Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-10-17 Town Council Minutes-14 _0 i MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING October 17, 1995 6:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 17, 1995, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Mery Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Steinberg Sybill Navas Jan Strauch Rodney E. Slifer Paul Johnston None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Administrative Hearing On People's Ordinance No. 1, 1995. Mery Lapin recused himself from this item due to a conflict of interest. Tom Moorhead presided over this hearing. Carol L. Curtis, Attorney for the Common Sense for the Commons committee was present and participated in this hearing. Candace Stutson of Candace Stutson Reporting was present as stenographer for the hearing. All original exhibits are on file with Stutson and copies are attached to these minutes. Moorhead called Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk, to identify three documents and entered them as exhibits. Exhibit 1 - Statement of Sufficiency for a Petition to Initiate A people's Ordinance #1, Series of 1995, Exhibit 2 - Resolution No. 27, 1986 A Resolution Adopting the Master Land Use Plan for the Town of Vail. Exhibit 3 - Vail Land Use Plan Adopted November 18, 1986. Morrhead called Rick Pylman, former Town of Vail Planner from 1985-1989 who was the project manager on the Vail Land Use Plan. Pylman indicated this land Use Plan does in fact include the land known as Vail Commons. The land use plan covers from approximately Wendy's up to the Brandess building and is zoned Community Commercial. Next to testify was Jay Peterson, local Vail attorney specializing in real estate, zoning and land planning for 20 years. Peterson testified that in his opinion the Land Use Plan is administrative in nature and the Peoples Ordinance No 1, 1995 is a legislative action. Carol Curtis argued the Town Council actions were legislative and entered three exhibits. Exhibit 1 - Resolution No 2, 1993 A resolution authorizing the purchase of an unplatted piece of land commonly known as The Vail Commons Property. Exhibit 2 - A cite from CRS 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity or converted to a private use without a public hearing process. Exhibit 3 - Resolution No 13, 1991 A resolution changing the Town of Vail Land Use Plan. Curtis read to council from Resolution 2, 1993 "WHEREAS, the Town Council believes it will benefit the public health, safely, and welfare to purchase the property for open space, parks, or other purposes". This conflicts with the use of commercial space and housing which the Council is now proposing. Resolution 13 modifies the 1986 Land Use Plan and Curtis feels this is an admission the plan has changed. Curtis would like to see a voter -approved master plan for the Vail Commons property. Moorhead had the following comments. The Colorado Constitution and the Vail Town Charter state clearly that the people can initiate proceedings. Master Land Use plans are an administrative act, so states case law. To put an administrative act on a ballot is not appropriate. All the negotiations pertaining to the lease of the Vail Commons property was held in open, public meetings. Mayor Osterfoss asked for other council questions. Strauch asked if Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17/95 the Commons was excluded from the land use plan. Rick Pylman stated no it was not and was always included as part of the plans. Curtis said Resolution 2, 1993 stated the land use was for open land or parks. Moorhead admits Resolution 2, 1993 was poorly drafted however there were no deed restrictions applied to this land and the Town Council made sure this land was purchased with general funds assuring no restrictions were placed on this land. Peggy Osterfoss and Tom Steinberg were both on council at the time of the land purchase. Osterfoss and Steinberg both agree the possibilities discussed prior to purchase of this land was employee housing, a fire house, Town offices, and commercial space. Rob Levine, former council member at the time of the land purchase, stated the funds used to purchase this land was from the "general fund" so as not to restrict what the property could be used for. Bob Buckley, also on Council at the time of the land purchase stated the land was purchased to create employee housing and a commercial site. Osterfoss summarized by stating Council will need to take all of this testimony under advisement in executive session at the end of this meeting and they will then come back with their decision. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Lew Meskiman asked that since Sunburst Drive to the Fall Ridge Condominiums on Vail Valley Drive is being resurfaced, could a line be put on one side designating a pedestrian way. Peggy thanked Meskiman for the suggestion and asked Bob McLaurin to check into it. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda: Mery Lapin joins the meeting. A. Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1973, Special Development District No. 7, The Marriott Mark; amending an approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 7; amending the Title of the Special Development District to the Marriott Vail Mountain Resort SDD in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 715 West Lionshead Circle/Lots 4, 7, C, and D, Block 1, Vail/Lionshead Third Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. B. Resolution No. 23, Series of 1995, a resolution designating additional signers on an imprest checking account for Library deposit transactions for the Town of Vail with Russ Johnson and Kathleen Winfield as signers on that account, permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes of the State of Colorado. Mayor Osterfoss read the Consent Agenda in full. Slifer moved to approve the Consent Agenda with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995, first reading of an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1995 tax year and payable in the 1996 fiscal year. Steve Thompson presented this item to the Council. The Council has been reviewing the 1996 budget for several weeks. The ordinance summarizing the expenditures is required by statute. Staff recommends the Council approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No.20 of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The fifth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance to change the zoning of 67 properties in the Town of Vail from their current zoning to the Natural Area Preservation District, Outdoor Recreation District, or the General Use District. Russell Forrest and Jim Curnutte presented this item to Council. On August 22, 1994, staff received approval to amend the text of Chapter 18.38, Greenbelt and Natural Open Space District (GNOS) and Chapter 18.36, Public Use District (PUD), of the Vail Municipal Code, and to create a new Chapter 18.33, Outdoor Recreation District (OR). These text amendments and the proposed zoning changes, Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17195 as identified in Ordinance No. 19, are intended to insure that the uses allowed in these zone districts are consistent with their purpose statements, and that properties throughout Town, especially those with open space characteristics, are located in the appropriate zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the proposed zoning changes on September 24, 1995 and voted 4-2-1 to recommend approval of these changes. The two dissenting members stated that they wanted parcel #21 (proposed par 3 site) to be rezoned to the General Use District. Staff also reviewed issues and public comments concerning the proposed rezoning of the Mt. Bell site (#34). The PEC felt strongly that the entire Mt. Bell parcel should be rezoned to the General Use District as per the staff memo. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1995. Hermann Staufer expressed his concern that the golf course was not properly zoned or the designated zoning was confusing. Jim Curnutte feels the zoning is appropriate for the golf course. Osterfoss asked staff to contemplate Staufer's point by second reading and spell out a golf course zone specifically. Bob Lazier asked for protection for Sun Vail from adjacent Red Sandstone School noise. Osterfoss noted that by second reading the line designations between the two properties would be more specific. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No.19 of 1995 on first reading, with staff looking at clarifying the Golf Course zoning and the designation line between Red Sandstone School and Sun Vail, with a second by Steinberg. Navas does not believe the zoning placed on some of the parks and golf course is correct and feels a zoning should be used which would provide greater flexibility to plan for future community development needs. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1 with Navas in opposition. The sixth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Section 5.04.120 Transfer of License and Section 5.20.100 Exemptions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Tom Moorhead, Steve Thompson and Sally Lorton presented this item to Council. 1) Council requested staff to prepare an ordinance that would allow some relief from the Annual Business License fee when a new owner occupied an existing space and began a new operation in a space that a prior owner had paid the annual business license fee. 2) Council requested staff to prepare amendments to our special events license to guarantee that exempt, non-profit organizations will significantly benefit from such special events. This direction was provided as a result of a special event that was perceived to be nothing more than a retail sales event that did not provide significant benefit to an exempt organization. Staff Recommendation: 1) Staff recommends a more equitable approach is to prorate the annual business license fee for the initial year of operation. 2) Staff advises that the change may significantly impact special events and sales tax revenue from those events. Bob Lazier supports pro -rating the fee on a quarterly basis. Meskiman would like it so a seasonal business does not have to buy a full year license. Andre de Lucinges suggested running the license period with the ski season. Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 21 of 1995 on first reading, with the quarterly proration of the business fee to be addressed by second reading, a second by Strauch. Johnston amended his motion to include that a special event must be sponsored by a non-profit organization, second by Strauch. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The seventh item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance providing for the major amendment of Special Development District No. 31, Golden Peak House; amending an approved development plan for Special Development District No. 31, in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; located at 278 Hanson Ranch Road/Lots A, B, and C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Jim Curnutte presented this item to Council. Applicant is requesting that Council rescind the action taken in regard to this Ordinance on September 19, 1995. To Rescind the previous action there must be a motion made by a Council member who voted with the prevailing side upon first reading. If such motion to rescind carries, then Council can reconsider the ordinance. On September 11, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted (by a vote of 4-2, with Armour and Pratt opposed) to recommend approval for the applicant's requests. The staff recommendation is for Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17195 approval of the applicant's request to modify the density section of the SDD, with regard to the overall number of dwelling units. Additionally, staff recommends denial of the applicant's request to modify the density/GRFA portion of the proposal. Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 14, of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The eighth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1995, first reading of an ordinance amending Section 9.22.101A. which contains the definition for larceny. Tom Moorhead presented this item to Council. On July 1, 1995, the State definition for theft was amended by increasing the value of the thing involved from $300 to $400. It is necessary for the Town of Vail Ordinance to remain consistent with the State provision. Staff is recommending that Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1995 be passed. Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 18, of 1995 on first reading, with a second by Navis. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The ninth item on the agenda was a request for a 30-day extension of the hearing process on the appeal of the Cook 250 addition proposed at 1012 Eagle's Nest Circle/Lot 2, Block 6, Vail Village 7th Filing. The applicant, Mr. Cook, is requesting that the appeals process hearing be extended form the October 17, 1995 Vail Town Council meeting to the November 21, 1995 evening meeting. On September 27, 1995, the Town of Vail Office of Community Development received a written request from the Cook's adjacent property owners, Tom and Flo Steinberg, requesting that the Design Review Board decision to approve the Cook 250 addition be appealed to the Vail Town Council. Pursuant to Section 18.54.090(c), appeal to Town Council, the Vail Town Council may grant a 30-day extension to the appeals process if the Council find that there is sufficient information available. The applicant is requesting that the appeals hearing be extended to the November 21, 1995, Vail Town Council meeting to provide the opportunity for the applicant's architect and legal counsel to be present at the hearing. Staff is of the opinion that the unavailability of the applicant's architect and legal counsel be interpreted as insufficient information. Upon consultation with Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead, staff would recommend that the Vail Town Council grant an approval of the applicant's request for a 30-day extension of the appeals process hearing due to insufficient information. Lapin moved to grant a 30 day extension with a second by Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The tenth item on the agenda was an appeal of a DRB decision to deny an application for a reroof of the Stevenson Residence, located at 3897 Lupine Drive/Lot 4, Block 1, Bighorn Subdivision, 1st Addition. Applicant: Mark and Maureen Stevenson. Lauren Waterton presented this item to Council. At the October 4, 1995 DRB meeting, the DRB passed a motion to deny (4-1) a request for a reroof at the Stevenson residence, replacing cedar shakes with a metal roof. The DRB based its denial on the incompatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends that the DRB decision be overturned and the request to reroof using a metal roof be approved by the Town Council. Eric Hill, Architect for the Stevenson showed the council samples of the proposed roof and asked for their approval. Strauch moved to overturn the DRB's decision and approved the metal roof, with a second by Navas. A vote was taken and passed, 6-1 with Osterfoss against. The eleventh item on the agenda was a request for a 30-day extension of the hearing process on the appeal of the Dews demo/rebuild using two 250's, located at 278 Rockledge Road/Lot 15, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. Applicant: Julie Dews. The applicant is requesting that the appeal hearing be extended from the October 17, 1995 Vail Town Council meeting to the November 7, 1995 meeting. Lauren Waterton presented this item to Council. Pursuant to Section 18.54.090(c), appeal to Town Council, the Vail Town Council may grant a 30-day extension to the appeals process if 1p the Council finds that there is insufficient information available. Julie Dews has requested that the Design Review Board decision to deny the demo/rebuild using two 250's be appealed to the Vail Town Council. The applicant is requesting that the appeals hearing be extended to November 7, 1995, Vail Town Council meeting to provide the opportunity for the applicant to be present at the hearing. Staff is of the Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10117195 opinion that the unavailability of the applicant could be interpreted as insufficient information. Upon consultation with Town Attorney, Tom Moorhead, staff would recommend that the Vail Town Council grant an approval of the applicant's request for a 30-day extension of the appeals process hearing due to insufficient information. Lapin moved to grant a 30 day extension, with a second by Slifer. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0. The twelfth item on the agenda was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) denial of a request for a density (GRFA) variance to allow for the conversion of attic space to GRFA located at 3130 Booth Falls Court/Lot 6-A, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Jeffrey & Eileen Shiffrin. Randy Stouder presented this item to Council. The applicants converted an area above their garage to habitable space (GRFA) without design review approval or a building permit. Staff became aware of the unpermitted construction after the Fire Department responded to an alarm at the subject property. Construction was on -going when the Fire Department arrived, and no building permit was in evidence. The Fire Department alerted the Community Development Department of the unpermitted construction and the job was red -tagged (stop work order issued) on July 26, 1995. A letter was sent to the applicant requiring that the unpermitted GRFA be removed (copy attached). The applicant decided to request a density variance in an attempt to gain approval to allow the GRFA to remain. On October 9, 1995 the PEC unanimously denied (by a vote 5-0) the applicant's variance request. The applicant is appealing the PEC decision to the Town Council. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request for a density variance. Jeff Shiffrin asked council to grant a density variance. Osterfoss explained the Town of Vail has clear guidelines to follow on density. Council must follow these guidelines. Strauch moved to uphold the PEC decision and deny the density variance, with a second by Lapin. A vote was taken and passed, 5-2 with Navas & Slifer against. The thirteenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was no report. Vail Commons Discussion & Decision. The Council agreed as a whole to remain in public session. Lapin once again recused himself and left the meeting. Osterfoss asked for public comment. Jeff Christensen thanked Carol Curtis for her help. He did not appreciate the Town releasing to the press a letter from William D. Rosell, as he felt this to be a smear campaign. Lew Meskiman agrees the master plan is administrative, however he feels the people should vote on the property use. Bob Fiske does not feel the Council pursued all avenues before deciding on City Market. Rob Levine believes this is a administrative issue. Paul Johnston believes this to have been an administrative process. Navas agrees with Johnston and truly believes council should move ahead with the project. Steinberg does not feel it necessary to have everything go to a vote. We would never need a land plan or a Town Council if this was the case. Wants to proceed ahead with the project as it is administrative. Slifer said this is clearly an administrative project. If this went to a vote what would the wording be on the ballot? Peoples Ordinance 1 asks for a master plan to be approved by the electorate. The Peoples Ordinance 1, 1995 is very badly written and would have to go to court to have it interpreted before it could go on a ballot. Strauch has heard no evidence the process has been legislative. He called 30 people who signed the petition asking them why and he received 30 different answers. He votes to proceed with the project. Osterfoss stated based on the information presented this process is administrative. It is not good news to hear that the Council has not communicated well with the public. Council will continue to try and do a better job at communication. Peggy thanked the Commons group for all their time put into the process. She hopes the council and community can now apply their energy and enthusiasm to other issues. Steinberg made a motion to not vote on Peoples Ordinance 1, 1995 nor refer it to an election, because this process has been administrative in nature and not legislative, second by 19, Johnston. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 6-0. There being no further business, Steinberg moved to adjourn at approximately 10:25 P.M. Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17/95 �J ATTEST: �v I" C..ICkJL Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk ('Names of certain Individuals who gave public input maybe Inaccurate.) 46 9 Respectfully submitted, A4'L LI- Margaret A. Osterfoss, M or Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/17195 RESOLUTION NO. 2 SERIES 1993 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF • AN UNPLATTED PIECE OF LAND COMMONLY KNOWN AS 11iE VAIL COMMONS PROPERTY, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A ATTAC:tED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF ("THE PROPERTY"}. WFIEREAS, the Town Council believes It will benefit the public health, safety, and welfare to purchase the property for open space, parks, or other purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to enter Into the contract to buy and sell the property which is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. 2. Tile Town Manager and the Town staff are authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to complete the purchase of the property by the Town of Vail front Vail Commons, Ltd. 3. This resolution shall take effect Immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1993. Margar A. Osterfoss, Mayo ATTEST. r • ✓ t,IN.I�i�✓/�.����,(t.GiyifLi��lc-� Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Acting Town Clerk 1.9 National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned for { private development. rl ?� 1.10 Development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public use. 1' 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity or convertea to a private use witnout a public hearing process. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (intill areas). 1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as :. well as its potential for public use. 1 2. Skier/Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while # accommodating day visitors. 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should i, work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town func- tion more efficiently. i. 2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve'facilities for day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural oppor- tunities to encourage summer tourism. 2.5 The community should improve non -skier recreational options to improve ` year-round tourism. 2.6 An additional golf course is needed. The Town should work with the down valley communities to develop a public golf course as well as other sports facilities.to serve the regional demand for recreational. facilities. 7• 2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space., 1 2.8 Day skier needs for parking and access should be accommodated through creative solutions such as: a) Increase busing from out of town. b) Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional base portals.y c) Continuing to provide temporary surface parking. . d) Addition of structured parking. 3. Commercial - — a 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. rx h:b,7` 7 RESOLUTION NO. 13 Series of 1991 A RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE TOWN OF VAIL LAND USE PLAN, CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY. LOCATED WEST OF THE TOWN OF VAIL SHOPS FROM OPEN SPACE TO SFMI-PUBLIC, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, conditions In Use Town of Vail have changed since the Land Use Plan was, originally adopted: and WHEREAS. Policy 6.1 of the Land Use Plan states that services should keep pace with Increased growth; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail has a need for additional land with the designation of seml- public In order to meet the standards of Policy 6.1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 6. VAIL, COLORADO THAT: s 1. The Town Council linds Ilse procedures for amending the Land Use Plan, as set forth In Chapter Vill, Section 3 of the Land Use Plan have been satisfied. 2. The Town Council hereby amends the Land Use Plan: A. Changing the Land Use Designation shown on the mldsection of the Plan from Open Space to Semi -Public for the property more particularly described In Exhibit A, and B. Changing text of Chapter VII, Section 2, "Public Works" to read: "The Public Works/Transportation Department Is housed at Ilia Town of Vail shop property which Is located north of 1.70 in the vicinity of the golf course. The Public Works Town Shops may need to be expanded to accommodate future space needs to allow for additional services to be located at the shops. Also, In the previous space use study, It was recommended that a small satellite facility to accommodate under storage and a snowplow be developed In West Vail," INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this e21 day of t ient�R. ose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A: Bran meyer, own Clerk l 1 � , STATEMENT OF SUFFTC—IENCY, Name of Petition: Petition to Initiate A People's Ordinance #1, Series of 1995 Petitioner's Committee: Jeffrey K. Christensen, 2308 A Garmisch Cynthia Steitz, 1895 Meadow Ridge Road Barbara Moser, 1880 Meadow Ridge Road Lars Burghardt, 963 Lionsridge hoop 4513 Barbara Feeney, 3145-A Booth Falls Ct. Date Petition Submitted September 12, 1995 Valid Signatures: 370 ,Date Supplemental Petition Submitted: October 2, 1995 ' Valid Signatures: 82* Number'of Valid Signatures:. 452 Signatures Required by Town Code: (IS% of 2,887 } 434 *Clerk stopped checking signatures after sufficiency of signatures was met. I hereby certify that the attached Supplemental Petition to Initiate a People's Ordinance #l, Series of 1995, does meet the requirements of Article V, Section 5.3a of the Town Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, and is sufficient in the required number of signatures of registered electors of the Town equal in number to at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of electors registered to vote at the last regular municipal election. F �`uqumm�Otn�iaiig � yCa �i �O • ° 9cs Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk itr.. A £, ! bate F3t10LLY1 W PFILESIUSE RS1f NITIATRSUFFICI. W PD SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION TO INITIATE A PEOPLE'S ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 1995 • INSTRUCTIONS TO CIRCULATOR 1. You must be a registered voter of Vail, Colorado, to' circulate this petition. Specifically, you must be: a. At least 18 years of age; and b A citizen of the United States; and C. A resident of the State of Colorado and have resided in the state at least twenty-five days; and d. A resident of the Town of Vail for at least twenty-five days. 2. Do not in any case unstaple this petition or remove a page or part of a page from this petition. Be sure the elector signs in ink, or indelible pencil his/her name and address (street and street number, not a post office box number), city, county, and date in your presence. 0 4. Only signatures of registered voters of the Town of Vail will qualify. 5. No one can sign for another person, unless the registered elector is physically disabled or illiterate and wishes to sign, in which case the elector shall sign or make his or her mark in the space so provided. Any person other than a circulator may assist the disabled or illiterate elector in completing the remaining information. The person providing assistance shall sign his or her name and address and shall state that such assistance was given to the disabled or illiterate elector. Married women should use their own given first name, such as "Mary Jones," NOT "Mrs. Thomas Jones." 7. When the petition is complete with signatures (or time is up), the circulator should sign the affidavit before a notary public and have the notary public complete the affidavit. Dateof notarization, notary's signature, seal, and expiration date must be included. 68. As soon as affidavits are completed, the committee should return the petition sections assembled as one instrument for filing to: Lori Aker, Deputy Town Clerk 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2136 0 "WARNING: IT IS AGAINST THE LAW: For anyone to sign any initiative or referendum petition with any name other than his or her own or to knoyljggly sign his or her name more than once for the same measure or to knowingly sign a petition when ! not a registered elector who Is eligible to vote on the measure. DO NOT SIGN THIS PETITION UNLESS YOU ARE A REGISTERED ELECTOR AND ELIGIBLE TO VOTE ON THIS MEASURE. TO BE A REGISTERED ELECTOR, YOU MUST BE A CITIZEN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AND REGISTERED TO VOTE. Do not sign this petition unless you have read or have had read to you the proposed initiative or referred measure or the summary of an initiated measure in its entirety and understand Its meaning." SUMMARY OF PROPOSED INITIATIVE is proposed that the Vail Town Council create an Ordinance establishing a Master Plan for the West Vail hopping M.?.11 area and the Vail Commons parcel of land. No contracts shall be entered into by the Town f Vail for the West Vail Shopping Mall or Vail Commons until a Master Plan is created and approved. All ieasures shall be made consistent with this Ordinance and any inconsistent measures shall be repealed. 0 FULL TEXT OF INITIATIVE PETITION he undersigned representing at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of registered electors, .gistered to vote at the last regular municipal election of the Town of Vail, Colorado, hereby demand that ie Town �ouncil of the Town of Vail, consider People's Ordinance #1, Series of 1995, which appears glow in its full text, and failing to approve said Ordinance the matter shall then be,referred to a Regular or pecial Town Election. A PEOPLE'S ORDINANCE #1 Series of 1995 ;TLE: In Order to Revitalize the Vail Community, an Ordinance Creating a Master Plan by the Town of Vail r the Redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. Shall be Ordained that the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado shall create an ordinance ;tablishing a Master Plan for the West Vail Shopping Mali Area and the Vail Commons parcel of land. s it Pher ordained that no contracts for redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall or development of e Vail Commons parcel be entered into by the Town of Vail until such a Master Plan is created by the :)wn of Vail and approved by the electorate of the Town. I Bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances or parts thereof, shall be made consistent with this dinance. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this ordinance ,e hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. PROPONENTS REPRESENTATIVES: ;ffrcy K. Christei isen, 2308 A Garmisch, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado �nthia Steitz, 1895 Meadow Ridge Road, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado is 1. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 2. PROED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 3. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 4. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 5: PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE • 6. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 7. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 3. 'RI D NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 10. 'RINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 'RINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 2. 'RIN' ED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS (5ITY. COUNTY DATE 3. 'RINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 4. RIND NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS CITY COUNTY DATE 5. RINTED NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS _ CITY COUNTY DATE rATE OF COLORADO } )SS, RUNTY OF EAGLE ) AFFIDAVIT OF CIRCULATOR (PRINT NAME) , (STREET ADDRESS) (CITY), (COUNTY), (DATE), is B registered votcrof tit, being duly sworn harehy sets f^rth the following; i personally circulated the petition. There are signatures on this page. All signatures on said page were affixed in my presence and I believe them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be. Each signer thereof had an opportunity before signing to read the full text of the Ordinance proposed. natu , Date ascribed and sworn to before me this , day of 1995. COMMISSION EXPIRES: . . . TARY PUBLIC ADDRESS RESOLUTION NO, 27 Series of 1986� A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MASTER LAND USE PLAN 0 FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL WHEREAS, the Town Council finds it important to develop and adopt a Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Vail; and WH;fREAS, the Town Council is of the opinion that a Master Land Use Plan is a critical element within the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Master Land Use Plan will be used as the principal long range planning document guiding decision making regarding land use matters within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has considered the Plan and recommended its adoption to the Town Council. E NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A. The growth of an orderly, viable and healthy community is dependent upon long range planning for appropriate land uses throughout the entire town. _, • B. That providing a framework for land use decision making is a critical need for the community. C. That pressure for growth and redevelopment is!anticipated to continue and planning efforts should respond in a positive and proactive manner. D. The Land Use Map and policy statements contained within the Master Land - Use Plan shall serve as the principal guide to decision making regarding land use and zoning proposals. E. That the Master Land Use Plan has been developed through a tremendous amount of public participation and the Plan essentially reflects the goals and desires of the citizens of the Town of Vail. ,,+ ,c 0 1 Section 2. In order to accomplish the above, the Town Council of the Town of Vail hereby adopts the Master Land Use Plan including the Master Land Use Map and the associated document as an official element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1n+h day of NPr 1986. Paul R. *Sonst?nn.' Mayor ( SAT' 5T: �- me Pamela A. randmeyer, wn Clerk N r , MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS: LAND USE PLAN TASK FORCE - Mr. Dan Corcoran, Town Council Mr. Sim Viele, Planning A Environmental Commission • Mr. Joe Macy, Vail Associates - Mr. Bob Poole, Forest Service Mr. Rod Slifer, At Large,. TOWN COUNCIL Mayor Paul Johnston Mayor Pro Tem Kent Rose Mr. Eric Affeldt Mr. Dan Corcoran Mr. Gordon Pierce Mr. Hermann Staufer Ms. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Mr. Duane Piper, Chairman _ Ms. Diana Donovan Mr. Bryan Hobbs ' Ms. Pam Hopkins Ms. Peggy Osterfoss• Mr. Sid Schultz Mr. Jim Viele _ CONSULTANTS THK Associates, Inc. Mr. Robert Gi,ltner, Director of Urban b Regional Planning '. Ms. Leslie Freeman, Senior Urban Planner Mr. Roy Fronczyk, Senior Planner . STAFF _ Ron Phillips - Town Manager Larry Eskwith - Town Attorney. Mr. Peter Patten,' Director - Community Development Dept. Mr. Rick Pylman, Planner II AND MOST OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY TA$LE.OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION CHAPTER II LAND USE PLAN GOALS CHAPTER III OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS CHAPTER IV EXISTING LAND USE CHAPTER V SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE - CMAPTER VI PROPOSED LAND USE CHAPTER VII COMMUNITY FACILITIES CHAPTER VIII IMPLEMENTATION APPENDIX A COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE - SUMMARY RESULTS APPENDIX Q ADDITIONAL GOALS • APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL SOURCES APPENDIX D ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW APPENDIX E TOWN OF VAIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY PAGE 1 6 9 . 11 17 29 41 59 LIST OF TABLES Pa e 1., Existing Land Use 16 2. Projected Vail Area Skier Visits by Type 21 3., Projected Population and Households by Type,- 22, 4. Projected Town of Vail Housing Unit Demand by Type 23 S. Projected Town of Vail Retail Sales by Category 24 6, Statistical Summary Skier Visits/Population/ Housing/Retail Sales 261.. . 7.. Land Use Demand Year 2000 27 8. Approved Units - Unbuilt 26 9. Proposed Land Use - "Preferred Land Use Plan" 39 10. Preferred Land Use Plan Analysis 41 LIST OF EXHIBITS Figure 1 - Constraints Figure 2 - Town Structure/Concept Figure 3 - Land Use P13n Figure 4 - Inventory of Town Properties 0 CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTON _ 1. Purpose of Project During 1985, the Town of Vail, Community Development Department initiated the process of developing a Comprehensive Plan for the Town. This process has involved the analysis and design of a series of plan "elements includ- ing: A. Master plans for Ford and Donavan Parks, completed in 1985; B. The Vail Village Master Plan, presently being completed.; and C. The Land Use Plan, contained in this document. Following adoption of this key element of the Plan, other components are scheduled to be undertaken including a Parks, Recreation and ,Open Space Plan and a Transportation Element. These elements, when integrated toget- her, will serve to guide the development of the Town'of Vail for the next fifteen years. Thus document is intended to serve as a basis from which future decisions may be made regarding land use within the Valley. The primary focus of the • Land Use Plan has been to address the long-term needs and desires of the Town as it matures. The Town of Vail has evolved from a small ski resort founded in 1962 with 190,0001 annual skier visits and virtually no per- manent residents to a community with 4,500 permanent residents and 1,223,450 annual skier visits in the short time span of twenty-four years. The Town is now faced with the challenge of creatively accommodating the projected growth, while preserving the important qualities which have made Vail successful in the past - as a ski resort, as a permanent place to live, and as a growing year-round resort. This is a considerable chal- lenge, given the fact that land within the Vail Valley is a well-defined "finite". resource; with much of.the developable land having already been. developed at this Junction. This Land Use Plan has been undertaken with the goal of addressing this challenge. A secondary purpose of the Land Use Plan project was to analyze a series of properties owned by the Town of Vail, to determine their suitability for various types of community facilities. Selected community facilities were anal -yzed for future needs and then matched with a series of suitable sites owned by the Town. - 0 1 Annual ;nir risiI `,ntribution of Skiing to the Colorado Economy - Eagle County Case Si.,uy - COILrado Ski Country U.S.A,, 1982. 2. Planning Process The process which was utilized to complete the Land Use Plan has been a dynamic one, with citizen participation playing an, important role. The process has involved: A. A systematic inventory of the physical properties of the Town, includ- ing the land conditions and the statistical components of the socio- economic base. S. A thorough analysis of the inventory to determine the long-term impli- cations of such data. C. An interactive public participation process to solicit goals, desires, and needs of the citizen, business and political communities within• the Town. D. A creative interpolation of the public input combined, with the devel- opment opportunities and constraints, into a realistic and achievable Land Use Plan for the Town. 3. Public Participation The public participation process has been a major factor in shaping the preferred Land Use Plan. A. The participation process was initiated with the following goals: 1) To develop an understanding of the forces which will direct the future of the community. 2) To help discover the various futures which the community could have. 3) To help develop a "collective" vision for the future, which could be supported by the community at large. " B. The.public participation has involved the following steps: 1) A Land Use Plan Task Force was established to act as a steering committee to guide the plan development process. This Task Force included a representative from the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Town Council, Vail 'Associates, the Forest - Service, a Citizen/Business Community Representative and Commun- ity Development Staff. •This Task Force met regularly throughout the duration of the project to develop policy and refine the plan _ as it progressed. 2 2) A "Town Meeting" was held early on in the process to introduce the Land Use Plan project. 'There was a brief presentation of the purpose of the project and the project schedule, which was followed by an open discussion of growth issues. The meeting was well attended with a total of 60 participants. Those in attend- ance were asked to breakup into smaller groups of about ten and then each group discussed:• a) Likes and dislikes about the Town as it exists now. b) Level, location and type of growth. c) Hot Spots - areas of specific concern regarding land use. A community survey was also distributed which was tabulated and is included in Appendix A. The results of this first meeting were tabulated and categorized, then used to formulate an initial set of goal statements. This information also then used as input in the generation of several Plan alternatives. ! 3) A second public meeting was held one month later to review the findings of the project to date with respect to the socioeconomic data base, the Plan alternatives, and the goal statements devel- oped from the first meeting. This meeting was also well attended, with approximately 60 people. Small groups were again formed and each group voted on and responded to the goal state- ments and finished by critiquing the proposed Land Use Plan s alternatives. The results of this meeting were tabulated and } used to refine the goal statements and to develop the preferred Plan. 4) A meeting was then held with the Planning/Environmental Commis- sion and the Town Council to obtain their feedback to the socio- economic base data and the preferred Plan. _ 5) A third public meeting was held to obtain additional input on the preferred Plan and begin the discussion of the various community . facilities within the Town.. This meeting was attended by 40 people and the input was again utilized to refine the Plan: The draft report was then written. _• 4. Growth Issues The Land Use Plan was intended to help address the following growth related questions identified by the Task force. 3 A. General 1) What are the various existing philosophies, issues and problems which have shaped growth in the past and will continue to influence the future? 0 2) What are the major constraints to growth and how may these change or be changed in the future? 3) What are the market demands .for growth and how should .these be directed by public policy decisions? 4) What type of growth is necessary and desirable for. the economic well being of the Town? S) How should environmental quality of life concerns play a role in directing growth? 6). Where is there room for growth, where do growth pressures exist versus where growth should optimally occur? 7) How should the ,Town of Vail approach the issue of annexation and National Forest land transfers. 8) What types of general administrative changes are necessary to address the issue of growth (i.e., land use regulation revisions, zoning changes, etc.)? B. Level of Growth 1) Given that Vail Mountain has approved plans for expansion of its capacity gradually over the next 25 years iannual average 3%), i how will this growth be accommodated and when? ' L 2) What growth rate is appropriate? a) No growth (expand 'parking for day use of mountain); e b) Slow growth; and c) Keep expanding at current rate. 3) Should growth accommodations be steered toward day use or over- night use? �• Location of Growth - Should growth be accommodated through; 1) Increased density in Core Areas; 21 Growth up hillsides/forest service land transfers; 3) Growth in existing multi -family developed areas; and/or 4) Growth in undeveloped areas. RR 4 r C. location of Growth - Should growth occur primarily in: 1) Hotels; 2) Accommodation units; 3) Condominums; 4) Townhouses; 5) Single family/duplex residences; 6) Commercial facilities; and/or 7) Balances in all sectors. The series of public meetings, along with input from the P&EC,.Town Council and Task Force have effectively answered many of these questions, as will I1 be evidenced in the later chapters of this document, specifically in the Goals Chapter and in the design of the Plan itself. i 5 i ICHAPTER I1 - LAND USE PLAN GOALS/POLICIES The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were geld throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then sub- stantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus, once the public had had the opportunity .to reflect on y the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the 'Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now represent a policy guide- line for the Land Use Plan. These goals are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals.- These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal. the goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows. •1. General Growth/Development, 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. • 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible 1.4 The original theme of the old. Village Core. should -be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of _ the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.5 Comnnercial strip development of the Valley should be avoided. 1.6 Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a case. by case basis. Limited development may be permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not highly visible from the Valley floor. New projects should be carefully controlled and developed with sensitivity to the environment. 1.7 New subdivisions should not' be permitted in high geologic hazard areas. 1.8 Recreational and public facility development on National forest lands may be permitted where no high hazards exist if: a) Community objectives are met as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan. b) The parcel is adjacent to the Town boundaries, with good access. c) The affected neighborhood can be involved in the decision -making . process. 1.9 National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned for private development. 1.10 Development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public use. 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term lea*ed to a private entity or converted to a private use .without a public hearing process. 1.12 Vail. should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). L.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as. well as its potential for public use. 2. Skier/Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day visitors. 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town func- tion, more efficiently. 2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve facilities for day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural oppor- . tunities to encourage summer tourism. 2.5 The community should improve non -skier recreational options to improve year-round tourism. 2.6 -An additional golf course is -needed. The Town should work with the down valley communities to develop a public golf course as well as other sports facilities to serve the regional demand for recreational facilities. 2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space. 2.8 Day skier needs for parking and access should be accommodated through creative solutions such as: a) Increase busing from out of town. b) Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional base portals. c) Continuing to provide temporary surface parking. d) -Addition of structured parking. 3. Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 7 3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the destination skiers. 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 3.5 .Entertainment oriented businesses and..cultural activities should be encouraged in the core areas to create diversity. More night time businesses, on -going events and sanctioned "street happenings" should # be encouraged. j 4. Village Core/Lionshead 4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to' facilitate access and delivery. 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable sa long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 4.4 The connection between the Village Core and Lionshead should be enhanced through: a) Installation of a new type of people mover. b) improving the pedestrian system with a creatively designed connection, oriented toward. a nature walk, alpine garden, and/or r sculpture plaza. c) New development should be controlled to limit commercial uses. S. Residential _ 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted .areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, _ with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. 0 0 L� 6. Community Services 6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth. 6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing growth with services. 6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods. A number of additional goals Were developed as a result of the public meeting input. These goals were related to other elements of the Compre- hensive Plan such as Parks and Recreation, Transportation and Economic Development. These are included only for informational purposes in Appendix B. These goals are not considered as a part of the goals adopted, in this Land Use Plan.. lie L- L. l _4 a I 8A CHAPTER III - OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Before an accurate picture of potential land use in Vail could be devel- oped, it was of critical importance to assess both the constraints and opportunities, with respect to development potential which exist in the 1 Town of Vail. These constraints/opportunities included an analysis of: 1. Floodplains/River Corridors/Hater Bodies These were mapped within the Valley and were considered an area which would preclude new development activity; except as related to open space and park development. The source for this information was the Gore Creek Floodplain Map, 1977, Hydro -Triad, Ltd. 2. Steep Slopes All areas over 40% slope were mapped. These areas were also classified to preclude development, as the Town of Vail presently has adopted (as a part of the zoning ordinance) requirements for development on slopes greater than 404. Slope maps were also obtained from the source listed above. 3. Major Barriers The 1-7D right-of-way was designated on the Existing Land Use Map as an area which would not be availablo -for future development. I-70 right-of- way maps were provided by the T9r(n. t 4. Rockfall, Debris Flow, Debris Avalanche, Snow Avalanche tRockfall, debris flow and debris avalanche areas were mapped on a separate 1"=400' map for low, moderate and high hazard areas. A composite map which included snow avalanche, geologic hazards, steep slopes, and floodplain areas was then compiled at a smaller scale of 1"=1,000'. The composite map . showed only high hazard avalanche, debris flow and rockfall areas." These hign hazard areas were considered areas in which new development should not . occur. The source of this information was the Environmental Constraints Map, 1977, Briscoe, Maphis', Murray and Lamont and Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abbey. The Debris Flow and Debris Avalanche Hazard Analysis, 1960, by Arthur T. Mears and the Rockfall Study, 1984, Schmueser and Associates studies and maps were also utilized. 5. Open Space/Park Lands All areas which were designated as permanent park and open space lands were j identified as a part of the Existing Land Use Map Exhibit. These lands I included active parks owned by the Town of Vail and passive open space and greenbelt areas owned by the Town and by homeowners' associations. These areas were considered to be unavailable for any future development, other than park -type developments. The Community Development Department provided f- a list of these sites. l E C L L L L L L ro AREAS OF HIGH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS WHICH INCLUDES; ' AraiaRche: • Hlgn Masard - Red Zone y� Geologic -Rapid Mass -Wasting PIOCess: , r Larel F-e Areas fW: KEY 0•bns fsoed 0abrls fasw j Wt. Ara/in Cbe Reca F•u Rod ArNancbe Flood Plain: . Gere Craea - so0r flood Zone yy we n.. a.wor •---- Slone AnalySiS: •"0 ""' ac"'°"'"�'— Orer aos Sloaea •• e.• ew •.em .n.: w.+. Figure 1—E Constraints to `Development (LAND USE PLAN 1 I tilt. ll l -J, L L L L AREAS OF HIGH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS WHfCH INCLUDES; Avalanche: L Hlph Hazard — Red Zoo** Gaologlc—Rapid Mess—Wssting Process: - Lore# Two Areas For: Goods Flood L Oearfs Fla. Dsarls Avalanche - Aoce Fo 11 Flock Arefanche Flood Plain: Gore Creek — Too year Flood 20oe Ste A Sl Over sax0% Slapee Over -- lA�d KEY Lind Use Plan Boundaly .—.— Town Boundary.—.— the Sarno* *soap[ after* Shown. Figure 1-M Constraints to Development LAND USE PLAN II L i f L L L L L L L/ L L L OL a r C"�� At°Sa Gra L � J ; AAEAS OF HIGH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS WHICH INCLUDES: Avalanche: _ High Hazard - Aed Zone Geologic -Rapid Mess -Wasting Process: ' Level hvo Areal For: Deorls Flood '. Deorls flow De tuts Avalanche Roca Fan - Avslan n Aoea c a Flood Plata: Gore Crook - 100 Year Flood Zone Land Use Plan Boundary..... • Town Boundary-- Slope Analysis: nd -- Boundary — over a0% slope$ re the same except where Shown._ Figure 1—W Constraints to Development ELAND USE PLAN 6. Vacant Lands Areas which contained no development as of 1986 were identified, mapped and quantified. Vacant lands were quantified with and without constraints according to the composite map which showed high geologic hazard areas, avalanche, floodplain and slopes over 40%. Vacant lands were identified through field observation and cross-checked with aerial photographs. 7. National Forest Lands An .important component of the Land Use Plan study was to .help .the Town develop a process whereby National Forest lands, proposed for exchange or sale, could be evaluated at a time prior to transfer, -annexation and zon- ing. The Town of Vail Council and staff had identified this as an area of primary concern at the time requests for proposals were issued for this Plan. The main motivation for investigating this issue was for the benefit of both the town and the Forest Service, so that both entities would be able to develop a cooperative approach to evaluating proposals on National Forest lands, having carefully evaluated the long term needs and desires of both entities.. In order to evaluate these lands the following analysis was performed. 1 A. As a starting point, lands which had been designated by the Forest Service on the "National Forest Land Disposal Map" were identified and added to the plan boundary. B. The Task Force decided, after discussions with the National Forest representative, to analyze all parcels adjacent to the Town that had areas less than 40% slope which could be feasibly accessed. These areas were evaluated by a study of U.S.G.S. quad maps, combined with the knowledge of the Forest Service, as to areas which should be analyzed. These areas amounted to isolated small parcels south of the _ Town boundaries, as well as parcels north and east of Potato Patch. These parcels were added into the plan boundary. 8. Vail Mountain Expansion Plans The Vail Mountain Master Plan provided by Vail Associates, was carefully studied and where the plans affected lands within the Town boundaries, - these were identified and mapped. In particular, a new area for the ski portal at Cascade Village and planned improvements south of Lionshead were shown as Ski Base Facilities, to indicate that these areas would not be available for other uses. A more detailed list of all reports utilized as a part of this study is provided in Appendix C. A map which illustrates the combined constraints is contained on Figure "i". More detailed large scale maps are available for review with the Town of Vail Community Development Department. 10 CHAPTER IV - EXISTING LAND USE An important step leading to the development of the proposed land use plan is to analyze the pattern of existing land uses within the Town. This analysis allowed fo.r,a definition of the opportunities for future growth, where it could be located, and why based on compatibility of surrounding land uses and physical constraints. 1. Inventory Process Existing land uses within the Town were inventoried through the combination of: a) field reconnaisance; b) analysis of 1977 existing land use maps; c) aerial photo interpretation; and d) verification with the Community Devel- opment Department. This information was then mapped and land uses were 'measured by land use category. The categories which were used to'classify land use were chosen to be consistent with earlier land use inventories, as well as to accurately reflect the array of land.uses within the Town. The land uses were classified as follows: A. Residential 1) Single Family Detached/Two" Family - includes single family and duplex units, at a density of less than 3 units per acre. 2) Multi -family Medium Density - includes townhomes, row houses,. condominiums, and cluster housing when individual units are not detached, .Densities range from 3 to 18 dwelling units per acre. 3) Multi -family High Density - includes apartments and condominiums at densities of over 18 dwelling units per acre.. B. Hotels, Lodges and Accommodation Units Includes all units which are occupied on a short term basis, other than condominiums and apartments. C.. Village and Lionshead Core Areas Includes a mix of uses including: retail, office, hotel, condominums and public/semi-public facilities such as: the municipal complex, post office, hospital and fire station. D. Commercial 1) Business Services - includes offices, clinics, banks, savings and — loans. 2) Commercial/Retail - includes retail uses, restaurants and per- sonal services. — 3) Intensive Commercial - includes commercial recreation, service stations, vehicle repair shops and sales, and general storage facilities. 11 E. Public and Semipublic Includes fire stations, churches, schools, water and sewer service and storage facilities, communication facilities, and municipal facilities such as maintenance and storage facilities. F. Parks Includes designated parks and athletic fields. G. Open Space Includes greenbelts, stream corridors, drainageways and other 'areas which function as passive open space. H. Ski Area Development Includes ski trails and ski base facilities •such as ticket purchase areas, restaurants, -ski school facilities, etc. I. Vacant/Platted Includes all lands which are within recorded subdivisions that are ! presently vacant. ' J. Vacant/Unplatted Includes all undeveloped lands that are unsubdivided, including National Forest lands administered by the Forest Service, as well as private holdings within the present municipal boundaries. K. Interstate 70 Right -of -Way _ Includes all lands designated interstate right-of-way as.it traverses the Vail Valley within the Town boundaries. L. Areas of'Less Than 40. Slope Outside of Town Boundary Includes lands adjacent to the Town boundaries presently within the . national forest, which have areas of less than 40% slope. In the analysis of existing land use, a series of documents were studied. These documents included: 1) The Cormnunity Action Plan - Town of Vail, 1984. 2) Development Statistics - Community Development Department, 1985. 3) Vail Plan - Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey, 1973. _ 4) Final Report - Economic Development Cornnission, 1984. 5) The Vail Village Master Plan - Draft, 1986. 6) Vail Mountain Master Plan - Vail Associates, 1986. - 7) Land Development Regulations and Codes - Community Development Department. 8) Numerous other technical reports supplied by the Community Devel- opment Department, as noted in Appendix C. The study of these documents led to a clear understanding of the various r forces that have influenced the development of Vail and will play a part in 7! its future development. r 2. Land Use Pattern 1 The pattern of existing land uses in Vail has been shaped by the natural characteristics of the Valley in concert with the man-made features that have been constructed over the years. The predominant features of the Valley which have played a major role in Vail's design, include the proxi— mity of steep slopes, the location of Gore Creek and its floodplain, the location of the ski mountain and attendant ski facilities and the:presence of a major transportation corridor - Interstate 70 and its interchanges. The primary nodes of urban development have developed at the base of the ski mountain at the Vail Village and Lionshead. With the ski access points planned at Cascade Village along with the construction of the hotel, and its attendent retail uses, a third node of urban development is being created. These nodes are presently the focus of the majority of the tourist oriented i retail, service and hotel activity within the Town. A fourth urban node has emerged at the I-70 interchange at West Vail, which is primarily oriented toward serving the consumer needs for local residents. The areas outside of these urban nodes have been shaped by the combined forces of the steep slopes, Gore Creek and I-70. Gore Creek has remained as an open space spine through the Valley and along with the golf course, has served to influence the location and type of growth. Residential land uses have developed over the years east and west of the urban nodes, pri- marily south of 1-70, due to the proximity of steep slopes to I-70 on the r north. Some development has also occurred in West vaii, north of I-70 [i where suitable development conditions have existed. The focus of the most intensive residential development has been to the south of I-70,between the freeway and Gore Creek. Less intensive development has occurred south of L the Creek, where more sensitive land conditions and less suitable access to I-70 have continued to influence the type of growth. These factors have significantly shaped the pattern of grwoth in the Vail Valley.and will continue to do' so throughout the life of this Plan. As Vail is, at this point in time, already fairly intensely developed, with land being a finite resource within the confines of the Valley, these past land use patterns are not expected to change drastically with the design and adoption of this Plan. The community, at it's public meeting process, expressed a desire to continue to build on these well established trends i and for this reason, these trends have been used as a foundation for the design of the proposed Land Use Plan. Figure 2 - Town Structure/Concept - illustrates these patterns in a concep- tual way. is A. Residential Development The most important force which has directed the mix of.land uses in Vail has been the ski industry, which is dependent on an adequate supply of lodgirg units, tourist -'related retail uses and areas for parking. These demands, when combined with the physical components of the Vail Valley and a relative scarcity of suitable land for development, have created a fairly 13 intense pattern of development within the Town of Vail. This is reflected in the fact that 60% of all dwelling units are devoted to multi -family, with an additional 20% in accommodation units. Densities range from 18-20 dwelling units per acre for multi -family and up to 50 dwelling units/acre. for hotels in the core areas. While multi -family accounts for the majority of the types of units, single family uses still cover, more land area, with 408.6 acres (or 12%) of the total land area in Vail devoted to single family and duplex uses. Multi -family uses account for 11% of the land area in Vail outside ,of the core areas of the Village and Lionshead. B. Parks and Open Space The residential areas are broken up by significant amounts of open space, greenbelt and park areas in both public and private ownership. These com- bined areas account for 17% of the land area within the Town or 555.7 acres. The park acreage includes both developed and undeveloped parks and the golf course. These park areas include Stephen's Park and Donovan Park in west Vail, Ford Park in the mid -Vail area and Big Horn Park in east Vail, all south of 1-70 and the Buffehr Creek, Red Sandstone and Booth Creek Parks,north of I-70. Areas designated as open space, which account for 296.6 acres, include the Katsos property east of the golf course, owned by the Town and several other parcels which have been designated to remain permanent open space, i.e., the Gore Creek stream tract. C. Ski Base Facilities/Public and Semi-public Uses Ski ,based facilities within the Town boundaries add up to 43.6 acres or 1% of the Town. Public and semi-public facilities also serve as partial areas of open space within the Town. Uses such as churches, schools, water ser- vice and storage facilities make up a total of 56.6 acres of 2% of the Town's land area. D. Core Areas As previously indicated, the Village and Lionshead Core Areas are the most intensely developed areas. These cores contain a mix of uses including hotels, condominiums, offices, retail businesses. and personal services, often all within the same building. Other types of uses such as pedestrian plaza areas, municipal services (town hall and fire station), semi-public uses (hospital and chapel), and multi -level parking structures are also found in the core areas. The two urban cores total 131.5 acres or.4% of the land area. This land use document did not analyze land use for these areas on a parcel or building -by -building level because of the in-depth study the Town has given these areas in the past (completion of the Lions - head Uroan Design Plan and -The Vail Village Master Plan currently being completed). As a consequence, land uses for these areas are only addressed 0 in a general way in this document. 1n E. :oercial Uses i KO$t ;,r the comnercial, business, retail, office and hotel uses have been i traaitionally located within the core areas. With the steady growth of the per:aanent population, Vail has experienced the need for diversification from tourist -based retail into a broader range of goods and services to serve both the needs of the local residents and the long-term visitor. These types of services, while found .to some degree in the core, occur primarily in west Vail. These business and commercial, areas make up a total of 16.4 acres, which is a very small proportion of the Town. In addition, there is -an 8 acre site in use as hotel and accommodation units in west Vail. In terms of the more intensive commercial, uses, which include mostly service stations, vehicle repair, maintenance and storage areas,.and areas of commercial recreation (outside of the ski area); there are 11 acres altogether. These combined commercial areas make up a total of 27 acres, which is only 1% of the total land area. This small propor- tion may be attributed to the fact that Vail is a ski -based community, therefore, the demand and the range of non -tourist related comnercial uses in general is limited in Vail. F. Interstate Right -of -Way Cne of the most significant areas within the Town, is the Interstate 10 rr;at-of-way. The right-of-way takes up an area of 505.5 acres or 15% of t-e land area, within the study area. This is the largest proportion in a^; one type of use. 'rational Forest Lands l',-aortant aspect of the land use analysis was to assess National Forest :s adjacent to the Town boundaries, within the White River National st, which may be considered in the future for an alternate use other tr,an puolic. It was determined by the Task Force, after discussions with the Forest Service, to assess areas that: 1) had been identified for disposal by the Forest Service; 2) could be feasibly accessed; and 3) eo^twined acreage of 40% slope or less. These areas for the most part were 'JWll parcels along the corners. of the Town on the south side, with two '14r;er parcels identified north and east of the Potato Patch club area. 11ese land areas came to a total of 125 acres, or 4% of the land within thearea. '- 'at• �'i—ing Land Use is shown on a large scale map available at Town of Vail offices. This map shows the configuration of land use within the Town, ilifi,ratively. Land -use categories have been generalized into broader a ;•� rats?pries such as residential, comnnercial., parks, open space and ski base 11=ant for ease of illustration at this scale. A larger scale map 12'•y"1 is on file with the Community Development Department in both black and white, which shows land uses by parcel for the more categories contained on Table 1. 0 0 r1 L - Table 1 EXISTING LAND USE LAND USE CATEGORY ACRES PERCENT Single Family/Two Family 408.6 12 (under 3 units per acre) Multi -Family Medium Density 287.4 9 (3-18 du/ac) multi -Family High Density 57.5 2 (Over 18 du/ac) Village/Lionshead Core Areas 131.5 ' 4 (Affixed -use Areas) Hotels, Lodges, Accommodation Units 8.0--••- 0 (Units for lease or rent on regular basis) i Business Services 3.5 0 ' (Offices, Clinics, Banks) Commercial/Retail 12.9 0 (Retail Uses, Restaurants, Personal Services) Intensive Commercial (Comnercial Recreation, Service Stations, 11.0 0 Vehicle Repairs, Storage) PUDlic/Semi-Public 56.6 2 - (Schools, Water 8 Sewer Service b Storage Facilities, Communication Facilities, and Municipal Facilities) Parks 259.1 8 (Designated.,Parks and Athletic Fields) - Open Space 296.6 J (Greenbelts, Stream Corridors, Drainageways) - Ski Area Development 43.6 1 (Trails and Ski Base Facilities) _ Vacant/Platted 412.5 12 (Subdivided, undeveloped lots) Vacant/Unpl,t.ted 767.8 23 - (UnsuodiviucW, undeveloped land) Interstate 70 Right -of -Way 505.5 15 _ (Witnin the limits of the Town) Areas of Less than 404 slope outside of 125.0 4 Town Boundary (National Forest Lands) Total 3,360.1 100 16 CHAPTER V - SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE i At the same time that the physical characteristics were being analyzed, the socioeconomic profile of Vail was being investigated. This process ( involved an in-depth analysis of the historical patterns of growth within j the Town of Vail, Eagle County, and in the ski industry as a whole. This process required developing a clear understanding of the complexity of fac- tors which have interacted to influence development over the .years. After assessing the historical growth characteristics, projections were developed for both the permanent and visitor populations to the year 20U0. The Vail Mountain expansion plans were carefully studied because ski area growth is the single most important factor which drives growth within the Vail Valley. These projections were then utilized to determine overall demands for the different types of land use which would need to be accommo- dated within the proposed Land Use Plan. These projections represent THK's best professional forecast for growth within the Vail Valley over the next 15 years. The assumptions used in the forecasting model were carefully reviewed with the Task Force and the Community Development Department staff and were accepted to be the most appropriate data from which to make projections. The forecasting projec- tions and assumptions should be analyzed and adjusted periodically as market conditions change throughout the life of the Plan. Presented in this chapter is a summary of the methodology used to generate the projections of the most important findings of the analysis. The com- plete.socioeconomic report is included in Appendices D and E. For the purpose of analyzing the differing effects on housing and retail space demand*, three ratios of destination (overnight) skiers were assessed. These varied from 50% to 60% up to 70% destination skiers, with the local percentage remaining fixed at 20%; while day skiers varied from 304 to 200, to 10% respectively. As the percentage of destination skiers increases, the demand for housing and the amount of annual retail sales, and hence retail space needs increase proportionately. For the purpose of fixing land use demand, the 6Ua destination skier scenario was chosen, because it most accurately represented the percentage of destination skiers visiting the Vail area in 1986. The other two scenarios are included in the Appendix and can be used to adjust projections for land use demand in the future, should Vail Associates reorient its marketing to increase or decrease the percentage of destination skiers. Before presenting the projections, it is important to understand the metho- dology used to generate the numbers. "Office demand was not projected due to the lack of adequate inventory information. 17 1. Forecasting Model The Town of Vail Forecasting Model was prepared by THK Associates in order . to assist the Department of Community Development in their efforts to develop a Master Plan for the Town of Vail. In general, the model utilizes estimated skier, population, housing and retail characteristics in order to project additional housing unit and retail space demands for the Town of Vail through the year 2000. All assumptions are based on existing studies and surveys available from the Department of Community Development, Vail Associates, Inc., Vail Resort Association, and Colorado Ski Country .USA with adjustments made based on review and discussion with Task Force members. The following is a brief overview of the sources and methodology employed in the Town of Vail Forecasting Model. ' The entire model keys off the projected design day* skier visits made in the Vail Master Development Plan (VA, Inc. and RRC, 1985). From the design day skier visits, average day, peak day and total skier visits are calcu- lated based on conversion formulas provided by VA, Inc. The design day skier visits are then allocated into day, destination and local skiers based on proportions available from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study (Gage Davis Associates, 1980) and the Report or the Vail tcOnomic Deve opment Commission (1985). Although not activated in the model cur- rently, the model has the capacity to allow an incremental change in the proportion of day, destination and local skiers over the length of the pro- jection period; rather than a constant proportion throughout. The day visitor and overnight visitor populations and permanent population are derived from different methodologies. The day skier visits and desti- nation skier visits are adjusted upward to reflect non -skier members of a skiing party which results in the. day visitor population and the overnight visitor population. The non -skier adjustment factors come from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study, the "Village Study Assumptions" (RRC, 1565) and the Department of Community Development. The Town of Vail perrma- nent population is based on the historical ratio of the permanent popula- tion (State Division of Local Government, 1985 and Department of Community Development) to the total 'skier visits. 'The number of households is then determined by dividing the overnight visitor population and the permanent population by the weighted average number of persons per household in visi- tor lodging and permanent housing, respectively. * "Design Day" is defined as that level of skier attendance which will be exceeded on only 10b of the days of the Ski season. The additional housing unit demand projections incorporate numerous assump- tions from several studies and surveys. Assumptions pertaining to the dis- tribution of permanent population by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate are from the study Affordable HousiEa le County-1984 (Eagle County Community Develop- ment Department and RR?, iq 4). Assumptions regarding the distribution of overnight visitors by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate by unit type are from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacityy Study, Department of Community Deve%p= went and VRA. To calculate the additional housing units required by type each year, the additional overnight visitor households and permanent house- holds per year are distributed according to the proportion of each unit type indicated by previous studies. Concurrently, additional units by type are adjusted upward by the appropriate occupancy rate. the retail sales projections for the Town of Vail are based on average day skier visits rather than design day skier visits. Average day skier visits are used because the goal is to determine the total winter visitor sales over the entire five month ski season rather than looking at sales on a one day" design day. Day skiers and destination skiers have different total dollar expenditures per day, and the allocation of their total expen- ditures among various rtail categories -is also different. The day skier and i on of Skiingt o a thenskier ColoradoxEconiomyeiCSCUSAnsare from 1984 Update) andtuareadjusts upward to reflect the pricing structure of Vail (per Task Force discussion 7/17/86). To arrive at the total winter visitor sales, the day skier and destination skier expenditures by retail category are aggregated. The "Town of Vail Monthly Retail Sales" (TOV, 1986) was utilized to determine the proportion of total winter sales made by the local population, the ratio of total winter sales to total annual sales, and the proportion of total annual sales made by the local population. Industry standards of dollar support per square foot of retail space are applied to the lodging, eating and drinking,. and entertainment categories. for the day and destination skiers and to the total annual sales to the local population category in order to translate the. average annual additional dollar support into average annual - additional square feet of retail space required. It should be noted that the terms "local population" and "permanent popula- tion" do not define the same group. Retail purchases in the Town of Vail are made both by the permanent population of Vail and by residents of sur- rounding communities. Since it is the total additional dollar support in the Town of Vail which determines the total additional retail space required, it is irrelevant for the purposes of this model from where those dollars come. Therefore, the local population refers to both the permanent population of Vail and residents of surrounding communities who make retail purchases in the Town of Vail. 19 2. Summary of Forecasting Results 1 Following is a discussion of the specific tables which led to the develop- ment of the land use demand figures. A. Projected Vail Area Skier Visits by Type (Table 2) Total skier populations have been projected from the Vail Associates Master Plan, which then translates into skier numbers, broken down by day, desti- nation, and local skiers. Table 2 shows average.,'design dayl, and peak day s.:ier population projections for all three skier groups projected to the year 2000. As can be seen from the table, by the year 2000 total skier visits are pro- jected to be 1,617,000, up from 1,223,450 in the year 1985, with the total number of average skiers per day being 10,780 in the year 2000, up from 8,160 per day in 1985. B. Projected Population and households by Type (Table 3) These numbers are then converted into population projections for overnight visitors, day visitors, and the permanent population. This table shows increases of approximately 25% for all three population groups. Day visi- tors increased. from 2,670 in 1985 to 3,530 in the year 2000, overnight visitors increased from 9,200 to 12,150, and the permanent population goes from 4,400 in 1985 to 5,920.in the year 2000. C. Projected Town of Vail Housing Unit Demand by Type (Table 4) The household numbers from Table 3 are then assigned a person/household number and occupancy rates (based on historical occupancy ratios) and hous- ing demand can then be estimated for the different types of -residential L housing and for lodging, for both the overnight visitor and the permanent resident. This is reflected in Table 4 which shows the additional demand for housing each year by housing type. The total residential housing demand for both permanent and the overnight visitor by the year 2000 is 1,523 units and for lodging the total demand is 395 units by the year 2U00. D. Projected Town of Vail Retail Sales by Category (Table 5) Retail space demands were estimated based on annual retail sales projec- tions. This is accomplished by converting annual sales (by looking at industry standards for sales per square foot) into future demand for retail space for visitor and locally oriented retail needs. - • This table shows total retail sales growing from $173.8 million in 1985 to $229.5 million in the year 2000. The estimated. amount of sales attributed to the permanent population is 25% of the total annual sales. l See "Design Day" definition in methodology section. 20 TARE 2: PROJECTED 9AIt ARIA SKIER 9tS111 67 %in, 1984- 198S 10 1999- 2M Projetted Skier Visitor Ckaracterlstles Calendar A.eragr Oay Design Day Peak Oar Oesi- Season Year Total Skiers/Oay Skiers/Day Skiers/Day bay Percept nation Percent total Percent 1984 - 198S 1985 1.223.450 .8.160 _ 12,560 15.910 2.S10 20.Os 7,S40 60.0E 2.510 20.0E Ms - 1986 1986 1.250.000 8.710 12.00 16.050 2.S40 20.0E 7,610 60.01 2.S30 20.0E 1966 - 1991 1907 t.294.110 8.460 13.060 16.S40 2.610 20.0% 1,840 60.02 2.610 20.01 19117 - 1988 1988 1.315.750 0,480 13.060 16.540 2,610 20.0E 2,840 60.0E 2.610 20. Os 1968 - 1999 1"9 t,3St.380 6.130 13.450 11.020 2.690 20.0E 11,070 60.01 2,690 20.01 1909 - t990 19" 1.371,700 9,000 13,a6D 17.550 2.770 20.01 8,320 60.01 2.770 20.01 ra MCI - 1"] 1991 1.113.100 9.000 13.860 11.550 2.710 20.0% 8,320 60.09 2,710 20.01 .� 1991 - 199Z 1992 1.391.500 9.790 -14.300 18.170 2.860 20.01 a.Sab 60.0E 2,1160 20.0E 1992 - 1993 1991 1.43Z.SOG 9.550 14.100 18.620 2.940 20.0E a.a20 60.01 2.940 Z0.01 1993 - 1994 1994 1,432.S00 9,550 14.100 18.620 2.940 20.0E 8.020 60.02 2.940 20.0E 199E - 1995 199S I.460.5U0 9.370 15.70D 19.250 3.4190 20.0E 9.120 60.01 - 3.040 20.0E 1995 - 1996 1996 1.519,500 10.130 IS.600 19.750 3.120 20.01 9.360 Wait 3.120 20.01 1996 - 1997 1997 1,SI9.SO0 10.110 15.600 19.750 3.120 20.0E 9.360 60.0E 3.120 20.01 199E - 19" 1998 31558.500 _ 10.390 16.000 20,260 3.200 20.0s 9.600 60.0E 3.200 20.0E 1998 - 1999 19" 1.611,000 10.190 16.600, 21.010 3.320 20.01 9.960 60.0E 3.320 20.01 1999 - Z000 2000 1.617.000 10,700 16.600 21.010 3.320 20.9% 9.960 60.01 3.729 ZO.01 Average Annual Change: (198S- 2000) 26.240 170 270 340 50 18.5% 160 S9.3s SO 1a.51 Sources: Cage Darks Assoc.. 9AI1 MD0117A1111 GORE 9ALI(T CAPACITY STOD7.0980 '. E09le COYnty Planning &Pt.. (MPIOTCE MOUSING SIRTET, (1984); CSCtPSA.tK COMTR1aUTIOM Or SKIING 10 1tIE COIOQA00 EE000M7, (9arlaps 1962 to-I9a5)1 rill Associates, Inc. 6 RRC. TAIL MASTER D19ELOPMEMI PIAR. (1985): and UK Associates. 1pc. r TABLE 3. PROJECTED TOWN OF VAIL POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE, 1984- 1985 TO.1999- 2000 Population Households Calendar Day Overnight Overnight Season Year Visitors Visitors Permanent Visitors Permanent 1984 - 1985 1985 2,670 9,200 4.400 2,560 11600 198S - 1986 1986 2,700 9.280 4,500 2.590 11630 i 1985 - 1987 1987 2.780 9.560 4.670 2.660 1,700 E 1987 - 1998 1988 2,780 9.560 4,760 2.660 1,730 1988 - 1969 1989 2,860 9,840 4,910 2.740 1,780 1989 - 1990 1990 2.950 10,150 4,970 2.830 1,810 1990 - 1991 1991 2,950 10.150 4,970 2.830 1.810 • 1991 - 1992 1992 3.040 10.460 5.050 2,920 1.830 1992 - 1993 1993 3.130 10.760 5.200 3,000 1.890 1993 - 1994 1994 3.130 10,760 5,200 3,000 1,890 - 1994 - 1995 1995 3,230 11,120 5.390 3,100 1.960 1995 - 1996 1996 3,320 11,410. 5.540 3,180 2.010 1996 - 1997 1997 3.320 11,410 5,540 3,160 2.010 1997 - 1958 1998 3.400 11.710 5,690 3,260 2.070 1998 - 1539 1999 3,530 12.150 5.920 3,390 2.150 1999 - 2CC0 2000 3,530 12.150 5,920 3,390 2,150 Average Annual Change: (1985- 2000) 60 200 100 60 40 Sources: Gage Davis Assoc., VAIL MOUNTAIN/ GORE VALLEY CAPACITY STUDY,(1980); Eagle County Planning Dept., EMPLOYEE -HOUSING SURVEY, (1984); _ CSCUSA.THE CONTRIBUTION OF WING TO THE COLORADO ECONOMY, (Various 1982 to 1985); Vail Associates. Inc. 5 RRC, VAIL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, (1985); and THK Associates, Inc. 22 TAME 6t PR0.11CTID TOWN Of Vktt NWSING UNIT DEMAND 8r tTPI. 1984- 19BS 10.1999- 20" , ' ownl9ht Visitors -. Pengnenl Nouseholds total Calendar Single/ torn- API_! Single/ loge- Apt-1 single/ 7wN- Apt./ Season !ear total Duple■ home Condo lodging Total Duple■ hone Condo Total owlea None Cando tadglr 9Aa - 19A5 19AS -" 2 b 2T la 32 10 . ] 1! 80 12 9 as I 985 - 986 - 19fl6 19B7 19R6 - 19B/ 49 lla ! 14 63 33 lA 24 6 ` 43 too 27 20 106 ? 9fl1 - 1909 19RO 0 0 0 0 0 32 10 t7 3 19, 33 32 193 t0 21 3 20 19 101 3 ISO - ISM 1999 110 t 16 71 S 18 8t 38 53 43 31 10 - 3 19 - 179 IS 21 100 - 1 1119 • 1990 1990 146 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 O MO - 191. - t991 1992 199t t992 tab S 18 - 81. 43 21 7 2 12 167 11 20 93 197 - 1993 1991 130 • 16 - 72 38 63 21 5 37 193 25 21 109 3, 193 - 199A 199a D D 0 D -90 0 0 0 - A8 74 24 0 6 j 0 43 236 29 26 133 A, MA - 1995 199S 163 S 70 - ! 16 71 38 53 I1 a 31 183 - 21 20 lei 3' NIS - 1196 19% 130 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 r16 • 1997 1991 0 a 16 12 38 63 21 S 31 193 25 21 109 St 197 - 1998 1998 130 712 1 26 117 62 84 27 _ 7 80 2% 39 33 161 6; 199 - 1999 19" 0 0 D 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 199 - 2000 2000 -rage Aawal Chae9e: (1985- 2000) 90 •3 11 50 26 39 13 3 2] 12! tS 16 )] P 100.01 3.11 t2.31 55-31 29.3E 100.01 32.51 8.51 - ".0% 100.02 11.9E 11.2E .S6-41 MI Sources: Cage Davis Assat.. VA11 IMPTAfN/ GORE VAL1111 CAPACITT Sll1ol m980); (a91e County Planning Dept.. EMPIDT11,"MING S1IRMV. 11981). CSCUSA.1111 EONIR18D11011 Or SKIING TO fill col OItA110 (ton". (Various 1182 to 198S); Vail Associates. Inc. ► RRC. VAll IMSIIR DEVEIDPMNI RAN. (196S); and INK Associates. Inc. - - ZSS�Yi I ik7z A7F§SI St�oSB • i ---rw w wr rrrrr` pztx A a s eazzs xro--8s=~ 'a - - - - a� t - « $gSa«g3S�«CCU S F K 4VT!; cgs ct It t r= §gPse-ter M Y.. « i I 3«. 24 E. Statistical 'Summary - Skier Visitors/Population/Housing/Retail Sales (lable b) This table is a composite of the four preceding tables showing projections by five year increments. As the table indicates, total population for both the visitors and permanent groups is projected to be 21,600 by the year i 2000 generating a need for 1,534 residential units and 395 lodging units. , Retail sales will increase 24% over the 15 year time period. 3. Land Use Demand These housing unit and retail sales numbers are then converted to addi- tional acreage demands and broken down as shown in Table T. The results of the projected unit and retail space demands then become the amount of growth which is expected by the year 2000. This growth may be accommodated in several ways: 1) by adding additional dwelling and lodging' units and commercial space; 2) by increasing the occupancy rates for dwell- ing units and lodging units; 3) by directing growth down valley, outside of the Town of Vail; and/or 4) through a combination of the three alternatives above. j The ability of the town to meet the growth demand will be defined by the t physical constraints such as geologic hazards, steep slopes,. floodplain areas, the availability of undeveloped land and the development policies of the Town. The land use, plan has been developed keeping these factors in mind. } The projected growth is moderate overall and necessarily follows an average • of 3% ski area visitor growth (with some peaks and valleys occurring in certain years). Due to the existing inventory of approved and undeveloped lots, a majority of the residential and lodging units may be accommodated I, through development in these already approved subdivisions and developme+it !! projects. The Town of Vail has the following number of units already approved, but unbuilt as shown in Table 8. i 25 u TABLE 6 STATISTICAL SUMMARY Skier Visits/Population/Housing/Retail Sales - 60% Destination Skiers } Characteristics Year i lytlb 199U 199b ZUUu A. SKIER VISITS I.. Average Skiers/Day 81160 9,000 9,870 10,780 ' 2. Design//Skiers/Day 12,560 13,860 15,200 16,600 r 3. Peak Skiers/Day 15,910 17,550 19,250 21,020, lj B. POPULATION PROJECTIONS {{ 1. Overnight Visitors j (winter only) 9,200 10,150 11,120 12,150 2. Day Visitors 1 (Winter only) _ 2,670 2,950. -3,230 3,530 3. Permanent 4,400 4,970 5,390 5,920 Total Population Yr. 2000 - I (Overnight/Day/Permanent) 21,07 •1985 1990 1995 2000 Total C. ADDITIONAL ROUSING UNITS 1. Residential Units 67 465 467 535 1,534 2. Lodging Units 14 114 129 138 395 Total -Unit Demand - Yr. 2000 0. RETAIL SALES (millions) Annual Sales $173.8 $191.5 $209.9 $229.5 Source: THK Associates, Inc., June 21, 1986. 26 Table 7 LAND USE DEMAND - YEAR 2000 Land Use Type 1. Single Family/Duplex" 2. Mul ti -f ami I a. Townhouses b. Apartments/Condos Subtotal Multi -family Total Residential 3. Lodging Hotels, lodges, accommodation units 4. Commercial/Retail a. Ski Related Demand b. Local Demand Total Retail Demand 1 Demand at 10 du/acre. 2 Demand at 15 du/acre. 3 Demand at 50 du/acre. Unit Demand 232 du 214 du 1,088 du 1,302 du 1,534 du Acreage Demand 78 acres+/- 22 acresl 73 acres2 yy acres 95 acres :. 395 du 8 acres3 Square Footaqe Demand 131,850 sq.ft. 89,122 sq.ft. 220.972 sq.ft. These densities were chosen to reflect average -existing densities within the Town of Vail. 27 9 n LJ 9 Table 8 APPROVED UNITS/UNBUILT Land Use Category Number of Units • 1. Single Family/Duplex 1,080 2. Townhomes/Apartments/Condos 879 Total Residential Units 1,959 3. Lodging 447 These numbers include all residential lots and projects presently approved E within the Town of Vail, including those which have development constraints f and would most likely never be built upon. Further analysis to determine how many of these are actually buildable was undertaken and is discussed in the next chapter,_ Proposed Land Use. However., these numbers indicate that a substantial amount of the projected land use demand may be accommodated through infill within existing platted projects. 28 CHAPTER.VI - PROPOSED LAND USE The proposed Land Use Map was developed through utilization of: - Public input at the three meetings; - Analysis of existing land use conditions; Analysis of opportunities and constraints; and - Projected market demands for residential, lodging, and retail uses. 1 Land Use Plan Alternatives For the purpose of initial discussion, three land use alternatives were developed. A. The first alternative was one which showed. all areas containing con- ~-,straints as undeveloped open space. These constraint areas covered parcels within already platted subdivisions. This, alternative was essentially a "No Growth" option, allowing for only limited infill in unconstrained areas. B. The second alternative was called the "Existing Trends" alternative which took constraints into consideration but would allow for continued infill within already approved subdivisions, so long as existing Town land use regulations could be met, with respect to slopes and hazards. Some areas of increased density were shown as a way to meet market demand for multi -family during the planning period. C. The third option showed new development outside of existing developed areas, irrespective of constraint areas. These options were reviewed with the Task Force and the "Existing Trends Alternative" was chosen as the preferred alternative. Option #A, the "No Growth" option was eliminated because: 1) it would have required a change in policy by the Town to prohibit future development within existing platted areas; and 2) it would not have provided enough areas for new growth, needed to accommodate projected market demands throughout the plan- ning period. Results of the first public meeting indicated the importance of accom- modating "balanced" growth to meet .the needs generated by expansion of the ski mountain. It was generally recognized that growth of the ski area was tied to the economic stability of the Town and growth should be accommo- dated, preventing major sources of revenue going outside of the Town, down valley. Option C, the "Unconstrained" alternative was not chosen as the preferred alternative due to: 1) The fact that development of hazard areas would have required major changes to development regulations in the Town. 29 2) The market projections, combined with available undeveloped land did not indicate a need to develop highly sensitive areas. The land use analysis showed that most of the new demand could be accommodated within existing platted projects. . 3) The opinions expressed by the public about development of hazard areas. The concensus was that development should not occur within high hazard areas. The "Existing Trends" alternative thus became the preferred option: This alternative most accurately reflected the market demands and the desires of. the citizenry. The public input had shown a general satisfaction with the location of existing land uses, which was used as the foundation for the preferred alternative. 2. Key Goals The most important goals culled from the public meetings were used to for- mulate the,Trends Alternative. These key goals are as follows: 1 A. Commercial Uses 1) Commercial strip development should be avoided. 2) Commercial growth should be concentrated primarily in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor.needs. 3) New hotels should continue to be located primarily in the Village . and Lionshead areas. S. Residential Uses 1) Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas.. 2) New subdivisions should not be permitted in proven high geologic hazard areas. 3) Development proposals on the hillsides may be appropriate, in a limited number of cases, for low density residential uses. These proposals would need to be evaluated on a case -by -case basis, with development being carefully controlled as to sensitivity to the environment and visibility from the Valley floor. C. Village/Lionshead Core Areas 1) Increased density for commercial, residential and lodging uses in the Core areas would be acceptable so long as the existing charac- ter of each area is being preserved. 2) The connection between the Village Core and Lionshead should be strengthened, through the creation of a natural pedestrian corridor which could contain garden areas and sculpture plazas. 30 D. Parks and Open Space 1) While an additional golf course was identified as being necessary, no site within the Town was pinpointed as a desirable site. 2) The preservation of open space was .determined to be a high prior- ity. The improvement of existing parks and open space areas, in concert with continued purchase of open space by the Town were both identified as priorities. E. General Growth'and Development j 1) Vail should 'continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintain- ing a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 2) The quality of the environment should be protected as the Town grows. _. 3) Recreational and public facility development on National Forest lands could,be appropriate if: a. No high geologic hazards exist; b. Community objectives are being met with the proposal (as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan); c. The parcel has adequate access and is adjacent to Town bound- aries; and . d. The affected neighborhood could be involved in the decision - making process. 4) National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned for private development. S) Development may also be appropriate on Town -owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than park and.open space) where: a. •No high geologic hazards exist; and b. Such development is for public use. 3. Land Use Plan Assumptions With the consideration of these goals, the following parameters were estab- lished for the Trends plan. A. New development would for the most part, occur within and adjacent to already developed areas. B. No new commercial districts would be created, but commercial activities would take place adjacent to or within existing commercial areas. ~ C. That substantial areas of open space would remain in the Town. } D. That constraint areas should, be considered in the designation of areas for future development. E. That National Forest lands should continue to remain as open space, accommodating only public facilities or.recreational uses.. F. That hillsides should also be assessed, taking constraints into con sideration. G. That the Yillage and Lionshead Core Areas would remain essentially the same, with the addition of a transition area to strengthen the connec- tion between the two core areas. Several new land use categories aimed . at strengthenng hotel and other tourist -oriented uses were also added. 4. Proposed Land Use Categories New land use categories were defined to indicate general types of land uses which should occur within the Town during the planning period. These cate- gories were varied from the existing land use categories to reflect the goals of the community more accurately. The specific land uses are listed as examples and are not intended to reflect an all-inclusive list of uses. .Uses would be controlled by zoning. These categories are indicated below. LDR Low Density Residential This category includes single-family detached homes and two family dwelling units. Density of development within this category would typically not exceed 3 structures per buildable acre. Also within this area would be private recreation facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools and club houses for the use,of residents of the area. Institutional/public uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space related facilities. MDR Medium Density Residential The medium density residential category includes housing which would typically be designed as attached units with common walls. Densities in this category would range from 3 to 14 dwelling units per buildable acre. Additional types of uses in this category would include private recreation facilities, private parking facilities and institutional/ Public uses such as parks and open space, churches, and fire stations. LHDR •High Density Residential The housing in this category would typically consist of multi -floored structures with densities exceeding 15 dwelling units per buildable acre. Other activities in this category would include private recrea- tional facilities, and private parking facilities and institutional/ public uses such as churches, fire stations and parks and open space facilities. HR Hillside Residential . This category would allow for single family dwelling units at densi- ties no more than two dwelling units per buildable acre. Also permit- ted would be typical single family accessory uses such as private recreational amenities, attached caretaker units, or employee units and 'garages. Institutional/public uses would also be permitted. These areas would require sensitive development due to slopes, access, visibility, tree coverage and geologic hazards. Minimum buildable area of 20,000 square feet would be required per dwelling unit. (See Chapter YIII for more specific discussion of implementation.) 32 1 TC Tourist Commercial The Tourist Commercial designation is aimed at preserving areas to accommodate commercial activities oriented toward the visitor to the area. Activities which would, be appropriate to this area include lodges, retail businesses and offices, restaurants and personal ser- vice establishments. A high density of development is suitable for . the area, with the emphasis on.the pedestrian.' Vehicular access would T be limited to emergency and service requirements. 11 RAS Resort Accommodations and Service This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward vehicular access from I-70, with other sup- port commercial and business services included. Also allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and.various.municipal uses. CC Community Commercial This area is designed to meet consumer demands from comnunity resi- dents. Primary uses would include supermarkets, dry cleaning estab- lishi�ents, hardware stores, service stations, financial institutions and medical offices. The design of these facilities would be oriented toward vehicular access and parking. CO Community Office This area is to include primarily office uses of all types. Some limited commercial uses, such as retail businesses; including general L merchandise, apparel and accessories and auto service facilities would also be permitted. T Transition The transition designation. applies to the area between Lionshead and the Vail Village. The activities and site design of this area is aimed at encouraging pedestrian flow through the area and strenghten- ing the connection between the two commercial cores. Appropriate activities include hotels, lodging and other tourist oriented residen- tial units, ancillary retail and restaurant uses, museums, areas of public art, nature exhibits, gardens, pedestrian plazas, and other types of civic and culturally oriented uses, and the adjacent proper- ties to the north. This designation would include the right-of-way of f west Meadow Drive and the adjacent properties to the north. PSP Public/Semi-Public The Public and semi-public category includes schools, post office, water and sewer service and storage facilities, cemeteries, municipal facilities, and other public institutions, which ,are located through- out the conununity to serve the needs of residents. 33 P i 4 P Parks Included in this category are town owned parcels intended for both active recreation activities such as athletic fields, golf courses and playgrounds, as well as areas for various passive recreation activities. OS Open Space Passive recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream corridors and drainageways are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were classified as undevelopable due to high hazards and slopes over 40% are also included within this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted by existing zoning, such as one unit. per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning. ` Also, permitted in this area would be institutional/public uses. SB Ski Base Ski trails and facilities related to a.sk.i base are included in this category. 1-70 Interstate 70 Corridor This category includes the right-of-way devoted to Interstate 70 and would be reserved for permanent public use as a roadway. NF - National Forest Lands National Forest lands not designated within the Land Use Plan boundary are assumed to remain as open space due to steep slopes, inaccessi- bility, high hazards and not having adjacency to the town. 34 5. `Preferred Plan" Land Use Pattern 1 The "Existing Trends" alternative was chosen as the preferred land -use 3 plan and was carefully reviewed area by area to assess feasibility and compatibility with adjacent existing land uses. Some modifications were then made in proposed new areas of medium and high density because of potential land use and neighborhood conflicts. The pattern which is reflected on the "Preferred Plan" is discussed below. A.- Residential Uses 1. Low Density Uses. 1._;.. Low density'residential uses are now planned for a total of 699.0 acres, or about 21% of the land in the' plan area, which is an increase of 8% over the area presently in low density residential use. These areas reflect the completion of existing platted pro- jects, with some additional areas added adjacent -to the --single family areas at low densities. The 8% increase reflects the large number of undeveloped, platted lots already existing in Vail. 2. Medium and High Density Uses. Medium and high density residential areas now account for a total of approximately 15% of the land in the plan area, with 421 acres r in the. medium density category and 68.5 acres in the high density. 1 category. This is a 4% increase in land area devoted to these two land use designations, reflecting a need to accommodate additional market demand for multi -family uses. For the most part, these multi -family areas have.been kept consistent with .the pattern of existing land use with additional multi -family occurring within unfinished projects and adjacent to these multi -family areas. Some new areas of high density residential have been added, specifically in east Vail between the frontage road and I-70, where access is good.and surrounding land uses would be compatible for this type of use. Other areas, ;north of I-70 where existing land uses are mixed containing both low and .m'edium density uses have been shown as medium density to meet the demand for additional multi -family dwelling units within the 15-year planning period. 3. Hillside Residential. The new category of land use types "Hillside Residential" covers a _ portion of two large parcels. These parcels account for 33.3 acres or a total of 1.0b of the land use area within the plan area. These parcels were designated in this category to allow the possi- bility for limited development if certain criteria could be met. Any development proposed would require the evaluation on a case - by -case basis, accompanied by an in-depth analysis, to assure sen- sitivity to constraints, provision of adequate access, minimization of visibility from the Valley .floor, and compatibility with sur- rounding land uses. Any such development would be required to meet all applicable Town ordinances and regulations. (See Chapter VIII for more specific information on implementation.) 35 8. Commercial Uses 1. Vail Village. The Vail Village area has been designated separately as a mixed -use area and accounts for 77 acres or about 2% of the plan area. This area has not been analyzed in'this Plan document because the "Vail Village Master Plan" study has addressed this area specifically in more detail. 2. Tourist Commercial. The area planned for commercial uses oriented toward products and services for the tourist includes the Lionshead commercial area and totals 16 acres or .5% of the land within the plan area. 3. Resort Accommodation Services. This area has been designated for the area which extends from the Lionshead hotel/accommodation unit area east along the frontage road to Vaii Road. Cascade Village has also been designated as Resort Accommodation. These are the areas where hotel uses will be concentrated during the planning period, reflecting the community goals to concentrate hotels within the core areas. These areas total 52 acres, or about 2" of the land area studied. • 4. Community Commercial. This new category has been designated for the west Vail commercial area, which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the perman- ent resident and the long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate commercial uses within existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas have been designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the land area. 5. Community Office.. This' area has been designated a mixture of office and support retail uses and is located to the west of the Lionshead RAS area. hese areas will affect a transition from the more intense commercial and resort uses to less intense uses outside of these areas. There is a total of 16 acres (about 1%) in this land use category. C. Transition Area A transition area hZ.s been na,iynited for the area to the north of West - . Meadow Drive (inr.lu,ing the roadway) between the RAS area to the north and the medium density residential area to the south, between Vail Road and the Lionshead Tourist Commercial Area. This area is intended to provide a strengthened pedestrian link between Lionshead and Vail Village. There are 11 acres (.3%) shown in this land use category. 36 D. Parks and Open Space Parks, open space, greenbelts and stream corridor areas account for 1,278 acres or approximately 381% of the land area within the plan boundary. The area designated as parks has stayed consistent with the areas shown on the Existing Land Use Flap and include major and minor parks owned by the Town along with the golf course. This makes up a total of 266 acres. Open space areas have increased significantly from 297 acres to 1,022 acres reflecting the community goals of preserving open space in sensitive environmental areas on the hillsides. Areas shown as open space .include both public and private land ownership patterns. F. Public/Semi-public Land Uses These areas, scattered throughout the Town, are consistent with the exist- ing land use pattern., The acreage has increased from 57 acres to 72 acres or 20 of the total land area due to the inclusion of a possible cemetary, site in east Vail. F. Ski Base Area This area has remained consistent with the location of the existing ski facilities. New areas have been added at Cascade Village and Lionshead for planned ski -related improvements, bringing the ski base acreage from 44 acres up to 86 acres (about 3% of the land area). G. Interstate, 70 Corridor 0 This acreage remained fixed, although the new access point west of Lions - head is shown on the Plan. The corridor accounts for 505.5 acres or 150 of the land use in Vail. This area is intended to remain as right-of-way during the planning period. All National Forest lands outside the plan boundary are assumed to be open space, with the best use considered to be National Forest. Table 9 shows the acreage breakdown of the proposed Land Use Plan. Figure 4 "Land Use Plan" shows the configuration of the proposed land use plan illustratively. A larger map W'=400') also hereby adopted shows proposed land use in more detail. This is available at the Community Development Department and should be consulted prior to time of preparation of development proposals. 6. "Preferred Land Use Plan" Analysis The "Preferred Plan" acreage. ware then compared with projected demands to the year 2000 for permanent housing, lodging units, commercial and office square footage. The resulting figures are shown in Table 10. This table compares the demand in units or acres with the supply of undeveloped land both platted and unplatted, which is unconstrained. Unconstrained lands are those areas which do not contain high hazard avalanche and geologic areas, floodplains or slopes over 40%. This table shows that the Preferred Plan will be able to provide enough lots/land area for all of the projected demand for single family and duplex lots, with a surplus remaining of 326 dwelling units. 37 There will be a shortfall of area for multi -family dwelling units of 17 acres, which may be accomrodated through increasing the occupancy rates of existing multi -family units or encouraging the down valley communities to supply a portion of this demand. This shortfall occurred because of 1) the need to assure that new areas designated for multi -family were compatible with surrounding land uses; 2) the desire of the community to discourage development in sensitive, undeveloped lands; and, 3)' the general satisfac- tion of the community with the existing land use pattern. It was thus - decided that it would not be appropriate to increase densities, in unsuit- able areas just to completely fill market demands. CA 38 "PREFERRED TABLE 9: PROPOSED LAND USE - LAND USE,PLAN" . Use Category Acres Percent Land Low Density Residential.' 698.8 20.8 Medium Density Residential 420.8 _ 12.5% High Density Residential , 684 2.0% Hillside Residential 33.3 1.0% Village Master Pi an 77.0 2.3% .Tourist Commercial 15.8 0.5% Resort Accommodation Services 51.9 1.6% Transition Area 11.4 0.3% Community Commercial 24.4 0.7% Community Office 15.6 0.5% Park 255.9 7.60 Open Space 1,022.9 30.54 Public and Semi-public 72.0 2.1`b Ski Base 86.3 2.6% Interstate 70 Right -of -Way _ 505.5 '15.0% 3,360.1 lOU.00 39 0 0 0 This table also shows that there will be a deficit of 70,272 square feet or approximately 3.3 acres of land for commercial/retail uses. This may be accommodated through: 1) increasing intensities of use within the core areas; 2) adding commercial square footage within Lionshead through the relocation of the Gondola building and possible addition of commercial space to the parking structure. These are both options being discussed but are not yet quantified. These two options could then provide the addi- tional 51,850 square feet of skier -related retail space; 3) addition of support retail outside of the core areas within the Community Office. land use area; and, 4) increased intensity of use in the west Vail Community Connercial undeveloped area. These two options could be utilized to accom- modate the 18.422 square foot shortfall of local related retail space. It was decided to rely on the marketplace to accommodate this additional retail demand through these types of options, rather than designating new .connercial areas away from existing nodes, which would have .been contrary to the desires expressed by the community at large. In summary, the Preferred Land Use Plan reflects a balancing of existing conditions, community opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands. This Land Use Plan, adopted as a part of this document and shown as a �. graphic representation in Figure 3 is intended to be used along with the goal statements, as a general guide for the review of new development pro- jects which may be proposed in Vail. The Land Use Plan illustrates in a general way the categories of land use which would be appropriate through- out the town. The small scale (1"=1,000') map contained herein should not. be used to determine the suitability of uses on a parcel by parcel basis. The larger scale map 1"400' is also hereby adopted and is on file with the Town of Vail Community Development.Department. This larger map is more suitable for identifying specific parcels, through this map does not deter- mine land use based on property boundaries. 40 mm� do -mow TAME 10: PINTEM LAND 115E PLAN AM -PSIS -Plan- Flan- Unconst ra load U nconstra lmd Dared Plat ted/Udleveloped Vacant/lkxl veloped Balance _Type of Use • Lots/Acres lots/Acres Acres SurpluslDeFlcit 1. Single-faaily/Qplex 232 du/78 ac 234 lots ( 55 of di 60.0 Acres 43Z dl 358 dplex du) (will accomiodate 145 du) = 558 di (413+145--556 2. Hiltl-faaily 413 du total 558-232= +326) B. 214 dr/22 act HE - 49.9 ac - 11.2 ac -17 b. Apt./Condo, 1.0% du/73 ec2 IM - 16.4 nc 11.0 ac (66.3 + 11.2 a 77.5 Total K 1,30Z da/95 aC 66.3 ac 11.2 ac t6tal=77.5 me 78-95 = -17) 3. .Lodging 395 ail a a,3 Approved Units W.A +stay 447 au (447-395 = +52) 4. Comerclal/Retail App.a Akih ilt (Care Areas) Coro Areas a. Ski Related 131,8% sq. ft. 27,000 sq. ft. -51,850 Sq• Ft. Allonmd In Faster Plan (Core Areas) M000-131,850 =-51.850) b. Local 89.122 so. ft. 53,0M sq. ft. Outside Cores 220,972 sq. ft. Total Village 6 Lionsheal Core Potential -18,422 sq. rt. (1tl,DDO sq.ft. (70,70a-89.122 =-10,422) ApproveWUnbuilt (Dutside Core) Total Deficit -7p,272 sq. ft. 70.7o0 sq. ft. + o or 3.3 acres Total Approved/Pln n d at .5 F.A.R. 1 0,7D0 sq, ft. (150,700-2211,972 = -70,272) 1. Daaand at 10 di/ac. 2. Dvaand at 15 di/a:. 3. Nmard at 50 du/a:. i • M L • lOR La OrnanY RHld"bal "OR Wodia Oenarly R[Sbsnful HOR N.gff 1J4ntr,, Rf Hdfwrral " MR fYnirii NrRtfd! Rei�lnl.N Yilbgf FfaSSd Man • jjC// T—sr Cm. ..... l Ratal AccvnmodadHn! anC Arvicet OA l, rransilidn MN %(�Zi Cnnmin�fY Cpmm•I[r.7 4SUi Ce,wm fr O/ll— - - - A Onln Sa.cf * Sal O*S- S11 PoN•1 • II.".a f..l. ••r.n. .f u.f[..w.. M •• G Os.. so.. Lle I•TD lnfar21111 70 Cllrrdw ..M Y...w tNW✓..� an! iw. Nnf.ti-�••�• Ht rw. asM .•t.N ��. � LON 411 rrq� ".11 Lay Density Reside -fiat NDR Medium Density Residential ' -HDR-. High Density Residential - o-;Kli: Hillside Residential village Master plan rafrisl Commerctat Resort Accommodations and Semites Mld //W1 fransillon Mae K E Y Ganmwrlty Commerefa! Community Office park Open Space NOTE: All lands oulslds of Land Sena-publfe Usa Plan Boun defy are assumed to be Open Space. Ski Bass * ski Pella, Land Use Plan Boundary 1-70 i lnlarslau r0 Corridor Town Boundary.—.._ he same except where shown. -.. ;}M Hillside Residential Village Masler Man Tourfst Commercial Resort Accommodations and Services Trans77ort Area Community Commercial Community Office Park - Open Space Semi-public Ski Be" $c Ski Portal 1-70 Interstate 70 Corridor i � � i � �•, •imnn �, P1�y*+;tee - .. a:"".�".'�+drs. KEY NOTE: All lands outside of Lend Use Plan Boundary are assum�tl to be open Sp-,c and Use Plan Boundary - — . l d Town Boundary- — -- are the same except where shown. Lance Use Plan Elemad LAND USE PLAN IOWfI omprerah hensivenaive Ian „1 i while R&W Nallomf Fares, 7 -1=1771 AW R 421 lz 10 wrrna Nv#r Mailoml Forest F-1 L -j 16': Whits Rl-r Msrionsl Forest L--- I ----- Figure 4-E Inventory of Town Owned Property RAND USE PLAN M-71, Tk,". -----Potato Patch Dr, -� I Forest I j White River Natlonat Forest I �1 li i [Bureau of Lend Management White River National Forest ................. 1s I • L-_-_------------- 121 14 15 --_-_-_---_-_--_--_-_- 13 KEY j Lae Plan Boundary-_._ j{! an n 8ounaary. are the Same except where Shown. Figure 4—M Inventory of Town Owned Property (I.—V LAND USE PLAN reeS1 ,,,15 r A� ti e0a / gullet Greex 'a'pB�iBo .. Chamonix / r_vo Narnave" or v s� Oaf • / / tie O Or • 4 p Mq ....::.... O� eu�eo �•. Grua ySrar ore teeK a hdn 0jr 4- eIr � prow a A, Pd r Vermont . '7 Bdtflower Hied./- % Bastnyda+e / 4a Blvd. of 'ka*. e9e 11 Bey °/ � Is� ti - � / �. �a'aM •�`'`./ a�'O'a/� -1•.1 Figure 4—W Inventory of Town Owned Property es\ KEY and Use Plan Boundary.�.� Ind Town Boundary•--- are the same except where Shown. LAND USE'PLAN Ps v' of Vail ,.� mprehensive �-' r r Ian �l CHAPTER YII - COMMUNITY FACILITIES 1. Inventory and Assessment of Town Owned Property The initial section of the study provides a general evaluation of the suit- ability of the numerous town owned sites to accommodate development. The terra development is used in its generic sense in that land which may currently be void of any activity or could be improved or developed to accommodate a public or private use. An initial screening of the properties is presented in which the site and location is presented. The physical character of the site is briefly described as is its current. use. Finally, an assessment of the suitability of a site is based on a number of factors including the following: - Size. The site may be too small to accommodate any.active or passive unction. - - Physical Constraints. The site may be subject to flooding, may con- tain geologic hazards or severe slope conditions. Accessibility. The site may contain significant limitations on access whicn may suggest only certain types of use. Existing Use There may be an existing public use on the site which is providing a valu- able service to the community and likely not to change. (Note: for pur- poses of this assessment, the planning horizon of the Year 2000 is used as the basis for commenting on future needs of the community.) Restrictions on Use A number of parcels of land which have been deeded to the Town of Vail con- tain convenant restrictions as to their use. These restrictions could pre- clude certain activities and dictate site utilization. This initial evaluation would be termed a coarse screening of the town properties. The intent is to identify those parcels which are likely not to change from their current use or activity and to eliminate them from further discussion. Conversely, those tracts of land which do represent opportunities for change or development will be analyzed further for their potential. Coarse Screen of Sites Following is a listing of identified Town of Vail owned properties and comments as to their character and suitability. The parcels are numbered generally from the east part of the community to the west and are located on Figure 4 - Inventory of Town Properties. 42 ITract 1 - Bighorn Park C This 6.43 acre parcel of land is improved as an athletic field and play- ground for younger children. it serves as a neighborhood park for area residents and will continue as a park and recreation site. Tract 2 Kinq Arthur's Court This site is located across Meadow Drive from Bighorn Park. The site pro- vides public pedestrian access to the•emuntain side on Forest Service lands to the south. The 'site is identified as being an area of high environ-. mental constraints and would appear to be most suitable for park and open 1 space activities. Tract 3 - East Vail Fire Station Located on Columbine Drive in the. Bighorn Subdivision, the station provides for the fire protection needs of the east Vail area. - Tract 4 - Bighorn Subdivision, Third Addition This area is north of Interstate 70 in the Pitkin Creek area. 'The tract of land had been subdivided into 18 lots, a. dedicated road and a 5.73 acre unplatted parcel. The parcel has limited access and it is located in an area of high environmental constraints. No convenant restrictions have been identified with the site,•however, its inaccessibility and development limitations suggest that open space is its most appropriate use. Tract 5 - Pitkin Creek Stream Tract This is the streambed and associated floodplain area of Pitkin Creek located between I-70 and Bighorn Road. It is also the site of the Historic Circle K ranch house which is used as a bus shelter. The open space char- acter of Pitkin Creek should remain as would the historic site and thus no change is anticipated. - Tract 6.- Katsos Ranch This parcel of land has been the subject of much community -wide discussions since its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 146 acres and lies immediately east of the Vail Golf Course and south of Gore Creek. A study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of alternative development scenarios for the property. The alternatives ranged from a "do nothing" or "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style golf course. The study concluded that a moderate level of develop- ment is the most desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running trail, cross-country skiing trails and picnic areas. Many of these improvements have been constructed and are used by area re.�i '.c!�t, and tourists alike. Based on this expression it is assufii • that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate use for the parcel. 43 Tract 7 - East of Booth Falls Road This area consists of three separate tracts of land which were dedicated to the Town of Vail for open space as part of subdividing. Of the separate tracts of land that have been dedicated, Tract C has little in the way of development constraints. Its location at the intersection of Katsos Ranch Road and the east Frontage Road has good proximity to roads and utilities. - There are other public and private recreation facilities in Booth Creek and the site offers no apparent unique visual or environmental benefits, This is a possible site for disposition by the town. However, it should be noted that there has been no confirmation of covenants or deed restrictions associated with the property. No alternate use has been identified for this site at this time. Tract 8 - West of Booth Falls Road f This area is similar in formation to Tract 7 in that individual parcels of land were dedicated to the Town of Vail as part of park and open space } requirements. Two of the parcels are within high environmental. hazard ' areas and are likely to remain as open space areas.. The third parcel of land in the subdivision has frontage along I-70 and back ups to the resi- dential area along Bald Mountain Road. This parcel is attractive for development because of its visibility, access to the frontage road, rela- tive large size (14 acres) and only a portion of the property is within a moderate environmental hazard area. There is, however, some questions as to the conversant restrictions on the property which may limit the.use to open space. This tract has been discussed in the past as a possible loca- tion for an executive par 3 golf course, however it is not large enough to accommodate such a use. A well planned 18-hole par 3 course requires 50 to 60 acres. A 9-hole par 3 course could possibly be accomplished on as lit- tle as 20 acres, however this site is only 14.acres and therefore would not ( accommodate "executive" type course very adequately.* While it is a possi- ble candidate for some type of development, there are no current public facility needs which could be accommodated at this site. Tract 9.- East of Sunburst Drive This site contains just over 28 acres and is'located south of the Vail Golf Course. The site is entirely within a high hazard area.and is viewed .as designated open space for the community. Just to the south of Sunburst Drive are several small parcels which are avalanche chutes, scheduled to j remain as open space. L Tract 10 - Vail Golf Course The Vail Golf Course comprises just over 94 acres of land along Gore Creek in the east -central part of the community. A portion of the course winds through a residential area along Vail Valley Drive. No channe is antici- pated in the function and extent of the area. * DeLhaiara, Joseph and Lee Koppelman, Urban Planning and Design Criteria, Pg. 380; and THK Associates, Inc. Tract 11 - Bus Barn, PublicWorks The Town of Vail bus barn and public works shops are located on a 17.3 acre site north of I-70 in the vicinity of the golf course. There is no change anticipated in this area and there appears to be sufficient room for expan- sion of the facility. This site is a potential candidate for the location of a limited use, special event oriented heliport. Tract 12 - Ptarmigan Road Avalanche Chute A 1.5 acre area has been designated as a safety area to accommodate poten- tial avalanches. The site would remain as open space in the community. Tract 13 - Fairway Drive Avalanche Chutes A 2.16 acre site to accommodate avalanche hazards has been dedicated to the town along Fairway Drive in the Vail Village loth Filing... This site pro- vides a safety area and would remain as open space for the community. Tract 14 - Ford Park The Ford Park is the focus of outdoor summer recreation activities in the community. It contains athletic fields for softball, soccer.and lacrosse, tennis courts, a picnic pavilion, barbeque grills, bike paths and a nature center. A Master Plan was recently adopted for the park and an amphi- theatre is currently under construction. During the past winter seasons, the athletic fields of the upper bench of the park has served as a day use parking area for skiers. The use of special WWII vintage landing mats have been used to protect the turf from damage. There is no change, other than on -going facility development for the park. Specifically, a community indoor swimming pool has been proposed for the east end of the site. Tract 15 - Golden Peak Athletic Field This five acre athletic field accommodates soccer, rugby and lacrosse activities during the summer.• This athletic field is anticipated to.con- tinue to serve as'a site for active recreation functions in the community. Tract 16 - Vorlaufer Park, aka Roger Staub Park The small .5 acre open area is located off of Gore Creek Drive in Vail Village serve as a passive pocket -park adjacent to Gore Creek. This passive area is landscaped and contains boulders for resting and provides a _ pleasant relief from the dense built-up nature of the Village. It is viewed as a positive attribute likely to continue to function as such. Tract 17 - Mill Creek Stream Tract This area extends from Hanson Ranch Road to Gore Creek Drive in back of the Red Lion Building. The tract serves as a drainageway and, should be pre- served in its open state. Development along Bridge Street has turned their back to the stream and rehabilitation and/or renovation in the area should be encouraged to take advantage of this pleasant open area. 45 Tract 18 - Gore Creek Stream Tract The stream tract extends from Ford Park in the east to Forest Road on the west and consists of a series of dedicated parcels as development pro- gressed within the Town. The area serves as a invaluable environmental and aesthetic component to the Village core. The primary uses of this area are linear open space and recreational paths. Tract 19 - Slifer Square Slifer Square consists of the covered bridge, the landscaped plaza and the "vest pocket" park between the Village parking structure and• the bridge. The area serves as an entryway to the Village core and is unlikely to change. It has also been identified as a possible site for the Town, of Vail Christmas Tree. Tract 20 - Villaqe Parking Structure The site of the parking structure contains just over 5.5 acres of land not all of which is occupied by the three level parking structure. The top of the structure serves as the Vail Transportation Center and is the focus for regional and town -wide bus routes. The east -end of the structure is i undeveloped and this area represents an opportunity for development.. Tract 21 - Pirate Ship Park 1 This facility is located along Mill Creek in the vicinity of the Vista Bahn chairlift. The tot lot and playground serve the recreational needs of smaller children in the community and would likely remain unchanged. Tract 22 - willow Circle Landscaped Area This 3.8 acre area serves as an open relief for residences which surround f it and would remain as such. Tract 23 - Ski Museum Located at the intersection of Vail Road and West Meadow Drive, this 1.23, acre site serves as one of the many tourist attractions in the community. The site is at one of the more congested vehicular intersections in town and there are numerous vehicular/pedestrian conflicts in the area. There are approved plans (related to the Vail Village Inn Special Development District) for the relocation of the museum. The plan calls for this site to become a small park/open space with opportunities for public art, to serve as a window into the transition area, between Vail Village and Lionshead. The plans for .this site may be modified in the future, with.the intersection improvements noted in the Vail Village Master. Plan, Tract 24 - Village Firestation The station site is likely to remain unchanged. 46 f ITract 25 - Interfaith Chapel Land south and west of the chapel is owned by the town and currently is used for parking for the chapel. Unless there is a change in the chapel activity then there appears to be no need to affect this tract. Is Tract 26 - Municipal Building and Post Office This site contains 2.81 acres and is located along the frontage road west of the Vail interchange. There are numerous options available,for change in use of this site which are discussed later in the study. Tract 27 - Dobson Ice Arena and Adjacent Lot to East The site and use appears to be fairly well fixed for the near future. There have been discussions about expansion and/or modification of the building to accomnodate small conventions. To date, no firm plans have been identified, and thus there is no change expected for the arena site. A possible use of the adjacent lot may be an outdoor ice arena. The lot is now planned to accommodate additional hospital parking needs._ Tract 28 - Vail Library and Adjacent Park Area The library is located south of the Dobson Ice Arena and like the arena there are no known expansion plans or relocation plans which would affect the site. There is a small park area adjacent to the library, which will remain in its present use. Tract 29 - Lionshead Parking Structure The Lionshead parking structure site is one which,offers an opportunity to include some additional activities. The structure presently contains a number of uses including the Teen Center. The types of activities are tied L in with the options which may result from activities at the municipal center. LTract 30 - Pedestrian Overpass The landing areas for the pedestrian overpass which connects Red Sandstone Elementary School and Lionshead are the two sites of this tract. No change is expected for this area, other than realigning the south approach. LTract 31 - Lionshead Entryway/Rights-of-Kay This "tract" is actually a series of parcels in and around Lionshead which i are entryways and landscaped bus turnarounds. No change is expected in L thi.s area. Tract 32 - Lionshead Mall The pedestrian mall of the Lionshead .commercial area is the site of this tract. The tract winds in and around the mall and connects the parking 1 structure with Lionshead Circle. The "Urban Design Guide Plan" addresses potential changes in this area. 47 Tract 33 - Lionshead Centre This site is located directly south of the Lionshead Centre building adja- cent to the Gore Creek stream tract. It currently is part of the open space and trail system in the area and no changes are likely. Tract 34 - Old Town Shops This site is.used for Town of Vail -recreational programs and for storage. This site may have some potential for redevelopment at the time the new access to I-70 becomes a reality. Tract 35 - Mountain Bell The Mountain Bell microwave facility and two day care centers are located• i on a 25 acre site owned by the Town of Vail which is north of I-70. A portion of this site under the microwave facility, is owned by Mountain Bell. Part of the entire site is located'in an area of medium environ- mental hazards and should continue to remain in its present use, with possible expansions of the day care centers. It may also be an option for the cemetary, further discussed later. Tract 36 - Red Sandstone Elementary School The Town of Vail leases the site to the Eagle County School District for educational purposes. This arrangement will likely continue through the planning period. Tract 37 - Potato Patch An irregular shaped area above Red Sandstone Elementary School was dedi- cated to the Town as open space. This area has a variety of high and medium environmental constraints as well as some areas with no identifiable development constraints. There are no apparent deed restrictions for use of the property, however, the site is, relatively difficult to access and seems to be most appropriately left in open space. Tract 38 - Lion's Ridge The Lion's Ridge parcel is designated as open space and because of the - severe topographic and environmental conditions is not suitable for other uses. _ Tract 39 - Casca,'e village Stream Tract This is an a ct. along Gore Creek in the vicinity of the Westin Hotel which serves as flood protection and provides some open space for the area. 48 Tract 40 - Donovan Park The undeveloped park consists of a 12-acre lower bench area north of Gore Creek and a 39-acre upper bench south of the Matterhorn Subdivision. The park has been the subject of a Master Plan which outlined the proposed park facilities for the site. The community intends to proceed with development of the project as funding becomes available. The upper bench has also been identified as a potential cemetary site. Tract 41 - Buffeter Creek A site of approximately one acre in size has been identified as a park site for neighborhood residents. The use of this site is likely to continue throughout the projection period. Tract 42 - Stephens Property This is a ten acre parcel of land located along Gore•Creek in the Inter- mountain area of West Vail. The tract is currently undeveloped and could be a possible cemetary,site. 49 0 r2. Facility/Service Requirements In this section of the study the existing facilities used by the Town of Vail's service providers will be discussed. In general, a majority of the municipal sources offered by the town are well situated to serve the growth needs of the community. However, as the community grows and matures there • are likely to be demands for additional services and/or facilities. For example, there has been an expressed need for an indoor aquatic center in r the community. This facility would be difficult to justify under normal measures of demand (one pool per 25,000 population is a typical National Park and Recreation standard). However, community interest is extremely high in a facility of this type due to the higher recreational participa- tion rates and the higher guest populations found in Vail and a site is recommended for its development. Following then is a brief discussion of status of existing services/facilities. (Note: a significant amount of -information reported in this section is a result of a Space Needs Study conducted for the town in December of 1984.) r Vail Police Department The Vail Department of Police is currently housed in the Municipal Build- ing. The department occupies a'portion of upper and lower -levels of the building with approximately one-third of the structure used for the law. enforcement function. The department is in need of additional space for personnel, facilities and storage. The 1984 study indicates that between 1,500 and 2,000 square feet of additional space is needed. Fire Protection Currently, two fire stations are serving the community: the East Vail Station on Columbine Drive in the Bighorn subdivision, and the Central Station on East Meadow Drive which is adjacent to the Village. The determ- ination of fire protection adequacy involves a complex formula which incor- porates construction type, building height, water flow rate, response time and service radius. The American Insurance Association (formerly the National Board of Fire Underwriters). prepares the evaluation. A rule of thumb for protection of residential areas is a radius of one and one-half miles for engine companies and two miles for ladder.* Applying this stand- ard suggests that an additional station could be proposed to serve the West Vail area. Library LThe library is housed in a new facility with apparent adequate space to accommodate the present and near future needs of community residents. f • Public Works The Public Works/Transportation Department is housed at the Town of Vail shop.property which is located north of 1.70 in the vicinity of the golf course. The site is of adequate size to accommodate future space needs, however, the site would require extensive preparation to be usable. Also, • in the previous space use study,it was recommended that a small satellite facility to accommodate under storage and a snowplow be developed in West Vail. Recreation The administrative function of the recreation department is currently located in the lower level of the library. There has been no indication that the current space is inadequate and thus it is assumed that the near term space needs of the department are satisfied. The second component of the recreation function is the land and/or facili- ties required to meet the recreational needs of community residents. This investigation has not included a parks and recreation master plan which would examine in some degree of detail these needs. However, there are some general indications of recreational desires as expressed by residents involved in the public meetings associated with the Land.Use Plan project and during the completion of the Master Plans for Ford and Donovan Parks. Park and recreation standards have historically been the means by which park requirements for future population have been estimated. The applica- tion of a ratio, typically expressed in acres per 1,000 population is often the point of beginning in projecting needs for a community. Also, these standards tend to be based on national trends as monitored by the National Park and Recreation Association. Of, ten these national standards are not applicable to a community's situation -- in the case of Vail this is most certainly true. The unique location of the comnunity and its recreation/ tourist base tends to skew the national standards. However. using a ratio as expression of future requirements is a technique which has some validity Lin this case. The results of the survey conducted as part of the land use plan indicated L that there are over 555 acres of land in the area devoted to park and open space use. A further breakdown indicates that 296 acres of the 555 acres are classified as open space and the remaining 259 acres are used for park purposes (improved parks and athletic fields). A major component of the ( parks acreage is devoted to the golf course which is just over 94 acres of L land. The current permanent population in the community is estimated to be 4,500 persons. Applying this population to the current park and open space acreage results in the following: L *UeChaiara, Joseph and Lee Koppelman, Urban Planning and Design Criteria, Pg. 356. L 51 1. Open Space Land - 65.8 acres per 1,000 population. 2. Park Land (including golf course) = 57.6 acres per 1,000 population 3. Park Land (excluding golf course) = 36.7 acres per 1,000 population Total Park b Open Space Land (1+2) = 123.3 acres per 1,000 population As a means of comparison, the most frequently used ratio in expressing the • requirement for park needs for urban conditions amounts to 25 acres per 1,000 population. The Town of Vail far exceeds this "normal" standard for the provision of park and recreation space. Throughout the public meetings associated with the land use. plan and the results of a community services questionnaire, there appeared to be general satisfaction with the level and amount of park and recreation facilities and areas. (A notable exception is the desire for an indoor aquatics center.) Thus, as one measure of the future needs in the community, { 'today's standards of providing park areas could be used to determine future j demands. The year 20OU population projections for the community indicate that the permanent population is 5,920 persons, or an increase of 1,420.persons above current levels. Using the existing ratio of park land now'provided to the increase in population results in the following: i Additional Park and Open Space Land Required Open Space Land (65.8 ac. x 1.4Z)* = 93 acres Parkland -Excluding Golf Course = 52 acres [ 4 (36.7 ac. x 1.42) Total 145 acres 'Note: the ratio which excludes the golf course was used because there are no additional areas which could accommodate a, golf facility in the planning area.) Using the above stated assumptions on level of service, one could antici- pate an additional need for 52 acres in parks and 93 acres in open space. ` This is only .a general indication of need -- it does not include important I factors such as location, down -.valley activities, or the availability of private recreation facilities in the community. This aspect of community facilities will be the subject of further study by the Town as a separate component of the Comprehensive Plan. This will be accomplished through completing a "Recreational Strategic Plan" which will study needs for all types of recreational and parks amenities and identify locations for such needs. This effort will complement the already com- pleted Master Plans for Ford and Donavan Parks, which programmed specific Luses and locations for recreational facilities ih each park. iCemetery A cemetery site has been identified as a high priority item for the commun- ity. In the process of identifying potential sites, contacts were made with agencies who may have regulations affecting the siting of such a facility. The Colorado State Department of Health was contacted and there are no regulations from their prospective which would affect siting of a cemetery. The only agency which does have an affect on cemetery operations is the Colorado State -Division o.f Insurance, which is concerned with 52 internment, general maintenance of the facility, and administration organi- zation necessary to operate the facility. There are several key considera- tions in site criteria for a cemetery including: 1) the suitability of the terrain for internment such as the nature of the subsoil; 2) drainage; 3) proximity to connunty water sources; and, 4) accessibility. Also, there is r the sensitive issue of the "feeling" of death that is associated with a ! cemetery and the inclination on the part of some people to avoid living in the vicinity of a cemetery. Finally, it is likely that a cemetery site will be used in perpetuity. Burial grounds are rarely moved due both to the practical and .legal difficulties involved. i Four sites have been identified as -meeting the above outlined criteria; there are, however, some unresolved questions with each. Parcel H This tract of land is located in East Vail under an elevated section of Interstate 70. The portion of the site appropriate for internment is north of Gore Creek and has direct access from Bighorn Road. Utilities, specifi- cally water service, is available in the area. The site is presently within the White River National Forest and acquisition of the tract would have to conform to a complicated and lengthy set of procedures. Also, it is unknown at this time what rights the Colorado State Highway Department may have on the tract. Even though I-70 is elevated as it tranverses the parcel, there may be some restrictions on use of the space under the freeway. Mountain Bell Tract The 25 acre tract of land, currently owned by the Town of Vail, with a por- tion owned by Mountain Bell, which houses the telephone microwave transmit- ting facility, is recommended as a second potential cemetery site. The site has many positive attributes including access, availability of utili- ties and isolation. The one negative factor of the site is the terrain type. Presently, a portion of the area is identified as having moderate environmental constraints. It does appear that a carefully designed site . plan could adequately overcome some of these constraints and provide a suitable cemetery site. This site is also intended to continue to be used L by the two day care centers with additional area to accommodate necessary expansion of these centers. Stephen's Property The Stephen's Property, in West Vail, is the third site which has been identified as a possible cemetery. Gore Creek tranverses this triangular L shaped tract of land with the south portion being more flood prone and sub- ject to moderate environmen*.?l constraints. As suitable as the site is it may face competition for use from the recreational requirement to meet future demands. Donovan Park A portion of the upper bench of Donovan Park was also previously identified as a possible cemetery site through the Master Parks Plan process for Donovan Park. ' c� General Governmental Services General governmental services include those municipal functions such as town administration, community development, finance and personnel. The previously cited space needs study indicated that, with the exception of the Police Department, department needs are primarily in the area of addi- tional storage. The individual needs of the departments are comparatively minor, however, when they are added to the Police Department requirements and the current site constraints of the municipal building and post office site there becomes a cumulative effect and/or requirement which is dis- cussed in a latter section of this report. Schools While education services are not provided by the Town, it is important to address the question of whether or not new sites for schools should be planned. According to conversations with Dr. Charles Schwann, Superintend- ent of School District RE50J, there are no projected needs for additional school sites within the Town of Vail. There are currently several school sites in Avon and Edwards which have been dedicated to the district. Due to the projected population distribution, in combination with the bus cir- culation routes, it is anticipated that needs for new schools will be met through the placement of facilities on these sites. 3. Locations for Other Facilities • During the course of this investigation there have been a number of special facilities or_cc-- 'ons which have been identified as being appropriate for comment. These )tems along with a summary of the key, findings of the previous sections are presented as follows. Aquatic Center Concurrent with this investigation the Department of Community Development conducted an evaluation of alternative sites for an aquatic center. The evaluation used a checklist of .seventeen different items which were applied to six separate sites in the community. The analysis resulted in an area at the east end of Ford Park as scoring the highest in al^Dst all of the evaluation categories. The results of the evaluation confirms the recom- mendations which were made as part of the Ford Park Master Planning pro- cess. Therefore, should plans proceed for such a facility it would be most appropriately located at the east end of Ford Park. _ Golf Course The only site in the community large enough to accommodate an executive style, Par 3 course is a portion of the Katsos Ranch pruperty as a well - planned 18-hole par 3 course requires 50 to 60 acres of land. As mentioned previously in the discussion of tract 8, a 9-hole par 3 course could possi- bly be built on approximately 20 acres. Tract 8 in the Booth Falls area could not accommodate this acreage requirement.* At the public meetings held during the development of this plan, there was overwhelming community opposition to the use of the Katsos property to accommodate a golfing _ facility. DeChaiara, Joseph and Lee Koppelman, Urban Plannina and Design Criteria, Pg. 380; and THK Associates, Inc. 54 Seasonal Surface Parkinq Areas In support of the impact assessment of the Vail Mountain Master Plan, a parking and bus utilization analysis was conducted. This analysis identi- fied the magnitude of the increase associated with skier expansion, as well as the internal shift in ski portal use because of the location of mountain expansion. It was projected that a shortfall of 597 public parking spaces would occur in the Village/Golden Park area while a surplus of spaces would result in the Lionshead/Cascade Village area. A variety of solutions to the projected shortfall were identified including:, - Expansion of the Transportation Center by 450 spaces. - Relocation of the rental car operation to free up spaces in the Trans- portation Center. - Increased parking as part of the Golden Peak base facility redevelop- ment. - Expanded parking at Ford Park. - Increased use of remote parking facilities such. as the golf,course lot. - Leasing of private spaces by employees. - Greater utilization of the bus system. The variety of options available to accommodate this growth suggests that there is likely no need to immediately look for additional surface parking areas. The experience with using Ford Park as a temporary solution has not be fully evaluated. However, from the communities perspective, there was no significant opposition to use of the upper bench of the park, as a i temporary solution to the parking problem. One of the concluding recommendations of the parking and bus utilization study involved the on -going activities of the Parking Task Force which would continue to monitor and document the adequacy of the parking system in the peak February -March period. Village Parking Structure LThe Village parking structure was previously mentioned as being one means by which to partially meet the additional parking requirement generated by the mountain expansion plan. The east end of the parking structure site is undeveloped. This area has been viewed as a possible site for numerous activities. It is recommended that since the parking structure has been designed for expansion and that the Village/Golden Peak ski portals are to be the focus of mountain expansion, that the east end site be designated for parking structure expansion. Extending the existing parking structure would create a building area of 31,250 square feet on top of the struc- ture (the length extends 250 feet, which is 50 feet short of the west pave - t ­ nt l i ne of Vai l Val l ey Drive and the wi dth i s hel d at the current 125 teet). This area could then be utilized for some other type of use. The landscaped slope facing south of the existing structure, along East Meadow Drive, has been discussed as possibly having some redevelopment potential' , otentia1. During the public meetings held to review this plan, the resi- dents expressed a desire to keep this area in its present use, as permanent open space. 55 Lionshead Parking Structure The Lionshead parking structure offers some of the same opportunities for joint use development as those of the Village structure. The types of activities and possible joint uses are somewhat different however. The east end of the parking structure site is currently not developed as a parking structure but is utilized for parking for large recreational vehi- cles or buses. This area has been suggested as a possible site for a new ` municipal building or town hall. The site could easily accommodate a i building of 20,UO0 square feet in a single or multi -level structure and could use either the existing parking structure for employee and/or busi- ness parking or could incorporate structured parking of its own. This potential building, along with the adjacent Dobson area and library, could form the components of a municipal center or complex, along with the exist- ing Teen Center in the structure. j Another potential joint use for the site would be an extension of the commercial space along the south face of the structure. There is currently 5,000 square feet of commercial/office space and some additional square footage of space could be incorporated in.the structure. . Unlike the Village structure, however, the depth of the space (i.e., from street R.O.W. to parking structure) is relatively shallow. Commercial uses I requiring a more square rather than rectangular shape may have to extend j into the parking structure. The deed of transfer`rom Vail Associates to the Town of Vail specifically prohibits nonpublic uses for the structure. a It should be noted, however, that existing commercial space is not physi- cally attached to the structure - they are two separate buildings which may be a means to be in compliance with the deed restrictions. The restriction may preclude any extension of commercial space into the structure. In the discussion of using the east end of the parking structure as a building site, it should also be noted that the parking structure itself has been designed to accommodate additional roof top loads. Thus, a new _ building could almost be placed anywhere on the parking structure site. The future use of both parking .structures is now the subject of further investigation by the Town. A feasibility study has been initiated to T address whether the structures should remain in their present use or be positioned for the addition of commercial, office and or parking uses. Municipal buildinq/Post Office Site The suggestion that municipal functions be relocated, as discussed in the previous section, would then make available the municipal building and municipal building site. Added to this is the desire of the post office to relocate its distribution function to an outlying location (the community would like to maintain a "retail" funcl, in Commercial Core I or II how- ever) could possibly "froe tip" both bui;atngs as well as the site. Some of the possible scenarios f,,r site use and activities include the following: E6 A. Municipal Function Relocated: 1. Use of the eastern part of the existing municipal building as a visitor's center. This portion of the building (police depart- ment) has good visibility as well as parking. As a supplement to the visitor center, a historical display area and/or the ski museum could also be provided. The post office could operate its retail presence in the building it presently occupies. 2. Another general option wouldbe to abandon the existing struc- tures and develop a multi -purpose community building to accommo- date the visitor center; Vail Resort Association, as well as space for other community service organizations. 3. Along the same lines as 2 above, the private sector could be encouraged to participate by offering the parcel for development, in exchange for the provision of a visitor center in the develop- ment. L The combination of uses are almost too numerous to list. Also, there needs to be some assessment of the size requirements of these facilities and whether any specific types of space are needed, as well as additional parking requirements. 8. Municipal Function Remains 1. If the municipal functions remain at the current site, then there would likely be a reallocation of uses among the two buildings. The Police Department's need for additional space plus their need for communication equipment suggest .that they remain in the existing municipal building. The post office building could become an "annex" to the main building in which some municipal functions could be housed. The post office retail function would probably have to find a new facility. 2. A variation to the above would be to demolish the post office building and build an .addition to the existing municipal build- ing. 3. Another variation could demolish both buildings and construct a new municipal complex. Locations for Public Art The presence of public art in a community adds to the quality of life of its citizens, Public art can be commemorative by reminding the viewer of an individual or event of significance in the community or it can be created to evoke an emotional response on the part of the viewer. Because of the diversity of the types of public art, it is difficult to prescribe specific locations whir.h are appropriate and suitable for all objects of art. Thus, the following items of consideration are provided as a means to review each proposal for the siting of a piece of public art, as further discussed on the following page. 67 The piece of art proposed for public viewing has characteristics and quali- ties which should be examined prior to its siting. The following should.be examined:. • - Size and Scale: Is the physical size of the piece of art such that it requires a certain amount of distance for the object for proper view- ing? For example, a kinetic sculpture the size of a small vehicle would likely require a pedestrian plaza area. =. Shape and Form: Whether the piece of art has a symmetrical. shape or has a tree -form has an influence on the most appropriate area from which to view it. Material: The material of the piece of art should be considered. For example, a high tech material of glass or polished metal may be out of place in a natural setting along a streambed or in a forested area. Conversely, this type of material may provide a dramatic contrast to a natural forested setting. - Mass and Density: The bulk and volume of a piece of art is also a factor which should be evaluated. There is a natural affinity between the mountainous terrain features of the area and a sculptural piece which expresses the mass and bulk. But again, a complimentary sculptural piece could provide a interesting contrast to the mass of the mountains. In addition to aesthetic and design concerns associated with individual pieces of. art, there are some very practical questions which should be. addressed. The placement of a piece of art in a public place should be evaluated as to its effect on public health, safety and welfare. The types of issues include the Safety of the piece of art from the standpoint of the viewer. Are there any sharp edges or delicate construction techniques which have the potential to cause injury to the viewer? Is the piece of art Secure, and well fastened to its viewing area not subject to easy removes? Is there some measure of protection against Vandalism associated with the piece? Can the piece be easily defaced or shou+a vanaa i i sm. occur, can the defacing be easily removed? Finally, how does the piece of public art and it's location relate to the Public Works function of the town? Specifically, are there any conflicts wtthsnow removal, emergency service access and bus transit routes? The above criteria is suggested as a means to evaluate individual piece- (,f L art. There are, however, general locations which are more appropriate for public art. Within the Vail Village Master Plan, specific locations have been identified. Beyond the village area, locations should focus around pedestrian concentrations or movement. Bus stops make excellent locations • for art because of the congregation of people. Similar.ily, formal plaza areas and areas where pedestrian pathways intersect are Suitable loca- tions. Siting areas along the pedestrian pathways associated with Gore Greek also are appropriate. In any of the above areas, the piece of public art should be selected and placed to compliment the urban or natural f setting and should act as a magnet to draw people to an area. cn CHAPTER VIII - IMPLEMENTATION The Land Use Plan developed as a result of this effort will become a part of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, which in its entirety will serve to guide growth within the Town of Vail for the next 15 years. The Land Use Plan is not intended to be regulatory in nature but is intended to provide a general framework to guide decision making. Specific implementation measures should be undertaken to assure that .the intent of th Plan is carried forward throughout the life of the Plan. Such measures should include changes to ordinances and regulations or policies adopted by the Town. These measures should also include develop- ing a system by which the Plan may be continuously monitored and periodic- ally amended. This is important because the planning process is one of continuous evolution with data, public opinion and market forces changing over time. j 1. Land Use Regulation Analysis [ The zoning and subdivision regulations should. be analyzed carefully to assure that objectives of the Land Use Plan may be met. while an in-depth analysis of these regulations is not within the scope of this project., some general recommendations may be made concerning new land use categories developed for the Land Use Plana The following categories should be ! reviewed for compatibility with the zoning regulations. i A. Hillside Residential L B. This new category will require the adoption of a new zoning category, which would allow for single-family residential units at a maximum density of two 'per acre, with a minimum buildable area of 20,000 square feet of contiguous area per unit. Allowance should also be made for an employee or guest housing unit to be built as an accessory unit attached to the primary living unit or garage. The existing regulations for access to subdivisions and for control of hazard areas should still be applicable. Community Office This category would zoning category to broad enough to be Land Use Plan. C. Transition require a review of the Arterial Business District ensure that permitted and conditional uses were consistent with the objectives established with the This area would require an analysis of the actual zoning along west Meadow Drive to ensure that the purposes of the transition district could be met. D. High Density Residential The actual location of the parcels of high density residential should be analyzed to determine a suitable minimum lot area permissible for high density development. The present high density zone district has the requirement of a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet of build- able area. It is conceivable that this minimum would not be adequate in some cases and may need to be increased to 20,000 square feet. 59 2. Procedural Method of Implementation The general method of developing implementation measures should be as follows: A. Define Plan/Zoninq Differences Compare Land Use Plan Map with Toning Map and identify areas of con- flict between categories as.described in the Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. B. Evaluate Zoning Ordinance Begin evaluating the zoning ordinance as compared with the Land Use Categories adopted inthis document and develop new categories or wording/use changes to bring the zoning document into conformance with general spirit of the Plan. This should include an analysis of the four categories mentioned pre- viously, proceeding from A through D in that order. The Hillside Category should be the first area of consideration since no zoning category exists presently to accommodate this type of use. The balance of the zoning and land use categories should be compared at a later time for compatibility. C. Refine P]an It is anticipated that after the Plan has been adopted and has been used as a working document for some time, the Town may identify i refinements which will need to be made to the Land Use Categories, Map 1 and Goal Statements. These should be undertaken after the zoning code revisions and other implementation documents have been prepared and are ready for adoption to "fine-tune" the Plan. It is recommended �. that these changes take place within the first year after adoption and occur as an amendment to the Plan, initiated by the Town. Amendment procedures are described on page 62. L D. Rezonings L The Town may wish to consider initiating select rezonings, when the community interests would be met through bringing areas into conform- ance with the Plan. LWhere conflicts arise between existing zoning and proposed land use categories (and changes have not been made in the development of the implementation measures described herein) existing zoning shall con- trol. When new applications for zoning or rezoning are made and the L 60 requested zoning is not consistent with the adopted Plan, this nor. - conformance shall be addressed by the applicant. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate hors conditions have changed since the Plan was adopted, how -the Plan is in error or how the addition, deletion or change to the Plan is in concert with the Plan -in general. Such nonconformance shall then become a factor . for consideration in the rezoning process, along with all other fac- tors considered in such cases, with respect to Town ordinances and policies. E. Annexation of National Forest Lands r In the future, the Town may desire to annex National Forest -lands for j the purposes of recreational and/or public facility development. This will involve close coordination with the Forest Service. However, National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned for private development. F. Parks and Open Space Consideration should be given by the Town to amending the ordinance which regulates the real estate transfer tax to allow funds to be utilized for the development of parks and open space, in addition to the purchase of these lands. 3. Amendment Process The amendment process is one which is intended to assure the Plan's effec- tiveness with periodic updates to reflect current thinking and changing market conditions. The process includes amendments which may be initiated in any of the following three ways: A. By the Community Development Department. B. By the Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council. C. By the Private Sector. A. Community Development Department Amendments The Community Development Department should update and revise the Plan every three to five years, whenever possible. However, if the plan is not updated within such timeframe, this shall not jeopardize the validity of the plan. This should include analysis of the goals and policies; updating of the forecasting model and review and revision of the Land Use Plan map. The Community Development Department would then make recommendations for proposed changes to the Planning and Environmental Commission where these changes would then be considered in a public hearing format. The Planning and Environmental Commission would then make recommendations to the Town Council, which would also �+ hold a public hearing on the proposed changes. If adopted, the changes would then become a part of the Plan. L 61 S. Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council Amendments i These entities could also initiate plan amendments periodically, as deemed appropriate. These amendments would also require public hear- ings with both the Commission and the Council, and upon adoption then become a part of the Plan. C. Private Sector Amendments The private sector may also initiate amendment requests. These should be initiated in the following ssi 1. Make application with the Community Development Department. Application may be made by either a registered voter, a property owner or a property owner's authorized representative. Such application may be made at any time. 2. Such applications will then be considered at a meeting with the PBEC. At the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing, a recommendation shall be made to the Town Council, whereupon a decision shall then be.rendered. To change the Plan by this pro- cedure, it will be the responsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate how conditions have changed since the Plan was adopted, how the Plan is in error or how the addition, deletion or change to the Plan is in concert with the Plan in general. j Such decision may include approval, approval with conditions or i denial. Amendments may be requested for changes to the goals and policies and/or Land Use Plan map. If such request is approved, such change shall be made to the Plan document and/or map. If such request is denied, no such request that is substantially the same as that previously denied shall be considered for a period L of one year. 4. Use of the Land Use Plan Map The. Land Use Plan map and the goal statements are intended to serve. as the L primary focus for the review of development •proposals, along with Town ordinances and regulations. The Plan Map and goal statements are founded upon the supporting information and data contained in this document and L therefore should not be utilized as the sole instrument for analysis of a project. Any project should be reviewed within the context of the intent of the overall Plan Document. The Community Development Department, along L with the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council will be responsible for the interpretation and implementation of the Plan. 62 k Where the 400 scale Land Use Plan map (adopted by reference herein) does not adequately define a land use category boundary, the boundary shall be interpreted by the Community Development Staff. It should Denoted that the boundaries established on the Plan Map are general in nature and were not determined based on parcel by parcel property boundaries. When ambiguity exists, generally, roadways, natural barriers and property edges Is shall define such boundaries., when a property in single ownership is divided by a land use category such that the property'cannot-be developed in a feasible and logical way for either land use, the staff may determine which use is appropriate, based on compatibility of surrounding; land uses, both existing and .proposed, and physical site characteristics..Where a disagreement between the staff and the applicant occurs, appeals may be made to the Planning and Environmental Commission. In conjunction with the use of the Plan Map, the constraint maps adopted by 'the Town for geologic hazards, snow avalanche and flood plains referenced herein shall also be utilized in the review of any development proposal. Areas which may fall within the I-70_corridor.. shall _be, determined by consulting the Town right-of-way maps also referenced herein. 63 0 APPENDICES Pa e A. Community Questionnaire - Summary Results A-1 - 6 B. Additional Goal Statements B-1 - 2 C. Additional Sources C-1 0. Economic and Demographic Overview D-1 -*12 E. Town of Vail Forecast.Methodology E-1 - 16 LIST OF TABLES .Appendix D 1. Historical Skier Visits to Vail, Beaver Creek and the D-2 State of Colorado, 1952-63 to 1985-85 2. Historical Population and Househol.d Growth Trends in -D'-4 Vail and Eagle County, 19.70-1986 3. Housing and Household Characteristics of Vail and D-5 Eagle County, 1970-1980 4. Historical Eagle County Average Annual Employment by ._ D-7 . Industry and Place of Work, 1975-1985 5. Historical Average Annual Employment by Place of Work D-8 for Vail and Eagle County, 1975-1985 6. Historical Eagle County Personal Income by Industry D-9 and Place of Mork (3000's), 1974-1984 7. Historical Eagle County Business Establishments by D-11 Industry and Employment - Ski Class, 1974-198.4 8. Historical Retail Sales by Month in Vail and Eagle D-12 f County (EOUO's), 1975-1985 Appendix E — Table 1-A - Town of Vail Forecast Assumptions E-4 1-50, 1-60, 1-7U - Projected Vail Area Skier Visits by Type, 1984-85 to 1999-2000 2-50, 2-60, 2-70 - F.iod Town of Vail Popula- E-5, 9, 13 tion and Househol-'P '­ T,,,'e, 1984-85 to 1999-2000 - 3-50, 3-60, 3-70 - Projected Town of Vail Housing E-7,11,15 Unit Demand by Type, 1984-85 to 1999-2000 _ 4-50, 4-60, 4-70 - Projected Town of Vail Retail E-8,12,16 Sal ,,y Category, 196 4-1985 to 1999-20UO APPENDIX A PAIL COWUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY RESULTS. 0 r� L APPDOIX A - VAIL CO "JNITY QMTIDWIRE - SL"WY FMJLTS 1. Crowth can be accommodated in a variety of ways. Which of the following area or areas do you consider most appropriate? ' i a. In the Village Care area thru redevelgm t, ' if necessary. b. On vacant land in already developed P.bdivisions ` throughout the community. i c. O7 vacant land at the edge of the built-tp area. d. On land suitable for developTent regardless of jownership. t� Total t e. Other: hillsides (no growth on) limit growth and improve wtat we have • Village, Lionshead, Westin do-n valley leave softball fields alone 2. Nhat tape of growth should be encouraged? a. hotel/lodge roomy. b. CaxrniniLm (short -tern rental or long -teen owner/user). c. Torr�. t d. Single family/duplex residences. Le. Ummercial uses. 1 Total LLL f. Other: limit growth, fogs on improving what we have affordable family living space more tine -snare condos recreational facilities low cost housing for locals Strongly Strongly Agree kiree Mleutral Disagree Disagree Total 9 6 3 2 ;2 22 6 10 4 - 1 21 2 4 6 3 4 19 2 6 1 S 7 21 19 26 14 10 14 83 8 5 5 2 2 22 2 2 4 7 6 21 1 8 7 5 1 22 4 7 7 3 1 22 5 7 4 1 1 18 20 29 27 18 11 105 3. What do you like about the Town of Vail? Ambiance ambiance of village core natural setting friendliness of locals mountain character well kept and prosperous people scale -public areas are accessible and naturally landscaped everything freedom the people surroundings - mountains climate mountain location the look of the Vail area neighborhood - community ambiance rural character :..,... setting, location, variety of people and interests summers it's clean, scenic, well planned - small town flavor with cosmopolitan flavor its location natural setting atmosphere design and location original and architecture . Recreation availability froin village to ski mountain (summer and winter) skiing community support for conservation of open spaces skiing recreation (paths and facilities) proximity to nature cultural acti v.i ty open space ,(what little there is) library, Ford Park, tennis Village Core/Lionshead pedestrian core pedestrian areas and Tyrolean design excellent landscaping like pedestrian streets when there are no trucks good atmosphere for tourist business flowers in summer shopping . A-z General Growth/Development size ono variety economic viability controls to keep greedy under control growth potential 1 Government/Public Services tree bus management good building codes 4. What do you find undesirable about Vail as it now exists? Commercial economics of commercial areas lower cost restaurants expensive shops high rents for retail shop owners restaurants too expensive Roads/Parking/Traffic 4-way intersections with bad visibility poor road conditions (Beaver Dam and Forest Road for example) parking in winter traffic control 4-way stop ! . parking commercial vehicles in CCI cars•in core lack of traffic organization lack of core parking in village for work force Village Core/Lionshead quality diminishing - need for upgrade of structures high-rise buildings near ski mountain growing congestion no activity in Lionshead - need vendor carts. night life no cohesion between Vail Village and Lionshead too much core construction during summer months Lionshead overbuilt high rises in old Vail quit tearing up town in summer village activities lack variety - Residential family living space (owner occupied) • housing too expensive A-3 Recreation night time recreation emphasis on adult rather than youth activities teens drinking and disorderly no swimming pool Government/Public Services . public rest taciiitles no rest rooms in restrictions of governmental bureaucracy the willingness of Council to grant variances overbearing of fire and police I-70 - too many cops General Growth/Development too many opportunists wishing to make fast buck and leave the area before many of the problems of overdevelopment occur not growing being all things to all people - sports vs. culture If old Vail goes like Lionshead - it will be a disaster. Hi rises and overbuilding thru variations will ultimately hurt the image and experience of visitors. Stability and control is necessary - looseness fn the plan- ning - zoning — variations is bad. As a condo owner in old Vail, we must keep the open areas open for summer fall and winter use. Because Vail has grown at an usually fast rate and because many developers . wanted a fast buck, it seems that the focus on growth should begin improv- ing what we already have. This concept would help to better utilize our limited space as well as make our town more attractive and cohesive. What has- become of the original architecture and standards of building? Lions - head, in my opinion, will never reach its potential as a town center, a retail center or an arts center. Vail Village looks like its seen its hay - day as the quality of some of the older buildings deteriorates and the new ones, like Lionshead, just don't fit in to the warmth our Village is supposably protraying. As a potential shop owner myself, I am sorry. I can't say that the rents they are asking in town for store space are worth it. I've seen too many good businesses and business people run out of town because of the high costs here. If Town of Vail would realize its the little people who have made a commitment to live and work here who count, we'd be making progress in the right direction. General eye sores signage dogs loose large groups with special rates who feel they can control the village to their liking no major complaints details need attention for quality - the last 1U4 don't take care of everyones needs - just the "haves" tourists A-4 . S. Please indicate your satisfaction with the following services•or facilities. Public Facilities and Services: Sidewalks and Street Maintenance Pbads and. Highways Water Service Fire Protection Sewer System Parks and Recreational facilities and Programs Law Enforce a t Traffic Control Animal Control Insect Control Library Facilities Otter Camwity Facilities and Services Sanitary Land Fills Telephone Service Utility Services Shopping Facilities Professional Services (physicians, laryers) Restaurants Tot al R-5 Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Total 8 4 10 22 8 3 13 .: 24 12 a 3 23, > 16 S 1 22 14 7 _ 21 14 S 4 23 7 13 2 22 4 6 13 23 s 11 7 23. S 13 2 20 19 2 - 21 4 14 3 21 10 10 2 22 8 10 3 21 10 4 8 22 13 7 2 22 20 1 1 22 177 123 74 374 6. Of the categories of public and community facilities and services above, which do you consider to be the most important to you? Public Facilities and Services traffic at peak periods road maintenance snow plowing street repair maintain pedestrian core with delivery access bike paths, walking paths parks and recreation facilities more golf open space along base of ski mountain more golf more community facilities - parks, swimming pool, etc. library fire and police protection animal control other Community Facilities and Services, utility services restaurants professional more shopping facilities are needed but not big mall professional services V.A. ('the mountain) A-6 40 0 E 0 r } APPENDIX $ - ADDITIONAL GOALS (Related to Other Elements of the Comprehensive Plan) Parks/Open Space 1. Vail should develop the parks system. I 2. Forest Service properties should remain as open space or may be used for public or recreational facility development; where appropriate. 3. More bike paths, which are separated from walking trails, should be j developed. ( 4. Open space areas and Gore Creek should be preserved and left unde- veloped. # 5. High quality landscaping should be encouraged in all development pro- jects. Recreation Facilities ! 1. More youth activities should be provided by the Town. 2. Construction of a public pool should be a high priority for the Town. 3. Nonskier, family activities should be encouraged. 4. Cultural experiences should be enhanced.. 5. Construction of a visitor center should be a high priority for the Town. Transportation 1.• Vail should improve opportunities for group transportation from Denver to Vail: 2. Parking and bus service should be improved. 3. Adequate parking should be provided to accommodate day skier growth. 4. The traffic flow, especially obstructions caused by truck traffic, should be improved in the core. S. Pedestrian/vehicle conflicts should be reduced through transportation improvements. 5. Surface parking should be reduced and provided underground where -possi- ble. 7. Construction of a people caover should be a high priority for the Town. B-1 C� • is Economic Development 1. The community should.help create a business environment which can serve middle income clientele and accommodate affordability for small businesses. j 2. New growth should also be made affordable for families living and working in Vail. 3. The Town of Vail should consider developing some type of mechanism to control tenant mix, so that a balance between tourist and convenience t; type of commercial uses is maintained. E s-z E 0 0 - APPENDIX C - ADDITIONAL SOURCES STUDIED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT 1. "The Vail Village.- Urban Design Guide Plan", June 1980. - 2. "Vail Village Design Considerations", June 1980. 3. "The Vail Lionshead - Urban Design Guide Plan", June 198U. C. "Vail Lionshead Design Considerations", June 198U. 5. "Lionshead Improvement District - Economic Benefit Analysis. Addendum" - Larry Smith 6 Company, LTD., February 1983. 6. •Zoning Code & Official Zoning Flap - Town of Vail, 1985. 7. Land Transfer Tax Ordinance - Town of Vail. 8. "Parks and Recreation Feasibility Analysis" - Communi•ty Uevelopment Dept., 1984. 9. "Vail Bikeway Plan" - Recreation Dept., 1984. 10. "Vail Traffic Counts" - Centennial Engineering, Inc., March 1986. 11. "Final Report I-70/Vail Feasibility Study" - Centennial Engineering, Inc., April 1984. 12. "Transit Development Plan 1978-1983 - Summary Report" - Coinnunity Development Dept., 1978. 13. "Transit Development Plan Update, 1987-1991" - Town of Vail, April 1986. 14. "Statement of Reasons of Town of Vail Appeal - Vail Land Exchange Proposal" - Town of Vail, 1986. 15. "Vail Master Development Plan" - Vail Associates, Inc. and Rosall, Reamen & Cares, Inc., October 1985. 16. "Transportation Work Program: Vail Master Plan" - Rosall, Remnen & Cares, July 1985. 17. "Parking and Bus Utilization - Vail Mountain Master Plan Update" - _ Rosall, Remnen, Cares, January 1986. 18. "Air Quality Analysis - Expansion of Vail Mountain and Development of the Valley - 1986 to 1993", Air Sciences, Inc., October 1985. APPENDIX D ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW OF THE TOWN OF VAIL 0 0 APPENDIX D: "ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW OF THE TOWN OF VAIL IINTRODUCTION From its opening season in 1962-1963, the ski industry has fueled and shaped the growth and development of the Town of Vail. Today, Vail is the largest ski resort in the State of Colorado. Although composed of only one-fourth of the total permanent population of Eagle County, Vail provides approximately 60% of all jobs and accounts for approximately 501 of all retail 'sales in the county. Vail is clearly .the center and driving force of economic activity in Eagle County. i The following economic and demographic overview begins with a .review of historical skier visits to Vail, Beaver Creek and the State of Colorado. Next, historical population and household growth trends as well as housing and household characteristics in Vail and Eagle County are examined. Finally, the economy of. Vail and Eagle County is analyzed 'through histori- cal employment, income, business development and retail data. Skier Visits Skier visits are the leading indicator of the Vail economy. From 55,000 skier visits during the 1962-1963 opening season, Vail experienced nearly 1.3 million skier visits over the past 1985-1986 season as presented in Table 1. This increase represents a substantial 14.5% annual growth rate over Vail's twenty-three year history. With increased competition, varying snow conditions and changing skier demographics, Vail's skier visits have r fluctuated over the past decade; nevertheless, Vail has shown a steady 2.0% annual growth rate over the past decade, 2.7% over the past four seasons, and 2.2% since last season. Vail consistently increased its share of skier visits to the State of Colorado from 10.0% in 1962-1963 to 18.8% in 1976-1977. Since the 1976- 1977 season, however, Vail's share has declined over time to 13.7% by the 1985-1986 season. Much of this decreased share can be directly attributed to the opening of the nearby Beaver Creek ski resort during the 19SU-1981 season. When combined, Vail and Beaver Creek have captured between 17.41, and 19.0% of the State's skier visits over the past six seasons. There- fore, a significant proportion of State skier visits continue to occur in the Vail Valley, but no longer exclusively at Vail Mountain. ■! R !„�■ a;■�■ss���■■e.s,■�a:_!=e !, •. !f| !■9§■■■5�■2=§■■■a2■§§z#■ £ �] °§ ;�! ��£#�#fie■s§�£§■■kg■£K&a$ �� . - - ! �| #K;;\# •. !, . § . e!■2a1 .. . _ :�� �■=■qs#■,■5,��■■_,�..�_! �: . . ^ §. -- @� - . - ;�=:■K■!E■2se■■##■!#■S!■ `3©3 ■a!! ■e■z2E;■§:=:^.=a.. �! eat©"^•£=�==s/■■§ak�#7<! !s ■■#m■,k�Z-=1t:::Ea==e= . ! � ■------&--sass&■!lkR2§E| ! !!|% }$2 ¢� � %} i �Q�2��■@;�±§"`�����3l��a •_ � � � .� � �� _ . » __: u , , , , ,, , TABLE 2: HISTORICAL POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS IN VAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY, 1970-1986 Averagg Annual Change 1970 1980 1986* 1910-1986 198U-1986 (April 1) (April 1) (April 1) (16 Years) (6 Years) Vail Termanent Population 485 2,261 4,500 250 . 370 Permanent Households 191 988 1,630 90 110 Average Persons Per Household 2.54 2.28 2.76 Eagle County Permanent Population 7,498 13,320 18,200 670 810 Permanent Households 2,302 5,217 6,230 250 170 Average Persons Per Household 3.25 2.54 2.92 Vail as a Percentage of Eagle County f t Permanent Population 6.5% 17,0% 24.7% 37.3% 45.7% Permanent Households 7.0% 26.2% 36.0% 64.7% *Estimate. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census; Colorado State Department of Local Affairs, Division of.Local Government; Eagle County Planning Office; Town of Vail, Department of Community Development; and THK Associates, Inc. 1 population and Households Typical of many Western Slope ski resort communities, Vail has experienced rapid population and household growth since 1970. As shown in Table 2, from a permanent population of 485 in 1970, Vail's permanent population increased to 2.261 by 1980 and is currently estimated at 4,500 in 1986. These figures represent an increase of 250 persons per year, or a 14.9% annual growth rate, over the sixteen year period and 370 persons per.year, or a 12.2% annual growth rate, over the most recent six year period. Households in Vail have also increased at a rapid pace from 191 in 1970 to 988 in 1980 to the current estimate of 1,630 in 1986. These increases represent 90 additional households per year, or a 14.3% annual growth, rate, over the sixteen year period and 110 additional households per year, or a 8.7% annual growth rate, over the most recent six year period. The slower growth rate of households in recent years reflects the increase in the average household size in Vail. Although both state and national trends show a continuous decline in the average household size since 197U, an increase in the average household size is not unusual in a resort community such as Vail. More persons per household portrays the preference of employees to live in Vail but the reality of a limited supply of afford- able employee housing. Eagle County has also experienced strong population and household growth since 1970 although not at the same. rapid pace as the Town of Vail. The. population of Eagle County increased at a 5.7% annual rate from 7,498 in 197U to an estimated 18,200 in 1986. This growth was, nevertheless, signi- ficantly faster than the State of Colorado growth rate of 2.6% over the same period. Households in Eagle County increased from 2,302 in 1970 to an estimated 6,230 in 1986, representing a 6.4% annual growth rate. As in Vail, the average household size in Eagle County decreased over the 1970 to 1980 period, but increased over the 1980 to 1986 period. The Town of Vail has substantially increased its share of the population and households in Eagle County from 1970 to 1986. Vail's permanent popula- tion comprised 6.5% of Eagle County's total population in 1970 but rose to 24.7% by 1986. Similarly, Vail'-s households accounted for 7.0% of Eagle County's total households in 1970 but rose to 26.2% by 1986. In recent years, approximately one-half of all growth in Eagle County has occurred in Vail. D-3 The housing stock and households of Vail and Eagle County are characteristic of _ communities and counties dominated by the tourism industry. Table 3 indicates that second -home households comprise a significant proportion of .the total year- round housing stock in both Vail and Eagle County. Whereas in the State of - Colorado only 1.9% of the total year-round homes,, in Vail 65.7% and in Eagle housing stock is classified as second County 33.7% of the total year-round housing stock are in the second -home category. Both Vail and Eagle County have high pro- portions of renter -occupied households with 59.5% and 43.1%, respectively. In comparison, in the State 35.5% of households are renter -occupied.. The generally young and mobile population attracted to ski resort communities results in a high proportion of nonfamily .households. In Vail, 57.4% of households are 'nonfamily whereas in Eagle County 43.1% are nonfamily. Only 30.04'of households in the State, however, are nonfamily. TABLE 3: HOUSING AND HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS OF VAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY, 1970-1980 .Eagle County Vail 19)U . 19bu 19W Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Housing Units 3,257 106.0% 11,060 100.0% 6,029 100.0% Seasonal and Migratory 455 14.0; 389 3.5% 197 3.91 Year-round 2,802 86..0; 10,671 96.5% 4,832 96.1p Year -Round Housing Units 2,802 Permanent Households 2,302 100.0% 10,671 100.0% 82.2% 5,223 49.0% 4,832 990 . 100.06. 20.5% Second -home Households* 295 10.54 3,599 33.74 3,174 65.74 Other 205 7.3% 1,849 17.34 668 13.84 Permanent Households 2,302 100.0% 5,223 100.0% 990 100.0% Family Households 1,828 79.4% 2,973 56.9% 422 42.6`1, Non -family Households 474 20.6% 2-250 43.1% 568 57.4% Average Persons per 3.25 2.54 2.28 Household Permanent Households 2,302 100.0% r,223 100.0% 990 100.014 Owner -occupied. 1,269 55.1% 2,973 56.9. 401 40.5% Renter -occupied 1,033 44.9% 2,250 43.1% 589 59.5% * Second -home households are defined as housing units held for occasional use regardless of the annual periods of occupancy. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census and THK Associates, Inc. D-5 The Economy The driving force of a local economy is those industries, known as basic industries, which derive their support from nonlocal dollars. These new dollars brought into the community generate income in the wholesale/retail trade, services, construction, transportation, communications, public utilities, real estate and finance sectors. In most rural economies, agri- culture, mining, manufacturing and tourism account for the great majority of basic economic activity. Within Eagle County, basic economic activity 1 i.s centered almost exclusively in tourism led by the ski industry of Vail. 1 Reflecting the rapid growth of the ski industry in Vail, Table 4 shows the substantial increase in the Eagle County employment base from 1975 to 1986. Over this period, the average annual employment increased from 4,12.4 in 1975 to 11,085 in 1985, representing a significant annual growth rate of •10.4% or 700 new jobs per year. New jobs in Eagle County formed at .the rate of 740 per year over the 1982'to 1985 period and 800 over the 1984 to 1985 period, reflecting continued healthy economic growth. The dominance of the tourism economy in Eagle County is evidenced by the i composition of employment. The services and retail trade sectors have con- sistently provided the majority of jobs in Eagle County with 73.1% in 1975, 62.5% in 1980 and 61.4% in 1985. The finance, insurance and real estate, government and construction sectors all place a distant second, each sector with approximately 100 of all jobs in 1985. Approximately M; of all jobs in Eagle County are estimated to be either directly or indirectly related to the ski industry.* The center of economic activity in Eagle County is the Town of Vail. Over the 1975 to 1985 period, approximately 60% of all jobs in Eagle County were located in Vail. As presented in Table 5, Vail's employment base increased from 2,470 in 1975 to 6,870 in 1985 for an annual growth rate of 10.8%. or 440 jobs per year. Over the 1982 to 1985 period, new jobs in Vail formed at the rate of 460 per year while nearly 500 new jobs were created over the 1984 to 1985 period. Although data by industry were not available for the Town of Vail, it is expected that the .proportion of services and retail (_ trade sector employment it higher in Vail than for Eagle County•as a whole. Personal income data also reflect the dominance of tourism in the Eagle County economy. Table 6 indicates that personal income in Eagle County increased from $39.5 million in 1974 to $198.5 million in 1984. Approxi- mately 80e of total personal income in Eagle County is estimated to be L 'derived either directly or indirectly from the ski industry.* The majority of personal income has consistently been derived from the services and retail trade sectors with 43.4% in 1974, 47.4% in 1979 and 50.91 in 1984. The emergence of Vail as a "mature resort" is evidenced by the decline in the proportion of construction sector income and the increase in the pro- portion of services sector income in r•ncent years. In 1979, construction represented 21.4% of personal income; by-1984, this proportion had declined j to 17.5 In contrast, services accounted for. 27.9% of personal income in I 1979; by 1984, this proportion had increased to 31.5%. *CSCUSA, The Contribution of Skiing to the Colorado Economy: Eagle County Case Study, 1962, p.v. D-6 •Drl +aulwssy y111 Pus 1luardota•a0 L11uww1 jo tuau1+1040 't01A to u"Ol tluanAol0u1 p t AO4f1 io luarl+sdao Opr+olol :a)+eo$ I •gep lua"lolda SL61 a43 ul laaAolO.A 1uar.+aA06 11"1 put ale1S jo OOlsnhra 441 61 a^P a6t+aAe lrn.ut Irni)t ur41 +a46lN.. 'Saa4Qt&.4 11301 put as+lt • is+apai sapnlwl luaw+a.og :5961-616t 'Aaa100" 0"1 put 1e+apal APO lapnl).l luauwn.o7 :9161 _ •taaLatOua te+apaj Alms swj ul luar ,1.03 -AL61'i161. K[ oil TO .. 9f9 560'll 902'01 9/Y6 sill@ title 696'1 tSr'1 CO►'9 ete's lot'1 ►It'/ V1o1 Alunoy SN 6t2 to let LI 202 ..Sol 2►I'1 9S01 01011 ozll'1 910't SSO't 099 lLf 66 LL 99 .luaw+a•00 to S 12It L61 1e1'1 Z12% W111 SC9'1 1a►'1 I11'1 tO112 CIo'1 6L6'I 011% ►5S't taluaS 11a 91it 791` l ill Sl!'l 91C•t 160'I ,. 2oo'C (is 9S6'2 191 9►[ 21S -its61► Sir 99C. 22C ilq q tray •a)us+nsul 'a).ta I 6 of S! 21 tkt S11 161'2 o0S'1 16►'1 062'2 D6o'2 661'9 999'1. 090% apr+l llryaf it e[ 92 12 66? . 061 ►6 0[2 06 ►ol to 9S1 69 6S1 9S OSt to, ftl 62 ft 52 aPra1 alto laWl /2 fl 1 7 662 I42 591 6S1 O12 (191 6C2 SS2 ►f 2l 19 1411; OR Due •01191+04sre+l. 11 - ►C 09 Ll 6o1't atoll ato't Well S10'1 606 251 LS9 Cr2 909 DS1 612 6u1+n1)einurl/ 7 0 0 1 22 71 91 - 12 CL i2 01 LI SI 91P SLC ►1 11 uoll)natluo3 i a [ 7 61 so 91 60 09 9S IC 9C U OC 62 6•1.IN lal+aylp '[alla+ol a+nt lnaµ6y Aral 1) 5161'►161 (t+eaA C) S"i-1 10f (1n34 Sl (1+sa), oil $061.0061 So6l'SL61 S861 6061 [e6t Le6t 1W61 0961 6161 offit 1161 NOT SL6l 4lsnput a6rt43 trnwll a lisay - Se61'SL6l "ON 10 llYld &NY Atli SOONI A6 JNIN101iNL trOMUY lOYeIAV 11N0e 11OY1 W31NOLSIN :t 116Y1 t�wapq le.wfe Mee�r�we�� �� f/46r� n.w�t r..•+� r.r+.� twr..� �._..� �l ... I I I I 1 TABLE 5: HISTORICAL AVERAGE ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK FOR VAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY, 1975-1985 Year Eagle County Vail 1975 4,120 2,470 1976 4,700 2,820 1977 5,020 3,010 1978 6,400 3,84b 1979 7,350 4,410 1980 7,970 4,780 1981 8,38D 5,190 1982 8,870 5,500 1983 9,250 5,730 1964 10,290 6,38U 1985 11,090 6,870 Average Annual Change 1975-1985 (10 Years) 700* - 440* 1980-1985 (5 Years) 620 420 1982-1985 (3 Years) 740 460 1984-1985 (1 Year) 800 490 * Higher than actual annual average due to the exclusion of state and local government employees in the 1975 employment data. Source: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment; Town of Vail, Department of Community Development, Transit Development Plan 1978-1983; Rosall Remmen and Cares, Inc., transportation worx Program; V.A. Master Plan, July 1985; and'THK Associates, Inc. 1 I I - I _" I`""' ►'_" !""- i ,....... ........ ....,,.. �..� .....r ,.� aa�,( aara.al ..n..1 ""') , TAKE 65 HIS10A)CAL fAOlf COUNTY p[ASONAL INCONC 19 1NOUStiT Aim nAC( Or War, (loDO's), 1974-19114 Ave►a!e Anovel Chg." [arnl,gi Dy Industry 1974 1975 1976 1971 1978 1979 1100 MI. 1982 1983 1974-1961 I984 (10 Tears) lfl!-1l64 (S Tprf) !!6t-tf84 (] Tears) 1961-ef84 ([ feet) Far- 11.160 171212 3551 S471 11.001 19o7 $869 1f22 1876 1757 PIll (ISO) 042) (1401 $21 S43,79) 155.373 165,776 S19,197 $101.601 1121,367 SM.572 1155.4110 $168.211 1197,159 11S,960 118.433 111.712 129,5S2 ^rlea to 117.361 138,6tO $48.609 157.710 170,789 197,809 $108.795 112S,993 $111.227 1147,819 11I5.792 $14,243 116,S9T 114.600 S21.913 Agrlculture, forestry, flsherles NO 1413 11.179 NO NO 110 1t.939 S2,984 11.271 $3.011 IM41 SI24 $548 106 1170 141n1rg NO 13.384 $3.442 NO ND NO 110 N0 (11S1) SZ41 (1190) (1201 (f40) '066) (14191 CaMLIUCtlon O jII S5.)41 16,321 S11.908 116.710 122.365 S71,111) 510.42S 129.251 $31,363 134.704 1I.89f 12.458 $1.426 13.541 Nanu7a(turin9 11,793 $2.310 12,781 MOM 11.759 14.123 15.004 16.061 $6.543 $6.146 16.515 $470 S490 Sill 1471 Traa,portallon and Utilliles 11,8S7 11.843 Odes 12.598 13,34S 54,861 14.425 IS,278 11.602 18.616 $10.411 1456 11.110 11.712 11,73S Uholrs.le Trade Val 9467 1473 1447 1190 11.111 No 11.100 11.656 12.IIS 12.702 U42 1)04 Sill $587 Retail trade 16.451 19.265 110.316 S11.508 S1S,402 120,40S 12S.$66 124.006 $31.911 • 134.401 136.511 $3.206 11.621 13.SO2 0.910 ftnance. Insurance, Real [State POSY $2.418 11.SO4 14,272 16,016 $0.304 19.46S NO If.611 512.122 S17.487 SI.S11 11.937 IS.821 15.36S Services 110.697 113.494 S16.244 119.994 W.116 179.148 $37,072 143.t40 147,378 149.682 162,5S7 $$.166 96.682 17,11! 372.E>S fwver-ent 14,804 $5.791 16.764 11.9.56 $1.000 110.194 112,842• SIS.S79 119.253 120.141 $21.917 '. 11.717 12.237 12.133 11.S79 Cm at; total 139.521 146.075 SSS,936 166,247 $00.878 $104.590 1122,134 $142.494. 1156."11 116O.9t4 11l6.547 . $IS.= 116.191 116.014 12f,S)3 Sc:r¢t7 U.S. 0epartwnt of Ceimm ce. lureao of Economic Analysll and 1HA Associates, Inc. The growth and composition of business establishments in Eagle County is r another indication of the strength and orientation of the area's economy. 11 Table 7 shows that in 1974, there were,365 firms in Eagle County. The number of firms increased to 695 by 1980 and reached 1,022 by 1984, or 657 new business establishments over the ten year period. Reflecting the tour- ism orientation of the economy, retail trade and service business estab- lishments dominate, accounting 'for 58.9% (215 firms) in 1974, 51.8% (360 firms) in 1980, and 51.8% (530 firms) in 1984. Although the proportion of retail trade and service firms has declined slightly over the.ten year period, it has been offset by a significant increase in the proportion of finance, insurance and real estate firms from 9.6% (35 firms) in 1974 to t 13.8% (141 firms) in 1984. IThe vast majority of business establishments in Eagle County are small; ,nearly 90% of all firms employ fewer than 20 persons. The largest employer in the county is Vail Associates, Inc. with peak employment of over 2,000. Other major employers (10U-500 employees) are concentrated in the lodging, restaurant and real estate industries and the Vail Valley Medical Center. The cyclical nature of a tourism economy based on the winter ski season is clearly demonstrated in Table 8. 'Over the 1975 to 1985 period, two-thirds of total retail sales in Vail consistently occurred during the five month winter ski season of November through March with the remaining one-third occurring during the seven month off season. Overall, Vail has consistent- ly accounted for approximately one-half of total retail sales in Eagle County on an annual basis. As expected, this proportion is substantially • higher during the ski season and substantially lower during the off season. . The influence of the ski industry on Eagle County retail sales is pro- found. Approximately 90% of total retail sales in Eagle County are esti- mated to be either directly or indirectly related to the ski industry.* The high level of suraner tourism in Vail, for example, is generated by the ski -oriented amenities, lodging, second -home industry, retail shops and - marketing base. * CSCUSA, p.v. 0-10 s $ o offffe • Oeef..O • e of of pse p p QQ I 3� p a p e p g 0 • p• e g e e 4 _ w _ p 0 0 0 0 0 p M ^ w w t f O a p O O w O O O O O w O « w • O O O w O O O _ MO O �_ V •-•- w-f N O b p• p. w �+ N N e O O O O O f � S j� 7i - Y r ep - _- ti � p� w ti M w X N p«_ w-_ • N r S>a S' - x oo_ z nw x n_p ^_ -« w .4 o w g Z F 8 4 F1✓Y- TABLE 8: HISTORICAL RETAIL SALES 8T MONTH IN VAIE ARC CAQU COIRITT {SD00's). 1975-198S 1975 1980 1985 Ea41e Co. Tail Vail as a £ogle Co. Val Val] as a Eagle Co. viI Vail at a Percent Of Percent of percent of Month Number Percent Number Percent Eagle Co. Number Percent Number Percent Eagle Co. Number percent Number Percent Eagle Co. January 8.803 11.21 S.781 14.1E 65.71 23.039 10.81 15.453 15.21 62.12 34.134 10.51 21.076 13_OS 61.72 February 8.085 10.2% 6.104 14.92 75.5% 23.DS2- 10.8% 15,412 15.21 66.91 33.982 10.51 22.369 13.81 65.0% March 8.268 10.51 7.258 17.71 07.81 26,170 17.31 17.754 17.5% 67.99 48.443 14.91 30.624 19.91 63.2% April 10.378 13.11 7.111 5.1% 20.31 12.228 5.71 6.481 6.42 53.0% 24.167 7.59 13.186 B.IS 54.62 May 4.401 5.61 733 1.82 16.71 8.161 3.8% 2.2S6 2.21 27.61 12.667 3.91 3.533 2.21 27.81 June 3.470 4.41 1.57S 3.8% 45.41 13.492 6.3% 4.264 4.21 31.62 19.475 6.01 7.266 4.51 37.39 July 4,651 5.91 2.SS9 6.2z 55.01 16,266 7.61 6.399 6.32 39.31 22.995 7.11 10.333 6.41 44.9% August 6.593 8.4i 3.146 7.79 47.71 16.890 7.91 6.888 6.82 40.8% 24.925 7.71 11.354 7.0% 45.61 September 5,783 7.31 1.874 4.0. 32.4Y 15.776 7.41 4,441 4.41 28.2s 24.219 7.511 7.856 4.91 32.4% October 3.714 4.71 1..217 3.01 32.81 13.052 6.11 3.298 3.31 25.31 1S.711 4.n 4.363 2.n 27.81 ' November 4.561 S.81 1.995 4.91 41.71 13,366 6.31 3.461 3.4% 26.05 17.330 5.33 5.693 3.51 32.9i Oecember 10.216 12.91 6.735 16.4% 65.9% 31.334 14.71 15.340 15.11 49.0% 46.125 14.21 24.218 15.0% S2.51 Total 78.927 IDO.DI 41,088 100.01 52.1i 212,828 IOO.01 101.467 100.01 47.7% 324.195 ID0.01 161.011 100.02 49.9% Source: Colorado Department of Revenue; Town of Tail. Department of Community Development: and THK Associates. Inc. APPENDIX E TOWN OF PAIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY L• L Le I 1 APPENDIX E: TOWN OF VAIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY 1 Forecasts for the Town of Vail were prepared by THK Associates in order to assist the Department of Community Development in their efforts to develop a Master Plan for the Town of Vail. In general, the methodology utilizes estimated skier, population, housing and retail characteristics in order to project additional housing unit and, retail ,space demands for the Town of Vail through the year 2000. All assumptions are based on existing studies and surveys available from the Department of Community Development, Vail Associates, Inc., Vail Resort Association, and Colorado Ski Country USA with adjustments made based on review and discussion with the Vail land Use Plan Task Force members. Note that all estimates utilized in this approach_ represent current conditions in the. Town of Vail; no attempt is made to adjust current conditions to reflect subjective "preferred" conditions. The following is a brief overview of .the sources and methodology employed in the Town of Vail forecasts. The methodology keys off the projected design day* skier visits made in the Vail Master Development Plan (VA, Inc. and•RRC, 1985). From the design day skier visits, average day, peak day and total skier visits are calculated based on conversion formulas provided by VA, Inc. The design day skier visits are then allocated into day, destination and local skiers based on proportions available from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study (Gage Davis Associates, 1980) and the Report of the Vail Economic Develop- ment Commission (1985). The day visitor and overnight visitor populations and permanent population are derived from different methodologies. The day skier visits and desti- nation skier visits are adjusted upward to reflect non -skier members of a skiing party. These adjustments result in the day visitor population and the overnight visitor population. The non -skier adjustment factors come from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study, the "Village Study Assumptions" (RRC, 198b).and the Department or Community Development. The Town of Vail permanent population is, based on the historical ratio of the permanent populattion (State Division of Local Government, 1985 and Depart- ment of Community Development) to the total skier visits. The number of households is then determined by dividing the overnight visitor population and the permanent population by the weighted average number of persons per household in visitor lodging and permanent housing, respectively. * "Design Day" is defined as that level of skier attendance which will be nxceedcH ln�, nf, the days o" the ski season. E-I The additional housing unit demand forecasts incorporate numerous assump— tions from several studies and surveys. Assumptions pertaining to the dis- tribution of permanent population by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate are from the study Affordable dousing Eaale County-1984 (Eagle County Community Develop- ment Department and RRC, 1984). Assumptions regarding the distribution of overnight visitors by housing unit type, the average number of persons per household by unit type, and the occupancy rate by unit type are from The Vail Mountain/Gore Valley Capacity Study, Department of Community Dever ment and VRA. To calculate the additional housing units required by type each year, the additional overnight visitor households and permanent house- holds per year are distributed according to the proportion of each unit type indicated by previous studies. Concurrently, additional units by type are adjusted upward by the appropriate occupancy rate. The retail sales forecasts for the Town of Vail are based'on average day skier visits rather than design day skier visits. Average day skier visits are used because the goal is to determine the total winter visitor sales over the entire five month ski season rather than looking at sales on a "one day" design day. Day skiers and destination skiers have different total dollar expenditures per day, and the allocation of their total expen- ditures among various retail categories is also different. The day skier and destination skier expenditure patterns are from The Contribution of Skiinq to the Colorado Economy (CSCUSA, 1984 Update) and are adjusted upward to reflect the pricing structure of Vail (per Vail Land Use Plan • Task Force discussion 7/17/86). To arrive at the total winter visitor sales, the day skier and destination skier expenditures by retail category are aggregated. The "Town of Vail Monthly Retail Sales" (TOV, 1986) was utilized to determine the.proportion of total winter sales made by the local population, the ratio of total winter sales to total annual sales, and the proportion of total annual sales made by the local population. Industry standards of dollar support per square foot of ret:,�l space are applied to the lodging, eating and drinking, and entertainment categories for the day and destination skiers and to the total annual sales to the local population category in order to translate the average annual additional dollar support into average annual additional square feet of retail space required. It should be noted that the terms "local population" and "permanent popula- tion" do not define the same group. Retail purchases in the Town of Vail are made both by the permanent population of Vail and by residents of sur- rounding communities. Since it is the total additional dollar support .in the Town of Vail which determines' the total additional retail space required, it is irrelevant for the purposes of these forecasts from where. those dollars come. Therefore, .the local population refers to both the permanent population of Vail and residents of surrounding conxnunities who make retail purchases in the Town of Vail. E-2 The following tables present the quantitative assumptions incorporated into the methodology and the results of the three series of forecasts. Since it is the destination skier which has the greatest impact on the Town of Vail in terms.of lodging and retail requirements, three different proportions of destination skiers were utilized in order to determine a range of values S for planning purposes. Table 1-A shows the quantitative assumptions used in the methodology. Note that the only variables which change in the -three scenarios are the propor- tions of destination skiers' and day skiers. Tables 1-50 to 4-50 present the results of the 50% proportion of destination skiers scenario, Tables 1-60 to 4-60 present the results of the 60% proportion of destination skiers scenario, and Tables 1-70 to 4-70 present the results of the 70% proportion of destination skiers scenario. For each scenario, forecasts of skier visits by type, population and households by type, housing units by type, and retail expenditures by category are made. E-3 0 TAILS 1-As TOVM OF TAIL /DR"WT ASSUMPTIONS - Calthaar kill" boy Sell" Tamp SttaraADar . I9N ties INS _ 12;360 - ]fis - use t!u• 12,610 311t - 11a7 l!tl 13,060 - 1941 - 19I1 flat 13.D60 , 19" -, 11D! His 13,a50 1 fit - 190D t990 13,160 - 19f0 - 1V91 11f1 13,a60 - 1991 - 1192 I"I 11.300 N. - 1»2 - iff3 1993 NO - 3993 1f94 111116 14,700 • 71194 • 3295 Itts i6,2D0 - 1f9s lots 3"A I1,6DO - lfu • stir u97 ts,wo list . If11 list 16, D00 "- lfft • 1fH 1999 I6,400 -" )ITS - 2DOD 200D 1:.$00 - - 1LIe• DOn.f •140n4: Des 11- Dar t.SA _ 14•411 qe 011 01f19a I. Dar 1.9s . TOtaI DAYS ISO Mpn. Oar 0.06 - 4111. o.0 /err-ent F.P. 0.0036 0.0019 1prlft short Trpt of Merll nq - Aler [u•rrnt AnnwF Ma./M+n hrsans Single/ TO- And Ca •Ar.e•nt+n: Snare Increase Share Per irnrt 0„042 hens Cents a Lie91n9 TOW Pe•n1-e^t 0.2 2.1S) 0.32S 0.005 0.59 p 1 Pap.lun,t 3.3 3_I 2.5 0 Du D.2 Ofst•^a11en 0.4 0 0.6 3.5156 0.03 0,12 O.54 0.31 1 POD. !>rnit S.2 5.2 5.2 t.a2 0".cl-cyt Visitor Pr•u ne nt . SIn11e Z, O.SS OJS TO. 0.55 0.45 Apt•/Canto 6.55 O.1S l of gln9 0.65 Awro of Slier Newt Sales Dal lr Lttt IS, fOttD. puff a Enter• Other Cho rf t tfrlltitlt Eeoenitl Tttatt Wool MnLAI I0491n1 Drinl fnq til Otent Aftatl L-IlAnh.Al m, 331.00 o.s7s o.Dzs D,as o a.: a a.1Ts Drl unat+On st5s. oo D. sea o.Du D.on D.2s6 o.19r o.ul o.3A1 V1Ater/A..aI 0.61 Savrte: IO-n Of Va 11. Drwtaent Of co --fly Ofrfleprent; 1411 Altatlattl. ins.; vast Rtlort AS/OCilliOn; Vast Lan1 Via Pla, Tail fortes E OIOra to Of pf rtrenl of I..' Affflrl, 01.111On Or Laul DOTerntent; TA. IOC, aM ARC. TAIL MASTtt DEVELOPMENT CZAR, III$; W ge DAtil A 11.11Atn, THE rA [1 1aVMTAiVWAI 1ALL11 CA/1C111 STODT, 1990, INC. VILLACE STOAT ASSUMPTtM, 1913; ALPoll Of I%t TAIL ICD0pe1C 1.110PRE% CDMIII ON, t9IS; 11911 Co.ntr Cerrunllr Dfrf1OPw^t 0ee4rtnent SON INC. Arr01DULl MC05IM Ual CODNIT, 19$4; CSCUSA, Phi g074110110M a SC1104 10 U1 COIOtADO iCDMDMTI 1984 MAIN; I" TRC AµOCtatel. let. Table 1-50: PROJECTED VAIL AREA SKIER VISITS 8Y TYPE, 1984-I965 10 1999-2000 Calendar Average Day Design Day Peak Day Season Year Total Skiers/Day Skiers/Day Skiers/Oar 1984 - 1985 1985 1.223.450 8.160 12.560 15.910 1985 - 1986 1986 1.250,000 8.230 12.68Q 16.OS0 1986 - MY 1981 1.294.7711 8.480 13.060 16.540 1981 - 1989 1989 1,319.750 3,480 13.060 16.540 1968 - 1989 1989 11358.300 8,730 13.450 17.020 2989 - 1990 1990 1.373,100 9.000 13.860 17.550 1990 - 1991 1991 1.373,700 9.000 13,860 17.550 1991 - 1992 1992 3.393.500 9.290 14,300 18.120 1992 - 1993 1993 1.432.500 9.550 14.700 16.620 1993 - 1994 1994 1.432.SDO 9.550 14,700 10.620 1994 - 1995 199S 1.480.500 9.870 15.200 19.250 1995 - 1996 1996 I.C,'.9.500 Ia. 130 I5,6D0 19.150 1996 - 1997 1997 1.519,500 10.130 15.600 19.150 1997 - 1998 1999 1.S58,500 10.390 I6.000 20.260 1998 - 1999 1999 1.617.000 10.780 16.600 21.020 1999 - 1000 2000 1.617,000 10.780 16.6DD 21.020 Average Annual Change: (1985- 2000) 26.240 170 270 340 Source: INK Associates. Inc. Projected Skier Visitor Characteristics Dest- Day Percent nation Percent Local Percent 3.770 30.01 6.280 50.01 2.5:0 20.09 3,800 30.01 - 6,710 50.91 2,510 20.01 3.920 30.01 6.530 50.01 2.6iv 20.02 3,920 30,Oi 6.530 30,01 2.610 20.01 4.040 30.01 -. 6.710 SO.01 2.S80 19.91 4.160 30.01 6.930 $0.01 2.770 20.01 4.160 10.01 6.930 50.0% 2,770 20,01 4.290 30.0% 1.150 50.02 2.8Sv 20,01 4.410 30.01 7.150 50,01 2.9;0 20,01 4,410 30.O2 7.350 SODA 2,950 20.0% 4,560 30.01 7.600 50.01 3,0;O 20.0I 4,680 30.01 7,800 50.01 3,120 20.0% 4.680 30.OI 1,600 SO.Oi 3,12C 20.0% 4.800 30.0% 8,000 50.01 3,2::3 20.01 4,90D 30.0% 8.300 50.0% 3.1-� Molt 4.980 30.02 .8.300 50.02 3,323 20.01 80 29.61 130 48.1% 7u 18.53 Table 2-50: PROJECTED TOWN Of VAIL POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE. 1984-198S TO 1999-2000 Population Households Calendar Day Overnight Overnight Season Year Visitors Visitors Permanent visitors Permanent 1984 - 1985 I98S 4.010 7,660 4.400 2,130 1,6CO 1985 - 1986 - 1986 1987 1986 1987 4.C40. 4.170 7.730 7.960 4,500 4,670 2,150 2,220 11630 1.1C0 1987 - 1988 1988 4,170 7.960 4.760 2,220 1,730 1988 - I989 1989 4,300 8.210 4.910 2.290 1,780 1989 - 1990 1990 4,430 8,450 4,970 2,360 1.810 1990 - 1991 1991 4,430 8,450 4,970 2,360 1,810 1991 - 1992 1992 4,560 8.720 5,050 2,430 1,830 1992 - 1953 1993 4,690 8.960 5,200 21500 1,890 1993 - 1994 1994 4,690 8,950 5,200 2,500 1,590 1994 - 1995 1995 4,850 9.270 5,390 21580 1,960 1995 - 1996 1996 4,980 9.510 5.540 2,650 3,CIO I996 - 1997 1997 4,980 9.,5IO 5,540 2,650 R,OIO 1997 - 1998 1998 5,110 9.,760 5,690 2,720 21070 1998 - I999 1999 5,300 10,120 5,920 2,820 2.150 1999 - 2000 2000 5.300 10.120 5,920 2.820 2,150 Average Annual Change: i (1985- 2000) 90 160 I00 50 40 i Source: THK Associates. Inc. . . . . - ! , !}}2�f . 2!!■,E§!�!■ � £\•-�§■:»,l,�!!! ! . . ..;;: ■!!2!■!s§£{!7!i« « -®-■ . . ! . kk;221;afl,=�«+/ : ��• I ziq I\�!E\t: 2■=!:!l:;,_!:■•' ■ !!!@ak\-kkkkkkk■ � ,!«m%l= !;i° . . !k£!ll2jl£!£££2}:/ . _ �::_ =�e!#■!§!!)!!! � _ . . !; §##!!#■.!k««kkk � �si�§=;�::e�:li■ ! -. ■!°-■;;;§��R�l=m ■ � _- «„ ■:G<=�=«_,!„ ! .� !- � ■�,-■:,.=. \.-t :--------------- £ . . . - } ! «!!■!■■�!!#.. ■ . ; --- . . j-\------k/----- ��m��m�!■!ea ! i2�22:i�--,,_;�'!■ . - . ■ � §kk§jkk§�2§}}&}! _. . | � � s!!■-�{2■!!\!!! . ! . . . . . ■ ! !: ■!:l:;R!■#!!i!§� --.-----. � . . f! .k - ' • ! !! -- ---!!■ ■ • --- - - - .----------- „ � � !e,!&!!!!!■�■-!! • � !� !!■!!mi!!lkmIt!!� ! ! Ta§ie 1-60: PROJECTED VAIL AREA SrIER VISITS 8T TYPE. 1984-1965 10 1999.2000 Calendar Average Day Design Day Peak Day Season Year Total Skiers/Day Skiers/Day Skiers/Day 1984 - 1995 1985 1,223,450 8,160 12.560 15,910 1985 - 1986 1986 1.250.000 81230 12,690 16.0S0 1986 - 1967 1987 1.294.770 8.480 13,060 16.S40 1987 - 1988 1999 1.319.150 8,400 11,060 16.54D 1988 - 1989 1989 1,358.380 8.730 13.450 17.020 1989 - 1990 1990 1.373.7DO 9.000 13.860 17.550 1990 - 1991: 1991 1.371.700 9.000 13.860 17.5SO 1991 - 1992 1952 1,393.500 9.290 14.300 18.1ZO 1992 - 1993 1993 1.432,500 9.SSO 14.700 10,620 1993 - 1994 1994 1.432.S00 9.550 14,700 18.670 1994 - 1995 199S 1.480.500 9.870 15.2DO 19,250 1995 - 1996 1994 1.519.500 10,130 1S,600 19.750 1996 - 1997 1997 1,519.500 10,130 15.600 19.750 1997 - 1998 1998 1.SS8.50O 10.390 16.000 20.260 1598 - 1999 1999 1.617,000 10.280 16.600 21.020 1999 - 2000 2000 1.617,000 10.780 16.600 21.020 Average Annual Change. 119OS- ZDOO) 26.240 170 270 " 340 Source: THK Assoclates, Inc. Projected Skier Visitor Characteristics Des t- Day Percent nation Percent Local Percent 2.SID 20.01 1.640 60.0% 2.S10 20.62 2.540 20.01 7.610 60.C1 2.S30 20.01 2.610 20.0% 7.040 60.01 2.610 20.01 2.610 20.01 7.840 60.0% 2.610 20.01 2.690 20.01 8.070 60.07, 2.690 20.01 2.770 20.01 6.320 60.09 2.770 20.01 2.770 20.0% 6.120 60.0% 2.770 20.D1 2.860 20.0% 8.S80 60.0% 2.860 20.OZ 2.940 20.01 8.820 60.01 2.940 20.Oi 2.940 20.01 8.820 60.01 2,940 20.OZ 3.040 20.01 9.120 60.01 3.040 20.01 3.120 20.01 9.360 60.0% 3.120 20.01 3.120 20.01 9.360 60.01 3.120 20.01 3.200 20.0% 9.600 60.01 3.200 20.01 3.320 20.01 9.960 60.01 3.120 20.01 3.320 20.01 9,960 60.01 1 3.320 20.01 50 18.5% 160 $9.32 50 18.51 i � | ! � F 2|!&!2|)2}!2|f;f§ E $| |)�k■2Ik■k��Ik2! ' I� I |2E■;§22!#2222!@!{| . ----- ! � ■ st sszzz Iall |§i i , � . ■ �{��s���{{§�s �k �! ■ ■ ���������j}�}}�} |( XT ! � \}�\\/\(��� s. ��tk}ktt#■|llls� �!\ jj9\k # ■!■sI;IE!#§�sKki } { ;E;IF§e§?2RRR§2= 2 ����e■\!F!!/7!!� |� / � »eEetF#tet■s!!;« !� � F „...... _ 7 �■!):�&s���2���� - ■ ���!■sr��t��a■!, �� ■=2R�7�I�72;!!77 E !@\!# �- ■ §!!■■�■## ■a !! ss;■!!§=@■;2/J\ rI2, _. �§#■■■k■�!■■@■■,, lF ............�#!= �| /�\F$&§k:; ,. a #K��a;■■k�■k;&\\ � /({(�( s=■�7■a�7e;;Zefe � ■ ����:fk§R#II$:s� -_- ! 77�.. .........; I= 2 ��a■// � @■!!!�!§!§§!)�!! !!\£&=E F#2�51/`/F $ ����/E:�a�l�■§k% & ��§aa�§■a!!%§!�e ���kl( ?able 3-60. MWICil0 TOW OF VAIL WAIaG MIT KHAN of IT?[. 19e1-190S TO 1799-2000 ' 0•erotgAt flitted ren "-t OWSTMles Total C43e+aar st1eglel I-- Aced slnole/ Taw- Art./ 11n91*1 Tw e0tJ •Seaton fear Total 0erlea Owe tonal toeoial Total parlea seam CeaA6 Total OurN. _ how tondo t61141 .loss - 398s Iles loss - also it" 49 2 6 27 16 32 30 3 11 as 12 9 46 16 loss - 1987 3907 116 a 14 63 33 to is 6 41 1" 27 20 106 33 19a7 - Iles ISM 0 - 0 0 0 0 3a 10. 3 17 32 10 3 11 0 1186 - 11e9 31a1 DO 6 36 72 3e S3 17 6 33 113 21 -20 103 3e a$as - 3990 19" lab s Is 81 U 32 10 3 17 Its Is 21 100 43 19"- 1913 1111 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a- 0 0 1901 - 1992 It92 146 s is It 43 21 7 ? 12 161 it 20 93 63 I1fa - 1913 1113 lm s 16 72 3e Al 21 5 37 193 Is ?1 I" 3A 1193 - 109e 3194 0 - a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a - a a a 1114 - Ion Ists 363 s 20 90 sa - 74 24 6 43 236 a9 26 t3s y lots - 1996 1196 130 a 16 72 3e 53 17 6 31 103 ?1 20 to] 36 1994 - I117 1191 a a D 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 - 0 a 0 MY - 1990 19941 130 a 36 72 - 3s 63 2t s 37 193 2s 21 lot 3e . 99" - Tool Is" M I 2a 117 62 es 27 2 s0 t% 34 31 Jay 6? It" - low 2000 a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 A.anp Faeoai Csange: (ISIS- am) 10 3 - 11 SO 26 39 13 3 ?1 Tat 1s 16 73 26 100.01 3.11 - 32.31 S$.31 29.31 100.01 3a.S1 0.53 l S9.01 100.0% 11.91 11.21 156.43 20.53 Sw"*.. INC asaectates. Ise. i Table 2-70: PROJECTED TOWN Of PAIL POPULATION.AND HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE. 1984-1985 TO 1999-2000 Population Households Calendar Day Overnight Overnight Season Year Visitors Visitors Permanent Visitors Permanent 1984 - 1985 1985 1,340 10,720 4,400 2.990• 11600 1985 - 1986 1986 1.350 10,830 4.500 3,020 1.630 1986 - 1987 1987 1.390 11,150 4,670 3,110 1,700 1967 - 1988 1988 I.390 11,150 4.760 3,110 1;730 1988 - 1989 1989 1.440 11,490 4.910 3,200 1.780 1989 - 1990 I990 1.480 11,830 4.970 3.300 1,810 1990 - 1991 1991 1.480 11.830 4,970 3,300 Ile10 1991 - 1992 1952 1.520. 12.210 5.050 3,400 1,830 1992 - 1993 1993 1.560 12.550 51200 3.500 1.890 1993 - 1994 1994 1.560 12,550 51200 3.500 1.890 1994 - 1995 1995 11620 12,980 5,390 3,620 1,960 .1995 - 1996 1996 1.660 13.320 5,540 3.710 .2,010 1996 - 1997 1997 1,660 13,320 5.540 3,710 21010 1997 - I998 1998 1.700 .. 13.660 5.690 3,810 2,070 1998 - 1999 1999 1,770 14,170 51920 3,950 2.150 i999 - 2000 2000 1.770 14.170 51920 3.950 2,150 Average Annual Change: (1985- 2000) 30 230 100 60 40 Source: THK Associates, Inc. 0 Table 1-70: PROJECTED VAit AREA SKIER VISITS 8T TYPE. 1954-1985 10 1999-2000 Projected Si.ter Visitor Characteristics Calendar Average Day Design Day Peak Day Dest- Season Year Total Sklers/Day Sklers/Day Skiers/Day Day . Percent nation Percent Local Percent 1984 - 1995 V Z 1.223,450 8.160 .12,560 15.910 1,260 10.02 8.750 7D.0% 2.SIO 20.0% 1985 - 1986 1.250,000 5.230 12.680 16.OS0 I,77fl 10.01 3.980 70.0% 2.530 20.01 1986 - 1987 .,_. 1.294.710 8.480 17.060. 36,540 1,310 10.01 . 9.140 70.0i 2,610 20.01 1981 - 1988 19 Z L 1.316.750 8.480 13.060 16.540 1.310 10.01 9.140 70.01 2,610 20.01 1998 - 1989 19U 1.358.380 8,730 13.450 17.020 1.350 10.01 9;420 70.0% 2.680 19.9% 1989 - 1990 1990 1.373.700 9.000 11.860 17.550 1.390 10.61 9.100 MIX 2.710 20.0% 1990 -. 199I 1991 1.373.700 9.000 13,360 17.550 1.390 10.01 9,100 70.0% 2,120 20.01 1991 - 1991 1992 1.393.500 1.290 14.300 18.120 1.430 10.01 10.010 70.09 2,860 20.01 1992 - W9 1993 1.432,500 9.550 14.700 18.620 1.470 10.02 10.290 70.01 2.940 20.01 1993 - 194-: 1994 1.432.SD0 9.550 14.700 10.620 1.470 10.01 10.290 70.09 2.940 .20,0i 1994 - I99L 1995 1,480.500 9.870 15.200 19.2SO 1.S20 IO.01 10.640 70.Oi 3;040 20.01 199S - 199" 1996 1.519.500 10.130 15.600 19dSO 1,560 10.01 10.920 70.Oi 3,120 20.01 1996 - 19s, 1997 1,519.500 10.130 15.600 19.750 1.560 10.01 10.920 70.01 3.120 20.02 1997 - MR 2998 1,558.500 10,390 366.000 20.260 1.600 10.01 11.200 70.0% 3;200 20.01 1998 -.I949 1999. 1.617.000 10.780 16.600 21.020 1.660 10.01 11.620 70.0Z 3.320 20.09 1999 - IOM 2000 1.611.000 10,78D 16.600 21.020 1.660 10.01 11.620 70.01 3.320 20.0% Average Anneal Change: (1985- 200D) 2-.140 170 270 340 30 11.1% 190 70.411 SO 18.51 Soerc3: IRK Associates. Inc. r _ _ __ • ! I!/ 1 1 I. I I I! 1 1!� 1 �. 88 ��/• r r r �o er �0 • �rl i N y •! ' ` tl p� r V r r� V r�r�I� � �y0y tl r� � �• • Y" N P u H r O P M v P N = �i � } r± Sr r rr = r yy a � 4 3 3 " s PPe�� o��a giooPPeP S:. • g e i g Y N O C \I � r e-.No��•ovYo W r W wW �� A O �I C ram' OPwO wR ON MO � r M r A } ss M P O v M O V D M• O,v V r• N M S\ iZ i i 8i s saasuo�ra�$as$usi 3 g 7i ��:d3ib�Ca:s:Si17 5 r:tw.��`xX7:Y:37 I�5 ttv :i9$.is'ig.rs S B,:Y•Y5z.a a li CL=� SY�tieSi:.'w: s xs�aa�sa�i�F"a:aM i z pie ....... sY.iieasu..: ir __a»"s=ss» =�Btm 1 :x I 1 I 1 3 1S TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road T' ' , Colorado 81657 -479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM Office of the Town Attorney TO: Vail Town Council FROM: R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney DATE: October 17, 1995 RE: Use of Initiative For Land Use Purposes Which Are Administrative Acts Article V of the Colorado Constitution reserves the initiative and referendum powers to the people: "Section 1. General Assembly -initiative and referendum. The legislative power of the state �. shall be vested in the general assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, both to be elected by the people, but the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and amendments to the constitution and to enact or reject the same at the polls... The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people by this section are hereby further reserved to the legal voters of every city, town and municipality as to all local, special and municipal leaislation of every character in or for their respective municipalities. The manner of exercising said power shall be prescribed by general laws, except that cities, towns and municipalities may provide for the manner of exercising the initiative and referendum powers as to their municipal leaislation..." (Emphasis added) These constitutional provisions permit the free exercise of legislative power by the people. However, the clear intention evidenced by Article V of the Colorado Constitution is to vest only legislative power directly in the people. Initiative applies only to acts which are legislative in character. Aurora v. Zwerdlinaer, 571 P2d 1074, 1076 (1977). The Charter of the Town of Vail also reserves the power of initiative to the people. Article V, Section 5.1(a) Initiative. provides: 'The registered electors of the Town shall have the power to propose any ordinance to the Council..." "The Council shall act only by ordinance, resolution or motion. All legislative enactments shall be in the form of ordinances; all other actions, except as herein provided, may be in the form of resolutions or motions" (Emphasis added) Article IV, Section 4.6 Charter of the Town of Vail. The substance of the petition to be evaluated is as follows: "A People's Ordinance No. 1: TITLE: In Order to Revitalize the Vail Community, an Ordinance Creating a Master Plan by the Town of Vail for the Redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. It Shall be Ordained that the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado shall create an ordinance establishing a Master Plan for the West Vail Shopping Mall Area and the Vail Commons parcel of Land. Be it further ordained that no contracts for redevelopment of the West Vail Shopping Mall or development of the Vail Commons parcel be entered into by the Town of Vail until such a Master Plan is created by the Town of Vail and approved by the electorate of the Town. All Bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances or parts thereof, shall be made consistent with this ordinance. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency." Pursuant to the Town of Vail Code it is the function and duty of the planning and environmental commission to make and adopt a master plan, for the approval by the town council for the physical development of the town. The plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts and descriptive matter, shall show the commission's recommendations for the development of the subject territory. Section 2.24.060 Vail Municipal Code. This provision is consistent with state law. Pursuant to Section 31-23-206 C.R.S., it is the duty of the planning commission to make and adopt a master plan for the physical development of the municipality. Consistent with the Vail municipal code a master land use plan was adopted by the planning and environmental commission and the Vail Town Council by Resolution No. 27, Series of 1986. This land use plan is an element of the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan and specifically provides for the physical development of the West Vail Shopping Mall and Vail Commons parcel of land. Based upon the nature of the act and the municipal code, this act is administrative in nature and immune from initiative. A master plan is advisory only as is evidenced by the statutory and municipal code scheme for creation of municipal planning commissions.... An amendment to the master plan, which may be accomplished by resolution, as contrasted with an ordinance, is not regarded to be legislative in character. Being advisory only, an amendment to a master plan is not legislative in nature which can be proposed by initiative. Maraolis v. District Court, etc., 638 P2d 297, 306 (1981). 40 As cited above, the Supreme Court continues to consistently rule that actions which are administrative matters are not subject to the constitutional right of initiative and referendum. Witcher v. Canvon Citv, 716 P2d 445 (1986); Citv of Idaho SDrinas v. Blackwell, 731 P2d 1250 (1987).