Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-01-20 Agenda and Supporting Documentation Town Council Work SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA TOWN OF 4� 0i VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 2:00 P.M., JANUARY 20, 2015 NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. Public comments on work session item may be solicited by the Town Council. 1. ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update (10 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell, Community Development Planner 2. ITEM /TOPIC: An update on the progress of the Chamonix Master Planning efforts and a presentation of three conceptual site plan alternatives. (45 min.) 3 PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Director of Community Development ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The desired outcome of this presentation is to receive feedback and instruction from the Vail Town Council on the required actions and next steps. BACKGROUND: The Vail Town Council has adopted a goal for the development of workforce housing within the community. In an effort to achieve that goal, the Town of Vail acquired the Chamonix property and adopted a master plan for its future development. The three conceptual site plan alternatives further the Town's goal of providing workforce housing within the community and help to achieve the development goals adopted within the Chamonix Master Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Vail Town Council provides feedback and instruction with regard to the proposed required actions and next steps outlined in the staff memorandum. ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion about vacancy and appointment to Commission on Special Events (CSE). (20 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Patty McKenny, Town Clerk ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: No formal action is taken at this time, however, Town Council will need to appoint another person to CSE during the evening session. BACKGROUND: Town Council will discuss the recent December interviews and candidates for one vacancy which exists on the Commission on Special Events (CSE). One vacancy exists because of the recent resignation from Nicole Whitaker. 1/20/2015 4. ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: 1) EGE Air Alliance Press Release Update - Houston Flight 2) CSE December 3, 2014 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3) VEAC January 13 Meeting Minutes (5 min.) ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports (15 min.) 6. ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: update on Town of Vail pending litigation, Samuel Maslak et. al. v. Town of Vail et. al. Case number 13CA1870 and 13CA2013; 2) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: update on Town of Vail pending litigation, Reggie D. Delponte Residence Trust No. 1 et. al. v. Town of Vail Case number 2014CV30404; 3) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Town owned unit Vail Village Inn Phase V, Unit No. 2 (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire, Town Attorney 7. ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment (estimated 4:05 pm) NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING TOPICS AND ESTIMATED TIMEFRAMES BELOW (ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD), TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2015 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THERE WILL NOT BE AN EVENING MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3 DUE TO OPENING CEREMONIES FOR 2015 FIS ALPINE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS. Ongoing agenda items DRB /PEC updates WS - 15 min.; Information Updates Attachments: WS - 15 min.; Executive Session items: 30 min.; Consent Agenda: 5 min.; Town Manager Report: 5 min. Other future agenda items: Vail Valley Medical Center: Road map for Master Plan, proposed Master Plan, PEC recommendations summary - 2/3 Cornerstone request for time extension - 2/17 Helipad location and design proposal - 2/17 Parking, Building Massing /Architecture, Meadow Drive /Streetscape, Employee Housing, Middle Creek, Procedural Considerations, Traffic /Circulation, Loading /Delivery Service, Land Exchange Considerations - 3/3 Review Master Plan - finAi" s and request for final decision - 3/17 DRB /PEC /AIPP Interviews and Appointments - 3/17 Proposed future agenda items Council Action Plan Follow up: Keeping Vail in Leadership Position, Define Balanced Community, Parking & Transportation, Technology and Wayfinding Vail Municipal Site Redevelopment Cleanup Title 12, zoning amendments Fee Schedule Revisions Water Quality Update Bed Base Report Proposal TIF Update 1/20/2015 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell, Community Development Planner ATTACHMENTS: January 7, 2015 DRB Meeting Results January 12, 2015 PEC Meeting Results 1/20/2015 ►owx of vn' 1[1 TOWN OF VA MEMBERS PRESENT Andy Forstl Brian Gillette Tom DuBois Bill Pierce Rollie Kjesbo DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING January 7, 2015 Council Chambers 75 South Frontage Road West - Vail, Colorado, 81657 PROJECT ORIENTATION SITE VISITS MEMBERS ABSENT 1. Field Trip to Sign Design in Eagle Vail -Push through Letters and Illumination -50 minutes 2. 4842 Meadow Lane — Morris Residence 3. 3235 Katsos Ranch Road — Katsos ranch LLC Residence 4. 263 East Gore Creek Drive — Gorsuch Building 5. 223 Beaver Dam Road — Gore Creek Properties Residence MAIN AGENDA Solaris Commercial Owner LLC DRB140549 Final review of a sign (business identification) 141 E. Meadow Drive /Lot P & Tract C, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Slifer, Smith & Frampton Real Estate, represented by Sign Design & Graphics ACTION: Approve with Conditions MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Forstl VOTE: 5 -0 -0 CONDITION(S): 12:45pm 3:00pm Jonathan 1) Prior to the installation of the sign, the applicant shall ensure no light can pass through the face of the push through letters or other push through elements of the sign. 2) Prior to the installation of the sign, the applicant shall ensure the front faces of the push through elements are covered to their fullest extent, with no portions of the fronts of the push letters or other push through elements left uncovered. 2. 1226 Vail LLC Residence DRB140551 Joe Final review of new construction (duplex) 1226 Westhaven Circle /Lot 38, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: 1226 Vail LLC, represented by Berglund Architects ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Forstl VOTE: 5 -0 -0 3. Gore Creek Properties Residence DRB140563 Joe Final review of new construction (duplex) 223 Beaver Dam Road /Lot 39, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Gore Creek Properties, LLC, represented by Berglund Architects ACTION: Tabled to January 21, 2015 1/20/2e 1 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Forstl VOTE: 5 -0 -0 4. Morris Residence DRB140562 Final review of new construction (single - family) 4842 Meadow Lane /Lot 10, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision 5t" Addition Applicant: John and Lisa Morris, represented by Suman Arctitects ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Forstl 5. Katsos Ranch LLC Residence DRB140564 Conceptual review of new construction (duplex addition) 3235 Katsos Ranch Road /Lot 5, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 12 Applicant: Robin Burch, represented by Martin Manley Architects ACTION: Conceptual, no vote 6. Gorsuch Building DRB140550 Conceptual review of an addition (patio enclosure) 263 East Gore Creek Drive /Lots C -E, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Gorsuch Ltd., represented by Semple Brown Design ACTION: Conceptual, no vote STAFF APPROVALS Krezowski Residence OTC 14-0067 Final review of a exterior alteration (roof) 5014 Main Gore Drive Building 4 /Lot 4, Gore Creek Meadows Filing 1 Applicant: Jim Krezowski represented by Turner Morris Inc. Lion's Ridge Apartments DRB140559 Final review of changes to approved plans (lighting, roof, fascia) 1265 North Frontage Road West /Lot 2, Timber Ridge Subdivision Applicant: Lion's Ridge Apartments, represented by Berglund Architects Wall Street Office LLC DRB140560 Final review of a sign application (business identification) 225 Wall Street/Lot B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: ResortApp, represented by Julie Norberg Joe VOTE: 4 -0 -1 (Gillette Recused) Jonathan Jonathan Martin Warren Jonathan Green Elephant Juicery DRB140557 Jonathan Final review of a sign application (business identifiation) 616 West Lionshead Circle Suite 206 (Concert Hall Plaza) /Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 Applicant: Green Elephant Juicery, represented by Mark Zbrzeznj Vista Bahn Building DRB140558 Jonathan Final review of a changes to approved plans (mechanical screens) 298 Hanson Ranch Road /Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Remonov & Co. Inc., represented by Rick Mueller Schwartzreicht Residence DRB140565 Joe Final review of a changes to approved plans (window) 421 Beaver Dam Circle /Lot 3, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 3 Applicant: Schwartzreicht, represented KH Webb Architects Sitzmark Lodge DRB140570 Jonathan Final review of a sign (business identification) 1/20/2PIfge 2 183 Gore Creek Drive /Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Slifer Designs represented by Patti Biggs Schulman Residence DRB140571 Warren Final review of a changes to approved plans (chimney) 1772 Alpine Drive /Lot 10, Vail Village West Filing 1 Applicant: Dave Schulman represented by MPP Design Shop Patterson Residence DRB140572 Jonathan Final review of an exterior alteration (gas line) 4133 Spruce Way Unit 7 /1-ot 6, Block 9, Bighorn 3rd Addition Applicant: William Patterson represented by Western Fireplace Supply Palmer Residence DRB140573 Jonathan Final review of an Exterior Alteration (vent) 2733 Kinnickinnick Road Unit C2 /Meadow Creek Condominiums Applicant: Chad Howard and Jonathan Palmer represented by KCB Construction The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road West. Please call 479 -2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. 1 /20 /2pIfge 3 TOWN OF VAIL' PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION January 12, 2015 at 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT Henry Pratt Michael Kurz Webb Martin John Rediker Luke Cartin Site Visit: Gorsuch Building - 263 Gore Creek Drive MEMBERS ABSENT Dick Cleveland Pam Hopkins 45 minutes A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to January 26, 2015 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5 -0 -0 George Ruther delivered an overview of the process thus far and the steps that lie ahead, including a request for a final recommendation on the VVMC Master Plan at the January 26th hearing. He spoke to the land exchange conversations and the fact that the outcome of the conversations would not be concluded prior to the January 26th hearing. The master plan will include conversation to account for the two possible outcomes. Commissioner Cartin asked for clarification on the process — the master plan would be approved before the CUP would be acted upon by the PEC? Ruther responded in the affirmative. Tom Braun gave an update on finalizing a proposal for the South Frontage Road future improvements. The preferred design is to locate the round -about in the vicinity of the current helipad location. There are some variables yet to be determined — approval from CDOT and the Federal government. Braun then explained the logistics of traffic flow to the Evergreen, Municipal, and VVMC site if this proposal were implemented. Commissioner Kurz asked about west -bound traffic leaving the medical center. Braun explained traffic would need to utilize the Main Vail round -about to turn and head west on the South Frontage Road. Doris Kirschner, CEO of the VVMC, spoke to the process of the land exchange. One component of the negotiation is re- working the covenant restrictions to allow for increased height for VVMC. Another is the covenant restriction Vail Resorts placed on the property deeded to VVMC. The parties involved in the land exchange conversation are aligned, however, there are many details to be resolved. She spoke to the 2 day charrette that occurred to allow all parties to explore the benefits and challenges of a land exchange. Commissioner Kurz stated that Vail Resorts provided the land in the best interest of the VVMC and he hopes they will see the benefit of the exchange in making their decision. He added, that the health of Middle Creek would be critical in the review process associated with the redevelopment of the west lot. Braun then discussed components of the master plan that are being revised. The most significant revision would be the details of the land exchange. This revision will have ripple effect throughout the master plan. Mery Lapin, Vail Resident, asked how the town's land (Lot 10) would come into play. Ruther asked for clarification as to what piece of land, then reported the Council and staff have discussed the future of Lot 10, however no decisions have been made. Lapin voiced concern with regard to any outcome which resulted in the selling of Lot 10, and that it would set a bad precedence. He spoke to his tenure on Council and the thinking behind the purchase of Lot 10 for use in the future for a museum, art gallery, or expanded Dobson Ice Arena. His other concern to have safe guards in place should VVMC not follow through on a portion or portions of the plan. He spoke to the past and the VVMC inability to follow through. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, spoke to the concern over the loading and delivery location off of West meadow Drive. He expressed support for a shared facility that is centrally located that would be used by VVMC, the Evergreen, and the Town, with access off of the South Frontage Road. He then spoke to the covenants. The voting parties need to be identified and the voting process needs to be discussed. Commissioner Cartin voiced support for the land exchange. He voiced a desire to see the master plan speak to the potential of loading and delivery access off of the South Frontage Road. He reaffirmed need to address and protect the heath of Middle Creek. Commissioner Kurz stated his concern for the potential of vehicular access to the Evergreen from Meadow Drive. Ruther stated the town's desire to prohibit such an arrangement should any land exchange occur. Commissioner Rediker said he was most interested in how the land exchange would affect loading and delivery and the location of the helipad. Braun said the loading and delivery site would remain on Meadow Drive. While the land exchange would provide for more frontage on the south frontage road it was not enough to address all the user groups who would be using the new entrance to the hospital. The helipad would likely shift slightly to the northwest. Commissioner Martin asked Ruther if the PEC was expected to approve a master plan in late March. Martin also stated he was hoping to see more on the loading and delivery proposal, and hoped VVMC would consider a new location. He then asked how soon the PEC can expect to see the revised master plan. Ruther responded that the PEC will be asked to for a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial to the Town Council on January 26th. The revised master plan will be placed on the town's website late Friday afternoon. A link will be sent to the commission members when it had been posted. Commissioner Cartin asked to see demonstrations as to how bulk and mass would change and would like to hear about measures used to reduce the impact of the height of the helicopter structure. Chairman Pratt stated his concern with locking in designs within a master plan. He would like for the master plan to be more goal oriented with imagery depicting a desired outcome. It would allow for greater flexibility in the review of future CUP applications. He added that a list of prioritized alternatives to various areas to be addressed may be appropriate. Braun spoke to the nature of this particular master plan and the need to be more design oriented. As this master plan will be immediately followed with an intial CUP application for the west wing this paln may be a bit closer to a sketch plan. Commissioner Kurz concurred with Chairman Pratt. He suggested the language be dumbed down (generalized) and the graphics dumbed up (increased graphics). 45 minutes 2. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12- 76-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an exterior renovation and addition, located at 263 Gore Creek Drive (Gorsuch Building) /Lots C -E, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140042) Applicant: Gorsuch Ltd., represented by Semple Brown Design Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Table to January 26, 2015 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Jonathan Spence delivered a presentation per staff's memorandum. Leila Schwyhart presented an overview of the proposal including the purpose, goals, use, and design aspects. Commissioner Kurz asked for clarification regarding access points. Commissioner Martin asked if the interior space decreased. Schwyhart replied, "yes." Martin was concerned about the relocation of the entrance. He then asked when the walls were built and if their allowance in the ROW was for the purpose of encouraging outdoor dining. Jonathan Spence said it was built in the 1970's, but did not have any evidence that there was any agreement regarding the location on town property. Rick Hayes, potential operator of restaurant, said he thought the Ore House was not successful as it was lacking year round seating. The outdoor space needs to be maximized in order to make for a financial sustainable venture. Commissioner Kurz said he felt the addition is an upgrade. He asked to see the interior floor plan. Schwyhart spoke to the need to move the entrance —that it allows for more seating. Commissioner Cartin stated his concern for the increase in bulk and mass, particularly at the northwest corner. It could compromise the pedestrian visual experience as you exit the Covered Bridge. Commissioner Pratt was concern about allowing lighting (private) to occur over town property. He also was concerned with introducing a hipped roof and glass railings (both new elements). He suggested strategic locations for benches along Bridge Street. Spence mentioned town's concern for impeding traffic. Commissioner Kurz agreed with Commissioner Pratt. Commissioner Pratt mentioned a concern with the entrance and ADA access. Spence asked for Pratt to speak to the hipped roof. Pratt felt a copper roof might be appropriate. Hayes agreed. Schwyhart asked if wood shake shingle were permitted. Spence clarified that wood shingles were not permitted under the Vail Town Code. Spence asked for the PEC to offer direction regarding recycling. Kurz asked to applicant to meet with all parties using the on -site trash facilities. 3. Approval of December 22, 2014 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5 -0 -0 4. Information Update 5. 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 January 9, 2015 in the Vail Daily. TOWN OF VAI N VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: An update on the progress of the Chamonix Master Planning efforts and a presentation of three conceptual site plan alternatives. PRESENTER(S): George Ruther, Director of Community Development ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The desired outcome of this presentation is to receive feedback and instruction from the Vail Town Council on the required actions and next steps. BACKGROUND: The Vail Town Council has adopted a goal for the development of workforce housing within the community. In an effort to achieve that goal, the Town of Vail acquired the Chamonix property and adopted a master plan for its future development. The three conceptual site plan alternatives further the Town's goal of providing workforce housing within the community and help to achieve the development goals adopted within the Chamonix Master Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Vail Town Council provides feedback and instruction with regard to the proposed required actions and next steps outlined in the staff memorandum. ATTACHMENTS: Town Council Memorandum Council Presentation Supporting Documents Chamonix Market Study 1/20/2015 0 rowN of vain A) Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: George Ruther, Director of Community Development Date: January 20, 2015 Subject: 2015 Chamonix Master Plan Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update on progress that has been made on the Chamonix Master Planning efforts and present three alternatives for further consideration. In addition, a series of actions required and next steps will be shared. The desired outcome of this presentation is to receive feedback and instruction from the Vail Town Council on the required actions and next steps. II. Chamonix Master Plan Goals • Optimize the use of the site for workforce for -sale housing • Design a context sensitive design solution • Ability to be phased over time • Deliver a desirable and marketable type of housing product • Maximize the town's limited supply of financial resources • Build responsibly with the existing site configuration and typography • Develop a diversified cost /sales structure to respond to a wider range of buyers III. Chamonix Master Plan — 3 Conceptual Site Plan Alternatives 359 Design has been retained by the Town of Vail to assist in developing site plan alternatives for workforce housing development on the Chamonix Site. Will Hentschel, principal, at 359 Design has been assisting the Town staff in this effort. Three conceptual site plan design alternatives have been prepared with the help of 359 Design. Each alternative helps achieve the Town's goals for development on the site. The alternatives vary in terms of overall residential dwelling unit density and delivery of product type (duplexes; one, two & three bedroom flats; and townhomes). All of the alternatives allow for phased buildout over time. A copy of the power point presentation illustrating the three alternatives has been attached for reference. IV. Actions Required /Next Steps Affirm a measurable set of project goals and objectives for development on the Chamonix site. Determine the market to be served as a result of workforce housing development on the Chamonix site. 1/20/2015 • Determine the desirable overall residential dwelling unit density and type of product to be delivered on the site. • Determine whether a portion of the site should be set aside for a future municipal office building. • Assemble a project design team( architect, civil engineer, project manager, etc.) to advance a selected alternative • Host a series of neighborhood, potential buyer and community meetings to seek input and feedback on an overall site plan and housing product design. • Develop a preliminary project budget ($1.25 M in 2015 ToV Capital Budget). • Identify a project funding source and develop a financing strategy for the project. • Prepare a timeline for the completion of next steps and required actions. V. Attachments A. Chamonix Site Alternatives PowerPoint Presentation, January 20, 2015 B. Chamonix Master Plan Information Update, December 17, 2013 Town of Vail 1/20/2015 Page 2 TOWN OF VAI L JANUARY 20, 2015 PREPARED BY 359 DESIGN PROJECT GUIDELINES AND GOALS *Optimize the use of the site for Workforce For -Sale Housing • Design a context sensitive design solution • Develop a design that has the ability to be phased over time *Deliver a desirable and marketable type of housing product *.Maximize the Town's limited supply of financial resources *.Build responsibly with the existing site configuration and typography • Develop a diversified cost /sales structure to respond to a wider range of buyers Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Program Analysis Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 — — — oo _. ,�•., a � ..� a . � � i. ... � - sr -* • F • i y, ' ^ 'e n a . gram EEO e S ite 3.6,acres. = , _ 7 z � Zoning - Hou'sing H I - Y b • Y i j, wo - _ dd 6r Or low Y yY , s r, Y I Y " F � Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Plan Context Aerial Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 w A° a �r r � s�o \' fr"'� Cad I' S� � � ♦ r _ *00 Lt. 100 ,. MO _ is �-. jvl�o Auk !s� W-0r; FLAT SITE I ♦ I ♦ � i I Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Plan Opportunities Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 CURB SOCK Cgj , GS ROCK SOCK - -. SURFACE ROUGHENING PERM. SEEDING PS - -_ - — — - PS_ A sF i49 r I f 6" MINIMUM UNLESS OTHERWISE � � - I PS NOTED IN GRADING PLANS _ - - r f;f EXPS±ING - - \. PILd 1' _ SR PLAN .� _ a � PI � '�ii�1. r Q�1;�. IAA r�= 7977.a - - MAINTAIN 10% (MIN.) GRADE AWAY FROM THE /' S,N= � k SyySb 1 ~� BLDG 6 13UL01NG IN THE FIRST 10 FEET WHERE A SIDEWALK .'• a * - r�R - s FF= 7954.5 4. 15. NOT ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING_ `,• _� fkISPING PS l T DUPLEX SECTION A -A v -� _ -- a - r . s ` - IP N.TS. • FF=7978.5 1 T, t. h I 53._47 BLDG 5 _4 io \ {XISiIAlG'._ 5n.�5 = 9 4.5 .4a.3 I / �'' " 2_501 ES qR PROPOSED 6 "MINIMUM UNLESS BLDG C 'SR is ±,a 2 saes s_v ��� •, 4TCT H ExST BL11LD €NG \ ICI OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS \ - � i BD•D ��7C PROPOSED REAR R'OW - - o N SF DRAINAGE SWALE (TYP) DES �u EXFSirNG SR �� BLDG 4 _s�.71 -�F C LV ttasE I' FF =7951.5 T4 B r� r. BLDG 8 SF ! __ - _ PROPOSED M DULAR _ s k BL' -,K E ET AIttING WALL SR A4 w I / 15P L SF TODUNHOME SECTION B -B \ /� PS SR MAINTAIN lOX (MIN.) GRADE AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED TYPE II Ct _ - y. a _ BULDING IN THE FIRST 10 FEET WHERE A SIDEWALK - O `` - - - �ip'o GUTTER WITH 5' AT-0 IS NOT ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING. EXISTING PROPO ED REAR 6e a ` - 49.74 SR -� ,"_. �` - SIDEWALK. REFER TO FH4SE 'r' SF DRAINAGE SWA1,E (TYF) T6 _ _ - ?. � t-J,O HORIZONTAL LAYOUT NOTE= REARS OF TOWNHOME MODELS ARE BURIED I . : • BLDG' A -. BLDG 3 _ 4'•. a'- �(',`C�p` FOR LIMITS AND O£SI 10 -14 FEET, ENSURE PROPER MEASURES ARE BLDG TO PR014DE 5" MINIMUM VERTICAL DISTANCE ! • ` FF =.7848.5 3796 - P FROM FINAL FINISHED GRADE TO SIDING OR PS ARGHITEGT FINISHES. .t• : ^' I. q7. _ _ - fXIS71MG SUMP INLET _ - ? • PROPO5'ED MOD R _ BLOCK RETAI L ING WA � PROPOSED 12' CONCRETE � N DRIVEWAY (TYP) SEE "r SR �= Boa a� 41 ,�. ..NOTES 3 AND 4 BELOW. RS 5R PSG k '`s BLDG 2 q' � + FF= 7942.0 a f - //! ',' ! f a f BLDG 1 FF= 7939.0 EXISTING ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS 4y PR ED GRATED MANHOLE NTH SUMP. NOTE- ADDPTIONAL PARKING STALLS _ / MANHOLE TO BE ADJUSTED DURING WILL - r MAY BE ADDED, BUT REDUIR£ li PHASE Il STORM SEWER IMPRDVEbAE�I CCIi1R01 NATIDN WITH TOWN OF VA1L I To RELOCATE EXISTING ELECTRICAL .. . IP ` TRANSFORMERS ANO INSTALL A / PROPERTY BOUNDARY f RETAINING WALL TO ACCOMMODATE PROPOSED 18' TRANSFORMERS AND CLEAR WORKING i _ RCP STORM SEWER DISTANCES- PROPOSED 10' TYPE 'R' INLET I 5f , •141� 4 I 91� - -- ROADWAY CONNECTION TO I -1 1 I EXISTING FIRE STATION. _ _ -- 1 -- PROPOSED 5' — .+ TYPE 'R' INLET - .. ... Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Previous Site Planning and Development Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN j 710 W. Colfax j Denver, Colorado j 303.884.9131 TUCK UNDER PARKING i CARPORT _ °' ° ■ ■ CARPORT -------------- =� �, \ � E � • � JJJ \ ♦ �\ \ 3 G? • \ HD -5 \ ♦ ♦ ♦\ \ S HD -1 ° ° ' HD -6 ♦' ♦ \ ' - TUCK UNDER PARKING CARPORT ♦' • L� ° -' O ♦♦ �' SQpGE ♦ i TUCK UNDER PARKING YYYY CO ° OPTION 1 - High Density DUPLEX GARAGE (TYP) / LD -2 ♦ �\ Pi j' • • SP ♦' - P2 \ / SITE ♦ • COO • ♦ `\ \\ �� ACCESS Y ♦ ♦ - POINT - - HD � -1 TUCK UNDER PARKING ��• ♦ /'� SURFACE PARKING SITE - ACCESS POINT d� ACCESS POINT OPTION 3 - Residential and Municipal / LD -4 ♦ ° P7 GREEN SPAGE DUPLEX GARAGE (TYP) / ` `) LD -3 - -< <� - • • \ �\ / ♦' ♦♦ \ ♦ ♦i` HD -2 \� ♦♦ ppG�_ 4 P3 �. ♦ ♦♦ HD -1 ♦ �\ ,� , 9 • Y Y Y � /' OPTION 2 - Mid - Density OPTIONS BREAK DOWN OPTION 1 - High Density -77 Units -All Flats / High Density OPTION 2 - Mid - Density -54 Units -Flats & Duplex / Medium Density OPTION 3 - Residential and Municipal -34 Units -Flats & Duplex - 25,000 sq ft Municipal Building Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Plan Option - Overview Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 1 710 W. Colfax I Denver, Colorado 1 303.884.9131 3 BR DUPLEX 2 BR TOWNHOME I� 3 BR TOWNHOME 1 BR FLAT CC - - - - - -- - - -- rr' 2 BR FLAT \ _ — �, 0 6 a 8 ' Q 3 BR FLAT a _ I GARAGE \ .fir �- — Poa� ;• a^ ,• . 6 \ APR - y z ,- CL 16 CC ..,X\ ! j ' 8 % TUCK UNDER PARKING op 0 • G r .194e - TUCK UNDER PARKING } / 0P ? , � S UNIT TYPE QTY 3 BR DUPLEX 0 2 BR TOWNHOME 10 3 BR TOWNHOME 10 1 BR FLAT 25 2 BR FLAT 22 3 BR FLAT 9 TOTAL UNITS 76 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Plan - Option 1 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 je( t 'M 6. Spa O°Jb Fiats + ,Oub\e Stark r low p. w P_ WP V,\ 10 00jes 'N OotOrn es MULTI FAMILY HIGH DENSITY 76 UNITS TOWNHOME 20 UNITS V FLATS 50 UNITS 4w CHARACTER • 3 Story - Higher Density/ Multifamily • Cars to the outside, Open Space to the inside • Building Scale Relates to Surrounding Commercial Hospitality -Easily Phased -Vehicular Access to West is difficult Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Aerial Context - Option 1 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 BUILDING D BUILDING C VIEW FROM WEST IVA %II111l___7i _0 BUILDING C -WEST SIDE BUILDING C - EAST SIDE BUILDING D -WEST SIDE BUILDING D - EAST SIDE Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Project Character - Option 1 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective A - Option 1 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 M. i � r V r. -'"01 0 . - - -� J� � - Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective B - Option 1 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 3 BR DUPLEX 2 BR TOWNHOME 3 BR TOWNHOME 1 BR FLAT . - -- - - - - -- 2 BR FLAT \ _ - -_� f 2 I GSA 3 BR FLAT GARAGE -_ - SP ES _ .. j 2 V" , - 20 2 � 16 2 _ 051E°. j 16 _ S SONG y r f � f 12 Ilev Y UNIT TYPE QTY 3 BR DUPLEX 10 2 BR TOWNHOME 0 3 BR TOWNHOME 0 1 BR FLAT 22 2 BR FLAT 22 3 BR FLAT 0 TOTAL UNITS 54 _ 1 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Plan - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 } I _& ``- M� \t�. - F \ats ' 2 00 ! , Ws 4 RESIDENTIAL - MID DENSITY - 54 UNITS DUPLEX 10 UNITS Iw no , - FLATS 44 UNITS CHARACTER ' 1 �, • 3 Story _ Higher Density/ Multifamily .. • Cars to the outside, Open Space to the inside ` • Building Scale transitions to Single Family / 4 Plex Neighborhood -More Open Space, Porous, Contextual • Very Easily Phased a Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Aerial / Context - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 El .-W-- r ��. q �� m -• . A. AO 1 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Project Character - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 IT Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective A - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 r R ix r r�L i4 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective B - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 f k A j ta j i -4 5 n "' :ate, � »f r'..ig A t r c i4 . i s — At r A. Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective B - Option 2 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 2 BEDROOM DUPLEX 1 BR FLAT 2 BR FLAT UNIT TYPE QTY 3 BR DUPLEX 8 2 BR TOWNHOME 0 3 BR TOWNHOME 0 1 BR FLAT 18 2 BR FLAT 18 3 BR FLAT 0 TOTAL UNITS 44 MUNICIPAL BUILDING GROSS BUILDING SQ. FTG. 24,370SF PARKING J M 1, 1101 - R ,gyp „r k I PARKING SPACES I COVERED 56 SURFACE 15 TOTAL 71 PARKING SQ. FTG. I COVERED /ENCLOSED 17,703 Ailfi Fool Town of Vail - Chamonix Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 +9 ✓ / II���• Sf 1/20/2015 EXISRM6 FIRE S ReF TtON f� -I_ -AF Y` 5F % J M 1, 1101 - R ,gyp „r k I .nf I I. t I 1 I I I ,SL I �S NOT , GE 115 1'RTiG� I Town of Vail - Chamonix Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 +9 ✓ / II���• Sf 1/20/2015 EXISRM6 FIRE S ReF TtON f� -I_ -AF Y` 5F % +73— J - `� I N TUCK UNDER PARKING PARKING �.:_. ;IJIJP 1I0 IX11� N J M 1, 1101 - R ,gyp „r k I .nf I I. t I 1 I I I +73— J - `� I N TUCK UNDER PARKING PARKING �.:_. ;IJIJP 1I0 IX11� N J M 1, 1101 - R ,gyp „r k I .nf I I. t N I U 1 V CC KITow whars below. I Ca I I before yau dia. .:41.1. 811 Lp,,.Pr rr' i'Pr 'G I *;I ET "1FT AAr. Fr<r'I -ail '. FII ""Ii OF PA-7,'�CPIr., "NFRAt_ OVERLOT GRADING NOTES; EROS ©N... C{7N7R% NOTES;. _ eA E) AND TOWNHOME UNITS (1 -6) AK 1. CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES NG �— ADDITIONAL .DING roOTPRINTS ONLY. FINAL AND LAYOUT WIL4 AND EIMPS WITH STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. r A tATER [LATE. PARKING 2 (10) NS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY SEEDING /VEGETATIONM HAST BEENM E STABOSHEPDERMANENT TMENTS ONCE ARCHITECTURA +- .AnS 'Iawt SCCr{ COMPLETED- r _835,._" 17Vis ` .- CUT WLiLt4Mfi t2.725 CY _ •RSVSWAY CUTS TO BE INSTALLED AT TIME OF MODEL I PILL 9 i _ CONST RUC71M DRIV-WAYS SHOWN ARE CONCEPTUAL •.!..- 'S!•nll RE winrim AS RF'r:F;S,ARY TC r Fn17TM'w715F'FC PR'OPL)SG% TYP ,NLCI '61111 SUP TUCK UNDER PARKING Site Diagram - Option 3 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 N U 1 V CC KITow whars below. .ul.�•rr II ��I �; � Ca I I before yau dia. .:41.1. 811 Lp,,.Pr rr' JI Site Diagram - Option 3 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - 2,500sf ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - 2,500sf HUMAN RESOURCES - 3.500sf TOWN MANAGER AND ADMINISTRATION - 2,300sf COUNCIL CAMBERS - 5.500sf INFORMATION AND FINANCE - 3,800sf IT AND STORAGE - 2.500sf COVERED PARKING - 17,703sf PUBLIC SPACE /MEETING AREA - 900sf VERTICAL CIRCULATION - 1,736sf MUNICIPAL BUILDING GROSS BUILDING SQ. FTG. 24,37OSF Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 LEVEL TWO LEVEL THREE Municipal Buildina - Option 3 359 DESIGN 1 710 W. Colfax I Denver, Colorado 1 303.884.9131 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - 2,500sf ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - 2,500sf HUMAN RESOURCES - 3.500sf TOWN MANAGER AND ADMINISTRATION - 2,300sf COUNCIL CAMBERS - 5.500sf INFORMATION AND FINANCE - 3,800sf IT AND STORAGE - 2.500sf COVERED PARKING - 17,703sf PUBLIC SPACE /MEETING AREA - 900sf VERTICAL CIRCULATION - 1,736sf SITE PLAN �2 A B C I PARKIN (62) Illillllll I -40 +44 PARKING (5) SECTION A 7962 7950 --------------- 7940 7962 ------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- -7950 7940 SECTION B 7962 7950 7940 SECTION C MUNICIPAL BUILDING GROSS BUILDING SO. FTG. 24,370SF Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Municipal Building - Section Diagrams Option 3 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 z -3 Story Municipal Building I� I: F1__ �F aV.\'M ck M\t` X sta F \ats . 2 s IRW Stack Oats i Yk ` I V 1 RESIDENTIAL / MUNICIPAL - 44 UNITS - 52 UNITS DUPLEX 8 UNITS FLATS 36 UNITS(44 UNITS) MUNICIPAL 21,000 SQ FT CHARACTER • 2 -4 Story - Mid Density/ Multifamily/ Municipal • Cars to the outside, Open Space to the inside • Building Scale transitions from Fire Station to Residentia • Open Space mixed with Mid Level Density 0 NW, 111� or-Wo WW Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Aerial / Context - Option 3 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 Ih 4F, e Y Cl e. e 4 t ooh r 00 Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Project Character - Option 3 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 mg - --------- 7 ----------- ------ 6 hm A61LM M k. ow Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective A - Option 3 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 A 1 i 4 I Town of Vail - Chamonix 1/20/2015 Site Perspective B - Option 3 Conceptual Design January 20, 2015 359 DESIGN 710 W. Colfax Denver, Colorado 303.884.9131 0) rowN of vain Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: George Ruther, Director of Community Development Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: Chamonix Master Plan Information Update I. Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Vail Town Council with background information on the Chamonix Master Plan. Over the past several months Town Council members have asked questions about the Chamonix Master Plan. In order to effectively convey the information, this memorandum will focus primarily on the Chamonix Master Plan, however a number of other employee housing planning and policy related documents have been included for reference. If there are any questions staff will schedule a work session to address them. II. Chamonix Master Plan 1. Where is the Chamonix Parcel located? • The Chamonix Parcel is located at 2310 Chamonix Road. Adjacent uses include the Shell Station, Vail Fire Station No. 3 and a mix of low to medium density residential developments. 2. When did the Town of Vail purchase the Chamonix Parcel? • The Town of Vail purchased the 3.6 -acre parcel in 2002 for "the purposes of constructing afire station, employee housing and land banking." In 2007 the Town acquired the adjacent 1.25 -acre Wendy's parcel as it is a more optimal location, from an emergency services perspective, for the West Vail Fire Station. 3. When was the Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan adopted? • The Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan was adopted in 2005 and it outlined development areas for a fire station, employee housing and open space. 4. Has the Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan been amended? If so, what was the reason for the amendment? 1 1/20/2015 • Yes, the Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan was amended. It was amended in 2009 following the purchase of the former Wendy's Parcel. The result was the Chamonix Master Plan, adopted January 2009. 5. What was the objective of the Chamonix Master Plan (2009)? • The ultimate goal was to provide a plan for the Chamonix Master Plan Area that balanced the concepts of density, neighborhood impact, and traffic and parking concerns with aesthetics, sustainability, and value in a way that would address the community need for additional affordable housing in a contextually appropriate way. • The Town Council identified eleven development goals to direct the master planning process. Those goals were: • The site is to be used for development of a fire station and employee housing. • Housing for student fire department employees should be considered in the design of the fire station. o An ambulance substation could be an ancillary use on the site. o Energy- efficient and sustainable design and construction techniques are important. Certification by a particular program (Green Globes, LEED) is to be investigated, although not mandatory. 0 100 percent of housing developed should be deed - restricted, for -sale employee housing, with a mix of one -, two -, and three - bedroom units. o The site should be optimized to provide the greatest amount of employee housing. o Re- zoning the site to Housing (H) District is preferred to allow flexibility in design and development. o Additional traffic onto Chamonix Lane should be limited. • One -story of development along Chamonix Lane is acceptable. • All financing and phasing options will be considered. • New pedestrian circulation and access routes should be provided around the site, along Chamonix Road and /or Lane, to ensure connectivity of the surrounding neighborhood to other areas within West Vail. Existing pedestrian paths through the site are to be limited. 6. What role did the community play in the adoption of the master plan? • Over a period of six months, the consulting team developed three schemes exploring various densities and internal character. Development of the schemes benefited from informal and formal meetings with stakeholders and Town staff and from responses to a survey distributed to potential residents. Revisions to the three schemes were presented to the Advisory Committee for additional input and direction, and these refinements were subsequently presented to the Town Council. 2 1/20/2015 Information from the Town department heads was considered in the site planning and design guidelines for the development of the employee housing and fire station at the Chamonix Master Plan Area. Information from other sources was balanced with input from the Focus Groups. Vail Town Council Consultant Team Advisory Town Staff Committee Employee Emergency Town Neighborhood Infrastructure Housing Focus Services Focus Department Group Group Focus Group Focus Group Heads 7. What is the relationship of the Chamonix Master Plan (2009) to the Employee Housing Strategic Plan (2008)? • In 2008, the Town of Vail adopted an Employee Housing Strategic Plan. The stated goal of the strategic plan is "to ensure there is deed restricted housing for at least 30% of Vail's workforce within the Town of Vail." The strategic plan identifies a series of actions steps the Town should consider, such as developing deed restricted housing on the Chamonix Parcel, in an effort to achieve its adopted housing goal. 8. What is the role of the Chamonix Master Plan in the decision - making process? • Like many of the Town's adopted master planning documents, the role of the Chamonix Master Plan is to illustrate and articulate the community's expectations and public input, and to guide decision - makers on how the Chamonix Parcel should be developed. The more a proposal adheres the recommendation of the Master Plan, the more likely it is to be approved. 9. How can the Chamonix Parcel help the Town achieve its goals for deed restricted housing? • The Town's Employee Housing Strategic Plans identifies Town participation in the development of new deed - restricted employee housing as a "catch up" opportunity. The "catch up" term refers to the shortfall that presently exists in the number of units available to meet the Town's adopted goal. • The 2011, Peel /Langenwalter Architects and Martin /Martin Consulting Engineers developed a plan showing up to 48 units on the parcel. The plan shows 5 for -sale duplexes (10 units) and up to 38 for -sale or rent condominiums or apartments. 3 1/20/2015 10. Is the Chamonix Parcel zoned? If so, what is the development potential of the Parcel? • The upper 3.6- acre portion of the Chamonix Parcel is zoned Housing (H) District and the lower (former Wendy's parcel) is zoned General Use (GU). Pursuant to the adopted land use regulations for each of the two zone districts, the development potential is determined based upon the review and approval of an approved development plan by the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission. Currently, the Chamonix Parcel is master planned for 48 residential units. 11. Have development plans been proposed for the Chamonix Parcel? If so, what were they and what is the status of the project? • No site specific development plans have been proposed for the Chamonix Parcel. In 2011, the Town Council discussed preliminary plans for an initial phase of housing development on the Parcel. A cost estimating set of civil drawings have been prepared for the required below grade utilities on the Parcel. No further action has been taken. 12. Does the Town of Vail have a policy when it comes to conveying ownership of land underneath town - sponsored, for -sale housing developments? • The Town of Vail has retained ownership of the land under all of the deed - restricted, appreciation- capped units in Town. A 99 -year land lease exists under Vail Commons, North Trail and the Arosa Duplex. A 35 -year land lease is being discussed for the Timber Ridge redevelopment. • An exception to this policy is the Red Sandstone housing development. There, the Homeowner's Association was given the land under the development because the Town of Vail owned one - third of the land and Eagle River Water & Sanitation District owned two - thirds of the land. 13. To what degree has the Town studied the marketability and suitability of the Chamonix Parcel for development? • The Town completed a market study in 2008 and updated it 2011. An update to the previous studies is presently underway. 14. How has the market conditions changed since the adoption of the master plan? • An updated market study is currently underway. The Town has contracted with Rees Consulting of Crested Butte, CO. to complete the report. The scope of the report will cover such factors as location analysis, demographic and economic framework, ownership market conditions, rental market review, competitive analysis, demand estimates, mortgage availability, and conclusions and recommendations. The report is scheduled to be completed 4 1/20/2015 III. Attachments • Chamonix Master Plan, January 2, 2009 • Resolution No. 2, Series of 2009 • Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan, August 2, 2005 • Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005 • Phase 1 & 2 Markup from Martin /Martin Consulting Engineers, 2011 • Chamonix Market Update, February 28, 2011 • Chamonix Market Study, 2008 5 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 6 January 2009 Adopted by Resolution No. 2, Series of 2009 Prepared For the Town of Vail by STAN CIAUS114 ASSOCIATESi�c .,d.,... ,..� ., ... - ..A .,.., I Drexel, Barreli & Ca. ice; a r c h I t e e I s Chamonix Master Plan Acknowledgements The Chamonix Area Master Plan Amendment is the result of over a year of work on the part of many individuals. Without the effort of the Vail Town Council, the Chamonix Advisory Committee, the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Vail Local Housing Authority, and Town of Vail Staff the Chamonix Area Master Plan would not have been completed. Vail Town Council Planning and Environmental Commission Dick Cleveland, Mayor Bill Pierce, Chair Andy Daly, Mayor Pro -Tem Rollie Kjesbo, Co -Chair Kevin Foley Mark Gordon Farrow Hitt Kim Newbury Margaret Rogers Chamonix Advisory Committee Bob Armour Jack Bergey Andy Daly Rollie Kjesbo Ethan Moore Mark Ristow Margaret Rogers David Viele Town of Vail Staff Stan Zemler, Town Manager George Ruther, Community Dev. Director Mark Miller, Vail Fire Chief Craig Davis, Vail Fire Department Nina Timm, Housing Coordinator Scott Hunn, Former Project Planner Michael Kurz Sarah Robinson - Paladino Scott Proper Susie Tjossem David Viele Vail Local Housing Authority Mark Ristow, Chair Sally Jackle Steve Lindstrom Ethan Moore Kim Newbury Consultants Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. Studio B Architects Drexel, Barrell & Co. Economic & Planning Systems 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Table of Contents 1. Project Scope 1 2. Process 3 A. Overview B. Advisory Committee C. Town Council Hearing D. Refinement of Schemes E. Sustainability 3. Final Recommendations 6 A. Advisory Committee B. Final Town Council Approval 4. Preferred Option 7 5. Procedural Requirements 9 6. Non - Preferred Options 9 7. Recommended Actions 12 8. Appendix 12 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 1. PROJECT SCOPE The proposed design schemes for the Chamonix Master Plan Area were directed by the stated goals and objectives developed early in the community participation process. The consultant team of Stan Clauson Associates, Inc., Studio B Architects, and Drexel, Barrell & Co. identified a variety of opportunities and constraints from the unique physical characteristics of the Chamonix site. The inclusion • of a fire station and student dormitory further complicated ► :.' ' w the layout and programmatic elements of the site design. : * i 4k e The Master Plan Area is generally south facing and '_.: sloped and occupies a highly 4 - r visible location off of the west � Vail exit (Exit No. 173) from I- �. 70. Highway commercial and strip mall commercial development characterizes the uses off of the frontage road and Chamonix Road, with residential neighborhoods characterizing the use patterns off of Chamonix Lane. The Chamonix Master Plan Area is located near to bus stops on both the West Vail Red and Green Loop transit lines. Commercial and employment opportunities are located in the commercial areas within walking distance of the site. The Town Council identified eleven development goals to direct the master planning process. These goals were: • The site is to be used for development of a fire station and employee housing. Housing for student fire department employees should be considered in the design of the fire station. • An ambulance substation could be an ancillary use on the site. Energy- efficient and sustainable design and construction techniques are important. Certification by a particular program (LEED, Green Globes) is to be investigated, although not mandatory. 100 percent of housing developed should be deed - restricted, for -sale employee 1 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan housing, with a mix of one -, two -, and three - bedroom units. • The site should be optimized to provide the greatest amount of employee housing. • Re- zoning the site to Housing (H) District is preferred to allow flexibility in design and development. • Additional traffic onto Chamonix Lane should be limited. • One -story of development along Chamonix Lane is acceptable. • All financing and phasing options will be considered. • New pedestrian circulation and access routes should be provided around the site, along Chamonix Road and /or Lane, to ensure connectivity of the surrounding neighborhood to other areas within West Vail. Existing pedestrian paths through the site are to be limited. The charge made by the Vail Town Council to "optimize the site" required that the planning concepts developed by the design team be evaluated in the context of adjacent uses. The ultimate goal was to provide a plan for the Chamonix Master Plan Area that balanced the concepts of density, neighborhood impact, and traffic and parking concerns with aesthetics, sustainability, and value in a way that would address the community need for additional affordable housing in a contextually appropriate way. The target group for the Chamonix development was families. The target group income was determined to fall within 60 -120% of the Area Median Income (AMI) range for Eagle County, with a possible inclusion of incomes up to 140% of AMI. In current dollars, this equated to a household income range of $47,000 to $94,000, with a possible excursion to $110,000. An important component to the site plan for the Chamonix Master Plan Area was the inclusion of a new fire station. Members of the Town Council recommended the fire station be segregated from the residential use of the Chamonix development for safety and noise reasons. Dedicated access for emergency equipment was requested, as was the incorporation of a community room for public gathering. A student dormitory, to help alleviate the cramped conditions experienced by fire department recruits, was also requested. Finally, provisions for possible Ambulance District participation were to be considered. 2 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 2. PROCESS A. History of Chamonix Master Plan Area The Town of Vail acquired the 3.6 -acre "Chamonix Parcel" in October, 2002, for the purpose of constructing a fire station, employee housing and land banking. To achieve the Town's goals the Town of Vail adopted the Chamonix Master Plan in 2005. The Master Plan outlined development areas for a fire station, employee housing and open space. In 2007, the Town of Vail was able to acquire the adjacent former Wendy's Site. It was determined the former Wendy's Site was a more optimal location, from an emergency services perspective, for a future West Vail Fire Station. Based upon the acquisition of the new property, the Town of Vail determined it could better utilize the two parcels if a new, comprehensive master plan process was completed. A Request for Proposals to hire a new consultant team was issued in September, 2007. The Team of Stan Clauson Associates, Inc., Studio B Architects, and Drexel, Barrell & Co. were retained by the Town of Vail to develop this new Chamonix Master Plan. B. Overview During a period of six months, the consulting team developed three schemes. The three schemes, titled Neighborhood Block, Neighborhood Cluster, and Village Neighborhood, explored varying densities and internal character. Development of the three schemes benefited from informal and formal meetings with stakeholders and Town staff and from responses to a survey distributed to potential residents. Members of the consultant team also attended the Fire Chief Magazine "Station Style Design Conference" in Phoenix to broaden their understanding of current fire station design trends. Revisions to the three schemes were periodically presented to the Advisory Committee for additional input and direction, and these refinements were subsequently presented to the Town Council. Information from the Town department heads was considered in the site planning and design guidelines for the development of the employee housing and fire station at the Chamonix Master Plan Area. Information from other sources was balanced with the input gained from the Focus Groups. 3 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan C. Advisory Committee On 16 January 2008 a "Kick -Off" meeting was held for the purpose of introducing the Chamonix Site Master Plan project to the Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee, which was selected by Town of Vail staff as well as citizens, consisted of representative from the Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Housing Authority, the Vail Fire Department, Community Development, and two Citizens at Large. Duties of the Advisory Committee consisted of reviewing previous master planning efforts produced for the Chamonix site, engaging in discussions on new opportunities and changed conditions to be considered during the new master planning effort, and issuing recommendations to the consultant team on the parameters that would guide the process and the creation of alternative development scenarios. D. Town Council Hearing The Town Council received an update on the work to date on 20 May 2008. The consultant team presented three schemes which ranged in total unit counts from 50 to 70 units. Optimizing the density of the site, the Council's charge at the outset of the master planning effort, was not construed to mean that the maximum number of units possible for the site should be sought. Rather, the consultant team sought a balance between number of units and resident population, with special consideration given to the quality of the experience of living in and around the 4 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan development. The Town Council instructed the design team to seek a middle path on density, considering internal views and character of the surrounding neighborhoods. There was also a discussion of unit sizes, with the Council inclining toward larger units of two, there and possibly four bedrooms. E. Refinement of Schemes Based on the Council's comments and the request accommodate more family - oriented units, the schemes were refined to concentrate on the creation of two and three bedroom units. Units ranged in size from 768 sq. ft for 1- bedroom units, 1,292 sq. ft. for 2- bedroom flats, 1,333 sq. ft. for 2 bedroom lofts, 1,460 sq. ft. for 3- bedroom units to 1,632 sq. ft. for 3 bedroom duplex units. Because family housing was the stated focus of the development, one bedroom units were incorporated sparingly and generally used as "infill." There was attention to the possibility of providing 4- bedroom units. While these were not included in the final unit mix, some units were designed with expansion potential, where a fourth bedroom could be finished later. F. Sustainability Various construction methods and site design techniques were discussed for the site which conformed to "green" practices. Both traditional on -site building methods as well as the use of offsite, factory built construction were considered for the ultimate construction of the housing structures. Based on discussions with the Advisory Committee, offsite, factory built construction became the preferred method due to the energy efficiencies as well as lower construction costs inherent with this construction method. Site design standards which focused on solar orientation, limits to site disturbance, brown -field development, open space preservation, access to transit, and on -site storm water retention were integrated into the three schemes as providing the basis for certifiably sustainable construction practices. Certification of the project using a third -party certification program, such as the United States Green Building Council LEED certification process, was considered and was included in the cost estimates. The Advisory Committee determined that third- party certification would create potential advantages in the future marketing of the development, would leverage the green techniques used in the development to 5 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan encourage or require other private developments to seek the same standards, and foster community pride. As a part of the third party certification process, on -site storm water detention, which would minimize impacts from impermeable surfaces at the Chamonix site to the municipal storm water system, was incorporated in to the design. 3. FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS A. Advisory Committee On 17 July 2008, the final Advisory Committee meeting was held. The consultants presented the final versions of the three schemes and, after discussing the schemes, the Advisory Committee members in attendance voted on their preferred scheme for recommendation to the Town Council. The "Village Neighborhood" scheme, which was the most dense scheme that featured an underground parking garage, received six of the ten votes cast, the "Neighborhood Block" plan received four of the ten votes cast, and the "Neighborhood Cluster" received none of the votes cast. While the Village Neighborhood became the elected preference of the Advisory Committee, a subsequent discussion after the vote tended to suggest that there was significant concern regarding the additional cost and maintenance of the sub -grade parking garage. This concern was noted and included in the report to Town Council. B. Final Council Approval On 5 August 2008, a final presentation of the three schemes was made to the Town Council. Following an update on the Advisory Committee recommendations the council voted six to one for the Neighborhood Block scheme as the preferred option. Reasons given for the preference for the Neighborhood Block scheme ranged from the middle density character of the scheme, the inclusion of open space, the mix of units, and the flexibility of unit layout. Council members voiced support for the third party certification of the project as well as for factory, off -site construction. 6 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 4. PREFERRED OPTION Neighborhood Block A. Overview The Neighborhood Block scheme contains 58 units. The following unit mix was proposed: • No 1- bedroom units; • twenty, 2- bedroom flats; • sixteen, 2 bedroom lofts; • eight, 3- bedroom units; and • fourteen, 3 bedroom duplexes. This unit mix provided for 81,696 sq. ft. of housing with a density of 16 dwelling units per acre. A main access street, which gained access to the site from Chamonix Road, bisected the site, with 3- bedroom duplexes on the north side and multi - family units on the south side. An alley offers secondary access to the multi - family units. The main 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan street passed through the development to the fire station site. While access to the fire station was intended to be limited, this configuration allowed for dual points of access to the site, thus alleviating internal traffic congestion. The landscape plan located potential community gathering spots throughout the scheme. Semi - private, stepped courtyards were located between the duplex units. Turf areas were limited to large open spaces on the east and west ends of the development. The open space on the east end could be utilized for such uses as a dog park. Landscaping on the east end was kept away from the street to preserve sightlines at the Chamonix Road /Chamonix Lane intersection. The open space on the west end would provide a viewing area into the fire station operations. For safety reasons, the viewing area was segregated from the fire station by a series of low, landscaped walls. The landscape palette utilized native trees and shrubs. Aspens were situated along the northern edge of the site and gradually "spilled" through the spaces created by the structures. In these stands of aspen, a native understory of grasses (Thurber's fescue, wheatgrass and blue -wild rye) was punctuated by (orbs such as columbine, common lupine, golden banner, and strawberry. Along the southern portion of the site, where retention ponds were intended to hold and treat storm water runoff, more water - oriented plants took over. Blue spruce was planted densely to act as a screen to the commercial uses to the south and 1 -70 beyond. Shrub thickets of willow and birch filled in among the spruce. B. Fire Station The fire station design shown in the Neighborhood Block scheme was the consensus alternative of Fire District staff and the r l V . COMW s 1/20/2015 Advisory Committee. The building foundation itself provided retention of the steep slopes to the north of the site, and thereby offered the most cost - effective site design. Chamonix Master Plan 5. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS Following extensive analysis of both the Chamonix Parcel and the Wendy's Site, staff determined the Official Land Use Map for the Town of Vail should be amended to reflect the new designation of Chamonix Master Plan Area. The designation of Chamonix Master Plan Area is harmonious with the residential and commercial uses in the surrounding neighborhood and achieves the development goals listed above. Both properties were rezoned to reflect the development goals of the Chamonix Master Plan Area. The 3.6 -acre parcel commonly known as the Chamonix Parcel was rezoned from Two - Family Primary /Secondary (P /S) zone district to Housing (H) zone district (Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2008)and the 1.25 -acre former Wendy's Site was rezoned from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) zone district to General Use (GU) zone district (Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2008) on November 18, 2008. Ultimately, the fire station itself will require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) in the General Use (GU) zone district as it is a conditional use rather than a permitted use in all zone districts. The master plan is intended to be used as the development guide for the Chamonix Master Plan Area. The plan identifies the location for the fire station and the employee housing. The plan locates the highest density employee housing to the south of the lower density employee housing. This layout ensures the greatest compatibility with the adjacent neighbors. Locating the fire station on the southern edge of the property also locates this more commercial type use farthest from residential development. 6. NON - PREFERRED OPTIONS A. Neighborhood Cluster Overview The Neighborhood Cluster scheme contained 50 units. Unit mix consisted of: • four, 1- bedroom units; • eight, 2- bedroom flats; • sixteen, 2- bedroom lofts; • fourteen, 3- bedroom units; and • eight, 3- bedroom duplexes. 9 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 1` a L A alllpe �,1 a JE The unit mix provided for 68,232 sq. ft. of housing with a density of 14 dwelling units per acre. A main access street, which gained access to the site from Chamonix Road, passed through the site to the fire station, again offering dual points of access. Access to the fire station was limited for safety reasons. Multi- family units were situated off the north and south side of the access road. Drives extend to the north off the main street to duplex units. The landscape plan, similar to the Neighborhood Block scheme, located community gathering spots throughout the design. These community spots utilized terraced courtyards which were located off of internal pedestrian circulation routes. As with the Neighborhood Block scheme, turf areas were provided on the east and west ends of the development, connected by a pedestrian trail. The turf area on the eastern portion could be utilized for an amenity such as a dog park, while the western turf area offered a segregated vantage point of the fire station operations. 10 1/20/2015 B. Village Neighborhood Overview ,11 M r►i - - IFW Chamonix Master Plan 1 -0 Y � The Village Neighborhood scheme contained 70 units. This scheme offered a combination of lower density duplex and multifamily units and a multi- story, multi- family structure. Unit mix consisted of: • nine, 1 bedroom units, • thirty -two, 2 bedroom flats; • no 2 bedroom lofts; • sixteen, 3 bedrooms; and • ten, 3 bedroom duplexes. The unit mix provided for 87,936 sq. ft. of housing with a density of 19 dwelling units per acre, the highest density of the three schemes. The main access to the site is via Chamonix Road. The entry road offered a traditional neighborhood lane, with duplex units to the north and multi - family units to the south. The lane terminated in the plaza located in the center courtyard of the multi- story, multi - family structure. The plaza was of a more urban character, with paving that allowed for pedestrian it 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan and occasional vehicular access as needed. A raised landscaped platform in the center offered a green gathering spot for residents. A parking structure was located below the plaza and provided parking for the residents of the multi- storied structure. The parking structure was accessed via a dedicated entrance off of the frontage road. As in the previous schemes, open space was provided on the eastern and western ends of the site, with similar possibilities for programming. 7. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS A. Amend the Vail Land Use Plan. • Planning and Environmental Commission recommendation on December 22, 2008 • Vail Town Council adoption, on first reading of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2009, scheduled for January 6, 2009 B. Rezone the "Chamonix Parcel" to Housing (H) District. • Occurred on November 18, 2008 (Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2008) C. Rezone the "Wendy's Site" to General Use (GU) District. • Occurred on November 18, 2008 (Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2007) D. Complete the final Chamonix Affordable Housing Development Cost and Revenue Analysis by Economic & Planning Systems. • Draft complete on December 9, 2008 E. Complete a site and unit mix specific market study to determine demand for the development, based on the pre- determined area median income target. • Initiated Phase II of contract with Economic & Planning Systems on December 16, 2008. Anticipated completion by February 15, 2009. 8. APPENDIX A. Neighborhood Block Site Plan B. Chamonix Affordable Housing Development Cost and Revenue Analysis C. Vicinity Map 12 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan y:E 0 mm f \` 0 N\ 0 Z V4 I I ------ - --------- ` (' III - -_ r ` // ll 'I III % I III � I I II III 1p z _ Q I r'. yil I 1 fZ- - - - - - - -- ------------ -- l 11 II 13 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Appendix B CHAMONIX AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COST AND REVENUE ANALYSIS Prepared for: Town of Vail Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. December 9, 2008 14 1/20/2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chamonix Master Plan PAGE I. Introduction .................................................................. ............................... 2 ProjectBackground ........................................................... ............................... 2 Scopeof EPS Analysis ......................................................... ............................... 2 II. Comparative Analysis ................................................. ............................... 3 Comparative Projects ......................................................... ..............................3 III. Feasibility Analysis ...................................................... ............................... 10 ProjectCosts ...................................................................... ............................... 10 ProjectRevenues .............................................................. ............................... 11 CostScenerios ................................................................... ............................... 13 IV. Findings ......................................................................... ............................... 0 Cost Considerations ........................................................... ............................... 0 UnitSubsidy .......................................................................... ............................... 1 Buyer Lending Issues ........................................................... ............................... 2 Additional Considerations ................................................. ............................... 2 1s 1/20/2015 LIST OF TABLES Chamonix Master Plan PAGE Table 1 Total Project Costs ........................................... ............................... 1 1 Table 2 Affordability Calculation ................................. ............................... 12 Table 3 Subsidy at Optimal AMI Levels ....................... ............................... 14 Table 4 AMI Levels for Stick Build & Standard Subsidy ............................ 15 Table 5 AMI Levels for Modular & Standard Subsidy ............................... 16 Table 6 Incomes Required to Cover Costs of Stick Built Construction . 17 Table 7 Incomes Required to Cover Costs of Modular Construction... 18 Table 8 Summary of Findings .......................................... ............................... 1 16 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan I. INTRODUCTION The proposed Chamonix affordable housing project site is located on Chamonix Lane in close proximity to the West Vail interchange. The Town purchased the site several years ago for the purpose of constructing housing. The former Wendy's site was purchased more recently for the purpose of constructing a fire station. Collectively, the two sites total 5.5 acres and are slated for housing and the fire station. Surrounding land uses in the area consist of highway oriented commercial development. Further north from the highway along Chamonix Lane, the land use pattern is composed of both single family and multi family residential uses. PROJECT BACKGROUND The Town of Vail recently retained Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. to complete a site plan and cost estimation for an affordable housing project on the Chamonix site. As part of the work, Clauson identified three possible development programs with varying levels of density and building types. Clauson's work also estimated costs associated with construction, engineering, and landscaping of the scenarios for both stick built and modular construction. In addition, the report considered additional costs and fees associated with achieving LEED certification. The analysis was completed in the fall of 2008. From this work, the Town Council identified scheme 1, Neighborhood Block, as the favored development program. Included in this program are 58 total units with an overall density of 16 dwelling units per acre. The project cost estimated by Stan Clauson ranges from $16.7 to $23.3 million depending upon the building construction method. As part of the evaluation of the project, the Town seeks to develop a full understanding of any and all costs in addition to land costs that may occur throughout the course of the project's implementation. SCOPE OF EPS ANALYSIS Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) was retained by the Town of Vail to conduct a feasibility study of the project, building on the work done by Stan Clauson Associates. First, EPS researched comparable projects within Summit County, the Roaring Fork Valley, and Eagle County to identify prominent factors influencing the overall economics of a number of projects. Second, EPS modeled potential Chamonix project revenue based on targeted AMI levels. Project revenue was then compared to estimated costs, including additional cost factors identified by EPS, to determine the AMI requirements needed to provide sufficient revenue to make the project feasible. 2 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan II. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS EPS compiled comparative cost information for seven projects in the Roaring Fork Valley, Summit County, and Eagle County based on interviews with project representatives. This section discusses the individual projects and then summarizes the relevant findings. COMPARATIVE PROJECTS SUMMIT COUNTY Vic's Landing The Vic's Landing project is located in the Town of Breckenridge across from the Breckenridge Golf Course on Tiger Road. The project was spurred by an annexation request by the developer, Tom Silengo, and the corresponding request for water taps. As part of the annexation, the Town's inclusionary housing requirement was triggered. The Town required the developer to construct 24 affordable units in exchange for entitlements for 12 market rate units. Town contribution to the project viability was limited to fee waivers and the entitlement of the 12 market units. The project is evenly split between one- and two - bedroom units with target AMI levels of 80 and 100 percent. The 24 -unit project consists of six four - plexes. One - bedroom units are priced at $185,000 and target income levels at 80 percent of AMI. Two - bedroom units target both 80 and 100 percent of AMI and are priced at $229,500 and $285,000 per unit. Among other standards, the deed restriction limits annual appreciation to three percent or the increase in local AMI, dependant upon whichever measure is higher. In addition, resales of the units are subject to income testing on the part of the buyer with a 10 percent income level tolerance. Closings began in April of 2008. The one - bedroom units in the project are sold out. Approximately half of the two bedroom units are sold. It should be noted that the two bedroom units were completed later and thus have been impacted to a greater degree by current credit restrictions. Federal Housing Administration (FHA) approval of the project was not originally sought, although an effort on the part of the developer is currently being made to receive approval. The approval is expected to broaden market demand as buyer financing will become more available. 3 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Valley Brook Valley Brook is a project in the final planning stages also located in the Town of Breckenridge on northeast corner of Airport Road and Valley Brook Street. The proposed project is being developed on a fee basis by Mercy Housing Colorado as a result of a Town issued RFQ in November 2007. As currently proposed, the project includes 42 units targeting income levels at 80 and 100 percent of AMI. The project is composed of two- and three - bedroom units in two -story townhomes. Approximately 52 percent of the units are targeted for AMI of 80 percent or less and 48 percent of the units are targeted for AMI of 100 percent or less. Units at 80 percent range in price from $133,000 to $160,000 per unit. Prices at 100 percent range from $200,000 to $250,000. Similar to Vic's Landing, the deed restriction limits annual appreciation to three percent or the percent by which AMI increases. Hard costs are currently estimated at $184 per square foot with total a total square foot cost of $230 per square foot for hard and soft costs as well as site work. The cost excludes land and off -site costs. Construction prices have increased approximately 10 percent from the time of that the project was initially bid. However, both the developer and representatives from the Town expect to benefit from a downward renegotiation of costs. The developer is charging a one -time fee equivalent to approximately four percent of total costs, although a 10 percent fee is typically used by the developer. The project is being developed with a high level of subsidy with contributions from town, state, and federal sources. In total, it is estimated that grant funding will account for $4.7 million of the project's budget, or approximately 38 percent of total costs, which does not include costs of land (which was contributed to the project by the Town). The subsidy figure does include fee waivers by the Town. In addition, the Town may also contribute an additional subsidy in grant funding. At this time, the subsidy per unit is estimated at $117,000 per unit. Roaring Fork Valley Rodeo Place The Town of Snowmass has recently completed the first homes in Rodeo Place, a 27 -unit affordable housing development located near the Rodeo Grounds. The project is located within the Town of Snowmass, approximately half the distance between the base area and Highway 82, and is highly visible to traffic along Brush Creek Drive. The project consists of 20 single family homes, two duplexes, and one triplex. Phase I accounts for 15 of the 27 total units. The Town finished and closed six units in the fall of 4 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 2008 and plans to have the balance of Phase I completed by the spring of 2009. The homes are modular. Town staff noted that there have been problems coordinating the site work and the manufacturer resulting in project delays and cost increases. Nevertheless, the Town staff is pleased with the overall process and the quality of the architectural design. The Town did not established AMI targets for the prospective residents but relied on surveys of interested households to derive home prices. Approximately 50 to 60 households with at least one full -time employee based in Snowmass expressed interest in the project. Most of these households have maintained interest in the project since the surveys were first distributed in mid 2007. The deed restriction, which limits appreciation to three percent per year (among other terms), has caused some prospective purchasers to drop out of the process. However, because housing options are limited (particularly in Snowmass), most households have maintained their participation throughout the development process and the pool of buyers has remained sufficiently large to provide adequate demand. Based on the response to surveys, homes were designed to fall into a price range spanning from $300,000 to $550,000 per unit (which translates to an AMI of approximately 140 to more than 250 percent). The small single family homes and duplexes are priced at $300,000, for 1,400 square feet of finished living area plus 700 square feet of basement floor area ($214 per square foot, finished). Medium sized single family homes are priced from $425,000 to $450,000 for 1,800 square feet, plus 900 square feet of basement area ($229 per finished square foot). The largest are priced at $550,000 for 2,150 square feet plus 950 of basement floor area ($256 per square foot, finished). Basements were not an optional feature, as the Town mandated that they be included in each home. The requirement not only ensures adequate storage, but also creates additional bedroom area to be used for sublets and /or roommates, increasing the number of employees that can be housed locally. The construction costs range from $210 to $225 per square foot and covers only vertical costs. The Town absorbed costs for all on -site infrastructure improvements as well as soft costs related to the site engineering and architectural design. While staff did not have specific costs for these services, they estimate a 25 percent increase for these costs resulting in a total cost of $262 to $281 per square foot. The Town had acquired the land previously and contributed the cost of the land as a form of subsidy. Subsidies range from $33,000 to $80,000 per unit based on an average construction cost of $271 per square foot. The smaller units generate $300,000 of revenue while construction costs total $380,000 (1,400 * 271), resulting in a net subsidy of $80,000. The medium sized units required a subsidy of $50,000 and the largest units were subsidized by $33,000. The average among all three unit types is $54,000. 5 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Burlingame Ranch Burlingame Ranch is a 21.5 acre affordable housing development in the Town of Aspen located off Highway 82 to the north of the Bar /X Ranch. The project is entirely dedicated to affordable housing and planned to be developed over three phases and will include a total of 236 units. To date, 91 units have been constructed on the site. Income targets for the project range widely, although the majority of the units accommodate income levels that range from approximately 80 to 140 percent of AMI. (Note that the Aspen Housing Office sets its own median income and corresponding AMI levels. The targets shown here are approximate.) The first phase of development includes 15 one bedroom units, 30 two bedroom units, 39 three bedroom units, and 7 single - family lots. Most of the units are townhomes. In addition to the identified income limits, residents are also required to earn a minimum of 75 percent of their yearly income within Pitkin County. The units are deed restricted to three percent annual appreciation or the percent by which the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases. All 91 units included in the first phase have been sold. An extensive audit of Phase I costs in Burlingame Ranch was completed as a result of a brochure that was published in 2005 misstating the total cost of the project to the public. The average sales price per unit (including lots) for the project was approximately $230,000. Hard costs for the project averaged $170 per square foot with an average total cost of $202 per square foot of hard and soft costs (which exclude land, off -site, and mitigation costs). Including land and all other costs, such an off -site infrastructure, mitigation, and community benefits, the total project cost $236 per square foot. The project's audit indicates a per unit subsidy of $331,567, or approximately 59 percent of the project's costs. This contrasts with an anticipated subsidy of $184,455 per unit. The increase is largely attributable to programmatic changes made by Council as well as shifting AMI targets to lower levels. The project costs increased by $11.7 million, resulting in relatively high per unit subsidies. Iron Bridge Iron Bridge is an affordable housing development located in Garfield County between Carbondale and Glenwood Springs. The affordable component of the project is part of the larger 300 home development by Iron Bridge Homes, LLC. The inclusion of affordable units in the development was a requirement of Garfield County's inclusionary housing ordinance triggered by the developer's request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) density increase. A total of 30 deed restricted affordable single family units were required. County representatives expect 24 to be completed on site and another six to be addressed via fees -in -lieu. 6 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan The affordable units are all comprised of 3- bedroom 2 -bath units with an average size of 1,430 square feet. The units are targeted to families earning 80 percent or less of AMI and working in Garfield County. The units are priced at $230,000 as a result of calculation of AMI based on a 6- person family. Garfield County has since amended their ordinance to limit the amount of people able to be included in the AMI calculation and maintain lower price points. The units are deed restricted to three percent annual appreciation or the percent by which the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases (among other requirements). Sales within the affordable component have been slow, as the developer has closed on only four units However, the balance of the project is under contract and the remaining 20 units are awaiting their certificate of occupancy which has been delayed as a result of the involvement of Lehman Brothers in the construction loan. As a result, the completion of the units and release has been delayed several months. No County or other public subsidy was used in the construction of the units. Developer representatives report that their approach was to sell the units at the cost of vertical construction and shift costs related to land, infrastructure, and soft costs to the market rate portion of the development. Vertical construction costs are estimated range from $160 to $175 per square foot. The project is not currently FHA approved, although the developer and County are investigating the measures necessary to become approved. EAGLE COUNTY Stratton Flats Stratton Flats is a 47 -acre housing development located in the Town of Gypsum south of Hwy 6 on the northwest side of the Eagle County Regional Airport. The developer for the project is Meritage Development Group. At build -out the 339 unit project will include 152 single family homes, 118 townhomes, and 69 condominiums of which 226 will include deed restrictions. At this time, a total of seven units have been permitted on the 47.3 acre site. The affordable units target income levels at 140 percent of AMI and are evenly divided between Town of Gypsum and Eagle County deed restrictions. The Gypsum restriction limits income to 140 percent of AMI and requires that buyers earn 85 percent of their income in Eagle County. The Eagle County deed restriction limits income to 140 percent of AMI and includes a cap on annual appreciation based on the increase to the local AMI. Units with the less restrictive Town of Gypsum deed restriction are priced at approximately $320,000 to $350,000 for townhomes and between $180,000 and $245,000 for condominiums. Units with the Eagle County restriction are priced at $350,000 for single family units, $300,000 to $330,000 units for townhomes, and between $180,000 and 8 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan $245,000 for condominiums. Market rate units range from $400,000 to $430,000 for single - family homes and between $340,000 and $380,000 for townhomes. To date, the developer has written 8 contracts for units in the project. The developer reported that approximately 80 people had pursued loans without success. As a result, the developer has pursued and recently received FHA approval, which allows for 97 percent Loan -to- Value buyer financing. The project was completed using modular construction at a total cost of $200 per square foot. From the time of initially ordering the modular units through the current point in the construction process, the developer reported a cost increase of eight percent. Within the Gypsum deed restricted units, there is a per unit subsidy of approximately $23,000 which was provided in the form of fee waivers by the Town. Eagle County units required higher subsidies of approximately $23,000 of waived Town of Gypsum fees plus $40,000 per unit which was provided through a $4.5 million equity investment in the project by Eagle County in the form of a subordinated position. Eagle Ranch Village Eagle Ranch Village is a land development project by East -West Partners located in the Town of Eagle off Grand Avenue on Sylvan Lake Road. The project includes approximately 60 units which were constructed as part of the Town's inclusionary housing ordinance and were constructed approximately five to six years ago. The affordable units within the project are housed in four - plexes within the Sylvan Square development, which is part of a larger development that includes single - family houses, entitled lots, and additional multifamily housing. The affordable units sold for approximately $300,000 per unit as compared to market rate units within the project that sold for approximately $350,000 per unit. Hard costs within the project were approximately $180 per square foot for vertical construction only. Soft costs accounted for approximately 20 percent of hard costs resulting in a total cost to approximately $216 per foot. The developer of the affordable units reported that no profit margin was received on the affordable units. No income restrictions exist on the units. The deed restriction requires that residents must live and work in Eagle County and limits annual appreciation to three percent or CPI, although this provision is waived if the seller cannot find a buyer. The Eagle County Housing Authority has the first right of purchase from the owner. The affordable units were provided a development subsidy through a land donation by East -West Partners as well as a 0.2 percent transfer fee on the market rate units. The fee is allocated by a community housing committee to individual units. Including land and the transfer fee, the total subsidy in Sylvan Square was approximately $50,000 per unit. 9 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan III. FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS EPS conducted a financial analysis to provide a full indication of the costs the Town of Vail will incur in the development of the Chamonix site. EPS analyzed potential revenues from varying AMI levels and projected the per unit subsidies needed to finance the project. Project Costs Town Council has indicated a preference for Scheme 1 of the Stan Clausen proposals which includes 36 two- bedroom and 22 three - bedroom units for a total of 58 units. EPS compiled the cost information provided by the consultant with line items for a developer's fee and contingency consideration. With these factors added to the original estimate, the total construction cost for the "stick built" Option A is $29,523,540. The cost for the modular built Option B is $21,844,116, as shown on the following page in Table 1. 10 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Table 1 Total Project Costs Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis Sources & Uses Neighborhood Block Option A Option B Total Square Feet 81,696 81,696 Program Engineering Services 7.0% 59,383 1 Bedroom 0 0 2 Bedroom 36 36 3 Bedroom 22 22 Subtotal 58 58 Costs Cost Factor $127,249 Engineering $848,328 $848,328 Engineering Services 7.0% 59,383 59,383 Construction 23,283,360 16,747,680 Landscaping 748,552 748,552 LEED Certification 135,420 135,420 Subtotal $25,075,043 $18,539,363 Cost per Square Foot $307 $227 Contingency Engineering Contingency 15.0% $127,249 $127,249 Construction Contingency' 10.0% 2,328,336 1,674,768 Landscaping Contingency 15.0% 112,283 112,283 Subtotal $2,567,868 $1,914,300 Fees LEED Certification Fee 0.5% 125,375 92,697 Developer Fee' 7.0% $1,755,253 $1,297,755 Subtotal $1,880,628 $1,390,452 Total Costs $29,523,540 $21,844,116 EPS additions to Stan Clauson estimate Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates 1 \1888] -Vail Ch... Housing Site Feasibility Analysis \DaNa[18887 -AMI Eagle ...ly xlslCOSts Project Revenues EPS estimated appropriate sales prices based upon an Average Median Income (AMI) of $75,000 for a household of three in Eagle County, as shown in Table 2. Target home prices range from approximately $228,000 at 80 percent of AMI to $407,300 at 140 percent AMI. 11 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Table 2 Affordability Calculation Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis Description Factor 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% Maximum Income 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom Housing Payment Capacity Monthly Payment Less: Insurance Less: Property Taxes Net Available for Debt Service Affordability Target Loan Amount Loan Term Down Payment Loan : Value Ratio Target Affordable House Price 30% $600 / Year 0.50% 7% interest Source: HUD; Economic & Planning Systems H: \18887 -Vail Chamonix Housing Site Feasibility Analysis \Data \[18887 -AM I Eagle County.xls]CwnrAfford $60,320 $67,860 $75,400 $82,940 $90,480 $98,020 $105,560 $60,320 $67,860 $75,400 $82,940 $90,480 $98,020 $105,560 $228,400 $258,300 $288,100 $317,900 $347,700 $377,600 $407,300 12 1/20/2015 2 & 3 Bedroom $1,508 $1,697 $1,885 $2,074 $2,262 $2,451 $2,639 -$50 -$50 -$50 -$50 -$50 -$50 -$50 _$90 _$1100 _$1110 -$120 -$130 -$140 -$150 $1,368 $1,547 $1,725 $1,904 $2,082 $2,261 $2,439 $205,600 $232,500 $259,300 $286,100 $312,900 $339,800 $366,600 30 Years 30 Years 30 Years 30 Years 30 Years 30 Years 30 Years 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% $228,400 $258,300 $288,100 $317,900 $347,700 $377,600 $407,300 12 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan COST SCENERIOS The total amount of revenue available to the project was determined by the number of units within the project dedicated to each income level. Total income was then compared to the total project cost to determine the net difference. This amount provides the basis of the estimate of subsidy per unit for the proposed Chamonix project in three scenarios. For this analysis, the costs are based on the San Clauson report. Stick built construction is assumed to cost $285 per square foot and modular is assumed to cost $205 per square foot. The field research indicates that these may be overly conservative at this time and that a lower cost figure may be reasonable. In the analysis that follows, the original cost figures have been maintained. It is recommended that the feasibility analysis be rerun with lower figures after the Town has had the opportunity to review them. The first scenario examined an optimal level of affordability with half of the units targeting households at 80 percent of AMI and half at 100 percent AMI. The second scenario determines the price points necessary to reach a per unit subsidy consistent with the comparative projects in the region. The third scenario examines the per unit prices needed for the project to break even. In the tables that follow, Scenario A refers to stick built construction costs and Scenario B is based on modular costs. 13 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan OPTIMAL AMI TARGET An optimal AMI level of 80 and 100 percent of AMI was used in this analysis. At these levels a stick built project requires a per unit subsidy of approximately $251,000 per unit, as shown in Table 3. Modular construction at these incomes requires a per unit subsidy of $118,000. Table 3 Subsidy at Optimal AMI Levels Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis Revenue Sources Neighborhood Block Option A Option B 2 Bedroom % of Total 50% 2,512,400 80% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 50% 4,111,200 4,111,200 90% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 100% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 50% 5,185,800 5,185,800 110% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 120% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 130% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 140% AMI - 2 Bdrm. o% 0 0 Subtotal 100% 9,297,000 9,297,000 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 50% 2,512,400 2,512,400 90% AN - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 100% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 50% 3,169,100 3,169,100 110% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 120% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 130% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 140% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 0 Subtotal 100% 5,681,500 5,681,500 Total Revenue $14,978,500 $14,978,500 Project Profit/Loss Square Feet ($178.04) ($84.04) Unit ($250,777) ($118,373) Total ($14,545,040) ($6,865,616) Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates H\1888] -Vail CM1am k Housing Site Feasibility Aaalyie\- [18887 -AMI Eagle C— tyAe[Reve- 14 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan TYPICAL SUBSIDY Based on the research of regional projects, a representative per unit subsidy for stick built construction in a project with only affordable units is approximately $120,000 per unit. A typical subsidy for modular construction is approximately $30,000 per unit. To reach a typical stick built subsidy, the program required units to be evenly split between 130 and 140 percent of AMI, as shown in Table 4. At these income levels, the project could be feasible with a per unit subsidy of approximately $117,000. Table 4 AMI Levels for Stick Build & Standard Subsidy Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis 3 Bedroom Neighborhood Block Revenue Sources 0% Option A 2 Bedroom % of Total 0 80% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AN - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 130% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 50% 6,796,800 140% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 50% 7,331,400 Subtotal 50% 14,128,200 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 130% AN - 3 Bdrm. 50% 4,153,600 140% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 500% 4,480,300 Subtotal 50% 8,633,900 Total Revenue $22,762,100 Project Profit /Loss Square Feet ($82.76) Unit ($116,577) Total ($6,761,440) Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates i \18887-Va11 Chamonix Housing Slle F— iblllly Analysis \D — [1888] - AMI Eagle County xls[Reve — 15 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan Modular construction affords a greater flexibility in the program required to reach typical subsidies. When 50 percent of units are priced for 120 percent AMI and the remaining units are divided between 110 and 130 percent AMI, a per unit subsidy of approximately $33,000 is needed, as shown in Table 5. Table 5 AMI Levels for Modular & Standard Subsidy Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis 3 Bedroom Neighborhood Block Revenue Sources 0 Option B 2 Bedroom % of Total 0 80% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 2 Bdrm. of 0 100% AMI - 2 Bdrm. of 0 110% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 30% 3,496,900 120% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 50% 6,258,600 130% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 20% 2,643,200 140% AMI - 2 Bdrm. of 0 Subtotal 100% $12,398,700 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0 0 90% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 30% 2,225,300 120% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 50% 3,824,700 130% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 20% 1,510,400 140% AMI - 3 Bdrm. of 0 Subtotal 100% $7,560,400 Total Revenue $19,959,100 Project Profit/Loss Square Feet ($23.07) Unit ($32,500) Total ($1,885,016) Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates i.\18887 -mama Hm IISite Fa-mmw1.11-- [,eee1 -AM I E�I ia C-11 islR�nuos 16 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan MINIMAL SUBSIDY The following two tables test hypothetical scenarios in which the Town pays the least amount of subsidy. For stick built construction, the project requires a subsidy of $102,000 per units even if 100 percent of the units are sold at 140 percent of AMI, as shown in Table 6. Table 6 Incomes Required to Cover Costs of Stick Built Construction Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% Neighborhood Block Revenue Sources 0% Option A 2 Bedroom % of Total 0 80% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 130% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 140% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 100% 14,662,800 Subtotal 0% 14,662,800 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 130% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 140% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 100% 8,960,600 Subtotal 0% 8,960,600 Total Revenue $23,623,400 Project Profit /Loss Square Feet Unit Total ($72.22) ($101,727) ($5,900,140) Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates H \1888] -Vail Chamonix Housing — F —blllry Analysis \Dada \[1888] -AM[ Eagle County I]Reve- 17 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan The Town could hypothetically achieve feasibility with minimal subsides using modular construction costs, as shown in Table 7. The sales modular constructed units are cost neutral when 40 percent and 50 percent of units are targeted for incomes of 130 and 140 percent of AMI, respectively. At these sales prices a small number of units can be devoted to 120 percent of AMI. Table 7 Incomes Required to Cover Costs of Modular Construction Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis 3 Bedroom Neighborhood Block Revenue Sources 0% Option B 2 Bedroom % of Total 0 80% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 10% 1,390,800 130% AN - 2 Bdrm. 50% 6,796,800 140% AMI - 2 Bdrm. 40% 5,702,200 Subtotal 60% $13,889,800 3 Bedroom 80% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 90% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 100% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 110% AMI - 3 Bdrm. 0% 0 120% AN - 3 Bdrm. 10% 695,400 130% AN - 3 Bdrm. 50% 4,153,600 140% AN - 3 Bdrm. 400% 3,665,700 Subtotal 60% $8,514,700 Total Revenue $22,404,500 Project Profit /Loss Square Feet $6.86 Unit $9,662 Total $560,384 Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Stan Clauson Associates H \1888] -Vail CM1amonix Housing Site FeasiUly Anelysl-- [18887- AMI Eagle Countyxls[Rev — 18 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan IV. FINDINGS The following analysis summarizes the most prominent issues encountered in the development of the selected affordable housing projects. Issues are organized by cost considerations, subsidy levels, and buyer lending. Cost Considerations Construction costs for the projects under consideration in this report ranged from $200 to $281 per square foot, as shown on the following page in Table 8, which summarizes the costs, revenues, and subsidies for the projects evaluated. The construction cost data shown in the table is exclusive of land, off site mitigation, and other considerations. The figures generally include hard costs, soft costs, and on -site infrastructure. Results indicate frequent instances of construction costs around $200 to $230 per square foot. Developers experienced cost escalations ranging from 8 to 20 percent from the time an initial bid was received to construction. However, project representatives repeatedly indicated that downward pressure in materials costs has fallen 20 percent from 2007 to 2008. Contractors in the planning stages are tending to renegotiate prices in light of weakening demand for construction materials worldwide. 1/20/2015 I Chamonix Master Plan Table 8 Summary of Findings Chamonix Affordable Housing Costs and Revenue Analysis Construction Cost Project Planned Built Target AMI Cost Subsidy 5 Escalation Price Range (sq. ft.) (per unit) Summit County Vic's Landing 24 24 80% to 100% Mercy Housing 42 - -- 80% & 100% Roaring Fork Valley Rodeo Ground Burlingame Ranch Iron Bridge Eagle County Stratton Flats Eagle Ranch Village 27 9 140%-250% 91 91 80% to 140% z 24 24 80% s 226 7 140% 60 60 live /work in Cty. Modular units z Majority of units in this range, AMI level based on survey a Based on six person household 4 Total cost derived by allocating 20% of hard costs to soft costs 5 Burlingame Ranch and Mercy Housing figure do not include waived fees Source: Economic & Planning Systems Unit Subsidy - -- fee waivers - -- $185,000 - $285,000 $230 $117,000 10% $133,000 - $250,000 $281 $300,000 - $550,000 $202 $332,000 12% avg. $230,000 $202 4 $0 - -- $230,000 $200 $23,000 - $40,000 8% $180,000 - $350,000 $216 4 $50,000 20% $300,000 Subsidies take many forms in affordable housing development. The research shows a clustering of per unit subsidies in the $20,000 to $50,000 range as well as a cluster on the upper end that spans from $120,000 to $330,000. In all cases, these subsidy levels are on top of land costs. In each of the case studies provided, land was provided at no cost to the affordable units, which is a minimum threshold for pursuing an affordable housing project at this time. Generally, the projects requiring lower subsidies benefit from market rate units that defray the land, soft costs, developer fees, on -site infrastructure, and off -site mitigation. For example, Iron Bridge, Stratton Flats, Vic's Landing, and Eagle Ranch Village all received indirect subsidy through the ability of the developer to build market rate units on -site. In addition, the projects also received fee waivers to help offset the costs of affordable units. The $23,000 to $40,000 subsidy at Stratton Flats includes both fee waivers as well as the benefit of a $4.5 million equity contribution from Eagle County. The $50,000 per unit subsidy at Eagle Ranch Village includes both fee waivers proceeds from a BETA and the value of a land contribution from the master developer. Another way to reduce subsidies is to increase sales prices and target higher AMI levels. The Snowmass project reflects relatively unique approach as virtually all of the units are priced at the upper end of the affordable spectrum, reaching approximate AMI levels near (or above) 140 percent. The Town was able to reduce the subsidy to $54,000 per unit based on sales prices for some units that exceeded $500,000. The project with the lowest required subsidy, Stratton Flats, 1/20/2015 1 • Chamonix Master Plan reflects a combination of benefits, including on -site market rate units, modest deed restriction terms, as well as higher AMI targets. In projects without supporting market rate units and conventional AMI targets that reach households earning as little as 80 percent of AMI, higher subsidies are required to cover project costs. The proposed Valley Brook project anticipates a per unit subsidy of approximately $117,000. Burlingame Ranch requires $332,000 per unit. Moving forward, the Town of Vail should recognize that land subsidy alone will be insufficient for the project unless construction costs drop and /or AMI targets are set high. The Town should carefully consider higher AMI levels and should set them only after completing additional market analysis, as identified below. Generally, the Town should anticipate committing additional levels of subsidy to the project based on the research of comparative projects. Buyer Lending Issues Project developers repeatedly indicated that underwriting standards for residential borrowers represent the greatest current risk to affordable housing development. Preliminary research shows that mortgage terms require down payments of 10 to 15 percent. Many developers cited the need to secure Federal Housing Administration approval, thus providing 97 percent loan -to -value financing. Project representatives indicated that FHA approval was contingent upon review of the deed covenants and in the case of the modular development (Stratton Flats) approval of building plans, including the unit foundation. Construction loans appear to be less of an issue than individual homebuyer loans. Representatives from the Valley Brook project indicated a willing market for construction loans. In addition, downward pressure on construction costs has also eased restrictions to borrowing. Additional Considerations Based on discussions with developers with active affordable housing projects in the region, there are a number of critical issues that warrant consideration, in addition to the issues of costs, revenues, and feasibility. These include: Competitive Market Position - The Town should understand the market position of the site relative to other projects within the county. Prospective home purchasers have options and can be expected to evaluate several other opportunities before selecting a home at this location. Documenting the market context and determining the competitive advantages provided by this site will shed light on the profiles of buyers likely to purchase here. The analysis will enable the Town to price its units based on the market and improve receptivity among the segment(s) most likely to consider it. 1/20/2015 2 • Chamonix Master Plan Product Alignment - Once the market position and price banding has been established, the Town should revisit the products designed for the site. Aligning the products with the buyer profiles is a critical step to creating a marketable project. It should be noted that most developers attempt to provide as broad a range of products as possible, thus generating interest from across the spectrum of prospective buyers. This approach is recommended for the Chamonix site as well; however, the Town should identify the most profitable and saleable product and ensure that the development program is concentrated around this unit type. ■ Market Depth by AMI Level - In addition to evaluating the market supply, as noted in the first two bullets, the Town should consider an analysis of market demand. Using recent survey data, the Town could understand the depth of potential demand for units by income level. The data can be cross - tabulated by a range of factors to better understand depth of demand by type of resident. ■ Financing Risk Mitigation - The current credit markets are substantially different from the recent past. Accordingly, developers must take action to ensure that financing is as available under the most flexible terms possible for future buyers. At this time, developers are seeking FHA approval to achieve this. The Town should understand the requirements of FHA and ensure that it is addressed from the start of 1/20/2015 3 • Appendix C Chamonix and We ndy's Parcels 2308 P �328 2289 Z338 V 9w, 2338 235 -77 9 Subject Property 978, 47-w 7tc -44 *4, A hF2 '245n ' N, 26 4 84 LssMdifed AUg-t19,2008 1/20/2015 Chamonix Master Plan 21p &s 14 2171 _ RESOLUTION NO.2 Series 2009 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CHAMONIX MASTER PLAN, TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING AND A FIRE STATION ON THE "CHAMONIX PARCEL" AND "WENDY'S PARCEL" AND TO AMEND THE VAIL LAND USE PLAN, PURSUANT TO SECTION 8-3, AMENDMENT PROCESS, VAIL LAND USE PLAN TO DESIGNATE THE CHAMONIX MASTER PLAN AREA LOCATED AT 2399 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD AND 2310 CHAMONIX ROAD /PARCELS A AND B, RE- SUBDIVISION OF TRACT D, VAIL DAS SCHONE FILING 1. 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"); and WHEREAS, The members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council ") have been duly elected and qualified; and WHEREAS, In 2002, the Town of Vail purchased the "Chamonix Parcel" for the purpose of constructing employee housing and a new fire station; and WHEREAS, In 2007, the Town of Vail purchased the "Wendy's Parcel" for the purpose of constructing a new fire station; and WHEREAS, On January 8, 2008, the Town Council established the "Chamonix Advisory Committee" for the purpose of developing master plan options; and WHEREAS, The "Chamonix Advisory Committee" held numerous public meetings over eight months; and WHEREAS, The "Chamonix Advisory Committee" developed three master plan options; and WHEREAS, On August 5, 2008, the Council instructed staff to fully develop the "Neighborhood Block" option for the development of deed restricted, for -sale employee housing and a West Vail Fire Station; and WHEREAS, On December 22, 2008 the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission gave a recommendation of approval with a modification (4 -1 -0, Proper opposed); and WHEREAS, The Town Council finds that the adoption of the Chamonix Master Plan and Land Use Plan Amendments are in keeping with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, The Town Council finds that the adoption of the Chamonix Master Plan is in the best interest of the Town as it promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TOM OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Req Mlon No. 2, Series 2009, IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE Pop I of 4 1/20/2015 Section 1. Chamonix Master Plan Adoption Adoption of the "Chamonix Master Plan dated January 6, 2009, prepared for the Town of Vail by Stan Clauson Associates, inc" copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit B, and made a part hereof by this reference. Section 2. Vail Land Use Plan Amendment A. The Council hereby approves the Vail Land Use Plan amendments, as illustrated by text additions stated in bold italics and deletions in stFikethFOUgh and the following maps and figures attached to this resolution as exhibits: 1. Amended Map A — Vail Land Use Plan 2. Tract 43 — Chamonix Parcel The 3.6 acre Chamonix Parcel has been identified for the location of a future high density, for -sale, deed - restricted employee housing development consisting of approximately 58 dwelling units (16 to 17 dwelling units per acre). T-GWR Of Vall U696. SeGendaFy uses eA the sate inGlude a medium density . A Land Use Plan depicting the the fie uses has been prepared as the result of a comprehensive public planning process and is included as Appendix F of this document. Tract 44 — West Vail Fire Station The 1.25 acre West Vail Fire Station Parcel has been identified for the location of a new fire station in West Vail. A Land Use Plan depicting the location of the new fire station on the parcel has been prepared and is Included as Appendix G of this document. CMP - Chamonix Master Plan Area Included In this category are those properties which are identified as being Included in the Chamonix Master Plan boundaries. Properties located within this land use category shall be encouraged to develop, per the Master Plan recommendations, as it has been found necessary in order for Vail to remain a successful resort community. Uses and activities for these areas are intended to encourage a safe, convenient and pleasant resident experience. The range of uses and activities appropriate in the Chamonix Master Plan (CMP) land use category may Include deed restricted employee housing, private recreation facilities, private parking facilities, and Institutional/public uses such as a fire station and other municipal facilities to serve the needs of residents. Section 3. Effective Date This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. Resolution No. 2. Series 2009, P"e 2 of 4 1/20/2015 INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6cn day of January, 2009. /2 6" (' e., /. Richard D. Clevelan yor, Town o Vail ATTEST IF OF ArR o lei onaldson, own 61erk CSE Resolution No. 2, Series 2009, Page 3 of 4 1/20/2015 INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6t' day of January, 2009. e Richard D. Clevelari ",4yor, Town o Vail ATTES tA op SEAL Lo 0 �7,0 601e�Ponalds�on, t6win- Clerk f % SEAL 06 a ^ ('c- LOR;�� Resolution No. 2, Series 2009, 1/20/2015 Page 3 of 4 CHAMONIX PARCEL LAND USE PLAN August 2, 2005 Prepared by the Town of Vail Community Development Department, Davis Partnership Architects, and Michael Hazard Associates 1/20/2015 I. SUMMARY Davis Partnership, Michael Hazard Associates, and a neighborhood committee, along with the Town of Vail Community Development Department staff have completed an analysis on the Chamonix Parcel and developed this Land Use Plan from those efforts. The process has incorporated the information from the study conducted by the consultants with the information culled from the neighborhood citizens to create a simple and flexible Land Use Plan document and Future Land Use Map in the form of a color - coded "Site Plan" (attached). A series of meetings among the appointed review team, neighborhood committee, and Town Council were held between August and November, 2004, which led to the establishment of the following project objectives: • Identify a location for the West Vail Fire Station on the Chamonix Parcel; • Identify other potential land use opportunities for the Chamonix Parcel; and • Provide a Land Use Site Plan which can be used as a guideline to establish detailed development plans for the Chamonix Parcel (attached). II. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS Following the study phase of this planning document, staff determined that the land use designation of the subject property is harmonious with the goals of this plan and does not require an amendment to the Official Land Use Map for the Town of Vail. The official land use designation of the Chamonix Parcel is "Medium Density Residential" on the Official Land Use Map, a designation which has Fire Station listed as a desired use to have in these areas and is harmonious with the residential component in this Chamonix Parcel Land Use Plan document. The only specific use other than fire station on the Chamonix Parcel upon which consensus was reached during the study phase of this project is a medium density residential use indicated on the attached plan map as the "Development Zone" and highlighted in yellow (Attachment A). In order to establish a medium density residential use on the subject property, a change in zoning from the current Two - Family Primary/Secondary (P /S) Residential district to the more appropriate Medium Density Multiple Family (MDMF) Residential district is required. The fire station use itself requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) in both the P/S and MDMF zone districts and therefore does not necessitate a change in zoning for it to be built. The passive recreational areas identified on the land use map do not require a zone change or modifying the parcel's land use designation on the Official Vail Land Use Map. III. SITE ANALYSIS Lot Size: 3.6 acres (156,816 sq ft) Zoning: Two Family Primary / Secondary (P /S) Residential Current Use: Undeveloped, vacant land Vegetation: Indigenous grasses and shrubbery, no trees 1/20/2015 Topography: Sloping from north to south at approximately 45% on the west side of the site and 10% on the east, with a fall of approximately 66 feet Constraints: The southeast corner of the site contains public service lines and transformers which must be relocated or protected during developme IV. USES Primary Use: Fire Station Secondary Uses: Medium Density Residential; Passive Outdoor Recreation; Open Space (See the Land Use Plan Summary on the attached Site Plan map.) The primary use onsite and the catalyst for this plan's development is the fire station long contemplated for this town -owned site in West Vail. The fire station is to be located lower down on the site adjacent to the existing sites in the Heavy Service (HS) zone district which are compatible with this type of use. The medium density residential use is secondary to the fire station and is meant to provide a logical transition from the commercial service oriented uses on the frontage road to the residential character of the area above Chamonix Lane. The architecture of a medium density residential improvement on the subject property should employ the use of pitched roofs to ensure compatibility with the residential neighborhood above. The passive recreational and open spaces contemplated for the site will serve as buffers to mitigate any potential impacts to neighboring uses. V. PLAN OBJECTIVES a. Maintain a safe intersection at Chamonix Road and Chamonix Lane; b. Minimize traffic and noise impacts for the neighborhood; c. Define a location for the fire station and other uses; d. Preserve and build upon community characteristics of the neighborhood; e. Be mindful of site access and the impacts of traffic on the neighborhood; f. Explore financing options for the fire station; g. Study the feasibility of drive - through engine bays; h. Allow for a possible future expansion of the fire station up to 16,000 sq ft and from two to four engine bays; i. Allow for adequate parking and snow storage at the fire station; j. Create adequate outside staging for the fire trucks. VI. LAND USE PLAN MAP The attached site plan is intended for use as the Future Land Use Map for the Chamonix Parcel and contains a general Land Use Plan Summary which describes the four color -coded land use areas: Blue - Primary Use: "Town and Fire Station Uses ", the proposed fire station building and any other Town of Vail amenities must go through the Design Review Application process and receive Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Yellow - Secondary Use: "Development Zone ", intended for Medium Density Residential use and development not to exceed 18 dwelling units per acre in accordance with 1/20/2015 2 the Medium Density Multiple Family (MDMF) zone district and any proposed buildings must go through the Design Review Application Process and receive Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Orange - Accessory Use: "Recreational Space ", upon which any physical improvements associated with passive outdoor recreation, would require Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Green - Open Space Buffer: no physical improvements in this area. VII. ATTACHMENTS A. Future Land Use Map ( "Site Plan ") 1/20/2015 Attachment: C CHAPTER VII - COMMUNITY FACILITIES 1. Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property The initial section of the study provides a general evaluation of the suit - i ability of the numerous town owned sites to accommodate development. The term development is used in its generic sense in that land which may currently be void of any activity or could be improved or developed to accommodate a public or private use. An initial screening of the properties is presented in which the site and location is presented. The physical character of the site is briefly described as is its current use. Finally, an assessment of the suitability of a site is based on a number of factors including the following: - Size. The site may be too small to accommodate any active or passive function. 1 - Physical Constraints. The -site may be subject to flooding, may con - tain geologic hazards or severe slope conditions. I - Accessibility. The site may contain significant limitations on access which may suggest only certain types of use. Existing Use r There may be an existing public use on the site which is providing a valu- able service to the community and likely not to change. (Note: for pur- poses of this assessment, the planning horizon of the Year 2000 is used as the basis for commenting on future needs of the community.) Restrictions on Use A number of parcels of land which have been deeded to the Town of Vail con - tain convenant restrictions-as to their use. These restrictions could pre- clude certain activities and dictate site utilization. This initial evaluation would be termed a coarse screening of the town properties. The intent is to identify those parcels which are likely not to change from their current use or activity and to eliminate them from further discussion. Conversely, those tracts of land which do represent I opportunities for change or development will be analyzed further for their potential. Coarse Screen of Sites Following is a listing of identified Town of Vail owned ro er comments as to their character and suitability. parcels s are p ties and generally from the east part of the community to the west and are nlocated on Figure 5 - Inventory of Town Properties. 1/20/2015 42 Attachment: D TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER II LAND USE PLAN GOALS 6 CHAPTER III OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ' 9 = CHAPTER IV EXISTING LAND USE _ 11 CHAPTER V SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE 17 CHAPTER VI PROPOSED LAND USE 29 CHAPTER VII COMMUNITY FACILITIES 41 - CHAPTER VIII IMPLEMENTATION _ 59 t APPENDIX A COt•U4UNITY QUESTIONNAIRE - SUhV-IARY RESULTS A -1 - 6 i APPENDIX B ADDITIONAL GOALS B -1 - 2 i APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL SOURCES C -1 APPENDIX D ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW 0 -1 - 12 APPENDIX E TOWN OF VAIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY E -1 - 16 i -1/20/2015 t0 �J r GA, no o •.�'. • 7A � / •J /\ P • •7 �` i a � v o � 1/20/2015 • \• L Q 0 a 4--a o a, L } N00 m > > Oo OO � C r Attachment: E i� r I a c 3 0 IC 1 • a• i v ; � � n m v x c c • • o 0 d m E e e „ � o e v c c • J c ° • � c° t� lb 4 1 0 � 0 A > c MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: August 16, 2005 SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, amending the Vail Land Use Plan pursuant to Chapter VIII of the Vail Land Use Plan, adding the Chamonix Parcel as Tract 43 in the "Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property" contained in Chapter VII, Community Facilities, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: The Town of Vail, represented by Suzanne Silverthorn Planner: Matt Gennett j44-C I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, The Town of Vail, represented by Suzanne Silverthorne, is requesting a second reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, an ordinance amending the Vail Land Use Plan pursuant to Chapter VIII, Vail Land Use Plan, adding the Chamonix Parcel as Tract 43 in the "Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property" contained in Chapter VII, Community Facilities, and setting forth details in regard thereto (Attachment A). The purpose of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, is to establish a land use plan for a fire station and other uses on the Chamonix Parcel, located at 2310 Chamonix Road/Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1 (Attachment B, Vicinity Map). The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, upon second reading, with the findings located in Section III of this memorandum. II. BACKGROUND On July 20, 2004, upon the recommendation of a council- citizen -staff review committee, the Vail Town Council authorized the Town Manager to hire the planning team of Davis Partnership /Michael Hazard Associates to facilitate a master land use plan centered on a fire station for the town -owned Chamonix property at Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1/2310 Chamonix Road. On January 24, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) held a work session to consider a proposed draft Land Use Plan for the Chamonix parcel, hear public input, and discuss the other possible uses on site which would be in addition to the primary fire station use. 1/20/2015 1 On June 27, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously approved a proposed land use plan produced by the collaborative efforts of the committee, staff, and Davis Partnership /Michael Hazard Associates to be used as a guide for future land uses on the Chamonix Parcel. On August 2, 2005, the Vail Town Council voted 6 -1 -0 (Donovan opposed) to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, on first reading. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005, upon second reading, with the following findings: 1. That the proposed amendments further the purpose and intent of the Vail Land Use Plan; 2. That the proposed amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town of Vail; and 3. That the proposed amendments promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town of Vail in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2005 B. Vicinity Map C. Chapter VII — Community Facilities, 1 Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property, Coarse Screen of Sites, Vail Land Use Plan D. TABLE OF CONTENTS, Vail Land Use Plan E. Figure 5 -W, Vail Land Use Plan, with proposed amendment F. Proposed APPENDIX F, Land Use Plan for the Chamonix Parcel 1/20/2015 2 Tract 43: Chamonix Parcel Lot Size: 3.6 acres (156,816 sq ft) Zoning: Two Family Primary / Secondary (P /S) Residential Current Use: Undeveloped, vacant land Vegetation: Indigenous grasses and shrubbery, no trees Topography: Sloping from north to south at approximately 45% on the west side of the site and 10% on the east, with a fall of approximately 66 feet Constraints: The southeast corner of the site contains public service lines and transformers which must be relocated or protected during development Site Plan Map Primary Use: Fire Station Secondary Uses: Medium Density Residential; Passive Outdoor Recreation; Open Space (See the attached Site Plan map.) Blue - Primary Use: "Town and Fire Station Uses ", the proposed fire station building and any other Town of Vail amenities must go through the Design Review Application process and receive Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Yellow - Secondary Use: "Development Zone ", intended for Medium Density Residential use and development not to exceed 18 dwelling units per acre in accordance with the Medium Density Multiple Family (MDMF) zone district and any proposed buildings must go through the Design Review Application Process and receive Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Orange - Accessory Use: "Recreational Space ", upon which any physical improvements associated with passive outdoor recreation, would require Design Review Board (DRB) approval. Green - Open Space Buffer: no physical improvements in this area 1/20/2015 I s` L 0 • o� �0 L, 6 3 1 I I N 7 N 7 =: —I j O m m N s o Z Q 0 Q (D 0� 7 Q O Q O Q c!) _ 0 3 0 N vCi m ° D Q m Q V� m m S m 3 o g r \ - C v o N- 0 v v Z -- o m a Q Cn Z' 5 v0 0 3 CD 3 m 0 0 0 cn w m IDoo v C N 0 tnQ�.� 0 0 0 N N C CD (D _ fD 3"Om333 °- n -o Q 0 o \ o N o v 0 v I C) \\ m- m m 0 3 \ \ O 0 O \Y0 \ N N p O D N r0 L S O n cD z. CD W 0 p C C1 v) m� 6 •� m �p Q ry (D O r'�t1 vim \ \ pA� ? X 0 m 70 m� \ ���300�� O - I 2s 3va�cl, m r \' '� �p C7 N Q ,� �9�;t CD C 0) 6 NI tc\\ ccD 3 O CQ N N rn Cn — \\ S a `G Z O Q D , I \ \\ \ 0 7 CD O (D a N m 2 1\ m -4 = \\ o m 3 D - �� CcD .c•. O � �• CD = � c CO '6 m \1 11 0 vci 0 0 O 0 i I' � O p� O ml cD v' c r 0 m° m a _ x m1 rrl -� m c�00 i n c C=03 oc �co m m-Iz rO z cn _0 v�<p�' 0az ll -0 D - m o� i z 0 CD CL z n i m 0 m m A I j n x r (n O O 2`' j otiy ` m D ,1 m r - fD CL a CD CO iv O oil D R CD CD co m \ m cn < o m > I D -_tom of I I i r I A�, m I r N 1 ai O ° V o n C-) 11 ~ tci: m > m 2 ma mz v'zz n zz r� rD, i X I r m m O EZ I 0962 ` I cy O ` -o- 1' m i. cn SAO c ` \ -\ ' o iz �� l� m z X cNq = z kRp � o` \ m-- o � 1 axA 5p" A r TOWN OF VAIL p� m 5 Tpm p o CHAMONIX PROPERTY a Y cn �m o m COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT z 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD > VAIL, COLORADO s o 1/20/2015 John Gulick - 10- 5chamonixmemo.doc Page 1 TO: Town Council FROM: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Suzanne Silverthorn, Project Facilitator DATE: October 5, 2004 SUBJECT: Chamonix Property Master Plan Update BACKGROUND Since July 20, 2004, at the direction of the Vail Town Council, the planning team of Davis Partnership /Michael Hazard Associates has been working to facilitate a master land use plan for the town -owned Chamonix property at 2310 Chamonix Rd. The purpose of the land use plan is to determine the most appropriate location for a future fire station on the property as well as other potential uses that would maximize community benefit while complementing characteristics of the surrounding area. The 3.6 acre property was purchased by the Vail Town Council in 2002 for $2.6 million. At the time, a fire station, affordable housing and land banking were identified as possible future uses. The property is currently zoned primary/secondary residential. A citizen review team has been assembled to help manage the process. Members include Kim Ruotolo and Dick Cleveland from the Town Council, as well as Bob Armour, Bruce Norring and Tricia Hutchinson from the neighborhood, plus town staff. The planning steps, to date, have included the following: August 9, 2004 Kick -off meeting with West Vail residents to introduce project and to identify neighborhood interests and concerns. Five key themes were identified: • Preserve and build upon community characteristics • Pay particular attention to site access and traffic impacts • Minimize fire station impacts to the neighborhood • Explore financing options for fire station • Explore long -term needs and opportunities August 9 - September 26, 2004 Seven fire station site plan options were developed using the following criteria: ease of fire truck movement; safety for fire truck access to site and exit from site; extent of site utilized /site availability for future development; response to existing neighborhood uses and existing zoning; and response to existing site grades. Two of the 7 site plan options were expanded to include possible master plan scenarios representing high density residential and land banking (see attachments). The scenarios included a site section showing height relationships and the impacts on existing residential properties on Chamonix Lane. 1/20/2015 John Gulick -­i` -'5c6monixmemo.doc Pa e 2 !I • September 27, 2004 Update meeting held with West Vail residents to present fire station site plan options and the beginning stage of land use planning options for the remainder of the property. The purpose of the October 5 update to the Town Council is to provide a summary of the September 27 neighborhood meeting, narrow the fire station options to 2 or 3, and describe next steps. SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, SEPTEMBER 27 Questions & Answers Q: What is the current zoning and how does that relate to height requirements for new development? A: The current zoning is Primary Secondary Residential. This current zoning limits the height to 33 feet for sloped roofs and 30 feet for flat roofs. It is recommended the site be rezoned to General Use to allow the fire station to be sited. The General Use zone is defined by the Planning and Environmental Commission for height limits. If the site was rezoned to high- density residential or public accommodation, the height would be limited to 48 feet. If the site were rezoned to medium residential, the height limit would be 36 feet above adjacent grade. Q: How many calls would the Fire Department respond to from West Vail? A: An average of 1 a day. Q: Where does Greater Eagle River Fire Protection District boundary begin? A: At mile marker 171 at Dowd Junction. Suggestions /Comments • Development of the property could help block highway noise and provide a visual screen from the service stations and Wendy's. • In addition to the fire station, consider a small park with picnic tables in lieu of residential use. • Look at open space opportunities. By adding more residential, it will add to traffic in the neighborhood, which is already a concern. • Maintain a pedestrian /bike path through the property. • Avoid a rental housing scenario. It would negatively impact single family homes. It would also compete with rental units already available by individuals who earn their living this way. • There are no easy access solutions for the fire station. Chamonix Road and the corner of Chamonix Lane are both difficult, especially during the winter when roads are icy. • Holiday Inn prefers drive - through for fire trucks to avoid use of back up beepers. • Lighting is of concern. • For sale units are preferred over rental units to avoid diluting the rental unit market in the neighborhood. Neighborhood Preferences • Drive - through scenario for fire station bays is preferred. • Option 7.0 for fire station location best minimizes impact to the neighborhood. 1/20/2015 NEXT STEPS • Following the Town Council's review of the fire station location options, the design team will carry forward the top three fire station location options. • The design team will then prepare a series of master plan options for the entire site based on an evaluation of the neighborhood themes, zoning considerations, density ranges, public - private scenarios and land banking options. • The design team will also produce a financial analysis of each option and a comprehensive evaluation of the opportunities and constraints. Schedule October 5, 2004 Review Fire Station location options with Town Council October 611 — October 291h Develop Master Plan Options November 1, 2004 Neighborhood Meeting to review Master Plan Options November 16, 2004 Present Master Plan Options to Vail Town Council for review and refinement 1/20/2015 Rtll,:W7 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TOWN OF VAIL DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER LAND USE PLAN CHAMONIX PROPERTY VAIL DAS SCHONE, TRACT D, FILING 1 REQUESTED BY TOWN OF VAIL OFFICE OF THE TOWN MANAGER 75 S. FRONTAGE RD. VAIL, CO 81657 June 18, 2004 1/20/2p 15 Background In October 2002, the Town of Vail acquired a 3.6 -acre parcel of land in West Vail for $2.6 million. The site, once known as the Hud Wirth property, and now called the Chamonix property, is located at 2310 Chamonix Road. The site is zoned primary/secondary residential and is the largest remaining town -owned developable parcel in Vail. In approving acquisition of the land, the Vail Town Council identified a "fire station, affordable housing and land- banking" as future public uses contemplated by the town. The next step is to master plan the property, which is the purpose of this RFP. The Town of Vail desires to hire the services of a planning team to work with the Town of Vail and its constituencies to develop a master plan for the Chamonix property with design work to be completed during 2004.The design team should be highly qualified to include expertise in the areas of land planning, site analysis and layout, architectural massing, space programming, construction cost estimating, and public process. Soils tests are being conducted simultaneously and will be provided to the planning team, as well as survey information and initial site planning studies. Purpose The purpose of developing a master plan for the Chamonix property is to accommodate the Town Council's desire to site a fire station on the property and to identify and evaluate additional uses that will maximize community benefit while complementing characteristics of the existing area. In addition to the fire station, the analysis should be inclusive to include the possibility of residential, commercial, mixed -use and additional public facilities and /or amenities. The plan should also address opportunities for public and private partnerships for development viability and efficiency. Phasing could also be a component of the plan. Scope of Work The planning team's submitted proposal should include a detailed breakdown of all general and specific tasks and products required to complete the work. The following is a brief outline of the desired minimum tasks requested with the anticipated products and services expected: 1. Identify and evaluate 2 to 3 site configurations for the West Vail Fire Station (approximately 8,000 sq. ft.) using design specifications provided by the Town of Vail following a scoping meeting with representatives from the Vail Fire & Emergency Services Department. One of the configurations should maximize the ability for additional development on the remainder of the site. The designs should explore possible options for drive -in /drive -out accessibility by emergency vehicles. 2. Determine range of potential for additional development on the property. 3. Work in conjunction with the town staff to conduct a public scoping process, using no more than 2 neighborhood /community meetings, to present current work and identify community wants, needs, benefits, expectations, concerns, etc. 4. Develop project parameters using key themes identified during the public meetings. 5. Assist town staff in presenting project parameters to Vail Town Council for approval and /or modification. 6. Using project parameters, develop 3 alternatives for master planning entire site with associated visuals. One of the approaches, assuming it meets the project 1/20/2021 5 parameters, should include a public - private partnership scenario that attempts to fund construction of the fire station with minimal to no public funding. 7. Work in conjunction with town staff to conduct a neighborhood meeting to present the 3 alternatives, collect and document public comments, and identify a preferred option. 8. Assist town staff in conducting a public hearing to present the 3 alternatives to Vail Town Council, plus a summary of comments and preferences from the neighborhood meeting. Receive direction from Town Council on a preferred alternative. 9. Develop a master plan document to include specific recommendations on zoning, and development parameters, such as maximum height, floor area, site coverage and circulation. In addition, the consultant should provide a preliminary cost estimate and proforma in cooperation with town staff for each alternative examined in master plan. 10. Coordinate hand -off to designated planner in Town of Vail Community Development Department who will assume project management for submittal to the Planning and Environmental Commission. Schedule The following is a general schedule for the project: June 18, 2004 Issuance of RFP Noon, July 9, 2004 Proposals due to Town of Vail July 19, 2004 Interviews July 22, 2004 Award of contract July 26, 2004 Begin work TBD Neighborhood meetings Aug. 17, 2004 Council consideration of project parameters TBD Neighborhood preferences meeting Oct. 19, 2004 Council selection of preferred alternative Oct. 26, 2004 Design work complete Submittal Requirements Respondents are requested to submit the following information: Cover Letter Identify team members and backgrounds State roles of each member and provide a team organization chart Highlight strengths of team Qualifications and Experience Describe team's expertise as it pertains to the delivery of a land use master plan Provide examples of previous experience with verification contact information Schedule Acknowledge ability to meet or exceed the schedule identified above and provide a specific timetable for each step identified in the scope of work Project Budget Provide hourly billing rate for each team member Provide a detailed fee proposal for the work broken down by tasks described above The team shall also provide any additional services deemed necessary for achieving the goal of this work 1/20/2015 3 Provide a detailed reimbursable schedule Submittal of Qualifications Address all questions and submittals (12 sets) to the attention of: Suzanne Silverthorn Community Information Office Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Phone: (970) 479 -2115 Fax: (970) 479 -2451 Email: ssilver(Dvail.net The deadline for submittals is 12 Noon July 9, 2004. Respondents should be available for interview on July 19, 2004. General Conditions Limitations and Award This RFP does not commit the Town of Vail to award or contract, nor to pay any costs incurred, in the preparation and submission of proposals in anticipation of a contract. The Town of Vail reserves the right to reject all or any submittal received as a result of this request, to negotiate with all qualified sources, or to cancel all or part of the RFP. After a priority listing of the final firms is established, the Town of Vail will negotiate a contract with the first priority firm. If negotiations cannot be successfully completed with the first priority firm, negotiations will be formally terminated and will be initiated with the second most qualified firm and, likewise, with the remaining firms. Selection Initial evaluation will be based upon the qualifications of the applicant. The Town of Vail reserves the right to not interview, and to make final consultant selection based upon the qualification statements and cost estimate. Equal Employment Opportunity The selected consultant team will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Contact Phasing Proposed tasks within this RFP may be eliminated by the Town of Vail at any time due to the progression and sequencing of the scope of work. 1/20/2015 4 1/20/2015 TOWN 0FVAIL CHAMOND(PROPERTY ~� fill, p~ � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD � U � VA|L' COLORADO 1/20/2015 TIMING INDEPENDENT cn cn cn cn cn cn OF ISSUES w0- 0 w w 0 OOwwww O }z z>- >- z zz >- >- >- >- z NEAR OTHER 00 wwww wwwwOw 0 RECREATION z _ >- > ->- >- >- r >- >- z>- z HIGH TRAFFIC Ow w000 wwwwww w AREA z>- >- zzz >- >- >- >- >- >- >- RESTROOM z z z C) 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 O AVAILABLE zz` z °v)0) OoNOrnN O co PARKING z z$C)� C)C)C)C)$0 00 000000 AVAILABLE 0 zrno° COr- 04NNvN o * *DISTTO o CD C) o00 0 00000 0 RESIDENTIAL` cc,:' o N m c—) Nco ( c CON - rn o FOOT /BIKE cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn co cn cn co ACCESS ow z >w-www z }wwzz z DISTANCE TO °oo` o000 00000_ o BUS STOP_' °)o o�000 oIq N(�Iqo O BUS ROUTE _00` 0000 0 0 0 0 t o !' = � � � DIST TO z o'` z z z z z o NO NO No No - o COMMERCIAL z° zzzz zNN��� M SIZE OF AREA cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn MIN10KSF ww wwww OwwowO -w >- >- >- >- >- >- z >- >- z >- z >- cn w C) cn o u- o *K 0 W o 0 W v. (n N N N� - 0 * � y W O tin_ �p V-O �pJpCD N~NW 2r- inW00 040 °'�cn o0 o -N -- apLo.Qoo¢ oZ'Wz cnYd'z o=m wvguiwNZ : -v c) cn r Y N J a� 0 Y o 0 0� ww „0- J U) � J w z Z Z Z W w Z Y Z z W W w W U) W0�WH0n.UW00WWJLLWW CO) F- Z Q F 0= W U F- Z w o o Q u_ P Z 0001: 000 - 0a0Oww =DQ'O ac)ouocoFnWWoou -Ww umuzj 1/20/2015 w U) u- 0 z J a W w U) z Q z 2 � z w 0 U) o uj w� z 0-0 w 0 o HmQ7) �u- zm 0<Z of O z > O QO o 0 Z 2u- W o W w Qz QO -i - X_ � z 0zcn O� m O Q = Z U) cn ui (D 0 Y Q 0 � II CL O J * O • ORDINANCE NO. 17 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER VII, PART 1, INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF TOWN OWNED PROPERTY, VAIL LAND USE PLAN, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER VIII, PART 313, PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION OR TOWN COUNCIL AMENDMENTS, VAIL LAND ISE PLAN, TO ALLOW FOR AN AMENDMENT TO ADD THE CHAMONIX PARCEL AS TRACT 431N THE INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF TOWN OWNED PROPERTY, CHAPTER VII, PART 1, VAIL LAND ISE PLAN; ADD THE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE CHAMONIX PARCEL AS APPENDIX F, VAIL LAND USE PLAN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, amendments to the Vail Land Use Plan are permitted pursuant to parameters set forth for such in Chapter VII, Part 1 of the Vail Land Use Plan of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held public hearings on January 24, 2005, and again on June 27, 2005, following which the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of the proposed amendments based on the criteria and findings presented in the staff memorandum; • and C7 WHEREAS, staff is proposing to add the Chamonix Parcel to the list of public properties contained in the Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property, Chapter VII, Part 1, Vail Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, staff is proposing to add the Land Use Plan for the Chamonix Parcel as Appendix F of the Vail Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, Chapter VII, Part 2, Facility /Service Requirements, Fire Protection, Vail Land Use Plan, states that an additional fire station is warranted to serve the West Vail Area; and WHEREAS, the Medium Density Residential land use designation, which the Chamonix Parcel is designated, has fire stations listed as a permitted use under such categorization; and WHEREAS, the Town Council convened a neighborhood committee comprised of citizens and elected officials and commissioned a study to be performed which led to the establishment of Ordinance No. 17, Series 2005 1/20/2015 • this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proposed text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Vail Land Use Plan, and those of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code; implements and achieves 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; demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject plan; and provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt this amendment to the Vail Land Use Plan. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The proposed text amendments are as follows: (Deletions are shown in MAW thmughladditions are shown bold) Chapter VII — Community Facilities, 1 Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property, Coarse Screen of Sites Tract 43 — Chamonix Parcel The 3.6 acre Chamonix Parcel has been identified for the location of a fire station as the primary use on the site and which may include other Town of Vail uses. Secondary uses on the site include a medium density residential development, recreational areas, and open space buffers. A Land Use Plan depicting the location of the future uses has been prepared as the result of a comprehensive planning process and is included as Appendix F of this document. TABLE OF CONTENTS (...)APPENDIX E • APPENDIX F CHAMONIX PARCEL LAND USE PLAN Ordinance No. 17, Series 2005 2 1/20/2015 • Figure 5 -W 0 is Appendix F, Land Use Plan for the Chamonix Parcel Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the 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. Ordinance No. 17, Series 2005 3 1/20/2015 J I ' • INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 2nd day of August, 2005 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 1 e day of August, 2005, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. ATTEST: A I L k kaa-L- Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk l t Rodney E. Slifer, M yor • READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 16th day of 0 August, 2005. ATTEST: 0 �a ^' ••4� i relei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 17, Series 2005 4 1/20/2015 Rodney E. lifer, M or z, N A PS VAIL G \ RESNepjV151GN MG\° \ (Pr ° P � / \ /� /, — CNPM0 -fs D fi5 -/' TS / / <or v � F B .�' A i T'2 `0 >" y I i I E �r I I ui I (i 1 / -ss r , Fz e 1 s • < ll o € €f�jn�j Q al�eY F u _ X N z qj 0 w = d U /I / / \ VPIL NP Y OE E . <°> z' / / �� I 2 /J / / // /i / / P RE FILING NO i s= Y - -- � � B 71 \ , v a T m `0r >2I R II F�� /F 30 1s ° 36 eo SCALE: — I IX /SPNG — — Sheet Number: RRE II STA77ON II F a n 1/20/2015 MEMORANDUM To: Nina Timm, Housing Coordinator, Town of Vail From: Andy Knudtsen and David Schwartz, Economic & Planning Systems Subject: Chamonix Market Update Date: February 28, 2011 Background The Town of Vail considers the Chamonix site in West Vail a component (%o of a larger strategy to address affordable housing needs in the community. The site has the potential to hold approximately 58 dwelling units and would expand the inventory of affordable housing within the Town. The elected officials believe that additional housing will enhance the sense of community by providing homeownership opportunities to local residents and improving economic vitality by expanding the pool of employees available to local businesses. In 2008, Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) provided a market analysis of the conceptual development plans for the site. The report included an evaluation of the market trends, an assessment of the position the site holds within Eagle County market, and a review of the site's competitive advantages and disadvantages. The market, however, has changed since that time. This memorandum provides an overview of updated market findings relevant to supply and demand conditions of the Eagle County market. Methodology EPS conducted its analysis by focusing on the broader market trends Economic& Planning Systems, Inc. and focusing in on specific relevant market segments. The following 73017th Street, Suite 630 methodology was used and outlines the content of this memorandum: Denver, CO 802 02 -351 1 303 623 3557 tel 303 623 9049 fax Berkeley Sacramento Denver 1/20/2015 www.epsys.com Memorandum February 28, 2011 Chamonix Market Study Update Page 2 • 3 Geographies: EPS identified areas within the County as having the following sales locations: o Upper Valley: Booth Creek, Cascade Village, East Vail, Highlands Meadows, Lionshead, Potato Patch, Sandstone Lionsridge, Spraddle Creek, Valley Ridge at Vail, Vail Golf Course, Vail Village, and West Vail. 0 Mid Valley: includes Arrowhead, Avon, Bachelor Gulch, Beaver Creek, Berry Creek Ranch, Cordillera, Eagle Vail, Edwards, Homestead, Lake Creek Valley, Minturn, Mountain Star, and Wildridge and Wildwood. 0 Lower Valley: includes Cotton Ranch, Eagle, and Gypsum. • 3 Time Periods: EPS identified periods of time over the past six years that represent distinct periods: 0 2004 -2008: During this period in Eagle County, the market continued its upswing in average sales prices and maintained its volume: 0 2009: Generally, 2009 saw a major decrease in average sales prices and a contraction in volume of activity; 0 2010: During this year, the market began to recover and stabilize. Average prices in parts of Eagle County climbed again, and volume increased over 2009, but did not return to the volume before 2008. • 3 Price Bands: Within the geographies and periods of time, three price bands are relevant to understanding where the market is today: 0 Under $438,000: was identified as the conforming loan limit of approximately $418,000 plus an estimated five percent that a buyer would have available for a down payment; 0 Between $438,000 and $600,000: was identified as the next band of price points, which identifies an upper threshold for other local buyer products; and 0 Sales above $600,000: was identified as a separate price band to isolate products purchased by second - homeowners or out -of -state buyers. Demand Conditions Employment and wage information comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). The BLS data identify trends and conditions of wage and salary positions through the second quarter of 2010. Data from the BEA identify counts of both wage and salary jobs and sole proprietors through 2008. Due to the comprehensive nature of BEA data, the lag time is greater. EPS has used the most comprehensive data available from these sources for this report. 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Employment & Wages February 28, 2011 Page 3 Major losses in employment have been sustained nationally, regionally, and locally. In resort economies, such as Vail's, significant losses have occurred in the construction industry. • Total wage and salary employment in Eagle County as of 2nd Quarter 2010 is 28,000 jobs. This is a 13 percent contraction from its peak in 2008. In 2008, as illustrated by Figure 1, wage and salary positions totaled more than 32,000 jobs. • While construction has lost 2,500 jobs since 2007, approximately 2,500 jobs were gained since 2000 netting out the losses. Although employment levels have returned to their 2000 level, the losses of the construction industry have been netted out by the gains in other industries. Industries with the largest gains since 2000 were: • Health Care and Social Assistance industry added 600 jobs; • Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation added 700 jobs; and • Accommodation and Food Services, though it sustained losses off its 2008 peak, added nearly 700 positions. • From 2000 to 2008, while wage and salary employment increased at an annual rate of 1.7 percent, the number of sole proprietors increased at a rate of 4.4 percent. In Eagle County, sole proprietors account for approximately 23 percent of the total workforce, as illustrated in Figure 2. In 2000, there were approximately 8,700 proprietors, and by 2008, the total had increased to more than 12,200, an increase of more than 40 percent. o Though data will not be available for nearly two years, it is likely that the number of proprietors also contracted from 2008 to 2010. Assuming a uniform 13 percent contraction, the estimated 2010 total of proprietors would still be 23 percent higher than it was in 2000. • Adjusted for inflation, average county wages have fallen 12 percent since 2008 and are 1.7 percent lower than real wages were in 2000.Similar to the wage and salary job trends; overall wages for the County have contracted since 2008 as illustrated by Figure 1. • Future economic trends must be tracked closely. While some data show that the economic recovery has been established in some markets across the country, the trends are not evident in Eagle County at this time. EPS research conducted for higher - priced inventory shows that a correction occurred in mid -2010. This correction may signify the return of higher income buyers and part -time residents, and may signify a return to a normalized Eagle County economy. The Town of Vail should track a range of metrics and measure the rate of recovery and the degree to which the market indicators move into historic ranges, when performance was strong. If the market does not continue to solidify, the Town is advised to proceed with this development slowly and with clearly identified exit strategies. 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum February 28, 2011 Chamonix Market Study Update Page 4 Market Conditions Housing market conditions and trend data come from the regional Multiple Listings Service (MLS). Data have been analyzed from the first quarter 2004 through the fourth quarter 2010. Sales Volume As described previously, the construction industry contracted approximately 50 percent from its peak in 2007. Similarly, the volume of housing sales contracted 48 percent after 2007, as illustrated in Figure 3 and in Table 1. Sales volume in 2010 was 757, or 54 percent of average annual volume from 2004 to 2008. From 2004 to 2008, average annual activity was 1,412 units. In 2009, volume decreased more than 64 percent to 504 units sold, or 36 percent of previous levels. In 2010, sales volumes have increased most in the Upper Valley, followed by the Mid Valley and Lower Valley respectively. • In 2010, there were 243 sales in the Upper Valley. A majority of the increase in activity was due to increased activity at prices above $600,000. The volume for units priced below $438,000 was 37 units. • In 2010, there were 354 sales in the Mid Valley. A large increase in volume came from the sale of units priced below $438,000. Sales volume at this price point was 93 units. • In 2010, there were 160 sales in the Lower Valley. Most of the activity is due to units priced below $438,000. Volume at this price point was 107 units. Price Trends Sales price trends in Eagle County have fluctuated widely in the past few years. On a per - square -foot basis, average prices peaked in late 2008 in each of the geographies, as illustrated by Figure 4. Average prices in the Upper Valley are currently $900 1sgft. This is a contraction of 34 percent from their istquarter 2009 peak to the istquarter 2010. Average prices (of attached and detached product) in the istquarter 2009 had increased to $1,100 /sqft, or 155 percent over their 1st quarter 2004 average of $430 /sqft. In 2010, Upper Valley sales have increased by 23 percent above the 1st quarter 2010. Average prices in the Mid Valley are currently $430 1sgft. This is a contraction of 25 percent from their 3rd quarter 2008 peak. In the 3rd quarter 2008, prices had escalated to $574 /sqft or nearly 60 percent above the 1st quarter 2004 average of $365 /sqft. Average prices in the Lower Valley are currently $190 1sgft. This is a contraction of 26 percent from their 2nd quarter 2008 peak. In the 2nd quarter 2008, average prices had increased 46 percent to $255 /sqft over the average of $175 /sqft in 2004. 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Units Priced Under $438,000 February 28, 2011 Page 5 Using the conforming loan limit of $417,500 and assuming a five - percent downpayment, EPS assessed the market for units priced at $438,000 or lower, as shown in Figure S. • Sales volume in 2010 was 237, or 31 percent of the total market. Today's volume is 54 percent of the average annual volume at this price point for the period 2004 to 2008. During the contraction in 2009, volume dropped to 154 units. • In the Upper Valley, there were 37 sales in 2010 at this price point. This is a decrease from the average 70 units sold per year from 2004 to 2008, but an increase over the 27 units sold during 2009. • In the Mid Valley, there were 93 sales in 2010 at this price point. This is a decrease from the average 199 units sold per year from 2004 to 2008, but an increase over the 51 units sold during 2009. • In the Lower Valley, there were 107 sales in 2010 at this price point. This is a decrease from the average 203 units sold per year from 2004 to 2008, but an increase in the 76 units sold during 2009. • Sales prices per square -foot in 2010 averaged $237 for an geographies at this price point. From 2004 to 2008, average prices per square foot were approximately $262 at this price point. • In the Upper Valley, prices average $385 per square -foot in 2010.This is a decrease from the average prices in previous years. From 2004 to 2008, prices averaged $393, and in 2009, prices averaged $478 on thin volume. • In the Mid Valley, prices average $266 per square -foot in 2010. This is a decrease from the average of $281 from 2004 to 2008 and a decrease from 2009, which was $292 per square -foot. • In the Lower Valley, prices average $186 per square -foot in 2010.This is a decrease from average prices from 2004 to 2008, which were $198 and $203 in 2009. Conclusions • Absorption. EPS believes the most comparable set of sales reflect those in the lowest price point, located in the mid valley. If the Town can capture 10 percent of this sales volume (93 sales per year), it can sell approximately 9 units annually, based on the performance of this submarket in 2010. If the Town can capture 5 percent of all Eagle County sales at this price point and below (237 sales), annual sales rates translate to approximately 12 units. These capture rates will drop when the Town performs a more refined segmentation analysis and narrows the proposed price banding. As the Town refines its development program and proposed pricing, it should further segment these sales records to understand pricing tolerances of the market and the segment which will receive the greatest demand. • Price Points. Recent sales at this price point indicate that most occur in the Mid Valley between $200 /sqft and $350 /sqft. This accounts for all ranges of products and all ages of structures. The data indicate that these units are relatively old (built in the early 1990's) and with an average size of approximately 1,200 square feet. It is recognized that the Town 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum February 28, 2011 Chamonix Market Study Update Page 6 could likely build larger product and the corresponding price per square foot will drop. EPS has established a price and size ratio, as depicted in Figure 7, which provides the parameters for pricing relative to square footage. • Competitive Position. Locations up valley will command a premium toward the higher end of this range, as will new product. Both will make the project compelling. Although a deed restriction will negatively impact the potential price point, it will not outweigh the premiums for location and new structures. 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Figure 1 Wage & Salary Employment Vail Chamonix Market Studv Update So,o00 $50, 000 Eagle C��rr3ty Wage & salary Trends, 45,000 $ 45,000 40,000 $4,13,000 35,000 $ 3 5, 000 30,400 $ 306 000 Total Employment 25,000 $ 2 5,000 _.— Nominal Wages Real Wages 20,05X) $ 20,400 15,400 $15, 000 10,000 $10,000 5,000 $ 5,000 o $0 20M 2001 2002 2008 2404 2005 2006 2002 2006 2009 2010 2�4D -201[} f I � y r Figure 2 Total Employment 1/20/2015 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Vail Chamonix Market Studv Update 64;400 Eagle Co u my Job Trends, 2000-2W8 50,904 a0,ono 351,404 ■ Proprietors ■ W age & Salary Jabs 20,000 10,400 0 2000 2001 2902 2403 2044 2445 2406 2407 2408 1/20/2015 February 28, 2011 Page 8 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Figure 3 Total Sales Volume by Price Category Vail Chamonix Market Study Update 600 Volume of Sales by Price Category, 2004 -2011 soy 400 300 ■Greaterthan $60,000 ■ $438,000 to $600,000 ■ Less than $438,000 200 100 0 [ 1> tt �`k �11, �� alb, �� y A {L L 15 A is Y A c� R ?a a {N 11, t' ttk C} c C4, b� C ` C�` �� b ` t�� Cif '36 a` 0� CYO 0"1- �}� C}d CY�4 C co �w5 �� Cir` C3ti �� (S C� NII February 28, 2011 Page 9 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Table 1 Sales Statistics by Time Period Vail Chamonix Market Study Update February 28, 2011 Page 10 Average Prices/ SgFt Average Annual Absorption Average Unit Sizes Upswing: Contraction: Stabilization: Upswing: Contraction: Stabilization: Upswing: Contraction: Stabilization: 2004 to 2008 2009 2010 2004 to 2008 2009 2010 2004 to 2008 2009 2010 Upper Valley Less than $438,000 $393 $478 $385 70 27 37 856 832 953 $438,000 to $600,000 $480 $458 $423 51 13 23 1,208 1,238 1,356 Greater than $600,000 $933 $826 $1,067 187 86 183 2,465 2,541 2,610 Subtotal $735 $714 $902 308 126 243 1,889 2,040 2,239 -- 97% 123% -- 41% 79% - -- 108% 119% Mid Valley Less than $438,000 $281 $292 $266 199 51 93 1,183 1,229 1,208 $438,000 to $600,000 $361 $304 $297 116 27 42 1,668 1,814 2,005 Greater than $600,000 $566 $504 $516 447 181 219 3,436 3,817 3,837 Subtotal $461 $441 $424 762 259 354 2,579 3,098 2,929 -- 96% 92% -- 34% 46% - -- 120% 114% Lower Valley Less than $438,000 $198 $203 $160 203 76 107 1,608 1,697 1,947 $438,000 to $600,000 $225 $180 $178 77 19 20 2,402 3,034 2,947 Greater than $600,000 $262 $249 $276 62 24 33 3,414 4,095 4,644 Subtotal $216 $209 $186 342 119 160 2,112 2,394 2,628 as %of 2004 -2008 -- 97% 86% -- 35% 47% - -- 113% 124% Source: Eagle County MLS; Economic & Planning Systems H: \20908 -Vail C ham o nix Market Update \Data \[20908 -M LS- 2011.xlsx]Table 2 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Figure 4 Overall Average Prices per Square -Foot by Geography Vail Chamonix Market Study Update $1,290 $1,000 $890 $600 $ 400 $290 $0 t"4 y 1L S 6� t1 4 A_ ¢�y C41, 'Y 3 y �t� 41_ 'L y �1) D_. �'_� `IV y 'is 04- 4. �1 9`_L q�'?_`r y tk {_y y "4 +1a �_ CS YT,q V� O' V� L} 0� C 06 V� C� V� V� AI� .� c 011 C 04 (3 011' k! 0v 61 1/20/2015 �UV 4-Qtr Avg - MV 4 -Qtr Avg LV 4 -Qtr Avg February 28, 2011 Page 11 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Figure 5 Prices per Square Foot by Geography under $438,000 Vail Chamonix Market Study Update $6W Price per Square -Foot Trends under $438,000, 2004 -2010 - X00 $500 $ 500 � LV Valume � MV Volume $30D - 460 � U V Volume - U pper Va Iley =Middle Valley 300 -- LowLrValley $200 $100 200 100 $0 0 4� V� �_ + C4,' A� . 0"a , C c C„� . c+ � 056°, ,} 065- r. h *1ti . h�� . C *," rx 4ti _ 06, 041, OK", C{- C {� . (k 1/20/2015 February 28, 2011 Page 12 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Figure 6 Volume by Unit Type by Geography under $438,000 Vail Chamonix Market Study Update 50 40 30 20 10 0 A to A td to -N td I -N N -M to td td -M M -M A to to M -M -M -M -0 L -0 L -0 i] A -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 L L -0 � -0 -0 L -0 - -0 � -0 .4 -1 in N -4 in ry Ln M ,4 CN Un m 1� ;t Un iv Un m in N m in a w ¢i v a v v v v v w v w na v • LaweeValley • Mid Valley • Upper Valley February 28, 2011 Page 13 1/20/2015 20908 -DM- 030111 Memorandum Chamonix Market Study Update Figure 7 Units Sold under $438,000 by Price /SgFt and Size 1/20/2015 February 28, 2011 Page 14 20908 -DM- 030111 TOWN Employee Housing Strategic Plan "To ensure there is deed restricted housing for at least 30% of Vail's workforce within the Town of Vail" September 2, 2008 Adopted by Resolution No. 20, Series of 2008 1/20/2015 In acknowledgement of the commitment to ensure deed - restricted housing options for at least 30% of Vail's workforce within the Town of Vail Vail Town Council Vail Local Housing Authority Dick Cleveland, Mayor Mark Ristow, Chairman Andy Daly, Mayor Pro -Tern Sally Jackle Kevin Foley Steve Lindstrom Mark Gordon Ethan Moore Farrow Hitt Kim Newbury Kim Newbury Margaret Rogers Planning and Environmental Commission Bill Pierce, Chair Rollie Kjesbo, Co- Chair Michael Kurz Sarah Paladino Scott Proper Susie Tjossem David Viele Vail Economic Advisory Council Local Employers Mark Gordon Vail Resorts, Inc. Dick Cleveland Town of Vail Alan Koslof Vail Valley Medical Center Bob Boselli Tivoli Lodge Greg Moffet Marriott Resort Rick Scapello Vail Cascade Hotel and Spa Robin Litt Vail Plaza Hotel Sally Hanlon Troy's Ski Shop Bill Jensen Vail Plaza Hotel Rob Levine Sonnenalp Hotel M. Joseph McHugh Sweet Basil Pam Stenmark Mark Cervantes Matt Morgan Brian Nolan RRC Associates, Inc Steve Kauffman Chris Cares Tori Franks Rayla Kundolf Bob McNicols �. , MWOFY1i, ' 2 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan Table of Contents Purpose 5 Time Frame 6 Threats, Weaknesses, Strengths, & Opportunities 6 Objectives 9 Policy Statements 11 Action Steps 12 Implementation Matrix 19 Roles and Responsibilities 21 Appendix 23 IMc a. Glossary b. Resolution Adopting the Employee Housing Strategic Plan c. Process Timeline d. Existing "Conditions" Survey Results (to be added upon completion) 3 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan 0 ■ TI'N'YAII� ' 4 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan TOWN OF VAIL EMPLOYEE HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN BACKGROUND In 2006, through the Vail 20/20 Focus on the Future process the community established a housing goal. It is as follows: "The Town of Vail recognizes the need for housing as infrastructure that promotes community, reduces transit needs and keeps more employees living in the town, and will provide enough deed - restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development " Based upon the community's work, the Vail Town Council has confirmed the Town of Vail recognizes deed restricted employee housing as basic infrastructure. This type of housing allows employees to live within the town, promoting community, and improving the quality of our local workforce, thereby supporting the local economy, and reducing regional transit needs. The Employee Housing Strategic Plan (EHSP) seeks to meet the expectations established by the community and confirmed by the Town Council and provide enough deed - restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the community's workforce to live in the Town of Vail through a variety of policies, regulations and publicly initiated development projects. PURPOSE IMc The EHSP is a decision - making guide for the implementation of employee occupied housing programs. The EHSP documents the Town's current approaches to ensuring employee housing. It identifies the goal, outlines methods and defines action steps the Town will pursue. In addition, the Appendices provide background information on Town housing definitions, policies, and initiatives. This information is provided as an additional resource. The EHSP also recognizes and affirms the importance of Vail constantly serving as a regional partner in the provision of employee housing. 5 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan The EHSP is meant to lead the actions of Staff, the Vail Local Housing Authority and the Vail Town Council in future decisions regarding funding and development of employee housing in Vail. PLANNING TIMEFRAME The EHSP is based on a five -to -ten year planning horizon; it looks well into the future anticipating the needs for employee housing over time. The EHSP also contains identified 'action steps" targeted for a one to three year period. These action steps will need to be evaluated annually and it is anticipated that they will be updated at least every three years as market conditions change. THREATS, WEAKNESSES, STRENGTHS & OPPORTUNITIES MW FiA It is important to recognize and plan for the threats, weaknesses, strengths and opportunities that exist in the Town of Vail as well acknowledge the broader trends that impact Vail. Threats ■ Increasing Competition For Employees o Within the next ten - years: ✓ Conservative estimates predict 2,000 new jobs will be created by development and redevelopment within the Town of Vail - The majority of these jobs will be service sector ✓ It is estimated that at least 7,500 new jobs will be created between Eagle Vail and Gypsum in the next ten years - The majority of the these jobs will be service sector ✓ It is estimated the Ginn Development will add 1,000 new jobs ✓ Lake County and Garfield County are both experiencing job growth - The oil and gas industry and mining generally pay substantially more than the service jobs being created in Eagle County ✓ State of Colorado predicts overall job growth of 23% (DOLA) 6 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan ■ Real Estate Trends • Real estate in the Town of Vail is expensive as compared to the rest of the region as well as compared to the national market • The conversion of locally occupied housing to second homes • The free market focuses on the housing desires of second homeowners • Increasing cost of construction • Local real estate values continue to trend upward • The gap between what locally earned wages can afford and free market housing prices continues to increase ■ Unique Geographic Constraints • Vail Pass on the East • Dowd Junction on the West • Limited undeveloped land within the Town of Vail • Surrounded on the north and south by National Forest and Bureau of Land Management lands • Farthest employment center from the Eagle County population base ■ Cost of Commuting • The cost of gas continues to increase • Public transportation does not provide a viable alternative to all communities • The availability and cost of parking is prohibitive Weaknesses IMc F& )� ■ Politics • Historical lack of political will for developing new employee housing • Previously, no clear policy direction for the provision of employee housing • Lack of Town owned land zoned for employee housing • There is not dedicated funding for employee housing • At the beginning, failure to plan for the housing needs of Vail employees 7 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan ■ Real Estate Market • Lack of free market homes affordable to local employees • Potential home buyers get less "bang for the buck" in Vail as compared to the region • Deed restricted housing developed does not provide a full spectrum of housing types (i.e., single family homes and seasonal rental units) ■ Lack of permanent employees hired by local businesses • The jobs being generated by redevelopment are predominately lower paying seasonal service jobs • Added challenge to establishing a diverse community Strengths • Community support for creating new employee housing • Clarity around the Town's adopted housing goal • Regulatory requirements • Commercial Linkage • Inclusionary Zoning • Vacant land owned by the Town • Strong local financial conditions • Bonding capacity • Strong local tax base • Potential to invest in employee housing • Regular private reinvestment in development • Expanding partnership opportunities with local businesses and governments • Current deed restricted housing stock • The "Vail" brand Opportunities IMc F& )� ■ Town Initiated • Employee Housing Strategic Plan • Town owns significant vacant land • Rezoning of Town owned vacant land • Land Use Plan amendments • Annexation of land adjacent to the Town 8 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan • Ability to reallocate existing revenue • Bonding capacity • Ability to go to the voters for a dedicated funding source • Partnerships with local employers • Public- Private partnerships for development • Potential United States Forest Service Land Swaps • Regional Opportunities • Other local governments are addressing the housing need as well • Significant vacant land • Partnerships with local employers • Public- Private partnerships for development • 'The Valley Home Source" ■ Current stagnation in real estate values OBJECTIVES A. Provide housing to address needs generated by new development or redevelopment. It is documented and understood that new development will require additional employees and a goal of the EHSP is to provide for that housing. This goal is also referred to as " Keep Up" in the EHSP; going forward the Town will attempt to address the increase in demand from new employees by requiring deed - restricted housing as a condition of new development or redevelopment. The Town will encourage developers to provide a range of housing choices for the entire spectrum of jobs that are being created by the new development. B. Respond to the existing affordable housing shortfall by pursuing a number of identified programs and development opportunities. mm1i, This goal is also referred to as 'Catch Up" in the EHSP; it describes efforts to address deficiencies in the available housing inventory that have arisen over a period of years. 9 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan C. Call for any deed - restricted housing that is required as a condition of development to be constructed at the time new development occurs. By dispersing year -round housing multiple objectives are met: neighborhoods are occupied throughout the year enhancing security and encouraging activity. Economies are achieved by having developers integrate deed - restricted housing at the time they are constructing other uses, and construction of new residences occurs at the time the demand is first triggered. D. Creation and maintenance of housing in Vail for emergency and key service workers. In Vail, where weather and the regional road system create periodic strains, this is especially important. The Town will also work with other businesses that provide services essential to municipal operations to encourage they have critical employees living within the Town of Vail. The Town will offer partnership opportunities to these types of employers. E. Actively address affordable housing for Vail workers to ensure that the community remains competitive in economic terms. With the number of Down - Valley jobs continuing to increase, there will be competition for workers; Vail will work to provide appropriate housing to ensure that the Town remains attractive in the regional job market. F. Increase and maintain deed - restricted housing within the Town to encourage the efficient use of resources by placing employees closer to their place of work. mn1i, It is understood there is a reduced need for personal automobiles and reduced transit costs when home and work are in close proximity to one another. Also, there may be changes in workforce demographics that result in opportunities to reduce parking associated with affordable housing in selected locations. To the extent these opportunities can be realized, without negative impacts on the overall community, they will be explored. 10 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan G. Planning for new employee housing will take jobs and wages into account. It is recognized that wages associated with a particular job influence housing demand. In both catch -up and keep -up programs the Town will work toward providing a range of housing types at price points appropriate to the varying incomes of workers in Vail. It is recognized the free market provides limited opportunity for even the highest wage earners to live and work in Town and it is necessary to have a full range of employees in the community. Diverse housing opportunities for the broadest range of employees will enhance the community. H. Provide and plan for housing along with local and regional public transportation. The EHSP recognizes that these functions are intertwined and where deed - restricted housing exists, there will be a demand for transportation services. It is the goal of the Town to minimize overall transportation costs by housing employees in proximity to their jobs, and to also anticipate the projected costs of transportation (due to fuel and other scarce resources) in the provision of deed - restricted housing elsewhere in the region. POLICY STATEMENTS The Town of Vail will pursue three broadly described methods to achieve the Town's housing goal. mn1i, The Town will Impose Regulatory Requirements • Development will be required to address a portion of its housing demand within the Town of Vail; and • New development and redevelopment will be required to address a portion of its housing demand at the development site. Development and Acquisition Initiated by the Town • To address employee housing needs beyond the regulatory requirements for new development; and • To respond to the desire to promote a more diverse and vibrant local community. 11 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan Form Regional Partnerships • These efforts will address employee housing needs beyond the regulatory requirements by actively seeking partnerships, including: i. Public / Private, and ii. Multi Jurisdictional. These broad methods are further addressed in the Action Steps that are described in the following section. ACTION STEPS The Town will continue to use tools already in place including: Regulatory Requirements: wohFY�1i, The "Linkage" or Commercial Jobs Generation Program The Town will review the current linkage program to evaluate whether it has been meeting the objectives of ensuring that new housing is being created to house a portion of the employee demand that is being generated by new commercial uses in the Town. At this time, no immediate changes in the overall requirements of the program are anticipated. However, the current requirement for new commercial development to provide employee housing for at least twenty percent (20 %) of the employees generated may be reevaluated and the required percentage may be changed as a result of the review, the areas of impact may be modified, and the formulas for calculating job generation rates may be further refined. Additionally, an updated Rational Nexus will need to be completed on a periodic schedule. The Linkage Program provides housing to "keep up" with new demand as it is generated. Achieves Objectives A, C, E, F, and G. The °Inclusionary" Program The Town does not anticipate major changes to the Inclusionary Housing program at this time. However, the current requirement to restrict 10 percent (10 %) of new residential square footage in high density areas to be employee housing with deed restrictions, may be reevaluated and the required percentage may be changed as a result of the evaluation, and /or 12 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan IMc the areas (zone districts) of impact may be modified. The Inclusionary Program provides housing to "keep up" with new demand as it is generated. Achieves Objectives A, C, E, F, and G. Housing District Zoning Designation The Town currently has a 'Housing District" zoning designation. As an action step to implement the Housing Plan, the Town will review the requirements of this district to ensure that it is fully meeting its intended purposes. That review will address the procedural requirements for the Housing District, land use provisions including density, parking and design standards, and provisions for density bonuses. The evaluation of the Housing District will ensure the Housing District provides optimal employee housing development. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, and G. Town Initiatives: Buy -Downs to Generate Deed - restricted Units The Town will actively pursue purchase of attractively priced units for imposition of an appreciation capped deed restriction, and subsequent resale. This technique for increasing the supply of permanently affordable housing is known as a 'buy down." It is recognized that this program will be highly market dependent, with limited applicability when the local residential market is surging, and becoming more attractive at times when there is a plateauing of prices. The Town will need to increase the allocation of funds to underwrite the costs associated with purchasing, deed restricting and reselling for -sale units. This is an opportunity to provide diverse housing, to serve the full spectrum of employees. It is important to update the parameters by which buy down units are considered so each buy down unit meets the established goals. Further, it is expected that there will be active involvement by the Housing Authority in overseeing this program. The Buy -Downs program provides housing to 'catch up" with existing deficiencies and reduce market leakage. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, and G. 13 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan Employee Housing Units Exchange Program The Town will conduct a review of the "dispersed housing units" that have been created under the density bonus provisions allowed by Town Code since 1982. It is estimated that 123 units were created under the existing program, typically ranging in size from 300 to 500 square feet. It is believed that many of these units are not being used to house employees as anticipated by the program. Although these units are covered by various types of deed restrictions, the requirements are not uniform and in many cases are not meeting the objective of providing long -term dispersed employee housing. The Town will evaluate the current program and will consider a 'deed restriction exchange program" as a part of this overall effort. The program would likely permit, at the initiation of the landowner, the exchange of small rental units for a larger for -sale, price appreciation capped employee housing unit. Guidelines for the program will be developed. It is expected that these standards will address recommended size of units, location, homeowner's fees and other aspects of the program. Such a program has been recently tried in Vail. It is believed that other dispersed employee units, not currently in use, could be leveraged into permanently restricted units by using this technique; it could represent an important element of this overall plan. The Units Exchange Program is to increase the quality and the total quantity of employee housing within the Town of Vail. Achieves Objectives B, E, F, and G. Incentive Zoning and Density Bonuses The Town will consider workforce housing objectives in all review processes that permit discretion. This means that the Town will work actively with developers as a part of the Housing District, Special Development District review processes and requested changes in zoning to not only meet the requirements of existing code, but to look for opportunities to go beyond code requirements to encourage additional workforce housing to be created. As a part of these review processes the Town will work actively with developers to create incentives to develop housing that exceeds the minimal requirements contained in the code. Additional density may be granted in selected locations through the appropriate review processes, and fee waivers and subsidies may be considered. The Incentives Zoning and Density Bonuses help Vail to woFY�1i, ' 14 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan "catch up" with existing deficiencies and add to the overall percent of employees living within the Town of Vail. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, and G. Review Rezoning and Vacant Land Opportunities The Town will regularly review existing codes and the vacant land inventory to identify opportunities to modify current programs that further support the goals of this Plan. The Review of Rezonings and Vacant Land provides "catch up" opportunities to address existing deficiencies and add to the overall percent of employees living within the Town of Vail. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, and G. Town Participation in Developments Providing Deed - Restricted Housing The Town is prepared to actively participate in, and will seek partners to further the development of deed - restricted housing. Vail Commons, Middle Creek, Buzzard Park and Miller Ranch (located near Edwards in Eagle County) are four relatively large developments that have been completed through active Town participation. The existing developments serve households at different income levels. This has been, and will continue to be an objective of the Town, to serve the broad spectrum of need within the community rather than focusing on just a narrow category of income or household type. The Town participation provides 'catch up" opportunities to address existing deficiencies and add to the overall percent of employees living within the Town of Vail. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, G, and H. Explore Options for a Dedicated Funding Source for Employee Housing Initiatives The Town will explore options for a dedicated funding source to ensure adequate and ongoing resources for employee housing initiatives. It is recognized the Town will play an integral role in the creation of employee housing and dedicated dollars will aid in these efforts. The Town may pursue any of the following funding alternatives: a dedicated sales tax increase, a dedicated mill levy increase, dedication of the Real Estate Transfer Tax or any other funding source that may be identified. A woFY�1i, ' 15 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan dedicated funding source would provide "catch up" housing opportunities for Vail workers. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, F, G, and H. Create an Existing Residential Conditions Base Line in the Town of Vail Conduct a comprehensive study of current units. Identify the type of units that exist (i.e. studio, one - bedroom, etc.), each unit's current use (i.e. employee occupied, short -term rental, etc.), and the ownership of the unit (i.e. owner - occupied, tenant occupied, etc.). This data will establish the baseline against which future employee housing success will be measured. The baseline conditions will support both "catch up" and "keep up" efforts. Achieves Objectives A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H. Monitor the Rate of Free Market Employee Occupied Homes The Town will monitor the rate of free market homes occupied by local workers, and deed - restricted homes, on a regular basis. Conversions of free market residential units to second home owner units will be considered in Vail's evaluation of progress toward the goals identified in this Plan. This monitoring will support both "catch up" and "keep up" efforts. Achieves Objectives B, E, F, and G. Conduct a Demographics Survey of Current Vail Residents In order to better understand the current demographics of the local population it is necessary to conduct a local survey. This will provide the Town with back ground information to consider in future housing policy and development decisions to ensure the Town is maintaining a character that is as diverse as it is today. This may occur in conjunction the Annual Community Survey. This information will support "catch up" efforts. Achieves Objectives A, B, D, E, F, and H. �. , ��FY�1i, ' 16 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan IMc Establish a List of Essential Service Providers in the Town of Vail Establish a list of essential service providers in the Town of Vail to potentially partner with to ensure critical service workers live within the Town of Vail. This information will support "catch up" efforts. Achieves Objective D. Host Personal Finance and /or Home Buyer Education To encourage home ownership and create successful home owners it is important to provide information and educational opportunities to potential residents. This may also provide the encouragement current renters or existing home owners may need to take the next step in the housing market, freeing up their existing unit to house other employees. This education may provide additional "catch up" opportunity. Achieves Objectives B, D, E, and F. Annual Review In order to ensure the EHSP is always current and is responsive to changing conditions, the Housing Authority shall review the EHSP annually and changes shall be periodically recommended to the Town Council. The purpose of these reviews shall be to ensure that progress on topics related to employee housing is being maintained and that adjustments in Objectives, Policies and Action Steps are made in a timely and specific manner. Achieves Objectives A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H. Regional Efforts: In order to house employees associated with existing and anticipated jobs, workforce housing will be required throughout the County as well as in the Town. Vail will work actively with Eagle County officials and other municipalities to look for regional solutions to providing housing. Further, the need to provide transit services along with housing is also identified. When developing housing for Vail employees in Down - Valley locations, the cost of transit services will be considered in evaluations. 17 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan While furthering regional housing is an objective of the Town, it will occur in concert with efforts in Vail, and in -Town deed - restricted housing will be a priority. The Town believes that there are a finite number of opportunities within Vail and these will be explored and pursued; Down - Valley development will not be undertaken if it results in not being able to participate in an opportunity within the Town's boundary. Partnering opportunities for Down - Valley development will occur through partnerships that may include not only the County, but also the Town of Avon, Town of Minturn, Eagle County School District, the U.S. Forest Service, and potentially private developers. The Dowd Junction area and the Village at Avon are identified as particular areas of interest where development opportunities are to be explored. II 'NOF ' 18 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX IMc 19 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan WHO ESTIMATED PROPOSED ACTION STEP IMPLEMENTS WHEN COST PRIORITY Establish and Fund VLHA Operating Town Council and 4th Quarter To Be Budget VLHA 2008 Determined A Establish Baseline "Existing Conditions" for All Town Council and Units VLHA 2009 $20,000 A Monitor Existing 1" Quarter of Conditions for All Town Council and Each Year Units VLHA 2010 $5,000 A Monitor Rental and Vacancy Rates Eagle County Continuous None A Conduct Housing In conjunction with Needs Assessment Eagle County 2010 $10,000 A Update Fee -in -Lieu for Commercial Community Linkage & Development Dept 1st Quarter of Inclusionary Zoning and Consultant Each Year $2,000 A Updated Rational Every Five Nexus Study Town of Vail Years 2011 $15,000 A Monitor Total Number of Jobs in 1St Quarter of Town of Vail Town of Vail Each Year $2,000 A Host Finance/ Home Buyer Education Classes VLHA Two Per Year $500 A Town Council and Buy Down Units VLHA Continuous $1,000,000 / year A Establish Buy Down Town Council and 4th Quarter Unit Criteria VLHA 2008 None A Develop New For- Potentially more Sale Housing at Town Council and than the value of Chamonix VLHA 2010 the land A IMc 19 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan IMc F& )� 20 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan WHO ESTIMATED PROPOSED ACTION STEP IMPLEMENTS WHEN COST PRIORITY Develop Additional Rental Housing at Town Council and Potentially the Timber Ride VLHA 2011 value of the land A Town Council - Com Dev Dept - Establish an EHU VLHA 4th Quarter $10,000 for legal Exchange Program Recommendation 2008 review A Implement the EHU Com Development Exchange Program Dept. and VLHA Continuous None A Town Council - Review & Com Dev Dept - Potentially Modify VLHA 1St Quarter of Commercial Linkage Recommendation Each Year None A Town Council - Review & Com Dev Dept - Potentially Modify VLHA 1st Quarter of Inclusionary Zoning Recommendation Each Year None A Town Council - Identify Com Dev Dept - Land /Development VLHA 2nd Quarter of Opportunities Recommendation Each Year None A Town Council - Prioritize Com Dev Dept - Land/ Development VLHA 2nd Quarter of Acquisition of Opportunities Recommendation Each Year Property A Propose Development Town Council and 2nd Quarter and /or Rezoning VLHA of Each Year Development B Town Council - Com Dev Dept - Review Housing VLHA 2nd Quarter Zone District Recommendation of Each Year None B Establish Incentive Town Council - Zoning to Ensure Com Dev Dept - No Net Loss of VLHA 2nd Quarter Rental Housing Recommendation of Each Year None B IMc F& )� 20 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Roles and Responsibilities — The provision of deed - restricted housing is viewed as a partnership between various boards within the Town, each having important roles and responsibilities. As such, it is imperative that communications be established and maintained between boards to achieve the goal and objectives that are stated in this Plan. Efforts will be made to define, and periodically refine, the roles and associated communications between the bodies identified below. The Town Council shall act in accordance with Town codes and shall fulfill their decision - making functions as identified by local ordinances. Land Use Regulations typically stipulate the review procedures to be followed in reviewing a proposed development. Ultimately, most reviews require an affirmative decision by the Town Council. Therefore, the Council will be the ultimate decision - making body for developments that require Council review. The Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board also play an important development review role. These two boards will review development proposals, consistent with the requirements of codes and ordinances, to ensure that development is in compliance. wohFY�1i, 21 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan WHO ESTIMATED PROPOSED ACTION STEP IMPLEMENTS WHEN COST PRIORITY None in 2009 Pursue a Dedicated Town Council and Begin 1st Marketing in Funding Source VLHA Quarter 2009 2010 B Monitor Free Market Real Estate VLHA and 1st Quarter of Transactions Consultant Each Year $5,000 B Establish List of Essential Service Town Council and 4th Quarter Providers Town Staff 2008 None C Create Partnerships with Essential Town Council and Service Providers VLHA Continuous None C ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Roles and Responsibilities — The provision of deed - restricted housing is viewed as a partnership between various boards within the Town, each having important roles and responsibilities. As such, it is imperative that communications be established and maintained between boards to achieve the goal and objectives that are stated in this Plan. Efforts will be made to define, and periodically refine, the roles and associated communications between the bodies identified below. The Town Council shall act in accordance with Town codes and shall fulfill their decision - making functions as identified by local ordinances. Land Use Regulations typically stipulate the review procedures to be followed in reviewing a proposed development. Ultimately, most reviews require an affirmative decision by the Town Council. Therefore, the Council will be the ultimate decision - making body for developments that require Council review. The Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board also play an important development review role. These two boards will review development proposals, consistent with the requirements of codes and ordinances, to ensure that development is in compliance. wohFY�1i, 21 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan The Vail Housing Authority (V.L.H.A.) plays a critical role in ensuring that housing for long -term residents and seasonal employees is available in the Town. This in turn, enhances the quality of life for local residents, and improves the economic viability of the area. The V.L.H. A. mission: The V.L.H. A. will play an advisory role to the Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission on matters related to housing policy and development. The Authority will use this Housing Plan as a working document to guide future efforts. As identified in the EHSP, the Authority will work to carry out the Action Steps over the next three years. The Authority's priorities will be those contained in the EHSP as it is adopted, and as it may be modified following subsequent annual reviews. IMc F& )� 22 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan GLOSSARY The following definitions are applicable for the terms used in this Plan. Area Median Income (AMI) Limits - most communities establish income limits for the programs they administer based on the area median income (AMI) for the area according to household size, which are adjusted annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Four different income categories are defined for various programs and policies., 1. Extremely low- income, which is less than 30 percent of the median family income; 2. Very low- income, which is between 30 and 50 percent of the median family income; 3. Low - income, which is between 50 and 80 percent of the median family income; 4. Middle income, which is between 80 and 120 percent of the median family income; and 5. Above middle income, which is over 120 percent of the median family income. 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person 5 Person 6 Person 7 Person 8 Person 30% $17,050 $19,500 $21,900 $24,350 $26,300 $28,250 $30,200 $32,150 50% $28,400 $32,450 $36,500 $40,550 $43,800 $47,050 $50,300 $53,550 60% $34,080 $38,940 $43,800 $48,660 $52,560 $56,460 $60,360 $64,260 80% $41,900 $47,900 $53,850 $59,850 $64,650 $69,450 $74,200 $79,000 100% $56,800 $64,900 $73,000 $81,100 $87,600 $94,100 $100,600 $107,100 120% $68,160 $77,880 $87,600 $97,320 $105,120 $112,920 $120,720 $128,520 140% $79,520 $90,860 $102,200 $113,540 $122,640 $131,740 $140,840 $149,940 160% $90,880 $103,840 $116,800 $129,760 $140,160 $150,560 $160,960 $171,360 Catch -Up Housing - Housing needed to "catch -up" to current deficient housing conditions. In this Plan, catch -up housing needs are defined by current resident households reporting housing problems (overcrowded, cost - burdened and /or living in substandard housing conditions), current renters and owners looking to purchase a home and in- commuters that would like to move to Vail. Catch -up housing is generally addressed through local city development initiatives, non - profits and housing groups and public /private partnerships. Housing Continuum, The - As illustrated below, it is possible to estimate the number of resident households in the Town of Vail at various income levels. Vail's planning is based on addressing the needs of households of different incomes, recognizing that there is a need to ensure housing for a diversity of households. 7MOOFW 23 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan 120-140% AMI Max Rent $2,738 Max Price $334,741 140% AM I $109,500 EXISTING DEED RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE HOUSING 80-100% AM I Buzzard Park Max Rent $1,825 100% AMI Max Price $241,432 $73,300 Rent 24 Units 80% AMI $53,850 50-80% AMI Max Rent $1,346 80-100% AM 100-140% " Max Price $180,238 425 HH/17.4% 496 HH121 50 -80 % AM I 50% AMI 345 HH /14.1% $36,500 <=50% AMI < =50 %AMI Max Rent $913 401 HH /16.4% Max Price $124,796 2007 Vail Households 120-140% AMI Max Rent $2,738 Max Price $334,741 140% AM I $109,500 EXISTING DEED RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE HOUSING Over 140 %AMI Rent Over $2,738 Price Over $334,741 Inclusionary Zoning — requires a minimum percentage of residential development be provided to serve local employees as part of new residential developments (10 percent in Vail). Inclusionary zoning is a housing production obligation based on the community's need for employee housing as related to many factors, including a decreasing developable supply of land, rising home values, insufficient provision of housing affordable to residents by the market, etc., in addition to any direct employee generation impacts of development. Keep -Up Housing — Housing units needed to keep -up with future demand for housing. In this Plan, keep -up housing needs focuses on new housing units needed as a result of job growth in Vail and new employees filling those jobs. Keep -up housing is often addressed by the existing free - market, as well as regulatory requirements or incentives to produce housing that is needed and priced below the current market. IMc 24 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan Buzzard Park Rent 24 Units Town Employee Miller Ranch Typically less than 120% AMI For Sale 282 Units Vail Commons, Red Sandstone, North Trail 60 -120 % AMI For Sale 77 Units 100 %AMI 100% AMI or less $73,300 80% AMI $53,850 80- 100 %AMI 100-140% AMI Max Rent $1,825 Max Income $109,500 140% AMI Max Price $241,432 Max Rent $2,738 $109,500 Max Price $334,741 Middle Creek Rent 142 Units 50% AMI 50 -80% AMI Less than 60% AMI Max Rent $1,346 $36,500 Max Price $180,236 Over 140% AMI Income Over $109,500 Rent Over $2,738 < =50 % AMI Price Over $334,741 Max Rent $913 Max Price $124,796 2007 Vail Households Over 140 %AMI Rent Over $2,738 Price Over $334,741 Inclusionary Zoning — requires a minimum percentage of residential development be provided to serve local employees as part of new residential developments (10 percent in Vail). Inclusionary zoning is a housing production obligation based on the community's need for employee housing as related to many factors, including a decreasing developable supply of land, rising home values, insufficient provision of housing affordable to residents by the market, etc., in addition to any direct employee generation impacts of development. Keep -Up Housing — Housing units needed to keep -up with future demand for housing. In this Plan, keep -up housing needs focuses on new housing units needed as a result of job growth in Vail and new employees filling those jobs. Keep -up housing is often addressed by the existing free - market, as well as regulatory requirements or incentives to produce housing that is needed and priced below the current market. IMc 24 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan Levels of Homeownership —When discussing affordability of properties by Area Median Income (AMI) level (defined above) and the types of homes households among different AMI groups are seeking; reference is made to a couple different stages of homeownership. This includes: 1. Entry- /eve/ ownership /first -time homebuyers: These are households typically earning in the lower to middle income range. In Vail, these are households earning 50 to 100 percent of the AMI. These include households that currently rent (or otherwise do not own a home) and are looking to purchase their first home. 2. Move -up buyers: These are households earning in the middle to upper income range (about 100 to 120 percent AMI or higher) that may currently own a home and are looking to purchase a new or different home for a variety of reasons (relocating, growing family (e.g., having children), shrinking family (e.g., empty- nesters), etc.). Mean —the average of a group of numbers, which is the sum of all the data values divided by the number of items. Median —the middle point in a data set. mn1i, 25 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan RESOLUTION NO. 20 Series 2008 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TOWN OF VAIL EMPLOYEE HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN; 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'); and WHEREAS, the Town has determined that no less than thirty percent (30 %) of Vail's workforce should be provided deed restricted employee housing within the Town limits; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that in order to achieve the established goal it is critical to create an employee housing strategic plan establishing and clarifying the objectives and action steps essential to achieve the stated goal; and WHEREAS, the Vail Local Housing Authority and Council developed the Employee Housing Strategic Plan over a period of six months that outlines the goal, objectives and action steps; and WHEREAS, the Vail Economic Advisory Committee provided input and direction on the Employee Housing Strategic Plan at their May 13, 2008, and June 10, 2008, meetings; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission provided input and direction on the Employee Housing Strategic Plan at their August 25, 2008, Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the Council supports the implementation of the Vail Employee Housing Strategic Plan; and WHEREAS, the Employee Housing Strategic Plan will direct policy and budget decisions in order to achieve the community's stated goal; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Council and the Housing Authority to implement the Employee Housing Strategic Plan over the next three years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: The Council hereby approves the Town of Vail Employee Housing Strategic Plan, dated September 2, 2008, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. The Council hereby finds: wohFY�1i, A. That the Employee Housing Strategic Plan is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and, 26 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan B. That the Employee Housing Strategic Plan furthers the general and specific purposes of Zoning Regulations; and, C. That the Employee Housing Strategic Plan 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 residential community of the highest quality 3. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of September, 2008. ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk MWc F& )� Richard D. Cleveland, Town Mayor 27 Employee Housing 1/20/2015 Strategic Plan PROCESS TIMELINE Vail Town Council May 6, 2008 Work Session Affirm housing goals and purpose of the EHSP Review proposed actions and timeline July 1, 2008 Work Session July 15, 2008 Special Work Session Identify and affirm objectives and action steps Confirm overall direction of the EHSP August 19, 2008 Work Session Identify and affirm the SWOT analysis Affirm overall direction of the EHSP September 2, 2008 Adopt the Town of Vail Employee Housing Strategic Plan Planning and Environmental Commission August 25, 2008 Work Session Provide feedback on the EHSP Vail Local Housing Authority March 24, 2008 VLHA Work Session Met with consultant (Chris Cares) Dusted off previous work towards a TOV Strategic Plan April 10, 2008 VLHA Work Session Review and update proposed actions and timeline April 24, 2008 VLHA Work Session Further refine actions and timeline for Council meeting May 13, 2008 Vail Economic Advisory Council Discussion of Housing Objectives May 15, 2008 wohFY�1i, 28 1/20/2015 VLHA Work Session Employee Housing Strategic Plan June 10, 2008 Vail Economic Advisory Council Further discussion of Housing Objectives June 10, 2008 June 24, 2008 July 8, 2008 July 22, 2008 SWOT Analysis August 12, 2008 SWOT Analysis August, 2008 VLHA Work Session VLHA Work Session VLHA Work Session VLHA Work Session VLHA Work Session Meet with Local Employers August 26, 2008 VLHA Work Session Review Planning Commission feedback Implementation Matrix Review TI'N'0 ' 29 1/20/2015 Employee Housing Strategic Plan 1/20/2015 Contents Introduction................................................................................................. ............................... 1 Purposeof the Study ............................................................................... ............................... 1 Organizationof the Report ....................................................................... ............................... 1 Methodology and Sources ....................................................................... ............................... 1 AreaCovered .......................................................................................... ............................... 2 1. Master Plan Summary ...................................................................... ............................... 3 Number, Type and Size of Units .............................................................. ............................... 3 Income Targeting and Prices ................................................................... ............................... 4 Amenities................................................................................................ ............................... 4 SitePlan .................................................................................................. ............................... 5 Access and Infrastructure ........................................................................ ............................... 5 Potential Market Impediments ................................................................. ............................... 5 11. Location Analysis ................................................................................. ............................... 6 Street Address /Street Boundaries ........................................................... ............................... 6 SurroundingLand Use ............................................................................. ............................... 6 Proximityto Services ............................................................................... ............................... 9 Shoppingand Dining ............................................................................ ............................... 9 PublicTransit ....................................................................................... ............................... 9 Bike and Pedestrian Access ................................................................ ............................... 9 Parks................................................................................................... ............................... 9 Schools................................................................................................. .............................10 Marketabilityof the Site ............................................................................ .............................10 III. Demographic and Economic Framework ........................................... .............................12 Market Area Demographics ...................................................................... .............................12 DemographicTrends ................................................................................ .............................14 TheEconomy ........................................................................................... .............................16 IV. Rental Market Overview .................................................................... .............................19 ApartmentInventory ................................................................................. .............................19 OccupancyLevels .................................................................................... .............................20 Rents........................................................................................................ .............................21 Condominium /Townhome Rentals ............................................................ .............................22 V. Ownership Market Conditions ............................................................... .............................24 County -Wide Ownership Market Trends ................................................... .............................24 PriceVariation by Area ............................................................................. .............................26 Availability of Market Housing ................................................................... .............................27 1/20/2015 Sales of Deed Restricted Units ................................................................. .............................29 Availability of Deed Restricted Housing .................................................... .............................30 LotSales .................................................................................................. .............................31 Foreclosures............................................................................................. .............................31 VI. Competitive Analysis ......................................................................... .............................32 Vail Deed Restricted Inventory ................................................................. .............................32 Amenities /Design Features ....................................................................... .............................37 VII. Demand Estimates ............................................................................ .............................39 MarketSegmentation ............................................................................... .............................39 MarketSize .............................................................................................. .............................42 DemandEstimate ..................................................................................... .............................43 Lottery /Buyer Applicants ........................................................................... .............................44 VIII. Mortgage Availability ......................................................................... .............................45 LoanProducts .......................................................................................... .............................45 Deed Restriction Limitations ..................................................................... .............................45 Lendingon Condominiums ....................................................................... .............................46 LeasedLand ............................................................................................. .............................46 ARM' s ....................................................................................................... .............................46 The Impacts of Interest Rates on Affordability .......................................... .............................47 DownPayment Assistance ....................................................................... .............................47 BorrowerProfile ........................................................................................ .............................47 IX. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................. .............................48 Competition.............................................................................................. .............................49 FamilyOrientation .................................................................................... .............................50 Income Targets and Pricing ...................................................................... .............................50 Unit Size, Type and Bedroom Mix ............................................................ .............................51 MortgageAvailability ................................................................................ .............................52 Marketing................................................................................................. .............................53 Amenities /Design Features ....................................................................... .............................53 Phasing.................................................................................................... .............................53 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 Introduction Purpose of the Study The Town of Vail contracted with Rees Consulting, Inc. to analyze the market for Chamonix, a proposed employee housing development. As envisioned, Chamonix will provide 58 units of deed restricted ownership housing, ranging from two- bedroom flats to three - bedroom duplexes serving households with incomes from 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) to 120% or possibly 140% AMI. The 3.6 -acre Chamonix site just north of the west Vail 1 -70 interchange was acquired by the Town in 2005. The original master plan for Chamonix was first adopted that same year. The current master plan, adopted in 2009, examined three development scenarios and involved citizen input and stakeholder focus groups. A guiding policy of the master plan calls for a family- oriented neighborhood. Two previous studies have been done analyzing the market, similar developments in other communities and financial feasibility /gap. Organization of the Report This report has nine main sections as follows: I. Master Plan Summary II. Location Analysis III. Demographic and Economic Framework IV. Rental Market Overview V. Ownership Market Conditions VI. Competitive Analysis VII. Demand Estimates VIII. Mortgage Availability IX. Conclusions and Recommendations The appendix contains supplemental tables with data supporting statements made herein. Methodology and Sources This study incorporates information from numerous sources including: • Interviews of staff managing deed restricted units in Vail, Avon and Eagle County's down valley communities, the school district, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, four realtors, an apartment manager and three mortgage lenders; • Eagle County Assessor records; • The Vail Board of Realtors MLS; • A rent and vacancy survey conducted by Polar Star Properties; • For -rent notices on craigslist.org and in the Vail Daily: • Current data on jobs, employment and the unemployment rate; • The 2000 and 2010 Census; Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Population and employment projections from the Demography Section of the Colorado Department of Local Affairs; and • Findings from the 2007 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment survey. Area Covered While Vail is the focus of this study, information is also provided on other areas within Eagle County as needed to analyze housing market supply and demand. Eagle County's economy and population are very inter - connected with 1 -70, public transit, and well established commuting patterns. Depending upon topic and information availability, the areas covered in this report include: • Vail, which includes only the area within municipal boundaries when referencing Census data but extends to the zip code boundary for jobs and the developed zone for MILS data. • The Up Valley Area, which includes the towns of Vail and Avon and the unincorporated community of Eagle -Vail, but does not include Beaver Creek, Arrowhead or other development to the west. • Eagle County, which is all encompassing with Vail and the Up Valley area included. Occasionally information is also provided by town within the county, such as when historical data is provided on the sale of deed restricted homes. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 1. Master Plan Summary A Master Plan was finalized in early 2009 for a 3.6 -acre parcel owned by the Town of Vail known as the Chamonix site. According to this plan, 100% of the housing to be developed on the site should be deed restricted, for -sale employee housing. The vision for the site going into the master planning process called for a mix of units serving families with incomes between 60% and 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI), possibly ranging as high as 140% AMI. After considering three development scenarios, the Neighborhood Block scheme was selected which provides for a mix of residential units with a density in the middle of the range considered and open space. It also included a new fire station on adjacent land known as the Wendy's site. This station has since been constructed. Number, Type and Size of Units The Neighborhood Block scheme contains 58 units, ranging from almost 1,300 square feet in size to over 1,600 square feet. Proposed Units by Size Unit Type # of Units Square Feet 2 BR Flats 20 1,292 2 BR Lofts 16 1,333 3 BR Lofts or TH's 8 1,460 3 BR Duplexes 14 1,632 No one - bedroom units are planned. This unit mix provides 81,696 sq. ft. of housing with a density of 16 dwelling units per acre. A main access street, which gained access to the site from Chamonix Road, bisects the site with the 14 three - bedroom duplexes on the north side and the 44 multi - family units on the south side. An alley offers secondary access to the multi - family units. The duplexes will be situated with southern exposure. The multi - family units will have varying north, south, east and west exposure, providing options based on views, sun exposure, highway noise and other preferences. • Units on the north side of the buildings will view residential uses up the hill and the hillside, but will be more protected from 1 -70 noise than other units; • Units facing south will have greater sun exposure in the winter and provide views of the mountains, but will be most prone to highway noise; and • Units facing west and east will have limited mountain views and varying degrees of sun exposure during the day, and moderate exposure to noise from the Interstate. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 3 Draft 4 -3 -14 Income Targeting and Prices Prices for the proposed homes have not yet been determined pending the outcome of this market study and a subsequent analysis of the development's financial feasibility. Based on 2014 AMI's the proposed units should serve households with annual incomes from approximately $40,000 to $120,000. 2014 Area Median Income - Eagle County AMI 1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 140% $85,260 $97,440 $109,620 $121,660 120% $73,080 $83,520 $93,960 $104,280 100% $60,900 $69,600 $78,300 $86,900 80% $44,750 $51,150 $57,550 $63,900 60% $36,540 $41,760 $46,980 $52,140 Source: Colorado Housing and Finance Authority For the proposed homes to be affordable for all households with these income categories, prices would need to range from about $135,000 to $450,000. Maximum Affordable Prices AMI 1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 140% $316,100 $361,300 $406,500 $451,100 120% $271,000 $309,700 $348,400 $386,700 100% $225,800 $258,100 $290,300 $322,200 80% $165,900 $189,700 $213,400 $236,900 60% $135,500 $154,800 $174,200 $193,300 Source: Rees Consulting calculation To calculate affordable prices for these targeted households, the following assumptions were used: • The monthly payment equals 30% of gross household income; • 20% of the monthly mortgage payment covers taxes, insurance and HOA fees; • Down payments average 5% of the purchase price; and • The interest rate is 5.5% for 30- years. As rates rise, a prediction economists seem to agree upon, the amount that households in the targeted income range can afford will decrease. Amenities As planned, Chamonix will offer the following amenities and design features: • Garages, probably for two cars, with the duplexes; • Parking for multi - family homes on site, probably in common garages under the buildings; • Semi - private stepped courtyards between the duplexes; Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 4 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Common area between the two rows of multi - family units large enough for a play area, grill and tables, flower /vegetable beds, etc. • Open space at the east end of the parcel which could potentially be used for a dog park; • Open space at the steeply sloping west end that might provide for viewing for fire station activities separated by a series of low landscaped walls; and • Extensive landscaping, including aspen groves and native vegetation along the southern edge of the parcel to buffer homes from neighboring commercial uses. Site Plan The parcel is about 3.6- acres. Zoning is Housing (H); the proposed use is allowed. The parcel is vacant, with native grasses, a few bushes and, on the southwest side of the parcel, scattered trees. The parcel has a moderate downhill slope from north to south, with a steep slope in the northwest corner of the parcel, which is not planned for development. Views of the mountains occur across 1 -70 to the south, southwest and southeast of the parcel. Chamonix Lane borders the property to the north. Chamonix Road runs along the east and southeast side of the property and the West Vail Fire Station borders the property on the southwest. Access and Infrastructure Access to the site will from Chamonix Lane (to the north) and Chamonix Road (to the east). The access off of Chamonix Road will loop through the West Vail Fire Station to the North Frontage Road, allowing for dual points of access and reducing internal traffic congestion. Power, water and sewer lines are in place on Chamonix Lane. Utilities connections will be provided concurrent with construction; significant utilities /infrastructure improvements are not needed prior to developing the site. Potential Market Impediments Although decisions have not been finalized on many aspects of the Chamonix development, this study examines the marketability of the proposed project taking into consideration: • Deed restrictions that allow only employees earning at least 75% of their income in Eagle County to purchase units and limit resale prices to no more than 3% per year; income limits would not be imposed; • Developing the 44 multi - family units and possibly the duplex units as condominiums; and • An underlying long -term land lease held by the Town of Vail. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 II. Location Analysis Street Address /Street Boundaries The project is located in west Vail just north of North Frontage Road. It is in a highly visible location on the north side of 1 -70, a major east -west interstate highway through Colorado, just off of exit 173. Project Location Map Surrounding Land Use Highway commercial and strip mall commercial development characterizes the uses off of the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Road, with residential neighborhoods characterizing the use patterns off of Chamonix Lane. • To the south and east of the parcel, off of Chamonix Road, includes two gas stations, a bank and associated commercial uses, a Holiday Inn hotel, cafe and local market and a brew pub. • Bordering the southwest corner of the parcel is the West Vail Fire Station, with access off of the North Frontage Road. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Primarily single family and duplex units are accessed off of Chamonix Lane to the north of the parcel. J Vicinity Map Ore d no A residential area is located to the north of the parcel accessed via Chamonix Lane. The units are primarily single family homes and duplexes although there are some interspersed townhomes and condominiums. The units were mostly built in the late 1960's and the '70's. Most are modest by Vail standards, and there are few signs of redevelopment /remodeling. Homes appear to be occupied by a mix of residents and second -home owners. The duplexes planned as part of the Chamonix development were placed along Chamonix Lane to ensure the greatest compatibility with adjacent neighbors in terms of unit type, size and style. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 7 �r�r Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 The Chamonix parcel, looking to the east from the northwest corner. Chamonix Road borders the east side of the parcel and the truck on the south side is in the West Vail Fire Station parking lot. Some residential uses can be seen on the north side of the parcel, off of Chamonix Lane. Standing on Chamonix Lane to the north, looking east. This shows mountain views and the Holiday Inn hotel. Standing on Chamonix Lane to the north, looking southeast. This shows the mountain views, back of the bank (grey building) and back of the cafe /market (green -blue roof). Shopping and Dining Draft 4 -3 -14 Standing on Chamonix Lane to the north, looking south. This shows the mountain views, 1 -70 bridge, and two gas stations adjacent to the parcel on the south. Proximity to Services Safeway is within 3- tenths of a mile of the site on North Frontage Road — about a six - minute walk along the relatively flat bike and pedestrian trail. This is also reachable via personal vehicle or bus. Other neighboring amenities include gas stations, bank, hotel, bar /restaurant, local market and, near the Safeway, a barber, UPS store, dental office, child care center, liquor store, coffee shop, Sports Authority, and 7- Eleven. Restaurants include a pizza place, sub shop, cafe, sushi restaurant and quick serve options, including Subway, McDonalds and Qdoba. Public Transit The site is located within % -mile of several bus stops on both the West Vail Red and Green Loop transit lines, including stops off of the North Frontage Road, Chamonix Lane and the South Frontage Road. These lines provide service every 40- minutes in the summer (May 27 through mid - December), once per hour in the spring (April 15 through May 26) and in 30- minute intervals during peak hours in the winter (December 10 through April 14). Buses run between 6 a.m. and 12 a.m. each day, with service offered until about 2 a.m. in the winter. Routes traverse the length of the North and South Frontage Roads, from West Vail to Vail Village. Bike and Pedestrian Access A bike and pedestrian path runs along North Frontage Road to the south of the parcel. This access also travels under 1 -70 to access the South Frontage Road and associated amenities. Parks The Chamonix Master Plan calls for some community gathering spots and semi - private courtyards between the duplex units. Larger open areas are provided on the east and west ends of the Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 Draft 4 -3 -14 development. The open space on the east end could be utilized for such uses as a dog park. Otherwise, Town of Vail parks, numerous mountain trails and open spaces are accessed from the property via the bike and pedestrian trails, bus service, and personal vehicles. Schools Children living at Chamonix would attend the following Eagle County public schools: • Red Sandstone Elementary is located at 551 North Frontage Road, 2.3 miles east of the Chamonix site (about a 5 minute drive). Homestake Peak School, located at 750 Eagle Road in Eagle -Vail, 5.2 miles west of the site, is where middle school children would attend. It offers kindergarten through eighth grade. • Battle Mountain High School, located at 0151 Miller Ranch Road in Edwards, is 11 miles, or about 15 minutes if roads are dry, west of the Chamonix site. School bus service is available with the closest stop a short distance from the site at Chamonix and North Frontage Road. Two different routes serve this stop. The route serving Red Sandstone Elementary, which continues on to Battle Mountain, has 9 students assigned for this stop. Morning pick up is at 7:33. Afternoon drop off is 4:25. For Homestake Peak, pick up is at 7:47 AM and drop off is also at 4:25 PM. Three students from this stop are now assigned to this route. Most of the District's bus routes are running full; a significant increase in students at the Chamonix site would need to be discussed with the District to make sure adequate capacity exists to serve them. Marketability of the Site The site is marketable in many aspects though has attributes that may not appeal to some, especially families with children and others seeking quiet, safe surroundings. It is located between a residential and commercial area, with easy access to groceries and other necessary goods and services. With a bike /pedestrian path running near the property and nearby bus stops serviced by two public transit routes, it is very convenient. Proximity to a transit stop is a big plus — a car is not required to reach most job sites, shopping, skiing and Vail's other amenities. Views of the mountains to the south, southwest and southeast are desirable, as well as the southern sun exposure for units facing that direction. Noise from 1 -70 and Frontage Road bus /truck traffic presents some concerns. The proximity of the West Vail Fire Station also adds some noise concerns, but conversely provides quick emergency response times. Trees will be planted along the south border, helping to mitigate the sight and sounds of traffic. Nonetheless, the use of advanced soundproofing in units to protect against such noise should help the marketability of units. Trees will also be planted around the open spaces surrounding the duplex units and a few scattered throughout the development. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 10 Draft 4 -3 -14 The site is highly visible; it can be seen from 1 -70 and both frontage roads and is conveniently located just off of Exit 173. It will not be difficult to provide directions to potential residents when they make inquiries. Impediments to marketability of the site include: • The proximity to 1 -70 and its noise. While there are few other options within Vail, many down valley housing options would be quieter. • Proximity to adjacent commercial uses. While convenient, these commercial uses generate traffic and bring in persons who are not residents of the community. • Limited public open space in the area. It is a densely developed area with much of the land consumed by buildings and parking lots, private residential lots and steep hillsides. There are no nearby parks within walking distance. • Distance to public schools. All children living in the area would have to bus to school, other than elementary school students who are old enough to bike to Red Sandstone. This is a distinct disadvantage compared to deed restricted housing options located in Edwards and further down valley. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 11 Draft 4 -3 -14 III. Demographic and Economic Framework This section of the market study consists of three parts: • Market Area Demographics, which provides information on population, housing units, households and household composition and size of renter households. Demographic Trends, which presents information from the 2000 and 2010 Censuses to identify trends and gain insights as to how current demographic characteristics will likely be changing in the future. • Economic Conditions, which covers jobs, wages and the distribution of jobs in Eagle County. Since most buyers of deed restricted homes are first time buyers, the focus is on the demographics of renter households. Market Area Demographics As of 2010, Eagle County had a population of around 52,000 persons residing in 19,236 households /housing units. Of these, 2,604 households or 13.5% of the total were within the town of Vail. About one -third of the county's households resided in the larger up valley area. 2010 Population and Housing Occupancy Eagle County is projected to have a relatively strong rate of growth during upcoming years, averaging 2% per year through 2015 then 2.9% per year through 2020. The State Demography Section projects that the county will have a population of 66,382 in 2020, a gain of over 14,000 residents, or about 700 persons per year. These growth estimates may be somewhat overstated; however. State Demography estimates for 2012 indicate the Eagle County has declined slightly since the Census, from 52,197 to 51,944. While most residential units in Eagle County were occupied as primary residences in 2010 (approximately 61%), only 36% of units in Vail were occupied by residents; second homes /vacation accommodations comprised the majority. In the up valley area, the housing occupancy rate was only 48% in 2010. The homes that are not occupied by members of the workforce typically create demand for workforce housing through cleaning, repair, snow removal, landscaping and similar jobs involved in the operation and maintenance of the units. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 12 Vail Up Valley Eagle County Population 5,305 15,257 52,197 Housing units 7,230 13,064 31,312 Households 2,604 6,294 19,236 Housing occupancy rate 36.0% 48.2% 61.4% Source: 2010 US Census Eagle County is projected to have a relatively strong rate of growth during upcoming years, averaging 2% per year through 2015 then 2.9% per year through 2020. The State Demography Section projects that the county will have a population of 66,382 in 2020, a gain of over 14,000 residents, or about 700 persons per year. These growth estimates may be somewhat overstated; however. State Demography estimates for 2012 indicate the Eagle County has declined slightly since the Census, from 52,197 to 51,944. While most residential units in Eagle County were occupied as primary residences in 2010 (approximately 61%), only 36% of units in Vail were occupied by residents; second homes /vacation accommodations comprised the majority. In the up valley area, the housing occupancy rate was only 48% in 2010. The homes that are not occupied by members of the workforce typically create demand for workforce housing through cleaning, repair, snow removal, landscaping and similar jobs involved in the operation and maintenance of the units. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 12 Draft 4 -3 -14 Proportionately more renters live up valley while more owners live down valley. While up valley is home to about one -third of Eagle County's total households, nearly 45% of total renter households reside there. Relatively fewer households can afford to buy homes in the Vail area; the option other than commuting to buy down valley is to rent up valley. Over one -half of the households in Vail and nearly 50% of those in the up valley area rent. Demographic characteristics vary by area. There are clear differences between up- valley and down - valley communities. Vail has proportionately more renters than owners, more singles and roommate households than families, and smaller renter households than down valley. Of the 3,336 renter households living up valley in 2010: • Roommate households were the most common (37 %). • Nearly 30% had only one member living alone. Families were in the minority. About 19% were families with children and 15% were families (both couples and singles) without children. 2010 Renter Households by Type: Up Valley Area Family, no children Roommates 479 total 37 /o ( ) (1,152 total) 29% (899 total) Source: 2010 US Census Family, with children 19% (800 total) In Vail, proportionately fewer renter households have children (only 8 %) and more consist of singles living alone (36 %) or with roommates (45 %). Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 13 Draft 4 -3 -14 The average size of renter households within the up valley area is about 2.45 persons per unit. In Vail is it considerably smaller at 2.04 persons per renter occupied unit. The largest segment of the renter market is comprised of one- and two - person households, which combined total 61 %. 2010 Renter Households by Size: Up Valley Area 5+ person 4- person 9% 12% (264 total) 1- person (2 3- person 18% (571 total) Demographic Trends Source: 2010 US Census 29% 9 total) son YO (1,014 total) Between 2000 and 2010, most of the population growth in Eagle County occurred down valley. While growth in Vail was slower, the rate of growth was particularly low elsewhere within the up valley area. The population increased by 25% in the county but only 17% in Vail and just under 6% in the up valley area. Growth in households followed a similar pattern. Total housing units, however, increased at about the same rate in the county and the up valley area (41 %) and at a slower pace in Vail (34 %), where land availability is very limited. The number of housing units grew faster than the resident population and households due to construction of second /seasonal homes. Change in Population, Housing Units and Households: 2000 - 2010 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 14 Vail Up Valley Eagle County Population 2000 4,531 15,326 41,659 2010 5,305 16,234 52,197 • change 17.1% 5.9% 25.3% Total Housing Units 2000 5,389 11,527 22,111 2010 7,230 16,286 31,312 • change 34.2% 41.3% 41.6% Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 14 Draft 4 -3 -14 The housing occupancy rate declined by about 7 percentage points in the county, 4 points in Vail and 9 points in the up valley area, indicating a significant rise in second homes. Even though growth in the number of households did not keep pace with growth in second /seasonal homes, the number of units occupied by local residents increased. The up valley area gained 680 households (owners and renters combined) between 2000 and 2010, for an average increase of 68 households per year. The increase in households within the up valley area was due primarily to growth in the number of renter households (a gain of 419 renter households between 2000 and 2010, or an average of nearly 42 households per year). Renters now comprise the majority of households living in Vail (51.5 %). The number of renter households in Eagle County as a whole increased by nearly 1,400 households, or an average gain of 140 households each year. There were some significant changes in the composition of renter households, which varied by area: • Roommate households declined as a percentage of households in all areas, from 34% to 27% in Eagle County, from 44% to 38% within the up valley area and from 49% to 45% in Vail. • Renters living alone increased, especially in Vail, from 33% to 36 %. • The percentage of family households, with and without children, stayed about the same in Vail but increased in the county as a whole; growth in families largely occurred down valley. 2000 2010 Change in Composition of Renter Households: 2000 — 2010 Family, no children Family, with children Living alone Non - family, roommates Family, no children Family, with children Living alone Non - family, roommates Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census Vail Up Valley Eagle County 1,032 2,917 5,499 12% 11% 17% 7% 19% 25% 33% 25% 25% 49% 44% 34% 100% 100% 100% 1,340 3,336 6,893 11% 15% 18% 8% 18% 29% 36% 29% 26% 45% 38% 27% 100% 100% 100% Changes in renter household size also varied by region: • Renter households decreased in size in both the town of Vail and the up valley area while size increased slightly in the county. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 15 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Renter households in all areas predominately have one or two - persons (56% to 73%), followed by 3- person households (16% to 18 %). • A much larger percentage of households have three or more members in both the county (26 %) and the up valley area (22 %) than in Vail (10 %). The population and labor force in the Vail area is aging, as is the trend in other Colorado mountain resort communities. The age of renter households increased between 2000 and 2010. • The largest increase occurred in households 35 to 44 years of age. • The percentage of households under 35 declined in all areas; although these younger households comprise a larger percentage of households in Vail and the up valley area than in the county as a whole. • Only households with a householder under 25 years of age decreased in number as well as percentage in all areas ( -21 in Vail, -150 in Eagle County and -153 in the up valley area). The Economy The economy in Eagle County is slowly recovering. Eagle County currently had about 37,820 jobs on average in 2013. This is down from the peak of about 40,500 jobs in 2008, but up from a low of 35,660 in 2010. The loss of 2,680 jobs reported by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs is much lower than a local estimate of nearly 6,000 jobs, a difference likely attributed in part to construction jobs, which are hard to track. Since 2010, total employment has increased by approximately 2,160 jobs, which equates to an average rate of growth of about 2% per year. 44,000 42,000 40,000 N 38,000 0 36,000 0 0 34,000 32,000 30,000 Change in Jobs: Eagle County, 2005 — 2013 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), State Demography Section Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 16 Draft 4 -3 -14 The unemployment rate in Eagle County has been declining. Unemployment reached a high of 9.6% in 2010 and declined to an average annual rate of 6.6% in 2013, slightly lower than the state average of 6.8 %. This is still much higher than pre- recession rates, which varied between 2.9% and 3.9% from 2005 and 2008, although during the 2013/14 ski season the rate hovered just above 5 %. Average Yearly Labor Force and Employment: Eagle County 2005 - 2013 Year Labor Force Employment Unemployment Unemployment Rate 2013 29,391 27,454 1,937 6.6% 2012 29,793 27,388 2,405 8.1% 2011 29,293 26,689 2,604 8.9% 2010 29,674 26,836 2,838 9.6% 2009 30,624 28,235 2,389 7.8% 2008 31,837 30,705 1,132 3.6% 2007 31,161 30,267 894 2.9% 2006 30,206 29,191 1,015 3.4% 2005 28,670 27,555 1,115 3.9% Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment It appears that the decline in the unemployment rate has been due in part to the continued out mitigation of the labor force. The total number of Eagle County's residents who were employed in the 2013/14 ski season was slightly lower than in the 2012/13 season. 35000 30000 d ,° 25000 0 20000 m 0 0 15000 w 1111 5000 0 Employment and Unemployment by Month: Eagle County July 2012 — June 2013 Employment (Unemployment Rate ( %) 9.7% .1% 8.0 °/ ° 8.4% 0 0 Tj�0 7.3% .6% no/ -.6 .4 ° 3% 6.6% o ° .4 /05,1 %5.3°/ Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment 12% 10% 8% 6% >, 0 n E d 4% 0 2% 0% Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 17 Draft 4 -3 -14 Unemployment rates in Eagle County vary by season. Unemployment is lowest during the winter months (December through March) and highest during the shoulder seasons, in May and November. For those who qualify, filing for unemployment is a common way to make it through the shoulder seasons. Eagle County jobs paid an average annual wage of about $39,187 in 2012. About 40% of jobs in Eagle County are in the lowest wage sectors of accommodations and food, arts and retail trade, averaging between about $28,700 and $34,000 per year. Vail is no longer the economic center of Eagle County in terms of jobs. Based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (does not include sole proprietors and employees exempt from unemployment insurance), approximately 26% of the county's employees work in the Vail zip code area. Just over 15% of establishments (businesses, government, non profits, etc.) are located in Vail, an indication that employers tend to be larger in Vail than elsewhere in the county. Wages in Vail are slightly higher than in Eagle County as a whole. Employees and Employers by Area Average Jobs Eagle County Vail Percent Vail 2012 28,179 7,401 26.3% 2013: 1st -3rd Qtr. 28,910 7,569 26.2% # of Establishments 2012 3,191 493 15.4% 2013: 1st -3rd Qtr. 3,199 483 15.1% Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 18 Draft 4 -3 -14 IV. Rental Market Overview To assess the extent to which limited rental availability and rising rents could impact the demand for ownership housing, rental market conditions in the Vail area are summarized, including number of units, vacancy rates, apartment and condominium rents, and trends in rental rates. Apartment Inventory This analysis focuses on two major apartment complexes in Vail, two in the Dowd Junction area and three in Avon. Combined, these properties have a total of 1,046 units. These units house approximately 30% of the renter households residing in the area. All but one of these properties, River Run, has some type of occupancy and /or income restriction. General Description of Competing Properties The only apartment projects within Vail through Avon that were not examined as part of this analysis are: • Riverview Apartments, a 72 -unit rent subsidized Section 8 complex in Eagle -Vail serving very low income households; • Three seasonal employee projects owned by Vail Resorts: First Chair, Vail, a 124 -bed project completed in 2011; River Edge, Avon, a 103 -unit project built in 1997; and The Tarnes, Avon, a 136 -unit project built in 2000; • 18 rental units located at Vail Commons above retail space; and • 36 units in two projects (Buzzard Park and Creekside) owned by the Town of Vail and rented to Town employees. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 19 Buffalo Buffalo EagleBend Kayak Middle River Run Timber Ridge Ridge II Crossing Creek Ridge Management Polar Star Corum Polar Star Polar Star Coughlin & Texas Capital Corum Properties Properties Properties Company Partners LLC Location Avon Avon Avon Dowd Vail Dowd Junction Vail Junction # of floors 4 4 3 3 3-8 3-4 3 Unit Type flats flats flats flats flats Flats /lofts /TH flats Year Built 2003 2003 1990 2000 2003 -04 1985 1981 General excellent excellent good good excellent good poor Total Units 68 176 294 50 142 117 199 Restrictions Local LIHTC /Mkt Local Local LIHTC /Mkt Mkt Local 50% AM 1 40 6 60% AM 92 91 80% AM 68 120% AM 294 50 None 44 45 117 199 The only apartment projects within Vail through Avon that were not examined as part of this analysis are: • Riverview Apartments, a 72 -unit rent subsidized Section 8 complex in Eagle -Vail serving very low income households; • Three seasonal employee projects owned by Vail Resorts: First Chair, Vail, a 124 -bed project completed in 2011; River Edge, Avon, a 103 -unit project built in 1997; and The Tarnes, Avon, a 136 -unit project built in 2000; • 18 rental units located at Vail Commons above retail space; and • 36 units in two projects (Buzzard Park and Creekside) owned by the Town of Vail and rented to Town employees. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 19 7 %R Tril l; Timber Ridge Middle Creek z Buffalo Ridge; ' I Pall ` 'Kayak Crossing h '13r EagleBend $ River Run �_ AAc Coy _`l Occupancy Levels •[p•Game C}`eelr 'I Bvxd Draft 4 -3 -14 a=r ta >•L7 "ir2 - 5nv,fmwn 5�!nup Chi 60� 'ga�q B�ai - ___- r al - � T_ El lturn `Traily- Rental occupancy levels were very high in March. The overall rate among the county's major non- seasonal apartment complexes was over 97 %. Timber Ridge, water damage and long term wear /tear limited the ability to rent some units, had the highest vacancy rate and skewed the overall average. Excluding Timber Ridge, the overall average occupancy rate was nearly 99 %. Apartment vacancy rates remained low through 2009, shot upward in 2010, started to decline in 2011 and dropped to their lowest point in three years by the first quarter of 2013. More specifically: • Vacancy rates remained low through 2009, long after the recession caused rental markets to soften throughout much of the country. This was due to the strong influence that construction has on jobs and the economy in the Vail Valley; construction projects initiated before the recession were not completed until 2009. • In 2010, vacancies shot upward from a combination of job losses and Vail Resorts terminating their master leases on many units. Their need to import seasonal employees dropped when high unemployment freed up many local workers to fill seasonal ski resort positions. Vail Resorts had extremely high vacancies in the seasonal worker properties they owned, as was the case at other Colorado ski resorts. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 20 Draft 4 -3 -14 Vacancy rates vary by season. Rates are consistently lower in the first quarter of each year and tend to be lowest in the third quarter. April and May generally have the highest turnover. The following table shows that properties in Avon and Edwards have similar occupancy levels as those within Vail. This means that, as occupancy levels continue to rise in general with the economy's recovery, moving down valley will not be a viable alternative to the decreasing availability and rising rents in the Vail area. Occupancy Levels by Property, March 2013 Rents The rents shown on the following table are market rates or rents for units with income restrictions in the same range at 80% to 120% AMI which, according to property managers, are set based on market conditions rather than income caps. In other words, the maximum allowed rents for 80% and 120% are not charged; rents reflect the market. The rents for Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) units with restrictions at 50% and 60% AMI have been excluded from this analysis. Rents by Unit Type and Property Location # Units Occupancy Kayak Middle River Rate Buffalo Ridge Avon 68 100% Buffalo Ridge II Avon 176 100% EagleBend Avon 294 99% Eagle Villas Eagle 120 93% Kayak Crossing Avon 50 98% Lake Creek Edwards 270 99% Middle Creek Vail 142 100% Timber Ridge Vail 198 87% River Run Avon 117 100% Total /Average 1 BR 1435 97.3% Source: Polar Star Properties Market Summary, 3/17/14 Rents The rents shown on the following table are market rates or rents for units with income restrictions in the same range at 80% to 120% AMI which, according to property managers, are set based on market conditions rather than income caps. In other words, the maximum allowed rents for 80% and 120% are not charged; rents reflect the market. The rents for Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) units with restrictions at 50% and 60% AMI have been excluded from this analysis. Rents by Unit Type and Property Buffalo Buffalo Ridge II Eagle Kayak Middle River Timber Average Ridge Bend Crossing Creek Run Ridge Income 80% 50% -Mkt 120 %AMI 120% 60% -Mkt Mkt None Restriction AMI AMI Studios $735 mkt $735 1 BR $930 $925 mkt $804 $1,703 $1,091 2 BR /1 BA $1,220 $1095 mkt $1,045 $1,140 $1,075 $1,115 2 BR /2 BA $1,910 $1,910 3 BR $1,455 $1,324 $1,450 $1,985 $2,210 $1,685 4+ BR $1,650 $1,650 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 21 Draft 4 -3 -14 Historically rents have generally been higher in Vail than down valley. Current rents among these properties, however, only partially reflect this. For example, rents for three - bedroom units at Middle Creek in Vail average about $575 higher than at Buffalo Ridge, EagleBend and Kayak Crossing further down valley. Alternatively, River Run, a condominium project in the Dowd Junction area that functions as an apartment property (all units owned and managed by one company) without any type of occupancy or income restriction, recently raised rents by around $540 per month, exceeding rents in Vail. The extent to which these rent increases may negatively impact occupancy levels or marketability can be evaluated by mid - summer when units vacated in April /May should be leased. Condominium / Townhome Rentals During the last week in April, a total of 61 units were listed for rent in the Up Valley area (Vail through Avon), 40 on craigslist and 24 in the Vail Daily, with only three duplicates. Of these, most were condominiums although a few were listed as apartments, townhomes, duplexes and lock offs. Rents for these units ranged from $700 for a studio to $3,200 for a three bedroom duplex. The overall average rent for these units was $1,918. Condominium and Townhomes For -Rent Listings Unit Type Average Rent 1 Bdrm $1,285 2 Bdrm $1,859 3 Bdrm $2,550 Trends in Rents Rents are rising after several post- recession years when rates dropped and discounts were widespread. The overall average rent for apartments increased 3% between July 2012 and 2013, and the per- square- foot average grew by 15 %, indicating relatively higher increases for smaller units. Change in Average Apartment Rents July 2012 — July 2013 July July March 2012 2013 2014 Avg. Rent /Unit $1,159 $1,162 $1,264 Avg, Rent /SF $1.17 $1.35 $1.46 Source: Polar Star Properties Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 22 Draft 4 -3 -14 Rates for units listed for rent in the Vail Daily and on craigslist.org were higher in April 2014 than in July /August 2013. Condo /Townhome Rent Increases Unit Type Average Rent Average Rent Percent Change July /Aug 2013 April 2014 1 Bdrm $1,104 $1,285 16.4% 2 Bdrm $1,762 $1,859 5.5% 3 Bdrm $2,106 $2,550 21.1% Source: Vail Daily and craigslist The decreased availability of rental units combined with rising rents will cause some renters who want to live in Vail to consider buying, especially households that have been residing in the area for some time. Employees moving into the area will be more likely than longer term residents to live with multiple roommates, allowing them to share the cost of higher rents with others and crowd into and occupy available units. Market rents have increased to levels where mortgage payments could be competitive, depending upon how units at Chamonix are priced. To be affordable for households with incomes ranging from 60% AMI to 140% AMI, monthly payments would need to range from about $900 to $3,000, with resulting in an overall average below $2,000 per month. Rents now average about $1,860 for two - bedroom condos /townhomes and $2,550 for three bedrooms. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 23 Draft 4 -3 -14 V. Ownership Market Conditions This section provides an overview of the ownership market in Eagle County for both market rate and deed restricted housing. This section evaluates current conditions and past trends including the number of sales, sales prices, and inventory of units listed for sale. Variations in market conditions by location within the valley is also analyzed to determine how values vary and if down valley housing is competitive given commuting costs. The focus is on deed restricted homes and market units priced less than $500,000 given that units at this price point would be most competitive with homes at Chamonix. Because Chamonix is proposed to target households with incomes in the 60% to 140% AMI range, this equates to a price range of $135,000 to $450,000, or a midpoint around $300,000. County -Wide Ownership Market Trends The ownership market in Eagle County has improved since 2009, although the recovery has not been robust or consistent across the board. Dollar volume jumped quickly in 2010 due to high -end sales then declined due to sales of bank owned properties and lower -end bargains. The number of sales, however, has steadily increased since 2009. In 2013, the overall dollar volume decreased slightly from 2012 yet the number of sales continued to increase. Trends - Transactions and Dollar Volume $1,600,000,000 $1,400,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $800,000,000 $600,000,000 $400,000,000 $200,000,000 $0 Source: Land Title Guarantee 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Dollar Volume Number of Transactions 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Just over 1,400 residential units sold in Eagle County in 2013. This figure includes the sale of 45 deed restricted units. The inventory of bargains and bank owned homes largely disappeared as buyers became motivated by several factors: • Evidence that prices had hit bottom and were starting to rebound; • Economic recovery; and Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 24 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Widespread predictions that mortgage interest rates will rise. Of total sales in 2013, over half were for prices at or below $500,000. The free market overall remains priced higher than deed restricted units in most of the county. The average 2013 sales price of $887,330 is nearly three times the $300,000 midpoint of the price range targeted by Chamonix. Residential Sales by Price Range, 2013 While non -local buyers, often paying cash, were some of the first buyers to take advantage of lower, post- recession prices, over half of the sales in Eagle County in 2013 were to local buyers. Sales to locals drove the high number of sales in 2013 of units priced under $500,000. All Sales by Unit Type, 2013 Origin of Buyer Number of Percent of Units Units Sold Sold Local 943 53% Front Range 267 15% Out of State - US 532 30% International 24 1% Total 1,766 100% Source: Land Title Guarantee Note: 365 vacant lots and non- residential sales included in these figures. The number of sales were about evenly divided in 2013 between up valley (Vail through Avon) and mid /down valley communities. Just over one -third of sales were within Vail. Vail Up Valley Area Down Valley Source: Land Title Guarantee Sales by Area, 2013 Number of Sales Percent of Sales 598 Number of Sales Percent of Sales Average Price <$500,000 724 51.7% $306,338 $500,001 - $1,000,000 374 26.7% $696,944 $1,000,001 - $1,500,000 108 7.7% $1,237,384 $1,500,001- $2,000,000 74 5.3% $1,734,328 >$2 million 121 8.6% N/A Total /Average 1,401 100.0% $887,330 Source: Land Title Guarantee While non -local buyers, often paying cash, were some of the first buyers to take advantage of lower, post- recession prices, over half of the sales in Eagle County in 2013 were to local buyers. Sales to locals drove the high number of sales in 2013 of units priced under $500,000. All Sales by Unit Type, 2013 Origin of Buyer Number of Percent of Units Units Sold Sold Local 943 53% Front Range 267 15% Out of State - US 532 30% International 24 1% Total 1,766 100% Source: Land Title Guarantee Note: 365 vacant lots and non- residential sales included in these figures. The number of sales were about evenly divided in 2013 between up valley (Vail through Avon) and mid /down valley communities. Just over one -third of sales were within Vail. Vail Up Valley Area Down Valley Source: Land Title Guarantee Sales by Area, 2013 Number of Sales Percent of Sales 598 34% 842 48% 924 52% Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 25 Draft 4 -3 -14 Sales were about evenly split between single family homes and multi - family units. The similarity in average price between the two categories is not typical in most market areas and can be attributed to the sale of high -end, multi - family second /vacation homes. Residential Sales by Unit Type, 2013 Number of Percent of Units Average Price Units Sold Sold Single Family 707 50.5% $970,764 Multi Family 694 49.5% $802,332 Total /Average 1,401 100.0% $887,330 Source: Land Title Guarantee Price Variation by Area Prices vary widely within Vail, due to the location, age, size and quality of units within various areas of the town. The Chamonix parcel is within the Buffer Creek, Vail Das Shone, Vail Heights, Vail Ridge area, where the median price in 2013 was $480,000. The average price per square foot was $475 for single family homes and $349 for multi - family units. County wide, variation in price is location dependent but is also influenced by age and size of units. The median price of 2013 sales in Gypsum, Edwards and Avon was lower or equal to the mid point of $300,000 under consideration for Chamonix. 2013 Sales by Area and Price Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 26 Number Median Avg. PPSF Avg. PPSF of Sales Price SF MF Bighorn, East Vail 85 $471,000 $475 $405 Vail Village 67 $1,650,000 $1,485 $1,581 Lionsridge, Sandstone, The Ridge, The Valley 40 $395,000 $506 $1,041 Buffer Creek, Vail Das Shone, Vail Heights, Vail Ridge 11 $480,000 $475 $349 Intermountain, Matterhorn, Vail Village West 45 $527,000 $394 $372 Minturn, Redcliff 43 $305,000 $271 $257 Eagle -Vail 80 $427,500 $247 $226 Avon 121 $278,000 $244 $326 Edwards 87 $300,000 $229 $258 Homestead, South 40 56 $422,500 $242 $225 Eagle 229 $341,000 $173 $160 Gypsum 229 $228,500 $133 $97 Source: Land Title Guarantee Note: 365 vacant lots and non - residential sales included in these figures. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 26 Draft 4 -3 -14 Availability of Market Housing The availability of housing listed for sale in Eagle County at prices under $500,000 is very limited. A total of 78 units as of early April were for sale at this price point in the major communities. This equates to a 1.3 -month inventory based on 724 sales in this price range in 2013. While the inventory of homes listed for sale may increase in the summer months it was very tight as of early April. Nearly half of the 78 units were condominiums, most of which were located in Vail. While the down valley inventory of homes in this price range has been much larger in recent years, only 21 units were for sale in Eagle and 16 units in Gypsum. To buy a free market single family home for less than $500,000 generally requires living in Eagle and Gypsum. Single family homes at this price point are no longer available in Edwards. Of the 15 units in Edwards, 13 were condominiums and the other two were duplex units. Market Units Listed for Sale at <$500,000, by Type and Location Condo Townhome Duplex Single Total Family Listings Vail 23 2 1 26 Edwards 13 2 15 Eagle 1 7 4 9 21 Gypsum 2 13 16 36 11 7 24 78 Source: Vail Board of Realtors MLS Note: A list of units for sale by area is in the appendix to this report. Opportunities to buy a free market homes for less than $300,000 were very limited throughout the county —12 in total, half of which were condominiums in Vail built in the 1960's or early '70's. Choice improves in the $300,000 to $400,000 range where 30 units were listed for sale. For this price, a buyer could choose among condominiums in in Vail or Edwards, small single family homes or larger townhomes in Eagle, or two- to four - bedroom single family homes in Gypsum. In the $400,000 to $500,000 price range, choices in Vail range from a lodge unit to a 1,500 square foot duplex. The average age of these 14 units is 42 years, with most built in the early 1970's. Of the five units in Edwards, four were larger, relatively newer condominiums (compared to Vail) and one townhome. In Eagle, a total of 7 duplexes and single family homes were for sale, averaging 2,500 square feet. In Gypsum, 10 single family homes were for sale at about the same average size as in Eagle though the range was much larger, from 1,816 to 4,130 square feet. The variation in price per square foot is indicative of the difference in home values in the county. At $527 per square foot the price of homes listed for sale in Vail under $500,000 is nearly three times the average price in Gypsum. The average price per square foot drops sharply between Vail and Edwards ( -45%) but then declines more gradually between Edwards and Eagle ( -30 %). The difference in the average price per square foot between Eagle and Gypsum was only $19. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 27 Draft 4 -3 -14 Market Units Listed for Sale at <$500,000, by Price Range and Location A total of 26 residential units were listed for sale in Vail in early April and priced under $500,000. The four units for sale most comparable to the proposed Chamonix units in terms of location and suitability for occupancy by year -round residents were listed for an average price of $458,750, averaged 1,298 square feet in size and were built between 1969 and 1972. Comparable Market For -Sale Listing in Vail Price Project /Area Bdrms Baths Scl Ft Price /SF Yr Built Type $432,500 Chamonix Ln 2 2 1103 $392 1972 TH $432,500 Chamonix Ln 2 2 1110 $390 1972 TH $475,000 Chamonix Ln 3 2 1480 $321 1969 Condo $495,000 East Vail 2 3 1500 $330 1967 Duplex Source: Vail Board of Realtors MLS, 4 -8 -2014 Of the comparable properties: • Two are townhomes on Chamonix Lane that are within different phases of the same property. Each townhome is listed at $432,500. One unit had just been listed in early April. The other had been on the market for about one month and received much interest — 6 or 7 showings within a few weeks. Most were from professionals who had lived in Vail some time (not new to the area) and were in their late 20's to early 40's. Some were singles and others were couples, but none had children. The units both have homemade storage sheds and small yards, but no garages. • One is a condominium listed for sale at $475,000 on Chamonix Lane that was originally a three - bedroom unit, but later converted into a two - bedroom unit on the upper floor with a lock -off studio and kitchen downstairs that can be rented separately. The two units combined total 1,480 square feet. It was built in 1969. It has a storage closet off of the patio, but no garage. The property had three offers within a couple of days of being listed — one from a Denver resident looking to buy a second home and two from developers looking for a unit to deed restrict in order to satisfy the Town's housing requirements. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 28 Vail Edwards Eagle Gypsum Total $100,000 - $149,999 1 1 $150,000 - $199,999 1 1 $200,000 - $249,999 1 1 1 3 $250,000 - $299,999 6 1 7 $300,000 - $349,999 3 5 11 2 21 $350,000 - $399,999 2 4 1 2 9 $400,000 - $449,000 7 2 4 3 16 $450,000 - $500,000 7 3 3 7 20 Total Listings 26 15 21 16 78 Avg. Price /Scl Ft $527 $308 $212 $193 Source: Vail Board of Realtors MLS, 4 -8 -2014 A total of 26 residential units were listed for sale in Vail in early April and priced under $500,000. The four units for sale most comparable to the proposed Chamonix units in terms of location and suitability for occupancy by year -round residents were listed for an average price of $458,750, averaged 1,298 square feet in size and were built between 1969 and 1972. Comparable Market For -Sale Listing in Vail Price Project /Area Bdrms Baths Scl Ft Price /SF Yr Built Type $432,500 Chamonix Ln 2 2 1103 $392 1972 TH $432,500 Chamonix Ln 2 2 1110 $390 1972 TH $475,000 Chamonix Ln 3 2 1480 $321 1969 Condo $495,000 East Vail 2 3 1500 $330 1967 Duplex Source: Vail Board of Realtors MLS, 4 -8 -2014 Of the comparable properties: • Two are townhomes on Chamonix Lane that are within different phases of the same property. Each townhome is listed at $432,500. One unit had just been listed in early April. The other had been on the market for about one month and received much interest — 6 or 7 showings within a few weeks. Most were from professionals who had lived in Vail some time (not new to the area) and were in their late 20's to early 40's. Some were singles and others were couples, but none had children. The units both have homemade storage sheds and small yards, but no garages. • One is a condominium listed for sale at $475,000 on Chamonix Lane that was originally a three - bedroom unit, but later converted into a two - bedroom unit on the upper floor with a lock -off studio and kitchen downstairs that can be rented separately. The two units combined total 1,480 square feet. It was built in 1969. It has a storage closet off of the patio, but no garage. The property had three offers within a couple of days of being listed — one from a Denver resident looking to buy a second home and two from developers looking for a unit to deed restrict in order to satisfy the Town's housing requirements. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 28 Draft 4 -3 -14 • The other unit listed for sale that is somewhat comparable to the proposed Chamonix homes is a duplex unit in east Vail with an EHU restriction (occupancy by an employee working 30+ hours in Eagle County). This 1,500 square foot, two- bedroom unit built in 1967 is listed at $495,000. It has been on the market for about one year. Interest has been moderate with 6 to 8 showings to qualified buyers. These potential buyers have all been single or couples without children. They have been considering homes as far down valley as Edwards, although some have also looked in Eagle. Sales of Deed Restricted Units County Assessor records indicate 144 deed restricted housing units sold from 2010 through March 2014, for an average of nearly 35 units per year or 2.8 units per month. In 2010 and 2011, the inventory of deed restricted units listed for sale was large due to a combination of factors: employees left the valley due to lack of work, opted to purchase free market homes when prices dropped, or delayed purchasing due to economic uncertainty and tough mortgage lending standards. By 2013, however, the deed restricted market had rebounded with 45 sales in a single year. In 2013, a record was set at the largest deed restricted development in the county, Miller Ranch. By the end of the year, the inventory of units listed for sale had been largely absorbed; none were listed for sale through Eagle County's Valley Home Store. The trend in deed restricted sales in Vail differed from that in the rest of the county. The number of sales peaked in 2010 then declined to only one sale in 2013. This was due to decreased availability of units for sale rather than demand, however. When owners of deed restricted units moved out of Vail during the recession, units became available for others to buy. Also two new units were added in 2010, the Arosa duplex. Availability did not last for long, however, as there were sufficient lottery applicants to purchase all homes that became available. Buyers during this period were always able to obtain maximum allowed resale prices, an indication that demand continued to outweigh supply. Sales of Deed Restricted Homes, 2010 — March 2014 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 29 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Percent of Jan -Mar Total Vail 11 5 4 1 2 23 16.0% Avon 1 1 0.7% Edwards 25 14 21 30 2 92 63.9% Eagle 2 4 5 5 1 17 11.8% Gypsum 7 7 4.9% Basalt 1 2 1 4 2.8% Total 39 24 30 45 6 144 100.0% Source: County Assessor data. Note: units with covenants only requiring preference be given to employees not included. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 29 Draft 4 -3 -14 Unlike with the free market, prices of deed restricted housing do not vary much by community. The homes at Miller Ranch in Edwards have generally been higher on both a per -unit and per- square -foot basis than units in Vail. While the development includes single family homes, it also includes duplex and condominium units. Deed restricted prices have been consistently lower in Eagle but the price differential is not nearly as great as in the free market. Prices of Deed Restricted Sales by Area, 2010 — 2013 Avg. Price /Unit 2010 2011 2012 2013 Eagle $172,500 $145,000 $153,700 $202,300 Edwards $247,904 $238,700 $237,319 $253,220 Gypsum $157,100 Vail $238,718 $199,060 $197,400 $164,300 Avg. Price /SF Eagle $189 $144 $130 $177 Edwards $226 $197 $200 $219 Gypsum $141 Vail $195 $167 $200 $177 Source: County Assessor data While sales of deed restricted homes in Vail have historically been able to command the maximum appreciation allowed, this has not always been the case down valley. Following the recession, the inventory grew and it was clearly a buyers' market. In 2011, deed restricted homes sold for 10% to 20% below allowed maximum resale price. The trend is reversing, however. In 2012, resale prices were generally 5% to 10% below the allowed maximum, and by 2013 the reduction averaged around 5 %. So far in 2014, some sellers have been able to obtain full appreciation while others have had to reduce prices up to 7% reduction. Sellers of smaller units are better able to stay firm on price whereas larger, more expensive homes are taking the biggest price hits. The down valley deed restricted market is definitively switching from being a buyer's to a seller's market. The 2010 average sale price for deed restricted homes in Vail may best represent the prices of the town's entire deed restricted inventory since there have been few sales since then and only one in 2013. Availability of Deed Restricted Housing Very few deed restricted homes are available for purchase. As of late April, four units at Miller Ranch and one at Eagle Ranch were listed for sale through the Valley Home Store. The Town of Vail had received notification that two units (one at Red Sandstone and one at Vail Heights) were being listed for sale. These seven units combined equal a 1.9 -month inventory based on 45 sales in 2013. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 30 Deed Restricted Units Listed for Sale Unit Type Development Town Bdrms Price Condo* Vail Heights Vail 1 $212,544 Condo Red Sandstone Vail 2 $236,248 Condo Miller Ranch Edwards 2 $183,000 Condo Miller Ranch Edwards 3 $248,000 Townhome Eagle Ranch Eagle 3 $354,900 Single Family Miller Ranch Edwards 3 $390,000 Single Family Miller Ranch Edwards 3 $354,000 *Town of Vail employees have priority. Note: Table does not include units that may be listed by realtors. Lot Sales Draft 4 -3 -14 In 2013, a total of 176 vacant residential parcels sold for an average of $264,750, up from 103 sales in 2012 and 100 sales in 2011. Foreclosures Short sales and sales of bank owned homes obtained through foreclosure should not have significant impact on the market in the near future. The number of foreclosures has dropped off sharply. In 2011, 463 foreclosures were filed in /near the county's major towns (not including the portion of Eagle County within the Roaring Fork valley). In 2013, the number had dropped to 178 or about 36% of the total two years before. Foreclosures Filed by Town, 2011 and 2013 Compared 2011 2013 Avon 103 43 Eagle 109 36 Edwards 64 34 Gypsum 152 51 Vail 35 14 Total 463 178 Source: Eagle County Public Trustee Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 31 Draft 4 -3 -14 VI. Competitive Analysis This section will focus on deed restricted units throughout the county. This analysis, in combination with the pricing and availability of free market housing both in Vail and down valley are used to determine the prices that the proposed units can command (see Conclusions and Recommendations). This analysis first focuses on the inventory of deed restricted ownership units in Vail then provides information on the nearly 650 other deed restricted units elsewhere in Eagle County. The marketability of amenities and design features is then examined. Vail Deed Restricted Inventory A total of 137 deed restricted condominium, townhome and duplex units are located within the town of Vail. This inventory does not include apartments. The largest project is Vail Commons, with 53 units. All of the inventory is deed restricted for occupancy by employees who work in Eagle County 30 or more hours per week. Most units (about 60 %) also have resale price caps that limit appreciation in order to maintain permanent affordability. The other 40% are Employee Housing Units (EHU's) units, which are scattered in various developments in Vail. These 56 units have occupancy restriction (they can only be owned by or rented to a household with an employee who works 30 or more hours in Eagle County). These units have no initial or resale price restrictions, nor are they tracked by the Town of Vail. Inventory of Deed Restricted Units in Vail Shading denotes focus of analysis. Location # Units Arosa Duplex 2 North Trail Townhomes 6 ERWSD Pitkin Creek & Trailridge 2 Red Sandstone 18 Vail Commons 53 Employee Housing Units (EHU) 56 Total 137 Not all of these units are owner occupied, including 9 units at Red Sandstone — 7 are owned by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and renter occupied and 2 are owned by Mountain Valley Development Services. This analysis will focus on the 79 units shaded in the table above since they are the most comparable to the proposed Chamonix units in terms of deed restrictions and method by which they are sold to qualified buyers. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 32 Draft 4 -3 -14 Arosa Duplex A LEED Silver Certified duplex completed in 2010 and located at the start of Arosa Drive in West Vail, this development is comprised of two units, each with three - bedrooms, two and one -half bathrooms and attached two -car garages. These units are two floors and are approximately 1,500 square feet of living area plus garages. Since this project is fairly new, applicants for these units are considered in the Demand Analysis section of this report. Units are located at the west end of North Frontage Road, where it turns north and becomes Arosa Drive. The City Market center and associated services are less than one mile east on North Frontage Road from the development. A transit stop is located about two- tenths of a mile from the duplex. The duplex is nestled on a small, relatively flat site at the end of a gulley. Residential uses are across the street and north of the site. The duplex gets good sun exposure, with one unit having south, east and west facing exposure and the other having north, east and west exposure. Views to the south look upon 1 -70 and the mountains; hills /mountains are seen in the other directions. Noise from I- 70 is very apparent. The Arosa units sold in 2010 for $402,300 and $410,300, or $254 per square foot. North Trail Town Homes This six -unit complex completed in 2001 is located at the intersection of Arosa Drive and Garmisch Drive. This development is comprised of: • 4 two - bedroom, two -bath townhomes located in a four -plex, all with attached one -car garages. These units are two floors and start at approximately 1,230 square feet. 2 three - bedroom, two -bath townhomes located in a duplex, with attached one -car garages. These units are two floors and start at approximately 1,440 square feet. This complex has little exposure to 1 -70 noise. It also has the best park access of all comparables, being located adjacent to Ellefson Park, providing usable outdoor recreation space for the residents. It is located in quiet residential neighborhood along Garmish Drive, which dead ends just east of the development. Duplex units face north /south and the 4 -plex faces east /west with views of hills and mountains in all directions. The nearest transit stop is about four - tenths of a mile -y from the development. The nearest large grocery store Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 33 Draft 4 -3 -14 (Safeway) is less than one mile, along with restaurant, fuel, convenience store, mail, lodging and shopping services. One of the six units in North Trail townhomes has sold since 2010 for a price of $223,800 or $198 per square foot. Red Sandstone Creek This 18 -unit complex completed in 1999 is located on Red Sandstone Road across from the Potato Patch Club in Vail. This development is comprised of two buildings with dispersed unit types of: • 2 one - bedroom, one -bath townhomes, with attached one -car garages. These units are two floors and approximately 850 square feet. • 10 two - bedroom, one -bath townhomes, with attached one -car garages. These units are two floors and approximately 1,040 square feet. • 2 two - bedroom, two -bath condominiums, with attached one -car garages. These units are one floor and approximately 1,160 square feet. • 4 three - bedroom, two -bath condominiums, with attached one -car garages. These units are three floors and approximately 1,430 square feet. Even though some units are townhome style (two story) all are part of a single condominium project. The Eagle River Water and Sanitation District either owns and rents out or has first right of refusal on 11 units. These units have had roof problems with some owners taking out second mortgages for repair. They have little to no noise exposure from 1 -70. Red Sandstone is located about three - tenths of a mile north of the North Frontage Road, nestled among the hills. A creek runs along the west side of the units. Brookstone Condominiums are on the other side of the creek, which appear to be a mix of local and second homeowner occupied units. The units are separated on the east side from the primarily residential and recreation - access Red Sandstone Road by a berm. Units face east /west, with good sun exposure. Views of mountains are available to the south, whereas north and west views are of the surrounding hills and east views include the river valley, Brookstone Public transportation is available via the Sandstone Purple transit line and stops about two - tenths of a mile from the site. A pedestrian bridge is available within one mile of the units, which crosses over 1 -70 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 34 Draft 4 -3 -14 into the Vail town center. The nearest grocery and other resident services are located within the City Market shopping center, about 1.6 miles from the development along the North Frontage Road. The development itself has limited shared outdoor space. Hiking is available on the hillsides near the development. From 2010 through March 2014, turnover was high at Red Sandstone when 12 of the 18 units sold. This equates to an average annual turnover rate of nearly 16 %. The prices for these units were as follows: Price Range Price Range 1 BR $168,000 - $177,900 2 BR $174,200 - $213,500 3 BR $235,000 - $249,000 Source: County Assessor records Vail Commons Average Price Average PPSF $172,950 $167 $200,217 $193 $239,975 $197 A complex with 53 for -sale and 18 rental units completed in 1997. The for -sale units are comprised of: • 24 two - bedroom condominiums located in three buildings, including either one - and -a -half baths or two - baths, each with a large exterior storage closet and a shared garage under every building. These units are one floor and approximately 992 square feet. • 13 two - bedroom, two -bath townhomes located in two buildings, no covered parking. These units are two floors and approximately 1,018 square feet. • 6 three - bedroom, two -bath townhomes located in two buildings, all with one -car attached garages. These units are two floors, were built with an unfinished basement and are approximately 1,800 square feet. • 10 three - bedroom, two -bath townhomes located in three buildings, all with two -car attached garages. These units are two floors, were built with an unfinished basement and are approximately 1,850 square feet. Units are located between the North Frontage Road and Chamonix Lane, just east of the City Market in Vail. Groceries and other services m� (restaurants, postal, hardware, shopping, vision care, etc.) are within easy walking distance of the 1_ complex and a day care center is located within the development. Transit stops are located within mile of the development. Units primarily face either north /south or east /west. Units located adjacent to the frontage road receive the most highway noise, although 1 -70 noise is present throughout the development. Views of mountains are available in all directions, with units located along the perimeter of the development having the best access to views. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 35 Draft 4 -3 -14 Open space within the development is of limited usability, primarily providing interior pedestrian pathways and property drainage. Hiking is available on the hillsides to the immediate north of the development. Of the 53 ownership units at Vail Commons, eight sold between 2010 and March 2004, a far lower turnover rate of 3.5% per year than at Red Sandstone. The prices for these eight units were as follows: Price Range Price Range 2 BR $155,400 - $176,700 3 BR $250,300 Average Price Average PPSF Other Deed Restricted Ownership Units in Eagle County $166,814 $172 $250,300 $132 There are nearly 650 deed restricted condos, townhomes, duplexes and single - family homes down valley from Vail in Eagle County (apartments and units in the Roaring Fork Valley not included). Deed restrictions vary widely from those with employment, income and resale limitations to ones only requiring that preference be given to Eagle County employees for a defined time when listed for sale. Down Valley Deed Restricted Ownership Housing Project location # Deed /Covenant Restricted Units Brett Ranch Edwards 156 Multiple Sites* Avon 64 Eagle Ranch Eagle 43 Miller Ranch Edwards 282 Red Draw Condos Edwards 16 Riverwalk Edwards 59 Stratton Flats Gypsum 26 Total 646 *Larger projects include the Sheridan, Chapel Square, Wildwood Townhomes and Grandview. • With 282 units, Miller Ranch in Edwards is by far the largest deed restricted development in Eagle County. Completed in 2006, it offers 69 single family homes, 64 duplexes, 49 townhomes and 100 condominiums. Features that make this development particularly attractive include walking distance to schools, ample parks /green space and neighborhood design. Deed restrictions limit price appreciation and occupancy to county residents who are employed, earn Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 36 Draft 4 -3 -14 at least 75% of their income within the county and are qualified for the Valley Home Store's Master Buyers List. • Red Draw Condominiums is a 16 -unit development in Edwards next to the St. Claire of Assisi Church has both local employment occupancy and resale price restrictions. The two - bedroom /two- bathroom units initially sold for $263,600. • Riverwalk Condominiums in downtown Edwards has restrictions that limit sale to Riverwalk then Eagle County employees for 90 days before anyone can purchase. • Brett Ranch in Edwards has covenants that impose a 1% transfer fee on sales to households that do not include Eagle County employees or that own another residential property. • Stratton Flats in Gypsum is a single family home development offering three and four bedroom homes with two -car garages starting around $240,000. Of the total of 339 units at build out, six were built under deed restrictions that limit price and occupancy. A modified deed restriction limiting occupancy to Eagle County employees has been applied to about 20 units. These units have sold for market prices with a small incentive (1% - 1.5 %) for closing costs. The deed restricted housing inventory in Avon includes 64 units scattered through the community in nine developments (apartment project excluded). Most units have occupancy restrictions (employment 30+ hours per week in Eagle County and incomes no greater than 120% AMI) and limits on capital improvements and resale prices. Of the 64 units, 13 are still owned by their developers and rented to employees. There is little turnover among the units. Amenities /Design Features Interviews of staff involved in managing /selling deed restricted housing as well as realtors revealed consistent opinions about the features most desired by local homebuyers. They are: 1. Storage — Mountain residents have lots of gear and recreational equipment. Plus outdoor furniture and grills must often be moved into storage in the winter so as not to impede snow removal. In -unit spaces, exterior storage lockers and extra space in garages have all worked well. Garages /Parking — Parking is very tight throughout most of Vail. While residents often take a bus, walk or bike to work, they have cars for other errands and travel. With a harsh winter climate, garages are highly desired for parking as well as storage. It does not appear that there are strong preferences for private attached garages over common garages with storage lockers and or detached private garages. Parking for guests is crucial but access should be limited so that day skiers do not park at Chamonix due to its proximity to a bus stop. 3. Outdoor Space — Common outdoor areas should be functional, large enough and designed so that it can be used for more than open /green space. It should be sunny. Grills, tables, seating, space for a garden, a play area for children, and a play area for dogs would all be appealing. Small private fenced outdoor areas for children and /or dogs is highly desired by many. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 37 Draft 4 -3 -14 4. Access to Sunlight and Views — Vail is known for having limited access to the sun in the winter. More sunlight has been cited by buyers of down valley housing as a reason for not considering Vail. Fortunately for the Chamonix site, access to one will provide access to the other — south facing units get the most sun and the best views are to the south. North facing walkways, front doors and garages entrances can be problematic. Positioning all units so that each has a south facing wall would be ideal. 5. An Extra Bedroom — While many of the owners now living in Vail's deed restricted housing and many of the potential buyers are single they want the opportunity to rent to a roommate even if only seasonally. Also, residents of resort communities tend to have a lot of company during peak winter and summer periods. Most want one more bedroom than they absolutely need. 6. Energy Efficient Heating System — Utilities can be very expensive in Vail. Heating systems are typically used nine months per year and occasionally even in the summer months. New, energy efficient systems, especially in floor heat, would be very appealing when compared to the systems in the older residential units in Vail and would keep heating bills comparatively low. 7. Convenient Access to Bus Stop — Sidewalks and internal walkways should be designed so as to make it easy to travel, wearing ski boots, from units to the bus stop. 8. Mud Room —Since Vail's residents have many boots, coats, hats and gear, a "mud" room /entryway is far more functional and appealing than a coat closet. Designs that provide an air lock /doorway between the entry and main living area would also improve energy efficiency. 9. A Second Bathroom — Whether for use by a roommate, family member or guest, most buyers seek two bathrooms. Other design features that should be a given but that have been overlooked in the past include: • Outdoor spigots —the lack of them has been a problem at Miller Ranch; • Roofs that last given snow loads without features that create ice dams and cause leaking; and • Snow shed /snow storage. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 38 Draft 4 -3 -14 VII. Demand Estimates This section quantifies the size of the market and the capture rates for the proposed units taking into consideration the number of households residing within the market area by income and household size, in migration of households from outside the market area, and projected growth in households. Market Segmentation To estimate the potential size of the market for the proposed Chamonix homes, the profile of buyers is analyzed to segment those who qualify and are most likely to qualify. From Where The potential market for deed restricted homes in Vail primarily consists of persons who already live in or near Vail. Very little movement up valley of families from Eagle and Gypsum should be expected although interest would likely be higher among some now living in Edwards. Results from a 2007 household survey in Eagle County showed there is not strong interest in moving from mid valley and down valley communities to Vail. Of the residents who indicated Vail was their first choice in which to live, 65% already lived within the community, 4% lived in the unincorporated area adjacent to Vail, 6% lived in Eagle -Vail, 4% in Minturn and 4% in Avon. Only 8% lived in Edwards and 3% in the Eagle area. Preference to Live in Vail Where Now Live Want to Live in Vail Edwards 8% Eagle /Brush Creek 3% Gypsum /Gypsum Creek 3% Vail- Incorporated 65% Avon 4% Basalt/El Jebel /Frying Pan 1% Minturn /Redcliffe 4% Eagle -Vail 6% Other 1% Vail- Unincorporated 4% Wolcott /Bellyache Ridge 1% 100% Source: 2007 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment Respondents to the 2007 survey were also asked whether they wanted to buy or rent a different residence and which community they preferred. Results showed that: Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 39 Draft 4 -3 -14 Edwards was the number one choice of where residents looking to buy most want to live followed by the Eagle /Brush Creek area; and Vail was third overall with nearly 15% of those surveyed indicating it was their first choice. There has been a fundamental shift in location preferences. According to the 1999 Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment survey, Vail had the highest ranking of where Eagle County's residents most wanted to live (22 %) followed by the Edwards area at 20% and Eagle at 12 %. The mix of applicants for the Arosa duplex lottery supports the 2007 survey findings. Of the 11 applicants, nine were living in Vail or Eagle -Vail at the time of application and two were living in Edwards, indicating that housing in Vail will primarily attract persons who already live in or near Vail. Arosa Duplex Lottery Applicants Household Type Where they lived @ application Priority Purchasers Couple with child Vail Commons Couple with child Eagle -Vail Townhouse Couple with 2 children East Vail Couple with child Eagle -Vail Townhouse Couple with child West Vail Single with 2 children Edwards Non - Priority Purchasers Couple no children Red Sandstone Couple no children Vail Commons Single Vail Commons Couple no children West Vail Single with 1 child Edwards There is less correlation between job location and where residents most want to live than might be presumed. According to the 2007 survey, about 40% of employees working in Vail indicated their first choice of location to live is Vail. Length of Residency Most buyers of deed restricted properties are long -time residents. Very few buyers will be new to the area. Although not tracked, the typical applicant for Vail's lotteries has lived in Vail for about 10 years. Of the 31 buyers of Miller Ranch homes in 2013, only one was moving in from outside of the county. The 2007 Housing Needs Assessment survey found that only 2% of homeowners in the county had lived there for less than one year. Most (69 %) had lived in the county for 10 or more years. First Time or Move -Up /Move -Down The majority of Chamonix purchasers will be first -time homebuyers, probably 75% or more based on historical sales. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 40 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Some will be moving within the deed restricted system, either moving up as families grow or, as has been increasingly the case, buying two residences to replace one in the event of divorce. • There have been a few cases where buyers have sold free market homes down valley and purchased deed restricted housing in Edwards. The extent to which this is likely to happen at Chamonix is hard to judge, but the possibility may increase as the free market appreciates over time. Household Composition Compared with Eagle County households overall, residents who indicated Vail was their first choice of where to live in the 2007 survey were more likely to live alone or with roommates than were residents who preferred to live down valley. Approximately 37% of the county's households overall compared with 25% of those who wanted to live in Vail included at least one child. Of the 79 fully deed restricted ownership units in Vail, 37 (or 47 %) are now occupied by singles without children. Families own about 42% of the units. The rest are owned by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District or Mountain Valley Developmental Services and are rented. A couple lives in the only one bedroom unit that is owner occupied. Three of the 24 three - bedroom units are owned by a single individual without children; 16 are occupied by households with at least one child (typically one). Of the 53 two - bedroom units, 34 were purchased by singles. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 41 OVERALL Vail —1' Choice Couple with child(ren) 27% 20% Couple, no child(ren) 27% 25% Adult living alone 23% 31% Unrelated roommates 10% 17% Single parent with child(ren) 8% 4% Family members and unrelated roommates 3% 2% Immediate and extended family members 2% 1% Other 1% 100% 100% Source: 2007 Housing Needs Assessment Survey Of the 79 fully deed restricted ownership units in Vail, 37 (or 47 %) are now occupied by singles without children. Families own about 42% of the units. The rest are owned by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District or Mountain Valley Developmental Services and are rented. A couple lives in the only one bedroom unit that is owner occupied. Three of the 24 three - bedroom units are owned by a single individual without children; 16 are occupied by households with at least one child (typically one). Of the 53 two - bedroom units, 34 were purchased by singles. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 41 Draft 4 -3 -14 Household Composition — Owners of Vail Deed Restricted Units Single Single w/ Couple Couple w/ Other Total Child(ren) Child(ren) Units Vail Commons 2 BR 25 2 10 37 3 BR 3 3 1 8 1 16 Red Sandstone 1 BR 1 1 2 2 BR 6 1 5 12 3 BR 1 1 2 4 North Trail Townhomes 2 BR 3 1 4 3 BR 2 2 Arosa Duplex 3 BR 2 2 Total 37 7 14 12 9 79 Percent of Total 46.8% 8.9% 17.7% 15.2% 11.4% 100% There are distinct differences between buyers interested in Edwards and those who prefer to live in Eagle or Gypsum. Edwards attracts singles as well as families, appeals to those who work mid valley or who commute in both directions, works well for residents who like to ski often, is attractive to households that prefer greater diversity in the community and are interested in higher density multifamily housing. Market Size Approximately 3,100 renters reside in the area that includes Vail, Eagle -Vail and Avon. This area should be considered the primary market area for the proposed Chamonix development since: • Past surveys have shown in interest in living in Vail is highest among existing residents; and • Lottery applicants and buyers of deed restricted housing in Vail lived in or near Vail at the time of application. Of these 3,100 renter households, roughly 1,600 households have incomes within the ranges specified by the Chamonix Master Plan (60% AMI to 140% AMI). How the proposed units are ultimately priced will impact the extent to which they are actually affordable for the wide range of targeted households. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 42 Draft 4 -3 -14 Market Area Renter Households by Income and Size, 2013 Income Range 1- Person 2- Person 3- Person 4- Person 5 +- Person Total 60 %AM1 $36,540 $41,760 $46,980 $52,140 $56,340 N/A 140% AM $85,260 $97,440 $109,620 $121,660 $131,460 $0- 10,000 211 69 6 16 0 302 $10,000- 20,000 189 23 115 9 10 346 $20,000- 30,000 32 157 68 99 13 369 $30,000- 40,000 83 46 107 22 148 406 $40,000- 50,000 123 174 43 32 2 374 $50,000- 60,000 132 171 94 21 11 429 $60,000- 75,000 97 126 37 54 67 381 $75,000- 100,000 15 166 37 97 9 324 $100,000- 125,000 16 30 36 9 7 98 $125,000- 150,000 4 2 9 9 0 24 $150,000- 200,000 11 32 10 0 0 53 $200,000+ 6 1 1 0 0 8 Total 919 997 563 368 267 3,114 Within Targeted Income Ranges 450 637 247 181 94 1,609 % by Household Size 28.0% 39.6% 15.4% 11.2% 5.8% 100.0% Source: Ribbon Demographics data and Rees Consulting calculations Demand Estimate There is total potential demand for approximately 1,850 ownership units in Vail generated by households with incomes in the ranges targeted by the Chamonix Master Plan. The proposed 58 units would need to capture 3.1% of this demand, which is a low capture rate. Demand and Capture Rate Calculation # Households Market Area Renter Households 3,100 In Targeted Income Ranges 1,600 Growth within 2 Years (2% per year) 65 Total Up Valley Market 1,665 In Migration (from down valley or out of county) 10% Total Demand 1,850 Capture Rate (58 units proposed) 3.1% This estimate of potential demand includes households that may not want to buy or may not be able to buy because they cannot qualify for a mortgage; however, with a conservative capture rate of only 3.1 %, it appears that demand is more than adequate for the proposed units. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 43 Draft 4 -3 -14 While four of the 11 applicants for the Arosa lottery were seeking to move up from existing deed restricted housing within Vail (Vail Commons and Red Sandstone), the vacated units will need to be sold; therefore, demand from existing owners has not been considered in this calculation. Lottery /Buyer Applicants Information on lottery /homebuyer applicants is provided for additional insight into demand. The Valley Home Store maintains a Master Buyers List with approximately 100 applicants currently who are pre - qualified under both Eagle County's Guidelines and for a mortgage. Of these applicants, roughly 20% include a member who works full time in Vail. At least some of the applicants on the list are potential buyers for Chamonix. The Town of Vail has had an average of 8.4 applicants over the past five years for its annual lottery (between 13 and three applicants each year). This lottery has been for resales; a separate lottery was held for the Arosa duplex units. No other new units were completed during this period. Lottery fatigue and perceptions that there was nothing available may have resulted in fewer households participating in the lottery than were interested in purchasing housing. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 44 Draft 4 -3 -14 VIII. Mortgage Availability Obtaining home mortgages has been more difficult since the recession due to the imposition of stricter lending standards. Further, mortgage availability is complicated by deed restrictions, leased land and condominium ownership. Through interviews of mortgage lenders, this section of the report examines how mortgage availability, deed restrictions /complications and interest rates affect the ability for households to purchase and afford homes. Loan Products Mortgage lenders provide a full array of loan products for deed restricted housing in Eagle County, including: • Conventional mortgages sold on the secondary market most often under Fannie Mae guidelines; • Portfolio loans held by the originating lenders and underwritten based on in -house criteria. These are most often 5- or 7 -year adjustable rate mortgages (ARM'S), but at least one lender can offer 30 -year fixed rates; and Government insured or guaranteed loans for 15- or 30 -year fixed rate mortgages — USDA for which no down payment is required and FHA that requires about 3.5% down. None of the lenders interviewed are now processing VA loans for deed restricted housing due at least in part to their understanding that VA requires deed restrictions to have income caps, which is typically not the case in Vail or Eagle County. Not all lenders provide all these loan products. Some provide only portfolio loans on deed restricted homes, while others also offer conventional and possibly government loans. Deed Restriction Limitations Deed restrictions must be approved by lenders. There are generally two approaches: In house approvals by larger lenders with the restrictions submitted for each individual loan application. This is the way it has typically been done in Eagle County. The requirements vary somewhat by lender. Project approval by Fannie Mae and /or FHA that would then allow any lender to originate conventional /secondary market mortgages for units within the development. The application process can be time consuming. Fannie Mae requires an application fee, and the approval is in effect for only two years. Lenders often apply their own unique limitations or "overlays" on top of Fannie Mae /USDA /FHA criteria. While underwriting guidelines vary, the following requirements are typical: Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 45 Draft 4 -3 -14 • The deed restriction must terminate at foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure. Fannie Mae no longer imposes this requirement, but lenders in Eagle County have not yet dealt with restrictions that survive foreclosure; • The appraisal has to include three comparables with similar deed restrictions; • The lender is not required to send notices of foreclosure to third parties, including the Town or other entities that might have an interest in preservation of the deed restriction; • Right of first refusal will only be granted to the entity that applied the deed restriction and the time period for acting on the right cannot exceed 90 days; • Resale controls must have a fixed period of time; and • The deed restriction must be in a public record identifiable through a routine title search. Lending on Condominiums Mortgage lending on condominiums is more complex and time consuming than for townhomes, duplexes and single - family homes for which the underlying land is subdivided. Several requirements are typically imposed that limit loans for condominiums, including having too many renter - occupied units in the complex, too many units owned by one party (as is the case at Red Sandstone where the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District owns seven units) and mixed /commercial uses on site. At least one local lender will not provide any long -term, fixed rate loans on condos at this point in time. A limit on the number of loans that can be made by a mortgage company on any one project is also common to limit their exposure (usually calculated as a percentage of total units in the development). The interest rate for mortgages on condominiums may also be higher or require more points. The condominium approval process can be intertwined with deed restriction approval procedures. Since FHA no longer allows "spot" loans within condominium projects, FHA approval of the entire project is required. In Eagle County Few projects (maybe only one) have current FHA approvals in place. None of the deed restricted housing in Vail is FHA approved or has a Fannie Mae master project approval. Leased Land Mortgage lenders typically accept land leases provided that the term extends beyond the term of the loan by a specified number of years. While leases complicate the mortgage application since underwriters must review and approve the lease with every application, they do not significantly limit the types of loans available. ARM's While most borrowers prefer loans where their payment is fixed for typically 15 or 30 years, most of the buyers of deed restricted units in Vail have obtained 5 or 7 year ARM's amortized over 30 years with a five point maximum lifetime increase in the interest rate. The initial interest rate on ARM's has been very low in recent years — below 3 %, and the annual adjustments have not been to the maximums allowed since fixed rates have been held low by Federal Reserve polices for a relatively long time. In other words, ARMS have provided the lowest, most affordable payments possible and have been stable in recent years. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 46 Draft 4 -3 -14 Interest rates are going to rise, however. Fixed rates have increased one percentage point since last year. Mortgage lenders generally feel that rates will remain mostly stable through this year but will increase starting next year as the Federal Reserve backs down from its economic stimulus efforts. The Impacts of Interest Rates on Affordability Interest rates have a profound impact on housing affordability. For every 1/4 point difference that rates rise between 4.5% (about the current average for a 30 -year fixed rate mortgage) and 5.5 %, a buyer's borrowing capacity decreases by nearly 3 %. A one point increase in the rate, as occurred in 2013, would drop the affordable purchase price for a household with an income of around 80% AMI by $20,000 to $25,000. According to a recent quote, the interest rate on ARMs is about 3% for 5 years and 3.5% for 7 years. The monthly payment for a $250,000 ARM at 3.5% with a 5 point lifetime cap could increase 73% during a period of rising interest rates, from less than $1,100 to nearly $1,900 in five to seven years. Interest Rate Comparison for Adjustable Rate Mortgages Starting Rate Maximum Rate Loan Amount $250,000 $250,000 Interest rate 3.25% 8.25% Monthly Payment (principal & interest) $1,088 $1,878 Down Payment Assistance Eagle County's down payment program was adjusted in recent years to limit the amount provided to no more than 3.5% of the purchase price. The program has not been utilized much since this change, however. The availability of funds is currently good. The program is ideal for use with FHA mortgages; however, the fact that few deed restricted projects are approved by FHA is likely reducing its utilization. Borrower Profile Most of the applicants for mortgages on deed restricted units are first time buyers. They tend to be young singles or families, though there seems to be an increase in middle aged borrowers. Many have credit issues. One lender indicated about 70% can eventually qualify while 30% cannot. Since the recession, credit problems have become more frequent. Very few have a 20% down payment and thus must obtain a government loan or pay for private mortgage insurance. At Miller Ranch, which is the largest of the deed restricted properties and has had the highest number of sales, between 30% and 50% of buyers have obtained USDA mortgages, which allow loans up to 102% of price or appraised value in order to cover the program's up -front costs. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 47 Draft 4 -3 -14 IX. Conclusions and Recommendations Market conditions appear to be prime now for proceeding with the development of Chamonix. The availability of housing affordable for households with incomes between 60% and 140% AMI to purchase is small while potential demand appears to be more than sufficient for the absorption of 53 additional homes. Specifically: • The economy is recovering with growth in jobs and significant reductions in unemployment. Projections call for continuation of this trend and population growth of 2% to 2.9% per year through 2020. • The housing market is rebounding. The number and choice of free market homes for sale down valley has decreased and prices are starting to rise. Bargains have disappeared and the number of foreclosures and bank sales has dropped sharply. • The deed restricted units currently in Vail have performed well. All units that have been listed for sale have sold, commanding the maximum allowable price appreciation. • The inventory of deed restricted units available for sale down valley has largely disappeared. There are five listings currently, all of which have been placed on the market this year. All units listed for sale in 2013 were sold or removed from the market by the end of 2013. • Rental availability is becoming increasingly limited and rents are rising; current average market rents are within the range that it would cost to purchase a Chamonix home at the targeted incomes. • Demand for deed restricted ownership opportunities is increasing with a record number of sales at Miller Ranch last year, an increase in lottery applicants (both Town of Vail and the Valley Home Store), and approximately 100 pre - qualified applicants on the County's Master Buyers List. Knowledge that the housing market has bottomed out and that prices are starting to rise, combined with concerns about interest rate increases, are spurring residents to buy. • Potential demand from households that are most likely to buy at Chamonix (i.e., households that now rent in or near Vail, have incomes in the 60% to 140% AMI range, and have from one to five members) appears be to be adequate for the proposed units with a low required capture rate of less than 4 %. To be responsive to demand and competition with limited but nonetheless attractive choices, some modifications to the existing development plan are recommended. These include some revisions to Master Plan concepts (unit mix and size) and additional recommendations for pricing, amenities /design features, marketing and mortgage options to enhance marketability of the proposed homes. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 48 Draft 4 -3 -14 Competition From within Vail Competition from within Vail is very limited. Of the units listed for sale under $500,000, only three condominium units and one townhome could be considered comparable to the proposed Chamonix units in terms of their suitability for year -round workforce households. While they offer a choice for households that might consider Chamonix, they are 42 to 48 years old and have no garages, outdated /inefficient heating systems, and HOA dues that are likely higher than will be charged at Chamonix. The one with an EHU restriction in place has been on the market for about one year. Interest in the unrestricted units has been higher, in part due to developers wanting to buy units to satisfy their employee housing requirements. Their price range from $432,500 to $495,000 sets an upper limit for Chamonix. Only two units in Vail with full deed restrictions as envisioned for Chamonix are listed for sale or soon will be, with maximum allowable prices of $212,544 and $236,248. The competition that Chamonix will create for current owners who desire to sell their deed restricted homes should be a concern only if the new units are priced lower than existing units. From Down Volley A total of 78 units down valley from Vail were listed for sale through the MLS in early April at prices less than $500,000. Prices per square foot were far lower than in Vail and decreased the farther down valley the units were located (527 in Vail, $308 in Edwards, $212 in Eagle and $193 in Gypsum). The free market is not generating significant competition in Edwards — only a few condominiums and townhomes were in this price range. A couple of small single family homes were listed for sale in Eagle for less than $400,000, but Gypsum is the only community were buyers can choose among new single family homes in the $300,000 to $500,000 range. The competition generated by homes in Gypsum and, to a smaller degree, Eagle for families with children should decline as the market continues its recovery. Regardless, the distance and the difference between Vail and Gypsum is so great, that attempting to set prices for Chamonix based on prices in Gypsum is not necessary — direct competition with these units will be limited. The deed restricted homes down valley, particularly in Edwards, provide attractive alternatives to purchasing at Chamonix. The neighborhoods like Miller Ranch, Eagle Ranch and Stratton Flats are attractive, well designed, near schools and parks and convenient to many jobs. They offer single family homes, which Chamonix will not provide. Yet availability is now low and no new deed restricted developments are currently planned. Five deed restricted homes were listed for sale in Edwards and Eagle through the Valley Home Store as of late April, with list prices that ranged from $183,000 for a condominium to $390,000 for a single family home at Miller Ranch. Miller Ranch will pose the greatest competition since it has so many units (282), has K -12 schools within a short walk, is a much shorter commute for employees working in the Vail area than Eagle or Gypsum, offers a variety of unit types (15 different models ranging from condominiums to single family), offers a wide range of pricing and is in Edwards, which appeals to singles as well as families. While the Chamonix site is suitable for housing, the proximity to commercial uses and the lack of schools and parks within Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 49 Draft 4 -3 -14 walking distance make it less desirable for families with children. The pricing and value of homes at Miller Ranch should be considered when designing and setting prices for Chamonix. Family Orientation Approximately 20% to 30% of the buyers at Chamonix will have children. Expectations that Chamonix will primarily target families is counter to experience among other properties, demographic trends and resident preferences. Specifically: • 25% of the county's households that prefer to live in Vail include at least one child. • 24% of the deed restricted units in Vail are occupied by households with at least one child. 32% of the renter households with incomes in the targeted income range have three or more members, but this figure includes roommate households; 28% live alone and 40% are two - person households. These statistics reflect what all of the key informants interviewed as part of this study relayed - households with school age children have housing options down valley that better meet their family's needs and preferences. Few families have moved back to Vail when three - bedroom homes have become available; the large majority of applicants for those homes lived in or near Vail. Chamonix will be ideal for couples, however, who plan to have children. Over time, the number of households with children living at Chamonix will probably increase. Income Targets and Pricing The Master Plan target of 60% AMI to 140% AMI is a wide range to serve in one 58 -unit development. Prices that are affordable for 60% AMI households would be much lower than what a household earning 140% AMI could afford and would likely pay for a larger /higher quality home. In 2014 figures, the income range would extend from less than $40,000 to over $120,000. Serving this entire range will necessitate a wage range of prices, from about $135,000 to just over $450,000. At the upper end, pricing units at the 140% AMI level is not recommended for several reasons: • Single family homes are available in Edwards at Miller Ranch for less ($350,000 - $390,000). Historically, deed restricted housing in Vail has been priced at similar or lower levels than at Miller Ranch. • The market is providing housing in this price range in Vail. While only four units were listed in early April for less than $500,000 that are well suited for ownership by year round residents, buyers generally expect deed restricted units to be priced below the free market. There are relatively few renter households residing within the Vail /up- valley area that have incomes at and above 140% AMI. The income distribution shows a drop in households between 100% and 120% depending upon household size. Of the relatively few with incomes above $140% AMI, most are two - person households and many of them are likely roommate households. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 50 Draft 4 -3 -14 While some households may want to move up from existing deed restricted homes in Vail, the incomes of these households are not known and the step up would large in terms of price. For example, the last two- bedroom unit at Vail Commons to sell was priced just over $250,000. To purchase a three - bedroom home priced around $450,000 for 140% AMI households would result in a significant increase in the monthly payment. Unless research on existing residents of Vail's deed restricted homes documents move up desire and capacity, Chamonix pricing should not extend to the 140 %AMI level. At the lower end, developing units for households with incomes as low as 60% AMI (roughly $135,000 to $175,000) will require substantial subsidies. It will also likely be more challenging for households at this income level to obtain mortgages. There are a significant number of renters with incomes in the 60% to 80% AMI range, but there are more with incomes between 80% and 100% AMI. It is therefore recommended that prices at Chamonix: • Be primarily affordable for households in the 80% to 120% range. If sufficient subsidies are available, providing some units for 60% AMI households should be considered, but pricing as high as 140% AMI is not advised at this time. • Be set lower than at maximum affordable levels. For example, to serve households with incomes at 80% AMI, prices should be set at 75% AMI, or even lower during periods of rising interest rates. • Possibly be structured using income tiers. In other words, identical units could sell for different amounts. This pricing technique is common for deed restricted units where the restrictions impose income limits. This has not been the way that Vail's deed restrictions have been structured in the past. • Be set with the expectation that interest rates will rise. Unit Size, Type and Bedroom Mix To serve a variety of households with incomes in the 80% AMI to 120% AMI variety in unit type and size is recommended. Specifically: • The size range should be expanded. As proposed, units would range in size from 1,292 for two - bedroom flats to 1,632 square feet for three bedroom duplexes. These sizes are relatively large. o Two - bedroom flats could be as small as 800 to 900 square feet and still be very livable provided that garage /storage space is provided. o Townhomes could range from 1,200 to 1,400, perhaps smaller depending upon price. o Duplexes units would be attractive as currently envisioned (1,632 SF) but could be marketable at 1,300 to 1,400 square feet. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 51 Draft 4 -3 -14 • Consideration should be given to reducing the number of condominiums and offering townhomes. Each unit could have a south facing wall, private garages might be feasible, mortgage availability /pricing would improve, the development would lend itself more readily to phasing, and it would allow for private outdoor space. • Provide variety within unit types, perhaps two or three models, so as to allow for a wider range of pricing, provide more choice for buyers and enhance marketability. • The bedroom mix could be adjusted to offer slightly fewer three - bedroom units. Existing deed restricted properties already disproportionately accommodates families with about 30% of units (not counting EHU's) having three bedrooms. As now proposed, 38% of the Chamonix units will have three bedrooms. Mortgage Availability Mortgage availability for the proposed Chamonix units will be complicated by: • Deed restrictions limiting purchase to eligible households; • Building at least some of the units as condominiums; and • Developing the project on land leased from the Town of Vail. With interest rates on the rise, the availability of 30 -year, fixed rate mortgages will become more important to the marketability of deed restricted housing. Although most of Vail's buyers have been willing to obtain ARMS in the past, more borrowers prefer a 30 -year fixed rate and, with rate increases, will insist upon it. Furthermore, limitations on mortgage availability will negatively impact Chamonix's competiveness relative to Miller Ranch, where about half of the buyers in recent years have obtained USDA loans with the lowest fixed rates available and no down payment. To increase the type of mortgages available and the lowest /most competitive interest rates for borrowers: • Consider redesign of the proposed flats and lofts so that all or at least some of the units are townhomes rather than condominiums. • Work with local lenders to obtain approval of the deed restrictions and land leases so that both conventional, government (USDA, FHA and VA) and portfolio loan products are available. • Explore obtaining Fannie Mae and FHA direct approval of the project. • Divide the development into multiple HOA's so that the duplex units and townhome units, if built, are not subject to the same limitations and rates as condominium units. • Provide a lender referral packet to applicants that describes the various loan projects each lender offers and compares fixed to adjustable rate alternatives. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 52 Draft 4 -3 -14 Marketing Vail's once a year lottery system has worked adequately for resales and project- specific lotteries have generated sufficient buyers in the past. Chamonix will be the largest deed restricted development built to date in Vail, however. Given this, the following steps are recommended to enhance sales: • Provide a more flexible sale system than a single project lottery. • Pre -sell to allow for interior finish choices. • Work with the Valley Home Store to access their Master Buyers List. Amenities /Design Features To enhance the livability and competitiveness of the Chamonix homes, the following should be provided: • Garages, space for parking at least two cars per unit and adequate guest parking; • Additional storage suitable for bikes, skis and other recreational gear; • Small fenced outdoor areas for small children and dogs; • Functional common outdoor areas; • Access to sunlight and views (each unit should ideally have some south facing exposure); • A mud room; • Adequate sound proofing from 1 -70 noise; • A landscaped buffer between the site and the adjacent commercial uses; • Energy efficiency; and • Convenient pedestrian access to the bus stop. It is important to make the outdoor areas at Chamonix functional for more than open /green space. The semi - private areas between the duplexes should be fenced. The green areas on either ends of the parcel should be developed for use, perhaps a dog park and a playground. The areas between the row of duplexes and multifamily units to the south should be usable yet not too noisy. Phasing If the recommendations provided herein are followed with variety in unit type, size, pricing and mortgage availability in combination with well- designed units, desirable amenities and a flexible marketing system, phasing will likely not be necessary. Applications and presales could be used to test the validity of this conclusion, with adjustments made if it appears that the length of time for the units to sell will exceed the Town's ability to retain ownership of units after their completion. Construction phasing would be inconvenient and disruptive to initial buyers, would be more costly in the long run and would be difficult for condominium units. Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 53 Draft 4 -3 -14 Appendix Change in Renter Households: 2000 - 2010 2000 # renter - households 1,032 2,917 5,499 renter - households 47.7% 48.0% 36.3% 2010 # renter - households 1,340 3,336 6,893 renter - households 51.5% 49.3% 35.8% % Change in renter households 29.8% 14.4% 25.4% # Change in renter households 308 419 1,394 Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census Renter Household Composition by Area, 2010 MW� Vail # Renter Households 1,340 Up Valley 3,336 Eagle County 6,893 Renter - Occupied 51.5% 49.7% 35.8% 18% 4- person 8% 12% Renter Households by Type 5+ person 2% 8% Family, no children 11% 15% 18% Family, with children 8% 19% 29% Living alone 36% 29% 26% Non - family, roommates 45% 37% 27% 100% 100% 100% Source: 2010 US Census Renter Household Size by Area, 2010 Persons per Unit 1- person 2- person !fail Mr 36% 37% Up Valley 29% 32% Eagle 26% 30% 3- person 16% 18% 18% 4- person 8% 12% 14% 5+ person 2% 8% 13% Average size 2.04 2.45 2.68 Source: 2010 US Census Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 54 Draft 4 -3 -14 Change in Age of Renter Households: 2000 — 2010 Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census For -Sale Listings in Vail, At or Under $500,000 April 2, 2013 Price Vail 1,032 Up Valley 2,917 'Eagle County 5,499 2000 (total renter households) 15 to 24 years 21% 22% 17% 25 to 34 years 46% 44% 40% 35 to 44 years 16% 18% 22% 45 to 54 years 10% 11% 14% 55 to 64 years 5% 4% 4% 65 years and over 2% 1% 3% 2010 (total renter households) 1,340 3,336 6,893 15 to 24 years 15% 14% 11% 25 to 34 years 42% 42% 36% 35 to 44 years 19% 21% 24% 45 to 54 years 12% 13% 16% 55 to 64 years 7% 7% 9% 65 years and over 4% 3% 4% East Vail 100% 100% 100% Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census For -Sale Listings in Vail, At or Under $500,000 April 2, 2013 Price Project /Area Bdrms Baths Scl Ft Price /SF Yr Built Type $248,500 East Vail 2 1 797 $312 1965 Condo $267,500 1 1 705 $379 1971 Condo $275,000 short term rental 1 1 835 $329 1973 Condo $279,000 Sandstone 1 1 530 $526 1974 Condo $289,000 1 1 576 $502 1973 Condo $299,000 1 1 576 $519 1973 Condo $299,900 East Vail 2 1 865 $347 1965 Condo $300,000 1 1 728 $412 1980 Condo $309,900 Vail Racquet Club 1 1 576 $538 1973 Condo $318,000 2 1 901 $353 1970 Condo $350,000 2 1 882 $397 1970 Condo $390,000 2 2 990 $394 1980 Condo $415,000 Vail Racquet Club 2 2 864 $480 1979 Condo $415,000 Vail Racquet Club 2 2 864 $480 1975 Condo $420,000 Vail Racquet Club 2 2 864 $486 1979 Condo $429,000 Vail Racquet Club 2 2 864 $497 1976 Condo Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 55 $432,500 $432,500 $435,000 $475,000 $489,000 $495,000 $495,000 $495,000 $499,000 $499,000 $499,000 Source: Vail Area Chamonix Ln Chamonix Ln Chamonix Ln Lionshead East Vail Lionshead East Vail Lions Sq. Lodge Lions Sq. Lodge Lions Sq. Lodge Realtors MILS MLS Listings - VRB.net Edwards 4/8/2014 Price $210,500 $309,000 $310,000 $315,000 $325,000 $329,000 $379,000 $397,900 $399,000 $399,500 $430,000 $438,000 $488,000 $490,000 $495,000 Draft 4 -3 -14 2 2 1103 $392 1972 TH 2 2 1110 $390 1972 TH 3 3 1792 $243 1972 Condo 3 2 1480 3 1969 Condo 1 1 506 $966 1972 Condo 2 3 1500 $330 1967 Duplex 0 1 308 $1,607 1971 Condo 2 2 1223 $405 1973 Condo 0 1 660 $756 1971 Condo 0 1 660 $756 1971 Condo 0 1 660 $756 1971 Condo Bdrms SF 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 924 1393 1259 1415 849 1415 1229 1884 1333 756 1293 1089 1078 2163 1505 Type Condo Condo Condo Condo Condo Condo Condo TH Condo Condo Condo Condo Condo TH Condo Eagle $189,900 2 908 Condo $299,000 2 1334 TH $312,500 2 1016 Duplex $324,000 3 1809 TH $325,000 3 1798 SF $325,000 2 938 SF $329,000 2 968 SF $335,000 3 1765 TH $335,000 3 1717 TH Price /SF $227.81 $221.82 $246.23 $222.61 $382.80 $232.51 $308.38 $211.20 $299.32 $528.44 $332.56 $402.20 $452.69 $226.54 $328.90 $308.27 $209.14 $224.14 $307.58 $179.10 $180.76 $346.48 $339.88 $189.80 $195.11 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 56 Draft 4 -3 -14 $341,000 3 1739 TH $196.09 $345,000 3 1717 TH $200.93 $349,000 3 1784 TH $195.63 $349,000 3 1702 Duplex $205.05 $375,000 3 2004 SF $187.13 $400,000 6 2582 SF $154.92 $407,000 3 2092 Duplex $194.55 $445,000 4 2756 SF $161.47 $447,000 3 1892 SF $236.26 $469,500 5 2905 SF $161.62 $497,500 3 2453 SF $202.81 $499,995 3 2822 Duplex $177.18 $211.70 Gypsum $149,900 3 1152 SF /mod $130.12 $245,000 4 1647 SF $148.76 $319,900 2 1213 SF $263.73 $349,900 3 2029 SF $172.45 $387,000 4 2992 Duplex $129.34 $395,000 4 2014 SF $196.13 $418,000 3 2006 SF $208.37 $449,000 3 2006 SF $223.83 $449,000 4 1996 SF $224.95 $450,000 4 2003 Duplex $224.66 $465,000 3 1816 SF $256.06 $477,000 3 2103 SF $226.82 $479,900 6 3705 SF $129.53 $485,000 5 4130 SF $117.43 $489,000 4 2948 SF $165.88 $489,000 3 1860 SF $262.90 $192.56 Rees Consulting, Inc. 1/20/2015 57 TOWN OF VAI N VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion about vacancy and appointment to Commission on Special Events (CSE). PRESENTER(S): Patty McKenny, Town Clerk ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: No formal action is taken at this time, however, Town Council will need to appoint another person to CSE during the evening session. BACKGROUND: Town Council will discuss the recent December interviews and candidates for one vacancy which exists on the Commission on Special Events (CSE). One vacancy exists because of the recent resignation from Nicole Whitaker. ATTACHMENTS: Memo CSE Appointment 2015 1/20/2015 0 rowN of vain Memorandum To: Mayor and Town Council From: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Date: January 13, 2015 Subject: Appointment to Commission on Special Events due to recent resignation With the recent resignation from Nicole Whitaker who is leaving the Vail Valley, the Town Council will appoint someone to the Commission on Special Events to serve the remainder of her term. Since the interview and selection process were just held last month, it was decided to review this list again prior to any additional posting. The table below reflects the names of those persons who were interviewed at a work session on December 2, 2014, and have been confirmed as still having interest in serving on the Commission. Please refer to Channel 5 Public Access TV website link below to access the December 2, 2014 meeting at which time interviews were conducted with this group. Be sure to click the Video Library and select the video that is titled "Work Session Part Two for December 2, 2014" and the interviews are at the start of this meeting. Link: http:// publicaccess5 .orgNideoLibrary.cfm Town of Vail 1/20/2015 Page 1 CRITERIA: 2) 3) own 1) resident in property business 4) employed w /in Name Vail owner in Vail Vail 1 John Bailey No No No Yes Eagle Nest Restaurant General Manager 2 Amy Cassidy No No No Yes Vail Info Inc in Vail 3 Robert Dahl Part-time Yes No No resident 30 to 40% 4 Shenna Jean Yes No No Yes Engleman Lululemon Athletica Store 5 Rebecca Yes Yes No Yes Seely Elway's Vail Restaurant Vail Resorts - ski instructor 6 Matt No No No Yes Whittington East West Resorts Asst. General Manager & On -Site Broker Eagle Point Resort Please refer to Channel 5 Public Access TV website link below to access the December 2, 2014 meeting at which time interviews were conducted with this group. Be sure to click the Video Library and select the video that is titled "Work Session Part Two for December 2, 2014" and the interviews are at the start of this meeting. Link: http:// publicaccess5 .orgNideoLibrary.cfm Town of Vail 1/20/2015 Page 1 The CSE consists of seven (7) voting members appointed, at large, by the town council. All seven (7) voting members shall be residents of the Town of Vail, own real property within the town of Vail, own a business in the Town of Vail, or be employed within the Town of Vail. The term of this appointment will expire December 2015 (at the end of Ms. Whitaker's term), see table below for current members and terms. Jeff Andrews I Dec. 2015 Marco Valenti Dec. 2016 Alison Wadey Dec. 2016 Barry Davis Dec. 2016 Mark Gordon Rayla Kundolf Nicole Whitaker Dec. 2016 Dec. 2015 Dec. 2015 The CSE supports Town Council's goals and objectives and makes decisions in alignment with the Town Council's marketing direction. Their mission is to support and assess a diverse collection of special events, both large and small, which promote Vail's economic vitality, sense of community and increase the quality year -round of the experience for guests and residents. Attachments: ■ Letters of Interest/ Resumes from Candidates 1/20/2015 Town of Vail Page 2 Patty McKenny From: John Bailey <JBailey @vailresorts.com> Sent: Friday, November 07, 201412:57 PM To: Patty McKenny Subject: CSE board Dear Vail Town Council: I am writing to express my interest in joining the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. I have been employed in the Town of Vail for over 25 years and currently work as General Manager of Eagle's Nest restaurants for Vail Resorts. I have been involved with helping organize summer mountain bicycling events in Vail since 1989. Each year I layout the GoPro Games mountain bike race course working with the Vail Valley Foundation. I have volunteered with the Town of Eagle to help bring the Colorado High School State Mountain Bike Championships to Eagle. During the winter I assist with logistics for the Taste of Vail picnic on Eagle's Nest ridge. I have been an active member of ECO Trails since 1997. 1 work professionally with land agencies and was an appointed member of the Resource Action Sub - Committee which wrote the new BLM Travel Management Plan. I was a member of the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Organizing committee that designed and managed the mountain bike race. I am currently helping some outside promoters with potential plans to bring some additional cycling events to Vail. I feel my years of experience with special events, ability to work well in committees including land agencies plus knowledge of the area will help me contribute to the CSE. Thank you for your time and consideration for a spot on the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. John Bailey ilbailevs @msn.com 970 - 331 -9053 John Bailey General Manager Eagles Nest Restaurants Phone: 970 - 754 -4543 Fax: 970 - 754 -4573 4baileyCaD-vailresorts.com VAIL Like nothing on earth. '1 VA L 2; Home of the 2015 World Alpine Ski Championships The information contained in this message is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the sender immediately, stating that you have received the message in error, then please delete this e-mail. Thank you. 1/20/12015 Isa. November 17, 2014 Vail Town Council Attn: Patty McKenny 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Ms. McKenny: It is with great pleasure that I submit to you and the Vail Town Council my intent to apply for a renewed term on the Vail Commission on Special Events (CSE). I was appointed to the board in December 2012 and have served diligently and effectively since my appointment. I am currently employed by Vail Info Inc. in Vail and do contract work for other clients in the Vail Valley and Summit County. I also publish Visit Vail Valley The Official Visitor's Guide to the Vail Valley on behalf of the Vail Valley Partnership. With over 20 years of experience locally in tourism and hospitality marketing, advertising and publishing, I am able to bring a unique perspective and level of experience to the board in its discussions and decisions surrounding special events and their potential impact within the Town of Vail. As a full -time resident of the Vail Valley since 1984, I have a passion for seeing Vail succeed and solidify its position as the Premier International Mountain Resort Community. I look forward to answering any questions the council members may have at its work session on December 2, 2014. In the meantime, should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 970 - 390 -5612 or cassidv @vail.net. Best regards, Amy Cassidy 1/20/2015 Patty McKenny From: robert dahl <snoopdahl @yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 4:23 PM To: Patty McKenny Subject: CSE Application Attachments: Robert Dahl Resume.pdf, Rob and Julie Oktoberfest jpg Dear Mr. Mayor, ladies and gentleman of Vail Town Council, This email is to introduce myself and apply for one of the vacancies on the Commission on Special Events (CSE). My name is Robert Dahl. I have been a lifelong visitor to the Town and resort of Vail and a property owner and part time resident since 2012. As a student of Vail's history, I have developed a great love for our town as well as for the people and places that make up it's current vitality and colorful past. When not in Vail, I live and own a restaurant in Fort Collins where I was born and raised. My beautiful wife of 11 years also has great affection for Vail. Her family has roots here dating back to the 60's. We started coming here, as a couple, in the early 2000's. In addition to the outdoor recreation we have enjoyed several of the special events hosted by the Town. We can be considered, somewhat, of a success story for the Council and CSE. Certain annual events, Oktoberfest and Fourth of July in particular, turned into yearly vacations for us. We've enjoyed several different lodging properties over the years, old Vail properties and new Vail properties from East Vail to Lionshead. We've dined and shopped at nearly every establishment in town. We are proud to call many of the hotel, restaurant, retail shop owners, real estate professionals, and several of the various workers our friends. Recently, our love of this place led us to buy property in East Vail and we now spend 30-40% of our time here. Our story started with family ties around the founding of the Town, to day visits that grew into extended weekends and week long vacations, to finally purchasing real estate and living here part time. It's time, for me, to become more of a participant in the community, not just a consumer. I appreciate the role the CSE plays in our community and I believe my experience would be an asset. My situation as a resident of both Vail and the Front Range gives me a unique perspective that could be valuable to the CSE. I am part of a highly desired demographic (Front Range mid -30's professional) and also a resident who understands the benefits and challenges that special events, big and small, have on our community services (police, transportation, parking etc.). As a restaurant owner, I also understand how different events can be a benefit or a detriment to sales and business traffic. I think the CSE does an outstanding job with it's mission to create a successful special event strategy. I understand the responsibilities of carefully reviewing event applications, responsibly allocating funds, working in partnership with event coordinators, Town staff, resort officials, and effectively communicating with local businesses. I feel my aforementioned experience and love for our community would make me a desirable candidate to serve on the CSE and I hope to be considered. Thank you, Robert Dahl 1/20/12015 ROBERT R. DAHL 3452 WIDEFIELD CT., LOVELAND, CO 80538 • (970) 213 -6069 4650 VAIL RACQUET CLUB DR. 11 -09, VAIL, CO 81657 EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT /ENTREPRENEUR Strategic Planning • Product Development • Marketing • Effective Interpersonal Relations Accomplished restaurant owner with more than nineteen years of expertise in restaurant and business management, cost control, menu and conceptual development, strategic planning, human resources, training, marketing, and superior customer service. Skilled in determining, developing and securing funding for successful business growth. Excels in demanding, dynamic environments while maintaining a pragmatic and focused vision. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Mackenzie's Pub & Grill 1995- Present Owner and CEO, 2002 - Present General Manager, 2001 Kitchen Manager, 1997 -1998 Head Cook and Bartender, 1996 -2000 Cook, 1995 Key Accomplishments • Established an unblemished financial history and excellent credit line • Received excellent health department ratings • No liquor violations of any kind • Increased profitability despite drop in golfer numbers • Renegotiated City of Fort Collins lease and contract for 2002 and 2006 • Personally coordinated catering services for the highest volume tournament schedule in Northern Colorado • Maintained expenses below budget through accurate planning, waste reduction, purchasing and cost - effective operating procedures Management/Administration • Accountable for budgeting, cost control, payroll, general accounting, and full profit and loss statements • Created and standardized new recipes, specials and beverages through effective conceptual development • Food and beverage purchasing • Developed and maintained relationships with five food vendors and countless beverage vendors to ensure top quality of food and beverage products • Constant involvement in all aspects of restaurant management, including developing relationships directly with customers, achieved by working 60 -70 hours per week • Purchased/leased additional beverage carts to ensure superior coverage for tournaments and league events ... continued... 1/20/2015 ROBERT R. DAHL • PAGE 2 Human Resources • Management of all aspects of employee relations including recruitment, payroll, goal building and retention of a staff of 25 employees • Rigorously trained employees in all aspects of the restaurant industry, while focusing on customer service skills, food and beverage preparation and sanitation • Crisis management • Wrote and compiled a thorough employee handbook outlining guidelines, rules and laws City of Ft. Collins SouthRidge Golf Course 2000 -2001 Maintenance crew and equipment operator • Managed construction of rain shelters • Performed daily operation of golf course maintenance • Trained on maintenance equipment operation and safety Fiddlestiks Dessert Cafe & Bakery 1999 -2000 Head Cook and Supervisor • Key originator of concept design and layout of restaurant • Created high quality, original menu items on a daily basis • Food and beverage purchasing • Supervision and training of staff • Menu item pricing East Coast Pizza Cook 1996 -1999 • Cooked for highest sales volume per square foot restaurant in a mall food court • Responsible for daily cash reconciliation Purgatory Ski Resort 1995 -1996 Head Cook • Responsible for food ordering • Created original recipes for a fine dining menu • Supervised dish washer and prep -cook staff EDUCATION AND CREDENTIALS Equivalent Associates of Applied Sciences in Hospitality and Food Management: Front Range Community College ServeSafe Certification for Excellence in Food Safety Studies Larimer County Health Department ACE Food Sanitation Certification 1/20/2015 Shenna Engleman 1136 Sandstone Dr A102 Vail, CO 81657 11/20/14 Hi Patty! My name is Shenna Engleman and I would very much like to be considered to be a member of the Commission on Special Events for the Town of Vail. I currently manage the lululemon athletica store on Gore Creek Drive and live in Vail proper. My time with lululemon has given me extensive experience on building community, as it is a pillar of our business. As a company we value relationships in our community more than anything else; we look to support those around us and help everyone grow and prosper. My strengths as a leader lie in quickly getting related to others, listening to build partnerships, enrolling a team or group of people in a common vision and getting them into action. How all of that directly benefits the CSE is that I have experience in creating, planning, and budgeting for events, as well as enrolling partners to support and execute when the time is right. In my time in Vail, I have made it my priority to connect and support the local business owners of our community. I value their partnership and I'm always looking to see what we can create for our communities that didn't before exist. I would add great perspective to the CSE given the location of the business I run. Gore Creek Drive is home to a significant amount of events throughout the year and I can speak authentically to how they impact and support local businesses in the direct neighborhood. Living in Vail proper also gives me the perspective on the impact events have to the residents of Vail, to ensure we're best serving them. I am passionate and proud about living in the Vail Valley! I would love nothing more than the opportunity to support our continued growth and success as we bring events to our community that bring in guests from all over the world. I look forward to meeting you and discussing the opportunity at hand. Thanks for your consideration! Sincerely, Shenna Jean Engleman 1/20/2015 S. Se4 . Becky.Seely @gmail.com • (303) 249 -3010 4295 Columbine Drive, #2A • Vail, CO 81657 November 191h, 2014 Dear Vail Town Council, I am very interested in being a part of the Vail Commission on Special Events. My experience, love of events, and passion for the Vail Valley would make me a perfect fit for this role. My experience with events has developed the ability within me to be exacting when reviewing the development of an event so that I can see the overall impact as well as each individual detail. I'm able to notice when an event planner has taken all aspects into consideration and has thought through the details thoroughly to make sure the event would bring a positive impact on the Vail community, align with the Vail brand, and gain positive media coverage for Vail. Although I have only been a full time resident and property owner in Vail for just over a year, I've spent many years visiting and living part time in Vail and can bring the perspective as someone who lived in Denver full time for 10 years. Since Denver is a major market for tourism in Vail, I can provide some added understanding of the demographics of this major geographic region that is important to events in Vail. As we move into the future, I believe that bringing events that build the reputation of Vail, build the sense of community, increase tax revenue, and use sustainable practices to show that Vail is world class place to host large events is important. I'm committed to working the other members of the Commission to bring events to Vail that will provide guests with the experience of a lifetime to create long - lasting memories of their time in Vail. Thank you for your time and consideration! Becky Becky Seely 1/20/2015 S. s Becky.Seely @gmail.com • (303) 249 -3010 4295 Columbine Drive, #2A • Vail, CO 81657 Objective A position on the Vail Commission on Special Events that utilizes my skills in event planning, marketing, and sales to help bring and execute world class events in Vail. Education University of South Carolina • Columbia, SC May 2005 Bachelor of Science in Sports and Entertainment Management GPA 3.8 Emphasis on event planning and management including music festivals and sporting events Volunteer VVMC • Vail, CO Aug 2014 - present Experience -Plan social and fundraising events for the VVMC volunteer corps -Attend Board Meetings to report to the Board of Directors on upcoming events and the results of previous events including expenses and profits gained from fundraising events Junior League of Denver • Denver, CO Sept 2006 -May 2014 -Positions held include Chair of Marketing Colorado Classique (a top 3 selling cookbook for 13 weeks), Chair of Publications, Provisional Chair, Fundraising Research and Development - Planned Colorado Classique debut event including media coordination -Organized and executed personal development classes for JLD members Teva Mountain Games • Vail, CO Intern @ Untraditional Marketing May 2004 -Aug. 2004 - Executed contractual sponsorship elements for the Teva Mountain Games - Coordinated the summer marketing campaign and sponsorships for the Town of Vail Sales and Principal Striking Social • Vail, CO April 2011- present Marketing -Sales of promotional products, social media, event planning and marketing services Experience - Execution and management of all accounts and company finances - Increased sales of promotional products up to 1500% Director of Sales & Marketing Zlux • Lakewood, CO March 2012 -April 2014 Zlux • Lakewood, CO - Planned and executed ad campaigns and media purchases - Developed and designed multiple collateral pieces for 4 different brands - Planned and executed all company events and as many as 12 tradeshows a year Director of Sales Western Media LLC• Northglenn, CO July 2007 -April 2011 -Sales of print advertising - Increased display ad sales by 50% and Internet revenue by 418% in a down economy -Grew display sales year over year at a rate 60 times more than the previous rep Hospitality Elway's Vail Experience Server - Deliver an enjoyable dining experience to guests at the Vail property -Work in a 2 person service team and other servers to provide the best possible service to our guests - Provided the finest personal service so that guests could enjoy a warm, relaxed, yet refined ambiance Ritz- Carlton, Bachelor Gulch Lobby Bar / Pool Server -5 -star standards training - Created an environment where the genuine care and comfort of my guest was the highest mission - Personally complimented by the Ritz - Carlton General Manager for my excellent service 1/20/2015 Patty McKenny From: Matt Whittington < MWhittington @eastwestresorts.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 20141:55 PM To: Patty McKenny Subject: Letter of Interest in CSE Hello Patty, I'm interested in being involved with the Commission on Special Events for the town of Vail. I've lived in the Vail Valley for a little over 12 years and absolutely love Vail and all of its' wonderful activities and events, whether summer or winter. I've worked for East West Resorts for the duration of my time in the valley and have worked my way up from front desk, to supervisor, to Asst. GM and CO Broker. I think the value of Vail, outside of the amazing views, is the truly eclectic and spectacular events and activities throughout the year that gets people excited, both tourists and locals, to keep coming back. Having said that, I would love the opportunity to be a part of anything that continues the great success that Vail has enjoyed. Also I would like the chance to become more involved with the community and expand my professional scope to be more beneficial for the Town of Vail as a whole, instead of being limited to my resort or company. Thank you for your consideration. Have a great day, Matthew Whittington Asst. General Manager & On -Site Broker mwhittinetonPeastwestresorts .com Eagle Point Resort 970 - 476 -6905 The information transmitted in this e-mail is the property of East West Resorts, LLC and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and /or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender by responding to this e-mail and delete the material immediately. Nothing in this communication is intended to operate as an electronic signature under law. For more information on East West Resort's privacy policy, please visit http://www.eastwestresort.com/privacy-r)530.aspx 1/20/12015 ►owx of vn' 1[1 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update: 1) EGE Air Alliance Press Release Update - Houston Flight 2) CSE December 3, 2014 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3) VEAC January 13 Meeting Minutes ATTACHMENTS: Houston Release CSE December 3, 2014 DRAFT Meeting Minutes VEAC January 13 2015 Meeting Minutes 1/20/2015 For Immediate Release Summer Houston Flights return to Eagle County Regional Airport for 2015 Flights Will Operate from June 25 to Aug. 17 Vail, Colo. — Dec. 29, 2014 — The EGE Air Alliance today announced the continuation of summer service operated by United Airlines from Houston (IAH) to Eagle County Regional Airport (EGE) three days a week for summer 2015. The nonstop flights will operate from Houston to EGE Thursday, Saturday and Sunday with southbound service from EGE to Houston on Friday, Sunday and Monday. Service will operate June 25 through Aug. 17, 2015. "We are so excited to offer non -stop air service from Houston to EGE for the third summer in a row," said Michael Brown of the Alliance. "Houston is an incredibly important market for Vail in the summertime and we are happy to be able to provide this convenient, non -stop service to visitors from South Texas once again. The flight also provides great connections for travelers from the East Coast, Mexico City and Latin America." Flights are timed conveniently to make later afternoon connections in Houston with an arrival into EGE around 7 p.m. Departure flights leave EGE around 8:30 a.m. with an early afternoon arrival in Houston or late afternoon arrival for most Eastern cities. In addition to offering daily winter - season service to the Houston hub, United also offers daily year -round service to its Denver hub and daily winter - season service to its New York /Newark hub. Travelers will be flying on Boeing 737 -700 aircraft with 118 seats — 12 in United First, and 106 in United Economy, including 40 Economy Plus extra - legroom seats. Summer flights to EGE from Houston are already loaded in the United reservation system and currently can be booked. For reservations, please visit www.united.com or call (800) 864 -8331. For more information on year -round service into EGE, please visit www.FIVVail.com. About the EGE Air Alliance The EGE Air Alliance is a 501 c6 not - for - profit entity dedicated to creating a vibrant flight service program at the Eagle County Regional Airport. The EGE Air Alliance is a public - private partnership with more than 65 supporting participants including local municipalities and private business stakeholders throughout Eagle County. Alliance members — both public and private — recognize the critical importance of the Eagle County Regional Airport to their towns, businesses and the entire community. The organization is committed to increasing air service from new markets in order to improve the experience of guests visiting the area as well as to grow jobs and improve the economic vitality of Eagle County. Located just 35 miles west of Vail, Eagle County 1/20/2015 Airport (EGE) is serviced by four major airlines during the winter season, offering non- stop flights to and from 11 major markets including Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas /Ft. Worth, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis /St. Paul, Newark and New York /Kennedy and Toronto. The airport is serviced by two major airlines during the summer, offering non -stop flights to and from Dallas /Ft. Worth, Denver and Houston. Media Contact: Mike Brown, EGE Air Alliance, mikebrown(aalpinebank.com, (970) 748 -5702 1/20/2015 TOWN OF VAIL Commission on Special Events MINUTES: COMMISSION ON SPECIAL EVENTS MEETING Vail Town Council Chambers 8:30am Wed., Dec. 3, 2014 CSE Members Present: Mark Gordon Jeff Andrews Bobby Bank Barry Davis Rayla Kundolf CSE Members Absent: Nicole Whitaker Amy Cassidy Town of Vail Staff Present: Sybill Navas, CSE Coordinator Kelli McDonald, Economic Development Manager Others Present: Laura Waniuk, Event Liaison Margaret Rogers, Vail Town Council Beth Pappas, Vail Recreation District Brooke Skjonsby, Vail Resorts Marketing AGENDA: Meeting materials can be accessed at the following link: http:// www. vailgov. com /WebLink8 /Browse.aspx ?startid= 48965 &row =1 & & & &d bid =0 CSE Chair, Barry Davis, called the meeting to order at 8:35am Administrative Items • Approval of the Minutes of the CSE Special Meeting Nov. 12, 2014 ➢ Motion to approve the minutes of the CSE Special Meeting, Nov. 12, 2014, as presented. MIS/P: Kundolf /Andrews /Unanimous The motion passed 5 -0 CSE Minutes ReguNfting: Dec. 3, 2014 Page 1 of 4 CSE appointments for terms beginning January 2015: Navas reported that the Town Council, at their evening meeting on Tue., Dec. 2, reappointed CSE members Barry Davis and Mark Gordon and appointed new members, Marco Valenti and Alison Wadey, to serve two year terms beginning in January 2015 and expiring Dec. 31, 2016. Navas expressed thanks to outgoing CSE members, Bobby Bank and Amy Cassidy, for their service to the community. Meeting Dates for 2015 were included in the packets. The CSE discussed the appointment of Marco Valenti, one of the new 2015 Commissioners, and a potential conflict of interest regarding his employer, Specialty Sports /Vail Resorts. The board requested further investigation and guidelines from Matt Mire, Town of Vail legal counsel. McDonald will speak to Mire regarding the legal questions from the CSE. Davis mentioned that in the future it would be good to provide more specific guidelines when the request for new candidates goes out. Rogers commented that the Tier IV category needs further clarification. Andrews said the CSE will create an initial recommendation to town council for the Tier IV category criteria for discussion. More details and criteria are needed for candidates such as charities, donations and other types of events, including fundraisers. Review input received from the Town Council at their meeting on Tues., Dec. 2, and revise and /or approve final 2015 special event funding allocations in accordance with direction received. Davis gave a short update on what was covered in the meeting and the questions the council posed. Andrews said that it would be good to explain to the VLMDAC about some of the Tier IV recipients and how they might come together to create a more cohesive group. Navas mentioned that there are two additional large sporting events coming to town this summer, a baseball tournament in July and a soccer tournament the weekend after GoPro Mountain Games. Neither of these producers requested funding because they weren't aware of the program at that time. Review Conditions of Approval for 2015 event allocations, and determine Tier designations for all funded events. Davis noted that larger funded events are responsible for providing the same information to the CSE as they are to their other large sponsors. The CSE will still implement its own survey. Andrews said that the CSE recap guidelines should state that TIER A events will include both data reports. CSE will provide independent survey services, but will expect that data to be augmented to the extent that all event follow -up information provided to major sponsors will be included in any event review documents CSE Minutes ReguNfting: Dec. 3, 2014 Page 2 of 4 Bank raised the issue of the Cindy Eskwith Memorial Soccer Tournament and how the funding translated into a percentage of the number of room nights that would be directed to various participating communities. The producer proposed the "Stay and Play" concept for Vail. Discussion continued about the amount of funding and relative contributions from other towns. The producer came back and attempted to negotiate a higher dollar amount to guarantee how many rooms would be booked in Vail. Gordon stated the funding should remain at $5,000, but that their recap needs to be very detailed and include where rooms were booked and how many, what the contributions from the other sponsors were and what they received from the Soccer Club in return. Davis said that the benefit for the funding provided by the CSE should be more equitable when compared with the other towns' contributions. Navas stated that Vail has more hotel rooms than any other location in the county and receives a strong benefit from the tournament as a result. Navas will communicate with the producer to explain what is requested of the producer for their event recap to the CSE. Tier designations were determined for all funded events, and the final funding list is attached to this document. Survey Proposal McDonald described the survey proposal. The majority of the survey questions are regarding economic impact to the town. McDonald requested a "snapshot" from RRC to be received 30 days after the event. This data will be provided to the event producer for their recap presentation. The VLMD also pays for a summer survey of guests in Vail. The Vail Resorts research team is used for the summer survey. Andrews asked if there are other opportunities to collect subjective data. McDonald can propose to event producers to work with RRC and add more questions to the survey, at their cost. Gordon requested an agenda item for a future meeting to discuss venues and challenges for event producers. The CSE may want to have Stan Zemler and Matt Mire in attendance to discuss Solaris venue requirements. Rogers mentioned the Town Council was discussing venues for future town planning. This is an opportunity for the CSE to provide a presentation or recommendations on existing venues. Final approval of 2015 CSE overall budget ➢ Motion to approve the 2015 Event Funding allocations and conditions. M /S /P: Kundolf /Gordon /Unanimous The motion passed 5 -0. ➢ Motion to approve the overall 2015 CSE budget, as presented. M /S /P: Bank /Davis /Unanimous The motion passed 5 -0. New Business and Community Input Jeff Andrews thanked Margaret Rogers for her contributions to the CSE as liaison from the Vail Town Council. ➢ Motion to Adjourn at 10:01am M /S /P: Kundolf /Andrews /Unanimous The motion passed 5 -0. CSE Minutes Regul lWing: Dec. 3, 2014 Page 3 of 4 There will be a breakfast /coffee gathering to welcome new members in lieu of the January CSE meeting 8:30am, Wed. Jan. 7, 2015 Location TBD Next Regular Monthly CSE Meeting: 8:30am, Wed., Feb. 4 Vail Town Council Chambers CSE Minutes ReguN&fting: Dec. 3, 2014 Page 4 of 4 Attachment to CSE Regular Meeting Minutes Dec. 3, 2014: 2015 CSE Final Funding Allocations and Tier Designations Event: Producing Entity: 2015 Dates: 2014 Funds Received 2015 Funds Requested: Grid Score 2015 Funding Allocated TIER Conditions: Big Beers, Belgians & Barleywines Festival Laura Lodge Jan 8 -10 $10,000 $40,000 344 $9,500 B Pink Vail Vail Valley Medical Center 21 -Mar $10,000 $25,000 Tier IV $5,000 C Tier IV Vail Film Festival Colorado Film Festival Mar 26 -29 $35,000 $90,000 407 $50,000 B Show confirmed minimum add'I sponorship of $70K by 1/15 Taste of Vail Angela Mueller Apr 8 -11 $37,500 $37,500 411 $35,000 A Spring Back to Vail Highline Apr 17 =19 $35,000 $100,000 446 $40,000 A Vail Whitewater Race Series Alpine Quest Sports LLC Tuesdays: 5/12,19,26 + 6/2,9 $5,000 $10,000 316 $5,000 C Vail Valor Races; Valor Running & Fitness Expo Speckled Hound Consulting May 24 -25 $10,000 $10,000 326 $10,000 C Go Pro Mountain Games Vail Valley Foundation Jun 4 -7 $100,000 $110,000 504 $85,000 A King of the Mountain Volleyball Leon Fell Jun 19 -21 $15,000 $15,000 409 $15,000 B Vail Kids Adventure Club Blue Creek Productions Saturdays: 6/20,27; 7/11,18,25; 8/1,8 $20,000 $20,000 360 $20,000 C Change name to eliminate confusion w /Kids Adventure Games Vail Farmers Market and Art Show Meadow Drive Partnership /Vail Farmers' Market Sun: Jun 21 -Oct 4 $35,000 $48,500 405 $35,000 B No Fri nt. markets, add 6 Farm to Table dinners Vail Lacrosse Shootout & Colorado corporation d /b /a International Lacrosse Promotions Jun 27 -Jul 5 $15,000 $20,000 441 $15,000 B Vail Arts Festival Eagle Valley Events Inc Jun 26 -28 $10,000 $10,000 304 $10,000 C Vail Summer Bluegrass Concert Series Lakeside Stride: Ariel Rosemberg Jul 1,15,29 and 8/12 $50,000 $60,000 404 $50,000 B Vail America Days'" Highline 4 -Jul $77,500 $100,000 424 $45,000 A $30K from fireworks funding + add extra activation Kick It 3v3 Soccer National Championship North American Sports Group Jul 31 -Aug 2 $40,000 $60,000 454 $55,000 B Vail Kids Adventure Games and Billy Mattison w /Vail Recreation District Aug 5 -9 $35,300 $75,000 409 $44,500 B Date change possible The America Cup Fly Fishing Tournament: 14th FIPS Mouche World Youth Fly Fishing Championships John Knight Aug 10 -16 $8,500 $25,000 428 $15,000 B Vail Rocks Love Hope Strength TBD- Proposed: 7/31 - 8/1, 8/7 -8, 8/21 -22 $25,000 $30,000 405 $25,000 B Gourmet on Gore Highline Sep 4 -7 $45,000 $75,000 425 $45,000 A VailOktoberfest' Highline Sep 11- 13 +18 -20 $42,500 $85,000 394 $45,000 B Vail Automotive Classic Vail Valley Concours /Doug Landin 13 -Sep $2,000 $2,500 355 $2,000 C Colorado Grand + LHMA Enhancements Tom Horan /Angie Getchel w /LHMA Sep 18 -19 $7,500 $10,000 346 $10,000 C Combined Co Grand and LH Merchants Vail- Beaver Creek Restaurant Week Group 970 Sep 25- Oct 4 $14,000 $14,000 394 $14,000 B Vail Outlier MTB Festival The Greenspeed Project, Inc. Sep 25 -27 NA $25,000 422 $25,000 B Top Shelf Harvest Eagle Valley Events Inc 26 -Sep $20,000 $30,000 337 $20,000 B Vail Valley Cup: Cindy Eskwith Memorial Soccer Tournament Vail Valley Soccer Club Oct 2 -4 $0 $10,000 357 $5,000 C Avon to match contribution (srn 11/18- waived: in -kind from Avon - 60% hotel stays in Vail) Vail Snow Daze Highline Dec 7 -12 (tentative) $45,000 $100,000 458 $40,000 A Vail HoliDaze Highline Dec 16 -21 and 31 $55,000 $90,000 388 $25,000 C $20K from Fireworks funding: event funding shall cover holiday tree lighting and ancillary events including torchlight ski down Fireworks funding - designated by Council TOV Jul 4 and NYE NA $50,000 TOTAL: $1,567,500 $850,000 CSE Special Event Funds Remaining: $0 2015 TIER IV Funding: Life Long Learning Tier IV Funds Available: $91,800 Event: Producing Entity: 2015 Dates: Start Date: 2015 Funds Requested: Total: Grid Score 2015 Funding Allocated TIER Starting Hearts Lynn Blake /Starting hearts 2015 1 -Jan $15,000 NA $6,000 Vail Living Well: Longevity Forum DiscoverWell Sept 10 -12 10 -Sep $10,000 $6,000 Vail Veteran's Program Vail Veteran's Program March 1 -5 1 -Mar $20,000 $13,800 Vail Symposium Vail Symposium Jan 1- April 10 -Jan $45,000 $35,000 Applied Leadership Programs in Vail Vail Leadership Institute 2014 Programming $60,000 $15,000 Peak Wellness Retreat: Women's Weekend and 2 Comp -fit events Peak Wellness Retreat May -Oct 2014 $50,000 $15,000 Vertical Express Can Do MS February 21 21 -Feb $10,000 $1,000 TOTAL TIER IV CATEGORY: $210,000 $91,800 Tier IV Funds Remaining: $0 2015 CSE Administrative Budget: $73,036 $73,036 Amount Spent: Admin Funds Remaining: CSE /VLMD Event Liaison Laura Waniuk $20,000 Intercept /Attendance Surveys $49,900 Meetings and other Miscellaneous Expenses $3,136 Administrative Budget Remaining: $0.00 $73,036 TOTAL r 1/20/2015 Vail Economic Advisory Council (VEAC) January 13, 2015 MEETING MINUTES VEAC Members Present: Rayla Kundolf. Michael Kurz, Paul Wible, Margaret Rogers, Kim Newbury, Mike Ortiz, Rob LeVine, Matt Ivy, Bob Boselli, Matt Morgan, Greg Moffet, Laurie Mullen, Alison Wadey, Mia Vlaar, Brian Nolan, Mark Gordon, Chris Romer Town of Vail Staff Present: Stan Zemler — Town Manager, Kelli McDonald - Economic Development Manager, Kathleen Halloran - Finance Director, Laura Waniuk — Town of Vail Event Liaison, George Ruther — Community Development Director Others Present: Jeremy Reitman, Charles Ford Vail Valley Medical Center Update, George Ruther Ruther discussed the background, process, current status and schedule of review meetings about the VVMC Master Plan. Next milestone is January 26, meeting with PEC to review and make a recommendation to Town Council. For more information please see presentation. Eagle Air Alliance Update, Chris Romer The EGE Air Alliance objectives include bringing more flights into EGE, investigating new routes and focusing on funding for the airport. EGE provides direct benefit to the local economy by providing jobs and bringing in visitors. Intercept studies are ongoing at EGE focusing on economic impact of visitors who come through EGE vs DIA. Compared to other resort budgets for air service; EGE has the lowest investment of the comparison resorts. The majority of the resort budgets for air service are for a minimum guarantee to the airlines. If the flights become successful, then the minimum guarantee is reduced or canceled. EGE Air Alliance goals moving forward: • Continuing to work on adding new flights and maintaining a robust, year - round schedule of flight service for both Eagle County residents and visitors • Developed a long -term, diverse funding committee made up of private and public stakeholders. • Competitive airport funding models were reviewed in detail. • Funding committee continues work on how to provide long -term resources for the EGE Air Alliance. • Because this is such an important part of our local economy, we will continue to be out there telling our story and connecting with everyone in Eagle County. 1/20/2015 For further details, please see presentation. Town Manager Report, Stan Zemler Zemler covered some of the town council agenda items. One key issue is the 1 -70 underpass planning and impacts, specifically noise impact and the sound wall. C -DOT funds the standard sound wall, the Town would be responsible for the cost difference if the wall materials are enhanced. The sound wall voting process is unique compared to the standard voting process because it is based on property and land ownership ratios. There are some questions about the materials; acrylic is one material that is being investigated. The business models and impact of the VRBO and airbnb lodging websites will also be discussed and the Council will be asked to make modifications regarding business licenses and tax implications. Chamonix is also on the agenda. There will be some alternative master plans presented. Please attend the Vail Town Council on January 20 for more information, or see the January 20 council meeting minutes. Financial Report, Kathleen Halloran Upon receipt of all sales tax returns, November collections are estimated to be up 9.5% compared to budget. Year to date collections are up 7.7% from the prior year. Across all funds, year -to -date total revenue is up 8.5% from the amended budget and up 17.6% from prior year, mainly due to increases in Sales Tax, Construction Use Tax, Construction Fees and RETT collections. Please see attached reports. Citizen Input None Other Business None Adjournment Next Meeting: February 10, 8:00 — 10:00 a.m., The Antlers Caribou /Pronghorn Room 1/20/2015 TOWN OF VAI N VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports 1/20/2015 Towx of vn' 1[1 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) -to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: update on Town of Vail pending litigation, Samuel Maslak et. al. v. Town of Vail et. al. Case number 13CA1870 and 13CA2013; 2) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: update on Town of Vail pending litigation, Reggie D. Delponte Residence Trust No. 1 et. al. v. Town of Vail Case number 2014CV30404; 3) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Town owned unit Vail Village Inn Phase V, Unit No. 2 PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire, Town Attorney 1/20/2015 TOWN OF VAI N VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: January 20, 2015 ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment (estimated 4:05 pm) NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING TOPICS AND ESTIMATED TIMEFRAMES BELOW (ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD), TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2015 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THERE WILL NOT BE AN EVENING MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3 DUE TO OPENING CEREMONIES FOR 2015 FIS ALPINE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS. Ongoing agenda items DRB /PEC updates WS - 15 min.; Information Updates Attachments: WS - 15 min.; Executive Session items: 30 min.; Consent Agenda: 5 min.; Town Manager Report: 5 min. Other future agenda items: Vail Valley Medical Center: Road map for Master Plan, proposed Master Plan, PEC recommendations summary - 2/3 Cornerstone request for time extension - 2/17 Helipad location and design proposal - 2/17 Parking, Building Massing /Architecture, Meadow Drive /Streetscape, Employee Housing, Middle Creek, Procedural Considerations, Traffic /Circulation, Loading /Delivery Service, Land Exchange Considerations - 3/3 Review Master Plan - final topics and request for final decision - 3/17 DRB /PEC /AIPP Interviews and Appointments - 3/17 Proposed future agenda items Council Action Plan Follow up: Keeping Vail in Leadership Position, Define Balanced Community, Parking & Transportation, Technology and Wayfinding Vail Municipal Site Redevelopment Cleanup Title 12, zoning amendments Fee Schedule Revisions Water Quality Update Bed Base Report Proposal TIF Update 1/20/2015