Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-07-16 Agenda and Supporting Documentation Town Council Afternoon Meeting Agenda VAIL TO W N C O U N C IL R E G U L AR ME E TIN G Agenda Town Council C hambers 1:00 P M, July 16, 2019 Notes: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine what time Council will consider an item. Public comment on any agenda item may be solicited by the Town Council. 1.D R B / P E C Update 1.1.D RB / P E C Update 5 min. Presenter(s): Ashley Clark, Planner 2.Presentation / Discussion 2.1.Update on Town of Vail and Vail Mountain Guest Experience I nitiatives 20 min. Presenter(s): Vail Mountain and Town of Vail Advisory Committee Action Requested of Council: Council feedback and direction. Background: The Vail Guest Experience Collaborative Advisory Committee has been working on a number of Vail guest experience initatives which will be presented. Programming addresses the following: 1) Community Guest Services Training, 2) Employee Engagement, and 3) Early-Season Guest Experience. The proposed programming has been developed in an effort to enhance the Town of Vail/Vail Mountain level of service and seamless guest experience. 2.2.Youth Vaping Dicussion 20 min. Presenter(s): Mandy I vanov, Health Promotion Coordinator, Schools Liaison, Eagle County Public Health Background: Presentation from Eagle County Public Health Office about the use of vaping in Eagle County and proposed measures for addressing the problem with youth. 2.3.Civic Area Plan Finance Discussion 90 min. Presenter(s): Matt Gennett, Community Development Director Action Requested of Council: Staff asks Council to review the presentation and provide direction related to municipal funding options. Background: The purpose of this presentation is to share information on municipal funding options, and receive direction from Council 3.Information Update (5 min.) 3.1.Meeting Minutes for the J une 3, 2019 A I P P meeting. 3.2.V LHA J une 25, 2019 Meeting Results July 16, 2019 - Page 1 of 110 3.3.C S E Draft Meeting Minutes 4.Matters from Mayor, Council and Committee Reports (10 min.) 4.1.Confirm August meetings related to town manager recruitment with Strategic Government Resources (S GR) 4.2.Town of Vail Community Picnics: Tuesday, J uly 23 at Bighorn Park and Tuesday, Aug. 13 at Donovan Pavilion – 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. 5.Executive Session 5.1.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: Lupine Drive Property 20 min. Presenter(s): Matt Mire, Town Attorney 6.Recess 6.1.Recess 4:00 pm estimate Meeting agendas and materials can be accessed prior to meeting day on the Town of Vail website www.vailgov.com. All town c ounc il meetings will be streamed live by High Five Acc ess Media and available for public viewing as the meeting is happening. The meeting videos are also posted to High Five A cc ess Media website the week following meeting day, www.highfivemedia.org. Please c all 970-479-2136 for additional information. S ign language interpretation is available upon request with 48 hour notification dial 711. July 16, 2019 - Page 2 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: D R B / P E C Update P RE S E NT E R(S ): Ashley Clark, P lanner AT TAC H ME N TS: Description July 3, 2019 D R B Meeting Results July 8, 2019 P E C Meeting Results July 16, 2019 - Page 3 of 110 D E S IG N R E V IE W B O AR D July 3, 2019, 3:00 P M Town Council C hambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1.Call to Order Present: J ohn Rediker, Doug Cahill, David Campbell, Peter Cope Absent: Bill Pierce 2.Project Orientation 2.1.2:00 P M 3.Site Visits 3.1.1170 Casolar del Norte - Allie's Cabin LLC 3.2.980 Vail View Drive - Brooktree Townhouses 4.Main Agenda 4.1.D R B19-0181 - Mexamer Davos LL C Final review of new construction (duplex) Address/Legal Description: 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision Applicant: Mexamer Davos LLC, represented by Scott S. Turnipseed Architecture & Construction, I nc. Planner: Chris Neubecker David Campbell moved to approve. Peter Cope seconded the motion and it passed (4-0). Absent:(1)Pierce 4.2.D R B19-0268 - Allie's Cabin LL C Conceptual review of an addition Address/Legal Description: 1170 Casolar Del Norte Units A & B/Lot 8, Casolar Vail Applicant: Allie's Cabin LLC & S & J Operating Co I C G I nc, represented by Camens Architectural Group Planner: Chris Neubecker 4.3.D R B19-0275 - Brooktree Townhouses Conceptual review of an exterior alteration (mansard roofs) Address/Legal Description: 980 Vail View Drive/Lot B5, Block B, Lion's Ridge Subdivision Filing 1 July 16, 2019 - Page 4 of 110 Applicant: Brooktree Townhouses, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Chris Neubecker 4.4.D R B19-0260 - Smith Residence Conceptual review of an addition Address/Legal Description: 895 Red Sandstone Circle, Unit A / Lot 2, Vail Village Filing 9 Applicant: Peter Smith, represented by Krueger Architecture Planner: J onathan Spence 4.5.D R B19-0261 - Vintage Final review of an exterior alteration (phone booth) Address/Legal Description: 12 Vail Road, Suite 100 / Lots N & O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Vintage Restaurant, represented by Laurance Broderick Planner: J onathan Spence David Campbell moved to deny. Peter Cope seconded the motion and it passed (4-0). Absent:(1)Pierce 4.6.P E C19-0017 - Title 12 & 14 Code Clean-up Discussion Final review of a zoning code text amendment Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Ashley Clark 5.Staff Approvals 5.1.B19-0238 - W yoming Land Trust Final review of an exterior alteration (reroof) Address/Legal Description: 2008 Sunburst Drive/Lot 18, Vail Valley Filing 3 Applicant: Wyoming Land Trust, represented by Arapahoe Roofing & Sheet Metal, I nc. Planner: Glen Morgan 5.2.B19-0244 - Kochman Residence/Wold Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (reroof) Address/Legal Description: 1328 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 22, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Applicant: Kochman Family Revocable Trust & Chris Wold Living Trust Planner: J onathan Spence 5.3.D R B19-0200 - Hankins Residence Final review of a change to approved plans (skylight/deck) Address/Legal Description: 1408 Moraine Drive/Lot 4, Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1 Applicant: Sharon T. Hankins Living Trust, represented by Beth Levine Architect I nc. July 16, 2019 - Page 5 of 110 Planner: Erik Gates 5.4.D R B19-0212 - U S W est Communications Inc. Final review of an exterior alteration (antennas) Address/Legal Description: 165 North Frontage Road W est/Lot 2, Middle Creek Subdivision Applicant: US W est Communications I nc., represented by Verizon W ireless c/o Kappa Consulting Planner: J onathan Spence 5.5.D R B19-0233 - Stiber Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (deck) Address/Legal Description: 1500 Lions Ridge Loop/Lot 22, Dauphinais- Moseley Subdivision Filing 1 Applicant: Robert & J udith Stiber, represented by W illiam Grossart Planner: Chris Neubecker 5.6.D R B19-0234 - Digregorio & Gladkin Residences Final review of an exterior alteration (decks) Address/Legal Description: 2883 Timber Creek Drive Units 5B & 10B/Lot 8, Block 4, Vail I ntermountain Development Subdivision Applicant: Macrina Digregorio, Cynthia Horvath & Victoria A. Gladkin Revocable Trust, represented by Sperry Properties Planner: Chris Neubecker 5.7.D R B19-0236 - Allen Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (solar panels) Address/Legal Description: 2725 Bald Mountain Road Unit B/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13 Applicant: Cyrus G. Allen I I I , represented by Active Energies Solar Planner: J onathan Spence 5.8.D R B19-0241 - Fritzlen Residence Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 1874 Glacier Court Unit B/Lot 22, Block 2, Lion's Ridge Subdivision Filing 3 Applicant: A. Guerin Fritzlen, represented by Ceres Landcare Planner: Ashley Clark 5.9.D R B19-0243 - Beaver Dam International L LC Final review of a change to approved plans (exterior) Address/Legal Description: 54 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 32, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Beaver Dam I nternational L L C, represented by V MD A Planner: Ashley Clark 5.10.D R B19-0244 - Dean Family Investments LL C Final review of a tree removal July 16, 2019 - Page 6 of 110 Address/Legal Description: 874 Spruce Court/Lot 11, Vail Village Filing 9 Applicant: Dean Family I nvestments L L C, represented by Ceres Landcare Planner: J onathan Spence 5.11.D R B19-0249 - Pinos Del Norte Condominiums Final review of an exterior alteration (flue termination) Address/Legal Description: 600 Vail Valley Drive/Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Pinos Del Norte Condominiums, represented by K H W ebb Architects Planner: Erik Gates 5.12.D R B19-0251 - Lodge at Lionshead Final review of an exterior alteration (vents) Address/Legal Description: 380 East Lionshead Circle/Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1 Applicant: Lodge at Lionshead, represented by Nedbo Construction Planner: Erik Gates 5.13.D R B19-0252 - Ford Residence Final review of a change to approved plans (patio/roof/windows) Address/Legal Description: 2765 Bald Mountain Road/Lot 4, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13 Applicant: Robert E. Ford Revocable Trust, represented by K H W ebb Architects Planner: J onathan Spence 5.14.D R B19-0255 - Foote Residence Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 4484 Streamside Circle East Unit A/Lot 12, Bighorn Subdivision 4th Addition Applicant: Max & J udy Foote Planner: J onathan Spence 5.15.D R B19-0257 - L P L Revocable Trust Final review of a change to approved plans (time extension) Address/Legal Description: 44 West Meadow Drive Unit 1/Lot I , Vail Village Filing 2 Applicant: L P L Revocable Trust I , represented by RA Nelson Planner: Chris Neubecker 5.16.D R B19-0258 - Field Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (boiler) Address/Legal Description: 586 Forest Road Unit B/Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 6 Applicant: Lawrence I . Field Revocable Trust, represented by J erry Sibley Plumbing, I nc. Planner: Ashley Clark 5.17.D R B19-0262 - Shirley Residence July 16, 2019 - Page 7 of 110 Final review of changes to approved plans (landscaping, deck) Address/Legal Description: 303 Gore Creek Drive, Unit 8 / Lot 8, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Erickson Shirley, represented by Pure Design Studio Planner: Chris Neubecker 5.18.D R B19-0263 - Booth Creek Townhouses Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 2875 Manns Ranch Road / Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 13 Applicant: Booth Creek Townhouse Association, represented by Pamela Stenmark Planner: J onathan Spence 5.19.D R B19-0267 - Potter Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (A C unit) Address/Legal Description: 223 Gore Creek Drive Unit 3/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: J ohn Potter, represented by Rocky Mountain Construction Group Planner: Ashley Clark 5.20.D R B19-0270 - Andrews Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (reroof) Address/Legal Description: 1179 Spraddle Creek Road/Lot 7, Spraddle Creek Estates Applicant: George A. Andrews Revocable Trust, represented by Meadow Mountain Homes Planner: J onathan Spence 5.21.D R B19-0272 - Town of Vail Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 1600 South Frontage Road W est/Unplatted - Donovan Park Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: J onathan Spence 5.22.D R B19-0277 - Four Seasons Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 1 Vail Road/Lot A-C, Vail Village Filing 2 Applicant: Four Seasons, represented by Ceres Landcare Planner: J onathan Spence 5.23.D R B19-0278 - O Neill Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (windows) Address/Legal Description: 2820 Aspen Court Unit B/Lot 14, Vail Village Filing 11 Applicant: Thomas ONeill, represented by Home Depot US A Planner: Ashley Clark July 16, 2019 - Page 8 of 110 5.24.D R B19-0279 - Prima Partners LL C Final review of a change to approved plans (windows/door) Address/Legal Description: 285 Forest Road/Lot 20, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Prima Partners LLC, represented by Shepherd Resources I nc. Planner: J onathan Spence 5.25.D R B19-0280 - Vail Marriott Final review of an exterior alteration (reroof) Address/Legal Description: 715 W est Lionshead Circle/West Day Subdivision Applicant: Diamondrock Vail Owner LLC, represented by The Roofing Company Planner: J onathan Spence 5.26.D R B19-0285 - Nunez Residence Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 1457 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 8, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Applicant: Deborah Nunez Living Trust Planner: Ashley Clark The applic ations 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 Town C ounc il Chambers. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Design Review Board will c onsider an item. Please call 970-479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification, dial 711. July 16, 2019 - Page 9 of 110 P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N J uly 8, 2019, 1:00 P M Town Council C hambers 75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1.Call to Order 1.1.Attendance Present: Brian Gillette, Pam Hopkins, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz, J ohn- Ryan Lockman, Brian Stockmar, Karen Perez (arrived at 1:20 P M) Absent: None 2.Main Agenda 2.1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. T he proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto (P E C19-0022) 30 min. Applicant:Vailpoint L L C, represented by Sarah J Baker P C Planner:J onathan Spence Planner J onathan Spence presented the application. He stated that this application has been before the P E C a few times over the past year and a half. Mr. Spence stated that the P E C previously approved a subdivision for this site. Relying upon a zoning map, Mr. Spence demonstrated that the lot has two different zoning designations. He noted that the parcel is under the same ownership and the applicant is seeking to change the zoning to one designation. He noted that two letters in opposition have been submitted into the record. Chairman Stockmar called for questions from the commissioners. Mr. Stockmar inquired about the court order quieting title. Mr. Spence stated the court order did not opine on the local regulatory structure or zoning and pertained only to ownership. Mr. Stockmar noted that the staff memo provides details that this is a unique situation. Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spence stated that in terms of the Community Development Department, having two zoning designations on one lot creates regulatory problems. He stated that in terms of setbacks and other calculations determining what is required is difficult. Chairman Stockmar noted that this is a de novo review and the P E C shall base their decision solely based on the materials in their packet and public July 16, 2019 - Page 10 of 110 testimony given today. There was a discussion over the protected covenants versus the change in zoning. Mr. Spence noted that the private covenants are not handled within the Community Development Department and are outside of the P E C or Staff’s purview. Ms. Sara Baker, representing the property owner, noted that the staff report states that all criteria have been met and requested that the P E C approve the zoning change. Ms. Baker noted that whatever covenants are in place today will not be impacted by any zoning change. She noted that the property is currently zoned Agriculture/Open Space and that development is permitted. Ms. Baker stated that the uses that are allowed by right are different in each district and is a unique situation and the application is a clean-up. Ms. Baker stated that the court order did not order a change in zoning and just addressed ownership. She noted that this is not the first time the town has rezoned property in identical situation. Relying upon the town zoning map, she referred to an application to rezone on Hanson Ranch Road. Ms. Baker provided additional examples of rezoning and stated that there is precedent for rezoning. Upon inquiry from Commissioner Hopkins, Mr. Spence stated that all setbacks are measured from property lines. There was a discussion regarding the flexibility in setbacks for Public Accommodation (PA) zoning districts that the P E C has discretion in setting. Chairman Stockmar called for public comment. Mr. J onathan Stauffer, resident, asked how we got here and stated that it has been zoned open space since the first mayor. He noted that it is open space that makes Vail such an attractive community. He stated if this proposal is allowed any developer can do the same thing. Mr. Wendell Porterfield, counsel for Christiana, and two others, stated that this is a self-created problem by quiet title. He stated that there is a statement in the memo that goal #4 has been met and a statement that the public has always perceived this as part of the residence. He concluded that they do not support the requested action. An owner of a condo unit abutting the property stated that all three groups sent a statement of objection and hope that they have received and read it. She stated that the applicant is asking the town the same question over and over. She noted that green space of any kind is valuable and stated that if the P E C approves the request it will set a bad precedent. Mr. J im Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, stated that the covenants were Vail’s first land use constitution. He noted that in a constitution you have two things: the rules and how to change those rules. Mr. Lamont stated that it would be best if not totally appropriate to have those rules amended before the application is brought before the board. A resident spoke in opposition to the proposal. He stated that it frightens him to see where development is going and encouraged the board to look July 16, 2019 - Page 11 of 110 at the open space encroachment across Vail. Lu Maslak, resident, stated that they came to Vail after looking at many ski towns and chose Vail because of open space and sentiment in the valley to keep these open spaces and noted that she’s observed an erosion of that concept. She stated that she is opposed to the encroachment on open space. She stated she is imploring them to consider what the P E C is doing. Herman Stafford, Vail resident, echoed everything that has been said so far. He stated that they have an obligation to protect open space public and private. He stated they must protect what we have and not let other people to take it away and let them redevelop the house but keep the open space. Chairman Stockmar closed public comment. Commissioner Lockman stated that he appreciated the public comment and stated that the P E C must look at this application as if no prior applications have been submitted. Mr. Lockman stated it is a challenging application and noted their duty for the town is to review the criteria in an objective way to see if the application meets the criteria in the town code. He further noted that you cannot have two zoning designations on one property. Mr. Lockman stated that, in reviewing, the criteria it does comply. Commissioner Hopkins stated that she is an old timer as well. Ms. Hopkins stated that she would have liked a plan delineating where the zoning district transects the property and stated she is inclined to vote against it. Commissioner Perez stated that she does not see that it meets Goal #4 of the master plan. She noted that she would like to see the final development and will vote against it. Commissioner Kurz stated that he would like to see the development plan as well. Mr. Kurz noted he is not ready to vote in favor at this time and would like to see the proposed development plan along with the zoning change. Commissioner Gillette stated that he also did not feel it meets Goal #4 of the master plan and is inclined to vote against. Commissioner Kjesbo stated that he would like to see the development plan before voting in favor. Chairman Stockmar stated that the issue before the P E C is the zoning and not the project, building, or anything presented to the board previously. He stated he is in agreement with the other commissioners and would like to see the development plan. He stated he would like to see the proposed building as well as everything brought before and invited a motion to table. Ms. Baker stated that the P E C has seen the development plan which they previously reviewed. Ms. Baker stated that the applicant would agree to table this request and urged the P E C to review the exterior alteration application. Upon inquiry from Ms. Perez, Ms. Baker stated there have been no changes made from the previously reviewed development plan. July 16, 2019 - Page 12 of 110 There was a discussion regarding the application for a major exterior alteration. Chairman Stockmar stated reviewing both the zoning and development plan together would be beneficial. Mr. Spence stated that while both applications can be reviewed together, zoning approval can not be tied to a development application. Ludwig Kurz moved to table to a future date. Pam Hopkins seconded the motion and it passed (6-1). Ayes:(6)Hopkins, Kjesbo, Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Stockmar Nays:(1)Gillette 2.2.A request for the review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-6I - 11, Development Plan Required, Vail Town Code, for a new housing development located at 3700 North Frontage Road East/Lot 1, East Vail Workforce Housing Subdivision (“Booth Heights Neighborhood”), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0018) 120 min. Applicant:Triumph Development Planner:Chris Neubecker Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing for P E C19-0018 and noted that written comments are encouraged as it gives the board time to review them ahead of time. Mr. Stockmar stated that he does not support allowing the consolidation of comments for one person to speak on behalf of several. Planner Neubecker stated that some comments were received by staff after 12P M on Friday and noted that while the comments were not in the packets, they were forwarded to the board for their review. Mr. Neubecker gave a presentation for the Booth Heights Neighborhood. Mr. Neubecker reviewed the Environmental I mpact Report (E I R) submitted to the town and recommendations made to mitigate impacts to wildlife. Mr. Neubecker noted that the application includes a landscaping plan and a wildlife enhancement area to create a better habitat for sheep. Mr. Neubecker noted that this area would be an ongoing commitment for the applicant to maintain for the sheep habitat. Mr. Neubecker stated that the previous application there was a discussion regarding the location of the bus stop design. He noted that a recommendation from Colorado Parks and W ildlife (C P W ) was to move the bus stop out of the west end. Mr. Neubecker presented an alternative design giving buses an area to turn around as suggested by the town’s Public Works and Transportation department. Another alternative, Mr. Neubecker, presented was to provide access to the east bus stop and not have a bus stop on the west side. Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Neubecker stated that coming west bound there is one stop on the north side of the Frontage Road. There was a discussion regarding access to crosswalks and bus stops. Mr. Neubecker reviewed four questions staff is requesting feedback on from the P E C. Mr. Lockman asked about the 3D model requested. Mr. Neubecker stated that the applicant is working on those additional materials and is part of the reason they are requesting to change the July 16, 2019 - Page 13 of 110 timeline for public hearings. Michael O’Conner, Triumph Development, provided the P E C an update. He noted that the concept of getting massing and project level elevations is something that makes a lot of sense and they can make progress on that by the next meeting. He stated it will be an update. Chairman Stockmar stated that they would like to see massing, sections and other visuals to help with their review. There was a discussion to have a meeting on J uly 22, 2019 to review massing. Mr. O’Conner stated that their technical experts are available to the P E C to answer any questions. Mr. O’Conner stated that the agenda today is to talk about items C, D and E. Mr. Koechlein, Professional Geologist, analyzed the geology for the site. Mr. Koechlein stated that the Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program was utilized for the analysis. Mr. Koechlein stated that the area proposed for development does not have as much impact as the adjacent property to the west (Booth Creek). He reviewed the rockfall design recommendations to create a means of dissipating the rockfall and collecting the rock when it reached the property. Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Mr. Koechlein stated that the berm will be approximately 20’ above existing grade, depending on the slope conditions. Chairman Stockmar asked if there are diagrams that show bolting or pinning of the potential rockfall and to what extent is that being proposed? He asked if you were to pin the fascia does that create less risk in terms of likelihood or potential greater risk that a larger chuck of the fascia could fall. Mr. Koechlein stated that rock bolting is done on many rocks and being able to accomplish that on this site would be very difficult and getting equipment to do that would be difficult. Mr. Koechlein stated that rockbolting would probably not be appropriate in this case. Mr. Gillette asked how this berm compared to another berm. Mr. Koechlein stated they are very similar, the shape is the same and the 1:1 is the same. He noted that they are similar in terms of slope however the rockfall analysis for this site is less of a concern as it was for the site to the west. Mr. Koechlein then reviewed the rockfall berm location and storm drainage. He reviewed the property to the west and location of the rockfall berm on that site. Showing photos of existing conditions, Mr. Koechlein reviewed the rockfall berm of the abutting site and noted a similar berm is proposed for the Booth Heights proposal. Mr. Koechlein reviewed the historic landslide map and noted that the major landslide is to the east of the yellow zone (as indicated on the slide). He noted the mass has moved down the slope and the building that may be July 16, 2019 - Page 14 of 110 affected by this, to be investigated further, would be the building to the very right. Mr. Gillette asked if the buildings on the right would be mitigated if it is a problem. MR. Koechlein stated that mitigation is possible and would require the construction of a concrete mass and install tie backs through the block and the tie blocks go into the formation and most cases back into the bedrock to stabilize and support to keep it from moving. Chairman Stockmar noted that a huge portion of the mountainside has slid off. Mr. Stockmar asked what the potential was that the same kind of event could happen over this project. Mr. Koechlein noted that the question is a good one and that is what the investigation would look into. Chairman Stockmar stated he would be interested in the results of the soil study and is a concern. Mr. Koechlein agreed and stated that is what the investigation will do. Chairman Stockmar stated that he would like to know what the likelihood of a similar event to happen. There was a discussion over risk evaluation. Ms. Perez noted that the reports date back to 2016 and asked if this report is limited to the 5 acre site or the entire site. Mr. O’Connor stated that they have updated the math and the model based on the relocation of the berm. He noted it’s been an evolution in studying the situation and then ultimately finalizing what is in the P E C package. He noted the initial reports dates back to 2016 and there are supplemental reports. Ms. Perez stated that she was looking at figure 2 in the report for Caesar I nc. on page 337 in the P E C packet. Mr. Neubecker confirmed that Ms. Perez is looking at the entire site, all 24 acres. Mr. Neubecker reviewed the 5 acres within the larger map where development is proposed. Ms. Perez stated that she wanted to make clear that Mr. Stockmar was looking at the entire site. Mr. Stockmar stated that the topographical image does clearly show the landslide and shows the massive elevation change that delineates the two parcels. There was a discussion over the landslide indicated on the topographic map and that there is a concern that another similar event would happen on that elevation. Mr. Stockmar stated that he looks forward to the investigation into the risk of landslide as Mr. Koechlein stated they were studying. Ms. Sandy Gibson, landscape architect, Outside LA in Steamboat Springs, presented the landscaping plan. Ms. Gibson stated that their goal was to balance a lot of the opportunities of the site inwardly due to wildlife issues. She noted that some internal open spaces have been curated for the residents versus pushing to the outside. She noted to the east of the large buildings exists a community area with trellis features; they have removed the gas firepits. Ms. Gibson stated that the communal gathering space with seating area and utilizing the fire turn around area with permeable pavers. Ms. Gibson then reviewed the site lighting plan and noted that it is similar to the plan at the Chamonix development. She noted July 16, 2019 - Page 15 of 110 they are wayfinding lights with cutoffs. Ms. Gibson reviewed development standards and noted as following: Criteria C is met as their plan is functional and aesthetic and noted substantial topsoil will be used and no substantial retaining walls are proposed. Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Ms. Gibson stated the boulder retaining walls are proposed. Mr. O’Connor interjected that they will not be more than 3’ in height due to front yard setback requirements in the Town Code. Ms. Gibson stated that the existing trees in the right-of-way will be preserved. Ms. Gibson noted that staff comments will be integrated into the final landscaping plan. She noted that the seed used will be acceptable to C D OT as well as the adjacent forest land. She noted cottonwoods will be planted in appropriate places, away from structures. Ms. Gibson further stated that the site plan will be revised to preserve all offsite trees. She then asked if there were any questions. Mr. O’Connor then reviewed “Criteria D” for pedestrian and site circulation. He noted traffic and the underpass, parking and circulation bus impacts. Kari Mc Dowell, traffic and transportation engineer, 1099 Capital Street, Eagle, C O. Ms. Mc Dowell stated they met with C D OT and Town of Vail staff to discuss traffic. Ms. Mc Dowell stated that the first page provides the site plan relative to the access. Relying upon the slide “Traffic- Project Access and Circulation” Ms. Mc Dowell stated the curb cut is approximately 1000’ from Big Horn Road and over 2000’ from Katsos Ranch Road. She noted that the internal streets are 26’ and multiple turnarounds are provided. Mr. Neubecker stated the fire marshal has reviewed the plans and the applicant has made changes based upon his feedback. Ms. Mc Dowell stated the North Frontage Road is a C D OT roadway. She stated the traffic data was collected during Christmas time so should capture peak use. Ms. Mc Dowell then reviewed the existing traffic conditions and findings of their traffic study. Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Kassmel reviewed the pedestrian improvements to the interchanges. Mr. Kassmel stated that the east Vail interchange does not have connecting sidewalks or high pedestrian traffic so it has not been a priority. Mr. Kassmel noted this additional development would bring more pedestrians to the area and it would be important to understand what the pedestrians would be walking to. Chairman Stockmar noted, anecdotally, that the underpass is very dangerous to walk under and noted he is looking for some way to make that a safer pedestrian experience year round. Mr. Kassmel stated that adding a sidewalk would provide that option for a pedestrian. Mr. Gillette stated that the town should explore how to connect this development safely to town for pedestrians. Ms. Kassmel stated they have had discussions to have one continuous path. He noted that while it is not in the master plan, it has been discussed July 16, 2019 - Page 16 of 110 whether there would be space to do that. Mr. Kassmel stated that if there was a desire for that connection there would be space. Chairman Stockmar noted that to get to the closest grocery store would require you to go under the underpass. Mr. Gillette inquired into the process is to get the sidewalk connection. Mr. Kassmel stated that it would need to be budgeted by Town Council for to create the sidewalk. Ms. Mc Dowell continued her presentation and presented an alternative traffic circulation and showed an exhibit that would decrease the lane width and create room for bike lanes. Ms. Mc Dowell then reviewed the anticipated traffic for the workforce housing portion and the portion that is not workforce housing and the other portion they used standard rates. Mr. Gillette inquired if national numbers were used in lieu of local numbers if they are higher or lower? Ms. Mc Dowell stated workforce housing was 40% lower than the national. She stated they looked at the transit ridership as well in their analysis and so used the same ratios and makes up for the difference between those. Ms. Perez inquired whether the developer will have mail delivery at the site. She noted that some of the traffic and ins and oust are to the post office which may have implications for the vehicular trip number. Ms. Hopkins stated this is an employee housing project and asked the number that will live there. Ms. Mc Dowell reviewed the traffic analysis. There was a discussion regarding growth in traffic in the future. Mr. O’Connor then reviewed the opportunity for additional parking. He noted that an item the P E C brought up was a concern for the parking availability for the workforce housing units. He stated they reviewed the site plan and have found a way to add a net additional 11 parking spaces. He noted the A D A required parking is noted on the site and discussed the possibility to have the electrical in place for E V charging stations. The snow storage plan is considerably above the town’s requirements at 39% with a required 30%. He stated this change creates 56 parking spaces with a ratio of 1.33 spaces per unit. He noted that is brings in line with P E C approval for Lion’s Ridge. Mr. O’Connor stated that those residents are more likely to own a car than the residents at this development. Mr. O’Connor showed a summer and winter pedestrian circulation plan and discussed the A D A needs. He noted they are only required to have 2 units A D A compliant but more that are adaptable. Mr. O’Connor then reviewed the proposed bus stop configurations. He noted there are many competing interests in consideration of access to the bus stop and location. He noted they have the east west connectivity. He stated to build the bus stop, Public W orks recommends would mean not doing some of the features the wildlife mitigation would are proposing. Rick Thompson, W estern Ecosystems, I nc. W ildlife Biologist, reviewed July 16, 2019 - Page 17 of 110 Criteria E Environmental I mpacts, Mr. Thompson stated that in 2017 he did a wildlife study while he was retired, then he was asked to give a presentation on optimal development design on wildlife. He stated that in developing design criteria he saw as an opportunity to put in some wildlife standards to protect the wildlife. He stated he agreed to work with the applicant based on their guarantee that they would incorporate wildlife design criteria. Mr. Thompson stated that he worked on three reports: August 2018, W ildlife Monitoring Report, W ildlife Mitigation Plan and the E I R W ildlife sections of the proposal. Relying upon a map with a pink polygon showing winter range in east Vail, Mr. Thompson discussed the C P W -mapped Bighorn Sheep summer and winter ranges. He then discussed wildfire suppression effects and the results of the 1998 Environmental Assessment (E A). He then provided an overview of sheep life history, specifically noting that with sheep winter range is escape cover represented by cliff bands and shrub habitat on south and southwestern facing slopes with good snow shedding. He noted sheep do not use forests and described the Booth Creek herd history and identified a preferred shrub of the sheep. Mr. Thompson described the sheep population. Mr. Thompson described the 7-month wildlife study with the purpose to evaluate the sheep. He then showed where game cameras were located for the study and described how winter severity affects spatial and temporal sheep habitat use patterns. Mr. Thompson then presented a winter range polygon based on his study and reviewed the findings of his report. He enumerated the design criteria and proposed mitigation strategies such as fully enclosed trash structures, no sizeable internal parks and minimum parking and fencing to restrict residents from surrounding habitat. There was a discussion regarding fencing. Mr. Thompson stated that Colorado Parks and W ildlife wanted fencing. Mr. Thompson and another biologist were against fencing due to the reduction of viable habitat. Mr. Thompson stated that the other biologist was opposed to the fence because “fences end” and it would be more appropriate to educate the residents. Mr. O’Connor stated that education, signage and other components are important for residents. Mr. Thompson then reviewed the proposed mitigation plan components. Restrictions include no heavy construction outdoors during winter range period, and screening with a berm and landscaping. Supplemental feeding of sheep could be done if warranted due to the weather. Enhancement would be done on site, up to 14.6 acres, removing downed logs, remove aspen stand, reclaiming habitat. Mr. Thompson then reviewed his outreach with the Forest Service and the Town of Vail. He then discussed mitigation plans outside of the proposed development area to create paths for the sheep to move back and forth and maximize habitat conditions by addressing an overgrown forest. He noted another critical component is the occupancy related management prohibiting year-round access and recreational use of surrounding lands. Mr. Thompson stated that resident education is a critical component and July 16, 2019 - Page 18 of 110 everyone must read and sign a wildlife mitigation plan. He noted the first violation is a fine of $250, second fine $500, and a third violation is a $750 fine and 1 month notice to vacate the premises for rental units. He stated for the employee housing Vail Resorts will have a disciplinary action for their employees. Mr. Thompson then discussed the impacts of the development to Elk and Peregrine Falcon. He then reviewed impacts to a variety of other wildlife groups. Mr. Thompson concluded his presentation by stating that the project effects have been avoided, minimized, and offset, by project design, construction and enhancement commitments, and implementation and enforcement of the mitigation. He noted that the real benefit of the project is the increased awareness of habitat quality. The PEC took a 5-minute recess. Chairman Stockmar closed the recess and continued on with the hearing. Mr. Stockmar stated he would like to create an opportunity at the next meeting reserved for public comment, though he was not sure if that would be entirely possible. Mr. Thompson presented his response to C P W ’s J uly 3, 2019 comment letter. He stated that the literature cited is correct but noted the literature doesn’t address the impacts on habituation. Mr. Thompson stated that he did not agree with the comment from the letter that states “The most consistently available and suitable winter range is predominantly restricted to the development site” Mr. Thompson continued to review his slides that outline his response to C P W ’s J uly 3, 2019 comment letter. Mr. Thompson then reviewed a summary of independent biologist reviews. He stated that the reviews did not consider his (2018) wildlife monitoring report or his 2018 peregrine nesting attempt brief, both of which detailed wildlife use that is only summarized in the E I R and Mitigation Plan. He noted that the Booth Creek herd is unique due to its habituation to human activity which the other biologists do not take fully into consideration. He continued his response to the independent wildlife biologist reviews and through his slides. Mr. Gillette stated there are proposed parking areas, multi-family buildings and townhouses. Mr. Gillette asked which of the uses is the least disturbing to the herd. Mr. Thompson stated the most disturbing will be traffic entering and exiting the parcel when the sheep are using that area as winter grazing range. He noted that this sheep herd is habituated to predictable unchanging events. He noted that they would not be impacted by cars going up and down the street as traffic flow, however, if someone were to stop and get out of the car that would be out of context and be impactful. Mr. Gillette reiterated the proposed uses and asked if the site layout is July 16, 2019 - Page 19 of 110 appropriate and asked which use should be closest to the west. Mr. Thompson stated he did not design the layout but did encourage development be located as close to the Frontage Road as possible to create the largest possible buffer between good foraging habitat and the residences. He noted the human activity that might be more regular outside of the townhomes should be most separated. He stated the parking lot provides a buffer from the west end of the parcel whereas the townhomes are screened by the north because of the aspen. Mr. Lockman inquired about the western berm. Mr. Thompson stated that that is an area that has not been completely resolved and would like to meet with Parks and W ildlife to discuss further. He stated the goal is to mitigate the sightlines of traffic with a buffer. He stated landscaping might be more effective at blocking the view, his concern is the level of landscaping that may be required might actually force the sheep out on the Frontage Road. He further stated the sheep are habituated to traffic on the existing road. Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Thompson, stated the western bus stop may be an impact of the project with the possible benefit that sheep that might use that during the day might not freak out from getting caught between the housing and road. He stated with this development he did not think the sheep would graze in that area anymore. Mr. Kjesbo inquired about the timeline for habitat mitigation. Mr. O’Connor stated that they could commit to the adjacent NA P improved site work done before the first winter of construction. He stated the sooner they receive approval, the sooner they can begin those mitigation efforts. He noted that they would only do the initial heavy construction from April 15 to November 15. There was a discussion regarding not allowing owners to have dogs and fences. Mr. Gillette voiced a concern regarding the impacts of dogs on the sheep. Mr. Kjesbo stated that this site is a very environmentally sensitive site. Upon inquiry of Ms. Perez, Mr. O’Connor stated that the mitigation that Mr. Thompson reviewed proposed design criteria which informed a site plan. He noted as an example the multifamily building was placed lower on the site. He stated from a wildlife standpoint, building one home has a significant impact. Mr. O’Connor concluded their presentation. He stated that they meet the standards of the code which is there to make development happen responsibility. He reviewed impacts of recreational use of backcountry land that are impacting wildlife. Mr. Gillette inquired about ongoing funding for maintenance of the NA P parcel. Mr. O’Connor stated the he wants to present a plan that is completely on private property to control and commit to maintain. He stated if they need to set aside some money for permanent maintenance and can be added into the plan. Mr. Gillette stated that the C P W was asking for money for offside July 16, 2019 - Page 20 of 110 enhancements. Mr. O’Connor stated they are already doing a lot on their private property. Chairman Stockmar called for public comments. Larry Stewart, East Vail Resident, stated that he is glad there will be another meeting. Mr. Stewart stated this meeting was surreal that included a long explanation from the applicant. He stated what the independent biologists have to say is a game changer and say some unbelievable things. C P W stated it is not an 1800-acre polygon, more like 150 acres that the sheep have which make it even more critical that we get this right. He pointed to findings in the independent biologist find that the report by Mr. Thompson was not scientific. He stated the experts should present to the P E C and encouraged the P E C to allow them to complete their work. Charlyn Canada and Clair Rose Kelly, Ms. Canada stated Vail Resorts serendipitously realized they owned the land and stated that the Town of Vail should buy the property. She stated with Vail Resorts touting itself as an ecofriendly business it could work to preserve the land. She stated to allow development would give Vail Resorts a public relations black eye and by association the entire valley. She stated there are options to limit short- term rentals to help impact employee housing. She described how as a child she taunted her pet ram, Captain Video who would run around in circles in the chicken coop. Ms. Canada described an encounter with a big horn ram and that she hoped he did not have the temperament of Captain Video. She stated observing the sheep for over three decades and we have encroached to a critical point which necessitates the denial of further development. Ms. Canada described weather conditions and hazards that are above this employee housing unit and we should not subject employees to that environment. Ariana Aghevli, 39 Fall Line Drive, she stated that buses using the Falls at Vail bus station gets very busy during the winter and the buses are already packed by the time they get there. The underpass under the highway is unsafe and on the idea of education of the residents, while it’s all good and great you can’t expect people not to have dogs. She stated that there is no real enforcement for 24/7. She then stated the population of the sheep is already declining and look to environmental stewardship as a core value. Rol Hamelin, stated the three wildlife biologists submitted their letters in writing. He stated that the independent reviewers were critical and noted that indirect human disturbance is a greater threat than direct. Mr. Hamelin stated that the study is not adequate in design and results is not sufficient to make a decision and not analyzed properly. He pointed out that everyone is asked to sign a paper and agree saying they understand everything above and noted that the rules are immediately broken. Sherry Dorward, 1515 Buffher Creek Road, landscape architect in the town for 30 years. She stated one of the other elephants in a herd of them is how we treat land. Ms. Dorward stated that’s what happens when you taken a 5 acre piece of property and scrape it up and take every bit of natural vegetation and change the grade so that it can be made to work for a lot of development. Mr. Dorward asked what kind of place are we creating. She noted that internal circulation at the main driveway is over 8% in Vail that requires snowmelt. You look at a parking lot that is double loading you would want 60’, however only 45’ are proposed. She asked how cars are going to be accessed and asked where they turn around. July 16, 2019 - Page 21 of 110 She stated that the landscaping that is meant to be an amenity and it isn’t just the absence of pavement, its something that feels natural. She stated the small shade trees are not going to work. Scott Hintz, stated that there are only 7,000 big horn sheep. He stated they are blessed with this herd and stated the migration pattern is the only one in the entire Gore Range. He asked if we are willing to destroy these natural environments and pave over the paradise they live in. Kirstine Hintz- An endangered species becomes that way for two reasons: loss of habitat and genetics. She stated that project by project, and community by community, habitat is being lost and stated we are a microcosm. She stated with this project we have another example of how local economic interest is trumping the bigger picture. She noted that one of the criticisms of the reports states that it does not to take into account the larger picture. She asked where is the environmental stewardship of the big horn sheep. She stated there is no need for this project and no need to feed the sheep during the construction of this project. Mark Herron, Vail Valley Partnership, stated they represent businesses in the valley. He stated that they have reviewed the project as a business community. He stated that environmental standards need to be maintained as existing conditions and stated the developer is proposing the largest private mitigation in the history of the town. He stated that affordable housing continues to be a major issue. He stated it is clear to them that the project meets the town requirements. He stated doing the right thing is not always easy but following the guidelines should be. Suzanne O’Neill, executive director Colorado W ildlife Federation, stated that they really are pleased that this is not an action item and commended the P E C for hiring outside experts. She stated that one of the reviewers did not have much time to do much research was recently retired. She stated all three are big horn sheep experts. She stated she appreciated the work Colorado Parks and W ildlife has done and if what we have to go on is a 7-month study, there are a lot of questions that remain. She stated that working with parks and wildlife, their studies are a minimum of two-years and are well crafted. She stated that the study should include the experience of the spring lambing and the following rut afterwards. She stated that the topic of feeding of wildlife in winter is discussed at C P W , it is a robust discussion and a big deal. She stated it is not a quick Band-Aid solution. Elyse Howard, resident Vail I ntermountain neighborhood, stated that balance in this community, the environment is critical as well as the wildlife. She stated that Vail’s vision to be the premier mountain community needs to be considered. She stated that the developer is not asking for any variances and should be taken into consideration. She stated it is the rule, not the exception, to see many families in one housing unit. She stating adding housing units adds to the inventory. Peter Casabonne, resident of west Vail, stated that the parcel was thought to be owned by C D OT and was considered open space on the Comprehensive Open Lands plan. He stated Vail Resorts and the Vail Local Housing Authority knew in the early stages of planning that the building areas of their new found asset included winter range sheep. He stated to satisfy criteria E the developer has submitted a short-term study and it has been used to downplay the risks of this singular herd of the July 16, 2019 - Page 22 of 110 bighorn sheep. He stated that the residents feel strongly and feel its review by C P W and three independent wildlife biologists have dedicated a significant portion of their career to the bighorn sheep. They suggest that the study done was too limited in scope to fully assess the impact. He stated that because Vial Resorts and Vail Local Housing Authority have been pushing their project forward before anyone asks what happens to the sheep. He urged the commissioners to consider the wildlife biologists recommendations. He stated this is not a win-win for wildlife biologists. J onathan Staufer, west Vail resident, stated that he is a business owner and member of the community. He stated this is not the only workforce housing option. He asked if we have the moral right to consign the bighorn sheep herd to oblivion and that we have a moral obligation to protect these little creatures. He stated this project cannot be mitigated. He stated if we allow this development this herd will cease to exist. I t will happen slowly. They will starve to death and these creatures calling this place home since the end of the ice age will be gone. He stated the P E C should call upon the Town Council to purchase this property to project it. Bill Andree, stated he is not a sheep expert, but was a game warden for 30 years he put every collar neckband on them. He stated he was not called to review this as an expert. He is the one that wrote the Town of Vail is not sustainable. He stated he has done a lot of work with Rick Thompson but disagree greatly on many of his conclusions. He stated you do not know if that animal is habituated without property monitoring. He stated winter time is starvation mode and the ewes are pregnant and they are trying to put on enough pounds for lactation. He stated habituation is not good for these sheep. He stated the sheep will not let you get anywhere near them. He stated when you see them along the road they take on a herd mentality. He stated he has reviewed many plans in Washington, North Dakota, and I daho. He stated wildlife has never won a battle. He stated he is sympathetic that it is tough here to live here as an employee. Donna Mumma, east Vail resident, stated the east Vail community is walled off. She stated that people are critical and people who use that underpass are critical and pedestrian safety is critical. She stated that is it not a 4’ wide passage way and barely allows a wheelchair or stroller, and in the winter it does not exist. She stated that she has an issue with the traffic study: they were looking at the passing lanes which obscure long sight vision though they did not say anything in their traffic report about pedestrians. She stated she would like Mr. Kassmel to prove that this intersection can have pedestrian safety features. Peter Seibert, 2381 Upper Traverse way, happy Chamonix Resident, stated they did a great job there at Chamonix and they had a nice Fourth of J uly block party. He stated that the project is zoned for this use. He stated this project is a lot like Vail when he grew up as it has a mix of seasonal employee, residents and second homeowner. Ms. Andi Saden, stated that the locals and the experts have provided a lot of information. She asked if this was compatible for the big range sheep and asked when common sense comes in. She stated she is counting on the P E C to represent the community’s interests. She stated maybe there is no balance with this project. J oel Stauffer, stated that between J anuary 5, 1963 and April 1st he and his wife moved 11 times, so he is very sympathetic to the housing issue. July 16, 2019 - Page 23 of 110 He stated this project should never have been. He stated you come up from Denver to take a weekend in the mountains and the first thing you will see is this humongous building. I mean welcome to the mountains and all you see is a suburb of Denver, and that’s where we’re going. Mr. Stauffer stated that employees will get cars as soon as they can afford them and most of the time there are two people in a bedroom so each two bedroom apartment has a potential need for four cars. He stated the project is all the wrong things. Blondie Vucich, Vail resident, stated that when the East Vail parcel was made in 2017 that the request was odd, both P E C and Town Council approved and the citizens were ensured a thoughtful process would be followed. She stated the P E C is charged with unpacking every detail of the environmental report. She stated three independent wildlife biologists and parks and wildlife submitted reports and pointed out that the study was inadequate in design and results. She stated there is no funding in place for wildlife mitigation. She stated all the reports give new reason to question the scale and mass of this project. Bill Eggers, stated that Triumph Development has been sincere in their development. He stated they are coming to the P E C and the P E C’s decision on this is one of the most important in a long time. Mr. Eggers stated that the P E C has the information from the wildlife biologists and they have an important decision, they can roll the dice and hope its alright with Triumph Development. He stated the other decision is how we do business in Vail. He stated this is robbing Peter to pay Paul. He stated it’s critically important and is for a corporation that is worth $10 billion. Tom Vucich east Vail resident, stated that he has read all the environmental reports. He stated that these reports need further review. He raised a concern regarding the extent the Colorado Parks and W ildlife has had in the plan. He stated that all report reviewers have extensive credentials and experiences and he stated these are the experts who speak for the animals and who can appropriate speak to the efficacy of any wildlife plan. He stated all these documents shed light on the inadequacy, too limited content of the plan submitted by Triumph. He stated the P E C now has legitimacy to go back to Triumph and request a report that adequately meets the Vail standards. He provided examples of mitigation meaning loss of wildlife habitat. He then defined insanity as defining the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. He stated if you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten. He stated our wildlife populations are in crisis. He stated as another wildlife expert said we are mitigating them to death. He urged the P E C to listen to the experts and stated this plan on this parcel needs much more scrutiny. Alison W adey, Vail Chamber and Business Association, stated that there are two sides on every coin. She stated that the balance comment hits the nail on the head. She stated this project is crucial to the local workforce. She stated that finding employees is a struggle and there is a way to find a middle ground. She stated the Town of Vail, developers and stakeholders involved can figure it out. Barb Keller, Booth Creek resident, questioned the design intensity and impact to sheep. She stated that after weeding through all the reports she is scared to death for the sheep. She noted that the reports indicate the sheep right now are in a dangerous situation and very vulnerable and could be pushed to extinction. She noted they are limited by grazing July 16, 2019 - Page 24 of 110 areas. She stated that sheep use the area and they hit the west corridor and tip toe around it. She stated the experts recommend testing the effectiveness of their usefulness before construction can proceed. She stated habitat restoration is not a one shot deal and requires dedication. She stated the experts recommend that no construction occur during the winter months and noted that it is hard to believe strategies implemented to project the sheep would not impact them. She stated the experts tell us the idea that the sheep will move elsewhere is not true. Pam Stenmark, Vail Resident since 1969. She stated that Vail Valley Partnership continues to state is that the 1800 acres of habitat that is available for the sheep. She stated that some of that acreage includes Frontage Road and other areas. She stated the usable land the sheep has is about 150 acres. She noted that the 14 acres of space in the NA P is not used by the sheep, the mitigation proposed in the section won’t help the sheep. She stated that currently the wildlife mitigation Triumph is proposing is woefully inadequate. She stated it is not just one project, but the life of the project. She stated we need to start over with the mitigation. Grace Paganski, Vail resident, stated that most of what she was prepared to say has already been stated. She referred to a report from Melanie W oolever, a wildlife biologist, 20 years experience in bighorn sheep. She stated that bighorn sheep are considered by the US forest service in the sensitive species. Colorado has placed bighorn sheep in the greatest need category. She voiced a concern about the enforcement of the rules and regulations being done by the HOA with seasonal employees, part-time owners and full-time owners she stated that she did not think you could put together an HOA that can address the needs of that community. She stated it is hard to enforce the rules. She stated in regards to the sheep habituation, they have been habituated to traffic on the highways and homes. They have not been habituated to large apartment buildings with lots of people and traffic coming and going constantly. Mark Gordon, Vail Resident and Business owner, stated if you live in Vail and are upset with the wildlife situation look in the mirror, because everyone is guilty for degrading the quality of wildlife. He stated we need to make sure we have a fair process and we have many residences existing in bighorn sheep territory. He stated he is worried of the fairness of the process. He stated the public comments and boards should identify flaws and suggest how to make it better. He stated he is worried when the process is done dishonestly and the goal is to kill the project. He stated the board must filter through and come up with the suggestions that are best for a private company to stay on private land. Lu Maslak, Sunburst Drive resident, stated that she is concerned about parking, traffic flow, and under the underpass, pedestrian traffic, and mitigation plans that don’t appear to be addressing the total need. She stated the only entity that hasn’t been represented are the big horn sheep. She encouraged the P E C to listen carefully and read more. Kaye Ferry, resident of Vail Golf Course, stated that she is a big advocate for affordable housing. She stated that the four panels on the wall took a lot of time and effort and were arduous to go through she stated that we made a commitment that the things we outlined there would forever define the way we moved forward in the town of Vail. She referred the town’s mission to “preserve and environmental stewardship” she stated that every decision to be made in this room was to be measured against those things. She July 16, 2019 - Page 25 of 110 said we are not talking about the environment in a responsible way which was the goal of those four panels when they were originally written and it is imperative their decision is based on those four things. Pete Fesitmann, Vail Resident, relying upon “Site Section A” stated that in his opinion, spending all this time on wildlife has minimized the time spent on the fundamental environmental question: should land which has been long determined open space be developed? He stated he is not ignoring Vail Resorts property rights. He stated the 2019 tax appraisal for $4 million and the town can manage that for ownership. He stated given the community’s desire to balance environmental needs and housing needs – if the P E C were to say yes to this proposal – what would they say no to? Chairman Stockmar then closed public comment and stated no action will be taken. He stated their comments could be deferred to further meetings. Mr. O’Connor asked to speak to the P E C in response to some comments from the community. He stated that he is not happy with the process as it relates to the environmental review. He stated it has been mismanaged and is extremely unhappy with the timeline. He stated the fact that three people were hired at the finish line to review the environmental reports is not fair. Mr. O’Connor reviewed his concerns with the three independent wildlife reviewers. Planner Neubecker referred the P E C to the questions posed in the memo and in the PowerPoint, so that the applicant can have some direction. Mr. Kjesbo stated that he is on the fence on the wildlife mitigation plan and more reading needs to be done and he is not ready to make a decision on that. I n regards to the landscaping, he thinks it is probably ok. The location of the bus stop he preferred the in and out similar to what is over at Middle Creek. He stated it’s safer. He was not concerned about the lower area near the road being an area of grazing sheep. Mr. Gillette stated that the additional information that they did not see, the wildlife patterns, should be sent to the independent reviewers. He stated there is a lot of mitigation that can be done at the west end and one would be moving the bus stop out of the location. He stated he is curious what the town’s biologist would recommend of what’s best at the west end – what uses and whether they agree with the developer ’s biologist. He stated the parking should be per the housing developments recommendations and they need to keep going. He stated as far as moving the bus stop west, he thinks that the bus stop fine where it exists and one should be added with a crosswalk, and need decent access, and need to get a sidewalk under the underpass and over to the southside of the interstate. Mr. Gillette stated the fence going to the south side of the berm is good and wondering if more aspen screening could be provided on the western side, and perhaps moving the berm. Mr. Gillette stated he wanted to discuss more construction and timing of construction activities. He stated it is reasonable to limit outdoor construction from November 15 to April 15 to and he noted this would extend the duration, and impact the phasing of the project. He stated we should not allow blasting or chipping until after J uly 31st. He stated short term rentals and dogs should not be allowed, except for service and emotional support animals. Mr. Kurz asked the applicant if the grade of the road through the project is over 8%. Mr. O’Connor stated that all of the grades meet the town of Vail’s July 16, 2019 - Page 26 of 110 requirements and do not require snowmelt. He stated in terms of the wildlife mitigation plan, he is not ready to make a determination, that they received information from wildlife biologists at 10A M this morning and stated that he would encourage anybody from public to send comments in writing. He stated in terms of the landscaping he would encourage the developer to improve landscaping near the frontage road and mitigate the impacts. I n terms of the bus stop, he would prefer the town’s preferred idea of the in and out loop on the north side without crossing the frontage road. Ms. Perez stated that she needed more time to review the studies that were sent today. She stated the extent of the mitigation plan is significant and wondered if this is going to be limited to Triumph. Ms. Perez stated that more parking is needed versus less parking. She stated this is a tough site and a tough development. She noted the P E C has a charge and must go through the criteria and the amount of time taken for this application is not the norm; the P E C is taking the time needed to review the project given what a difficult site this is. She stated there is a lot of material to process and more to come. She stated she preferred the bus turnaround on the same side of the highway as it works well at Lions Ridge. She stated she is concerned for pedestrian safety and going under the underpass. Ms. Perez stated she would like a response to what could have been built previously on this site with former zoning. Ms. Hopkins stated that she is concerned about the wildlife mitigation plan. She stated that on the landscape plan she has an issue that the berm is being counted as part of the calculation. She stated it’s not natural to make it that way and takes a long time to establish and will use a lot of water. She stated to excavate this site will require large retaining walls or to go beyond the property. She stated she did not like the bus stop out on the west and preferred it be tucked in and not have such an impact on that parcel. Mr. Lockman stated that he concurred with most previous opinions on needing more time. He stated that they do review the materials. He stated that the developer has done a good job and put good faith into this process. He stated on the west end, that we can protect the wildlife and mitigate the impacts from the community. He preferred a similar Middle Creek type bus stop for safety reasons. Mr. Lockman stated he liked the additional parking though has a concern over snow storage. He stated he is still concerned about the town’s underpass. Mr. Lockman stated that ongoing research is important and having long term monitoring. Chairman Stockmar stated, in regards to the wildlife issues, he still does not know and still needs to review the reports. He stated there is a lot of information left to absorb and digest. He is concerned about the wildlife. He stated he has to rely on the work of experts in this area. He hopes information comes to them sooner for their review. He stated he is concerned about the compliance of both buildings in terms of the fencing and access to the area outside of the development. He stated he did not know if they can enforce those restrictions. Recreational activity could cause significant environmental damage to the area. The landscaping needs to be such that it will hide the buildings; otherwise, he is concerned about the Middle Creek looming problem. He would like to see that they hide behind decent landscaping and is concerned about highway noise. He stated he has friends who live in west Vail near the highway and cannot use their decks. He stated that parking is a little better but due to the location of the project, even with enhanced bus service, the parking may July 16, 2019 - Page 27 of 110 not still be adequate. He noted there will be a lot of people living in those buildings that may or may not use public transportation. He noted they’ve not received full evidence that the residents will not have cars. Mr. Stockmar stated that the bus stop on the same side of the road is preferable. Crossing the street is a dangerous situation waiting for an accident. He noted that the underpass, while not part of the project, is not a safe condition. He stated there may be straightforward solutions; however, the existing condition is not safe. Chairman Stockmar stated he wanted to know more about compliance and enforcement and about parking. There was a discussion regarding continuing the meeting to J uly 22 to provide an additional opportunity for public comment. Mr. Gillette added for the mitigation plan a Developer I mprovement Agreement for the NA P site maintenance and possibly putting NA P parcel into a land trust and berm maintenance in the mitigation plan. Mr. Stockmar stated he would like to hear clarification on the short-term rental situation to restrict short-term rentals, which may be a condition of approval. Ludwig Kurz moved to Table to J uly 22, 2019. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.3.A request for the review of a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 12-16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of dwelling units within the Housing (H) zone district, located at 3700 North Frontage Road East/Lot 1, East Vail W orkforce Housing Subdivision (“Booth Heights Neighborhood”), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0019) 30 min. Applicant:Triumph Development Planner:Chris Neubecker Ludwig Kurz moved to table to J uly 22, 2019. J ohn-Ryan Lockman seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 3.Approval of Minutes 3.1.J une 24, 2019 P E C Results Minutes should have page numbers; on page 6 in the minutes Michael O’Connor comments, word “manor” should be “manner”, and additional hanging pages – last two should be deleted from a previous meeting.Karen Perez moved to approve with corrections. Ludwig Kurz seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 4.Adjournment Ludwig Kurz moved to adjourn. J ohn-Ryan Lockman seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspec tion during regular offic e hours at the July 16, 2019 - Page 28 of 110 Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site vis its that prec ede the public hearing in the Tow n of Vail Community Development Department. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and c annot be relied upon to determine at w hat time the Planning and Environmental Commission w ill c onsider an item. Please c all (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department July 16, 2019 - Page 29 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Update on Town of Vail and Vail Mountain Guest E xperience I nitiatives P RE S E NT E R(S ): Vail Mountain and Town of Vail A dvisory Committee AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: Council feedback and direction. B AC K G RO UND: The Vail Guest Experience Collaborative A dvisory Committee has been working on a number of Vail guest experience initatives which will be presented. P rogramming addresses the following: 1) Community Guest S ervices Training, 2) E mployee E ngagement, and 3) E arly-Season Guest Experience. T he proposed programming has been developed in an effort to enhance the Town of Vail/Vail Mountain level of service and seamless guest experience. AT TAC H ME N TS: Description Vail Guest Experience Presentation July 16, 2019 - Page 30 of 110 VAIL GUEST EXPERIENCE INITIATIVE July 16, 2019 July 16, 2019 - Page 31 of 110 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.Purpose 2.Objective & Goals 3.Planning Approach 4.Program Concept 5.Budgetary Considerations 6.Timeline July 16, 2019 - Page 32 of 110 3 PURPOSE On Feb. 5, 2019, the Vail Town Council directed the Vail Guest Experience Collaborative Advisory Committee to proceed with the following Initiatives and Programming for Year One 2019-2020: 1.Enhance Town of Vail/Vail Mountain Level of Service and Seamless Experience with the creation and implementation of a customer service training program, embracing the foundational work by the Vail Chamber & Business Assoc. and to be made available to all Town of Vail business license holders. 2.Bolster early winter season economy with the Re-Imagination of the Thanksgiving Holiday, both on-and off-mountain guest experiences and tradition-activation. 3.Ensure broad community stakeholder input. July 16, 2019 - Page 33 of 110 4 OBJECTIVE & GOALS OBJECTIVE: Provide a seamless and world-class guest experience for those in Vail. GOALS: 1.Reimagine the Thanksgiving Week guest experience (11/22-31) 2.Implement a town-wide guest service program July 16, 2019 - Page 34 of 110 5 PLANNING APPROACH -METHODOLOGY 1.Knowledge Sharing •Stakeholder interviews •External resources 2.Feedback & Considerations •Best Practices & Tools •Ownership & Support •Resource implications 3.Program Concepting •Model build out •Strategic planning •Timing •Vail Chamber & Business Assoc. •Vail Valley Partnership •Vail Mountain and Town of Vail HR •Vail Mountain and Town of Vail Guest Service •Whistler-Blackcomb Chamber visit to Vail •Vail Economic Advisory Council •Vail Mountain’s Legacy Circle •Vail Local Marketing District Advisory Council •Commission on Special Events July 16, 2019 - Page 35 of 110 Intercept Surveys 6 PROGRAM CONCEPT EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT EARLY-SEASON GUEST EXPERIENCE WORLD CLASS GUEST EXPERIENCE COMMUNITY GUEST SVC. TRAINING Participant Feedback Retention Rate July 16, 2019 - Page 36 of 110 7 PROGRAM CONCEPT –EMPLOYEE GUEST SERVICE TRAINING Employee Training Goal: Provide exceptional guest service, by educating and empower employees with tools to enhance guest interactions. Program Components: 1.Comprehensive training curriculum and schedule 2.Leadership development forums Component Details TOV Budget (CY19) Vail Mtn.Budget (CY19) Program Lead & Education Coordinator $10,000 - Content coordination & packaging $5,000 $55,000 value Training logistics & Incidentals $5,000 - July 16, 2019 - Page 37 of 110 8 PROGRAM CONCEPT –2019 SAMPLE TIMELINE Guest Service Training #1 10/30/19 Guest Service Training #2 11/12/19 Leadership Forum #1 11/15/19 Guest Service Training #3 11/22/19 Leadership Forum #2 12/9/19 Guest Service Training #4 12/10/19 July 16, 2019 - Page 38 of 110 9 PROGRAM CONCEPT –EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Employee Engagement Goal: Strengthen the fabric of our community, and retain employees through programs and experiences to engage with one another. Program Components: 1.Employee engagement programming calendar 2.Employee appreciation benefits package, including recognition model 3.Cross-season retention strategy Component Details TOV Budget (CY19) Vail Mtn.Budget (CY19) Employee Engagement Production & Planning $10,000 - Event Hosting & Expenses $4,000 - Retention Outreach & Execution $5,000 - July 16, 2019 - Page 39 of 110 10 PROGRAM CONCEPT –2019 SAMPLE TIMELINE Guest Service Training #1 10/30/19 Guest Service Training #2 11/12/19 Leadership Forum #1 11/15/19 Guest Service Training #3 11/22/19 Leadership Forum #2 12/9/19 Guest Service Training #4 12/10/19 Learning Vails History #1 10/29/19 Community & Merchant Tour #1 10/30/19 Employee Engagement Kickoff 11/7/19 Learning Vails History #2 11/11/19 Learning Vails History #3 11/17/19 Learning Vails History #4 12/5/19 Community & Merchant Tour #2 12/11/19 Employee Appreciation #1 12/12/19 July 16, 2019 - Page 40 of 110 11 PROGRAM CONCEPT –GUEST EXPERIENCE Guest Experience Goal: Elevate the experience and grow Destination guest and Local loyalty, by re-imagining the early-season and introducing Vail traditions. Program Components: 1.Vail’s competitive position in the early-season with a significant capital investment in snowmaking supported by a robust marketing campaign 2.Develop and launch a new daily tradition 3.Elevate Thanksgiving week guest experience with incremental activations Component Details TOV Budget (CY19) Vail Mtn.Budget (CY19) New Vail Tradition (Daily)TBD TBD Event Production Planning & Execution $100,000 TBD Guest Satisfaction Measurement (Intercept)$15,000 - July 16, 2019 - Page 41 of 110 12 PROGRAM CONCEPT –GUEST EXPERIENCE (NEW TRADITION) Summary: Celebrating Vail’s European alpine heritage by developing an ownable resort experience, which differentiates Vail amongst its competitors, and also enhances the village core and economy. Concept: At 3 PM each day, the villages and mountain come together to celebrate the legacy of Vail. The clock towers in the villages chime, bells ring across the mountain and in the village symbolizing the beginning of an activated Après experience. Timing: •11/15/19 –4/19/20 (156 Days) July 16, 2019 - Page 42 of 110 13 PROGRAM CONCEPT –2019 SAMPLE TIMELINE Guest Service Training #1 10/30/19 Guest Service Training #2 11/12/19 Leadership Forum #1 11/15/19 Guest Service Training #3 11/22/19 Leadership Forum #2 12/9/19 Guest Service Training #4 12/10/19 Learning Vails History #1 10/29/19 Community & Merchant Tour #1 10/30/19 Employee Engagement Kickoff 11/7/19 Learning Vails History #2 11/11/19 Learning Vails History #3 11/17/19 Learning Vails History #4 12/5/19 Community & Merchant Tour #2 12/11/19 Employee Appreciation #1 12/12/19 VAIL’S NEW DAILY TRADITION –“Vail Après” THANKSGIVING REIMAGINED July 16, 2019 - Page 43 of 110 14 BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS COMMUNTY GUEST EXPERIENCE TRAINING •Program Development •Feedback Measurement Tool TOTAL EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT •Planning & Hosting •Employee Programming TOV CY 2019 Nov-Dec $20,000 $19,000 $115,000 EARLY-SEASON GUEST EXPERIENCE •Thanksgiving Re-Imagined •A New Vail Tradition $154,000 July 16, 2019 - Page 44 of 110 15 NEXT STEPS TIMELINE 19/20 Season Start Concept Alignment Program Parameters Curriculum Development (Phase 1) Community Launch (Phase 1)Feedback & AssessmentPHASE 1 PHASE 2 Curriculum Development (Phase 2) Community Launch (Phase 2) Feedback & Assessment 20/21 Season Start July 16, 2019 - Page 45 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Youth Vaping Dicussion P RE S E NT E R(S ): Mandy I vanov, Health Promotion Coordinator, Schools L iaison, Eagle County P ublic Health B AC K G RO UND: P resentation from E agle County P ublic Health Office about the use of vaping in Eagle County and proposed measures for addressing the problem with youth. AT TAC H ME N TS: Description 2017 H K C S Eagle River Valley High Industry Marketing Tobacco 21 Factsheet Brief Military and T21 Licensing Benefits Overview Retailer and Industry T21 Image July 16, 2019 - Page 46 of 110 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, Eagle River Valley All High Schools New questions in 2017: 1.% of students feel it would be easy/very easy to get vaping products if they wanted 2.% of <18 year olds, currently using cigarettes, purchase own from a “brick & mortar” location 3.% of <18 year olds, currently using vaping products, purchase own from a “brick & mortar” location 4.% of students with past 30 day use of cigarettes, vape products, or other tobacco 5.% of students with past 30 day use of other tobacco (cigar, chew, snus, water pipe, bidis) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 e-device access: easy/very easy <18 cigarette purchase <18 e-device purchase past 30 days any tobacco past 30 days other tobacco 2017 July 16, 2019 - Page 47 of 110 1400 I Street NW - Suite 1200 - Washington, DC 20005 Phone (202) 296-5469 · Fax (202) 296-5427 · www.tobaccofreekids.org “From the 1950s to the present, different defendants, at different times and using different methods, have intentionally marketed to young people under the age of twenty-one in order to recruit ‘replacement smokers’ to ensure the economic future of the tobacco industry.” —U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler Final Opinion, United States v. Philip Morris1 The major tobacco companies now spend $9.4 billion per year—over $25 million every day—to promote their products, and many of their marketing efforts directly reach kids. According to the most recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reports on cigarette and smokeless tobacco marketing, that $9.4 billion represents a slight decrease (by 1.2%) from the previous year, but a 36 percent increase since the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement. Cigarette marketing expenditures decreased slightly to $8.6 billion in 2017 from $8.7 in 2016. Smokeless tobacco marketing expenditures also decreased from $759 million in 2016 to $718 million in 2017. This is still nearly five times the amount spent on smokeless tobacco marketing in 1998 and nearly three times the amount spent in 2005 ($250.8 million), the year before cigarette companies entered the smokeless tobacco market.2 These tobacco marketing expenditures don’t even include spending to market and promote products like e-cigarette and cigars* because unlike cigarette and smokeless tobacco companies, other tobacco product companies are not currently required to report their marketing and promotional expenditures to the FTC. However, according to the Surgeon General’s Report, E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults, that e-cigarette advertising expenditures have increased dramatically, from $12 million in 2011 to $125 million in 2014.3 Other studies have also documented this significant increase in spending.4 These figures underestimate total industry spending since they don’t capture expenditures like retail marketing, social media, and sponsored events. Survey research demonstrates that these advertising efforts have effectively reached youth and young adults. The 2016 Youth Tobacco Survey (YTS) found that 78.2 percent of middle and high school students—20.5 million youth—had been exposed to e- cigarette advertisements from at least one source.5 Tobacco industry documents, research on the effect of the cigarette companies’ marketing efforts on kids, and the opinions of advertising experts combine to reveal the intent and the success of the industry’s efforts to attract new smokers from the ranks of children. Tobacco Industry Statements & Actions Numerous internal tobacco industry documents, revealed in various tobacco lawsuits, show that the tobacco companies have perceived kids as young as 13 years of age as a key market, studied the smoking habits of kids, and developed products and marketing campaigns aimed directly at them.6 As an RJR Tobacco document put it, “Many manufacturers have ‘studied’ the 14-20 market in hopes of uncovering the ‘secret’ of the instant popularity some brands enjoy to the almost exclusion of others. . . . Creating a ‘fad’ in this market can be a great bonanza.”7 The following are just a few of the many more internal company quotes about marketing to kids: Philip Morris: “Today’s teenager is tomorrow’s potential regular customer, and the overwhelming majority of smokers first begin to smoke while still in their teens…The smoking patterns of teenagers are particularly important to Philip Morris.” 8 * In 1999, the FTC released a report, “Cigar Sales and Advertising and Promotional Expenditures for Calendar Years 1996 and 1997,” but FTC has not released subsequent reports on cigars. TOBACCO COMPANY MARKETING TO KIDS July 16, 2019 - Page 48 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 2 RJ Reynolds: “Evidence is now available to indicate that the 14-18 year old group is an increasing segment of the smoking population. RJR-T must soon establish a successful new brand in this market if our position in the industry is to be maintained in the long term.” 9 Brown & Williamson: “Kool’s stake in the 16- to 25-year-old population segment is such that the value of this audience should be accurately weighted and reflected in current media programs . . . all magazines will be reviewed to see how efficiently they reach this group.” 10 Lorillard Tobacco: “[T]he base of our business is the high school student.” 11 U.S. Tobacco: “Cherry Skoal is for somebody who likes the taste of candy, if you know what I’m saying.” 12 In August 2006, U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler released her final opinion in the U.S. Government’s landmark case against tobacco companies, meticulously describing how the tobacco companies target youth with sophisticated marketing campaigns. According to Judge Kessler, tobacco companies intimately study youth behavior and use their findings to create images and themes attractive to youth. Judge Kessler found that: “Defendants spent enormous resources tracking the behaviors and preferences of youth under twenty-one…to start young people smoking and to keep them smoking.”13 Tobacco companies knowingly placed advertisements in magazines popular with youth, in violation of the terms of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, and often sent direct mail pieces to youth without verifying their age. Judge Kessler’s conclusion is very straightforward: “The evidence is clear and convincing—and beyond any reasonable doubt—that Defendants have marketed to young people twenty-one and under while consistently, publicly, and falsely denying they do so.”14 The 2014 Surgeon General Report further emphasized the tobacco industry’s marketing to youth and the way in which it perpetuates the tobacco problem: “…the root cause of the smoking epidemic is also evident: the tobacco industry aggressively markets and promotes lethal and addictive products, and continues to recruit youth and young adults as new consumers of these products.”15 Tobacco Companies Still Market Their Products to Kids The tobacco companies claim that they have stopped intentionally marketing to kids and targeting youth in their research or promotional efforts, but they continue to advertise tobacco in ways that reach vulnerable underage populations. For example, tobacco companies continue to advertise heavily at retail outlets near schools and playgrounds, with large ads and signs clearly visible from outside the stores. In fact, in 2017 tobacco companies spent 96 percent ($9 billion) of their total advertising and promotion expenditures on strategies that facilitated retail sales, such as price discounts, point-of-sale advertising, coupons, and payments to ensure prime retail space.16 The 2014 Surgeon General Reports states that “the tobacco industry continues to position itself to sustain its sales by recruiting youth and young adults…as consumers of all their nicotine-containing products including cigarettes.”17 This report adds to the findings of a comprehensive report on the media and tobacco use, released by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in June 2008, that describes how tobacco company advertising targets specific populations, such as youth and young adults, by employing themes and messages that resonate with them. For example, tobacco advertisements suggest that smoking can satisfy adolescents’ need to be popular, feel attractive, take risks and avoid or manage stress.18 The extent of the tobacco industry’s marketing to kids is well documented: July 16, 2019 - Page 49 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 3 • A study based on data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey found that 90.7 percent of middle school and 92.9 percent of high school students were exposed to pro-tobacco ads in stores, in magazines or on the internet in 2011. Though exposure to tobacco ads in newspapers or magazines declined from 2000 to 2009, exposure increased from 2009 to 2011. In 2011, 48.2 percent of middle school and 54 percent of high school students reported seeing tobacco ads in magazines. Exposure to pro-tobacco ads through the internet also increased over time; in 2011, 43 percent of adolescents were exposed to pro-tobacco images on the internet. Among middle school students, exposure to tobacco advertising was associated with increased likelihood of being susceptible to smoking.19 • In April to June 2013, ads for R.J. Reynolds’ Camel Crush cigarettes appeared in at least 24 magazines, including several with large teen readerships. This marked the first time RJR advertised a cigarette brand in magazines since 2008, when the company suspended its magazine advertising while facing public and Congressional scrutiny and lawsuits by nine states for engaging in marketing that targeted kids. Publicly available data from GfK MRI, a consumer research firm, shows a total teen readership (12-17 years old) of 12.9 million for just nine of the magazines involved— Entertainment Weekly, ESPN the Magazine, Sports Illustrated, Rolling Stone, People, Glamour, InStyle, US Weekly and Vogue. The total teen readership for all 24 magazines would be millions more. Reynolds’ marketing to kids through magazines is not new. In June 2002, a California judge fined RJR for advertising in magazines with high youth readerships in ways that violated the state tobacco settlement agreement’s prohibition that forbids the cigarette companies from taking any action directly or indirectly to target youth in the advertising, promotion, or marketing of tobacco products.20 • A 2013 assessment of retail advertising for tobacco products in Philadelphia found that 29 percent of retailers with indoor tobacco ads placed one or more of them in close proximity to products targeted toward children.21 • A 2011 study of retail outlets in California found that stores contained an average of nearly 20 tobacco marketing materials. The proportion of stores with any tobacco advertising at or below three feet increased significantly from 14 percent in 2008 to 34 percent in 2011. The proportion of stores with tobacco advertising near candy also increased significantly from less than 1 percent to 9 percent. When looking only at convenience stores, researchers found that nearly half (47%) had at least one tobacco advertisement at or below three feet, and 10 percent had tobacco advertisements near candy. Across all stores, there were more marketing materials for Marlboro than for Camel and Newport, which is consistent with the market share of these brands and youth’s preference for them.22 • Research shows that there is more store advertising for menthol cigarettes and a greater availability of price promotions for menthol brands near California high schools with more black students, meaning tobacco products, like Newport, are both more visible and more affordable to kids.23 Newport is the leading brand of cigarettes among African American youth ages 12-17.24 • A 2006 survey of 184 retail stores in Hawaii found 3,151 tobacco advertisements and promotions, most of which were for RJ Reynolds’ Kool, the cigarette brand most heavily smoked by teenagers in Hawaii.25 • A 2002 survey in a Californian community found that stores where adolescents shop most often have more than three times more cigarette advertisements and promotional materials outside of the stores and almost three times more materials inside compared to other stores in the community.26 • A 2001 study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that the 1998 MSA had little effect on cigarette advertising in magazines. In 2000, the tobacco companies spent $59.6 million in advertising expenditures for the most popular youth brands in youth oriented magazines. The settlement has not reduced youth exposure to advertisements for these brands. Magazine ads for each of the three most popular youth brands (Marlboro, Newport, and Camel) reached more than 80 percent of young people in the United States an average of 17 times in 2000.27 July 16, 2019 - Page 50 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 4 • A Massachusetts Department of Health study found that cigarette advertising in magazines with high youth readership actually increased by 33 percent after the November 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, in which the tobacco companies agreed not to market to kids.28 An American Legacy Foundation study found that magazine ads for eight of the top ten cigarette brands reached 70 percent or more of kids five or more times in 1999.29 • In July 2000, a study revealed that after tobacco billboards were banned by the Master Settlement Agreement the cigarette companies increased their advertising and promotions in and around retail outlets, such as convenience stores.30 • According to a study conducted by the Massachusetts Department of Health, the United States Smokeless Tobacco Company (UST), the country’s largest smokeless tobacco manufacturer, spent $9.4 million advertising in magazines with high youth readership in 2001, compared to the average $5.4 million spent in 1997 and 1998, the two years before the settlement. Nearly half of the company’s advertising (45%) continued to be in youth-oriented magazines after the settlement.31 At the same time as they deny marketing to kids, major tobacco companies vigorously oppose reasonable efforts to make it more difficult for kids to obtain cigarettes, such as raising tobacco excise taxes, requiring that all tobacco products be sold from behind the counter, forbidding sales of single tobacco products or “kiddie packs” (e.g. single sticks of little cigars) or prohibiting sales of tobacco products via the Internet or through the mail. In her final opinion, Judge Kessler also noted, “Defendants continue price promotions for premium brands which are most popular with teens.”32 The cigarette companies are addicted to underage smoking. About ninety percent of all regular smokers begin smoking at or before age 18, and hardly anybody tries their first cigarette outside of childhood.33 In other words, if kids stopped smoking, the cigarette companies market of smokers would significantly shrink. But each day, about 2,000 kids try smoking for the first time and more than 300 additional kids become regular daily smokers, largely due to tobacco company marketing efforts.34 Empirical Evidence of the Impact of Tobacco Marketing to Kids Beyond the tobacco industry’s own statements, there is strong empirical evidence that tobacco advertising has a direct impact on the industry’s recruitment of new, youth tobacco users. A key finding of the 2012 Surgeon General Report was the conclusion that there is a causal relationship between the advertising and promotional efforts of the tobacco companies and the initiation and progression of tobacco use among young people.35 In 2014, the U.S. Surgeon General reiterated this finding, stating that, “…advertising and promotional activities by the tobacco companies cause the onset and continuation of smoking among adolescents and young adults.”36 The 2008 NCI Monograph, noted previously, also found that “the evidence base indicates a causal relationship between tobacco advertising and increased levels of tobacco initiation and continued consumption” and that even brief exposure to tobacco advertising influences adolescents’ attitudes and perceptions about smoking as well as their intentions to smoke. The NCI report also found that exposure to depictions of smoking in the movies is causally related to youth smoking initiation.37 The 2008 monograph adds to the findings from an earlier NCI report which reviewed the research on tobacco advertising and promotion and its impact on youth smoking and concluded that there was a causal relationship between tobacco marketing and smoking initiation.38 Numerous studies lend additional support to the link between tobacco marketing and youth smoking: • According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 81.3 percent of youth smokers (12–17) prefer Marlboro, Newport and Camel (the three most heavily advertised brands), while only 62 percent of smokers 26 or older prefer these brands.39 • A survey conducted in March 2012 showed that kids were significantly more likely than adults to recall tobacco advertising. While only 25 percent of all adults recalled seeing a tobacco ad in the two weeks prior to the survey, 45 percent of kids aged 12 to 17 reported seeing tobacco ads.40 July 16, 2019 - Page 51 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 5 • A 2010 study in the Journal of Preventive Medicine confirmed the dose-response impact between exposure to cigarette advertising and higher risk of smoking among youth and also found that “the association between tobacco advertising and youth smoking is specific to tobacco advertising content and not simply a marker of an adolescent who is generally receptive to marketing.”41 • A study published in the May 2007 issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, the first national study to examine how specific marketing strategies in convenience stores and other retail settings affect youth smoking, concluded that the more cigarette marketing teens are exposed to in retail stores, the more likely they are to smoke, and that restricting these retail marketing practices would reduce youth smoking. Specifically, the study found that retail cigarette advertising increased the likelihood that youth would initiate smoking; pricing strategies contributed to increases all along the smoking continuum, from initiation and experimentation to regular smoking; and cigarette promotions increased the likelihood that youth will move from experimentation to regular smoking.42 • A June 2007 study from the American Legacy Foundation found that 40 percent of youth smokers (ages 13-18) recalled seeing advertisements for flavored cigarettes. Eleven percent of youth smokers had tried flavored cigarettes and more than half who had heard of flavored cigarettes were interested in trying them, with almost 60 percent believing that flavored cigarettes would taste better than regular cigarettes.43 Though flavored cigarettes (not including menthol) were banned in 2009 with the passage of the federal Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, other flavored products, such as cigars, were not. According to the 2011 National Youth Tobacco Survey, 4 out of 10 current high school cigar and cigarette smokers use flavored cigars or flavored cigarettes.44 • A study published in the December 2006 issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine found that exposure to tobacco marketing, which includes advertising, promotions and cigarette samples, and to pro-tobacco depictions in films, television, and videos more than doubles the odds that children under 18 will become tobacco users. The researchers also found that pro-tobacco marketing and media depictions lead children who already smoke to smoke more heavily, increasing the odds of progression to heavier use by 42 percent.45 • A 2002 study in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found that receptivity to tobacco advertising had a significant impact on each step of the progression from non-smoking to established regular smoking, even when exposure to smoking in the home and by peers was controlled. The biggest impact was on influencing non-susceptible youth to becoming susceptible to smoking.46 • A 2002 American Journal of Preventive Medicine study found that youth who were highly receptive to tobacco advertising were 70 percent more likely to move from being experimental smokers to established smokers compared to those who had a minimal receptivity to tobacco advertising.47 • A 2000 study in the American Journal of Public Health showed that adolescents who owned a tobacco promotional item and named a cigarette brand whose advertising attracted their attention were twice as likely to become established smokers as those who did neither.48 • A 1998 longitudinal study of teenagers in the Journal of the American Medical Association showed that tobacco industry promotional activities influenced previously non-susceptible non-smokers to become susceptible to or experiment with smoking.49 • A 1996 study in the Journal of Marketing found that teenagers are three times as sensitive as adults to cigarette advertising.50 • A December 1996 survey of advertising industry executives found that roughly 80 percent believed that advertising for cigarettes reaches children and teenagers in significant numbers and makes smoking more appealing or socially acceptable to kids; 71 percent believed that tobacco advertising changes behavior and increases smoking among kids; and 59 percent believe that a goal of tobacco advertising is marketing cigarettes to teenagers who do not already smoke.51 July 16, 2019 - Page 52 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 6 • A 1995 study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found that teens are more likely to be influenced to smoke by cigarette advertising than they are by peer pressure.52 • According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the development and marketing of smokeless “starter products” with features like pouches and cherry flavoring have switched smokeless tobacco from a product used primarily by older men to one used mostly by young men.53 Currently, 14.7 percent of high school boys use smokeless tobacco, a nearly 34 percent increase from 2003.54 • Between 1989 and 1993, when advertising for the new Joe Camel campaign jumped from $27 million to $43 million, Camel’s share among youth increased by more than 50 percent, while its adult market share did not change at all.55 • A 1994 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that six years after the introduction of Virginia Slims and other brands aimed at the female market in the late 1960s, the smoking initiation rate of 12-year-old girls had increased by 110 percent. Increases among teenage girls of other ages were also substantial.56 As a commentator in the Advertising Age trade journal put it, “Cigarette people maintain peer pressure is the culprit in getting kids to start smoking and that advertising has little effect. That’s like saying cosmetic ads have no effect on girls too young to put on lipstick.”57 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, March 5, 2019 / Laura Bach More information on tobacco company marketing to kids is available at https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/fact-sheets/tobaccos-toll-health-harms-and-cost/tobacco-and-kids-marketing. 1 U.S. V. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., No. 99-CV-02496GK (U.S. Dist. Ct., D.C.), Final Opinion, August 17, 2006. 2 U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Cigarette Report for 2017, 2019, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/federal-trade- commission-cigarette-report-2017-federal-trade-commission-smokeless-tobacco-report/ftc_cigarette_report_2017.pdf [data for top 5 manufacturers only].; FTC, Smokeless Tobacco Report for 2017, 2019, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/federal-trade- commission-cigarette-report-2017-federal-trade-commission-smokeless-tobacco-report/ftc_smokeless_tobacco_report_2017.pdf. [Data for top 5 manufacturers only]. 3 US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2016. 4 Legacy, Vaporized: E-Cigarettes, Advertising, and Youth, April 2014, http://legacyforhealth.org/content/download/4542/63436/version/1/file/LEG-Vaporized-E-cig_Report-May2014.pdf.Truth Initiative, Vaporized: Youth and Young Adult Exposure to E-Cigarette Marketing, November 2015, http://truthinitiative.org/sites/default/files/VAPORIZED%20- %20FINAL%20VERSION.pdf. Kornfield, R, et al., “Rapidly increasing promotional expenditures for e-cigarettes,” Tobacco Control, Published Online First, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051580, April 30, 2014. See also: Dutra, L, Adolescent E-cigarette Use: What We Already Know. 2014 data from Kantar Media. Presentation at the FDA “Electronic Cigarettes and the Public Health: A Public Workshop,” June 1, 2015. 5 Marynak, K, et al., “Exposure to Electronic Cigarette Advertising Among Middle and High School Students—United States, 2014-2016,” MMWR 67(10): 294-299, March 16, 2018, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/pdfs/mm6710a3-H.pdf. 6 See, also, Perry, CL, “The Tobacco Industry and Underage Youth Smoking: Tobacco Industry Documents from the Minnesota Litigation,” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 153:935-941, September 1999. 7 RJ Reynolds, “NFO Preference Share Data – ‘Youth’ Market,” March 8, 1973. 8 Philip Morris, Special Report, “Young Smokers: Prevalence, Trends, Implications, and Related Demographic Trends,” March 31, 1981, Bates No. 1000390803. 9 RJ Reynolds, “Planned Assumptions and Forecast for the Period 1977-1986,” March 15, 1976, Bates No. 502819513 -9532 10 Brown & Williamson, Memo by RL Johnson, Brand Manager, to Executive Vice President Pittman, February 21, 1973, Bates No. 680135996. 11 Lorillard, Memo from executive TL Achey to former Lorillard President Curtis Judge re Newport brand, August 30, 1978, Bates No. TINY0003062. 12 Freedman, A, “Juiced up: How a tobacco giant doctors snuff brands to boost their ‘kick,’” Wall Street Journal, October 26, 1994 [quoting former UST sales representative]. 13 U.S. V. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., No. 99-CV-02496GK (U.S. Dist. Ct., D.C.), Final Opinion, August 17, 2006, Paragraph 2717. 14 U.S. V. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., No. 99-CV-02496GK (U.S. Dist. Ct., D.C.), Final Opinion, August 17, 2006, Paragraph 3296. 15 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2014, http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50- years-of-progress/. 16 FTC, Cigarette Report for 2017, 2019; FTC, Smokeless Tobacco Report for 2017, 2019. July 16, 2019 - Page 53 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 7 17 HHS, The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2014, http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50-years-of-progress/. 18 National Cancer Institute, The Role of the Media in Promoting and Reducing Tobacco Use, Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 19, NIH Pub. No. 07-6242, June 2008, http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/19/m19_complete.pdf. 19 Dube, S, et al., “Pro-Tobacco Influences and Susceptibility to Smoking Cigarettes Among Middle and High School Students—United States, 2011,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 52:S45-S51, 2013. 20 Girion, L & Levin, M, “R.J. Reynolds Fined for Ads Aimed at Teens: Tobacco: Judgement of $20 million for magazine pitches is first financial penalty for violation of 1998 national settlement,” Los Angeles Times, June 7, 2002; Statement of Decision, People of the State of California v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, Case No. GIC 764118, June 6, 2002, http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=863&year=2002&month=6. 21 University of Pennsylvania School of Design and Philadelphia Department of Public Health, “Retail Advertising for Tobacco Products and Sugary Beverages in Philadelphia,” August 2013, http://www.pfma.org/pdf_files/Tobacco%20and%20sugary%20drinks%20ad%20report_82013_final.pdf. 22 Schleicher, N, et al., “Tobacco Marketing in California’s Retail Environment (2008-2011), Final report for the California Tobacco Advertising Survey,” Stanford, CA: Stanford Prevention Research Center, July 2013. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)'s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2015. http://pdas.samhsa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2015- DS0001/crosstab/?row=CIG30BR2&column=CATAG3&weight=ANALWT_C&results_received=true. See also CDC, “Cigarette Brand Preference and Pro-Tobacco Advertising Among Middle and High School Students—United States, 2012-2016,” MMWR, 67(4): 119-124, February 2, 2018, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/pdfs/mm6704a3-H.pdf. 23 Henriksen, L, et al, “Targeted Advertising, Promotion, and Price for Menthol Cigarettes in California High School Neighborhoods,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 14(1):116-121, January 2012. 24 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)'s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2015. http://pdas.samhsa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2015- DS0001/crosstab/?row=CIG30BR2&column=CATAG3&control=NEWRACE2&weight=ANALWT_C&results_received=true. 25 Glanz, K, Sutton, NM, & Jacob Arriola, KR, “Operation Storefront Hawaii: Tobacco advertising and promotion in Hawaii stores,” Journal of Health Communication 11(7):699-707, 2006. 26 Henriksen, L, et al., “Reaching youth at the point of sale: Cigarette marketing is more prevalent in stores where adolescents shop frequently,” Tobacco Control 13:315-318, 2004. 27 King, C & Siegel, M, “The Master Settlement Agreement with the Tobacco Industry and Cigarette Advertising in Magazines,” New England Journal of Medicine 345(7):504-511, August 16, 2001. 28 Bowker, D & Hamilton, M, “Cigarette Advertising Expenditures before and After the Master Settlement Agreement: Preliminary Findings,” May 15, 2000, http://tobaccofreekids.org/reports/addicting/magazines/connolly.pdf. 29 “Tobacco Brand Magazine Advertising to Teens,” American Legacy Foundation, May 17, 2000. 30 Wakefield, M, et al., “Changes at the point of purchase for tobacco following the 1999 tobacco billboard advertising ban,” University of Illinois at Chicago, Research Paper Series, No. 4, July 2000. 31 Massachusetts Department of Health, “Smokeless Tobacco Advertising Expenditures Before and After the Smokeless Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement,” May 2002, http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/Script/DisplayPressRelease.php3?Display=503. 32 U.S. V. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., No. 99-CV-02496GK (U.S. Dist. Ct., D.C.), Final Opinion, August 17, 2006. 33 Calculated based on data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)’s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2016, https://pdas.samhsa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2016-DS0001. 34 SAMHSA, HHS, Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, NSDUH: Detailed Tables, 2018. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/cbhsq-reports/NSDUHDetailedTabs2017/NSDUHDetailedTabs2017.pdf. 35 HHS, Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2012, http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/preventing-youth-tobacco-use/index.html. 36 HHS, The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2014, http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50-years-of-progress/. 37 National Cancer Institute (NCI), The Role of the Media in Promoting and Reducing Tobacco Use, Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 19, NIH Pub. No. 07-6242, June 2008, http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/19/m19_complete.pdf. 38 NCI, Changing Adolescent Smoking Prevalence, Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No.14, NIH Pub. No. 02-5086, November 2001, http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/14/index.html. 39 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)'s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2015. http://pdas.samhsa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2015- DS0001/crosstab/?column=CATAG2&results_received=true&row=CIG30BR2&weight=ANALWT_C. 40 National telephone survey of 536 teens aged 12-17 conducted March 14-20, 2012 and 1,004 adults conducted March 14-20, 2012 by International Communications Research and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points for the teen survey and 3.1 percentage points for the adult survey. 41 Hanewinkel, R, et al., “Cigarette Advertising and Adolescent Smoking,” Journal of Preventive Medicine 38(4): 359-366, April 2010. See also, Hanewinkel, R, et al., “Cigarette Smoking and Teen Smoking Initiation,” Pediatrics 127(2), February 2011. 42 Slater, SJ, et al., “The Impact of Retail Cigarette Marketing Practices on Youth Smoking Uptake,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 161:440-445, May 2007. 43 American Legacy Foundation, “Cigarette Preferences Among Youth – Results from the 2006 Legacy Media Tracking Online (LMTO),” First Look Report 17, June 2007, http://americanlegacy.org/Files/FINAL_FL17_singles.pdf. July 16, 2019 - Page 54 of 110 Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids / 8 44 King, BA, et al., “Flavored-Little-Cigar and Flavored-Cigarette Use Among U.S. Middle and High School Students,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 2013. 45 Wellman RJ, et al., “The extent to Which Tobacco Marketing and Tobacco Use in Films Contribute to Children’s Use of Tobacco: A Meta- Analysis,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 160(12):1285-96, 2006. 46 Kaufman, N, et al., “Predictors of Change on the Smoking Uptake Continuum Among Adolescents,” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 156:581-587, June 2002. 47 Choi, W, et al., “Progression to Established Smoking, The Influence of Tobacco Marketing,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 22(4):228-233 (2002). 48 Biener, L & Siegel, M, “Tobacco Marketing and Adolescent Smoking; More Support for a Causal Inference,” American Journal of Public Health 90(3):407-411, March 2000. 49 Pierce, J, et al., “Tobacco Industry Promotion of Cigarettes and Adolescent Smoking,” Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) 279(7):511-505, February 1998 [with erratum in JAMA 280(5):422, August 1998]. 50 Pollay, R, et al., “The Last Straw? Cigarette Advertising and Realized Market Shares Among Youth and Adults,” Journal of Marketing 60(2):1-16, April 1996. 51 Telephone survey of 300 advertising executives in agencies with billings of more than $10 million, commissioned by the New York advertising firm of Shepardson, Stern, and Kaminsky, December 1996. 52 Evans, N, et al., “Influence of Tobacco Marketing and Exposure to Smokers on Adolescent Susceptibility to Smoking,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute 87(20):1538-45, October 1995. 53 CDC, “Surveillance for Selected Tobacco-Use Behaviors – United States, 1900-1994,” MMWR Surveillance Summaries 43(SS-3), November 18, 1994, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00033881.htm. 54 CDC, “Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2013,” MMWR 63(4), June 13, 2014. 55 CDC, “Changes in the Cigarette Brand Preference of Adolescent Smokers, U.S. 1989-1993,” MMWR 43(32):577-581, August 19, 1994, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00032326.htm. 56 Pierce, JP, Lee, L, & Gilpin, EA, “Smoking initiation by adolescent girls, 1944 through 1988: An association with targeted advertising,” JAMA 271(8), 1994. 57 Rance Crain, Advertising Age, October 20, 1995. July 16, 2019 - Page 55 of 110 1400 I Street NW · Suite 1200 · Washington, DC 20005 Phone (202) 296-5469 · Fax (202) 296-5427 · www.tobaccofreekids.org Tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, killing more than 480,000 Americans each year.1 Tobacco use is known to cause cancer, heart disease and respiratory diseases, among other serious health problems, and costs the U.S. as much as $170 billion in health care expenditures each year.2 Each day, more than 300 kids under the age of 18 become regular, daily smokers; and almost one-third will eventually die from smoking.3 Because tobacco is so harmful, we should do everything we can to prevent tobacco use among young people. Increasing sale age for tobacco to 21 will help reduce smoking and save lives. Raising the Minimum Legal Sale Age Will Help Save Lives A 2015 report by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) concluded that raising the tobacco sale age to 21 will have a substantial positive impact on public health and save lives.4 The IOM finds that raising the tobacco sale age will: • significantly reduce the number of adolescents and young adults who start smoking; • reduce smoking-caused deaths, and • immediately improve the health of adolescents, young adults and young mothers who would be deterred from smoking, as well as their children. Raising the Minimum Legal Sale Age Is Being Adopted Across the U.S. and Is Popular • Jurisdictions across the country are raising the sale age for tobacco. Fourteen states – Arkansas, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Washington – have raised the tobacco age to 21, along with at least 470 localities, including New York City, Chicago, San Antonio, Boston, Washington, DC, Cleveland, Minneapolis, and both Kansas Cities.5 • Raising the legal sale age is popular with the public, including smokers. A 2017 CDC survey found that three quarters of adults favor raising the tobacco age to 21, including nearly two-thirds of adult smokers.6 Addiction Occurs Early—Most Adult Smokers Start Smoking Before Age 21 • Tobacco companies target kids and young adults because they know that is when most users first try and become addicted to tobacco. • About 95% of adult smokers begin smoking before they turn 21, and about 80% start before age 18. Four out of five become regular, daily smokers before they turn 21.7 • Nicotine is highly addictive and a dolescents are particularly vulnerable to its effects. Because adolescence and young adulthood are critical periods of growth, exposure to nicotine can have lasting, negative consequences on brain development.8 • Delaying the age when young people first experiment or begin using tobacco can reduce the risk that they transition to regular or daily tobacco use and increase their chances of successfully quitti ng, if they do become regular users.9 Older Adolescents and Young Adults are a Source of Cigarettes for Youth • Raising the age of sale will help keep tobacco out of high schools, where younger teens often obtain tobacco products from older students. • More than 60% of 10th grade and nearly half of 8th grade students say it’s easy to get cigarettes.10 • Friends and classmates are a common source of tobacco products for youth users. 75% of current smokers ages 15 to 17 reported obtaining cigarettes from social sources.11 Raising the Tobacco Sale Age to 21 Will Have Minimal Impact on State Revenues • In the short run, a tobacco sale age of 21 is expected to have minimal to no fiscal impact because 18- to 20- year olds account for just two to four percent of total cigarette consumption and unfortunately, most will not stop smoking as a result of this policy.12 • The policy begins working immediately to make it harder for youth and young adults to obtain cigarettes, but the consumption declines that would impact state revenues will take time to accrue. As a result, reductions in smoking initiation and prevalence will initially be small and will grow over time. INCREASING THE SALE AGE FOR TOBACCO TO 21 WILL REDUCE SMOKING AND SAVE LIVES July 16, 2019 - Page 56 of 110 More information on increasing the sale age for tobacco products to 21 is available at http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what_we_do/state_local/sales_21. 1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Ch ronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2014 2 HHS. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General, 2014; Xu, X., et al., “Annual Healthcare Spending Attributable to Cigarette Smoking: An Update,” Am J Prev Med, 2014. 3 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), HHS, Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, NSDUH: Detailed Tables https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/cbhsq-reports/NSDUHDetailedTabs2017/NSDUHDetailedTabs2017.pdf; CDC, “The Health Consequences of Smoking – 50 Years of Progress A Report of the Surgeon General 2014,” http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50-years-of-progress/50-years-of-progress-by-section.html 4 Institute of Medicine, Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products , Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2015, http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2015/TobaccoMinimumAgeReport.aspx ; In addition, a recent study suggests that raising the sale age to 21 is a promising practice, finding that the policy contributed to a greater decline in youth smoking in one community that passed a 21 ordinance compared to comparison communities that did not pass an ordinance restr icting tobacco product sales to 21 and older. While the results are promising, the magnitude of the impact is unknown given that there are no baseline me asurements and there were confounding issues that were not controlled for. See Kessel Schneider, S. et al, “Community reductions in youth smoking after raising the minimum tobacco sales age to 21,” Tobacco Control, June 12, 2015, http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2015/06/12/tobaccocontrol - 2014-052207.1.abstract 5 Some of the localities are in the states that subsequently enacted statewide laws. See: http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/content/what_we_do/state_local_issues/sales_21/states_localities_MLSA_21.pdf . 6 Gentzke, AS, et al., “Attitudes toward raising the minimum legal age of sale for tobacco products —United States, 2017,” poster presented at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT). 7 Calculated based on data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)’s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2016, https://pdas.samhsa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2016-DS0001. 8 HHS. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General , 2014. 9 See, e.g., Khuder, SA, et al., “Age at Smoking Onset and its Effect on Smoking Cessation,” Addictive Behavior 24(5):673-7, September-October 1999; D’Avanzo ,B, et al., “Age at Starting Smoking and Number of Cigarettes Smoked,” Annals of Epidemiology 4(6):455-59, November 1994; Chen, J & Millar, WJ, “Age of Smoking Initiation: Implications for Quitting,” Health Reports 9(4):39 -46, Spring 1998; Everett, SA, et al., “Initiation of Cigarette Smoking and Subsequent Smoking Behavior Among U.S. High School Students,” Preventive Medicine 29(5):327-33, November 1999; Breslau, N & Peterson, EL, “Smoking cessation in young adults: Age at initiation of cigarette smoking and other suspected inf luences,” American Journal of Public Health 86(2):214-20, February 1996. 10 Johnston, L. D., et al. (2018). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use: 1975-2017: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf -overview2017.pdf. 11 Tanski, S, et al., “Youth Access to Tobacco Products in the United States: Findings from Wave 1 (2013 -2014) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research , published online November 8, 2018. 12 Chaloupka, F., Analysis of data from the Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey, 2010-2011(TUS-CPS) and Winickoff, JP, et al.,”Retail Impact of Raising Tobacco Sales Age to 21 Years,” American Journal of Public Health 104(11):e18-e21, 2014. July 16, 2019 - Page 57 of 110 1400 I Street NW · Suite 1200 · Washington, DC 20005 Phone (202) 296-5469 · Fax (202) 296-5427 · www.tobaccofreekids.org Military leaders recognize the toll tobacco takes on troop readiness and on the military health care system and are actively taking steps to reduce tobacco use in the military. Tobacco use remains this nation’s number one preventable cause of premature death and disease, killing more than 480,000 Americans annually.1 The Department of Defense (DoD) estimates that 175,000 current Active Duty Service members will die from smoking unless they are able to quit.2 Almost all smokers start smoking before the age of 21,3 and the ages of 18 to 21 are a critical period when many smokers move from experimental smoking to regular, daily use. Tobacco use is not a rite of passage or an expression of freedom. It is an addiction. Tobacco companies target young people before they can fully appreciate the consequences of becoming addicted to the nicotine in tobacco. Nearly 70% of adult smokers want to quit4, but once a person is addicted to nicotine, it is difficult to stop, and the health consequences begin immediately and accumulate over a lifetime. Tobacco companies have a long history of promoting tobacco to members of the military and have a vested interest in tobacco use by the military, an important market for recruitment of the next generation of smokers.5 Raising the tobacco sale age to 21 will help prevent our service members from starting to use this deadly and addictive product and support DoD efforts to reduce tobacco use among service members. Military Leaders Support Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Tobacco use is bad for military preparedness. The military recognizes the negative impact of tobacco on troop readiness and soldiers’ health and has initiated a series of actions to curb tobacco use in the military.6 The Department of Defense and the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force have each set goals to become tobacco-free.7 In April 2016, the Department of Defense approved actions “to ensure a comprehensive tobacco policy that assists with preventing initiation of tobacco use, helping those who want to quit using tobacco succeed, and decreasing exposure to secondhand smoke for all our people.”8 Our military leaders understand the toll tobacco takes on our troops. DoD’s Quit Tobacco— Make Everyone Proud cessation campaign advertised quotes and videos from high-ranking military officials about the toll tobacco has on health and military readiness: • General Robert Magnus, now retired Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, stated, “Tobacco impairs reaction time and judgment. It stands in the way of a Marine's number one priority: to be in top physical and mental shape - combat ready.”9 • Rodney J. McKinley, now retired Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force has stated, “Tobacco use impacts physical fitness, night vision and healing – it impairs mission readiness.”10 Military officers and veterans have also spoken out in favor of tobacco 21 policies : • After Hawaii raised its tobacco sale age to 21, effective January 1, 2016, Hawaii’s military bases opted to comply with the higher age in recognition of its benefits to r eadiness, health and finances:11 RAISING THE TOBACCO SALE AGE TO 21: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MILITARY July 16, 2019 - Page 58 of 110 Raising the Tobacco Sale Age to 21 and The Military / 2 o Bill Doughty, spokesman for the Navy Region Hawaii, stated, "We see it as a fitness and readiness issue. When we can prevent sailors from smoking or using tobacco, if we can get them to quit, then that improves their fitness and readiness, and it saves them a ton of money too."12 o Rear Admiral John Fuller, Navy Region Hawaii and Naval Surface Group Middle Pacific stated, “I’ve heard this argument by some shipmates against cracking down on tobacco: ‘If someone is young enough to die for their country, they should be free to be allowed to smoke.’ But, turning that argument on its head: ‘If someone is young enough to fight for their country, they should be free from addiction to a deadly drug.’ Tobacco harms people’s physical wellbeing, leads to illness and costs them money.”13 • In testimony submitted on behalf of the Oregon Military Department and the Oregon National Guard, Major General Michael Stencel, the Adjutant General for the state of Oregon, stated that they would not seek a military waiver. He stated that, “Reducing tobacco use within the Oregon National Guard will have an immediate, positive impact on the resiliency and readiness of our Soldiers and Airmen.”14 • 27-year senior officer of the Air Force and Chautauqua, New York, County Executive Vince Horrigan, stated, on signing a bill to raise the tobacco sale age to 21: “As a retired 27-year senior officer of the Air Force, I join with many other military leaders in the perspective that tobacco products are a threat to our military readiness and too often compromise the health of our professional military who put their lives on the line to defend our freedoms.”15 • Major General Bret Daugherty, the Adjutant General for the state of Washington and Commander of the Washington National Guard stated in testimony supporting raising the tobacco sale age: “…I want to address the age-old argument that if someone is old enough to serve their country in the military, then they are old enough to use tobacco products. This is clearly an outdated argument. There is a laundry list of things that we as a country have decided are contrary to the interest of young people and public health, whether they are in the military or not. Decades ago, this very body saw the wisdom in raising the drinking age to 21. That policy change significantly reduced drunk driving deaths and contributed to the overall health of our public here in the state.”16 • Retired military leaders supported an Illinois bill to ra ise the tobacco sale age to 21. Major General (Ret) William Enyart, U.S. Army, Former Adjutant General of Illinois, 2007 -2013; Major General (Ret) Randal Thomas, U.S. Army Former Adjutant General of Illinois, 2003 - 2007; Brigadier General (Ret) John “Jay” Sheedy, U.S. Air Force, Brigadier General (Ret) Avrum Mark Rabin, Illinois Air National Guard stated: “Americans owe much to the young people who choose to serve in our military. But early addiction to a deadly drug is no reward. Their physical fitness and health should be paramount in policymaking decisions.”17 Tobacco Use Hurts Military Readiness and Is Costly While tobacco use takes an enormous toll on all users, it has particularly detrimental consequences for active duty military personnel. Tobacco use reduces soldiers’ physical fitness and endurance and is linked to higher rates of absenteeism and lost productivity. In addition, service members who use tobacco are more likely to drop out of basic training, sustain injurie s and have poor vision, all of which compromise troop readiness.18 Tobacco use places a July 16, 2019 - Page 59 of 110 Raising the Tobacco Sale Age to 21 and The Military / 3 significant burden on the D epartment of Defense (DoD). The DoD spends more than $1.6 billion each year on tobacco-related medical care, increased hospitalizations, and lost days of work.19 Tobacco Use Among Active Duty U.S. Military Smoking rates are higher among active duty military than among civilians. Nearly one-quarter (24.0%) of active duty military personnel in 2011 reported currently smoking, compared to 19 percent of civilians at that time.20 Smoking rates vary significantly by service, ranging from 16.7 percent in the U.S. Air Force to 30.8 percent in the U.S. Marine Corps. Many of the military’s current cigarette smokers are dual users of smokeless tobacco.21 In addition, close to half of all military service members (49.2%) used a nicotine product* in the past twelve months.22 * Nicotine product includes cigarettes, chewing tobacco, snuff, other smokeless tobacco including new forms of smokeless (e. g. dissolvables), cigars, pipes, and electronic nicotine delivery products. Alarmingly, many current military smokers - 36 to 40 percent - report initiating tobacco use after joining the military.23 Given everything we know about what smoking does to the body and how it weakens our combat preparedness, it is unacceptable that soldiers smoke at higher rates than the general population and that more than 1 in 3 soldiers who are current smokers started smoking after joining the military. Raising the Minimum Legal Sale Age Will Help Save Lives Raising the tobacco sale age is an evidence-based policy that is an important part of a comprehensive approach to tobacco prevention. A 2015 report by the Institu te of Medicine (IOM) concluded that raising the tobacco age to 21 will have a positive impact on public health and save lives.24 Specifically, raising the age to 21 is predicted to reduce the smoking rate by about 12 percent and smoking -related deaths by 10 percent over time, which translates into 223,000 fewer premature deaths, 50,000 fewer deaths from lung cancer, and 4.2 million fewer years of life lost.25 Tobacco use is a deadly and addictive behavior that compr omises the readiness and health of our military and prematurely kills half its adult users.26 Raising the tobacco sale age to 21 is an important step that will protect young people and service members from a deadly addiction and will complement other tobacco prevention and cessation efforts being undertaken by the military. Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, April 25, 2019 / Laura Bach 1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2014. 2 Department of Defense, Memorandum re: Reducing Tobacco Use in the Armed Forces and Department of Defense, March 1 4, 2014. 3 United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2014. ICPSR36361 -v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-03-22. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36361.v1 4 Babb, Stephen. "Quitting Smoking Among Adults—United States, 2000–2015." MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 65 (2017) 5 Smith, Elizabeth A., and Ruth E. Malone. "“Everywhere the soldier will be”: wartime tobacco promotion in the US military." American Journal of Public Health 99.9 (2009): 1595-1602 and Smith, Elizabeth A., and Ruth E. Malone. "Tobacco promotion to military personnel:“the plums are here to be plucked”." Military Medicine 174.8 (2009): 797 6 Partnership for Prevention and Action to Quit, Help Your Patients Quit Tobacco: An Implementation Guide for the Armed Forces , July 2014, http://actiontoquit.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/armedforcestobaccocessationguide.pdf and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, “Policy Memorandum 16-001, Department of Defense Tobacco Policy,” April 8, 2016, http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcphc/Documents/health- promotion-wellness/tobacco-free-living/INCOMING-CARTER-Tobacco-Policy-Memo.pdf July 16, 2019 - Page 60 of 110 Raising the Tobacco Sale Age to 21 and The Military / 4 7 Institute of Medicine, Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations , 2009. http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2009/MilitarySmokingCessation.aspx ; see also, https://www.ucanquit2.org/AboutUs/Policy 8 Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, “Policy Memorandum 16-001, Department of Defense Tobacco Policy,” April 8, 2016, http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcphc/Documents/health-promotion-wellness/tobacco-free-living/INCOMING-CARTER-Tobacco-Policy- Memo.pdf 9 U.S. Department of Defense, UCanQuit2.org, https://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcphc/Documents/health-promotion-wellness/tobacco-free- living/gen-magnus.pdf. 10 U.S. Department of Defense, UCanQuit2.org, https://www.mildenhall.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/273201/new-smoking-cessation-site- helps-airmen-kick-butts/. 11 Seck, Hope Hodge, “Marines Will Comply With Hawaii Law Raising Smoking Age to 21,” December 29, 2015, http://www.military.com/daily- news/2015/12/29/marines-will-comply-with-hawaii-law-raising-smoking-age-to-21.html; Uyeno, Kristine, “Tobacco, eCig laws take effect on New Year’s Day; Hawaii first state to raise legal age to 21,” December 28, 2015, http://khon2.com/2015/12/28/new-years-day-tobacco-ecig-laws- hawaii-first-state-to-raise-legal-age-to-21-3/ 12 Houck, John, “Hawaii’s Legal Smoking Age Increases to 21 Starting Today, New Law Will Penalize Retailers and Underage Smokers,” Inquisitr, January 1, 2016, http://www.inquisitr.com/2672520/hawaiis-legal-smoking-age-increases-to-21-starting-today-new-law-will-penalize- retailers-and-underage-smokers/ 13 Rear Admiral Fuller, John, “Young Enough To Not Die From Smoking,” Navy Medicine Live, http://navymedicine.navylive.dodlive.mil/archives/9815 14 Major General Michael E. Stencel, Testimony in Support of SB 754 to the Oregon State House Committee on Health Care , April 24, 2017, https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2017R1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/122339 . 15 Chautauqua County, New York, Horrigan Provides Statement Upon Signing Local Law to Raise Tobacco Purchase Age, May 17, 2017, http://www.co.chautauqua.ny.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=540 16 Major General Bret Daugherty, Testimony in Support of SB 5025 to the Washington Stat e Senate Commerce, Labor, and Sports Committee, February 9, 2017 17 Mission: Readiness, Military Leaders for Kids, Letter in support of IL SB3011 to raise the tobacco sale age to 21, April 19, 2016 18 Institute of Medicine, Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations , 2009. http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2009/MilitarySmokingCessation.aspx 19 Institute of Medicine, Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations , 2009. http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2009/MilitarySmokingCessation.aspx 20 Department of Defense, 2011 Health Related Behaviors Survey of Active Duty Military Personnel, http://prevent.org//data/files/actiontoquit/final%202011%20hrb%20active%20duty%20sur vey%20report-release.pdf, February 2013; 2011 National Health Interview Survey. 21 Department of Defense, 2011 Health Related Behaviors Survey of Active Duty Military Personnel, http://prevent.org//data/files/actiontoquit/final%202011%20hrb%20active%20duty%20survey%20report -release.pdf, February 2013. 22 Department of Defense, 2011 Health Related Behaviors Survey of Active Duty Military Personnel, http://prevent.org//data/files/actiontoquit/final%202011%20hrb%20active%20duty%20survey%20report -release.pdf, February 2013. 23 Institute of Medicine, Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations , 2009. http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2009/MilitarySmokingCessation.aspx 24 Institute of Medicine, Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products , Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2015, http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2015/TobaccoMinimumAgeReport.aspx 25 Institute of Medicine, Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products , Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2015, http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2015/TobaccoMinimumAgeReport.aspx 26 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Reports of the Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Smoking-50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), 2014 July 16, 2019 - Page 61 of 110 July 16, 2019 - Page 62 of 110 July 16, 2019 - Page 63 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Civic Area Plan Finance Discussion P RE S E NT E R(S ): Matt Gennett, Community Development Director AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: Staff asks Council to review the presentation and provide direction related to municipal funding options. B AC K G RO UND: The purpose of this presentation is to share information on municipal funding options, and receive direction from Council AT TAC H ME N TS: Description Funding Options Overview July 16, 2019 - Page 64 of 110 Civic Area Funding and Financing Overview July 16, 2019 - Page 65 of 110 Background ●The Civic Area team has evaluated a wide range of redevelopment options and funding packages ●Redevelopment options have been narrowed down to four distinct scenarios (although components of strategies can be combined) ●Order of magnitude estimate of construction costs range from $127M to $167M ●The final Civic Area strategy will be informed by the funding sources that are available The purpose of today’s meeting is to provide Town Council with a more detailed overview of the recommended funding approaches and gauge Council’s support for specific approaches. July 16, 2019 - Page 66 of 110 Outcomes ●Discuss advantages and disadvantages of each financing tool ●Understand implications for utilization (or removal) of a given tool ●Create direction for the project: ○Narrow the options under consideration ○Form parameters for the final development programs ●Testing a new format to understand Council Direction: ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 67 of 110 Public Financing Mechanisms Description Acronym Urban Renewal Authority URA Downtown Development Authority DDA Business Improvement District BID General Improvement District GID Metro District (Special District)Title 32 Public Improvement Fee PIF Dedicated Sales Tax N/A Land Lease / Land Sale N/A Current Town Reserve N/A Town Bonding Potential N/A Joint Venture Terms JV Philanthropy Philanthropy July 16, 2019 - Page 68 of 110 Public Financing Mechanisms Description Acronym Urban Renewal Authority URA Downtown Development Authority DDA Business Improvement District BID General Improvement District GID Metro District (Special District)Title 32 Public Improvement Fee PIF Dedicated Sales Tax N/A Land Lease / Land Sale N/A Current Town Reserve N/A Town Bonding Potential N/A Joint Venture Terms JV Philanthropy Philanthropy July 16, 2019 - Page 69 of 110 A. TOV Bonding Capacity ●Town poised to commit the following: Low High ○Capital Fund:$2.5M $3.5M ○General Fund:$1.0M $1.0M (Based on recent annual surplus in GF) ○Total $3.5M $4.5M ●This commitment would generate $40M to $52M in proceeds. ●Also could consider a Pay-As-You-Go approach ●Historical view shows 15 bonds from 1970 to 1991 (see next slide) July 16, 2019 - Page 70 of 110 A. TOV Bond History Year Type of Financing Bond Proceeds Purpose 1970 General Obligation Bonds $ 250,000 Fire House Construction 1971 General Obligation Bonds 1971A $ 575,000 Municipal complex 1971 General Obligation Bonds 1971B $ 225,000 Municipal complex 1973 General Obligation Bonds $ 3,000,000 Purchase of 39 acres for municipal uses (Ford Park) 1974 General Obligation Bonds $ 5,500,000 Lionshead Parking structure 1975 Promissory Note $ 850,000 Town park & rec facilities & impr. Vail Transportation Center 1976 General Obligation Bonds $ 300,000 Pedestrian Overpass 1977 General Obligation Bonds $ 450,000 Purchase open space (Katsos & Lot 10) 1977 General Obligation Bonds $ 2,350,000 Dobson Arena + open space purchases 1980 General Obligation Bonds $ 7,000,000 Vail Village Parking Structure 1982 General Obligation Bonds 1982B $ 2,900,000 Library 1984 Note Payable $ 2,200,000 Purchase of Vail Golf Course (full price $2.65M) 1984 General Obligation Refunding Bonds 1984 $ 1,600,000 Improvements Lionshead Mall area 1989 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds 1989 $ 9,200,000 Vail Village Parking Structure Expansion 1991 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds 1991 $ 2,555,000 Issued to finance acquisition of certain equipment and construction of capital improvements 1992- 2019 None $ 0 No Debt July 16, 2019 - Page 71 of 110 A. Discussion of Bonding Capacity ●Cons ○A 30-year commitment will limit future Council decisions ○There may be higher priority projects (or those of greater necessity) in the future ○The cost of interest is substantial, a plan to pay-as-you-go saves money ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Enables Town to accomplish more, particularly with complex programs that require underground levels ○Recent pattern indicates General Fund generates a surplus annually, thus, no impact to services ○Additional Council comments? ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 72 of 110 B. Lionshead Urban Renewal Area Current Revenues and Expenditures •Annual revenues average $5.7M •Annual operating expenses average $800K •Planned capital outlay totals $9.3M over next few years •Debt service averages $1.1M •Fund balance in 2019 $3.1M Future Estimates •Projected fund balance by 2030 is $45M •Bond proceeds for a 2021 construction start approximate $35M July 16, 2019 - Page 73 of 110 B. Discussion of URA Proceeds ●Cons ○None identified by consultant team ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Established ○Little risk, given the previous years of performance ○The purpose of many URA’s is to catalyze additional investment, which this would do ○Additional Council comments? ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 74 of 110 C. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) What is a DDA? ●A DDA, like an Urban Renewal Authority, redirects TIF into civic improvements and civic programming within a recognized boundary. ●TIF (Tax Increment Finance) is based on net new assessed valuation within the district, most often generated by redevelopment. Without new private development, no TIF. ●The DDA has a duration of 30 years, after which the TIF flows to the existing taxing entities ●The purpose is to improve property values or structures in districts recognized as the concentrated area of governance and commerce. July 16, 2019 - Page 75 of 110 C. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) How TIF Works The assessed value of taxable property in the DDA and/or sales tax is determined for the base year If the assessed value increases, the DDA receives the amount of the increase in taxes, except for property tax increases due to general reassessments. The base resets at Year-30. $0M $5M $10M $15M $20M $25M $30M 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Assessed Value Years Base Increment Reversion July 16, 2019 - Page 76 of 110 C. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) How is a DDA formed? ●Determine that a DDA is appropriate for the area ●TOV to hold hearing and determine: ○Boundaries ○Powers and limits on powers ○Financing capabilities ○Election date and the administration of election ●Hold the election with the “qualified electors”which include residents, landowners, and lessees. Revenue Potential Low Medium High Total Development Value $0 $290,000,000 $653,500,000 Bond Rate 5.0%5.0%5.0% Bond Term 30 years 30 years 30 years Annual Revenue $0 $1,000,000 $3,700,000 Bond Amount $0 $11,500,000 $42,100,000 July 16, 2019 - Page 77 of 110 C. DDA Discussion ●Cons ○The tool generates revenue only as private development is built ○Redirects revenues that would otherwise flow to other taxing entities ○Dependent on successful election by property owners and tenants within proposed district ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Net new revenue to Vail ○No risk to the TOV ○For strong markets, increment and corresponding revenue can be substantial ○Does not affect any existing revenues. School district revenues are back-filled from state. ○Additional Council comments? ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 78 of 110 D. Public Improvement Fee (PIF) What is a PIF? ●A PIF works similarly to a sales tax, but is adopted as a private agreement between land property owners and tenants ●Given that it is a private agreement, it is designated as a ‘fee’instead of a ‘tax’ ●Typically, it applies to the full range of items which are subject to a sales tax, as well as services. Often, the municipality collects the PIF on behalf of the developer ●In this case, a PIF would most likely be applied to lodging sales in order to fund a new multi-purpose event center. July 16, 2019 - Page 79 of 110 D. Public Improvement Fee (PIF) How is a PIF formed? ●Requires the consent of individual property owners – most likely surrounding hotels that would benefit from a new multi-purpose events center ●The property owners elect to impose a PIF on lodging sales ●PIF revenues can be assigned directly to a non-profit corporation called a public improvement corporation (PIC) or can be pooled with other revenues in a common financing district ●The district then issues bonds to fund public infrastructure or improvements associated with the multi-purpose events center. Revenue Potential PIF (Low)PIF (High) Participating Rooms 40% of total 60%of total Bond Rate 5.0%5.0% Bond Term 30 years 30 years PIF Rate 1.50%1.50% Annual Revenue $1,400,000 $2,100,000 Bond Amount $16,300,000 $24,500,000 July 16, 2019 - Page 80 of 110 D. PIF Discussion ●Cons ○Higher cost for lodging may affect demand ○Lack of uniform adoption may reduce cohesion within lodging community ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Strong nexus between the groups that pay the PIF and benefit from the improvements ○Local lodging group has stated it supports an increase in lodging tax to cover costs associated with additional meeting space ○PIF provides a method to establish fund without requiring an election ○Additional Council comments? ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 81 of 110 E. TOV Reserve ●Total Reserves range from $60M to $70M ●Of this, $23M to $24M required to be “Restricted”and “GF Minimum” ○“Restricted Reserves” ●Of the balance, $37M to $46M, a portion could be used as a One-Time investment or could be used for debt service ○“Available Reserves” ●A $10M One-Time investment accounts for 22% to 27% of available reserves July 16, 2019 - Page 82 of 110 E. Discussion of the use of TOV Reserves ●Cons ○Large reserves provide a cushion for future, unforeseen expenses ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Current available reserves are 1.6x to 1.9x the minimum threshold for restricted reserves ○Provides ‘gap coverage’for projects, prior to other revenues coming on-line ○Additional Council comments? ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 83 of 110 F. Land Lease / Land Sale Basic Assumptions ●Two primary sites in play ○Municipal Site ○Charter Bus Lot ●Town sells or leases land to a developer. Uses land revenues to offset costs associated with public improvement. Recipients of proceeds could include: ○Multipurpose events center ○New Town Hall ○Redeveloped Dobson Arena ●Potential Uses that would have interest: ○Luxury Hotel and/or Condominiums, possibly a Conference Center/Hotel ●Land value is based on the highest and best use of the town owned land July 16, 2019 - Page 84 of 110 F. Land Lease / Land Sale Market Potential ●Conference Hotel ○Reasonable interest from hotel operators -opportunity to enter Vail market. ○Mixed interest from investors given past challenges with the P3 process, general feasibility of a conference hotel, shoulder seasons, and annual occupancy challenges. ○Additional research indicates Town may need to contribute land. ●Luxury Hotel ○Very strong interest from operators. ○Reasonably strong interest from investors. Concerns with rising construction costs and close proximity to I-70. ○Interest driven by proven market and margins in Vail Village that are difficult to replicate elsewhere. ●Condominiums ○Strong market potential for high-end condos at this location ○Already have seen initial interest from developers for site. Premiums with luxury hotel could be significant. ○Could generate land value of roughly 10-15% of total project value. July 16, 2019 - Page 85 of 110 F. Land Lease / Land Sale Recommended Path Forward ●Identify site for potential P3 (muni site or charter bus lot) ●If luxury product, issue RFI/RFP and proceed with negotiations ●If conference/hotel or multi- purpose event space, should complete economic feasibility study and then proceed with RFQ/RFP Revenue Potential Multi-Purpose Conference Center Luxury Hotel / Condo Land Value $0 $0 or Low Value $15M-$20M Lease Term N/A N/A 60 years Lease Rate N/A N/A 8% of total land value Annual Lease Revenue N/A N/A $1.2M-$1.6M Rate N/A N/A 5.0% Term N/A N/A 60 year Bond Amount N/A N/A $13.9M-$18.5M July 16, 2019 - Page 86 of 110 F. Land Lease / Land Sale Discussion ●Cons ○Requires that some level of private development occurs on land that is currently publicly owned ○Requires that the Town give up some amount of control over land in the Civic Area ○Necessary to engage in complex negotiation with potential developer in order to agree on final price and development program ●Pros ○Leverages P3 approach to generate revenue for public improvements ○Potential to activate the Civic Area through private development ○Generates a considerable amount of revenue ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 87 of 110 G. Dedicated Sales/Lodging Tax Dedicated Sales Tax Dedicated Lodging Tax Revenue Potential Low High Low High Tax Rate 0.25%0.50%1.00%1.50% Bond Rate 5.0%5.0%5.0%5.0% Bond Term 30 years 30 years 30 years 30 years Annual Revenue $1,700,000 $3,900,000 $2,400,000 $3,500,000 Bond Amount $19,600,000 $39,100,000 $27,200,000 $40,900,000 ●Provides source that mirrors the previously adopted tax dedicated to the conference center development. ●Establishes a revenue stream from an additional sales tax would be dedicated to a specific use or improvement, most likely a multi-purpose events center. ●Previously, the dedicated sales tax was 0.5%, paired with a dedicated lodging tax of 1.5%, both committed to funding the conference center. July 16, 2019 - Page 88 of 110 G. Dedicated Sales/Lodging Tax Discussion ●Cons ○Additional tax on sales or lodging in the Town ○Additional Council comments? ●Pros ○Potential to generate a significant amount of revenue ○Additional Council comments? ●Note ○Requires voter approval ●Council Support ○Thumbs up --Thumbs down --Neutral July 16, 2019 - Page 89 of 110 Summary of Funding Options Description Acronym Urban Renewal Authority URA Downtown Development Authority DDA Business Improvement District BID General Improvement District GID Metro District (Special District)Title 32 Public Improvement Fee PIF Dedicated Sales Tax N/A Land Lease / Land Sale N/A Current Town Reserve N/A Town Bonding Potential N/A Joint Venture Terms JV Philanthropy Philanthropy July 16, 2019 - Page 90 of 110 Funding Options Questions, comments, thoughts . . . . July 16, 2019 - Page 91 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Meeting Minutes for the J une 3, 2019 A I P P meeting. AT TAC H ME N TS: Description June 3, 2019 AIP P Meeting Minutes July 16, 2019 - Page 92 of 110 Public Notice - Art in Public Places Board Meeting Minutes Monday, June 3, 2019 - 8:30 a.m. Town Council Chambers AIPP Board members present: Susan Bristol, Julie Hansen, Kathy Langenwalter, Bill Pierce, Margaret Rogers, Kara Woods AIPP Board members absent: Patricia Donovan Others present: Molly Eppard, AIPP Coordinator 1. Roll call and approval of minutes from May 7th meeting. 2. Citizen input. 3. Red Sandstone Garage Public Art Installation Review Molly reviews the delivery and installation of the art by John Fleming. The board discusses conditions and repair expectations for artist: missing and chipped paint, clean the straight cut of edges where there are several paint drips, remaining blue tape on edges, clean top portions, remove strap mark, repair of text box. The paint should be clean and pristine. He will also have to paint over the later addition of text. The board will outline their expectations for these repairs prior to the return of the artist on June 14th. These repairs will need to be made by the artist for acceptance of the art prior to final payment. Kara and Bill will be present at the installation when the artist arrives. Molly explains how the installation was delivered and installed. The board reviews the process of selection for public art calls. Molly reviews the artist’s suggestions for anti-graffiti coating. The board expresses concern about the application of the anti-graffiti coating and the proposal of artist for the work to rust naturally. The board decides to watch it over the summer and assess the condition. The board would like to mitigate and discourage any additional text or images to the installation. 4. Summer Mural Program Update. Pedro & Jamie are to begin painting on July 15th. They will be submitting a proposal prior to painting in the Lionshead structure. Molly discusses the filming of Kelsey’s mural which will be highlighting culture and art in Vail. After the Taylor Swift recent commission her social media and print media has increased significantly. Kelsey and Courtney are 4th generation Colorado. AIPP will be partnering with the Four Seasons on this project. The property will also be hosting our meet the artist and book signing on the afternoon of June 26. The Montagues arrive June 21 to begin the filming and the mural will begin on Sunday, June 23. Molly reviews the filming schedule. The episode it 10 – 18 minutes providing a 3 minute teaser for social media. Public works is going to sand blast the wall and applying primer 5. Collection maintenance.  10th Mountain Division Soldier is off site and under conservation. We hope to have it installed last week in June. Molly is also getting base cleaned by Steammaster.  Bronze collection cleaning will take place when temperatures get warmer.  Stone collection cleaning. Molly is getting an estimate from Steammaste for cleaning TOV’s stone collection.  Stickwork – Molly will hire security during GoPro concerts.  Robert Tully is repairing the chimes on Cloudscape. July 16, 2019 - Page 93 of 110 6. Coordinator Updates.  Art Walk tour – Molly gave a tour to the Denver Metro Leadership Foundation.  Art Walks begin June 26 through August 28  Art Festival June 21- 23  Timaree McKenny will intern this summer – help with art collection booklet and fliers.  We are looking at the week of July 8 for Ava to paint the utility box in Ford Park. 7. Other Matters from the Board. Margaret share’s Looking Up by Thomas Freidman. It is her favorite work in Chicago! She reached out to the studio as it was on loan to the City of Chicago. It is a 36 foot tall work which has been exhibited in many cities around the country. She suggests it may be a fun fit for Vail. Bill discusses the possibility of an art museum within the Civic Plan. He said they reviewed in the past having it along the south side of the Lionshead Parking structure. He believes it is something Vail is lacking and we should seriously explore this opportunity within the Civic Plan. Molly and Bill will meet to discuss how to best present this concept. 8. Meeting adjourned. July 16, 2019 - Page 94 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: V L HA J une 25, 2019 Meeting Results AT TAC H ME N TS: Description V L H A June 25, 2019 Meeting Results July 16, 2019 - Page 95 of 110 Vail Local Housing Authority Results June 25, 2019 3:00 PM Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1. Call to Order 1.1. Call to Order Lindstrom call the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m. as quorum is present, Meza arrived 3:15pm. 2. Citizen Participation 2.1. Citizen Participation There were no comments, no public present. 3. Approval of Minutes 3.1. VLHA May 28, 2019 Meeting Results Morales made a motion to approve the results as presented. MOTION: Morales SECOND: Wilkins VOTE: 4-0 Approved 4. Main Agenda 4.1. Resolution No. 17, Series of 2019, a Resolution Approving the Purchase of a Deed Restriction Interest in Property (Type III Deed Restriction) in the Town of Vail Legally Described as Capstone Townhouses Unit 6, Eagle County, Colorado with a Physical Address of 1817 Meadow Ridge Road Unit 6, Vail Colorado; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. Presenter: Lynne Campbell, Housing Coordinator Wilkins made a motion to approve Resolution No. 17, Series of 2019. MOTION: Wilkins SECOND: Morales VOTE: 4-0 Approved 5. Matters from the Chairman and Authority Members 5.1. Matters from the Chairman and Authority Members Presenter: Steve Lindstrom, Chairman July 16, 2019 - Page 96 of 110 Lindstrom updated board on his tour of for-sale Stillwater units in Edwards. Wilkins provided update on construction and project completion. 100% of ERWSD employees will reside at Stillwater. If no ERWSD units will be opened to school district and others for month to month rentals. Lindstrom provided Board an update on the EPS report with intent to present to Board at 7/9 meeting. At last Tuesday’s Council meeting Magellan present the housing survey results update to council. Ruther intent moving forward is to follow up on the survey. Great information was received. He stated there is opportunity and support for housing in the community though not ready to fund via a tax increase. Rather the community thought there is more work to be done on short term rentals. Ruther added an update of EHU compliance and Council’s support to move forward summonsing those delinquent. Council recommended reviewing compliance policies and return to Council with suggestions. The Housing department will provide information to VLHA at a future meeting to discuss opportunities. Ruther mentioned the Town has begun 2020 budget review. He discussed deed restriction capital improvement cost. Today labor is not included in those costs. It may be disincentizing owners to update / maintain units. Housing will bring to VLHA for review. There is opportunity for partnerships with TOV and other agencies for land opportunity. TOV also reached out to CDOT regarding housing / parcel opportunities. Wilkins asked if there are there any thoughts regarding land opportunities in Minturn? He recommended the Town keep eye on this should Minturn’s deal not move forward. Wilkins inquired about the 2019 Housing Now Conference in October. Wilkins and Morales are interested in attending. Morales will miss the July 9 meeting. 6. Executive Session 6.1. Executive Session per C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(a)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, regarding: submitted Vail InDEED applications and program details. Presenter: Lynne Campbell, Housing Coordinator Wilkins made a motion to enter executive session per C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(a)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, regarding: submitted July 16, 2019 - Page 97 of 110 Vail InDEED applications and program details. MOTION: Wilkins SECOND: Morales VOTE: 5-0 Wilkins made a motion to exit executive session and reenter the regular meeting. MOTION: Wilkins SECOND: Morales VOTE: 5-0 7. Any Action as a Result of Executive Session 7.1. Any Action as a Result of Executive Session McDougall made a motion to instruct staff to proceed with the 2 Vail InDEED applications as discussed in executive session. MOTION: McDougall SECOND: Wilkins VOTE: 5-0 8. Adjournment 8.1. Adjournment at 5:00 p.m. (estimated) Wilkins made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 4:00 p.m. MOTION: Wilkins SECOND: Morales VOTE: 5-0 9. Future Agenda Items 9.1. • EHU Capital Improvements, Labor Cost • Housing Data • Housing Sites • Discussion Civic Area Plan • Proposed 2020 Budget Discussion • Annual Deed Restriction Compliance Verification Policy 10. Next Meeting Date 10.1. Next Meeting - July 9, 2019 Meeting agendas and materials can be accessed prior to meeting day on the Town of Vail website www.vailgov.com. All housing authority meetings are open to the public. Times and order of agenda are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Vail Local Housing Authority will discuss an item. Please call (970) 479-2150 for additional information. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hours prior to meeting time. Housing Department July 16, 2019 - Page 98 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: C S E Draft Meeting Minutes AT TAC H ME N TS: Description C S E Minutes 6-5-2019 July 16, 2019 - Page 99 of 110 COMMISSION ON SPECIAL EVENTS MEETING Vail Town Council Chambers Wednesday, June 5, 2019 @ 8:30a.m.-10:00a.m. AGENDA: Meeting materials can be accessed after 5/31/18 at the following link: June Meeting Materials 1. @8:30a.m.: Administrative Items (5 minutes) a. Approval of the Minutes from the CSE Meeting on May 1, 2019 Davis motioned to approve, Kundolf second, passed 7-0 b. Meeting reminders: • July 3 CSE meeting – all agreed this date would be fine • Joint Meeting with VEAC & VLMDAC –June 11 at 8am at the Donovan 2. @8:35a.m.: Event Recaps (50 minutes) a. Burton US Open – Whitney Heingartner (15 minutes) - Introductions of Team Burton Marc Murphy, Colby Sears, Megan Tracy - Played video, thank you from Donna and Jake Burton they love Vail - Seven years behind us here in Vail, 2022 will be ten years in Vail, 40 years overall for event and an Olympic year - Heingartner went through promo deck offering high level recap of sustainability efforts, media capture, music talent, attendance (slightly down-attributed to weather and music selections) - Run through of RRC research/ survey i.e. visitor type, daily spend, ROI, - W omen brought a slightly higher percentage which at Burton we love to see - 52% Net Promoter Score, slightly down but still a positive story here - Just signed a three year plan with Red Bull Media House & Red Bull TV, people are engaging and watching for longer periods of time - Social media saw large increases in impressions and engagements - Barry Davis asked about action Items and council’s access to our comments - Gordon commented on how the CSE handles its funding and assesses how each tax dollar is spent and is curious how the council will be with that moving forward - Jenn Bruno commented that council is discussing and trying to determine next steps - Kundolf- Why couldn’t the CSE just attend council recap so that event promoters don’t have to recap twice - Kundolf – loves this event and it’s one of the non-CSE events she likes to attend, everyone behaves themselves and it’s a reflection of how well promoter does - Wadey – agrees with Jen Mason of quality over quantity but am curious about moving forward to increase the attendance July 16, 2019 - Page 100 of 110 - Heingartner- We’re looking at our music programming and our scheduling to best utilize time, but always reevaluating marketing efforts etc. - Marc Murphy- At one of the highest years with a different music act we were $10k over what we would consider a comfortable attendance level - On venue there really isn’t space for more people, but we are always looking - Davis- ‘Best Line” video was great. Also your environmental efforts area is a huge leader. It is also the highest level of talent and we need to stand behind that. I feel the same about the huge importance of focusing on female athletes and female focus - Davis – What does level set mean? Heingartner responded It’s really a balance of what music does the town want, the mountain want and Burton want, so what works well for all? - Gordon- What is your impression of what the town wants for music? - Murphy- I think that it may be more resort focused, looking to have some input I into what bands would be and dictate what guest that would draw - Gordon- I thought your musical selection was interesting and the Tune Yards were one of the best acts ever, and a couple others were really solid and would encourage you to keep pushing the envelope on that - Bisantz- I agree with Mark Gordon and think this is one for the events that make Vail appear more forward thinking - Valenti – I like how you keep working on moving people back and forth from locations and think that a pedestrian bridge at base of Gold Peak may be a great idea - B. Spring Back to Vail – Peggy Wolfe (15 minutes) - Newbury Rediker commented and apologized that she would have to leave in ten minutes - Wolfe – Thank you for your continued hard work, I know this isn’t funded by you but we appreciate your diligence. We really tried this year to make it a multiple day festival style event. I think we lay good ground work for moving forward - This year’s calendar we were outside of spring break but before closing weekend. It made it a challenging weekend but think that we did well - RRC offered to different sets of data, one included only the concerts and the other included all activation for the four days. - Wolfe ran through RRC data, various lodging partnerships and visitor types - Liz Gladitsch from Vail Mountain is present to answer any marketing questions that you may have for her - We want to start earlier by increasing partnerships with others and we’ve made a conscious decision to do that moving forward to that we can really move the needle - Gordon – The 51 Instagram Posts were ones that Vail Mountain Posted? Gladitsch confirmed - Wolfe also commented that RRC got 47 full surveys back and 11 that were partial to answer a question from Wadey - Kundolf-I don’t understand how it computed that $9 room night information July 16, 2019 - Page 101 of 110 - NPS score is respectable, I would also look at Hot Summer Nights, an event that struggled but has been brought back to life and I see parallels between that event and this event - Kundolf- I think the event completely reinvented, in comparison to Powabunga it appears fresh and new and different. I don’t see that here an think you should work on it. -Kundolf- profit should matter, make it a good event and profit will come, make it what it is, a true Colorado event - Davis- Bad data is frustrating, especially with this amount of money in play. Another frustration is blaming a bad snow year like last year, so I feel the same about blaming a good snow year - Davis-currently in reviewing this event I don’t want to throw good money after bad so I agree we need to see improvements and during this time period. - Davis-Kudos to the silent disco, maybe look to expand that and other engagements around the clock - Gordon-Does the town charge you for electricity? Wolfe responded that no, they do not. - Gordon -Attendance figures for the concert from Police Department was 3400 and 3100 for concert evenings - Do you hire a F& B vendor? Wolfe answered that we hire out the food and keep the alcohol sales within Highline. - You remit sales taxes? Yes. - Gordon- In 2018 council funded an extra $120,000 which led to a $31,839, this year, council gave $300,000 which led to a $27,241 in tax return, which leads me to believe that the investment shows a fundamental flaw in the model. I don’t see an incentive for you guys as Highline, to bring in better bands and we need to rethink the overall model when this event doesn’t give us the additional value - Gordon -I do agree that starting earlier is a good idea but we need to discuss the model and reinvent. - Gordon-If the ROI is present I don’t mind spending money but I don’t see that here. - Gordon-I think council needs to rethink the model and I hope the minutes reflect my opinion on that. - Kundolf- we can’t speak for council in my opinion - Gordon- we give advice and reviews to council is how I am to understand it. - Gordon – I am not questioning council’s responsibility and I am just acting fiscally responsible - Davis- We have an institutional knowledge of reviewing events and that is why this recap occurred here today. - Wadey- I do see this as a constructive process and we enjoy providing context - Vlaar-This was also a collaboration with the mountain and the focus was on the music and that is where the money went to and this was the first response and effort to respond to the mountain’s call to improve the event. - Gordon- multiple organizations should have input - Wolfe- We look at it beyond ROI which is measureable but the other elements and how can we put the closing weekend back on the map for Vail? July 16, 2019 - Page 102 of 110 -Valenti- Two points I’d like to make- 23% passive rating in NPS and I see those as convertible and that’s a a positive. Secondly, my thought about this and Snow Days are that they are at strategic times and should have the resources to insulate it from weather. - Bisantz- When $300K is given for talent and production what goes to talent and what goes to production? Wolfe - I would have to look at that breakdown for you and will do. - Bisantz- When was the funding released? Wolfe- Not until January was the money released from council. - Davis- six additional months really helps you to find that talent? Wolfe-Yes it also gives us a chance to look at the overall model and other partnerships. - Davis- I would also like to know what the production looks like year over year. - Wolfe- The production costs generally go hand in hand based on requirements, bigger bands cost more in production -Bisantz- Over the past number of years the money and timing was even less and you still managed the talent so it is hard for me to swallow all of that. I think you need to focus on putting on the event and the profit will follow. -Wadey- I am hopeful that all of these parties can come to the right formula. - Wadey -Thank you for your openness and willingness to listen to our feedback. Taste of Vail – Angela Mueller (10 minutes) - Thank you for helping us to create a true food and wine event, it brought people in from all over the nation. It helped that we had great weather. We saw a great media presence that we hadn’t seen in years past. We will share articles as they become available - Signed La Croix, GMC and Guinness as new sponsors - 56% were nonlocals and staying in Vail - Our whole goal is to make a soft time in Vail busy and show Vail has a world class culinary destination - 100% compostable and recyclable - NPS score was 63% - Kundolf- I’ve been funding this for years, the lamb event was outstanding, I’d like to see the picnic be freshened up a bit. I feel like the Grand Tasting could be more of a black tie event like it used to be - Wadey- I thought the Grand Tasting was great, best it has been in years. - Davis- happy to see continued success but I do think the Rose and Lamb could continue to evolve and a great place to focus your vision - Bisantz- I think you are moving in the right direction, great wine and seminars were great, and I’m a cork dork. I do think it would be great if we could celebrate the Lamb Winner a little but more - Motion to approve release of final funding Davis and second Kundolf, passed 7- 0 July 16, 2019 - Page 103 of 110 Pink Vail – Christine Albertson (10 minutes) -Thank you to CSE and town staff for all that you do for us - Great successes especially our NPS score of 69 and we’ve seen our sponsor opportunities have grown, this year we had lot of great local sponsors. Over $200,000 in cash and in-kind - We received great national exposure on the weather channel via Michael Holton - Gordon- Are you happy with the move to Golden Peak? Yes, it has allowed it to grow and we think it can continue to do so. - Motion for final funding Davis, Second Kundolf, passed 7-0- Wadey noted that all recaps should be held to the same standard and provide the same information - Miano commented that he may not have shared all the information that event producers sent to him but he will make a more conscious effort in the future - Vlaar – we should have a work session to come to a consensus on the recap template that we can share with event producers - Gordon- agreed, it’s been a long time since we have discussed the recap process 3. @9:15 a.m.: Event RFP Discussion, CSE (30 minutes) - Miano – this came about because of the brainstorm behind pursuing different events that we would like to see, a way to attract a specific event etc. - Noted that he reached out to Burton in regards to a skateboarding event - Vlaar- our agency had commented how our marketing agency had suggested teen events and is there a way that we can be more proactive, but we could add to a work session. We had discussed a teen ninja idea - Wadey- this sounds like it could be more of a staff level discussion - Kundolf- VLMD is in summer and is all teen. I will also admit that the teen ninja concept could be a nice hit here in town - Valenti suggested we reach out to Team Player Productions about certain needs and opportunities - Gordon- asking for specific events is difficult but it would be relatively easy to add a preamble talking about events that appeal to family with teens etc. - Miano noted he will put a introduction letter together and share with the CSE - Gordon- that would be great and letting event producers know a bit of background about Vail and what are needs are - Kundolf mentioned reaching out to the Colorado Film Institute about potential “ shorts” and movie premiers 4. @10:20a.m.: New Business and Community Input (5 minutes) - Vlaar- an offer has been extended for the special event coordinator position - Miano- Unsettled has decided that his Vail event will be cost prohibitive and will be sharing a letter of explanation with the CSE and Miano will share - This would reopen a $10,000 fund balance for the Education and Enrichment category and Miano will send out the previous funding requests July 16, 2019 - Page 104 of 110 - Davis- Will he be showing up to ask for more money in the fall? Miano A) Unsure - Davis asked if we could also reach out to those event producers - Bruno suggested that town council could allow the funds to be moved into the next year - Vlaar- The Vail Valley Foundation reached out to council in regards to GoPro Mountain Games moving to a signature event status funded via town council as it is already identified as a signature event it just hasn’t been consistently funded as such - Gordon- Have we given them what they’ve asked for each year? - Wadey- Not this year. - Davis- This board was created to take certain things off the councils plate and now things are returning to councils plate, so council needs to decide how they’d like to move forward. It would be beneficial if we could have a 30 minute discussion with council to get an idea of direction to most effectively move forward. - Vlaar- great suggestion and we’ll reach out to council. It ultimately is their decision - Gordon – yes, it is 100% councils decision - Davis- Yes, they have a full agenda though and I don’t know if that’s what they are going to want to do that? - Kundolf- Is their a specific pot of money for signature events? - Bruno – Our signature events get a 3% bump per year, but council has yet to discuss the Mountain Games and we do like you to discuss most of the events and we appreciate your efforts, but the CSE was not created to take things off our plate but rather to create events that would drive tourism - Gordon- there used to be unlimited ask periods which was crazy and they began to hone into a CSE model - Wadey- Our budget hasn’t increased and nobody is coming down in what they ask for as far as event producers so I would ask that if events get moved over to signature events that the funds they were getting from CSE don’t go with them so that we can continue to assist event producers . Our budget needs to remain robust. - Kundolf- Mia and Alison should go have a conversation about funding because we don’t have the benefit of a 3% increase. - Miano- Explanation of mountain games gift bag and tickets - Vlaar- Thank you to Jenn Bruno and Esmarie Fessler for attending Davis Motion to adjourn, Kundolf second, motion passed 7-0 Upcoming events to attend: • GoPro Mountain Games – 6/6-6/9 • King of the Mountain Volleyball Tournament – 6/14-6/16 • Vail Lacrosse Tournament – 6/17-6/19 • Rocky Mountain Burger Battle – 6/20 • Vail Craft Beer Classic – 6/21-6/23 • Vail Summer Bluegrass -6/26-7/17 (In Solaris) • Vail Lacrosse Shootout Tournament – 6/29-7/7 • Vail America Days – 7/4 Adjournment @10:00a.m. July 16, 2019 - Page 105 of 110 Next CSE Meeting: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 – 8:30-11:00a.m. - Vail Town Council July 16, 2019 - Page 106 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Confirm August meetings related to town manager recruitment with S trategic Government Resources (S G R) July 16, 2019 - Page 107 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Town of Vail Community Picnics: Tuesday, J uly 23 at Bighorn P ark and Tuesday, A ug. 13 at Donovan Pavilion – 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. July 16, 2019 - Page 108 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: 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: L upine Drive P roperty P RE S E NT E R(S ): Matt Mire, Town Attorney July 16, 2019 - Page 109 of 110 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C: Recess 4:00 pm estimate July 16, 2019 - Page 110 of 110