HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-05-15 Town Council MinutesVail Town Council Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
6:00 P.M.
Vail Town Council Chambers
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:00 P.M. by
Mayor Andy Daly.
Members present: Andy Daly, Mayor
Kerry Donovan
Ludwig Kurz
Greg Moffet
Margaret Rogers
Susie Tjossem
Members Absent: Kevin Foley
Staff members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager
Matt Mire, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was the Vail Youth Recognition Awards for 2012. Scott O'Connell,
representative for the Vail Valley Exchange and the Vail Recreation District, presented the 2012
Vail Youth Recognition Awards for 2012 to Battle Mountain High School junior Meredith Steinke,
and Vail Mountain School senior, Sage Ebel. These awards were created to recognize and
award youth in Vail for their excellence in academics and as great role models for their peers.
The second item on the agenda was Citizen's Participation. Jim Lamont, representing the Vail
Homeowners Association (VHOA), said they have been watching the Ever Vail project being
continued for quite some time. They have been looking for the Ever Vail project to be
developed and are curious to get an update on where the Ever Vail process will continue. Daly
said what has delayed was the negotiation of the Developer Agreement. This should be in front
of Council within 30-45 days, then back to the approval process in July.
The third item on the agenda was a discussion regarding the water supply and drought
conditions in Eagle County by Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWDS)
representatives.
Diane Johnson, Public Affairs and Communications Director for ERWSD, said they have been
notifying and educating as many people as possible on drought conditions in the area and how
to handle it. Eagle County is classified as a D2 class or severe conditions area. Overall 95% of
Colorado is in drought conditions. The lack of winter snowpack is the cause of the drought
conditions in Colorado. She reviewed the power point presentation with Council. She said the
peak run day is usually around May 2rd. This year it was two months early, March 4-8. As of
May 14, snow pack is 57% of average. Snowpack is Colorado's primary water reservoir.
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 1
Todd Fessenden, Director of Operations for ERWSD, noted the improvements they have done
to create more efficient use of water. He said the Vail Golf Course is a community leader in
improving their water system. He reviewed the improvements that have been done since 2002:
expansion of capacity; tank capacity; improved intake structures; identification of ground water
lost within the system due to leaks was reduced from 30% to 10%; and managing water
demand through community actions. The drought management priorities are public safety and
health (maintain fire storage and normal indoor use); aquatic health (proactively support stream
ecology); local economy (recreation and tourism); and reliability (minimize disruption of service).
He said the prevention and coordination will help increase monitoring of water use regulations.
They will work with local governments to identify and prioritize through an intergovernmental
agreement based on priority needs. ERWSD will coordinate necessary diversions, processes
and outreach education. They are working with landscapers and educating property owners.
Johnson said there has been a lot of great work done with town departments. They have been
working with Fire and Emergency services on wildfire preparedness; protection of critical
infrastructure and safety training; working with Public Works to prioritize water use in parks and
public spaces and irrigation permit processing; and landscaping requirements with the
Community Development Department. They will be focusing on outdoor usage with the
community. They are preparing people to make plans this summer when outdoor usage will be
restricted. They are educating them on how to be prepared when a notice is issued that water
will not be available for outdoor usage.
The fourth item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda, which included the April 3 and April
17, meeting minutes.
Moffet made a motion to approve the consent agenda and the motion was seconded by
Donovan. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was the Town Manager Report. There was nothing to report.
The sixth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 21, Series 2012, a resolution authorizing the
Town Manager to enter into agreement(s) between the Town of Vail and selected vendors for
the purchase and installation of financial systems for the town.
Kathleen Halloran, Budget Manager, stated staff reviewed several finance systems. The town
staff has chosen New World Systems Corporation for the financial system upgrade. She said
this system doesn't meet all of the town's financial system needs but meets most of them. She
requested Council approve the Town Manager to enter into an agreement with New World
Systems. Overall, staff will keep the project within budget.
Daly asked if all four systems that the town has could be done by one vendor and when staff
would implement the new system.
Halloran said one system for all the needs would be wonderful. However, there is not an
available option, especially for the sales tax component, as there are few municipalities that are
self collecting for sales tax like Vail. She said they would move forward as early as June and go
"live" in October. Zemler said one of the challenges is the possible move of the municipal
building. Halloran said the current AS 400 financial system is directly connected to the
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 2
municipal site and cannot be accessed remotely. The new system is web based and can be
accessed from several sites.
Moffet made a motion to approve Resolution No. 21, and the motion was seconded by Tjossem.
A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0.
Zemler thanked staff for the tremendous number of hours expended in time, effort and research
put into this process.
The seventh item on the agenda was the Welcome Center Operations discussion.
Suzanne Silverthorn did a historical recap of how this process and discussion came about. She
said the Town of Vail (TOV) has historically provided the funding and facilities to operate visitor
centers in Vail Village and Lionshead in its role to stimulate economic vitality and prosperity for
Vail businesses. For many years, the centers were managed by a non-profit, the Vail Valley
Chamber & Tourism Bureau (VVCTB). In 2005, a subcommittee was created with
representation from town staff and Council to refine a request for proposal (RFP) process for the
future operation of the centers based on a set of singular guest service goals, with an emphasis
on equal representation of all Vail business license holders. This included elimination of a
commission fee for lodging and activities booked within the center, a policy which remains in
place today.
During the 2005 RFP process, operational bids were submitted by the VVCTB, Vail Chamber &
Business Association (VCBA) and Vail Info, Inc. The review team recommended selection of
Vail Info, Inc., to operate the centers, in part, because its independent status as a for -profit
business would align best with the town's vision and goals in providing fairness in representing
the business community. Since then, Vail Info, Inc., has been contracted to operate the visitor
centers for two -concurrent three-year terms, plus a one-year extension to allow the town to
complete initial phases of the Guest Enhancement Initiative, including the opening of the new
Lionshead Welcome Center. The current operational contract with Vail Info, Inc., ends on
September 30, 2012. This $206,813 contract provides for 5,784 hours of annual operation
($198,290), plus new services to include scheduling and coordination of the Community Hosts
($8,523). The review team, which included Council members Kerry Donovan and Susie
Tjossem, and staff members, JP Power, Krista Miller and Suzanne Silverthorn, evaluated the
desired scope of services for future operation of the Welcome Centers which incorporates the
Guest Enhancement Initiative programming components of high-touch/high-tech. The review
team identified two operational approaches for consideration and policy direction by the Council:
1) Selection of contract operator via an RFP process. The RFP would be issued in May, 2012
with the contract to begin Oct. 1, 2012. (Note: Another alternative is to negotiate a new contract
with the existing contract operator, Vail Info. Inc.); or 2) Town -operated function overseen by a
Town of Vail guest services manager and guest services specialist with support from TOV
seasonal employees and volunteer hosts to begin Oct. 1, 2012.
After evaluating the two approaches and the pros and cons associated with each, the review
team recognizes inherent conflicts within the recently adopted Town Council Strategic Plan. On
the one hand, the Council has endorsed actions to "develop an economic development strategy
to encourage small business to remain and to locate in Vail." Another stated goal is to "improve
the quality of the guest experience" that will set Vail apart from its competition. After thoughtful
debate and consideration, the review team believes that while both operational approaches
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 3
would contribute to the Council's overriding goal to improve economic vitality, a town -managed
operation for the near -term (three years) would provide the greatest benefits.
The rationale is as follows: because the Guest Service Enhancement Initiative is in its early
stages, a town -managed operation for the near -term allows the Welcome Center programming
to evolve more fully with greater opportunities for shared resources and consolidation of effort.
Currently a work in progress, the opportunity to test and refine the operations in-house before a
fixed contract is assigned would be of great benefit to the town and a future contractor. This pilot
arrangement would provide the flexibility for adjustment and adaptation on a daily basis. In
addition, after analyzing associated costs, the Review Team has determined a town -managed
operation would be comparable in cost to a contracted Welcome Center program. In this
scenario, the return on the town's investment would be derived from value-added services
through increased coordination and integration as a result of direct day-to-day management of
the Welcome Centers. Additional efficiencies are envisioned in the future with the possibility of
enhanced guest services at Checkpoint Charlie, the ability to sell parking passes from the
Welcome Centers, and potential staffing support for management of The Grand View
community space. The town received correspondence from Bobby Bank with Vail Info., Inc., to
continue to have a three-year contract. Staff is looking for policy direction from Council.
Rogers asked if the staff has investigated if other towns manage this process in-house.
Silverthorn said they didn't uncover any entity that operated it as the town did, most were in-
house.
Daly said he thinks the review team should solicit input and feedback from the community.
Tjossem said there were several community members involved in the Welcome Center process.
Kurz asked if the RFP would be different from 2005 with the changes and enhancements.
Silverthorne said this was an entirely different scenario from 2005. The current contract is static
and calls out specific levels of service and no ability to add new services or items. The current
RFP could help with add-ons, new programming and would adapt to have active involvement.
Tjossem said she was surprised at the number of town departments that are already involved in
this process. Silverthorn said even though the current contract is a stand alone third party
contract, there are town services provided to Info. Vail, Inc., with a significant amount of
interaction from IT, Finance, Human Resources and other town departments. She said because
some departments already have active involvement, it makes sense to bring it in house in the
short term to figure out how to fine tune the process.
Rich ten Braak, representing the Vail Chamber and Business Association (VCBA), asked if
funding for the programs existing were tied in to the business license fee. Camp said the
information contract is part of a departmental general fund budget. Daly asked if the cost would
be the same as now. Silverthorn said it would be comparable and be a salaried employee. One
of the "ah-has" in the process was the importance of hiking as an activity. The Vail Local
Marketing District Advisory Council (VLMDAC) and the Commission on Special Events (CSE)
would need to be consulted on how to staff the centers for special events coming to town and to
bring in visitors.
Ten Braak said they could reach out to their members to see how they feel about this shift. He
said he hasn't heard any complaints. This comes down to finances and he would like to see
what is being proposed. There are a lot of components that need to be addressed. He asked if
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 4
the goals and objectives of the community will be addressed. He offered the VCBA services to
help with this process. He doesn't see the benefits of changing the current system.
Tjossem said there are currently many loose ends to clean up and there is no final product yet.
They need to find out who provides different components of the process and who will be
responsible for different parts of the process.
Bobby Bank, owner of Vail Info. Inc., said his staff has seen 500,000 guests and sold over $1.3
million in lodging to date. He is proud of his staff and company. He stated there is no
commission for booking lodging. Staff has tried to courteously greet every guest, meet their
every need and help benefit the community. Bank handed Council twenty-two letters of support
from community members and businesses. Daly said the letters of support will be part of the
public record. Bank said the task of promoting various entities has been easy as they don't
have an affiliation with any one entity. He said 90% of what they do is guest interactions of
where various locations are in town. Ten percent is the bells and whistles type stuff. They have
developed a "Vail app" and are excited to see it launched. He thanked the Council for the
possible opportunity to continue to provide this service.
Donovan asked Bank to give examples of the 90% and the 10% bells and whistles. Bank said
getting last minute rooms for guests is 10% of what they do. The other 90% is to provide every
other type of service to every guest as needed. They need to keep in mind they are there to
help people get what they want. He said by 2014 most lodging will be booked on smart phones
and not on computers.
Dale Bugby, a local property management representative, said Bank came to him for support.
He said he remembered how ugly and contentious this process used to be. He said this
process is best done by an independent third party. He doesn't want to see a small business be
put out of business. He wants Council to adopt option number three and give Bank another
three year contract.
Moffet said he and Kurz have scars about the Welcome Center process from previous years
when they were on Council. He said Bank advocates for customer service. He was
disappointed that this process was designed before great ideas were discarded. He said
customer service is not the town's core competency. As a consequence he doesn't feel the
town can put customer service first. He doesn't want a municipal product there. He asked who
would be hired for three years. He said adding a new department goes against current
personnel policies. He can't support staff recommendations. He said Council ought to have
Vail Info., Inc., for three more years, with a caveate that in another 3 years there would be a
whole new ballgame.
Rogers agrees with most of what Moffet said. However, she feels customer service within the
town is very high. She doesn't want to lose Vail Info., Inc., by taking what he has developed
and then flounder. She said they should expand the scope of his responsibilities and ask him
what he thinks would work as he is the expert. She recommended a fourth option to have the
review team committee sit down with Bank and talk about expectations, what needs to be done
and get his input of what can be accomplished. She said the town can't afford to disregard
ideas like the "Vail app." She said they could greatly expand Vail Info., Inc.'s, scope of
responsibilities and see if it can work. She doesn't feel the Council has all the information they
need to make a recommendation.
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 5
Donovan said the review team tried to remove the current Vail Info., Inc. stuff and to approach
and see this process at the 30,000 foot level. The option Rogers recommended was not an
option that was discussed within the committee. A discussion with Bank with increased scope
of services discussion should be had with Bank. They don't know how some of the pieces will
operate. She said the pilot program didn't include a three-year term. She said there may be
potential unforeseen synergies to be had if this is brought in-house.
Kurz said what the town has currently is not broken and things have gone well. His sentiment is
along the lines of Moffet and there will be fifteen months of displacement of staff. He asked if
staff should be burdened by this displacement. He is not sure how, after making the
recommendation, the committee can work well with Bank and have an outcome of what is
expected. The idea is good but the execution will be difficult. No decision should be made
tonight as they need more information and feedback. He wants business and community input.
Tjossem re-emphasized that Vail is a resort town and not just a municipality. She said this
Council adopted a guest service initiative and Council and staff are passionate about it. She
said this process wasn't about Vail Info., Inc., or Bank. This was about being neutral and to see
what structure was needed to integrate, coordinate and go in a different direction. She said
within the scope from seven years ago this is not broken, but the scope and direction needs to
change. She said staff already provides a lot of support to the welcome centers now. She
stated Silverthorn laid out a great RFP on how to proceed.
Daly said there are three alternatives on the table. The issues raised by Donovan to
communicate with guests is exciting. The complexities have yet to be understood. He suggests
extending the current contract with Vail Info., Inc., for one year and to continue to work it out,
and to have one year to continue conversations and to fine tune the process.
Zemler said he is concerned with the comment of leaving the process as is because it's not
broken. He acknowledged that Bank does a fine job within the scope of services as is in the
contract now. The underlining themes of innovation and expansion of being better with
technology and having better customer service was the purpose of this process. He said at a
minimum he would like to use the RFP as a template. The thrust behind the RFP is to make
this operation work better and to reinvigorate the process. There needs to be better integration
and advocacy on behalf of the town's initiative. His recommendation is to negotiate and use the
RFP as the template. Daly agreed with that recommendation. The core principal is to embrace
innovation. Bank needs to change his operations to incorporate this into his operation.
Moffet said to remember the primary purpose is customer driven. He said it was incumbent
upon the Council to take heed of what the customer is asking for, not what the town wants the
customers to want. Tjossem said the community guest service enhancement is high customer
touch, high tech and the next wave of what the customer wants. She said "Apps" are what the
customers are using. The high touch and high tech has always been the basis of all the review
team's discussions.
Rogers said a one year contract doesn't work. She wants to incorporate Bobby Banks into the
discussions and to consider having his company use the RFP parameters to redefine the
operations of the information centers.
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 6
The eighth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 23, Series of 2012, a Resolution Approving
a Scope of Services and a Fee for Triumph Vail MOB, LLC for certain development
management services related to the Town of Vail municipal site redevelopment; authorizing the
Town Manager to execute a Development Management Agreement on behalf of the town for
provision of said services; and setting forth details in regard thereto.
George Ruther, Community Development Director, stated the purpose is it approve Resolution
No. 23, authorizing the Town Manager to execute a development and construction management
agreement, on behalf of the Town of Vail, for the completion of the town's portion of the parking
garage and required off site improvements. The scope of services generally described in Exhibit
A of the resolution will be formalized in the agreement. The agreement shall be drafted in a form
acceptable to the Town Attorney.
Zemler said the dilemma is to go with either the flat fee versus a seven percent (7%) fee. They
don't know what the final cost will be.
Rogers said she could live with the 7% but if the cost is more than $4 million, the money starts
adding up. She wants to know that before the Council commits to the 7%. She said projects
expand and it could be more than $280,000. Daly said it would be up to the Council to control
the scope of the project.
Ruther said in the parking structure, the greatest risk is how many parking spaces are built in
the parking structure and how it is managed. This is the real question of why it's a percentage
fee versus a flat fee.
Daly shares Rogers concern. They were told a fee of $280,000 was what they had agreed
upon. Ruther said this was not true. Daly said this was not what Council was lead to believe at
the work session. Tjossem asked if they can build in a "not to exceed" in the agreement.
Kurz said he agreed with Ruther that if the town does their job, he is comfortable with the 7%
fee. Tjossem is okay with 7% as well.
Moffet made a motion to approve Resolution No. 23, with a change in Article No. 2 to change
the fee to a 7% fee, and the motion was seconded by Kurz. A vote was taken and the motion
passed, 6-0.
Zemler said staff will commit to Council and to report to Council if they think it will surpass the
$4 million cost.
The ninth item on the agenda was an appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town
Code, of the determination of the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC)
that the zoning administrator correctly determined an appeal submitted by the Vail Gateway
Plaza Condominium Association on January 4, 2012, was untimely, and therefore, could not be
heard by the PEC. This determination was made in accordance with Section 12-3-3.3 of the
Zoning Regulations of the Town of Vail. The Vail Gateway Condominiums are located at 12 Vail
Road/Lot N, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1.
George Ruther, Community Development Director, said there was quite a bit of material in the
packet. On March 26, 2012 the Town of Vail PEC heard an appeal and voted 5-0-1 (Pierce
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 7
recused) to uphold the determination of the zoning administrator that the appeal filed on
January 4, 2012, by the Vail Gateway Plaza Condominium Association was untimely, pursuant
to Section 12-3-3.3, Appeals, Vail Town Code. Staff recommends the Council uphold the
determinations of the zoning administrator and the Town of Vail PEC. The appeal was
submitted after the 20 day time limit of the appeal process.
TJ Vobril, representing the Vail Gateway Plaza Condominium Association (VGPCA), said the
VGPCA wants to have their project reconsidered and the appeal to go back before the PEC. He
went through the documentation submitted to Council for consideration.
Nancy Adams, a homeowner, said 18 of the 20 owners want this appeal dismissed. She said
Council should be aware the condominium association had time to process this and the court
denied the request for an injunction. She said the condominium association information was
speculation and Judge Thompson's decision is part of the Council packet. She said the judge
found the use was consistent with the homeowner's association documents and the town code.
He dismissed the restraining order and also found the permit was properly posted.
Mire commented for the record, that the court found the association had actual notice of the
construction permit and the contemplated use was properly noticed and available at the town for
inspection. The letter from Ruther might have been interpreted incorrectly by the association.
The code is very clear about when the decision is final. Mire said the determination was made
prior to September 21, 2011, and complied with the zoning at the time.
Vobril said he represents the homeowners association and Ms. Adams does not. He wants to
find out if the association can be heard on the determination from the PEC. Mire pointed out the
association had notice and time to have gone to the PEC prior to the deadline.
Rogers made a motion to deny the appeal and to uphold the Planning and Environmental
Commission decision, and the motion was seconded by Kurz. A vote was taken and the motion
passed, 6-0.
The tenth item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2012, an
ordinance amending Chapter 12-6, Residential Districts, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section
12- 3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish a new zone district, Vail Village Townhouse
(VVT) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto; and Resolution No. 7, Series of 2012,
amending Chapter VII, Vail Village Sub -Areas, East Gore Creek Sub -Area (#6), Vail Village
Master Plan, pursuant to Chapter Vill, Implementation and Amendment, Vail Village Master
Plan, to include recommendations related to a new Vail Village Townhouse (VVT) District, and
setting forth details in regard thereto.
Moffet said a variety of new information has been produced in the last few days. He wants
more time to prepare on the subject. He said if the town goes to 1.35 ratio, a sizeable portion of
the townhomes will lose square footage.
Moffet made a motion to table this item to the June 5u' meeting. Tjossem seconded the motion
as there was an inadvertent error. If they are acting on this information, Council needs
confidence to know that the information presented is correct.
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 8
Warren Campbell, Chief Planner, said the information in the packet is correct. Unfortunately,
there was a typographical error carried forward in the table presented. He said the data in the
tables accurately reflects the three goals of the policy. If they want to move forward tonight,
they can discuss the difference between 1.25 versus 1.35 and what that means. Daly said
Campbell said it was a typo but they had heard it was a miscalculation. Moffet said this was not
an intentional error. Campbell said there is a miscalculation on the Vail Trails Chalet and Vail
Trails East section of the table. The error would have taken the calculations on the Vail Trails
Chalet from 1.22 to 1.33 and the Vail Trails East from 1.17 to a 1.4. Those numbers fall within
the acceptable range that were exhibited to the PEC and reflect what GRFA was allowed for
those properties
John Dunn, representing one of the owners, the Bridgewater's, stated the Bridgewater's have
been under this uncertainty for three -and -a -half years. This is now a town initiated ordinance
and they urge the Council to adopt the ordinance without further delay.
Jim Lamont said this was a sufficiently critical issue and didn't think this was communicated with
affected parties sufficiently. He said this is somewhat worrisome. He asked for sufficient time
to send out to affected parties in order to formulate a response back to the Council and have
public input that is informed.
Jerry Orton, representing the Vail Town House Association, supports the Council motion to
continue this item and wants Council to hear a proposal to have a broader ratio for these
condominiums to redevelop. This needs to be incentivised and will present additional nuances.
Dale Bugby, Vistar Real Estate, representing some of the owners of the condominiums, said he
supports the decision for Council to table this item. The Council needs to get more input from
the condominium owners. These were the first condominiums built in the 1960's. They are
concerned about street parking and losing development rights. They want the parking to be their
right from the beginning. A permanent right not a revocable right; and they also want to have
the 1.50 GRFA ratio.
Chris Galvin wants this item tabled as well. He said he has been coming to Vail for 47 years
and the calculation error may impact homeowners. He wants the data to be accurate.
Dominic Mauriello asked that this item be tabled to the second meeting in June which is June
191'.
Moffet made an amendment to his motion to table to the June 19'h meeting and Tjossem
seconded the motion.
Tjossem stated one thing not addressed is the diminished development rights and whether that
feels right to potentially take away owner's development rights. That wasn't one of the criteria
worked under.
Donovan asked if the recommendation would have changed if this error had not occurred.
Campbell said no, the errors still fell in the range based on the town's polices and goals.
Daly said he would like communications between staff and Council when issues come up so if
Council get calls or people on the streets come up to them, they are informed on the issues.
Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 9
A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-2 with Rogers and Donovan opposed.
The eleventh item on the agenda was adjournment.
As there was no further business, Moffet made a motion to adjourn and the motion was
seconded by Donovan. A vote was taken and the motion assed unanimously, 6-0. The
meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m.
Reso ull ubmitted, _
Daly, Mayor
Att st:
�Irelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Town Town Council Meeting Minutes of May 15, 2012 Page 101