The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-08-04 Agenda and Supporting Documentation Town Coundil Work SesionNOTE 2 3 9 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 9:00 A.M., AUGUST 4, 2015 TOWN QFVAIL� 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. ITEM/TOPIC: Site visit and walk along East Vail Trail - Weather Permitting Topic Items: Condition of trail Connectivity to other trails Wetlands Neighboring property lines Follow -Up Discussion to occur during the afternoon meeting. MEET AT VAIL MUNICIPAL BUILDING AT 9:00 A.M. FOR VAN RIDE TO TRAILHEAD RETURN TO MUNICIPAL BUILDING AT 11:00 A.M. AFTERNOON SESSION BEGINS AT 3:00 P.M. (120 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie, Senior Landscape Architect ITEM/TOPIC: Vail Trail Follow -Up discussion from the morning site visit. (10 min.) PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie, Senior Landscape Architect BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff proposes to continue with the planning process on the Vail Trail. That process includes working with private owners on the existing Vail Trail, completing the environmental analysis on the Vail Trail Extension and holding public open houses over the next several months to gather input on the Vail Trail project. ITEM/TOPIC: DRB/PEC Update (10 min. ) PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence, Planner ITEM/TOPIC: A presentation on snowmelt usage, efficiency, and offset programs. (30 min) PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia, Environmental Sustainability Manager and Dan Koelliker, PE, LEED-AP, President, Beaudin Ganze Consulting Engineers, Inc. 8/4/2015 ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests the Vail Town Council listen to the presentation and participate in the discussion. BACKGROUND: A discussion of snowmelt use in the Eagle Valley, specifically as it relates to Renewable Energy Mitigation Programs (REMP) and local code and offset programs. Dan Koelliker, BGCE, will share experience and knowledge of snowmelt energy usage, efficiencies, and other REMP programs, such as Eagle County's ECOBuild, as well as Energy Smart Colorado, now managed by Walking Mountains Science Center. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no staff recommendation at this time. 5. ITEM/TOPIC: Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter Renovation Project Update (15 min) PRESENTER(S): John King, Facilities Manager, Public Works Department ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the project update and provide direction to staff on the proposed scope of work. BACKGROUND: The Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter located along Pitkin Creek on Bighorn Road is in need of restoration. Staff has researched the history of the structure dating back to the early 1900s. Based on this research staff is proposing a recommended project scope to renovate the structure. The project cost would be covered in the 2015 Facilities Capital Budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends proceeding with the renovation of the bus shelter as proposed in the accompanying memorandum. 6. ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update: May 2015 Vail Business Review June 2015 Sales Tax July 2015 Revenue Highlights (5 min. ) 7. ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports (15 min.) 8. ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(e) - to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: possible purchase of property (15 min. ) a PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire, Town Attorney ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (4:40 p.m.) 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, AUGUST 18, 2015 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Ongoing agenda items 8/4/2015 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. Future agenda items: Golf Course Contract - 9/1 Special VLMD Meeting VLMD 2016 Operating Plan - WS - 9/1 Five Year Capital and Real Estate Transfer Tax Budgets - 9/1 2016 Budget Review (First Draft) - 9/1 Whistler Delegation Visit - 10/14 2016 VLMD and TOV Budget Resolution - ES - 10/20 Joint Meeting with VEAC (DestiMetrics Mountain Travel Update) - WS - 12/15 2016 CSE Funding Allocation Recommendation - ES - 12/15 Proposed future agenda items EGE Air Alliance Update - TBD Joint meeting with VLHA - TBD CIRSA Charter Review - TBD Booth Creek Park - TBD Cleanup Title 12, zoning amendments Fee Schedule Revisions TIF Update Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for information. 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Site visit and walk along East Vail Trail - Weather Permitting Topic Items: Condition of trail Connectivity to other trails Wetlands Neighboring property lines Follow -Up Discussion to occur during the afternoon meeting. MEET AT VAIL MUNICIPAL BUILDING AT 9:00 A.M. FOR VAN RIDE TO TRAILHEAD RETURN TO MUNICIPAL BUILDING AT 11:00 A.M. AFTERNOON SESSION BEGINS AT 3:00 P.M. PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie, Senior Landscape Architect 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Vail Trail Follow -Up discussion from the morning site visit. PRESENTER(S): Gregg Barrie, Senior Landscape Architect BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff proposes to continue with the planning process on the Vail Trail. That process includes working with private owners on the existing Vail Trail, completing the environmental analysis on the Vail Trail Extension and holding public open houses over the next several months to gather input on the Vail Trail project. ATTACHMENTS: Vail Trail Update Memorandum 8/4/2015 0 rowN of vain Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: Department of Public Works Date: August 4, 2015 Subject: Vail Trail Update I. INTRODUCTION Over the past year, staff has presented concepts for improving the hiking and mountain biking trail system in Vail. One of the specific projects for the improved trails system is the renovation and extension of the Vail Trail. The purpose of this memorandum is to update the Council on status of this project. II. BACKGROUND The goal of the Vail Trail project is to provide a beginner -level hiking and mountain biking trail for residents and guests. The trail would traverse through lodgepole pine forest, aspen groves and open meadow with easy access to the paved Gore Valley Trail as well as providing connections to adjacent neighborhoods in multiple locations. The Vail Trail concept is best considered in two parts: 1) the existing Vail Trail and 2) the proposed Vail Trail Extension. The work would require widening and rerouting parts of the existing Vail Trail and constructing new trail as needed for the extension. The existing Vail Trail is approximately 1-'/z miles long and connects Golden Peak to the Golf Course Clubhouse. It was constructed in the mid -1980's and is a narrow, moderately strenuous trail with switchbacks and some steep grades. The trail begins on Vail Resorts property, crosses thru several pieces of private land as well as USFS and Town of Vail - owned property, and drops down the hillside to the Clubhouse. The 1994 Comprehensive Open Lands Plan recommends extending that trail to East Vail. The proposed Vail Trail Extension is approximately 2-1/4 miles long. The extension would connect the east end of the existing trail to the Vail Memorial Park thru the Katsos Open Space. The trail would be constructed on Town of Vail -owned property, with a 500' section on USFS property. III. PROJECT STATUS A. Existing Vail Trail The USFS has asked that private property easements be resolved prior to a Forest Service review of the project. To begin that process the following tasks have started... 8/4/2015 • Property corners have been staked along the trail to determine where the existing trail crosses into private property. The existing trail crosses two single family/duplex lots at the southern property line as well as through the Golf Course Townhome property. • Staff has started a dialogue with the Golf Course Townhome Association as that is the largest private parcel that the existing trail crosses with the exception of Golden Peak. B. Vail Trail Extension • The 500' USFS crossing on the west end is tied in with the existing Vail Trail approval and is therefore on hold pending conversations with private owners. However, there is opportunity for designing/building the sections of the trail on town -owned property to the east. • The initial alignment for this section has been flagged. It is approximately 1-3/4 miles long, beginning east of the USFS land and ending west of the Vail Memorial Park near the Katsos pedestrian bridge. • The proposed alignment is the first step in the environmental analysis process that determines potential wetlands or other sensitive habitats. • It has come to the town's attention that there may be an active Boreal Toad population in one area. The extent of the population and how that may impact trail design and construction will be determined in the environmental analysis. • Staff has discussed this project with several of the Memorial Park Board Members. It was agreed that the first phase of the trail should descend to the paved Gore Valley Trail west of the Memorial Park. If the trail is ever continued to East Vail per the 1994 Comprehensive Open Lands Plan, the board is generally in favor of the trail as it passes south of the Memorial Park, but feels that it shouldn't pass through the center of the park. • One of the proposed trail sections was located between the paved Gore Valley Trail and Gore Creek. After evaluating that section during runoff, staff feels that the area is likely a high-quality riparian habitat and that further study is required before recommending a trail alignment through there. IV. CONCLUSION The 1994 Comprehensive Open Lands Plan emphasizes the importance of trails and trail connections throughout Vail. The opportunity to provide 3-'/2 miles of beginner -level hiking and mountain bike trail almost entirely on town -owned open space provides an important amenity for Vail's residents and guests. And, there are numerous opportunities for trail improvements throughout Vail. With Council support, staff proposes to continue with the planning process on the Vail Trail. That process will include working with private owners on the existing Vail Trail, completing the environmental analysis on the Vail Trail Extension, and holding public open houses over the next several months to gather input on the Vail Trail project, as well as other potential trail projects in town. These tasks will help determine the ultimate scope of this project. Attachments: 1. Proposed Trail Alignment — Vail Trail Town of Vail Page 2 8/4/2015 VAIL TRAIL RENOVATION VAIL TRAIL EXTENSION VAIL TRAIL RENOVATION (TOP) EXISTING 4,520 NEW 5,390 ACCESS SPURS 1,000 TOTAL 9,910 = 1.9 MILES VAIL TRAIL EXTENSION (BOTTOM) EXISTING 0 NEW 12,250 ACCESS SPURS 1,880 TOTAL 14,130 = 2.7 MILES The Vail Trail Proposed Improvements and Extension 4xc]a.un w VAIL TRAIL RENOVATION VAIL TRAIL EXTENSION KATSOS NEW TRAILS KATSOS EXISTING TRAILS VAIL TOWN BOUNDARY CONTOUR INTERVAL 10' 0 200' 600' 1000' 2000' SCALE: 1 "= 600' TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: DRB/PEC Update PRESENTER(S): Jonathan Spence, Planner ATTACHMENTS: July 27, 2015 PEC Meeting Results 8/4/2015 0 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TOWN OF VAIL July 27, 2015, 1:00 PM Vail Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Call to Order Members Present: Brian Gillette, Henry Pratt, Kirk Hansen, John Ryan Lockman, John Rediker, Dick Cleveland Members Absent: Webb Martin 2. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-18-9, Restoration, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a roof height of 18'-2" to exceed the existing roof height of 12' for the restoration of a nonconforming structure, located at 1552 Matterhorn Circle (Matterhorn Inn)/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150025) Action: Approve with conditions Motion: Gillette Second: Cleveland Vote: 6-0 Conditions: 1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this proposal. 2. Approval of this variance is for the building in its entirety as presented, and not of individual units. 3. The roof sheathing at the rear of the building shall be no higher than the existing roof. 4. The eave on the eastern portion of the property shall not encroach any further than the existing eave. Planner Spence delivered a presentation per Staff's memo. A brief history of the property was reviewed with regards to the fire that occurred this past fall. They are attempting to restore the building to the same location, number of units and form with a minor change to the roof height. The requirements of the Vail Town code, specifically in the restoration chapter, for non -conforming properties that have been damaged by a fault not of their own, they must be replaced with the same building footprint, units, height, etc. Staff would like to request that if approved that an additional condition simply stating that the approval is for the plans as proposed for the whole building. Commissioner Rediker inquired as to where the language is in the code that states that things have to be restored exactly the way they were before. Are we using a literal interpretation of the word restored? Spence confirmed that we are using a literal interpretation of the word restored. Commissioner Pratt asked about the applicants' letter as it indicated that no wood shakes are allowed on the walls, the commissioner was not aware of this regulation. With the drawings presented, they are not coming back with the same materials, doesn't this also deviate from the restoration standards? Spence clarified that wood shakes as well as other wood materials are allowed on the walls to a certain height. Clarification was also made with regard to the restoration code that the materials are not regulated in the restoration statute. That code is in regard to dimensional standards such as height, number of units, set -backs etc. Commissioner Pratt invited the Applicant to make a presentation. Michael Current, Current Architects, representing the applicant stated he did not have any further information to present with the exception that this request supports a better approach to improving the 8/4/2015 structure and livability of the units. All designs are matching what existed with the exception of the roof. The previous flat roof was leaky. Commissioner Cleveland asked why this roof form was chosen. Current responded that this roof was preferable due to economics, esthetics & functionality. It will shed water, snow & rain much better than the flat roof. Aesthetically it's more pleasing than the flat mansard style. Commissioner Cleveland indicated that the reasons for requesting a variance include in order to prevent or lessen practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with this objectives of this title. Even in the staff memo, there is no explanation of the hardships other than physical. We have to find the hardship by interpreting it the way it is. Economics are not a hardship Current responded that the functionality of a flat roof versus a sloped roof. The flat roof in this climate is not always the most practical application. Commissioner Gillette asked what is the proposed overhang on the east side. What is the existing overhang on the mansard? When measuring the plate height are you measuring to the top or the bottom of the mansard? Current responded that the overhang on the east side is proposed at 30" and that the current approximately 2' but will need to verify this. Plate heights are top of wall, bottom of mansard. The existing roof height was additional. Overall height is 12' as it exists today. Commissioner Gillette asked for clarification on the purpose of raising the plate height in the back. What do you gain from this? Current responded stating getting a little larger clear story window in the front to allow for more light and air as these are very small units. Gillette stated that the biggest impact to neighbor on east. Did they respond? Seems that you are only 4' off of the property line now and you are requesting to extend the eve even further. Second, you are raising the roof height which could block the sun and affect the neighbor. Seems you and the neighbor would benefit if we drop the rear plate down to the plate height rather than extending it. You still get a sloped roof, clear story, vaulted ceiling but the effects to the neighbor is lessened. Current responded that the neighbor to the east has not responded to this request. The benefit of increasing the back roof height would allow for additional storage in these units as well. Commissioner Gillette stated that the applicant is 4 '/2 feet off of the property line and we are trying to balance the concerns between the neighbor and the property owner. Drop the rear plate down, pull the eave back in and then it solves the issue of snow shedding, light, and vaulted ceilings. Commissioner Cleveland asked for clarification on the roof pitch. Current stated that the proposed pitch is 2:12. Commissioner Pratt asked if there were any additional questions for the applicant. He then closed the public hearing and requested commission comments. Commissioner Lockman felt that Commissioner Gillette brought up some interesting points regarding height in the back of the building and why it is being brought up. He also agreed with Commissioner Cleveland regarding the possible lack of hardship. However, he felt that Staff has reviewed the application and does understand that the fire has created this condition. Feels that the hardship is vague yet supportable. 8/4/2015 Planner Spence clarified that it would agree that its less of a hardship, than a practical difficulty. Staff sees it as an opportunity to add some value to the process and the value of the product. Adjacent structure is also non conforming and directly on property line. Commissioner Hansen felt that this property is important to our community. States that he agrees with the logic to this application and fully supports staff recommendation. Commissioner Cleveland questions the appropriateness of granting a variance. That being said, questions if we could get DRB with the roof the same way it was. Agree with Commissioner Hansen that this type of building is important to community. Shares Commissioner Gillette's concerns regarding the variance has to be the absolute minimum required. Stated that this application is asking for things that shouldn't be granted through this process. Variance can be granted under the current circumstance. Commissioner Rediker stated a variance in this circumstance is appropriate. This board typically has difficulty with variances because a lot of times we are trying to look at the regulations and ensure that there is a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship that leads to the variance. In this instance, a strict literal interpretation of the code imposes a hardship. Inclined to vote for this application since the height falls within height limits. I do would like to hear more about the roof proposed closer to the neighbors' property. We need to minimize impact to neighbors. Commissioner Gillette nothing additional to add. Perhaps we should forward a motion to approve with additional conditions one being that the eve no closer to lot line than current, and the other that the spring point be lowered to the existing plate height. Commissioner Pratt having gone through this before and having relied heavily on the reconstruction clause that stated you did not have to go to PEC & DRB to rebuild it exactly the way it was, little concerned about what we are doing. There is no doubt that the design is an improvement over what was there, there is no doubt that it is in the towns best interest to see this property improved. That said the commissioner has a hard time with the fact that this particular design is nothing like what was there. The application is changing wall materials, changing roof form, and roof pitch. There is no great benefit to a sloped roof over a flat roof as there are flat roofs all over town, this application is for an esthetic improvement not a physical hardship. This application is unique in the fact that it has a DRB component so in essence we are not using the restoration clause as it is intended. The application as presented makes it difficult to find a hardship to support granting a variance. The request for the variance as well as the DRB application is working against everything in the restoration section in the code. Regarding Commission Gillette's comments, the overhang in the back makes sense since it is such a narrow space and with a metal roof everything is going to get covered anyway. As for the height, this is nothing like what was there, it's way under the building height. Why quibble over 12". Commissioner Rediker requested clarification from staff if there was no fire, what if they wanted to do this roof today? Would they still be required to request a variance? Would they have to come into conformance with additional regulations? Spence clarified that the applicant would still have to come before the board to request the variance. They would not be required to come into any greater conformance. Commissioner Cleveland disagreed that the board has attempted to bring more properties into conformance through this process. We ask for improvements in a non -conformity regularly during these hearings. Community Development Director George Ruther reviewed the practical difficulties with this application. A lot of the non -conformities today are a result of actions taken in the 1970s & 1980s. We have multi -family zoned properties with many more units on them and far more non -conforming than this. Chamonix Chalets is in a district zoned Primary/Secondary. Asking homeowners to give up their homes to allow the property to become conforming is not a reasonable conversation to have; especially in light of the circumstances and the fire. In a perfect world, the town would have already 8/4/2015 gone through an exercise to address non -conforming properties rather than leave it up to an applicant to have to apply for a variance. Commissioner Cleveland restated that this is an aesthetic change. We've kept everything the same with the exception of the roof, windows. These aesthetics are not contemplated in the restoration code. This variance is really for aesthetic not for physical hardship. Ruther clarified that the allowable building height in this district is 33' and what is proposed is well under the allowed building height. No one is building anything back exactly the way it was existing. Unfortunately, with the non -conforming clause in the regulations as adopted, the premise is good — you can maintain it as long as you want, but as soon as you want to change something it has to go away. The purpose for the variance request is Commissioner Pratt is hanging his hat on finding 3b in the memorandum. Stated that there are extraordinary circumstances to this property that do not exist on neighboring properties. Commissioner Gillette believes we should throw out restoration clause as this isn't applicable to this application. If we look at it based on there wasn't a fire, we are just grating a variance based on aesthetics & not hardships. Commissioner Pratt stated that the restoration clause should not be thrown out. It is a vehicle for them to keep their non -conforming issues out of the discussion. As for a variance only for height which leads to this aesthetic. Commissioner Rediker asked for clarification if there really is no benefit to pitch roof vs. flat roof. Building Contractor Mark Scully doesn't agree with flat roof comment. Generally speaking, if its built correctly, spend a lot of money, they work well. Generally, pitch is better. This is an improvement to the flat roof. Commissioner Rediker asked what type of roof was on the building previously? Current responded that the roof was originally mansard style roof with a mix of gable forms & flat roof with parapet. Commission Rediker asked if we follow the strict definition of the word restore, the exact same type of roof will go back onto the buildings. Commissioner Pratt stated that there would have to be slope to the roof even if it was flat as required by the roof. 3. A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61-11, Vail Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the Chamonix parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) Applicant: Town of Vail Community Development Department Planner: George Ruther Action: Table to August 10, 2015 Motion: Cleveland Second: Hansen Vote 6-0 4. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a major amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the former Cascade Village Theater and Colorado Mountain College property to include 14 dwelling units, one (1) onsite Employee Housing Unit and the preservation 4,087 square feet of existing commercial, retail and office space, located at 1310 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Village, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This project was previously approved most recently in 2007 and expired on June 1, 2015. (PEC150014) 8/4/2015 5 A Applicant: Ultimate Cascade LLC, Planner: Jonathan Spence Action: Table to August 24, 2015 Motion: Cleveland Second Approval of Minutes July 13, 2015 PEC Meeting Results Action: Approve Motion: Cleveland Informational Update represented by Mauriello Planning Group Hansen Second: Gillette Environmental Training — Kristen Bertuglia Vote 6-0 Vote 4-0-2 (Rediker, Cleveland abstained) A Snowmelt Usage, Efficiency, and Offset program presentation was made to the Planning and Environmental Commission by Taylor Critchlow from AEC Engineering. The floor was opened for questions regarding this topic. Planner Spence asked if there off site monitoring systems ensure no systems are left on during the warmer months (like a fire alarm system). Critchlow was not aware of any of site third party monitoring companies. Commissioner Gillette asked for Taylor's opinion on idling vs. powering the system on and off. Half of the cost is in idling. Critchlow responded that he recommends setting up a system with idling at the lowest energy usage. It takes a lot of energy to reheat something that was previously turned off. Commission Pratt stated that costs do not necessarily decrease with on/off scenario. Our code currently incentivizes applicants to use snowmelt systems by reducing the amount of on-site snow storage requirements as well as in some circumstances a steeper grade is allowed. It's also important to remember that the Vail Valley is very tight and payback on a solar system may not occur for an extended period of time and payback in East Vail is never. Commissioner Hansen asked Kristen Bertuglia if Vail has a progressive modern code or are we in the process of updating or modernizing the code. Bertuglia responded that the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as well as the other International Codes are current and we are going to be adopting the 2015 code. There is nothing additional in the IECC that address snowmelt. There has always been controls and the high efficiency boiler requirement is going away. Bertuglia requested Critchlow explain to the group why condensing boilers are a good application for snowmelt. Critchlow responded that the condensing boilers have a higher efficiency by condensing flue gasses. Commissioner Pratt asked staff what the goal is. Is the goal to get some sort of snowmelt legislation into our code similar to Aspen/Pitkin? Bertuglia responded that the Town has done a great job in recent years in energy efficiency in other ways but it has never addressed outdoor energy use. Are we missing something if we are focused on the building envelope but ignore outdoor energy use? Should we start working on this for future? Vail owns more than 350,000 feet of snowmelt and there is more than 200,000 feet of privately owned snowmelt so finding the offset for this amount will be quite challenging. 8/4/2015 Commissioner Pratt asked if there is a technology out there in a residential environment that can capture heat and somehow drive that to the snowmelt system. Is there anything internal, waste heat, boilers? Critchlow responded that Solar is the only residential application. There is nothing renewable from residential environment that could be transferred to a snowmelt system. The energy level is so small that there isn't enough to drive a system. Commissioner Hansen asked if other communities measure carbon footprint and does the Town? Bertuglia responded that we do track this information in a number of ways. It's difficult to measure what the community uses but substation data is available on a limited basis from Holy Cross Energy. Most resorts have some sort of carbon inventory and tracking system. Commissioner Gillette is very familiar with Eagle Counties system. Suggests that there should be a carbon tax added to utility bills with a mill levy off set. Effectively what would happen is that someone who is energy efficient would have less property tax to pay and those who use snowmelt will pay this tax on their energy bills. Bertuglia responded that some would feel that all tax payers would be subsidizing the users. Commissioner Rediker responded to the carbon tax option that we can't tax everyone has to pay for those that choose to install snowmelt systems. Commission Hansen asked if the staff would like the commission to jump into this and make it a priority to see if we want to adopt a policy similar to Eagle County or Aspen/Pitkin County. Bertuglia responded that staff would like to continue the discussion, if that is what is directed by the Commission. The Town will be updating the Sustainability Strategic Plan beginning this year, which will require setting new energy goals. Commissioner Pratt brought up other options that may be available in our area. Micro -hydro plants along the gore creek or something up at the Black Lakes. These could be used to offset the energy production required for snowmelt. Commissioner Rediker would like to see us get away from the Aspen/Pitkin model and look at the individual users. Base fees on the usage over the year. Commissioner Pratt commented that the valley is 90% built out so this type of fee would have to be imposed on current & future users in order to build a fund. Commissioner Gillette stated that this is exactly what the carbon tax does. It taxes the individual users and those utilizing snowmelt are going to be higher carbon taxes. Stated he would prefer to recommend a ban on snowmelt and require people to plow and remove the incentives for installation of these systems. Commissioner Lockman indicated that the Town is the largest user of snow melt and imposing a fee on private property when the Town has installed such a large amount may not be fair initially. The Town should take a leadership role by penalizing itself first. Noted that the Energy Smart Colorado program utilizes snowmelt offset funds through ECOBuild and distributes it back to the community in the form of rebates. Commissioner Rediker stated that the benefit the Town recognizes is through our guests being able to walk on our streets without a slip and fall risk. 8/4/2015 Commissioner Pratt commented that we have to look at the incentive side of the program instead of the penalty side of this. Maybe additional GRFA allowed or a similar program. Bertuglia stated that it appeared that there is enough support to continue the conversation and Staff will come back to the Commission with options. 7. Adjournment Motion: Rediker Second: Cleveland Vote: 6-0 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 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for information. Community Development Department Published in the Vail Daily July 24, 2015 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: A presentation on snowmelt usage, efficiency, and offset programs. PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia, Environmental Sustainability Manager and Dan Koelliker, PE, LEED-AP, President, Beaudin Ganze Consulting Engineers, Inc. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests the Vail Town Council listen to the presentation and participate in the discussion. BACKGROUND: A discussion of snowmelt use in the Eagle Valley, specifically as it relates to Renewable Energy Mitigation Programs (REMP) and local code and offset programs. Dan Koelliker, BGCE, will share experience and knowledge of snowmelt energy usage, efficiencies, and other REMP programs, such as Eagle County's ECOBuild, as well as Energy Smart Colorado, now managed by Walking Mountains Science Center. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no staff recommendation at this time. ATTACHMENTS: Presentation by Beaudin Ganze - Snowmelt 8/4/2015 gn@�m@0� Mq5ag@o S9'D(AO@R ffset Programs EAUDIN F GANZF consulting engineers, inc. Oec�r�eoc�� o� �o � aQ� a 8/4/2015 0 mgmp og,%eOgn 1pQpQmg%p,% 8/4/20 C@mm@n Nnwov C��f�oQoc�c�Q� OO G°pG°porr�Uno�a�� . 8/4/2015 IQ Jea�c�c�c� ER@TgY7 EggnQ�n@RQY7 OPP@TUROMM5 8/4/2015 IQ Jea�c�c�c� ER@TgY7 EggnQ�n@RQY7 OPP@TUROMM5 awy - aoeu ° 0.bsa 0.9YHi-' b.l¢l+.ib 6_03 0._➢l1Mi 0.)i F r J r,-. 0 ;. . OA O C�r��rrg� OO opo wommrw-,. 470F 8/4/2015 Zn@�M@�� EngTgY7 C@R�UMP�00@[M 11 11 D .um 8/4/2015 zn@�WMM� A@d@Hung 8/4/2015 ER@Tgy7 U,(�Qg@ C�a�c� ZDd]Y7 EM 2@@]W@T CT@@Ik K@T@P@flukn [Doudflud - BEAVER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT SNOWMELT HEATING COSTS alo FEB 2004 MONTH 1 YEAR THERMAL UNITS AVG DAILY TEMP I COST 1 DAY TOTAL COST/ MONTH THERMAL UNIT COST Nov -99 20 32 F $0.93 $14.82 $0.43520 Dec -99 41563 16F $533.73 $17,876.41 $0.43520 Jan -00 40,272 20 F $704.83 $17,536.55 5043520 Feb -00 34,849 24 F $528.65 $15,176.66 $0.43520 Mar -00 30,595 24 F $421.97 $13,325.48 $0.43520 Apr -00 8,213 37 F $133.82 $3,585.04 $0.43520 May- 0 1 1,831 46F $29.13 $808.43 $0.43520 - Jun -OD 242 54 F $4.07 $116.95 $0.52449 Jul -00 94 58F $2.31 $130.48 $0.49228 Aug -00 31 57 F $1.09 $31.29 $0.49228 Se 00 579 50 F $10.50 $301.42 $0.58588 Oct -CD 690 40 F $14.38 $412.87 $0.58588 TOTAL 158469 $69,317.00 Nov -00 54235 18F $94921 $31,791.71 $0.58588 Dec -00 46621 18F $952.02 $27,330.81 $0.58588 Jan -01 58489 15 F $1,58546 $47,076.85 $0.85038 Feb -01 43656 20 F $1,198.47 $37,152.59 $0.85546 Mar -01 26814 27 F $763.18 $22,894.78 $0.85546 Apr -C)1 13257 35F $378.61 $11,358.16 $0.85546 may- 1 2412 44 F $69.36 $2,080.66 $0.85546 Jun -01 2239 54 F $34.82 $1,949.96 $0.85546 Jul -01 0 58F $0.56 $17.26 $0.85546 Aug -01 68 56 F 32.51 $75.42 $0.85529 Se O1 93 49 F $3.23 $96.80 $0.44809 2ct-01 2905 141F $46.49 $1,441.11 $0.44809 TOTAL 250789 $183,266.11 8/4/2015 Qec�r�ao /�Rnud CC@MpQp,Dg5@R 8/4/2015 G3c��c��aa0c� ER@Tg) Y7 �o�ogQ�'@R PT@gTQM (r5@Ewd 8/4/2015 on@�WM(A Enwgv U�Qgg ego iiL 1R@g,D@Rd on@ WMr M 1R@R(mWQIM(p IPT@gTgm,% NO Quc)'(oR'(�00`00OD h TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter Renovation Project Update PRESENTER(S): John King, Facilities Manager, Public Works Department ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to the project update and provide direction to staff on the proposed scope of work. BACKGROUND: The Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter located along Pitkin Creek on Bighorn Road is in need of restoration. Staff has researched the history of the structure dating back to the early 1900s. Based on this research staff is proposing a recommended project scope to renovate the structure. The project cost would be covered in the 2015 Facilities Capital Budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends proceeding with the renovation of the bus shelter as proposed in the accompanying memorandum. ATTACHMENTS: Pitkin Creek Bus Stop staff memo 8/4/2015 TOWN OF Memorandum To: Town Council From: Public Works Date: 8-4-15 Subject: Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter (Kiahtipes Ranch House) and Water Wheel SUMMARY & PURPOSE This council work session includes the following items. • Discussion of the Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter historic restoration project. • Staff would like to have the town Council provide input regarding the project scope. II. BACKGROUND The History: The building currently being used as the Pitkin Creek Bus Shelter in East Vail was the summer ranch home for the immigrant Greek sheep ranching family the Kiahtipes. The Circle K brand painted on the top of the buildings chimney was the family's brand. A photo of the West elevation of the building is shown in the book," Vail, Story of a Colorado Mountain Valley" by June Simonton. This project was previously presented to the council and at that time two past council members had asked what would be involved in a full historical restoration of the building. Staff solicited the advice of Ron Sladek with Tatanka Historical Associates. Mr. Sladek provided a proposal for a full Historic structure Assessment in the amount of $15,590.00. Staff discovered that the building had another room on the Eastern side of the building which had been removed. Mr. Sladek informed us that to bring the structure back to full historical accuracy that this room would have to be re -built. This is not possible as the additional room would span over the property line. Mr. Sladek also said that we would have to remove the front porch and ramp. This of course would preclude the buildings use as a bus shelter. Based on these findings, staff recommends performing the project described below. The Project Scope: The building was constructed using hand hewn logs for the floor structure and walls. Many of the timber members have a significant amount of rotting. The original chimney is sinking which is causing damage to the balance of the structure. The 8/4/2015 8/4/2015 chimney is pulling away from the structure and has some large cracks creating a potential safety hazard. The plan is to demolish the existing chimney and then have the structure moved off to the side. While the structure is removed, we will replace the rotten members in both the floor and the walls. During this time we will excavate for and place a proper foundation. The structure will be placed back on the new foundation and the chimney rebuilt out of concrete block with a stucco finish to mimic the existing. The new exposed foundation wall will be covered in thin stone to look as much as possible like a dry stacked field stone foundation. A new river rock fire place will be installed on the building interior to match the existing. Funding; The cost of renovation of the bus shelter structure is approximately $100,000, and will be funded out of the Facilities Capital Maintenance account. Staff (John King) will act as the general contractor and select subcontractors will be used to complete the work. The next steps for the Bus Shelter portion of the project is DRB review and approval. Application for a building permit will follow with an anticipated start date of September 1, 2015 with a 60 day construction schedule. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends proceeding with the renovation of the bus shelter as described in the proposed project scope. V. ATTACHMENTS Photos 1. East fagade 2. Example of rotting log 3. Large vertical crack in the chimney 4. West facade and additional cracking of the chimney. 5. Plan elevations. 8/4/2015 8/4/2015 a Pitkin Creek ic" jILA FFAV'M I - lip Z113 aw- N Dl ov, YL r4� I-- ziv .......... L 4; � 3,: :ice t' _ •; � � � � - C'Er- Vl� ol L oar dO 4L L oar J z a� 7rn5 D ri E Rrn _1 a -moi rrnn �i 8/4/2015 ►owx of vn' 1[1 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update: May 2015 Vail Business Review June 2015 Sales Tax July 2015 Revenue Highlights ATTACHMENTS: May 2015 Vail Business Review June 2015 Sales Tax Memorandum August 2015 Revenue Hightlights 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIL' 75 South Frontage Road West Finance Department Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.2100 vailgov.com 970.479.2248 fax Vail Business Review May 2015 July 16, 2015 The May Vail Business Review breaks down the four percent sales tax collected for May. Overall May sales tax decreased 8.1 % with Retail decreasing 5.8%, Lodging decreased 4.9%, Food and Beverage decreased 4.1 % and Utilities/Other (which is mainly utilities but also includes taxable services and rentals) decreased 18.5%. Excluding the Out of Town category sales tax was down 2.5%. Electronic filing and payment of Vail sales tax is now an option. Please visit www.vailgov.com/epay Town of Vail sales tax forms, the Vail Business Review and the sales tax worksheet are available on the internet at www.vailgov.com. You can subscribe to have the Vail Business Review and the sales tax worksheet e-mailed to you automatically from www.vailgov.com. Please remember when reading the Vail Business Review that it is produced from sales tax collections, as opposed to actual gross sales. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to call me at (970) 479-2125 or Kathleen Halloran at (970) 479-2116. Sincerely, LA Sally Lorton Sales Tax Administrator 8/4/2015 May TOWN OF VAIL BUSINESS REVIEW TOWN OF VAIL Sales Tax Newsletter May 2015 Sales Tax 7/16/2015 5:08:48 PM emGovPower Page 1 of 2 8/4/2015 May 2014 Collections May 2015 Collections May % Change VAIL VILLAGE Retail 49,858 47,810 -4.11 % Lodging 45,920 43,800 -4.62% F & B 86,330 93,813 8.67% Other 1,245 2,378 91.06% Total 183,353 187,802 2.43% LIONSHEAD Retail 10,021 11,618 15.94% Lodging 28,428 31,151 9.58% F & B 25,284 21,484 -15.03% Other 4,581 4,077 -11.00% Total 68,314 68,331 0.03% CASCADE VILLAGE/EAST VAIL/SANDSTONE/WEST VAIL Retail 83,311 85,983 3.21 % Lodging 19,965 13,828 -30.74% F & B 36,584 26,876 -26.54% Other 4,887 3,827 -21.69% Total 144,748 130,514 -9.83% OUT OF TOWN Retail 81,794 66,517 -18.68% Lodging 1,868 2,684 43.69% F & B 312 186 -40.28% Utilities & Other 127,759 102,641 -19.66% Total 211,733 172,029 -18.75% 7/16/2015 5:08:48 PM emGovPower Page 1 of 2 8/4/2015 May TOWN OF VAIL BUSINESS REVIEW TOWN OF VAIL Sales Tax Newsletter May 2015 Sales Tax TOTAL RETAIL SUMMARY May May May RETAIL -FOOD 2014 2015 % RETAIL -LIQUOR Collections Collections Change Retail 224,984 211,929 -5.80% Lodging And Property Mgmt 96,182 91,464 -4.90% Food and Beverage 148,510 142,359 -4.14% Other 138,472 112,923 -18.45% Total 608,147 558,676 -8.13% RETAIL SUMMARY 7/16/2015 5:08:48 PM emGovPower Page 2 of 2 8/4/2015 May 2014 Collections May 2015 Collections May % Change RETAIL -FOOD 63,688 65,481 2.82% RETAIL -LIQUOR 17,355 18,795 8.29% RETAIL -APPAREL 22,299 22,143 -0.70% RETAIL -SPORT 22,181 20,072 -9.51 % RETAIL -JEWELRY 6,461 4,698 -27.30% RETAIL -GIFT 1,793 1,153 -35.73% RETAIL -GALLERY 2,562 252 -90.17% RETAIL -OTHER 88,609 79,336 -10.47% RETAIL -HOME OCCUPATION 35 0 -100.00% Total 224,984 211,929 -5.80% 7/16/2015 5:08:48 PM emGovPower Page 2 of 2 8/4/2015 MEMORANDUM July 27, 2015 To: Vail Town Council Stan Zemler Kathleen Halloran From: Sally Lorton Re: June Sales Tax estimate Vail will collect another $47,000 in June sales tax to bring collections to $1,230,477. If so, June will be up 5.4 or $63,295 from budget and up 6.7% or $77,230 from June 2014. 8/4/2015 Month 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Town of Vail Sales Tax Worksheet 7/27/2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Budget 2015 Collections Budget Variance % Change from 2014 % Change from Budget January 2,275,967 2,597,985 2,783,306 2,976,655 2,619,673 2,564,383 2,795,688 2,855,524 3,145,620 3,483,245 3,525,333 3,695,713 170,380 6.10% 4.83% February 2,429,377 2,527,130 2,718,643 3,071,615 2,588,889 2,577,360 2,803,136 2,994,580 3,267,351 3,477,419 3,620,104 3,592,488 (27,616) 3.31% -0.76% March 2,785,101 2,852,954 2,986,446 3,327,304 2,504,567 2,685,004 3,143,418 3,185,859 3,650,157 3,788,185 3,949,005 4,048,436 99,431 6.87% 2.52% April 915,554 1,280,324 1,330,740 1,098,918 1,235,941 1,156,934 1,191,690 1,183,087 1,069,186 1,280,641 1,313,158 1,365,709 52,551 6.64% 4.00% May 458,770 449,283 545,874 622,103 516,150 421,925 473,292 487,739 563,602 607,729 616,645 579,707 (36,938) -4.61% -5.99% June 834,913 805,362 953,017 918,061 717,233 873,765 895,951 963,143 1,023,801 1,153,247 1,167,182 1,183,477 16,295 2.62% 1.40% Total 9,699,682 10,513,038 11,318,026 12,014,656 10,182,453 10,279,371 11,303,175 11,669,932 12,719,717 13,790,466 14,191,427 14,465,530 274,103 4.90% 1.93% July 1,166,183 1,255,243 1,265,781 1,397,842 1,121,860 1,228,767 1,481,329 1,573,499 1,654,161 1,829,102 1,879,577 August 993,985 1,055,614 1,162,746 1,349,795 1,068,391 1,147,352 1,310,471 1,380,710 1,507,048 1,674,813 1,695,885 September 795,807 832,549 908,318 834,569 753,754 761,425 889,945 978,037 994,135 1,054,015 1,124,778 October 566,173 614,396 688,519 662,767 581,033 594,362 623,420 644,577 755,133 752,295 799,096 November 713,117 799,582 747,877 719,109 651,873 701,075 788,430 825,873 947,627 962,344 1,016,057 December 2,549,032 2,771,258 2,821,871 2,652,628 2,553,974 2,963,763 3,184,645 2,973,826 3,422,178 3,818,096 3,779,180 Total 16,483,979 17,841,680 18,913,138 19,631,366 16,913,338 17,676,115 19,581,415 20,046,454 21,999,999 23,881,131 24,486,000 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIL REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS August 4, 2015 Sales Tax Upon receipt of all sales tax returns, June collections are estimated to be $1,230,477 up 6.7% from last year and up 5.4% compared to budget. Year to date collections of $14,512,530 are up 5.2% from the prior year and up 2.3% from budget. Inflation as measured by the consumer price index was up 0.1% for June. The annual budget totals $24.5 million. Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) RETT collections through July 27 total $3,398,409 down 1 % from this time last year. 2014 annual collections totaled $6,849,449, a record year since the peak in 2008. The 2015 amended budget of $6,190,000 is a 9.6% reduction from prior year actuals. Construction Use Tax Use Tax collections through June 30 total $1,151,959, up 32% compared to $872,241 from this time last year. The annual budget totals $1.8 million. Summary Across all funds, year-to-date total revenue of $36.8 million is up 9.5% from the amended budget and up 2.4% from prior year, mainly due to increases in sales tax. Total year-to-date revenue is 58.6% of annual budgeted revenues of $62.8 million. -1- 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from the Mayor, Council and Committee Reports 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(e) - to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: possible purchase of property PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire, Town Attorney 8/4/2015 TOWN OF VAIN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (4:40 p.m.) 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, AUGUST 18, 2015 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 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. Future agenda items: Golf Course Contract - 9/1 Special VLMD Meeting VLMD 2016 Operating Plan - WS - 9/1 Five Year Capital and Real Estate Transfer Tax Budgets - 9/1 2016 Budget Review (First Draft) - 9/1 Whistler Delegation Visit - 10/14 2016 VLMD and TOV Budget Resolution - ES - 10/20 Joint Meeting with VEAC (DestiMetrics Mountain Travel Update) - WS - 12/15 2016 CSE Funding Allocation Recommendation - ES - 12/15 Proposed future agenda items EGE Air Alliance Update - TBD Joint meeting with VLHA - TBD CIRSA Charter Review - TBD Booth Creek Park - TBD Cleanup Title 12, zoning amendments Fee Schedule Revisions TIF Update 8/4/2015