fertilizer and recyclable material that have been source separated for collection . Hauler: A registered person or company in the business of collecting, transporting or disposing of discarded materials for a fee, or for no fee except as described in Subsection B. of 5-12-3. Multi-Family Customer: Any residential structure(s) that employs a communal system for solid waste and or recyclable materials collection. 3/4/2014 Page 3 Non-Attractant: Any substance which does not attract wildlife. Substances that are considered to attract wildlife include food products, pet food, feed, compost, grain or salt or materials which formerly contained such items. Office Paper or cardboard that did not previously contain food are considered non-attractants. Recycling: The process of separating recyclable materials from refuse and placement for collection by a hauler for the purpose of such materials being re -used or reprocessed into new or different materials. Residential Customer: Any residential structure(s) that does not employ a dumpster or communal service for solid waste and or recyclable materials collection. Recyclable Materials: Materials from any commercial, multi-family, or residential source to be collected separately for the purpose of such materials being repurposed or reprocessed into new or different materials. Recycling Facility: A licensed Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) (e.g. the Eagle County MRF) that accepts and sorts, packages, and otherwise prepares recyclable materials to be repurposed or reprocessed into new or different materials. Refuse: As defined in 5-9-2, Vail Town Code. Refuse shall not include recyclable material. Solid Waste: All putrescible (i.e. containing organic matter) and non-putrescible waste or refuse, excluding discarded or abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, sewage sludge, hazardous waste, materials used for fertilizer and recyclable material that have been source separated for collection. Source Separation: The process by which recyclable materials are separated at the point of generation by the generator thereof from solid waste for the purposes of recycling. 5-12-3: HAULER REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT: It shall be unlawful for any person or company to operate or conduct business as a hauler of residential, multi- family, or commercial solid waste or recyclable material without first obtaining a municipal solid waste hauler registration as set forth in this Section. A. Applicability: 5-12-3 applies to any hauler of solid waste or recyclable material operating in the Town of Vail. B. Exceptions: The following persons or entities are not required to obtain a municipal solid waste hauler collection registration: 1. Any person or their designee who transports to the landfill only the refuse that person generates 3/4/2014 Page 4 2. A civic, community, benevolent or charitable nonprofit organization collecting, transporting and marketing recyclables solely for the purpose of raising funds for a civic, community, benevolent, or charitable event 3. A property owner or agent thereof who transports discarded materials left by a tenant upon such owner’s property, so long as such property owner is not provided compensation from tenants on a regular basis 4. Demolition or construction contractors or landscaping companies that produce and transport discarded material produced incidentally to the demolition, construction, or landscaping work 5. Any person who transports only liquid waste (e.g. restaurant grease or portable toilet waste) 6. The Town of Vail municipal organization and employees thereof, who transport solid waste, recyclable materials and compostable materials generated by the municipal organization, public containers, or special events 7. Special event producers, who transport solid waste and recyclable materials for permitted events 8. Companies that provide special event collection services (e.g. electronic waste collection, on-site paper shredding) 9. Companies contracted by registered solid waste haulers C. Registration Process: The Town of Vail Community Development Department shall set forth the standards for the implementation of the municipal solid waste hauler registration process including the amount of the registration fees, the designation of recyclable materials, and the schedule for collecting registration fees. 1. Proof of Insurance: Upon request, registered municipal solid waste haulers shall provide proof of general comprehensive liability / automobile insurance policy protecting the hauler from all claims for damage to property of for bodily injury, including death, which may arise from operations under or in connection with this registration and providing limits of coverage of not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence or in aggregate. 5-12-4: MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE HAULER REQUIREMENTS A. Bi-Annual Reporting Required: All registered municipal solid waste haulers (the “registrant”) shall submit twice yearly reports to the Community Development Department on the weight (in tons) of solid waste and recyclable materials collected within the Vail town limits. For loads that contain solid waste or recyclable materials originating in part from within the town limits and in part from outside the town limits the reported quantity may be estimated by the registered hauler but shall use a format approved by the Community Development Department which shall include the use of both the scale tickets and customer route sheets, and reported as an estimate. 3/4/2014 Page 5 B. Submittal Required: Bi-annual reports shall be submitted on May 1 and October 1, or on the next business day, using a format approved by the Community Development Department. All reports shall be treated as confidential commercial documents under the provisions of the Colorado Open Records Act. C. Recyclable Material Designation: Except for materials that customers have not properly prepared for recycling and so are contaminated 25 percent or more of non-recyclable refuse, haulers may not dispose of recyclable materials set out by customers by any means other than delivering it to a MRF that sorts, packages, and otherwise prepares recyclable materials to be repurposed or reprocessed into new materials. D. Notice: Haulers of residential, multi-family, or commercial solid waste shall give each of its customers written notice of all available service options and corresponding variable rates ranges upon commencement of service. Written notice of the full range of services including variable rate service, container sizes, and the recycling service options including the materials that may be recycle d shall be provided to all new customers upon commencing service and all haulers shall provide notice at least annually to customers on the full range of services, container sizes, variable rate ranges for each level of service and recycling options including the materials that may be recycled. On or before January 31st each year the hauler shall deliver to the Community Development Department a true and correct copy of the notices sent to each customer type. E. Residential Embedded Rates: On residential customer waste bills, haulers shall combine charges for solid waste and recyclable material collection service and may not itemize them separately. F. Residential Volume Based Rates: Haulers shall offer each of its customers the option to subscribe to different levels of service with different capacities of solid waste containers, such as 32, 64 and 96 gallon containers/carts, and shall charge their customers based on this volume of service. For r esidential source customers, the base unit of solid waste service shall be no larger than the approximate capacity equivalent of a 32 gallon container or cart. If a customer does not select a level of service, the provider shall establish a default minimum level of service that is not larger than 2 units of service or a single 64 gallon container or cart. 1. Variable Rates: Haulers shall charge variable rates for the corresponding level of service or units of solid waste collection for residential customers. a. Haulers shall structure the increments of their variable rate at a multiple of the base unit of solid waste collection which is no larger than 32 gallons. The second largest increment of solid waste collection shall be no larger than two times the capacity of the base unit or no larger than 64 gallons, and the third largest increment of solid waste collection shall be no larger than two times the capacity of the second largest increment of solid waste collection. Such rate increments shall be equal to 80% or more 3/4/2014 Page 6 of the charges for the base unit of collection (e.g, if $10.00 is applied to a 32 gallon container, a minimum of $18.00 shall be applied to a 64 gallon container, and a minimum of $32.40 shall be applied to a 96 gallon container). b. The provisions of this subsection shall not be con strued to prohibit any hauler from establishing rules and regulations regarding the safe maximum weight of containers of solid waste and recyclable material containers. c. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting any hauler from providing separate pricing for special collection of bulky items, yard waste, contaminated recyclables, unscheduled pick-up or extra volumes of solid waste or recyclable material, or more than what was subscribed for with the hauler. G. Commercial Embedded Rates: On commercial customer account bills, every solid waste hauler shall combine charges for solid waste and recyclable material collection service and may not itemize them separately. Haulers shall provide sufficient recyclable material capacity and frequency service to prevent an overflow of material. H. Auditing: A representative of the Town of Vail may audit a registered municipal solid waste hauler’s subscription, billing and other relevant records to determine whether or not the provider has complied with the provisions of 5-12-4 at the provider’s office located nearest to the Town of Vail during hours that the office is open for business, on at least five day’s written notice. I. Frequency of Residential Recycling Service: Haulers shall offer each of their residential customers curbside recyclables collection service at the same frequency of all other refuse collection, no smaller than 64 gallons capacity of the designated recyclable materials. All containers are subject to the provisions of Section 5-9, Vail Town Code, wherein all attractants shall be stored in wildlife resistant, locked containers. Non-attractants are not required to be stored in wildlife resistant, locked containers provided they are not mixed with attractants. J. Container Labels: Haulers shall provide labels or label all solid waste and recycling material containers indicating what materials are accepted in each container. The labels shall include pictures and words of the acceptable materials and be in both English and Spanish. 5-12-5: DESIGNATED RECYCLABLES LIST A. Designated Recyclables (Collection): The recyclable materials that haulers are required to pick up shall be set forth in the Town’s ‘Recyclable Materials List’ which shall be prepared and may be amended as conditions change. The Recyclable Materials List shall be available for review on the Town’s website. 3/4/2014 Page 7 B. Designated Recyclables (Generators): The recyclable materials that generators are required to source separate from their solid waste shall be set forth in the Town’s ‘Recyclable Material List’ which shall be prepared and amended as conditions change. The Recyclable Materials List shall be available for review on the Town’s website. 5-12-6: RECYCLING REQUIREMENTS A. Placement of Recyclable Materials and Solid Waste for Pick Up: 1. All recyclable materials accumulated on any premise s shall be placed in a container or containers separate from solid waste. 2. Recyclable materials shall not be placed in solid waste containers. 3. No refuse, solid waste, or compost shall be placed in any recycling container. 4. Nothing in this section is intended to prevent any person from donating or selling recyclable materials generated on their premises . B. Requirement for Recycling Service: 1. All recyclable material shall be source separated, stored, and presented for collection by a registered municipal solid waste hauler. 2. It shall be the duty of any owner or occupant of any premises to ensure that containers designated for collection or disposal as solid waste do not contain recyclable materials when such containers are offered for solid waste collection. 3. It shall be the duty of any owner or occupant of any premises to ensure that they contract for recycling service or otherwise provide service for the delivery of recycling material to a MRF. The service shall be of an adequate level to prevent the designated recyclable material containers from overflowing on a regular basis. 4. The container(s) shall be wildlife resistant, and handled in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 9, Vail Town Code, employing a latching mechanism on the access door sufficient to defeat attempts by wildlife to enter. a. Exception: Recycling containers greater than 20 cubic yards of capacity. 5. Any owner or occupant of a commercial establishment with solid waste disposal containers available for customers or guests shall make available a 3/4/2014 Page 8 container for recyclable materials that is of similar size and located in an equally convenient location. 5-12-7: VIOLATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT A. Violations (Hauler): It shall be unlawful for haulers to: 1. Fail or refuse to follow the requirements for registration of this chapter or; 2. Aid or abet another in any attempt to evade any requirements imposed by this chapter. 3. Violation of provisions of the ordinance shall be subject to penalties according to Section 1-4-1, Vail Town Code. B. Violations (Generator): It shall be unlawful for any owner or occupant of any residential, multi-family, or commercial premises to: 1. Fail or refuse to follow the requirements imposed by this chapter 2. Aid or abet another in any attempt to evade any requirements imposed by this chapter. 3. Violation of provisions of the ordinance shall be subject penalties according to Section 1-4-1, Vail Town Code. C. Enforcement: Town of Vail police and code enforcement officers shall have the authority to issue a warning notice or a summons and complaint to any person in violation of this chapter. D. Penalty Assessment: A resident or owner/occupant of a commercial establishment shall be deemed to have been issued an appropriate notice of violation if it is personally served upon the resident or owner/occupant, placed in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid and addressed to the resident or owner/occupant according to the last known address given by the re sident or owner/occupant to any town of Vail or Eagle County government department. If the identity of the resident is not known, the entity responsible for payment of refuse removal services for the subject location will be held responsible for complying with this chapter and for any penalties assessed pursuant to the same. E. Hardship: Upon application to the town manager, and showing of hardship by a property owner or contractor of waste services, and good faith effort of intent to comply, the town manager may grant an extension, for a three month period of time, with which to comply with the provision of this Chapter. Section 7. Effective Date: Ordinance 6, Series 2014, shall be in effect as of June 1 July 1, 2014. Section 8. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity 3/4/2014 Page 9 of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 9. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 10. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 11. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, r esolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST AND FINAL READING this 18th day of February, 2014 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 4th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail Colorado. ________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON SECOND AND FINAL READING this 4th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail Colorado. ________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, an ordinance for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12-2-2: Definitions of Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and to amend Sections 12- 7B, 12-7H, 12-7I and 12-8E replacing the term “Commercial Ski Storage” with “Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club, and setting forth details in regard thereto. PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, upon first reading. BACKGROUND: At the Town Council Public Hearing on February 18, 2014 staff provided an update on this item with information from the February 10 th Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. After careful deliberation and after taking public comment, the Town Council determined that the existing regulatory mechanism, discounting the determination of similar use that occurred in 2006 related to the 3 rd floor of the Vista Bahn Building, is sound and appropriate pertaining to allowable locations for ski storage/ski club type uses. The Council directed staff to perform the necessary analysis and code work to make certain, with no ambiguity or room for misunderstanding, that ski storage/ski club uses, in all their variations, are appropriately located only in the basement or garden level of a structure in the Commercial Core 1 (CC-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) and Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR-2). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission at their February 24, 2014 meeting unanimously recommended approval of the proposed code amendments. ATTACHMENTS: TC Memo Ski Storage 3/4/2014 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2014 SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, an ordinance for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 12-2-2: Definitions of Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and to amend Titles 12-7B, 12-7H, 12-7I and 12-8D replacing the term “Commercial Ski Storage” with “Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140003) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY The Community Development Department requests a first reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014 to redefine Commercial Ski Storage as Commercial Ski Storage/Private Club, to clarify allowable locations for Commercial Ski Storage/Private Clubs and to provide additional language to assist in the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure. These proposed code amendments do not result in any changes to the regulations pertaining to the location or operating characteristics of ski storage/ski concierge/ski clubs within the Vail Villages. The changes do provide clarity and a greater understanding concerning these subjects. On March 18, 2014 staff will be returning to the Town Council with a resolution that will document the previous determination made by the Town Council in 2006 that a particular ski storage type use was a “Cocktail Lounges and Bars.” This resolution will clearly and unambiguously memorialize that this determination is no longer valid and that Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Clubs are appropriately located only in the basement or garden level of a structure in the Commercial Core 1 (CC-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) and Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR-2). II. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE TOWN COUNCIL The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, upon first reading. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 III. BACKGROUND On June 18, 2013, the Vail Town Council enacted a moratorium on the acceptance and processing of land use applications involving ski storage/ski clubs to December 17, 2013. The purpose of the moratorium is to enable the community to study their effects, with consideration for the Town’s existing land use regulations and master plans. This moratorium has been extended to March 19, 2014 to allow additional time to complete the necessary analysis and review. The Community Development Department presented a historical background on the Commercial Ski Storage use at the January 7, 2014 work session before the Town Council. At this meeting the council requested additional information concerning sales tax generation, the varieties of ski storage/ski clubs in operation and about the possible impacts ski storage/ski clubs on existing or future business/professional office uses Staff returned to the Town Council on February 4, 2014 with the information requested to build upon the previous conversation and for a determination on what changes, if any, to the policy on Commercial Ski Storage and private ski clubs may be appropriate. At the Town Council Public Hearing on February 18, 2014 staff provided an update on this item with information from the February 10th Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. After careful deliberation and after taking public comment, the Town Council determined that the existing regulatory mechanism, discounting the determination of similar use that occurred in 2006 related to the 3rd floor of the Vista Bahn Building, is sound and appropriate pertaining to allowable locations for ski storage/ski club type uses. The Council directed staff to perform the necessary analysis and code work to make certain, with no ambiguity or room for misunderstanding, that ski storage/ski club uses, in all their variations, are appropriately located only in the basement or garden level of a structure in the Commercial Core 1 (CC-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) and Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR-2). The Planning and Environmental Commission at their February 24, 2014 meeting unanimously recommended approval of the proposed code amendments. IV. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, upon first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council pass the following motion: ““The Vail Town Council approves on first reading Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, an ordinance to amend Title 12-2-2: Definitions of Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and to amend Titles 12-7B, 12-7H, 12-7I and 12-8D 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 replacing the term “Commercial Ski Storage” with “Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2014, on first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council make the following findings: “Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections V of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated February 24, 2014, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Vail Town Council finds: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations outlined in Section 12-1-2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality." VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No.8, Series of 2014 B. PEC memorandum dated February 24, 2014 C. Draft PEC Meeting Minutes. 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 8 SERIES OF 2014 AN ORDINANCE FOR PRESCRIBED REGULATION AMENDMENTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 12-3-7, AMENDMENT, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO AMEND SECTION 12-2-2: DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS PERTAINING TO COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE AND THE DELINEATION OF DIFFERENT FLOORS OR LEVELS WITHIN A STRUCTURE, AND TO AMEND ARTICLES 12-7B, 12-7H, 12-7I AND 12-8E REPLACING THE TERM “COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE” WITH “COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE/SKI CLUB”, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the “Town”), is a home rule Town duly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado and its home rule charter (the “Charter”); WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have been duly elected and qualified; WHEREAS, Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, sets forth the procedures for amending the Town’s Zoning Regulations; WHEREAS, the existing term “Commercial Ski Storage” no longer accurately encompasses the types and operational characteristics of this use; WHEREAS, it is necessary to define a new term, ““Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club” that will accurately define the range of operations included in this use; WHEREAS, it is necessary to replace “Commercial Ski Storage” with “Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club” in those zone districts where it is an allowable use; WHEREAS, the delineation of a structure into levels or floors is essential for the application of horizontal zoning; WHEREAS, the Community Development Department is committed to making the Town Code easily understood; WHERAS, from time to time is it necessary and prudent to update the Town Code; WHEREAS, on February 24, 2014, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. Section 12-2-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, shall be amended as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 2 - BASEMENT OR GARDEN LEVEL: For the purposes of implementing horizontal zoning within specific zone districts, basement or garden level shall be any floor, or portion of any floor, of a structure located substantially below the first floor or street level of that structure, as determined by the administrator. More than one floor, or portion of floors, may be defined as basement or garden level within a single structure. Floors that exhibit characteristics of more than one particular floor or level shall be classified at the most restrictive level. Possible characteristics include but are not limited to varying topography, multiple points of access and the existence of adjacent vehicular or pedestrian ways; e.g. a floor with both garden and street level attributes will be classified as street level as the uses on the street level have greater limitations. COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE: Storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles) and/or clothing used in skiing related sports, which is available to the public or members, operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. Ski storage that is part of a lodge, or dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage. COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE/SKI CLUB: Storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles) and/or clothing used in skiing related sports, which is available to the public or members, operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. This use may have, but does not require, the following components: • Personal lockers • Boot dryers • Ski storage racks • Ski tuning • Food and beverage service • Areas for congregation and/or socializing • Restrooms and/or shower facilities • Non-winter activities • Concierge ski services • Retail sales • Business Center Ski storage that is within a lodge, or dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage/ski club. FIRST FLOOR OR STREET LEVEL: For the purposes of implementing horizontal zoning within specific zone districts, first floor or street level shall be any floor, or portion of any floor, of a structure located at or nearest to (either above or below) the level of the adjacent vehicular or pedestrian way, as determined by the administrator. More than one floor, or portion of floors, may be defined as first floor or street level within a single structure. Floors that exhibit characteristics of more than one particular floor or level shall be classified at the most restrictive level. Possible characteristics include but are not limited to varying topography, multiple points of access and the existence of adjacent vehicular or pedestrian ways; e.g. a floor with both garden and street level attributes will be classified as street level as the uses on the street level have greater limitations. 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 2 - Section 2. Section 12-7B-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, (CC1 District) Vail Town Code, shall be amended as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in basement or garden levels within a structure: 2. Personal services and repair shops, including the following: Beauty and barber shops. Commercial ski storage. Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club Small appliance repair shops. Tailors and dressmakers. Travel and ticket agencies. Section 3. Section 12-7H-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, (LMU-1 District) Vail Town Code, shall be amended as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in basement or garden levels within a structure: Banks and financial institutions. Child daycare centers. Commercial ski storage. Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club Eating and drinking establishments. Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title. Personal services and repair shops. Professional offices, business offices and studios. 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 3 - Public or private lockers and storage. Recreation facilities. Retail establishments. Skier ticketing, ski school and skier services. Travel and ticket agencies. Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of section 12-3-4 of this title. Section 4. Section 12-7I-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, (LMU-2 District) Vail Town Code, shall be amended as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in basement or garden levels within a structure: Banks and financial institutions. Child daycare centers. Commercial ski storage. Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club Eating and drinking establishments. Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title. Personal services and repair shops. Professional offices, business offices and studios. Public or private lockers and storage. Recreation facilities. Retail establishments. Skier ticketing, ski school and skier services. Travel and ticket agencies. Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 4 - subsection, in accordance with the provisions of section 12-3-4 of this title. Section 5. Section 12-8E-2, Permitted Uses; (SBR2 District) Vail Town Code, shall be amended as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): The following uses shall be permitted within the ski base/recreation 2 district: Eating and drinking establishments including the following: Bakeries and delicatessens with food service, restricted to preparation of products specifically for sale on the premises. Cocktail lounges and bars. Coffee shop. Fountains and sandwich shops. Restaurants. Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title. Lodges. Private or public off street loading facilities. Private or public off street vehicle parking structures. Public parks and outdoor recreation facilities. Residential uses including the following: Accommodation units. Multi-family residential dwelling units. Single-family residential dwelling units. Two-family residential dwelling units. Ski base oriented uses including the following: Commercial ski storage on the basement or garden level of a building. Commercial Ski Storage/Ski Club on the basement or garden level of a building. 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 5 - Retail stores and establishments. Ski lifts and tows. Ski patrol facilities. Ski racing facilities. Ski school facilities. Ski trails. Skier and guest services including, but not limited to, uses such as basket rental, lockers, ski repair, ski rental, lift ticket sales, public restrooms, information/activity desk. Snowmaking facilities. Special community events, including, but not limited to, ski races, festivals, concerts, and recreational, cultural and educational programs and associated improvements/facilities, subject to the issuance of a special events license. Section 6. Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance, the Vail Town Council finds and determines the follows: a. The amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and are compatible with the development objectives of the town; b. The amendments further the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and, c. The amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. d. This ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 7. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 8. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 8, Series 2014 - 6 - remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 9. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 10. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of March, 2014, and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 18th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. __________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: February 24, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 12-2-2: Definitions of Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140003) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence I. PURPOSE With a revised direction from the Town Council, the purpose of this hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission has also changed. In contrast to exploring the possibilities of allowing ski storage/ski clubs on floors other than basement and garden levels, the purpose has shifted to ensuring that the Town Code and the community are absolutely clear on what ski storage/ski clubs are and where their use is permissible. Staff highlights the following areas in need of clarification: • Revise the definition of Commercial Ski Storage to accurately identify the use and its possible components. • Examine the existing language pertaining to how different floors of a structure are classified in terms of basement, garden level, street level, etc. for the purposes of simplifying and clarifying its methodology. • Investigate the effects of an existing use becoming nonconforming as a result of any code revisions. II. INTRODUCTION In the Spring of 2013 the Department of Community Development received a written request for a use determination concerning ski storage/ski club type uses on the second floor of the Vista Bahn Building, formerly occupied by the Tap Room bar and restaurant. This request was utilizing for its basis the 2006 determination by the Vail Town Council 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 that a “ski club with ski storage” where the storage did not utilize in excess of 30% of the floor area was, for the purposes of zoning, the same as a “cocktail lounge and bar,” a defined use in the Town Code. This determination allowed the Cordillera Gondola Club to operate out of the third floor of the Vista Bahn Building since that time. On June 18, 2013, the Vail Town Council enacted a moratorium on the acceptance and processing of land use applications involving ski storage/ski clubs to December 17, 2013. The purpose of the moratorium is to enable the community to study their effects, with consideration for the Town’s existing land use regulations and master plans. This moratorium has been extended to March 19, 2014 to allow additional time to complete the necessary analysis and review. The Community Development Department presented a historical background on the Commercial Ski Storage use at the January 7, 2014 work session before the Town Council. At this meeting the council requested additional information concerning sales tax generation, the varieties of ski storage/ski clubs in operation and about the possible impacts ski storage/ski clubs on existing or future business/professional office uses Staff returned to the Town Council on February 4, 2014 with the information requested to build upon the previous conversation and for a determination on what changes, if any, to the policy on Commercial Ski Storage and private ski clubs may be appropriate. At the Town Council Public Hearing on February 18, 2014 staff provided an update on this item with information from the February 10th Commission meeting. After careful deliberation and after taking public comment, the Town Council determined that the existing regulatory mechanism, discounting the determination of similar use that occurred in 2006 related to the 3rd floor of the Vista Bahn Building, is sound and appropriate pertaining to allowable locations for ski storage/ski club type uses. The Council directed staff to perform the necessary analysis and code work to make certain, with no ambiguity or room for misunderstanding, that ski storage/ski club uses, in all their variations, are appropriately located only in the basement or garden level of a structure in the Commercial Core 1 (CC-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 (LMU-2) and Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR-2). III. INVESTIGATION Ski Storage/Ski Clubs Use Definition The current definition of Commercial Ski Storage was adopted in 1989 to clarify the use and the location where the use was allowed. The use was (and is) restricted to the Basement and Garden Levels of a structure and reads as follows: EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE: Storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles) and/or clothing used in skiing related sports, which is available to the public or 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 members, operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. Ski storage that is part of a lodge, or dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage. During the research surrounding the issue of ski storage/ski clubs, staff identified a minimum of five (5) different variations on the use occurring within the community. While the Town Council also recognized the differentiation that has occurred within the use, the direction was not to treat any of the variations separately and that the same standards related to operating locations should apply. To this end, staff offers the following revised definition to replace the existing Commercial Ski Storage definition: Chapter 2, Definitions is proposed to be amended in part as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE: Storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles) and/or clothing used in skiing related sports, which is available to the public or members, operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. Ski storage that is part of a lodge, or dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage. COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE/SKI CLUB: Storage for equipment (skis, snowboards, boots and poles) and/or clothing used in skiing related sports, which is available to the public or members, operated by a business, club or government organization, and where a fee is charged for hourly, daily, monthly, seasonal or annual usage. This use may have, but does not require, the following components: • Personal lockers • Boot dryers • Ski storage racks • Ski tuning • Food and beverage service • Areas for congregation and/or socializing • Restrooms and/or shower facilities • Non-winter activities • Concierge ski services • Retail sales • Business Center Ski storage that is within a lodge, or dwelling unit, in which a fee is not charged, is not considered commercial ski storage/ski club. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 4 Building floor determination During deliberations before both the Commission and the Town Council, confusion was apparent related to the classification of different floors within a structure. Challenges have been expressed from staff and the community on this topic, especially concerning determinations that result in portions of a floor having a different classification than other portions of the same floor. To remove this uncertainty and provide a more predictable regulatory environment, staff suggests the following revisions: Chapter 2, Definitions is proposed to be amended in part as follows (text to be deleted is in strikethrough, text that is to be added is bold, and sections of text that are not amended have been omitted): BASEMENT OR GARDEN LEVEL: For the purposes of implementing horizontal zoning within specific zone districts, basement or garden level shall be any floor, or portion of any floor, of a structure located substantially below the first floor or street level of that structure, as determined by the administrator. More than one floor, or portion of floors, may be defined as basement or garden level within a single structure. Floors that exhibit characteristics of more than one particular floor or level shall be classified at the most restrictive level. Possible characteristics include but are not limited to varying topography, multiple points of access and the existence of adjacent vehicular or pedestrian ways; e.g. a floor with both garden and street level attributes will be classified as street level as the uses on the street level have greater limitations. FIRST FLOOR OR STREET LEVEL: For the purposes of implementing horizontal zoning within specific zone districts, first floor or street level shall be any floor, or portion of any floor, of a structure located at or nearest to (either above or below) the level of the adjacent vehicular or pedestrian way, as determined by the administrator. More than one floor, or portion of floors, may be defined as first floor or street level within a single structure. Floors that exhibit characteristics of more than one particular floor or level shall be classified at the most restrictive level. Possible characteristics include but are not limited to varying topography, multiple points of access and the existence of adjacent vehicular or pedestrian ways; e.g. a floor with both garden and street level attributes will be classified as street level as the uses on the street level have greater limitations. Effects on an existing use becoming nonconforming In clarifying ski storage/ski club uses and their allowable locations, existing uses in particular locations may become nonconforming. Uses that were legally established are allowed to continue with certain restrictions. The code sections applicable are: 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 5 Chapter 18: Nonconforming Sites, Uses, Structures and Site Improvements (in part) 12-18-1: PURPOSE: This chapter is intended to limit the number and extent of nonconforming uses and structures by prohibiting or limiting their enlargement, their reestablishment after abandonment and their restoration after substantial destruction. While permitting nonconforming uses, structures, and improvements to continue, this chapter is intended to limit enlargement, alteration, restoration, or replacement which would increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the development standards prescribed by this title 12-18-4: USES: The use of a site or structure lawfully established prior to the effective date hereof which does not conform to the use regulations prescribed by this title for the zone district in which it is situated may be continued, provided that no such nonconforming use shall be enlarged to occupy a greater site area or building floor area than it occupied on the effective date hereof. Any subsequent reduction in site area or floor area occupied by a nonconforming use shall be deemed a new limitation, and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater site area or floor area than such new limitation. Although it is the intention of the code to limit the number and extent of nonconforming uses, the creation of new nonconforming uses is unavoidable if the purposes of the revised code language are to be realized. No changes to this section are proposed. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BODIES Order of Review: Generally, text amendment applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Commission will forward a recommendation to the Town Council. The Town Council will then review the text amendment application. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for the review of a text amendment application, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and forwarding of a recommendation to the Town Council. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a text amendment to the Vail Town Code. Town Council: The Town Council is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a text amendment application, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 6 The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. V. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and Section 12-1-2, Purpose, Vail Town Code, identifies the general and specific purposes as follows: 12-1-2: Purpose: A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 7 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Staff finds the proposed zoning code amendments further the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations by promoting the harmonious development of the Town’s villages while maintaining established community qualities and economic values. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and Staff finds that the proposed prescribed regulations amendments will better implement or achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Specifically in the Vail Land Use Plan’s adopted Goals and Policies, staff identified the following applicable statements: 1. General Growth /Development 1.1. Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 2. Skier /Tourist Concerns 2.4. The community should improve summer recreational options to improve year-round tourism. 2.5. The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve year-round tourism. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 8 4. Village Core / Lionshead 4.3. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural settings, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 3. The text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and The storage of skis and skiing related gear has evolved from the storage of equipment to a personal service desired and often expected by our guests. As this land use has evolved, the Vail Town Code has remained static, choosing instead to characterize the new uses as variants of other uses. As a result of this inaction, the town code is unable to provide the necessary regulatory framework to effectively and fairly uphold the intent of the Lionshead and Vail Village Master Plans and the Town Zoning Code itself. The new definition takes into account the substantial changes that have occurred concerning the use since the adoption of the current regulation. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and Staff believes this text amendment will ensure a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with the Town's development objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the planning and environmental commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the prescribed regulations amendments. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 12-2-2: Definitions of 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 9 Words and Terms pertaining to Commercial Ski Storage and the delineation of different floors or levels within a structure, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V this memorandum, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations outlined in Section 12-1-2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality." 3/4/2014 Page 1 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION February 24, 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 John Rediker Luke Cartin Susan Bird Michael Kurz 20 minutes 1. A request for a final review of a variance, from Section 12-14-17, Setback From Water Course, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for additional gross residential floor area within the stream tract setback, located at 4444A Streamside Circle/Lot 11, Bighorn Subdivision 4th Addition, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140001) Applicant: Mark Medley, represented by Steven James Riden Architect Planner: Joe Batcheller ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 4-1-0 (Kurz opposed) CONDITION(S): Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail design review approval of this proposal. Joe Batcheller gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Commissioner Bird inquired as to the ability to provide an alternative power source for the lift station in the event the power goes out to ensure that raw sewage does not back up and potential enter the stream. Steven Riden spoke to his support for the town’s desire and role to better the health of Gore Creek. He highlighted changes made since the last hearing to address the concerns. He spoke to the fact that there will be two sump pumps and that insurance was requiring a back up power supply for the pumps to insure insurance coverage. He spoke to the revised landscape plan which was design to return the bank to a more natural vegetative state. There was no public comment. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the improvements along the creek being a desired outcome on all properties along the creek. Commissioner Pratt stated that despite grade elevation change with the walkout and the 100- year floodplain there are events which exceed this and there is a risk of a flooded basement. Commissioner Kurz spoke that he appreciated the review of the Environmental Sustainability Coordinator. He was concerned about the recent 303d listing and a continued attempt to creep up onto the creek which have a negative effect. He does not believe there is a hardship and the property owner does enjoy a reasonable use of the property. Commissioner Pierce stated there is a distinction between this property and publicly owned land encroachments. 3/4/2014 Page 2 20 minutes 2. A request for the review of an amended conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and private school, to allow for the construction of a new attached greenhouse, located at 3000 Booth Falls Road/ Lot 1, Vail Mountain School, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140004) Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Joe Batcheller ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Bird VOTE: 4-0-1 (Pierce recused) Joe Batcheller gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Bill Pierce recused himself due to a conflict of interest as his firm worked on the plans. Commissioner Kurz supported the use of and construction of a greenhouse. He encouraged the applicant to use best practices with regard to fertilizers, composting, pesticides, etc. Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, covered many elements of the application, including reaching out to many neighbors to have face-to-face meetings to ensure concerns were addressed. Commissioner Cartin inquired as to the thoughts around the excess heat loading caused by the greenhouse. Was the heat going to be used or just vented out as necessary? He also asked the applicant to look at glare properties of the windows and impacts to adjacent roadways and properties. Dominic Maureillo spoke to the goals and desires with the proposal. There was no public comment. Commissioner Pratt spoke to the prominence of the location and the importance of looking at the glass glare issues. He felt it would be an asset to the curriculum. 25 minutes 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: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 4-1-0 (Pierce opposed) CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant shall execute a Subdivider’s Improvement Agreement in a form approved by the Town of Vail prior to the submittal of a building permit to ensure the completion of the proposed driveway extension for the Elk Meadows Subdivision. 2. The applicant shall submit final engineered construction plans for the driveway extension to the Public Works Department for final review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for a residential structure in the Elks Meadows Subdivision. 3/4/2014 Page 3 3. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District for the abandonment of the current easement and the acceptance of the new easement. Joe Batcheller gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Sharon Cohn asked some questions regarding the conditions of approval and how the timing would work between recording the plat and commencing construction. Staff proposed new language that allows for flexibility per the Town Attorney’s input. Commissioner Pierce stated his continued opposition to the relocation of Lot 1 and its effect on the open space. Commissioner Bird asked about the fire turn around, fire hydrant, and guard rail. Joe Batcheller explained that parking in the fire lane will not be allowed; the fire hydrant will be located between lots 2 and 3; and a guard rail may or may not be recommended during the development review process. 30 minutes 4. A request for a work session for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi-public indoor community facility (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: George Ruther ACTION: No Vote, Work Session Warren Campbell delivered staff’s presentation Susan Bird ask how the recommended site was determined. Warren Campbell referenced the Town Council’s decision based on the Ford Park Master Plan criteria for evaluating locations. The PEC discussed the other locations and the process by which the preferred location was selected. Pratt mentioned accessible pathways and which entity is responsible for modifying them and to what degree? Warren Campbell said that it will need further discussion to be properly addressed. Pratt said that it directly correlates to question #7. Warren Campbell responded… Jack Hunn gave a presentation, responding to the 18 questions to the last working session. Chairman Pierce asked for clarification on questions 7, 8, 17, and 18. Jack Hunn addressed the concerns with ADA compliance, and separate bathroom facilities. Henry Pratt suggested a subterranean bathroom accessed from the basketball court. Jack Hunn addressed the concerns with homerun softballs. Chairman Pierce asked how this would be mitigated. Hunn responded with a higher fence. Chairman Pierce would like the VRD to weigh in. 3/4/2014 Page 4 Kurz: “What’s going to grow on your roof ?” Jack Hunn stated it would be similar to what already exists on-site. Luke Cartin asked about loading and deliveries. Jack Hunn explained a workable scenario. Chairman Pierce expressed reservations with increased vehicular traffic on West Betty Ford Way. Jack Hunn then discussed questions 14 & 15. Henry Pratt said he agreed with staff’s opinion and felt an additional bus stop was unnecessary and reinforces the feasibility of the other site by the existing bus stop. Michael Kurz mentioned the need for an operating plan to address loading and deliveries. Jack Hunn deferred to Nicola to address question 18. Nicola stated that the BFAG Center would not solicit renters for special events, but would like the option to make it available. Commissioner Bird inquired about the “volunteer space.” Nicola explained. Luke Cartin asked about the process and the sequence of approvals needed (???). Warren Cambell explained……… 60 minutes 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Titles 12 & 14, Zoning Regulations and Development Standards, pertaining to the definitions, use restrictions and development standards for Commercial Ski Storage and Private Ski Clubs, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140003) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5-0-0 Jonathan Spence gave a presentation. Susan Bird asked for clarification. Jonathan Spence reiterated the points of his presentation. Chairman Pierce asked about the Sebastian ski storage scenario—if such would be allowed today. Jonathan explained that as floors are defined, yes, it could be. The Gondola Club (in the same building, third floor) would be non-conforming, however. Henry Pratt asked about private ski clubs and how they would be allowed. Jonathan explained that it depended on how its use was defined, in tandem with its accessory uses. Henry Pratt asked about some specific examples using various properties and uses, and how such may be defined as a floor. Jonathan and Warren assisted the commission in understanding how floor determination is made. 6. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from W atercourse, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of gross residential floor area within the prescribed setback, located at 1975 Placid Drive Unit 33/Lot 33, Vail Village West Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC130025). Applicant: Rosslyn May Valentine Residence Trust, represented by Richard Bolduc Planner: Joe Batcheller 3/4/2014 Page 5 ACTION: Withdrawn 7. 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: Table to March 10, 2014 MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Bird VOTE: 5-0-0 8. Approval of February 10, 2014 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 4-0-1 (Cartin recused) 9. Information Update 10. Adjournment MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin 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 February 21, 2014 in the Vail Daily. 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: First reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140002 ) PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Town Council review the Planning and Environmental Commission recommendation and approve, approve with modifications or deny the first reading of the rezoning ordinance. BACKGROUND: On August 21, 2012 the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2012 establishing the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District. The Vail Village Townhouse (VVT) District was adopted following numerous public hearings before the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council first, as a private property owner initiated application and later, as a Community Development staff led effort. On December 17, 2013 the Vail Town Council instructed staff to submit a rezoning application for the properties known as The Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes, omitting from the application the Vail Rowhouses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalet and Vail Trails East. On February 10, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Vail Town Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” ATTACHMENTS: Staff Memo with Attachments 3/4/2014 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2014 SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140002) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY The applicant, Town of Vail, is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. II. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE TOWN COUNCIL The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, upon first reading. III. BACKGROUND On December 17, 2013 the Vail Town Council instructed staff to submit a rezoning application for the properties known as The Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes, omitting from the application the Vail Rowhouses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalet and Vail Trails East. On January 10, 2014 staff notified the owners of the properties affected by the proposed rezoning of the proposal and the planned meeting dates. This correspondence was in addition to the formal notice which was sent to the property owners on January 23, 2014 and published in the Vail Daily on January 24, 2014. On February 10, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, for the properties located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4. This recommendation was based upon the review of the criteria outlined in the February 4, 2014 memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the evidence and testimony presented. IV. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, upon first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council pass the following motion: “The Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, an ordinance rezoning certain properties from the High Density Multiple- Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council make the following findings: “Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections IX of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated February 10, 2014, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Vail Town Council finds: 1. That the amendments are consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; 2. That the amendments are compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and, 3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality.” 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 V. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2014 B. PEC memorandum dated February 10, 2014 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 9, Series 2014 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 9 SERIES OF 2014 AN ORDINANCE FOR A ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 12-3-7, AMENDMENT, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ALLOW FOR A REZONING OF: 1. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 7 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 7 2. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 8 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 8 3. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 9 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 9 4. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 10 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 10 5. TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN UNIT: A AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11A 6. TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN UNIT: B AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11B 7. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 12 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 12 8. OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS UNIT: 1 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 13 9. OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS UNIT: 2 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 13 10. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 1 11. TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 2(1) 12. TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 2(2) 13. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 3 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 3 14. MURFREE CONDO UNIT: 4A AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 4(A) 15. MURFREE CONDO UNIT: 4B AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 4(B) 16. FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS UNIT: 5A AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 5(A) 17. FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS UNIT: 5B AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 5(B) 18. TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 6 UNIT 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 6(1) 19. TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 6 UNIT 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 6(2) 20. TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 7 UNIT 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 7(1) 21. TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 7 UNIT 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 7(2) 22. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 8 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 8 23. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 9 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 9 FROM THE HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE-FAMILY DISTRICT TO THE VAIL VILLAGE TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the “Town”), is a home rule Town duly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado and its home rule charter (the “Charter”); and, 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 9, Series 2014 - 2 - WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have been duly elected and qualified; and, WHEREAS, Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, sets forth the procedures for amending a zone district boundary; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties, described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, (the “subject properties”); and, WHEREAS, on August 7, 1973, the Town of Vail adopted Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1973, to establish comprehensive zoning regulations for the Town of Vail. In establishing comprehensive regulations, this ordinance created 12 new zone districts including the High Density Multiple-Family District; and, WHEREAS, on August 21, 2012 the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2012 establishing the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the amendments is to establish incentives for the redevelopment of existing townhouse properties in Vail Village; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the amendments is to preserve the existing character of the townhouse properties in Vail Village and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, on February 10, 2014, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the zone district boundary amendment to rezone the subject properties from High Density Multiple-Family District to Vail Village Townhouse District; and, WHEREAS, on February 10, 2014, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the zone district boundary amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and, WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the amendment to the Town Code furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and, WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 9, Series 2014 - 3 - residential community of the highest quality. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. This ordinance adopts the following zone district boundary amendment as further described in Exhibit A: A rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to Vail Village Townhouse District. Section 2. Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance, the Vail Town Council finds and determines the follows: a. The zone district boundary amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; b. The zone district boundary amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and, c. The zone district boundary amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. d. This ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 9, Series 2014 - 4 - inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of March, 2014, and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 18th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. __________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Tammy Nagel, Acting Town Clerk 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 9, Series 2014 - 5 - Exhibit A 3/4/2014 Page 1 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: February 10, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7- 13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140002) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT The applicant, Town of Vail, has submitted a rezoning application for the Planning and Environmental Commission’s review to rezone the properties known as the Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes, located at 303 and 483 Gore Creek Drive respectively. Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed zone district boundary amendment application, subject to the findings noted in Section IX of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Town of Vail is proposing a zone district boundary amendment to the parcels listed below from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 1. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 7 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 7 2. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 8 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 8 3. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 9 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 9 4. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 10 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 10 5. TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN UNIT: A AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11A 6. TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN UNIT: B AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11B 7. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK: 5 LOT: 12 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 12 8. OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS UNIT: 1 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 13 9. OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS UNIT: 2 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 13 10. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 1 11. TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 2(1) 12. TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 2(2) 13. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 3 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 3 14. MURFREE CONDO UNIT: 4A AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 4(A) 15. MURFREE CONDO UNIT: 4B AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 4(B) 16. FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS UNIT: 5A AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 5(A) 17. FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS UNIT: 5B AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 5(B) 18. TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 6 UNIT 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 6(1) 19. TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 6 UNIT 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 6(2) 20. TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 7 UNIT 1 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 7(1) 21. TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH LOT: 7 UNIT 2 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 7(2) 22. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 8 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 8 23. VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 LOT: 9 AKA TEXAS TOWNHOME LOT 9 A complete property list including ownership and assessor’s parcel numbers can be found as Attachment C. A vicinity map (Attachment A), the proposed rezoning map (Attachment B) and written public comment received (Attachment D) have been attached for review and inclusion in the record. III. BACKGROUND On August 21, 2012 the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2012 establishing the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District. The Vail Village Townhouse (VVT) District was adopted following numerous public hearings before the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council first, as a private property owner initiated application and later, as a Community Development staff led effort. This zone district was established for the following purposes: 1. To provide for the regulation of existing townhouse properties in Vail Village that were legally non-conforming in regard to the provisions of the High Density Multiple-Family District. 2. To create incentives for the redevelopment of the existing townhouse properties in Vail Village. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 3. To preserve the existing character of the townhouse properties in Vail Village and the existing character of the neighborhood. With the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District in place, staff reached out to the property owners of the parcels originally identified as potentially suitable for a Community Development Department initiated rezoning. Those properties included the Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes in addition to the Vail Rowhouses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalet and Vail Trails East. A first correspondence requesting feedback was initiated on August 1, 2013 with a second request occurring on November 18, 2013. The deadline for feedback from the November 18th request was December 9, 2013. Vail Row Houses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalets and Vail Trails East have submitted letters of opposition representing their 56 units. Opposition has also been received from the owners of units 11 and 11B of Vail Rowhouses and the owners of units 6 and 6B in the Texas Townhomes. Of the approximately 77 units, staff has received opposition from 60, support from 4 and no response from the remaining 13. On December 17, 2013 the Vail Town Council instructed staff to submit a rezoning application for the properties known as The Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes, omitting from the application the Vail Rowhouses (1-6), Vail Trails Chalet and Vail Trails East. On January 10, 2014 staff notified the owners of the properties affected by the proposed rezoning of the proposal and the planned meeting dates. This correspondence was in addition to the formal notice which was sent to the property owners on January 23, 2014 and published in the Vail Daily on January 24, 2014. IV. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BODIES Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for forwarding a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of approval, approval with modifications, or denial of zone district boundary amendment applications, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a zone district boundary amendment. However, the Design Review Board is responsible for the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Council: The Town Council shall consider but shall not be bound by the recommendation of the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Town Council may cause an ordinance to be introduced to change zone district boundaries, either in accordance with the recommendation of the planning and environmental commission or in modified form, or the council may deny the petition. If the Council elects to proceed with an ordinance amending the regulations or changing zone 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 4 district boundaries, or both, the ordinance shall be considered as prescribed by the charter of the town. V. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS VAIL LAND USE PLAN CHAPTER II: LAND USE PLAN GOALS / POLICIES (in part) The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal. The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows: 1. General Growth / Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (in fill areas). 2. Skier / Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day visitors 4. Village Core / Lionshead 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 5 4.2. Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.3. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains) 5. Residential 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2. Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER V. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTION STEPS GOAL # 1: Encourage high quality, redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1. 1 Implement a consistent development review process to reinforce the character of the Village. Objective 1. 2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Policy 1. 2. 1: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the Action Plan and as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Objective 1. 4: Recognize the “historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Policy 1. 4. 2 The Town may grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. GOAL # 2: To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year- around economic health and viability for the village and for the community as a whole. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 6 Objective 2. 1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub –areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. Policy 2. 1. 1: The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. GOAL # 3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the village. Policy 3. 1. 1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Objective 3. 2: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. GOAL # 5: Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation systems throughout the village. Policy 5. 1. 5: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. CHAPTER VII: Vail Village Sub –Areas East Gore Creek Sub -Area (#6) A number of the earliest projects developed in Vail are located in the East Gore Creek Sub -Area. Development in this area is exclusively multi –family condominium projects with a very limited amount of support commercial. Surface parking is found at each site, which creates a very dominant visual impression of the sub -area. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 7 While the level of development in East Gore Creek is generally greater than that allowed under existing zoning, this area has the potential to absorb density without compromising the character of the Village. This development could be accommodated by partial infill of existing parking areas balanced by green space additions or through increasing the height of existing buildings (generally one story over existing heights). In order to maintain the architectural continuity of projects, additional density should be considered only in conjunction with the comprehensive redevelopment of projects. Clearly, one of the main objectives to consider in the redevelopment of any property should be to improve existing parking facilities. This includes satisfying parking demands for existing and additional development, as well as design considerations relative to redevelopment proposals. The opportunity to introduce below grade structured parking will greatly improve pedestrianization and landscape features in this area. This should be considered a goal of any redevelopment proposal in this sub -area. Development or redevelopment of this sub -area will attract additional traffic and population into this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub -Areas 7 and 10. TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Chapter 12-1: Title, Purpose, Applicability (in part) 12-1-2: Purpose: A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 8 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Chapter 12-2: Definitions (in part) LOT OR SITE: A parcel of land occupied or intended to be occupied by a use, building, or structure under the provisions of this title and meeting the minimum requirements of this title. A lot or site may consist of a single lot of record, a portion of a lot of record, a combination of lots of record or portions thereof, or a parcel of land described by metes and bounds. Article 12-6H: High Density Multiple-Family District (in part) 12-6H-1: PURPOSE: The high density multiple-family district is intended to provide sites for multiple-family dwellings at densities to a maximum of twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre, together with such public and semipublic facilities and lodges, private recreation facilities and related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located in the same zone district. The high density multiple-family district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with high density apartment, condominium and lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable residential and resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, which relate to the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community and, where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residential character of the zone district. Article 12-6J: Vail Village Townhouse Zone District (in part) 12-6J-1: PURPOSE: The Vail Village townhouse district is intended to provide sites for, and maintain the unique residential character of, existing townhouse properties in the East Gore Creek subarea of the Vail Village master plan area. This zone district was specifically 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 9 developed to only be applied to the properties known at the time of the establishment of this district as the Vail townhouses condominium, Vail row houses, Vail trails chalets, Vail trails east condominiums and the Texas townhomes. The Vail Village townhouse district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with townhomes, and to maintain the desirable residential and resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, which relate to the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and year round community and, where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residential character of the zone district. This zone district was established to regulate existing townhome properties that were legally nonconforming in the high density multiple-family district. The Vail Village townhouse district is meant to encourage and provide incentives for redevelopment of existing townhouse properties in accordance with the Vail Village master plan. The incentives in this zone district include addressing both townhouse projects and individually platted townhouse lots, reductions in lot area standards, reductions in setbacks, increases in density, increases in gross residential floor area (GRFA), and changes in parking design requirements. More restrictive design considerations have been applied to these properties in accordance with the Vail Village master plan to maintain the unique residential character of existing townhouse developments in Vail Village. 12-6J-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the VVT district: Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title. Multiple-family residential dwellings, including attached and row dwellings and condominium dwellings. 12-6J-3: CONDITIONAL USES: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the VVT district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 of this title: Bed and breakfasts, as further regulated by section 12-14-18 of this title. Home child daycare facilities, as further regulated by section 12-14-12 of this title. Public buildings, grounds and facilities. Public utility and public service uses. Timeshare units. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 10 12-6J-4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the VVT district: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 2(2012) § 4) 3/4/2014 Page 11 VI. COMPARISON OF HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE-FAMILY (HDMF) AND VAIL VILLAGE TOWNHOUSE (VVT) DISTICTS Development Standard HDMF District VVT District_______________ Lot Area/Site Dimensions Townhouse Project Minimum Area 10,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. Individually Platted Townhouse Lot N/A 2,000 sq. ft. Minimum Frontage 30 feet 20 feet Minimum Square Area 80 feet per side N/A Setbacks Front 20 feet 20 feet Side 20 feet 20 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet Between Townhouse Units N/A 0 feet Height 45 feet flat/ 48 feet sloping 35 feet flat/ 38 feet sloping Density 0.67 GRFA Unlimited GRFA No More than 25 du per acre No More than 25 du’s per acre or what is existing, whichever is greater Site Coverage 55% of total site area 55% of total site Landscaping 30 % with area minimums 30 % with area minimums Parking Quantity/Design Per 12-10, Vail Town Code Per 12-10, Vail Town Code Parking Location Per HDMF Requirements Per VVT Requirements 3/4/2014 Page 12 VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Existing Use Zoning District North: Open Space, Natural Area Outdoor Recreation (OR) and Natural Area Preservation (NAP) South: Residential, Lodging High Density Multiple Family (HDMF), Public Accommodation (PA), Parking (P), SDD #17, SDD #19 and SDD #28 West: Open Space, Commercial Outdoor Recreation (OR), Commercial Core 1 (CC1) and High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) East: Residential SDD #38, General Use (GU) and High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) VIII. REVIEW CRITERIA ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT Before acting on a zone district boundary amendment application, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to this proposal: 1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town. Staff finds the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the following goals of the Vail Land Use Plan: 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (in fill areas). 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 13 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day visitors 4.2. Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.3. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains) 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2. Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. Staff finds the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the following general and specific purposes of the Town’s adopted Zoning Regulations: 12-1-2: Purpose: A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 14 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Staff finds the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the following purpose of the Vail Village Townhouse District identified in Section 12-6J-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code: The Vail Village Townhouse District is intended to provide sites for, and maintain the unique residential character of, existing townhouse properties in the East Gore Creek subarea of the Vail Village master plan area. This zone district was specifically developed to only be applied to the properties known at the time of the establishment of this district as the Vail Rowhouses condominium, Vail Rowhouses (7-13), Vail Trails Chalets, Vail Trails East Condominiums and the Texas Townhomes. The Vail Village Townhouse District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with townhomes, and to maintain the desirable residential and resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, which relate to the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and year round community and, where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residential character of the zone district. This zone district was established to regulate existing townhome properties that were legally nonconforming in the High Density Multiple-Family District. The Vail Village Townhouse District is meant to encourage and provide incentives for redevelopment of existing townhouse properties in accordance with the Vail Village Master Plan. The incentives in this zone district include addressing both townhouse projects and individually platted townhouse lots, reductions in lot area standards, reductions in setbacks, increases in density, increases in gross residential floor area (GRFA), and changes in parking design requirements. More restrictive design considerations have been applied to these properties in accordance with the Vail Village Master Plan to maintain the unique residential character of existing townhouse developments in Vail Village. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 15 2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents. Multi-family residential dwellings, including attached and row dwellings are allowed as a permitted use in the Vail Village Townhouse District The proposed rezoning continues to allow the existing uses on the site but corrects a number of nonconformities that existed previously under the High Density Multiple-Family Zone District. It should be noted that not all nonconformities will be eliminated with this action. Variances, although greatly reduced in number and degree, may still be necessary in some circumstances. Surrounding uses include residential, lodging and commercial uses in a resort setting. The scale and intensity of these uses is compatible with the uses permitted under the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District. Staff finds that the proposed rezoning is suitable with the existing and potential uses on the site and with potential and existing surrounding uses. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives. Staff believes the existing residential properties currently have a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among land uses in the surrounding neighborhood. Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning of the subject property will alter this relationship. As a component of the establishment of the VVT Zone District, the Vail Village Mater Plan was amended by Resolution No. 7, Series of 2012. These amendments include design considerations that will, in concert with the dimensional standards of the zone district, ensure the continued, harmonious relationship between land uses. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole. This zone district amendment provides the appropriate incentives for the orderly redevelopment of the subject properties. The development standards of the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District, working with the VVT specific design considerations of the Vail Village Master Plan, will provide for appropriate, compatible development. This zoning amendment does not result in the granting of privilege nor is it incompatible with the Vail Village Master Plan, two tests for a determination of spot zoning. Therefore, Staff does not believe the applicant’s proposal constitutes a spot zoning and therefore finds the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 16 5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features. Staff finds that rezoning of this property from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District will not alter the impacts on the natural environment in comparison to existing conditions. The Town of Vail owned streamtract is located directly to the north of both the Vail Rowhouses (7-13) and the Texas Townhomes. The fifty foot (50’) required setback from the centerline of the Gore Creek is not entirely within the streamtract and does impact these properties. The required watercourse setback will not be altered as a result of the proposed zone change and the streamtract will continue to be monitored for possible encroachments. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 6. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district. As identified above, Staff finds that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose of the Vail Village Townhouse Zone District as outlined in Section V of this memorandum. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate. The subject properties were constructed between 1963 and 1965 prior to the incorporation of the Town of Vail in 1966 and the first zoning regulations in 1973. The Town of Vail’s articulated desires for the timely and appropriate redevelopment of the subject properties render the existing High Density Multiple-Family zone designation inappropriate. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed rezoning meets this review criterion. 8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple- Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, for the properties located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7-13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 17 regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval for this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following motion: “The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning from the High Density Multiple-Family District to the Vail Village Townhouse District, for the properties located at 303 Gore Creek Drive (Vail Rowhouses 7- 13) and 483 Gore Creek Drive (Texas Townhomes)/ Lots 7-13, A Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village Filing 1, and Lots 1 – 9 Vail Village Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of this request; the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: “Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections IX of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated February 10, 2014, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. That the amendments are consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; 2. That the amendments are compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and, 3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality.” X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Rezoning Map C. Property List D. Public Comment 3/4/2014 PIN Owner Name Physical Property Address Legal Description per Eagle County Assessor 210108231001 APPEL, LISA LEVIN 303 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 Block: 5 Lot: 7 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 7 210108231002 SHIRLEY, ERICKSON S. 303 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 Block: 5 Lot: 8 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 8 210108231003 CHRISTOPHER B. GALVIN REVOCABLE TRUST 303 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 Block: 5 Lot: 9 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 9 210108231013 SUN UP TRUST 303 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 Block: 5 Lot: 10 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 10 210108231009 BRIDGEWATER, B.A., JR & BARBARA P. 303 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN Unit: A AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11A 210108231010 BRIDGEWATER, B.A., JR & BARBARA P. 303 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE ON LOT ELEVEN Unit: B AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 11B 210108231007 GALVIN, MICHAEL P. - ETAL 303 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 Block: 5 Lot: 12 AKA VAIL ROWHOUSE UNIT 12 210108231011 VAIL RETREAT LLC 303 Gore Creek Drive OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS Unit: 1 210108231012 VAIL RETREAT LLC 303 Gore Creek Drive OGLESBY/STOREY CONDOS Unit: 2 210108235016 PARKER, FOXHALL A. & HELEN W. 483 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 Lot: 1 210108272002 GORDON, LORIE 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 1 210108272003 GORDON, LORIE 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 2 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 2 210108235004 WOODHULL TRUST JOHN AND BARBARA WOODHULL TRUSTEES 483 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 Lot: 3 210108273005 WOODHULL FAMILY 2010 TRUST FBO ELIZABETH W. PERKINS 483 Gore Creek Drive MURFREE CONDO Unit: 4A 210108273006 WOODHULL FAMILY 2010 TRUST FBO JOHN A. WOODHULL 483 Gore Creek Drive MURFREE CONDO Unit: 4B 210108274008 EDWARDS, LEE MACCORMICK 483 Gore Creek Drive FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS Unit: 5A 210108274007 GORDON, LORIE 483 Gore Creek Drive FORBES/PARKER CONDOMINIUMS Unit: 5B 210108275014 MACCORMICK, ALEXANDER 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 6 UNIT 1 210108275015 MACCORMICK, ALEXANDER 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 6 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 6 UNIT 2 210108276011 PROCHNOW, CHRISTOPHER T. & ANN T. 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 7 UNIT 1 210108276010 HELEN H. CHATFIELD TRUST 483 Gore Creek Drive TOWNHOUSE LOT 7 VAIL VILL 4TH Lot: 7 UNIT 2 210108235009 LIGHTHALL, DIANE GAMEL 483 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 Lot: 8 210108235001 LIGHTHALL, DIANE GAMEL 483 Gore Creek Drive VAIL VILLAGE FILING 4 Lot: 9 TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF LOT A, BLOCK 1, VAIL VILLAGE FILING 7 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 From:Chris Galvin To:Council Dist List ; Jonathan Spence; Warren Campbell; Stan Zemler ; jflamont@vail.net; gigi@oddlotent.com Subject:Vail TownHouse Re-Zoning Date:Friday, December 13, 2013 12:01:02 PM Dear Town Council Members: As many of you are aware, it was my application that started the three year process to create the new Vail Village Townhouse District which was adopt a year and a half ago. My team, the PEC, and the Town Council worked tirelessly to develop a district that everyone could agree to. Its appears now that there is some opposition to being rezoned and I believe the primary reason for the opposition was that the building height restriction went too far: from the 48' allowed today to the 38' in the adopted ordinance. There were many trade-offs included in the ordinance. Design elements like requiring the second and third floors to setback further from the street. Elements that did a very good job at protecting the character of Vail Village. The PEC actually recommended 43', a reduction of 5' from the current HDMF. This is consistent with the maximum height in the Village core, the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and the Vail Village Master Plan. I believe that 43' for sloping roofs may be the right number and believe that similarly situated properties such as Vail Rowhouses, Vail Townhouse Condos (Vail Rowhouses 1-6), and Texas Townhomes and most of their owners would agree to this. The Town should take the time to verify with the owners of Vail Townhouse Condos (1-6 Vail Rowhouses) and Texas Townhomes that the height is in fact the significant reason for being opposed. The majority of Vail Rowhouses 7-13 are supportive of the rezoning. If we verify that there is support amongst these three properties for 43', I would like to suggest that you bring forward two ordinances: one to change the height from 38' to 43' in the VVT District and the other to rezone the Vail Row House properties (1-13) and the Texas Townhomes. You can always exclude from the rezoning Mr. Bridgewater's property (Lot 11) without negatively affecting the remaining properties I also believe it is appropriate that you not rezone Vail Trails Chalets and Vail Trails East at this time. They have their own redevelopment ideas which may involve adding new density and dwelling units. Those owners have expressed interest in developing a more robust plan for their buildings which should not slow the redevelopment efforts of the other properties. They would always have the right to come back later and request a rezoning. Thank again for all of your support and help over the last 5 years. Sincerely, Chris 3/4/2014 Christopher B. Galvin HARRISON STREET | Capital LLC 71 South Wacker Drive | Suite 3575 Chicago, Illinois 60606 | Tel. 312-920-0600 Email: cgalvin@harrisonst.com (Dictated via Dragon – Transcription errors possible) 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: A request to proceed through the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell and Kyle Webb ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: On behalf of the property owner, the Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the applicant’s request for property owner authorization to proceed through the Town’s development review process. BACKGROUND: On October 16, 2012, the Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Donovan opposed), directed staff to enter into a license agreement for “landscaping, patio, drainage, and water feature improvements" on town owned stream tract. On August 21, 2013, the Design Review Board by a vote of 3-1-0 (Kjesbo opposed) approved with a condition, a design review application for a new duplex on the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve the applicant’s request, Staff recommends the Council pass the following motion: "The Vail Town Council, on behalf of the property owner, approves the applicant's request to proceed throught the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto." ATTACHMENTS: Staff Memorandum Applicant's written request Attachment A Site Plan Attachment B Photogrpahs Attachment C Recorded Easement Attachment D 3/4/2014 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2014 SUBJECT: A request to proceed through the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Alan Zekelman, represented by K. H. Webb Architects Planner: Warren Campbell I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Alan Zekelman, represented by K. H. Webb Architects, is requesting property owner authorization to proceed through the Town’s development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio constructed upon Town of Vail owned stream tract. A letter from the applicant detailing the request (Attachment A), site plan (Attachment B), and photographs (Attachment C) are included for review. Specifics of the proposal include: • The reconstruction and realignment of an existing subterranean pipeline which carries water from neighboring properties, Forest Road, and Beaver Dam Road through the site. The reconstruction and realignment allow for a new pipe material (reduces likelihood of repairs in the immediate future) and alignment which will not fall beneath proposed improvements on the site. • Removal of an existing stone patio adjacent to the existing pond on the town owned stream tract. • Removal and redirection of a portion of the water path above the existing pond into a new water feature on the site. • Reconstruction of the existing pond in its current location and configuration. II. BACKGROUND • A duplex was built on the subject property in 1988. • In 1990, Vail Resorts and the applicant submitted a number of documents to the Town of Vail stating an encroachment agreement would be executed, or said 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 2 encroachments would be removed. The encroachment agreement was never executed, but the encroachments remain. • A design review application was submitted in 1993, with an electrical permit issued for the recirculating pump for the water feature on Vail Resorts property. • On December 21, 1999, Vail Resorts deeded the subject streamtract to the Town of Vail. • On October 16, 2012, the Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Donovan opposed), directed staff to enter into a license agreement for “landscaping, patio, drainage, and water feature improvements” on town owned stream tract. • On October 19, 2012, the Town of Vail and the owners of 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road executed an encroachment easement agreement (Attachment D). • On August 21, 2013, the Design Review Board by a vote of 3-1-0 (Kjesbo opposed) approved with a condition, a design review application for a new duplex on the property. III. CONSIDERATIONS • On July 19, 2011, the Vail Town Council unanimously approved a zero tolerance policy for encroachments into town owned stream tract in order to improve the health of Gore Creek. However, improvements that were approved by the Town have been permitted to remain in place with license agreements that include revocability clauses. • The town has consistently been working to remove encroachments upon town owned stream tract. • The recorded encroachment easement agreement (Attachment D) for the constructed improvements includes a provision for termination of the agreement for the following reasons: o Determination by the town that the easement parcel is needed by the town for a valid public purpose. o If the improvements are not maintained in good condition or repair. • As a complete removal and reconstruction of all improvements upon the town owned stream tract is requested, is this an appropriate time to revoke the encroachment easement and return the property to the town? IV. ACTION REQUESTED On behalf of the property owner, the Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the applicant’s request for property owner authorization to proceed through the Town’s development review process. The approval of this request will only grant the applicant the required property owner authorization necessary to proceed through the town’s development review process and does not constitute an explicit approval of the proposed improvements. As representatives of the property owner, if the Town Council has specific concerns with what is being proposed, those concerns must be expressed at this time. 3/4/2014 Town of Vail Page 3 V. RECOMMENDATION Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve the applicant’s request, Staff recommends the Council pass the following motion: “The Vail Town Council, on behalf of the property owner, approves the applicant’s request to proceed through the development review process with a proposal to reconstruct an existing water feature and remove an existing patio on Town of Vail owned stream tract, located adjacent to 463 and 473 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Letter from applicant dated January 13, 2014 B. Site plan dated December 31, 2013 C. Photographs of the site D. Recorded Encroachment Easement Agreement (Reception #201221487) 3/4/2014 k. h . w e b b a r c h i t e c t s . p c 710 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE, SUITE A VAIL COLORADO 81657 970.477.2990 970.477.2965(F) www.khwebb.com MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS January 13, 2014 Vail Town Council C/O Warren Campbell, Chief of Planning Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: 463 Beaver Dam Road Water Feature Warren, Thanks for all of your assistance with our project at 463 Beaver Dam Road! As you know well, when you get into any project you learn more and find the anomalies and idiosyncrasies of the site you are working with and this is exactly the case here. Ultimately, the owner has elected to start with a new home design in lieu of working with an almost 30 year old house with complex subgrade water issues. During this process, we have also learned of how run-off water from Vail Mountain as well as Beaver Dam and Forest Roads has been managed through the site in greater detail. As we build the new home, we now understand that an underground pipeline exists from the neighboring Jordan property, through our site and extends below the existing pond within the easement area on Town of Vail property. We also understand that with our current approval and extensive tree planting plan as approved by the Town, we will eliminate the ability to move construction equipment to the rear of the site to easily maintain the pond in the future. At this point, it only makes common sense to maintain and re-construct the pipeline and pond to new while we are in construction on the new house. After review of the “Encroachment Easement Agreement” with Town of Vail, date October 19th, 2012, that governs this pond, landscaping area and associated elements. We are requesting permission to proceed through the development review process with a Design Review application to reconstruct the pond exactly as it exists currently as well as remove the Sandstone paved areas that exist on the easement. Below are the governing paragraphs from the attached easement agreement that permit such work and they are further documented on the attached exhibits. SECTION 2. PURPOSE The. Easement Parcel may be used and occupied by the Owner for the purpose of Constructing and maintaining landscaping, patio, drainage and water feature improvements over and on the Property that are consistent in size. scope and character as the encroaching improvements existing as of the date of this Agreement. SECTION 4. MAINTENANCE Owner shall, at its own expense, keep and maintain in good repair any improvements, landscaping, fixtures or structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Easement Parcel and, within thirty (30) days of termination of this Agreement, shall remove all such items. It is very clear from a common sense point of view that what we are proposing makes complete sense. 3/4/2014 k. h . w e b b a r c h i t e c t s . p c 710 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE, SUITE A VAIL COLORADO 81657 970.477.2990 970.477.2965(F) www.khwebb.com MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS 463 Beaver Dam Easement Page 2 You can, of course, take a strict and literal interpretation of this situation. That would be that we are doing exactly what the agreement intended and exactly what we are permitted to do under the agreement. “Maintain in good repair any improvements, landscaping, fixtures or structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Easement Parcel.” Again, maintain to the highest standards, how a natural water course and the Town of Vail’s street drainage flows across private property and back on to Town of Vail property, at no cost to the Town of Vail. Overall, an essential responsibility for both the Town and our client to work hand in hand to maintain and why we see this as very black and white. I hope that you and the Town Council look favorably upon this request as it truly seems like the right thing to do. If you do have questions, please feel free to contact me at our office. Regards,  Kyle H. Webb, AIA, NCARB K.H. Webb Architects P.C. CC: Alan Zekelman Jim Wear, Sherman & Howard 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 Eagle County, CO 201221487 Teak J Simonton 10/25/2012 Pgs: 5 02:11:15PM REC: $31.00 DOC: $0.00 ENCROACHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS ENCROACHMENT BASEJMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement'!) is made this 19th day of October, 2012, by and between the Town of Vail, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule municipality with a legal address of 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 (the "Town"), and David P. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg, with a legal address of 509 East High Point Road, Peoria, lllinois 61614 ("Owner"). Owner owns certain real property in the Town of Vail, Colorado, that is legally described as follows (the "Owner Property'"): · P ARCBL A, TOGBTIIER. WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 JNTEREST IN .AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILING, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. AND PARCEL B, TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 lNTEREST IN AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILlNG, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. For and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) paid by the Owner to the Town, the covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration. the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. UCENSE Owner desires to obtain an exclusive easement to occupy and use the property more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Parcel"), which is located on a parcel of land owned by the Town that is adjacent to the Owner Property. Subject to all the terms and conditions hereto, the Town hereby grants to Owner an easement to occupy and use the Easement Parcel for the purpose set forth in Section 2 hereof. SECTION 2. PURPOSE The. Easement Parcel may be used and occupied by the Owner for the purpose of constructing and maintaining landscaping, patio, drainage and water feature improvements over and on the Property that are consistent in size. scope and character as the encroaching improvements existing as of the date of this Agreement. 3/4/2014 SECTION 3. TERMINATION Owner may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein by giving written notice to the Town specifying the date of termination, such notice to be given not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date specified therein. The Town may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein: (1) upon a detennination by the Town that the Easement Parcel is required for use by the Town for a valid public purpose after notice to Owner and an opportunity to be heard; or (2) if the improvements constructed by Owner from time to time on the Easement Parcel are not maintained in good condition and repair or if improvements are constructed by Owner that encroach outside of the Easement Parcel or are inconsistei;J.t with the uses granted in Section 2 above, and Owner has not resolved such situation to the satisfaction of the Town within 60 days after notice from the Town. SECTION 4. MAINTENANCE Owner shall, at its own expense, keep and maintain in good repair any improvements, landscaping, fixtures or structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Easement Parcel and, within thirty (30) days oftennination of this Agreement. shall remove all such items. SECTION 5. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY Owner shall be responsible for all damage to the Easement Parcel arising out of or resulting from the use of the Easement Parcel by the Owner~ its agents, employees~ visitors, patrons and invitees. The Town shall notify Owner immediately upon discovery of any damage. to the Easement Parcel. Owner shall correct and repair the damage within one {1) week of notification or knowledge of the damage unless otherwise directed by the Town. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION Owner shall indemnify, hold hannless and defend the Town and its representatives, officers, employees, agents, and contractors from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney fees, arising from or in ·any way connected with injury to or the death of any person or physical damage to any property resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the. Easement Parcel under this Agreement that arise during the period of Owner's ownership of the Owner Property. Owner agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against any such liability, claims or demands at his sole expense, or, at the option of the Town, agrees to pay the Town or reimburse the Town for the defense costs incurred. by the Town in connection with any such liability, claims or demands. Owner also agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including court· costs and attomey fees, whether or not any such liability, claims or demands alleged are groundless, false or fraudulent. SECTION 7. INSURANCE Owner agrees to procure an insurance pollcy that includes and covers the Easement Parcel that is the subject of this Agreement, an~ to name the Town as an additional insured 2 201221487 3/4/2014 thereon; Such insurance policy shall at a minimum include liability and property damage insurance, with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per pers~:m and six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) per occurrence. A Certificate of Insurance showing the Town as an additional insured shall be provided to the Town within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, and annually thereafter. The failure to provide the Certificate of Insurance shall be grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement and revocation of the license granted herein. SECTION 8. NOTICES Any notice given pursuant to this Agreement by either party to the other shall be in writing and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: To the Town: To Owner: TownofVail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 At Owner's address listed with the Eagle County Assessor at the time that notice is given SECTION 9. MISCELLANEOUS A. Agreement Binding. This Agreement and the.easement granted herein shall run with the land and inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Easement Parcel and Owner's Property, and the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, subject to any other conditions and covenants contained herein. B. Applicable Law and Venue. The laws of the State of Colorado and applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement. and the venue for any legal proceeding arising out of this Agreement shall be Eagle County, Colorado. C. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended except iii. writing by mutual agreement of the parties, nor rnay rights be waived except by an instrument in writing signed by the party charged with such waiver. D. Headings. The headings of the sections of this Agreement are inserted for reference purposes only and are not restrictive as to content. E. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided herein, there are no intended third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement. F. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. 3 201221487 3/4/2014 G. Governmental Immunity. Nothing herem shall be construed as a waiver of any protections or immunities the City may have under the-Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.RS. § 24--10-101, et seq., as amended. IL· Integration. The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no additional or different oral representation, promise. or agreement shall be binding on any of the parties hereto with respect to the subject ma1;ter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement effective the day and year first above written. ' By: OWNER: n~.!{?~ ~~ STATEOF /f./..J~f 5" COUNTYOF ~/# ) ) ss. ) L/ -------.:....:.___ OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL L. CARROLL ·NOTARY PUBLIC ·STATE OF H.UNOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 1f.fi8.201S Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this E day of &070./J ~ 2012, by DavidP. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg. My Commission expires //-;y:. .:2 d/ .f. (SEAL) 4 201221487 3/4/2014 201221487 UNPUITTED Lor 4 LOT 5 , BLOCK 4 VAIL VILLAGE-THIRD FILING LOT 2 LEGAl. DESCR:IC'TION That part of the rm :t, secti<Jn 7, 't'oWnsblp 5 soutb, R;~nge 80 WeGt. of ttle Sbcl:b Principal ~diun, 'l:'own of Vail, Ell.gl~ County, <:olorildo, dosaribed «s follows: Beginning at the ~t omstcrly ~~<IX" ot' t.Qt !lr :sl9Cl\: '1, Vall Vll.lage -'rhJ.rd l'".ll!.ng uccaJ;O;ing to tho 'lltilP "thel:'eof raco:r:a~ in tlm oi!t';l.ce o:t; the l!'ag"l.e County, Co~orado, Cl.el:k ana nacardel:: tllence N44"52'49"Yl 31.00 feet; l:benoe '!'132°07'53"2 6l..SQ eeetr thimee Nll0°57'4G!'E ss.oo feet. to tl\e nm:thwcctcrlll" line of ou.id Ldt S; thence S36~11'43"W 1.27·:36 feet, along· solid ·no:t-.hweste.t'ly Un&, to the point of beginning, com:aininy o.oass ac-.res, r.tere or less. I I 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S.§ 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession of Marijuana. PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. BACKGROUND: In 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana. Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older. In light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession and open and public display or consumption of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013. Ordinance No. 5 reconciles the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 and to clarifies the Town's penalty provisions concerning the possession and open and public display and consumption of marijuana. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 5 Series of 2014 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 SERIES 2014 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6-3C-6 OF THE VAIL TOWN CODE TO RECONCILE THE TOWN CODE WITH C.R.S. § 18-18-406 CONCERNING PENALTIES FOR THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA WHEREAS, in 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana; WHEREAS, Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older; WHEREAS, in light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Vail Town Council to pass legislation reconciling the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 concerning the penalties for possession of marijuana. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Subsection C of Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3C-6: Possession of Marijuana, Marijuana Products and Marijuana Accessories: . . . C. Penalty: 1. Violations of this Section shall be punishable as set forth in Title 1, Chapter 4 of this Code, except that a person who possesses not more than two (2) ounces of marijuana in violation of this Section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00); and 2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this Section that a person is in possession of a valid registry identification card authorizing the medicinal use of marijuana issued by the state health agency, so long as consumption or use does not occur in a public place. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 2 of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 18th day of February, 2014 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 4th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 4th day of March, 2014. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (10:00 p.m.) 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 Eagle County, CO 201221487 Teak J Simonton 10/25/2012 Pgs: 5 02:11:15PM REC: $31.00 DOC: $0.00 ENCROACHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS ENCROACHMENT BASEJMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement'!) is made this 19th day of October, 2012, by and between the Town of Vail, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule municipality with a legal address of 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 (the "Town"), and David P. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg, with a legal address of 509 East High Point Road, Peoria, lllinois 61614 ("Owner"). Owner owns certain real property in the Town of Vail, Colorado, that is legally described as follows (the "Owner Property'"): · P ARCBL A, TOGBTIIER. WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 JNTEREST IN .AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILING, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. AND PARCEL B, TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 lNTEREST IN AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILlNG, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. For and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) paid by the Owner to the Town, the covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration. the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. UCENSE Owner desires to obtain an exclusive easement to occupy and use the property more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Parcel"), which is located on a parcel of land owned by the Town that is adjacent to the Owner Property. Subject to all the terms and conditions hereto, the Town hereby grants to Owner an easement to occupy and use the Easement Parcel for the purpose set forth in Section 2 hereof. SECTION 2. PURPOSE The. Easement Parcel may be used and occupied by the Owner for the purpose of constructing and maintaining landscaping, patio, drainage and water feature improvements over and on the Property that are consistent in size. scope and character as the encroaching improvements existing as of the date of this Agreement. 3/4/2014 SECTION 3. TERMINATION Owner may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein by giving written notice to the Town specifying the date of termination, such notice to be given not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date specified therein. The Town may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein: (1) upon a detennination by the Town that the Easement Parcel is required for use by the Town for a valid public purpose after notice to Owner and an opportunity to be heard; or (2) if the improvements constructed by Owner from time to time on the Easement Parcel are not maintained in good condition and repair or if improvements are constructed by Owner that encroach outside of the Easement Parcel or are inconsistei;J.t with the uses granted in Section 2 above, and Owner has not resolved such situation to the satisfaction of the Town within 60 days after notice from the Town. SECTION 4. MAINTENANCE Owner shall, at its own expense, keep and maintain in good repair any improvements, landscaping, fixtures or structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Easement Parcel and, within thirty (30) days oftennination of this Agreement. shall remove all such items. SECTION 5. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY Owner shall be responsible for all damage to the Easement Parcel arising out of or resulting from the use of the Easement Parcel by the Owner~ its agents, employees~ visitors, patrons and invitees. The Town shall notify Owner immediately upon discovery of any damage. to the Easement Parcel. Owner shall correct and repair the damage within one {1) week of notification or knowledge of the damage unless otherwise directed by the Town. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION Owner shall indemnify, hold hannless and defend the Town and its representatives, officers, employees, agents, and contractors from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney fees, arising from or in ·any way connected with injury to or the death of any person or physical damage to any property resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the. Easement Parcel under this Agreement that arise during the period of Owner's ownership of the Owner Property. Owner agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against any such liability, claims or demands at his sole expense, or, at the option of the Town, agrees to pay the Town or reimburse the Town for the defense costs incurred. by the Town in connection with any such liability, claims or demands. Owner also agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including court· costs and attomey fees, whether or not any such liability, claims or demands alleged are groundless, false or fraudulent. SECTION 7. INSURANCE Owner agrees to procure an insurance pollcy that includes and covers the Easement Parcel that is the subject of this Agreement, an~ to name the Town as an additional insured 2 201221487 3/4/2014 thereon; Such insurance policy shall at a minimum include liability and property damage insurance, with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per pers~:m and six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) per occurrence. A Certificate of Insurance showing the Town as an additional insured shall be provided to the Town within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, and annually thereafter. The failure to provide the Certificate of Insurance shall be grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement and revocation of the license granted herein. SECTION 8. NOTICES Any notice given pursuant to this Agreement by either party to the other shall be in writing and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: To the Town: To Owner: TownofVail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 At Owner's address listed with the Eagle County Assessor at the time that notice is given SECTION 9. MISCELLANEOUS A. Agreement Binding. This Agreement and the.easement granted herein shall run with the land and inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Easement Parcel and Owner's Property, and the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, subject to any other conditions and covenants contained herein. B. Applicable Law and Venue. The laws of the State of Colorado and applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement. and the venue for any legal proceeding arising out of this Agreement shall be Eagle County, Colorado. C. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended except iii. writing by mutual agreement of the parties, nor rnay rights be waived except by an instrument in writing signed by the party charged with such waiver. D. Headings. The headings of the sections of this Agreement are inserted for reference purposes only and are not restrictive as to content. E. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided herein, there are no intended third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement. F. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. 3 201221487 3/4/2014 G. Governmental Immunity. Nothing herem shall be construed as a waiver of any protections or immunities the City may have under the-Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.RS. § 24--10-101, et seq., as amended. IL· Integration. The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no additional or different oral representation, promise. or agreement shall be binding on any of the parties hereto with respect to the subject ma1;ter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement effective the day and year first above written. ' By: OWNER: n~.!{?~ ~~ STATEOF /f./..J~f 5" COUNTYOF ~/# ) ) ss. ) L/ -------.:....:.___ OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL L. CARROLL ·NOTARY PUBLIC ·STATE OF H.UNOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 1f.fi8.201S Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this E day of &070./J ~ 2012, by DavidP. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg. My Commission expires //-;y:. .:2 d/ .f. (SEAL) 4 201221487 3/4/2014 201221487 UNPUITTED Lor 4 LOT 5 , BLOCK 4 VAIL VILLAGE-THIRD FILING LOT 2 LEGAl. DESCR:IC'TION That part of the rm :t, secti<Jn 7, 't'oWnsblp 5 soutb, R;~nge 80 WeGt. of ttle Sbcl:b Principal ~diun, 'l:'own of Vail, Ell.gl~ County, <:olorildo, dosaribed «s follows: Beginning at the ~t omstcrly ~~<IX" ot' t.Qt !lr :sl9Cl\: '1, Vall Vll.lage -'rhJ.rd l'".ll!.ng uccaJ;O;ing to tho 'lltilP "thel:'eof raco:r:a~ in tlm oi!t';l.ce o:t; the l!'ag"l.e County, Co~orado, Cl.el:k ana nacardel:: tllence N44"52'49"Yl 31.00 feet; l:benoe '!'132°07'53"2 6l..SQ eeetr thimee Nll0°57'4G!'E ss.oo feet. to tl\e nm:thwcctcrlll" line of ou.id Ldt S; thence S36~11'43"W 1.27·:36 feet, along· solid ·no:t-.hweste.t'ly Un&, to the point of beginning, com:aininy o.oass ac-.res, r.tere or less. I I 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S.§ 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession of Marijuana. PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. BACKGROUND: In 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana. Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older. In light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession and open and public display or consumption of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013. Ordinance No. 5 reconciles the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 and to clarifies the Town's penalty provisions concerning the possession and open and public display and consumption of marijuana. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 5 Series of 2014 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 SERIES 2014 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6-3C-6 OF THE VAIL TOWN CODE TO RECONCILE THE TOWN CODE WITH C.R.S. § 18-18-406 CONCERNING PENALTIES FOR THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA WHEREAS, in 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana; WHEREAS, Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older; WHEREAS, in light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Vail Town Council to pass legislation reconciling the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 concerning the penalties for possession of marijuana. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Subsection C of Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3C-6: Possession of Marijuana, Marijuana Products and Marijuana Accessories: . . . C. Penalty: 1. Violations of this Section shall be punishable as set forth in Title 1, Chapter 4 of this Code, except that a person who possesses not more than two (2) ounces of marijuana in violation of this Section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00); and 2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this Section that a person is in possession of a valid registry identification card authorizing the medicinal use of marijuana issued by the state health agency, so long as consumption or use does not occur in a public place. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 2 of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 18th day of February, 2014 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 4th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 4th day of March, 2014. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (10:00 p.m.) 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 3/4/2014 Eagle County, CO 201221487 Teak J Simonton 10/25/2012 Pgs: 5 02:11:15PM REC: $31.00 DOC: $0.00 ENCROACHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS ENCROACHMENT BASEJMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement'!) is made this 19th day of October, 2012, by and between the Town of Vail, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule municipality with a legal address of 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 (the "Town"), and David P. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg, with a legal address of 509 East High Point Road, Peoria, lllinois 61614 ("Owner"). Owner owns certain real property in the Town of Vail, Colorado, that is legally described as follows (the "Owner Property'"): · P ARCBL A, TOGBTIIER. WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 JNTEREST IN .AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILING, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. AND PARCEL B, TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 lNTEREST IN AND TO PARCEL C, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 4, VAIL VILLAGE, THIRD FILlNG, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 2, 1990 IN BOOK 523 AT PAGE 843, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. For and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) paid by the Owner to the Town, the covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration. the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. UCENSE Owner desires to obtain an exclusive easement to occupy and use the property more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Parcel"), which is located on a parcel of land owned by the Town that is adjacent to the Owner Property. Subject to all the terms and conditions hereto, the Town hereby grants to Owner an easement to occupy and use the Easement Parcel for the purpose set forth in Section 2 hereof. SECTION 2. PURPOSE The. Easement Parcel may be used and occupied by the Owner for the purpose of constructing and maintaining landscaping, patio, drainage and water feature improvements over and on the Property that are consistent in size. scope and character as the encroaching improvements existing as of the date of this Agreement. 3/4/2014 SECTION 3. TERMINATION Owner may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein by giving written notice to the Town specifying the date of termination, such notice to be given not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date specified therein. The Town may terminate this Agreement and the easement granted herein: (1) upon a detennination by the Town that the Easement Parcel is required for use by the Town for a valid public purpose after notice to Owner and an opportunity to be heard; or (2) if the improvements constructed by Owner from time to time on the Easement Parcel are not maintained in good condition and repair or if improvements are constructed by Owner that encroach outside of the Easement Parcel or are inconsistei;J.t with the uses granted in Section 2 above, and Owner has not resolved such situation to the satisfaction of the Town within 60 days after notice from the Town. SECTION 4. MAINTENANCE Owner shall, at its own expense, keep and maintain in good repair any improvements, landscaping, fixtures or structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Easement Parcel and, within thirty (30) days oftennination of this Agreement. shall remove all such items. SECTION 5. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY Owner shall be responsible for all damage to the Easement Parcel arising out of or resulting from the use of the Easement Parcel by the Owner~ its agents, employees~ visitors, patrons and invitees. The Town shall notify Owner immediately upon discovery of any damage. to the Easement Parcel. Owner shall correct and repair the damage within one {1) week of notification or knowledge of the damage unless otherwise directed by the Town. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION Owner shall indemnify, hold hannless and defend the Town and its representatives, officers, employees, agents, and contractors from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney fees, arising from or in ·any way connected with injury to or the death of any person or physical damage to any property resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the. Easement Parcel under this Agreement that arise during the period of Owner's ownership of the Owner Property. Owner agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against any such liability, claims or demands at his sole expense, or, at the option of the Town, agrees to pay the Town or reimburse the Town for the defense costs incurred. by the Town in connection with any such liability, claims or demands. Owner also agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including court· costs and attomey fees, whether or not any such liability, claims or demands alleged are groundless, false or fraudulent. SECTION 7. INSURANCE Owner agrees to procure an insurance pollcy that includes and covers the Easement Parcel that is the subject of this Agreement, an~ to name the Town as an additional insured 2 201221487 3/4/2014 thereon; Such insurance policy shall at a minimum include liability and property damage insurance, with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per pers~:m and six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) per occurrence. A Certificate of Insurance showing the Town as an additional insured shall be provided to the Town within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, and annually thereafter. The failure to provide the Certificate of Insurance shall be grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement and revocation of the license granted herein. SECTION 8. NOTICES Any notice given pursuant to this Agreement by either party to the other shall be in writing and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: To the Town: To Owner: TownofVail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 At Owner's address listed with the Eagle County Assessor at the time that notice is given SECTION 9. MISCELLANEOUS A. Agreement Binding. This Agreement and the.easement granted herein shall run with the land and inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Easement Parcel and Owner's Property, and the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, subject to any other conditions and covenants contained herein. B. Applicable Law and Venue. The laws of the State of Colorado and applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement. and the venue for any legal proceeding arising out of this Agreement shall be Eagle County, Colorado. C. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended except iii. writing by mutual agreement of the parties, nor rnay rights be waived except by an instrument in writing signed by the party charged with such waiver. D. Headings. The headings of the sections of this Agreement are inserted for reference purposes only and are not restrictive as to content. E. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided herein, there are no intended third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement. F. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. 3 201221487 3/4/2014 G. Governmental Immunity. Nothing herem shall be construed as a waiver of any protections or immunities the City may have under the-Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.RS. § 24--10-101, et seq., as amended. IL· Integration. The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no additional or different oral representation, promise. or agreement shall be binding on any of the parties hereto with respect to the subject ma1;ter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement effective the day and year first above written. ' By: OWNER: n~.!{?~ ~~ STATEOF /f./..J~f 5" COUNTYOF ~/# ) ) ss. ) L/ -------.:....:.___ OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL L. CARROLL ·NOTARY PUBLIC ·STATE OF H.UNOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 1f.fi8.201S Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this E day of &070./J ~ 2012, by DavidP. Ransburg and Alexandra L. Ransburg. My Commission expires //-;y:. .:2 d/ .f. (SEAL) 4 201221487 3/4/2014 201221487 UNPUITTED Lor 4 LOT 5 , BLOCK 4 VAIL VILLAGE-THIRD FILING LOT 2 LEGAl. DESCR:IC'TION That part of the rm :t, secti<Jn 7, 't'oWnsblp 5 soutb, R;~nge 80 WeGt. of ttle Sbcl:b Principal ~diun, 'l:'own of Vail, Ell.gl~ County, <:olorildo, dosaribed «s follows: Beginning at the ~t omstcrly ~~<IX" ot' t.Qt !lr :sl9Cl\: '1, Vall Vll.lage -'rhJ.rd l'".ll!.ng uccaJ;O;ing to tho 'lltilP "thel:'eof raco:r:a~ in tlm oi!t';l.ce o:t; the l!'ag"l.e County, Co~orado, Cl.el:k ana nacardel:: tllence N44"52'49"Yl 31.00 feet; l:benoe '!'132°07'53"2 6l..SQ eeetr thimee Nll0°57'4G!'E ss.oo feet. to tl\e nm:thwcctcrlll" line of ou.id Ldt S; thence S36~11'43"W 1.27·:36 feet, along· solid ·no:t-.hweste.t'ly Un&, to the point of beginning, com:aininy o.oass ac-.res, r.tere or less. I I 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, An Ordinance Amending Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code to Reconcile the Town Code with C.R.S.§ 18-18-406 Concerning Penalties for the Possession of Marijuana. PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. BACKGROUND: In 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana. Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older. In light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession and open and public display or consumption of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013. Ordinance No. 5 reconciles the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 and to clarifies the Town's penalty provisions concerning the possession and open and public display and consumption of marijuana. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments or deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 upon first reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 5 Series of 2014 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 SERIES 2014 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6-3C-6 OF THE VAIL TOWN CODE TO RECONCILE THE TOWN CODE WITH C.R.S. § 18-18-406 CONCERNING PENALTIES FOR THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA WHEREAS, in 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which amended Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution by the addition of a new § 16 regarding the personal use and regulation of marijuana; WHEREAS, Amendment 64 permits the possession, use, display, purchase or transportation of marijuana accessories and one ounce or less of marijuana by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older; WHEREAS, in light of Amendment 64, the Colorado General Assembly repealed and reenacted C.R.S. § 18-18-406, which establishes the maximum penalties for the possession of marijuana, and such changes became effective in October 2013; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Vail Town Council to pass legislation reconciling the Vail Town Code with C.R.S. § 18-18-406 concerning the penalties for possession of marijuana. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Subsection C of Section 6-3C-6 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3C-6: Possession of Marijuana, Marijuana Products and Marijuana Accessories: . . . C. Penalty: 1. Violations of this Section shall be punishable as set forth in Title 1, Chapter 4 of this Code, except that a person who possesses not more than two (2) ounces of marijuana in violation of this Section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00); and 2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this Section that a person is in possession of a valid registry identification card authorizing the medicinal use of marijuana issued by the state health agency, so long as consumption or use does not occur in a public place. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity 3/4/2014 Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014 2 of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 18th day of February, 2014 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 4th day of March, 2014, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 4th day of March, 2014. _____________________________ Andrew P. Daly, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Tammy Nagel, Interim Town Clerk 3/4/2014 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: March 4, 2014 ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (10:00 p.m.) 3/4/2014